DECEMBER 19 — In the 1980s, Mahathir Mohamad targeted 70 million as the ideal population number for Malaysia. Whether they loved Mahathir or loved...erm, love, Malaysians went out — even out of their way — to make babies.

Malaysia’s population in 1985 was 15 million.

Now, 40 years later, there are 30 odd million of us after subtracting the official foreigner count.

Almost halfway there to 70 million, however, prevailing information suggests Malaysia may have hit peak population. The pendulum swings conspicuously in the other direction.

Malaysia’s total fertility rate (TFR) dipped to 1.6 in 2022. (2.1 is replacement level fertility, the rate to stay as is.)

It is not just Malaysia, others have it worse. Singapore expects last year’s TFR to stand at 0.97. At this rate, a more aggressive drop from the current 6 million population is expected.

How about Malaysia?

The Women’s ministry already postulated that both late nuptials and costs of living caused the malady.

Though, identifying the reasons are just starting points.

With a higher ratio of Malaysian women with higher education they’d develop ambitions and plans beyond changing nappies. They also set a higher bar for potential partners.

Love leading to partnerships was already complicated before modernity lent new complexities.

The reasons continue to be debated, but how should Malaysia react to the situation?

Come on now, do it!

Hectoring the population to do the government’s bidding is a popular choice. Expect those ads on TV.

Oh, no, the young are not tuned to terrestrial programming. Which leaves government physical access to schools, college campuses and government offices.

Not sure asking them to have larger families sooner, signals younger people to get on with it sooner.

Not sure asking civil servants who probably have the best TFR since they have the best benefits improves the situation.

Various governments like in Australia pay for babies — receding with each child by couple. Selangor already extends RM500 for each baby.

Together with longer maternity leave and increased childcare, there are incentives. There is one radical suggestion, allow unmarried women to register births with less hassle.

Removing religious taboos can assist people with alternative lifestyles to raise children, even if they do so in an unorthodox fashion.

Still, many initiatives to up the TFR in countries like China and Singapore have failed so far.

The pull factors fail to overcome the natural order of late marriages — if at all — and families due to economic upliftment are disinclined to have large families.

In many ways, countries which evolve societally and thrive economically, are victims of their own success. The TFRs naturally slide down as nations progress.

The setback will not stop governments from trying. Yet, at the same time, nations have to prepare their people for the demographic shifts.

To be blindsided today creates a dimmer future for toddlers today. Preparations begin with discussions.

Stay well, read well

The two central issues, education and healthcare, change radically.

For public schools, urban migration and private education surges, when mixed with smaller families means capacity issues. The politics to appease race and religion saddle us with parallel public school systems, many of them increasingly empty.

With multiplying variables bearing further on the matter, any persistent effort to reformat our public schools surely draws brickbats.

There’d be issues with nuclear families rearing socially awkward children and a host of psychological challenges, not best dealt by the school counsellor.

With mental wellness deteriorating in our schools, the government cannot refuse to prioritise mental care.

Medical health advances mixed with a high ratio of those above 65 is a recipe for rising costs.

People live longer and treatment options widen and work more often. Palliative care and prolonged aged home facilities prop up as new challenges.

Both schools and hospitals are set to cost even more.

It’s the third part which ultimately forces a change in attitudes in Malaysia.

With a shrunken working age segment, and overall cost increase in state sponsored childcare/schooling and medical care, the working age folks must bear higher taxes.

The days of low wage earners paying no income tax and only selected sales taxes are set to end.

When taxes are universal and broader, their burden to the taxpayer is far more visceral. They find taxes at every corner.

When voters pay more, they speak more frequently about their tax disgruntlement.

Which leads to their opinion about the spending. Because they can see where the tax ringgit goes and without much coaxing they’ll have things to say.

Demography ratios

One path to repopulate the country is to encourage citizens to reproduce. The more evident and effective way for countries is migration.

Less developed countries (LDC) lead the TFR charts. Poverty apparently attracts religions and pregnancies. These potential parents want to work in rapidly developing countries like Malaysia.

To the consternation of our politicians, a large number of them like to make Malaysia home too. This is the other path to repopulate. Singapore is adept in naturalising talent.

Malaysia traditionally deplores demographical race changes.

Even if traditional politicians today fear less about being swept by Chinese or Indian Malaysians today, the spectre of a whole coterie of Asean, South Asian and East Asians lining up for citizen papers is scary.

A huge policy decision will be upon the government of the day at that juncture. Does Malaysia stick with its strict rule on citizenship in order to preserve ethnic ratios, or let new arrivals carry our passport?

The whole matter of low TFR stockpiles questions and leaves most bereft of answers.

There’s no point looking for answers, for just like any couple trying to decide whether to have kids, an answer is not important.

The conversation is. In a roundabout way, the country needs to have a conversation to tackle low TFR with its leaders facilitating it.