DAWA ZANGMO
Thimphu
In a session of the National Assembly on June 24, the Member from Drametse-Ngatshang Constituency Kinzang Wangchuk raised queries regarding the recently established Quality Monitoring Office under the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), drawing attention to its limited staffing and questioning the government’s long-term vision for quality assurance in infrastructure development.
The MPs line of questioning focused on three key concerns. Firstly, he inquired whether the current human resource capacity of the Quality Monitoring Office is sufficient to fulfill its mandate effectively.
The office, which has been formed to monitor the quality of major infrastructure projects across the country, currently operates with a very lean team, which has raised questions about whether it can realistically oversee the scope of work required under the 13th Five Year Plan (FYP).
Secondly, the MP sought clarification on whether the government has any plans to institutionalize a permanent National Quality Institute to continue overseeing infrastructure quality beyond the 13th FYP.
The creation of such an institute, in his view, might provide long-term consistency and institutional memory for quality monitoring and assurance across Bhutan’s fast developing infrastructure sector.
Lastly, the MP raised concerns about how these initiatives align with the government’s broader commitment to keeping the civil service compact, efficient, and free from unnecessary expansions.
Given the government’s public pledge to streamline bureaucratic processes and avoid bloated structures, the MP questioned whether creating additional bodies even temporary ones was in line with that ethos.
In response to these queries, the Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay gave a detailed explanation on the necessity and role of the Quality Monitoring Office and its place within the broader framework of the 13th Five Year Plan.
He began by reaffirming the government’s firm commitment to infrastructure development, identifying it as a pillar of national progress and a key strategic area within the current Five-Year Plan.
“Infrastructure development is critical for the socio-economic transformation of Bhutan,” said the Prime Minister. “It is not merely about building physical structures, but about enabling connectivity, access to services, and creating pathways for economic growth and national prosperity.”
According to the PM, the government has allocated a total budget of Nu. 86 billion specifically for infrastructure development under the 13th FYP. This includes a wide range of construction projects spanning bridges, lhakhangs, schools, hospitals, and most notably, roads.
Of this total budget Nu. 33 billion has been earmarked exclusively for road construction and related works, which the PM emphasized as one of the most important tools for generating tangible socio-economic benefits.
“Good roads connect people to markets, education, healthcare, and employment opportunities,” he said. “We want to ensure not just development, but quality development.”
Turning to the role of the Quality Monitoring Office, the PM explained that this entity has been set up as a temporary unit under the Prime Minister’s Office for the sole purpose of overseeing quality assurance in infrastructure projects, particularly focusing on road construction and maintenance.
The office, he revealed, currently consists of only two engineers. These engineers are on secondment from the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport.
While the office may appear under resourced at the moment, the PM assured the House that further reinforcements are in the pipeline. Four more engineers are expected to join the office soon.
However, these additional professionals will not be recruited under the Royal Civil Service Commission (RCSC), but through the project itself.
This method of recruitment is intended to maintain the government’s commitment to keeping the civil service lean while ensuring the office has adequate manpower to fulfill its responsibilities.
Importantly, the PM stressed that the Quality Monitoring Office is not a permanent institution.
“This is a time bound initiative under the 13th FYP, designed to enhance quality control during a crucial phase of infrastructure expansion,” he said. Once the current plan concludes, the office will be dissolved.
The PM also acknowledged the support of the Government of India in making this initiative possible. The Quality Monitoring Office is being funded through Project Tied Assistance (PTA), a scheme under India’s broader assistance program to Bhutan.
This collaboration, the PM noted, underscores the shared commitment between the two countries toward ensuring high standards in Bhutan’s infrastructure development efforts.
“We are grateful for the continued support from the Government of India. Through the Project Tied Assistance mechanism, we are able to enhance the quality of our infrastructure while adhering to fiscal discipline,” he stated.
Addressing the question of whether the government intends to establish a permanent National Quality Institute, the PM clarified that there are no such plans.
He acknowledged that while permanent institutions can offer continuity and long term oversight, in this case, establishing a fixed body could lead to unnecessary administrative complications and possibly reduce operational efficiency.
“Setting up a permanent quality institute would not only be a strain on our limited resources but might also go against the broader goal of maintaining a compact and efficient civil service,” he said, adding the purpose of the Quality Monitoring Office is specific and time bound.
“Once that purpose is fulfilled, there is no justification for prolonging its existence.”
The PM’s explanation appears to be aligned with the government’s ongoing efforts to rationalize its workforce and promote a results oriented public service.
By recruiting professionals outside the formal civil service structure and keeping the Quality Monitoring Office under the direct supervision of the PMO, the government is attempting to maintain flexibility and responsiveness while avoiding long term institutional burden.
The current approach appears to be a strategic compromise allowing to enhanced quality monitoring during a period of heavy infrastructure development, without locking the government into permanent staffing or structural commitments.
The PM also used the opportunity to highlight the government’s broader policy direction under the 13th FYP.
Infrastructure development, he said, is not being pursued for its own sake but is integrated into the national vision for economic self-reliance, improved public service delivery, and enhanced national well-being.
“This is about delivering quality development outcomes in the most efficient and accountable manner,” he reiterated. “We will continue to assess and adapt our systems to meet the needs of the time, without compromising on our principles of good governance.”
While some MPs may continue to question whether the current staffing is sufficient, the government appears firm in its belief that targeted, temporary solutions can be more effective than creating permanent bureaucratic structures.
