Importance of central planning cannot be overemphasized

Academics keep on telling us about the progress Pakistan achieved during the 1960s – basically, through the tutelage of the then most effective Planning Commission.

All of the infrastructure created then was attributed to concerted effort towards planning at the national level with no nexus with any interested party. That it all stalled after this era is constantly assigned to political governments that took over after 1988.

The infrastructure projects that are being set up presently are considered whimsical and those that are taken up without any appreciable study or after any consideration of the cost benefits of the same. That some of the projects graduated afterwards as beneficial ones does not prove that these were good ones at the beginning too.

A prime example would be the artificially elongated M-3 Motorway that was to open up the Punjab hinterlands to industry but did not – but it did make the opened-up areas a bonanza for the most ambitious land developers. However, it did lead to acceptability of motorways as the right thing but unfortunately at too big a price.

Experts believe that other avenues could have been more beneficial and profitable for the Country, at least in the 1990s. This opinion has been supported by the fact that the Pakistan motorways are still unable to pay off their costs along with the accrued interest, etc. The critics have always quoted the Indian example where a much more frugal approach had netted great dividends.

Similarly, the advent and induction of the now criticised IPPs (independent power producers) is oft quoted as a damning concept. This too was never planned as such by the related in the GoP – rather, had para dropped in the Country away from any discerning eye. It is further said that had the IPPs been planned in a comprehensive manner, then, in all probability, an exit strategy too would have accompanied the induction.

Moreover, the IPP concept would have been just a one-time dispensation to cover the specific shortages of the time. Moreover, tariff based on the cost-plus formula would not have taken hold in the Country as is the situation at present. Sadly, continued acceptance of the pre-1996 scheme of things – as touted by the World Bank then, has become an existential threat for us.

Another apt example would be the four LNG-fired Combined Cycle Power Plants (CCPPs) sited and installed in the Punjab. All of these too have been brought to fruition without the benefit of a detailed feasibility plan or being a necessary appendage to the then nascent IGCEP (Indicative Generation Capacity Expansion Plan).

Incidentally, these plants were installed against the then government’s own policy of banning any new power plants running on imported fuel, while quoting the ongoing shortages and that provisioning of gas turbines was the only solution to be adopted for priority amelioration of the power shortages.

Indeed, two of these CCPPs immensely assisted in meeting the power shortages then but along with these, the rest of the two plants have become the proverbial weight around our necks.

Sadly, all of these four state of art plants are destined for very low dispatches in 2024 and onwards – with the luckless consumers paying for the ensuing raw capacity charges in addition to the legitimate tariff.

Another important example of picking projects at will, and that too at the behest of vested interests, is the failing water and sanitation infra-structure of all of the bigger cities of Pakistan. The set-ups are patchwork at best and prone to crash when the need is the maximum.

The World Bank did assist in designing comprehensive plans, but most of the time it all was too little and then also too late. It is most disconcerting to see that such ad hocism continues. Similar is the situation in the mass installation of RO Plants ostensibly to provide clear drinking water in the hinterlands of Sindh.

Mass scale failures have not deterred the concerned to implement more of such plants. Had provisioning of clear water been taken up after due planning process the things would have been different.

Another issue that merits attention relates to the mega water supply infrastructure for both Karachi and Islamabad. Though K-4 for the southern metropolis is on way to completion through WAPDA, but the same for the capital city in not even on the drawing boards.

Even K-4 is facing funding issues while large amounts have just been doled out to the parliamentarians to squander at will. Unfortunately, a large part of the largesse may end up lining pockets too. Central Planning would preclude such wasteful spending as only the approved projects would be able to secure financing.

Once national funding is channelized, then undue soliciting of loans too will stop. Besides, the sustainability of approved projects would be assured through comprehensive planning – instead of being taken up on the stand-alone basis.

It is also important to discuss the ML-1 railways concept and the push-pull it has faced since the last decade or so. Though a classic case of extreme criminal delay in the implementation of any project, the elapsed time period has proved that no project can succeed in absence of a detailed study.

Once such a study is available, the decision to take it up or scuttle the same can easily be taken. Similarly, it too can be firmed-up whether the project needs change, has to be taken-up in phases or it has to be a going project that just allows it to be completed with these segments dovetailing themselves into the existing system.

On the other hand, as the concept is nearly a decade old, hence it needs to be up-dated after due planning process.

It is further seen that certain projects are well suited for planning at the local level. In other words, infrastructure projects that are autonomous in content and in a way do not affect the rest of the works can, of course, be pinpointed, planned and even executed at the local level without the benefit of being a part of any central planning.

But in that case too, the projects have to be a necessary part of local planning otherwise these too would be facing problems similar to those being faced by the bigger or mega projects at the national or the provincial levels.

In case of above localized projects too, planning is a basic requirement to be undertaken at the tehsil and the district levels. It would thereafter become a part of the base for the pyramid planning activity –becoming a necessary part of the central planning at the national level.

In a way, the local authorities can suggest large or mega projects too, but it all is better left to the agencies operating at the national or federal level.

As a corollary, recommendations of the political elite/government of the day will also be routed for implementation through the entity tasked for planning at the national level and the recommended ones would only be prepared for implementation after due process and after going through the modules set for prioritization.

In other words, priorities already in place can only be changed if the new project completes all qualifications for jumping the queue – again on the basis of a firm study. Incidentally, all of the projects quoted as examples in the preceding paras, though important, would not have qualified for completion at that specific juncture. Actually, other more emergent infrastructure works would have received precedence to the benefit of the people.

Another important facet related to the fact that these all were tied up to the PKR-USD parity, which could not stay as it is. Any change in the assumed parity would thus change the whole dynamics. HUBCO’s tariff of 1996 was fixed at US cents 6/KWHr(with the PKR-USD pegged at Rs 36.08 per $) provided furnace oil was supplied at Rs 2,850/per MT.

Imagine the burden on the power consumer and the changing benefit cost ratio, when considering the PKR-USD parity to be 305 and the going price of furnace oil to be PKR 1,50,000/per MT (at its highest sometimes ago).

Consequent of the lack of discipline on part of the concerned, Pakistan has ended up with a seriously lopsided development. People quote the Indian example where their Planning Commission has been put to rest and thus would recommend the same for Pakistan too. However, as Pakistan is beset with differential level of development, a most divergent per capita income, an HDI level which showcases miseries for huge swaths of the country and lastly a failing writ of the state in most of western Sindh, Baluchistan and the KP provinces, there is a need to re-prioritise development projects in the country – necessarily through national or central planning.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023