Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

Posted: 26 Sep 2012 04:47 PM PDT

SEPT 27 — I grew up not knowing long-term financial planning. My dad would drive the night cab, and my mum would wait for the 3am cash status update from him.

The next day would be formed around available funds. The kids always got their school day allowance in the morning and life went on.

I'd pride myself in being able to walk up and down the aisles looking for the cheapest soap, shampoo or anything my mum asked me to run down to the stores to get.

Therefore, a month's finances planned in advance would appear grander than a trip to a theme park — we went once to Mimaland — but an annual one, that would be like the Marshall Plan.

So you see, the national Budget for 2013 due out tomorrow is really long term to people from my side of the train tracks.

And today, 70 per cent of households in Malaysia — since they earn RM3,000 or less a month, which also makes them an even larger representation of total population in percentage since poorer families have larger families — are just trying to get by, so they may be forgiven to think that Malaysia's financial planning is more secure in the hands of the privileged class.

For they know money better, the elites of Malaysia. No?

No, actually.

I've always known the value of money. Most of us who spend most of our days wondering if we are going to have any do. Sure of that now, as I was when my late step-grandfather showed me a RM5 note and told me that men have to toil hard so that they are be able to earn it.

Similarly, millions of Malaysians, rich or poor know what money is.

But I have great disdain for a system that does not want to draw people into the larger discussion of how money is gathered and then spent. That is what a Budget shows, the careful, deliberate and detailed accounting of what is to be done with money.

It is the duty of an equitable and egalitarian society to include all.

The Budget and the family

Information generally is convoluted in Malaysia — financial information a more unwieldy beast akin to dead languages.

Therefore to simplify, I'll compare the national Budget to the single family unit's financial planning.

I'll respect the limitations of the analogy as a means to understand the broader and wider impact of the Budget.

But the principles, the unadulterated elements do stand. As ex-US President Bill Clinton put it, the real genius behind his administration's budgetary surplus in the '90s was arithmetic. You spend only what you have, adding and subtracting will do the trick.

The Barisan Nasional government continues to prevaricate over the financial management of the country, and the deficit grows.

It may want to learn arithmetic from families. They live within their means.

They spend what they have. Families cannot afford budget deficits. They don't issue bonds, they visit the local pawnshop and thereafter remember daily the family heirloom or wedding jewellery.

When they fail to pay the debt, the penalty is exacting.

So how do governments avoid budgetary errors?

Can't buy two schoolbags and no school books

A family pools its money. If three persons in a family of six work, then the combined incomes of the three can give more to the six, than three incomes separately acting to improve the welfare of the six.

This is about scale. Similarly, the country with its pooled resources can do exponentially more than if each citizen held on to his or her individual contribution and proceeded to effect the same outcome.

Citizens expect their government to exhibit their ability to exploit scale and stretch the ringgit.

The government only tells where it spends, and most Malaysians are convinced these are sinkholes.

There are various parts to the jigsaw. All the pieces must fit in order to have an appropriate return.

For example, the Klang Valley MRT project is under way, but trains don't pass through all our homes and neither do all of us live within walking distance to designated stations. So, without buses, tricycles and other public transportation, plans to get city dwellers from home to station A and then station B to office regularly, systematically and reliably, then the train stations will be hit and miss.

The RM50 billion the train system is expected to cost will only be recouped if millions of city folk use it, and that number will be determined by access. Right now, the MRT appears to be a standalone and based on the support the present rail systems get — LRT and Komuter — the former will also fail to shine as much as it should.

See no evil, and everything else

The above seems like an abstract critique, and maybe misplaced accusing BN of not exploiting scale and stretching the ringgit.

For there are millions of permutations involving millions of people, the best way forward is to include as many of those millions in the mapping out of the expenditures, like for train systems.

Where does BN fail, then?

The opaque manner in which the largest infrastructure project in the history of the country is being carried out along with every other major project does not only encourage leakages, it results in poor fits.

Since the execution, the paying for it happens without examination, the mismatches emerge. This is where they fail.

That is why diligent MPs, conscientious ministers and integrity-driven civil servants playing out their various roles in spending or perusing spending under the glare of a vigilant mainstream media, and all of them cross-examining each other results in a more rigorous Budget.

The lack of oversight hurts the integrity of any BN Budget.

The modern family democracy

Though someone is in charge of family finances — with several members probably contributing to the pool — every member pays when family unit's financial decisions go awry.

Since everyone can potentially be affected, all members should have a say. They must have a valid say constantly.

Members don't want to contribute all year round and only hope that their contributions will benefit them.

They want to see the plan, not just what is being spent. Otherwise their commitment to the family unit ebbs.

And that is the stalemate in the shaping of Malaysia's Budget and its execution.

The government does not want its financial planning to be processed, they just want it to be accepted.

Which is why our country telecasts the Budget announcement "live", because there will be very little changed by the 10 days mandated for a parliamentary debate over the proposed Budget by MPs. The attitudes have not changed.

But inclusivity is not perfection.

For I'll concede, even if all Malaysians feel that their input is considered directly or through their representatives or through the establishment of a gladiatorial structure of checks and balances, any Budget may still adversely affect Malaysians.

But the leakages will be lower, and the mismatches largely absent. I can live with that.

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

Royalti pelakon dari sudut yang realistik

Posted: 26 Sep 2012 04:37 PM PDT

27 SEPT — Baru-baru ini Persatuan Seniman Malaysia (Seniman) yang diketuai oleh presidennya Zed Zaidi telah mengusulkan berkenaan hal royalti untuk para pelakon. Ianya mendapat respon yang positif dari pihak kementerian.

Melalui Seniman, satu badan pengurusan artis yang dikenali sebagai Malaysia Screen Actors Guild Berhad( MSAGB) akan ditubuhkan sebelum hujung tahun ini 2012 ini mengikut perancangannya.

Hasil pertemuan dengan Menteri Perdagangan Dalam Negeri, Koperasi dan Kepenggunaan, Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob, perkara tersebut akan diberi perhatian yang serius dan perlukan penyelidikan yang menyeluruh .

Manakala sumber dari royalti itu akan dikutip dari badan-badan penyiaran tempatan seperti Astro, RTM, Media Prime serta penyiar IPTV jika filem-filem atau drama yang dilakonkan oleh mereka yang terlibat disiarkan.

Ianya isu yang menarik untuk dibincangkan kerana Hollywood yang merupakan industri filem yang terbesar pun tidak ada agihan ataupun peruntukan royalti untuk para pelakon. Yang ada mungkin hak kebajikan para pelakon yang diuruskan oleh satu-satu badan yang ditubuhkan namun ianya bukanlah dalam bentuk royalti.

Ianya juga agak rumit untuk dilaksanakan kerana antara lagu dan filem adalah dua genre yang berbeza.

Penyanyi atau komposer mendapat royalti mengikut kontrak yang mereka persetujui. Maknanya penyanyi tidak dibayar gaji kecuali advance atau wang pendahuluan. Gaji mereka adalah hasil dari penjualan album/ringtone mengikut perjanjian antara mereka dan syarikat rakaman.

Berbeza dengan situasi pelakon yang gaji mereka dibayar oleh produser dalam bentuk "lump sum". Maknanya bakat mereka adalah produk yang diniagakan. Adakah penerbit atau badan penyiaran akan bersetuju dengan idea tersebut?

Apabila penerbit menjual produk mereka pada badan penyiaran dengan harga yang telah ditetapkan, ianya adalah urusan perniagaan. Pelakon atau krew yang terlibat dengan kontrak lakonan telah dibayar gaji oleh penerbit, jadi di sini isunya agak rumit juga untuk diselesaikan.

Maknanya juga seluruh krew yang terlibat juga sepatutnya mendapat royalti kerana mereka juga terlibat juga untuk sesuatu projek filem atau drama itu.

Saya suka jika pelakon mendapat royalti. Pelakon pun mungkin suka tapi itu bagi saya atas ehsan penerbit/produser kerana mereka berniaga yang mahukan keuntungan juga.

Dalam dunia muzik juga khususnya, para penyanyi/kumpulan dari syarikat rakaman juga akan menandatangani kontrak untuk tuntutan royalti dalam bentuk perjanjian mengikut syarat-syarat yang telah ditetapkan.

Di era awal tahun 90an, banyak penyanyi solo mahupun berkumpulan yang mencipta nama di Indonesia seperti kumpulan Iklim, Search dan Sheila Majid antaranya. Jualan album Search dan Iklim di sana sangat laris sehingga mencecah rabutan ribu unit. Adakah mereka mendapat royalti dari hasil jualan album tersebut?

Mereka adalah produk yang diniagakan antara syarikat rakaman Malaysia dan Indonesia. Jika di dalam perjanjian hanya melibatkan kontrak mereka di Malaysia sahaja, maknanya mereka tidak berhak mendapat apa-apa royalti pun dari syarikat rakaman malah industri muzik Indonesia juga tidak mengamalkan sistem agihan royalti untuk para artis yang bernaung di syarikat rakaman mereka kecuali wang, rumah dan kereta dalam bentuk "lump sum".

Saya pernah bekerja sebagai pemeriksa menara telekomunikasi di Perak beberapa tahun lalu. Apabila pihak telco (Maxis, DiGi, Celcom atau Telekom) dari Maxis contohnya menyewa tapak tanah dari tuan tanah untuk dibina menara pencawang telekomunikasi dengan nilai RM1,500 setiap bulan contohnya, itu perjanjian di antara pihak Maxis dan tuan tanah yang telah bersetuju dengan syarat dan perjanjian.

Kemudian Maxis pula menyewakan pencawang mereka kepada Celcom mahupun DiGi untuk ditumpangkan microwave dish untuk dipasang di pencawang mereka atau ada tolak ansur atau kerjasama antara mereka.

Maka apabila itu berlaku maka ada pihak tuan tanah yang tidak berpuas hati kerana itu tidak adil pula bagi mereka tapi sebagai penyewa pihak Maxis berhak untuk berbuat begitu kerana perjanjian yang dipersetujui adalah antara mereka dan tuan tanah sahaja, bukan dengan Celcom mahupun DiGi.

Hasil temu bual santai saya dengan seorang kawan yang juga seorang penerbit, beliau berpendapat ianya agak mustahil kerana gaji para pelakon dibayar mengikut standard mereka. Penerbit pula perlu mencari budget untuk segala keperluan termasuklah peralatan filem dan keperluan lain yang melibatkan kos yang besar.

Kita tidak boleh membandingkan industri filem di negara kita dengan Hollywood kerana budget dan pasaran mereka besar dan mereka telah jauh maju ke hadapan berbanding kita di sini. Di sini para penerbit terpaksa menyewa segala peralatan yang termasuk dalam kos produksi sebanyak RM200,000 sekurang-kurangnya untuk satu tempoh projek itu.

Itu hanya kos peralatan sahaja, belum lagi melibatkan kos-kos lainnya. Isunya di sini adalah kebajikan untuk pelakon di hari tua mereka nanti tapi dari sudut yang lebih realistiknya?

Berlakon adalah ibarat berniaga sendiri. Tidak ada jalan lain untuk jaminan masa depan kecuali sistem pengurusan kewangan yang teratur. Mereka dibayar agak lumayan selagi bakat mereka diterima sehingga ada yang mampu beroleh pendapatan puluhan ribu ringgit sebulan.

Jika di Hollywood semakin tua pelakon itu semakin tinggi bayaran mereka tetapi situasi itu tidak berlaku dalam industri filem kita di sini. Di sini semakin tua jika semasa laku mereka tidak beringat, maknanya karamlah hari tua mereka.

Jadi seperti seorang peniaga, mereka perlu menabung semasa masih diterima untuk mengelakkan hidup melarat di hari tua nanti.

Kalau masa tengah laku kita enjoy nak hidup macam orang kaya dan hidup nak bermewah-mewah, memang masaalahlah bila tiba hari tua nanti.

Apabila seniman besar kita Tan Sri P. Ramlee meninggal dunia pada tahun 1973 dulu, tiada harta yang ditinggalkannya melainkan sebuah rumah dan sebuah kereta Datsun 120Y. Itulah kenyataannya.

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

Kredit: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com

Khamis, 27 September 2012

The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan