The wasteful relocation of PCAA and PAA Headquarters to Islamabad

The Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority (PCAA) / Pakistan Airports Authority generates total gross annual receipts scaling around PKR 150 billion per annum across all operational and regulatory revenue streams. Revenue from Aeronautical Operations & Overflights driven by shifting international flight corridors, the authority earns roughly $800,000 per day (scaling near USD 24-25 million monthly) purely from international navigation and overflight charges paid in US dollars.  As reported in the media both PCAA and PAA is being shifted to Islamabad. The proposed shifting of the headquarters of both PAA and PCAA to Islamabad raises an even more disturbing question then splitting of CAA in 2023.Millions have already been spent on offices and infrastructure. Now those headquarters are to be shifted. What happens to the money already spent? Will new offices have to be constructed or rented? Will accommodation and relocation expenses be incurred? Will employees be compensated? Will additional infrastructure be required? If millions more are spent simply to move offices from one city to another, it would represent an extraordinary waste of public money. And there is a human dimension. Many employees have established their homes and family lives where they currently work. A compulsory transfer to Islamabad could result in resignations, reluctance to relocate and the loss of experienced personnel.

Before such a decision is implemented, the government should publish a complete cost-benefit analysis. The public deserves to know precisely how much the relocation will cost and what measurable benefit it will bring. Where Is the Accountability? Perhaps the most serious problem is the absence of a culture of accountability. In Pakistan, governments repeatedly restructure institutions. Departments are renamed, authorities are divided, new posts are created and new offices are established. Each time, the exercise is described as reform. But who returns after three years and asks: Did it work? Did expenditure fall? Did efficiency improve? Did public service improve? Did revenue increase? Were unnecessary posts abolished? Was the taxpayer better off? Too often, nobody asks. Instead, the new structure becomes permanent, the new posts become entrenched and another government eventually comes along with another “reform”. This is how small kingdoms are created within the state, each with its own hierarchy, privileges, vehicles, offices and administrative machinery-while accountability becomes increasingly diluted.

There should be a comprehensive and genuinely independent audit of both authorities. The audit should examine staff strength, senior positions, salaries, allowances, vehicles, procurement, contracts, office accommodation, consultants, administrative duplication and all major expenditures. There may well be considerable scope for reducing expenditure without affecting essential aviation operations. But an audit is meaningless if its findings are simply filed away. Where irregularities or waste are identified, responsibility must be fixed. Where money has been unnecessarily spent, recovery should be pursued wherever legally justified. Where posts are redundant, they should be abolished. And where systems are defective, they should be corrected. The larger question the CAA issue is only a symptom of a much larger problem. Pakistan cannot continue borrowing money on one side while creating new administrative expenditure on the other. We cannot repeatedly tell ordinary citizens to pay more taxes, higher electricity bills and increased charges while public institutions continue expanding their own costs. We cannot preach austerity to the poor while practicing extravagance within the state. The government must understand that every rupee it spends ultimately comes from the people directly through taxation or indirectly through borrowing that future generations will have to repay. Before creating a new authority, splitting an existing institution or shifting a headquarters, three questions should be mandatory: What problem are we solving? How much will it cost?What measurable improvement will the public receive? If these questions cannot be answered convincingly, the reform should not proceed. Pakistan does not need endless experimentation. It needs vision, continuity, efficiency, financial discipline and accountability. If an institution is functioning, generating substantial revenue and providing an essential national service, the first priority should be to make it more efficient not to dismantle it, duplicate its bureaucracy and burden the taxpayer with additional costs.

How long will this continue? Will there ever be an end to experimentation, or will we continue playing with the hard-earned taxes of an already overburdened and struggling population? The people of Pakistan deserve not another experiment, but responsible governance. Ultimately, abandoning a fully functional, architecturally sound, and purpose-built headquarters in Karachi to chase an expensive relocation to Islamabad is an imprudent use of public funds at a time of severe economic strain. This decision not only inflicts heavy, unnecessary costs involving millions of rupees on the national exchequer for temporary setups and new constructions, but it also disregards the deep-rooted operational history and logistical advantages that Karachi has historically provided to Pakistan’s aviation sector. Rather than draining resources on redundant administrative upheavals that uproot employees and disrupt institutional continuity, the government must prioritize fiscal responsibility by optimizing the magnificent infrastructure that already exists.

Aeronautical charges such as route navigation, landing, and housing fees constitute the vast majority of the revenue for both the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the Pakistan Airports Authority (PAA), flowing in automatically as a byproduct of national and international air traffic without requiring aggressive commercial intervention. Because this steady stream of income is generated with minimal operational effort, squandering millions of rupees on disruptive administrative exercises like relocating headquarters to Islamabad is entirely unjustified. Directing these funds toward vanity relocations rather than critical safety upgrades, technological advancements, or air traffic infrastructure represents a gross misallocation of resources. Instead of indulging in non-productive bureaucratic shuffling, authorities should focus on safeguarding existing infrastructure and managing these effortless revenues with fiscal discipline.