 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Will austerity gain grounds? |
AUSTERITY measures designed to reduce the size of the government, proposed by the Committee on Austerity Measures under the chairmanship of Federal Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin, were tabled for cabinet approval in its last meeting held on Wednesday. The cabinet, however, had no time to take up that agenda item in its entirety and dealt with only two items namely: Gas Load Management and the 5-day work week for industries.
The rest, dealing with austerity measures, were deferred for consideration to some other time. The suggested austerity measures were as unimaginative as the name of the Committee and included besides the two weekly holidays; reduction in the number of vehicles in the entourage of the president, the prime minister, members of his cabinet and restructuring of public sector entities like Pakistan International Airlines (PIA), Wapda, Pakistan Steel Mills (PSM) and National Highway Authority (NHA).
Two weekly holidays, with one hour extra to be worked during the five-day week, is no doubt going to compromise the already low productivity of the country. If this measure had been followed by the civil service reforms that sought not only to reward output, but also rationalise the number employed by the state, then such a measure would have borne fruit. No one will argue against the proposal to reduce the entourage, in terms of vehicles and manpower, provided to members of the executive.
However, with the security situation worsening, reflected adequately by the president and the prime minister merely condemning the suicide attacks that cost hundreds of lives almost daily and not visiting the sites, as is the common practice by heads of state and government in other countries, it is doubtful if this measure would be actually implemented.
And finally the proposal to restructure, as opposed to privatise, state-operated institutions may have limited success unless appointments are made on merit. Given the track record of this government so far in appointments, with even the Prime Minister's recent promotion decisions of senior bureaucrats creating concern, this is perhaps the least likely to be successful.
It is also pertinent to note that the entities mentioned, namely PIA, PSM and NHA have been much in the news for decades as institutions heavily engaged in corruption and/or incompetently run. One can only hope that the restructuring would deal with such critical and long-standing issues - a challenge for anyone.
The austerity measures proposed are certainly the need of the hour attributed to the continued failure of the government to either convince its Friends to convert their pledges into disbursements, or indeed to endorse a tax policy designed to increase tax collections from the rich and the influential.
Thus, with revenue floundering well below targets, to finance expenditure and with the development budget already being massively slashed, there was little option but to request the executive to cut down its own expenditure. However, that these measures are simply not enough, is evident. The government needs to look more seriously into tightening its own belt.
The large cabinet, over 90, is simply not tenable, even if it is designed to appease the coalition partners, as claimed by PPP stalwarts. That this is not always the case in many a ministry is reflected where the Minister and the Minister of State are both from the PPP. An example is the Planning Commission. Then there are multiple ministries dealing with the same subject.
But by and large, the most-unsound policy is the existence of full-fledged federal ministries on provincial subjects, for example the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Health etc.
What is required is for the government to have one Inter-Provincial Co-ordination Ministry, with the objective of monitoring and dealing with any inter-provincial issues that may arise from time to time as well as ensuring smooth relations between the federal and the provincial governments. One sincerely hopes that the government does succeed in ensuring that our tax rupees are used frugally, as well as appropriately and that it is seen to be so.
|
| |
|
Ray of hope in Burma |
BURMA is in the news again, this time, at least, for a positive development. The Burmese opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, in a surprise move, was allowed to meet visiting US officials by the military junta. The delegation—comprising Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell—is the highest-level US contact with Burma’s ruling hierarchy in 20 years.
While details of the US meeting with Suu Kyi and Burmese Prime Minister Thein Sein have not been disclosed, the fact that they occurred at all is positive.
The US decision to engage the Burmese leadership amid continued sanctions, taken a few weeks earlier, is apparently influenced by a rethink of its previous policy of isolating the military regime. Despite longstanding economic sanctions, the US has not been able to alter the regime’s policies of repression. The fact that Myanmar enjoys Russian and Chinese support against further sanctions is something that ?hinders US objectives and reduces pressure on the regime.
The Burmese military’s decision to allow contact between US officials and the National League for Democracy (NLD)—led by Kyi—is a consequence of Ms Kyi writing a letter offering cooperation to General Than Shwe. Her offer for cooperation entails dialogue with western diplomats to remove sanctions in the larger interest of the common people.
This development of a cooperative relationship between the military and the democratic opposition, guided by mutual benefits, may not last long, considering their divergent principles. This should also not be taken as a guarantee that elections scheduled for early 2010 will be smooth sailing for the repressed opposition. Even after winning a resounding victory in the last election held in 1990, the NLD had not been allowed to form a government. The two decades in between the elections have been marked by detentions and measures to quell even peaceful protests by monks. Fearful of releasing Kyi’s release for pre-election canvassing, the junta has been resorting to lame excuses of extending her detention at home to sabotage the election.
The question worrying the Burmese leadership will be how long can they stagemanage the status quo? They may have succeeded in suppressing political movement for democracy so far, but the discontent among the people is growing by the day. Not only that, the leadership feels compelled to justify the political situation. One sure way of doing that is by holding elections. Ironically, as witnessed previously, with the outcome of the elections not to the liking of the military command, the whole exercise turns into a grand pretence. While this may have succeeded in the last election, the situation is different now, with the regime under increasing pressure domestically and from abroad. After the establishment of contact with Washington—something Myanmar probably covets despite its nonchalance— and in case of continued engagement it will become increasingly difficult for Burma to continue its policy of subjugation. As for the US, it is better to keep communication channels open. Isolating regimes like Iran, North Korea and Burma has not helped Washington, something it will do well to foster into its foreign policy.
—Khaleej Times
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
