Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Posted: 13 Jan 2013 10:37 PM PST

http://www.bfm.my/assets/images/events/eb12speakers/Malek_Ali2.jpg

On a daily basis, the staff members of my radio station want to debate issues that really matter to the country on a rational, analytical and non-partisan basis. We want to bring representatives of both sides of the political divide to the table (or rather our studios) to see where their fault lines lie, and whether there is room for agreement or compromise. We want Malaysians to call in to our talk shows and put forth any question to their elected representatives and their opponents so that we can all benefit from their explanations. But we cannot do these things freely.

Malek Ali, founder of BFM 89.9 in fz.com

FIFTY-FIVE years since Merdeka. Forty-nine years since the formation of the Federation of Malaysia. "At the crossroads" aptly describes our country. And some decisions we make today as citizens will set the tone for our journey as a nation for years to come. Here are some of our choices:

Ethnic diversity: Strength or weakness?

Do we see our multi-ethnicity as an advantage or disadvantage? History is laden with examples of ethnic strife, so that seems to be the natural order of the human condition. But where ethnic diversity is accepted, enduring civilisations appear to emerge.

In our context, shall we use ethnicity to forever argue one's ethnic share of the Malaysian pie and play off one ethnic group against another for expedient political purposes? Or do we take advantage of our multi-ethnicity to become the trade fulcrum between the current and future economic giants of China, India and Indonesia, as we did 600 years ago, and expand our economic and human potential?

It boils down to choosing between leaders who see strength in our ethnic and cultural diversity versus those who view it as a zero-sum game.

Leadership: Populist or principled?

In the context of political leadership, it's easy to be a populist. Goodies for the public are easy to grant. And it is even easier to be a populist in the opposition as promises can be made without needing to be directly accountable for them, at least not for a while.

Principled leadership is a much rarer commodity. The principled leader accepts that an unpopular policy might hurt his chances at the polls, but he still goes through with it because it is the right thing to do.

I wish there were a leader that said to me: "I will have to reduce petrol subsidies and here's the three-year subsidy reduction plan. I will have to introduce the goods and services tax (GST) because we need to widen our tax base. But in return, I promise you the eradication of wastage and corruption and within five years we will have the first phase of the MRT system completed, start to give great education, provide decent public housing and come close to running a budget surplus.

Do we have a deal? I can't see any politician today who is brave enough to tell me what my options truly are.

Religion: Public or personal domain?

As citizens, we really need to address the elephant in the room by asking ourselves to what extent we want religion to play a part in our public lives. To me, religion is an intensely private matter and I resent the state playing the role of moral guardian and enforcer, especially when hypocrisy abounds. This could be a minority view, but regardless, let's put this discussion on the table.

Let's truly debate the issue of the constitutional circumscription of the powers of the state in matters of religion. Let's also discuss the areas where civil law and Islamic law collide and which should take precedence in such an event.

Do we want leaders who fudge the role of religion in Malaysia or do we want those who are brave enough to table it for rational debate?

Gripped by water issues

Posted: 13 Jan 2013 10:25 PM PST

It's public knowledge that from day one of coming to power, the Selangor government, led by Mentri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim, was bent on making life difficult for Syabas. Among other things, it refuses to approve the much-needed capital expenditure (capex) for Syabas to implement projects under the agreement and has stopped the company from imposing a tariff increase on water from January 2009 as provided under the agreement.

Azman Ujang, The Sun

I HAVE a confession to make. Since I started this column almost one and a half years ago, I have been obsessed with writing about Selangor's water politics. The issue threatens to hold the water security of the state, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya to ransom amid warnings of a critical water crisis by next year.This is my seventh column on water.

Although 2014 has been singled out by Syabas, the Selangor water services concessionaire, and the federal government as the year when the crisis would set in if the Selangor government continues to stall granting a development order for the Langat 2 treatment plant, I always believed that it would happen earlier.

I'm not an alarmist or a pessimist, just a realist because having lived in Selangor for the last 30 years, it's obvious that this is one state where the pace of development has been uncontrolled and unstoppable.

Added to this is the massive transformation of Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya in terms of construction development and population increase, for which the most basic need is water.

Thousands of people from all over the country are settling down in the Klang Valley daily because this is where the hub of the economy is, providing jobs and business opportunities in a nation experiencing a population boom.

Malaysia has also become one of the world's top tourist destinations with Kuala Lumpur being the main gateway, thus adding even greater pressure on water demand.

The harsh realities of an earlier-than-anticipated water crisis were driven home with the onset of the New Year when some 500,000 people in 90 areas in Ampang, Cheras and Gombak had their taps running dry and had to make do with supply from Syabas tankers.

The disruptions were due to a drastic decline in the water pumping level at the Wangsa Maju pump-house by 30 million litres a day (MLD). It used to pump 210MLD but had to be scaled down to avoid damage due to over-pressure.

Now Syabas is working round the clock to instal bypass pipes, and supplies are due to be restored in two days if all goes well.

As of the weekend, Syabas had deployed nearly 2,900 tankers at great cost to deliver water to affected areas.

Well, this is just a harbinger, or even a preview, of what could be a bigger crisis if partisan politics is still the weapon or trump card used by Selangor in its game of brinkmanship with the federal government over a critical issue.

Dr Ahmad Zaharuddin Sani Ahmad Sabri, an academician and water expert, is disgusted with Selangor and Pakatan Rakyat politicians for putting the blame on Syabas for the crisis, while failing to carry out its responsibilities under the water concession agreement.

He has a point. Under the Selangor water concession agreement signed in 2004 that led to the privatisation of the state's water industry, river cleaning and water catchment areas, giving approval to operators of water treatment/supply for construction of new pump stations and the upgrading of plants and pump stations fall under the jurisdiction of the state government.

Ahmad Zaharuddin said the state government owned a 30% stake in Syabas and is represented on its board by two directors, Noorusa'adah Othman and Suhaimi Kamaralzaman, but the way it keeps blaming Syabas is as if it wants to conceal its stake or that the company has no link to the Selangor government.

"Why blame others? Why not discuss during a board of directors meeting what is wrong and what needs to be rectified," he told Bernama, while saying that he found it amusing that the state government even planned to sue Syabas for the water disruption. This is akin to suing itself, as it owns 30% of Syabas.

This non-approval for a tariff increase had led Syabas to file a legal suit two years ago against the state government for a compensation worth over RM1 billion.

All this is done because Khalid has come out with his plans to take over the state's water assets and restructure the water business, an issue he keeps harping on as the reason why he's stalling the development order for the Langat 2 plant, a federal government project to prevent a water crisis in the long term.

He is not only adamant about rejecting the construction of the new plant, but has dug deeper into his bag of water politics, when he said he would wait even for 100 years to implement the restructuring plan.

In another twist to the state government's water politics, Parti Keadilan Rakyat director of strategy Rafizi Ramli accused Syabas of making the people suffer in the hope of trying to topple the Selangor government.

Rafizi said he was even convinced that this was Umno's political game that "had received the consent of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak".

Najib quickly rubbished Rafizi's allegation. He made it clear that the Barisan Nasional government does not play politics over water which is everyone's fundamental right.

"The opposition should not play politics when it involves the survival of the people," Najib said over the weekend.

He said the situation would be "disastrous" if the Langat 2 plant, now over 30 months behind schedule, was not built.

The federal government, however, is going ahead with building the plant and is ready to fight in court.

Tenders for the RM1.2 billion project were closed last month.

A highly placed legal source said that Selangor could only reject the application for the development order within the law. This means that political consideration won't stand in court.

In the meantime, to prevent dry taps crippling more areas in densely populated parts, I think Syabas needs to rationalise the flow of water based on its capacity to produce treated water and not based on the seemingly unlimited demands of consumers, especially households.

Given the constraints pending the Langat 2 plant coming into operation, would it not be more sensible to ration the flow if it's technically possible and if this is the reality?

According to news reports, tempers flared among consumers who had to wait in long queues for water tankers. Certainly, rationing enables consumers to store water for their needs in their homes during specified hours and is better than collecting from tankers.

As the prime minister said: "It is sad to see scenes of people carrying buckets of water in the affected areas, especially those who live in flats.

"Some have to carry the buckets up 10 floors. The young can manage, but what about the elderly?"

If Khalid and the state government are unmoved, Najib has offered the people of Selangor a way out.

"All these problems will be a thing of the past if Barisan Nasional is returned to power in Selangor," he said in Semenyih on Saturday.

With the general election expected within the next two months, and water being a matter of personal survival, Najib's pledge should be taken seriously to solve the water woes once and for all.

Azman Ujang is a former editor-in-chief of Bernama.

What are BN's and PR's Fiscal Policies?

Posted: 13 Jan 2013 05:03 PM PST

The 13th general election is just weeks away and the two opposing coalitions do not feel the need to show the electorate their fiscal policies. All we get are populist freebies being handed out by both coalitions which are superficial and unsustainable. These are not fiscal policies to redistribute wealth, never mind fundamental changes in economic policies, including nationalization of utilities.

Dr Kua Kia Soong, Suaram Adviser

We look at the Republicans and Democrats in the US, Conservatives and Labour in the UK and we say that their general election is like choosing between Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola because mutatis mutandis, they all stand for the same neo-liberal capitalist policies. Nevertheless, we notice that for at least a year of electoral campaigning before their general elections, these Cola parties are expected to put forward their respective fiscal policies before the people. The Democrats, for example, want to tax the super-rich a bit more and have more public spending while the Republicans want spending cuts and tax cuts for the rich.

Surprisingly in Malaysia, the 13th general election is just weeks away and the two opposing coalitions do not feel the need to show the electorate their fiscal policies. All we get are populist freebies being handed out by both coalitions which are superficial and unsustainable. These are not fiscal policies to redistribute wealth, never mind fundamental changes in economic policies, including nationalization of utilities.

Well, the ruling BN coalition will just carry on as they have for the last 55 years waiting to be dumped by the rakyat but what are PR's fiscal and public spending policies? Do we have to wait for the election to be called and all the manifestoes to be printed in small print and these important policies submerged by the usual campaign rhetoric?

Financing the Welfare State

One of the most transformational makeovers by PAS is their proposal for a welfare state instead of their erstwhile insistence on an Islamic state as the end-all and be-all of politics. Is there a consensus within the PR coalition for such a proposal? We don't hear DAP or PKR echoing this. Will this be in PR's last-minute manifesto and how will it be financed? Why can't we hear it now or are they going to give the excuse that BN may steal their idea?

PR claims that "good governance" will save so much money that it will allow us to do wonders. Without fundamental changes in policy from that of BN's, this is a mere pipe dream. Take PKR's stand on guaranteed minimum wage for example…

Guaranteed Minimum Wage Policy

The Selangor GLCs have successfully implemented such a policy with RM1,500 as the base line but the PKR director of strategy, Rafizi Ramli has been quoted as saying a minimum wage beyond RM1,100 in the other sectors would have an adverse effect on industries. He says this is according to a classified World Bank report.

Since when has the World Bank been concerned about the plight of the lowest paid? So, does this mean that PR will not have a RM1,500 guaranteed minimum wage policy as demanded by the workers' network? We are unlikely to achieve the objective of a high-income society if we continually depend on low-wage labour and use the same excuse about the adverse effect on industry. When Singapore implemented such a policy with its National Wages Council in the 1970s, it was met with the same objections from those who were not prepared to up wages for their workers. It looks like they are now forced to face another round of reality check after the recent revolt by their foreign workers.

With a guaranteed minimum wage policy acceptable to the labour organisations, our small and medium industries can be supported by other means of revenue and government incentives. That is why we need to have a debate about fiscal policies.

So where will the money come from? Since the existence of the first human societies, taxes have been a means of financing public works and other expenditure. The question is whether the burden should be on the bottom 90 per cent or the top 10 per cent income earners. This is where a progressive fiscal policy is expected of any coalition that is contesting the general election.

Taxing the Rich

The rich pay a substantial share of taxes across the developed world, and this share has risen in recent decades. According to the OECD, the top 10% of earners contribute about a third of total tax revenues—28% in France, 31% in Germany, 39% in Britain and 42% in Italy. America's wealthiest households contribute a larger share to government than in any other OECD country, at 45%. In Europe, they certainly have more to show for it – social services, unemployment benefits, a national health system and other social benefits. Despite this, William Buffett, one of America's richest men recently criticized the US tax system as manifestly unfair since he is taxed at a lower rate than his secretary!

Malaysia's income tax system grants greater tax savings for the rich as well as encourages tax evasion. We rank among the world's top countries for illicit outflow of money. In addition, the limited coverage has resulted in poor revenue generation. Without sufficient revenue, individual income tax cannot provide substantial funds for poverty lifting projects.

In recent years, the oil boom has provided the bulk of Malaysia's revenue. These windfall gains should have been scrupulously invested for our future generations. Instead, they have been blown on populist mega projects and financing the annual budgets. Oil's share of revenue is above 30% while nearly 50% come from direct taxes.

Review Fiscal Incentives and Tax Exemptions to Multinationals

The granting of fiscal incentives to companies like Lynas is a trend that has existed for many years under the BN government which has offered generous tax holidays to such foreign investors. Some of these foreign investors have the effect of displacing existing investments that paid taxes. Thus, the country not only faces a reduction in tax revenue, there is no net increase in employment. The energy guzzlers in Sarawak (foreign-owned aluminium smelters, mining companies, etc) are not only expecting the same kind of fiscal incentives including tax holidays, they are opportunistically waiting for the tariff rates of the Bakun and Murum dams to fall further before they commit their investments.

So what is PR's policy toward the granting of such fiscal incentives in general and these toxic, energy guzzling industries in particular if they come into federal power?

These are some pointers for a progressive fiscal policy in the Malaysian civil society 13th general election demands:

1. Impose a higher marginal tax rate on high income earners and a correspondingly lower tax rate for lower income earners;

2. An incremental Capital Gains Tax on property;

3. A progressive inheritance tax;

4. Implement regular review and monitoring of the tax laws and implementation to ensure there are no tax loopholes;

5. Review capital allowances and tax holidays for foreign firms;

6. Regulate and impose a tax on all international financial transactions and hedge funds;

7. A progressive tax on all luxury goods.

Defence Cuts and a Progressive Economic Policy

While we are agonizing over giving our lowest paid workers a guaranteed minimum wage of RM1,500, the government is coolly shopping for the next generation Multi-Role Combat Aircraft to replace the MIGs. British Aerospace (BAE) is trying to flog their Typhoons and other special offers in a RM10 billion arms deal!

Is it also time for PR to tell us their defence policy or will they merely be interested in exposing the commissions that will be creamed from this next big arms deal? The Scorpene deal (costing RM7 billion) has been the biggest single deal so far and we still haven't got to the end of that story!

This plus a progressive economic policy including nationalizing all utilities and essential services including water resources, health, public transport, energy, ensuring they are owned and controlled by the Malaysian peoples at federal, state and local levels, will bring respite to our lowest paid workers who deserve a decent standard of living and not populist crumbs.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Isnin, 14 Januari 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan