Public Transportation

I see that our new Prime Minister has made frequent and “unprotocol” visits to see how ordinary Malaysians live. This is good and I hope he will continue to do so.

I think our Prime Minister should know how scheduled and ceremonial visits to departments and problematic areas are almost useless. The visit is usually marked by days, if not weeks, of preparation by the department concerned to ensure that every thing is tip-top during the VIP visit. Instantaneously all the problems faced by the rakyat daily seem to have vanished and the visit was nothing more than a misplaced assurance to the VIP that everything is doing fine. To our Prime Minister and all other ministers: if truth is what you desire, you must have more surprise visits and preferably go incognito. I think the time to be courteous and gentle to government departments and agencies is over.

Coming back to city transportation, I think nothing is more urgent than providing a comprehensive LRT system covering the whole Klang Valley from Rawang, to KL City, Kajang, Petaling Jaya, Shah Alam, Klang and Puchong. Dear Prime Minister, this is the place where the bulk of the nation’s GDP is produced and consumed. Right now, the situation is grim and the lack of viable and efficient transportation system is really affecting the cost of doing business and people’s quality of life. Building more multi-storey car parks, having more flyovers, city highways and toll houses, and putting more RapidKL buses on the roads are at most temporary measures. The long term solution lies with an extensive and intensive LRT system that covers the whole Klang Valley which by any standard of measure is already a huge metropolis. The cost of undertaking such a project is evidently high. To me it is a matter of priority. After all, we do have hundreds of projects costing billions that have no obvious benefits.

I think it is alright if we swallow our pride and look to Singapore and see how they construct and operate the MRT there. The thing the rakyat fear most is cost overrun and incomplete projects which have occurred time and again.

Sloganeering

Our new Prime Minister’s new catch phase “One Malaysia, people first and performance now” gets me thinking about the state of our country.

If you walk around towns in Malaysia from Kota Bahru, Penang to Tawau, you will not fail to notice bill boards depicting numerous slogans: “Jaga Kebersihan Bandar Kita”, “Jangan Buang Sampah”, “Cintai lah Bandar Kita”, “Dadah Musuh Pertama Negara”, “Tak Nak” and also colourful pictures/photos of people who are least bothered with our life. You will probably also see arches and buntings with colourful lights lining along the roads everywhere.

In the meantime, you and I know that most towns in Malaysia are full of garbage, disorderly, clogged drains emitting stench, filthy hawker centres infested with rats, mosquitoes and cockroaches while teenage smoking and drug addiction remain unabated.

Now, I want you to relate “1 Malaysia, people first and performance now” to what I have just said above and you will probably know what I meant.

Over the years, I think Malaysia has become masters in sloganeering quite akin to the communist states. Resources and energy were channelled to doing all the nonsense while the real problems are left unattended to. Never mind about the clogged drains, just put up bill boards “cintai lah bandar kita”.

We are now talking about KPIs for each minister and ministry. Please trust me; like the KPIs for GLCs before this, most personnel in each the ministry will now be very busy not so much with the actual functions and responsibilities of the ministry. Instead, they will probably spend all their valuable time and energy debating and discussing what KPIs to incorporate and how to meet the KPIs targets that they have agreed on. The central focus of the ministry will no longer be its actual functions and responsibilities.

Please think. If we form a ministry and needs KPIs to know exactly what that ministry is supposed to accomplish, then in all livelihood that ministry is not needed. This is Malaysia, the land of sloganeering!

Set Up Institute of Race Relation?

Here it comes, setting up another organisation to promote “harmonious race relation, racial integration and unity”. I am referring to the news article in the Star, “Lam Thye: Set up institute of race relations” as published in the Star (January 26, 2009).

With due respect, I am not sure whether Lam Thye is naïve or we are just simply not honest enough to own up to the root causes of racial discord in this country. How many studies and more studies do we need? Are we saying that after 51 years we still do not know?

In fact, there is a saying in the civil service: “if we are not capable of doing anything, what we need to do is to go on talking about it”. Let’s face it; the calling for the setting up of institute of race relation reflects such an attitude or saying. We are just not man enough to confront and tackle race problems in this country. So, we seek the well trodden path – let us set up another organisation, get a “has been” politician to head it, allocate a small budget, conduct some surveys, and produce reports that no body reads or cares. In the meantime, let the people think that the government is serious about racial unity and integration. If you think what I wrote is negative, I would counter that the truth always hurts.

Here I am sitting in front of my laptop writing you a piece on the causes of racial discord in this country. I am not referring to any study or document in particular. I write based on my observation and experience as a citizen that grew up and now growing old in this country for most part of my life.

First, we have a political system that accentuates and reinforces racial differences. Almost daily, politicians from each racial group would tell their people to unite based race and religion rather than nationality. Let’s face it, each race was taught from young how its culture, language, value and religion are superior to others. Almost everyday that has gone by without us hearing politicians asking each particular racial or religious group to unite ostensibly to achieve national unity? Do you guys buy this? If so, may I know how and why?

Then we have a civil service that is parochial to the core ostensibly again to balance the dominance of a particular race in the private sector. It is time to challenge this misconception. First, the Malaysian private sector is no longer dominated by a single race. Second, even if it is still true, a private sector dominated by a single race can not have far reaching implications as a public service that is dominated by a single race.

Civil service has a pivoted role in national development and integration. It is civil service that helps formulate and enforce national policies, programmes and projects.

It is simple, if we have a political system and a civil service that is dominated by a single race, then whatever the issues, be it abuse of power, cronyism, corruption or sheer incompetence, those issues will inevitably be equated with racial undertone. Hence, Kugan’s case may be viewed as one race bullying another race when the actual cause could be the abuse of power and the total lack of training or professionalism among those responsible. Similarly, it is my humble observation that some of the government’s ill-conceived privatisation programmes that have enormously benefited the Malays and the non-Malays alike, but the general view was one of racial discrimination and unfairness.

The government must honestly and sincerely embrace multiracialism and promote a more inclusive civil service. The era of lip service and forming organisations aiming at truncating the clamour for change and inclusiveness is over. Racial unity and integration can not be promoted by formal institutions or by asking people to give up their identities for some illusionary notion of commonality. National unity and integration is brought about by genuine desire of individuals to sacrifice a little of themselves in exchange for the greater common good that they can see happening in the society and country they live in.

The folly of subsidies‏

I read with consternation your news report, “Fishermen in Perak extend strike” as published in the Star on December 16, 2008. I am even more alarmed by the unequivocal support given by the Pantai Remis Assemblyman for the strike to continue. At the present retail price of RM1.80, the government has already subsidised about RM0.50 for each litre of petrol and diesel for the fishermen.

What has all these come to? I have long suspected it is not right for the Government to go for numerous sectoral or targeted subsidies. We are just creating multitude of distortions in the economy without getting clear benefits. We have fuel subsidies for fishermen, taxi, buses and other transport operators and but the benefits in the form of lower prices or better services for the consumers are very much in doubt.

Instead of giving subsidies and imposing price control, the government should go for the alternative which is to free the economy and allow greater degree of competition. If the government were to allow freer entry and exit policies for each of the industries mentioned above, be it fishing, taxi or express buses, I am sure competition will be more intense. Instead of protecting the existing inefficient operators through subsidies, the government should rightly encourage and allow more capable and efficient people to compete.

It is not the business of the government to decide the optimum number of licences/operators for each industry because the government has no way of knowing it. It is also not the business of government to decide who should and who should not be in certain industry. Let those who want to enter do so with their eyes wide open. If they can’t compete, let them exit the industry at their own expense. The government should neither restrict the entry nor should it bail out or subsidise those who can’t compete.

I think it is not too late to let our market economy work more fully. Too much of intervention is bad for efficiency and it breeds corruption and rental class. In the final analysis, it is always difficult to juggle demand with supply and control prices. The communists failed miserably in this regard. Instead of juggling and controlling, we should let competition work, and I am sure prices, demand and supply will take care of themselves.

Coming back to fishermen’s strike, one fundamental issue is really the quantum of subsidy. If fishermen are able to get huge subsidy per litre of petrol or diesel, they must be idiots to continue fishing. Just engage in arbitraging the fuel allocated to them and I am sure they could make more money than fishing. Perhaps it is time for the government to look at the amount spent on fuel subsidies and the amount of fish landed by these fishermen. Yes, we have enforcement but we have also heard of rampant corruption.

Asked also the consumers. I don’t think most of us are buying fish at “subsidised” price anyway. So why bother, let them strike and see how far they can go. To the Minister of Agriculture and Agro Based Industry and the Pantai Remis State Assemblyman, I urge both of you to make hard decision, not a populist one.

Slow and Steady the Better Option

My letter appeared in the Star today, 10 December 2008

I REFER to the letter from Prof Dr Tan Eu Chye “Get prepared for recovery of global economy” (The Star, Dec 4). He lamented the lacklustre growth of the Malaysian economy and expressed concern over the medium- and long-term growth prospects.
What is wrong with our economy growing at a slower pace as long as it is sustainable and in line with our potential? I think we ought to realise that it was precisely because of the preoccupation of many countries to grow beyond their means that has caused the present global problem.
It was excessive loose monetary policy, low interest rates and unrestrained fiscal expansion that were distorting the market economies and hence inflated asset prices, induced excessive speculation, and caused infeasible investment.
I disagree with the writer on the observation that any sign of economic recovery could trigger a sharp rebound in oil prices which in turn will affect growth. The recent behaviour of oil prices and other commodities have very little to do with real demand and real supply but much to do with excessive speculative/manipulative activities that have nothing to do with the performance of the real economy.
The price of crude has gone up and down by more than US$100 within a period of less than six months. Are we saying that the real consumption and production of crude oil have changed so significantly during the period to account for this change, despite the impending recession or otherwise?
I am also deeply disturbed by the observation that many developing countries would not have enjoyed rapid economic growth if not for the consumption binge in the US. This is precisely the baloney of the global economic and financial systems that they have got themselves into. Not only must the world support the US’ unsustainable consumption and massive monetisation of fiscal and trade deficits, we are now told to support the good-for-nothing excessive leveraging, speculation and derivative trading.
May I know how much is enough and when are all these going to stop? May I know what the developing countries are getting from unsustainable US consumption and excessive speculation?
Oh yes, what we get are heightened global financial and economic volatilities and an increasing amount of US papers we call foreign exchange reserves that our central bankers are happily parading.
Developing countries, particularly those from East Asia, must learn to grow their economies other than through export. Why is there so much poverty despite our endless streams of exports? Why can’t we consume and generate our own demand domestically and create happiness and welfare among our own people?
If by so doing we grow a little slower, so be it. There is no need to rush if at the end what we get is a piece of wasteland with extreme income disparity, polluted air and water and filth everywhere.
The mighty US dollar is not as great as most of us think. It is great now because we Asian suckers allow it and attach great value to that piece of paper!
T.K. CHUA,
Kuala Lumpur.


Thursday December 4, 2008
PROF DR TAN EU CHYE's letter:
Thursday December 4, 2008
Get prepared for recovery of global economy
WHILE monitoring the global economic condition, it is perhaps worthwhile pondering over the medium- to long-term prospects of our national economy in anticipation of an eventual recovery of the global economy.
Our national economic growth has been lacklustre since the 1997 East Asian financial crisis compared with the high growth rate era prior to 1997. Growth in excess of the 7% benchmark rate was only achieved in 2000 when the economy recorded an 8.9% expansion.
At least two recent developments on the international economic arena could arouse concerns about the medium- to long-term growth prospects of our national economy.
First, the earlier upward oil price spiral due largely to speculative forces only saw a reversal in tandem with the gloomy outlook of the global economy. It implies that any future sign of economic recovery could trigger a sharp rebound in oil prices. This could then be growth-retarding.
And secondly, while the current financial turmoil is attributable to derivatives trading and over-leveraging in the West, it is also plausible that many developing countries would not have had enjoyed rapid growth in the absence of such practices.
The consumption binge in the US could have directly or indirectly provided the wherewithal to growth for many countries and raised their living standards.
Hence, any move to check such practices, including reforms made to the international financial architecture, though desirable, could mean that economies can only grow at a slower pace. The world may then be placed on a stable but lower growth path.
All this may call for a review of our national development strategies. Management of the nation amidst a low growth era could be more challenging, especially with rising expectations of the people.
Apart from liberalizing the service sector, lowering the cost of business operations, human resource development and enhancing the public sector delivery system, no efforts should be spared in improving the public transport system. This is to ensure that the public will have recourse to a reliable and efficient public transport system when oil prices start skyrocketing again.
Continued attention must be given to domestic food production even though global food shortage has eased.
With respect to the current global economic upheavals, one could at least, for now, take comfort in being spared the double whammy of stagflation, a scenario seemed probable earlier when oil prices were escalating.
The macroeconomic and other policy initiatives undertaken by national governments could potentially minimise the severity and duration of the current crisis.
PROF DR TAN EU CHYE,
Universiti Malaya.

Get Education Basics Right First

My letter in the Star on 15 November 2008:

WE HAVE yet another proposal for a new curriculum and programme, another call for a paradigm shift, the liberation of minds and intellectual renaissance. I am referring to your news report “Najib: M’sian education system must change” (The Star, Nov 13).

It is not that I disagree with the Deputy Prime Minister.

It is more of matching words with deeds. We have so often talked about change for the sake of change.

We have often talked about a paradigm shift when what we need is to do the existing things right.

We have so often talked about the need for liberation of minds among the young when the atmosphere and the environment we inculcate are so feudalistic and stifling. I say just go back to the basics.

There is no miracle curriculum or programme for our youngsters. If we want thinkers among us, teach our students how to read, write and count.

What I have in mind is not what “communication language” students learn nowadays.

How can our students develop thinking skill when they hardly write essays?

How can they think coherently when they never have to put down in writing a complex idea?

How can our students think holistically when they are not trained to carry more than two variables in their heads?

How can they ever learn to write an extract of a situation or a synopsis of an event when they are not trained to write a precis?

When we say we know a language, we must know it well enough to be more than for day-to-day communication.

We like to make fun of the British for knowing only one language, but I think they know it well.

Malaysians have always taken pride in knowing many languages, including English.

I urge all of us to think again. We are fast emerging as a nation without mastering a single language (be it English, Malay or Chinese) well enough for our intellectual and thinking pursuit.

On liberation of minds and intellectual renaissance, I think the first thing we need to do is to get rid of all the third world submissive and feudalistic cultures.

In a way, it is ironic.

Almost everyone would agree that our official functions are too elaborate, self-serving and wasteful and yet such practices are becoming more widespread.

I am sure many of us must have heard of salutations longer than the speech or have seen a minor VIP being treated like royalty.

So much for our intellectual renaissance. I have not even mentioned the “caveman” mentality among our teachers and lecturers.

A Free Market that is Obviously Flawed

My letter published in the Star, 30 October, 2008:

I refer to your news report “Abdullah: KL will back move to regulate global market” (the Star, October 26, 2008).
I certainly agree the “free market” as being practised today is flaw.
One may recall that in the middle of this year prices of food, energy and other commodities kept rising when they had remained abundantly available. At that time, not many people believe or would want to take seriously the heightened speculation and manipulation that were going on. Obviously, the plummeting prices of commodities now would suggest that there is no shortage in the first place.
The free market or the laissez faire economy today is about privatising profits and socialising liabilities; it is about “too big to fail”; it is about trading currencies, futures, options and other derivatives that have nothing to do with the real economy; it is about governments everywhere not doing what they are supposed to do and doing what they are not supposed to do;
It is about macroeconomic policies of most countries aiming at providing “free lunches”, the so called generation X macroeconomists who think they can create something out of nothing. I believe that the flawed global financial system has also given rise to the present crisis.
When the US government offered the US$700bil bailout, the first question one ought to ask is where the US government got the money? Is the US government that solvent compared to those banks that it intends to rescue?
It is a common knowledge that the US government is running massive trade and fiscal deficits amounting to billions of dollars for years. One can only conclude that the government is resorting to the printing press. However, the irony is that all over the world, from Australia to UK and many parts of Asia, we are just happily urging, watching and supporting the move.”
This is the baloney of the free market system as we understand today. With US dollar as the reserve currency, the United States is creating “free lunches” and consuming without limitation and the rest of the world, particularly Asia, is financing and supporting the very beggar who could least afford. I must say the Americans are having too much free lunches and the Asian central bankers are too stupid for allowing it to happen.
So, there is no such thing as free market. On the contrary, we must be wary of excessive government intervention. For Malaysia, the secret is to find the right balance. There are many areas that the government must grapple with, especially managing the trade off between growth and equity; between free market and government regulation/control; between protectionism and liberalization; between excessive profits and social concern/governance; and between competition and patronage.
Over the years I have seen the government oscillating between the left and right, sometimes doing things that she is not supposed to do and sometimes not doing what she is supposed to do.
One more point: I urge the government not to depend too much on “successful” businessmen or wizard currency/equity/derivative traders for advice to resolve the present crisis. These are the pseudo macroeconomists who preoccupation is to taste caviars and french wine at the expense of others. They are not too big to fail.


The comment by a Star reader on my letter:

World needs a new economic model

T. K. CHUA’s letter “A free market that is obviously flawed” and his comment on our present market system is timely, though he is not the only person who has voiced this view.
We need reformist leaders who can think out of the box, and not treat the West, and the Americans in particular as our economic mentors when in fact they also promote trade restrictions for their own benefit.
A case in point is the slant in the reporting of financial news giants like the CNBC.
When the announcement was made that the oil price has fallen to about US$60 per barrel and commodity prices have likewise fallen to less than half the prices a few months ago, I can’t help noticing that the mood was sombre.
Why should decreasing oil and food prices be necessarily a “bad” thing for the World? It’s only a bad result for the speculators and the financial “wizards” in Wall Street.
The world should be relieved that items that are necessary for life and communications, have been made affordable once again.
Besides proving, as T.K. Chua mentioned, there is no shortage of these commodities at all. It shows that immoral profits have been made at the expense of the silent and poor majority.
We need to find a new economoic model in order for the world to survive the next crisis, and one that is not based on the utter supremacy of the US dollar. Thailand has even resorted to barter trade for oil in exchange for its rice.

TAM YENG SIANG,
Petaling Jaya.