Was 90s privatization program a failure?

One of the biggest arguments made by the anti-privatization camp in Pakistan is that the program has been a failure. Ignoring the successful examples, like that of KESC (now K-Electric), those against privatization in the country support their arguments by citing a certain October 1998 unpublished consultant report by the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
Critics have been using that report to say that privatisation between 1991-1996 was either a failure or didn achieve the desired results. However, the interesting bit is that the ADB itself cites the same study to showcase that privatization program in that era was in fact a success.
In an article published in a local newspaper, former chief economist of Planning Commission Tahir Pervez, said that ADB "assessed the performance of 100 units after privatization. Only 20 units were performing better than before. In the case of manufacturing, 16 out of the 38 privatized units were performing worse than the pre-privatization period". The same was cited by Social Policy and Development Centre in its policy paper No. 24 late last year.
Another feature published in a local monthly-news magazine, cited the same 1998 study and wrote that "only 22 percent of the privatized units performed better than in the pre-privatization period; 44 percent performed the same whereas approximately a third (34 percent) performed worse".
Likewise, Asad Umar, the PTI MNA, expressed his no-love for privatization on last years Valentines Day. In his article titled "Privatization or the sale of the century?" Asad wrote that "the results of the 1990s privatization programme were dismal......only 22 percent of the state-owned enterprises that were privatized were performing better under private-sector management, whereas 34 percent of the units performance worsened significantly".
In contrast to these statements, note 13 of ADBs RRP document (Report and Recommendation of the President) for the recently signed Public Sector Enterprise (PSE) Reforms Project, cites the same study and calls the 1991-1996 programme a success.
"An impact assessment of the last Pakistan privatization program concluded that it was a success. Of the 95 PSEs privatized from 1991 to 1996, 32 percent performed better after privatization, 39 percent performed at the same level, and 29 percent performed worse," writes the ADB, while making a reference to the said 1998 unpublished study titled Impact Analysis of the Privatization in Pakistan.
Note how almost the same data is read differently by different camps. BR Research hasn been able to get its hands on that report as yet. ADB Pakistan supposedly doesn have that report or otherwise it cannot share it on account of client confidentiality requirements. However, we have asked ADBs head office to disclose that report for the purpose of clarity and transparency. Until such time we get that, this column wouldn attempt to venture further on how to interpret the complete findings of that report.
But while we wait for the ADB head office to get back to us, here is a little piece of nugget that refutes what Chairman Privatization Commission, Mohammad Zubair, recently said about privatization. Responding to the Senate Subcommittee on Finance, Zubair said that the government is not selling assets to achieve fiscal deficit targets.
Not only does that statement seems to be a play on semantics, as this newspapers editorial highlighted last Friday, but it also runs contrary to what the government supposedly told the ADB.
ADBs documents for the recently signed $20 million project for PSEs says that "the main motivations for the governments privatization program are the potential sales proceeds, the fiscal space gains from reduced fiscal transfers to PSEs, improved service provision, and inflows of foreign exchange from foreign investors". Given how these institutions work, the ADB must have gathered the governments "main motivation" from the government itself.
The idea is not to make a mountain out of a molehill, but to emphasise that when it comes to public policy, you don only have to be right. You have to be right for the right reasons. This column is all for privatization, not to plug the fiscal gap, but because the government has no business doing business. Using the right lens often makes a world of a difference between a good policy and bad.