Budget 2025 hit and miss

Most said that it solved short-term challenges but fell short for long-term pressures.

Budget 2025 was perceived as strategic but not transformative, failing to address long-term pressures, according to The Uncertainity Horizon: Perspectives on Budget 2025 from Undecided Voters and Expert Observers report by Blackbox Intelligence revealed.

The study interviewed 24 participants. Seven expert policy observers, 10 undecided voters aged under 40, and seven undecided voters aged over 40.

63% of those interviewed said that financial support measures were not enough. When asked what adjustments they could make to any of the cost-of-living measures in the budget 33% of respondents highlighted the importance of addressing indirect cost drivers by introducing measures such as price controls and targeted business rebates to counteract soaring housing costs and unchecked price hikes.

21% recommended shifting from vouchers to direct cash handouts, arguing that the flexibility and ease of cash would better support those— especially seniors—struggling with rising expenses. The same percentage also called for an expansion of CDC voucher programs, suggesting increased frequency and value, whilst also advocating for more equitable benefit distribution based on individual income rather than household size.

8% proposed reassessing GST policies and adopting longer-term systemic solutions to tackle the underlying structural challenges contributing to the cost-of-living pressures.

Meanwhile, three-quarters of respondents believe that the new BTO measures will ease the strain.

Participants also acknowledged that the financial relief measures for businesses provide immediate relief for rising costs through tools like the corporate tax rebate and wage co-funding, which help ease cash flow pressures in the short term.

However, many participants questioned whether these measures would drive genuine business transformation without additional, more substantial investments and changes, noting that addressing persistent issues such as high rental costs remains critical.

42% said the measures have a limited impact on business transformation. 33% said it did not address structural cost pressures. On the other hand, 25% of participants acknowledged that the workforce development grant could enhance productivity and upskilling, potentially supporting longer-term innovation and entrepreneurial activity.

For the government’s upskilling efforts, over half believe they are helpful but insufficient for immediate job security.

38% were skeptical about the tangible benefits of programs like SkillsFuture, citing issues such as poorly targeted courses and operational inefficiencies that fail to translate into real employment outcomes. 21% emphasised that individual proactive upskilling is essential, especially in the face of rapid technological changes that could disrupt both white-collar and blue-collar roles.

In addition, the majority of participants expressed that they do not feel personally prepared for the rapid pace of changes driven by AI and automation, citing critical skill gaps and a sense of being overwhelmed by technological progress.

83% were skeptical about the effectiveness of government upskilling programmes in keeping up with these developments, believing that external support may fall short. 67% said they feel unprepared, whilst 21% believe personal upskilling and proactive learning are key to remaining competitive.