| July 1, 2005 | Friday | Jumadi-ul-Awwal 23, 1426 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Why that many ministers?
No more fivers
THE federal cabinet on Wednesday announced the setting up of a six-member sub-committee to conduct accountability of all district and tehsil governments. The timing is interesting. The announcement came just a day before the publication of the local election schedule. We had always believed that elections were the best way of judging whether a government has done a good or a bad job of governance and has worked honestly and in a transparent way. But obviously the federal cabinet thinks otherwise, and this raises some questions. The reason for the formation of the accountability sub-committee is said to be discontent among ruling party legislators about the conduct of district and tehsil governments and their demand that nazims be investigated for alleged corruption and other wrongdoings. An audit of the local bodies is already reportedly underway. More interestingly, the very same day that the cabinet took its decision, the acting chief election commissioner told a conference in Islamabad that the EC would soon be issuing criteria to ensure that no “corrupt nazim” gets re-elected. The Local Government Ordinance of 2001, under which the district and tehsil governments were elected, already has various provisions under which nazims or naib nazims can be removed from office, if their actions are deemed to be against the public interest or if they are guilty of misconduct. Such action can be initiated by the chief minister of a province or even at the request of a member of a district council after which a motion can be moved for a vote.
With such elaborate procedures already in place and with elections round the corner, one wonders at the sudden clamour for accountability of district and tehsil governments or the announcement that criteria will be laid down to prevent any corrupt nazim from getting re-elected. This smacks of Ziaul Haq’s “accountability before elections” slogan as a political device. As far as the demand that the expenditure and receipts of all district and tehsil governments be audited, this is quite in order and indeed not merely local governments but all institutions should be subject to this process. If there are any specific instances to be investigated, those involved should be proceeded against in accordance with the law. But there should be no suspicion that the ruling party or coalition in any province wants to use accountability as a ploy to screen out political opponents or to pressure them to switch loyalties. In any case, the 2001 ordinance authorizes the auditor-general of Pakistan to conduct an audit of any district or tehsil government that may be considered necessary. Other tactics like those used by the Punjab and Sindh governments lsuch as barring local governments from passing their budgets have also been employed at a most inopportune time and without assigning any reason. Stripped of its budget-making powers, a local government cannot possibly operate since there will be no money apportioned to pay employees, to carry out any of its functions or to initiate development projects.
There is also the matter of appointing caretaker administrators for the interim period before the local body polls. A decision to this effect has already been taken. As a step to ensure neutrality, this could be welcomed, although logic would suggest that caretaker arrangements should be for all elections, not just the local body polls. But what is deeply disturbing is the confusion that has come to mark the local government system through ad-hoc and parochially motivated decisions. We had long suggested that the system should be carefully monitored and the faults uncovered removed through consultation and consensus to prevent whatever gains that have been made in terms of devolution of power from being reversed. This was not done. Attention should not be focussed on political engineering but should be concentrated on ensuring that polls are free and impartial. Incumbent nazims and naib nazims should be allowed to present themselves to the public for re-election, if they so desire, and if grounds for malfeasance exist against any of them, these should be presented before courts.
BALOCHISTAN is the most underdeveloped of the four provinces and thus needs to spend all the money it has on developing its human and natural resources. However, a large team of ministers is not the right answer to its burgeoning problems. A report says the Balochistan cabinet is to have three more members. This will take the total number of ministers to 34, including Chief Minister Jam Mir Mohammad Yusuf. The Balochistan Assembly has 65 members. The expansion of the cabinet means more than half the MPAs will be ministers. Perhaps this is not as grotesque as the position in the last assembly when, out of 43 MPAs, 32 enjoyed the perks and privileges that go with being a minister. What has prompted the expansion is not clear. With a general election scheduled for 2007 — or earlier — the existing cabinet that has managed, or mismanaged, provincial affairs could have carried on without any problems for another one and a half years. That a bulkier cabinet will lend greater efficiency to the Jam team is very much to be doubted.
Since January, Balochistan has been in the news. The trouble in Sui hit headlines in the national press and prompted high-level talks between Baloch leaders and parliamentary teams from Islamabad. But, surprisingly, the provincial cabinet was never in the picture. Perhaps there was a reason. The stakes were high, and so was the level of fighting between the Frontier Constabulary and terrorists firing rockets. In such a situation, even though law and order is a provincial subject, the Quetta cabinet could do practically nothing. It had to seek the federal government’s help, which it received. But that goes only to show the powerlessness of the provincial cabinet. To arm it with more power raises some constitutional questions, and this has been one of the main demands of all Baloch parties — raising the quantum of provincial autonomy. Pending that, we still insist that an oversize cabinet is not what Balochistan needs to get to grips with its problems, even though the inspiration might have come from Islamabad, where the federal cabinet boasts of no less than 70 ministers and ministers of state.
THE five-rupee note bows out today after having changed hands for 57 years and undergoing several design improvizations. It was issued in October 1948, and the present design was adopted in 1976. Given the way the cost of living is rising, the five rupee note had become practically worthless. But it still served to buy a couple of naans or the odd ‘paan’. The State Bank explanation for withdrawing it is that it cost too much to print and had a very short life; the coin that replaces it could last 30 years. It is now planned to have Rs 20 and Rs 5,000 notes. The more prices rise and the value of the rupee falls, the more you need to print high-denomination notes and the more prices are likely to go up. You may in time, if the state-stimulated spending spree lasts, need a Rs 5,000 note to pay for a soft drink. How would it feel for those earning Rs 5,000 or Rs 10,000 a month — and, Mr Shaukat Aziz, don’t forget, there are many of them — to be handed just a note or two in wages at the end of each month? No need to count. Take a note and begone. So even that satisfaction goes, wetting your finger and carefully counting each note in the bundle. Well, the anna went, the pice went, the one and two-rupee notes went, and we got used to it all and so what if the five-rupee note too goes out? Is this what the old saying means — bad money drives out good?