Region 
 

Islamabad

Bargaining Chip

At a time when Pakistan faces pressing economic and institutional challenges, the decision to expand the cabinet appears misaligned with the country’s needs.

By Shakeel Ahmed Shah | May 2025


On the eve of the National Assembly’s first anniversary in February 2023, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif made a decision that sparked widespread debate across political and economic spheres—expanding his cabinet by adding thirteen federal ministers, eleven ministers of state, and three advisers, bringing the total (with non-ministerial portfolios) more than 50. This move more than doubled the size of the federal cabinet, raising questions about its necessity and timing. The expansion is particularly perplexing given that the government had managed its first year with a significantly smaller team, nearly half the size of the current cabinet. What prompted the need for such a substantial expansion if the administration could function effectively with fewer ministers? Was this decision driven by governance needs, political exigencies, or other underlying factors?

At the core of any cabinet expansion lies the argument of governance efficiency. Proponents suggest that a larger cabinet allows for a more equitable distribution of responsibilities, enabling better oversight across ministries. However, Pakistan’s historical experience paints a different picture. Successive governments have frequently resorted to cabinet expansions not out of administrative necessity but as a tool for political bargaining. This pattern raises concerns about whether the recent expansion is more about political maneuvering than improving governance.

In this instance, the inclusion of ministers from allied parties such as the Balochistan Awami Party (BAP), Istehkam-e-Pakistan Party (IPP), and Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) suggests that political calculations rather than administrative needs may have driven the move. The timing of the expansion, coinciding with the government’s first anniversary, hints at an attempt to appease influential party members, accommodate coalition partners, and consolidate power within an increasingly fragmented political landscape. Pakistan’s governance model has long been held hostage to coalition politics, where ministerial appointments often serve as bargaining chips rather than mechanisms for enhancing governance. Prime Minister Sharif may have aimed to strengthen alliances with key stakeholders by enlarging his cabinet, ensuring their continued support for his government.

While the argument for an enlarged cabinet to improve governance holds some theoretical merit, the reality is often more complicated. An expanded cabinet inevitably places an additional financial burden on the national exchequer. Ministerial positions come with significant privileges—official residences, staff, security, travel allowances, and other perks—all funded by taxpayers. At a time when Pakistan is grappling with severe economic instability, rising inflation, and ongoing struggles to meet its International Monetary Fund (IMF) commitments, the decision to expand the cabinet sends a contradictory message. On one hand, the government preaches austerity, urging citizens to endure the hardships of economic reforms. On the other, it increases its own expenditures without clear justification. This raises a critical question: If the country can afford additional ministers, why can’t it afford to provide essential relief to its citizens?

The past year demonstrated that the government could function effectively with a smaller, more streamlined cabinet. Ministries operated, policies were formulated, and decisions were implemented without significant administrative bottlenecks—though legislative challenges persisted. The sudden need for expansion, therefore, contradicts the notion of efficiency. Historically, larger cabinets in Pakistan have often led to inefficiency rather than effectiveness. Bureaucratic red tape increases, decision-making slows down, and overlapping responsibilities create confusion rather than clarity.

Beyond the immediate political and financial implications, the cabinet expansion raises broader questions about governance priorities in Pakistan.

Moreover, little evidence suggests that increasing the number of ministers translates into better governance. Some of the most effective governments globally operate with lean cabinets, focusing on merit-based appointments rather than political accommodations. In contrast, Pakistan’s track record indicates that ministerial positions are often awarded based on loyalty rather than competence, further undermining institutional performance. This practice weakens governance and erodes public trust in the government’s ability to deliver.

Beyond the immediate political and financial implications, the cabinet expansion raises broader questions about governance priorities in Pakistan. While a legitimate case could be made for strengthening administrative oversight, the timing and scale of this move suggest a political rather than a functional rationale. At a time when the country is grappling with economic crises, institutional challenges, and public disillusionment, the decision to more than double the size of the federal cabinet appears unjustifiable. Citizens are increasingly frustrated with political maneuvering, prioritizing power consolidation over service delivery. The government’s focus on expanding the cabinet seems misaligned with public expectations, particularly when economic recovery, institutional reforms, and governance improvements should be the top priorities.

Furthermore, the expansion could backfire politically. Opposition parties have already seized upon it as a point of criticism, framing it as an example of government excess and mismanagement. The move risks alienating the public, who may view it as another instance of political elites prioritizing self-interest over national interest. In a country with low trust in political institutions, such decisions can further erode public confidence.

In conclusion, the expansion of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s cabinet raises fundamental questions about governance priorities in Pakistan. While the need for effective oversight and administrative efficiency is undeniable, the timing and scale of this move suggest that political considerations outweighed functional necessities. At a time when Pakistan faces pressing economic and institutional challenges, the decision to expand the cabinet appears misaligned with the country’s needs. Rather than increasing the government’s footprint, a more prudent approach would have been to streamline functions of the existing cabinet further, focus on efficiency rather than increasing quantity, and ensure that ministerial appointments were driven by dire need and merit rather than political convenience. This expansion is a stark reminder that power dynamics often take precedence over governance effectiveness in Pakistani politics, leaving citizens to bear the consequences.

Read More