Elections 2013: Sherpao says prime minister using FATA’s funds for his own party

Qaumi Watan Party chief alleges that funds for Benazir Income Support Programme are being used for political gains.


Our Correspondent December 16, 2012
Elections 2013: Sherpao says prime minister using FATA’s funds for his own party

MANSEHRA:


Qaumi Watan Party (QWP) chief Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao criticised Prime Minister (PM) Raja Pervez Ashraf for using 30% of the funds meant for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas’ (Fata) Annual Development Programme.


He said the PM had exhausted his discretionary funds within three months and is now “unlawfully” spending money.

Speaking to the media on Saturday, the former chief minister said that the Election Commission of Pakistan should take notice of the PM’s activities. He alleged that Ashraf has used Fata’s funds for the Pakistan Peoples Party’s election campaign.

He further added that funds for the Benazir Income Support Programme were being used for political gains.

In reference to the Kalabagh Dam, the QWP chief said: “When they don’t have the resources for the Bhasha Dam how can they build the Kalabagh project?” He added that he had always opposed the Kalabagh Dam in the past.

Criticising Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa chief minister, Sherpao said that Ameer Haider Hoti spends 26 days of a month in one district and neglects the others, especially Hazara division.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 16th, 2012.

COMMENTS (2)

Kamran Naqvi | 11 years ago | Reply

If he is serious, he should file complaint with ECP.

Beatle | 11 years ago | Reply

I have a suggestion for ECP for upcoming elections, which is: Any party bagging less than 10% of total vote-cast should not be considered as a party in the house. Its elected members could remain there as "Independent". This might eliminate chances to black mail the treasury benches, since it would be more convenient to deal with individuals.

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