Devolution of Social Sectors Muzaffar Mahmood Qurashi Pakistan Study Group on Federalism National Institute of Historical and Cultural Research Quaid-i-Azam.

Devolution of Social Sectors

Muzaffar Mahmood Qurashi

Pakistan Study Group on FederalismNational Institute of Historical and Cultural Research

Quaid-i-Azam UniversityIslamabad

March 10, 2015

Devolution under the 18th Amendment

• Devolution: its philosophy; impact on the people– Resolutions, Speeches; papers; discussion in media– dissertations for MA, M Phil and Ph D– Resolutions of NA and Senate

• Implementation committee; TORs; Background of members with regard to the social sectors

• Did the Implementation committee grasp all relevant issues? Did it address them properly? Unlikely.

• Consequences

Consultations – pre 18th Amendment

• Session “in camera” Why “in camera”? How often? • Joint resolution, bi-partisan. Why? How often bi-partisan resolutions?

• Process followed in creating One Unit in 1955• Working of the One Unit – Akhtar Hussain Report

• Consultation for undoing One Unit 1969-70, Justice Akbar Commission report

• Senior Committee – MM Ahmed, AGN Kazi, Ghulam Ishaq Khan, Raja Ahmad Khan.• implementation Committee headed by V A Jafaree – SJB, Khawja Muhammad

Hamid, Shamim A Khan, Ishrat Hussain, MMQ

• Documents on 4 provinces published by Parvez Masud, DS (General) S&GAD Punjab (1971 or 1972)

• Governors’ Council – to resolve outstanding issues - Ikramullah Qureshi, Secretary to the Council

•

The internal view - i

• December 19, 2014 - Furqan Bahadur, Addl Secy IPC• Provinces want provincial control over natural

resources• Lack of trust between provinces• Fear that Federal government wanted to strengthen

control over provinces• Devolution becomes strong only when local

government is strong• Provinces want more control over revenues

The internal view - ii

• Baluchistan – PSDP funded mostly by the Federal Government

• Most demands of provinces met; Most issues before CCI have been resolved

• Education and Health were always provincial subjects. What is the effect of 18th Amendment?

• UNDP helping that mis-trust be redressed• Improvements in Ed and Health Absenteeism?

Medicines, equipment; Service delivery

17 Devolved Ministries

• (5) Local Government and Rural Development, Population welfare, Special Initiatives, Youth Affairs, Zakat and Ushr

– 2 December 2010• (5) Culture, Education, Livestock and Dairy Development,

Social Welfare and Special Education, Tourism - 5 April, 2011

• (7) Environment, Food and Agriculture, Health, Labour and Manpower, Minorities Affairs, Sports, Women Development - 29 June, 2011

• Partial devolution – Finance, Revenue, Interior, Law, Ports and Shipping, Communications

New post Devolution Ministries

• Capital Administration and Development Division (CADD)

• Ministries of National Harmony, Human Resource Development, Professional and Technical Training, National Heritage and Integration, National Disaster Management, National Food Security and Research

• Effort to fill gaps continues – TB programme• Now 30 Ministries and 38 Divisions

Financial Implications

• Linking Devolution to NFC award• Funds transferred on pro rata basis• Fear – loss of initiative• Employees – in field organizations - transferred to provinces under

section 10– In the ministry - to be adjusted in other

ministries

Devolution as it happened

section created in each ministry for transfer of staff, offices, buildings, labs, vehicles, recordsSO, DS, JS [devolved ministry, in cabinet Div, in IPC][record keeping far worse than in 1947, 1955, 1970]files scattered; telephonic request “file needed”; response – “come and pick it up.” also 7 inches thick file; DG QuarantineHealth - Global Fund fiasco- ran to cabinet, to IPC, forgot, ok will get it done, send a small note, urgently obtained PM approval, brought Global Fund back

Negatives in Implementation of the 18th Amendment

• Many hit (jobs, promotion blocked, lost benefits) • Some pushed Devolution and watched• Umpires, avenue for rectification, for redress?• Reports in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 on Devolution

(on the pattern of Annual Administration Report)?• Un-paid bills, Un-paid salaries, Un-paid pensions• Delays in release of funds, sanction of Grants• Settlement of outstanding issues

Devolution and Patronage

• How much patronage – pop, environment, women, climate change?

• Patronage in Education and Health vs. pop • Importance of National Focal persons for sensitive

subjects – pop, environment, women• Those who pioneered these initiatives. • Need for Provincial Focal persons for pop,

environment, women • Population ranks low in provincial departments• Devolution – has not enhanced its importance

After Devolution

• Celebrations for NFC below the sea• Provinces went back on commitments• Asked for Federal Funding – for One year, then 5 years• Implementation of social sector programmes, projects and

schemes by provinces after Devolution• Improvements – were they as expected? Or better?• Weaknesses – unforeseen? Or were always expected?• Are Provinces performing better in 17 devolved departments? • Documentation of where some fall behind • To what extent?• Remedies

The effect of Devolution on the lives of people

• Plusses and Minuses of Devolution• Provincial Governments, NSPP, academic journals• donor reports – relating to donor funded projects• impact of Devolution on population programme

(2010-15)? • third party analysis - overcoming operational

problems of programmes and projects (2010-15)• the view of users on the difference in pre and post

devolution programme (2010-15).

Population Programme devolved 2001

• Inter-provincial meetings 2000, 2001 to achieve consensus

• Amending Ordinance July 2001: Civil Servants provincialised. continued drawing salaries from Federal Government until 2003 (end of plan)

• Beyond 2003, transfer of resources for the population programme as part of NFC award.

• In case NFC award not finalised, funding to continue.• 1 July 2001 - all service outlets transferred to

Provinces (including RHSA) • VBFPW (female) finally transferred

Reservations on 2001 Devolution

• Provinces wanted employees not down loaded to them; only adm control be given to Provinces; the employees should continue as federal employees.

• Chairman, P&D strongest opponent transfer to province.

• No Federal Govt. deptt. devolved to the Distt. Government, except Population

• Employees went to court in protest against Provincialisation of cadre

Ups and downs of Population Welfare programme

• Five (5) swings – – Federalization, Provincialisation, Boards, Ministry

of Planning & Development, Health Ministry, Ministry of Population Welfare

– Provincial DGs, Provincial Secretaries• Funding from Provincial or from Federal Budget• No review by ACS or CS of the Provinces• Court cases on seniority and promotion• Neglect of District Population Welfare Officer• Population placed under EDO (Health) – a come-

down for DPWO

After De-Federalization of Population Programmers

• Federalization, Provincialisation, Boards• Ministry of Planning & Development, Health Ministry,

Ministry of Population Welfare• Provincial DGs, Provincial Secretaries• Issued revised seniority lists – enormous task • court cases against Provincialisation of cadre• House Requisition (loss) • Funding from the federal government : Yes? No?

• Wife of Governor or CM designated as Patron of Population Programme

De-federalization of Population Programme

• objective of de-federalization unexceptionable – – All authority located closer to action– Decision making faster and more responsive. – Easier to assess performance– Linkages in proposals with ground realities

explicit • “Handing Over Note” by the Ministry of Population

Welfare (June 2002) authorized provinces to make changes in consultation with the federal government.

• Not done• release of funds, cuts, filling of posts, promotions• Donors in favour of defederalisation – as all experts.

Devolution 2010 in a prism

• Eighteenth amendment• How much informed public debate – Before, during, or since decisions?

• Remedial actions– Delay in protection of critical segments– Creation of new Divisions– Sessions in camera– Concurrent list deleted– Ministries abolished: Phase I; Phase II, Phase III

• Consequences for the social sectors

work to be done

• Resource Center at National Institute of Historical and Cultural Research and at COSS

• All documents to be collected; Continuous up-date• Locate focal persons in: (a) Cabinet division; (b)

Ministry of Inter Provincial Co-ordination; (c) Focal points in provinces (CS, S&GAD, and FD)

• Dialogue with the every last Secretary in each of the devolved ministries before Devolution

• independent reviews and third party analysis

Ministry faced with extinction

• Senior officers hastily left the Ministry• Everyone who could, managed a posting

somewhere• Those who couldn’t were placed in surplus pool• Indifference of provinces to new responsibility– Loss of continuity, scarce capital resources– records (1955 – 1970); “Come and Search!”– formulation of policy

• No spokesperson for the population programme

Responsibility for social needs

• poverty, illiteracy, kachy abadies - 1950, 1980, 2015• housing, water, jobs, primary heath, poverty• Embarrassingly high TFR and low CPR • Pop in 1947 – 35 million. Illiterates in 2015 twice as

much - Expansion in darkness • Agony – un-met need, Loss of Demographic dividend• Commitments at international level; CPR 50% • How to? Action by provinces? By GOP? By others?• No co-ordination

Need for apex body

• Time Bomb – ticking away• Need for a National Programme• Data needs – PBS• Reporting and analysis of trends• Commitments to international community• Mobilizing donor funding• Best practices from abroad• Pop policy - draft in 2010• Provincial population policy in draft stage – 2015• No major innovations in population strategy

Crises Five years after Devolution 2010

• Energizing pop components – LHWs, FWCs• Delivery wards• BHUs• TGIs• RMPs• Addressing the question of unwanted births• Learning from the analysis of couples denied

fp services

GOP must step in - a new role

• Helping provinces – Quality– Independent monitoring– Innovations

• Lessons from Bangla Desh, India, Sri Lanka, Iran, Turkey

• Guarantor of Commodity Security• Bring change in out dated structures

Post Devolution mission for GOP

• Support - rather than intervene– Not tread on their toes

• Promote – rather than censure• Fill gaps• Bring experts – identify un-met need– Ensure adequate cover

• Make up for lost time – demographic dividend• Win confidence of provinces