I like to share with readers a response from
a kadir hj ismail: NEP http://www.1malaysia.com.my/8654-mengibarkan-panji-panji-negara#comments to my post at Najib’s official blog:
QUOTE
Sdr LOH,
Kenapa berlaku Peristiwa 13 May 1969? Apakah tujuan utama NEP? Its is not about MALAY, CHINESE or INDIAN. Its is about social injustice. We heritage colonial Divide and Rule policy until to the extent that the MALAY lack in every fields. What NEP did was to 1) TO ERADICATE POVERTY 2)RESTRUCTURING THE SOCIETY. Malay is the poorest and so they must be helped. If the Indian are poor then they must be helped and so for the Chinese.Look at other nation! What happen to the country if only one race is wealthy? Indonesia for example. 1997 after Suharto collapsed? Didn’t the Chinese fled the country because the native ransack their properties…
This will happen in Malaysia if only one races is superior than others. That is why the policy remains until it is achieved.
So LOH, think again.
UNQUOTE
The reply was in response to my post appearing under the same blog.
QUOTE
Loh: Najib should honour his father’s promise- cond.
The 30% ball park number given by Tun Razak which through the government policies of ensuring 30% of share alloted to Malays had long been achieved, even within the first 20 years of NEP implemetation, albeit in wealth of various form other than share capital. The fact that Malays chose to unload their shares in Malaysia and invest their funds outside was a choice of individuals which should not be sneered upon. What is wrong is for the government to insist that the 30% should stay as corporate share as a proof of success when the more important criteria should have been the length of time when NEP, a discriminatory race-based policy, had been imlemented. Tun Razak wanted it for 20 years as the upper limit so that the country would not be seriously polarized. Sadly, Najib as the son of Tun Razak does not take it his duty to hounor the promise Razak made to Malaysians in 1970. 11
June 28, 2010
Loh: Najib should honour his father’s promise
It is good that Najib notices that Malaysian flag flies in other countries because entrepreneurs venture into other countries, and they include the Malays. Indeed Daim Zainuddin alone with his billion ringgit investment in banks keeps Malaysian flag flying in many African countries. Thus equity share capital owned by Malays are not fully captured in the ownership survey in Malaysia. Had the Malays’ wealth remained in Malaysia, they would have helped in increasing the Malays’ share in corporate ownership in Malaysia. It must be noted that the Malays who venture outside the country, including Taib Mahmood, the CM of Sarawak, and Daim Zainuddin are the beneficiries of NEP. If NEP beneficiaries park their wealth outside the country, that would make it that bit more difficult to achieve the 30% target envisaged under NEP.
UNQUOTE
I am sure the person who responded did not read or chose to ignore my post as follows at the Najib’s blog entitled Rural development and progression why I detail hat happened leading to May 13 as stated by Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad. http://www.1malaysia.com.my/8242-rural-development-and-progression-8242
Quote
Loh: NEP is against 1Malaysia-contd4
A tautological classification was adopted where Malays were classified as one who practices Malay culture among the other two requirements in terms of language and religion. Thus only religion is the only clear-cut criterion and the UMNO is eying the 1.2 billion Muslims around the world as Pseudo-Malays. It certainly would be an insult to the Islamic religion if Muslims are deemed weak and require affirmative action.
NEP as formulated by Tun Razak and implemented beyond the promised period serves only the Islam religion and Muslims rather than the country.
The government has always declared that the 30% target has not been achieved but chose not to present a transparent assessment of whether that threshold has been reached. If it had, it would have done public accounting on the progress achieved, particularly since NEP has overrun its sunset time.
1

June 19, 2010
Loh: NEP is against 1Malaysia-contd3
It means that NEP should end for all other sectors then, and that government funds such as the windfall gains through oil revenues should have been used to hold shares in trust for Malays. Indeed the GLC should have served the purpose. It was illogical to insist that the 30% level should be maintained at all time.
The 30% target was set without taking into consideration how it would be possible to prevent poor Malays from getting jealous of the rich Malays especially when they obtain their wealth at the expense of other Malaysians while the Malays were encouraged at the same time to become jealous of other communities who earned their wealth. It was also illogical to pretend that Malays belong to a homogeneous group of persons capable of being classified on anthropological ground as evidenced by the definition of Malays as adopted under article 160 of the constitution.

2

June 19, 2010
Loh: NEP is against 1Malaysia-contd2
Nobody would expect Tun Razak to apologize to the nation for not telling Harun much earlier in the morning of May 13 to avert the incidents. Tun Razak chose to create the impression that NEP was needed as a way to explain away the riots without having to take responsibility. At the same time NEP gave him the excuse to play racial politics to the hilt to get UMNO entrenched in power.
Tun Razak promised that NEP was to be implemented for 20 years and the target of Malays participation by then in business would attain Malays’ ownership of 30% of equity share capital in corporate sector, in the country. That the 30% as a target threshold level should be based on the total equity at the end of the plan period at 1990 should be self evident.
3

June 19, 2010
Loh: NEP is against 1Malaysia-Contd1
I {Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad} was beside Tun Razak when he took the calls from them late past tea time on the fateful evening of 13 May. I recall clearly what Tun Razak told Harun “…the good news is you will continue to run Selangor. Chee Khoon and Chong Eu had just spoken to me that they want status quo preserved. So tell the people gathering at your house to disperse.” Harun thanked Tun and asked him to convey his gratitude to the two statesmen. Between five-to-ten minutes after that Harun rang Tun Razak to say that it was too late. As he was persuading them to disperse news reached the crowd that clashes had begun in Chow Kit Road and surroundings and beyond.

3.Tun Razak asked Harun to calm the gathering and urged him, in strong terms, to attempt his best to stop the clashes from escalating. The rest, as they say, is history. Though Harun and I were not on good political terms I must be fair. I think he did try, but by then, to no avail.
UNQUOTE

4

June 19, 2010
Loh: NEP is against 1Malaysia
Mahathir said that May 13 riots were a result of class struggle, and that he was not a racist. Mahathir did not say where and what he was doing on the fateful day. But TAN SRI ABDULLAH AHMAD in his speech AT THE “FROM MAY 13 TO 1MALAYSIA – THE FUTURE OF MALAYSIAN NATION BUILDING” – FORUM held at 8 PM WEDNESDAY MAY 13 2009 AT THE CIVIC CENTRE MBPJ, PETALING JAYA gave the details hours before May 13 riots took place.
Two relevant paragraphs of the speech are given below.
QUOTE
2.The tragic and vicious incident need not have happened had Tun Razak’s message to Dato’ Harun Idris, the menteri besar of Selangor, reached him 30-minutes earlier or had Tan Sri David Tan Chee Khoon and Tun Lim Chong Eu spoken to Tun Razak 30 minutes earlier relaying their decision not to cooperate with DAP to form the state government of Selangor nor worked together in Perak and elsewhere.
5

June 19, 2010
UNQUOTE
What happened in 1997 riots in Indonesia is now used as a threat in place of May 13. I consider the 1997 Indonesian riots a having been inspired by May 13. The persons who perpetrated the Indonesian riots did not hold power after they failed the attempted coup d’etat and Indonesians did not blame Suharto as Malays did the British.

The followings appear in Najib’s blog:
Loh: Najib’s NEM now reads NEP
In pursuance to his 1Malaysia vision Najib announced his NEM in place of NEP and stated that “We risk losing our competitive edge altogether if we do not act quickly to address structural barriers to growth that stand in the way of an effective response to the changing economic environment.” As NEP has been the mainstay of UMNO and BN government policies for the past four decades, the position Malaysia is in has only NEP to thank for.
Najib’s NEM envisages dismantling of quotas, preferences, APs, closed tenders and other non-competitive processes. The removal of closed tenders alone would have stopped those who had enjoyed the ‘negotiated government projects’ running to hundreds of billion over the past two decades to continue dipping their hands in government coffers. That brought the patron of Perkasa and his henchmen to oppose NEM during the Bumiputra Economic congress.
13
June 21, 2010
Loh: Najib’s NEM now reads NEP
They, Perkasa, claimed that Malays still needed the crutches though it is clear that those who attended the congress were hardly the persons who fought for poor bumiputras in Sabah and Sarawak. They were fighting for their continued right to rob the state. They did it too in the name of protecting Malays who after 53 years of affirmative actions are still not ready to be exposed to a society of a developed nation which progress through competition where merit and excellence are criteria for decisions making and processes implementation. To Perkasa, transparency, accountability and integrity as part of normal business practice would deny those who have a say on UMNO the continued opportunity to treat government treasury as UMNO fund. They want status quo through the continuation of NEP.14
June 21, 2010
Loh: Najib’s NEM now reads NEP-contd2
Najib has capitulated to the demand of Ibrahim Ali who said after the 10th Malaysia Plan was unveiled “it was really worth our effort [to stop NEM in the Bumiputera Economic Congress ] and it shows that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak paid heed to the needs of the bumiputera”. Ibrahim Ali might be right that the announcement of NEM and the opposition to it by Mahathir might all be a plot to show that the government cannot stop NEP because Najib wanted NEP to remain for ever to keep Malays’ votes. Or Najib has proven to the world that he has no political courage to do the right thing; he cares more for himself than for the well being of the country. Najib should tell the world outside, including leaders in the west why his NEM is inferior to NEP, and that he was wrong in his judgment for advancing NEM.

I like to share my response to :a kadir hj ismail: NEP
///Sdr LOH,
Kenapa berlaku Peristiwa 13 May 1969? ///

Datuk Harun Idris, the Mentri Besar of Selangor up to the May 10 1969 election played a dangerous game with the knowledge if not approval of Tun Razak. Tun Razak was half an hour too late in making a phone call to tell Harun to disperse the gathering of people who perpetrated atrocities on the evening of May 13. Please refer to the speech given by Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad, and the reference made by me under the title “Rural development and progression in Najib’s blog.

///Apakah tujuan utama NEP? Its is not about MALAY, CHINESE or INDIAN. Its is about social injustice. We heritage colonial Divide and Rule policy until to the extent that the MALAY lack in every fields. What NEP did was to 1) TO ERADICATE POVERTY 2)RESTRUCTURING THE SOCIETY. ///

The question that needs to be asked is about the intention to eradicate poverty; is it out of compassion for the poor and the down trodden, or is it out of the desire to remove jealousy among the people so that the poor would not feel that they had nothing to lose and start causing riots?

If it was out of compassion to care for the poor, then that same sense of compassion should apply to the poor of all races, since it would pain the person to see suffering of another human being, whatever religion he professes. NEP said about poverty alleviation without mentioning race. But UMNO government that has been implementing policies in the name of NEP said that it was meant to help Malays. Even Najib after 40 years of NEP still emphasizes that the government would look after the interest of poor Malays. He did not talk about the poor of other races that need his attention, as the son of the former PM the late Razak.

If the desire to help the poor is to remove the sense of jealousy of the poor so that they would not take part in riots, as organized by politicians, does UMNO government consider that only poor Malays were entitled to the sense of jealousy, and not other races. That was also why Mamakthir considered it his greatest achievement to arouse the sense of jealousy against other race in the name of removing ‘social injustice’.

Historians would not agree that colonial master’s divide and rule policy provided any preferential treatment to the non-Malays over the Malays. If it was so, there would not have been Malay royal houses remaining in the country.
NEP second objective was not ‘restructuring the society’ as a kadir wanted us to believe. A kadir must have formed that opinion based on the justifications provided by UMNO leaders, and that he had not seen official declaration of the second objective of NEP which was to make sure that people of different races are not linked to their economic functions (my paraphrasing, and not the actual wordings). UMNO has all the might to implement NEP as it pleases. Malay government servants accounted for more than 75% in 1969, or 1971 when NEP started. That percentage is higher than the share of Malays proportion in the population at slightly higher than 55% then. Now, Malay government servants account for more than 90%. So Malays are identified with government services a link which NEP wanted to remove. UMNO has changed it from bad to worse.

///Malay is the poorest and so they must be helped. If the Indian are poor then they must be helped and so for the Chinese.///

A Kadir makes the right observation. Helping the poor because they are poor is out of compassion. It is a thought that should be encouraged. That is how a religious person should view life, and I truly respect him for that sentiment.
But NEP has not been implemented in that manners. Worse, we hear statement like those made by Ismail Ahmad of Penang calling non-Malays pendatang so that NEP should continue, to discriminate against non-Malays.

///Look at other nation! What happen to the country if only one race is wealthy? Indonesia for example. 1997 after Suharto collapsed? Didn’t the Chinese fled the country because the native ransack their properties… ///

Actually when there are Chinese multi-billionaires, it does not mean that other Chinese got a share of his wealth. It has been said that a Chinese tycoon used his wealth to make a DAP Chinese assemblywomen to change side so that UMNO instead of PAS member becomes Mentri Besar of Perak. The same question seems appropriate to ask what would happen if only one race controls position in government, such as the permanent secretaries of Ministries and Director-generals of government departments. It should be alright if these incumbents were selected based on merits and it so happened that they came from one race. Under that circumstance we can expect that the persons appointed to their various individual position will serve the functions expected of the post; we can be sure that rule of law would be upheld, and the police would ensure public security, the MACC would nab those corrupt officials, and certainly PKFZ would not have risen to a scam that amounts to 12.5 billion, which averages 500 ringgit per person. But when NEP causes the distribution, then race became the criterion for government decision and we now have a failed government.

///This will happen in Malaysia if only one races is superior than others. That is why the policy remains until it is achieved. ///

Malays have the special right to enjoy under NEP, and so is superior to others. Would one say that the 1997 Indonesian would again repeat in this country?

The country has no problems until 1969 when the government under Tun Razak considered it wise to use the argument above to explain why May 13 did happen, and started NEP. Mamakthir in 1981 used the justification that Malays had to be wealthy, rather than to implement what was originally intended of NEP. He made Mamaks billionaires, and he made a few non-Malays to take advantage over others, but they would remain his ATM to disburse money as Mamakthir desired. That approach of using government funds to enrich the agents of the power-that-be would continue if NEP remains.

///So LOH, think again.///
Two million Malaysians, mostly non-Malays have thought this over many times over and they decided to migrate because with one word from the PM that “NEP objectives have not been met and NEP remains, NEP remains and non-Malays would continue to suffer along with other non-UMNO putras. Of late, it seems that Ibrahim Ali was big enough to declare that NEP objective has not been met, to have a stay of NEP. A Kadir might have been a NEP beneficiary but he might not have been an UMNOputra. In that case NEP causes him to be a low income earner.
2