anilnetto.com

If the NEP goes, what will replace it? The Malaysian Economic Agenda? Unlike the NEP, the MEA calls for providing assistance to all those who need it, irrespective of ethnicity.

Fine, but PKR, DAP and Pas leaders must realise that the people voted for more subsidies and greater government social spending. This is what they were promised. They did not vote for “free market”, “business friendly” policies. Neither did they opt for neoliberal policies (privatisation, corporatisation and policies favouring the corporate elite), which have actually widened the gap between the rich and the poor.

Voting for greater democracy does not mean support for “free-market” policies. Actually, what we often have in Malaysia is a situation, as economist Charles Santiago puts it, “where you had subsidies for the rich and a free market economy for the poor. While you subsidise the rich on one side, the debt of the country is being borne by the middle-classes and the poor”.

So true - just think of the billions of ringgit in gas subsidies dished out to the lucrative Independent Power Producers, who are raking in the profits.

Remember, ordinary Malaysians voted in droves for people-centred development (projects that really benefit the ordinary people) rather than corporate-driven development (mega projects that primarily benefit the corporate elite while ruining the environment).

Power shift to the provinces

by Anil Netto

PENANG, Mar 18 (IPS) - Malaysia’s race-based affirmative action policies have come under the spotlight in the aftermath of a pivotal general election which saw opposition parties making sweeping gains.

Opposition parties captured the ‘rice-bowl’ state of Kedah and the industrialised states of Penang, Perak and Selangor in addition to retaining power in the Muslim heartland state of Kelantan on the east coast in the Mar. 8 general election.

The three industrial states will be ruled by coalition governments made up of the multi-ethnic — but largely ethnic Chinese — Democratic Action Party (DAP), the multi-ethnic People’s Justice Party (PKR) and the Islamic party PAS. The opposition parties won 82 of 222 parliamentary seats while the ruling federal coalition Barisan Nasional (BN), or National Front, clinched 51.5 percent of the popular vote.

The new state governments now have their work cut out for them to make good on their opposition campaign promises of ending the New Economic Policy in favour of their ‘Malaysian Economic Agenda’. The NEP was introduced in 1971 to uplift the economic position of the majority ethnic Malays and remove the stereotyping of race with specific occupations. Full article

There’s been a lot of reaction over the selection of the Perak Mentri Besar, which has gone to a Pas candidate. Kit Siang should not have asked his DAP state assembly members to boycott the swearing in. After all, there was an agreement among the DAP, PKR and Pas at the state level that they would respect the Perak Sultan’s choice.

And if party leaders believe in democracy, then they should understand their roles in the party. Lim, is just an adviser to the party, though he played a significant role in contributing to the Opposition’s good showing. It should be borne in mind that many Malaysians voted across ethnic and religious lines. By asking DAP assembly members to stay away, how different is that from the BN assembly members staying from Guan Eng’s swearing in ceremony in Penang? Really, Kit Siang should respect the wishes of a large number of Malaysians for these parties to work together.

In any case, the Perak DAP, one would think, would have a better feel of the local situation, along with its realities, and the need to cooperate with PKR and Pas.

In all the excitement about the ethnic composition (I thought we were going beyond racial politics - or are we still trapped in that old mentality) of the state governments, not enough people have inquired deeply into why the stock market plunged on Monday after the election results.

Some say it was the economic uncertainties in the United State, where a major financial meltdown could be on the cards. Then there are those who say that it was the political uncertainty in the aftermath of the shock opposition inroads in Malaysia. But another factor that has not been adequately discussed in the local media is the uncertaintly about the economic policies of the five new state governments.

I am sure the huge corporations in Malaysia would have been jittery with the prospect of an opposition victory in the industrial heartland of Malaysia. For one thing, controversial mega contracts might be reviewed. There might be added calls for a minimum wage in Malaysia. Cronyism involving top tycoons might be revealed. The policy of suppressing local wages by importing cheap migrant labour might be reviewed. The new state governments might impose stiff new environmental and planning regulations that would not go down well. There might be calls for a strengthening of the trade union movement and greater respect for labour rights. All this would have been a nightmare for Big Business.

A bouquet from the PGCC developer: “Business friendly” or “people friendly”?

So what did the opposition leaders do when they walked into the corridors of power in the states? Among the first things they did was to reassure the business community that they would be “business-friendly”. We have heard calls from both the BN and opposition leaders in Malaysia that they would uphold a “free market economy” (whatever that means) and “business-friendly” policies. There were pledges that all contracts signed would be respected (but what if they were signed in dubious circumstances, in bad faith and are against the public interest?).

No wonder the Malaysian stock exchange perked up after that. But did those assurances amount to a betrayal of the people’s aspirations for more people-friendly economic policies?

In a way, it reminded me of the general election outcome in India in 2004, when the BJP suffered a shock defeat at the hands of Congress. The Stock Exchange plunged too.

Listen to Arundhati Roy:

In its election campaign, the Congress party indicated that it was prepared to rethink some of its earlier economic policies. Millions of India’s poorest people came out in strength to vote in the elections. The spectacle of the great Indian democracy was telecast live - the poor farmers, the old and infirm, the veiled women with their beautiful silver jewellery, making quaint journeys to election booths on elephants and camels and bullock carts. Contrary to the predictions of all India’s experts and pollsters, the Congress won more votes than any other party. India’s Communist parties won the largest share of the vote in their history. India’s poor had clearly voted against neoliberalism’s economic “reforms” and growing fascism. As soon as the votes were counted, the corporate media dispatched them like badly paid extras on a film set. Television channels featured split screens. Half the screen showed the chaos outside the home of Sonia Gandhi, the leader of the Congress party, as the coalition government was cobbled together. The other half showed frenzied stockbrokers outside the Bombay Stock Exchange, panicking at the thought that the Congress party might actually honour its promises and implement its electoral mandate. We saw the Sensex stock index move up and down and sideways. The media, whose own publicly listed stocks were plummeting, reported the stock market crash as though Pakistan had launched ICBMs on New Delhi.

Even before the new government was formally sworn in, senior Congress politicians made public statements reassuring investors and the media that privatisation of public utilities would continue. Meanwhile the BJP, now in Opposition, has cynically, and comically, begun to oppose foreign direct investment and the further opening of Indian markets.

This is the spurious, evolving dialectic of electoral democracy.

As for the Indian poor, once they’ve provided the votes, they are expected to bugger off home. Policy will be decided despite them.

Similarly, did the millions of low-income Malaysians vote for business-friendly policies or people-friendly policies? Did they vote for a free-market economy with lots of tax incentives for the big corporations or did they vote for greater subsidies and more assistance for the poor and those struggling to make ends meet?

Remember the election promises? To lower the price of oil (more subsidies presumably - though this would be unsustainable in the long run). To provide free education from primary to university level (more social spending). To do something about higher food prices - presumably caused by “free-market” economic policies that promote cash crops and biofuel ahead of food security. To tackle the growing gap between the rich and the poor - also the result of neo-liberal “free-market” policies and massive corporate projects tied in with cronyism. To protect the environment from the ravages of a rampant corporatocracy. To protect the rights of the working class. At least those were the promises I heard at the ceramah. Of course, there was much talk about Malaysia losing out in terms of “competitiveness” and “foreign investment” due to corruption etc, but for the most part, the promises were about more subsidies and policies to protect the people’s interest.

Neo-liberal “free-market” policies are hardly the solution. In fact, they are the cause of much of our misery. The “trickle down” approach has not worked either; instead, it has widened the chasm between the rich and the poor so that today Malaysia has among the largest income disparities in the region.

In a sense, the BN’s loss amounts to the people’s rejection of “business-friendly” neoliberal economic policies that have added to the people’s burden: think of the spiralling costs for the rakyat following the privatisation or corporatisation of utilities, education, water, and health care.

The opposition leaders should do well to remember that the people voted for people- and worker-friendly policies and not “business-friendly” policies. They should think twice and three times before they capitulate to powerful business interests

From the perspective of Catholic Social Teaching, the economy should serve the people and not people serve the economy and workers should take precedence over capital and not vice versa.

For a start, the Penang state government must call for wide-ranging public consultation on all these mega projects. A thorough cost-benefit analysis - which would take into account traffic and environmental impact - must be carried out.

Source: The Edge Daily

If they are not feasible or if they are environmentally damaging, they must be scrapped in favour of more cost-efficient, sustainable, people-friendly alternatives.

For example, would a cheaper tram service be more cost-efficient than a monorail system? Would it enhance the heritage value of George Town?

How about improving the bus service and poor ferry service for a start? That won’t cost a bomb.

Scrap the PGCC project and turn the land into a People’s Park.

And look into the sale of the huge plot of land on Penang Hill formerly used by the La Salle Brothers’ bungalow to a tycoon or his son. The state government must look into zoning and bulding plans as this plot lies in an eco-sensitive area. We don’t want to have another Disneyland or huge high-rise buildings on the side of the hill. The new state government must exercise greater control over Penang Hill compared to the previous administration.

And while we on the subject of “development” projects, look again at the “Gurney Paragon” project on the 10-acre St Joseph’s Novitiate (former Uplands School) site. As a friend of mine observed, this should be a prime candidate for a thorough review of land conversion/alienation deals. People want to know how it was possible for a property provided for educational/religious purposes to be converted to mixed/commercial development.

Do remember who voted for you: the people, including millions of workers. And they want people-friendly, worker-friendly policies - ahead of business-friendly policies.

Photo credit: PSM Operations Room, Sungai Siput

So Jeyakumar Devaraj of Parti Sosialis Malaysia has finally triumphed over S Samy Vellu. When I spoke to him early this morning, he sounded tired but happy. It had been a long, long struggle - more than nine years.

“I think the victory was largely due to the nationwide swing to the opposition,” he said, modestly.

I told him that that alone would not have been enough to unseat Samy Vellu, who once famously defeated the DAP titan P Patto in an epic battle. “It was your dedication, commitment to the cause and perseverance on behalf of the people over the years that saw you through,” I said. “I think that shone through, making it impossible for the people of Sg Siput to ignore you.

“Plus you had an incredible team of supporters who gave their all in campaigning for you.” He couldn’t argue with that.

In one corner, you had Kumar, the soft-spoken respiratory physician who has sacrificed so much for the grassroots and marginalised communities. His quiet front belies a steely determination and passion for empowering the poor. Even the MMA recognised his commitment to society and awarded him a gold medal for community service many years ago.

One doctors recalls working as a houseman when Dr Kumar was the Chest Physician in Ipoh GH: “He was the most approachable and soft spoken consultant. He would treat us lowly housemen with kindness and patience whenever we spoke to him. His heart really is to help the poor as his chest clinic would be filled with his patients who absolutely loved him. Dr Kumar drove around in his old Volkswagon and lives a very humble life. So if anyone deserves to win, it is him. Humility has triumphed over arrogance!”

Kumar represents a multi-ethnic approach to politics; he sharply critiques the way the capitalist class are marginalising workers and other grassroots communities. Also an Aliran member, he had pointed out the flaws in Hindraf’s communal approach, which he said was misguided. Instead, he called for a broader multi-ethnic analysis of what was fuelling alienation, disenchantment and marginalisation. This broader world-views seems to have drawn support from the Indians, Malays and Chinese of Sg Siput who voted for him in surprising numbers.

Kumar, along with economist Charles Santiago, the new MP for Klang, will be a tremendous asset in Parliament in checking the trend towards neo-liberal economic policies while highlighting the huge gap between the rich and the poor of all ethnic groups.

In the other corner, you had the flamboyant and eloquent Samy Vellu, the powerful MIC supremo, for whom funding for infrastructure projects was no problem. Samy Vellu is of course an integral part of the entrenched race-based system of politics, a keen supporter of the capitalist class. His ministry is responsible for awarding multi-million ringgit privatisation projects that generates huge profits for this class. Not to forget the Maika scandal that has dogged his every step for years - until the Hindraf protests exploded into a cacophony of boos and jeers that greeted him wherever he ventured outside Sg Siput. It was in Penang - ground zero of the political quake - that the jeers were first heard in the Penang International Sports Arena, as reported in this blog earlier.

I can’t say I knew Samy Vellu personally. But my late grand-aunt, Anna, was his teacher in Batu Arang, once a prosperous mining town in Selangor where the young Samy grew up in the 1940s and worked as an office boy. The Batu Arang English School was actually set up by the coal-mining company.

Samy’s parents, who were both rubber tappers, eventually settled in Batu Arang, where his father worked in the coal mine. The young Samy (Left: Samy Vellu and his mother) would have been familiar with the huge open mines into which lorries would descend until they appeared to be the same size as matchboxes to those standing at ground level.

I took a trip down memory lane to Batu Arang during the Chinese New Year holidays. The old school is still there; so is the school field. It is all lush and green today.

It was not all green in those days. The British burned down the jungle foliage on both sides of the approach road to Batu Arang because they were afraid the communists would lie in wait to ambush them - so the roadsides were all brown and dry.

Back then, a visitor to Batu Arang would have been greeted with the smell of burnt coal and some parents including Anna would fret about the effect the pollution would have on their children’s health. Others worried whether the tunnels deep beneath the earth would collapse.

Today, the deep open mines are filled with water and resemble scenic lakes. Small groups of Indian Malaysian young men gather to chit-chat on the grass by the lake with little piles of crushed beer cans near them as evidence of their ‘liquid’ picnic.

Batu Arang town Source: Wikimedia

Grand-aunt Anna, whom I called Amma, would reminisce with me: “Even in those days, Samy had the gift of the gab.” Indeed, Samy would go on to become a Tamil drama actor, a news-reader and eventually a political boss who is not exactly reticent or tongue-tied. In fact, he is regarded as one of the best orators in the Tamil language in Malaysia today.

I can’t say Amma was terribly impressed with Samy and how he had turned out. She had a habit of speaking her mind and didn’t suffer fools gladly. She was also aware of the Maika scandal. Still, she was bemused by the great respect he had for his former teachers. Some years ago, when she was arriving at a wedding reception for one of Samy Vellu’s relatives, the MIC president spotted her entering the hall. He immediately yelled excitedly to his brother, “Palani, teacher varuthe (teacher has come)!” (S Palanivelu passed away last year after a heart attack.) Whereupon both of them raced up to pay their respects to her. “Dei, naalkaali kondu va! (Get her a chair!)” Samy urged one of his aides.

I also bumped into another retired Batu Arang School teacher, in his late seventies or eighties, who described to me the young Samy’s tenacity. Now this teacher had a beautiful Triumph motorbike when he was in Batu Arang, which he parked by the road one day. As he watched from a distance, he noticed the young Samy Vellu walking up to admire the bike. Time passed, and one day, as this teacher was out driving, he spotted a young man vrooming past him on a Triumph bike. It was Samy who had got or borrowed a bike of his own! “You see how tenacious and determined he was?” the former teacher mused.

Samy Vellu’s perseverance saw him taking evening classes to become a draughtsman and he eventually went to the UK to study architecture. If you are interested, you can actually see his name listed in the website of the Royal Institute of British Architects.

(Just search for “Malaysia” and you will see a list of architects based in Malaysia. Look for the names beginning with “S” and you will see the name “Samy Vellu Sangalimuthu , Malaysia”.)

Why am I telling you all this? Just to say that Samy Vellu had humble beginnings but through sheer perseverance, tenacity and who-knows-what-else worked his way to the top. No one denies he has helped some Indian Malaysians with infrastructure and scholarships etc - but like the rest of us, Samy had choices to make along the way: Would he offer them the spoils or the scraps? Where would the spoils really go? Would he really address the root causes of their sense of disempowerment or would he just offer band-aid solutions and cash handouts to address their immediate problems? Could he - would he - have done more, a lot more, to empower the dispossessed? Or would he be more interested in serving the elite capitalist class? And should he have known when to quit, on his own terms, before the writing was on the wall?

In the end, he slunk into anonymity, a sad, solitary figure who will have much soul-searching to do during his retirement.

On a lighter note….