It is no surprise that Mr Clean, first as finance minister and then prime minister, presided over a most elaborate fudging operation. With an IMF programme under operation, budgetary data was not touched. As the IMF now wanted the State Bank to verify the tax collection figures, the data produced by the State Bank itself was also left alone. Specially targeted was the Federal Bureau of Statistics (FBS), a marginalised attached department of the ministry of finance. Thus, figures of poverty, growth, prices and employment were all micromanaged through phone calls by the then economic adviser and by creating obstacles in the career progression of those not falling in line. For almost the entire period of the rule, the post of the director-general of the FBS was kept vacant. Instead of appointing full-time secretaries of the statistics division, the mantle was assigned to additional secretaries in charge who had no shame in acting as director-general of the FBS, a junior position. In effect, the then economic adviser ran the organisation with direct access to Mr Clean, who kept the finance portfolio with him even after becoming prime minister. Publication of the Economic Survey on the day before the budget used to be a routine exercise managed by low-key economic advisers. As finance minister, Mr Clean took it upon himself to announce progress on key indicators in televised press conferences. Even as prime minister, he ordered the Annual Plan Coordination Committee to avoid a discussion on the economy and chose to announce the 2004-05 growth rate himself. The number was way above the one indicated in the working papers and the highest in the country’s history. In 2006-07, the fiscal year before the elections that former president Pervez Musharraf wanted won at all cost, Mr Clean announced a bumper wheat crop — calculated by his economic adviser against all sane advice — to show that the targeted GDP growth rate of seven per cent had been achieved.
When the FBS data indicated a poverty ratio of 32.1 per cent for 2001, the ‘Clean Team’ ordered an illegitimate recall survey to contest it. Nothing much came out of it. The next survey for 2005 was, however, targeted with a lot of preparation. ‘Midnight Jackals’ attacked the computer centre of the FBS. Poverty has been falling ever since. Mr Clean’s gift of the gab and killer PR skills acquired as a private banker were employed to maximum effect. As a smokescreen, a draft law kept doing the rounds to make the FBS autonomous. Exactly what happened can only be unearthed by a commission of inquiry, not standard verification exercises by the World Bank or individuals. This is not unusual. The Indian Supreme Court has recently questioned the government’s poverty data.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 29th, 2011.
COMMENTS (8)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Meekal: very interesting details.. thanks for sharing.
@Ghazanfar Raza:
Sir,
I have a huge collection of hand-written notes, letters, minutes of meetings, documents, and other materials in my possession which I consider to be the privileges of my working days in government and the IMF. At an appropriate time I propose to include it in my Wikileaks book should time and good health be with me.
As for the amount of the fine, the IMF staff report investigating our self-confessed cooking the books is available for all to read on the IMF web-site under "Pakistan". I don't recall the figure and am not in the business of spoon-feeling people here. I do recall that it was several hundred million dollars because that was the amount that was drawn under false pretences while engaged in an IMF program and had to be returned as per the IMF rules on misreporting.
The account of that woeful story is also described in my chapter "An Economic Crisis State?" in the book edited by Ambassador Dr Maleeha Lodhi titled "Pakistan: Beyond the Crisis State". Look it up.
Whether I did commendable work in government or elsewhere or not is for others to judge. I don't know who you are and if you have even the faintest idea of my years in the Planning Commission and I am sure you have absolutely no idea of the work I did in the IMF.
As a government servant I was obliged to support government whether it was Ayub, Bhutto, Yahya, Zia or BB and/or NS, not gossip and intrigue and keep any state secrets that I came to know of during the course of my employment secret. I was also supposed to be completely non-political -- unlike today. I am proud but humble by what I was able to accomplish in educating myself and in serving faithfully and to the best of my ability the government of the day. That government bestowed on me a great honor by posting me in the IMF after I refused the job for seven years. The file is available in the Planning Commission and the Ministry of Finance.
Have a good day.
@Meekal Ahmed: Very interesting. Why not send the first three paras to letters@tribune.com.pk
Did you know there was an old boys get together about the same time at the Haley College of Commerce, Lahore. Short-cut and Sartaj, both Haleans, were there. Short-cut was heard telling Sartaj that the fudging never happened.
Data collection challenges are present in all developing nations and India is no exception. However in case of India it is the organs of the executive e.g. Reserve Bank Of India, Planning Commission etc. which are complaining about inconsistent data that is hindering policy making. In particular the big differences between provisional and final figures. The Chief Statisician has been complaining for a while that it is difficult to get the right number of mathematically trained and inclined staff since most would prefer to work for software companies.
The situation is not comparable with that in Pakistan where you are alleging deliberate fudging.
PT very interesting but some ammendments to your story are in order.
The IMF did not find the fudging. Mr Clean, without prior warning or consultation with the IMF Executive Directors office, sent a letter to the Managing Director of the IMF in which he acknowledged mis-reporting of fiscal data (I still have that letter). We, in Washington, were blind-sided and stunned. Why would he do something so dumb and humiliate the country?
I have no idea.
One man in the Minstry of Finance was made a scapegoat and was sent home for TEN years. The other cookers and fudgers stayed on and one was promoted.
Whether people did or did not cook is not the point. Complicity or turning a blind eye is just as reprehensible and deserves equal punishment to those actually manipulating the numbers. Remember that takes some brains and brains were (and still are) in short supply in Finance.
Once Mr Clean came clean for reasons best known to him except he wanted to burnish his credentials with the IMF as being a "regular guy", paying a fine was not his choice. Since the fudging was done while accessing IMF resources, the money had to be returned and it was. I forget the figure but it was several hundred million dollars.
If Mr Know-It-All had consulted before shooting from the hip and causing so much embarrassment, we may have found a quiet, dignified way to settling the issue of misreporting.
This case is a storm in a teacup. The Chairman did something stupid. He released the GROSS (not NET) figures for sales tax in his eagerness to show that the tax revenue target had been met. That was an error. There was a lot of other stuff going on (such as asking for billions as advance tax and back-dating the deposit to June 30. That is where the real fancy acccounting went on). Once those advance taxes are returned, the tax figures for July will take a huge nose-dive.
At end of the day, no one is fooled. The Fund will simply take out all the tricks employed to show a higher tax revenue number. They will then use a "normalized base" and add your tax measures in the budget. It will show that you will be nowhere near 4% of GDP in FY12 (more like 4.6% of GDP thanks to the tax free but free-spending provincial budgets), and that you will need additional tax and/or spending measures of billions to reach it.
End of the matter.
When you say incorrect data then you have to give correct data with evidence. This will help people to analyse many things and in future they will take precaution.