Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has directed the Finance Ministry and the Planning Commission not to resort to a cut in development funds earmarked for projects under the Multan and Larkana packages, a Recorder Report quoting sources has claimed.
The directive coincides with the ongoing scrutiny of projects by the Planning Commission, in consultation with all the ministries and divisions, which has directed them to provide lists of prioritised projects, to be continued after the cut in the PSDP 2009-10, said to be around 50 percent. The prime minister had sought details of all the projects under the Multan and Larkana packages before giving approval to the summary.
He has reportedly barred the Planning Commission from slashing allocation for any project, under these packages, in the list of deleted projects after the rationalisation of PSDP. The Finance Ministry wants the cut in PSDP from Rs 446 billion to Rs 250 billion, but the Planning Commission wants to keep the size of the PSDP at Rs 285 billion.
The cut in PSDP has been prompted essentially by three factors: one, non-materialisation of pledges made by the Friends of Democratic Pakistan, two, Washington's failure to release the promised Coalition Support Fund assistance, and three, the hike in expenditure due to the ongoing military operation in Waziristan. All these factors have understandably caused an acute financial crunch.
The Finance Ministry has estimated the expenditure incurred on the war on terror in 2009-10 at Rs 213 billion, which will be absorbed by slashing the PSDP - traditionally considered a handy tool by successive governments in Pakistan to meet financial emergencies. The government has also had to revise upwards the expenditure on defence services from Rs 343 billion to Rs 378 billion, ostensibly in response to a hefty raise made in India's defence budget.
Saber-rattling by New Delhi and its growing clandestine involvement in Pakistan's insurgency-hit areas has also played a part. Currently, over half of India's budget has been allocated for military, paramilitary services and debt-servicing. Given Pakistan's internal and external security situation, the hike in Pakistan's defence budget is amply justified, though creating fiscal space, through a cut in PSDP allocations, is not the best policy option available to us.
The primary cause of our fiscal troubles has been two-fold: One, financial planning, based largely on projections and conjectures that at times prove unreliable, and two, our almost uncontrollable deficit, which in turn has restricted fiscal space. Additionally, an extremely narrow tax base because of a large number of exemptions, aside from non-filing and under-filing, has further complicated things.
Area-specific development packages in Pakistan, as elsewhere in the Third World, invariably have political, ethnic and regional overtones, which some may view as being violative of the primary spirit of egalitarianism if the packages are used to protect the vote banks of individuals or political parties.
At the same time, taking care of the interests of the constituents is also an established practice in parliamentary democracy, albeit allowing such considerations to influence the decision-making processes would bear resemblance to "favouritism," though not all packages can be viewed in this light.
For instance, the idea of creating a Saraiki province in Punjab has gradually gained strength, and the recent statement issued by parliamentarians in its support is a measure of the growing popularity of the idea. Packages in Pakistan are often announced to correct some historical wrong, as in case of Aghaz-i-Haqooq-i-Balochistan, though the very name of the package is not without a ring of irony.
Without any wish on our part to sound partisan, the fact that the prime minister has barred the Planning Commission from putting any project, under the Multan and Larkana packages, on the list of deleted projects after rationalisation of the PSDP, may seem to many to be an unbecoming show of "tilt" by the holder of the second highest office in the country.
Although for a parliamentarian or a minister to indulge in such things would seem less odd. Secondly, spending public money to further personal or party political interests would not go down well with the principles of egalitarianism and fairplay, which is the essence of democracy.
There is a need to cultivate a culture of non-partisanship that can help promote a spirit of mutual accommodation, which we badly lack. If assiduously pursued, this can have a very civilising influence. Let the stakeholders, across the board, set the precedent.