Amid national security concerns, poor law and order situation within the province, and demands for new provinces, the Punjab Assembly met for eight sessions between September 2011 and May 2012. Amendments to federal level laws to suit provincial needs were a high priority on the agenda in the post-18th constitutional amendment scenario.

The proceedings were marked by frequent tussles between the opposition and the government and use of harsh language against women.

Demands for new provinces on administrative, historical and political grounds also received much attention. The opposition-backed resolution calling for creation of the Janoobi Punjab province, and the one backed by the ruling PMLN calling for the restoration of Bahawalpur’s provincial status were both adopted. Their adoption has the potential for creating further political standoffs since the PMLN backed resolution essentially calls for the creation of two new provinces – Janoobi Punjab and Bahawalpur, whereas the opposition backed resolution includes the former state of Bahawalpur in its demarcations of Janoobi Punjab. There have been widespread demands for new provinces after the passage of the 18^th amendment in 2010.

Another influence of the passage of the 18th amendment on agenda-setting were the amendments to 37 existing laws to suit the province’s jurisdictional needs – aptly related to devolved subjects such as health (four bills), economy (three bills) and transport (two bills), among others.

Only four new bills were passed, relating to power, education, proprietary rights and urban planning. These bills were aimed at facilitating private investment in the energy sector, giving ownership rights to tenants who have been continuously cultivating land for 20 years, establishing a university in Dera Ghazi Khan, and conserving the walled city of Lahore.

In the wake of the kidnapping of Shahbaz Taseer (son of slain ex-governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer) in late August 2011, the Punjab Assembly was faced with a worrying law and order situation that included incidents of police violence, murders during dacoities, and kidnappings, concentrated in districts around the provincial capital. These were addressed through 24 calling attention notices.

Other issues of note that are the responsibility of the executive, such as education, health, local government and community development and agriculture, etc. were brought to the floor of the house through 1,431 questions submitted by the members. Twelve of these were unstarred questions (requiring written responses), while the remaining were starred questions, to which the relevant ministers were required to furnish oral responses. Ninety eight percent of the starred questions were answered while all of the unstarred questions were fully responded to.

These same subjects – health, education, law and order etc. – were also raised on the floor by the MPAs through 249 adjournment motions, of which 100 were disposed of and 115 left pending. Unsuccessful provision of free hepatitis tests, sale of prohibited and/or expired medicines, lack of functional medical equipment in hospitals, dengue, issuance of birth and death certificates, shortage of doctors, lack of teaching staff in schools, flaws in books issued by the Punjab Textbook Board, explosion of CNG cylinder-fitted vehicles, and corruption in government departments were some of the issues highlighted in these adjournment motions.

In addition to the above adjournment motions and the 41 bills passed during the reporting period, the assembly took action on other important issues by adopting 48 out of a total 64 resolutions on the agenda. Apart from adopting resolutions on education, agriculture and democracy, a resolution also called for addressing the problems of Balochistan and demanded arrest of killers of Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, who died in a military operation on August 26, 2006.

While the disposal of agenda items related to the executive’s oversight was swift, with more than 95% of all CANs and questions taken up and responded to by the house, items left pending, such as 115 adjournment motions may be because of including too many items on the orders of the day. Moreover, the number and duration of sittings held, and the optimum attendance and participation of key figures such as the chief minister, leader of the opposition, speaker and parliamentary leaders as well as other MPAs is not only an indicator of members’ commitment, but is also a factor in the timely disposal of agenda.

To this end, the absence of the chief minister from 53 out of a total 55 sittings and the leader of the opposition (parliamentary leader of the major opposition PPPP) who was absent from 28 sittings are indicative of the leadership’s disinterest.

Other parliamentary leaders of political parties (the MMAP, PML, PMLF, and PMLZ) also attended less than half of all sittings in the assembly. The attendance of members in general was low, since on average only 51 MPAs were present at the beginning and 56 at the end of each sitting, much less than the one-fourth of the total membership (93 out of 371) required for quorum. The Punjab Assembly Secretariat does not make the attendance of members’ public. FAFEN observers therefore, take a headcount at the beginning and end of each sitting. Other information, such as draft legislation under consideration, the parliamentary calendar and quorum is also not shared.

Another reason for low disposal of some agenda may be the excessive use of points of order to make speeches and rejoinders rather than pointing out any breaches in parliamentary discipline. The MPAs raised 339 points of order consuming 15% of the time otherwise allocated for regular agenda. Since the chair did not give a formal ruling on any of these points of order, they do not count towards any assembly output.

For complete report click here