June 20, 2007	Wednesday	Jamadi-us-Sani 04, 1428

PESHAWAR, June 19: The NWFP assembly on Tuesday adopted a resolution condemning the British government over the grant of knighthood to controversial writer Salman Rushdie. The assembly also called on the federal government to sever ties with the UK in protest against the move.

“This house strongly condemns the decision to confer the title of ‘Sir’ on Salman Rushdie, who is hated in the Muslim world for his blasphemous book The Satanic Verses,” the resolution said.

“The move is part of a campaign being waged in Europe and the West to hurt the feelings of Muslims,” it said, calling upon the federal government to sever diplomatic relations with Britain in protest. The resolution was moved by five lawmakers of the MMA government — namely,Amanat Shah, Zobaida Khatoon, Naeema Kishwar, Guransaran Lal and Maulana Mohammad Idrees.

Earlier, when proceedings of the House began, lawmakers of the combined opposition boycotted the budget session, accusing the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal government of diverting funds meant for opposition leaders’ constituencies to MMA strongholds.

The opposition lawmakers did not come back to the house despite assurances of an equal treatment given by ministers. Talking to journalists in the opposition’s chamber, Abdul Akbar Khan of the People’s Party Parliamentarians said the budget was meant for the cabinet only.

He said the chief minister and his cabinet colleagues had diverted 80 per cent of development schemes to their constituencies, turning the budget election-specific.

Mr Khan claimed that every minister had shifted 80 per cent of his department’s development schemes to his constituency. He said last year the provincial assembly speaker had acted as a mediator between the opposition and the government, but later he pulled himself out of the tussle.

He said the MMA government, which claimed to be a champion of equality, justice and fair play, had shown the worst kind of favouritism by ignoring opposition constituencies in the allocation of funds in the budget.

He said it was the MMA government’s last budget, which it had framed with a specific purpose: to win the next general elections. He said the government had allocated Rs160 million for 11 constituencies of Peshawar, while it had reserved Rs1.30 billion for a single scheme in Bannu, the home district of Chief Minister Akram Durrani.

He claimed that the opposition had always extended full support to the MMA on legislation and issues of common interests in the House during the past four years, but it had always let the opposition down.

He said the opposition members would not attend the budget session, unless their demand for an equal treatment in distribution of development funds was entertained.

He said: “The opposition en bloc rejects biased allocation of funds, a feature of dictatorship. We too are representatives of the people. Why has the MMA leadership ignored our voters?”

Bashir Ahmed Bilour of the Awami National Party said the government had completely ignored Peshawar.

Terming the budget election-specific, he alleged that funds of opposition constituencies had been diverted to MMA constituencies which was a sheer injustice.

He said the MMA government had failed to complete development schemes in Peshawar, claiming that even some incomplete development schemes in opposition constituencies, had been completed through MMA activists by releasing funds to them instead of the opposition lawmakers.

Mushtaq Ghani of the Pakistan Muslim League said the government had allocated some funds in the last budget for some roads and schools in his constituency, but these development schemes had remained on papers as the government shifted funds of these schemes to MMA strongholds.

Anwar Kamal Khan of the Pakistan Muslim League (N), Sikandar Hayat Khan Sherpao of the PPP (S) and Opposition Leader Shahzada Gustasap Khan also criticised the government for what they called step-motherly treatment to the people living in opposition constituencies.

Mr Gustasap rejected the impression that the opposition had differences with the MMA government over some other issue, adding that the opposition was opposed to inequality and discrimination made by the MMA government.