Opposition criticises funding priorities
Punjab Assembly's budget debate on Sunday was dominated by sharp criticism from the opposition and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), describing the document as a collection of misleading statistics and expressing reservations over development priorities and allocations for South Punjab, agriculture, health and education.
On the other hand, the treasury members defended the government's performance and accused the opposition of turning the house into a platform for political rhetoric instead of debating the budget.
As proceedings started about one and a half hours behind schedule on the third day of the general discussion on the budget, there were only 30 lawmakers present in the 371-member assembly, including 18 from the treasury and 12 from opposition.
Opening the debate, opposition MPA Ejaz Shafi alleged that the budget figures were a "numbers game" and claimed that allocations for agriculture, school and higher education, health and special education had actually been reduced despite government claims of increased spending.
He questioned the utilisation of last year's development funds and criticised what he termed declining investment in public welfare sectors.
Alongside budget criticism, he also raised the cases of jailed PTI leaders and workers, insisting that they were being denied justice.
PPP lawmaker Wasif Mazhar Ran echoed concerns over the budget, wondering how the government could claim to have presented a tax-free budget while projecting a 65 per cent increase in revenue collection.He urged the government to prioritise health and education.
Opposition members repeatedly argued that South Punjab had been ignored in the provincial budget. PTI MPA Nadeem Qureshi claimed only Rs96 billion had been allocated to South Punjab from a development budget of Rs752 billion despite the region contributing around 40 per cent of Pakistan's agricultural output.
He alleged that allocations for higher education and agriculture had remained disproportionately low. He also criticised the government for objecting whenever opposition members raised political issues, remarking that politicians could not be expected to avoid politics in the assembly.
Another opposition member, Ali Imtiaz Warraich, argued that Punjab's budget could not be understood without examining the federal outlay, claiming that the province had transferred Rs546 billion to the federation without adequately taking the assembly into confidence.
He criticised the government's overall economic model, alleging that it had failed to improve public services, particularly in South Punjab.
The opposition speeches frequently shifted from the budget to politics. Several PTI lawmakers claimed the party remained the province's most popular political force despite its leadership being imprisoned.
PTI MPA Farrukh Javed Moon challenged the government to hold transparent elections in Lahore, claiming that the ruling PML-N could not win a fair contest. He alleged widespread corruption in departments, criticised the outsourcing of public schools, questioned wheat procurement policies and accused the government of making false promises during the election campaign.
MPA Saima Kanwal said voters had elected her party to seek the release of imprisoned PTI founder Imran Khan and demand the return of what she described as the party's "stolen mandate".
She criticised government spending priorities, alleging that public funds were being used for luxury instead of welfare.
MPA Zarnab Sher also criticised the budget, alleging that development spending remained limited compared to total expenditures, while accusing the government of reducing allocations for health and education but increasing spending on administrative offices and the Chief Minister's Secretariat.
The debate also briefly turned to law and order after Opposition Leader Moin Riaz Qureshi raised the killing of an Australian-Pakistani child during a police operation in Chakwal.
He raised the question why similar incidents involving Pakistani citizens had not received the same attention.
Speaker Malik Muhammad Ahmad Khan agreed that an impartial investigation was necessary and directed the government to present details of both the Chakwal incident and another one reported from Bhakkar before the assembly.