The announcement by Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim to cut education subsidies for wealthy children in Budget 2025 to assist poorer groups appears reasonable as it indicates the government’s efforts to ensure that targeted subsidies reach those who are genuinely in need. Nevertheless, this proposal requires thorough guidelines on its implementation to prevent unnecessary conflicts and controversies from erupting in society.

The current education system does not categorise schools based on household income. Concerns grow as to how the Prime Minister intends to define and execute the subsidy withdrawal for families determined to be “ultra rich.” Should the government allocate water and electricity tariff reliefs based on the incomes of families with children in each school, and then determine the specific proportion of the expenses to be borne by the respective family and the government? How will the government identify which families are "ultra-rich" to revoke their subsidies?

In the Klang Valley, would a T20 household income of RM15,000 monthly be considered wealthy? If the mere T5 and T1 are referred to as the top ultra rich families, how many of these families enrol their children in schools receiving government subsidies, instead of international schools? Isn’t the government’s move thus a redundant exercise?

The essence of education should aim to bridge disparities among students. Since 2018, the Ministry of Education has moved away from classifying students based on grades, to prevent children from being labelled from an early age.

Hence, the premier’s proposal to classify subsidies based on family income is regressive. Using income to categorise students creates divisions between the 'wealthy' and the 'poor,' which thereby contradicts the spirit and essence of education.

While acknowledging the government's aspiration to assist vulnerable groups, the lack of details in yesterday’s announcement might foster resentment and 'class envy' sentiments. This could exacerbate social tensions and contravene the principle of education enabling inclusiveness.

We understand the government's challenges on financial allocation, but we must avoid adopting any anti-wealth sentiments in official discourse or policies. Such attitudes can skewer society’s view of wealth as a 'crime,' ultimately undermining social cohesion in the long run. The government wields a duty to promote fairness and justice, not to create new conflicts in society.

Saw Yee Fung
MCA Youth Secretary General

1 October 2024

-MCA Comm-