No new health projects earmarked for capital in budget

Paltry sum allocated for health facilities operating in rural areas


Asma Ghani May 30, 2017
Paltry sum allocated for health facilities operating in rural areas. PHOTO: EXPRESS

ISLAMABAD: The government has allocated a paltry amount for health facilities operating in the rural areas of Islamabad in the finance bill for the fiscal year 2017-18.

The allocated money has been budgeted primarily for administrative expenses with no new projects for rehabilitation, expansion of existing or establishment of new facilities for the expanding population of the capital.

The government has allocated Rs599 million for health facilities which are administrated by the Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) administration.

Of this, the government has earmarked around Rs135 million for recurring expenditures.

On the other hand, the government has not allocated funds for any new health project even as it outlined Rs488 million for ongoing development projects in the capital.

For the construction of a Basic Health Unit (BHU) in Kirpa along with accommodation for staff accommodation, the government has allocated Rs24.368 million in the upcoming fiscal year.

The project had been approved in July 2009 at a total cost of Rs47.806 million.

For the construction of the Islamabad General Hospital in Tarlai, the government has pledged Rs440 million in FY 2017-18. The project had been approved in December 2015 and was estimated to cost around Rs2.5 billion. Of this, around Rs2 billion will be provided by foreign governments.

Non-functional units

There are around 18 basic health units and rural health centres which provide health care to people living in the suburbs of Islamabad. However, most of these units are virtually not functional either due to lack of infrastructure or non-availability of staff. As a result, patients, especially expecting mothers from the rural areas - have to seek care at tertiary care hospitals in the capital.

An example is the health centre located in Sihala. While the centre has basic infrastructure, it lacks doctors. Hence, expecting mothers have to journey to the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (Pims) or the Polyclinic to seek care, a health care staffer said.

Health experts say under the nose of the government rural areas health facilities are neglected that overcrowd the tertiary care hospitals as patients with minor complaints of flue and fever go to Pims or Polyclinic.

Recently, MNAs Zahra Wadood Fatemi and Naseem Kishwer introduced a private member bill in the National Assembly which would make it mandatory for the government to ensure that basic health units have facilities for birthing centres and maternity services for women while lady health workers and paramedical staff are prohibited from operations during delivery.

“The purpose of the bill is to rehabilitate the rural and basic health units and provide antenatal care to mother and child in their vicinity,” explained Fatemi while talking to The Express Tribune.

The BHUs and RHUs are not working, while expecting mothers do not go to hospitals for checkups either, instead they rely on LHVs or paramedical staff for births,” she said, adding that this results in stillbirths, weak and malnourished children.

Moreover, mothers are also malnourished and they do not get antenatal care.

Fatemi further said that even if doctors are appointed at RHUs and BHUs, they do not perform their duties and instead outsource their jobs to LHVs.

Noting that LHVs are doing good work, Fatemi was of the view that they are not qualified to carry out tests or diagnose like physicians can to determine if a mother has any kind of deficiency or is suffering from any complication.

The bill makes it mandatory for LHVs to work under the supervision of doctors so that mothers can get good antenatal care at rural health centres for the good health mothers and child.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 30th, 2017.

COMMENTS

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