Sarawak's Free Tertiary Education: A Scheme That Sounds Better Than It Works

BusinessToday

7 days ago

Dr. Syed Alwee Alsagoff
The Sarawak state government's recent approval of the Free Tertiary Education Scheme (FTES), debated in Dewan Undangan Negeri Sarawak and set to commence in 2026, deserves closer examination. Academic commentators caution that such schemes may, in certain conditions, undermine the very goals they seek to achieve.
Theoretical frameworks across disciplines warn against such approaches. Economic theory via Gary Becker's Human Capital demonstrates how removing price signals distorts investment decisions. Sociological analysis through Pierre Bourdieu's Cultural Capital shows free access benefits only the privileged. Social psychology's Leon Festinger's Cognitive Dissonance Theory explains why students undervalue cost-free education.
The fundamental flaw becomes apparent when examined through three critical pressure points. These interconnected challenges are funding sustainability, employment economies, and social outcomes. When any one area fails, the entire system breaks down.
The Funding and Quality Crisis
Free tertiary education begins with noble ideals. It may quickly collapse under financial strain. Universities become chronically underfunded – lecture halls overflow, equipment grows obsolete. Faculty burnout soars as universities compensate by slashing staff and morale – quality lies in ruins. Without proper funding, 'free' becomes a bargain at the cost of excellence.
Scotland's SNP policy cut per-student funding by 15% in a decade. France still struggles with Mitterrand's underfunded fiscal legacy – its 2014's dismal stats reported 30% on-time graduation, 44% first-year retention. Macron's recent €904M education budget cuts worsen overcrowded reality. Germany stumbled initially. Merkel's Higher Education Pact 2020 and Excellence Initiative had to pour billions into reforms. They reinstated Numerus Clausus restrictions.
Elite program admissions remain brutally competitive everywhere. Only 20% of qualified applicants secure UK medical school spots. 25% in Germany's Numerus Clausus. 5% of NEET-qualified candidates in India. These bottlenecks exist regardless of tuition fee schemes.
The verdict? Free tuition works only with massive, sustained investment and tough controls. Anything less fails students and economies alike.
Job Market Disconnect
Critics argued against Sri Lanka's Mahinda Rajapaksa-era 20% graduate unemployment. Egypt's Abdel Fattah el-Sisi's education expansion bred 'diploma mills.' Free tuition without market accountability fails. When neither students nor universities bear the cost of poor program choices, the result is identical. Protests over unemployable degrees. Systems that prioritise access over outcomes.
Today, Sarawak's economy depends heavily on oil, gas, and palm oil. It requires specific technical skills and entrepreneurial capabilities. While the FTES covers STEM, Law, Medical, Accounting, and Finance programs, this traditional academic focus may not align with future emerging economic needs. A free university system that channels students toward conventional programs today – rather than future growth sectors like digital technology, green energy, and advanced manufacturing – creates ill-equipped graduates tomorrow.
Social Mobility Failure
The most profound irony: poorly designed free education policies may increase inequality rather than reduce it. Chile's experience under Michelle Bachelet's expanded free higher education shows how middle-class families capture the greatest benefits. Working-class students continue facing barriers from living costs and cultural capital gaps.
Brazil shows similar patterns under Lula da Silva's expansion policies. Chronic underfunding creates a two- tier system. Wealthy families send children to expensive private schools for university preparation. They then capture most free public university places. Poor students miss out entirely.
In Sarawak, urban families in Kuching and Miri are better positioned to take advantage. They have superior secondary education preparation and stronger social networks. Rural and indigenous communities face different barriers that removing tuition fees doesn't address.
A Better Path
Some critics say Sarawak merely requires resolute governance to optimise implementation rather than pursuing ideologically-driven yet demonstrably ineffective strategies.
Rather than blanket free tuition, the focus should be on:
Enforcing PTPTN's income-contingent loans with proper graduate tracking
Targeted equity reforms – more scholarships for poor and rural B40 students
Performance-based funding that rewards universities for post-tertiary professional trajectories.
The debate isn't about ideals of access (this is unassailable) but implementation realities. A tuition-free degree is worthless if it doesn't open doors. Related