Losing Our Country...? Part 2

Please read Losing Our Country -- the Beginning? Part 1 (June 29, 2005)before proceeding.

Continuing my rumination of the thought-provoking article by PAUL KRUGMAN titled Losing Our Country in The New York Times of June 10, 2005, I yesterday posed the question: Are we losing our country too?


A few more points from Krugman’s column:
* Since 1980 in particular, U.S. government policies have consistently favored the wealthy at the expense of working families - and under the current administration, that favoritism has become extreme and relentless. From tax cuts that favor the rich to bankruptcy "reform" that punishes the unlucky, almost every domestic policy seems intended to accelerate our march back to the robber baron era.
** Above all, the partisans engage in name-calling. To suggest that sustaining programs like Social Security, which protects working Americans from economic risk, should have priority over tax cuts for the rich is to practice "class warfare." To show concern over the growing inequality is to engage in the "politics of envy.

When I quoted these points, it’s Krugman who holds the opinions about the state of affairs in the United States. What this writer tries to do here is discourse on some of the points’ relevance or trends which might bedevil this country, so leading us to “losing our country”.

Question: Is our government not implementing policies or programmes that favour the rich and well-connected? Isn’t the creation of a thousand more millionaires a better goal than creating one more billionaires? Did not some parties engage in calling fellow citizens “traitors” for holding dissenting views – holding the line that those who criticize government policies are also “unpatriotic”?
I’m not against creating wealth and a bourgeosie class, but also let’s distribute the country’s wealth and the fruits of its natural resources more equitably and fairly. Isn’t a situation of 90 percent wealth distributed among 70 percent of the populace more equitable and desirable, and a better goal than 80 percent of the nation’s wealth concentrated in top 10 per cent of the populace?


I had mentioned about the billion-ringgit losses at Malaysia Airlines (MAS), Bakun Hydro-Electric Dam, KLSE shutdown for three days (stand corrected on the number here, which affected the Singapore Stock Exchange similarly too, due mainly to Pan-El Industries scandal)Bank Negara forex misadventure...you add on the list! Just the two cases of Perwaja Steel and MAS involved bailouts by the government amounting to RM20billion (our money – taxpayers’ money!). If all the losses by government-linked companies and bailouts during the past two decades were combined, they could amount to some RM100billion, enough for 100 months of government civil servants’ salaries. If one were to divide the sum of RM100billion by 20 (number of years) and used the money for paying these civil servants bonuses instead, it would translalte into 5 months’ pay as bonus annually! Can you imagine the generation of local business flowing from much of these expenditures by the majority of government servants, thus priming up the local economy?

With the Barisan Nasional government’s policies and programmes today, the country does not see any chance of the creation of a more equal and equitable society. It has been mainly “all talk and little action” on meeting some of the nation’s problems. Take the case of over-worked doctors, nurses and other para-medical staff in the government service. Despite years of lanuguishing in silence suffering inadequate wages and working overtime on miserable allowances, suddenly the government woke up to realise there was a great shortage of doctors and para-medical staff. The leaders appeal to Malaysian doctors overseas to serve the Motherland.

Do people really think "patriotism" on empty stomachs, or the most, living on blue collar pay after they spend some six years of their life studying in medical schoool, with some of the parents selling off a house to pay for expenses as high as RM500,000? Do you blame parents whose top-scoring children were deprived of scholarships advising their graduating children four-six years later to stay put in foreign countries, later as permanent residents after working a number of years there--in Australia, New Zealand, Britain, Canada?

Yes, the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has acknowledged corruption is a big headache in the country, and he asked all true-blooded Malaysians to lend a helping hand in fighting the scourge. But so far, he has done a half-hearted job, after one-and-half years at the country's helm. His underlings postured themselves as being "above" board when their names were/have been/are still on the Anti-Corruption Agency lists.

I'm delighted that a former PM, none other than Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad himself, coming forth with a diagnosis that the cancer of coruption has moved from below-the-table to above-the-table. Never mind during his 22-year-old adminsitartion the cancer was becoming endemic to reach "above-the-table" stage within the past 18 months after Pak Lah took over as the nation's CEO. But what de-motivates most Malaysians is that Pak Lah only takes "selective" cases to court -- whether the official country's courts or UMNO's "makhamah".

Yes, on June 24,2005, almost a year since the UMNO general assembly where party elections were held, the UMNO vice-president who garnered the highest number of votes, Tan Sri Mohd Isa Abdul Samad, was found guilty of five out of nine charges of "money politics" by the party’s disciplinary board; his penalty is suspension from the party for six years. At the time of writing this article, the former Menteri Besar of Negri Sembilan of 20 years, is still nominally Minister of FederalTterritories until his filing of an appeal, within 14 days after the official verdict was announced on June 27, 2005 is exhausted. Mr Prime Minister: How about an accounting of the wealth he now holds, both in local and foreign accounts, to verify where his "wealth" used to engage in "money politics" came from, and whether he had also pillaged the NS state coffers?

I now recall that Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim, with a Masters in Law from the UK, said before the General Elections 2004 in March 2004 that the authorities had completed investigations on 18 very, very important persons (VVIPs) for corruption charges, and prosecutions could be expected very soon.

After the GE2004, when pressed by the press on what's happening to these 18 VVIP cases, the Prime Minister replied to the effect that these 18 cases did not refer to individuals, but to groups or sectors. Yes, but Rais never did say the media quoted him wrong when the press went to town with reference to VVIPs, or very high-profile people, unless Rais was misinformed or sled by the authorities concerned.

But since then, when the new Cabinet was formed following the March 2004 elections, Rais had been moved conveniently from the PM's Department (where he was de facto Law Minister) to be in charge of Arts and Heritage. And the media kept a deafening silence about the transformation of VVI persons into VVI groups/sectors. Is the government protecting these alleged “robber barons” whose files with the ACA have reportedlybuilt a pirma facie case against them to answer?

From profit to loss

Recently, the media in the business pages reported that two Bursa Malaysia listed companies, Goh Ban Huat Bhd (GHB) and Supercomal Technologies Bhd, had been reprimanded and fined RM100,000 and RM50,000, respectively, by Bursa Malaysia Securities Bhd for accounting blunders in their quarterly financial results.
According to TheEdgeFinancialDaily April 20, 2005 report, Bursa Securities in a statement said the ceramics wares producer GBH had breached Paragraph 9.16 (1)(a) when it failed to ensure that its announcement on Feb 28 of its unaudited fourth quarterly results ended Dec 31, 2004 was factual, clear, unambiguous, accurate, succint and contains sufficient information.

On March 8, GBH reported a net loss of RM20.84million in its financial year 2004 instead of the earlier announced net profit of RM100.06million.
Bursa Securities said it viewed the contravention seriously and cautioned GBH and its board of directors of their responsibility to maintain appropriate standards of corporate responsibilty and acountability.

There is a substantial group of retail investors who bought shares in the "window period", short no doubt, between the announcement of profit of RM100.06million, and the statement of loss later of RM20.84million. Who will pay for their losses when they bought "high" and had to force-sell when the GBH shares plunged subsequently?
So the company GBH -- none of the individuals involved -- was fined RM100,000, does this send a message that such offences would incur commensurate punishment? The fine was just a tap on the wrist for a corporation. It was the shareholders’ monies that went into paying the fines. The CEO and directors got away scot-free. The consumers in Malaysia are often made the suckers in any scams.

Am I stating a truism that Malaysians have been enveloped in a shroud of cynicism and despondency the past year? Our prime minister has, on taking office, pledged: I'll walk the talk on delivering a clean, accountable, responsive and transparent government. Pak Lah wants to listen to us -- wants us the Rakyat to tell it as it is -- no balls-carrying, in very crass terms, and I'm saying it as it is, as the very honourable PM has asked for it. No currying or other flavouring.

But the events of the past few days restored some optimism in me -- the air of sceptism has been lifted a little -- a wee bit, no doubt, still it gives rise to hope. Read the two page 1 headlines in theSun of June 28, 2005:


Under the heading, ACA: We will act, the Sun reported that that the Anti-Corruption Agency chief, Zulkifli Mat Noor said the ACA would investigate any UMNO leader found to have been involved in money politics. This assurance was given in light of the PM's comment the previous Sunday that UMNO members found guilty of breaching party ethics might be referred to the ACA, if there is strong evidence of involvement in money politics.

A second news report on the same day, headlined Director and ex-remisier deny fixing share price is that a company director Chin Chan Leong was charged in a sessions court for manipulating shares on the Bursa Malaysia Securities Bhd (formerly Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange), to which he pleaded not guilty, while a remisier Hiew Yoke Lan, claimed trial to abetting Chin.

Would Pak Lah proceed to act aggressively on the “big fish” – both in government, and in the corporate sector -- in his fight against corruption and show his government is really committed to transparency and good governance? For example, Dr Mahathir’s repeated appeals that the government publish the lists of approved permits (AP) holders (with his son identified by International Trade and Industry Minister Rafidah Aziz as one such holder...) have been rebuffed. I support the good doctor's calls not because it came from a former nation's CEO, but that IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO -- all in line with Pak Lah's professed commitment to good governance.

Or maybe the lists, when made public, would show that certain individuals have been given immensely large allocations of the APs. Is it true that a certain long-serving Minister’s relative was/is a substantial beneficiary of the APO system? Pak Lah, come clean on this if you have nothing to hide!

Would the PM challenge the ACA to move faster in bringing the “big fish” to court, and really show the people he’s serious in starting to WALKING THE TALK. Or the UMNO’s action against Isa is just a “flash in the plan”, or as was reported by a foreign press, this UMNO VP was just made “a sacrificial lamb”?