Malaysia's public universities: study hard and be let down again: top scorer, no offer; low point for high achievers!

It’s a perennial problem – more top scorers than places at public universities for medicine, dentistry and pharmacy. The cheapest route to these degrees is fraught with uncertainties and heartache.

IT costs the government about RM70,000 a year to train a medical student at a public university. That works out to RM350,000 for a five-year course.

But a student who gains a place at one of the dozen public institutions offering medicine forks out less than RM20,000 in total tuition fees; the rest is subsidised by the Government.

Does it not then make sense for any brilliant student whose family cannot afford the RM350,000 to RM1mil for a private or foreign degree to spend two years doing Form Six and sitting for the STPM?

Everyone knows that the STPM or Malaysian Higher School Certificate is seriously tough, more difficult to excel in than the internally examined Matriculation offered mainly at matriculation colleges where 90% of the students are bumiputra.

That is why every student who slogs away and scores the maximum CGPA of 4.0 feels “cheated” of the cheapest route to a medical degree when they fail to secure a place at a public university.

This applies to other critical courses like dentistry, pharmacy and certain branches of engineering too. When even those with a CGPA (Cumulative Grade Point Average) of 4.0 don’t make the grade for medicine, they will be “dumbed down” to take up their second and third choices of the critical courses; and in the process, raise the cut-off point for these courses.

The spillover effect will be felt by those with lower CGPA scores who had hedged their bets by applying for dentistry and pharmacy.

This translates to more applicants crying foul because they didn’t get their course of choice despite having almost perfect scores.

There is also a perceived lack of transparency in the information made available for “strategic” application on the part of STPM students.

For one, while STPM results are made public, matriculation results are not. (Last year, there were 83,000 Form Six and 26,000 matriculation students.)

As an STPM candidate, you don’t know where you stand against the others competing for the limited places. In 2004, for example, when “Medic blues” (same issue of top scorers not getting into medicine) made headlines, there were 527 STPM students with CGPA 4.0 but more than double (1,247) with the same grade via matriculation.

For STPM students who may take up to five subjects, their CGPA scores are calculated based on the best four subjects, including General Studies.

The results of students from both “streams” are merged into a master list for allocation of places in universities.

Perfect score students failing to get their preferred course – this year, some were offered nothing – is a perennial problem.

But it is more acute in a year when the STPM yields better results while the number of places remain static. A total of 442 who sat the exam last year scored 4.0 compared with 300 the year before.

Last week, Higher Education Department director-general Prof Datuk Dr Morshidi Sirat said in a statement that 41,573 of STPM, matriculation and Asasi (Centre for Foundation Studies) students were successful in gaining admission to 20 public institutions of higher learning.

According to UPU, the coordinating body for intake into public universities, on its Facebook page, there are more than 2,500 (including the 442 from STPM) applicants with a CGPA of 4.0, most of whom applied for competitive courses like medicine, dentistry and pharmacy.

But the number of places allocated for the three courses in all public universities is just 1,078 or less than half the number of perfect top scorers! Imagine the competition, what more for the 699 medical places. It’s 699, 119 and 260 respectively.

If this is an annual predicament, can’t more places be opened up at public and private institutions?

In terms of physical infrastructure, it is possible, although the intake is strictly guided by criteria set by the Malaysian Medical Council. Student-lecturer ratio must match the facilities provided.

But the problem lies in academic staffing and the limited places for clinical training at teaching hospitals.
If public universities are bursting at the seams, the same may not be the case at private universities.

If the Government subsidises a student’s tuition fees at a private university like it does in public universities, more places can definitely be made available.

What the country needs is “good financial modelling”, says Taylor’s University vice-chancellor and president Prof Datuk Dr Hassan Said.

Private institutions too would like to have top scorers enrolled in their medical courses and raise the competition among their students, making it a win-win situation.

Should supply meet demand?

That is a question the Health Ministry has to grapple with. Are there more students who want to be doctors than the country needs?

Currently, doctor-patient ratio in Malaysia is 1:800. We are expected to achieve the 1:600 ratio recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) by 2015.

With the 3,500 doctors (via public and private institutions) that the country is producing annually, the Health Ministry expects to hit doctor patient ratio of 1:400 by 2020, which will exceed WHO’s recommendation.

Doctor wannabes should bear in mind that getting a job may not be as easy in future although the country still lacks specialists.

For medicine, scoring 4.0 may be the main hurdle but it is only the first hurdle. Participation in co-curricular activities also contributes 10% to the total points for entry into public universities.

Universities today want some say on who should join their most competitive course and put candidates through aptitude tests and interviews.

While there are calls for universities to do away with the “subjective” interviews, those in the medical faculties feel strongly that this is the most effective way to gain a snapshot of a candidate. Does he really want to be a doctor or is there parental pressure?

In private institutions like Monash University Sunway campus, an applicant has to go through four “mini” interviews – 10 minutes each with four interviewers separately.

Its head of the Jeffrey Cheah School of Medicines and Health Sciences Prof Datuk Dr Anuar Zaini Md Zain shares that the interviews are designed to be as objective and reliable as possible.

He says they are looking for the ability to communicate, empathise, work in a team, and have real expectations of the job.

“You need to be able to communicate and listen or you won’t be able to know your patient’s problem. In fact, the biggest complaint against doctors is that they don’t talk and can’t communicate.

“English proficiency is really important as teaching is mainly in that language, whether in clinical years or post-graduate training anywhere in the world,” says the former medical dean of Universiti Malaya.

Basically, interviews are not designed to fail an applicant but to help weed out the wrong candidates and reduce the attrition rate among medical students.

While it is costly for universities to conduct interviews for every applicant, it will be even costlier for them – and society in the long run – to train the wrong person. 

Common Sen-se By Leanne Go
> Twelve years ago, I wrote a comment on the problem of top STPM scorers not getting their course of choice and titled it “Study hard, come out on top and be let down”. Looks like little has changed. Feedback is welcome at leanne@thestar.com.m

 Top scorers appeal cases after not being offered any courses

KUALA LUMPUR: They are among the brightest students in the country and yet were deemed not good enough for local public universities.

Eight students who scored cumulative grade point average of 4.0 were not offered any courses at the public universities despite successfully submitting their forms to enter the universities.

They are among the 108 appeal cases that MCA has received from students who sat for the STPM and matriculation programme since the issue was highlighted last week. Of the total, 55 have 4.0 CGPA.

MCA education bureau chairman Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong said he could not accept the Education Ministry’s excuse that technical error was among the reasons why many top scorers either failed to obtain places at public universities or did not get courses of their choice.

“They obtained 4.0 CGPA. Don’t tell me they do not know how to fill a form.

“I cannot accept this silly explanation. It is grossly unfair to the students,” he said after meeting 22 students and their families at Wisma MCA yesterday.

Dejected lot: MCA education bureau chairman Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong looking at the top scorers’ results. — AZLINA ABDULLAH / The Star

His remarks at the press conference were greeted by applause from those present.

Further substantiating his point over the issue of technical error, Dr Wee pointed out that 16 of the 22 students were called for an interview with Universiti Sains Malay­sia.

“If it was a technical error, how could USM call them for an interview?” he asked.

He said the party would seek the help of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin to resolve the issue.

Najib, in a tweet, said he knew some were disappointed at not getting places in universities.

“But don’t give up. (I) will discuss at Cabinet this week how best to help these students,” he said.

MIC national youth council member G. Kalaicelvan said the MIC received many complaints of top Indian students not getting courses of their choice.

“Most want to do medicine and their STPM results meet the requirement but somehow they do not get a place in the public universities,” said Kalaicelvan.

He said many Indian students end up disappointed after the STPM results are out every year.
“It’s a never-ending problem,” he said.

- The Star/Asia News Network

Related posts:
Give top students scholarships ! 
Top Malaysian Chinese students rejected by public universities
Beware of Malaysian Chinese school leavers being  lured into dubious degree and diploma proggrams! 

Malaysian too distracted to be patriotic?

It may be the National Day month but most people are more preoccupied with the upcoming general election.

EVERY August, many of us look forward to the entire nation being awash with feelings of warmth and patriotism as we celebrate our National Day on the last day of the month.

Aug 31 was, until 2010, celebrated as the National Day as it was the day Malaya gained its independence from the British colonial masters, but this caused many Sabahans and Sarawakians to feel left out because their independence did not come until Sept 16, 1963.

Thus, the Government from 2010 declared that Sept 16 would also be a national holiday as it was the day Malaysia was formed – a move many Malaysians on the Borneo side of the country felt was long overdue.

So instead of a one-day National Day celebration, we now have a month-long one from Aug 16 to Sept 16. During this time Malaysians are encouraged to fly the Jalur Gemilang.

This is something that I have been doing regularly even before the call from politicians because I am a very patriotic Malaysian and unlike others I only declare myself as a Malaysian and nothing else.

However, this year I find it very difficult to bring myself to fly the flag. The amount of quarrelling and finger pointing that is going on at the moment makes it very bitter to express my patriotism.

Yes, there will be many of you who will say that the finger pointing and political posturing that’s going on at the moment are also a show of nationalism.

I do not disagree that being politically partisan is part of our democratic process but I cannot help but feel that the political temperature has gone too high for anyone to show his or her loyalty and love for the country.

From the way every act connected with the celebrations of Aug 31 and Sept 16 have been criticised and attacked on the Internet, any neutral but patriotic Malaysian will question themselves if they are being nationalistic or bias towards one side.

The way the criticisms flew when a certain logo was suggested for this 55th celebrations left many quarters stunned. It’s only a logo but yet the venom with which the attack was carried out was frightening.

Would the act of flying the Jalur Gemilang be mistaken as a symbol of support for one side or the other?

Yes, the way the Government had planned the National Day celebrations may not have been very bi-partisan with most of the programmes seemingly be centred around the achievements of the Government of the day.

Yes, the so-called 55th Merdeka song “Janji ditepati” reads like a roll call to the achievements of the Barisan Nasonal government.

But that’s what all the other 54th celebration songs, logos and themes were about – singing praises of such achievements and the 55th anniversary celebration plans are not very different.

The difference, I feel, is the heightened tension in the country stoked by the high expectation of an impending general election.

People are now too busy guessing when the general election will be held to be bothered about anything else.

Recently, there was a rumour that it would be held in September because “someone told someone” but according to the same media a few days later, it has again been “postponed” to November it seems.

Why? Because two Sabahan Barisan Nasional politicians had left their party positions to co-operate with Pakatan Rakyat.

The “jumping” of the two had been expected for over two months.

Nothing done these days is not seen to be connected to the GE 13. It does not matter whether it is the shortage of water or the call for the protection of certain environmentally sensitive places.

The problem is that politicians have been quick to jump on the bandwagon to use these issues to attack their opponents and instead of these matters being resolved, they get muddied by politics.

Politicians, regardless which side of the divide they are from, are extra sensitive during this run up to the general election. Every statement, newspaper report or social media comment which they deem as not favourable to them as made by people with an agenda against them.

Even supposed defenders of press freedom want to gag the media in case their reports do not favour their side.

The country is highly charged. Recently, it was reported that an elderly couple in Pasir Emas, Kelantan was divorcing after 14 years of marriage, the husband allegedly could no longer convince his wife to join his political party.

The 78-year-old man reportedly accused his 61-year-old religious teacher ex-wife of deviating from Islam for not supporting his party. The wife was supposed to have supported Umno while the husband was an ardent follower of PAS.

If political differences can destroy a marriage then what chance has our National Day celebrations got?

As it is, I am the only person in my multi-racial neighbourhood who bothers to fly the Jalur Gemilang come every August. I put this down to the apathy of my neighbours and the lack of patriotism due to ignorance.

They do not realise that the expression of patriotism by flying the flag is the best way to show that we are Malaysians and that nothing can take that away from us regardless of our religious or cultural backgrounds.

WHY NOT? BY WONG SAI WAN
saiwan@thestar.com.my

> Executive Editor Wong Sai Wan will not bother to dig out the old Jalur Gemilang this year – he will go buy a new one – regardless if it’s the silly election season.

A war against corruption!

Much like transformation itself, rooting out corruption is a marathon rather than sprint

WHEN we talk about corruption, we are not talking about a fight against corruption or a battle against corruption. We are talking about a war against corruption fought on a broad front with many battles, some lost and some won, over a period of years before eventual victory.

No country has done it overnight and for many it is an ongoing war that must be waged relentlessly. Hong Kong took 10 years. It is endemic in countries around the world and it is in the most advanced and structured of societies that the war against corruption has been most telling.

But here in Malaysia, many of us expect that it can be crushed and eradicated in a short period of time and all it takes is political will. Yes, political will is necessary but it is not the only condition. Many things need to be put in place and real results will take time.

This is one aspect of transformation where we have to constantly battle against unrealistic expectations – people want results yesterday but we can’t give it to them immediately. Not today, not tomorrow, not even in the next month, because the war against corruption is one of the most difficult and, beyond time, it takes a considerable amount of effort, by many, many parties.

This is further complicated by a problem of measurement. The prevalence of corruption is not easily measurable. When we take action against corruption, the number of people brought to book will be higher but this does not necessarily mean that corruption has decreased.

For better or worse, we have to rely on perceptions of how corrupt we are, both from our own public and how foreigners see us. Sometimes, there are situations which skew the final results against us as we shall see shortly.

There is absolutely no doubt that we need to step up the war against corruption especially since the two most common indicators, Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) and the Global Corruption Barometer survey, show no significant change over the last two years – 2010 and 2011. But still we have made some progress when we take a closer look at the figures.

In 2010, Malaysia’s CPI score was 4.4 as the average score of nine surveys. Then, in 2011, Malaysia’s CPI score was 4.3 as the average score of 12 surveys. This means that three additional surveys were added. Our ranking slid to 4.3 from 4.4. (No country obtained 10 points – the highest. New Zealand topped with 9.5 while Singapore was fifth at 9.2.)

The movement in the CPI score (minus 0.1) was due to these additional three surveys, which had very low scores, thus bringing the average down. If these three surveys were not added, Malaysia’s CPI score would have moved up tremendously. One of the new surveys included was the Transparency International Bribe Payer’s Index.

This survey showed that Malaysians have a high tendency to pay bribes when they work or operate in other countries. I am certain that without that particular survey, our CPI would have increased. Because it is perceived that Malaysians working overseas bribe, it affects the CPI of the country itself.

Additionally, our ranking was 60 out of 183 countries in 2011 against 56 out of 178 countries in 2010. In Asean, we were placed at the third spot after Singapore and Brunei.

In terms of the barometer survey in 2011 conducted by Transparency International in 2011, 49% of the Malaysian public felt that the Malaysian Government’s fight against corruption is effective or extremely effective, a marginal improvement from 48% in 2010. This, however, is a vast improvement from 2009 when only 29% Malaysians thought that the Government’s effort on corruption was effective.

Overall, the two surveys show that we have made some progress in terms of the perception of corruption in the country and the number of people who have confidence that something is being done.

People like to say we must go for the big fish first. But it is not as simple as that. The process of gathering evidence is not easy and the very presence of corruption can make this process more difficult and even impossible in practice.

But what we need to do first is to put building blocks in place, a more bottom up approach which seeks to put in place a framework for good practices and a mechanism to report and root-out any corruption that takes place. It may look like we are starting small, but we are not. We need to put the right foundations in place.

Here are some examples of building blocks we have put in place:

● Whistle blower provisions: Implementation guidelines were issued in March last year. Agencies are already processing complaints of improper conduct under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010. To-date, there are 28 cases;

● Integrity pact: The Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) project was to be the first large-scale project to implement the full Integrity Pact including monitoring and oversight elements. An oversight body was established involving the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). An independent external monitoring system headed by the Auditor-General, with external party involvement, was formed to ensure adherence to the terms of the Integrity Pact. Full implementation of the Integrity Pact is only carried out on big projects with a high monetary value, so as to justify the cost of implementation;

● Faster prosecution: To hasten prosecution, 14 special corruption courts were set up since February last year and more than 250 cases have been processed;

● Naming and shaming website: The MACC has set up a website to list those who have been successfully prosecuted for corruption offences. This offers a ready database for interested parties and acts as a further deterrence to corruption. There are 710 listings to date (2010: 284; 2011: 96; and 2012: 13);

● Open, competitive tenders: Wherever possible we have open competitive tenders with set procedures for government procurement. For increased transparency, there is the MyProcurement Portal which lists 5,157 government contracts online in 2011; and

● Reduction of red tape in business licence applications: We are reducing the number of licences required from 780 to 375 and saving RM730mil in compliance costs. Such reduction of red tape reduces opportunities for corruption.

These are just a sampling of the measures being implemented. Over time we aim to build a wall against corruption by putting in place measures to stop its occurrence in the first place. This is as important as prosecution. Indications are some of the measures taken have directly helped government revenue. For instance, following MACC’s investigations into the Malaysian Customs Department, customs tax collection rose to a high of RM30.4bil last year. The highest previously recorded was RM28.6bil in 2008. This year, Customs expects to collect RM32bil.

In addition, the changes and reforms that we have put in place are also slowly showing results with foreign investors. According to a survey by the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) in Singapore, perception of corruption in the region, a long-standing issue, has greatly improved, with only 35% of respondents reporting dissatisfaction in 2011 compared with a high of 63% in 2010.

Consulting firm A.T. Kearney has also recognised Malaysia as among the top 10 countries in the Foreign Direct Investment Confidence Index for 2012.

We are taking serious efforts to fight corruption and we know the payback will be large. We are starting with the building blocks and then we will do more. Much like transformation, it is a marathon rather than a sprint. We need time.

You can do your own part by simply refusing to be part of any corrupt practices and, of course, reporting it when you come across it. That will help tremendously.

● Datuk Seri Idris Jala is CEO of Pemandu, the Performance Management and Delivery Unit. He also Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department. Reasonable comments related to this column are welcome.

Related posts:
Malaysia could go bankrupt by 2019? 
Malaysians, work hard to succeed ! 
Competition begins at home 
Malaysisia changes over the last 42 years; quanity yes ... 

The Great Malaysian Robbery?

PRESS ANNOUCEMENT BY SUARAM - EVERY MALAYSIAN MUST LISTEN TO THIS: 

 French prosecutors: Najib sought US$1bil for Perimekar

French public prosecutors probing shoddy deals in French-Malaysian arms deals found evidence that then-defence minister Najib Abdul Razak had sought US$1 billion (RM3 billion) for local company Perimekar from French shipmaker DCN's subsidiary DCNI.

According to prosecution papers revealed by NGO Suaram today, a fax shows that Najib had asked for the amount for Perimekar as a condition for a meeting with him on July 14, 2001.

The fax,dated June 1, 2001 was from Francois Dupont, the Malaysian representative for private company Thales Asia International, to one D Arnaud.

The document, one of 153 shown to Suaram, was seized by French police from the office of Henri Gide, an officer with Thales.

However, no copy of the fax was provided to media at the press conference today as Suaram said it is not allowed to take the documents out of France.

Instead, the NGO, which is pursuing a civil complaint against state-owned DCN for allegedly paying 114 million euros in defence kickbacks to Perimekar, provided media with notes from its French interpreter.

According to the notes, Dupont had in the fax detailed out the chronology of visits and future actions during a visit to Malaysia, including details of “negotiation meetings with the Ministry of Defence and the management members of Perimekar”.

“(In the negotiations) two contract proposals would be mentioned (from DCNI to Perimekar as well as between Perimekar and the Malaysian government).

“(Dupont) finally indicated a meeting with Datuk Seri Najib in France on July 14, 2001 with the condition that DCNI offers a maximum sum of US$1 billion for Perimekar’s stay (in France),” it reads.

Malaysia purchased two Scorpene class submarines in 2002.

Perimekar is owned by Najib’s associate Abdul Razak Baginda, who was acquitted on a charge of abetting in the murder of Mongolian translator Altantuuyaa Shariibuu, without his defence being called.

Razak Baginda’s company paid 360,000 euros

According to Suaram, another document obtained by the prosecutors revealed that Terasasi Sdn Bhd, a company owned by Abdul Razak and his father, was also linked to the scandal.

Suaram's interpreter noted that prosecutors had on Aug 22, 2011, obtained an invoice faxed to Terasasi Sdn Bhd on Sept 19, 2004, to the then-chief executive officer of Thales, Bernard Baiocco, for the purpose of “success fees”.

The invoice states that 359,450 euros (RM1.43 million) was to be paid into a bank in Petaling Jaya, while a handwritten note on the fax reads:

“Razak demande si ce SF peut etre pris en compte assez vite. Le Support Fee suit avec un rapport (Razak is asking whether the SF can be paid into the account quite urgently. The support fee follows with a report.)”

However, Suaram director Cynthia Gabriel said the prosecutors were still trying to determine whether the ‘Razak’ stated in the note refers to Najib or Abdul Razak.

‘The Great Malaysian Robbery’

Referring to the case as “the Great Malaysian Robbery”, Gabriel said the prosecutors also found “a slew of companies” had been formed to muddy the money trail.

“More retro-commissions have surfaced, allowing the misuse of bodies such as a pilgrimage fund (Lembaga Tabung Haji) and the military pension fund (Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera).

“The Malaysian and French people have clearly been misled, cheated and robbed of their monies through blatant corruption and mismanagement of funds in the name of national safety and security,” Gabriel (right) said.

As such, Suaram demanded that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission open investigation papers on these new revelations and for the Malaysian government to cooperate with the French inquiry.

It also demands that the Defence Ministry lists out to Parliament the companies involved in the procurement process involving DCN and the commissions paid.

Source: Malaysiakini - Malaysiakini

More than 20,000 Malaysians march for election reforms, Bersih 3.0 rally

Protesters of the Bersih (Clean) group shout slogans near Dataran Merdeka, also known as Independence Square, in Kuala Lumpur Photograph: Bazuki Muhammad/REUTERS

Up to 20,000 protesters calling for fair elections and greater accountability marched on Kuala Lumpur's centre on Saturday in a show of force that will test the Malaysian government's reformist pledges and may affect the timing of national polls.

Police shut down much of the city centre and closed off the historic Merdeka (Independence) Square with barriers and barbed wire, enforcing a court order that the protesters should not enter the symbolically important site.

The Bersih (Clean) group that is leading the protest says it will obey the ban but will march as close as possible to the square, raising the possibility of a repeat of violent clashes that marred Bersih's last major protest in July 2011.

"Now it looks like we will have to fight for our right to gather at Merdeka Square as well as fight for free and fair elections," said Muhammed Hafiz, a 28-year-old store clerk who was preparing to join the protest.

Organisers hope the protest will draw 100,000 people, including thousands demonstrating against a controversial rare earths plant being built by Australian firm Lynas on the country's east coast. That would make it the biggest protest since the "Reformasi" (Reform) demonstrations in 1998 against then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad.



A police official estimated the protesters numbered 15,000 to 20,000 by midday with just one arrest reported.

The protest is a delicate challenge for the government of Prime Minister Najib Razak, possibly affecting the timing of elections that he is preparing to call as early as June.

A violent response by police would risk alienating middle-class voters and handing the advantage to the opposition in what is shaping up as the closest election in Malaysia's history, possibly forcing Najib to delay the poll date.

But Najib must be mindful of conservatives in his party who are wary that his moves to relax tough security laws and push limited election reforms could threaten their 55-year hold on power.

Last July's rally, more than 10,000-strong, ended in violence when police fired tear gas and water cannons at the yellow-shirted protesters, drawing criticism of a heavy-handed response and sending Najib's popularity sliding. His approval rating has since rebounded to 69%, according to one poll.

Police helicopters buzzed overhead on Saturday morning as protesters gathered. Reuters correspondents saw about 200 riot police stationed in the square and five water cannons heading to the site where Malaysia declared independence from Britain.

Bersih, an independent movement whose goals are backed by the opposition, has a history of staging influential rallies as Malaysians have demanded more freedoms and democratic rights in the former British colony that has an authoritarian streak.

Younger Malaysians have become more politically active in recent years, chafing at restrictions on student activism.

"The younger generation, especially my generation, want to be involved. Look at Lynas and Bersih. We cannot be quiet," said 19-year-old university student Chan Mei Fong.

The July protest was a watershed moment for Najib, prompting him to promise reform of an electoral system that the opposition says favours the long-ruling National Front coalition.

The National Front is trying to recover from its worst ever election result in 2008 when it lost its two-thirds majority in parliament, giving the diverse, three-party opposition led by former finance minister Anwar Ibrahim real hope of taking power.

Najib has replaced tough security laws - ending indefinite detention without trial - relaxed some media controls, and pushed reforms to the electoral system that critics have long complained is rigged in the government's favour.

A bipartisan parliamentary committee set up by Najib this month issued 22 proposals for electoral reform, including steps to clean up electoral rolls and equal access to media.

But the government gave no guarantee that any of the steps will be in place for the next election.

Bersih says the proposals do not meet most of its key demands, including lengthening the campaign period to at least 21 days from the current seven days. It also wants an independent audit of the electoral roll and international observers at polling stations. Bersih and opposition parties say they have unearthed multiple instances of irregularities in voter rolls, including over 50 voters registered at one address.

Source: guardian.co.uk

Related posts:
Bersih 3.0 rally: Malaysia braces for electoral reform protests
Malaysian police fire tear gas at more than 25,000 protesters, Bersih 3.0 rally 

When the Malaysia's Elections will be after Bersih 3 & Occupy Dataran? 

Malaysian politicians return of the silly season?

 The happening days are back in Malaysian politics but the seasoned ordinary Malaysians are not even batting an eyelid.

IT’S dubbed the silly season by the media and for good reasons. In the months ahead of the general election, politicians will say the silliest things as both sides of the divide fire at each other. Often, the media get caught in the crossfire.

Many see agenda when there is none, presumably because as politicians they are used to the murky world of self-interest and plots.

Unsure of whether they will get re-elected, or worse, dropped as candidates, many are understandably jittery and overly-sensitive as the pressure builds up. After all, much is at stake.

Wanting to get the attention of their party bosses, they start bombarding media offices with tons of press releases, many of which are hardly newsworthy.

The political minnows are unlikely to get their news across and that’s when news organisations are accused of sidelining them for purported political motives.

Then there are rural-based politicians who wonder why they do not get any coverage at all. They insist on the presence of the press even when most of the newspapers do not reach their constituencies, let alone read by the voters there.

There are politicians who blame everyone for their failings except themselves. Again, their critics and the media get the blame.

There’s another group of has-been politicians. They have held positions including Cabinet posts for what feels like forever but never seem to be able to fade away. They still refuse to find time to play with their grandchildren.

So, come election time, they will find a way to get some publicity, including trying to seek a seat to contest or to quit their party.

Retirement age, it would seem, is only for the ordinary citizens, not for politicians. We have got two generations contesting in polls. We have father-son teams, a husband-wife-daughter team, and with Malaysians increasingly living longer, we may end up having their grandchildren as fellow candidates too.

By now, Malaysians are used to the saying that there are no permanent friends and enemies in politics. So, last week, former Selangor PAS leader Datuk Dr Hasan Ali was accused of spending lavishly during his tenure in the state government, including “wasting” RM300,000 to renovate his office.

The allegation was made by PKR’s Azmin Ali, the Gombak Setia assemblyman, who also said more than RM500,000 was spent on a conference organised by the Selangor Malay Customs and Heritage Corporation.

Barisan Nasional rightly asked why Azmin was only making this revelation after Dr Hasan had left PAS and Pakatan Rakyat.

But politicians always have an answer for every question, no matter how illogical it sounds. Azmin replied that he only received the evidence recently and had asked PAS to probe the matter even before Dr Hasan was sacked.

The state executive councillors are located on the same floor at the state government’s office and no one is going to believe that no one knew renovations were being carried out in Dr Hasan’s office. It’s the same with the purported expensive conference.

Surely, there must have been meetings on the budget allocated for the conference and it is difficult to accept that no one knew about the allocated sum.

Barisan state assemblymen have rightly asked whether these would be exposed if Dr Hasan had remained in PAS and had not rebelled against the state government.

Dr Hasan, in any case, was supported and campaigned for by the same Pakatan leaders in the 2008 elections. The same people who criticised him now are the same people who had heaped praises on him then, persuading people to vote for him.

It’s never a dull day in Malaysian politics – on some days it is amazingly incredible – but at the same time, Malaysians are not getting surprised any more.

How frail the Malaysian unity!

How frail our unity is

WHY NOT? By WONG SAI WAN saiwan@thestar.com.my

Malaysians always boast about how we can live with each other but yet that multi-racial fabric is easily torn.

REPORTERS for English newspapers in Malaysia are taught from their very first day not to write their reports on racial lines but to promote national unity and, more importantly, not to incite racial hatred.

The most common example of this is reporting on court cases.

This is why court reporters go out of the way to find out the occupations of the protagonists in the trial.

More often than not, one would read in a paper like ours that “a factory worker was charged with stabbing a clerk at a shopping complex”, without reference to the ethnicity of the people involved.

The thinking of our newspaper gurus in the early days was that although we were made up of various communities, it was best we saw each other as Malaysians, and to mention someone’s ethnic background was considered bad form.

Of course, there was an underlying reason for it.

Editors those days were also conscious of promoting unity and maintaining good race relations.

Imagine the sort of problems that could arise if the story above read: “A Malay factory worker was charged with stabbing a Chinese clerk at a shopping complex.”

Such writing, it was argued, would do nothing for the development of the country or race relations.

In fact, there were some who argued that such a writing style would only inflame hatred, especially if the report was about violence.

It would not be wrong to say such thinking became even more pronounced after the racial riots of May 13, 1969.

I was taught this no-race mantra when I joined this newspaper in 1984. In fact, my editor told me, the mere mention of the name would be a dead giveaway of the person’s race (his words, not mine).



“Wong Sai Wan cannot be an Indian person” was his favourite reminder to me each time he caught me writing an article where I mentioned someone by his ethnicity.

However, things have changed over the past three decades.

Although most English language newspapers in this country still do not report crime and court articles according to ethnicity, most of us now allow mention of language or ethnicity if it gives perspective to an article, especially features.

After 40 years, we would have all thought that we would be mature enough to handle any form of differences without referring to it in terms of race or religion.

Along with the millions of other Malaysians, I often shake my head in disbelief when opportunist politicians try to use the race card to shore up their flagging popularity.

I was so proud to see young Malaysians reject the position taken by these older politicians from both sides of the divide and instead to treat any issue based on merit and not on the colour of one’s skin.

Since 2008, I have been slowly converted to the position that Malaysia has become mature enough to handle conflicts and criminal violence even if the perpetrators were identified by race or religion.

Yes, our society has created code words to describe each other and most of the time these descriptions are taken in good humour.

These code words evolve with time. For example, during my younger days, all Malays were referred to as Ah Mat, Chinese as Ah Chong and Indians as Muthu.

Nowadays, the nicknames have changed to Mat Rempit, Ah Beng and Macha.

These monikers are slightly crude, but not derogatory – at least that’s what I think and see from the reaction within our modern society.

However, then came the infamous I-City KFC incident.  It was a simple case of a restaurant worker losing his cool and punching a customer who obviously also lost his cool.

However, the incident, unlike similar fights that had happened numerous times in other restaurants, was captured on video and uploaded on YouTube.

It went viral after it was shared on Facebook. The clip was uploaded without moderation to give it some sort of perspective.

The person who taped it with a handphone described it as a fight at KFC.

What happened over the next few hours of the uploading of the video on cyberspace was truly disgusting. Malaysians put a racial slant on the incident.

Most of those who took the side of the customer, Danny Ng, were non-Malays, while the restaurant staff were mainly defended by Malays.

On Facebook, supporters on either side started to verbally attack each other – with some making up various stories of how the incident started, and the supposed quarrel between Ng and the staff.

The words used by the two groups to attack each other were derogatory and racist. The so-called unity we boast about was shattered.

Ng has since denied that the incident was racial in nature and clarified that neither he nor the KFC staff used any racial slurs.

However, those on the social media ignored this and continued to make all sorts of comments.

Facebook and YouTube are the most popular forms of social media. Opinions are shaped on these two websites.

Comments there become a strong reflection of the state of our own society.

Sadly, in this case, we failed big time. Malaysians have come across as immature, racist and unforgiving.

Malaysians need to show the world that we can handle ourselves, accept each other and celebrate our differences.

Fortunately, the “quarrel” occurred over cyberspace, and maybe it was a good place to let off steam without taking it into the real world.

This incident has shown that our unity is very fragile and our race relations far from adequate.

Our leaders must realise this and not rely on bigotry to gain popularity with only a certain segment of society.

> Executive Editor Wong Sai Wan loves his fried chicken but also hates poor service.

 Related post:


Let’s all be Malaysians first !

Get set for Malaysian politics of the young!

Get set for a generational political shift

CERITALAH By KARIM RASLAN

The UKEC’s Projek Amanat Negara (PAN) shows how much young people can achieve without the straitjacket of thought control. Open debate events like the PAN will do Malaysia a world of good.



I’M in London and it’s late at night. Having arrived from Davos only yesterday I’m also exhausted but I can’t sleep. I’m too excited.

In fact, I’ve just returned to my hotel from the United Kingdom & Eire Council of Malaysian Students (UKEC) Projek Amanat Negara (PAN) conference and I feel as if I’ve seen – if not participated – in the future.

Whilst the World Economic Forum was an overwhelming event, the PAN conference was altogether more enthralling and meaningful for me - as a Malaysian.

What can I say? A small if well-organised group of Malaysian students in Britain – full of enthusiasm and determination – has set out to bring the best Malaysian minds and voices together.

In short, they succeeded and in doing so have shamed their nervous, narrow-minded elders back home in Kuala Lumpur – those who mumble that Malaysians aren’t ready for or need democracy and/or debate.

Instead, and with great confidence, they have proved that Malaysians are ready for change and that dialogue – open, frank and at times, heated – is well within our capacity.



Whilst I wasn’t much of an expert in the topic of my session (religion, of all things), I was glad and grateful to have contributed to the PAN along with my fellow panellists: Dr Carool Kersten, Zainah Anwar and PAS’ Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad.

Nonetheless, the highlight of the conference was undoubtedly the debate on public policy between PKR’s Rafizi Ramli and Umno’s Khairy Jamaluddin.

The anticipation in the lead-up was almost unbearable.

Taking a front row seat and sitting alongside fellow columnist Marina Mahathir, I prepared myself for the encounter. Behind me, the room was seething with activity.

Would the session degenerate into a nasty, partisan session between the two prominent young lions? Both men are renowned as passionate voices for their party’s causes and Rafizi has recently assumed a very high national profile with his attacks on Government mismanagement (especially the NFC).

What we got, however, was a total surprise. The session was gracious and very statesman-like as two very smart young men squared off.

Both of them explained their respective political positions. Rafizi argued for political change whilst Khairy called for the status quo (plus reform).

When I thought about their responses later, I had to acknowledge that they held remarkably similar positions.

Calm and reasonable, the two men discussed a wide range of issues: from media access to freedom of assembly, race relations and Government tax policy.

Throughout the hour-and-half debate, the two men eschewed personal attacks. Neither was crude or vulgar: their points were well-argued and professional.

Moreover, instead of trying to score personal political points, they remained above the mere partisan.

The organisers had obviously spent time thinking through the format of the session to achieve the maximum impact and I congratulate them on the dramatic US Presidential-style format.

As I looked on, it struck me that I was a witness to a critical generational shift in Malaysian politics – as leaders stepped forward to discuss their differences openly in a manner that rose above mere political pettiness.

Glancing at my Twitter feed throughout the conference, another thing I noted was how many people shared my contention – which was published a few weeks ago – that it was a real tragedy that such an event like the PAN could not take place in Malaysia.

Many people have claimed that such debates are not part of the “Malaysian culture”.

Well, the historic exchange between Rafizi and Khairy showed how wrong they are.

The UKEC shows how much our young people can achieve without the straightjacket of thought control.

Open debate events like the PAN will do Malaysia a world of good and I call on all Malaysians to go online and watch the debate.

As Rafizi so pointedly said in his debate: “It doesn’t matter which side you get involved with. The important thing is that you go home – go home and make a difference.” One can only hope that they take his advice.

“Clothes that poke eye”, Melayu English; Lost in translation!

All abuzz over ‘Ethical Clothing’

Netizens laughing at Mindef's  no 'clothes that poke eye' dress code

By JOSEPH SIPALAN and JOSEPH KAOS Jr
newsdesk@thestar.com.my

PETALING JAYA: If you are working at the Defence Ministry, be sure not to wear “clothes that poke eye”.

This was one of the many colourful descriptions of “Ethical Clothing” (etika berpakaian) that is acceptable within the ministry’s standards.

Netizens on social networking sites were literally ROFL, which is cyberspeak for “rolling on the floor laughing”, as they shared the link to the ministry’s amusing English translation of the staff dress code on its official website.

Lost in translation: The amusing English translation of the staff dress code on the Defence Ministry website.

“Clothes that poke eye” is a literal translation of pakaian yang menjolok mata, which is supposed to mean revealing clothes in Bahasa Malaysia. Other finds included: “collared shirts and tight Malay civet berbutang three”, which, in Malay, is berkolar baju Melayu cekak musang berbutang tiga. 

Baju batik lengan panjang berkolar / cekak musang buatan Malaysia, meanwhile is translated as “long-sleeve batik shirt with collar / mongoose fight made in Malaysia”.



There was also “shine closed”, which was translated from kasut bertutup, or closed-toe shoes.

Another was the brief summary of the ministry’s history on the website, which read: “After the withdrawal of British army, the Malaysian Government take drastic measures to increase the level of any national security threat.”

The actual summary in Bahasa Malaysia read: Selepas pengunduran tentera British, Kerajaan Malaysia mengambil langkah drastik untuk meningkatkan tahap keselamatan negara dari sebarang ancaman.
The ministry took down the English translated version several hours after it went widespread on Twitter and Facebook.

A ministry spokesperson said a clarification has since been posted on the website, adding that page hits shot up remarkably yesterday.

The clarification on the website said corrective action was being taken on the related software to ensure translations were accurate. 

Lost in translation

On The Beat By Wong Chun Wai

Malaysians have to accept the reality that horrendous English is here to stay.

Does it come as a surprise that the English translation on the Defence Ministry website is so atrocious that it has become the butt of every joke in town? It’s not even Manglish, but simply sub-standard English.

Malaysians used to be amused at the bad Bahasa Malaysia subtitles in movies but the “clothes that poke eye” translation for “pakai­an yang menjolok mata” simply takes the cake. “Ambil kuih”, if literally translated.

Last week, the social media zoomed in on the ministry’s official site which had a page listing out guidelines on “ethical clothing” that have to be adhered to by its staff.

Other interesting examples included “collared shirts and tight Malay civet berbutang three” for “berkolar baju Melayu cekak musang berbutang tiga” and “long-sleeve batik shirt with collar/mongoose fight made in Malaysia” for “Baju batik lengan panjang berkolar/cekak musang buatan Malaysia”.

There was also “shine closed” which was translated from “kasut bertutup”.

Thankfully, the Defence Ministry responded in double quick time – it not only took down the relevant pages but also posted an online clarification promising to make the necessary corrections. Still, time on the Internet moves by the milliseconds so the spread in cyberspace could not be so easily contained.

The ministry adopted the right and honourable approach by not offering any lame excuse or shifting the blame.

This is not the first time lazy and incompetent officials have got us into trouble. If they are not capable enough, they should seek the help of professionals.

Last April, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and his entourage must have laughed their heads off when they saw the words in Chinese printed on the banner backdrop at the welcoming ceremony in Putrajaya.

The words were literally translated from the Bahasa Malaysia sentence, “Istiadat Sambutan Rasmi Sempena Lawatan Rasmi TYT Wen Jiabao Ke Malaysia” (Official welcoming ceremony in conjunction with the official visit of His Excellency Wen Jiabao to Malaysia).

The Chinese translation had so many serious syntax and grammatical errors that the Chinese-literate Malaysian ministers and members of the media could only cringe in embarrassment. Translated literally, it read, “Official welcoming ceremony, with him Wen Jiabao His Excellency’s official visit Malaysia”.
Our officials apologised to Wen Jiabao and this was widely reported in China.

Although Bahasa Malaysia is our official language, it is necessary that all our official websites also have an English version simply because English is the language of the Internet. There are many convenient translation tools on the Internet, such as Google Translate and Yahoo BabelFish, but while these tools claim to be able to translate practically every language on the planet to another, they are not meant to substitute the services of professionals.

I decided to use Google Translate to translate “pakaian yang menjolok mata” and was pleasantly surprised that the English equivalent was “dress scantily”; it was certainly much better than “clothes that poke eye”. But on the more difficult phrases, this tool failed miserably.

What our ministries should do is to engage professionals who are not only competent in English but are able to make their websites attractive. Two ministries – Home, and Women, Family and Community Development – have websites that are regarded as more “innovative and approachable” and they will certainly draw more visitors.

The bigger issue here is that Malaysians have to accept the reality that horrendous English is here to stay. The day our leaders killed English as a medium of instruction and further downgraded the language as a subject in schools was the beginning of its demise.
 
Teaching hours for the subject have been drastically reduced and a compulsory pass is not even required in our school exams. So how serious can we be about uplifting the standard of English in this country? Worse, many teachers who are teaching English in schools are themselves not fluent in the language. It’s truly a case of the blind leading the blind.

Just yesterday, a retired civil servant, Dr Pola Singh, wrote that in the course of going through the application forms for jobs meant for graduates, he came across numerous instances of local graduates listing down that they have an “honest” degree when they meant an honours degree.

Honest to goodness, this is no laughing matter.

Related post:

‘Poke eye’ Melayu English in many public institutions inexcusable!