Is it true that many ministries, organizations and governmental institutions and some governorates annually return to the Treasury sums of money that may be 25 percent of their budgets or even more?

If this is true, it means that:

• Government sectors request huge amounts for small projects or allocate money for things they don’t need in the first place;

• There is failure in planning, administration, organization, processes and procedures that prevents the institutions from benefiting at the right time and place;

• There is disinclination on the part of companies and institutions in meeting deadlines stated in the contracts according to specifications; and

• Finances allocated to these projects are less than their actual costs.

Whether the reason is one of the above or something else, the phenomenon shows that there’s something wrong and, whatever it is, it is not acceptable. It’s only logical that contractors don’t take big projects with limited budgets that will result in low profits.

And if these financial lump sums are returned because of managerial failure, then this insufficiency needs to be stopped and addressed. The country’s future will be jeopardized because of a lack of proper planning, administration and organization.

And if the reason for the problem is the cancellation of contracts because owners fail to complete their work, we must clearly identify the reasons behind this incompetence. If the problem is related to the contractor’s credibility or professionalism, then looking for trustworthy competent contractors is the solution.

Returning the money to the Treasury is not. And if the reason is that there are other types of business done under the table that cause disagreements leading to incompletion of projects and cancellation of contracts, this is corruption that needs to be alleviated.

If the reason is that some companies and institutions enter into contracts that are far beyond their capabilities and expertise, then the choice was wrong from the beginning. The idea of awarding a contract for the lowest bid is a very good reason for people not providing what’s required of them.

In this case, we need to remove this policy when making deals and replace it with good and logical conditions to choose between competitive offers in the light of knowing what each company is capable of and willing to provide with its limited budget.

And if the reason perhaps is companies and contractors are prevented from recruiting proper and sufficient manpower, then we need to resolve this matter and not make it an obstacle that hinders or stops the completion of projects.

But if the real reason is the inability of national companies to embark on billion-dollar projects then we must go to international companies — as we used to do with Korean, Japanese and Chinese companies that executed a lot of huge projects with international standards of quality and commitment.

What is important is that the country’s life doesn’t stop and its development plans and programs don’t stop. Instead of returning millions of riyals to the Treasury every year, we should be establishing new projects everyday that help employ our children.

This topic in particular needs a group of people to study it because the issue should no longer be ignored.