The National Assembly witnessed a familiar scene of political polarization during Wednesday’s debate on the federal budget, with lawmakers engaging in sharp personal attacks and disputes over electoral mandates. The discussion also touched on a recently announced US-Iran security agreement, further intensifying the session.
Presided over by Speaker Ayaz Sadiq, the debate exposed deep divisions not only between the treasury and opposition benches but also highlighted tensions within the ruling coalition of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP).
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan began by urging political reconciliation while questioning the government’s commitment to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s recent offer for dialogue. Khan welcomed the proposal but pressed for clarity on the delay in initiating talks.
However, the fragile atmosphere quickly deteriorated when Federal Minister for Food and Security Rana Tanvir Hussain, a close ally of the Sharif family, shifted the focus to national security. Hussain praised the prime minister’s domestic standing and highlighted Pakistan’s role in facilitating a peace agreement between the United States and Iran, asserting that Pakistan’s defense capabilities had earned it newfound respect on the global stage.
Despite this, criticism emerged from within the ruling alliance itself. PPP lawmaker Shazia Marri delivered a harsh critique of the federal budget’s economic targets and the government’s dependence on International Monetary Fund (IMF) conditions. She accused the government of offloading the consequences of its failures and the inflation burden onto the public under the guise of IMF requirements.
Marri also condemned the poverty line set in the budget as unrealistic, challenging the government’s classification of individuals earning Rs8,483 per month as poor, and questioned how a household could survive on Rs10,000 monthly. She congratulated Pakistan and Iran on the forthcoming US-Iran agreement and reiterated Pakistan’s consistent support for peace and resilience against terrorism.
Highlighting the Gilgit-Baltistan elections, Marri emphasized the enduring legacy of PPP founder Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in the region and noted that her party had been instrumental in granting the territory its current constitutional status. She stressed that the PPP respected political mandates and would oppose any reduction in provincial shares under the National Finance Commission (NFC) award. Quoting PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, she affirmed there would be no compromise on provinces’ financial rights, even as the federal government sought provincial contributions for national defense.
Meanwhile, PPP lawmaker Naz Baloch launched a veiled critique of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P), recalling Karachi’s history of political violence, extortion, and illegal land dealings during the 2000s.
Senior PTI leader and former National Assembly Speaker Asad Qaiser used his time to counter Defence Minister Khawaja Asif’s allegations of secret political tactics. Qaiser challenged Asif’s electoral legitimacy from the February 2024 general election, which the opposition claims was heavily rigged. He urged Asif to resign if he felt guilty and contest his seat again against PTI-backed candidate Rehana Dar.
PTI lawmaker Amir Dogar raised concerns with Speaker Ayaz Sadiq about opposition members not receiving sufficient time to voice their opinions during the budget session. Dogar argued that opposition lawmakers were being denied adequate floor time to present their views.
In response, Speaker Sadiq noted that even when extra time had been granted previously, former members Shafqat Mahmood and Shireen Mazari had complained about insufficient speaking opportunities. He accused Dogar of reiterating old arguments and pointed out that the opposition had already been allocated double their usual speaking time, yet complaints persisted.
The session concluded without any major legislative advancement on the fiscal budget. Speaker Ayaz Sadiq dismissed opposition grievances regarding speech time restrictions, emphasizing that the opposition had been afforded ample opportunity to participate in the debate.
