Rightways

Saturday, November 3, 2018

Malaysia's Budget 2019: Making the tiger roar again in 3 years?

https://youtu.be/r8SdMk4UfTs https://youtu.be/SvZUBTyEoWQ https://youtu.be/BSp7aNmTZS4 https://youtu.be/hh_EYfFJZW8

The Pakatan Harapan government yesterday tabled its maiden budget that sought to restore Malaysia’s status as an “Asian Tiger” with a clean and transparent government that cares for the rakyat. (EPA/FANDY AZLAN)

KUALA LUMPUR: THE Pakatan Harapan government yesterday tabled its maiden budget that sought to restore Malaysia’s status as an “Asian Tiger” with a clean and transparent government that cares for the rakyat.

Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng, in tabling the 2019 Budget in Parliament, said: “As long as we are clean, people-centric and focused on carrying out institutional reforms, we can restore Malaysia back to fiscal health in three years.

“Let our love for our country unite us, our challenges make us stronger and our confidence awaken Malaysia as an Asian Tiger all over again.”

Themed “A Resurgent Malaysia, A Dynamic Economy, A Prosperous Society”, the RM314.5 billion budget for next year has three areas of focus with 12 key strategies.

One focus area — to ensure the socio-economic well-being of Malaysians — will be the key performance indicator of the government’s success.

“We will seek to meet this objective by ensuring welfare and quality of life, improving employment and employability, enhancing wealth and social welfare protection, raising real disposal income and education for a better future,” he said.

In a speech that lasted more than two hours, interrupted by intermittent heckling from opposition lawmakers, Lim announced a slew of measures to address the people’s key concerns, from cost of living to housing, healthcare, education and transport.

Cash grants for the low-income Bottom 40 (B40) group will continue, single vehicle/motorbike owners with engine capacity of 1500cc and below will get targeted fuel subsidy, and the minimum wage will be raised to RM1,100 from Jan 1.

A National Health Protection Fund, with free coverage on four critical illnesses of up to RM8,000 and a hospitalisation benefit of RM50 a day, was also introduced for the B40 group.

For the affordable home programmes, Lim announced an allocation of RM1.5 billion while Bank Negara Malaysia will set up a RM1 billion fund to help those earning below RM2,300 a month to own houses costing below RM150,000.

The government will also allow the private sector to engage in new crowdfunding schemes for first-time housebuyers.

The Education Ministry received the lion’s share of the budget, with an allocation of RM60.2 billion, including RM2.9 billion assistance for the poor and RM652 million to upgrade and repair schools.

An amount of RM3.8 billion has been set aside for government scholarships.

All intra-city toll rate hikes will be frozen next year, said Lim, and public transport users, meanwhile, can buy RM100 monthly passes for unlimited trips on RapidKL rail or bus services beginning January.

A RM50 monthly pass is also available for those who use RapidKL buses only.

Civil servants and pensioners were not left out — staff up to Grade 54 will receive a one-off special payment of RM500; while government pensioners will get RM250.

The budget deficit for this year is likely to be 3.7 per cent, while gross domestic product (GDP) growth is forecast at 4.8 per cent and 4.9 per cent next year.

To ensure strong and dynamic economic growth, another focus area is to promote an entrepreneurial state that leverages innovation and creativity, while embracing the new digital economy.

The government aims to provide at least 30Mbps broadband connectivity outside urban centres within five years, while funds have been allocated to encourage investments in green technology and transition into Industry 4.0.

Corporate tax rate will be reduced to 17 per cent from 18 per cent for SMEs with paid capital below RM2.5 million, and businesses with annual taxable income below RM500,000.

Meanwhile, after inheriting “a worrying state of financial affairs which was in dire straits” with debts amounting to RM1.065 trillion from the previous administration, the third area of focus is to implement institutional reforms that promote transparent fiscal discipline.

“We intend to table a new Government Procurement Act next year to govern procurement processes to ensure transparency and competition, while punishing abuse of power, negligence and corruption,” Lim said.

He said open tenders will not only achieve more value-for-money for taxpayers, it will also nurture an efficient and competitive private sector.

To ensure that Malaysia has a clean government, the budget also saw the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission receiving an increased allocation of RM286.8 million.

Lim said the allocation, which is an 18.5 per cent increase from this year’s, will see MACC employing up to 100 more staff next year as the government revs up its anti-graft campaign.

Putrajaya expects to collect a revenue of RM261.8 billion next year, including a RM30 billion dividend from Petronas.

To raise its revenue, the government will leverage its assets and review taxation policies.

This includes reducing its stake in non-strategic companies, expanding the Service Tax to cover online services, and raising licence fees and taxes in the gaming sector.- By Nst Team

The following are the highlights of the 2019 Budget, which was tabled by Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng in Parliament on Friday. (Bernama photo)

The budget carries the theme of "Credible Malaysia, Dynamic Economy, Prosperous Rakyat" and will focus on three main thrusts with 12 key strategies to recapture Malaysia's 'Economic Tiger' status.

The three main thrusts are:

*Institutional reforms
*People's wellbeing
*Promotion of entrepreneurial culture
.
The 12 strategies are:

*Strengthening fiscal management
*Restructuring and rationalising government debt
*Increase government revenue
*Ensuring welfare and quality life
*Increasing job opportunities and marketability
*Improving quality of healthcare services and social welfare protection
*Increasing disposable income
*Education for a better future
*Initiating new economic power
*Grabbing opportunity to face global challenge
*Redefining government’s role in business
*Ensuring economic fairness and sustainable economic growth

Related:

Govt vows to restore our finances - Nation

image: https://www.thestar.com.my/~/media/online/2018/11/03/03/17/budget-spread.ashx?la=en

Click to view details

http://clips.thestar.com.my.s3.amazonaws.com/clips/news/2018/budget%202019%20p24.pdf

Good news for 6.6 million road users - Nation

http://clips.thestar.com.my.s3.amazonaws.com/clips/news/2018/original%20petrol%20subsidy.jpg

https://youtu.be/EkgANoSlvek

https://youtu.be/Z-PRfnn0Uw8

‘Give us time to iron out the mechanism’

It’s the price that fuels heated reactions among motorists

Budget 2019 Highlights

For full coverage of Budget 2019, go to http://bit.ly/budget2019TheStar.

Budget 2019: The Real Winners (And The Losers) - iMoney

Housebuyers body slams new property gains tax

Higher RPGT will raise sub-sale prices, says PAM

Thursday, November 1, 2018

Malay supremacy - Ketuanan Melayu ! How to be supreme ?

"If we want to be tuan (master), we need to have knowledge, willingness to be hardworking, do things properly and not steal. Don't fellow the example of our previous prime minister (Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak" said Dr. Mahathir:
Dr M: All races to be consulted on ICERD first

How to be supreme!

Here’s a plea to reconsider an unpalatable term favoured by certain politicians and nationalists.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Can our dear politicians stop fighting? That’s what they keep telling us, don’t they?

If it is a Malay politician, he is fighting for Malay rights. If it’s an Indian leader, he’s fighting for Indian rights. If it’s a Chinese bloke, he’s fighting for... You get the drift.

Instead of the aggressive and violence-laden word, “fighting”, how about they use words like “promoting”,

“protecting” or “nurturing”?

I actually like another word more: “sharing”. I wish politicians will say things like, “Let me share what the Malay community’s thoughts and concerns are so that we can address them together.”

The word “Malay” can be substituted by any of the following: Chinese, Indian, Iban, Kadazan, Orang Asli, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, etc.

And why should it be so? Because we share this nation. It’s as simple and obvious as that.

The soil, air and water we all need to live have no boundaries when it comes to pollution, global warming and diminishing resources that affect us collectively.

Because when our economy gets bad, everyone suffers – jobs are lost, crimes increase, prices go up... You get the picture. If that happens, will fighting over community rights or racial supremacy help?

That’s why this endless debate over Malay supremacy – ketuanan Melayu – is so pointless and unnecessary.

Why do people get all riled up whenever it comes up, the latest being our youngest Cabinet member, Youth and Sports Minister Syed Saddiq Abdul Rahman, who said on Saturday the era of ketuanan Melayu had ended under the Pakatan Harapan government?

He went on to give the assurance that this did not mean the needs of the Malay community would be sidelined but that Putrajaya now preferred to emphasise the concept of “shared prosperity” to ensure fair and equitable distribution of wealth across all races.

Somehow that was misconstrued by some quarters and Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia president and Home Minister, had to step in to explain and defend his young colleague. And how was Syed Saddiq misconstrued by the likes of Majlis Belia Negeri Johor?

Well, its president Md Salleheen Mohamad was quoted as saying that Syed Saddiq needed to understand Malay supremacy in the historical context.

He added that it wasn’t about the Malays as master and the non-Malays as slaves but about the position of the Malay sultans as pillars of the nation that protect the importance of Islam, Malay customs and the Malay language.

That sounds perfectly acceptable to me. But what is perhaps not very acceptable or palatable is the use of the word “supremacy” in the context of a race or community.

Despite the assurances that it is not about master versus slave, it brings to mind things like white supremacy and the Nazi’s brand of Aryan supremacism. And surely right-thinking people would agree these are really bad things.

The poster boys for white supremacists are the Klu Klux Klan of America whose members believe that the “white race” is superior in intelligence and culture over other so-called non-white races.

Back in the 1800s to the 1950s when white supremacy was at its height during the era of European colonisation of Africa and Asia, Europeans used being white-skinned and Christian to justify slavery and taking political and economic control of people of darker skin by military and religious methods.

But how “white” is defined is fluid. Not all ethnic groups with white skin were deemed white. The Irish and Italians were not considered as such in late 19th and early 20th century America. But the US government expanded its definition of whites to include Arabs and North Africans in 1944.

America is today very multi-ethnic but the Jim Crow mentality continues and is getting a major boost under Donald Trump’s presidency. The man suspected of sending letter bombs to Barack Obama and others last week considers himself a Trump supporter and a “foot soldier” for white supremacy. He openly proclaimed his love for Adolf Hitler and ethnic cleansing.

Indeed, the most dreadful and extreme example of racial supremacy was demonstrated by the Nazis and Hitler who used it to justify his extermination of millions of Jews and other undesirables like the gypsies, blacks, gay men and the disabled.

So when some people obsess over the need for their race or community to be supreme or “above” others, it doesn’t go down well as they come across as frightening and hate-filled.

That’s why such a term, Malay supremacy, to describe the upholding of the position of the Malay rulers and Islam is wrong in our Malaysian context.

Malays, I like to believe, are not hate-fuelled, nor do they want to exterminate the non-Malays. They just want to be reassured that the non-Malays understand this is a Malay-Muslim majority nation and that it will stay that way.

As a non-Malay Malaysian, I can give that assurance. And easily so. After all, as have been pointed out repeatedly, Malays dominate the armed forces, the civil service, the Cabinet, the GLCs and in plain demographics with a healthily growing urban middle class.

With such dominance and strength, surely the Malays are in a position to be more generous-hearted and can wean themselves off the siege mentality they were brainwashed with by the previous government that did it to stay in power.

As I have said before, non-Malays are not the enemy. Corrupt, divisive leaders are. They are the ones who want to continue the British colonial tactic of divide and rule that keeps the various races “at just the right distance from each other” so that it is easy to sow fear and suspicion against each other.

So let’s not fight any more. As Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who has said he did not subscribe to the ketuanan Melayu concept, puts it, what is far more important is the willingness of all the communities to share the good and the bad and work together.

Here is where the Malays can show the way. It’s called leadership, Malay leadership. - The Star So aunty, so what? June H.L. Wong

AN OPEN LETTER TO OUR ELECTED NEW GOVERNMENT PUBLIC SERVANTS

Dear PH elected public servants,

We, the rakyat, elected a coalition called Pakatan Harapan under a single banner led by a 92 year old statesman whom we have, at least, the most trust for to save this nation. This is a MALAYSIAN mandate. Do not forget that. You are all public servants. SERVE.

We did not elect you to squabble over posts and spoils of war. We want a reformed nation. Not the same politicking and sharing of spoils amongst politicians. We do not care which party you came from.

The nation faces 3 immediate and present dangers:

1. We have an economic catastrophe waiting to happen due to economic malfeasance over the last decade - financed by debt.

2. We have a corrupt, racialist religiously-bigoted civil administrative system to be dismantled and replaced.

3. We have today an ineffective education but instead a religious-centric education system that has been the source of extremist indoctrination of Malay-Muslim youths and populace over the last 2 decades at least. The result being, Malaysia is per capita the largest exporter of terrorist Islamic fighters in the world and sympathisers. And a large unemployable pool of graduates as product of our failed system.

Lets be honest in our euphoria of victory that the work ahead is difficult. To be honest, the economic problems, intractable as it looks, is the easiest to solve. That I have full trust in Tun, his brilliantly assembled Council and newly minted Minister of Finance.

The other two challenges could very well be almost impossible but if not solved will mean the utter destruction of our beloved nation.

It will take great political-will from your leadership to make hard decisions to drag some of you, not to mention the mostly entitled ketuanan bangsa and ugama Malay-Muslim populace kicking and screaming towards reforms.

1. We need clear separation of religion and government. Government and public funds must stay out from the business of religion and religious morality.

2. We need to take out religious education and proselytising from the public arena. Religion must be a private matter and kept private.

3. Our education must emphasise education not indoctrination. There is no such thing as religious education, only indoctrination. The nation's future rests in its populace being science and technology passionate.

In conclusion, as I had mentioned before, by 2050, seven of 10 Malaysians will be Muslims. We do not reform at our peril. Do we want our nation to be another failed Muslim majority country as everyone of them is, or do we want to pioneer one that is a model Malaysia - developed, wealthy, technologically superior multi-ethnic multi-religious nation fair to all.

We, the Malaysian rakyat will be watching and we will be calling you to account throughout your term. Mark my word, we and I are only starting.

We wish you all the best and before I forget - congratulations.

Siti Kasim

A Malaysian

Note: No need to ask, just share if you agree.

Related:

Making Malaysia an innovation hub - Business News

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

Malaysia goes to UK court to challenge IPIC-1MDB consent award US$5.78bil (RM24.16bil)

Malaysia legally challenges a consent award granted in 2017 to Abu Dhabi's sovereign wealth fund, International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC), following a debt dispute with its state investment fund, 1Malaysia Development Bhd.

Under the consent award, Malaysia is obliged to pay US$5.78 billion to IPIC and the bond trustee over five years. The country has paid US$1.46 billion so far.

Below is the full media statement from Malaysia's attorney-general, Tommy Thomas, explaining why the country is filing the legal challenge.

https://youtu.be/q_hewkxdyp8

CHALLENGING THE IPIC ARBITRATION CONSENT AWARD

1. The Government of Malaysia will apply to the Courts of England for an order to set aside a Consent Award recorded on 9th May 2017 by an Arbitration Tribunal sitting in London. We are confident that we have a strong case. The Arbitration, conducted under the Rules of the London Court of International Arbitration, was between International Petroleum Investment Company (“IPIC”) and Aabar Investments PJS, as Claimants, and 1MDB and our Minister of Finance Inc., as Respondents.

2. Under the Consent Award, Malaysia is obliged to pay US$5.78 billion to IPIC and the Bond Trustee over a five year period. So far, US$1.46 billion has been paid, leaving a balance of US$4.32 billion, with the next interest payment of US$50 million due on 11th November 2018. Similar interest payments are payable periodically until April 2022. The final bullet payments, representing principal and interest of US$1.8 billion each, are due and payable in May and October 2022.

3. The basis of Malaysia’s legal challenge in the High Court in London is that the Consent Award was procured by fraud or in a manner contrary to public policy. The Court application relates to the knowledge of IPIC and Aabar of the serious allegations made by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) against former Prime Minister and Finance Minister Najib Razak, who was also the moving spirit and ultimate decision maker in 1MDB. Such knowledge on their part was acquired, “inter alia”, no later than the time when the DOJ’s Press Conference was held by the Attorney General of the United States, Loretta Lynch, in July 2016 when she announced the filing by by DOJ of several civil suits for the freezing of assets purchased by fraudsters from stolen proceeds, and popularly described as the greatest kleptocracy in modern history.

4. The grave, detailed allegations in those DOJ court documents were given tremendous global publicity, particularly in the political and business media. They had certainly entered the global public domain by July 2016. Najib Razak is identified as “MO1” in the DOJ pleadings. Any reasonable reader reading these court documents would immediately become aware of his central role in defrauding 1MDB to the benefit of himself, his stepson and Jho Low.

5. In such circumstances, Malaysia takes the position that IPIC and Aabar were aware of the fraud of Najib Razak. He was principally responsible for 1MDB and Minister of Finance Inc. consenting to the Award. Every system of law would hold that he could not possibly have acted in the best interests of his country and his company. Indeed, he did not. Fraud is an established ground to challenge the consent award for public policy reasons.

6. We are pleased to report that the application will be filed today in the High Court in London. Malaysia will claim that as a result of the fraud, we are relieved from any obligation to pay the balance of the US$4.32 billion to IPIC or Aabar under the Consent Award, and additionally have a right to recover the US$1.46 billion already paid.

Tommy Thomas Attorney General 30th October 2018

Related:

Tun M Hired The Right Man A.G. : Tommy Thomas To Recover RM24.16bil ...

1MDB and IPIC settle arbitration proceedings

https://youtu.be/ooyrdnnGtsc

Govt to appeal consent award - Nation | The Star Online

Malaysia to appeal for order to set aside RM24.16bil consent award in ...

AG says Malaysia doesn't have to pay US$4.32b to IPIC as 1MDB defrauded

Najib is guilty of incompetence, he says: board to be blamed for 1MDB debacle, not me, I don't know !

Ex-PM Najib, his treasury sec-gen Irwan & spy boss Hasanah charged with CBT RM6.63bil

Najib & his strong wife Rosmah with 17 charges in Court over money laundering

Najib's wife Rosmah says she is okay after 13 hours long grilled by anti corruption agency over 1MDB

Najib's US top lawyers, hiccup to choice of new AG as 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) probe widens

Tuesday, October 30, 2018

Behind crazy rich Singapore’s mask, a growing class divide

Inequality bites: In Singapore, households with accumulated wealth and connections over past generations, like the hit movie’s protagonist Nick Young’s family and friends, can pass on advantages to their offspring. —AP

Two Singapores: Poverty has always existed in the cosmopolitan city state, but the setting of the hit movie ‘Crazy Rich Asians’ has seen a widening income gap in the past few years. — Reuters

There is another side to the Lion City's fabled wealth: a widening gap between rich and poor that is forcing its citizens to question whether their home is really the land of opportunity they once thought.

IN the background, a luxury goods shop, a stooped elderly cleaner sweeping its storefront; on one side of the bridge sits expensive condominiums, bars and restaurants, on the other, rental flats housing Singapore’s poorest.

These scenes unfolded in a documentary titled Regardless of Class by Channel News Asia released on Oct 1, with a security guard revealing he felt as though he was not treated like a person. A cleaner said: “I know I’m invisible. I have to get used to this, and learn to stop caring.”

Poverty and inequality in the city state – the setting of the hit movie Crazy Rich Asians and where the per capita income is among the highest in the world, hitting US$55,000 (RM228,494) last year – has always existed.

But in the last year, Singaporeans have been confronted with discomfiting evidence of growing social stratification, shaking to the core a belief that meritocracy can smooth out unequal beginnings and lead to more equal outcomes.

Sociologist Tan Ern Ser from the National University of Singapore said class origin or background now had a greater influence on opportunity and social mobility, as the country faced slowing growth, job losses and obsolescence and an ageing population.

Singapore’s Gini coefficient, a measurement of income inequality from zero to one – with zero being most equal – has fluctuated above 0.40 since 1980 before adjusting for taxes and transfers. It was 0.417 last year. In the United Kingdom, it was 0.52 in 2015, the United States was at 0.506, and Hong Kong reached a record high of 0.539 in 2016.

Experts say inequality in itself is not worrying – sociologist Tan said it could even “be good for motivating people to want to do better”.

But in Singapore’s case, it has allowed households with accumulated wealth and connections over past generations to pass on advantages to their offspring, helping them to shine, while those without the same social capital and safety nets are forced to toil harder to do the same.

As Singapore University of Social Sciences economist and nominated Member of Parliament Walter Theseira put it: “If you can buy advantages for your child, such as tuition and enrichment, they are going to end up doing better in terms of meritocratic assessments.”

Donald Low, associate partner at Centennial Asia Advisors and the former associate dean at Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, said Singapore’s meritocratic and universal education system for the past 50 years led to a great deal of social mobility initially, but society would “settle” after a few decades.

“This is amplified by marriage sorting. That is the well-educated marrying one another and passing on their advantages to their children,” Low said.

A paper published last December by local think-tank Institute of Policy Studies, which demonstrated the sharpest social divisions were based on class, not race or religion, started the latest debate on the impact of inequality.

The report, co-authored by sociologist Tan, showed low interaction between students who attended elite and regular schools, and between Singaporeans living in private and public housing.

This was followed by a bestselling book by Nanyang Technological University sociologist Teo You Yenn titled This is What Inequality Looks Like, which told of the experiences of the low income group, and the systemic issues keeping them poor.

In early October, a six-minute clip on Facebook of the Regardless of Class documentary sparked feelings of discomfort, guilt and self-reflection among Singaporeans – possibly from realising “there may well be two Singapores in our midst”, said former nominated Member of Parliament Eugene Tan, a law don at Singapore Management University.

In it, six students from different education streams talked about their dreams and school experiences.

Some were aiming for an overseas degree and a minimum of A’s; others just wanted to pass their examinations.

When presenter Janil Puthucheary, a Cabinet member, mooted putting students of mixed abilities together in one classroom, a girl from the higher education stream said it was not viable, as “it might even increase the gap if these students feel like they can’t cope so they just give up completely”.

Puthucheary asked if the conversation was awkward.

One boy from the lower education stream said: “The way they speak and the way I speak (are) different, I feel like.

” Another student completed the sentence: “Like they are high class and we are not.”

Seetoh Huixia, a social worker for 13 years who is assistant director of AWWA Family Services, said she had seen this sort of low self esteem in the people she works with. “The sense of us versus them, the inferiority complex, that they’re not good enough,” she said.

The Straits Times opinion editor Chua Mui Hoong wrote: “It got me thinking; how did we become a society that looks down on people for the work they do or the grades they get? Are we all complicit in this? Can anything be done to turn our society inside out so that we are all less disdainful, more respectful, of one other?”

Academics felt the documentary was a good conversation starter, but urged Singaporeans to look at the underlying causes of this class divide.

Low said the documentary was problematic because “the root causes of economic inequality, an elitist education system and the government’s anti-welfarism are not interrogated, and that a complex issue (of structural inequality) is reduced to people not having enough empathy or being snobbish”.

“All this class consciousness and implicit bias is a function of our systems and policies,” he added.

Teo urged Singaporeans to look beyond attitudes and focus on the inequality that had led to the divide.

“We must not focus on perceptions – whether of ourselves or others – at the expense of real differences in daily struggles and well-being. The perceptions exist in response to those differences. Just as thinking about gravity differently would not stop a ball rolling downhill, pretending differences don’t exist isn’t going to magically make the differences disappear,” she said.

Sociologist Tan said structural changes through policies would be critical. “It can’t be just about telling people to be nice and respectful toward one another.”

Experts have in the last decade proposed ways in which Singapore can mitigate gnawing income inequality, ranging from policy changes in the areas of wages, taxes on wealth, social spending, housing and education.

The government has responded by increasing its social spending — supplementing the income of low-wage workers, introducing a universal health insurance scheme, increased personal income tax rates for high earners. It has also expanded its network of social service touchpoints and just in September tweaked the education system to reduce the emphasis on examinations.

But its social spending is still lower than Nordic countries and personal income taxes remain competitive to attract talent, leading developmental charity Oxfam and non-profit research group Development Finance International to this month call out the government for “harmful tax practices”, low public social spending, no equal pay or non-discrimination laws for women and lack of a minimum wage.

They ranked Singapore in the bottom 10 of 157 governments (at 149th place), ranked on how they were tackling the growing gap between rich and poor.

The government staunchly disagreed with the report, with Minister for Social and Family Development Desmond Lee saying Singapore’s outcomes in health care, education and housing were better than most countries despite spending less. The World Bank’s Human Capital Index, leaders noted, placed Singapore top for helping people realise their full potential.

One area experts agree on is that more tweaks are needed to the education system.

Singapore Management University’s Tan said apart from higher wealth taxes, “the education system needs to ensure not just equal opportunities but endeavour to provide for equal access to opportunities. There is a world of difference between the two. We may have focused on the former but not enough on the latter”.

Low said the education system needed to be “truly egalitarian”.

He suggested the state funds a national early childhood education system for children aged four onwards to remove segmentation from the get-go, to remove the national exam sat by 12-year-olds in Singapore and have schools run for the entire day so parents do not fill their children’s afternoons with tuition.

Theseira had a more novel solution: affirmative action that accords favours to the disadvantaged.

“It basically says that somebody from a disadvantaged background who achieves the same thing as somebody from a privileged background should be given much more credit because that is actually a much bigger achievement given the starting point,” he said.

“Are we willing to contemplate that? I don’t think we are at the moment but it’s a very obvious policy that addresses this problem with the definition of meritocracy.”

There must be a sense that a class divide is harmful for everyone, especially among those who have thrived under the current system, Eugene Tan said.

“A class divide could threaten Singapore’s existence because it would pit Singaporeans against Singaporeans. The divide would render Singapore to be rife with populism and to be consumed by sub-national identities. The class divide is also likely to reinforce existing cleavages based on race, religion and language.” — South China Morning Post by kok xing hui

Related posts:

Singapore budget 2018: hiking its sales tax, but not until 2021 or later

China leads the way as world's billionaires get even richer

The United States created 53 new billionaires in 2017, down from 87 five years ago China produced around two new billionaires a we..

Malaysia’s widening income gap between rich and the poor has only RM76 a month after expenses

Monday, October 29, 2018

Separate role for property managers

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysian Institute of Professional Property Managers and Facility Managers (MIPFM) is suggesting property and facility management to be treated independently from valuation.

President Sarkunan Subramaniam said the bias towards valuers had to stop if property management is to progress in today’s fast-changing digital and technology capabilities.

“I urge the Board of Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers to reconsider its decision and listen to the professional bodies.

“Giving a property management licence to one who has no or little experience in property management is dangerous,” he said.

Sarkunan was speaking at the MIPFM Conference 2018 on Bridging Property Management and Facility Management.

He said the current real estate degrees are skewed towards valuation subjects. Those who trained in predominantly valuation-based companies have little to no experience in managing properties.

Government valuers, having passed valuers test, are automatically handed the property management licence.

Sarkuanna, himself a valuer, is calling for objectivity. He said the diverse range of office buildings, mixed integrated projects and stratified residential projects must be matched with parallel top grade maintenance. Or their value may suffer.

“I will get a lot of opposition for my views but this is for the good of the real estate sector,” he said.

Sarkunan also highlighted the rife corruption in this field. “Corruption in procurement, kickbacks and side money is so prevalent that it has rusted performance, bringing many buildings to a grinding halt,” he said.

Sarkunan related the tale of two office blocks in Bangsar where seven out of its nine management committee (MC) members have resigned, the chairman among them.

Those who resigned were from Tower A, which the developer had earlier sold to private individual owners. Tower B belonged to the developer who had put the building under a real estate investment trust.

There was a cash surplus in the accounts. It seems that during the period when the developer was managing the property, the developer apportioned all surplus monies collected to the tower they retained. When the MC took over, it faced a defiant developer.

The Commissioner of Buildings has directed an extraordinary general meeting to be held.

In another case, a developer refused to pave the way for a joint management body (JMB) to be formed because it wanted to control the money collected, Sarkunan said. COB stepped in to resolve the issue.

Transparency International Malaysia president Datuk Seri Akhbar Satar said fraud and corruption is common due to the variety of goods and services involved.

Satar said that in 2010, Palm Court Condominium residents alleged that about RM144,000 was misappropriated. The committee agreed to take “appropriate measures” but refused an independent audit.

On Jan 31, 2017, members of a JMB were arrested by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission for allegedly misappropriating RM1.5mil.

Satar said cases like these highlighted the need for a culture of integrity and transparency.

- The Star by Thean Lee Cheng

Related posts: