The launch of the ‘Maryam Ki Masihaai’ programme by Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz, which aims to provide free heart surgeries for children, raises concerns over the use of public funds for self-promotion. Naming the initiative after herself suggests a clear effort to cultivate personal branding through a government project. This focus on individual recognition undermines the principle that public services should be free from personal or political agendas and purely serve the needs of the people.
Rather than strengthening the public healthcare system, the programme includes provisions for surgeries at private hospitals if public facilities are unavailable. This reliance on the private sector indicates either a lack of investment in, or mismanagement of, public health infrastructure. Instead of outsourcing medical services, the priority should be on improving the capacity and efficiency of public hospitals. Shifting essential healthcare to private entities not only raises questions about sustainability but also reflects poorly on the state’s ability to manage its own resources.
The chief minister’s emotional rhetoric, likening her role to that of a mother empathising with the grief of others, distracts from the fundamental issues plaguing the healthcare system. While the programme may offer immediate relief to some, it does little to address the systemic flaws within the healthcare sector. Her comments, while compassionate in tone, do not substitute for substantive reform that could prevent such tragedies in the first place.
There is also the concern of political exploitation. While extending care to children beyond Punjab might seem like a magnanimous gesture, it has the effect of positioning Maryam Nawaz as a national political figure, using a humanitarian issue to gain broader political traction. This approach risks reducing a serious healthcare issue to a tool for building political capital.
Additionally, the long-term sustainability of the programme remains in question. Is this initiative merely a short-term project designed to win public support, or will it be embedded into the healthcare system to continue beyond the current administration? Our country has a history of welfare projects that lose momentum or disappear altogether once political leadership changes, often due to a lack of proper planning and institutional support.
While the intent behind the programme might be noble, the manner in which it is framed and implemented suggests it is more about political gain than solving the healthcare crisis. Public resources should be devoted to comprehensive and lasting improvements, not used to elevate the profile of political figures.
