Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- The Special Position of the Malays (Part One)
- Touché?
- Janji dicapati?
- Menetapkan Gaji Minimum Adalah Idea Yang Buruk Bagi Rakyat
- Malaysian Youth Rights Movement Urge the Youth Not to Vote for Pakatan Rakyat
- Banks and Bank Negara have a fiduciary duty
- The Sultans’ Daulat is a Myth
- Rosli Dahlan triumphs again!
- The debt driven 5.4% GDP growth in Q2 2012
- We Need You on 308
| The Special Position of the Malays (Part One) Posted: 29 Aug 2012 07:19 PM PDT
When, therefore, the Alliance parties agreed to preserve the special position of the Malays in 1957, they were simply continuing what had existed in Malaya the decade before Merdeka. Between 1948 and 1957, the special privileges consisted mainly in reservations for the Malays in four areas:
A memorandum prepared for the Reid Commission set out the extent of these privileges. In the area of landholdings, the special privilege consisted primarily in the reservation of land for Malays pursuant to State laws in gazetted areas in the Malay States (but not in Malacca or Penang). The specific provisions and the extent of the reservations varied from State to State; e.g. in Kelantan, nearly the whole State was reserved for the Malays, whereas in Trengganu, no reservations had been made. Within the public service, qualified Malays were given preference over other applicants for employment. In addition, certain government departments applied a 4:1 or 3:1 ratio of Malays to non-Malays. But as the memorandum noted, these policies applied only to first appointments to the Service and not for subsequent promotions, pursuant to clause 152 of the 1948 Federation of Malaya Agreement, as 'racial considerations cease to count in respect of the promotion of officers who are already in the Government Service.' In education, similar quotas also applied. The memorandum states that in 1948, due to the fact that there were few non-Malays who were federal citizens (Malays formed 85% of the electorate in the first nationwide election in 1955) a 3:1 ratio had been proposed 'to safeguard not only the special position of the Malays but also the legitimate interests of the other communities'. Eventually, it was thought, the awards would be divided in accordance with the proportion of Malays and non-Malays among federal citizens as a whole. But the 3:1 quota came to be seen as fixed, and relaxing it required the consent of the Conference of Rulers. Nevertheless, minimum standards were maintained: each year between 1952 and 1956, because of the shortage of qualified Malays in technical subjects, the British asked for, and Rulers consented to, the majority of overseas scholarships to be given instead to qualified non-Malays. In the area of business licences and permits, the special privilege only applied to the road transport industry, where the policy was applied to licences and permits for taxis, buses and haulage lorries in each State or Settlement, in order to 'render the proportion of [Malay operators] equivalent to their proportion of the population of that State or Settlement as a whole'. It is with this background in mind that we can now consider the agreed position of the Alliance parties at the time of Merdeka. The Alliance memorandum to the Reid Commission on 25 September 1956 provided:
The first point that we may note is that the special position of the Malays was meant to be a limited derogation from the general principle of equality and non-discrimination. The extent of the derogation was to be limited, firstly, by the specified areas to which reservations could be made, and secondly, by the requirement that such reservations must be reasonable. The second point that we may note is that the special position of the Malays was not intended to 'adversely affect or diminish' the rights and opportunities that were then available to the other communities. Further clarification was obtained by Lord Reid on 27 September 1956, during submissions by the Alliance before the Reid Commission:
|
| Posted: 29 Aug 2012 04:27 PM PDT To me, touché was a one-word admittance of one's error or absurd logic when countered by one's opponent's right-on-target sarcasm against one's statement, or perhaps a polite reminder for one to first look into the mirror before making such a statement. It's almost, though not quite, like a 'stone thrower' confessing to the proverb 'Yes, you right, those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones'.
|
| Posted: 29 Aug 2012 01:42 PM PDT |
| Menetapkan Gaji Minimum Adalah Idea Yang Buruk Bagi Rakyat Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:53 AM PDT Ahli politik adalah individu-individu yang mereka sangka mereka mengenali masyarakat dan tahu apa yang baik dan apa yang buruk untuk mereka. Selain itu, mereka juga sangat pakar dan mahir dalam ilmu untuk memperdaya rakyat dalam menerima sesuatu perkara yang mereka mahukan ke atas rakyat. Dari situ berlumba-lumbalah ahli politik dari kerajaan dan pembangkang untuk memperkenalkan gaji minimum pekerja. Kemahuan golongan persatuan pekerja ini tidak dilayan pada zaman pemerintahan Tun Dr. Mahathir kerana beliau mungkin tahu baik buruk polisi ini. Atas desakan yang kuat, kerajaan Perdana Menteri sekarang terpaksa akur dan menetapkan gaji minimum ini kepada pekerja. Dalam artikel ini, kita akan membincangkan kenapa penetapan ini adalah satu idea yang nampak berniat baik tetapi sebenarnya sesuatu yang buruk bagi masyarakat miskin dan orang berniaga.
1. Tidak Adil Bagi Semua Jika benar kerajaan dapat meningkatkan pendapatan golongan miskin dengan menetapkan gaji minimum, kenapa kerajaan tidak hanya menetapkan gaji minimum ini kepada RM 5000 sahaja. Dengan mudah semua buruh akan mendapat gaji tinggi dan semua orang pun akan gembira. Bagaimana gaji meningkat ? Gaji meningkat apabila produktiviti per kapita setiap rakyat di sesebuah negara itu meningkat. Apabila produktiviti meningkat, pendapatan meningkat, perniagaan berkembang dan seterusnya gaji pekerja akan meningkat dan ini meningkatkan taraf hidup rakyat secara keseluruhan. 2. Memusnahkan Perniagaan Kecil Jika buah epal dijual dengan harga RM 1.00 meningkat kepada RM 2.00. Secara logik mudah, orang akan kurang membeli buah epal. Ini juga yang akan terjadi kepada pasaran buruh di sesebuah negara apabila kerajaan menetapkan gaji minimum. Jika saya mempunyai 10 orang pekerja. Penetapan gaji minimum mungkin hanya mempunya kesan kepada 2 orang daripada pekerja saya. Tetapi peningkatan ini akan mengakibatkan saya untuk menaikkan gaji bagi kesemua pekerja saya. Tidak mungkin pekerja yang sudah 5 tahun bekerja dengan saya akan bersetuju dengan gaji pekerja yang baru masuk kerja bulan lepas. Itu yang pertama, yang keduanya saya sebagai pemilik perniagaan akan memilih untuk mengurangkan penggunaan pekerja sebagai langkah untuk berjimat supaya saya tidak rugi dalam perniagaan yang saya sedang ceburi. 3. Peningkatan Jenayah dan Meningkatkan Pengangguran Apabila peniaga mengurangkan bilangan pekerja kerana tidak mampu membayar gaji minimum. Golongan buruh bawahan ini tidak akan mendapat sebarang kerja dan ini akan meningkatkan pengangguran dikalangan masyarakat. Seperti yang anda sudah ketahui, peningkatan pengangguran akan menyebabkan kadar jenayah juga meningkat. 4. Beban yang terpaksa ditanggung oleh semua Penetapan gaji minimum akan menyebabkan peningkatan harga barang. Manakan tidak, kos pembuatan sesebuah barangan itu telah meningkat jadi sudah tentu kos ini akan digilirkan kepada pelanggan yang akan membeli sesebuah produk. Dengan itu akan berlaku peningkatan harga barang serta peningkatan kadar inflasi. Ini akan menyebabkan semua orang terutamanya pengguna terpaksa menanggung kerugian Dalam pasaran bebas, harga barangan dan gaji pekerja tidak seharusnya ditetapkan oleh sesiapa samada ahli politik atau kerajaan. Ianya seharusnya dibiarkan terapung dan bebas. Pernah dalam satu pertikaian pada zaman Rasulullah, baginda dipanggil untuk menetapkan harga roti di pasar. Baginda bersabda "Aku tidak mahu darah mereka ini di tangan aku di akhirat nanti" ("An Islamic economic system largely supports a market mechanism for coordination Read more at: http://www.shahabudeenjalil.com/2012/08/menetapkan-gaji-minimum-adalah-idea-yang-buruk-bagi-rakyat/
|
| Malaysian Youth Rights Movement Urge the Youth Not to Vote for Pakatan Rakyat Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:32 AM PDT The full quote (translated) from the statement of the DPPM of PAS was "Humans can now be considered animals that hang around wherever they want doing whatever they want". The statement from Nik Abduh Nik Aziz also mentioned that the pool party "insulted Islam, and and tears apart the dignity and norms of humanity". It then went on to say that "Nothing can be expected from society other than unrestrained sex, sex outside of marriage, prostitution which leads to children born out of wedlock, abortion, baby dumping and the like". The pool party had a dress code of "stylish, sexy, trendy & tasteful, swim wear allowed", thus swim wear was not a requirement – participants could choose what to wear and whether to enter the pool or not.The Pool KL has responded to this issue with a statement on their Facebook page (http://fb.com/thepoolkl), saying that the event was organized by a third party event organizer, and that they believe in a free and democratic Malaysia with freedom of religious choice. They apologized if they have offended any party that found it offensive, and in addition the event emcee made announcements that Muslim women should refrain from wearing outfits deemed inappropriate to the Muslim faith. It is an insult to all the young men & women of Malaysia to equate them to animals. At the same time , PAS should also apologize for accusing the party venue (The Pool KL, Jalan Ampang) for claiming that they are organizing a "sex party". The Pool's main draw is a swimming pool in the middle of the club, hence the name. The event is basically just a pool party – it is out of line for PAS to even bring up things like prostitution, abortion, abandoning babies in the same speech condemning the event, all because of what is essentially just an event at a licensed entertainment outlet that caters to people of legal age. Malaysia has long enjoyed freedom – be it dress code & fashion, or even choices of lifestyle and entertainment. However in the states that PAS has held power for a long time, the freedom to dress and even mingle with others is severely restricted. PKR claims that hudud law will not happen in Malaysia because they need a 2/3 majority in order to implement hudud in the country, however before they are even are in federal power, they have tried to ban Valentine's day celebrations in Malaysia, and in Kelantan they have instituted seperate supermarket checkout lanes for men and women, seperate park benches for men and women, and even requiring unmarried men and women to sit seperately when watching movies. There is also a ban on bikinis in Terengganu and Kelantan, and in addition, the Kota Bahru council has forbidden their employees to wear lipstick and certain types of high-heeled shoes to work. This is an issue for every Malaysian to take note of, even in Selangor where PAS is the least dominant political party under the Pakatan Rakyat administration, Lotus Five Star, the only cinema in Kuala Selangor, has put up notices saying that unmarried Muslim couples are banned from sitting side my side. The controversial ruling was issued by the Kuala Selangor District Council, and was believed to have been advocated by the local authority's PAS councillors, who have already implemented regulations like that in Kelantan. We are not alone in questioning these restrictions. A recent survey among 20-year old youths in the New Straits Times regarding the proposed gender segregation in cinemas quoted a law chambering student, Oazair Tyeb, as saying "the idea would also be questioned and opposed not just by Muslim youth but also those from other races". Another, Kishore Ramdas said that imposing such a controversial ruling on Malaysians would set the country back another 50 years and "I think Malaysians are mature enough not be told how to behave, where to sit and stand or even what to wear". Programme officer Mohani Niza, 25, is of the view that Islam should not be "hijacked" to control moments in people's daily lives. Though the rule is not enforced, we might be on a slippery slope towards a more intolerant society." Read more at: http://1sya.com/?p=1467
|
| Banks and Bank Negara have a fiduciary duty Posted: 27 Aug 2012 01:08 PM PDT What exactly is meant by fiduciary duty? Fiduciary duty, according to a law dictionary, simply means an individual in whom another has placed the utmost trust and confidence to manage and protect property or money. It stems from the Latin fiducia, meaning "trust," a person (or a business like a bank) who has the power and obligation to act for another (often called the beneficiary) under circumstances which require total trust, good faith and honesty. To ensure the upholding of their fiduciary duty, banks in Malaysia are bound by a solid framework of best practices determined by Bank Negara Malaysia. It's known as the Banking and Financial Institutions Act, 1989 (BAFIA) wherein lie the terms of reference on how banks and financial institutions shall operate to the highest integrity in their fiduciary duty. Fabiani Azmi still has many questions to ask… In recent weeks, more attention has been drawn to BAFIA than ever before since PKR Strategy Director Rafizi Ramli was charged in the sessions court on 1 August for violations of the Act. It began on 7 March this year when Rafizi made public, at a news conference, the confidential information of 21 bank accounts belonging to companies and individuals. He did so illegally without the permission of the account holders, the bank or Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM). Police reports were lodged in March and April, and complaints were also filed with both Public Bank Berhad and BNM. Despite BAFIA being in place to protect the security of bank customers' information and transactions, there were obviously weaknesses in which the opposition was able to pry, spy or buy. Banks have a fiduciary duty to protect and safeguard the information in their custody and many, like top-class, award-winning Public Bank, even have a client charter and a privacy policy in place to guarantee customers of their fiduciary duty. What is the promise by Public Bank Berhad to its customers? Its client charter specifically states, "We highly respect and thoroughly appreciate your concerns on the privacy and security of all personal information and financial transactions handled by us. We will employ the tightest security architecture to prevent unauthorised access and ensure your peace of mind concerning all your transactions with us. We will pursue the strongest form of preventive and punitive measures against any party which attempts to compromise your right to transaction security and confidentiality." It would appear that Public Bank has failed on these accounts. Notably, it has failed to demonstrate that it "will pursue the strongest form of preventive and punitive measures against any party which attempts to compromise your right to transaction security and confidentiality" for it failed to take action against the main culprit, Rafizi Ramli, who had infiltrated its systems and exposed its customers' confidential information to journalists. Why Public Bank has yet to take action against Rafizi is puzzling. The strongest punitive measure has just been to investigate the bank clerk. The bank did not even have the chance to fire him. The bank clerk resigned. If it were not for Rafizi, there would really be no blatant abuse of the bank and BAFIA. Rafizi, with his passion for dramatics, wielded and distributed the documents to chalk up his political points - much to the detriment to the sterling reputation of award-winning Public Bank Berhad. So how did a bank clerk gain access? It is very puzzling that a bank clerk with no access to privileged customer information was able to extract confidential data. There are concerns if serious weaknesses exist. If there are, would our wealth be equally vulnerable to prying hands – stolen at the click of a mouse? One can only deduce that there are more senior people behind the BAFIA breach than just a mere clerk. Could tellers, officers, managers, branch managers, regional managers, general managers right up to the executive directors have had a hand? Did any of them collude to provide a back door for the bank clerk to pry into the 21 bank accounts? Were there opposition sympathisers from within the bank? Enquiring minds would really like to know. The plot can get quite convoluted. Let's suppose a senior bank official well-connected with the opposition did go into cahoots with Rafizi. He might have given the access password to the bank clerk to print. Having done so, the information is then passed to Rafizi. But because the customer complained of the leak to the bank and BNM, internal audit and security had to investigate. The audit trail would point to the terminal that was used to download the information. CCTV cameras would focus in on the perpetrator. Such evidence cannot be ignored or dismissed. Internal auditors work independently, reporting only to the very top echelons in the bank. Public listed companies like Public Bank Berhad would have their internal auditors report directly to the Board Audit Committee. So the clerk is apprehended and interrogated by the bank and BNM. His handphone is seized. He denies wrongdoing. He says he had no access as he is only a clerk. So the plot must go deeper into how he managed it. Was it really the bank clerk? Or is he just a smoke screen to something more devious? The bank has confirmed in its Privacy Policy Statement that there is limited employee access. Section 1.3 reads, "The PBB Group maintains stringent procedures authorising only such employees as are strictly relevant or required to access the Customer's information on a need-to-know basis. The PBB Group's employees have been educated on the Customer's right to privacy and confidentiality. Any breach by the employee of the PBB Group's policies would subject the employee to such disciplinary action as the PBB Group may consider appropriate." This would certainly suggest that there is obviously someone else senior in the bank that has committed the heinous crime to violate the customers and betray the bank through his privilege and access. It just wasn't the bank clerk on a solo mission. It just couldn't be. He had no privileged access. BNM may have been misled by the bank and even by Rafizi into believing it was just the clerk. In a 14 May news conference organised by the opposition, Rafizi tried to shift blame and public perception on the BAFIA breach to the bank clerk, claiming the bank clerk was the whistleblower. Why only the clerk when he had no access? One needs to ask, is there a lot more going on than BNM initially suspected? Section 2 of the bank's Private Policy Statement reads, "In accordance with strict compliance to the Banking and Financial Institutional Act 1989 (BAFIA), and apart from the sharing of information between members of the PBB Group, the PBB Group will not disclose the Customer's information to any third party or external organisations." BNM governor Tan Sri Dato' Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz was also clear on this when she said, "The confidentiality of customer information is clearly protected by the Banking and Financial Institution Act 1989 (BAFIA)." Zeti said it s only when there is a suspected offence under federal law or if there is a court order or where a customer has given consent, that relevant law enforcement agencies are authorised under the law to obtain information. This information must be obtained through Bank Negara Malaysia, and if the central bank says there is no foundation for it, the information will not be given. Read more at: http://www.mole.my/content/banks-and-bank-negara-have-fiduciary-duty
|
| Posted: 26 Aug 2012 09:43 PM PDT Book Review: Ampun Tuanku. A Brief Guide to Constitutional Government. Zaid Ibrahim. ZI Publications, Petaling Jaya, 2012. ISBN 9 789675 266263 256 pp, RM As a youngster in 1960 I had secured for myself a commanding view high atop a coconut tree to watch the funeral procession of the first King, Tuanku Abdul Rahman. My smug demonstration of my perched position drew the attention of the village elders below. They were none too pleased and immediately ordered me down. "Sultans have daulat," they admonished, "you cannot be above them." Apparently even dead sultans maintained their daulat. I did not dare challenge my elders as to what would happen once the king was buried; then we all would be above him. To put things in perspective, this attribution of special or divine powers to rulers is not unique to Malay culture. The ancient Chinese Emperors too had their Tianming, Mandate from Heaven. That however, was not enough to protect them. Even though it has deep roots in Malay society, this daulat thing is a myth. The Japanese, despite their own "Sun Goddess" tradition, had no difficulty disabusing Malay rajas and their subjects of this myth. The surprise was not how quickly the sultans lost their power and prestige, or how quickly they adapted to their new plebian status during the Japanese Occupation, rather how quickly the Malay masses accepted this new reality of their rajas being ordinary mortals sans daulat. Only days before the Japanese landed, any Malay peasant who perchance made eye contact with his sultan, may Allah have mercy on him for the sultan certainly would not. When the Japanese took over, those rajas had to scramble with the other villagers for what few fish there were in the river and what scarce mushrooms they could scrape in the jungle. Nobody was bothered with or took heed of the daulat thing. So much for it being deeply entrenched in our culture! To pursue my point, had the Malayan Union succeeded, our sultans today would have been all tanjak (ceremonial weapon) and desta (headgear); they would have as much status and power as the Sultan of Sulu. Across the Strait of Malacca, hitherto Malay sultans are now reduced to ordinary citizens. They and their society are none the worse for that. Today's slightly better educated Malay sultans and crown princes (there are no crown princesses, let it be noted) would like us to believe in yet another myth, this time based not on our culture but constitution. They believe that it provides them with that extra "something" beyond their being mere constitutional head. This new myth, like all good fiction, has just a tinge of reality to it. The Reid Commission had envisaged the Conference of Rulers to be the third House of Parliament, after the elected House of Representatives and the appointed Senate. It would be a greatly reduced House of Lords as it were, to provide much-needed "final thought" to new legislations. That assumption had considerable merit, at least in theory. As membership is hereditary, those rulers would be spared from having to pander to the masses as those elected Members of Parliament, or please their political patrons as with the senators. Additionally, this third house would be non-partisan. An expression of this "Third House of Parliament" function is that all senior governmental including ministerial appointments have to be ratified by the Conference of Rulers. However, unlike the transparent deliberations of the "advice and consent" function of the United States Senates where senior appointees are subjected to open confirmation hearings, the proceedings of the Conference are secret. We know only those who have been accepted, not those rejected or why. Zaid Ibrahim's Ampun Tuanku. A Brief Guide to Constitutional Government addresses what should be in his view the proper role of sultans in the Malaysian brand of constitutional monarchy, specifically whether they have this "something extra" beyond what is explicitly stated in the constitution. As a lawyer Zaid is uniquely qualified to write on the matter. He is no ordinary lawyer, having once headed the country's largest legal firm and served as the nation's de facto Law Minister. The title notwithstanding, this highly readable book is more persuasive than descriptive; more political science treatise, less legal brief. The expository flow is smooth, logical and highly convincing. It is refreshingly free of legal jargon or references to court cases that typically pollute commentaries by lawyers. To Zaid, the constitution does indeed grant Malay sultans that something extra, but not in their capacity as the titular head of the government, rather as their being head of Islam and defender of the faith. Zaid explores the many wonderful opportunities possible as a consequence of this second function without having to invoke additional "special powers." I will pursue his novel ideas and wonderful suggestions later. At 40 pages, his chapter on this issue ("The Rulers and Islamization") is the longest, and deserves careful reading especially by the royal class. He puts forth many innovative ideas that if pursued would benefit not only Malays but also all Malaysians. With active and enlightened engagement by the rulers and Agong, Islam would emancipate Malays just as it did the ancient Bedouins, and in the process enhance race relations. That would be a pleasant if somewhat radical departure from the current environment where Islam not only deeply polarizes Malays but also sows much interfaith and interracial distrust. In all other aspects the sultans and Agong are bound by what is explicitly stated in the constitution. Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy, Zaid stresses, and our sultans and Agong must abide by the wishes of the rakyat as expressed through their elected representatives in the executive branch. If citizens have made their wishes clear through an election that they would prefer a certain party and individuals to lead them or certain legislations enacted, the sultan must abide by that decision regardless of where his personal sympathy lies. In short, there are no penumbras of rights and privileges emanating from those hallowed clauses of our constitution. The matter is clear: Sultans are bound by the law. Sultans cannot claim a penumbra of power based on daulat or divine mandate, as the Sultan as well as the Raja Muda of Perak tried to argue recently. Daulat is fiction.
|
| Posted: 26 Aug 2012 05:10 PM PDT That is a startling arrogant statement that A-G Gani Patail can show his middle finger to the courts of this country and there is nothing the courts can do about it because A-G Gani will definitely not allow himself to be charged before any court of law. No wonder A-G Gani Patail seems invincible despite the expose' on his Hajj exploits with Tajuddin Ramli's proxy, Shahidan Shafie; his interference with the Ho Hup Bhd Boardroom tussle and even the highly explosive book by Zainal AbidinAhmad titled 'Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail: Pemalsu, Penipu, Penjenayah?'
It seems that A-G Gani Patail can fix people up and practise selective prosecution (more like persecution) and there is nothing anyone can do about this.
Was that why, five years ago A-G Gani Patail dared to sanction the brutal arrest of lawyer Rosli Dahlan and then make the Anti-Corruption Agency (now known as the the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission [MACC]) to charge him on Hari Raya's eve?
Was that why the MACC was not bothered about losing that case badly despiteits Deputy Director of Prosecution, DPP Kevin Anthony Morais, being exposed as a Liar? Was that why A-G Gani Patail remained unperturbed and made the MACC appeal against Rosli's acquittal and kept that hanging on for two more long years but withdrew it last minute on the very day the appeal came up for hearing? Is it because A-G Gani Patail feels his conduct cannot be questioned by anyone, even by the Prime Minister? I considered that as an abuse of power, malicious prosecution and prosecutorial misconduct and made that the central theme in my recent writings in these links: HERE, HERE, HERE
To my mind, abuses must be exposed and checked by the Courts– that simple! That is why I posted Tan Sri Robert Phang's Statutory Declaration describing how the MACC knew they had no case but was made to continue persecuting Rosli by A-G Gani Patail. I now understand why Rosli had filed multiple law suits against those him he considered "Rogues in Government" to seek accountability from them. Despite initial disappointments when dirty tactics were used in Rosli's criminal trial and goal posts were changed several times, Rosli was vindicated by the criminal courts.
Rosli is now pursuing civil claims against his perpetrators – 17 Defendants were named in his RM50 million law suit filed in 2008 including the Government of Malaysia. He also sued big mainstream media like Utusan Malaysia, The Star and The NST. Utusan Malaysia had published a public apology admitting that "their news article was untruthful and written in a sensational manner to generate publicity which exceeded the parameters of ethical journalism".
Rosli seems to be taking on the whole establishment. As I have seen how his family and career suffered during his incarceration and persecution, perhaps he should step back and think about his family. Many will be cheerleaders but eventually he will be standing alone in facing the onslaught from those in the corridors of power. That is my friendly advice because his path towards vindication has been quite a rocky climb and he has had to go through a baptism of fire.
|
| The debt driven 5.4% GDP growth in Q2 2012 Posted: 26 Aug 2012 01:04 PM PDT The Q2 2012 Gross Domestic Product growth of 5.4% seems to be a pleasant surprise from 1Malaysia administration. The Second Finance Minister who is on top of the numbers pointed out the oil rigs are responsible. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tuesday August 21, 2012 Husni: 5.4% Q2 growth a boost for Malaysia IPOH: The better-than-expected 5.4% growth in gross domestic product (GDP) in the second quarter is a confidence booster for Malaysia to perform better for the rest of the year. Second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah attributed the current positive growth to the resumption of operations at oil rigs, which had affected the country's production of crude oil previously. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- According to Jabatan Statistik Malaysia, however, has more to say: http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1699&Itemid=153〈=en ECONOMIC GROWTH The Malaysia's economy strengthened further to 5.4 per cent against 4.9 per cent in the preceding quarter led by continued expansion in the Services and Manufacturing sectors. The robust growth in Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF) has driven the demand side.  The statistic seems to point to services as the catalyst, rather than oil rigs. Notice also that the Perbelanjaan Penggunaan Akhir Kerajaan growth vs Perbelanjaan Penggunaan AKhir Swasta growth. For 2010, the government's growth in spending was 2.9% vs private at 6.6% but starting from 2011, the government spending growth exceeded the private sector and morphed onto double digits! Look at Q3 and Q4 2012 at 21.1% and 22.95% respectively. The increase in Najib administration's expenditure is getting at very significant pace. When BN administration spend our tax payers' money, the usual stuff like Auditor General's horror stories, contracts awarded without open tender comes to mind. With regards to services sector, the Jabatan Statistik has this to say: SERVICES The Services sector rose to 6.3 per cent supported by Wholesale & Retail Trade and Finance & Insurance. The growth of 5.9 per cent in Wholesale & Retail Trade was led by the Retail segment. In addition, the growth in Motor Vehicles segment accelerated to 8.4 per cent during the quarter (Q1 2012: 0.2 per cent) propelled by the higher sales of motor vehicles. Finance & Insurance expanded to 6.6 per cent boosted by the higher fee income on banking activities and increase in premium income on insurance activity. Meanwhile, Business Services picked up to 8.8 per cent underpinned by professional services related to engineering activities. The growth in motor vehicles sales is due to lack of viable public transport, the need to preserve Proton and hence the Malaysian public is burden with overpriced cars that build on hire purchase loans and interest repayment.  CONSTRUCTION The Construction sector expanded remarkably at 22.2 per cent from 15.5 per cent in the previous quarter. The growth was spearheaded by the robust performance in the Civil Engineering and Residential. The vibrant performance of Civil Engineering at 39.8 per cent was spurred by major infrastructure projects mainly in Sabah, Melaka, Pulau Pinang and Perak. During the quarter, Residential continued the strong momentum at 20.1 per cent driven by the high-end residential projects in Klang Valley. So residential housing is the key driver of growth but is this "growth" a quality growth i.e. improving the quality of life of the people? For a minority per yes but for the majority, house prices increase have far outstripped salary/earnings growth. Try asking for a salary increment that matches the house price increase and see what your boss say. Therefore, while it looks good when economic growth is measured on inflated house prices, the sentiment on the ground is very much different. Property market in certain parts of Malaysia, notable Klang Valley are subject of speculation. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Efforts to curb property speculation By Zaidi Isham IsmailPublished: 2012/08/15Share PDF THE government will initiate measures to address various issues gripping the property sector, including curbing rampant speculative activities in the market. Metro Kajang Holdings Bhd group managing director Datuk Eddy Chen Lok Loi said for example, a house built in Perlis cost RM250,000 but the same house using the very same materials but built in KLCC would cost RM1 million Meanwhile, National House Buyers Association secretary general Chang Kim Loong said all parties, including the government and developers, need to launch proactive measures to stop steep price increases in the property market due to false demand and excessive speculation fuelled by easy mortgages and low real property gain tax. "There is a huge mismatch between what the average household income can afford to buy compared to what is available in the market. A homeless generation will emerge and create various social problems," said Chang. Chang said the average rakyat in a major urban area was struggling to buy his dream home where the average household with income of RM5,962 in 2009 would not be able to qualify for a 90 per cent loan over a 30-year period. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The crazy property prices mean crushing housing loan debts. And it will also deprive families of having more money to be spent elsewhere, curtailing their purchasing power hence hindering other consumer commercial activities. The crazy house prices have made many Malaysians bearing housing loan debts at beyond reasonable level compared to their earning as well as what their counterparts in other countries as the article below shows: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Generally a debt service ratio of 30% is acceptable, i.e. one third of a household income is used to pay off debt (principal and interest). However, the Malaysian household debt service ratio was 9.1% in 2006, rose to 49.0% in 2009 and dropped slightly to 47.8% in 2010. This means that on average almost half of a household's income goes to repaying debts. Thus after paying off the debt there is not much left to spend on food, transport, education, and for emergencies. Should the breadwinner fall sick or lose his job, the family will find it hard to make ends meet and loans may be defaulted.   In fact, the GDP numbers hide the ever increasing debts – national debts which have to be paid by tax payers, housing and personal loans which also have to be paid by tax payers. This is no more than debt fuelled pumped up growth That is why bankers are having a great day and it shows in their contribution to growth in GDP Read more at: http://wangsamajuformalaysia.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-debt-driven-54-gdp-growth-in-q2-2012.html |
| Posted: 26 Aug 2012 01:03 PM PDT We must once again, get together to show our might as one force, as an Anak Bangsa Malaysia leading to the final shove when the wall will crumble and fall, over the other side is a new beginning where hopes are renewed, where our dreams of a nation of brothers and sisters are realised and where opportunities are in abundance and sufferings no longer seen. This is a dream that could only be achieved if enough of us believe in it and are willing to participate in action towards it. When we get together in pursuit of our dream we generate a powerful energy that permeates all strata of our society that will instinctively share the energy of the dream that we so desire. To do this we must overcome whatsoever remnants of fear that stands to deny us of what is rightfully ours, if we can overcome this plastic fear that veils us from the truth we would be able to see in reality the power of our dream which will be clearly visible and within touching distance. I beg you to understand one simple fact that this nation belongs to all of us and the fact that it is up to every single one of us, we should know that we need to act and not just talk or worse still, leaving it to others to fight for what we want. We are not spectators in this episode of our nation, we are not watching a movie with a box of popcorn, we are all the real actors that will decide the outcome of the conflict between good and evil, between failures and success, between ruins and opportunities, ruins if we leave it to others and opportunities if we were to act ourselves and in the words of my friend Haris Ibrahim is "to take ownership". There are yet those who claims to be leaders yet holds half a pint of faith, their faith in their fellows is lacking and their sincerity unbinding, they fail to listen and their sights are blurred, they fail to seek out the people and see only numbers in creation when it should be in cohesion. They don't keep their house and don't understand the principles of sharpening their ax, which is shared by Abraham Lincoln here quoted; "If you give me 6 hours to chop down the tree i will spend 4 hours in sharpening the ax". They them self add to the fear when they should be open to the challenges and remove all doubts from their fellows, their doubts are created when too much of self is in play, they must see the bigger objectives and the dreams of the people so that the power of the dream could be tapped and generated. This nation is not about political parties but about the people, the rakyat, it is not the call of the politicians but the call of the rakyat. And a good leader is in sync with the heart of the people and gets his own people prepared for the eventuality. People, fellow brothers and sisters, we must take charge of this nation if you share the same dream that i think we share, the dream of a better nation for the next generation and we are the builders of that dream, all of us, let not others tell you otherwise, let not others tell you how it should be done, where they doubt your intellectual capacity and treat us like just another number and of lesser mind. We need leaders of man not leaders of parties and groups where the play is in within and not with the rakyat at large, we need leaders who will share the truth and not those that treat you as a lesser being, yet again overlooking the power of the dream of the rakyat. |
| 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