- The Rule of Law or the Rule of Central Bankers? By Lawrence H. White
- Climate Change -- A Report Card By Kathi Wyldeck
- Letters to FreePakistan
- HumorWise
- Basic social services to all
URDU BLOG: SAB KA PAKISTAN
Protecting personal freedom and establishing rule of law can transform Pakistan already misappropriated by the elite classes into Sab ka Pakistan. The Blog contextualizes important news and developments regularly.
Visit, read and comment Sab ka Pakistan
SIGN THE CHARTER OF LIBERTY!
Raise your voice to secure your fundamental rights! Endorse the demands made in the Charter of Liberty!
Two reasons to endorse the Charter of Liberty: 1. Make your commitment public; 2. Helps us show that this campaign is getting more and more support
HELP US BRING FREEDOM AND PROSPERITY TO PAKISTAN
SUPPORT ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS INSTITUTE
You can extend your help to us in many ways
* Buy a book
* Fund our activities such as seminars, workshops, press briefings, etc
* Fund our research projects
* Fund translation of relevant texts into Urdu and other local languages and/or fund their
publication
Or let us know how you want to help us.
Send your donations and contributions through cheque, draft, etc. to:
Alternate Solutions Institute
Room No. 32, 3rd Floor, Landmark Plaza,
5/6, Jail Road, Lahore, Pakistan
BE OUR MEMBER AND SUPPORT OUR CAUSE
Fill out and send the Membership Form to us via email or snail mail and a Membership Certificate will be mailed to you. Use capital letters.
YOU NEED NOT DOUBLE YOUR DONATION TO OUR INSTITUTE, ATLAS WILL DO!
In 2008, Alternate Solutions Institute, along with 180 think tanks from all over the world, competed for the Fisher Venture Grant of US$ 100, 000, instituted by Atlas Economic Research Foundation, USA. We were one of the 9 think tanks and the only Middle Eastern think tank among the first class of recipients of Dorian & Fisher Venture Grant.
For more information, click the following link:
Quotes of the Month:
An elective despotism was not the government we fought for; but one in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among the several bodies of magistracy as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.
[James Madison, Federalist No. 58 (February 20, 1788)]
Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule — and both commonly succeed, and are right.
[H.L. Mencken]
Cowardice asks, is it safe? Expediency asks, is it politic? Vanity asks, is it popular? But Conscience asks, is it right?
[William Morley Punshon]
Free Pakistan, a monthly newsletter, exists for the promotion of limited government, rule of law, protection of property rights, market economy, individual freedom, and private initiative. Its vision is a free and prosperous Pakistan; for only such a Pakistan can contribute positively to the creation of a free and prosperous world.
The Newsletter is an affiliate of Alternate Solutions Institute, Lahore, Pakistan, http://asinstitute.org, the first free market think tank of Pakistan. Urdu website: http://Hum--Azad.org
The Alternate Solutions Institute is a registered, non--profit, non--political, non--governmental, educational and research organization. Its mission is to promote a limited responsible government in Pakistan under the rule of law protecting life, liberty, and property of all of its individual citizens without any discrimination.
DISCOVER YOUR POLITICAL LEANINGS! World's Smallest Political Quiz
Take the Quiz now and find out where you fit on the political map!
PHILOSOPHY OF LIBERTY
What is Philosophy of Liberty? A screensaver by Lux Lucre and Ken Schoolland explains it.
Download and install it. http://www.free--market.net/rd/321907219.html ; or visit: http://www.jonathangullible.com
By Lawrence H. White
[Lawrence H. White is Mercatus Professor of Economics at George Mason University, USA. This paper first appeared in the Cato Journal Volume 30 Number 3 – Fall 2010. To download the original paper, visit the link: http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj30n3/cj30n3--3.pdf]
Economists often prescribe that countries seeking economic development should embrace the principle of the rule of law. I want to suggest that we listen to our own advice and apply it to our monetary and financial system. The principle of the rule of law could usefully guide us in resolving the extraordinary situation we have been in for the past two years or so, and even more importantly help us to avoid future crises.
The approach of Federal Reserve and Treasury officials during this crisis, unfortunately, has been to consider every possible remedy but applying the rule of law.
In case you think I exaggerate, let me quote Ben Bernanke. At a strategy meeting with other Fed and Treasury officials early in the crisis he declared, as reported by the New York Times: “There are no atheists in foxholes and no ideologues in financial crises.” Over at the U.S. Treasury, when Neel Kashkari, the Treasury’s chief bailout administrator under Secretary Hank Paulson, was asked by a reporter how the Treasury would spend the $700 billion in bailout money that Congress had provided (essentially without instructions), Kashkari replied that nothing was ruled out. To quote a news account: “ ‘We are looking at everything,’ he said. ‘We are trying to figure out what will provide the most benefit to the financial system.’ ”
If we unpack Bernanke’s and Kashkari’s messages, here is what they were saying: “When we in authority declare that it is time to be pragmatic, then we can do whatever we please. There are no durable principles, no constitutional or statutory constraints, limiting what we may do once we declare an emergency. Our hope of avoiding a deeper crisis authorizes us to make it up as we go along, to do whatever seems expedient at any given moment.”
Such sentiments are not surprising from men held responsible for the health of the economy which by the way is an absurd assignment for any government to give, an absurd assignment for anyone to accept, and an absurd assignment for the rest of us to take seriously.
THE RULE OF LAW
References to the rule of law are rare in discussions of Federal Reserve policy. The concept of the rule of law in jurisprudence and political philosophy has several dimensions. At its core is the classical liberal principle of nondiscretionary governance that stands in contrast to the arbitrary or discretionary rule of those people currently in authority. In shorthand, either we have the rule of law or we have the rule of authorities. Under the rule of law, government agencies do nothing but faithfully enforce statutes already on the books. Under the rule of authorities, those in positions of executive authority have the discretion to make up substantive new decrees as they go along, and to forego enforcing the statutes on the books.
Friedrich Hayek in his classic work The Road to Serfdom contrasted “a country under arbitrary government” from a free country that observes “the great principle known as the Rule of Law.” “Stripped of all technicalities,” he continued, “this means that government in all its actions is bound by rules fixed and announced beforehand—rules which make it possible to foresee with fair certainty how the authority will use its coercive powers in given circumstances and to plan one’s individual affairs on the basis of this knowledge.”
It is of course true that laws must be executed by people in authority. We also know that the referees in a soccer match will be people (although robot referees would be cool). But they can either be people who impartially enforce the rules of the sport as they were known at the outset of the match—that is, who follow the rule of law—or they can be people who arbitrarily enforce rules against one team but not the other, or (even worse) who penalize a team for “infractions” of novel “rules” that they have made up in mid--match.
The rule of law concept has deep historical roots. Hayek elsewhere quotes David Hume’s History of England—written two centuries earlier—on the value of establishing the rule of law in place of the unconstrained discretion of government officials. Hume acknowledges that it is not always convenient in the short run to forego ad hoc measures. He writes that “some inconveniences arise from the maxim of adhering strictly to law,” but affirms the lesson of history that in the long run we are better off from adhering to the rule of law. According to Hume, “It has been found, that . . . the advantages so much overbalance” the inconveniences that we should salute our ancestors who established the principle.
The contrast between the rule of law and the rule of men is sometimes traced still further back to Plato’s dialogue entitled Laws. In that work, the Athenian Stranger declares that a city will enjoy safety and other benefits of the gods where the law “is despot over the rulers, and the rulers are slaves of the law.” In other words, government officials are to be the servants and not the masters of society.
The rule of law is vitally important because it allows a society to combine freedom, justice, and a thriving economic order. When legal rules are known and government actions are predictable, free people can confidently plan their lives and businesses, and can coordinate their plans with one another through the market economy. Citizens need not fear arbitrary confiscation of their possessions or nullification of their contracts. Entrepreneurs know that if they succeed in turning lower--valued bundles of inputs into higher--valued products, they get to keep the rewards. If they fail, they fail, and they bear the losses.
THE RULE OF CENTRAL BANKERS
What does all this have to do with avoiding and resolving financial crises? The rule of law clearly does not prevail in our current monetary and financial systems. We do not have, to use Hayek’s words, “government in all its actions . . . bound by rules fixed and announced beforehand.” Not when participants in financial markets hang on every word from the lips of the central banker, trying to guess his future policy actions.
Central bankers today are discretionary rulers over the economy’s monetary and financial institutions. Defenders of the rule of law, who in general decry the arbitrary rule of men, should specifically decry the rule of central bankers. Central bankers today are not “slaves of the law” but exercise wide discretion in monetary policy and regulatory rule--making under the legislation that created and empowered the central bank.
Discretion in monetary policy and financial regulatory policy does not give us better results. It is today widely recognized that inflation is inadvertently fostered by the discretionary policies of central banks, where “discretion” means the absence of pre--commitment to any fixed policy rule. It should also be widely recognized that discretionary central bank policy can create asset price bubbles, as the record since 2001 has shown. I need not recite the evidence that the Federal Reserve inflated the housing bubble that preceded the crash. But I do want to note that when Alan Greenspan held interest rates so low that the real fed funds rate (the nominal rate minus the contemporary inflation rate) was negative for two and a half years, he was exercising discretion, not faithfully executing any rule on the books.
Just as inflating central bankers like to pose as inflation fighters, they also like to pose as stabilizers of financial markets. Indeed, they responded to the instability in the aftermath of the bubble’s collapse in a highly discretionary fashion. In their policies for addressing the current crisis, central bankers have not limited themselves to the orthodox crisis policies of injecting reserves into the banking system in the aggregate and making short--term last--resort loans to particularly illiquid commercial banks, policies that are already disturbingly discretionary. They and Treasury ministers have been unorthodox and undeniably arbitrary, bestowing favors on some firms and burdens on others. The Bernanke Fed—and normally one shouldn’t personalize the Fed, but here the topic is actions that exemplify the rule of men in authority rather than the rule of law—has by its arbitrariness violated the rule of law in at least the following actions:
1. The Fed created new “facilities” for lending to nonbanks and for buying their illiquid or toxic assets, even dedicating the majority of the Fed’s asset portfolio to these facilities.
2. The Fed set up a special subsidiary (called “Maiden Lane LLC”) to sweeten an acquisition deal to protect the bondholders of the investment house Bear Stearns. It did not do the same for the investment house Lehman Brothers. It set up other subsidiaries (Maiden Lane II, Maiden Lane III) to buy and hold bad assets from a single failed insurance company, AIG.
3. The Fed jammed the failed investment house Merrill Lynch down the throat of Bank of America. The Fed had decided that Merrill Lynch needed to be immediately acquired rather than liquidated. The Bank of America’s CEO Ken Lewis initially agreed that BOA would be the acquirer, then changed his mind when due diligence revealed that Merrill’s assets were more toxic than previously suspected. Rather than let BOA back out, as the potential acquirer has every right to do in such a case, Paulson and Bernanke reportedly “pressured Lewis into violating his own legal fiduciary duty to his shareholders, who had to approve the deal based on accurate information. Relying on no legal authority whatsoever, the Fed and Treasury threatened to remove the board and management of Bank of America if they refused to go forward and demanded that Lewis not divulge the conversation.”
As Hayek warned in The Road to Serfdom, giving an executive agency (or legislature) the discretion to bestow benefits and burdens on known recipients is a recipe for partiality:
Where the precise effects of government policy on particular people are known, where the government aims directly at such particular effects, it cannot help knowing these effects, and therefore cannot be impartial. It must, of necessity, take sides, imposing its valuations upon people and, instead of assisting them in the advancement of their own ends, choose the ends for them.
If we expand our discussion to include the Paulson--Geithner Treasury, we could note its forcing an arbitrary set of nine major banks to issue and sell new preferred shares to the Treasury. Some banks wanted to make the deal, but others did not. Three of the banks were newly converted investment houses, given commercial bank status with unprecedented speed, just in time to qualify for the infusion. The same treatment was later extended to smaller banks.
There is a serious question as to whether all of the Fed’s actions have even been technically legal under the Federal Reserve Act. The Federal Reserve’s statutory authority is overly broad, but even so may not be broad enough to cover all of the Fed’s nontraditional actions in the crisis. Experts like Walker Todd, formerly an attorney on the staffs of the Federal Reserve Banks of New York and Cleveland, now a fellow of the American Institute of Economic Research, are skeptical. Todd has dryly commented that “much less of [the Fed’s recent] lending is based on clear statutory authority than one might prefer if one cared about the rule of law and the potential for tyrannical government.” Since the spring of 2008, the Fed in its press releases has repeatedly claimed authority under the emergency provisions of section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act.1 The current language of the section authorizes the Fed’s Board of Governors, “in unusual and exigent circumstances,” which prevail “during such periods as the said board may determine” by a vote, to “discount . . . notes, drafts, and bills of exchange” for any individuals or firms it chooses (not just for commercial banks). The Fed interprets 13(3) as essentially giving it carte blanche. One has to read between the lines and off the edge of the page, however, to find authority for the Fed to purchase assets that are not “notes, drafts, and bills of exchange,” or authority to create special subsidiaries to do so. It is difficult to disagree with economist Edward Kane when he states bluntly that the Fed in the last 18 months “has exercised discretion it was never given.”
Whatever the extent of its statutory authority, the Fed violates the rule of law by its repeated use of 13(3). Under the cover of emergency, the Fed undertakes essentially fiscal operations of subsidizing certain classes of firms at taxpayer expense. As Todd notes, “This stands the entire Federal Reserve Act on its head. The exceptional rule—the emergency power—has now become the regular way of doing things and the quantitatively dominant method of extending credit for the Fed.”
If the statute law allows the central bank an indefinitely wide range of actions, practically without constraint, then we have not the rule of law but the rule of central bankers. Hayek explained the difference in The Road to Serfdom:
The fact that someone has full legal authority to act in the way he does gives no answer to the question whether the law gives him power to act arbitrarily or whether the law prescribes unequivocally how he has to act. . . . If the law says that such a board or authority may do what it pleases, anything that board or authority does is legal—but its actions are certainly not subject to the Rule of Law. By giving the government unlimited powers, the most arbitrary rule can be made legal; and in this way a democracy may set up the most complete despotism imaginable.
FOLLOWING THE RULE OF LAW IN A FINANCIAL CRISIS
What is the alternative? What does the rule of law tell monetary and regulatory authorities to do when large financial firms are insolvent? The first thing it says is: Do not practice discretionary forbearance, turning a blind eye in the vain hope that a failing firm’s red ink will happily turn to black, that a zombie institution will come back to life, that toxic assets will detoxify themselves. Do not arbitrarily rescue or bail out an insolvent firm at taxpayer expense. Instead, resolve the insolvency. If nobody wants to buy the firm as a going concern without subsidy, follow bankruptcy law. If a special bankruptcy law applies to financial institutions, follow that. In the United States, the FDIC Improvement Act of 1991 mandates that the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) resolve banks on the edge of insolvency swiftly and at least cost to taxpayers. The authorities have been ignoring this statutory mandate. (Instead, the Treasury “injected capital” into failing banks when it forcibly purchased preferred shares.)
Enacting a “prepackaged bankruptcy” law to swiftly resolve future failures of nonbank financial institutions would be a good idea, but in its absence follow the laws that are on the books.
The rule of law in bankruptcy means not only making shareholders accept that they have been wiped out, but also consistently making creditors and counterparty institutions take the losses that are theirs. Creditors divide up the remaining assets without discretionary authorities sheltering them from losses with taxpayer funds.
It is true that putting Lehman Brothers into resolution was a great shock to the financial market, after expectations of a rescue had been established by the Bear Stearns precedent. But an economist must ask: What was the alternative? The alternative to leaving the losses with Lehman’s stakeholders was shifting the losses onto taxpayers. This implies either (a) loss--covering handouts to those who deliberately took great risks of loss to enjoy the upside of great gains, or (b) nationalization. Viewed in a long--run perspective, rather than in the heat of the moment, both are worse than resolving major financial institutions that have reached insolvency. Both are inconsistent with the rule of law, because they cannot possibly be applied consistently. Not every failed business in a country can be bailed out and kept on life support indefinitely—there is not enough money in the Treasury. Not every firm can be nationalized— the economy will cease to function.
Consistently enforcing the rules that require insolvent firms to exit the market promptly would remove the kind of uncertainty that followed the Lehman collapse and provide greater clarity to financial markets. It was inconsistency on this front—from abrogation of the rule of law in the Bear Stearns case—that created the situation where the authorities faced the choice between an ugly Lehman failure and the even uglier options of nationalization or open--ended bailouts.
The prospect of bailouts and other favors, in violation of the rule of law, creates moral hazard. We have learned the hard way that letting only shareholders bear losses, while protecting creditor and counterparties at taxpayer expense, as was done in the case of Bear Stearns, is not enough to control moral hazard. After Bear Stearns was rescued, Lehman Brothers increased its leverage and its exposure to risky mortgage assets. If creditors and counterparties think that they can count on government protection, they will be willing to lend copiously and cheaply, enabling a borrowing firm like Lehman to hold a highly leveraged portfolio of risky assets. From the viewpoint of the shareholders in an intermediary, the higher return on capital from “leveraging up”—relying heavily on borrowed funds—makes it a profitable strategy when lenders supply funds with very low risk premia. From the viewpoint of the taxpayers now on the hook, the firm takes on an overly leveraged portfolio of overly risky assets. The most stunning examples of this over leveraging phenomenon were Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but investment houses like Lehman and Bear Stearns exhibited it as well.
If everyone knows that the rule of law will be followed, such that nobody will get bailed out, the incentive for imprudence disappears along with the hook into taxpayers. This does not mean that no financial firm will ever act imprudently, but rather that there won’t be system--wide malincentives producing an epidemic of imprudence. If it is known that nobody is “too big to fail,” or too well connected to fail, then lenders will not let financial firms leverage up cheaply in the belief that they will be protected. The potential for failure of a hedge fund, investment bank, or other financial institution is therefore no rationale for new legal restrictions on them, like arbitrary limits on firm size or imposed capital ratios or executive compensation ceilings. Without the malincentives of implicit or explicit guarantees, their shareholders and those who lend to them can and will appropriately determine how much capital is adequate.
It cannot be denied that with consistent resolution of insolvent firms, in Hume’s words, “some inconveniences arise.” But the advantages “much overbalance” the inconveniences, for the good reason that pulling the plug on failed firms is consistent with the logic of the market economy—those who stand to gain when they succeed must also stand to lose when they fail. Nationalization and bailouts are failed policies, for the good reasons that they are inconsistent with the logic of a market economy.
CAN THERE BE A CENTRAL BANK CONSISTENT WITH THE RULE OF LAW?
Yes, if the central bank is limited to the useful functions of serving as bankers’ banks for clearing and settlement and enforcing known rules regarding the solvency and liquidity of member banks. Such a central bank can be private, as these roles were originally played in historical banking systems by private clearinghouse associations, self--governing membership clubs of banks. Even when clearinghouse associations organized “last--resort” mutual--support lending among member banks the problem of arbitrary government did not arise, because they were not the creatures of legislation. Taxpayers were not on the hook.
Clearinghouse associations did not monopolize the issue of currency nor pursue a monetary policy in pursuit of macroeconomic goals. (A gold or silver standard controlled the quantity of money without the need for a monetary policy.) No one has yet devised a plan for making these last two functions, and thus government central banks as we know them today, compatible with the rule of law.
Many economists favor “independence” for central bankers over monetary policy dictated by the legislature. Congressional backseatdriving of discretionary monetary policy is indeed not an attractive prospect. But those are not the only two alternatives. The rule of law in monetary institutions is served neither by following the legislature’s discretion nor the central bankers’ discretion. The independence of Federal Reserve policy in 2001–07, as already noted, did not deliver stability but fueled an unsustainable path in mortgage volumes and housing prices. The key to stability is not the independence but the restraint of central bank money and credit creation. Because the incentives facing central bankers do not produce self--restraint, external restraint is needed.
ALTERNATIVES TO DISCRETIONARY CENTRAL BANKING
Suppose we take fiat money as a given. Milton Friedman long called for a “quantity rule” reform that would replace the central bank’s discretion in monetary policy with a nondiscretionary algorithm for money growth (for example: every day expand the monetary base such that M2 grows at 4 percent per year). He sometimes described his proposal as one to replace the central bank’s monetary policy committee with a robot. Another quantitative type of rule, Hayek’s proposal of 1931, would direct the central bank to target nominal national income (GDP).
After more than 20 years of seeing his advice ignored, Friedman in the early 1980s began to realize that the Fed would not adopt such a proposal because it had no incentive to tie its own hands. Central bankers sincerely believe, despite Friedman’s and other evidence, that they can achieve net benefits by their wise use of discretionary powers. For the same reason, Friedman warned, central bankers appointed to carry out an “automatic” monetary policy would find every pretext for reestablishing their discretion. To eliminate the problem they must be sent home completely. In 1984 Friedman proposed abolishing the Federal Open Market Committee, freezing the stock of Fed liabilities (fiat dollars), and allowing commercial banks to again issue banknotes in order to satisfy any growth in the demand to hold currency. Freezing the stock of fiat money is a way of eliminating discretion in monetary policy that is relatively easy to monitor and enforce.
Friedrich Hayek in 1976 began calling for the “denationalization of money.” He imagined unbacked or fiat--type banknotes and deposits provided by competing private issuers. Moving money--issue to the private sector, at least in countries where contract law is honored, removes it from the realm of state action where we must worry about holding the money--issuer to the rule of law.
If we are willing to think beyond fiat money, there is much to be said for the system favored by classical liberals from Adam Smith to Ludwig von Mises, free banking on a gold or silver standard. Free banking allows us to implement the ultimate restraint on central banking—namely, doing without a central bank. In a nutshell, gold or silver redeemability for banknotes and deposits in a competitive banking system sets a strict limit on the volume of money and credit created. It imposes a rule on money--issuers by private contract and competition rather than by legislation. A gold or silver standard, without a government central bank to loosen its constraints, will stop the banking system from following a path that inflates a bubble in asset prices.
Proposals for doing without a national central bank are certainly not “radical” in areas that already operate without a central bank, such as Panama (which has official dollarization) and Hong Kong and Estonia (which have a currency board). For a small open economy, tying itself to an external monetary standard through dollarization or a currency board provides a discipline analogous to a gold standard. These arrangements are compatible with the rule of law if they are “orthodox,” that is, set up so as to be immune to discretionary tinkering. Their chief drawback today is that they require relying on the good behavior of the external central bank whose currency provides the standard.
Hayek was not always so clear, before 1976, on the benefits of free banking over central banking. During a lecture tour promoting The Road to Serfdom in 1945, pointedly cross--examined by two academics on a radio program, Hayek said that the creation of the Federal Reserve System was not a step along the “road to serfdom,” and added: “That the monetary system must be under central control has never, to my mind, been denied by any sensible person.” Hayek was certainly wrong on the second claim, if we may count Adam Smith and his own mentor Ludwig von Mises as sensible persons. The sequence of Federal Reserve actions over the past two years—including interventions like the Fed’s recently announced intention to “subject executives, traders, deal makers and other employees of the biggest banks to regulatory scrutiny of their compensation”—should give us pause that he may have been wrong on the first claim. Perhaps the Federal Reserve System, developing ever more intrusive controls on banking and finance, is now moving us away from freedom and along the road to serfdom. [Courtesy The Cato Journal]
By Kathi Wyldeck
[It was on this October 1st that I participated in the 1st International Conference on Climate Change, in Sydney, Australia. The event was sponsored by the Heartland Institute, USA. I was fortunate to make acquaintance of Kathi Weldyck, based in Sydney, who on her own compiled a report of the Conference and its deliberations which is more than a ‘Report Card’ on the issue of Climate Change. As in Pakistan the dominant view is that of man--made climate change, we are producing the Report below in full for the benefit of our readers so that they could lend an ear to the not--man--made climate change view. Thank you, Kathi!]
It was so nice to meet you at the Climate Change Conference in Sydney last week, and although we didn't speak for long, I enjoyed our little talk together. I checked your website at the Alternate Solutions Institute, and enjoyed it very much. I have now subscribed to the website, as I know I will learn a lot about Pakistan that I cannot learn so well by reading the Australian newspapers.
I wrote up a little account of the Conference last week and have pasted it below, if you are interested to look at it. You are welcome to use it in any way you like, if you think it will be interesting for others to read.
Below is the account I wrote on the Climate Change Conference. I hope you enjoy it:
The Heartland Institute's First International Conference on Climate Change
Yesterday (Friday, 1st October, 2010), I was lucky enough to be able to attend the Heartland Institute’s First International Conference on Climate Change, organised by the Institute of Public Affairs. It was held at the Sheraton on the Park, and began with a hot English breakfast at 8 a.m., followed by three wonderful speakers for the morning session: Dr. Chris de Freitas, a leading climatologist from New Zealand, Dr. Robert Carter, one of Australia’s top climate scientists, and Senator Cory Bernardi from South Australia.
Dr. de Freitas spoke about the influence of the Pacific Ocean on the world’s climate, and explained the Walker (east--west) and Hadley (north--south) air flow systems, as well as the Southern Oscillation Index (El Nino and La Nina). He talked about the Great Pacific Climate Shift of 1976, which saw a change from regular La Ninas and a period of global cooling to more frequent El Ninos and a move towards a phase of global warming. This phase ended in 2000, and since then, the La Nina pattern has recommenced, accompanied by the expected global cooling. Dr. de Freitas spoke about the thirty year warming/cooling cycle that has been a natural part of the Earth’s climate for centuries, if not millennia. For example, there was a cooling period between 1870 and 1910, followed by a warming between 1910 and 1945. Then another cooling phase began between 1945 and 1976, followed by a warming period between 1976 and 2000. Since 2000, we have entered a new cooling phase which is expected to last for another two decades or so.
The scientist emphasised that long--term prediction of climate (as the IPCC is attempting) is not possible because climate is a coupled, non--linear, chaotic system. Dr. de Freitas also stated that although the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide has risen since the Industrial Revolution began, there is not a single, peer--reviewed research article which provides empirical evidence of man--made global warming. As a scientist who was involved with the 1st, 2nd and 3rd IPCC reports on global warming, he commented on the fact that these assessments were cautious in their predictions about anthropogenic climate change, stating that there was little evidence for man’s influence on the global climate. Words like “prediction”, “scenario”, “story line”, “speculation”, “may” and “might” were used to show this lack of confidence. It was only the 4th IPCC assessment, of which he was not a part, which made the outrageous claim of 90% confidence that humans are causing climate change. De Freitas regards this claim as being purely political and not based on science. He also mentioned that the IPCC scientists, Mann, Salinger and Cranberg, who were responsible for this assessment, tried to stop the publication of all climate research papers that showed results that cast doubt on their claims. On the other hand, the two scientists considered to be the world’s top atmospheric physicists, Spencer and Lindzen, do not support the anthropogenic global warming theory.
De Freitas also discussed the fact that the Earth’s climate is a stable system governed by negative feedback that always brings a swing in climate back to the normal range. For example, as temperature rises, cloud cover increases, and albedo brings the temperature back to normal. High clouds produce warming, while low clouds cause cooling. During La Nina, the Walker Cell is more active and the Hadley Cell quietens down, and when El Nino comes, the Hadley Cell is dominant and the Walker Cell is less active.
The changing tilt of the Earth, volcanic activity, the Sunspot Cycle and several other factors all influence the temperature of the Earth, with the concentration of CO2 playing a very minor part. Finally, de Freitas stated that increased levels of atmospheric CO2 act beneficially as a plant fertiliser, increasing the rate of photosynthesis, resulting in increased food production for the world’s growing population.
After question time, Dr. Robert Carter spoke. He began by telling us that there is no such thing as an expert in climatology, as the United Nations would have us believe. Climatology, itself, involves around one hundred different disciplines, and no climate scientist can be a master of the entire field.
His talk concentrated on the history of sea level rise and fall. During the last ice age, eighteen thousand years ago, the sea level was 120 metres lower than it is today because so much water was locked up in the ice caps and glaciers. At that time, Tasmania was part of mainland Australia, and Queensland was joined to New Guinea. Further back in time, the seas were 100 metres above our present level, and five thousand years ago, sea level was 1.5 metres higher than it is today. Many islands in the Pacific and Indian Oceans today were totally submerged at that time.
Dr. Carter then explained that sea level is measured locally, not globally, and that the term “average global sea level” is meaningless. For example, when the last ice age finished in Scandinavia, the huge weight of ice that had pushed the land downwards disappeared as the ice melted, and Scandinavia experienced an isostatic rebound, with the result that sea shells can be found on the hills, 70 metres above the present sea level. On the other hand, the remains of molluscs and estuarine sediments can be found deep below the ocean surface off the coast of Australia. Another example of the variation in different localities is shown in Sydney Harbour where the rate of sea level rise is only half that of the current global average.
The two main ways to measure sea level are via satellite readings and tide gauge measurements. Tide gauge readings are considered more accurate than satellite measurements (which can be contaminated with results connected to the changing shape of the Earth). During the 1980’s, the eustatic (global average) rise in sea level was measured at between 10 and 20 centimetres per century, compared with a rise of 10 metres per century at the end of the last ice age, when the ice was melting rapidly. Between 1993 and 2010, satellite readings have shown a drop in sea level as more ice forms around the southern ice cap. Although ice has been melting in the Arctic, with rising temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere, the opposite has been happening in the Southern Hemisphere with a build--up of Antarctic ice and resultant sea level fall.
The next speaker was the South Australian Liberal Party Senator, Cory Bernardi. He spoke about the threat of the Green Labour Government’s plans for a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme, in which the public would have to endure huge rises in their electricity, gas, petrol and food bills, with absolutely zero effect on the Earth’s carbon dioxide concentration, and no science to prove the link between industry and world temperature. The fact that global temperatures have now been falling for the past ten years puts an even greater question mark over the need for a carbon tax. However, Prime Minister Gillard is intent on forming a closed committee, made up solely of anthropogenic global warming alarmists, which will not feed any information to the public and has a set agenda of high taxes and wealth redistribution from the working, productive members of society to the unemployed and special interest groups. Climate change is merely the “well--meaning” guise by which to hoodwink the public. Bernardi plans to call for the setting up of a Royal Commission to look at the scientific evidence for manmade climate change before any carbon taxes can be forced upon the public.
Following this talk was lunch, consisting of delicious wraps, cheeses and fruit. This whole day was free of charge, with talks, food and drink all supplied without any cost to the interested public. Everyone was very friendly and I talked to an astronomer who measured the shape of asteroids as they passed in front of distant stars, a nice woman from America and a Pakistani PhD who lectured in philosophy at a university in Lahore.
The afternoon session began with a wonderful talk by Dr. David Evans, an engineer and mathematician who had worked for the Australian Greenhouse Office, now called the Department of Climate Change. As a former anthropogenic climate change believer, his views changed as he gathered more information on climate and witnessed, firsthand, the manner in which the science was being corrupted by politics. He left the department in disgust and his talk was about the methods used by politically motivated groups to warp and distort the global temperature record to give the results they wanted in order to “prove” manmade global warming.
There used to be six thousand well--placed weather stations around the world. “Well--placed” means away from windbreaks, brick walls, concrete and asphalt, air conditioning outlets, car engines, aeroplane exhausts and sewerage storage ponds. Since the idea of anthropogenic global warming reared its head twenty years ago, these carefully placed stations have been closed down, and there are now only one thousand stations which measure global temperatures. 80% of these stations are now placed next to motorways and airport tarmacs, in city centres and next to brick buildings, air conditioning units and car parks.
Dr. Evans stated that in cities with one million people or over, the urban heat effect was 12°C warmer than elsewhere, and yet these results were being included, along with the other inappropriate readings, in the climate record. Weather bureaux, government offices and universities were also manipulating data so that past temperature records were being pushed down or “lost”, while more recent readings were being elevated. The “Climategate” IPCC scientists who were found guilty of scientifically doctoring their temperature records were just the tip of the iceberg when it came to keeping fraudulent records.
Dr. Evans stated that satellite temperature records have shown that global warming stopped in 1998, and temperatures are now falling. He also said that Argo buoys, which record ocean temperatures, are extremely accurate, and they have measured a strong decline in world ocean temperatures since 2003. The results of the Argo readings have not been published, and access to them is not available online or by any other means.
According to Dr. Evans, during the 1980’s and 1990’s, many global warming sceptics have been sacked from their jobs in meteorology and climatology, and global warming believers have been hired in their place. There is no auditing, no regulation, no competition and no opposition to these bodies, which are now heavily influenced by the United Nations and government departments. This includes the Australian Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO, a once proud scientific organisation. Britain’s Royal Society has also become a victim of the global warming scam, and so has the BBC, which also used to have a fine reputation for its accurate reporting of scientific matters. To conclude, Dr. Evans summed up by saying that the global temperature records have now been so corrupted that no--one can use them as an accurate measure of anything, and that any evidence for or against anthropogenic climate change that we might have been able to spot is now buried amongst statistically altered and untrustworthy garbage.
The final speakers for the day included: an economist, Dr. Alan Moran, who talked about the effect of carbon taxes on a nation’s gross domestic product and on the falling living standards that will be suffered by its people (e.g. Spain now has an ETS, loses two ordinary jobs for every “green” job created, has run up a massive national debt and now has an unemployment rate of over 20%); Dr. Barun Mitra, a political advisor and public opinion monitor for the Indian Government, who gave an account of the Copenhagen Climate Conference from the Indian and Chinese perspective; a lawyer, whose name I’ve forgotten, who described the false temperature records being kept by the weather bureau in New Zealand, which reported rising temperatures where there had been none, and about the coming court case which will ask the weather bureau to provide accurate scientific information regarding climate change or face being closed down; and finally, a climate change blogger called Joanne Nova, who spoke about the tyranny of the “Global Warming Witchdoctors” and their reliance on pseudoscience and deliberate misinformation and disinformation to the public for their own political gain, and how to turn the tide against them by using sarcasm, humour and ridicule to inform the public of their lies and deceit.
The day ended at 5 p.m. with free books and information sheets to take as we pleased, and an encouragement for us all to try to inform others of the science and corruption around this very important subject of climate change – a most enjoyable day.
PAKISTAN SUFFERING ECONOMIC FREEDOM SET BACK
[George L. Singleton, USA]
Since 1995 I am a licensed Realtor, currently with an active Broker's license, here in the US. Unhappily the worldwide economic setback your good Institute writes about currently is worse than the data you used to evaluate same. Data from 2009 and now still going 2010 is much worse than were the data from 2008. Economic history shows that 2008 economic data compared to 1930 economic data, the first full year of the Great Depression, is worse in 2008 using standardized baseline data that was 1930. I worry here in the US that we have only kept our banking system solvent but have not primed the pump for ordinary businesses to get the needed, recurring loans to keep their businesses afloat. Tight credit is a fright reaction without reason. Banks are making money on free or near free interest rate funds from the US Federal Reserve and the US Treasury.
The biggest single cause of the current worldwide economic crisis (a downright depression in my own terminology) has been pushing too hard, worldwide, to make mortgage loans to folks who by measured absurdly low credit scores cannot possibly keep their very modest finances in line. We have wrecked the creditworthiness of our repurchase of mortgages systems such as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. There is no utopia wherein everyone "is entitled" to a home when they just don't have the income and credit history to carry mortgage debt they should never been allowed to have to begin with. Some folks are simply more able to deal with paying rent vs. the heavier more complex responsibilities associated with full home ownership.
IS THE WORLD BANK AN EFFECTIVE STEWARD ON THE GLOBAL WAR ON POVERTY?
[David Shaman, USA]
In 2008, The New York Times revealed that pledges by the richest nations such as the U.S. and Western Europeans in Monterrey in 2002 and Scotland in 2005 to increase development assistance had not been met. Times research indicated promises to reach 0.7% levels of GDP had in fact only reached 0.28%. The U.S. was only at 0.16%. Concurrently, most experts agreed key U.N. Millennium Development Targets for reducing global poverty by 2015 would not be achieved. The World Bank is the leading international institution charged with reducing poverty. Prior to the 2008 global financial downturn, the Bank failed to convince rich donors to live up to their commitments.
I believe there were three basic reasons why the Bank had not been a more effective advocate during the 2000s:
1 -- Donor countries were deeply skeptical the Bank’s lending was effective. Research from a number of development think tanks, economists and NGOs question suggested important shortcoming in the Bank’s lending effectiveness. Weaknesses in the Bank’s lending portfolio undermined appeals by the institution to donors for more aid.
2 – Borrower countries found the Bank’s lending “conditions” stringent, draconian and often creating unnecessary hardships on their populations. Conditions, such as structural adjustment lending that forced poor countries to reduce public spending, increase savings and reduce inflation may have been sound macroeconomic policies but belied the political realities facing developing economies. As a result, borrowers have increasingly shied away from the Bank and turned to private capital financing for their development needs. This led to an evolution of the Bank’s portfolio with more emphasis on emerging market economies rather than developing economies. And importantly, the Bank influence over client countries weakened.
3 -- Shareholders – donor and borrower members – and stakeholders such as NGOs, community--based organizations and private citizens viewed the Bank as a monolithic society where well--connected financiers close their doors to debate the economic fate of millions. Critics accused the Bank of having a culture of secrecy, an aversion to transparency and a lack of accountability. As a result, they hesitated to trust the Bank. The result was the moral standing of the institution had been weakened and its ability to advocate for policies it supports had deteriorated.
In April 2009, the G--20 met in London and pledged to infuse $1.1 trillion in capital to the Fund and Bank. Nevertheless, concerns for donors, borrowers and civil society stakeholders about the Bank have not been fully addressed. Questions remain as to whether the Bank will be any more effective in using the aid provided from the G--20 or future aid than it had before the global economic downturn.
This is the second in a series of blogs to be offered in the next few months on the World Bank and transparency, accountability and reform issues. I INVITE YOU TO SHARE YOUR OWN EXPERIENCES AND OBSERVATIONS with a wide community of international development practitioners and interested readers. http://theworldbankunveiled.wordpress.com/
PRESIDENTIAL ORDINANCE
[Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd), Rawalpindi]
An ordinance taking away certain powers of the NAB and giving them to the Ministry of Law is said to have been issued under rather strange circumstances by the President on September 16th but made public around the end of the month. According to it the Ministry of Law would be able to transfer a NAB case under trial from one judge to another at any time or stage of the trial. It is generally alleged to have been incorporated to favour the blue eyed NRO beneficiaries, whose cases have reopened, to be tried by the favourite judges appointed by the regime. Does it mean a judge would be expected to dispense the justice unjustly, against the merits of the case and against his conscience? If so, God help the judiciary and democracy in the land of the pure.
WHERE IS ALL THIS WATER COMING FROM?
[Katherine Aaishah]
Since the first day of the flood we have seen the pictures of the raging mud--reddened water flowing through Peshawar. It reminded me of the times my father took us swimming in flooded rivers during July while we were living near Islamabad. That water was tame in comparison to what rushed through the Peshawar region during the first days of the floods. The big shock came as the flood worsened and covered so much of northern Pakistan and then beyond. We were feeling so sorry for the hardship and loss and suffering of the people and animals. Now I wonder about the situation because we are no longer receiving news about it. All media has now focused upon another Pakistan issue: cricket and match fixing.
Many people would like to point fingers at an enemy to blame for the floods. I think this is most unfair and not at all helpful. I received more concern from friends in USA about the flood situation in Pakistan than about the on--going political problem that has brought normal life to a stand--still in the Vale of Kashmir, where I live. Although I sent many messages concerning the curfew situation that began 12 June and continues now and has cut off our means of income, my friends were quicker to respond to the messages I sent out about the flooding in Pakistan. One American friend, who has never visited Pakistan, wrote to me that her office is having a fund raiser to send to Pakistan. Another friend actually came over to Pakistan to help out in person and has been advocating publicly to alert the public and get them to donate. These are ordinary Americans.
I agree that dams can and certainly do have a serious impact on the environment. All over the world. In USA the environmentalists have confronted the government concerning this issue. The great zoologist Gerald Durrell wrote a novel that explained the impact of building a dam on an island. In his book it was made clear that the dam would in the long run destroy much of the local people's quality of life and ruin their economy. Building of dams is a sensitive issue. Really there ought to be a neutral group of international scientists who would be consulted before any dam any where in the world could be built.
When one blames the dams for the extreme flood conditions of Pakistan, and point the finger at certain foreign governments, one makes oneself as bad as everyone else who choses to focus upon only one aspect of a situation and accuse another of intentionally causing harm when it is not necessarily true. Indirectly these governments may have caused harm, but to claim that they are waging a water war against the people of Pakistan is just silly. Earlier this year, there was flooding in the upper Indus area of Pakistan where the dam is located there in Pakistan. We heard much news about the situation and felt concern for the people in the region along the Karakoram highway. There were also terrible floods here in India's Punjab and Harayana and for weeks the people were suffering from the worst floods in so many years. Up here in Kashmir, our tourists were soaked through from the unusual amount of rain that fell in May.
We live on the Jhelum River in a houseboat and throughout the month we were constantly dealing with the flooded Jhelum. In July, while the rains were so heavy in Pakistan, it also rained so much over here, and again we were dealing with the flooding of the Jhelum. We live comparatively close to the source of the Jhelum. Along its course down to Pakistan, many tributaries flow into the Jhelum. Mountain streams quickly swell with rain water and flow downhill with the force of gravity and fill up the main rivers such as the Chenab, the Jhelum and the Indus, which all flow into Pakistan. I do not know how many dams are constructed along the way in India. I have only seen one dam on the Chenab located in a gorge in the Jammu region.
As for melting glaciers, the time we notice it most is in spring when the weather is warmer and the snow is melting. Thus the rivers are swollen from snow melt and glacial melt. If there is more rainfall, then the rivers swell even more. Such was the case earlier this year. As the general climate on earth is warming, more of what has been frozen throughout the year is starting to melt. This is natural. If your refrigerator temperature is a degree or so higher, your ice will also start to melt.
Soon after the flood situation in Pakistan, there was an unusual flood in Ladakh caused by a sudden cloud burst, filling the Indus with yet more water that would eventually end up adding to Pakistan's floods. It just happens that the water in the Chenab, Jhelum and Indus flow from India into Pakistan. This year Mother Nature has dropped much more rain than in previous years, thus the rivers have swollen. Wherever there is a dam on route, the pressure against the dam wall must be alleviated by opening the gates a certain amount and allowing the water to pass through without bursting the dam, which would cause a greater damage.
In India the Jumuna has also been rising to dangerous levels. The Sutlej must also be bursting its banks as it flows on down to Pakistan. Rivers flowing from Nepal are overflowing into India. I do not think that Indians are pointing the finger at the Nepal government for causing the flooding in that region of India. Europe has also suffered its share of flooding and now the hurricane season is happening in North America.
Flash flooding is a part of nature. How man has chosen to develop cities, towns and villages in areas that are likely flood plains is more an issue to pay attention to. Deforestation can be the cause of flooding and devastation by land slides. In Ladakh after the devastation from the flash floods and land slides that were caused by it, the news spoke of how people have built indiscriminately in areas that were previously left undeveloped especially because ancient knowledge taught the people that these areas were unsafe. Modern man has lost touch with nature and chooses to build wherever and however it pleases with no concern to sustainability. Here in Srinagar, when I talked to one Moslem man about the flood situation in Pakistan, he told me that God is punishing Pakistan because of guns. How does such a statement feel to the child or mother who have just been struggling to live in the best of times? All this finger pointing is too silly and magnifies the stupidity of human(un)kind.
We need to think a hundred times before pushing our opinions and placing blame. Better would be to put our energy into actually paying attention to the situation and helping in whichever way we can. Meanwhile there is serious flooding in China, Niger, India and one can always expect a flood in Bangladesh. People have been displaced by the volcanic eruption in Sumatra. Who shall we blame for that? What we can do is start to pay attention to our environment and stop raping the land with our polluting habits and building practices. We can look to how we can lead a sustainable life style. I am fortunate that my mother raised me to have an awareness of the importance of our environment, so it is very easy for me to conserve water, electricity and other resources, to go places on foot or by bicycle, to carry my own bags with me to go shopping, and to reduce waste by not buying so much packaged things. Where it is possible I recycle. There is so much we can do, but most people prefer to shout slogans and then quickly drop rubbish on the ground.
Please stop pointing fingers and find a more productive means to dealing with difficult situations.
LAWYERS CONDUCT
[Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd), Rawalpindi]
In a TV talk show an office bearer of Karachi Bar Association when questioned point blankly if the licences of the Lahore lawyers who had not only stormed the LHC but also manhandled media persons and beaten up police officials would be cancelled, tried in a typical court room evasive style to parry the question by saying that if a petition in this regard were made to the Lahore District Bar Association, it would certainly take note of the ‘misconduct’ of the concerned lawyers. I think the Bar Associations at all levels in the country should confine themselves only to the ‘professional’ conduct or misconduct of their members as given in the Code of Professional Conduct of Lawyers and not try to hear their cases for indulging in any criminal activity in clear violation of the Pakistan Penal Code. Would a Bar Association hold proceedings to cancel or not to cancel a lawyer’s licence even if he commits a culpable homicide? The alleged lawlessness of the Lahore Lawyers clearly falls under the purview of a criminal act -- involving law and order of the land -- and should, therefore, be proceeded against them by the law enforcing agencies only.
ELECTION SANS VALIDITY…
[Ahmed bin Babar]
The question is not that if the incumbent President does or doesn’t enjoy the presidential immunity, the question is why he has been elected to the Highest State Office without the inscribed constitutional terms and conditions which strictly demand one lawful electoral scrutiny..? In accordance with the article 41 of the Constitution, “there shall be a President of Pakistan who shall be the Head of State and shall represent the unity of the Republic.” “A person shall not be qualified for election as President unless he is a Muslim of not less than forty--five years of age and is qualified to be elected as member of the National Assembly.” Now for becoming member of the National Assembly, a graduation degree, from a recognized University, was the precondition so where is the degree which was produced to the Election Commission for this purpose/process and what kind of check (scrutiny) was made to verify the authenticity of that degree..?
Further under this article (41) of the Constitution the Chief Election Commissioner is legally and constitutionally bound to scrutinize all the contesting candidates for the presidential office keeping in view the terms and conditions laid down in the State Constitution of 1973. “The Chief Election Commissioner shall hold and conduct election to the office of President, and shall be the Returning Officer for such election.” “The Chief Election Commissioner shall by public notification fix the time and place for depositing nomination papers, holding a scrutiny, making withdrawals, if any, and holding the poll, if necessary.” “The scrutiny shall be held by the Chief Election Commissioner at the time and place fixed by him, and if after scrutiny only one person remains validly nominated, the Chief Election Commissioner shall declare that person to be elected, or if more than one person remains validly nominated, he shall announce, by public notification, the names of the persons validly nominated, to be hereinafter called the candidates.”
Even under article 218 of the Constitution the Election Commission is duty bound in the following manner; “It shall be the duty of the Election Commission constituted in relation to an election to organize and conduct the election and to make such arrangements as are necessary to ensure that the election is conducted honestly, justly, fairly and in accordance with law, and that corrupt practices are guarded against.” Now apparently the corrupt practices to be guarded against are: rigging, false documents, intimidations, unlawful favor, display of arms etc. And if these things happen then the Election Commission is dishonest, unjust and unfair in carrying out its bona fide legal and constitutional duties. As per article 227 of the Constitution, “all existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah, in this Part referred to as the injunctions of Islam, and no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such injunctions.”
However, there is no provision for immunity for any post or person in the Holy Quran and Sunnah, according to the Islamic injunctions no one is above or immune to law. So the making and faking of the NRO was absolutely repugnant to the injunctions of Islam as this exclusively gave relief to the selective lot of corrupts and criminals in the land of pure and unfortunately the incumbent President was one of the top beneficiaries. As per article 62 of the Constitution the qualifications for membership of the Parliament are as followed and the same qualifications are also required (applicable) for the office of the President as mentioned above. A person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a Member of Parliament unless, “He is of good character and is not commonly known as (Mr.10, 20 or 100 per cent) one who violates Islamic injunctions.” “He has adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and practices obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstain from major sins.”
While Mr. Zardari is allegedly involved rather a major suspect in at least two murder cases as per registered FIRs. “He is sagacious, righteous, non--profligate, honest and ameen, there being no declaration to the contrary by a court of law.” Here the observations/declarations, regarding Mr. Zardari, made by the PAK/Swiss courts of law are self--speaking. As per article 63 of the Constitution, “He has been, on conviction for any offence involving moral turpitude, sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years, unless a period of five years has elapsed since his release.” Whereas Mr. Zardari spent almost eleven years behind the bars and was released around one year before becoming President. The Swiss cases are still alive, frozen but not filed.Under article 47 of the Constitution the President may be removed from office on the ground of physical or mental incapacity or impeached on a charge of violating the Constitution or gross misconduct.
Even under this article he can be impeached for violation of the Constitution before, under and after his election because he, through unlawful means and methods, got himself elected and is continuously defying (directly or indirectly) the Apex courts and trying, time and again, to undermine the Constitutional status of an Independent Judiciary. In fact under article 63 it is forbidden to hinder, defame ridicule or infringe the integrity or independence of the Judiciary of Pakistan. Instead under article 190 of the Constitution, “All executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan shall act in aid of the Supreme Court.”
Before I conclude I shall underline that the existing Constitutional immunity (which in fact is repugnant to the Islamic injunctions) is valid only for that person who has been elected, without the minutest ambiguity, in accordance with the manifest terms and conditions as laid down in the Constitution while in case of the incumbent President there are many ambiguities and violations overlooked and committed by the President (himself) and the then Chief Election Commissioner and thus the very election of the President has never been valid or constitutional from day ONE. We are not against the PPP rule but it must bring a fair lot to the power which respects the State Constitution, believe in the rule of law and dispense socio--economic justice for the common and collective good of every citizen of Pakistan.
RICH MNAS
[Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd), Rawalpindi]
Mr. Mubashir Mahmood asks in bewilderment in the NewsPost of date that what kind of business or jobs these MNAs do that it triples their assets in just six years. Oh poor me Mubashir, I am surprised at your naivety. Don’t you know that each MNA and MPA spends crores first on securing the party ticket and then on his electioneering campaign notwithstanding the restrictions imposed by the Election Commission on election expenditure? Does he spend this kind of money for your or my health’s sake? My dear innocent, he invests it in the most lucrative business going around with unparalleled returns not only for himself or his coming seven generations but also for the seven generations of his party bosses. If you don’t believe me just ask Raja Rental or Maulana Diesel.
TWO PLUS TWO MAKES FOUR “BREAD”
[Mahabat Khan Bangash, Peshawar]
President Zardari follows the doctrine of “two plus two makes four bread.” For every problem he finds a single solution through foreign funds. A few days back, while meeting the US congress delegation in Islamabad, he urged US Govt. to empower our tribal areas by providing funds so as to counter the militants. So what, if the funds are provided when the political scenario is not put in order by Zardari Govt? And then what is the guarantee that would ultimately happen to these funds, if provided?
NRO AND SC
[Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd), Rawalpindi]
Brig. Imtiaz and Khwaja Adnan are the first beneficiaries of the defunct NRO to be sent to jail. It has rekindled the expectations of the people from the higher judiciary and they earnestly hope that these two would not be the last ones to go to jail. All NRO beneficiaries would also be made to account for their acts of omission and commission in the courts, irrespective of the high pedestal they occupy presently. People also hope that the President would not grant post haste remission to the blue eyed if the courts find them guilty and sentence them to imprisonment. It is highly encouraging and reassuring that the Supreme Court of Pakistan seems fully resolved to have its decisions implemented by all including the government. There are no two opinions that for the survival of true democracy in a country its judiciary must be independent, impartial, fair and honest. Mr. Justice Iftikhar Ch., Sir, you owe it to the nation and the nation wishes you Godspeed in your such undertakings.
ANGELINA JOlLIE NOT HAPPY WITH HER VISIT TO PAKISTAN
[Mahabat Khan Bangash, Peshawar]
The philanthropist, world’s number one female actress Angelina Jollie is not at all happy with her visit to Pakistan to see the flood victims. She made donations, stood up with the miseries of the people and denied any photo session, but then she talks about the darker side of the things. PM Gilani’s family was especially flown down all the way from Multan to Islamabad and they presented expensive gifts to Jollie and had a sumptuous meal with her. She said that she was feeling awful at the time to see so much food at the table, suffice for hundreds of flood victims. She felt uneasy when she saw the interior of lavish Premier House and the chartered planes and other such luxuries, when there were so many miseries outside. In her report to the UN, she has recommended to ask Pakistani Govt. to first cut down on their expenses on luxuries, before asking the aid from the world. This reminds me when once I had applied for scholarship during my college times. One after noon the college Principal visited me in the hostel to enquire about my financial position. He accepted a cup of tea but was much annoyed when I served with cake pastries. My application was rejected by the Principal.
CHILEAN MINERS
[Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd), Rawalpindi]
Not many in Pakistan knew that 33 miners were trapped for more than two months deep beneath a Chilean gold and copper mine and were rescued on Wednesday 13 October 2010. A marvel of engineering and precision, first in drilling down a 2,041--foot shaft through the rock to reach the miners and then raise them up one by one in a rescue capsule called Phoenix. In the flawless operation Chileans gave a message of nationalism and leadership at each level to the entire world. At the lowest level was the undaunted shift foreman named Luis Urzua, a man who held the group together when they were feared lost, who enforced tight rations of their limited food and supplies before help could arrive. He was also the last man to come out after ensuring complete safety of his men. Bravo Luis Urzua!!
At the highest was the President Sebastian Pinera himself, who remained at the rescue operation site for the entire 22 hours and 37 minutes at a stretch without a wink or rest, till the last man was out to safety. He personally greeted each coming out miner and hugged them affectionately and smilingly. Bravo Pinera!! The entire nation beamed with pride and rose as one. The crowds in the streets set off confetti, released balloons waving flags and chanting victory slogans in the miners' honour. "We have done what the entire world was waiting for," the miners said. "We had strength, we had spirit, we wanted to fight, we wanted to fight for our families, and that was the greatest thing." President Sebastian Pinera told them, "You are not the same, and the country is not the same after this. You were an inspiration. And you would transform the nation in performing still braver feats. The crowd was joyous singing the national anthem. Catastrophes change the nation. So – they say, I wonder!!
THE PARTY IS OVER
[Dr Irfan Zafar, Islamabad]
“The Party is over.” (Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Lahore, August 1976). History is going to repeat itself with poetic justice. [Pakistan Observer]
TATA: TALIBAN ADMINISTERED TRIBAL AREAS
[Mahmood Elahi, Ottawa, Canada]
I am writing in reference to an analysis by Farhat Taj ‘An unethical survey on FATA’ (Daily Times, October 9, 2010). Farhat Taj is absolutely right when she says: “The IDPs from all over FATA that I have been interacting with say that most of the damage has been caused by the army. They allege that the army is deliberately killing innocent people and avoiding targeting the militants. They perceive state collusion with the Taliban. They want the termination of this collusion before the military operations. Until then, they are comfortable with the drone strikes on militant positions.” With the Taliban and their acolytes slaughtering fellow Pakistanis, drone strikes are the only way to keep the extremists on the run. Without drone strikes, the Afghan Taliban, with the backing of the ISI, would become de facto rulers of FATA. Not just FATA, in fact, the whole of the Northern Areas would become the Taliban Administered Tribal Areas (TATA). [Daily Times]
PRIME MINISTER’S CLOTHES
[Dr Irfan Zafar, Islamabad]
Some time back the prime minister decided to put all his western suits and ties up for auction, the proceeds of which were to be donated to the flood victims. Till date we haven’t heard anything from the government regarding the said auction. By the way, the ones who can afford to wear the designer clothes of the PM will never go for used clothes. [The News]
BALA GUJAR
[Mahabat Khan Bangash, Peshawar]
Hollywood star Angelina Jollie was impressed with the personality of PM Yousaf Raza Gilani and recommended him to take part in film industry in Hollywood. But she didn’t recommend as to what role he should play i.e. a hero, villain and clown or as a character actor. Jollie was shrewd enough to notice Gilani’s qualities, when we have been watching his performance in different roles as “Bala Gujar.” Before this, our Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi had appeared before the camera for a love making scene, when he erotically touched his head with the head of Lady Clinton in Washington. President Asif Ali Zardari is yet another actor of this soil when he tried to take liberty with the host ladies in hugging them during his initial tours to the US as President.
[The Frontier Post]
MOSQUITOES
[Dr Irfan Zafar, Islamabad]
President Asif Ali Zardari in an address to his party workers said that he was not afraid of jail's mosquitoes. Well, the hospital wards that were converted into five--star jails to accommodate him do not have mosquitoes. [The News]
NRO REVIEW
[Mir Tabassum Mairaj, Islamabad]
Delaying tactics by the present government regarding its cases in the SC, specially NRO review petition, reminds me an old story. A trader use to take sacks full of salt on his donkey’s back to the city for sale. The donkey when reaches a stream use to dip in the water to reduce its load. This way trader suffers the loss and beats the beast but to no avail. Then he decided to teach the culprit a lesson and loaded the cotton. Not knowing the change, the over--clever donkey when reached the stream, sat in the water. Now the load was unbearable. Then lesson was learned for ever. But Pakistani politicians are different and their learning process is vicious. [Pakistan Observer]
BADMASHI BAND
[Mahabat Khan Bangash, Peshawar]
That is what was needed at this hour. Enough is enough and the people are now fed up with the tricks of this Govt. It is time when the honourable Superior Judiciary may block the course of lawlessness in the country, irrespective of the status or position of the criminals as has been done in the case of Brig Imtiaz or the others wearing suit and coloured neck ties, who happen to be the beloveds of this PM or that President or some times sacred cows. The people are extremely happy over the Supreme Court’s decision passed on the historic day of 21st September. That was exactly what the people wanted or was their dream. Next step should be to put the Election Commission of Pakistan on right path to end the menace of institutionalized rigging to encourage suitable and competent persons to reach the assemblies. Clean up in police, bureaucracy and civil courts is yet another necessity. More important is to bridle the clergy which has paralyzed this society. All this can be done with the support of the people’s power, who is now gaining confidence of the Superior Judiciary and information by the media. [The Frontier Post]
MINERAL WATER
[Zafarul Haq Memon, Karachi]
Musharaf has forgotten to tell the people, while launching his party, that he had promised that the year 2007 would be the year of providing clean drinking water through out the country. Let us hope he will bring mineral water for the people of Pakistan, when he comes. [Pakistan Observer]
It is for the people, especially for the think--tanks and NGOs, and no doubt for media also, that the big issue for the next election should be the provision of basic social services (water supply, sanitation, public transport, roads, paved streets, street lights, libraries, parks or playgrounds, and noise and pollution free environment) to all the citizens in Pakistan not only ensured in the constitution but binding on the next government also. If achieved, that will be a great step forward towards the unification of the ordinary and elite Pakistans. Is there any political party ready to take up this at the top of its agenda? [Editor]
DRINKING WATER QUALITY IN KARACHI
[An expert, Karachi]
This is apropos of the news item ‘Karachi may be getting polluted water from Indus’ (Sept 16). The report says, among others: (a) 100 mgd of raw, untreated water from the Indus is mixed with treated water from the KWSB’s water treatment plants, and this mixed water is supplied to the city; (b) The KWSB claims that this water is fit for consumption; (c) The quantity of chlorine has also been increased to ensure that all sorts of bacteria and germs are eliminated.
There are 14 rivers in Asia and the Pacific, which have thermo--tolerant coliform (TC) levels ranging from 100 to 1,000 per 100 ml, and three rivers with TC levels of more than 100,000 per 100 ml. On the other hand, according to WHO, drinking water guidelines (2008), the water meant for drinking must have zero TC per 100 ml. Mixing with contaminated water, containing more than 100,000 coliforms per 100 ml, will not produce safe drinking water. This practice is unheard of in water engineering and is responsible for the massive complaints of poor drinking water quality and of waterborne and diarrhoeal diseases, in Karachi.
In Sindh, municipal and industrial wastewaters are discharged untreated in the receiving streams. The Indus is, therefore, serving unjustly as a recipient of wastewaters of all the towns in Sindh. Wastewaters contain wide--ranging pollutants --- coliforms, oxygen--demanding substances, pathogens, organic and inorganic compounds and chemicals and heavy metals. Also, fertilisers, insecticides, etc., are frequently used in Sindh. During wet seasons, these agrochemicals drain down to the Indus. Persistent organic pollutants in the environment bio--accumulate through the food web, and pose a risk of causing adverse effects on human health and environment. They result from industrial applications and waste incinerators.
In case of industries, like thermal power plants, parameters like mercury and temperature are of major concern. At Jamshoro, where power plants are also located, presence of mercury in the Indus water has been reported. Sudden increase in surface water temperature by three degrees Celsius is harmful for marine organisms. The required level of oxygen is usually not available, as the increased water temperature decreases the solubility of oxygen in water. Conventional water treatment plants (rapid sand filters for major cities; and slow sand filters for rural towns), depending on the quality of raw water, design and operation of the plant, remove conventional pollutants only, to a varying degree.
Karachi water treatment plants (rapid sand filters) do not remove heavy metals and chemicals. These are removed by tertiary or advanced water treatment. According to FAO and USAID fact--sheets, floods have caused death of 1,800 human beings, 1.2 million animals, six million poultry and have destroyed two million houses. Houses in rural areas store, among others, the pesticides. All these deaths are decaying in river water, causing pollution. This is enough to convince even a layperson that in order to produce safe drinking water, the Indus water needs appropriate treatment, before it is conveyed in Karachi’s water distribution system to citizens. Potential benefit of chlorine becomes effective only when water turbidity is less than five ntu, even if enhanced dosage of chlorine is used. Turbidity of the Indus waters is 100 ntu and above. In addition, residual chlorine in water in excess of four mg/l will cause eye and nose irritation, chest congestion and stomach discomfort. According to the UN’s General Comment No. 15 (2002), “The human right to water entitles everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic uses.” [Dawn]
CHOKED WATER LINE
[Muhammad Saleem Mangrio, Karachi]
I am the owner of house No. B 8/2, 10th Street, Gulshan--I--Faisal, Bath Island, Karachi. The water line of my house has been blocked since Aug 18. I made several complaints to the authority concerned but to no avail. Embarrassed with this situation, I thought it preferable to approach the managing director of the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board vide my letters dated Sept 4 and 14, with a hope that being at the helm of affairs he would take note of my complaint and would certainly ensure clearance/repair of blocked water line of my house. Quite the reverse, the managing director has not only failed to do the needful but has not even cared to respond me despite lapse of sufficient time. [Dawn]
UNSAFE DRINKING WATER
[An expert, Karachi]
Two encouraging news items on drinking water quality were reported recently in this paper. According to one report (Sept 30), the Sindh Assembly decided to recommend appropriate actions to the Sindh government against the firms marketing and supplying contaminated water through various brands of bottled water in Sindh. A house committee was formed comprising the chairmen of the standing committees of the assembly on health, environment, industries, law and public health engineering. The house empowered the committee to co--opt any other member for its assistance with the directives to examine and investigate the quality of bottled water being marketed in Sindh and submit its recommendations to the assembly by the next session. The report must also suggest action against the companies found supplying contaminated water.
According to another news report (Oct 2), the Sindh High Court directed the KWSB to ensure that unfit drinking water was not sold by water hydrants. The High Court also ordered the KWSB managing director to obtain water samples from hydrants and send them for testing to the Aga Khan University Hospital. An earlier report of the Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources indicated that 33 brands out of 63 brands of bottled water are unfit for human consumption. On the other hand, tap water in Karachi is also unfit for human consumption. The question is: what should the consumers in Karachi do, when it is known that contaminated water cause waterborne and diarrhoeal diseases.
Most developing countries provide safe drinking water. A critical review of some countries’ water supply system points to, among others, two reasons that contribute to providing safe drinking water. One is the presence of highly qualified engineers, who run and manage water institutions. The second is a sincere and comprehensive water quality monitoring programme. For example, Singapore has an extensive and comprehensive water quality monitoring system, covering all steps in water supply from source (catchment/reservoirs) to waterworks and distribution system up to customer taps. In addition, they also carry out online monitoring for all essential parameters at water treatment plants and, at critical locations in the distribution system. An important aspect is the third--party monitoring of water quality. The drinking water quality in Singapore is monitored and audited regularly by their regulatory agency (National Environment Agency).
In addition, there are internal and external audits, with teams of water quality experts from local and overseas professional institutions, who monitor the drinking water quality. The fact that in Singapore there are no incidences of waterborne diseases and the unaccounted--for water (water loss) is less than five per cent (in Karachi this is 33 per cent) speaks volumes of the superb water quality maintained in Singapore. A water quality control department, attached with the chief secretary’s office, needs to be established, which will not only control the drinking water quality, but also, handle the water quality of the Indus river and other surface water bodies in Sindh. The UN General Assembly passed a resolution on July 28 declaring the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights. On Sept 30 the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution affirming that water and sanitation are human rights. Resolutions on right to water and sanitation by two important UN organs, within a span of about two months, are enough for the Sindh Assembly and the Sindh High Court to enforce and implement this essential right. [Dawn]
LIBRARIES
[Faiza Sultana, Lahore]
Jinnah Library, one of the most prominent libraries in Lahore, was constituted for the general public. However, there are strict rules and a sum of fees for joining that every student has to pay. There are a lot of private or institutional libraries are in Lahore but these are not easily accessible to everyone. Having proper and numerous libraries is the basic need of every developed and underdeveloped country. The key to the success of every developed country is that their nation is literate and has vast variety of knowledge which the students can only acquire by going to libraries. There should be no restricting criteria for joining these libraries and the fees should be kept to minimum so that more and more people can benefit. Building more libraries and furnishing them with the latest and up--to--date books is pertinent if we want to earn good reputation at international level. [The Post]
LIBRARIES NEEDED IN HYDERABAD
[Syed Ammar Hussain Rizvi, Hyderabad]
Libraries quench the thirst for learning and create a healthy environment to attain knowledge. We, the residents of Latifabad (Hyderabad), are in dire need of educational libraries. Latifabad is a populated and well--developed area of Hyderabad. The Sindh Local Government Ordinance 2002 directed the district government to raise funds for the establishment of Citizen Community Board and libraries to ensure a harmonious environment but residents still wait in this regard. A number of libraries are a feather in the cap of Hyderabad: Shamsul Ulema Daud Pota Library, Gymkhana Library and Hasrat Mohani Library. CSS and PCS aspirants residing in Latifabad are still in a state of flux in the absence of any efforts to establish a library. [Dawn]
POLITICS OF PUBLIC PARKS
[Hina Ishtiaq, Karachi]
It can be clearly said that parks and recreation spots developed by the provincial or city government are meant for the general public and are owned only by the state. For some years now, different political parties have started claiming credit for constructing these recreational facilities as if they were built from their own accounts. Not only the party executing the park development project establishes a permanent office for its local activists, but also makes sure their presence within the vicinity of the park is felt. Such a trend cannot be encouraged, as most families are uncomfortable with this. The citizens fear that the political activists could create trouble for them. Where is the concept of public parks for rest and recreation? It has become a law and order issue. [Daily Times]
AN EFFECTIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM NEEDED
[Saadia Qayyum, Lahore]
It is rather unfortunate that in more than 60 years our policymakers have not been able to provide an efficient and effective public transport system. While the population, especially in cities, is getting bigger with every passing day, transport services have been gradually declining. Almost no attention is paid to the ways and means by which the demand for motorised transport can be met by improving the quality of public transport. In the absence of an adequate level of public transport services, Middle--and higher--income people living in larger cities prefer private vehicles. This has resulted in an increased number of cars competing for road space. Traffic jams are no rare phenomenon in a city like Lahore where every day one will get stuck on one road or another. For those who can’t afford private vehicles, travelling on wagons and buses is the only option.
The ordeal with these buses is that on routes where there should be 10 of them, there is hardly one or two. Hence passengers have to resort to either wait for long hours or try to fit in a bus which already has twice the number of passengers it could carry. As one would witness, most people choose the latter option. Some of the more unfortunate ones, who cannot even find a place to stand in the bus, have no option but to hang from the door putting their lives in jeopardy. All of this can be avoided if a better public transport system is put in place. In addition to increasing public transport facilities, there is a need for improving the service frequency. More importantly, there is a need for reviving and in some cities introducing rail--based public transport system. If the demand for public transport system was estimated, it would be evident that only such a system would be able to carry large numbers of passengers with higher speeds and smooth ride. This would not only reduce the average time spent on road but would drastically reduce fuel consumption and traffic pollution. [Dawn]
Edited and prepared by
Khalil Ahmad
[FreePakistan Newsletter, among other things, is a compilation of views and news taken from the national newspapers’ print and online editions. It is not possible to mention the source of every piece of news or view made use of herein; but as a matter of policy, where possible the source is mentioned with due thanks. However, no opinion expressed here should necessarily be taken as reflecting the view of Free Pakistan Newsletter.]
Disclaimer:
“You are subscribed to the monthly Free Pakistan Newsletter, an affiliate of the Alternate Solutions Institute Lahore, Pakistan. <http://asinstitute.org>. If you have received this message by mistake or wish to be removed from the mailing list, please send an email to subscribe@asinstitute.org with the subject “unsubscribe.”
