The PPP-led government has presented its first ever budget amidst high expectation that it would provide relief to the poor and marginalized groups of the society. The budget is there but there is hardly any thing real for those whom it claims to represent the most.
The government has, ironically, called the budget people-friendly which has not gone beyond announcing increase in salaries and pensions of the government employees. There is no visible impact on the lives of the rest of the population pushed to the wall by rising inflation and price hike of essential goods.
The government’s kitty has been kept dependent on indirect taxes, while no significant break through has been made in terms of placing the tax burden on the well offs. Stock exchanges have been spared off and the tax net has not been extended to incomes of the big land holders.
The support price for wheat has already been raised and the subsidy available to the lower strata of population to lessen effects of high inflation withdrawn. Interestingly, the main beneficiaries of the subsidy on DAP will remain the big and middle land owners who have already got agricultural loans written off by the Zari Taraqiyati Bank Limited (ZTBL) by getting the ceiling for this facility fixed above Rs 0.5 million.
The small farmers, who constitute majority and owns only a meager portion of cultivable land in Pakistan, are living on razor’s edge. Their lands are being auctioned by the ZTBL while the canal water is being denied.  The increase in oil prices has raised their input cost while the productivity of land is decreasing due to over cultivation as well as non-availability of canal water. Not surprisingly, the phenomenal rise in poverty of the countryside is due to the marginalized existence of the small farmer.
As far as the labourers are concerned, most have migrated to the cities from rural areas to compensate losses in their incomes due to rise in population and squeezing of the land resources. Mechanization of the agricultural sector has pushed a large number of families who earned their livings in the countryside through engaging themselves in menial jobs. Today, the image of the self-depended countryside has evaporated, thanks to the increasing role of the capital in the people’s affair.
What is important to note is that the rise in population has not increased the availability of more lands for the small farmers. The new lands have been allotted to the retired bureaucrats, civil and military, who, in most cases, don’t belong to this group of the society. The more the new areas have come under cultivation the more the small farmer has got its canal water share reduced.
The previous government was essentially pro-business, but it did not prove to be so cruel due to availability of necessary funds for the provision of subsidies to the marginalized sections of the society. The difference was also evident in the fact that it did not claim to change the lives of the people overnight, as the PPP and PML-N said during election times. The PML-Q was far from being a revolutionary political party; its character will not change in future as well, if it survives threats of disintegration.

One may insist that the previous government’s policies created mafias in financial sector who have just become uncontrollable to the disadvantage of the present political setup. Even if it is true, the undeniable fact is that the same group has funded the election campaign of the present ruling parties and the newly developed nexus between financial and landed interests is dangerous for the existence of the poor and marginalized groups of the society.
Now if the subsidies have been withdrawn, employment opportunities are thin, investors feel reluctant to have stakes in economy in the face of high inflation and skyrocketing interest rates and the prices of essential remain high, what is the way out for the people? The answer has to be provided by the political parties and, ultimately, those now in power. There exists a problem that is not unique in the history of the nations.
If every matter concerning the economy is left to the international market forces, what is the use of having a government? If a state is unable to protect life and liberty of its citizens and is indifferent to matters of their welfare, what a right it has to collect taxes? If legislators don’t take interest in the law-making process and leave the statecraft to the bureaucracy, why actually we need elections?
It is highly unrealistic to promise jobs and safety nets for the poor when economy is growing at 5.5% rate and there is no solution to resolving the energy crisis. If the government spends on education, health and environment too little and is enable to keep law and order under control, how can it claim to be a legitimate government. Any commitment to people will become evident not through slogans but actual performance in the above mentioned areas.
What the political leadership needs to understand is that people are impatient for change in their life. So it is not a time to make promises. Besides increasing allocations for education, health and environment and showing unfaltering commitment with the rule of law, the government has to reduce the burden of taxes on the middle and low income groups if they have to be given virtually no representation in the policy-making process of the state.