SJKT Batu 14 Puchong fund for classrooms

/* July 3rd, 2011 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


They got Rm150k from one MIC guy and RM130k from Selangor government. Still need about RM50k more. Don’t think MOE would give any money, so depends on makkal for support.

 

AFTER numerous attempts to raise funds for additional classrooms, SJK (T) Batu 14 finally received RM113,000 from the state government.

The school’s Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) chairman Murali Mathukrayan received the cheque from Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo last Saturday.

Of that amount, RM3,000 will be given to 200 poor students who could not afford school fees.

According to Murali, the school desperately needs the extra classrooms as the number of students has doubled from 700 to 1,400 over the 10 years.

“We had to use the school labs and the library as makeshift classrooms.

“Over the years, we have been applying for funds to build classrooms from the Education Ministry but we only received a letter from them stating that ‘the application will be considered’.

“It costs RM330,000 to build eight classrooms. We received RM150,000 from an individual from MIC,” he said, adding that the remaining amount would be raised through fundraising efforts.

Gobind said it was a collective responsibility to ensure that there are sufficient facilities for schoolchildren.

“I would also like to call upon other PTAs in need of funds to come forward, we will help if we can,” he said.

source: http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2011/6/29/central/8978938&sec=central

 

Broadband definition

/* June 29th, 2011 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Just checked wikipedia on what is defined as broadband:

Broadband is often called “high-speed” access to the Internet, because it usually has a high rate of data transmission. In general, any connection to the customer of 256 kbit/s (0.25 Mbit/s) or greater is more concisely considered broadband Internet access. The International Telecommunication Union Standardization Sector (ITU-T) recommendation I.113 has defined broadband as a transmission capacity that is faster than primary rate ISDN, at 1.5 to 2 Mbit/s. The FCC definition of broadband is 4.0 Mbit/s. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has defined broadband as 256 kbit/s in at least one direction and this bit rate is the most common baseline that is marketed as “broadband” around the world. There is no specific bitratedefined by the industry, however, and “broadband” can mean lower-bitrate transmission methods. Some Internet Service Providers (ISPs) use this to their advantage in marketing lower-bitrate connections as broadband.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_Internet_access

So, the baseline is 256kbps, which is most commonly marketed worldwide.

I’m not sure which baseline is adapted by our country, but according to the minister, we have reached 60% penetration. If its 256kbps, well nothing much to say. Also need to consider the quality of the transmission.

 

This year’s national broadband penetration 60 per cent target has been achieved, said said Information, Communications and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim.

The distribution of 1 Malaysia netbooks and launched village broadband facilities have contributed to the quick success said Dr Rais, according to Bernama Online.

He was speaking in Kampung Rumpun Makmur, part of the Kerdau state constituency in Pahang today.

The success has spurred the ministry to increase the target to 70 per cent penetration nationwide for 2011.

The minister also highlighted the efforts of the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) and respective telcos in improving access and quality.

source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/2011-broadband-target-achieved-in-half-a-year-says-minister/

 

misleading subsidy information?

/* June 29th, 2011 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I tried searching the statistics for 2010, but so far the 74 billion refers to subsidies in 2009. Not sure if coincidentally the amount is same for 2010.

For 2009, the slides from Pemandu shows that:

 

[click to enlarge]

42.4 billion was for social subsidy (health and education?) which is 57%.  And this is mentioned in media as well, with slightly different figures:

According to Pemandu figures, the country’s total subsidy bill was RM74 billion, or equivalent to RM12,900 per household.

Pemandu said the government subsidises RM23.5 billion for fuel, RM4.6 billion for infrastructure, RM3.1 billion for food and RM41.8 billion for social welfare (health, education and higher education).

But the finance ministry said yesterday the country’s total subsidy was RM18.6 billion or equivalent to RM3,246 per household.

It said that RM7.1 billion was spent for fuel, RM800 million for infrastructure, RM2.9 billion for food and RM7.8 billion for social welfare.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/tsu-koon-defends-pemandus-subsidy-data/

 

However, if the announcement below is correct, then it won’t look good on Pemandu. Hope to hear their clarification soon.

 

The federal government had “misled” the public when the Performance, Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu) stated it had footed a subsidy bill of RM74 billion in 2010, an economist said today.

NONESpeaking at the Selangor 2012 budget talks in Subang Jaya today, Nottingham University visiting associate professor Subramaniam Pillay said 54 percent of that bill was for education and healthcare, which is in fact government responsibility.

“All governments in the world subsidise different items for different people. But education and health are what economists call ‘public goods’ and are the responsibility of the government,” said Subramaniam who retired as Nottingham University Business School head last year.

“All developed countries around the world subsidise healthcare heavily, except the US, but (President Barack) Obama recently tabled a Healthcare Bill.”

Take the two big-ticket items away and the bill was only RM31.1 billion, of which only food subsidies (RM3 billion or about 2 percent of the federal budget) went directly to the rakyat.

He said much of the RM23.7 billion fuel and energy subsidies paid in 2010 had gone to gas subsidies to independent power producers.

“For infrastructure, all the subsidies go to (highway concessionaires) not because they need it but because they signed an agreement (with the government), which was stupid. It’s not a subsidy for therakyat,” he said.

The Pemandu figure of RM74 billion has been cited by the government to justify its subsidy cuts on petrol, natural gas, diesel and food items.

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/168198

Roundtable Conference on Tamil Schools

/* June 29th, 2011 by poobalan | View blog reactions 2 comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


This is a good news, even though it is very very late. Well, better late than never. Of course having roundtables, squaretables or notables makes no difference if no action is taken, as mentioned by Naragan in his letter it will be a just “wayang kulit” (shadow play). I fully agree with his arguments – we see lots of rhetorics, chest-thumping and promises. But when it comes down to action, the numbers speak for themselves. No one can hide from this fact.  Just check the allocated budget and the expenditure for the last 6 or 7  Malaysia Plans.  In terms of percentages, there’s very little allocation all around. Most of the time, its ad-hoc token sums given to troubleshoot school problems. Never a long term strategic solution.

Let’s look at a simple issue – license for a school. What hinders the Education Minister from issuing license to relocate a school? Lack of land? Lack of money? Lack of agreement from school/PTA?

Next is status of school – fully or partially aided. What causes a school to be partially aided? The size of land? The ownership of land on which the school sits on?

I pass by Bandar Bukit Puchong 2 often. I notice a brand new school being build  – a religious primary school (and its quite big!). Just imagine if build a national school there – everyone can study? Why the school can get such a big land in a new housing area? And vernacular schools can’t even get land to relocate? Or relocate to shitty areas? If Chinese housing developer still OK can help to relocate Chinese schools by donating land (for example SJKC Ladang Harcroft by IOI – relocate from Sitiawan to Puchong – across states!). Tamil schools need government intervention because not many developers will be willing to donate land.  Then, there’s not many philanthropists who are willing/able to help out with financing the construction. End up, we get small buildings and lesser facilities. Few years down the lane, same problem recur.

BTW, I don’t think the teachers of schools closed down will lose their job. They will be relocated to other schools or pooled in some district/state education offices.

So, I wonder how seriously this roundtable will taken.  will it be just talk, talk, talk and nothing comes out in the end? Most likely yes.

Since things are at critical level, the committee should suggest that every new housing project in areas/district/mukim with at least 7% Indian community population  should allocate land for relocating tamil schools from underserved areas (if we take schools with less than 50 students, that’s about 250 schools). And this to be made a rule in next month. Now, it would be interesting to see how that works!  Next, all schools should be allocated a minimum of 5 acres, and given an allocation of RM20 million per school for construction. That’s just R500 million, which can be spread over 5 years. Every year, relocate and construct 50 schools. Good boost for economy, no?

Finally, ensure that the overseeing committee consists of NGOs, as the developers, local councils, land offices, state governments, education departments etc. cannot be trusted to carry out the orders.

Several Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat MPs held a historic roundtable conference on the future of Tamil schools.

Held in Parliament today, the conference was organised by DAP’s Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran.

He said discussions were held to set up a steering committee to chart a blueprint for the future of Tamil schools in the country.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, who chaired the conference, promised that the government would not close down or demolish Tamil schools in the future.

“What the Indian community should to do now is engage with all political parties no matter BN or Pakatan, become a united group to raise Tamil school issues,” he said.

Present at the conference were Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department SK Devamany, Federal Territories and Urban Wellbeing Deputy Minister M Saravanan, DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang and Penang Deputy Chief Minister P Ramasamy.

Others who attended the conference were MPs M Manoharan (DAP-Teluk Intan), S Manikavasagam (PKR-Kapar), Charles Santiago (DAP-Klang), R Sivarasah (PKR-Subang), Selangor exco Dr Xavier Jeyakumar, Sungkai assemblyman A Sivaneson, Senawang state assemblyman P Guna and Senators Daljit Singh Dalliwal and S Ramakrishnan.

Schools facing closure

Kulasegaran expressed concern over the situation of Tamil schools located on private land as well as the issue of partially and fully-aided schools and the danger of closure of some 50% of Tamil schools.

“The danger concerns Tamil schools which have less than 50 students and this involves nearly half of the 523 schools. There are 64 Tamil schools with less than 25 students which are facing closure. This will cause some 200 teachers to lose their jobs,” he said.

He added that in the last 30 years, 68 Tamils schools had been closed down.

Devamany said that over the last three years, the government had spent RM300 million on Tamil schools.

The MIC vice-president also stressed that his party was willing to work with any group or political organisation to develop Tamil schools.

Meanwhile, NGO Tamil Foundation suggested that the government grant licenses to relocate several Tamil schools from the estates to urban areas.

According to statistics in 2010, 84% of the Indian community were living in urban areas.

Licence for Simpang Lima school

Sivaneson suggested that the government change its policy that all schools which owned land must be recognised as fully-aided schools.

Currently, schools with five acres and more were eligible to be fully-aided schools.

A resolution was also passed at the conference that the government must immediately grant licence to the Simpang Lima Tamil cchool in Seri Andalas, Selangor.

The school was the first Tamil school picked as a cluster school among the 30 schools appointed under the Education Ministry’s cluster of excellent schools programme. However, the school was facing a shortage of places for the 2,400 pupils.

Kulasegaran said that the second meeting would be held on July 8 to select the members of the steering committee.

It is learnt that of the 18, there would be six members from BN, six from Pakatan and the rest from Tamil Foundation and other NGOs.

source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/06/27/bn-pakatan-reps-meet-over-tamil-schools/

HINDRAF still planning to sue British government

/* June 28th, 2011 by poobalan | View blog reactions No comments »
 Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Not sure what to make of this.  Even if sue, no guarantee of winning. I remember the Batang Kali massacre case which was unsuccessful.

And would the UK government pay USD 4 trillion? Sure bankrupt la.

Hindraf Makkal Sakti is set to refile its suit against the British government by the end of he year.

Hindraf chairman, P Waytha Moorthy, originally filed a class action suit on Aug 31, 2007, the 50th anniversary of Malaysia’s independence, against the United Kingdom London courts for US$4 trillion.

The suit was filed prior to Nov 25 historic Hindraf rally in Kuala Lumpur, to demand compensation for Indian Malaysians whose ancestors were brought in by the colonial government as indentured labour.

It claimed that, after granting independence to Malaya, the British had left the Indians without representation and at the mercy of the majority Malays.

However, the suit was stalled following the Malaysian government’s clampdown on Hindraf and arrest of several lawyers, including the movement legal adviser and Waytha Moorthy’s brother Uthayakumar under the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA).

Hindraf’s lawyers in London say that to refile the suit they need relevant documents which is kept by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO)

The lawyers have made a second request to the FCO to facilitate its impending million pounds suit against the former colonial master.

The movement’s legal counsel in London, Imran Khan (pix below) has made the second request on May 25 this year after the Hindraf’s first request on Jan 6 this year was refused by FCO.

The second request is made to seek access to all documents and information held or that which is within the knowledge of the FCO as well as any material held by any other governmental departments which have had access/dealings with Malaya between 1945 and 1957.

“In the event that the FCO refuses to provide us with the documents, we will then exhaust all internal review procedures to have access to the disclosure of these materials and documents.

“If this too failed, we will pursue other avenues such as a judicial review to force the FCO to release the documents necessary for the claim,” said solicitors Imran Khan & Partners in a statement to FMT.

More documents available

The statement said the FCO has turned down Hindraf’s first request citing that domestic records of colonial administrations did not form part of British official records and they were kept by the individual states created at independence.

It has now come to Hindraf’s knowledge that there were more classified documents held in undisclosed locations by the British government, as stated by Lord David Howell, Minister of State for FCO in the recent “Mau Mau uprising” case in London.

Lord Howell has also said that it was the general practice for the colonial administration to transfer to the United Kingdom, in accordance with Colonial Office instructions shortly before independence, selected documents held by the governor.

Lord Howell has said that these documents were deemed not appropriate to hand on to the successor governments.

FCO is said to hold about 8,800 files from 37 former British administrations, including Aden, Brunei, Cyprus, Fiji, Gambia, Jamaica, Kenya, Malaya, Malta, Mauritius, Nigeria, Northern Rhodesia, Palestine, Sarawak, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Swaziland, and Uganda.

The UK legal firm said it was first instructed by Waytha Moorthy in 2009 to look at the prospects of re-filing a legal action in the English courts for reparation against the UK government for failing to protect the legitimate interests of the minority ethnic Indian group under the Malaysian Federation Constitution when it was drafted in 1957.

Independently, Waytha Moorthy and a small team of volunteers of their own volition have unearthed nearly 35,000 “declassified” documents from various independent sources.

Hindraf’s solicitors were seeking more classified documents because the documents on hand clearly showed a huge lacuna (gap) in the information leading to Malaya’s independence.

Hindraf claimed that the Reid Commission was partly to blame for the government’s discriminatory policies as the commission did not provide for constitutional protection to the Indian community.

source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/06/24/hindraf-seeking-more-classified-documents-to-sue-britain/