Expert Responds to Linking State Debt with MBG: Superficial Thinking!
Jakarta, 12 May 2026 - Economic observers assess that the notion linking the rise in state debt to the Free Nutritious Meals (MBG) programme represents a superficial fiscal thinking approach. This assessment fails to understand the mechanisms of modern state budget management.
This was at least affirmed by analyst Ronny P. Sasmita from the Indonesia Strategic and Economic Action Institution (ISEAI). According to him, in modern state budget governance, government debt is not used to finance a single specific programme, but rather forms part of the overall national financing strategy.
“In the structure of the modern state budget, state debt never stands alone to finance a single programme, but is part of the overall national financing strategy, from infrastructure, education, health, energy subsidies, social protection, to economic stabilisation,” said Ronny in his statement on Tuesday (13/5/2026).
Previously, based on data from the Directorate General of Financing and Risk Management (DJPPR), the central government’s debt was recorded at Rp9,920.42 trillion as of 31 March 2026. This figure is equivalent to 40.75% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
From its composition, the debt consists of Government Securities amounting to Rp8,652.89 trillion or 87.22%, and loans amounting to Rp1,267.52 trillion or 12.78%.
The realisation of debt, said Ronny, cannot be linked solely to one programme. Technocratically, Indonesia’s state budget structure uses a pooled financing mechanism, not project-based debt as understood by some of the public, so stating that debt is rising due to MBG is an imprecise simplification academically.
“If such logic is used, then all state programmes, from toll roads to civil servant salaries, could be accused as the single cause of debt. In fact, the national economy works far more complexly than mere fiscal cocoklogy on social media,” he said.
Ronny also emphasised that investment in child nutrition is one form of productive state expenditure. Especially within modern development theory.
According to him, the quality of human resources is the main foundation of a country’s long-term productivity. He stated that children experiencing stunting, protein deficiency, or chronic nutritional deficits have the potential for lower cognitive capacity and economic productivity as adults.
“The state is not spending money on lunch, but making biological and intellectual investments in the productive generation 15 to 20 years from now,” he explained.
Ronny added that the greatest cost to a country is not feeding children, but allowing a generation to grow with poor health and intelligence quality. Because the impact will be far more expensive on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the future.
In addition to the nutrition aspect, he assessed that the MBG programme also has a multiplier effect on the agriculture, livestock, food SMEs, and regional logistics sectors. Up to the creation of local job opportunities.
“State money does not disappear, but circulates in the domestic economy. In a global situation full of uncertainty, fiscal instruments like this also serve to maintain national consumption and strengthen domestic demand,” he added.
Therefore, Ronny believes that public debate should focus on the effectiveness of programme implementation, not questioning its existence.
“A healthy debate should not be about whether MBG is needed, but how to ensure this programme is on target, efficient, and not leaky,” he concluded.