The federal government is turning to private investors to fund essential infrastructure, including roads, hospitals, water schemes, and power projects, as public funds cover only a fraction of the country's requirements. According to the Privatisation Commission (PC), the federal development budget for this year is Rs1.126 trillion, while the stated need is Rs4.1 trillion.
To address this gap, the Privatisation Commission (Amendment) Bill, 2026, is currently before the National Assembly Standing Committee. The bill proposes merging the Public Private Partnership Authority (P3A) into the PC to create the Privatisation and Public Private Partnership Commission. The PC stated that this law would repeal the P3A Act, 2017, placing both privatisation and public-private partnership (PPP) deals under a single board and a single approval framework.
Economists noted that the merger is driven by the massive gap between funding and needs. They explained that PPPs allow private firms to finance, build, and operate projects while the state generally supports only the viability gap. They suggested this arrangement could stretch limited public money further, provided the contracts are sound.
For investors, the PC said the change is primarily about simplicity. Previously, investors had to deal with two boards, two approval processes, and two sets of advisers. The PC described the new setup as a "one window, one law and one accountable board." Business stakeholders claimed that moving between offices had been a hidden cost for investors and that a simpler track would help local companies participate rather than just large foreign ones.
The bill also aims to accelerate project delivery. The PC stated that every project would receive a fixed deadline and a dedicated team, while ready funds for project preparation, viability funding, and facilitation would remove common causes of delay. Four non-lapsable funds are proposed: privatisation, public contribution, viability gap, and PPP project development. Analysts noted that the current stop-start pattern of annual funding increases project costs, and the ability to carry forward unspent money could ease this.
