Critics of the proposed relief measures warn that the government must exercise extreme caution regarding fiscal discipline. While supporting MSMEs is a popular political move, the national budget is already under significant pressure due to high debt levels and the need to fund essential public services. Any new financial aid programs must be carefully scrutinized to ensure they do not lead to unsustainable spending or exacerbate inflation, which would ultimately hurt the very businesses they are intended to help.
There is also skepticism regarding the implementation of large-scale education reforms. Past attempts to overhaul the national curriculum have often been slow, costly, and met with bureaucratic resistance. Critics argue that simply calling for more vocational training is not enough; the government must demonstrate how it will coordinate with industry partners to ensure these programs are actually effective and not just another layer of administrative spending. Without a clear, evidence-based roadmap, these reforms risk becoming expensive projects that fail to deliver measurable improvements in graduate employability.
Finally, some observers worry that focusing on new relief programs might distract from deeper structural issues, such as the need for comprehensive tax reform or the removal of inefficient subsidies. Relying on government handouts, even for small businesses, can create a culture of dependency rather than encouraging the innovation and self-sufficiency needed to compete globally. The government should prioritize long-term structural changes over short-term financial interventions that may provide only temporary relief while adding to the long-term fiscal burden.