{"id":10244,"date":"2026-06-23T17:14:40","date_gmt":"2026-06-23T17:14:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hrcp-web.org\/hrcpweb\/?p=10244"},"modified":"2026-06-23T17:14:40","modified_gmt":"2026-06-23T17:14:40","slug":"2026-27-federal-budget-ignores-labour-and-white-collar-workers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hrcp-web.org\/hrcpweb\/2026-27-federal-budget-ignores-labour-and-white-collar-workers\/","title":{"rendered":"2026\/27 federal budget ignores labour and white-collar workers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Press release<\/p>\n

2026\/27 federal budget ignores labour and white-collar workers<\/strong><\/p>\n

23 June 2026, Lahore<\/em>. At a seminar hosted by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) earlier today, civil society representatives concluded that the 2026\/27 \u2018austerity\u2019 budget had systematically undermined low-income household welfare, labour protections, and gender equality.<\/p>\n

Moderating the seminar, economist Dr Fahd Ali observed that lower public spending on education, health, social protection, and nutrition would deepen existing inequalities. At the household level, he argued, changing consumption patterns and declining nutritional quality reflected growing economic distress. Moreover, at a time when the estimated living wage substantially exceeded the statutory minimum wage, stronger enforcement of labour protections was essential to ensuring an adequate standard of living.<\/p>\n

Economist Dr Hadia Majid argued that the budget\u2019s gender commitments appeared largely rhetorical, with responsibility for education, health and protection having been shifted almost deviously to the fiscally constrained provinces. While social protection allocations under BISP had increased, these transfers were not enough to meet people\u2019s basic nutritional needs. The tax relief measures announced were also unlikely to benefit most women, given low female participation in formal employment. Despite persistently poor outcomes in maternal health, child survival and girls\u2019 education, the budget had failed to address the structural barriers limiting women\u2019s economic participation.<\/p>\n

Labour leader and APTUF secretary general Rubina Jamil criticised the budget as prioritising expenditure that did little to address the needs of working people, while offering limited protections for those most vulnerable to economic insecurity. Developed without meaningful consultation with workers\u2019 representatives, she said that it lacked targeted measures for contract workers, domestic and home-based workers, workers in hazardous sectors, garment workers, agricultural workers, and pensioners. The burden of economic adjustment, she argued, fell disproportionately on those least able to absorb it, thereby reinforcing perceptions that the budget favoured economic elites over workers.<\/p>\n

Economist Dr Aqdas Afzal observed that despite rising remittances and headline poverty indicators, the budget reflected an economy that had not undergone meaningful structural reform. He said that continued reliance on indirect taxation, limited expansion of the tax base and fiscal consolidation amid rising hardship had placed disproportionate pressure on low-income households and salaried workers. At the same time, social protection was insufficient and unevenly targeted, with serious implications for households below the poverty line.<\/p>\n

Participants from civil society organisations and networks, including South Asia Partnership \u2013 Pakistan, Simorgh, the Women\u2019s Action Forum, the Aurat Foundation, and Joint Action Committee, as well as several labour federations and trade unions agreed that the economic stabilisation being touted by the government was being achieved at the cost of citizens\u2019 survival and social justice.<\/p>\n

Asad Iqbal Butt
\nChairperson<\/p>\n

A recording of the seminar is available here<\/span><\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>