The Debate: How should UMNO handle MCA?-1

A few days ago, I wrote an article on the way UMNO is handling the MCA crisis. I said, the way UMNO is handling it is flawed. I said, the UMNO style of broadcasting to the world, giving MCA ultimatums, at times seeming to take sides, is making MCA lose face. I then proceeded to explain briefly, the significance of giving and losing face.

That article has spawned a raging debate which at times, becomes an issue of the proper place of UMNO vis-a-vis its junior partners. At other times, the debate evolved into a spirited discussion of what UMNO stands for.

I found these debates to be very stimulating. There is one gentleman by the name of Shamsul Anuar who makes it out that I am less UMNO than he is. I leave it to readers to judge that. I am publishing his views on the article I wrote and that of the rest of the other energetic debaters. I think, the debate that rages on, should also be heard by a wider audience. I have published them verbatim, but have found it necessary to re arrange in paragraphs.

shamshul anuar said...

Dear Sakmongkol,

I am surprise at your comment. You seem are not happy with the way UMNO deals with its allies within BN. Let us get real. UMNO is the dominant party in BN . It is treated as "Big Brother" in BN. It however never cry out loud demanding such treatment. Rather treatment accorded as Big brother comes with reality that it is the most powerful party in BN. That is the fact. Just like a situation whereby a person owns approximately 60% share in a Sdn Bhd co. He may be a humble folk but everybody knows that he controls the company. By saying that, I am not suggesting that it is OK to be arrogant. You seem to miss the point that MCA leaders who went all out to make "courtesy calls" to UMNO leaders.

Why? Simple. because UMNO leaders are also leader of the govt. I believe UMNO's record of "generosity" know no bound. At height of power when at times it controlled almost 70% of Parliamentary seats, it still continue to shall its hallmark" ;that is willingness to share.When Gerakan and MCA were anything but wiped out in 1999 General Election, Gerakan was still rewarded the Chief Minister post of Penang despite UMNO being the most senior party in BN Penang.

where on earth you will find such magnaminity?Granted, UMNo also wins because of non Malay votes. Or MORE IMPORTANTLY, other parties like Gerakan and MCA and MIC depend on UMNO for survival. The last election shows that without UMNO, these 3 parties would have been annihilated completely.

It is no secret that these 3 parties won because of Malay votes ( due to their alliance to UMNO). So, give some credit. As for MCA, the enemy is within. AS long as MCa leaders are reluctant to tell Chinese community that alliance with UMNO is not a sign of weakness, it will always have problem to secure Chinese votes.

As long as MCA keeps quiet( sort of silently agreeing) to DAP' trying to instill hatred to Chinese community that , it will always will end up losing Chinese support. As long as MCA panders to Chinese extremists, MCA will end up losing.

MCA must have the courage to tell Chinese community that UMNO is dominant because it holds 79 seats out of 139 won by BN. Simple mathematics will show that without UMNO, BN will collapse.

Whatever said about UMNO, nobody can deny its sway among Malay voters. In Perak, many Malays told me that BN would have easily won in MAC 2008 if not for Malays rejecting Bn indian candidates inb MMalay majority areas.

For decades, UMNO was accused as "sleeping with infidel" by PAS for accepting reality that non Muslims must be included in govt line up for being sizable majority. It shows "sederhana" is the hallmark of UMNO.

Upset over Hindraf's slander on Malay and UMNO, Malays punished BN by voting for Malays, resulting in Indian BN candidates lost. The same goes in seats such as Kota Raja, Lunas, Pasir panjang, Bandar Tun Razak, Teluk Kemang, kuantan.

Muhyiddin is not behaving like a maharaja. He just reminded any reasonable person that firmness is required here and interest of party is superior to personal interest. What is wrong in saying that. And time table is needed here as clearly without time table , the split can go on for years.

Do not blame UMNO if MCA loses support. MCA leaders , by asking Najib to intervene shows that they recognise dominance of UMNO. There is nothing to be embarrased about that.

19 December 2009 15:12

Peter said...

Shamshul Anwar,

Wow .. UMNO is dominant party and all must bow down to it. In fact those chicken parties did just that. They all bowed down in awe of the power of UMNO. UMNO only need to ask them to shut up .. they did just that and in time is became normal.

Before March 2008, that UMNO roar was loudest. After that it was more or less chickened ... a bit. and obviously you are very unset by it reading your post how everyone owes you their living.

For crying out loud .. wake up to reality. UMNO is nothing if not for the other component parties. No racist party can survive alone.

So you think those Chicken parties would have lost without Malay support? Right you are ... so the same goes.. without those Chickens UMNO would have been history because if you dare to do your maths properly, no one party commands support of all the Malays.

As Dato has said only a maximum of 2 million Malays voted for the almighty UMNO. Even so the BN depended on Sabah and Sarawak to form the govt.

So how the cows can you be powerful if not for chickens? They really are still very chickens i tell you. .. and that is why they are going to be history... and together with them UMNO

Being the majority does not give you the right to lord over others. In any country you have to look after all the minorities under one single roof to be able to rule the country properly. Miss that you have lots and lots of problems as you can see for your own self what is happening to our country.

The arrogance shown by your posting gives proof to all the problems with our country. Be arrogant people ignores you and do not work with you. Without partners how the cow can you govern?

Wake up.... look into the mirror and you would know who is actually at fault.

In most countries, most partners have equal rights ... not the lopsided partners you have in BN. Look into the Pakatan today... they do not have your weakness of one lording over the other.

Bet who will survive longest? Guest who i would vote for ? Chickens or those who stand up for their members' rights?

19 December 2009 17:48

Wenger J Khairy said...

Shamsul,
That is exactly the way to lose an election. DS is talking about WINNING! Your talking about LOSING! (hmmm then you can blame money politics).
Most people perceive the double game between the PM and the DPM. Its quite clear and what Dato is doing is to just make it clear.

If Dato is right, BN will lose the next by election in a mixed race constituency. If Dato is wrong, BN will win.

That is my conclusion. But a loss in 2010 so soon to the 13th GE will be disastrous.

For me, BN can still win because operationally the Opposition are weak and people know it. Although initially a skeptic, from my conversations, 1Malaysia can sell. The marketing right now is working, at this pt people are still unsure about the end product, but are willing to take a gamble. If the Majority control card is being played in the background, however, it may not be the best way to win votes.

Lastly, when on earth does a person use a business analogy for a political dimension? Sounds stupid, but alas, thats what I would expect from a bona-fide supporter of a minion like Parpukari.

19 December 2009 18:18

sam said...

Shamshul,
If your post is summarised into two words, it would be "Ketuanan Melayu".
Good. Let UMNO be the big brother and lord over the little brothers and lets see how BN performs in the next GE.
You also seem to justifies UMNO's absolute control on the police, judiciary, macc, ec and the media... because it holds majority shares in the listed company called Malaysia.

19 December 2009 20:27

shamshul anuar said...

Dear Sam,

Perhaps you should reread carefully what I wrote. Nowhere in my writing that I used the word "Ketuanan Melayu".

What i stress is a fact. Was it not MCA leaders who made "courtesy calls" to UMNO leaders due to the latter's position as leaders of the govt of the day. It was MCa leaders who asked help from UMNO to solve the problem. So, do not blame UMNO for this.

UMNO is dominant in BN. And it earns the dominance through winning in ballot box. Let us face it. It won 79 out of 139 seats held by BN.

Yu may loath to accept but that is the fact. It has the most influence due to its winning the most number of seats. That cant be construed as being arrogant.

As for Peter, do not get upset. Do reread my comment. Nowheew in my writing that I deny the votes of non Malays. Rather, I only tell the truth. In the last election, MCA, MIC and Gerakan were saved from total disaster due to their alliance with UMNO.

Check the results. Majority of seats won by these parties are Malay majority areas such as Tapah, Grik, Pandan, Simpang Renggam.

I never say it is OK to be arrogant. Rather, I do not agree with Salmongkol's blaming UMNO for trying to help MCA out of this messy problem. What is wrong in agreeing to help?

Merely trying to help cant be construed as bullying other into submission. I however, understand the tagline "One vote for MCa is one vote for UMNO" was used very succesfully by DAP to instill hatred towards UMNO.

It is however a double sword. If you care to analyse( if only), you will find that Malays also start behaving like Chinese community. Many of them, upset at being accused as racist or worse still "conducting etnic cleansing), vowed to vote only for Malay candidates even they are from PKR or PAS.

That is why BN candidates for Teluk Kemang, Bandar Tun Razak, Pasir Panjang, Kuantan, Lunas lost among other.

"Siap kau Tan Chai Hoe", many of my friends told me at eve of general election. Not that they are angre with him personally. Only they feel MCA is not doing enough to criticize DAP for stirring racial issue.

Dear Anonymous, what make you think I am being brainwashed by UMNO. I am also critical of UMNO. I told off one Ketua Bahagian UMNO for being so "distant" with rakyat.

But I also give credit when it is due. For decades, UMNO was ridiculed for agreeing to let MCA and MIC won in Malay majority areas. Is that not an act of generosity?

Remember, PAS used to belittle UMNO as being "sinful" for asking Malays to vote for MIC or MCA?

And who is the hypocrite. Do remember that way back on JUne 1998, Karpal Singh during DAP convention in WP said Anwar is a homosex and challenged Dr Mahathir to sack him.

And PAS now may want to forget Mohd Sabu's numerous call that Anwar is "Aljuburi" for sodomy and never fail to challenge DR Mahathir to sack his DPM.

This aptly reminder never fail to elicit the same response from PAS members; red face with immediate attempt to change the topic of conversation.

19 December 2009 22:47

shamshul anuar said...

Dear Wenger Khairy,

This is my observation;
1) Malay support for PAS and PKR is steadily eroding. PAS is perceived as "submitting " to DAP which is to Malays is the most racist party in Malaysia.

Besides, PAS used to ridicule UMNO for its alliance with non Malay political parties. So, PAS is at lost to justify its alliance with DAP.

2) Anwar is a traitor from viewpoinnt of many Malays. He lost respect when he refuses to swear. Swearing before Kuran is seem as ultimate act of telling the truth. And Anwar refuses.

Besides, he is seen as being vengeful and playing dirty just like when he was with UMNO.

3) Malays start to warm up to UMNO as they are dissapointed with PAS becoming "slave" to DAP.

19 December 2009 23:22

Tweet

Read more...

Brochures to Economic Heaven.

What do the people want? They want first of all a good government. Now, a good government could not possibly be described in a single sentence. It has been suggested that a good government can provide a fertile ground of democracy. The elements of democracy as people know, include such principles as the rule of law, free elections, freedom of speech, assembly and association and so forth. These are highly valued to be sure, but I am not sure they occupy the first level of priority.

The people's definition of good government would likely define it as a government that provides an enabling environment where people are well taken care and provided for. I say environment, not the actual things that come along in one's shopping list of being well cared for. We want and desire a government that is honest, efficient and effective in protecting its people, a government that provides law and order within which all can advance, they can have a good life, a future for the family and children.

We are led to believe and I think such a belief is justified, that the present government wants to create a new economic model. That would be one that creates an enabling environment that supports a high income economy. Within that economy, everyone can advance in life, have a good life, and provide a decent future for the family and children. Further, upon the achievements of these key result areas (yes, these are the people's KRAs), we shall build a meaningful democracy with the attendant elements that make it so.

How do we get there, is the next question. Wise people say, it is easier to describe heaven than it is to provide a map getting there. Yet we have the sneaky feeling that those people who undertake a detailed description of the utopia fail to provide us answers to the second part of the process. How do we get there?

Sure, we are told our economy will grow. We are also told that our stock market, our products, our workers- the creative and the not so creative are very productive, we are competitive, our exports are growing by each quarter- yes, these are all the outward appearances of a very rosy picture indeed. But they can also be nothing more than glossy real estate brochures about Economic Heaven, based on many assumptions. As a presentation of goals and potentials they are useful.

The chief problem is this. Those people in the driver's seat who want to change the character of the economy are the every same people who hate to usher changes. And to make the great leap forward from what has been to what will become requires fundamental changes in economic thinking.

PM Najib may desire to effect such fundamental change, but will his enthusiasm rub onto others- those conservative UMNO leaders, government servants, interest groups etc? The chief problem with the conservative thinking crowd is to assume what has been will continue to be and this desire to ensure what has been will continue, is overwhelming. What has been include the elements that make up the ' salad days' of being given contracts, having inside tracks on share issues, being given freebies, being in power until passing on, etc. these are powerful hurdles and deterrents to what PM wants.

We shall explore some of the ideas that can bring us there.

Tweet

Read more...

The Brahmin Bumiputera vs the Pariah Bumiputera

Let me begin with a story. I invite you to spot the difference between a Brahmin Bumiputera and a Pariah Bumiputera.

Sometime ago, Halim Saad of Renong fame, got a contract to lay submarine cables. These are communication cables made from fiber optics. They were to be supplied by a local company. Call it Xco Sdn. Bhd. That wouldn't be hard to identify, because the supply of optical cables was and is monopolized by only one company.

The contract to install the submerged cables was quite lucrative. The person associated with the supply of optic cables wanted a piece of the action. It's a natural extension of our business, he declares. So he went over to randy Halim Saad and made an offer the latter couldn't refuse.

Halim Saad had to relent because Mr. Xco was exceedingly well connected. It was said, light could travel through the cable he had, faster than the best optic cables produced by Corning. Mr. Xco then was also developing one pristine Island off the coast of Sabah into a diver's haven.

He went to Halim Saad because Mr. Xco knows Halim Saad can understand where he is coming from. He comes from a world, where you get things by being who you are, by being from this genetic pool. Halim Saad can relate to these things- for he can relate to anyone being a member of MC-gay-gay whose membership entitles the members to get things as of right. He comes from a world where rules apply only to common folks and he, being of a special breed is excluded from mundane rules. He comes from a world where all the good things in life are meant only for the likes of him such as the phallic pleasures of driving in Porsche Cayennes or straddling in palatial mansions in Lorong Tun Ismail, somewhere in the pristine enclaves of KL, away from Proletarian Chow Kit. Halim Saad knows and understands all these.

In order to lay down the cables, Mr. Xco and his people bought and operated a cable laying vessel. She was christened SOB- not Son of A Bitch but Spirit of Borneo. So, she was put to use to lay down the cables with workers on board.

One day, an engineer who was doing consulting work inspected the vessel. To his horror, he found all the ship's certificates had expired. Anyone who operates or owns any type of ocean going vessel, will know that a ship must be certified seaworthy of ocean going. There are a number of certificates which any ship must pass upon inspection. The bloody SOB had nothing passed. It was unfit and not safe to operate with.

The engineer knew who owns the ship. What can he do? He can't complain to Halim Saad or the local authorities. What he did, was to complain to the union of ship workers which made such as ruckus that the SOB was taken out of service.

No sooner was it taken out; SOB was back in operations within the next 2 days. The leader of the shipping workers union called his engineer friend to ask whether he knows who the owner is. The engineer replied he didn't.

Who is Mr. Xco?

Mr. Xco illustrates how a special Bumiputera operates.

We shall not mention names. He is a typical Brahmin Bumiputera. The rest of the Bumiputera are the Pariah Bumiputeras. Hence, when we talk about Bumiputera, we must be clear as to which type of Bumiputera are we talking about? Some bumipteras are more equal than others.

How do you differentiate between the Brahmin Bumiputera and the Pariah Bumiputera?

First the Brahmin Bumiputera operates on the basis of his inherited stature. He advances in life on account of who he is. If he is from a distinguished genetic pool, what he wants he gets as of birthright.

Sociologists call this method of classifying people, as the ascriptive norm. You are placed on the hierarchy on the basis of who you are. Your being is more important to define your status- bloodline, old boy network, belonging to a particular grouping such as ANSARA or MCOBA etc.

The Brahmin Bumiputera is the naturally favored choice in anything. Because they are assumed to get things done by virtue of being who they are. In business he gets what he wants. In politics he expects to be given position. Political office, government position-all these are his exclusive province.

Rules apply only to plebeians and peasants. They don't apply to special Bumiputeras. Hence when we speak of Bumiputera special privileges, we actually mean, privileges for some special Bumiputeras.

The Pariah Bumiputera on the other hand has to qualify his way at every inch. He must qualify himself with superior education, superior talent and even superior morals. He must operate on the basis of what he can do society. He, the pariah Bumiputera operates on achieved norms- that is, he will judged in accordance to what he can do.

When it comes to rules and regulations, they apply more to the pariah Bumiputera than the Brahmin Bumiputera. Universal rules apply to common people, particular rules to special people.

Take one simple example. The behavior of people in relation to traffic lights. Everyone knows, the rule is, you never cross red lights. The universal rule is, if the lights are red, you must never cross it even when there is no traffic. But some people do cross red lights reasoning that they are no people. If caught, the people who flouted the rules are often excused because they are my brothers, relatives, members of my fraternity.

The above is a simple example of a Universalist or rule-based culture and a discretionary or particularist culture. In a rule-based culture, the approach is roughly: "What is good and right can be defined and ALWAYS applies."  In particularist cultures, far greater attention is given to the obligations of relationships and unique circumstances.  

Take the case of trying to cross the street at the red light that we gave above.   In a rule-based society, you will still be frowned at even if there is no traffic.  It tends to imply equality in the sense that all persons, or citizens, falling under the rule should be treated the same.  But in societies like like ours for example, where particularist judgements focus on the exceptional nature of circumstances, it is likely to be OK with one if it is his/her brothers or friends that violate the traffic rule. 

Thus for example, Dato Mohamad Abdul Aziz is likely to apply strict moral and whatever measures of censure on ordinary individuals but will likely excuse Bung Mokhtar. The Bung Mokhtars of this world are not just "citizens", but their "friends" or "brothers".  This difference probably explains why there have been difficulties in implementing a judicial system that is credible in our country.

In morals, the pariah Bumiputera has to be whiter than white. The Brahmin Bumiputera is not censurable by any measures of moral sanctions. Accordingly the Brahmin Bumiputera is  genetically immune to moral and religious censures. It is therefore all right for him to commit religious and moral transgressions. That is all part of his genetic immunity.

The pariah Bumiputera faces the terrible wrath of the moral gendarmerie and religious carabinieri. Woe betides if he is seen partaking in intoxicants or found in the company of intoxicated company. He or she can get caned. But the Brahmin Bumiputera even if he opens establishments selling liquor and other intoxicants or even owns a substantial share in a brewing company is spared the punishments or moral censure of any kind.

In treating others, Brahmin Bumiputeras and pariah Bumiputeras operate differently. The Brahmin Bumiputera acts as though he owns other people. Hence, the private space of others belongs to him and he may enter and goes as he pleases. Sociologists call this method of treating others as a social practise in diffuse culture. He is the master and lord over all others. It's the replay of the feudal chieftain bossing over the serfs. The boss-subordinate relationship usually does not stop only in the office or in the boss-worker relationship as contractually defined. The boss is likely to have a say in other aspects of his/her employee's personal life.   The boss owns everything.

What a modern and democratic society wants is specific work culture, where an individual's life space is free from the encroachment of others. This is also an element of genuine freedom- i.e. to be from the control of others. In such a society, the leader would segregate out the task relationship he/she has with a subordinate, and insulates this "work relationship" from other dealings.  Therefore, the leader's authority only reaches where his/her work relationship with the subordinate is defined, and each area in which the two persons encounter each other is considered apart from the other.  Work and life are sharply separated in specific-oriented cultures.

Non Bumiputera Malaysians I encounter do not fear the ordinary Bumiputera and can understand and accept Bumputraism. By that we mean, the adoption of policies designed to correct the imbalances and historical accidents in which the majority of Malay Malaysians find themselves in. Except, they expect it as mandatory, that the polices so designed work in such a way as to encourage the ordinary Bumiputera 'stepping out' from self imposed and imagined limitations.

What they fear most are the special Bumiputeras or the Brahmin Bumiputeras. Because these people expect to be given what everyone aspires and wants in life as a matter of birthright.

Tweet

Read more...

UMNO and MCA-brother or satellite vassal?

UMNO and MCA.

The way UMNO is handling the MCA crisis is tactically wrong. Tactics are employed at winning battles. Strategy is the better way. It is for winning wars. Strategy is for longer term.

The longer term interest is to ensure MCA retains the trust of the Chinese community. It must see MCA as a dependable, rational and stable representative of the Chinese community.

Now how has UMNO been doing its part to help out MCA?

First, it's treating MCA just like a little brother who needs twisting on the ear. Not respectable to treat a party which has helped out UMNO since the 1940's not just by delivering Chinese allegiance but at times, material help.

Two, it offers solutions to MCA in pompous and even arrogant manner- everything splashed on the political silver screen. Muhyidin is not going to get best actor award for that. You are asking the MCA to accomplish something within a forced time table. The MCA leaders have been battling it out for over 18 months.

How does this typical arrogant UMNO approach create more damage than healing process?

Very simply, it makes MCA lose face. Not just to MCA, but to all Chinese in general losing face is a big deal. UMNO makes MCA lose face. It loses trust. In Chinese culture, losing face, saving face and giving face is very important and should never be forgotten. A person can lose face as a result of confronting an individual or putting them on the spot or acting in an arrogant manner or failing to show appropriate respect.

Has UMNO accorded MCA mutual respect?

Perhaps, it's timely to give UMNO a reminder in the exercise of humility. Please remember that in the last general elections UMNO candidates obtained 2.38 million votes within which there was a sizeable portion of non Malay votes. Actual Malay votes UMNO candidates received were probably around the region of 2 million.

Accordingly please stop to think. You have 3.5 million card carrying, profanity shouting members and yet you could only muster 2 million Malay votes. That means more than 1 million of your own members rejected your half past six candidates. With this kind of legitimacy, you want to throw your weight around?

There were over 5 million Malay voters in the last elections. That means over 3 million Malays did not vote for UMNO candidates, demolishing your claim that you are representing the Malays. What UMNO represents is just the concept of Malay interests and Malays as a concept simpliciter. In substance, it hopes to regain.

What I am trying to say, is that if UMNO wants to regain Malay trust it must ensure it regains the trust of its political partners. At the very elementary level, it must begin by giving trust to MCA leadership. It must not show its taking sides. The only way it does this, is by letting MCA be MCA. Let it be itself. Allow MCA to carry out what measures IT sees necessary not what UMNO sees it.

Perhaps the UMNO leadership needs to learn a few things about face in Chinese culture. Face idiomatically meaning "dignity; prestige". Face is the respectability and/or deference which a person can claim for himself from others.

MCA has achieved some standing among the Chinese community. It can validly claim the same standing as UMNO does within the Malay community despite losing much support at the previous elections. If UMNO, despite losing much Malay ground can still go around convincing itself that it still represents the Malays- that same privilege must be accorded to MCA. But by imposing your weight around and throat-pushing your solution on the MCA crisis, UMNO causes the MCA to lose face.

UMNO leaders must learn some interaction etiquette. Face is something that is emotionally invested, and that can be lost, maintained, or enhanced, and must be constantly attended to in interaction. In general, people cooperate in maintaining face in interaction, such cooperation being based on the mutual vulnerability of face.

How vulnerable is Face?

Face is a sense of worth that comes from knowing one's status and reflects concern with the congruency between one's performance or appearance and one's real worth. "Face" means 'prestige; dignity; honor; respect; status'.

Lin Yutang writing in 1935, considered the psychology of "face" saying as interesting as the Chinese physiological face is, it is the psychological face that makes a still more fascinating study. It is not a face that can be washed or shaved, but a face that can be "granted" and "lost" and "fought for" and "presented as a gift." This is something UMNO needs to learn about Chinese social psychology. Abstract and intangible, it is yet the most delicate standard by which Chinese social intercourse is regulated. Losing face has far more serious implications for one's sense of self-esteem or decency than gaining face.

The other pertinent point to note, that the way UMNO handles the MCA crisis actually reveals to others its true character. Anyone who does not wish to declare his social bankruptcy must show a regard for face: he must claim for himself, and must extend to others, some degree of compliance, respect, and deference in order to maintain a minimum level of effective social functioning. By bullying others, being pugnacious in some ways reveal the social bankruptcy of UMNO.

By bossing around, UMNO shows its impoliteness. Some sociologists have shown that there are two sides in a face. The positive and the negative face. Positive face is the positive self-image or personality claimed by interactants". MCA has the legitimate desire to be seen as the representative voice of the Chinese and it expects this self image to be appreciated and approved by others. UMNO cannot replace MCA as the voice of the Chinese. Negative face is the basic claim to territories, personal preserves, rights to non-distraction -- i.e. to freedom of action and freedom from imposition.

I found a most pertinent observation about the concept of face that is worth pondering:-

Face is the public image that a person claims for himself. Within this claim there are three dimensions. Autonomy face describes a desire to appear independent, in control, and responsible. Fellowship face describes a desire to seem cooperative, accepted, and loved. Competence face describes a desire to appear intelligent, accomplished, and capable

Tweet

Read more...

Khazanah’s orderly divestitures

In my conversation with The Oracle of Syed Putera (a 4 part series will appear next week), I asked about the selling down by Khazanah. Khazanah is the investment arm of our government. Its chairman is our PM and the MD is Azman Mokhtar. One board member is the minister in charge of the EPU. He was made a member when he was the Finance Minister 2. By right he should relinquish the position to allow the present MF2 to sit on the board. But he wants to hold on to the post. Azman Mokhtar was handpicked by him to head the GLC and to educate the stupid public what is KPI.

Except that the public is not stupid all the time.

When I asked the Oracle about this, he asked me back. Why are we placing too much emphasis on what Khazanah does? The value of the portfolio it holds is relatively minuscule when compared to say, what PETRONAS has. We should focus our attention to PETRONAS.

The more significant portion of the answer was, to whom does Khazanah divest its holdings? We are not exactly clear on that. If Khazanah sells its portfolio holdings to other GLC such as the EPF, this is tantamount of transferring from one pocket to the other. The public is not enriched by such transaction. Of course, Khazanah gets money from selling down its portfolio. It improves it liquidity it says.

The sale to EPF is also questionable for it can be interpreted as temporarily parking the portfolio until a suitable suitor comes along.

It's also questionable since we are also not certain whether EPF has the smarts to manage its new acquired portfolio. Didn't EPF say it the last time, it doesn't have the competency to handle investments and that was the main reason given when it surrendered management of a sizeable fund to another private entity? Remember Valuecrap Valuecap?

Now it has the competence to buy over what Khazanah sells them. It should be able to declare better dividends this year.

A short while ago, the Khazanah boss, Azman Mokhtar hit out at criticisms against Khazanah's divestitures and insisted everything is orderly. In December 2009, khazanah sold 86.85 million shares in TNB and got RM 700 million. This is the beginning of Khazanah's process of divesting shares that it holds to other buyers. And over the last 5 years, Khazanah had sold RM 12 billion worth of shares and gained RM 3.6 billion. It has sold its stakes in Bintulu Port, PTP Port, RHB Bank, Tradewinds Hotels and Time Dotcom.

Who were the buyers? The owners of the other bloc of shares in the respective companies? If that is so, then the shares that Khazanah held in the first place and paid for were means to provide additional liquidity to the owners of that business. In actuality, the money parked by Khazanah was a form of soft loan.

Therefore contrary to the aims of Khazanah as being the investment arm of the government that buys shares for strategic reasons, it was just acting as a business partner binging along with it, OUR money to help out selected businesses. When it sold back to presumably the original owners, it really wasn't looking out after the strategic interest of holding something valuable on behalf of the ketuanan Melayu or on behalf of whomsoever interest it thinks it wants to define at any particular time. All it was doing was holding out for the interests of the privileged few.

Let us debate a little on the semantics of 'orderly'. Just what does this phrase mean? If it means, when doing the transactions Khazanah's accountants and financial experts pored over details, and the lawyers combed through with due diligence, then, we have no quarrel over the term orderly.

But what if orderly means, the prospective buyers are all selected buyers known only to Khazanah? Or in the words of Khazanah's boss- whichever company we feel is non-core, or has reached a certain maturity that we feel we don't need to hold and there are good buyers at the right price and of the right type sp that they can tackle that particular industry and company further….

It doesn't need a rocket scientist to figure out that the right type of buyer will be the existing owners of the other shares not previously held by Khazanah. Because certainly, they know the business and can be the only type of buyers who can take the company farther.

If this is the reasoning, then it reconfirms our suspicions that Khazanah was holding the shares not for reason of strategic Bumiputera/national interests but participated at the beginning, to inject some loan sanitized as capital, into the original venture.

I think full public disclosure of who are the buyers of Khazanah shares is most apt. After that we shall form our KPI on Khazanah so that we can judge how clever these people are.

Tweet

Read more...

Leadership Lessons: Loyalty or Competence?

Loyalty or competency?

Loyalty is sometimes an overrated virtue. One much respected counsel once suggested that PM Najib form a new team.

The PM was reluctant to do so. The main reason he says, the people around him have been loyal to him. For that reason, he is prepared to overlook other qualities.

The wise counsel answered back. Loyalty is indeed an esteemed virtue. It was essential when you operated at the other level. You needed that virtue to ensure you achieve your goals. The loyalty that you speak of is specific.

Now, you are operating at a different level. The loyalty that you require is of a different kind- a higher level of loyalty that is universal in its effects. Its loyalty in the sense of being faithful to a cause. Not faithful to a person.

The kind of loyalty that you speak of, serves your personal purpose. To get where you are. You can reward those who are loyal to you in other ways.

But at this level, competence is more important than loyalty. Because competence affects other people, it affects the whole country. Loyalty serves a narrower purpose. Competence and the elements that flow from it- efficiency and dedication affect whole people.

Suppose those who are loyal to you are incompetent? Their incompetence debilitates people and undermines good governance.

To make the great leap forward a personal and often specific nature of loyalty, is by nature violent and harsh. But that is the call of a leader.

Loyalty is of special interest only in a feudal setting. In the history of Malay civilization, the only time when loyalty was the center of the universe was during the epochal battle between the Malay warriors Hang Tuah and Hang Jebat.

I feel inadequate if I were asked to discuss the full symbolic significance of the battle between these two warriors. Only one person in Malaysia can do justice to such a prominent cultural event. I am of course referring to Kassim Ahmad (comrade Kassim to me always) who was the one who actually produced the gold standard in the study of Hang Tuah. He was the one who wrote the book which became staple text for students of my generation at 6^th form level.

Nevertheless here is my interpretation. At the centre of the epochal battle, is the concept of loyalty. Two concepts of loyalty were involved. One, which was represented by Tuah and the other by Jebat. One may argue that both were actually fighting for two different versions of loyalty.

Tuah was fighting for loyalty towards the preservation of an eventually disappearing world- loyalty to the preservation of a feudal order embodied in the person of a feudal king. It was a loyalty that was specific; serving the narrow interest of a reckless and unjust king that caused irreparable damage to a wider concept of loyalty- that of seeing justice and the brotherhood of man prevail.

Jebat was fighting for a loyalty to a cause. The loyalty which he represented was of universal import. To fight for the universal principle of justice so that future generations can build on this principle as one of the foundations of a modern and democratic society.

So while both can claim they fought for a concept of loyalty, we the present generation shall judge which kind of loyalty is more functional to the greater good.

Hopefully, the symbolic significance behind the bloody and macabre fight between two protagonists of two different concepts of loyalty is not lost on the leader of this country.

To move from a specific centered loyalty to a loyalty of universal import is never easy. As the epic fight between Tuah and Jebat demonstrated, by the very nature of the principle at stake, it was also essentially and necessarily violent and, in contemporary terms, revolutionary. The leap between the lower level of loyalty to the higher level must by necessity, be violent. Hence it will not be in the manner of attending a dinner party, or making embroidery or having a cup of Darjeeling tea.

In terms of leadership then, in order to take the next leap and to take the nation to the next level, the leader needs to be assertive and firm. Just like the carriage cars that are pulling the carriage head ever backwards, the solution is to replace the carriage cars.

Now, apply our judgment on the 10 ministries that failed to submit their reports on KPIs and the BN lawmakers who absented themselves from the business of the August House. There are thousands of others who are willing to take up the responsibility as lawmakers and do something that makes a difference for the greater good of our society.

Tweet

Read more...

Shinkansen,Maglev dan PM Najib.

Saya terbaca suatu komen oleh seorang pembaca blog Dato Kadir Jasin, penulis yang terkenal itu. Ia berbunyi demikian:-

What I saw next to federal highway really shocked me! I saw electric train KTM komuter coaches being pulled by diesel locomotive. What really amused me was that in between the loco and the komuter, there is 1 inter-coach meant for generator set to energize the electric Train set!!!!

Terbaca mengenai keretapi, saya teringat mengenai analoji keretapi dengan pengurusan yang di amalkan oleh kerajaan. Bolehkah kita mempelajari apa apa dari analoji tersebut? Pembaca buatlah pengadilan sendiri.

Belasan tahun yang lampau, saya ada terbaca sutau rencana dalam Fortune Magazine. Penulis rencana tersebut telah menemu ramah seorang usahawan Jepun yang sangat berjaya. Dan kita tahu bahawa Majalah Fortune biasa nya menemu ramah mereka yang berjaya dalam perniagaan dan perusahaan supaya kita semua , yakni pembaca mengambil penjagaran dari nya.

Usahawan jepun tersebut telah menggariskan beberapa sebab mengapa syarikat nya berjaya. Beliau mengatakan bahawa kaedah pengurusan yang di pakai dia sebutkan sebagai bullet train management.

Saya percaya sesiapa yang selalu pergi ke Negara Jepun sudah menaiki keretapi laju yang di sebut Shinkansen. Ia boleh mencapai kelajuan 200 km sejam. Jika Shinkansen melalui mana mana terowong, telinga kita akan menjadi 'pekak' untuk sementara. Demikian lah betapa laju nya Shinkansaen tersebut.

Bullet train menggunakan kaedah magnetic levitation untuk mencapai kelajuan. Maka keretapi super laju ini kadang kadang di sebut sebagai maglev train.

Keretapi Shinkansen yang menggunakan teknoloji maglev bukan sahaja boleh bergerak laju tapi juga mencapai tahap keselamatan yang tinggi dan selesa di guna.

Dalam kereta api yang konvensional, kita ada suatu kepala gerabak yang di pasang dengan enjin disel menarik gerabak yang lain. Untuk mencapai kelajuan, tentulah kepala gerabak mesti dispang dengan enjin yang berkapasiti besar dan ianya sendiri mesti kuat. Jika muatan dalam gerabak di belakang berat atau pun gerabak yang di belakang rosak, maka kelajuan keretapi konvensional menjadi lambat. Apatah lagi jika kepala gerabak pun tidak berada dalam keadaan yang 100% sempurna.

Apabila bercakap mengenai prinsip bullet train management ini dan terbaca komen dalam blog Dato Kadir Jasin, saya teringat apa yang mahu di capai oleh PM Najib melalui KPI nya. Kita sema tahu PM Najib mahu mengujudkan kaedah pengurusan yang baru. Anggaplah ianya sebagai suatu niat untuk mengujudkan Shinkansen. Ianya bertujuan bukan sahaja keretapi pengurusan kerajaan menjadi laju tapi juga selamat dan selesa.

Tapi apabila saya terbaca juga ada 10 orang menteri tidak terdaya menyiapkan KPI untuk kementerian mereka, maka ini lah saya anggap sebagai gerabak yang rosak atau mempunyai excess bagage yang banyak. Untuk membaiki keadaan, gerabak yang rosak kenalah di ganti dengan gerabak yang tidak rosak.

Kembali kepada jawapan yang di beri oleh usahawan Jepun tadi. Mengikut penjelasan nya, tren yang konvesional akan mempunyai satu enjin yang menarik gerabak2 yang lain. Tapi keretapi Shinkansen, sebagai perumpamaan, mempunyai enjin enjin bukan sahaja di sepanjang trek keretapi tapi juga di dinding dinding tembok trek yang di panggil sebagai guideway. Trek Sinkansen dan tembok di pasang dengan magnetic coils yang powerful.

Kombinasi magnetic coils yang ada di sepanjang trek dan sepanjang tembok guideway, menjadikan seolah olah setiap gerabak dan bukan sehaja kepala gerabak mempunyai enjin yang tersendiri. Kombinasi semua enjin membolehkan Shinkansen mencapai kelajuan 200km sejam dan yang terbaru sehingga 300km sejam.

Maka jika PM Najib mahukan suatu pentabiran yang laju cekap, berkesan dan dedikasi dia mestilah memastikan supaya setiap anggota kabinet bermutu tinggi. Kayu kayu mati mesti di buang supaya tidak membebankan kepimpinan nya.

Apabila semua cekap, berkesan dan dedikasi maka pengurusan nya menjadi laju, selamat dan selesa. Yakni, sepanjang trek Shinkansen PM Najib seolah olah nya mempunyai enjin yang tersendiri.

Analoji seterusnya, ialah persekitaran Shinkansen PM Najib mesti mempunyai prasarana sokongan yang kuat. Tadi kita telah sebutkan bahawa tembok atau guideway Shinkansen di pasang dengan magnetic coils. Bersama dengan magnetic coil yang ada pada trek , teknoloji ini menarik semua gerabak dengan super laju. Kombinasi magnetic coils yang ada pada tembok guideway dan trek, seolah olah nya, mengujudkan kusyen angin, di atas nya, tren boleh begerak dengan tersangat pantas. Anaoji tembok ialah untuk mencapai Shinkansen PM Najib, dia memerlukan persekitaran yang membolehkan atau enabling environment seperti civil service yang cekap , dedidakasi dan berkesan, sistem nilai yang baik dan seumpamanya.

Prinsip pengurusan Shinkansen PM Najib mesti mengandungi elemen elemen seperti berikut:-

1. 
   
   Laluan Shinkasen PM Najib mesti berlainan daripada laluan trek keretapi konvenional. Dalam bahasa yang mudah, janganlah kualiti kepimpinan kabinet nya sama dengan mutu kepimpinan JKKK atau persatuan bola sepak.
   
   
   
2. 
   
   Ertinya, pengurusan yang selekeh tidak boleh di benarkan di amalkan di kementerian kementerian. Standard pengurusan kementerian dan jabatan kerajaan mesti berada pada tahap yang tinggi. Tidak boleh ada lagi pegawai tinggi perbendaharaan makan kuaci ketika taklimat atau seminar di jalankan.
   
   
   
3. 
   
   Pengurusan PM Najib mesti di sokong oleh pentadbiran awam yang bermutu tinggi. Pentadbiran awam yang bermutu tinggi umpama sistem terowong terowong atau viaducts yang membolehkan Shinkansen Pm Najib bergerak tanpa halangan.
   
   
   
4. 
   
   Trek Shinkansen PM Najib mesti tidak mempunyai lintasan atau crossings di mana. Mana mana menteri yang melambatkan pergerakan atau mengujudkan lencongan atau crossings mesti di gugurkan. Terpulanglah kepada PM Najib mendefinisikan 'lencongan' yang di sebabkan oleh anggota cabinet dan pentadbiran.
   
   
   
5. 
   
   Laluan trek Shinkansen PM Najib mesti jadi trek kawasan larangan yang mutlak bebas daripada segala bentuk pencerobohan.
   
   
   
6. 
   
   Laluan trafik Shikansen di awasi oleh PM Najin sendiri yang bermakna PM Najib sendiri mesti mempunyai pasukan pengurusan yang super cekap.
   
   
   

Demikian beberapa analoji dari Shinkansen.

Tweet

Read more...