Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

Posted: 23 Jan 2013 03:12 PM PST

JAN 24 — We are firmly in the election season and for casual observers of democracy, THAT question remains.

Not who to vote for, that everyone gets wrong one time or another.

But to determine what should be measured, weighed or counted when choosing; then how to compare those units of value with other units or even which units to set by the side to compare; and finally decide which candidate crossed the finishing line from that flow of thought.

For the vote does not happen every day, but it affects everyone's everyday.

So, those somewhat interested are the most vocal, all of them need a decision making matrix — which is a complicated way of saying "a way to add up things right" — and later defend their choice. The vote is secret, but voters have to live with that choice as they witness events thereafter.

Some people don't show up on Election Day because being responsible for your vote is too heavy a burden. Universal suffrage is not new, however when seen as a stretch on the timeline of human history it is a "Johnny Come Lately."

This column will run a series of issues that must be on the radar of voters, starting with education.

Teach a man to fish

Never before in history do countries' education levels dictate competitiveness wholly. While cynics poured scorn in the past on the millions of graduates from the Indian sub-continent and the Philippines for decades, saying there was no point in having so many unemployed engineers, the joke has turned on the tormentors.

Regardless of oil finds, abundant cheap labour and holding the major sea-lanes of the world, Malaysia is a modestly populated nation whose long term future is in the hands of its people and their readiness for the world.

That state of ready is measured by our levels of education. Real education, not bending the rules to fake success as our examination driven structure coupled with gaming the process in tuition centres and boarding schools exhibit.

Autonomy to teach

Let's leave the grades aside. Daily, young people sit in classrooms waiting to be engaged, to learn a little more about the universe they live in. The fuel for learning is curiosity.

How can learning dominate our schools when the fuel championed is exam results?

Irrespective of the medium of instruction to be employed in public schools, for none of us ever gets our way in a massive public delivery like public education, are the policies and their ensuing implementation up to scratch?

The voter obviously cannot be overwhelmed by the system's failures, for even if it is lamentable it is unfair for it to be the sole basis for judgement.

Consider where Malaysia is, and then ask if there have been solid policies sustained with all the support structures necessary to drive them.

Have our kids become smarter across the board? Are there good plans to get them smarter?

The way public universities complain about the general quality emerging from the system is discouraging. The level of disdain corporations express for the general graduates, from those institutions and the coterie of private institutions mushrooming where there is plumbing, has to be worrying.

That the government is stretching its entry-level employee base to accommodate unemployment underlines a systemic collapse.

Again, look for signs.

Has there been an honest and refreshing response, even if it fails, to these seemingly obvious but really highly complex challenges?

The only meaningful debate when it comes to primary and secondary education has been about the medium of instruction. The opposing positions are both compelling, with me on the side of Malay language for now, but they do sidetrack other equally alarming issues.

The capacity and motivation of teachers entering the service is continuously suspect, and schools are adjusting to the teaching staff rather than urging them forward. The exam-focussed system with reliance on tuition centres and the destruction of sports and co-curricular activities fits many teaching staff rooms.

The five-type public education structure — national, Chinese, religious, Tamil and state-boarding — is rupturing, for there are obvious inequalities, economies of scale are absent while costs sear and the demand for progressive education grows.

There is no quick fix, but the principle issues have to be confronted.

The initial attraction of national schools in the 60s to early 80s to the non-Malay communities eroded in the 90s and has stayed that way. Can national schools be truly national, and will politicians back their words with actions?

The kids should not be kept apart, but parents don't want their eight-year-old to be the punching bag of a system because the child is not Malay. They don't trust the teachers will be impartial, and based on open statements by ruling politicians, they are completely in the right not to trust.

Some of the Chinese schools can voluntarily be turned into national schools, they are already taking in substantial number of non-Chinese students. But the school administrators must feel the Mandarin language programmes will be upheld and that the learning culture which has contributed to the school's success will remain.

Through a long steady process, the public schools system can gain leverage on economies of scale and build on the previous successes of the schools generally ignored.

Private schools, public schools and the in-betweens

And perhaps the answer to parents wanting a more progressive education system may be in affordable private education.

These parents don't just want their kids to learn technology in English, they generally want them to do and learn other things like drama, fencing, gymnastics and even more "engaging" Islamic classes.

The public education system may not be the thing for them, and that is not a bad thing.

If the state can restructure some of the schools to become fee paying with a government grant, then both the parents and ministry of education win. Some of the mission schools and old English government schools would fit the bill.

Around the dinner table

It can be frustrating to reduce the large framework of learning for millions into limited paragraphs, but the immovable feature of true education is to render someone stronger.

When families sit for dinner, children should be able to recount all the wonders of learning they experienced in school. That parents are assured that their children have become stronger because they went to school that day.

Public education is about resource management and giving most Malaysians enough education to meet future challenges.

Even if the reader is avidly opposed to how the opinions are formed in this column, he cannot ignore the centrality of education to the future of the country.

On that token the voter must say he or she factored the direction and policies of education in Malaysia today when deciding who to vote.

So if you have five things on your decision matrix come election day, don't forget education — however you feel about the present system and ongoing policies.

* This is the personal opinion of the columnist

Politics shouldn’t be taboo in financial world

Posted: 23 Jan 2013 03:10 PM PST

JAN 24 ― Malaysian private economists mostly find themselves in domestic banks. They typically provide macroeconomic outlook and commentaries on the Malaysian economy for the banks and its clients.

These economists are mostly interested in business cycles, which is a code word for short term economic fluctuation. After all, most professionals in the finance industry and especially the fund managers are mostly interested in making money. Money is made during a business cycle. Beyond the cycle, it is academic.

Academic matters are good to know but one cannot use it to make a killing in the market. Five years down the road? Structural issues? "Cool story, bro."

So, these private economists focus on projecting Malaysia's economic growth, inflation, foreign exchange and interest rates as well as trade figures for the year and the next. These short-run forecast are the big five traditional things that private economists have their eyes on.

Those are not the only things on which economists maintain a close watch. They do monitor and comment other economic indicators and irregular issues, which include developments in other countries that may affect the Malaysian economy.

What is happening in the euro zone? Will the Greek government get the bailout money? Will the US Congress increase the debt limit? What is happening in China? Will the new Abe administration really interfere in the operations of the Bank of Japan?

In many cases, things that are being asked are not strictly economics. They can be political in nature. Do you think Obama will win in the US presidential election? What will happen to Monti? Will Merkel continue to lead Germany? What is Hollande doing? Will Japan and China go to war over those islands? All these questions and more affect the global economy even if they are firmly set in the realm of politics.

Sometimes, some people ask economists about the weather. How bad will Hurricane Sandy be? Regretfully, it seems that economists are the in-house political experts, gypsies with a crystal ball and meteorologists all at the same time. It is outrageous but it just comes with the job. It is demanded of them.

These questions on foreign politics can be answered by these private economists frankly. Not too many will be offended by the answers. The reason is that many in Malaysia do not invest their livelihood in the politics of other countries. They just need to know what is happening abroad so that, for instance, they can anticipate the exchange rate movement. So, foreign politics is not ― in Malaysia-speak ― sensitive to the Malaysian financial industry.

But Malaysian politics is.

Despite the fact that politics clearly affects the economy and, specifically, the financial market, frank political discussions are a bit of a taboo in the industry here in Malaysia.

When the conclusions do not place the government of the day in a good light, there is at least a need to rethink how to deliver the message, if there is a need to deliver that message at all.

While the research arm of a bank is theoretically independent, they are under some pressure to avoid direct political reference altogether, however potentially relevant it is to the economy and the performance of the financial market. The conventional wisdom is, do not offend anybody in politics, especially not the government of the day. Conservatism rules the day.

It does take a lot of tact to write something political. Not in the rhetorical or polemical way mind you but as in critical analysis and how it may affect policy, hence investment. To circumvent the problem, analysts and economists express political-related opinions behind closed doors. It either remains unwritten or coded in confusing sentences if it is written at all.

After all, the typical large clients of the banks are large, rich statutory bodies. One does not want to commit a faux pas and lose out on millions of ringgit worth of transactions and deals.

This is not to say that employees in these institutions are political hacks. No. Like the most economists in these private banks, they are professionals and most of them are completely reasonable. The issue is really the line of command; there are government appointees somewhere up there with a big stick who cannot take political analyses that do not favour their side.

And, yes, research publications by these banks are licensed and monitored by Ministry of Home Affairs. So, the issue of freedom of press also affects these banks although to a much lesser extent compared to the media. After all, analysts and economists at these banks have very little reason to write something about race and religion, the powder keg of Malaysian society.

One example of how politics can be a taboo involves one of the biggest domestic investment banks in Malaysia and a prominent federal opposition member of parliament.

The research arm of the investment bank invited the MP to join them on a roadshow to talk to its clients in Singapore about the latest political development in Malaysia. The bank's clients were interested to know because politics affects their returns on investment. They needed to decide and they needed information. This was a chance to get the information straight from the horse's mouth.

The bank was later criticised for inviting the opposition MP to its programme, by a major pro-Barisan Nasional newspaper. That was the end of it.

As an economist, I also had a report that was mildly political in nature for circulation. The management did not give the publication their green light, however, because they deemed it as too politically sensitive.

The publication was not political rhetoric, which is inappropriate for an investment bank. It was a summary of the finding of a closed door discussion held at the bank earlier, which was about the potential outcome of the next general election. Yes, many banks are concerned about uncertainty surrounding the outcome of the next election.

The management was skittish about organising it because of the profile of the speaker. Still, the forum was held anyway because the bank thought the clients would appreciate it. They clients did appreciate it.

The worst case proving the existence of the taboo so far involves an economist at Bank Islam. He has been suspended by the management of the bank for predicting that Pakatan Rakyat will likely win the next general election and describing such scenario.

His presentation that landed him in hot water does not appear like campaign material. It was more of a mild, measured opinion of an economist instead of a raging, campaigning politician.

As has been reported in the news, the bank has distanced itself from the opinion of its chief economist. That only highlights how averse the bank is to politics.

To be fair, however, the chief economist at Bank Islam, Azrul Azwar Ahmad Tajudin, is not exactly a politically neutral person. He is associated with Parti Keadilan Rakyat and he does advise the party on economic matters. His active participation in politics may have worked against him.

While the fear of losing millions of ringgit and the publication permit is real (perhaps overstated maybe but one can never know), the sensitivity is counterproductive to the industry and those whom it serves. Owners of funds ultimately demand returns to their savings and investment. Having critical and frank analyses on business, the economy and politics are crucial to making the right financial decisions.

Since politics does affect policies and these policies do affect the economy and the financial market, having political discussion as taboo in the financial markets makes making the right decisions harder than it should be.

* This is the personal opinion of the columnist

Kredit: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com

Khamis, 24 Januari 2013

The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan