One interaction cannot be viewed in isolation, says PPP’s Shazia Marri after Bilawal’s mid-presser curtness – Pakistan

Table of Contents

PPP MNA and spokesperson Shazia Marri said on Friday that one instance of interaction between two people who had worked closely for several years “cannot be viewed in isolation”, after a video clip of PPP Chairperson Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari curtness with her went viral on social.

The incident took place at a press conference after the PPP’s parliamentary party meeting at the Parliament House in Islamabad on Thursday.

During the press briefing, a journalist asked Bilawal for his views on ministers in the federal government suggesting that education, health and other subjects, particularly the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) be given back to the Centre under a proposed 28th constitutional amendment.

Several subjects, including education and health, were devolved to the provinces under the 18th Constitutional Amendment in 2010.

Bilawal began his reply by stating that he was not aware which federal minister the journalist was referring to.

At that point, Marri, who was also present at the press conference, corrected him, stating that it was not a federal minister but Minister of State for Religious Affairs and Interfaith Harmony Kesoo Mal Kheal Das.

Das was reported to have said last week, while speaking to reporters, that the government was considering devolving BISP to provinces.

After Marri’s mention of him, Bilawal responded by saying, “I am not asking you.”

At that, Marri began apologising, but Bilawal interjected and said, “Thank you.”

As a video clip of the interaction went viral on social media, Marri seemingly addressed the matter in a post on X.

“One interaction that made its way on social media, between people who have worked closely together for many years, cannot be viewed in isolation. PPP has always prioritised the collective good of the people and nothing should take away from our joint mission of public service,” she said.

Her post was in response to another, which pointed out that the entire coverage of the presser had diverted to that “one instance”.

Source Link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to content