Archive for October, 2010

Less non-Malay applicants for civil service jobs

October 17th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Earlier, we saw some very suspicious statistics by Deputy Minister Murugiah which looked like an insult to our intelligence.

Today, we read that there were only 2,595 Chinese and 2,341 Indian of the 50,756 successful applicants for government post last year.  That’s 5.11% Chinese and 4.61% Indians. Definitely can’t achieve a balanced ratio in next 30 to 75 years.

If the reason given is that not many applicants, then one would logically ask: what steps were taken to generate more awareness. I seriously doubt that the issue of low application only occurred in 2009. In fact, post 2007 rally, there seems to be an increase of Indian staff, even though its just based on my observation.

There must be some innovative measures to attract more (quality) applicants. Maybe can rope in NGOs, temples, have booths at areas with high population of non-Malays, advertise in vernacular paper/radio/TV channels, promote at IPTA/IPTS and so on.

The civil service this year will take in more non-Malays, who make up only 5% of the more than 50,700 applicants for government jobs last year.

There would be more briefings and talks to prepare them for the public sector, Public Service Commission (PSC) chairman Tan Sri Jamaluddin Ahmad Damanhuri said, adding there will be more interview centres nationwide to draw more non-Malays for jobs in the civil service.

“Our staff will be at the interview centres to explain the jobs available for certain levels of qualifications,” he said at the end of a four-day public services conference here yesterday.

Jamaluddin said the lack of non-Malay staff in the public service was mostly due to the fact that many were unaware of the jobs available as well as qualification requirements.

He added that more than 1.5 million people applied for jobs last year and only 50,756 candidates were selected.

Among them were 2,595 Chinese, 2,341 Indians and the rest Malays and other races.

Meanwhile, Public Service Department director-general Datuk Seri Abu Bakar Abdullah said those who intend to join the government can use its eSMSM short-messaging service to check on their application status, interviews and results of interviews.

He said the public sector is always encouraging non-Malays, including those from Sabah and Sarawak, to join the service.

“It is important for us to have public servants from various races to enable the sector to be more sensitive to the different cultures and views of the public,” he said.

Budget 2011

October 15th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


This is summary of Malaysian Budget 2011 which was presented live by PM Najib from 4pm till 5.42pm.

Basic Info:

  • RM212b for budget, 2.8pc higher than 2010
  • Of entire budget, RM162.8b for operating expenses & RM49.2b for development expenditure.
  • Income per capita will increase 6.1% to RM28,000 while income in terms of purchasing power parity to US$16,000
  • Govt aims to achieve 6% growth in 2011
  • Federal Government deficit to decline to 5.4pc of GDP in 2011, from 5.6pc in 2010.
  • Government revenue collection is estimated to increase 2.3% to RM165.8 billion in 2011, up from RM162.1 billion in 2010

The Good

  • Government will extend tax relief of up to RM5,000 to help parents w/ expenses such as daycare, caretakers & other daily needs
  • Govt will increase pre-school enrolment rate to a targeted 72% by end-2011 through an additional 1,700 classes.
  • RM20mil to increase PhD qualified academic staff to 75% in research unis, to 60% in other higher learning institutions.
  • Govt will increase pre-school enrolment rate to a targeted 72% by end-2011 through an additional 1,700 classes.
  • RM40b MRT to begin in 2011, ready by 2020.
  • import duty on approximately 300 goods preferred by tourists and locals, at 5% to 30%, be abolished.
  • 50pc stamp duty exemption for first-time house buyers for houses not exceeding RM350,000.
  • RM576mil allocated in the form of scholarships for those wishing to further their studies
  • RM500 financial assistance to government staff RM500 Special Financial Assistance for civil servants Grade 54 & below in December 2010.
  • No increase of toll rates for next 5 years in PLUS highways.
  • Mobile phones exempted from 10pc sales tax effective Oct 15.
  • To revitalise capital market activities, the Govt will launch a Private Pension Fund in 2011
  • To assist children, particularly low-income, excel academically, the 1MDB will provide multi-vitamins for primary school pupils
  • A mixed development project including affordable houses to be developed at a cost of RM10 billion in Sungai Buloh and is expected to be completed by 2025 (hopefully more of the “affordable” types rather than luxury types]

And The Bad:

  • A new landmark, Warisan Merdeka, expected to be completed in 2020, will include a 100-storey tower, the tallest in Malaysia costing RM5 billion [another mega project!]
  • Rate of service tax be increased from 5% to 6%. [increase in everything from handphone bill to KFC to Astro!]
  • New 6pc service tax for paid TV broadcasting service effective Jan 2, 2011. [affects Astro users]
  • RM250mil for development expenditure to schools: religious, Chinese-type, Tamil national, missionary, Government-assisted [too little! If divide by four, its just RM 62 million].
  • Govt will enforce basic minimum wages for security guards, to between RM500 and RM700 a month depending on location [The minimum wage should be more than poverty line. Should be set to minimum RM700 to RMxxx]
  • Government allocates RM100 million for Orang Asli & Pribumis. [Again, too little!]

Increase in Chinese and Indians hired in civil service?

October 14th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


This is the statement made by Deputy Minister Murugiah. It seems the percentage increased since from 2008, but at a meager 9% for the Chinese and 4% for the Indians. This means 58.3% of 1,559 Chinese and 42.7% of 1833 Indians have been hired in 2010 (up to June 15).

Is an increase of 9% or 4% over two years something to be proud of? At this rate, when can the civil service be on a more balanced ratio?

But wait, the statistics for 2008 was 49.2% out of 4,648 Chinese and 38.8 per cent of the 6,106 Indian candidates interviewed were hired.

Now, can anyone who is expert in Maths tell me which is bigger:

58.3% of 1,559 or 49.2% of 4,648?

42.7% of 1,833 or 38.8% of 6,106?

I believe elementary division is taught in primary school.

I wonder whose head is going to roll for making the Deputy Minister seem so [fill in the blanks].

Putrajaya moved to quell criticisms today that the civil service was dominated by one race, claiming there was an increase in non-Bumiputera government servants since 2008.

Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Senator Datuk T. Murugiah told a press conference in Parliament today that it was not true that the government only focussed on hiring Bumiputeras into the civil service.

“People always criticise us for hiring only those from one race to work in the service but it is not true. The percentage of non-Bumiputeras hired by the Public Service Commission has increased in the past few years,” he said.

Murugiah explained that 58.2 per cent of the 1,559 Chinese job applicants interviewed for posts in the service were hired by the commission as of June 15 this year.

The number of Chinese employed to date, he added, had seen an increase of nine per cent as compared to 2008.

“There were only 49.2 per cent of Chinese applicants chosen out of the 4,648 who applied. If there are many applicants from one particular race, we will look at the number of applications, their qualifications and their presentations during their interviews.

“We have many applicants but they may not make the screening process due to their qualifications… they have to comply to the set of rules and regulations,” he said.

He added that the applicants were shortlisted by a computer, which wa programmed to filter through applicants according to their qualifications.

“There is no bias there. All races are given opportunity for top management positions. There is no quota system,” he stressed.

Murugiah added that for the Indian applicants, the commission had hired 42.7 per cent of the 1,833 who were interviewed this year.

This, he said, was higher than in 2008 when only 38.8 per cent of the 6,106 interviewed were hired.

But, wait till you read this statement from Minister Koh Tsu Koon which seems to indicate another set of figures (article on 27 August 2010):

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon said the Public Services Commission (PSC) received 25,789 applications from the Chinese last year compared with 12,872 in 2007.

Koh said the appointments offered by PSC to the Chinese during that period also rose by almost 100 per cent — 2,600 appointed as civil servants last year compared with 1,323 in 2007.

He said statistics as at June this year showed that Malaysia had 1.29 million civil servants, with Malays making up 77 per cent, followed by Sabah and Sarawak Bumiputeras at 8.7 per cent, Chinese (six per cent), Indians (four per cent) and others (4.3 per cent).

Let’s take an average  increase of 2,600 Chinese staff in year, and if you want to increase the 6 percent representation to 20%, how long would it take? Assuming number of civil servants will be 1.3 million.  That would be increase from 77,400 to 260,000 which is 182,600 new staff.  Assuming an unrealistic assumption of no Chinese staff retiring or perishing while in service, it would take another 70 years to reach the target.

Let’s take Murugiah’s figure from 2008 that about 2300 Indians are hired. Same scenario: assume the civil servants are to remain at 1.3 million, no Indian staff retiring or perishing in duty, and we want to increase the 4% (51,600 out of 1.29 million) to 10% (130,000 out of 1.3 million). That’s an increase of 78,400 and would take 34 years to reach.

Obviously, its nearly impossible to have the target ratios within this century. You can’t create new posts since the civil service is too big for the population, and you can’t remove current staff from the high percentage group and give the place to the lower percentage groups. Some sort of “affirmative action” for the minority groups can be proposed, but it won’t be acceptable to some quarters.

the PMR History paper question on vernacular school

October 13th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


The question in question (!) is QUESTION 49 as below:

Senarai berikut berkaitan dengan sistem pendidikan di negara kita sebelum merdeka.

  • Sekolah vernakular melayu
  • sekolah vernakular cina
  • sekolah vernakular tamil

Apakah kesan perlaksanaan sistem pendidikan tersebut?

A Petempatan baru bertambah

B Perpaduan rakyat sukar dicapai

C Penghijrahan penduduk ke bandar

D Perbelanjaan pengurusan meningkat

What is your opinion on the question and answers above? The answer is B. My opinion is that the question talked about the 3 types of schools (Malay, Chinese, and Tamil) and said that the vernacular schools (note: Malay school is vernacular as well) were in place before independence. The impact of having such separate school systems is that unity is difficult to achieve. Note that the question talked about the situation before independence where the syllabus, teachers, and pretty much everything was not standardised. The teaching material focused on the “motherland” at that time (Jawi/Arab/Malay, India and China). There was no common syllabus and nothing about “unity”. Secondly, the correct answer said that unity is hard to achieve (sukar dicapai). It didn’t say not achievable (tidak boleh dicapai).  For me, nothing wrong in the question, but just that in the current “hot” and “sensitive” times, it could have been avoided.

What happens now is the complaints by parents and other parties:

PARENTS of PMR students are unhappy with a question in the History test, which they claim asked the students about the effect the implementation of vernacular schools before independence had on the country’s educational policy, reported Makkal Osai.

The daily reported the parents as complaining that the question had also said vernacular schools were a stumbling block to the country’s unity. They alleged that such questions would affect the mentality and morale of younger children studying in Tamil and Chinese schools.

The parents also said that for the past 53 years, the vernacular schools had been fully supportive of the changes introduced by the Education Ministry.

They also called on examiners to be careful in selecting questions in the future so as not to create unease and tension among the major communities.

As one MCA leader said, don’t make vernacular school as scapegoats because post-independence, the syllabus, teachers training, the education philosophy and policies are all standardised. Both BM and English are taught in Tamil and Chinese schools, and any student from any race and religion can study in any vernacular school. There’s no barrier and no segregation.

I don’t agree with HRP this time on this issue. There’s many other issues to pick on, don’t waste time on this non-issue because it dilutes the other arguments. Refer to their statement below:

The PMR history question which suggests that Tamil schools are the reason for national disunity being achieved is an insult to the PMR students intelligence. [it did not say Tamil schools only. Also include Malay and Chinese schools].

It is either Tamil schools or no schools for most of the 70% of the Malaysian Indians who are in the poor or hardcore poor category. They have a Tamil school at walking distance. How can they afford to pay the RM100 to RM250 bus fare when they earn a mere RM600 to RM800 per month? [indeed, most would sent to the nearest school]

These 70% Indian poor is as a result of 53 long years of UMNO racism, discrimination and exclusion of the Indians from the national mainstream development of Malaysia.

The UMNO led Malay-sian government has to get to the point by abiding by Article 8 of the Federal Constitution which guarantees equality for all Malaysians.

To start off with 370 or 70% of the 523 Tamil schools nationwide (NST 11/6/08 at page 24) have been denied full government financial assistance resulting, for example, the Ladang Jeram Estate Tamil School, Kuantan Tamil school being wholly in shipping containers, Lukut Tamil school Port Dickson housed upstairs a shophouse, Assad Tamil School Penang in a basement and the Tepi Sungai Tamil School, Klang which is operating from a JKR storeroom – should all be provided with state land and made fully assisted. There is no where else in the world where a primary school exists in these conditions. Only in bi-racial One Malay-sia can this extent of racism prevail. [Two of the schools are still in same condition, while th new building for SJKT Tepi Sungai is up and running. Refer http://sjktjlntpsg.blogspot.com]

The allocation per Tamil school student is RM10.55 but for a Malay school is it three times higher at RM33.00 per student (Sempuruthi Magazine August 2008 pg 47) [this is part of education policy I believe].

To the direct contrary 7,500 Malay schools will be marked 3 star, 2,000 marked 4 star and 500 marked 5 star by 2010. (NST 16/9/08 page 9). But the historical Mount Austin Estate Tamil School completely disappeared from the face of One Malay-sia. The first of it’s kind on planet earth! (MN 13/10/10 at page 4).

Teachers training opportunities are also denied to 1,522 temporary teachers in Tamil schools nationwide. (TN 5/1/09 front page) Only 100 out of 1067 temporary Tamil school teachers get to do the Kursus Dalam Cuti holiday Teachers training course. (TN 30/9/08 page 2).

But 15,000 Diploma qualified and trained (Malay muslim) primary school teachers are given the opportunity to do the primary school graduate teachers programme to ensure that at least 50% of the 140,000 (Malay muslim) primary school teachers have a degree in education awarded by 2010 in the five years Degree programme consisting of four years school holiday course and the fifth year on full time basis at all the Teacher Training Universities. (NST 23/7/2008 at page 18). Such facilities are denied to tamil school teachers.

These inequalities and UMNO racism are the real reasons for racial disunity in Malaysia even after 53 years of independence and not the vernacular schools.

Thus racist PMR exam questions to this effect holds no water and should not be allowed in future. The Director for PMR exams must therefore be forthwith sacked for this line of PMR exam questions especially in the light of UMNO Prime Minister Najib Razak’s bi-racial One Malay-sia policy.

P.Uthayakumar

Indomie banned in Taiwan for cancer causing content

October 12th, 2010
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Just heard this on Buletin Utama news on TV3. Taiwan has banned Indomie instant noodle due to some ingredients in the “perencah”. According to Singapore’s AVA its para hydroxy benzoic. This chemical can cause cancer in the long run.

Our Health Minister said that Health Ministry has been ordered to do testing on Indomie products immediately. So, students, parents, stall patrons, etc., please be aware!