Anjum Ibrahim
The general perception amongst Pakistani politicians is that the more spent on Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) the greater the chances of being re-elected. This presupposes being in government as a party in opposition would naturally not be able to divert government resources for development purposes.
This perception accounts for the widening gap between budgetary allocations on PSDP which, over time, have become a wish list and the revised amount at the end of the year. At the time of the budget speech, there is much crowing by the incumbent finance minister claiming that the government has dramatically increased its outlay on PSDP indicating its expenditure priorities and little is made of the failure to achieve the allocation targets for the outgoing year.
Be that as it may, the budgeted federal PSDP for 2014-15 was realised and critics argue that by providing monetary incentives to provinces to generate a surplus as well as delaying the release to provinces under the federal divisible pool accounted for the Dar-led Finance Ministry to keep the federal PSDP unchanged but its repercussions on the provincial annual development programmes was significant. In 2013-14 the federal government budgeted 23 billion rupee provincial surplus; however, revised estimates were eight times higher amounting to 183 billion. The following year 289 billion rupees was budgeted with 141.5 billion rupees was realised and the current year’s PSDP is 700 billion rupees (158 billion rupees higher than last year) with a budgeted provincial surplus of 297 billion rupees, however, reports indicate that the government has already agreed with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to slash PSDP by around 22 to 25 percent to meet the deficit target.
Be that as it may, it is a matter of record that the two PPP prime ministers namely Yousuf Raza Gilani and Raja Pervez Ashraf spent a considerable amount of public money on development schemes in their constituencies based on the premise that this would guarantee them victory in the 2013 polls. Both men lost their seats reflecting a delinking of development outlay from electoral fortunes. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is constantly reiterating what he claims is his government’s focus on development projects and accuses PTI, his main rival in PML-N stronghold in Punjab, as being responsible for derailing the process of development. This may not be sufficient to win him the next elections.
Those who cite the proverb what’s in a name with respect to the title of development projects in Pakistan must be aware that our two national parties that have till now formed a government in the centre namely the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and the Pakistan People’s Party Parliamentarians have their own favoured titles. The PPPP has traditionally announced People’s Programmes, an offshoot of the party’s name to ensure that there is no mistaking by the public as to which party is responsible for these programmes, as well as using the names of their deceased leaders namely Z A Bhutto and Benazir Bhutto for development projects/public buildings/tractor schemes/airport/hospitals/share options.
The Sharif administration, perhaps more enamoured of the office its leader holds after the party is victorious at the polls, favours allocation of funds for Prime Minister’s programmes. In 1992, yellow cabs acquired under Nawaz Sharif’s yellow cab scheme were lined up for miles in support of Mian sahib when he launched his long march which, reports at the time indicated, surprised him. This may account for the Sharif administration favouring projects that allocate funds to individuals as opposed to the development of a sector/subsector. At last count there were seven Prime Minister’s schemes with individual beneficiaries in the budget for the current fiscal year: (i) Prime Minister’s Interest-Free Loan Scheme; (ii) Prime Minister’s Business Loan Scheme; (iii) Prime Minister’s Fee Reimbursement Scheme for less developed areas; (iv) Prime Minister’s Youth Training Scheme; (v) Prime Minister’s Youth Skill Development Scheme; (vi) Prime Minister’s Scheme for provision of laptops; and (vii) Prime Minister’s Housing Scheme. It is relevant to note that given survey results that the youth support Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) the focus of these seven schemes, clearly the youth, have political overtones.
The most important pro-poor project launched during the Zardari tenure was Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) which envisaged payment of cash to the poor and vulnerable. Dar has repeatedly claimed that it was he who conceptualized the programme during his six-week tenure as the Finance Minister in 2008 though he is silent on the inadvisability of publicly accusing his predecessor Shaukat Aziz of data manipulation – a charge that almost compromised the 7.2 billion dollar Stand By Arrangement that was approved by the IMF on 20th November 2008. Be that as it may, BISP may have been conceptualized by Dar, but it was refined and implemented by the PPP – a much more difficult and challenging task.
Two elements need to be highlighted in the BISP context. First, the 2015-16 budget itemizes National Income Support Programmes (total allocation of 102 billion rupees) into two sub-items namely BISP (allocation 102 billion rupees) and Prime Ministers Schemes with no allocation though the document notes the allocation is reflected in PSDP under Prime Minister’s Youth Programme with a budget of 20 billion rupees. This reinforces the fact that (i) the inclusion of Benazir in BISP continues to irk the Sharif administration; (ii) to counter BISP the government itemized the list of seven PM schemes; and (iii) many of BISP programmes envisaged under the PPP regime have been transferred out of BISP and into the Prime Minister’s programme which may well imply a lower outlay on BISP and higher on PM schemes.
Asif Ali Zardari in private conversations when he was the President exhibited overwhelming confidence that his party would sweep the 2013 polls. This assessment was based on his three-pronged strategy: first, what he referred to as electables who were already in the party or could be lured with promise of lucrative positions, the policy of reconciliation which placed him in a better position to form a coalition and his belief that the millions of BISP beneficiaries would vote PPP. That this strategy failed to grant him an electoral win in the National Assembly may be attributed to the completion of his five-year tenure which not only eroded the sympathy/victimization vote that political parties had hitherto relied on but also led to many constituencies especially in major cities, towns and in their environs, voting on the basis of performance – a factor that wiped out PPP from most constituencies other than rural Sindh (where the party nominees had no rivals) as well as a key coalition partner ANP from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. BISP beneficiaries did not overwhelmingly vote PPP and the linkage between the recipients and votes never materialized. In clearly what is not a lesson learned from the PPP was the flawed decision of the Sharif administration to direct Marvi Memon, the Chairperson of BISP, to campaign in support of Ayaz Sadiq last year – a woman who had failed to win the elections in her own constituency in Sindh. Sadiq won but procedural changes brought about by the Punjab government are widely believed to be the reasons for his victory. In addition, Dar is on record as stating that the Sharif administration has tripled the allocation on BISP, a claim that may not win votes in 2018.
Nawaz Sharif this week past mentioned improved law and order as his administration’s major achievement and committed to ending the energy crisis by 2018, the election year. The improvement in law and order is being attributed to Chief of Army Staff which accounts for his popularity being much higher than that of any political leader including Nawaz Sharif. But if the Sharif administration is successful in ending the energy crisis and at a tariff that is affordable by the end of its tenure there is little doubt that the Prime Minister would be in a better position to present his case for reelection: that he resolved a crisis within his term as promised and would continue to resolve all other pending issues.
The opposition, however, would raise the issue of lack of transparency in holding Sharif loyalists accountable, including the investigation into the Model Town tragedy, the murder of two PTI loyalists in Faisalabad, the death of one PPP loyalist in AJK, bypassing parliament and taking decisions unilaterally, not resolving provincial concerns by not summoning the Council of Common Interest every three months as required by the constitution, massive assets held abroad by politicians but particularly by the Sharif and Dar offspring and go slow investigations on past corruption by all politicians – potential vote losers for the ruling party.
