In between lockdowns, PLF secured Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s time to gather his thoughts and views for our Oral History series on “Malaysia’s Economic Development”, past and present. We present an excerpt of the session that he had with interviewers Dato’ Dr Vaseehar Hassan and Mr Eddin Khoo in May 2021.
Dato’ Dr Vaseehar Hassan
If you reflect on 1981 when you became the Prime Minister, what were the most pressing economic issues in your mind at that time? How did you implement those priorities?
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
Well, when I took over in 1981, the economy was not doing well at all. We had to sit down and think about how to overcome this. We did succeed because we introduced new ideas. We wanted to change people’s mindsets. We wanted them to understand that they are capable but they were not making use of their capability. So, we introduced concepts such as the Look East Policy as we wanted to emulate the Japanese. At that time, the Japanese were doing very well compared to the Koreans and the Chinese. We also introduced Islamic values because they are congruent with development and are good to build the character of the people. Foreign investment soon grew very quickly because (foreign investors) saw Malaysia as a stable country with good policies. So, although the economy was not doing well in 1981, we recovered very quickly.
Mr Eddin Khoo
As the Prime Minister, how did you ensure that the economic plans were followed through and implemented by the various ministries under your management, Tun? What is the main obstacle of translating policy into action given our particular circumstances?
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
This is very important. You can craft policy but it’s not going to be carried out unless you know how the person who devised the policy is going to implement it. For example, we made a policy decision to build a road 800 kilometres long. That was a decision but how do you get it done? We were a poor country; the government had no money and there were many other obstacles in the way. So, we decided to build a toll road and have the people who will use that road pay for it. That was one part of the solution. We also faced the very high cost of building the road, and we could not charge high toll rates; that would not make the people happy. High tolls would deter motorists from using the road and the project would be a failure. How could we reduce cost? Well, we worked out a solution whereby the government would lend money to the developer and transfer the land for the road to help reduce costs. It was not meant to help the developer. Rather, we needed them to build the road but at a lower cost so that toll rates could then be at a more acceptable lower rate. These were all the things we had to figure out from that one policy decision. It is not as simple as it seems.
There are a lot of suggestions and we have many good policies but we must also know how to materialise them. How do you do it? So many things have to be done, they cost money, and problems arise when you want to do something. If you suggest a policy, then you need to also know the solution (to implement). If you don’t know the solution and you don’t guide them, it will not be done. I always demanded that reports be made to me so that I am kept apprised of progress. I also visited project sites often. For example, when they were building the Petronas Twin Towers, I visited every week to see the progress by myself and to ensure that any problem that arose was tackled. Taking a personal interest in the projects that you propose is very important. You cannot propose a project and leave it to somebody else to do it. It’s not done.
Mr Eddin Khoo
Perhaps we can leap to your second period in the government. When you became Prime Minister for the second time in 2018 and the moment you took office, what were the economic exigencies?
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
We were very concerned about corruption. If we could tackle the problem, the economy would recover. The economy was depreciating because of the costs of doing business in Malaysia and the inefficiency of the government at that time. The focus was not on developing the country but on self-interest. So, that was our first job – to remove corrupt politicians as well as administrators.
Mr Eddin Khoo
Tun, if we could pursue this line of questioning on development again; we had this belief that development and infrastructure growth would lead to economic growth, greater prosperity for the people, peace, harmony, and improved living standards for all. But it seems that the divide between the rich and poor in this country continues to grow. It is one of the highest in the region and it shows no sign of improving. Why do you think this has come about?
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
Well, it is a natural phenomenon. Capable people will grow faster than the people who are not capable. Over time, the disparity becomes bigger and it becomes more difficult for the low-earning people to catch up with the rich. They need to be helped but sometimes they also make mistakes. We helped Bumiputras by giving them licences, Approved Permits, contracts, and all that. What did they do? They sold them for the same amount of upfront money. Therefore, they remained poor and the people who bought from them became very rich.
Only a few made use of the opportunities. The Naza Group, for example. The founder purchased Approved Permits and did not sell them for easy money. Today, Naza is a big and successful group which has gone into housing, development, and other sectors. If the Malays had made full use of the opportunities that were given to them, the disparity between the Malays and the Chinese would have been reduced. If the problem was lack of skills, we were willing to provide training. We can train them to be contractors or to go into business. But they opted for quick cash. They had the licence and the opportunity, but they sold them away. The people who bought the licence became rich and they remained poor.
Dato’ Dr Vaseehar Hassan
Was that a flaw in the selection process because we were giving opportunities to everyone instead of selecting people like (the founders of) Naza and Sapura who made good use of the privileges afforded to them?
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
We had no means of determining how they would perform. We had generated a lot of opportunities and there were many applicants. Even then, we could not give to everyone. We were always under pressure to give to more people as people claimed that selecting a few was not fair. I was already charged with cronyism, accused of giving licences to my friends only. What happened was that I gave (licenses) to a lot of people but only a few succeeded. Those few who succeeded were called my friends. They were not my friends before they succeeded. I personally did not know (the late) Tan Sri Nasimuddin and Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar but they succeeded with the opportunities given them. For every one person who succeeds, there may be a hundred people who fail. The ones who fail received the same opportunities but they did not know how to make use of them.
So it is not true that we discriminated by giving only to our cronies. We gave opportunities and scholarships to thousands of people, but some do well while others fail. Unfortunately, those who do well are accused of being cronies to the government and me. The only way I can avoid being accused of cronyism is to make sure that they all fail! But then, where is the good in a policy that fails?
Dato’ Dr Vaseehar Hassan
One of the ideas of Vision 2020 was creating Bangsa Malaysia. You had explained that Bangsa Malaysia means that all Malaysians must think of themselves as Malaysians first, not as their ethnic group. Where are we in this today? What are the challenges of creating a Bangsa Malaysia?
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
Well, it’s very difficult because unlike other countries where migrants accept the language and culture of the indigenous people, we rejected this in Malaysia. At the time when we became independent, the Chinese still wanted to identify themselves as Chinese. The Indians also wanted to call themselves as Indians and of course, the Malays wanted to call themselves as Malays. They did not want to lose their (ethnic) identity. The result, of course, affects our politics. In any democratic country, if you don’t follow the wishes of the people, you will lose. The corrupt may be able to bribe people (for votes) but normally, you have to respond to the wishes of the people.
Today, people still feel that they are not Malaysians. They are Chinese Malaysians, or Indian Malaysians, and the identity with this country is not a full one. This is the problem that we face. I proposed that we have Chinese, Tamil, and national schools on one campus, so that certain activities can be shared across schools. For example, students can gather together every morning for assembly or they can meet each other through sports. Sports houses can draw members from each school instead of being confined to one school. This is one way to get young Malaysians to mix, but the idea was rejected by Dong Jiao Zong. The resistance to become Malaysian is very strong.
Dato’ Dr Vaseehar Hassan
Is it because of the political structure that we embraced after Independence (1957) that created this division? Are the people or the politicians responsible for this division?
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
The politician has to respond to the people. It would be easy if the people are willing (to assimilate) but from the time of Independence, there has been resistance. I had once thought that we would be able to become a Malaya where everyone speaks Malay as their home language, in much the same way that Americans speak English. In the US, even citizens who are of German or Dutch origin speak American English and identify only as Americans. But in Malaysia, the people don’t want to do that. We want to retain our home language. Officially, we use Malay but we still want to have our own (vernacular) schools. So, the resistance is strong, so much so that we had to accede to the conditions laid down by the Chinese community to get their agreement for our Independence. This is not stated in our history books. For example, Penang didn’t want to become a part of Malaysia; Penang wanted to be like Singapore. They called themselves the Straits Chinese British Association and the King’s Chinese. To get them to be part of Malaysia, we had to accede to their demands.
