Fafen report on NA budget session: PM attends 54pc sittings, Opposition leader 100pc

ISLAMABAD: The first annual budget session of the incumbent National Assembly (NA) recorded 179 lawmakers participating in the discussions on budgetary proposals for financial year 2024-25 with the opposition lawmakers receiving the majority (52 percent) share in the time allocated for the discussions, according to Fafen report on budget session of the National Assembly.

The Fafen in its report on budget session of the National Assembly, from presentation of budget to laying of authorized schedule of expense before the House, consumed around 48 hours and two minutes.

The lawmakers participating in budget discussions comprised 69 from Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC), 40 from Pakistan People’s Party Parliamentarian (PPPP), 37 from Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PMLN), 18 from Muttahida Qaumi Movement Pakistan (MQMP), five from Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam Pakistan (JUIP), five independents and one each from Pakhtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP), National Party (NP), Istehkam-e-Pakistan Party (IPP), Pakistan Muslim League (PML) and Majlis-e-Wahdatul Muslimeen Pakistan (MWMP).

According to Fafen report, the general discussion on the budget consumed two-third (66 percent) of the total parliamentary time spent on budget approval.

The discussion on charged expenditure, which represents almost 80 percent of the entire government expenditure, consumed a mere six percent of the time allocated for budget approval.

Around 20 percent of the time was spent on discussion and voting on the demands for grants and cut motions. The House did not discuss the supplementary and excess budget statements and no cut motion was moved on any supplementary or excess demand for grant.

Figure 6 shows the allocation of time for various budget stages: The chair allotted around 52 percent of the time allocated for discussions on the budget to the parties sitting on the opposition benches including SIC, JUIP, PkMAP, BNP, MWMP and independents while the remaining 48 percent was given to the parties that sit on the treasury’s side of the floor including PMLN, PPPP, MQMP, IPP, PML, BAP, PML-Z and NP.

According to Fafen observation on a party-wise disaggregation of allocation of time for discussing the budget, as many as 125 (70 percent) of the lawmakers who participated in the budget discussions were critical of the budgetary proposals, around 13 percent of the discussion participants highlighted the pros and cons in the budgets, and thus were classified in “unable to determine” category.

While only 12 percent were appreciative of these proposals and almost five percent of the discussants did not explicitly comment on the budget during discussions but rather spoke on political issues. This later group was classified separately.

Lawmakers moved a total of 422 cut motions aimed at reducing the amounts sought for various government departments and divisions under 30 demands for grants. These cut motions constituted approximately 22 percent of the total number of demands put forward by the government for vote in the National Assembly. However, the remaining 103 demands for grants for the financial year 2024-25, along with 104 supplementary demands for grants spanning the financial years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024, and 207 excess demands for grants covering the financial years 2022-2023, 2023-2024, and 2024-25, were approved without any cut motions. All of the cut motions moved were ultimately rejected by a majority vote.

The demand for grants to cover expenses of the Ministry of Interior faced the highest number of cut motions, totaling 91, followed closely by the Power Division, which received 77 cut motions. The following table lists the ministries and divisions whose demands for grants faced cut motions:

Approximately 125 (70 percent) of the lawmakers participating in the budget discussions expressed critical views on the budgetary proposals in their speeches.

The criticism came from members of both the treasury and opposition benches. The general discussion on budget spanned five sittings and consumed almost two-third of the entire time allocated for budget approval.

The discussion and voting on demands for grants and cut motions on these demands took around 20 percent of the time. The discussion on the charged expenditure accounted for six percent, the debate and vote of the Finance Bill 2024 took four percent, and the discussion on Senate recommendations on the Finance Bill took two percent.

The finance minister’s budget speech consumed two percent of the total budget proceedings. The opposition lawmakers sought reduction in 30 out of 133 demands for grants to meet the expense of government ministries and divisions through 422 cut motions.

However, all these motions were defeated. Nevertheless, the motions provided the movers an opportunity to express their concerns on the government performance. The supplementary and excess demands for grants for the financial years 2022-23 and 2023-24 were approved without any discussion.

In addition to the demands for grants and the Finance Bill, the House passed five government bills with minimal debate and by suspending the due legislative procedure.

Furthermore, three resolutions were adopted, and six calling attention notices (CANs) were raised, highlighting various governance issues.

No private members’ business was conducted throughout the session. According to official attendance records, the average attendance per sitting was 231 (68 percent of the total membership) during the session.

The prime minister attended seven (54 percent) sittings while the Leader of the Opposition attended all sittings (100 percent). As many as 60 lawmakers had a 100 percent attendance while five did not attend any sittings.

The Speaker chaired 43 percent of the proceedings while the Deputy Speaker 44 percent. The rest 13 percent were presided over by two members of the Panel of chairpersons.

According to official attendance records available on the National Assembly website, the average attendance per sitting was 231 (68 percent of the total membership) during the session.

The maximum attendance was 287 (85 percent) recorded during the last sitting of the session when the Finance Bill, 2024 was passed.

The lowest attendance was 174 (52 percent) recorded on the day when the general discussion on the budget began during fifth sitting. On average, each member attended 10 sittings.

Male lawmakers attended an average of nine sittings, while female lawmakers 11 sittings, similarly, the cabinet ministers’ average attendance was slightly lower than the private members’ attendance. On average, each cabinet minister who is member of the National Assembly attended eight sittings, whereas each private member attended 10 sittings.

As many as 60 Members of the National Assembly (MNAs) – 42 men and 18 women – had a 100 percent attendance. Five lawmakers including three belonging to PMLN and one each to BNP and PML did not attend any of the sittings during the session.

Party-wise Percentage of Lawmakers, disaggregated by their status Of Participation, 82 percent of SIC participated in budget and 18 percent lawmakers who did not participate in the budget, 59 percent of the lawmakers of the PPP participated in budget and 41 percent who did not participate in the budget, 34 percent of the PMLN who participated in budget and 68 percent who did not participate in the budget, 86 percent of the MQM legislators participated in the budget and 14 percent who did not participate in the budget, 63 percent of independent legislators participated in the budget and 37 percent did not participate in the budget, 63 percent of legislators of the JUI (F) participated in the budget and 37 percent did not participate in the budget, 25 percent of the legislators of the IPP participated in the budget and 75 percent did not participate while each legislator of MWMP, NP, BAP, PML-Zia, BNP and PKMAP participated in the budget, 20 percent of the legislators of the PML-Q participated in the budget and 80 percent did not participate.

The prime minister and members of his cabinet made nine specific commitments in response to issues raised by private lawmakers during the budget session. This number excludes the financial commitments announced by the minister for Finance in the budget speech.

The government commitments included plans to induct 975 new teachers in Islamabad schools, setting up Daanish School in Islamabad, increase monthly payments to widows under the benevolent fund by 10 percent, address the issue of electricity outages and overbilling in Karachi, and resumption of work on the Sukkur-Karachi motorway. Only two commitments included implementation timelines.

The House Committee on Government Assurances is yet to become functional as it has not elected a chairperson till date.

Transparency and accessibility of House proceedings and business information were largely maintained through the Assembly’s official website and guest and media galleries.

Records such as the agenda items, daily bulletins, drafts of legislation, and lists of questions were uploaded, although verbatim records were only available for five out of 13 sittings.

Certain parts of the video recordings on the official YouTube channel were muted without announced reasons. Video records of as many as 10 out of 13 sittings had muted segments.

A comparison of both the video and verbatim record for a sitting shows the remarks censored in video were included in the verbatim record. Lawmakers from both opposition and treasury emphasized the need for targeted interventions and financial commitments for women and other marginalized groups.

Issues raised included funding for girls’ schools, financial support for widows and women affected by floods, adherence to employment quotas for persons with disabilities, and business loans for women.

The women-focused commitments in the finance minister’s budget speech included privatization the First Women Bank, increase allocations for the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP), and launch initiatives such as a free meals programme for schools and the pink bus service for girls. However, some remarks during the session reinforced gender stereotypes and faced backlash from the House.

One SIC lawmaker’s membership was suspended for using inappropriate words during his speech.

According to Fafen scoreboard of Budget Session 2024 the House met for a total of 82 hours and seven minutes during the sixth (budget) session, spanning 13 sittings. For nearly 13 hours and 23 minutes, the House proceedings remained suspended for prayers or meals.

Throughout the session, the Speaker presided over 43 percent of the proceedings, while the Deputy Speaker 44 percent. Additionally, two members of Panel of chairpersons belonging to PMLN and PPPP presided over the session thrice during the session, accounting for 13 percent of the proceedings.

The budget proceedings starting from fourth sitting and continuing till last (13th sitting) consumed the majority of the session’s time (59 percent), while around 20 percent of the time was used for regular parliamentary business including six government bills, three resolutions, six calling attention notices, and 87 questions, Points of order raised by lawmakers accounted for nearly five percent of the proceedings.

The Speaker did not reserve any day for private members’ business during the budget session. According to Rule 51 of the National Assembly’s Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business, 2007 the private members’ business shall have precedence over all other business on Tuesdays.

However, the third proviso of the said rule requires that if any Tuesday is allotted by the Speaker for the presentation of the Budget or for any stage of the budget, a day in lieu of such Tuesday shall be set apart by the Speaker for private members’ business.

The quorum was called only once during the second sitting by a SIC lawmaker. The House had to be adjourned after the quorum was found lacking upon counting. SIC lawmakers staged protests on three instances during the session: against the Federal Budget 2024-25, the passage of the government legislation, and being denied the opportunity to raise a point of order.

In a separate instance, the party staged a walkout when one of their lawmakers was denied floor for raising a point of order.

Women lawmakers belonging to PMLN and PPPP also walked out in protest against the use of inappropriate language by a SIC lawmaker.

Conduct of Members Fafen observer noted seven instances of lawmakers’ conduct in the Assembly that violated the instructions given in the Rule 30 and 31 of the National Assembly’s Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business, 2007. These rules prescribe the expected conduct to be adhered to while present in the House and when speaking during the proceedings.