While the annual report of the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) only confirms known and established factors and analyses of conditions , it is nevertheless an important document and its contents need to be considered seriously to avoid pitfalls in the way of various spheres of the national economy.

For the agriculture sector, areas have been identified by the SBP report for financial year (FY) 2003-04 for the performance that was poorer than expected and unable to match growth figures of the year before. Top of the SBP inventory is water shortage, the most vital commodity for agriculture that is becoming scarcer by the year.

Among other ailments of Pakistan's agriculture cited in the report, loans available to and availed by farmers certainly have a bearing on the growth in the sector but its impact is neither as direct nor as wide spread as water and, for small farmers, the cost of inputs; the later problem seems to have gone unnoticed, or has been ignored, by the SBP. It has a significant undermining effect on the produce size.

The main points of the report carried by newspapers have a pedestrian ring and remind one more of provincial government handout explaining reasons of failure than a view offering otherwise unavailable insight. However, its emphasis on developing water resources should serve as rejoinder for individuals and groups opposing the building of major water reservoirs.

The report appreciates and supports the government's National Water Development Programme (NWDP-2000-2005) initiative and stresses that only 'timely completion' of the programme would benefit the country. Citing statistics of shrinking water resources and coupling it with rising population, an argument has been built to plead for redressing the issue at the earliest.

One wishes that official of the State Bank had also tried to draw a picture of what is likely to happen if the problem remains unattended because, if the water issue is not tackled immediately and with all the resources of finances and commitment of the state, Pakistan should be attaining the frightening status of a famine hit state within foreseeable future.

The question is: who is listening to the Bank? The present government has been in command for five years and has constantly expressed its determination to resolve the issue but it has remained short of taking a decision because such a step would have negative political repercussions for prolonging its stay in power. This is the position unfortunately also adopted by quasi-political governments in recent past and the administration of the all powerful dictator who ruled Pakistan from 1977 to 1988, of course without admitting selfish personal motives directly, simply hiding behind the need for consensus.

The importance of national consensus is not to be denied in a federation, indeed in any society. But governments have to resolve basic issues one way or the other. There appears scant, if any chance of building consensus on water reservoirs at this point in time. This is not merely because some segments are opposed to mega water projects but in view of the growth of new political irritants or re-emergence of previous differences with sharper and more divisive forces between the federal government and some of the federating units.

The sense of deprivation and reservations of provinces have deepened on many counts, some of them mainly of making of the government by mishandling of issues and by policies regarded as detrimental to their interests by provinces. The federal government would be better advised to continue striving for consensus for building reservoirs but it should do that quietly instead of high-pitched declarations that tend to antagonize even the protagonists of water projects.

Consensus can be ultimately achieved because all provinces have a stake in agriculture but their apprehensions need to be allayed. An authoritative policy for achieving consensus is most likely to produce adverse results. The governments also has many 'converts', politicians who had opposed the projects in the past but, as part of the present set up, they have either crossed the line or they have been found wanting when it comes to wholeheartedly supporting the construction of dams.

The present approach, in short, has little to endear itself to opponents of reservoirs and win them over. This is not to suggest that the projects should be shelved once and for all but to recommend a political policy in place of the current oratorical but hollow sounding declarations for the projects.

The government should continue working for consensus but wait for the time when better sense would prevail and people would realize that water shortage is not just serious but it is grim and turning in to a matter of life and death for all federating units. Parched and non-productive fields would ultimately change the views of the most die-hard antagonist of reservoirs.

Meanwhile, other options should be adopted and speedily implemented. The government has already undertaken a major programme for brick lining of water channels and canals to reduce water losses that constitute a high percentage of waste of precious water resources.

The project has taken off but the progress is not exactly brisk, most certainly not matching the need of the country and lacks the urgency that the situation demands. Many estimates have been made of the quantity of water lost through seepage at different stages of its application to crops. Whatever their sum total, it is essential that these losses are reduced to the minimum and that the project is implemented most expeditiously.

Provincial governments are managing the project at what seems a leisurely pace because the work force is not oriented to the kind of efficiency required for its quick and effective implementation. The management is also tied in knots of red tape and lethargy; the project is indeed treated like any other policy but it is different, to be exact it is lifeline for the country.

Its start has actually been negative because trained and dedicated work force was dismissed before the approval of the project. A framework for its implementation had existed but a short-sighted approach stemming from internal rivalries within the government caused its disbandment.

However, that phase is over and it is time that all components of the provincial agriculture departments, particularly of Sindh and Punjab should get down to the task ahead and leadership should provide them the fullest support.

The other solution lies in greater mechanization in the farming sector and, more importantly, increasing the use of conservation technologies. They have been introduced but their propagation is at a slow pace. Results from their application are already there in the form of boost for produce, higher income for farmers, timely sowing and productive utilization of residue moisture in the fields as well as reduced water needs of crops.

Local governments have been assigned the responsibility of providing the required implements to farmers but reports on this count are not very encouraging; the work is being done as a matter of routine. This would not do if the government means serious business and wishes to boost agriculture as well as counter water shortage to the extent it is possible without beefing water resources with reservoirs.

Ultimately, water shortage cannot really be countered without major reservoirs but till a consensus is build for their constructions, other available means must be harnessed to the maximum for the fields to produce the nation's food needs.