Linking Debt to MBG, Expert: Fiscal Thinking Too Superficial
Jakarta (ANTARA) - Senior Analyst from the Indonesia Strategic and Economic Action Institution (ISEAI) Ronny P. Sasmita assesses that the thinking which links the rise in national debt to the MBG programme constitutes a fiscal approach that is too superficial and fails to understand the mechanisms of modern state budget management.
In a written statement issued by the Government Communication Agency of the Republic of Indonesia (Bakom RI) in Central Jakarta on Wednesday, he said that 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, national debt never stands alone to finance a single programme, but becomes part of the overall national financing strategy, from infrastructure, education, health, energy subsidies, social protection, to economic stabilisation,” said Ronny.
Based on data from the Directorate General of Financing and Risk Management (DJPPR), he continued, the central government’s debt was recorded at Rp9,920.42 trillion as of 31 March 2026. This figure is equivalent to 40.75 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
In terms of its composition, he said the debt consists of Government Securities amounting to Rp8,652.89 trillion or 87.22 percent and loans amounting to Rp1,267.52 trillion or 12.78 percent.
According to Ronny, debt realisation cannot be linked solely to one programme.
Therefore, according to him, stating that debt is rising due to the Free Nutritious Meals or MBG programme is an imprecise simplification academically.
“If such logic is applied, then all state programmes, from toll roads to civil servant salaries, could be accused as the single cause of debt. In reality, the national economy operates far more complexly than mere fiscal cocoklogi on social media,” he stated.
Ronny also emphasised that investment in child nutrition is one form of productive state expenditure in modern development theory.
This is because the quality of human resources becomes the main foundation of a country’s long-term productivity.
He said children experiencing stunting, protein deficiency, or chronic nutritional deficits have the potential for lower cognitive capacity and economic productivity as adults.
Ronny added that the greatest cost to a country is not feeding children, but allowing a generation to grow up with poor health and intelligence quality. This is because the impact will be far more expensive on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the future.
In addition to the nutritional aspect, he assessed that the MBG programme also has a multiplier effect on the agricultural, livestock, food SME, regional logistics, and local job creation sectors.
“State funds do not disappear, but circulate 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 the programme’s implementation, not question its existence.
“A healthy debate should not be about whether MBG is necessary, but how to ensure this programme is on target, efficient, and not leaky,” he said.