From: othman@ntrc25.ntrc.ntu.ac.sg (othman (EEE/Div 4))
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asean
Subject: Re: The "success" of NEP
Date: 21 Nov 92 14:35:27 GMT
Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Ahmad On (on@husc10.harvard.edu) wrote:
: 
: I'd just like to throw out a few facts on the effect that the NEP
: has had on the Malaysian economy in the past 20 years or so.
: 
: 1. $30 billion was spent on poverty eradication.  But, the government
:    admits that only $12 billion of this reached the target groups, with
:    the rest going to administration and infrastructure costs.
:    Unfortunately, it is unlikely that even this $12 billion reached the
:    groups targeted for poverty eradication since some of the recipients
:    obviously did not deserve it (i.e. rich Bumiputras).

Is this part of the NEP? It is  excessively low. Could it also include training
cost which do not give direct cash to the target group?
: 
: 2. The quota system at local universities has had preverse effects on
:    economics development in two ways:
: 	a. It has resulted in greater non-Malay student enrollment
:            abroad, causing massive loss of foreign exchange.

The fact is correct but the conclusion is poor. IT is not the quota rather
the lack of university. In fact the quota had not even been reached. I've
met Malaysian students who are offered places in Malaysian universities 
ending up at NTU. Also a lot of quota places are not being filled because
of being rejected, according to MCA.  

: 	b. It has encouraged emigration among non-Malays who are
: 	   disillusioned with the status quo, causing a brain-drain
: 	   for the Malaysian economy.

Again the fact is correct but the conclusion is ridiculous. CAn you explain why
I'm in Singapore? I will say that only fools want to stay and work in Malaysia
given the extermely low salary. Of course I'm one of the fools when I go back
to Malaysia in March 1993. 

:    Also, government sponsorship for Malay students abroad has resulted
:    in less financing for local universities, causing declining student-
:    faculty ratios and reducing public regard for domestic tertiary
:    education.

This can be one of the reasons but not the only one. The reasons are deeper
but I like to summarise it as 'overseas trip'.

: 
: 3. Although 45 percent of all eligible Bumiputras participate in the
:    Amanah Saham Nasional (ASN) unit trust scheme, only 1.3 percent
:    of all eligible Bumiputras owned 75 percent of ASN shares in the late
:    1980s, despite the $50,000 ceiling imposed on individual ownership.

IT WILL BE nice to know how big is the ASN share. Is it 5billion? 75% of that
is 3.75 bil. IF there are 16 million in Malaysia. Let us say 60% are bumi,
assume that only 25% are above 21. There are therefore 2.4 million investors.
1.3% of them is 31,200. With maximum of 50,000, they contribute 1.56 billion.
Of course if you calculate the % when ASN first start in 1981, then the figure
is valid but that is not how you do an honest figure. The figure should be
taken in late 1980s or 1991, when people are becoming aware of the benefits.

: 
: 4. The various consequences of ethnic streaming and double standards
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The FULL boarding schools constitute only a smal percentage of the total
student population so how can that be an overall ethnic streaming. How can it
be a double standard when similar chinese based private elite schools are
allowed to exist? IN fact some of these missionary schools are among the best
in the nation, in fact produce much more better qualified students than these
bumis based elite schools.


:    in tertiary education have undermined and continue to undermine
:    Bumiputra self-esteem and confidence as well as public perception
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well this is too much. In fact it has the opposite effect.
Public perception is very hard to gauge but I assures you that the majority
do not feel that there is any problem. The people who have grudges are the 
opposition parties such as DAP, which do not manage to gather that many votes.
Even if you double the number of DAP votes to take into account the possibility
of canvassed votes, the number is still a minoriy because the chinese and
Indians are the minority unless you are led to believe that they make up 50%
of the population, which is nonsense. They are more obvious because they are in
towns and live in better houses.
	You do not see the majority poor natives.

:    of ethnic relations.  
: 
: (Figures taken from "Pacific Affairs".  I can't remember the exact
: issue but if you're interested, I'll be glad to look it up for you.
: It is, IMO, a very interesting overview on NEP in the past 20 years.)
	VEry interesting review indeed but I'm sure the figures come from
government agencies but they way they conclude based on those figures are
outrageous. Some of these figures had been used by Government agencies to
correct the mistakes by 1990s. Of course this were not reported.
	There are still many more to be corrected.

As to the ongoing correction, maybe the younger Malay students can explain to
us the current situation. I may be out of date but from what I've observed,
it is still not enough. Howeve under current policies, the government is
SLOWLY going into the correct direction, which is not the destruction of the
NEP, rather making its implementation more cost effective. 
--
Othman bin Ahmad, School of EEE,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 2263.
Internet Email: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg
Bitnet Email: eoahmad@ntuvax.bitnet