Three major PTI projects scuttled

Govt rejects proposal for funds allocation for Murghi Paal Scheme


Our Correspondent June 11, 2023
PHOTO: FILE

RAWALPINDI:

Rejecting the proposal by the Rawalpindi Poultry Research Institute for the allocation of funds to revive the erstwhile Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government’s Murghi Paal Scheme, the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM)-led coalition government has officially scuttled the programme including two other initiatives of the previous regime.

The other projects which faced the axe include the Katta Farba and Katta Bachao schemes.

Sources said no funds have been allocated for these three subsidised programmes in the new federal budget while the provincial departments have now contacted the Punjab government after being disappointed with the federal government to restore and continue these programmes.

The sources said letters have also been sent to the caretaker provincial government for their revival along with the details of the ‘record success’ of these three projects. However, sources in the Livestock and Dairy Development Department and the Rawalpindi Poultry Research Institute are not optimistic about the revival of these programmes. After their launch in 2019, these programmes successfully ran for four years.

According to sources,  the top military, civil and judiciary officers also received sets of chickens at subsidised rates under the public-friendly Murghi Paal Scheme.

At the start of the project, a set of five desi chicks and one hen were provided at Rs1,050 with a subsidy of Rs450. For fresh meat of desi chicken, a set of six chickens was given for Rs1,050.

According to the programme in-charge, Deputy Director Dr Arif, under this programme over the past four years, a total of 2.5 million chickens were distributed across Punjab while there was a further demand for 1.5 million birds.

 

Published in The Express Tribune, June 11th, 2023.

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