While the UN Global Compact Leaders Summit held a few days ago on June 24 tackled issues regarding the building of a new era of sustainability, we get our own youth to talk about sustaining Malaysia for years to come.  This discussion could not be timelier considering that recently the government put forth an idea to stop providing subsidies to the rakyat.

From fuel to food, there has been a proposal for the RM74 billion which the government spends on us annually, to be cut. This painful step is said to be necessary should we hope to solve our current debt of over RM300 billion - a huge liability which will prevent us from achieving sustainability of our country's future.

By Pauline Wong

What would you do with RM12,900?

Would you use that money to pay for the petrol in your little blue Kelisa as you zoom to classes? Or would you use that money to pay for sugar, flour, oil, rice and the essential student fare - Maggi?

That is the question now as Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, Datuk Seri Idris Jala, recently declared that if the subsidies of RM74 billion a year (which translates to RM12,900 per household) is not gradually cut, we will be bankrupt by 2019.

While pointing out that the necessary subsidy cuts would eventually save the government RM103 billion over the next five years, Idris is pushing for several cut backs on energy, education and healthcare - cutting the subsidies for petrol, electricity, essential foodstuff, public hospital fees and abolishing the free textbook schemes, among others. Those supporting the move have said that the current subsidy rate (which is at 54 per cent of our country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP)) is unsustainable in the long run and we will go the way of Greece if we do not cut subsidies now.

This would in turn see prices soar for much of the basic necessities abovementioned. Idris has also recommended handling cash rebates to consumers to offset this burden.

As this hot issue of tightening our purse strings is being debated here, concurrently, the United Nations (UN) Global Compact Leaders Summit 2010 is looking at the situation of our world's sustainability, which the UN says is at 'a critical juncture'.

Thus, in looking at ourselves and where we stand while also projecting Malaysia's future, we are actually in tandem with the world. However, is passing the expenses onto the rakyat, many of whom can hardly get by in an economy of ever rising prices - food, transport, tax, school fees, petrol hikes, sugar price increases etc, etc, etc - something sensible? Are we ready to be burdened with even higher price tags, and inundated with more massive bills? To continue living, is it absolutely necessary to cut off our limbs?

In a poll of among 200,000 Malaysians by the Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu), in which Idris is Chief Executive Officer, it was found that over 60 per cent was in favour of the cuts over the next three to five years.

Whatever the decision made by the adults; whatever is concluded in the end, do not doubt it for one minute that it will be this current generation of youths who will be inheriting the outcomes, good or bad. And this is exactly why our youths' voices must be heard as well

Subsidies VS Sustainability?

Victoria S.N., 22, Marcomm Executive

"I disagree completely with the idea of subsidy cuts. I believe it will only work as a temporary solution to our debt. The problem in the long run, is finding other ways to sustain our economy - the key word here is sustainability! Some have said that the subsidies are not sustainable, but abuse of funds and the 'money leakages' are not sustainable either!

"I remember reading somewhere that DAP Public Secretary and Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua said, in response to Idris, that subsidy cuts are not the only way to boost funds and help build a sustainable economy. 

"While Pua agrees that the cuts will help ease the debt, he believes that it is only a temporary balm to the wounds of wasteful expenditure and corruption. He also pointed out that Malaysia is currently ranked 47 out of 180 countries in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index. This is bad, especially when we are moving towards developed status.

"Transparency, transparency, transparency. Every Malaysian will keep reciting these words until the day we achieve it. I believe that to fix a problem, one must get to the root of it. Unfortunately these roots are tangled and the arms of the corrupted are long. It pains me as a Malaysian to see us in debt while little has been improved for the citizens."

"Other factors come to play too - despite our advances in education, nothing has stopped the brain drain of our best and brightest. I remember a report that over 305,000 Malaysians emigrated between 2008 and 2009, prompting Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin to urge our local talents to come back to our shores. It is also estimated (as of 2007) that some 30,000 of our 80,000 graduates are working overseas, despite having received scholarships."

"If we keep losing our talent, how will we sustain a bright future? For me, we (as a country) can do everything and anything - but whether we actually want to do is another matter. So as long as we keep ahead of countries we deem less fortunate than ourselves, I don't believe we'll ever decide to catch up to the rest of the world."

Jolene Sim Hui Ching, 20, budding entrepreneur and undergraduate

"Inflation and the inevitable price hike are what one expects as a result of the subsidy cuts.

"But I believe that cutting subsidies is inevitable and should be done in the long run. However, the phasing out of subsidies - if not done in a reasonable and transparent manner - could garner very negative reactions from the public. Cutbacks should be done slowly and as a long term solution or it could result in very adverse, even devastating effects."

 "Proper management of funds is also needed. The problem of debt is a global one - no country is ever free from debt. The States is over US$11 trillion in debt, for example, as a result of overspending by both the government and the people. So it is not an easy problem to solve. It's not a Malaysian problem, it's not even an American problem. It's a global economic problem. McKinsey & Company of the McKinsey Global Institute predicts six to seven years of deleveraging episodes for major economies globally with GDP contracting before expanding. Perhaps Malaysia's cut in subsidies is but a small tiny picture in the bigger puzzle?

"But education and medical subsidies should never be something we compromise. One deals with human capital development, and the other deals with human life. For the rest like tolls and fuel, I agree it's necessary though it would have significant impact as it increases daily expense and living costs."

Yong Ian, 22, executive

"There is no doubt that the subsidy cuts will provide an instant remedy to the debt situation but personally I believe it is not a long term solution. The people will face problems such as inflation and reduced spending power in the years to come - which will not aid the economy, nor make our ringgit sustainable in any way. The future ramifications of this short-term move are weighty issues and should not be considered lightly."

"Besides, the authorities are telling us why they are cutting the subsidies without coming out with efficient remedies to cure the possible effects. For example, if subsidies are lowered for petrol, road users might be forced to convert to public transport to avoid burning a hole in their pockets. But is our public transportation system truly efficient and capable of catering to this possible increased demand, or provide an extensive network?"

"But on that note, in the recently announced 10th Malaysia Plan (10MP), Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced that improving public transport efficiency is one of the top priorities, promising a high-capacity mass rapid transit system in Kuala Lumpur that will cover a 20 kilometre radius as well the full delivery of all 35 new four-coach train units."

"I believe accountability and transparency will go a long way to create a bright future for the young to inherit; I mean, financial dealings are not properly clarified (think RM 300 million spent on a roof that collapsed) - and when things go wrong, we get a full battle of finger-pointing going on, which frankly, doesn't really solve anything."

Subsidies: Temporary, but Necessary

Nazirul A., 22, student.

"I happen to agree with him (Idris). Even if we are not bankrupt by 2019, we would be so eventually if we continue to live on subsidies. A major bulk of the government subsidies is for oil and gas, and these resources are not limitless. A lot of our subsidies I read somewhere comes from Petronas: Directly, they subsidise oil to electric companies so that we are charged cheaper rates, indirectly Petronas, like any other company, pays the government in dividends and taxes and this is in turn used by the government to subsidise many things we have taken for granted throughout our lives.

"I have heard of our local reserves depleting and would be able to last only for a few years more. Irrespective of explorations abroad, if our consumption increases while no new wells are found or our barrels of reserve stay the same, we will have to start importing oil. Now, can you imagine what could happen then? That's why we need to start being more prudent in our spending, allow the government to introduce these subsidy cuts in a slow, gradual manner so as not to shock the nation, and learn to start living within our means."

"In the end, whether Malaysians like it or not, a future without subsidies is a reality they would have to face at some point or another."

"At the same time, while reduction in subsidies may not guarantee a sustainable economy in the future, it would help in weaning off Malaysians from their dependency on subsidies. We've enjoyed these benefits but it is true that it is not sustainable. In order to ensure that a sustainable economy exists for future generations, the government should focus on providing quality education to the people. If we look to our neighbour, Singapore, they are able to sustain their economy even without the resources we have simply because of their nation's level of education is high."

 "It is also really crucial for our present leaders to come up with a long-term national plan that can be adopted and well received by all Malaysians regardless of race, political orientation or socio-economic status. Healthy competition is always a good way to spur better performance from the rakyat."

Subsidies: Curing the Symptoms, not the Sickness

Lexuangzl Cheong, 20, student

"The subsidy cuts are a temporary relief to a permanent problem. I'm not saying that it wouldn't help; it would, but only for a short period of time. More important than cutting subsidies is to find out what exactly are the issues that are causing the debts, as well as to find other ways of paying the debts. To put it in simpler terms: If we do not find the hole in the tyre (debt) there's no point trying to pump more air into it. Doing so may temporarily fill up the tyre, but the tyre would still stay flat, because the hole is still there."

"So finding means and ways to sustain the economy should be the top priority. These subsidy cuts are a double-edged sword: It will alleviate the burden of debt temporarily, but will cause development to slow down as people struggle to deal with increased costs but not increased wages. In the years to come, chain effects like the weakening of our ringgit will also happen as development dips."

"We look to political leadership to foresee these problems and move swiftly to plan carefully before everything else. The people have a certain expectation of a country's political leadership but sometimes, the leaders just cannot perform to the people's expectations. The integrity in the political leadership may be compromised in certain circumstances too, at times. After all, the leaders are the ones who will decide what will happen to the money saved, should the subsidy cuts be implemented."

Letchumi L.M, 23, writer

"Saving the government money is great, but to what end? Does saving the government money equate saving the country money? Will the saved money really be put into good use? Corruption and misused funds can just set us back further.

"Still, I believe cutting back subsidies is a temporary but necessary solution. The long-term solution to get out of debt is to live within our means, and adopting sustainable living habits. I was reading an article on Cuba, and their people have to live with limited resources. Their purchasing power is greatly limited by the government, and their wages are really low. However, it is because of these restrictions that Cubans find all sorts of means to save, and also to make their stuff last longer (i.e. through recycling)."

"In our own country, the price hikes may result in us having to live less comfortably. However, I'm not sure if that's such a bad thing. Sustainable living and reducing consumption may finally make sense to a majority of Malaysians when limited resources are actually affecting their wallets."

Nevertheless, there are areas that must be improved before anything else.

"I think the government needs to drastically improve the public transportation system. That way, our consumption of petrol can be greatly reduced. In fact, if the government wants to cut subsidies on petrol, they should offer Malaysians an alternative - and the sad state of our public transport does not provide an option."

"As for taking away the support for education, one must remember that this subsidy helps the poor rise above the poverty line and give them a brighter future. To take away this subsidy would be unwise."

"In conclusion, there is more than meets the eye to the proposed subsidy cuts: While necessary, it is only going to be a brief respite to a long-lasting illness of debt and mismanagement of funds. The leaders of our country must take swift action to achieve three things: A sustainable economy, first-class education for a first-class workforce, and transparency to ensure that finances are not abused."