Claims that the 300 litre monthly quota under the Budi Madani RON 95 (Budi95) programme are not sufficient have been dismissed by prime minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who said that consumption data showed that most Malaysians use far less than the limit, the New Straits Times reports.
He said that criticism that the allocation was too low was not supported by real-world usage patterns recorded since the implementation of the programme, and that the average fuel consumption among users stood at less than 100 litres per month, while about 90% of Malaysians consume no more than 200 litres monthly, reiterating that indicated by Datuk Johan Mahmood Merican, the secretary-general of the treasury, ministry of finance, last week,
Anwar said claims about the limit not being enough are not borne out by the data. He added that the figures demonstrated that the targeted subsidy mechanism was calibrated to actual needs, rather than theoretical assumptions, and that the government continued to monitor usage closely.
He described Budi95 as a major administrative success, citing its scale and smooth execution since its introduction. He said that the system processes about 3.1 million transactions daily, a level that would normally pose significant operational challenges, but has instead functioned smoothly. “This is not a small number. Millions of transactions take place every day, yet the system is running in an orderly and efficient manner,” he stated.
The prime minister said that the approach had helped curb leakages associated with blanket fuel subsidies, while ensuring that government assistance reached those who genuinely needed it, without compromising economic stability.
Over 14.6 million Malaysians have enjoyed subsidised RON 95 petrol under the Budi95 programme as of February 11. The programme is expected to save the government at least RM2.5 billion this year, subject to movements in global crude oil prices and exchange rates.
Looking to sell your car? Sell it with Carro.
I have to agree with PMX on this. If you are driving big car with large tank, you can afford non-subsidize petrol after exhausted the 300 litre.
That’s the problem with our politicians. They don’t listen to the problem. 90% uses less than 200L per month. So it’s the 10% that’s complaining as they have to pay market price after 300L quota is used up. Itu pun tak faham?
those who complain not enough might be involved in smuggling
Petrol too cheap, traffic jam terrible. At the same time killing the EV push.
Definitely not enough since orangutan with mycard also needs to help orang asing pumps ron95
While many make noise, a transparent figure is working to fix our nation’s foundations. Saving Malaysia requires accountability, and seeing that transparency from the top brings confidence for our future.
depan macam tak kenal orang kerja sales. tak smp satu minggu dah 300L habis.
If you have a sales job, it’s only appropriate you pay market price and charge it as company expense. Whether you’re the managing director or the employee running the sales, the subsidized fuel is for personal use and not for business use. Understanding the difference helps.
u tiap2 hari naik thailand turun singapore ke, pakai perodua 300L can jalan sampai 4500km sebulan, setahun dh 54k km . if really x cukup just claim from company je
Pmx driving?
This scheme is the best compromise for Malaysians, who have long been used to unlimited subsidised fuel, even for T20 folks. I can say that most months I under use the subsidy.
Those who say it is not enough don’t understand that the issue isn’t about being enough; the issue is about cost to the government. The long game is people adjust their usage to their own budget. If 300 litres is not enough for you, change your behaviour.
This change could be how you travel (personal car, or public transport or car pool or a different mode) how far your travel using different modes (to the nearby shops using your bicycle or walking, to work on PT and outstation using personal car), how often you travel (every weekend outing or every other weekend outing)… you get the drift. The economic situation of has changed so you have to change to suit it.
Cukup cukup lah jadi manja. Hehehehe…
Billions spent on subsidizing cheap fuel. Shouldn’t we be asking if we have better use for that money? Like perhaps education, up skilling, research, venture financing for tech startups? Most advanced economies, and even some high growth developing countries tax their fuel. It encourages efficient use of an increasingly scares ,and environmentally damaging, resource, and hopefully deploy it to grow the important segments of what makes a country strong and prosperous.
A 400L consumption under the new structure is only RM 31.00 extra per month compared to the previous RM 2.05/Ltr. Cut down on cigarettes/alcohol/Starbucks/travel for lepak and that cost is recouped.
Cost of fuel incurred in the generation of revenue (e.g. sales travel) should be borne by the business in form of a petrol card or travel allowance. Businesses should not be profiteering off subsidized petrol meant for personal use and daily work commute in the first place.
How about the subpar diesel subsidy policy?
The diesel-petrol subsidy gap is a blatant double standard. For example, diesel fixed subsidy only eligible for M’sian with annual income below RM100k, merely a M40?
So why is an M40 earner being squeezed at the diesel pump while the wealthiest T15 are still filling up with subsidized RON 95?
Expecting people to ‘just switch’ to petrol cars they can’t afford shows a complete disconnect from the financial reality of the middle class.