The RMK10 Forum at Berjaya Times Square

Ramadhan has always been a busy month for me. With over 100 Mosques and Suraus in Shah Alam, my evenings, nights and even dawn prayers are packed with programs. I try to go to all the Mosques and Suraus but it is obviously impossible to do. Nonetheless I do try and I may have some 50% covered by the end of the month.

The packed program however did not allow me much room to prepare for my forum with KJ on the 25th of August 5 pm at Berjaya Time square. However, as it was agreed to well in advance, I went after getting assurances that, this time around, I would be the second speaker. Previously in Nikko KJ came after me and this left a somewhat uncomfortable taste in the mouth as he obviously had the last say.

Well, this time around I was to be disappointed as again he was made the second speaker with me as the first. The chairman giving a rather lame excuse that they had flipped a coin and I lost! Well, if that was so, the very least they should have done was to flip the coin in front of me! Anyway, it soon became apparent that they were more under his influence than mine but it did not deter me from proceeding. The knowledge that KJ was not prepared to go first in itself was a consolation. Even on a topic which was supposedly familiar to him, he was concerned about going first.

Anyway, I proceeded, stating clearly that I felt like a fish out of water as being an Engineer by training, economics was not my cup of tea. Nevertheless, I spoke for about 25 minutes and I highlighted the following:

1. The fact that economic policies are not implemented in a vacuum and the possibility of success was also very dependent on non-economic aspects of society including the effectiveness of the various institutions of government and its many departments as well as social stability and unity. Thus all the talk about ‘transformation’, 1 Malaysia and the NKRA and NKEA.
2. The need for realistic targets which is not the case for the RMK 10 as the targets set looked more like a ‘wish list’ rather than a list of realistic and achievable targets. This was of course not surprising as even for RMK 8 and 9, targets were far from achieved. However in the practice of non-accountable governance for which BN is famous, the failures were of no consequence. So they can carry on setting impossible targets and keep on failing with no one in the administration batting an eye. The targets for growth and investment, both private and public, were areas of particular concern. Private investment figures clearly showed a downward trend with it showing a negative growth in 09.
3. The need to ensure that National debt was under control by reducing the fiscal deficit. This is however to be achieved by ensuring crony or production subsidies were reduced or slashed altogether and not consumer subsidies as was currently the case. The penchant of the BN to go after consumer subsidies was unjust and bound to cause inflation.
4. The need to ensure that all contracts are awarded on a tender and not a negotiated basis. I made mention of the Sg. Besi, Sg. Buloh lands and the MRT while highlighting the fact that this practice was still very much alive in the BN for all the lip service. Cronyism was still very much alive. I quoted a few examples. I always made an early reference to BN giving party interests priority over national interests in the case of Kelantan.
5. I also emphasized that we should not be focusing only on growth while the question of distribution was ignored. An inclusive development which ensured that society as a whole received the benefits of this development was the only way to ensure that development would be sustainable.

KJ was quick to catch my slip up on the acronyms wherein I translated the ‘N’ in NKRA and NKEA as to mean ‘New’ instead of National. This was to him reason enough for him to assume PAS as being a party which is illiterate in economics. I responded saying that it was no big deal be it New or National as the point raised is still relevant. But I can call it ‘New’ National Key Result Areas and New National Economic Areas if it would make him happy. The point I was raising being that in the past it would seem that the administration was doing things without knowing the key areas which needed attention. Something like working in the dark.

KJ rebutted by saying that all the areas were included in the previous RMKs. He even wanted to place a ‘friendly wager’. When I wanted to respond he quickly highlighted it was his floor and it was the last round so no chance for me to respond then! All I wanted to say was that it is therefore obvious it was the same old thing, just in new packaging!

But he did stump me once when he declared Malaysia’s top ten rating as an investment destination. I wasn’t aware of the rating, being a non-economist, and was rather taken aback especially after reading all the bad reports and reducing investment figures of 2009. How could such a rating be I questioned myself? It was contrary to all that I had read, admittedly hurriedly, before. Nothing has changed for the better in Malaysia, the flip-flop nature of government, the lack of independence of the judiciary, the level of corruption and so on and so forth. If nothing has changed here, then surely either the ratings are wrong, or something has changed elsewhere making the other places worse than Malaysia, I deduced. However, not having the facts, I remained silent on this issue. Post forum I was told that my deduction was spot on as the investment climate in Europe was bad as was too that in the Mid-east with the Dubai crisis having just happened.

Figures can be informative, leading one to the right conclusion or it can also be used to mislead. Such was the case with the ratings mentioned above as well as the ‘growth figures’ for the 1st and 2nd quarters of 2010. KJ highlighted the 8 plus % and 10 plus % achieved but what he did not say was that these were relative figures comparing the growth of 2010 to the same quarters in 2009. As the 2009 figures were poor, the relative performance in 2010 was seen to be much better than what it actually was. This was as the base line for comparison was low.

KJ also had a tough time in respect of PERKASA as I mentioned that it was all an act and that UMNO and PERKASA were actually working hand in glove. KJ retorted by saying he would leave UMNO if PERKASA’s stand was chosen over his. We will wait and see.

He also admitted that BN has to be made accountable for the targets set in the RMK 10 and if they were not achieved then BN should be dumped in the next General Election. Interestingly, the media did not highlight this statement made by KJ. He probably regretted saying it.

Anyway, in a nut shell, the experience was a good one for me as it forced me to improve in my understanding of economics. In the past I was happy to allow those more passionate about economics to highlight the issues and be at the fore-front. I would pick one or two of the issues and hammer it home in support.

Now I too have to be as passionate about economic issues and this requires further reading and understanding of the topic. If others can understand the subject, some better than others, why can’t I? This effort to improve my understanding of the subject is expected. This is the more so given the fact that PR is currently ‘a government in waiting’.

WaLlahu 'Alam
KHALID SAMAD

No comments

Powered by Blogger.