بھکی پاور پلانٹ اور جنرل الیکٹرک

بھکی پاور پلانٹ اور جنرل الیکٹرک 

حال ہی میں ڈان اخبار میں ایک مضمون چھپا ہے جس میں بھکی گیس پاور پلانٹ میں استعمال ہونے والی ٹیکنالوجی پر اعتراضات اٹھائے گئے ہیں. ان ہی اعتراضات کو شاہزیب خانزادہ نے بھی اپنے پروگرام میں دہرایا. اس سلسلے میں حقائق جاننے کے لئے میں نے کچھ انٹرنیٹ ریسرچ کی. اس ریسرچ کا خلاصہ پیش خدمت ہے

بھکی پاورپلانٹ میں امریکن کمپنی جنرل الیکٹرک (جی ای) کے بنائےہوئےگیس ٹربائن لگائے جائیں گے. جی ای گیس ٹربائن بنانے والی دنیا کی سب سے بڑی کمپنی ہے. بھکی پاور پلانٹ میں لگنے والے ٹربائن نائن ایچ اے سیریز کے ہیں. میڈیا کے مطابق یہ ٹیکنالوجی کبھی ٹیسٹ نہیں ہوئی اور پاکستان کو تجربہ گاہ بنایا جا رہا ہے. یہ بات سراسر غلط ہے

ایچ سسٹم پر کام کا آغاز1992 میں ہوا.  1995میں ٹیکنالوجی متعارف کرائی گئی. 1998 میں فل سپیڈ ٹیسٹ کیا گیا. 2003 میں پہلے ایچ نائن سسٹم نےپیداوار شروع کی. 2012 میں ٹیکنالوجی کی ایفشنسی بڑھاکر61 فیصد کی گئی جو کہ انڈسٹری میں سب سے زیادہ ہے. ایچ سیریز ٹربائنز نے 2012 میں دو لاکھ گھنٹے مکمل کئے. 2014 میں اس ٹیکنالوجی کی اگلی جنریشن ایچ اے سیریز متعارف کرائی گئی. اس ٹیکنالوجی کے پیچھے 23 سال کی ریسرچ اور ڈویلپمنٹ ہے

یہ چارٹ جی ای کی ویب سائٹ سے لیا گیا ہے

اب آتے ہیں اس سوال پر کہ کیا پاکستان یہ ٹیکنالوجی لینے والا پہلا ملک ہے

یہ بات بھی سراسر غلط ہے . ایچ ے سیریز کا پہلا آرڈر جی ای نے 2014 میں امریکہ سے ہی حاصل کیا

GE sells first HA gas turbines in US market

دو ہزار چودہ کے آخر تک جی ای  اپنی ایچ اے سیریز کے 16 آرڈر حاصل کر چکی تھی. یہ آرڈر دینے والے ممالک میں امریکہ، جاپان، برطانیہ، برازیل، کوریا، فرانس، روس، جرمنی، ترکی، ارجنٹینا اور مصر شامل ہیں

آرڈرز کی مزید تفصیلات کے لئے یہ لنک دیکھیں

GE secures 16 orders for HA series of gas turbines

جی ای وہ واحد کمپنی ہے جس کا اپنا ٹربائن ٹیسٹنگ سینٹرہے. اس فل سکیل، فل لوڈ سینٹر میں ٹربائن کوپروڈکشن سےزیادہ سخت حالات میں ٹیسٹ کیاجاتا ہے. اپنے ٹربائنز کی ٹیسٹنگ کے بارے میں جی ای کا کہنا ہے کہ

حکومت نےبھکی پاورپلانٹ کےآپریشن اورمینٹننس کا معاہدہ بھی جنرل الیکٹرک کےساتھ کیاہے. یعنی کمپنی اپنی مشینری کی کارکردگی کی خود زمہدار ہوگی

اس تھریڈ میں دی گئی معلومات میں نے آدھ گھنٹے کی انٹرنیٹ ریسرچ سے حاصل کیں اور ہر بات کا ریفرنس بھی دیا ہے. کیا ہمارا میڈیا کسی خبر کو نشر کرنے سے پہلے آدھ گھنٹے کی ریسرچ بھی نہیں کر سکتا؟

Statement by PM Nawaz Sharif during the 17th Session of the UN General Assembly

Statement by

His Excellency Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Sharif

Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan during the

General Debate of the Seventieth Session of the

UN General Assembly

30 September 2015

Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Distinguished Delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

We congratulate Mr. Mogens Lykketoft for his election as President of the 7th Session of the UN General Assembly. It is acknowledgement of your distinguished career in public service. We share your commitment to action towards building a more just and stable world.

We also pay tribute to Mr. Sam Kutesa for his able stewardship of the 69th Session.

Mr. President,

Seventy years ago, the United Nations was created from the ruins of the most devastating war the world has witnessed. Its purpose was to build universal peace and prosperity on the basis of equitable
principles, cooperation and collective action. Despite the constraints of the Cold War, the United Nations served the international community as the beacon of hope; the repository of freedom; an
advocate of the oppressed; a vehicle for development and progress.But, we - the peoples of the United Nations - have not succeeded in beating our arms into ploughshares or promoting universal prosperity and larger freedoms. Confrontation has returned between major powers at a time when many parts of the world are in turmoil. Terrorism is spreading. Poverty and deprivation have yet to be overcome. Gross violations of human rights are rampant. We are witnessing human dislocation - refugees and forced migrants - on a scale not witnessed for over half a century. Our very existence is threatened by the wanton damage done to our planet's life sustaining systems.

Yet Mr. President, this is also a moment of opportunity. Today, our interdependent world possesses the financial, scientific and organizational capabilities to address these diverse and interrelated challenges that pose a common threat to all member states. At the historic Summit over the weekend, we have collectively committed ourselves to achieve 17 Sustainable Development Goals, to promote equitable and inclusive development for all our peoples. The real challenge remains - to mobilize the collective political will and resources to ensure the comprehensive implementation of the agenda we have solemnly endorsed. Pakistan has already initiated action on national goals to promote the Post-2015 Development Agenda. We are also creating a robust mechanism for the monitoring and implementation of these goals and targets.

Mr. President,

Later this year in Paris, we will need to respond with common but differentiated responsibility to the threat posed by Climate Change. Partisan interests must not stand in the way of an ambitious and collective commitment to halt and reverse the damage done to our planet.

Mr, President,

On the 70th anniversary of the UN, we should strive to adapt this world organization so as to respond effectively to the current and emerging challenges that confront us all. Pakistan supports a comprehensive reform of the United Nations, including that of the Security Council. We need a Security Council that is more democratic, representative, accountable and transparent. A Council that reflects the interests of all member states, in accordance with the principle of sovereign equality. Not a Council, which is an expanded club of the powerful and privileged.

Mr. President,

Peacekeeping has been one of the key responsibilities of the United Nations. Pakistan is proud of its historic and current role as a major troop contributor. We regard it as our obligation to uphold international peace and security.

Mr. President,

Pakistan is the primary victim of terrorism. We have lost thousands of lives including civilians and soldiers to terrorist violence. The blood that has been shed - including that of our innocent children - has reinforced our resolve to eliminate this scourge from our society. We will fight terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, irrespective of who their sponsors are. Our Operation, Zarb-e-Azb, is the largest anti-terrorism campaign against terrorists anywhere, involving over 180,000 of our security forces. It has made substantial progress in cleansing our country of all terrorists and will conclude
only when our objective has been accomplished. This Operation is complemented by an all-inclusive National Action Plan. It encompasses police and security actions, political and legal measures and social and economic policy packages, aimed at countering violent extremism. The global threat of terrorism cannot be defeated unless we address its underlying causes. Poverty and ignorance are part of the problem. Extremist ideologies must be opposed. But the narrative of the terrorists also has to be countered through the just resolution of the several instances of oppression and injustice against Muslims in various parts of the world. Unfortunately, some seek to use the global campaign against terrorism to suppress the legitimate right of occupied peoples to self -determination.

Mr. President,

The rise and spread of terrorism across the Middle East today poses unprecedented security challenges. Wrecked by violence, ethnic and sectarian conflicts, and the rise of Daesh, several
countries of the region are today the vortex of conflict and instability. Others are being sucked into this quagmire. The tragedy of Palestine has intensified. The accepted avenue for peace between Palestine and Israel - a two state solution - appears further away today than ever before, due to the intransigent stance of the occupying power. Yet as I speak the proud Palestinian flag is being raised just outside this hall. We hope this is just the first step. We look forward to welcoming Palestine as a full member of the United Nations.

Mr. President,

Muslims are suffering across the world: Palestinians and Kashmiris oppressed by foreign occupation; persecuted minorities; and the discrimination against Muslim refugees fleeing persecution or war.
The international community must redress these injustices against the Muslim people.

Mr. President,

We welcome the comprehensive nuclear agreement reached between Iran and the P-Five plus One.
This shows what diplomatic engagement and multilateralism can achieve. It augurs well for the peace and security of our region and beyond

Mr. President,

Pakistan-Afghan relations underwent a positive transformation after the advent of the National Unity Government in Kabul. In response to the request from the Afghan Government and with the support of the international community, Pakistan made strenuous efforts to facilitate the process of Afghan reconciliation. Dialogue did open between the Afghan Government and the Taliban, which was an unprecedented first. But it was unfortunate that certain developments stalled the process. Thereafter,
militant attacks intensified, which we unequivocally condemn. Pakistan will persist in the endeavour to help resume the dialogue process and promote peace and stability in Afghanistan. We can, however, do so only if we receive the required cooperation from the Afghan government. Tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan are in neither country's interests. We are encouraged that the international community, including the major powers, desire continuation of the peace process in Afghanistan.

Mr. President,

Pakistan greatly appreciates China's proactive role in promoting peace and prosperity in Afghanistan and our region. We welcome China's vision of "One Belt, One Road". The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, announced during President Xi ainping's visit to Pakistan earlier this year will spur regional economic integration and bring prosperity to the entire region and beyond. This is an inspiring model of South-South cooperation that should be emulated. We also welcome Russia's greater focus on Asian cooperation. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which Pakistan will be joining this year as a full member, holds great promise for promoting regional connectivity.

Mr. President,

The history of South Asia is one of missed opportunities. Among its dire consequences is the persistence of poverty and deprivation in our region. Development is my Government's first priority and has underpinned my policy to build a peaceful neighbourhood. Our peoples need peace to prosper. Peace can be achieved through dialogue, not disengagement. In 1997 when the Composite Dialogue was launched with India, our two countries agreed that this would encompass two principal items: Kashmir and Peace and Security, along with six other issues, including terrorism. The primacy and urgency of addressing these two issues is even more compelling today.

Consultations with Kashmiris, who are an integral part of the dispute, are essential to evolving a peaceful solution. Since 1947, the Kashmir dispute has remained unresolved. UN Security Council resolutions have remained unimplemented. Three generations of Kashmiris have only seen broken promises and brutal oppression. Over l00,000 have died in their struggle for self-determination.
This is the most persistent failure of the United Nations.

Mr. President,

When I assumed office of the Prime Minister of Pakistan in June 2013, for the third time, one of my first priorities was to normalize relations with India. I reached out to the Indian leadership to emphasize that our common enemy was poverty and underdevelopment. Cooperation, not confrontation, should define,our relationship. Yet today ceasefire violations along the Line of Control and the Working Boundary are intensifying, causing civilian deaths including women and children.
Wisdom dictates that our immediate neighbour refrains from fomenting instability in Pakistan. The two countries should address and resolve the causes of tension and take all possible measures to avert further escalation. That is why I want to use the opportunity today to propose a new peace initiative
with India, starting with measures that are the simplest to implement:

One, we propose that Pakistan and India formalize and respect the 2003 understanding for a complete ceasefire on the Line of Control in Kashmir. For this purpose, we call for UNMOGIP's expansion to monitor the observance of the ceasefire.

Two, we propose, that Pakistan and India reaffirm that they will not resort to the use or the threat of use of force under any circumstances. This is a central element of the UN Charter.

Three, steps be taken to demilitarize Kashmir.

Four, agree to an unconditional mutual withdrawal from Siachen Glacier, the world's highest battleground.

An easing of threat perceptions through such peace efforts will make it possible for Pakistan and India to agree on a broad range of measures to address the peril posed by offensive and advanced weapons systems. Pakistan neither wants to, nor is it engaged in, an arms race in South Asia. We cannot however remain oblivious to the evolving security dynamics and arms buildup in our region, which obliges us to take essential steps to maintain our security.

As a responsible nuclear weapon state, Pakistan will continue to support the objectives of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. We have maintained the highest standards of nuclear security and have established an effective regime to ensure the safety and security of our nuclear facilities and stocks. South Asia needs strategic stability and this requires serious dialogue to achieve
nuclear restraint, conventional balance and conflict resolution.

Finally Mr. President, We look forward to playing our part to build a brighter era of peace and
prosperity in South Asia. We owe it to our people and to succeeding generations.
I thank you Mr. President.

Houbara Bustard: Extinction or Exaggeration?

Every year in Pakistan, there is a great hue & cry in the media over hunting of the "endangered" Houbara Bustard. These reports are largely based on incomplete understanding of the situation, half truths & poor research on the subject. The reports have recently led to the Supreme Court of Pakistan imposing a complete ban on Houbara hunting and cancelling all permits. In this article, I will highlight aspects of this issue that are largely kept hidden from the public in Pakistan.

To begin with, the IUCN red list of threatened species lists the conservation status of the Asian Houbara Bustard as 'vulnerable' and not 'endangered'. The word endangered repeatedly used in Pakistani media implies a higher level of threat and is misleading.

A second misconception created by the media is that the numbers of Houbara in Pakistan are rapidly declining. Following is a quote from a 2014 WWF Pakistan's report

the population of Houbara Bustard in Pakistan which was declining rapidly two decades ago has stabilized in the last twenty years since. As an example, conservation efforts started by Houbara Foundation International Pakistan and provincial wildlife department of Balochistan have revealed positive trend in Nag Valley (Rashid, H 2003). WWF-Pakistan appreciates these positive trends

IFHC Breeding Centre

The Sheikh's of UAE are portrayed as the greatest enemies of the species and blamed for the decline of Houbara population in Pakistan. Hardly ever a mention is made that the same people lead the largest conservation effort of these birds in the world under the banner of International Fund for Houbara Conservation. IFHC runs conservation projects and Houbara captive breeding programmes that, in the last 18 years, have produced 74,475 birds of the Asian species & 131,763 birds of the African Houbara species. In 2014 alone 25,588 Asian Houbara birds were produced in IFHC breeding centres in Abu Dhabi & Kazakhstan. Six hundred birds were recently released in the Lal Sohanra National Park, Bahawalpur. Since Houbaras are a migratory species, birds released in Kazakhstan increase the regional population and these birds find their way to Pakistan in the winter months.

WWF advocates "Controlled hunting of the species to be undertaken within the framework of species conservation." I wish our media would do a little more research before raising false alarms and our judiciary would call in experts before ruling on such issues.

Open letter to DFID regarding Alif Ailaan, Part II

I wrote a letter to DFID, UKaid a few weeks ago expressing my concern over a campaign by Alif Ailaan unfairly targeting the federal government to increase spending on education to 4% of GDP. I have now received a response from DFID. Since Alif Ailaan (AA) ran a public campaign and I raised my objections via an open letter it's only appropriate that I share their response publicly as well. Their letter is reproduced below

Following are some of my comments in response.

The letter says that the campaign does not exclusively target the finance minister. I am not aware of all the fine details of Alif Ailaans campaign but as a member of the general public I found the targeting was quite obvious. Not only did the campaign directly address the finance minister, it completely omitted the four chief ministers with whom the decision to allocate resources actually lies. The four provincial governments in Pakistan are headed by four different political parties. Alif Ailaan could have ran a better campaign by encouraging healthy competition between the four governments. By making the federal government a convenient escape goat for the provincial governments, AA has actually done a dis-service to the cause of education in Pakistan.

The main argument put forth by DFID/AA for targeting the federal government is that the centre needs to create 'fiscal space' for the provinces, enabling them to increase their education spending. Firstly, as the DFID letter clearly states, fiscal space needs to be created through the National Finance Commission. This allocation is not made in the federal budget! What then is the purpose of this campaign at the time of the federal budget apart from political point-scoring? Secondly, the share of provinces was increased from 47% to 57.5% when education was devolved from the centre to the provinces creating fiscal space for them. It is up to the provinces to allocate resources as per their priorities from these funds. Thirdly, even if the centre were to increase the size of the divisible pool it would have no constitutional authority to dictate education spending to the provinces. The finance minister is not legally empowered "to ensure that 4% of national income is spent on education."

The response also mentions a "write a letter" campaign where public were asked to urge the finance minister to increase education spending. I have not seen any such campaign perhaps because it was not as aggressively promoted. Nevertheless the target of these letters should have been the provincial Chief Ministers and not the Finance Minister.

Most importantly, DFID/AA need to re-assess the validity of their assumption that it's the lack of fiscal space that is hampering education spending by provinces. Recent news stories suggest otherwise. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government could spend only Rs9.3bn of the total development budget of Rs19.9bn for elementary and secondary education as of June 5, 2015! 

I believe that the AA campaign is based on false assumptions, is wrongly targeted and poorly executed. I have little doubt that, sadly, it will fail in producing any tangible results.

An open letter to DFID regarding political activities of Alif Ailaan

I would like to share my concerns with you regarding furthering of a political agenda by a DFID funded NGO, Alif Ailaan (AA) in Pakistan. For the last several weeks, a television / print campaign has been launched on Pakistani media that apparently aims to pressure the Federal Government into increasing budgetary allocation for education to 4% of GDP. I have no objection to the underlying goal but the campaign reeks of a political agenda to misguide the Pakistani public into believing that resource allocation for education is primarily the responsibility of the Federal Government.

I am sure AA is well aware that after the 18th constitutional amendment, education is a Provincial subject. Resource allocation for education is the decision made independently by each of the Provincial governments and has nothing to do with the centre. Yet AA repeatedly names the Federal Government and the Federal finance minister in its campaign with absolutely no mention of the Provincial Chief Ministers or the Provincial governments. The general Pakistani public is not aware of where the constitutional responsibility lies and is likely to be misled into blaming the Federal Government for the lack of fund allocation to education. The Federal Government already distributes 57.5% of the divisible pool among the provinces and it has no control over how each province decides to allocate these resources. Even if the Federal Government were to increase the divisible pool, it would have no constitutional authority to specify Provincial budgetary allocation for education.

AA, in its defense, might cite Article 25A of the constitution which reads:

The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of five to sixteen years in such manner as may be determined by law.

A cursory reading might lead one to believe that this puts the burden on the Federal Government but if we look up the definition of “the State” in Article 7 of the constitution, it reads

“the State" means the Federal Government, Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), a Provincial Government, a Provincial Assembly, and such local or other authorities in Pakistan as are by law empowered to impose any tax or cess.

Other justifications that AA might put forward include promises made in the ruling party’s manifesto. All parties should be held accountable but only to the extent of the provinces where they hold sufficient majority to influence budgetary allocation.

I have expressed my concerns openly on twitter tagging AA’s twitter handle @alifailaan but no clarification or justification has been put forth in response. I request you to kindly look into the matter and advise AA to refrain from using DFID funds to further political agendas of its management. This money will produce better results if spent on ensuring judicious use of allocated funds in the provinces.

Sincerely

@SaudSami
A Concerned Pakistani Citizen

Charter of Economy میثاق معیشت

سیاست میں بہت سے معاملات ایسے ہوتے ہیں جن پر تمام جماعتوں کی رائے کم و بیش یکساں ہوتی ہے لیکن وقتی مصلحت ان جماعتوں کو مخالفت پرمجبور کر دیتی ہے. اپوزیشن جماعتیں حکومت مخالفت میں آئین سازی نہیں ہونے دیتیں لیکن جب حکومت میں آتی ہیں تو خود انہی مسائل کا سامنا کرتی ہیں جن کا سامنا پچھلی حکومت کو تھا. اس ہی طرح حکومتی جماعت اپوزیشن کے جائز مطالبات پر قانون سازی نہیں کرتی کیونکہ اس کے اختیارات میں کمی آئے گی لیکن جب دوبارہ اپوزیشن میں جاتی ہے تو اسے اس کی اہمیت دوبارہ یاد آتی ہے. نواز شریف اور بینظیر بھٹو کو دو دو بار حکومت چھن جانے کے بعد یہ بات سمجھ آ گئی . وہ سر جوڑ کر بیٹھے اور ان تمام معاملات پر اتفاق رائے پیدا کیا جن پر نا اتفاقی کا فائدہ تیسری قوت اٹھا رہی تھی. یہ اتفاق میثاق جمہوریت کی صورت میں ہمارے سامنے آیا. مسلم لیگ نون اور پیپلز پارٹی نے میثاق جمہوریت کی اکثر شقوں کو عملی جامہ پہنایا جس کے نتیجے میں پاکستان میں جمہوریت مظبوط ہوئی اور پہلی بار ایک جمہوری حکومت نے اپنا پانچ سالہ دور حکومت مکمل کیا

آج پاکستان میں جمہوریت مظبوط ہو رہی ہے. ہماری اگلی ترجیح معیشت کی بحالی ہونی چاہئے تاکہ جمہوریت کے فوائد پوری طرح عوام تک پہنچ سکیں. معاشی معاملات میں بھی کچھ وقتی مصلحتیں قومی مفاد پر غالب آ جاتی ہیں. حکومت اپنے اختیارات پر سمجھوتہ نہیں چاہتی اور اپوزیشن حکومت کے لئے مشکلات پیدا کرنا اپنا فرض سمجھتی ہے. طاقت کی اس جنگ کا نقصان معیشت کو ہوتا ہے. مثال کے طور پر پالیسیوں کا تسلسل معیشت کے لئے انتہائی ضروری ہے لیکن ہر آنے والی حکومت پچھلی حکومت کی پالیسیوں کو یکسر تبدیل کر دیتی ہے جس سے سرمایہ کروں کا اعتماد متاثر ہوتا ہے. اس ہی طرح اپوزیشن جماعتیں قومی اداروں میں بھرتی کی شفافیت پر زور دیتی ہیں لیکن حکومت میں آنے کے بعد من مانے طریقے  سے بلا ضرورت سیاسی بھرتیاں کرتی ہیں. نجکاری، قرضوں کے حصول و ادائیگی ، ٹیکس نادہندگان سے وصولی جیسے معاملات پر وقتی مصلحت کے تحت سیاست اور پائنٹ سکورنگ کی جاتی ہے

ایک مثال سے یہاں بات واضح کرنا ضروری ہے. بجٹ پر بحث کے دوران ٹیکس دینے والوں کی تعداد میں اضافے کا معاملہ ہر سال اٹھایا جاتا ہے. سب جانتے ہیں کہ ہمارے ملک میں اکثریت اپنے حصّے کا ٹیکس ادا نہیں کرتی. حکومت  ٹیکس نادہندگان پر سختی کرنے سے کتراتی ہے کیونکہ اس کے نتیجے میں ان نادہندگان کی طرف سے 'یسے ہوئے مظلوم طبقے' کا روپ دھار کر ہڑتالوں اور مظاہروں کا ایک سلسلہ شروع ہو جائے گا. اپوزیشن جماعتیں سیاسی فائدہ اٹھانے کے لئے ان مظاہرین کے پیچھے آن کھڑی ہوں گی اور حکومت چلانا مشکل ہو جائے گا. پانچ سال بعد رول تبدیل ہو جاتے ہیں اور مسئلہ جوں کا توں رہتا ہے. اگر تمام جماعتیں متفق ہو جائیں کہ ٹیکس نادہندگان کی سیاسی حمایت نہیں کی جائے گی تو ان نادہندگان کے خلاف سخت کروائی عمل میں لائی جا سکتی ہے 

اسحاق ڈار صاحب کئی بار میثاق معیشت پر اتفاق رائے کی حکومتی خواہش کا اظہار کر چکے ہیں لیکن سیاسی جماعتوں اور میڈیا نے اس بات کو اب تک کوئی خاص اہمیت نہیں دی.  وقت آ گیا ہے کہ معیشت کی بحالی کے لئے سیاسی جماتیں اسی بلوغت کا مظاہرہ کریں جس کا انہوں نے جمہوریت کی بقا کے لئے کیا تھا. پاکستان کا فائدہ ہم سب کا فائدہ ہے 

Why I'm Keeping Faith in PMLN

This is in response to the article Why I'm losing trust in the PML-N by Adnan Rasool.
Mr. Rasool starts off with the following line.
"It is very traumatic to lose trust in something you have believed in for a long time"
Let me set the record straight, right away. Contrary to the impression he tries to create, the author is not a 'long-time' believer in PMLN. He joined the PMLN campaign shortly before 2013 elections. His twitter timeline (@AdnanRasool) will confirm this assertion.

The author opens by criticizing the way government prepared the federal budget. An absolutely nonsensical statement that the "finance ministry ran the show" does not do justice to the authors wisdom. Who else should lead the preparation of the budget? The interior minister, the planning minister or someone else? Every ministry sends its budgetary requirements and recommendations to the finance ministry well before the budget. This is part and parcel of every ministers job and no invitation to participate is required to be sent out. Budget preparation, by definition, means allocating limited resources to a broader set of needs. Once all ministries have made their expectations known, a final decision on allocation rests with the finance ministry which seeks guidance from the Prime Minister on the priorities of the government. It is an exercise that inevitably leaves some with less than what they had hoped for and they must modify their plans accordingly.

The author also wonders "why do the most powerful people in the Federal Cabinet do not happen to be elected members" perhaps taking a shot at the finance minister. I will not delve into the merits of calling a senator 'non-elected', but can the writer please enlighten us as to which elected PMLN member is more qualified for the finance minister's job than Ishaq Dar?

The author goes on to criticize the 'Punjab Governance model." If we subtract the malice from the authors words, the model can be reworded as

Political appointments of elected members to technical positions are to be done away with. Cabinet positions shall not be used as political reward as this leads to inefficiency and corruption. A small cabinet with efficient ministers whose qualifications match the job will work closely with the chief minister. Officers of good repute, having necessary technical skills, shall report directly to the CM to minimize bureaucratic delays.

It is this 'Punjab Model' that gave us the Lahore Metro in 11 months! Perhaps the writer prefers the Sindh Model where the 16Km Lyari express-way is still incomplete after 7 years? Or maybe he has faith in the KP model where talk is cheap but nothing really gets done?  The writer forgets that it is this 'Punjab Model' that helped PMLN sweep the elections in Punjab with 3/4th majority! Pursuing any other model after elections would amount to political dishonesty. The writer might also recall that it was the governance in Punjab that won him over to PMLN!

In his famous election day victory speech of May 12, 2013 Nawaz Sharif requested the people to pray for an absolute majority. This prayer was motivated by his previous experience of how a weak government is forced to bow to internal and external pressures and compromises on its election promises. Now that the prayer has been answered, the PM is refusing to relent to internal & external forces which is causing the current tensions.

Losing or keeping faith in a political party should naturally depend upon the party's performance and not on internal party politics. The writer however omits the subject entirely. Any article that analyses the one year performance of PMLN but fails to highlight any of the numerous achievements should put a question mark on the authors motive. Securing $32bn investment from China for the Pak-China economic corridor, unprecedented investment in the power sector including mega projects such as Gadani Power Park & Dasu Dam, an exponential rise in forex reserves, stabilization of currency, GSP+ status, transparent 3G/4G auction, a promising start to the privatization program with the sale of UBL/PPL shares, no corruption scandals, securing financing from World bank, the list is long and impressive. Here is a Google map showing the government initiatives in just the power sector. If this fails to impress, I cannot imagine what will? So despite inner wrangling for power, real or imaginary, between ministers / bureaucrats I am keeping Faith in PMLN.

In conclusion, the author condones 'the mischief of external forces' by making the utterly shocking statement "I do not blame them for what they are doing given the way this government acts"! Nothing, absolutely nothing justifies interference of non-democratic forces. I am sorry Sir, but you are no democrat and someone PMLN can well do without. The author is disappointed, this much I will accept. I would advise him to collect his thoughts and rethink the reasons for his disappointment. Does it really stem from the governance of PMLN or is it more of a personal nature?

Answering Objections to Privatization

PMLN government has finalized a list of state owned enterprises (SOEs) to be privatized in the coming months. Various quarters have voiced criticism of the plan. Most of this criticism is motivated by groups having vested interests. Political opponents also see this as an opportunity to score points and are trying to confuse the public regarding the need and the effects of the proposed privatization process. In this article, we will discuss the various objections raised.

The first objection or rather allegation is that the privatization program is being carried out on the dictates of the IMF. Anybody who has followed PML-N's history will know that privatization has been the cornerstone of PMLN's economic policies since the 1990's. It was PMLN that initiated the process of privatization in Pakistan. Privatization has been an important part of the PMLN manifesto for more than 20 years. In its Jan, 2013 manifesto PMLN clearly states

Identify enterprises which need to be privatized and assign targets to the privatization commission to ensure completion of the privatization process within the assigned time frame.

PMLN therefore has a public mandate for its privatization program. Anybody calling it a policy formulated under the dictates of the IMF is clearly unaware of history and core party policies.

The second objection relates to questioning the need for privatization. There are two groups of people that raise this argument. One questions the need for privatization in totum, irrespective of the status of the SOE. This group does not even support the privatization of loss-making entities that are sucking up hundreds of billions of government funds annually. The main group falling in this category is Pakistan People's Party. PPP's founder Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was responsible for the nationalization program of the 1970's and is therefore predisposed to opposing any privatization plan. Supporting privatization would amount to admitting the mistake of its founder, a move that PPP is not yet mature enough to consider. Secondly, PPP, in each of its tenures, has used SOEs to generate employment for its loyal party workers (jiyalas) and their families. Many SOEs including PIA and Pakistan Steel are heavily staffed with PPP loyalists. Privatization, with management control, will put the jobs of these loyalists at risk. Furthermore, after privatization, PPP will lose the ability to use employment in SOEs as a political reward / bribe in any future government. Many scandals relating to misuse of SOE funds and assets surfaced during PPP's last tenure. These include the NICL and OGRA scams currently being investigated by NAB on the direction of the supreme court. The bottom line is that PPP does not want to lose control of these SOEs. They may be generating losses for the government of Pakistan but they are certainly benefiting the party.

The second group only objects to the privatization of SOEs that are running in profit. They question why the government should off load these entities when they are generating a profit? There are several reasons for the privatization of such entities. Running businesses is not the job of the government. The job of the government is to provide an environment conducive to running of the businesses by regulating business practices and protecting consumer rights.  If an entity is generating profits under government control it will generate higher profits under private management with better quality of service. Secondly, after the privatization of large loss-making SOEs, the burden of political over-staffing and misuse of government resources will shift to the remaining SOEs turning them into loss making entities. It is therefore better to privatize them while they are still profitable.

The present government is investing heavily in power generation to end the menace of load-shedding once and for all. Several projects have been initiated that require funding. Divesting from current SOEs will release funds to the government that can be invested into these new projects. For instance, the government is in advanced stages of finalizing two coal-fired power plants each of 660MW from its own resources in the Pakistan Power Park, at Gadani. The government's own investment in the project will give confidence to foreign investors and it is planned that a further eight plants each of 660MW will be installed in the power park. This government investment in the power sector holds far more value for the people than its current investment in banking or insurance. In the medium term the new SOEs created in the form of these power plants will also be privatized and the funds will be utilized where needed the most.

Another objection is the national pride argument. It is claimed that privatizing Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) and the steel mills will somehow dent our national pride. How many other governments, in democratic and developed countries are running airlines and steel mills? Pan Am, the national flag carrier of the United States, went bankrupt in 1991. The U.S. government made no attempt to save the airline in the name of national pride. The U.S. government has even ended its space shuttle program realizing that the private sector has developed to a point where it can provide the same services at a fraction of the cost. Seeing Pakistan Steel run on life support at less than 10% of its capacity should hurt our national pride more than seeing it prosper in private hands.

Finally there is the argument of why can't the government restructure these SOEs by bringing in qualified management. Billions have been flushed in the name of restructuring and bail-out packages on SOEs in the past. Those asking for more seem to have learned nothing in the last 40 years.