What's new

Malaysian Malays and their "Chinese pig" song

You, I and Phukimak has illusion about China and we should keep it to ourselves instead of debating with these scions of CPC. It will go nowhere.

There is no such thing that Thai Chinese will get shitt. Thai Chinese control Thailand. Just that you are too sentimental about China.

It is very clear that all SE Asian Chinese and Taiwanese somehow align with one another to a large extend. We rely on ourselves and we are independent people. We do not deserve all these insults and bs.

You are right. I'm quite save. I put Thailand 1st. I write all this because I feel sympathy to Indonesian Chinese.
I feel so bad that despite there are 2 China states, non can save the fate of Indonesian Chinese.

Those PRC posters, they are still young. Sometime young people have a single mind. Sometime young people cannot understand the complexity of interwoven relation of states, nations, and people. They are always think about simple word of state name. There are no China or Thailand. There are only people. Everything you are talking about is actually talking about people. And people are interwoven with conflict and interest. Therefore, we need to slowly preach them the way mothers do to sons. Keep saying until they understand.

Brush your teeth! Wash your hand before eating.
 
Last edited:
Large parts of the economy of Uganda was dominated by the Indians. The crazy dictator Idi Amin
ordered the expulsion of the Indians which led to the collapse of the economy of Uganda.
The successor of Idi Amin literally begged the Indians to return.
I wonder weather something similar could happen in Malaysia with the Chinese.
 
PRC Chinese are not true chinese, just bunch of CCP slaves

Too bad, everyone in the world recognizes that PRC = China. :lol:

Chinese is not by blood, but by nationality. Chinese nationals are composed of 56 ethnic groups.

"Ethnic Chinese" can be of any foreign nationality, and any foreign loyalty. It's not the same as a Chinese citizen.
 
Malaysian Bumiputera, Privileged or Just Plain Unlucky?
bumi_1.jpg

An aerial view of Kuala Lumpur – a property hotspot and capital of Malaysia.
Photo by Daniel Hoherd

bumi_2.jpg

Property developments will have a mandatory quota for Bumiputera.

bumi_3.jpg

Professor Dr. Christopher Shun has vast experience in the property sphere.

bumi_4.jpg

Bumiputera high-rises may be harder to sell compared to landed-properties.
Photo by Phalinn Ooi

bumi_5.jpg

Terrace houses below RM300,000 will have less problems selling.

bumi_6.jpg

The Bumiputera allocation must be flexible in adjusting to the demographics.
Photo by Khairil Faizi

bumi_7.jpg

We may get mixed feelings when it comes to policies, but harmony comes naturally for the different races of Malaysia.

Text : Lawrence Julius

The concept of a Bumiputera ethnic group was coined by former Malaysia Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman in an effort to preserve the rights and privileges of certain races under it. Malaysian Malays and a few more ethnicities who are non-Chinese and Indian are categorized under Bumiputera, including the indigenous of Sabah and Sarawak.

While we certainly found a degree of harmony within the country, one that can still awe foreign visitors, equality issues do creep up once in a while. Race-based privileges are a sensitive matter, though some have been questioned. And one of it correlates to the property industry.

In 1971, the Malaysian New Economic Policy (NEP) was launched as affirmative action. It was in an effort to raise the Bumiputera national wealth share from the then 2.5% to 30%. Although the NEP was replaced by the National Development Policy in 1991, most of the policies founded under the NEP retained its position.

One of the stratagems introduced under the NEP was the Bumiputera Lot Quota Regulation. This policy was implemented to assist the Bumiputera through a 30% minimum mandatory quota as well as a minimum 7% discount on property. All Bumiputera are eligible exclusively.

The quota is a national implementation to promote balanced socio-economic development in the country. It was set in place to encourage more Bumiputera to own houses and promote greater interaction among the various ethnic groups of Malaysia. And more importantly, help lighten the load of those who are not as financially capable as others.

Professor Dr Christopher Shun, Group Managing Director of Capital Sanctuary Sdn Bhd defines it as “a socio mechanism to allow for more equitable sharing of wealth and affordability”.

So the question is: are the rules being implemented effectively?

A formulated debate is within the topic of low-cost versus high-end properties. The issue is on how the Bumiputera quota rule applies to both. At one point, certain voices called out suggesting the rule to be nullified for properties above RM5 million. Should those able to afford high-end properties be exempted from discounts? These voices were met with heavy fire from the other side of the fence saying Bumi privileges are not to be touched and existing rights should be preserved.

Another point for argument ties with the nation’s goal of becoming a developed nation: The only possible way to achieve this is for us to escape from the middle-income trap. But why have we not been able to make a breakthrough as easily as some of our former peers have? An answer probably lies within our nation’s brain drain epidemic. World Bank concluded the same after a recent survey on 200 Malaysians living abroad in February; Malaysia must find a way to stem and overturn the brain drain issue.

Interestingly, we have more than a million Malaysians plying their talents elsewhere. According to the survey two out of 10 tertiary educated Malaysians leave the country to work elsewhere and 87% of respondents suggested that “a shift away from race-based towards needs-based affirmative action” may be able to attract a return to Malaysia. This is certainly a blow for the country, one that could use the extra hand to reach its lofty goals.

In March 2010, current Malaysia Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Haji Mohd Najib Tun Haji Abdul Razak unveiled his much-anticipated New Economic Model (NEM) that will act as an improved extension of the NEP. The ultimate goal of the NEM is to lead the economy to become one with high incomes and quality growth by 2020. With it, certain policies were liberalized to advance the nation as Datuk Seri Najib also pledged to roll-back some of the NEP policies to fit present times. However, the government’s social contract to provide certain benefits to the Bumiputera could not be repealed and ultimately retained.

The Bumiputera Lot Allocation Rule was preserved. While few would dispute the rule is appropriate for those in need of financial assistance, there are doubts regarding implementation and its efficiency. This topic has always been heated within the property sphere – a delicate matter as it touches on racial issues and on-going political agendas. But to really understand the benefits, the issues and the consequences, we must dissect and look deeper. At the same time, widen perspectives.

So what is a Bumi lot?

The Bumi Lot

In the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, the Bumiputera housing quota is set at 30%, paired with a 7% discount. These are the Bumi lots. But for the state of Selangor however, the numbers and rules may take on a different shape. Residential properties here are discounted at 7%, while commercial and industrial properties are marked at 10%. There are different sets of rules implied as the state authorities have the ability to fix as seen fit, so some figures may even be higher than others.

How does this affect the buyers?

The quota percentage can be as high as 70% in some states. Melaka for example, has its Bumi residential quota set at 60%, and 35% for commercial. The headache for developers here is that the quota is implemented across the board, irrespective of location and local ethnic predominance. For an area, which is prominently Malay-based, one would think that there’s no need to apply a quota.

However, Dr Christopher explains that it is natural to have higher quotas where there are more Bumiputeras. It all comes down to adjusting with demographics and market data. Melaka has a population of about 60% Malay and 30% Chinese, in a way it is reflective of the quota. When there are more people who qualify to buy, you’ll be able to sell, naturally. But the rule must be set according to the various subdivisions and the dispersion of people within the state. Dr Christopher agrees that this rule is a positive one, but the issue is on the method and sometimes how it is enforced.

“Each state must look at their demographics and come up with the balanced ratios that meet the needs of the people.

“We must find a way to recalibrate it to the market,” says Dr Chistopher.

The Klang Valley for example, the property hotspot of the peninsular, comprises various districts and towns. Each of which, belong to its own demographic of people. So for example, a predominantly Chinese area like Maluri in Cheras, a high Bumi quota will lower the chances of these lots being sold-off.

Saleha Yusoff, Head of Research at Rahim & Co Chartered Surveyors Sdn Bhd believes that without the quota, the socio balance away from the Bumiputera.

“Developers, being driven by profit, will only look at the margin they will gain from property development. The government has a role to play in promoting equitable progress among all races, which sometimes can be seen as creating inefficiencies in the delivery system,” Saleha explains.

“In a multi-racial country like Malaysia, benefits should not only be justified in terms of economic profitability but also from the perspective of socio-economic equality,” says Saleha.

The issue here is not about Bumiputera allocations according to Dr Christopher; it is about social wealth distribution. When the issues are viewed from this angle, there is no need for racial conflicts or political spats; it’s about helping those who are in need.

“The issue of the Bumi discount must be revisited and recalibrated in the line of social-economic wealth transfer,” says Dr Christopher.

A suggestion would be to base the discount rate on income. Bumiputera privileges would still be maintained, but discounts are set higher for those earning less and lower for those earning more.

“Wealth distribution must not be done punitively, in a way that some groups of people feel disadvantaged. This will not make a happy community,” says Dr Christopher adding, “we need to give back to the rakyat (people) and help those who are less capable. I don’t think anyone would have any qualms with this.”

A Balancing Act
It is right to suggest that the best developments, or townships, or communities, are balanced. But instead of getting the rules right, these locales focus on the people. A “balanced” community, according to Dr Christopher is one that reflects the nation’s demographics. This could be one of the best means to increase Bumiputera lot marketability, in fact the development as a whole. One community that comes to mind when mentioning balance is Taman Tun Dr Ismail (TTDI).

“Here we find 60% Bumiputeras, 30% Chinese and 30% Indians. Perfect.

“It reflects Malaysia’s general demographic,” says Dr Christopher.

It is a challenge to achieve such balance in the Klang Valley, but when the formulas are right, as achieved in TTDI, demand will be strong and the overhang of Bumi lots can be curbed.

One would expect that with the quota and discounts, these lots would be property hotcakes. But in truth, one of the toughest challenges for a developer is selling off Bumi units. In 2010, out of 94,836 completed units in the country that year, 24% was unsold according to the National Property Information Centre (NAPIC). Even for newly launched residential properties, sales performance sat below the 50% mark in 2010 (see Sales Performance and Value of Unsold Residential Units).

According to findings from a survey conducted on 135 developers by the Real Estate and Housing Developers’ Association Malaysia (REHDA), Bumiputera allocation is the top reason contributing to the overhang. The survey showed 30% voted Bumi lots as the culprit while 18% suggests economic and market conditions being the cause. Tallying it up, it is obvious there are stocks of property that are not selling. It shows that buyer demands are not as competitive as it used to be and there is minimal need to reserve units.

Hj Muztaza Mohamad, Managing Director of Fairview Group feels that Bumi properties sold below RM300,000 will not face much difficulties as oppose to the more luxurious range. Muztaza’s experience catering to the Bumiputera market, in areas like Semenyih, shows that low-cost landed housing do well. He singles out terrace-houses as the favorite. High-rises might face some hiccups but landed properties are usually in demand. It is probable those buying to stay will take up the Bumi offer, but doubtful for those seeking to invest.

“The Bumiputera normally wait until the development is completed,” says Muztaza.

Professor Dr Hamdan Ismail, Executive Director of Institute Sultan Iskandar, University Technology Malaysia, approaches the subject in a different angle. To him, the problems of attracting buyers for the allocated lots can be solved using “universal values”. Green and sustainability, community living, landscaping, park facilities – these are all examples that can promote a successful development, Bumiputera lot included.

“These are not racial issues,” says Dr Hamdan, and urges focus to be on the human side of things.

If a developer succeeds in providing these values, Dr Hamdan believes there will be no problems in sales performance. There are actually a number of developers who have implemented the “universal values”. SP Setia Bhd, Sunway Bhd, Mah Sing Group, Sime Darby – these are some who have proven the effectiveness of universal values. Even a simple addition to your standard brick and mortar will bear appreciation.

Dr Hamdan says Malaysians of all races have been living together for decades now and there are no issues; it is a valuable country asset that can be honed to make thriving townships. This eliminates all the worry of lots under-performing. If a developer can create a good environment for residents, it already bears the mark of a good development, the rest will come naturally.

“The developers must do a thorough market study, and not simply build where there’s land,” says Dr Hamdan.

Those who spend more time and effort in studying data before leaping in may reap the reward of good performance in the long run. Market research and consultations play a vital role in getting
things right.

In the initial stages, it is critical to pick the right Bumiputera lots to offer the market. In usual cases, “less-prominent” lots are the ones that are chosen as Bumi, worsening the plight of buyer and developer.

“It’s all about doing your job well,” Dr Hamdan reminds.

If all entities manage to deliver the best, there’s no way the market won’t be interested. We should first and foremost move away from political agendas, focus on Malaysians and reignite the essence of nation building.

The Release
The tallest wall to jump now is the stamp on the property itself. If a property is endorsed “Bumiputera” on its title, owners can only sell this lot off to another Bumiputera. Ultimately this affects the selling power and restricts it in the secondary market. Buyers would find it a hard investment, while developers deem it a selling choke-point. The stigma here is that the Bumiputera themselves prefer buying non-Bumiputera lots, as it enables them to access a wider market when needed.

“It shouldn’t restrict the Bumiputera,” says Dr Christopher. “It is like buying a car, then not being able to sell it off.”

But not all states brand the title in this ink. In Perak, there are no endorsements on the title but the Menteri Besar’s consent is required when selling off the lots. It depends on the individual rulings of each state government. At least owners are allowed to seek approval from local authorities to resell Bumiputera lots in the open market. But still, the amount of bureaucracy involved can be daunting for some. A number of developers are greatly affected because capital is tied up from holding-on to unsold units, some even for years.

For now, what happens then when these lots are under-performing? For the developers, when Bumi lots are not flying-off the shelf, they can apply for a release and sell the lots off to non-Bumiputeras. In some cases, the state government will buy off theses lots at the discounted price and take over the selling responsibilities.

The release mechanism is dependent on the respective state authorities (See Release Clause in Major States). The good news is that all states possess some form of release for the allocated Bumi lots, albeit some are more tricky and complicated than others.

For developers within the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, the lots are released on a staggered basis. When construction on a project reaches 50% and all non-Bumi lots are sold, developers can apply for the first release. On approval, only a maximum of 30% of the unsold units may be freed from the allocation. When the development reaches 80% completion, developers may reapply for another percentage of the remaining unsold lots, subject to the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL). Upon full completion, a final application can be made to release all remaining lots. However, developers are required to contribute a sum equivalent to the Bumiputera discount of each unit to DBKL after the release.

A common requirement in the application process is a show-proof of the developers’ marketing efforts. The common criterion is to have advertised in the local papers for a certain period or format before being eligible for the release. Again, the local authorities determine the specs and there is no fixed guideline to follow as one jumps from state to state. The complications associated to the release stipulations may even choke developer interest in an area – hindering growth.

A quick-fix would be to remove the endorsements that make it a re-sell headache. Developers would surely be more than happy to maintain the quota and discounts. Another would be to loosen the release mechanism and make it easier to convert non-performing Bumi lots into normal lots.

Although we all know the Bumiputera Lot Allocation rule will not be going anywhere anytime soon, we do know that there are ways to help overcome its effects. While total abolishment of the privilege is out of the question, it could use a few tweaks here and there. A balance must be reached, addressed with a clear mindset – and never twisted or made political makeweights. Whatever the plan may be, solving the strivings of the public should be first order. Let the rules better lives, and create an unencumbered future for all.

What are your thoughts on the industry? Is the Bumiputera Lot Regulation sustainable in today’s property market? Let us know what you think! Email your feedback to mailbox@homefinder.com.my along with your details.

Release Clause in Major States

Kuala Lumpur
Quota, 30%
Discount, 5%
Title, Decided by Kuala Lumpur City Council (Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur)

Release
Stage 1
Construction progress at 50% and all non-Bumi units sold.
Advertised (minimum of three advertisements) in Malay and English newspapers, participating in property exhibitions and other promotions.
DBKL will consider release on a staggered basis on a maximum of 30% of remaining unsold units.
Required to re-advertise for remaining unsold units.

Stage 2
Developer may re-apply when the construction reaches 80% .
Re-advertise and participate in DBKL’s Bumiputera Property Exhibition.
DBKL will consider release on a staggered basis.
Re-advertise remaining unsold units and participate in DBKL’s cluster advertisement.

Stage 3
Re-apply upon completion.
Re-advertised.
All remaining unsold Bumi can be released within six months from the issuance of Certificate of Fitness (CF).
Contribution required, equivalent to the Bumiputera discount.

Selangor
Quota
Residential area – based on State Constituencies (ADUN), according to the Blueprint Perumahan Negeri
Selangor Darul Ehsan (2004-2014) by Lembaga Perumahan dan Hartanah Selangor (LPHS).
Commercial area, less than 50 units – decided by the Lands and Mines Office.
Commercial areas of more than 50 units, 60% for low cost (Market Price of RM120,000) and 50% for
other pricing.
Industrial areas less than 10 acres, 40%.
Industrial more than 10 acres, 50% of low cost (Market price of RM150,000) and 40% for other pricing.

Discount, 7% for housing, 10% for commercial (except low cost), 10% for industrial

Title, Not endorsed, since 2005 Bumi lots are marked for six months from project launch

Release
Advertised property in LPHS for three months.
7% of selling price for residential,
10% for commercial properties as contribution to state government.
Industrial areas, 10% of the selling price per unit released.

Johor
Quota, 40%, Conversions approved after Dec 11, 2004, all residential property are subject to the following allocations:
Selling price less than RM200,000, 40%.
Selling price RM200,001 – RM300,000, 30%.
Selling price more than RM300,001, 20%.

Discount, 15%
Title, Endorsed
Release, Upon approval from State Authorities
Applicable after 65% of the construction has been completed.
Placed at least six advertisements in newspapers (minimum size of 16cm x 16 cm).
Placed radio advertisements 14 times in two weeks.
Registered with PERTAM Properties Sdn Bhd and that the selling price of the units have been certified by the same.
Paid contribution at 5% to 15% of sales price for Malay Quota Emission (MQE).

Penang
Quota, 30%
Discount, 5%
Title, Not endorsed, Bumi units indicated by local authority

Release
Construction at 65% – 85% (95% in some cases).
Advertised three times in the newspaper within six months from the date of the first advertisement.
Obtained release letter from the State Housing Department to procure CF (Certificate of Fitness).
Contribution paid to Bendahari Negeri Pulau Pinang, fixed at 30% of the 5% discount due on any unsold Bumiputera units.
 
Too bad, everyone in the world recognizes that PRC = China. :lol:

Chinese is not by blood, but by nationality. Chinese nationals are composed of 56 ethnic groups.

"Ethnic Chinese" can be of any foreign nationality, and any foreign loyalty. It's not the same as a Chinese citizen.

"Chinese is not by blood, but by nationality"??:p:

sun-yat-sen-1.jpg


Citizen of USA

It is a mistake PDF make you a think tank, on view of your scope, knowledge and breath.
 
Malaysian Bumiputera, Privileged or Just Plain Unlucky?
bumi_1.jpg

An aerial view of Kuala Lumpur – a property hotspot and capital of Malaysia.
Photo by Daniel Hoherd

bumi_2.jpg

Property developments will have a mandatory quota for Bumiputera.

bumi_3.jpg

Professor Dr. Christopher Shun has vast experience in the property sphere.

bumi_4.jpg

Bumiputera high-rises may be harder to sell compared to landed-properties.
Photo by Phalinn Ooi

bumi_5.jpg

Terrace houses below RM300,000 will have less problems selling.

bumi_6.jpg

The Bumiputera allocation must be flexible in adjusting to the demographics.
Photo by Khairil Faizi

bumi_7.jpg

We may get mixed feelings when it comes to policies, but harmony comes naturally for the different races of Malaysia.

Text : Lawrence Julius

The concept of a Bumiputera ethnic group was coined by former Malaysia Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman in an effort to preserve the rights and privileges of certain races under it. Malaysian Malays and a few more ethnicities who are non-Chinese and Indian are categorized under Bumiputera, including the indigenous of Sabah and Sarawak.

While we certainly found a degree of harmony within the country, one that can still awe foreign visitors, equality issues do creep up once in a while. Race-based privileges are a sensitive matter, though some have been questioned. And one of it correlates to the property industry.

In 1971, the Malaysian New Economic Policy (NEP) was launched as affirmative action. It was in an effort to raise the Bumiputera national wealth share from the then 2.5% to 30%. Although the NEP was replaced by the National Development Policy in 1991, most of the policies founded under the NEP retained its position.

One of the stratagems introduced under the NEP was the Bumiputera Lot Quota Regulation. This policy was implemented to assist the Bumiputera through a 30% minimum mandatory quota as well as a minimum 7% discount on property. All Bumiputera are eligible exclusively.

The quota is a national implementation to promote balanced socio-economic development in the country. It was set in place to encourage more Bumiputera to own houses and promote greater interaction among the various ethnic groups of Malaysia. And more importantly, help lighten the load of those who are not as financially capable as others.

Professor Dr Christopher Shun, Group Managing Director of Capital Sanctuary Sdn Bhd defines it as “a socio mechanism to allow for more equitable sharing of wealth and affordability”.

So the question is: are the rules being implemented effectively?

A formulated debate is within the topic of low-cost versus high-end properties. The issue is on how the Bumiputera quota rule applies to both. At one point, certain voices called out suggesting the rule to be nullified for properties above RM5 million. Should those able to afford high-end properties be exempted from discounts? These voices were met with heavy fire from the other side of the fence saying Bumi privileges are not to be touched and existing rights should be preserved.

Another point for argument ties with the nation’s goal of becoming a developed nation: The only possible way to achieve this is for us to escape from the middle-income trap. But why have we not been able to make a breakthrough as easily as some of our former peers have? An answer probably lies within our nation’s brain drain epidemic. World Bank concluded the same after a recent survey on 200 Malaysians living abroad in February; Malaysia must find a way to stem and overturn the brain drain issue.

Interestingly, we have more than a million Malaysians plying their talents elsewhere. According to the survey two out of 10 tertiary educated Malaysians leave the country to work elsewhere and 87% of respondents suggested that “a shift away from race-based towards needs-based affirmative action” may be able to attract a return to Malaysia. This is certainly a blow for the country, one that could use the extra hand to reach its lofty goals.

In March 2010, current Malaysia Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Haji Mohd Najib Tun Haji Abdul Razak unveiled his much-anticipated New Economic Model (NEM) that will act as an improved extension of the NEP. The ultimate goal of the NEM is to lead the economy to become one with high incomes and quality growth by 2020. With it, certain policies were liberalized to advance the nation as Datuk Seri Najib also pledged to roll-back some of the NEP policies to fit present times. However, the government’s social contract to provide certain benefits to the Bumiputera could not be repealed and ultimately retained.

The Bumiputera Lot Allocation Rule was preserved. While few would dispute the rule is appropriate for those in need of financial assistance, there are doubts regarding implementation and its efficiency. This topic has always been heated within the property sphere – a delicate matter as it touches on racial issues and on-going political agendas. But to really understand the benefits, the issues and the consequences, we must dissect and look deeper. At the same time, widen perspectives.

So what is a Bumi lot?

The Bumi Lot

In the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, the Bumiputera housing quota is set at 30%, paired with a 7% discount. These are the Bumi lots. But for the state of Selangor however, the numbers and rules may take on a different shape. Residential properties here are discounted at 7%, while commercial and industrial properties are marked at 10%. There are different sets of rules implied as the state authorities have the ability to fix as seen fit, so some figures may even be higher than others.

How does this affect the buyers?

The quota percentage can be as high as 70% in some states. Melaka for example, has its Bumi residential quota set at 60%, and 35% for commercial. The headache for developers here is that the quota is implemented across the board, irrespective of location and local ethnic predominance. For an area, which is prominently Malay-based, one would think that there’s no need to apply a quota.

However, Dr Christopher explains that it is natural to have higher quotas where there are more Bumiputeras. It all comes down to adjusting with demographics and market data. Melaka has a population of about 60% Malay and 30% Chinese, in a way it is reflective of the quota. When there are more people who qualify to buy, you’ll be able to sell, naturally. But the rule must be set according to the various subdivisions and the dispersion of people within the state. Dr Christopher agrees that this rule is a positive one, but the issue is on the method and sometimes how it is enforced.

“Each state must look at their demographics and come up with the balanced ratios that meet the needs of the people.

“We must find a way to recalibrate it to the market,” says Dr Chistopher.

The Klang Valley for example, the property hotspot of the peninsular, comprises various districts and towns. Each of which, belong to its own demographic of people. So for example, a predominantly Chinese area like Maluri in Cheras, a high Bumi quota will lower the chances of these lots being sold-off.

Saleha Yusoff, Head of Research at Rahim & Co Chartered Surveyors Sdn Bhd believes that without the quota, the socio balance away from the Bumiputera.

“Developers, being driven by profit, will only look at the margin they will gain from property development. The government has a role to play in promoting equitable progress among all races, which sometimes can be seen as creating inefficiencies in the delivery system,” Saleha explains.

“In a multi-racial country like Malaysia, benefits should not only be justified in terms of economic profitability but also from the perspective of socio-economic equality,” says Saleha.

The issue here is not about Bumiputera allocations according to Dr Christopher; it is about social wealth distribution. When the issues are viewed from this angle, there is no need for racial conflicts or political spats; it’s about helping those who are in need.

“The issue of the Bumi discount must be revisited and recalibrated in the line of social-economic wealth transfer,” says Dr Christopher.

A suggestion would be to base the discount rate on income. Bumiputera privileges would still be maintained, but discounts are set higher for those earning less and lower for those earning more.

“Wealth distribution must not be done punitively, in a way that some groups of people feel disadvantaged. This will not make a happy community,” says Dr Christopher adding, “we need to give back to the rakyat (people) and help those who are less capable. I don’t think anyone would have any qualms with this.”

A Balancing Act
It is right to suggest that the best developments, or townships, or communities, are balanced. But instead of getting the rules right, these locales focus on the people. A “balanced” community, according to Dr Christopher is one that reflects the nation’s demographics. This could be one of the best means to increase Bumiputera lot marketability, in fact the development as a whole. One community that comes to mind when mentioning balance is Taman Tun Dr Ismail (TTDI).

“Here we find 60% Bumiputeras, 30% Chinese and 30% Indians. Perfect.

“It reflects Malaysia’s general demographic,” says Dr Christopher.

It is a challenge to achieve such balance in the Klang Valley, but when the formulas are right, as achieved in TTDI, demand will be strong and the overhang of Bumi lots can be curbed.

One would expect that with the quota and discounts, these lots would be property hotcakes. But in truth, one of the toughest challenges for a developer is selling off Bumi units. In 2010, out of 94,836 completed units in the country that year, 24% was unsold according to the National Property Information Centre (NAPIC). Even for newly launched residential properties, sales performance sat below the 50% mark in 2010 (see Sales Performance and Value of Unsold Residential Units).

According to findings from a survey conducted on 135 developers by the Real Estate and Housing Developers’ Association Malaysia (REHDA), Bumiputera allocation is the top reason contributing to the overhang. The survey showed 30% voted Bumi lots as the culprit while 18% suggests economic and market conditions being the cause. Tallying it up, it is obvious there are stocks of property that are not selling. It shows that buyer demands are not as competitive as it used to be and there is minimal need to reserve units.

Hj Muztaza Mohamad, Managing Director of Fairview Group feels that Bumi properties sold below RM300,000 will not face much difficulties as oppose to the more luxurious range. Muztaza’s experience catering to the Bumiputera market, in areas like Semenyih, shows that low-cost landed housing do well. He singles out terrace-houses as the favorite. High-rises might face some hiccups but landed properties are usually in demand. It is probable those buying to stay will take up the Bumi offer, but doubtful for those seeking to invest.

“The Bumiputera normally wait until the development is completed,” says Muztaza.

Professor Dr Hamdan Ismail, Executive Director of Institute Sultan Iskandar, University Technology Malaysia, approaches the subject in a different angle. To him, the problems of attracting buyers for the allocated lots can be solved using “universal values”. Green and sustainability, community living, landscaping, park facilities – these are all examples that can promote a successful development, Bumiputera lot included.

“These are not racial issues,” says Dr Hamdan, and urges focus to be on the human side of things.

If a developer succeeds in providing these values, Dr Hamdan believes there will be no problems in sales performance. There are actually a number of developers who have implemented the “universal values”. SP Setia Bhd, Sunway Bhd, Mah Sing Group, Sime Darby – these are some who have proven the effectiveness of universal values. Even a simple addition to your standard brick and mortar will bear appreciation.

Dr Hamdan says Malaysians of all races have been living together for decades now and there are no issues; it is a valuable country asset that can be honed to make thriving townships. This eliminates all the worry of lots under-performing. If a developer can create a good environment for residents, it already bears the mark of a good development, the rest will come naturally.

“The developers must do a thorough market study, and not simply build where there’s land,” says Dr Hamdan.

Those who spend more time and effort in studying data before leaping in may reap the reward of good performance in the long run. Market research and consultations play a vital role in getting
things right.

In the initial stages, it is critical to pick the right Bumiputera lots to offer the market. In usual cases, “less-prominent” lots are the ones that are chosen as Bumi, worsening the plight of buyer and developer.

“It’s all about doing your job well,” Dr Hamdan reminds.

If all entities manage to deliver the best, there’s no way the market won’t be interested. We should first and foremost move away from political agendas, focus on Malaysians and reignite the essence of nation building.

The Release
The tallest wall to jump now is the stamp on the property itself. If a property is endorsed “Bumiputera” on its title, owners can only sell this lot off to another Bumiputera. Ultimately this affects the selling power and restricts it in the secondary market. Buyers would find it a hard investment, while developers deem it a selling choke-point. The stigma here is that the Bumiputera themselves prefer buying non-Bumiputera lots, as it enables them to access a wider market when needed.

“It shouldn’t restrict the Bumiputera,” says Dr Christopher. “It is like buying a car, then not being able to sell it off.”

But not all states brand the title in this ink. In Perak, there are no endorsements on the title but the Menteri Besar’s consent is required when selling off the lots. It depends on the individual rulings of each state government. At least owners are allowed to seek approval from local authorities to resell Bumiputera lots in the open market. But still, the amount of bureaucracy involved can be daunting for some. A number of developers are greatly affected because capital is tied up from holding-on to unsold units, some even for years.

For now, what happens then when these lots are under-performing? For the developers, when Bumi lots are not flying-off the shelf, they can apply for a release and sell the lots off to non-Bumiputeras. In some cases, the state government will buy off theses lots at the discounted price and take over the selling responsibilities.

The release mechanism is dependent on the respective state authorities (See Release Clause in Major States). The good news is that all states possess some form of release for the allocated Bumi lots, albeit some are more tricky and complicated than others.

For developers within the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, the lots are released on a staggered basis. When construction on a project reaches 50% and all non-Bumi lots are sold, developers can apply for the first release. On approval, only a maximum of 30% of the unsold units may be freed from the allocation. When the development reaches 80% completion, developers may reapply for another percentage of the remaining unsold lots, subject to the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL). Upon full completion, a final application can be made to release all remaining lots. However, developers are required to contribute a sum equivalent to the Bumiputera discount of each unit to DBKL after the release.

A common requirement in the application process is a show-proof of the developers’ marketing efforts. The common criterion is to have advertised in the local papers for a certain period or format before being eligible for the release. Again, the local authorities determine the specs and there is no fixed guideline to follow as one jumps from state to state. The complications associated to the release stipulations may even choke developer interest in an area – hindering growth.

A quick-fix would be to remove the endorsements that make it a re-sell headache. Developers would surely be more than happy to maintain the quota and discounts. Another would be to loosen the release mechanism and make it easier to convert non-performing Bumi lots into normal lots.

Although we all know the Bumiputera Lot Allocation rule will not be going anywhere anytime soon, we do know that there are ways to help overcome its effects. While total abolishment of the privilege is out of the question, it could use a few tweaks here and there. A balance must be reached, addressed with a clear mindset – and never twisted or made political makeweights. Whatever the plan may be, solving the strivings of the public should be first order. Let the rules better lives, and create an unencumbered future for all.

What are your thoughts on the industry? Is the Bumiputera Lot Regulation sustainable in today’s property market? Let us know what you think! Email your feedback to mailbox@homefinder.com.my along with your details.

Release Clause in Major States

Kuala Lumpur
Quota, 30%
Discount, 5%
Title, Decided by Kuala Lumpur City Council (Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur)

Release
Stage 1
Construction progress at 50% and all non-Bumi units sold.
Advertised (minimum of three advertisements) in Malay and English newspapers, participating in property exhibitions and other promotions.
DBKL will consider release on a staggered basis on a maximum of 30% of remaining unsold units.
Required to re-advertise for remaining unsold units.

Stage 2
Developer may re-apply when the construction reaches 80% .
Re-advertise and participate in DBKL’s Bumiputera Property Exhibition.
DBKL will consider release on a staggered basis.
Re-advertise remaining unsold units and participate in DBKL’s cluster advertisement.

Stage 3
Re-apply upon completion.
Re-advertised.
All remaining unsold Bumi can be released within six months from the issuance of Certificate of Fitness (CF).
Contribution required, equivalent to the Bumiputera discount.

Selangor
Quota
Residential area – based on State Constituencies (ADUN), according to the Blueprint Perumahan Negeri
Selangor Darul Ehsan (2004-2014) by Lembaga Perumahan dan Hartanah Selangor (LPHS).
Commercial area, less than 50 units – decided by the Lands and Mines Office.
Commercial areas of more than 50 units, 60% for low cost (Market Price of RM120,000) and 50% for
other pricing.
Industrial areas less than 10 acres, 40%.
Industrial more than 10 acres, 50% of low cost (Market price of RM150,000) and 40% for other pricing.

Discount, 7% for housing, 10% for commercial (except low cost), 10% for industrial

Title, Not endorsed, since 2005 Bumi lots are marked for six months from project launch

Release
Advertised property in LPHS for three months.
7% of selling price for residential,
10% for commercial properties as contribution to state government.
Industrial areas, 10% of the selling price per unit released.

Johor
Quota, 40%, Conversions approved after Dec 11, 2004, all residential property are subject to the following allocations:
Selling price less than RM200,000, 40%.
Selling price RM200,001 – RM300,000, 30%.
Selling price more than RM300,001, 20%.

Discount, 15%
Title, Endorsed
Release, Upon approval from State Authorities
Applicable after 65% of the construction has been completed.
Placed at least six advertisements in newspapers (minimum size of 16cm x 16 cm).
Placed radio advertisements 14 times in two weeks.
Registered with PERTAM Properties Sdn Bhd and that the selling price of the units have been certified by the same.
Paid contribution at 5% to 15% of sales price for Malay Quota Emission (MQE).

Penang
Quota, 30%
Discount, 5%
Title, Not endorsed, Bumi units indicated by local authority

Release
Construction at 65% – 85% (95% in some cases).
Advertised three times in the newspaper within six months from the date of the first advertisement.
Obtained release letter from the State Housing Department to procure CF (Certificate of Fitness).
Contribution paid to Bendahari Negeri Pulau Pinang, fixed at 30% of the 5% discount due on any unsold Bumiputera units.

affirmative action for the retarded malays to the extreme.
 
Hey admit it. I thought you say Chinese is by nationality

Yes it is by nationality.

Or do you consider Gary Locke, the American politician to be Chinese as well? :lol:

Or Lee Kuan Yew?

No, Gary Locke is an American, Lee Kuan Yew is a Singaporean. The most you can say is that they are "ethnic Chinese".

This isn't Nazi Germany to be so focused on race, just because Gary Locke has Han DNA doesn't mean he is Chinese, not even slightly.
 
affirmative action for the retarded malays to the extreme.
Malaysia is supposed to be a "moderate Muslim country"

Malaysia: A Never Ending Policy

THE policies which favour ethnic Malays and other indigenes at the expense of Malaysia’s ethnic Chinese and Indian citizens are an oddity in the realm of state discrimination. It is not unusual that they favour a majority, the two-thirds of the population known as the bumiputra, or sons of the soil. But it is peculiar that their Chinese and Indian targets have never ruled Malaysia.

Their presence in the country, though, was encouraged under British colonial rule without the consent of native Malays. After independence this became a source of grievance, one exacerbated by the minorities’ wealth. In 1969 mobs burned Chinese shops, killing hundreds. The government responded with a “New Economic Policy” (NEP) aimed at improving the lot of the bumiputra with preferences in university admissions and for civil-service jobs. Billed in 1971 as a temporary measure, the NEP has become central to a system of corrupt patronage.

Attacking that system is the main plank of the opposition’s campaign in the election to be held on May 5th—the first since independence in which it has a real, if small, chance of beating the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition, dominated by the United Malays National Organisation. Both government and opposition agree that the system of discrimination should be dismantled, but the government fears alienating the hardline Malay vote.

Provisions that require a certain proportion of the shares of any publicly quoted company to be in bumiputra hands, and that favour bumiputra-owned firms for various government contracts, undoubtedly enrich a few well-connected Malays. And the policies seem good for bumiputra civil servants: the civil service is now 85% Malay, if one excludes teachers. But they do little for the rest. “There has been little or no trickle-down effect, and I think more bumiputra know this today,” says Wong Chen of Pakatan Rakyat, the main opposition party. The increasing wealth of ethnic Malays in past decades echoes rising fortunes across South-East Asia, casting doubt on the idea that affirmative action has been a particular help.

Malaysia’s Chinese and Indian citizens chafe at being second-class citizens. Quotas in university admissions are particularly resented. Most universities in Malaysia reserve 70% or more of their places for bumiputras. Chinese and Indian students flock instead to private and foreign ones. Those who leave often stay away. A World Bank study in 2011 found that about 1m Malaysians had by that stage left the country, which has a total population of 29m. Most were ethnic Chinese, and many were highly educated. Some 60% of skilled emigrants cited “social injustice” as an important reason for leaving Malaysia. This exodus makes it a less attractive place to invest in.

Supporters of the NEP argue that, without such assistance, Malays will not catch up economically or academically. Critics worry that it dulls their incentives to excel. There is evidence of a skills gap. Nearly half the managers at Malaysian manufacturing firms surveyed by the World Bank said that the ability of local skilled workers to handle information technology was either “poor” or “very poor”. Mahathir Mohamad, a former prime minister who in his time extended the reach of the NEP, lamented in 2002 that bumiputras too often treat university places as “a matter of right”, neglecting their studies.

A survey in 2008 found that 71% of Malaysians agreed that “race-based affirmative action” was “obsolete” and should be replaced with a “merit-based policy”. The ruling coalition pays lip service to such ideas and has tinkered with the racial preferences—lowering, for example, the fraction of a company’s shares that has to be in bumiputra hands when a service company goes public. The opposition argues for “colour-blind” affirmative action—that is, policies that favour the poor in general, rather than the bumiputra specifically. But are enough of the sons of the soil ready to make the change?
 
Malaysia only has one quarter ethnic Chinese, so they stopped growth and deeply fell into middle income trap. If majority Malaysia population are ethic Chinese, they will be a true developed country.
 
Malaysia's complicated ethnic politics
Toward the end of British rule, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO) emerged as a political force dedicated to protecting ethnic Malays and the Islamic religion. Since independence, the party has been a part of every government alliance.


Today, Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy, loosely modeled after the United Kingdom: The head of state is the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, effectively a monarch elected by Malaysia's traditional Malay rulers. The prime minister is the head of government, officially appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to lead a majority in Malaysia's lower house of parliament. While the constitution of Malaysia, which came into force in 1957, says all Malaysian citizens are equal, Bumiputera (a designation that refers to the indigenous people of Malaysia, including ethnic Malays) are singled out for special treatment in Article 153. That section of the constitution begins:

  1. It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.
The logic behind Article 153 was that Chinese and Indian immigrants to Malaysia had been favored during British rule, and both had subsequently gained economically while Malays and others remained in poverty.

After independence, these economic disparities had begun to cause problems in the country: Singapore's removal from Malaysia was based in part upon a number of race riots that took place in the country between Chinese and Malay groups in 1964, and Kuala Lumpur had its own race riots in 1969. In 1971, economic measures referred to as the “New Economic Policy” (NEP) were implemented to favor Bumiputera, offering them positive discrimination in the civil service and business in a bid to improve their economic standing.

Racial discrimination in Malaysia: Perspectives from the Constitution and international covenants
By: Jeya Seelan
Jeyaseelen Anthony is an advocate and a councillor of the Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ). He also heads the Centre for Constitutional Research and Education Malaysia.

Published: 12 November 2013

In this article I wish to highlight some important issues with regards to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and International Covenant on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) vis-à-vis the right of minorities and the position in Malaysia. ESC rights are basically related to labour related rights, right to health, right to housing, the right to education, the right to food and cultural rights. These rights have a great impact on the rights of minorities in any given country. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) has stated that every ESC right, as with every human right, includes the duties to respect, duties to protect and duties to fulfil as part of the states obligation.

The states duty to respect includes protection state organized forced evictions, protection from direct threats to health by state actors and protection against arbitrary termination of employment etc. For example, in the case of the Islamic Community in Bosnia Herzegovina, the Human Rights Chamber of Bosnia held that denying the Muslim community the ability to rebuild destroyed mosques, breached the community’s religious and property rights. The states duty to protect is where the state is required to prevent third parties from unduly interfering in the right holder’s enjoyment of a particular freedom or entitlement. The duty to fulfil imposes on a state obligation’s to facilitate, provide and promote access to ESC rights.

An important aspect of the justifiability ESC rights involves claims of discrimination. The CESCR has made very clear, that within the provisions of the ICESCR and the ICERD, the prohibition on discrimination is an obligation of immediate effect. Several clauses enshrined in the ICERD and the Convention against Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) makes reference to their application to ESC rights in the implementation of social policies and the provision of social services. An important aspect of the current development of anti discrimination law is now applied to those cases where legislation or administrative practices subject certain groups of people to a disparate treatment which results in a denial or restriction of rights.

In Malaysia, the skewed implementation of affirmative action or positive action policies as some may call it, contained in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution has resulted in discrimination against the non- Bumiputra minority communities. The affirmative action policies by way of preferential treatment provided under Article 153 are mainly to alleviate the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak from poverty and economic disadvantage. It protects the majority Bumitputra population when in fact affirmative action policies are created to protect minorities in most developed countries. Malaysia is unique in this sense.

Article 153 provides for the reservation of quotas mainly in the areas of:

1. positions in the public service;
2. scholarships, educational or training privileges or special facilities;
3. permits or licenses for the operation of any trade or business required by federal law; and places in institutions of higher learning (universities, college and other educational institutions) providing education after Malaysian Certificate of Education (MCE).

It is implicit in Article 153(1) that “It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) to safeguard the special position of the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interest of other communities".

The phrase "legitimate interest of other communities" means that Article 153 does not allow simply any kind of preferential treatment in favour of the "Bumiputra". It is not a ‘blank cheque’, but it merely confers limited powers on the government and Parliament, pursuant to Article 153, to derogate from the principle of equality and equal protection of the law.

The implementation of Article 153 has often been the bone of contention as many have argued that its implementation has been at expense of the non-Bumiputra communities in Malaysia. For example, although Article 153 provides for quotas only for the issuance permits and licenses to the Bumiputra, however, even government contracts and procurement have been awarded solely to Bumiputra companies. Government-linked companies (GLC’s) and statutory bodies assign their work solely to Bumiputra companies and some major banks assign their legal work only to Bumiputra legal firms. These practices are clearly against Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.

The majority of employees at the GLC’s and some major banks are Malay Bumiputra’s although the Federal Constitution only provides for reservation of quotas in the public service. Ethnic quotas are imposed on private companies by government agencies and licensing is used as a way to get private companies to observe Bumiputra quotas, a policy which is clearly against the Federal Constitution as Article 153 only provides for reservation of quotas in the public service.

The lack of job opportunities in the public sector for the non- Bumiputra’s is a glaring example of an unreasonable application of affirmative action policies.

Although Article 136 of the Federal Constitution provides for impartiality in the public sector, there have been complaints by the non-Bumiputra in the various government departments that they have been deprived from getting promotions or have been sidelined in favour of Bumiputra candidates. This explains why non-Bumiputra’s shy away from seeking employment in the government sector and GLC’s and unfortunately it also explains the current brain drain that is currently plaguing our country.

Our public universities and our education system as a whole have also not been spared form this unfortunate state of affairs. This is evident from the incessant complaints by non-Bumiputra students that they have been denied entry into the local universities although they have sound academic results. Latest being in July of this year, where of the 41,573 applicants who were successful in gaining entry into public universities, a staggering 74.3% were Bumiputra applicants. Year after year only non-Bumiputra students complain about not being able to gain entry into public universities despite having achieved very good results.

The Education Ministry assures us that applicants are given fair consideration but yet a record number of high achievers are rejected year after year. The only logical deduction one can make is that the selection process is riddled with racial bias where racial considerations outweigh qualifications. Debating competitions in secondary schools are also subjected to a discriminatory policy since according to a Ministry of Education guideline on English language debating competitions held in secondary schools there must be at least one Bumiputra student in the debating team as required by Article 153 of Federal Constitution. It is policies like these that creates a socially divisive and uncompetitive environment in our schools. This is an example of an affirmative action policy made under Article 153 which has clearly gone beyond the limits of Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.

Even local authority contracts, licenses and permits are only given to the Malays Bumiputra’s. For example local authority contracts for infrastructure work are only given to Class F licensed contractors which is a type of license only given to Bumiputra contractors although nothing in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution permits Parliament to restrict business and trade solely to Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak. This license which is issued by the Ministry of Finance under a Federal government policy is clearly unconstitutional.

There are some interesting issues about Class F licenses which is worth mentioning here. Under the Ministry of Finance guidelines there are six categories of contractors ranging from Class F to Class A. Each category of license determines the maximum amount that a prospective contractor is able to bid on. For e.g. the ceiling for a Class F contractor is RM 200,000 while Class A contractors can bid for jobs worth RM 100 million and above.

Now here comes the shocking piece of information. As of 2005, there were 42,313 registered contractors. Interestingly 35,253 of the total mentioned are Class F Bumitputra contractors. This basically means that a staggering 83% or four out every five contractors are Bumiputra contractors from the Class F category.

Therefore all government procurements valued below RM 200,000 are essentially a Bumitputra only affair. This is again another blatant example of how Article 153 has been abused to justify a discriminatory policy where only Bumiputra’s are able to bid for government contracts.

Since it’s an open secret that most of these contracts are subcontracted to a number of different contractors by the Class F contractor, the consequences of such procurement practices are highly inflated prices, kickbacks, wastages, shoddy work and goods not delivered according specification in quantity and quality. In fact the weaknesses of such policies have already manifested itself, when one reads about collapsed stadiums and hospitals, serious leakages in newly built buildings and unfinished or abandoned public projects, all as a result cost cutting and shoddy work by incompetent contractors.

Government and local authority contracts, permits and licenses are given to people who are linked to the major ruling political parties and other powerful Bumiputra politicians who in turn rent out their licenses and permits for a fee or a percentage of profit, thus depriving others of these lucrative contracts. Again the result of such a practice are highly inflated prices, kickbacks, wastages, shoddy work and goods not delivered according specification in quantity and quality.

With all these race based policies which promotes racial discrimination in Malaysia, I am astonished as to how Malaysia was voted in as a member of the UN Human Rights Council ! Be that as it may, since Malaysia is a member of the UN Human Rights Council it has the obligation eliminate policies which promote racial discrimination.

It cannot be denied that the improper and arbitrary application of affirmative action policies provided under Article 153 has contributed significantly to the deteriorating race relations in Malaysia. The deprivation of equal rights and opportunities has caused racial tensions to run high in recent years. The Reid Commission when drafting our constitution proposed that affirmative action measures contained in Article 153 be limited for a period of 15 years but this was rejected by UMNO. The terms of reference of the Reid Commission in its report states:

“Our terms of reference require that a provision should be in the Constitution for the safeguarding of the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other communities”. The special position of the Malays was already recognized even before Article 153 came into being. It is contained in the Clause 19(1) (d) of the Federation of Malaya Act 1948 and the Reid Commission took this fact into consideration and said “When we came to determine what is ‘the special position of the Malays’ we found that as a result of the original treaties with Malay states, reaffirmed from time to time, the special positions of the Malays has always been recognized. This recognition was continued by the provisions of clause 19(1) (d) of the Federation of Malaysia Agreement 1948, which made the High Commissioner responsible for safeguarding the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other communities”. The Reid Commission then submitted the draft constitution and proposed that the special position of the Malays be continued under Article 153 with the qualification that it be limited to15 years. However this proposal was rejected by UMNO and it was removed thus making it a permanent feature of the Federal Constitution”.

The Reid Commission must have realized that if there is no limitation placed on the application affirmative action measures, the consequence would be disastrous to the nation. The Reid Commission must have known that the continuous application of affirmative action policies for the Malays would result in a culture of dependence on the government for aid and handouts, creating a community which fear competition and hard work that would ultimately lead to their downfall. In fact we can now see this happening. The affirmative action policies implemented over the past 40 years under Article 153 has in fact created a divided Malaysia. There is a widening income gap between the rich and the poor in the urban areas, creating phenomenon called "urban poverty".

The urban poor are dominant in areas where there are large numbers of low cost flats or Pusat Perumahan Rakyat (PPR Flats) in Selangor and the Federal Territories (FT). I call these areas as the "ghettoes" of Selangor and the FT. I have organised community programs in these areas and I have come across parents who can’t afford to buy school bags and shoes for their children, single mothers who can’t afford to take care of their children as result of the rising cost of living in the city, children from families which become unstable because of alcoholism and debts incurred by their parents who can’t earn enough money to sustain living in the city and then end up in poverty, children from these unstable families who drop out from school and end up in the streets working in car wash outlets, car workshops, factories, stalls, restaurants and scrap metal yards and there are children and young adults from these unstable families who end up in crime in order to live. In fact a large number of youths getting involved in dangerous crimes are from these "ghettoes".

There are also people especially Indian youths who are enterprising and who want to get out of poverty but their efforts are hampered by the race based policies practiced in the public sector and local authorities in the areas of employment and business opportunities which I have pointed out earlier. Affirmative action policies should be implemented to reach people from these places and backgrounds but currently this is not happening.

A majority of these people known as the urban poor are Malays, who are settlers from other poorer states like Kelantan, Terengganu, Pahang, Perak and Kedah and Indians who are pre-dominantly Tamils who were displaced from the estates during 80’s and the 90’s. I have met some of these people from older generation and they have told me that they were better off living in the estates.

There is also a feeling of discontentment within the non- Bumiputra communities that they are actually second class citizens in their own country as result of being denied equal rights. This divide is getting bigger. The limitless affirmative action policy being practiced in Malaysia has created a feeling that such a policy are Malay and Muslim rights and thus anything and everything must be Malay and Muslim centric even when it comes to building design, dress codes, schools, universities and even in education and employment. Our education system has unfortunately fallen victim to this Malay/Muslim centric affirmative action policies created to further and strengthen the Malay/Muslim agenda in Malaysia. For instance, since the English language was removed as the medium of instruction in government schools it has created a large number of unmarketable Bumiputra and non- Bumiputra graduates who are unable to speak and write proper English.

They are often unemployed as the private sector are unable to employ them because this of this deficiency. They can’t even compete globally in the global employment market because of this. Indians have always said that the greatest gift that the British had ever left them was the English language! Today most Indian professionals end up being CEO’s of the worlds largest banks and multinationals, they are the most successful migrant community in the US, a large number of professionals in the US are from India, even in places like NASA. All this was possible for India because it gave the English language prominence. It is very unfortunate that our education policy has rejected the English language since the Malays themselves could have been like the Indians from India. And there you have it, a Malay centric education policy which has gone wrong!

The government set up the matriculation system which was initially only for the Bumiputra and then opened up a little bit for the non- Bumiputra’s in recent years. It has failed to produce students who are in par with their counterparts from STPM examination system. Everyone knows that it’s easy to pass the matriculation examinations as compared to the STPM examinations and STPM graduates are of better quality and much sought after by employers and even reputable foreign universities for enrolment into professional degree courses. This is another example of an examination system created under a Malay/Muslim centric affirmative action policy to increase the number of Bumiputra professionals which has compromised on quality and emphasized on quantity and the result- a large number of unemployed Malay graduates. Policies like these have done more harm than good for the Malays and other Bumiputra’s. On the economic and business side, the Malay/Muslim centric affirmative action policies like the Class F license has only created a large number of politically connected Bumiputra rent seekers promoting a business system riddled with kickbacks and corruption.

It is clear that the indefinite use of affirmative action policies has drained the country of its resources, be it human or economic and has undermined Malaysia’s economic standing. It has driven the Bumiputras backwards because the Malays have become a race that fears competition. In fact the ICERD has affirmed that the affirmative action policies cannot be used for indefinite period of time since it has a negative effect on its beneficiaries, thus there must be a review of these policies.

The government cannot pretend that everything is all and good in our country. The government should take the cue from the results of the last two general elections to realize that the majority of non-Bumiputra’s and some classes of the Bumiputra populace too are clamouring for equal rights and opportunities. The government needs to take drastic steps to arrest this problem.

Firstly it needs to do away with the distinction between Bumiputra and non-Bumiputra and treat everyone regardless of race as Malaysians and guarantee each and every Malaysian equal rights and opportunities in education, employment and business procurement.

Secondly, the government needs to avoid any form of ethnocentric approach in dealing with poverty eradication or social restructuring. Poverty eradication and economic social restructuring policies should be implemented across the board. It must not be an initiative inclined towards helping the Bumiputra only but policy regardless of race. Being poor and socially disadvantaged cuts across race and religion and it is colour blind. As Martin Luther King once said “If colour made them different, misery and oppression made them the same”.

Therefore Bumitputra centric economic plans like Teraju, the National Development Policy which has its roots from the New Economic Policy (NEP) and the recently announced Bumitputra Economic Empowerment Agenda (BEE) must be abolished and replaced with an open economic policy benefiting all deserving Malaysians. If the measure for equity is need rather than race, then I believe the problem facing our country will be solved.

Thirdly, the government must ratify the International Covenant on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) to show its commitment in eradicating racial discrimination which continues to hamper the country’s progress and fourthly the government must do away with the quota system since quotas in itself are discriminatory. India for example has had to battle with the issue of reverse discrimination for decades, where more and more high achieving students are being rejected from obtaining university seats on the grounds the quota is filled up and to make things worse more and more good students are being picked up by universities from the US and the UK and are employed there too, thus causing a brain drain. A situation our country is currently facing too.

Therefore meritocracy must be embraced to its fullest for Malaysia to achieve its fullest too. Fifthly, Article 153 of the Federal Constitution must amended to reflect an affirmative action policy which is inclusive of other racial groups rather than a policy which is exclusive only for the benefit of Bumiputra’s and such a policy must be based on need, solely targeting the poor and the marginalized and limited to period of may be 20 years.

Lastly, in order to improve race relations between the races in Malaysia there should be legislative intervention. I would call for the creation of a Race Relations Act and Race Relations Commission or the enactment an Equality Act based on the UK model. The Race Relations Commission will have powers under the Act to investigate and bring to book public and private institutions which practice racial discrimination based on race based policies and at the same time propose and formulate transparent policies free from racial bias. – November 12, 2013.

- See more at: Racial discrimination in Malaysia: Perspectives from the Constitution and international covenants - The Malaysian Insider
 
Large parts of the economy of Uganda was dominated by the Indians. The crazy dictator Idi Amin
ordered the expulsion of the Indians which led to the collapse of the economy of Uganda.
The successor of Idi Amin literally begged the Indians to return.
I wonder weather something similar could happen in Malaysia with the Chinese.

I don't blame Idi Amin. Tough to trust Indians.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom