The pursuit of consensus for constructing water reservoirs proved highly elusive for the governments of Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif but the present regime seems to have succeeded where they failed: the Parliamentary Committee on water resources has managed to achieve that highly desirable end.

But it seems to have done that by pushing the issue into a depth from where it cannot be recovered, regardless of the declarations of good intentions by the President of the country and other luminaries of the state. Only the other day President Musharraf reiterated his determined support for big dams in the country.

The committee was assigned the task of building consensus among provinces on the construction of water reservoirs. Two reservoirs were on the top of its list for this purpose, Kalabagh (KBD) and Bhasha Diyamir Dam (BDD) even though there are no grounds for comparison between them because one is ready for immediate construction while the other is three years away from start of work.

Predictably, the committee found the going tough and its head, Senator Nisar Memon, conceded on June 14 that there is no consensus among stakeholders as every province has refused to show flexibility, particularly with regard to Kalabagh and Bhasha Dams. This was hardly a revelation.

But his statement at a press conference about six weeks later sprung a totally different surprise when he declared that all four provinces are unanimous on the construction of mega water project namely Bhasha Dam while there were reservations in two provinces about KBD.

He reported consensus among provinces after a meeting with the chief ministers; one has however not come across any clear-cut support for BDD from any CM. There is no evidence to corroborate his conclusion and as far as one knows, the positions of provinces remains non-flexible, just as he identified in his June 14 press conference. Consensus is in any case requires broader support than the privately expressed views of a chief minister.

Earlier, a meeting on this issue convened by the committee in Karachi was boycotted by number of political parties and some influence wielding individuals of the Sindh province. There was a report that the KBD was rejected by that did not, by any stretch of imagination, imply that the other project had received support.

While the senator's word must be trusted, it is only fair to wonder what made the provinces reject the KBD and cast their vote in favour of the BDD. The sites of the two projects are different but the water stored by the two dams would remain the same and it would follow the same route when it is distributed.

Some objections of the NWFP leaders opposed to the KBD would be valid for the BDD too. The construction of the dam would cause dislocation of local population; a larger number of NWFP's citizens would be affected by the BDD in comparison with the KBD that would have the bulk of uprooted people from Punjab. One does not expect principled politicians and conscientious objectors to abandon a stand and opt for a wholly different position without valid argument.

The moot point, as far as Sindh is concerned, has never been the site but the impact the construction of a reservoir will have on agricultural, ecological and environmental conditions in the province and its effect on its inhabitants, particularly the people living in the interior. The dam, according to many leaders of Sindh, would sound the death knell for riverine life, Sindhi culture and damage forestry in the province.

The leadership of Sindhi speaking population of the province has made its reservations abundantly clear on dams and it has done that more than once. There is no ambiguity to its stand and neither the argument that the right and voice of each unit must be heeded to because Pakistan is a federation can be run down.

It is the same with Punjab that has backed the KBD over the years. Water shortage is becoming increasingly acute and poses a serious concern to people living in rural areas of the province who constitute more than 60 percent of the province's population. All of its members are linked with, they are indeed dependent on, agriculture one way or another.

They want better water resources without delay. The problem cannot be resolved overnight. But if the way out is building a reservoir, there must be a concrete reason for preferring a project that would take an additional three years to build and cost more than one where construction can start without loss of time.

The only advantage with the BDD would be its capacity for storing more water. However, there is not any reported opposition to the BDD in Punjab but shelving the KBD for it is incomprehensible for obvious reasons and there can be conceivably no support for such a measure.

If anything, the idea can prove a catalyst for arousing suspicions in Punjab that the KBD is being rejected because it means revenue for the province due to its location.

Which means that the parliamentary body constituted for obtaining consensus has embarked on a path that is leading to the opposite end, that is, enhancing existing misgivings among the provinces. Punjab has been all out for the KBD but many people in the province may oppose the BDD even if it promises water for parched agriculture lands.

Undertaken right now, Bhasha would be completed, other factors remaining equal, in year 2014; the KBD would become operational three years earlier. The cost of the BDD is estimated at $6.72 billion at this point in time while that of the KBD is $ 5.85 b. Admittedly the storage capacity ofthe BDD is 7.30 MAF while that of the KBD is 6.1 MAF but that is an argument if both of them could be taken up right now. A smaller quantity of water in 2010 can be far more useful for the country's agriculture than more water in 2014.

In all likelihood, the present cost estimates would need to be revised during the construction period. Judging from trends, the bill for the BDD should rise more than the cost of inflation for the KBD because it would be there for a longer period of time. Does that enhance the feasibility of the former project in comparison with the later? The answer is in the negative.

Bhasha-Diyamir would certainly generate more electricity than Kalabagh but we have to look at them as water reservoirs ahead of any other mileage from these two, for that matter, any other water reservoir projects.

Other benefits from water reservoirs are of a secondary nature; their first and foremost importance is as projects adding to water resources of the country. On that count, the KBD has a clear and huge edge over any other reservoir project.

While any increase in the availability of water is important for all parts of the country, there is no denying the fact that Punjab, as the largest agriculture territory in the country would be the biggest beneficiary. But that position would not be affected by the name and site of the dam that is built first.

Prime Minister designate Shaukat Aziz has diplomatically tackled this issue by stating that both dams should be built simultaneously. As finance minister, he would know if resources required for the projects are available with the country. As it is, one feels that Pakistan would have to stretch itself beyond the limits to undertake even one project.

But all propositions and discussions may be shelved because the Parliamentary Committee that was created for developing consensus seems to have dealt a deadly blow to whatever chances existed for an agreement among the provinces.

Assigned the task of furthering understanding between the provinces on the issue of water reservoirs it appears to have fanned dissensions and created an atmosphere for greater controversy.