Pakatan Rakyat: Building an Economy for All

by Liew Chin Tong

Sept. 30, 2012

Barisan Nasional paraded its “55 years” of track record” in “fulfillment of promises” – Janji Ditepati –  during the Prime Minister Najib Razak’s recent roadshows and on National Day 2012.

One would expect a government with such a long experience in office would have long term strategies for the nation. Unfortunately, apart from arguing that i) change of government is not good for the economy and ii) that it is better to elect the known devils than the unknown angels, BN offers very little beyond the status quo.

BN’s economic platforms today can be summed up as follow:

1) Criticising Pakatan Rakyat’s economic policies as populist (while not offering concrete economic policies and strategies);

2) Offering more handouts to win the general election (which will cost billions of ringgit);

3) Preparing to introduce Goods and Services Tax (GST) after the general election (GST means every single person in Malaysia will be taxed).

BN’s polls-driven handouts and Pakatan’s care for the people

BN launched its polls-driven handouts, Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia (BR1M), in the 2012 Budget. It was actually a response to policy ideas mooted by Pakatan Rakyat.

Pakatan Rakyat announced in August 2011 that its Budget 2012 aimed at uplifting families with household monthly income of less than RM3,000. Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin replied that Pemandu was instructed to craft a response, which eventually becomes the RM500 per household aid.

In comparison, Pakatan Rakyat’s policies are well thought-out answers to the economic malaise faced by Malaysians.

The Malaysian economy is now serving the vested interests of a small group of cronies at the expense of ordinary Malaysians.

• 60% lives on a household income of not more than RM3,000 monthly; in fact, 40% are below RM1,500;

• Household debts is 77% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP); worse still, household debts is 140% to disposable income, second highest in Asia after Japan;

• 33% of workers earn an income of less than RM700 monthly.

Such dire situations require national attention. It is an impending crisis that has been swept under the carpet.

Economic policies must focus on improving the income and disposable income of the 60% at the bottom.

The basic idea is that when the ordinary folks have more cash in hand, they would not keep it in Swiss banks like the cronies; the lower income group would spend the cash in the economy, hence keeping the domestic economy afloat which in turn would benefit the businesses through multiplying effect from the expansion of aggregate demand.

It will be a rising tide that lifts all boats.

The global economic crisis has made it more urgent for Malaysia to focus on improving income and disposable income of its citizens. The most profitable economic activities of Malaysia and the rest of Asia for the most of the past four decades have been about exporting to the United States and Europe. Suppression of wages and currencies are typical policy tools to keep export cheap and competitive.

However, the advance nations are now faced with high unemployment rate which means diminished purchasing power.

What Pakatan will do for the people

Malaysia and other Asian neighbours need to ensure that its citizens have enough money to consume their own products to sustain a vibrant economy.

In the long run, huge income gap and a large section of the society being squeezed economically jeopardise cohesiveness and security of a society.

Hence, Pakatan Rakyat offers:

• A monthly minimum wage of RM1,100 (BN only announced the figure of RM900 a month but had yet to implement it);

• A commitment to reduce unskilled foreign workers who drive down wages and impede drive for automation;

• Through massive assistance to industries and businesses to encourage innovation, technological upgrade and automation to shift the economy away from its dependence on unskilled foreign labour;

Through various policy measures to increase female labour participation from 46% to 60% within five years. A bi-salary family generally means a higher household income.

Most Malaysians, especially the lower income and middle class, have to fork out large portion of their incomes to pay for transportation, housing, education, health and security, due to poor delivery of public services or outmoded public policies. Addressing policy gaps in these areas will help improve disposable income of ordinary Malaysians.

Pakatan Rakyat proposes:

• Transportation – to reduce excise duties for car in order to cut car price hence reducing debt burden while improving the disposable income of ordinary Malaysians; to develop a multimodal public transport system which is based on bus and bus rapid transit (BRT) to reduce dependence on private vehicles.

• Housing – apart from taming speculation, new concepts such as social housing for the poor that do not require them to own a house, shared equity for middle class households and other measures would be introduced to ensure the availability of housing for those who need them, as well as reducing indebtedness.

• Education – free university education so that the youth are not burdened with huge debts before starting their careers.

• Health – to improve public health care services and to require government linked corporations not to own shares of private hospitals with the aim to narrow the gaps between public and private provision of healthcare.

• Security – to ensure the full commitments of the police to crime prevention.

Demolishing monopolies, cartels and oligopolies also play an important role in the effort to improve disposable income of the ordinary folks. Abolishing tolls in stages, removing control of cronies over paid television, rice, sugar etc, will contribute to better disposable income.

It is clear that Pakatan Rakyat offers a better life for all of us. BN has the opportunity to do something good for the country but its leaders have chose to protect only their family members and cronies.

Without offering new ideas and initiatives, BN can only offer cash handouts now. After the general election (which is within the next few months), each and every one of us

Who will bankrupt the country?

BN has been attacking Pakatan Rakyat’s policies by claiming them to be mere populist measures without being fiscally responsible, and if implemented will bankrupt the nation.

Alas, typical propaganda from UMNO and BN leaders, as they are the ones who are controlling the media for many decades.

One of Pakatan’s key policy objectives is to see that Malaysian families live on a household income of more than RM4,000 a month at the end of PR’s first term as the federal government. The RM4,000 a month objective is not an income guarantee or a minimum wage.

PR is reshaping our economy to one that shifts from BN’s obsession with race quota and distribution of wealth to a select few, to one that helps everyone at the bottom 60% regardless of race to live a dignified life.

How the people will suffer under BN: Beware of GST

BN has no solution to finance the ballooning national debts.

The BN Government claims that now “educating” the public on the impending implementation of Goods and Services Tax. It has also whispered to the financial market that the unpopular tax would be implemented in 2014. There are also talks about subsidy cuts which means higher fuel price.

Pakatan is not in favour of a higher fuel price until and unless public transport is adequate. The lack of decent public transport makes private vehicles almost a necessity.

Studies have shown that petrol price hike encouraged people to switch to motorcycle from cars, and, as a consequence, resulted in higher motorcycle deaths. Policy makers must be cognizant of the implications and impacts of their decisions on ordinary citizen.

Likewise, those who promoted the GST as the silver bullet to “get more people to pay tax” and solve the budget deficit are living in their own world. They said that there are too few Malaysians paying tax.

Certainly there are tax evaders and we have sufficient laws to deal with them. But the reason why the bulk of the population is not paying tax is because their income is too low to qualify to pay taxes.

Imposing a new tax on the lower income group is bad enough. A regressive, blanket tax like GST is going to hurt the bottom 60% badly. And with the bulk of the population having less disposable income, the rest of the economy would not do well either.

What must we do

BN should return to the root causes of high deficit – corruption and cronyism. In order to reduce the level of debts, the government must deal with corruption steadfastly. Unfortunately, UMNO and BN leaders are not interested in doing all these good things.

Why? Doing good for the people means putting aside their cronies. No, BN will never do that and has no intention of doing it.

The choice is getting clearer now. We voters of Malaysia have the power to decide what’s best for our family, our community and our nation.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 30 September 2012, 10:51 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Crime
,
Education
,
Elections
,
Housing
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Transport
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Parents know best; the days of government knows best are over

— May Chee

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 29, 2012

SEPT 29 — The first part of the topic above is my belief; the second is espoused by our honourable Prime Minister himself. I mean what I say and I hope he does, too.

The Malaysian New Education Blueprint unveiled recently has promised to depoliticise the education system, vowing equal opportunities for all. Hmmm…I like how it sounds.

Now, I’ve nothing against those who support the MBMMBI. I do understand that our national language is important to us Malaysians, being the medium of communication that unites. In fact, being an advocate of PPSMI does not bring one in direct conflict with MBMMBI. I believe PPSMI can aid the noble aim of MBMMBI.

Though English is the dominant global language, it should not dominate every sphere of our lives. That’s why both PPSMI and MBMMBI can complement each other. We know for a fact that those who want to write for a world audience, e.g. to gain international recognition; need to have their efforts published in English. Though these works have a better chance of being published in their mother tongue in their homeland, but for a global audience, these efforts have to be translated into English.

I can see how for the Arts, e.g. Literature, language is not just a means to communicate content. It, itself, is an essential source of enjoyment and once translated, certain if not most aspects like the sounds, rhythms, images, allusions and evocations of the original can only be approximated and thus, the beauty of these efforts sorely diluted. So, yes, certain aspects of education must be retained in our national language. After all, great authors only write in one language!

However, I do see the need for PPSMI. The fields of the sciences can be rendered more efficient when their knowledge is transmitted in a common language. Those against PPSMI have lamely and “falsely” argued that interest in the sciences have waned because of PPSMI. One can only have one’s interest heightened when one can lay one’s hands on materials pertaining to it. And that, we know, most findings in the sciences are published in English. How can one advance one’s interest and competence in a particular field of science if one has to depend only on works published in Bahasa Malaysia? If one cannot even begin to comprehend the medium in which these works are published in? We know how “potent” knowledge can be when taken out of context, don’t we? Or, is it “impotent” where the sciences are concerned? How can our homegrown bright sparks make a mark in their chosen disciplines if they cannot publish their works in English? By and large, those who stick to their mother tongue except English, of course, have lower ambitions and do less significant work. In this context, I humbly think, we are doing our homegrown Einsteins a great disservice by not giving PPSMI a chance in Malaysia.

Let’s revisit our Education Act of 1996. It says that “the purpose of education is to enable the Malaysian society to have a command of knowledge, skills and values necessary in a world that is highly competitive and globalised, arising from the impact of rapid development in science, technology and information.” Can we be global players or just “Jaguh Kampungs”? PPSMI will enable our very own Malaysian Einsteins to take on the world for PPSMI will render them competitive and globally employable and recognised.

The Education Act of 1996 also reiterates this: “AND WHEREAS it is considered desirable that regard shall be had, so far as is compatible with that policy, with the provision of efficient instruction and with the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure, to the general principle that pupils are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents.”

If PPSMI has failed certain sectors of the population, I can only say its implementation left much to be desired. That’s definitely not efficient instruction. We have to train our teachers a lot, lot better. Since 2003, some RM5 billion has been allocated and spent in the implementation of PPSMI. Abandoning it now, surely would mean RM5 billion of public expenditure down the drain! And what about our rights as parents to educate our children according to our wishes?

PAGE has done their homework. A majority of parents, both in the rural and urban areas, would like to have PPSMI continued. Now PAGE is not asking for PPSMI to be implemented nationally. Datin Noor Asimah, chairman of PAGE, recognises the fact that not one size fits all. So, for PPSMI to be implemented in certain schools, according to the wishes of the majority of the parents there, is plain democratic, realistic and what’s more, rather do-able. For the minister to say that having 2 different streams for the teaching of Mathematics and Science is confusing, is akin to saying. “Malas-lah!” Hey, Mr Minister, our children are everything to us. What about yours, to you? (Where are they studying, by the way?)

The New Education Blueprint does not set out to politicise education, so it says. Good, I’m counting on that. I’m hoping that the 11 shifts do not shift our focus away from education per se and the 3 waves, do not wave our concerns away. As parents, we want what’s best for our children’s future and that includes a relevant and effective education that will equip them to compete in today’s challenging world. So, we are telling you now, the powers-that-be, it’s our right to choose how our children should be educated. Since English is the working language of the day, globally, we would like our children to be educated in the English language, especially when it comes to Mathematics and Science.

The New Education Blueprint vows that equal opportunities will be given to all. Fair, wonderful, even. Since many ministers’ children are educated in international schools with English as the medium of instruction, Mr Minister, please reintroduce schools, using English as the medium of instruction. We are not asking for all schools. Let the parents decide. Please do not allow principals to rig decisions concerning the choice of the parents. I know, for sure, in a particular premier school, the parents said “aye” to PPSMI, but the principal went to the education department and said, “nay”!

You know what’s my beef with education in Malaysia, today? It discriminates! How the policy makers know so well that an education in the English medium, gives an advantage to their children who are not in national schools, yet they deny the masses from one. Young parents wanting to give their children the best they can, work day and night, to enable their children to go to international schools. What does this say about their quality of life? Worst still, it’s always the poor who will lose out. This, I deplore!

How can education not be politicised when it’s politicians helming the ministry? How dare you lie into our faces when you say there will be equal opportunities for all when your own children don’t go to national schools? Have you forgotten we parents have the right to determine the kind of education we want for our kids? Or what we want or need don’t matter to you? Do our votes matter?

In case you forgot, Mr Education Minister, the days when the government knows best are over. Now, we parents know best. We always, have.

Thank you and God bless.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 30 September 2012, 12:44 am and is filed under
Education
,
English
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Budget 2013

— Lim Guan Eng

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 30, 2012

SEPT 30 — Even though many goodies where announced during yesterday’s Budget 2013 speech by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, this budget has failed the Malaysian people by not addressing three crucial areas which are necessary to guarantee the long term well-being of our country and its people — namely fiscal prudence, economic sustainability and cost of living increases.

Firstly, even though the budget deficit is projected to come down from 4.5 per cent in 2012 to a ‘mere’ 4.0 per cent in 2013, this figure masks the poor track record of the BN government in sticking to its spending plans.

For example, total expenditure for Budget 2012 was announced at RM232.8 billion in last’s year’s budget speech. But in this year’s Economic Report 2012 / 2013, total expenditure for 2012 is projected to total up to RM252.4b.

This is almost RM20b more than the projected expenditure announced last year. We were fortunate that projected revenue is expected to be RM207 billion for 2012, RM20 billion more than the RM186.9 bilion projected revenue announced last year. Without this tax ‘windfall’, our budget deficit would have ballooned up to 6.7 per cent of GDP rather than the projected 4.5 per cent for 2012.

But we cannot expect that actual revenue will continue to exceed projected revenue especially given the slowing global economy. Furthermore revenue from oil related tax revenue is likely to decrease given the change in the dividend policy of Petronas as well as political uncertainty in Southern Sudan which could decrease Petronas’s bottom line by as much as US1 billion.

While we do not object to giving financial assistance to the truly deserving, there is nothing to indicate that the government has stopped leakages in the BR1M program which went to people like an MCA Datuk in Pahang.

The initial RM1.8 billion that was allocated to BR1M for 3.4m households in the 2012 budget ballooned to over RM2 billion for over 4 million households. A country whose GDP is projected to expand by 5 per cent in 2012 should see fewer households earning less than 3000RM. And yet, BR1M recipients are projected to increase to 4.3 million households with another 2.7m individuals earning less than 2000RM joining them.

Without proper checks and balances, the RM3b that has been allocated to BR1M 2.0 for Budget 2013 can easily increase to more than RM4b, if not more. The same lack of fiscal prudence could be seen in the expenditure on subsidies.

An allocation of RM32.8 billion was given for subsidies in Budget 2012 but the actual expenditure on subsidies is projected to be at RM42.4 billion, an increase of RM9.6 billion or 29.3 per cent over the original budget! If the same kind of trajectory is followed, the RM37.6 billion which is allocated for subsidies in Budget 2013 could easily increase to almost RM50 billion!

Given the BN’s poor record for fiscal prudence and especially if elections are held next year, it is likely that BN will break the bank to funnel out as much taxpayer’s money as possible in a blatant attempt to buy votes by giving handouts irresponsibly. I would not be surprised if our total expenditure will be RM30 billion over budget and our budget deficit for 2013 would end up well in excess of 5.0 per cent!

Secondly, this budget provides incentives and handouts which favours certain projects and parties rather than providing the basis for longer term sustainable economic growth that will benefit all.

In fact, many of these incentives will skew the system against hardworking Malaysian entrepreneurs who are not in the position to receive and benefit from these incentives.

For example, Budget 2013 continues to give preferred incentives and tax treatments for companies who want to locate to and developers who want to build in the Tun Razak Exchange formerly known as the Kuala Lumpur International Financial District (KLIFD) including tax exemptions for property developers, income tax exemption for 10 years for TRX-status companies, stamp duty exemptions, industrial building allowance and accelerated capital allowances for TRX Marquee-status companies.

The aggressive promotion of TRX not only increases the problem of a property glut in commercial office space in Kuala Lumpur, it also unfairly disadvantages developers who own and are in the process of developing commercial property which TRX is directly competing against.

These developers would lose out if existing or future tenants decide to relocate to TRX and at the same time, the taxpayer would also lose out since these companies would be given income tax exemption for 10 years.

As part of this initiative, 1MDB will be allocated an additional RM400m from the Prime Minister’s Department in Budget 2013, an unnecessary expenditure for what is essentially a property development project.

Similarly, under the guise of lowering prices of goods in Sabah and Sarawak, the government is introducing 57 Kedai Rakyat 1Malaysia or KR1M stores at the cost of RM386 million. Just like in Peninsular Malaysia, the ones who will be hurt by this move are the owners of the kedai runcit stores who cannot compete against the government subsidized KR1M stores.

It would make more sense for the government to abolish the cabotage policy and to improve the transportation network in Sabah and Sarawak to reduce prices of goods in Sabah and Sarawak, which is what Pakatan is proposing, rather than to subsidize KR1M stores that are run by one private company which would drive out many existing kedai runcit owners out of business.

These kinds of initiatives contradict PM Najib’s statement that the era of ‘government knows best is over’. Indeed, according to the Economic Report 2012 / 2013, the public sector is expected to expand by 13.3 per cent in 2012 to account for 25.2 per cent of GDP (up from 23.3 per cent in 2011), meaning that the government will play a larger role in the economy, rather than to reduce its footprint and to allow the private sector to thrive and drive the economy forward.

By promoting and undertaking these initiatives, Najib is contradicting one of the major thrust of the New Economic Model (NEM) and also the impetus behind the Economic Transformation Program (ETP). Thirdly, this budget fails to bring to the table long term solutions for the problem of rising cost of living, especially in the urban areas.

Crime is one of the main drivers of cost of living increases. Businesses which have to spend more on security pass the costs to consumers. Residents who have to pay for private security have less disposable income.

Sadly, the measures which are in Budget 2013 to reduce crime leave much to be desired. There are no recommendations to re-organize the police force by re-allocating Special Branch officers, which have twice as many investigating officers / detectives as the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), or by re-allocating some of the 14,000 General Operations Force (GOF) police personnel, an organizational legacy from the Communist fighting days, to the CID and the frontlines of fighting crime.

Instead, what was provided was the allocation of RM20m to buy 1000 motorcycles at a cost of RM20,000 per motorcycle to set up a Motorcycle Patrolling Unit. In addition, there were hardly any efforts proposed to involve the state and local authorities to fight crime.

All that was mentioned as the allocation to buy 496 units of CCTVs for 25 local authorities to prevent street crimes in urban areas. This works out to 20 units of CCTVs for every local authority which is not even sufficient to cover one neighbourhood, much less the area in one state authority.

Similarly, the ambitious program to build more than 100,000 affordable and low cost houses will come to naught if these housing projects are not integrated with public transportation. The MRT project and the LRT extension cannot possibly cover all the areas which have or will have low cost and affordable homes, assuming that they even get built.

Allowing the state and local authorities to provide bus services would be one possible solution to this problem. But instead of this, the federal government is expanding the federally owned RAPID bus services to other places, this time to Kuantan.

With car prices still at very unaffordable levels, especially for the lower middle income groups, the issue of affordable and low cost housing cannot be seen in isolation from the issue of public transportation.

Unfortunately, PM Najib does not seem to have realized this as seen by his Budget 2013. Pakatan Rakyat’s budget, on the other hand, exercises much more fiscal prudence. Not only is our projected deficit lower at 3.5 per cent of GDP or approximately RM37 billion, our revenue and expenditure projections are also much more conservative, at RM197 billion and RM234 billion respectively.

A more conservative budget would give us more room to maneuver if Pakatan does take over power at the federal level and puts its budget in place. PR’s budget is also more economically sustainable in that we do not attempt to favor one sector or project over another. Instead we will set out to abolish monopolies, abolish unfair practices and increase competition in all sectors of the economy.

Our budget also gives more focus on long term solutions to address cost of living issues including a proper redeployment and reallocation of police personnel to fight crime, more involvement of local authorities to reduce crime and provide public transportation alternatives, reduce and abolish toll rates to put money back into the pockets of the people and to find new ways of providing affordable public housing.

The choice for Malaysians is very clear. Najib’s 2013 budget is full of one shot goodies and handouts which do not adequately address the long term concerns of the country namely fiscal prudence, economic sustainability and cost of living increases.

Pakatan, through its Alternative Budget, and through the state governments in Penang and Selangor, have shown that it can govern with fiscal responsibility in mind, with sustainable policies which encourage fair competition and with measures that puts money in the pockets of the people in the long term. Let the people of Malaysia choose wisely.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 30 September 2012, 2:35 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Crime
,
Lim Guan Eng
,
Penang
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tunggu sahaja penggal ini tamat tempohnya

— Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 30, 2012

30 SEPT — Najib Razak adalah Perdana Menteri pertama yang menjadi ketua negara yang tidak mendapat mandat kepimpinan beliau dari rakyat walaupun sesudah menjadi PM selama empat tahun. Beliau hanya meneruskan mandat Abdullah Badawi dan ini sudah cukup menunjukkan yang Najib menjadi PM dengan meminjam mandat Abdullah Badawi dahulu sahaja.

Najib memangnya tidak pernah di uji dalam kepimpinannya. Beliau selama ini mendapat kedudukan secara percuma dengan bermain dengan sikap “play safe” dan tidak pernah melalui ujian melalui krisis besar dalam kepimpinannya.

Najib mendapat segala-galanya dengan percuma dan menaiki kedudukan sekarang melalui permainan selamat dan tidak menunjukkan sikap tegas dalam mana-mana krisis yang telah dilalui oleh Umno.

Najib bermain politik mengikut resmi air, “di mana lekok di situ dia berhenti dan berkumpul”. Dia tidak pernah menentang arus semasa perlu menentangnya. Beliau akan sentiasa mengintai untuk memihak “the buttered side of the bread”.

Kali ini beliau telah berjaya menjadi Perdana Menteri dengan permainan selamat itu, tetapi sekarang sudah sampai waktunya beliau untuk membuat keputusan yang “decisive” untuk negara.

Tetapi malangnya beliau begitu lembek dan tidak berupaya melakukan apa yang sepatutnya beliau lakukan dalam krisis keyakinan rakyat yang sedang beliau lalui sekarang ini. Krisis keyakinan rakyat ini di tambah pula dengan masalah dalaman yang sedang dihadapi oleh Umno iaitu masalah keyakinan kepimpinan di bawah-bawah beliau serta ahli Umno keseluruhannya. Najib tidak mendapat dukungan padu dari barisan pimpinan Umno diperingkat tertinggi dan ahli-ahli Jemaah Kabinet yang bersama-sama membarisi kepimpinan dalam kerajaan.

Sebenarnya Najib tidak mengetahui keadaan sebenarnya yang berlaku di peringkat bawahan ini dan ramai merasakan yang Najib akan jatuh oleh kerana beliau tidak merasakan apa yang sebenarnya yang diresahi oleh rakyat. Beliau seperti sifat semula jadi beliau, di dalam politik jika ada masalah cara penyelesaiannya ialah dengan membayar dan membeli perasaan ramai.

Itulah sebabnya beliau membentangkan Belanjawan 2013 Jumaat lepas dengan menumpukan usaha membeli undi dengan “hand-outs” berbentuk tunai kepada rakyat yang mempunyai pendapatan dibawah RM3000 dalam program BRIM beliau.

Tetapi beliau masih lagi enggan untuk membubarkan Parlimen kerana ada perasaan kurang keyakinan terhadap sokongan rakyat terhadap kepimpinan beliau. Sudah empat tahun menduduki kerusi PM, tetapi beliau masih belum berani untuk mendapatkan “endorsement” rakyat itu.

Selemah-lemah Abdullah Badawi beliau berani memanggil pilihanraya umum hanya selama 6 bulan beliau mengambil alih jawatan PM dari Dr Mahathir Mohammad. Abdullah lagi “strategic” dalam pemikiran beliau.

Beliau sedar beliau telah mengambil alih kepimpinan dari Dr Mahathir semasa rakyat hanya menunggu masa untuk menolak Dr Mahathir di dalam pilihanraya 2004 jika Dr Mahathir masih menjadi teraju kepimpinan negara pada 2004 yang lalu. Dr Mahathir bernasib baik kerana beliau telah mendapat “signal” jelas dari rakyat dan beliau bertindak meletakkan jawatan.

Abdullah beruntung kerana semasa itu rakyat terpaksa memberikan sokongan padu kepada sesiapa yang mengambil alih kepimpinan dari Dr Mahathir. Justeru itu Abdullah telah mendapat mandat yang amat besar semasa PRU 2004.

Sebaliknya Najib telah mengambil alih sudah lama dari Abdullah tetapi sehingga hari ini beliau tidak mempunyai kudrat untuk memanggil pilihanraya lagi. Oleh kerana tempuh penggal ini sudah hampir tiba, jika Najib memanggil PRU sekarang pun, rekod tetap tercatat yang Najib merupakan satu-satunya PM negara yang tidak mndapat “endorsement” peribadi dari rakyat atas kepimpinan beliau. Mungkin oleh kekurangan inilah Najib bertindak untuk bercakap besar dan meninggi seolah-olah beliaulah PM yang paling handal dan berpengaruh.

Oleh yang demikian memanggil PRU itu sekarang atau membiarkan sahaja tempoh penggal ini tamat pada 28 April tahun depan ia tidak memberikan apa-apa perbezaaannya. Beliau tetap seorang PM yang tidak terbukti mendapat “endorsement” peribadi dari rakyat jelata.

Najib tidak payah bersusah payah memikirkan tarikh pilihanraya itu. Tamat sahaja tempoh penggal ini, iaitu pada 28 April tahun depan Dewan-Dewan Undangan Negeri akan terbubar dengan sendirinya. Tidak payah berfikir lagi bagi Najib kerana tentu beliau telah banyak berfikir tetapi belum juga mendapat penyelesaiannya.

Najib mungkin masih belum memahami yang Belanjawan yang beliau bentangkan dua hari yang lepas tidak akan dapat mengubah pendirian sebahagian besar rakyat yang telah membuat keputusan.

Segala kemungkaran politik dan ekonomi yang dilakukan oleh pimpinan Umno selama ini sudah menjadikan rakyat sudah “conclusive” untuk menolak Umno kerana terlalu lama masa telah diberikan kepada Umno untuk kembali kepangkal jalan, tetapi tidak juga berbuat demikian kerana parti itu sudah tidak dapat lagi hidayah yang telah hilang itu.

Ingat pesepsi rakyat terhadap Umno, “Umno dan rasuah itu ibarat aur dengan tebing”, di antara satu dengan lain. Persepsi ini tidak dapat membawa Umno kembali di hormati sepert yang pernah mereka alami pra-Dr Mahathir dahulu.

Lagi pun, pada bila-bila pun PRU itu di adakan, keputusannya adalah “predictable”. Keputusan sudah berada ditangan rakyat sekarang. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 30 September 2012, 7:14 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Borneanisation in Sabah 20-Pt Agreement – “Janji Ditepati”?

Point 8 of Sabah’s 20-Point Agreement 1963 leading to the formation of Malaysia states:

“8. Borneanisation: of the public services should proceed as quickly as possible.”

Recently, the favourite slogan on the lips of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak is “Janji Ditepati”.

Has Point 8 of Sabah’s 20-Pt Agreement on Borneanisation been honoured?

In reply to my question in Parliament, the Prime Minister has disclosed that out of 133 Federal Departments (including Federal statutory bodies) in Sabah, 61 (45.9%) agencies are headed by Sabahans while 72 (54.1%) are headed by non-Sabahans.

Is this “Janji Ditepati”?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 October 2012, 8:04 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Budget 2013: Tussle of the titans

— Kim Quek

The Malaysian Insider

Sep 30, 2012

SEPT 30 — Barisan Nasional’s election-orientated budget 2013 is disappointing because it concentrates on raining one-off cash on the electorate to ease their pain, while forgetting to address the ills that necessitate such profuse dosage of pain-relievers in the first place.

If the people are affluent and contended, do they need to be showered with such pacifiers; or alternatively, would the feeding of such sweeteners sway their decision on whom they are going to vote for?

Obviously there are vast masses of disgruntled electorate who are not happy with the current living conditions. They are unhappy because they find it increasingly difficult to make ends meet; and they are also worried about the worsening safety of their environment.

The common people are simply overwhelmed by a cost of living that forever is speeding far ahead of their slow moving income increment. Needless to say, our economy is in trouble. What’s wrong with our economy?

Economic disease

Malaysia is plagued by economic malaise, which in turn is caused by a draught of private investment — Malaysia’s peculiar economic disease that first surfaced in the Asian financial crisis in the late nineties.

Since that watershed event, its private investment as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), as repeatedly reminded by the World Bank, has been staying at the doldrums, hovering around 10%, which is among the lowest in the region.

Investors, both foreign and domestic, have fled the country, as exemplified by Malaysia having a net FDI (foreign direct investment) outflow for many years, a unique dubious distinction among developing countries.

Such apparent loss of economic competitiveness is described by economists as the middle income trap, from which Malaysia does not seem to be able to extricate itself from. A main culprit of this predicament is of course the notorious and obsolete NEP (New Economic Policy) — an affirmative action policy that has been morphed into a monstrosity of racism and corruption, which has been conveniently used by the ruling elite to corruptly amass personal fortunes at the expense of the people and the country.

Spinning from that central policy is the phenomenon of GLC (government linked corporation), an ever sprawling network of state-controlled enterprises that has grown to dominate the nation’s economy.

GLC, with its overbearing and negative influence over the economy, is of course also a retarder to the spontaneous flowering of entrepreneurship in the country, as it practices the philosophy of the NEP.

Compounding the economic misery of Malaysia is the hegemony of Umno — the ruling power that has wielded almost unlimited political power, perpetuated through its racial-divide-and-rule policy.

As the famous saying goes “absolute power corrupts absolutely”, Umno has become openly corrupted with impunity.

Umno hegemony wreaks economic havoc

And the toxic cocktail of Umno’s corrupt hegemony, NEP and GLC has played havoc to the Malaysian economy. Skeptics of my view may ask: if Umno’s economic management of the country has been so bad, why is it that Malaysia’s economy is still standing strong?

My simple answer is: if it has not been for Petronas and the associated petroleum income, which contributes almost half of the government’s operating expenses, this country would have gone bust ages ago.

In fact, the country’s economy has been so badly run by Prime Minister Najib Razak, who seems to be perpetually operating in an electioneering mode, and squandering public funds to curry favours from the electorate incessantly without commensurate economic returns that public debts have escalated exponentially, climbing a whopping 71 per cent from RM266 billion in 2007 to RM456 billion in 2011.

This debt figure, which is close to the statutory limit of 55 per cent of GDP, does not include hidden liability of RM117 billion (12 per cent of GDP) in the form of guarantees issued against commercial loans to government agencies and GLCs.

While all this frightening debt-incurring is going on, there is no sign that the economy has started to stir from its slumber. Against this darkening economic backdrop, what tiding has the Prime Minister brought with his budget 2013 proposal to deal with the underlying causes of our economic ills? Nothing.

To be frank, he looks more like Santa Claus bringing a bagful of Christmas gifts, which will of course bring momentary joy.  But the awful truth is that we are sick, and what we need is medical treatment that will restore health, not gifts that will cheers us just for a while.

Pakatan tackles root causes

In  this connection, the Pakatan Rakyat shadow budget is immensely superior, in that it boldly introduces measures to tackle the root causes, in addition to bringing welfare relief for the needy. It proposes to replace the NEP with an affirmative policy that is need based.

Corollary to that, Pakatan will dismantle the unwieldy economic creatures that have blossomed under BN’s crony-capitalism, namely the current monopolies, oligopolies and cartels that have enjoyed the regime’s favours and protection; and Pakatan will free the economy to open and fair competition.

To enforce that policy, Pakatan will set up an Anti-Trust Commission to punish offenders and break up recalcitrant outfits. It will also review numerous lopsided concessions improperly awarded to cronies by the current regime at the expense of public interests.

This will be done through the establishment of a Public Contracts Commission under the proposed enactment of Unfair Public Contracts Act. At the moment, Malaysia’s economy is heavily distorted by GLCs, monopolies, oligopolies, cartels and concessionaires, whose tentacles have stretched far and wide to affect almost every aspect of a citizen’s livelihood.

As these bodies normally enjoy undue advantages and special privileges from the ruling power, they don’t operate on optimum efficiency while enjoying undeserved profits; and naturally consumers and national economy have become their victims.

The removal of these parasitic elements and privileged groups in our economy will at once lower the price of goods and services, while it will also open up a competitive field where pent-up entrepreneur energy inherent in our people will  be  released.

Pakatan also proposes to re-instate open and competitive tenders for public procurement in replacement of BN’s long-established murky award of contracts, which has been the mother of all corruption. Billions after billions have been leaked through such corrupt practices that have prevailed not only among the ruling political elite, but also in every strata and segment of Malaysia’s public services and GLCs.

By plugging such leakages through open tenders, tens of billions of ringgit of public funds so saved would be sufficient to finance most of the welfare services proposed by Pakatan to help the needy.

Will transform economic landscape

Indeed, these simultaneous measures will see the transformation of Malaysia’s economic landscape. The elimination of corruption and cronyism, with the corollary induction of accountability and transparency, coupled with the opening up of the economy for fair competition will surely restore investors’ confidence and re-hoist the Malaysian flag in the radar screens of international investors.

Many Malaysians may still remember the boom days of the nineties up to the Asian financial crisis. Those good days were brought about by robust influx of FDI and local investment.

During those days, private investment to GDP ratios were fluctuating close to 30 per cent reaching a peak of 37 per cent, which was the highest in the region then, according to the inaugural issue of ‘Malaysian Economic Monitor’ released by the World Bank .

The same scenario can return if we have a competent political leadership to make sweeping changes in tune with current time to replace defunct policies. Prosperity is certainly not beyond our reach because Malaysia has the good fortune of having abundance of natural endowment and human resources, the latter of course still have to be upgraded through a more enlightened educational policy.

We must realise that it is only through sustained economic prosperity — brought about by genuine entrepreneurship and high productivity — that our people will find true relief to their current economic hardship.

As such heightened economic activities will boost citizens’ income, in addition to topping the public coffers. And for that to happen, the people must first install a good political leadership to whelm the country.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 October 2012, 12:05 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
,
NEP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The ‘Biggest Bribe Budget’?

 By Kee Thuan Chye

Malaysian Digest

01 October 2012

I don’t know about you but I got practically nothing from the 2013 Budget. I don’t qualify for the BR1M payout of RM500 for households with a monthly income of not more than RM3,000. I also don’t qualify for the 50% discount on passports for senior citizens.

But that’s all right. I don’t want anything from the Budget. It comes from the people’s money and should be spent wisely on developing the country. I should not expect to get something directly from it.

The way it looks, though, Prime Minister Najib Razak doesn’t seem to think the same way. His 2013 Budget is a lot about giving money away to people. It seems this is to make them happy, and perhaps this feeling of happiness could translate into votes for his Barisan Nasional (BN) government at the upcoming general election.

What worries me is that Najib is spending money like there is no tomorrow. That seems the right way to put it because his Budget does not address the future. Maybe except for education, especially in boosting vocational training and encouraging small entrepreneurs.

There’s hardly anything about enhancing the country’s economic growth, spending prudently or reducing the national debt.

In fact, of the projected amount of RM252 billion to be spent, a whopping RM202 billion will be used for operating expenditure. Only one-fifth left is for development expenditure.

Najib is gung-ho about the global economy despite the uncertainties predicted by financial analysts. He said, “In 2013, based on the prospects of an improved global economy, the Malaysian economy is forecast to expand strongly between 4.5% and 5%.”

Is that predicated on a DR1M?

Meanwhile, the reality, according to online news website Free Malaysia Today, is that this year the national debt has risen 10.1% to a new high of RM502.4 billion or 53.7% of the GDP. That is only 1.3% short of the 55% debt ceiling the country is allowed to reach.

And according to The Malaysian Insider, this debt figure “does not include hidden liability of RM117 billion (12 per cent of GDP) in the form of guarantees issued against commercial loans to government agencies and GLCs (government-linked corporations)”.

Is our fiscal future already in the pawnshop?

In the social media, people are calling Najib “an illusionist” for throwing so much money around when Malaysians are wondering where it is coming from. They’re calling this Budget “the biggest bribe Budget of all time”.

The main targets appear to be the low-income groups, youths and civil servants (who will be getting one-and-a-half month’s bonus).

BR1M is back. It has even been extended to unmarried individuals aged above 21 who are earning not more than RM2,000 a month. These people will get RM250.

I don’t understand the rationale for this. In fact, I think it’s rather silly. Perhaps the minimum age is too low. A newly graduated employee who earns, say, between RM1,500 and RM2,000, which is about what a lot of fresh graduates get these days, would be entitled to the BR1M RM250 even if he or she doesn’t need it.

And what if this person has lost both parents and is therefore a household of one? Does he or she claim the RM250 plus the BR1M RM500, which in principle he or she should also be entitled to?

Even more mind-boggling is the RM200 rebate for those aged between 21 and 30 earning not more than RM3,000 to buy smartphones. Why smartphones? It’s a non-essential item. Besides, many may already own one.

Consider this: A 20-something who earns RM2,900 and has no dependents, therefore no commitments, would be flushed with cash and already own a smartphone. Why give him or her that aid?

As someone pointed out on Facebook, it may transpire that some of them will make a deal with the smartphone dealers and get the cash instead. “Just give me RM150, you keep the other RM50” or something like that.

We saw signs of such a tendency when the Government gave tertiary students book vouchers earlier this year only to see them put up for sale on the Internet. Not having learned from that experience, it is still giving out more book vouchers, worth RM250, through the new Budget.

Indeed, the range of goodies dished out to youths seems to show desperation on the part of BN to secure their goodwill since many of them will be voting at GE13. The Budget even offers a 20% discount to borrowers who pay back in full their National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) loans by the end of September next year.

This was, to be sure, taking a leaf from the Opposition’s Buku Jingga. It just falls short of Pakatan Rakyat’s proposal to do away with the loans totally and therefore giving free education to everyone. Nonetheless, the Government was not bashful about appropriating the basic theme.

That’s not surprising. This is not the first time the Government has taken ideas from Pakatan Rakyat and used them. Besides, with the general election coming up, any populist idea has to appear a great idea.

Sceptics, however, are not persuaded. Neither are those who are capable of seeing beyond the temporary gratification of the handouts they are given.

As one Netizen wrote on Facebook: “Ini semua secara ‘pinjaman’ saja. (This is all just a ‘loan’.) Payback time will come after GE13. The people will have to pay back with interest if BN wins. Wait and see.”

Indeed, when the Government has to give money out like this, something must have been wrong with its administration of the country. Has it not done the right things to improve the economy of a country blessed with a wealth of natural resources in order to ensure that its people enjoy a high per capita income arising out of a huge GDP?

Why are we at this point in our development still trying to become a high-income nation? Why is our average national wage still so low? According to CIMB, in 2010 it stood at only RM1,804.43.

I was recently reminded by a friend about ‘Bersih, Cekap dan Amanah’ (Clean, Efficient and Trustworthy), the tagline of former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad’s administration. What happened to its promise? Did it turn out to be the opposite instead? And thereby led to leakage and wastage of public money and corruption in high places that sucked away our resources and rendered us poorer than we should be?

Ironically, then, the 2013 Budget shows us even more clearly the failure of the BN government over the decades in taking the country’s economy to a higher level. Compared to Singapore, which has no natural resources, Malaysia is a laggard.

And yet, to make doubly sure that Malaysians got the message that his goodies were meant to secure their votes, Najib stressed: “With … support from the rakyat, God-willing, we will see six more budgets tabled by the BN government before Malaysia transforms into a nation with high-income status” (meaning in 2020).

He then proceeded to bash the Opposition.

It prompted someone to post in Facebook: “This is the first time in the history of Malaysia that a PM shamelessly tells us that we need to vote for him after he gives out the goodies. Tak malu ke? (Not embarrassed?) Does he think the Government coffers belong solely to BN?”

Yes, lest we forget, the money is not BN’s. It is the public’s money. Yours and mine.

Blogger Sakmongkol AK47 puts it aptly, “The Budget is about the PM asking for our money and telling us how he wants to use the money he is asking from us.  It is not a gift from him, not ehsan or hadiah.”

This connotes that we need not be grateful for getting the handouts because it’s our own money. Nonetheless, we still need to ask: Is the PM doing the right thing with our money? Is he bribing us? And if he is, will we allow ourselves to be bribed?

These are questions we also need to answer.

* Kee Thuan Chye is the author of the bestselling book No More Bullshit, Please, We’re All Malaysians. Its Malay translation, Jangan Kelentong Lagi, Kita Semua Orang Malaysia, is now in bookstores.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 October 2012, 11:56 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Havoc Education Reform Inflicts: Education Blueprint 2013-2025 (Part 3 of 5)

by M. Bakri Musa

Third of Five Parts: Quality, Efficiency, Efficacy, And Trimming of Fat

[Part One discusses the Blueprint’s failure to recognize the diversity within our school system, and with that the need for specific solutions targeted to particular groups. Part Two discusses the particular challenge of having competent teachers especially in science, English, and mathematics, a critical problem not adequately addressed by the Blueprint. In this third part I discuss the inextricable link between quality, efficiency, and efficacy, points not fully appreciated in the Blueprint.]

The one diagram in the Blueprint that best captures what’s wrong with the Malaysian education system is Exhibit 6-4, the ministry’s organizational staff structure. The diagram is described as rectangular; it’s more fat Grecian column. Incidentally, that diagram is the best graphic representation of data in the entire document; it captures and demonstrates well two salient points. One, there are as many Indians as there are chiefs in the organization, and two, the overwhelming burden of administrative staff at all levels.

            “Malaysia arguably has one of the largest central (federal) administrations in the world, relative to the number of schools,” says the Blueprint, quoting a UNESCO report.

            We do not need those highly-paid international consultants to remind us of the bloat. The gleaming tower that is the Ministry of Higher Education in Putrajaya is emblematic of that. It reveals the government’s perverted priorities. That edifice shames that of the Department of Education of the US, or any First World country.

            By any measure, relative to the economy, population, or total budget, Malaysia funds its education system generously, much more so than countries like Finland and South Korea. Yet our students and schools lag far behind. The answer lies in Exhibit 6-4. The bulk of the resources expended do not end up in the classrooms.

            It reflects the panel’s commitment (or lack of it) to enhancing the system’s efficiency that the post-reform chart looks only slightly tapered at the top. It needs to be sharply pyramidal to tackle the current bloated rectangle.

            Efficiency is one of the Blueprint’s six goals. Briefly though not inaccurately defined, efficiency is output relative to input. If I expend “x” amount of resources (time, money, effort) and produce “y” amount of intended results, while my colleague expends twice as much, then I am twice as efficient. However, if he produces other than the intended results, then he is not being efficacious quite apart from being not efficient. His producing all those unintended and unwanted products reduces or interferes with his output of the desired ones. Efficiency is doing things right; efficacy, doing the right thing.

            Our system of education is both inefficient and inefficacious. We are not efficient because despite the vast resources expended we produce far too few graduates who are bilingual, science literate, mathematically competent, and capable of critical thinking. We are not being efficacious because the graduates we produce are not the types we desire, meaning, they are unilingual, unable to think critically, and good only at regurgitating what has been spoon-fed into them.

            A more tangible manifestation of our inefficiency is this. Rwanda could provide each child with a laptop at a fraction of the Malaysian price. We are not being as efficacious as Rwanda where its laptop program teaches not only the children but also spills over to their families. In Malaysia those laptops end up either being “lost” or gathering dust in the school’s storerooms. Our teachers have not been adequately trained to use them; besides those computers belong to the school and not given to individual teachers. Thus there is no pride of ownership, and opportunities for them to learn are that much reduced.

            Pursuing efficiency, we have two ministries (one for higher education), each with its own overpaid minister, deputy ministers, KSUs, DGs, Deputy KSUs, Assistant Deputy KSUs, and hordes of directors. With the government’s stated goal of autonomy to universities, all you need is one person to write the checks perhaps once a semester. You do not need a ministry, much less a grand one. That expensive edifice and bloated administrative staff divert resources that otherwise could have been diverted to the classrooms and teachers.

            Peruse the organizational structure of the Ministry of Education (MOE); dozens of divisions could be chopped off. Why do we need a separate division for matrikulasi; it is nothing more than Sixth Form; likewise with residential schools. The purpose of decentralization and devolution of authority to the periphery is, among others, to reduce the central bureaucracy, not to lighten the load of those already under-worked civil servants at headquarters. If schools truly have autonomy then all you need is one person at headquarters to write the big check every month, term, or year.

            Bureaus like Textbook, Translation, and Dewan Bahasa could be privatized and the resources saved diverted directly to pay writers, translators, and publishers, the actual producers of goods and services. Then there are the corporate and international relations offices. Get rid of both. The only important relationship MOE should cultivate is with parents and teachers.

            I would also spin off the Examination Syndicate. Such bodies in America like the College Board (responsible for the Scholastic Assessment Test, SAT) and American College Testing (ACT), as well as those responsible for graduate and professional studies like GMAT (business school) and MCAT (medical school) are private.

            Yet there is not a word in the Blueprint on streamlining the ministry, reducing the bloat, and getting rid or at least privatizing those peripheral services.

            Malaysians, individually and as a society, value and respect education. We willingly expend resources on it but are unwilling to expend the extra effort to make sure that that those funds are spent wisely. MOE’s budget escapes critical scrutiny.

            MOE, being part and parcel of the massive Malaysian bureaucracy, is also afflicted with rampant corruption, blatant cronyism, embarrassing incompetence, naked nepotism, and a distorted sense of meritocracy. The last scandal (at least one that was exposed) was in 1960 under Rahman Talib when RM100 million in school construction funds were “unaccounted for,” the euphemism for “missing.” That may seem small change by current standard of greed, but after factoring for inflation and devaluation, it would be a billion in today’s currency.

            The Blueprint completely ignores this blight of administration in MOE. In an earlier book I cited the example of the bloated cost of a MARA residential college where through competitive bidding we could get three such schools for the price of two. If competitive bidding were to be standard practice, then not only would we get more for our money but also our schools would have roofs that would not collapse, thus endangering our children.

            Najib and Muhyyiddin have not demonstrated their ability to take on local UMNO warlords. On the contrary, both are central to the corrupt political patronage system that plagues Malaysia. So expect the bloat and inefficiency in MOE (and the rest of the government) to continue.

            As for efficacy, the Blueprint does not even comment on whether the recent rescinding of teaching science and mathematics in English advances the goal of producing bilingual and science literate graduates. There is no recommendation for increasing the number of hours of instruction in English or mandating a pass in the Malaysian University English Test (MUET). The more hours and the younger you are exposed to a language, the more proficient you would be, and faster. Making students pass a test definitely motivates them to study for it.

            In the 1950s the government mandated all civil servants to pass a test in Malay to impress upon them its importance. That prompted many to take private lessons lest they would be bypassed in promotions. This Blueprint does not mandate teachers and headmasters demonstrate their competence in English.

            As for developing “critical, creative and innovative thinking skills,” the government could begin by abolishing that indoctrination center, Biro Tata Negara (BTN). The resources saved could be diverted to schools. Both Najib and Muhyyiddin are ardent defenders of BTN; that reflects their veneer of commitment to nurturing independent critical thinking.

            Quality is linked with efficiency, efficacy, and the trimming of an organization’s fat. We must strive high; surpassing a low bar is no achievement. It only gives us a false sense of it. On a recent visit to China Muhyyyiddin declared that we have done well with “93 percent of Malaysians able to attend school and most of them could read, write and count.” Malaysians deserve better; we expect more.

            The goal should be our children attending not just any school but one that would teach them to be fully bilingual, science literate, mathematically competent, and able to think critically. We should be haunted by the fact that 40,000 of our graduates are still unable to find jobs at a time when Malaysia has millions of foreign workers. That tells us that it is not a problem with the economy rather with the quality of those graduates.

            The focus must be on quality and not on years spent in schools. Instead of extending mandatory schooling to 11 years (the Blueprint’s recommendation), I would focus first on providing universal preschool and kindergarten especially in rural areas. If you want to teach kampong kids English, starting them in immersion classes at preschool years would be the most effective way. Insights from modern neuroscience support that contention.

            Further, a year of preschool costs considerably less and is far more consequential to a child’s future than a year at high school. As the Jesuit wisdom would have it, “Give me a child until he is seven, and I will give you the man.”

            Without quality, our schools would degenerate into nothing more than human warehouses for the young; our teachers, well-paid babysitters. We would have wasted all those precious resources, but the most precious of all is of course all those young minds. They would be better off out of school and learning the more important lessons of life in the real world instead of being bullied by their peers and indoctrinated by the system. Then when they failed, they would be tagged forever as losers, turn into caricatures of their race, and made to bear the burden of ugly stereotypes.

            That thought should haunt anyone given the awesome responsibility of educating our young; likewise those tasked with reforming the system.

Next:   Part 4: Roar of An Elephant, Baby of a Mouse

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 October 2012, 9:30 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mahal betul harga nak kekalkan BN dan Najib

— Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Oct 01, 2012

1 OKT — Najib Razak setiap hari keluar berkempen memaki hamun semua parti-parti yang dalam PR dan kerajaan negeri-negeri tadbiran Pakatan Rakyat. Bagi kita yang sudah berumur dan ada sedikit pengalaman berpolitik ini memahami apa yang ada di dalam hati dan sanubari pemimpin utama negara kita itu. Beliau gentar dan resah gelisah.

Cara beliau bercakap bergegar-gegar itu tidak lebih dan tidak kurang menunjukkan yang beliau amat gelisah dengan apa yang berlaku dikalangan rakyat akar umbi. Najib sedang panik dan masih tidak berkeyakinan yang BN akan mendapat mandat kali ini walaupun berbillion-billion ringgit telah dibelanjakan membeli hati dan jiwa rakyat sekalian.

Cara beliau berucap tidak menampakkan yang beliau seorang Perdana Menteri. Mungkin beliau terlupa sekejap yang beliau itu Perdana Menteri kerana selalunya pemimpin utama negara akan bercakap dengan nada yang rendah tapi meyakinkan. Di Pulau Pinang semalam Najib bercakap dengan nada yang begitu tinggi dan nampak jelas beliau terlalu banyak kelemahan yang beliau mahu lindungi dari pandangan rakyat. Beliau mempunyai banyak perkara yang putus yang perlu di sambung dan yang koyak untuk ditampal.

Setiap malam tidak ada orang lain dikaca TV selain dari Najib berkempen melaluinya. Bahan kempennya tidak lain hanya memperlekehkan pentadbiran semua kerajaan negeri-negeri yang ditadbir oleh Pakatan Rakyat. Najib tidak nampak apa kebaikan yang telah dilakukan oleh PR di Pulau Pinang, Selangor dan Kedah serta Kelantan. Najib amat resah dengan pengaruh kerajaan-kerajaan negeri dalam PR kerana kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat melakukan pembersihan segala politik dan ekonomi yang dilakukan oleh kerajaan BN dahulu.

Seboleh-bolehnya Najib mahu mengajak rakyat menafikan kelebihan berada di bawah tadbiran PR. Kejayaan PR mentadbir negeri-negeri yang di perintahnya amat menyulitkan Najib siang dan malam. Najib terpaksa mencemuh dan bergegar-gegar menempelak kebaikan yang di tunjukkan oleh PR di empat buah negeri tersebut. Tetapi bagi kita yang faham, jangan diambil pusing dengan apa yang dikatakan oleh Najib itu.  Kita faham yang beliau sedang berada di hujung tanduk. Beliau sedang terkapai-kapai meminta tolong dan merayu untuk diberi peluang kali ini.

Tetapi selama ini rakyat telah memberi peluang kepada BN sejak negara merdeka. Tetapi kebaikan rakyat selama ini di ambil sebagai kelemahan yang mereka boleh mengambil kesempatan ke atas mereka dengan melakukan perkara-perkara yang menjolok mata.  Najib sudah menganggap rakyat sekarang degil dengan kerajaan. Justru Najib sekarang sedang bertempur dengan rakyat dengan menghina pilihan rakyat dan ini adalah satu pencemaran kepada semangat persekutuan.

Orang yang menjadi sasaran Najib ialah Anwar Ibrahim dan Lim Guan Eng, Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang serta Khalid Ibrahim MB Selangor. Najib amat aggressif dan mahu memaksa rakyat memberikan sokongan kepada BN. Usaha Najib dan BN untuk memecahkan perhubungan baik di antara parti-parti dalam Pakatan Rakyat telah gagal dan kegagalan beliau memecah belahkan komponen PR itu membuatkan Najib tidak lalu makan dan tidak lena tidur. Seperti biasa apabila tidak ada perpecahan Umno akan hanyut.

Seperti ilmu matematik, cara memilih dalam pilihanraya dengan baik ada formulanya. Jika sesebuah parti dan pemimpin itu menjadi sasaran cemuhan yang kuat oleh Najib dan pimpinan BN, itulah parti atau pemimpin yang rakyat perlu sokong. Kalau di ikutkan formula ini maka yang perlu diberikan sokongan ialah mana-mana parti yang berada di dalam Pakatan Rakyat.

Sebabnya mudah. Apa yang dikecewakan oleh BN dan Najib ialah rakyat sudah merasakan dan nampak dengan jelas yang PR boleh memimpin walaupun ditekan dengan hebat oleh kerajaan persekutuan yang di kuasai oleh BN. BN sedang cuba menggelapkan mata rakyat untuk tidak nampak apa yang dilakukan oleh Pakatan Rakyat. Kejayaan Pakatan Rakyat adalah kegagalan kepada BN  Itulah sebabnya Najib terpaksa berucap sampai terkeluar anak tekak untuk melindungi rakyat dari mengakui kewibawaan PR itu.

Itulah sebabnya rakyat wajar memberikan sokongan kepada PAS, DAP dan PKR untuk menguasai Putrajaya kerana jika PR dapat menguasai Putrajaya maka kerajaan-kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat di negeri-negeri tidak akan di tekan dan mudah untuk melaksanakan segala dasar yang di gubal oleh kerajaan baru itu.

Jika Pakatan Rakyat memerintah maka kita boleh memberikan harapan untuk membina kembali semangat persekutuan yang telah di ranapkan oleh Umno sejak Dr Mahathir Mohamad memerintah dahulu. Saya secara peribadi berharap Pakatan Rakyat akan menghormati kedaulatan kerajaan-kerajaan negeri pilihan rakyat itu. Cara untuk menghormati rakyat ialah dengan menghormati kerajaan-kerajaan negeri pilihan mereka kerana negeri-negeri itu adalah kepunyaan rakyat yang merdeka dan berdaulat.

Saya ingin mengulangi tidak akan ada kerajaan persekutuan tanpa kerajaan-kerajaan negeri yang berdaulat itu. Tetapi semangat itu tidak pernah dihormati oleh pimpinan persekutuan kerana mereka terlupa agaknya yang negara kita ini adalah negera persekutuan bukannya negara “unitary” seperti Thailand dan Indonesia. Pimpinan di Putrajaya berfikir yang seluruh negara ini adalah kepunyaan ibu bapa atau datuk nenek mereka sahaja dan boleh memaki hamun rakyat yang selama ini telah memberikan mandat yang mereka lalaikan selama ini.

Apabila rakyat sudah mula sedar, maka mundar mandir lah Najib di setiap negeri dan daerah memaki hamun pihak lain dan sentiasa menyalahkan PR dan rakyat kerana kelemahan yang mereka wujudkan sendiri. Rakyat kini sedar yang kepercayaan yang hanya Umno boleh menjamin masa depan rakyat itu hanyalah satu “myth” yang dibina oleh Umno dan BN melalui media masa perdana selama ini. Sekarang rakyat sudah sedar yang Umno telah mengelirukan mereka dan itulah yang membuatkan Najib tidak kering peluh berjalan kesana kemari meminta tolong dan beliau tidak sedar yang beliau sekarang adalah seorang kembiri politik yang paling sibuk dalam sejarah politik negara.

Najib bercakap besar dengan nada yang tinggi seolah-olah beliau dan Umno sahaja yang boleh mentadbir negara ini. Rakyat yang mendengar ucapan beliau dikaca TV setiap malam seolah-olah kita semua ini adalah “little cousins” beliau. Rakyat yang mendengar itu kebanyakkannya adalah mangsa Umno yang selalu mengelirukan mereka dan mereka tidak mahu lagi diperbodohkan oeh Najib dan pimpinan negara yang lain. “Enough is enough. No more listening to silly statements from Najib please!” kata salah seorang bekas menteri yang bercakap dengan saya pagi semalam.

“Najib has oversold himself bro,” kata seorang yang baru saya kenali dalam satu majlis Hari Raya beberapa minggu yang lepas. “Najib talks too much to an extent of clowning himself. The more he talks the more weaknesses uncovered from him. Najib is telling too much lies that he now believes his own lies,” sambung kenalan baru saya itu. Saya hanya menjawab: “Let him tell lies about us, but we can tell the truth about him.”

Pendeknya Najib sedang sedaya upaya untuk mengalihkan pandangan rakyat dari isu-isu peribadi yang sedang beliau hadapi sekarang ini. Yang menjadi mangsa di atas kesalahan beliau adalah rakyat yang ramai ini. Mahal betul harganya untuk mengekalkan Najib dan BN ini. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 October 2012, 12:42 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Lim Guan Eng
,
Najib Razak
,
Penang
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s Coming Election: Beyond Communalism?

International Crisis Group

Asia Report N°235

1 Oct 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Malaysia’s thirteenth general election, which Prime Minister Najib Razak will have to call by April 2013, could be a watershed in communal relations. More than ever before, there is a chance, albeit a very small one, that opposition parties running on issues of transparency, economic equity and social justice could defeat the world’s longest continually-elected political coalition, the National Front (Barisan Nasional), that has based its support on a social compact among the country’s Malay, Chinese and Indian communities. That compact, granting Malays preferential status in exchange for security and economic growth, has grown increasingly stale as the growing middle class demands more of its leaders. Both ruling party and opposition are using images of the Arab Spring – the former to warn of chaos if it is not returned to power, the latter to warn of popular unrest unless political change comes faster.

Social and demographic change, coupled with effective opposition leadership and the rise of a broad-based movement for electoral reform, are likely to make this election at the very least a close contest. The ruling coalition, composed of the dominant United Malays Nationalist Organisation (UMNO); the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA); and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), as well as several smaller parties, faces the People’s Alliance (Pakatan Rakyat), composed of the People’s Justice Party (Partai Keadilan Rakyat, PKR), led by former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim; the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (Partai Islam Se-Malaysia, PAS). More than ever before, the swing vote may be the Malay middle ground: urban professionals, students and “netizens” – internet users – who have benefited from constitutionally-protected preferential status for Malays but who are tired of cronyism and corruption and are chafing under the tight controls on civil liberties.

The deck is stacked against the opposition for many reasons, not least because of an electoral system based on questionable voting rolls and carefully gerrymandered, single-representative constituencies where victory requires only a plurality (first past the post). Demands for a more level playing field gave rise in 2007 to a broad-based civil society movement, the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections, known as Bersih (Clean), that has held four mass street rallies drawing tens of thousands of participants: in November 2007; July 2011; April 2012 and August 2012. The first three were broken up by police with hundreds of arrests. In the third, violence on the part of a few participants led to harsh police counter-actions and allegations of brutality. Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, now retired but leading UMNO’s ultra-conservatives from the sidelines, has been warning Malaysians to expect more violence in the streets if the opposition loses.

The big issues are the economy, corruption and political reform. Bread-and-butter topics matter most to the electorate, and Barisan’s vast resources enable it to dole out economic favours to strategic constituencies in the lead-up to the election. The opposition is getting plenty of mileage out of corruption scandals involving top UMNO officials, although UMNO is fighting back with legal challenges and defamation suits. Political reform is seen by both sides as a political winner. Prime Minister Najib has rolled back or reworked some of the draconian legislation – most notably the colonial-era Internal Security Act (ISA) – that Mahathir used to curb dissent during his 22 years in power, but the opposition denounces it as too little, too late.

Two huge issues are largely off the official agendas of both coalitions but dominate them in many ways. One is the preferred treatment for Malays in virtually all spheres of public life and whether opening political space and promoting social justice would diminish that status. The ultra-conservatives within UMNO are determined to protect Malay rights at all costs. The other is the question of Islamic law and religious tolerance. Under Mahathir, Malaysia embarked on a program of Islamisation of the government and bureaucracy, culminating in his declaration of an Islamic state in 2001. PAS, once known for a hardline Islamist agenda, is now led by pragmatists who are willing to put contentious issues like Islamic criminal justice on hold, at least temporarily, in the interests of trying to defeat Barisan. But neither side is above trying to scare non-Malay communities, particularly the Chinese, by predicting greater intolerance if the other wins. Within the opposition coalition, relations between PAS and the Chinese-dominated DAP remain fragile.

Both sides are furiously making calculations about tactics to win seats, tailoring their message to the communities concerned. The two eastern states of Sabah and Sarawak could be kingmakers, because they control 25 per cent of the available seats.

Ultimately the question Malaysians will have to answer on election day is which of the two choices will be better able to accommodate political change, while protecting minorities against the hardline forces that more openness can produce.

Jakarta/Brussels, 1 October 2012

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 October 2012, 1:20 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Popular populism? Najib’s Budget 2013 gamble

Bridget Welsh

Malaysiakini

Oct 1, 2012

COMMENT Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has announced the second election primer budget full of goodies, extending from bonuses to civil servants to handouts to lower income households.

This budget is Najib’s latest fiscal effort to secure him a solid victory in the 13th general election that has to be held before the end of June next year.

The budget is a continuation of a historically unprecedented pattern of direct government transfers to woo political support that has broadened in scope, increased in amount and moved development policy from needs based initiatives to what appears to be a coordinated regime political survival programme.

Najib’s main campaign strategy to win political support has been to offer financial rewards, and he has used his position as premier in an attempt to buttress his political position.

With something for everyone, he is clearly trying to increase his popularity through a variety of populist initiatives. Given his priorities, will this budget actually secure his political fortunes?

Although at first glance it is difficult to see through the mass of ringgit allocated, the measures introduced Friday were carefully aimed at different constituencies. Foremost is an effort to secure Umno’s traditional base – older voters, civil servants and lower income Malaysians.

The 1.3 million civil servants have been Umno’s political foundation. The party was formed by many civil servants, and although former civil servants only comprised less than 20 percent of the party representatives today, it is estimated that every Malay family has a relative who is a civil servant. Importantly, they are spread out across political constituencies nationwide, comprising a tipping group in tight races.

Of special focus are teachers, who are influential opinion-makers in local communities, a group that has become increasingly quietly critical of the incumbent coalition.

They received special attention in the budget, with greater training opportunities, improvements in education content and the upgrading of school facilities – the latter factor has been a persistent complaint especially for older schools. Najib’s is shoring up the barricades to diminish the possibilities of changing loyalties.

This is the second out-of-the-norm allocation for civil servants in less than a year, and suggests that the political support for Najib within the bureaucracy is not as secure as it once was.

While the budget announcement actually amounts to a one-month bonus (not one and a half, as half a month was distributed for Hari Raya Aidilfitri), this is a calculated act based on a recognition that a split in the bureaucracy could lead to BN losses.

Rumblings in the civil service began last year over the flawed pay scheme that favoured the higher ranks in the service and was seen to unfair to lower and middle ranks. They involve not just issues of pay, but corruption, promotions, and a sense that the civil service is being side-lined in governance decision-making with organisations such as Pemandu taking the lead.

Many in the civil service have also been quietly worried that the direct transfers will actually curtail their ability to have funds to carry out their programmes and run their offices, as one feature of Najib’s governance has been reductions in budget allocations to the operating funds of departments.

Najib’s knows his political position is at stake and is extending personal pocket-book oriented financial incentives as an olive branch.

Essential to BN

Similar base-protecting measures are directed at senior citizens, whose low pensions have made them more vulnerable to rising costs. Older voters have been the most loyal to Malaysia’s governing coalition and least likely to change loyalties. They have witnessed first-hand the developmental changes in infrastructure and seen qualitative improvements in Malaysia’s hardware.

Now they face increasing difficulties in making ends meet, especially with regard to health care, as Malaysia is aging. Today 5.1 percent of the Malaysia’s 29.5 million population is over 65, with greater numbers living longer in the expanding population.  With more senior citizen benefits in the budget, the aim is to keep Malaysia’s Merdeka generation within the BN fold.

The third group central to the BN’s political fortunes are lower income groups. An estimated 53 percent of Malaysians make under RM3,000 in monthly income. Last year they were eligible to apply for the one-off payment of RM500 in the Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia (BR1M) cash transfer programme (although income alone is not the only determinant of eligibility).

Five million Malaysians received a total of RM2.6 billion. The budget allocates another RM500 to this group and extends the range to single-earners under RM2,000, aged 21-30, broadening the umbrella to include as much as 60 percent of the population.

The total allocated to cash transfer spending involved has risen sharply another RM3 billion. This programme is especially targeted for Malaysians in Sabah and Sarawak. Thirty-seven percent of the governing coalition’s seats are from the two states and over the last year, these states have become more politically competitive with the advent of a Borneo political awakening.

Disproportionally these states are poorer, with Sabah having the highest incidence of lower incomes nationally. The cash transfer initiative is aimed at reducing the income imbalances, but it is not a sustainable initiative. At its heart it is political, aimed at assuring the seats the government needs to hold its majority. The programme’s wide eligibility assured that a large share of possible voters will gain – at least short term.

Swing group political targeting

To complement this initiative are special measures for fisherman, retired military personnel and hawkers, all of whom experience high levels of vulnerability but are decisive constituencies.

Fishermen are notably actors in multiple seats in Perak, Kedah, Terengganu and Johor, many of them competitive such as Pengerang. This shows careful thought on the groups that will matter in close races.

This budget is also extending outreach to another important political group. The focus on youth is clear – graduate employability task force, entrepreneur funds and smart phone allocations.

It is sweetened by a first home programme, although the actual delivery of these will not be before polls and some of this measure is repackaging of programs introduced last year. Voters under 30 make up 25 percent of the electorate, and whoever wins will need youth support to do so.

A boost, blip or backfire?

This politically crafted budget rests on the underlying assumption that Malaysians are motivated by bread-and-butter concerns and pocket book enticements sway support. No question, Malaysians are concerned with the economy, and this factor historically has been decisive at polls. Jobs, salaries prices, and economic management are dominant issues.

Yet, the impact of financial cash rewards is less known. Surveys show that less than 10 percent  of Malaysians admitted to receiving benefits tied to elections before this year and most of these were in Sabah and Sarawak. These ‘gifts’ are highly symbolic and often spent quickly. In close races spending can be the determinant, as has happened in by-elections.

We have also seen that targeted financial incentives, as occurred in Terengganu in 2004 through the allocation of wang ehsan, can have their effect. Monetary incentives are seen to disproportionally sway those with lower education and lower incomes, when the amounts involved are well beyond their usual incomes.

These earlier measures were markedly different than what is happening now. The current allocations are government transfers from taxpayer money openly given at a time of high political polarisation and greater competition.

They are not party funds, but the people’s money. By using public funds so openly Najib faces a potential backlash from voters, as the spending could be seen as an indication of weakness rather than strength, particularly the focus of the measures on the traditional base of Umno.

The fact is that many Malaysian voters recognise the political nature of the allocations. And no matter how often the government denies the political rationale and points to initiatives that address broader problems in society – and there are measures in this budget that do so, such as the programme for health – they cannot step away from the reality of the political interests that embedded in this spending bonanza.

This strategy also faces the risks as it is short-term and shallow. The first round of BR1M did give Najib a boost, but it was short-lived and actually quite small, a few percentage points in his popularity. Like the electoral gifts, this money will be spent quickly.

Importantly, it did not markedly sway support for Umno, whose popularity remains at record lows. The budgetary spending will very likely have to be followed by additional gifts during election time, which are also reaching unprecedented financial amounts.

Election timing will be crucial for these measures to have a political impact. Any delay beyond one month of distribution will diminish any budget bonus Najib hopes to get. Voters forget easily, especially after the money is spent. The timing of budgetary distributions suggests a February or March polls.

Broader questions

The scope and amount of goodie spending raise broader issues the country’s economic management. Najib now has to contend with the criticism from some that he is primarily concerned with his own political interest.

He has had consistent and higher deficit spending – every year he has been in office, making the country’s finances more precarious longer term. This places the country in a less robust fiscal position at a time of global economic uncertainty and bucks the trend internationally of greater fiscal prudence.

Cash transfer programmes moreover are not seen to generate long-term economic growth or development aims. While they are likely to give a boost to consumption, they are unlikely to bring back significant revenue in the government’s coffers.

The benefits for the private sector are mixed at best, as the link between Najib’s budget and growth is not clear. Real questions are being raised – about the size of the debt, the size of the revenue base, the sources and sustainability of growth, and importantly, the impact on development.

The questions are even more serious when one considers the longer term effects on ordinary people. The high spending now will only make for a more austere cuts and reforms later, bringing to the fore the real possibility of the introduction of a goods and service tax (GST).

For every person who receives funds now, they is a real possibility that they will have to give much more back to the government through a GST tax later. It also will make the challenges of resilient solutions to inequality harder, as it is challenging to move out of a sense of dependence and entitlement that are the product of repeating cash transfers towards genuine sustainable transformation.

Najib hopes that Malaysian voters will ignore these longer term questions at the polls. He hopes the spending will give him and his party the security they appear to need. He is hoping that his populist spending will make him popular. He is taking a gamble.

DR BRIDGET WELSH is associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University and she can be reached at
[email protected]

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 October 2012, 12:56 am and is filed under
Bridget Welsh
,
Budget Debate
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


REFSA’s and IDEAS’s Misplaced Focus on Critiquing Subsidies in the 2013 Budget

Dr Lim Teck Ghee

2nd October 2012

In their joint statement recently released on 28 September, IDEAS (Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs) and not-for-profit research institute REFSA (Research for Social Advancement) drew attention to the “shocking federal government subsidy bill for 2012” which according to them is now expected to hit RM42 billion, a massive RM9 billion or 27% above the RM33 billion originally forecast for the year.

While it is true that subsidies have quadrupled in the past five years, and some of it is wasteful and not efficiently targeted at the most needy or priority sectors, the REFSA-IDEAS contention of the debilitating effects of subsidies on our economic health needs to be challenged.

Yes, blanket subsidies for cheap petrol and sugar do result in a degree of excessive and wasteful consumption. However the extent is debatable, and even if considerable, is not a sufficiently compelling reason for their immediate removal.

The other argument that such subsidies “discourage investments in improving productivity and efficiency” and “benefit upper class Malaysians who consume much more than their poorer cousins” also needs dissecting.  There is little empirical research to back up what has become an increasingly popular line of argument.  For it to be useful or credible, echoing of popular opinion is not sufficient.  The REFSA and IDEAS team need to substantiate their position with hard data and rigorous analysis on these so-called negative effects.

Government is our biggest subsidy burden

It is necessary to remind the REFSA-IDEAS team that subsidies have an important role to play in providing a safety net for vulnerable groups. They help bring down the cost of living as well as enable access to health, education, transport and other necessities.

They are a necessary burden in a highly skewed capitalist economy such as Malaysia’s where the lower classes of labour do not get the fair remuneration that they are entitled to or deserve.  We already have one of the highest levels of income inequality in the region.  In pushing for a free market system without due attention to the structural defects of our political economy,  proponents of a neo-liberal ideology run the risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

In their final argument REFSA-IDEAS state that “restructuring subsidies is the low-hanging fruit that will help restore fiscal balance and improve our dwindling national competitiveness.”  In fact, subsidies and price controls to help poor households comprise a small proportion of the total government operating budget.  The largest part of the budget is spent on salaries (to civil servants); pensions to retired civil servants and supplies and services – the last bloated by “excessive and wasteful” procurement and projects whose costs are inflated by rent-seeking and patronage charges.

There is a credible counter argument that the ballooning deficit and growing mountain of debt in the country is mainly due to government spending on itself, rather than spending on the rest of the country or on the poor.  The REFSA and IDEAS team would be doing the country a greater service if they shift their focus onto this lower hanging fruit, especially the allocations provided to the political Ministries which have been overrun with staff whose main function seems to be to look after the political and economic interests of the ruling party and its supporters rather than provide services to the public.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 October 2012, 9:29 am and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Lim Teck Ghee
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Defaming Penang CM akin to Nazi Germany tactics

Zairil Khir Johari

Malaysiakini

Sep 29, 2012

Outrageous defamation of Guan Eng in the STPM trial examinations is nothing more than a malicious personal attack based on fabricated lies and a shameless attempt at brainwashing students.

According to press reports, state-wide STPM trial examinations in Johor contain an inflammatory question-and-answer scheme that asserts the implication that Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s “warning” to schools in Penang not to subscribe to Malay mainstream newspapers is “racist and impeding integration among races”.

The essay question requires students to discuss the hypothesis that “integration among races can be achieved through national education system, but various challenges have to be overcome to realise this objective.”

According to the alleged answer scheme, one of the answers to this question was:

“The warning of Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng to 84 Chinese primary schools in the state to stop subscribing to Malay language mainstream newspapers is a racist action that impedes integration among races”.

Such an attempt to implicitly accuse the chief minister of a racist action is outrageous because not only is it a malicious personal attack based on fabricated lies, it is also a shameless attempt at brainwashing students through politicising education.

In early April this year, the chief minister had in jest asked Chinese schools not to subscribe to Utusan and Berita Harian but to replace them with Sinar Harian instead, a national Malay daily that is more respected and objective in its scope.

This is based on the fact that the BN-controlled media such Utusan Malaysia and the official Umno website Umno-Online have repeatedly fabricated malicious lies and accusations against the chief minister, including allegations that his underaged son had assaulted a female classmate.

The arrogance of money

Even though such and many other allegations have been proven to be untrue, no apology or action from the authorities have been forthcoming.

As a result of this inaction, the chief minister had no choice but to bring the matter to the courts by filing two defamation suits against Utusan.

In both cases, the chief minister won and was awarded RM200,000 in damages.

However, RM200,000 appears to be loose change for Utusan for they have continued to defame the chief minister, safe in the knowledge that they can afford such damages.

With a proven history of defamation and lies against the chief minister, is it even right for schools to continue to subscribe to such a rag?

For the chief minister to be implicitly called a racist for this comment is both injudicious and misleading, when the chief minister had also “suggested” that the schools subscribe to Sinar Harian instead.

Is the latter not a Malay newspaper as well?

Finally, the politicising of education has to stop. In addition to the above, another examination question listed “joining the opposition” as one of the choices to the question, “Which of the following will cause a person’s citizenship to be stripped?”

Clearly, there is a concerted attempt to malign and influence young students against the Opposition.

This shameless case of brainwashing students is repugnant and akin to propaganda tactics used in Nazi Germany.

ZAIRIL KHIR JOHARI is special officer to the Penang Chief Minister.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 3 October 2012, 11:13 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Lim Guan Eng
,
Media
,
Zairil Khir Johari
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.