Economic Indicator Listing

  For Pakistan in year 2009 Indicator Value

GDP Growth (Constant Prices, National Currency) 1.966 %
GDP (Current Prices, National Currency) PKR 13,095.04 Billion.
GDP (Current Prices, US Dollars) US$ 166.513 Billion
GDP Deflator 230.185 (Index, Base Year as
per country's accounts = 100)
GDP Per Capita (Constant Prices, National Currency) PKR 34,736.31 .
GDP Per Capita (Current Prices, National Currency) PKR 79,957.82 .
GDP Per Capita (Current Prices, US Dollars) US$ 1,016.72
GDP (PPP), US Dollars US$ 437.411 Billion
GDP Per Capita (PPP), US Dollars US$ 2,670.82
GDP Share of World Total (PPP) 0.641 %
Implied PPP Conversion Rate 29.938
Inflation, Average Consumer Prices (Indexed to Year 2000) 198.366 (Index, Base Year
2000 = 100)
Inflation (Average Consumer Price Change %) 20.775 %
Inflation, End of Year (Indexed to Year 2000) 201.782 (Index, Base Year
2000 = 100)
Inflation (End of Year Change %) 13.139 %
Population 163.774 Million
Current Account Balance (US Dollars) US$ -8.551 Billion
Current Account Balance (% GDP) -5.135 %

GDP (purchasing power parity): $448.1 billion (2009 est.)

$436.4 billion (2008 est.)
$422 billion (2007 est.)
note: data are in 2009 US dollars

Definition: This entry gives the gross domestic product (GDP) or value of all final goods and
services produced within a nation in a given year. A nation's GDP at purchasing power parity
(PPP) exchange rates is the sum value of all goods and services produced in the country valued
at prices prevailing in the United States. This is the measure most economists prefer when
looking at per-capita welfare and when comparing living conditions or use of resources across
countries. The measure is difficult to compute, as a US dollar value has to be assigned to all
goods and services in the country regardless of whether these goods and services have a direct
equivalent in the United States (for example, the value of an ox-cart or non-US military
equipment); as a result, PPP estimates for some countries are based on a small and sometimes
different set of goods and services. In addition, many countries do not formally participate in the
World Bank's PPP project that calculates these measures, so the resulting GDP estimates for
these countries may lack precision. For many developing countries, PPP-based GDP measures
are multiples of the official exchange rate (OER) measure. The difference between the OER- and
PPP-denominated GDP values for most of the weathly industrialized countries are generally
much smaller.

HTTP://WWW.INDEXMUNDI.COM/PAKISTAN/GDP_%28PURCHASING_POWER_PARITY%29.HTML

SEE ALSO

 GDP (PURCHASING POWER PARITY) RANK CHART

 GDP (PURCHASING POWER PARITY) - COMPARATIVE MAP
 GDP - REAL GROWTH RATE
 GDP - PER CAPITA (PPP)
 GDP - COMPOSITION BY SECTOR
 GDP (OFFICIAL EXCHANGE RATE)

Equivalent Data From the International Monetary Fund

Variable: Gross
domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity
(PPP) valuation of country GDP
Note: These data form the basis for the country weights used to generate the World Economic
Outlook country group composites for the domestic economy. Please note: The IMF is not a
primary source for purchasing power parity (PPP) data. WEO weights have been created from
primary sources and are used solely for purposes of generating country group composites. For
primary source information, please refer to one of the following sources: the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Bank, or the Penn World Tables.

For further information see Box A2 in the April 2004 World Economic Outlook, Box 1.2 in the
September 2003 World Economic Outlook for a discussion on the measurement of global growth
and Box A.1 in the May 2000 World Economic Outlook for a summary of the revised PPP-based
weights, and Annex IV of the May 1993 World Economic Outlook. See also Anne Marie Gulde
and Marianne Schulze-Ghattas, "Purchasing Power Parity Based Weights for the World
Economic Outlook," in Staff Studies for the World Economic Outlook (Washington: IMF,
December 1993), pp. 106-23.

Units: Current international dollar

Scale: Billions

Country-specific Note: See notes for: Gross domestic product, current prices (National
currency).

Source: International Monetary Fund - 2009 World Economic Outlook

 GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT BASED ON PURCHASING-POWER-PARITY (PPP) VALUATION OF PERCENT
YEAR
COUNTRY GDP CHANGE
1980 49.143  

1981 57.421 16.84 %

1982 64.906 13.04 %

1983 72.047 11.00 %

1984 78.54 9.01 %

1985 87.06 10.85 %

1986 93.881 7.83 %

1987 102.839 9.54 %

1988 114.482 11.32 %

1989 124.698 8.92 %

1990 135.284 8.49 %

1991 147.72 9.19 %

1992 163.07 10.39 %

1993 168.77 3.50 %

1994 178.766 5.92 %

1995 191.547 7.15 %

1996 204.655 6.84 %

1997 210.38 2.80 %

1998 218.183 3.71 %

1999 229.496 5.19 %

2000 244.453 6.52 %

2001 254.637 4.17 %

2002 267.026 4.87 %

2003 286.033 7.12 %

2004 311.738 8.99 %

2005 340.301 9.16 %

2006 372.986 9.60 %

2007 405.296 8.66 %

2008 422.392 4.22 %

2009 437.411 3.56 %

Variable: Gross domestic product based on purchasing-power-parity (PPP) per

capita GDP

Note: These data form the basis for the country weights used to generate the World Economic
Outlook country group composites for the domestic economy. Please note: The IMF is not a
primary source for purchasing power parity (PPP) data. WEO weights have been created from
primary sources and are used solely for purposes of generating country group composites. For
primary source information, please refer to one of the following sources: the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development, the World Bank, or the Penn World Tables. For
further information see Box A2 in the April 2004 World Economic Outlook, Box 1.2 in the
September 2003 World Economic Outlook for a discussion on the measurement of global growth
and Box A.1 in the May 2000 World Economic Outlook for a summary of the revised PPP-based
weights, and Annex IV of the May 1993 World Economic Outlook. See also Anne Marie Gulde
and Marianne Schulze-Ghattas, "Purchasing Power Parity Based Weights for the World
Economic Outlook," in Staff Studies for the World Economic Outlook (Washington: IMF,
December 1993), pp. 106-23.

Units: Current international dollar

Scale: Units

Country-specific Note: See notes for: Gross domestic product, current prices (National
currency) Population (Persons).

Source: International Monetary Fund - 2009 World Economic Outlook

Source: International Monetary Fund - 2009 World Economic Outlook

YEAR GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT BASED ON PURCHASING-POWER-PARITY (PPP) PER CAPITA GDP PERCENT CHANGE

1980 596.165  

1981 676.574 13.49 %

1982 742.807 9.79 %

1983 801.499 7.90 %

1984 849.998 6.05 %

1985 917.102 7.89 %

1986 962.877 4.99 %

1987 1027.465 6.71 %

1988 1114.617 8.48 %

1989 1183.654 6.19 %

1990 1248.008 5.44 %

1991 1333.213 6.83 %

1992 1429.502 7.22 %

1993 1442.229 0.89 %

1994 1489.844 3.30 %

1995 1557.479 4.54 %

1996 1624.243 4.29 %

1997 1630.413 0.38 %

1998 1651.838 1.31 %

1999 1698.399 2.82 %

2000 1777.453 4.65 %

2001 1814.17 2.07 %

2002 1865.1 2.81 %

2003 1949.119 4.50 %

2004 2083.115 6.87 %

2005 2231.041 7.10 %

2006 2400.633 7.60 %

2007 2562.407 6.74 %

2008 2624.042 2.41 %

2009 2670.817 1.78 %

Purchasing power parity (PPP) is an economic technique used when attempting to determine the
relative values of two currencies. It is useful because often the amount of goods a currency can
purchase within two nations varies drastically, based on availability of goods, demand for the
goods, and a number of other, difficult to determine factors. PPP solves this problem by taking
some international measure and determining the cost for that measure in each of the two
currencies, then comparing that amount.

Perhaps the most famous example of purchasing power parity was given by The Economist
magazine as the Big Mac® index. Using the Big Mac® index, the cost of a McDonald's Big
Mac® sandwich can be determined in a number of countries, and then an exchange rate can be
concluded based on this index. For example, if a Big Mac® costs $3 US Dollars (USD) in the
US, and 9,000 riel in Cambodia, the exchange rate can be determined as $1 USD for 3,000 riel.
This indexed exchange rate would then be used to determine relative value of other items.

One of the primary uses of PPP is in lessening the misleading effects of shifts in a national
currency. This is particularly an issue when calculating a nation's Gross Domestic Product
(GDP). For example, if the riel falls in value to 80% of its value on the dollar, the GDP as
expressed in US dollars will also drop to 80%. This does not accurately reflect the standard of
living in that country (a common use of GDP), however, because the devaluation of the riel is
most likely due to international trade issues that will not yet have had any effect on the average
Cambodian. By using purchasing power parity, however, one is not misled by the temporary
devaluation of the riel in relation to the dollar — a Big Mac® still costs 9,000 riel in Cambodia
and $3 USD in the US, and so the Big Mac® index exchange rate remains the same.

ECONOMIC COST OF FLOOD IN PAKISTAN

IRFAN MUFTI
WITH MONSOONAL RAINS CONTINUING, THE WORST FLOODING IN PAKISTAN IN 80 YEARS IS STILL SPREADING. PAKISTANI
RELIEF ORGANIZATIONS AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE STRETCHED TO THE LIMIT. YET DESPITE URGENT APPEALS FROM
THE UN AND OTHER AID ORGANISATIONS, THE LEVEL OF INTERNATIONAL AID IS PITIFUL, EVEN MEASURED AGAINST THE
LIMITED ASSISTANCE DONATED IN OTHER RECENT DISASTERS. THE FLASH FLOODS IN SEVERAL PARTS HAVE ALREADY
DAMAGED COUNTRY’S ECONOMY AND WILL LEAVE MARKS ON THE COUNTRY’S AGRICULTURE AND ECONOMIC GROWTH.
ACCORDING TO THE EARLY ESTIMATES MORE THAN 20 MILLION PEOPLE (ALMOST 13% OF THE COUNTRY’S TOTAL
POPULATION); INCLUDING 9 MILLION CHILDREN ARE DIRECTLY SUFFERING. THIS FIGURE DOES NOT INCLUDE THOSE THAT ARE
NOW INDIRECTLY BEARING THE BURDEN. THIS IS IN ALL COUNTS IS THE LARGEST EVER WATER SPLASH IN THE 64 YEARS
HISTORY OF PAKISTAN. THE MAJOR FLOODS OF 1973 (LESS THAN 5 MILLION PEOPLE) 1976 (5.7 MILLION PEOPLE), 1992
(10 MILLION), 2005 (8 MILLION) AND 2010 (20 MILLION AFFECTED PEOPLE AS OF AUG 15) PROVE THE POINT. THE
ENORMITY OF THE DAMAGE CAN BE JUDGED FROM THE FACT THAT 10.51 PEOPLE DISPLACED MORE THAN 3000 DEAD
(THE ACTUAL COUNT WILL BE KNOWN LATER ONCE THE WATER WILL RECEDE) MANY DEATHS ARE LIKELY TO BE
UNRECORDED. IN THE LAST 64 YEARS AMONG TEN BIGGEST NATURAL DISASTERS IN PAKISTAN THAT INCLUDES FLOODS,
DROUGHTS, EARTHQUAKES AND STORMS THIS WATER TRAGEDY BY FAR IS THE LARGEST EVER DISASTER HAPPENED TO THIS
COUNTRY.
THE SWAT VALLEY IN THE WORST AFFECTED PROVINCE—KHYBER‐PAKHTUNKHWA (FORMERLY THE NORTH WEST FRONTIER
PROVINCE)—IS CUT OFF, TRAPPING AN ESTIMATED 500,000 PEOPLE. MOST HAVE RECEIVED NO RELIEF SUPPLIES,
EXCEPT SMALL QUANTITIES BEING TRANSPORTED INTO THE AREAS BY FOOT OR DONKEY. IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY,
FLOODING IS THREATENING MAJOR CITIES AND TOWNS.
AT THE MOMENT MORE THAN 10.5 MILLION PEOPLE ARE ON THE MOVE ON THE ROADS OF THIS COUNTRY LOOKING FOR
REFUGE AND SHELTER. A VERY SMALL FRACTION OF THIS POPULATION HAS SO FAR FOUND SHELTERS IN GOVERNMENT
FACILITIES OR TEMPORARY CAMPS SET‐UP BY NGOS AND PHILANTHROPISTS. MAJORITY OF THIS DISPLACED POPULATION
IS STILL LIVING IN OPEN FIELDS AND WITHOUT PROPER SHELTER, FOOD, MEDICINES OR PROTECTION. MOST OF THE
MAKESHIFT
CAMPS ARE WITHOUT ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND POORLY MANAGED. GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS ARE USED TO CAMP
DISPLACED POPULATION AND MOST OF THESE BUILDINGS ARE ALREADY IN DILAPIDATED CONDITIONS AND CANNOT HOUSE
VICTIMS FOR A LONG TIME. THE GOVERNMENT AND HUMANITARIAN AGENCIES HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SET‐UP TENT
FACILITIES THUS INCREASING RISKS OF SHOCKS AND VULNERABILITIES. THE FOOD, MEDICINES, WATER, NON‐FOOD ITEMS
AND TEMPORARY SHELTERS PROVIDED BY GOVERNMENT, NGOS, PHILANTHROPISTS AND INTERNATIONAL GROUPS ARE FAR
LESS THAN THE DEMAND. IT IS PREDICTED THAT THE TRAUMA IS STILL NOT OVER AS MORE MONSOON IS PREDICTED AND
WILL ADD MORE VOLUME OF WATER IN THE RIVER SYSTEM.
IT IS SAID THAT THE TOTAL VOLUME OF WATER IN THE INDUS RIVER WATER SYSTEM IS NOT EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH FOR THE
RIVER SYSTEM TO ABSORB. THE DISASTER HAPPENED BECAUSE OF LACK OF ATTENTION TO MAINTENANCE OF RIVER
EMBANKMENTS, SILTING OF RIVER BEDS, WEAK WATER PROTECTION INFRASTRUCTURES, MASSIVE DEFORESTATION AND
UNPLANNED SETTLEMENTS IN RIVERINE AREAS. ALL THESE FACTORS CONTRIBUTED A GREAT DEAL IN THE ON‐GOING ORDEAL
OF THE PEOPLE. LEVEL OF PREPAREDNESS TO COPE WITH THE IMPENDING DISASTER WAS VERY LOW. THOUGH THERE
ARE SEVERAL DISASTER MITIGATION AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND AUTHORITIES SET‐UP IN LAST FEW YEARS BUT
THEIR PERFORMANCE IS FAR BELOW THAN EXPECTED STANDARDS. IRONICALLY MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE EITHER
FORCED TO LEAVE HOUSES UNALARMED OR WITH PRIOR NOTICE DID NOT KNOW WHERE TO GO FOR SHELTER, FOOD,
MEDICINES AND OTHER BASIC FACILITIES. NO GOVERNMENT INFORMATION FACILITIES WERE SET‐UP OR PRIOR
ARRANGEMENTS WERE ENSURED. MASS EXODUS FROM FLOODED CITIES FURTHER CHOKED NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AND
NEARBY CITIES AND TOWNS.
TRAGICALLY THE FLOOD HIT THE MOST FERTILE FOOD GROWING AREAS. GILGIT, SWAT, CHARSADA, SWABI, NOWSHERA TO
LARKANA, DADU AND MATIARI ARE FOOD GROWING POCKETS AND CONTRIBUTE A REASONABLE SHARE IN COUNTRY’S
FOOD AND GRAIN ECONOMY. MAJOR LOSSES OF CROPS, ORCHARDS, CATTLE, FODDER, COTTON AND OTHER MAJOR CASH
CROPS WILL HAVE A SERIOUS SETBACK ON THE ECONOMY. THIS WILL CREATE FOOD SCARCITY AND INSECURITY FOR MANY
IN COMING MONTHS. SOME OF THESE CROPS ARE EXPORT ORIENTED AND COUNTRY WILL FACE DECLINE IN EXPORT
EARNINGS.
FLOOD ALSO CAUSED DESTRUCTION TO RAILWAY NETWORKS, ROADS, BARRAGES, CANALS, VILLAGE INFRASTRUCTURE AND
OTHER ESSENTIAL FACILITIES IN THE CATCHMENT AREAS. TRANSPORTATION OF GOODS AND PEOPLE IS ALREADY EFFECTED.
IT HAS ALSO DESTROYED BUILDINGS, FACTORIES, WAREHOUSES ETC AND CLOSED DOWN WORK IN THESE PLACES DUE TO
WHICH NOT ONLY THE WORKERS WILL SUFFER BUT ALSO THE INDUSTRIES WILL SUFFER. IN COMING MONTHS THE
GOVERNMENT HAS TO INVEST HUGE AMOUNT OF FUNDS AND MANPOWER IN REHABILITATION OF PEOPLE AND
INDUSTRIES, WHICH WILL CAUSE THE ECONOMY TO SUFFER AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL.
THE MASS DISPLACEMENT OF POPULATION WILL IRK CITIES SCARCE RESOURCE AND LOAD NEARBY TOWNS. THOUGH MOST
OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE DISPLACED ARE SKILLED AGRICULTURE LABOR AND CAN BE ADJUSTED AS UNSKILLED LABORER IN
OTHER SECTORS BUT IT THE LABOR IN AGRICULTURE SECTOR WILL BE SCARCE.
IN PREVIOUS YEARS THE FLOODS DAMAGES/LOSS AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL GDP VALUE WAS SIGNIFICANT DURING
FOLLOWING YEARS. LOSS AS PERCENTAGE OF GDP VALUE WAS 3.04 IN 1973, 5.09 IN 1976 AND 2.60 IN 1992. IF
DAMAGE DUE TO CYCLONES AND STORM SURGES WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, THE OVERALL LOSS AS A PERCENTAGE OF
GDP WOULD BE MUCH HIGHER. IT MAY BE NOTED THAT THE GDP VALUES ARE AT CONSTANT 1985 PRICES. ESTIMATES
OF THE EFFECT OF FLOOD LOSS ON THE GDP ARE BASED ON STATIC ABSOLUTE FIGURES OF FLOOD LOSS. THE STRUCTURES OF
THE FLOOD DAMAGE LOSSES AND THEIR RELATIVE WEIGHTAGE TO TOTAL GDP HAVE NOT BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
HOWEVER, THE ESTIMATES PROVIDE A NOTIONAL INDICATION OF THE IMPACT OF FLOOD DAMAGE/LOSS ON THE
ECONOMY.
IT MAY BE MENTIONED THAT FLOODS CAUSE LOSSES BOTH TO THE GDP AND TO THE CAPITAL STOCK AND THUS HAMPER
THE GROWTH POTENTIAL OF THE COUNTRY. MOREOVER, THESE LOSSES ALSO HAVE LONG‐TERM IMPACTS ON THE
MACROECONOMY.
THE LONG‐TERM IMPACTS WILL BE TWOFOLD: CAPITAL DAMAGES INDUCE A LOWER GDP IN SUBSEQUENT
YEARS (TO THE EXTENT OF INVESTMENT LOSSES); AND OUTPUT LOSSES (CAUSED DURING THE FLOOD‐AFFECTED YEAR)
LOWER INCOMES AND POSSIBLY, REDUCE SAVINGS AVAILABLE FOR FINANCING INVESTMENTS.
IN ADDITION, THERE WILL BE ENORMOUS SOCIAL LOSSES DUE TO THIS FLOOD, THE IMPACT OF WHICH ON THE
MACROECONOMY
IS MUCH MORE THAN MICRO‐ECONOMIC LOSSES IN TERMS OF ACCELERATING THE GROWTH POTENTIAL OF THE
ECONOMY. HOWEVER, AS YET THERE IS NO COMPREHENSIVE SOURCE THAT PROVIDES INFORMATION/ANALYSIS OF
POSSIBLE MACRO‐ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CURRENT FLOOD LOSSES.
THE GOVERNMENT WAS ALREADY FACING WIDESPREAD HOSTILITY OVER ITS PROXY WAR ON BEHALF OF THE US AGAINST
ISLAMIST MILITANTS, AND THE COUNTRY’S ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CRISIS. NOW THE FLOODS HAVE WIPED OUT LARGE
AREAS OF CROPS, DESTROYING THE LIVELIHOODS OF MANY FARMERS AND LEADING TO HIGHER FOOD PRICES. AS THE
FLOODING WORSENS, ANGER AND PROTESTS WILL INEVITABLY SPREAD, COMPOUNDING THE CRISIS OF A FRAGILE REGIME
DESPITE THE IMMENSE SCALE OF THE DISASTER, INTERNATIONAL AID IS ONLY TRICKLING IN. AS OF EARLY THIS WEEK,
ACCORDING TO THE UN’S FINANCIAL TRACKING SYSTEM, THE FUNDS COMMITTED BY GOVERNMENTS TOTALED LESS THAN
$US45 MILLION, WITH AN ADDITIONAL $91 MILLION PLEDGED.
THE GOVERNMENT HAS SO FAR FAILED TO MOBILIZE EXTERNAL AND DOMESTIC RESOURCES TO MANAGE THE EFFECTS.
THIS DELAY WILL LIMIT GOVERNMENT ABILITY TO RESTORE HUMAN SETTLEMENTS, REHABILITATE AGRICULTURE AND RURAL
ECONOMY, REBUILD INFRASTRUCTURE, PROVIDE SAFE AND TIMELY RETURN AND RECOVERY OF THESE PEOPLE AND
REDUCE STRAIN FROM URBAN CENTRES. ALL THESE WILL BE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS IN MULTIPLYING SHOCKS OF THE
DISASTER. GOVERNMENT CREDIBILITY DEFICIT AND LACK OF TRUST OF FUNDERS IS WORRISOME FACTOR. THE SHEER SIZE
AND SCALE OF DEVASTATION REQUIRES MUCH HIGHER LEVEL OF SUPPORT FAILING TO WHICH WILL WEAKEN THE
GOVERNMENT’S CAPACITY TO DEAL WITH THE DOMESTIC ISSUES MAINLY TERRORISM, RECESSION, INFLATION AND HIGH
SCALE OF UNEMPLOYMENT. IT IS MUCH NEEDED THAT ALL STAKEHOLDERS INCLUDING DONORS, INVESTORS,
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE ORGANIZATIONS, AID CONSORTIUMS AND OTHER ECONOMIC POWERS MUST INVEST IN THIS
TIME OF CRISIS TO AVOID ANY UNDUE SPILL OVER OF THIS SITUATION. IT IS NEEDED THAT GOVERNMENT INVITES ALL KEY
STAKEHOLDERS TO A PLATFORM AND DEVELOP DISASTER MANAGEMENT PLAN WITH GREATER PARTICIPATION OF CIVIL
SOCIETY AND EFFECTEES. ALL EMERGENCY, RELIEF, EARLY RECOVERY, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT EFFORTS MUST
BE DONE OUTSIDE THE AMBIT OF USUAL GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES. ONLY AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION LEAD BY
CREDIBLE PERSONALITIES CAN ENSURE GREATER PARTICIPATION, TRUST AND OPTIMUM RESULTS OF THESE EFFORTS.
IN THE MEANTIME THE GOVERNMENT MUST DEMONSTRATE ITS POLITICAL WILL TO SUPPORT. IT HAS TO PUT THESE
PEOPLE AS ITS FIRST PRIORITY AND SHIFT OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENDAS IN THE SECOND LIST. SO FAR THE GOVERNMENT
HAS FAILED TO SHOW ITS RESOLVE AND LEADERSHIP IN TACKLING THE PROBLEM. THE PRESENT DISASTER WILL ALSO BE A
TEST FOR THE PRESENT POLITICAL GOVERNMENT AS MOST EFFECTEES ARE ALSO THE VOTERS OF THE RULING PARTY AND
RIGHTLY EXPECTING URGENT AND SUBSTANTIVE SUPPORT. GOVERNMENT HAS TO CUT DOWN ON ITS EXPENSES, MAINLY
NON‐DEVELOPMENT EXPENDITURES AND DIVERT THESE RESOURCES TO THE MUCH NEEDED RELIEF AND REHABILITATION
OF THESE 20 MILLION PEOPLE. FAILING TO WHICH WILL HAVE SERIOUS REPERCUSSIONS FOR THE COUNTRY AS WELL AS
PRESENT GOVERNMENT.