Sindh CM heads to China for CPEC meeting

He will campaign for inclusion of three schemes in the project

Our Correspondent December 27, 2016
A file photo of Sindh Chief Minister Syed Murad Ali Shah. PHOTO: PPI

KARACHI: Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah along with his three cabinet members and concerned senior officers, left for China on Tuesday night to attend a China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) related meeting.

The chief minister returned to Karachi via a special flight after attending the death anniversary of Benazir Bhutto at Garhi Khuda Bux and left for China to attend a CPEC-related Joint Committee for Cooperation (JCC) meeting.

He was accompanied by provincial ministers Manzoor Wassan, Jam Khan Shoro and Syed Nasir Shah, acting chief secretary of development Muhammad Waseem, energy secretary Agha Wasif, transport secretary Taha Farooqi, chairperson of the Board of Investment Naheed Memon and others. The chief minister will give presentation to the JCC to include three important projects in CPEC. These are the Keti Bandar Power Park and special Jetty, Karachi Circular Railway (KCR) and Special Economic Zone at Dhabeji.

After continuous campaigning by the chief minister, the federal government has already approved the inclusion of Keti Bandar and KCR in CPEC, while Chinese authorities have also shown interest in the railway project.

Shah has said that he will present this case seriously during the JCC meeting and hopefully all the three projects will be approved for CPEC. "I am sure I will return with good news for the people of Karachi as well as the people of the province and country," he said.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 28th, 2016.


professor iqbal | 4 years ago | Reply Why are we begging China ? This project is a 15-20 year duration. If the whole project is 60 billion , it makes 4 billion a year at 60/15 yrs. Pakistan must be raise this amount from taxes instead of running with Kashkol
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ


Most Read