AS the nation walks out of the pain of the century on the double jeopardy that was Covid-19 and its resulting economic crisis that cost so many lives and livelihoods, the scenario for the coming year could not be more optimistic given the absolute lows that occurred in mid-2021.

The people are expecting Budget 2022 to put genuine effort toward installing more investments in their welfare, as well as rebuilding the economy and society from the ruins of the pandemic.

The general public would appreciate the government showing that they still care and recognise the hardships and sacrifices they had gone through.

Many, especially those from B40 and vulnerable communities, are probably still struggling to get by, would need assistance and social care to weather through their tricky situations.

Given that the pandemic would be under control, especially for most high-income countries, the global economy is expected to turn around and grow next year.

With more sectors expected to open up, including tourism, and demands for goods and services to increase, the government put an estimate that the Malaysian economy will double its GDP growth rate to 5.5-6.5% in 2022.

This is the basis for the government to expect collecting more revenue (about RM13 billion), and thus able to provide more budget expenditure for various programmes: RM13.9 billion and RM13.6 billion more for operating and development expenditure, respectively.

The Covid-19 Trust Fund, though the government has continued its investment given the fact that the pandemic is not yet over, had its budget allocation reduced RM16 billion for next year, due to the expectation that the requirement for funding would be much smaller as the pandemic is moving into the endemic phase.

The RM2 billion allocation for purchasing booster vaccine doses would be more than sufficient for that purpose. The public would mistakenly think that the budget allocation for Covid-19 comes directly from the Health Ministry.

In the budget speech, Finance Minister Tengku Zafrul Tengku Abdul Aziz intended to offer the impression that the government is being socially inclusive, touching upon almost every segment of society, demographic and regional groups, and economic sectors.

He also used internationally trendy buzzwords such as Industrial Revolution 4.0, carbon neutral, green-budgeting, 5G and etc. The fiscal policies tended to cater to B40 and rural communities as these demographics were frequently mentioned.

Despite the development expenditure being increased substantially (22% from 2021), surprisingly, there were few mentions about mega projects, apart from the already announced Pan-Borneo Highway and Central Spine Road.

Most projects mentioned are about maintenance, repair and upgrading from existing public infrastructure, including community amenities. The increasing public investments in the rural areas and East Malaysia are welcome, where the projects may provide an economic multiplier effect in the local region.

The finance minister also passionately talked about enabling mobile units of banks, clinics and vaccination centres, providing service access to certain demographics.

Some sceptics might put a politically partisan view on this, doubting the genuine intention of the efforts due to the widely expected general election next year. I, however, do think that the rural and indigenous people communities deserve much better attention from the federal government.

Bantuan Keluarga Malaysia (BKM) is a rebranding exercise of a popular monetary government aid programme, which seems like a norm with every change of federal government.

Few would expect the government to drop this programme or allocate anything less. The so-called increment in the pay-out to the beneficiaries is not substantial (certainly no ‘wow’ factor), and the fact that the government attempts to widen the base of beneficiaries spreads the resource too thin for the more needy households.

What is the real social impact of RM350 a year for the singles population, besides making them marginally happier with extra pocket money?

Despite the minister declaring that his approach is targeted assistance, it is only rhetoric, but still populist, in nature, as I do not see much of the specificity of distribution according to needs.

It is a waste of opportunity to utilise the RM8.2 billion resource efficiently to make a real impact on those households that actually need the benefits more than others. Nevertheless, the majority of the beneficiaries (9.6 million) would still be happy to see the money deposited in their bank accounts. Who wouldn’t?

Another populist measure is that the government decided to give away a free tablet each to all 600,000 B40 students currently in higher education institutions.

I recognise that there are genuine needs among the student group and they deserve help from the government. However, to provide to the students who already own one such device or laptop is also unnecessary and this presents another waste of precious resources.

While I appreciate the government programme to help unemployed people get back to work via the JaminKerja initiative, the name could not be more misleading.

The government’s incentive grants cover to 20-30% (general) and 30-40% (women, disabled, indigenous people and ex-convicts) of the wages for currently unemployed persons. Nothing is really “guaranteed” as the name suggests.

It would definitely help potential employers (especially those in SMEs) to cover the operating cost for expanding their workforce, and incentivise them to create more vacancies to tap into this opportunity.

However, the big caveat is that the employers would not be just reactive to the incentive and hire any unemployed person if the candidate is not suitable.

It is found that 59% and 65% of the total retrenchments in 2020 and 2021 (January-June) are considered skilled workers, and statistics point to the fact that about one third of workers experiencing loss of employment this year is between 25 and 34 years old.

The age range is typical for Malaysians to get married and start a new family. It would be interesting to see what vacancies are created, and how many of these would help unemployed youth.

Many also talk about the post-pandemic world without addressing pre-pandemic woes. This is especially true for public health.

Given that the public healthcare system is seriously challenged and weaknesses were exposed during the pandemic, it is a great disappointment to me that the government still does not prioritise investing in the public health sector.

The growth rate in the Health Ministry budget is the smallest since 2016, only 1.5% or RM468 Million in addition.

The increment for the ministry’s operating budget looks more like an annual adjustment for the emolument, but the government will scale down the development expenditure to the amount of RM338 million reduction.

This is baffling when the government is increasing the development expenditure in Budget 2022. Moreover, during the Covid-19 pandemic, we have seen how the capacity of public healthcare was overstretched and many areas are in need of expansion, upgrading, and maintenance.

The over-crowdedness in urban public hospitals in the pre-pandemic period is a known fact, and more emphasis on physical distancing standard operating procedure and pandemic-driven impoverishment will drive more healthcare demand back to the public health facilities.

So how could the government not invest more while expecting the administrators to manage it?

I also tend to agree with the Hartal Doktor Kontrak movement that the announcement in the budget speech to extend two years of contract to the health practitioners is another delay tactic.

Even though we will see an increase of 5,533 positions in various departments, there is still a long way to go towards absorbing the more than 10,000 contract doctors on the waiting list.

However, I applaud that the government is investing more substantially in public health programmes, such as for disease control, family health development, and health education.

I would expect the government to keep up with their word to strengthen public health in years to come.

In conclusion, Budget 2022 may have created some feel-good factors across the sectors and demographics, thanks to the masterfully crafted messaging and rhetoric in the speech.

There are, of course, some good, positive and innovative policies. The main issue is the creation of a real and sustainable social protection system and addressing various socioeconomic structural reforms.

Though this budget is the first after the adoption of the 12th Malaysia Plan, it leaves much to be desired towards achieving the goals stipulated in the grand blueprint document. – November 1, 2021.

* Lim Chee Han is a founding member of Agora Society and a policy researcher. He holds a PhD in infection biology from Hannover Medical School, Germany, and an MSc in immunology and BSc in biotechnology from Imperial College London. Health and socioeconomic policies are his concerns. He believes a nation can advance significantly if policymaking and research are taken seriously.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.