1.​When the idea of a national car was mooted, it was met with widespread criticisms and cynical comments. We were a third world country and we know nothing about motorcar manufacturing. Our market was tiny. It would be a waste of our money.

2.​It was easier to simply buy imported foreign-made cars. At best we could import CKD (Completely Knock-down packs) and assemble the cars here. That was as much as our agriculture-based economy could do.

3.​But we did talk even at that time of industrialisation, of being an industrial nation. How do we become an industrialised nation if we have no industry other than assembling electronic components.

4.​Malaysia has always been and it still is a trading nation. Buying things from foreign countries must result in outflow of funds. This would be bad for our balance of payment. Our trade would be in deficit. Trade deficits are not sustainable. We cannot generate enough wealth internally to pay for our imports. Our raw materials, such as rubber, tin and palm oil exports cannot earn us enough to pay for imports. We will be in deficit.

5.​To prevent this we can do two things. We can limit imports or we can increase exports. Among the items which absorb funds in large amounts is the import of cars. The purchase of cars involves large sums of money. When we buy foreign cars there would be a big outflow of funds.

6.​In those days we could not think of exporting Malaysian made cars in order to increase the inflow of funds and have a healthy trade balance. Still if we produce our own cars and our people buy them then much of the money would stay in the country. There would be less outflow, less tendency to have deficits.

7.​But could Malaysian made cars compete in the domestic market against foreign imports? They could if the price is right. To ensure right prices the Government had to tax imports at a higher rate.

8.​This was not going to be welcome by Malaysian consumers. But all countries wishing to promote local automotive industry had no choice but to make imported cars costly. Japan and Korea had done this. Other countries simply make it bureaucratically difficult for cars to be imported. Apart from taxes on foreign cars, standards were raised in foreign countries so that imports find difficulty to qualify. The standards were raised periodically so that foreign cars wishing to enter the market have to be upgraded continuously.

9.​Any nation wishing to go into an industry dominated by foreign imports will not be able to match the imports immediately. When, after World War II Japan decided to build cars, the design was atrocious and the quality inferior. The Datsun Bluebird seemed to be an inferior copy of the British Hillman. The car was imported into Malaysia but was not well accepted despite the low price.

10.​But we all know how much the Japanese cars have improved. They not only meet the standards of European cars but are often superior to many of these cars. Today no one questions the quality of Japanese cars. Even though the price is no longer low they are able to penetrate foreign markets. Clearly it takes time to improve locally produced manufactured goods to match imported goods. To have an industry, especially automotive, time is required to achieve world standards and to be competitive.

Continue reading SHAPING A NATIONAL AUTO INDUSTRY : HOW NATIONAL CARS CAN CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS ECONOMIC DEVELOPEMENT →

Saya tidak berniat untuk kempen dalam PRK Sungai Limau. Ini sebahagian dari kawasan saya pada tahun-tahun 1964 – 1969. Saya sukar berkempen di sini. Tetapi kerana sebab tertentu saya lapangkan masa pada 3hb November dan saya memutus untuk ke Sungai Limau.Sungai Limau tebal dengan PAS kerana terdapat guru agama yang terkenal di situ. Tetapi kali ini BN dapat masuk dan saya juga boleh berkempen. Sudah longgar agaknya.

Bendera PAS sama banyak dengan BN. Kit Siang turut berkempen tetapi DAP masih takut bayang-bayang saya. Tumpuan Kit Siang ialah mencaci saya, seolah-olah saya yang bertanding. Kit Siang tidak senang kenapa saya masih aktif selepas bersara.

Pada 1964 saya jadi Wakil Rakyat. Kit Siang menjadi Setiausaha Politik kepada Devan Nair. Kemudian setelah PAP tidak dapat aktif lagi di Malaysia Kit Siang menubuh DAP dan menjadi ketuanya. Saya bersara 2003. Kit Siang belum bersara, masih ketua DAP dan menjadi wakil rakyat Gelang Patah. Bila Kit Siang akan bersara? Sampai mati kah? Jika sudah bersara nak jadi pemimpin kanan (Senior Leader) DAP kah?

Kempen sekarang ini berbeza dari dahulu. Banyak wang diguna. Diadakan Karnival di mana ada acara hiburan, jamuan dan hadiah percuma seperti T-shirt BN, PAS yang belum memerintah terpaksa jual T-shirt. Apabila jadi Kerajaan T- shirt tentu percuma.

Continue reading Pilihanraya Kecil Sg Limau →

1. Among the cleverest people in the world are the analysts – the people who can see through solids, even see and recognise what lies behind. This gives them power and as we all know power corrupts. Few among the analysts can restrain the corrupting influence of their power.

2. The analyst who works for Malaysian Insider clearly is one who cannot resist the abuse of that power. Given a task by his master he comes up with a fantastic analysis on the recent decision by the court that the word “Allah” is exclusive to Islam and may not be used by the Catholic “Herald”. He saw an opportunity to serve his master like the toady he is.

3. His master had recently demonised me by incorrectly and clearly deliberately translating my statement on corruption. I had said that I was sold by my divisional representatives for RM200/-. The English version was correct. But the Malay translation implied that I bribed my divisional delegates with RM200/-. Why I should bribe them so they would not vote for me is beyond me. But the opportunity to blacken my name in the eyes of the Malays was too good to be missed by his master.

4. When asked to correct and apologise, Malaysian Insider decided to demonise me instead by stating that twenty-five years ago when “Tun Mahathir Mohamad dismantled one of the most respected judicial institutions in the Commonwealth and destroyed the concept of separation of powers in Malaysia rhetorically he asked “how many Malaysians were truly upset with his interference?” In one sentence he made a lie appear to be an indisputable truth, without stating what indeed I had done to deserve the demonisation.

5. The arguments by the great analyst are rather convoluted but the implication is clear. The Malaysian courts (and here Tun Suffian’s words are made use of) will never be able to recover the respect they had before I “destroyed” them.

6. The truth is that the courts often made judgements against me or the government I lead. The classic case is when UMNO, the ruling party was declared illegal because a few branches cheated. Yet recently when the Central Committee of the DAP was found to have basically cheated, it was simply asked to hold another election. But for UMNO, when four out of more than 6000 branches did not follow procedures, the whole party was declared illegal. The judge who made this judgement was then promoted. I did not object.

7. When Anwar sued me for defamation because I repeated to the press the judgement made by the Appeal Court which acquitted him I thought a Malaysian court would decide this in one sitting. If I was wrong, then the appeal court which found that Anwar did not commit sodomy on the day mentioned in the charge but averred that he did commit sodomy on other days must also be wrong. The third appeal judge concurred with the guilty verdict of the High Court. But on the basis of a wrong date, Anwar was acquitted and released. I merely repeated the findings of the Appeal Court when asked at a Press Conference.

Continue reading The Mind of the Analyst →

Artikel in telah disiarkan di dalam akhbar Mingguan Malaysia , Oktober 20, 2013

1. Dasar kerajaan untuk menjadikan Malaysia negara berpendapatan tinggi (high income country) tentulah diterima baik oleh rakyat. Tetapi kita harus ambil kira kesan pendapatan tinggi, terutama dalam bentuk upah dan gaji kepada kos sara hidup Negara.

2. Apabila upah atau gaji dinaikkan tidak dapat tidak kos barangan dan khidmat akan turut naik. Kenaikan ini akan mengurangkan dayabeli (purchasing power) berbanding dengan pendapatan yang dinaikkan.

3. Kita tahu benar negara-negara yang pendapatan amat tinggi dari segi upah yang diterima tetapi taraf hidup mereka jauh lebih rendah dari kita. Pendapatan tinggi semata-mata tidak bermakna kekayaan dengan taraf hidup yang tinggi.

4. Yang akan menjadi kehidupan kita setaraf dengan negara maju ialah daya beli pendapatan kita yang sama tinggi dengan dayabeli penduduk negara maju. Kenaikan pendapatan tanpa kenaikan dayabeli tidak bermakna sama sekali. Sebaliknya ia akan menghalang pembangunan Negara kearah sasaran menjadi Negara maju.

5. Negara-negara yang ditakrif sebagai negara maju tidak sahaja memiliki pendapatan per kapita yang tinggi tetapi mereka memiliki daya pengeluaran (produktiviti), yang tinggi dengan kemajuan mereka dalam bidang ilmu pengetahuan, kecanggihan dan kebesaran industri serta perniagaan dan perusahaan. Negara mereka dilengkapi dengan infrastruktur yang canggih dan mencukupi untuk keselesaan hidup rakyat serta membantu aktiviti perniagaan dan perusahaan. Infrastruktur ini termasuklah jalan-jalan yang menghubungi semua bandar dan kampung, bekalan api dan air, khidmat pelajaran dan kesihatan dan lain-lain. Banyak terdapat Negara yang berpendapatan amat tinggi tetapi tidak dianggap maju.

6. Kita perlu pisah kemajuan sesebuah negara daripada pendapatannya yang tinggi. Walaupun negara maju biasanya disertai dengan pendapatan yang tinggi bagi semua rakyat, tetapi pendapatan yang tinggi dengan sendirinya tidak bermakna Negara sudah maju.

7. Hasrat Kerajaan tentulah untuk menjadi bukan sahaja negara berpendapatan tinggi tetapi menjadi negara maju dengan kuasa dayabeli rakyat yang tinggi. Untuk ini tumpuan perlu diberi kepada usaha daya keluar (produktiviti) yang meningkat yang akan menyumbang kepada dayasaing (competitiveness) negara. Kenaikan dayasaing Negara-negara Timur inilah sehingga mengalahkan Negara Barat yang menjadikan beberapa Negara Timur maju.

8. Menaikkan pendapatan adalah mudah. Umpamanya apabila gaji atau upah minimum dinaikkan maka matlamat pendapatan tinggi tercapai. Tetapi seperti yang disebut di atas, kenaikan ini tidak menjadikan rakyat lebih kaya, disebabkan dayabeli tidak naik bersama pendapatan.

9. Umpamanya kenaikan upah minima katakanlah dari RM 700/- sebulan kepada RM 900/- sebulan akan membawa dua kesan. Mereka yang sedang menerima RM 900/- sebulan akan kecewa jika upah mereka tidak dinaikkan supaya yang berada di bawah mereka tidak mendapat gaji yang sama dengan mereka. Apabila gaji kumpulan ini dinaikkan maka yang dahulu mendapat upah yang lebih tinggi akan meminta kenaikan supaya jarak yang lama dikekalkan. Akhirnya kenaikan gaji minima kepada RM 900/- akan disusuli dengan kenaikan gaji atau upah di semua peringkat. Kenaikan yang menyeluruh ini tidak dapat tidak akan menaikkan kos pengeluaran semua barangan dan khidmat. Dengan perkataan lain kenaikan gaji dan upah, tanpa kenaikan produktiviti akan menaikkan kos sara hidup.

10. Yang kedua kenaikan gaji dan upah tetap akan menjadikan barangan dan khidmat yang kita beri kurang kompetitif di pasaran dunia. Pelabur tempatan dan asing juga tidak akan melabur dan yang menganggur tidak dapat bekerja untuk sara hidup mereka.

Continue reading NEGARA BERPENDAPATAN TINGGI →

1. Sekarang baru saya tahu kenapa kontraktor Bumiputra tidak pernah diberi kontrak oleh swasta Malaysia. Mengikut Fellow Kanan Institut Kajian Sosioekonomi dan Alam Sekitar (SERI). Dr Michael Lim Mah Hui, Bumiputra tiada kualiti.

2. Ketua Pakar Ekonomi RAM Holdings, Dr Yeah Kim Leng, pula berkata, swasta mementingkan meritokrasi, bukan menutup peluang kepada Bumiputra.

3. Kita tahu Kerajaan yang dikuasai oleh Bumiputra yang tidak berkualiti, telah mengambil hampir 100% Bumiputra untuk menjadi pegawai dan kakitangan Kerajaan. Hasilnya dapat kita lihat Malaysia tidak dapat ditadbir dengan baik dan pembangunannya memang buruk sekali berbanding dengan negara-negara lain yang mencapai kemerdekaan bersama dengan Malaysia.

Continue reading BUMIPUTRA TIDAK KUALITI →

1. The world is in a bad shape because politicians instead of journalists run it. I came to this conclusion after reading a copy of The Economist, the British magazine. The writers in the Economist seem to know everything that ails the world and they also know how all these ailment can be cured.

2. The copy begins with the front page illustration of the statue of Christ tumbling through the air from its pedestal on Sugar Loaf mountain in Brazil; down, I suppose to crash on Rio de Janeiro. I suppose it is to illustrate the grave situation in the country.

3. The articles on Brazil began with “Grounded”, followed by “A rough ride for (President Dilma) Rousseff”. Then “The price is wrong”, and an advice on agriculture, “Leaves Well Alone”, followed by “The Road to Hell”. “Money no Object” (on the football stadium), “Land of the Setting Sun”, “Look Good” followed by “Reality Dawns”. The articles describe all the wrong things that are being done by Brazil and how they should and could be corrected.

4. Other articles are entitled “A new Face of Terror” (which Western Governments do not know), “Sending the Wrong Smoke-Signal” (on E-cigarettes), “Angela’s Dilemma” (telling Angela Merkel to look to the Greens).

5. “Curb Your Enthusiasm” is to warn everyone not to put too much faith in Iran’s nuclear deal “and keep the sanctions on”. Cameron, the Prime Minister of United Kingdom is told to “Remember what you once were (the Prime Minister should reclaim the radical centre of British politics)”. “The Unquenchable Fire” is about the Al-Qaeda still being around and deplore the fact that Mr Zawahiri, its current leader is not dead yet. This seems like hinting that the United States should assassinate the Al-Qaeda leader as they did Osama Ben Laden. I suppose Zawahiri’s corpse would be dumped in the sea.

Continue reading POLITICIANS vs JOURNALISTS →

This article appeared in the New Straits Times, Oct 1, 2013

1. Attempts to declare Chin Peng a patriot, nationalist and freedom fighter reflect how far derailed some Malaysians are from what the Communist Party of Malaya represented and what was its real objective.

2. Firstly, it must be pointed out that the CPM continued with their insurgency long after Malaya and then Malaysia had gained independence in 1957.

3. In their fight against the Government of independent Malaysia, the CPM killed civilians and security personnel by the thousands without considering their role as defenders of independence or their innocence. Senior police officers were assassinated and police patrols were ambushed and gunned down.

4. Nationals of an independent country do not kill fellow nationals who were only doing their duty to provide security for the citizens who wanted just to earn a living, who wanted to live a normal life. Yet the CPM ignored the independence of the nation, the democratic rights of the people in its single-minded desire to create a Communist dictatorship in Malaysia. The CPM were prepared to use extreme violence so as to install its leader Chin Peng, as the authoritarian ruler of the country.
Continue reading Chin Peng →

1.      The British parliament, to the surprise (and probably relief) of Prime Minister David Cameron, rejected British armed intervention in Syria.  Then Barack Obama, President of America, decided that he would ask for Congress approval even for what he called limited military action against the Syrian Government despite his right to declare war without the approval of Congress.  In other words he is   not really willing.  It is a smart move on his part because if the venture fails Congress cannot blame him alone.

2.      It looks like the Western Powers have learnt something from their experience in Afghanistan and Iraq.  They once thought that it would take only a few months of shock and awe to achieve regime change in these two countries.  In the event after ten years of war, after losing thousands of their own soldiers while killing hundreds of thousands of Afghans and Iraqis, devastating these countries, the regime changes have not resulted in the democracy they expected.  If at all the present situation in these two countries is much worse than before invasion and the regime changes.

3.      The hesitation over a military adventure in Syria, even a limited one is understandable.  Yes, the use of chemical weapons probably killed over a thousand innocent Syrians.  But already about 200,000 people have been killed.  Is it acceptable to kill unlimited numbers of innocent people with bombs, rockets and bullets but not with chemical weapons?

4.      If a military invasion is to take place surely it would cause more deaths, definitely more than the number killed by chemical weapons.  And supposing the arsenal of chemical weapons are hit, would it not cause even more deaths.

5.      Supposing limited war takes the form of assassination of the President, would the war stop?  Would the opposition take over the Government and set up a democracy?  The killings of Saddam and Ghadafi have not resulted in stability for their countries.  Even the removal of Hosni Mubarak has not resulted in Egypt being stable and democratic.

Continue reading REGIME CHANGE →

1.  If you want to fight then pick on someone you can beat.  If you do this you will always win.  But then you will be called a bully.  That is alright.

2.  The weak of today are the Muslims.  And the Muslims are weak because they choose to be weak.  I say they choose because Allah has not just given them a good religion, a religion of high values which when practiced would make them strong and respected but Allah has also given them resources of wealth which enable them to have a good life doing nothing.  With money they can get others to do their work for them.

3.  Because of all these the Muslims are weak and can be bullied by anyone. And when they get bullied no one, certainly not their Muslim brothers will come to their help.  So whenever a bully wants to bully he will always pick on the Muslims.

Continue reading THE ROHINGYAS →