///Najib said at the MCA AGM “It is conventional wisdom and rational thinking that if the majority of the country has a small percentage of the wealth, that is inequitable. I think MCA will also agree.

So I think there should be a nice balance that the Malay feels they have a bigger share in the economic wealth but the Chinese also feel that they are growing economically in our system”///–The Star

There is a statistical measure known as Gini ratio that calculates the share of any item of interest corresponds to the percentage of people owning it. It is subjective to claim what is equitable, and more so in terms of wealth. Besides should the persons owning them, for the computation, be restricted to classification by race, rather than by income class? Since the advent of NEP, within the Malay community, a larger percentage of wealth has fallen in the hands of fewer Malays, in percentage term.

Najib uses the second paragraph to rephrase NEP’s argument that the unfair treatment against non-Malays would be compensated by the expanding cake. Tun razak conveniently ignored the fact that though expanded economic activities did benefit people in business but not all Chinese were involved in business, and they are like Malays, they want to be trained to be employed in the public sector and elsewhere. The rural and poor Chinese who are not in business are no difference from Malays who are said, incorrectly, not to have acumen for business activities. Yet these Chinese are at the receiving end in NEP implementation. They are denied opportunities for scholarships, seats of learning and employment in the public sector.

Najib talked about a nice balance so that Malay feels they have a bigger share in the economic wealth and the Chinese feeling they grow their wealth. So it is the feeling that is said to polarize the nation. Let us examine Najib’s thought. What would Malays’ feeling of bigger share of economic wealth equal to? UMNO is fond at arguing that economic disparity among the races caused May 13. That means jealousy of Malays against non-Malays because some of them were wealthy. Thus a bigger share would reduce some jealousy but when would that jealousy be removed? The argument might be plausible when all Malays were poor? But the fact is there are rich Malays too, and some Malays are very rich like billionaires created by the government under Mamakthir. Would Najib believe that jealousy does not arise within the Malay community, or in Muslims community? If it does, then how can Malay feels satisfied that others in the community are rich while he is poor. If Malay does not feel jealous of wealth enjoyed by other Malays, why should Malay harbour the sense of jealousy when the rich happened to belong to other Malaysians who are not Malay?

Najib talked about Gini ratio as if it applies only to community as a group. Nurul I. Anwar said that it is time that some of the very rich Malays offer their corporate shares at par value to others to make it more equitable among the Malays.

It is perfectly sensible for anybody who wants to work to own a larger wealth than he currently has. But to talk about cumulative wealth of a community, whose feeling should be the guide? Mamakthir said that as long as there is Malay employed by Chinese as driver, NEP had not succeeded. To Mamakthir no amount of wealth owned by Malays would be sufficient for Malays to forgo the special treatment given to Malays because of their special position as not being ready for true competition as in pre-Independence days. Besides how does one get satisfied to having a bigger share of wealth, and when should he be contended with what the community has rather then continuing asking for more and bigger share? Who should be the representative of Malays who decides on the quantum of share Malays own to be satisfied? Should it be UMNO, PAS or PKR?

When Najib said that he thought there should be a nice balance that the Malays feel that they have a bigger share in economic wealth it means that it is his government policy to give to Malays a bigger economic share. It would not be acceptable in a democracy anywhere in the world if the government declares that it offers opportunities to a particular race, or classification of its citizens, to benefit from government more than other citizens. That would be racism.

Najib is expounding the need to be racist based on the 40 year-old argument given by his father in launching NEP. Najib needed NEP to justify why May 13 happened without prosecuting the culprits. NEP is an aberration to the constitution particularly to Article 8 where all Malaysians are equal. Razak forced through the programme stating that it was to be for a period of 20 years. He at least acknowledged that NEP being an aberration to democracy should be time-bound. Unfortunately Najib utilized the untenable argument of an expanding cake to justify why the minority group should continue to be discriminated.

The Speaker took the question as hypothetical not so much the question but the answer. You see what ever Najib might say at one instant he denied it at another. Najib is NAJIB and so since no action just insincere bullshit, the Speaker was right that Najib only gives hypothetical answer. He should stop Najib talking rather than stop Karpal asking the question.