When a National Day Address Sounds More Like an Economic Briefing

 Was this year’s National Day address simply ceremonial — or was it quietly outlining the economic road ahead? 

With Vision 2035 now less than a decade away, the message carried signals that many may have heard but few paused to unpack. Between talk of AI, food security, maritime logistics and entrepreneurship lies a deeper question: are we still imagining the future, or are we already being asked to deliver it? 

In this week’s KopiTalk reflection, I revisit the address — not to repeat what was said, but to explore what it may mean for businesses, investors and ordinary citizens watching the nation’s next chapter unfold.

 

 

By Malai Hassan Othman

Every National Day address offers its share of inspiration. This year's message, however, felt less like a ceremony and more like a quiet economic briefing to the nation. With Vision 2035 shifting from a distant aspiration to an approaching deadline, the language revealed a noticeable change in tone — fewer broad ideals, more signals about execution.

 

At the heart of the address was a reminder that economic diversification is no longer an abstract ambition. His Majesty stated that efforts to diversify the economy under the national Economic Blueprint "continue to be intensified," a phrase that may sound familiar but carries new weight when viewed against a shrinking timeline to 2035.

 

What stood out was not only what was said, but how the priorities were arranged. Maritime logistics, artificial intelligence infrastructure, food security cooperation, and eco-tourism were presented as an interconnected system rather than as isolated initiatives.

 

The development of a maritime ecosystem supporting transhipment activities, for instance, was framed as a move that could "reduce logistics costs and enhance the competitiveness of local businesses at the regional level."

 

For the business community, that single line reads less like rhetoric and more like a strategic invitation.

 

The reference to technology was equally deliberate. The address highlighted the country's focus on building AI-based data center capabilities, noting that such initiatives would "strengthen strategic technology development, ensure data security, and drive digital innovation."

 

In an era where nations compete not only on resources but on data sovereignty and digital infrastructure, the message to investors and young professionals alike was unmistakable: the economy Brunei wants to build will not resemble the one it inherited.

 

Food security, long a recurring national concern, was also reframed through regional cooperation. The proposed Brunei-Singapore Agri-Tech Food Zone was described as an effort that could "strengthen the food supply chain while generating local business and employment opportunities."

 

Between the lines, this suggests that resilience is now being pursued not just through domestic production but through strategic partnerships — a pragmatic recognition of how small economies survive in an increasingly uncertain global landscape.

 

Yet perhaps the most revealing part of the address was directed not at institutions but at individuals. In urging local entrepreneurs to "make the best use of these opportunities" and to work alongside the government to energise economic activity, the tone subtly shifted responsibility outward.

 

It was a reminder that policy alone cannot deliver transformation. Ecosystems require participation — from startups, SMEs, professionals, and investors willing to take calculated risks.

 

For many ordinary citizens, these economic signals may still feel distant from daily concerns about jobs, wages, and future security. But the emphasis on education reform and entrepreneurial skills hinted at a deeper recognition: the next phase of development will depend as much on mindset as on infrastructure. The call for young people to cultivate patriotism through active community engagement was not merely symbolic; it pointed toward a broader expectation that national progress will require collective ownership rather than passive observation.

 

Viewed as a whole, the address did not announce dramatic policy shifts. Instead, it mapped out a direction — one that links logistics, digital innovation, food resilience, and tourism into a single narrative of economic transformation. For investors watching quietly from the sidelines, the consistency of these priorities may matter more than any single project announcement. Stability, after all, is often conveyed through repetition.

 

The strongest message may therefore lie in what was implied rather than declared. Vision 2035 has long been described as a destination on the horizon. This year's address suggested something different: that the horizon is drawing closer, and the question facing the nation is no longer whether the vision is clear, but whether its people, institutions, and businesses can move fast enough to meet it.

 

If previous years invited the country to imagine what 2035 could look like, this message felt like a reminder that the countdown has already begun — and that progress, from this point forward, will be measured not by aspiration but by momentum.

 

And perhaps that is the quiet weight of this year's message — not a call to celebrate how far the nation has come, but a reminder, almost in passing, that the road ahead now asks for pace, partnership, and purpose in equal measure. (MHO/02/2026)

 

Di Antara Langit Terbelah dan Hati Manusia

Subuh Ramadan. Sebuah kelas kecil, tanpa sorakan, tanpa gimik — hanya Surah Al-Insyiqaq yang dibaca perlahan dan hati manusia yang diam-diam sedang diperbetulkan. Catatan ini bukan tentang kiamat yang jauh di hadapan, tetapi tentang bagaimana ayat-ayat itu menyentuh kehidupan hari ini — tentang usaha yang tidak selalu terlihat, fasa hidup yang sering disalah faham, dan ketenangan yang datang dalam diam. Mungkin kita tidak sedar, tetapi ada subuh tertentu yang mengubah cara kita melihat diri sendiri.

Sebuah Taddabur Subuh Ramadan | KopiTalk with MHO

Kelas taddabur awal pagi di bulan Ramadan selalu mempunyai suasana yang berbeza. Tidak banyak bicara yang berlebihan, tidak juga terlalu formal, tetapi cukup untuk membuatkan hati perlahan-lahan tenang sebelum hari bermula.

Dalam sesi Surah Al-Insyiqaq yang saya hadiri baru-baru ini, perbincangan berjalan sederhana — Ustad Abd Malik Al-Amin berkongsi, para peserta mendengar, dan ayat-ayat Al-Quran dibaca dengan nada yang tidak tergesa-gesa.

Tiada siapa yang cuba menjadi pakar; masing-masing datang dengan niat untuk memahami sedikit demi sedikit. Perbincangan bermula dengan gambaran langit yang terbelah, bumi yang patuh, dan fenomena kiamat yang sering dianggap jauh daripada kehidupan harian.

Namun ustad mengingatkan bahawa gambaran besar itu sebenarnya membawa mesej yang sangat dekat dengan diri manusia — bahawa “terbelah” bukan hanya berlaku pada langit, tetapi juga pada hati manusia yang kadang-kadang tidak selari antara apa yang diyakini dan apa yang diamalkan.

Suasana kelas itu terasa hidup kerana tafsir yang dibawa tidak meleret kepada teori yang sukar difahami. Ustad mengaitkan ayat-ayat awal surah dengan peringatan agar manusia tidak sombong, kerana jika langit sendiri tunduk kepada perintah Tuhan, maka manusia yang lemah ini tidak mempunyai alasan untuk merasa lebih tinggi daripada orang lain. Di bulan Ramadan, kata-kata seperti itu terasa lebih mudah diterima. Mungkin kerana perut puasa menjadikan hati lebih lembut, atau mungkin kerana waktu subuh adalah satu-satunya ruang di mana manusia belum sepenuhnya diserap oleh kesibukan dunia.

Apabila perbincangan bergerak kepada ayat yang menyebut bahawa manusia akan melalui tahap demi tahap kehidupan, suasana kelas menjadi lebih hening. Ada peserta yang sekadar mengangguk perlahan, ada yang menunduk membaca mushaf masing-masing. Ustaz mengaitkan perjalanan ini dengan sejarah dakwah Nabi Muhammad SAW — bagaimana pembinaan akidah di Mekah mendahului pembinaan masyarakat di Madinah. Analogi itu terasa dekat kerana Ramadan sendiri adalah perjalanan berlapis; pada awalnya kita mungkin sekadar menahan lapar dan dahaga, tetapi perlahan-lahan kita belajar tentang sabar, disiplin, dan akhirnya tentang makna taqwa.

Ayat keenam Surah Al-Insyiqaq yang menyebut tentang usaha manusia menuju Tuhan menjadi titik yang paling menyentuh dalam sesi tersebut. Ustad tidak menghuraikan dengan panjang lebar, tetapi cukup dengan satu peringatan bahawa setiap langkah kecil yang dilakukan dengan niat yang benar tidak pernah sia-sia.

Dalam dunia yang sering mengukur nilai manusia melalui pencapaian yang besar, ayat ini terasa seperti penawar. Ada yang datang ke kelas hanya untuk mendengar, ada yang mungkin belum mampu membaca dengan lancar, tetapi kehadiran mereka sendiri sudah menjadi satu bentuk usaha. Ramadan mengajar bahawa ibadah tidak semestinya besar di mata manusia; kadang-kadang ia hanyalah keberanian untuk bangun subuh dan duduk dalam lingkaran ilmu walaupun hati masih berat.

Perbincangan kemudian menyentuh pembahagian manusia di akhirat — mereka yang menerima kitab dengan tangan kanan dan mereka yang menerimanya dari belakang. Cara ustad menyampaikan tidak keras, sebaliknya seperti mengajak semua yang hadir untuk melihat diri sendiri tanpa menghukum orang lain.

Golongan yang digambarkan hidup gembira di dunia tetapi lupa akan pertemuan dengan Tuhan bukanlah kisah orang jauh; ia boleh menjadi refleksi kepada sesiapa sahaja yang terlalu tenggelam dalam kesenangan sementara.

Dalam suasana Ramadan, peringatan ini terasa lebih lembut kerana semua yang hadir datang dengan niat untuk memperbaiki diri, bukan untuk menilai siapa lebih baik atau lebih buruk.

Satu analogi yang dikongsikan pada penghujung kelas sangat sederhana tetapi meninggalkan kesan yang mendalam. Ustad menggambarkan bagaimana bakul yang dicelup air berulang kali akhirnya berubah warna. Begitulah hati manusia apabila terus membaca Al-Quran. Perubahan mungkin tidak terasa dalam sehari atau seminggu, tetapi bacaan yang konsisten perlahan-lahan membersihkan jiwa. Ada peserta yang tersenyum kecil mendengar analogi itu, mungkin kerana ia begitu dekat dengan pengalaman harian — sesuatu yang mudah difahami tanpa perlu penjelasan panjang.

Apabila kelas berakhir, tiada tepukan atau penutup yang dramatik. Para peserta hanya bangun perlahan, menutup mushaf, dan bersalaman sesama sendiri sebelum bersurai untuk memulakan hari. Namun Surah Al-Insyiqaq yang dibincangkan pada subuh Ramadan itu seolah-olah masih bergema — mengingatkan bahawa kehidupan manusia memang berfasa-fasa, bahawa usaha yang kecil tetap dihargai, dan bahawa hidayah boleh datang walaupun dalam keadaan yang paling sunyi.

Dalam kesederhanaan kelas tersebut, saya melihat bagaimana ayat-ayat Al-Quran tidak hanya dibaca sebagai teks, tetapi dihidupkan melalui pengalaman — satu proses yang mungkin perlahan, tetapi sangat nyata bagi mereka yang terus hadir dan terus belajar.

Mungkin begitulah subuh Ramadan bekerja dalam diam, membetulkan hati tanpa banyak suara. (MHO/02/2026)

 

 

Between Survival and Dignity: A Quiet Reflection on Work in Brunei Today

    

We began with a simple question about minimum wage.

Along the way, the conversation shifted — from survival, to dignity… and finally to meaning.

Perhaps the real issue was never only about pay, but about how we experience work itself.

☕ KopiTalk with MHO

Minimum Pay, Meaningful Work — Part Three

When Work Becomes Meaningful

In the days after Parts One and Two were shared, several readers reached out — each offering a different perspective. One reminded me of a verse describing how human beings can feel restless in hardship and guarded in comfort, suggesting that dissatisfaction may sometimes stem from within. Another pointed to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, framing our struggle as a journey from survival toward purpose. Yet another sent a detailed pay-structure proposal, reflecting a deep desire for systems that feel predictable and fair. Taken together, these voices reveal something larger than a debate about minimum wage. They show that beneath our conversations about numbers lies a more fundamental question: how do we balance structure, expectation, and meaning in the work we do — and in the lives we are trying to build?

 

It made me pause and reflect on something we rarely say openly. Perhaps our national conversation about wages has never really been about a single number. Some look for formulas because they promise certainty. Others search for spiritual meaning because they sense an emptiness beyond material gain. And many simply want a structure that feels fair — a pathway where effort, skill, and experience translate into progress that people can understand. When these expectations collide, frustration grows. The debate then stops being about minimum wage alone and begins to reveal a deeper unease about how we define success, security, and dignity in a changing Brunei.

 

If Part One asked whether minimum pay represents survival or dignity, and Part Two explored the uncomfortable gap between policy and lived reality, then Part Three must confront a more subtle question: what makes work meaningful in the first place?

 

For some, meaningful work begins with stability — a predictable income, reasonable hours, and the confidence that tomorrow will not suddenly erase today's effort. For others, it lies in recognition — the sense that skills and education are valued rather than underutilized. And for many younger workers navigating a shifting job market, meaning is often tied to growth: the belief that work is not only a means to survive but a pathway toward personal development.

 

Another reader introduced a perspective that deserves careful reflection: meaningful work does not grow from wages alone but from the strength of leadership surrounding it. Economists sometimes refer to this as managerial capital — the ability of managers and mentors to translate talent into progress. 

 

Many organizations today have capable people and clear policies, yet struggle when leadership development does not keep pace with workforce expectations.  

 

This may also explain why some graduates feel underutilized — not because opportunity is absent, but because guidance and developmental mentorship do not always keep pace with education itself. 

 

The difference between a job that feels stagnant and one that feels purposeful often lies in whether employees are guided, trusted, and developed by those entrusted to lead them. When managerial capital deepens, even ordinary roles can become meaningful journeys; when it is lacking, even structured systems can quietly lose their meaning.

 

A reader's reference to Maslow's hierarchy offered a useful reminder: human motivation often moves in layers. Survival may come first, but people rarely stop there. Once stability is within reach, the search quietly shifts toward belonging, respect, and purpose. Policies can secure the foundation, but meaning emerges only when individuals feel safe enough to invest themselves fully in what they do.

 

Another perspective introduced a more introspective lens — the reminder that human beings can be anxious in hardship and guarded in comfort. It invites a humbling question: are some of our frustrations shaped not only by external structures but also by internal expectations? In a society where aspiration grows alongside opportunity, the line between need and desire can become blurred. Recognizing this does not dismiss structural concerns; rather, it enriches the conversation. Meaningful work may require both fair systems and self-awareness — a balance between what society provides and how individuals respond to it.

 

At the same time, the suggestion that wage structures should feel more proportionate and transparent reflects a longing for clarity. People do not only seek higher pay; they seek pathways that make sense. When progression appears uncertain or disconnected from effort, work can begin to feel transactional rather than purposeful. Perhaps this is where many modern systems struggle — they measure performance efficiently, yet sometimes fail to communicate meaning clearly. This is not simply an economic issue; it is a question of trust. Systems that feel predictable encourage patience, while those that appear arbitrary can quietly erode morale.

 

Perhaps this is where the trilogy finds its most honest tension. Minimum wage debates often begin with numbers, but they rarely end there. Beneath the discussions about inflation, productivity, or grading structures lies a deeper search for dignity — not only in how much people earn but in how they are seen, supported, and allowed to grow.

 

In many ways, Brunei stands at a crossroads familiar to societies navigating change. Economic diversification, evolving expectations among younger generations, and the realities of a globalised workforce all shape how people understand work today. The question is no longer simply whether jobs exist but whether those jobs create a sense of purpose strong enough to sustain both individual aspiration and collective stability.

 

Meaningful work, then, may not be a fixed destination. It is a relationship between survival and aspiration, structure and flexibility, material reality and inner contentment. Policies can set baselines, institutions can design pathways, and communities can nurture values. But meaning itself often emerges quietly, at the intersection of all three.

 

As this reflection comes to a close, I return to the original conversation that sparked the trilogy — a simple question about minimum wage that slowly unfolded into something far more human. Perhaps the real measure of progress is not whether we agree on a number but whether we continue to ask honest questions about how people live, grow, and find dignity through their work. Because in the end, the debate about minimum pay was never only about wages; it was about the quiet hope that work might offer more than survival — that it can become a space where dignity takes root, purpose deepens, and the meaning we seek is built together, one thoughtful conversation at a time. (MHO/02/2026)

 

 

Episode 13 — Titih dan Lutanan: The Quiet Path to Itqān

  

Some people work fast.
Some people work hard.
But our orang lama used to say — buat kerja mesti titih dan lutanan.

Somewhere between rushing for deadlines and chasing KPIs, many of us forgot what that really means.

This episode is not about productivity hacks.
It is about something quieter — the difference between being busy… and doing work with itqān, the kind of excellence that nobody may see, but Allah always does.

If Episode 10 made us reflect on tatfīf,
Episode 11 reminded us about amanah,
and Episode 12 spoke about heavy hearts —

Episode 13 asks a simple question:

Are we working merely to finish…
or working with care that leaves a trace of barakah?

 

☕ KopiTalk with MHO | MIB Management 101

There is an old Brunei phrase I heard many times growing up.

“Buat kerja mesti titih dan lutanan.”

 

Back then, I thought it simply meant rajin — work hard, don’t be lazy, jangan duduk diam.

 

The elders never explained it like a theory. They just lived it.

They repaired things carefully. They finished tasks properly. They didn’t rush just to say the job was done.

 

Only much later did I begin to see something deeper.

 

What our orang lama called titih dan lutanan carries a spirit very close to what Islam calls itqān — doing work with care, precision, and sincerity, even when nobody is watching.

 

And maybe, somewhere along the way, we forgot that quiet habit.

 

These days, many workplaces feel busy. Almost restless. But not always moving forward.

 

People are busy. Very busy.

Emails fly. Meetings happen. Files move from one table to another.

 

Yet something feels… unfinished.

 

Not wrong enough to cause a scandal.

Not broken enough to stop operations.

 

Just slightly off.

 

Like a door that closes, but never fully locks.

 

We notice it when reports are rushed because deadlines matter more than depth.

When tasks are completed just enough to avoid complaints.

When people say quietly, “asal siap sudah.”

 

Nobody openly rejects excellence.

 

But slowly — almost without realising — excellence becomes optional.

 

And that is where the difference between lutanan and itqān begins to show.

 

A person may be lutanan — always moving, always doing something, never sitting still.

 

But itqān asks a gentler question:

Not just how much did you do — but how well did you do it?

 

Islam teaches that Allah loves when a believer performs work with excellence — not perfectionism that suffocates the soul, but sincerity that honours the amanah entrusted to us.

 

Itqān is not about impressing supervisors.

It is about respecting the work itself.

 

I remember observing two types of workers during my early years.

 

One moved quickly, always appearing busy. Papers everywhere. Phone calls are non-stop.

The other worked quietly. Slower at times. But when his work reached your table, it rarely came back for correction.

 

The first looked impressive.

 

The second built trust.

 

And over time, people began to realise that real strength in an organisation is not noise — it is reliability.

 

Today, many offices feel exhausted not because work is hard, but because work keeps repeating.

 

Fixing the same mistakes.

Revisiting the same issues.

Correcting what should have been done properly the first time.

 

Maybe this is not only a system problem.

 

Maybe it is a loss of itqān.

 

Our Brunei culture once understood this quietly.

 

Titih means measured, careful, not careless.

 

Lutanan means industrious, persistent — always moving with purpose.

 

Put together, they describe a person who works not only with effort, but with conscience.

 

And when I look back, I realise our elders were not talking about productivity.

They were talking about character.

 

They knew that a person who works titih dan lutanan will, over time, produce work that carries itqān — mastery shaped by sincerity.

 

But modern workplaces often reward speed more than depth.

 

We praise quick results.

We celebrate fast turnaround.

We measure output, but rarely measure care.

 

So people adapt.

 

They learn to finish quickly instead of finishing well.

 

They learn to look busy instead of being meaningful.

 

They learn that perfection is not required — only compliance.

 

And slowly, quietly, the soul of work becomes thinner.

 

No one notices immediately.

 

But over years, organisations begin to feel heavy.

 

Not because people lack skills.

 

But because work begins to lose barakah.

 

Itqān does not demand that we become flawless.

 

It asks something simpler:

Do your work in a way that you would not feel ashamed if Allah saw the smallest detail.

 

Because He does.

 

That awareness transforms even ordinary tasks.

 

Writing an email becomes an act of amanah.

Serving a customer becomes an act of ihsan.

Reviewing a document becomes a form of adl.

 

And suddenly, work is no longer just labour.

 

It becomes ibadah.

 

In a Negara Zikir, this understanding matters deeply.

 

We are not only building efficient institutions.

 

We are shaping hearts that carry responsibility with dignity.

 

Titih and lutanan remind us that excellence is not foreign to our culture.

 

It has always been here — in our language, in our elders, in the quiet way people once approached their duties.

 

Maybe we do not need new slogans.

 

Maybe we only need to remember what we already knew.

 

Work carefully.

Work sincerely.

Work as if it matters — because it does.

 

Perhaps the real question for us today is simple: Are we just busy?

 

Or are we building something that carries the spirit of itqān?

 

Because when effort becomes titih, and character becomes lutanan, excellence stops being a target.

 

It becomes a way of living.

 

KopiTalk with MHO — reflections brewed gently, with honesty and heart.

 

Between Survival and Dignity: A Quiet Reflection on Work in Brunei Today Minimum Pay, Meaningful Work — Part Two

    

We often debate minimum wage through numbers — inflation, formulas, and economic models. But what if the real question is not how much people earn… but how they experience work itself?

Curious to hear your thoughts.

 

☕ KopiTalk with MHO

The Gap Nobody Wants to Define

After Part One was shared, a reader reached out to suggest that discussions about minimum wage should be closely aligned with inflation — that wages ought to move symmetrically with economic indicators that rise and fall beyond our control. 

It was a thoughtful observation, and one that reflects how many of us instinctively approach economic questions. When conversations about work become uneasy, we often return to numbers — inflation rates, market forces, productivity curves — because they feel measurable and reassuring.

And yet, the comment stayed with me for a different reason.

It reminded me how quickly our national conversations shift toward formulas, as if the right equation might finally settle the question of fairness. Inflation is certainly part of the equation. But sometimes our discussions focus so heavily on the mechanics of adjustment that we overlook a deeper reality — how people actually live within those numbers, and how they experience work beyond what an index can capture.

In Part One, I reflected on the idea that minimum pay often represents survival rather than dignity. The policy itself exists, and its intention is clear. But once we move beyond the existence of a wage floor, another question quietly emerges: if minimum wage is meant to prevent the worst outcomes, what then defines a meaningful livelihood?

This is where the conversation becomes less comfortable.

Because the gap between a policy figure and a lived reality is not always easy to quantify. Some will argue that wages should follow inflation closely, rising with the cost of living. Others will point to economic sustainability, employer capacity, or external pressures that shape the labour market. All of these perspectives have merit. 

Yet perhaps our discussions have become so accustomed to debating adjustments at the margins that we hesitate to ask whether the structure of work itself has changed beneath us. 

Perhaps the real challenge is that none of them fully explains why many workers — especially younger graduates — feel caught between employment and uncertainty, working hard yet unsure whether their efforts are leading toward stability or simply maintaining momentum.

I was recently reminded of a young graduate who quietly shared his frustration after years of study, only to find himself accepting work far outside his field simply to remain employed. 

 

The job paid enough to survive, but not enough to plan a future. He did not complain about working hard — he worried about standing still. His experience is not unique. 

 

It reflects a growing undercurrent of underemployment among graduates, where qualifications rise faster than opportunities that match their skills or aspirations.

Perhaps this is where many of our labour conversations become difficult. We speak openly about wage figures, inflation and policy adjustments, yet are more cautious about the structural mismatch between education, expectations and the kinds of jobs our economy is currently able to absorb. Numbers help us understand the surface of the issue, but they do not always reveal how people feel when the path forward seems uncertain.

 

And maybe that is why the question raised in Part One continues to echo in a different form: not simply what the minimum should be, but whether the gap between survival and dignity is widening quietly beneath the numbers we debate so confidently — and whether meaningful work is becoming the next question we can no longer avoid. (MHO/02/2026)

 

 

Between Survival and Dignity: A Quiet Reflection on Work in Brunei Today

Someone asked me a simple question about minimum wage.

The more I thought about it, the more it became a question about dignity — not just numbers.

Part One of a quiet reflection on work in Brunei today.

☕ KopiTalk with MHO

Minimum Pay, Meaningful Work — Part One
Minimum Pay: Survival, Not Dignity

Recently, someone asked me — quite candidly — for my opinion on the issue of minimum wage in Brunei.

It did not begin in a seminar room, nor in a policy paper. It began with a forwarded message, a simple exchange among friends who were trying to make sense of a complicated reality. The questions were disarmingly direct:

What is the minimum pay required for a Bruneian to live on?
What is a meaningful income?
What is a meaningful job?

One voice insisted that any wider discussion about productivity, employment or economic participation would be redundant unless we first answered these basic questions. Another recalled an old poverty study from years ago suggesting that a living threshold might be around BND 1,500 a month — while elsewhere, people were quoting figures as low as BND 500.

Between those two numbers lies more than just a policy debate. It reflects the tension between survival and dignity.

My immediate response in that conversation was simple: minimum pay is about survival, not dignity. And perhaps that distinction is where this discussion must begin.

Brunei is not new to the idea of minimum wage. The country has already taken a measured step through the Employment (Minimum Wage) Order, which entered its second phase on 1 April 2025. The policy mandates a wage floor of BND 500 per month, or BND 2.62 per hour, covering selected industries such as finance, healthcare, education, professional services and hospitality. The intention is clear — to strengthen worker welfare, narrow wage gaps and provide a basic safeguard against exploitation.

But perhaps before we debate whether the number is high or low, we must first be honest about what minimum wage is designed to do — and just as importantly, what it is not meant to solve.

Minimum wage is, at its core, a protective mechanism. It is a boundary line drawn to prevent exploitation, not a guarantee of comfort. It sets the lowest acceptable standard, not the ideal destination. When policymakers speak of a wage floor, they are not promising prosperity; they are establishing a safeguard so that work does not slip below a level society considers unacceptable.

In that sense, minimum wage answers a narrow question: How low is too low? It does not necessarily answer a deeper question that many Bruneians quietly ask themselves — Is this enough to live with dignity?

The distinction matters.

When the figure of BND 500 is discussed, some hear it as a lifeline. Others hear it as a reminder of how far the conversation still needs to go. And perhaps both reactions are valid. A policy designed to protect the most vulnerable will inevitably feel modest to those measuring it against rising living costs, family responsibilities and the quiet expectations of adulthood in modern Brunei.

To be fair, the phased approach suggests that policymakers are trying to balance two realities at once. On one side stands the welfare of workers; on the other, the capacity of industries — particularly smaller enterprises — to absorb higher labour costs without shrinking opportunities.

So perhaps the real question at this stage is not whether minimum wage is right or wrong. That chapter has already begun.

If minimum pay defines where survival begins, then the more uncomfortable question waiting ahead is this — where does dignity truly start, and are we ready to talk honestly about the gap in between? (MHO/02/2026)