The Economic Advisory Council serves the government in image building and perhaps by providing some input for policymaking.

Has it contributed towards improving the quality of economic policy, developing a critique from a neutral viewpoint or broadening the base of decision making? Businessmen and experts express doubts.

“The performance scorecard of the EAC is not satisfactory. It never guided policymaking. After the initial sound and fury it quickly settled into a forum of mutual admiration. Many independent members lost interest and some were sidelined for not towing government lines.

“Currently, mostly those who wished to please the government in order to get their files moving or ones keen to build a profile for the lecture and consultancy circuit are regular attendees, beside, of course, a bureaucrats brigade that fill chairs around the table”, commented an insider from Islamabad.

“It is not fair to blame all experts for the council’s under performance. In a national spirit some of us did work hard. My group highlighted key issues in the energy sector and offered a set of viable options in a solid report based on experience and research. Our task ended there. We couldn’t possibly have forced the government to draw from our input”, a member of the council argued.

Soon after assuming power the PML-N-led government reconstituted and activated the Economic Advisory Council that lost steam after the exit of Shaukat Tarin as finance minister in 2010 under the PPP rule.

Chairing its first meeting in 2013, Finance Minister Ishaq Dar projected the council as a forum of experts for germination of ideas and solutions. He claimed that the Nawaz Sharif government was keen to tap human resources for delivering inclusive development.

‘The performance scorecard of the EAC is not satisfactory. It never guided policymaking’

The EAC identified seven key sectors, energy, mining, agriculture, social amenities, taxation, privatisation and remittances. It pledged to provide valuable input in these areas to assist the government in policy formulation.

People associated with the council in its formation stage told Dawn that the body’s prime purpose was to engage reputable minds and capitalise on the intellectual capital and expertise in key sectors available outside the fold of the government. This was so as to evolve a vision for change and develop a better strategy to counter challenges to sustainable development.

A retired officer who was a key member of the Dar team defended the EAC that it, in his view, did help the government and council members.

“As the very name suggests the council is an advisory body. The government is not obligated to implement or even agree with all their recommendations. You need to understand a government has to work in with all kinds of pulls and pushes. Sometimes an obvious solution is not workable because of so many factors. The government needs to juggle all the time to strike a balance between competing demands”, he explained his position.

“I believe experts and economists sitting around the table must also have gained insight on the government’s working. The council gave them access to current economic data before it is published for public consumption”, he asserted.

A bitter member, who quietly moved away, said the initial brief was misleading. “The whole exercise was about generating the perception of a consultative decision-making mechanism without actually caring for experts or their views. They have no value for collective wisdom.

“Ask any participant, the meetings were consumed by the functionary’s rhetoric. Most experts were not even given a chance to speak. The government hierarchy did not veil their displeasure over any criticism in the forum”, he said.

“Look at the frequency of EAC meetings. The council was supposed to meet every three months. By March 2017 it should have had convened 14 meetings but last week’s meet was the eighth one. Normally it is convened before the budget or the IMF’s economic review meeting”, he shared.

The meeting last week was missed by some independent members. Mr Dar repeated the long list of achievements.

He briefed the council members on OECD Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax matters and the Swiss bilateral agreement for the benefit of bringing transparency and improving tax administration.

He also talked about rebasing of GDP exercise underway to accommodate emerging sectors and assigning others a more realistic weight. He claimed that the country was poised to increase development spending in the last PML-N budget before the general elections scheduled next year.

In a four-hour long meeting Dr Suleri presented the industry’s case for relaxing regulatory shackles and reducing tax compliance cost to improve business environment. Qazi Azmat Essa hammered the issue of regional inequalities with reference to sharing benefits of the CPEC. Mr Sakib touched on the sore issue of rising public debt and falling exports.

Majyd Aziz, president, Employers Federation of Pakistan, was disappointed with the government and did not see the utility of the EAC for an administration that was too inward looking.

“FDI, exports and remittance are falling. We need to shake off the ‘ostrich syndrome’ and learn to take the bull by its horns to face off challenges. What do we need the Privatisation Commission, Board of Investment and Trade Development Authority of Pakistan for? There is a cost involved to run these outfits, he said.

Published in Dawn, Economic & Business, April 3rd, 2017