Your editorial, 'The cost of not building, dated Mar 09, states that Kalabagh dam requires a national consensus. Sir, may I submit that the necessary consensus has already been developed, all that is needed is public awareness of it. Was not replacement of WAPDA with IRSA a first step towards consensus building. Why were the provinces stopped from having any direct control over supplies to their canals? It is IRSA today which draws up a 'Distribution Plan, depending on availability of water, and instructs WAPDA to release water to the canals accordingly. Why would Punjab have agreed to an increased share for Sindh in all future dams by reducing Punjabs share? Equal share for both was agreed, despite Punjab having 70 percent of the total cropped area of Pakistan, bearing 80 percent of the total agriculture load of the country, and having more than twice the population of Sindh. Why would Punjab have agreed to the posting of engineers from the Sindh irrigation department at major headworks of Punjab, if not to allay sindhs fear of theft of water from Kalabagh dam. Sindh is a signatory to the Water Accord of 1991 which states, inter alia: All the provinces are agreed to the necessity of more dams on all the rivers including on the Indus. Sir, rather than keep asking for a consensus, we need to highlight the consensus that is already in place. KHURSHID ANWER, Lahore, March 11.