The census remains a sensitive subject since population is linked to political and economic distribution in various shapes and forms. The question is whether there is a way to depoliticise the census?
As it turns out that Pakistan is not unique to this problem. In his recent interview with BR Research, Asif Bajwa, the boss of Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, pointed out that India had also faced these sensitivities in 1975. But back then, they decided that for the purpose of number of seats in the parliament the population ratio, as per their 1971 census, will remain fixed for the next 60 years.
Many commentators in Pakistan from the academia as well as the civil society at large have been making a case to follow the Indian model, and freeze all seat shares in the parliament irrespective of what the ensuing census reveals in the next ‘n’ number of decades. They maintain that this compromise will pave the way for a political consensus to ensure that census is duly held every ten years. Some policy analysts are also calling for the freezing of population ratio for the horizontal distribution of revenue in the case of NFC and PFC awards.
The problem with the suggestion to freeze population is that it leads to unequal democracy at federal as well as provincial level. Over time, this compromise comes at the cost of under-representation of certain regions while others are being over represented, as is becoming quite evident in the case of India. Is this not morally repulsive? Could there not be a constitutional, institutional or technological way around it?
Is the policy community not even willing to consider how the use of technology and strengthening of institutions can minimize the risks of deliberate over reporting on the population? For instance, couldn’t there be a change in law whereby there is a sanction on the incumbent federal governments if they do not hold census when the census becomes due during their tenure (exceptions being: war, emergencies etc).
Such a sanction, for example, could be s lower share in vertical revenue transfers until such time the census is held. There could be other types of sanctions or changes in law to ensure that provinces cooperate in the census; say by giving the governors certain powers to direct or control provincial bureaucracy in matters relating to census, if provinces do not cooperate in the holding of census.
Need one remind that the pace and frequency of domestic migration can be expected to quicken in the ensuing years as the ripple effects of globalisation seep within domestic economies. Ten years ago, Islamabad was still a sleeping town; today there is an increasing demand for public goods in the capital city. Likewise, if things go as per plan, Gwadar and the CPEC route should see noticeable changes in population and therefore an increase in the requirement of public service provisions.
Should these not result in corresponding changes in the distribution of political representation in national and provincial assemblies but also public goods by way of NFC and PFC awards? Citizens should not be politically or economically worse off simply because of lazy policy thinking that may lead to the freezing of population share in revenue sharing and political representation.
It is reasonable to assume that citizens do not produce human beings in anticipation of representation in national or provincial legislature or the NFC/PFC awards. The suggestions to freeze population ratio is born from the fears of deliberate over reporting of the population in a certain area. These are valid fears. However, the advent of technology and the collective understanding of how to make strong institutions have surely come a long way since the 70s when India first froze its population ratios. Anti-natal policies mustn’t come at the cost of democracy or fair distribution of resources!