Razak’s young Turk talks about his mentor

by Md Izwan

The Malaysian Insider

14 January 2015

To commemorate the 39th death anniversary of Malaysia’s second prime minister and “Father of Development” Tun Abdul Razak, The Malaysian Insider is running a series of interviews with his colleagues and close associates who, with Razak, steered Malaysia through the early days of rebuilding following the race riots of May 13, 1969.

Earlier today, we heard from four of Razak’s sons on his legacy and their personal memories of their father.

In this article, former deputy prime minister Tun Musa Hitam speaks about Razak’s leadership style and of his experience working with the man who brought him back to Umno after his expulsion. Musa had been expelled from Umno after the race riots over a fall-out with the then prime minister and Umno president, Tunku Abdul Rahman.

Readmitted to the party by Razak, Musa went on to rise in Umno and also held the post of Minister of Primary Industries in Razak’s cabinet.

Despite the political tension surrounding Tunku’s departure and Razak’s ascension as prime minister, Musa remembers his mentor for his gentleness, patience and consultative approach, coupled with his firmness to see a decision through once it was made. These were values, Musa says, that Razak knew were needed to manage a multireligious and multiracial country like Malaysia.

TMI: What kind of person was Tun Razak to you? As a leader, a friend or a colleague?

Musa: Tun Razak was a national leader in the true sense of the word. He had vision and perception. He understood the priorities of our country on attaining independence. The long term interest of the nation, to him, was a united Malaysian nation based on the principle of unity within diversity.

Undoubtedly he recognised the immense challenges, appreciating that years of colonial rule had left the country racially compartmentalised. Razak thus started off with giving top priority to education and rural development where these, as it happened, coincided with disparities among racial groups.

In shaping the country’s priorities and targets, Razak was consultative but once conclusions and decisions were made, he ensured that these were implemented with firmness, justice and fairness.

As a leader, he was never rude (I never witnessed him raising his voice in any discussions or conversations), respected as well as respectful. His priority was national interest and never personal interest.

On a personal note, Razak was always the inspiring teacher and guide to my political journey right up to the end of his life. He was always willing, in fact always encouraging, to hear my opinions and views that I would care to bring up to him in many of my one-to-one meetings with him.

He was respectful and accessible to the young. And collectively, as the young in Umno then, we found him always ready to listen (and) at the same time advise us.

With such high respect I had of him as a national leader, I could never categorise him either as friend or colleague but as the Leader.

TMI: Please share some of the memorable things you can recall of his leadership and of personal experiences you had while working with him.

Musa: Being consultative as he was, his leadership style was focused, confident and relaxed. This, in turn, gave so much confidence (to) the different communities in the country, which in turn attracted widespread support.

One personal memorable occasion that I gained from him was a (piece of) very personal advice he gave me: “You just work hard with honesty and dedication… that way the party (i.e Umno) and the people will discover you”.

TMI: Following the May 13, 1969 racial riots, can you recall his role from the time he replaced Tunku Abdul Rahman as prime minister? Did you agree with the pressure against Tunku then?

Musa: After the May 13 turmoil, as chairman of the National Operations Council (NOC), the powers bestowed upon Tun Razak were near absolute. Yet, he appointed personalities who were ideas-oriented and passionate in trying to look at the best way of putting the country back on track. He dedicated himself to finding the best route to national reconciliation.

Prior to my departure from government (because of my difficulties with the Tunku, who was PM then), both Tun Razak and Tun Dr Ismail (then Minister of Home Affairs) separately gave me appointments for a hearing, listening intently to my criticisms and views. Even at a number of meetings which I attended, I had always felt welcome to air my views on all issues, ranging from hawkers to squatters to security as well as future direction of the country. These privileges were not exclusive to me, of course. Thus was Razak’s leadership, well informed, clear and firm.

To cap it all was the formation, the structure and the methodology of the National Consultative Council. The NCC was all inclusive of both civil society and political interests. The NCC greatly contributed to the shaping of the New Economic Policy.

On the Tunku, Tun Razak was well aware of the “out-datedness of the Tunku” as prime minister, but pleaded for time and patience. I was one of the strongest of the Tunku’s critics but within the confines of the top leadership.

To me, it was the experience and gentle skills of Tun Razak that managed to get the Tunku in the end to make way, thus paving the way to the progress of modern Malaysia.

TMI: Tun Razak set up Barisan Nasional (BN) to replace the Alliance. Do you think this formula of one-race parties sharing power in an alliance is still relevant today, or should Malaysia move towards more inclusive, multiracial political parties?

Musa: The formation of the Barisan Nasional was the culmination of Tun Razak’s personal approach towards national reconciliation through the concept of consultation, accommodation and inclusiveness. It was also his acceptance of the realities of race as a major factor in Malaysian politics; yet (it was the) start of the long journey towards a multiracial Malaysia.

Unfortunately, within Umno itself there is still a very strong lack of political willingness to accept a multiracial Malaysia in the original version as envisaged by our founding fathers led by the Tunku, Tun Razak and Tun Dr Ismail, Tun Tan Siew Sin and Tun VT Sambanthan, joined later by leaders in Sabah and Sarawak then.

The irony of it all was that it was some Umno dissidents who broke away and formed the opposition grouping that seem to venture into political multiracialism and pluralism.

“Pluralism” and “liberalism”, which actually translate into multiracialism, however, are “dirty words” currently and under intense attack by some Umno personalities as well as related groups.

Thus, it remains to be seen how these original national objectives of our founding fathers would survive. Beside the need for a strong assertive political leadership, education, overall, is the only factor that could counter such trends and threats.

TMI: Has the New Economic Policy (NEP) introduced by Tun Razak been successful in closing the gap between the rich and the poor?

Musa: The NEP has achieved considerable success. The Malays, particularly, are way above their original position of backwardness and neglect. One needs to look back to appreciate how it was then and how it is now to appreciate how successful Tun Razak was in his vision of putting Malays up to the level of playing equal parts in modern Malaysia’s national development.

One could choose selectively any lack of progress in any particular field, of course, and find fault. It was considerably the result of the NEP that racial groups in Malaysia now can no longer be compartmentalised into professions and stereotypes. There are so many social, cultural and mentalities that could easily be accepted as “Malaysian” as indeed Malaysians are proud of.

The NEP was meant to be the means to an end. The NEP itself was the means to the end objective of nationhood. Detractors are aplenty with questions of “at what cost…?” to each community. Such whining is to be expected because there is surely no perfection in any human endeavour.

As far as the NEP and its effects on the country as well as issues relating to national unity are concerned, there is an urgent need to try to get them out of the way of partisan politics and open them up to rational discussions. That is why I am encouraged by the emergence of the Group of 25, the Group of 33, etc, and the tendency towards rational debate and discussions.

More encouraging and meaningful would be if these groups could engage themselves in closed-door, non-publicised meetings in the true spirit of looking for a genuine national understanding and consensus.

Perhaps it would be helpful if one were to learn from the experiences of the National Consultative Council (NCC) formed after the May 13 turmoil. The NCC was a platform for all to have their say, yet addressors were prevented from playing to the gallery for political support. The idea here is not to duplicate but rather to use the NCC as a model to achieve positive, consensual results. Perhaps a small beginning could be such as between the G25 and the G33? Without constructive efforts, digging heels in in the current atmosphere of racial and religious stresses and tensions would bring disaster!

Considering that the NEP was launched in 1970 and that it has gone through 45 years of up-and-down experiences, it should never be dismissed as a failure. On the contrary, as I said earlier, it has achieved considerable success. It is the pull from different directions by a much more successful, enlightened and demanding civil society that has contributed to more intense demands and criticism that we all are witnessing now. It is to the credit of the BN government that a much more democratic environment exists in Malaysia.

The challenge for the governing parties now is how not to panic and resort to easy short cuts in the way of curtailing the freedoms (now that were) initiated by former prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

TMI: How would you describe Tun Razak’s legacy to Malaysians today?

Musa: The best tribute to Tun Razak and the best way of recognising his legacy is for the government to stay the course with calmness, with patience and a high level of tolerance in managing our beloved country. Indeed, as the most outstanding leader among our founding fathers, it was Tun Razak who wished our country to be a multireligious, multiracial one that would be to the well being of all Malaysians. – January 14, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 15 January 2015, 8:04 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
NEP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why BN does not want more Parliament seats

By
Ong Kian Ming
 | 11:10AM Jan 13, 2015

Malaysiakini

MP SPEAKS The fact that no new no Parliament seat was added in Sarawak by the Election Commission is a very good indication that the yet-to-be revealed peninsular Malaysia and Sabah delimitation plans will also not include parliamentary seat increases.

With 31 out of 222 seats, Sarawak currently has 14 percent of the total Parliament seats. This figure would be diluted further if parliamentary seats are added in peninsular Malaysia and Sabah but not in Sarawak.

Any Sarawak chief minister would not have agreed to the new Sarawak delimitation plan if there was no assurance from the BN at the national level that no parliament seat will be added in either peninsular Malaysia or Sabah. This way, the current distribution of parliamentary seats and power at the federal can be maintained.

The delay in revealing the new delimitation plans for peninsular Malaysia and Sabah also indicates that a decision has been made to present plans without any increase in Parliament seats.

Election Commission chairperson Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof (seated right), in various statements in 2014 indicated that new Parliament seats would be added in the coming delimitation exercise, especially in existing seats with more than 100,000 voters. It was also reported in various news reports that the delimitation exercise would begin by the end of 2014.

While the floods in the East Coast may have caused the public display of the new delimitation exercise in peninsular Malaysia to be delayed, and will likely delay it further, there is also another alternative explanation. Which is that the EC was asked to amend the delimitation proposals so that no new parliament seats are added.

My colleague, Anthony Loke, the MP for Seremban, had already revealed in early November 2014 that he saw an electoral map for Negri Sembilan which proposes an increase in parliament seats including splitting the seat of Rembau into two.

This shows that the maps for peninsular Malaysia, and possibly Sabah, were ready for public display. 2014 came and went but these maps were never shown.

So, why was this the case?

One possible explanation is that the EC obtained orders from ‘above’ not to increase any parliamentary seats to avoid the possibility that the whole delimitation exercise would be ‘stuck’ in parliament because BN does not have a two-thirds majority to vote through an increased number of Parliament seats, as this will require amending the federal constitution.

It is also likely that the EC was asked not to increase any state seats in the states where the BN does not enjoy a two-thirds majority – Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu, Penang, Perak, Selangor and Negri Sembilan.

This is to avoid the problem of not being able to obtain a two-thirds majority in these state legislatures to increase the number of state seats by amending the state constitution. The exception here may be in Kelantan, where the PAS state government has had experience in negotiating with the Election Commission to increase state seats.

In states where the BN does enjoy a two-thirds majority such as Perlis, Pahang, Malacca, Johor and Sabah, it is likely that the EC will propose new state seats because such proposals are likely meet the approval of the BN-controlled state legislatures, which includes the necessary constitutional amendments at the state level.

What are the political implications?

What would be the impact of such a move by the EC? While we cannot be sure until the maps are revealed, it is likely that if no new Parliament seats are added, the EC will redraw the existing parliamentary boundaries to be favourable to the BN.

We saw this happen in Kedah in the 2003 delimitation exercise where no Parliament or state seat was added, but major gerrymandering took place which helped the BN win back marginal Parliament seats in lost in the 1999 general election, including Pokok Sena, Bali and Jerai.

In states like Selangor, boundaries may be redrawn to help BN win back marginal parliamentary seats such as Kuala Langat, Sepang and Hulu Langat. In Johor, boundaries may be redrawn and new state seats created in order to help the BN win back marginal state seats such as Bekok, Tangkak and Parit Yaani.

The ‘no increase’ urging by some NGOs

Ironically, the EC may justify its decision not to increase Parliament seats by referring to the statements made by NGOs such as Bersih, Tindak Malaysia and ABU requesting that no new parliament seats be added in the delimitation exercise.

While I am certain that none of these NGOs would approve of the EC’s attempts at gerrymandering even if no new parliament seats are added, their insistence on no new parliament seats may come back to haunt them.

This is because if new parliament seats were proposed and new state seats in the Pakatan-controlled states of Kelantan, Penang and Selangor and in states where Pakatan has at least one-third of state seats – Terengganu, Kedah, Perak and Negri Sembilan – the EC and the BN would have been forced to negotiate with Pakatan.

Then, the option would have been available for Pakatan to reject the delimitation plans, either at the federal or at the respective state levels by refusing to amend the state and federal constitutions. The default then would likely be to go back to the existing maps, which would be somewhat fairer, electorally speaking, compared with a new set of delimitation plans that would most certainly be more favourable to the BN.

What can we do then?

If the EC wants to bulldoze such a delimitation proposal in Parliament and in the respective states, the remaining options for the opposition as well as civil society, would be the following:

Organise as many objections as possible to the proposed delimitation exercises and use the public hearings to pressure the Election Commission to amend its delimitation proposal;

Ramp up pressure on the EC at each subsequent public hearing; and

If all else fails, the rakyat should organise another massive public gathering to protest of the delimitation exercise.

We cannot allow a government that was supported by only 47 percent of the voters in the 13th general election to abuse the electoral system so that it can stay in power in perpetuity.

Yesterday:
Part 1 – In 2015 delimitation, is Najib going for ‘nuclear’?

__

ONG KIAN MING is the DAP representative in the Pakatan Rakyat delimitation exercise committee and the MP for Serdang.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 15 January 2015, 2:07 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Wolf in sheep’s clothing

Mariam Mokhtar| January 9, 2015

Free Malaysia Today

The greatest threat to the Malays comes from bigots like Abdul Hamid Mohamad, Umno Baru and extremist Muslim NGOs.

COMMENT

Former Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad has dishonoured his profession. He is a disappointing role model to Malaysians and a disgrace to his Muslim brethren. Whilst many Malaysians are trying to rebuild their lives after the devastating floods, it appears that Hamid is keen to sow seeds of hatred and create racial disharmony. There must be a reason for Hamid’s racial attack. His reappearance comes just as the nation is questioning the lack of preparedness of the government and the attitude of the ministers in dealing with the flood crisis in Kelantan.

It is perplexing that Hamid’s inflammatory remarks on race and religion continue to escape censure by the authorities. His comments have come at a time when the rakyat is demanding answers to many problems besetting the government.

Is Abdul Hamid colluding with the government to distract the Malaysian public from issues like 1MDB, the Kassim Ahmad trial and the appeal against the acquittal of the two men implicated in Altantuya’s murder? Or is he acting to divert attention away from the negative publicity generated by the flooding?

According to news reports on January 3, Hamid wrote a letter to Utusan Malaysia to voice his support for a PAS-Umno unity government. The greater strength would enable Malays to stem the rise of Chinese political power, he reportedly said. He said Malay loyalties were divided between PAS and Umno Baru, thus giving the Chinese ample opportunity to exploit the political situation.

He said that after the tsunami in Aceh, the provincial government worked together with the central government in Jakarta to rebuild the county. He strongly hinted that Kelantan should emulate Aceh to form the unity government of PAS and Umno-Baru. He said, “Isn’t there a lesson to be learnt from Aceh? Hasn’t the disaster taught them to repent and start prioritising something bigger like religion and race instead of party interests?”

Hamid is no stranger to controversy. During the fasting month last July he warned that Islam in Penang was under threat and that if the problem continued, the religion would lose its “special position as the religion of the Federation”. He claimed that a Penang mufti had described the difficulties of securing allocations for Islamic activities in Penang.

He said he understood PAS’ reluctance to form a unity government because it had been previously betrayed by Umno-Baru. Nevertheless, he criticised PAS for ignoring the needs of Islam and the Malays, both of which formed the basic foundations of both parties. He said PAS “did not think about Islam and the Malays” and that PAS’ resentment of Umno-Baru made it neglect both the Malays and Islam.

The former CJ made another incendiary allegation when he said that the PAS members who were aligned with the “pro-Christian” DAP created difficulties for the formation of a unity government. He said, “There are the non-ulama faction in PAS now. This faction idolises communists, supports the Catholic church in the Allah issue and appears to be more keen on supporting any DAP agenda just to get votes and become MPs or state assemblymen.”

Bogeymen

This former judge continually harps on the bogeymen of Malays under attack and Islam being threatened. In his former profession, he would have had to uphold justice and to dispense it without fear or favour to all Malaysians. Why is he now trying to disunite Malaysians?

Last July, retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram described a case in 1996, which gives us an insight into Hamid’s character. The civil case involved a bank suing two business partners, a Malay and an Indian, both of whom were the guarantors for a loan. These men claimed that their signatures had been forged by a third party.

Sri Ram said that Hamid’s written judgement, in Malay, accepted the Malay defendant’s claim that “a Muslim does not tell lies”; however, Hamid had rejected the Indian’s allegation, which then prompted both the bank and the Indian businessmen to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Sri Ram said, “The Court of Appeal dismissed the bank’s appeal, set aside Hamid’s judgment and ordered a retrial.”

It appears that Hamid showed racial and religious bias even as a practising judge. Is it any wonder that people like Hamid disgrace the judiciary and make us lose confidence in this institution? The recent floods brought the community together. Unlike Hamid, Malaysians ignored the race and religion of the people whom they were helping.

As a former judge, Hamid should know that Islam is protected under the terms of the constitution and the Malays have no one to fear but themselves.

Ironically, the greatest threat to the Malays comes from bigots like Abdul Hamid, Umno Baru and various extremist Muslim NGOs.

Mariam Mokhtar is an FMT columnist.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 15 January 2015, 6:47 pm and is filed under
Judiciary
,
Malaysian Dream
,
Mariam Mokhtar
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


I did what I had to for my country, says airman sacked over indelible ink claim

by Yiswaree Palansamy

The Malay Mail Online

January 15, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 15 — Despite being discharged from the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) for questioning the integrity of the indelible ink used in Election 2013, former airman Zaidi Ahmad says he has no regrets over his actions.

On Monday, a military court found Zaidi guilty of misconduct for publicly complaining about the inefficacy of the indelible ink used in the general election, bringing an abrupt end to his 26-year career as an air force pilot with the rank of Major.

He was also found guilty for publishing an article without the consent of the Defence Ministry, and revealing the contents of official documents on the indelible ink without authorisation from the Malaysian Armed Forces Council, and was subsequently discharged from duty.

To the authorities, Ahmad may be viewed as a disloyal soldier who was insubordinate, but to the general public, the father of four has been hailed as a true Malaysian hero.

“I did what I had to do for my country and I will continue doing it,” Zaidi told Malay Mail Online in an email interview.

“As a responsible citizen, I must always strive to help the nation and its people to fight for justice and truth, combat lies, misappropriation and corruption,” he said.

Recalling how he summoned up the courage to expose the indelible ink issue, Zaidi said several of his former military comrades had been arguing and complaining online anonymously, on how the ink did not really remain for as long as the Elections Commission (EC) claimed it would.

Since none of the complainants dared to step up and substantiate their claims with proof, Zaidi felt he had to do it himself.

“So, I washed my finger with mere dishwasher soap and hand sanitizer, which were available at my work place.

“I then continued to wash at home and the ink truly did fade and left no trace! My wife who had voted with me that day then tried it on herself and she, too, saw similar results.”

Zaidi said he initially thought what had happened was a genuine technical glitch.

But his patience wore thin after the government made no effort to investigate his complaints on the matter.

“An announcement by the Election Commission chairman that same night that the indelible ink usage was a success because there were no reports claiming otherwise seemed like a call to me to then report that the ink on mine and my wife’s fingers were not at all indelible and can be washed off,” he said.

Zaidi said as there were no specific directives or orders from his superiors on the issue, he and his wife made the first move — which he felt was the safest — by lodging a police report on the ink.

He said he had also urged his military colleagues via text messages that night to step forward and “do the right thing”.

Zaidi alleged that his superiors, after learning of his intention to lodge the report, had also tried to stop him.

“But I was clear that this is my right as a voter who felt cheated by the EC and had nothing to do with my position as a military man,” he explained, saying that he would rather be sacked for telling the truth than keeping silent about the indelible ink issue.

“So, it is better that I quit or be sacked and find another job rather than being included into filthy matters like this,” he said.

Zaidi said that he joined the airforce to seek a “halal” income to support his family.

“My mother was the only one left to fend for her eight children after my parents divorced. My father left for Kuala Lumpur to become a bus driver thereafter, where he met and married a local there and had his own family.

“She however was left taking wages working off peoples’ paddy fields and did many odd jobs around the village. I wanted to give this woman a good life in her old days. I was also fuelled to serve my country and contribute whatever expertise I have,” he said,

Zaidi said it was an honour to have been picked by the air force.

“I am proud to have been able to contribute to my country from a very dangerous and challenging field.”

Indelible ink was introduced in Election 2013 as one of the main safeguards against repeat voting, but the scandal surrounding its easy removal transformed it into a symbol of the widespread electoral fraud allegedly perpetrated to keep Barisan Nasional in power.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 January 2015, 5:42 am and is filed under
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


National Security Council (NSC) is looking for excuses to justify its weaknesses, lapses and failures by making the hyperbolic and ludicrous  claim that Kelantan floods was  like Japan’s 2011 tsunami

The National Security Council (NSC) is looking for excuses to justify its weaknesses, lapses and failures by making the hyperbolic and ridiculous claim that the Kelantan floods was like Japan’s 2011 tsunami.

On March 11, 2011, a 9.0 earthquake struck Japan off Tohoku, generating a 10-metre high tsunami that swept away everything in its path and caused a nuclear disaster with the meltdown of Fukushima and other  nuclear power plants.

It was the most powerful earthquake ever recorded to have hit Japan and the fourth most powerful earthquake in the world since modern record-keeping began in 1900.

The earthquake triggered powerful tsunami waves that reached heights of up to 40.5 metres (133ft) and travelled up to 10 km (6 miles) inland.

The Japanese National Police Agency confirmed that the triple catastrophes caused  15,889 deaths, 6,152 injured and 2,601 people missing across twenty  prefectures, as well as over 127,290 buildings totally collapsed, with a further 272,788 buildings “half-collapsed” and another 747,989 buildings partially damaged.

The main tremoir split highways, flattened buildings and ignited fires all over the northeastern Pacific coast. The ensuing tsunami wiped out entire villages.

As many as 4.4 million households in northeastern Japan were left without electricity and 1.5 million without water.

Hundreds of thousands of people were evacuated when the tsunami caused nuclear accidents primarily at the three nuclear reactors in the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant complex.

The World Bank estimated economic cost of the triple disasters in Japan in March 2011 as US$235 billion, making it the costliest natural disaster in world history.

Although the 2014 floods catastrophe in Kelantan and the East Coast  is undoubtedly the worst floods catastrophe within living memory in Malaysia, causing close to a million flood victims, evacuating  a quarter of a million people to the  various flood relief centres, responsible for a toll of 25 deaths, reduced a few kampongs like Manek Urai, Kampong Manjur and Kampung Karangan in Kuala Krai into Ground Zero and billions of ringgit of losses, it was no comparison whatsoever with the apocalypse of the triple catastrophes which struck northeastern Japan on March 11, 2011.

NSC officials, especially its secretary, Datuk Thajudeen Abdul Wahab have been comparing the recent floods that ravaged Kelantan and the East Coast to the triple earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disasters that hit Japan in March 2011, when such a comparison is completely baseless although the purpose is very clear – to seek excuses for the weakness, lapses and even failures in disaster response, relief and reconstruction spearheaded by NSC.

I shudder to think what it would be like if Malaysia had been struck by a natural disaster anything like the apocalypse of the triple earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disasters that struck Japan in March 2011.

Even in his interview with Malay Mail Online yesterday, Thajudeen was clearly more interested in looking for excuses for the lack of leadership, particularly the failure to declare a state of emergency,  and the sub-par disaster response, relief and reconstruction phases of the  2014 Floods Catastrophe.

According to Thajudeen, the recent floods had been so severe that they caused the collapse of the Kelantan District Office that was in charge of disaster management, preventing the NSC from coordinating and receiving information from them.

Thajuddin posed a rhetorical question which highlighted the sheer failure and disaster of the sorry state of Disaster Management Preparedness of the NSC under the chairmanship of Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin instead of justifying the NSC’s total breakdown of chain of command and communications during crucial first few days of the floods catastrophe, viz:

“Even if I have 50 or 100 officers down there, if I call everybody in the whole country to be there in Kota Baru, but if you can’t communicate with them there, what can you do?”

As a result, we have the shocking episode of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, only realising that the floods disaster was a “major catastrophe” on the fourth day of his return after cutting short his vacation in Hawaii, after he had visited the two worst flood-stricken districts of Gua Musang and Kuala Krai.

This is the fourth week of the worst floods catastrophe in living memory in Malaysia, but the third phase of the flood disaster reconstruction has hardly started.

On Wednesday, a Johore DAP flood relief mission comprising DAP Johore elected representativers and state leaders led by DAP Johor Chairman and MP for Kluang Liew Chin Tong had a very depressing visit to some of the Ground Zero kampongs in Kuala Krai like Kampong Manjur and Kampung Karangan.

This is Chin Tong’s report:

“It has been almost four weeks since the floods in Kuala Krai on 22th December 2014 but the local conditions are almost unchanged and increasingly worrying. The clean-up efforts are frustratingly slow.

“Firstly, the Federal Government should  declare an emergency on areas worst hit by flood and deploy the armed forces personnel and all possible assets to clean up once and for all immediately to prevent the outbreaks of disease.

“I saw with my own eyes in Manjor a Health Ministry car with loudspeaker moving around to advise the residents to use clean water and to use proper toilets. But the irony is that there is no water and electricity supply, and the residents are bathing in the river…

“Second, the rebuilding of Kuala Krai and beyond must not be a way for crony contractors to con the Federal government for contracts. Governments of all levels, as well as NGOs, should give emphasis to creating temporary jobs for the locals in the rebuilding effort…

“Something serious must be done very quickly to protect public health, and temporary jobs should be created to keep the local economy moving. ”

The NSC must pull itself up by the bootstraps as its second and third phases of relief and reconstruction in the  worst floods  catastrophe in living memory are not up to the mark and not impressive at all, after a very  dismal performance in the first phase of response to the floods catastrophe.

This is why I have called for a Royal Commission of Inquiry to carry out a comprehensive review of the government’s Disaster Management Preparedness, whether response, relief or reconstruction to ensure that the grave weaknesses, lapses and failures of disaster management preparations,  mitigation, relief and reconstruction in the 2014 Floods Disaster become object lessons in dealing with future disasters.

Instead of looking for excuses by making the false and ludicrous claim  that Malaysia had not done too badly, as the recent floods catastrophe was like Japan’s 2011 apocalyse of triple earthquake, tsunami and nuclear catrastrophes, Malaysian leaders should wake up from their complacency and comfort zone and learn from the lessons, mistakes and failures of Disaster Management in all three phases of response, relief and reconstruction in the 2014 Floods Catastrophe.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 January 2015, 2:21 pm and is filed under
Kelantan
,
NaturaL disaster
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sacked airman says dismissal proves honesty doesn’t pay in Malaysia

by Yiswaree Palansamy

Malay Mail Online

January 15, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 15 — Former airman Zaidi Ahmad said his discharge from the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) for blowing the whistle on the weaknesses of the indelible ink used in Election 2013 demonstrates that honesty comes with a price here.

On Monday, the Military Court found Zaidi guilty of misconduct for publicly complaining about the inefficacy of the indelible ink used in the 2013 general election, and ordered his dismissal as a major in the RMAF.

“The honest ones are often the ‘criminals’, while liars who betray are the ones who are adulated and given various recognitions,” he told Malay Mail Online in an email interview.

Despite his misgivings over the court martial, Zaid said he accepts the decision with “an open heart”.

The father of four was also found guilty of publishing an article without consent from the Defence Ministry, and for revealing the contents of official documents on the indelible ink without authorisation from the Malaysian Armed Forces Council, and was discharged from duty.

Zaidi now says he want to move on, and is thinking of setting up a direct-selling business in order to support his family.

“I would be better off being on my own and not tied up with an employer like before so that I can move freely anywhere I want and speak about any issues, so long as it doesn’t violate Islamic rulings and the Federal Constitution,” he said.

When asked if he will be joining any non-governmental organisations (NGO) to champion electoral issues, Zaidi said he would be willing to help and work with anyone who is sincere in championing issues of national interest.

“It does not matter if they are an NGO or a political party, as long as they do not go against the country’s laws, as well and do not violate Islamic rulings,” he stressed.

Indelible ink was introduced in Election 2013 as one of the main safeguards against repeat voting, but the scandal surrounding its easy removal transformed it into a symbol of the widespread electoral fraud allegedly perpetrated to keep Barisan Nasional in power.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 January 2015, 6:11 am and is filed under
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Zahid must not take Malaysia as a nation of fools even if he can achieve a Cabinet of fools with Ministers obediently  accepting his outrageous take about his infamous letter to the FBI

I do not believe that the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi  suffers from comprehension problems that he could not understand that his letter was not merely intended to clarify that Paul Phua, the alleged gambling kingpin standing trial for illegal gambling in Las Vegas, Nevada was not a member of the 14K triad “in Malaysia”.

I do not believe that Zahid is so unsophisticated as to believe that when his infamous letter to the FBI referred to Phua as having helped the Malaysian government in “projects affecting our national security”,  that “we continue to call upon him to assist us from time to time as such, we are eager for him to return to Malaysia” and that Phua’s release would impact on furthering “good international relations between our two countries, especially in the exchange of information”, these statements would be regarded by FBI as  superfluous, empty and meaningless verbiage and not meant to influence FBI handling of  Phua’s case.

Zahid is being very brazen and blatant in demanding that everybody act as gullible fools to accept his version that his infamous letter to the FBI was merely intended to clarify that Phua was not a member of the 14K triad “in Malaysia” and nothing more.

Zahid claimed yesterday that the Cabinet at its meeting on Wednesday was “satisfied with his explanation on the matter”.

I do not believe that our Cabinet Ministers suffer from  comprehension problems either or they will not have risen to their present  pinnacle of political power in government.

For reasons best known to themselves, they prefer to appear to be gullible fools but this  is no compliment on their political purpose and integrity that they could be cowed into obediently accepting Zahid’s outrageous explanation of his infamous letter to the FBI, knowing in their heart of hearts that Zahid was not speaking the truth.

Are there  Ministers who really believe that Zahid’s infamous letter to the FBI was nothing more than clarifying  that Phua was not a member of the 14K triad “in Malaysia” and are prepared to step forward and identity themselves one by one?

I doubt there will be a single Cabinet Minister who will be prepared to state openly and publicly  that he or she truly believes that Zahid’s infamous letter was just to clarify that Phua was not a member of the 14K triad “in Malaysia”, although collectively they have been cowed into accepting  Zahid’s claim or at least not to puncture the balloon in public that his explanation had been accepted by the Cabinet!

Zahid must not take Malaysia as a nation of fools even if he can achieve a Cabinet of fools with Ministers obediently accepting his outrageous take about his infamous letter to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) on behalf of Paul Phua.

Zahid made one startling revelation  yesterday to justify his infamous letter to FBI, claiming that  previous Home Ministers before him had also written such clarification letters.

Is this true, that previous Home Ministers had also  unilaterally written to the FBI, without the knowledge of the police or the IGP at the time,  contradicting police reports to the FBI, as well as without the knowledge or clearance from the Foreign Ministry?

If this was the case, then the Ministers of the past had been even more indisciplined, wild and arbitrary than the Malaysian public had ever dared to  imagine.

Previous Home Ministers like Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar, Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad  and Datuk Azmi Khalid must speak up to clear themselves and to put the record straight, and Malaysians expect no less from them.

From one Minister endorsing and vouching for the character of an alleged gambling kingpin standing trial for illegal gambling in Las Vegas, we have now the whole Malaysian Cabinet seeming to have endorsed Zahid to vouch for the character and integrity of the alleged gambling kingpin.

Is this the intention of the Malaysian Cabinet on Wednesday when, according to Zahid, it accepted Zahid’s explanation on his infamous letter to FBI?

Zahid said yesterday that the  nature of the “national security projects” which Phua had helped the government cannot be revealed as they were classified under the Official Secrets Act 1972.

Has Zahid informed the Cabinet last Wednesday the nature of these “national security projects”?

If not, how could the Ministers “accept” Zahid’s explanation for his infamous letter to the FBI?

If yes, every Cabinet Minister is now not only collectively but personally responsible for  Zahid’s infamous letter to the FBI.

This must also  be the first time in the nation’s history where the Home Minister is using the Official Secrets Act to keep secret, not only from the public, but the police force and the Inspector-General of Police, the nature of the “national security projects” which Phua had been involved in!

What is most significant about Zahid’s press conference yesterday was that Zahid ended it abruptly before the media could ask any questions for clarification.

It is a powerful testimony that Zahid himself knew that he was defending the indefensible, and he did not want to expose himself  to the multitude of questions of  the waiting reporters.

Malaysia’s international reputation has been sullied enough by Zahid’s infamous letter to FBI and the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak must step in to clean up the mess or he would be no different from “Nero playing the fiddle while Rome burns”.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 January 2015, 6:34 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Police
,
Zahid
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


India fails to exploit oil price slump

By M K Bhadrakumar

Asia Times

January 8, 2015

As an energy-deficient country whose import bill for oil in the last financial year stood at $150 billion, the sharp fall in oil prices is a moment to celebrate. There are two ways to celebrate. One could be to open the champagne bottle and enjoy the good things in life. Then, there is a second way – the Chinese way – which is to seize the happy hour to plan for the future.

The Indian government is sipping champagne. The budget deficit significantly narrows and that is good news for the upcoming annual budget. A Morgan Stanley report in September calculated that a mere 10 percent drop in oil price could bring down the current account deficit by 0.6 percent of India’s GDP – no small matter.

However, how is the government taking advantage of the unexpected windfall? Plainly put, the benefit has not been passed on to the consumer. Whereas in the US, the average gasoline prices have reached their lowest level in the past four-year period, there is no such luck for the Indian consumer. Worse still, the government’s price fixation method is so opaque that a suspicion forms that private oil companies are being enabled to make huge profits.

Meanwhile, there is also a larger question involving energy security. Two news items concerning China draw attention to this aspect. One, Reuters reported on Wednesday that China has seized the moment to spring into a “buying spree” leading to record crude imports. China appears to have doubled the oil put aside for strategic reserves in 2014 compared to the previous year. In sum, China appears to have fast-forwarded its plan to fill up its strategic oil reserves. China’s strategic reserves are currently estimated at more than 30 days’ worth of crude imports, but it plans to increase it to ninety days of imports. It stands to reason that China is exploiting the opportunity of low cost crude.

Secondly, Associated Press reported earlier in the week that China has extended a $20 billion lifeline to the beleaguered Venezuelan economy (shaken by the big drop in income from oil exports). Part of the deal is that China’s state-run oil company will expand its activity in Venezuela’s oil-rich Orinoco belt. Now, replace Venezuela with Russia and it is clear India’s lotus eating attitude is self-defeating.

Apart from a brief period when Mani Shankar Aiyar was petroleum minister in the early part of the last decade, India never really cared about evolving a long-term strategy on energy security. Our political masters seem to be relishing the prospect of dealing with the spot market rather than get into long-term arrangements in the national interest.

Ironically, Jim O’Neill who famously coined the acronym BRICS just took note that India’s growth rate has begun accelerating and “With the election of Narendra Modi as prime minister and the large drop in oil prices, India still has an outside chance of meeting my expectations for the full decade. It could even grow more than China in the second half [of the decade].”

According to O’Neill, India is the only BRICS economy other than China’s , which is likely to average a 7.5 percent growth for the full decade ending 2020.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 17 January 2015, 6:30 pm and is filed under
Oil
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Maslan should apologise for the false claim on Jan 5 that the Federal Government had spent RM800 million to help flood victims when only RM41 million had been spent up to now!

Deputy Finance Minister, Datuk Ahmad Maslan said on January 5 that the government had spent RM800 million through the National Security Council to help victims in states affected by floods for the provision of food supply, logistics and cleaning houses of victims.

This created an uproar of protests all round.

At a media conference in Kota Bahru the next day, I expressed shock and outrage at Maslan’s RM800 million claim, stating that I had visited Kota Bahru three times, been in Kuala Krai twice, even in the Ground Zero zones of Manek Urai, Kg Manjur and Kg Karangan, as well as been in Gua Musang, but I definitely did not feel or sense that RM500 million to RM600 million had been spent in Kelantan in relief efforts for the flood victims.

(As Kelantan was the worst flood-stricken state in the floods catastrophe, if Maslan was right that RM800 million had been spent on the flood victims, the bulk of the expenditure, say RM500 million – RM600 million, should have been spent in the state).

I demanded Maslan reveal how much had been spent in Kelantan, Terengganu, Pahang and Perak and a full and detailed audit of this RM800 million claim as I just did not believe that RM800 million had been spent on the flood victims, an impression shared by all NGOs and good-hearted Malaysians who had gone to the aid of the flood victims on their own efforts unrelated to government relief efforts.

I stressed in Kota Bahru: “There should be strict audit of the so-called RM800 million already spent to help flood victims, and the other expenditures still to be made, to ensure that there is no hanky-panky whatsoever.

“No money should be spared to help the flood victims, but not a sen should be wasted.

“All government expenditures spent in the floods catastrophe must directly benefit the flood victims and not the ‘floods’ barons, entrepreneurs or cronies.”

Even the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Chairman Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamad was taken aback by Maslan’s announcement, saying that PAC would be asking the Finance Ministry and the National Security Council to explain the RM800 million that had been spent on flood relief efforts.

Nur Jazlan said the amount allocated was huge and as such, its management needed to be transparent.

Even the PAS leader in charge of the Terengganu flood relief operations, Syed Azman Syed Ahmad Nawawi expressed surprise at Maslan’s claim as he could not see any Federal funds used for the flood victims in the state.

Maslan kept completely mum for 11 days despite repeated demands by Pakatan Rakyat leaders, NGOs and NGIs demanding for details of the RM800 million which the Deputy Finance Minister claimed had already  been spent on flood victims on January 5.

Yesterday, January 16, the cat was finally out of the bag.  Maslan was not telling the truth as the Federal Government had never spent RM800 million on the flood victims on January 5.

In an interview with The Malay Mail Online yesterday, the National Security Council secretary Datuk Mohamed Thajudeen Abdul Wahab clarified that the East coast flood relief aid approved by the Federal Government was RM500 million and not RM800 million.

Where did Maslan’s RM800 million come from?

From  Thajuddin’s interview, it would appear that the Federal Government had not even spent RM100 million on the  flood victims – confirming what I and many others had said that the flood victims, which  must be close to a million with a quarter of a million evacuated to the various flood relief centres, could not feel that hundreds of millions of ringgit had been spent by the Federal Government on them – not to say on January 5, not even now, the fourth week of the worst floods catastrophe in Malaysia in living memory.

It would appear that the RM500 million allocated by the Federal Government for the worst floods catastrophe was the amount announced by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak when he visited Kelantan cutting short his vacation in Hawaii.

How much of this RM500 million had been spent in each of the flood-stricken states?

So far, Thajuddin could only mention RM41 million for 82,000 families of flood victims who stayed at evacuation centres with each family receiving RM500.

What about the families of flood victims who did not stay in evacuation centres? Are they to get nothing?

How are the balance of RM459 million to be spent?

Maslan should apologise for the false claim on Jan 5 that the Federal Government had spent RM800 million to help flood victims when only RM41 million had been spent up to now!

Furthermore, Malaysians are entitled to an explanation why the clarification only came 11 days after Maslan’s false claim.

If this is a reflection of the efficiency  of the public service, it is no wonder that in all three phases of the worst floods catastrophe in living memory, flood response, relief and reconstruction, Federal Government performance are  so abysmal with many areas  of flood devastation  hardly undergoing any change although the floods catastrophe was  more than three weeks ago.

It also from Thajuddin’s interview with The Malay Mail Online that I learnt that death toll from the floods were 25 lives.

This is most shocking, as contradictory and conflicting figures of total death toll had been given by different agencies, such as between the Police and the NSC!

This is a reflection of the lack of transparency, accountability and efficiency in the Floods Disaster Management Preparations, reinforcing the argument for a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the mishandling of the worst floods catastrophe in living memory in Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 17 January 2015, 4:01 pm and is filed under
Kelantan
,
NaturaL disaster
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Remembering the Tun

Dyana Sofya

The Malay Mail Online

January 16, 2015 10:46 AM

JANUARY 16 — In commemoration of our country’s second prime minister Allahyarham Tun Razak’s 39th death anniversary, Roketkini.com organised a forum featuring DAP Parliamentary Leader Lim Kit Siang, editor of The Malaysian Insider Jahabar Sadiq, MP for Lembah Pantai Nurul Izzah Anwar and the late Tun’s former political secretary, Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad.

It was certainly an eclectic mix of speakers, and this notion wasn’t lost on Dollah Kok Lanas, as Tan Sri is better known, when he trumpeted that he was “the only Umno man in the room.”

He proved to be a memorable speaker as he recounted his close working relationship with the Tun. With trademark sarcasm, he also pointed that “ironically, Umno does not remember Tun Razak while it is DAP that remembers him.”

I tweeted that gem of a quote and immediately received backlash from supporters of the ruling party, some of whom tried to defend Umno by saying that a tahlil had been organised, and that it was more appropriate to hold prayers than to discuss Tun Razak’s ideas in a forum.

Certainly, it is commendable to have a tahlil to mark his death anniversary, but I believe that we can only do justice to the Tun’s legacy by discussing and sharing thoughts on his policies, ideas and contributions, many of which are more relevant than ever in our present time.

In his speech, Kit Siang mentioned that Tun Razak was the youngest prime minister in the history of Malaysia, having been appointed at the age of 48. In fact, he had become deputy prime minister at the age of 35, which one may notice is younger than the current Umno Youth Chief.

When he was my age, Tun Razak had been his party’s Youth Chief, though some people thought I was too young to be elected back in May last year.

Like Indonesia’s Sukarno, our country’s founding fathers believed in the power of young people. They actively invested in and engaged the youth. It wasn’t just Tun Razak who had been elevated to high office in his 30s. Our country’s Inspector-General of Police and the Chief of Navy then were also both in their 30s.

The fact that so much opportunity and responsibility had been placed in the young meant that the leaders then believed in renewal. Unfortunately, most of those in government today only believe in renewing their own terms of office.

Tun Razak, who is credited as being the architect of the New Economic Policy (NEP), had been a member of the British Labour Party when he was a student in London. As Labour was rather heavily left-leaning in those days, it is no wonder that his policies reflected Socialist values, despite being of aristocratic background.

For example, the Tun had been responsible for pioneering PKNS, Felda and Mara, besides pushing for more state intervention to support social equality at a time when the country lacked basic necessities and essential services. In fact, the NEP’s main objective was to eradicate poverty and the identification of economic function with race.

On a cultural point, Jahabar noted that in Tun Razak’s days, Malay men wore suits and danced the joget. Though meant to be light-hearted, it is certainly true that Malaysians were more broadminded and liberal where societal and cultural issues were concerned.

There was certainly less moral policing, yet our civil service was world class and our schools and universities produced top quality graduates. Somehow, individual freedom had not constrained the development of young Malaysians.

Unfortunately, nowadays people are more interested in what the young are wearing and how they are supposed to behave. The state is now an arbiter of what is morally acceptable, resulting in a focus on superficial facades rather than what really matters.

Somehow, we as a society have lost sight of our priorities. Fifteen-year-old girls are being targeted by the religious authorities, while those selling dodgy consumer products in the name of religion are not paid any heed.

In another case, a school in Cheras had allegedly sent a non-Malay girl home for wearing a baju kurung to school. There is no excuse for a school to act in such a manner.

If modesty was the reason, then the school should simply require female students to wear plain-coloured camisoles underneath. When I was in school, girls who chose not to do so were issued demerit points instead of being deprived a day of school. Once again, we do not know how to prioritise.

I wonder what Tun Razak would say were he alive to see all this happening in the country he sacrificed so much for. Perhaps his youngest son, Datuk Seri Nazir Razak, is right when he said that his father would be shocked that it is already 2015 yet race and religion appears to divide Malaysians even more than during his time.

Oh, where have we gone wrong?

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 17 January 2015, 6:15 pm and is filed under
UMNO
,
Youth
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Cabinet on Wednesday should uphold the principles of good governance and accountability and declassify information on the “national security projects” involving alleged gambling kingpin Paul Phua which the police knew nothing about

Zahid Hamidi will become the standing joke in the world for a bumbling and bungling Home Minister so long as he does not come clean and admit that his infamous letter to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) vouching for the character of an alleged gambling kingpin, Paul Phua, standing trial in Las Vegas, Nevada for illegal gambling, was an egregious error of judgment.

Zahid, the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib  Razak and the entire Cabinet should not delude themselves into thinking that the Zahid-Phua-Shafee-Khalid quadrilateral tangle would just disappear into thin air if the Home Minister invokes the Official Secrets Act followed by  a blanket of silence  on the issue from official quarters.

Zahid is supposed to be one of the smartest political leaders in the UMNO pantheon but he could not have been more  foolish and self-destructive in his outrageous “defence” of his infamous letter to the FBI, going against not only the Police, the Foreign Ministry and  the national interests but simple common sense!

If Zahid is not prepared to come clean and honest and publicly admit and apologise for his infamous letter to the FBI vouching for the character of an alleged gambling kingpin, the Cabinet at its meeting on Wednedsay must revisit the issue and take a stand which is in accord with national interests.

The  Malaysian public are entitled  to know whether the Cabinet had approved and endorsed Zahid’s infamous letter to the FBI after Zahid’s explanation, and the invocation of the  Official Secrets Act to hide the nature of the “national security projects” involving Phua which even the Police knew nothing about!

The Cabinet should let Malaysians know whether there had been such “national security projects” involving Phua in the past, how many of them and why the Police knew nothing about it.

The Cabinet should in fact decide on Wednesday whether in the interests of upholding the principles of good governance,  accountability and transparency, and in keeping with the much-vaunted Government Transformation Programme, information on the so-called “national security projects” involving Phua which even  the police knew nothing about, should be declassified and its details made known to the public.

Malaysians are eager to know what could be these “national security projects” involving Phua which even the Police knew nothing about – whether  all these “national security projects” happened during  Zahid’s 19-month tenure as Home Minister from May  2013  or whether Zahid had inherited the “national security projects” involving Phua from the previous Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 18 January 2015, 6:20 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Police
,
Zahid
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Can we have equal education for all in Malaysia?

Zan Azlee

The Malaysian Insider

16 January 2015

I have always wondered why parents (and even many students) in Malaysia are obsessed about getting into the right schools so that their children can get the best education.

They pressure their children to get good grades so they can get into schools like fully-residential schools (SBP) and MRSMs (Mara Junior College).

Some even go to the extent of faking their addresses so their children can get into their choice of non-boarding schools that are not in their living vicinity.

Even my parents did the same for my brothers and I. They didn’t fake our address, but they did make sure we got into the “best” schools – I even had to go to a fully-residential school.

Why I’m raising this issue is not because I think parents shouldn’t want their children to go good schools. Of course they should, and so should their children.

My real intention is to ask why there should even be a difference in the quality of schools all around the country. Shouldn’t public education be equal and standard for all?

Why is it that the best teachers are sent only to certain schools like the bestaris, SBPs and MRSMs instead of being spread throughout the country?

Why are only certain schools given better allocations to develop their infrastructure and resources for the benefit of the students and teachers instead of every single school?

Why is PPSMI (Science and Mathematics in English) stopped in public schools but the IGCSE (Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education) offered in MRSMs?

I completed my Form 5 in an SBP and every single one of us had to take the English 1119 paper (GCE O-level English) and two years of preparation classes for it.

None of my friends who were in the ordinary public secondary schools had the option to take that paper in school (they were, of course, able to take it outside privately).

So why is the education system in Malaysia in such a state that there is a double standard for different schools? Is it because there is a double standard for different Malaysians?

And who actually determines the education policy for the country? Does the Education Ministry do it on its own or is the public given a chance to express itself?

Education is an important element in the development and progression of the country. It is where the youth are enhanced so that the future is determined.

And that responsibility lies on the adults of today and the elected leaders of today. So I say that there should be equal education for all in Malaysia.

People in Ranau, Sabah should have the same quality of education as those in Sarikei, Sarawak and even those in Arau, Perlis and Segamat, Johor. Nobody gets left behind.

Who are we to determine who gets more education than another? But now, yet another questions arises: are we capable of maintaining the same level of education consistently throughout? – January 16, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 18 January 2015, 7:10 am and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


It is not too late for Najib  to convene a special meeting of Parliament to present the revised  2015 Budget

The question the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak must answer is why he is not convening a special meeting of Parliament to present the restructuring of the 2015 Budget.

As it is Parliament which approved the RM273.9 billion 2015 Budget, it is only right and proper, fully in accord with the principle of parliamentary democracy, that Najib should convene a special Parliament to present the restructured 2015 Budget because of the weakening of ringgit and the plunging oil prices.

It is not too late for Najib to do what is right, and convene a special meeting of Parliament to present the revised 2013 Budget as a special Parliament can be convened even within 48 hours. Otherwise, Najib would be showing utter contempt to Parliament and the principle of parliamentary democracy.

Oil-related revenue accounted for 29.5% of total government revenue.  According to the Estimates of Federal Government’s Revenue 2015, oil-related revenue is calculated on the basis of Malaysian crude oil price being USD110 per barrel in 2014 and USD105 per barrel in 2015.

Based on these assumptions, the Government had projected a total income of RM235.2 billion for the 2015 Budget with a total expenditure of RM273.9 billion, targetting a gross domestic product (GDP) growth by 5% to 6%, and trimming the fiscal deficit to 3% of GDP by end-2015.

By early November,  crude oil prices have fallen to USD80-85 per barrel. Today, global crude oil prices have already declined by almost 60% from the middle of last year to trade below US$50 per barrel.

The latest forecast is that oil prices could trade around US$40 a barrel in the first half of the year.

It has been estimated that every drop of USD1 per barrel would cost the federal government about RM650 million in revenue.

This was why almost a month before 2015 Budget was approved by the Dewan Rakyat on 25th November 2014, DAP had already called for a revision of the 2015 Budget as its very basis and projections had been knocked off  by the drastic fall in crude oil prices and other economic developments including the weakening of the Malaysian ringgit.

Najib had ample time to convene a special Parlament to present his restructured Budget 2015. Why is he not doing so?

In fact, the last Cabinet meeting for last year on Dec. 17, 2014 should have taken the bold but right decision for a special Parliament for a revised 2015 Budget before the end of last year.

Instead, the Cabinet went on on year-end vacation, and the country was virtually without a Federal Government with the Prime Minister and most Ministers out of the country when  Malaysia suffered the worst floods catastrophe in  living memory three days before Christmas.

Although Najib cut short his vacation in Hawaii and subsequently ordered all Ministers to return from their vacation overseas, not all Ministers complied, and the Cabinet was unable to hold any special meeting whether on the worst floods catastrophe or revised 2015 Budget before the 2015 New Year, and the Cabinet could only be  reconvened on 7th January 2015.

The question is whether a revised 2015 Budget was on the agenda of the first Cabinet meeting on January 7, and if so, why a special Parliament was not convened as there was ample time to do so.

A special Parliament should  have been convened by the second Cabinet meeting on January 14.

In fact, a special Parliament meeting could still be convened in a matter of 48 hours.  Why has Najib ruled out such an option as he is showing utter contempt for Parliament which had approved the original 2015 Budget on Nov. 25.

A special Parliament meeting is urgent and imperative, as apart from a revised 2015 Budget, many issues confronting the country need to be addressed, including (1) the worst floods catastrophe in living memory and the appalling state of unpreparedness with regard to the Flood Disaster Management Preparations by the National Security Council; (2) the Report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Illegal Immigrants in Sabah; (3) the RM1.3 trillion illegal capital flight in the ten years from 2003 to 2012; and (4) the urgent need for moderates in Malaysia regardless of race, religion, region or politics to unite and defeat the rhetoric and politics of hate, bigotry, intolerance and extremism.

MPs and Malaysians will be watching whether in  the revised 2015 Budget, the Prime Minister is prepared to set the example by slashing the ballooning RM19.1  billion Budget for the Prime Minister’s Department for 2015.

At RM19.1 billion, the allocation for the PM’s Department represents an increase of about 16% from RM16.5 billion last year. In 2013 Budget, the budget for PM’s Department was RM14.6 billion.

In the revised 2015 Budget, the Prime Minister’s Office must set an example for all Ministries and its allocation of RM19.1 billion should be slashed by more than 50 per cent.

I want to remind Najib that in the early 1960s,  the total Federal budget expenditure per year did not even reach RM1 billion!

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 18 January 2015, 10:43 am and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Finance
,
Najib Razak
,
Oil
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


It’s time we decide the country we want

Syerleena Abdul Rashid

The Malaysian Insider

16 January 2015

Malaysians used to be more tolerant than we are today. Once upon a time in a not-so-distant past, we used to visit each other’s open houses freely without worry. The idea of what was halal or haram was mutually understood and we didn’t have holier-than-thou organisations to tell us that we couldn’t mingle with fellow Malaysians who professed different religions because they were a threat to our own faiths. We ate and drank together while some of us even played mahjong until dawn.

But now, our society has swayed from tolerance and respect to antithetical values that condemn logic and defend non-negotiable conservatism. Traditionalists may twist the articulations of conscience to justify their causes but their narratives are often arbitrary and sometimes quite laughable. Consider the controversies that surround our society: for instance, the recent furore over a K-Pop act, school principals not allowing non-Malay students to wear the baju kurung, arguments over “domesticated genes” and so on. The voices of the absurd and the one dimensional are becoming louder with each passing day, only because they have been sanctioned to spread intolerance by the powers that be.

We now live in a time where violence and persecution is encouraged. Our differences are magnified and played out incessantly – ideas that we are different and should remain different have been drilled into our heads and as a result, our behaviour and how we speak to one other is reflective of the prejudices they encourage. Such factions only want us to hate people who are different and require us to harass those who think differently. They do this because they fail to understand the unique dimensions of human relations, but mostly because they possess a very shallow understanding relating to the philosophies of religion.

Unfortunately, the current situation in Malaysia seemingly paints a picture where we can no longer talk about or instigate discussions on the very things that make us unique and diverse. Those who do or attempt to are quickly labelled as out of touch with reality or just seditious, but without understanding, the wedge the keeps us apart will only pry harder until the imminent social breakdown occurs.

These factions have mastered the art of turning language into a weapon where terms such as “liberal”, “pluralism” and “moderates” have all become expletives. Never mind if such words exist in our Rukun Negara; their intention is only to create fear among the gullible. However, no rational argument or logical excuses are presented; reason and logic materialise through the medium of language and thus, the death of reason simply requires the destruction of language and the cunning play of words.

Never forget that Malaysia is a democratic nation, even if past and present incidents may show otherwise. Never forget that Malaysians can still depend on our Federal Constitution, even if certain factions have taken advantage of public ignorance. Their goal is to purge this country of everything except what is beneficial to them and their ilk.

Malaysians must always remember that true democracy supports the notion that decisions are achieved through rational debates which enhance society’s understanding and allows us to exchange any grievances that might arise. Conservatism basically accuses anyone who disagrees as simply denying the fundamental order of the universe by providing arbitrary narratives. The lack of dialogue replaces reason with authority and when such uncertainty is established in our culture, democracy corrodes over time, making it possible for such factions to dominate our minds.

As Malaysians, we should ask ourselves, what sort of nation do we really want? Are we content with allowing the conservatives, the ultra-traditionalists, the right wing, the elite, the cronies, the opportunists and the bigots to bellow their sermons of hate, intolerance and fear? Or can we – as a nation – muster the courage and strength to tell them that we have had enough? Are Malaysians ready to take ownership of this country? I know I am. Are you? – January 16, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 18 January 2015, 6:42 am and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Razak’s NEP was for all races, says ex-civil servant who helped draft it

by Elizabeth Zachariah

The Malaysian Insider

17 January 2015

The man who helped Malaysia’s second prime minister Tun Abdul Razak Hussein craft the New Economic Policy (NEP) to eradicate poverty and end identification of occupation with race laments that it has now become distorted by race and religion.

Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam, who was the deputy head of the Economic Division in the Treasury under Razak’s administration, said the NEP was “a wonderful, noble policy”.

“He (Razak) was serious about eradication of poverty regardless of race. Every poor chap, regardless of his ethnicity, was given help.

“Not today, I am afraid. Along the way, it got distorted as race and religion got in the way,” Ramon told The Malaysian Insider in an interview to conclude a series commemorating Razak’s 39th death anniversary.

Razak died of leukaemia on January 14, 1976, after only six years of leading the country.

He introduced the NEP in 1971 as a measure to steer Malaysia away from potential racial conflict with the affirmative action policy that set out to level the playing field between the Malays and other races, although the policy’s approach was targeted at all races.

Like Ramon, others interviewed in this series, who were Razak’s contemporaries, said they were supportive of the NEP but noted that over the years, problems arose in its implementation, which allowed abuses to happen.

For that, the NEP has drawn much criticism from other races who blame it for causing rifts among the ethnic groups as its implementation appeared to favour only the Malays.

Razak, as the brains behind the policy, however, was deeply rooted in the values of Malaysia’s founding fathers who believed in tolerance and unity among races, Ramon said.

“We were encouraged and confident that he would continue the legacy and philosophies of the founding fathers. And he improved on it by giving more attention to the lower-income groups.

“He was a man of the people and had his ear to the ground. He would remember even a promise to build a bridge at a kampung and would follow up with visits to see if things are in order,” he added.

Back then, Ramon recalled, the people had faith in the wisdom of politicians, including Umno and the Barisan Nasional (BN), which have been the ruling government until today.

“We had faith in their wisdom, in the wisdom of Umno and the Alliance (which later became BN) at that time. We had faith in their leadership.”

Ramon, 80, said working for Razak was nothing short of “remarkable” as those around him sought to follow his example.

“He was such an honest man. You felt inspired in his presence. And because you knew the man was so dedicated, hardworking and diligent in his work, you would not want to let him down. You would do your best, too.”

The economist was 35 when Razak came into power, succeeding the first prime minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, in 1970.

“I never worked directly under Tun Razak but I used to meet him in meetings that he chaired on economic policy, poverty and rural development, when I was working in the Treasury.

“I remember when he first took over as PM. I remember feeling confident that this man will deliver for the country. Why? Because he was second to Tunku Abdul Rahman for many years. In many ways, he was groomed by Tunku.

“Where Tunku brought independence, he (Razak) brought development. There was no point of development if the people were not taken care of and continued to live in poverty,” he said.

Ramon, who is now the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (Asli) director, also recalled Razak being so committed to his work that he did not have much time for his family.

But he had a sense of fun and enjoyed relaxing with his staff. Those were the days when civil servants would hold dance parties to celebrate their hard work.

“I remember once we were celebrating the Budget speech and we had a party at the Finance Ministry that night. We had joget music but no one was dancing.

“And I could tell he didn’t like that. He looked around, pointed at me and asked me to dance. So, I went looking for a girl and began dancing,” said Ramon, laughing.

Working under Razak was some of the “best days of my life”, said Ramon, who is also group corporate adviser in the Sunway Group.

“It was fulfilling. Serving him was fulfilling your own aspirations of quality and excellence. He inspired a strong sense of loyalty to the country.

“He led with honesty, integrity and high standards of management. He felt very strongly all Malaysians. He felt that Malaysia should be proud of its diversity and worked hard for the benefit for all.

“And because of these principles that he had, there was peace and definitely greater unity back then.” – January 17, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 18 January 2015, 6:23 am and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
NEP
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


To rescue the economy, put national interests before self-interest

Rash Behari Battacharjee

The Malaysian Insider

17 January 2015

It is as plain as daylight that Budget 2015 must be revised in the wake of plunging world oil prices, given that some 30% of government revenue comes from petroleum. In addition, it has been noted, the unprecedented ferocity of the year-end floods which will require a multi-billion ringgit reconstruction effort means that development expenditure must be reallocated to rehabilitate damaged infrastructure and restore normalcy to the victims’ lives and the economies of the affected regions.

Last week, Prime Minister and Finance Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak indicated, not a day too soon, that an announcement about a possible restructuring of the budget to address these challenges would be made this week.

Analysts have noted that a confluence of external and internal factors in recent months – including the oil price shock, capital outflow, flood devastation and 1MDB’s performance, besides corrosive political developments – have heightened  concerns about the prospects for the Malaysian economy, both in the immediate future and the longer term.

Nevertheless, the current adversities present an invaluable opportunity to set right the ship of state, which is showing alarming signs that it is heading for the rocks.

Although it is evident that the budget revision exercise would encompass the rationalisation of government expenditure through a raft of measures including cost-cutting and the de-prioritisation of  non-urgent projects and programmes, it is essential to acknowledge that these steps do not address fundamental issues of governance that are at the heart of Malaysia’s development dilemma.

Chief among these is the current paradigm of political financing that nullifies the entire infrastructure of checks and balances that are central to democratic rule, from the principle of separation of powers to parliamentary oversight of national affairs to the practice of transparency and accountability.

In fact, attempting to instil fiscal discipline in the public administration without addressing the underlying decay in governance is essentially an exercise in futility. In a word, we must be serious about cleaning out the Augean stables of public office built on rent-seeking and patronage if we truly care to ensure a bright future for the country.

To put the government budget back on a sustainable track, wind back its ballooning operating expenditure and address the structural problems that are weighing down the economy, it is necessary first of all to commit ourselves to a functioning system of public accountability that enables the key democratic institutions to scrutinise public policies and performance and prevent the whole range of aberrations that are giving rise to grave concerns even about the viability of the country.

A common step taken by debt counsellors to help an individual debtor overcome the addiction to easy credit is to literally cut up the debtor’s credit cards before him or her. An equivalent action is necessary to cut the attachment of the political parties and their leaders to friendly business interests to finance their war chests and oil their political machinery.

This will require a radical shift in the political culture in order for political parties to introduce a transparent system of political financing, where private funding is open to scrutiny, public funding of political activity is given a bigger role and spending limits for political campaigns effectively enforced. There is no shortage of time-tested models of political financing in mature democracies that can be adapted to the local situation, if the political will for it can be summoned.

However, the tools of transparency must be fairly applied and not used by incumbents in office as a means of ferreting out the financial backers of political opponents in order to penalise them. It will not work if it is used to produce a zero sum game.

Is such a level playing field even conceivable in the current political climate? Although the issue is fraught with difficulties, there is perhaps no other choice for Malaysia but to start on a fresh slate, given that the template for political financing that is currently being used threatens to drain the lifeblood from the nation.

Admittedly, this matter can only be given serious attention if the key stakeholders in the situation recognise that the political equation that was set in place at the time of the nation’s independence is in an extremely fragile state after close to six decades and therefore, that a powerful new inclusive formula must be introduced to give the diverse Malaysian people a fighting chance to pull together to build a vibrant future.

Enough unease has been generated by the polarising influences of racial and religious politics to show that for Malaysia to become a successful nation, it must quash the idea of organising society along communal lines and start afresh. In its place, a multi-cultural approach is essential, albeit in tune with constitutional safeguards for Malay rights, to attune the people and economy towards an era of globalisation.

To turn the country away from the insular, antagonistic thinking that is being given disproportionate attention today, national institutions and leaders must project an open, forward-looking outlook that encourages Malaysians to see themselves in the global context, both as consumers and producers in a progressive and productive future.

That will require the political establishment to discard the race-tinted glasses through which the nation’s affairs, including its economy, people and culture are viewed, although that ensures them a permanent spot in the news. To make the change happen, they will only need to abandon self-interest in favour of the national interest. – January 17, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 18 January 2015, 7:00 am and is filed under
Economics
,
Finance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Revised 2015 Budget should declare war on corruption, incompetence and extravagance to provide example and leadership of government commitment to austerity, accountability and integrity

The revised 2015 Budget should declare war on corruption, incompetence and extravagance to provide example and leadership of government commitment to austerity, accountability and integrity.

Such a campaign would save the Malaysian government and taxpayers scores of billions of ringgit, which would help the country tide through the looming economic crisis as a result of the sharp fall in prices of oil and commodities and the weakening of the Malaysian ringgit.

Despite the greatest investment in anti-corruption campaign, with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission developing into a huge bureaucracy but with very little to show in terms of results, the Najib premiership is still far behind the Abdullah and Mahathir premierships in both ranking and score of the annual Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI).

Malaysia lags seriously behind other countries in the battle against corruption, particularly Indonesia and China, and Malaysia is at risk of being overtaken by these two countries which had occupied the bottom two of rungs of the TI CPI 1995 two decades ago in a matter of a decade.

China had persevered in its anti-corruption campaign against “tigers and flies” while Indonesia had been quite impressive in catching “crocodiles”, but Malaysia had failed to net and jail a single tiger or crocodile in the 34 years of the the Prime Ministers of Tun Dr. Mahathir, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

Has the Prime Minister’s Department or the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission ever conducted a study why China could net “tigers” and Indonesia catch “crocodiles” while Malaysia has singularly failed to do, only able to get “ikan bilis” in the last two decades of the anti-corruption campaign?

If the revised 2013 Budget could mark a serious anti-corruption campaign first time in the country’s history, with the jailing of the first “tiger” or “crocodile”, then it would be a most path-breaking event.

The country’s worst floods catastrophe in living memory is also the worst example of the government’s lack of competence and lack of a sense of crisis, resulting in the appalling Federal government responses to the worst floods disaster in history, as well in the other phases of floods disaster management on relief and reconstruction.

The damages of the worst floods catastrophe in living memory in Malaysia would not be so great as to cause over a million flood victims, evacuating a quarter of a million to the various flood relief centres in the country, causing a death toll of at least 25, damages to the tune of billions of ringgit and the devastation of Ground Zero zones like Manek Urai, Manjur and Karangan, if both the Federal and State Governments, particularly the National Security Council chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, had been better prepared for the floods disasters.

The false claim by the Deputy Finance Minister, Datuk Ahmad Maslan that the Federal Government had spent RM800 million on January 5 to help the flood victims in terms of food, logistics and clean-up operations when only RM41 million had been spent to date, is the best evidence of the incompetence and ineptitude of Federal Ministers in charge of the destiny of Malaysians.

I do not believe that Maslan had set out to deliberately lie or mislead Malaysians with his false and ridiculous RM800 million claim, as once it was made, everyone on the ground involved in the flood relief operations knew it was utter rubbish, as nobody could sense or feel the hundreds of millions of ringgit which the Federal Government claims to have been spent.

The very fact that a Deputy Finance Minister could make such a blooper is an indication of the quality of governance in Malaysia.

The annual reports of the Auditor-General provides reams of example of government waste, extravagance and ineptitude year after year.

I had suggested that Najib should set example by slashing by at least 50 per cent the RM19.1 billion budget for the Prime Minister’s Department, which involved gargantuan “slush funds” solely to further the political agenda of the ruling coalition.

The Federal Government is also bloated with too many Ministries and Ministers as compared to other countries like Australia and India.

For a start, let Najib slash the number of Ministers and Ministries by at least 10 per cent – to mark a new era of government austerity and integrity.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 19 January 2015, 8:53 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Economics
,
Najib Razak
,
NaturaL disaster
,
Oil
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP proposes a two-day special Parliament meeting on Jan 26 and 27 on the revised 2015 Budget instead of Najib unilaterally announcing restructuring of the 2015 Budget in utter contempt not only of Parliament but also of Cabinet

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, seemed bent on announcing his restructured 2015 Budget tomorrow.

This will mean that the revised 2015 Budget is made not only without parliamentary sanction or approval, but also without Cabinet approval or sanction.

This is because the Cabinet would only meet the day after on Wednesday, January 21 2015.

This is most irregular and improper, revising the 2015 Budget after the Dewan Rakyat had approved the original budget on Nov. 25 after more than a month of debate, both on general policy as well as during the detailed committee stage, by MPs from both the Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat in the Dewan Rakya

This could only mean that what the MPs from both BN and PR had said on the 2015 Budget, both during the policy and committee stage debate, were an utter waste of time, resources and effort as far as the Finance Minister was concerned!

Now Najib proposes to announce his revised 2015 budget tomorrow, when clearly it has not been cleared or approved by the Cabinet.

What all this means is that the Prime Minister had developed a most deplorable and regrettable disregard and even contempt not only for the views of BN MPs, but also BN Ministers as well!.

Just as the Federal Government had relied on series of pre-budget dialogues before the formulation of each year’s budget, there should also be a series of pre-Budge Revision dialogues to hear the views of the public as to how the government should react to the latest economic crisis.

Who is Najib relying on to review and restructure the 2015 Budget – his highly-paid army of international consultants and advisers who have already landed Malaysia in much grief because of the inappropriate and even ill-advised policies.

For over three months, Najib had simply ignored calls, including from DAP, to revise the 2015 Budget because of fast-changing international economic developments, especially the sharp fall in the prices of crude oil as well as other commodities.

Najib’s father, Tun Razak made a name for himself with his “red book” approach, making visits all over the country to uplift rural development.

But Najib’s most characteristic quality after more than five years as Prime Minister is to be hands-off rather than hands-on like his father, establishing general indifference as the hallmark of Tun Razak’s premiership!

DAP proposes a two-day special Parliament meeting on Jan 26 and 27 on the revised 2015 Budget instead of Najib unilaterally announcing restructuring of the 2015 Budget in utter contempt not only of Parliament but also of Cabinet.

From tomorrow onwards, the Federal Cabinet can conduct pre-budget revision dialogues to hear the people’s views and proposals on how best the country respond to the economic crisis.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 20 January 2015, 9:03 am and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Economics
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Decentralisation is about effective governance

ZAIRIL KHIR JOHARI

Published: 20 January 2015

The Malaysian Insider

A
recent article
 I wrote proposing greater decentralisation of powers in Malaysia has managed to attract criticism and attacks by Umno apparatchiks, such as Kepala Batas MP Datuk Seri Reezal Merican and Umno-owned national daily Utusan Malaysia. They said my suggestions were nothing short of an attack on the Federal Constitution and, unsurprisingly, seditious (what isn’t, these days?).

I quickly responded by pointing out the obvious – that there is in fact an explicit provision in the Federal Constitution (Article 76A) that effectively allows the delegation of federal power to state authorities. In other words, decentralisation of powers from the federal to the state is not merely allowed but in fact envisioned by our country’s highest law.

Also, I ridiculed Umno’s hypocrisy on the matter. If it is considered seditious or unconstitutional to devolve powers from the centre to the periphery, then why isn’t it the other way around?

Over the last forty years, the federal government has wrested power from the state and local governments over what are, sensibly, local areas of governance, such as sewerage, solid waste management, public cleansing and the likes. If anything, it is the Barisan Nasional (BN) federal government that has gone against the spirit of federation.

But, more than merely disrespecting the original intentions of our country’s contract of federalism, this alarming trend of “over-centralisation” has grossly concentrated power in the hands of the federal government, resulting in two major consequences.

Firstly, it has increased the scale of corruption and rent-seeking. For example, it is immediately noticeable that centralisation tends to occur in areas that involve management contracts, the awarding of licences, as well as infrastructure projects. So, the more powers are centralised, the easier it is for the federal government to dispense patronage.

Secondly, the attempt to manage everything centrally, often hundreds of kilometres away, has been proven to be inefficient. More so in areas such as public transport, where even bus route changes require approval from the Land Public Transport Commission in the Prime Minister’s Department. As a result, it is extremely difficult for democratically elected state governments to make improvements to public transport infrastructure. Even road maintenance is subject to different ownerships – federal, state and local government.

An impasse

Due to their near-absolute control over federal and state legislatures, the BN’s agenda of gradual centralisation has managed to escape public scrutiny. This is no longer the case in today’s two-coalition environment. It may not have mattered much that state governments did not have much power as long as the federal government was cooperative, but this is clearly not the case when opposition parties hold power at state level.

In the case of Kelantan, which has been ruled by PAS for 43 out of 58 years since 1957, even their oil royalty is denied them. Terengganu also saw their oil royalty payments halted when Pas ruled the state between 1999 and 2004. The double standard is apparent when BN-controlled states such as Sabah and Sarawak have no problems receiving their fair share of oil income, as set out by the Petroleum Development Act 1974. If even what is legally enshrined can be denied, then what cause is there to rely on cooperation from the federal government?

This attitude of the BN federal government has resulted in an impasse with regard to the development of states under opposition control. In Penang, attempts by the state government to improve public transport have been thwarted time and again. Even when the state government offered to pay existing bus operator RapidPenang to provide free bus trips throughout the entire state during peak hours to encourage greater usage of public transport, the Ministry of Finance-owned bus company unfortunately felt that this offer of guaranteed income should be rejected.

More effective governance

High on the list of priorities is the need for fiscal decentralisation, without which states would continue to be severely handicapped. In most models of federation, revenue is shared between the state and federal governments. Typically, taxes collected would be redistributed to states based on a formula that takes into account the state’s share of contribution as well as its level of development.

Currently, there is no such tax-sharing mechanism as the only available federal funds are the Capitation Grant, the State Road Grant and minor grants for local councils, all of which combined amounts to just over RM150 million a year for a state like Penang. Meanwhile, state development funds are beyond the reach of state authorities, as they are managed by the State Federal Development Office, a unit under the Prime Minister’s Department.

This effectively means that state governments are starved of funds and completely reliant on revenue from properties, lands, mines, forests and local council assessments. As one can imagine, this does not actually amount to much. Constitutional constraints also mean that states cannot raise funds through loans. As a result, Penang’s 2015 budget is equal to less than 0.4% of the 2015 Federal Budget. This is an astonishingly insignificant proportion when one considers that Penang is the second most-developed state after Selangor.

Besides a more equitable revenue-sharing regime, there is also an urgent need to review the efficacy of overly centralised control over areas such as education (school principals, for instance, have no power over hiring and firing of teachers), housing (particularly when land is a state matter) and welfare, along with the more naturally local areas of governance such as public transport, waste management, public cleansing and sewerage.

In this context, the rationale behind the call for greater decentralisation is not about devolving political control per se, but making governance more efficient, effective and accountable. In other words, it is an urgent administrative exigency that would reduce federal interference in local services, allow state governments to carry out their popular mandate, and improve the responsiveness and delivery of governance at every level. – January 20, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 20 January 2015, 9:12 am and is filed under
Constitution
,
Good Governance
,
Zairil Khir Johari
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.