Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
PP, you see, I think you dont even know who this minister was? So how could this overheard story about his tantrum for a new car hold any weight? That said, i do agree this episode could be true, but like what Maddy said above, the need for armoured cars is very crucial in Pakistan, not for the sake of privileged individuals, but for individuals who matter for Pakistan.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
It was rather well pubisized Haris. Everyone was talking about it. This person is well known within the govt circles, im just not so familiar with all the names in Islamabad so the person name eludes me. But it did appear in Dawn. Im just throwing that out as an example, but im sure there are many such cases that dont see this much publicity.
One of the points made by a Dawn editorial was that in our immidiate neighborhood (read India), many of the MP’s actually have to drive locally made Indian cars, while ours insist on expensive imported luxury ones…
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
I believe its the ambassador brand car in India which is a tardemark of govt officials, although I am fairly certain that atleast for cabinet members there have to be some sort of armoured cars.
anyways.. no takers on my point about the masses being cheats and not paying taxes by using flimsy excuses like wasteful govt spending?
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
PP,
I see, well thats what i said, it may have happened. But the armour car is almost a necessity in Pak now.
I remember there was an issue right afte the elections in 2002 when all Fed Ministers were issued new Corollas and a few were issued models 1-2 years old and they threw a tantrum and refused to accept those cars till given new ones. At the same time there were also some who refused to accept the new corollas because they had their own vehicles which they preferred using, some of those pvt vehicles were much better than the govt issued corollas; Prados and BMWs. I dont recall names either, but i guess this is what the general psyche is.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
I think you will find that T Blair travels with entourages just as big if not bigger than Shaukat Aziz. I seem to recall a trip to Saudi Arabia where there were about 40 "business men" accompanying Blair not to mention the diplomats and politicians that also went with him.
With regards to corruption, I don't think our politicians are more corrupt than Western politicians just that they aren't as good or as subtle. I mean what exactly was Mark Thatcher's contribution to the Al Yamamah deal that was worth in excess of £10m?
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
Obviously security issues explain the large entourage for a book (oops sorry official) tour.
Musharraf’s 18-day visit priciest ever
WASHINGTON: The 18-day visit of President Pervez Musharraf to the US and three other countries may have been one of the most expensive undertaken by any Pakistani head of state or government in the last 59 years. In New York, the president and his entourage stayed at the Roosevelt Hotel, which is far from being one of the city’s best, yet the bill for his delegation was over $500,000, according to a source with information. Twenty-eight limousines plus two vans were hired for the delegation which cost the Pakistani taxpayer $375,000. While some limousines were placed on duty round the clock, others were hired for 10-hour shifts. Figures for the president’s two visits to Washington are not known. On the first leg, the entire delegation – barring some members of the official media – stayed at one of the district’s most expensive hotels, the Four Seasons, where a single room can cost $500 or more. The PIA aircraft carrying the president remained parked in New York and for a couple of days at Washington. The president also toured Texas for a physical check-up. In calculating costs, what will need to be taken into account, first, is how much revenue PIA lost by the 18-day loss of one of its passenger aircraft. To that figure should be added airport parking charges and fuel costs wherever he travelled. Some members of the delegation travelled from Pakistan and returned there by commercial flights. He also visited Belgium, Cuba and the UK but the costs of those visits are not known. khalid hasan
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
o bhai to he stated at not one of the most expensive hotels, if he dinn care he would have stayed at the most expensive hotel. and then there is an issue when he stays at four seasons, what do ppl want.. hat th head of state goes to some YMCA?
lets just say that price paid is a bargain compared ot the results in national security, the write offs, and the aid.
'Nuff said
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
Well you cant have the leader of the country staying in a motel when he visits a foreign nation.. Its a matter of self respect, regardless of what country you are.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
who said anything about living in a motel?!
There's a difference between spending what is necessary, for security, communications, etc. and spending on lavish luxury.
Spending like you are the President of the USA, instead of a 3rd world leader.
In regards to the latter, this govt has gone even beyond BB and NS who people criticised so heavily for the very same thing.
Just another example of how those who support this govt for personal reason's will ignore how it has become just a corrupt as previous govts they criticise.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
^ do they have special third world leader rates for hotels, rental car etc?
btw nawaz or BB never needed this much security, they were never as important on a global scale as mushrraf is, and they were never under as much threat as the current administration.
I am as against wasteful spending as the next person, but these studies do not take into account things such as cost icreases, external circumstances, timing of visit etc.
In the end there is no corruption free country in the world. Given the choice between a corrupt regime that does good for teh country versus a corrupt regime that does not do good for the country, I would take teh former, so even if the regime is as corrupt as previous (hey we are not #2 on the corrupt nations list though), it has delivered much more than previous regimes, check worldbank, IMF etc for proof.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
I am as against wasteful spending as the next person, but these studies do not take into account things such as cost icreases, external circumstances, timing of visit etc.
In the end there is no corruption free country in the world. Given the choice between a corrupt regime that does good for teh country versus a corrupt regime that does not do good for the country, I would take teh former, so even if the regime is as corrupt as previous (hey we are not #2 on the corrupt nations list though), it has delivered much more than previous regimes, check worldbank, IMF etc for proof.
The same Transparency International you are relying on published a report recently that showed Pakistani's believe this govt is even more corrupt than previous govts. If other countries have increased and moved past Pakistan on the corruption scale, that is another issue.
As for IMF, Worldbankd, etc, do we really have to go through the effects of 9/11 again?....or is it going to be denied?
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
go back and read what the report author says about the weakness in that very report before quoting it. The thread was here, look it up, read up.
and again, perceptions are not reality, ppl in pakistan want all change to cascade down to them in 2 years otherwise they are not happy, plus their misgivings about the govt for its anti mullah stance means that they will ding the govt on surveys.
In the end perceptions are not reality. that study was perceptions, reality can be seen in world bank reports. and dont get me started on thatll of this is due to economic benefits after US support post 9/11. The govt had already instituted changes that were designed for provide economic gain and benefits. just like the govt had been tough on religious extremists and militants even pre 9/11.
go look at wrld bank reports on pakistan’s positive moves pre 9/11 and you would see that for the first time in decades world bank experts thought Pakistanw as doing the right things.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
and again, perceptions are not reality, ppl in pakistan want all change to cascade down to them in 2 years otherwise they are not happy, plus their misgivings about the govt for its anti mullah stance means that they will ding the govt on surveys.
Is 7 yrs of absolute rule not enough? After all BB and NS were judged on a couple years in office
As for pre-9/11, Pak was going nowhere, and I know you are smart enough to remember that
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
read the stats, look at what happened between 99 and 2001. Nothing started pouring in the country like on 9/12, tell you what look at first 3 quarters of 2001, versus 2000, and 99 and see for yourself.
I am smart enough to not only remember that, but smart enough to have read stats and reports.
Here is some data on 98-99 vs 2000-2001.
FY 98-99 vs FY 00-01
Large Scale Manufacturing growth rate (percentage) 3.6 vs 11.0
Inflation rate 5.7 vs 4.4
Exports ($ billion) 7.8 vs 9.2 B
Exports % of GDP 12.8% vs. 15.0%
Liquid foreign exchange reserves
($ million) End-of-the-period 1730 vs. 3212
Budgetary Deficit (as % of GDP) 6.1 vs. 5.3
Current account balance (as % of
GDP) -3.8 vs. 0.6
Debt Servicing paid ($ million) 2657 vs. 8857
PS: these are numbers from before 9/11 from state bank of pakistan
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
Much of the growth that occured was due to the IMF intigated structural reforms that started soon after Musharaf took power… 9/11 helped, but the process had started sooner. So Pakistan was going places despite your claims.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
agreed, the stats I posted above would point to that as well.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
Pakistan govt and economy is funny that way. When west hears of a coup and military rule they immediately jump to think of it as what happen with idi amin and kabila and such. In case of Pakistan atleast with Gen.Musharaf, my opinion is it is not just one or two generals benefitting but a whole class of officers in a variety of ways (some ok some a little iffy) - in other words it is not one man. since so many peopel are involved (only my opinion) I think some of the actions lead to positive for the economy, not just one person...
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
yeah I am no attributing it to musharraf but to the administration overall. Right decisions were made at the highest level which showed positive results and we are seeing the impact of them even now. yes the aid after 9/11 help but it was not the reason of the improvement, it added to the improvments that the administration had already implemented. It was the brains of shaukat aziz, and it was musharraf's vision to bring shaukat aziz in for this task.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
In other news the Sindh government, with the appointment of new advisors is now along with the Punjab and federal cabinets the largest in Pakistans history.
Re: As paid for by the Pakistani tax payer..
How we forget the book tour. Mark it down boys and girls, our president went on a book tour while in office. Well, ok, not just a book tour, he visited his doctor in Texas too. See boys and girls, Musharraf trusts his life to texans. In the end he hits every major broadcaster in the western continents, cracks a few jokes with a Jon Stewart, and yells at hecklers outside a restaraunt in Washington. When he comes back to Pakistan, not a whisper is heard. No opposition, no criticism, nothing.
He got away, and we’ll let the totalitarian despot do it again.
See this “criticism of army will not be allowed”:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\10\16\story_16-10-2006_pg1_1