Essay Competition 2010 – Remarks by Dato’ Ng Tieh Chuan
May 27, 2010 in Events@PLF, Interviews, Media, PLF News, Spotlight
You are browsing the Blog for Interviews.
Perdana Leadership Foundation Officially Launches Essay Competition 2010
May 24, 2010 in Events@PLF, Interviews, PLF News, Spotlight
The Perdana Leadership Foundation’s “Nurturing the Minds of Future Leaders” Essay Contest 2010 was officially launched on the 21st of May 2010 at the MPH Megastore in 1Utama. Attended by Press and Youth NGOs, the launch was officiated by the Executive Director of the Perdana Leadership Foundation, Tan Sri Nik Mohamed Nik Yaacob; the CEO of MPH Group, Dato’ Ng Tien Chua; and the Chief Judge of the Competition, Emeritus Professor Tan Sri Dato’ Dr. Khoo Kay Kim.
Tan Sri Nik Mohamed explained the objectives of the competition: to encourage solid research into current topics affecting Malaysia, and reward good writing. The competition is also a way for the Foundation to reach out to younger Malaysians, and learn more about the views and opinions of Malaysian youth. The Foundation made the decision to focus on the 18 to 25 year-old age group this year, as the response from this group had been the most disappointing for the past two installments of the competition. “We hope that this group will surprise us this year,” he said.
Emeritus Professor Tan Sri Dato’ Dr. Khoo Kay Kim, who has been a judge for the competition for the past installments, similarly expressed his hope of receiving more entries from the young adults segment. When asked on the quality of essays received in previous years, the Professor said that while most of the entries were “disappointing” in that they reflected the current trend of students regurgitating facts, there were some which were “outstanding”. What he wants to see in this year’s essays are originality of thought, and a confident expression of the entrant’s ideas.
Dato’ Ng of MPH Group said that the competition is in line with MPH’s aims to encourage young writing talents within the country. The topics for this year would also require good awareness of current events.
This year’s competition will run until 30th September 2010, and is open to all Malaysians aged 18 to 25, regardless of student status. Prizes up for grabs include a RM7,000 cash prize, E-Readers, Netbooks, and MPH book vouchers.
Click here to the news clippings of the Essay Competition 2010
Click here to view the press statement of the Essay Competition 2010
The Nation – Mahathir Mohamad on Asean, the crisis, and the future
March 4, 2010 in Interviews, PLF News, Resource Centre, Spotlight, Tun Dr. Mahathir
Nation Channel’s Veenarat Laohapakakul held an exclusive interview with former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohammed, one of Asia’s most outstanding and controversial leaders in modern history. Here are excerpts from the interview, aired last night on Channel 9.
Q: Are you happy with the way Malaysia is run right now by Prime Minister Najib Rasak?
A: Well, I think it’s okay.
Q: But it’s heading in the right direction?
A: Yes, it is.
Q: In the 70s and 80s Southeast Asian countries began to manufacture a lot, export a lot, but now we tend to look to tourism, to education. Looking to the future, what will be the new areas that Southeast Asia should look to in order to earn foreign income?
A: Most East Asian countries depend upon export earnings. They manufacture for export, but now we find that markets have shrunk because of the crisis. So we need to see how much our countries can depend on each other, develop each others’ economies so we don’t have to depend that much on markets outside East Asia.
Q: For Asean, do you think we are going in the right direction, now that we have the Asean charter?
A: Yes, we are but the speed is very slow. We need to come together much more. It’s about cooperating, because Asean has to contest with other regions like Europe, and with the idea of free trade. Ibodyless worldf one country tries to defend itself, it’s not strong enough, but if Asean as a group takes up an issue then people will listen to us. Of course Asean can also work with Northeast Asian countries like China, Korea, Japan and so become stronger in protecting our interests.
Q: What is the biggest threat to Asean as a regional bloc?
A: We are not as strong economically as developed countries. If we open up our market to them, they can take advantage of us, but we can’t take advantage of them because we don’t have the technology, we don’t have the capital, and we cannot be active in their countries the way they are active in ours.
Q: Do you think Asean is a dysfunctional family? We have this non-intervention policy, so even though we always talk about family spirit, we don’t talk about each others’ domestic affairs. We have a lady in Burma under house arrest surrouded by men with guns, but other members just let it be.
A: Yes, we have a problem like that but the question is, how do you tackle the problem? The Western idea is that you punish these people, apply sanctions, make them poor, make them suffer so they will come begging. That is not the Asian way. Asians don’t tell people what they should do in their own house. Sanctions punish the people, not the leaders. We should not apply pressure, we should try to persuade.
Q: Do you think Southeast Asian countries need economic prosperity for stability more than civil liberties?
A: Well, I think it’s fun to have civil liberties and be poor. You’re free, but what does it get you? If a country is to develop, there must be some restrictions, because one’s man freedom can mean another man’s lost freedom. We have to think about the majority of the people. If we have a demonstration in a town, people who are doing business in the town cannot earn money, and some of them are very poor, so it’s not fair to them.
Q: Do you think authoritarian government, suppressing the press or stamping out the opposition is still the way to go in the 21st century?
A: No. there’s limit to everything, a limit even to freedom. If you have a press that constantly creates (problems) between people then we shouldn’t call that freedom of the press. It’s like when you have freedom, you can’t go around and punch other people. There are certain things you cannot do. We have to look at the welfare of the people. If anybody exercises freedom in a way that damages other people, then we should say stop.
Q: What do you think of President Barack Obama?
A: Well, Barack Obama made lots of promises but so far he hasn’t done anything.
Q: Do you think the US has less influence in the world today?
A: Yes, it has lost a lot of influence because of itself. It abuses the banking system, the monetary system and has created a crisis in the rest of the world.
Q: Do you think the balance of power has shifted from West to East, with China leading the way?
A: Not completely, but I think it is going in that direction. There’s a need for us to sit down and consider the international financial system, the monetary system, the banking system. All these things have been abused.
Q: A lot of people look at how you spoke up against the West. Do you think Asia needs someone like that today?
A: Well, especially if they stand together. We were very much alone, we were frightened to stand up against the world but were reasonably sure that what we did was right and would help us, so we took a stand by supporting Asean to stand together with us. Then we were much more comfortable.
Q: Looking back to your proudest achievements. We are sitting now on the 86th floor of the Petronas Towers. Is this one of them?
A: In Malaysia we have three different races living together. They are divided by language, religion, culture and even wealth. So the ingredients for constant clashes, even civil war, are there. I am very happy that I inherited a stable country and I was able to keep it stable during my term of office. This is something I’m proud of because when I became prime minister I was known as a Malay extremist, but when I stepped down, those who called me extremist became my strong suporters.
Click here for the full article
Perdana Focus: Sue Valquis Md. Mashhor
March 1, 2010 in Interviews, PLF News, Research@PLF, Spotlight
by Nurol Akma Latif
Research Focus: An Analysis of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s Approach in Regional Development and ASEAN
Assoc. Professor Sue Valquis Md Mashhor is one of Perdana Leadership Foundation’s research scholars. She is a senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law, UiTM and has been lecturing for 20 years in courses such as Public International Law, Malaysian Legal System, islamic Family Law, Law of Torts, Law and Medicine, Law Relating to Health Care, Legal Process and Administrative Law. She is currently pursuing her PhD in Law in UiTM.
Ms Valquis’s research is entitled “An Analysis of Tun Dr. Mahathir’s Approach in Regional Development and ASEAN” The research aims to study the concept of regional development propounded by Tun Dr. Mahathir for Malaysia during his premiership. Apart from that, the research focuses on Malaysia’s policies relating to regional development and whether any of these policies were extended to the development of ASEAN.
Perdana Leadership Foundation’s Research Awards was introduced in 2005 with the aim of stimulating research on the leadership of Malaysia’s past Prime Ministers. The Foundation offers short-term and long-term grants to qualified scholars with academic adminis¬tration provided by the Institute of Research, Development and Commercialisation (IRDC), Universiti Teknologi MARA. The objectives of the Research Fellowships are: to encourage the study of this country’s history beyond facts and figures; to yield valuable insights for future Malaysian leaders via in-depth study of the nation’s past leaders and how their leadership as well as policies affected national development; to increase awareness of, and boost interest in, Malaysia’s rich intellectual heritage. The first fellows of the Research Awards are Dato’ Prof. Dr. Mohd Yusof Hasan, Dr. Suhaimi bin Shannon, Prof Madya Kamarudin bin Ngah, Assoc Prof Azhari Karim, Assoc Prof Sue Valquis Md. Mashhor and R. Sivaperegasam P Rajanthiran.
ASEAN was established during the time of Tunku Abdul Rahman. Can you comment on each of our Prime Minister’s involvement in ASEAN?
ASEAN was established in 1967.
The Federation of Malaya obtained its independence from the British Government in 1 957. Tunku Abdul Rahman as the first Prime Minister had taken efforts towards regional cooperation by forming the Association of Southeast Asia (ASA) in July 1960. Thailand, Malaya and Philippines were the founders. ASA however perished when Philippines made claims onto Sabah in early 1963. After the claims on Sabah subsided, Tunku, President Macapagal (Phillippines) and President Sukarno (Indonesia) set up MAPHILINDO as a move to cooperation but it became stillborn when Malaysia had to face the Indonesian confrontation against the formation of Malaysia in 1963. The confrontation subsided with the downfall of President Sukarno at the hands of General Suharto who took over the presidency in September 1965. A peace accord was signed on 12 August 1966 between Malaysia and Indonesia with the initiatives of Prince Sihanouk of Cambodia and Robert Kennedy of United States. In 1968, the Malaysian government then called for the neutralisation of the Southeast Asia region and proposed the policy of co-existence.
Tunku’s administration focused on a movement for peace, friendship and diplomacy among the member countries in the region. ASEAN was established in 1967 with five original founders namely Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. The early aim of ASEAN was to stop the advancement of communism into South-East Asia.
Tun Abdul Razak had actively during his premiership (1970 – 1976) moved ASEAN into making the region a neutral area. In 1971 Tun Abdul Razak said:”The premise of the neutralisation proposal is regional and national resilience. Southeast Asia must stand on its own feet. We individual countries as well as the region as a whole must be self reliant if we wish to survive. If a country or a people values its way of life, it must be prepared to defend it against any form of external encroachment…”
Tun Hussein Onn was the Prime Minister of Malaysia in 1976 – 1981 and he signed the Declaration of ASEAN Concord and Treaty of Amity and Cooperation. The treaty laid down the fundamental principles of operation for ASEAN namely mutual respect, sovereignty of states, non interference of domestic matters, non use of force or threat and settlement by peaceful means. The 1977 ASEAN Summit held in Kuala Lumpur fortified the call for peace in the region. In 1979 ASEAN called for intra-regional cooperation and extra-regional activity.
When Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad (1981-2003) became Prime Minister, ASEAN then was 14 years old. Dr. Mahathir assisted ASEAN by defining its role and identity in the international sphere. As a regional organisation, the member countries have to cooperate to achieve the objectives of the Association. Globalisation is at the doorsteps of ASEAN and it has to be tackled. Foreign investors will only be willing to come to Southeast Asia if the region is politically stable and technologically equipped. When Dr. Mahathir introduced the Look East policy in Malaysia and harped on K-economy, the other ASEAN members followed suit so that the region would be equipped with tools of modern technology.
What were the policies introduced by Tun Dr. Mahathir during his 22 years of involvement in ASEAN?
One main policy introduced by Tun was the Look East policy.Tun was most impressed by the exceptional work ethics of the Japanese and Koreans. The workforce also practiced standards that enhance fair competition in their marketing of goods.
A policy that Tun Dr. Mahathir proposed for ASEAN during the financial crisis of 1997 was Prosper Thy Neighbour. According to Tun, Malaysia should help its neighbours to develop their economy. Intra-ASEAN trade should be enhanced so that there is movement of trade and capital between the member countries.
How can the approaches that Tun successfully implemented in Malaysia be applied in other ASEAN countries?
Malaysia is a cosmopolitan country with many ethnic groups. It is important for Malaysia to be politically stable. Democracy is practiced and previously it had been based on cooperation. But today the younger generation must understand the consociationalism* that forms the basis of Malaysia’s independence. Moderation and tolerance are the basis of unity. Secondly a country must be strong economically so that the livelihood of its people is improved.
ASEAN can learn from Malaysia’s efforts to cultivate unity and build economic strength.
ASEAN consists of a developed nation (Singapore), emerging markets (Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, Philippines, Brunei) and developing countries. How can a balanced regional development be achieved?
The concept of balanced development means the sharing of resources. The creation of Growth Triangles between Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia in the north and that of Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia in the South are forms of sub-regional cooperation. The resources developed are shared through joint-venture agreements between enterprises and the jobs created will help improve the standard of living of the people therein.
Can ASEAN create a one-value system with so many different cultures and religions practiced in the region?
When the Malaysian Government emphasises on values for development, the government wants the people to adopt positive attitudes towards work and life and take steps to make Malaysia a united, just, stable and progressive country. The need to achieve national unity requires Malaysia to uphold national interests above ethnic and communal interests. Over-concern for sectional and parochial interests will be detrimental to the long-term interests of the nation. Because of the need to maintain stability, Malaysians need to keep their racial and religious differences to the minimum. Values of moderation, tolerance, and appreciation of the sensitivities of each other are crucial in the building of a united, just, stable and progressive nation.
ASEAN too has to identify the values it wants the ASEAN Community to practice. The people must be proud of ASEAN. There should be less formal procedures to enter ASEAN countries and less stringent conditions in the employment of ASEAN people, with no discrimination of employees among ASEAN countries.
Do you believe that ASEAN should strive towards supra-nationalism like the European Union?
I believe that ASEAN countries should keep their overeignty and work along the lines of Smart Partnerships and good neighbourliness rather than supranationalism like the European Union.
Perdana Focus: Professor Dr. Hazman Shah
December 29, 2009 in Interviews, Research@PLF, Spotlight
Perdana Focus: Interview with Prof. Dr. Hazman Shah Abdullah, the Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Dr. Teh Hong Piow Resident Fellow
Professor Hazman at his PLF office
Q. Can you briefly explain what your research is about?
My research stems from the following observation; since 1980’s the improvement focus in the public arena has been more on the service quality and less on governance quality. The basic question has been – how can we make public agencies more efficient and effective in delivering services to the citizens?
The general answers have been to debureaucratise (make flexible), decouple (unlink service provision from policy or regulatory role), performance orientation (measure output, outcome and customer satisfaction) and rationalise (transfer to private and third sector). These outcomes have resulted in dramatic improvements in public services. Despite the service improvements the world over and at home, the public trust in government and elected officials have generally declined.
Hence the paradox, as customers, people are more satisfied now than before but as citizens, they are less trusting of the government that has performed better!
The problem is that the focus has been to improve the service quality dimension of governments with less emphasis on the governance aspects. Admittedly, the governance aspects are much more difficult to transform. This lopsided development has troubling consequences for the future of the nation. Government must not only deliver services, it must do so in way that is based on public participation, subject to the laws, with integrity, and accountability for the results. The danger is that governments are more focused on improving the delivery of services and less aggressive on improving the manner in which these improvements are brought about. Good governance is about both ends and means. This research is to dramatise these dangerous imbalance at the local government level.
In short, my research is about examining the twin arms of public governance i.e. service quality and governance quality. Public governance operates on the basic premise that when governments observe good governance practices, the quality of services and policy making will improve. Unfortunately, we have worked on mainly one front.
Q. Can you elaborate on the relevance of your research?
It is publicly acknowledged by the government that public services must be improved if the overall competitiveness of the nation is to be enhanced. Through the efforts undertaken since the 1980’s, public services have seen notable, and in some cases, remarkable improvements. But the governance dimension has generally suffered through less attention and slow changes.
Corruption is still perceived to be high, integrity of public and elected officials is questioned and trust in politicians and government is low in Malaysia; accountability of public agencies is largely internal and weak externally. These symptoms show the lack of parallel development on the governance front. As consumers, Malaysians like the public service improvements but as citizens they have misgivings about the way the government goes about its business. This paradox or imbalance must be researched and debated for better understanding so that there can be greater traction on the governance related changes.
Q. Can you let us know which local authorities (or states) you have chosen for your research, and why?
The choice of local authority is deliberate. Local authorities is the third tier of government in Malaysia, are unelected and hence, do not have a critical governance mechanism available to the state and federal governments. Local authorities continue to perceive themselves as corporations responsive to the consumers and accountable to the state (like shareholders). They have emphasised (in my mind over-emphasised) service quality and de-emphasised governance quality. This is unhealthy and does not augur well for the development of well governed local authorities. Therefore, local authorities are an excellent setting for this study.
The local authorities chosen for this study are Johor Baru City Council and Kota Baru Municipal Council. Besides being located in the extremities of Peninsula Malaysia, they are under state governments controlled by different political parties. The service-governance paradox can be studied in two different political settings.
Q. What do you hope will be the impact or benefits of your research?
I hope the research will draw attention to the developing imbalance and compel more debate both within and without the government. Research evidence can ensure the debate is serious and not polemical. The more we juxtapose and show the paradox, the more difficult it is to deny the imbalance. Hopefully, with the present resolve to improve the governance quality after the historic 12th national election, the study can be a further catalyst in this direction particularly at the local government level.
The social, economic and political crises that we face require government to act fast and firm. But with the decline in political legitimacy (low perceived governance quality), the government will be reluctant to move forward.
Q. You mention in your research proposal that the government has reformed its service delivery and efficiency but that there are still challenges at local authority level. Can you elaborate on this statement?
Local authorities have improved their services but the improvements have not been uniform. Local authorities have changed little in so far as governance quality is concerned. In fact, some would argue that it has declined!
The growing urbanisation will bring more Malaysians within the ambit of local authorities and yet local authorities are not “open” to their influence and involvement. With growing education, information and knowledge among the people especially n the urban areas, local authorities cannot continue with their arms-length approaches. These challenges are faced in many urban local authorities on an almost daily basis.
Q. Do you believe that elected local councillors will improve governance?
At present, local authorities (LA) are government with no direct accountability to the people who pay taxes. Their role in this level of government are limited and in many cases, rejected. Elected councillors will change this and make LAs more democratic and accountable to the local residents. LAs must learn to govern, not to rule the increasing urban and educated masses.