AGL 40.02 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.02%)
AIRLINK 127.99 Increased By ▲ 0.29 (0.23%)
BOP 6.66 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.76%)
CNERGY 4.44 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-3.48%)
DCL 8.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.46%)
DFML 41.24 Decreased By ▼ -0.34 (-0.82%)
DGKC 86.18 Increased By ▲ 0.39 (0.45%)
FCCL 32.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.28%)
FFBL 64.89 Increased By ▲ 0.86 (1.34%)
FFL 11.61 Increased By ▲ 1.06 (10.05%)
HUBC 112.51 Increased By ▲ 1.74 (1.57%)
HUMNL 14.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.32 (-2.12%)
KEL 5.08 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (4.1%)
KOSM 7.38 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.94%)
MLCF 40.44 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.2%)
NBP 61.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.08%)
OGDC 193.60 Decreased By ▼ -1.27 (-0.65%)
PAEL 26.88 Decreased By ▼ -0.63 (-2.29%)
PIBTL 7.31 Decreased By ▼ -0.50 (-6.4%)
PPL 152.25 Decreased By ▼ -0.28 (-0.18%)
PRL 26.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.38 (-1.43%)
PTC 16.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.15 (-0.92%)
SEARL 85.50 Increased By ▲ 1.36 (1.62%)
TELE 7.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-3.27%)
TOMCL 36.95 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (0.96%)
TPLP 8.77 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.27%)
TREET 16.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.86 (-4.87%)
TRG 62.20 Increased By ▲ 3.58 (6.11%)
UNITY 28.07 Increased By ▲ 1.21 (4.5%)
WTL 1.32 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-4.35%)
BR100 10,081 Increased By 80.6 (0.81%)
BR30 31,142 Increased By 139.8 (0.45%)
KSE100 94,764 Increased By 571.8 (0.61%)
KSE30 29,410 Increased By 209 (0.72%)

The PRSP expenditures in the third quarter of 2003-04 were Rs 157.88 billion against Rs 127.59 billion for the corresponding period of FY03, an increase of about 24 percent.
Overall spending under the PRSP umbrella in Q3 of FY 03-04 has increased by 23.7 percent. Likewise, the increase was 27.4 percent in Punjab, 7.7 percent in Sindh and 36.2 percent in Balochistan over the first half of FY 03-04. NWFP, however, registered a decline of 11 percent.
In retrospect this has indicated that significant ground has been covered since the first year of devolution (FY 2001-02), when the PRSP expenditures in Punjab, NWFP, and Balochistan registered a decline of 21, 26, and 5percents, respectively, on a year-on-year basis.
The sectoral analysis exhibited increase in critical areas like 69 percent in Roads and Bridges, 30 percent in Education, 27 percent in Health, 51 percent in Population Planning, 184 percent in Social Security, 20 percent in Land Reclamation, 10 percent in Law and Order, 23 percent in Administration of Justice, and 51 percent in Water Supply and Sanitation.
However, an important sector of Rural Development has registered a decline of 41 percent.
At the federal level, a new policy of expenditure management of allowing the Ministries to spend 50 percent of PSDP allocations in social sectors and 45 percent in other sectors during the first half of the financial year without reference to ways and means has started paying dividends in the form of substantial increase.
The provinces have been advised to gear up the pace of expenditures in the sectors that are lagging and keep track to ensure meeting quarterly quantitative targets. It is expected that by the end of second quarter, the position would be improved.
It may be noted that water and sanitation is now a completely devolved function to Tehsil Municipal Administration in all district governments except city governments and expenditure is booked against transfers to the local fund.
As the devolved financial management system is taking shape, the devolution process is being consolidated, new operational snags are being addressed and the administrative capacity of district governments is being augmented through increased technical assistance, operational support, and training, it is expected that it would also increase effectiveness of the spending and improved service delivery.
At the same time, a fast track approach would have to be adopted in ironing out issues of releases, bookings, disbursements, and utilisation - between provincial, district, and Tehsil governments - to ensure that pro-poor expenditures remain in line with the government's medium-term targets.
These measures would have to be supplemented by institutionalising effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to measure the social impact of these outlays, especially at the district level.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2004

Comments

Comments are closed.