New Provinces in Pakistan?

These days almost all political parties of Pakistan are talking about the need to divide existing provinces for one reason or the other. Every party has its own interests in this cause; some would like to avoid division on linguistic or ethnic basis and others would like to exploit the two bases, some would like to increase the representation of current Punjab, in Senate, from 25 to 40, some would like to appoint one of their leaders as a CM of a new province, some would do it to protect rights of the people of ignored/underprivileged Punjab. Whatever the reason be, most of the parties agree to have more provinces.

This is encouraging that we realize the need for new provinces. The desire to have more provinces should be inspired by administrative reasons and not by any other reason. All other reasons will give birth to a new problem of having boundaries for each province.

Pakistan already has around 25 administrative divisions. An administrative division is the next tier of government after a province. Why not make each Division a Province? Since all divisions are administrative, the new provinces will be made purely on administrative basis. I feel that the proposal of promoting each division to a province can serve as a litmus test for the parties who are serious in their demand for new province. Their seriousness in demands for new province will be in doubt if the parties who still want to have Saraikistan, BJP, or South Punjab but do not like to have a Division as a Province. This should also make those happy who want to divide Punjab and those who want to divide Sindh.

There can be reasons to disagree with the suggestion; for example legislative issues, new buildings for assemblies, high courts etc. But there will be legislative issues whenever we want to have a new province. Since each division has basic infrastructure already in place, I feel that there is very little need to build brand new buildings. Existing buildings can be used for the time being and new ones can be built overtime.

Promoting a Division to a Province can resolve many administrative as well as political issues. There will be no conflicts in demarcation of provincial boundaries. This system will allow people to have their representative at a relatively smaller area. This will end the debate of giving rights to south Punjab or rural Sindh. This approach to have new provinces has no linguistic or ethnic reasons. Hopefully, this will end the dirty politics of fooling people and exploiting their sentiments on the basis of their association with a locality. This tier of government is a middle tier between the local government and current provincial government. These new provinces will reduce the gap between the two tiers of the government. Also, this approach to create more provinces is more proactive than reactive.

MQM helps Sindh Assembly pass a unanimous resolution against Musharraf :)

The 168-member assembly of the southern province of Sindh Wednesday unanimously passed a resolution that demanded a vote of confidence on President Pervez Musharraf in the presidential electoral college or his resignation.

One of Musharraf's devout allies, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), staged a walkout as the debate on the resolution started, leaving no one in the house to defend the beleaguered leader.

The Sindh assembly has around 69 pro-Musharraf members from the MQM and three other smaller parties.

Sindh Assembly passes resolution against Musharraf's ouster

PML-Q and MQM should have voted and prevent a unanimous resolution... i mean this is the province where mush could get some support... 60 to 70 legislators could have voted for him n let him feel a bit stronger... but the 'representatives' of ppl of khi, who were blindly supporting mush for last so many years, suddenly turned their back towards the president... will the ppl of khi who kept supportin mush for many reasons includin the 'economic boom' ask their legislators y did this happen??? y did the legislators left their beloved man alone in difficult times??? wht is the stance of mqm??? wht caused them to change their loyalties???

From other provinces, where there was no or negligible support for mush, the resolution could not pass unanimously. Even in punjab, where there r so many critics of mush, PML-Q stood bravely for their leader... But in a province where almost 40% legislators were musharraf's ally, the resolution passed without any resistance... '0' votes against the resolution

the credit goes to 'representatives' of ppl of khi, and PML-Q... well done both parties...

it seems tht mqm is now friends with ppp coz it only needs govt. it only needs incentives... who cares for the ppl n their wishes... will ppl of khi think abt this behavior by their party??? will they ever hold them responsible for anything???

the time is not far when ppl of khi who were the strongest supporters of mush, will have anti mush sentiment... ppl r just waitin for an order from the headquarters, their only leader, the world's only honest man... altaf bhai... this is how mqm proceeds... this wht they call politics

Also see the following:

MQM members’ decision to boycott the session was described by Sindh Information Minister Shazia Mari as "a positive role" and a victory for the people of the province.

Earlier, a joint meeting of parliamentary party of MQM in Sindh Assembly and Rabta Committee late on Tuesday night announced that the party would not support the impeachment resolution against President Musharraf. A statement released by MQM affirmed its support for President Musharraf claiming that the party never ditches its friends.

Khaleej Times Online - Sindh MPAs pass no-trust motion against Musharraf

a unanimous resolution clearly shows tht "MQM never ditches its friends" hehehe... it just shows its back when friends need it... MQM actually is a friend in need... i.e. it is friends with u only if it is in need :)... wht does it need???? govt., power n its hold on khi... thts it!

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Nasty jolts to the economy

By Shahid Javed Burki

PAKISTAN�S economy received several nasty jolts in the last several months. Some were delivered by the developments over which the country�s policymakers did not have any control. These included the inexorable increase in the price of oil which has affected all oil-importing countries including Pakistan.

There has also been an increase in the price of agricultural commodities Pakistan must import to meet domestic demand. These include wheat and oil seeds.

There were other jolts to the economy for which policymakers must take full responsibility. These include the shortage in the generation of electric power which has resulted in load-shedding that is taking a heavy toll in terms of both lost output and great discomfort to the citizens. Most affected by this shortage are the less well-to-do segments of society who cannot afford to buy alternate sources of electric supply such as portable generators.

These shortages should have been estimated by the previous administration and appropriate investments should have been made. Instead, for eight years, Pakistan did not make investments in electric power generation while the demand for electricity continued to increase at nearly seven per cent a year. This has left the country with a demand-supply gap estimated by the government at 4,000 megawatts.

Compounding these problems were the decisions taken by Islamabad to spend carelessly in order to help the party in power in the elections of Feb 2008. Public expenditure was allowed to increase way beyond the resources available to the government by way of tax and other revenues. The result was a ballooning of fiscal deficit estimated at 9.5 per cent of GDP by Ishaq Dar who was the minister of finance in the first coalition government to take office after the elections.

A significant part of this deficit was financed by borrowing from the central bank which added to the inflationary pressures already present in the economy. This produced price increases without precedence in Pakistan�s history. Once again it is the poor and the not-so-well-off segments of society that are suffering. Unless help arrives soon, Pakistan may begin to see political and social pressures building up. Considering the weak state of institutional development in the country, it would be hard to contain these strains.

The new set of political leaders, who have come to power, is being advised to adopt adjustment measures to deal with the pressures under which the economy is labouring these days. The prescriptions being offered are the usual ones: contain government expenditures by cutting spending on both current and development parts of the government budget, raise resources by expanding the tax base, provide relief to the poor by giving them cash transfers and by creating jobs for them by starting rural and urban works programmes, take advantage of the fall in the value of the rupee by encouraging exports, and make non-essential imports more costly.

In a report released by the new Lahore-based Institute of Public Policy that I chair, the government was also advised to transfer greater authority to the provinces and to the institutions of local government. This will help with the process of adjustment since it would bring economic governance closer to the people. We also advised the government to make sure that the design of adjustment policies ensured that future growth was not compromised. This was done in the 1999-2002 period when, following the advice of the International Monetary Fund, the then administration applied hard breaks to the economy.

This, as indicated above, is the standard advice given to most governments dealing with difficult economic situations. Pakistan, however, needs to do much more than follow the standard prescription. It needs to adopt an approach and develop a strategy that lessens the grip on the economy of several powerful vested interests. Over time, the Pakistani economic elite has increased its influence on the making of public policy.

The extent to which this has happened is clearly shown by some simple calculations. The latest World Development Indicators published by the World Bank provide estimates for all countries of the share in national income of various segments of the population. In Pakistan, the top 10 per cent of the population claims 26.3 per cent of the total national income while that of the bottom 10 per cent is only four per cent. This is one of the sharpest differences in the developing world: the rich receive 6.8 times the amount of national income that accrues to the poor.

However, a comparison of the shares in national income does not fully reflect the amount of real inequality between different classes of people. The rich have much better access to public services than the poor; the state generally looks after their interests much more than it does for the poor.

What makes these income differences even more problematic is that they are widening as a consequence of the growth model followed by the Musharraf government which favoured the rich. The sectors that flourished under President Musharraf did little for the poor while they provided large amounts of incomes and asset appreciation for the rich. The recent price increases in food commodities have added further insult to the injury inflicted by the pursuit of the growth model.The poor�s real income will decline significantly if food and fuel prices are allowed to eat into their disposable incomes. Not only is the price increase hurting the poor, the latter are also being affected by the various shortages that have appeared in the economy against which the rich can protect themselves but the poor are left to fend for themselves.

In fact, the rich have succeeded in creating large cocoons around themselves, thus isolating themselves from the less fortunate citizenry. They have built gated communities, protected by private security companies; they send their children to expensive private schools that provide education of reasonable standards; they go out over the weekends to shop in the malls of Dubai and go for summer vacations to various watering spots in Europe.While one should not grudge this lifestyle, it cannot be sustained in the midst of great and growing poverty. And it must not be sustained at the expense of the poor. Public policy must address this problem to ensure not only sustained economic growth but also social and political stability.

DAWN - Editorial; June 10, 2008

Blogged with the Flock Browser