IN a document launched recently, corporate Pakistan sought protection, lower taxes and regulatory controls, free hiring and firing rights, scrapping ill-negotiated trade pacts and more incentives for investment and exports.

The Pakistan Business Council (PBC), a policy advocacy forum of an exclusive club of the most successful companies, acknowledged the economic challenges facing the country and pledged support for short-term official initiatives to ease pressures. It hinged the possibility of sustained growth on the implementation of structural reforms supported by stakeholders.

The PBC, in its current programme ‘Agenda for the Economy’, dropped its earlier demand to promote regional trade that it projected as a driver of growth in its national economic agenda of 2013. The normalisation of economic relations with India was regarded as the cornerstone of proposed economic diplomacy strategy.

‘The corporate sector of Pakistan needs to break out of its decadent mindset to capitalise on the growth potential,’ says Dr Ishrat Husain

In interactions with the writer back in 2013, PBC leaders expressed excitement for leading a structured debate on the economy, engaging major political parties to evolve a consensus on key issues.

The agenda back then encompassed broader social concerns such as protecting the poor and promoting education besides a demand for a policy shift from stabilisation to growth. Other proposals of the six-point plan related to energy and water security.

With general election next year, the group has again drafted a wish list and probably wanted to repeat the earlier exercise of interacting with political parties in need of material support from the rich for expensive electioneering next year.

The assessment of the last exercise and its fate was missing in the current document. The progress on all points of the last agenda might be debatable, but the growth rate did improve from 3.6pc in 2013 to 4.7pc in 2016. Tangible progress on energy has also been made.

Corporate Pakistan opted to veil its apprehensions, but did not appear to be comfortable with the multibillion-dollar China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) plan. In the said document, it cautiously articulated its fears. It called on the government to measure dividends of the CPEC to Pakistan in terms of job creation and correction of trade imbalance with China.

The council defended its stance on ‘Make in Pakistan’ as relevant as it said the country was de-industrialising prematurely.

The document states: “Regretfully, lack of political will, unaligned and unpredictable policies, weak and fragmented bureaucracy, and vested and short-term interests have together worked to convert Pakistan into a nation of import-reliant traders, costing jobs, creating repeated cycles of pressure on the external account and resulting in the loss of tax revenue necessary to fund social development.”

Dr Ishrat Husain, a former State Bank governor and a regular public speaker on economic policy issues, was of the view that the charter should also include the obligations of the private sector.

“The business class cannot be absolved of the responsibility for narrow industrial and export base of Pakistan. They share the blame with the government for not fulfilling their part of the deal,” he said, commenting on the document over the phone from Lahore.

“They did not pay attention to improving competitiveness of the industry, did not invest in training the labour force for better productivity, resorted to a contract system in both production and recruitment for cost-cutting that compromised production quality and did not diversify the product and market base of exports. The government never stopped them from doing any of this.

“Now with 17pc guarantee of return in the power sector they are all falling over each other for power projects. The corporate sector of Pakistan needs to break out of its decadent mindset to capitalise on the growth potential,” he remarked.

“This is not to undermine the need and the urgency of reforms in taxation and many other policy areas,” he concluded.

Another economist, who was forbidden by his employer to go on record, agreed. “PBC’s document perfectly reflects the mindset of the risk-averse elite of Pakistan that likes to privatise gains and socialise cost.”

“It’s true that Pakistan has a narrow industrial base, but big business is doing very well. Several dozen business groups have morphed into conglomerates loaded with wealth. Many directors on PBC’s board live in extreme affluence and own pricey properties abroad besides private aircraft and luxury sea vessels. They have no capital constraint. The fact is that they think small and do not trust the country enough to lock their capital in long-term industrial investment,” he added.

Critically examining the document, a banker also supported the views expressed above. “The interest rate has been at historical low, but the bigwigs do not feel motivated and look for risk-free guaranteed returns,” he said.

A rice trader was furious at the PBC’s take on trading. “What are they talking about? Amongst them they control at least 40pc of major trading companies,” he said.

A former commerce secretary was bitterly critical of PBC members who he said abhorred competition and wished to monopolise and manipulate the market.

“It would be stupid to assume that the private sector would innovate or bring the cost-price efficiency voluntarily. Look at auto, pharmaceutical, textiles or any sector of your choice in Pakistan.

“The fact is that any concession to this class of businessmen would be at the cost of medium or small businesses and consumers. They have already assumed a critical mass where it has become impossible for a new entrant to break into their sphere of business.

“The competition could only come from manufacturers abroad. The country and its people need openness and free trade to get value for its money,” he concluded.

Repeated attempts were made to solicit the views of PBC members on this criticism, but the response did not reach Dawn within the deadline conveyed.

Published in Dawn, The Business and Finance Weekly, December 11th, 2017