The 12th Malaysia Plan: A Painful Mirage?

The 12th Malaysia Plan has three main themes to help the nation attain high-income status.

The plan takes a “transformative” approach with three themes, four catalytic policy enablers and 14 game changers.

As defined by the World Bank, the high-income threshold as of 2020 was a gross national income (GNI) per capita of US$12,056 (RM50,472). Currently, Malaysia’s GNI per capita sits at RM42,503, with the 12MP aiming for this to be RM57,882 by 2025.

Other key targets include average annual GDP growth of 4.5% to 5.5% during the plan’s lifespan, an increase in average household income to RM10,000 a month, a narrowing of GDP-per-capita gap between the peninsula and East Malaysia and a slashing of greenhouse gas emissions.

The three main themes are resetting the economy, strengthening security and wellbeing and advancing sustainability. It has earmarked RM400 billion to fund policies serving these aspirations. The “catalytic policy enablers” and “game changers” are grouped under the themes. These refer to broad areas the government has targeted for improvement, such as the performance of SMEs, the healthcare system, poverty eradication efforts and talent development.

Among others, the government has agreed to approve several major programmes and projects to be implemented in the 12MP. “They are investment loan fund for research and development in aerospace, electrical and electronics; the establishment of the Centre of Excellence for Future Industry; intellectual property funds; and easy financing schemes for digitisation and technology adoption to support local companies in transitioning to advanced technology.”

Some of the ideas are new and will require new initiatives and projects, while others focus on strengthening existing policies or allocating additional funds for them.

In presenting the plan, Prime Minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob said Bumiputera-held shares and companies would be tradable only to other Bumiputeras in order to inch the equity ownership of the group towards 30%. Netizens were unimpressed with the new regulations and deemed it was going against Ismail Sabri’s own “Malaysian Family” concept. This is more of a “Malay Family” concept.

The plan has received its fair share of brickbats from the opposition, with a number of prominent MPs speaking against it.

Commenting on the equity policy, DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said he had fielded complaints from many Malays who had said it would shrink the demand for their shares and sink their value, which would hurt the very group the government was thinking of protecting.

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim took issue with the RM10,000 household income target, calling it “unrealistic” and suggesting the poverty rate be used as a more appropriate indicator of prosperity. Perhaps, he should look at the Gini coefficient on income distribution.

Damansara MP Tony Pua questioned how the plan could be effective given that it was “80% identical” to the 10th and 11th Malaysia Plans, which he said had failed to achieve their stated goals.

Outside of the government, the Galen Centre for Health and Social Policy expressed disappointment in the healthcare portion of the plan, saying that long standing issues had not been addressed with substance, or at all. The think tank said areas in need of improvement but left unaddressed in the plan include the management of non-communicable diseases like diabetes and cancer, healthcare financing, contract doctors and a lack of public sector specialists.

When you have wastage and self-indulgent expenses, why do you need a Plan? The Auditor General’s Report (2019) listed 10 failed projects:

1)      Quarters' maintenance in Putrajaya;

2)      Malaysia's electoral system; 

3)      mySalam scheme;

4)      Open Approved Permit management for vehicles;

5)      Malaysia My 2nd Home (MM2H) programme;

6)      Kuala Lumpur City Plan 2020;

7)      Pahang - Selangor Raw Water Transfer project;

8)      Langat 2 Water Treatment Plant (LRA2) project and Phase 1 Distribution System;

9)      Solid Waste and Public Cleansing management;

10)    Technical and Vocational Education and Training programme

 

Three projects were determined to have led to wastage of RM285.04 million in total. These comprised the uCustoms system involving RM272.99 million in losses; the Pahang-Selangor Raw Water Transfer project (RM7.16 million), and the Government Integrated Telecommunications Network (RM4.89 million).

 

There were also two instances of leakages totaling RM29.92 million involving the Open AP Vehicle management (RM28.06 million) and hospital medical equipment management (RM1.86 million).

 

The report also flagged three improper payments amounting to RM65.61 million, involving the uCustoms system (RM64.89 million), Solid Waste and Public Cleansing management (RM0.65 million), and the Government Integrated Telecommunications Network (RM0.07 million).

 

Four management weaknesses were identified in managing programmes and projects, namely weaknesses in contract enforcement and monitoring activities; delays in loan collection and arrears in revenue; delays in signing contracts, and weaknesses in planning and lack of methods in measuring the outcomes.

 

Then there is the RM30 million renovation cost for Seri Perdana. You could build a new house with that cost!

 

If we can’t rectify weaknesses and continue to perpetuate wastage, what’s the point of a Plan other than to enrich consultants? Grandiose statements and slogans are good in the Third Reich, not for Malaysia! And many countries including India have abandoned five year plans, so why do you need one if you have the “Shared Prosperity Vision”?

 

 

References:

The 12^th Malaysia Plan and what people think of it, Imran Ariff, October 1, 2021 (https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com)

 

High income nation by 2025, Bernama, September 28, 2021

 

“Malaysian Family hyprocrisy”: Netizens pan “racist” policy under 12^th Malaysia Plan, G Vinod, Focus Malaysia

 

AG Report: 10 projects failed to meet objectives, NST, September 28, 2021