By Ahmad Faiz Yazid
The 13th Malaysia Plan (RMK-13) outlines ambitious targets for 2026–2030: **4.5–5.5% annual GDP growth and a fiscal deficit under 3% by 2030**. It packages RM430 billion in five-year development expenditure (about RM86 billion per year) to drive these goals. Yet history reminds us that even large plans can stumble. RMK-13’s success will hinge on rigorous execution and fiscal discipline. We must not let it become another “shelf document” of slogans and wish lists.
Emphasizing execution and fiscal discipline
A recurring concern is that Malaysia’s development blueprints often face a familiar hurdle: the implementation gaps. The RMK-13 itself warns that its effectiveness “will depend more on how the money is spent” than the budget size. In other words, pouring cash into projects is not enough; we need strict controls to ensure timely, cost-effective delivery.
This starts with reining in the ever-growing operating expenditure (OE) of government. Under RMK-13, operating costs (on wages, subsidies and debt servicing) are projected at a staggering RM1.81 trillion, much larger than the DE budget. If we fail to control these recurring expenses, even well-planned development spending cannot restore fiscal balance.
In fact, interest payments alone now consume about 15sen of every Ringgit of revenue. Such non-productive debt servicing crowds out funds for schools, hospitals and infrastructure. In practical terms, each additional Ringgit borrowed for debt repayment is a Ringgit not available for growth initiatives. Over time, this undermines Malaysia’s fiscal flexibility and risks crowding out investment.
To keep the debt path sustainable, RMK-13 must target a lower OE share of the budget. Any liberal subsidies or unchecked wage growth would dilute the gains from development projects. Hence, the plan’s goals like halving the deficit mandate tough measures on spending. We should insist on annual budget reviews that explicitly map every expenditure line to the plan’s targets, ensuring each Ringgit advances a strategic outcome.
History shows this is not a mere theory. Past auditor-general reports have exposed cost overruns and inefficiencies in state projects, with recent audits revealing irregularities in projects worth over RM48 billion. If RMK-13 is to deliver its promise of productivity boosts and better living standards, it must include value-for-money checks on its biggest programs.
For example, major infrastructure tenders and government-linked company ventures should be subject to rigorous audits and clear timelines. Transparent scorecards of progress (to be released each year) would keep implementation honest. In practice, this means linking the national budget to the plan’s priorities so that voters and legislators can see exactly how policy commitments are funded.
Beyond rhetoric: Linking plans to action
Another risk is that RMK-13 falls into the old ritual of planning without doing. In recent years, Malaysia’s Five-Year Plans have become overloaded with frameworks and buzzwords, what critics call “strategy soup”. Citizens outside the policy circles can barely recall the pillars of RMK-12 or its “17 Big Shifts” under the MADANI vision. This is not just an academic point: if people and even officials lose sight of the plan’s core messages, implementation inevitably suffers.
Therefore, RMK-13 must break this cycle. It should be treated as a living contract with the nation, not a decorative launch event. The plan’s authors (consist of many government officials) and cabinet must commit to institutional accountability. A first step would be to publish a frank “report card” on RMK-12, spelling out what policies worked, which fell short, and why. This would not only build trust but also guide better policy design.
Going forward, every ministry budget (from 2026 onward) should be tagged against the plan’s priorities, effectively making the budget a GPS to track the plan’s journey. In other words, spending decisions cannot be made in a vacuum: each ringgit should contribute to specific plan targets (as if raising exports, cutting poverty, improving human capital).
The plan’s presentation itself should become simpler and more results-focused. Instead of drowning readers in dozens of sub-themes, it is recommended to focus on four or five outcomes that matter most to Malaysians, such as wage growth, affordable energy, efficient public services, digital skills and effective social safety nets. Clear KPIs (key performance indicators) for each outcome would then be set and publicized. For instance, goals like “full employment by 2030” or “average household income of RM12,000” should have intermediate milestones and timelines, not be vague ambitions.
Other countries serve as proof of concept: South Korea runs a national dashboard tracking every agency’s five-year targets, while Indonesia’s planning agency links its development plan to real-time implementation updates. Malaysia can do the same. By reporting on progress quarterly or annually, perhaps via a user-friendly online portal, we turn the plan from a static document into an ongoing monitoring process. An empowered existing Economic Planning Unit under Ministry of Economy or secretariat should be charged with keeping this data updated and public.
Critically, citizen engagement must be built into RMK-13. The plan should launch with an online platform where any Malaysian can check progress, download data, and even give feedback. Such a portal would help move away from opaque decision-making. If people can see which projects are on schedule and ask questions (or flag issues), political leaders will feel more accountable.
Transparency breeds trust: a development plan becomes a genuine social contract with the rakyat, rather than an elite blueprint gathering dust.
Ahmad Faiz Yazid holds a Bachelor of Economics from Universiti Malaya and is currently a Graduate Executive Trainee at Permodalan Nasional Berhad (PNB).