Opposition in the Punjab Assembly on Monday heavily opposed the University of Gujrat Bill 2003, saying that it should be built in deprived areas of the province otherwise a sense of deprivation would prevail in such areas.
However, the thin Opposition was put on the back foot, after the Treasury Benches rejected nine of its total 11 amendments to the bill.
As the session could accommodate all the sections of the bill, including two amendments proposed by the Opposition, due to time constraint, the Speaker adjourned the Assembly till the next day to the conclude the debate on the bill.
While tabling an amendment to the bill, an opposition member Samiluallh Khan said that an even distribution of education, health and infrastructure was the responsibility of the government.
He further said if the government fails to deliver on these grounds, it would invite hatred from the people of the deprived areas and this would also give birth to anti-national leaders.
He was of the view that a university in Gujrat might not be acceptable to the people of southern Punjab and they may allege that 'the earning from cotton they produce has been invested in the Gujrat University'.
He proposed before the House for public consensus building on the bill in order to avoid a revolt.
Another opposition members Chaudhry Asghar Ali Gujjar said that the government has taken the right step of building a university, but instead of Gujrat it should be built in areas where higher education infrastructure lack the most.
Other opposition members also followed the same line and showed discontentment on setting up a university in Gujrat.
In response, Punjab Law Minister Raja Basharat said that Gujrat was also a vital contributor to the exchequer and the people's opinion through their representatives in the Assembly has been catered in the bill.
It was ironic to note a slip from the opposition when the Speaker rejected two of their amendments on technical grounds which later while talking to newsmen Arshad Baggu accepted the lapse.
The opposition's misery further continued when a member of the opposition, Syed Ihasan Ullah Waqas of Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) criticised Opposition Leader Qasim Zia and other senior opposition leaders for not attending the sessions on legislative matters.
He said, "We were elected and paid for making legislation, but it was strange that our senior opposition leaders abstain from the sessions and in the process neglecting their job."
These remarks triggered a mudslinging between Ihasan and Samiluallh Khan, accusing each other of aligning with the Musharraf's government. Ihasan went as far as labelling the MMA as 'pocket opposition'.
Earlier during the question-answer session, the opposition members objected to reversing the ban on kite flying for a short period to celebrate basant.
They argued that this activity costs lives and millions of rupees to the Water and Power Development Authority.
In response the Law Minister said that 'dangerous kite flying' was still prohibited.
By dangerous kite flying, the Minister meant use of 'tandi', metal or chemical string and he pointed out that its sale also prohibited.
He disclosed that those found guilty of use or selling it would be punished with imprisonment or fine or both.
To another question, the Law Minister accepted that the existing promotion system of Assistant and Deputy District Attorneys lack incentives, which prevents them from working with dedication.
"We were holding a series of meetings in this regard and we would revamp the system under the Access to Justice Programme so that a better working environment was given to them," he added.