The Senate on Monday unanimously passed a bill to amend the Fiscal Responsibility and Debt Limitation Act, making it mandatory for the government to lay medium-term statement, fiscal policy statement and debt policy statement in the Upper House besides, the National Assembly.
The Senate will enjoy all the constitutional provisions on the matter, as envisaged in the law for the National Assembly. Labour and Manpower Minister Ghulam Sarwar Khan and Senator Enver Baig of the PPPP traded allegations over the export of manpower to Malaysia soon after the passage of the amendment.
Taking notice of a point of order by Senator Professor Khurshid Ahmad of the MMA, Senate Chairman Mohammadmian Soomro said he had brought the issue of ministers' absence from the House to Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz's notice, and would go for further action thereon in case they kept staying away from the House. At that time, only one minister was present in the Senate.
The government and opposition benches also agreed to a proposal by Senator M. Ishaq Dar of the PML(N) that the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) should also have a representation in the Senate besides the Lower House of the Parliament.
Reacting to it, Leader of the House Wasim Sajjad said that the Senator might bring the proposal before the Senate's law and justice committee for consideration.
Before the House approved the amendment, Wasim Sajjad expressed the hope that the bill would be duly passed by the National Assembly before the budget.
He said the government would be bound to eliminate revenue deficit and reduction in public debt to a prudent level by effective debt management and the Parliament would be kept informed.
The Lower House of the Parliament had passed the bill last year and while passing the bill, the opposition in the Senate had called for laying of reports and discussions thereon by the Upper House while proposing an amendment to it. The House resumed the business after a two-day break at 4:30 pm, half an hour behind the schedule.
After the amendment was passed, the House plunged into pandemonium, when Ghulam Sarwar and Enver Baig exchanged hot words and interestingly, the chair did not expunge harsh comments by either side.
The Senate echoed with allegations and counter-allegations following the moving of an adjournment motion by Professor Khurshid regarding some media reports about the plight of scores of Pakistani labourers in Malaysia and overcharging by the relevant manpower exporter agencies.
The minister contended that the motion was neither technically fit for a debate, nor was it based on a recent occurrence. He, however, expressed his readiness for a House debate on the overall labour policy.
One ruling PML Senator Fauzia Fakhruzzaman and Rukhsana Zuberi, who on receiving complaints, visited Malaysia and met several Pakistanis alleged that the attitude of the Pakistan ambassador was like of a colonial officer towards the countrymen.
Narrating her experience, Senator Fauzia with agony visible on her face, described how in Malaysia initially the ambassador tried to resist her meeting with the labourers, and they wept and begged her to rescue them.
The labourers are being paid grossly less, given inadequate food and forced to work from early morning to late at night, and this was in addition to the manpower exporter agencies charging them from Rs 50,000 to Rs 100,000. She made particular mention of their emaciated bodies and desperation to return home.
The minister rejected that majority of Pakistani labour was being paid less and subjected to overwork. However, he conceded that the Ministry had received 89 complaints. After investigations, licences of 21 companies were cancelled and blacklisted.
He claimed that the confidence of Malaysia on Pakistan had been restored and from 2005 to April, 2006, 12,275 labourers had started work in Malaysia while there was a fresh demand for 22,395 Pakistani workers.
He said Pakistan was expected to receive demand from Singapore and the government was exploring markets in other countries as well. Earlier, speaking on the admissibility of the motion, Professor Khurshid contended that the government had not been able to capitalise on the golden chance of capturing Malaysian labour market. He claimed that scores of Pakistanis had not been only heavily overcharged but also could not find jobs there, resultantly India grabbed the opportunity.