CABLE GAMES
By Masood Hasan
[The writer is a Lahore-based columnist and a well-known journalist. masood_news@hotmail.com]

It wouldn’t be foolish to assume that even on its best days, the government of Pakistan, has simply no clue what half of it is doing - and worse, they don’t even know which half. If going round in circles is now the done thing, Islamabad is setting new standards that are going to be hard to beat. Somehow, irrational, whimsical and stupid behaviour characterizes many of the orders that flow and affect the lives of millions. The on off game that has gone on for months between the government and the cable operators is comical if it wasn’t for the fallout which is anything but comical.

The ‘Indian’ channels are the bane of Pakistan’s policy planners. Either they are being taken off the air or being put on and this cat and mouse game is played without any rules whatsoever. PEMRA - and what it stands for I am not quite sure anymore — is the watchdog body that was created to streamline the cable business but it seems to function erratically all the time. The ‘Indian’ channels are identified as Star, B4U and Zee, which are dominated by India but are actually international networks. They lean towards India because that is where their revenues and their software comes from - software being the new buzz word for programming. Indian dramas that project middle class conflicts and social issues attract large advertisers because in simple terms of numbers, they command large viewership. Any marketing person, who can tell the difference between a horse and an ass, will not put his company’s money into a channel or a programme that no one is watching. The marketing trends dictate largely the content of the channels — it’s a two way street but perhaps that is too complex an equation for the muddle heads who view this in an altogether different way.

They call it a cultural invasion and by banning them seem to be doing their bit in fighting this insidious propaganda from across the divide. Such inane thinking has been our undoing in the past and surely will continue to hurt us in the future as well. Indian lifestyles such as joint family living, worship rituals, mannerisms, social customs and indeed the language feature heavily in some of the soaps that run on the ‘Indian’ channels. Do they promote an Indian way of life? Sure. Are these converting Muslims into Hindus? The answer is too silly to be given any space. The analogy is somewhat akin to another popular fallacy, namely that those who studied in convents and missionary schools have been brainwashed to think and act in a decadent westernised manner. This is quixotic thinking and Islamabad has developed it into a refined art. The ‘Indian’ channels are listed on the NASDAQ and are just as Indian as the Pakistani channels like ARY and Geo that operate out of Dubai and are therefore ‘Arab’ channels. When satellite channels started giving out programme timings, it was a bit humiliating to see that Pakistan times were never mentioned, but Indian times were. The truth is that the market dictates everything and tomorrow if Pakistan commands the kind of clout India has, the changes will come fast. Pakistan’s estimated Rs 7 billion advertising market stands nowhere against India’s Rs. 97 billion sweep — and that too in Indian rupees. So as Wendy Burgers asked many years back, ‘Where’s the beef?’

In reality the rumours and theories point the finger at those channels, which seek official protection to remain in business and use the cultural invasion syndrome to good effect knowing that there are enough loony bins in Islamabad to buy that kind of tripe. This is precisely the same argument that was advanced by the film industry when the country was starting out and their plea for ‘protection’ against the culturally offensive and hostile Indian industry received official sanction. The local industry thus assured of a playing field that was 100% tilted in its favour, spent the next 50 years producing the worst garbage on celluloid the world has ever had the misfortune to see. Today, our film industry is dead and buried and there is little point in telling anyone where its Indian contemporary stands. Chalk and cheese would be a poor description. Dung cakes and cheese may be more like it. Successive industries shy of competing have used the same argument to mint money and fleece the public. Today, we all know that for the price we pay for an automobile, we get zilch. Cars which are priced at over a million are truly not worth that price in terms of features, performance etc yet consumers pay through the nose, then suffer the humiliation of waiting like ration card holders for delivery or fall, victimized by ruthless middlemen who hoard the goods, extract premiums and go for Umrahs. People in the cable business say that a few g overnment favourites with clout at the centre are responsible for the periodical bans so that they don’t go under, unable to stand the competition. The ‘Indian’ channels were attracting advertising revenues from Pakistan for reasons that are obvious. Our answer is to change the goal posts. This way, the whining, weeping and moaning channels will receive the protective patronage they need.

In any event, the age of blocking communications sadly is over and the new technology alas makes no special concessions for ideologies and twisted thinking. PTV which has lived far too long on a very precarious heritage has refused to come out of its cocoon. Its mainstay, the family dramas died a few decades back and the new fare it churns out daily is so poor and revolting that people prefer to watch something else. As a medium with a national coverage that cable cannot match, it is still a force to contend with and were it to spend more time improving the quality of its production than planning the downfall of the competition, some good may still emerge. But then, quality is hard to come by and requires many virtues and no compromises. Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel and this is true of those who use this much-abused term to save their skins. For weeks now, letters have been appearing criticizing the government’s ill-advised move of banning certain channels but predictably, there is no response. On the one hand, there is talk of an enduring peace and burying the hatchet but the contradictory behaviour leaves everyone confused. As for the poor people who have little to choose from in terms of entertainment, banning this channel or that, simply adds to the growing frustration and economic deprivation. Someone must begin the long journey to understand that such actions lead to catastrophic upheavals and when those unfurl their fury, then little can stand in the way. We may have stacked a few million in our foreign exchange piggy bank but that money is useless until it finds its way down into the lives of ordinary folk who want work and wages. Bans like the cable one, are short lived and dangerous. Instead of spending days poring over the effects of ‘Indian’ propaganda, perhaps their lordships might turn their fleeting interest to something far more serious than Madhuri Dixit dancing provocatively.

Pakistan is now one of the world’s largest producer and exporter of pirated CDs. In fact the entire country is overflowing with pirated CDs, DVDs, VCDs, films and cassettes - books too but only a few dozen read those. There is nothing on the horizon which remotely looks like tackling this big daddy. The goods are produced and marketed openly across the length and breadth of Pakistan. The companies which have installed expensive equipment to produce the illicit goods are publicly known, yet the long arm of the law seems to have shrivelled and died. Thousands of artists, foreign and local are losing hard-earned revenues because some mobsters are making a killing. Instead, all that the GOP and its PEMRA are doing is looking the other way and chasing the wrong thieves.
[Courtesy: The News International August 31, 2003]

THE QUESTION OF THE CABLE MONOPOLY
By D.W. MacKenzie

It is now common to hear about failures in privatization and deregulation, with even the New York blackout being blamed on too-little government (even though electric utilities are still heavily regulated). Of course, every reduction of government intervention in commerce has its critics. Partial deregulation of the type that has occurred in utilities, which leaves in place many regulations that hinder market competition, invites such criticism.

The cable industry is no exception. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 promised much, and has delivered results that have some quite upset. Some at the US Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) fit this description. This organization recently published a report on how privatization in cable TV has failed to benefit consumers, and has in fact, promoted monopoly exploitation of consumers.

Much of this report uses the type of analysis that one will readily find in college classes on economics. The interpretation of recent events in the cable industry is, however, questionable. There also appears to be more than just conventional economic analysis behind this report.

PIRG claims that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 left cable subscribers without protection from unrestricted rate hikes. On March 31, 1999 this act ended Federal Price Regulation. Since then rates have skyrocketed and service has declined1. There has been increased concentration and vertical integration in this industry. The top ten cable providers sell to 85% of cable subscribers. Three of these serve 56%. Cost reductions stemming from the consolidation of this industry have not translated into lower rates. In areas where there is a second provider, rates are 17% lower. This does not happen very often. Based on this evidence, it would appear that privatization has failed to produce anything but greater monopolization for this industry.

While there is evidence suggesting that consumers are worse off now than before the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the idea that this is simply a failure of privatization is not clear. In fact, the explanations offered by PIRG suggest the possibility that the problem in the cable industry might be one of partial privatization or too little deregulation.

1. One factor that this report mentions is vertical integration. This is not the most convincing argument for the existence of monopoly pricing in private markets
2. This report discusses various other "anticompetitive practices" by the cable industry, and asserts that they have succeeded in restricting competition for monopolistic purposes. It also dismisses the notion that Direct Broadcast Satellite providers offer real competition. The evidence they cite here indicates that to some extent, cable providers have simply done a better job than satellite providers in servicing their customers
3. These arguments do not make a clear case for increased regulation.

While it is certainly true that private businesses want to avoid competition so they can increase their profits, private industry cannot monopolize markets on their own. Government promotes monopolies rather than limiting them.

The oddest part of this report is that while it concludes that privatization is a failure, it also provides solid evidence showing that remaining regulations were at least part of the problem. Indeed, the authors of this report have grossly misinterpreted their own data. Evidence of increased prices and industry concentration does not itself prove that private markets have failed. Government failure is just as possible. The examples they list in their own report of regulators assisting cable providers in limiting competition indicate that government failure is a large part of the problems in this industry.

This report admits that in the days when cable was challenging airwave broadcasters, regulators "did not hesitate to grant exclusive franchises to cable operators"4. It speaks specifically of a long history of successful regulatory lobbying by the cable industry. This report claims that lobbying of regulators resulted in a variety of tactics to deter competition (p. 35). It claims that regulators protected and favored cable incumbents for years. Licensing policies have directly or effectively barred competition in many local markets (p. 44). Such practices are no longer official, but cable companies still succeed in enlisting the help of regulators to bar direct competition (p. 44).

Incumbent cable companies have also gotten regulators to use "level playing field laws" to increase the costs of entering the cable market (p. 45). Cable companies have also saddled new c ompetitors with disproportionate shares of subsidies for public education and government programming (p. 45). The cable industry has also succeeded in getting the FCC to quash new competitors with prices for leased access no competitor "could pay and remain c ommercially viable" (p. 47).

Economists George Stigler and Sam Peltzman have shown how private businesses can capture regulators to secure monopoly status. Fred McChesney has shown how regulators can use regulations to extract rents. Mancur Olson has shown how concentrated interests (like cable companies) have a distinct advantage over diffuse interests (like TV consumers). Increased regulation may benefit narrow interests in private industry rather than consumers. Sections of this report indicate that this theory has been put into practice by the cable industry.

While the conclusions of this report are questionable, the intentions behind what this report recommends are unmistakable. The authors of this report want increased regulation, albeit at the local level. Also, this report recommends that "Citizen-Viewers" should have a direct voice in cable regulation and should be able to create well-funded news and public affairs channels. There should be local channels around which consumer interest groups organize and advocate pro-consumer and pro-democracy media policy.

The authors of this report are, in fact, concerned with the influence that private media interests have in influencing public opinion. One of them declared that such interests limit opinions that harm their interests. Oddly enough, I heard him make this claim on cable TV. Apparently, cable TV censors dropped the ball for once by allowing these persons to discuss their report on CSPAN.

Calls for empowering "citizen viewers" in this report reveal that its authors had more than notions of market failure in mind when writing this report. They apparently hold populist ideals very closely. This might also explain why they construe clear examples of government failure as failures of privatization. They exhibit the naiveté of persons who refuse to think critically regarding revered institutions, even when confronted directly by negative evidence. Collective action and informational problems do plague the democratic process, as is apparent in this report. PIRG is obviously very much in favor of democracy. This is not in itself a bad thing. However, one should not allow such sentiments to cloud any important issue.

It is also the case that the economic concepts employed in this report depend upon a static notion of competition. In competitive equilibrium, markets deliver ideal results. It is easy to show that no real market has perfect competition. Showing that governmental intervention can improve upon the market process is another matter. As F.A. Hayek and Ludwig von Mises taught us, markets are dynamic and ever changing. Competition in markets reveals data to us about what people want, what resources are available to satisfy consumers, and how much consumers are willing to pay. Governmental regulators do not simply know what competitive prices are, and are themselves often subject to perverse political incentives. They may be neither able nor willing to act in the interests of consumers.

The authors of the recent PIRG report on the cable industry obviously have strong convictions. They believe that greater public involvement in the media will lead to better economic efficiency and improved public dialogue. In the extreme this approach leads to the establishment of a Pravda type of media system. In the less extreme form that we currently have, we have retained variety of opinion, but might, it seems, be paying too much. The people at PIRG believe that a few more steps towards politicizing the media are a good idea, but there are very sound reasons to think otherwise.

Actual experience with partial privatization indicated that the part of the regulatory structure that remained in place served to enable incumbent cable providers to raise their rates without fear of new competition. This is because cable services are typically granted special treated at the local level and work to saddle potential competitors with regulatory burdens.

Of course, complete privatization would not lead to ideal results, but this could well unravel most of the anticompetitive practices that exist in the cable industry. The lesson that we should draw from the results of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 is that efforts to partially privatize the industry are likely to retain those elements of regulations that benefit concentrated interests in business most. This being the case, we should press deregulation further, and should also view calls for increased regulation with great suspicion.

Truly free markets offer a promising and little tried alternative to the failed political enterprises of the past. Rather than repeat our errors, we should learn from them and embrace what the free market has to offer: relative economic efficiency and the respect of individual liberty.

1. This reports cites increased complaints that regulators can do little about. It also claims that cable rates have gone up much faster than inflation and have increased on a per channel basis as well. This raises the possibility of private market power, but also the possibility of Public Choice problems with remaining regulations.
2. Every industry has some degree of vertical integration. Vertical integration of stages of production can reduce the costs of coordinating production. If separate businesses at different stages of production face problems in negotiating and enforcing contracts, then it makes economic sense for those businesses to integrate. The idea that vertical integration increases monopoly power is highly suspect. Vertically integrated firms can face fierce competition from horizontal competitors. See Coase (1937) and Grossman and Hart (1985) for discussions of these issues.
3. This report claims that Direct Broadcast Satellite providers cannot reach many urban subscribers who lack direct line of sight with satellites. Many refuse DBS and when they can it is without local channels. 47% of subscribers refuse to buy DBS services without local channels. It is also costly to install DBS in multifamily housing. It also offers less in terms of phone service and high speed internet service. As cable operators have improved their service with digital technology, DBS suppliers have lost the quality advantage they once had. Cable systems now have an advantage since bad weather does not affect their performance. This may all be true, but the fact remains that DBS is a viable alternative for many, and that it has failed in part is due to the fact that cable providers have provided some valuable services and conveniences. While access and line of site do put this option beyond the reach of some consumers, it is also the case that many consumers seem willing to pay extra for cable services. If people want to pay extra for local channels and other services, why should self-appointed consumer guardians like PIRG object?
4. A federal appellate court struck this down.

SOURCES

• The Failure of Cable Deregulation US Public Interest Research Group August 2003.
• Coase, Ronald. 1988. "The Nature of the Firm," The Firm the Market, and the Law.
• Grossman and Hart. 1986. "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and
• Lateral Integration," Journal of Political Economy vol. 94, no. 4 (August), 691–719.
• Hayek F.A. 1977. "Competition as a Discovery Procedure," New Studies in Philosophy, Politics, Economics, and the History of Ideas.
• Mises, Ludwig. 1949. Human Action, a Treatise on Economics. Fox and Wilkes.
• McChesney, Fred. 1997. Money for Nothing. Harvard University Press.
• Olson, Mancur. [1971] 1965. The Logic of Collective Action. Harvard University Press.
• Peltzman, Sam. "Toward a More General Theory of Regulation," Journal of Law and
• Economics 1976.
• Stigler, George. 1971. "The Theory of Regulation," Bell J. Econ. Man. Sci. 2:3–21.

Letters to FreePakistan

. . . thank you so much for the excellent newsletter! I'll pass it along to others. Thank you for publishing Jalena's letter. I have just received a copy of the Kiswahili edition and news of the newspaper publication in Greece. This is a very exciting time for JG.

Ken Schoolland
[Hawaii, USA]

. . . Yes, privatization that simply creates private monopolies is a common problem worldwide and undermines the policy of privatization. In the US we fight it as well. A key purpose of Privatization Watch is to constantly educate the public and government officials on the lessons of privatization done right or done poorly and to focus on doing it right so that the people benefit.

Keep up the good work in Pakistan, and let us keep each other informed of our work.

Adrian Moore
Reason Foundation
[USA]

As always I appreciate your newsletter! As Bureaucrash grows I am wondering if you would like to start a Bureaucrash Pakistan. If not you, do you know any other libertarians in Pakistan who might?

Bureaucrash can offer a website, an ad free discussion list, and assistance with activism. I'd love to work with you on this so please let me know!

Jason D. Talley
Crasher In Chief
The Bureaucrash Foundation
Work: www.bureaucrash.com
Home: www.jdtalley.com

After the 23 on the 2001 cover: Mongolian, Korean, Kyrgyz, Bulgarian, Kiswahili, and Greek, Urdu (version of The Adventures of Jonathan Gullible: A Free Market Odyssey) will make #30! That will be a milestone worth a great celebration!

Ken Schoolland
[Hawaii, USA]

Letters from the Press

MAKING VIEWERS SUFFER
[Lubna Gul, Islamabad]

There was a programme on PTV World on the night of Sunday ie 24-8-2003 about the cable operators and the government rift. The stance adopted by the government officials was most ridiculous and least convincing. Cable TV has been in Pakistan for many years and up till now the government was least concerned about our national identity, religious and social norms. The dawn of realisation has come late to make the viewers suffer.

Secondly do the English channels which are being aired even slightly match our social and religious norms? If the government can allow English channels to be aired then why fear the Indian channels.

Thirdly do the Pakistani movies and stage shows fulfil our requirements of social and cultural norms in any way? Do they truly represent our national identity and character? Can anybody watch Pakistani movies with the family? Instead of banning the Indian channels the government should try to improve the standard of declining PTV and try to counter foreign channels. But for the time being please don’t make the viewer suffer who pay a handsome amount to the cable operators only to find nothing to watch.
[The News Lahore Edition]

BLACK MARKETING OF CARS AND CONSUMERS’ RIGHTS
[Engr. S. T. Hussain, Lahore]

For the past couple of years, the black marketing of cars by dealers in connivance of the car manufacturers is going on under the nose of various government ministries and the rights of the consumers are being infringed under the knowledge of the ministry of commerce. By allowing this shear black marketing whose personal interest is being served? Is it not the duty of the government to safeguard the interest of the consumers? We are forced to pay extra amount on the sale prices of various cars for taking immediate delivery. Why this is being so? Who is benefiting from the extra payment? Why the government has not taken any action? How long the ministry of commerce will prefer and protect the interest of car dealers and manufacturers and not the interest of general public? Why government is not allowing the import of second hand cars to meet the increase in demand if such demand of cars is really existing and providing the opportunity to the general public to buy the vehicles of their choice at a reasonable cost? On the one hand, government is c alling the business community to prepare for the WTO and free market economy and on the other hand government is negating the rights of the general public to freely import the cars from anywhere. As long as the government is interfering and controlling the business of the country, it is not possible to have prosperity for the people.
[The News Lahore Edition]

BEGGARS BY NEED
[Tariq A Rana, Islamabad]

This is in response to letter of Maj Gen Zaheer on beggars (August 18, 03) when army eats 50 percent of the national budget it is no surprise that common people will beg. A 100, 000 fleet of batmen, billions spent on luxury staff cars, generals’ agricultural lands in billions, free phones, free electric power to run free ACs, to mention few. I might remind Gen Zaheer that ‘there’s sufficiency in the world for man’s needs but not for man’s greed.’
[The News Lahore Edition]

COMPETITORS DON’T CRIB
[Ihtesham Kayani, Rawalpindi]

There was a report in "The News" August 11, 2003 that "PIA to suffer as Emirates gets more landing rights". PIA has a long history of crying foul whenever there is a competition. It always likes to fly alone at home, leaving no choice for passengers. Avoiding competition has resulted in poor service and financial records. Whereas Heathrow airport of London facilitates landing to almost all airlines of the world and still British Airways manages to become world’s favourite airline. Dubai has become hub of international aviation industry and yet Emirates is ranked number one airline in the world. It’s about time the PIA authorities realise that success lies in competition and without it complacency and slack attitude sneaks in. Therefore, there is no need to make hue and cry on landing rights of just one airline, after all PIA itself is enjoying competition free flights on major European routes after 9/11.
[The News Lahore Edition]

WONDERS OF THE WIZARDS
[SMF Hassan, Lahore]

Officially, Pakistan’s economy has matured and would not require any loan from IMF. Yet, an annual loan of one billion would be taken from World Bank for several years, besides 160 million dollars for specific projects. Officially, monetary expansion reached 18 per cent last year without corresponding increase in production. Yet, inflation remained only 3.5 per cent.

Officially, investment climate is excellent. Yet, foreign countries are being explored for investment from foreign reserve and the US Congressional Committee reported in July, 2003 that "Pakistan’s economic future continues to be bleak."

Officially, foreign debt stands reduced by 3 billion. Yet, it remains the same, in spite of rescheduling and an unproductive foreign reserve of 11 billion dollars.

Officially, Wapda is asked to decrease electricity rates. Yet, it is not allowed to retire its huge loans of 18 per cent, consuming billions of its revenue.

Officially, NAB recovered 90 billion from bank defaulters. Yet, Governor, State Bank, put it at only 17.5 billion.

Officially, poverty is being alleviated for the last four years. Yet, the country slipped from 117 to 144 in the world.

State Bank’s report (2001-02) shows foreign reserve at 1672 million on June 30, 1999 and 1720 million in September 2001. Yet, the post-September spurt is claimed as an achievement and not due to flood of tainted money from abroad.

On November 2, 1999, the President vowed to recover every paisa from the defaulters of 250 billion. Yet, according to governor, State Bank, 50 billion was or would be written off during 2000-05 against 10.7 billion during 1986-99. Such wonders of the imported wizards would multiply if politicians accorded priority to political, not economic, issues.
[The News Lahore Edition]

INSTRUMENTS OF TERROR
[TS Bokhari, Islamabad]

No doubt these energy meters have become instruments of terror in the hands of Wapda, a corrupt organisation, especially after the Khakis have come to help it. These meters are fixed outside the premises where any body can play havoc with them but the consumer concerned is held responsible when the meter is assumed to have tilted in his favour and as a result he is penalised by being c harged with a provisional bill, a detection bill, an adjustment bill etc. etc.

I had a bitter experience of this meter-bashing by Wapda's IESCO (Islamabad Electric Supply Company). In June last Year the army surveillance team raided our house and assumed our meter to have 'tilted' in our favour. Here it may be pointed out that the meter was hanging loosely on the wall without any proper covering. The Wapda, however, took this opportunity to impose a series of penalties upon us -- first, a provisional bill; then, a detection bill and after a year, an adjustment bill for the same period.

When I enquired from the IESCO why, after all, this adjustment bill when you have already issued me a provisional and a detection bill, they said that this was done as a result of an audit report.

Now when I read the audit report, a copy of which I got after much fuss, I was surprised to learn that according to audit the meter shown 'tilted' and 'stopped' was actually in 'OK Position' but was wrongly shown defective by the meter reader. He did, according to audit, subsequently try to rectify his mistake but the computer failed to comply or perhaps they did not consider it wise to tell the audit that they had already billed the charges in the form of a detection bill by treating the meter 'tilted' and 'stopped'. Or, perhaps, they just followed the line of least resistance of taxing the poor consumer by issuing an adjustment bill based on the 'actual reading' of the so-called 'tampered' meter when it was found actually to have 'tilted' in favour of Wapda.
[The News Lahore Edition]

TAX WITCH-HUNT
[Shakeel Akhtar, Rawalpindi]

Since October 1999, the government is expending more efforts on terrorising and compelling the citizens to submit complex IT returns with a lot of superfluous information than on the actual taxable income and assets. Consequently, it has opened floodgates of corruption through misinterpretation of the superfluous information given in the IT returns with or without connivance of the IT advocates, and converted the CBR into a Gestapo force to blackmail those who oppose the government or the government officials in any way.

I wish if the government could advertise only the taxable income and assets, and design the IT returns accordingly. Most citizens will be more than willing to pay taxes through a simple and hassle-free procedure. Unfortunately, such a suggestion is not acceptable to most of those in authority at various levels to relinquish the power of witch hunting, as we like to rule not serve.
[The News Lahore Edition]

A PRIME MINISTER’S CAMP OFFICE
[Hussain A Siddiqui]

A press tender, issued this week invites tenders by Pak PWD for the Special Repair of the Prime Minister’s camp office-residence at Rojhan Jamali. Estimated cost of the repairs is Rs. 1,133,756.

Earlier, tenders were invited for supply and installation of body fitness and exercise machines at the PM secretariat Islamabad. When criticised by the press, there was a clarification that the same were meant for the officers of PM Secretariat and not the PM himself. What is the explanation going to be now Mr. Prime Minister for spending over a million rupees on special repairs at your Rojhan Jamali office and residence? Following the footsteps of Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, Mr. Clean?
[The News Lahore Edition]

FreePakistan News-Briefs

LOCAL CAR MANUFACTURERS DEMAND PROTECTIONISM
The members of Pakistan Association of Automotive Parts & Accessories Manufacturers are deeply concerned about recent news items recommending the import of built-up cars into Pakistan. Before the government falls into the trap laid by unscrupulous vested interests, we ask them to consider these points: The auto industry and allied industries currently provide direct or indirect livelihood to over a million people. During the last fiscal year, there was an unprecedented growth in exports of auto parts. This is the best performing industrial sector of Pakistan. Are we going to kill all this progress without a second thought?

CHINESE CAR IMPORT TRIGGERS CONTROVERSY
The prospects of import of a 600cc small Chinese car has triggered a controversy, and therefore the venture was delayed for months allegedly due to the manipulation of a local 800cc car manufacturer.

SUBSIDY TO CNG BUSES
The government has decided to give 10% subsidy to CNG buses to encourage CNG technology in the country.

BOT POLICY FOR PRIVATE SECTOR
The Punjab government is giving final touches to mechanism for implementation and execution of ‘Build, Operate and Transfer’ regime in the province which would help private sector participate in the infrastructure development.

TAX PROBLEM FORCING INVESTORS TO SHIFT CAPITAL
Tax problems forcing increasing numbers of investors to shift their capital outside Pakistan are being reflected in official documents as rising menace both for the tax collecting machinery and the taxpayers.

INDUSTRIALISTS FOR DIRECT POWER SUPPLY FROM IPPs
Industrial consumers of the Karachi Electric Supply Corporation (KESC) have urged the federal government to allow the utility to acquire power directly from independent power producers rather than the Water and Power Development (WAPDA).

IMPORTED CHEMICALS CHEAPER THAN LOCALLY PRODUCED
Pakistan’s chemical manufacturing sector still produces expensive products as compared to imported chemicals which are selling for less in the market despite carrying additional costs of freight, duties and taxes.

HELD FOR WATCHING PORNO FILMS
The Lahore city police have arrested 10 persons from a tea stall on charges of watching porno movies.