They inched their way into the house patiently, despite the discomfort of the huge crowd, just to have a final look at Kak Endon.

I spoke to a few of these people to find out what were the qualities they admired so much about Kak Endon although they professed that they had never met her, let alone talk to her.

All said, they were deeply touched by the love showed by Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Endon. Their open display of affection touched the hearts of many Malaysians, who saw them as model husband and wife.

On Friday, I received a telephone call from Zainah Anwar, an advocate of Muslim women rights for Sisters in Islam. Zainah, a former New Straits Times journalist, had covered many assignments with me. She had the privilege of getting to know Endon and family members well, and was still in grief.

Kak Endon had always been supportive of the non-governmental organisation's cause while her daughter Nori, too, plays an active role.

Zainah suggested that I read a speech made by Endon at a function organised by the group in 2003. Endon had told her listeners that a "happy family is one that is not taken for granted, and a happy marriage is one that cannot be taken for granted".

She spoke of her 40 years marriage with Pak Lah, saying their bond grew stronger each day because they placed great priority on their relationship and their family members.

She said everyone in the family understood their responsibilities and support for each other at all times. It was well known that she did not tolerate polygamy and at one time, her views upset some people, but her focus on the family as an important institution earned the respect of many of us.

There will be Malaysians who asked whether Pak Lah would be able to cope with the loss of someone he loves greatly. The loss, as in the passing away of someone so close, would surely be felt. The loneliness would certainly be there. Pak Lah would need plenty of support from his family members, especially Nori, and close friends.

He can also count on all ordinary Malaysians who pray for him and his family. His work, health and concerns will always be in our prayers which, in the words of Endon, is the greatest gift of all.

Pak Lah's strong faith in God would certainly help him go through this difficult period. Despite his Mr Nice Guy image, he has strong character and will be able to move on, make no mistake about it.

Pak Lah, we can assure you that Malaysians will work with you in leading the country, especially in the fight against corruption. You will never walk alone.

Bureaucracy and undue obstructions from over-zealous middle-ranking civil servants have long been blamed for why Christians have difficulties in building churches although the Federal Constitution is clear on everyone's right to freedom of worship. The size of the Christian population is taken into account before approval can be given in line with religious sensitivity. Thus, if the numbers are wrong, it would have repercussions on followers of the faith.

The liberal policy of the Government and the open-mindedness of our leaders are clear in protecting the rights of all religions, especially the minorities. The Selangor Government, for example, recently allocated and approved land for the construction of churches.

It has not been an easy journey for Christians in Selangor, particularly the Roman Catholics. Unlike Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus, the Christians have a lesser voice, in terms of representation in government. Still, it is encouraging to know that complaints from many Christians that their religion has been wrongly recorded have received the attention of the Government.

I understand that the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Dr Maximus Ongkili and Deputy Home Affairs Minister Datuk Tan Chai Ho are helping to rectify the problem, together with the ministry's secretary-general Tan Sri Aseh Che Mat.

Aseh, a dedicated and fair-minded civil servant, I honestly believe, would be able to resolve this concern.

NRD director-general Datuk Wan Ibrahim Wan Ahmad was recently quoted as saying that "changes on religion could not be made without proof as the department has to be accountable" while public relations officer Jainisah Mohd Noor reportedly said the procedure of signing a declaration form was necessary for the department's documentation.

I share the concern of these two officials in wanting to ensure accuracy for statistical reasons but their good intentions may not be well received by many. Some may find such requests unacceptable because it is unlikely that those from other religions would be asked to show such proof.

The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship Malaysia said it had received complaints that some NRD clerks insisted that those who wished to make amendments to their religion should produce baptism certificates or letters from their churches as proof of change in religion.

This problem has surfaced because of the NRD's assumption on religion that it is based on the birth certificate, past IC information or simply race. Pastors, for example, have found their religion listed as Buddhists or Hindus. When they sought amendments, they were asked to show proof that they are Christians.

In all fairness, new Christians should also not be too quick to accuse the NRD of wrongdoings if they themselves have not informed the clerks of their change in religion. But what the NRD can do is to ensure some uniformity at the front desk level. For example, a simple form should be sufficient. Unlike Muslims, those from other faiths do not have legal implications if they wish to change their faiths.

In short, non-Muslims have the right to change their religion as it is essentially a personal matter. There is thus no need for non-Muslims to prove their religion and the job of the NRD clerk is to record the information, that's all.The NRD has no legal basis or authority to ask MyKad applicants for baptism certificate or church letters.

Religion has always been treated as a sensitive matter in Malaysia and rightly so too. The NRD must understand and appreciate this concern.

***Comment: CORRECTION : ERROR – In Paragraph 8, the NAME of the NRD director general is INCORRECT. The director-general is Datuk Mohd Abdul Halim Muhammad and NOT Datuk Wan Ibrahim Wan Ahmad. Error pointed out by Royce Cheah Shiou Han and confirmed by Parkaran – 27/12/2005

All the earlier talk of punishing Hattan under the National Anthem Act 1968 must have made Malaysia sound like an intolerant police state.

Malaysians who watched the football final, either at the stadium or at home, hardly noticed Hattan's purported jazzed-up version of the Negaraku.

Many of the VIPs who attended the game went on record to say the same. For them, it was a non-issue until it was brought up in Parliament.

What we noticed were football players and the fans in celebratory mood when the national anthem was played. Instead of standing still to attention, many were seen running and jumping in joy.

And certainly we saw plenty of Indonesian flags for a game between two Malaysian states vying for the Malaysia Cup. Hello, this is Malaysia.

No one, including the Yang Berhormat, seemed to have brought this up. Instead, he was more preoccupied with Hattan, whom many of us thought sang with great gusto and pride.

But Arts, Culture and Heritage Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim instilled some common sense when he said there was nothing offensive about Hattan's rendition of the Negaraku.

After watching the footage, he said, he found nothing degrading in the manner Hattan had sung the national anthem although the last modulation went a bit high. There was no jazzing up whatsoever and neither did he ridicule the national anthem.

Dr Rais correctly pointed out that some of the spectators were seen to be disrespectful.

Following the controversy created by one MP, Dr Rais has now suggested that the Negaraku should revert to the original tempo first introduced in 1956.

He said this was to ensure that the tempo of the national anthem would remain the same.

Dr Rais must have good reasons in wanting to protect the dignity of the national anthem, which is a national treasure.

But I do miss the faster, marching version of the Negaraku introduced a few years back. Younger Malaysians felt it was more inspiring and forthright, in comparison to the slower version.

It reminded us of the faster pace of development set by the country and our commitment to marching forward to a developed nation.

The point here is that even the official 1956 version has been changed before. It was set during the 50s.

Music is alive. There is no such thing as the national anthem must remain static, but as of now it appears that only the politicians can have a say in telling us what is right or wrong.

Surely Malaysians, too, would want to have their say. The Negaraku does not belong to just the MPs and Cabinet members.

Let's allow Malaysians, especially the younger generation, to have their say about the tempo of the Negaraku.

It should become a practice for all Malaysians to sing the national anthem and not just stand attentively whenever it is played.

We do this when we are overseas but we are seemingly shy to do so when the Negaraku is played at home.

We have seen how the Americans sing their national anthem, with one hand on the heart, when their national anthem is played before a boxing or football match.

Sometimes a black singer would sing the soul version, and even we non-Americans would find it a delight to the ears.

The point is that the Negaraku must be sung beautifully in a passionate way. The key word is "sing", not just listen – that will be music to the ear then to Malaysia.

Various reasons have been cited why Chinese tourists have been shunning Malaysia but one clear factor must be the order from the China National Tourism Administration (CNTA) to its travel agents to cancel group tours to Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand.

That directive hurt Singapore as well. The island republic's number of Chinese tourists fell to 352,000 in the first six months of this year but that was only a 10% drop, which isn't as bad as that for Malaysia.

One area of unhappiness, which is being talked about among Chinese visitors, are reports of Chinese tourists being robbed of their passports and female tourists being hassled at Immigration because of suspicions that they might be involved in prostitution.

MCA public services and complaints department chief Datuk Michael Chong said he had received many complaints from bona fide Chinese visitors, including investors, that they had encountered such difficulties at KL International Airport.

He said one businessman, regarded as one of the richest men in China, had to wait until 5am before he was allowed to enter Malaysia although he had the proper travelling documents including a visa.

Chong said the businessman, who has an office in Kuala Lumpur, had his Malaysian visa on an old passport, which he carried along, but that did not satisfy the Immigration officer. The man was allowed in after some intervention from senior Immigration officers.

But the "loss of face" for the Chinese investor infuriated him so much that he threatened to close down his KL office, which would have meant retrenchment for the Malaysian staff. But Chong managed to calm him down.

That is not all. I have personally heard of a Chinese shipper, with a branch office here, whose 60-year-old wife was denied entry because of some technical problems relating to her visa. The matter was eventually brought up to a Cabinet minister.

To be fair to Immigration, rules are rules. If the officers have reasons to be suspicious, then they must be allowed to exercise their discretion to turn away foreign visitors, irrespective of their nationality.

But Immigration must be sensitive to such complaints, especially from genuine tourists. We should not give the perception, no matter how small, that Chinese tourists are discriminated against.

A few years back, I accompanied then Deputy Tourism Minister Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen on her tourism promotion trips. She decided to take along a senior Immigration officer to allow him to hear directly the problems faced by Chinese tour agents.

It was an eye-opener for the officer. More interestingly, he was surprised at the development in Chinese cities. Talking to him, the impression I had was that he thought Kuala Lumpur was ahead of these cities.

The situation has improved much but more needs to be done. In fact, there should be more consistency and better coordination between the Tourism Ministry and the Home Ministry, especially the Immigration department.

Bad press such as the recent case in Genting Highlands where Chinese tourists staged a sit-in after they discovered hotel workers had drawn pigs on their pass cards used for restaurants, and the murder of Chinese students in Malaysia certainly did not help.

These are isolated cases, no doubt, but we need to tackle them as every country is fighting hard for the tourist dollar. The competition is no longer from Asian countries but also from Europe and the United States.

In the past, this region attracted many Chinese tourists but as they become richer, they have turned to Europe and the US. In Australia, entertainers from Hong Kong and Taiwan have become major acts in theatres to cater to these Chinese arrivals.

Malaysia needs to review its strategy to win these Chinese tourists and with their interest in eco-tourism, Malaysia will continue to enjoy certain advantages.

Tourists from the southern Chinese cities should be encouraged to visit Penang, Kuala Lumpur, Johor and Malacca, because many Malaysians speak in Hokkien and Cantonese, which should make them feel at home.

Tourism Minister Datuk Dr Michael Toyad and his deputy Zahid have worked hard but it will help tremendously if a Chinese-speaking deputy minister is appointed in the next Cabinet reshuffle. The personal touch, coupled with the required social skills, is crucial in doing business in China.

We can dismiss or challenge the index, including the criteria used, but it would not help Malaysia. It will be better if we do something about it to improve our standing in the international community.

Malaysia still has a chance to get things right. On the forefront of the campaign against corruption is the Prime Minister but he alone cannot eliminate or reduce graft overnight. Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has kept the momentum going and has attempted to introduce a new culture of national integrity but all this takes time.

All the efforts including the setting up of a National Integrity Institute and the launching of a National Integrity Plan have the support of all Malaysians but the time has come for a strong push.

Pak Lah's efforts must not be allowed to go to waste. Corruption must be regarded as a criminal act and nothing less. If not, corruption will be regarded as a way of life and a norm.

But Malaysia may come to that point if we are not careful. According to a survey carried out among hawkers and stall operators by the Kuala Lumpur Society for Transparency and Integrity, the respondents viewed corruption among local councils as a "very serious" problem.

Unfortunately, the victims of bribery also said that corruption was a norm, with 17% of the respondents saying that giving bribes was acceptable to ensure their business could operate smoothly.

Pak Lah has taken the right move by insisting that the delivery system must be simple and effective. That means doing away with regulations or, at least, simplifying them, to prevent corruption. More transactions with the Government should be done online to cut red tape and corruption.

The media must continue to expose corruption, with prominence given to civil servants and politicians charged with corruption. That's not all – their titles should be automatically revoked when they have been sentenced.

I can detect the frustration of many Malaysians, especially businessmen, who believe that individual Malaysians cannot do anything to effect change. There is growing pessimism and the perception that corruption has become so entrenched in some areas that it can no longer be fought.

For example, despite the prominence given by the media to the blatant practice of restaurants placing tables and chairs along roadsides, many municipal councils have ignored the media outcry. In short, the media can shout but the status quo remains.

Some Malaysians believe that it does not pay to stand on principle and feel that it is acceptable for a low-ranking government officer to take a small bribe since the bigger fish are doing it and getting away with it.

Despite such a dampening mood, there is certainly greater public awareness but unless the proper mechanism is put in place, all the good intentions of the leadership will go to waste. Worse, its sincerity will be questioned because of the rising expectations.

Unless the Anti-Corruption Agency is made independent, and not just another government department, its effectiveness will be limited and even compromised. Our ACA deserves to be given the kind of autonomy like that of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) of Hong Kong, which drew much objection from police officers when it was set up.

There is also a need to introduce laws to protect whistle-blowers if we want the public to come forward to testify against the corrupt. There should be no fear of reprisals once such laws are in place.

Steps should also be made by the ACA, with the support of the National Integrity Institute, to make it more accessible to the public to lodge reports against those who take bribes.

In Hong Kong, the ICAC have offices near market places and even shopping areas to enable the public to interact with them. The public can just walk into these offices to voice their grievances.

Fighting corruption should be regarded as community work. Let's join hands with Pak Lah to fight graft.

"It's the question time I am worried. The public can vote you out every five
years but the backbenchers can get you out by the end of the week," said the
panicky politician to his wife Annie in one episode.

"It's the question time I am worried. The public can vote
you out every five years but the backbenchers can get you out by the end of the
week," said the panicky politician to his wife Annie in one episode.

by Najib, although the Deputy Prime Minister has downplayed this
sportingly.

In August, she did not turn up for a Cabinet meeting where she was supposed to
explain the AP issue, saying she was sick and needed treatment for a knee
problem.

On Wednesday, Rafidah was again absent from the Cabinet meeting chaired by
Najib, This time, she is away in the United
States on a trade mission.

She should have turned up at the Dewan Rakyat to face the MPs, who are the
people's representatives, and to clear whatever doubts they might have.

While the minister could have been on an important mission for Malaysia
but the Dewan Rakyat is the most important forum.
Like Pak Lah, former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and other Malaysian
leaders also watched the long-running political satire.

International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz had obviously
not taken seriously the one-hour allocation for questions and answers when the
Dewan Rakyat sat from Monday to Thursday.

On Thursday, there were resentment and anger from fellow Cabinet members and
Barisan Nasional backbenchers when she did not attend the sitting to reply to
the MPs on the controversial Approved Permit (AP) issue to import cars.

It did not help that she decided to reveal the names of MPs who had received
APs, with the elected representatives saying it was a move to arm-twist them
into not speaking up on the issue.

As far as the MPs were concerned, she should have been there to face them but
rightly or wrongly, she chose to snub them.

They told the press in no uncertain terms how they felt, and certainly did not
care if she was away on a trade mission.

Her absence could well be a turning point in her political career, with many
now saying that her Cabinet position was untenable and that her holding to her
position stubbornly would only hurt the Government.

Just a few months ago, she was heckled and booed by Umno members at the party
general assembly over the AP controversy.

If that was not enough, she also ended up having an exchange of words, to put
it mildly, with some of her fellow Cabinet members.

One news report had it that she sniped at a minister who was smiling when the
hot topic was brought up while another colleague was reportedly told to take
care of his ministry first.

Her colleagues described her as "combative", "confrontational" and "abrasive"
and one minister reportedly said the longest serving Miti minister was
dismissive of anyone who disagreed with her.

At the core of the controversy are the unanswered questions on the huge
allocation of APs to a few individuals.

Of the 67,000 APs issued this year, more than 28,000 went to Tan Sri Nasimuddin
SM Amin, Datuk Syed Azman Syed Ibrahim, Datuk Mohd Haniff Abdul Aziz and Datuk
Azzuddin Ahmad.

The ministers felt Rafidah had not replied to several crucial issues on which
they wanted answers.

To put it bluntly, her integrity as a minister has been questioned at all
levels and now, MPs from both sides of the benches, have spoken up openly
against her with Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri
Abdul Aziz slamming her for not turning up to field questions on the AP
issue.

On Thursday, the Opposition attempted to refer her to the parliamentary
privileges committee but what was astounding was the silence of government
backbenchers when the DAP motion was rejected by Speaker Tan Sri Ramli Ngah
Talib.

The usual table thumping to signify approval was missing, a point certainly
noted by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, who attended the
morning session on Thursday.

They were obviously incensed that the names of MPs who received APs were
revealed without an explanation.

MPs and senators are entitled to an AP once in their lifetime as part of their
perks.

An irate Nazri told reporters that the AP issued to each MP and senator was not
meant for them to resell for financial gain but for their own individual
use.

He said what probably raised the hackles of the MPs most was that Rafidah's
name was not on the list.

In fairness to Rafidah, it was a question from Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang
and she was merely providing a written reply.

The public are actually interested in knowing which MPs have enjoyed such a
perk but it would mean a lot to these elected representatives if her ministry
took the trouble to explain it was only a one-off thing.

But there is now a new dimension to the issue – Rafidah has stayed away from
two Cabinet meetings chaired
The perception now is that she had run away from the MPs or she had decided to
ignore them. Either way, it's bad for her image and reputation. The Government
needs to move away from the AP issue.

Despite the setting up of a committee, headed by the Prime Minister, to review
and decide on all issues related to APs, the issue has not gone away.

It has taken up too much of government time and attention.

Rafidah has got herself into a corner because of her own doing. Worse, while
she has put the Government in a tight spot she may have put her Cabinet job on
the line now.

Fact number three is that Judge Datuk Abdul Kadir Musa,
in his 49-page judgment, found there was not too much evidence adduced against
all three or for their defence to be called.

He has correctly pointed out that there were unresolved doubts and unanswered
questions in the prosecution's case.

The judgment has not gone down well with most Malaysians and many are outraged,
but a judge has made his decision on evidence available.

That is how the law operates and a judge must not be swayed by public
sentiments or prejudices.

If there is anyone to blame, then it must be the police and the
prosecution.

As the judge noted, the prosecution hurt its own case by failing to call a
certain Insp Moin.

That was not all, Koh's driver Mohd Razbean Md Tab, a key witness, has gone
missing. That does not speak well of the police at all.

Another key witness, Fang Sui Jing, said to be a girlfriend of Koh, has been
deported to China and even the date of her deportation is unknown.

The Chinese national, who was serving a 10-month sentence in Kajang prison for
overstaying, was a key witness and yet no attempt was made to keep her until
the case was over.

Investigating officer Asst Supt Nor Omar Sapi admitted that he did not make any
formal request to the Kajang prison for Fang to be handed over to the
police.

Malaysians are left grappling with questions like how a murdered boy could end
up in the swimming pool of a heavily guarded bungalow with 23 injury
marks.

These are questions the prosecution failed to answer and we are not sure if
they will ever be.

But Malaysians, concerned with the increasing crime rate, are upset that the
prosecution and police have failed to resolve a series of high profile murder
cases.

The public would like to think that our police are efficient and they have
proven able to live up to our expectations when it comes to serious
crime.

But when our defenders of public order keep losing their cases, especially
murders, then Malaysian taxpayers have a right to ask what they are
doing.

What are our investigators and prosecutors doing when they keep losing in the
courts?

When judges throw out their cases, it just means that the prosecution has
failed to produce sufficient evidence. That's how the legal system works.

Our hearts go to the family of Xu in China who had hoped that their child would
get a decent education in Malaysia and grow up to be somebody they can be proud
of.

Instead he was murdered and, worse, we cannot even find his murderer or
murderers. It's a murder most foul.

The increasing cost of living is the number one topic among Malaysians. They do not care about politicians trying to rewrite Malaysian history or squabbling politicians fighting to protect their positions in the name of serving the community.

It was thus refreshing to read about the Prime Minister's immediate decision to decide that there would be no petrol, diesel and cooking gas price increase at least until the end of the year. That's fair enough.

The other decisions were road tax reductions of up to 80% from Sept 12, no toll increase for this year and next, as well as increased aid for senior citizens, the poor, and disadvantaged children.

These steps will in many ways help ease the public's burden brought on by escalating prices of consumer goods. The Consumer Price Index, which indicates the price variables, rose 2.8% during the first six months of this year. The increase would certainly have affected the purchasing power of consumers.

For the average Malaysian worker, his salary does not stretch that far these days. Apart from the usual deductions – EPF, Socso and income tax – there are also the usual bills to pay. Those with schoolgoing children also have to pay more for transportation, food and even tuition fees.

In Kuala Lumpur and Johor Baru, probably the country's two most expensive cities, it is tough for someone earning RM2,000 to make ends meet.

Many of us eat at coffee shops or food courts in shopping malls, and not at upmarket eateries in Bangsar. But the prices of our kopi kau and mee goreng have gone up too.

We are told that we should shop at reject shops or the pasar malam to get the best bargain, but the fact is that's where most Malaysians do their shopping even before inflationary times. The Louis Vuitton bag is from Jalan Petaling, by the way, and not from Paris.

In the midst of these price increases, it has become fashionable to blame the retailer, the wholesaler and sometimes the consumer for the inflationary trend.

While there would be errant ones who take advantage of the situation, it would be wrong to see them as the primary causes.

There have been statements by some politicians asking hawkers or traders to absorb the increasing costs of their items. That seems illogical as they are in business to make money.

Like it or not, they have to pass it to their consumers or simply sell us a smaller portion of the char koay teow.

Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's emphasis on agriculture since he took over the leadership would probably receive more urgent attention now. He is right that domestic food production must be accorded priority to cut down on our food import bill.

Buying imported foodstuff leads to outflow of the ringgit and with the hike in oil prices, naturally we have to pay more. Greater emphasis on local food production would help us reduce our dependence on foreign suppliers.

The PM is also right in saying no to prestige projects so as to reduce public sector expenditure. Expensive non-functioning projects which only benefit the developers and contractors are certainly not necessary.

For example, one state has committed a huge amount of money to build a state assembly complex, which does not meet that often. It is mind-boggling.

Meanwhile, the government should enhance enforcement to curb profiteering and hoarding.

We do not know whether oil prices will keep going up but the government, with the support of the media, certainly needs to regularly explain why the oil subsidy has to go.

It is not an easy job but the cut is necessary as over RM1bil has been literally pumped away, at the expense of Malaysian taxpayers.

In 2003, taxpayers had to bear subsidies for oil products amounting to RM6.6bil and last year, the subsidies shot up to RM11.9bil. This year, it is expected to reach RM16bil. At this rate, it is just not possible to continue.

Pak Lah has taken the initiative of providing Malaysians some early relief and we certainly look forward to his Budget speech on Sept 30, which is just weeks away.

Singapore Airlines, it pointed out, made an operating profit of US$153mil in the last quarter despite rising fuel costs. The SIA managers were told the airline enjoyed no special protection and had to sink or swim in a highly competitive market.

More pertinent, the article stated, its staff, management and crew were drawn from all over the world and "what was Singaporean about it was the way the airline was managed".

It would not be accurate for anyone to compare Malaysia Airlines with SIA. SIA has no unprofitable routes to worry about in the name of national service and can focus its attention on foreign routes.

Neither does SIA bother about flying to unpopular destinations in South America and Africa to promote South-South cooperation. In fact, Singapore does not have that many embassies in developing countries.

MAS executives are also trying to understand why a decision was made to fly to Ipoh, which is less than two hours away by road. The drive from Kuala Lumpur to the KL International Airport alone would probably take at least 40 minutes.

MAS became national news recently for the wrong reasons when it posted a net loss of RM280mil and the man who had to face the firing squad, to put it figuratively, was its managing director Datuk Ahmad Fuaad Dahlan.

It has been reported that while  fuel costs were up almost RM1bil, the other contributing factors were in-flight meals (up RM35mil) and consultancy fees (RM31mil).

Instead of understanding the flaws behind MAS and to rectify them, we have now gone on to debate whether a foreigner should be allowed to head the national carrier.

Umno Youth head Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein said the appointment of a foreigner to lead the nationally-owned company could be likened to allowing Malaysia to be re-colonised, albeit in a new manner.

He urged Malaysians not to look at such an appointment "purely from the commercial aspect but (we) should look at it in the bigger agenda, that is the Malay agenda".

Hishammuddin said MAS had to give reasons why Malays or Malaysians were not qualified, adding that present-day imperialism was perpetrated not only through the use of weapons but also through the mind, culture and economy.

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad responded, in a cynical way, saying "perhaps all the national companies should be allowed to be run by foreigners. Then I think we should have a different definition of a national."

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said he did not think Malaysians were incapable of heading MAS, saying he would leave the decision to MAS.

Malaysians would probably have reasons to be wary of a foreigner but more important is that MAS must not be allowed to continue bleeding. It makes no sense if a Malaysian is incapable of running the airline effectively, competitively and with integrity.

The priority for MAS now is to find a capable CEO who can help make the airline profitable again. The nationality, race or gender should not be an issue.

Numerous companies including car makers are being managed by foreigners. The Japanese, who have a hard reputation against foreigners, have even accepted a foreigner to run Nissan.

At home, we openly accept foreigners to manage our hotels because we have grown accustomed to it. Malaysians own these hotels but foreigners manage them because they are good, it's as simple as that.

So if a foreigner CEO can do the job, so be it. Likewise, if a non-Malay can help turn a debt-laden government-linked company around, there is no reason why the CEO must be a Malay.

But even the most qualified CEO, regardless of his nationality, race or gender won't be able to do the job if he is not left alone to work on it. Political interference is enough to kill any enthusiasm, let alone ambitious plans.

MAS has a bad reputation of being over-staffed and no CEO has been brave enough to trim it down, fearing a labour backlash. But the fact is that it is bloated and the management has to do something about it.

That is not all. Newcomer Air Asia recently trumpeted its performance with the announcement that it had achieved a net profit of RM111.8mil for its last financial year "despite battling spiralling jet fuel prices, SARS, bird flu and other adverse circumstances".

But Malaysians love our national airline. Even as we grumble about its services, deep in our hearts, we know that it is a great airline and anyone who has flown on European airlines can tell the difference.

We long for smiles from our MAS stewardesses and the hot nasi lemak after weeks overseas. We know we can only get these from MAS and certainly it has brand loyalty.

MAS should just get its act together and the last thing it should worry about is Air Asia. As its media-savvy CEO Datuk Tony Fernandes told a forum recently, "bus companies should be more worried about Air Asia than MAS" with its low fares.

Let us be realistic – nationalism has no meaning if we remain losers and are incapable of competing effectively in the global market.

Not everyone, especially Muslims, would approve of Tunku's personal interests. Some would even advocate that it is best we did not talk about it, preferring to forget or ignore what they believed to be his shortcomings. But the Tunku was never a hypocrite.

He was open with his poker games and love for horse racing including attending the prestigious Melbourne Cup races. It must be remembered that Tunku lived in the era of P. Ramlee movies, greased hairstyles, nightclubs, tight kebaya and Vespas.

That has always been one of the endearing qualities of the Tunku. He admitted his weaknesses and never pretended to be what he was not.

It would not be wrong to say that this is indeed a rare attribute in the context of present day politics.  Like Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, he strongly believed in the substance of faith, rather then its form.

His religious work was recognised by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and he spent much money and energy on Perkim, which carried out missionary work on converts.

As Malaysia celebrates National Day on Wednesday, I decided to read the proclamation of independence by the Tunku at Stadium Merdeka. It was a simple nine-paragraph statement. The pledge of loyalty read by the student representatives at the annual Merdeka parade would probably be longer.

Our schools should make it a point for our students to read it. Not to memorise it but to appreciate the spirit of independence the Tunku had pledged at the stadium at the height of nationalism and patriotism.

The Tunku pledged that the Constitution would safeguard the rights and prerogatives of the Rulers and the fundamental rights and liberties of the people and the orderly advancement of the nation as a constitutional monarchy based on parliamentary democracy.

That proclamation, I believe, remains sacred to Malaysians today regardless of their race, religion and culture.  The keywords are the rights and liberties of all people.

Less and less is being written about the Tunku now. He has become a memorable item only for the National Day and probably a one or two-page mention in our school textbooks.

Yet, the Tunku was the man who brought together the Malays and other communities in the turbulent fifties in a common quest for independence. It surely was not easy convincing the Malays to give the Chinese and Indians citizenship.

On the other hand, the non-Malays must have been fearful their economic, religious and cultural rights would be affected now that the British were gone and the Malays had taken over.

But through the moderation of Tunku and the other Chinese and Indian partners, he managed to convince them that under the Umno leadership, the politics of consensus would prevail.

The keywords were compromise and accommodation – the very same formula that is now carried out by the Barisan Nasional, which takes into account the sentiments of all races.

As the nation celebrate its 48 years of independence, our politicians and people need to reflect upon our weaknesses and strengths. The biggest question is whether we have moved sufficiently towards the direction of Malaysian consciousness.

Some section of non-Malays still cannot appreciate the significant positions of Islam and Bahasa Malaysia while some section of Malays cannot grasp the importance of non-Malay languages, especially English and Chinese, in a globally-competitive age.

Terms like orang kita and kaum asing are still being insensitively used by some national leaders at public functions instead of the more acceptable economically-advantaged or disadvantaged.

Then, there are non-Malays who totally ignore Bahasa Malaysia or English at functions, forgetting the presence of Malays, Indians and non-Mandarin speaking Chinese at their gatherings. Hello, this is Malaysia.

We still struggle with the right approach to economic development. While the middle class has expanded, the poor, whether in the rural or urban areas, certainly need assistance. The rich surely should not be allowed to get richer, at the expense of the poor, simply because of their political affiliations.

Malaysians should also ask whether we have matured politically. Surely, parliamentary democracy isn't about elections, parliament sittings and press statements from politicians.

After more than four decades, the hopes and optimism of Malaysians have been renewed with the national commitment to public integrity, particularly the determination to fight corruption, greed and abuse of power in high places.

Malaysia is the only country we know – we were born and will die here, there is no other place.  Our destiny is the same, irrespective of our race, religion and culture. Orang kita should simply mean Rakyat Malaysia and nothing less.