Re: Idris Jala: M’sia must cut subsidies, debt by 2019 or risk bankruptcy

Letters

by
Sara Wak

Dear YB Idris Jala and Koh Tsu Koon,

For the last many years, the BN Govt has been handing big ang pows to the rich Malays who are given APs, and it has been said by the BN Govt that this practice will go on until 2013 0r even 2014!

Why can’t the Govt control the issue of APs to people who want to import cars? The govt can collect RM30,000 to RM40,000 on each important cars. Why must the BN Govt decides to pass the right to collect these payments to only a handful of rich Malays?

How many APs are issued to these rich Malays a year ? Like what Rafidah did when she was minister , in giving APs and shares to her relatives?

The Malaysian Economy has deteriorated so much for the last decade because of all these handouts to the UMNO cronies. Malaysia was ahead of Korea, Taiwan and Singapore, and look at it now, it is even behind countries like Thailand, Vietnam and others in Asia !

I am sure that both you intelligent Ministers know too well why it is like that .

The Malays are treated just like the Aborigines who have been given handouts by the Australian Govt and look at them now, what state are they in ? They never improve, and actually falling more behind.

If the 2 of you are serious about improving Malaysian economy, get rid of Corruption, Nepotism and Cronyism!

Look at Sarawak in the last 25 years, what happened?

Sarawak was the richest state with plenty of Timber, oil and gas, and may I ask how much reserves/deposits the state government have?

Not only does it not have any money in its state coffers, it owes many banks billions of RM!

Why? Do you know?

Is this why Sarawak joined Malaysia ? So that the people can continue to become poor so that a few people at the top MISMANAGED the state and pocket the state’s money into their own, those of the their families and cronies ? Only a handful of Sarawakians benefit from what they have been doing ?

They are supposed to be servants of the people, but they become the masters of the people!

If both of you have any conscience, act now for the people. Do not pay lip service only and make the BN elite richer!

Feel your hearts, and use your heads please. Look at what majority of the plight of the Malaysians, instead of just serving the elite few.

We all know why Gerakan was defeated so badly in the 2008 elections and even Dr Koh lost his seat. Well, he managed to get into the Government by virtue of being appointed a Senator !

Has he not learned what he and his party was voted out after so many years in power ? I do not need to tell him at all.

Yet, what is he doing for the people now? Do you think Gerakan will be able to get their seats back from PR? If this continue, I think Gerakan and many Chinese BN parties will die a natural death !

During the Sibu by-election, Wong Soon Koh of SUPP publicly stated that hundreds of thousands of Malaysians migrated overseas because of the Opposition’s policies. I just wish he can go and talk to those who actually migrated, including the Malays, and see what they say, and do not just dream about it, or just lie to the people who may not be very knowledgeable or uneducated ! I feel Very sad and disgusted indeed that we have this sort of people as ministers !

How much has Sarawak invested in 1st Silicon and Borneo paper & Pulp projects and how much has the state profited or lost in them? How much did Sarawak borrowed and how much still remain unpaid?

How much loan interest has the state paid so far since those projects started and how much more is it expected to pay in the future?

Do you know? The people of Sarawak definitely do not know ! Is this what we call transparent Govt. Do all the monies that the State Govt has paid and continue to pay belong to just the CM and his ministers or do they belong to the people? If they belong to the people, why is it that the Sarawak people do not the info relating to how much has been spent and how much more will be spent?

If this is the type of politicians and ministers we have, Malaysia is doomed to fall and fall hard!

I just hope that the Chinese, the Natives of various states and even the poor Malays will wake up and see what they can do in the next elections. They should vote only for the people who can be their servants and not their masters.

If the 2 of you continue to pay lip service to UMNO instead of working of the good of Malaysians, I suggest that it is better for both of you to retire instead of doing more harm to Malaysians by supporting BN!

Good Luck to the 2 of you ! And thank you if you care to have read what I have written as a simple Malaysian who has no political connections at all, just like Dato Seri Idris Jala who does not belong to any political party.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 31 May 2010, 5:48 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Economics
,
Finance
,
Good Governance
,
Letters
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Kit Siang: A cabinet chock-full of senators

Kit Siang: A cabinet chock-full of senators

Malaysiakini | Jun 1, 10 7:59pm

Pakatan Rakyat leaders slammed Prime Minister Najib Razak for “setting the dubious record” of leading a cabinet with the most unelected representatives.

DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang challenged the Najib to compel the new senators-turned-deputy ministers to stand for elections to prove their level of support.

“Ask these new senators to stand for election so that they have the mandate of the people,” he told reporters after the Pakatan Rakyat supreme council meeting in Petaling Jaya today.

“We will have more by-elections and it will be good for the people, as in Sibu where the (federal government) poured tens of millions of ringgit and the PM visited twice in 10 days,” he said tongue-in-cheek.

He added that the ‘mini-cabinet reshuffle’ is turning the cabinet into the Dewan Negara, oft-criticised as irrelevant, and supports calls for parliamentary reforms.

Lim also took a potshot at Palanivel, stating that he “was not fit to stand as a candidate in Hulu Selangor” but apparently fit to be part of the cabinet.

11 senators-turned-deputy ministers

Four new senators – MIC deputy president G Palanivel, PPP senior vice-president Maglin D’Cruz, MCA vice-presidents Donald Lim and Gan Ping Shou – were appointed deputy ministers today.

Previously, Najib’s cabinet consisted of three senators – Koh Tsu Koon (Prime Minister’s Department), Jamil Khir Baharom (Prime Minister’s Department) and Raja Nong Chik Zainal Abidin (Federal Territories minister).

Senators-turned-deputy ministers includes – Mashitah Ibrahim (Prime Minister’s Department), T Murugiah (Prime Minister’s Department), Awang Adek Hussin (Finance), Abu Seman Yusop (Home), Heng Seai Kie (Women, Family and Community Development), Maznah Mazlan (Health), A Kohilan Pilay (Foreign Affairs).

With this, it is roughly a quarter of the deputy ministers posts are held by non-elected representatives.

In an immediate reaction, Rembau MP and Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin ‘retweeted’ a post by an unknown individual, describing the new cabinet line up as “solid”.

This was met by a retort from Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua who said: “Not without you!”

—————

Pakatan mocks Najib’s Senate-powered appointments

By Clara Chooi | The Malaysian Insider | June 01, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, June 1 — Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leaders today poked fun at Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s Cabinet tweaks, pointing out that the increasing number of senators only proved that Barisan Nasional (BN) lacked qualified elected representatives for the posts.

DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang said Najib was now leading a government with “the most number of senators” and had failed to stick to his “people first, performance now” pledge with the mini-reshuffle.

“I am concerned with these appointments, that even more senators have been appointed,” the Ipoh Timur MP told reporters after attending a PR secretariat meeting at the PKR headquarters here.

He listed out the senators who were named as deputy ministers to assist the Cabinet ministers — PPP vice-president Datuk Maglin Dennis D’Cruz (Information, Communications and Culture), MCA vice-president Datuk Donald Lim (Finance), MCA vice-president Gan Ping Sieu (Youth and Sports) and MIC deputy president Datuk G. Palanivel (Plantation Industries and Commodities).

“This is a government with the biggest number of senators — a government of senators, not of elected representatives in the Parliament,” he declared.

Lim said the appointments served as an “indictment” to Najib’s premiership and accused the prime minister of being “regressive and reactionary” instead of “progressive and reformist”.

PR had earlier urged Najib to hold a series of by-elections to allow his newly appointed senators to contest for a spot in Parliament in order to better justify their posts in government.

“Yes, I would agree to that. It appears that by Najib’s measurement, there are no qualified representatives from Umno or the MIC to sit in the government which is why he chose these others.

“Better to have by-elections so that these appointees can contest… it would bring us plenty of benefit,” jibed PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, when agreeing with Lim.

Lim, who proposed the idea, said the by-elections would help Najib remove the “deadwood” representatives in the BN who Najib had felt were “unfit” to become ministers or deputy ministers.

“And then you can see him (Najib) pouring billions of ringgit in the constituencies like in the Sibu by-election and he would even visit at least three times during the 10 days (campaign period),” he said.

PAS secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali concurred with his PR partners, saying that the bloated Senate mirrored that the people had no confidence in the BN.

“Those appointed were not chosen by the people as representatives,” he said.

Lim also said the reshuffle showed that the BN leadership had failed to take stock of the message from the political tsunami of Election 2008.

“This reshuffle is not seen as a plus for MCA or BN or even Najib. It does not show that they have learned from the message from the 2008 elections that the people want change,” he added.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 1 June 2010, 9:30 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysians are now at the crossroads – an advanced high-income country in 2020 or a bankrupt nation in 2019

Malaysians are now at the crossroads and must choose to take the road towards an advanced high-income country in 2020 or a bankrupt nation in 2019.

The New Economic Model (NEM) launched by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak on March 30 promised a new development path encompassing economic, social and government transformation to catapult Malaysia from two-decade-long middle income trap to become an advanced high-income nation by 2020.

The NEM is however predicated on one basic assumption – the existence of “political will and leadership to break the logjam of resistance by vested interest groups  and preparing the rakyat  to support deep-seated changes in policy directions”.

One  alternative to a high-income advanced nation with inclusiveness and sustainability by 2020 is the spectre of a bankrupt nation by 2019 so vividly spelt out by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Idris Jala, last Thursday.

The rejection of the NEM by the Perkasa-led Malay Consultative Council on Saturday signifies that it is more probable that Malaysia will become a bankrupt nation in 2019 than to be a high-income advanced nation with inclusiveness and sustainability in 2020!

Najib created shock waves not only in the country but also internationally when he yielded to the pressures of the Perkasa-led Malay Consultative Council and began distancing himself from the NEM.

For a year since becoming Prime Minister, Najib and his Cabinet Ministers had been telling the nation and the world of his resolve to take the country on a new economic path under the NEM, which will put a premium on innovation, creativity and meritocracy.

Early this year, he even declared that one principle underpinning the success of the NEM is the “courage and judgment to make tough decisions”.

Why  then is Najib demonstrating the lack of “courage and judgment to make tough decisions” when confronted with objection and resistance to the NEM, although this will result in Malaysia becoming a bankrupt nation in 2019 rather than a high-income advanced nation in 2020?

In early March,  Najib attempted to quash talk of the repeated delays in launching of the NEM, which was originally scheduled to be announced last year.

Najib went on public record after receiving the the 2009 Annual Report of Pemudah on March 11 that the NEM would be launched on time and in two stages – the first stage on March 30 and the second stage of the announcement would be made concurrently with the unveiling of the 10th Malaysia Plan.

The Tenth Malaysia Plan will be presented in Parliament next Thursday on June 10, but without the second part of the NEM.

As Malaysians had been told that the NEM would be the basis of the Tenth Malaysia Plan, but all this have changed with the recent declaration by Najib that the NEM is  not the Government’s “final stand” but merely the “trial balloons” of a group of experts making suggestions from the global market’s perspective.

What then is the basis of the Tenth Malaysia Plan which Najib will present to Parliament next Thursday?

[
Speech at the Sabah DAP Tadau Kaamatan dinner at Dowish Restaurant, Kota Kinabalu on Monday, 31st May 2010 at 9pm
]

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 1 June 2010, 12:43 pm and is filed under
Economics
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


No Kaamatan promotion at airports — Kit Siang

By
Chok Sim Yee
 | The Borneo Post

KOTA KINABALU: Pesta Kaamatan (Harvest Festival) is one of the highlights in the Sabah annual calendar of events, but sadly, not much effort has been made to promote the cultural event, even at the main gateways to the state — the airports.

At least this was what Democratic Action Party (DAP) advisor Lim Kit Siang noticed when he arrived yesterday.

Claiming that there was not much effort done by the federal government to recognise and promote Pesta Kaamatan, he said this defeats the whole meaning of the 1Malaysia concept, which was the brainchild of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

“Pesta Kaamatan is the most important celebration in Sabah but sadly, I do not see any Pesta Kaamatan-related decorations when I arrived at the airport,” he said, pointing out that it was the best place to promote the event as it is the first place to welcome incoming tourists, be it domestic or foreign.

He also questioned why Najib could not even spare some time to attend such an important programme.

“If the Prime Minister could go to the Sibu by-election for three to four

times, then he should be able to join in the Kaamatan celebration with the KadazanDusuns and Muruts in Sabah, and later with the Dayaks for the Gawai in Sarawak. He was the one who suggested the 1Malaysia concept, so practise it.

“He should walk the talk and show he placed importance on the celebrations of all races,” he stressed.

He later attended the closing of the State-Level Pesta Kaamatan at the Hongkod Koisaan Building in Penampang, yesterday.

Lim was also seeking clarification from Najib on whether his cabinet ministers are putting the “Malaysian people” first, or their own race as priority.

In another development, Lim said the recent Sibu by-election result showed that the Barisan Nasional (BN) had lost its grip on the fixed-deposit states, and that the parliamentary seats in Sabah and Sarawak would be open for a fair competition between Pakatan Rakyat and the BN.

He pointed out that the by-election had sent a clear message that the BN Government could not provide a fair treatment and failed to fulfil the people’s demands in East Malaysia.

Hence, Lim revealed that he would bring the matter up with the Prime Minister in the Parliament sitting next week on whether the government will be setting up a Royal Inquiry Committee to determine whether Sabah and Sarawak received a fair treatment and development ever since both states and Malaya formed Malaysia in 1963.

“I will ask the Prime Minister to list the number of allocations and types of allocation given to Sabah and Sarawak from 1963 till present.”

He added that he would also raise the issue of illegal immigrants in Sabah during the Parliament sitting as well as the reason why Malaysia surrendered the claim over Block L and Block M in Limbang to Brunei.

Lim also spoke on the Malay Consultative Council (Perkasa), which he claimed is disrespectful to the Agong by slamming the New Economic Model at the Bumiputra Economic Congress.

He said the Agong had described Najib’s NEM as revolutionary and had the potential to develop the country, thus urging for the people’s blessing towards the NEM.

“However, Perkasa which heads the congress criticised NEM, showing their disrespect to the Agong.”

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 1 June 2010, 2:08 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan invites PM to roundtable talk on Israeli attacks

By
Clara Chooi
 | The Malaysian Insider | June 01, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, June 1 — Pakatan Rakyat (PR) has invited Datuk Seri Najib Razak and all parties across the political divide for a roundtable talk this Friday to jointly condemning Israel’s attack on the Gaza-bound humanitarian aid flotilla.

PR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today issued the invitation to the prime minister, all Barisan Nasional and PR parties and all Islamic and non-Islamic NGOs to attend the talk, set to be held in Kampung Baru at 11.30am on Friday.

“We need to take a more serious stand in this issue and condemn this continuing violence,” he said after attending the PR secretariat meeting at the PKR headquarters here today.

Anwar added that following the roundtable talks, all invited parties would then march to the US embassy and submit a memorandum on behalf of all Malaysians, calling for an end to the violence.

“For this, we have also decided to invite the prime minister to join us in this special meeting,” he said.

He said PR parties had also jointly agreed to urge for an emergency parliamentary session to be held on Friday or latest by Sunday to allow all parties to give its united stand on the issue.

“We want Parliament to hold this special session so that we can speak out in one voice,” he said.

Anwar said it was in PR’s opinion that Israel’s “conceit and rage” had stemmed from the US government’s continuing support of the Zionist regime.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 1 June 2010, 9:53 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Palestine
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tackling Subsidies And Their Myriad Manifestations

By
M. Bakri Musa

Idris Jala, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department and PEMANDU CEO, has yet to convince his cabinet colleagues, in particular the Prime Minister, of the need to reduce subsidies specifically and government spending generally.  He has to do that first before taking his Subsidy Rationalization Lab road show to the rest of the country.

            Responding to the first “Open House,” Prime Minister Najib indicated that he would “leave it to the people to decide on whether they [the subsidies] should be maintained or abolished.”  In doing so he abrogated his leadership on a critical economic issue.  He is following instead of leading public opinion; a wet-finger-in-the-air type of leader.

            While I do not share Idris Jala’s dire prediction of Malaysia becoming bankrupt in nine years – nations, unlike corporations and individuals, cannot do that – nonetheless the grim picture he painted is not far from the likely reality.  His likening Malaysia’s future to today’s Greece may or not be valid but there are enough useful lessons from the current Greek tragedy.

            Greece is not bankrupt, nor will it ever be; the Greeks are suffering because of economic mismanagement by their leaders.  Subsidy for the poor or for essential goods was only a minor part of the mess.  The Greeks were borrowing beyond their capacity to pay; they borrowed just to keep their bloated government afloat.

            The other pertinent lesson is that even when faced with a catastrophe, people who have long enjoyed subsidies and special privileges would not readily give those up.  This is true of the Greeks (the ugly mass demonstrations and strikes there attest to that) as well as others.  Americans long used to generous subsidies for their home mortgages and health insurances would severely punish their leaders at election time should they dare even touch either issue.  And America has a deficit much worse (twice as bad, as a percentage of GDP) than Malaysia.

            As a reminder, the current global economic turmoil was triggered by the American expansion of its housing subsidy through “sub-prime mortgages.”  Again, this was facilitated primarily through two government-sponsored (and thus subsidized) corporations, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  It was done with the best of intentions, making housing affordable to the poor.

            Those factors notwithstanding, in the many deliberations on the current economic crisis, I have yet to hear an American leader or economist suggest doing away or even trimming the housing subsidy.  And America does not lack for wise leaders or smart economists!

            So if Idris Jala or anyone thinks that Malaysians would readily give up their subsidies, he is blind to the universal precept of human behavior.  Likewise with special privileges, which after all are subsidies manifested differently; so do not expect Bumiputras to give that up easily either.

Choosing An Easy Target

Idris Jala showed the frightening and unsustainable trend of rising debt and increasing deficits.  There are only two ways out:  increase revenue through economic growth, and reduce spending, or more accurately, curtail expenditures that do not contribute to economic growth.  As any businessman knows, you sometimes have to spend money to generate money.

            I wish Idris Jala had concentrated only on those two central themes.  Instead he focused on ending subsidies, specifically on petroleum and essential food items.  Thus he is being portrayed as targeting the poor, and not without good reasons.  That distracts him.  It is easy and tempting to prey on the poor; though large in numbers they lack economic and political clout.

            Of the record RM74B spent on subsidies in 2009, about 57 percent were on social services; 33, fuel and energy; 7, infrastructures; and 3, foods.  As for the beneficiaries, only 2 percent were farmers, fishermen, and the poor.

            Those subsidies on social services and infrastructures could be viewed as investments as they could potentially enhance our human and physical capital, and thus the nation’s productive capacity.  Even here we could increase the efficiency by plugging the leakages.

            Ending subsidies for foods would address only a tiny part of the problem (3 percent).  Besides, the per capita consumption of such staples among the poor is comparable to or only minimally less than the rich, but the poor has to expend proportionately more of their income.

            Idris purported to show that Malaysians enjoy the cheapest price in the region, with cooking oil costing only RM3.30 as compared to RM8.70 in Singapore.  In making that comparison, Idris used the exchange rate instead of the purchasing power parity (ppp) or the Economist’s Big Mac Index.  Had either been used, the price differential would be less impressive.  I do not know whether Idris is disingenuous, trying to mislead, or being intellectually dishonest in using the exchange rate.

            Idris proposes mitigating measures to help the poor.  That would inevitably require massive administrative machinery, thus consuming whatever savings being generated.  For the amount involved, it would be preferable as well as politically wise to leave things where there are, except for sugar.  I would remove its subsidy not for economic but public health reasons.  With rampant obesity and diabetes, any initiative that would lower sugar consumption would be good.  Likewise I would hike taxes on alcohol, tobacco and gambling, but not high enough to stimulate a thriving contraband industry.

            Petroleum however is different; its per-capita consumption among the rich is considerably higher.  Consequently, its subsidy disproportionately benefits the rich.  Again here Idris proposes cash rebates to motorcycle and small car owners.  Another bureaucracy!

            I am for ending petroleum subsidy, phased in slowly to minimize dislocations since it is such a crucial fuel literally and figuratively in a modern economy.  However, instead of cash rebates I would eliminate taxes on buses, taxis and other conveyances to transport passengers.  That would effectively half the price of a Proton to be used as a taxi, making it easier for owner-operators.

            I would subsidize season tickets for bus and rail to ease the burden on commuters, as Canada is doing.  Vancouver has a per capita income many times that of Malaysia, yet its car-ownership figure is considerably lower.  Consequently the air in that city is not polluted with car exhaust, and the streets a pleasure to stroll.  Singapore uses differential toll rates and efficient mass transit to discourage city driving.

            Ending subsidy on petroleum would save not only money but also the environment.  Focusing only on petroleum and sparing food subsidies (except sugar) would also make the exercise an easier sell.  Besides, petroleum subsidy is massive, while food subsidies are small change in comparison, and evoke considerable emotional response.  It is just not worth expending political capital and risking public wrath for the promised minuscule returns.

Hidden Subsidies

Idris should not stop with the obvious and massive petroleum subsidy.  He should pursue other equally expensive and rapidly growing but hidden ones.  They are pernicious precisely because they are not overt; the public is not apprised of the costs.  There are no available figures to be put on fancy graphs and pie charts for your Power Point presentation.

            One is the preferential awarding of contracts to Bumiputras.  However noble the objective may be, unless we know what the added costs are, we cannot begin a cost-benefit analysis or assess the program’s efficacy.  Few would quibble with the extra 5 or 10 percent to have a contract awarded to a Bumiputra in the name of social equity and correcting past inequities, but many would grumble if that figure were to balloon beyond 30 percent.

            It is customary that contracts below a certain amount be awarded exclusively to Bumiputras.  Even if the added costs were only 10 percent each (a very conservative estimate!), in the aggregate they would impose a considerable burden on the government.  I suggest that Idris’s “lab” do a study on this.

            Then there are the overt as well as hidden subsidies to the myriad GLCs.  Many are perennial “corporate welfare bums,” forever hooked on government bailouts.  The Malaysian corporate scene is littered with the carcasses of the likes of Bank Bumiputra.  Again I challenge Idris to analyze that!

            Such studies would require much thought and wise analysis; they cannot be done by posing simplistic questions via SMS.

            The only difference between the recipients of cooking oil subsidy versus those preferred Bumiputra contractors and “corporate welfare bums” like Bank Bumiputra is that the former are weak while the latter, powerful.

            If Idris Jala had been diligent and fearless in analyzing the twin problems of ballooning deficits and increasing spending, he would begin with the obvious and massive petroleum subsidy, then flush out the hidden subsidies represented by non-competitive bids of government contracts, and then get rid those money-losing GLCs.  That would definitely make a dent on our deficit and spending problem.  That would also invigorate our economy, thereby enhancing the revenue side.

            He does not need a road show for that; all he has to do is convince his colleagues in the cabinet, beginning with the Prime Minister.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 1 June 2010, 11:00 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Economics
,
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


308 Political Tsunami crossing South China Sea (4 videos)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 2 June 2010, 8:40 pm and is filed under
Post-2008 general election
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malay Nationalists Trash Premier’s Economic Plan

Asia Sentinel

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak gets a cold reception

Just how difficult it will be to modify Malaysia’s affirmative action program for its majority ethnic Malays came clear over the weekend when some 1,500 members of the Malay Consultative Council summarily rejected Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s plans to replace it with what the premier calls the New Economic Model.

Najib was due to unveil his NEM, as he calls it, on June 10 in conjunction with the publication of the 10th Malaysia Plan. But so far no details have been released, with less than two weeks to go before its publication, and it is questionable what will be in it. The consultative council turned it down without bothering with the details.

Since he came into office as premier in April of 2009, Najib has been attempting to get Malays, who make up roughly 60 percent of the country’s 27 million people, to give up some of the perks that they have enjoyed since the New Economic Policy was promulgated in the wake of bloody 1969 riots that took the lives of hundreds of Malays and Chinese alike. Modifying the NEP, originally designed to remain in place only until 1990, has become the third rail of Malay politics.

The vote of the council, made up of 76 Malay-rights organizations, amounts to a stinging rebuke of the prime minister’s policy even before it is announced. Ibrahim Ali, the head of Perkasa, the most strident of the Malay nationalist organizations and an ally of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, told Najib publicly that the vote amounted to a vote of no-confidence in him. Rather than ratifying in principle Najib’s plans, the council instead passed a 31-point resolution demanding that the essentials of the NEP remain in place.

In particular, the Malay Consultative Council is demanding guarantees of what they call the special rights of ethnic Malays in return for granting citizenship to non-Malays – who have been here for generations. Chinese make up about 25 percent of the population, Indians another 8 percent, with the rest other races. Critics say that amounts to apartheid by another name.

The National Economic Advisory Council, hand-picked by Najib to write the new economic framework, came under particular fire. The NEAC, as it is known, is made up of nine academicians, economic experts and consultants including some of Malaysia’s most distinguished economists. However, Ibrahim told the conference, some of the members are non-Malays who would have no way of knowing the Malay soul, and the Malays who are there are liberals who have forgotten their roots.

The prime minister’s cause probably wasn’t helped much by the Saturday release of the annual Forbes List of richest Malaysians. Of the top 10, eight are Chinese and not a single one is an ethnic Malay. Second on the list, after Robert Kuok with US$12 billion in assets, is telecommunications tycoon Tatparanandam Ananda Krishnan, an ethnic Indian. At eighth is the only other non-Chinese, Syed Mokhtar AlBukhyary,who is of Arab descent.

The Forbes List of Malaysia’s 10 Richest

1) Robert Kuok; US$12 billion

2) T. Ananda Krishnan; US$8.1 billion

3) Lee Shin Cheng; US$4.6 billion

4) Sri Lee Kim Hua; US$3.9 billion

5) Quek Leng Chan; US$3.85 billion

6) Teh Hong Piow; US$3.8 billion

7) Yeoh Tiong Lay; US$2.5 billion

8) Syed Mokhtar AlBukhary; US$1.7 billion

9) Vincent Tan; US$1.6 billion

10) Tiong Hiew King; US$1.2 billion

The vote presents Najib with a seemingly insoluble political dilemma. He needs to eliminate costly subsidies that stifle both personal and corporate competitiveness. According to one account, in 2009 the government spent RM74 billion (US$22.7 billion) in subsidies for sugar, fuel and other items. Subsidy expenditure was 11 percent of nominal gross domestic product according to these figures between 2006 and 2009. But as Badawi learned, cutting subsidies is dangerous. A cut in fuel subsidies contributed to his unpopularity.

Najib’s move last year to cut a long-standing requirement mandating ethnic Malay participation in 27 economic sub-sectors and remove another that 30 percent of shares in IPOs go to ethnic Malays was one of the developments led to rising Malay irritation. His weekend comments to the Consultative Congress that the government is still in the process of gathering feedback before implementing his new policy – just 11 days before it is supposed to be tabled – is an indication that he and his advisors have little idea of how to do it.

In particular, while there has been no break with former Prime Minister Mahathir, Mahathir has been attending Perkasa rallies and in some cases leading them, and, witnesses say, some of them have turned pretty ugly. Najib had to step in to cancel one that Mahathir had called on May 13, the 41st anniversary of the 1969 riots that brought about the NEP in the first place. That rally now is to be revived for June 14. Originally expected to draw 10,000 Malays in a state of ferment that resembles the Tea Parties in the United States, the rally is now expected to draw double that. The 84-year-old Mahathir is expected to be the keynote speaker.

The premier is aware that Mahathir’s implacable enmity played a major role in bringing down Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Although Najib’s public approval rating is now 68 percent, up from a disastrous 44 percent when he took office, he faces the possibility of rivals in UMNO if he pushes too hard – including his deputy prime minister, Muhyiddin Yassin, who is also the deputy president of UMNO.

Najib has repeatedly vowed to clean up corruption in UMNO, which has abysmal public approval ratings, according to an April survey by the respected Merdeka Center, a Kuala Lumpur-based think-tank, and despite his own reputation for questionable contracts when he was minister of defense. The survey found that only 22 percent of Malaysians placed their trust in UMNO, which has largely run the country since its inception. That has been borne out by a long series of by-elections since national polls in March 2008. The Barisan Nasional has lost eight of the 11 by-elections and only won on in Kuala Selangor by a relatively small margin of votes.

Najib has said repeatedly that the country can no longer rely on a few sectors like oil palm plantations and crude oil sales to drive growth, instead calling for diversification and incentives for new strategic industries. The education system – which critics say now gives ethnic Malays virtually blanket passes with little academic rigor – must be reevaluated and improved, he says, to reward excellence and nurture talented graduates who excel in strategic and creative thinking, and entrepreneurial and leadership skills that will drive success in the decades ahead. A flock of bloated state-owned or government linked companies continue to swallow up money – the latest being the plantation giant Sime Darby, which recently reported as much as US$1 billion in writeoffs for bad investments, or the chronically money-losing Proton national car.

But in order to do any of that, he stands a strong chance of alienating his political base – or, in the case of the Proton, Mahathir. He has also demanded an end to practices that support the behavior of rent-seeking and patronage. But doing so would take away a major reason for the existence of UMNO, which is regarded as hopelessly corrupt by a large segment of the population – and thus the 22 percent approval rating for the party.

“Obviously, I as the president of Umno cannot forsake the interests of the Malays who form the majority in Malaysia,” Najib said when closing the Bumiputera Economic Congress organized by the Malay Consultative Council.

As the son of the founder of the New Economic Policy (NEP) the late Abdul Razak Hussein — Malaysia’s second prime minister — in no way would he betray his father’s struggle, he said. However, he didn’t point out to the crowd that when his father and other UMNO leaders implemented the NEP, they designed it to end in 1990.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 2 June 2010, 8:46 am and is filed under
Economics
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s most difficult question in the forthcoming five-week parliamentary meeting – how many Cabinet Ministers are Malaysian first, race second in keeping with 1Malaysia policy?

I have posed what is probably the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s most difficult question in the forthcoming 22-day parliamentary meeting:

“How many Ministers in his Cabinet, naming them, regard himself/herself as Malaysian first, race second in keeping with the 1Malaysia policy”.

It will test Najib to the limit of his intellectual prowess and political acumen to answer this question, as he will have to be a David Copperfield political magician to try to “square the circle” in view of two diametrically polar positions:

The declaration of the 1Malaysia Government Transformation Programme Roadmap that the goal of 1Malaysia is to create “a nation where every Malaysian perceives himself or herself as Malaysian first, and by race, religion, geographical region or socio-economic background second”; and

The declaration by the Deputy Prime Minister and UMNO Deputy President Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin in December last year that he is Malay first, Malaysian second!

Will Najib be honest and give a frank and straightforward  answer to  this question, without ifs and buts?

Or will he try to evade it by  resorting  to the classic Barisan Nasional parliamentary tactic of getting the question rejected on the spurious ground that it has run afoul of one Standing Order or another?

We will know soon enough how Najib handles this question, which I deem as his most difficult question in the forthcoming six-week parliamentary meeting from Monday June 8 to July 13, which has the 11-day debate on the  Tenth Malaysia Plan as its centerpiece.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 2 June 2010, 4:20 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib Cabinet2 not only the most unrepresentative in nation’s history, but also very backward and inward-looking which does not inspire confidence that 1Malaysia and NEM are more than slogans

The Najib Cabinet2 is not only the most unrepresentative Cabinet in the nation’s history with the most number of unelected and unelectable Senators, but also very backward and inward-looking which does not inspire confidence that 1Malaysia and New Economic Model (NEM) are more than slogans.

The minor Cabinet reshuffle yesterday is the second blow in a week to Najib’s claims to reformist credentials – the first being the public humiliation and slap-in-the face the Prime Minister endured when he attended the congress of  the Perkasa-led Malay Consultative Council on Saturday to be told of its rejection of NEM.

After the Prime Minister had talked so much about national political, economic, social and government transformation if Malaysia is not to miss the boat to escape the two-decade middle income trap and take the quantum leap to become a high-income advanced nation with inclusiveness and sustainability by 2020, one would have expected the Najib Cabinet2 to send out the message: “We are capable of change”!

But this is not the case. Instead of change and a breath of fresh air, Najib’s Cabinet2 is another game of musical chairs with old,  tired and discredited political faces.

Instead of a trimmed-down Cabinet to get rid of Ministerial deadwood, the Cabinet has been expanded with the appointment of four new Senators so that they could be given deputy ministerial appointments.

By Najib’s sleight-of-hand, Barisan Nasional has expanded from a coalition of 14 parties to become a 14+ creature – with Senator Datuk T. Murugiah, retained as Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, in his capacity as  President of PPP2!

The dropping of Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat from the Cabinet has not come as a surprise, making him the shortest-serving MCA Minister in MCA history, although not the short-serving MCA elected president – as former MCA President Tan Koon Swan resigned as MCA President in August 1986 after only nine months in office.

However, it must be conceded that Ong outshines all the four MCA Ministers in public credibility.

One example why Najib’s Cabinet2 is sending out all the wrong messages detracting from his claims as the Great Reformer is the elevation of Datuk Chor Chee Heung as Minister for Housing and Local Government.

What signal is Najib trying to communicate when he could appoint Chor as Minister although the latter was among the politicians implicated in the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal for possible conflict-of-interest by the PricewaterhouseCooper (PwC) audit report released last year?

Although the Alor Star MP, who was Port Klang Authority Chairman from 2007-2008, had denied any wrongdoing and claimed that he had accepted the post of chairman to do “national service”, Malaysians are entitled to ask why Chor’s disastrous tenure in his “national service” in the PKFZ scandal should not disqualify him from another tenure of “national service” as a full-fledged Minister!

As Chor was specifically implicated by the PwC audit report into the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, has Chor’s appointment as full Minister been cleared by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)?

It is noteworthy that the new Transport Minister Datuk Seri Kang Cho Ha has nothing to say about the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal in the MCA newspaper, the Star, on his new appointment.

Is the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal now “dead and buried” as an issue in the Barisan Nasional Cabinet and government?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 2 June 2010, 11:33 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Good Governance
,
Najib Razak
,
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Unifi ‘backdoor’ allows hacking, spying

By
Lee Wei Lian
 | The Malaysian Insider

June 02, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, June 2 — Over 1,000 UniFi customers are exposed to a potential security risk of attacks from hackers and spying when using the high speed broadband service from Telekom Malaysia.

The security risk comes from a second administration account on routers that UniFi customers have to use.

The routers have the option for remote management enabled and customers were not informed and therefore unable to reset the password.

Security consultant Dinesh Nair, who has seen the second administration account, said that it appeared to be for maintenance purposes and allows Telekom Malaysia to troubleshoot UniFi problems remotely.

But he added that the password was “guessable” and with the remote management option turned on, it left the router vulnerable to unauthorised access and abuse such as forcing dropped connections and listening to the setting up of email passwords.

“It’s a security risk,” said Dinesh

“Telekom Malaysia should have been open about it from day one. The potential for damage is there.”

He said that the remote management option should have been turned off by default and turned on only when Telekom Malaysia needed remote access.

He added that it was particularly critical for business Unifi customers as competitors could try and gain unauthorised access to company IT systems via the remote management option.

“It’s a foot in the door,” he said.

When contacted, Telekom Malaysia said that they will discuss the issue with their technical team and issue a response.

One broadband industry executive said that the severity of the risk depended on the permissions that were granted to the remote access user.

“Can they reset the box? Or is it just to monitor usage?” said the executive.

“But the risk is greater for business users than home users as it could pose a security breach.”

UniFi user KC Lau said he was upset after reading about the issue on a techie forum (http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/1439287 ) and recalled how his technician told him not to change the passwords on even his WiFi router so that Telekom Malaysia technicians could have remote access.

“Why can’t we change the password on our own WiFi router?” he said.

As of May 7, there were about 1,700 UniFi customers.

Telekom’s UniFi service is part of its High Speed Broadband (HSBB) project was initiated in 2008 and is initially be available in fourareas around the Klang Valley: Shah Alam, Subang Jaya, Taman Tun Dr Ismail and Bangsar. It will be expanded to another 22 areas by June and a further 22 by December.

By 2012, TM expects to hit 1.2 million premises passed.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 2 June 2010, 6:23 pm and is filed under
IT
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Chua still stuck in the past

By
Stanley Koh

Free Malaysia Today

COMMENT Yesterday’s announcement of a Cabinet reshuffle tells us much about what went on in MCA President Dr Chua Soi Lek’s mind as he juggled with the names of party leaders to recommend for ministerial positions. The public can now judge whether he has been following the “philosophy of the humble ant” in leading the MCA, as he promised in his campaign for the presidency.

His political rivals are putting on a sober and subdued face while frantically sending out cryptic messages to their supporters, no doubt commenting on the Cabinet changes.

Has Chua been true to his election pledge to follow the doctrine of “no more yes men” and no more favouritism in party and government appointments? To put it another way, has he wisely picked credible and capable leaders?

Some of his more vocal critics are asking whether the MCA ministerial line-up reflects “credible and capable leadership that combines the right mix of experience, attitude and talent to reflect the aspirations of the grassroots” as he promised last March during his campaign for the party presidency.

“This is the worse line-up since the days of former president Lee San Choon,” the chairman of an MCA division in the Klang Valley told FMT on condition of anonymity.

Chua’s detractors are claiming that he has not departed from the old practice of rewarding staunch key supporters with a jolly good pat on the back as well as with position.

Some, of course, have shrugged it all off as part of the political game. Chua, in playing the victor, is no different from his predecessors, although he used to accuse them of favouritism.

Kong Cho Ha stands out like a sore thumb. Defeated by Liow Tiong Lai for the deputy president’s post, he was given the job of party secretary-general in order to justify recommending him for a senior Cabinet position. Kong, formerly Housing and Local Government Minister, is now Transport Minister, the post vacated by the removal of Ong Tee Keat, one of Chua’s opponents in the MCA presidential race, the other being Ong Ka Ting.

Chua’s supporters rebut that the adjustments made to the Cabinet reflect the changes in MCA following the March polls.

Ong Tee Keat, MP for Ampang, was dropped in spite of the popularity he has acquired with the general public for his role in exposing corruption in PKFZ.

Wee Jeck Seng, former political secretary to Ong Ka Ting, was dropped from his position as Deputy Youth and Sports Minister.

Chua is also being criticised for nominating his son, Chua Tee Yong, who is now Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Agro-based Industries.

The backdoor route

Before yesterday’s announcement, the MCA president was reported to have avoided answering a student who asked about rumours that the junior Chua would be made a deputy minister.

“You seem to know more than me about who should be nominated,” he was quoted as saying. “I would like to appoint you as my adviser.”

Chua has publicly defended his son’s capabilities and qualifications. Tee Yong, MP for Labis, has professional experience as a former chief financial officer in a firm. He graduated from the Mt Eliza Business School and the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in Australia.

Nepotism and political patronage seem always to get in the way of election promises.

Najib’s minor reshuffle involves the appointment of 11 senators as deputy ministers. Three of them are from MCA.

Chua appears to have found himself stuck in the politics of the old school. Obviously, he has not fully comprehended the new thinking among a more politically aware public.

He publicly declared he would not endorse himself for a Cabinet posting “through the backdoor” by seeking to be appointed as a senator. Was he being aboveboard or are his detractors speaking the truth when they say he privately lobbied for support to be appointed to the Cabinet.

The new Cabinet line-up shows that he did use the backdoor for his men to join the Cabinet by the senator’s route.

Was it politically wise in the context of enhancing the esteem of his party? Did Chua, in making his recommendations, consider the following: first, the prevailing argument that the Dewan Rakyat—the House of Representatives—should be filled only by elected representatives; second, are those MCA leaders appointed to the Cabinet either academically or professionally matched to their respective portfolios?

“Malaysians have been promised transformation, but the latest appointments fail to point to this direction, especially in MCA,” a party critic said.

“Shouldn’t we learn from Singapore in the appointment of the best professionals to the government ministries?”

Chua recommended senators Heng Seai Kie, Donald Lim Siang Chai and Gan Ping Sieu for deputy minister’s posts.

Heng, who is Wanita Vice Chairman, replaces former Wanita Chief Chew Mei Fun as Deputy Minister for Women, Family and Community Development. Chew recently resigned, fulfilling her pledge to do so if Chua, tainted by a sex scandal, became party president.

Donald Lim, who is Selangor MCA chairman and one of the losers in the 2008 general election, is now Deputy Finance Minister.

A silent mutiny

A MCA insider, defending Chua’s decisions, argues that it is the norm for party vice presidents to be given government postings. It is on this ground that the vice presidents and those elected central committee members are recommended for government posts.

Deputy ministers Lee Chee Leong (Home), Dr Hou Kok Chung (Higher Education) and Heng Seai Kie (Women, Family and Community Development) obtained the highest votes respectively in the recent party elections.

Critics of Chua’s choices for the Cabinet are not likely to make their voices heard, but SMS messages are certainly making the rounds.

The president’s detractors and potential challengers are said to be patiently waiting for yet another “Save MCA” campaign. The undercurrents of a silent mutiny are allegedly gathering momentum.

Chua won the MCA presidency by merely 68 votes. That less-than-impressive win, together with his tainted background, may make it tough for him in the next electoral battle.

Will his tenure as president last until the next general election, considering that there is a hidden agenda to oust him?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 3 June 2010, 9:01 am and is filed under
MCA
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Idris Jala: M’sia must cut subsidies, debt by 2019 or risk bankruptcy

By
Sara Wak

My Dear Ministers,

I think both of you must know what are the reasons why Malaysian economy has been on the fall for the last decade. Malaysia has a lot of oil and gas and the income was supposed to enable Malaysia survive for many years to come.

However, What PETRONAS has made since it was incorporated has evaporated into thin air, where the profits have been WRONGLY used by the Federal BN Government to support many failed business deals, such as The Bumiputra Finance scandal, the buy back of MAS shares from Tajuddin at RM8 a share when the market price was only RM3 a share, and many others such as Port Klang Free Zone, Parwaja Steel, etc etc.

There are just too many to name.

Perhaps you should read what Malaysians have been circulating among themselves on the article below in comparing Malaysia to Greece, which Dato Seri Idris Jala also used !

Bureaucracy – you are only too aware, otherwise you won;t be talking about KPIs. Bloated civil service – so many civil servants Corruption – need we say more on this when contracts are awarded without tender ?

Tax evasion – when Inland revenue does not do anything on transfer pricing !

No transparency in governance – Govt and ministers are not held accountable.

These sounds very familiar in Malaysia.

I would like to comment on some of your proposals, although I wish I can do so for all of them :

Text book loan scheme and tuition subsidy aid to be abolished

If you look at many developed countries, the government provide FREE text books for primary and secondary school children, and now you are talking about Text book loan scheme and tuition subsidy aid to be abolished!

Just look at the poor natives from Sarawak and Sabah for example, including the Kelabits and Penans in Sarawak, some parents do not even have money to book their children’s text books and uniforms !

If we are serious about Human assets for the future of Malaysia, we should try to encourage all children to be educated, especially those who are poor. In Malaysia, those who are poor are mainly those in the villages like in Sarawak and Sabah, especially the natives like Dayaks, Kelabaits, Penans, Malays, Kadazans, Muruts, Kenyahs, etc etc.

If the BN Government can allow RM billions to be wasted through corruption and bail-outs, how is it that they cannot afford to buy the books for primary and secondary schools, at least up to Form 3?

Malaysia’s fuel prices are among the cheapest in the world.

I am sure both of you are very intelligent people, otherwise how could you both have such high education and went up so high in positions to MD, and ministers?

When you say furl prices are cheap in Malaysia, what are you comparing them with?

Are you comparing apples with apples or apples with oranges?

Just look at the regular petrol fuel prices below:

Malaysia  –    RM1.80 per litre

Singapore – S$1.757 per litre

Australia –     A$1.35 per litre

You should not convert the prices in Singapore and Australia from S$ and A$ to RM in order to compare them.

What you should compare is the per capital income of the population in each country.

In Malaysia, a fresh graduate can only earn RM1,500 a month, this is very good already, some in Sarawak can only earn RM1,000 or less a month.

In Singapore, a fresh graduate earns at least S$2,000 a month and in Australia, a fresh graduate earns at least A$3,000 a month. I know it as 2 of my children were offered engineering jobs in Malaysia for RM1,500 a month, they were also offered S$2,000 a month in Singapore and A$4,500 in Australia a month!

Look when you compare fuel prices, you need to look at the earnings and you cannot just simply convert the various prices into a single currency.

Why don’t you compare prices of cars in Malaysia with those in USA, Australia and NZ and UK?

I hope both of you have done some studies in economics and finance before you start doing all the analysis and comparison and make yourselves look stupid in comparing apples with pears!!

Foreign students will pay full fees at public universities

I wonder why this is brought up. Has the Malaysian Government not charging full fees for foreign students? If it is the case, why are public universities not offering Malaysian students to study in local universities at reduced prices and allow foreign students to study there?

In most developed countries like Australia and Singapore, they only offer some places to foreign students but at full price! I wonder what the BN Government has been thinking all along. Why not offer those university places to pour own Malaysians at those reduced rates instead of them spending more overseas?

I would like to hear your comments on the above points which I raised with you and look forward to your response.

Thank you.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 3 June 2010, 2:51 pm and is filed under
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Rebuking Idris show Umno’s distaste for subsidy cuts

By Debra Chong

Malaysian Insider

June 03, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, June 3 — Datuk Seri Idris Jala’s plan to save Malaysia from going broke appears to be stillborn, as Umno’s constant attacks on the minister show that the Najib administration has no appetite for subsidy cuts.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak also appears to have distanced himself from Idris’ proposal, after he told the Perkasa-led Malay Consultative Council meeting last week that proposals to save RM103 billion in subsidies were not yet finalised.

“Idris’ proposal is stillborn. I don’t think the Najib administration has the courage to carry out the cuts… not across the board and not as Idris planned it,” DAP publicity chief Tony Pua said.

Analysts contacted by The Malaysian Insider agreed.

Ibrahim Suffian, from the independent Merdeka Center, observed that a lot of politicians were resisting the proposal because they know it is an unfavourable measure and will impact the way the public will vote at the next elections.

“The biggest impediment to Idris’ proposal is that the move is unpopular. People are getting upset. Why should they have to pay for someone else’s expenditure?” Ibrahim said.

“My sense is that given the unpopularity of this move, I think it will be shunted to one side,” he added.

The Barisan Nasional (BN), which has ruled the country since Independence 53 years ago, lost its traditional two-thirds control of Parliament in 2008 following a series of price hikes for petrol and other consumables announced by the Abdullah administration prior to the general elections.

The ruling coalition has yet to recover despite the number of opposition MPs crossing the floor and the spate of by-elections for federal seats in the last two years.

“It’s trying to commit suicide, politically,” said Dr Sivamurugan Pandian from Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), repeating what politicians from both BN and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) told The Malaysian Insider previously.

The senior lecturer in social sciences added that Najib would not make any moves on the subsidy system unless he knows he has a strong mandate in the elections.

Najib, who is also the MP for Pekan, suffered a scare in the general election a decade ago and nearly lost the seat he inherited from his late father and Malaysia’s second prime minister, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein.

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia’s Dr Agus Yusoff doubted the Najib administration had the political willpower to pull it off, noting the prime minister appeared to be distancing himself from Pemandu’s laundry list of proposed cuts

“It’s certainly not the right time… unless the government can come clean and take measures not to spend unnecessarily,” he said.

“Rakyat akan menolak (The people will reject it). There will be a public outcry bigger than the one in 2008,” Agus highlighted, referring to the shift in voting patterns in Election 2008.

“People can understand the economy and know we have to go for cuts, but they are not clear why… they can see from the by-elections [that the] government spends as if there is no problem with the economy, but after, they are told differently,” the academic related, referring to Idris’ sell on why the public has to bear the burden of increased prices after subsidies are cut.

The minister handpicked by Najib to head the Government Transformation Programme (GTP) has come under heavy fire lately since stating last week that Malaysia would be a bankrupt nation by 2019 unless Putrajaya slashed spending on subsidies soon.

The opposition bloc has been gunning at the ruling BN government over Idris’ pitch to the public on why they should shoulder Putrajaya’s increased spending.

But Umno politicians also appear bent on hanging Idris out to dry over his doomsday prophecy.

BN backbenchers say the Sarawakian minister’s prediction is “far-fetched”, Bernama reported yesterday, citing Umno MPs Datuk Seri Utama Shahrir Samad and Khairy Jamaluddin.

Former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad also entered the fray, saying Idris was “exaggerating” the country’s financial position even as he admitted the need for subsidies to be cut.

“Any cuts this year would be done piece-meal and involve only the ‘man-on-the-street subsidies,’” Pua said, describing the subsidies on petrol, sugar and flour, which are spread across a wider group of consumers.

“They’ll probably stagger the subsidy cuts, one every three to four months, as long as there is no by-election,” he predicted.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 3 June 2010, 7:51 am and is filed under
Economics
,
Finance
,
Good Governance
,
Najib Razak
,
NEP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Two parliamentary questions on Najib’s three strategic initiatives to transform Malaysia but which have run aground

In the forthcoming parliamentary meeting beginning on Monday, I have given notice to pose two questions to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak on his three strategic initiatives to transform Malaysia but which have run aground because of strong opposition mostly from Umno and its outsourced organizations like Perkasa.

These three initiatives of Najib are his three strategic pillars which make up his roadmap to achieving Vision 2020 – an high-income advanced nation with inclusiveness and sustainability by 2020:

1Malaysia, People First, Performance Now;

Government Transformation Programme; and

New Economic Model.

My two questions are to ask the Prime Minister:

how many Ministers in his Cabinet, naming them, regard himself/herself as Malaysian first, race second in keeping with 1Malaysia policy; and

what steps have been taken to ensure that Malaysia will never go the way of Iceland and Greece of becoming a bankrupt nation requiring regional or international rescue.

Since the warning by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Idris Jala at the Subsidy Rationalisation Lab Open Day last Friday, that Malaysia could become a bankrupt nation by 2019 if the country is not prepared to cut subsidies and embrace the New Economic Model, the knives from UMNO leaders have been out to get at Idris – with the Prime Minister distancing himself from Idris’ warning and his immediate superior, the Chairman of Perrormance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu) Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon leaving Idris completely  in the lurch.

The other focus of my questions in the forthcoming Parliament will be on Sabah and Sarawak, underlined by my question to the Prime Minister whether he would set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry on the broken promises to Sabah and Sarawak on the formation of Malaysia in 1963, in particular just and equitable development of the people from the two rich states.

Such a Royal Commission will be particularly apt and meaningful with the approach of the half-century anniversary of Sabah and Sarawak in Malaysia.

My other questions on Sabah and Sarawak are:

To ask the Prime Minister the outcome of Federal Government efforts  since April 2009 to resolve the long-standing problem of illegal immigrants in Sabah which have made Sabahans “foreigners in their own homeland”.

To ask the Prime Minister the outcome of Brunei’s claims to Limbang and the terms of Malaysia’s ceding of offshore Blocks L and M in South China Sea to Brunei.

To ask the Prime Minister to give the amounts of Federal allocations to Sabah for each year since 1963, giving a breakdown of their uses.

To ask the Prime Minsiter to give the amounts of Federal allocations to Sarawak for each year since 1963, giving a breakdown of their uses.

My other parliamentary questions are:

To ask the Prime Minister the progress of Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission in stamping out “grand corruption”  of top political and government leaders and in particular why no “big fish” in the PKFZ scandal have been nabbed.

To ask the Home Minister why there has been no official government apology for the trigger-happy police killing of 14 year-old Aminulrasyid Amza in Shah Alam on April 26 and why a public inquiry had not been instituted instead of a Special Panel under the Deputy Home Minister.

To ask the Prime Minister the reasons for the 10-month delay in implementing the Enforcement Agencies Integrity Commission (EAIC) and whether it would be replaced by an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) instead.

To ask the Prime Minister the terms for  Petronas’ securing oil production-sharing contracts with UNOG for deep-sea Blocks MD-4, 5 & 6 in Myanmar’s Gulf of Martaban and what has been paid by Petronas.

To ask the Home Minister the number of citizenship certificates he had given out during by-elections, the number of outstanding citizenship and PR applications, and why he had not resolved them instead of using them as “by-election” goodies.

To ask the Prime Minister to give a full list of the oil production agreements entered into by Petronas world-wide, citing the value of each such agreement.

To ask the Prime Minister to give a racial breakdown of Petronas employees (i) inside the country (ii) in each foreign country.

To ask the Prime Minister to give the total number of scholarships given out by Federal government/agencies as well as government-related GLCs, giving a racial breakdown, for each year since 2000.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 3 June 2010, 10:15 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Economics
,
Education
,
Najib Razak
,
Oil
,
Parliament
,
PKFZ
,
Police
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


With 2 out 5 civil servants deemed corrupt by CUEPACS, the MACC is a big flop as it did not even arrest 0.1 per cent of the corrupt civil servants last year

Cuepacs President Omar Osman said in Temerloh last night that a total of 418,200 or 41 per cent of the 1.2 million civil servants in the country were suspected to be involved in corruption last year.

This is the Bernama report last night:

41 Per Cent Of Civil Servants Suspected Involved In Graft Last Year
 – Cuepacs

TEMERLOH, June 2 (Bernama) — A total of 418,200 or 41 per cent of the 1.2 million civil servants in the country were suspected to be involved in corruption last year, said Cuepacs president Omar Osman.

He said this was worrying and needed to be tackled urgently.

“To combat the scourge, Cuepacs will work closely with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission so that civil servants involved in corrupt activities can be brought to book,” he told reporters after opening the triennial general meeting of one of the affiliates of the umbrella union, here Wednesday.

Omar said besides corruption, Cuepacs would also not protect civil servants who had discipline problems like playing truant or forging medical certificates.

“There have been cases where a 1 day medical leave prescribed by the doctor have been amended to read 11 days,” said Omar.

— BERNAMA

With Cuepacs making the shocking disclosure that two out five civil servants in government are corrupt,  the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is a big flop as it only arrested 500 people last year and 144 people in the first quarter of the year.

According to official statistics, only 76 out of the 144 arrested by MACC for corruption in the first quarter were civil servants, i.e. 52.7%.

If the CUEPACS President ‘s estimate is not far wrong, and going by the breakdown of this arrests in the first quarter of this year. i.e. 52.7% are civil servants, this would mean that last year, the number of civil servants arrested was 263 (52.7% of 500) when the total who should be arrested should be 418,200  (41% of 1.2 million).

This is not even 0.1 per cent as  it represented a mere 0.06 per cent of the civil servants deemed corrupt by the CUEPACS President.

What has MACC got to say for such shocking failure in the discharge of its statutory duty to combat corruption, that it could only  target 0.06% of those deemed corrupt in the civil service last year?

Did the CUEPACS President Omar Osman know what he is talking about?

Or was he misquoted by the official news agency – Bernama?

Malaysians are entitled to proper explanations  from all the relevant authorities concerned – CUEPACS, MACC and not least of all, the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 3 June 2010, 4:14 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MIC, Maika deserve to be cursed for 10 generations

By
P. Ramakrishnan
 | Aliran

More than 66,000 Indians, mostly poor and from the estates, invested RM103 million with high expectations of good returns. That was what they were promised, and they were enticed to rally around this Indian venture that was solely for the Indians. Many pawned their jewellery, others took loans or invested their entire life-savings to support this venture that was touted as a sure-win undertaking.

For almost 30 years, they waited in vain to enjoy the fruit of their investment. Many continued to service their loans and suffered. Others passed on, dejected and frustrated. There was no hope for them whatsoever and they stopped dreaming of the wealth that was promised them.

While the Maika shareholders suffered, the directors of Maika continued to be paid very well. They did not take a pay cut but enjoyed their full benefits.

Now, there is some kind of offer for these shareholders. They are now being offered RM0.80 for every RM1.00 they had invested. After waiting for almost 30 years, now they have to suffer not only a 20 per cent loss on their investment but also the purchasing power of whatever they receive  now is a lot lower than it was 30 years ago. Instead of some gains, they are forced to suffer a further loss after 30 long years. What a tragic end to their dreams!

Even if the shareholders were given a 0.05 sen profit, they would have been thankful. After 30 years, don’t they even deserve a wee bit for the sufferings that they have had to endure?

But to offer 80 per cent is not fair at all. The assets of Maika which include a potentially money-making insurance company and valuable land — besides other assets — should have been able to yield a better return for these poor Indians, who had been led up the garden path with rosy promises.

What is unforgiveable is the fact that it was an Indian effort to raise the welfare of the Indians that was so badly managed by Indians in positions of authority.

The 10 million Telekom shares that were offered to Maika in 1990 would have helped these unfortunate Indians to realise their dreams but the Great Leader of the Indians high-jacked 9 million shares and gave them to shell companies run by his cronies. He literally deprived them of their just dues. This unforgiveable betrayal robbed the Indians of what should have been theirs by right.

It looks as if 20 per cent of their assets will be given over to those who have come up with this package to buy up the shares of these frustrated Indians. Maika and MIC have caused enough misery to these shareholders to deserve their curse for ten generations! — Aliran

                This entry was posted on Friday, 4 June 2010, 5:00 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Reshuffling the same dog-eared pack of cards

By
Tunku Abdul Aziz

I am told on good authority that you cannot make good china with poor clay, and it is so obvious that we should know it instinctively. By the same token, I expect you cannot form an effective cabinet with general election rejects. Appointing them to cabinet posts in such large numbers through the Senate is not illegal, but is it ethical? Jesse Jackson in a speech to the 1992 National Democratic Convention reminded his audience that what was morally wrong would never be politically right. Najib, as our Prime Minister, would do well to ponder and reflect on the wisdom of this self-evident truth so that he would feel encouraged and inspired to bring moral and ethical principles to bear on the governance of this nation. I naturally hope that in the process, and with God’s help, he will find some time to dwell upon his many grave lapses that have brought his fitness for the highest political office in the land into serious question.

Some months ago I had occasion to allude to the fact that no prime minister in our country’s history had come into office, bent over not with the burden of leadership which would have been understandable, but in Najib’s case, it was his oversize baggage comprising a mix of potent allegations of impropriety ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous. While some may be nothing more than coffee morning tittle-tattle among the leisure classes, and, therefore, to be treated with the contempt they deserve, one worrying aspect of Najib the man that refuses to evaporate into thin air is corruption.

People still point to the arms purchases made during his long stints as Minister of Defence, and what he got out of them through his redoubtable defence/political analyst, Razak Baginda. Would the MACC care to take a look at the wealth behind the man so as to give our 1Malaysia Prime Minister a chance to clear his name? And while they are looking at Najib, I think it only fair that they take a look at the wealth of Mahathir and his family. To show that they are not being selective, they might like to check out Badawi and his family. I am sure these great leaders of ours are dying to clear their names for the sake of their reputation, however defined.

To return to the blatant abuse of the function and role of the Senate in the constitutional life of our country, it is clear that Najib does not put great store by basic rules of the game. He obviously plays by his own rules that postulate the inevitability of immoral behaviour in politics and that scruples are not for the Prime Minister of Malaysia. This is a sad commentary on 50 years of Barisan Nasional rule that has seen this once proud country now on its unstoppable decline in social, political and economic terms. Is this the promised just reward for the people of this country for putting their blind faith in the UMNO leadership? It is also a sad reflection of the bankruptcy of ethical values that those whom the people of this country, exercising their rights to choose, cast aside in a democratic process, have now been brought back into the cabinet. Who are these recycled seconds supposed to represent?  Even if they were a galaxy of Nobel laureates, it would still be totally indefensible for Najib to show such utter contempt and disregard for public opinion by appointing them to the cabinet. And these are by no means the crème de la crème of Malaysian brains-those that have not disappeared overseas.

Najib plays by his own rules. For him, offering inducements to voters as played out in the Hulu Selangor by-election with a repeat performance in Sibu was par for the course. He obviously could see no contradiction in urging the people to fight corruption while he himself breaks the law with complete impunity, as always aided and abetted by the ever independent Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, so it proclaims, and the equally fearless Elections Commission. When will Najib learn that there is no substitute for integrity in national life? It is within his power to clean up his act so as to lessen the burden of the negative views and innuendos that he carries on his back to the detriment of his effectiveness as PM. He must learn quickly that the ultimate decision whether he remains in office, and his party in power, will be made by the very people for whom he has shown such blatant contempt. He may, at this rate, be the last UMNO prime minister.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 5 June 2010, 2:05 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Chin flays ‘ungrateful’ folk

By
STEPHEN THEN
 | The Star

MIRI: The lack of gratitude shown by some urban voters in Sarawak towards the ruling government worries the Sarawak United People’s Party (SUPP).

SUPP organising secretary Datuk Seri Peter Chin said there were people who had forgotten what the Government had done for them and now they wanted to bring it down.

“Who gave them jobs? It was the Government. Who provided hundreds of millions of ringgit every year to build roads, houses, schools, health facilities, basic amenities like water and electricity for them?

“Was it the Opposition parties who did all these? Of course not. It was the ruling Government.

“SUPP feels very sad that these forgetful and ungrateful people do not look at the good things we have done for them,” he said at a Gawai Dayak gathering here on Saturday night.

Chin, who is Miri MP and Minister for Energy, Green Technology and Water, said the ‘’ungrateful people’’ blindly believed and supported the propaganda of Opposition parties.

He said he wanted the urban people of Sarawak to ask themselves what they could gain by bringing down the Government.

“The Opposition parties blame the Government for everything. They are always negative.

“They find fault all the time. They find issues to play up to fire up anti-Government sentiments among the people.

“They deride government leaders, criticise every decision we make no matter how much benefit we bring to the state and country.

“They run down the ruling government at every given opportunity but they never stop and think about the peace and stability we are enjoying and who was responsible for keeping this country safe,” he said.

Chin said it was high time that the urban people change their anti-establishment attitude, recognise the good the Government had done for them and show their gratitude during election time.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 7 June 2010, 10:35 am and is filed under
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Perkasa, Kampung Baru, and the Failure of Malay Leadership

By
M. Bakri Musa

Squatting within view of KL’s gleaming skyscrapers like a blob of dung at the tip of a high-heeled boot is a collection of quaint kampung houses.  To patronizing foreigners, those wooden houses on stilts in Kampung Baru are a welcomed relief to the concrete jungle of a modern metropolis.  To its inhabitants, taken in by the curious and feigned interests of gawking tourists, Kampung Baru is their tropical urban Shangri-La.

            To Malaysians however, it is nothing but your typical Third World slum.  Kampung Baru assaults your sensibilities and senses, especially olfactory.  Not that the rest of KL is pristine and sweet smelling!

            Alas to Malays, Kampung Baru is an embarrassing and glaring reminder that beneath the bravado of Ketuanan Melayu we remain marginalized, despite over half a century of independence and a continuous succession of Malay sultans and prime ministers.  Not to mention Article 153 protecting our “special” position!

            If Kampung Baru is the physical reminder of the impotence of Malay leaders in tackling the challenges facing our community, then Perkasa and the coalition it leads, People’s Awakening Movement – Gerakan Kebangkitan Rakyat (Gertak) – reflect the intellectual bankruptcy of our leaders.

Sultan Syndrome and Abracadabra Leaders

 In an earlier book I described a malady peculiar to our leaders, the sultan syndrome, where leaders behave like sultans, content with being mere figureheads and indulging the perks of their positions.  Engaged executives they are not.

             Like sultans, these leaders are consumed with issuing endless edicts (titahs).  They have no idea what those would entail, much less how to execute them or the challenges involved.  Hence we hear with nauseating frequency their exhorting us to, “Be efficient!” or “Be competitive!”  When asked how, they would be silenced.  The best they could muster would be to mumble something like, “Be like the Japanese!”

             I am being generous in describing them as leaders.  Like sultans, they are there not to lead us but for us to sembah (pay homage to) them.  Like religious figurines in Hindu homes, they are there for us to pay tribute.  And pay it we must, for any hint of disrespect would be met with harshly.  Those sultans and sultan wannabes are like Hindu gods; there is no escaping their spell.  Anger them at your peril!  Public hand kissing, endless gifts of trinkets, and effusive displays of loyalty are all part of this homage paying.

            Their demands keep getting more voracious and insatiable.  What we need is not Article 153 (to protect the sultans) but its reverse, to protect us from our rapacious sultans and sultan wannabes.

            This sultan syndrome is associated with what I would call “abracadabra leaders.”  These are ‘leaders’ who, when issuing their titah and arahan (directive) delude themselves into thinking that that alone is sufficient, like waving a magic wand.  Little do they know that the real world does not work that way, even if they were to incant, “Abracadabra!”  It takes hard work and creative thinking to translate your vision into reality, and that is what these abracadabra leaders lack.

            In his latest pronouncement, complete with the frothing of the mouth, flaring of the nostrils, and the obligatory brandishing of the keris (this time thankfully spared of the ketchup), Gertak leader Ibrahim Ali demanded that NEP be maintained and Malays accorded a specified portion of the economic pie.  There was as usual no mention on how that could be achieved.  Ibrahim forgot his “Abracadabra!”

            I am not surprised that Ibrahim is gaining traction with Malays; we have always been partial to soaring rhetoric.  The Indonesians would listen for hours to Sukarno’s pidato.  Meanwhile their country spiraled into chaos and mass starvation.  What surprises me is when the likes of Mahathir fall for Ibrahim.  To think that Malays are pinning our hopes on this Al-Katak! (Jumping Frog, in reference to his party hopping habit.)

            Fellow commentator Azly Rahman reminds us that gertak means “childish verbal threat.”  Ibrahim Ali is certainly childish and all verbal, but he is no threat.  Only those who could easily be gertak would perceive him as a threat.  Unfortunately Najib Razak is one of those.

            In his usual humorous but biting take, Azly suggests that the coalition change its acronym to Gelak – Gerakan Anti-Lawan Antara Kaum (Movement Against Inter-Communal Conflict), a more noble goal.  Gelak also means “laughter,” appropriate as Ibrahim (and his movement) is already a laughing stock.

Developing Kampung Baru

Lamentably, Ibrahim Ali’s laughable big but empty talk is the norm among Malay leaders.

            Consider the lack of development in Kampung Baru, a problem that has challenged leaders since Datuk Onn in the 1940s.  The only innovative thinking had been the British gazetting the area in 1900.  Whatever we may think of the merit of the idea today, without it Kampung Baru would have long been gone.

            This latest folly of 60-40 partnership with non-Malays has been wisely torpedoed by the residents.  It is not difficult to sympathize with them.  They have heard too many half-baked ideas before, of leaders spouting without thinking, and their not making any attempt at understanding the problem.  Often, as demonstrated by this latest idiocy, these leaders would blame the residents when those ideas fail.

            For example, knowing Malay inheritance laws and traditions, these properties have multiple owners and have been hopelessly fragmented, made worse with Malays having no written wills, not even those with substantial estates, as attested by many high-profile inheritance disputes.  We do not know the magnitude of this problem as there is no survey of land ownership in Kampung Baru.

            A major obstacle to developing Malay properties is this multiple and unclear ownership, and the attendant difficulties in decision making.  Unless resolved, this will remain an insurmountable obstacle to development.

            Tun Razak was aware of this when he started FELDA.  Thus FELDA land cannot be subdivided but must be inherited by only one son.  This apparent contradicting of Islamic and traditional inheritance practices did not prompt outcries from the Islamists and traditionalists.  They saw it as a sensible solution to a major problem.

            This ownership conundrum in Kampung Baru and other Malay Reservation land could be solved by creating a family corporation, where the ownership of the title may be divided but the land itself cannot; it remains under this new entity.

            In his forthcoming book, The Long Divergence: How Islamic Law Held Back The Middle East, Timur Kuran suggests that Arab (and Muslim) underdevelopment is attributed in part to this inheritance practice.  While the Quranic injunction is just, it results in the fragmentation of estates.  The European medieval practice where the entire inheritance went to the eldest son may be unjust but it had the advantage of keeping intact the family’s estate.

            It is this fragmentation of estate that prevented Muslim enterprises from growing from one generation to the next, a problem shared by Malays.  However, we have yet to acknowledge let alone solve it.  Consider the current inheritance litigation over Naza Corporation; there are many others.

            As for restrictive land ownership, statutes like the Malay Reservation Act are not unique to Malaysia.  America has its Indian Reservations and Hawaiian Native land trusts.  That did not prevent development on those reservations as attested by the gleaming casinos and hotels.  In Hawaii, native-trust land can be leased long-term; its low price compared to freehold properties a competitive advantage.  An all-Malay ownership need not be an obstacle to development; cheap land could be a formidable advantage.

            As for the tangled ownership, the entire Kampung Baru could be made into a corporation with its present owners as shareholders.  That corporation could then negotiate with developers, foreign and local, to get the best deal for a BLT (Built, Lease, and Transfer) or similar arrangement for the whole area.  Those owners would get a unit or more in the development based on their contributions through their land.  The rest would be rented out, as with any development.  Properly structured and managed, a gentrified Kampung Baru could be an economic jewel as well as the model for developing other Malay Reservation land.

            The government’s proposed Kampung Baru Development Corporation, already approved by the cabinet, is precisely the wrong approach.  It is a top-down initiative, with the corporation controlled by ministry bureaucrats instead of the landowners.  It calls for a GLC to develop the property, presumably without competitive bidding (as is the usual practice with these GLCs).  That is just another scheme to enrich the politically powerful.

            These and other dilemmas of Malays could be solved only through careful studies and analyses.  The faculties needed for that are humility (to facilitate your knowing what you don’t know), political skills (to craft the necessary compromise among the competing demands), and intellectual integrity (to enhance your learning curve).

            Unfortunately those are the very skills lacking among our leaders today.  Consequently, count on Perkasa and Kampung Baru being with us for a very long time.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 7 June 2010, 8:26 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Question on 1Malaysia rejected

Twitter
@limkitsiang
 :

My Q 2PM how many Ministers regard themselves Msian 1st race 2nd rejected 4offending rule agnst asking 4opinion abstract hypothetical matter

Monday, June 07, 2010 9:40 AM

How sad. Despite all publicity abt 1Malaysia PM dare not answer Q how many Ministers believe in it as 2rgd themselves as Msians 1st race 2nd

Monday, June 07, 2010 9:45 AM

                This entry was posted on Monday, 7 June 2010, 12:38 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
,
Twitter
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anwar denied right to counsel at panel hearing

By
Clara Chooi
 | The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, June 8 — The Parliamentary Rights and Privileges Committee has summarily rejected Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s application to allow his counsel to attend his hearing on the APCO-Israel issue today.

Committee members Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) and R. Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) told a press conference in Parliament after the panel concluded its meeting that the decision was made after the votes were taken from the members.

“Anwar Ibrahim (picture) has been denied counsel. He cannot appear with counsel.

“The decision was made whereby I and Subang (Sivarasa) were against it while all four Barisan Nasional committee members were for it.

“The vote was not unanimous,” said Karpal.

A total of seven lawmakers sit on the panel including Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia as chairman and six members — Karpal, Sivarasa, Datuk Razali Ibrahim (BN-Muar), Nancy Shukri (BN-Batang Sadong), Deputy Speaker Datuk Ronald Kiandee (BN-Beluran) and Datuk Seri Dr Fong Chan Onn (BN-Alor Gajah).

“It was a four-two vote score,” said Karpal.

He noted that the decision was a far-reaching one as it went against the rules of “common sense and natural justice”.

“Standing Order 83 Rule 7A clearly states that a person under trial is allowed his right to have his counsel present during such a hearing like this,” he said.

Karpal added that the hearing would proceed tomorrow without the presence of Anwar while a representative from APCO Worldwide would be present to give evidence on behalf of the company.

“This again goes against the rules of natural justice because you cannot take evidence in the absence of a person accused of an offence.

“We take a serious view on what has just happened; we would have thought that Anwar would have been given a right to counsel and to full representation. Let us see what happens tomorrow,” he said.

Anwar is facing the committee for making statements in Parliament’s last session linking APCO, a public relations firm employed by the government, to the Zionist Israeli regime.

He also claimed that APCO was the brainchild behind the prime minister’s 1 Malaysia concept and the One Israel campaign.

Sivarasa said according to Standing Order 83 Rule 7A, parties whose conduct forms the subject matter of the investigation by the committee would be allowed the right to counsel representation during the hearing.

“This is why Anwar applied. He stands accused of the offence and if found guilty, he will suffer penal consequences. It is fundamental principles of justice but the majority was against it.

“After all, we have agreed that even if APCO should require it, they can be represented by their lawyer but here the main person in question is denied this right,” said Sivarasa.

He noted that the decision could not be appealed.

“There is no appealing and at this point Anwar will be summoned again on a later date yet to be fixed to stand before the committee. However for now, the hearing proceeds tomorrow at 11.30am without his presence,” he said.

Karpal, however, said the matter would likely be raised once the committee makes its recommendations to the House.

On the banning of MPs from attending the hearing, Sivarasa said the Standing Orders were silent on the matter.

“However, we believe that like in the UK, of which we share the same parliamentary practice, MPs should be allowed into the hearing to merely observe the proceedings — not to disrupt but just to observe,” said Sivarasa.

Earlier today, Anwar attempted to attend the meeting with a large team of Pakatan Rakyat MPs and his lawyer but were blocked from doing so.

The committee then told him that his counsel, former Bar Council president Datuk Ambiga Sreenavasan, would be allowed into the hearing but would not be allowed to make submissions or ask questions.

Following his appeal, Pandikar Amin agreed that the committee would reconsider his application for counsel representation. The meeting proceeded until 1.40pm.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 June 2010, 5:05 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s foreign debt – Parliament Question

SOALAN:

Lim Kit Siang (Ipoh Timur) minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah tindakan yang telah diambil untuk memastikan bahawa Malaysia tidak akan mengikut jejak langkah Iceland dan Greece dan menjadi sebuah negara bankrap yang memerlukan penyelamatan dan masyarakat serantau atau antarabangsa.

JAWAPAN:

Tuan Yang di-Pertua,

Untuk makluman Yang Berhormat, hutang negara adalah hutang luar negara yang terdiri daripada hutang luar jangka sederhana dan panjang bagi Kerajaan Persekutuan, Perusahaan Awam Bukan Kewangan (PABK) dan sektor swasta serta hutang jangka pendek sektor perbankan dan swasta. Peratusan hutang negara kepada Keluaran Dalam Negara Kasar (KDNK) dan tahun 2004 hingga 2009 kekal terurus dengan purata 34.6% dan pecahannya adalah seperti berikut:

Tahun

Peratus hutang negara kepada KDNK

2004

42.3

2005

37.8

2006

32.1

2007

29.2

2008

31.9

2009

34.3

Pada tahun 2009, jumlah hutang negara berkurangan kepada RM233.92 bilion daripada RM236.18 bilion pada tahun 2008 walaupun peratusannya meningkat sedikit. Pengurangan adalah disebabkan bayaran balik bersih hutang jangka sederhana dan panjang oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan dan sektor swasta yang lebih mengimbangi ambilan bersih yang lebih besar oleh Perusahaan Awam Bukan Kewangan (PABK). Kekukuhan nilai ringgit berbanding dengan dolar AS juga menyumbang kepada penurunan hutang luar negara secara keseluruhan. Nisbah khidmat hutang luar negara pada 31 Disember 2009 dianggarkan pada tahap 7.0% mencerminkan kekukuhan pendapatan eksport untuk membayar tanggungan hutang. Nisbah rizab antarabangsa kepada hutang luar jangka pendek lebih daripada mencukupi bagi menampung 4.2 kali hutang luar jangka pendek.

Kerajaan terus melaksanakan pengurusan hutang luar negeri yang berhemat dan pragmatik untuk memudahkan pelbagaian pinjaman luar negeri oleh sektor awam dan sektor swasta, meminimumkan risiko berkaitan obligasi luar negeri yang besar dan kemampuan khidmat bayaran hutang. Bagi sektor swasta, pinjaman luar negeri hanya dibuat jika perlu untuk membiayai aktiviti ekonomi yang produktif yang mampu menjana terimaan tukaran asing untuk membayar balik pinjaman. Langkah-langkah khusus yang diambil oleh Kerajaan untuk mengurangkan hutang luar negara adalah seperti berikut:

dasar semasa Kerajaan ialah mengutamakan pinjaman dalam negeri yang tidak menyebabkan inflasi. Ini adalah kerana mudah tunai yang tinggi di pasaran domestik dan kos pinjaman yang lebih murah.

bagi menggalakkan kestabilan monetari dan kewangan di samping memelihara kedudukan imbangan pembayaran, pengurusan hutang luar negari disokong oleh sistem pengawasan dan pemantauan hutang yang menyeluruh. Ini bagi membolehkan pengesanan awal risiko dan kelemahan yang berpunca daripada pendedahan hutang luar negari keseluruhan;

selaras dengan matlamat konsolidasi kedudukan fiskal secara berperingkat, Bajet 2010 memberi penekanan kepada langkah-langkah untuk menambah balik keberkesanan dan kecekapan pendapatan dan perbelanjaan Kerajaan. Kerajaan sedang mengkaji penstrukturan sistem subsidi bahan api yang merupakan sebahagian besar dalam perbelanjaan tahunan Kerajaan;

bagi mempertahankan kedudukan fiskal yang berterusan tanpa menjejaskan matlamat pertumbuhan dan pembangunan yang menyeluruh, Kerajaan juga akan memperhebat program perkongsian sektor awam-swasta (public-private partnership program) untuk beberapa projek berimpak tinggi termasuk projek jalur lebar berkelajuan tinggi, koridor pembangunan wilayah dan infrastruktur pengangkutan awam; dan

untuk memperkukuhkan aliran pendapatan, Kerajaan sedang berusaha memperkenalkan cukai barangan dan perkhidmatan (goods and seivices tax, GST). Melalul GST, asas pendapatan Kerajaan akan diperluas dan sekaligus lebih terlindung daripada ayunan kitaran harga minyak.

Kejayaan Malaysia mengekalkan hutang negara di paras yang terkawal dan langkah-langkah yang diambil untuk mengurangkan kadar hutang, Malaysia tidak akan mengalami masalah seperti yang berlaku di Greece dan Iceland. Kedudukan kewangan Kerajaan Persekutuan akan terus dirancang, dipantau dan dikawal dengan baik dan bertanggungjawab. Paras defisit dijangka akan menurun dan paras hutang akan terus terkawal pada jangka masa sederhana dan panjang. Usaha-usaha ini akan membantu memastikan paras hutang dan defisit Kerajaan Persekutuan tidak akan meningkat sehingga menjejaskan kemampuan negara membayar balik hutang.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 June 2010, 5:36 pm and is filed under
Finance
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.