PAGE hits back: Don't twist the facts for "political expediency"

Sourced from here-

Written by  Noor Azimah Abdul Rahim , PAGE

GMP (Gabungan Mansuhkan PPSMI), led by PAS members is pushing the Government to stand firm on abolishing PPSMI (The teaching and learning of Science and Mathematics in English) yet again, and claiming that only 3% of pupils benefited from PPSMI.

Evidence to support the continuance or abolishment of PPSMI, should be based on the achievements in UPSR, PMR and SPM. That should be the benchmark. The test results of these three national examinations, proved to be very encouraging, clearly supporting the continuance of PPSMI while contradicting all statements that have been brought against PPSMI.

Results are telling

Bear in mind that PPSMI started in 2003. Let’s evaluate the results.

UPSR chart – Passes in BM, English, Science and Mathematics 2001 – 2009, SK & SJK (Source: The Millenium Development Goals 2010)

a)       Science and Mathematics passes were the highest in 2007, but took a dip in 2008 then picked up again in 2009, at the same level of 2007. The lowest result in Science and Mathematics was in the year 2001, when Science and Mathematics were still in Bahasa Malaysia.

b)       The best achievement in English was in the year 2008, and the trend is on the incline ever since the start of PPSMI.

c)       In SK Bahasa Malaysia result was constant, showing that PPSMI has no negative effect on Bahasa Malaysia. In fact, the highest achievement in Bahasa Malaysia was recorded after the implementation of PPSMI. On the other hand, achievements in Bahasa Malaysia in vernaculars schools (Chinese & Tamil) show a declining trend from year 2006/2007.

PMR chart – Passes in BM, English, Science and Mathematics 2001 – 2009, SK and SJK (Source: The Millenium Development Goals 2010)

a)       PMR results were the most affected by the PPSMI switch. It showed a dip in the early years of PPSMI in all main subjects except English; however the trend showed improvement from 2007 onwards for Science and Mathematics

b)       English improved, evident in year 2003 -2009 with PPSMI in operation. Bahasa Malaysia remained constant throughout.

SPM charts – Passes in BM, English, Science and Mathematics 2004 – 2010, Rural & Urban students (Source: MOE)

a)       In Science, the rural students constantly outperformed the urban students throughout the seven-year trend. Clearly the rural students were able to cope with PPSMI contrary to the perception that rural students do not fare well with PPSMI. The highest achievement in Science recorded in the year 2008 by the rural students.

b)       In Mathematics, the rural students were beginning to show improvements from the year 2008 onwards. The best percentage increment took place between the year 2009 and 2010, recorded by the rural students. The best performance by rural students was in 2010. The urban-rural gap showed narrowing trends with the 2010 performance.

c)       In English, both the urban and rural students showed improvement throughout the years, best performance in 2010.

d)       In Bahasa Malaysia, both urban and rural students were at par with each other. The results were constant throughout the seven year trend. It suffers no damage under PPSMI.

English works even for Rural students

PPSMI is working, even for the rural students. That is the conclusion that can be derived from the three examination results under the PPSMI policy. They all showed improvements in English, no reduction in Bahasa Malaysia, and improvements in Science and Mathematics in the last few years.

GMP has joined the bandwagon because they have nothing to lose to push for the abolishment of PPSMI. It is good for them since the parents who cannot get PPSMI could ironically vote for PAS at the coming election.

Parents with national school going children and concerned citizens must come together to ensure that their voices are heard. It is not about politics. It is about the children, and parents want what is best for their children. The Education Act 1996 stipulates that “pupils are to be educated according to the wishes of their parents”, not teachers, not principals, not PTAs and most definitely, not politicians or deluded national language linguists.

This may well be our last ditch attempt to urge the government to offer the PPSMI option to parents who want their children to continue with it indefinitely. Parent Action Group for Education Malaysia (PAGE) urges all parents who support PPSMI to speak up NOW. Parents should do the right thing in the name of their children and the future.

In large numbers, parents voice matter. To date we have 100,000 phone numbers of parents who support PPSMI. Make the voices heard for the sake of the children and for the future of this beloved nation. Yes to PPSMI option. Register at www.pagemalaysia.org .

PAGE is an educational lobbyist that aims to serve as a channel between concerned parents, the Ministry of Education and other educational stakeholders

Khan Academy

My sister and her American family visited Malaysia during the Summer. Her eldest son, having completed his freshman year, will be entering his sophomore year soon.

He is a top-notch student. In my proud avuncular eyes, he's likely to graduate with a magna cum laude or. at the very least, summa cum laude.

But, he was home-schooled. That intrigued me. So, I interviewed him intermittently.

My nephew said that in the first few months it was tough going because it felt strange to be sitting at home and listen to recorded teaching. Eventually he got used to it.

More importantly, I asked him how he got by without any tuition (a popular past time for young Malaysians with kiasu parents). He said he relied on the Khan Academy website.

"What?", I thought.

I furtively moved toward the iMac and googled "Khan Academy".

The website and its YouTube video tutorials blew me away. I, later, found out that it also blew Bill Gates away when he also found out that his daughter (I think it was) was also using the Khan Academy's tutorial resources.

Unlike impecunious me, Bill Gates got the Bill and Melinda Foundation to use its considerable resources to provide financial support for the Khan Academy. 

So, back to the story...

I excitedly whispered to my 16-year old son that he should check out the Khan Academy website for video tutorials on any subject that he needed more help on (in addition to the tuition he was getting .... yes, mea culpa my children attend tuition classes too!).

He looked at me impassively and replied that he WAS already using the Khan Academy resources.

Since my son turned 13, I have been having this discomfiting feeling that my stature has shrunk in his eyes from that of a god to a demi-god to a mere human and, now, close to a cretin (probably already one).

Mind you, I'm beginning to surreptitiously listen to specific tutorial topics in the Khan Academy, particularly on areas that I was such a dud on, like geometry, calculus, algebra and other branches of mathematics.

So, those of you who have school-going children may wish to get them to check out the Khan Academy website. 

And, no, there is no upper-age limit. So, you, too, can get on it and learn something!

The only catch is that EVERYTHING IS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!

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.

Malaysians Say "YES" To PPSMI

I received the message below from PAGE Malaysia. Please support this worthy cause to alert the Malaysian Government and, in particular, the Ministry of Education that it must respect the rights of Malaysian parents on the choice of PPSMI-

Dear parents and friends,

The quality of Malaysian education has deteriorated to an alarming level, with our schools and local universities churning out TOO MANY unemployable graduates who possess a severe lack of ability to communicate or correspond in English despite numerous A's scored in examinations, and producing ‘professionals’ of worryingly poor calibre especially in the fields of science and mathematics.

The former Prime Minister took steps to rectify the situation by implementing the policy of English for the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics and Science (Malay acronym: PPSMI) in 2003. The policy was fully embraced by the Government of the day, and ICT, hardware and software were acquired and designed and teachers were trained. Parents were greatly relieved that finally something concrete was being done to arrest the decline of the Malaysian education system.

Shortly after that, the general election was held and a new minister took over the Education Minister’s portfolio.

Shockingly, after only 6 years of implementation, without even allowing the first cohort of students who started with PPSMI in Primary 1 to complete the full cycle of schooling, the new Education Minister decided to abolish PPSMI in 2012, mainly for political reasons, despite

• huge public outcry and protests from parents and students alike;
• a massive number of letters and articles in newspapers and cyberspace from people in support of PPSMI, far outnumbering those against PPSMI;  
• support for PPSMI from various professional bodies, business concerns and numerous concerned groups both local and international; and
• solid evidence that PPSMI has improved student outlooks and is advantageous for the future of our children and the country.

The Education Minister has IGNORED the pleas of parents and has blatantly disregarded the provision of the Education Act 1996 which stipulates that pupils are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents.

The world is moving forward but yet Malaysia is going backward. We are going to remain stagnant in terms of progress and development.

Students in Form 1 next year will have to study Mathematics and Science in Bahasa Melayu after learning these subjects in English in primary school. Worse, for those who are going to Form 4, after learning Maths and Science in English for 9 years, they will be forced to switch to Bahasa Melayu for 2 years and then back again to English for their tertiary education!

Parents and friends, enough is enough. We are the Rakyat. The days of ‘the Government knows best’ are OVER! A democratic government must abide by the wishes of the majority.

We believe the majority of parents in Malaysia would choose PPSMI for their children if given the option. Unfortunately many choose to remain silent. Why? WE MUST MAKE OUR VOICES HEARD! Our numbers must be significant so that the Minister has no choice but to heed our wishes!

YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE. CLICK HERE AND SAY YES TO PPSMI OPTION !

If you want your children’s school to be given the option of continuing PPSMI in 2012, attached is a simple form for you to REGISTER YOUR SUPPORT. It will take only a few minutes of your time to fill in. We urge you to register immediately as 2012 is just around the corner.

Please also help to forward the email to as many people as possible.

Please be assured that all information you provide will be carefully guarded and we will take great care to ensure that your personal information remains confidential.

Thank you for showing that you care about your children's future AND the future of Malaysia!

Parent Action Group for Education (1266-10-WKL)pagemalaysia@gmail.comwww.pagemalaysia.orgFor Our Children. Demi Anak Kita

-- PAGE Parent Action Group for Education (1266-10-WKL)pagemalaysia@gmail.comwww.pagemalaysia.orgFor Our Children. Demi Anak Kita

Referendum on PPSMI (updated)

I wish to offer my congratulations and my wholehearted support to PAGE and JMM for their joint call upon the Government to hold a nationwide referendum on whether PPSMI should be reversed.

Think about it. This proposal de-politicises the whole PPSMI issue.

No political party will win.

Only the rakyat wins.

Is that a bad thing?

____________________________

Sourced from The Star-

Two groups are calling for a referendum to determine if there is enough public support for the option of having Science and Mathematics taught in English in schools.

The Parent Action Group for Education Malaysia (PAGE) and Jaringan Melayu Malaysia (JMM) are appealing to the Education Ministry to consider the voices of parents who want the option to have PPSMI in schools.

PAGE chairman Datin Noor Azimah Abdul Rahim said this at a joint press conference with JMM president Azwanddin Hamzah yesterday.

The PPSMI policy was initiated by former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and implemented in phases, beginning with Year One, Form One and Lower Six students in 2003.

Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassinannounced in 2009 that the Government would reverse the PPSMI policy and revert to Bahasa Malaysia in national schools; and Chinese and Tamil in vernacular schools, while more emphasis would be placed on English.

However, he said in August that the Government was keeping its options open on the matter.

Noor Azimah said to date, PAGE had handed over six memorandums three each to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Muhyiddin but added she had not received any reply.

Noor Azimah said a letter requesting to meet with Najib was handed to him in late August, appealing to the Prime Minister to intervene in the long-standing issue.

Azwanddin said JMM and PAGE were not asking for a change in the official language.

“We are only asking for our children to be given the opportunity to study Science and Mathematics in English,” he said.

Noor Azimah said parents wanted their children to be educated according to their wishes as stipulated in the Education Act 1996.

She said students heading into Form One in national secondary schools in January next year were the ones most affected by the policy reversal.

Noor Azimah advised parents whose children will go to Form Four next year to urge principals to continue with PPSMI in their schools.

“It should be the parents who decide on the medium of instruction, not the principals.”

PPSMI - An election issue?

If ever there was even the remotest possibility of the existence of a Silent Majority, it would have to be Malaysian parents whose children are in the Primary and Secondary schools that are subjected to the National Syllabus.

Education is a perpetually hot issue in every country anywhere in the world. Malaysia is no different.

The Education Ministry has sought to offer free text books. Under the 2012 Budget, it is seeking to remove school fees. All these, in an effort to pander to parents.

In the life of Malaysian parents, we wear many hats, of course. At work, we wear one hat. With friends, we wear another hat. 

Surely the most important hat that we wear must be that of a parent to school-going children.

Children are a constant reminder to parents that there is a need to protect the future. The future of our children are the future of Malaysia. Malaysian children embody the future of Malaysia. They personify the Malaysian future.

So, it is not hyperbole when I say that I am angry with the Minister of Education. Yes, I'm very angry.

When Najib ascended to the Prime Ministership of Malaysia he was quoted as saying that the era of Government knows best is over.

Obviously the Minister of Education didn't read about it. Or, maybe he doesn't believe that statement to be true. Possibly, he thinks the Prime Minister was making a lighthearted, jocular remark. Maybe he doesn't care what that statement was intended to mean.

Whatever. 

The fact is that the position of the Minister of Education is that PPSMI is a policy that will be revoked.

This is the thing that pisses me off.

WHY was a policy change made, in the wake of a strong electoral message in 2008, without prior consultation with all stakeholders in Malaysia's Primary and Secondary education?

WHY was the consultation restricted to some doctrinal and dogmatic and myopic few, whoever they may be?

There is recent evidence to show that so-called experts or academics in Malaysia are wobbly in their reasoning. An immediate example would be the Council of Professors who declared that Malaysia was never colonised. They did not understand the difference between a de jure position and a de facto reality. 

Were these some of the people that the Ministry of Education consulted with in deciding to reverse the PPSMI?

The revocation of the policy on PPSMI is, to my mind, a clear and unequivocal sign that the ruling coalition or, at the very least, the Minister of Education, believes that the "Government knows best" philosophy is still the way to go. 

I, for one, am making PPSMI an election issue.

In this coming GE13, I am voting as a PARENT.

I'm not going into the polling booth with any other hats. I'll only be wearing the hat of a PARENT.

I can only hope that the rest of the Silent Majority of PARENTS (and all other concerned Malaysian voters) will do likewise.

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.

A "sweet" Budget 2012

I will say this, Najib is nimble.

Big Dog has declared it an Election Budget. I am in agreement. The Budget contains a lot of sweets for many categories of Malaysians; from the civil servants to parents.

The fact that the "kaya" of goodies is spread quite thin must surely be because Treasury is mindful that one of the greatest concerns of financial observers, local and international, is the fiscal deficit. Well, the deficit is not expected to increase in spite of the goodies. In this sense, Najib is nimble.

Neither corporate tax nor personal income tax was touched. This, to me, is a prelude to the expected rollout of the GST after GE13. In this sense, Treasury has to hold the keel steady until more revenues can be extracted from the Malaysian economy when GST is rolled out.

Real Property Gains Tax

The part I quite like is the tweaking of the Real Property Gains Tax. From next year, anyone who buys a piece of property and flips it within 2 years must pay 10% of any gains. If he or she sells the property between 3 to 5 years later, the tax is 5% on any gains. There is no RPGT if the property is sold more than 5 years later.

I like it because a reversion to the much earlier 3-tier structure where the top RPGT rate was 30% is likely to have created a bubble-bursting effect (yes, I believe there is a bubble or, if you like understatement, then, "excessive frothiness" might be a substitute phrase). 

So, this is an attempt to effect a controlled release of air from the property bubble. 

Liberalisation of 17 services subsectors

An interesting matter is that among the 17 sub-sectors that will be liberalised include private hospital services, medical and dental specialist services, architectural, engineering, accounting and taxation, legal services, courier services, education and training services, as well as telecommunication services.

The one subsector that stands out is legal services. This is one sector that has been cloistered forever. The  other one is architecture. These 2 service areas will see major structural changes.

I foresee that the immediate impact is not so much that a lot of foreign lawyers will literally parachute into Malaysia so much as foreign law and architectural brands will become more prominent. They will hire lots of Malaysians and a sprinkling of expat (remember, there's still the issue of work permits...aha!!!).

I see this as a good thing because the work processes for the legal and architecture professions will be immeasurably improved over time.

No, I don't see the loss of too much market share by local players to foreign service providers because, from my observation, foreign service providers are mainly interested to handle international work entering Malaysia in the form of foreign investments, direct or indirect. And, they are also interested in doing work for Malaysian companies investing or exporting overseas. This is their cachet...the international reach. 

Malaysian-based clients can't afford to pay these international firms anyway!

The accounting firms won't feel a thing with this liberalisation because Malaysian accounting firms from Tier-1 to Tier-3 are already under foreign brands and varying legal ownership structures.

Anyway, this move has been a long time coming. Some say, it's overdue.

To borrow Stan Lee's expression, "Nuff said".

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.

Mental masturbation on the socio-economic Catch-22

I'm writing about something that has bothered me for a long time. I've actually blogged about it intermittently when I started blogging, particularly in 2008 when the U.S. sub-prime crisis unfolded.

It's about the Catch-22 of modern capitalism.

As with all things, there's a Yin and Yang view (how wise the ancient sages were).

From the perspective of the leaders of modern large corporations, the KPI is the mantra of "shareholder value".

Shareholder value

What is shareholder value? It's about generating profits. Not just profits, mind you. The target is profit growth year-on-year.

Just read the financial news. Just watch the financial media. Just read analyst reports. 

If a large corporation made a billion last year and made another billion this year, the watchers and analysts and, yes, shareholders start decrying the zero profit growth year-on-year. This makes the company boring. The only consolation is if the company declares some higher dividend payout than from the year before.

Hell, unlisted companies have serious orgiastic parties if they record good profits every year. But, no, it's just not good enough for the shareholders of modern large corporations.

Flat is bad?

Flat growth is decried...even if it is still a highly profitable enterprise.

And, who are these shareholders?

Well, it's you and me.

Even if you hold up your hands to sanctimoniously cry aloud that you have never bought a single share of a publicly-listed company in your entire life, you would still be wrong.

We've all got money stashed away in pension funds, superannuation, or whatever one call it. So, indirectly, we're all complicit.

We bitch about poor returns, poor yields.

Where does that yield come from? Why, from the modern large corporations, of course.

Whether we like it or, not, we're in a carousel that is spinning out of control.

I have no idea how to stop the carousel. Do you?

Changed social values

All I know is that the correct social values as it existed in a village or kampung has disappeared in the era of modern capitalism.

Countries like our own Malaysia are caught in this awful carousel.

Our government is told that we need to reduce taxes in order to attract FDIs. FDIs are typically in the form of modern large corporations looking for cost-effective venues to produce goods and services at competitive prices. Competitively-priced products are attractive to consumers. Consumption of these products generate revenue and profits to the modern large corporations whose KPI is to generate growing year-on-year profits. And, the cycle is complete and, it repeats itself, year-on-year.

If only there was a better way to harness these great surpluses to plough into public amenities like more parks, community centres, welfare, public health, education, and so on.

We know that public finance comes in the form of tax revenues. But, wait a minute, aren't governments being told that taxes must be reduced in order to ensure competitiveness to attract FDIs?

If we peer across the Pacific Ocean to the U.S., we will see President Obama struggling to convince the American public that a tax regime that attempts to extract greater public revenue from modern large corporations and high net worth individuals is a good thing. Many believe that he is committing political suicide, because the U.S. is the citadel of modern capitalism.

Voluntary tax

Another equally ironic situation is when a bunch of tycoons in Malaysia buys out a lottery company owned by another tycoon in order to distribute welfare to non-Muslim Malaysians.

A lottery is what economists call a "voluntary tax". 

I've blogged about this before. 

The irony is that the Malaysian government was very enlightened up until the 1980s when Islamism and privatisation policies became the rage.

That spelled the death knell for the Social Welfare Lottery (remember that?) and Toto (remember that?).

As I said, it's ironic.

So, where does all this meandering lead to?

It leads to the one key takeaway that is good to mentally masturbate over.

The futile hope

A significant portion of the surplus of modern large corporations should be extracted for the public good.

If there were better social amenities, like public parks, sports complexes, sports programmes, academic instituions, vocational training institutions, better roads and pavements, better maintenance of public facilities all around ... and better public institutions to help farmers grow better fruits, vegetables, grains, dairy, meat (which is an excellent way to control food inflation)... then, we may not need to fret so much about savings and investment returns.

Then, we may leave the leave the modern large corporations to do more R&D on products and services that improves the human condition instead of generating the desire to consume at an irrational rate.

Maybe....

As I declared earlier, it's mental masturbation. But it does have some pleasurable side effects...

Govt revenue from taxes unch over 3-4 yrs

It's always useful to capture vital statistics. Sourced from here-

The government's revenue from taxes has not been increasing for the past three to four years, Deputy Finance Minister Senator Datuk Donald Lim Siang Chai said.

He said on Tuesday, Sept 20 the amount was around RM160 billion a year even though expenditure was on an increasing trend.

He said one third of the government's revenue came from oil and gas, one third from taxes from companies and individuals while the remaining one third from indirect taxes such as stamp duties and Customs duties.

"There is a need to increase the number of skilled labour so that the government would be able to collect more taxes and increase its revenue," he said at the launch of a new Malaysian Financial Planning Council (MFPC) secretariat office and signing of a memorandum of agreement between MFPC with UCSI University and UMSLink Sdn Bhd on registered financial planner (RFP) programmes here.

In Malaysia, Lim said, out of the 12.8 million workers, only 29% were skilled labour as compared to developed countries where 40% of their workers were skilled labour.

"Out of the 12.8 million workers in Malaysia, only 1.65 million pay taxes," he said.

The finance sector, he said, was one sector which has a lot of potential to create skilled professionals with its certification standards.

He said the government was looking at ways how Form 5 school leavers could gain certain skills such as to be a mechanic.