“It seems that the elders of the Bhutto and Sharif clans have sorted out the bitter differences that had erupted between the two ruling parties last month, ostensibly over how the distribution of relief to the victims of the recent Punjab floods should be managed,” Dawn says in its editorial.
To wit, the PPP had insisted that the authorities use the Benazir Income Support Programme system to distribute aid to affected citizens, but the PML-N government in Punjab had responded with a hard ‘no’, saying it would work out its own mechanism for the distribution of relief goods. What followed was a sustained exchange of rather nasty rhetoric between the second-tier leadership of both parties.
The paper further says at its nadir, the cold war between the two parties saw elaborate press conferences being held almost every day, in which one party would denigrate the other at length. It was most unfortunate that this political drama ended up distracting the public’s attention from the plight of flood-affected citizens, and it remains unclear how much aid actually reached citizens while the parties were bickering over how it ought to be delivered. But it seems that good sense has now prevailed, and the parties may be ready to move on.
“The prime minister seems to have intervened and given some assurance to the PPP that the BISP will be utilised, as wished. According to the PPP’s information secretary, this assurance was extended directly to the PPP chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari. What will be interesting to see, however, is how the prime minister sells this concession to his niece, Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz. Ms Nawaz had been rather confrontational earlier while asserting Punjab’s prerogative over deciding how aid would be distributed. At one point, she had even raised the highly contentious topic of the Cholistan canals project, which had previously sparked widespread protests in Sindh, questioning the opposition to it and famously remarking that, “It is my water, my money; everything is mine”. It is quite disappointing that what should have been an opportunity to join forces for public service was spoiled thus. It seems both parties were eager to take credit from flood-ravaged families, and each thought their way of doing it would secure their individual political interests.”
Now that they have realised they may have erred, they should make amends. They must look past such petty conflicts if they are to hold the government together.
