Article 153 Special Privilege on Scholarship
Below is part of the report on the debate of MP for Pasir Salak. In fact, MP for Rembau and MP for Muar also spoke about this allocation of scholarship and the quotas. One of them argued on the point of Art 153 of the Federal Constitution, the special privileges and allocation of scholarship is a matter listed under Art. 153.
They asked for the “cake to be enlarged” but the quota of 90% for bumiputera to be maintained.
In fact, last week, there was a report in a Malay daily which reported an academician expressing his concerns of widening the gap between bumiputera professionals and non bumiputera professionals, when commenting on quota of 55% - 45% which is applied recently, instead of the 90%-10% (bumi- non bumi), previously.
You want to encourage or “keep” the top scholars, but at the same time, you are worried about the “gap” or perhaps, one may puts it, “it is one of our special privileges.” As such, we must have “much more”, always.
I do accept that it is provided in the Federal Constitution and I am to abide to it, but, it is the application which I am seeking clarification.
I asked myself, what is this? Art 153, is sensitive? We, non bumiputera cannot raise or question its application? Can I? In fact, earlier, MP for Pasir Salak during the ninth Malaysia Plan (mid term review) called on the government to provide a course on - the origin of different races in Malaysia.
Dear readers, let me have your views, strictly on scholarship , please. Thank you.
Wednesday July 2, 2008 (The Star)
MP: Help non-bumis but don’t mess with quota
THE Government should help non-bumiputra students, who achieved academic excellence but not at the expense of jeopardising scholarships awarded to bumiputras, said Datuk Tajudin Abdul Rahman (BN - Pasir Salak).
“By all means, we help them but not at the expense of bumiputra students. I do not agree to increase the ratio of scholarships to non-bumiputra students.
“The ratio of 80% for bumiputra students should remain. I am ready to face the Education Minister for (saying) this,” he said, when debating on the motion on the mid-term review of the Ninth Malaysia
Plan.
(part of the report only)
If it’s enshrine in the federal constitution all of us must respect it.
Comment by solidleong — July 15, 2008 @ 10:44 pm
I’m sure YB knows that nowhere in the constitution are there any numbers or percentages that separate the people according to the race. There is only provisions that say the King have right to allocate based on his wisdom certain amount of “things” like education opportunities and business licenses to the bumiputra group (not malays).
Secondly, if I’m not mistaken, the article says that any such provision should not conflict with equal rights for all citizen or discriminate anyone (Article 8 i think).
It will be interesting to see the documents that record such instructions from the King or King handing the power to PSD to decide the percentages.
Comment by poobalan — July 15, 2008 @ 11:03 pm
We, non-bumiputera Malaysian do pay taxes and nothing less. But we are not getting any equal benefit & privelage from the government. Can we take the excuse of enjoying less benefit & privelage than the bumiputera, to pay less taxes? What Art 153? This was writtten by them to “make” it a privelage for themselves, for their next generation and next generation. And no one can touch their privelage. All these was laid out properly to make the life of non-bumiputera hard and difficult over the years. Non-bumi are lacking behind everyday. Its very obvious over the last few years.
What can the non-bumi do? Can we demand changes? I am very worry for our next generation. All this is making the non-bumi feeling not welcome in Malaysia.
YB, please fight for our rights. We are only asking for equality and fairness. Make Malaysia a better place to live in.
Thanks.
Comment by Leong WK — July 15, 2008 @ 11:46 pm
All Malaysians who can contribute to build this nation should be given scholarship. We have the funds but the government has siphoned them into their own pockets. The Malay and non Malay quota are nonsense that should not apply to today’s condition. We should be treated equal and be given equal opportunities for everything as we are MALAYSIANS and ARE BORN HERE. Without us there is NO MALAYSIA.
Comment by Dian Abdullah — July 16, 2008 @ 12:49 am
The origin of article 153, in the Reid Commission, clearly says the reason for it was ’serious AND unfair disadvantage’. The key word is does removing any of the privillege represent ’serious AND unfair’ to the bumiputra. It no longer does. Stretching the constitution barely allow the NEP which clearly eventually will be unconstitutional.
Comment by Bigjoe99 — July 16, 2008 @ 9:52 am
my personal opinion is that they made a mistake by whopingly increase the quota from 10% to 45%, they should do it step by step, 10% to 20%, then 25%, 30% and so on until it is acceptable to majority of the people.
now that they have increased it groobingly, how’d they expect to cut it down!? they had to resolve in adding to the scholarship amount itself.
i’d say first they had to tackle the probs by sponsor the students domestically first, and then opt to move to sponsor the students overseas.
Comment by kuder — July 16, 2008 @ 10:02 am
in my opinion i think the allocation of scholarship should be in proportion of the population i.e. if malays forms 60% of the total population & 40% comprise indians , chinese & others.
pasir salak says “THE Govt should help non-bumiputra students who achieved excellenct results but not at the expense of jeopardising scholarships awarded to bumiputras”.
pasir salak wan tis & wan another…..does he think he could have the best of both world’s ???? has he any suggestions for his above comments for it to materialize ?
Comment by cookie monster — July 16, 2008 @ 11:41 am
There issues has already been dealt by Dr. Kua Kia Soong.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/opinions/86112
Article 153 was framed simply as follows:
“It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article…and to ensure the reservation for Malays of such proportion as he may deem reasonable of positions in the public service…and of scholarships, exhibitions…”
Where 50% of the scholarships are already provided to the malays, one cannot argue that the malay community has not been more than satisfied, has not been protected.
Comment by temenggong — July 16, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
Look at it this way I have few friends that are qualify for to enter UM as she have 11 A1 but yet government say no sudah penuh what is this everyone here pay tax so in my friend father and mother. we are equal but well what to do like my mom always say we are 2nd wife daughter and son so can complain. My friend got full scholar ship in Singapore and even great she got a job right after she graduate and is a promising one too. Now she is a PR and doing well it have been years she is there.We here in Malaysia we are a baby sarong we gave birth to great rakyat but we are never cared as we are the same son.
Hope MP Foong you could make a different for us as I would like my children to have a better life in future.We don’t hope to move to other country or place as this is where I am born this is where I am going to die. This country have a lot to offer but like every company the company is a great one but the people who managed it is bad. Is all human. I hope i didn’t offend anyone on what I have said here is my 2 sen
Comment by Kelly Loh — July 16, 2008 @ 5:13 pm
Do away with quotas and implement meritocracy. Let the deserving win scholarships on their own merit without fear or favor. If bumiputra students deservedly win 95% of scholarships so be it. If they win 10% so be it too. Of course this will never happen, the crutch mentality has enslaved the Pasir Salak MP and he cannot think his way out of this dilemma. The brain drain will continue.
Comment by clearwater — July 17, 2008 @ 12:32 pm
Chinese will only stop talking about this when they control 90% of scholarship…and also control the country or at least Uncle Lim become PM…….now they are throwing tantrums….talking like people who didn’t learn Sejarah at school (maybe they learn Sejarah Negara China kot..)
If DAP rules the country, can you guarantee you’ll practice absolute meritocracy?..in case of 2 candidates with exact same result but of 2 races (chinese and malay), which would you choose?. Answer truthfully..(i know the answer as it is happening to singapore malay now
ps: Please stop looking down at other races..there are malays who worked as hard as some chinese…and contrary to what you believe, we pay taxes too
Comment by BosanDenganCinaTakTahuPerlembagaan — July 17, 2008 @ 12:44 pm
To BosanDenganCinaTakTahuPerlembagaan,
There is only ONE and ONLY ONE to be the BEST.
In the name of meritocracy, if you want to pick the best, then it’s only one you can pick, regardless of race, religion and background.
I’m looking at business-minded kind of idea. An employer will definitely choose the best, most suitable and value for money candidate.
Where by in the case of scholarship, it should be the same.
It should be only given to the best group of students. That is meritocracy.
Of course, if you want to bring up “Perlembagaan”, then there is no meritocracy. What’s next? I should go back to India or China. Or go to hell
Don’t get me wrong, but I never look down other races.
I still respect Anwar, Ku Li and to certain extends Tun M.
What we want here is to fight for a fair and open environment for everybody to compete.
However, if you think your race would be always more “competitive” behind “Perlembagaan”, then I respect your thoughts. God bless you.
Thanks
Comment by EK — July 18, 2008 @ 10:08 am
BosanDenganCinaTakTahuPerlembagaan
1st since when did the chinese say they want control 90% of scholarship ? in the past all malaysians could see for themselves for those minorties who had excellent academic results most of them failed to get scholarships and most end up in overseas foreign universities……
2nd i refer to yr statement “talking like people who didn’t learn sejarah (History) at school (maybe they learn Sejarah Negara China kot..)” wat do you mean by tat ? can u kindly explain……
3rd DAP could never rule malaysia alone without its other partners mainly “PKR” & “PAS” …..for the past 50 yrs of nation building under BN , all malaysians know tat whoever is elected as UMNO’S 1st & 2nd top person will automatically assume the PM & DPM post respectively moreover this had been a tradition …..so do u think DAP’S top man could assume the premiership so easily & break this tradition which had been in practise for past 50 yrs of nation building ?
4th i refer to yr statement “If DAP rules the country, can you guarantee you’ll practice absolute meritocracy” my question to you is “assuming” if pakatan rakyat comes to power and if “PKR” or “PAS” top person assumes PM position , do you think they will also practise meritocracy ? & from yr statement it “seems” u had cast yr if DAP were to come to power they will not practise meritocracy ? haven’t penang CM shown he had practised it by openly inviting talented BN ppl to join his penang admin ?
lastly , yes we won’t deny tat malays had also contributed to the nation’s coffers , however if you remember in the past during DR M’s era he had actually said minorities in malaysia were actually major contributors to the nation’s coffers ?
therefore in my opinion , by & large , the govt should help all malaysians iregardless of race , language or religion.
Comment by kent — July 18, 2008 @ 10:42 am
BosanDenganCinaTakTahuPerlembagaan
1st since when did the chinese say they want control 90% of scholarship ? in the past all malaysians could see for themselves for those minorties who had excellent academic results most of them failed to get scholarships and most end up in overseas foreign universities……
2nd i refer to yr statement “talking like people who didn’t learn sejarah (History) at school (maybe they learn Sejarah Negara China kot..)” wat do you mean by tat ? can u kindly explain……
3rd DAP could never rule malaysia alone without its other partners mainly “PKR” & “PAS” …..for the past 50 yrs of nation building under BN , all malaysians know tat whoever is elected as UMNO’S 1st & 2nd top person will automatically assume the PM & DPM post respectively moreover this had been a tradition …..so do u think DAP’S top man could assume the premiership so easily & break this tradition which had been in practise for past 50 yrs of nation building ?
4th i refer to yr statement “If DAP rules the country, can you guarantee you’ll practice absolute meritocracy” my question to you is “assuming” if pakatan rakyat comes to power and if “PKR” or “PAS” top person assumes PM position , do you think they will also practise meritocracy ? & from yr statement it “seems” u had cast yr if DAP were to come to power they will not practise meritocracy ? haven’t penang CM shown he had practised it by openly inviting talented BN ppl to join his penang admin ?
lastly , yes we won’t deny tat malays had also contributed to the nation’s coffers , however if you remember in the past during DR M’s era he had actually said minorities in malaysia were actually major contributors to the nation’s coffers ?
therefore in my opinion , by & large , the govt should help all malaysians iregardless of race , language or religion.
Comment by cookie monster — July 18, 2008 @ 10:46 am
Actually Malays need not worry that their scholarship quota would be reduced. The government can annoubce a higher quota to non bumiputras but those goons in the JPA are not going to implement it. Neither is the government going to reprimand them. It will be CAKAP TAK SERUPA BIKIN situation. Come May - June next year, non bumiputra top students are still going to be denied their scholarship. Where can we see the light?
Comment by Leedon — July 18, 2008 @ 5:19 pm
Education is the foundation towards a strong society and country.
Scholarships should be given base on meritocracy and financial well being.
If there is NOT such wastage of the country’s wealth - the $ available should be sufficient for all without the need to squabble over the % allocation for Bumis vs nons.
Some of the MPs still coose to remain blinded and ignorant to such facts staring in their eyes.
Comment by Gan — July 19, 2008 @ 11:30 am
Scholarships, by definition, should be on merit basis, for ALL high achievers.
Study loans should be given for ALL eligible university students.
Thats solves the problems, since everyone (except the rich) gets one or the other!
Comment by temenggong — July 19, 2008 @ 5:02 pm
Talks about scholarship is equal to touch about the Malay liberty, urgue about the special offers to BUMI for houses, quato offered to enter Universities…qtc.
But, what I wanted to emphasize & as to remind leader in Malaysia is that…look forwards to Malaysia future fortune in global ranking and rivalize. Besides, what is the fairness and what a reason to always protect Malay in this country? How much about non-bumi contribution in so-called “malay country”?
Comment by dap admire — July 20, 2008 @ 4:28 pm
There are several issues here.
The Constitution allows for scholarships an dplaces in the Civil Service for Bumis, but nowhere is any % stated in it. This is an indisputable FACT!
So, Govt policy must address fairly and openly the issues of rectifying the pre-1957 situtation where many Malays were deliberately (for political control reasons) denied the opportunities for further, especially tertiary education by the British Administration, AND MERITOCRACY post 2000, the new millenium, after 30 years of NEP.
Few non-Malays would object to affirmative-action policies favouring the Malays & Bumis in securing a certain number of places in Universities and Colleges. It is necessary for our economic growth since a fairer distribution of National Income would benefit all Malaysians. But, a time frame must be established to ensure that purely non-Meritocratic policies are not continued beyond their useful shelf lives. Make no mistake, a CRUTCH, used beyond the convalescence period, will naturally engender a dangerous culture of laziness and complacency.
But, securing places in Universities & Colleges must NOT be equated with automatic full-fees paid scholarships, which should be awarded on an income-means tested basis. Thus children of multi-millionaires who secure a place on MERIT should still pay the full fee.
A further restriction should be imposed that for the more important professional courses such as Medicine, Law, Engineering etc, entry and scholarships in each category (Bumi/non-Bumi) MUST be based on Meritocracy, and if one category is not filled up due to insufficient candidates, quality must not be compromised by accepting Grade 2 & 3 substitutes. We allow for a system of half-baked professionals at our own peril!
The real area of dispute and dissatisfaction is that the process of selection of candidates is perceived as NOT transparent, especially where non-Bumi candidates with stellar results do not secure places and/or scholarships while it is suspected that many Bumis with much poorer results are rewarded. The public is not able to guage if the system has been compromised to the detriment of the Nation.
A 90% allocation of scholarships to the Bumi group in post-2000 bespeaks of a Govt policy gone totally wrong. The 30 year NEP period is over and a wholly unsatisfactory policy need a total review and complete over-hauling. And statistics must not be obfuscated or skewed by excluding special awards, bursaries and allocations.
Before that can be done, the Govt must first properly re-define who is a Bumi. Are recently naturalised Indonesians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and older Indian Muslims, Bumis? While Indians, Chinese and others who can trace their ancestry in M’sia to the early part of the 20th Century and before that, NOT?
Comment by donplaypuks — July 22, 2008 @ 10:40 am
The late Peter Drucker once said that it is foolish to assume change from someone who have benefitted from the old order. How true the statement is!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by alvin lee — August 2, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
Hi YB Fong,
I’m quite devastated to know that you may decide not to run for the DAP CEC membership…
It may not be easy to deal with certain people inside the committee, but I don’t believe you are a person who easily give up something… You almost gave up your Batu Gajah MPship, and now you chose to give up the chance to lead the party…
The party politics isn’t pleasant… and isn’t fair to you as well… *sigh*… but I do think you can do more and go far… against all odd…
Comment by Zurena — August 2, 2008 @ 11:28 pm
Dear YB
here somthing from MalaysiaToday at http://us1.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/10891/84/
“EXTREME FINANCIAL IRREGULARITY IN PURCHASE OF INDELIBLE INK
Posted by Vineeth Menon
Wednesday, 06 August 2008 19:41
I would like to expose an extreme financial irregularity in the purchase of indelible ink by the Malaysian government from India for purported use in the last general election.
It was reported that 48,000 bottles of indelible ink was bought from India at the cost of RM2.4million.
The ink would have been bought from Mysore Paints and Varnish Ltd which is the ONLY ink manufacturer in the whole of India who are authorized by the Election Commission of India to produce the indelible ink for use in elections.
In a story in the Indian national paper, The Hindu, dated September 11,2007(HERE) , the price for 35,000 bottles of 5ml vials which can mark 300 voters is stated as being Rs 15 lakhs (RM115,700). This puts the price of each 5ml bottle at RM3.30.
On February 1, 2008, the EC deputy chairman Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar was quoted in The Star as saying two bottles of ink are sufficient for 600 people. Hence it is clear that that the bottles purchased by the Malaysian government are the very same 5ml ones.
At the above rate, the cost of 48,000 5ml bottles (enough for 14.4million voters) for the Malaysian election should be a mere RM158,400, a far cry from the RM2.4million said to have spent by the
Malaysian government. Where has the money gone?
It could be the case that the rate at which the bottles are sold to foreign customers are higher than that to the Indian government.
On March 10, 2007, The Hindu published another story (HERE) about the sale of 29,856 bottles or vials to Cambodia at the cost of Rs1.28 crore. (RM999,120). Here you can see how the price of each 5ml bottle has been marked up to RM33.4 per bottle. While the mark up of 10 times the original price is itself questionable and open to underhand dealings between officials on both sides considering the position of both India (72) and Cambodia (164) on Transparency International’s 2007 Corruption Perceptions Index ; even at this rate, 48,000 bottles should have cost the Malaysian government only RM1.6million.
There is substantial financial irregularity here (despite ignoring the inflated price of 10 times the original price the ink is sold for locally), involving hundreds of thousands of ringgit – approximately RM800,000 of Malaysian taxpayers’ money. Where has this money gone? Who was in charge of the purchase? Has this exorbitantly large sum of money been pocketed by government officials? Where are the 48,000 bottles of indelible ink now? ”
htp://donplaupuks.blogspot.com
I call upon the ACA to fully investigate this mismanagement of public funds and make public their report. It is shameful enough that after spending so much money, the indelible ink was not used in the last general election. It is even more appalling to think that at a time when our economy is struggling, there might be corrupted individuals who are pocketing huge amounts of public funds and directing it into their personal bank accounts.
I hope the ACA and the authorities do a thorough investigation and audit of the above expenses at the soonest and bring to justice those who are guilty of corrupt practices.
Sree Sudheesh
Comment by donplaypuks — August 6, 2008 @ 9:06 pm