No cheers for Farce of the Year

By
Kee Thuan Chye

SURE, “politics is the art of the possible” – especially if it involves politicians who can change their tune overnight. That’s why it has been possible for Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat and Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek to suddenly become friends again after a year of fierce animosity between them.

The art of the possible also works with politicians who can forget about scruples and put on a show. Nothing exhibits this more clearly than the outwardly awkward reconciliation between these enemies last Thursday. For added value, the would-be usurper of the presidency, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai, was also dragged into the act, a seemingly reluctant performer at that. So too was Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha, who had until now kept a dignified low profile.

It was a show that could easily have given the Goons of that famous British TV comedy a run for their asininity. I laughed so much, I had to call it the Most Laughable Farce of the Year, and nominate Ong, Chua and the supporting players for Best Comic Ensemble.

Who in their right mind would give much credence to this quick-glue patch-up that is aimed at reunifying the MCA? From reports, Ong had to leave the press conference room for 10 minutes to bring Liow and Kong in. Scriptwriters would have their imagination fired up by what transpired in those 10 minutes. They would be wondering, too, about what might be simmering behind those counterfeit smiles flashed for the media cameras. The tears of a clown? The resentment of facing a checkmate?

Scriptwriters would also be wondering if there was an unseen hand behind this sudden volte-face on the part of Ong and Chua since both have said that the prime minister gave them his blessing to get back together. Was this an example of deus ex machina, a la Aristotle? Who is the deus (“god” in Latin)? Are these four men in actuality wayang kulit characters putting on a show at the command of their puppet-master?

Sorry, I got carried away with the dramatic possibilities. I actually meant to ask: Where is the concern for integrity in this latest episode of the MCA saga? At what level is the moral quotient of these men who purport to lead the MCA? How is the MCA going to be credible in the eyes of the Chinese community – let’s not even consider the wider Malaysian public – when what its leaders have done must force us to suspend our disbelief?

Besides, how workable is this hasty marriage of inconvenience between Ong and Chua likely to be?

Chua was the duly elected deputy president. Then he got sacked from the party because Ong looked hell-bent on getting him out. That riled Chua up and he fought back with a vengeance. At the Oct 10 EGM, the delegates sent both a message – they registered a vote of no-confidence against Ong as president, and reinstated Chua as an ordinary member but not as deputy president. In short, both should bow out.

Ong had promised to step down if the no-confidence motion was carried by only one vote, but he broke his promise. After the EGM, 20 Central Committee members urged him to resign. Ong said he felt betrayed by his friends and so he turned the tables on them. A deal was struck between him and his former foe. And now they’re back, shaking hands. How does one perceive all that? Can one view these two men as being other than desperadoes who want to cling on to their positions?

Chua now seems to question the outcome of the EGM. Although the delegates voted against his reinstatement as deputy president, he has applied to the Registrar of Societies to clarify whether he should be reinstated in spite of that – since his sacking from the party has been overturned. This doesn’t show good faith. It shows that he is willing to respect only the resolution that is in his favour and to dispute the one that is not. Surely, this will infuriate some of the delegates. How then can his new pact with Ong help to reunify the party?

There is still a chance that the registrar or the home minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, will decide to have Chua restored to his number two post in the party. If that should happen, what would become of Liow, who has meanwhile been elected deputy president, after the EGM, by the Central Committee? Is he going to be eventually played out and left in the cold? What then might be the consequences?

Chua has said rather glibly, “Then I become deputy president lah.” That’s easy to say, but there may be other ramifications. Right after the EGM, Liow was not thinking of only becoming number two; he had ambitions of becoming the chief. Is he likely to quietly go back to being vice-president and be a model MCA man?

On the other hand, what if Chua does not get reinstated? Would his followers be happy that Liow remain in what was Chua’s domain since the latter was the duly elected one whereas Liow was merely elected by the CC? Is everyone going to take it lying down for the sake of reconciliation and unity? Are warring factions likely to become peaceniks overnight?

Ong says the leaders can now “re-focus on strengthening the party to regain the confidence and trust of the Chinese community and Malaysians in general”. Of course he would say that. What else is there? It’s a platitude he needs to hang on to since he didn’t do the honourable thing of stepping down like he said he would. Who can believe what he says now?

Chua, too, has his own platitude. In justifying the reconciliation, he said, “In politics, they say it is an art to make the impossible possible and the possible impossible.” He might have thought he was adding a new twist with the second clause of that statement, but it could even turn out to be a prophecy. What might have been possible for the MCA – the chance of renewal with the departure of the two “tigers” Ong and Chua – could eventually become impossible.

Kee Thuan Chye is the man behind the book, March 8: The Day Malaysia Woke Up

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 27 October 2009, 1:28 pm and is filed under
Kee Thuan Chye
,
MCA
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sivakumar disrobed in ‘BN conspiracy’

Humayun Kabir | Oct 28, 09 6:42pm | Malaysiakini

Barisan Nasional has been accused of orchestrating an elaborate plan to prevent ousted Pakatan Rakyat speaker V Sivakumar from exercising his duties at the state assembly sitting today.

Sivakumar, who levelled the charge at a press conference in Ipoh, said this was evident when a large group of police personnel stopped him at the car park of the state secretariat building, where the legislative assembly is located.

He said their motive was to confiscate the speaker’s robe and songkok that he was wearing.

“It was a BN conspiracy to grab the official robe from me,” he claimed, saying the police choked him in the ensuing struggle as he attempted to hold on to it.

Teja state assemblyperson Chang Ming Kai said he went to Sivakumar’s assistance, but was in turn was stopped by police personnel.

“One of them grabbed me and pulled me to the ground (in the melee),” Chang said.

At a press conference later at state DAP headquarters, ousted Pakatan menteri besar Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin provided more details, saying he had witnessed the incident.

“During the struggle with the police, Sivakumar managed to hang on to the collar of the speaker’s robe. There was a threat to the life of the speaker,” Nizar claimed.

Sivakumar, who lost the battle – first for the songkok and then for the robe – did manage to save the collar which he displayed to the media.

Nizar said there is video footage of the assault on Sivakumar and that legal action is being considered against the police.

As a result of police intervention, the Pakatan delegation’s attendance at the sitting was delayed. By the time they entered the assembly, BN speaker R Ganesan had ordered a recess of an hour.

Chronology of events

This chain of events was reconstructed from details provided at the press conference.

Sivakumar was wearing the robe when he started out with the Pakatan delegation from DAP headquarters for the 10am sitting.

After passing through three barriers and two checkpoints, he lost the songkok to a police officer who snatched it off his head. At the time, Sivakumar was about to enter the lift at the basement, to go to the chamber on the second floor.

Enraged, the Pakatan team left the building and returned to the main road where they told the media about what had happened.

They also said the police had tried to detain Sivakumar under Section 111 of the Criminal Procedure Code to record a witness statement in relation to police reports lodged against him earlier.

Nizar said he grabbed the cap of a police officer in anger and refused to give it back to him, asking instead: “How do you feel when your official cap is unlawfully (snatched)? That is how Sivakumar felt (about losing the songkok).”

After arguing for five minutes with the police, the Pakatan team returned to the state secretariat where other police personnel confronted Sivakumar. This is when they tried to get the robe off him.

Again, Sivakumar returned to the main road to brief the waiting media about the ‘assault” on him. However, realising that any assemblyperson who fails to attend two sittings could lose his seat, he made his way to the assembly.

Police reports lodged

Sivakumar later lodged two police reports – one was about the alleged assault by police personnel and the other was to disclaim knowledge of a fake notice that he is accused of circulating.

The document states that a state assembly sitting would be convened at the Heritage Hotel in Ipoh today to table the 2010 budget, as well as a motion by Nizar, the Pasir Panjang representative, to dissolve the assembly.

It said Nizar would seek the Perak sultan’s consent to dissolve the assembly and call for fresh state elections, at an audience with the ruler at Istana Kinta at 3pm today.

According to Bernama, Sivakumar claimed that he is a victim of dirty politics. He denied having issued any such notice, which carries the letterhead of the speaker’s office and is dated Oct 23, 2009.

Swift state budget

Meanwhile, Nizar also chided the BN government for passing of the 2010 state budget within an hour.

The people-friendly budget when tabled by Menteri Besar Zambry Abdul Kadir was passed in a very swift manner with a show of BN hands as the Pakatan side did not participate in the budget debate.

“They shovelled and bulldozed the state budget within a hour as they fear that we might jeopardise their 2010 budget,” said Nizar.

“Normally it will take about 45 days for the federal budget to be passed in Parliament but here in Perak we have the shortest time for the passage of the budget,” he reasoned.

“I believe this is the fastest budget that was passed in the state’s history,” he said.

——

Double trouble in Perak

Written by Chan Kok Leong

Wednesday, 28 October 2009 19:31

The Edge Malaysia

IPOH: After the almost six-hour fiasco of May 7, not many journalists had expected a quick and speedy resolution to Perak’s second or third legislative assembly (DUN) sitting of the year.

But, despite the twin sittings today, complete with two Speakers, Menteris Besar, sets of assemblymen and even opening prayers, there were fewer casualties.

There was also no repeat of scuffling within the legislative assembly hall or outside the state government office.

The only casualties were Pakatan Rakyat appointed Speaker V Sivakumar who was unceremoniously and literally stripped off his robes inside the state office. Sivakumar’s DAP compatriot Nga Kor Ming experienced the same.

Nga alleged that police within the hall had also “literally grabbed him by the genitals”.

Barely 24 hours ahead of the meeting, the authorities and Barisan Nasional appointed Speaker Datuk R Ganesan had taken the necessary precautions (See Perak state assembly braces for another storm).

Despite the relative calm and ease of movement outside the perimeters of the state government office, security going into the legislative hall was tighter than Kuala Lumpur International Airport.

Journalists and photographers, who began entering the hall at 9.30am, were frisked and individually scanned before getting their bags searched thoroughly.

In contrast, some police personnel, whose total presence is estimated to number above 300, were seen enjoying their roti canai, along with two elderly joggers at the only mamak restaurant across from the state office. Incidentally, the DAP Perak office is housed above the restaurant.

Media personnel, invited guests and government officers were the first group scheduled by Ganesan to enter the hall at 9.30am. Before the last reporter entered the hall, almost 100

guests and officers were already seated.

So too were MB Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir and his backbenchers, who formed the second group of people allowed into the hall. BN-friendly independents Osman Mohd Jailu (Changkat Jering), Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang) and Hee Yit Foong (Jelapang) were also “early”.

Ganesan was also in the Speaker’s seat surrounded by some 15 sergeants-in-arms.

The bell signalling the commencement of the sitting promptly rang at 10am and Ganesan began the sitting by expressing the DUN’s condolences over the Kampar bridge tragedy, observing a minute’s silence and reminding the representatives of the prohibitions he had put in place a day earlier.

Representatives were prohibited from taking videos, using theirs phones, laptops or email during the sitting. Interestingly, during the entire proceeding, Datuk Mohd Khusairi Abdul Talib (Slim-BN) was happily banging away at his laptop.

Ganesan then proceeded by asking Zambry to deliver the Perak Budget 2010 speech. Without fuss nor debate and within 20 minutes, the budget had passed the second reading.

The Speaker’s timetable worked to the ruling government’s advantage as it was another 25 minutes later before the sounds of a commotion announcing the arrival of Pakatan Rakyat’s representatives were heard.

Ganesan promptly adjourned the sitting till 11.20am as photographers rushed to the entrance. Amid the shouting and some shoving, the “other” MB Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin and his backbenchers entered the hall with Thomas Su (Pasir Pinji) chanting, “Speaker haram!

Bodyguard banyak!”

Looking amused, the BN backbenchers kept their peace while officials and guests laughed off the spectacle.

It was another 15 minutes before Sivakumar took his seat on the opposition side of the hall and a second doa was read out.

In the midst, Chang Lih Kang (Teja-PKR) used the microphone to bellow: “Speaker haram! Sila keluar dewan!”.

After the commotion, the PR side of the sitting passed three motions — to suspend all national service camps or outdoor programmes, to recognise the Auditor-General’s report on Perak and to appoint PKR state chief Osman Abdul Rahman as a senator.

At 11.20am, Ganesan reconvened his sitting and managed to pass Perak’s 2010 Budget amid  continuous derision from PR representatives.

Despite their attempts at distracting him, Ganesan kept his eye on the ball and his script. He was so focused that at one point, the former Sungkai representative could not hear Zambry’s

attempts to read his script.

For a brief moment, both spoke into the microphone. But by that time it did not matter, as the sitting was rendered academic — BN’s sitting will most likely be the one recognised.

At that point, not only were PR representatives treating the BN sitting as a non-event but guests and government officers alike were seen walking and talking on their phones at will. Legislative decorum and respect appeared to have abandoned the hall.

Shortly after BN backbenchers had passed their budget, Sivakumar adjourned his sitting and PR assemblypersons left the hall for their press conference.

During the press conference, Sivakumar told the press he had been roughed up as the police tore off his robes.

“Some 20 policemen, some in uniform and others in plainclothes, grabbed me and seized the Speaker’s robe from me. In the process, I was choked and the robe was torn,” said the Tronoh

assemblyman in a press conference at the DUN library.

At another press conference at 1.30pm, Nizar told reporters he would also file police reports for assault, excessive police force and a poison pen letter.

BN adjourned their sitting at around 1pm.

During BN’s press conference, a beaming Zambry said he was pleased with today’s sitting.

“Despite the chaotic environment, the BN reps behaved well. BN always follows the rules and I wish to congratulate our representatives for maintaining their decorum,” said Zambry during the press conference in his office.

Commenting on his counterparts from PR, Zambry said they were “quite outah (poor standard)” and were only looking to “dramatise” the event.

“They were here to provoke us into acting against them and then using it to gain public sympathy.”

By 3pm, with the actors off the stage, things have returned to normal.

But there is no doubt in Perak, at least, that the circus has not left town yet.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 28 October 2009, 10:01 pm and is filed under
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


RPK’s son beaten in prison?

The crisis of confidence in the key institutions in the country is also highlighted by Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s two days ago, viz:

“To those who walk in the corridors of power, I wish to inform you that I know you are beating up my son in the Sungai Buloh Prison. Every day he is being subjected to beatings to force him to withdraw his not guilty plea and to plead guilty to the various charges he is facing.

“I also know he is being subjected to these daily beatings to force him to withdraw his not guilty plea and instead plead guilty because there is no evidence against him and the charges are merely trumped-up charges.

“Furthermore, I know he is being threatened with six additional charges to the ones he is already facing and he is being beaten up to force him to plead guilty to these charges as well.

“My son has informed me he can no longer stand these daily beatings and he wants to plead guilty to the charges. I have advised him to do so although we both realise that this means he will be spending at least ten years or so in jail.

“My son is aware he is being subjected to this torture to induce me to surface and he is prepared to plead guilty and spend ten years in jail if that means it will save me from the powers-that-be.

“Today, Barisan Nasional is in power so it has the power of life and death over its citizens. Well, who knows, one day Barisan Nasional might be kicked out and Malaysia will see a new government.

“Those behind the effort of torturing my son with these daily beatings had better hope that Barisan Nasional stays on as the government for a long, long time to come. If not, and if Barisan Nasional falls, then rest assured it will be retribution time and all those people who are using my son to get to me will be made to pay for it.

“And, please, this is not a threat. This is a promise. And that is all I wish to say about the matter.”

Parliament and the nation are entitled to a full and satisfactory response to RPK’s blog.

[Speech by DAP Parliamentary Leader and MP for Ipoh Timor Lim Kit Siang in the Dewan Rakyat on the 2010 Budget on 29th Oct. 2009]

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 29 October 2009, 6:44 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Raja Petra Kamaruddin
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


1Malaysia kills – “1Malaysia 2Perak 3Katak”

Najib will be finishing his seventh month as Prime Minister which he started off with the slogan “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”.

Does Najib’s 2010 Budget pass as a 1Malaysia Budget?

Two events have cast their shadows over the 2010 Budget and the 1Malaysia slogan –  first, the drowning of 11 year-old Dina Devi Nathan from SJK (T) Mambang Di Awan and we have just received reports confirming the death of the other  two eleven-year-olds Devadharshini Mageswaran from SJK (T) Mambang Di Awan and Divya Shree Vasudevan from SJK (T) Gopeng when the suspension bridge of the Education Ministry’s 1Malaysia motivation camp at SK Kuala Dipang collapsed on Monday night, sending some 30 pupils crossing the bridge into the Kampar River.

Like other DAP MPs including the MP for Bagan, Lim Guan Eng, MP for Beruas Ngeh Koo Ham, MP for Ipoh Barat, Kulasegaran who visited the tragic Kuala Dipang site on Tuesday, I was shocked and outraged at the utter recklessness, negligence, irresponsibility and complete disregard for the lives and safety of schoolchildren on the part of the authorities, particularly the education department and the contractor concerned, in allowing the suspension bridge to be built without adequate foundation or safety features causing its collapse in two weeks and claiming the lives of three children.

There should be a full public inquiry into the tragedy of the collapse of the Kuala Dipang 1Malaysia centre suspension bridge, with no cover-ups to avoid accountability as is the prevalent culture of the government-of-the-day.

Heads must roll, whether the Education Minister, Deputy Education Minister, the Education Ministry Secretary-General, the Education Director-General or others to end the culture of impunity if the tragedy of the Kuala Dipang Suspension Bridge tragedy and the loss of innocent lives are not to be repeated.

This is one dire example that Najib’s “1Malaysia.Performance Now. People First” programme can kill innocent people, like the three hapless Tamil school pupils in Kampar if it is a camouflage for corruption, abuse of power and various improprieties and irregularities.

The second event was the farce of two separate Perak State Assembly sittings held simultaneously at the same time and in the same venue at the Perak State Secretariat yesterday, with two Mentris Besar and two Speakers – all caused by “1Malaysia. 2Perak. 3Katak”!

What is even more shameful was the gross abuse of police powers yesterday after their shameful and dishonourable role in the May 7 State Assembly meeting when plainclothes police personnel physically dragged out the legitimate and lawful Speaker Sivakumar in Speaker’s Chair out of the Assemblymen and illegally imprisoned him in the storeroom.

Despite or because of the public statement of the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein to “use less force” for the Oct. 28 Perak State Assembly, the police got the message to ensure that their “dirty work” was not committed in broad-daylight videoed for the whole world to see – like being physically dragged out in Speaker’s Robe in Speaker’s Chair which barbaric scene was immediately flashed world-wide.

The police, some 40 to 50 in plainclothes used force to assault and strangle Sivakumar to forcibly remove Speaker’s robe and songkok from him, but all this was done in the carpark of SUK, with the police hoping that such a dastardly deed would be committed without being photographed or videotaped.

What happened in the charade of the two simultaneous Perak State Assembly sittings in Ipoh yesterday was as reprehensible and shameful as the May 7 episode.

How can Najib convince Malaysians that he is fit and qualified to lead a 1Malaysia campaign when he is most responsible for creating 2Perak, two Perak Mentris Besar, two Perak Speakers, foisting an illegitimate, illegal and undemocratic state government on the people of Perak by robbing them of their democratic rights to elect the government of their choice?

Is Najib prepared to end the political charade in Perak by returning power to the people of Perak to freely and democratically choose the government they want by dissolving the Perak State Assembly and the holding of Perak state general elections?

This is the most democratic and legitimate way for Najib to resolve the undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak.

Najib should be forewarned that unless he could honourably and democratically resolve the illegitimate power grab in Perak by returning power to the people, he would never be able to earn full public credibility and legitimacy as a Prime Minister fit to lead a 1Malaysia campaign for the whole country.

[Speech 2 in Parliament on 2010 Budget on 29.10.2009]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 11:20 am and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A Malaysian Civil Service totally against 1Malaysia concept

To many Malaysians, the deplorable cowhead protests incited by UMNO in Shah Alam section 23 three days before National Day over the relocation of a Hindu temple was strong evidence of the lack of seriousness and commitment of the Najib administration to the “1Malaysia concept” – which put Malaysia in the dock of world opinion with adverse international media reports scaring off intending investors with the spectre that Malaysia is on the verge of greater racial and religious polarisation and intolerance.

The announcement in the budget of the award of national scholarships to  30 crème de la crème students strictly on merit for educational studies in world renowned universities is not proof of 1Malaysia  – but the very reverse, of the discriminatory and divisive nature of Barisan Nasional government policies in the name of NEP when they should be based on meritocracy coupled with socio-economic need and justice.

National scholarships to 30
crème de la crème
 students for world renowed universities is a  paltry and most ridiculous figure 52 years after Merdeka.

In March this year, the then Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Tan Sri Bernard Dompok announced that out of 2,000 Public Services Department scholarship scheme for foreign degrees, 20 per cent or 400 scholarships would be for excellent students, 60 per cent or 1,200 scholarships for bumiputra and non-bumiputra SPM leavers; 10 per cent for 200 scholarships for Sabah and Sarawak bumiputra SPM leavers; the remaining 10 per cent for disabled students who excelled in their studies.

Has the Barisan Nasional government again been misleading the people about the award of PSD scholarships based on “merit”?

Just one example to show the disconnect between the rhetoric and reality of Najib’s 1Malaysia.

Before the launch of the New Economic Policy in 1971, the racial breakdown of the Malaysian civil service comprised 60.8 per cent Malay, 20.2 per cent Chinese, 17.4 per cent Indian and 1.6 per cent others.

Some 35 years after the NEP in 2006, the already under-represented Chinese percentage in the Malaysian civil service had fallen further from 20.2 per cent to 9.37 per cent, while Indians who were somewhat over-represented with 17.4 per cent before the NEP were  under-represented with 5.12 per cent.

On the first day of the current parliamentary meeting on 19th October, in reply to the question by the Penang Chief Minister and MP for Bagan, Lim Guan Eng, the Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Liew Vui Keong said:

“Sehingga 31 September tahun ini, bilangan penjawat awam adalah seramai RM1,222,947 orang. Daripada jumlah tersebut, pecahan mengikut kaum adalah seperti berikut:-

Kaum

Bilangan

Peratus (%)

Melayu

932,225

76.2

Cina

72,875

6

India

50,140

4.1

Lain-lain

167,707

13.7

It is clear that government promises in response to my speech on the Ninth Malaysia Plan in April 2006 to implement strategies to ensure a more balanced and multi-racial Malaysian civil service had been a total failure, with the worst racial ratios in the Malaysian civil service of Malays at 76.2 per cent, Chinese 6%, Indians 4.1% and Others 13.6%. What 1Malaysia is Najib talking about?

[Speech4 in Parliament on 2010 Budget on 29.10.2009]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 12:25 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Education
,
nation building
,
Parliament
,
public service
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Broadband Penetration vs Broadband Quality vs HSBB

The Finance Minister said in the budget speech that the Government will expedite the implementation of HSBB at a total cost of RM11.3 billion, of which RM2.4 billion is from the Government and RM8.9 billion from Telekom Malaysia, and that a speed of 10Mbps will be provided in selected areas in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor by end-March 2010 while these services will be extended to other selected areas nationwide between 2010 and 2012.

He also said that Malaysia’s broadband penetration is currently at 25%, a rate that is far lower compared to Korea, Singapore, Japan and United States.

There is a contradiction here.

In simple terms, administration is spending RM2.4 billion to encourage Telekom Malaysia to spend RM8.9 billion for selected areas in KL and Selangor to be further extended to other selected areas nationwide.

The government policy in subsidizing HSBB is creating broadband desert in the rural area as its fiscal policy continues to favour the urban and high-income rakyat as shown by its tax cut for the top-earners.

To narrow the digital divide and to bring oasis to the broadband desert in Malaysia; I hereby propose the RM2.4 billion resources be channelled to provide minimum Broadband speed of 512 kbps to all Malaysians for free of charge. The RM2.4 billion govt grant should be matched ringgit to ringgit by Telekom Malaysia.

There’s nothing revolutionary in such a proposal. On 14 October 2009, Finland rocked the IT world with its announcement that “Starting next July, every person in Finland will have the right to a one-megabit broadband connection”  With this announcement by the Finnish Ministry of Transport and Communications. Finland is the world’s first country to create laws guaranteeing broadband access.

Earlier on Finland had already decided to make a 100 Mbps broadband connection a legal right by the end of 2015. The new goal is an intermediary step for Finland.

CNN commented, “Finland is one of the most wired in the world…But the law is designed to bring the Web to rural areas, where geographic challenges have limited access until now.

Let me come to Broadband Penetration vs Broadband Quality. Broadband Penetration measurement is today’s literacy rate. The world’s leading economy have meanwhile moved on from Broadband Penetration measurement to Broadband Quality measurement.

Thirteen years ago Malaysia proclaimed the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) as “a gift to the world” and the centrepiece of the country’s strategic initiative to leapfrog the nation into the IT era to become one of the world IT powers.

Since then, MSC and Malaysia have faded away from the world radar screen as an international IT hotspot – and Malaysia’s unchecked plunge in IT international competitiveness in the past decade has been confirmed by another adverse global study, the 2009 Oxford/Cisco Global Broadband Quality Score.

This study of the global state of broadband quality put Malaysia 53rd out of 66 countries in terms of the quality and reach of its networks – understandably behind countries like Korea, Japan, Sweden, Denmark, United States but also trailing countries we should be leading like Turkey, Chile, China, Qatar, Brazil, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, Cyprus, Costa Rica, Bahrain, Thailand, Tunisia, Mexico, Philippines and UAE.

Malaysia could not make it into the three top broadband categories of “Ready for tomorrow” (nine countries led by South Korea and Japan), “Comfortably enjoying today’s applications” (16 nations), “Meeting needs of today’s applications” (14 nations), but falls into the last category of “Below today’s applications threshold” (27 nations) and occupying the 17th position.

South Korea and Japan continue to dominate the league table in this second global study, largely due to their commitment to fast networks.

In South Korea, for instance, the government has promised universal speeds of up to 1Gbps by 2012.

Internationally, broadband quality has moved from one of penetration, i.e. who had broadband connection and who did not, to include broadband speed but Malaysia is till bogged down in the initial stage.

I have received an answer to my question to the Minister for Communications on the country’s  international internet  broadband capacity as  Malaysian broadband users are not talking about 2Mbps – lucky if 512 or 256kbps without disruptions – in their daily experience with national broadband speed.

The Minister’s answer, that Malaysia’s cumulative total international internet bandwidth capacity is 112Gbps second as of June 2009, up from 64.1 Gbps in 2008, has given rise to more questions, viz:

Can the minister explain why the growing universal criticism to the broadband speed experienced by customers?

Is TM over selling its international Internet bandwidth to corporate clients, banks, government and other ISPs?

What is the true international Internet bandwidth per user in Malaysia currently?

[Speech7 in Parliament on 2010 Budget on 29.10.2009]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 2:54 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
IT
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Does 2010 Budget pass as a 1Malaysia Budget?

Or does Najib think that Umno/BN victory in the Bagan Pinang by-election could be used as proof of popular support for his 1Malaysia slogan?

Then, what about Umno/BN defeats in the Bukit Gantang, Bukit Selambau and Permatang Pasir by-elections, if we do not to mention Penanti by-election, where 1Malaysia theme could not ensure victory? Is this to be taken as three by-election defeats as against one victory for Najib’s 1 Malaysia since he became Prime Minister in April?

It is not wise to turn 1Malaysia into a political party issue.

I had publicly called on Najib to officially withdraw the 1Malaysia slogan from the BN Bagan Pinang by-election campaign.

Firstly, what 1Malaysia could the BN talk about when there is even no 1Umno, 1MCA, 1MIC or 1BN?

If there is 1Umno, Tan Sri Mohd Isa Samad would not have become the BN candidate in Bagan Pinang by-election as evident from the strong objections from former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir and Umno stalwart Tengku Razaleigh.

There is no 1MCA with the self-proclaimed third largest Chinese political party in the world split into three or four separate “forces”, with a Super force hovering over all of them as the Umno President holds a “golden share” in MCA with power exceeding the MCA President, MCA Central Committee and MCA General Meeting all combined!

Is there 1MIC although there is still 1Samy Vellu!

When is there is no 1Umno, 1MCA or 1MIC, where is the 1Barisan Nasional?

Secondly, half the voters of Malaysia or more than half the voters in Peninsular Malaysia rejected the Barisan Nasional in the political tsunami of the March 8 general election last year. This has robbed Najib of any legitimacy to claim the support of all Malaysians for his 1Malaysia slogan and policy, which have proved to be largely similar to the very policies which had been repudiated in the 12th general elections. Instead of producing 1Malaysia, 52-years of Umno/Barisan Nasional rule have produced a Half(1/2)Malaysia or 2Malaysia – a clearly DividedMalaysia.

Thirdly, if Najib is trying to craft a new 1Malaysia policy to unite Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region, he should be inviting leaders of all political parties, whether in government or opposition, to reach a national consensus of a unifying overarching national policy accepted and recognized by the overwhelming majority of Malaysians as capable of qualifying to be termed 1Malaysia.

The last thing he should do is to turn his 1Malaysia slogan and programme into a divisive partisan question to be trotted out in by-elections as campaign issues.

The 1Malaysia logo dominated the recent Umno General Assembly and 1Malaysia is clearly the fad of the day in the speeches of UMNO leaders.

But are all the Umno leaders, including the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his deputy, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin really serious and fully committed to the 1Malaysia slogan as the overarching national philosophy in nation-building?

Without having to go into details, the first test of whether Najib, Muhyiddin and the Umno leaders are serious about 1Malaysia policy is whether they are prepared to set the example of being “Malaysian first, Malay second” for everyone to be Malaysian first and Malay, Chinese, Indian, Kadazan or Iban second?

Although the proof of the pudding is in the eating, there is no need to get to the eating stage even.

Are Najib and all the Umno leaders prepared to make a public commitment that in keeping with the 1Malaysia motto, they pledge to be “Malaysian first, Malay second” just as all Malaysians should pledge to be Malaysian first and Malay, Chinese, Indian, Kadazan or Iban second?

Can we get to this pledge stage of a 1Malaysia slogan?

I have grave doubts.

I for one pledge to be “Malaysian first, Chinese second”. Let every Minister, Deputy Minister and MP declare in Parliament that he or she is Malaysian first and Malay, Chinese, Indian, Kadazan or Iban second!

[Speech3 in Parliament on 2010 Budget on 29.10.2009]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 11:38 am and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
nation building
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


End NEP which has trapped Malaysia in middle-income group instead of becoming a high-income economy

In his first budget, the 2010 budget, presented to Parliament last Friday, the Prime Minister and Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak  claimed that he is laying the foundation for the development of a new economic model to become a high-income economy.

He stressed that the new economic model must be based on innovation, creativity and high-value added activities so that Malaysian can remain relevant in a competitive global economy.

Najib announced that his government “will transform Malaysia through a comprehensive innovation process, comprising innovation in public and private sector governance, societal innovation, urban innovation, rural innovation, corporate innovation, industrial innovation, education innovation, healthcare innovation, transport innovation, social safety net innovation and branding innovation.”

So far, Najib’s most successful innovation in his First Two Hundred Days is “branding innovation”, as never before has a Prime Minister’s slogan, “1Malaysia”, been promoted so blatantly, not only during by-elections but there is even a 1Malaysia Toilet in Terengganu, putting the previous Prime Minister’s slogan of “Islam Hadhari” to shame – all thanks to the tens of millions of ringgit spent on public relations companies, in particular the US-based Apco Worldwide PR firm to promote the new Najib brand at public expense.

As for “innovation” in other important sectors of national life, Najib has got very little to show.

Najib said the focus of his budget will be on the well-being of the rakyat, with particular emphasis on advancing the role of the private sector as the driver of economic growth and developing high-skilled human capital and enhancing the efficiency of the public service.

This is nothing new as it is said in every budget speech in Parliament as far as I can remember, but they have not been able to stop the significant decline of private investment to below 10 per cent of GDP, with total domestic direct investment decreasing from RM72 billion in 1997 to RM56 billion in 2008, while total net foreign direct investment (FDI) plunged from RM19.7 billion to RM3.6 billion.

Najib should end the  50-year New Economic Policy if he wants to  lay claim to innovation or shift to a new economic model as the NEP had stunted Malaysia’s economic growth and prevented the nation from becoming a high-income country.

Although Najib acknowledged the dire choice faced by the country of remaining trapped in a middle-income group instead of advancing to a high-income economy, he is not prepared to take the next crucial step to admit that it was the NEP which had placed Malaysia in such a trap, with the country unable to harness her wealthy human and natural resources because of a divisive and discriminatory NEP.

When we achieved independent nationhood in 1957, Malaya was No. 2 in Asia after Japan in terms of prosperity and income, despite having a per capita income of only US$200.

In the first decade after Independence, Malaysia’s per capita GNP was still ahead of South Korea and Taiwan although behind Hong Kong and Singapore.

Malaysia’s per capita GNP in 1967 stood at US$290 as compared to Taiwan’s US$250 and  South Korea’s US$160 with Singapore at US$600.

Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan have long joined the ranks of  high-income nations while Malaysia got stuck in the middle-income trap for the past four decades.

The government should commission a study as to how Malaysia was trapped in the middle-income trap for four decades because of NEP if we are really serious in wanting to join the ranks of high-income countries?

In his speech, Najib said the government is committed and serious in undertaking a total innovation to a more advanced economy – with the slogan “Innovative Leadership for 1United, Innovative Malaysia”.

Slogans and sloganeering however will not transform Malaysia into an innovative economy.

Is Najib prepared to pass the first test of an Innovative Economy by bringing  to a close the NEP policy, which both stunted Malaysia’s economic growth as well as Malaysia’s nation-building process?

[Speech in Parliament on 2010 Budget  on 29.10.2009]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 11:04 am and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Economics
,
NEP
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


It was the best of times it was the worst of times…..

By
Hussein Hamid

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times; it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness; it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity; it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness; it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair; we had everything before us, we had nothing before us; we were all going directly to Heaven, we were all going the other way.” Charles Dickens.

Those lines are an apt description of the situation Pakatan Rakyat finds itself in today! Pakatan Rakyat is the Government in waiting and yet will it govern?

The people had the wisdom to chose Pakatan Rakyat in the last GE and yet would they be foolish enough now to hand it back to UMNO; Pakatan Rakyat leaders had belief that the people within their midst were committed to the ideals and aspirations of the Rakyat and Party and yet incredibly there are those within Pakatan Rakyat that would put self before the party – even before the Rakyat;
We the Rakyat can see the light at the end of the tunnel and yet the season of darkness under UMNO is still upon us; This is the Spring of hope that we have all waited for to rid ourselves of the tyranny of UMNO and yet we still live in the winter of despair because we continue to suffer the injustices and the arrogance inflicted upon us by the Judiciary, The Police and our own government; We have everything before us with the coming of the General Election and yet all might come to nought if we are not focused and committed to our cause ; If we are victorious in what we do we will have the heaven we have hoped for…. if not another 50 years of hell under UMNO.

So where do we go now? In all honesty I do not see how Najib could even start to govern. It would seem that even the heavens are against him. Two days ago three schoolgirls died because of human errors that could and should have been avoidable. Just as we were coming to terms with this terrible tragedy the Father of one of these girls’ dies – of a broken heart I guess. Najib must think that even the heavens are conspiring against him. Maybe they are…maybe they are!

Najib is reduced to taking whatever mileage he can out of the perceived misfortunes of the opposition! Like the tow trucks that will only make their money when there is an accident or if your car breaks down…. like the Funeral Houses that needs a corpse before it can make its money……Najib makes merry out of the perceived misfortune of the opposition. But while he thinks he is dancing on top of the graves of his opponents – his opponent is really cleaning house. Ridding itself of unwanted baggage and blood sucking parasites. And Najib welcomes these unwanted baggage and blood sucking parasites with open arms! What would UMNO do with these filth once the euphoria of them jumping into UMNO/Barisan is done with? The toddy shop loves a drunkard – but not for his son-in-law. What would UMNO do with these people? What would UMNO do?

What of the Opposition? What of Pakatan Rakyat? Yes it would seem that it is the winter of their discontent and yet their courage in ridding

themselves of their unwanted baggage will serve them well in the long run. Not in the short term but in the long term – after all the GE is still a few years away. Enough time for those unwanted baggage who have joined UMNO to become a burden and an embarrassment to UMNO while PR will have time to ensure that new blood have been given their ‘baptism of fire’ and are ready for the coming GE.

This is what we see being played out in front of our eyes today. I can only say this for now: “Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.” So says Buddha. We will have to use much of our common sense and our sensibilities to discern the right and the wrong, the good and the bad and ultimately Pakatan Rakyat or UMNO. For me that decision has been made many years back when the politics of patronage, cronyism, deceit, greed and arrogance defined UMNO for what it is. A Party that uses its own race to further the financial interest of its own members! We can do without them!

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 3:21 pm and is filed under
Hussein Hamid
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s losing battle for international competitiveness

What is the credibility of Najib talking about a total innovation of the Malaysian economy and nation when Malaysia is facing a losing battle in  international competitiveness because of continuing loss of confidence in key national institutions whether judiciary, the civil service, the police, the MACC or the Election Commission?

This is the reason for the two recent adverse global rankings for Malaysia, falling three places from 21st to 24th ranking in the World Economic Forum (WEF)’s Global Competitiveness Report (GCR) 2009-2010 and a drop of two places in the World Bank’s Doing Business 2010: Reforming Through Difficult Times from 21st to 23rd placing.

The first seven months’ of  Najib’s premiership have not seen any restoration of public confidence in the key national institutions but the reverse whether in the strategic areas to fight corruption and ensure integrity; keep crime low to protect the safety of citizens, tourists and investors; or to uphold the administration of justice.

This is why Najib’s budget presentation last Friday ended so disastrously, when he tried to capitalise on the Umno/BN by-election victory in Bagan Pinang as testimony of a national transformation to greater heights.

Najib’s last two sentences in his speech were virtually drowned in the shouts  by Pakatan Rakyat MPs with their spontaneous chant of “Rasuah” – which was a dubious parliamentary record in the past five decades, not only for a maiden budget speech but also for any budget presentation by former Finance Ministers.

Najib had earlier failed to make any impression on MPs when he devoted two cursory paragraphs of his budget speech to “Combatting Corruption”, but which did not evince any political will on his part to break the back of the problem of rampant corruption in Malaysia.

What Najib has to show for the battle against corruption in his first seven months as Prime Minister is quite a dismal record, reinforced by the Umno/BN nomination of a tainted candidate for money politics and corruption as a candidate in the Bagan Pinang by-election – and the Umno/BN victory in Bagan Pinang is a major setback in the battle against corruption.

Is Malaysia heading for the worst Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI) ranking and score in 15 years, when the TI CPI 2009 is released next month?

As pointed out by Transparency International Malaysia last month during the launch of the country report of the TI Global Corruption Report (GCR) 2009, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and other “reforms” introduced by the government have so far been ineffective in fighting corruption.

These measures have not produced the desired results and so the public perception of corruption remains unchanged.

Malaysians are fed up with the status quo and the unbearable effects of corruption in the country. The Global Corruption Barometer 2009 surveyed released in May showed that 70 per cent of Malaysians believe that the government is ineffective in fighting corruption.

In contrast, although Indonesia has a far worse position in the corruption perception index than Malaysia, 76% of its people believe their government is effective in fighting corruption.

The public perception position for Malaysia is likely to be even worse than the Global Corruption Barometer 2009 survey in May after two further developments:

the mysterious death of DAP political aide Teoh Beng Hock on July 16, who went to the 14th floor MACC headquarters as a healthy, vigorous, idealistic young man to give his co-operation as a witness but ended up as a corpse on the 5th floor of the building; and

the MACC role as Umno catspaw to declare war on Pakatan Rakyat instead of declaring war on corruption, going all out to harass Pakatan Rakyat over alleged constituency allocation improprieties involving RM2,400 (even costing a human life) while being totally blind to corruption and abuses of power against Barisan Nasional leaders running into tens or hundreds of millions or even billions of ringgit!

For quite some time, there had been increasing complaints that the MACC had become a law unto itself, violating the basic constitutional and human rights of witnesses and suspects interrogated by MACC officers.

Even the police are afraid of the MACC because of the powers the MACC officers hold over the police in corruption investigations.

This is unacceptable and intolerable. I call on the Prime Minister to make public the number of reports which had been lodged against MACC (previously ACA) officers for abuse of power and use of physical force in interrogations in the past three  years. Furthermore, what percentage of these reports against MACC (or ACA) officers for physical violence and torture during interrogation had been investigated.

The first step to restore public confidence in the MACC is to bring the MACC and all its officers within the ambit of the law as no democratic country can allow an institution to become a monster or a Frankenstein with no regard whatsoever to the rudiments of the rule of law and the most fundamental notion of human rights, as there should not be another Teoh Beng Hock murder.

In this connection, I call on the authorities concerned to fully co-operate with Teoh Beng Hock’s family who wants to get to the bottom of Teoh’s death and is asking for exhumation of Teoh’s remains for a second autopsy by renowned Thai pathologist Dr. Porntip Rojanasunand after her inquest testimony of Teoh’s death as 80% probability of homicide and 20% suicide.

Other instances why there has been a deepening crisis of confidence in the institutional independence, efficiency and professionalism in the past seven months greatly undermining Malaysia’s international competitiveness despite Najib’s “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” include:

Renewal of Tan Sri Musa Hassan as IGP – the ridiculous parliamentary answer by the Deputy Home Minister, Abu Seman Yusup that Musa’s term was extended for a year because of his “excellent performance”.

In the past seven months, the Police and MACC were neck to neck as to which key national institution has lower public confidence and esteem.

Last month, when the MACC Deputy Chief Commissioner Datuk Abu Kassim Mohammad was the special guest of the Star online live chat, there was an online opinion poll which produced the following result at the end of the hour-long programme:

How would rate the MACC’s performance so far in fighting corruption?

Good

3%

Fair

0%

Poor

98%

Should MACC only ‘interview’ suspects during office hours?

Yes

79%

No

6%

Depends on the situation

15%

How would rate the MACC’s handling of Teoh Beng Hock’s case?

Good

0%

Fair

4%

Poor

96%

Should it be made compulsory for lawyers to be present, …

Yes

83%

No

 6%

Depends on the situation

11%

For the police, in the last week of July, the Home Ministry website carried an opinion poll whether the people felt safe, with the following results:

97% or 9,729 out of 10,060 respondents felt unsafe because of the high crime rate, with only 1% or 89 respondents felt safe and 2% or 242 respondents in the “uncertain” category.

95% or 8,883 out of 9,319 respondents felt that the safety of the people was not guaranteed as compared to 3% or 248 respondents who felt it was still guaranteed, with 2% or 188 respondents in the “uncertain” category.

94% or 8,743 out of 9,261 respondents felt that government had not done its best to ensure that the safety of the people was at the best level with 2% or 185 respondents felt that the government had done its best, and 4% or 333 persons “uncertain”?

Never before had the re-appointment of an IGP attracted greater opposition from all sectors of society, whether MPs in the form of a Parliamentary Roundtable or civil societies, especially on two grounds:

Failure of Musa in Key Performance Indicators (KPI) as IGP in the past three years, in all the three core police functions to keep crime low, eradicate corruption and protect human rights. In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that under Musa, Malaysians are even more unsafe from street crimes now than when he became IGP in September 5, 2006.

The re-appointment of Musa for another term of IGP cast an adverse aspersion on all the senior police officers, as if there is not a single one out of the eight top police officers occupying key police positions below the post of IGP who are qualified or competent enough to become the new IGP to provide a new police leadership and culture to roll back the tide of crime in the past five years.

[Speech5 in Parliament on 2010 Budget on 29.10.2009]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 1:27 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Corruption
,
Crime
,
Parliament
,
Teoh Beng Hock
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Marina, you’re no bumi

Friday, 30 October 2009 02:02

KUCHING – For 17 years, Marina Undau lived a life of a child growing into a young adult.

School, her family and friends were a central part of her existence. She dreamt of doing her parents proud by furthering her education in a university and eventually getting a good job.

SPM came and went, and the 18-year-old science stream student of SMK Simanggang did well, scoring 9As and 1B last year.

But then she had a rude shock.

Not eligible

The education system said she was not eligible to enroll in a matriculation course, a prelude to varsity and a degree. The reason? She was, it seemed, not a bumiputra.

Born to an Iban father and a Chinese mother, Marina’s hope for a smooth climb up academia was dashed. With it went a part of her identity and the drive that made her a top scorer.

sarawak-semi-bumiputra.pngIn an interview with The Borneo Post at her house in Sri Aman on Wednesday, Marina expressed her feelings in Iban: “Aku amai enda puas ati nadai olih nyambung sekula ngagai universiti (I’m very sad that I can’t pursue my university education).”

Meantime, she has started Form Six in her old school as a workaround solution.

Upset and bewildered

Seated between her parents, Undau Liap and Wong Pick Sing, the disappointment in the teenager was plain to see.

Her elder sister never had a problem getting into a university. Her identity was never questioned and she is at present in her second year at Universiti Sains Malaysia in Penang.

Marina is worried that a similar obstacle she faced after SPM awaits once she completes her STPM.

“If I get good results, what’s next?”

Marina’s father, Undau, would not take no for an answer.

When her application to enter matriculation was rejected, Undau, a civil servant, contacted the Education Ministry’s Matriculation Department in Putrajaya on June 23 and was told that her daughter was not a bumiputra.

Pressing on

Dissatisfied, the father wrote to the ministry on July 1. The reply he received shocked him, and it is bound to challenge the identity of many Sarawakians who are of mixed-parentage.

The ministry said in a reply on July 14 that Undau’s appeal was turned down because “the candidate is categorised as non-bumiputra (father is Iban and mother is Chinese)” based on a definition used by the Student Intake Management Division, Higher Learning Department and Higher Education Ministry.

Their definition is as follows:

If either parent of a candidate is a Malay who is a Muslim/Orang Asli as defined in Article 160 (2) of the Federal Constitution, the child is considered a bumiputra.

Sabah – If the father of the candidate is a Malay who is a Muslim/native of Sabah as defined by Article 161A(6)(a) of the Federal Constitution, the child is considered a bumiputra..

Sarawak – If the father and mother is a native of Sarawak as defined under Article 161A(6)(b) of the Federal Constitution, the child is considered a bumiputra..

Despite the explanation, Undau is still dissatisfied and urged the government to clear up education issues that differentiate bumiputras from non-bumiputras.

He said the 1Malaysia concept would be rather hollow if education today continues to be polarised along such lines

“Why all the differences in the intake of students for higher learning? I am not questioning the Constitution, but what is the meaning of 1Malaysia if things like this happen?”

NRD and Native Court weigh in

The National Registration Department (NRD) headquarters here said it has received a flurry of enquiries about the bumiputra status of late.

An NRD spokesman said that in Sarawak, a person’s race is registered based only on the race of the father.

On whether such a person is automatically accorded bumiputra rights, the spokesman said: “We don’t actually handle that. We look at the race of the father. If the father is Iban, the child is Iban. If the father is Chinese, the child is Chinese. The bumiputra status comes under the Native Court.”

Native Court registrar Ronnie Edward said the bumiputra status was a “birthright” and the Native Court only hear cases where a person who was to be declared a bumiputra although his father was not a native.

He said Marina was not alone in facing this problem.

Edward believes the only way to clear the air is to amend the Federal Constitution.

“Article 161(A) of the Constitution has to be amended. The article says that in Sarawak, both parents have to be ‘exclusively’ a native,” he said.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 3:51 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Super cover-up of RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal?

RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal.

The Cabinet decision last month to set up a super task force, headed by Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Mohd Sidek Hassan, to take over all investigations into the PKFZ scandal is not a demonstration of political will to get to the bottom of the “mother of all scandals” but the opposite.

I see it as a major step backwards in public accountability and good governance, as it smacks of being a super “cover up” task force for the PKFZ scandal.

What is needed is a Royal Commission of Inquiry to conduct a comprehensive and no-holds-barred investigation into the “mother of all scandals” including relevant Ministerial and Cabinet aspects of the scandal instead of trying to sweep the whole issue back under the carpet.

In the first place, is Mohd Sidek the most appropriate person to head the super task force on the PKFZ scandal?

Before Mohd Sidek takes up this appointment, he should explain to the Malaysian public why he had failed in the past two years to carry out the Cabinet decision in July 2007 when it resolved on the RM4.6 billion bailout of PKFZ, including giving retrospective approval to the four illegal Letters of Support unlawfully given by the two previous Transport Ministers, Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik and Tan Sri Chan Kong Choy, that the Chief Secretary should conduct an inquiry as to how the four Letters of Support could have issued unlawfully and to take the necessary disciplinary actions against the culprits who have now landed the country with a RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal.

Did Mohd Sidek carry out such an inquiry as not a single culprit had been identified, let alone penalised for the unlawful issue of the four Letters of Support in the past two years ?

Clearly, Mohd Sidek had not carried out the Cabinet instruction or there would not be today a merry-go-round of multiple investigations into the PKFZ scandal, but all without the necessary sweeping powers to get to the bottom of the scandal.

Can Mohd Sidek succeed where he had failed in the past two years? I hope Parliament is given a specific answer to these questions in the ministerial replies.

I have always maintained that the MCA, as the party which is most implicated in the PKFA scandal as so many MCA top leaders involved whether as Transport Minister or Port Klang Authority Chairman, should take a stand to ensure that there should be no further cover-up of the PKFZ scandal and give total  support in Cabinet and Parliament  for a Royal Commission of Inquiry to bring to book all MCA, Umno and BN leaders implicated in the PKFZ “mother of all scandals”  – but unfortunately, the PKFZ scandal is being used only as a pawn in the ongoing MCA power struggle.

Closure of V.K. Lingam case, as revealed by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz that no legal action would be taken despite the recommendation of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Lingam Tapes that action be taken.

The crisis of confidence in the key institutions in the country is also highlighted by Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s two days ago, viz:

“To those who walk in the corridors of power, I wish to inform you that I know you are beating up my son in the Sungai Buloh Prison. Every day he is being subjected to beatings to force him to withdraw his not guilty plea and to plead guilty to the various charges he is facing.

“I also know he is being subjected to these daily beatings to force him to withdraw his not guilty plea and instead plead guilty because there is no evidence against him and the charges are merely trumped-up charges.

“Furthermore, I know he is being threatened with six additional charges to the ones he is already facing and he is being beaten up to force him to plead guilty to these charges as well.

“My son has informed me he can no longer stand these daily beatings and he wants to plead guilty to the charges. I have advised him to do so although we both realise that this means he will be spending at least ten years or so in jail.

“My son is aware he is being subjected to this torture to induce me to surface and he is prepared to plead guilty and spend ten years in jail if that means it will save me from the powers-that-be.

“Today, Barisan Nasional is in power so it has the power of life and death over its citizens. Well, who knows, one day Barisan Nasional might be kicked out and Malaysia will see a new government.

“Those behind the effort of torturing my son with these daily beatings had better hope that Barisan Nasional stays on as the government for a long, long time to come. If not, and if Barisan Nasional falls, then rest assured it will be retribution time and all those people who are using my son to get to me will be made to pay for it.

“And, please, this is not a threat. This is a promise. And that is all I wish to say about the matter.”

Parliament and the nation are entitled to a full and satisfactory response to RPK’s blog.

[Speech6 in Parliament on 2010 Budget on 29.10.2009]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 30 October 2009, 2:39 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Judiciary
,
Parliament
,
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


2010 Budget: sound and fury without substance (2)

By S.C.

The Macro-Economic Scene

The key economic indicators and assumptions used in the budget formulation are:

Malaysia economy to grow 2-3 percent in 2010 after a contraction of 3 to 4 percent in the current year.

Per capita income to increase by 2.5 percent to RM24, 661. This rate of growth is inconsistent with a GDP growth rate of 2 to 3 percent as population growth is in the region of 2.5 percent; this would yield a per capita growth of close to zero

Budget 2010 allocations total RM191.5 billion, of which RM138.3 billion is for operating expenditure and RM53.2 billion for development expenditure.

Federal government revenue in 2010 to decline by 8.4 percent to RM148.8 billion despite the tax changes proposed.

Budget deficit at 5.6 percent of GDP compared with 7.4 percent in 2009.

Exports will revive to 3.5 percent growth after having fallen by over 23 percent in the first half of 2009; this assumption is dependent on developments globally;

Private consumption will  grow by 2.9 percent as against 0.5 percent in the current year

Inflation will remain low

Unemployment will not exceed 4 percent

Private investment will grow by 3.4 percent in 2010

FDI flows in 2009 are in the region of RM3.6 billion, recording a dramatic fall from RM19.7 billion from the previous year.

It is appropriate to comment broadly on these statistics. The performance for the year 2009 as reported is based on actual outcomes for the first half of the year. There appear to be rather optimistic assumptions of performance for the second half of 2009. Thus, the overall outcome for the year as a whole is based on partial information and therefore subject to a degree of uncertainty.

Other independent forecasts project a lower rate of GDP growth both in the second half of 2009 and in the early part of 2010. The Asian Development Bank in a recent assessment of growth prospects for the region highlighted the fact that Malaysia would be one of the economies that would have a slower recovery than its neighbours given the structural impediments. The IMF too hedged its bets by alluding to the problem of the size of the fiscal deficit.

The budget deficit may indeed be larger if account is taken of the lower revenues and the higher expenditures when supplementary allocations are taken into account. The deficit as reported may understate the actual magnitude if full account is taken of the off budget expenditures.

The estimated FDI flows (based on approvals) may not materialize given the political uncertainties and weak policy responses. If account is taken of the capital outflows from Malaysia as reported by UNCTAD in a recent report, then net FDI flows are negative in the case of Malaysia. Malaysia would be one of the few middle income economies that are recording outflows of FDI. This is an indication of lack of confidence in the policy regime and the ability of the Government to manage the economy in a sound manner.

For more than a decade the BN government has followed a policy of running large deficits. These deficits have been financed by large scale borrowings, domestic for the most part. The current domestic debt of the Government is approximately 52 percent of GDP. This in itself is an understatement for sure, if account is taken of the unknown and hidden contingent liabilities of the Government ala the guarantees amounting to some RM 11 billion in the case of the PKFZ. The question is how many more PKFZ scandals are hidden away since the Government accounts are cast in a manner meant to conceal rather than to inform the public.

The dependence on revenues from oil and gas resources in the form of dividends, taxes, royalties and export duty are critical to the Government. These have risen from RM19 billion in 2004 to RM67.8 billion in 2009 or 43.5% of government revenue. The narrow tax base that exists is patently inappropriate. In addition, in 2005 Petronas saved 42.5% of its profits, these now amount to only 21.1%.

The labor market is highly distorted by the heavy dependence on cheap migrant workers. The low productivity levels in Malaysia are contributing to the loss of competitiveness and impact on the ability of Malaysian industries to innovate, adapt practices that lead to greater investment. The high levels of migrant workers also have further adverse impacts such as large amounts of remittances, social consequences such as crime and other disruptions.

What is stark is that the budget does not even allude to these pressing issues that are affecting the investment climate and the prospects for growth, let alone offer policy options. The unwillingness to acknowledge these issues makes a mockery of the call for innovation, creativity and value-added activities that the Prime Minister made.  The so-called “new economic model” and strategy for high income growth that are promised are therefore rhetorical in nature and remain illusionary given the absence of a coherent and integrated set of policies. The sound and fury built into the budget statement are hollow and will remain so until the BN Government begins to acknowledge what ails Malaysia. It is time that there is a change from the ostrich-like approach that characterizes economic policy making to a more open and environment.

The 2010 budget largely continues  with the economic policies of the Mahathir era which can be summarized in the following terms: “
 Spend and spend on so called development which is nothing but directed at enriching the UMNOputras and warlords by awarding contracts without the benefit of competitive bidding; privatize public assets into the hands of cronies thus enriching a few chosen individuals; drop a few sops to the public at large via subsidies while the larger share of resources are siphoned off and permitting corruption and rent-seeking on an unprecedented scale.”

The changes announced in the budget are cosmetic for the most part and do not deviate much from the path of previous policies.

(to be contd)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 1 November 2009, 2:36 am and is filed under
Economics
,
Finance
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


2010 Budget: sound and fury without substance (3)

By S.C.

The Track Record

The Budget for 2010 must be seen against the larger canvass of economic management by the BN Government over the recent past.

It should be recalled that the global Great Recession began in mid 2007 as the sub-prime fiasco in the United States began to unfold. The economic slowdown spread and gained momentum in 2008. As the gathering storm clouds hovered over the horizon, many Governments began to react and take counter recessionary measures.

The Barisan Nasional Government for its part remained in a state of denial. Ministers dismissed with some arrogance the notion that the Malaysian economy would succumb to the global slowdown. They argued rather smugly that Malaysia was immune as it had decoupled from the global economy.

Despite the key economic indicators pointing to a weakening in terms of industrial output, declines in FDI flows, lower exports and indications of capital flight, they continued to forecast robust growth. The markets for their part made their own assessments and lowered the country’s credit ratings.

The Budget for 2009 presented in August 2008 was based on unrealistic and rosy assumptions of growth and buoyant commodity prices, especially of petroleum, and the Government announced a humongous increase in spending both on the recurrent and development budgets. An increase of RM20 billion in spending was unprecedented.

In the months that followed, even as it begun to become crystal clear that the global crisis was likely to be severe, the Finance Minister, the Second Finance Minister and the Governor of Bank Negara indulged in soothing sound bites about the state of the economy even as the indicators pointed to a slowdown; they persisted in sticking to untenable estimates of growth, made light of the weaknesses and refused to use the instruments at their disposal to make policy corrections.

Thus, when almost every country was lowering interest rates, Malaysian policymakers remained in a state of paralysis.  Only in late 2008, as it began to become abundantly clear that the economy was indeed weakening, panic measures were taken.

Interest rates were lowered marginally; a Stimulus package of RM7 billion was hurriedly put together; RM5 billion was channelled to up the stock market; there were additional off budget measures taken. At a minimum some RM32 billion were injected.

Despite this massive infusion of resources the economy continued to spiral downwards. It is patently clear that the remedies adopted, namely propping up “friendly“ corporations, massive spending on less than urgently needed infrastructure projects, and handouts to party warlords were not the right mix of measures to stem the haemorrhaging.

The ad hoc packaging of projects with long gestation periods was clearly inappropriate to address the immediate effects of the economic slowdown with consequences for employment and income levels.

It was also starkly clear that without policy reforms there would be a failure in coping with the recessionary effects. These lessons were not learnt. An ill conceived second Stimulus Package was hastily put together.

The truth of the matter is that dubious schemes and narrow politicking in the context of UMNO politics took precedence over prudent policy making.  The then Second Finance Minister for his part cut a sorry figure as he went about repeating like a broken record that the Malaysian economy would continue to grow; the Minister responsible for the EPU was neither heard nor seen; the Governor of Bank Negara was hamstrung and failed to move by adjusting interest rates or by allowing a true float of the ringgit.

This is a sorry indictment about the competence of the BN government in piloting the economy through stormy and uncharted waters.

The Second Stimulus Package was rather haphazard with little consultation or input from the various stakeholders. Datuk Seri Najib Razak  must take personal responsibility for the package. It was he who put together the package of RM 60 billion, a package of unprecedented size in Malaysian history.

The package of measures he revealed was largely met by a yawn; the markets were unconvinced by the scope of the package. The KL Bursa fell by O.6 percent on the first day of trading. There was considerable scepticism on several counts.

First and foremost there was the question about the size of the package, considered large and unwieldy. Second, there were concerns that the package of measures did not deal with the immediate consequences of the recession on employment and income levels. It ignored the pain inflicted on vulnerable groups.

There was a great imbalance in the package. Loans for businesses accounted for RM25 billion, or 41 per cent of the package. These were to buffer the downside risks to corporate earnings and help industries struggling with debts.

Expectations that the package would include measures to boost consumption, like cash-vouchers or cash bonuses, which would have had an immediate effect on Malaysia’s economy, were missing. A tax waiver would have also provided the most and fastest multiplier effect.

A further RM5 billion injection in 2010 was announced. The then Deputy Prime Minister said however that the RM25 billion in guaranteed funds as well as the RM10 billion investments to be injected by the government investment arm, Khazanah Nasional, were not “silver bullets” but meant to prevent Malaysia from slipping into recession.

If so, why were these funds being disbursed? Why were there no provisions for direct assistance to those being retrenched, or those suffering a sizable drop in earnings by way of elimination of overtime, or those facing a precipitous fall in earnings because of lower commodity prices?

The package of measures was skewed towards corporate interests and favoured support for INVESTMENT activities over support for PRIVATE CONSUMPTION. This was clearly a fatally flawed policy choice.

For a start it was consumption that needed sustaining and support to alleviate the pain associated with the recession. Malaysia deviated in the design of its stimulus package by focussing largely on investment rather than sustaining consumption.

It was also clear that stimulus needed to impact on the short term circumstances: thus direct measures in support of consumption that impact positively and immediately should have taken precedence.

On the other hand, channelling resources towards investment, as the package favoured would mean a trickling down; the proposed investment outlays had a long gestation period; the impact will thus be felt only after a lag. This would negate the goal of delivering immediate assistance to those feeling the impact of the recession.

The failure to front load disbursement of funds was seen as inevitably delaying the flow of resources to counter the adverse forces generated by the recession. Other criticism offered by analysts at that time  touched on the lack of a coherent and integrated overall scheme for mounting a program of reforms which were critically needed to move the Malaysian economy out of the doldrums. The DPM-cum-Finance Minister was silent with regard to introducing much needed policy reforms. This ominous silence sent its very own message, namely no reforms are contemplated.

An objective assessment of the proposals left one with the feeling that  Najib was taking a large gamble on the premise that large and massive spending would somehow enable the Government to dig itself out of the hole it found itself in. The package was little more than a brazen attempt to hijack public resources and to shovel these into the laps of UMNO warlords and cronies to protect and promote UMNO.

A sharper criticism of the measures announced was that there was no overarching policy framework to accompany the disconnected and disjointed expenditure proposals. The lack of a coherent policy vision indicated that Najib  failed to think out of the box and had displayed a singular lack of leadership.

In the months since the launch of the Stimulus package the Prime Minister has announced piece meal and ad hoc reforms. These included the rather limited and token liberalization of 27 sub-service sectors, changing the role of the Foreign Investment Committee, and feel good measures such as the Amanah Saham 1Malaysia.

What has been the impact of the stimulus package? The Budget Speech glosses over the outcomes. Najib said: “The implementation of these packages has prevented the economy from sliding into a deeper recession. As of October 16th, more than 48,000 projects have been completed and almost 40,000 projects are being implemented. The implementation of the packages is on schedule.”

This is indeed an incredulous statement. The nation and people are entitled to a fuller explanation of how these billions were spent; what has been the impact of these expenditures on sustaining growth, how many jobs were saved, what long term benefits have these expenditures led to? It is somewhat insulting that all that can be reported is that some 88,000 “projects”, many of which were clearly boondoggles, were launched and were mysteriously able to prevent a deeper recession.

Clearly,  the Government has hardly a clue about the true impact. All it can point to is that funds were disbursed. For the most part these were channelled to either corporate entities, including GLCs, and to contractors who are for the most part the UMNO warlords and cronies. A damning statistic that says it all– is that reporting on private household consumption (private consumption is the largest component of GDP), it grew by a meagre 0.5% in total.

What this rate indicates is that on a per capita basis private consumption FELL since population growth exceeded the growth in consumption. In human welfare terms, the brunt of the slide in the economy was borne by households.

 It is thus clear that the billions expended in the name of “stimulus” had little or no benefit for the wage earners, the self employed, the farmers and the fishermen. These are the groups in society who paid the price for the foolish and disjointed policies pursued by the Government.

Had the Stimulus Packages been crafted with an eye to supporting incomes and employment levels, strengthening safety nets and channeling assistance to those most in need and most vulnerable, millions of Malaysians would have been spared the pain inflicted by the recession. What the recession has displayed is that there were a whole range of flawed policies and a singular lack of vision that bring into question the capacity of the BN to govern this nation with a degree of competence.

The Budget offered another opportunity to correct the failures of past policies. Regrettably, the opportunity has been missed. It is appropriate to briefly review the key Budget proposals.

(to be contd)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 1 November 2009, 3:17 am and is filed under
Economics
,
Finance
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


2010 Budget: sound and fury without substance (4)

By S.C.

Key Budget Allocations

The budget allocations listed in the budget speech are indeed astonishing and represent a long litany of projects and allocations, the direct beneficiaries of which appear to be special interests and well connected individuals.

This should be no surprise as the budget has become the chosen means to distribute corporate welfare with a few sops for the public at large.  One may well ask why billions more are being channelled to infrastructure at a point in time when the economy is in greater need to strengthen institutions, develop human capital and to widen the safety net programmes to protect the weak and the vulnerable elements of our population.

For instance, why is it necessary to have TNB invest RM5 billion to expand electricity generation and distribution given that overcapacity exists? Why is it that RM3.5 billion is allocated for infrastructure and basic amenities and training programmes and socio-economic projects to support implementation of private sector projects? Is not the private sector capable of undertaking these types of projects that benefit the sector? The Prime Minister announced that the Government will provide subsidies, incentives and assistance amounting to some RM2 billion to farmers and fishermen to safeguard their interests.

It is legitimate to ask why it is necessary to increase subsidies at  a point in time when efforts are being made to scale back subsidies which amount to a very large component of Government expenditure (RM24 billion in total subsidies) of Government operating expenditure. How can this inconsistency be explained?

Although the Prime Minister took great pains to list at length the expenditure proposals and allocations — perhaps to project a “feel good” factor— he was somewhat cryptic in announcing the cuts in spending in the coming year. He announced that spending cuts would come from:

reduced operating expenditure, seen down by 13.7 per cent in 2010 at RM138.3 billion;

lower development spending, seen down 4.5 per cent to RM50.6 billion;

Further reductions in food and fuel subsidies which are projected to fall by 14.7 per cent in 2010 to RM20.9 billion.

No further details were provided as to the areas of expenditure cuts. The Prime Minister should table a paper providing full details concerning the proposed cuts. Transparency and accountability must exist if the credibility of the Government is to be enhanced.

The Prime Minister’s commitment to eliminate hardcore poverty by the end of the next fiscal year must be welcomed. However, it is somewhat incredible that it has taken over 50 years of BN rule and the spending of billions of ringgit to reach that stage! It is indeed a sad commentary that mega projects have been a higher priority than the elimination of hardcore poverty.

The recently released Auditor General’s Report has yet again castigated the Government for the lax procurement procedures that permit abuse and mismanagement of public funds. It is clear that the adoption of a system of competitive bidding in Government purchases would result in savings of billions of ringgit and reduce the extent of corruption.

Adopting such practices continues to be resisted vigorously by the BN Government. It is indeed scandalous that a basic measure of this nature does not truly feature in the Government’s agenda in order to achieve savings, cut waste and improve public administration. It is legitimate to ask as to why basic reforms of this nature are resisted. Is it because of the need to ensure that the few and favoured are protected at the cost of millions ordinary taxpayers?

Revenue Measures

The ballooning budget deficit can be rightly attributed to the explosion in spending. However, it is important that we take account of what has happened on the revenue side.

Over the years, the Government’s tax policies have become skewed. The nation has become more and more dependent on income from oil and gas revenues. These revenues are derived from the exploitation of wasting assets. Their misuse is depriving future generation of Malaysians of their patrimony.

Available data indicate that the contribution to total Federal revenues from this source exceeds 40 percent. As a consequence the tax base has become narrower. The narrowing of the tax base has also seen a shift in the tax burden.

Although no details are available, consumption taxes that fall on the shoulders of ordinary consumers have gradually increased while more and more concessions and rebates are extended to corporate entities. These distributions of the largess are justified by the Government on the grounds that the private sector needs to be encouraged and provided with incentives to invest and create employment. However, this assertion has never been tested by way of a rigorous study of the impact of tax policies on growth.

Evidence from other countries supports the view that tax incentives to businesses play a minor role in drawing FDI and in encouraging domestic private investment. Global studies of what drives FDI indicate that taxes play a small role in investment decisions. It is good governance, the existence of the  rule of law and the absence of corruption and over regulation that have a vitally important role in private sector development.

The Prime Mister made much of the need to develop and put in place a new economic model but gave no details of what would be incorporated in such a model. Lest it become yet again another slogan, the Prime Minister should begin the process by instituting a full and rigorous study of the tax system. A new system of taxation that reduces the dependence on oil and gas revenues, that provides a more balanced burden sharing and does away with “corporate welfare” for the chosen few is urgently needed. These measures are imperative in order to set the stage for a new economic model.

Turning to the new revenue measures announced by the Prime Minister, it is clear that little or no thought has been given to the impact of these taxes on the overall macro-economic picture. With the projected cuts in public spending, the economy will face a contraction – in effect the stimulus will be withdrawn.  Economic revival in 2010 will thus critically depend to a larger extent on the revival of private consumption. Yet, the imposition of the tax on credit cards and the re-introduction of the real estate tax will impact adversely on households and directly and indirectly curb household expenditures. This is clearly a contradiction between policy goals and government actions.

The other tax changes impacting on individuals e.g. the reduction in the income tax rate from 27 to 26 percent and the level of exemptions announced in the budget are for the most cosmetic and offer marginal relief to hard pressed workers. In any event these changes will benefit the narrow band of high income individuals and have no impact on the bulk of wage earners and small traders.

Studies indicate that the income disparities between the rich and the poor have widened in Malaysia. Indeed, Malaysia has one of the worst income distribution patterns in the region. The budget sadly contained no measures to address this issue. Cynically, not even a mention was made of this grave issue.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 1 November 2009, 8:56 am and is filed under
Economics
,
Finance
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The 2010 Budget: sound and fury without substance

By S.C.

Introduction

The maiden Budget unveiled by the Prime Minister was anticipated with great expectations of a new direction to move the Malaysian economy on to a new path of growth and revival through the adoption of policy reforms designed to restore competitiveness. These expectations, sadly, were not met.

The 40-odd-page two-hour long Budget speech delivered by the Prime Minister in Parliament was a great disappointment. It contained little by way of a bold policy agenda or a set of much needed measures to begin to restore the Malaysian economy to health.

The speech was long on rhetorical assertions and a litany of expenditure proposals; it contained little in the way of actual innovative thinking despite the Prime Minister’s resolve to adopt a new model for the economy “based on innovation, creativity and value-added activities”.

There were hardly any credible steps outlined as to how the unsustainable record high fiscal deficit of 7.4 percent recorded in 2009 was to be slashed. The broad assertion that the reduction of the deficit to 5.6 percent was to be largely achieved via proposed expenditure cuts in the year ahead. The main spending cuts are to come from reduced “operating expenditure”, lower food and fuel subsidies, and less money for development spending. Yet the expenditure proposals for 2010 allocate 11 per cent more money for the Government wage bill in 2010 for the nearly one million workers on the payroll which account for almost 10 per cent of the work force and constitute a mainstay of the BN government’s support.

The main spending cuts come from:

reduced operating expenditure, seen down by 13.7 per cent in 2010 at RM138.3 billion;

lower development spending, seen down 4.5 per cent to RM50.6 billion;

Further reductions in food and fuel subsidies which are seen falling 14.7 per cent in 2010 to RM20.9 billion.

These targets appear to be ambitious particularly in the light of the Government’s history of exceeding budgeted allocations of expenditures because of supplementary provisions and under performance in revenue collections.

However, it must be noted that these drastic cut backs appear to represent a stark and dramatic reversal of policies. It must be recalled that barely 6 months ago the Minister rushed through this House a Stimulus Package of RM 60 billion. He now proposes to cutback almost RM 29 billion from the budget for 2010 over the level from the current year.

By any standard, this is a dramatic and remarkable reversal of spending policies. It is truly amazing that the Prime Minister was largely silent to as to why it is necessary to reverse course so soon after the introduction of an unprecedented package.

We may well ask: Is this because the Government’s coffers are empty? Or is this late night conversion to prudent policies an acknowledgement error? Or is it that the markets are sending signals that deficits of the size and magnitude are deemed unacceptable in the context of credit ratings?

Be that  as it may, the Prime Minister cannot evade responsibility and is obligated to put all of the cards on the table now that the gamble he took earlier is coming unglued. The erratic pattern of policy changes sends strong signals to markets that this Government is in a state of confusion and has no long term strategy to chart a course for the medium term.

The Budget appears to have been built upon a set of macro-economic assumptions that are questionable. It would appear that the key assumptions are: a) a rapid revival of the global economy in 2010 with positive trade developments; b) that these developments will contribute rapidly to a revival of growth in the Malaysian economy.

These assumptions are flawed on several counts. First and foremost, the early green shoots of a recovery in the global economy are tender shoots that could be stifled and the recession could be prolonged; there is a danger of a second round of decline. The US economy in particular is showing weaknesses as unemployment continues to rise and the Obama administration is under pressure to take steps to mount a further stimulus package.

Thus, it is indeed a high risk strategy for Malaysia to count on a rapid reversal in the slow down, particularly given the fact that historically growth and recovery in Malaysia emerges with a long of 6 to 9 mounts.

The assumptions underpinning the 2010 budget are that Malaysia will experience a V-shaped recovery. The prognosis is however that the recovery path is more likely to be U-shaped.

Thus, it is hardly likely that the projected deficit reduction and growth targets will be met. The early assessments by the rating agencies have drawn a mixed reaction from credit ratings agencies. The budget appears to have been crafted on a basis of a hope and a prayer rather than on a set of realistic assessments that factor in the down side risks.

In overall terms, the 2010 budget can be described as an exercise full of sound and fury, signifying little by way of tangible policy measures and reforms to regain competitiveness. The budget presented on October 23rd marks yet another missed opportunity to embark on a course that would re-establish and restore the integrity of key institutions and their ability to perform.

(to be contd)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 1 November 2009, 2:13 am and is filed under
Economics
,
Finance
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Test for 1Malaysia – Najib should ask Cabinet on Wednesday to revoke earlier decision to ban the use of  word “Allah” for religions other than Islam

Malaysia is again at the centre of adverse international publicity despite our tourist promotion of Malaysia as a harmonious and model multi-religious nation and the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s new slogan of 1Malaysia.

In the past few days, the world media like
CNN
 and
international press
 have been giving extensive coverage to  the government seizure of 15,000 Bibles in recent months because they refer to God as “Allah” raising concerns and fears of religious intolerance in the country.

A consignment of 10,000 copies of the Indonesian-language Bibles which feature the disputed word “Allah” was confiscated in Kuching, Sarawak in September while another consignment of 5,100 Bibles was seized in March.

The root problem of the seizure of these Bibles is the earlier decision taken by the Cabinet to ban the use of the word “Allah” for religions other than Islam, although this is a most unreasonable, divisive and even unconstitutional decision as:

The term “Allah” was in use long before there was the  religion of Islam in the world;

The term Allah was used to refer to God by Arabic-speaking Christians before Arabic-speaking Muslims existed; and

Malaysia is probably the only nation where the use of the term “Allah” by Christians to refer to their God is prohibited, whereas its use to refer to Christian God has never been prohibited in many countries in the Middle-East and the Americas.

The confiscation of the Bibles and the ban on the use of the word “Allah” for religions other than Islam is incongruous with and even inimical to Najib’s 1Malaysia objective to give top priority to foster better inter-racial, inter-religious and inter-civilisational relations among Malaysians.

This is a test  whether Najib’s 1Malaysia is to be taken seriously and I call on him to ask the Cabinet to revoke its earlier decision taken under  previous administrations to ban the use of the word “Allah” for religions other than Islam.

I hope all Cabinet Ministers, particularly from MCA, Gerakan, MIC and the Sabah and Sarawak component parties of Barisan Nasional can take a bold and united stand on this issue to convince UMNO Ministers to support the revocation of the previous Cabinet ban on the use of the word “Allah” for religions other than Islam, as at issue is the very credibility and legitimacy of Najib’s 1Malaysia slogan and policy.

(Speech at Taiping DAP “Road to Putrajaya” thousand-people dinner at Hua Lian Chinese Independent Secondary Hall, Taiping on Sunday, 1st November 2009)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2009, 8:27 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.