Posts Tagged ‘1Malaysia’

55th Merdeka Celebration Logo

July 26th, 2012
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


UPDATE 30/7/2012:  government says the official logo is the 1Malaysia logo and all others are promotional materials:

The move was announced by Information, Communications and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim earlier this morning over Twitter.

“To quell some misunderstanding we only hv 1Malaydia (sic) as logo for Merdeka n Hari Msia. There will be several promo  hihglights till th big day,” he said on his Twitter account, @DrRaisYatim.

“Tahun ini seperti tahun lalu tiada logo rasmi melainkan logo 1Malaysia. Cuma temanya ialah 55 Tahun Merdeka Janji ditepati. (This year as in past years there is no official logo save the 1Malaysia logo. Only the theme is 55 Years of Indepence Promises fulfilled.)

“Bahan hiasan (artwork) kini hanya paparan selingan bukan logo rasmi. Ada bbp bahan promo menjelang Hari Merdeka 31 Ogos dan Hari Malaysia. (The current artwork is only a variation of the illustration and not the official logo. There are several promotional items in the run-up to Independence Day on August 31 and Malaysia Day),” he added.

source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/putrajaya-axes-controversial-55th-merdeka-logo/

Embarrassment for the ministry and minister.

———————————————————————————-

The collection of pictures below is quite interesting. Never knew a logo can be quite, well… exhaustive.

I guess we can be (un)creative and come up with such logo that don’t actually look like one 🙂

Definition of logo (wikipedia): A logo is a graphic mark or emblem commonly used by commercial enterprises, organizations and even individuals to aid and promote instant public recognition. Logos are either purely graphic (symbols/icons) or are composed of the name of the organization (a logotype or wordmark).

image source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/online-the-2012-national-day-logo-gets-a-drubbing/

If you read the article above, the logo is being mocked by some section of the design industry.

And we haven’t gone into the theme yet…

The logo’s explanation:

bendera Merupakan simbol negara Malaysia yang dicintai yang mempamerkan pencapaian cemerlang negara sejak merdeka. Merupakan kebanggaan setiap rakyat Malaysia kerana namanya kini terserlah di persada dunia.
bendera Melambangkan Kedaulatan Institusi Raja Berpelembagaan dan kedaulatan Negara yang telah dipertahankan sejak 55 Tahun.
bendera Melambangkan perpaduan utuh masyarakat Malaysia yang berusaha mencapai kemajuan (Maju) dan kemakmuran (Makmur) negara sejak dari awal kemerdekaan dicapai.
bendera Melambangkan keunikan, liku-liku serta cabaran yang dihadapi oleh para pejuang dan pemimpin negara dalam memperjuang dan mempertahankan kemerdekaan serta kedaulatan negara.
bendera Melambangkan kesungguhan dan komitmen kerajaan dalam menunaikan janji kepada rakyat untuk membawa kemakmuran, kemajuan, kehidupan dan peluang ekonomi yang terbaik.
bendera Mencerminkan rakyat Malaysia yang saling bersatu padu, bekerjasama, bermuafakat, berdikari, berfikir dan menghayati satu visi untuk membina satu Negara Bangsa.

 

source: http://www.malaysiamerdeka.gov.my/v2/ms/malaysiaku/galeri/tema-dan-logo-kemerdekaan-ke-55

 

I think can remove the flag (redundant) and the word “merdeka” (understood la, kan independence day celebration!). And some of the fonts are soooo…Microsoft Word! So, leaves you with the 1, “janji ditepati” and number 55.

Thaipusam, Street Demonstration and Peaceful Assembly Act

June 22nd, 2012
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


MP Kubang Kerian YB Salahuddin (PAS) during a debate on the Public Assembly bill with Deputy Higher Education Minister YB Saifuddin (shown live on Astro Awani.  Caveat: I DID NOT watch it),  mentioned about Thaipusam (along with Maulidur Rasul festival) as example of procession or demonstrasi jalanan. He mentioned perarakan Thaipusam and also said “secara separa sedar” (semi conscious” and “walaupun ada Kavadi” (even though got Kavadis), and also tanpa perlu gas pemedih mata (without need of tear gas). The clip below extracted the part about Thaipusam statements.

These statements were picked up by YB Kamalanathan and blogged at his website:

http://pkamalanathan.blogspot.com/2012/06/my-letter-to-yb-kubang-kerian-with.html

 

 

I think saying that the participants are semi conscious is not appropriate and lacks sensitivity. In fact its a bad example as in our social climate, we can easily misunderstand and get angry. Most of the devotees walking along the chariot or at Batu Caves are perfectly conscious!  He should apologise for this wrong statement, possibly due to his ignorance. Next time invite him to join Thaipusam festival as observer to see how things are. Anyway, this coming from PAS is expected. They aren’t really into understanding all faiths.

The YB tried to justify and explain, but I think he should just apologise and move on:

“The point that I was making was not about religion.

“I was talking about Article 10 of the Federal Constitution. I highlighted Thaipusam to make a point about how Malaysians throughout the years, even before independence have gathered and organised themselves in large numbers.

“This was part of a list of other examples that I used to put my point across,” he said.

The Kubang Kerian MP stressed that he had no intention to insult the religious event which is a major Hindu celebration here.

Salahuddin, who met with Kamalanathan, to explain his comments on the matter said that to drive his point across, he used the examples of the gathering against the Malayan Union led by Onn Jaafar (1946), the Perarakan Kerandah 152 (2009) which demanded for the importance of the Malay language, Thaipusam and Maulidur Rasul celebrations to commemorate the prophet’s birthday.

“I did not mean to insult any religion. Why then did I bring up the example of Maulidur Rasul?” he asked.

Kamalanathan, who is the Hulu Selangor MP, took Salahuddin to task yesterday for his comments on Tuesday during a debate entitled “Street demonstrations: Does it build or destroy democracy?” organised by Malay daily, Sinar Harian.

Salahuddin reportedly said that thousands of Hindus gathered during Thaipusam peacefully without the intervention of the authorities.

The PAS leader was also alleged to have said that some Hindus carrying kavadi were semi-conscious and yet they do not need tear gas to keep the situation calm.

Calling Salahuddin “naive”, Kamanathan said his comments were both “insulting and hurting” to the Hindus.

“Belittling the practices of another religion and calling the devotees semi-conscious street demonstrators show lack of understanding and respect for the Hindu devotees,” he added.

‘Just stating facts’

Salahuddin, however, stressed that he was not insulting but merely stating facts about how the public could organise themselves.

“It was only to show that the public is capable of organising themselves. We have the devotees who are semi-conscious but still controllable,” he said.

“Then I also mentioned the large crowds that march during the Maulidur Rasul. You don’t need to use tear-gas to control the crowd.

“That is the point I was making that as long as excessive force is not used, the gatherings have always been peaceful,” he added.

Note: YB Kamalanathan forgot to mention about the Maulidur Rasul part on his blog. In spirit of 1Malaysia, he should also stand up for fellow Muslims and demand apology from the YB for insulting/desecrating/slighting/hurting their feelings.

 Now, the part about Thaipusam being street protest or street demonstration (demonstrasi jalanan).

Let’s look at the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 (refer source pdf file at: http://www.federalgazette.agc.gov.my/outputaktap/20120209_736_BI_JW001759%20Act%20736%20(BI).pdf or http://www.parlimen.gov.my/files/billindex/pdf/2011/DR422011E.pdf

Under Para 3:

  • “assembly” means an intentional and temporary assembly of a number of persons in a public place, whether or not the assembly is at a particular place or moving;
  • “counter assembly” means an assembly organized to convey disagreement with the purpose for which another assembly is organized, and held at the same time, date and place or approximately at the same time, date and place as the other assembly;
  • “simultaneous assemblies” means two or more assemblies to be held at the same time, date and place, but which have no relationship to each other;
  • “participant” means a person intentionally or voluntarily present for the purpose of an assembly;
  • “street protest” means an open air assembly which begins with a meeting at a specified place and consists of walking in a mass march or rally for the purpose of objecting to or advancing a particular cause or causes;
  • “prohibited places” means— (a) the protected areas and protected places declared under the Protected Areas and Protected Places Act 1959 [Act 298]; and (b) the places as may be specified in the First Schedule;

These are the locations specified in First Schedule:

  • Dams, reservoirs and water catchment areas
  • Water treatment plants
  • Electricity generating stations
  • Petrol stations
  • Hospitals
  • Fire stations
  • Airports
  • Railways
  • Land public transport terminals
  • Ports, canals, docks, wharves, piers, bridges and marinas
  • Places of worship
  • Kindergartens and schools

And this is the Third Schedule:

ASSEMBLIES FOR WHICH NOTIFICATION IS NOT REQUIRED

  • Religious assemblies
  • Funeral processions
  • Wedding receptions
  • Open houses during festivities
  • Family gatherings
  • Family day held by an employer for the benefit of his employees and their
  • families
  • General meetings of societies or associations

Para 11:  Consent of owner or occupier of place of assembly

11. The organizer of an assembly, other than a religious assembly or a funeral procession or an assembly held at a designated place of assembly, shall obtain the consent of the owner or occupier of the place of assembly for it to be used for the purpose of the assembly.

Reading the above extracts from the Act, some questions arise:

1. What is the difference between assembly and street protest? Street protests is defined to be an assembly that is “open air” and for purpose of a cause (for or against).  Assembly can be stationary or moving, while street protest involves marching (moving la..).  So, if its (i) indoor or (ii) assemble for no reason or (iii) assemble and don’t move, its assembly. Quite ridiculous. Even people want to assemble to lepak also got reason or cause – melepak.

2. Note the phrase “street protest”. If you take basically any event involving thousands of people, it will fall into the “street protest” category. The definition doesn’t mention that “not including religious activities”. Example, gathering of million youths at certain location, people marching during uniformed bodies activities, event parades, religious events, and yes, even funeral procession (you are support the cause of sending of the person on his last journey).

The only exemption given is that religious event or funeral need not provide notification to authorities. That’s all.  It doesn’t say its not street protest. Yes, common sense will tell you obviously a religious parade or funeral procession is not a protest. But this law doesn’t specifically state so? So does that mean a religious procession can be a street protest per the definition above?

3. Why is place of worship is prohibited? Does it mean we can’t “assemble” at Batu Caves  or the local shrine any more? Need to get approval? Sounds contradictory to the “no notification needed” clause.

Conclusion: If you don’t know what you are talking about, better don’t talk about it. Give other example that you really know of. If not, end up like this la.

3000 Indian students applied for matriculation

June 18th, 2012
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


According to MI President, about 3000 students applied for matriculation (contrary to popular belief that not many Indian students apply) and 750 places have been taken up.  So, it won’t be difficult to pick 1500 students, right? I mean if you can pick students with 4As from the other race, there’s no excuse to do the same here, right? Have a quota la – 20% top students (300 seats), 60% average students (900 seats), and 20% weak students (300 seats) like you do for the other race.  So easy maa, I’ve even calculated the number of seats for you. I can even volunteer to help pick students 🙂

BTW, those that didn’t get a place can make an appeal and don’t forget to send a copy to MIC (and also MIETA – Arivu Ananthan – 012-3993710 or Elangovan Annamalai – 017-7081946)

More than 3,000 Indian students have applied for matriculation courses in government colleges, said MIC president Datuk Seri G. Palanivel.

Palanivel, who is also Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, said the 1,500 seats allocated for Indians would be filled by the end of the month.

“Generally, only 500 seats are allocated for Indians, but Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has acceded to MIC’s request for an additional 1,000 seats,” he said yesterday.

Palanivel said Indian students with excellent results but failed to obtain places in colleges could appeal to the Education Ministry and forward a copy to MIC.

source: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/6/17/nation/11497488&sec=nation

According to MIC President as well, the full list of students will be released by MOE by end of June. Refer video below:

I strongly suggest that the list contains name, school, location (to identify rural/urban) and the student’s qualifications.  If not, MIC will get another round of bashing for not being transparent, practising nepotism, or unable to get MOE cooperation etc. Either way it looks bad on MIC if they not able to deliver what the PM pledged because community expectation is high now. We want to know details and not just be told off with some token answers.  And MIC being self-appointed guardian of Indian community have a hard time living up to the new expectations.

Which brings me to another issue – should we have a Indian deputy Education Minister?

 Footnote: MIC says will ask for more place next year. My question: why not ask to streamline STPM/Matriculation first. Saves lots of headache and cost, and provide a level/just/fair platform for all.

The MIC will request that the quota of Indian students in government matriculation colleges be increased next year, its president Datuk Seri G. Palanivel said today.

He said the number of Indian students in matriculation colleges nationwide has increased from 500 to 1,500 for the 2012/2013 session.

“This year we will ask for additional (quota) for next year,”

source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/mic-wants-bigger-quota-for-indians-in-matriculation-colleges/

MIC President clarifies 1000 extra matric seats will be in govt centres

May 31st, 2012
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


We can breathe easier now as MIC President issued press statement clarifying the allocation of the extra 1000 seats will be in government matriculation centres, and not in any IPTS. This is in response to earlier questions and uncertainties after video emerged on the allocation.  I’ve blogged about it about 3 weeks ago.

With that issue considered settled, the next is about how to fulfill the extra 1000 seats. According to the statement below, about 700 seats has been filled, leaving another 800 or so vacant. The problem is how to get these places filled up.

 

Previously I’ve commented on a post by Mahaganapathy Dass (MIC Higher Education Bureau) on his FB wall:

i think the 1000 extra places should not be limited to those with all As. as you very well know, the 90% places is given to those with even 4/5/6As. with that in mind, we should be firm in our stand that applicants with minimum 5As to be allowed under the 1000 extra seats. in this way, you’ll have a much bigger pool of students.

instead of waiting for matriculation dept to settle the application procedure, why not start a separate “registration process” to fill the 1000 seats (assuming we don’t have enough applicants in the first place). You can collect the applicants and pass to matric dept to process – save their time.

and i think the 1500 matrics place should not include the bursary recipients. that’s unfair and unethical. let bursary be bursary and extra 1000 place to be EXTRA 1000 place. i hope the PM, JPA and MOE understands this. [note: Bursary refers to JPA Bursary for SPM top scorers]

if matric dept says got enough indian applicants to fill the 1500 seats, then just fill it up la. can relax the entry requirements if not able to get 1500 students. those rules are manmade, not law of God. if you can relax for the “others”, why not for us. We must be firm in our stand. this year MUST have 1500 seats filled (excluding bursary recipients). no excuse from matrics dept will be accepted.

and another comment:

 it will be good if matric dept reopen their registration if not enough candidates. maybe for 2 week period. and we can get our promotion machinery to inform as much students as possible – facebook, THR, MIC branches, MP/ADUN office, Astro Vanavil, Minnal FM, RTM news, newspapers etc.

I’m sure the 800 places can be easily filled up if the requirements are not purposely stringent. We should allow those with 4/5/6/7As to enter matriculation as well. A short 2 or 3 weeks exercise would be sufficient to get the SPM leavers to apply, provided we are able to make use of the promotion and publicity channels mentioned above.

However, a rather disturbing email reached me this morning. Its about a parent of a matric student that is unhappy (distressed actually) over the treatment of her daughter.  I think if such negative news is spread, parents will be angry and scoff the offer to study at matriculation. OK, more on that later once I get more info.

 

PRESS STATEMENT BY MIC PRESIDENT DATUK SERI G PALANIVEL 

KUALA LUMPUR, 28 May (MIC) — All the 1,500 matriculation seats allocated to Indian students this year will be conducted at government colleges and no private institutions are involved.

There should be no confusion on the matter. Some people are saying that the 1,000 extra seats allocated for Indian students will be conducted at private colleges.

That is not true. All the students who have been successful will be placed in government colleges

In the MIC assembly last year I had asked for extra 1,000 seats to add to the existing 500 seats.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin had agreed to the request and said the courses will be conducted in government institutions.

I had raised the issues with Tan Sri Muhyiddin, who is also the Education Minister, that to date only 700 places have been offered.

I also raised the issue that some Indian students with 11A+ were also not offered matriculation places.

Tan Sri Muhyiddin assured me that all deserving cases would be offered a place and that all 1,500 places for Indian students will be filled.

–MIC

SOURCE: http://mic.org.my/mic_news.php?id=220

1000 extra matriculation places for Indian students at Binary University College?

May 7th, 2012
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I’m sure you still remember our PM’s announcement that an additional 1000 places will be provided for Indian students to pursue matriculation. It was well received, although I expected a more concrete policy-level and high impact announcement (like opening matriculation for all or abolishing it). At the moment, about 500 places are allocated. There’s no mention if this is a one-off gesture or will be implemented annually.

(Interesting fact: the 1000 places were agreed in September (refer video below) but announced in February, during Ponggal celebration in Kapar.)

Now, news is coming out that the 1000 places will be in Binary University College (located in Puchong), and not actually at the government matriculation centers.

MIC President, Senator G Palanivel and also Deputy Minister SK Devamany themselves mentioned that “some” students will be placed in IPTS, including Binary. So another permutation is provided. ( from MIC TV Online):

The announcement is was made on 19th September 2011 (refer the photos on Binary’s website – http://www.binary.edu.my/index.php/events/events-at-binary/ ) and compare to the video above.

This was also highlighted on a youtube video below with some valid questions:

And also in an article in The Kuala Lumpur Post:

They are many unanswered question about the 1000 places given to Indian students to pursue matriculation this year. Those representing the community at the higher level show their gratitude by praising the Government for providing this opportunity. We are also happy because at last the Indians are given the opportunity to compete on the even field. Now many are claiming that they have fought tirelessly for this opportunity but are not given due recognition. However, we shouldn’t be clouded or blinded with all these elation and celebration. We need to know clearly that this promise is being implemented effectively due to claims that a particular private higher learning institution has been appointed carry out this initiative.

The questions are:-

  1. Who is monitoring this process? Is it MIC
  2. If MIC is monitoring the implementation of this initiative, can they assure that all the students will be placed in public matriculation colleges rather than private institutions?
  3. If at all the students are placed in a private institution, will they be accepted into Public Universities (IPTA) after completing their matriculation?
  4. If no, why other professional private institutions such AIMST, TAFE, Penang Medical College, Perdana University, International Medical College and other professional institutions are not included in this initiative?
  5. How about the fee – if the students are placed in private universities – do they have to follow the fee structure in private universities or public universities – we are talking about cream of the society who deserve places in public universities – finally they will end pay back more than what they supposed to payback.
  6. Can the admission of the students offered places in matriculation be made public to ensure transparency?

source: http://kualalumpurpost.net/unanswered-question-about-the-1000-places-given-to-indian-students-to-pursue-matriculation/

The comment on the article above is also useful to gauge the possible impact of placing 1000 students in an IPTS.

But if you refer to the NST article below (on the announcements during Ponggal), the PM specifically said that the places will be in public institution and that MOHE will arrange for it.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak yesterday announced that the government would offer 1,000 more places annually for Indian Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia holders to pursue matriculation courses at public institutions.

MIC president Datuk Seri G. Palanivel welcoming Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak at a Ponggal celebration at the Kelab Kilat Padang, TNB, in Kapar yesterday.

With this, the prime minister fulfilled the promise made during the recent Thaipusam celebrations.

Najib said this to applause from some 20,000 people during the Ponggal celebration at Kelab Kilat Padang TNB, here, last night.

He said with the increased intake of deserving Indian students, it would encourage them to strive for excellence in public institutions.

“This means the number of Indian students in matriculation now will increase from 559 students to more than 1,500 students for the 2012/2013 session.

“The Higher Education Ministry will be arranging the 1,000 seats after last year’s SPM results are announced,” he said, adding that priority will be given to high achievers.

Obviously, we consider the latter events had superseded the earlier ones, and thus hold PM onto his word that the places will be in government public institutions and not some IPTS which got  1 Star for MyQuest under Science Maths and Computing cluster (although overall it was given 5 Star, and for Social Science Business given 6 Star),  Tier 3 for SETARA 2009, never run a matriculation program and is not a proper campus. (refer MyQuest document in MOHE website).

Anyway, I seriously doubt anyone would be dumb enough to place all 1000 students in one place as that will be a PR disaster.

When these kind of half-baked announcements are made, without proper details and transparency, and later you have to read the fine print to find that all is not so rosy, makes it look like 1 step forward and 2 step backwards for them.

My question: aren’t you supposed to study matriculation at pusat matrikulasi, instead of some IPTS? And when would you learn to provide accurate and detailed information to the citizens?