Controversy over dams

IT is no surprise that the committee on big dams has failed to present its report to the prime minister by the due date. Headed by Mr A.N.G. Abbasi, the report was eagerly awaited so that the government could finally take a decision on the issue. However, the very fact that the report is not yet complete speaks of the complexity of the issue and the difficulties involved. Some committee members have reportedly objected to the way the report was being finalized, even though those objections are procedural. The point at issue is the desirability or otherwise of having a big dam on the Indus upstream. The case for a big, multi-purpose reservoir seems obvious going by the future requirements of a fast-expanding population. More electric power is needed for industries and domestic use. The demand of both for power is rising at a fantastic rate, while more water is needed for bringing in more land under cultivation for increasing agricultural production. The existing dams, barrages and reservoirs have reached the limits of their capacity. The walls of the Mangla dam are being raised to store more water. But that will only help the situation only marginally. As for Tarbela, the world’s biggest earth-filled dam, it has lost at least 30 per cent of its storage capacity as a result of silting. De- silting is not an easy task and the cost is formidable. This leaves the nation with no other choice but to build a big dam which could provide electricity and store irrigation water to be released in leaner months.

Now the question is: Bhasha or Kalabagh, or none at all? The latter option is absurd, to the point of being disastrous, for it would then be impossible to have an eight per cent growth rate visualized by the government for the economy. A big dam is already late by several decades. The Afghan war and its impact on Pakistan’s internal scene, besides weak political governments, combined to put the issue on the back burner. But now that the present government is keen on its construction it is unable to proceed because of a lack of national consensus. The NWFP government last week gave its support to the Bhasha dam while opposing Kalabagh. However, the strongest opposition to the latter comes from Sindh. Led by politicians, large sections of the agricultural community feel that Sindh, which is at the tail-end of the Indus water system, could lose its share of it if the Kalabagh dam were built. Already, the reduced flow has hurt Sindh’s coastal areas. Sea water has moved in, making fertile agricultural lands saline, affecting mangrove forests and uprooting fishing communities. If the Kalabagh dam is built, many in Sindh believe that it will be an agricultural and ecological disaster.

These are views the government has to take into consideration while making a decision. Without doubt the country needs a major multi-purpose dam, but work on it should begin only after the fears of the small provinces have been removed. This is now the task of all — the government, the opposition, NGOs, experts and the media — to help evolve a consensus that should aim at the nation’s best interest. Those opposing the Kalabagh dam should not try to politicize the issue. Instead, the dam must be examined from a technical point of view to ascertain its value for all parts of the country.

Budget for Karachi

KARACHI City Nazim Niamatullah Khan has presented a record Rs42.9 billion budget to the city council for the fiscal year 2005-06, which is 35 per cent higher than that of the previous year. Major spending goes towards development works, which account for Rs20 billion. However, the finer points of the budget need to be examined further to fully understand the way the money will be collected and spent. First of all, there are questions about the projected receipts against which the budget has been prepared. The City Nazim said at a press conference that there were differences with the provincial government over the release of funds under the Tameer-i-Karachi programme. These need to be sorted out at the earliest so that the expected funds are released. If this is not done, there are chances that many of the proposed development programmes would have to be abandoned. Receipt projections from other sources, especially since the city government has not imposed any new taxes, are also seen to be optimistic. Given that this is an election year for the city government, an overly optimistic budget may have been presented to the city council.

In the budget, the emphasis seems to be on high-profile projects like bridges, bus terminuses and flyovers. Other less prominent but equally important areas have been allotted much less. For example, the upkeep of parks in the city has been allocated Rs21 million — under one per cent of the budget. The city government also needs to pay more attention to the micro-level issues. While Rs8.5 billion has been allocated as salaries for employees, their performance leaves a lot to be desired. Overflowing gutters, heaps of garbage and pot-holed roads are a common sight in the city. This indicates a lack of proper supervision. An absence of proper monitoring is all too evident. City flyovers have developed potholes in many instances but the CDGK still does not check quality of construction or punish contractors who are responsible. Finally, there seems a clear lack of foresight and planning in city development. The faulted design of the underpass at Schon Circle is a case in point as there are now plans to rectify it. One wonders when these issues will be addressed as part of the CDGKs overall responsibilities in civic management.

Tighter immigration laws

IMMIGRANTS in the US have good reason to fear the possible passing of the Real ID Act which will have a major impact on immigrants’ rights, already under target since the 9/11 attacks. The proposed bill which was attached to a supplementary appropriations package aimed at funding troops in Iraq and tsumani relief efforts — is said to have been passed by the House of Representatives without any debate so as to ensure its speedy passage. If it is passed this week by the Senate, it will prevent immigrants from getting drivers licenses and deny them basic legal rights from tightening the bail process to abridging the judicial reviews on deportation orders. The Act will be a blow for those seeking religious or political asylum as they will have to provide documentary evidence of their persecution; failing to do so will result in deportation. Moreover, the Act aims at raising barriers across wetlands in California to prevent people from illegally entering the country — a move which is being described as one that goes against existing environmental laws. Civil rights groups, who are outraged by this bill, are likening it as a move to introduce a national ID system.

Given that evidence has pointed to intelligence failure as part of the reason the 9/11 attacks took place, it is understandable that the US government wants to review its immigration laws to prevent any future attack. However, using immigrants as scapegoats and denying them their due rights bodes ill for a country that claims to be a champion of human rights because it is flouting these very concepts in the Real ID Act. One hopes that sanity will prevail in the Senate and that it will scrap this controversial legislation that does little to tackle the problems in the US immigration system, nor does it make the country any safer.