Teachers Question BGN’s Efficiency Claims for Free Meal Program
Teachers Cast Doubt on BGN s Free – TEMPO.CO, Jakarta — The Association of Education and Teachers (P2G) has raised concerns about the National Nutrition Agency (BGN)’s assertions that it is efficiently managing the free nutritious meal (MBG) initiative. These doubts emerged following BGN’s recent proposal to set a budget cap of Rp270 trillion for 2027, which some educators argue undermines earlier promises of cost-saving and structural improvements. Despite claims of reviewing and refining the program, the P2G maintains that the budget figures suggest a lack of genuine commitment to evaluating the program’s effectiveness.
Leadership Discrepancy Sparks Debate
P2G’s Advocacy Director, Iman Zanatul Haeri, expressed skepticism about BGN’s ability to assess the MBG’s performance. In an interview on Sunday, June 21, 2026, Iman stated, “We have a reason to doubt that BGN is evaluating [the program].” This sentiment reflects a growing rift between the agency’s leadership and the education sector, which has long criticized the program’s financial management. According to Iman, the proposed budget contradicts the group’s ongoing legal challenge to the Constitutional Court (MK), which seeks to clarify how education funds are being allocated to support the MBG.
“This shows that BGN did not consider, did not listen, and did not have the capability for evaluation,” Iman added.
Iman emphasized that the current budget proposal fails to address the critics’ concerns about the program’s efficiency. He pointed out that the government has yet to provide a clear response to the arguments raised by educators and activists, who have long argued that MBG is diverting essential resources from core educational goals. “If the budget for quality education is cut, then the goals of the MBG will not be achieved,” he said, underscoring the belief that the program could be harming the overall educational landscape.
Contradictions in Policy Statements
The discrepancy between BGN’s public statements and its financial decisions has fueled further scrutiny. While the agency’s head, Nanik Sudaryati Deyang, previously pledged to achieve efficiency through measures such as reorganizing the program for remote and underdeveloped regions, the proposed Rp270 trillion budget for 2027 does not reflect this commitment. Instead, it includes an education function allocation of around Rp224 trillion, which exceeds the previous year’s figures.
Iman criticized this as a clear contradiction. “There is a mismatch between the promises made by BGN and the actual budgeting process,” he noted. He argued that the program’s expansion, rather than its optimization, is being prioritized. This has led to accusations that BGN is treating the MBG as a flagship initiative without fully considering its impact on other educational priorities.
Legal Challenge and Public Accountability
Iman’s remarks come amid P2G’s legal battle at the Constitutional Court, where the group is challenging the use of education funds for the MBG. The lawsuit highlights a fundamental issue: the government’s failure to distinguish between the educational function and the nutrition fulfillment program. “This proves that the government does not understand what the educational function nor what educational quality is,” Iman asserted.
The P2G’s argument centers on the belief that the MBG is being used as a tool to justify higher spending without addressing systemic inefficiencies. Iman believes that the program’s current structure does not align with the constitutional mandate to prioritize education quality. “The MBG is an enemy of education,” he said, adding that its continued funding without evaluation risks undermining the broader educational objectives.
Iman also called for transparency, urging the House of Representatives’ Commission IX to explain its stance on the budget allocation. The commission recently approved the discussion, and P2G argues that the public needs clarity on whether the program’s expansion is justified. “The DPR should clarify how it plans to balance education funding with the MBG’s costs,” he said, emphasizing the importance of public accountability in policy decisions.
Contextual Background and Broader Implications
Established as a key component of President Prabowo Subianto’s administration, the MBG program aims to provide nutritious meals to students nationwide. However, educators contend that the program’s financial model has not been optimized, leading to concerns about resource allocation. Iman highlighted that BGN’s previous cost-saving measures, such as halting meal distribution for certain groups and focusing on underdeveloped regions, have not translated into significant budget reductions. “The proposed funding fails to reflect these promises,” he stated.
The debate has intensified as the budget ceiling for 2027 approaches. Critics argue that the program’s high costs are not being justified by measurable improvements in student outcomes or educational quality. They stress that the MBG should be evaluated not just for its ability to provide meals but also for its role in supporting learning environments. “Efficiency is not just about cost-cutting; it’s about ensuring that every resource contributes to the program’s ultimate goal,” Iman explained.
BGN’s approach to the MBG has also drawn criticism for its perceived lack of consultation with stakeholders. While the agency claims to be streamlining the program, educators feel their input has been overlooked. Iman pointed out that the budget proposal, which allocates more funds to education than previous years, does not address the core issue of how these resources are being utilized. “The government is prioritizing quantity over quality,” he said, adding that this shift could compromise long-term educational reforms.
The controversy underscores a deeper divide over the role of the MBG in national education policy. Some view the program as a necessary investment in student well-being, while others see it as a financial burden that could detract from critical educational needs. Iman’s concerns align with broader critiques that the MBG has become a symbol of mismanagement rather than progress. “We need to understand the difference between feeding students and educating them,” he said, calling for a more integrated approach to policy implementation.
Public Awareness and Policy Reforms
As the budget debate progresses, P2G has called for greater public awareness about the implications of the MBG’s funding. The group argues that the program’s success should be measured against its ability to enhance educational quality, not merely its scale. Iman stressed that without proper evaluation, the MBG risks becoming a political project rather than a meaningful contribution to education.
Iman also referenced a recent fact-check article that addressed claims about the MBG’s status in June 2026, which highlighted the program’s continued presence despite allegations of inefficiency. This underscores the ongoing nature of the debate and the need for sustained scrutiny. “The public needs to know the truth about how their education funds are being used,” he said, urging transparency in the budgeting process.
In conclusion, the P2G’s criticisms reveal a growing mistrust in BGN’s ability to manage the MBG effectively. While the program remains a cornerstone of the administration’s agenda, its financial trajectory has sparked calls for a reevaluation of its priorities. Iman’s comments serve as a reminder that policy efficiency is not just about reducing costs but about ensuring that every investment aligns with the broader vision of educational development. As the 2027 budget takes shape, the debate over the MBG’s role in education is likely to continue, with educators demanding a more balanced approach to resource allocation.
Read: Fact Check: Did Prabowo Abolish the Free Nutritious Meal Program in June 2026?
Click here to get the latest news updates from Tempo on Google News
