The government on Tuesday referred a Pakistan People's Party Parliamentarians bill, supported by all parliamentary parties in the National Assembly, to House standing committee. The bill envisages deletion of the concurrent list from the Constitution.
PML (N), the ruling PML, Muttahida Qaumi Movement and Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) all supported the bill and strongly advocated for grant of provincial autonomy to provinces to end their "seething sense of deprivation".
The bill, 'The Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2006', seeks to amend Article 153 and Fourth Schedule to the Constitution and substitution of Articles 101 and 104 and deletion of Article 160, pertaining to the constitution of National Finance Commission, which would give the provinces a great deal of financial independence and greater control over their own resources.
It was perhaps the only occasion that the 100-item agenda was exhausted on the private members' day during the National Assembly's four-year existence. Speaker Amir Hussain greeted and thanked the members for this "achievement".
Earlier, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Sher Afgan Niazi said he wanted Mujeeb Pirzada of PPPP, mover of the bill, to first have an audience with PML President and chairman of the parliamentary committee on Balochistan Shujaat Hussain. Other movers of the bill are Mehmood Achakzai, Qurban Ali Shah, Hizbullah Bughio, Kahlid Iqbal Memon, Manzoor Wassan, Anwar Bhutto, Zafar Shah and Rauf Mengal.
Majority of the bills were either referred to the relevant standing committees or were deferred.
The minister fully agreed with both treasury and opposition members that any further delay in removing genuine concerns of the provinces could harm the federation. "There is no party in the House that may oppose removal of any lacunae in the way of provincial integration. The blame game should end now. The list must be fine-tuned," Niazi added.
He conceded that it was high time to forge unity, rising above party lines.
Pirzada, himself a lawyer, said that there was a war-like situation in Balochistan and Sindh, particularly after the killing of Akbar Bugti. He said that military operation was no solution to the issues, and added that these could be resolved through dialogue.
Pervez Malik of PML (N), Farid Paracha of MMA, and PPPP's Qurban Ali Shah and Naveed Qamar recalled that the concurrent list was to be eliminated after ten years following the passage of the Constitution in 1973, which was never done, resulting in complications between provinces and the Centre.
"What the rulers are waiting for? It is the best time to delete the list. We are ready to cooperate with the government if it wants to legislate on this important matter," they said.
MQM member, parliamentary secretary for communications Abdul Qadir Khanzada, contended that to save Pakistan, it was crucial to implement the 1973 Constitution in letter and spirit. He cautioned that further dilly-dallying could endanger the federation.
MMA's bill to provide protection to women, 'The Women Protection Bill, 2006', was outrightly rejected by parliamentary affairs minister on the plea that already a bill is to be considered on Thursday.
Samia Raheel, daughter of Qazi Hussain Ahmed, agitated over rejection of the bill and flayed the ruling PML leaders, who, she claimed, had assured her of accommodating the recommendations in the new piece of proposed legislation on the subject.
Another bill by MMA members, which sought to prohibit immoral advertisements, 'The Prohibition of Immoral Advertisements Bill, 2006', was also rejected through voice vote.
Explaining the aims and objectives of the bill, Sabir Awan and Dr Farid Paracha said that the proposed bill was a key to end 'misuse' of women for promotion of business.
"We will not let our country be shifted to a western way of life, where women are disgraced and exploited. Many ads on media hurt sanctity of women. There should be a ban on such ads," they contended.
Niazi strongly opposed the bill, dubbing it as a ploy to tarnish the country's image abroad and play havoc with business activities. "Who will decide whether or not an ad is moral or immoral? They have a hidden agenda that we will not allow," he alleged.
The leave to introduce the bill was not granted despite MMA members' insistence that at least it should be referred to House standing committee.
PML members Kashmala Tariq and Riaz Fatyana and PML (N) Saad Rafiq's bill to amend 'Family Courts Act, 1964' was introduced.
MMA female members were not allowed to move a bill to improve literacy in the country. Zulfiqar Gondal's bill to amend the 'Airports Security Force Act 1975' was introduced and referred to the standing committee.
Another bill moved by MMA members seeking repeal of 'Aga Khan University Examination Board Ordinance 2002' was deferred. Mehnaz Rafi withdrew her bill regarding amendment to 'Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance 1979', 'The Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Amendment Bill, 2006'. She agreed to a proposal by Niazi that since a comprehensive bill had already been tabled and was to be taken up for consideration, there was no need for her bill.
The ruling PML minority member MP Bhandara said he found himself alone when he sought leave to move a bill for amendments to the rules of procedure and conduct of business in the assembly.
He had proposed that in case of absence of any member without leave from the House at the time of quorum is under final count, the member's all pay and allowances for that day be forfeited. "The bill can be called a new invasion in the rules. It is like putting an honourable member in jail," commented parliamentary affairs minister.
Bhandara reminded the House that its one-minute proceedings cost Rs 0.15 to 0.2 million, "while the members don't take it seriously".
Disposing of a calling-attention notice by Sabir Hussain, Ahmed Ghafoor, Abdul Malik, Attaur Rehman and Rehmatullah Khalil, the Speaker directed State Minister for Commerce Hamid Yar Haraj to arrange a meeting of government officials and tobacco growers on the House standing committee platform.
The minister had earlier said that the Ministry of Health wanted reduction in tobacco production while the Ministry of Industries encouraged boost in its production. The movers contended that growers were suffering due to two ministries' tug of war. They wanted the government to ensure that growers get due price for their crop, and that it is timely lifted.
Comments
Comments are closed.