Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- How to choose our Leader using the C.A.P.I. method
- Pakatan Manifesto changes: Too little, too late
- Youth for Change Lancar Siri Video Kesedaran Politik
- GO BACK TO VOTE CAMPAIGN IN SHANGHAI
- First ABU, now ABCD, and then what?
- Open Letter from Lord Ahmed to the Malaysian Attorney General...
- The great Maika Holdings and Telecom shares betrayal by MIC & Samy Vellu
- Maika Holdings Saga
- PR Manifesto Mentions all Races except Indians
| How to choose our Leader using the C.A.P.I. method Posted: 09 Mar 2013 12:22 PM PST
True achievement is about results; not efforts, not promises, not words.
Anas Zubedy
This GE 13 we the rakyat will be choosing our leaders; MPs and ADUNs. These Malaysians will eventually steer our nation the next 5 years. Our votes are crucial and enormously important. We must be guided with reason, knowhow and conscience.
I would like to share with you a method I designed for the corporate leaders in choosing Top Talents for their organization. This one is free, because Malaysia is worth it. We call it C.A.P.I., making it easy for recall. I hope it will help you choose the best for Malaysia.
Capacity A person's capacity is the basic foundation of his or her ability to deliver. No amount of training or exposure can bring out what is expected from a talent if he or she lacks the capacity. Like a car engine, capacity determines the ability to perform under different circumstances. The larger the capacity, the greater the propensity to deliver. We cannot ask a car with a 4 cylinder engine of 1500CC to perform like a 12 cylinder with 6000CC one no matter how much we try to modify it. That would be sending the person to failure. When the leader fails, our country suffers.
Achievement True achievement is about results; not efforts, not promises, not words. Top talents focus their energies on where the results are, they make things happen, they deliver. They spend more time doing and delivering. They don't talk as much as they do. When they talk, it is to engage people to perform. They want to get things done, make things right. They lead people to actions that are based on clear goals. We must choose leaders that deliver.
People Skills Top talents deliver through working with and through people. They harness and focus the energy of others toward common goals. They are team leaders. Talent who prefers working alone are specialists and they are great support for top talents. Remember that we must choose talents that work with others in their effort to move up in an organization, not rise up by stepping on them. The latter will cause future disunity to the team. In the Malaysian context we must also choose leaders who are willing to listen and work with not just a particular race, but every ethnic group. Not just with those in the Peninsular but also Sabah and Sarawak and vice versa. Care for those in urban as well as the rural areas plus willing to engage not just the old, but the middle aged and the young. In short, we must choose a leader that is with the rakyat, one that will work with us and care much about our well-being.
Integrity Leadership must come with integrity - there is no compromise. Without integrity talent is a liability. No matter how brilliant, knowledgeable or successful, lack of integrity disqualifies any and all talent for any leadership position. We must check their track record like their propensity to lie, practice double standards, say one thing and do the other. In short in choosing our leaders, integrity is the final sift that must not be put aside no matter what.
|
| Pakatan Manifesto changes: Too little, too late Posted: 09 Mar 2013 12:14 PM PST
Two changes to the manifesto even before the ink is dry? Knowing Pakatan's pet obsessions, they should perhaps have used indelible ink before they published their manifesto. That would have ensured that an important document as a manifesto cannot be tampered with for political exigencies. What guarantee is there that, after elections, it will not be amended again? Easow Verghese Anwar Ibrahim's promise today to amend the Pakatan Manifesto to include specific commitments to the Indian community is another knee-jerk reaction. It is another feeble attempt at damage control. His promise is a carrot that he dangled before Indian voters, hoping they would bite. But it is too little too late. This was Anwar's second flip-flop since Pakatan released its election manifesto less than two weeks ago. The first was when he agreed, three days later, to amend the manifesto to accommodate increased oil and gas royalty to Kelantan Malays. After that the manifesto went back to the drawing board again, this time ostensibly to placate Indians who were miffed that no mention was made of their plight in the manifesto while there were specific references to other races. Two changes to the manifesto even before the ink is dry? Knowing Pakatan's pet obsessions, they should perhaps have used indelible ink before they published their manifesto. That would have ensured that an important document as a manifesto cannot be tampered with for political exigencies. What guarantee is there that, after elections, it will not be amended again? At this rate, it is reasonable to expect the manifesto to undergo more changes when other groups also step up demands to have their pet projects also included in the document. Eventually, the manifesto will become a bulky document. But that won't please DAP Secretary General Lim Guan Eng who had expressed his aversion to a 'thick manifesto". But the more important question is this: If Pakatan is unable to produce a solid and comprehensive document at the party level, how can it be trusted to do it at the government level, if it gets its chance to rule? It is plain for everyone to see that not much serious thought went into the manifesto which was really only a rehash of past promises. Another weakness of the manifesto was laid bare by a DAP leader and MP Charles Santiago who made a damning admission today. A Malaysian Indian, he said that he was not consulted by the framers of the manifesto. Then who was consulted on Indian affairs? Were any of the other Indian MPs consulted? What about Sivarasa, Kulasegaran, Manickavasagam? Since todate none of them has owned up, is it safe to assume that all the Indian leaders in PKR, including its vice-president N. Surendran were kept totally in the dark? Or they were too afraid to speak up, fearing that if they did their candidacy in the upcoming election would be in question? And so, they left it all to the PKR supremo Anwar Ibrahim. In a swift about-turn yesterday, Anwar promised to amend the manifesto to include these promises -- to build affordable homes for estate workers, to resolve the issue of stateless Indians, and to provide technical and job opportunities for Indians. These are, at best, hollow promises. How can Anwar provide affordable homes when he could not even keep his promise to provide alternate housing for the displaced residents of Kampung Buah Pala in Penang despite having promised to do so? Resolve the issue of stateless Indians? Anwar promised to do this in 100 days. Pakatan had always claimed that there are 300,000 stateless Indians in the country. If Pakatan wants to play the role of honest broker, it will have to clear 3,000 cases every day, or 350 cases every hour. This means completing the whole process of filling out the forms, verification of data and completing all other formalities before the applications are signed, sealed, stamped and delivered. Any primary school children who has studied maths in ether English or Bahasa Malaysia will tell you that this is impossible. The figures simple don't compute. Pakatan must think Indians are gullible enough to believe in the impossible. Anwar also makes vague references to funding for Tamil schools and providing vocational training and job opportunities. These promises pale in the light of what the BN Government has been doing these past months and years, and continues to do, for the Indian community. Pakatan has pledged RM17 million for Tamil schools, but the BN Government has already made grants totalling RM350 million for this purpose from 2009 till 2011. More grants are in the pipeline, increasing the total to RM500 million. And that's only for the upkeep of schools. There's more for new schools and for upgrading of facilities. This has never before been done in the history of Malaysia. As against the pittance promised by Pakatan, let's see what else the BN government has offered the Indian community( See publication Janji Ditepati). Free education, more matriculation places, more scholarships, RM 50 million for training 3,200 school leavers, and RM150 in loans for Indian SMEs. And then there is TEKUN, TUKAR, SEED, ATOM, 1MISM,DHRRA,KAR1SMA, SARA and USD1. These are all acronyms that stand for the various initiatives that the Najib regime has already rolled out for Malaysian Indians in all sectors, for all age groups, and in rural and urban centres. In short, wherever there is an Indian in need, there is promise of help, usually only a phone call away. Stateless Indians? Long before Pakatan made a gross miscalculation in the number of stateless Indians, the Federal Government had already introduced MyDaftar programme to resolve this issue swiftly and humanely. Many have been helped. The door has not been closed. The exercise is ongoing. This episode of the Pakatan manifesto has revealed many weaknesses in the Pakatan fabric. Clearly, within the ranks of Pakatan, the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. Rather some underhand handiwork is suspected. For instance: • Lim Guan Eng was quoted to have said that the manifesto only sets out the common policies of political parties but not the specifics. But now Anwar has contradicted him by including specifics-- about the Indian community. • Anwar Ibrahim had said when the manifesto was first launched, that it transcends racial groups. But now Anwar has contradicted himself. • Pakatan's director of strategy, Rafizi Ramli had said it was not a mistake to not have mentioned Indians in the manifesto. But now Anwar has made him eat his words. After all the hullabaloo made by segments of the marginalised Indian community who felt they were being again marginalised in the manifesto, Pakatan is trying hard to regain lost ground. But it is too little too late.
|
| Youth for Change Lancar Siri Video Kesedaran Politik Posted: 08 Mar 2013 11:27 AM PST c3TKUHC5Eew Empat video klips yang akan dilancar pada pagi ini termasuk isu hangat seperti isu rasuah, pelan transformasi, hak rakyat dan isu penyalahgunaan kuasa. Walaupun video-video tersebut mungkin dilabel sebagai video yang "pro-pembangkang", tetapi pada hakikatnya video tersebut juga menggambarkan realiti hidup yang dihadapi oleh semua rakyat.
5 tahun yang lalu, Rakyat Malaysia telah mencipta tsunami politik serta mengubah lanskap politik negara kita. Dengan kebangkitan rakyat dan kuasa yang ada pada perpaduan rakyat, masa depan negara kita lebih cerah lagi.
Hari ini, kami ingin melancarkan video-video yang penuh dengan ejekan, kiritkan serta sendaan terhadap hipokrisi ahli politik. Semua contoh kehidupan seharian juga dimasukkan dalam video yang telah dibuat oleh Youth For Change.
Episode pertama "Kontrak Tupai" telah dimuat naik ke Youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3TKUHC5Eew
|
| GO BACK TO VOTE CAMPAIGN IN SHANGHAI Posted: 08 Mar 2013 10:31 AM PST
|
| First ABU, now ABCD, and then what? Posted: 07 Mar 2013 11:38 AM PST
[ABU] in effect follows the framework that promotes the kind of decision making that uses blanket, all-or-nothing, blind support or rejection. Such a campaign breeds a longer term danger. It spurs more unthinking divisive positions and a precursor to civil hostility.
Anas Zubedy
In striving to make Malaysia a better nation we must be careful with the road taken.
We must not sacrifice the journey for the goal, the means for the end. We need to change Malaysia in the right way towards the right goal. It may take a longer time and we may not be able to see the fruits of our labour but our future generations will profit from it. It is slow, but sure. Good and lasting change needs time to be cultured, we cannot be in a hurry.
That is why on many occasions I have registered my disagreement with the ABU's unthinking, irresponsible and destructive approach in choosing our MPs and ADUNs in the effort to advance Malaysian politics. The method in effect follows the framework that promotes the kind of decision making that uses blanket, all-or-nothing, blind support or rejection. Such a campaign breeds a longer term danger. It spurs more unthinking divisive positions and a precursor to civil hostility.
Today this divisive scheme has given birth to another blanket stupidity, ABCD; Asalkan Bukan Cina DAP. I have seen this acronym popping in my FB threads and posts that belong to PAS supporters. This trend perhaps was triggered after CM Lim Guan Eng politicised the 'Allah' issue via his Christmas message.
What if that 'Cina DAP' is better than the other candidates no matter what their background or ethnicity? Similarly, in the case of ABU, what if the UMNO candidate is the better choice? Aren't we giving the other candidate a free ride? Will we be able to secure the best of Malaysians to be our lawmakers with this method?
First ABU, now ABCD, and then what? Is this the way we want to go?
|
| Open Letter from Lord Ahmed to the Malaysian Attorney General... Posted: 06 Mar 2013 08:09 PM PST
Open letter from Lord Ahmed of Rotherham to The Hon. Attorney General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed Minister of International Trade & Industry & the Federal Commercial Crimes Department chief Syed Ismail Syed Azizan 7th March 2013 ********************************************* Notes to Editors: Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/British-Victims-of-Investing-in-Malaysia/144142372413916?ref=hl |
| The great Maika Holdings and Telecom shares betrayal by MIC & Samy Vellu Posted: 06 Mar 2013 02:38 PM PST
It is very apparent that he keeps a very tight hold on Maika. That being the case, how could Maika undertake any business venture without his knowledge and blessing? Shouldn't he be part of the debacle that is haunting Maika today? Shouldn't he also shoulder the blame for "the dismal performance of the Maika management?" Indrani Devi Dear Mr Najib Razak, we the Indian Community in Malaysia present the story below and know in our hearts you will respond Maika Holdings was touted as an economic vehicle and a miracle to lift the Indian poor from the shackles of poverty, Maika was launched with much hype and hope. The poor Indians – traditional MIC supporters, the lower middle-class and the working class Indians as well as a vast majority of plantation workers – were mesmerised into responding enthusiastically. The poor plantation workers put their life savings into the venture, some scraping the barrel, others mortgaging their property and pawning the last of their jewellery. A vast majority also took loans at exorbitant rates to invest in a venture that promised dreams of hopes and tantalising prospects. It's not only the poor Indians who responded to this call to rally behind MIC's efforts to secure seven percent of corporate ownership for the Indian community – which at that time had been stagnating at under one percent since 1960. Although the original plan by the MIC was to ensure that at least RM30 million worth of Maika shares were subscribed, so successful was the promotion campaign that by 1984, a phenomenal RM106 million was raised from almost 66,400 shareholders. A large majority of the shareholders are poor plantation workers. The largest individual shareholder with almost 2.8 million shares was MIC president S Samy Vellu. The amount invested in Maika was even larger than that obtained by MCA's Multi-Purpose Holdings when the company commenced business. When it started operations, Maika had one of the biggest cash reserves among Malaysian companies. At a time when business conglomerates like YTL, Berjaya, Malaysian Mining Corps, etc were practically unknown entities, Maika was already well known and if properly managed, would have been a billion dollar company now. However, in its 25 years of tortured history, Maika investors have known nothing but pain and sorrow. The new dawn of a golden opportunity that was promised to the Indian poor never arrived. Instead, each passing year only witnessed dashed hopes and broken promises that littered the chequered history of Maika. Many of the investors had since passed away, their spirits broken by the betrayal of the leader they trusted.
What went wrong? It is a case of bad management, poor investment, sheer arrogance and pure greed. In spite of a number of major acquisitions made into some important companies – like the United Asian Bank (UAB), United Oriental Assurance (UOA), Malaysian Airlines System (MAS), Malaysian International Shipping Corporation (MISC), TV3 and Edaran Otomobil Malaysia Bhd (EON) – Maika's performance has been mediocre. There wasn't any fanfare when Maika was allotted 10 million shares of Syarikat Telekom Malaysia Bhd (STMB). It was assumed in 1990 that Maika had been allotted all the shares it had subscribed to. No details were made known at that time. Sometime in the middle of February 1992, the shroud of secrecy surrounding the Telekom shares allocation was ripped apart. Then, all hell broke loose. A journalist from Watan disclosed that "there could have been some hanky-panky in the allocation of Telekom's shares to Maika Holdings. This was then followed by another report in a Tamil magazine, Thoothan on April 1, 1992, which disclosed that there could have been some discrepancy in the distribution of the 10 million Telekom shares allocated to Maika by the Finance Ministry. Malaysians learned for the first time (two years after the share issuance), that Maika acquired only one million and not the entire 10 million shares that were allotted to Maika Holdings. Samy Vellu, through the Tamil Nesan and at MIC meetings, tried to explain by insisting that the cash flow problem faced by Maika did not allow Maika to take up all 10 million shares. But, one of the directors, a one-time ally of Samy Vellu, Vijendran, issued a statement insinuating that the truth may not have been told. When this matter was raised in parliament, then finance minister Anwar Ibrahim disclosed that since Maika had stated that it could take up only one million shares, the remaining nine million shares were allocated to three companies proposed by Maika because to his "ministry's knowledge, the three companies represented the interests of the Indian community" (The Star, April 30, 1992). Note: At the time of share allocation in 1990, Tun Daim Zainuddin was the finance minister.
Maika did not reject the shares The mystery deepened and bewildered the shareholders when another Maika director, Pasamanikam, contradicted the statements made by Anwar and Samy Vellu. According to Pasamanikam, Maika did not reject the Finance Ministry's offer and did not propose that the nine million shares be allocated to any other company. He further revealed that Maika had indeed raised a RM50 million loan to facilitate the acquisition of the entire 10 million shares even before the Finance Ministry had withdrawn its offer. A tidal wave of questions engulfed the share holders: 1) Why did the Finance Ministry cancel the initial offer of the 10 million shares and subsequently allot only one million shares to Maika? 2) Who was responsible for the retraction of the original offer? 3) Who lied to the Finance Ministry? 4) Who informed them that Maika had recommended that the nine million shares be given to three companies? 5) Who supplied the names of these three companies? 6) Who coerced the Finance Ministry to change their mind? 7) Who aborted this offer? (There was no earthly reason for the Finance Ministry to change its mind on its own after having allocated 10 million shares). According to GK Rama Iyer, former managing director of Maika Holdings Bhd – as revealed in his press release dated May 16, 1992 : Samy Vellu was informed at 6.10am on Oct 5, 1990, that Maika had been offered 10 million STMB shares and of the probability of obtaining full loan financing and that Maika intended to take up the entire allocation of 10 million shares. Indeed, a letter dated Oct 5, 1990, from Arab-Malaysian Merchant Bankers Bhd. (AMMBB) – offering RM50 million to finance the purchase of the 10 million shares was received on Oct 6, 1990.
There must have been a mistake He further clarified that Samy Vellu replied that "there must have been a mistake. The offer to Maika should be for one million and not 10 million" According to Samy Vellu, the remaining nine million shares were for allocation to "other MIC bodies". "Further, Samy Vellu stated that he would contact the ministry to clarify the position." It was then, after Samy Vellu had contacted the Finance Ministry; that the letter of offer was retracted and Maika's allocation reduced to only one million shares.
Why did Samy Vellu prevent Maika from acquiring the 10 million shares? Wasn't Maika his brain-child to raise the corporate wealth of the Indian community so that their economic welfare would be secured? Wasn't he the leader of MIC which launched Maika as a business venture to enrich the community which had long been associated with deprivation and poverty? This was God-sent wealth. Why did he prevent this wealth from reaching Maika? Imagine how much Maika would have made from these shares for which it only paid RM5 per share. When Telekom shares were first traded, it fetched a price of RM6.15 per share and that too during a bearish market. By mid-1992 the share price was hovering around RM11-RM13. According to an article in the Aliran Monthly – 1993:13(10): Samy Vellu had taken away from Maika RM120 million in profits (which it would have attained had it just held on to the 10 million shares until 1993).
They don't deserve 10 million shares Samy Vellu made it extremely clear that he personally decided to allocate only one million shares to Maika. According to Samy Vellu, "I could have given all the shares to Maika Holdings if not for their past business record. They don't deserve 10 million shares because of the dismal performance of the Maika management. They have to learn to do business on their own and not depend on shares and make money out of it". (New Straits Times May, 16 1992) His autocratic style and arrogance comes through so forcefully: "I could have given all the shares to Maika Holdings…," he boasts. "They don't deserve 10 million shares…," he berates. It is very apparent that he keeps a very tight hold on Maika. That being the case, how could Maika undertake any business venture without his knowledge and blessing? Shouldn't he be part of the debacle that is haunting Maika today? Shouldn't he also shoulder the blame for "the dismal performance of the Maika management?" And why should he give nine million shares to three obscure companies? SB Management Services Sdn. Bhd and Advanced Personal Computers Sdn Bhd were in fact shell companies with paid-up capital of RM2 each. The third company is Clearway Sdn. Bhd. Samy Vellu decided on the shares allocation – not the Ministry of Finance! On what criteria did Samy Vellu decide that the three companies deserve to get the Telekom shares instead of Maika? What business experience and success could these companies boast about to warrant their being chosen from among all the other Indian businesses in the country?
Serious conflict of interest There was a serious case of conflict of interest involved in this scandal. A director of Maika was also a shareholder and director of one of the three companies, all of which divided the nine million Telekom shares equally. Lim Kit Siang named this person as R Selvendra on May 7, 1992. Two of the three companies – Advance Personal Computers and SB Management Services – shared the same business address: Level 2, Block F-North, Damansara Town Centre, Damansara Heights, Kuala Lumpur. These two companies had the same company secretary: S. Balasubramaniam. Significantly, S Balasubramaniam and S Sothinathan were both directors and shareholders of these two companies. Note: Sothinathan is none other than the present MIC vice-president and MP for Teluk Kemang. Samy Vellu rewarded a person who helped him hijack the Telekom shares by making him a deputy minister and could also probably groom him for future leadership of MIC.
Do we need leaders like this? If the 10 million STMB shares were allocated for the MIC, who would be the natural inheritors of these shares on behalf of the Indian community – Maika with its 66,400 shareholders or three insignificant private companies with six shareholders? Does this information in any way suggest that these three companies represented the interests of the Indian community? Who lied to the Finance Ministry that these "three companies represented the interests of the Indian community"? What was the motive for diverting nine million shares to three private companies? Those who sought to find the answers were threatened or beaten up. One brave soul who went on a crusade to expose this scandal was stabbed in Penang. Whenever questions regarding Maika were raised at MIC meetings presided by Samy Vellu, it was alleged that thugs would suddenly appear beside the person asking the question and that would be the end of the affair to seek answers. On May 13, 1992, the then Selangor assemblyman for Seri Cahaya S Sivalingam (now deceased), had also acted as a thug when he led an assault on Maika shareholders who were peacefully picketing against the Maika Telekom shares scandal outside the Maika headquarters. In October 2006, the MIC Johor assemblyman for Tenggaroh, the late S Krishnasamy assaulted M. Kulasegaran the DAP MP for Ipoh Barat at the Maika annual general meeting (AGM) at Legend Hotel. Even though Kulasegaran lodged a police report, no action was taken against Krishnasamy. Some years ago, it was claimed that at one particular MIC meeting at the Dewan Sri Pinang in Penang, chaired by Samy Vellu, a Maika shareholder wanted to know the position of Maika. It was alleged that Samy Vellu told this shareholder that he would provide the answer after the adjournment for refreshment. In the meantime two thugs confronted this shareholder and told him that if he wanted to return home in one piece it was the right time to go home. When the meeting resumed, Samy Vellu reportedly called for the shareholder to repeat his query. But since he wasn't there, Samy Vellu continued with his meeting without touching on the subject of Maika. What is puzzling is the fact that in spite of so much overwhelming evidence, the Anti- Corruption Agency (ACA) after 17 months of investigation cleared Samy Vellu of any wrong-doing but unfortunately without clearing the doubts in the minds of the Malaysians. In 1994, the then chairman of MIC public claims committee, V Subramaniam – also known as Barat Maniam – made a startling public accusation. He charged that the accounts were fabricated to make it appear as if all the profits from the sale of Telekom shares were channelled to MIED. In challenging Samy to take him to court, he declared, "I have come out with this statement to prove that Samy Vellu is a thief. He has stolen (Telekom) shares from the Indian community."
Maika Scandal refuses to be buried In spite of 25 years of history, the Maika scandal refuses to be buried. It keeps on surfacing, haunting and hounding the perpetrators of a crime that robbed the poor of their fair share. The controversy surrounding the Maika-Telekom shares scandal appears to be far from over. Promises were made; time and again, that Maika shareholders will get their hard earned money back. But not a penny was paid. At each Maika annual general meeting, the shareholders continue to press for answers. Often the meeting degenerates into violence as 'thugs' linked to the MIC president rough up those who dare ask questions. Samy Vellu appointed his son Vell Paari as CEO of Maika Holdings in 1999. He is now in the process of selling off the few remaining assets of Maika Holdings. Samy Vellu is very much in control of MIC, and he runs the party as a feudal organisation where he makes all the decisions. He has systematically hounded many capable leaders out of MIC to maintain his iron grip in the party. His deputies and committee members are loyal minions who will not hesitate to do anything and everything he says. After years in power, MIC is now a rotting mass, particularly in the head. Instead of serving the Indian community, MIC has become a party that serves only its leaders while millions of Indians face untold misery. The poor Indians have remained poor while those close to Samy Vellu became rich beyond their own expectations. MIC exists for the benefit of its leaders, not the poor Indian community.
Now Mr Prime Minister, can you just ignore these contentious issues that have destroyed the lives of thousands of your citizens? The entire Indian community awaits your response and our votes hang on your action.
|
| Posted: 06 Mar 2013 12:26 PM PST
Using the Maika Holdings money, the gang bought into well-run companies and turned them upside down by appointing their own people to run these companies, squandering away the profits with luxurious parties and lavish parties, and, finally, by closing down these companies. They plundered in epic proportions. Bernard Anthony One of the main reasons why MIC President S Samy Vellu should leave the MIC is because he, along with his group of gangsters, robbed the Indian people of an enormous amount of money through Maika Holdings. And they still remain at large. Maika Holdings raised RM108 million in 1981 from Indians, especially rural folks from the lower- and middle-income groups. These people were told to use their life savings – and even sell their jewelry – to invest in Maika Holdings because they were told the company would give them returns that were 10 to 20 times their initial investment. This, of course, is sweeter an offer than any licensed bank could make. Samy Vellu, whose rhetoric needs no introduction, managed to fool these mostly not-so-well- educated individuals into parting with their money. If you ask anyone who was in MIC at that time about how they organised groups of people to go out there to convince the masses to part with their money, you will be surprised. They even went to the extent of telling would-be investors to sell their properties and cattle to invest in Maika Holdings. In other countries, this would have been considered a huge financial scandal, not just because of the amount of money involved, but because of the number of people involved in fleecing equally vast numbers of poor and less-educated citizens. The RM108 million then had a buying power that was 10 to 15 times its value today. In today's terms, it would be valued between RM1 billion and RM1.5 billion. Shortly after the initial investments were collected, the recession in the mid-1980s enabled the cash-rich Maika Holdings to go shopping for properties and collect fantastic deals. If those properties were still in the hands of Maika Holdings, the company would be worth some RM3 billion to RM5 billion today. But those properties were sold at below-market prices through shady deals in which more money was transferred under the table than through actual and legal sales agreements. Some of us may also remember the Telekom shares scandal, in which Maika Holdings was extended an offer to buy Telekom shares during its initial public offering (IPO). But Maika Holdings did not buy the Telekom shares. Instead, Samy Vellu bought them through his personal company, because Maika Holdings, supposedly, did not have the money to do so. Maika Holdings could have made RM30 million, but this opportunity was hijacked by the sole defender and representative of the Indian community. Telekom was only the first privatised government department. Since then, many other government agencies and departments have been privatised. As with Telekom Malaysia, shares were offered to Maika Holdings, but the offers were hijacked over and over again by Samy Vellu and his gang. Using the Maika Holdings money, the gang bought into well-run companies and turned them upside down by appointing their own people to run these companies, squandering away the profits with luxurious parties and lavish parties, and, finally, by closing down these companies. They plundered in epic proportions. To date, Maika shareholders have received almost nothing for their investments. The Maika Holdings scandal has cost many their life savings, property, opportunities to send their children for advanced education and so much more. Recently, during a political speech, Samy Vellu announced that he will return RM1.30 for every RM1 invested in Maika Holdings and set a deadline of 100 days to do so. At the end of the deadline, however, he conveniently turned around and said that he has nothing to do with Maika Holdings because Maika Holdings is a business enterprise and he is only the president of MIC. The managing director of Maika Holdings, Vel Pari, the son of Samy Vellu, then said that he did not know of any such deadline and, as such, is not bound to honour any kind of commitment. Those who had the courage to go to Maika Holdings' annual general meeting last year were met by thugs who intimidated and harassed anyone who raised questions about the management. Death threats and armed assaults are not uncommon at Maika Holdings' annual general meetings. No wonder the MIC is considered the most violent political party in Malaysia with two MPs shot dead by assailants in recent years, one or two knocked down by cars (in what are supposed to be accidents) and some even slashed by parang-wielding gangsters. But Samy Vellu and gang have been allowed to continue plundering Maika Holdings without any accountability. And they were never questioned by the government, Bank Negara, the former prime minister or even the present prime minister. The MIC's handling of Maika Holdings was a con job approved and blessed by the highest public office. Perhaps it's because Indians are the disenfranchised lot in this country that Samy Vellu can do anything, as long as he delivers the votes every election. The government's total apathy regarding this scandal shows its attitude towards Indians – we are nobody's children. This injustice – this lack of government oversight – is happening in Malaysia, a country that is, supposedly, a leader among developing countries and is supposed to be a 'developed nation' in 12 years. If the government is serious about showing its commitment to the Indians, start by asking Samy Vellu to step down. Get Maika Holdings cleaned up and bring to justice those who have been responsible for cheating its shareholders. Don't be so stupid as to think that all we want are a few temples to be left in a few squatter areas. We know that as long as they are in squatter land, they will have to go. And repairing a few Tamil schools in some estates is like throwing us table scraps. Show us that the government cares about Malaysian Indians as equal citizens who are entitled to equal protection under the law.
|
| PR Manifesto Mentions all Races except Indians Posted: 06 Mar 2013 12:20 PM PST
The Indian community has been conspicuously totally disregarded in most aspects of the PR manifesto under the pretext of open non discriminatory society. In fact any implementation of policies needs to consider the discriminated and marginalized society first to bring it with the rest of Malaysian society. Paraman Subramaniam PKR director of strategy Rafizi Ramli is unapologetic that the PR manifesto makes no specific mention of Indian Malaysians, despite the brickbats from the community. However, being a key member of the manifesto committee, he is silent about the fact that virtually all races in Malaysia are mentioned in the manifesto except the Indians. Even though PR prides in the fact that its policies are mainly on needs basis, it however fails to justify the introduction of specific programs that are pointed and targeted to particular racial groups. The abolishment of PTPTN loans will effectively wipe out billions of hard earned tax payers money that have been used over the years for Malay students predominantly. Though it may save them money for the future, it is silent about the existing loans that have not been paid up yet by some of these Malay students. Other policies like doubling the Tabung Haji Fund, more allocations for Islamic religious departments, Justice for Felda settlers, adding value to wakaf land and GLC's to be tuned to produce more viable Bumiputra entrepreneurs are all catered for predominantly the Malay race. Extra allocation of funds is also proposed for specific civil servant government sections that consist predominantly of Malays only. The manifesto has also crafted policies that are pointed and targeted for all races in Sabah and Sarawak. The Chinese community stands to benefit by the recognition of the certificate for Combined Chinese Secondary Schools for the purpose of furthering academic admissions to higher education institutions. This primarily strengthens all Chinese Secondary schools existence in this country. The manifesto does not fail to mention the Orang Asli community. It proposes: The Indian community has been conspicuously totally disregarded in most aspects of the PR manifesto under the pretext of open non discriminatory society. In fact any implementation of policies needs to consider the discriminated and marginalized society first to bring it with the rest of Malaysian society. If at all the manifesto hopes the Indian community to gain through trickledown economics at the most. This has in the past, time and time again been proven to be a failure. What is most surprising is that PR prides in itself of having many Indian representatives but the glaring omission of the Indian community's critical needs like statelessness and fully aided Tamil schools to say the least, in their manifesto has exposed their lack of tooth within the corridors of power of the PR leadership. A clear line of demarcation between Indian representatives versus Indian representation is visible for all to see now. Could self preservation of their positions and future seat allocation be a reason for this? HINDRAF has expressed its total disappointment with PR for not including critical Indian needs into their manifesto as what they had done for all other races. Considerable pressure has been mounted and PR has scrambled to do damage control by having a meeting recently to reluctantly include some Indian issues into their manifesto. In any case it will be seen as an afterthought and PR's image among the poorer section of Indian voters has taken a severe beating. More so HINDRAF's blueprint has been totally ignored thereby giving the impression that PR is only interested in the Indian votes but not their representation making it not very much different from UMNO.
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan