malaysiakini: Power is duty, not a prize.... by Razaleigh Hamzah

Power is duty, not a prize

Razaleigh Hamzah
Jun 19, 2011, 10:29am

 

Malaysia's post-colonial history began with optimism and a grand hope in 1957. When Tunku Abdul Rahman, the first prime minister of Malaysia, proclaimed our Independence at the Merdeka Stadium in the unforgettable words that "Malaysia is a parliamentary democracy with an independent judiciary," he had a vision of a happy people in spite of the formidable economic problems we needed to solve.

After that dawn of independence, there was a search of how we could achieve this happy society, fulfilling the needs and aspirations of all Malaysians which was to continue for the generations to come. He symbolised the concept and conviction of generational responsibility in his vision.

Tunku Abdul Rahman and his generation were dedicated leaders, not for power but a sense of duty to the present and the future. They were not in politics for the money or for themselves. Indeed, even after they had assumed power, they never used their position to benefit themselves or their families, nor did they build loyal cronies who would act as their financiers or hold any wealth unlawfully earned at the expense of the people.

The guiding philosophy was responsibility of public office. Public office was seen as a duty, not as an opportunity. The public office was also part of their sense of political commitment to create a Malaysia that was fair, just, cohesive, and balanced. This was combined by a deep conviction of generational responsibility for those who would come after them.

Our three lost decades

One of the greatest losses in public life and in politics today in Malaysia is that loss of generational responsibility. Everything seems to be surrounded by greed and the desire to be billionaires.

This had led to a pyramid of cronies within the incumbent political parties and their associates in business. It is this combination of the hierarchy of political cronies and business cronies that led to the centralisation of power in the incumbent political leadership and in the Office of the Prime Minister.

This power in one individual allowed the manipulation of the political system; I mean by this the institutions of power including the media. In exchange for the centralisation of power, greed and self-interest were encouraged by example and in the guise of racial loyalty deserving rewards.

This is the case in all the parties within the power structure. This state of affairs is one of the most dangerous and difficult to dismantle because there has been three decades of centralised power.

The political style that has dominated in these lost three decades has been "double-think" and "double-talk". One of the features which is alarming in this plan to maintain status quo is the encouragement covertly of racial and religious obscurantism.

The underlying theme was a policy of using a balance of racialism and religion on the one hand and talks of unity on the other hand in order to make the people hostage to the status quo of power.

As a result, racialism and racial concerns seem to have a grip on all aspects of our lives, in politics, economics, education and employment, irrespective of the present reality which has got nothing to do with race or religion. We are deliberately made to feel that we are hostage to these forces.

Freedom of speech and expression of our political concerns to change the atmosphere are restrained by how it will be interpreted by those who want to deny us the right to differ.

Article 10 of the Constitution which guarantees this freedom is almost non-existence or subject to fear of retaliation or defamation. Legal suits intended to silence legitimate concerns of public responsibility are increasingly used.

Unfortunately, our judicial system has forgotten the fundamental importance of Article 10 to the democratic life of Malaysia. Common sense seems to have been taken out of the law.

Obscene income inequality gap

On the economic front, income inequality in Malaysia has widened. Some studies suggest that Malaysia's inequality is wider than Thailand's or Indonesia's.

Historically, the concern was about ownership and control of the economy. It was the view of some that if ownership was de-racialised or balanced at the top, economic justice would follow. It is no longer a valid premise for the future.

Income inequality is no longer a problem between races; it crosses the racial divide and it is a problem of the majority of Malaysians who feel the pressure of inflation in almost every essential aspects of their lives, challenging their well-being of themselves, their families, and their future.

Today and in the near future, this is the most serious challenge we face. It is not an easy challenge to overcome. It is a time when Malaysia needs leadership of the highest quality and of those who have the moral courage to change and re-think our economic policies.

It is in these circumstances that we face the serious problem of rising food prices, inflation in price of houses compounded by shortage in housing for the vast majority of young Malaysians.

Lack of economic expansion to give all levels an opportunity to use their talents to seek work that is commensurate with their contribution, their needs of daily life, and to narrow the inequality gap, is the threat of the future.

Therefore, we should be concerned about the justification of the removal of subsidies that affects the low income because that will further widen the inequality and open the society to social disorder and disintegration, and increase social incohesion.

It is in this context that I raise the issue about independent power production companies (IPPs). The privatisation contracts are today protected by the Official Secrets Act, and therefore we are unable to really know whether or not the public and Petronas, as trustees of the public, are directly or indirectly subsidising these companies and the tycoons who are benefitting at the expense of the public.

Related to the question of the withdrawal of subsidies is the deficit that the government suffers from in managing the economy. This question cannot be separated from the way that the government has managed the nation's finances.

If the deficit is as a result of wastage, corruption and extravagance in the use of public funds, then the solution to the problem should not be passed on to the public. What is needed is a reexamination of the management of the country's finances before taking any drastic steps that would affect the well-being of the people.

We need to know the reality behind the apparent subsidies that are given to the public and its relationship in the totality of the management of the public finance. Only after we know the truth - and the whole truth - should any change in the policy of subsidies be implemented, as the consequences would have life-changing impact on the livelihood of the people.

In the circumstances of rising inflation in food, stagnation of the economy and income, we should not do anything that would widen the disparity of income which would cause social instability.

Rule of law, not of men

The challenge today is for the return to generational responsibility in politics and public office. This can only be achieved if we have democracy and parliamentary power which is responsible.

Democracy was the basis of the founding of the state of Malaysia by the Constitution in 1957. When it was briefly suspended in 1969, the leaders of that generation were uneasy, and they restored democracy as soon as possible.

That is because they realised that democracy has an intrinsic value in creating a citizenship that is not made up of sheep but of responsible citizens. Only responsible citizenship that understands democracy can bring about stability, cohesion and economic prosperity.

During those days, it was ingrained in that generation of leaders that democracy was not only a form but a value system that respected the essential institutions of democracy like the independence of judiciary, the supremacy of parliament subject to the Constitution, the respect for fundamental rights, and free speech.

They also understood the meaning and primacy of the rule of law and not of men. They also knew that democracy is the common heritage of humanity that we inherited and have a duty to continue. The law that they understood was also from the common heritage of all civilised nations.

And one of our inheritances is the common law system of the rule of law which is enshrined in our constitution. They knew that the phrase "common law" meant the wisdom that is passed to us in the progress of law and the values that are encapsulated in the law governing public office and responsibility to society. That laws are meant to enhance democracy and freedom but not to maintain and continue political power that is inconsistent with the rule of law and the constitution.

Independence did not come with peace but with very difficult problems, particularly the management of the economy and transforming it to bring about a balance between all the racial groups.

They realise that some of their problems had roots in the history of Malaysia. There was a serious imbalance between the countryside and the urban sector with racial dimensions which were too sharp. Indeed, poverty was also quite prevalent. There were open discussions and experiments.

Some of you may remember that one of the highlights of public debate was organised at the University of Malaya under the title, 'The Great Economic Debate' every year. That disappeared with the changes in the Universities and University Colleges Act and the decline of universities' autonomy.

The search was to eradicate a sense of inequality between the various peoples of Malaysia, whether because of one's identity and social origins, or for other reasons. It was as part of this search that during Tun Abdul Razak's time, the Second Malaysia Plan was launched in 1971.

We need to be reminded of the objective of that plan:

"National unity is the over-riding objective of the country. A stage has been reached in the nation's economic and social development where greater emphasis must be placed on social integration and more equitable distribution of income and opportunities for national unity."

Erosion of the Malaysian Dream

That dream was slowly eroded from the mid-1980. The hope that we had at that time is now challenged in the most serious way.

Recently, Petronas announced that it had made a RM90.5 billion pre-tax profit. If we accumulate the profit of Petronas over the years, it would come to a mind-boggling figure of billions and billions.

Yet, the greatest poverty is found in the petroleum producing states of Kelantan, Terengganu, Sarawak, and Sabah. This moral inconsistency in a way exemplifies how the nation's economy is mismanaged and how the institutions set up in the 1970s have lost their objective and commitment to solving the immediate and pressing problems of the nation.

Petronas was set up with the objective of serving the nation's interest as a priority. It was never intended to give Petronas a life of its own as an incorporated company for selected individuals to profit at the expense of the national interest, nor was it the objective to allow Petronas a cooperate existence independent of national interest.

What is needed is for institutions like Petronas is to have a national focus rather than maintain a multinational status. The aim of making Petronas a multinational cooperation at the expense of national interest is contrary to the Petroleum Development Act.

Petronas should have a Petroleum Advisory Council to advise the prime minister on the operation of the law as well as the management and utilisation of its resources as spelt out in the Petroleum Development Act.

Another example of the abuse of power is the privatisation of certain government institutions which were set up as a public service to serve the people.

Bernas is one example of a privatisation of an essential commodity as a monopoly for a group of people and owned partially by two companies in Hong Kong. An essential commodity such as rice should not have been privatised for business purposes. We are the only rice producing country that has privatised and given as a monopoly to one company the importation and distribution of all rice products.

The reality today is Thailand and Indonesia are self sufficient in rice and we are dependant on 30 percent of imported rice. But because it is a monopoly, imported rice is cheaper in Singapore than Malaysia.

Privatisation for the benefit of private individuals to profit from such an essential commodity is a clear abuse of power. It would not have happened in those days. But with the centralisation of power in the office of the prime Minister who had the party under his absolute control, anything was possible!

I will suggest to you that there was a deliberate plan to centralise power in the leadership in a surreptitious manner. Unfortunately the nature of racial politics blinded us of the reality behind certain policies and conduct of leaders at that time.

RM880 bil in capital flight

The decline of democracy, the abuse of power, and the mismanagement of our economy and the nation's finances, the economic waste, the lack of national cohesion in our economic policies led to the flight of capital in the region of RM880 billion over the years from the 1980s.

That was the beginning the lost decades and the full impact of the consequences of the economic policies which has continued since then, is yet to have its full impact on our national lives. And when it does the consequences are unpredictable.

The centralisation of power in the Office of the Prime Minister and the attorney-general had a major role in this state of affairs. The challenge today is to reverse the centralisation of power and restore the check and balance of a genuine democracy.

We need to reclaim as citizens of Malaysia our rights in a democracy; that power and authority are positions of trust and responsibility, not to serve personal interest or as an opportunity for personal enrichment. We need to reassert as politically active and responsible citizens the concept of social obligation and public service in those who seek political office. Power is duty, not a prize.

We need to rethink our economic policies. Particularly in the focusing on the national objectives that are urgent; economic policies is not only about wealth creation but needs to have a moral dimension which takes into account the well-being of all citizens as the ultimate priority over profits.

I have given you a broad sweep of the past and a bird's eye view of the looming problems of managing our economy as it is today. I hope this will open a dialogue which benefits all of us.

TENGKU RAZALEIGH HAMZAH is former finance minister and Gua Musang MP. The above speech was part of the Perak Lectures, organised by Perak Academy on June 18 in Taiping.

Malay Mail: Angkasa taken to court.... By Frankie D'Cruz and Nadirah H. Rodzi,

Angkasa taken to court

Posted on 11 February 2011
By Frankie D'Cruz and Nadirah H. Rodzi, The Malay Mail

KUALA LUMPUR: Crisis-ridden apex cooperative movement Angkatan Koperasi Malaysia (Angkasa) — with a membership of close to eight million — has been slammed with a suit by five cooperatives alleging criminal breach of trust, mismanagement, misappropriation and abuse of power by eight key officials.

The five cooperatives have alleged the officials of Angkasa had cost the national cooperative organisation of Malaysia, that has 7,688 cooperatives under its wings, to suffer losses running into millions of ringgit.

The suit was filed amid a claim this morning by the Adviser to the Cooperative Union of Malaysia, Thuraisingham Shun, that 75 per cent of civil servants were in debt with financial institutions over various loans.

He said the figure, suggested by a Universiti Malaya economist, was a further indicator that Angkasa was in shambles and that today’s suit was a move to revamp the body.

Shun said Angkasa’s operations should be suspended and the accounts frozen until the court has made a decision. The officials implicated are Angkasa president Prof Datuk Mohd Ali Bahrum, Datuk Fatah Abdullah (deputy president), Armi Zainuddin Mutadho Bahri, Jamal Abdullah (all vice-presidents), chief executive officer Nasir Khan Yahya, executive secretary Mohd Zamri Yaakob and chief accountant Suresh Kumar.

The plaintiffs are Koperasi Rangkaian Sahabat Dungun Bhd, Koperasi Insan Bantu Insan Kuala Lumpur Bhd, Koperasi Konsortium Kontraktor Bumiputera Bhd, Koperasi Pembangunan Melayu Raub Berhad and Koperasi Pengurusan Tanah Malaysia Bhd.

The cooperatives filed an originating summons with the Kuala Lumpur High Court (Appellate and Special Powers) this morning seeking a declaration to suspend the officials for allegedly:

● taking more than a million ringgit in allowances for attending board meetings from 2007-2009. The president was accused of taking RM155,118 in 2008.

● failing in their fiduciary responsibilities in the purchase of a land in Kelana Jaya and causing a loss of RM6.5 million in the deal with Malaysian Association of Productivity.

● approving and spending RM500,000 for a delegates’ conference, including allowances, in 2009 in violation of by-laws.

● spending RM1.27 million to buy seven Toyota Camry for their personal use just before Hari Raya last year while only RM400,000 was authorised for that purpose.

● approving and spending RM500,000 over and above the sanctioned budget of RM1.5 million in 2009 without permission.

● abusing their powers in suspending three members of the State liaison committee for three years.

● paying unauthorised allowances to officials of the Malaysian Cooperative Societies Commission, and other government officials who attended several board meetings. These payments were viewed as corruption.

● making false media statements that Angkasa had made a profit of RM2 billion for the financial year ending 30th June 2010.

Fatah and Muhtadho were also said to have failed to relinquish their positions at the ensuing annual general meeting after they were appointed to fill the vacant position of vice-president temporarily following the demise of the former president Datuk Rahim Bakar in 2009.

In the supporting affidavit, a director of Koperasi Rangkaian Sahabat Dungun, Datuk Seri Noor Zainan Zainul, said despite reports to the police, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the Malaysian Cooperative Societies Commission, no action had been taken by the defendants to resolve the issues.

The cooperatives, through their lawyers, applied to the court to suspend the entire board and requested for a court administrator to manage the affairs of Angkasa.

They also sought a forensic audit to ascertain the true financial situation in Angkasa and refer the findings to a special general meeting.

Noor Zainan led four representatives of the other cooperatives to file the affidavit through their lawyer Moghan Muthiah at 10.30am.

Shun later told reporters the five cooperatives would file a certificate of urgency for speedy hearing of the matter.

He said the affected co-operatives had sent a letter to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak on Jan 31 and were hoping to meet him to address the state of cooperatives in the country.

Angkasa, registered in May 1971, is recognised by the government as the national apex body of cooperative organisations.

East Asia Forum: Can Malaysia graduate?... by Hal Hill, ANU

Can Malaysia graduate?

East Asia Forum
January 19th, 2011
by Hal Hill, ANU

Malaysia is one of the developing world’s great success stories. Few countries outside of East Asia can match its development record. Since its independence over 53 years ago per capita incomes have risen more than eight-fold, and absolute poverty has been all but eliminated.

But it currently faces three key, interrelated challenges, some generic to upper middle income developing countries, others specific to Malaysia itself.

The first, how to graduate to the rich-country club, has been clearly articulated by the country’s Prime Minister, Tun Najib: ‘We are now at a critical juncture, either to remain trapped in a middle-income group or advance to a high-income economy … We now have to shift to a new economic model based on innovation, creativity and high value added activities.’

The second, shared by some of its Southeast Asian neighbours, is the country’s slower development trajectory since the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s. Even before the current global financial crisis, which it has navigated quite successfully, economic growth in the 2000’s was about two percentage points below that of the decade 1986-96.

Particularly worrisome is the slump in investment, which has been stuck at little more than 20 per cent of GDP since the late 1990s. This is 10-15 percentage points of GDP lower than the country’s historic ratio. With savings remaining buoyant, the country’s external position has been transformed dramatically. In 2002, the country had net liabilities equivalent to 35 per cent of GDP. By 2008, this had been transformed to net assets of 20 per cent of GDP. Put simply, Malaysians have been finding overseas investment increasingly attractive, while foreigners have been less attracted to Malaysia.

The third challenge relates to the development of high-quality institutions to underpin a modern market economy in a country that has experienced continuous one-party rule for over half a century. Malaysia’s ruling United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) is in fact the world’s longest-serving governing party currently in power among all ‘quasi democracies’. Not surprisingly, elements of UMNO exhibit the problems of complacence and arrogance that one expects from entrenched one-party dominance.

Malaysia’s strengths are not to be underestimated. It has always been one of the most open economies in the developing world, to both trade and foreign investment. It has rarely had a severe macroeconomic crisis, in large part because of this openness. It derived a major early mover advantage from its adoption in the early 1970s of export oriented industrialisation through foreign direct investment, before it was fashionable to do so.

Among emerging economy manufactured goods exporters, it has progressed from 15th ranked and 1.2 per cent of the total in 1969-70 to 5th ranked and 5.2 per cent of the total in 2006-07. It is a major player in the global electronics industry. In 2006-07, it accounted for 3.8 per cent of global parts and components exports, in East Asia behind only the highly industrialised economies of China, Japan and Korea.

But Malaysia is struggling to shift out of low-skill activities, where it is no longer competitive with lower wage neighbours. These problems have been exacerbated by its vigourous promulgation of one of the longest running affirmative action programs in the developing world. Designed to redistribute employment and wealth to the dominant Bumiputera – principally ethnic Malay – community after the nasty communal conflict of May 1969, the so-called New Economic Policy (NEP) and its successors played an important role in promoting racial harmony in the country where there are large differences in living standards across racial groups.

But these programs have created a culture of entitlement, and they have resulted in institutionalised leakages that permeate practically every aspect of Malaysian commercial, social, political and educational life. The programs to advance Bumiputera development have benefited spectacularly the politically well-connected within this community, through preferential contracts, share allocations, and general commercial advancement, while all too little has trickled down to the general community. The programs can hardly be justified as anti-poverty programs when the principal beneficiaries are already egregiously wealthy.

As a result, some of the country’s industry policies have backfired. Malaysia might have been expected to be the leading Southeast Asian automotive producer, but Thailand has become the ‘Detroit of Asia’ owing to Malaysia’s disastrous national car program. In addition, the ‘spillover’ benefits from the large multinational presence in manufacturing have been limited by the fact that Malaysia’s small and medium enterprises (SMEs), that are predominantly owned by the ethnic Chinese community, prefer to stay small, below the threshold above which Bumiputera employment quotas become mandatory.

The country’s public universities, once among the region’s best, have also slipped in East Asian rankings owing to these ethnic quotas as well as heavy bureaucratic control. The civil service is bloated and in need of reform, while there is a very large state enterprise sector that functions in a non-transparent manner and subject to little public accountability.

Moreover, Malaysia has missed out on emerging service sector opportunities owing to the slow pace of liberalisation in that sector, itself a product of the very large presence of state-dominated firms and the NEP-preference schemes. And the country continues to experience a substantial brain drain as a result of the exodus of skilled professionals from the Chinese and Indian communities.

It is fashionable in Malaysia to attribute its current malaise to China, a country that is able to out-compete Malaysia in low-end and increasingly a sophisticated range of manufactures. While the ‘export similarity index’ (that is the composition of their exports) for the two countries is quite high, and thus there has some been some loss of market share to China from Malaysia in third-country export markets, the notion that the rise of China explains Malaysia’s current difficulties is untenable. That view overlooks the positive sum game for Malaysia from China’s rise.

As a resource-rich economy, Malaysia has benefited from the general China-fuelled rise in commodity prices, for example its exports of palm oil and oil and gas. Similarly, commercial opportunities in tourism and education have been rising rapidly, with two-way investments rising very quickly. And Malaysia is a central player in the increasingly China-centred East Asian production networks that export to the world.

Hal Hill is HW Arndt Professor of Southeast Asian Economies at the Australian National University. With Tham Siew Yean and Ragayah Haji Mat Zin, he is co-editor of ‘Graduating from the Middle: Malaysia’s Development Challenges’, forthcoming in 2011.

malaysiakini: A nation of failed economic development plans... by AB Sulaiman

A nation of failed economic development plans

AB Sulaiman
Sep 20, 10
1:45pm

COMMENT The world can be a nasty place especially in terms of planning, where your best and well intentioned plans can produce the worst unintended results. The country's numerous development plans is a perfect example of this.

Since Independence we have always strived to be a country with strong social, economic and political credentials: a strong healthy and united people, public safety and security, great infrastructure, mature democracy, clean human rights record, good education system, governed under rule of law, and of course, a justice-minded judiciary.

To top them all off we are to enjoy a per capita income equal to the peoples in advanced economies. We wish to be an advanced country in our own right.

The current realities are anything but. The people are fragmented while some are migrating to friendlier lands, our infrastructure while adequate is wasteful, our democracy is an ugly disguise for authoritarianism, our education system produces non-thinking graduates, the rule of law has become the rule by law, and the judiciary is an international laughing stock.

The latest world indices would confirm this. There are many but I'd mention just two. First, the 2009 figures for FDI showing an 81 percent fall from US$7.32 billion to US$1.38 billion. At this paltry level we now have joined investment-unattractive countries like Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos and Timor–Leste.

Not only that, apparently the FDI into Thailand and Indonesia have overtaken that coming into Malaysia, once the darling of international investors.

Two, as for per capita income we are at about US$7,000 while the advanced countries we wish to join are at US$30,000 and above. We are less than a quarter of the way to our self-proclaimed goal.

On looking back, we started well in the arena of economic development, but somewhere along the line we faltered and very badly.

Faltered from the start

I reckon we faltered beginning 1970 when we introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP). This was when we began propounding and experimenting economic development plans beyond the parameters of sound economic principles.

Specifically we made plans and projections not in the interest of the country, but in the interest of a segment of the population, namely the Malays.

Now this might be an explosive statement to make so I have to make my stand clear.

The fact of the matter is that the factors of production in an economic set-up are land, labour, capital, entrepreneurship, and in an increasingly knowledge-based world economy, on the ability to access and utilise knowledge. I 'borrow' these factors as principles for economic development.

For an economy to expand therefore, all scarce resources must be optimally channelled for the development of these principles.

I'd reiterate: develop land, inject capital optimally for investment, encourage entrepreneurship, enhance the level of knowledge through smart education. Only then can the economy expand and achieve sustainability.

This last element of sustainability is important – the developing economy must reach a level when it can sustain or regenerate itself without anymore support from any planning agency.
Anything less than this and we can see an economy not going anywhere, and could in fact regress, like our current situation. Lim Kit Siang sums it well – the economy would be a 'work in regress'.

What has gone wrong with our string of development plans? In my view there are several, and I mention them here despite being aware that many commentators have mentioned them constantly. Perhaps there can be some wisdom in saying the same things again, hoping somewhere along the line the decision makers can begin to listen.

Several hundred billion USD wasted

First, after 1970 we seem to divert the elementary formula for economic development mentioned above, into some non-optimal channels resulting in massive wastage. Our planners channelled land development mainly to the Malays. We made development plans for sectarian, not for national interests.

In this way the Malays gain comparatively easy access to scarce capital they cannot fruitfully use because of their lack in entrepreneurial skill and spirit. Their lack in education and knowledge have rendered their productivity level below that of their non-Malay counterparts.

I am aware of course that this resource misallocation was for a special reason and thereby meant to be implemented only for twenty years. But when this time was up the authorities would merely forget this proviso.

As events turn out, such allocations have proven to be below optimum level; even wasteful of scarce resources. External observers have noted that the NEP wasted several hundred billion US dollars!

Favouring race over economics

When the leaders saw that the Malays could not cope and the non-Malays restive they use race and religion to both spur the Malay on and to push away any non-Malay disgruntlement. In other words the leaders dismissed the traditional economic factors of national asset creation in favour of Malay racism and cultural hegemony under the banner of Ketuanan Melayu; and of Islam.

I might be out of academics but I have never known racism and religion to substitute economic factors in any country's asset creation efforts. Surely the planners have not forgotten that this new formula was experimental in nature and to last only for twenty years.

In any case, here we see the early unintended results of the NEP. On the part of the Malays we see a community of people developing a false sense of confidence that they have progressed ahead on the platform of race and religion; whereas in actuality they have not.

On the part of the non-Malays they see the wastefulness of the country's allocation of scarce resources in the interest of racism and religion as the sure way towards non-sustainability and regression.

And yet the authorities would prevent the citizens to even debate the issue.

No post mortem conducted

Come 1990 and the NEP report card had shown the recklessness of this development programme. Malay achievements were nowhere in sight.

Would there be some form of post-mortem analysis to see the good and bad points? To see whether the country should progress ahead in the same race-and-religion principles?

There has been no such effort, not to my knowledge anyway. It has been more of the same: more racism, more religion. And here we see the continuation of a string of failed development programmes.

Dr Mahathir Mohamad (left) announced the Vision 2020 stating that the country would join advanced nations by this magical year. It was well-intended perhaps, but with the economic principles remaining unchanged, that is in favour not of the country but of the Malays, the country began its slide downwards.

When Abdullah Ahmad Badawi took the reins of power, many people had thought that he might just do the right thing to put the country back on the right track again. But he used religious motives (remember Islam Hadhari) to lead the people forward – there was no change there either.

Now we have Najib Razak leading the nation out of the dangerous zone of falling into the steep precipice of a failed state. He has his own plans of course, and its called 1Malaysia: people first, performance now. Will he make any headway?

I just say this to him for whatever it is worth. Go ahead with your development plans based on the proven factors of production as mentioned severally above.

But do not be distracted by sectarian interests, nor for religious considerations. Go for optimum scarce resource allocation and economic sustainability.

AB SULAIMAN is an observer of human traits and foibles, especially within the context of religion and culture. As a liberal, he marvels at the way orthodoxy fights to maintain its credibility in a devilishly fast-changing world. He hopes to provide some understanding to the issues at hand and wherever possible, suggest some solutions. He holds a Bachelor in Social Sciences (Leicester, UK) and a Diploma in Public Administration, Universiti Malaya.

TMI: Will Najib push through an effective NEM to transform a failed, problem-ridden Malaysia? — Dr Chen Man Hin

Will Najib push through an effective NEM to transform a failed, problem-ridden Malaysia? — Dr Chen Man Hin

The Malaysian Insider, September 14, 2010

 

SEPT 14 — It will take a liberal New Economic Model and a strong prime minister to push much needed reforms to transform Malaysia into a high-income country with democracy, justice and prosperity for all regardless of race or religion.

The political and economic outlook for the country is critical. We are riddled with multiple problems of corruption, lack of judicial independence, racialism, brain drain, with 40 per cent of households living below the poverty level of RM1,500, and four out of five poor households are Bumiputeras.

All these things are happening even after two years of PM Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s rule since April 2008. His 1 Malaysia and mediocre attempts at reforms have failed.

WORLD RANKINGS OF MALAYSIA
The sorry state of political and economic development is reflected in the world ranking status of Malaysia on areas which indicate whether a society is honest, democratic, transparent, and just.

CORRUPTION: Transparent International Corruption perception — Malaysia is ranked 56 among countries in 2009 having dropped from 47 of 2008 and from 23 in 1995. It indicates that corruption has deteriorated during Najib’s watch, whereas Singapore and Hong Kong are almost corruption free.

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE: Malaysia’s world ranking for year 2009-2010 was 52 compared with Thailand 54, Taiwan 49, Singapore 19, Australia 5, Finland 4, Denmark 3, Sweden 2, and New Zealand 1. Low ranking for Malaysia is not surprising, especially as the Sodomy 2 case against Anwar Ibrahim has raised international concern about the integrity of the judiciary in Malaysia.

UNIVERSITY RANKING: This year no university from Malaysia made it to the top 200 world universities list of QS World University Ranking 2010. Last year one Malaysian university, Universiti Malaya, was ranked 180. This year Universiti Malaya was ranked 207.

ACADEMIC RANKING OF WORLD UNIVERSITIES BY SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY: No university from Malaysia was in the list, which indicates that the academic standards are questionable.

POLICE STATE: It is a fact that the government uses all the institutions — police, judicial, attorney-general and media — to exercise rigid and a repressive controls on the social, economic and political life of the people. The ISA is used to oppress the opposition. Press freedom is muzzled, as seen by the ranking for Malaysia which was 141 out of 196 countries. Which is not unexpected as the government has imposed a tight censorship of all opposition news. The government plans to impose censorship of the Internet, which is gaining popularity with the people.

FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENTS (FDI): The World Bank has released figures which showed that for 2009 there was an 81 per cent fall in FDI into Malaysia from US$7.32 billion to US$1.38 billion. FDI into Thailand and Indonesia has overtaken FDI into Malaysia, which has now joined the ranks of countries like Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos and Timor Leste. These are figures which indicate that investors, both local and foreign, have lost confidence and prefer to put their money in Indonesia and Thailand.

Poor global rankings of Malaysia are an indictment of the Najib regime, which under the cloak of 1 Malaysia is actually practising the politics of race, corruption, cronyism and rent seeking. If the same policies are continued, then inexorably, Malaysia will join the ranks of failed states like banana republics Myanmar and Zimbabwe.

THE ONE HOPE
Follow the advice and recommendations of the World Bank and IMF which have recommended that Najib follow free and liberal market policies. There has to be a structural reform, which means no NEP regulations like 30 per cent Bumiputera equity and cronyism or rent seeking. A culture of competitiveness and meritocracy must be practised.

At the same time, the reforms must be inclusive to look after the interest of the poor — Bumiputeras and others. A new type of affirmative policy must be practised where help is given according to needs and merit. This affirmation action should not interfere with the mainstream liberal free market economy, or the main economy will stagnate or collapse as it did the 40 years of NEP rule from 1971 to 2010.

The fate of Malaysia is now in the hands of the prime minister. The whole country is now watching the next move of the prime minister. Will he follow the NEM policies as endorsed by World Bank and IMF? Or will he wilt under the pressure of Perkasa?

“To be or not to be, that is the question.” – Hamlet. The whole country awaits.

* Dr Chen Man Hin is the life adviser of the DAP.

The Malaysian Insider (mysinchew): The unkindest cut for the poor — Thomas Lee Seng Hock

The unkindest cut for the poor — Thomas Lee Seng Hock

The Malaysian Insider, July 17, 2010

 

JULY 17 — The decision by the federal government to increase the prices of sugar, gas and petrol as the first step of its gradual subsidy rationalisation programme is sure to irk the people, especially those in the low-income group.

There will certainly be massive bitter resentment and anger among the people, especially when the Ramadan month cum Hari Raya Puasa, the month-long Hungry Ghost Festival, the Mid-Autumn or Mooncake Festival, and the Kew Ong Yah (Nine Emperor-Gods) Festival are just around the corner. Many Chinese also hold their weddings during the auspicious Mid-Autumn Festival period.

Obviously, the price-increase move will cause a domino effect on the economy, sparking a rise in prices of other goods and services, especially in the food and transportation sectors.

The move is also expected to cause some major political repercussions for the Barisan Nasional, especially with the impending Sarawak state election, which must be held before the end of the year, and a possible general election early next year.

The timing of the price increase announcement, just a few hours after Parliament adjourned its latest sitting, has also cast uncomplimentary aspersions on the Najib administration for wanting to avoid an open debate by the country’s lawmakers on such a vital issue.

The federal government has described the cuts as part of a difficult but bold decision to reduce fiscal deficit, and said that it would still have to spend RM7.8 billion on fuel and sugar subsidies this year.

According to a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office, the subsidy rationalisation would allow the federal government to reduce its expenditure by more than RM750 million this year.

The so-called savings through the cut in subsidies will surely become a point of contention as the people are upset that they have to suffer the increasing cost of living while the government spends hundreds of millions on what they perceive as non-essential things, such as the mega building projects and the purchases of defence equipment.

There had also been massive wastage of public funds, such as the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) fiasco, which arose after the cost to develop the massive 400-hectare integrated cargo distribution hub spiralled from RM1.9 billion to RM4.6 billion.

Then there is the mega purchase of two France-made Scorpene submarines. According to figures supplied to an MP in Parliament by Defence Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, total costs, excluding annual maintenance, works out to €1.34 billion or RM6.7 billion. This breaks down to €969 million for the two submarines, €219 million for missiles, €38 million for miscellaneous equipment and €114 million for commission paid to the middle-man company Perimekar. Maintenance fees were originally agreed at RM600 million for six years or RM100 million per year. However, this has been increased to RM270 million per year.

Sure, the people will support the government in what it has described as the “long-needed” economic reforms to help the country maintain the strong growth it had achieved to become a developed and high-income nation.

But the people also want responsibility, competency, accountability, transparency, and authenticity in the Barisan Nasional government’s stewardship of the hard-earned tax money they contribute to the nation’s coffer.

Although Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has promised that the government would adopt an approach that would not burden the people when implementing the subsidy rationalising plan, the truth is that the move will certainly result in an inflationary economic environment, with a general increase in the prices of goods and services, and the people who will be hit hard most will be the low-income families.

The government has argued that those that benefit most from the subsidised items are the businesses which used twice as much subsidised sugar than households, and owners of luxury cars who enjoy cheap fuel although they could afford unsubsidised prices.

Of course, those in the privileged class will not feel much impact from the cut in subsidies, and they will go on enjoying their upmarket lifestyle with nary a care for anything.

The poor, however, will have to tighten their already tight belts to make ends meet. As it is, many are just living from hands to mouths, with nothing left in their bank accounts before the end of the month.

It is anticipated that the ah longs will be doing roaring business, especially among the small petty traders and hawkers who will find it hard to survive in a tight market situation with their regular customers cutting their spending.

By making a general blanket withdrawal of subsidies, the government is causing much hardship to the low-income families who form the majority of the country’s population.

The so-called subsidy rationalisation to curb the wrong beneficiaries, wastage and abuse is like a machine-gun shooting at all, and those who get hit are those who couldn’t afford the bullet-proof vests.

I propose that the federal government take the following three measures to help relieve the financial difficulties of the low-income people:

• (a) Those earning less than RM50,000 a year should be exempted from paying personal income tax.
• (b) A family of three or more with an household income of less than RM30,000 should be given a cost-of-living allowance (Cola) of RM200 a month for each schooling child or disabled dependent of the family, and each non-working old folk above 60 years old. 
• (c) All those who have reached the mandatory retirement age, but are still working should be exempted from paying personal income tax. These people have been paying income taxes all their working life and they deserve a respite to enjoy their sunset years.

The move to increase the prices of sugar and fuel is surely the unkindest cut for the poor. But, if Najib and the Barisan Nasional implements the measures I proposed before the next general election, I guarantee that the Barisan Nasional will return to power with a landslide majority. — mysinchew.com

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or the publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

Malaysian Insider: Najib’s ‘Year of Living Dangerously’-- Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed

Najib’s ‘Year of Living Dangerously’

By Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed 

 Malaysian Insider APRIL 3 — As a son of a former dedicated party man and minister, I understand the almost impossible task of emulating a legacy in politics.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Najib Abdul Razak is still struggling to shake off the public’s  comparison with his great statesman father, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein after a year in office.

Datuk Seri Najib can draw a few similarities with the enormous task at hand confronting his late father 40 years ago.

Both men had to manage heightened racial tensions and stagnant economic conditions.

The difference is Tun Abdul Razak was not saddled with the negative perception of his party and cabinet of Ministers. He did not have to contend with an inept and equally corrupt perception of the civil service and institutions.

Tun Abdul Razak did not have to manage external political and cyberspace influences.

Tun Abdul Razak had the opportunity to use Emergency powers to basically redraw the economic and political structure of the country and successfully implemented his reforms.

But Datuk Seri Najib does not have these advantages and has had to carry the baggage of public apathy and hatred against Umno and Barisan Nasional that grew from the time of the country’s fourth prime minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

The extremely difficult challenges that lie ahead of Datuk Seri Najib would make him our greatest Prime Minister if he were to succeed.

One year on after pledging his oath of office, his challenges remain no less challenging but are mounting as he seeks to reverse the mistakes of the past and bring the country forward to progress and developed nation status.

It isn’t easy especially for political parties that have won power and continue to rule a country. Most political parties that won independence have not remained in power for more than half a century.

Only the Communist Party of China has succeeded to remain in power today. And Umno from the days of the Alliance with MCA and MIC to the present coalition started by his father, the Barisan Nasional. Yet many are writing it off in the next general elections.

But Datuk Seri Najib is a careful man and is methodical in solving problems.

His proposals to change the current economic model to enhance growth and align the country with the global economy, introduce key performance indicators to improve the efficiency of the bureaucracy and the 1 Malaysia concept to stabilize the political environment demonstrates his comprehensive problem solving style.

Dr Mahathir privately acknowledged Najib as one of his brightest ministers.

He is in essence a perfect English gentleman who is polite and does not like to disappoint anyone

He likes to be inclusive in his management style, which sometimes may have been taken for granted. But his good nature may have sent ambivalent signals to the public.

This may explain his actions in introducing and then delaying the implementation of his NKRA , GST , 1 Malaysia and recently the New Economic Model after receiving negative feedback from certain quarters.

This has only increased the public perception that Najib lacks the strong will to overcome his detractors. Despite this drawback , the public has still given him a high favourable rating of 68 per cent as the Prime Minister according to a recent poll.

I witnessed his changed personality at a recent gathering of party leaders at his official residence in Putrajaya. I believe that the Prime Minister has realized that he needs to respond to the public opinion and be more assertive on his party and the civil servants.

Maybe he believes that time is also against him as the end game for Umno and Barisan Nasional is near. Because I certainly subscribe to that thinking if nothing is done to regain public support, not just that of one community but the entire electorate.

If he fails, Umno and Barisan Nasional would really be punished and thrown out of power for failing to execute its good policies. This is Najib’s “Year of Living Dangerously” then, formulating policies and strategies to bring the country forward and to keep helming the nation in times of crisis and peace. Just like his father but without the favourable conditions of the past.

Datuk Seri Najib can. He must.

 Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed is a two-term MP for Pulai. Apart from being in the new politics, he also writes for The Malaysian Insider while debating other matters at www.jazlan.net

Malaysian Insider: Perkasa, GLCs and the New Economic Model — Lim Teck Ghee

Perkasa, GLCs and the New Economic Model — Lim Teck Ghee

MARCH 29 — During the recent Perkasa meeting on March 27, Ibrahim Ali expressed his displeasure with the CEOs of government-linked companies (GLCs) for not attending his Malay rights group inaugural congress.

He also criticised the GLC heads for being more concerned about their personal interests instead of the interests of the Malay community.

Introducing a note of intimidation, he warned that Perkasa will scrutinise the GLCs. “We are not only looking at their performance but also the role they play in helping Malay entrepreneurs.”

The GLC rebuff is indicative of a rejection of the Perkasa agenda by the Malay captains of industry who recognize the negative implications of the policies being espoused.

It is also salutary that apart from Deputy International Trade and Industry Minister Mukhriz Mahathir, no other significant member of the cabinet took part in the gathering of the ultras at the Putra World Trade Centre (PWTC).

The Malay and Malaysian public should look forward to hearing the outcome of Perkasa monitoring the GLCs and learning the truth about how these bodies are standing in the way of, or seriously implementing, their mission of fulfilling the Malay agenda.

The importance of GLCs to the Malay agenda can be ascertained from the following facts:
• GLCs are major shareholders of corporate equity. They comprise 36 per cent and 54 per cent of the market capitalization of Bursa Malaysia and the benchmark Kuala Lumpur Composite Index.
• Seven out of the top 10 listed companies are under majority ownership of the government.
• Senior GLC positions are largely determined along ethnic lines. GLC directors, management and staff are largely Bumiputeras.
• Non-Malay owners of listed and unlisted companies often have no choice but to work with influential Bumiputera and GLCs to help protect their interests through obtaining sub-contracts or becoming suppliers of goods and services.
• Non-Malays may own 40 per cent of corporate equity based on the government’s flawed calculations but GLCs are the major players and have control over the economy.

Because they have done very well for the Malays (including the likes of Ibrahim Ali and many of his supporters who have benefitted from GLC patronage and largesse), it is rather dumb of Ibrahim Ali to expect these GLC leaders to openly attend the meeting and to proclaim to Perkasa members and the world the various ways in which they are protecting and advancing the Malay socio-economic position.

In fact, Ibrahim Ali and many GLC Malay leaders may be on the same wavelength on the issue of enhancing the Malay socio-economic position. However, the main difference might only be that the Perkasa head is a politician using crude racist tactics whilst shouting from the top of his voice at the PWTC while the GLC chiefs are likely to pursue the Malay cause through more subtle means. As corporate figures, they recognize that growth is a prerequisite to fulfillment of long-term Malay and national goals.

Quite apart from this, many of these GLC leaders also recognize the realities and implications of policies that have contributed to capital flight, the virtual drying up of FDI flows, a sizable brain drain and a general loss of competitiveness. These negatives have been acknowledged by the Second Minister of Finance and are indeed implicit in the call by the Prime Minister to adopt a New Economic Model (NEM).

A New Economic Model devoid of a course correction —via adoption of more market friendly and less racially skewed policies —would be an exercise in futility. Ibrahim Ali’s formula constitutes an abandonment of much needed pro-growth strategies in favour of a discredited policy package that is centered round the distribution of existing wealth. No country in the world in this era of globalization and liberalization has chosen such an economic strategy.

Similarly with the refusal by Umno to respond to Ibrahim Ali’s unfounded charges that the Malays have been marginalized in the country.  All Umno leaders (except perhaps Mukhriz) are aware of the overwhelming dominance of Malay power in the country. Far from Malay constitutional rights being eroded or usurped by other communities, it is the other way round. This is acknowledged by many Malay leaders including Anwar Ibrahim and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah.

If one is using a purely racial lens approach it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Malay hegemony has never been so strong or firmly entrenched as it is today. Ibrahim Ali and his cohorts are opportunistically delusional and appear to be living in a cocoon of their own. They fail to factor in the fact that the political and economic model that they espouse will bring irreparable harm to the nation and future generations of Malaysians, including Malays.

Tackling Malay poverty
In the economic sphere whilst there is still much work to be done to uplift the lot of the poor Malays, the task is less formidable than official statistics may make it out to be.  This is because Malay poverty — as distinct from Bumiputera poverty — is likely to be considerably over-estimated by the present statistical practice whereby the Malay figures are lumped together with the figures of recent migrants from Indonesia who have obtained Bumiputera status as well as the other Bumiputera from East Malaysia.

The great majority of the former group — Javanese, Sumatrans, etc — who have now assimilated into the country’s population in very large numbers especially after the 1970s came with virtually nothing in terms of assets or income. Inclusion of these poor “pendatang”, despite their upward mobility after settlement, has had much impact in distorting the racial distribution of household income. Without them (and also Bumiputra communities in Sabah and Sarawak), the ‘native’ or ‘indigenous’ or ‘local’ Malay achievement, as distinct from Bumiputera achievement, will be much higher on all the social and economic indicators used by the Department of Statistics to measure inter-ethnic differences.

At the same time, Ibrahim Ali and his supporters are wholly mistaken in their view of poverty. The government’s own statistics indicate that poverty, however defined, has been drastically reduced. The stark issue is the unconscionable and widening income disparities that prevail within the Bumiputera community. Ibrahim Ali and his keris waving Umnoputra crowd are totally silent on this aspect of the Malay dilemma.

Malay wealth
Umno leaders are also fully aware that much of the new wealth in the country is in Malay hands. These sources of wealth include the plantation sector which is dominated by Felda and PNB companies;  the smallholding agricultural sector where the Malays are the major group amongst the 112,635 Felda settlers; the hi-tech aerospace industry; the highly lucrative defense industry; the petroleum and gas industry where apart from Petronas and MMC, the Malays have substantial holdings in key MNCs such as Shell, Exxon, BP; the finance and banking sector where eight out of 10 banks are Bumiputera- owned and controlled; the automotive sector where Malay interests are dominant in Proton, Perodua, DRB Hicom, UMW and Naza, and where the system of APs ensures a steady stream of income for select Bumiputeras; as well as the energy and utilities sector where TNB and Malakoff are key players; and so on.

Perhaps the ace in the pack in Umno’s claim to have successfully stood up for Malay interests (besides its own) is that a key target of the NEP restructuring programme — the building of a strong Malay professional and technical elite class — was attained some years ago. From a very small base of professional and technical workers in 1970 (Bumiputera comprised 4.9 per cent of registered professionals at that time) the Malay component of the country’s professional and technical workers today is the biggest amongst the various racial groups. According to the Malaysian government’s Third Outline Perspective Plan (2001-2010), the Bumiputera community comprised 63.5 per cent of the ‘Professional and Technical’ category of employment in 2000.

This growth of a strong Malay professional class within a short period of 30 years is possibly the fastest recorded by any marginalized community anywhere in the world. That this information is not widely known or disseminated is not due to modesty but carefully controlled political spin aimed at under-reporting Malay achievement and emphasizing non-Malay dominance of the economy.
Meanwhile, the employment pattern in the public sector at all levels is overwhelmingly Malay because of discriminatory policies in hiring and in promotions. If there is any prong of the New Economic Policy that has not been fulfilled, it is the restructuring of the public sector.

The New Economic Model and the country’s future
In a few days’ time, the Prime Minister will unveil the New Economic Model which is intended to replace the New Economic Policy and its racially divisive policies. At that point, we will be able to see if Perkasa, Dr Mahathir Mohamad and other carpetbaggers have been able to successfully hijack the NEM and set the country up for another round of Malay preference policies that will destroy the promises contained in the Najib Razak vehicle ‘1 Malaysia’.

Were these fears to come to pass, Malaysia will take another step downwards to joining countries such as Burma and Zimbabwe which squandered their prospects for prosperity because of the greed of a small elite group that hijacked national wealth.

It is time for all Malaysians to firmly and clearly reject the strident siren calls of Mahathir and Ibrahim Ali to return to policies that hold no hope of serving the country’s needs. It is also important that the NEM reflects the aspirations of all Malaysians rather than the myopic views of yesterday’s men. Najib has a solemn duty to resist those that would derail moves to put right what has been wrong.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or the newspaper. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

Malaysian Insider-Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad: We need ‘painful’ economic reforms, not a GST

We need ‘painful’ economic reforms, not a GST

Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad

 Malaysian Insider, MARCH 16 — The PM has finally taken heed of our critique of the GST. Or has he really? That’s how it seems for now.

But you really couldn’t tell from this move as to why he defers the second reading of the the bill on GST.

It could have been done to evade that ugly demonstration of the Pakatan’s MPs and the NGOs that would have otherwise marred the opening of the new parliamentary session by the Agung.

This writer (a member of the Anti-GST Task Force) however would like to believe that the PM has finally taken heed of all the critiques, not the least or perhaps most seriously from the Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM).

The cost to both the government and businesses is monstrous. Australia paid A$4.8 bilion  (RM14.56 billion) when it implemented the GST 10 years ago.

It may cost us in total, close to RM4.5 billion with 200,000 companies or persons as ‘taxable persons’ under the new GST as opposed to the 50,000 under the old SST regime.

The BN government is now saying that they would like to listen more extensively from the people, the rakyat. Strange.

Not after all these debates in the first reading in the parliament and especially if one considers that this is second attempt at tabling this new taxation system (after 2002), which is a onerous, massive and pervasive one!

So they are now saying that they have forgotten to engage the rakyat. Didn’t they want to even seek the rakyat’s perception and take, on the GST earlier?

Only after the Pakatan’s Anti-GST Task Force took on the offensive and later on joined by the NGOs, did the BN government realise that the GST is after all not well received and perhaps vehemently opposed save by the greatest beneficiary, the tax accountants, not all though.

Pakatan reiterates our stance on the GST. We are not against the GST per se.

However, Pakatan is totally against its reckless implementation and especially not when the nation’s economy is at its critical time to undergo ‘fundamental and structural’ reforms, in what is now hyped to be the “New Economic Model” — it better be one.

Pakatan strongly proposes few prerequisites to be put in place before attempting to replace the current SST. Though the initial 4 per cent rate for the GST may look appealing and enticing enough, this sugar-coated medicine, may actually become the medicine that kills the patient.

Reiterating, the nation needs to address, the low-income trap as only 15 per cent or 1.5 million of the work force pay income tax.

Real wages of in the domestic sector, according to the World Bank, only grew by a mere 2.6 per cent between 1994 and 2007. That’s well beyond a decade of stagnation in term of real wages growth (after taking account of inflation).

The economy must be allowed to propel into a higher income economy based on productivity (keeping cost-per-unit down) in knowledge-intensive industries and activities. No two ways about it.

That’s the way forward. Growth should now be generated through private investment (both local and foreign) and not merely by pump priming of the G-factor (in the GDP) in infrastructural mega-projects by the government, exacerbating the already yawning deficit of 8 per cent (yes not 7.4 per cent as claimed) in 2009.

We need the quality foreign investment (FDI) not so much of the portfolios investment or the hot-money.

More importantly, we need to reverse the outflow of capital ie. getting our local investors to fund growth and industries hence employment locally in higher value-added activities.

Together with the real wages issue, is the urgent need to close-up the widening income disparities.

Our income, let alone equity, disparity is about one of the worst in the world, close to perhaps Papua New Guinea. It’s quite meaningless talking about improving income per capita when the income disparity is malignant.

The NEM must seek to improve both before GST is put in place.

Finally, back to the bone of contention. Why must the government ‘victimise’ the rakyat for new revenue source and stream. Is that the true meaning of Rakyat-First’s slogan of the PM? That is to be first victimised!

We have argued and proposed that the Federal Government plucks all holes of leakages and stop the hemorrhages through ‘best practice’ and good governance in procurements and the entire delivery system. The Auditor General’s report alluded a saving of RM28 billion a year if these measures are put in place.

That’s RM27 billion more than the mere additional RM1 billion the government is targeting in the first year of the GST implementation.

How about the APs that could be monetised through an open-tender system which could easily bring in a revenue stream of RM2 billion yearly, depending on how much the government wants to tender the 60-70,000 APs yearly.

Stop subsidising the non-deserving private sectors eg. IPPs etc. and stop crony practices and bailouts as in rewarding Syabas, a private company closely linked to the Federal Government, a RM320 million interest-free loan facility that is also unsecured and back-loaded.

That BN’s penchant for giving such handouts and patronising rent-seeking activities is globally recognised, hence the reason why we are in these unending economic woes.

We are in serious need of concrete but perhaps ‘painful’ reforms. If the PM insists of pacifying the rakyat through this delay tactic, he cheats no one save himself.

He does it at his peril again!

Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad is a member of the PAS central working committee and MP of Kuala Selangor.
* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

Malaysian Insider: Is Malaysia heading to an early election?

Is Malaysia heading to an early election?

Malaysian Insider, KUALA LUMPUR, March 15 — The country’s recent pullback on fiscal reforms has fuelled talk that the government of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is gearing up for snap polls even though the next general election is not due until 2013. Following are questions and answers on the possible timing and the political and economic implications of an early general election in the country.

Why are early polls likely?
The end of fuel subsidy reforms as well as a delay in tabling a Goods and Services Tax Bill in Parliament indicate a reluctance by the government to impose measures that would have an impact on poorer Malay voters, a critical vote bank for the Umno, backbone of the ruling coalition. This in turn signals a government that may be making preparations for early polls.

Should investors worry?
To some extent. The last elections turned unpredictable in 2008, when the opposition alliance, now led by former Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, scored the country’s biggest-ever election upset. It ended the government’s two-thirds parliamentary majority, and the opposition wound up controlling five of 13 states. That election result triggered a stock market sell-off.

Recent moves to halt fiscal consolidation imply the government thinks it can narrow its budget gap, which stood at a 20-year high of 7.4 per cent of GDP in 2009, purely on the back of increased economic activity and higher oil prices.

Longer term, failure to implement fiscal reform leaves the country, Asia’s third-most trade dependent economy, vulnerable to external economic and commodity price shocks. State oil company Petronas provides almost half of all government revenues.

When could the polls be held?
The most probable timing now seems to be during 2011, for several reasons:

• The government normally calls for polls only when economic growth is in positive territory. Najib is aiming for GDP growth of at least five per cent this year after the economy contracted 1.7 per cent in 2009. The government would need at least until the first quarter of next year for the recovery to reach ordinary voters.
• Many of the reform pledges that Najib has made, covering six core areas from fighting graft to improving urban transportation, have deadlines at the end of this year.
• Elections in Sarawak. The state is Barisan Nasional’s (BN) stronghold that provides the government with 30 of its 137 Parliament seats. Sarawak is the sole state in the country that holds state elections separately from national polls. It must hold polls by June 2011.
• If the government held the next Sarawak state election concurrently with federal polls it would stretch the opposition’s meagre campaign resources even more thinly.
• Alternatively, the government could call for state elections in Sarawak either late this year or early next year, in the hope that a strong showing would bolster confidence ahead of national polls that would follow soon after.
• But even if the government scores a landslide win in Sarawak, it may not be willing to take a risk in far more politicised mainland Malaysia where the PAS is making inroads into its Malay voter base.
• Petrol price hikes in 2006 helped the opposition DAP to an unprecedented six state seats in Sarawak polls that year.
• “I believe the Sarawak polls will be held separately before the next general election because Sarawak is usually taken as a rough barometer before the national polls are held,” said Shaharuddin Badaruddin, associate professor at Universiti Teknologi Mara.
• Calling for an election later than next year also poses a risk for the government due to the possibility of a rise in religious and racial tensions. Ethnic Chinese and Indian voters have shown no sign of returning to BN since 2008.

What are the indications of imminent polls?

• The following indicators will provide a rough early warning that polls are coming in the next three to six months. None have taken place so far:
• BN component party leaders and state leaders from the Umno, the lynchpin of the 12-party ruling coalition, will be summoned by Najib to finalise their proposed list of election candidates.
• The Election Commission will also indicate looming polls with a step up in its own logistical preparations and a finalising of the electoral rolls.
• A run-up in the stock market. In the past, government-linked funds were asked to prop up the stock market several months ahead of elections to create a feel-good factor for the economy, though the extent of such rallies varies.
• What would be the outcome of the polls?
• While the Opposition has never been stronger in the wake of what locals dubbed the 2008 “political tsunami”, the odds are still loaded in favour of BN.

The Anwar-led opposition has won seven out of nine by-elections held since the 2008 elections and most of Umno’s partners in BN are either paralysed following the drubbing they received in 2008 or plagued by infighting.

Anwar is battling charges of sodomy in court, in what he says is a repeat of a political conspiracy that saw him jailed for six years after his sacking as deputy prime minister in 1998.

The government insists he will get a fair trial. One risk is that a guilty verdict could energise and embolden the opposition. Alternatively it could drive a wedge between the reformers, ethnic Chinese and Islamists that comprise his alliance.

Umno has 78 parliamentary seats. Adding in allied MPs from its stronghold states of Sabah and Sarawak, its total rises to 117 seats, enough for a simple majority in the 222-seat Parliament even if all the coalition’s ethnic Chinese and Indian parties fail to win anything.

Najib however needs a two-thirds majority if he is to legitimise his rule and avoid a leadership challenge, a fate that befell his predecessor Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who presided over the 2008 election losses. — Reuters

Malaysian Mirror: Martin Jalleh: An Unhappy Chinese New Year?

An Unhappy Chinese New Year?	Share
Martin Jalleh Sunday, 21 February 2010 03:55
A CHINESE New Year has dawned. The Prime Minister declares that Malaysian Chinese should be daring to help build a more dynamic 1Malaysia. Such a dramatic invitation by Najib Abdul Razak  is made against the dark and depressing background of discordant voices by Umnoputras which the drums and deafening firecrackers fail to drown out and exorcise. We hear the disturbing insult of all the Ahmad Ismails labelling the Malaysian Chinese "immigrants" and "squatters" and adding that they have no right to equal treatment with the Umnoputras – who just happened to migrate here a little earlier than the rest of us. Lost in translation We hear the deranged Nasir Safars spitting on us in 1Malaysia seminars with their vile claim that our mothers and grandmothers came here to sell their bodies, whilst never mentioning how the Umnoputras sell their principles, souls and even the country away. We hear the devious speeches of Umno “intellectuals” in the Biro Tatanegara such as the ridiculous claim of a Chinese conspiracy with Singapore, when the Malays are disunited, to topple the Malay government, when very obviously the BTN courses are meant “to promote certain government leaders” (Nazri Aziz) and to protect, perpetuate and preserve their political power! We hear the disgraceful racist rant of all the Abdul Rauf Yusohs in closed-door Umno functions abroad and at home calling non-Malays “‘bangsa asing” and accusing them of “trampling on the Malays in ''Tanah Melayu'', when the glaring reality is that of Umnoputras trampling on each other and on ordinary Malays to grab and gobble the largest piece possible of ‘Tanah Melayu’ that is left! We hear the despicable and highly racist hysteria of Perkasa whose president Ibrahim Ali has hopped back as the saviour of the hapless Malay by waging war against the supposedly avaricious Chinese, whilst hiding the fact that the real enemy of the Malays are people like him and his cohorts who have been Umno’s self-serving sycophants who suck up to the powers that be to satisfy their insatiable greed. We hear the views of Dr M claiming (without any substantiation, solid evidence or statistics) that the Chinese are the real masters of the country – when in reality it is he, his cronies and a few Chinese capitalists whom he had created who are the real “tuans”. He is also the real mastermind of Umno’s racist policies – the “Father of all racists” as Nazri Aziz has crowned him! The real culprits We hear the disgusting attempts to make the Chinese the scapegoat of Malay poverty when for the last 39 years of the NEP it was the Umnoputras who have squeezed and bled this country dry, siphoned and stashed their ill-gotten gains overseas and sent their children abroad to study in premier schools, whilst deceiving, denying and depriving the poor Malay of what was due to them. We hear the deafening silence of the Umnoputras on the many bail-outs, buy-outs and the mind-boggling billions wasted and still more which went missing without being accounted for or anyone held responsible for, especially during the Mahathir years, and which goes on unabated till today, whilst the Chinese are accused of getting richer at the expense of the Malays! We hear the derogatory remarks of Umnoputras against the Chinese newspapers while Umno-owned English and Malay papers, especially the Utusan Malaysia, are allowed to go on a spree of spinning falsehood, spouting lies, spewing seditious articles and spreading what Nazri Aziz calls “outdated racist propaganda” with impunity and immunity by the Umno Home Minister. We hear the diabolical voices in Umno who politicise religion for the party’s survival by creating unfounded fears and insecurities amongst Muslims, deepening distrust of adherents of other religions and derailing sincere efforts at inter-religious dialogue whilst declaring those who detest their devious ways as anti-Islam and anti-Malay. We hear the desperate attempts by Umnoputras to manufacture imaginary threats and bogeymen such as the Chinese wanting to conquer this country from the Malays, the Christians hell-bent on confusing and converting every Muslim and even the CIA having covert operations here! Alas, Umno can only survive with a siege mentality which Khairy Jamaluddin had urged it to abandon. We hear the deceiving hypocrisy of Umnoputras who portray themselves as the protectors of the Malays to revive their comatosed political careers, and when in actuality Malay rights have always been outlined, stated and guaranteed clearly by the Federal Constitution (Professor Dr Abdul Aziz Bari), i.e., the Malays do not need further protection from Umno or the likes of Ibrahim Ali! We hear the Umnoputras’ drummed-up danger of the Malays losing their rights – when they in fact control all the (Malay) institutions, dictate all laws and policies, own all the state-owned companies, GLCs (Petronas), banks and national assets and resources and are accorded priorities and privileges when it comes to properties, public contracts and scholarships! If indeed the Malays do lose their rights – it is to the Umno elite! Pervasive delirium We hear the delirium of the Umno warlords who are drunk with power, warning non-Malays not to push the Malays too far (who is pushing?) or they would go amok, create a bloodbath and start another May 13 “or Feb. 13”, when it is obvious that such intimidating threats of thuggery and mob violence are meant to defend “the most corrupt institution in this country” (Lim Kit Siang), Umno! We hear Najib’s voice spurring the country towards oneness, but will it be silenced by Umno’s cacophony of racism? Will the PM show spine, substance and nerves of steel and stop the mounting dissonance by the Umno warlords, government officials and extremist groups like Perkasa or will he be satisfied in being a sloganeer and somnolent PM and meet the same tragic fate as his predecessor? We hear Najib’s invitation to the Malaysian Chinese to be more courageous, committed and to contribute to a more dynamic 1Malaysia. At the same time, Umnoputras are allowed to gamble away the country by playing the racist card to the hilt! Is this part of Najib’s charade and chicanery of “concrete change” on Chinese New Year’s Day? If it is, he and Umno will not last very long.

Mysinchew: The moment when dream is awakened

The moment when dream is awakened 

mysinchew, 02/12/2009

I wonder if you feel the same as me, all of the sudden, I realized friends and relatives around me seem to get lesser by the day.

Those years when the New Year drew near, all sorts of gathering appointments almost completely filled the diaries, but this year it seems so quiet.

Even in normal time, phone calls become less and less, face to face meet up also become much less.

Perhaps, everybody is busy with their own things, or perhaps, nowadays people prefer to stay in.

However, it is not entirely like this, thinking further, actually old friends and relatives are not around any more. God bless, they are still alive and well, they just left the country, Malaysia.

They have gone to China to set factory; Ah Wang quit his engineer job and migrated to Australia to set up his little food store business, Ah Fong left the local University went to Hong Kong as a lecturer. 'Frog' went to Taiwan to pursue his second career life. Others went to Americia, England, even Indonesia... 

At first, I thought these are individual cases, but gradually, people around me realized the same, these are not individual cases but a general symptoms of our society. they are not small numbers but the pretty big indeed.

Department of Foreign Affairs released the figures earlier, it confirmed the situation is real.

From March 2008 through September 2009, a total of 300,000 Malaysian migrated to other countries, among them 200,000 left between Jan - Aug 2009. (in 8 months)

Cumulatively, there are 2 million Malaysian migrated, this figure is close to the number of Indonesian workers in Malaysia today.

The difference are, those migrated are mostly professional and middle class people.

They have many reasons to leave: pursue career development, for the future of
their children,  in search of better life and environment...   

In one sentence, they lost hope of Malaysia.

50 years ago people said: Malaysia is very good, better than Hong Kong and even Japan.

30 years ago people said: Malaysia is not bad, comparable to S.. Korea and Taiwan. (No mention of Hong Kong and Japan any more).

20 years ago people said: Malaysia can do lah, at least better than China and Thailand (Cannot compare with Taiwan and Korea lah)

10 years ago poeple said: No matter how bad Malaysia is, cannot be worse than Vietnam and Indonesia (China is already in a different category).

Today, the economic growth rate of Vietnam and Indonesia already far exceeded Malaysia. Social activity and intellectual development of the country is also better, the gap between us and them is closing up.

Why worry? there are still Philipines, Cambodia and Myanmar behind us.  
However, according to an economist who recently surveyed Phillipines,  he thinks in 20 years' time, Malaysia can replace Phillipines to become the World exporter of Malaysian maids. 

Over half the century, Malaysians live in the big old imperial housing complex, closed up and survive on properties left behind by the ancestor; continue to consume up social resources, wasteful, and drive away talents; they never talk about competitiveness, totally neglect productivity and hate meritocracy. 

When Asia economic storm hit in 1997, Malaysia closed their doors, thinking we beautifully avoided a disaster, they even think of themselves as genius being able to handle the situation so well.

However, just look at other countries in our neighbourhood, they stand up, face the storm, and walk out of the storm. They overhauled the system, improve the processes and march forward, they moved up to a new level. And Malaysia, still walking on the same spot.

Dear Malaysia, it's time to wake up! We are very very late now ! 

For original article, please see link below: http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/12566