At the outset, bespeaking the preferment of actions to corral the untrammelled private schools’ tuition fee by the Punjab government is commonsensical to avoid being demonised on the basis of erroneous conflict of interest perceptions. Simultaneously, it is equally necessary to profess being a beneficiary of reduced tuition fees and to confess being supportive, at least to the extent of basic necessities, of proliferation of government in commerce. Quite perturbing, however, was the reluctance of democracy, and therefore by default capitalism, to eschew the government’s action to curtail private enterprise in education. Do they not realise that democracy is under threat? If the associated economic system is marginalised, the political system will inadvertently eventually fall into decline. At least that was the gist of the cornucopia of arguments employed to malign communism when planned economies failed, or if conspiracy theories are to be believed, made to fail. Perhaps the proclivity of the masses to identify critics of perceived public benefits, as being in bed with the opposing camp, was the fundamental reason for reticence amongst public intellectuals to get involved in this kerfuffle. But since these recent actions of the government may turn out to be a watershed in the future of education in Pakistan, there is a necessity for ratiocination thereon. Education remains the condition precedent for Pakistan’s success and growth. And if the champions of democracy will not rise to the occasion, so be it; after all, these are the exact terms of reference for the devil’s advocate. Fundamentally, every public action is a zero sum game; the gains to any particular segment of society are exactly balanced by the losses of another segment. Those who portraiture a win-win scenario, consequent to any government action, are either deliberately lying to sell the policy to the voting public or are ignorant. This undeniable fact can easily be demonstrated by the very existence of government. The government snatches from the rich, the losers, in the gibe of taxation, to pay for its very own existence and public services, with the identity of the winner being dependent upon the integrity and competence of those in power. If government action were ever nonzero-sum, there would be no need for lobbyists. To grasp the ramifications of government action unequivocally take the Metro projects. The beneficiaries are those who on completion of the Metro enjoy a subsidised, air-conditioned and efficient commute to work and back home every day. The flip side of the coin, the losers, can include the boodle of taxpayers having to pay increased sales tax and now income tax on bank transactions to subsidise the building and future operations of the Metro; the transporters who had invested and were operating the old commute routes, the numerous shopkeepers along the route, those who lost out since projects productive for their respective area, or in their interest, were deemed low priority by the decision makers. “In the department of economy, an act, a habit, an institution, a law, gives birth not only to an effect, but to a series of effects. Of these effects, the first only is immediate; it manifests itself simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The others unfold in succession; they are not seen. It is well for us, if they are foreseen,” Frederic Bastiat. The “seen” effect of the Punjab Private Educational Institutions (Promotion and Regulation) (Amendment) Ordinance 2015 is putting those greedy sponsors of private schools in their right places. It may also be extremely gratifying, in addition to no fee increase, for the parents to finally see self-proclaimed educationists humbled by the munificent action of the government. But the pertinent question here might be: was fee the criteria for selecting private schooling for children in the first place? Seriously, if money is an issue, try public schools. The reason why parents opt for private schooling in the first place is the quality of education, which is considered to be rather dismal in public schools. Even the genteel middle class balances its budget, cutting consumption elsewhere, to send their children to private schools in the hope of providing them a better future. Admittedly, private schools may even have exceeded the limits of reasonableness while determining current fee levels, but is the solution to bring them down to public school level? And let there be no doubts: if private schools are required to be registered with a government authority and have to plead their case for a fee increase to the bureaucracy, there are two quite likely possibilities, in addition to perhaps many more. The advent of corruption within private education systems or disallowance of costs incomparable with a cost benchmark derived from public school budgets. In either case, the net effect would be lesser funds available for paying teachers. And that is not all. Justifying costs in all details to the regulator will have a related shock: an overtly and covertly more aggressive tax collector. The private sector pushed from above and from below will either employ unethical tactics to make ends meet or will simply invest elsewhere. Over time the level of investment in private education will deteriorate together with the quality of teachers and obviously education. Under the free market theory, unreasonably high profits culminate in competition that inevitably brings down profits to normalcy. The barriers to entering the education business in Pakistan are currently not prohibitive, which should be the check and balance on school owners’ greed. If the government has a duty of regulation, it is not the fee but the quality and standard of education; something perhaps like what the Punjab food department has achieved lately. However, a debate on whether more than necessary government regulations are comparable with a socialist system or not is deferred for the time being. In response to the argument over equality in education across all segments of society, the solution is not to bring elite education down to the poor person’s education level; the objective should be the other way around. The limitations of a column only allow for pointing out some possible outcomes of government interference in private education, considering its track record in public education and the necessity of a lucid strategy. There is a need for professional educationists to take the business of education seriously, in the best interest of Pakistan. The writer is a chartered accountant based in Islamabad. He can be reached at syed.bakhtiyarkazmi@gmail.com and on twitter @leaccountant