Najib said that non-Malays have more wealth than Malays and so NEP which discriminates against non-Malays for the past 39 years have not made non-Malays poor. So it seems the government has the right to institute more discriminatory policies against non-Malays as collectively they had wealth, contrary to expectation.

For Najib’s statement to make some sense there should be a law in the country which makes the community shares the wealth among themselves like a communist state. Najib should know that ISA is against communism and so there is no law to ask rich Chinese such as the CEO of SP Setia to share his wealth with other Chinese. Thus Najib was merely talking nonsense with his statistics.

Najib has also conveniently forgotten that the rich Chinese could withstand NEP because they can easily fund the activities of their children. But ordinary Chinese have to save from their meagre earnings to foot the bills of bringing up their children. Unlike Malays who stand a chance to study in residential schools with government support, non-Malays do not have such facilities. Unlike Malays who can easily get into local universities and some even get state bursaries, non-Malays have less opportunity to be admitted to local universities, and invariably they have no financial support from the government. Unlike Malays who get overseas scholarship when they show good results, non-Malays do not get even 0% of the scholarship offered when they have at least 25% of scholars, assuming all races of the same intelligence, who qualify based on universally accepted meritocratic criteria. In terms of employment, 1.2 million Malays get to enjoy the perks of government services and the remaining 100,000 non-Malays government servants, if there are that many would have their promotion and career development obstructed. Despite that there are at least 300,000 non-Malays (by population ratio) who would like to be employed in the government service, despite career obstacles. They are denied that chance simply because some so-called Chineese like the CEO of SP Setia who became rich despite NEP.

There are complaints that Malays are not favourably treated in the private sector. Firstly, it seems that GLCs are not in the private sector. Secondly, the private sector companies that have semblances of job security (in the sense that company does not go bankrupt) and career advancement are in the listed companies and they invariably have Malays in the management. As for the small time employers, they have to make sure that the little hard earned money they have would make the company viable. They certainly want their money to buy its worth of services. Thus such small time private sector services cannot be requested to perform social services for employment like the government does. In fact the government service is the greatest welfare organization in the country; but 90% of such social-transfers go to Malays. Yes, government services do need some skeleton staff to give the impression that it looks like an office and perform some functions. That was why there are some non-Malays around.

Because Najib is surrounded by rich Chinese and he does not know that there are ordinary Chinese and Indians who live from hand to mouth. Their 4,000 years culture conditions them not to live on handouts. But the discriminatory NEP policies make life difficult for them. Despite not getting handouts from the government, the poor non-Malays have to subsidize the Malays through paying more for housing units so that Malays can get a discount, on top of the handouts the Malays obtain from the governemnt.

Najib is correct that after his father amended the Article 153 to make the council of rulers decide on that article after it had been approved by 2/3 votes in the parliament, amending or doing away with article 153 is not automatic. But to say that is impossible is telling Malaysians that the rulers cannot decide among themselves. That is contempt of the Royal houses. It is undemocratic of the government to deny citizens the right to discuss provisions in the constitution. If this country practises rule of law, then it can stop hooligans creating unrest responding to civil discussions. The government can use ISA to stop discussion, but it shows that the government could not allow free flow of information as part of democratic voting system. There are tall buildings but there is so social development in this country. Yet Malaysia signed the ASEAN Charter and accepted the principle of democratic governance. It is easy to fool Malaysians, but wouldn’t Najib blush in front of his counterpart of other ASEAN countries in allowing Rais Yatim to suggest police actions against free speech?