New Malaysia’s Underclass: What to do?


June 11, 2018

New Malaysia’s Underclass: What to do?

by Dr. Lim Teck Ghee

“What’s important is that we will need to think out of the box and have the courage to challenge long held orthodoxy; or we will end up with more of the same old Malaysia”.–Dr. Lim Teck Ghee

Underclass by Definition

  1. the lowest social stratum in a country or community, consisting of the poor and unemployed.

  2. a group of people with a lower social and economic position than any of the other classes of society; “they are an underclass who lack any stake in popular capitalism and who are caught in the dependency culture”

Image result for Malaysia's underclass

Poverty right in the heart of Kuala Lumpur

In the euphoria and after glow of the recent election and current preoccupation with correcting the excesses and abuses of the Barisan Nasional (BN) government, it is all too easy to forget about or ignore the plight of the Malaysian poor and underclass class.

Whatever is the actual poverty situation – we can expect the dispute over definition and numbers to continue endlessly – and whether we can believe the previous government’s boast that only 1% of the country’s households can be considered to be poor – the reality confronting our politicians and policy makers is that the country’s underclass (and this includes many more households than just those adjudged to be living below the poverty line) is sizable, growing and has remained relatively intractable and unyielding to the billions of ringgit poured into the group in the last few Malaysia Plans.

Image result for The Penans

A young Penan Maiden–A victim of Neglect

Why have so many socio-economic development and poverty alleviation projects failed to make a significant dent in the plight of the underclass should be an important part of the discourse among politicians. It also needs to be a concern for all stake players engaged in forging a new Malaysia that does not replicate the missteps, mistakes and wrongly focused projects and programmes deployed by the previous government in dealing with the underclass.

Image result for The Penans

Barisan Nasional Leaders in Sarawak–where are they today?

Here are some suggestions on the fresh start needed in Pakatan’s development planning which can make a greater impact in tackling the multitude of obstacles and problems that stand in the way of improving the lives of the underclass:

  1. Ditch or minimize approaches which reinforce rather than reduce dependency. Malaysia is not at the same development stage that it can afford the extensive social safety nets found in developed nations. Expensive subsidy programmes of any kind – and this includes the replacement for BR1M, and petrol subsidies – should be pruned back and targeted at a small number of the most vulnerable such as the elderly or female headed households. Able working age adults below a certain age – say 60 years – should not be eligible for any form of subsidy programme.

  2. Review all costly agricultural and rural development projects to assess their impact and real benefits. In view of continuing rural to urban migration, it is in urban and semi-rural areas where the underclass is mainly clustered and where public expenditure will have greater impact on the poor and vulnerable.

  3. Fragile families are a significant contributor to the intergenerational reproduction of poverty and should be a key concern for the authorities. They are also likely to be a major factor accounting for the racial and class disparities which have caused so much angst within the nation since the tendency towards fragility seems to be more pronounced in the Malay and Bumiputra community.

  4. Together with a focus on fragile families, there is a need to jumpstart the national family planning programme which has been put in cold storage for several decades. It is clear that given the relationship between very large and large families and underclass status – evidence for this can be found in many countries around the world – early family planning interventions will be able to help many large-sized poor and middle class families avoid later life marginalization by improving their socio-economic position through better planning and early intervention in their childbearing practices.

  5. A community’s socio-cultural and religious practices may either stand in the way or assist in the upward mobility of its most needy members. There needs to be an openness and readiness for politicians and policy-makers to discuss these issues and take corrective action even if it may involve touching on sensitive or taboo concerns.

  6. We have had a top down approach to development which has resulted in a stream – even, torrent – of opportunities and rewards especially for the elite and their support group in the civil service and professional class.  This top down approach, compounded by leakages and corrupt practices, needs to be replaced with, or at least complemented by one where resources and opportunities are directly channeled to and managed by groups at the community and grassroots levels. Although the decision has been made to abolish JKKKP’s, a revival of JKKK’s with membership of these committees extended to include youth and women members can provide an impetus to local level development. When led by motivated community leaders, JKKK’s can become a catalyst in local level development and slow down the burgeoning of the underclass.

  7. Experience in other countries has shown that the great wealth of technical expertise and human resources brought to bear on anti-poverty work – especially in terms of the administrative apparatus engaged in planning and implementation – has turned out to be a liability by diverting resources away from the target group to pay for staff salaries and operating costs. Some of the most reputable NGOs in other parts of the world engaged in anti-poverty work have ended up with three quarters or more of donor funds being used to meet administrative expenses. Information on public expenditure intended for poverty and underclass target groups should be widely disclosed and disseminated, especially to the target groups to ensure transparency and accountability.

  8. Lastly, in view of the fact that the larger proportion of the underclass comprises members of the Malay community, it is imperative that successful members of the community step up to the plate to help the less fortunate members move out of their depressed situation. This has to begin with a critical and honest appraisal of the causative factors found within the community which accounts for why the Malay underclass continues to grow despite the government’s best efforts in the last fifty years.

       Image result for the orang asliThe Orang Asli of Malaysia

What’s proposed here is an example of the changes – and paradigm shifts – needed to conventional strategies and current wisdom if we are to make greater progress in arriving at a fairer and more equal society.

They may or may not work. What’s important is that we will need to think out of the box and have the courage to challenge long held orthodoxy; or we will end up with more of the same old Malaysia.

GE-14: Malaysians Voted for Big Change. Now work hard for its success. There is no such a thing as a free lunch


May 15, 2018

GE-14: Malaysians Voted for Big Change. Now work hard for its success. There is no such a thing as a free lunch

Image result for victory for malaysia

 

By Janice Fredah Ti

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

Image result for victory for malaysia

Pakatan Harapan–Stop Bickering and Got on with the Business of Government

Let’s examine the word “revolution”. It’s usually used to describe the forceful or even violent overthrow of a government by a huge part of the population. It brings to mind chaos, fighting, tear gas and chemical-laced water unleashed against citizens; citizens fighting the authorities; police, ambulances, sirens, injuries and even death.

However, my understanding of the word “revolution” is not limited to just that. Revolution, to me, means a big change. It means any movement or activity brought about by concerned citizens to bring about a paradigm shift in the mindset of fellow citizens, that will hopefully eventually effect a major shift in any given political or socioeconomic situation through entrepreneurship, education, the ballot box and others.

Let us hope there will be more to come and lot of changes in personnel in the civil and foreign service and GLCs.

Given that, a revolution is hard to define. It’s hard to determine when it starts or comes full circle. But a half-revolution – that is what I’d like to explore today.

Given our unique political conundrum, made worse by economic uncertainty, Malaysians cannot be faulted for toying with the word “revolution”. One minute, we’re plagued by political fatigue and on the verge of giving up; the next, someone mentions “revolution” and we’re instantly energised!

But what exactly is a revolution in the Malaysian context? Are we managing our expectations, are we leaving things to chance, are some people blindly following so-called leaders, and are others being misled?

Many of us do not like the fact that we are dependent on opposition political parties for any possible change in government. However, many believe that we are. Efforts to create a meaningful and sizeable third force by informed and concerned citizens over the years have met with very little success. Smaller parties like PSM are doing great work but unfortunately, they have not been accepted into the main opposition coalition, perhaps due to ideological differences.

The main opposition pact, Pakatan Harapan (PH), consists of PKR, DAP, PPBM and Amanah. We also have the runaway faction of the standalone PAS, PSM and other smaller parties. Putting aside PAS for now, what is PH doing in terms of effecting a paradigm shift in the minds of the general population to bring about the much needed change in government?

Image result for victory for malaysia

Governing Malaysia is no circus with clowns. It is hard work and sacrifice. There is no such a thing as a free lunch.

PH parties have been fighting among themselves. They were involved in multi-cornered fights in the Sarawak state elections, giving the enemy an easy victory much to the bewilderment and disappointment of those who placed their hope in them. Are we to trust them with federal power if they can’t sort themselves out in state elections?

Some remain silent while others flip-flop on important matters like RUU 355. Shouldn’t PH, as the main opposition coalition, have a collective stand on major issues concerning the people?

PKR’s Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail even went on record in an interview with Al Jazeera to say, albeit vaguely, things most would not like to hear on the hudud issue. She closed the interview by saying she was only a seat-warmer for Anwar Ibrahim.

DAP’s arrogance meanwhile has shot through the roof, what with the production of tacky video clips which supposedly serve to amuse a particular set of audience. And more than one DAP representative has used racial slurs in a public speech.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg as far as Malaysia’s main opposition coalition is concerned, but it should not be taken lightly.

As if the ruling government’s circus of incompetent and corrupt members was not bad enough, the main opposition has started its own circus as well.

It all began with a major upset that occurred in the already-polarised nation torn apart by a government gone mad. A movement started by former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad emerged out of no where in 2016, and to date, all it has succeeded in doing has been to further divide the people, much to the amusement of the ruling government.

Why has this happened? Why is the nation divided by a new movement that didn’t quite accomplish its mission?Because it was started by none other than Mahathir himself, and supported by a string of stars in a line-up consisting of the ever-important who’s who of opposition political parties and civil movements.

For several months there was major confusion, debates, quarrels, and coffee shop talk that resulted even in the loss of friendships as people could not understand why others supported or refused to support such an initiative.

Some are adamant that the engineer of Malaysia’s current situation cannot be supported at any cost; that it would be an insult to former ISA detainees and their families (who, by the way, are very much alive and among us still); that he has never been sorry for what happened or for what resulted in Malaysia today; and so on and so forth.

This group of people think if Mahathir wants to start something, by all means he should but it is way too early to throw any support behind him. Others meanwhile are inclined to think that since Mahathir is taking this step, he should be supported regardless of his past deeds or association with current UMNO leaders, or for that matter, even his personal agendas if any.

The second group just want Barisan Nasional’s (BN) current top guy out, it seems. Some are fine with a reformed UMNO in the event that Mahathir does return to his former party, while some hope he will continue leading the opposition. Some don’t care about anything as long as the current top guy (Najib) is out. Who is right and who is wrong?

The leaders of some civil movements became involved, resulting in many Malaysians jumping into the fray to sign the Citizens’ Declaration without too much consideration. If you believe this is the right thing to do, well, they have rightly influenced people to the right path, otherwise they have misled them.

I am sure many would not disagree that a huge number of Malaysians would support and sign anything without question or analysis for the simple reason that their idols are there.

I personally think they have misled the people – not all, but many. We could argue until the cows come home, but don’t we all know of someone who has regretted signing the Citizens’ Declaration for one reason or another? This is the first step towards the grand disunity about to besiege the nation.

Based on the premise that a revolution is the result of unity and a paradigm shift in the minds of citizens, is this a revolution… or half a revolution?

Then came the formation of Mahathir’s new party PPBM, which initially accepted only Bumiputera membership. This was later revised to allow non-Bumiputeras to become associate members with no voting rights. I’m not sure how many, but I’ve been made to understand that quite a few non-Bumiputeras accepted this arrangement, including my own friends.

Have we not fought against racism for so long? Have we not complained about the current administration’s racially biased policies? Have we not completely despised groups like Perkasa (coincidentally, Mahathir is the VIP patron) and the infamous Ikan Bakar Tak Laku? And we are now told to accept a new racist party into the main opposition fold, because apparently, “we have no other choice”.

It’s mind-boggling, but again – is this leading us to the revolution we seek, or only half a revolution?

After an agonising wait, GE14 has finally been called. Most of us have been there, done that, seen and heard it all. Social media, which is a big part of many voters’ lives, is threatening to explode with the insults and quarrels from both sides of the political divide.

Understandable, many want change. But what change? Change is a process and a journey, not an event called GE-14. And a change to something worse is also called change.

PH, which has been entrusted to make this change, is now led by the very same person whom many acknowledge laid the foundation for the kleptocratic and autocratic government that we have today. To make things worse, he recently sought to exonerate himself from two of the nation’s saddest and darkest events: Ops Lalang and the prosecution of Anwar Ibrahim. How convenient!

For those who must believe that it takes a thief to catch a thief, please carry on. For the rest of us, this is not palatable. It was never an issue of forgive and forget, but more of what possible reforms PH can bring forward with Mahathir in the coalition. What reforms could possibly take place with someone who apologises and makes a U-turn in six hours? PH is taking us for a ride, lock, stock and barrel.

Someone once said, “Change can never take place from the level of consciousness it was created.”PH – are you leading us to a revolution, or half a revolution?

If PH is serious about change and good governance, why are its parties, particularly PKR, fielding last-minute parachute candidates, worse still those who are not local, for state seats? Last-minute decisions for something as important as what they call “the mother of all elections”?

The power struggle is so blatant, and they are trying to tell us that they are for the people? How are they different from the very people they wish to bring down – BN? Try harder next time, PH.

PH, we want a revolution, not half a revolution. Many are angry at my disapproval and constant bashing of PH, as well as what they call my idealism. They say I am seeking perfection when the reality is that it doesn’t exist. I don’t think idealism is exactly the opposite of realism, but let’s save that for another day. If idealism involves not voting for a half-baked opposition coalition which could have presented itself as a sincere catalyst of change through real hard work and good planning, I am fine with idealism for now.

Happy voting, abstaining, or spoiling of votes!

Janice Fredah Ti is an FMT reader.

The views expressed by the writer do not necessarily reflect that of FMT.

 

 

Najib Razak’s Gua Tolong Lu, Lu Tolong Gua Survival Economics


October 22, 2017

Malaysia’s Economic Policy--Najib Razak’s Gua Tolong Lu, Lu Tolong Gua Survival Economics

by MP Liew Chin Tong@www.malaysiakini.com

Image result for Najib is a liar

MP SPEAKS | The suffix “-nomics” is a popular media term to denote a certain type of economic idea or just a form of ridicule against political rhetoric.

“Najibnomics” is an attempt to show off Najib’s set of clearly articulated economic ideas to drive the nation forward. But is it even real?

On October 27, 2017, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak in his role as finance minister will present his ninth Budget to the Parliament.

Najib took over from Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as Finance Minister following a tense negotiation on September 17, 2008.

The 2009 Budget was presented by Abdullah on August 29, 2008. Najib then succeeded Abdullah as prime minister on April 3, 2009.

The only time Najib was close to articulating a framework was during the launch of the now defunct (and discredited) “New Economic Model” on March 31, 2010, a year into his premiership.

Image result for dr jomo kwame sundaram

In a recent interview with Malaysiakini, Professor KS Jomo (photo) had this to say about the New Economic Model:

“Let us be clear about this. The New Economic Model, or NEM, is really a wishlist of economic reforms desired from an essentially neo-liberal perspective. That does not mean it is all good or all bad. It contains some desirable reforms, long overdue due to the accumulation of excessive, sometimes contradictory regulations and policies.

“Although the NEM made many promises and raised expectations, most observers would now agree that it has rung quite hollow in terms of implementation despite its promising rhetoric. As we all know, the NEM was dropped soon after it was announced for political reasons, and has never been the new policy framework it was expected to be.”

I share Jomo’s sentiment that NEM was more or less a wishlist from the neo-liberal perspective. But at least there was a plan.

New Economic Model, RIP

Three key takeaways from NEM are worth noting.

First, Malaysia could no longer depend on just capital investments, be it foreign or local, or having more foreign unskilled labour. What is required is productivity through innovation.

Second, social inclusiveness was one of the three key pillars in the NEM. The other two being “high income” and “sustainability”.

“Inclusiveness” is World Bank’s shorthand for “inequality”. Even in 2010, it has been identified that inequality is one of the major concerns that the Malaysian economy has to confront.

Third, NEM argues that more economic decision-making powers should be devolved to state and local governments, and not concentrated in the hands of the central government.

Worse still, economic decisions are increasingly concentrated in the hands of Najib himself, bypassing the cabinet entirely.

The key recommendations of NEM are listed as follow:

Not that I agree with NEM entirely, but, again, there was a framework and a plan.

Less than three months after the launch of NEM, Najib presented the 10th Malaysia Plan, prepared by the Economic Planning Unit of the Prime Minister’s Department, in June 2010.

NEM was prepared by a group of senior economists with relatively broad-based consultations with the wider society.

The Malaysia Plan has become a bureaucratic routine. The two documents – NEM and the 10th Malaysia Plan – did not seem to “talk” to each other.Najib has no conviction. He has no clear idea of which ideas to adopt. As soon as NEM was launched, it was shuttered prematurely – after protests by some right-wing Malay groups.

Minimum wage and BR1M

While NEM was ostensibly killed by right-wing groups, the actual killer was Idris Jala’s Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu).

Image result for Idris Jala

Idris Jala–Malaysia’s Super Bullshitter

Najib’s then supposed economic troubleshooter Idris Jala packaged some of NEM ideas into the “Economic Transformation Programme” (ETP) which focused on the so-called high-impact “Entry Point Projects” (EPP).

Between 2009 and 2011, Najib was telling the investor community that he intended to “liberalise” the Malaysian market, with rules for some 27 sectors relaxed.

Beyond that, he neither articulated any coherent economic ideas nor pushed for significant reforms apart from proposing a minimum wage and the cash handout programme 1Malaysia People’s Aid (BR1M).

Image result for Najib is a liar

Only Raja Petra Kamaruddin wants him to stay because he is a beneficiary of Najib’s Gua Tolong Lu, Lu Tolong Gua Policy

The opposition and the trade unions had long called for the implementation of the minimum wage. Najib agreed to implement minimum wage in the hope to take the sails out of the opposition’s wind.

BR1M was even more interesting. The then Pakatan Rakyat policy committee, of which I was a member, announced in July 2011 that it planned to focus the “bottom 60 percent” with a comprehensive set of economic reforms.

Najib’s government answered Pakatan Rakyat’s plan with BR1M to pacify the bottom 60 percent.

Making rating agencies happy

Post-May 2013 general election, the Prime minister’s focus was on pacifying the rating agencies.

The emerging markets suffered sudden currency slides in May and June 2013 in what was termed a “taper tantrum” as the US Federal Reserve indicated its intention to scale back monetary easing.

Rating agencies panicked and started to look at the weaknesses of Asian economies.

Najib’s knee-jerk reaction was to form a “fiscal policy committee” which has a membership almost identical with the weekly “Majlis Ekonomi” (Economic Council) meeting that bypasses the proper full cabinet deliberation on economic matters.

The fiscal policy committee committed to keeping the deficit at three percent and eventually achieving a balanced budget in 2020.

To this end, subsidies were cut, government services were slashed and the Goods and Services Tax (GST) was recommended in the 2014 budget speech (presented in 2013, the first Budget after the last general election).

Image result for Najib is a liar

From then on, Najib’s economic policies were reduced to ensuring that the rating agencies were happy and the government has sufficient revenue to pay for its excesses. Nothing about refashioning the economy or any long-term vision.

It’s all about Najib’s survival

The year 2015 was probably Najib’s annus horribilis. Oil prices dropped dramatically since October 2014, and as a consequence, the ringgit plunged too.

From March 2015 onwards, details of the 1MDB scandal emerged and subsequently, in July 2015, details about the “donation” into Najib’s personal account surfaced.

Najib sacked then Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, then Attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail and then Rural and Regional Development minister Shafie Apdal (now in Jail) on July 28, 2015.

In September 2015, in order to deal with the trust deficit, a special economic committee (JKE), which included Nazir Razak (right in photo), Najib’s respected banker brother, was formed to advise the government on economic policies.

There is reason to believe that the JKE no longer meets. Even if it has met, Najib has no time for any views. By now, it is about his survival and nothing else.

Since late 2015, the government has decided on the propaganda line that the Malaysian economy is doing very well under Najib, and whoever claims otherwise is bordering on economic treason or sabotage.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of the Economic Planning Unit (EPU) Abdul Rahman Dahlan, who also doubles as BN strategic communications director, typified this approach.

The government is no longer prepared to listen to the grouses of ordinary Malaysians who suffered the triple blows of GST implementation, the stiff depreciation of ringgit and government austerity (cuts to subsidies, health, welfare and education funding).

“There is no crisis!” So Najib and his associates believe. There are even court jesters who sing praises of the wonders of “Najibnomics”.

Image result for Najib  Don't Worry, I will be gone soon

But just like the emperor with no clothes, at some point, probably at the ballot box, the voters will call his bluff. By then, perhaps many of us will realise that Najib has had no serious economic policy for the past nine years as finance minister and more than eight years as Prime Minister.In the end, it’s all about “Nothing-nomics”.

LIEW CHIN TONG is the MP for Kluang and DAP national political education director.

 

Malaysian Indians deserve Recognition, Respect and Reward, not Fawning MIC Politicians


May 12, 2017

Malaysian Indians deserve Recognition, Respect and Reward, not Fawning MIC Politician

by P. Gunasegaram@www.malaysiakini.com

“Prejudice is a burden that confuses the past, threatens the future and renders the present inaccessible.”

– Maya Angelou

Image result for The Malaysian Indians

If the government is truly serious about helping the Indian or any other minority oppressed group, then this is what it has to do. It has to come down hard on anyone who does otherwise and perpetuates the continued oppression of the minority community. It is never all about handouts. It requires genuine effort at inclusion – nothing else works.–P. Gunasegaram

QUESTION TIME | Perhaps the title should have been just “Apa India mahu?” because the word “lagi” implies that you have too much. The fact is that Indians in the country have too little of everything except for their relative shares in such things as the extent of gangsterism, number of people in jails, number of people killed in custody, unemployment and so on.

Although the per capita income of Indians in Malaysia is higher than that of the bumiputeras (includes Malays and others), they are the most disadvantaged group in the country as shown by other social indicators. In fact, even in terms of per capita income, Indians, who are now largely in the urban areas as opposed to bumiputeras in the rural areas, face higher living expenses. If this is adjusted for, they might become the most disadvantaged even in terms of income.

But who are the Indians?

Indians form about two million people accounting for some seven percent of the population in Malaysia with Malays about 50 percent, Chinese about 25 percent and other bumiputeras about 11 percent. But they are not a uniform community – many subgroups being far better off than the average in terms of income and social well-being.

Tamils from India (see table) form by far the vast majority, accounting for some 75 percent of those considered Indians and this is the group which has been the most disadvantaged largely because of historical and social reasons. They were exploited successively by the British, the Malayan and the Malaysian governments who gave and are giving scant attention to their predicament. This is the group that we are referring to here when we talk about disadvantaged Indians.

While Indians have a long presence in Malaysia, dating back over 2,000 years ago, most of them were brought in to work as indentured labour – a form of bonded labour which replaced slavery after it was abolished in the late 19th century. Bonded labour involved working to pay off a debt which is often not clearly specified with workers paid extremely low wages for very hard work.

Most of them worked in the rubber plantations and in labour intensive tasks such as building roads and railways. In fact, it would be true to say that in the years of British occupation and the early years of Malaysia’s independence, the Indians built not only the roads and railways, making Malaysian infrastructure among the best in developing countries, but made rubber the main export earner.

But their efforts were not rewarded despite them being organised in the plantation sector in 1954 under the National Union of Plantation Workers or NUPW, at one point one of the largest unions in the world. While their union leaders were chauffeured around in Mercedes Benzes and they did manage to bring some benefits to members, plantation workers remained mired in extreme poverty.

Eventually, the Indians, the majority of whom were then in estates, were dealt a severe blow when in the 80s, the government encouraged cheap illicit labour in the hundreds of thousands into plantations and other industries, halting any chance of higher income there.

A former finance minister and plantation owner, Tan Siew Sin, even said then that if illegal labour was removed from plantations, they would collapse. The NUPW, the MIC and the government stood by and watched this happen – a move that further impoverished an already impoverished community.

In fact, some in the government and in politics may even have clapped their hands perversely to watch this perceived Indian dominance of the plantation industry albeit at the labour level whittled away through the import of cheap, exploited Indonesian labour.

From the green ghettos, the Indians moved into towns and cities to earn a living, creating slums. Unemployment among them increased, they lived in squalor, they took whatever work they could get and as with any disadvantaged minority they took to crime as a means of living. They resorted to gangs for social inclusion and self-respect.

The MIB

Image result for Zakir Naik

The Indians don’t deserve this extremist naturalised Malaysian Indian. He has become the Pope of UMNO Muslims

Now, on the back of an impending election, the government very publicly came up with a Malaysian Indian Blueprint, or MIB. The prime minister himself unveiled it. Considering that the government and the MIC have done precious little for the Indians, will the MIB make a difference?

From a brief look, the MIB is a pretty good blueprint in terms of identifying and documenting the Indian problem. It lists all the major problems backed with relevant statistics which show that Indian Malaysians are lagging behind and may slip further.

For instance, median household income for Indians per month rose 7.5 percent compounded annually (against 7.8 percent for Malaysia) for 44 years between 1970 and 2014 to reach RM4,627 compared to RM4,214 for bumiputeras and RM5,708 for Chinese.

Recall that Malays form about 50 percent of the population and that other bumiputeras form some 11 percent – the latter group includes indigenous people, and those from Sabah and Sarawak, are among the poorest in Malaysia. This could mean that Indian income is already lower than that of Malay income. I could not find standalone figures for Malay income.

The MIB also recognises that Indians in the top 60 percent of income bracket account for 83 percent of the Indian income. In the bottom 40 are 227,600 households or 1.14 million people; assuming five to a household – over half of Indians earn live with only 17 percent of the Indian share of income!

Here are some direct quotes from the MIB which starkly reflect the Indian predicament:

“In 2014, Indian families accounted for 21 percent of the total number of reported domestic violence cases. In that same year, a total of 518 Indian children or 12 percent of all reported cases were classified as children who are in need of care and protection. These statistics indicate a prevalent problem of dysfunctional family dynamics and broken family bonds.”

Image result for The Poor Indians in Kuala Lumpur

The sacrifices of their hardworking ancestors mean nothing to these poorest among the poor in Malaysia

“It is estimated that about 70 percent of gang members in the country are Indians. Although some leave behind gang activities after their schooling years, field experts suggest that a number of them, particularly those from underprivileged and broken families, stay on in gangs and progress to more serious crimes. According to PDRM 2014 statistics, of all violent crime arrests, Malaysian Indians comprise 31 percent (against national population of 7 percent) compared to Malay and Chinese counterparts at 51 percent and 11 percent respectively.”

“The Malaysian Indian community has the challenge of ensuring its religious rights are preserved while working with the regulatory requirements and sensitivities of the majority group. At the same time, Indian religious institutions such as temples need to increase their contribution to their communities in areas such as education, values and welfare.”

“…while there are points of pride in being of Indian ethnicity, some aspects of Indian representation in Malaysian public life – such as associations to crime, gangs, alcohol abuse, violence, low education and poverty – impart a negative slant to the community’s overall image.”

And finally, for me the most important point the MIB makes: “If left unchecked, the economic, educational and social challenges highlighted above will solidify the existence of an Indian sub-class that is continually marginalised and excluded from the Malaysian mainstream. Not only is this a waste of human potential, it is a cost to the country’s economy and a threat to national inter-ethnic harmony.” Well said.

The 3Rs

But going beyond the thoughtful recommendations by the MIB, the Indian community has a far better chance of progressing if the government and the politicians are serious about helping them.

What is it that the Indians want and need? Apa lagi India mahu? Indians want to claim their right to this country through what I shall call the 3Rs – recognition, respect and reward.

Recognition means acknowledging the immense contribution of Indians to the development of the nation which was out of all proportion to their numbers through the growth and development of the rubber industry and infrastructure projects amongst others. This also means acknowledging that they worked under terribly unfair conditions and paid a major price for their systematic exploitation. It includes as well dealing once and for all with the issue of stateless Indians even as Muslim Indonesians, Bangladeshis and Filipinos are routinely given citizenship with few questions asked.

Trust this Prime Minister to faithfully implement MIB (Malaysian Indian Blueprint). I won’t even trust him with my cat. But I expect the Malaysian Indians to vote for him in GE-14. You want respect, start with self respect first. How about that. Remember the words, SELF RESPECT. Do not be like the UMNO Malays who are dependent on handouts.–Din Merican

Respect means to give them due consideration to practice their way of life without being ridiculed and discriminated against because of their colour, manner, background or way of life. It means honouring their religious tradition without being constantly harassed by fanatics who heap scorn on their beliefs and destroy their temples and places of worship. It means no stereotyping and attributing unfair cliches to Indians. Respect also means not being arrested at the drop of a hat, or being arrested, beaten up in the lock-up and sometimes killed.

Reward means to give them their due for the effort that they have put in by themselves to improve themselves. This means stopping racist administrators dispersed throughout the civil service who make it a point to make life difficult for some and routinely practice discrimination against other races and religions, and especially Indians. Reward means giving them their due without they having to constantly ask and fight for it in every sphere.

If the government is truly serious about helping the Indian or any other minority oppressed group, then this is what it has to do. It has to come down hard on anyone who does otherwise and perpetuates the continued oppression of the minority community. It is never all about handouts. It requires genuine effort at inclusion – nothing else works.

The Indian helped build this country, with his two bare hands. He wants to be recognised and respected for that. He wants to be given the opportunity for his children to progress beyond what he has been able to.

His ancestors and he himself have paid for that with their blood, sweat and tears. He is as good as any other Malaysian can be. If you deny him that, he will fight for it any which way he can for he has little left to lose.

Malaysia: Impact of defunding Public Universities


January 24, 2017

Malaysia: Impact of defunding Public Universities

by Dr. Lee Hwok Aun
Published in The Edge, January  16, 2017

Malaysia’s public universities are headed for troubled waters and it is unclear whether our policy makers and executers are even on the lookout. The university rankings business is a debatable one, but I bring it up here because it is the government’s ultimate performance benchmark, and recent developments underscore the detachment of officialdom from the institutions’ woes.–Dr. Lee Hwok-Aun

Image result for Defunding Malaysian Public UniversitiesMalaysia’s Finance Minister Najib Razak–Presiding over a soon to be financially insolvent nation

Malaysia’s public universities are headed for troubled waters and it is unclear whether our policy makers and executers are even on the lookout. The university rankings business is a debatable one, but I bring it up here because it is the government’s ultimate performance benchmark, and recent developments underscore the detachment of officialdom from the institutions’ woes.

The University of Malaya’s rise to #133 on the QS World Universities score sheet in 2016, its best position ever on this rankings scheme, was greeted on campus with surprise, nonchalance, and a dash of despair. The sentiments are distinct from previous years. When UM inched up the rankings, from #156 in 2012 to #146 in 2015, these small and steady gains brought relief, and a bigger hop from #167 in 2011 to #156 in 2012 infused a sense of accomplishment. Research grants were quite abundant, there was support for internationalization, for recruiting and retaining talent. Universities were basically supported, we seemed to be doing things better; improvement in the rankings made sense.

Then came the funding cuts. Federal budget allocations for universities were slashed by 12% in 2015, 15% in 2016, and 19% in 2017. UM took the biggest hit in 2016, when it suffered a 27% shortfall from the previous year. And here lies the trigger of despair. This defunding spree, coinciding with a major leap in the rankings, might be taken as vindication, and perhaps embolden further budgetary constriction.

The government will be perilously mistaken to do so. Continual aggressive defunding brings three significant deficits on Malaysia’s public universities.

First, a personnel deficit. Severe fund-slashing compels severe cost-cutting, shock therapy induces desperate measures. Contract staff are one of the first on the chopping block because the funds for this specific category of employees have dried up. Many contracts have not been renewed, and they are not substituted with allocations for part-time instructors or new recruits. Financial dispensability, however, does not equate with importance to core activity and service. Numerous academic departments count on contract academic staff to teach core courses and produce research and publications.

As contract staff are ushered out, the same workload gets distributed among the remaining staff, increasing their burden and contributing to the second deficit, in morale. Academics will likely see burdens increased, while concerns toward the funding cuts are typically dismissed by invoking the seemingly non-negotiable policy of reducing public subsidization of university expenditure. The Higher Education Blueprint 2015-2025 outlined new funding formulae, with performance-based allocations and per student funding as appealing new features. This formulae is to be rolled out on a “gradual”, “gate-staged” basis.

Image result for Dr Lee Hwok Aun

ISEAS-Yusuf Ishak Institute Senior Fellow, Dr Lee Hwok-Aun

“Performance funding” is especially contentious. If fixated on numbers and not adequately anchored to the public interest and long-term objectives, as seems to be the case, there is every potential for the system to be gamed, for example, by lowering academic rigour to boost completion rates and student satisfaction, or pursuing quantity over quality of research. Given these complexities, one would expect the policy to be agonizingly deliberated, and gradual and systematic if implemented.

Image result for University of Malaya

But Universiti Malaya and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia have already, for 2016 and 2017 respectively, been administered huge funding cuts of 27% and 31%. Why? Enrolments have not fallen precipitously, nor have the universities massively scaled down operations. Have they performed so badly? The lack of coherence and transparency in the targeting of funding cuts, compounded by drained research grant reservoirs, are disconcerting, and cannot be good for morale in the academic community.

Some initiatives with good potential risk derailment. At the University of Malaya, to allow for academics to play to their relative interests and strengths, different career tracks – focused on research or teaching – are also being rolled out. But in the hasty pursuit of extracting more output from less resources, research track targets have been made frighteningly difficult to hit. Few select that option, and some – the more diligent, productive, conscientious ones – have been forced to take it against their wishes, to the detriment of their morale.

What of the next generation of academics? Policy brims with rhetoric of talent development, and reference to the Higher Education Talent Roadmap, but the Malaysian approach diverges from the practices in recognized institutions. Globally leading universities excel by attracting talent, then trusting them, through their dynamism, creativity and self-motivation, to research, teach and contribute to public knowledge with light monitoring. Malaysian universities are increasingly inclined to do the opposite – micromanaging rewards for formulaic outcomes, distrusting the industry and capability of staff, monitoring for compliance and resisting change, which seriously risk repelling and losing talents that are drawn to institutions that safeguard trust, autonomy and freedom.

Which brings us to a third deficit that can grow as public financing shrinks: our international profile. Malaysia’s public universities, having made inroads in internationalization, could see these gains reversed. The public universities are subject to the public services employment scheme, including the rule that a non-citizen cannot be hired on a permanent basis. All non-Malaysian academics are on contract, predominantly short term. The more contracts are not renewed, the less international our profile. Will Malaysia’s public higher learning institutions, especially the research universities, become more domestic, less global? That might happen, and if so, our presence on the world academic stage will fade. A specific recruitment scheme for public universities, promoting secure employment of international academic staff, is worth considering.

The presumption that rebalancing of university funding sources and reducing of government subsidy necessitates budget cuts also warrants scrutiny. These can be achieved by maintaining the federal allocations, while facilitating growth in other sources. There is currently a baffling downward spiral and multiple moving targets. Both the share of government subsidies and the overall expenditure of universities are falling – why?

Suppose a university currently spends RM100 million and receives RM90 million from government, in line with the current 90% subsidization rate. Expenditure of RM120 million in ten years would be a reasonable projection. If the government share declines to 70%, then in ten years – a “gradual” rollout as the Blueprint stipulates – the government’s contribution would amount to RM84 million, or basically holding steady, not dropping steeply.

Will the government assess the impact of the funding cuts and reconsider the policy – at least its pace and severity? This will take courage, since reducing public funding has been high on the higher education agenda for a decade, and the government defends the deep cuts apparently as a mark of its resolve.

But at the rate we are cutting funds, it will be impossible to avoid deficits in personnel, morale, and international profile.

Dr. Lee Hwok Aun is Senior Fellow at ISEAS-Yusuf Ishak Institute.

 

Nobody takes Malaysia’s Budget seriously and here’s why


October 24, 2016

Nobody takes Malaysia’s Budget seriously and  here’s why

by T K Chua

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

“It is simple; the annual budget can’t instil discipline if there is no oversight. The annual budget can’t function as an instrument of control if borrowing and off-budget activities are allowed to roam free, unrestrained and unchecked.”–T K Chua

Image result for Najib's 2016-2017 Budget

When I read “Why I didn’t watch the Budget speech” as written by Kensi from Sarawak, I found my feelings were the same. For the first time in a quarter century I did not sit through the whole Budget speech. I walked off after the first hour or so.

The Budget has long lost its aura. It is just an annual pomp for fund managers to get excited and for the government to announce some goodies. Whether or not the goodies are carried out as planned is as good as anyone’s guess.

Image result for Najib's 2016-2017 Budget

Malaysia’s National Budget is Petty Cash for this First Couple. When the cash is finished, just borrow more or ask Bank Negara to print more money and then pass the burden to ordinary Malaysians by way of debt service or inflation. That is Najibonomics: Tax and Spend recklessly.–Din Merican

Why do I say our federal budget is meaningless?First, the annual budget has never capped the amount of borrowing that the federal government could incur each year. If the federal government may borrow without restraint, who bothers whether our projected revenues and expenses are adhered to? If revenues fall short, the government could borrow more to fill the gap. If expenses burst the budget, again the government could borrow more.

Where are the restraints and control that the annual budget is supposed to provide? In fact, the annual supplementary budgets are clear indications that the budget has failed to keep government financial indiscipline in check. The government will borrow and spend as it wishes, regardless of the revenue performance or actual expenditure incurred.

Second, the annual budget is just a mechanism to dish out allocations, but never to accomplish its intended outcomes. We mistakenly look at the allocation earmarked for each programme as if it is a fait accompli.

But this is far from true. For example, just look at the allocation for subsidies which the government has always bragged about. It is time for the government to list out how much of the allocation has reached the intended target groups and how much of it was siphoned off by corrupt officials, businessmen and those who could indulge in arbitrage.

Seriously, if budget spending has been constantly effective over the years, I believe there would be no more poor people in this country.

Image result for Najib's 2016-2017 Budget

Third, the annual federal budget is no longer the true representation of government financial commitment and responsibility. Off-budget agencies and activities have now overwhelmed traditional government ministries and departments.

Parliamentary oversight of government taxation and expenditure through the annual budget is at best only half correct.

When non-financial public enterprises and GLCs set up ventures, incur debt and impose contingent liabilities on the government, did they get the approval of Parliament to begin with? When government decides on privatisation projects, including guaranteeing revenues and profits of privatised entities, did it seek the approval of Parliament?

Image result for Najib's 2016-2017 Budget

This guy is excited about the Budget–He is the Minister of Defense: Commissions

I thought the Federal Constitution, (through Part VII – Financial Provisions), is very clear on financial oversights by Parliament – no taxation shall be levied or expenditures incurred unless with expressed authority of federal law. How then did the government spend and borrow so massively through off-budget agencies such as GLCs and Non-financial public enterprises?

It is simple; the annual budget can’t instil discipline if there is no oversight. The annual budget can’t function as an instrument of control if borrowing and off-budget activities are allowed to roam free, unrestrained and unchecked.

T.K. Chua is an FMT reader.