Incriminating crime

If the people in charge of national security and economic planning were to trouble themselves to think harder and clearer on the ecosystem of Malaysia based on putting Malaysia's national interest first and foremost they ought to come to a realisation that they have much to expiate.

First, on what basis was the decision made to open the spigots to allow cheap foreign labour to enter Malaysia?

If it was due to intense lobbying by the property development and plantation sectors, then, the basis may be wrong if the decision makers failed to take into account the socio-economic impact of the usage of cheap foreign labour.

Did anyone bother to prepare econometric models to consider the displacement effect that cheap foreign labour will have on Malaysia's own indigent labour class? Where would this class of Malaysians go when they are displaced by cheap foreign labour? Where will they get their income? With low skills, poor education it is not a stretch to forecast that these Malaysians will be pushed to the fringes of society.

And, "fringes of society" clearly means crime, lawlessness and unsavoury activities.

Second, what is so wrong about raising the income levels for the labouring class?

Yes, the cost of everything will rise commensurately. What is the big deal with that if it lifts up the entire substratum of Malaysian society?

Plantation sector

In the case of the plantation sector, no access to cheap foreign labour would have resulted in higher wages for Malaysian labour AND it would have forced 2 things to happen-

1. Increase the incentive and urgency to innovate the plantation sector. This may manifest itself in the form of more intense downstream activities and discovery of new applications for rubber and palm oil products.
2. Increase the incentive and urgency for Malaysian companies to search for cheaper and lower cost countries to establish plantation activities.

Instead, due to molly-coddling by the Malaysian government, the silly and myopic arguments used by Malaysian plantation owners resulted in an inefficient plantation sector that is now at risk of losing Malaysia's edge to countries like Indonesia and those in the African and South American continents.

The sad reality is that Malaysia was bound to lose its dominance in the plantation sector anyway. But Malaysian companies should still be the dominant players in the rubber and palm oil sectors IF they now work at double-speed to conquer the emerging upstream plantation jurisdictions.

Don't just be the kings of our own backyard! That should be the message that the Malaysian policy makers should be exhorting the plantation sector to do.

Property development sector

As for the property developers the self-same critique also holds true.

No access to cheap foreign labour would have resulted in higher wages for Malaysian labour AND it would have forced 2 things to happen-

1. Cost of construction would have gone up. Prices of properties would have gone up. The property market would have been cooler and less speculative. Property developers would have faced profit margin compression but, still be profitable.
2. Increase the incentive and urgency to innovate the property and construction sector by using different construction materials and using better equipment.

Better paid Malaysian workers

Better paid Malaysian labour with a commensurate higher cost of living has the salutary effect of improving the quality of life in Malaysia. 

Malaysian labourers will have a chance to get their children a better education. This type of mindfulness, about the need to have a better education, usually comes with having better income.

With less cheap foreign labour and a Malaysian labour class that has better wages we will experience a higher cost of living. This higher cost will be tempered by higher income all around for Malaysians. The resulting effect is less crime.

Another resulting effect is that Malaysia and its citizens will have to greater incentive to move up the value chain of skills.

My visceral and indelible impression of reasonably high wage income in the labour class was a mature age classmate in Melbourne Australia in the 1980s. Robert D. was already in his late 30s when he enrolled in Law School. He chose to be a bricklayer for some years. It was a decent enough job, income-wise. Constructions sites in Australia have always been safe and clean environments, unlike the cesspools and dengue-breeding places we have here.

My other impression is that of a Greek Australian family who still manifested a strong Greek-accented Ozzified English when spoken in a reasonable posh suburb in Melbourne. The guy owned just one heavy duty lorry which he drove himself. His neighbours were bank managers and white-collar management level. Is that cool, or, what?

I'm not saying that we have to be at that kind of stratospheric level. I'm just saying that for the benefit of all Malaysians, super-rich, rich, well-off, breakeven and poor, our economic system must put Malaysians first.

Not just the rich. Not just the owners of plantation and property development sectors.

Just let the common wealth of our country percolate down more than it does now.

This can be done, in direct fashion, via enlightened economic and labour management policies.

There are a trillion reasons as to why the scenario that I have sketched will be argued to be impractical, idealistic and, even Utopian.

But, as with all right-thinking Malaysians, I wish for a better society and a better country for my family, my friends and my colleagues.

Is this challenge too much to ask or, to expect?

Emasculation: BN as a coalition brand

To me, blogging has always been about putting wayward and happenstance thoughts out into the open.

If I have more serious thoughts, I would reduce them into academic papers and have them published as I have in certain academic and professional journals.

This entry is about wayward and happenstance thoughts.

The formation of the Alliance Party comprising UMNO, MCA and MIC was an astute strategy to address a fragmented market of voters in the 1950s and 1960s.

Equally so, the formation of the even larger Barisan Nasional coalition was, in many ways, a response to the needs and demands of an even more fragmented market of voters in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.

The new millennium was dramatic for the BN largely due to the formal retirement of Dr M. 

Dr M was the embodiment of and, may well be the last of the paternalistic political leaders Malaysia will ever see. In the immediate euphoria of the post-Mahathir era, BN's successor leadership reaped the benefits and outpouring of goodwill towards the BN brand. BN's landslide win in 2004 was comprehensive and cut across every conceivable section of the Malaysian electorate.

If ever there was an example of a collective high, 2004 was it for Malaysian politics. The stuffy air in an enclosed room was replaced by the fresh air of greater political freedom.

What happened then? 

There is enough good political analyses already published that accurately document and contain sound inferences about why that groundswell of goodwill toward BN in 2004 was lost in 2008. 

This entry is about GE 2013 from the narrow perspective of BN as a political brand and, more to the point, why only the main sub-brand of UMNO attracted its traditional loyal following while the other component sub-brands suffered badly.

Why did the voters not embrace the BN brand when presented with non-UMNO sub-brands?

There are many factors, of course. There is the factor of the urban voters. There is the issue of racial groupings. Perhaps, we can add the possibility of personality, religion, campaign messages and strategy and many other factors. This is fertile ground for much socio-politica analysis.

I choose to look at only one possible factor. Emasculation.

Yes. You got it right. Emasculation.

The loss of power and, for want of a better word, masculinity.

Castration. Cutting off the cojones. Weakening. Deprivation of vigour.

These words describe the non-UMNO components of the BN.

This, to my mind, was a major factor that explains why non-UMNO BN components fared badly.

In the mid-1990s, I was, like the rest of the world, enthralled by Tiger Woods and his amazing skills and his will to win. He wore the Nike brand.

Everyone wanted to be like Tiger. Hell, I wanted to be like Tiger. How do I get to feel like I can be like Tiger? 

I bought the brands that Tiger wore. I bought Nike.

And, what, you may ask, has this Tiger-fixation episode got to do with the failure of the non-UMNO BN components?

Those of us who are either of a certain vintage or, who are conscientious armchair students of Malaysian history, may recall the deep personal bonds of friendship between the leaders of UMNO, MCA and MIC in the 1950s and 1960s. They would hang out, spin yarns, gulp down brandy and enjoy jocular banter. It was a true fraternity of the political elite.

Voters felt that if there was any issue that needed to be resolved these leaders would do so in a congenial setting and discuss matters with civility.

There was still evidence of this in the 1970s.

It disappeared in the 1980s.

BN went from a partnership of friends and transformed into a large corporation of strangers.

There is a light theory that it didn't help matters that Dr M never played golf. So, one could never catch up with him for casual chit chats with him in various states of undress in the dressing room. He was only accessible in controlled settings. That may be just golfers' bias. But, then again...

Anyway, the point that I am hazarding is that the electorate is neither blind nor deaf nor dumb. 

It can see the glaring contrast between the power and the glory that UMNO's leaders embody and the emasculated parochialism, insularity and pettiness that successive non-UMNO BN leaders has embodied.

Juxtapose that with the constant joint appearances of the Pakatan Rakyat leaders from PKR, PAS and DAP and their distinctive combined party logos in the shirts worn by the Pakatan Rakyat leaders and  the flags flown.

The contrast in imagery was that leaders from the non-UMNO BN components needed to "make an appointment" to have access to power, while Pakatan Rakyat leaders could just look each other up without any formal arrangements.

This is what I mean about the emasculation chanelled by non-UMNO BN components.

The marketing message of Pakatan Rakyat was, even for neutrals, sublime, exciting and seductive.

Who doesn't want a multiracial leadership and national unity? Who doesn't want leaders with power or, at least, real access to power?

Who doesn't respond to positive vibes that channels Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream" oratory?

In contrast, voters were entreated with non-UMNO BN components like the MCA leaders pleading with the electorate not to give them "an egg" (meaning "zero"). Worse still, voters were abused with  self-indulgent and poor karaoke singing and forced to take home DVDs of candidates singing.

All of us want leaders who can hold themselves as a prism through which we can identify the best things that we wish for ourselves, our children and our community. We want leaders who can mirror our desires and aspirations.

The UMNO-BN leaders were obviously able to channel all that.

The non-UMNO BN leaders were not able to. Instead, they channeled a sense of emasculation and self-indulgence. This is not something the electorate want to see or feel when it examines the slate of political candidates.

This, to my mind, is the challenge for BN as a coalition brand. I admit that it is a simplistic entry; superficial even. That is why it is only a blog post and, not an academic paper.

The challenge is at many, many levels. Each BN component needs an internal overhaul. 

Someone made an observation to me recently, that the MCA's party constitution is so skewed to favour the incumbents that there is almost no way for any maverick to move the delegates to challenge the incumbents. So, it becomes a cesspool where elite factions fight each other without allowing young leaders to enter.

In fairness, the same accusation can be hurled at the Pakatan Rakyat components.

So, the difference may be in the area of the attitude of the leaders. 

For some reason, the Pakatan Rakyat is able to attract bright and young political talent and fast-track them into the electoral fray.

In contrast, BN components appear to be hierarchical, bureaucratic, staid, slow, ponderous, troglodytic and unimaginative.

Is this just a perception? 

Judging from the harsh feedback from the electorate in GE13, BN components have got a lot of soul-searching and structural reconstruction to embark on.

Leaders like Saifuddin Abdullah may well have hit the nail on the head in renewing the call for direct memberships into BN.

Voters need to feel like they are voting for candidates who have real power.

BN leaders may say, what is the point of voting for Pakatan Rakyat candidates who are not in government? Where got power, like that?

But, they would be wrong.

A good wakil rakyat will get the job done or, be seen to try to get the job done. That, to the voter, may be good enough...for now; someone to lend an ear; someone to lend a shoulder to lean on; someone to cry out about your plight; someone to represent your frustration; someone who can stand up for you.

So, please get to work!

How to Listen When Someone Is Venting

I found this piece here so apposite to the political situation that Malaysia is in. The only thing is that the author, Mark Goulston did not end with the obvious advice on what next to do after dealing with the venting. Here's an extract-

As I have written before, when people are upset, it matters less what you tell them than what you enable them to tell you. After they get their feelings off their chest, that's when they can then have a constructive conversation with you. And not before.

I reproduce the piece in full below for your edification-

I still remember how it felt when, as a medical student, I drained my first abscess in a patient. We called the procedure "I & D" which stands for "Incision and Drainage" (I told you not to read this just before you eat).

When you do an I & D, you locate what is the most protruding and bulging part of the abscess, wipe it off with alcohol, than pierce it with a scalpel. At that point the pus comes out first, followed by any blood. After this procedure, you may put the person on an antibiotic. Over time, the wound heals from the inside out. If you don't drain the abscess first, and just start with the antibiotics, the undrained pus may prevent the wound from healing.

Federal Cabinet: The best and the brightest

I had to borrow the title of David Halberstam's seminal book (1972) on the Vietnam War for this post. While Halberstam's title was intended to contrast negatively the excellent academic and corporate credentials of the U.S. Cabinet members who somehow lost their objectivity and led the U.S. in the miasma and morass of the Vietnam War, this post hopes to address a reverse scenario in the context of the new Federal Cabinet that BN will be forming.

Whether or, not, the MCA maintains its stand to reject Cabinet positions under the new Najib Administration, I hope that Najib will look beyond the BN component party leaders to form the new Cabinet. 

I hope Najib will use all resources available to him to seek and, persuade, capable people to assume Cabinet positions.

People like Koh Tsu Koon and Rais Yatim were ineffective in the previous Cabinet as were a few others.

Whatever brickbats that may have been thrown at him, the elevation of Idris Jala to a Cabinet position was quite an inspired decision. For better or, for worse, Idris Jala put in the type of effort that many Cabinet members didn't.

So, Najib should look beyond the pale of the BN component parties in an effort to seek out capable Malaysians to serve the country and narrow the rural-urban divide that seems to have formed as shown in the 2013 General Elections.

I say, make full use of the Senatorships, to get in the talent.

Don't just look at the paltry offerings in the larder.

The task at hand, if anything, is to continue to focus on the Economic Transformation Programme.

The capital market has responded positively to the certainty that a continued BN Administration offers. This is a very good re-start.

The concern remains about the debt levels of the Malaysian government. The fiscal deficit has to be pared down. This is a must.

The handouts must be reduced. There must be a better managed needs-based welfare programme that alleviates poverty and social challenges at a more target-specific level. No more carpet-bombing of money handouts, please.

While Malaysia's social safety nets are already quite good, it can be better.

Legacy

I read with great interest the latest blog post by etheorist here. The blogger wrote about the fixation many of us have with the accumulation of wealth and went on, wistfully, to reflect on the implications of this wealth-fixation of ours. The blogger raised much food for thought (if we have time for that).

I also read, with sadness, the Obituary of Datuk Khoo Eng Choo. Datuk Khoo was the leader of PriceWaterhouseCoopers in the 1990s together with YM Raja Arshad.

I didn't know Datuk Khoo personally nor have I ever worked with him.

The anecdotal information that I have suggests that Datuk Khoo and his team built the old PWC from the foundation and legacy left by the late Jaafar Hussein who had moved on to helm the Malayan Banking group and, later, became the Bank Negara Governor.

Datuk Khoo and Raja Arshad and the team they had built PWC's reputation and sealed its dominance of the accounting profession in Malaysia. 

To acquire market leadership in any field, in any market jurisdiction, requires great skill, care, industry and foresight. By all accounts Datuk Khoo had these qualities in abundance.

As any great leader will attest, the path to success is littered with injured egos and perceived unfair treatment by team members who were found wanting. I am certain that Datuk Khoo who is said to have possessed Napoleonesque qualities has his fair share of detractors.

This should not cloud his legacy and the achievements of the team that he led at PWC in the 1990s.

I hope that those who worked beside him will not consign him and his work to ignominy. 

Where etheorist's blog post and the matter of Datuk Khoo's legacy merges in my mind is the issue of what types of goals and values that we should have and what we want our offspring and successors to embrace.

I wish to hazard a proposition that perhaps a life well lived should, ideally, leave a zero sum legacy where people will say that in our lifetime we did not leave the world worse off that when we first arrived.

I would hazard a corollary proposition that if we were to be excessively exuberant during our lifetime, that excessive exuberance led to an improvement to the world that we lived in.

For, if we left the world a worse off place than it was when we first arrived, we would have committed a crime, or, as the people of faith calls it, a sin.

So, picking up on etheorist's thread, our industriousness in wealth accumulation should lead us to acquire and enjoy a comfortable and reasonable luxurious life of happiness and when the time comes for us to depart, we should only leave behind enough for our children to receive a decent education and an adequate stipend for them to get started on their life's journey.

Anything exceeding that should be bequeathed for the betterment of the community.

Those, I believe, are reasonable goals and values for each of us. 

Where good ideas come from

I'd like to think that my mind has sufficient complex creativity with sparks flying in the way that Steven Johnson's YouTube displays below. But, in mock humility, I should say that I'm not so sure my mind is this good.

What about your mind?

What ails the GLCs?

I have been reading all the chatter about GLCs (both Malaysian and elsewhere) and their travails. Many who take a macro view are peeved that GLCs, being large corporations with the backing of sovereign governments, have an inside track to plum projects and deals. These inside tracks and opportunities have a perceived cost because they are done at the expense of depriving privately held corporations (as opposed to those that have government or statutory shareholding ownership) of the opportunity to bid for the plum projects and deals.

Another peeve is that GLCs are often in serious and earnest asset-shuffling mode. Often, these asset-shuffles aka "mergers and acquisitions", result in 1+1=1 instead of 1+1=3 or more in value creation. In other words, there are seldom any true synergistic benefits arising post-merger or acquisition.

Truth be told, this applies not just to GLCs, but also to many large corporations.

There are many examples of these disastrous corporate exercises. The Time Warner and AOL deal is probably the all-time classic example. Closer to home, the example would be the great Sime Darby merger.

So, here we have 2 basic issues-

First, the allegation that GLCs "crowd out" the private sector.

Second, GLCs are merely shuffling assets and playing a game of stacking numbers i.e. shuffling assets and cashflows between and amongst different corporate entities to produce a financial result that shows higher profits and greater valuations.

The first issue is obvious. So, I'll just leave it there.

The second issue is more interesting to me. Let's try to taxonomise them.

I see 2 types of large publicly-listed corporations, GLC or privately-held.

Type A is a corporation that thrives on asset-shuffling and, mergers and acquisitions.

There are 2 kinds of Type A corporations.

Type A-1, are corporations that conduct asset-shuffling, mergers and acquisitions within a clearly defined core business. These corporations try not to stray outside their field of expertise. Rupert Murdoch's News Corp is a good example of this. That said, News Corp screwed up big time with Myspace, acquiring Myspace's parent company, Intermix Media for USD500 million in 2005 and recently selling it for a paltry USD35 million. Nevertheless, the constant asset-shuffling, mergers and acquisitions give market investors paroxysms of orgasmic highs and cold turkey lows. It's a combination of thrills and fear. Like riding on a roller-coaster.

Type A-2, are corporations that conduct asset-shuffling, mergers and acquisitions with an assortment of businesses. There are many Malaysian privately-held corporate groups that do this. I shall not name them. And, then, there are the institutions that own the GLCs such as Khazanah Nasional and PNB.

Type B corporations are more honest-to-goodness, stick-to-what-you-know-and-grow types. Apple is, of course, the sexy example.  Another is IBM. 

Most of the criticism is levelled at Type A-2. 

The key issue is how well the drivers of corporate deals understand the core business of these corporations.

Throughout the world, not just in Malaysia - many, many large corporations, not just GLCs - are now led by finance men. These are numbers-crunchers. These are people who only look at numbers and how they stack together. These people do not see businesses, business history or people. They only see numbers. They are like the evil twin of Neo in the Matrix Trilogy.

Why is this a concern?

Well, the concern is that these finance men do not know how to manage core operations. Many of them don't believe that it is necessary for them to learn business operations. Many of them believe that the numbers are all that matter.

What is the market share today? How does it compare with the last quarter? What is the projected market share in the next quarter?

What is the pre-tax profit today? How does it compare with the last quarter? What is the projected pre-tax earnings in the next quarter?

What are the trade receivables today? How does it compare with the last quarter? What is the projected collections in the next quarter?

What is the inventory today? How does it compare with the last quarter? What is the projected inventory in the next quarter?

Reams of excel spreadsheets are generated. Lots of score cards are prepared. Numbers. Digits. Plus. Minus. Percentages.

To be fair, the same questions that the finance men ask are equally asked by business leaders who worked their way up from operational ranks. 

But...

But, the comprehension and insight offered by these numbers differ markedly between the finance men and the business leaders who were involved in the core business - whether from the production side or the sales department.

I have nothing against finance men. Some turn out to be great business leaders. Many others turn out to be the investors' greatest nightmare.

It may be that the excessive presence of finance men - who have no clue about the core business, the human capital in these businesses and the future potential of the businesses - is the factor that ails the GLCs.

I may be wrong. 

But, I don't think I am.

The remedy?

Don't discard willy-nilly the homegrown career managers. Give them a fair shake at leading the core businesses.

When is enough, enough?

When you're already a tycoon the acquisition of additional assets is a mere intellectual challenge in a game where winners are measured objectively in the form of dollar value.

The problem arises when in chasing for superlative success in this game the tycoon's normally excellent judgment is clouded by the hunger to beat out the competition and grab the trophy.

And, suddenly, unwittingly(?), the line is crossed.

In the test of character, it is a fail.

In the measure of success, it is still a win because the desperate moves that crossed the line from being competitive and skillful to one who is felt to use underhand tactics that crosses the legal line, still results in the increase of net worth in dollar terms.

Sadly, in ethical and moral terms it means bankruptcy.

Which is to be treasured? High net worth in dollar terms? Or, high regard and a sterling reputation to take to the grave?

Which is better? The ignominy of being the richest S.O.B. who ever lived? Or, to be the greatest pillar of integrity that is held up forever as the ultimate role model of business leadership?

These are questions that should haunt those of us who have any pretension of ambition.

BN: Downsizing to be nimble and true

While most people like to plunge into the rough and tumble of cat-calling and invective of happenstance events such as movies with food themes that contain socio-political commentaries, I find it more useful to examine our key political players for structure and process.

The 3 major components of the BN are facing a spot of bother.

They each have bloated memberships.

I use the word "bloated" most deliberately because, I dare say, two-thirds of their membership are filled with passive "hangers-on" who became members in the hope of material gain.

I have experienced several times, a situation where prior to meetings with certain MCA Ministers, I was asked whether I was a party member. 

Such a question typifies the 3 major BN component parties.

This is based on the paradigm established in the 1980s when BN's hegemony writ large and the patronage game was all the rage.

It is likely that in that era (which may have ended in March 2008), the leadership perception was that a large membership base will guarantee a large base of human capital that can be tapped whenever required.

The question that should rightly haunt BN leaders is, what happened to the millions of members in March 2008?

Malaysia has changed from the times when it was important for political parties to enter into business directly to institutionalise the warchest to fight all future political battles. Such a move is now questioned by all and sundry - from the rarefied air of the corporate suites of GLCs to the warungs.

Malaysia's population has become better educated and, some say, wealthier. And, there is also that Pandora's Box that will never ever close again, the Internet and social media.

Troglodytes in the BN ranks, particularly those in charge of multimedia, see the Internet and social media as a threat. They constantly attack the medium with appalling results. For, the Internet and social media behaves exactly like the mythical Hydra.

So, what to do?

I will provide a simple example that will address both the issue of bloated memberships (and, therefore, the need to downsize) and the strategy to engage the Internet and social media.

Just study the wildly successful Obama Presidential Campaign of 2008. That's the key.

The other is, to slowly pare down the bloated "inventory" that are the passive memberships. 

The third key takeaway should be to discard the treasure chest - yes, discard it by making earnest and sincere gifts of these valuable assets, such as controlling stakes in publicly-listed companies - and makes gifts of them to established and credible non-profit and charitable institutions - give it back to the people, so to speak.

Then and, I believe, only then, can the BN components re-engage the body politic with positive outcomes.

The key is how to engender the spirit of volunteerism in the mass of voters.

There are many, many, many examples of political parties with small membership bases that attract throngs of volunteers in the run-up to each political election - usually young voters - who are attracted to and, buys into the platform and manifesto of the political party in question.

The irony is that it is difficult for BN to find volunteers because everyone called upon by the BN expects to be paid. That used to be a good thing. Post-Match 2008, it's become a shitty situation.

A volunteer internalises the choice to support you. They are invested in you and your cause.

Paid party hacks and their fellow travellers have no heart because they're only in it for the money.

If BN components cannot see the difference, then, they're cooked.

This is a tough and stark choice.  

MCA: Get the emotional connection going

The MCA almost lost its underpants in the General Elections of 2008.

With GE13 looming its luminaries are attempting (belatedly) to enter into cyberspace more aggressively.

The MCA has also offered to buy Menara Multi-Purpose in KL as a long-term investment.

What do these two disparate actions mean?

Let's not forget the cat-calling and trading of barbs between the ex-President and the sitting President.

I'm not about to psychoanalyse the MCA. That would be the stuff of serious academic analysis. I will not presume to trivialise a political institution as important as the MCA.

Yes, the MCA is a political institution. It has a long and distinguished history. Hell, "renegade" MCA guys like Ong Yoke Lin in the KL Branch went against Tan Cheng Lock in 1951 to tie-up with UMNO at a time when Onn Jaafar's Independence of Malaya Party was the preferred flavour of the British colonial administration. Historical records confirm this.

So, how the heck did MCA's leaders lose the plot? How did they get the party so emasculated that it is now a mere eunuch? 

During the 1974 General Elections (yes, the one where all Chinese Malaysians were entreated to the photo-op of Tun Razak shaking hands with Chairman Mao), my father's car was festooned with mini BN flags. My father was an MCA Branch Chairman.

Where is this leading to?

I think I read somewhere that the MCA has a net asset worth in excess of RM2 billion (or, maybe more).

With that kind of deep pockets, the MCA can spend on some serious marketing and advertising campaign.

This is no time to be parsimonious. 

Come GE13, the MCA will be fighting for its political life.

It's time to sprinkle some magic dust.

My humble suggestion to the great egos at the MCA (yes, I've met some of them. And, yes, I did have to look up to the heavens for some of them. Though, to be fair, many MCA leaders were suitably modest...which is one of the minor reasons why I'm even bothering to write this.) is to consider an advertising and public relations campaign.

MCA has the financial resources. It has deep enough pockets to execute a good pre-GE13 campaign.

Whatever MCA has been doing to-date is too little and too lost in the cacophony of Malaysian politics.

And, by the way, getting nubile young Wanita MCA lasses to do tweets won't be enough. They'll either be too cheesy and effusive or, worse, become tweet-bitches if they are too aggressive. 

What the MCA needs is to tell its story.

The MCA story needs to be told at several levels.

To the mature demographic, the emotional connection is to MCA's role in the founding of the nation. Hearken back to the days when the MCA had Ministers holding substantive portfolios such as Trade and Commerce and Finance. Apart from the populace, there's no harm reminding big brother UMNO that when there was an MCA guy in charge, the Finance portfolio was well-run.

To the middle-class demographic, the MCA needs to create an emotional connection.

To the entry-level voting demographic, the MCA needs to provide an edgy message beyond just whacking the DAP and whacking hudud. The MCA has to go beyond making lame appeals to UMNO. The MCA has to realise that saying that there will be no MCA Ministerial representation if it gets less than the number of seats it currently has won't cut it with the voters.

The entry-level voting demographic needs to get an emotional connection with the MCA. They need to get beyond the cynical view that everyone who joins the MCA is in it for the money alone and, everything else are platitudes.

I don't have the answers as to what emotional messages need to be created. Nobody is paying me to think that hard about the MCA! 

I can only give clues. 

By the way, although my father was an MCA Branch Chairman many, many moons ago, I don't have any emotional connection to the MCA. I felt something momentarily in the late 1980s. But, since then I've lost it. Nada. Nothing.

But, wait a minute, the fact that I constantly write about the MCA, UMNO and BN, less about the DAP and Pakatan, should give you a clue.

Needless to say, I am jaded with BN as a whole because of Perkasa and PPSMI. Both matters reek of manipulative opportunism by a desperate BN machinery. The rakyat can see through the ruse and, they ain't buyin.

My humble view is that there was never any need for BN "to go there" - to the darkest recesses of the Malaysian psyche.

So, back to the MCA.

The MCA needs to ratchet up its emotional connection to Malaysians, Chinese or otherwise.

That's the key...the emotional connection.

Get the message right and Malaysians like me may give it a real, hard look.

Federation of Europe

The EU has 2 stark roads to take. It is at the fork in the road.

One road leads to the dismantling of the EU itself, starting with the break-up of the common currency, Euro. It's a bad outcome.

The other road is further integration. The formation of a federation. Or, a confederation.

The second road emerges because of the need for the stronger EU members to support (bailout) the weaker ones.

The second road is consistent with the vision offered by Bertrand Russell many, many years ago. Lord Russell wrote (which I have extracted from his essay, Political Ideals)-

The whole conception of trade, which has been forced upon
us by manufacturers who dreaded foreign competition, by trusts which
desired to secure monopolies, and by economists poisoned by the virus
of nationalism, is totally and absolutely false. Trade results simply
from division of labor. A man cannot himself make all the goods of
which he has need, and therefore he must exchange his produce with
that of other people. What applies to the individual, applies in
exactly the same way to the nation. There is no reason to desire that
a nation should itself produce all the goods of which it has need; it
is better that it should specialize upon those goods which it can
produce to most advantage, and should exchange its surplus with the
surplus of other goods produced by other countries. There is no use
in sending goods out of the country except in order to get other goods
in return. A butcher who is always willing to part with his meat but
not willing to take bread from the baker, or boots from the bootmaker,
or clothes from the tailor, would soon find himself in a sorry plight.
Yet he would be no more foolish than the protectionist who desires
that we should send goods abroad without receiving payment in the
shape of goods imported from abroad.

............

Our economic system is topsyturvy. It makes the interest of the
individual conflict with the interest of the community in a thousand
ways in which no such conflict ought to exist. Under a better system
the benefits of free trade and the evils of tariffs would be obvious
to all.

Apart from trade, the interests of nations coincide in all that makes
what we call civilization. Inventions and discoveries bring benefit
to all. The progress of science is a matter of equal concern to the
whole civilized world. Whether a man of science is an Englishman, a
Frenchman, or a German is a matter of no real importance. His
discoveries are open to all, and nothing but intelligence is required
in order to profit by them. The whole world of art and literature and
learning is international; what is done in one country is not done for
that country, but for mankind. If we ask ourselves what are the
things that raise mankind above the brutes, what are the things that
make us think the human race more valuable than any species of
animals, we shall find that none of them are things in which any one
nation can have exclusive property, but all are things in which the
whole world can share. Those who have any care for these things,
those who wish to see mankind fruitful in the work which men alone can
do, will take little account of national boundaries, and have little
care to what state a man happens to owe allegiance.

................................

What is to be desired is not cosmopolitanism, not the absence of all
national characteristics that one associates with couriers,
wagon-lit attendants, and others, who have had everything
distinctive obliterated by multiple and trivial contacts with men of
every civilized country. Such cosmopolitanism is the result of loss,
not gain. The international spirit which we should wish to see
produced will be something added to love of country, not something
taken away. Just as patriotism does not prevent a man from feeling
family affection, so the international spirit ought not to prevent a
man from feeling affection for his own country. But it will somewhat
alter the character of that affection. The things which he will
desire for his own country will no longer be things which can only be
acquired at the expense of others, but rather those things in which
the excellence of any one country is to the advantage of all the
world. He will wish his own country to be great in the arts of peace,
to be eminent in thought and science, to be magnanimous and just and
generous. He will wish it to help mankind on the way toward that
better world of liberty and international concord which must be
realized if any happiness is to be left to man.

.................................

The principle espoused by Lord Russell, if you didn't catch the drift, is that, in the current context, EU members need not fear the loss of nationalism or local culture as they gravitate towards a federal formula. It is akin to having a sense of being part of a huge village. It's going back to the roots of why people chose to live close to each other in the first place.

Euro: The downside of common currency

I'm not sure if the architects of the Euro could have envisaged a widespread economic contagion that covers Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain (hence the porcine acronym of PIIGS).

Were it not for the Euro, I would imagine that if any nation goes into economic turmoil for whatever reason, say, the bursting of asset bubbles, the national currency will depreciate because that nation's debt will invariably increase. The conventional response to economic crisis is the printing of money to finance fiscal deficit.

Where a common currency is in play, which is the case of the PIIGS, there are many more variables. 

One such variable is the obvious differences in the economic health of member countries sharing the common currency.

Unlike the PIIGS, leading member countries like Germany and France are in relatively robust economic health. They would cherish a stable currency at a reasonable value relative to other currencies so that their cross-border trades within and outside of the European Community are predictable. 

But, the dilemma of the economically robust member countries is that they are now reluctant participants to bail out (or, to be politically correct, support) the PIIGS.

The common currency has become the unintended tether that threatens to pull down the healthy economies as they bailout the ailing ones. The awful metaphor is that of the mountaineers who have to deal with fallen colleagues whose lives are, literally, hanging by a thread.

Without the Euro, the PIIGS would have taken a depreciation of their currencies. Such depreciation would have made their exports cheaper. It would have made their tourist attractions cheaper relative to other destinations. Thus the natural ebb and flow of economics would have taken place.

With the Euro, the dilemma of the PIIGS is that their exports remain at a higher value than otherwise. And, visitors would still find the price of hotels, restaurants and trinkets still relatively expensive.

This scenario validates the stubborn resistance of the United Kingdom and many of the Scandinavian countries that resisted the pressure to join the Euro. 

Perhaps it is time to consider the dismantling of the Euro.

UK Riots: Crowdcrime

The spark may have been an unfortunate shooting incident involving the Police in Tottenham. But nothing, nothing can excuse the outbreak of lawlessness in London and other cities in England.

It's not about poverty or lack of opportunities. I just heard on the BBC that the first culprit that was brought before a Magistrate was a teaching assistant!

No, the outbreak is about the phenomenon of what I will term, "safety in numbers". Aided by modern mobile communications and social media, hundreds of energetic youth have been executing the criminal equivalent of "flash mobs", or rather, flashmobs gone awry - I call it "Crowdcrime".

There must have been a realisation in the wake of the initial Tottenham riot that where the number of participants exceeded, say, 50 to 100, the law enforcement adopts a playbook stance that plays right into the hands of the hooligans.

I was flabbergasted when I watched a BBC clip showing 3 pairs of policemen in riot gear (carrying "Captain America" type round shields instead of the head-to-toe height shields that the Malaysian FRU carry) approaching the hooligans tentatively. Needless to say, the hooligans won that round.

I am amazed that in the wake of the London bus bombing some 6 years ago, the law enforcement strategies in the UK is still so inept.

As a matter of interest, I recall a remark made by a Queen's Counsel with whom I was having a beer. The QC was in KL to deliver a paper at a symposium. He marvelled at how much effort us Malaysians put into these symposiums - with the banging of the gong - music - fanfare - I digress.

The QC was musing about how soft the UK Government was about many matters.

This round of random riots throughout the length and breadth of England is confirmation that, not just in the UK, but also places like Norway and throughout the West - a serious review of where Western notions of law enforcement and the rights of criminal suspects need to be made.

There is a need for law enforcement to ensure that we can have quiet enjoyment of our lives.

Anyone that crosses the line drawn by the Law must be brought to book.

In an exigent event such as a riot or acts of hooliganism, law enforcement officials must be allowed to inflict pain - in the form of tear gas, water cannons and, yes, even rubber bullets.

And, I should also suggest that the police use paint guns - oil-based or permanent dye not water-soluble -  to mark the culprits so that after the event, the police can conduct house-to-house searches. Or, conscientious parents and friends can report these "stigmatised" persons.

Worried about innocent bystanders being shot with paint? Don't be. I would not want to be present where a riot was happening. Would you? So, if you're in the wrong place at the wrong time your instinct would have been to run or walk away. If you have stayed as a busybody and got shot with paint, then, you've got some explaining to do. That's all.

If anyone feels that this view is extreme, just ask that poor chap whose 100-year old furniture store in  Croydon was burnt to cinders.

The UK riots are not about any socio-economic or socio-political matters.

The UK riots are a terrible new phenomenon - Crowdcrime.

Rating the U.S. and S&P

It is tempting to gloat. "Told ya!", our minds scream while we sip our caramelised teh tarik to wash down the roti canai at our favourite warung.

It is an ugly, awful spectacle that has unfolded in the U.S.

For those of us of a certain vintage, our minds may have wandered to the possible range of sarcastic remarks that our dear erstwhile leader, Dr M would have spewed at the frail, fratricide that is unfolding in the democratic political process that the U.S. has so earnestly and ideologically promoted over the past century.

Our minds would also have wandered back to the difficult, challenging insults and invective hurled against Malaysia in the despairing days of 1998.

Every orang utan has its day.

We have now witnessed a troubled giant continue an implosion that started in November 2008.

Flashback to 1998. They said that we, in Malaysia, were in denial.

Flash forward to 2008 and, again, to 2011. We see the U.S. printing money to support its government's pump-priming efforts since 2008. They don;t call it "pump-priming", of course. It's nebulously called "Quantitative Easing".

Mind you, I'm not gloating. I'm not gleeful.

These are troubling times.

The U.S. is finding that the pump-priming is not working at the level of Main Street. The pump-priming appears to have only favoured Wall Street and selected Fortune 500 corporations. The average U.S. worker is in economic danger. 

The U.S. Congress is practising partisanship politics in a leaking vessel. The U.S. President is floundering in a hamstrung attempt to lead on a populist line. They call it brinksmanship.

The unkindest blow came when Standard & Poor downrated the U.S. economy, ironically, because of the political chicanery that took the U.S. Government to the brink of bankruptcy (many say it is already bankrupt anyway...or, at least, technically insolvent).

This meandering post is meant to lead to one point. 

I am impressed with how quickly the U.S. eco-system rallies around a perceived threat. This time the threat comes from within. It comes from the S&P downrating.

The amount of criticism heaped at S&P from the U.S. politicians, media commentators and intelligentsia is quite breathtaking.

This leads me to the second point.

Who's the conductor in this cacophonic symphony?

Is it a grouping of vested interests who have designed the greatest economic coup imaginable?

Might the coup be the sovereign default on U.S. Treasury Bills to the extreme detriment of China? (Japan, South Korea and the others will be collateral damage)

This would be one way to re-boot the downward spiralling U.S. economy.

The other would be war.

Think about it.

MCA: Malaysian Communities Association

In spite of being far removed from the rarefied air of politics in Malaysia, there is one clear view about the necessary direction that the Malaysian Chinese Association needs to take if it wishes to avoid the certainty of becoming less and less relevant to all but a select few well-heeled Chinese Malaysian businessmen.

The MCA has to be less about race and more about the Malaysian community.

The present tactic of the MCA in appearing the meet provocative views tossed out by the likes of Perkasa rings hollow.

Worse still, the views offered by the likes of Dr Chua Soi Lek are stymied by the parameters of race. 

I hope that there will be an urgent reassessment by the MCA leadership to earnestly and concertedly frame all issues within the framework of the needs of the Malaysian community as a whole instead of spewing points that are of supposed importance to the Chinese community in Malaysia.

Why deprive MCA of the ability to transcend the racial paradigm?

If the polemics are caught within the framework and agenda of race, it is ALWAYS going to give the appearance of a zero-sum game. If there are 10 units of resources and 4 racial groupings with an average ratio of Bumiputra 5, Chinese 3, Indians 1 and Others 1 the resources will be arguably distributed based on the 5:3:1:1 ratio.

But such a mindset is stupid, myopic, troglodytic and wrongheaded.

The correct perspective should be how to increase the units of resources from 10 to, say, 20 or, even 50?

Even my poorly educated grandfather knew this perspective way back in the 1950s. His metaphor was that of changing the size of the kuali or wok to an ever-increasing size and capacity in order to properly feed a growing family. 

Almost everyone knows that it is an easy and lazy and mischievious tactic to harp on race.

It is foolhardy for the MCA to fall into such a trap.

So, I call upon the MCA to reassess its political strategy and rework its paradigm in order to stay relevant and to win back support.

Otherwise, it will be giving more business to the undertakers.

Malaysia's Third World maintenance culture

Recently I have been attending meetings at buildings owned and largely occupied by some of Malaysia's largest institutional investment and pension funds.

The first thing that struck me was the poor state of the buildings that house these billion-ringgit funds.

It may be that the people managing these funds want to project the image that they are thrifty, even parsimonious, because they are handling funds belonging to large sections of the Malaysian public.

But, that is a silly mindset.

I'll tell you why.

My impression was that the management of these funds are inept and identifying true value.

It felt like they were locked away in a time-warp created one or two decades ago.

The ambience was that of staleness and decay.

It reflected an overly defensive state of mind that did not dare to engage change.

If the management of these funds cannot understand the need to maintain their Headquarters, how can they understand and be alert to changes in the nano second pace of the world of investments?

How can their staff be proud to go to work when their workplace is filled with signs that the urinal is not functioning or that the lifts are under maintenance.

For good measure, my point is that there is a serious need for awareness in thinking and a serious need for mindset change in many of our institutions.

The starting point is the awareness of the importance of proper maintenance and regular renovations and upgrades to buildings and amenities.

Hire a Blogger to Promote Your Business

The evolution of business opportunities driven by technology continues. This piece from Forbes is another example. Food for thought...and maybe action.

________________________

Outsourcing all kinds of social media marketing—from writing a company blog to updating Twitteror Facebook—is becoming a viable option for small business owners who simply don't have the time or inclination to take on the job themselves. Even some entrepreneurs who prefer to handle their own social media may designate a surrogate—in-house or outside—for when they are on vacation, in case they fall ill, or during busy season.

"There is an incredible need for [small and midsize businesses] to get up to speed on social media and social media best practices," says Jo Lilore, who consults on social media marketing and search engine optimization atWebBizStrategy.com in Pasadena, Calif. "Commerce and the Web in general have gone social, and there's no turning back. If you're not up to speed and in the game, you are not only losing potential leads and customers, you are also missing opportunities."

Jon Gelberg, chief content officer at Blue Fountain Media, a New York Web design and online marketing company, agrees. "Businesses are learning how valuable a well-written blog can be as a tool for branding a company, personalizing a company, and establishing the company or individual executive as an expert in their field," he says. But "a poorly written blog, on the other hand, can have a negative impact."

Facebook Shares Get Sliced Into Derivatives as Value Surges

Don't mind me. I'm just putting this up as a resource. But, since I'm at it, I may as well say what I think in the deep recesses of my vacuous mind.

I'm endlessly fascinated and, at the same time, repulsed, by the numbers of ways in which equity, equity-type, financial, and financial-type products can be derived and derived upon derive from a basic equity or debt instrument.

Here we have another derivative product. It is linked to a super-duper company, Facebook. 

This report is from Bloomberg:

Facebook Inc.’s surging valuation is spurring shareholders to slice and dice their stock, giving investors everywhere from Silicon Valley to Wall Street a chance to bet on the company.

How To Innovate Like Steve Jobs

All the stuff that we've been reading in the local mainstream media and, all the interviews *blah-blah**yawn* never really tell you how innovative ideas come about.

There's a scene from a great 1980s movie, Working Girl, where the media tycoon, Trask, asked Melanie Griffith's character (who had been accused of stealing Sigourney Weaver's character's idea), "What was your impulse (for the multi-million dollar merger deal)?"

What was your impulse?

Where does the creative spark come from?

Do rote-learning help with creativity?

Does the lack of reading help with creativity?

Don't worry, I am just being rhetorical. Not substantive. Just light fluff. Just like how politicians talk at general assemblies.

Anyway, back to the point.

The lead-in to the extract that I'm setting out below is that we have to understand that Steve Jobs had a restless and inquisitive mind. He has always been a passionate man. I imagine that he reads voraciously.

True, he was a college dropout. But, remember that, just as it was with Bill Gates, Jobs dropped out of college because he had a kind of epiphany - a realisation that he really wanted to get into the nascent computer industry of the time. It was NOT because he felt that he was too dumb to pass his exams.

Some of us are plodders. We follow the syllabus. Others, like Jobs, have minds that are wired differently.

Remember the scene from A Beautiful Mind where Russell Crowe's character, John Nash was standing at the pub bar in Princeton. The girl walks in. All the men turned their heads to look at her. Suddenly it hit Nash. He saw the patterns of probabilities and possibilities in human behaviour that led him to his great Game Theory postulation. It eventually won Nash the Nobel Prize (was it for Economics or Mathematics?).

So, read on...the piece is surced from Forbes:

There’s a chapter in the book called, “Kick-Start Your Brain.” In it, Gallo explains that what scientists have found is that great innovators practice what’s called “association”. They look outside their industry for ideas they can apply within their organization. Steve Jobs has been doing that his whole life.

Here are two examples:

1) Gallo says Jobs’ inspiration for not having a designated cashier in the Apple Store, came from the Four Seasons hotel chain, which has a concierge;

2) When Jobs and Steve Wozniak were creating the Apple 2 computer, which became one of best selling personal computers of its time, Jobs wanted a computer people would have in their homes. But instead of looking at his competitors, he walked through the kitchen appliance isle at Macy’s for inspiration.

In that same chapter, scientists explain to Gallo that another key to kick-starting your brain and get those creative juices flowing is to try new and novel experiences that push you outside your comfort zone and push your interests.

1MDB and IDR in the landscape of GTP, NKRA and ETP

I love History. I love it because there is much wisdom in having a context and perspective of how we arrived at where we are. Without knowing History, we will be forever groping in the dark. Not knowing which direction to take. Let's see how this post pans out.

Economics of development

In terms of the economics of development, the role of government is to decide how resources are to be allocated. There has to be a presumption that the resources must be allocated equally. There must also be a corollary rule that equal allocation be subject to merits.

"Merits" in the economic sense must mean the positive impact that such an allocation has on economic development and growth for the whole country.

This positive catalytic effect is termed the "multiplier effect".

Having put out the boring contextual matters let us dive into the issues at hand.

In the 1960s and 1970s, our economic planners were exemplary in identifying foreign investment to generate economic development. We had limited financial resources. We needed foreign money in the form of direct investment.

This meant getting foreign investors to set up shop here.

The name of the game at the time was industrialisation. We had a literate workforce. Wage levels were affordable to foreign investors.

Our economic planners made sure there was ample and reliable utilities in the form of roads, electricity and water supply.

Geography of development

But, beyond this generalisation, I wish to emphasise that our economic planners had to face up to the reality that the foreign direct investments (FDI) being manufacturing-based, needed access to a good supply of workers.

The logical location was Petaling Jaya first. PJ met the criteria. Next was Shah Alam, the logical extension since the direction of growth was towards Port Klang where the manufactured goods could be cost-effectively exported.

In the 1980s, Penang got into the game. The economics and locational principles remained the same.

From industrialisation to knowledge and services-based activities

Fast forwarding into the millennium, we witness the shift in emphasis from industrialisation to knowledge and services-based activities.

The reasons are obvious. Over time, the wages have risen. Industrial activity needs cost-effective wages since the skills of the work is limited and repetitive. Easy to train freshies. Experience is not a factor. That is why industrial FDIs have relocated elsewhere.

This situation is where our country is at. This is what people call the "middle income trap". We have become too expensive for industrial processing. But, we may not be skilled enough to get into creative work that pays well.

Finally, we get to 1MDB, IDR, GTP, NKRA and ETP

You may now ask what the relevance of such a long preamble on 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), Iskandar Development Region (IDR), Government Transformation Programme (GTP), National Key Results Area (NKRA) and Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) is?

Well, first, I need to say that this post is my way of expiating reasonably sceptical analyses done previously on these self-same matters.

I have felt strongly since Najib's tenure as Prime Minister began that the government has recognised the urgency of the "middle income trap" situation.

I have also felt very troubled that this urgent economic situation has been clouded by the ripple-effect of over-politicisation and power plays.

The message that the rakyat sent on March 8, 2008 was that change is needed. What the nature of the needed change was is something that we can debate until the cows come home.

Economics trumps politics

The takeaway from March 8, 2008 that I am recommending for your consideration is that the rakyat sensed the urgency of dwindling economic opportunities.

I am aware that many of you will not agree with this narrow interpretation. But, if you adopt the Abraham Maslow heirarchy of priorities, I will resoundingly say that economic welfare trumps any other issue in terms of priority. If you are not convinced, I suggest that you read about Mikhail Gorbachev and the perestroika saga.

So, what we have here today, is a set of nebulous principles in the form of GTP, NKRA and ETP.

If we were to take a helicopter to rise above the thicket of nebulous words in the GTP, NKRA and ETP, we may be able to get a better idea of the socio-economic landscape that confronts Malaysia.

Crossroads

We are at a crucial economic crossroad.

Yes, the GTP, NKRA and ETP are imperfect roadmaps. But, I don't have a better roadmap than this. So, yes, I have been prepared all along to buy-in. Of course, my buy-in is done with eyes wide open. That's the whole point of the exercise of buying-in, anyway. As citizens, taxpayers and stakeholders we must not be indolent. We have to be a part of the thought process.

And, what of IDR?

IDR makes geographic sense, I suppose. It's proximity to Singapore means that the chances of its key investment criteria succeeding is that much higher. The key areas of the IDR are:

6 categories of service-based sectors:

• Creative
• Education
• Financial advisory and consulting
• Healthcare
• Logistics
• Tourism

And, of course, the attractive features are:

• Exemption from the Foreign Investment Committee (FIC) rules
• Flexibilities under the foreign exchange administration rules as follows:
  • Make and receive payments in foreign currency with residents;
  • Borrow any amount of foreign currency from licensed onshore and non-residents;
  • Invest any amount in foreign currency assets onshore and offshore; and
  • Retain export proceeds offshore.
• Unrestricted employment of foreign knowledge workers
• Eligibility for tax incentives

The tax incentives are:

• Exemption from corporate income tax for a period of 10 years in respect of statutory income derived from qualifying activity carried out within the approved node for customers situated within the approved node and outside Malaysia or wholly for customers outside Malaysia. Such activities must commence on or before 31 December 2015; and
• Exemption from compliance with the withholding tax provisions on payment of royalty and services fee to non-residents for a period of 10 years from commencement of operations.

And, what of 1MDB?

Well, from my previous postings you will, no doubt, have gotten an idea of my concern about the debt edifice of 1MDB.

Be that as it may, I do wish for the Sungei Besi Airport redevelopment and KL Financial District projects to be successful.

Here comes the reason for my long preamble.

In a sense, the 1MDB projects can be seen as the present day equivalent of the industrial parks of past decades. Where industrial parks were meant to house and cluster manufacturing concerns, the 1MDB projects are intended to house services-based concerns. This is consistent with the ETP goals, I suppose.

And, I am making a strong assumption that to ensure the financial viability of the 1MDB projects, there will be IDR-like incentives in the pipeline. And, like IDR, the incentives will be legislated by Parliament and decreed by MIDA.

Calling the Klang Valley "Greater KL" is, I suppose, a branding exercise to the global customer base. I have no problems with that just as most of us have no problems with the KLIA being called KLIA even though it is in Sepang. It's about global branding.

Two key takeaways for you

All the foregoing is intended to lead to 2 points that I wish to make:

• First, how about extending the IDR-type incentives to the whole country?
• Second, how about (here I go again) reducing the corporate and personal income tax rate to 18%?

What a stimulus and seriously positive economic multiplier these will have on the whole country.