Fix Malaysia's Schools First: Why Malaysian Children Must Be the Priority

On 5 October 2026, Member of Parliament Teresa Kok expressed her full support for a proposal by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to allow refugee children to enrol in Malaysian government schools. According to her parliamentary speech, approximately 41,745 registered refugee children were not receiving formal education. I understand the humanitarian concerns behind this proposal, as education is essential for every child's development and future opportunities. However, understanding a humanitarian problem does not necessarily mean agreeing with every proposed solution. My concern is whether Malaysia should take on additional responsibilities when significant problems within its own education system remain unresolved.

Before discussing opportunities for refugee children, I believe our policymakers should examine the challenges faced by Malaysian families. Many parents are already struggling with education-related expenses, school accessibility and the quality of facilities available to their children. Some communities continue to face overcrowded classrooms, ageing infrastructure and limited educational resources. These are not imaginary concerns, nor are they problems that can be dismissed simply because the government has announced improvement programmes. Shouldn't our elected representatives focus on ensuring that Malaysian children receive the education they deserve before proposing to expand access to those outside the existing public school system?

Whenever I hear proposals about extending public resources to refugee communities, I cannot help thinking about the children in Sabah and Sarawak. These states are part of Malaysia, yet many rural communities still face serious educational disadvantages compared with more developed urban areas. Some schools have struggled with deteriorating buildings, inadequate facilities, unreliable utilities and geographical barriers that make access to education more difficult. Students in remote communities may have to overcome challenges that children in better-connected areas rarely experience. How can we discuss expanding access to government schools for refugees while Malaysian children in Sabah and Sarawak are still waiting for proper educational facilities?

These problems are supported by official reports and public statements, not merely personal observations. In July 2026, the Education Ministry reported that RM4.6 billion had been approved for the redevelopment of dilapidated schools in Sabah between 2023 and 2026, with projects at different stages of completion. In September 2026, Sarawak's Minister for Education, Innovation and Talent Development, Roland Sagah, continued to highlight unfinished school rehabilitation projects and the need for further funding. These ongoing efforts are important, but they also demonstrate the scale of the problems that remain. If we still have Malaysian children learning in schools that require urgent repairs, improving their learning conditions should remain one of the government's foremost priorities.

Public educational resources are not unlimited, and every policy decision involves financial and operational consequences. Classrooms, school buildings, teachers, teaching materials, maintenance budgets and educational support services all require proper funding and management. In my view, the resources currently available within Malaysia's public education system should be prioritised for Malaysian children rather than redirected to accommodate refugee enrolment. This is particularly important when existing resources are still insufficient to meet certain educational needs across the country. The government has a direct responsibility to ensure that its citizens can access a safe, functional and high-quality education system.

I find it difficult to accept proposals that could place additional pressure on public services without clear evidence that the system can accommodate them. Malaysian taxpayers contribute to the development and maintenance of public infrastructure, including schools that serve future generations of Malaysians. These contributions should translate into better classrooms, stronger educational programmes and improved opportunities for children throughout the country. I am not claiming that educating refugee children would automatically deprive Malaysian students of resources, but such a risk must be properly assessed rather than ignored. No Malaysian child should lose access to educational opportunities, facilities or support because policymakers have introduced additional commitments without adequate preparation and funding.

Another issue that deserves serious consideration is how the proposed enrolment would be distributed across Malaysia's education system. Our publicly supported school system includes Sekolah Kebangsaan (SK), Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina (SJKC) and Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Tamil (SJKT), each with different educational environments and capacity considerations. Teresa Kok's speech supported access to government schools without specifying which individual school streams would be involved. If this proposal is ever considered for implementation, I would question why ordinary national schools should be treated as a default option without a proper assessment of alternatives. Policymakers should examine the capacity of different school streams, including SJKC, rather than assume existing SK classrooms can simply accommodate more students.

At the same time, transferring the responsibility to SJKC or another school stream does not automatically solve the problem. These schools also have their own resource limitations, language requirements, teaching arrangements and responsibilities towards existing pupils. Any proposal would need to identify the schools involved, the number of additional students, the required funding and the measures needed to prevent overcrowding. It would also need to explain who would provide additional teachers, learning materials, language support and administrative resources. Without these details, a proposal that sounds compassionate in Parliament may create entirely different challenges for the schools expected to implement it.

I recognise that refugee children, including those from the Rohingya community, face difficult circumstances beyond their control. They deserve compassion, protection and opportunities to learn, regardless of the political circumstances that forced their families to flee. Nevertheless, I believe there must be a clear distinction between recognising a humanitarian need and expecting Malaysia's existing public education system to absorb the responsibility. Granting access to education does not automatically grant Malaysian citizenship, and it would be inaccurate to suggest otherwise. However, the proposed expansion of public school access still raises legitimate questions about national priorities, available resources and long-term financial commitments.

Malaysia should not have to choose between caring about humanitarian suffering and protecting the interests of its citizens. The two objectives can coexist when governments establish clear boundaries, realistic plans and appropriate funding arrangements. For example, UNHCR, international organisations and non-governmental organisations could work together to strengthen refugee learning centres and develop more sustainable educational programmes. This would allow refugee children to access learning opportunities while reducing the risk of placing additional pressure on already stretched public schools. Humanitarian assistance should be supported by properly identified resources, not by compromising educational improvements that Malaysian children are still waiting to receive.

What concerns me most is the possibility that policymakers may become enthusiastic about new humanitarian initiatives while unresolved domestic problems continue to receive insufficient attention. Across Malaysia, particularly in rural Sabah and Sarawak, families are still waiting for educational infrastructure and opportunities comparable to those available in better-developed areas. The government should be accelerating school repairs, improving basic facilities, strengthening teacher support and ensuring that children in remote communities are not disadvantaged by where they live. These commitments require consistent attention, sufficient funding and measurable results. It would be deeply unfair for Malaysian children to remain underserved while the government undertakes additional responsibilities without first demonstrating that existing needs are being adequately met.

My position is not that refugee children should be denied every opportunity to receive an education. Rather, I believe the burden of addressing their educational needs should not automatically fall on a public school system that still faces substantial infrastructure and resource challenges. Before supporting an expansion of enrolment, elected representatives should demand evidence of school capacity, dedicated additional funding and clear safeguards for Malaysian students. They should also explain how the proposal would affect long-term education planning and whether alternative learning arrangements could achieve similar humanitarian outcomes. Compassion should be accompanied by accountability, especially when public resources are involved.

To Teresa Kok and every policymaker supporting this proposal, I have one fundamental question: Have we done enough for our own children before asking the public education system to take on additional responsibilities? Have we adequately addressed the conditions of rural schools in Sabah and Sarawak, provided sufficient facilities for students and ensured that every Malaysian child has a fair opportunity to learn? Have we resolved the shortages, maintenance issues and accessibility problems that continue to affect communities across the country? If the answer to these questions remains incomplete, then our attention should remain firmly on fulfilling those responsibilities. Public policy should be guided not only by good intentions but also by practical priorities and the government's capacity to deliver.

I believe Malaysia can demonstrate compassion towards refugees without neglecting the needs of its own people. There is nothing unreasonable about demanding that Malaysian children receive priority in the allocation of educational resources funded to serve them. The government must ensure that humanitarian commitments do not undermine its responsibility to provide accessible, safe and quality education to Malaysian citizens. Before expanding our obligations, we must complete the work that remains unfinished at home. Do not allow the needs of Malaysian children to be sacrificed in the pursuit of helping others, especially when so many of our own students are still waiting for the basic facilities they deserve.