The announcement by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak of a new category of Public Service Department (PSD) scholarships next year based purely on ‘pure merit’, regardless of race, is welcome although it is taken with a heavy pinch of salt after repeated disappointments with previous promises of ‘meritocracy’ by the Barisan Nasional Government.
Firstly, some six years ago, Malaysians were promised a system of ‘meritocracy’ in the annual intake of university students but it proved to be a ‘fradulent’ meritocracy, as there continues to be two incomparable university entrance examinations, the world-class two-year course STPM and the inferior one-year matriculation course.
If Barisan Nasional government is serious about wanting to stop the sharp drop in standards of Malaysian public universities – best illustrated by the best Malaysian universities falling out of the league of the world’s Top 200 universities – and transform Malaysian universities into world-class institutions, the best lecturers and students must be recruited regarded of race or religion.
The first step is to do away with the ‘fraudulent meritocracy’ for university student intake by having one common university entrance examination – whether STPM or matriculation – coupled with a programme of positive affirmation to ensure that students from socio-economically backward sectors get special assistance to get universities places based on need and not race.
Secondly, Parliament and the nation were assured last year that in this year’s 2,000 PSD scholarships for foreign university studies, 20% or 400 places would be allocated solely on merit. This again has proved to be a hollow undertaking, explaining the repeat this year of SPM top-scorers with 11 to 16As denied scholarships as compared to those with lesser academic results.
Now Najib promises a new PSD scholarship based on ‘pure merit’ regardless of race. My response: Welcome, but to see it is to believe it!
Can Najib really ensure that from next year, ‘the best of the best and the creme de la creme will be studying in Malaysian public universities, rather than as at present going abroad universities resulting in serious national brain drain or in private universities?
Skepticism that this new PSD scholarship based on ‘pure merit’ will end up less than ‘pure’ is understandable because of the absence of a genuine 1Malaysia mindset in the higher echelons of the political leadership and the bureaucracy to treat all Malaysians regardless of race as equal Malaysian citizens.
For instance, why is the government planning to limit the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia to 10 subjects for the candidates?
While I frown on students sitting for 18, 19 or 20 subjects, why should students be barred from sitting for say, 12, 13 or 14 SPM subjects?
The problem is not with SPM students taking 12, 13 or 14 subjects but because SPM results are used for the award of PSD scholarships. This problem can be resolved by making STPM or one common university entrance examination results as the basis for the award of PSD scholarships.
However, the real problem is whether Najib can convince Malaysians that his 1Malaysia is not just an empty slogan, good for a ‘dance and a song’ but a living and driving philosophy in all aspects of government policy.
How can Najib convince Malaysians about his seriousness about a 1Malaysia concept when he has not given up his push for ‘Malay unity government’ talks between Umno and Pas?
Is Najib prepared to give his blessing for the holding of ‘Chinese unity’, ‘Indian unity’, ‘Kadzandusunmurut unity’ and ‘Iban unity’ political talks in the country? If Najib is not prepared to publicly give his blessing for ‘Chinese unity’, ‘Indian unity’, ‘Kadazandusunmurut unity’, ‘Iban unity’ political talks, how can he reconcile 1Malaysia with the Umno-Pas ‘Malay unity government’ talks?
What is even more telling is that nobody in MCA, Gerakan, MIC, SUPP, PBS or the other Barisan Nasional component parties dare to ask for a clear decision whether in Cabinet or the BN Supreme Council whether such demands for Umno-Pas Malay unity government talks is completely inimical with 1Malaysia concept!
Umno Youth leader Khairy Jamaluddin has attacked me for being a ‘borderline racist’ in criticising the call for Umno-Pas Malay unity government talks as going against the 1Malaysia concept.
I think Khairy wanted to call Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad a ‘borderline racist’ but dare not do so, and is using this way to hit out at the former Prime Minister. Mahathir repeated his opposition to any Umno-Pas Malay unity government talks at the Pandan Umno division motivational course yesterday.
Khairy’s allegation that I am a ‘borderline racist’ is most laughable coming from one who had been very good at playing the role of a rabid racist, as when he made an uncalled-for attack on the Indian community during a live telecast at the Umno General Assembly in November 2007 or his infamous outburst about the so-called marginalisation of the Malays in Penang.
But so long as Khairy can continue to play with impunity his role as a rabid racist, Najib’s 1Malaysia concept as a unifying force for all Malaysians regardless of race will remain suspect.
#1 by Loh on Monday, 29 June 2009 - 5:32 pm
Racists may be divided into benevolent racists and malignant racists. The formers are those who able to empathize with people who they consider to belong to the same blood line. Though they might believe their ‘race’ to be more superior to others, and they believe that they can work better and cooperate better with people of the same race, they do not actively work against the interests of other races. The malignant racists are those people who might or might not care about the welfare of their own race, but they would be hostile to people who are different from them in terms of bloodline. Racist thought might be inherent in normal human being. It becomes harmful when racists organize people of their own kind to carry out hostile activities against others.
Institutions are organizations which are recognized by the law of the land. When it is the law of the country which favours one racial group against others, it is institutionalized discrimination. That could be mitigated within the agreed context of helping an endangered race, for which protection and special care was needed. For that purpose, the protected ‘species’ ought to be clearly defined, and the number should not be ever increasing. Obviously, the more numerous the beneficiary, the harder is the burden the disadvantaged groups have to bear. Moreover the longer such inequality exist in the society, the worse the intensive polarization based on the characteristics of qualification for the different treatment would arise Thus, persons who deserved such largesse should be controlled to lessen the pains the disadvantage group had to bear.
Article 153 was included in the constitution to be in force for 15 years, and subject to review. It may be reasonable to provide some ‘compensation’ to those who were born before independence for changes which might arise when the change took effect on 31 August, 1957 on Independence Day. For those who were born after independence, they come to this world on the same condition that they found on their birth, which is that people are equal under the constitution. The 15 years duration for special assistance or reservation of quotas for Malays was intended to help Malays to advance in business, profession or occupation, and to help their children to have a head start. It was not intended to allow Malays to avail themselves of unfair advantages; and certainly it was not intended for them to enjoy the unfair advantages from cradle to grave.
With the non-water-tight definition on the terms Malays provided in the constitution, which understandably was intended to be crucial for a limited period, not only those which were wrongly classified anthropologically are so included, but those whose ancestors were not Malayans were included. We have now more NEWMalays than Malays, and they now form the numerical strength to ensure that the unfair advantages remain perpetually. The restrain preventing Malays from asking for the Article 153 to be held in perpetuity was the pride of Malays, according to the late Tun Ismail. But NEWMalays can hardly be expected to empathize with Malays on their pride, and they would not forgo the opportunities the loophole in the constitution provides.
Malay in no longer a race based on anthropological classifications. It is opportunism that people such as Muyyiddin who claimed that the last drop of blood would be spilled to protect Article 153. That was not pure racism; it is racial opportunist.
Religion is a private matter, and though in the past there were religious leaders who led their followers to be belligerent against believers of other religions. In Malaysia, because Muslim is a classification required as membership to the unfair political advantages, people of the relevant religion are now more inclined to ‘protect’ their religion, as though they are larger than the religion, and that they have a monopoly in the country. One wonders how much of their fight was for political interest that avails them of the unfair advantages.
The country is said to be sitting on time bomb because of racial and religious polarization. The institutional set up which allowed the benefit of diversity to be converted to a curse was due to the desire of UMNO leaders to exploit the situations so that they could plunder the state with impunity, and to ensure that they could build political dynasties for ages. The fact that the son of PM becomes PM, and sons of other PMs waiting at the wing testifies to this.
#2 by Ramesh Laxman on Monday, 29 June 2009 - 7:49 pm
Dear YB Lim,
In the civil service promotions are also based on merit. All officers are graded base on 100 marks. If you make a study of the marking system you will find that majority of the officers get at least between 90 and 95 per cent. Then what happens is that the officer who gets 95.1 percent is prmoted. So you see good officers who get 95 percent are left behind.
In my view scholarships should only be awarded after the students secure a place in the university. By that way quality control will become transparent and there will be no arguments..
#3 by Joshua on Monday, 29 June 2009 - 8:22 pm
How good it is for Malaysia to retain such talents?
This is the true story —
Man from Sekinchan
>
>
>
>
> ———- Forwarded message -
> Subject: Man from Sekinchan
> To: b
>
>
> Interesting to know that the Pen Drive was invented by a Malaysian
>
> Chinese who could not get into one of our local universities primarily
> because he is not a bumiputra. He had to study in Taiwan.
>
> Pua’s mighty ‘Pen’
>
> S. INDRAMALAR speaks to the creator of the now indispensable Pen Drive
>
>
> Fact file
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Name: Pua Khein Seng
> > > Age: 31
> > > Hometown: Sekinchan, Selangor
> > > Education: SJKC Yeok Kuan, Sekinchan; Pin Hwa
> > > Independent school, Klang; Chiao Tung University, Taiwan
>
> > > Occupation: Engineer/ president of Phison Electonics
> > > Corp
> > >
> > >
> > > Current base: Taipei , Taiwan
> > > Years abroad: 12
> > >
> > >
> > > WHEN
>
> > > he set off for Taiwan in 1993, Pua Khein Seng’s only
> > > aim was to
> > > complete his degree in Electrical Control Engineering at
> > > the renowned
> > > Chiao Tung University and return home to work in Malaysia
>
> > > .
> > >
> > >
> > > Never did he envision himself heading a multi-million
> > > dollar
> > > Taiwanese company that developed the world’s first USB
> > > flash removable
>
> > > disk, which they called Pen Drive .
> > >
> > > Pua
> > > Khein Seng went to Taiwan to get his engineering degree but
> > > ended up
> > > staying on, starting his own company and inventing the pen
>
> > > drive.
> > >
> > >
> > > “I went to Taiwan to pursue
> > > my undergraduate degree. I chose Taiwan only because it was
> > > too
> > > expensive to study either in the United States or Singapore
>
> > > .
> > >
> > > “However,
> > > I did well in my undergraduate programme and was offered a
> > > place to do
> > > my masters,” explained Pua, who was back in Kuala
>
> > > Lumpur recently for a
> > > holiday.
> > >
> > >
> > > After completing his Masters in July 1999, Pua worked for
> > > about six
> > > months in a local company before deciding to set up his own
>
> > > venture
> > > company with four fellow engineers who had studied with him
> > > at Chiao
> > > Tung.
> > >
> > >
> > > “We were confident that we had the know-how and
>
> > > ability to start our
> > > own business, which is focused on USB technology. The
> > > company is called
> > > Phison because there are five of us – two Malaysians and
> > > three
>
> > > Taiwanese engineers,” said Pua, 31, who hails from
> > > Sekinchan, Selangor.
> > >
> > >
> > > Phison Electronics Corporation was set up in November 2000
> > > and
> > > within six months the young entrepreneurs came up with
>
> > > their first
> > > invention – a USB storage device called Pen Drive
> > > .
> > >
> > > “We
> > > were the first company in the world to develop the USB
> > > Drive SoC
>
> > > (System On Chip) and we were very confident that the market
> > > for USB
> > > will be huge. At the time, no one believed in us so we had
> > > to do
> > > everything ourselves – from developing the technology,
>
> > > the chips to the
> > > product itself.
> > >
> > >
> > > “We were only 27 at the time and inexperienced. But we
> > > were
> > > confident that we could design good systems and chips but
>
> > > we didn’t
> > > know anything about selling. So, we sought partners or
> > > traders who
> > > could help sell our products for us,” Pua added.
> > >
> > >
> > > Through smart partnerships and shrewd strategies, Phison
>
> > > soon made
> > > its way into European, American and Japanese markets. One
> > > quick move
> > > was securing Japanese tech giant Toshiba as Phison’s
> > > largest
> > > shareholder and customer.
>
> > >
> > >
> > > “We launched Pen Drive in June 2001 and by
> > > August the same
> > > year, we broke even! From September 2001, we were reaping
> > > monthly
> > > profits from our invention and there has been no turning
>
> > > back since.”
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Having established himself in Taiwan , Pua is in the midst
> > > of setting up Phison’s branch in Malaysia , due to begin
> operations this February.
>
> > >
> > > “I am starting a branch in Malaysia because this is my
> > > country. I would like to do contribute to its development.
> > >
> > >
> > > “We have about 100 engineers at Phison in Taiwan , 20
>
> > > of whom are
> > > Malaysians. Though they studied in Taiwan , I had to
> > > re-train all the
> > > engineers I hire because, like most fresh graduates (in
> > > this field),
> > > they are not industry-ready upon graduation.
>
> > >
> > >
> > > “Unfortunately, some of the Malaysian engineers want
> > > to return home
> > > after a couple of years because they are homesick, about to
> > > start a
> > > family and so on. Some prefer to work in Singapore , as it
>
> > > is closer to
> > > home. Instead of losing them to competitors, I decided to
> > > set up an
> > > office in Malaysia where they can still work for me,”
> > > said Pua.
> > >
>
> > >
> > > Another problem faced by returning computer engineers from
> > > Taiwan ,
> > > Pua added, was the lack of job opportunities for hardware
> > > engineers in
> > > Malaysia .
>
> > >
> > > “There is no environment or support for design
> > > engineers here in Malaysia . One of my Malaysian engineers
> > > from Phison
> > > returned home and ended up as a teacher in a Chinese
>
> > > school! I was
> > > shocked and thought, ‘After all that training and
> > > re-training, he is
> > > going to just teach?’ I told him to hold on till I open
> > > up the Phison
>
> > > branch in Malaysia .”
> > >
> > >
> > > Though he has been in Taiwan for the past 12 years and
> > > married to a
> > > Taiwanese, Pua is not sure how much longer he will remain
>
> > > there.
> > >
> > > “I
> > > have really no idea where I will be in 20 years. Maybe
> > > Taiwan , maybe
> > > Malaysia , maybe somewhere else … it all depends on my
> > > business. The
>
> > > industry is moving so fast that I cannot predict what or
> > > where I will
> > > be,” he said.
> > >
> > >
> > > For the moment though, Taiwan is home for Pua, his wife and
>
> > > two children even though he misses the Malaysian way of
> > > life.
> > >
> > > “I
> > > come home once a year for Chinese New Year and will usually
> > > stay for
> > > about two weeks. There are several things I really miss
>
> > > about Malaysia
> > > . One is the food! For the past 12 years I have been
> > > craving for
> > > Malaysian food … I miss laksa, curry noodles,
> > > chee cheong fun and all the other delicious dishes we
>
> > > have here.
> > >
> > >
> > > “I also miss the lifestyle and quality of life here.
> > > When I come
> > > back, I am always amazed to see people hanging out and
> > > relaxing at mamak shops at night. In Taiwan , most
>
> > > people would still be at work at that time of the night!
> > >
> > >
> > > “Before I got married, I used to work for 15 to 17
> > > hours a day,
> > > everyday. Now that I have children, my wife has forbidden
>
> > > me to stay so
> > > late. Now, I go to work at 9am and come home by 11pm. These
> > > hours are
> > > quite normal for the Taiwanese.”
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The man who invented USB pen-drive is a young modest
>
> > > Malaysian
> > > who can’t even get into a local University but invented
> > > the most
> > > versatile, indispensable computer peripheral today. And
> > > helped
> > > his adopted country, Taiwan made $31bil in the process. The
>
> > > rest is history….
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> http://www.allmalaysia.info/news/story.asp?file=/2006/2/6/msiansabroad/12940731&sec=mi_msiansabroad
pw: Docu- cola
#4 by monsterball on Monday, 29 June 2009 - 10:20 pm
Joshua…You need not apply this type of low class..idiotic presentation to disturb the blog.
You cannot even understand Malaysian Malaysia……yet you understand what “1 Malaysia” is?
You son of a gun…good for nothing young punk…is lucky LKS approve your “message”….which I suspect he wants all his frontliners..to be alert and sharp……to fark anyone disturbing his blog………hahahahahahahaha
#5 by imranj78 on Monday, 29 June 2009 - 11:30 pm
Loh,
You are right in saying that the Malaysian consitution provides for equal rights to all Malaysians irrespective of race and religion. However, the `special rights’ of Bumiputera’s are also enshrined in the constitution and there is no such thing as this rights being `time bound’. Nobody, not even the PM can amend this portion of the constitution without significant backing in parliament and by the royalty. As such, we cannot and should not fault Najib for working within the confines of the constitution. If we are not guided by the constitution to govern our country, what else??
In my view, Najib has shown his real intentions towards reforms and improvements, that even Anwar is alarmed to the extent of trying to wrongfully declare that Najib is `seemingly’ copying PR’s intentions when in fact this is consistent with his 1Malaysia approach.
Yes I agree that talk only is cheap and we want to see real results. But lets not put down such good ideas without first giving Najib the opportunity to show his mettle.
#6 by monsterball on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 12:42 am
imranj78 is [deleted]
Using the majority advantage…UMNO amended and amended the Constitutions to keep playing race and religion dirty politics… ..he totally forgot.
[deleted]
If he agrees talk is cheap…then Najib unelected PMship is the cheapest of all UMNO stunts.
Dare imranj78 agrees to get Najib call for a snap 13th GE election…to get Malaysians endorsed him as PM?
Before imranj78 utters a word that UMNO represents the people….let him know…it was Dollah.. the last elected UMNO PM…elected by the people.
UMNO is always twisting and bluffing…to win election.
Lets s how they will do in 13th GE.
Want to take a bet…imranj78?
[deleted]
#7 by katdog on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 12:51 am
The story of Phison Electronics again serves to emphasize my belief that you are wasting your talents by trying to get into a local university.
By studying in good internationally renowned universities, its not just the paper degree that matters. The chance to meet and work together with other capable and excellent students is also important. For example, your former classmates in Taiwan might eventually want to start an engineering company and remembering you as an excellent worker, may invite you to join. Would you get such opportunities studying in a local university? When the majority of the local student population are all ‘tidak apa’ and only interested in a piece of paper called a degree?
If you are a high achiever and excellent student look for opportunities to study overseas to maximize your potential. For example, aim for Singapore’s ASEAN scholarship. A worst case example. You could get into an Australian U. If you do well in the first semesters, you can actually apply for full scholarship from the U based on these results. The reason being, Australian U’s are delighted to have excellent students as part of their student population. And they would happily waive any fees to be able to retain such students.
#8 by monsterball on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 1:09 am
Perak disunited….lost 4 by-elections.
Humans became frogs
Non stop police raids and lock ups on political opponents.
What bloody “1 Malaysia” is Najib talking about?
If he is totally sincere and confident…he should call for a snap election to confirm he is People’s PM.
In the history of UMNO….he is the only unelected PM with so many accusation and bad reputation….yet he never sue anyone…like Lee Kuan Yew.
Why not do the right thing and clear up his name with a 13th GE snap election?
Abdullah did that….immediately being appointed and got 92% support…..down to 52% in his last call…yet he was very much an elected PM by the people.
Who is Najib…..claiming to be …People’s PM?
How thick skin…how illogical…how greedy for power and money…how frighten to loose and be exposed.
He can continue to control the papers….TV…and do his stupid acting walks ….all over Malaysia.
He will be carrying babies..visit the old folks home…singing and laughing with the school children…donate to charities..build temples..donate to .chinese schools..and many more…for these are out-dated low class political acts …to win votes….that is.. if there are anymore suckers left in Malaysia to fall into this kind of ways to win votes.
Concentrated on CORRUPTIONS….do not forget the many unsolved cases……and now the PKFZ RM12.5 billion scandal.
Concentrate on CORRUPTIONS….and you will see UMNO will never change.
Do you want to move forward..yet stay stagnant with one party governing for 53 years and more?
Are you afraid of UMNO or your future?
[deleted]
#9 by Loh on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 1:15 am
Imranj 78,
You are right to say with regard to Article 153 that the current constitution does not have the clause to provide for a review after 15 years. But the original constitution had it, and the provision for a review after 15 years was removed through the constitutional amendment in 1971, during NOC rule.
When people talk generally about social contract, they have to refer to the written agreement in the form of the constitution, particularly with regard to the relative positions of the people who together obtained independence from the British. The removal of the review provision took away the intended objective of having Article 153 in the constitution; that Article might no longer be needed when Malays have attained the capability not to rely on crutches. Let me repeat what Tun Dr Ismail said, “Malays would forgo Article 153 when they no longer required it, out of pride”. I still believe that Malays, who are classified as Malays like Tun Ismail would do what he said. But NEWMalays have since taken over the political power, and to them the pride of Malays means nothing to them. They enjoy the benefits while Malays suffer the indignity of having to rely on crutches, 51 years after independence.
One smart Alex said that Malaysian constitution does not provide equality when read together, though there is a specific clause on that effect. The anomaly was with regard to Article 153, which was time-bound when it was prepared. In any case, when there are conflicts between different parts of the agreement, it is an accept convention that the paragraphs that appear earlier take precedent.
The electronic version of Malaysian constitution that one gets from Wikepedia does not show the original version, though there are write up explaining the review provision. It is hoped that readers in London would be abe to obtain the original version and post it for reference.
#10 by johnnypok on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 1:17 am
Dear Najib,
Please distribute the 500 million “Kopi-O” money from the submarine deal to all the deserving high-achievers, and order TDM to return back all the loots and to build more schools in Sabah and Sarawak.
#11 by monsterball on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 1:32 am
Why keep harping on out dated Constitutional laws that do not unite the people?
Time and people have changed and much more educated…especially the Muslims.
Why refer to this or that and keep clinging to it like a leech..afraid to advance..to be free?
There is no end to Malaysians being disunited…with this kind of discussions.
Laws are made by wise men of visions.
All are gone….due to greed and selfishness.
Sincerity to all Malaysians is a joke from UMNO.
It is plain for everyone to see.
Without race and religion politics…UMNO is finished.
Let scholars keep talking….debating.
People’s Power comprises of more sincere..smart and down to earth without much education and can think better than scholars.
They think of the children…the country and the people…more than those words of out-dated wisdom…..be it what..that do not unite Malaysians at all.
Yes…UMNO is finished….if Malaysians hate racialists.
#12 by Joshua on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 6:12 am
YB Lim,
I do not intend to disturb your blog as I post some emails that had gone round the world with many such >>> which would be tedious to delete.
The story in the news is a lesser one.
YB Lim, I hope you understand this.
Thanks Monsterball for the message.
pw:escaped 27
#13 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 6:48 am
Public Service Department (PSD) scholarships next year (20%) based purely on ‘pure merit’???
YB, what about wealthy (assets more than UD$120 billion) state owned Petroliam Nasional Berhad (PETRONAS)’s scholarships – how many are there, what are they worth per year, are 20% of them also based on pure merits?
The last i heard it is -isn’t it?- a stakeholder for heritage/wealth and well being (present and future) of all and not just some Malaysians.
#14 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 7:15 am
Is there any truth in the rumour that TDM (reversing “Buy British Last” policy ) allowed British construction and engineering company Balfour Beatty to be awarded civil works contracts for the Pergau Dam (built on the Malaysian-Thai border) — without competitive bidding – in exchange for Magaret Thahtcher’s Conservative Govt’s £234 million of British overseas aid – and a certain allocation at top universities in UK (including Khairy’s Oxford/Cambridge) per year for Malaysian Govt’s PSD scholars??? Assuming so, will these places be allocated for the 20% merit PSD scholars regardless of race?
#15 by monsterball on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 8:41 am
A person is man enough to know his mistake and thank me for pointing it out…deserves my full respect.
This argurs well for his own future too.
Joshua….you are OK…..keep it up.
May you be well and good.
#16 by Joshua on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 8:41 am
Jeffrey,
Since you bring out the Pergau dam, there was a big story in UK and Aliran over the 1billion pound sterling payoff to UMNO baru and the royalties in M’sia in 1987/88 when the internal crisis of UMNO after which UMNO was ruled illegal.
So that is part and parcel of international corruption over arm deals.
Who actually benefitted in the names of others?
pw: mulish 0f
#17 by Joshua on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 9:03 am
Monsterball,
thanks for your kind words.
much appreciated.
pw:galoshe Through
#18 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 10:14 am
Joshua,
Thatcher then was Conservative’s PM and Douglas Hurd was Foreign Secretary. They got £234 million from British overseas foreign aid budget to fund the Pergau Hydroelectric dam at Thai border. Concurrently, the Malaysian government bought around £1 billion worth of arms from the UK. £1 billion is probably contributed from £234 million from British overseas foreign aid budget. A nice piece of round tripping. The British learned how to spin a deal from the Malaysian politicians!
(Its not exactly a 1 billion pound sterling payoff to UMNO baru and the royalties in M’sia in 1987/88 per Aliran unless one thinks that its one and same thing)!
This is what Wikipedia says “The suggested linkage of arms deals to aid became the subject of a UK government inquiry from March 1994. In November 1994, after an application for Judicial Review brought by the World Development Movement, the UK High Court held that the British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd had acted ultra vires (outside of his power and therefore illegally) by allocating £234 million towards the funding of the dam, on the grounds that it was not of economic or humanitarian benefit to the Malaysian people.”
#19 by OrangRojak on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 11:05 am
It’s not only the Malaysian government that embarrasses its own people.
I’m not sure what Loh refers to:
While the notes of the Reid Commission that record the Rulers’ reluctance to add communitarian clauses to the Constitution and suggests a time period, I’m fairly sure a slightly later document, perhaps on the actual publication of the Constitution says that no time period was thought necessary. I can try to find refs if Loh is convinced there was a time period once upon a time in the Constitution, but I think the closest ever thing was conjecture that it might be a good idea.
These sorts of issues should really be the subject of some public effort to lay to rest – and obviously not organised by the government. It’s easy to keep suggesting that things should have been different, because there’s no credible source of information either way. Perhaps some concerned Malaysians would like to start an Internet-based Museum of Malaysian Politics, where the scraps of information could be argued over until some sort of consensus could be reached.
Even if there was once a time period in the Constitution for the Social Crutch, it would be only of academic interest. As imranj78 points out above, ‘significant backing’ did what it pleased with the Constitution in the past, and now we have to work with it. I think significant backing for a rejection of racist policies is more or less available, so it’s just a matter of time until this matter can be dealt with. I hope that the next few years will see young Malaysians encourage the government to make wholesale changes to Malaysian law to bring it into line with the UDHR. The cosmetic nonsense going on now isn’t going to fool many people for very long.
Completely unrelated, I was delighted to see the article about Hindraf planning to burn an effigy of LGE over the High Chaparral issue. The GLC (Greater London Council) did the same thing with an effigy of Margaret Thatcher while she was PM on a huge bonfire opposite the Houses of Parliament on Guy Fawkes’ night, many years ago – to the sound of The Sex Pistols’ ‘Anarchy in the UK’. You have to love democratic protest!
#20 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 11:08 am
Sorry its not £1 billion worth of arms from the UK- RM1 billion.
#21 by m2molo on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 12:40 pm
Najib’s government should instead really think about how to improve the quality of local universities. The Chinese government also provides scholarship to their students, but most of them are partial scholarship, i.e. the scholarship only covers the living expenses. Chinese students must get a place with fee waiver in oversea universities. Most of them have no problem to get such offer because their degrees obtained in Chinese universities are well accepted and recognised by oversea universities. If the quality of local trained undergraduates or postgraduates are as good as those trained in those local Chinese universities, then for every scholarship that Malaysian government spends now can be used to fund 2-3 students oversea.
I still remember… my friend, who graduated from the Universiti Sains Malaysia, wished to apply a place in a university in Canada to further his MSc course. If I’m not mistaken, the Canadian university he applied is not very well known. The Canadian university has doubt on his degree, and asked him: “We never heard about this type of degree before. Can you show us the proof? For example, ask your previous university to send us a proof?”
#22 by Loh on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 2:05 pm
OrangRojak,
I have not seen the original, but the campaign by the opposition parties during the 1969 election centred on the review to the constitution in 1972. Tun Razak threatened that parliament would not be reconvened unless the government could amend the constitution, and that indeed was done, after Sabah delivered all 16 parliamentary seats returned unopposed after Tun Mustapha used his power of arrest vested Tun Razak to stop opposition candidates filing their papers on nomination day.
I am certain that BN under UMNO would not remove that that article 153, but the provision of review points to the plausible reasons why that was included; it was not a question of the degree of ‘pendatangness’.
#23 by OrangRojak on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 5:00 pm
I have a PDF on my PC (from MCA web?) title “Report of the Commission of Enquiry, North Borneo and Sarawak, 1962
Also known as the Cobbold Commission” starting at para 148d. It’s an obvious transcript, the text is selectable, and there are word-recognition errors which I doubt would be in the original. Under the head “Special Position of Indigenous Races”, it says:
… which suggests to me that no review period was written in the Federal Constitution at that time.
In “Constitutional Proposals for the Federation of Malaya (June 1957)” Under the head ‘Special Position of the Malays’ it says (transcribed by me with snoring and heavy son on shoulder, so may be typos)
So it probably wasn’t included at 1957. That final ‘should’ would never have made it into any kind of law, I imagine. So if not in 1957, not in 1962, when would the review clause have been added? I would have thought there would be a celebrated document to mark that occasion, if in fact it was the case. I strongly doubt there’s any document anywhere in Malaysia obliging anyone to conduct a review, given the notes above.
I imagine at the time, all involved in drawing up the Constitution agreed that the preferential clauses were an obvious eccentricity in an otherwise fairly reasonable document, and of course they would be tackled in due course. And then time passed and they weren’t eccentric but actually the most important part of the whole document. Funny old game, life.
#24 by Loh on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 6:37 pm
Well, there can also be a different interpretation. The following para:
///163. If a decision is taken that the provisions in the existing Federation of Malaya’s Constitution in this regard should apply to the natives of Borneo, we recommend that the question should be reviewed after 10 years in the light of the progress made by the native races.///
Could mean that the 10 years from 1963 could tie in with the review which ought to be made in 1972, when the review on the position of Malays in Peninsular is made.
///55. The Commission recommended that their proposals for continuing the present preferences should be reviewed after 15 years. This recommendation was given careful consideration but it was not considered necessary to include such a provision in the Constitution. It was considered preferable that, in the interests of the country as a whole, as well as of the Malays themselves, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong should cause a review of the revised proposals to be made from time to time.///
The above para when viewed from the current position of UMNO strength and their habit of negating promises could mean that they would be able to deny the promise “ the Yang di-Pertuan Agong should cause a review of the revised proposals to be made from time to time” and chose not to have the provision written in it. But the UMNO leaders at that time might want to have a 15-year free time to effect whatever changes they wanted to make, and not subject to the review from time to time, which might have to start before the 15 year is up. The decision about the inclusion depended on political environment then and how the leaders of the three community trust one another.
According to the press reports in around 1970, the constitutional amendment would be made to this Article and future amendment to it would require the expressed approval of the King. There was no requirement to introduce constitutional amendment if the provision for a review was not in the original text. Why would Tun Razak threaten to extend emergency and NOC rule if amendment to the constitution could not be effected? NEP did not need changes to the constitution.
The opposition parties in 1969 campaigned to deny Alliance 2/3 majority so that the government could not amend the constitution with regard to the article, and they wanted a strong support for the review. The opposition could not ask for an amendment to it if it was not in power, and they did not expect to. They campaigned for support hoping to minimise the period of further extension. For that they had to base on the provision of a review written in it. Or are we to believe that the opposition parties in 1969 fooled the voters?
The Pre-1957 version of the Malayan constitution would clarify the matter.
#25 by OrangRojak on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 7:26 pm
I’ll try to find it online Loh, though if a person were to try to track it down in person, where would he go? Somewhere in KL?
I searched the Malaysian National Archives online at arkib.gov.my, but all I got was:
Warning: ocilogon() [function.ocilogon]: _oci_open_server: ORA-12514: TNS:listener could not resolve SERVICE_NAME given in connect descriptor in D:\xampp\htdocs\webcompass\english\_func.php on line 16
More later
#26 by Joshua on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 - 8:40 pm
Jeffrey,
This is more correct and how this is linked to Pergau dam?
In the Observer’s news report of 7 May, 1989, Sunday Page 10 -OPEN FILE- by Adam Raphael titled “Thatcher used aid to sell arms” it was reported as follows:-
Adam Raphael wrote “The Malaysian deal according to informed sources in London and Kuala Lumpur, involves an upfront payment of 300 million Malaysian Dollars about £60 Million to Prime Minister Mahathir’s political party, UMNO Baru, as well as large payments totalling Another 200 million Malaysian Dollars (£40 million) to agents and ruling families.”
pw:1903 scription
#27 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 1 July 2009 - 6:13 am
Joshua, thanks for the Observer’s report.