“It is very important that there should be cross fertilisation between government and academia. Both parties can benefit from having a better understanding of how the other works” — Nicholas Stern
In civilised countries, governments and those in power often turn towards academia to develop constructive and comprehensive policies for the purpose of development, growth and providing the people with a secure and better life along with justice. Governments rely on academia’s ability for in depth study, conducting research and driving innovation, while in return academia benefits from funding, access to resources and the opportunity to address mind boggling challenges offered by a rapidly evolving world.
It must be remembered that holders of public office have tremendous responsibilities but at the same time may not have full knowledge of matters related to various departments of governance. To formulate workable policies, one should be aware of all the minute details that could enable a practical and favourable outcome of policies. Where the available studies predict failure, such proposals should be shelved.
To run an effective state machinery, advanced countries appoint leading academicians as advisors in crucial domestic and international matters. The State Department of the United States of America hires renowned professors to provide feedback on proposals related to various issues. For example, when Ronald Reagan’s government was grappling with severe economic problems, Arthur Laffer, a scholar of great repute, was taken on board as a member. His advisory role spanned from 1981 to 1989 and his contributions were critical in the implementation of supply-side economics as well as tax policies, with tax cuts being called the most successful policy initiative of the post-war era.
Unless a proper diagnosis is made, treatment for any disease is not possible. Otherwise, we end up taking Panadol for fever whereas the infection may be in the kidneys, as happens in our beloved country. Long-term policies require comprehensive and pragmatic studies. It is easier to take a Panadol but difficult to undergo treatment for cancer and that too which is in the third stage.
People and groups having heartfelt regard for Lahore are persistently opposing any project that would harm the city’s heritage and environment
Fanciful wishes of the governing elite can only be checked by experts. Experts are important for facilitating not very adroit public office holders who want to be in power merely for the sake of power.
There can be no two opinions about the significance of both development and urban rapid transport systems. These are integral to the socio-economic growth of a metropolitan area and its residents. However, another undeniable critical aspect is that in a given region, all urban centres should receive equal treatment so that just one city is not overburdened in terms of population and resources. Regrettably, consecutive provincial governments in Punjab are wary of considering the many smaller towns and cities as worthy of attention except for Lahore, a historical city of the Subcontinent having spiritual value for everyone.
Already, Lahore’s traditional character of being a city of gardens has become stigmatised by the ruthless massacre of its original dwellers. Thousands of mature trees, responsible for maintaining its beauty and ecological balance, have been cut down. This brutality unleashed in the form of Metro Bus Service and Orange Line, catering for just a marginal population, has left this budget surplus producing province indebted in terms of billions of rupees. As if this was not enough, another project by the name of Yellow Line has been proposed. These schemes are being introduced not only without the approval of the native population but also in total ignorance of academia and numerous research papers on solving Lahore’s transport system. But who cares.
The Lahore Yellow Line Metro project, a 24-kilometre electric bus rapid transit service between Thokar Niaz Baig and Harbanspura, is in the pipeline and intends to ease traffic congestion and reduce emissions. Both these aims could easily have been achieved by introducing a large number of electric buses along dedicated lanes and planting more trees in and around the city, all at a much lower cost compared to the 60 to 110 billion rupees that is to be burned on the altar of someone’s ego, who is merely interested in unveiling an epitaph regardless of the heavy debt that would be tagged on future generations.
This is in addition to traffic disruptions and displacement of residents and businesses, such as on main Khayaban-e-Jinnah in Johar Town, during the intended year-long or longer construction plan. Lahoris already face traffic congestion during rush hours, cricket tournaments and despite signal-free lanes.
Rosy pictures of returns were painted at the time of Metro Bus Service and Orange Line but both have become white elephants in terms of maintenance and subsidies. The Yellow Line too is portrayed as a revolutionary addition to Lahore’s infrastructure, something that is being debunked by experts and even the judiciary. The courts have debarred the government from cutting trees and from constructing buildings without complying with green building standards.
People and groups having heartfelt regard for Lahore are persistently opposing any project that would harm the city’s heritage and environment. So far they have failed in preventing the eradication of greenery and the introduction of Metro Bus and Orange Line. Members of these groups are calling out loud for more cohesively led protests but so far nothing positive is emerging from these pleas.
The Government of Punjab is bent on destroying whatever little is left of this beautiful city. It is ready to embark upon a suicidal mission like the earlier Sasti Roti schemes and Danish Schools. Only when the entire population of Lahore, regardless of political affiliation, rises up can public office holders be stopped from realising their atrocious plans.