I refer to the reported apology by Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim to the people for his mistakes in fielding unqualified candidates in the last general election.
Legally, it is not possible for him to sack all those unqualified candidates as state assemblymen and members of parliament to rectify his mistakes.
However, the sincerity of such apology to the people can be shown by Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim, as PKR’s adviser and Pakatan Rakyat’s de facto leader if he immediately:-
1. issues a list of all those state assemblymen and members of parliament from PKR that he now felt as unqualified candidates in the last general election;
2. takes disciplinary action against those state assemblymen and members of parliament that against the policy of PKR and Pakatan Rakyat; and
3. give assurance to the people that all those state assemblymen and members of parliament from PKR as disclosed in the list would not be fielded again in the next general election.
I believe the people (especially those who have voted for PKR) have the rights to immediately know who are these “unqualified candidates” from PKR that were mistakenly fielded in the last general election.
It is inappropriate to label any assemblyman or member of parliament from PKR or Pakatan Rakyat as “unqualified” only after they decide to leave PKR and Pakatan Rakyat.
Unless the above actions are taken immediately, the apology tendered by Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim is unacceptable and it is fair for Malaysians to assume that the views and actions of those so called “unqualified candidates” are sanctioned by PKR and Pakatan Rakyat.
17 February, 2010
13 February, 2010
HAPPY CHINESE NEW YEAR
HAPPY CHINESE NEW YEAR AND MAY THE YEAR OF THE TIGER BRING PROSPERITY TO OUR COUNTRY!
10 February, 2010
Readers Views On The PTPTN Issue Extracted from NST
Extracted from New Straits Times (2010/02/10)
PTPTN:Let merit be sole criterion
I WOULD like to join the debate on the National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) loans.
I just started Form Five and I am concerned about the statement by Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Khaled Nordin that he was looking at ways to limit the loan amount, for example, by only covering tuition fees, and to give help only to those who "need" them.
Kedah Gerakan Youth chief Tan Keng Liang, in his letter published in the NST on Feb 2, asked the government to raise the allocation for PTPTN instead, and to ensure that everyone was given a chance to take PTPTN loans.
There was also a letter, published on the same day, by M.P. Babu of Johor, who said that PTPTN loans should only be given to those who need them.
I agree with Tan and disagree with Babu. How can the government know who needs loans and who doesn't? Why must a student's need be decided by his family's financial status?
The government should not discriminate against students based on their parent's financial status. I agree with Tan's remarks: "There could be instances where 'well-to-do' parents refuse to finance their children's education as they may not see this as a priority.
"There could also be situations where well-to-do parents have many children and it is beyond their means to finance every single child.
"It would be unfortunate if those students with merit are deprived of the opportunity to pursue higher education due to the poor definition of well-to-do parents."
Another reader, in a letter published on Feb 3, said it was the business of banks to give education loans and that the government should not compete with banks.
I don't mind if banks give loans similar to those given by PTPTN but I have not heard of such a bank loan. I hear that some parents borrow from moneylenders to send their children for further studies.
My family is in the middle- income bracket. I have five brothers and sisters and had planned on taking a PTPTN loan to continue my studies at Kolej Tunku Abdul Rahman and proceed to Universiti Tun-ku Abdul Rahman.
I don't think my parents can afford to pay for my university education, even though they earn RM6,000 plus per month. They have to pay the mortgage, car-loan instalments and other things.
I hope the government will allow students to take PTPTN loans without any difficulty and not discriminate on family background or financial situation.
GEORGE YEOH, Kajang
Equal access
I DISAGREE with Marisa Demori's views on the National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) loans ("It's the business of banks, not govt" -- NST, Feb 3).
Education is not merely about acquiring technical skills; it is also about self-improvement, knowing how to apply the knowledge gained and being able to innovate using that knowledge.
PTPTN serves a vital role in providing equal access to education for everyone. By giving loans to those who have got a place in our universities, the fund allows students from lower-income backgrounds to not only improve their lot, but to expose themselves to intellectual debate and stimulation of their peers.
As a final-year university student, I can state that in my two years of university education, I have gained so much more than my textbooks ever taught me.
It has allowed me to mature in an environment that encourages thinking and criticising, instead of merely believing what is put in front of me. The exposure to different viewpoints, each with its own merits, and the guidance of my professors have given me an experience that has changed me, and will continue to change me for the better.
Has Marisa thought of the consequences of the private sector taking up the responsibility of funding the education of our students?
The more stringent requirements and higher burden required to take a loan would discourage many from pursuing their dreams, resulting in an educated generation consisting only of those from more privileged backgrounds. This would result in a huge imbalance in society.
A government's role is wide-ranging and it has to take the long-term and short-term consequences into account. Where would we be in 50 years if we do not educate the present generation?
Admittedly, experience is something that contributes invaluably to work performance, but experience guided by knowledge is so much more useful. Instead of blindly performing the task at hand, having a proper academic background would lead to questions such as, "Why am I doing this?" and "How can I do it better?", and this is where the roots of progress lie.
Management expert Peter Drucker once said: "A knowledge worker is non-manual, what you have to go to school to learn; what you can't learn by an apprenticeship."
He recognised the importance of education, our forefathers recognised the importance of education and now we must act on our recognition of the importance of education.
The problem faced by PTPTN is not so much a lack of funds as the slow repayment of loans. PTPTN should liaise with the Internal Revenue Board and the Employees Provident Fund to ensure that those who can pay up loans do so when they start working.
It should consider converting loans into scholarships should students enter government service.
The corporation should solve the problems that plague the implementation of its service and punish those who exploit it.
Let education be a dream to aspire to, not a privilege.
CHAN YI JIEN, Subang Jaya
Poor planning
THE National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) needs to be commended for extending financial aid to students pursuing tertiary education. Taxpayers' money is well used, as thousands of students benefit from this scheme.
The PTPTN loan is confined to students who secure entry to local colleges and universities. It is given to any student who applies for one.
It is time the corporation extends the loans to students who study in overseas universities. It is simple logic that studying abroad is more expensive.
Why then this discrimination, when our country aspires to become a developed nation? Why does the corporation fail to understand the financial burden shouldered by parents who send their children to study at foreign universities?
Aren't these parents also paying tax? What is the rationale for denying loans to these students?
I hope the government will consider giving PTPTN loans to students studying abroad.
Now, we hear even more bad news: the government plans to give loans only to those who "need" them. The reason, the corporation says, is a shortage of funds.
How could there be a shortage of funds if there had been proper financial planning and projection?
PERUMAL LETCHUMANAN, Lunas, Kedah
PTPTN:Let merit be sole criterion
I WOULD like to join the debate on the National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) loans.
I just started Form Five and I am concerned about the statement by Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Khaled Nordin that he was looking at ways to limit the loan amount, for example, by only covering tuition fees, and to give help only to those who "need" them.
Kedah Gerakan Youth chief Tan Keng Liang, in his letter published in the NST on Feb 2, asked the government to raise the allocation for PTPTN instead, and to ensure that everyone was given a chance to take PTPTN loans.
There was also a letter, published on the same day, by M.P. Babu of Johor, who said that PTPTN loans should only be given to those who need them.
I agree with Tan and disagree with Babu. How can the government know who needs loans and who doesn't? Why must a student's need be decided by his family's financial status?
The government should not discriminate against students based on their parent's financial status. I agree with Tan's remarks: "There could be instances where 'well-to-do' parents refuse to finance their children's education as they may not see this as a priority.
"There could also be situations where well-to-do parents have many children and it is beyond their means to finance every single child.
"It would be unfortunate if those students with merit are deprived of the opportunity to pursue higher education due to the poor definition of well-to-do parents."
Another reader, in a letter published on Feb 3, said it was the business of banks to give education loans and that the government should not compete with banks.
I don't mind if banks give loans similar to those given by PTPTN but I have not heard of such a bank loan. I hear that some parents borrow from moneylenders to send their children for further studies.
My family is in the middle- income bracket. I have five brothers and sisters and had planned on taking a PTPTN loan to continue my studies at Kolej Tunku Abdul Rahman and proceed to Universiti Tun-ku Abdul Rahman.
I don't think my parents can afford to pay for my university education, even though they earn RM6,000 plus per month. They have to pay the mortgage, car-loan instalments and other things.
I hope the government will allow students to take PTPTN loans without any difficulty and not discriminate on family background or financial situation.
GEORGE YEOH, Kajang
Equal access
I DISAGREE with Marisa Demori's views on the National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) loans ("It's the business of banks, not govt" -- NST, Feb 3).
Education is not merely about acquiring technical skills; it is also about self-improvement, knowing how to apply the knowledge gained and being able to innovate using that knowledge.
PTPTN serves a vital role in providing equal access to education for everyone. By giving loans to those who have got a place in our universities, the fund allows students from lower-income backgrounds to not only improve their lot, but to expose themselves to intellectual debate and stimulation of their peers.
As a final-year university student, I can state that in my two years of university education, I have gained so much more than my textbooks ever taught me.
It has allowed me to mature in an environment that encourages thinking and criticising, instead of merely believing what is put in front of me. The exposure to different viewpoints, each with its own merits, and the guidance of my professors have given me an experience that has changed me, and will continue to change me for the better.
Has Marisa thought of the consequences of the private sector taking up the responsibility of funding the education of our students?
The more stringent requirements and higher burden required to take a loan would discourage many from pursuing their dreams, resulting in an educated generation consisting only of those from more privileged backgrounds. This would result in a huge imbalance in society.
A government's role is wide-ranging and it has to take the long-term and short-term consequences into account. Where would we be in 50 years if we do not educate the present generation?
Admittedly, experience is something that contributes invaluably to work performance, but experience guided by knowledge is so much more useful. Instead of blindly performing the task at hand, having a proper academic background would lead to questions such as, "Why am I doing this?" and "How can I do it better?", and this is where the roots of progress lie.
Management expert Peter Drucker once said: "A knowledge worker is non-manual, what you have to go to school to learn; what you can't learn by an apprenticeship."
He recognised the importance of education, our forefathers recognised the importance of education and now we must act on our recognition of the importance of education.
The problem faced by PTPTN is not so much a lack of funds as the slow repayment of loans. PTPTN should liaise with the Internal Revenue Board and the Employees Provident Fund to ensure that those who can pay up loans do so when they start working.
It should consider converting loans into scholarships should students enter government service.
The corporation should solve the problems that plague the implementation of its service and punish those who exploit it.
Let education be a dream to aspire to, not a privilege.
CHAN YI JIEN, Subang Jaya
Poor planning
THE National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) needs to be commended for extending financial aid to students pursuing tertiary education. Taxpayers' money is well used, as thousands of students benefit from this scheme.
The PTPTN loan is confined to students who secure entry to local colleges and universities. It is given to any student who applies for one.
It is time the corporation extends the loans to students who study in overseas universities. It is simple logic that studying abroad is more expensive.
Why then this discrimination, when our country aspires to become a developed nation? Why does the corporation fail to understand the financial burden shouldered by parents who send their children to study at foreign universities?
Aren't these parents also paying tax? What is the rationale for denying loans to these students?
I hope the government will consider giving PTPTN loans to students studying abroad.
Now, we hear even more bad news: the government plans to give loans only to those who "need" them. The reason, the corporation says, is a shortage of funds.
How could there be a shortage of funds if there had been proper financial planning and projection?
PERUMAL LETCHUMANAN, Lunas, Kedah
FULL SUPPORT TO EC ON AUTOMATIC VOTER REGISTRATION
I refer to the statement today by Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof, Chairman of the Election Commission that the Election Commission would consider an automatic voter registration system for all Malaysian who attain the age of 21 years old. The default voting constituency would be based on the last known birth address registered with the National Registration Department.
In line with my earlier statement, I fully agree that all Malaysians should be automatically registered as voter upon attaining the age of 21 years old.
There is no reason why Malaysians have to register themselves as voters. The existence of the current manual registration system would only serve to deprive certain Malaysians from voting in the General Elections. Currently, those unfortunate people stand at 28% of all Malaysians, from the statistics given as of end of last year.
Such a system is also a waste the government’s resources and the people’s money.
As correctly highlighted by Tan Sri Abdul Aziz, such a proposal would require amendments to existing laws, including the Federal Constitution.
It would be good if both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat would support the implementation of the automatic voter registration system and amendments to the existing laws, including the Federal Constitution.
Political parties no longer need to waste time and resources to gather their supporters to register as voters.
More important, Malaysians would no longer be deprived of their rights to vote on technical grounds.
Thus, I hope that the government would immediately set up a working committee under the supervision of the Election Commission to study the mechanism required for the implementation of the automatic voters’ registration system and the amendments required under existing laws and the Federal Constitution.
The automatic voters’ registration system would be best implemented by the next general election.
In line with my earlier statement, I fully agree that all Malaysians should be automatically registered as voter upon attaining the age of 21 years old.
There is no reason why Malaysians have to register themselves as voters. The existence of the current manual registration system would only serve to deprive certain Malaysians from voting in the General Elections. Currently, those unfortunate people stand at 28% of all Malaysians, from the statistics given as of end of last year.
Such a system is also a waste the government’s resources and the people’s money.
As correctly highlighted by Tan Sri Abdul Aziz, such a proposal would require amendments to existing laws, including the Federal Constitution.
It would be good if both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat would support the implementation of the automatic voter registration system and amendments to the existing laws, including the Federal Constitution.
Political parties no longer need to waste time and resources to gather their supporters to register as voters.
More important, Malaysians would no longer be deprived of their rights to vote on technical grounds.
Thus, I hope that the government would immediately set up a working committee under the supervision of the Election Commission to study the mechanism required for the implementation of the automatic voters’ registration system and the amendments required under existing laws and the Federal Constitution.
The automatic voters’ registration system would be best implemented by the next general election.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
