The Benazir Income Support Programme, despite its intentions, has often been criticized for fostering dependency and for becoming a long-term financial burden on the country without producing meaningful economic progress rather than empowering people to become self-reliant. BISP often creates a cycle of dependency where beneficiaries rely on monthly handouts rather than pursuing education, skills, or employment. Many deserving families are left out while politically connected individuals exploit the system, raising serious concerns about transparency and fairness. The programme also fails to address the root causes of poverty—such as lack of job opportunities, poor education, and weak local economies as making it an unsustainable.

 Many argue that it encourages a culture of waiting for government assistance instead of developing skills or seeking employment. There are also concerns about political influence, misuse of funds, and insufficient checks to ensure that only deserving families benefit. As a result, the programme sometimes fails to create long-term, sustainable improvement in people’s lives and can burden the national budget without producing meaningful economic growth.

1. Creates Dependency Instead of Empowerment

•BISP encourages people to rely on government handouts rather than working or learning skills.

•It does not offer a path to self-reliance, only temporary relief.

2. Does Not Address Root Causes of Poverty

•Poverty exists due to lack of education, jobs, and skills—not due to lack of cash handouts.

•BISP fails to invest in long-term solutions that actually uplift communities.

3. Misuse, Political Bias, and Corruption

•Beneficiary lists are often influenced by political connections.

•Fake and duplicate entries waste millions.

•Lack of transparent oversight makes the entire system vulnerable to corruption.

4. Huge Burden on the National Budget

•Billions are spent every year without measurable progress.

•Money used on BISP could be redirected to schools, hospitals, or job creation, which have lasting economic benefits.

5. No Real Economic Impact

•Cash handouts do not stimulate sustainable economic growth.

•They temporarily ease financial pressure but do not help people generate income.

6. Discourages Skill Development

•When people receive income without effort, motivation to learn skills or work decreases.

•Generations get trapped in the cycle of dependency.

7. Inefficiency and Poor Targeting

•Many deserving families are left out while undeserving individuals benefit.

•Verification systems are weak and outdated.

8. Encourages a Culture of Entitlement

•People start expecting government aid instead of taking responsibility for their own economic progress.

•This mindset harms national productivity and work ethic.

Suggested Points for Improvement / Alternatives:

•Convert unconditional cash payments into conditional support, tied to education or skill training.

•Introduce nationwide vocational and technical training programmes.

•Launch micro-financing and small-enterprise support instead of permanent handouts.

•Enforce strict digital verification, audits, and transparency.

•Create a graduation system so families can move from aid→skills→jobs→independence.

              •Introduce strict transparency and accountability mechanisms to reduce political misuse.

•Shift from unconditional cash handouts to skill-based training and employment programmes.

            •Link assistance with education or vocational milestones (e.g., completing training, attending school).

•Encourage micro-finance or small-business support so families can build sustainable income.

•Implement digital monitoring systems to ensure only genuinely eligible individuals receive payments.

•Gradually transition beneficiaries from aid to self-reliance plans with clear timelines.

Tahmeed Sadiq

Birmingham – UK