Dissecting the ETP Annual Report (Part 1) — Grade A+ for obfuscation!

— Ong Kian Ming and Teh Chi-Chang

The Malaysian Insider

May 31, 2012

MAY 31 — Top marks for befuddling even highly-qualified Malaysians. PEMANDU released its annual report last month to an expected chorus of praise. An economist at a leading financial institution gushed that the ETP deserves an “A” for transformation. Our analysis however, finds that pretentious words and slick presentations, protestations of diligence and toil and selective representation of data obscure the true picture.

Real GNI grew only 4.7 per cent last year. This is well below the 6 per cent per year growth rate called upon for the duration of the ETP. Nominal GNI growth, which includes inflation, was 12.3 per cent. But inflation does nothing for our real quality of life, and it is only because inflation was higher than expected that the nominal GNI growth rate hit double-digits.

PEMANDU’s GNI “target” is questionable. PEMANDU claims it has outperformed as GNI last year exceeded its RM797 billion target. Strangely enough, this “target” was declared only after the actual data was already out. Furthermore, the target was exceptionally low. As far back as October 2010, the Ministry of Finance was already projecting RM811 billion GNI. It is easy to exceed targets when they are low, and only declared after the fact. No real value is added, though.

Scoring is easy when you can shift the goalposts. The subterfuge by PEMANDU includes attempting to steal credit for 2010 economic growth, conflating GDP with GNI and using exchange rate movements to amplify performance. And these are just on the subject of headline economic performance. We shall uncover more ruses as we delve into the execution details. Stay tuned!

PEMANDU’s RM797 billion nominal GNI “target” for 2011 was very low, and only declared in 2012, after the actual data was out!

Real GNI growth was just 4.7 per cent. Nominal growth was higher because inflation was much higher than expected.

The ETP focuses on GNI, but CEO Datuk Seri Idris Jala misdirected Malaysians by citing the stronger GDP numbers.

Let’s be honest. Celebrate successes. But also admit mistakes and share the learning experience so we can all transform.

Data integrity has reached abysmal depths

PEMANDU claimed an achievement of astounding performance in the inaugural Annual Report of the Economic Transformation Program (ETP) released last month. Each National Key Economic Area (NKEA) achieved marks ranging from 65 per cent to a flabbergasting 170 per cent, depending on which of 3 self-defined criteria is applied.

The Annual Report claims the ETP met or exceeded nearly all of the targets outlined in the ETP Roadmap Report released in October 2010. These achievements include:

Surpassing its income and private investment targets for 2011:

RM830 billion GNI (Gross National Income) vs RM797 billion target;

RM94 billion private investment vs RM83 billion target;

72 out of the 131 EPPs (Entry Point Projects) taking off;

EPP investments totalling RM179 billion, creating RM130 billion of GNI and nearly 314,000 new jobs.

The “achievements” were impressive enough for analysts at the likes of financial institutions such as CIMB Group to give it an “A for transformation”. These analysts took PEMANDU at face value.

Our analysis concludes that PEMANDU does deserve an A+ indeed, but for obfuscation. Data integrity and transparency have reached abysmal depths as far as the ETP is concerned. As we have seen all too often with PEMANDU and the ETP, the true picture is obscured behind pretentious words and slick presentations, protestations of diligence and toil and selective representation of data, sometimes bordering on misrepresentation.

Read on for the foundations underpinning our strong words.

PEMANDU exceeded its GNI “target” but delivered nothing

The ETP continues to be plagued by data integrity problems which cast doubt on the self-proclaimed excellent performance. The first and most major issue is PEMANDU claiming credit for exceeding performance benchmarks which are declared only after the event:

Prior to this Annual Report, PEMANDU had never explicitly stated that the ETP had a 2011 nominal GNI target;

However, after the Ministry of Finance released the national income statistics showing RM830 billion of GNI, PEMANDU claimed that the RM797 billion GNI targeted by the ETP had been exceeded;

Where did this RM797 billion target come from? It was not stated in the ETP Roadmap that launched it all in October 2010. Nor did PEMANDU mention it in its numerous communiqués and updates last year.

Furthermore, the RM797 billion GNI “target” that PEMANDU claimed it exceeded for 2011 is exceptionally low:

● The Ministry of Finance (MoF) as far back as October 2010 had already projected RM811 billion GNI for 2011;

● The MoF’s projection was equivalent to 9.6 per cent nominal growth. PEMANDU’s “target” was equivalent to just 7.8 per cent nominal growth from 2010. This is lower than PEMANDU’s average 8.8 per cent annual growth rate target stated in the ETP Roadmap Report.

PEMANDU might have exceeded its “target”. But what value did it deliver? The MoF was already projecting GNI higher than PEMANDU’s claim of RM797 billion “target”, even without the benefit of the ETP!

And as we have highlighted, PEMANDU’s so-called “target” is underwhelming. Taken at face value, PEMANDU is dragging down the Malaysian economy instead of transforming it. How else would you explain PEMANDU’s target for national income (GNI) being smaller than the forecast made by the MoF?

In response to an article recently published by Ong Kian Ming, PEMANDU senior analyst Marc Fong wrote the following on the methodology employed to calculate the GNI target:

“The ETP’s true north has and will continue to be US$15,000 GNI per capita in 2020. The aggregate national GNI is the numerator but denominator is total population. In order to establish a yardstick by which we measure ourselves, we adopted a linear approach to calculating the GNI target that would indicate we were on the right path.”

In that paper, Kian Ming questioned the basis for PEMANDU’s RM797 billion GNI “target” for 2011 and highlighted that it called for just 7.8 per cent growth, whereas the ETP Roadmap Report targets 8.8 per cent growth per year. Marc Fong’s reply fails to shed any light. Using a “linear approach”, GNI has to increase by RM78 billion every year under the ETP to reach the “true north” target. On this basis, the GNI target for 2011 should have been RM817 billion, and not RM797 billion. PEMANDU’s figures just do not compute.

In our view, this is yet another demonstration of PEMANDU’s preference for obfuscation over clarification. A simple answer with numbers would have sufficed. Instead verbose language and tortuous arguments are employed to cloak its methodologies and data. It is easy to score when you can shift the goalposts

Scoring is easy when the goalposts can be moved to your advantage. And PEMANDU does move the goalposts to make itself look good. Sometimes the shift is obvious. At other times, it is insidious.

A particularly sly example can be found in the very first “Transformation Blues” column by PEMANDU CEO Senator Datuk Seri Idris Jala. He wrote: “… our GDP grew by 7.2 per cent in 2010 and 5.1 per cent in 2011 and that’s an average of 6.2 per cent; we are meeting our Economic Transformation Program (ETP) target.” That statement contains two counts of serious intellectual dishonesty:

1. Firstly, the ETP was launched only in late October 2010, which means that PEMANDU cannot possibly take credit for the 7.2 per cent economic growth in 2010, which was actually relatively high because it bounced off the low base of a recession year in 2009. So the focus really should have been just on 2011, where real GDP grew by just 5.1 per cent;

2. Secondly, why did the good Datuk Seri talk about GDP (Gross Domestic Product) when the ETP focuses on GNI growth, not GDP. This misdirection is particularly devious given that PEMANDU just two weeks earlier in response to a REFSA critique said that “comparing GDP to GNI is incorrect” since “this is comparing apples and oranges, and this begs the question as to why REFSA is choosing to compare two different measures”.

This wilful obfuscation between GDP (Gross Domestic Product) instead of GNI (Gross National Income) hides the fact that real GNI growth in 2010 and 2011 was just 3.9 per cent and 4.7 per cent respectively — which is far below the 6 per cent real GNI growth rate targeted by the ETP.

And why are the goalposts in American dollars?

Idris Jala, in his Transformation Blues column on May 7, said: “In 2010, our GNI per capita was US$8,126 and this rose to US$9,508, a 17 per cent increase in 2011. We are well on track to reach our high-income target by 2020.”

Ordinary Malaysians live and work and spend their money mostly in Malaysia and in our domestic currency, the ringgit. A jump in our GNI per capita because the US$ weakens against the ringgit would not have a direct impact on the quality of life of most Malaysians. For example, let us say GNI per capita today is RM24,000, or US$8,100 based on an exchange rate of RM3.00:US$1. If the US$ were to depreciate to, say, RM2.80:US$1, our GNI per capita would increase to US$8,571 even though it remains unchanged in ringgit.

The weaker US$ may help those who go abroad for their holidays, and may result in cheaper imported goods but those are big “ifs”. The value of the US$ hinges on many factors, most of which are beyond the control of PEMANDU. For example, a US-specific economic issue might result in the US$ weakening against most major currencies. If that were to happen, we might be richer in US$ terms, but not when compared to other currencies such as the euro, yen and Australian dollar because they all also appreciated in tandem.

Which makes us wonder why Datuk Seri Idris chose to express the changes in our GNI per capita in US dollars instead of in ringgit terms. It is surely just coincidence that, measured in ringgit, the performance is a lot less impressive. In ringgit, GNI per capita increased by just 11.2 per cent in 2011.

And by the way, the goalposts are not real

Detractors might accuse us of carping — after all, 11.2 per cent might be lower than 17 per cent, but it is still a double-digit growth rate GNI per capita growth rate. Furthermore, total nominal GNI grew by 12.3 per cent, which at first glance, is far higher than the 6 per cent growth rate targeted by the ETP.

This brings us to another very crucial point — the difference between nominal income and real income. Nominal GNI growth of 12.3 per cent includes inflation. Real GNI growth was only 4.7 per cent. This is well below the ETP’s target of 6 per cent.

As we have pointed out, it is real income that matters. For example, if your nominal income goes up by 10 per cent, but inflation makes your cup of kopi-O and all the other things you buy 15 per cent more expensive, you are actually worse off!

It’s time for an honest referee to step in

PEMANDU asserts that it is exceeding the “transformative” and “ambitious” targets set by the ETP. The mainstream media goes along with the charade. That is not surprising. However, it is disconcerting that professional analysts and economists have also chosen to bury their heads in the sand and take PEMANDU’s assertions at face value. The lack of due diligence is disappointing.

We are therefore extending our DEEDS framework to evaluate the ETP Annual Report and PEMANDU’s declarations of outperformance. In this Focus Paper, we focused on Data Integrity, starting with PEMANDU’s impact on national income (GNI). As we have seen:

1. The ETP has FAILED when measured by real GNI growth. Real GNI grew by just 4.7 per cent in 2011, compared to the 6 per cent per year target cited in the ETP Roadmap Report;

2. PEMANDU is GUILTY of obfuscation. CEO Datuk Seri Idris spotlighted GDP numbers which obscure the fact that PEMANDU had failed to deliver on GNI. This is especially insidious as just a fortnight before, PEMANDU had censured its critics for apparently not understanding the difference between GDP and GNI;

3. PEMANDU steals credit when none is due. Datuk Seri Idris cited 2010 economic numbers as part of his achievements, but the ETP Roadmap Report was published only in October 2010;

4. PEMANDU is DISCONNECTED from everyday reality in Malaysia. CEO Datuk Seri Idris sometimes chooses to measure his performance in American dollars. But it is ringgit that is important to ordinary Malaysians;

5. PEMANDU sets LOW TARGETS that result in no value being added when they are exceeded:

a) Its claim of RM797 billion “target” for 2011 GNI was lower than the MoF forecast of RM811 billion. Why was PEMANDU, which is supposed to add value, forecasting a number lower than the MoF?

b) The professed RM797 billion GNI target for 2011 is on very shaky foundations. This “target” was only publicised after the GNI data was released by the MoF. Furthermore, it is very low, calling for just 7.8 per cent growth, well below the average 8.8 per cent targeted in the ETP Roadmap Report.

In subsequent Focus Papers in this series, we shall cover Execution, Enterprise, Diversity and Socio-Economic Impact. We shall delve deeper into the investments numbers and status of EPPs (Entry Point Projects) and show more evidence of how PEMANDU and its CEO Datuk Seri Idris Jala selectively choose figures and data to show targets being reached but fail to acknowledge that other targets have not been reached.

This is not a fault-finding exercise. It is crucial that PEMANDU, which is tasked with transforming the Malaysian economy, provides accurate information and works from solid foundations:

1. Firstly, if PEMANDU gets even the headline GNI numbers wrong or is obfuscating these numbers, it makes one wonder whether other statistics touted, which are much more opaque, such as the achievements of each individual EPP, can be trusted. And if we don’t even know where we are, how can we plan for the future?

2. Secondly, life is not a bed of roses. Things don’t always go according to plan, and yet, based on the ETP Annual Report, almost everything is hunky dory. Nothing is said about stalled or abandoned projects. Successes should be celebrated, but failures and missteps must be acknowledged and remedial action taken.  Learning from our mistakes will help us grow faster.

As we will show later in this series, not everything is as rosy as the picture painted by PEMANDU and the ETP Annual Report.

About this series and DEEDS

Let’s evaluate PEMANDU on its DEEDS, published on January 25, 2012, introduced DEEDS and a series assessing PEMANDU and the ETP on the goals, plans and targets stated in the ETP Roadmap document. Doing so facilitates constructive discourse as it uses the framework which PEMANDU has chosen to work within. In keeping with the spirit of the alphabet soup of NKEAs, NKRAs, SRIs, EPPs, and GNI surrounding the entire GTP, we evaluated PEMANDU and the ETP on its DEEDS – Data transparency, Execution, Enterprise, Diversity and Socio-Economic Impact. The 8 Focus Papers in this series, together with related infographics and a Powerpoint presentation can be found at www.refsa.org.

Note on PEMANDU’s response

We wrote to PEMANDU seeking clarification on the methodology and assumptions used to calculate their claimed GNI target.  The only response has been Marc Fong’s article referred to herein. — REFSA (Research for Social Advancement)

* Dr Ong Kian Ming holds a PhD in Political Science from Duke University and Economics degrees from the University of Cambridge and the London School of Economics. He is attached to UCSI University, which has been named as the project owner of two Entry Point Projects (EPPs). To avoid any potential conflict of interest, he will not make references to or analyse these two EPPs. He can be reached at
[email protected]
.

* REFSA (Research for Social Advancement) executive director Teh Chi-Chang holds a first class degree in Accounting & Financial Analysis from the University of Warwick, an MBA from the University of Cambridge and the CFA (Chartered Financial Analyst) charter. Prior to joining REFSA, he headed highly-regarded investment research teams covering Malaysia, and was himself highly-ranked as an analyst. He can be reached at
[email protected]
.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 31 May 2012, 11:08 pm and is filed under
ETP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is Malaysia under rule of law or law of jungle where Radio Free Sarawak presenter Peter John Jaban can disappear for 6 hours after arrival in Miri without anyone in authority claiming knowledge or responsibility?

Is Malaysia under the rule of law or the law of jungle where Radio Free Sarawak presenter Peter John Jaban can disappear for six hours after arrival in Miri this morning without anyone in authority claiming knowledge or responsibility?

I have just spoken to Jaban’s lawyer, Alan Ling, the DAP Piasau State Assemblyman in Miri, and he confirmed that he is completely in the dark as what  to has happened to Jaban some six hours after he met him at the Miri Airport on his arrival from Kota Kinabalu.

Alan had just spoken to the Miri police less than an hour ago and he  was again told that the Miri  police had no instruction or was not in anyway involved in Jaban’s arrest or disappearance.

Jaban had arrived in Miri  from Kota Kinabalu in an Air Asia flight at about 10.45 am and as the Miri police had assured Alan that there was no instruction for Jaban’s arrest, Jaban had left the airport for Miri town with the Miri PKR chairman Dr. Michael Teo.

On their way to town, three men in a Proton car stopped Teo and Jaban, and Jaban was taken away.

Six hours have passed and nobody knows what has happened to Jaban or he is, safe or otherwise – and whether the three men who took Jaban away were from the police specially dispatched to Miri to apprehend Jaban, and if so, why the Miri police have been kept completely in the dark.

Malaysia is under an international microscope in the government handling of the Jaban case as  it will become an international scandal of the first magnitude if  a person could just disappear into thin air for six hours after arrival at the Miri airport this morning.

The Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein and the Inspector-

General of Police, Tan Sri Omar Ismail must be reminded that they are living not only in the era of information technology where information travels with the speed of light but also of global and not just national accountability.

Malaysians and the world expect them to immediately throw light on the whereabouts of Jaban as six hours are definitely enough  time for the police authorities to come out with clear statement of Jaban’s whereabouts or an open admission that lawlessness in Malaysia have reached a new level where  three persons completely uninvolved with the police or the government have abducted Jaban in broad daylight in Miri in  Malaysia!

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 31 May 2012, 4:33 pm and is filed under
Law & Order
,
Police
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MACC’s cow sense

— The Malaysian Insider

May 31, 2012

MAY 31 — Here’s a question for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). Who accused Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil of being involved in the process of awarding the RM250 million government soft loan to the National Feedlot Centre (NFC) operated by her family?

Short answer, no one. Long answer, not one person ever did.

So, clearing the Wanita Umno chief of any involvement in the scandal is not even news because she wasn’t accused of that. And if MACC and Shahrizat are crowing about this, they have as much cow sense as the cattle in the Gemas farm.

Let’s be clear why Shahrizat’s name has been dragged into this and the government had to drop her from the Cabinet by not extending her tenure as senator.

Her family is accused of abusing public funds meant for a cattle-rearing project for their own shopping spree of luxury properties in Malaysia and abroad. They had admitted as much, saying the funds were being put to some use while waiting for the Ministry of Agriculture and Agro-based Industries to do its part of the deal.

Of course, it begs the question whether public funds meant for one project can be used in other ways while waiting for something else to happen. The short answer, no. The long answer, of course not.

MACC operations evaluation panel (PPO) chairman Tan Sri Dr Hadenan Abdul Jalil was stating the obvious today when he said that investigations into Shahrizat’s involvement in NFC were now closed.

“We have found she was not involved in the process of awarding the loan,” Hadenan told reporters at a press conference today.

“The decision to award the contract to the company and to award the loan does not involve her,” he added.

Malaysians are just outraged that a company with no experience in cattle farming got the money and instead of working on the project, it used the funds for something else. Because there are farmers out there in Malaysia who could use a bit of that money for their own cattle farms.

Because there are Malaysians out there who get their loan applications rejected even if it is not a government soft loan.

Because it looked like the financial records of the company showed Shahrizat’s family was living the high life from the company that was funded by public money. Perhaps she might have benefitted? We don’t know. Because the MACC didn’t look into that.

They just investigated if she had a role in approving the loan. Why would she be involved? Was she in the particular ministry? Was she in the treasury? Did the matter even come up at any Cabinet meeting where she attended?

Why is the MACC pulling wool over our eyes? Why are they even investigating this aspect which is not even a complaint from anyone?

Why is the MACC spending public funds to get its officers to investigate a non-story?

Why do they have cow sense instead of common sense?

What is the MACC supposed to do? Will they ever do it?

Today’s conclusion by the MACC just shows how little transformation has happened since the anti-graft agency was upgraded into a commission. They should have been a lot smarter than they revealed themselves to be today.

Is there a wonder that people have little faith in the MACC?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 31 May 2012, 11:21 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Good Governance
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PEMANDU hiding ETP failure, say critics

By Shannon Teoh

The Malaysian Insider

May 31, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, May 31 — Putrajaya’s efficiency unit is “shifting the goalposts” to hide its failure to transform the economy since launching its ambitious Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) in October 2010, says the Research for Social Advancement (REFSA) think-tank.

The opposition-linked think-tank, which has published a series of critiques on the ETP that aims to double per capita income by 2020, said in a focus paper released today that the Performance Management and Delivery Unit’s (PEMANDU) gross national income (GNI) targets were lower than those set by the government.

REFSA noted that after the Finance Ministry (MoF) released the national income figure of RM830 billion for 2011, PEMANDU claimed the RM797 billion target had been exceeded. The unit under the Prime Minister’s Office is tasked with executing various transformation plans,

“Where did this RM797 billion target come from? It was not stated in the ETP Roadmap launched in Oct 2010. The MoF had already projected RM811 billion GNI for 2011, before the ETP Roadmap was launched.

“PEMANDU’s so-called ‘target’ is underwhelming. Taken at face value, PEMANDU is dragging down the Malaysian economy instead of transforming it. How else would you explain PEMANDU’s target for GNI being smaller than the forecast made by the MoF?,” REFSA said.

It added that while nominal GNI growth hit 12.3 per cent in 2011, this was due to the 7.6 per cent hike in prices under its “GNI deflator” which incorporates all goods instead of a basket of goods which includes price-controlled items.

“The ETP has failed when measured by real GNI growth. Real GNI grew by just 4.7 per cent in 2011 compared to the six per cent per year target cited in the ETP Roadmap Report,” it said.

The paper, authored by political analyst Ong Kian Ming and Teh Chi Chang, who was previously economic adviser to the DAP, added that PEMANDU’s target was equivalent to just 7.8 per cent nominal growth, lower than its own 8.8 per cent average annual growth target to achieve high-income status.

“PEMANDU might have exceeded its ‘target’ but what value did it deliver? The MoF was already projecting GNI higher than PEMANDU’s… even without the benefit of the ETP,” they wrote.

They also accused PEMANDU chief executive Datuk Seri Idris Jala of “intellectual dishonesty” by taking credit for the 7.2 per cent gross domestic product growth in 2010.

“PEMANDU steals credit when none is due. Idris cited 2010 economic numbers as part of his achievements but the ETP was launched only in late October 2010,” said the paper, referring to the minister in the Prime Minister’s Department.

PEMANDU has previously insisted that the ETP was developed accurately despite assertions by the think-tank that the government agency’s figures do not add up.

“We stand by the fact that the ETP Roadmap was developed with thought and input from a wide base of expertise and as the intention is to make Malaysia globally competitive, international benchmarks were used,” it said in a blog posting in February.

The unit was set up after Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak took office in April 2009. On Monday, he announced 21 new projects worth over RM20 billion under the ETP, that was expected to boost the GNI by RM4.59 billion in 2020 and create 39,918 jobs.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 31 May 2012, 8:56 am and is filed under
ETP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Hishammuddin should give personal attention to escalating cases of political thuggery and violence like the vicious attacks on Ganapathirao and Papparaidu instead of propaganda concerns like official video compilation on Bersih 3.0

As Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussin should give personal attention to escalating cases of political thuggery and violence in the country  like the vicious attacks on DAP Selangor State Committee member V. Ganapathirao and his brother Papparaidu in Klang on Wednesday night instead of propaganda concerns like the official video compilation on Bersih 3.0.

Yesterday, Hishammuddin said that a video compilation, containing footage of what transpired during the Bersih 3.0 rally last April 28, would be ready within two days and would be uploaded on the ministry’s website once it was ready.

He said it would contain “the good, bad and ugly” visuals received from many parties throughout the rally.

Would the official video compilation on the Home Ministry website contain all the available “ugly” videos  of all the cases of brutality and violence which happened on Bersih 3.0, regardless of whether the victims were police personnel, media representatives or peaceful protestors or would it only be a very selective compilation as the latest in the official campaign of vilification and demonization of Bersih 3.0?

Malaysians are  very wary of this official campaign of demonization of Bersih 3.0,  both over government television channels and the Internet in the past month, completely ignoring the fact that Bersih 3.0 was a great historic awakening of a quarter of a million  Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, class, region, age or gender, gathering peacefully for a common national cause but which was marred by incidents of brutality and violence involving a small number of police personnel and peaceful protestors.

Why is Hishammuddin giving top priority to this video compilation of what transpired during Bersih 3.0, when these videos should be furnished to the Suhakam inquiry into Bersih 3.0 to establish what actually happened on April 28?

Or could it be that Hishammuddin does not have absolute confidence in the Hanif “independent advisory panel” that he has decided unilaterally to upload  on the Home Ministry website his  video compilation of what transpired on Bersih 3.0 instead of submitting them to the Hanif panel?

Be that as it may, I call on Hishammuddin to act responsibly as Home Minister in two regards:

Firstly, to accede to legitimate public demands for the dissolution of the Hanif inquiry panel and government and police giving fully support to the Suhakam inquiry; and the submission of the video compilation to the Suhakam inquiry; and

Secondly, to give personal attention to escalating cases of political thuggery and violence in the country  like the vicious attacks on Ganapathirao and Papparaidu in Klang on Wednesday night.

It is clear that the attack on the two was politically motivated, related to their successful organization and holding of the Indraf 2.0 rally in Brickfields in Kuala Lumpur on Sunday.

Ganapathirao suffered nasal bone fracture, swollen jaw and several bruises while Pappparaidu had more serious injuries, with broken right arm and shoulder dislocated.

The escalation of the political culture of aggression, thuggery and violence in recent weeks, with Pakatan Rakyat figures and functions as the targets, must be deplored and condemned in the strongest possible terms – not only by the Pakatan Rakyat but also by the Prime Minister, Cabinet Ministers and all Barisan Nasional leaders.

I had suggested that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak should convene an all-party conference to end the escalating political culture of aggression, thuggery and violence to uphold the peaceful, democratic and constitutional political process in the country.

DAP and Pakatan Rakyat are prepared to play our role to end this political culture of aggression, thuggery and violence.

What is the response of the Prime Minister, the Home Minister, UMNO and Barisan Nasional leaders to this overture?

Or do they want to see the further escalation of the political culture of aggression, thuggery and violence in Malaysia?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 1 June 2012, 3:06 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Elections
,
Hishammuddin
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MACC must break its silence on the corruption-cum-treason case of selling Navy secrets to foreigners in connection with the purchase of the Scorpene submarines

Yesterday, public confidence in the professionalism, independence, impartiality and  integrity of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) reached a new low 41 months after it was elevated from its former form as Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) with greatly expanded powers, budget and staffing.

Members of Parliament and Malaysians were promised when the MACC Bill was debated in Parliament in December 2008 that the MACC was going to become another ICAC (Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption) respected world-wide for its uncompromising and no-nonsense commitment against corruption without fear or favour for position, status or influence.

Instead, MACC continues to be a standing joke as it has not been able to

to shake off its early image as a tool of the Barisan Nasional to hound and persecute Pakatan Rakyat leaders and establish its reputation as a fearless, uncompromising and dedicated graft-fighter, whether against ikan bilis or ikan yu.

MACC harvested many media headlines yesterday, including:

“MACC clears Shahrizat of NFC contract, loan award”;

“Anti-graft panel wants Azmin probe re-opened”;
 and

“Probes against Taib, Musa yet to be resolved”.

But these  headlines has further  reinforced public perception and conviction that the MACC is making no progress whatsoever towards becoming another ICAC but just a more expensive and bloated ACA.

For 1996, Parliament approved a budget of RM29.4 million for ACA and that was the year when Malaysia was ranked No. 26  in the Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI) with  the highest CPI score of 5.32 in the past 17 years.

For 2011, Parliament approved RM 202.2 million for MACC, about seven times the budget for ACA in 1996, but Malaysia’s TI CPI  ranking plummeted  to No. 60 out of 183 countries with a lowest-ever CPI score  of 4.3 out of 10 in the past 17 years.

By coincidence rather than by design, the public image of MACC as an impotent and irrelevant body to deal with VIP and high-profile corruption cases was brought into sharp focus not only by the harvest of MACC headlines yesterday but also by the revelation in Bangkok by French lawyer Joseph Breham, counsel for human rights NGO Suaram in its corruption case against Paris-owned shipbuilder DCNS that the company had paid 36 million euro (RM142 million) for a secret document by the Malaysian Navy on an evaluation for the order of the Scorpene-class submarine.

The selling of top secret document from the Royal Malaysian Navy is an act of treason and national betrayal. It is also a despicable case of corruption.

Malaysians are entitled to know why the MACC, including its Operations Evaluation Panel, are totally unconcerned and unmoved by such heinous crimes of “grand  corruption” when they have so much time to be pawn and catspaw of Barisan Nasional to harass and persecute Pakatan Rakyat leaders – as in the infamous case causing the death of Teoh Beng Hock in July 2009, the harassment of Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim as well as the disgraceful role of MACC in the undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional toppling of the Pakatan Rakyat Perak State Government in 2009.

MACC must break its silence on the corruption-cum-treason case of selling Navy secrets to foreigners in connection with the purchase of the Scorpene submarines.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 1 June 2012, 12:36 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Defence
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Main challenges for a PR government

– Ong Kian Ming

The Malaysian Insider

Jun 01, 2012

JUNE 1 — What happens in the unlikely event that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) wins and maintains control of the federal government after the 13th general election? This is a question which few people have tried to address systematically. In this article, I want to highlight what I think will be the five main challenges facing a PR federal government as a way to contextualise the policy options which such a government will have to address.

I have summarised these five main challenges into five “P”s: (i) Dealing with the “Past” (ii) Distributing “Power” between the federal and state governments (iii) Coming up with a new set of “Plans” in the economic, political and social arenas (iv) Focusing on a smaller number of “Priorities” which can be delivered within 100 days and one year and finally (v) Finding a set of “Procedures” to deal with disagreements within the PR coalition.

(i) Past

Having been in power for 55 years, there are bound to be a whole list of “legacy” issues which a new government has to figure out how to deal with. It would not be practical for a new federal government to conduct a massive witch hunt to weed out all those who have paid bribes to the previous government to obtain contracts, to find evidence to convict all BN politicians who have received bribes or have amassed wealth beyond their means or to sack all civil servants who have been complicit in corrupt dealings involving the previous government. But at the same time, it makes sense for a PR government to outline a clear set of rules with regard to how it will, for example, deal with dubious contracts which the government has signed with private companies. This is important because there is a great temptation for PR to blame the previous BN government for many of the problems that it will face when it is governing. Instead of blaming BN in an ad-hoc manner throughout its first term in government, it would be better for PR to outline a place to clear out the skeletons in the cupboard early in its tenure in power.

PR has already given some indication as to the contracts it will attempt to cancel or renegotiate when it comes to power, namely the contracts with toll operators and independent power producers. There are bound to be many other smaller contracts which are potentially disadvantageous to the government which could be renegotiated or cancelled. The criteria for contract renegotiation or cancellation need to be spelled out as soon as possible as a way of assuring the markets and the many companies which have large contracts with the government.

Similarly, PR needs to figure out the extent to which it wants to change the government procurements process. It will be a tricky balancing act since many of the current contractors have well established relationships with Umno who are also Malay entrepreneurs who will question PR’s commitment to protecting Malay entrepreneurship if they are cut off from these government contracts. At the same time, this also presents an opportunity to introduce open tender processes that could potentially save the government billions of ringgit in expenditure.

More than important than mere contracts is the fate of those who wrongly benefited from the awarding of these contracts and other government-related concessions and favours. To what extent will a PR government go after the likes of Tajudin Ramli, those involved in PKFZ, NFC and Scorpene submarine scandals? Will a PR government try to recover as much revenue as possible and will it try to convict the individuals involved in these scandals as well?

Similar questions surround the fate of BN politicians who may have amassed ill-gotten gains through their government positions. Will PR go after the ill-gotten gains of the individuals in question or will it also go after the individuals in question? Is there a cut-off mark under which some cases may not be investigated?

Here, it may be useful to establish an equivalent of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee established in South Africa after the abolishment of apartheid. In exchange for amnesty, politicians, civil servants and even businessmen who have amassed ill-gotten gains can use this platform to “confess” their past wrongdoing and return a percentage of their wealth to the taxpayer. Similar actions can be taken by individuals who want to blow the whistle on themselves and admit to past wrongdoing, not just in terms of financial gain but also in terms of other past abuses of power including granting citizenship to foreigners to allow them to vote, wrongfully jailing innocent victims, beating up public protestors, just to name a few.

This may be a cathartic experience for the nation for past mistakes to be revealed and for the nation to move on and firmly establish itself as a democratic nation with regular alternations in power. Question is, will a PR government subject itself to the same levels of scrutiny, including admission of past mistakes among those in PR who were formerly high ranking politicians in the BN government?

(ii) Power

The second major challenge to a PR government is in the re-allocation of power between the federal government and the states. Right now, the PR state governments in Kelantan, Kedah, Penang and Selangor say that their hands are tied because of the lack of funding and co-operation from the federal government on key issues including the consolidation of water assets and pricing, the consolidation of wage management, the responsibility for public transportation and road maintenance and the proper allocation of federal funding including the oil royalties paid to Kelantan, Terengganu, Sabah and Sarawak.

With a PR government at the federal level, such excuses will no longer be valid. A PR federal government will have to pick the low hanging fruit in terms of distributing power and funds back to the states in areas which are clearly defined to be under state jurisdiction. This may not be as easy as it sounds. Even increasing the oil royalty from 5 per cent to 20 per cent will entail a redistribution of as much as RM10 billion from the federal government to the states. Hard decisions will have to be made with regard to where some of these cuts have to be made at the federal level.

Other issues concerning decentralisation of power from the federal to the state governments, a cornerstone of PR’s promises both in the Buku Jingga (Orange Book) and more recently in the Tawaran Jingga (Orange Offer), will require achieving an internal consensus within PR. The DAP will want to push for the restoration of local council elections, something which PAS and PKR seem lukewarm about. PAS will want to push for the implementation of hudud, especially in the states which it controls, especially Kelantan. Needless to say, the DAP will object to this vehemently.

A PR federal government would also be under some pressure to apply some of these decentralisation measures consistently among the states, including those governed by the BN. For example, it would be inconsistent for the BN to give an increased share of oil royalties to Kelantan but not to the (likely) BN governed states of Terengganu, Sarawak and Sabah. Nor would it be consistent for PR to promise to pass this money back to these states on the condition that voters in these states vote in PR state governments.

It actually makes long-term sense for a PR federal government to decentralise as much as is economically and politically plausible as an insurance policy in the likelihood that it loses control of the federal government in the future. Having greater democracy and decentralised power means that the states and local authorities which PR still controls can have more independence and, hopefully, be more effective as well.

(iii) Plans

While one can question their effectiveness, there is less doubt that Prime Minister Najib Razak has put in place a comprehensive transformation plans to address various shortcomings in the political, economic and social arenas. Most politically aware Malaysians are already familiar with the alphabet soup which is associated with Najib’s transformation programmes — 1 Malaysia, ETP, GTP, NEM, PTP — even if they are unsure about the achievements of these programmes.

PR is not likely to follow in Najib’s footsteps in designing a similar “transformation” programme but it will still need to come up with concrete and well thought out plans of its own in order to shape the country’s political, economic and social agenda according to the vision and philosophy of PR and its leaders.

PR is better placed in some areas to deliver substantive positive change compared to the BN. It would be relatively easy for PR to deliver on promises of reform in terms of political rights and civil liberties by abolishing any laws which allow for detention without trial such as the Security Offences Special Measures Act (SOSMA), abolish the need to have a permit to print a newspaper and to allow political parties to have a presence in university campuses, just to name a few. But PR would also have to resist the temptation of using their power in order to intimidate and threaten the mainstream media newspapers and television which are owned or closely associated with BN parties. Similarly, it also needs to resist the temptation of using RTM1 and 2 as a government mouthpiece.

PR can also deliver significant institutional reform such as making the Election Commission (EC) and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) independent and allowing them to carry out their jobs without political interference. It would also have to tackle the tricky task of reforming the police force including finding new roles for existing Special Branch officers, assuming that their services will no longer be needed or needed less often. It is also needs to strengthen the civil service’s resolve to be professional and accountable rather than to force it to change its political allegiance from BN to PR.

In terms of the economy, PR will have to find new sources of economic growth as well as enhance current sources of growth. Some of this can be realised by the freeing up of certain monopolies so that competitive forces can be released in currently protected sectors. Other initiatives require a longer time period to come to fruition such as increasing the innovation and R&D capacity in the country. One way in which this process can be expedited is to tap on the large Malaysian disapora, some of whom may be interested to come back and invest their time, expertise and money under a new non-BN federal government.

One of the biggest policy areas for PR to tackle would be in education since this is something which almost all Malaysians care about and where there is a widespread consensus that something drastic needs to be done in order to arrest the decline in the standard of public education in the country. PR has said that it would respect the rights of vernacular (Mandarin and Tamil) and religious schools to flourish in the country. It will have its hands full in taking on the civil service as well as some within the PR who do not want to strengthen vernacular and religious education, especially in allowing more Chinese primary and independent secondary schools to be established.

These are only a few of the key policy questions which PR has to address if it comes to power at the federal level. The list can easily be longer. PR’s challenge is to design a strategic plan or plans in order to fulfil a set of political, economic and social goals.

(iv) Priorities

Not all of the plans outlined in Part (iii) can be fulfilled in a short period of time. Some may even take more than one term to deliver the desired results. PR does not have the luxury of taking its time to deliver once it is in control of the federal government. It needs to prioritise its various objectives so that some immediate quick wins can be given the proper focus. Some of PR’s promises in its first 100 days in government have already been outlined in the Buku Jingga such as setting up an RCI on the problem of illegal immigrants in Sabah, providing free wifi to the rural areas in the country and abolishing certain corporate subsidies such as the gas subsidy to the independent power producers (IPPs). These deliverables may have to be adjusted if a PR federal government realises that some of the initiatives may take longer than 100 days to fulfil.

It is important for PR to show it can deliver concrete results and initiatives early in its administration so that it can build momentum for other initiatives later on. Without clear, focused priorities, PR may fall into the trap of wanting to do too much but failing to deliver anything significant in a timely manner.

(v) Procedures

Finally, PR will have to come up with certain procedures, both formal and informal, for dealing with disagreements between the PR component parties on key policy issues. I have already pointed out that local government elections and hudud are two potential flashpoints within the PR. There is no doubt that other controversial disagreements will emerge from within the PR coalition. Unlike in the BN, where Umno can dominate and control major policy directions, the parties within the PR coalition are much more equal in terms of stature and also control of Parliament and state seats. Even though the prime minister from PR, most likely Anwar Ibrahim, will yield considerable power, it would be difficult for him to ride roughshod over his component party members in the same way as Dr Mahathir Mohamad within the BN context.

The PR supreme council needs to be strengthened and proper procedures identified in order to solve conflicts emerging from within PR on issues of national and sub-national importance.

Conclusion

This article has barely scratched the surface of what a PR government may look like and the main challenges which it will face as a new ruling coalition. But hopefully, it has been helpful in outlining the major issues of contention and providing some guidelines as to how these challenges may be addresses so that PR can effectively deliver positive change to the country. — New Mandala

* Ong Kian Ming holds a PhD in political science from Duke University. He is the project director of the Malaysian Electoral Roll Analysis Project (Merap), political analyst and a lecturer at the University College Sedaya International (UCSI). He can be reached at im.ok.man(at)gmail.com

                This entry was posted on Friday, 1 June 2012, 10:05 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call on Malaysians to emulate the spirit of 250,000 Bersih 3.0 supporters who acted selflessly out of supreme patriotism for Malaysia and for the  sake of next generation

We should now be in the thick of the battle of the 13th General Election and not be launching the Perak DAP 13th General Election machinery if not for the “428” Bersih 3.0 rally which completely scattered Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s earlier plan for June polls.

Events are proving me right when I said in early May that Bersih 3.0 was a greater public relations disaster for Najib than Bersih 2.0, as this has been confirmed from the high-handed, insensitive and reactionary government responses so far, especially the high-level campaign of demonization of Bersih 3.0 and the 250,000 Malaysians regardless of race, religion, class, region, age or gender who gathered peacefully in Kuala Lumpur in support of a common national cause – a clean election for a clean Malaysia.

Every day we are seeing the Barisan Nasional leaders shooting themselves in the foot – the latest being the announcement by the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein to upload a video compilation of what happened on Bersih 3.0 on the Home Ministry website, which made an utter mockery of the assurances by the Barisan Nasional government that it wants an independent inquiry to find out the true facts of what went wrong on Bersih 3.0 on April 28, causing the incidents of brutality and violence, regardless of whether the victims were police personnel, media representatives or peaceful protestors.

My strongest message today is to call on Malaysians to emulate the spirit of the 250,000 Bersih 3.0 supporters who acted selflessly on April 28 out of two most honourable motives – firstly, as an act of supreme patriotism and love for Malaysia and secondly, for the  sake of the next generation of Malaysians to ensure that they have a better Malaysia than today.

The 13th General Election is going to see the dirtiest election campaign in the nation’s history.

Let all 	Malaysians act in unison to achieve three objectives – firstly, to destroy once and for all the spectre of May 13 which had been wielded as a weapon of fear to terrorise voters, making clear that Malaysians have risen above the fear of May 13 because Malaysians, regardless of race or religion, are uniting to bring about changes for the better for the nation and people.

Secondly, to crush the unbroken UMNO political hegemony in the country which had enabled UMNOputras to exploit ordinary Malaysians, Malays and non-Malays, to serve their selfish political and economic interests.

Thirdly, to end the racial politics which had been practised by UMNO and Barisan Nasional in their “divide and rule” control of the people and country.

In the 13 General Election, Malaysians must unite behind Pakatan Rakyat to demonstrate that Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region, can unite under one political coalition to end corruption, abuses of power and all forms of injustices in the country, and  most important of all, to save democracy in Malaysia by giving birth to a two-coalition system in Malaysia –  a precondition if Malaysia is to become a normal democratic country.

(Speech at the launching of the Perak DAP 13th General Election machinery held at Excelsior Hotel, Ipoh on Saturday, 2nd June 2012 at 11 am)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 2 June 2012, 2:34 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
DAP
,
Elections
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s popularity dips even as polls beckon, survey shows

The Malaysian Insider

Jun 01, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, June 1 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s popularity has slipped in recent months, an opinion poll showed today, as he lost support among Chinese and middle-class voters ahead of a general election that he could call within months.

Najib is facing a dilemma over the timing of the election as his Barisan Nasional coalition seeks to reverse a dismal showing four years ago that deprived it of its two-thirds majority in parliament for the first time.

The 58-year-old leader has enjoyed high personal approval ratings, but analysts say it is unclear whether that will translate into increased support for his less popular Umno party and its allies.

Support for Najib slid to 65 per cent in the May poll from 69 per cent in March, according to the Merdeka Center, the country’s most respected polling firm.

The dip may add to speculation that Najib may choose to delay elections until after presenting the budget on September 28.

“The small gain in Malay voter satisfaction towards the PM appears to have been outweighed by the large negative swing among Chinese voters,” Merdeka Center said in a statement.

The poll found that approval for Najib was weakest among the Chinese, tumbling 19 percentage points to 37 per cent. Among those in the middle income bracket, this fell 18 percentage points to 50 per cent. His popularity among Malays, who form the majority of Malaysia’s population, rose 5 percentage points to 79 per cent.

Voters’ views on the government remained lukewarm, with approval staying unchanged at 48 per cent.

The survey was carried out between May 10 and May 18 among 1,019 registered voters to gauge sentiment after an anti-government protest in April.

Najib’s popularity has been lifted by giveaways to lower-income households and reforms to repressive security laws. He announced Malaysia’s first national minimum wage at the end of April in another boost for poorer voters.

He has faced a tougher struggle winning over middle class voters, however. At least 25,000 demonstrators rallied in Kuala Lumpur in April to demand reforms to an electoral system they say favours the ruling coalition.

The protest ended in chaos after police fired teargas and water cannon to disperse crowds. Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was charged in May for defying a court order related to the protest and could be disqualified from parliament if convicted.

A separate Merdeka Center poll after the protest showed that 92 per cent of Malaysians want shortcomings in the country’s electoral rolls to be fixed before the election. That survey also found that only 44 per cent of respondents were confident of a free and fair election process. — Reuters

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 2 June 2012, 7:52 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The ‘G’ in the C+I+G=Y formula

 — Sakmongkol AK47

The Malaysian Insider

Jun 01, 2012

JUNE 1 — When Kenyesians dan Hayekians debate each other, they don’t debate on the science of economics as a science. As a science which studies the allocation of scarce resources among competing wants and needs, that part is settled. They debate on the bigger issue of how to manage the economy. Keynesians want to steer the economy while Hayekians want to set the economy free. One side thinks they can plan for others. The other side wants the planning to be done by many as individuals adapting themselves to the free market.

They debate on the efficacy of polices, whether managing aggregate spending or freeing the market is better in order to increase income. Controlling aggregate spending suggest some control over the aggregates, whether consumption, investment or government spending. Who controls them? The answer: the government. Control suggests the omnipotence of government and of course governments all over the world like to control things.

Hayekians support the free market, relying instead on the actions of individual economic actors with motivations and self-interests (what interests the individual) to make the economy work. Free market does not mean free from government involvement absolutely. Rather, government’s scope is limited over a few matters such as keeping peace from within and without. Government’s role is that of an umpire and the umpire must be neutral.

Our government of course supports the Keynesian approach without a doubt. They are adherents to the dictum, we are Keynesians now. But here is where the similarities end. While in western economies, the focus is on actually seeing the economy succeed, the emphasis in our country is different. The focus here is to concentrate steering power into our hands as much as possible, so that in the name of guiding the economy, the state plays the role of allocating resources to who they think can advance the economy. The state assumes omnipotence stature. And because of this status, they get to choose who succeeds and who fails.

We are digressing too far I am afraid. We can already anticipate the headlines. “We must avoid what happens to Greece. In order to do that, we must spend more. To hell to those who complain of increasing public debt to GDP share. If we cut spending, the economy will contract. The opposition is stupid. They are just following the IMF’s prescriptions.”

What we fear most from the tragedy of Greece is that it will be used as justification for more deficit spending. The dependents to government contracts and the tenderpreneurs, the rent seekers will support the government. Greece, Ireland will be used as examples NOT to be stingy but to spend more. It will give carte blanche for the powers-that-be to pick and choose winners based on whether the chosen are liked or disliked. The business elite will be celebrating the fall of Greece in anticipation of windfalls from our Santa Clausian government.

The real issue of restructuring is kept on the backburner.

The basic idea behind the Keynes Theory is to spend more to get out from economic slowdown. Mahathir before and Najib now like spending. They like the G in the C+I+G=Y formula. Najib likes announcing spending plans; when the private sector created a shopping paradise for high-end products in JB, Najib was there hailing Premium Outlets as an example of government initiatives. Did that initiative increase productive capacity of the economy? Consumption spending does not create productive capacity of the economy.

When Guocoland announced that it will spend billions to create an eco-city in Sungai Pelik, Sepang, we all feel pelik too, he was there behaving like the midwife delivering a new economic initiative. Clever, by strategically officiating such private sector initiatives, Najib can be seen as the originator of the business plans. Didn’t I say before the ETP was just a collection of private businesses business plans adopted by the government as its own National Economic Transformation Plan?

It’s going to be spend baby spend after this. Before FGVH lists, Najib got money to pay settlers RM15,000 per FELDA household. Where did the money come from? Advances by underwriting banks? Loan from EPF? Internal FELDA funds? Then it’s the settlers’ own money they are getting and they are jumping up and down in euphoric hysteria.

The missus is now demanding that the next RM5,000 instalment must be paid directly into her account lest her husband in FELDA Chini goes south to Segamat and patronises one of the massage parlours there. The son will demand the subsequent RM5,000 be banked direct into his BSN account so that he can finally get that Kris motorcycle he planned to get to rempit on the nice FELDA roads.

What happened to Greece will be used gleefully by the pro-deficit people who hate the idea of austerity. Because to them, cutting back on government spending means painful cuts that is hurting growth. Their growth, that is. No more negotiated tenders. No more free passages.

That, they say is silly economics. The PM says the economic plans by the opposition don’t make sense. The people must choose between austerity and growth. Let us clarify some of the issues here. The issue here is to curtail public (government) spending but free the people to do the real economic work. Allow them to be taxed lower and give easier credit and capital. — sakmongkol.blogspot.com

* Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman (2004-2008).

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 2 June 2012, 7:23 am and is filed under
ETP
,
Felda
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


BN Amended PPPA to Protect Itself

– by Kee Thuan Chye

Malaysian Digest

Sunday, 03 June 2012

LET’S be honest and admit it. The recent amendments to the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) have done nothing for press freedom. In fact, they show no signs of moving in that direction.

Relieving newspapers and other publications of the need to renew their licence annually is of no use if they are still subject to the threat of getting their licence suspended or revoked. The Home Minister still holds the power to implement that threat.

This means they still have to be cautious about what they publish. They are still controlled.

Of course, there is now another amendment that allows for the Home Minister’s decision to be challenged in court. That’s something new and seems a bit of a surprise. And the Government has come out to claim that it’s a big leap forward.

But if one considers that there could be more to this amendment than appears on the surface, it will not be such a surprise after all.

I suspect it was made because Barisan Nasional (BN) the party is hedging its bets. It was made in case at some point in the future, BN should lose power.

If that day should come and the new government under Pakatan Rakyat (PR) decided to be nasty to BN, it could instruct its Home Minister to revoke the licences of all the existing BN-owned newspapers, which currently make up almost the entire newspaper market.

Those affected would include Utusan Malaysia, Berita Harian, New Straits Times, The Star – the main spinners of BN propaganda.

If that were to happen and the Home Minister’s decisions could not be challenged in court, BN would be left with no print propaganda machinery whatsoever. With no recourse for appeal. And that would be unimaginable.

It is therefore to forestall such a disaster and protect its own interests that, I suspect, the BN government proposed the amendment.

But of course de facto Law Minister Nazri Aziz would make a big deal of it in other terms, and to try to make the rakyat feel grateful for the amendments. He said in a recent interview with theSun that “we now provide you with the avenue to take the matter to court (if you are unhappy with the Home Ministry), so where else do you want to go?”

That comes across as a pompous and arrogant question. And one that shows that he’s either ignorant or pretending to be so. Surely, he knows the answer.

Amending the PPPA is not the ultimate. The Act is still a deterrent to a free press. And keeping it such is probably why the amendments were hurriedly passed. When they were tabled in April, MPs had hardly any time to debate the amendments. If they did, the Opposition would have called for the Act to be repealed.

Indeed, the only way to liberate the press is to repeal the Act.

As it is, the Act continues to allow the Home Ministry to wield power in approving applications for publishing licences. This is one of its strongest controlling measures.

With this power, the incumbent government would invariably ensure that applications by the Opposition to start its own mass-market newspaper would be rejected. This, in fact, has been the case ever since the Act was passed in 1984.

So where’s the freedom?

By right, if we are to believe what Prime Minister Najib Razak has promised – that he wants to make Malaysia “the best democracy in the world” – there should not be any more need for a publication licence.

By right, anyone who has the inclination and the capital to start a publishing business should be able to do so without seeking approval from the Government. This would allow, so to speak, a thousand publications to bloom. This would allow a laissez-faire growth in the marketplace of ideas consistent with the principles of democracy.

But this will not happen as long as the Government does not want to allow the Opposition to set up its own newspapers freely and disseminate its own propaganda, in conflict with that of the Government’s.

And press freedom will not be a reality as long as the Government wants to exert control, even over the existing newspapers that already belong to the ruling coalition.

The bonus that comes with this is that if any of them did deviate, it would provide a wonderful opportunity for the ministry to intimidate the errant newspaper till it repented and atoned – by being even more subservient.

A good example is what happened in February to The Star. The newspaper went through hell after publishing a picture of the American entertainer Erykah Badu with the word “Islam” tattooed on her upper chest. The Home Ministry went after it like a rhinoceros after a rat. After The Star had published two apologies and suspended two of its senior editors for the faux pas, committed out of honest ignorance and not out of deliberate malice, Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein declared in public that he was still not satisfied.

Thenceforth, The Star became more closely watched and it got even more cautious of what it published. Any material considered the slightest bit risky would be rejected. At the same time, the newspaper became visibly more obsequious in its efforts to serve the Government’s cause.

Its coverage of Bersih 3.0 exemplifies this. It mainly sought to vilify the rally participants who were involved in the violence and downplay the police brutality that resulted from it. It refrained from highlighting the impact of the rally in calling for free and fair elections.

Would this be any different when the amendments to the PPPA are in place?

The answer would have to be “no”. The Star would still be afraid of the ministry. And so would independently owned newspapers.

The latter would still fear getting suspended or having their licence revoked. And they would think twice about taking the ministry to court while the independence of the judiciary is still in doubt.

Furthermore, going through a court process can take time. If a newspaper’s licence is revoked, it goes out of business immediately. If it takes the issue to court, a long time may elapse before the decision comes out. And even if the newspaper obtains a favourable verdict, it would nonetheless have lost a lot of momentum during its period of closure, and winning back its former glory and subscribers would not be easy.

Therefore, while in theory, taking the minister to court appears a bright proposition, in reality, it may not be so practical.

So, we’re back to where we started. The amendments to the PPPA are not, despite what the Government would have us believe, a leap forward.

The only leap forward that can be made is to repeal the PPPA.

* Kee Thuan Chye is the author of No More Bullshit, Please, We’re All Malaysians, now available in major bookstores in Malaysia and Singapore.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 June 2012, 12:34 pm and is filed under
Kee Thuan Chye
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Government losing Chinese support, putting reforms at risk

Reuters/The Malaysian Insider

Jun 03, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, June 3 — Ethnic Chinese voters, upset over policies that favour majority Malays, have become increasingly alienated from Malaysia’s ruling coalition, raising the risk of racial polarisation and a slowdown in the pace of reforms.

Support for Prime Minister Najib Razak among Chinese voters plunged to 37 per cent in May from 56 per cent in February, a survey by the independent Merdeka Center showed on Friday. It found 56 per cent of Chinese were dissatisfied with the government, compared to 30 per cent of Indians and 23 per cent of Malays.

Recent state and by-elections underline the trend. The main Chinese party allied with the ruling National Front coalition in eastern Sarawak state lost 13 of 19 seats it contested in local elections last year and the opposition won a by-election in the same state in 2010 largely thanks to Chinese backing.

The Southeast Asian nation’s 6.5 million ethnic Chinese turned heavily to the opposition in 2008 polls, handing the National Front, which has ruled uninterrupted since independence from Britain in 1957, its worst election showing.

Malaysia has seen ethnic Chinese voting with their feet, leaving the country for better prospects aboard including to neighbour and rival Singapore, in a troubling brain drain of talent and capital. “Malaysia needs talent to meet its goal of becoming a high-income country,” the World Bank noted in a report last year. “But the problem is that talent is leaving.”

With elections likely later this year, the government has failed to reverse the tide with voters such as Jack Gan, who complains he had to study much harder than his ethnic Malay peers to get into one of the country’s top universities.

“I’m used to the lifestyle here but I don’t like the government and the policies,” said the 24-year-old law student, referring to decades-old affirmative action policies that favour Malays in education, business and employment.

Government efforts to appeal to minority Chinese and Indians were “just propaganda, not a policy,” he added.

Malay chauvinists

Chinese disillusionment is straining relations within the ruling coalition, complicating Najib’s efforts to reverse the shocking losses four years ago. Najib has rolled back some repressive security laws in an effort to appeal to middle-class, urban voters but his reforms have not gone far enough for many Chinese.

The main ethnic Chinese party in the ruling coalition, whose parliamentary seats were halved to 15 in 2008, says it won’t accept any cabinet posts if it does worse this time, raising the prospect of a government dominated by ethnic Malays.

The trend risks deepening racial fault lines if, as some analysts expect, the lead party in the coalition, the United Malays Nationalist Organisation (Umno) effectively “gives up” on the Chinese vote and focuses on championing Malay rights to secure support in rural areas.

Some analysts think Chinese voters could be shooting themselves in the foot if a weak showing by Najib in the election hands power back to right-wingers within Umno and puts the brakes on his reform programme. The three-party opposition alliance is seen as unlikely to win enough seats to form a government.

“The concern I have is that it is going to be a coalition of one (party) plus a few others who are not as strong as they are,” said Wan Saiful Wan Jan, the head of Malaysia’s Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs. “It’s going to be a very imbalanced mix in the new coalition that will be formed.”

The prime minister is stuck on the horns of a Malaysian dilemma: He has promised to reform the 40-year-old affirmative action programme for majority Malays that has long upset Malaysia’s minorities; yet to do that he needs Chinese electoral support to strengthen his hand against Malay chauvinists in his party.

Middle-income trap

In the past, the National Front could rely on sizeable support from the Chinese community, who control most of the country’s wealth despite making up only about a quarter of Malaysia’s 28 million people. But that support — forged through cosy business ties and strong government support for a separate, Mandarin language school system — has frayed in recent years as Chinese frustration with slow progress on reform has grown.

Malaysia’s Chinese, many of whose ancestors came to the country in British colonial times, increasingly lead separate lives from Malays, attending separate schools, speaking Mandarin and socialising with friends from the same race.

“We are not integrated, sadly, and I think it’s going to take a long time before we can integrate because economically we are compartmentalised,” said Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, a long-serving Umno member of parliament and former finance minister.

The Chinese account for many of an estimated one million people who emigrate annually, a “brain drain” driven by a lack of education and job prospects that is eroding Malaysia’s competitiveness.

Malaysia had been among the best performing economies in the world over the past 50 years under the National Front, which transformed a poor, colonial plantation economy into a modern, middle-income country. Per capita GDP has reached US$8,100 (RM24,300), almost doubling each decade.

But economists now warn Malaysia has fallen into a “middle-income trap”, in which a country is unable to make the next leap to developed nation status — Malaysia’s stated goal by 2020.

Domestic investment has struggled to recover since the 1997/98 Asian financial crisis. Foreign investment, which powered the earlier decades of growth, has stagnated. And the affirmative action policies, aimed at helping Malays better compete in the economy through educational and ownership quotas, have become an impediment to growth by not fully exploiting the human resource potential of the Indian and Chinese minorities.

Critics say the privileges, which include requiring companies to employ at least 30 per cent Malays, have also scared off some foreign investors who think it represents too much government interference in the economy.

Najib has tried to unite the country with a highly touted programme called “1 Malaysia”. His efforts, however, have often been undercut by his own party, whose conservative wing has dug in its heels over protecting Malay privileges.

The government says it has reached out to Chinese under Najib, increasing funding for Mandarin schools and for lower-to-middle income Chinese communities.

“The government is continuing to implement measures under the transformation agenda and all Malaysians — including the Chinese community — stand to benefit,” a government spokesperson said.

Nevertheless, the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), the main Chinese party in the coalition, could see its seats slashed again in the coming election as it pays the price for corruption scandals in the ruling coalition and perceptions it has failed to defend Chinese interests, analysts say.

Penang pull factor

One factor driving Chinese voters from the ruling coalition is they now have a viable alternative following the opposition alliance’s unprecedented takeover of five state governments in 2008, including the northwestern coastal state of Penang, one of Malaysia’s biggest manufacturing hubs.

“A major pull factor is that the DAP is a much stronger party now — it is able to capture the imagination of Chinese voters,” said political analyst Ong Kian Ming, referring to the Democratic Action Party, the opposition’s ethnic Chinese party.

Penang’s Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng is a veteran of Malaysia’s hardball politics: He spent 18 months in detention from 1986 under the draconian Internal Security Act (which Najib had repealed) and a year in prison for sedition for making allegations against an Umno state leader.

He is credited with cutting debt and attracting a flood of high-tech investments into Penang. Ethnic Malay businesses still get the lion’s share of state contracts, Lim says, but his move to make all public tenders open through a computerised system has cut down on the cronyism that annoys Malaysians of all races.

“We have broken the myth that Malay contractors cannot compete on the open market,” said the 51-year-old Lim, whose father Lim Kit Siang has been a party leader since its beginnings in the 1960s. “It goes to show that Malay contractors can compete. It is only Umno cronies who cannot compete,” Lim told Reuters.

After taking over in 2009, Najib signalled he would take a bolder approach on dismantling affirmative action. In 2010 he introduced the “New Economic Model”, with poverty and income, not race, as the main criteria for getting help, and calling for less government interference in the economy. But so far the model has been short on policy implementation with little change to the core privileges that often benefit well-connected Malays more than the poor and have been blamed for fuelling cronyism.

Najib’s defenders say he is hoping a strong electoral mandate will strengthen the reformist wing of Umno — but he will need Chinese support to make that case.

MCA leader Chua Soi Lek acknowledged the party leadership had been too “low profile.” But he told Reuters Chinese voters risked losing influence over policy and ushering in a less business-friendly government if they turned their backs on his party.

“The message to the Chinese community is to choose wisely. We are a business community. The wrong choice of government and everybody suffers but it will affect the business community … more than everybody else.” — Reuters

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 June 2012, 11:28 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Lim Guan Eng
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
NEM
,
NEP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Himpunan Hijau ke Putrajaya… Wah, lebih 100,000 hadir!

 — Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Jun 02, 2012

2 JUN — Himpunan Hijau ke Putrajaya di Alor Star malam tadi adalah perhimpunan raksasa dan yang hampir sebesar perhimpunan Bersih 3.0 yang diadakan pada 28 April yang lalu. Himpunan Hijau itu telah menunjukkan kepada rakyat seluruh negara bahawa kedatangan lebih daripada seratus ribu pengunjung perhimpunan itu membayangkan manifestasi keseluruhan rakyat benar-benar serius untuk ke Putrajaya selepas PRU yang akan datang ini.

Himpunan anjuran PAS ini sangat berjaya kerana orang ramai sudah memenuhi stadium dari pukul 4 ptg semalam. Orang ramai bukan sahaja telah memenuhi semua tempat duduk Stadium Alor Star itu tetapi juga meliputi padang stadium tersebut dan juga di luar stadium. Ramainya peserta himpunan ini menunjukkan bahawa rakyat serius dalam perjuangan untuk menuju ke Putrajaya dan sambutan itu sudah cukup untuk memberikan gambaran sebenar akan kemahuan rakyat keseluruhannya.

Kejayaan ini amat membanggakan kerana mereka datang dengan sukarela dari seluruh negara tanpa dibayar tambang atau tempat penginapan dan tidak pula diberikan kemudahan perkhidmatan ribuan bas percuma seperti yang dilakukan oleh Umno. Bayangkan jika Umno menganjurkan perhimpunan tanpa wang, topi dan T-shirt serta tempat penginapan tidak akan ada siapa pun yang akan hadir kerana pergerakan Umno dan ahlinya memerlukan tolakan dengan wang ringgit.

Jika Umno hendak mengadakan perhimpunan sebesar ini secara “conservative”nya ia akan memakan belanja sekurang-kurangnya RM15 juta. Itulah sebabnya saya dan ramai yang lain selalu berkata Umno (baru) tinggal sejarah sahaja setelah wujud sejak 24 tahun yang lepas.

Kalaulah begini keadaannya saya tidak nampak bagaimana Umno boleh bertahan di seluruh negara dan apatah lagi untuk kembali mengambil alih kerajaan Kedah itu. Umno tidak berani untuk menunjukkan kepada media keadaan himpunan sejuta belia yang baru berlalu itu. Kementerian Belia dan Sukan telah berbelanja puluhan juta ringgit untuk membawa artis-artis dari dalam dan luar negara untuk mendapatkan kehadiran yang sejemput itu.

Sebaliknya ratusan ribu yang datang ke Perhimpunan Hijau Ke Putrajaya di Alor Star malam tadi tidak perlu membawa artis Korea dan Jepun dengan pakaian-pakaian seksi dan mengiurkan tetapi perhimpunan itu hanya didatangi oleh Uztaz Azhar Idrus sahaja. Uztaz Azhar Idrus tidak datang dari Korea atau pun Jepun dan tidak pula berpakaian seksi atau pandai menari dan berjoget. Uztaz Azhar Idrus hanya datang dari Terengganu sahaja.

Enam puluh peratus daripada ratusan ribu yang hadir itu adalah dari golongan muda mudi, kelompok terbesar di antara rakyat negara ini. Himpunan ini merupakan pemaparan manifestasi sebenar rakyat di negara ini. Mereka mahukan perubahan. Untuk kemajuan masa depan kita perlukan perubahan. Mereka mahu menolak kerajaan rasuah melalui peti undi dalam pilihanraya yang akan datang. Itu sahaja.

Jika dinilai daripada keadaan tekanan terhadap kerajaan hari ini tidak salah jika kita cadangkan supaya Umno mengangkat bendera putih sahaja dan menyerahkan sahaja pentadbiran kerajaan kita kepada pihak alternatif kali ini.

Kita tengok sahajalah, apa yang Umno perlu buat selain dari mengaku kalah sahaja. Umno sudah tidak boleh berbuat apa-apa lagi sebenarnya. Hanya yang tinggal pada Umno ialah ego dan keras kepala mereka sahaja.

Bagaimana pula reaksi Rais Yatim kali ini berhubung dengan jumlah peserta perhimpunan ini. Agak-agak Datuk Seri, jumlah kehadiran perhimpunan hijau ini sampai tak 2,000 orang? Kita hendak bertanya kepada Datuk Seri, kerana dalam ramai-ramai rakyat di negara ini hanya Datuk Seri sahaja yang pandai mengira. Kita semua ini semuanya buta, tuli dan bodoh-bodoh belaka.

Tetapi gambar-gambar ini dengan sendirinya memberitahu Rais Yatim jumlah sebenarnya kehadiran peserta Himpunan Hijau ke Putrajaya itu. Datuk Rais, kigho boto-boto. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 June 2012, 10:45 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘Nor the main culprit behind forex scandal’

Athi Shankar | June 3, 2012

Free Malaysia Today

An ex-Bank Negara insider reveals the inside track on the currency speculation undertaken by Nor Mohamed Yakcop and other powerful people about 20 years ago.

GEORGE TOWN: A former Bank Negara insider has named four powerful elites as main players to have caused the central bank’s massive RM30-billion loss in the international foreign exchange speculation scandal some 20 years ago.

In his explosive revelation, retired Bank Negara deputy manager, Dr Rosli Yaakop named former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamed, ex-finance minister Daim Zainuddin, ex-Bank Negara Governor, the late Jaffar Hussein and current Minister in Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Economic Planning Unit Government Nor Mohamed Yakcop as the “forex scandal elite club masters.”

Rosli told a forum here yesterday Jaffar and Nor were biggest culprits by going overboard in the speculative foreign currency venture.

He said the duo speculated and they gambled recklessly and irresponsibly with no regard to the safety of Bank Negara’s assets.

He revealed that they wanted to beat George Soros, perhaps, to impress their bosses that they were experts in forex dealings.

The former high ranking Bank Negara officer said the forex speculation activities were against the very grain of central bank principles.

He asked on how a central bank can be heavily involved in massive forex speculations when its task was to stamp out excessive speculations?

“Bank Negara’s duty was to protect and strengthen the value of ringgit, not to gamble ringgit in forex market.

“I think it was a deliberate attempt to make money for certain people using Bank Negara as piggy ride,” Rosli hammered home his conclusion during a question-answer session later.

He accused Nor to have directly caused the forex losses given that the Tasek Gelugor MP was the man tasked to speculate, and ultimately gamble, Malaysian Ringgit against foreign currencies.

He said Nor, then Bank Negara advisor in charge of investment department, would use his computer and other staff computers to speculate and gamble in foreign exchange market.

This has led international forex players to believe that Bank Negara had many aggressive market traders.

“But truth is it was Nor Yakcop did it all,” Rosli told the forum titled: “Bank Negara Forex Scandal – When Government Becomes Speculator.”

With ex-banker Julian Candiah as moderator, Rosli and Opposition Leader and former finance minister Anwar Ibrahim were two panelists at the full house forum held at a meeting room in Dewan Sri Pinang.

Organised by state government think tank, Penang Institute, Chief Minister and DAP secretary general Lim Guan Eng delivered an opening speech.

Also present were Penang Institute chief executive officer Zairil Khir Johari and state PKR leaders Law Choo Kiang and Abdul Malek Kassim.

‘Yes Man’ governor

Rosli said the central bank ventured into speculative forex market in a big way during Daim’s tenure as finance minister.

“The order to go and make money in the forex market was from Daim with Dr Mahathir’s blessing,” Rosli disclosed, adding that Jaffar was their “Yes Man” Governor at that time.

He said Bank Negara strategy was to hit a currency for a couple of yards and once the initial transaction has gone through, re-hit it again with another couple of yards normally only minutes later.

This will send shocks to the market and dealers will scramble to buy the currency, sending the currency value up.

Bank Negara would then sell the currency with a healthy profit.

“But then, dealers caught on to the scheme hit back,” said Rosli.

In 1992, he said Bank Negara gambled on the British Pound. It bought the Pound long and George Soros, major player in forex market, short.

When the Pound was devalued, Bank Negara lost USD5.5 billion and George Soros gained USD1.7 billion.

Bank Negara then claimed it was only paper loss of RM9.3 billion.

Rosli said experts estimated Bank Negara’s exposure for having lost that much was USD27 to USD33 billion, which was five times more than its foreign reserves and its entire assets of USD20.7 billion in 1992.

Rosli said that Bank Negara was indeed such a real gambler that Alan Greenspan of the US Federal Reserve warned the central bank to stop its speculative activities.

“But it fell into deaf ears and as a result, the bank incurred more losses in 1993,” he said.

Then Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang estimated Bank Negara lost a colossal RM30 billion. But Bank Negara claimed RM10.1 billion loss in 1992 and RM5.7 billion in 1993.

“Bank Negara claims of losses were schematically understated.

“Losses were hidden through revaluation of BNM’s gold holding and revaluation of quoted investment,” disclosed Rosli.

Bank Negara was once the largest player in the international currency market and in April 1991, Reuter described it as “a dominant force in the foreign exchange scene for some years.”

Rosli said that reasonable profits made before 1992 – 93 was the impetus incentive for Bank Negara to gamble in forex in a major way.

Although the market norm was to trade in lots of USD1million, USD5 million or USD10 million, he said Bank Negara would trade in USD50 million-lot and USD1 billion-yard a day.

He said Bank Negara would trade up to between five and 10 lots per call and sometimes, a few yards a day.

“That’s real gambling … even closest rival, Japanese Fund Managers, would trade in USD50 million-lot only once or twice a year,” said Rosli.

Anwar’s ordeal

He said when Anwar took over the finance ministry in 1991, with it the burden of forex losses, everything had gone sour.

“He could only stop further bleeding which he did,” narrated Rosli on Anwar’s ordeal.

Anwar later explained he could only do damage control and some public relations exercise to save the government from further embarrassment.

The Pakatan Rakyat de facto leader said the finance minister and the Cabinet then did not have a clue about the scandal as there were no documents or reports tabled about it.

He said he took initiative to investigate the scandal after being tipped off by Zurich-based journalist friend.

Until then all Anwar knew was that the Bank Negara was only protecting the ringgit in forex market.

Subsequently he took some bold cleaning up decisions after he probed into the bottom of the scandal.

Nor was forced to resign from Bank Negara on July 10, 1994, which Rosli decribed as a grossly insufficient punishment for such a big a crime he committed against the nation.

Anwar said the deal was that Nor shall never be involved with Bank Negara again.

But, in 1997, Rosli said Nor was ‘rewarded’ when he returned to Bank Negara to handle the ringgit crisis.

Jaffar, who died in 1998, was also forced to resign in April 1994. But Rosli said he was also ‘rewarded’ with the appointment of PNB deputy chairman.

He said the masters were Mahathir and Daim, while Jaffar and Nor was given the dirty job to gamble.

He said this was the reason why Jaffar and Nor were left scot-free and rewarded later, and no independent investigation held on the scandal.

Kit Siang’s suggestion for a royal commission of inquiry was ignored and Jaffar even did not bother to attend public accounts committee inquiry.

Due to involvement of people high-up, Rosli said an open investigation would prove politically disastrous as details of the scandal can gruesome and cause damaging embarrassment to the-powers-that –be.

He suggested that Pakatan Rakyat, if were to capture Putrajaya, should re-open investigation on the scandal which was approved by the audience.

He said certain people would have been in jail as criminal elements existed in the forex scandal.

He said the criminal elements were negligence, overstepping of power, falsification of accounts, “creative accounting”, misinformation, breach of trust and corruption.

“But, they had protectors,” he said.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 June 2012, 12:54 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Financial Scandals
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mahathir is worried that the truth will be out about all the financial scandals during his 22-year premiership if Pakatan Rakyat forms national government in next polls

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad has been more than his  hyper-active self  in the past fortnight, not only making preposterous statements about the political situation in the country but doing his utmost to fob off any possibility that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak might stick to his earlier timetable to hold 13th General Election in June/July.

It was in the past two weeks that Mahathir:

•	Made the wild and preposterous statement that the Bersih 3.0 rally was a “preparation” and “warm-up” by Pakatan Rakyat for violent demonstrations to reject the results of the 13th general election should the opposition fail to win it.

•	Made another wild and preposterous statement when warning that the defeat of UMNO would be akin to the Malays losing power in their own country, when the coalition that would replace UMNO/Barisan Nasional would be Pakatan Rakyat comprising PKR, PAS and DAP;

•	Returned again and again to the theme that because of the Abdullah premiership, the  Najib government is still weak and not ready for the 13th General Election which he wants to be held off until after the fasting month which ends in August.

However, the real reason why Mahathir is so hyper-active in the past fortnight and making so many wild and preposterous statements is because the former Prime Minister is worried that the truth will be out about all the financial scandals during his 22-year premiership if Pakatan Rakyat forms the national government in next polls.

In a forum yesterday in Penang on the RM30 billion Bank Negara foreign exchange losses scandal 20 years ago, a former Bank Negara insider, former Bank Negara Deputy Governor Dr. Rosli Yaakop stepped forward to throw some light on what was undoubtedly the biggest financial scandal in the nation’s history.

Rosli named four persons constituting the “forex scandal elite club masters” as responsible for the massive Bank Negara losses two decades ago –former  Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamed, ex-finance minister Daim Zainuddin, ex-Bank Negara Governor, the late Jaffar Hussein and current Minister in Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Economic Planning Unit Government Nor Mohamed Yakcop.

Rosli told the forum Jaffar and Nor were the  biggest culprits by going overboard in the forex speculation activities, which were against the very grain of central bank principles.

He said the duo speculated and they gambled recklessly and irresponsibly with no regard to the safety of Bank Negara’s assets.

Rosli accused Nor, who is the Tasek Gelugor MP,  to have directly caused the forex losses as he was the man tasked to speculate, and ultimately gamble, Malaysian Ringgit against foreign currencies.

He said Nor, then Bank Negara advisor in charge of investment department, would use his computer and other staff computers to speculate and gamble in foreign exchange market.

This has led international forex players to believe that Bank Negara had many aggressive market traders.

“But truth is it was Nor Yakcop did it all.”

Rosli said the central bank ventured into speculative forex market in a big way during Daim’s tenure as finance minister.

“The order to go and make money in the forex market was from Daim with Dr Mahathir’s blessing,” Rosli disclosed, adding that Jaffar was their “Yes Man” Governor at that time.

In 1992, Bank Negara gambled on the British Pound. It bought the Pound long and George Soros, major player in forex market, short.

When the Pound was devalued, Bank Negara lost USD5.5 billion and George Soros gained USD1.7 billion.

Bank Negara then claimed it was only paper loss of RM9.3 billion.

Rosli said experts estimated Bank Negara’s exposure for having lost that much was USD27 to USD33 billion, which was five times more than its foreign reserves and its entire assets of USD20.7 billion in 1992.

I had  estimated in Parliament two decades ago that  Bank Negara lost a colossal RM30 billion. But Bank Negara claimed RM10.1 billion loss in 1992 and RM5.7 billion in 1993.

Rosli said yesterday that Bank Negara claims of losses were “schematically understated”, hidden through revaluation of BNM’s gold holding and revaluation of quoted investment.

Rosli mentioned that my call in Parliament at the time for a royal commission of inquiry into the Bank Negara in forex scandal was ignored as an open investigation would prove politically disastrous as the details of the scandal can be gruesome and cause damaging embarrassment because of the involvement of people high-up.

Rosli said certain people would have been in jail as criminal elements existed in the forex scandal. The criminal elements were negligence, overstepping of power, falsification of accounts, “creative accounting”, misinformation, breach of trust and corruption.

At the Penang forum yesterday, Rosli suggested that Pakatan Rakyat, if were to capture Putrajaya, should re-open investigation on the Bank Negara forex scandal of 1992.

I fully agree with Rosli. If Pakatan Rakyat forms the federal government in the next general election, there should be a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the RM30 billion Bank Negara forex losses scandal in 1992, as well as into all the other financial scandals during Mahathir’s 22-year premiership.

Barry Wain, in his book “Malaysian Maverick”, estimates that Malaysia lost RM100 billion just in four financial scandals during Mahathir’s premiership.

But this is what  Mahathir does not want and most afraid of.

Yesteray, former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak was sentenced to life imprisonment for complicity in the killing of protesters during last year’s uprising.

I am not suggesting that Mahathir should face jail sentences for the financial scandals in his 22-year premiership but at minimum, Malaysians are entitled to know the truth about these financial scandals which would serve as painful national lessons to prevent their recurrence.

But clearly, this is what Mahathir would not want and would do his utmost to prevent, including outclassing himself in the wild and preposterous statements about Pakatan Rakyat in the run-up to the  next general election.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 June 2012, 3:56 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Financial Scandals
,
Mahathir
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Say what, PM?

 — Lucius Goon

The Malaysian Insider

Jun 02, 2012

JUNE 2 — Does Najib Razak really listen to himself? Or does he just read a speech and love the bluster.

He was at his Umno best today at the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s birthday, threatening to crush anyone who threatened law and order (just for clarification, he was not talking about the million illegals in Sabah who pose a law and order threat or the foreigners being given documents so that they can vote in Selangor but I suspect his ire was directed at Pakatan Rakyat and Bersih).

One line in his speech caught my attention: the ends must never justify the means, said Najib.

That is a good joke coming from the prime minister who has watched/encouraged/stayed silent as:

1) Perkasa/Pekida and other thugs encouraged by Umno have started a wave of violence against political opponents and Malaysians who don’t support the current regime.

2) Mat Rempits and other groups are funded and encouraged to beat up and harass anyone identified as a threat by the BN government. Ambiga Sreenevasan, Nurul Izzah and Lim Guan Eng come to mind.

3) The cops abused their power and strength to fire upon and assault citizens of this country on April 28. Where were you then, Mr PM?

4) A systematic campaign of defrauding the electoral system by padding up the voter register with foreigners. And we are having a discussion about the ends never justifying the means.

If my memory serves me correctly, Najib famously declared that Putrajaya must be defended come what may. And he has spoken that same desperate message to silat groups, Pekida and other unsavoury groups.

So Najib, I think you have lost your right to dish out advice.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 June 2012, 11:07 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Law & Order
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.