The increase in total public debt over the FRDL period is mainly due to persistent high level of fiscal deficit which for Yll is 6.
The only positive recommendation of FRDL is that in the act expenditure on social and poverty alleviation has been protected up to 4.
The FRDL is silent about the expenditures incurred by the provincial governments on social & poverty related issues.
The FRDL is silent over the rate by which the expenditure on education and health would be double.
Keeping in view the past trends of contingent liabilities one can ask the question that what is economic rational of including guarantees in the FRDL.
The above table indicates that neither prior to the formulation of FDRL nor after the imposition of FRDL the contingent liabilities pose any threat to the fiscal policy formulation.
Interestingly the FRDL overlooked the one of the important action of the government i.
The FRDL was implemented to improve overall fiscal discipline in the country so as to put the country on the desire path of economic growth.
Following recommendations are suggested to improve the quality of FRDL and to make it more effective.
The basis of FRDL should be more on economic reality of the country rather than on the basis of constitutional provision.
The jurisdiction of FRDL should be enhanced from federal government to all provincial governments.