In your interview, "Recovery hinges on peace" (#128) the ADB's Richard Vokes rightly states what donors want to see: An improved effectiveness of public expenditure. He assures us that monitoring of implementation on the basis of in house anti-corruption guidelines is scrupulously maintained. But there are still loopholes in procurement which gives the corrupt leeway. Both the banks need to look at the basic rate of hiring experts which is multiplied by a certain overhead coefficient, usually 2.0 to 2.5 times. Shouldn't the basic rate be taken as actual expenditure incurred to be paid to the expert in question? It should not be made in itself a part of the profit by the contractor. Consulting firms (national, "anti-national", or expat) in most cases never pay the stated basic rate declared in their proposal on which the cost of the project is based. Shouldn't the donor assisted by its auditor, the employer government agency together check the documents submitted by the consultant and monitor what goes on in practice? Ignoring this basic rule of transparency creates a vast resource of black money that government, politicos and influence peddlers can siphon off. The case with contractors for job procurement is another (longer) story.

D Gajraj,
email