During a cabinet meeting, Prime Minister Gilani has expressed displeasure over the performance of some of his cabinet ministers. The interesting thing is that the remarks have been cited in an official statement about the proceedings of the cabinet. Thus the PM wants the public to know that the performance of some of his ministers has been shoddy. He has accused them of failing to implement a number of key MoUs with friendly countries which could have significantly improved our economy, social sector and physical infrastructure. The statement raises a number of questions.
In early February, while addressing what was then billed as the last meeting of the resigning cabinet, Gilani did not say a single word about the failures of his colleagues. Instead, he paid rich tributes to the team and expressed gratitude for their assistance. Was he right then or is he right now? Again, in a parliamentary democracy the PM is the team-leader who sets goals for individual cabinet members and checks their performance from time to time to find if it is up to the mark. The cabinet has been in office for three years now. Had the PM exercised an efficient oversight, the neglect that he complains about now could not have occurred. In case certain ministers were repeatedly found to be negligent in the performance of their tasks so important for the economy and social development, he should have in the first instance called for an explanation from the ministers and in case they persisted in their criminal neglect that he accuses them of now, he should have shown them the door. Were these ministers so powerful that he could not reprimand them or dismiss them? In that case, the honourable way for him would have been to quit. The only time he offered to resign was when no minister was willing to take responsibility for the security lapses that led to the killing of Federal Minister Shahbaz Bhatti. This time too, the offer was immediately withdrawn at the insistence of his colleagues who praised the PMs performance. The cabinet thus exonerated every minister.
Gilanis remarks about the failure of the ministers and lack of action against them by the PM for more than half his tenure is as much damaging for the unnamed cabinet members as it is for the PM himself. This would provide a justification to critics to maintain that the PM is in fact finding scapegoats for his own shortcomings.
