IN recent years the government has introduced quite a few welfare programmes targetting the poorest of the poor. While there has been some criticism, the fact remains that in terms of policy, the approach is correct, and may lead to social betterment.

Such an approach worked for a country like South Africa and we can learn a lesson or two from its example. In 1948, the apartheid system enforced racial segregation policies that affected all domains of life. The wealth inequality it caused is still a problem in that country. In August this year, World Bank Poverty and Equity database showed that about 80 per cent of the household wealth was distributed among the richest 10pc of the population.

To manage the problem in the post-apartheid era, South Africa started a number of social welfare programmes, from unemployment insurance to schooling and household-targetted subsidies.

One way of collecting funds for such welfare programmes is by imposing a wealth tax. With the help of the government, a progressive wealth tax system can be imposed on people with annual earnings of, say, more than R3.6 million. Studies show that up to Rs160 billion can be raised by opting for such a tax mechanism.

The entire revenue from the wealth tax should be directly transferred to the welfare programmes, and a specific portion can go to the government to keep the tax-collection machinery moving.

Once South Africa started such a programme, according to a New World Wealth report, about 4,200 wealthy citizens left the country over about a decade and the number is likely to increase due to the imposition of a progressive wealth tax. The rich relocated at their own cost, but the space left by them was used by the next tier to grow up, and it happened right down to the bottom tier.

As most of the rich citizens happen to be smart investors, a new system of investing money can be introduced. By donating a certain amount of money to the welfare programmes, individuals can target a group of less fortunate people to provide them with immediate benefits and in the process reap a profit in the coming years. For instance, through donations, the poor would be able to complete education and get a decent job.

Once they start earning a decent amount of money, they would have to give 2-3pc of their monthly salary to that wealthy individual. In this way, the welfare programmes will be funded and both the rich and the poor would stand to benefit.

If South Africa can fight back against wealth inequality, Pakistan surely can follow suit. And we should.

Aaliyan Shaikh
Karachi

FAIR TAXATION: With reference to the letter ‘Fair taxation’ (Dec 7), I would like to point out that Zakat is not imposed on income, but on the value of assets. It is actually a kind of wealth tax and does not burden the poor. If the government cannot do away with income tax entirely, it should impose it on those who earn more than a million every month. Simultaneously, it should tax assets worth more than Rs10m.

Shakir Lakhani
Karachi

NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENTS: The recent ‘understanding’ through ‘negotiated settlements’ with the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) have left one wondering what kind of a message is being sent out to the marginalised sections of society, and to the world at large. Such policies raise serious doubts about what is happening where.

Mirza Muhammad Ali Hossain
Karachi

MEDAL FOR HUMILIATION: This refers to the report ‘IAF pilot Abhinandan awarded India’s third-highest gallantry medal’ (Nov 22). The fact, as known to India as well, is that the said pilot was thrashed by civilians in the area where he had parachuted before being rescued by the army personnel. He was later handed over to India where he has now been ‘awarded’ the ‘gallantry’ medal and promotion. It seems nothing but another face-saving effort by the Indian government which has now become the global laughing stock. The manner in which India has ‘honoured’ its defeated pilot is a deception against its own people.

Muhammad Soomro
Kandhkot

INSINCERE TEACHERS: My young brother studies in a government school in Islamabad. Recently, during exams, I went to drop him at the school, but it was closed due to teachers’ protest. It is unfair to hold protests during exams. The non-serious

act exposes the insincerity of the teachers. The authorities concerned should take action against these teachers for shutting down the school without prior notice.

Meher Azeem
Islamabad

Published in Dawn, December 11th, 2021