The politics of development spending
With a year to go in the next general elections, PA members are aware that the distribution of these funds holds the key for wooing constituents during elections.
Thursday’s showdown between two Faisalabad MPAs – Opposition leader Raja Riaz and Law Minister Rana Sanaullah – appeared to be a last-ditch attempt by the opposition members to extract as much funds as possible.
The opposition members had received Rs8 million every year for the three years PPP and the PML-N shared the treasury benches.
The funds stopped with the breaking down of the coalition. No funds were available for PPP MPAs during the fourth year. This year too the treasury and opposition seem to be on a collision course.
Sanaullah’s remark that opposition members would not get funds by force was in fact a declaration that time for electoral politics had arrived.
In Pakistan, development funds are mostly allocated as patronage and not entirely through an institutional mechanism. The prime minister or the chief minister monitors the allocations and prioritises members of his own party. Members of the allied parties are entertained once all members of the ruling party have got it. The leftover funds are then given to the opposition members. While all ruling party members are equal in theory, some are closer to the chief executive and are thus preferred over others. For instance in Lahore, distribution of funds per PML-N MPA ranged between Rs120 million and Rs8 million last year.
Seeing the plight of the PPP MPAs in the Punjab, the prime minister had announced a few days ago that Rs70 million would be provided for each PPP MPA by the federal government. Likewise, PML-N MNAs from the Punjab are getting development funds for their constituencies from the Punjab government.
Given the lack of an institutional mechanism and inter-party and intra-party rivalries, a large chunk of these funds remains unspent every year. Last year, Rs72 billion of the Rs192 billion Annual Development Plan remained unspent.
A misunderstanding must be addressed here. Legislators do not get any cash. They get to identify schemes for which funds are then allocated. The legislators can woo constituents to their camp by getting a road built or a basic-health facility established in their area.
So why is there a need to leave these funds in the hands of the chief executive?
While the constitution has vested the executive power with the government, it provided proper oversight by parliamentary committees. These committees are meant to be bipartisan. Then, there is audit to ensure transparency in the use of these funds.
But somehow, the system ends in benefitting the treasury members alone. None of the political parties seem to be bothered about rectifying the wrong. Double standards are evident in withholding funds for constituencies of opposition members and releasing those for treasury members.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 30th, 2011.
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