FROM A RINGSIDE SEAT

The budget session of the National Assembly was prorogued on Thursday evening as Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz offered his vote of thanks to the members on both sides of the aisle.
The role of the opposition was constructive, its members were less critical than expected, he said but "I am sorry that some members targeted the armed forces...the forces are the national asset". His tone exuded confidence, not betraying even the slightest hint that a huge chunk of ruling coalition members had only recently conveyed to him their dissatisfaction over denial of opportunity to them of participating in the budget debate. Leaders of this group, numbering 56, most of whom sit on the back benches and hail from southern Punjab, spoke to the mediamen in the cafeteria and confirmed having written the letter.
Why should these disillusioned members raise this issue only towards the end of the fortnight-long budget session when they did not make a conspicuous effort to take the floor remains a mystery. Generally speaking, in third world countries adoption of budget is awaited if a political change is to be effected. Have we arrived at the eve of a change is anybody's guess but there is a substantial body of opinion that suggests that the Establishment would prefer to have a political government to confront the present opposition at the hustings in September 2007. Today, the June 22, is not only the longest day of the year it is also the first day of the election year. There are not many takers in the Establishment of the opinion that the present set-up can win the next elections, and hence the efforts continue, mostly surreptitiously, to strike a deal with Benazir Bhutto.
What a paradox that the long and enthusiastic debate in the National Assembly, at the precious cost of siesta and often continuing late into the night, failed to make any impact on the budget as conceived by the bureaucracy. No doubt a lot of sound and fury was released in the air of the parliament building during the debate but not a word in the 6000-page budget documents was changed as a consequence. The government, however, agreed to some 16 out of 36 recommendations made by the Senate, but these are of no great significance, said opposition member Chaudhry Manzoor Ahmad. If the budget is to be passed as presented without changing a word then why to hold such an expensive and tiring charade of debate, some others said.
As it is said to every cloud, howsoever dark and threatening, there is always a silver lining; in case of the budget session that lining were the daily feasts. According to a rough estimate something like Rs 30 million were spent on these feasts that included breakfasts, lunches and dinners to over a thousand persons, including journalists, on daily basis. But not all the beneficiaries of this "man-o-salva" were grateful: On Wednesday Sher Afgan complained to Speaker Amir Hussain that the 'halva' served to the members had in it the sand particles. It could be even poison, added another.
On the Orders of the Day for Thursday was listed a discussion on charged expenditure as shown in the Supplementary Grants and Appropriations for the year ending June 2006 and then a discussion and voting on Supplementary Grants in respect of expenditure other than expenditure charged upon the Federal Consolidated Fund for 2005-06. Both totalled about Rs 217 billion, which constitutes about 20 percent of the budget as passed. Opening discussion on this part of the budget, Liaquat Baloch described it "practically a mini-budget" that clearly shows that the government had no control over its expenditure. Pointing out a number of shortcomings that confront the government he said Rs 100 million as charged expenditure for the ministry of foreign affairs is unacceptable given Pakistan today is facing increasing isolation in the world. "The presidency should have acted as role model" instead of asking for additional funds, he said.
Next speaker Aitzaz Ahsan termed the supplementary budget an "indictment" of the government, adding it is all the more tragic that this government never tires of claiming that its finances are in complete control and begging bowl has been smashed. Request for additional Rs 1.47 billion by the Cabinet Division to buy among other luxuries 80 bullet-proof cars must be opposed by all including the backbenchers of the government, he said. He also opposed granting Rs 17 billion extra to the defence arguing why to shift GHQ only four miles away from its present location. Hitting at a demand about "Miscellaneous" expenditure, he said the money would go into buying aircraft for the Prime Minister.
Babar Ghauri objected to the assertion that bullet-proof cars were purchased for the ministers and then asked Aitzaz Ahsan did his government not ask for supplementary grants for Defence and others. Sherry Rehman was sad that in the year that Pakistan faced the worst tragedy of its history the government did not hesitate to buy 32 more luxury cars.
Farid Paracha asked how could one justify extra expenditure exceeding 10 percent of the sanctioned allocation, wondering what would the people get in return of the Rs 3 billion, that have gone into maintaining an army of ministers and advisers.
Then came a telling sum-up from him: "Jitnay Baithay Hain Mandairoon Per Shakista Per Hain/ Jin Kay Per Sabit Hain Un Ko Kaun Rayhai They Ga". Pervaiz Malik focussed on the glaring imbalance in income and expenditure, arguing such a huge supplementary budget negatively reflects on the claims of good governance. He demanded reconstitution of NFC and solution of the issue of royalties, and also proposed that in case the government confronts a budgetary over-run, it should seek the approval of the parliament on six-month basis.