Malays must have positive attitudes

Najib: Malays must have positive attitudes
04 Sep 2006
KUANTAN: Umno should not base its struggles solely on defending Malay special rights.Party deputy president Da- tuk Seri Najib Razak said it was now more urgent for Umno to shift its focus towards instilling positive attitudes among the Malays."Umno will not succeed if we just continue to defend the (racial) status quo," he said while opening the Paya Besar Umno division meeting here yesterday."Yes, we can build this and that using the (political) powers that we have, but can we change the attitude of the Malays?"That is what we should ask ourselves, as this is the factor which will determine whether Malays can progress further."Umno, he added, must act as the catalyst for the promotion of a culture of excellence and good behavioural practices in all fields. Najib said Malays also needed to be urgently pushed to cast off the attitude of taking things easy if they want to preserve their cultural identity in a globalised world.He said failure to take "an immediate quantum leap in the right direction" could spell doom for them.He described the coming 15 years before Malaysia’s 2020 target to be a fully developed country, as the most challenging period for the Malays."We could probably meet the deadline, but the question is, what would become of the Malays?"We certainly do not want Malays to lag behind then, and continue to rely on handouts."Najib said acquisition of a first-class mentality, through efforts which could improve their human capital, should now be the main priority of Malays."For instance, a small-time Malay producer of goods should now be knowledgeable enough to do something to improve his business, such as becoming a supplier to hypermarkets."To ensure this message reached the Malay masses, Najib said Umno members and leaders had to maintain constant contact with the grassroots and continuously explain the challenges faced by the community."Later at a Press conference, Najib, who is also the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence, said Malaysia welcomed the United Nation’s green light for Indonesia to send peacekeeping troops to war-ravaged Lebanon.He described it as a positive sign for Malaysia as a meeting had been held with Indonesia and Brunei to jointly co-ordinate their peacekeeping efforts if allowed into Lebanon.Israel had objected to the presence of peacekeeping troops in Lebanon from countries with no diplomatic relations with it.However, it withdrew its objection against Indonesia on Saturday. Indonesia, like Malaysia, does not recognise the Jewish state.
Comment: The important thing is return of integrity
03 Sep 2006Ng Tze Shiung
DOES a former prime minister, whose policies and opinions used to attract more headlines but less public deliberation than the incumbent’s, make the better chief executive?Strangely, such is the basis for concern among the general public as to the state of our development today. Yet it is a superfluous question. As Malaysians, we must ask whether our country is in better health than before; and if not, what must be done to correct this.A strong state implies that the institutions which keep our society in good working order are intact. These relate to the values and organs upon which our country was founded — the Constitution, democracy, federalism, religious freedom, property rights, the rule of law, parliamentary and local representation, the forging of laws through the legislature, their interpretation and protection by the judiciary, their execution by civil government, the formulation of policy by the Cabinet and their promulgation by ministries and local councils. Only from this basis can sustainable economic growth and social stability proceed.Francis Fukuyama identifies the strength of a state not by its scope of functions, but rather by how effective these functions are. The Philippines, for example, though a minimalist state, is increasingly recognised in case studies in university courses as a failing state. Whereas an interventionist state like Indonesia, despite its recent upheavals, has strengthened by leaps and bounds over the past decade after having trimmed bureaucracy, achieved results against corruption, and finding compromise with Aceh, among others.What Indonesia has done is settle its debts of externalities arising from the past and sow the ingredients for future economic growth and social development.By comparison, how do we fare? Indeed, how do we even fare in comparison to the laissez-faire government under Tunku Abdul Rahman, or Tun Razak’s interventionist one? Tunku faced off Sukarno and reached a political settlement with Singapore without putting our homes, families and everyday lives at risk. Similarly, Tun Razak nationalised British assets and instituted the New Economic Policy, thereby providing for employment and welfare, without impinging on property rights with the severity that had characterised Nasser’s Eqypt or Mao’s China. Nine years after 1997, we are now familiar with how the globalisation of capital ruined us. We are also aware how crony capitalism and corporate misgovernance left us vulnerable. These, however, do not represent the root causes of 1997 per se, but are symptomatic of something less complicated. We were vulnerable before, during and still, after the Asian financial crisis because we had allowed our institutions over our recent past to lose their sanctity, legitimacy and effectiveness. How so?We privatised national assets and state contracts but dispensed with the necessary tender process. Our motor industry took off through technology transfer as an import-substitution initiative, but after two decades its export market continues to be under-developed and financed through domestic demand. Our conglomerates sought speculative gains in the capital market but not true productivity growth in the long term. Our first-class airport has neither developed the air industry, nor quality of service, nor established Kuala Lumpur as a major hub for international airlines. After years of protectionist strategies and co-operation with Matsushita to make compressors, or Seagate to produce disk drives, we have no local champions who can take up the slack and cash in when they move out.These few examples imply poor policy direction and even poorer regulation by state agencies. They point to colossal leakages in the system where public funds ended up in the pockets of rent-seekers and oligarchs with vested interests, thus undermining our Keynesian attempts at government spending.They suggest the depth of clientelism in our political culture. They most certainly prove that our laws have been flouted, and worse, that they were allowed to be flouted. All in all, the collective fault lies with our declining state capacity; that is, the integrity of each institution in conducting state affairs in adherence to all that our Constitution stands for and to the rule of law, while maintaining an independence from personal and political influences.How politicians, lawmakers, and bureaucrats regularly descend into tribal spats today when they are unable to deliberate with each other also demonstrates this decline. Another is the continued sectarianism and communalism that eat away at our multiculturalism. Yet another is the increasing pressures we face over the environment, unemployment, crime, AIDS, drugs, disease, even teenage pregnancies. Granted these are also part and parcel of a universal recession and rising oil prices, yet they do represent the costs of inequitable development engendered by past policies.That these weaknesses did not implode even before 1997 is owed to the fact that capacity shortfalls were surrogated by the neo-patrimonial nature of the previous administration, when decisions were observed to have been made from the apex of a pyramidal state structure to which all state institutions were subordinate. This may have worked before, but it is not sustainable in the long term. Indeed, instead of reversing the decline of our institutional capacity, such a construct would erode it further.What Malaysia needs today is not sound economic policy foremost, but above all a restoration of institutional integrity. Only then can government spending be given an honest chance. Evidence of progress is found not in the personality of the prime minister nor the number of mega-projects conceived, but with the performance of our institutions. If and where the person of the prime minister is to be judged, it is in relation to how well he nurtures, and continues to nurture, this regeneration. So far Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s emphasis on human capital is but one measure which addresses the widening income gaps and social inequities across our demographic. This, and the transparency now increasingly apparent in the actions of Government, demonstrates a return of both the rakyat and the rule of law to prominence.When such democratic checks and balances are allowed to re-emerge, then public confidence returns and proper conditions cast for sustainable economic development. Will the courts resolve cases like Perwaja Steel and bring corporate wrongdoers to account? Can the bureaucracy ever be liable unto itself? Has the quality of debate over new laws and amendments improved in Parliament? Can our security, health, and welfare agencies meet the negative pressures of social change? Will we be lucky witnesses to a Malaysian spring, a renaissance? Only time will tell. The choice is ours to make.The writer is a post-graduate student in East Asian Studies.
Comment: An intellectual par excellence
03 Sep 2006Dzulkifli Razak
IT not often that a young nation like Malaysia is blessed with a gentleman, an intellectual, a thinker and a scholar par excellence, all wrapped up in one. Even then, the nation could never have enough of his services. Tan Sri Dr Noordin Sopiee passed away last year at the age of 61, after battling cancer for several months.But like all national heroes, more so the intellectual ones, there are not enough of them. Noordin will be remembered for a variety of reasons.In his various capacities, as a Press person at the New Straits Times Press to the helm of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS), Noordin left his mark.Starting out as a journalist, he rose to became group editor of the New Straits Times in the late 1970s.A prolific writer and thinker, the job suited him well, going big into investigative journalism and features, as well as introducing a complaints service, all of which created an impact on readers. Noordin had always an interesting viewpoint on "big issues" that set others thinking on what he wrote.His colleague and current chairperson and chief executive officer of ISIS describes him as "a wordsmith with a flair for a fine turn of phrase". Noordin read Political Science and International Selations at the London School of Economics. As secretary-general of the London Union of Malaysian Students, he organised demonstrations in the streets of London against Indonesian aggression during Confrontation.As a director-general of ISIS, Noordin made many crucial contributions, no less to the national blueprint, Vision 2020, an effort he regarded as "intellectually assembled in a single document the economic reforms of the last 10 years which have restructured and transformed the Malaysian consensus".Noordin once said that "Malaysia has always been a prime candidate for the dustbin of history", given our heterogeneity. He reasoned we should in theory have become a "Lebanon" long before Lebanon became a "Lebanon". Hence, the first objective of Vision 2020 is to become "a united Malaysian nation with a sense of common and shared destiny. This must be a nation at peace with itself, territorially and ethnically integrated, living in harmony and full and fair partnership, made up of one Bangsa Malaysia with potential loyalty and dedication to the nation". Noordin recognised that this is the most difficult quantum leap that we must make over the years. Noordin contended that all drafts must be subjected to the "30-second rule". He insisted that if a 10-year-old boy or grandmother cannot articulate the country's vision in 30 seconds, the planners should go back to the drawing board.Such is the passion of a person who truly loved his country.Many will vividly remember his full-page open letter to newspapers in November 1998, protesting the then US vice-president’s unbecoming behaviour at the dinner of the Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation (Apec) Forum in Kuala Lumpur. The US Government had also kept the elaborate pretence that the US president would be coming when they had no intention of having him in Kuala Lumpur for the Forum. Needless to say, this global Malaysian is set to defy the Malay proverb patah tumbuh, hilang berganti (loss is not permanent) for a very long time to come.One can never pay enough tribute to Noordin for his immense contributions to the nation and the intellectual world. He was an inspiration whose legacy will remain as the nation blossoms. The writer is the vice-chancellor of Universiti Sains Malaysia. He can be contacted at vc@usm.my.
Comment: Aim for a professional civil service
02 Sep 2006A. Ragunathan
LIKE his predecessors, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has pummelled civil servants for the same serious flaws despite the stringent measures taken thus far. He warned the "little Napoleons" and others in the civil service to work hard and contribute to the success of the Ninth Malaysia Plan (9MP). Those who failed to do so were told to quit or face disciplinary action. It was the same tonic prescribed by former prime ministers, and has not worked well for cogent reasons.There is an acute need to look more closely at the qualities and skills of government workers and address some of the critical issues that have impacted the civil service.However, frequent revision of the General Orders on Discipline due to "dead wood or mediocrity" is not the answer. Some heads of department and supervisors have abandoned the necessity to discipline officers. Therefore, strict supervision as well as swift disciplinary action without interference from any quarter must be taken so that the civil service is not tainted with a bad image.The present set-up of the civil service with its domination by administrators creates a situation where professional and technical advice does not reach the top levels where decisions are made. One of the difficulties endured by the service arises from the growing separation between administrators and professionals. Thus, the divide between authority and responsibility denies the best results and makes blame difficult to apportion. Furthermore, where there should be a growing proportion of senior posts going to professionals, the trend is in the reverse. The result is a brain drain of experienced professionals who leave with a feeling that the civil service is not for them.With the civil service continuing as the backbone of the nation’s planning, the role of administrators must give way to those in the scientific, technological and specialist fields. There must be greater specialisation and professionalism in the bureaucracy. The best and most able men and women must be chosen to lead the public sector. Leadership must be improved to carry out the effective execution of policies.The task of restructuring the civil service will no doubt be formidable because of the resistance by a small number of administrators who may perhaps feel disadvantaged by reform. In the overriding public interest, the Government must have the will to bring about radical change so as to establish a professional civil service that can restore trust and confidence in the Government’s ability to manage public business effectively.Another area of concern is the alienation of non-Bumiputeras in the civil service, which does not augur well for a multi-racial country. This has shrunk the talent pool from which the Government can hire.The Government has recognised the seriousness of this problem. Not enough is being done to break through the prejudices that have been implanted among job-seekers over the years. Frustrated civil servants, especially non-Bumiputeras, feel that their contributions have not been recognised. They not only discourage their children from entering the civil service but give them the idea that its quality and expectations are not demanding enough for a fulfilling career.The civil service operates constantly under pressure from the political environment. But it must be neutral in politics. Its task is to serve the state and those in authority. Civil servants must at all costs avoid politicising or injecting their political biases.Attempts by some politicians in the past to enlist support had unfortunately resulted in a few senior civil servants and a large number in the middle and lower levels dabbling openly in party politics and thus bringing in party political influence into the civil service. This trend can weaken the service as well as erode public confidence. The Government and trade unions have pivotal roles to play in seeing that civil servants are not used as pawns by political parties.It is imperative at this stage of the 9MP that the Government appoint a committee under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister or his deputy to detect, examine and rectify the weaknesses in the civil service and remove the bias in recruitment and promotion policies.The committee should draw up an effective evaluation system, specially suited to the needs of the departments and ministries, while giving authority to senior officers to discharge their duties and responsibilities. The committee must ensure that hardworking officers are promoted.There is a need to look into the root causes, so as to avoid unwarranted and indiscriminate attacks on civil servants by politicians and taxpayers. It is fervently hoped the committee will find lasting solutions to the woes of the civil services for the good of the nation.The writer is a former president of Cuepacs.