PENANGITES have plenty of reasons to look forward to the speech by Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi at the Dewan Rakyat today. They expect the Prime Minister to give them a present in the Ninth Malaysia Plan he is tabling in Parliament.

The speculation is that Penang will get the second bridge. And there is likely to be a bonus. Penangites, who have long complained about the poor public transport system, will get a monorail link.

The second bridge, the monorail and the outer ring road will be the biggest improvement in the state's public transport system. Hopefully, with this massive integrated link, Penangites will see the last of their transportation nightmare.

In short, it is time to end the chaotic traffic and deplorable public transport system in Penang. With Pak Lah as the Prime Minister, he can do plenty for his home state. Now is the time.

From traffic congestion to narrow streets to an almost non-existent bus system, Penangites have long had to put up with this daily grind.

I remember as a schoolboy a bus conductor used his elbow to stop me from getting on board a municipal council bus to my home in Kampung Melayu in Air Itam.

More than three decades later, the stressful situation hasn't changed. There are now air-conditioned buses; but for passengers, it is still a daily test of patience as they wait for the bus by the roadside.

More than 1.4 million cars and motorcycles choke the state's highways and narrow streets every day.

It is frightening because Penang only has a population of 1.45 million people.

The ratio of private vehicle ownership to the population in Penang is almost one to one while Singapore, with a population of over 4.6 million, records a ratio of one vehicle to two persons.

The average Penangite has a car and a motorcycle, maybe two, at home, for short-distance travel. Hardly anyone takes the taxi, because Penang cabbies have long refused to use the meter. The taxi sapu is the preferred choice.

Abdullah is unlikely to give any specific date for the construction of the monorail but the word is that preliminary work has been conducted.

There is even talk that for a start, the routes will be between George Town and Batu Ferringhi, Batu Uban and Paya Terubong.

The second bridge and monorail projects are justified, even overdue.

At present, an average of 110,000 vehicles use the existing bridge on weekdays, and as high as 120,000 on weekends.

The Penang Bridge's optimal capacity is 80,000 vehicles.

The second bridge, estimated to cost RM2.6bil, is crucial if the Government plans to make Penang a regional transport hub, which will benefit Kedah and Perlis. At present, at least 54% of Penangites already live on the mainland.

But the people in other states won't be left out. The focus of the 9MP will be the development of an integrated and efficient public transport system.

There is a likelihood that a public transport commission will be set up to oversee the improvement of public transport in the Klang Valley, the heart of the nation.

Transit hubs are expected to be set up in Kuala Lumpur for better travelling.

For the people in Negri Sembilan, Malacca and Johor, the 9MP focus is expected to be on upgrading the southern corridor. The expansion of development beyond the Klang Valley is inevitable.

The traffic congestion problem in Johor is as bad, if not worse than that in Penang and Kuala Lumpur, during the weekends, when Johoreans have to fight for space with Singaporean visitors. A dispersal link to ease the problem may be included in the 9MP.

But it won't be just roads and bridges in the 9MP. The rail infrastructure is almost certain to be upgraded as it has been a reliable form of transport in many states; and special attention is expected to be given to new industrial areas.
 

He has made it clear that the issue should no longer arise
and that the directive is final. But this is not the first time the government
circular on this matter has been ignored. It probably won't be the last.

Noh had said that the ministry would not defend any school
or teacher who implemented rules that went against ministry circulars.

The issue was raised by Datuk Wan Adnan Wan Mamat (BN-Indera
Mahkota), who claimed that his daughter, a student in Sekolah Kebangsaan
Methodist in Kuantan, suffered discrimination because she did not wear the
tudung.

Last month, the principal of SMK Abdullah Munshi withdrew
her school's under-15 and under-18 netball teams from the Penang Schools Sports
Council tournament because some of her players had removed their tudung during
the competition. The students did so because they found it uncomfortable as
they were sweating profusely during the game.

Kota Baru MP Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, in a letter to The Star
recently, wrote that the Penang case "is not an isolated
incident where headmasters and teachers often make rulings involving Muslim
students either on dress code or other aspects of morality".

Schools, he said, were places where we teach our students
skills on subjects approved in the syllabus and a place where we open the
students' minds and not close them.

"Certain things in life should be left to the individual
students and their parents. One of them is, of course, whether or not female
students should wear the tudung,'' he said.

Now there is this issue involving the tudung as being part
of the policewoman's uniform in official parades, whether she is a Muslim or
not.

We hope the leadership will understand that the tudung, in
the eyes of non-Muslims, is not a cultural or ethnic dressing. This is unlike
the baju kurung, kebaya and songkok, which are part of the Malay costume and
readily accepted by non-Muslims.

The kebaya has such elegance and beauty that it has become
the preferred dress code of many non-Muslim women at formal functions because
it has class.

The tudung is a religious statement and the arguments put
forth by Muslims centre around the religious aspect of it. The nearest one can
put from the cultural point is that it is a Middle Eastern headgear, not Malay
for sure.

Last year, the tudung issue surfaced when a woman graduate
was reportedly barred from attending the convocation in August because of her
objection to the dress code.

In an unrelated case, two non-Muslim women were seen
entering the Parliament's chamber wearing the tudung.

When a Member of Parliament asked whether there was a rule
requiring non-Muslim female parliamentary staff to wear the tudung when on
official duties inside the chamber, Speaker Tan Sri Ramli Ngah Talib clarified
that there was no such rule. Following the clarification, the two non-Muslim women
staff were seen without the tudung when they carried out their duties.

Intervention by higher-ups such as Ramli and Noh is crucial
because no one, especially non-Muslims, must feel that they are compelled,
through subtle pressure, to wear the tudung.

One would expect rulings of such nature, particularly in
dressing, to come from PAS but now, we hear of such directives from government
institutions. Surely there is cause for much concern.

We believe the Barisan Nasional under the leadership of
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has always exercised fairness
and moderation.

Non-Muslims who have brought up this tudung issue have no
intention of creating any controversy. They merely want to express their
sentiment.

The key word is that there should be no compulsion.
Similarly, we should be angry when Western countries bar Muslim women from
wearing the tudung or Sikh men from wearing the turban. It is their right and
all of us should respect their religious beliefs.

On that argument, if Malaysians do not wish to wear any
religious clothing, then their rights too must be respected and protected. Malaysia
has a democratically elected government with a federal constitution, not a
theocratic nation. Let's keep it that way.

Looking forward to Tunku movie

There is a lot of excitement over the upcoming film on our
first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman (pic). It is good that so many people
have shared their viewpoints, which the film makers should take into
consideration.

Since The Star broke the story on Friday, many have come
forth to share their recollections of the Tunku.

We should be mindful that no film can ever give a totally
accurate depiction of any one man or incident, no matter how detailed the
research may be.

But we should be thankful that this project is under way
because there are many Malaysians today who may have forgotten the legacy left
by the Tunku.

In many of the issues that we face today, especially with
regard to ethnic and religious matters, we can look to the Tunku and learn from
our history. I am looking forward to the film.

THERE are plenty of expectations for the Ninth Malaysia Plan. After all, the Prime Minister has been telling Malaysians to look forward to the five-year development plan, which is to be unveiled in Parliament next Friday.

After all the hype, it would not be wrong to assume that many Malaysians have the perception that the 9MP would be similar to the annual Budget, where tax cuts and increases are announced.

The 9MP is a development plan for the next five years. As in past plans, not every project will be completed within the period; but more importantly, the 9MP is a not a silver bullet to end some of our economic woes.

The public, frustrated by the rise in fuel prices and the cost of living, must know that Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will not be waving a magic wand on that day.

There will be no news on tax cuts, no increase in cigarette prices, no toll price reductions, no special allowances for teachers and no bonuses for civil servants as in the usual Budget report.

But the thrust of the 9MP, the first under Abdullah's leadership, will have a tremendous impact on the country's economy. The more informed Malaysians hope to see renewed confidence among investors and a lift in the stock market, which is now one of the weakest in the region.

It may not help much in the short and middle term, even after Abdullah's speech, but the economic spillover will surely be felt as the Government is expected to spend up to RM200bil.

The Prime Minister has taken great pains to ensure Malaysians will benefit from the 9MP, which has taken about a year to put together, and by the time, he reads his speech, it would possibly be the 11th or 12th draft.

The previous prime ministers would spend about five days to finalise the details of such development plans with certain key ministers and officials before making them public but this time, Abdullah has dedicated 10 days for this task.

The details of the 9MP remain a secret. But the assumption is the broad strategies, as developing new growth areas such as modernising and developing the agricultural and biotechnology sectors to boost the economy would be emphasised.

Used to the pace of a manufacturing-based economy, many Malaysians do not see the tangible benefits of agriculture but this sector has gone beyond just planting padi and fish farming.

From deep-sea fishing to setting up global halal centres for meat to the West Asian market, to products from biotechnology, the leadership is expected to provide more support to these sectors.

It is a two-pronged approach – modernising agriculture and creating wealth and job opportunities for the rural people as well as addressing imbalances in urban-rural wealth. New zones or regions would be identified to be developed into modern agriculture and agro-based areas.

Tourism and education would likely be the other areas that Abdullah would want to see help boost the economy. We can expect to see financial commitment in these two areas.

The appointment of Datuk Mustapa Mohamed, who was very much involved in the drafting of the 9MP, as Higher Education Minister, is a clear indication of the Government's commitment to education. The Government sees knowledge as a key factor in building new businesses and industries.

There would be less talk of building schools this time but more talk on improving the quality of teaching and the curriculum at all levels to meet changing market needs.

For the people of Penang, Abdullah's home state, the surprise is almost certainly to be a second Penang bridge. The bridge will not only help the construction sector but spin off many benefits to the northern region.

A second bridge, estimated to cost RM2.6bil, is necessary as an average of 110,000 vehicles use the existing link during weekdays, with the figure going as high as 120,000 on weekends. Its optimal capacity is 80,000 vehicles.

The new link will surely boost the townships of Bandar Cassia in Batu Kawan, Bandar Perda in Bukit Mertajam and Bandar Bertam Putra in Kepala Batas.

Penang has 1.4 million people, but at least 54% now live on the mainland. Taking this into account, there are plans to use Penang as the transport hub for the northern region. Again, this could be reflected in the 9MP.

The Southern Corridor, to expand development beyond the Klang Valley, is likely to be given attention. States like Negri Sembilan, Malacca and Johor would surely benefit from the emphasis.

But the 9MP would not just be about operating expenses and infrastructure because much focus would be on developing human capital to improve the living standards of Malaysians.

From improving the transport system in the Klang Valley to providing comfortable homes to the lower income groups, Abdullah is expected to spend a lot of his energy on this particular endeavour.

Threats, intimidation and name-calling are used to shut down
their opponents. The worst behaviour is often seen at these parliamentary
meetings.

In fact, rather than to sweep things under the carpet and
pretend these problems do not exist, it is better to tackle them.

Young Malaysians, especially, just cannot accept that due to
the "sensitiveness" of these issues, they should not be discussed.

In some cases, the purported "sensitiveness" of the issues
has been used by some powerful individuals to prevent the flaws in the
implementation of some policies from being discussed.

Take for example the policy on the eradication of poverty.
No one in his right mind can dispute the aim of such a policy.

It's simple. The poor and disadvantaged, especially those in
the rural areas, deserve all the help because of the odds stacked against them.

Rural poor does not just mean Malays because there are the
Orang Asli, Bidayuh, Kenyah, Ibans and Kadazans. There are also the Chinese in
new villages.

Take a hypothetical case, Ahmad, a poor kampung boy has to
take a boat to school with minimal facilities every day. His parents are
farmers and tuition classes after school is something unheard of, let alone
exist.

There are no bookshops in the village for him to buy
workbooks to prepare for the SPM exam. He does well and gets 5As. He applies
for a Public Services Department scholarship and he gets it.

He wasn't the best applicant, academically speaking, but
most of us would agree that he deserves this chance in life.

But another Ahmad, a rich urban boy with 5As, who rides his
dad's Mercedes-Benz to school also gets a scholarship. If his competitors with
15As do not get it, surely something is wrong.

It does not matter whether the applicant is a Malay, Chinese,
Indian or Melanau because there are rules to everything.

We believe the PSD has their criteria and they have tried
their best to accommodate our best brains, irrespective of their race.

The PSD also has pointed out that the socio-economic background
of the applicant and his extra-curriculum activities would be taken into
consideration. Rightly so.

But the point here is that if a Malaysian questioned whether
the rich Ahmad boy deserves a scholarship, there is nothing sensitive about it.

Unfortunately, some of our lawmakers have chosen to play to
the gallery just to get their names printed in the newspapers in the most
undignified manner.

Whether it is Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) or Datuk
Badruddin Amiruddin (BN-Jerai), we like to remind them that their constituents
comprise all races. They are supposed to represent Malaysians of all races, not
just one race.

And after the uproar, the sad part is that the subject is
closed and nothing is really achieved beyond the rhetoric.

If someone brings up the point that our civil service is
dominated by the Malays, that is a fact.

So are the police and the army. Certainly, all the
vice-chancellors in our public universities are Malays. That is a fact and
there is nothing sensitive about it.

The point here is that there is nothing the Government can
do if other races do not want to join the civil service, the army, the police
or public universities.

They may not want to join because they feel the pay is not
good enough or they feel the promotion prospects are not there. But again, it's
a chicken-and-egg situation.

And if our vice-chancellors, top civil servants and police
chiefs do their job well, irrespective of their race, so be it. It's when they
do not do their job well that it becomes a problem.

All this talk of race upsets us because we celebrate the
50th year of independence next year. In terms of human age, we are past the
middle age.

Why are some of our politicians and civil servants still
thinking along racial lines when the world has become more open and
competitive?

Ahmad, Ah Kow and Arumugam are no longer competitors because
the threat is now from outside. The faster we wake up to this fact, the better
we are.

We have to face the fact that in any policy, there is a need
for certain political agenda, but it must no longer be the over-riding concern
if we care about meritocracy and excellence.

If we love Malaysia
and if we believe that Malaysia
has lost precious ground against our competitors, then we must be ready to
begin changing our mindset and environment.

The more we realise that our competitors are the Chinese,
the Indians, the Singaporeans, the Thais and soon, the Vietnamese, we will be
closer as the Malaysian Team.

Can our politicians use their time in Parliament to put
their heads together to take Malaysia
forward?

Last week, it was reported that more than half of the
councils had yet to install these cameras under the Safe City Concept initiated
by the Housing and Local Government Ministry.

The installation of these cameras – one of 23 measures under
the programme – has been proven to be effective in curbing crime, including
rape, theft and extortion. The police also can rely on such cameras to nab
criminals.

In addition, they also act as a deterrent as criminals know
their movements are being monitored and recorded.

In many major cities worldwide, these cameras have become a
common feature in tourist spots. Visitors are able to move around with the
knowledge that the authorities have their safety in mind.

Our councils have claimed that they lack the funds to
install the cameras despite collecting revenues of more than RM10mil a year. In
some cases, their collection even crossed the RM20mil mark.

Let's face it. The police, which is already facing a
shortage of personnel, can only do so much. Fighting crime is everybody's
business. The councils can do their part by making sure the streets are
well-lit and there is also CCTV surveillance. This is a modern way of crime
prevention.

Councils responsible for town-planning can do a lot to
ensure a safe city. Pavements, overhead bridges and parks should not have
hidden corners and blind spots. Lights placed at strategic places can ensure
that people are not up to mischief.

In short, this is to make it difficult for potential
offenders to target any physical object or human for crime. The cameras are
just one example of creating a safe environment in cities.

But now we hear the lame excuse that councils have no money.
Such an excuse does not hold water because we often read reports of councils
spending huge sums on their own buildings. Not to mention, ugly sculptures and
fountains that do little to beautify the towns.

The latest example is the Sungai Petani Municipal Council's
installation of 10 clocks worth RM390,000 around town, and already some of
these clocks have stopped functioning.

There are other worse examples, including the many overseas
study tours which have always come under criticism from rate-payers like us.
But we can be sure that this will not be the last that we will hear from the
councils about such trips.

What is sad is that instead of going to nearby Singapore,
which has earned a reputation of being a green city, and Kuching, which has
even received United Nations recognition for city maintenance, our councillors
choose to visit cities that actually have bad track records.

Our councils seem to have a penchant for grandiose projects
but the rate-payers merely want them to get back to the basics of providing
services to the people, such as prompt maintenance of drains, roads and
collection of rubbish.

Our local government leaders, unfortunately, seem to be more
preoccupied with seeking city status, achieving ISO recognition, with some even
aspiring for world-class standards when in our own backyards, the simple task
of collecting rubbish cannot even be properly carried out.

The installation of CCTV cameras is surely an essential
need. It is not a question of whether they want to because an order has already
been given in 2004 by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, who
chairs the National Council for Local Government.

The average cost of installing these cameras could run up to
RM200,000 or more but the councils must see this as an investment. It is
peanuts for rich councils with revenue of over RM10mil.

For example, the crime rate in Bukit Jambul, Penang,
reportedly dropped by 68% after such cameras were installed.

The problem with the local government is that they are
getting their priorities all wrong and in the process, good money has gone to
waste.

The Safe City Concept deserves the support and participation
of the people, police and councils. It will never take off if the councils do
not see it as an urgent agenda.

There is little point in nodding their heads in agreement
when meeting Najib or Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Seri Ong Ka
Ting but on returning to their offices, they put the file at the bottom of the
pile.

Let's not give this excuse any more because it is just not
acceptable.

DATUK Tony Fernandes and Idris Jala are the two most watched persons in Malaysian aviation.

Fernandes is regarded by the public as the one who has made flying affordable to all and is somewhat of a folk hero.

The AirAsia Bhd chief executive would pose for photographs with his passengers, and with his trademark baseball cap, he is a walking advertisement for the airline. His tagline that he does not fly business class when he goes overseas has further endeared him to the people.

Idris, the Malaysia Airlines managing director, is regarded as a knight who has been given the unenviable task of rescuing MAS. We want him to succeed but we also know he is fighting with one hand tied.

Idris has just announced a three-year turnaround plan which ranges from managing revenue, cutting unprofitable routes, joining an international alliance to seeking over RM2bil from the Government.

Fernandes has also been in the news with AirAsia's plan to take delivery of one Airbus A320 a month following the airline's decision to order 100 of the European-made aircraft, to be delivered over the next 96 months.

But for the average Malaysian, his main interest is in whether AirAsia will get to ply domestic routes and whether he can now pay less for flying.

Fernandes has put on a diplomatic front, but sounds frustrated at Jala's suggestion that MAS wants another year to restructure its domestic operations.

But the word in Putrajaya is that the Cabinet is likely to announce its decision soon, having deliberated on the matter. It is unlikely that MAS will have its way, with the AirAsia plan delayed after more than 12 months of negotiation, according to Transport Ministry sources.

Said one Finance Ministry official: "The writing's on the wall. We have spent RM110mil on the low-cost carrier terminal which will be open soon."

AirAsia has proposed to take over all MAS domestic flights excluding to Lahad Datu, Limbang and Mulu. MAS flies to 118 domestic routes but reported losses on 114 routes.

AirAsia believes it can turn the routes profitable but it needs a commitment now because of the rising fuel prices.

MAS feels that it, too, can do a good job if it is given the same freedom as AirAsia to determine destinations, schedules and fares, and consequently the size of its network, fleet choice and seat configurations.

Said one MAS official: "AirAsia cannot cherry pick the domestic destinations. There is such a thing as national service for the rural folk."

MAS also wants a free hand in turning around the business, the restructuring costs to be paid by the Government, and the Government to give the national airline financial support for rural air services.

But AirAsia has countered that the one-year time frame given by MAS was too long and that taxpayers would end up paying for the delay, which would run into hundreds of millions of ringgit.

According to reports, the MAS domestic losses, borne by the Government via MAS' parent company Penerbangan Malaysia Bhd, could range from RM100mil to RM200mil each quarter.

Idris has reportedly said that restructuring takes time as it may lead to retrenchment and "we must do it in as humane a way as possible. You can never rush to that activity." Under the proposal, AirAsia would absorb between 300 and 1,600 workers.

But the biggest losers would be taxpayers because the fact is, we do not know how much domestic losses Penerbangan Malaysia had incurred. With some accounting moves, the loss no longer appears on the MAS balance sheet but goes into the books of Penerbangan Malaysia.

Malaysians do not care about the corporate ambitions of MAS and AirAsia; but as taxpayers we certainly do not want to see more money being used to cover up financial holes.

We want to see MAS become profitable again and compete effectively with other regional airlines because MAS is a national pride.

But we certainly do not want to support an inefficient and unprofitable domestic carrier.

Previously, the MAS management blamed domestic routes for its losses and if that is the case, then there should be no reluctance to give up these routes to focus on international destinations.

It may work, to some extent, in the civil service where the
majority finishes work by 4.30pm but
for the private sector, where most people stay back late to finish their work,
it doesn't make sense at all.

Perlis Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim has also
chipped in with a suggestion. He reportedly urged civil servants to cycle to
work to save fuel, saying it was a common practice in Holland.

The idea is unlikely to catch on simply because our roads
are not friendly to cyclists, unlike in Holland.
And our weather is certainly not as conducive. But if Shahidan is serious, he
should take the lead first to see if the idea is feasible. The roads in Kangar
may be a bit safer but he should try it not just for a week but over a period
of time.

The catchphrase now seems to be "Change lifestyle" but for
most Malaysians in the lower and middle-income bracket, there is not much of a
lifestyle change they can adjust to because it is a question of trying to make
ends meet with the essential bills to pay.

The fuel increase will be painful to most of us. The average
Malaysian is careful with his spending because the salary goes to the house,
the groceries, the water and electricity bills, payment for the car, children's
education, with a little set aside as savings.

But we must also learn to live with the fuel price increase.
We have been told by the Government that the almost 20% price hike was
inevitable and that our fuel prices still remain among the lowest in the world.

Upset as we may be over the 30 sen per litre price increase,
we have to acknowledge that Malaysians have had it good for many years. In
fact, the subsidy still remains as of now. The retail price could be even
higher if the subsidy were to be taken off completely as in Indonesia,
Thailand and Singapore.

But like it or not, the good times are over. The subsidy
cannot remain forever, especially when current levels run into RM14bil to
RM16bil a year. It must eventually go because we are not a welfare state.

Malaysians must accept the fact that we have been pampered,
in many ways, and we have to stop whining eventually. We talk about the subsidy
mentality and we readily say it must go, but we seem to be selective. If the subsidy
benefits us, we accept it but if it doesn't, we cry foul.

Nothing lasts forever – not even our oil reserves because at
our current production rate of 700,000 barrels a day, we will become a net
importer of oil before 2010 or even earlier. It doesn't help if we pump more
oil to increase our revenue because it will simply mean we deplete our reserves
faster.

What we should be concerned about should be how the RM4.4bil
raised from the fuel price hike would be used. We are told that it is a package
deal – there will be no increase for this year and the savings would go to a
trust fund for public transportation.

Malaysia
needs a decent integrated public transport system. Kuala
Lumpur may have the light rail transport but its
connecting system needs plenty of improvement. The feeder system, too, is still
not up to our expectations. Unless these teething problems are addressed, not
many people in the urban areas would be encouraged to use public transport.

Unlike Singapore,
where one does not need to wait too long for a bus to come, it is a different
experience for commuters in Kuala Lumpur
and Penang. In some states, a bus service is
non-existent. Well-planned bus routes need our immediate attention.

While it is relatively easier to get a taxi, we also know
that many pick and choose their routes during peak hours. Most of these
culprits, unfortunately, are able to get away with such action.

If given a choice, most Malaysians would take public
transport but it is not very attractive at this point. Its unreliability and
unattractiveness are the two main reasons. The LRT in the federal capital is
certainly no match for the subway trains in Hong Kong, London
and Singapore.

We believe that the Government needs to give public
transport priority if we wish to finally abolish the fuel subsidy. That serious
decision must be taken now and not until another round of petrol price
increase.

There is another contradiction – asking Malaysians to use
public transport and promoting the use of national cars like the Kancil at the
same time. It just doesn't gel.

A lot of money, which is now spent on roads and highways,
can be spent on other development projects if we take many vehicles off the
roads, especially in the cities. Not to mention, many lives saved too.

But to do that, we have to invest in a good public transport
system. Costly as it may be, it is something every major city in the world
needs, even if it operates at a loss because it is an essential public service.

But as we ask Malaysians to change their lifestyle, we also
want to see an end to government wastage. We have a right to be upset when we
read about wastage by government officials, agencies and government-linked
companies.

It is heart-wrenching to read about GLCs (government-linked
companies) losing billions of ringgit. Following its massive loss, Malaysia
Airlines has now asked for RM2bil funding from the Government as part of its
turnaround plan.

To put it bluntly, these government agencies must know that
the money is not theirs. It belongs to the rakyat and they cannot simply lose
it because of sheer incompetence, inefficiency or corruption.

It is better for us to now focus our attention on how to put
together a public transport system that really works – that is essential if we
want to encourage Malaysians to use less fuel in the long term.

The New Straits Times, which was issued a show-cause letter
by the Internal Security Ministry to explain why action should not be taken
against the newspaper for printing a cartoon deemed offensive to Muslims, has
apologised unconditionally and the Government has accepted it.

For journalists, there is no reason to rejoice when a rival
newspaper runs foul of the authority. Regardless of what newspaper a journalist
may work for, the same thing can happen to any publication.

Editors have to take responsibility for what is published in
their newspapers but these days, a newspaper can run up to 300 pages or more,
comprising the various sections from news to business, lifestyle, metro to
sports.

Great care is taken by the editors to ensure that there is
no offensive news relating to race or religion in the news section but what
about those sections within the paper deemed the least sensitive?

I do not wish to refer to any newspaper but merely to shed
light on how a newspaper functions in a general way.

In most cases, it is the lifestyle section, where the
cartoons, music, fashion and celebrity stories appear. When there is a slip-up,
it is often painful because as editors, they have to take responsibility. But
carelessness is often the only reason. There is no malice, no agenda and
certainly no disrespect to anyone.

But in this time and age, there is no room for any
oversight. A newspaper these days not only has thousands of copies in print,
but the news is also posted on the website where its reach just multiplies in
cyberspace. Even if a person does not subscribe to the paper in question,
chances are he can get a copy of it via the Net.

Unlike other professions and businesses, the punishment
meted out on journalists and newspapers appear tough, even harsh. Editors often
have to take the rap for mistakes made by their subordinates.

Politicians, including ministers, also make mistakes and
sometimes, the failures and fiascos are even bigger.

I understand the feelings of uncertainty faced by my fellow
journalists. I, too, lost my job as a reporter for five months when The Star
lost its permit in October 1987, together with Sin Chew Jit Poh and Watan, a
Bahasa Malaysia tabloid which has ceased operations since then.

Those were difficult times as we had to go through
Christmas, the New Year and Chinese New Year without a job. Many employers were
reluctant to hire us as they believed we would get back our licences. But with
bills to pay, their optimism did not help our morale.

Looking back, we learnt much from what happened during the
149 days of The Star's closure, particularly in handling race relations in Malaysia.
It is natural for me, having gone through it, to be affected. More so, for us,
who had to cover the political gatherings, where racial emotions were running
high.

The political circumstances of the past few weeks, leading
to the actions against the media, are entirely different. The irony is that the
storm started in Denmark
but the publication of the cartoons here, probably due to slip-ups by
journalists in the production section, had offended many Muslims.

There are plenty of lessons to learn, chief of which is that
not everyone is as tolerant and liberal as we like to think. Some of the
published items may seem harmless to us but can be deemed unacceptable to
others.

Race, religion and language are no laughing matter and that
is reinforced in the mind of every reporter who joins a newspaper.

There is no need to apologise over this rule in Malaysia.
Press freedom is not about hurting the feelings of any particular faith or
community.

The experience that my journalist friends are going through
is something that media houses have to reflect seriously on.

The media in Malaysia
walks on a tightrope – there are sufficient laws that already make the job
difficult but now, there are calls to set up a council to regulate our work.

But the painful reality is that, while the serious readers
clamour for more thought-provoking articles, they do not necessarily represent
the majority of the reading public.

The best-selling newspapers in Malaysia
are those that carry news about celebrity scandals, sex websites, crime and gay
spas.

One Internet news website that emphasises on human rights
and democracy found its readership slipping when it decided to charge a minor
sum for its services. It must have woken up the newsmen there.

I believe that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad
Badawi is committed to a vibrant, honest and constructive media and that this
is good for Malaysia.

We become journalists because we honestly believe that our
work will make the country better, even if we have to work within these rules.

Or else, we would have looked for a job that is less
stressful, and which probably pays more.

In two days, he received more than 2,600 SMS although only
200 of them were related to complaints against his ministry.

Since then he has calmed down, and probably changed his mind
over the need to personally handle every complaint from the public.

But the fact remains that people are fed up of bringing
their problems directly to the authorities simply because they feel there would
be no follow-up.

We are happy even if we can get through to a clerk who will
listen to us, record our queries or complaints, and refer us to the appropriate
department for a real follow-up.

We don't need a minister to attend to us. That would be
asking for too much.

The sad thing is that most of us have gone through enough in
our dealings with the authorities to be able to write a book about how we are
often passed from one person to another, or from one department to another.

The mentality of a bureaucrat is that the public must write
an official complaint to the right person at the right department before action
can be taken, if at all. A letter is a form of record. A telephone call or an
e-mail would not be encouraged.

Rightly or wrongly, that is the perception of our
bureaucracy. No wonder Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is still
stressing on the importance of the delivery system after two years in office.

Just make a cursory check on the complaints made by the
public through the various newspapers. Almost all these complaints get no
response from the affected departments.

It is the job of the public relations officers to respond to
these problems highlighted by the public but not many are doing their job.

The only ones who regularly reply to these queries and
complaints are from the Employees Provident Fund and the Internal Revenue
Department.

Last week, I voiced my unhappiness in this column about the
numerous potholes along Lebuh Bandar Utama from the Aman Suria area. Following
that, the MP for PJ Utara, Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun, directed the municipal
council to patch up the holes.

Residents are grateful to Chew who, as an MP, shouldn't
really trouble herself with such matters. But although she got the workers to
show up, they did not really do a good job.

We noticed that they had used poor material to just fill up
the holes and we wondered if the regular downpours these past few evenings
would wash away all their hard work.

Well, that's what has happened. Our temporarily patched-up
potholes, sad to say, are now looking more like craters.

But the point is that prior to Chew stepping in, we had gone
through the proper process.

According to the Bandar Utama Residents Association, they
had complained to the council direct.

I also sent a letter to the Bukit Lanjan Assemblyman Yong
Dai Yin, where the road is said to be located, but received no reply. The
letter was sent by fax and also couriered to her.

I am sure there are similar situations elsewhere. Yet, we
can be sure that roads will be freshly tarred by the councils come election
time. And then we will hear no end of the promises of our politicians promising
us another five years of dedicated service.

I have since sent a letter to the council thanking the
officer for the immediate action but pointed out that a quick job just won't
do. As taxpayers, we deserve better service. I am not sure whether there will
be a reply.

Such apathy is not just confined to the local government
level but also at state and federal levels.

The Singapore
government expects its officers, at home or abroad, to reply to all letters and
e-mail, in particular complaints made through the media, as it is serious about
protecting its image.

Its Foreign Ministry expects its press officers to defend
the country's position and they are required to send rebuttals, with
well-researched statistics and arguments. Nothing is too small or too trivial
to merit a response.

But over here, it would not be wrong to suggest that not
only are the letters ignored but no follow-up action is taken.

It is because of such frustrations that Malaysians tend to
bring their unhappiness to the media.

In the age of the Internet, the public must be able to file
their complaints through the websites of the various authorities. In turn,
these authorities must also ensure that they respond and that their websites
are also properly maintained.

One country, for example, makes it a point to send a
reminder to passport holders as the expiry date of their travelling documents
approaches.

That is being efficient. Why can't we do the same?

There is really no need to travel to South
Africa, Mauritius
and Egypt on
so-called study tours at our expenses.

One councillor boasted that he visited more than 10 toilets
during his tour, in an effort to justify the trip. Big deal, most of us visit
our toilets more than 10 times in two days at home and at the office.

A colleague some years back decided to test the efficiency
of several town councils in the United Kingdom
and Australia
by sending e-mail to the press officers concerned for information.

He received immediate responses and in cases where they
could not assist, they suggested alternative links and e-mail addresses.

I dare say that none of our local councils dare to take up
this challenge, much less to answer every complaint and query within a
stipulated deadline.

Civil servants, as the name implies, means being civil and
being a servant to the public.