KATHMANDU: Relations between the CPN-UML and the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) remain strained, with the UML sharply criticizing the government’s performance during its first 100 days in office.
Khabarhub spoke with UML lawmaker and party whip Nisha Ghatani about the government’s achievements and shortcomings. Excerpts from the interview:
How do you assess the government’s performance during its first 100 days?
The government itself appears dissatisfied with its performance. It has admitted that around 40 planned tasks remain incomplete. That suggests it has not been able to achieve much during its first 100 days. As a member of the opposition, I have assessed the government’s performance not only from my party’s perspective but also from the viewpoint of ordinary citizens.
Why do you say that? Don’t you think the government has made some progress?
Even if I set aside my party affiliation and look at the situation from the public’s perspective, it is clear that ordinary people have suffered the most. The government promised to publish the SEE and Grade 12 examination results within a month, and it did. However, students have been forced to protest because of errors and problems with the results and certificates.
The government’s manifesto also promised to create opportunities for Nepalis working abroad to return home within 100 days. Instead, the number of people leaving the country for foreign employment continues to rise. There is no indication that returnees have found adequate employment opportunities at home.
The issue of landless squatters remains unresolved. While some land ownership certificates have been distributed, many families are still living in temporary holding centres. Some small cooperative depositors have received refunds, which is a positive step. However, it appears that the initiative was driven more by a desire for popularity than by a comprehensive solution. The government should have focused on addressing the root causes of the cooperative crisis.
Similarly, the government has failed to provide alternatives for families living in holding centres after asking them to vacate within a week. Many are struggling to find housing. Farmers, meanwhile, continue to protest because they cannot obtain sufficient fertilizer.
In my constituency, the problem of human-elephant conflict remains unchanged. Residents of Susta and other border areas are still protesting over border-related issues. While the government celebrated its first 100 days, people expected some progress on these long-standing concerns, but nothing significant happened.
There has also been little effort to reduce the growing number of road accidents. The government failed to prepare adequately for the monsoon season, and we even witnessed vehicles being swept into rivers. It lacked sensitivity and preparedness for such emergencies.
Overall, I believe the government has not performed well during its first 100 days.
What should the government have done differently to inspire greater confidence?
Nearly a year has passed since the previous government collapsed, while the caretaker administration had limited authority. During that period, many preparatory tasks could have been completed. For example, although the SEE results were published quickly, problems with certificates created unnecessary complications. Proper verification should have been completed before publication. As a result, students were forced to protest, and the government eventually had to form a committee to address the issue.
We are prepared to support any good work carried out by the government. But farmers continue to suffer because they cannot obtain fertilizer. The government should also have been more sensitive to border issues.
Within days of assuming office, the Prime Minister apologized to the Dalit community over a controversial incident. Yet, for more than 70 days, Dalits continued protesting over housing issues, and one person even died in custody in Sindhuli.
Several other incidents also occurred during this period. Many of these problems did not require additional budget allocations but rather effective implementation of existing laws. Unfortunately, the government failed on that front.
I also serve on the Infrastructure Development Committee. Many lawmakers had offered recommendations to reduce road accidents, but those suggestions were not implemented. The government has fallen short in delivering tangible results, even though it has been effective at generating publicity.
Based on its first 100 days, do you think the government can accomplish its five-year agenda?
If the government continues at this pace—relying heavily on ordinances—it appears more focused on serving its own interests than addressing the country’s priorities.
For example, amendments to the Cooperative Act were approved within 24 hours without adequate discussion. Important legislation should not be rushed through in that manner.
The government seems more interested in political spectacle than in following due process and the rule of law. The confidence that comes with holding a near two-thirds majority has turned into arrogance.
The Prime Minister’s statement suggesting that Nepal had also encroached on Indian territory sparked widespread criticism. Such sensitive issues require careful study and evidence before being made public.
Instead of strengthening national interests, the government has weakened public confidence and failed to demonstrate responsible leadership.
What should the government do now to govern confidently over the next five years? What steps are needed to improve people’s living standards?
First, the government’s budget and policy programmes have largely overlooked low-income communities. Most of the programmes are targeted at the middle class. Instead of concentrating policies and budgets on the Kathmandu Valley, the government should focus on neglected regions—from Karnali and Sudurpashchim to Olangchung Gola in Taplejung in the east and Darchula in the west. It should also address pressing issues such as water scarcity in the Madhes, from Kechana Kawal in Jhapa onwards.
The concerns of people at the grassroots have been ignored. The government’s priority should be the poor rather than the middle and upper classes. It is inconsistent to criticize previous governments for neglecting disadvantaged communities while repeating the same mistakes.
We are not in favour of allowing the landless to remain squatters indefinitely. However, any relocation should be carried out only after proper rehabilitation and management. During our party’s tenure in government, land ownership certificates may have been distributed more slowly and to fewer people, but the management process was more systematic. The current government has stumbled on several fronts, and those shortcomings need to be corrected.
The government should also ensure transparency, particularly in appointments. Instead of appointing people close to those in power, it should follow an open and accountable process.
Major decisions should not be rushed. At the same time, there should be no political retaliation. Even now, our party’s vice-chairman remains in custody in a money-laundering case despite what we believe is a lack of evidence. We see this as politically motivated. Likewise, many families removed from holding centres have still not been provided with proper housing.
Many government decisions generated headlines and became popular because they were announced quickly. However, the government has paid less attention to whether those decisions have actually been implemented. It should not be distracted by social media trends or public relations. While chasing publicity, it must not overlook the hardships faced by low-income people. In the end, it is the poor who bear the greatest burden.
I want this government, which emerged with the support of the Nepali people, to remain people-centred. It should move forward in close coordination with the 70 to 80 percent of citizens who belong to lower-income groups. So far, however, the government’s approach has largely neglected them. That must change.
A two-thirds majority will not last forever. The government should use its mandate to build lasting trust with the people through inclusive and accountable governance. I wish the government success. It has said it is new and has asked to be judged over five years. We, too, are ready to acknowledge and learn from any good work it accomplishes.
Comment