The government claimed in the year 2000 that its economic revival strategy has been embedded within the themes of poverty reduction. Five years later in 2005 the poverty has yet to show clear signs of receding despite achieving fabulous average growth rates.

In absolute terms number of citizens living a sub-human life, denied of even very basic human amenities have increased over the last five years. What does this indicate? Was it an inevitable affliction at the current stage of the country's development? Is it weak management and failure of delivery system? Or the very policy and the government's outlook were flawed?

The economic experts of all shades have interpreted the issue from different perspectives. The Social Policy Development Center (SPDC), a reputable research outfit in Karachi in a report titled 'Social development in Pakistan, Combating poverty: Is growth sufficient?", released recently analyzed threadbare the poverty reduction strategy of the government.

The study tries to prove that the strategy that has been focused on GDP growth is a "disjointed collection of measures". Such a policy cannot deliver pro poor development.

The report quotes from the foreword of the paper: "The development challenges for Pakistan include achieving accelerated and sustained broad-based economic growth" (PRSP: i). And again: "... growth is a precondition for sustained poverty reduction" (PRSP:27).

The report states: "Accelerating economic growth is premised upon five elements: macroeconomic framework, monetary and fiscal policy, financial sector reform, capital market development and trade liberalization.

That the acceleration of economic growth is perceived almost exclusively through the prism of stabilization measures emerges rather clearly. More seriously, there appears to be a rather explicit assumption that getting financial statistics right will inevitably lead towards accelerated growth, and by virtue of the trickle-down effect, towards employment and poverty reduction".

The SPDC believes that PRSP ignores national and international evidence of jobless growth and employment in high wage brackets only. And the fact is that the presence of high wealth and income inequality is likely to cause the bulk of the benefits of growth to be appropriated by upper income groups, leaving the poor out in the cold.

It sees what it calls "two glaring omissions in the PRSP". First, there is no reference to a commitment to promote equity through redistribution of assets. An unequal distribution of assets would lead to an unequal distribution of income.

Fiscal policy offers a means to alleviate the inequality in the flow of income through imposing burden of taxation largely on the rich and directing public expenditure towards areas that are more beneficial to the poor. The research reports reconfirms that the tax system in Pakistan is biased against poor where share of direct tax is still barely 27 per cent.

Second, there is no specification as to where the revenue will flow from for financing Pillar 3&4 of the poverty reduction strategy that promised provision of health cover, drinking water and sanitation, education and youth development and provision of safety nets. In short: In the words of the study, "PRSP constitutes a disjointed collection of measures devoid of a clear central theme and lacks a coordinated approach".

To give an equal space to the government to argue its case, the advisor to PM on economic affairs Dr Ashfaque Hasan Khan was approached to comment on the findings of the SPDC report. The Advisor at the outset expressed doubts over the credibility of the afore- mentioned institute and its patrons. "In Islamabad we do not hear much about it. "

Dr Khan defended the Government's poverty reduction policy and termed it comprehensive. "I am satisfied with the direction of our policy", he said, and claimed that it had dented the poverty more than statistics reveal.

Regarding the regressive fiscal regime he said that the gradual enhancement of the share of direct taxes was implicit in government fiscal policy so it did not matter if it was not explicitly mentioned in the PRSP.

As for redistribution of agricultural land through land reforms, the Advisor felt that the issue was not as crucial as some quarters projected it to be. Dr Khan stated that fragmentation of landholding in rural Pakistan over the last fifty years had taken care of the issue by itself. "Land reforms were relevant thirty years back but not a significant issue anymore", argued the Advisor.

The debate on the issues and policies that have direct bearing on lives of people_ the most active agent of development anywhere_ is certainly relevant. May be, it is useful to anchor the discussion on the government's PRSP.

However, the compulsions that led to the formulation of poverty reduction strategy paper and the haste with which it was prepared are relevant to form an opinion on its success or otherwise.

Could it really be just a coincidence that the government drafted the poverty reduction strategy in the year 2001, just about the time when the World Bank initiated a new line of credit (PRGF) for countries that were equipped with such a strategy?

In the year 2000, the hierarchy of the World Bank and IMF acknowledged that extended structural adjustment facility (ESAF) had led to aggravation of economic woes of struggling developing nations.

Instead of resolving problems the facility led to net transfer of resources from less developed nations to developed countries. Whether or not this public acceptance of responsibility for aggravating problems in developing countries actually led to a real shift in policies of twin sisters is debatable.

The Bank and the Fund, however, changed the language and terminology of their prescriptions for the ailing economies of the world. In January 2000 it launched the strategy for alleviation of poverty. The World Bank President Wolfenson publicly advised the Third World leaders to use poverty reduction strategy papers as anchor for securing fresh economic support.

To judge whether or not the government of PM Shaukat Aziz wants to improve the lot of poorest of the poor in Pakistan on the basis of the merits of the strategy paper would perhaps be an exercise in futility.

The PRSP was designed more to qualify for a certain concessionary loan (PRGF). The paper did achieve its purpose and Pakistan did qualify by meeting the pre-condition for the facility. To put too much meaning to a paper that targeted something very specific is neither wise nor appropriate.

"It is unfortunate that a section of people are so obsessed with some notions that they are not ready to accept even what is clearly present before their eyes", commented Dr Ashfaque. "We are doing better than what even the government itself projected.

The current unemployment figures show that the unemployment rates have come down from 8.3 to 7.7 per cent which indicates that poverty rate is also coming down. "It is not fair not to give credit where it is due", he complained.

For a majority of the people, the strengths of Musharraf-Shaukat Aziz government may outweigh its weaknesses. However, the concerns about how, and in whose interest the government was running were likely to grow.

The improved GDP growth rates had in fact, made the contrast between socially powerful privileged classes and not so vocal underprivileged people and backward regions more stark.

In no way will this situation facilitate governance of the country or ensure travelling of the economy on a linear growth path. Incidents of sabotage in Balochistan, could be an indicator to show how things might turn, in spite of achieving a 7% plus GDP growth rate.

For Pakistan to realize its true potential a well rounded policy package that serves the interests of majority, encompassing all elements of macro policy areas and not some fancy paper full of rhetorics to set things right is urgently needed.

People are trying for decent economic survival and at the same time waiting for opportunities promised to them. The architects of the country's economic policy may do well to give another thought and review the impact of its policies on the poorest of the urban and rural poor.