LAST week’s kerfuffle over Menu Rahmah had hardly died down, only to be followed by another commotion.

On February 14th, Kapar MP Dr Halimah Ali criticised Menu Rahmah for its “low quality”, and worse, she reportedly said the affordable food could expose low-income groups to the dangers of “cancer, autoimmune diseases or autism”.

Menu Rahmah was launched by the Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Ministry on January 31 to tackle rising costs of living by providing wholesome meals to the B40 group and hardcore poor.

Under the scheme, more than 15,000 eateries across the country serve lunch or dinner sets at a fixed price of RM5. The meals comprise rice, chicken or fish, and vegetables with plain water.

The remark from Halimah, a medical doctor, about the “low-quality” menu drew flak from people such as Mydin owner Ameer Ali Mydin, who insisted that the low price does not mean sellers are giving consumers food of compromised quality.

Advocacy groups Autism Inclusiveness Direct Action Group and Autism Initiatives Malaysia-High also hit back at the Kapar MP for linking food quality to autism as her remarks could enhance stigma against autistic people. 

Malaysian Mental Health Association president Dr Andrew Mohanraj said low-cost meals provide basic nutrition to people who struggle to put food on the table.

This was followed by another heated exchange in the august house on February 20, when Halimah categorically denied she ever made the claim that the meal scheme could cause cancer. 

She even challenged her critics to check the Dewan Rakyat’s Hansard to prove her innocence, which her detractors as well as members of the media did. 

The transcript from the Hansard reveals the following, among others: 

“I have no problem with the term ‘rahmah’ or such but don’t let it reach a point where the poor B40 are given a low-quality food supply that may also cause them to be exposed to cancer, autoimmune diseases, autism and such.”

The Hansard established that Halimah did make the controversial statement. This put holes into her denial, which is concerning on two levels. 

First, as an opposition politician, the PAS lawmaker is indeed expected to be critical of the government of the day, but is also expected to provide constructive criticism. 

If there are weaknesses in this meal scheme, which is supposedly a temporary fix, it is the role of opposition lawmakers such as Halimah to offer ideas to help improve it. 

Or better still, they could suggest a better alternative for the benefit of the targeted groups. 

For opposition MPs to criticise for the sake of criticism is not what the electorate expects, especially if the criticism is laced with falsehoods. It’s abominable. 

Opposing the scheme in this manner may raise suspicion, rightly or wrongly, that there is a deliberate attempt to paint a negative picture of the meal scheme initiated by the unity government in its effort to help ease the economic problems of the B40 group and hardcore poor, many of whom are Malay (the opposition’s targeted groups). 

Second, it is indeed appalling that she, as a doctor, makes claims that are not based on scientific evidence or data. It borders on fear-mongering.

The issue emerged during a time when many of us were hoping we would never again see doctor-politicians making erroneous judgements. 

One case that comes to mind is when a doctor-politician prescribed drinking warm water as a cure for Covid-19, which triggered shock in the medical fraternity and society at large.

If a mistake was made, we would expect Halimah, or any politician for that matter, to own up and offer an apology.

Her denial is not regarded as resolve. It’s a weakness, really. – February 23, 2023.