Tunisia’s Islamist-led government rejects laws to enforce religion

Al Arabiya News

Saturday, 05 November 2011

Tom Heneghan

TUNIS REUTERS

Tunisia’s Islamist-led government will focus on democracy, human rights and a free-market economy in planned changes to the constitution, effectively leaving religion out of the text it will draw up, party leaders said.

The government, due to be announced next week, will not introduce sharia or other Islamic concepts to alter the secular nature of the constitution in force when Tunisia’s Arab Spring revolution ousted autocrat Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali in January.

“We are against trying to impose a particular way of life,” Ennahda leader Rachid Ghannouchi, 70, a lifelong Islamist activist jailed and exiled under previous regimes, told Reuters.

Tunisian and foreign critics of Ennahda, the moderate Islamist party that won 41.7 percent of Tunisia’s first free election on Oct. 23, have voiced fears it would try to impose religious principles on this relatively secular Muslim country.

Interviews with politicians and analysts revealed a consensus that the new assembly, the first to emerge from the Arab Spring uprisings, will focus on reassuring Tunisian voters, and the foreign tourists and investors vital to its economy.

All parties agreed to keep the first article of the current constitution which says Tunisia’s language is Arabic and its religion is Islam. “This is just a description of reality,” Ghannouchi said. “It doesn’t have any legal implications.

“There will be no other references to religion in the constitution. We want to provide freedom for the whole country,” said the Islamist leader, who will not take any official role in the new government. The new constitution is due in about a year.

No law to promote faith

Ghannouchi’s reformist Islamist writings in the 1980s and 1990s helped influence Turkey’s current mix of Islam and democracy, and he said his 22 years of exile in London helped him see the importance of civil society in influencing politics.

Like Turkey, Tunisia had decades of secularist dictatorship before evolving into a democracy where moderate Islamists – dubbed “Muslim Democrats” in a take-off of Europe’s Christian Democrats – have emerged as a strong political force.

“Law by itself doesn’t change reality,” Ghannouchi said at Ennahda’s headquarters, a six-story building abuzz with the excitement of open politics after decades of dictatorship.

“There shouldn’t be any law to try to make people more religious,” said Ghannouchi, whose party has pledged to continue to allow alcohol and Western dress here and pursue economic policies favoring tourism, foreign investment and employment.

The Islamist leader said he interprets sharia, the ill-defined and often confusing complex of Islamic teachings and laws, as a set of moral values for individuals and societies rather than a strict code to be applied to a country’s legal system.

“Egypt says sharia is the main source of its law, but that didn’t prevent (deposed President Hosni) Mubarak from being a dictator,” he said, noting the explicit reference to sharia in Cairo’s constitution.

Potential secularist allies agree

Samir Ben Amor, a leader of the secularist Congress for the Republic party due to join a coalition with Ennahda and another non-religious party, agreed there was no dispute about maintaining the brief reference to Islam in the first article.

He said there was wide agreement among political parties to strengthen democracy in the constitution by referring to international human rights conventions. “We want a liberal regime,” he said.

Although all parties agreed to defend Tunisian women’s rights, some of the most advanced in the Arab world, Ben Amor said they could not agree to some feminists’ demands to have the country’s liberal Personal Status Code written into the constitution.

“No constitution in the world has that,” he explained. These rights would be protected through legislation, he added.

The main area of disagreement seems to be whether Tunisia should opt for a parliamentary system, which Ghannouchi said he preferred after seeing British politics at first hand, or the French-style mix of a directly elected president and parliament preferred by the other parties.

“The parliamentary system can lead to political instability and, coming out of a dictatorship, we don’t think we can risk that,” Ben Amor said.

Radwan Masmoudi, Tunisian-born director of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) in Washington, said last month’s elections showed the country had opted for an “evolutionary revolution” that avoided radical changes.

“Tunisians agree on almost everything,” he said in the CSID office here. “They want to keep their identity as Arab and Muslim but not live in a theocracy.

“I think Tunisia can pave the way for other Arab countries to build a true democracy that is fully compatible with Islam.”

Masmoudi said the realities of coalition parties and the probable need for a two-thirds majority to approve the constitution would force all parties to seek a broad consensus.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 6 November 2011, 5:13 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Islamic state
,
Middle East/Africa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


When will four MCA Ministers make the formal proposal in Cabinet to make English a compulsory pass subject for SPM?

I welcome the proposal by the MCA President Datuk Seri Dr. Chua Soi Lek to make English a compulsory pass  subject for SPM, although it was a decade after I had made such a proposal.

On 18th May 2002, in expressing the DAP’s full support for the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s call to Malaysian students to master English as “necessary for communications essential to keep abreast of developments in the technical fields such as engineering and science”, I had gone one step further in proposing making pass in English compulsory in SPM, STPM and matriculation.

This is what I said some 10 years ago:

“The government has been talking about the decline of the standard of English language in the past two decades and the urgent need to arrest it, but it had nothing to show for the results.

“There can be no dispute as to the importance of English as a global language in the era of globalisation and information and communications technology.  English is the dominant language of commerce, of science, of the skies, of the Internet and of opportunity.

“It is the official language of in more than 75 countries. Although 1.2 billion people speak Chinese as their mother tongue, more than 1.5 billion people speak English as their mother-tongue or use it as a second or foreign language.  Plans are afoot for some 300 million people Chinese in China to learn to speak and use English.

“The European Union uses English alongside French at its informal gatherings, even though Europe has more native German and Italian speakers. In Japan, the government had said that the tongue of its onetime enemies should become its second official language to ‘achieve world-class excellence’.   In Dutch-speaking Netherlands, some government officials recently proposed switching the language of education to English – the language of most reference works.

“Virtually all scientific organizations use English, partly because most relevant literature and terminology is in English and partly because scientists want to spend time on science, not on translation.

“The urgent question for Malaysia is not whether English is an important global language which Malaysians must master if we are not to continue to lose our edge of international competitiveness, but what immediate actions to  take to arrest the catastrophic decline of the standard of English and to achieve a turnaround to the  high standard of English three decades ago.”

In my statement of May 2002, I had raised the most fundamental question about the PPSMI (teaching of mathematics and science in English) which was being introduced at the time, viz:

“Educationists and parents are legitimately concerned whether with the present low standards in English, Mathematics and Science, without major reforms in the infrastructure of the education system for the teaching and learning of English, the teaching of science and mathematics in English from Standard One would be a cure worse than the disease resulting in further lowering of the standards of Mathematics and Science without any significant increase in English fluency.

“Musa (the then Education Minister Tan Sri Musa Mohamad)  should make public all the studies which the Education Ministry had carried out which positively demonstrated that the immediate introduction of the teaching of Mathematics and Science in English from Standard One is the best and most effective method to arrest the decline of the English standard   in the schools – as parents are equally concerned about the decision.

“I believe the decision with the most far-reaching effects in generally raising the standard of English in schools is to make a pass in English compulsory for SPM,  STPM and matriculation examinations, which should be seriously considered and decided by the Cabinet on Wednesday.

“The Cabinet should also establish an all-party committee to launch a nation-wide campaign to promote the learning and use of English among the people to restore Malaysia’s international competitiveness edge lost as a result of the unchecked decline in the standard of English in the past three decades – so that this problem is tackled in a non-partisan manner transcending the pressures of political party competition.”

The four MCA Ministers in Cabinet ten years ago never supported the proposal to make English a compulsory pass subject even just for SPM, and the standard of English in the schools and universities had further declined in the past decade with Malaysia losing out to other ASEAN countries like Singapore and the Philippines in terms of English proficiency.

When will the four MCA Ministers raise the proposal to make English a compulsory pass subject for SPM in Cabinet – or is this only a MCA proposal meant for media publicity and not to be pursued seriously in the Education Ministry or Cabinet?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 6 November 2011, 1:53 pm and is filed under
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Foreign varsities swoop amid Malaysia’s brain drain

By
Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

Nov 07, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 7 — Malaysia will face another brain-drain threat when some of the world’s best-ranked universities descend here this Wednesday to lure more local talent abroad, London-based Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) cautioned today.

The data-gathering firm predicted Malaysian students “will be taking the opportunity to study abroad” during the QS World University Tour, which will see universities offer them attractive education packages aimed at addressing their financial concerns.

“With approximately 80,000 Malaysian students studying overseas, the country may be seeing signs of brain drain as an increasing number of students are looking overseas to pursue their higher education in Germany, France, the UK and other EU countries,” QS public relations head Simona Bizzozero said in a media release today.

The release noted that the universities recognise the students’ financial concerns in receiving overseas education and are ready to offer them scholarships and practical advice on how to apply for different aid schemes.

“Parents and students will also have the chance to have in-depth conversations with the various schools,” QS said.

It described the QS World University Tour as a unique platform which allows potential undergraduate students to meet representatives from some of the world’s best-ranked universities.

Malaysia is already facing a major brain-drain crisis with the World Bank warning recently that the haemorrhage of local talent here would likely intensify over the years and further erode the country’s already narrow skills base.

Its senior economist Philip Schellekens had said the number of skilled Malaysians living abroad tripled in the last two decades with two out of every 10 Malaysians with tertiary education opting to leave for either OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries or Singapore.

According to the World Bank Economic Monitor, the brain-drain crisis is depriving Malaysia of talent, and accounts for a third of the country’s one-million strong diaspora. Singapore alone has absorbed 57 per cent of these departing educated workers.

Quoting TopUniversities.com editor Danny Byrne today, QS said that the internationalisation of higher education has seen a growing trend of Malaysian students seeking foreign education, “despite Malaysia having over 35 universities”.

“With such great interest in obtaining an overseas degree, the world’s top universities are intensifying their recruitment of talented Malaysian students for their institutions this year,” Byrne added.

The Najib administration has been scrambling to plug the country’s talent leak and recently established Talent Corp under the Prime Minister’s Department to initiate and facilitate initiatives aimed at wooing local talent back to the country.

Talent Corp has rolled out two programmes. One is a long-term resident’s pass for skilled foreigners and former Malaysians. The other is the Returning Experts Programme, which aims to woo Malaysian professionals abroad with incentives such as a low tax rate. The latter scheme has stirred some interest.

The measures, covering the period from 2011 to 2015, are aimed at fulfilling the country’s long-standing goal of becoming a developed nation by 2020. At present, only 23 per cent of Malaysia’s current work force is highly skilled. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said this number must rise to 37 per cent by 2015 if it is to become a developed nation by 2020.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 7 November 2011, 5:45 pm and is filed under
Brain drain
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysians Abroad Should Not Vote

by
M. Bakri Musa

Malaysians abroad are misguided and plain wrong in agitating for exercising their right to vote in Malaysian elections.

            I can the see the validity for students, diplomats and others on temporary assignment abroad demanding such rights, but then they already have them. For others, especially those who have acquired permanent resident status elsewhere, their clamor for retaining their right to vote in Malaysian elections is misplaced for at least three major reasons.

            The first and most important is that since they do not live in Malaysia, they would not have to bear the burden of the consequences of their voting decision. Second, those Malaysians are essentially seeking representation without taxation; that is presumptuous. Third, since they had sought permanent residency status abroad, their focus should now be to prove to their new host country that they are deserving of such a status. Meaning, they should focus their attention, indeed loyalty, to their new adopted land.

            My last reason is not major but merely financial. There are considerable added costs to have Malaysians abroad vote in Malaysian elections; I would rather have the government spend that money and resources in Malaysia.

Elections Have Consequences

For an action to be meaningful its consequence must affect the participants, otherwise the exercise is merely academic or worse, a game. It may be a fun game for those abroad to vote in Malaysian elections, but for the locals who have to live with the consequences, it would not be so. In short, Malaysians abroad participating in Malaysian elections are engaged in a fraudulent act besides muddying the waters for the “natives” who have to live with the results.

            It is also the height of presumptuousness for those residing abroad to seek political representation but at the same time dispensing with paying their share of the costs, meaning, Malaysian taxes. Americans abroad have a right to vote not only because of the fact that they are citizens, but also because they are taxed on their worldwide income. An American may earn her entire income in Malaysia and in ringgit, nonetheless she still has to pay her share of income tax to Uncle Sam as if she had earned that income stateside. So I can see her demanding her right to vote and that the American embassy provides her the necessary facility so she can readily exercise that right.

            Malaysians abroad in contrast do not pay any Malaysian income tax, unless they have Malaysian sources of income, and those Malaysians already retain their right to vote. If the rallying cry of those original New England “Tea Party” colonists back in the 17th Century was “No taxation without representation,” today we have Malaysians abroad who pay no Malaysian tax yet perversely are demanding their right for representation without taxation. Absurd if not arrogant!

            The Election Commission’s retort to them should be, paraphrasing the famous words of John Hampden uttered at the height of the English Civil War, what a Malaysian abroad has no right to demand, their home government has a right to refuse.

            Malaysians abroad on permanent residency visas should not seek or be given the right to vote in Malaysian elections because they have essentially decided that there is no hope for them in Malaysia. If they were to harbor any sliver of hope for change, then they would have stayed behind and agitated for change from there, where their efforts would have the potential of having the greatest impact.

            Besides, having made the emotionally wrenching decision to emigrate, their main focus now should be to adjust to that decision and make the best of it. Thus they should endeavor to plant roots in their new adopted community, be an active and contributing member, and not be bothered with matters (especially political ones) they left behind.

            If they should be clamoring for any voting rights, it should be for the right to vote in the affairs of their new community, if for no other practical reason than that those decisions will now directly impact them.

            If after adjusting well in their new adopted community, these émigré Malaysians still retain a reservoir of goodwill and gratitude for their homeland and wish to contribute, then there are other more productive avenues to do so than to agitate for the right to vote in Malaysian elections.

Eradicating the “Temporary Abode” Mentality

There is something irritating when I see Malaysians holding green cards or otherwise having permanent resident status being more concerned with Malaysian affairs then they are with those of their adopted homeland. If as a non-native in a new land I feel that way, imagine what the real natives would feel. In America I see frequent backlashes against Mexican-Americans for example, who are more concerned with affairs south of the border than they are with matters American.

            A green card (or any permanent resident status) is a privilege; literally millions in the world would give anything to secure one. Having secured one and then to treat it so cavalierly is being disrespectful to the grantor state. Worse, that is the height of ingratitude. In fact in some jurisdictions, any political involvement with affairs back in the “old country” would be grounds for rescinding that permanent resident status.

            Permanent resident status is more than a long-term permit to work; it is a statement of your intent to be a permanent resident of that country, as the terminology of the document implies. In many countries permanent residents are granted nearly as full a privilege as citizens. Thus it behooves the holders of such visas to exercise their privileges in such a way as to demonstrate to the host country that they value and thus are deserving of such a status.

            If I were a native Singaporean, for example, I would not be too happy to see the republic’s permanent resident visa holders more interested in Malaysian rather than the island’s elections. Indeed there is now a palpable backlash among the republic’s citizens to these new permanent residents who treat the affluent island merely as a place to earn a good income and nothing more.

            Malaysians would not be too enthralled either if foreigners granted Malaysian permanent residency status were to preoccupy themselves with matters in their former native land while ignoring local affairs.

            A common complaint among Malays is that too many non-Malays treat their Malaysian citizenship merely as a stepping stone for them or their children to emigrate to the West. Thus Malays see the lack of enthusiasm by non-Malays to learning our national language as a manifestation of this “temporary abode” mentality. So when these Malaysians emigrate and then agitate to have the right to vote in Malaysian elections, they are reverting to their old stereotypical “temporary abode” behavior, albeit not in Malaysia this time but in their new home country.

            Just to be clear, I am directing my comments not to those Malaysians on temporary assignment abroad as students, civil servants and company employees. For students especially, I would encourage and give them every facility to vote. Doing so would be the best way to get them engaged in the affairs of their homeland. God knows, if they were back in Malaysia their political activities would be severely circumscribed. At least abroad they would be free to partake in full in the political affairs of Malaysia.

            If the Malaysian government were to give in and pander to those abroad (parties in power tend to do that!) then I suggest that those voters be made to pay for the full costs of making the necessary accommodations. In my estimation, a fee of US$100.00 per voter would be appropriate, at least in America. That fee would of course be waived for those with proof of payment of their Malaysian income tax in the preceding year.

            Impose that fee and then see how many abroad still remain “passionate” about Malaysian affairs to demand the right to vote in its elections. Now if those expatriate Malaysians were as passionate in seeking amendments to the Income Tax Act to making their global income subject to Malaysian taxes as they are in clamoring for their rights to vote in Malaysian elections, then I would salute them, but I would still not support it simply because of the costs it would impose on me.

            The Malaysian Election Commission faces a host of monumental problems not least of which would be to clean up the electoral roll and streamline the postal voting process for those already in Malaysia, as with the police and military personnel. The clamor of Malaysians abroad seeking the right to vote is so far down the list that I can hardly see it. Further, I see little merit in representation without taxation.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 7 November 2011, 10:56 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysians caught in a cultural gridlock

Terence Netto

Malaysiakini

Nov 6, 2011

COMMENT

At least, we have the MRT, the biggest infrastructure project in Malaysian history, on the cards to ease the traffic jams that have been building up on our roads, particularly in the Klang Valley, over the past three decades.

But what solvents are there for the cultural stalemates we increasingly encounter these days, those that threaten to render public discourse in the country an exercise in which the argumentative appear to be talking to the deaf.

Strident Muslim groups, aided and abetted by a ham-fisted police force, frowned on an annual rite of commiseration for gays, lesbians, transgender and transvestites because, they asserted, it would promote an alternative lifestyle considered repugnant in some religious traditions.

People of unconventional sexuality are outraged and their sympathisers appalled because the police have moved in to stop Seksualiti Merdeka’s annual workshop on the grounds that the project is a threat to national amity.

The ban supposedly placates Muslim sensitivities, thought to have been rendered taut by the suspicion that proponents of unconventional sexuality are pushing to have their orientation given public respect.

Muslim sensitivities are Muslim sensitivities, but in a plural society they are not the only sensitivities extant.

Slaughter of cows in schools

Today is the feast of the sacrifice (Aidil Adha) for Muslims. In mosques and other places the ritual slaughter of cows is held, considered de rigueur in imitation of Patriarch Abraham’s sacrifice of a ram on Mount Moriah, the seminal event that launched the three monotheistic religions – Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Ritual slaughter of cows within designated spheres ought to be no problem, even to those to whom the animal being slaughtered is an object of reverence.

But when it is held, in extended celebration of the feast of the sacrifice, in places not usually known to be the proper ones for such rituals, it hints at an overweening sensibility. Like grass overgrowing its verge, it ought to be pruned.

The NGO for non-Muslims religions, MCCBCHST, have implored the authorities not to allow the ritual slaughter of cows in schools because not only are educational institutions not the proper place for staging such spectacles, but the action itself is deemed insensitive to Hindus and Buddhists to whom cows are scared.

So authorities who earlier appeared to be inordinately solicitous of the sensitivities of one set of religious believers are now requested to be mildly respectful of the beliefs of other sets of believers.

It is just the situation for a bout of harrumphing by the Oxford don, Richard Dawkins, who is the world’s most renowned atheist.

In his book, ‘The God Delusion’, in a few years back, he famously proposed the theory of “memes”, which would make religious belief a kind of dangerous virus of the mind.

Respect for certain boundaries

But Dawkins’ argument for the futility, obsolescence, and ludicrousness of religious belief is likely to meet the same fate as Marx’s prediction that nationalism would disappear as a force in the world once the working class become the owners of the means of production: burial by history from much contradiction.

Because the religions are here to stay, their sensitivities are in for the long haul. For that reason, it is politic for everyone to join in the reining of the overweening and allow for respect for obvious boundaries.

But, in plural societies, the problem is that what may be obvious to the goose may not so for the gander.

Still, common sense, which only an overweening sensibility would be in revolt against, impels the respect of boundaries.

Pushing the envelope in matters of religious sensitivities is unwise. So long as sensitivities are regarded as a two-way street, their placation would not entail too much a sacrifice of sacred principle.

Otherwise, in a multiracial, multi-religious society, the gridlocks that would be engendered would be such that people would much prefer being stalled in vehicular jams than in cultural dead-ends.

The latter would induce people to feel about others the way existentialist philosopher Jean Paul-Satre observed: “Hell is other people.”

                This entry was posted on Monday, 7 November 2011, 5:38 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Muhyiddin is  “flip flop Minister who denies that he flip-flops” on PPSMI

Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin’s denial that he had been inconsistent on the government policy on the teaching and learning of science and mathematics in English (PPSMI) has only made him a “flip-flop Minister who denies that he flip-flops” on PPSMI.

That Muhyiddin had “flip-flopped”, there is no need to go further than to quote the chairman of  Parent Action Group for Education (PAGE) Datin Noor Azimah Abdul Rahim who told the Malaysian Insider that she was “pleasantly surprised”  by Muhyiddin’s announcement on PPSMI last Friday, “pointing out that until Thursday, Muhyiddin had appeared bent on pressing on with the government’s original decision to scrap PPSMI completely next year”. (
The Malaysian Insider
).

Controversial constitutional law academician, Aziz Bari has offered the view that PPSMI is unconstitutional in violating Article 152. He disagreed with the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment  by Justice Mohd Zawawi Salleh in May 2010 that it is constitutional for mathematics and science to be taught in English.

This is the second case where I do not  agree with Aziz Bari , the other being his contention that hudud laws could be implemented without amendment of the Federal Constitution.

DAP had all along been consistent and principled in our stand on PPSMI.

DAP welcomes Muhyiddin’s announcement on PPSMI last Friday although it is not a satisfactory long-term solution to address the problems of raising the standards of English, mathematics and science among our students so that Malaysia can enhance our international competitiveness with the rest of the world.

When Muhyiddin announced the BN government decision to abolish the PPSMI in July 2009, I had described it as a Cabinet decision which was “as disastrous as the Cabinet decision in 2002 to rush headlong into implementing PPSMI for Std. One for all national, Chinese and Tamil primary schools without any preparation or research whatsoever”.

In my statement dated 13th July 2009, I had made four proposals for the Cabinet to “undo the various disasters of its decision on PPSMI”, viz:

•	Endorsing the call of Parents Action Group for Education (Page) that schools should be given the option to teach science and mathematics in Bahasa Malaysia or English or in one’s mother tongue;

•	Revert to the use of English as medium of instruction for mathematics and science in secondary schools;

•	A flexible education approach that takes into account the urban-rural gap as well as the weaknesses of students, particularly in rural areas in proficiency in English, mathematics and science; and

•	The important principle that advanced students should not be held back because of students who lagged behind academically.

Why did I say that the Cabinet decision in July 2009 to abolish the PPSMI was as disastrous as the 2002 Cabinet decision to implement the PPSMI?  This was what I said in my statement of 13th July 2009:

“The Cabinet decision on PPSMI (Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Sains dan Matematik – teaching and learning of Science and Mathematics in English) is as disastrous as the Cabinet decision in 2002 to rush headlong into implementing PPSMI from Std. One for all national, Chinese and Tamil primary schools without any preparation or research whatsoever.

“Now, Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, in justifying the Cabinet’s latest decision on PPSMI has made the shocking revelation that before the PPSMI was launched six years ago, there had been neither discussion or approval by the Cabinet nor discussion with the parents.

“Several current Ministers were in the 2002 Mahathir Cabinet, including the present Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, DPM Muhyiddin himself, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein and Information, Communication and Culture Minister, Datuk Seri Rais Yatim, and they as well as the leaderships of Umno, MCA, Gerakan, MIC, SUPP and other Barisan Nasional component parties should all explain how they could permit such a far-reaching decision affecting the future generation of Malaysians to be taken in so haphazard and irresponsible a manner!

“I agree that the Cabinet decision on PPSMI last Wednesday came as ‘a bombshell to many, especially those in the urban areas’.

“Just before Najib’s Cabinet reshuffle on April 10, the then Education Minister Hishamuddin was expected to have proposed the reversion to mother tongue for mathematics and science only at primary level, while retaining PPSMI at the secondary level.

“As many had said, the complete reversal of PPSMI at both primary and secondary levels ‘has come as a real surprise’, as it is sheer political expediency which makes no educational sense whatsoever.

“For instance, last Wednesday’s Cabinet decision means that Malaysia will have the most crazy educational system, where students in Form 4 in 2012 will have to switch to Bahasa Malaysia for mathematics and science in the last two years of secondary education, after nine years of learning these two subjects in English – again to switch back to English for pre-university and tertiary education!

“Ministers who want millions of Malaysian students to go through the crazy system of nine years of mathematics and science in English from Std. 1 to Form 3, followed by two years in Bahasa Malaysia in Forms 4 and 5, and switch back again to English for pre-university and tertiary education must have their heads examined as to whether they are fit to be in Cabinet in the first place!”

                This entry was posted on Monday, 7 November 2011, 1:01 pm and is filed under
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pengalaman graduan tempatan di negara asing

 —
Wong Tan Kim

The Malaysian Insider

Nov 07, 2011

7 NOV — Sedang saya duduk berehat di sebuah hotel di kota Shenzhen, China teringin saya untuk menulis untuk bacaan The Malaysian Insider akan kehidupan seorang graduan tempatan di negara asing.

Saya dihantar oleh majikan saya di Malaysia untuk bertugas di kota Shenzhen. Setelah beberapa tahun berulang-alik di antara Malaysia (Johor Baru), Singapura, Hong Kong, Shenzhen dan Guangdong, saya dapati ada sesuatu yang tidak betul dengan sistem pelajaran di negara kita.

Saya seorang graduan lepasan UKM dalam tahun 80an. Saya mengikuti sepenuhnya dunia pendidikan saya di dalam Bahasa Malaysia. Saya mengikuti kuliah yang dikendalikan oleh profesor seperti Dr Shamsul Amri Baharuddin, Dr Sanusi Osman, Allahyarham Rustam Sani, Dr Noraini Othman, Dr Ting Chew Peh dan ramai lagi pensyarah yang saya sudah lupa namanya.

Saya seorang bangsa Cina yang tidak boleh membaca tulisan Cina dan menulis tulisan Cina. Saya hanya boleh bertutur Bahasa Mandarin yang ringkas. Dengan latarbelakang yang sedemikian, boleh bayangkan cabaran saya di negara China. Saya melihat saya sebagai seorang rakyat Malaysia dan bukan warga China walaupun nenek-moyang saya berasal dari China.

Saya mengikuti perkembangan semasa negara kita melalui The Malaysian Insider, Malaysiakini dan beberapa akhbar bahasa Inggeris secara “online”.

Ketika ini isu PPSMI hangat diperbahaskan. Golongan nasionalis Melayu tidak dapat duduk senang dengan kelangsungan dasar PPSMI manakala penyokong PPSMI ingin terus diadakan sampai hari kiamat. Tidak ada titik pertemuan yang disenangi oleh semua pihak. Dr Mahathir selaku pelopor PPSMI pula mencadangan referendum untuk menentukan nasib PPSMI. Tidak keterlaluan kalau dikatakan PPSMI secara tidak langsung dapat meningkatkan penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris.

Bukanlah hasrat saya untuk memperkecilkan kewibawaan BM. BM hanya dapat digunakan di Malaysia sahaja.

Pada hakikatnya, BM tidak pernah digunapakai di dalam arena antarabangsa. Segala urusan hanya diuruskan di dalam Bahasa Inggeris.

Perbincangan, perbualan dengan rakan seperniagaan dan konvensyen hanya dikendalikan di dalam Bahasa Inggeris. Kita berdepan dengan sekumpulan delegasi yang datang dari seluruh dunia. Apakah kita ada pilihan lain jikalau bukan Bahasa Inggeris. Setelah hampir 20 tahun saya meninggalkan UKM, tidak ada satu surat pun yang pernah saya baca ataupun tulis di dalam BM. Adalah sangat sedih apabila saya melihat bila ada usaha untuk mempertingkatkan Bahasa Inggeris, ianya ditentang sebegitu rupa.

Bagaimana kita hendak bersaing di pentas antarabangsa jika rakyat kita tidak dapat menguasai Bahasa Inggeris dan bukan sekadar mendapat P7 diperingkat SPM dan terus ke Tingkatan Enam.

Penutur BM dianggarkan cuma berjumlah 25 juta orang. Ianya tidak akan memberikan sebarang impak ke atas sosio-ekonomi dunia. Oleh kerana faktor politik kenegaraan, saya faham dengan langkah kerajaan Malaysia untuk memartabatkan BM jikalau tidak identiti Melayu akan hilang dan ditelan zaman.

Kerajaan Malaysia menutup semua sekolah aliran Bahasa Inggeris dan digantikan dengan sekolah aliran BM untuk semua subjek kecuali Bahasa Inggeris dalam tahun 70an ternyata bukan satu polisi yang menafaatkan. Akibatnya, penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris di kalangan pelajar jatuh mendadak. Impian pengubal polisi ketika itu yang menjangkakan BM dapat menggantikan Bahasa Inggeris ternyata tidak tercapai.

Apakah tidak mungkin sistem aliran Bahasa Inggeris di peringkat sekolah menengah diperkenalkan semula?

Nasionalis Melayu tidak harus melenting dengan saranan ini. Orang Melayu Islam akan tetap orang Melayu Islam tidak kira bahasa apa yang dipelajari.

Zaman kolonial sudah lama berlalu. Falsafah hegemony sudah lupus. Janganlah berasa malu untuk menerima Bahasa Inggeris untuk masa depan dan kemakmuran yang akan datang.

Intergrasi nasional bukan hanya terletak semata-mata ke atas bahasa kebangsaan. Saya pernah terbaca pengkritik bangsa Melayu yang mengkritik orang bukan-Melayu masih tidak fasih berbahasa Melayu setelah 54 tahun negara merdeka!. Tetapi adakah golongan ini merupakan golongan yang akan mengancam ketenteraman negara?

Bukankah kita juga mengetahui di mana perang saudara juga meletus di kalangan mereka yang sebangsa dan menutur bahasa ibunda yang sama?

Arus perkembangan globalisasi yang berlaku menuntut kita untuk berubah. Kita harus menerima hakikat bahawasanya — dunia sains dan teknologi adalah “milik” Bahasa Inggeris.

Demi “survival” kita, anak-anak muda kita harus dilengkapkan penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris mereka. Bagi saya penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris tidak akan mencukupi dengan PPSMI. Subjek-subjek lain perlu juga diperkenalkan dalam Bahasa Inggeris supaya suasana pembelajaran Bahasa Inggeris itu lebih menarik.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 7 November 2011, 2:49 pm and is filed under
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Chaotic catharsis

by Hugo Dixon

Reuters

Nov 6, 2011

Chaos, drama and crisis are all Greek words. So is catharsis. Europe is perched between chaos and catharsis, as the political dramas in Athens and Rome reach crisis point. One path leads to destruction; the other rebirth. Though there are signs of hope, a few more missteps will lead down into the chasm.

The dramas in the two cradles of European civilization are similar and, in bizarre ways, linked. Last week’s decision by George Papandreou to call a referendum on whether the Greeks were in favor of the country’s latest bailout program set off a chain reaction that is bringing down not only his government but probably that of Silvio Berlusconi too.

The mad referendum plan, which has now been rescinded, shocked Germany’s Angela Merkel and France’s Nicolas Sarkozy so much that they threatened to cut off funding to Greece unless it got its act together — a move that would drive it out of the euro. But this is probably an empty threat, at least in the short term, because of the way that Athens is roped to Rome. If Greece is pushed over the edge, Italy could be dragged over too and then the whole single currency would collapse. So, ironically, Athens is being saved from the immediate consequences of its delinquency by the fear of a much bigger disaster across the Ionian Sea.

Italian bond yields, which were already uncomfortably high, shot up after the Greek referendum fiasco.
 Berlusconi was forced to pacify Merkel and Sarkozy at the G20 meeting in Cannes by agreeing to a parliamentary confidence vote on his government’s lackluster reform program as well as to monitoring by the International Monetary Fund. The humiliation in Cannes, where Berlusconi’s finance minister pointedly failed to back him, could be the final nail in the PM’s coffin.

The end of the Berlusconi and Papandreou eras should, in theory, be a cause for celebration. Although the Italian PM’s behavior has been scandalous, whereas the Greek PM’s has not been, they have both led their countries deeper into debt. They are also both members of political castes that have enfeebled their nations for many years. Getting rid of them could be the start of a renewal process.

The snag is that it’s not certain that what comes next will be better. In both countries, where I have spent much of the last fortnight, the best outcome would be national unity governments committed to rooting out corruption and cutting back overgenerous welfare states. This could happen either before or after snap elections. Unfortunately, the old political castes die hard. They could continue bickering over who suffers the most pain and who gets the top jobs until they are staring into the abyss — or even fall in.

Many in the rest of Europe, meanwhile, would probably love to push them over the edge if they were themselves strong enough to take the strain. But Merkel, Sarkozy et al have been criminal in their lack of preparation. The so-called comprehensive plan agreed to at the euro summit of Oct. 26 was another case of too little, too late. Not only was the plan for recapitalizing Europe’s banks only about half as big as it should have been as well as foolishly delayed until next June; the scheme for leveraging up the region’s safety net, the European Financial Stability Facility, is full of holes. This became clear at Cannes, where Merkel had to admit that few other G20 countries wanted to invest in it.

The whole of Europe is now in a race against time. The Greeks have to get their act together before the rest of Europe is ready to cut them loose. The Italians have to restore credibility before they get sucked into a vortex from which they can’t escape. And the rest need to put in place really strong contingency plans in case Athens and Rome continue to let them down. If everybody runs very fast, the last week could be the beginning of the catharsis. If not, chaos beckons.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 November 2011, 5:15 pm and is filed under
international economic crisis
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Chua Soi Lek vs Lim Guan Eng

By
Spencer Gan
 | November 08, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

NOV 8 — It is obvious that the black ops team at the MCA has been active and it believes that by beating the fear drum about hudud, Chinese voters will run away from Pakatan Rakyat into the arms of the MCA.

That is why the MCA ragsheet, The Star, has been giving great space to Chua Soi Lek, the soiled president of the MCA, on this issue.

So he now wants the DAP to explain how hudud will impact the Chinese community before seeking its support in the next elections. I prefer a more straightforward test, a test between Chua and the DAP’s Lim Guan Eng.

1) Who went to jail for standing up for a voiceless, young girl, not concerned about race or religion? Who escaped going to jail despite millions seeing him commit a criminal offence punishable by jail time?

These two are critical questions because they go to the heart of any human being: his moral core.

In the US today, Republican Herman Cain is being hammered because of sexual harassment cases against him. In Malaysia, the man who was not charged for reasons best known to the BN government wants to contest again!

2) Who has run the state of Penang responsibly and which state was mentioned favourably in the Auditor-General’s Report as fiscally responsible?

Who runs a political party with barely 50 per cent of the mandate from party delegates; is charge of a party which has seen its former presidents in the dock on cheating charges and whose ministerial portfolios (transport and tourism) have been dogged by controversies (PKFZ and direct negotiations instead of open tenders)?

These questions are important because they touch on an important leadership quality: the ability to lead and produce results.

3) Who has not been afraid to take on Utusan Malaysia and other fascist powers in Malaysia?

Who has been afraid of upsetting Perkasa, Utusan Malaysia and Umno?

These questions are important because they indicate whether a politician will speak up without fear or favour or is only interested in self preservation.

So it is really quite straight forward the option before the Malaysian electorate.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 November 2011, 4:25 pm and is filed under
Lim Guan Eng
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is Muhyiddin best person to “transform” Malaysian proficiency in English, maths and science as to become a global power house?

Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin has not inspired or convinced Malaysians in his 31 months as Education Minister that he is the person to “transform” the proficiency of Malaysian students in English, maths and science for Malaysia  to become a global power house in these three subjects.

This point has been further driven home for most Malaysians by his recent maladroit flip-flop over the PPSMI issue.

The greatest disservice Muhyiddin has done to Malaysian education and our international competitiveness was his decision on PPSMI, which was given Cabinet approval on 8th July 2009.

My immediate reaction (9th July 2009) was to describe the Cabinet decision on PPSMI “not a New Deal, as proclaimed by some newspaper headlines,  but a Raw Deal leaving Malaysia stranded in the march towards global educational quality, excellence and competitiveness and doing a great disservice to millions of students currently in both the primary and secondary schools”.

I had stressed at the time that the Cabinet’s PPSMI decision of July 8, 2009 “cannot be the last word on the controversial subject and the whole issue must be re-opened for a broader, more liberal and flexible solution which would have far-reaching consequences not only to nation-building, nature of a society we want to build in Malaysia but also whether Malaysia can compete and stand tall with the rest of the world”.

I had right from the beginning in 2002 opposed former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s PPSMI, as it is educationally unsound because educational experience on bilingual education worldwide in the past three decades have shown that using a second language as a medium of instruction from too early stages can impede the development of thinking skills of children resulting in low achievement in mathematics, science and languages – powerful educational arguments against the use of English to teach maths and science from Std. One.

This argument does not apply for children whose home language is the English language or a total immersion education system is adopted with English as medium of instruction.

This is why I had suggested a flexible approach to the PPSMI problem which does not allow a “One Size Fits All” solution, by giving parents the choice to decide on the type of education they want for their children – including having classes or schools using English as medium of instruction for mathematics and science.

The purpose of the ill-conceived PPSMI in 2002  was to raise the standards of English, mathematics and science for Malaysian students which are imperative if Malaysia is not to continue its descent into a backwater, with one country after another overtaking the country in national development and progress.

The reasons prompting the PPSMI in 2002 to transform Malaysia into a global powerhouse in English, maths and science were right, proper and should be supported but the approach in conceiving and implementing the PPSMI from Std. One was wrong.

In his 31 months as Education Minister, Muhyiddin has failed to come up with a formula which commands public confidence that English, maths and science proficiency of Malaysian students would be upgraded for Malaysia to become a global powerhouse in these three subjects.

In fact, high and vivid in the memory of Malaysians is the admission by Muhyiddin after becoming Education Minister that he did not know that English is not a “must pass” subject for SPM – which shows that neither education nor the decline of English language among students  in the past four decades  had been very close to his heart in his political career.

Muhyiddin was one of the leading advocates of UMNO for PPSMI in 2002, defending the proposal with the half-baked argument that many countries in the world, including China, Japan, Korea and France were turning to English as it could help them to progress – showing his inability to understand the actual reasons for the opposition to PPSMI in national, Chinese and Tamil primary schools by parents and teachers from all the major races in the country.

It is sad and most deplorable that in his 31 months as Education Minister, Malaysia is today no nearer to finding a solution to “transform” the proficiency of Malaysian students in English, maths and science as to become a global power house in these three subjects to best position Malaysia in the march towards global educational quality, excellence and competitiveness.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 November 2011, 10:54 am and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


It’s raining goodies in Johor

By
S Rutra
 | November 8, 2011

Free Malaysia Today

MUAR: After Pakatan Rakyat declared its intention of making inroads into Barisan Nasional’s stronghold of Johor, the ruling coalition is leaving nothing to chance, especially when it concerns Indian voters.

These voters are being showered with cash and hampers, and leading the goodie train is none other than Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin and Menteri Besar Abdul Ghani Othman.

An ex-MIC state leader told FMT that while the Indians here have been traditional supporters of BN, the party leaders however are not taking this granted.

“Even though in some of the constituencies, Indian voters are as low as three or five percent, they still may be the deciding factor in ensuring that Johor remains a BN fortress,” he said.

Among others, the menteri besar announced that the state government has allocted RM500,000 for the construction of a Sri Murugan Centre (SMC) Ashramam in Muar town.

This is in addition to the education grant of RM100,000 a year allocated for the centre since 2007. The centre provides tuition for children from the lower income bracket.

Speaking to FMT, state SMC co-ordinator P Subramaniam said the RM500,000 was promised by the state government prior to the 2008 general election to support the centre’s effort in securing a plot of land for the construction of the ashramam.

“We are happy to get the money, but we will seek further funds from the state to complete the RM2.5 million ashramam,” he added.

Meanwhile, Muhyiddin, who is also the MP for Pagoh, recently handed cash to single mothers and the elderly to offset their medical bills. They received between RM300 and RM1,000 each.

Apart from this, Tamil school pupils effected by the floods here in January received RM200 each.

For the record, the state government paid RM500 to each household affected by the floods in February and the federal government also compensated those who suffered loss of crops and livestock.

“This has nothing to do with the general election,” said an aide to Muhyiddin. “We always provide assistance to the people. Our help is not seasonal nor confined to a particular race.”

‘Whisky bottles for teachers’

In Batu Pahat, several Tamil school headmasters and their assistants were suprised to see hampers on their tables when they returned to work after the Deepavali break.

What stunned them the most was that the hampers contained a bottle of Famous Grouse whisky.

The hampers were from the Batu Pahat MP Mohd Puad Zarkashi, who is also the deputy education minister.

“Most of us were suprised and felt uncomfortable. Firstly, the hamper contained a liqour bottle and secondly, we as civil servants should not receive such gifts

“Perhaps it is the deputy minister’s way of thanking us for our contribution,” said a teacher, who declined to be named.

However, he said that sending flowers would suffice and there was no need for liquor bottles.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 November 2011, 3:29 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Johore
,
Muhyiddin Yassin
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia remains rich but also intolerant, says new study

By
Melissa Chi
 | November 07, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 7 — Malaysia maintained its rank as the 43rd most prosperous nation, trailing behind Singapore at 16th but the latest index of overall wealth also ranked the country among the worst countries for personal freedom and democracy, while it also scored poorly for security and the educational levels of workers.

It was also found that Malaysians did not trust each other and generally did not welcome outsiders.

Overall, Malaysia was a more prosperous nation than its other Asean neighbours such as Thailand which came in at 45 out of 110 countries.

The London-based think-tank Legatum’s Prosperity Index assesses 110 countries based on performance in eight areas such as economy, personal freedom, health and social capital.

This year, Norway tops the list of 110 countries while Central African Republic came in last. Norway also topped the previous year’s list.

Malaysia’s economy is ranked at 17th, the strongest sub-sector, and the report said Malaysia’s economy performed well and there is a “high level of public confidence” in the financial sector.

Despite Malaysia’s positive ranking in the economy sub-sector, the country scored 35th in the governance sub-sector.

The report said that objective and subjective indicators give a mixed account of Malaysia’s governance.

“Malaysia places 72nd, globally, for the strength of its democracy. The bureaucracy is the 28th most efficient in the world; however, following a period of significant political unrest in 2008 the political system underwent substantial change,” the report said.

On entrepreneurship and opportunity, Malaysia ranked at 36th. The report said Malaysia’s ICT infrastructure encourages commercial activity.

“Although only 1 per cent of GDP is spent on R&D, Malaysia maintains a very high level of ICT exports, placing it third on this variable both globally and regionally,” the report said.

On the education and health indicator, Malaysia ranked 46th.

The report said the limited enrolment at high education levels means Malaysian workers are relatively poorly educated. The report also said that perhaps the low health expenditure per capita contributed to only “moderately good” indicators of public health, the report said.

However, Malaysia was let down by personal freedom — its worst-performing indicator — ranking only 96th in the sub-index.

The report said although Malaysians enjoy a fairly high level of civic choice, they do not welcome “outsiders”.

“In a 2010 survey, 77 per cent of respondents expressed satisfaction with their level of individual freedom, placing Malaysia in the top 50 countries of the index on this variable. However, this level of freedom does not create a tolerant society,” it said.

Malaysia is considered under the “weak” category in this sub-sector, along with Thailand, China, Indonesia, Cambodia, and Pakistan.

The safety and security as well as social capital categories also dragged down Malaysia’s overall ranking, with the country placing 53rd and 75th respectively.

The report said despite overall stability, Malaysia experiences some political pressures, and citizens feel unsafe.

“The average levels of internal displacement and communal conflict place Malaysia 53rd for demographic instability, which may result from border disputes, ownership or occupancy of land, access to transportation outlets, control of religious or historical sites, or proximity to environmental hazards,” it said.

The report also said Malaysians feel “unable to trust or rely on others”, indicating a lack of social cohesion.

“Malaysians are more likely to help others through formal structures: 37 per cent had donated to charities and one in five people volunteered their time over the same period, placing Malaysia 35th and 52nd, respectively,” it said.

Europe dominates the top 10 countries on the list in taking six spots. The United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand make up the rest of the top 10, consistent with last year’s rankings.

The last three rankings were countries from Africa. Other Asia-Pacific countries that made the top 20 were Hong Kong (19) and Taiwan (20).

Malaysia also scored ahead of its neighbours like Vietnam (62), the Philippines (66), Indonesia (70) and Cambodia (94).

Malaysia’s average life satisfaction ranking is at 22nd, while the per capita GDP ranking is at 44th.

Overall, Norway, Denmark and Australia topped the table.

The US ranked 10th — the same as last year — and scored high in measures of public health and entrepreneurial environment.

While the shadow of the economic crisis still looms over many countries, the index shows some bright spots. The report noted that since 2009, 87 out of the 110 countries have seen a rise in their overall prosperity score.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 November 2011, 4:38 pm and is filed under
Economics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s reforms in ‘dribs and drabs’, says Ku Li

By Lee Wei Lian

The Malaysian Insider

Nov 08, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 8 — Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah criticised the pace of reforms in the country today, saying that it was too inconsistent and there appeared to be no overall plan to transform the country and society.

The Umno veteran and president of newly registered civil society NGO Amanah (Angkatan Amanah Merdeka) said that while there have been initiatives such as the National Key Result Areas (NKRA’s), they were currently too fragmented.

“I don’t know actually because everything is done in dribs and drabs,” he said at a press conference when asked about the government’s reforms. “There is no overall plan as to how they are going to transform our country or society.”

He added that it was “very difficult” for him to gauge what is going to happen in terms of transformation unless there is “a complete reformation.”

Since taking office in 2009, Datuk Seri Najib Razak has initiated a reform agenda which included a government and economic transformation programme to be driven by the special purpose performance management unit, Pemandu.

While the prime minister has won praise for the bold move of proposing to repeal oppressive detention laws and relax media licensing laws, his reform efforts in terms of overhauling the government machinery and transforming the economy have been met with a less than effusive response from the public.

Critics say that the lack of radical reforms effectively amounted to policy tinkering that would deliver only lacklustre results.

Many members of the public also say that they do not feel any marked difference in their lives despite shiny statistics released periodically by Pemandu showing achievements such as a reduction in the crime rate and billions in new investment.

Government officials and some economists, however, have pointed to Malaysia’s rise in rankings such as the World Economic Forum’s Competitiveness Index and the World Bank’s Doing Business Index this year as proof that Najib’s reforms are working.

The prime minister, however, is also perceived to be constrained by hardliners in his party who would be opposed to widespread economic reforms that would entail levels of liberalisation that could threaten the rice bowls of politically connected businessmen.

Some corporate and political leaders also have said that the government is so set in its ways that Najib faces an uphill battle to break bad habits that have taken root over the decades.

“In corporations you can hire and fire fast but to take disciplinary action in government is extremely time consuming,” said Minister in Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Koh Tsu Koon last week.

Some analysts say that the prime minister could be holding out for a strong mandate from the 13th general election before embarking on more sweeping reforms.

The Wall Street Journal, however, said on September 28 that Najib would need to commit to reforms if he intends to propel Umno and Barisan Nasional to victory in the next general election as many members of the younger generation of voters do not feel beholden to the ruling coalition.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 November 2011, 9:47 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Razaleigh Hamzah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PPSMI, a tough pill to swallow

—
Dr Kamal Amzan

The Malaysian Insider

Nov 08, 2011

NOV 8 — This is déjà vu.

Back in Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s day, we saw many U-turns and flip flopping of government decisions.

The decision to build a crooked bridge, double tracking rail project, comes to mind. Malaysians were so tired of such fickle-mindedness that they voted the Opposition into a few states in March 2008.

Three years later, we usher in the era of PPSMI.

Within a week we saw two big announcements by the education minister. One was to uphold the abolishment of PPSMI, while the other was to extend PPSMI until 2021.

After quoting numerous studies and expert opinions on why they have to shelve the teaching of science and mathematics in English, and how teaching in the Malay language will be better for students, the education minister decided that the country could still prolong the teaching of said subjects in the English language.

What were his decisions based on? The proximity of the next general election, or because our students and Malaysia deserve a better future?

Should we expect another U-turn after the general election? Or should we be fickle and vote someone else in?

Whatever the answer, education for Malaysians must not be used as currency to garner support or votes. No matter how unpopular a policy vis-a-vis our education is, the government and the rakyat must swallow bitter pills to ensure a progressive and developed Malaysia.

Gambling with our children’s education is never the answer.

The teaching of science and mathematics in English will not only improve our children’s command of the language, but will hasten the knowledge transfer to make our younger generation more marketable, attracting high income companies in their wake to make Malaysia a high income nation.

Critics who scream violation of the national language should be made to understand that as long as Malaysia is regarded as a third world country (no matter what the politicians want us to believe), as long as our graduates are unemployable, and as long as Malaysia remains behind technologically, Bahasa Malaysia will never be looked up to by the world.

Only a developed Malaysia will allow the respect Bahasa Malaysia deserves, and its proliferation as the next lingua franca in the region if not the world by our world-class, English proficient, sought after graduates.

How many more generations do we need to experiment on before we accept the fact that English language goes hand in glove with advancements in science and mathematics, which will unmistakably lead to national progress?

As with any policy in their infancy, we are bound to encounter problems. Solving them as we move along will be a teaching experience for the teachers, parents and officials in the education ministry and the nation, as long as everyone is committed to such lessons in the English language.

That is called a learning curve, and maturing into a more advance nation.

Crying wolf, giving PPSMI a bad name, getting people to scream and protest against it, and attempting to erase them from history because they are too difficult to handle, or too complicated for the ministry to handle is not the answer.

Malaysians are a mature lot that understand sacrifices for the sake of the future. No sane, rational parent will object to the use of English in the classroom for the teaching of science and mathematics unless they are politically motivated, or are ignorant of world affairs.

The government should be firm in implementing PPSMI, and not bow down to presumed pressure from NGOs and other politically motivated parties. The government must act as a guardian to our children’s and nation’s future, and not let a handful of ill informed parties hijack the policy meant for a better future.

Start making tough decisions and sticking to them please. Bitter pills to swallow, for a better Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 8 November 2011, 9:34 pm and is filed under
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Corporate Malaysia has failed

By
Nawawi Mohamad
 | November 09, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

NOV 9 — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was a visionary leader who forcefully guided Malaysia’s development by corporate nationalism to achieve the status of a developed nation by 2020.

He made great achievements based on the benchmarks and milestones but was also hampered with some failures, but still the situation had not been that bad; there was still light at the end of the tunnel and remains in effect to the end of his term in office.

Unfortunately the success story stops here and the derailment began. Abdullah Badawi was not able to fill the shoes of Dr Mahathir. Abdullah Badawi was lost in his own world, without any real grasp of what was going on in the country economically, financially, socially and politically.

He pushed everything to the “fourth floor goons” led by his son-in-law to manage the country.

A classic example of his reply on the RM150 million owed by Osu Sukam to one of the casinos in the UK, whereby just by referring to some newspaper articles Abdullah made a knee-jerk condemnation of the former Sabah chief minister, without considering the political impact and the integrity of the BN government.

Abdullah is neither a real politician nor a leader to lead the nation. He was just a caretaker and a lousy one too.

Dr Mahathir was already furious when Abdullah scrapped the crooked bridge project resulting in the government having to pay roughly RM115 million compensation to the concessionaire and concluded that Abdullah was not only unfit for the post.

Meanwhile, the economy was getting stagnant, yet the cost of everything rose and the government simply could not make ends meet. When Najib Razak took over, he had no choice but to borrow.

The government had borrowed before but this time was out of desperation.

Thus our national debt is now more than RM407 billion (2010 figure). The problem with Najib is that he has too much in his hands. He has his personal scandals, wastages and extravagance, his brothers’ issues, his wife meddling in running the country, her extravagance, and lately, his own son is also in the news pertaining to one timber company.

Everything he proposed and tried to execute, just did not work as planned. The problems are further aggravated by the scandals of Khir Toyo, Sodomy II, Bersih 2.0, MACC deaths, police brutality and incompetence, the deterioration of Umno, the doom of Gerakan, MIC and possibly MCA, the RM407 national debt, and the Auditor-General’s report on the callous government spending in 2010 that ended up in the opening of the Pandora box!

In short, Najib has not been able to focus on the management, development, economy and financial health of the country. I need not write the details here as you can find the information from the recent book by Sahbudin Husin.

We have already been informed of the RM6 billion loan by the EPF to Felda (which has not enough money) and Petronas has to issue bonds for development capital. The next train for another disastrous derailment has already begun with continued borrowing and overspending.

It seems that the Umno/BN will eventually have to beg make ends meet. Corporate Malaysia in going bankrupt.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 9 November 2011, 6:27 pm and is filed under
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Impotent rage

By
Kapil Sethi
 | November 09, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

NOV 9 — So it’s final. No more PPSMI. Over a year of PAGE campaigning, petitioning, protesting and writing letters to the editors have come to naught. As the deputy prime minister remarked, the decision was made by the government in 2009 and it will not bow to the demands of small groups. The only concession is that those already under PPSMI will be allowed to finish their schooling under PPSMI.

So it’s final. No more arguments over amendments to the Employment Act. Three months of the Malaysian Trade Unions Congress (MTUC) campaigning, petitioning and picketing have had no impact on the government. The human resource minister called the picket illegal (November 1, The Malaysian Insider) and insisted “this is a policy issue by the government. If they picket, they are going against the law.”

Both PAGE and MTUC threatened to divert support from Barisan Nasional to the opposition if their demands were not met. The PAGE Facebook protest page garnered approximately 100,000 “Likes” while MTUC has over 800,000 members and counts on the support of 5.7 million workers. Even the Lynas controversy has managed to alienate a substantial portion of Kuantan residents, with no solution offered by the government beyond bare denials.

So it seems either extremely brave or recklessly foolhardy on the part of the ruling coalition to upset such large numbers of voters especially on the eve of a make or break battle in the next general election.

What gives? Beyond the usual politicking by vested groups, lobbyists, nationalists, et cetera, is there an implicit assumption being made about the nature of the Malaysian voter? Does the ruling coalition believe that much like the Auditor-General’s annual report on numerous instances of government mismanagement of finances, come election time all issues are forgotten save one: The safety of the familiar Barisan Nasional over the fear of the untested Pakatan Rakyat?

This belief is premised on a couple of things. One is the lack of access to information of the rural, conservative voter who has been programmed over the decades to give credit to BN for the gradual improvements to her economic status while safeguarding her family from unhealthy modernity.

The other is the fear of the urban minorities of radical political change putting a disparate bunch of parties with considerable ideological differences in power that may put the economic and social stability of the nation at risk.

If so, that may be a very dangerous assumption to make. It ignores the impact of the rising flow of information through alternative media and the ability of the middle class to act as an agent of change. It also implies that for Malaysians, race and religion take precedence over everything else.

When over 60 per cent of the population is connected to the internet, which is seen to be a more credible news source and that news source is primarily concerned with exposing the misdeeds of the parties in power to counter the propaganda of the mainstream press, the impact goes beyond the urban-rural and racial divide. The frustration over the lack of response to such corruption or mismanagement from the authorities enables groups upset with government inaction over different issues to make common cause.

While race and religion are important, bread-and-butter issues will always take precedence. If the future of one’s children or the livelihood of one’s husband is threatened by official apathy and corruption, if every demand is met with a paternalistic “no”, then the conditions are ripe for change, and safety and familiarity begin to look worse than inexperience and naiveté.

While it is true that PAGE and MTUC represent a primarily urban, middle-class audience, they possess extremely strong connections with other segments of the electorate, through either family ties or through business and work.

Misrata and Cairo demonstrated the power of an angry and frustrated urban middle- class to carry the country with them. In Malaysia, that anger is going to have an impact across the country come election time.

IF BN is to turn the tide, it must first begin to follow the fundamental precept that the essence of democracy is compromise. In all three of the issues mentioned above, consultation that leads to an acceptable compromise should be the objective. After all, it is supposed to be a government of “People First.”

For now the rage is impotent. But the election is not far away, and today, issues are not allowed to be forgotten that easily.

________

Kapil is an advertising strategist based in KL, who likes nothing better than to figure out why people behave the way they do. Naturally this forces him to spend most of his time lounging in coffeeshops and bars. He can be reached at
[email protected]

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 9 November 2011, 3:56 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Elections
,
English
,
environment
,
IT
,
Labour
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Towards a modern IT, High Tech, and High Income Malaysia

By Dr Chen Man Hin, DAP life advisor

PPMSI since its launch in 2002 to achieve a modern IT society has not made progress because of lack of purpose and unity. It was the product of the Mahathir dynasty, when PM Mahathir was pushing the idea of Bangsa Malaysia or Vision 2020.

His target of a progressive Malaysia could be achievable if the people were well versed in Mathematics and Science and they could make the country progressive like other high tech countries in Asia, like Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, S Korea and Taiwan. And as English was the language of Science and Maths, so the quickest way was to educate our youths to speak and write in English. Hence his cabinet pushed the policy of PPMSI (teaching and learning maths and science in English). That was in 2002.

The year now is 2011, what are the results? Are the students competent in English and well versed in Maths and Science?

Unemployable graduates, with deplorable English. The results have not been encouraging. It is well known that most of the university graduates are not equipped or trained to work in the commercial and business world. They have no communicating skills and could hardly write a letter in English. The businessmen coined these graduates as ‘unemployable graduates’.

Shocking low ranking in Maths and Science. The TIMS study 2007 showed that Malaysian students who participated in the international Maths and Science ranking showed that they have very low scores.

MALAYSIA

SINGAPORE

HONG KONG

S KOREA

TAIWAN

MATHEMATICS

GRADE 4

0

41 (NO 1)

40

0

24

GRADE 8

2

22

22

22

22

SCIENCE

GRADE 4

0

36

14

0

19

GRADE 8

3

25

10

17

24

The low scores for Malaysia students in an international renowned ranking body like TIMS should not be scoffed. It is very serious and puts the whole aim of 1 Malaysia in jeopardy. Without graduates well educated in English, Maths and Science,  how can Malaysia join the ranks of developed countries like Singapore, Hong Kong or South Korea. The quest for a high income economy will be impossible to achieve  by 2020.

Vital for PPSMI to be promoted and implemented with the greatest urgency. It is imperative for PM Najib Razak to put his weight behind the patriotism of PAGE which is fighting for the rights of hundreds of thousans of parents who want PPSMI for their children studying in our schools so that they can be talented and equipped to build a better high income Malaysia.

Learn from Singapore, a multiracial, multilingual society which chose Englis to be the common uniting language and to become a high income society with a per capita income of US$60,000, whereas the per capita for Malaysia is US$8,500.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 9 November 2011, 4:12 pm and is filed under
Dr. Chen Man Hin
,
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Ministry of Education (or Miseducation)?

By
Angry Parent
 | November 10, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

NOV 10 — Phew! Finally anxious parents get a reprieve (or do they?) with announcement from the DPM that students who started out studying Mathematics and Science in English will be allowed to continue in the language they studied. What remains to be seen will be the implementation of this policy.

Our hearts go out to parents whose children commence Standard One next year — especially as there are many of us, who speak English at home and who want our children to compete in the international arena.

Mismanagement

Malaysian politicians are famous for making grandiose statements with little or no concern about the implementation. Regardless, parents still remain anxious and uncomfortable at the politicisation of education. Our children have become pawns in the hands of these ministers, who for political mileage use education as a bait. And leaders elected by us to be our representatives have played us out.

Parents want to know categorically, how the policy will be implemented in schools. We do hope the minister will ensure that, especially in urban schools, these subjects be taught in English and the option not be left to the discretion of the teacher. We parents had rightly guessed the implementation would be left in the hands of the principals and teachers of the schools.

Now why do we parents find this unacceptable? Because most of the principals and teachers will find the easy way out and with impunity teach Maths and Science in Malay. So where does that leave our children who would be disadvantaged by this flip-flop policy?

We, angry parents, would like this question to be answered by the Ministry of Education (MOE): in what language are the texts for Science and Math for 2012 and what about our children who are in schools that are unable to teach in English?

Some of the children have already received text books in English, and so we ask again of the MOE, will these students be taught in English? What is the time frame to complete the transfer of school, if we wish our children to be in schools that teach these subjects in English? Let us know categorically which schools will be teaching in English and the procedure for transfer.

Is the Ministry of (Mis) Education aware that SPM students who are sitting for exams next week had to return their textbooks to the school before their exams? What kind of system is in place that does not care for the needs of the children?

We do hope that all these issues of mismanagement of the education system will be reflected in the KPIs of the ministers. The bureaucrats in the Ministry of Education should also be hauled up and held accountable.

Many excuses have been used to revert to the teaching of Science and Maths in Malay such as the teachers are unable to teach in English. Why should this be when millions was spent in training the teachers, for software, including teachers’ and student manuals? These subjects have been taught in English for almost six years — enough time for teachers to cope with the changes.

Tuition, syllabus and streaming

This is also a call to take action or ship out all those incompetent and lazy teachers who promote their own tuition classes to students instead of giving their best in class. This has become a racket and a bane to parents. In some countries, it is a policy that teachers cannot give tuition to students from their own schools.

Furthermore, parents of students in national schools are forking out huge sums on tuition and activity books, notwithstanding the petrol costs and time spent in ferrying students to and from tuition, duplicating what should have been taught in school. Shouldn’t the educational needs for students be met in school? The amounts we pay out each month are almost what parents pay to have their children schooled privately!

Our syllabus is not challenging to young minds: we promote rote learning rather than creative thinking. It is baffling why there has to be multiple choice for maths, when 2+2=4 and can never be 22 or anything else! The syllabus for English is, in a nut-shell, students study greetings from Standard One to Form Five, keeping the students on the brink of boredom through their school years.

Oh, I wonder what the reason is for 50 per cent of the Form Four history syllabus being dedicated solely to Islam. After all, Muslim students do study this separately and it will be repetition for them. Furthermore, a small portion of the syllabus dedicated to this beautiful religion would be fine; otherwise it is proselytising?

At primary level, students are barely exposed to the laboratory; yet their Science paper has an entire section devoted to experiments, their observations and conclusions. There is hardly any space for creative writing or intellectual discourse.

The truth is, if we want to compete with the rest of the world and acquire developed status, the level of teaching in schools should be improved to enhance the education standard. The government should have a more inclusive multiracial recruitment policy and a compensation system to reward good teachers. This will automatically raise the level of efficiency and productivity of concerned school-teachers and directly improve the performance of students.

By the way, the system of streaming young children is absolutely ridiculous as it only serves to lower children’s self esteem, with no benchmarks for either the good or the poor students to emulate. It is a form of segregation and should be abolished immediately.

It is also believed that only the best classes get good teachers; then you are giving those children an unfair advantage and that in itself is cheating the other students, totalling eroding their self confidence. After all, the Malaysian education system has not produced any Nobel laureates; so now, concede to the weakness and make the necessary changes!

An education hub?

Malaysia also has a grand plan to become an education hub, and again taxpayers’ money is spent on promoting Malaysia as a destination for higher education. How the heck are we to do this, when our students, even teachers and lecturers, are more proficient in BM than English? Is anyone at the Ministry of Higher Education even thinking?

Would you believe the dismay of an international PhD student who submitted a PhD proposal to the English Department in the University of Malaya and received the recommendations and comments in Bahasa Malaysia! This truly happened and such are the standards that we have come to accept in our country.

Regardless, it all boils down to raising the standards of English all round, which the DPM has promised to do. But we wonder if the minister realises this can only be achieved when a majority of the subjects are taught in English and the teachers begin to speak and write in English. Only then will Malaysia achieve a breakthrough in this realm.

We have lofty goals to achieve, and anyway it looks rather nice for the government to proclaim it wants to become high-income nation and that Malaysia wants to acquire developed status. But what are the plans implemented to achieve these goals?

Can these benchmarks and milestones be achieved without English, the lingua franca of international education, trade and industry, banking and finance and even tourism? Where does the lack of English language proficiency leave us all, if we cannot compete in the global arena? Perhaps on the road to Greece?

It is imperative and incumbent on the government and the Ministry of Education to formulate an acceptable and concrete plan as to how Science and Maths are going to be taught over the next few years. Parents, who are also voters, want to know what is being done to upgrade the education system in Malaysia to ensure our children are not left behind and are able to compete at the international level. No, not all of us can afford international schools; we are not cronies nor are we well paid government bureaucrats who can afford to send out kids to elite schools. So don’t even tell us so.

Seriously, the education system needs to be revamped. A good starting point would be to remove the purview of education from politicians and leave it in the hands of reputable academicians. Our children are not footballs to be kicked around by our ministers of (mis)education! — aliran.com

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 10 November 2011, 10:19 am and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sell One Law, Get Two Free?

By Kee Thuan Chye

Penang Economic Monthly

IS the Internal Security Act (ISA) really going to leave us? In name as well as in spirit? Will its body be laid to rest forever and its soul consigned not to purgatory but to hell, where it will be burned to nothingness and never more be resurrected?

Or will the government of Prime Minister Najib Razak design the two laws proposed as its replacement such that the repressiveness inherent in the ISA will live on, and the ruling regime can use it to its political advantage?

These are the questions on the minds of Malaysians who have at one time or another spoken out against the ISA or campaigned for its abolition over the years. For no law has had such power in shaping aspects of its people’s personality and the socio-political culture they live in than this law that authorises detention without trial.

Even in recent times, you could hear Malaysians in private conversations lowering their voices and looking over their shoulders whenever they spoke about something that seemed slightly “sensitive” – for fear of being overheard and hauled away by some Special Branch officer who might be hiding behind a potted plant.

Has the situation changed since Najib made the announcement on September 15 that the ISA would be repealed?

For now perhaps, because it would look odd if the Government hauled anyone in under any circumstances. But what it will be after March 2012, when the repeal of the Act would have been tabled in Parliament together with the proposal of the two new laws replacing it, it’s hard to predict – unless we have some inkling of the substance of the latter two.

But why are we getting two laws to replace one? That’s been the nagging question and bone of contention. Are we being given a bazaar offer – sell one, get two free?

It looks like one of them could be used for preventive detention, which would probably cover so-called “threats to national security”, and the other for anti-terrorism. If so, these are no different from the terms of the ISA. In which case the fundamental liberties of Malaysians that have been unfairly curbed by the ISA will continue to be curbed.

Will the two new laws give the Home Minister the same absolute powers he enjoys with the ISA? If so, what is there to ensure that he will not brand a political opponent a “terrorist” in order to shut him away? What mechanisms will be built into the two new laws to prevent the abuse of power?

To be sure, since the ISA’s enactment in 1960, close to 11,000 people have been arrested under it. Although its original stated purpose was to deter communism, its brief of acting against anyone believed to be a threat to national security is decidedly broad. Not surprisingly, therefore, detainees have included NGO personnel, student leaders, teachers and even theatre artists. Also a Malay who converted to Christianity, arrested for “disrupting Malay culture by being a Christian”. How does one person’s religious conversion amount to a security threat?

More drastically, in 2002, the then deputy home minister Zainal Abidin Zin even threatened that the law could be used against those who gave a “racial” twist to the new policy of teaching Science and Mathematics in English in schools. This was then prime minister Mahathir Mohamad’s pet policy, so woe betide anyone who tried to oppose it.

That happened at the height of the culture of fear, generated and intensified during Mahathir’s premiership. In fact, the most notorious use of the ISA was under his watch, when Operation Lalang made its big swoop on more than a hundred Malaysians in 1987. Many of them were Opposition politicians and social activists who had spoken out against the Government. Operation Lalang remains a black mark for Malaysian democracy because it displayed how mighty the State could be for having a weapon like the ISA.

Apart from that, the decision on an arrest could sometimes be arbitrary, as we saw in the Tan Hoon Cheng case. The Sin Chew Daily journalist was arrested under the Act in September 2008 for no apparent reason.

Just prior to that, she had written a four-paragraph report of a speech made by Penang Umno leader Ahmad Ismail in which he called Chinese Malaysians “penumpang” (tenants). The remark inflamed the Chinese. It bordered on sedition. But who got arrested instead? Irate Malaysians clamoured to know why. What crime had Tan committed in merely reporting what Ahmad Ismail said?

The then home minister, Syed Hamid Albar, came out to face the music. But instead of providing a rational answer, he came up with the most absurd reason. He said Tan’s detention was meant for her own “protection” – because, he declared, her life was “under threat”.

The next day, loan defaulters were begging to be detained – in order to be protected from Ah Longs seeking blood! No wonder the Government had to release Tan after only a 20-hour detention, making her the shortest-serving detainee in the history of the ISA!

But, seriously, I have to say there has however been no such happy ending for all the other ISA cases, and I can’t recall another blackly comic instance. I recall instead the gloom and severity of watching the eminent journalist A. Samad Ismail ‘confess’ on public television in 1976, three months after his arrest, that he was a communist. After that, he was detained for another four years.

In 1981, he made a second ‘confession’ on television to attest that he had recanted. His deadpan expression and the way he merely mouthed the words without meaning what he said showed his innate resistance to the staged event. He would have known that acting as he did, astute viewers would see through the absurdist drama that was being played out. The words he seemingly read out looked like they were prepared by someone else.

It later became public knowledge that the man who orchestrated Samad’s arrest and subsequent ‘confessions’ was none other than the then home minister, Ghazali Shafie, and that Samad had been coerced into making those appearances. Ghazali’s use of the ISA to consolidate his power reinforced the belief that the law was increasingly being used against political opponents. Mahathir’s was publicly perceived as doing that as well as silencing the citizenry.

The original purpose of deterring communism has long been lost sight of. In any case, communism in Malaysia is virtually dead. On that score, the ISA has gone way past its use-by date. Besides, we have ample provisions in our penal laws that can be upgraded to take care of terrorism. Before Zaid Ibrahim resigned as de facto law minister in 2008, he and his colleagues were already studying ways to address that through amending the Criminal Procedure Code and the Penal Code.

In fact, the idea of having two new laws is suspect. It cannot bode well for Malaysian democracy that in this day and age of increasing demands for civil liberties, our government is considering implementing more controls. Even if it’s in the name of “safeguarding peace and public order”.

Detention without trial cannot be justified, and certainly not for an initial period of 60 days as is the case under the ISA. Even 14 days, the period allowed by detention laws in Australia and the United Kingdom, is too long. The ISA also allows for the detention to be extended to two years at the pleasure of the home minister, renewable after that for an indefinite number of terms. This is inhumane and cannot be allowed any more. How did we allow that to go on for 51 years?

The ISA must go. Detention without trial must go. Everyone must have a right to be proven guilty before he or she is put away. Between now and March 2012, it is not too late for the public to call on the Government to reconsider its proposal to introduce the two new laws. One law is bad enough. Two is doubly bad.

Malaysians have fought hard to get the ISA repealed. Many have risked arrest to demonstrate against it. On August 1, 2009, alone, about 15,000 took to the streets in Kuala Lumpur to call for the law’s repeal, and nearly 600 were arrested. We have come this far to break the culture of fear. We must not regress. We must not let down the people who have struggled for our freedom, and allow the Government to deceive us.

If the Government cannot give us our fundamental right and our fundamental freedom, then it has no right to be our government.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 10 November 2011, 10:04 am and is filed under
ISA
,
Kee Thuan Chye
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why Malaysia is not a member of the Asia Tigers Club of Singapore, Hong Kong, S. Korea and Taipei

By Dr Chen Man Hin, DAP life advisor

Can PM transform Malaysia to become a high income nation in 2016. When he cannot improve the economy to join the Asia tigers club of Singapore, Hong Kong, S. Korea and Taipei?

When became PM in 2009, Najib announced his proposals to transform the economy with his Economic Transformation Program (ETP) by injection of tens of billion ringgits promised largely by government related companies. His predecessor Tun Mahathir also injected billions but the economy scarcely moved and the FDIs did not come in.

But money is not the primary mover of the economy. More importantly it is manpower.

Since 1970, the NEP has been a negative factor to drive the economy. With the NEP the GDP of Malaysia began to fall far behind those of Singapore, Hong Kong, S. Korea and Taiwan. Even now, the NEP has been a major factor in chasing away hundreds of thousands of our skilled manpower overseas, and this has affected the economy. While the four tigers leaped ahead to high income economies, while Malaysia stagnated.

Even today, the NEP continues to disappoint the young men and women who continue to emigrate overseas to seek better opportunities. Statistics show a million of young Malaysians are now overseas, with half of them in Singapore. Largely because of their skills, the Singapore economy has rocketed upwards, and its per capita income is now the highest in Asia.

Because of the NEP, our youths are not properly educated. Science and Maths are the foundation stones to train our youths in schools and universities to be engineers, scientists  and research workers to propel our society into the IT era. Proficiency in English is the key to Science and Maths. And yet the ministry is not keen to keep PPSMI policy to teach our students to be conversant with English.

It is the basic thing to do, to use English to teach science and maths in schools and universities, so that the country can be an IT economy, which translates to a high income economy.

The World Bank has produced a paper criticising the NEP as the cause for the deterioration of academic standards of Malaysian universities. It is a sad thing to report that world renowned ranking organisations have not ranked our universities as world class like National University of Singapore and Hong Kong University. As a matter of fact, not one university in Malaysia is ranked as world class.

So much for PM Najib boast that our country will be 1 Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 10 November 2011, 10:50 am and is filed under
Dr. Chen Man Hin
,
Economics
,
Education
,
Najib Razak
,
NEP
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.