The Government of Pakistan has proposed Rs 1.75 billion for the Prime Minister’s Office in the 2025–26 budget. This is a rise from last year’s revised amount of Rs 1.45 billion. The increase has sparked debate, especially as the country faces tough economic conditions and budget cuts in other sectors.
This article breaks down the allocation figures, the economic context, and the public reaction, offering a complete picture of what this budget means for the people of Pakistan.
-
PM Office budget raised to Rs 1.754 billion for FY 2025–26.
-
Reflects a 21% increase from the current fiscal year’s revised allocation.
-
Over Rs 87 million designated for internal operations of the PMO.
-
Rs 896.5 million allocated for public-related expenses.
-
Finance Minister highlighted lower inflation at 4.7% and a primary surplus of 2.4% of GDP.
-
Budget part of Rs 17.573 trillion national outlay for FY 2025–26.
The PMO budget is part of the broader Rs 17.573 trillion federal budget for 2025–26, unveiled by Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb in the National Assembly.
-
Inflation down to 4.7% – a sharp drop attributed to government interventions.
-
Primary fiscal surplus of 2.4% of GDP – seen as a sign of fiscal discipline.
-
Efforts to broaden the tax base and curb non-development expenditures.
The minister noted that the budget reflects a “stabilization-to-growth” strategy, aiming to keep inflation under control while boosting economic activity.
A deeper look into the Rs 1.754 billion PMO allocation reveals that over half the amount — Rs 896.5 million — is intended for public-related expenditures. This includes:
-
Welfare programs are supervised directly by the PMO.
-
Support for national relief initiatives.
-
Administrative coordination for development projects.
The Rs 87 million for internal PMO operations includes:
-
Salaries of staff and advisors.
-
Office maintenance and utilities.
-
Logistics and travel expenses for official PMO duties.
The budget announcement triggered mixed reactions across social media, civil society, and political circles.
-
The increase is justified due to inflation and rising operational costs.
-
It reflects the need for efficient administration during a time of national recovery.
-
More than half is for public engagement and coordination, not luxury spending.
-
The government should lead by example in austerity.
-
Allocating more to the PMO sends the wrong signal when the public is burdened with rising taxes and reduced subsidies.
-
Lack of transparency in defining "public-related expenditures."
A social media user tweeted: “People are struggling to pay utility bills, and the PMO gets Rs 1.75 billion? Priorities!”
The government attributes this positive trend to:
-
Reduced imports of luxury items.
-
Tight monetary policy by the State Bank.
-
Timely subsidy adjustments and fuel price controls.
However, critics point out that the drop in inflation has not translated into relief for everyday consumers due to persistent high food prices and job insecurity.
A primary surplus means the government’s revenue (excluding interest payments) exceeds its spending. This is seen as a key benchmark for economic stability, especially when dealing with:
The Prime Minister’s Office plays a crucial role in:
-
Coordinating federal ministries and agencies.
-
Implementing national priorities (climate change, digital governance, poverty reduction).
-
Serving as the face of executive leadership at home and abroad.
Thus, while the budget allocation might appear symbolic, it reflects the government's administrative approach and its commitment (or lack thereof) to fiscal responsibility.
While the PMO budget won’t directly affect most Pakistanis, the broader fiscal picture does:
-
Increased taxation measures may reduce disposable income.
-
Cuts to subsidies or public programs could impact low-income groups.
-
Better PMO administration could enhance policy implementation nationwide.
The government’s proposal to allocate Rs 1.754 billion for the PM Office in the 2025–26 budget reflects a delicate balancing act between operational needs and public optics. Whether this increase leads to better governance or more political backlash depends on how transparently and efficiently the funds are used.