2010-03-22 : No Cowardly Past

* Speech by Gua Musang MP Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah at the launch of the Second Edition of “No Cowardly Past: James Puthucheary, Writings, Poems, Commentaries” at the PJ Civic Centre.

James Puthucheary lived what is by any measure an extraordinary and eventful life. He was, among other things, a scholar, anti-colonial activist, poet, political economist and lawyer. The thread running through these roles was his struggle for progressive politics in a multiracial society. His actions were informed by an acute sense of history and by a commitment to a more equitable and just Malaysia. James was concerned about economic development in a way that was Malaysian in the best sense. His thinking was motivated by a concerned for socioeconomic equity and for the banishment of communalism and ethnic chauvinism from our politics.

The launch of the Second Edition of this collection of James Puthucheary’s writings, No Cowardly Past, invites us to think and speak about our country with intellectual honesty and courage.

Let me put down some propositions, as plainly as I can, about where I think we stand. We

1) Our political system has broken down in a way that cannot be salvaged by piecemeal reform.

2) Our public institutions are compromised by politics (most disturbingly by racial politics) and by money. This is to say they have become biased, inefficient and corrupt.

3) Our economy has stagnated. Our growth is based on the export of natural resources. Productivity remains low. We now lag our regional competitors in the quality of our people, when we were once leaders in the developing world.

4) Points 1) -3), regardless of official denials and mainstream media spin, is common knowledge. As a result, confidence is at an all time low. We are suffering debilitating levels of brain and capital drain.

Today I wanted to share some suggestions on how we might move the economy forward, but our economic stagnation is clearly not something we can tackle or even discuss in isolation from the problem of a broken political system and a compromised set of public institutions.

This country is enormously blessed with talent and natural resources. We are shielded from natural calamities and enjoy warm weather all year round. We are blessed to be located at the crossroads of India and China and the Indonesian archipelago. We are blessed to have cultural kinship with China, India, the Middle East and Indonesia. We attained independence with an enviable institutional framework. We were a federation with a Constitution that is the supreme law of the land, a parliamentary democracy, an independent judiciary, a common law system and an independent civil service. We had political parties with a strong base of support that produced talented political leadership.

We have no excuse for our present state of economic and social stagnation. It is because we have allowed that last set of features, our institutional and political framework, to be dismantled, that all our advantages are not better realized.

So it makes little sense to talk glibly about selecting growth drivers, fine-tuning our industrial or trade policy, and so on, without acknowledging that our economy is in bad shape because our political system is in bad shape.

A case in point is the so called New Economic Model. The government promised the world it would be announced by the end of last year. It was put off to the end of this month. Now we are told we will be getting just the first part of it, and that we will be getting merely a proposal for the New Economic Model from the NEAC. Clearly, politics has intruded. The NEM has been opposed by groups that are concerned that the NEM might replace the NEP. The New Economic Model might not turn out to be so new after all.

The NEP

The irony in all this is that there is nothing to replace. The NEP is the opposite of New. It is defunct and is no longer an official government policy because it was replaced by the New Development Policy (another old “new” policy) in 1991. The “NEP” was brought back in its afterlife as a slogan by the leadership of UMNO Youth in 2004. It was and remains the most low-cost way to portray oneself as a Malay champion.

Thus, at a time when we are genuinely need of bold new economic measures, we are hamstrung by by the ghost of dead policies with the word New in them. What happens when good policy outlives its time and survives as a slogan?

The NEP was a twenty year programme. It has become, in the imaginations of some, the centre of a permanently racialized socio-economic framework.

Tun Ismail and Tun Razak, in the age of the fixed telephone (you had to call through an operator), thought twenty years would be enough. Its champions in the age of instant messaging talk about 100 or 450 years of Malay dependency.

It had a national agenda to eradicate poverty and address structural inequalities between the races for the sake of equity and unity. The Malays were unfairly concentrated in low income sectors such as agriculture. The aim was to remove colonial era silos of economic roles in our economy. It has been trivialized into a concern with obtaining equity and contracts by racial quotas. The NEP was to diversify the Malay economy beyond certain stereotyped occupations. It is now about feeding a class of party- linked people whose main economic function is to obtain and re-sell government contracts and concessions.

The NEP saw poverty as a national, Malaysian problem that engaged the interest and idealism of all Malaysians. People like James Puthucheary were at the forefront of articulating this concern. Its present-day proponents portray poverty as a communal problem.

The NEP was a unity policy. Nowhere in its terms was any race specified. It has been reinvented as an inalienable platform of a Malay Agenda that at one and the same time asserts Malay supremacy and perpetuates the myth of Malay dependency.

It was meant to unite our citizens by making economic arrangements fairer, and de-racializing our economy. In its implementation it became a project to enrich a selection of Malay capitalists. James Puthucheary had warned, back in 1959, that this was bound to fail. “The presence of Chinese capitalists has not noticeably helped solve the poverty of Chinese households.. Those who think that the economic position of the Malays can be improved by creating a few Malay capitalists, thus making a few Malays well-to-do, will have to think again. “

The NEP’s aim to restructure society and to ensure a more equitable distribution of economic growth was justified on principles of social justice, not claims of racial privilege. This is an important point. The NEP was acceptable to all Malaysians because its justification was universal rather than racial, ethical rather than opportunistic. It appealed to Malaysians’ sense of social justice and not to any notion of racial supremacy.

We were a policy with a 20 year horizon, in pursuit of a set of measurable outcomes. We were not devising a doctrine for a permanent socio-economic arrangement. We did not make the damaging assumption of the permanently dependent Malay.

Today we are in a foundational crisis both of our politics and of our economy. Politically and economically, we have come to the end of the road for an old way of managing things. It is said you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all the time. Well these days the time you have in which to fool people is measured in minutes, not years.

The world is greatly changed. The next move we must make is not a step but a leap that changes the very ground we play on.

The NEP is over. I ask the government to have the courage to face up to this. The people already know. The real issue is not whether the NEP is to be continued or not, but whether we have the imagination and courage to come up with something which better addresses the real challenges of growth, equity and unity of our time.

At its working best the NEP secured national unity and provided a stable foundation for economic growth. Taken out of its policy context (a context that James helped frame) and turned into a political programme for the extension of special privilege, it has been distorted into something that its formulators, people such as the late Tun Razak and Tun Ismail, would have absolutely abhorred: it is now the primary justification and cover for corruption, crony capitalism and money politics, and it is corruption, cronyism and money politics that rob us and destroy our future.

No one who really cares about our country can approve of the role the NEP now plays in distorting the way we think about the economy, of our people, of our future, and retarded our ability to formulate forward-looking economic strategy.

The need for a wholistic approach to development based on the restoration and building of confidence.

We need a wholistic approach to development that takes account of the full potential of our society and of our people as individuals. We need an approach to development that begins with the nurturing and empowerment of the human spirit. Both personally and as a society, this means we look for the restoration of confidence in ourselves, who we are, what we are capable of, and the future before us.

I return to the question of the Middle Income Trap that I alluded to some time ago. I am glad that notion has since been taken up by the Government.

The middle income trap is a condition determined by the quality of our people and of the institutions that bind them. It is not something overcome simply by growing more oil palm or extracting more oil and gas. Our economic challenge is to improve the quality of our people and institutions. Making the break from the middle-income trap is in the first place a social, cultural, educational and institutional challenge. Let me just list what needs to be done. Before we can pursue meaningful economic strategy we need to get our house in order. We need to:

1) undertake bold reforms to restore the independence of the police, the anti-corruption commission and the judiciary. Confidence in the rule of law is a basic condition of economic growth.

2) reform the civil service

3) wage all out war on corruption

4) thoroughly revamp our education system

5) repeal the Printing Presses Act, the Universities and Colleges Act, the ISA and the OSA. These repressive laws only serve to create a climate of timidity and fear which is the opposite of the flourishing of talent and ideas that we say we want.

6) Replace the NEP with an equity and unity policy (a kind of “New Deal”) to bring everyone, regardless of race, gender, or what state they live in and who they voted for, into the economic mainstream.

These reforms are the necessary foundation for any particular economic strategies. Many of these reforms will take time. Educational reform is the work of many years. But that is no excuse not to start, confidence will return immediately if that start is bold. As for particular economic strategies, there are many we can pursue:

· We need to tap our advantage in having a high savings rate. Thanks to a lot of forced savings, our savings rate is about 38%. We need more productive uses for the massive funds held in EPF, LTH, LTAT and PNB than investment in a low yielding stock market in which they are already over-represented. One suggestion is to make strategic investments internationally in broad growth sectors such as minerals. Another is that we should use these funds to enable every Malaysian to own their own home. This would stimulate the construction sector with its large multiplier of activities and bring about a stakeholder society. A fine example of how this is done is Singapore’s use of savings in CPF to fund property purchases.


· The Government could make sure that the the land office and local government, developers and house-buyers are coordinated through a one-stop agency under the Ministry of Housing and and Local Government. This would get everyone active, right down to the level of local authorities. The keys to unleashing this activity are financing and a radical streamlining of local government approvals.

· We have been living off a drip of oil and cheap foreign labour. Dependence on these easy sources of revenue has dulled our competitiveness and prevented the growth of high income jobs. We need a moratorium on the hiring of low skilled foreign labour that is paired with a very aggressive effort to increase the productivity and wages of Malaysian labour. Higher wages would mean we could retain more of our skilled labour and other talent.

· Five years ago I called for a project to make Malaysia an oil and gas services and trading hub for East Asia. Oil and gas activities will bring jobs to some of our poorest states. We should not discriminate against those states on the basis of their political affiliations. No one is better placed by natural advantage to develop this hub. Meanwhile Singapore, with not a drop of oil, has moved ahead on this front.

· We should ready ourselves to tap the wealth of the emerging middle class of China, India and Indonesia in providing services such as tourism, medical care and education. That readiness can come in the form of streamlined procedures, language preparation, and targeted infrastructure development.

These are just some ideas for some of the many things we could do to ensure our prosperity. Others may have better ideas.

Conclusion

We are in a foundational crisis of our political system. People can no longer see what lies ahead of us, and all around us they see signs of decaying institutions. The country will continue to haemorrhage wealth and talent

To reverse that exodus we must restore confidence in the country. We do not get confidence back with piecemeal economic measures but with bold reforms to restore transparency, accountability and legitimacy to our institutions. Confidence will return if people see decisive leadership motivated by a sincere concern for the welfare of the country. The opposite occurs if they see decisions motivated by short term politics. Nevermind FDI, if Malaysians started investing in Malaysia, and stopped leaving, or started coming back, we would see a surge in growth.

In the same measure we must also break the stranglehold of communal politics and racial policy if we want to be a place where an economy driven by ideas and skills can flourish. This must be done, and it must be done now. We have a small window of time left before we fall into a spiral of political, social and economic decline from which we will not emerge for decades.

This is the leap we must make, but to make that leap we need a government capable of promoting radical reform. That is not going to happen without political change. We should not underestimate the ability of our citizens to transcend lies, distortions and myths and get behind the best interest of the country. In this they are far ahead of our present leadership, and our leadership should listen to them.

2010-02-06 : The Push And Pull Factors

By TEE LIN SAY

THERE are reasons why people leave the country of their birth. Usually, it is for the sake of their children’s education and future. Or it could be their own personal professional advancement. Or it could be a slew of reasons to do with the socio-economic and political factors.

Whatever the reason may be, it is a decision that is not made overnight. As they consider the events that engulf them and the country and mull over their own experiences, they reach a conclusion – to stay or to go.

If they move on, they hope they are moving on to greener pastures. If they stay, they hope things will be better.

Below are some of the reasons why Malaysians leave the country they called home.

Meritocracy and education

The issue of meritocracy and education is perhaps one of the biggest reasons. The education system has flip-flopped with language switches, and its standards pushed to alarming levels.

The passing mark for subjects in public exams have fallen very low while the increasing number of distinctions have risen astronomically high with SPM students notching up to 21As, says a teacher from a secondary school.

Furthermore, there are questions on why a student’s race is encoded in his serial number during public examinations.

The other issue is that scholarships offered by government and government-linked corporations seem to favour one race.

The situation is working out in favour of Singapore. With a GDP per-capita and currency that is 4 times and 2.5 times respectively that of Malaysia, Singapore knows only too well the importance of nurturing human capital.

“Many Malaysians have left the country for Singapore’s Asean scholarship programme. After being bonded for 3 years to the Singaporean government, these young Malaysians take up permanent residence there,” says private equity manager, Sherilyn Foong.

AmBank Group economist Manokaran Mottain says that in many private Malaysian colleges, Singapore employers are waiting to hire them.

“There have been cases where scholarship holders purposely default on their scholarships and are willing to pay the penalty because they feel their new place offers a better prospects and a higher quality of life,” says Manokaran.

He adds that many parents themselves, encourage their children to study and make a living abroad, as they have lost confidence in the Malaysian education system.

The quality of tertiary education is important in making it more attractive for people to remain.

“We are not tackling the real issue – and that is the politics behind all these policies,” he says.

A low cost model

Malaysian salaries are significantly lower than its neighbours.

Historically, Malaysia has driven its economy through a low cost model.

Some forty years ago, it started off as a manufacturing base assembling TVs, electric and electronic parts.

Because Malaysia did not do the design and research of the products, skills were not nurtured and salaries were low.

The Government also operated on a fairly strong subsidy policy – staple goods such fuel, chicken, sugar and flour were kept at artificially low prices.

Hence, people didn’t go in search of high salaries as they were able to make do with the situation.

At that time, providing a low cost environment was Malaysia’s competitiveness. This was important to get its people out of poverty. However, this policy also caused a wage disparity between Malaysia and other countries to widen.

“The Government has realised in the last five to six years that they have gotten themselves into a dead end. It is not competitive, and its industries do not permit high salaries. So now, the Government knows the importance of having an economy that is more knowledge centric,” says Stewart Forbes, executive director of the Malaysian International Chambers of Commerce and Industry (MICCI).

This low cost model has also caused the battle for the share of foreign direct investment (FDI) among our neighbours to become tougher. FDI now goes to countries like Cambodia, Vietnam and Indonesia.

“Malaysia is still a remarkably good place to invest, but it does not stand out,” says Forbes.

The Economic Planning Unit is targeting to have a Gross National Income (GNI) per capita of US$15,400 by 2020, which is roughly to double from current levels.

“While that is not easy to achieve, we must bear in mind that other countries will also be growing at a very fast rate over that period.

Singapore’s GNI per capita, by that time, will be US$50,000,” says Forbes.

The other issue that need to be addressed is protectionism. When there is so much protectionism, what is the incentive for these companies to grow and move up the value chain? Competition spurs innovation.

Malaysia’s indolence in phasing out uncompetitive industries and in implementing meritocracy perhaps explains why Malaysia’s development is behind economies like Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea despite having natural resources, infrastructure and an English speaking population.

“Hence, Malaysians with a high level of technological skills find that their skills are not suitable in Malaysia. They simply cannot find jobs here, so they leave for more developed economies,” says Foong.

Salary gap

The salary gap now is so significant that it is only natural for working professionals to be tempted by the high salaries of the more developed countries.

Malaysian Employers Federation (MEF) executive director Shamsuddin Bardan says a mid-level manager in the US earns about US$100,000 a year (or RM30,000 a month).

In our survey, senior manager earns about RM20,000 a month only. No matter how much one loves the country, it’s hard to make that kind of sacrifice,” says Shamsuddin.

He adds that in attracting foreign talents, visa application is important.

“Singapore has made it hassle-free. After two years of working there, one can apply for permanent residence status. If it is above 5 years, he can be a citizen. In Malaysia, expats have to renew work permit yearly.”

As for the medical profession, who has not heard about the poor remuneration in government hospitals or about the compulsory three-year housemanship for returning doctors.

Apart from having paid so much to study medicine, the Malaysian government appears to be discouraging these doctors to return.

Recent, it was reported that the government is considering extending the compulsory public service period for medical graduates from the current three years to five or 10 years.

Health Ministry director-general Tan Sri Dr Mohd Ismail Merican, who is also Malaysian Medical Council president opposed the move. “I disagree with the proposal because whether the doctors are serving the government or otherwise, they are still serving the country,” he reportedly said.

The current housemanship period for medical graduates is five years, comprising two years of housemanship and three years of compulsory service. The housemanship period was extended last year, from only a year in three compulsory disciplines to the current two years.

The low pay aside, the environment is harsh due to the acute shortage of doctors. Sometimes these doctors work 36 hours continuously, which is unheard of in countries like Australia and Britain.

“Not even night shift workers work for 36 hours straight like some doctors do,” a reader complained to The Star’s letters column.

It was highlighted recently that a Malaysian medical doctor working in Australia applied to work in Malaysia had his application rejected on the grounds that his application was submitted after having returned. (See flashback)

Apparently, the application should have been submitted while he was in Australia. Is this not a poor excuse of attracting our talent back?

Brain gain

While it may not be possible to lure Malaysians to return, it is possible to make up for the loss of expertise by bringing in qualified expatriates.

Malaysia has some 38,000 expatriates today, but this number too is falling. Singapore is going a step further by trying to lock in these expatriates into their gene pool.

“If we don’t have the skills, we have to import them and stop having protection blinkers over our eyes. We cannot say ‘No’ to an FDI because it brings with it 20 expatriates and hence deny 20 Malaysians of a job. We need to look at the bigger picture,” he says.

Malaysia has to improve its environment and move up to being a knowledge based economy to attract both expatriates and the existing labour market.

Today, expatriates who come here take a more holistic view. They want to know the state of security in the country, the education system and the overall environment they will be living in.

In terms of advancement of broadband, Malaysia is still pathetic, and way below its penetration target of 50%. Its pick up in IT is very slow, and this could be due to some degree of protectionism.

Malaysia, however, scores high in its infrastructure of ports, dams and bridges. It also has a government that is business friendly. Its citizens can speak English, although that too, is declining.

“The Government is now talking about creating a more meritocratic education system. There is now talk of high merit schools and new curriculum. While these will take time to implement, hopefully it will prevent people from leaving Malaysia,” says Forbes.

His other suggestion would be to maximise the use of its labour resources.

There are people under the Malaysia My Second Home Programme who are not allowed to work. These are the skilled and educated wives of expatriates. Automatic PR could also be given to expatriates who have worked in Malaysia for a certain number of years.

“We could also allow people who have given up the Malaysian citizenship to reapply for Malaysian citizenship. They do not stop being Malaysians just because they have given up their citizenship. Do not penalise your people for making mistakes,” says Forbes.

NEP

One of the push factors lie in the New Economic Policy (NEP) policy and this needs to be addressed with urgency and sensitively.

Last February, CIMB Group CEO, Datuk Nazir Razak suggested a review of the NEP and how the country can attract the best talent.

“I hope the Government will embark on a holistic review of the NEP and all its instruments of implementation towards a framework for affirmative action that today’s Malaysians can accept and unite behind,” he said.

The key thing that is objectionable in the NEP is the method of implementation.

Private equity manager Sherilyn Foong shares this view. “No one had problems with the NEP. Problems only arose due to its implementation ... in the quotas and job reservation in the public and private sector, local universities and government linked companies.”

The NEP was introduced in 1971 in the aftermath of the May 1969 race riots as a policy tool to rectify racial imbalances, which was thought to have been one of the main causes of racial disharmony in the first place.

Says Forbes: “The introduction of the NEP was a good thing, but its implementation was not as effective as it could have been. The Government realises this, hence liberalising FIC regulation rules last year. I say we should reformat the NEP without artificially clamping down on other sectors. You can have your cake and eat it too.”

2010-02-05 : Noisy Protest Against Penang CM

Bernard Cheah and Wong Wooi Kean

GEORGE TOWN (Feb 5, 2010): Some 300 people held a noisy protest today against Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s state administration, causing an afternoon traffic jam around Komtar, where Lim's office is located.

Despite the fiery speeches that demanded the state do more for the Malays, the organisers at the end refused to hand over a memorandum to Lim’s officers, insisting he come down himself to collect it.

They instead burned Lim’s effigy; and Lim’s political secretary, Ng Wei Aik, who came down to collect the memorandum was turned away and heckled by the crowd.

The gathering, organised by the Peninsular Malay Students Alliance (GPMS) and the Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce, began at about noon, at the compound of the Simpang Enam Mosque at Macalister Road, about 150m away from the government office in Komtar, with fewer than a hundred people showing up.

Calling themselves ‘Sedaq’ (a slang of the Malay word ‘sedar’ or "aware"), they alleged the state government was victimising Malays by unduly demolishing unlicensed premises operated by Malay traders.

Chamber president Rizal Faris Mohideen also dismissed state government statistics that showed the Malays had not been marginalised. He said the chamber would come up with its statistical findings to clarify the matter soon.

According to state figures, of the unlicensed hawkers the Penang Island Municipal Council (MPPP) had acted against in 2008 and 2009, only 1,600 were Malays compared to 2,809 Chinese and 443 Indians. It also said some 88% of the Penang government’s contracts though open tender in the same period were awarded to Bumiputra companies, while 76% were given to Bumiputras through call for quotations.

The event was also characterised by banners condemning Lim, warning him, among other things, not to challenge the "patience of the Malays", as they are the rightful lords of the land. There were also banners telling Lim to "go back to Malacca", his hometown. Pasir Mas MP Datuk Ibrahim Ali, who is also the president of Malay NGO Perkasa, arrived at about 1pm.

Police officers were deployed near the mosque to ensure there were no untoward incidents and to control traffic flow.

The event became slightly chaotic after prayers, at about 2.20pm, when the crowd swelled to about 300 and marched to Komtar following a brief speech by Ibrahim. Curious passers-by and tourists made the congestion worse.

Upon reaching Komtar, the group turned away Lim’s officers who had come down to collect the memorandum.

Police then warned everyone, including passers-by, to clear out; and the crowd dispersed without any untoward incident by 3.45pm.

2010-02-03 : The Tragic Tale Of Malaysian Education

By Lee Wei Lian

What do Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, Malaysia's founding father Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's second richest man T. Ananda Krishnan and YTL chairman Tan Sri Francis Yeoh have in common?

The answer: all four studied at once famous schools that are now glaringly absent from the list of 20 high performance schools recently announced by the government.

Victoria Institution (Ananda, Yeoh), St John's Institution (Najib), Penang Free School (Tunku Abdul Rahman) and others like Malacca High School and St Michael's Institution are all storied schools that have been allowed to fall behind until they are no longer counted as among the elite educational institutions in the country.

Just imagine if Eton College in the UK or Raffles Institution in Singapore was not recognised as one of the top schools in their respective countries.

That is the equivalent of what has befallen what were once the most respected schools in Malaysia. Today, they do not even rate a mention on a list of the top 20 high performance schools.

It is a crying shame as these schools produced many leaders that were influential in the development of Malaysia and to a lesser extent even in Singapore.

But what happened to these academic icons? Was it merely a case of these venerable institutions being surpassed by more ambitious upstarts? Was it merely oversight that they were left off the list? Or was it a result of deliberate attempts over the years to sideline these institutions because they were founded by the British and/or missionaries?

Or was it sheer mismanagement on the part of the government that these once most prestigious names in Malayan/Malaysian education were allowed to fade along with the general perception of the quality of education in the country? Did, like so much else that is wrong with Malaysia, politics get in the way of academic stewardship?

Just consider the contributions these schools have made to society and business. Besides Tunku, the Penang Free School also nurtured the likes of Tan Sri P. Ramlee, actor and director extraordinaire, Danny Quah, a prominent economist and head of the department of economics at the London School of Economics who also sits on the National Economic Advisory Council which is formulating Malaysia's new economic model, and Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development in the United Nations' Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

Apart from the prime minister, St John's groomed one of Asia's top bankers, CIMB CEO Datuk Seri Nazir Razak, one of the world's top central bankers Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz and the former vice-chancellor of the National University of Singapore, B.R. Sreenivasan.

Methodist Boy's School produced the chairman of the Genting group, Tan Sri Lim Kok Thay, the chairman of the OCBC Bank and former CEO of Singapore Airlines, Dr Cheong Choong Kong, the vice chancellor of UKM, Professor Tan Sri Dr Sharifah Hapsah Syed Hasan Shahabudin, Tan Sri Tay Ah Lek, managing director of Public Bank, and Singapore's former Minister of Education Ong Bang Poon.

Besides Ananda and Yeoh, Victoria Institution also educated the one of the world's richest men, the Sultan of Brunei, Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah, former Singapore Deputy Prime Minister S. Rajaratnam, as well as some of Malaysia's most legendary sportsmen, footballer Mokhtar Dahari and all four Sidek brothers.

Even if there was no list of top 20 "high performance schools" there would be little disagreement that these schools are now just a shadow of their former selves and can no longer command the respect they once did.

What does it then say about a government that allowed such historic and educational gems, some that date back nearly 200 years, to slip down the ranks in less than 50?

A closer look at the list also reveals something of the government's apparently negligent attitude towards heritage conservation. Seri Bintang Utara made it to the list as a high performance school despite having to survive the demolition of its premises in Jalan Bukit Bintang, Kuala Lumpur where the "ginormous" Pavilion mall now stands and what appears to be attempts to wipe out its identity as it was formerly known as the Bukit Bintang Girls School, or more popularly BBGS.

To this day, while I like and enjoy the high quality of the Pavilion mall, I still feel a wave of disgust every time I set foot in it that seemingly nothing of BBGS, Kuala Lumpur's oldest and one of its most prestigious schools, was preserved in the construction of the mall and that the government did not see fit to mandate any preservation either.

And all this is more than an academic shame as these schools are reminders of a time when students of all races grew up in school together and were taught to discard their racial lenses and be Johannians and Victorians, a truly depressing contrast to the current situation where Malays grow up in national schools, Chinese in Chinese schools and Indians in Tamil schools.

Can the Najib administration reverse the decline of these once prestigious schools? Anything can be achieved if there is sufficient will so the bigger question is, do they even want to?

* Lee Wei Lian attended the Bukit Bintang Boys School in Petaling Jaya. Nisi Dominus Frustra.

Addendum: The list of Malaysia's 20 high performance schools are: Sekolah Tun Fatimah (Johor Baru), Sekolah Dato' Abdul Razak (Seremban), Malay College Kuala Kangsar, Sekolah Seri Puteri (Cyberjaya), Sekolah Menengah Sultan Abdul Halim (Jitra), Kolej Tunku Kurshiah (Seremban), Kolej Islam Sultan Alam Shah (Klang), Sekolah Menengah Sains (SMS) Tuanku Syed Putra (Perlis), Sekolah Sultan Alam Shah (Putrajaya) and SMS Muzaffar Syah (Malacca), Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan (SMK) (P) Sri Aman(Petaling Jaya), SMK Aminuddin Baki (Kuala Lumpur), SMK Sultanah Asma (Alor Star) and SMK (P) St George (Penang), Sekolah Kebangsaan (SK) Seri Bintang Utara (KL), SK Taman Tun Dr Ismail 1 (KL), SK Bukit Damansara (KL), SK Zainab (2) (Kota Baru), SK Convent Kota (Taiping), SK Bandar Baru Uda 2 (Johor Baru).

2010-01-30 : What Are We To Do

By LIN SEE-YAN

THE Great Recession started in the United States in late 2007. It brought in its wake the biggest bubble since the Great Depression (1929-32). The past two years were difficult.

I have been in this business for almost 50 years – never saw anything quite like it. World recovery still has a soft-belly. In the US and Euro-zone, the rebound is uneven, even anaemic.

When I last checked, doubts encircle the vigour and rhythm of this nascent global recovery. But one thing is certain, the world has changed, so much so that we don’t know what’s normal anymore.

Indeed, it is now cool to talk about the “new normal” – views differ on what this really means. For us in Malaysia, much has changed over the past 25 months – in partisan politics, investor behaviour, business perception, economic outlook, even the art scene. Or, has it?

On the heels of the most harrowing period for exporters in particular, there was a convergence of resolve: never again!

I remember a multinational executive yelling his head off at the golf club on his unexpected new experience in late 2008 – the “waterfall” drop in demand for what he produces – today it’s here, tomorrow it’s gone!

For politicians, businessmen and investors, the talk was for review, restructure and reform in a fundamental way. A senior government official remarked: “We have been able to successfully identify, appreciate, debate and think-out-of-the-box on the systemic issues. Our job is to go back to basics, change and implement a new game plan.”

The Prime Minister’s New Economic Model (NEM) is seductive and to the point. He is pushing to change the parameters of the nation’s comfort zone. That’s leadership; to have the serenity to accept what cannot be changed, the courage to change what cannot be accepted, and the wisdom to distinguish one from the other (R.Niebuhr, US author).

As I look back, it is striking how little politics and business have really changed. Indeed, even amid the change, much more has stayed the same.

Talk, not change

How loud does the Prime Minister have to get? His vision of the NEM was first mooted in early 2009. His overarching strategy – to build an innovation-based economy with the clear objective of creating a high-income society.

Since then, much water has passed under the bridge. No doubt, reaction has been positive. This shift in direction is refreshing; the rakyat is thrilled with renewed expectations for a better life. Businesses and investors liked the idea and promised – together with the civil service – to assist in its design and delivery.

I understand the details of the NEM framework – to form the basis of the 10th Malaysia Plan (to be announced in June) – will be unveiled next month. But on the street and in corporate boardrooms, it’s still very much business as usual.

The momentum of change doesn’t seem to catch-on. The elite appear consumed with their incessant, discordant fiddling over money politics, vested business interests, old-school petty squabble over turf, and the “blame-game” over the delivery of public services.

In all of this, the hard working middle class and the very poor got pathetically short shrift. I wonder whether most politicians, civil servants and businessmen fully grasp the depth of the crisis and fully understand what the NEM can accomplish.

Implicitly, some question “if it ain’t broke, why fix it?” The trouble is, the system has cracked once too often. All that is needed is for something to happen and bang, the entire system breaks down. We definitely have to fix it. No question.

What’s at stake

I travel quite a bit these days fulfilling speaking engagements, engaging academic interests, networking Harvard alumni (as the university’s regional director for Asia) and occasionally, fostering business ties and ventures.

I feel the dynamism of Asia – refreshing, vibrant and invigorating. It is a region that never fails to amaze.

Malaysia has had a good run for nearly two-generations. It is slipping, squeezed in the middle by China and India, and failing to find a firm footing among its more dynamic Asean neighbours.

In the Asian market space, standing-still is not an option. Simply keeping-up is no better. We need to run faster than most to preserve our place in the sun.

Today, Northeast Asia and India are changing so fast, what a difference a year makes. Today, geography is history!

What’s at stake is our ability to compete and grow in a sustainable way to raise living standards.

We need to realise that:

·Time is not on our side – we must be able to move at a pace that meets stressed (not soft) targets;

·The world (especially Asia) moves-on whether we like it or not – it waits for no one;

·The window of opportunity to move up the value chain is still open, but we are already late – if not taken, we’ll be left behind;

·For inward foreign direct investments (FDI) from the US, Euro-zone and Japan, Malaysia is off the radar-screen – we have to work real hard to get FDI back in;

·Our best bet is to aggressively build on our long-standing relationship-capital within Asean, and with China and India. To succeed, we need to be small-and-medium enterprise (SME)-focused and innovation-based;

·We must be really “hungry” – be prepared to compete and fight for our niche-space; and

·Only private initiative and enterprise can make us efficient and sufficiently competitive to bring out the “animal spirit”, which is critical for success in entrepreneurial endeavours.

What is to be done

That’s why the NEM is so pivotal; it’s the change that brings to bear on our society. For the NEM to work, the innovation-based economic engine functions best in an ecosystem that fosters its own incubation – an environment that:

·Promotes the rule of law and a clear sense of security;

·Builds unity in the face of diversity;

·Embraces family values and a sense of community;

·Practises transparent democratic politics;

·Inculcates a fair and open society;

·Fights corruption; and

·Prioritises education; it grows, draws and retains talent, especially in science and technology.

We need to work harder at creating a more hospitable ecosystem. Indeed, this is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the NEM’s success. The new 1Malaysia drive helps but we need to do better in practice.

Sure, it is an on-going process. For without it, even the best of economic model will be sub-optimal. It is important we get this right.

The US experience has shown that given the right environment, innovation has driven more than one-half of its productivity growth over the past 50 years. As I see it, innovation simply means fresh approaches that create value and societal well-being.

While easier said than done, innovative value-add has to permeate every facet of our economic life from responsible politics to government policies and procedures, to business methods and organisation, to household practices and systems.

Finally, there is the issue of focus on new growth areas. These not only lend support to the innovative-based economy but equally important, provide a new source of strength to capitalise on new opportunities to expand both the gross domestic product and gross national product.

It must involve a sharper shift to expand the services sector, where the real stimuli are expected to emanate from vibrant entrepreneurial SMEs – the very essence of middle-class progression.

The four major pillars-of-support include: Health (wellness) and life sciences, tourism, education and human resource management, and renewal energy and the environment (green growth).

Education remains our last defence – the acquisition and management of knowledge capital remains key in building a pool of global-savvy talent and niche skills.

The nasi-lemak principle

The centrepiece of the NEM is to drive innovation. This is particularly timely. History teaches us that promotion of and spending on innovation must be sustained through tough times to better compete when the new cycle of growth emerges.

I see this being done by private enterprises in Japan, China, India, South Korea and Taiwan, where research and development spending remain aggressive despite recession. If you think about it, innovation is rather simple for the mark of true innovation is not the grand gesture but the simple things done well. I call this the nasi-lemak principle. It has done well for the folksy nasi-lemak. It will do well for the NEM.

What else to do

There are no quick fixes. Building strong fundamentals help but they are not enough. Sure, we have lots of problems. So do others. What’s important is to make continuing progress; make sure today is better than yesterday and tomorrow, better than today.

The direction is vital. In no time, we can be on our way. Similarly, leadership is important but it is not enough.

Leaders have to make serious political commitments to build unity out of diversity and to use a lot of political capital to bring about real change.

It is important that change is made transparent and highly visible. That change is seen in everything we do – applying the nasi-lemak principle in processes and procedures, systems and regulations, organisations and methods. This is the only effective way to deliver.

Concomitantly, two traditions need to be immediately revived and actively inculcated:

·A tradition of predictability in public policy, consistency in its application and transparency on the ground. This builds credibility.

·A tradition of integrity, strong work ethic, hard work, and always, value-added service. This strengthens credibility.

In the final analysis, the NEM works only if the ecosystem – within its bosom the model is conceived and in turn, re-enforced – is soundly grounded and solidly anchored in private enterprise.

A former banker, Dr Lin is a Harvard-educated economist who now spends time promoting the public interest. Feedback is most welcome at
starbizweek@thestar.com.my.

2010-01-29 : Be big and bold to implement performance roadmap, civil servants told

Government Transformation Programme launched

KUALA LUMPUR: Civil servants and politicians must be “big and bold” in implementing the Government’s roadmap to improve the performance of the Government, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said.

He said this should be done because the people would evaluate them on whether they have managed to make good the promises in the plan.

Najib said early results could already be seen in areas where initiatives have been implemented.

Some of the measures in the Government Transformation Programme Roadmap are:

- To fight corruption, successful applicants of government tenders to be published in a website;

- In education, financial and non-financial rewards will be given to school heads who exceed targets;

- In public transport, a single ticket for use on buses, trains and the LRT will be a launched;

- To cut crime, police may employ stake-outs for vehicle thefts and house break-ins.

2010-01-27 : Pig Heads Thrown Into Grounds of Malaysian Mosques

By Barry Porter

Jan. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Pig heads were found at two Malaysian mosques, the latest incident of desecration and vandalism following an inter-faith dispute over the use of the word “Allah” by non-Muslims.

Worshippers arrived for morning prayers at a mosque in Petaling Jaya, Selangor, to find the bloodied heads of two wild boars wrapped in plastic bags together with one-ringgit notes. Heads were also found in the grounds of a mosque three kilometers (1.9 miles) away, police said. Pigs are considered unclean animals in Islam.

“I advise the public to stay cool and not to react to certain people who are trying to stir the situation,” Selangor police chief Khalid Abu Bakar said in a telephone interview.

Acts of violence were reported against 11 Christian institutions, one Sikh temple and two Muslim prayer rooms in the past three weeks following a High Court judge’s decision to allow a Catholic newspaper to refer to God as “Allah” in its Malay-language section.

“These are attempts by certain quarters to create chaos in the country,” Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein told reporters in Kuala Lumpur today, pledging to track down those responsible.

Malaysia’s government banned non-Muslim publications from referring to “Allah” in 1986 on the grounds it could threaten national security and confuse the country’s Muslims, who make up more than 60 percent of the 27 million population.

“Any violence on a place of worship and prayer of any religion is in a sin of the highest order,” the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism said in a statement. “It is disappointing that such sins continue unabated. Don’t let the provocateurs succeed.”

Police Arrests

Police have arrested 15 Muslim men in connection with the church attacks and four other unidentified suspects linked to the attacks on Muslim prayer rooms.

Political and religious leaders have denounced the recent upsurge in violence, which follows decades of largely amicable inter-faith relations. The incidents, including a series of fire-bombings, add to a perception that Malaysia is coming under the influence of extremists.

Last year, dozens of Muslims paraded with a bloodied head of a cow, a sacred animal in Hinduism, to protest the proposed relocation of a Hindu temple to their neighborhood.

Pop star Beyonce Knowles canceled a concert in Kuala Lumpur last October without explaining why after an Islamic political party protested her revealing stage clothes. A young mother is awaiting a caning sentence to be carried out in Malaysia as punishment for drinking a beer.

To contact the reporter responsible for this story: Barry Porter at bporter10@bloomberg.net