PPP, Centre clash in NA over Sindh water data
.

Concerns over acute water shortages in Sindh and Balochistan triggered a heated debate in the National Assembly on Thursday as PPP lawmakers questioned official water distribution figures and demanded answers over shortages affecting agriculture and irrigation.
The issue surfaced during a calling-attention notice moved in the House, where PPP leaders warned of a worsening water crisis in Sindh.
However, Federal Minister Moeen Wattoo defended the government's position and data from the Indus River System Authority (IRSA), claiming that Sindh had received more than its allocated share of water.
Speaking on the floor of the House, PPP leader Syed Naveed Qamar said Sindh was facing a severe shortage of water and questioned how farmers could be expected to cultivate crops without adequate supplies.
"At this time, Sindh is facing an acute water shortage," Qamar said, asking what answer could be given to growers if water was unavailable during the sowing season.
Responding to the calling attention notice, Federal Minister Moeen Wattoo said IRSA's data showed that Sindh had consumed more water than its allocated share, while Balochistan had also received water in accordance with its entitlement.
"According to IRSA, Sindh has used more than its allocated share of water," Wattoo said. He added that Sindh was currently being supplied 140,000 cusecs of water.
The minister's figures were immediately challenged by PPP lawmakers. Shazia Marri objected to the data and questioned why the telemetry system, aimed at improving transparency in water distribution, had still not been installed.
"The federal minister's figures are not correct," Marri said, adding that rainwater releases could not be counted as part of Sindh's share.
In response, Wattoo said the telemetry system would be completed by 2027 and defended the accuracy of the government's data. "How can I provide incorrect figures?"



















COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ