Minister Musadik Malik reassures PPP as it fumes over Irsa law changes

ISLAMABAD / HYDERABAD: As the PPP intensified its opposition to any modifications to the law governing inter-provincial water distribution, the PML-N assured its ally that any decision on the matter would be made with consensus.
The amendments to the Indus River System Authority (Irsa) Act 1992, yet to be tabled by the PML-N-led federal government, have pitted the two allies against each other for the second time since the general elections.
While speaking in the Senate on Tuesday, Minister for Water Resources Musadik Malik assured PPP lawmakers that the government “would not push” any legislation if it did not suit a province. “How can we do so at the cost of annoying our allies?”
The minister said the apprehensions of PPP leaders were “premature” as the government, so far, has only received a document from Irsa members demanding these changes.
Mr Malik claimed that Mohammad Ehsan Leghari, Irsa’s member from Sindh, had also signed the document, which is being considered.
All objections raised by Sindh would be removed, the minister assured.

Earlier, PPP Senator Sherry Rehman said the proposed amendments were “unc­onstitutional” and a “direct attack” on the water share of lower riparian provinces. She claimed that the proposed chan­ges would bring Irsa under federal control whereas it was a regulatory agency governed by the Council of Common Interests (CCI).
Another PPP lawmaker, Jam Saifullah Dharejo, said his party didn’t want to “create disharmony” among the provinces, but it “would not accept any changes to the Irsa law”.
Pushback from PPP
Among the major changes proposed in the amendments is the authority’s restructuring, making the currently autonomous body subservient to the federal government.
As per the draft, the post of ‘vice chairman’ would be introduced, while the body’s chairman would be a grade-21 officer of the federal government to be appointed by the prime minister.

The PPP, which supports the PML-N-led federal government in the National Assembly, has apparently pre-empted the move by passing a unanimous motion in the Sindh Assembly.
The draft legislation on Irsa’s composition apparently enjoyed the backing of President Asif Ali Zardari, but Nisar Khuhro, president of the party’s Sindh chapter, said he wasn’t aware of the president’s ‘approval’ of the amendments.
The president reportedly called for “discussing the issue with provinces”, he claimed.
The PPP leadership, including Faryal Talpur, the president’s sister, are said to have been briefed about the ramifications of amendments, and only then was the resolution tabled in the Sindh Assembly.
The PPP still waited for a few days before moving the resolution, apparently to gauge the reaction in Sindh, where it is in the government.
Nationalist parties, as well as farmers’ groups, have rejected the proposed amendments that would turn the province “barren”.
Mr Khuhro, the PPP Sindh chapter president, has categorically stated that the amendments “can’t be accepted”.
‘Green Pakistan’ initiative
PPP leaders are not only opposing the changes to Irsa Act, but they have also voiced concerns over the ’Green Pakistan’ initiative, a corporate farming plan — conceived last year — to irrigate five million acres of “barren” land.
While speaking to a private news channel on Tuesday, PPP MNA Naveed Qamar said, “You name it green or red Pakistan initiative, it is all about creating new water users at the cost of older ones. We won’t accept it”.
PPP’s opposition to the initiative — that includes plans to irrigate 4.8m acres of land in Punjab — was expected as it had already objected to the new canals built on the Indus river over fears they would draw water from Sindh’s share.
According to Nafisa Shah, the PPP MNA from Khairpur, the plan to irrigate land was initiated by the caretaker government “which had no authority to do so”.
The PPP wants water availability for the existing land, she said, and asked: “How can caretakers decide critical matters? Why doesn’t the federal government take up the issue of corporate farming in the Council of Common Interests.”
Contending that the distribution of resources should be equitable, she said, “We need to raise the voice for farmers and local communities for equitable resource distribution.“She added that unless things are decided within the legal framework, their legitimacy would be questioned.
Published in Dawn, September 11th, 2024