Able stewardship
Incorporating Senate’s non-binding suggestions is an admirable adherence to unwritten constitutional conventions
Mr Dar has shown that it pays to have a politician as finance minister. PHOTO: PID
In scaling back some of his more aggressive taxation proposals, Finance Minister Ishaq Dar appears to show the kind of statesmanlike flexibility that is required of a person in his position. In theory, as finance minister, so long as he has the support of his cabinet colleagues, he can propose whatever budget he likes and his party’s majority in parliament is bound by the 14th Amendment to support him. Yet in holding rounds of consultations with the various stakeholders of the economy — particularly those who would be directly affected by his proposals — and then incorporating their suggestions into the budget, Mr Dar has shown that it pays to have a politician as finance minister. It is true that his predecessors also held such consultations. But Mr Dar appears to have managed to keep the essence of his policy of trying to expand the tax net, without alienating some of the most powerful lobbies in the country. The steps taken in the 2016 budget are small, but meaningful, and Mr Dar’s ability to stick to his guns bodes well for the future.
We are also glad that, despite the fact that the upper house is dominated by the opposition parties, the minister decided to incorporate a majority of the Senate’s proposed changes on the budget. In a convention that dates back to the Magna Carta, Pakistan’s Constitution mandates that the budget must originate in the National Assembly, which is made up of the most directly elected representatives of the people. It also dictates that the Senate may not vote on the Money Bill, but only pass non-binding resolutions that make recommendations for changes. This last bit can be particularly tricky, since Pakistan’s federation consists of four very unequal provinces and to have the chamber that represents those federating units equally — the Senate — not vote on the budget has resulted historically in skewed allocations of spending priorities to the largest province. For a party that derives almost the entirety of its political support from Punjab, and for one that is currently in the minority in the upper house, to incorporate the Senate’s non-binding suggestions is an admirable adherence to what are still relatively new, and unwritten, constitutional conventions in Pakistan. We do not think this budget was as good as it could have been, but on the stewardship of the debate process, we have no complaints.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 21st, 2015.
We are also glad that, despite the fact that the upper house is dominated by the opposition parties, the minister decided to incorporate a majority of the Senate’s proposed changes on the budget. In a convention that dates back to the Magna Carta, Pakistan’s Constitution mandates that the budget must originate in the National Assembly, which is made up of the most directly elected representatives of the people. It also dictates that the Senate may not vote on the Money Bill, but only pass non-binding resolutions that make recommendations for changes. This last bit can be particularly tricky, since Pakistan’s federation consists of four very unequal provinces and to have the chamber that represents those federating units equally — the Senate — not vote on the budget has resulted historically in skewed allocations of spending priorities to the largest province. For a party that derives almost the entirety of its political support from Punjab, and for one that is currently in the minority in the upper house, to incorporate the Senate’s non-binding suggestions is an admirable adherence to what are still relatively new, and unwritten, constitutional conventions in Pakistan. We do not think this budget was as good as it could have been, but on the stewardship of the debate process, we have no complaints.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 21st, 2015.