Ceremonial local governments

Cities are not just places to live; they are the largest economic enterprises and real engines of economic growth, fostering creativity, innovation, cultural diversity, social inclusion and openness. Globally, now cities matter more than the nations. When local governments are genuinely empowered, economies expand, services improve, and citizens begin to matter. Porto Alegre's participatory budgeting gives ordinary people a direct say in public spending, producing transparent governance, responsive services and public trust. Real city governance is rooted in fiscal authority, decision-making power and accountability to real people.

Even in developed world, empowered local governments wield immense economic power and fiscal authority. New York City manages a budget exceeding $100 billion across transport, housing, sanitation, policing and public health. London and Paris exercise strong mayoral control over urban policy, infrastructure, housing and climate action.

Outside the developed world, South American cities like Bogotá and Curitiba clearly exhibit how empowered professional mayors can transform mobility, public space and service delivery through locally-driven inclusive reforms. In the Indian state of Kerala, the People's Plan devolved 35% of state development funds to local governments, enabling communities to set their own priorities. In China, mayors are incentivised to maximise local economic growth. Their career growth hinges upon economic performance, such as GDP growth, investment and industrial output. These cities succeed for one simple reason: highly professional leadership; resting of authority with elected representatives, not with distant bureaucracies; or competing authoritarian urban institutions. Elected city leaders answer to citizens, not distant bureaucrats.

Now, look at Pakistan, all like to talk about local governments as if they matter or exit in true sense. The reality is far bleaker. Most of our cities are not run by elected representatives, but by distant federal bureaucrats who decide everything from budgets to project approvals. Local governments do sometimes exist, but only as decorative props, creating the illusion of citizen participation.

Over time, the promise of devolution has been hollowed out. Provincial WASAs, WMCs, housing departments, development authorities, transport authorities, parking companies have steadily swallowed the functions and revenue niches that should belong to city governments. Urban management, far from being localised, has been recentralised. Decision-making, fiscal authority, operational autonomy - all stripped away. Mayors do exist sometimes but not allowed to make decisions or legislate.

The paradox is striking: we elect mayors, but we do not allow them to govern cities. Instead of nurturing local leadership, the state manufactures it. Political cronies become mayors. Their loyalty lies with provincial political and bureaucratic elite, not citizens. Democracy at the local level becomes a show, a cosmetic ritual, masking where real power resides.

The fiscal injustice is equally stark. Cities generate revenue, yet it flows directly to provincial coffers. Money raised in a distant city in South Punjab can vanish in Lahore. Cities receive only enough to cover salaries; literally too little to plan, too little to build infrastructure, too little to serve citizens. City assets are seized by provincial departments. Without control over resources and assets, mayors cannot act. Without action, cities cannot govern. Compare this to Porto Alegre, where citizens directly influence budget allocation, asset management, building accountability and trust between people and their city.

The law enforces this subordination. Each local government statute ever instituted, places mayors and councils under the Deputy Commissioner, requiring compliance "in letter and spirit". City level policies, budgets and projects are conceived and executed provincially. Citizens? Irrelevant. Bureaucracy behaves as a ruling elite, insulated from oversight. The official narrative is predictable: "People know nothing; we know best." The outcome: alienation, stagnation, inefficiency - the opposite of what decentralisation through city governments promises.

Local governments in our cities, if ever exist, cannot legislate, innovate, or reform themselves. Even city development projects are conceived and executed by provincial authorities, bypassing local priorities. Our cities have institutions that are neither local nor effective - unlike global economic powerhouses where municipal power drives economic vitality and inclusive development. So why maintain these hollow bodies at all? When power, money and decisions reside entirely with the province, elected councils exist only to legitimise and extend provincial authority and pacify citizens with empty rituals of democracy.

If Pakistan aims competitive and livable cities, it must confront a hard truth: real devolution is essential. Establishing empowered local governments with fiscal and decision-making authority is a constitutional duty, not a policy choice. Effective local governance is no mystery; it emanates from deliberate design and political will. Cities perform when authority lies with elected local leaders, fiscal autonomy is ensured through strong own-source revenues and predictable transfers, and citizens are treated as participants, not spectators.

Political parties must nominate competent professionals to run for mayoral election, and mayors must answer to their constituents rather than distant bureaucracies or political bosses. Professional management, clear functional boundaries, transparency and a focus on service delivery turn municipalities into engines of growth and accountability. City councils must manage assets professionally to generate revenues innovatively while departing from taxation alone model. Maintain bankable business models and balance sheets. Institute business friendly regulations to attract investments alongside workable public-private partnership models for urban development rather than solely relying upon state grants and regressive taxation. These principles must be institutionalised otherwise local governments and grassroots democracy will remain ceremonial facades.