There are, according to most updated official files on the government website, as of 10th May, 2011, 28 Federal Ministers, nine Ministers of State, five Advisors to the Prime Minister (four of whom have status of Federal Ministers) and three Special Assistants to the Prime Minister (two of whom have status of Ministers of State and one is on a MP 1 scale). This list does not include the Deputy Chairman Planning Commission who also heads an important federal body. And though newspapers often say Ms Shahnaz Wazir Ali is a Special Assistant/Advisor to the PM, her name is not on the list either. But even with this omission, if it is one, there are 46 odd people holding the fort at the federal cabinet/ministry level currently.
These are days when the Finance Minister is running from pillar to post to raise loans, get grants if he can, and so on, in order to put together a decent budget. It is also the time we have cut down our development expenditures substantially and we are saying that subsidies should also be cut as the government cannot afford these.
Does it make sense to have this size for looking after the federal governance structure? Especially when we also keep saying that a lot of the service delivery departments have been or will soon be devolved?
Of the chosen immortals mentioned above, there are four Federal Ministers, one Minister of State and two Special Assistants who do not have portfolios (again this is by 10th of May official document) or things to assist on. This is funny, especially in the case of Special Assistants, as one thought the position of Advisor and Special Assistant was usually for experts on specific areas who were not Parliamentarians and so could not become Ministers. But clearly in this case these positions are just being used to accommodate coalition partners.
There is a Federal Minister for Defence, a half Federal Minister (gentleman has two portfolios) for Defence Production, and a Minister of State for Defence Production. While anything defence related is of course the preserve of the omni-present armed forces of ours. These gentlemen must keep very busy indeed. Interestingly, there is no Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs in the Cabinet. Instead a Minister of State, who has additional charge of Finance, Economic Affairs and Statistics, and has worked in that Ministry for the last eight odd years, has the charge of Foreign Affairs.
We have a Federal Minister and a Minister of State to look after Production. In addition, we have an Advisor (almost all Advisors to Prime Minister have status of Federal Minister) for Industries, a half Federal Minister for Industries and a separate Federal Minister for Textile Industry, while areas such as Railways, Postal Services, and Water and Power all have separate Federal Ministers. We have one Federal Minister and a Minister of State looking after Privatisation alone.
More interestingly Overseas Pakistanis have a Federal Minister and a Minister of State looking after them. This must be a very lucrative ministry. Could there be another reason for having two ministers ministering this area?
There is a Federal Minister for Religious Affairs, a Minister of State for Interfaith Harmony and Minority Affairs, and an Advisor on Minority Affairs. Is it that the government wants to oblige people within its own party as well as coalition partners but also does not actually want to give them a place where they could be gainfully employed or have any real responsibility?
Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs has a Federal Minister and an Advisor looking after it. And in addition there is an Advisor to the Prime Minister for Human Rights as well. Given the conditions of law and order in the country and the state of human rights it is hard to believe these ministers are doing much at all.
Why do we need so many Ministers, Ministers of State, Advisors and Special Assistants in the first place? Clearly we do not. But the government, as usual, is trying to appease constituencies and appease coalition partners. If the rightwing parties, who were PPP coalition partners earlier, were to decide to come in, they too would get some slots. But then how can the government’s promises of austerity and the pronouncements of the Prime Minister and President mean anything? How can they have even an iota of credibility? How can people believe the government when it says that people should tighten their belts, should pay more taxes while it keeps a fat Cabinet and keeps cutting development expenditures and subsidies for the people?
But even if the government has to have some slack in Cabinet, why can the government not have competent people, and appoint them in positions where they can do some work for a change? Why are there not more people in Finance, Planning and Taxation, why do we not have a Foreign Minister and why do we have to have full Ministers for facile portfolios like Defence Production and Postal Services and two people looking after overseas Pakistanis?
Apparently economic hardship or not, austerity or not, Osama or not, it is business as usual in government. This government has no intention of doing any reforms, or setting any examples (good ones) or tackling any of the many significant challenges that our society faces. It seems to be there just to ensure that it can complete its five years and then hope that the voters will be struck by amnesia in the next election or feudal, ethnic and/or biraderi politics will save them.
The writer is an Associate Professor of Economics at LUMS (currently on leave) and a Senior Advisor at Open Society Foundation (OSF). He can be reached at fbari@sorosny.org