FROM A RINGSIDE SEAT

The walk outs in the National Assembly are a common feature as the inevitable happened after Juma prayers. Liaquat Baloch (LB) and Fareed Piracha (FP), walked out separately. The definition and content of the Finance Bill was the issue this time.
Naveed Qamar and Naheed Khan, LB and FP, were on their feet that the Finance Bill 2007-08 contained a number anomalies in those ordinary pieces of legislation that do not fall within the definition of Money Bill but have been interpolated in the Finance Bill.
They were objecting to the legislation about Federal Board of Revenue, which plans to recruit new people from outside throwing out old employees. This was in contradiction to Prime Minister's accolades of few weeks earlier, during which he showered praises on this department, for doing such a marvellous work of revenue collection. "Is it the intention to jettison old hands who made this enormous revenue growth happen and fill the job with cronies and favourites?"
Quoting Article 73 of the Constitution, Naveed Qamar enunciated that only matters with regard to the imposition of abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of any tax could form the subject of Money Bill. Speaker Chaudhry Amir Hussain promised to look into the constitutional provision and come back to the opposition members who were agitating the issue.
But the Financial Bill would be adopted by the House all the same, although the Opposition has been speaking over the past two weeks there was nothing for the poor man in this document.
At one time, the number of Treasury (and Opposition) members were so few that Syed Khurshid Ahmad Shah suggested that they take siesta until at least 50 treasury members were present. The opposition was talking to an empty House, with treasury members paying attention to their points. Perhaps, to attract more members the Speaker kept announcing that he would order voting in a few minutes.
Naheed Khan, FB, LB, NQ, Pervez Malik and Shahida Akhtar Ali pointed that a number of legislative features were introduced, including those relating to extension to be given to favourites in the National Bank and the Kushali Bank, and this was being repeated after a piece of Legislation had been turned down by the NA Standing Committee. Now it has been brought deceptively in the Finance Bill.
Coupled with this is the fact that the previous Report of the Standing Committee was not presented to the House, and disappeared from the government agenda.
At this point Parliamentary Minister Sher Afgan made a statement that under the authority of the Rules of Procedure he could by pass Standing Committee reports.
The four discussants thought the Minister's remark was insulting to the Members of the Finance and Revenue Standing Committee and staged a protest walk out, suggesting that other Members of the Committee do the same.
Certainly, Minister Sher Afgan's comment on the function of Standing Committee is extraordinary to say the least even though he may substantiate it by quoting the Rules of the National Assembly. His stand is in complete reversal to the minutes of the meeting of Chairs of all legislative chambers of Pakistan who met at Islamabad in February with Speaker NA in the chair.
Expressing the desire to strengthen Standing Committees it was decided to meet again in March. However, the meeting has not taken place. Even otherwise it is universally held that the enormous volume of work before a legislature and the limited time at disposal of legislative chambers makes it impossible that every matter should be discussed at length in the House.
Therefore, in order to do 'the work expeditiously and with reasonable care, responsibilities have to be entrusted to the Standing Committees, for undertaking preliminary discussion of legislative projects.' Thus while the Parliament is called as a House on exhibition Standing Committees are treated as Parliament at work.
In any way the construction of the Rules by Minister Sher Afgan about the function of Standing Committees is astonishing. His view, if transmitted outdoors, might agitate a number of explanatory commentaries on this subject by parliamentary scholars.
However, the proceeding of the House in the morning was overshadowed with disagreement on a number of issues. Mohtrama Benazir Bhutto whose birth day was celebrated yesterday featured in the discussion, though unfortunately, in an uncharitable manner. Her admirers in the PPP rank were seething with anger that some one had used her name negatively in a banner hung outside.
The incident led to a consensus brainstorming conducted by Speaker about the nature of banners, posters, and wall chalking that should not be tolerated in Islamabad Federal Capital territory. Speaker Amir Hussain proposed a ruling that the CDA should pull down banners that hand an element of disrespect to prominent political leaders or heaped insults on political parties. Religious Minister Ijazul Haq was also the subject of prolonged discussion at the House, perhaps, for the reason that he had probably justified suicide attacks.
As Member Satti (PPP) argued, the House must learn to differentiate between respect the right course of showing honour to our beloved Prophet (PBUH) and terrorism, and not mix the two. 'We should not try to divide the Ummah and the particular banner that was causing offence was an incitement to divide the people of Pakistan from protesting against the disrespect shown to the Prophet (PBUH) by conferring knighthood on a despicable individual who is despised by the Muslims through out the world.
Chaudhry Amir Hussain showed his acumen in balancing the hurt feelings of members and therefore piloted a new edition of resolution to convey the outraged feelings of the people of Pakistan and the Muslim world demanding that the knighthood conferred on Satan Rushdi should be withdrawn.
Diversion: The Opposition has kept pressure on the Treasury benches by accusing the government of scam and financial wheeling and dealing. Once again a news conference was organised in the afternoon. This time, in the words of Liaquat Baloch, Fareed Piracha, Khwaja Asif, and Ghulam Mustafa Shah, they were accusing of the 'loot' of plunder at the hands of government in residential resources of the country, but with particular reference to the innumerable irregularities in the Lahore Defence Housing Society.
We are given to understand that an official who has been entrusted wit the examination of the Prime Minister's reference is expected to be away from the secretariat for some time.