Ezam: Politik Baru dan Bad Samaritans

Baru-baru ini saya sempat hadir dalam satu acara diskusi bersama Sdr. Ezam Mohd. Noor, Pengerusi Gerak Malaysia yang juga bekas Ketua Angkatan Muda Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR). Yang menarik perhatian saya ialah bicara Ezam mengenai “politik baru”.

Sudah ramai orang membicarakan tentang perkara-perkara baru dalam pilihanraya umum ke 12 yang lalu. Tetapi bagi saya Ezam agak istimewa. Beliau merupakan antara orang yang terawal mempopularkan “politik baru” - yang didefinisikan sebagai politik pelbagai kaum - melalui penglibatannya dalam Parti Keadilan Nasional (keADILan) ketika parti itu mula dilancarkan pada tahun 1999. Tetapi, tujuh tahun kemudian, setelah melalui onak dan duri dalam politik pembangkang, termasuk meringkuk dalam tahanan di Kamunting, beliau akhirnya membuat keputusan untuk meletakkan semua jawatan dalam parti.

Sebagai seorang yang pernah mempelopori idea “politik baru”, dan sekarang berada di luar wadah yang diperjuangkan dahulu, agak menarik untuk melihat bagaimana Ezam melihat perkembangan politik semasa. Apakah jawapan beliau kepada persoalan samada PRU 12 merupakan manifestasi politik baru sepertimana yang digagaskan hampir sepuluh tahun yang lalu?

Jawapan Ezam ialah tidak. Beliau menghujjahkan bahawa sejak kebelakangan ini, politik Malaysia menjadi semakin bersifat perkauman. Perdebatan mengenai hak kebebasan beragama, isu tuntutan HINDRAF, perungkaian kontrak sosial, penolakan terhadap Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) dan isu negara Islam - walaupun diolah menggunakan bahasa demokrasi - masih merupakan isu-isu kaum. Pola mengundi juga menunjukkan kewujudan dikotomi kaum. Sementara berlaku peralihan drastik undi bukan Melayu kepada parti-parti pembangkang, perkara yang sama tidak berlaku kepada undi Melayu. Justeru, bagi Ezam, politik baru rentas kaum sepertimana yang digagaskan pada tahun 1999 tidak berlaku dalam pilihanraya kali ini. Malah, tegas Ezam, pilihanraya kali ini merupakan pilihanraya yang paling bersifat perkauman dalam sejarah pilihanraya Malaysia.

Saya fikir penegasan Ezam dalam hal ini wajar diteliti. Kemunculan politik baru rentas kaum dianggap oleh ramai orang sebagai sesuatu yang tidak dapat dielakkan lagi. Keputusan PRU 12 seolahnya memberikan “hukuman mati” kepada ideologi dan sistem politik berasaskan kaum di Malaysia. Politik bukan berasaskan kaum sudah pasti menjadi paksi kepada masa depan politik Malaysia. Tiada alternatif lain lagi.

Teringat saya kepada TINA dalam wacana globalisasi. There is no alternative. Mahu tidak mahu dunia ini harus melalui proses globalisasi yang ditandai oleh pasaran bebas dan sistem politik demokrasi liberal. Itulah satu bentuk ortodoksi yang diseru oleh kelompok neo-liberal di dunia ini. Walaupun tesis korelasi antara pasaran bebas, demokrasi liberal dan kemakmuran ekonomi disanggah di serata dunia - dengan fakta kuantitatif dan kualitatif - para pendokong faham neo-liberal, dan teman-teman neo-cons mereka di Bretton Woods Institutions dan Rumah Putih, galak mengajar kepada dunia bahawa pasaran bebas dan negara dengan kuasa minimal merupakan satu-satunya resipi kemakmuran. Mereka ini digelar “Bad Samaritans” oleh Ha-Joon Chang, seorang warga Korea dan ahli ekonomi pembangunan di Universiti Cambridge dalam bukunya Bad Samaritans: Rich Nations, Poor Policies and the Threat to the Developing World.

Adakah wujud “Bad Samaritans” ala Malaysia? Apakah politik baru rentas kaum - yang turut membawa bersamanya idea-idea demokrasi liberal, pertarungan bebas, perungkaian kontrak sosial berasaskan kaum, kebebasan beragama (atau kebebasan daripada agama?) dan lain-lain yang seumpamanya merupakan rentetan daripada ortodoksi neo-liberal yang problematis itu? Apakah idea-idea ini akan (atau telah) menjadi satu ortodoksi baru di Malaysia?

______________________________________________________________________

MARZUKI MOHAMAD ialah pensyarah sains politik di Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia. Pandangan beliau mengenai isu-isu politik semasa boleh didapati di http://marzukimohamad.blogspot.com.

Views on 'Syariah'... the word, the meaning and other ideas

I have no problems with christians using the word 'Allah' in their translation of the bible, as it is argued that the word means 'god' derived from the arabic language. Justified intentions for such 'uproar' of the 'issue' by muslims and christians alike is debatable.

I would also like to point out that 'syariah' as in Syariah Law, also comes from the arabic language and isn't necessarily exclusive to Islam. I'm unsure of what its literal translation is, but from wikipedia.org, it states:

"There is no strictly static codified set of laws of sharia. Sharia is more of a system of how law ought to serve humanity, a consensus of the unified spirit, based on the Qur'an (the religious text of Islam), hadith (sayings and doings of Muhammad and his companions), Ijma (consensus), Qiyas (reasoning by analogy) and centuries of debate, interpretation and precedent."

The 'syariah system' may have its origins in Islam (Qur'an & hadith), but its concepts and principles are universal (consensus, reasoning by analogy, debate, interpretation & precedent). Similarly to 'Islamic' banking which is developed based on the principles in Islam, but is universally appealing that even non-muslims use Islamic banking.

Even the many fields of Islamic studies which includes theology, mysticism, philosophy, sociology, science, jurisprudence, art, literature and many more are universal in nature. These fields of studies are not 'Islamic'-specific but are broad human studies and search of knowledge. It's classified as Islamic studies just because they are done by muslims or founded by muslims. Whereas they have counterparts from people of other religion pursuing the same field of study. It is a known fact that modern mathematics, medicine and other fields of science have their foundations or have contributions from muslim academics and scholars of times past. My point is not that these field of studies have to be credited to Islam, but that the studies of these fields were in the spirit of humanity; knowledge to be shared for all humanity. Please look up 'Islamic studies' in wikipedia.org to find out more details.

Many more 'terms' found in Islam are merely words in arabic, yet the definition behind it, the principles that govern it, the concepts that shape it; can be beyond any 'religion'. Syariah Law, Civil Law, Common Law; the name doesn't matter. What matters is the system and whether it is fair and just to all.

Syariah Law is not merely about Islamic divorce and Islamic family law, or just deals with sex out of wedlock, not fasting during Ramadhan, apostasy; all issues related to muslims. It is much more than that. There should not be any problem with there being only 'one' Court of Law in Malaysia, but it can be divided into many divisions such as criminal, commercial, family, muslim-related etc. As I've said before; consensus, reasoning by analogy, debate, interpretation & precedent; can be used when deriving and defining the law and its system. Whether to term it Syariah Law, Civil Law, In-Law, My-Law... is besides the point.

The process of deriving and defining such laws should not just involve muslim scholars and academics, but also non-muslim scholars and academics; representing any or every religion, level of society and related fields of interest. Use & apply reasoning & precedent; debate the matter and issue; interpret with wisdom; and decide on consensus.

One Court of Law, but separate clauses in the law for muslims or non-muslims if applicable. This may seem as practicing double standards, but I think it's fair considering matters like alcohol drinking, gambling, sex, adultery, divorce and so on, where people of other religion may have different principles, views and ideas on fairness, justice, enforcement or morality. keyword: consensus. Such issues like hudud or not, keyword: debate, interpret & consensus.

Apostasy in Islam is a sensitive matter that has been politicized as a religious issue. However, I view it as a personal matter between the apostate and God. In Malaysia, it never really was a religious issue, but a legislative, authoritative and administrative matter. Why? Because the issue originates from someone wanting to change the religion stated on ones identity card (administrative) so that one does not fall under the authority and purview of Islamic law (legislative) and enforcement (authoritative) when dealing with marriage, divorce and so on. If one does not wish to be a muslim; after counsel with an Imam or someone with the right knowledge and wisdom (not 'brain-washing' or 'degrading the person' type of session); then let it be. Trust and have faith in God. What is meant to be will be. In the end, all shall be judged by God.

The fact of the matter is, don't be overzealous in brandishing or harping on the 'name'or 'term' just for the sake of promoting 'Islam'. Neither should you be afraid or overreact in such negativity to such 'name' or 'term' just because its 'Islamic' nature. 'Syariah' is just an arabic word. Seek knowledge and apply wisdom. Take the good; leave the bad. Positive over negative. Is it really that hard?

I hope someone who is more knowledgeable and a lot wiser than I am, can expand further on my arguments, views and ideas with more facts, examples and further discussions. To agree or to disagree, it doesn't matter as long as it is constructive.

By backs, just another Malaysian

Comments on “Melayu Bersatulah” (Dari Jelebu)

I think “Dari Jelebu – Melayu Bersatulah” is a good analysis, but it still remains unfinished. To be complete it needs to be explained how the economic interests of the various groupings are advanced and how they clash with each other as well as how one group triumphed against others.

I do not think it is enough to assign class background to individuals to be analytically convincing. To be fair, analysis developed in such a manner would properly occupy a whole book and not just a short article.

For example, what class was Onn Jaafar? What class was Tunku Abdul Rahman? Why did Tunku triumph instead of Onn Jaafar? What class was Tun Razak? Tun Hussein Onn? What class forces achieved enough power, and how, to push out Hussein Onn in favour of Mahathir? How did policies affect the development of various class forces? How did the class forces develop, starting with the newly formed and fresh UMNO to current day UMNO?

What was the role of the old MCA. What is its role now? What class does the PAP represent? What class rules Singapore? What class does the DAP represent? Is the political struggle in Malaysia limited to changing government and national policies and practices, or does it also require a class struggle as well?

Is Anwar Ibrahim a comprador and national bourgeois who was kicked out of UMNO? Or does he truly and honestly represent small capitalists and peasants? How do the policies of PKR advance the class interests of the members it represents?

What classes do RPK and Hishamuddin Rais represent? And how do their individual and personal struggles advance the interests of the classes they represent?

My understanding is that the basis of the “Dari Jelebu” analysis is absolutely true – each individual acts in his own economic interests. This after all is the basic assumption of ALL economic theories.

In the case of Malaysia, contending individuals act our their economic interests, but the class movements are still immature and not fully formed and each political party contains a gamut of different individual and class interests which may not be fully class conscious yet. These individuals and weakly formed, not fully conscious classes compete and contend with each other for power within the political parties themselves as well as with other political parties.

Political parties are therefore not fully pure and homogeneous in their class content. At least not one single class wholly and completely dominates each political party in Malaysia. The rulers or government of Malaysia, therefore, like rulers in other new states and countries are still wholly tribally or racially-based political parties, not class-based rule. Even in China and Vietnam, the state is ruled by a tribe called “communists” and the government is monopolised by a political party called the communist party.

Even though communist parties started off as representing revolutionary workers almost purely, different class interests crept into these parties and their character changed as a result of internal contention and struggles with revolutionary workers losing out in almost all communist parties. Rule by the majority is still not a realisable reality compared to rule by a small, powerful and well-organised minority.

I think it is purely because it is easier to have a small disciplined minority which can cooperate within themselves and thus organise themselves as a formidable force than a large nebulous mass cooperating and organising themselves to form a government.

The same thing happens in Malaysian political parties too, with the difference that they are still very much in the early and immature stages of class development and have not advanced much due to the wide use of racial and religious divisive factors. The only classes that have advanced their class interests with great strides are those of the comprador, bureaucrats and bourgeoisie (in that order) while even the feudal classes have slipped in competition against these classes. Feudal traditions now only provide a veneer of respectability for the compradors.

In this sense, UMNO is the most well-developed class-based party. It is probably already conscious of its class background and class interests but hides it even from its own rank and file members.. It is therefore good that UMNO is exposed as a comprador, bureaucrat and bourgeois party which does not have at heart the interests of the majority of the people in Malaysia.

This does not mean however that the policies UMNO follows will not serve the interests of the majority of the people well. It is completely possible that the leadership of the comprador under current global conditions may well serve the interest of the majority of people in Malaysia well (besides the interests of UMNO cronies). Criticism of UMNO therefore also has to be targeted at how its policies go against the both individual and national economic interests as well as the whole national well-being of the majority of Malaysians.

I do not write this to negate Hishamuddin Rais’s article which I think is excellent, but hope to advance the arguments and debate on what the actual conditions in Malaysia are. I myself do not have the answers to many of the questions I have posed and am desperately seeking answers. I do not even know whether these questions have answers or that they are the right questions in the first place.

By batsman

The 12 Golden Rules for MPs

The elections have come and gone and we now have 222 MPs to represent us in Parliament. This time round, we have a lot of new faces who are first time MPs while there is also a good number of MPs who have served several terms (including those who have served too many terms).

Irrespective of whether they are old or new faces, what these 222 people do or don't do will affect the future of the country and all Malaysians. While, they as MPs, should know how to play their proper role (otherwise, they're not fit for the position), it is nevertheless worthwhile highlighting to them what the Rakyat expects of them, just to make sure that we are all on the same page.

I've listed down here my expectations which I've called the "The 12 Golden Rules for MPs" and I hope MT readers can chip in with what else they think should be included in order that we would have fully effective MPs who would do a brilliant job to progress the country. Following that, perhaps MT or RPK can formalize a proper, official document to submit to all these MPs so that "due notice has been served on them".

Here's my list of the "Golden Rules" :

1. You report to the Rakyat, not your party leader or coalition leader or any other bosses. Just to "repeat one more time", you report to the Rakyat.

2. The word "MP" does not mean "Many Perks" or "Master of the People". It stands for "Most Principled" ( It would also help greatly if you are also "Most Pleasant" as a person). For an MP, it's a privilege to serve and it's not privileges from serving.

3. Don't just talk; let us see positive action as well. We don't need any more hot air – the millions of cars on the roads and all the factories around produce enough of that already.

4. Like gold, your performance must shine. Being an MP is like running a maternity ward or a courier company --- you have to deliver. We did not put you there to make the numbers or to warm the seat in Parliament. Chair warming is just as serious an issue as global warming. MPs who just warm their seats will soon find their asses on fire.

5. No, we don't expect you to die for the country (because we know yours is an undying love) but we expect you to be committed and to work hard as well. This is not an unreasonable expectation because the future of the country and the welfare of more than 25 million people depend on what you do or don't do.

6. We do not require you to have the intelligence of a rocket scientist but you need to be well-informed on issues and you must also have the pulse on what is going on. (This is just in case we are being observed by some extra terrestrials and we need to uphold "Malaysia Boleh" and show them that there are signs of intelligent life forms in the Malaysian Parliament ).

7. Your words must be worth their weight in gold. And don't ever forget your election promises. We are not saints who will forgive and forget.

8. We need you to be accessible so that we can raise issues and give feedback to you. MPs must not be like the Olympics that you get to see only once in every 4 years.

9. You do not need to outdo Mother Theresa to be a living saint but MPs must have a certain "gold standard of behaviour" and have the proper decorum, especially in Parliament. People who cannot fit into the shoes of a good and respectable MP will definitely get the boot.

10. Always remember the "Yes" and "No" principle – you say "Yes" to all those things that are good for the country and benefit the rakyat while you firmly say "No" to all those things that don't. It's as simple as that.

11. Don't ever misappropriate our gold.

12. Finally," NO", you cannot bend the above rules. Remember, they are golden rules, not made of rubber.

By Political Doctor

Derita anak-anak mangsa ISA menggamit kebahagiaan yang tidak ditemui

Anak yang kini sedang dalam proses membesar ke alam remaja sudah tentu memerlukan seorang bapa bagi membantunya menempuh alam baru.

Anis Nazri, HARAKAH

Tatkala melihat kanak-kanak seusianya bergelak ketawa bersama ibu bapa, mulut petahnya terdiam seketika. Dia termenung, sebelum melepaskan satu keluhan kecil. Air matanya bertubir di sudut matanya, dan dia berlari menuju ke rumah. Biar hilang pandangannya dari melihat kebahagiaan itu.

Hatinya sayu. Sayu mengenangkan nasibnya yang tidak seuntung kanak-kanak tadi. Masakan tidak? Sudah sekian lama dia tidak dapat berkumpul, bergembira dan bermesra dengan bapa kesayangannya. Sudah lama dia terpisah dari bapanya. Bukan kerana Allah menjemput bapanya ke alam roh, tetapi satu-satunya akta zalim ISA yang bertindak demikian!

Bagi Suhaib Mat Sah, tidak tercapai di fikirannya bahawa satu ketika nanti dia tidak dapat mengecapi kebahagiaan bersama bapanya angkara ISA. Dia sentiasa berasakan bahawa kasih sayangnya bersama kedua ibu bapanya sentiasa berpanjangan. Namun, impian itu bukanlah realiti baginya. Kini, hampir enam tahun beliau tidak dapat bermesra dengan bapanya.

Enam tahun! Bapanya masih meringkuk di Kemta tanpa sebarang bukti kukuh yang boleh disabitkan ke atasnya. Kekecewaan anak berusia 14 tahun ini, jelas tergambar apabila dia pernah bertanya kepada uminya..."apa lagi yang PM nak?", "apa lagi yang cuba Pak Lah nak buktikan kesalahan abah?".

Aduhai hati, siapalah yang tahu penderitaan dan kesayuan yang dirasai Suhaib ini. Bagi kita yang dewasa, jika kehilangan orang tersayang pun sudah cukup meruntun hati. Apatah lagi bagi Suhaib, yang menyaksikan sendiri bapanya dibawa pergi, di tengah malam, enam tahun lalu.

Bermula saat itu, hidupnya tidak seindah kanak-kanak lain. Hatinya tersentuh setiap kali melihat kemesraan kanak-kanak lain bersama ibu bapa mereka. Hati kecilnya sering tertanya-tanya, bilakah abah yang dikasihinya akan menghirup udara kebebasan dan berpeluang kembali mencantum kebahagiaan mereka sekeluarga.

Seringkali Suhaib mendengus dan merungut, seolah-olah menyesali dengan apa yang terjadi. Apalah anak sekecil itu, yang sememangnya memerlukan kasih sayang seorang bapa mampu menghadapi dugaan maha perit ini?

Namun, dalam rontaan hatinya yang membenci tindakan ISA itu, dia tetap seorang anak yang kuat dan tabah. Walapun sesekali dirinya tewas dengan ketabahan yang dipupuk uminya sejak abahnya diheret pergi. Dia tetap seorang anak yang cekal, biarpun di hatinya hanya Allah yang mengetahui bebanan perasaan yang ditanggungnya.

'Kehilangan' abahnya cukup membuatkan perkembangannya tergugat. Anak yang kini sedang dalam proses membesar ke alam remaja sudah tentu memerlukan seorang bapa bagi membantunya menempuh alam baru.

Jika bapanya memang sudah tiada di dunia, mudahlah hati anak kecil itu dipujuk dan dikhabarkan berita itu. Malah, jika bapanya di penjara dalam tempoh yang diketahui akan berakhir sekalipun, pasti mudah dia menerimanya.

Namun, apa yang dilakukan ISA ini, benar-benar tidak berperikemanusiaan. Sudahlah terkepung tanpa bicara yang boleh membuktikan bapanya bersalah, pembebasan bapanya juga menjadi tanda-tanya dan mengikut sesuka rasa pihak pemerintah.

Baik lagikah ISA ini dalam masyarakat? Apakah ketenteraman negara ini akan terjejas sekiranya akta ini dimansuhkan seperti yang dituntut Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA (GMI) selama ini?

Sedangkan adanya ISA inipun keselamatan rakyat di negara ini sudah tidak tenteram. Sana sini dikhabarkan berlaku penculikan, pembunuhan, rogol, samun dan sebagainya. Tenteramkah negara ini? Selamatkah kita dengan adanya ISA ini?

Aduhai pemimpin Malaysia, hentikanlah penderitaan keluarga mangsa tahanan ISA ini. Sapukanlah air mata yang mengalir di pipi anak-anak kecil ini. Bukan Suhaib seorang menanggung derita ini, masih ada 70 keluarga lain yang menangisi dan menderita akibat ISA.

Wahai rakyat Malaysia yang prihatin, bangkitlah. Bangkitlah sekali lagi bagi membantu GMI dalam rangka usaha mereka untuk membebaskan semua tahanan ISA, selain memansuhkan akta zalim ini.

Bangkitlah menunjukkan kuasa anda mendesak kerajaan dengan kepimpinan 'baru' ini agar mendengar dan menunaikan tuntutan semua pihak seperti yang dinyatakan Menteri Dalam Negeri yang baru, Dato' Seri Syed Hamid Albar dalam Utusan Melayu tidak lama dulu..."Saya akan memenuhi tuntutan semua pihak..."

Buat pembaca yang prihatin dengan nasib malang keluarga mangsa ISA ini, sila hantar sumbangan anda kepada HARAKAHDAILY DOT COM, nombor akaun Maybank 564070000336.

Umno dan fantasi 'Ketuanan Melayu'

Mungkin identifikasinya sebagai orang Melayu berasaskan hakikat Parameswara telah memeluk Islam apabila berkahwin dengan seorang puteri Raja PASai.

Shirzad Lifeboat, HARAKAH

Ada ketikanya, apabila kita merenung kembali ungkapan "Tidak Melayu hilang di dunia" yang didakwa telah diucapkan oleh Hang Tuah, seorang pahlawan yang sumber pensejarahannya cuma sebuah buku, juga berjudul Hang Tuah dan Sejarah Melayu tulisan Tun Sri Lanang, kita terpaksa bertanya apakah bangsa Melayu pernah hidup dalam satu tamadun yang gemilang?Umno dan fantasi 'Ketuanan Melayu'

Jika kita mahu mengambil Kesultanan Melayu Melaka (1402-1511) sebagai sebuah tamadun Melayu misali, maka kita perlu akur kepada hakikat bahawa Parameswara yang mengisytiharkan dirinya sebagai raja dengan menggunakan nama Sultan Iskandar Shah adalah seorang putera berketurunan Hindu berasal dari Kerajaan Srivijaya.

Mungkin identifikasinya sebagai orang Melayu berasaskan hakikat Parameswara telah memeluk Islam apabila berkahwin dengan seorang puteri Raja PASai.

Dalam era kegemilangan yang berakhir selama kira-kira 109 tahun itu, ekonomi Melaka boleh di katakan di kuasai oleh para pedagang Hindu dari India Selatan, seperti Nina Chatu dan ramai pembesar negeri pula terdiri daripada mereka yang bukan berdarah Melayu seperti Tun Mutahir yang menjadi Bendahara Melaka menggantikan Tun Perak.

Tun Mutahir adalah ketua Muslim Tamil yang cukup berpengaruh di negeri Melaka dan bertanggungjawab melantik mereka yang berketurunan Muslim Tamil memegang jawatan penting dalam kerajaan. Hal ini dimarahi oleh orang Melayu.

Raja Mendeliar dan Laksamana Khoja Hassan akhirnya berkomplot memfitnah Tun Mutahir kononnya mahu menjatuhkan Sultan Mahmud.

Selepas perisitiwa ini, segala-galanya adalah sejarah. Sifat tamak, dengki, khianat, sikap mementingkan diri sendiri, sikap terlalu mementingkan harta dan kedudukan, tidak amanah, belot dan politik istana yang berpuak-puak serta tidak menjiwai ajaran Islam yang sepatutnya menjadi ciri-ciri utama telah memusnahkan apa yang dianggap sebuah empayar dibina sejak seabad lalu. Kedatangan Portugis menakluki Melaka hanyalah satu kebetulan.

Di vmanakah 'ketuanan Melayu' ketika itu? Selain daripada Tun Perak dan beberapa orang pembesar Melaka yang berketurnan Melayu, termasuk Laksamana Hang Tuah (sekiranya dia benar-benar wujud)? Siapakah orang Melayu yang paling berkuasa pada ketika itu? Apakah orang Melayu yang menduduki bumi Melaka sebelum 1402 itu dapat menerima bulat-bulat seorang anak raja Hindu hanya kerana Parameswara terlihat peristiwa ganjil pelanduk mengejar anjing?

Tentu sekali tidak ada ketuanan Melayu pada ketika itu sebagaimana tidak adanya ketuanan Melayu setelah Portugis berkuasa dan seterusnya Belanda, kembali kepada Portugis, British, Jepun dan kembali kepada British untuk tempoh masa 446 tahun.

Sebagai sebuah bangsa, Melayu bukan sahaja dianggap sebagai bangsa hamba kerana bertuankan penjajah tetapi dianggap sebagai sebuah bangsa yang "pemalas dan membuat rumah di atas pokok".

Pengarang British Anthony Burgess (The Malayan Trilogy) mendefinisikan Melayu sebagai: "satu bangsa berkulit coklat, agak menarik, pemalas, telah diIslamkan oleh pedagang Arab tetapi kabur tentang asal-usul pemelukan agama itu."

Dalam trilogi yang menceritakan banyak tentang sikap asli orang Melayu itu, tidaklah diketahui mengapa Burgess yang pernah bertugas di Malaya sebelum Merdeka, termasuk di Kolej Melayu Kuala Kangsar, menggunakan sebuah negeri Melayu imaginasi yang dinamakan sebagai negeri "Lanchap".

Tetapi Burgess bukan keseorangan. W. Somerset Maugham, Joseph Conrad, Henri Fauconnier Malaisie tidak pernah mengangkat orang Melayu sebagai tuan di dalam tulisan-tulisan mereka.

Malah tokoh berketurunan Arab-India, Abdullah Abdul Kadir (Munshi), juga bergelar Bapa Sastera Melayu Moden juga tidak mempunyai sesuatu baik untuk ditulis mengenai orang Melayu di dalam bukunya.

Sekiranya inilah deskripsi bangsa Melayu yang digambarkan oleh pengarang Melayu dan bukan-Melayu pada satu ketika dulu dengan segala sifat dan amalan yang tidak Islamik, apakah kita mahukan sebuah bangsa Melayu yang memenuhi kriteria ini terus hidup?

Apakah orang Melayu jenis ini yang dimaksudkan oleh Hang Tuah dalam ungkapan immortal atau abadinya "Tak Melayu Hilang Di Dunia"?

Kalau begitu, apakah bezanya orang Melayu hari ini dengan bangsa-bangsa lain yang masih hidup tetapi tidak diketahui umum seperti kaum Red Indian, Chawtow, Navajo dan lain-lain yang masih terus hidup tetapi lagi dikenali umum?

Hari ini, walaupun orang Melayu telah berjaya menjadi penumpang kapal angkasa, namun masih ramai lagi warga dunia yang tidak kenal siapakah orang Melayu dan di manakah letaknya Malaysia.

Jika kita mempunyai pilihan, sudah tentu kita tidak mahu bangsa Melayu kita dinilai dan diberikan persepsi sebegitu rupa.

Sebenarnya, kita memang mempunyai pilihan. Apabila kita menentang gagasan Malayan Union British, kita menggunakan slogan "Hidup Melayu". Tetapi slogan tinggal slogan apabila pada tahun 1951 Umno mengubah slogan "Hidup Melayu" kepada slogan "Merdeka".

Sebaik sahaja selePAS Merdeka, slogan hidup Melayu tidak lagi kedengaran. Umno yang memimpin kerajaan pada ketika itu sepatutnya sudah mempunyai perancangan bagi menghidupakan satu bangsa Melayu yang benar-benar progresif dan bertamadun.

Namun, ini tidak dilakukan. Tidak ada rancangan konkrit bagi mengangkat darjat orang Melayu dari sekadar menjadi petani, posmen, budak pejabat, kerani, pemandu dan anggota polis pangkat rendah yang disebut-sebut sebagai mata-mata gelap.

Ketuanan Melayu pula hanyalah terletak kepada Perdana Menteri yang berketurunan Melayu dan beberapa orang Menteri Melayu dan Ahli-Ahli Parlimen Melayu. Tetapi bagi rakyat Melayu biasa mereka adalah hamba.

Dari segi ekonomi, orang Melayu tidak pernah menjadi tuan punya sebarang perniagaan atau perusahaan. Untuk menjadi tuan kepada ekonomi Malaysia, tentulah jauh sekali. Malah tanaman padi yang diusahakan dan menjadi identiti orang Melayu sejak dulu lagi juga tertakluk kepada perhambaan kewangan.

Dalam tulisannya berjudul "Malay Padi Planters Need Help" (The Straits Times, 30 Oktober 1949), Dr Mahathir Mohamad (Tun) menulis (terjemahan):

"Justeru, apabila tiba musim menanam padi berikutnya, mereka (penanam padi Melayu) mendapati mereka tidak mempunyai wang mencukupi untuk membeli baja, menyewa kerbau dan secara umumnya menyediakan tapak untuk tanaman berikutnya. Tapi mereka tak perlu bimbang, mereka sentiasa boleh mendapatkan wang dari sistem padi kunca. Dalam sistem ini, peminjam wang akan membeli padi untuk tuaian musim akan datang� Adakalanya RM40 dibayar untuk nilai padi yang sepatutnya diPASarkan pada harga RM120� Mereka yang paling beruntung adalah pekedai China di kampung-kampung."

Sistem padi kunca yang meletakkan orang Melayu sebagai kurang dari menjadi tuan ini beransur lenyap selePAS Merdeka disebabkan oleh pelbagai bantuan yang diberikan oleh kerajaan kepada penanam padi. Namun sistem pajak gadai yang menjadi talian-hidup orang Melayu berterusan.

Kemisikinan orang Melayu selepas Merdeka masih bersifat fenomenal. Bukan sahaja orang Melayu tidak memiliki sebarang saham dalam syarikat awam, tetapi sebagai peniaga pemilikan tunggal yang berjaya pun boleh dikatakan amat kecil.

Kegagalan Umno inilah yang telah menghakiskan kepercayaan orang Melayu terhadap Umno pada Pilihanraya Umum Ke-3, 1969.

Untuk memperbetulkan keadaan ini Umno memperkenalkan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) menerusi Rancangan Malaysia Ke-2 (1971-1975). Apabila Kajian Separa Penggal, Rancangan Malaysia Kedua, 1971-1975 diterbitkan maka terserlah hakikat orang Melayu cuma mempunyai kurang daripada 2 peratus saham dalam syarikat-syarikat awam, sementara kaum Cina menguasai 23 peratus dan orang luar menguasai 61 peratus.

Pada akhir tahun 1990, tahun terakhir sasaran awal DEB, penguasaan orang Melayu dalam PASaran modal mencatatkan angka terakhir, lebih sedikit daripada 20 peratus dan kurang 10 peratus dari sasaran yang telah ditetapkan ketika DEB dilancarkan pada tahun 1971. Sementara penguasaan kaum Cina meningkat kepada 45 peratus dan tidak ada sebarang peningkatan ketara untuk kaum India yang kekal pada tahap pegangan 1 peratus di sepanjang tempoh pelaksaan DEB.

Selepas tempoh tersebut, Umno mungkin menyedari perjuangannya membela nasib orang Melayu tidak mungkin akan tercapai. Tentulah tidak boleh diterima betapa dasar afirmatif selama hampir 20 tahun dalam pelaksanaan hanya berjaya melahirkan kontraktor kelas E dan F, graduan Melayu kelas kedua dan ketiga dari universiti-universiti awam yang tidak lebih merupakan kilang untuk anak-anak Melayu mendapatkan segulung ijazah.

Peniaga asal Melayu yang mendapat pinjaman MARA dan juga pinjaman bank komversial menerusi skim Perbandanan Jaminan Kredit dan terlibat dalam pelbagai perniagaan runcit � dari perniagaan PASar mini sehinggalah perniagaan import-eksport beransur-ansur gulung tikar sehingga hanya segelintir sahaja yang masih beroperasi pada akhir tahun 2000. Malah cita-cita menjadi agensi kerajaan seperti Pernas menjadi sebuah sogo-sosha seperti Mitsubishi, Mitsui atau C.Itoh hanya tinggal kenang-kenangan.

Akhirnya, Dr. Mahathir sendiri yang begitu menonjol dalam menyuntikkan psaikologi tentang kehebatan Melayu yang boleh membuat itu dan ini tidak dapat menyembunyikan rasa putus asa beliau. Ketika berucap pada Perhimpunan Agung Umno 2002, Dr. Mahathir berkata:

"Orang Melayu yang juga orang Islam yang teramai sekali di Malaysia belum selamat. Orang Melayu masih menjadi kaum yang lemah, kaum yang termiskin di negara kita ini. Ya, Malaysia sudah banyak maju, tetapi orang Melayu masih kurang maju. Jika kita keluarkan orang Cina dengan segala-gala yang dibina dan dimiliki oleh mereka, tidak akan ada bandar kecil atau besar di Malaysia, tidak akan ada perniagaan dan perusahaan, dan tidak akan ada dana daripada cukai pendapatan dan korporat untuk membiayai segala subsidi, bantuan dan kemudahan untuk orang Melayu. Orang Melayu akan kembali ke zaman mereka dijajah dahulu, miskin, tidak berpelajaran dan dihina oleh siapa sahaja. Jangan fikir selepas Umno, PAS tetap akan memerintah. Dalam politik, yang tidak dijangka boleh berlaku."

Sekiranya pelbagai langkah diambil di zaman Dr. Mahathir untuk merealisasikan ketuanan Melayu tetap menemui kegagalan, maka di zaman Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi yang jauh lebih lesu, slogan Ketuanan Melayu tidak lebih dari retorik Umno yang digunakan sebagai benteng terakhir dalam mempertahankan hakisan kepercayaan orang Melayu terhadap parti tersebut dan sering ditonjolkan melalui ciuman keris oleh Ketua Pemuda Umno, Dato' Hishamuddin Tun Hussein.

Benar. Usul Presiden PAS, Tuan Guru Dato' Abdul Hadi Awang agar Umno, PKR dan PAS bersepakat mencari jalan bagi menyatukan orang Melayu adalah satu usul tepat, ikhlas dan terkehadapan. Begitupun, kita harus menanti apabila Umno tidak lagi membuang masa dengan fantasi Ketuanan Melayunya. Kenyataan Naib Presiden PAS Dato� Husam Musa yang menyifatkan usaha mencari persepakatan sedemikian sebagai membuang masa, adalah relevan.

Comments on Article Titled "Are Chinese and Indian Merely Hedging?"

Dear Raja Petra,

I would very much like to express my view over the issues of Social Contract and unhappiness among Chinese and Indian over the implementation of New Economic Policy.

I believe most of Chinese and Indian will agree with me that they do resent at all the monarchy system in this nation and in fact, we pledge our loyalty to Yang Dipertuan Agong, being the head and most respected leader of Malaysia. We feel nothing wrong with the Social Contract. And, off course, with aim of eliminating poverty among the rural Malays, we were also supportive of New Economic Policy at the very initial stage, which, according to general opinions, would sustain peaceful environment in this country since it has been widely accepted that poor, helpless and jobless groups would cause social illness.

However, the implementation of New Economic Policy has unhealthily transformed into the following:-

• Chinese and Indian are both exploited from education opportunities at tertiary level at public universities, and, private universities are too few to absorb those intending to study;

• Public sector is almost totally dominated by only Malays, leaving only private sector, and, worse still, Ministry came out with guideline to restrict recruitment of Chinese and Indian at executive level in multinational corporations;

• Whilst, in business sector, there are so many fields that Chinese and Indian entrepreneurs are totally barred from. Not to mention to many, logistic - freight and forwarding service, petrol kiosks etc.;

• In professional fields, foreign medical degrees which are recognized worldwide, particularly British Medical Council, are disrecognized and treated as substandard to local universities' certificates. Holders of law degrees from non-local universities are asked to sit for over-tough CLP exams which carry extremely low passing rate. And, to operate an audit firm, you need a Bumiputra partner, or else, audit license will not be granted;

• There is no transparency in Government awarding infrastructure contracts, resulting in that political cronies without capability and technical background earn mega projects, and, at a later stage, subcontract to Chinese and Indian at much much lower price at very slim margin, and, worse still, these political cronies at most occasions dishonour settlements, leading to backrupcies among the Chinese and Indian.

As a mankind, we admit that there is tendency to safeguard own race's interests. But, should it be to the extent of breaking the rice bowls of others and forcing them to die? We do not resend policies to upbring the Malay community, but we really cannot stand being bullied, exploited, denied of rights to pursue education and career, and, cleansed up!

Yours faithfully,

Singaram, Lawyer

Um...no youth

What will then happen to Umno? In the light of the current reforms of the judiciary, are we heading for a repeat of February 1988 when Umno was deregistered?

Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed, THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER

Let's face it. Since Umno Baru was founded in 1988 - let's not kid ourselves that it is the same party from 1946 - there has not been a vote for the top two party posts. It's a succession by patronage.

In other words, it's feudal. Not something that we need in today's hyper-competitive world.

My point is that the 30 per cent quota for nominations in the Umno election rules is hampering talent from rising to the top. It allows them to move up to a point before party warlords decide which horse to back and leaving the rest trailing in the dust. Not necessarily the best go up but probably only the popular.

In the DAP, those voted into the central working committee divide the posts among themselves. In PAS, those vying for leadership need to get the nod from the Shura before contesting. Both systems are not democratic.

But Umno is democratic. The grassroots nominate their favourites and those who breach the 30 per cent quota of nominations get to contest. This only favours the popular and the influential in grabbing nominations leaving the young leaders without a ghost of a chance for a stab at the top.

Where does that leave us? It leaves Umno without much of its talent as the young possibles and probables will either turn the feudal way and perpetuate an outdated system or leave in disgust for other parties. Either way, it is a dead end for Umno.

I am not advocating a contest against Pak Lah because of the current climate but I want to advocate competition to ensure that Umno gets the best talent to take us forward to the 21st Century when the Opposition have already undergone radical change leaving us wondering what has hit us.

Because what we have is a double-edge sword that could possibly leave us with a leader undesired by all.

Imagine if you will, that there are four contenders for the post of Umno where to qualify one needs 30 per cent of the nominations. Let us say that not one of the four contenders achieve the 30 per cent requirement; which I feel is too onerous for Umno's democratic process to function.

Even worse, assume that one of the four candidates scrapes 30 per cent and the rest do not. The one that meets the required quota wins without contest. Is this fair?

Don't you think that the person who gets 29 per cent of the nominations will challenge this outcome? Are we to be brought to court again?

What will then happen to Umno? In the light of the current reforms of the judiciary, are we heading for a repeat of February 1988 when Umno was deregistered?

Perhaps the Opposition may not have to finish off Umno, we will do it ourselves!

I believe that Umno and its management committee should consider this scenario seriously especially in the current climate where veterans are already casting an envious eye on the top post while the young will eventually inherit a party bereft of hope and talent.

As an example, the management committee should consider reducing the quota to 15 per cent for the post of president. At this level, a person who is contesting would need at least 29 nominations.

There is no state in Malaysia where Umno has more than 26 divisions and this will ensure that the candidate has support beyond his home state.

The number of nominations should be substantive but not burdensome. This will ensure only quality candidates will contest. I do not believe that a person should contest for president with just two nominations as this would result in many trivial challenges.

We can handicap candidates to get the best but not at the expense of handicapping the party of talent.

Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed is a two-time MP for Pulai and writes an occasional exclusive column for The Malaysian Insider. He blogs at www.jazlan.net

Royalti minyak: Umno jadikan rakyat Terengganu merana

Perlu diingat tidak kurang RM1 bilion Terengganu sepatutnya memperolehi royalti minyak setahun memandangkan kenaikan mendadak harga minyak dunia, lebih USD100 setong sekarang.

Suhaimi Taib, HARAKAH

Nampaknya Kerajaan Pusat di bawah Barisan Nasional (BN) melancarkan perang terhadap kerajaannya sendiri di Terengganu apabila tidak berhasrat untuk mengembalikan semula wang royalti peroleum dan gas sebagaimana perjanjian kerajaan itu dengan Petronas pada 22 Mac 1975 yang sepatutnya diterima secara tunai sebanyak lima peratus setahun.

Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi semalam dilaporkan menafikan dakwaan Menteri Besar Terengganu bahawa wang royalti minyak yang disalurkan melalui kaedah "wang ehsan" tidak banyak membantu rakyat negeri itu kerana projek-projek pembangunan ditentukan di peringkat pusat.

"Ada satu kaedah yang telah kita buat dengan kewujudan wang ehsan ini, dan ini sebenarnya membantu rakyat negeri Terengganu selama ini," kata Abdullah di sidang media selepas menyampaikan ucap utama pada Dialog Integriti Asean 2008 hari semalam.

Beliau diminta mengulas kenyataan Dato' Ahmad Said semalam bahawa sejak wang ehsan diperkenalkan pada 2000, semua projek yang dilaksanakan tidak merujuk kerajaan negeri dan tidak mengambil kira keperluan rakyat.

Perlu diingat tidak kurang RM1 bilion Terengganu sepatutnya memperolehi royalti minyak setahun memandangkan kenaikan mendadak harga minyak dunia, lebih USD100 setong sekarang.

Persoalannya apa yang dimeteraikan antara kerajaan negeri Terengganu dan Petronas itu adalah perjanjian untuk mengeluarkan lima peratus wang royalti minyak kepada negeri itu dan wang itu pula diserahkan kepada kerajaan tersebut diurus tadbir dan dimasukkan dalam Wang Disatukan sekaligus menjadi hak kerajaan dan rakyat negeri secara undang-undang.

Dengan tindakan tersebut Perdana Menteri tidak mengiktiraf lagi perjanjian tersebut walaupun beliau tidak mengatakan perjanjian itu batal. Tetapi dengan tindak tanduknya yang serupa dengan bekas perdana menteri lalu, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad seolah-olah perjanjian itu terbatal dengan sendirinya.

Dengan kerajaan sendiri pun, Abdullah masih tidak terbuka dan mengiktiraf perjanjian pemberian royalti petroleum dan gas untuk negeri Terengganu sedangkan di negeri lain seperi Sabah dan Sarawak, perjanjian itu masih berjalan seperti dahulu tanpa gangguan .

Malah difahamkan kedua-dua negeri berkenaan akan menerima lima peratus lagi royalti petroleum dan gas tidak lama lagi.

Apakah beliau berdendam dengan Ahmad atau dengan pihak lain di Terengganu, tidaklah diketahui.

Apakah Abdullah mahu melihat demonstrasi besar-besaran rakyat berlaku di Terengganu, menuntut royalti petroleum dan gas di kembalikan kepada kerajaan Terengganu? Rasanya tidak sukar ia dibuat jika ada penggeraknya apa lagi jika disokong kerajaan negeri sendiri.

Pokoknya kerajaan di bawah Dato' Ahmad dan rakyat Terengganu tidak boleh menerima keputusan Kerajaan Pusat yang masih enggan menyerahkan semula wang royalti itu.

Apa yang dinyatakan oleh Abdullah hanya satu alasan yang dibuat-buat untuk membolehkan tindakannya tidak mengembalikan wang rakyat itu.

Apa motif sebenarnya tindakan Abdulah di sebalik keenggannya menyerah wang itu? Mungkin umum boleh membaca dan membuat andaian. Pertama projek yang dilaksanakan dengan menggunakan wang tersebut masih belum selesai spenuhnya.

Ini termasuk Taman Tamadun Islam (TTI) di Pulau Wan Man, Kuala Terengganu bernilai kira-kira RM300 juta, Monsoon Cup yang perbelanjaan sebanyak kira-kira RM300 juta lagi. Ia mempunyai kontrak selama lapan tahun mulai 2005.

Selain itu projek Tamadun Ilmu dan Masjid Hadhari masing-masing di Besut bernilai beratus-ratus juta ringgit, semuanya menerima peruntukan dari wang tersebut yang kini bertukar menjadi Dana Khas (sebelum ini di pangil Wang Ehsan).

Kedua, orang yang bekerja keras mendokong projek berkenaan, Dato' Seri Idris Jusoh, sekarang tidak lagi menajdi menteri besar. Idris adalah orang Abdullah manakala Ahmad menteri besar yang diperkenan oleh istana dan rakyat.

Justeru kesinambungannya tidak ada. Lagi pun jika wang itu dikembalikan sebagai royalti, dipercayai Abdullah dan kroninya tidak dapat lagi menggunakan wang itu untuk meneruskan projek yang dirancang dengan bebas tanpa sebarang auditan sebagaimana dilaporkan Ketua Audit Negara baru-baru ini.

Tidak diaudit bererti penyalahgunaan wang berkenaan tidak akan terdedah kepada umum dengan mudah. Justeru, kroni dan keluarga Abdullah yang dipercayai terbabit dengan projek raksaksa di Terengganu itu begitu mudah mendapat habuan tanpa memperdulikan samada ia bertentangan dengan peraturan atau tidak.

Dipercayai inilah untungnya bagi Abdullah dan anak menantunya, Khairy Jamaluddin dan kroni mereka Patrick Lim mengekalkan Terenganu tidak menerima wang royalti petroleum.

Sekarang siapa yang mahu dipersalahkan? Umno Terengganu di bawah Idris Jusoh sebagai Pengerusi Perhubunganya perlu dipersalahkan. Merekalah dikatakan menjadi punca royalti petroleum bertukar menjadi Dana Khas.

Inilah akibatnya apabila keangkuhan dan dendam kesumat bertakhta dalam politik negara. Kepentingan jangka panjang untuk rakyat terengganu diketepikan begitu sahaja kerana dendam itu dan permusuhan Umno terhadap kerajaan PAS Terengganu sedikit masa lalu.

Sekarang siapa yang susah? Rakyat dan Kerajaan Terengganu di bawah Dato' Ahmad yang susah.

Penulis amat tersinggung dengan tindakan politik tidak berperikemanusiaan ini.

BPR kepada Suruhanjaya, sekadar 'gincu' untuk politik Abdullah

(Harakah) - Cadangan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi untuk menjadikan Badan Pencegah Rasuah (BPR) sebagai sebuah suruhanjaya bebas dianggap pelbagai pihak sekadar bersifat 'kosmetik' bagi mencantikkan wajah politik beliau yang semakin buruk berikutan kekalahan teruk BN dalam pilihan raya umum lalu.

Keputusan pilihan raya itu juga membuktikan bahawa segala idea, janji dan dasar yang pernah diuar-uarkan Abdullah pada empat tahun sudah tidak dapat diterima lagi malah dianggap sebagai retorik politik semata-mata khususnya yang membabitkan isu-isu rasuah.

Buktikan dengan pelaksanaan

Mengulas lanjut isu terbabit Bendahari PAS Pusat, Dr Hatta Ramli berkata badan itu tidak perlu diberi 'imej' baru jika pelaksanaannya masih berada ditakuk lama dan tidak mendatang sebarang impak maksima dalam kesungguhan kerajaan untuk memanteras gejala rasuah dalam negara khususnya yang melibatkan pemimpin politik atau tokoh yang berpengaruh.

Beliau menjelaskan contoh badan yang dikatakan bebas seperti Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR) yang dilihat bersikap dan bersifat menyelebelahi kerajaan dalam banyak hal dan mendiskriminasikan parti pembangkang terutama membabitkan pilihan raya.

"Kita tidak mahu BPR nanti dilihat bersikap seperti SPR yang diragui kewibawaannya walaupun ianya badan bebas, yang akhirnya mengundang kemarahan rakyat sehingga turun ke jalan raya menyatakan rasa tidak puas hati.

"Buktikan dengan pelaksanaan bukan sekadar berkata-kata ataupun mengubah wajah menjadi cantik tetapi sikap dan peribadi masih buruk," katanya ketika dihubungi Harakahdaily.

Beliau yang juga merupakan Ahli Parlimen Kuala Krai mahu kes-kes yang pernah menimbulkan keraguan rakyat seperti 18 kes rasuah berprofil tinggi yang pernah didedahkan oleh Dato' Seri Rais Yatim diambil tindakan segera sebagai langkah awal untuk membuktikan Abdullah serius mahu menangani masalah terbabit.

"Jika tidak kita akan lihat, cadangan ini sekadar untuk memulihkan imej Abdullah yang buruk di kalangan rakyat dan di mata dunia," katanya.

Tidak mendatangkan impak maksima

Sementara itu bagi Ketua Penerangan PAS Pusat, Mahfuz Omar sangsi dengan cadangan Abdullah itu kerana banyak aspek penting yang perlu diubah di dalam BPR seperti bebas daripada pengaruh eksekutif dan tugas pendakwaan masih seperti sediakala menjadikan badan itu tidak bebas sepenuhnya.

Contoh ketara katanya ialah Abdullah masih lagi bertanggungjawab penuh ke atas BPR walaupun ianya dijadikan badan bebas termasuk mengemukakan laporan kepadanya setelah dimajukan kepada Parlimen.

Begitu juga dengan pendakwaan kes rasuah yang masih lagi berada di dalam bidang kuasa Peguam Negara yang dilihat tidak mendatang sebarang impak maksima ke atas usaha untuk memerangi rasuah.

"Ini umpama gincu baru nak 'mencantikkan' wajah politik Pak Lah. Pelaksanaan masih sama cuma diberi nafas baru sahaja.

"Dan cadangan ini merupakan 'nafas baru' bagi perasuah-perasuah negara yang akan lebih dilindungi daripada didakwa atau dikenakan sebarang tindakan," katanya ketika dihubungi pagi tadi.

Selain itu idea untuk menambahkan pegawai sejumlah 5,000 itu akan merugikan dana rakyat kerana tidak berperanan sebaiknya memandangkan kata Mahfuz secara sinis kes-kes yang dikendalikan oleh BPR khususnya membabitkan pemimpin politik dan tokoh terkenal akan ditutp begitu sahaja.

"Apa guna tambah pegawai apabila para pegawai tidak ada kes untuk didakwa dan tugas penyiasatan yang mereka lakukan selama ini menjadi sia-sia kerana tidak ada sebarang tindakan yang bakal diambil,"tambahnya.

Dalam pada itu Mahfuz juga mahu Abdullah sendiri memulihkan kredibiliti dan integiritinya terlebih dahulu kerana pernah dikaitkan dengan isu rasuah sebelum ini.

Antaranya yang membabitkan isu Oil For Food, ECM Libra yang melibatkan menantu beliau Khairy Jamaludin, pembelian rumah di Australia, pemberian Kapal Layar oleh saudagar terkemuka dan tender-tender kerajaan yang melibatkan syarikat anak beliau Kamaludin, kata Mahfuz.

"Bersihkan dulu imej dia sebelum mahu memperbetulkan orang lain barulah rakyat yakin dan akan meberi sokongan," katanya yang juga merupakan Ahli Parlimen Pokok Sena.

BUKU BARU dari Hishamuddin Rais

KEGANASAN, PENIPUAN & INTERNET
Hegemoni media daulah pecah

Dapat dibeli di semua kedai buku minggu ini:

1) MPH
2) Kinokuniya
3) Borders
4) Time
5) Coop Book Store
6) Popular BOOK Store
7) RiceCooker Annex Central Market

Buku akan di lancarkan dan dijual di Bau Bau Cafe Annexe Central Market

Pada 1 May 2008

Aturcara majlis:

8.30 pm – Pelancaran Buku

8.45 pm - Jamuan

9.00 pm – Party muzik/bands

Semua dijemput hadir,

Hishamuddin Rais

ACA to be fully independent

Press Statement Issued by the President of MCA, YB Dato Seri Ong Ka Ting

Dato’ Seri Ong Ka Ting as the President of MCA says that the party welcomes the move by the Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Abdullah Badawi to make the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) fully independent and answerable to the Parliament.

“We wish to see the performance of the ACA strengthened and a new political will being forged to ensure the independence of the ACA is truly upheld. We want the rakyat to understand that the BN government is serious about tackling corruption in the country, both in the public and private sectors. Accountability must also be all encompassing to include the integrity of the entire system and respect for the moral values of our society.”

“It is through the collective responsibility of the Parliament that decisions can be made, without fear or favour over the cases.”

Federal Constitution enshrines equality for every Malaysian

Press Statement Issued by the MCA Publicity Dept

Reference is made to the counter statements by various individuals implying that the MCA President’s earlier statements made on behalf of the party in response to the remarks by the Tengku Mahkota of Kelantan, Tengku Faris Petra Sultan Ismail Petra were seditious.

MCA wishes to clarify that we recognise the special position of the Malays as stated in Article 153 and in no way wishes to challenge that position as stated under the Federal Constitution. In fact, it is the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard BOTH the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak AND the legitimate interests of all other communities.

We also wish to emphasise and reiterate that all Malaysians - Malays and non-Malays alike – enjoy same and equal fundamental rights and liberties as enshrined under Part II of the Federal Constitution.

For that reason, while recognising the special “position” of the Malays under Article 153 of the Federal Constitution, MCA wishes to stress that all Malaysians enjoy equal “rights” under the Federal Constitution.

It follows that no one race should feel superior or inferior in this country. It is on this basis that our President’s earlier statement was issued.

Judicial reckoning

In an amendment bulldozed through by the then Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad administration’s two-thirds strong majority in parliament in 1988, the judicial power conferred upon by the Constitution was taken from the hall of justice.

Commentary by Thomas Soon, THE EDGE

Two decades and a peaceful revolution of sorts later, the process of bringing back equilibrium to the balance of power among the three arms of government has begun.

The voice of the people in the last general election may indirectly go down in history as the single most influential factor that leads to the restoration of the independence of the judiciary.

While Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s Barisan Nasional may have lost four states and failed to win back Kelantan, it has not lost its power mandated by the people to govern the country.

Whatever Abdullah’s motives may be, political or otherwise, the Umno president and BN chairman is now using that mandate to deliver monumental change in our political system.

His administration has begun the process of rejuvenation of the judiciary — a cornerstone of the Constitution — via the proposed setting up of a Judicial Appointments Commission.

The commission, it is hoped, will aid the prime minister in appointing judges in a credible and transparent manner, thereby leading to a judiciary that will be seen to be imbued with integrity and respect for the rule of law and natural justice.

While Abdullah has taken the courageous first step towards reconciling the executive arm with the judiciary, it, however, cannot be the be-all and end-all of measures to bring back trust among the people and the international investors.

Section 121(1) of the Constitution of Malaysia binding the courts to executive and legislative actions will have to be returned to its original version for the entire system of government to regain the trust of the people.

There are no two ways about it. The original Section 121(1) declared that the “judicial power of the Federation” shall be vested in the courts.

In an amendment bulldozed through by the then Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad administration’s two-thirds strong majority in parliament in 1988, the judicial power conferred upon by the Constitution was taken from the hall of justice.

Instead, the judiciary was granted only such judicial powers that parliament allows it — effectively relegating it to being part of the civil service that was subservient to the government of the day.

Effectively, given its control of parliament, the balance of power among the three branches of government — executive, legislature and judiciary — tilted to the executive arm.

Since then, the democratic equilibrium was lost and has not been regained since. From that moment, on matters ranging from sports to healthcare, an Act that gives the final decision to federal ministers could not be questioned in court.

Theoretically, government officials could act with impunity, unchallenged. Remember the days when Malaysia was tagged with such phrases as “dictatorship”?

How could this have been allowed to happen, many may wonder. Where were the judges when all this happened? The then Lord President Tun Salleh Abbas tried to prevent it.

In the power tussle between the executive and the judiciary, six prominent judges, including Salleh, were sacked. The Opposition’s voice was drowned out in parliament. The Bar Council was no match against the executive will.

Many had griped at the Mahathir administration’s firm grip on the mainstream media, which was, and continues to be, owned by ruling parties, but dissenting voices were effectively undermined.

As honourable as the restoration of the pride and integrity of the sacked judges is, it is equally vital that the country’s democratic foundation — the separation of powers — be restored to its rightful place in the Constitution.

Some may argue that the judges themselves were to be blamed for not standing resolute and the fact that the judiciary never as a single unit challenged the constitutional amendments suggested perhaps it lacked depth.

The judiciary was cowed into subservience and new faces, apparently amid minority dissenting voices, were more than happy to play second fiddle to the executive.

Subsequently, the culture of patronage, so dominant in our political parties, crept into the judiciary.

Some may also argue that the judiciary’s integrity and inherent right to question executive and legislative measures was never lost in the first place, but save for minority dissenting voices, it has not been able to shake off the executive shackle.

A new era is dawning upon us. De facto Law Minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has expressed the need for separation of powers, and Chief Justice Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad has likewise reaffirmed it, calling judges to be strong enough to resist any attempt to interfere with their independence.

Abdullah has spoken of the need to revitalise the judiciary, which “must be fortified to be an institution that serves the democratic principle of separation of powers”.

Blame it on dictatorial rule, patronage, the media or general apathy and lack of awareness of the public, for what was — but the judiciary now has a chance to redeem itself and to find its rightful place in the Constitution.

We may be on the way to maturing into a civil society, but Section 121(1) has to be amended, no question of perception.

The executive, legislature and judiciary will lock horns again in the future, to be sure, and again, it will have to be the people, directly or indirectly, who will have to ensure that justice is done and seen to be done.

Mid-Term Review of the 9th Malaysia Plan Open Forum

24th April 2008, Wawasan Open University, Kuala Lumpur

The 9^th Malaysia Plan was launched in Parliament in March 2006, the five-year developmental plan that charts strategies and implementation programmes for Malaysia for the period of 2006 – 2010. Two and a half years later, Malaysia stands right at the mid-point of this 5 year plan. The Mid-Term Review document will be tabled to the Cabinet at the end of April, and presented to Parliament officially in June.

The Centre for Public Policy Studies, together with Wawasan Open University, will jointly organize the “Mid-Term Review of the 9^th Malaysia Plan Open Forum”, as we believe it is important to examine how far we have come in achieving the goals set out in the 9^th Malaysia Plan. Whilst the 9MP contains 5 strategic thrusts, this forum will focus in particular on three areas that have recently emerged as pressing issues to examine, especially in light of the results of the 12^th General Elections. We will examine strengthening institutional and implementation capacities, especially transparency and accountability issues, economic competitiveness, and addressing socio-economic inequalities: trends in income inequality and distribution.

The forum will be a convening platform for key experts and people involved in the execution of various aspects of the 9^th Malaysia Plan to reflect and review development, successes and failures up to this point. We welcome civil society, the private sector, Government officials, policy makers, academicians, researchers and political party members to join us in what we hope will be a constructive and fast-moving discussion on Malaysia’s developmental progress, and where the country is headed towards.

REGISTER HERE

It's go, go, go with Teresa

Sometimes the residents refuse to deal with my staff and expect to see me personally to solve their problems.

By THO XIN YI, THE STAR

MY ADUN: Kinrara

Full name: Teresa Kok Suh Sim (DAP)
Age: 44
Marital status: Single
Hometown: Kuala Lumpur
Education: Universiti Sains Malaysia (Bachelor of Communications), Universiti Malaya (BA in political science, Master in Philosophy)
Party positions: DAP national publicity secretary, Wanita DAP national secretary
Government position: Selangor Senior State Executive Councillor in charge of Trade, Industries and Investments
Constituency: Kinrara (under the Puchong parliamentary constituency in Selangor). She is also the MP for Seputeh in Kuala Lumpur
Contact details: teresakok@yahoo.com.myThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Service Centres:L-02-01, Pusat Perniagaan Kinrara,PSN Kinrara Sek 3, Taman Kinrara,47100 Puchong.
Tel No: 03-8070 3807 Fax No: 03- 8076 9821
28-3A, 4th Floor, Sri Desa Entrepreneurs Park, Jalan 116/B, Off Jalan Kuchai Lama, 58200 Kuala Lumpur.
Tel No: 03-7983 6768 Fax No: 03- 7983 7576

Teresa Kok is an enthusiastic, energetic and enterprising lady, always on the go and working from dawn till late at night almost every day.

“I wake up at about 7am, and start working at about 8am.

“By the time I call it a day and go home, it's usually past 11.30pm,” she said.

Teresa has a driver to take her from one place to another, so she could catch some rest in the car. But most of the time, she is reading letters or newspapers and making arrangements for appointments on her mobile phone.

“It's very taxing and many people don't understand the situation,” she said, citing the demanding residents as an example.

No stopping this lady: Despite her busy schedule, Kok still has time for a walk.

“Sometimes the residents refuse to deal with my staff and expect to see me personally to solve their problems.

“Some even scold me for not showing up during floods while my assistants, who are my representatives in Puchong had already gone in the downpour to look into the problem,” she said.

Teresa said although her busy schedule was very taxing, she tried to make it a point to do some regular exercise.

“I must go for a walk once a week. I feel that I get tired easily if I don't,” she said.

“Once, a business journalist wanted to talk to me over some Chinese investors issues. I said I could only see him at 11.30pm and when he showed up at my condominium, I had this urge to go for a walk. We ended up talking about the issues while walking for half an hour, and I did some stretches along the way,” she said.

StarMetro: Do you blog?

Teresa: Yes, my blog address is teresakok.com Lim Kit Siang started it first and his blog became very popular, and many of us followed suit.

StarMetro: How much time do you spend on the computer each day?

Teresa: I have less time to blog and update my Facebook now. I also don't have the time to reply the e-mails individualy. I have posted on my Facebook that I won’t be accessible for some time due to my busy schedule. While waiting for my turn to speak in the Parliament, I use the time to blog and reply e-mails.

StarMetro: Are you into movies?

Teresa: Yes and I enjoy award-winning movies, those that are highly recommended or highlighted as controversial in the press, and whatever that catches my attention.

StarMetro: Do you enjoy reading?

Teresa: I don't have time for reading now and what I read mostly now are executive summaries and reports.

StarMetro: Got a nickname?

Teresa: No, but I know my members call me Si Tau Po (Cantonese meaning “woman boss”) sometimes.

StarMetro: Why did you name your Facebook's FluffPet as Taufoo Pok?

Teresa: I was registering an e-mail account but all names were taken up. After a few attempts I was angry so I thought why not try some Chinese food? I tried Taufoo and bingo, it's available (laughs). Then when I was required to type a username, I thought of Taufoo Pok.

StarMetro: What languages do you speak?

Teresa: English, Malay, Cantonese, Mandarin and Hakka.

StarMetro: Name an idol whom you look up to and why.

Teresa: Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar. I admire her for her untiring struggle for the people, democracy and human rights.

StarMetro: What's your favourite food?

Teresa: Pork steamed with salted fish. I hardly have this dish now but it's very nice.

StarMetro: Favourite actor and actress? Why?

Teresa: Anthony Hopkins and Gong Li. Both of them act very well and Gong Li is very pretty.

StarMetro: You have a weakness for...

Teresa: Earrings. It's something you can change every day and it's noticeable.

Dr Mahathir: I’m ready to be probed

(The Star) - Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is prepared to be investigated by a full and formal public inquiry if Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim were to become the Prime Minister.

However, the former premier said he hoped that those who sit on the board of inquiry would be neutral, impartial and probably foreigners.

“He’s (Anwar’s) welcome to do that if he becomes the Prime Minister of Malaysia, but if he wins members of the ruling party to his side it is the present leader who should be blamed because he can’t even get the loyalty of his own members,” he said during a 30-minute interview on the BBC World News HARDtalk programme with Stephen Sackur.

He was asked to respond to Anwar’s statement that he would call for a full and public inquiry into Dr Mahathir’s misdeeds if Anwar were to become the Prime Minister.

Asked whether he was ready to express regret over what he did to Anwar now that he has retired for several years, Dr Mahathir said: “Why should I regret? He was arrested under the laws of the country. He was tried in the courts of the country. Sentenced by court. If he was not wrong, no matter what you think about our judiciary, I don’t think he would have been sent to prison.”

On Anwar saying that he would push politics that were not racially defined, Dr Mahathir said that it was opportunism for Anwar, who was now out of the government but never did anything when he was in the government.

Asked about Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s conciliatory gesture of offering monetary compensation to judges who were suspended during the 1988 judicial crisis, he said: “Fine, but it’s a political strategy by a man who is very unpopular at the moment wanting to show that he’s going to do something right.”

“Nobody can say anything against him. Newspapers report about how great he is. His own supporters misled him into believing that if he holds elections before the end of his term, he would win a clean sweep. If you look at the record of his statements, he said he would win with zero opposition.”

On claims that his criticisms against Abdullah over the last few years had brought his successor down, he said: “I don’t see why I should not criticise wrongdoings by him.”

On why he picked Abdullah to replace him as Prime Minister, he said Abdullah was known as “Mr Clean”.

To a question about some of those with Umno blaming Dr Mahathir for tearing down the party, he said that sometimes it might be necessary to do so.

“I’m a doctor; if one leg is becoming gangrenous I remove it,” he said.

Samy Vellu Wannabe

There are reports that I raised only petty issues at the roundtable retreat held by FT ministry on 17-18/4/2008 at Hotel Istana. As a responsible Pakatan Rakyat MP for Segambut, I of course did more than that... (I am glad of all details, whether they seem to you to be relevant or not- Sherlock Holmes).

For the record, on the 1st day of the retreat I have reiterated all issues that were raised by my Pakatan Rakyat MPs before me. I have also raised issues such as when and how Jalan Segambut can be widened/upgraded to tackle the 24/7 traffic woes there, whether the hillside “Damansara21” project to build only 21 bungalows selling at more than 10 millions each is still safe to proceed, to be given the list of names of all key holders to all Segambut community halls which are owned and managed by DBKL but in control by BN people, whether City mayor is waging a war on Pakatan Rakyat MPs by conducting activities/programs under the names of respective Parliament constituency without even informing let alone inviting the rightfully elected MP there and yes, the double standard issue on hotel parking. I further criticized city mayor & FT minister in wasting tax payers’ money on having the retreat at 5-star Hotel Istana while there are available many unutilized DBKL big halls. I even disclosed the misery of a former BN MP in KL who couldn’t get help/cooperation from DBKL even while his term as a MP. And I was the first one to query city mayor and his gangs why the media were not allowed to cover the whole morning session.

As expected, all my issues raised have not been answered at time of writing this blog and yes, I got to pay RM10 for parking.

Unlike Samy Vellu wannabe Datuk M. Saravanan who disappeared at the retreat right after having 5-star hotel lunch only to show himself at the end of the afternoon session and the pompous Tengku Adnan who stormed off the venue shortly after his grand arrival at 2:30pm, FT Minister Datuk Seri Zulhasnan Rafique sat throughout the 9-hour meeting on the 1st day of the retreat.

I didn’t attend the 2nd day of the retreat because Adnan already said that the retreat was rubbish and also of threat by Saravanan not to hold the retreat anymore. They are part of the retreat organizer yet they don’t encourage the need of such forum, so why should I?

US firms' profits shrink as sales dwindle, costs of raw material soar

Companies are more pessimistic, and more plan to cut hiring and investment: Survey

WASHINGTON - THE combination of slower sales and soaring expenses for raw materials is taking a harsh toll on companies in the United States, an influential survey has shown.

For the first time since 2003, companies reporting falling profit margins outnumbered those with increases in the past three months, according to the National Association for Business Economics (Nabe).

Almost two-thirds said they paid more for raw materials in the first quarter, the most since 2004.

US companies also grew more pessimistic in the first quarter, as the intensifying credit crisis and slump in housing weakened sales, the survey found.

Six per cent of the firms said demand improved last quarter, down from 20 per cent in the previous three months and the fewest since the 2001 recession.

The report, which also shows more companies planned to slow hiring and investment this year, reinforces concern that the US economy is in, or may slide into, a recession.

'Companies have pulled in their horns,' said Mr Ken Simonson, the chief economist for the Associated General Contractors of America and point man for the business group.

'They are finding it hard to pass through higher materials costs, and profits are getting squeezed,' he added.

Almost 40 per cent of the businesses reported they were hurt by stricter borrowing rules compared with just over a quarter in the prior survey in January.

Seventy per cent of the firms said their annual forecast for the year had dimmed. The Nabe survey, taken between March 24 and April 8, included responses from 109 members of the business economists group.

While employment still increased, fewer companies planned to add workers in the next six months compared with the January survey, and more businesses planned to reduce staff, the report showed.

The outlook for investment also remains soft.

About 28 per cent of the firms planned to increase capital spending in the next 12 months, down from 40 per cent in the January survey.

A majority of firms said the government's fiscal stimulus program and the Fed's rate cuts would have no effect on their business, the survey showed.

Sixty-nine per cent of the survey respondents said the Fed's moves to reduce borrowing costs and improve access to credit have no influence, the report showed.

'This is a warning sign that we may not get the quick pickup that people are looking for in the second half,' Mr Simonson said.

Thirty per cent of those polled predicted the economy would contract in the first six months this year, up from one out of 10 in January.

BLOOMBERG NEWS

Oil prices hit new record above US$117

LONDON - CRUDE oil prices yesterday surged above US$117, setting a new record high, because of worries over supply disruptions from major producers and comments by Opec reiterating there is no need to raise output.

United States light crude hit a record high of US$117.40 a barrel. London Brent crude also struck its all-time peak of US$114.65.

The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec) sees no need to raise oil production to counter high oil prices, said its president Chakib Khelil on Sunday, when asked by reporters whether the group would raise production.

Mr Khelil, who is also Algeria's Energy and Mines Minister, added that raising output would have no impact on prices as the market was well-supplied.

His remarks came amid concerns over supplies from Nigeria, Africa's largest oil exporter, and North Sea production because of an impending strike by workers at a refinery in Scotland.

A Nigerian rebel group said last Friday it had sabotaged a major oil pipeline operated by Royal Dutch Shell and vowed to step up attacks on oil installations.

Officials at Shell, which is currently pumping 400,000 barrels per day below capacity in the Opec nation because of sabotage and security concerns, confirmed a small amount of production had been shut in.

REUTERS

Rumblings of social unrest

WORLD FOOD CRISIS

During seven of the past eight years, grain consumption exceeded output. After seven years of drawing down stocks, world grain carryover stocks this year have fallen to 55 days of world consumption, the lowest on record.

By Lester R. Brown, THE STRAITS TIMES

A FAST-UNFOLDING food shortage is engulfing the entire world, driving food prices to record highs.

Over the past half-century, grain prices have spiked from time to time because of weather-related events - such as the 1972 Soviet crop failure that saw a doubling of world rice, wheat and corn prices.

Today's situation is entirely different. The current doubling of grain prices is trend- driven, the cumulative effect of some trends that are accelerating demand and others that are slowing supply.

The world has not seen anything quite like this before. In the face of rising food prices and spreading hunger, the social order is starting to break down in some countries. In several provinces in Thailand, for instance, rustlers steal rice by harvesting fields during the night. In response, the villagers have taken to guarding their ripe rice fields at night, armed with loaded shotguns.

In Pakistan, where flour prices have doubled, food insecurity is a national concern. Armed troops have been assigned to guard grain elevators and to accompany trucks that transport supplies.

Food riots are now becoming commonplace. In Egypt, the lines at bakeries that distribute state-subsidised bread are often the scene of fights. Morocco has jailed 34 food rioters. In Yemen, food riots have turned deadly, taking at least a dozen lives. In Cameroon, dozens of people have died in food riots and hundreds have been arrested.

Other countries with food riots include Ethiopia, Haiti, Indonesia, Mexico, the Philippines and Senegal.

The doubling of world rice, wheat and corn prices has sharply reduced the availability of food aid, putting the 37 countries that depend on the UN World Food Programme (WFP) at risk. Last month, the WFP issued an urgent appeal for US$500 million (S$678 million) of additional funds.

Around the world, a politics of food scarcity is emerging. Most fundamentally, it involves the restriction of grain exports by countries that want to check the rise in their domestic food prices. Russia, Ukraine and Argentina are among the governments that are restricting wheat exports. Countries restricting rice exports include Cambodia, Egypt and Vietnam. These export curbs simply drive prices higher in the world market.

This chronically tight food supply is driven by the cumulative effect of several trends that are affecting both global demand and supply.

On the demand side, the trends include the continuing addition of 70 million people per year to the world's population, the desire of some four billion people to move up the food chain and consume more grain-intensive livestock products as well as the sharp acceleration in the use of grain to produce ethanol for cars in the United States.

Since 2005, this last source of demand has raised the annual growth in world grain consumption from 20 million tonnes to 50 million tonnes.

Meanwhile, on the supply side, there is little new land to be brought under the plough unless it comes from clearing tropical rainforests in the Amazon and Congo basins and in Indonesia, or from clearing land in the Brazilian cerrado, a savannah-like region south of the Amazon rainforest.

Unfortunately, this has heavy environmental costs: the release of sequestered carbon, the loss of plant and animal species as well as increased rainfall runoff and soil erosion. And in scores of countries, prime cropland is being lost to industrial and residential construction and to the paving of land for roads, highways and parking lots.

New sources of irrigation water are even more scarce than new land to plough. During the last half of the 20th century, the world's irrigated area nearly tripled, expanding from 94 million ha in 1950 to 276 million ha in 2000. In the years since, there has been little, if any, growth. So irrigated area per person is shrinking by 1 per cent a year.

Meanwhile, the backlog of agricultural technology that can be used to raise cropland productivity is dwindling. Between 1950 and 1990 the world's farmers raised grainland productivity by 2.1 per cent a year. But from 1990 until 2007 this growth rate slowed to 1.2 per cent a year. And the rising price of oil is boosting the costs of both food production and transport while at the same time making it more profitable to convert grain into fuel for cars.

Beyond this, climate change presents new risks. Crop-withering heatwaves, more-destructive storms and the melting of the Asian mountain glaciers that sustain the dry-season flow of that region's major rivers are combining to make harvest expansion more difficult.

In the past, the negative effect of unusual weather events was always temporary; within a year or two things would return to normal. But with the climate in flux, there is no norm to return to.

The collective effect of these trends makes it more and more difficult for farmers to keep pace with the growth in demand.

During seven of the past eight years, grain consumption exceeded output. After seven years of drawing down stocks, world grain carryover stocks this year have fallen to 55 days of world consumption, the lowest on record.

The result is a new era of tightening food supplies, rising food prices and political instability. With grain stocks at an all-time low, the world is only one poor harvest away from total chaos in world grain markets.

Business-as-usual is no longer a viable option. Food security will deteriorate further unless leading countries can collectively mobilise to stabilise population, restrict the use of grain to produce automotive fuel, stabilise climate, stabilise water tables and aquifers, protect cropland and conserve soils.

Stabilising population is not simply a matter of providing reproductive health care and family planning services. It requires a worldwide effort to eradicate poverty.

Eliminating water shortages depends on a global attempt to raise water productivity similar to the effort launched a half-century ago to raise land productivity, an initiative that has nearly tripled the world grain yield per hectare. None of these goals can be achieved quickly, but progress towards all is essential to restoring a semblance of food security.

This troubling situation is unlike any the world has faced before. The challenge is not just to deal with a temporary rise in grain prices, as in the past, but rather to alter those trends whose cumulative effects collectively threaten the food security that is a hallmark of civilisation.

If food security cannot be restored quickly, social unrest and political instability will spread and the number of failing states will likely soar, threatening the very stability of civilisation itself.

The writer is president of the Earth Policy Institute.

World 'may face deepest recession in 30 years'

But govts can lessen the pain by acting swiftly to stabilise markets: Tony Tan

By Bryan Lee, Economics Correspondent, THE STRAITS TIMES

ST PHOTO: LIM WUI LIANG

THE world could be facing its worst recession in three decades, but governments can lessen the effects of the downturn if they act decisively within the next three to four months.

The warning came from Dr Tony Tan, the deputy chairman of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC), who urged policymakers to take strong action to stabilise investment markets and sentiment amid the extreme uncertainty surrounding the global economy.

'We could be facing a recession which is longer, deeper and wider than any recession that we have encountered in the last 30 years,' he said yesterday.

'The next few years may well be among the most challenging years for GIC since our establishment in 1981.'

As for the GIC's recent investments in global banks UBS and Citigroup, Dr Tan said these long-term investments will 'give us good returns when markets stabilise and economic conditions return to more normal levels'.

The world economy and its financial markets are in turmoil, triggered by a mortgage crisis in the United States that is still unfolding.

The crisis of confidence has led central banks, especially the US Federal Reserve, to intervene in unprecedented ways to avert a seizure in the world's banking system.

Dr Tan told about 500 staff at the GIC's first annual staff conference: 'The prospects for the US economy and possibly even the world economy are fraught with considerable downside risks.'

He warned that financial markets will be 'extremely nervous and volatile over the next one to two years'.

But the pain can be reduced and shortened if policymakers around the world act swiftly, he said. By doing so, 'investment markets and sentiments can turn around sharply'.

The alternative is that market forces would be left to themselves to stabilise the US housing sector, which would be a 'considerably more painful and long-drawn process'.

Dr Tan said the GIC has been alert to the prospect of the current problems since last year and moved its portfolio to a more conservative posture by selling some shares and holding on to the cash.

Such a move, said Dr Tan, had not been taken for 'quite some time'. And it provided liquidity for the GIC's subsequent investments into UBS and Citigroup.

The GIC has beefed up its management structure over the past nine months. After creating four senior posts in July last year, the GIC set up three group-level committees to oversee operations, investments and risks across its three main units.

The management committee is helmed by managing director Lim Siong Guan and looks into organisational, business and personnel issues.

The investment committee is charged with developing and implementing asset allocation policies and investment strategies. Led by chief investment officer Ng Kok Song, it also does regular reviews of the risk and performance of the GIC's various investments.

Finally, the risk committee provides oversight and guidance for the GIC's risk management policies and practices. It is led by chief risk officer Sung Cheng Chih.

Mr Ng's and Dr Sung's appointments were two of the new posts created last July. The other appointments were for GIC's asset management arm. GIC managing director Lee Ek Tieng was made chairman of the subsidiary and Mr Quah Wee Ghee, president.

'This management structure enables GIC to have groupwide oversight on our operations, investments and risks,' said Dr Tan.

But it also gives sufficient autonomy to the GIC's investment subsidiaries - asset management, real estate and special investments - so that they can respond in a timely fashion to changes in investment circumstances, he added.