Dialogue without an agenda is bound to fail

October 15, 2026

National Assembly Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq has urged the government and opposition to continue political dialogue despite their failure to reach an agreement in their latest meeting. His appeal is reasonable, but it also raises an important question: why did the talks fail despite taking place under his own roof?

Both sides came together in the Speaker’s chamber with hopes of finding common ground. Representatives from the government, its allies and the opposition sat down to discuss their differences. The Speaker appreciated their patience, respectful behaviour and willingness to listen to each other. Yet, when the meeting ended, there was no agreement.

The failure should not be treated as a minor setback. It should force the Speaker and both sides to examine why the talks produced no result.

Dialogue without a clear agenda is bound to fail. Bringing political leaders into one room and maintaining a friendly atmosphere may be useful, but it is not enough. Negotiations need a clear purpose, agreed points for discussion and a realistic plan to resolve differences. Without these basic requirements, meetings can become formal exercises that create hope but deliver little.

The Speaker has asked both sides to keep talking and avoid unnecessary debate in the National Assembly. However, the responsibility for successful dialogue cannot rest only on the patience of political leaders. Someone must ensure that the meetings have direction and that participants know what they are expected to achieve.

As the host of the negotiations, Ayaz Sadiq should ask both sides to agree on a written agenda before the next meeting. The agenda should identify the main issues, the demands of each side and the areas where compromise may be possible. A timetable for discussions and a clear record of progress could also help prevent the process from becoming endless.

The government and opposition must also show political maturity. Neither side should enter negotiations merely to gain time, improve its public image or blame the other for failure. Dialogue requires sincerity, flexibility and a willingness to make difficult decisions.

The Speaker is right that one failed meeting should not end dialogue. But the next round must be different. Both sides have already held talks under his roof. Now he must help them move beyond courtesy and achieve results. Otherwise, repeated meetings will only deepen public disappointment.