Prime Minister Oli has chosen a finance
minister and an industry, commerce and supplies minister (source:
setopati.net) today. The importance and unpredictability associated
with finance and commerce would suggest that the ministers that go
into ministries related to finance and commerce are themselves
predictable, orderly and such. This could be a reflection of personal
character, but also the current status and aspirations of the
political party that they represent. Is this rationale apparent in PM
Oli's choices today? That the finance ministry itself won't
“dissolve” is evidence of a basic order in Nepali politics, but
it may not be evidence of a system wide order and predictability,
only that some “elements” in the political system are, or behave,
in an orderly and predictable manner.
Furthermore, a study on the history
of the finance ministry and other Nepali ministries is needed to
evaluate their endurance; given that there is no prominent existing
administrative element that actively sustains and manages the
division of ministries on a day to day basis, the endurance of a
ministry seems dependent on how it originated: What events led to its
origin? Can we even say that some ministry like the finance ministry
had an “origin” which is fully the result of Nepali politics, when its main task seems to be to act as a stable and predictable element in the wider financial system?
What is the endurance of the
ministries, given that they arose it seems not from a day to day
delaying of their end, but from an elaborate planned project, which
means that their endurance is projected, for five, ten or fifteen
years, given the measurement of their capacity to withstand
resistance or challenges? In an unpredictable field like finance, a
field which needs as much stability and predictability as possible,
is it the case that the ending of the finance ministry is extremely
accurately defined?
No comments:
Post a Comment