From Azam Mohd
The 2027 budget raises a question Malaysians rarely ask: who bears responsibility when national promises reach citizens unevenly? The answer cannot rest with Putrajaya alone.
A budget becomes meaningful through state governments, local councils, schools, clinics and businesses. Malaysians should therefore judge this spending plan by whether public institutions can work together across administrative boundaries.
Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim tabled a RM460 billion federal budget on Oct 9. The finance ministry projects growth of 4.2% to 5.2% next year, while the fiscal deficit is expected to narrow to 3.3% of gross domestic product.
These forecasts are not guarantees. Their significance depends on what happens after Parliament approves expenditure and ministries begin implementation.
Consider the distance between a federal announcement and a household’s experience.
A parent may welcome education funding but still be confronted with an overcrowded classroom. A patient may hear about health allocations yet encounter long waiting times. A trader may qualify for financing but struggle with permits, infrastructure or inconsistent local enforcement.
Getting things done
None of these difficulties can be resolved by increasing appropriations alone. The missing ingredient is coordination.
Federal ministries design programmes, states control land decisions, and local authorities shape everyday business conditions. When their priorities diverge, public money can purchase activity without producing improvement.
The resulting frustration is often blamed entirely on whichever party governs nationally, although responsibility may be distributed across several institutions. This is particularly important for Sabah and Sarawak, where distance, infrastructure gaps and administrative arrangements complicate delivery. The same principle applies to rural districts in Peninsular Malaysia and densely populated urban neighbourhoods.
Equal allocations do not necessarily create equal access. A credible federal budget must recognise different costs and starting conditions without turning regional needs into partisan bargaining chips.
The 2027 budget also arrives amid uncertainty surrounding the Middle East conflict. Bank Negara Malaysia has announced additional financing support for smaller enterprises facing temporary cash flow pressures. Such measures can help firms survive disruption, but credit cannot repair a blocked supply route or eliminate higher transport costs. Businesses need agencies responsible for financing, logistics and trade facilitation to respond coherently together.
Delivering on promises
Malaysia, therefore, needs a delivery compact between federal and state institutions. For major programmes, the responsible ministry should identify the implementing agencies, milestones and obstacles. State governments should disclose the approvals and infrastructure commitments under their control. Local authorities should report service bottlenecks.
These arrangements would make responsibility visible without assigning every problem one political owner.
Parliament has an important role. Budget debates too often concentrate on announcements and partisan comparisons. Parliamentary committees should instead examine why comparable districts achieve different results with similar resources. Auditors can test whether procurement and implementation follow established rules, while elected representatives can question delays without alleging misconduct.
Poor performance warrants investigation; it is not, by itself, proof of corruption.
There are legitimate objections. Reporting can become bureaucratic, and states may resist federal conditions that intrude upon their constitutional responsibilities. The solution is not another elaborate national dashboard. It is a limited set of jointly agreed service standards, published responsibilities and independent verification, designed around programmes where fragmented authority obstructs delivery.
Out of the political fray
Political competition makes this more urgent. With the next general election approaching, governing parties will claim achievements while opponents highlight shortcomings. Both have legitimate democratic roles.
But citizens should be able to distinguish a policy that failed because of flawed design from one delayed by procurement, staffing, local approvals or unexpected external shocks. That distinction improves accountability rather than shielding ministers from criticism.
A useful starting point would be to select several high impact programmes spanning education, healthcare, small business support and regional connectivity. Publish who is responsible for each stage, invite state participation and review outcomes after implementation begins.
Where cooperation fails, disclose the disagreement and its consequences. Where it succeeds, retain the practice regardless of which coalition controls the relevant government.
The 2027 budget will ultimately reveal whether Malaysia can move beyond a culture in which announcing expenditure is treated as governing.
The country does not lack ambitious public promises. It needs institutions capable of delivering them together, especially when political loyalties differ. Fiscal credibility begins with sound numbers, but public confidence grows when responsibility is shared, visible and impossible to evade.
Azam Mohd is an FMT reader.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.