Islamic state – MCA/Gerakan should stop hypocrisy and double standards

(Speech 2  at the first  Public Ceramah/Consultation with DAP MPs, Excos, State Assemblymen at Chin Woo Hall, Ipoh on Saturday, 12th April 2008)

In the past few days, MCA and Gerakan leaders have suddenly found their voice and become quite articulate, as if to prove to Malaysians that after the March 8 “political tsunamii”   they have learnt their lesson  and are breaking away  from their past culture of silence and subservience in the Barisan Nasional.

But this is not really the case, as they continue as captive as before March 8 to Umno political hegemony.

MCA and Gerakan leaders, including the MCA President, Datuk Ong Ka Ting, seems to be competing among themselves  to lash out at the DAP for misleading the Chinese in Malaysia in the last general election over PAS’ Islamic state agenda.

MCA and Gerakan leaders should stop applying double standards on the Islamic State issue. When on Sept. 29, 2001, the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad declared that Malaysia was  an Islamic state, unilaterally, arbitrarily and unconstitutionally abrogating the cardinal nation-building principle in the Constitution and Merdeka “social contract” that Malaysia is a multi-religious and secular state with Islam as the official religion but  not an Islamic State, there was not only no objection from MCA and Gerakan leaders – they gave  immediate public support.

Similarly last year, when the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak trampled on the Malaysian Constitution and the 1957 “social contract” and declared Malaysia as  an Islamic state, there was not a whimper  of opposition or protest from Ong Ka Ting and  the other MCA, Gerakan and Barisan Nasional Cabinet Ministers and leaders.

It is the height of irresponsibility and hypocrisy for MCA and Gerakan leaders to demand that the DAP must come out openly about our stand on Malaysia as an Islamic state, when it is the MCA and Gerakan which should stop its hypocritical,  opportunistic and  unprincipled stand on the Islamic state.

DAP’s  stand of Malaysia as a secular state and opposition to Malaysia becoming an Islamic state, violating the secular basis and commitment of the 1957 Merdeka Constitution and “social contract”, is so  crystal clear and unmistakable that only the most ignorant or unprincipled can question it.

It is not the DAP which must come out clearly on its stand on Malaysia as an Islamic state – as it is the MCA and Gerakan which had betrayed their party founding principles on Malaysia as a secular state and not an Islamic state.

For a start, MCA and Gerakan leaders should stop applying double standards on the Islamic State issue and  they should ask Abdullah and Najib to withdraw their declaration that Malaysia is an Islamic state and return to the founding principles of the 1957 Merdeka Constitution and “social contract” on the secular basis and character of Malaysia, which was not questioned even by Barisan Nasional leaders until Mahathir’s  “929 Declaration” on Sept. 29, 2001.

Recently, the statement by some PAS leaders on Islamic state have created “waves” in the country as well as among the three political parties, DAP, PAS and PKR.

DAP leaders had said throughout the recent general election campaign that DAP and PAS had no links or relationship as the DAP had always remain steadfast in our commitment to preserve the secular basis of Malaysia as agreed by the forefathers of the major communities on the attainment of independence and nationhood half a century ago and our rejection of Malaysia as an Islamic state.

The results of the March 8, 2008 general election, which which came like a political tsunami, ending the Barisan Nasional’s unbroken two-thirds parliamentary majority and brought down the Barisan Nasional in five states, sent out a clear verdict – that the majority of Malaysians want far-reaching changes in the country and the people want DAP, PAS and PKR to co-operate to effect these changes.

This message is most clear in Perak and Selangor where without the co-operation of the three parties to form a coalition government, power would have to be returned to the Barisan Nasional.

This message has been vindicated just now  when I asked the thousand people gathered at this DAP Public Ceramah/Consultation here tonight  whether they support the formation of a DAP-PKR-PAS coalition government in Perak to effect the changes Malaysians of all races and religions desire, and  there was an unanimous show of hands in support.

There was another massive show of hands of support to demonstrate that the changes that voters want in the March 8 political tsunami is for  accountability, integrity, justice, democracy and good governance and not for Islamic state or hudud laws – as the majority not only of non-Malays but also of Malays are clearly not in support of Malaysia becoming an Islamic state.

The co-operation of DAP, PAS and PKR in the proposed Pakatan Rakyat is clear and specific on  the common goals of accountability, integrity, justice, democracy and good governance and not for an Islamic state or hudud laws.

There is a great difference between the DAP’s relationship with PAS and PKR   on the one hand and the MCA and Gerakan with UMNO in Barisan Nasional on the other.

DAP’s relationship with PAS and PKR is one of equals while MCA and Gerakan’s  role in BN is a subservient one  totally subject to Umno’s political hegemony.

In Pakatan Rakyat, DAP makes it clear that our stand on Malaysia as a secular state and our objection to turn Malaysia into an Islamic state is a fundamental principle which is not open to compromise – while MCA and Gerakan had compromised away  this principle in the Barisan Nasional by accepting the public declarations of Mahathir, Abdullah and Najib of Malaysia as an Islamic state.

DAP, PKR and PAS are working on a common statement of principles as the basis for co-operation of the three political parties  in Pakatan Rakyat at state and national levels so that there could be no mistake or misunderstanding on the basis of co-operation of the three political parties – and  that such a co-operation has nothing thing to do with the issue of Islamic state or hudud laws.

In 2001, an earlier attempt to create an opposition front comprising four political parties, DAP, PKR, PAS and Parti Rakyat in the form of an Alternative Front failed because of the breach of the common programme “Towards A Just Malaysia” when PAS unilaterally went ahead to push its programme of an Islamic state.

If the proposed Pakatan Rakyat is to survive and succeed in fulfilling the trust and hopes  of the people as expressed in the March 8 “political tsunami”, then it must not repeat the mistakes of the Alternative Front, and must  fully commit the constituent parties to the principles of justice, freedom, democracy and good governance, and not allow  it to be used as an excuse to pursue separate agendas such as an Islamic state or hudud laws.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 13 April 2008, 1:37 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Islamic state
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Unrecognised doctors

Letters

by Frustrated doctor

The Star article titled
‘Hope Yet For Med Grads’
(10th April 2008) claims to give the option to unrecognised doctors of transferring credits to local establishments to pursue their goal of becoming doctors . If this article is true , this is a misleading thing the new health minister is undertaking .

        Firstly , the option to transfer credits has been there since 1998 when students in Indonesia were allowed to pay 60,000rm to an agent to transfer to Malaysian recognised Indonesian government universities . Many decided not to pursue this option as they didn’t have the money ; and the studies they were doing in other universities which were claimed to be unrecognised in Malaysia were actually on par with the recognised government universities there .

        This whole credit transfer came about when 3 JPA sponsored students from Padang came back after only 4 years of theory claiming that they had finished their studies and were posted to do their housemanship . Not having any clinical experience , their peers and dept heads found them lacking and refused to accept them when it was found out that they didn’t do their 2 years of clinicals to be considered doctors in Indonesia . Thus , JPA and MMC tried asking the U in Padang to take them back but the U refused saying that they had ‘mencemarkan nama baik universitas’ . Thus , JPA had to pay hefty amounts to the govt U in Bandung who decided to allow them to continue their studies there . Using this case of credit transfer , an agent worked out with various other recognised Indonesia government universities to accept students . Even local Indonesian students were irritated with this as this smacked of double standards as the same option was denied even to them .

        It is a known fact that wherever JPA is able to put students , the U is given recognition in a short time . Malay students were gathered and all placed in an Islamic private medical U to finish their studies . However , due to the large number of non-bumi students there , this U was not given recognition and the Malay students were placed in the govt U in Bandung . However , since they hadn’t finished their 4 years of theory , the Bandung U gave some problems . Then they were placed a 3rd time in the govt U in Medan . This U was not strict with the rules as hefty sums were paid to the rector’s office to close a blind eye . Each transfer involved a sum of about 60K . Three transfers and the JPA would have paid nearly 200K for each chap . This is how much the govt doesn’t mind paying for bumi students from all the Petronas money they have received .

        Needless to say , most of those who came back from unrecognised Universities were due to their parents being poor and not being able to afford the highly inflated capitation fees demanded for education in ‘esteemed’ recognised institutions . The moment a university becomes recognised , the fees in fact sky rocket even doubling or tripling the earlier amount . If you ask the MMC , they will claim that the recognition is not done by them but by a panel from various bodies . Basically , it is done by non-medical practitioners who are feted nicely and given under counter money to get the university recognised . The MMC is more interested in bringing back specialists who refuse to return home even after having all their studies sponsored by the government but turn a blind eye to doctors from unrecognised universities who are willing to slog it out for the government even when they paid for all their studies on their own .

        Also , due to the quota system , most unrecognised doctors couldn’t get into the only 3 local institutions here then . Only now is there an abundance of medical universities . The quota for Indian doctors into UKM , UM and USM then was just about 5 or 6 per year in total . Thus , even with good grades , many had to seek options overseas . When they realised after 2 years of pre-clinical studies overseas , the huge amount which was unaffordable to their parents ; they had no choice but to enter unrecognised universities .

        In a country which is lacking doctors , they thought the govt would appreciate them coming back to serve . However , the NEP govt under Mahathir made rules even stricter . During the early 80s , unrecognised doctors could come back and do 1 year of probation before starting housemanship . However , there were some ungrateful chaps who complained that they were being paid 200rm lesser from houseman for the same work . Using this , the govt made an even bigger mistake by insisting that they now had to sit for an exam with the 3 local universities – UM , UKM and USM . These universities were even stricter with these doctors going to the level of ridiculing them in front of patients and staff and using them as the failure rate to pass off their students .

        Exams were stricter for unrecognised doctors with them having different role numbers , having to answer the same questions in English while their local counterparts answered in Malay , negative marking for unrecognised doctors but not for the local chaps , marks given for the course work to be accumulated into the theory papers for local chaps but none for the unrecognised doctors etc .  Even in the clinical exams , they would be questioned more than local counterparts as no lecturer when examining their students would want to make it look like they hadn’t taught their students well .

        Also , with the NEP policy of even giving the exam questions to Malay students in the guise of ceramah Agama a day before the exams , the fate for the unrecognised doctors was sealed . If they failed , they had no one to speak on their behalf ; but the local university senates could even pass off failed local students even after 3 attempts . Furthermore , even if they passed one part of the exam , they couldn’t just repeat the parts they didn’t get through but had to repeat the whole exam . In all 3 attempts , they may have actually cleared the various portions at different times . When questioned , the MMC said this was the university’s ruling and they couldn’t do anything about it . They insist that the doctors pay them 200rm when registering to sit for the exam but then deny any responsibility for the exam . The unrecognised doctors sit for the same exams but do not get the university’s cert at the end of the day .

        Many from Indonesia questioned why they were being made to sit for a theory exam when technically their theory years were recognised due to the credit transfer which was allowed . Even with all obstacles , nearly 90% cleared the clinical exams . However, the MMC gave them only 2 reasons – firstly , that they can not help the unrecognised doctors , and secondly ; they are not to question what MMC does . Thus , most after just 1 attempt refused to be subjected to any more attempts and 30 took a court case in 2004 .

        Actually , in February 2002 , the cabinet chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Badawi (when Mahathir was overseas) announced that the health minister Datuk Chua Jui Meng would will use his powers as the minister to absorb the unrecognised doctors . They were to do 1 year of supervised service followed by 2 years of housemanship and 3 years as a medical officer . However , the MMC objected to this – as usual not acting in the interest of doctors as their cash cow of ‘recognition’ would be killed off . Finally , after making the doctors wait the whole year , they used the information during the registration of the doctors for this program to overrule the minister who had publicly announced in the newspapers and even on the TV3 and NTV7 news . MMC gave the reason that since nearly 70% had not attempted the exams even once , they had to sit for a one off 6 months training at the local hospitals and attempt the exams at the 3 government universities . This was confirmed by Samy Vello in January 2003 , who insisted that the doctors go for it . When questioned about the earlier cabinet decision , he said Mahathir (being the dictator he was) had over ruled the health minister .

        They waited nearly 6 weeks for the results of the October 2003 exam when the local students knew their results in 3 days! When news of the dismal results came in where only 10-20% had passed , the doctors went to meet the new health minister in early 2004 , who welcomed them with open doors as he was new in the post . He even arranged for them to meet with the MMC , and that meeting took nearly 4 hours . However , 2 weeks later , Datuk Chua Soi Lek was too busy to meet them and the MMC gave their 2 famous sentences – “We can not help you” , and ;  “you are not to question what we do” . This prompted 30 doctors to take the case in August 2004 .

        When news of the case came out , the MMC held another one off 6 months training in 2005 and refused to accept those who had filed the case against them . Then they used the points the 30 doctors had raised to do an eye wash exam . They insisted all those who went for this to sign a declaration of waiver from holding them responsible for any lacks. They also made the doctors sit for a theory exam and then only those who passed , to sit for a clinical exam ; stating that they didn’t have the man power for a clinical exam for the nearly 70 who signed up . Needless to say , nearly 2/3rds were failed in the theory exam and the MMC upheld its quota of only passing about 10% to 20% .

        The MMC always talks about quality doctors . However , in early 2005 , they predated the recognition of a Russian U to accept nearly 150 chaps who had come out from there before recognition was granted . In this , there were chaps who had failed the exams in all 3 attempts but now are working due to this simple paper ruling . Even the MMC President and DG for Health knowing the short falls , announced last year that he wanted all doctors from overseas to sit for an exam . However , needless to say , the agents and rich parents who can afford nearly ½ a million to 1 million in fees put a stop to this .

        Just before the elections , the unrecognised doctors met Samy hoping that the BN would offer them some goodies .  However , when Samy put the idea of going to his U to do a credit transfer , they refused flatly to it . Now , to offer goodies after their dismal showing in the elections , the BN govt has decided to help the unrecognised chaps . AIMST is a new university with a medical faculty just in their infancy . To give a credit transfer to them is a slap in the face for unrecognised doctors who come from universities which are 40 to 100 years old . They are already doctors . To make them go back to U for 3 years is like a double slap in their faces . Who is going to pay for their families , house and car loans etc when they are supposed to go back to study . For this , the minister who claims to look out for Indian affairs would offer a MIC loan but why should they take a loan which must be paid up later . The minister is going to meet the doctors on Tuesday to most probably announce that this is the best and final option just like he did in 2003 before they were made to go for the slaughter of the first one-off 6 month training and exam .

        For the doctors , nothing short of taking them in like what was promised in 2002 is a rape of their intellectual minds .

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 13 April 2008, 2:14 am and is filed under
Health
,
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Bangalore heart trip – self-inflicted malady of Malaysian healthcare

Letters

by
GS

When Chua Soi Lek first came to office, he apparently called for a meeting of all senior officers and when asked about the priority of problems at the Ministry of Health, he reportedly was inundated with numerous comments about the dastardly troubles private hospitals had created and how they and their devious doctors were leeching the poor Malaysian public and something had to be done urgently. The gullible Chua, ever willing to show-off the political strongman that he conjured himself to be, wasted no time in implementing the shelved PHFSA and together with his DG, utilizing the BN’s brute but now mercifully clipped majority in parliament, brushing off all objections against the Act just so he can show who’s boss. Needless to say despite all of Chua’s and Merican’s big talk and assurances, the first victim who got thrown into jail was a registered doctor, a stark reminder of the previous government’s callous and appalling methods of governance.

New Health Ministers are almost always a shoo in for our  health ministry officials who have become rather slick in cornering incoming, inexperienced and invariably unknowledgeable Ministers into making silly decisions. All Ministers are political animals and make distorted decisions essentially because the minister is fed only half the story or the story he generally likes to hear. And so it is with the new health minister Liow Tiong Lai.

While Tanzanian president, Jakaya Kikwete, was going on an all out war against witchdoctors (read bomohs, sinsehs, etc) who were gorging out eyes of albinos and the Brazilians were calling in the army and possibly Cuban doctors to help battle the mortal incidence of dengue in that country, back in Malaysia, the hapless Liow had thrust upon him a meaningless business turf battle between pharmacists and doctors as his first task. The Brazilians must have wondered about the priority of the Malaysian health minister and cannot be faulted if they thought that Malaysians had indeed licked the dengue scourge and were actually moving on to bigger stuff.

Far from it. The dengue fever outbreak in Brazil had infected 55,000 people, and killed 67 Brazilians so far this year with half of those killed by the mosquito-borne illness being under 13-years-old. But Malaysia’s “Disease Control Director”, Hasan Abdul Rahman reported a proportionately higher mortality ratio of 9,889 people diagnosed, with 26 of them dead for the first three months from January to March alone of this year. Maybe we may have something to learn from the Brazilians or more likely our stats are out of sync.

But these problems will pale into comparison as the new and inexperienced health minister has made a second momentous decision. That of shipping unfortunate children with congenital heart disease to Devi Shetty’s “world famous” heart center 2000 miles away in Bangalore, the Narayana Hrudayalaya. Even Chua, known to be a brusque decision maker refused to take this decision. But the new health minister had no qualms sending these children off….or was he pushed into make this decision.

When the NST published their under-researched cum marketing piece for the IJN on the lack of heart surgeons and the need for critical care for paediatric cardiac surgical patients in a center spread on 2/4/08, they didn’t quite delve into the factors as to why this country has not caught up with the rest of the world or at least India, despite the government spending millions to curb the rising incidence of heart disease. Paradoxically, after 50 years of Merdeka, we are in fact sending off patients overseas for treatment just like the Mauritius, Ghana, Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Bangladesh to the Narayana Hrudayalaya Institute of Medical Sciences (NHIMS) Do we not have the expertise? Elementary. It is just poor management of our resources.

PUBLIC HOSPITALS OFFERING CARDIAC SURGERY

The government has five heart units. The unit in Penang was established in 1995 at a cost of RM30 million, followed by Johor Bahru in 1997 for RM40 million and Kuching in 2001 for RM55 million. A new unit was set up at Alor Star when the new Sultan Bahiyah hospital was being constructed midway causing the hospital to have serious delays in its opening and another at Serdang Hospital which has been designated as the Ministry’s heart center for the Klang Valley. Surprisingly despite the government spending millions on infrastructure, little attention was paid to manpower leaving many of its units underutilized or not operational.

There are no paediatric cardiac surgical services at government hospitals save for a small number being attempted by an expatriate surgeon in Kuching. The Penang unit although busy in the beginning, had its work slowed down when the initial surgeon resigned. It further attracted controversy when expensive and untested cardiac equipment bought for millions of ringgit ended up as a white elephant. It was in the news again in 2005 when surgeons left the unit in droves when  anesthetists there tried to take control of the cardiac surgical ICU which has always been the domain of cardiac surgeons throughout the world. The unit was then briefly run by an Indonesian-born doctor who surprisingly was awarded a JPA scholarship to do his training. However patients complaining at the greatly-lengthened waiting list reportedly as a result of the new surgeon being unable to do bypass surgery there saw the Ministry moving some of its doctors from Johor Bahru to cover the unit. The Indonesian surgeon, in a bizarre move by the MOH, has been transferred to head the Serdang unit.

The Unit at JB was initially run by a British trained Malaysian surgeon who left for Singapore leaving the unit now running only on a single theater at times. The Kuching Hospital unit is one of the better run units at the Ministry. One of the reasons for this is the high level of commitment of doctors there and the support financially by the local community. Despite the lack of manpower, the Ministry is planning to open more units in other areas such as Ipoh, Kuantan and Kota Kinabalu. In KK alone, the MOH announced last month that it will be spending RM70 million. Even planning administrators in the Ministry have argued that that there should be a period of consolidation instead of splurging more capital until manpower problems are sorted out. But these reservations have apparently been over-ruled by the surgeons and anesthetists. It is always nice to splurge … if it is not your own money, especially if it brings you fringe benefits like more overseas trips for “lawatan sambil belajar”

PRIVATE HOSPITALS OFFERING CARDIAC SURGERY

There are in total 23 units doing cardiac surgery in the private sector. One in Alor Star, 4 in Penang, one in Ipoh (apparently now defunct), 9 in the Klang Valley, three in Malacca, one in JB, one in KK and one in Kucing. Only the Adventist Hospital in Penang and Gleneagles in KL do paediatric cardiac surgical cases in significant numbers. The rest are essentially adult units. Most private units are solo runs by individual surgeons. As a result they do small numbers. However the Penang and Malacca units cater for quite a number of foreign patients especially from Indonesia.

IJN

In the early eighties, the GHKL was the only heart unit the MOH had. It was controversially corporatised to IJN soon after Mahathir had his heart surgery. Many then thought that perhaps corporatisation of this service will soon see Malaysia self sufficient in this particular area but as always in the Malaysian scene, corporatisation comes with strings attached. IJN’s founders made a deal where all heart cases in the central region must be solely given to them. They didn’t want any competition.

But despite being a monopoly they couldn’t hold on to their surgeons. One paediatric cardiac surgeon resigned to go to Gleneagles while two more found cushy jobs in Saudi. So it has gone back to the same routine of trying to train more surgeons. Despite the high volume of cases it does, it apparently lacks space which may be resolved when its new building is commissioned. Interestingly IJN offered to run the Serdang Hospital Heart Unit for the Ministry but this deal was obstructed by the Ministry’s own surgeons. You sometimes wonder if everyone in this area is really working for the common good of patients..or for themselves…at the expense of the general public…with the Ministry and their political masters…the MCA doing nothing.

TRAINING PROGRAMS

So why are we not training enough heart doctors? There are three university heart units based at the UH, HUKM and HUSM in Kubang Kerian respectively. But the volume of surgery and procedures done are small, especially in Kubang Krian despite the disproportionately large incidence of coronary, valvular and congenital heart disease in Kelantan. The UIA in Kuantan apparently has been enthusiastic about setting up a heart unit there but again there was a problem regarding manpower and commitment by some of its specialists and of course the unending destructive rivalry between the MOH and the Universities. The price you pay if you don’t have your own hospital.

The first open heart unit this country ever had was the one established as early as 1969 at the University Hospital by NK Yong who took up the post of Foundation Professor in Surgery when the UM’s Medical Faculty was first set up. He had trained at Kentucky University and despite virtually no trained staff he performed Singapore’s first open heart surgery in 1965 after painstakingly assembling and training a cardiac team for two years following his return from the US in 1963.

His presence at the UH saw the emergence of new surgeons such as Saw Huat Seong and the late Razali Hashim. The unit was further strengthened by an expatriate surgeon from the Christian Medical College in Vellore, George Cherian. But all this came to an end when Razali passed away prematurely almost 20 yeas ago. Saw Huat Seong is in private practice in Singapore, George is in Kansas and NK Yong is of course retired and is now a famed wine connoisseur. The heart unit at the UH today is more renowned for fist fights and slapping incidents with no trainees forthcoming. While heart units around the world progressed by leaps and bounds, the UH unit stagnated and in fact regressed. The country’s pioneer unit fell victim to medical politics and to the tantrums of the remaining surgeon when heart disease was the pre-eminent killer with irresponsible University authorities just looking on, doing nothing or dabbling in trying to sell off university grounds.

UKM, which initially suffered a similar fate when it set up its unit a decade ago, has progressed much better and proposed a training program for cardiac surgery last year to the Ministry but it has yet to get off the ground. Again medical politics and unbridled, cumbersome, attritional professional jealousy has been the bane that threatens the progress of heart treatment in this country. The MOH and university authorities are in particular guilty of not dealing with these problems firmly, instead pandering to the whims and fancies of individual specialists against national interests leading Malaysian patients now possibly to that dusty road to Bangalore.

THE NARAYANA HRUDAYALAYA

The center is primarily the brain child of Devi Shetty who initially trained at Guys Hospital in London where Philip Deverall, a British pioneering and innovative paediatric heart surgeon was based. He has no formal postgraduate cardiac qualifications unlike most Indian cardiac surgeons. However, apart from the thousands of cases he has carried out, he has conducted hundreds of seminars, wrote innumerable papers, created many training programs and of course built and managed quite a few heart hospitals. Devi Shetty is living proof that clinical and operative skills may not necessarily be congruent to academic qualifications, something our local MMC (Malaysian Medical Council) should wake up to. Dedication and commitment could be far more valuable factors. In fact in all likelihood; Devi Shetty might not even get a job if he applies for one at the MOH as his qualifications would have been deemed by our “elite” council members as “not recognized”

Shetty returned to India in 1989 to set up a hospital for the Birla group in Calcutta before ultimately moving onto Bangalore to found the Narayana in 2001. He is married to Shakunthala Shetty, the daughter of the wealthy construction magnate Sri Charmakki Narayana Shetty, who owned the land where the 800 bedded hospital is situated. The Narayana Hrudayalaya is located in the Bommasandra Industrial Area on the outskirts of Bangalore on 25 acres of land, 30 km from the old Bangalore airport and 50km from the new one. The grimy road leading to the hospital where the pillars of Bangalore’s off/on Metro project stick out like sore thumbs may not really be palatable to Malaysian patients or parents used to our highways. But the hospital itself is a remarkable story.

The hospital design is simple and furnishing is bare. It has 25 operating theaters for cardiac surgery alone of which half are currently operational. Shetty’s group which includes surgeons trained in India, Australia, Britain and Russia carry out an astonishing 20 to 30 open heart surgeries a day, clocking close to almost 6000 cases a year. Of these a third are congenital cases.

Devi Shetty is one of India’s many rising entrepreneurial hospital pioneers who have contributed immensely to not only healthcare in India but also to its economy. They believe not only in bringing world class healthcare to India’s poor but are firm believers of strict financial prudence so that treatment remains extremely cost effective, a culture virtually absent in the Malaysian healthcare scene especially in government hospitals.  In a country where the incidence of congenital heart disease is 8 per 1000 births against a questionable 1 per 1000 in Malaysia, India has 180,000 children born with congenital heart defects every year with 90,000 requiring early intervention at the neonatal stage.

Shetty’s strategy for success is simple. Focus on maintaining good results which are the accepted 2% mortality for adult cases and an incredible 5% mortality for congenital heart surgery considering that some very complex cases end up here.  And an innovative packaged price for treatment. Heart hospitals are expensive. And if you are going to extend complex world class surgery to the poor, then, to make that buck, you need to operate a large volume of cases which is not a problem in India. Shetty maintains a fixed price of almost RM10,000 ringgit for each paediatric case no matter how complex the lesions are, making his money back through volume.

He doesn’t compromise on equipment which is pretty similar to the ones Malaysian hospitals have. He further saves on costs especially on medication, equipment and consumables which are indigenously manufactured. But the most important asset he has is the great depth in staff required to look after patients. And this he does by having active academic programs which is headed completely by a dedicated academic dean. No one is actually sure why Chua was attracted to this hospital. Perhaps he was impressed by the shear numbers of the assembly like care patients received in diagnostics, theater and especially the ICU. Or maybe he was influenced by an ex-senior health ministry official who is the Dean of a local private medical school which has a twinning program with a medical school in Bangalore where Shetty maintains a branch.

Whatever it is, Shetty has done remarkably well. And this he managed to achieve through sheer hard work and perseverance. To operate such a large volume of cases with a low mortality he would have had to climb that agonizing learning curve and cross a lot of dead bodies, something Malaysian surgeons are anathema to, focusing rather on safe, less complex cases. To be successful in paediatric cardiac surgery you will have to run through that deadly gauntlet that ended the careers of Professor James Wisheart and Janardan Dhasmana at the Bristol Royal Infirmary in 1999. Both found out to their costs that taking the risky gamble of operating on paediatric cardiac surgical patients with iffy paediatric cardiologists, anesthetists and ICU staff can not only end your career but may get you profoundly vilified for the rest of your life.

But certainly Shetty’s hospital is not the only one doing similar surgery at these prices. There are almost 200 centers in India that offer heart surgery in India. In South India alone, the level of work that is carried out at the Narayana is done in 11 other paediatric cardiac surgical centers with the total number of paediatric cardiac surgical units throughout India numbering about 20. Some of these centers like the Amrita Heart Institute, Cherian Heat Foundation, Madras Medical Mission, Ramachandra Medical College, CMC Vellore, MIOT and the Asian Heart Institute in Bombay produce very good results but do not match Shetty’s costs. On average, the cost of treating a congenital heart defect can cost between RM20-30,000 per case. Surprisingly only a single government hospital, the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in Delhi, does any neotatal cardiac surgery of note. And every heart surgeon in the private sector in India will swear that the price of similar surgery at the government funded AIIMS is far costlier then the ones done in private centers, a testimony that accountability in subsidized healthcare is almost always never accountable to anyone, anywhere around the world including Malaysia.

SOLUTIONS

The MOH stated that an agreement had been reached to operate on 200 children at a cost of RM10,000 for each child over a period of one year excluding incidental costs. These costs would be probably flight fares, food, accommodation, etc which may put the cost at about RM15,000 or more, provided there are no complications.  Paediatric cardiac surgical cases are generally divided into cyanotic and acyanotic babies, meaning blue and non-blue babies. It is the blue babies that are difficult to manage, are costlier to operate on and generally would require complex surgery including initial palliative surgery if expertise for complete correction is not available in the first instance.

The Ministry could:

   1. Outsource non-blue baby and palliative surgery for blue babies to local private hospitals at a competitive price as this will be logistically more suitable for the family. Blue babies that will require complex staged surgery could perhaps be flown to Bangalore although there will be risks involved for the 3 hour flight and that perilous road journey to the Narayana itself.

   2. Alternatively it could ask local surgeons or their surgical teams in “not so busy” private hospitals to operate in the Ministry’s government units so that there are savings in consumables and theater time. Since the Ministry has the infrastructure but not the staff, perioperative care could also be contracted out.

    3. Or it could invite foreign surgical teams or surgeons to operate at its heart units on a regular basis to do surgery. Cases that don’t require urgent surgery could be accumulated and be done on a regular monthly basis with our local surgeons and hospital staff looking after them. It would be a good learning experience for them although cases need to be carefully chosen.

   4. Or allow private hospitals to employ these foreign surgeons or teams directly and the Ministry outsources the work to these hospitals. Foreign medical staff, especially surgeons, anesthetists and cardiologists could be offered incentives like PR and citizenship etc so that they stay back in this country.

   5. And importantly, the Universities and the MOH have to revise their training programs to ensure that Malaysia’s expertise in this area rises to match the number of patients in this country.

 Whoever did this marketing for the Bangalore team may have done Shetty a large favour and a disservice to cardiac care in this country. But this story is the natural end result of a poorly managed service that saw no proper audit in cost production ratios. It is sad refection of the state of services in this country where for far too long the focus has been on constructing sophisticated infrastructure without paying attention to human development in direct contrast to India where the reverse has taken place.

Before the Minister dives into the uncharted National Health Financing Scheme, he should perhaps ponder if outsourcing healthcare to private hospitals that offer competitive pricing is a better option. The Ministry should refrain from reinventing the wheel all the time by building more heart units that only make contractors and suppliers rich, and instead save its financial resources and perhaps outsource its work to hospitals that provide a service at very cost effective prices. You can save a whole lot of money in places like Kota Kinabalu where instead of blowing 70 million ringgit, you can buy services from the Sabah Medical Center where its cardiac operating theater and 12 ICU beds are almost always lying idle.

Competition and innovation is the key to lower prices and better services. If the Malaysian public is to be saved, the confrontational policies of the previous Minister and DG must end. There must be greater cooperation between the large numbers of private doctors and the public service. Failure by Liow to handle this impasse effectively will ultimately see not only cardiac going India way but a whole lot more of other specialties.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 14 April 2008, 1:05 pm and is filed under
Health
,
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Pakatan Rakyat MPs will support judicial and other belated institutional reforms

(Speech at the DAP Public Ceramah/Consultation with DAP MPs/State Excos in Sri Kembangan  at the Seri Kembangan Dewan Serbaguna on Sunday, April 13, 2008)

During  the 2008 general election campaign, the “kingmaker” of the Abdullah administration, the Prime Minister’s son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin vowed to destroy the Opposition. In the end, he nearly destroyed Umno and Barisan Nasional.

Umno Information chief and newly-resurrected Minister  for Rural and Regional Development, Muhd  Muhammad Taib, has admitted that the arrogance of some Umno leaders was to be blamed for the Barisan Nasional’s poor performance in the March polls.

In fact, it it not “some” but most Umno leaders  who were arrogant while some, like  Khairy,  were “very” and insufferably arrogant!

The pressure is on in Umno for Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to assume full responsibility for the March 8 “political tsunami” and to step down as Prime Minister.

The biggest question today is how long Abdullah can survive as Prime Minister, whether until after the Umno polls in December or whether he will have to step down even earlier, with former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad leading the campaign to demand  that his successor should vacate Sri Perdana immediately.

The  future of Abdullah as Umno President and Prime Minister of Malaysia will have to be decided by the internal politics of Umno, but Malaysians are entitled to know whether there is the political will to honour the  post-election statements by Abdullah and other Barisan Nasional leaders that they have finally heard the voices of the people and would belatedly implement the pledges of reform made in the 2004 general election – that the new 12th Parliament would open at the end of the month with a full parliamentary agenda  of  wide-ranging reforms!

For the first time in the history of Malaysian Parliament, the Barisan Nasional government is without the requisite two-thirds majority which allows it to amend the Malaysian Constitution at its whim and fancy, as was its wont in the past few decades.

Now, the Barisan Nasional government must secure the support of the Opposition MPs numbering 82 in a House of 222 MPs in order to get constitutional amendments enacted in Parliament.

DAP and Pakatan Rakyat MPs will not oppose for the sake of opposition and the nation and people can be assured that we will support the Barisan Nasional government whether in amending the Constitution or to enact laws if this is  in the interest of the people and nation.

There have been considerable talk that the government is finally serious about judicial reforms, especially in ensuring that there is a just and satisfactory closure to the 1988 “Mother of all judicial crisis” in the arbitrary sacking of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President and Datuk George Seah and the late Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh as Supreme Court judges;  the repeal of the 1988 constitutional amendment which removed the “judicial power” of the judiciary and gave a fatal blow to  the doctrine of the separation of powers among the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary; and the establishment of a Judicial Appointment and Promotion Commission.

The 82 Pakatan Rakyat MPs  are prepared to co-operate with Abdullah and Barisan Nasional government to usher in judicial and other major reforms to ensure Malaysia regains  our international competitiveness to recover lost ground in the past four decades to catch up with  the economic progress of Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan

One important message of the March 8 “political tsunami” is the consciousness  of Malaysians, regardless of race, religion and political beliefs, that 50 years after Merdeka, the priority concern of Malaysians is not the competition between  Malays and non-Malays but between Malaysians and the rest of the world.

It is for this reason that the recent speech by the Regent of Kelantan, Tengku Mohammad Faris Petra that non-Malays should not ask for equal  citizenship rights  cannot find resonance or support among progressive Malaysians, whether Malays or non-Malays – as it is the global focus of international competition that should engage our primary attention.

If Malaysia is to fully enhance our international competitiveness so that Malaysians can rise to up the challenges of globalization, Malaysia must undertake a full reform programme to ensure that the country becomes a First-World developed nation with  world-class institutions whether  judiciary, Parliament, Cabinet, local government, civil service, police, anti-corruption agency, universities, schools and  mass media.

These are  the issues the first meeting of Parliament should grapple with when it meets at the end of this month, if MPs whether from the Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat, have heeded the message of March 8 “political tsunami”.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 14 April 2008, 4:53 pm and is filed under
Judiciary
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Targeting The Biggest Ass

by
Bakri Musa

Johore UMNO leaders had apparently told Prime Minister Abdullah that he must have a succession plan that is “structured, smooth and speedy.” This three “S” strategy missed targeting the biggest ass of all, Abdullah himself.  The initiative had more to do with saving Abdullah’s “face” than with solving the grave problems confronting the party.

            If UMNO members and leaders were serious, they would focus on getting this harsh and unadulterated message straight to Abdullah:  He is unfit to lead the party and country.  He has clearly demonstrated this through his deeds (or lack of them) and words.  The man is a habitual liar; he cannot separate fact from fiction and distinguish reality from fantasy.

            Abdullah’s idea of taking responsibility for his party’s electoral debacle is merely to utter that statement.  He has no inkling of what it means to accept responsibility.

            Abdullah’s pleading that he is needed to “revive” the party is laughable and self serving.  If he could not pilot his ship of state competently when it was calm, there is no hope that he would be any more capable when it is now stormy, and threatening to get even more so every day.  Abdullah is the problem, and a very huge one at that.  Consequently his moving out would be a big part of the solution.  It would not solve everything of course, but it would remove a major impediment.

            His “leadership” has been nothing more than endless sloganeering (Work with me, not for me!”), like the leader caricatured in Shahnon Ahmad’s short story, “Ungkapan” (Sloganeering).

            Having grown accustomed to the perks and trappings of his office, Abdullah will not leave voluntarily, much less gracefully.  He has to be literally dragged out.  Subtleties and hints will not work on this man.  He is too dumb to read the signals.  He is also insulated, surrounded by courtiers ever willing to spin bad news.

Only Three Exit Strategies

There are only three ways to get rid of Abdullah.  One is for him to be successfully challenged as party leader in the upcoming UMNO General Assembly in December.  Two, would be for a sufficient number of the ruling coalition members to vote with the opposition in a “no confidence” motion in Parliament.  And three of course, would be through divine intervention, not inappropriate for a man who is never shy in parading his piety and religiosity.

            Knowing the onerous obstacles placed in UMNO towards challengers, the first option is unlikely.  Granted, Tengku Razaleigh – the only one to have come out publicly to challenge Abdullah – is a formidable challenger.  More daunting however, is the cultural inertia of Malays, especially those in UMNO.  They have yet to learn the essential lesson that challenges and competitions are healthy, not acts of treason or betrayal.

            The second path is more realistic.  The political resurgence of Anwar is real.  Far from being the “Anwar who?” of a few years ago, he is now increasingly viewed not only as the de facto leader of the opposition (even though he is not yet in Parliament) but rightly as Prime Minister-in-waiting.

            Anwar will be able to contest a parliamentary seat once his statutory prohibition ends on April 14, 2008.  A vacant seat will surely come up soon as Malaysia has a good track record of MPs dying in office or getting caught in some scandalous acts and thus having to resign.  More likely though would be for one of the current PKR MPs to resign, not to pave the way for Anwar (though that would be the convenient and acceptable excuse) but because the job is not as glamorous or challenging as it is made out to be.  Many PKR MPs are successful, young and honest professionals; their “elevation” to the “Yang Berhormat” (Your Honorable) status cuts deeply into their income and career prospects.

            As for divine intervention, that is beyond my purview.  However many a leader had used “medical” reasons as a convenient face-saving cover for resigning.  Abdullah could always blame his hemorrhoids or narcolepsy (a pathologic tendency to doze off).

Abdullah Is
The
 Problem

When Abdullah assumed office nearly five years ago, I was one of the few who were not enthused about his leadership potential.  My conclusion was based on reviewing his performance as a minister.  I predicted then that by the time Abdullah leaves office, Malaysians would be counting their blessings if he had not screwed up the country too much, and that the best we could hope for was for him to maintain the status quo.

            Alas, I was wrong.  I had not counted on the maturity and resilience of Malaysians in overcoming Abdullah’s gross incompetence.  Malaysians are also incredibly generous as demonstrated by their giving him a rousing endorsement in the 2004 election in the hope that it would give him the necessary boost and confidence to lead.  Unfortunately that too could not override his basic ineptness.

            In their collective wisdom, in this recent election Malaysians decided that it was not necessary to deal a crippling blow, only enough punch that would leave Abdullah and UMNO reeling, and in the process trigger an implosion in an already corrupt and dysfunctional organization.

            Equally remarkable, Malaysians also demonstrated that they are capable of executing peaceful political change.  There was not even a hint of civil disorder following Barisan’s loss of five states.  Compare that to 1969 and the horror that followed when the ruling coalition lost only one state.

            To be sure, had the election been conducted free and fair, with no stuffed postal ballots and with the use of indelible ink to prevent fraudulent voting, the ultimate message would have been delivered, and Abdullah and his ilk would have been kicked out.

            Perhaps it was better this way.  For had the Barisan Nasional been voted out, there would have been a dangerous political vacuum as none of the opposition parties could form a government.  Their loose coalition, the Pakatan Rakyat (Citizens’ Alliance) had yet to be ratified.  Now having sensed that power is within their grasp, the opposition parties are ready and willing to sink their differences for a common cause.

            Meanwhile UMNO and its coalition partners are galloping fast towards their collective demise.  Their course is irreversible.

            Thankfully my earlier dire prediction on Abdullah was misplaced.  Abdullah has not destroyed Malaysia, only UMNO and Barisan Nasional.  Malaysians can all count their blessings for his legacy not being any worse.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 14 April 2008, 1:55 pm and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Bakri Musa
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Fate of 200 doctors from unscheduled universities

Letters

by
Unrecognised doctors

The Star, published an article, “Flunked doctors have a chance”, dated April 10, 2008. We were very saddened to know, that the Health Minister and the Director General of Health, have failed to understand the plight of our situation. This issue should not be treated as a platform for showing ones power or a battle of egos, or a money making scam.

Many of us have graduated from the year 1992. We all have families to support, and not having a steady income, to come up with the finances yet again for this purpose is not only near impossible but even unreasonable. Even if we are helped by the government giving us loans, for those of us who have passed and received our medical degrees over 15 years ago, to go for a compulsory course of 3 years, then sit for the final exam, only to become a houseman seems unfair and impractical. After this process, one has to slave for 2 years as a houseman, and 3 years as a medical officer, and then is eligible for permanent registration. Many of us will be near retirement age, and this proposal seems unrealistic.  We seem to be getting the shorter end of the stick, and come to you for support.

We have tried in our capacity to do a post mortem of the situation, and have come up with facts and figures for your kind perusal. Please do go through it, for you to get a finer picture of our situation.

There has always been a critical shortage of doctors in Malaysia, and the Health Ministry and the Malaysian Medical Council have opted in the past and are still recruiting foreign doctors to fill in the vacancies, many of whom have their undergraduate qualifications from unrecognized universities. We are Malaysians, have a medical degree, and yet find ourselves unemployed.

Till date there are 450 qualified medical doctors in Malaysia, from unrecognized universities. Many of the doctors, disheartened by the partiality being practiced in the medical sector, have left their home country, to a foreign land only to earn a livelihood. We are qualified doctors, and yet some of us work in pharmaceutical warehouses, car sales, insurance policies, and some of us resort to selling different products to make a living. Some of us are forced to sit at home; unable to get employment, as we know no other skills apart from the skills we have been trained and qualified for. We are qualified professionals, and yet we are ‘unrecognised’.

We are in a no win situation and come to you for justice. ‘NO EMPLOYMENT’ IS ABSOLUTELY NOT AN OPTION FOR US. WE TOO HAVE HOMES TO RUN AND CHILDREN TO FEED.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 15 April 2008, 11:07 am and is filed under
Health
,
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Questions about the charging of ex-sessions judge for falsifying document

Last Friday, former sessions court judge
Zunaidah Mohd Idris
 was produced in the Raub sessions court where she had sat as presiding judge  from 2004 to 2005 and charged with falsifying a document written by magistrate Nurul Mardhiah Redza in relation to a drug case in the magistrate’s court.

Zunaidah, 48, pleaded not guilty to committing the offence in her chambers on Sept. 14, 2005.

If convicted, Zunaidah can be sentenced to seven years’ jail and fined. She was released on RM2,000 bail and the hearing fixed for July 8.

Without getting into the merits of the charge, the prosecution handling of the case has raised questions.

Firstly, deputy public prosecutor Mohamad Hanafiah Zakaria told the court the prosecution would be conducted by prosecution division head of the Attorney-General’s Chambers Datuk Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden.

This has raised eyebrows and question why the head of the Attorney-General’s Chambers is conducting the prosecution of this comparatively minor  case when neither he nor the Attorney-General is conducting the prosecution in  the high-profile Mongolian Altantunya Shariibuu murder trial with its far reaching political and good governance implications.

Zunaidah was the sessions court judge in Klang on Nov. 26, 2007 who granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal to three Hindraf leaders  P. Uthayakumar, P. Waytha Moorthy and V. Ganapathi Rao who had faced sedition charges.

After her decision, Zunaidah was taken off the Klang Sessions Court and transferred to the Attorney-General’s Chambers in Putrajaya and assigned to administrative duties.

Was Zunaidah’s charge for falsifying a document going back to September 2005 in any way related to her decision to reject the prosecution case in setting the three Hindraf leaders free at the Klang Sessions Court on charges of sedition, by  granting a discharge not amounting to an acquittal?

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 15 April 2008, 1:47 pm and is filed under
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Reflections on Malaysia’s Economic Progress and Wealth Distribution: Some Key Questions to Policy Makers (1)

By Dr Teck-Yong Eng

The People have delivered their verdict on the recent Malaysia’s 12th general election and it is time for all bickering about political rhetoric to take a back seat. In the midst of chaotic restructuring and constant backstabbing of politicians, the opposition could lose focus on turning the election manifestos into reality and serving the people.

Economic wellbeing and progress of the nation is one of the main reasons for the people’s dissatisfaction with the ruling government (BN), which transpired to a historic election defeat.

In a crude sense, our economic malaise especially economic and wealth distribution is not the sole responsibility of the current PM but has been simmering under the various positive headlines with politically motivated agenda of the previous premier.

To the uninitiated, poverty may not be physically visible as one observes our surroundings but when one probes and examines the deeper fabric of socio-economic deprivations and inequalities, the voice of dissatisfaction is loud and clear particularly for those in the lowest income group, where poverty is affecting them in a vicious circle on future generations in terms of education and knowledge, health service and proper nourishment for child development, and economic opportunity. This is even more profound when one removes government subsidies on basic commodities such as oil.

The result is disheartening, as the use of subsidies and short-term tax incentives for attracting foreign direct investment to propel domestic economic growth is unsustainable in the long term.

There are also greater socio-economic gaps between the working class and the middle class (not to mention the upper class). The indirect effects are marginalisation of certain groups of the population, creating various social problems such as community integration (e.g., recent protests of the Indian community), turning to crimes and vices for living, and downward spiralling standards of living for the majority.

So, to our leaders, what measures of economic and wealth distribution are in place to redress this economic imbalance and distribute economic wealth to the lowest population strata of economic wellbeing?

Unfortunately, there is no clear cut solution as economic, health and education policies are intertwined. Within the economic framework, economic and wealth creation and distribution are mainly driven by national economic policy across resource-based industrial and agricultural sectors, e.g., conventional government projects are meant to stimulate job markets, growth, consumer demand etc. from industry to micro-market or consumer level.

Setting corruption aside for another discussion, we could start by revisiting past and examining current and future economic policies. In this context, one would need to reflect on some of the following basic economic questions and brief comments whilst policies are being analysed and formulated:

1.	What did we learn from past economic policies?

Over the last two decades, Malaysia’s economic focus in terms of trade and export incomes has tended to shift from agricultural resources to industrialised manufacturing (see: Malaysia’s Industrial Master Plans (IMP). Initially, from the look east policy of attracting foreign direct investment (re:Japan) and MNCs plants locational decision with various tax incentives, though some sceptics would argue that excessive red tapes hampered this effort.

Despite some success in attracting major MNCs (Japanese and Western corporations), the economic impetus stopped short of knowledge transfer initiatives and creation of new industries and opportunities. Evidently, the rise of China and India (not to mention competitive neighbouring labour markets in the Far East Asia Region) has caused policy makers to question the role and value of MNCs in job creation, and technology and knowledge transfer.

With the exception of Proton (though debatable and its global market position in under threat), there is little evidence of development and accumulation of intellectual assets through concerted and effective past economic policies.

The question is how foreign capital inflows, and both direct and indirect investments have resulted in adequate distribution of wealth in terms of knowledge transfer (such as technical knowledge and managerial skills) to blue and white-collar workers.

During the period of economic boom in the mid 1990s, the government have also championed information technology and knowledge based industries such as the creation of MSC. This has been a worthy economic investment, though it had not been carefully planned and implemented. In addition, the timing was wrong in terms of human capital and infrastructure development, e.g., there was no systematic policy in encouraging and developing ICT knowledge at all levels of education.

The lack of investment in technology-related and technical knowledge has been a critical shortcoming when potential investors and companies evaluate and make their investment choices, and decisions vis-à-vis other countries. So, what will the government do to nurture and create opportunities for future generations, who are likely to be relying more on knowledge-based industries?

After the Far East Asian economic crisis and various circumstances (September 11, bird flu, tsunami, etc.), one could argue that the government seemed to have lost its economic focus (e.g., incoherent economic direction in the Ninth Malaysia Plan) and hence, the search for new and major infrastructure projects took place, which resulted in the Iskandar Development Region (IDR) project in Johor.

Amid growing criticisms of economic stagnation during the period of 2004-2006, the government fumbled and resorted to driving internal economic demands through construction and real estate sectors, agricultural sectors, and extension of the Visit Malaysia Year campaign.

The post September 11 event has also facilitated the growth of Middle East investors in real estates and medical care services, and the idea of Islamic Banking hub. The idea of medical tourism was also put forward despite glaring basic health concerns of the national health policy for the people, e.g., the government could do more to educate people about the health risks of smoking.

There has also been substantial investment in petrochemical and chemical based products driven by natural resources in the face of increasing world demand of oil and chemical-based products.

While these industrial sectors are important to the economy, the government had been reactive or ad hoc (as opposed to proactive) in charting the strategic development of the economy. For example, what resources were allocated to help small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and local businesses in developing skills and knowledge of modern agricultural techniques particularly with regards to previous economic plans? In what ways the current economic emphases are building on previous investments in MSC projects, industrial clusters and knowledge-based industries?

Furthermore, the Iskandar Development Region (IDR) (as much as a welcome boost of capital injection) baffled the geo-economic and strategic logic of effective allocation of scarce resources.

Although this can be seen as an attempt to distribute resources to other states in the country, the IDR project is arguably a wrong strategic and investment decision in terms of the following points (which can be discussed further in another article):

(a) diseconomies of scale whereby investment in existing industries and infrastructure is counterproductive and non-competitive when the region has little slack resources.

(b) When the choice of strategic position (location) may not be advantageous in terms of the presence of existing industries and services to support demand of technical skills, and the labour market is relatively small compared to other states. Also, not to mention there is little consideration of geography and population, and topography of the region, e.g., had the region been prone to flooding?

(c) When our neighbour, Singapore has established networks and advanced industries (Gulati et al., 2000). The thought of benefiting from economic spillover effects is also a non-runner – as Singapore focuses on highly technical industries such as financial hub services and international seaport services.

(d) When the cost-benefit and opportunity cost analysis had not been carefully examined, e.g., the use of existing strategic/national infrastructure airport, seaport and administration.

(e) When human capital development in a progressive manner from existing industrial regions had not been fully capitalised, e.g., there is a steep learning curve in the region that will further curtail skills upgrade in the extant industries.

(f) When our economic bi-lateral relationship with Singapore had not been carefully managed, promoted and professionally developed.

(g) When previous economic projects had not been integrated or further revised to capitalise on time compression diseconomies as opposed to inefficient allocation of resources.

(h) When FDI strategy mainly promises asset appreciation without transfer of technology or knowledge – further questioning the government policy of carefully planned distribution of economic wealth in the long term.

(to be continued)

[Dr. Teck-Yong Eng is Senior Lecturer, King’s College London, University of London, School of Social Science & Public Policy.

Email: teck.e
[email protected]
.  Blog : http://strategisingmalaysia.blogspot.com/)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 15 April 2008, 10:08 am and is filed under
Economics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Reflections on Malaysia’s Economic Progress and Wealth Distribution: Some Key Questions to Policy Makers (2)

By
Dr Teck-Yong Eng

2.	Have ordinary citizens benefited from the period of economic boom or growth from the mid to late 1990s? If not, what went wrong and what lessons can be drawn to prevent such recurrence?

Unfortunately, only a minority of people reaped the rewards of the long gone boom period in the Asia region. Again, most would argue that this is due to deeply entrenched corruption, nepotism and cronyism in awarding projects, siphoning state resources, and misusing funds and abusing of power. I would refrain from the topic of corruption and clean governance to focus on economic and wealth distribution.

In a buoyant economic climate, one would expect the government to reinvest revenue growth and savings, improve national and foreign reserves, upgrade strategic infrastructure, and distribute economic benefits taking a long-term view. To a large extent, these key foundations for improving the standard of living and average national income of the population had not been exploited for the majority of ordinary Malaysians. First, can the government account for specific economic wealth distributed across Malaysian states and communities? If so, who have been the beneficiaries? Have the people who live in villages, small businesses and blue-collar workers benefited? It is true that there have been growth in the construction and property sectors. But they are exclusive to several developers with privilege government approvals. Importantly, real estate development derives from natural resources (lands) and employs foreign cheap labours. There is no creation of sustainable value in terms of human capital development. There are also questions on the effective use of natural resources, quality of developments and sustainability of townships in terms of the effects on the environment. Of particular concern is that the people in low-income groups have been sidelined and they remain impoverished in the share of economic wealth. Second, the government had the opportunity to bolster the country’s national and foreign reserves. Yet, it is questionable that the Bank Negara and policy makers had used domestic and export growth to maintain a healthy currency-money ratio without risky exposure to credit expansion and retirement of bank notes, as evident in capital control measures in the aftermath of Asia financial crises. In addition, the monetary base had not appeared to be in balance, as growth in foreign reserves from trade surplus were not exploited to counter monetary effects and purchase of foreign assets. This could have stabilised our currency and balance trade liabilities but the Malaysian Ringgit depreciated unfavourably. To the laypeople, had the government implemented appropriate fiscal measures, the cost of goods would not be exposed to unhealthy inflationary pressures (e.g., wages had not increased as rapidly as prices of goods) and the people would have a higher purchasing power and hence raise their standard of living. Third, due to haste and poor planning (perhaps also self-interest or personal gains) major infrastructure projects (highways, skyscrapers, airports, etc.) had not been appropriately funded. The treasury could have channelled revenues from major corporations (e.g., tax windfalls) and natural resources (e.g., oil) to finance basic infrastructure such as highways instead of passing on the ever increasing and eternal costs (e.g., toll fees) to the people. Although privatisation of certain national assets may improve service quality, there is lack of competition in government projects as well as complicated bureaucracy serving further barriers for the functioning of perfect markets. Furthermore, some mega projects were excessively expensive (I omitted names) and fully funded by the government, as opposed to funding basic infrastructure for the people especially in the context of a developing country. Most importantly, for the ordinary people, there has been too much window dressing at the national and state level when residential roads and associated public services (from clearance of rubbish to uneven roads with pot holes) remain mostly unattended. Again, most infrastructure development comes at a high price without proper planning, affecting local communities financially, socially and environmentally.

3.	How competitive is our public services and infrastructure in attracting FDI?

The creation and distribution of economic wealth are influenced by the performance of public services, government aids and infrastructure. Substantial inroads have been made to promote efficient and high quality public services to the people as well as potential investors. But much more remains to be done especially public transport services, health care services and local council services. If the public complained about the standard of such services, it would be questionable that the standard is competitive for attracting foreign investors. One instance is the poorly planned LRT system without sensible forethought of current and future requirements, e.g., short platform, limited and/or fixed capacity, flawed urban and traffic reduction strategy. This is clearly hampering the capital’s competitiveness and discouraging the public from using our LRT system in the city. On this note, I strongly advise the present coalition (Pakatan Rakyat) to avoid benchmarking the KL system and carry out its own feasibility study. Not to mention, we have all heard of irresponsible bus companies rendering transportation services. The implications are not only far-reaching in terms of attracting investors and tourists but also dire, as public safety is unduly compromised. Another area where improvement is long overdue is the provision of efficient banking and financial services. Whilst the banking industry has consolidated in recent years, the standard of service particularly to local businesses is variable and inconsistent (if not substandard by international ratings). For example, there is shortage of trained personnel in providing financial advice on both basic and complex financial instruments and customers usually need to queue for hours to be seen. This is counter productive to the economy, which would defeat all the efforts put into attracting foreign businesses. There is a need for more competition, compliance to an acceptable level of service set by financial services authorities and government support in competitive measures. The government have been making many headlines about investment in public services and positive inflows of FDI. But to many observers, there are gaping concerns with the competitiveness of our public services. In a nutshell, the government and relevant authorities need to address and improve public services and implement visible improvements. Obviously, one would argue that there have been improvements but as long as our public services remain below par compared to rival nations, the government have not yet delivered for the people. In the context of economic and wealth distribution to the poor and marginalised, basic amenities and public services are the backbone for facilitating entrepreneurial pursuit – whereby Malaysians can be more progressive and competitive through efficient support of basic public services.

4.	What forms of support and incentives that the government provide for SMEs (if so, have such incentives been accessible to ordinary Malaysians)?

Small and medium-sized businesses are the foundations of thriving local economies and with the right policy the people would not only benefit but also create stability and value in the economy. For example, are there effective measures in improving the agricultural and farming industries in terms of quality and productivity? This could help alleviate shortage of basic commodities such as rice and flour (at least in the short to medium term) and underline domestic economy stability. Malaysia is a fortunate country endowed with the abundance of natural resources, tropical climate suitable for agricultural activities, and surrounded by the ocean with huge potential marine lives export. But years of neglect, lack of strategic vision and under investment meant that the resource-based of a nation’s competitive advantage had been overlooked. Did the government consider the associated opportunity costs when finalising the successive IMP 1, 2 and 3? Even, if there had been investments in the agricultural sectors, they were lacking in economic convictions and competitiveness measures. The federal government have been too preoccupied with industrialisation (see no. 1) and loose sight of the varied nature of economic resources particularly in building on existing resources in the East Malaysia. We could only look back the years of loss opportunity for the people across different states (not necessarily in the capital) to improve their living standard through investment in technology, production techniques, sustainable agricultural activities and business skills for SMEs – benchmark against regional and international standards. The government only recognised this in the Ninth Malaysia Plan and tried to reposition the agricultural and agro-based industry. One could also argue that this is a reactive response, as the country’s reliance on manufacturing competitiveness is dwindling without substantial technical and knowledge transfer strategy in the early years of IMP 1 and 2. In terms of strategic and economic planning, the implications are costly due to scale effects and diseconomies (e.g., playing catch up in the regional market, network barriers, marginal costs) and the Ninth Malaysia Plan can be criticised for the absence of clear strategies to circumvent these negative effects.

Furthermore, piecemeal solutions, sheer planning without strategic vision and poor implementation have negative social and economic implications. For example, what are the complementary economic effects of activities related to industrialisation, agriculture, financial and professional services, tourism, and ICT and knowledge-based services? Evidently, the tourism development (re: the Visit Malaysia Year Campaign) has been poorly coordinated with various substandard ancillary services, e.g., see some of the letters of dissatisfied tourists published in The Star. Many sectors of local businesses are ill prepared and the government campaign falls short of providing relevant aids (e.g., service training, international marketing) to enable small businesses to share the benefit of invisible income from tourism activities. Most critically, the negative word-of-mouth affects future business and competitiveness of this industry – dampening efforts to create economic wealth for many businesses.

In the effort of driving the agricultural industry, there are also underlying social and economic issues mainly due to conflicting resource demands particularly for skilled and trained labour markets. For example, the constant labour/population migration to the capital and industrial states, and perceived economic disincentives in the agriculture-based sectors is creating a myriad of social and cultural problems. There is no clearly visible government action in managing and balancing these demands at the state and national levels through its economic and human resource strategy. This affects the movement of labour and skills development with long-term consequences for the people’s social and economic wellbeing.

(to be continued)

[Dr. Teck-Yong Eng is Senior Lecturer, King’s College London, University of London, School of Social Science & Public Policy.

Email: teck.
[email protected]
. Blog : http://strategisingmalaysia.blogspot.com/)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 15 April 2008, 10:15 am and is filed under
Economics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Reflections on Malaysia’s Economic Progress and Wealth Distribution: Some Key Questions to Policy Makers (3)

By
Dr Teck-Yong Eng

5.	What measures have the government put in place to explore and exploit Malaysia’s strategic and cultural position of two major growing economies in Asia, India and China?

Malaysia’s foreign economic policy with regards to India and China remains relatively under tapped from a strategic viewpoint. Despite our geographical proximity, advantage of language and cultural similarity, and established networks with commonwealth countries (serve as potential economic and business conduits), there is no evidence of systematic economic initiatives in helping Malaysian businesses to see the bigger picture of economic rewards and how Malaysia could leverage its economic position.

In particular, what did the government do to promote Proton in China and India? This would not be restricted to selling our national cars but extend to the exchange of technology and knowledge development, e.g., in parts and components manufacturing, joint ventures and strategic alliances. In effect, we could create and add value to related local manufacturers and suppliers, and spur domestic economy. As both India and China are experiencing tremendous growth in the motor vehicle industry the government need to be proactive and implement market-driven strategy (Day, 1994) to form business partnerships and attract potential investors. There are also ample business opportunities in other industries such as construction and real estate. What did the government do to help our construction companies to compete with overseas rivals? For example, the Korean construction industry is benefiting from the growth in China with knowledge of relationship development and marketing strategy (Eng and Wong, 2006; Eng and Spickett-Jones, 2007; Eng et al., 2008) despite not having the language advantage. The tourism industry would also benefit from the increasing wealth of these countries. But various government agencies in the tourism sector are lackadaisical, overlooking obvious provision of basic leisure services for these markets, e.g., language assistance at airports and major tourist attractions.

Government policy could help small and medium-sized business entrepreneurs explore and develop their business in China and India. The representatives from the MCA and MIC could support local business entrepreneurs and build economic ties using the advantage of language and culture such as through specific foreign business missions and conventions. There are also benefits for the halal food industry in targeting Muslim population in China. As a nation of multicultural society, this advantage is readily accessible to ordinary Malaysians and can be leveraged through informed business and marketing strategy. Despite our experience from the success of organising the Commonwealth games (albeit in a smaller scale), the government could have been bold and competitive in helping local businesses to bid for potential projects of the Beijing Olympic Games. The rapid pace of growth in China and India also creates opportunities for our petroleum and chemical business in terms of energy consumption of consumers and industrial markets. The focus of government foreign economic policy on these emerging economic powers would generate a far more pronounced economic effect with longer term economic growth compared to investment in other markets.

Clearly, scarce human and economic resources of our country need to be allocated to the most effective use in maximising return-on-investment. The government need to be selective in developing its portfolio of foreign economic ties and strategic in creating economic benefits especially in addressing wealth inequalities. While the Ninth Malaysia Plan noted the importance of moving the economy up the value chain, it is hard to find any specific action plans at local levels, and metrics for performance and control of strategy in the published document. In brief, value creation on the global commodity chain is progressive and highly influenced by marketing skills such as branding (Gereffi, 1999; Humphrey, 2004; Cheng et al., 2005; Eng et al., 2007, 2008). Information technology application alone would not result in higher value-added services but the stock and combination of intellectual and human capital assets as well as knowledge of resource development are essential for successful upgrading on the value creation chain (Helfat and Peteraf, 2003). Furthermore, economic conditions would moderate this economic aspiration, e.g., the scope and intensity of competition could stimulate innovation (Porter, 1980). This depends on the functioning of an efficient market (e.g., transparent and competitive rather than based on quotas) with appropriate mechanisms to deregulate and privatise major industries. A highly bureaucratic business environment would only serve to jeopardise efforts of eradicating economic equalities in the long-term. This is simply because markets are dynamic (Teece et al., 1997) and at a minimum, protective measures would limit exposure to competitive knowledge.

6.	Is the current economic development parallel with human capital investment and/or education policy? In other words, is the country over relying on both spectrum of the labour market (skilled and unskilled) as well as experiencing high levels of brain drain?

As discussed above (no. 1), the pace of human capital development is lagging behind industrialisation (re: first-class infrastructure third-class mentality quoted in the Ninth Malaysia Plan). The economy is also over-relying on cheap labour and suffering from high levels of brain drain. The implications are not only resulting in the increased of socio-economic inequalities but also negative consequences for knowledge transfer and acquisition at both ends of the labour-market spectrum, i.e., government policy would not be motivated to upgrade foreign-labour skills and knowledge development is transient without continuity at the higher level. Unskilled and poor people would be left in doldrums to fend for themselves whereas the rich entrepreneurs would hit stagnation in terms of business development opportunity (e.g., a typical family business/ownership aspiration).

The government education policy is non-competitive in terms of awarding scholarships and university places. At the very least, this cultivates complacency at all levels of the national education system and at worst, this produces incompetent graduates affecting wellbeing of future generations. Although more Malaysians have obtained tertiary and higher education degrees, foreign multinationals seemed prefer to recruit non-government sponsored graduates or foreign personnel. In a u-turn strategy of sponsoring students abroad, the government encourage Malaysians to study at local universities by setting up many new universities and/or granting university status to many former local colleges. But many Malaysians questioned the standard of our universities against other international institutions (e.g., against Singapore’s universities) especially after our recent poor performance in the world university rankings. Some universities attempted to fix this problem by rotating senior management rather than instigating a systematic investigation to enhance higher education standards. Unsurprisingly, the government admitted to the widening inequality of income in the Ninth Malaysia Plan despite the increased levels of education across the board. If the country’s education standard had not been on par with overseas institutions, the majority of students that graduate from local institutions would be at a disadvantage in competitive job markets. Put simply, for future generations (managers, engineers, doctors etc.) to survive successfully in the changing environment the government should not compromise or cut corners when it comes to investment in education. The people who are most vulnerable or to lose are those in low income groups. It is time for the government to take actions – not be hesitant or intimidated by certain self-interest individuals. Furthermore, academic resources are not strictly immobile and they are tradeable in competitive markets (Black and Boal, 1994).

The above questions are not exhaustive and merely scratching the surface of basic economic issues in the functioning of markets and distribution of economic wealth. The government’s past economic records and current economic policies are in tatters. I urge stronger and more informed opposition from the Pakatan Rakyat, and the current government to listen to the people. One has to examine methodically across industry sectors using relevant indicators and analytical tools for the context of our country. The interrelated nature of policy formulation and decision-making in public sectors means that economic performance is not bound to standard economic measures but include cultural and behavioural phenomenon. To fellow Malaysians, I hope that the extent to which we assess changes and judge the government and the coalition (opposition) would be on tangible outputs rather than policy per se. And to the Malaysian media, I extend my support for greater information and press freedom where reporting would be independent, timely and accurate, so that, the people are informed and empowered to drive democratic changes from the elected and relevant government representatives.

Bibliography

Black, J.A. & Boal, K.B.(1994) Strategic resources: Traits, configurations and paths to sustainable competitive advantage, Strategic Management Journal, 15, 131-148.

Cheng, J.M.S., Blankson, C., Wu, Paul C.S. & Chen, Somy S.M. (2005) A stage model of international brand development: the perspectives of manufacturers from two newly industrialized economies – South Korea and Taiwan. Industrial Marketing Management, 34(5), 504-514.

Day, G.S. (1994) The capabilities of market-driven organizations. Journal of Marketing, 58, October, 37-51.

Eng, T.Y., Tu, Y., Fu, G. 2008. Brand development of manufacturing companies in technology related products: The case of China. Global Marketing Conference, Shanghai, Jiao Tong University, Korean Academy of Marketing Science 20-23 March.

Eng, T.Y. & Wong, V. (2006) Governance mechanisms and relationship productivity in vertical coordination for new product development. Technovation, 26(7), 761-769.

Eng, T.Y. 2007. Relationship value of firms in alliance capitalism and implications for FDI. International Journal of Business Studies, Vol. 9(1), June, 43-68.

Eng, T.Y. and Spickett-Jones, J-G. 2007. Marketing capabilities of global manufacturing firms in China and Hong Kong. China Marketing Association Universities Conference, Harbin City, Harbin University, 26 – 29 July.

Eng, T.Y., Rufo, M. and Spickett-Jones, J-G. 2006 Exploring Network Structure and Content for Leveraging Network Resources in Entrepreneurial Marketing. The European Marketing Academy Conference, Athens 35th Conference, 23-26 May 2006.

Gereffi, G. (1999) International trade and industrial upgrading in the apparel commodity chain. Journal of International Economics, 48, pp. 37-70.

Gulati, R., Nohria, N. and Zaheer, A. (2000) Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 203-215.

Helfat, C.E. & Peteraf, M.A. (2003) The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 997-1010.

Humphrey, J. (2004) Upgrading in global value chains. ILO Policy Integration Department, Working paper 28, ILO.

Porter, M.E. (1980) The Competitive Advantages of Nations, London: Macmillan.

Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. & Shuen, A. (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,  21, Special Issue, 1147-1161.

[Dr. Teck-Yong Eng is Senior Lecturer, King’s College London, University of London, School of Social Science & Public Policy.

Email: teck.
[email protected]
. Blog : http://strategisingmalaysia.blogspot.com/)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 15 April 2008, 10:20 am and is filed under
Economics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


DAP welcomes signs of imminent judicial reforms

DAP welcomes developments indicating that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is finally prepared to carry out long-overdue reforms to take the first step to restore national and international confidence in the independence, impartiality, integrity and quality of the judiciary.

I have been calling for judicial reforms both in and outside Parliament in the past two decades when  the country reeled  from one judiciary crisis to another since the  “Mother of Judicial Crisis” in 1988 with the arbitrary sacking of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President and two Supreme Court Judges, the late Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh and Datuk George Seah as Supreme Court judges, and the victimization of independent-minded judges.

Abdullah should not take  half-hearted measures but must  initiate far-reaching judicial reforms to restore the Malaysian judiciary to its world-class pedestal which it had enjoyed since Independence in 1957 until two decades ago.

To ensure that Malaysia  move out of the “judicial darkness” in the past two decades, the elements of a far-reaching judicial reform programme  must include:

•	A Royal Commission of Inquiry on Judicial Reforms to make detailed recommendations after a probe into the “judicial darkness” of the past two decades;

•	A just and proper closure to the 1988 judicial crisis over the sacking of Tun Salleh Abas as Lord President and Datuk George Seah and the late Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman Pawanteh as Supreme Court judges, bearing in mind that the victims of the “Mother of Judicial Crisis in Malaysia” were not confined to the three top judges sacked, the three other judges who were persecuted and hauled before a Judicial Tribunal but also the Malaysian people and nation who suffered for two decades the depredations of a  deepening “judicial darkness”;

•	Restoration of  the doctrine of the separation of powers by reinstating the inherent judicial powers of the judiciary as entrenched in the Merdeka Constitution but which was taken away in a constitutional amendment in 1988 as part of the 1987-88 Operation Lalang crackdown on fundamental liberties.

•	A Judicial Appointment and Promotions Commission; and

•	Overhaul  of the Judges’ Code of Ethics to restore public confidence in judicial independence, impartiality and integrity, and  to provide for a satisfactory and accountable  mechanism for public complaints against judges, including the Chief Justice,  for  breaches of the Judges’ Code of Ethics.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 16 April 2008, 1:15 pm and is filed under
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Send Uthayakumar to IJN – Abdullah should heed the plea of his mother

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi should heed the
plea
of Hindraf leader P. Uthayakumar’s mother, K. Kalaivaniy, 64, to allow her son to be admitted to the National Heart Institute to deal with his deteriorating health.

Alternatively, Uthayakumar should be admitted to any private hospital of her choice as she is willing to bear the cost of the medical treatment and not burden the authorities with the medical bills.

It is not good enough for the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar to dismiss widespread concerns about Uthayakumar’s health claiming that there is no truth in claims that Internal Security Act (ISA) detainees at the Kamunting detention centre were being deprived of proper medical attention.

His assurance that ISA detainees will never be denied nor deprived of their right to receive proper medical treatment, is neither satisfactory nor acceptable as it is given from his air-conditioned office and has no relationship with what is actually happening in the detention centres to the detainees.

As a ISA detainee twice, I can speak with some authority  that medical treatment for ISA detainees especially in sensitive cases like that of Uthayakumar, who is a diabetic with many grave complications, were often unsatisfactory.

Uthayakumar and the other four Hindraf leaders, newly-elected Selangor DAP State Assemblyman for Kota Alam Shah A. Manoharan V. Ganabatirau, R. Kenghadharan and T. Vasantha Kumar should have been released immediately and unconditionally after the March 8 “political tsunami” vindicating their cause for Makkal Sakti and an end to the long-standing marginalization of the Malaysian Indians in the country.

Every day the five Hindraf leaders are incarcerated under the ISA in Kamunting detention centre is a daily proof that Abdullah and his government have yet to fully get the message of the Malaysian voters in the March 8 “political tsunami” that the Barisan Nasional government should end its abuses of power and human right abuses to crack down on dissent.

Until their release , the Prime Minister must ensure that Uthayakumar and the other ISA detainees are given prompt and proper medical treatment, particularly for those suffering acute and sensitive ailments like Uthayakumar.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 16 April 2008, 5:05 pm and is filed under
Hindraf
,
Human Rights
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Tamil Makkalosai suspended for a week – beginning of crackdown post-March 8?

Popular Tamil daily,
Tamil Makkalosai
, has been suspended for a week by none other than the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar himself for giving too much coverage of  Pakatan Rakyat news.

With immediate effect, Tamil Makkalosai will not appear in the streets until next week, awaiting the fate of its appeal to the Home Minister.

Is this the first sign of repression and crackdown on human rights and the little space opening up in the printed media after the March 8 “political tsunami”?

It is clear that the decision to stop the publication of Tamil Makkalosai, which is still awaiting for its KDN this year, has got the “green-light” from the Cabinet meeting this morning.

Why did the Ministers, particularly from Umno and other Barisan Nasional component parties,  particularly from the MIC,  who have promised to end their subsidiary and  subservient role in Cabinet ,  agreed to such a repressive measure as to immediately close down Tamil Makkalosai?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 16 April 2008, 5:35 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Indians
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.