Strengthening the Planning Commission

Hidden though it may be, there has always been a rivalry in our country between the Planning Commission and the economic ministries, particularly the Finance, to attract the attention of the powers that be.
In this game, the Ministry of Finance had usually the upper hand because of its authority it enjoys to manipulate the purse strings of the country and the superior status of most of the finance ministers in the cabinet in the past. Lately, however, the fortunes of the Planning Commission seem to have improved somewhat.
According to a news report, the government has decided that the Prime Minister would be the Chairman of the Planning Commission from now onwards instead of the Finance Minister, a reversion to the pre-Ziaul Haq era.
When General Zia made Mahbubul Haq the federal minister for Planning, he made the then Finance Minister, Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Chairman of the Commission, a post that Zia had occupied here-too force. Now it has also been decided to constitute a 21-member planning and development policy board headed by the Prime Minister to enhance the role of the Planning Commission in formulating a long-term policy for development and economic growth.
A full-time policy board, again headed by the Prime Minister, would work as a policy-making forum and the Deputy Chairman of the Commission would perform his duties under this board. The number of Planning Commission members would be enhanced to nine instead of three and all of them would be placed in special MP-1 (Management Post) grades. All these members would be assisted by nine respective task forces to recommend sectoral policy initiatives. The members would act as think tanks to take up policy measures with the policy board for approval and implementation.
The newly created policy board of the Planning Commission would comprise 20 members, including 10 ministers and nine full time members, besides Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. These decisions are reported to have been taken to restructure, revamp and strengthen the Planning Commission's capacity to meet the country's future planning and development needs.
The restructuring of the Planning Commission on these lines would give a lot of teeth to the country's central planning organisation. Historically, the President or in the parliamentary form of government (whenever we had one) the Prime Minister used to be the Chairman of the Planning Commission with a Deputy Chairman having the status of a Federal Minister as its functional head while its Secretary performed the role of principal accounting officer. The decision to revamp the Planning Commission has been purportedly taken in view of the deteriorating capacity of its various wings.
The number of chiefs and deputy chiefs has already declined from about 80 to 24 during the last few years because no direct recruitments through the normal selection process of the Public Service Commission could be made during the last 30 years. The restructured Planning Commission, it is hoped, would now assist in defining the national vision and undertaking strategic planning, assessing material, capital and human resources of the country, formulating proposals for augmenting of such resources and building capacity of the agencies involved in the development process.
The decision of the Prime Minister to involve himself more closely in the affairs of the Planning Commission would obviously impart more prestige to the institution and enhance its standing in the government hierarchy, but how long such an arrangement would last and be effective is anybody's guess. The change in the status of the Planning Commission from a high-flying institution in the 1960s and 1970s to a near irrelevant body in the later years is the result of a change of emphasis in the economy.
Planning is always more important in a socialist economy or where the public sector plays a dominant or at least a crucial role. In an economy like Pakistan where the private sector is now supposed to act as an engine of growth and play a pioneering role, the role of the Planning Commission can at best be visualised as advisory.
The entrepreneurs in the private sector are not moved by government fiats but motivated only by concrete incentives and self-interest which depends on so many factors. This is, however, not to suggest that an economy driven by profit motives is less welfare oriented or inimical to growth, employment or prosperity but only to say that the role of the Planning Commission would have to be secondary in a free market economy. In fact, most of the developed countries have no Planning Commission as such to guide or oversee the activities of various sectors of the economy.
The Planning Commission in Pakistan, in our view, should also try to restructure and redefine its role in line with the changing environment in the country. The Prime Minister, instead of involving himself more and more with economic ministries of the country, should also try to enlarge his domain and give more time and attention to other ministries.
There are also other constraints the Planning Commission is likely to face on its working in Pakistan. Any plan or advice of the Planning Commission can easily be vetoed by the Ministry of Finance on the pretext of lack of funds. Also, less viable projects can be undertaken at the whims of the powers that be or considerations other than economic which renders the Planning Commission irrelevant at times. In our view, the government should be thinking of a leaner and smaller planning organisation, manned by highly motivated and competent staff so that it could really function as a think-tank of the government and earn the respect of other departments to look to it for guidance and advice.
Such a move can redeem the lost glory and prestige of the Planning Commission to a major extent and also make it relevant to the present situation. Of course, the problem about such a restructuring of the Planning Commission would be to recruit and retain highly qualified staff that may not be available in the normal pay scales of the government.