POLICY FORMULATION

ON LOCAL LEVEL
PLANNING

S.Rangarajah
Chief Secretary
Northern Provincial Council
09th May 2007
1
Objective:
• To highlight the needs for a policy
thrust.

2
Policy Stand by the
Government

3
 When the PS Act No.15 was
passed in 1987 “The
Government’s position was that
the Bill aimed at consolidating
Local Government with
development and to help people
with self determination.”
It was pointed out that a higher
level policy decision will be made
by the Parliament. (ARC 1.3.9) 4
As per Local Government’s
reform circular No.4, among
other recommendations by the
Reform Commission, “The main
recommendation is that the
Local Authority should be the
Local Level Planning Authority
for both Development Planning
and Physical Planning”.
5
One of the Policy thrust of the
National Planning Department
towards governance is:
“recognize Local Governments
as Autonomous Bodies
accountable to the people and
strengthen them by giving
adequate manpower, financial
and decision making power.” 6
 The latest commitment by the Government
is : “At the local level, the administrative
support system should be designed to
facilitate the optimal exercise of
responsibility for local services so as to
meaningfully make it accountable to the
local community for the efficient delivery of
services. This would include autonomy in
respect of finances and personnel so as to
allow assignment of widest possible
responsibility for designing service
deliveries.” (Mahinda Chinthana
Discussion Paper, 2007) 7
 Current Situation
• Planning Authority of the Local
Governments undermined.
• Multiple Planning Agents.
• Principles of Subsidiarity are not
followed.
• Local Government reduced to a sector.
• Inadequate resources (F,F,F).
• Poor coordination and integration.
• Superficial approach.
• Other institutionalized impediments.
8
 Consequences
• Crisis in Planning undermine good
governance.
• Socio Economic condition remains
stagnant.
• Urban Rural gab and regional
disparities.
• Sustainability is at risk.
• Inefficient use of resources.
• Burden on the center increases.
9
Some Aspects of Planning
Crisis at Local Level

10
Local level Social / Economic
development projects and
programmes are delivered
through 4 lanes.

11
Lane 1: Lane 2: Lane 3: Lane 4:
NGO / UN
Central Govt. Provincial Council Project Offices Agencies

District Admn. District Line Dept. District Admn

District Line Agency
District PO

Divisional Secretariat Divisional level Offices Divisional Field

Divisional level Offices Secretariat Officers

Community Community CBO Community Community

CBO CBO 12
Sometimes through

Divisional Secretary

Grama iladari

Community

Sometimes not
13
At the end, there are enormous
number of CBOO and
Programmes at the bottom level

14
Instead of Multi level planning
there is multiple planning
with
• Overlaps
• Duplications
• Inconsistent criteria
• Inconsistencies in concepts
• Loose integration
• Inconsistencies in methodologies, designs and
modes of delivery 15
 Conflict between
objective criteria
and
subjective judgments

16
 CBOO are for local level
development but not linked to
any Local governance structure

17
 Principle of subsidiarity
not practiced

•Decisions of purely local in nature are

taken at higher levels.
•Catchment concept is lost.

18
 Several claim ownership for
planning but
no one committed.
(Who has the vision and who
is entrusted with mission?)

19
Local plan and projects are
not legally sanctioned.

All local projects are not legally

authorised by a Local
Governance structure.

20
Legally mandated organisations
are marginalised.

Pradeshiya Sabhas are the People’s

institution legally mandated to
“Decision making process relating
to administrative and development
activities at a local level”

21
Approval of the local authority
is not obtained.

Local authorities do not provide

facilities and support to local
development projects.

22
Major partners are loosely linked

• Governance councils
• Service delivery Departments
• GOO
• Communities

23
Planning prerequisites are
absent

24
 Enormous investment is taking
place without proper integration
among activities and
coordination at Local level

25
Participatory process is only
partial,
dominated by officials

26
Sustainable maintenance is
absent or weak

27
There is no link between
Development and
Resource management

Sustainability Risk?

28
 Proposals
• Local Authorities to approve all
development interventions.
• To develop guiding principles and
concepts for a unified local level
planning procedures.
• To develop a unified planning
procedures to local areas – a manual.
• To get the Government’s commitments
to it – for functions, functionaries and
funds. 29
Thank you

30