The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion
The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion |
| We are better than what they say Posted: 01 Jun 2011 06:06 PM PDT JUNE 2 — It was bright summer on the lawns of Sydney University, days into the new millennium. It was Open Day, so all sorts of teenagers and parents roamed about as big decisions were being made about futures. The university in a separate part of the campus, but simultaneously, was hosting the World University Debating Championships, so wiser minds decided to show the students the type of opportunities the student union offered; by putting on a debate since there were hundreds of top debaters in the vicinity. So for obvious reasons they made it Australia versus the rest of the world. The world team was made of two former world champions from Britain and a Malaysian, me. The Australian team had a former world champion and best speaker. The other was an ex-Sydney Union debater — an inspirational speaker and now Australia's minister for sustainability, environment, water, population and communities. It was a debate about multiculturalism. But topics don't matter, neither do reputations, as we have a saying — you are only as good as your last debate. So old hacks hacked away. My joke about kebab sellers in Parramatta went down fairly well and a good time was had by all. So far I am following the script, a Malaysian happy about being associated with high achievers. But that has never been my intention. For me, it is the fear of being the token. It is the fear I have carried all my life, of being insignificant. I want those in the room to feel the same level of respect sharing the space with me. We are colleagues. Their finest and ours together, as a natural occurrence — that is the objective. I want to be competitive and relevant. It does not matter who is in the room, it is important I am trying to shine, to do what I can. And that is what I hope for my countrymen. To believe they are worth more than just deciding who is more deserving inside Malaysia. The thing is, I know how it feels to be intimidated. And in situations like the above and other occasions, I've had to rise to the occasion. Self-pity and other emotional withdrawals do not help. Sometimes you have to show up. A reader commented about my lofty expectations of our nation and its people, saying we have to manage expectations as after all, we are just Malaysians. But as a country, mediocrity only leads us down the path of average. Decent politicians will do, forget great. Win the Asean Cup every 20-odd years and sate our football appetites by catching the Champions League. Build stadias and facilities so the truly great can fly in and perform in them. Let us settle for opportunities to be near legends. A brush with immortality. I've never bought that, I do not accept a reality where a permanent pecking order exists, with us behind indefinitely. That is not living. A nation must believe in its own greatness and endeavour to scale to the summit. Caution: I'm not advocating for a set of obscure and awkward achievements like the most number of teh tarik on a large field, or for more state-funded and heavily politicised climbing teams to Everest. Those are silly preoccupations. To set our own conditions to success, that is a cop-out. Eventually we will meet the world on its terms. We need to. In a world where nation-states are the default, nations which preach mediocrity are asking for a fall. There are low levels of confidence in this country. Nothing is proof of our insecurities more than how quickly we turn on each other. Let's engage the challenge. Seeking excellence as a national culture is not about winning everything in sight. Competition helps provide shape and measure of excellence, but it in itself is not excellence. Global conquest is not the goal, the goal to is deny the belief we are two steps behind anyone. The Japanese and Germans surrendered at the end of the Second World War. They apologised for their fascism which ran contrary to the rights of many across the world and resulted in their defeat. They did not, unsurprisingly, apologise for their national pride. Their sense of excellence was kept intact. Within 40 years of losing the war; they turned their military industries into, well, industries. No one remembers Mitsubishi as the maker of fighter planes. They've returned their countries to being high-income nations. They hosted two Olympics and one World Cup. Their cities are global icons. Nicol David is our shining light. I just wonder about the mental strength that girl carries. She has for more than half a decade captivated global squash in a competition where only the Caucasian girls triumph. It is a pretty tough, physical and enduring sport, with no one in this country ever being where she is. No one. And she has kept on, I mean not as just someone who has won a few titles but as the undisputed champion of global female squash for that long. No one from her country is in this league, no one from her continent is actually. In a short while, no one ever. How must it be for her on the tour. To not have anyone familiar near her, just cities and competitors — all out to beat her, because your reputation on the circuit is built on beating her — and to go on without fuss. At the end of the year she goes home for Christmas, shares the presents and is back on the tour to make history this country will bask in for decades. That is just wow. I taught a course in Terengganu in 2006 and saw a female participant with a paper file with a large poster of Nicol stuck to it. I asked her, and she said that she saw so much in her, and in return so much in herself. That is Nicol's legacy to our country. Even if she loses every match she plays from now on. That is my hope for my country, to be a nation of competitors. Not to eat into each other's success as vultures, jackals and simpletons. To be a nation of champions. * The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist. Full Feed Generated by Get Full RSS, sponsored by USA Best Price. |
| Reducing the political cost of liberalisation Posted: 01 Jun 2011 05:49 PM PDT JUNE 2 — A price-control mechanism has its economic cost, on top of that associated with the current subsidy regime in place in Malaysia. There are also some political costs to the control. In tight times when commodities are becoming dearer, any government that dares to reset retail prices upwards invites public wrath. There was talk of an early general election, but the rumour machines now suggest that the election will be held only later. The Barisan Nasional-led federal government needs room to manoeuvre before renewing its mandate. The prime minister is under pressure to seek a mandate of his own. One has to remember that Datuk Seri Najib Razak is running on the 2008 mandate secured by the highly-unpopular Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Not only that, the prime minister also needs Barisan Nasional to do better than it did in the last general election. He must get the two-thirds majority in Parliament to prove that his government is better than the one led by his predecessor. That is one of the ways the political cost matters. The political cost can affect cold but rational economic calculations. This is especially relevant for those whose conviction is measured by their appetite for adventure, or lack of adventure rather. That makes it important to reduce the political cost of liberalisation lest the liberalisation agenda, however dissatisfyingly incomplete it is in its current form, be left high and dry. The local political cost that exists is unfortunate because global economic reality largely ignores local political reality. In many cases, the increase in retail prices is inevitable amid rising world prices of various commodities. The factors fuelling the hike are real: growing population, growing affluence and therefore growing demand. That is the current long-term trend. Mere business cycles neither erase nor change long-term trends by much. There are some institutional issues affecting local retail prices as well. Without hurting the trustworthiness of the government, these problems have to be solved. Liberalise the market instead of granting monopoly power to specific firms. Make the market open instead of having deals made in the shadows. Stop signing contracts that are grossly lopsided at the expense of public money. All that can lessen the degree of the hikes in the long run. Yet, local issues just like short-term fluctuations are unlikely to drown out long-term trends. Until new technology, new culture and new alternatives prevail over old ones — or if total world population drops — prices will generally go up to clear the markets. Because of the dissonance between local political and global economic realities, the political cost should be reduced so that both run parallel to each other. The political cost is a disincentive to good economic policy. Democracy coupled with entitlement culture is a recipe for irresponsible populism. This is especially true for the fuel subsidy regime where the subsidy fixes the price ceiling and in effect subsidises everything between retail prices and world prices. Under this arrangement, the government risks hypothetically unlimited expenditure. The higher the world prices, the larger the subsidy bill. So, how does one reduce the political cost? The government can stop being the fall guy. To do so, the government needs to stop managing prices. Relax the control. Let prices float. Let the market take charge instead. Let those closest to the ground — the actual buyers and sellers — determine the prices. Using the fuel subsidy as an example, the relaxation can exist together with fixed per unit subsidy regime rather than the current unfixed per unit subsidy. In this way, the subsidy burden shouldered by the government will remain constant given a consumption level. Any increase or decrease in retail prices will be due to market forces only. This particular arrangement will reduce the political cost faced by a liberalising government by making the link between prices and primary market participants clearer. Prices will no longer be linked to the government. With the government out of the way, then perhaps the government will receive less flak. The question of subsidy reduction itself will not even surface because increase in world prices will not increase the subsidy bill given the level of consumption. Indeed, a typical model will suggest that an increase in world prices might actually decrease the total subsidy bill due to decreased consumption. In the end with less flak, perhaps the liberalisation agenda can go farther down the road without unnecessary undue erosion of political capital. * The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist. Full Feed Generated by Get Full RSS, sponsored by USA Best Price. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan