Post Election Thoughts

Despite my avid interest in politics, I am happy that the elections are over. The intensity of the elections was beginning to show how stupid Malaysians are, and I am glad it has subsided enough that I can pretend that the truth isn't so. I have beef with both sides of the divide. I'm going to start first with Pakatan Rakyat supporters.

The outrage and anger among Pakatan Rakyat folk is largely justifiable. It's been 10 years since Dr. Mahathir retired and while the people tolerated corruption under his regime (largely because of a lack of open space to discuss abuses of power) they hoped for great change after he stepped down, but they have had a decade to fester disappointment and frustration. That being said, having been victims of corruption and deceit for so long, Pakatan Rakyat supporters are incredibly paranoid and self victimizing. It was embarrassing to see Malaysians intimidate and hurl insults at skinny dark skinned folk in line to vote because they thought these people were Bangladeshi illegal immigrants. There are countless videos that display this backwardness of Malaysian culture. May 5th wasn't a good day to be a foreigner in Malaysia. So convinced that Barisan Nasional had shipped foreigners in to vote for them, these crowds shouted and yelled at "suspects" as if they were less than human and undeserving of respect. Guilty until proven innocent, hardly the sort of values one would expect from groups that demonize institutionalized racism. On this account, Pakatan Rakyat supporters made me sick.

Other rumors are that Opposition seats were lost because of blackouts that occurred at polling stations across the country. Independent media sources like Malaysiakini and The Malaysian Insider never reported such instances, but Pakatan Rakyat supporters, ever ready to play the role of victim sprung into action, spreading these stories online and stirring up greater resentment towards Barisan Nasional and the Election Commission. All I ask is that reports of injustice be verified before we spring into fits of anger. If these events happened, can Pakatan Rakyat supporters wait for clear reports and announcements to be made before going ape-crazy. We are lucky to live in a day and age where some online media sources can be trusted; we should let them inform us before we jump to conclusions about fraud.

Too much anger, too little thinking, that is the fuel that is keeping Pakatan Rakyat alive right now. That is incredibly frustrating because good governance cannot be founded on victim playing attitudes. We need to ship out corrupt and incompetent governance, but if we're going to replace it with whiners who run high on anger, then all we can expect from the second lot is a witch hunt to right the past with no focus on the future. I'd like a more competitive political landscape to be a win-win, not a lose-lose situation for this country.

Barisan Nasional on the other hand, are a laughable bunch. Everyone anticipated the tsunami that wiped them out of urban seats across the country except them . In Penang, Perak and Negeri Sembilan, the DAP swept all seats they contested. In Selangor, PAS picked up five urban seats to hand Pakatan Rakyat a 2/3rds majority in the legislative assembly. For some reason, MCA and Gerakan leaders were shocked that they won fewer parliamentary seats than there are days in the week. Either they didn't have internet access to see it coming, or they're stupid; at least in Penang where one has access to free wifi in public areas, we have to conclude the latter. The immediate reaction of blaming their losses on the Chinese found support only among writers at The Star whose monthly salaries are paid by the bosses at MCA. Someone needs to tell Barisan Nasional that saying Chinese voters they were "fooled" by racist DAP strategies doesn't help. You can't insinuate that people are stupid and were deceived, then expect them to vote for you in the future.

Najib Razak's administration has generally been stiff lipped and guarded in their speech, which is why most are not terribly inflamed by his leadership thus far. But Najib and his allies have let their guard down since suffering these "unexpected losses." Najib failed to condemn Utusan's racist headlines blaming and attacking Chinese Malaysians. His closest ally, Zahid Hamidi, told people unhappy with the current electoral system to migrate to a different country. So much for the spirit of democracy and participate governance. It has been left to Saifuddin Abdullah and Shahrir Samad to play down the racial card and insist that "transformation" must be accelerated to win back disenchanted urban voters.

That Najib isn't outraged by Utusan's racially instigating motives, or the incredibly shallow and patronizing comments by his close friend Zahid Hamidi suggests that maybe he isn't the inclusive and progressive leader he displayed himself to be prior to the election. Urbanization and a youth bulge mean that the numbers are going to continue to be stack in Pakatan Rakyat's favor for the next few elections, and if Najib and his team cannot revamp their party to endear themselves to educated, urban voters, then in five years time, someone new will be Prime Minister and he won't be from UMNO.

Anwar Ibrahim has already won

Terence Netto is on the money. I'd like to see Rocky Bru concede this point. Regardless of the outcome, Anwar Ibrahim emerges a winner, uniting a long fractured opposition front, forming a formidable coalition to challenge UMNO and Barisan Nasional, doing what many have failed to do in the past. Terence Netto writes:

"These are stupendous achievements, ones that eluded past protagonists of anti-Umno/BN coalitions, Onn Jaafar and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, who dented but could not dislodge the ruling powers, now over a half-century in harness, a span that's formidably difficult to end because of the enormous advantages conferred by incumbency."

It has been a true perfect storm for Anwar. I think it is fair to say that his charisma has overwhelmed that of Onn Jaafar and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, but Anwar alone didn't cook the opposition front into the power that it is today. He was fortunate to rise as BN component parties fell. MCA and MIC have hollowed out allowing the DAP to rise to take their place. Mahmud Taib's decision to hold on to power has frustrated Sarawak Chinese, and the inability of UMNO to shake of the shackles of corruption 10 years after Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's ascension to power with promises of corruption reform has driven even Malays to reject the once all powerful UMNO. The loose ends of the Mahathir, Liong Sik and Samy Vellu regime is haunting BN daily. Anwar has seized this opportunity and boy has he done well. He may end up teaching at a university come Monday, May 6th, 2013, but we can all agree, Malaysia's political landscape will never be the same.

PM or not, Anwar Ibrahim has won

Terence Netto 2:09PM May 4, 2013

COMMENT That Anwar Ibrahim would be adjudged the most consequential political leader of the second half century of the Malaysian nation's existence is not in doubt.

This would be true even if by midnight tomorrow he is not endorsed as prime minister of the country as a result of the outcome of the country's 13th general election.

His achievements will be deemed to be weighty even if the coalition he leads, Pakatan Rakyat, does not win a majority of the seats in Parliament at tomorrow's polls, the most pivotal in the nation's history and, by reason of it being the 13th in the series, the most unnervingly resonant.

This is because the race riots of May 13, 1969, continue to rattle in the attic of the nation's memory like cargo come loose in the hold of a freighter.

The ghosts of that incident and the aftermath it unveiled, in an initially good and, then, gone badly wrong social engineering scheme, desperately need to be exorcised from the nation's collective memory.

Otherwise this country will forever be pinned down by the twin obsessions of race and religion, with its society teetering permanently on the brink of multiple schisms.

Reinventing Malaysia

No Malaysian leader has demonstrated more capability at possible attainment of that release than Anwar because of his skill at challenging and re-shaping the assumptions of the people he proposes to lead.

When he re-emerged on the national scene in 2007 to lead the opposition to continued rule by BN, after the shipwreck of a six-year stay in prison on trumped-on charges and a brief spell in the grooves of academe, Malaysian politics was firmly stuck in the quagmire of race and religion, a bog 50 years in the making and seemingly unyielding to nostrums.

By dint of being the principal adhesive in an ideologically disparate opposition that grouped a theocratic PAS and a secular DAP, with his own PKR holding the balance, he was able to lead the coalition - with an assist from the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) - to a historic denial to the ruling BN of its vaunted two-thirds parliamentary majority in the general election of March 2008.

That in itself was a tremendous achievement.

Given that previous electoral pacts between the exclusively Muslim PAS and the Chinese-dominant DAP did not amount to government-buffeting proportions or had unravelled soon after the polls, the fact that the Pakatan has endured now for five years makes his welding together of it a tour de force.

These are stupendous achievements, ones that eluded past protagonists of anti-Umno/BN coalitions, Onn Jaafar and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, who dented but could not dislodge the ruling powers, now over a half-century in harness, a span that's formidably difficult to end because of the enormous advantages conferred by incumbency.

That Anwar has been able to lead and sustain a coalition while simultaneously fending off a campaign, partly played out in the courts, of sustained vilification of his moral character was evidence of admirable reserves of moral fibre and resilience.

Massive crowds

The huge crowds that have turned out to hear him since Parliament dissolved on April 3 have been bigger and more responsive than the ones that showed up at his campaign appearances in the lead-up to GE12 in 2008.

Those crowds had paved the way for an unprecedented denial to BN of its traditional two-thirds majority in Parliament.

These days the crowds' magnitude presages the downfall of the BN government, the reason for caretaker Prime Minister and BN chief Najib Abdul Razak's vacuous optimism that his coalition would regain its two-thirds majority being interpreted as cover for electoral fraud on a massive scale.

That move would be foolish, given the size and mood of the crowds that have turned up at Pakatan rallies in several cities and towns in the residential hubs of the country.

Mainly, the people have come to hear and see the Pied Piper of Malaysian political reform, to look at how he has held up under the barrage of vituperation and character assassination.

No leader in modern times, in this and other countries, has been subjected to such a sustained and intense bout of personal vilification.

Throughout it all, Anwar composed himself before countless audiences in such manner as to steadily stay on the issues of national concern, telling his listeners how these have been grossly mishandled by Umno-BN.

Aided by a potentially disastrous decision by Najib to defer the polls on the assumption that a new-broom PM would recover lost ground through handouts and cosmetic changes to policies, Anwar used the time thereby extended him and the Pakatan leadership cohort to hammer away at the massive corruption and colossal waste of the country's resources by over a half-century of BN rule.

Revelations from a serial run of scandals affecting the government was of great help to making the point that Umno-BN was diseased beyond redemption.

Alternative media

The Pakatan message would not have gotten through widely enough without the connectivity of the alternative media, the mainstream one having been rendered a joke by its sickeningly supine attitude to its masters and owners.

The consequence of this widely disseminated message is the spectacle of the return in droves from such places as Singapore and nearby countries of otherwise indifferent Malaysian voters resident in those places who are keen to give the Pakatan plea for urgent reform of a decayed and dysfunctional system a chance to be realised.

These returnees and their local counterparts should help make the voter turnout at GE13 a peak - far more than the previous highest of 72 percent of the electorate - unmatched before.

Needless to say, a huge turnout would be a big fillip to Anwar's anticipated arrival at a personal summit: the fulfillment of a youthful ambition to be prime minister.

If the good life is a dream of youth realised in maturity, the great one must be the confluence between the fulfillment of a personal goal with the attainment of a national purpose which, in Anwar's view, is the salvation of Malaysia from Umno-BN's depredations.

Even without this fusion, his career has been a consequential one. With it, it would be a great one.

Al-Jazeera: Najib Razak

I can't decide if I was more frustrated with the moderator's passive approach or with Najib's expected lack of commitment to answering any question with a direct and honest answer. I was terribly disappointed with his response on the "Allah" issue, and wish he was more telling on his choice of Zulkifli Nordin as a party candidate among other things. By and large, Najib was his usual self, avoiding questions and giving slow and long winded responses only loosely related to the question at hand. More disappointing was the moderator's lack of conviction. She didn't press him on the party's failures. Why has it lost all urban support? She didn't press him for a more clear answer on the "Allah" issue, or it's affiliation with Perkasa. Najib did, however, gain some points for his light insinuation of the opposition's involvement in the Sulu attacks. That was subtle enough to be clever. Maybe the guy isn't as dumb after all?

I'm not anti-Najib like most urban Malaysians. The policies of his administration have been generally favorable and I am willing to attribute some of the weaknesses in his policies to the fact that he does not have his own mandate to lead yet. Given a victory in the upcoming elections, I see him more committed to implement the painful policies such as weaning the country off subsidies for petrol, sugar, flour and the like. I don't see BR1M handouts as vote buying schemes. Sure, he's timed them conveniently and strategically, but we cannot fault him deeply because the policy itself is a far better method of redistribution than subsidies, and should be continued. I have seen sufficient evidence to be convinced that there is a positive effect of cash transfers in helping families climb out of poverty.

Yet my apprehension with the man lies in his history. I'm not referring to his shady military deals as Defense Minister or his Mongolian connections, I am referencing his undying commitment to UMNO since his foray into politics at the tender age of 22. At his core, what does Najib Razak believe in, and what is his honest and personal vision for the country? That question is impossible to answer given his absolute loyalty to the Hussein Onn, Mahathir and Abdullah administrations he served under. He has never criticized any of these leaders or openly disagreed with any of their policies, so he gives us nothing to help us pin down his ultimate intentions. Is he purely an opportunist who is administering reforms to hold on to power and wealth? Or is he dedicated to his father's legacy, who was seen as a Malay nationalist, but not an "ultra" by today's standards? Or has he an entirely different agenda of his own? He holds his cards so close to his chest; it is not possible to know who he is or what his ideals truly are. His vision for Malaysia is blurry and unclear. Sadly, the only other window into his life is his wife, Rosmah Mansor, which paints the unfortunate picture I need not go into detail about. 

My ultimate hope is that Najib Razak is dedicated to an equal Malaysia. I hope he is not racist (in that he believes that Malays have a supreme right to ownership of the country). I also hope he is genuine about eradicating poverty and not playing a clever game to maintain the corrupt relations between the country's coffers and the many UMNO leaders those coffers have enriched in the past.
Most importantly I hope that should he be returned to power, he be quick to implement change. I blame his current slow progress on the lack of his own mandate but if he wins this one I want more bold efforts at change. I want him to offend his party UMNO, and make enemies as necessary. I'd like concerted effort to repopulate MCA with anyone other than the scarecrows that belong to it now. I'd like a hurried dismantling of affirmative action policies.

But if he continues with the reserved pace of the last four years,I may have to withdraw support for him in the 14th general election, five years from now. In writing this, I admit I am not confident of these dreams. Najib Razak has done well enough thus far, but he has a lot more to do to gain a favorable place in Malaysian history. I don't think he has it in him to do it but I'm willing to give him a shot.

P.S. This is my 500th blog post. Milestones in the making!

Al-Jazeera 101 East: Tony Pua and Nor Jazlan Mohamed

I think the audience and moderator were too easy on Tony Pua. At times I felt like the program was an opportunity to scrutinize Barisan Nasional and allow Pakatan Rakyat time in the limelight more than anything else. The audience members were opposition leaning. While the scrutiny of Barisan Nasional was completely justified (though the sentiments expressed were predictable and at times tiresome), there were plenty of harder questions they could have thrown at Pakatan Rakyat besides Hudud law. When talking about corruption, there was no mention of Kumpulan Semesta; Tony was not asked to respond to the many other concerns should Pakatan come to federal power such as who would be Prime Minister, the lack of an existing shadow cabinet,and  the lack of representation in the coalition from Sabah and Sarawak interests. 

If they do take a majority of the seats in Parliament, we should expect a mad, disorganized and worrying scramble to form the federal government. It is disheartening that while everyone is willing to concede that there is a chance Pakatan Rakyat will win, no one is willing to pressure them to come up with an organized plan of federal governance, in lieu of this possibility. Shortsightedness of opposition supporters is an understatement on this front.

In the end though, it was still entertaining to see an UMNO politician struggle to dance around its party's failures and avoid admission of past faults. The party needs to start owning up to its failures so that it can speak more frankly about how it will and is changing itself to remain relevent. Nur Jazlen Mohamed is a voice of reason in UMNO. He is critical of corruption and twisted policies within his own party but he is not honest about these faults in public which makes the party look arrogant and oblivious.Only by admitting the ugliness of its past, severing these bad ties and positioning itself as reformed will they begin to win back urban voters who have long been disillusioned with the Barisan Nasional regime. Barisan Nasional better start making enemies with its past or it will give away any hope of a future.

The internet and political choice

Simon Lee, son of former Bukit Gasing State Assemblyman, the late Edward Lee, is running for his father's seat, but not under the DAP banner his father represented. Simon Lee is standing as an independent, or as he positions himself, a "community candidate." The video introduction he presents on his campaign website presents himself as a convincing and legitimate candidate. It will be interesting to see how many votes he can muster without party support. 

Billi Lim Peng Soon, author of "Dare to Fail,"
a twice failed independent candidate has
much to write about. He garnered less than
0.5% of votes each time.

Independent candidates have typically been the loose nuts and bolts of society. Typically, only the crazy, delusional and weird stand for elections without the support of political party machinery . Almost all garner few enough of votes to lose their RM5000 candidacy deposit along with their pride and dignity. Being a serious contender in any election takes a lot. Not only do you have to have the political charm to endear voters to you, you need money and endorsements. Speaking loud during the campaigning period requires flags, functions, speeches and door to door visits, all of which require a host of resources. You need a lot of help to win a state or parliamentary seat, hence without political party affiliation, the chances of winning a seat have always been slim.

Simon Lee

Yet Simon Lee's serious campaign suggests that maybe, just as the internet has changed landscape of Malaysian news and media industry, it may change the political landscape as well. Bukit Gasing is a wealthy suburb of Petaling Jaya with a high internet penetration rate. This means getting information to voters in Bukit Gasing is cheap. A website and some videos are all one needs to spread a message. Charlie, David and this sneezing panda can all attest to how cheap it now is to get the world's attention. The internet could, to an extent, leveled the campaigning playing field. In developed areas, speaking the loudest doesn't require booking a conference hall and blaring speakers to reach the masses, just a video camera and a strong and credible message. These lowered costs mean that good candidates, who would otherwise shy away from putting their name on the ballot as an independent because of the insurmountable costs of campaigning, may now decide to give it a go.

If the internet means greater political choice for voters, then we may witness a more vibrant democracy in the future. Malaysia can already attest to how the internet created a freer media, which has led us to this exciting election come May 5th; this is hopefully just the beginning. We may have a wider variety of choices in future elections, with more independent candidates, unencumbered by the baggage that comes with party affiliation. Let's hope Simon Lee's candidacy is just the tip of the iceberg and that we can look forward to a wider spectrum of credible choices in the future.

Anwar Ibrahim on Al-Jazeera News

I highly recommend this video. The awful journalistic quality of Malaysian media deprives the nation of quality information about party platforms and propositions. I have both superficial and substantive comments about this interview of Anwar Ibrahim by Al-Jazeera:

 

First, the substance: Anwar Ibrahim is a tremendous orator. The key thrust of his campaign is a convincing one; Barisan Nasional propagates a culture of corruption and change will dismantle that pervasiveness in society. Of concerns of disunity among his coalition parties, Anwar Ibrahim says the problems are academic and theoretical. In reality, the parties can work together and have proven so in the four states that they currently govern. They have more in common then the divergent philosophical underpinnings of these parties suggest. Will his coalition be able to manage the economy? He says with eight years of experience as Minister of Finance, yes.

He answers the questions well, though there are a few issues he sidesteps along the way. He sweeps under the carpet some of the major ideological differences that plague his coalition. While it is probably fair to assume that his party, Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), and the secular Chinese dominated party, the Democratic Action Party (DAP) are largely compatible, even when leaving "theoretical and academic" arguments aside,the vast ideological dispersion within the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) is one of concern. PAS has led more Islamic regimes in the states of Kelantan and Kedah (as well as Terrenganu between 1999 and 2004) but its representation in the Selangor government and the short lived Perak government were much more secular. The ideological platform of the party is strongly conservative and Islamic, however to stay relevant in more urban and progressive areas, the party has acquired more liberal flair. While these differences need not be reconciled when ruling state governments where ideology is fairly homogeneous, it remains to be seen how PAS will position its governance at the federal level.Though it is likely to tow the line and give in to its more secular partners, how much dissent will arise among its conservative wing, and will the party be able to control this dissent? Anwar Ibrahim would probably say that dissent will be minimal, and in all likelihood a win will propel PAS towards a more liberal agenda, but that is an issue we cannot place too much confidence in considering evidence in the past.

As for managing the economy, Anwar Ibrahim's confidence is not entirely placative. His cabinet, should they come into power, will be largely inexperienced in interacting with the large force of civil servants that run the country and while there is good in replacing the corrupt politician-civil servant ties that abound in Malaysian governance, inexperience will probably cause some economic chaos, though the chaos will probably be very temporary and uninhibitive to the administration of the nation. The greatest concern lies within Anwar's own party. Lacking the strong philosophical framework and history that underlie the DAP and PAS struggle, PKR is filled with opportunists looking to make quick inroads to power and wealth. Because of the party's short history, it will be hard to figure out who the genuine and honest leaders are, and who is out to make some quick money by being in power. Many DAP and PAS leaders have struggled for years, even decades, as opposition politicians,  much of the time with no realistic shot at coming into power. Their intentions to create a better nation have been proven by their struggle. Anwar Ibrahim, on the other hand, does not have history to rely on. He will have to be wary of the wolfs in his own backyard just as much as he is wary of the wolfs in his neighbor's yard. I have much lower confidence in PKR's ability to provide quality leadership. The level of unknown is great and a massive concern, large enough to make me hesitant to support the idea of turning over the reigns of the nation to Anwar Ibrahim.

Don't get me wrong, I want Anwar's coalition to win many states (preferably, Penang, Perak, Selangor, Kelantan and Negeri Sembilan) and maintain a strong presence in parliament (denying Barisan Nasional a two third's majority again) but I'd be more comfortable if they mounted their colossal challenge for power in the next general election. Five years of well managed administration of the states they win will be enough to convince me of their abilities to lead the nation. The first five years they have had has proven some but not enough.

On a lighter note, the interview reminded me that Anwar Ibrahim has a really sinister look about him:

Najib Razak, on the other hand, looks like a gentle Dunder Mifflin paper salesman. If I was picking the good guy based on looks, I'd bet on Najib not screwing me over. Judge a book by it's cover? I'd say sometimes it works out better than you'd think.

Revenge instead of justice

I guess what it comes down to is, I just don't trust the guy. If Pakatan Rakyat comes into power, will he go on a witch hunt to exact revenge on the many leaders in UMNO that have bullied and abused him for over a decade? Considering the man is a fighter, I'd say I think so. This sounds like it is just the beginning of it. I'd have felt better if he said he was going to review all contracts to see if there is evidence of cronyism, but to cancel Sapura Kencana's contract immediately because of the Mahathir connection sounds a lot like a man of anger trying to get back at someone for betraying him. And while he has every right to be angry considering the manifold accusations made against him, I want my future leader to be driven by fairness and justice and not a personal vendetta.

Now, to all avid Pakatan Rakyat supporters out there, I'm not saying Anwar Ibrahim is wrong in going after UMNO. I think we've all agreed that UMNO's rent seeking behavior is a known fact and a change of regime will dismantle that culture. I'm concerned that Anwar Ibrahim's ultimate goal is not justice, but revenge. If we're swapping a corrupt bureaucracy for a new vengeful administration, I'm not sure if the nation will be taking a step forward, largely because vengeful regimes have fared very poorly in history and always stirred up anger and dissent among the public and I'd like for our country to remain at peace.

Saddam Hussien's trial, the recent Bangaldesh trial for war crimes, the gruesome death of Muammar Gaddafi; there are all stories that tell of tragic ways for society to seek justice for past corruption. I'm not trying to equate a Pakatan Rakyat take over of government as being as dramatic as the uprisings in Libya, but I am saying that if Pakatan Rakyat chooses to be governed by anger and revenge rather than justice, then we may end up no better when they are in power. In seeking revenge, what the country will lose is an opportunity to obtain true justice. Hasty persecution of Barisan Nasional leaders for corruption will mean they get unfair treatment and unfair trials even if they are guilty, and that will wipe out the satisfaction from seeing dirty politicians put behind bars, a satisfaction the "rakyat" truly deserves. My fear is that Anwar Ibrahim will operate not in fairness but in anger, and deny the country of justice. I plead that fairness and forgiveness prevail.

Food

Double Yoked Egg!

Roti Canai with Chicken Curry and Cauliflower Curry

Swedish Meatballs with a Romaine and Mushroom Salad

Oatmeal with Brown Sugar and Blueberries

Orange Glazed Chicken and Salad

Mango and Strawberries with Coconut Gelato

Pasta Puttanesca with Baked Brussel Sprouts

Polish Sausage, Breakfast Potatoes, Cauliflower, Onion and Mushroom Fry, Tomato and a Fried Egg

Let's talk economic policy

I was having a conversation with someone the other day about how Malaysian politics lacks a social dimension. Our politicians are not championing social causes, just economic ones. No politician in Malaysia needs a formulated position on AIDS, drug addiction or abortion to win a seat in Parliament. Because we are a developing country, I'm willing to overlook these shortcomings because I believe most Malaysian voters are not educated to have such levels of social awareness and hence, are not in the position to demand such things from their politicians yet.
However, what I am not willing to overlook is the lack of conversation on economic policies. Malaysians only care about how the government will help make them money. Economic wellbeing has always taken centerstage in Malaysian politics. Yet, the discussions in newspapers and online media have never been about the pro's and con's of policy, and to ignore the conversation is to negate the importance of policy in fueling growth. Here's an example of two policies from Parti Keadilan Rakyat, and more broadly, Pakatan Rakyat, that most Malaysian know about, but no good discussions have taken place over:

Parti Keadilan Rakyat wants to increase petrol subsidies by removing energy subsidies to power producers and wants to lower car excise taxes by auctioning off Approved Permits for foreign vehicles. 

First, let's talk about petrol prices and subsidies. Petrol prices below the market rate are a bad thing because they cause people to over consume petrol. By maintaining prices low when in actuality the price of petrol is high, people behave as if there is an abundance of petrol when in actuality world supply of petrol is tight. This means, with low prices, Malaysians are going to buy houses that are further away and induce sprawl, they are going to buy cars that are less fuel efficient and they are going to drive more. Companies and firms increase transportation by road and under invest in fuel efficient methods of transportation because petrol is cheap. These habits, particular the decision of dwelling choice will have long term consequences on society. Let's assume the country loses it's financial ability to sustain petrol prices at low prices. Maybe Petronas, the nation's piggy bank, makes smaller profits because of dwindling reserves, then prices will have to rise and the nation will be ill prepared for reality. With houses built in locations which require a long commute, and businesses which have under invested in fuel efficient methods of transportation, households go into debt and businesses fold. All this is a result of an artificial distortion of market prices. By subsidizing we create an energy inefficient society that runs on petrol more than on other resources. As for shifting subsidies from electricity generation to petrol, the quality of that decision is difficult to assess without better knowledge on the structure of the energy industry. If energy producers sell energy at a fixed rate to Tenaga Nasional, and make hefty profits in spite of subsidies, then subsidies should probably be remove. If energy is sold to Tenaga Nasional at a market rate, then, we should expect prices to rise, hence by paying for cheaper petrol, Malaysians pay higher electricity prices and overall the winner is the household who drives a lot and is never at home.

Next up, car prices. Taxes on vehicles are a good idea on some levels because they can be made progressive, that is the rich person pays more in taxes than the poor person, and for the most part, Malaysia's tax code reflects that. However, the excise tax that is mentioned is too high. Since Malaysians have no alternative to driving to get places, they still buy cars at exorbitant prices, and end up with higher levels of household debt. Lowering these taxes, while reducing government revenue, will help Malaysian households financially and will probably not result in much of an increase in car ownership (which is good because more cars means potentially more congestion). Making up the losses in government revenue by auctioning off Approved Permits is an obvious solution. Parti Keadilan Rakyat's policy on cars is far more well thought through than its policy on petrol subsidies.

The concern of traffic congestion must be addressed. Parti Keadilan Rakyat takes a jab at the lack of public transportation investment under Barisan Nasional's administration, yet they are intending to implement two policies that will encourage driving: lower petrol prices and cheaper cars. While cheaper cars probably won't result in more cars on the road, the savings from lower car prices may be ploughed into more driving, since petrol now is cheaper too. The end result: congested streets and empty buses since driving has become so cheap. Since public tranportation infrastructure can only be sustained if there are many riders, Parti Keadilan Rakyat policy will make public transit highly unprofitable and unsustainable, while clogging up streets. Overall, transportation policy under Pakatan Rakyat will be no good. 

What should be done? Car prices should be reduced and Approved Permits should be auctioned. These two policies should be revenue neutral, more or less. But petrol subsidies should be reduced, not increased to bring the price of petrol closer to world market prices. The savings from these subsidies should be put to improve public transit facilities in secondary cities like Ipoh, Kuantan, Seremban, Melaka, Alor Setar, Kota Bahru, Kuala Terengganu, Kuching and Kota Kinabalu where transit is nonexistent currently. These cities are just the right size for sustainable bus networks. To pay for public transit in Johor Bahru, Penang and Kuala Lumpur, these cities will have to implement congestion pricing mechanisms. This may take a few years; first, the cities will have to look at further improving public transit routes so that drivers have a viable alternative to driving, but borrowing from future income from congestion pricing should hurry along transit investments. It has been found that congestion pricing raises considerable revenue, hence the option should not be ignored. Economists have long proposed this ignored solution and Malaysia should have the political will to see this through, hopefully by 2018. 

A lengthy discussion on policy is the very least we could ask for. It is unfortunate that our local media are not capable of such things, hence instead we fixate our minds on who is going to run where and why we are still waiting for the elections to happen. Shame on you, Malaysia. 

Global Witness on Sarawak

I rarely get this excited about investigative journalism pieces but this one hits all the right chords. I've long thought dubious the wealth of the Chief Minister of Sarawak. In a state filled with rural communities, he has amassed wealth far exceeding the growth in income among his people. I've mentioned before how his corruption is causing severe deforestation in Sarawak. But today, an expose by a UK based environmental organization, Global Witness, has been released giving more tangible suggestions affirming what many have long thought to be true, the leaders of Sarawak are hiving profits from state land deals to personal bank accounts. They keep their money in Singapore which reveals that the rich little island not so squeaky clean. Sure, this is a story that has yet to be proven true, and it will be unfortunate if these confessions turn out to be empty and meaningless, but if any piece of this is true and a storm starts to brew, it may mean good things for the state. If we've been right all along about the dirty leaders of Sarawak, then today is a good day for the country.

Balance: A Matter of Political Survival

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak does not have a mandate of his own from voters in Malaysia. Until 2008, his party, the United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) and the ruling coalition of largely race based parties it leads, the Barisan Nasional (BN) or National Front, had never lost a general election. However, the general elections in 2008 was very different, BN failed to gain a two thirds majority of seats in parliament for only the second time in Malaysia's 57 year history, seceding 63% of its seats to opposition parties. By 2009, UMNO had replaced it's then leader, Mr. Abdullah Ahmad Badawi with Mr. Najib.

By virtue of being the leader of UMNO, Mr. Najib also became leader of BN and ascended to the post of Prime Minister of the Malaysia, just over a year into his predecessor's term. Being leader of UMNO meant Mr. Najib had the arduous task of reviving a coalition of parties that had lost its lustre and fallen out of favour with much of the voting public. Since then, he has found life at the top very lonely. Opinion polls have consistently shown his approval ratings far exceeding that of BN. Equally unpopular is Najib's wife, who is often portrayed as Malaysia's version of Filipino prima donna, Imelda Marcos. Parliament must be dissolved and a general election held by April and it appears that Mr. Najib has only his own persona to count on, as he seeks his own mandate and attempts to anchor his party to victory in what is touted to be the closest election in Malaysian history.

Much of the dissatisfaction with BN stems from faults beginning in a previous era. Under the administration of long serving Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamed, the coalition became known for corruption and cronyism. Leaders of BN component parties used their positions to gain construction contracts and land deals for their families and close associates. While many of these leaders have since retired, the negative perceptions still exist; few are convinced that the rent seeking culture that began during Mr. Mahathir's era has been dismantled.

Last week, the president of one of BN's major component parties, the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), Mr Chua Soi Lek, announced that the party had left out from the its list of recommended candidates for the upcoming election, a former president of MCA, Mr. Ong Tee Keat. The MCA was established to represent the interests of the large ethnic Chinese minority that make up about 25% of Malaysia's population. Mr Chua ousted Mr. Ong from the presidency in party elections in 2010. However, Mr. Ong has remained very popular among leaders of UMNO as well as the general public. Much of BN's heavy losses in the 2008 general election were due to discontent by both the ethnic Chinese as well as urban voters. Mr. Ong was one of the few ethnic Chinese representatives from BN to win a seat in an urban constituency.

Soon after, rumours began floating that Mr Najib had decided in closed door meetings to field Mr. Ong as a "direct  BN candidate" in the seat that Mr. Ong currently holds. This means Mr Ong may be fielded as a BN candidate that does not belong to any of the component parties in BN. The idea of "direct candidates" has been used by the coalition only once before, in 1995, but it may be Mr Najib's ticket to victory in this upcoming election. While the country has generally acknowledged Najib's success as Prime Minister, they are not convinced that the component parties of BN have changed much. "Direct candidates" will give Mr. Najib the opportunity to field personalities who are viewed as "anti-establishment"; candidates who are unpopular among their parties yet popular among the voting public for that very reason. They could be symbols of a fresh start for BN, unencumbered by the dirty history in its past.

There is another reason why "direct candidates" may be a good idea. In 2008, BN lost thirty parliamentary seats to the National Justice Party, a multicultural party led by former Deputy Prime Minister and current Opposition Leader, Anwar Ibrahim. It has been suggested that one of the reasons for Mr. Anwar's party's success was its was multicultural platform. The victory has been taken by some as a sign that Malaysia is ready for less communal and raced based politics. Most of BN's component parties are race based; they represent an older era, when society was more fractured and defined by ethnicity. Since it is argued that many issues that concern Malaysians today transcend race and ethnic culture, "direct candidates" may help Mr. Najib define the intention to dismantle the racial segregation within his coalition and merge the parties into a single multicultural entity.

Unfortunately, there are a few problems with the use of the use of "direct candidates" as well. Firstly, there are few obvious choices as "direct candidates" besides Mr. Ong. Idris Jala is one of the only other obvious choice. Mr. Jala is currently a Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, but not a member of any BN party. He was hired to manage Mr. Najib's Economic Transformation Program because of his stellar work turning around an almost bankrupt Malaysia Airlines, when he was that company's Chief Executive Officer. Before that, he was a managing director with Shell Gas. His lack of partisanship and his business savvy has lent him great credibility among the Malaysian public. Besides Mr. Ong and Mr. Jala, there are few personalities that are disassociated from BN's turbulent past yet close allies of Mr. Najib. Secondly, even if Mr. Najib does find the right people to field as "direct candidates, he has to be careful not to depend too heavily on the strategy less he upsets the parties in his coalition. By ignoring the recommended lists of candidates for seats by component party leaders, he is not only denying these parties a chance at greater representation in the next Parliament, but undermining the integrity of these parties as well.

It is ironic that the BN coalition's logo is a pair of balanced scales because the key to victory for the coalition will lie in Mr. Najib's ability to balance the need for change with the need to please his partners in the coalition. An unbalanced strategy could see him either losing the support of key partners or losing votes from a demanding population. Mistakes could  leave him without the strong mandate he is seeking despite his personal popularity and will play perfectly into the hands of the very tactical Mr. Anwar who with his allies, have been plotting to take over governance of the nation since their surprising success in the last elections.  

Food!

Grilled Chicken Salad 

Beef Rendang and French Bean Stir fry

Nasi Lemak with Chicken and Prawn Sambal

Orange Chicken and Green Beans

An Entire Roast Chicken!

Roast Chicken II

Tuna Salad

Roast Chicken, Roast Potatoes, Stuffing and Green Beans

Creamy Avocado Pasta with Cajun Shrimp

Avocado Tuna Melts with Tomato Basil Soup

Election Outcome Hopes

Here's how I want the election to play out:

State Politics

• A win for Pakatan Rakyat in the Penang State Legislative Assembly, with PKR and PAS winning a few seats currently held by UMNO. A loss of one or two seats by DAP to Gerakan to keep a rational opposition voice going and give Gerakan hope of reviving what was once the most philosophically sound party in the nation.
• A win for Pakatan Rakyat in the Perak State Legislative Assembly, with an increased majority over the previous election. DAP maintains the seats it won in the last election (with a thumping victory in Jelapang) while PAS and PKR make inroads in rural seats currently held by UMNO.
• A win for Pakatan Rakyat in the Selangor State Legislative Assembly, with PKR holding the majority of seats and no major change in the composition of seats in the Assembly.
• Wins by progressive and non-conservative figures by any party in Kedah, Kelantan and Terengganu to quieten the fundamentalist movement on the east coast and revive a more progressive image of Islam for the nation. Preferably for the PAS government to be returned to power in Kelantan with a smaller majority and for Terengganu to be continue to be held by UMNO. I have no preference for who will govern Kedah. The PAS led Pakatan Rakyat government there has been ineffective but I abhor the boasting from BN should they take the state.
• A larger opposition, led by the DAP in Negeri Sembilan
• Wins by PKR and DAP candidates in Malacca to rain on the confidence of the overbearing Datuk Seri MohdAli Rustam,
• Wins by DAP over MCA in all Johor State Legislature Assembly seats to show MCA that they have not sufficiently reformed to have gained the trust of the Chinese community, or the nation as a whole.
• Small gains by Sabah based parties and losses to Sabah UMNO to curb the influence of Peninsular Malaysia figures on Sabah politics, and erode the power of UMNO over Sabah so that eventually, governence of the state is returned to Sabahans.

Federal Politics

• Major wins by Sarawak opposition parties in Sarawak Parliamentary Seats to signal the beginning of the end of Abdul Taib Mahmud's tyrannic thirty two reign in Sarawak.
• Wins by Pakatan Rakyat candidates in all seats in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, and in all urban Parliamentary seats in Selangor to signal to the government that the urban voters are still unimpressed with the rent seeking scum of Barisan Nasional, and greater reform still must take place.
• Increased wins and winning margins for Pakatan Rakyat in Perak Parliamentary seats to signal that the takeover of state seats by BN in 2009 was dirty and despicable.
• More wins for the Pakatan Rakyat coalition in Sabah to create a more competitive political environment there and to erode the "safe deposit" perception BN has of the state.
• Small inroads by the opposition in Melaka and Negeri Sembilan
• A wipe out of MCA Johor for the same reasons a wipeout of their state representatives is necessary. The party must be brought to its knees for the lack of reform despite losing in 2008.
• A slim majority for Barisan Nasional such that Najib Tun Razak  is returned to power led once again by wins from  UMNO in Perlis, Terengganu, Melaka, Negeri Sembilan and Pahang as well as slight increases in wins from rural Selangor and Kedah. The outcome spurs a new agenda to aggresively wipe out rent seeking personalities from positions of power within Barisan Nasional parties as well as within the civil service. Also, the coalition is moved to create new strategies to restore support from the Chinese and urban communities, primarily by dismantling MCA and a new movement towards making BN a multiracial party with open membership to anyone.   

Election Wishes

It's been a while since I've made any sort of comment on politics, but with the elections drawing near I figured I'd say a little about what I care about as a voter and what I'd like to see of the winning Prime Minister of the coming elections.

"Allah" Controversy
This needs to be settled once and for all. The current home minister has already said he regrets the ban. Christians in Malaysia have used the term for ages and the sudden desire to outlaw the use of the word is completely irrational. What has not been an issue to the country for centuries shouldn't suddenly be an issue now. It's like the rules of the game have changed against Christians overnight and that is unfair. I'm not one to champion Christian rights politically often (see here) but this is one of the issues which I believe matters. This case of antagonism is a sign of deepening roots of fundamentalism that I think the nation's leaders should be concerned about because it could throw the multicultural spirit into disequilibrium.

I'd like the Prime Minister to take the bull by the horns and seal the deal. Let an inter-faith panel decide, let the cabinet decide, have the Sultan's issue a decree; do something monumental that makes it official: the word is a non issue and there should is no need for discussion beyond that. Islam in Malaysia should be moderating; it has lost a lot of ground since the Iranian revolution; and though, as a non-Muslim I recognize the limitations in my right and ability to have an opinion on the matter, I will say this, the founding fathers did not envision religion to shape this nation so distinctly, and it is up to the current leaders to see a more tolerant Malaysia take shape, as was the plan when we achieved independence. I'd like my Prime Minister to be brave enough to handle Islamic fundamentalism.

Civil Service Reform
Someone I respect argues that the need for a change in government lies in the need to severe the unhealthy ties between the civil service and the ruling government. I do not agree with the conviction that Malaysia is better under a different ruling government but it is true that the current ruling government and the civil service have enjoyed a cosy relationship for as long as this nation has existed; and in many ways, the civil service runs the show, not the government. The inertia against administrative reform in the nation is great. The many "little napoleons" that people complain about are not members of parliament or state representatives (after 2008, elected representatives have become well aware that they are easily replaceable)  but administrative staff in government department staff who cannot be fired and keep their positions regardless of which sitting government is in power. The problems facing mission schools and non-Muslim religions, the corruption in any sort of licensing and approval, the inefficiencies of public service department scholarships, and the list goes on; much of these problems are rooted in a civil service that understands and exerts it's power.

The Prime Minister must do more to undo the harm the civil service imposes on society. Make them dispensable, make the civil service competitive, and most of all make sure that policies are enforced and followed. I do not mean to insult the many civil servants who work hard and are under appreciated, but I am addressing the systematic weaknesses in the administrative process that has prevented this country from achieving greatness. The personal agenda of powerful civil servants must be circumvented, cronies must be replaced. A comprehensive policy that addresses this will satisfy me

Local Government Elections
Closely related is the need for local government elections. The overreach of the civil service in administration of local government must come to an end. Elected officials at the local level will provide checks and balances to the system; I believe it will help remove the excess of power in the hands of the civil service. I'd like to see the federal government overturn the laws that currently prevent local government elections. I'm more attracted to political parties that vow to make this a reality should they win a majority in Parliament

Removal of Subsidies
Distortions of market outcomes for basic necessities like food and petrol should end. They are expensive and regressive in distributional outcomes. The appropriate response would be to formulate better policies that help redistribute to the poor, cash handouts being one of them but also,  improvements in public amenities in poor and rural areas such as public transportation, clinics, schools, parks and athletic facilities. Also, I'd like to see long term plans like investments in polytechnics, community colleges and vocational schools.

Higher Education Reform
The current organizational structure of higher education in Malaysia is a mess. The moratorium on new universities and colleges are indicative of poor and unsustainable planning by the ministry which has led to an oversupply of doctors and poor monitoring of quality of education. You cannot undo an individual's investment in higher education, and the fact that so many poor institutions of higher learning exist mean the government is setting it's citizens up for failure. I'd like to see a consolidation of universities, colleges and "university colleges" to better facilitate monitoring of institutions. Some colleges should be shut down altogether for poor quality. There needs to be better ways of relaying the quality of education at institutions to students and parents, and there needs to be a directed plan by the government to provide quality education at all levels (elite universities, universities, colleges, polytechnics, community colleges). That the country has yet to court a liberal arts institution that emphasizes undergraduate education is disheartening. We need institutions that attract out best and brightest to stay home and a liberal arts college would do that.

Malaysia and Power Distance

Hofstede's Power Distance index measures the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. It measures how accepting and respectful subordinates are of hierarchy.  Societies with greater levels of power distance concentrate larger proportions of power and authority at the top of the social pyramid while societies with lower levels of power distance allow greater contribution from subordinates in decision making processes. It isn’t surprising that at 104 out of 120, Malaysia ranks first on this index. Our country has a keen inclination towards respect for those in authority at all layers of society. From a very young age, we are taught to respect our elders and not to undermine the authority of those above us.

It isn’t necessarily a bad thing that we outrank other nations on Hofstede’s Index. From observation of youth both in Malaysia and abroad I can attest to the politeness and respect Malaysian teens have for adults. I have worked with American teenagers, very many of whom are outspoken, confident and assertive. However, they lack the graciousness and courtesy Malaysian teens have for those older than them.

It isn’t necessarily a good thing that we outrank every other country on the index either.  The power distance inculcated within our culture is reflected in our education system. An overemphasis on obedience to authority has created a young Malaysian generation that lacks creativity, self confidence, critical thinking and assertive opinion. Malaysian teenagers don’t speak out for themselves like their international counterparts and critics of our local education system lament this point endlessly.

My point is this: one of the reasons why youth ministry continues to struggle in many Malaysian churches today is that it is difficult for adults in the church to relate to youth amidst a culture of strong power distance between young and old. God has called Christians to invest in the lives of young people. Jesus said “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” (Matthew 19:14) Malaysia's number one ranking on Hofstede’s index suggests that there are ways that the church can better fulfill that call, by a force of counter culture to current ways.

How does Hofstede’s Power Distance Index help us in our responsibilities as a church toward young people? First, we have to remember that teenagers have been culturally programmed to be closed and reserved toward adults. Respect and fear are confused, leading to the detachment of youth culture from much of regular society. It may take hard work to get teenagers to be comfortable with an equal relationship with an adult but when they see a genuine heart, they will open up. If we are truly invested in attaining this, we will see it happen.

Secondly, we have to remember that Malaysian teenagers lack the cultural voice they have in other societies. Youth in many countries possess social and political entities that express their views and sentiments. Malaysian youth have few of such avenues. The church can fill that void. It starts with being aware of their rights and needs, and creating an environment where they are treated as equals. Many are brought up to think of themselves as lesser but the church can demonstrate the contrary. It is easy in our society to ignore youth because they don’t speak up for themselves and are unaware of their entitlements but 1 Timothy 4:12 says “Don't let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in life, in love, in faith and in purity.” The church needs to facilitate youth activity to achieve these words that Paul wrote. Malaysian teenagers are capable of being an example of Godly conduct to the church and society, they can be leaders even in their youth but the silence imposed upon them  by local culture is their greatest obstacle.

Thirdly, the church needs to provide for Malaysian teenagers what society has failed to do for them. We can complain about the deteriorating scene of our local education system and do no more, or we can transform our youth ministries to reflect the ideals we seek in the educating of our younger generations. While schools emphasize memorization and test taking, the church can and should provide avenues for emphasis on sports, music, art and communication. We should encourage and provide teenagers with the opportunities and facilities to engage in creative expression. God calls us to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves. Teenagers cannot provide for themselves a wholesome upbringing but the church can play its part in making that possible.

I look forward to the day when Malaysian churches are known as the champion of the voice and rights of youth; where, as Christians we will fulfill the duty Jesus set for us to bring children up in the training and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4)