A hypothetical problem

NGO X approaches a Mr. Y working for a department A to get authorisation to work in one place. "No, no" says Mr. Y, you should not work in that place. Instead, go and work in place B. As it turns out, place B also just happens to be the place where Mr. Y's brother ran lately for elections. Mr. Y says he is afraid that people will feel his brother is purposefull stopping developpement if they don't get the project of NGO X. That's one explanation. At the same time, NGO X feels that Mr. Y may just be keen to support his brother's next election, in only a few years.

Simultaneously, deputy governor Z decides that he, on the other hand, wants the project to be implemented in the town C, because he receives a lot of letters from its inhabitants and, as it happens, the city in question is the head town of the province, where his comfy bum would be keen to embrace the governorate seat.

Meanwhile, NGO X is still eager to work where it originally suggested because the budget doesn't really allow to work anywhere else and it is kind of trying to build ties with communities and continue development project with them and that would hardly be lilely in either place B or town C. To settle the matter, ministry A decides that whatever department A says will be the final word. As a result, NGO X lobbies like mad Mr. Y, promising to conduct a proper needs assessment in place B and try and find funding at a later stage, if only they are now allowed to carry on with their work. Mr. Y ultimately bends, but only on the condition that all of the easy-to-build infrastructures of the project go to town C. - Well sure, Mr. Y has plenty of reasons to want to be friend with deputy governor Z and the people of the city.

And in all that, if you've understood any of it, I am asking, it is the NGO that is threatens local development?!