Of austerity measures
EVERY time there is a political change in the country, meaning a change of guard in the government, there are talks of belt tightening to save available resources to be later invested in nation-state building. The idea is indeed praiseworthy and evocative of a noble prospect. Who knows, it may one day provide a lifeline to the nation during the worst times. So, for any newly established dispensation, austerity has become almost a buzzword, even if it is inconsequential on the ground. So, that is what we saw soon after the present government came to power last year. But talks aside little was done on the ground to minimise waste and conserve whatever little resources we have.
Notwithstanding the incumbent Al's lip service to austerity, the tradition of the spendthrift habits dies hard, putting a strain on our wobbly public exchequer. Indeed an opposite trend is in evidence to hide our inabilities as the administration becomes bloated because of political expediency. I often wonder whether several dozens are indeed required to run the government. I remember that the central cabinet of a much larger and more complex polity like Pakistan used to be composed only of half a dozen ministers, most of whom used to be considered national figures in olden days. We could ignore the mega size of our cabinet but, at the same time, its members carry a price tag in term of their perks and privileges, and it is the public who is to bear the burden of each one of them.
The prime minister and her hand-picked foreign minister already have an enviable travel record. Our national airline has already nose-dived. As a result, I presume that most of the longer travels hops are made by exorbitantly expensive foreign airlines. They are often accompanied by delegations whose size cannot be justified. Whenever there is an opportunity of a junket, our officials busy themselves in such a way that they appear to be indispensable and have to be included in the delegation.
During the eighties, this scribe attended the IISS security conference in Norway. In one of the plenary sessions of the conference held in Oslo's Hotel Scandinavia, King Olaf V was invited to share his views on the subject under deliberation. To everyone's surprise, he simply walked into the hotel unannounced. He came walking from his residence located just across the road. There was no honour guard, no trumpets, no escort. He came as quietly as he left.
With few honourable exceptions, a large number of officials and ministers continue to make air dashes and move around with unnecessarily large escorts that, at the best, may serve so-called security requirements, although the actual purpose of such display is to rather message the ego of our VVIPS.
Such official profligacy is nothing new, but is undesirable in this poor country. But recently, I read in a vernacular daily that fifteen MPS are going to visit seven countries to learn in situ about port operations. Isn't it a rather expensive way of learning? What has, however, made our spendthrift tradition particularly distasteful is that it comes at a time of severe economic stress. Although the government has been telling us about the overflow of money in the apex bank's vault, we see no sign of it either in the rehabilitation of Sidr and Aila victims or in the alleviation of poverty. There is only the oratory of the pundits in a comfortable zone of deliberation. In the meantime, the country has been looking towards the donors as the number of the poor keeps swelling.
Slashing the number of ministries and divisions is the need of the day, as is cutting down on other expenses that have more to do with pomp and splendour than official business. No garlanding, no gates, no illumination -- that's the newly pronounced mantra for salvation.
The Second World War broke the economic backbone of Britain. The war ravages put almost all of Europe under rationing of the essentials. Unable to get along with the austerity, many fled to countries such as Australia. Britain itself had to embrace austerity to the point of hunger. She voluntarily dismantled her vast empire and subsequently bounced back to a new life.
Economics aside, there is a human element to the story. The government needs to show that it is alive to the misery of the people and is taking steps to alleviate their condition. One small step towards this goal is to refrain from unnecessary expenditure in these grave times.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments