29 April 2005	Friday	19 Rabi-ul-Awwal 1426

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

LAHORE, April 28: The overall expenditure on development projects required to be identified by assembly members under the Taamir-i-Punjab Scheme has remained dismally low this year because of the ‘political management’ of those identified by the opposition MPAs and rejection of those pointed out by women parliamentarians elected on reserve seats.

Since the funds are non-lapseable, a majority of treasury MPAs also are not taking interest in identifying schemes in their respective constituencies.

The scheme was launched on the demand of MPAs, who wanted to carry out development activities in their constituencies after they had lost such powers under the devolution plan. The parliamentarians in the 1980s and 1990s used to get huge funds in the name of development in their constituencies, but they had to give up the practice in view of the transfer of such powers to the district governments.

Every MPA is entitled to suggest and supervise schemes up to Rs5 million every year. The spending in the current fiscal has been only 16 per cent compared to 65 per cent in the last year.

Official sources claimed on Thursday that the provincial government had been politically managing schemes by the opposition MPAs, which had led to less utilization of funds.

The government, too, had decided not to release funds for the schemes identified by the women MPAs elected on reserve seats because they had no constituencies. This policy decision was taken after observing that such MPAs were suggesting schemes wherever they liked in the province.

The treasury members also were not taking interest in the project because of the knowledge that their funds would not lapse and they could use those during the next financial year, the sources said.

“The MPAs are required to only identify the schemes, which are approved by the district development committees, headed by the DCOs. They do not have any involvement in the expenditure of funds and under these circumstances you can judge the level of their interest in the programme,” they said.

“Ultimately the general public suffers because it is not being given the benefits of the programme whatever the reason may be,” the sources said.—INTIKHAB HANIF