By ASIF IQBAL
In a single stroke, the government raised the prices of petrol and diesel by Rs55 per litre. The decision may have taken only minutes to make, but its consequences will be felt by millions of people for months, perhaps years.
In Pakistan, this is hardly a new story. Every few months, the public is presented with a familiar explanation: global oil prices have increased, circumstances are extraordinary, geopolitical tensions are rising, and the economy is under pressure.
Yet the same question continues to linger and it now sounds more bitter than ever: when global prices fall, why does relief not reach the public with the same urgency?
The reality is that the price of petrol in Pakistan is not determined solely by the fluctuations of the international oil market. Each litre includes a range of charges customs duties, petroleum levy, climate levy, and the margins of oil companies and dealers. A significant portion of the final price, therefore, rests not on the cost of oil itself but on taxes imposed by the state.
Even so, when prices are raised, the move is described as a “difficult decision”.
But a fundamental question remains unanswered: why do these difficult decisions always seem to be difficult only for the public?
Rarely does one hear of a substantial reduction in government expenditures. There are no announcements about downsizing an oversized cabinet, limiting ministerial privileges, or curbing unnecessary official delegations and foreign trips.
State expenditures continue to grow, yet the demand for sacrifice is directed almost exclusively at ordinary citizens.
Petrol, Diesel Prices Up Rs55 per Litre Following Middle East Tensions
The price of petrol does not stop at the fuel tank of a vehicle. Once petrol becomes more expensive, transportation costs rise. When transportation becomes expensive, the prices of vegetables, flour, pulses and other daily necessities follow the same path.
In other words, an increase in fuel prices is rarely just about fuel; it often signals the beginning of a new wave of inflation.
What makes the situation even more puzzling is that, over the past 24 hours, government officials repeatedly assured the public that Pakistan possesses sufficient petroleum reserves for at least a month, and possibly up to six weeks. It was even suggested that supply to petrol pumps could be rationed if needed to protect these reserves.
If that is indeed the case, then why was such a sudden increase of Rs55 per litre deemed necessary?
Was the decision driven by unavoidable economic pressures, or was it simply another instance of shifting the burden of administrative shortcomings onto the public?
At its core, the issue is less about economics and more about priorities.
If, in every difficult moment, the government’s most immediate solution is to reach into the pockets of ordinary citizens, then it is reasonable to ask what purpose an expansive cabinet, numerous ministers, and their extensive privileges actually serve.
If official vehicles, elaborate protocols, foreign trips and other state-funded conveniences continue unabated, while the common citizen struggles without even modest relief, the growing distance between the state and its people becomes inevitable.
The fundamental responsibility of a state is to support its citizens in difficult times, not to repeatedly treat price increases as the easiest solution to every crisis.
Unfortunately, the picture often appears reversed.
Decisions are made in the corridors of power, but their burden falls squarely on those far removed from them.
That is precisely what has happened again.
The decision may have been made in a handful of rooms, but its cost will be paid by every citizen of the country.
Over time, a simple truth becomes increasingly clear: states are sustained not merely by decisions, but by a sense of fairness. When that fairness weakens, even necessary economic measures begin to feel like an unbearable burden.
If governments continue to transfer the weight of their failures onto ordinary people, the day will eventually come when those very people demand accountability.
History offers a simple lesson: decisions may be taken at the top, but their consequences are always felt at the bottom.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.