Pakistan Railway's top bosses claim to have achieved a turned-around of the organization, making it a profitable, commercial venture.
Unlike, Wapda headed by a serving three-star general, Railways are being run by two three stars retired generals as the minister for railways and communication and secretary/chairman, Railway Board, and both are located in Islamabad/Rawalpindi.
The minister is more vocal in making claims and taking credit for doing what others could not do earlier.
But what are the facts and figures on the ground? If all these are taken into consideration, the Railways are certainly not back on the track and have a long way to go before it could be termed as a public sector organization financially, commercially and rolling stock-wise efficient and capable of delivering the goods.
The facts and figures taken from official documents speak volumes for regarding the mess the Railways has been in for years together like many other public organizations. Those at the helm of its affairs should concentrate on doing some concrete work instead of going around and making tall claims.The Pakistan Railways had lot of overage sleepers and rails on which it was running the operations across the country. Kilometre (km) age of overage sleepers and rails stood at 4907 and 5042 track km respectively as of June 30, 2001.
According to the ministry of communications and railways own record, the overage rails and sleepers would increase to 5972 and 5820 track km respectively by June 2006 if no renewals were carried between 2001 and 2006.
These and some other relative facts and figures were mentioned in Pakistan Railways Project for the rehabilitation and improvement of its track which was to be implemented over a period of five years in phased manner i.e. 2001-06 at an estimated cost of Rs29.05 billion including the foreign exchange component of Rs 10.06 billion.
According to the Planning Commission sources, the project "Rehabilitation and Improvement of Track on Pakistan Railways" envisaged complete track renewals (CTR) of 1790 km, sleeper renewal (SR) of 225 km, rail renewal of 25 km on primary A 1881 km CTR on primary B 324 km CTR on secondary 307 km CTR on territory routes; comprising in overall 4327 km of rail renewals and 4527 kms sleeper renewals between July 2001 to June 2006. The methodology proposed for the project implementation was 1692 km of primary A line (including 1628 km double line from Landhi, Karachi, to Lodharan) would be replaced by new UIC-54 rails, pre-stressed concrete sleepers (PCS), Vossloh Fittings (both imported and local) over 12 inches ballast cushion. The rails released from primary A sections would be lifted as such and relaid on primary B and those released from primary B would be relaid on secondary and territory lines.
And, what had transpired in the meeting of the Central Development Working Party (CDWP) when the project was taken up for consideration in its meeting sometime back made quite an interesting reading.
The planning and development division's chief (transport and communications) introducing the project informed the meeting that Pakistan Railways had in September 2000 submitted a rather comprehensive rehabilitation plan estimated to cost Rs 40.086 billion including foreign exchange component of Rs 19.009 billion. The same was considered by the National Security Council / Federal Cabinet and subsequently by the concept clearance committee of the planning commission. He said the said rehabilitation plan included track rehabilitation programme estimated to cost Rs10.59 billion and as such there was no co-relation of the proposal under consideration with the project size considered by the NSC/federal cabinet and the concept clearance committee.
Conveying his disagreement with the proposed methodology, the chief (T&C) stated that in fact it was relaying of track and not the rehabilitation of track.
He said that an allocation of Rs 1.543 billion including FEC of Rs 1.143 billion was made for the project in the public sector development programme 2001-02 whereas Pakistan Railways had proposed Rs 6.452 billion (FEC Rs 3.214 billion) for the first year of implementation of the project. Thus, there was no co-relation between the availability of resources and financial phasing proposed by the Railways in the PC-I.
He also expressed apprehensions regarding implementation capability of the Railways for undertaking such a major project. Although the PR had confirmed their implementation capability in their replies to the observations earlier raised by the planning commission but, "it was still doubtful in the light of the past track record."
The forum was accordingly informed that the PR had proposed increase in speed upto 140 km per hour (KMPH) and that 69 diesel electric locomotives being procured from China under a separate scheme would be capable of hauling the train for the targeted speed.
The meeting was apprised that PR in replies pertaining to the locomotive project had informed that DEL of 3500 horse power (HP) would be capable of running at the maximum speed of 125 KMPH depending upon the load to be hauled.
The Pakistan Railways had in fact raised the speed, during the Seventh Five Year Plan, to 120 KMPH which was, however, subsequently decreased to 105/110 KMPH on main line due to shortage of maintenance funds for track and coaches.
The planning commission official opined that availability of maintenance funds would be scarce and the proposed increase in speed would meet the same fate.
As regards financing availability for the project, it was stated that $20 million were committed by Austria and another tranche of $20 million was also promised, besides $ 7 million from Jeddah-based Islamic Development Bank. Thus the indicated finances totalled about Rs3.102 billion while the financing of the balance amount of Rs7.00 billion including FEC was not known.
Concluding he opined that the project in its present form may not be recommended for approval and instead the PR be directed to submit a re-cast PC-I after identifying critical sections for rehabilitation while confining within the indicated resources for the ten-year plan. Other members also had recorded their observations and objections.
The chairman of the CDWP(deputy chairman of the planning commission), observed during deliberations that the project was over-designed and desired its implementation in phases by submitting a recast PC for first phase spread over 5-6 years.
While conveying his concern over arrangements through the suppliers credit he concluded that it was neither advisable nor possible to suggest such mega projects through suppliers credit at high interest rates. The Pakistan Railways representative had a rather bleak picture to paint while responding to observations and projections raised during the discussions.
He informed the CDWP that 60 per cent of the track was over-aged and referred to an accident near Kotri where the rails had got broken into 13 pieces and 5 people were killed.
He stated that PR was running passenger trains and were under the obligation of ensuring security of passengers.
He said the condition of the track on branch lines was terribly bad , the rails were laid about 100 years ago, and the continuation of operation on some of these lines was a safety risk.
He said indigenous manufacturing of rails from the Pakistan Steel Mills was explored but somehow the same could not be managed.
He pleaded strongly for the approval of the project in the present form for implementation in phases adding that balance foreign exchange requirement would be net through the suppliers credit.
After all this and much more deliberations on different aspects of the project, the CDWP decided to return the project to the sponsoring agency with the direction that a recast PC-I should be submitted as Phase-I of the programme after identification of critical sections in consultation with the planning commission and carry out phasing of the overall plan on a realistic basis.
