src='https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-2513966551258002'/> Rightways Infolinks.com, 2618740 , RESELLER

Pages

Share This

Wednesday, September 5, 2018

Are Malays powering the nation ?

The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics messed up!

Old politics: If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist and religious-centric tactics and policies of the past, thinking this is what they need to do to keep the votes, it will just be the repeat of past mistakes of the Umno era.


Malays are powering the nation


WE refer to “The real Malay Dilemma” (The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics./Sunday Star, Aug 26) by Siti Kassim. Siti’s rambling diatribe against Malay Muslims can be reduced to two baseless, provocative, insulting and defamatory allegations, namely:

1. Assimilation of Islamic values in governance is responsible for Malay backwardness and inability to compete with other races; and

2. Malays, constituting 60% of the population, are unproductive and parasitical, depending on the industry and labour of the remaining 40%, Chinese and Indians.

On the assimilation of Islamic values in governance, Siti questions whether “a Malay society, more insular and superstitious in thought... can compete on a fair footing with the rest of the Malaysian non-Muslim population.” She writes that Malays have been given preferred places in universities, GLCs and the civil service for over 40 years, resulting in “uncompetitive universities, a significant pool of unemployable Malay graduates and with most being employed by the civil service... failed GLCs and ...corrupt administration...” She asks if more religion would help and continues, “This has been the unintended consequence of the assimilation of Islamic values in governance.”

What evidence has Siti got to link the above allegations of Malay backwardness to the so-called Islami­sation? Has she conducted any studies or consulted reports and research findings to come to that conclusion? Her claim is just hot air driven by prejudice towards Islam.

There has been no assimilation of Islamic values in governance as provided by the syariah. Having prayer rooms in government offices, teaching Islam to Muslim students in schools, broadcasting azan on TV or having an Islamic TV channel do not make governance Islamic. The Malaysian state is based on a constitution drafted by secular jurists and not on syariah. Most government leaders and top bureaucrats, products of Western education, are very much influenced by secular ideas and ignorant about Islam and its contributions to civilisations.

It is the separation of the moral from governance under a secular system that has facilitated the corruption, abuse of power, nepotism and cronyism of our government leaders and administrators. So, why blame Islam?

Siti condemns Malays as parasites. The Cambridge English Dictionary defines a parasite as a person who is lazy and lives by other people working and giving them money.

Siti writes that the majority of Malays are satisfied with their lives and carry on being religiously obsessed because they have been “able to live off the teats of the government in one way or another”.

She continues: “Thirty per cent to 40% of the population cannot sustain 100% of us. You need the remaining, at least majority, of that 60% (Malays) to be able to truly contribute economically and not be consumers of tax from the minorities. And religion is not an economic contributor. It is an unproductive consumer of epic proportions with no returns.”

Obviously, she has not heard of Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. To Siti, Malay businessmen, professionals, workers, farmers, fishermen, civil servants, police and soldiers do not contribute sales tax, income tax, road tax and other taxes payable under our laws. They are only “consumers of tax from minorities (Chinese and Indians)”. In other words, they are parasites. This is an insulting and provocative lie!

She claims that the transformation of Malaysia from an agricultural to an industrial nation with liberal economic policies was “powered by an industrious non-Malay population and the liberal segment of the Malay society”. She must have been blinded by prejudice not to see the role played by millions of Malay workers, engineers, surveyors, architects, policymakers and administrators in the industrial development of Malaysia.

Good public education and healthcare services are essential to becoming a developed industrial society. In 2016, Irina Bokova, then the Unesco director-general, praised Malaysia for “leading the way in South-East Asia in fostering inclusive and equitable education as the basis of sustainable green growth”.

And in his message on 2018 World Health Day, WHO regional representative Dr Lo Ying-Ru Jacqueline stated that Malaysia has been acknowledged globally for its high-performing health system based on a well-trained workforce, excellent infrastructure and quality service delivery.

Since independence, infant death has fallen by more than 90% to 6.7 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2016. Maternal mortality has also decreased by 89% between 1963 and 2013.

Who are these “well-trained workforce”? Mostly “unemployable Malay graduates” from “uncompetitive universities” and other institutions.

Who are the members of “the liberal segment of the Malay society” who powered the industrial transformation of Malaysia?

Are they those who are blond and advocating “separation of religion and government; religion must be a private matter and kept private; take out religious education from the public arena”? Or those who call for recognition of homosexual, gay and lesbian rights; criminalisation of polygamy and decriminalisation of adultery; and free sex?

Sorry Siti, if there was any contribution from this deviant group, it was very minimal as many of them look to green pastures outside Malaysia and migrate. The rapid transformation of the Malaysian economy has been powered by patriotic devout Malay Muslims and the minorities, Chinese and Indians.

It is not the Malays who face a dilemma in engaging the modern world because their religion teaches them to seek success in this world and in the hereafter (Quran 2:201). It is Siti who faces a serious dilemma on whether to decolonise her thinking and become a true Malay Muslim or remain a Western secular clone.

By MOHD AZMI ABDUL HAMID President Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization

Endorsed by:

Syekh Ahmad Awang, chairman, International Union of Muslim Scholars Malaysia
Syekh Abdul Ghani Samsudin, chairman, Secretariat for the Assembly of Ulama of Asia
Assoc Prof Dr Roslan Mohd Nor, secretary-general, Ulama Association of Malaysia
Datin Ustazah Aminah Zakaria, chairperson, Persatuan Persaudaraan Muslimah Malaysia
Hj Baharudin Masrom, secretary, Kongres Ummah
Dr Mohamad Ali Hassan, committee member of SHURA
Prof Dr Rahmatullah Khan, committee of MaSSa
Dr Abdul Rahman Ahmad, committee of SUARA
Datuk Abdullah Mad Din, former director of Islamic Division, Ministry of Education
Datuk Hadzir Md Zain, former deputy director-general, Implementation Coordination Unit, JPM

Elaborating the dilemma in today’s terms


I REFER to the comments from the Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization in response to my latest column “The real Malay Dilemma” (The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics/Sunday Star, Aug 26).

Mine was an opinion piece. It seems the writer of the letter from the Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization and the characters endorsing it cannot differentiate between journalism and opinion. Having said that, whatever I say speak for itself.

Our former prime ministers Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein and Tun Hussein Onn were all secularists. Our present Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s “Malay Dilemma” and what he continues to say today about how we Malays practise Islam still stands. I just elaborated the dilemma in today’s terms.

Is our Malay society not more insular or more superstitious than in the 80s? Ask yourselves. I won’t go into the nonsense and tahyul being preached on Malay sites that are popular today; let’s just look at the public universities that are managed and led by Malays. Did we use to have faculties in universities producing anti-hysteria kits or paranormal detection equipment or holding seminars on hell or how to interact with non-Muslims?

There’s a chief syariah judge proposing to have standard operating procedures for cases with “mystical elements”.

What is going on? Even in the 70s or 80s, such nonsense was unheard of among Malays leading our institutions.

Just reading the rants equating liberalism with perverts and everything to do with sex practically tells one of their mindset. They cannot escape from their dogmatic conservative religious notion of what makes a person a liberal.

They are intent on demonising liberalism so they can impose devoutness as they see it unto society.

Where were all these defenders of Islam and the Malays when our leaders were robbing the nation blind? Did we hear a peep from them?

I speak of leadership to change our society. I am so glad, in spite of the recalcitrant conservatives, that the Sultan of Selangor took the mantle of leadership and pronounced that the legal age of marriage be raised to 18 for Muslims. That is liberalism.

Only liberals have been calling for this to protect the childhood of our girls and to ensure they have the opportunity for education and a full life.

I am a Malay and a Muslim. I will speak up for the good of our society without fear or favour or intimidation. We need to face our demons and change to progress. Someone needs to tell the inconvenient truths.

By SITI KASSIM

National unity – an inconvenient truth?

Dear new government, if you continue to divide us, you will rue the day.



TWO events in recent days reminded me what is truly important to this nation.

The first was the National Day celebration on Friday in Putrajaya.

Although the euphoria over GE14 has waned, there was still enough to make me want to be part of the National Day celebration even if via my telly. So I did something I hadn’t done in years: got up early just to watch the parade.

The cameras at Dataran Putrajaya showed thousands of Malaysians who were more excited than me and had taken the trouble to line the thoroughfare to enjoy the spectacle and catch glimpses of members of the new Cabinet.

Indeed, it was deja vu to see Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as Prime Minister and Tun Dr Siti Hasmah Mohd Ali sitting with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Muhammad V on the VIP grandstand.

It was also a touch surreal to see several faces we once thought impossible to see in such a setting – Cabinet members such as Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, Gobind Singh Deo, Lim Guan Eng, Mohamed Sabu, M. Kulasegaran and Teresa Kok.

On the pavement, the opening and closing acts by flag-waving young Malaysians dancing in unison warmed the cockles of my heart.

I appreciated the effort to ensure all races were brought together to perform in a show of unity, emphasising the slogan: Sayangi Malaysiaku.

Yes, I do love my Malaysia, as do millions of others who were born and bred in this gracious, blessed land. That birthright is what unites us all.

And that is the key lesson to the well-being of our nation – unity.

Which leads me to the second event: the GE14-inspired movie, Rise: Ini Kalilah.

I caught it on Monday night and relived somewhat that incredible time when Malaysian history was made.

While not perfectly told and it is a story that only Malaysians can fully understand and appreciate, the movie has enough to keep its audience interested and it ultimately delivers the feel-good factor as it too reinforces the power of unity; that is, what can be achieved when enough citizens unite for a common cause.

Yet that power was never properly developed because it was politically inexpedient.

For its own political survival, especially after the 2008 GE, the Barisan Nasional government preferred to use race and religion to divide and rule the nation. That ultimately wreaked havoc on our interracial ties, as stated in local human rights group Pusat KOMAS’ Malaysia Racial Discrimination Report released in March this year.

National unity, as far can I can remember, was trotted out as important only after something bad had happened.

It took the terrible May 13, 1969, racial riots for the government to set up the National Unity Council.

The council was disbanded in 1971 and replaced by the National Unity Advisory Council, whose secretariats were the Department of National Unity and the National Muhibbah Office.

The two agencies were merged to form the National Unity Ministry in 1972. But it only lasted till 1974, when it was replaced by the National Unity Board.

The next time national unity took the spotlight was after GE13. The results showed the need to do something to reduce racial polarisation and to build a “united Malaysian nation”. That led to the formation of the National Unity Consultative Council in September 2013.

The NUCC held a series of meetings with agencies and NGOs to formulate a National Unity Blueprint. In 2014, it proposed three so-called Harmony Bills to replace the Sedition Act.

But the Act remained and the Bills became mired in controversy since they would make it mandatory for the government and all persons to promote equality and prohibit discrimination based on religion, race, birthplace, gender and disability. That was somehow anathema to the Malay agenda and the Bills went on the backburner.

It would appear the previous government saw the need for better national unity as an inconvenient truth and continued to use it for “display purposes only.”

So whither national unity in New Malaysia?

Political scientist Chandra Muzaffar, in criticising Pakatan for leaving it out in its election manifesto, wants the new government to make its stand known and emphasise the Rukunegara to show “it is serious and sincere about one of Malaysia’s foremost challenges but would have also demonstrated that it is crystal-clear about the direction we should take as a people.”

But others take a different view. Prolific online commentator T.K. Chua says: “What is the point of declaring unity as our goal when our policies, programmes and actions are doing just the opposite?”

He adds: “It is time to stop the endless declarations and slogans typical of a third world country. We can’t talk ourselves to national unity. National unity is the product of years of inclusive policies, programmes and actions.”

And that is what he wants to see in the Pakatan government – action, or in today’s jargon, walk the walk.

I take both views to be important: talk the talk and walk the walk. In our fractured nation, we sorely need to hear Pakatan leaders openly and loudly embrace national unity as a must-do KPI and then see them implement it in all their policies and actions for the long haul. Only then can we hold them to their words and judge them by their actions.

For now, Pakatan still seems dazed by its own victory and further stunned to find government machinery that Dr Mahathir says is broken.

If that is the case, Pakatan has the chance to rebuild the machinery that was abused by its predecessors and set it right. No more “divide and rule” but “one for all and all for one”!

By June H L Wong


Related posts:


The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics messed up!

Old politics: If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist and religious-centric tactics and policies of the past, thinking this is what they need to do to keep the votes, it will just be the repeat of past mistakes of the Umno era.

New Malaysia should push for meritocracy

The Meritocracy Paradox

Malaysia sacrifices talent to keep one race on top, said Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore


Tuesday, September 4, 2018

Rocky times ahead for China FDI in Malaysia

Li: ‘Malaysia must remember that by targeting Chinese investors in an unreasonable way, this will scare away not only FDI from China, but also from other countries.’ - credit: Malaysia Today

Great wall of controversy: Dr Mahathir’s criticism of Alliance Steel’s barricade for its RM6bil integrated steel complex has upset some Chinese investors.

A series of attacks on China-funded projects in Malaysia by the Prime Minister is causing anxiety not only to Chinese nationals but also locals.


INVESTMENTS and mega contracts linked to China will have to brace for rocky times ahead if Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad continues unchecked with his incessant tirade against Chinese endeavours in Malaysia.

The golden era for Chinese investments, which possibly peaked during the rule of former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, seems to have come to an unceremonious end.

The future of foreign direct investment (FDI) from China is now seen as unpredictable – at least for the next 3-5 years – under the new government of Dr Mahathir, according to Datuk Keith Li, president of China Entrepreneurs Association in Malaysia.

Li: ‘Malaysia must remember that by targeting Chinese investors in an unreasonable way, this will scare away not only FDI from China, but also from other countries.

“The series of comments made on Chinese investments by the PM have affected the confidence of Chinese investors. Those who originally wanted to come are adopting a wait-and-see attitude, while those already in are careful about their expansion plans,” says Li in an interview with Sunday Star.

The outspoken leader of Chinese firms notes that businessmen from the mainland are “worried”, although some comments of the Prime Minister were later “clarified” by other Cabinet Ministers or the PM’s Office.

“Malaysia must remember that by targeting Chinese investors in an unreasonable way, this will scare away not only FDI from China, but also from other countries as well,” adds Li.

Since his five-day official visit to China that ended on Aug 21, the 93-year-old Malaysian leader has caused anxiety to all by making shocking announcements.

While summing up his China trip on Aug 21, he declared he would cancel the RM55bil East Coast Rail Link (ECRL) and two gas pipelines being built by Chinese firms.

As the ECRL is of strategic importance to China’s Belt and Road Initiative – the policy which Dr Mahathir has repeatedly voiced his support for, Beijing would expect a renegotiation of the contract terms rather than an outright cancellation.

Dr Mahathir had reasoned that with national debt of over RM1 trillion, Malaysia could not afford these projects. In addition, these contracts are tainted with unfair terms and smacked of high corruption.


Although the Prime Minister said Chinese leaders understood Malaysia’s situation, reactions of Chinese nationals on social media were unforgiving with many suspecting Dr Mahathir “has other motives”.

Many see Dr Mahathir as attempting to raise Malaysia’s bargaining power in the negotiation for compensation for the cancelled projects. China, according to social media talk, is asking for RMB50bil as compensation.

On social media, there are also suggestions that Dr Mahathir is aiming at his predecessor as most China-linked projects were launched during the rule of Najib.

During the rule of Najib, Malaysia-China relations were intimate.

This has resulted in the influx of major construction and property companies from the mainland, followed by banks and industries.

But on May 9, Dr Mahathir’s Pakatan Harapan coalition toppled the Barisan Nasional government of Najib after the most bitterly fought general election in local history.

The second-time premier has put the blame on Najib for the massive 1MDB financial scandal, which Najib has denied, and mismanagement of the country’s finance.

And while the Chinese nationals are all riled up by the cancellation of ECRL, Dr Mahathir came up with an ill-advised statement.

Last week he ordered a wall surrounding Alliance Steel, which is investing US$1.4bil (RM6bil) for a massive steel complex, to be demolished. This was seen as unreasonably targeting a genuine FDI.

Although the foreign ministry later clarified that the leader had mistaken the wall to be built around the Malaysia-China Kuantan Industrial Park (MCKIP), the anger of Chinese nationals lingers on.

The industrial park is a G-to-G project to jointly promote bilateral investments. There is an even bigger sister industrial park in China that houses many Malaysian firms. All these were built during Najib’s reign.

Dr Mahathir’s statement has also caught the attention of China’s Global Times, the mouthpiece of the Communist Party of China.

In an editorial on Aug 28, the news portal warned: “Many words of Kuala Lumpur can spread to China via the Internet, causing different reactions. How the Chinese public sees China-Malaysia cooperation is by no means inconsequential to Malaysia’s interests.”

It noted “while Dr Mahathir advocates pursuing a policy of expanding friendly cooperation with China ... but when it comes to specific China-funded projects, his remarks gave rise to confusion. Like this time, it is startling to equate the controversy surrounding a factory wall with state sovereignty.”

Global Times added: “When such remarks are heard by Chinese people, the latter find it piercing. They will definitely make Chinese investors worry about Malaysian public opinion and whether such an atmosphere will affect investment in the country.”

In fact, it would be unwise for the government to disrupt MCKIP. Co-owned by Chinese, IJM Corporation and Pahang government, this industrial park has lured in Chinese FDI of over RM20bil.

It is an important economic driver in the East Coast and has aimed to create 19,000 jobs by 2020.

While the “wall” statement might be seen as a minor mistake, Dr Mahathir’s flawed announcement last Monday that foreigners would be barred from buying residential units in the US$100bil (RM410bil) Forest City stirred another uproar.

On Aug 27, Reuters quoted Dr Mahathir as saying: “That city that is going to be built cannot be sold to foreigners. Our objection is because it was built for foreigners, not built for Malaysians. Most Malaysians are unable to buy those flats.”

Currently being developed by Country Garden Holdings of China, this 20-year long project, built on reclaimed land in Johor Bahru, aims to house 700,000 people. As about 70% of the house buyers are Chinese, some locals fear this could turn into a China town.

Unlike Alliance Steel that has stayed silent, Country Garden fought back by seeking clarifications from the PM’s Office.

In a statement, the major Chinese developer said all its property transactions had complied with Malaysian laws.

Citing Section 433B of the National Land Code, it added a foreign citizen or a foreign company may acquire land in Malaysia subject to the prior approval of the State Authority.

In addition, it said Dr Mahathir’s comment did not correspond with the content of the meeting he had with Country Garden founder and chairman Yeung Kwok Keung on Aug 16.

During the meeting, Dr Mahathir said he welcomed foreign investments which could create job opportunities, promote technology transfer and innovations.

In fact, this forest city project – along with ECRL – were the main targets of attack by Dr Mahathir before the May 9 election.

Opposition to these projects had helped drive Dr Mahathir’s election campaign, during which he said was evidence of Najib selling Malaysia’s sovereignty to China.

These projects, together with major construction contracts won by Chinese and the inflow of industrial investments, place the total value of Chinese deals at more than RM600bil in Malaysia.

But few would expect Dr Mahathir to use his powerful position to resume his attacks on China-linked projects so soon after his so-called “fruitful visit” to Beijing.

During his official visit to Beijing, the Malaysian leader was accorded the highest honour by China, due mainly to respect for “China’s old friend” and strong Malaysia-China relations built since 1975.

Dr Mahathir was chauffeured in Hongqi L5 limousine, reserved for the most honourable leaders, and greeted in an official welcome ceremony by Premier Li Keqiang. He was also guest of honour at a banquet at Diaoyutai State Guesthouse hosted by President Xi Jinping.

But beneath these glamorous receptions, there were reservations exuded by the Chinese for this leader whose premiership is scheduled to end in two years.

There were no exciting business deals signed in Beijing. There was absence of high diplomatic rhetoric that “Malaysia-China ties have been elevated to another historic high”, oft-repeated during Najib’s past visits.

Many even notice that Premier Li and Dr Mahathir had a cool handshake after their short joint press conference in Beijing.

And although China promised to buy Malaysian palm oil, the statement was qualified with “price sensitivity”, which means it will not buy above market price.

In addition, there was no mention of “buying palm oil without upper limit”, which was promised to Najib last year.

If Dr Mahathir’s original intention was to target Forest City and its owners, his move has certainly backfired. The country will have to pay a price for his off-the-cuff statement.

The “new policy” will have serious ramifications as it would hit the value of the properties not only in Forest City but also in other China-linked and non-Chinese projects.

Country Garden’s Danga Bay project will also be hit. It now faces a more daunting task of selling the balance of about 2,000 units in Danga Bay, according to a Starbiz report.

Other Chinese developers like R&F Princess Cove and Greenland Group will be affected.

VPC Alliance Malaysia managing director James Wong told Starbiz there may be legal suits against the government.

“That may force Country Garden to scale down because it has invested a lot with its industrial building systems factory and an international school, among other investments. It will impact Country Garden and Malaysia’s property sector negatively,” Wong said.

“Foreign buyers and other foreign companies will shy away,” Wong added.

The change in government and the insensitive comments on China-funded projects have turned Malaysia into a high-risk investment destination for the Chinese, according to Li.

“We don’t know which China projects will be targeted next. Looking back, it’s a blessing in disguise that we were pushed out of the RM200bil Bandar Malaysia project. It is also lucky that Chinese money has not gone into the RM30bil Melaka Gateway project,” says Li, who owns a travel agency in Malaysia.

“In the immediate future, more tourists from China are likely to shy away from Malaysia.

“Malaysia may not hit the target of having three million visits from China this year,” Li adds.

Credit: Ho Wah Foon The Star

Related posts:

Old politics: If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist and religious-centric tactics and policies of the past, thinking this i...

Malaysia sacrifices talent to keep one race on top, said Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore


Malaysia Bans Foreigners From Project https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2018-08-28/malaysia-bans-foreigners-from-project-video ..

Saturday, September 1, 2018

SST - for better or worse ?

What is Sales & Service Tax (SST) in Malaysia? - SST Malaysia

Today, the Sales and Service Tax (SST) makes a comeback on our tax radar screen to replace the three years and two months old Goods and Services Tax (GST), which was implemented on April 1, 2015.

The abolition of the GST and replaced with SST is an election promise of the Pakatan Harapan manifesto.

It has been claimed that the GST is a regressive broad-based consumption tax that has burdened the low- and middle-income households amid the rising cost of living. The multi-stage tax levied on supply chains also caused cascading cost and price effects on goods and services. That said, the Finance Minister has acknowledged that the GST is an efficient and transparent tax.

Following the implementation of the SST, the Government will come to terms that the budget spending will have to be rationalised and realigned with the lower revenue collection from the SST to keep the lower budget deficit target on track.

The expected revenue collection from SST is RM21bil compared to an average of RM42.7bil per year in 2016-17 from GST.

During the period 2010-2014, the revenue collection from the SST, averaging RM14.8bil per year (the largest amount collected on record was RM17.2bil in 2014), of which 64% was contributed by the sales tax rate of 10% while the balance 36% from the service tax of 6%.

Faced with the revenue shortfall, the Government expects cost-savings, plugging of leakages, weeding out of corruption as well as the containment of the costs of projects would help to balance the financing gap between revenue and spending.

The sales tax rate (0%, 10% and 5% as well as a specific rate for petroleum) and service tax of 6% is imposed on consumers who use certain prescribed services. The taxable threshold for SST is set at annual revenue of RM500,000, the same threshold as GST, with the exception for eateries and restaurants at RM1.5mil.

As SST is levied only at a single stage of the supply chain, that is at the manufacturers or importers level and NOT at wholesalers, retailers and final consumers, it has cut off the number of registered tax persons and establishments from 476,023 companies under GST as of 15 July to an estimated 100,405 under SST.

The smaller number of registered establishments means no more compliance cost to about 85% of traders.

The distributive traders (wholesalers and retailers) will be hassle-free from cash flow problems, as they are no longer required to submit GST output tax while waiting to claim back the GST input tax. During GST, many traders imputed refunds into their pricing because of the delay in GST refunds. This was partly blamed for the cascading cost pass-through and price increases onto consumers.

For SST, 38% of the goods and services in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) basket are taxable compared to 60% under the GST.

It is estimated that up to RM70bil will be freed up to allow consumers to spend more.

Expanded scope

The proposed service tax regime has a narrower base (43.5% of services is taxable) compared to the GST (64.8% of services is taxable).

Medical insurance for individuals, service charges from hotel, clubs and restaurants as well as household’s electricity usage between 300kWh and 600kWh are not taxable. However, the scope of the new SST has been expanded compared to the previous SST. Among them are gaming, domestic flights (excluding rural air services), IT services, insurance and takaful for individuals, more telecommunication services and preparation of food and beverage services as well as electricity supply (household usage above 600kWh).

For hospitality services, the proposed service tax lowered the registration threshold of general restaurants (not attached with hotel) from an annual revenue of RM3mil under old service tax regime to RM1.5mil, resulting in expanded coverage of more restaurants.

Private hospital services will be excluded under the new SST regime.

How does SST affect consumers?

Technically speaking, the revenue shortfall of RM23bil between SST and GST is a form of “income transfer” from the Government to households and businesses. This is equivalent to tax cuts to support consumer spending.

Will it lead to higher consumer prices?

The contentious issue is will the SST burden households more than that of the GST? It must be noted that the cost of living not only encompasses prices paid for goods and services but also housing, transportation, medical and other living expenses.

The degree of sales tax impact would depend on the cost and margin (mark-up) of businesses along the supply chain before reaching end-consumers.

The coverage and scope of tax imposed also matter.

As the price paid by consumers is embedded in the selling price, this gives rise to psychology effect that sales tax is somewhat better off than GST.

The good news to consumers is that 38% of the goods and services in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) basket are taxable compared to the 60% under the GST.

Technically speaking, monthly headline inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index, is likely to show a flat growth or even declines in the months ahead.

It must be noted that consumers should compare prices before GST versus the three-month tax holiday (June-August).

Generally, consumers perceived that prices should either come down or remained unchanged as the sales tax is levied on manufacturers.

On average, some items (electrical appliances and big ticket items such as cars) would be costlier when compared to GST and some may come down (new items exempted from SST).

Nevertheless, we caution that consumers may experience some price increases, as prices generally did not come as much following the removal of GST in June.

There are concerns that prices may still go up in September when the new SST kicks in as irresponsible traders may take advantage to increase prices further.

Household consumption, which got a big boost during the three-month tax holiday in June-August, could see some normalisation in spending.

The smooth implementation of the new SST, accompanied by strict enforcement of price checks and the curbing of profiteering, especially for essentials goods and services consumed by B40 income households, are crucial to keep the level of general prices stable.

Strong consumer activism with the support of The Federation of Malaysian Consumers Association and the Consumers Association Penang as well as the media must work together to help in price surveillance and protect consumers’ interest.

Credit to Lee Heng Guie - comment

Related post:

GST vs SST. Which is better?

 

Friday, August 31, 2018

New Malaysia should push for meritocracy

The Meritocracy Paradox

Pakatan Harapan’s unexpected win in the recent 14th General Elections sent a signal that it is time for the country to move towards focusing on being more performance oriented and making decisions on the basis of meritocracy for the long-term good of its citizens.

Interview with Tan Sri G.Gnanalingam

Westports Holdings Bhd’s chairman Tan Sri G. Gnanalingam says this is the basis of how the company has been operating all this and notes that it is paying off today.

“Westports has always prided itself on being a performance-oriented organisation, being innovative and treating our employees as family members,” he says.

Gnanalingam, who has been the face of Westports for more than 20 years, says this idea can be extended to how the country can be governed as well.


He says that in the company, everyone is treated equally irrespective of race or gender and this has worked tremendously well.

He notes that this also comes with some form of a safety net for those who can’t perform as well as their counterparts.

“The system should be such that we reward success but provide some safety needs for the unfortunate few who didn’t make it, but the safety net is not so big that it promotes complacency.

“There will always be some members of the community who do not do as well as others. This is where we need to lend a hand to support them, regardless of race or gender,” Gnanalingam adds.

This is important because innovation is best built on meritocracy and is a needed ingredient for the country to excel in the new economy of the Internet.

“Innovation is needed as the world prog­resses forward; we cannot move backward. Today, we have a computer in our pocket called the smartphone, which does all kinds of things.

“Malaysia needs to forge ahead as the future is increasingly influenced by information technology, artificial intelligence and Industry 4.0,” Gnanalingam says.

“As for the new Malaysia, I believe that transparency, good governance and people first should be values that are celebrated,” he adds.

Gnanalingam, who is the founder of Westports, also tells of the company’s humble roots, noting that it has grown by leaps and bounds and is now listed on Bursa Malaysia.

“The year 1994 was when we started building Westports. In fact, we were the first private company to build a port after the British left in 1957.

“Prior to the birth of Westports, Port Klang was a port that had less than one million container volume. Malaysia transshipped everything from Penang, Kuantan, Johor and even East Malaysia to Singapore,” he says.

He also highlighted that while the company is primarily a family-owned firm and is now helmed by his son Datuk Ruben Emir Gnanalingam, who is Westports’ group managing director, the family still takes heed of the advice of professional managers.

“Leading Westports is a bit like managing a football team. In order to win, we must assemble the best players, train very hard, formulate specific strategies and out-do our opponents. And we must continuously improve our skills and knowledge of the game. There will always be room for innovation and a better way to do things,” Gnanalingam says.

Westports has grown steadily since its inception in the year 1994.

Today, the company is a RM12.8bil company in market capitalisation on the Bursa Malaysia Main Board.

Recalling the the company’s early days, Gnanalingam says Westports had to focus on what was important: its productivity.

“I always tell our people to focus on raising productivity, being innovative and being cost-effective. Westports is ranked among the top five in the world in terms of productivity.

“Westports has also risen from 27th place to 12th place in the world port traffic league rankings.

“Once Westports was born, we focused on producing the best service for our customers, the shipping lines. To do that, we improved our productivity.

“Our crane operators are well trained. Their performance is world class as they are able to do 35 or more containermoves per hour,” he says.

The company’s terminal tractor operators and stowage clerks have also been upskilled to create a fast turnaround time for the cargo from the container yard to the vessel and vice versa.

While the going seems smooth now, Gnanalingam notes that it was not always smooth sailing for Westports, as it had to go through several financial crises and political uncertainty on the global front, where it threatened or slowed down shipping demand.

However, hHe notes that it has grown its market share steadily and incrementally over the past 20 years.

Today, he notes that Westports captures 16% of the container volume moving through the Straits of Malacca and supports 38% of all container volume in Malaysia.

“And today, we are proud to be one of only three mega-transhipment hubs in the entire Asean region,” he says.

Costs to ship and out of Malaysia have also fallen tremendously and Gnanalingam notes that both exporters and importers pay some 90% lower in freight charges today.

“Before 2005, it cost about US$800 (RM3,280) to freight a container from Port Klang to Busan in Korea. Today, the cost is about US$35 (RM143) only.

“To cite another example, before 2005, it cost about US$500 (RM2,050) to freight a container from Port Klang to Kaoshiung in China. Today, the cost is about US$110 (RM450), which is almost 80% lower,” he says.

Credit to : Daniel Khoo The Star

Related:

Letters to CIA, Spies and the millions - Malaysian External Investigation Organisation (MEIO)' under probe

Bundles of money: Azam (second from left) and his officers showing the seized money during the press conference in Putrajaya.

https://youtu.be/89gTYnelAmA
> https://youtu.be/q4bT80wh29Y
https://youtu.be/7xVhzykRBbQ
https://youtu.be/BhdL4ocvsoM
https://youtu.be/u7Gc5Dossrs


PUTRAJAYA: The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is widening its investigation into the alleged misappropriation of US$12mil (RM49.3mil) worth of government funds involving a little-known spy agency.

It has already made nine arrests as it looks into unravelling the web of intrigue involving Datuk Hasanah Abdul Hamid, the former director-general of the Malaysian External Investigation Organisation (MEIO).

The anti-graft investigators are probing if the senior intelligence officers had “help” to bring in US$12mil – believed to be from a Middle East source – into the country.

The cash was believed to have been brought in via air, possibly through Kuala Lumpur Inter­national Airport.

Highly placed sources in the anti-graft body said this angle needed to be looked into as it would be difficult to carry such a staggering amount of money undetected.

Malaysian laws require those bringing in US$10,000 and above into the country to have it declared at the point of entry.

“Obviously, there was a breach of security because the cash was brought in without raising alarms of the authorities at the airport.

“We want to investigate if those who brought in the money had some assistance so that they need not declare it,” a source told The Star.

Following the remand of officers from the MEIO as well as its former chief Datuk Hasanah Abdul Hamid, investigators found out that the money was brought into the country three months ago in May.

“The timing suggests that the cash was for the general election. But the other question is why the officers had their hands on the money,” said the same source.

Investigators are also not discounting the possibility that the funds could be from 1Ma­­lay­sia Development Bhd (1MDB).

“We will have to probe deeper before coming to a conclusion,” the source added.

Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission deputy chief commissioner (operations) Datuk Seri Azam Baki said there was a possibility that the money was brought into the country through the airport.

“Whatever the entry point is, we would like to know how it passed through security. Obviously that would be one angle of investigation,” he said.

Azam said his officers could still manage the investigation but if the need arises, it would seek assistance from other authorities.

Hasanah and seven other former MEIO officers were arrested earlier this week, and a ninth arrest was made on Wednesday night involving a 47-year-old businessman.

The businessman, who has a “Datuk” title and is also a permanent resident of Britain, was ­arrested in Kota Baru at 11pm on Wednesday.

The MACC has so far recovered US$6.3mil (RM25.9mil) of the US$12mil that was brought into the country about three months ago, as well as RM900,000 in ringgit.

The bulk of the US currency, about US$4.07mil (RM16.7mil), was seized from the businessman.

“We have raided several locations, including a rented condominium in Cyberjaya and the Prime Minister’s Department, where we seized the cash along with other valuable items including a luxury watch.

“Our swoop on the suspects began on Monday and we are not ruling out the possibility of making more arrests in the future,” Azam told a press conference at the MACC headquarters earlier yesterday.

The MACC has already called ­several witnesses, including three foreigners, and at least 20 more witnesses will be tracked down and called to assist with the investigation, he said.

MEIO was listed as the “research division” of the Prime Minister’s Department under the previous Barisan Nasional administration.

“Initial investigations revealed that the funds were brought into the country about three months ago,” said Azam.

“We are investigating whether this was before or after the last ­general election (on May 9).

“We are also investigating the source of the funds and which country the money came from.”

And despite its widening scope, the MACC is hoping to wrap up its investigation within two months as long as it does not involve a complicated money trail or require any foreign assistance, he added.

Hasanah was arrested at the MACC headquarters at 4.15pm on Tuesday after she arrived to give a statement to the anti-graft body.

She had previously courted controversy after writing a letter to the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director Gina Haspel, appealing to the United States to support former premier Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s administration.

She and the seven officers are also being investigated under Section 23 of the MACC Act 2009 for abuse of power.

Related

RM26mil in US currency seized in spy agency graft probe RM26mil in US currency seized in spy agency graft probe


Thursday, August 30, 2018

Foreigners Not Welcome as Malaysia Joins Property Clampdown

Malaysia Bans Foreigners From Project

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2018-08-28/malaysia-bans-foreigners-from-project-video

https://youtu.be/Xqnq7QFJpiI

https://youtu.be/8FJw3z0J340

  • Mahathir’s planned crackdown taps into nationalist rhetoric
  • Housing affordability has driven restrictions around the world

Hanging a ‘foreigners not welcome’ sign on a giant real estate development, Malaysia’s prime minister this week appeared to add to housing curbs around the world fueled by soaring home prices and populist politics.

Describing the Chinese-backed $100 billion Forest City as “built for foreigners” and beyond the reach of ordinary Malaysians, Mahathir Mohamad tapped into the nationalist rhetoric that helped secure him an election victory -- and global angst over housing affordability. Around the world, post-financial crisis property booms driven by low interest rates have left locals struggling to buy homes.

“The tension around foreign investment is always going to be much more acute when affordability is getting worse,” said Brendan Coates, a researcher in Melbourne at the Grattan Institute think tank. When locals get “priced out of the market,” foreign buyers may be blamed even when their effect is small, he said, commenting on the global picture.

Hanging a ‘foreigners not welcome’ sign on a giant real estate development, Malaysia’s prime minister this week appeared to add to housing curbs around the world fueled by soaring home prices and populist politics.

Describing the Chinese-backed $100 billion Forest City as “built for foreigners” and beyond the reach of ordinary Malaysians, Mahathir Mohamad tapped into the nationalist rhetoric that helped secure him an election victory -- and global angst over housing affordability. Around the world, post-financial crisis property booms driven by low interest rates have left locals struggling to buy homes.

“The tension around foreign investment is always going to be much more acute when affordability is getting worse,” said Brendan Coates, a researcher in Melbourne at the Grattan Institute think tank. When locals get “priced out of the market,” foreign buyers may be blamed even when their effect is small, he said, commenting on the global picture.

A wave of restrictions or taxes on foreign purchases already stretches from Sydney to Hong Kong to Vancouver. Measures targeting foreign home buyers have included stamp duties, restrictions on property pre-sales to non-residents and limits on the types of homes that can be purchased.

‘New Colonialism’

New Zealand is banning foreigners from buying existing residential properties after Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern campaigned in last year’s election on pledges including affordable housing. Canada and Australia have rolled out one restriction after another, and Singapore just ramped up a tax on overseas buyers. Denmark and Switzerland have restrictions, a Grattan report shows.

The 93-year-old Mahathir’s comments came at a late stage of the game. Globally, property shows signs of cooling from the post-crisis boom. His concern seems to be sparked not by property market overheating but, rather, foreign investments that don’t benefit Malaysia and what he terms the risk of “a new version of colonialism.”

Late Tuesday, a statement from Mahathir’s office said the nation welcomes all tourists, including from China, as well as foreign direct investment that “contributes to the transfer of technology, provides employment for locals and the setting up of industries.” It didn’t refer to Forest City.


“Mahathir has never liked the idea of Forest City or the idea of many foreigners buying up property in Malaysia,” said Ryan Khoo, co-founder of Alpha Marketing Pte Ltd., a Singapore-based real estate consultancy.

Foreigners will be blocked from buying units at the project, on artificial islands in Johor, and refused visas to live there, Mahathir said at a press briefing on Monday. That left analysts and local officials parsing his words to guess at how bans might work. The Chinese developer, Country Garden Holdings Co., said his comments clashed with past assurances. The project’s targeted buyers have included people in mainland China.

With a wall of Chinese money blamed for pushing up prices around the world, local lawmakers, media and the public can struggle to disentangle xenophobia from legitimate efforts to constrain inflows of capital. In Australia, “populist reporting” exaggerated the role of Chinese investors, according to Hans Hendrischke, a professor of Chinese business and management at the University of Sydney.

Read more on global property: 

Chinese buyers had the “bad luck” of becoming overly visible in markets around the globe, said Carrie Law, chief executive officer of Juwai.com, a Chinese international property website.

Foreign buyers get blamed for soaring home costs even when the evidence is minimal. More than 60 percent of Sydney residents cite foreign investment for price increases, according to a survey from University of Sydney academic Dallas Rogers. That’s despite research by Australia’s Treasury showing only a marginal impact. Likewise, data suggest foreign buyers play only a small role in New Zealand’s housing market.

(Updates with Mahathir statement in seventh paragraph, chart on global restrictions.)

No Chinese belt, road or bedrooms for Malaysia

Construction works going on normally at the mammoth Forest City project in Gelang Patah in Johor

PERPLEXED, wounded, indignant or still optimistic. The Chinese developer Country Garden Holdings Co can put any spin it wants on its Forest City project, a US$100bil Malaysian township whose fate suddenly has been thrown into doubt after Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s pointed refusal to let foreigners buy apartments or live in them long term.

One thing is clear, though: The prime minister is not acting impulsively. The project claims to be a “new global cluster of commerce and culture,” and a “dream paradise for all mankind.” However, in Malaysian political discourse, Forest City is just a gigantic Chinatown of 700,000 residents.

Taking on the developer is part of Mahathir’s broader plan to redefine Malaysia’s relationship with Beijing, pulling Kuala Lumpur away from the client-state mindset introduced by his predecessor.

Already, the 93-year-old leader has cancelled the Chinese-funded East Coast Rail Link, dealing a blow to China Communications Construction Co, which was building the US$20bil belt-and-road route. Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, ousted in May, claimed the link would bring prosperity to eastern Malaysia.

But Dr Mahathir, who spoke bluntly in Beijing this month against “a new version of colonialism,” took a very different view of the railway, which would have connected areas near the Thai border along the South China Sea to busy port cities on Malaysia’s western coast, near the Strait of Malacca.


He also shelved a natural-gas pipeline in Sabah, a Malaysian state on the island of Borneo. Dr Mahathir justified the cancellations on the grounds that they were too expensive.

However, the abrupt message to Country Garden, which is neither linked to the Chinese state nor would add a dollar to Malaysia’s national debt, shows that sovereignty – and Malaysia’s racial politics – are Mahathir’s real concerns.

Two-thirds of the homebuyers in Forest City are from China. Last year, as a trenchant critic of Najib’s policies, Dr Mahathir flagged the risk that anybody living in Malaysia for 12 years would be able to vote.

Country Garden should have seen the political risk in marketing the flats to mainland Chinese, who were separately lapping up long-stay visas under Najib’s Malaysia My Second Home programme. Najib’s generosity toward the mainland wasn’t the natural state of affairs. In 1965, the country expelled Singapore from the Malaysian federation out of fear that the peninsula’s majority Muslim Malays could lose their political dominance to the island’s ethnic Chinese.

If Country Garden misread the political tea leaves, it’s also wrong to bark up the legal tree after Dr Mahathir’s outburst. So what if Malaysia’s national land code permits foreign ownership? Approval of global investors may not matter all that much to a politician who has, in his previous innings, trapped their money at the height of a financial crisis.

The new prime minister isn’t as reliant on Beijing as his predecessor. If anything, he has to reward local businessmen and contractors for switching their allegiance from Barisan Nasional, the erstwhile ruling coalition that suffered its first loss of power in six decades.

It’s a given then that Malaysia under Dr Mahathir will have little appetite either for One Belt, One Road – or, for that matter, three- and four-bedroom apartments that could create a new political constituency.

Forest City could still be salvaged, but as a predominantly local project. If Donald Trump can unilaterally change the rules of game for China and Chinese businesses, so can, in his limited sphere, Dr Mahathir. As far as Country Garden is concerned, he just has.

Credit Aandy Mukherjee— Bloomberg

Related: 

MB: Forest City beneficial to all - Nation | The Star Online

 

Confusion over property policy - Nation

 


Setback for foreign property buyers in Malaysia - Business News


Hey, it's normal for Dr M to be abnormal! 

 


Belt and Road envisions great win-win global connectivity

History will remember the Belt and Road initiative as one of the most significant chapters in China's history and a great milestone in the development of human civilization.

BRI envisions great win-win global connectivity

History will remember the Belt and Road Initiative as one of the most significant chapters in China's history, and a great milestone in the development of human civilization.

Tuesday, August 28, 2018

The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics messed up!

Old politics: If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist and religious-centric tactics and policies of the past, thinking this is what they need to do to keep the votes, it will just be the repeat of past mistakes of the Umno era.

The issue is whether any of the Malay leadership  would be willing to change its society from a religious-centric one to one that is progressive and modern in character


A HIGH-level panel has been announced to review the administration of Islamic Institutions at the Federal level. Commendably, all views from the general public is welcomed. The Keeper of the Rulers’ Seal is also quoted as saying, in the announcement of this Panel, that it was appropriate that the related institutions undergo improvement so as to protect the religion of Islam, as well as promote its universal values in the country.

So here is a short opinion - Islam does not need protection, nor does it need to be institutionalised.

As a Muslim, I believe in God Almighty. His religion does not need anyone’s help, least of all from fallible human beings. Islam and God has no need for anything, but human beings do. No one represents Islam. Everyone represents their version of Islam that suits their wants and needs. These include those in political parties that say it represents Islam but simply do not. They merely represent their personal human interest for power and authority.

We need our Government to protect us from people who want to wield powers upon others by using religion as their weapon. That is what we Malaysians, Muslims and non-Muslims need. I want to ask the political leaders of Malaysia, elected and unelected: What do you intend to do to protect us from those in power whose interest is to wield their religion over others?

In Malaysia today, we are obsessed with religion. Politicians and Ministers talk about religion and upholding religion. We have dedicated channels and programmes on religion on mainstream TV. Teachers force their religion and religious interpretations on children. Even the technical department, JKR (Public Works Department) for example, has set up sign boards espousing religious thoughts. Ever go to civil service offices? Observe just how many religious seminar banners and thoughts are plastered all over these places. Sometimes I wonder whether these are public services departments or religious propaganda functionaries.

Why this parade of religion in the public sphere? Is it because our people obsess on religion, as they personally have got nothing else of substance to promote that would enhance their work and the lives of the people they serve? Or that they have to cling to religion as that is their one and only part of their lives that provide them any sense of self-worth?

Today, our Malay society has become a society so religiously judgemental that the sight of a woman without head-cover is practically blasphemous.

Think about this, after all the hue and cry of the 41 year old with 2 wives, from Kelantan who groomed his third, 11 year old child bride from the poor family in Thailand, the state religious authority penalised him for an unregistered marriage and then, instead of voiding it, basically approves the marriage. A significant portion of our Malay- Muslim society rejoiced!

Can a Malay society, more insular and superstitious in thought, that is now funding thousands of religious schools and Tahfiz centres/boarding houses than ever before in its history, create a population that is competitive to succeed in the 21st century?

Can it even compete on a fair footing with the rest of the Malaysian non-Muslim population? Malays have been given preferential places in universities, GLCs and the civil service for more than 40 years now, what have we got to show for it? Uncompetitive universities, a significant pool of unemployable Malay graduates and with most being employed by the civil service and the failed GLCs, and such corrupt administrations that a 93- year-old man has to come back to be the Prime Minister, that’s what. Would more religion help? Or would it make the population less competitive? Let us all be honest.

This has been the unintended consequence of the assimilation of Islamic values in governance (“penerapan nilai-nilai Islam”) instituted in 1985. The road to hell, they say, is always paved with good intentions. If nothing is done this nightmare is just beginning for the Malay society and Malaysian in general will suffer for it.

If we want to see where our nation is headed with this type of ideology and cultural religious mind-set besetting 60% of our population, we don’t have to look far to Saudi Arabia or Iran or even Aceh, we just need to see the state of governance and life in Kelantan. Democracy is only as good as an informed and intellectually challenging population. The Nazis in Germany and the Mullahs in Iran were all elected by the majority. Today, the Iranians are rebelling against their repressive theocratic Government but the Mullahs are not going to let go of power that easily. Thousands are in jail. But our Malays don’t seem to see or learn the lesson. Erdogan is taking Turkey on that road to already disastrous consequences and many of our Malays applaud.

The only reason the majority of the Malays today are satisfied with their lives to carry on being religiously obsessed, thinking non-stop of the afterlife and judging others, while the non-Malays are focused on bettering themselves in this life, is that the Malays, by and large, has been able to live off the teats of the Government in one way or another. It has been a fulfilled entitlement that will end sooner rather than later.

This gravy train has stopped. Mahathir and Robert Kuok, two 90-year-old plus statesmen, had to go to China almost in tribute with offerings, to extricate us from the mess our Malay leaders have created.

Unfortunately, Malays are oblivious to this fact. In fact, even most non-Malays are oblivious to the fact that if we do nothing, 30 to 40% of the population cannot sustain 100% of us. You need the remaining, at least, majority of that 60% to be able to truly contribute economically and not be consumers of tax from the minorities. And religion is not an economic contributor. It is an unproductive consumer of epic proportions with no returns.

Mahathir came to lead the Government in 1981 and transform an agricultural hamlet into an industrial one with liberal economic policies powered by an industrious non-Malay population and the liberal segment of the Malay society.

This was the population that made the country progress. Mahathir was not popular as a result of Islamisation. Mahathir was and is popular because he brought progress, prosperity and in-turn unity and pride in the country to everyone as Malaysians. He brought revolutionary change to real life. For all intents and purposes, he was a liberal progressive leader.

A progressive leadership will only be elected by a progressive society. The only reason the Pakatan Harapan government was elected was because the progressive societies of the non-Malays and the liberal Malay voted for it. We saved the nation, again. Unfortunately, that liberal segment is now forgotten and vilified. Malay liberals who are capable and focused on a productive life are labelled blasphemous and extremists, and shunned by the leadership in power, no matter who are in power.

The religious conservatives, on the other hand, are courted and coddled as if they will be the ever-lasting vote bank that must be assuaged. Think again on this paradigm. Malay swing votes are persuadable but only if the leadership shows the way.

If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist, and religious-centric policies of the past, thinking this is what they need to do to keep the votes, they will just be repeating past mistakes of the Umno era. More of the Malay population will move to the right of centre towards the Mullahs. It is an inevitable outcome of such a policy. Islamisation was a counter to PAS, it only made Umno the old PAS, and PAS the new Taliban and a stronger party every year from that time onwards.

Religion by its very nature will always veer towards conservatism and fundamentalism, no matter how one wants to spin those words. Because institutionalised religion is about following. The attractiveness of institutionalised religion is the abdication of thinking to religious leaders with easy answers one shall not question. More so, when the population is uncompetitive against the outside world. In Malaysia, we have one of the most sophisticated array of institutionalised Islam in the world today.

So, without a change from the religious-centric environment the Malay society is currently in, and an education system that indoctrinates rather than enhance critical thinking, Malay society will continually drift towards the insularity of religious conservatism and away from progressive capabilities to succeed in the modern world. And population demographic will ensure that a progressive Government will eventually lose out.

Therein lies the real Malay dilemma.

Would any of the Malay leadership be willing to change its society from a religious centric one to one that is progressive and modern in character?

Do you want our Malay society to continue to regress and be uncompetitive? Do you want it to drag the rest of us down the road of conservatism and economic ruin?

As Malay leaders, do you placate or do you lead for change?

How do you lead that change?

Credit to: 


By Siti Kasim

We are Malaysians first - own it!


The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Star.

Related posts:

The Origins and Evolution of Ethnocracy in Malaysia: The Malay Supremacy!


 Hishammuddin Hussein with kris at UMNO conclave:


1Malay or 1Malaysia? Malaysia All Screwed-Up!


1MDB business model relied on debt to form capital is not sustainable


>>>> " 90% of the Doctorates held by Malays is not worth the toilet paper on which it is printed because it was all prod...

The notorious National Civics Bureau - Biro Tatanegara (BTN)