Big test: The latest by-election will be closely watched as it takes place in Tanjung Piai, which has been called a mixed constituency seat. — Bernama

An upcoming by-election could prove how far we have come from the divisive and degenerative politics of race and religion.

THE Tanjung Piai by-election will serve as a good platform for our politicians to stop, or at least, refrain, from using the race and religion cards simply because the Parliamentary constituency has almost equal representation of Malay and Chinese voters.

It has an electorate of over 53,000, of which 57% are Malays, 42% Chinese and 1% Indian. It’s hardly inaccurate to describe this seat as a racially mixed one.

The relentless recycling of toxic issues, a forte of some of our politicians, will only backfire if they cross the line.

An issue may be hugely appealing to one race but appalling, and even offensive, to another community. That’s the tale of plural Malaysia.

It was reassuring to hear Umno vice-president Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin expressing hope that the Tanjung Piai by-election will be about a healthy and moderate contest for a more democratic Malaysia.

Similarly, Johor Pakatan elections director Datuk Salahuddin Ayob has pledged that Pakatan Harapan will be moderate in its campaign, pointing out that with Tanjung Piai being a mixed constituency seat, “support from one community will not be enough.”

It’s good that these two leaders can sit at the same table and think of the greater good for a mixed-race electorate and Malaysia. Hopefully, leaders from PAS will also read the narrative.

Malaysians, and not just Tanjung Piai folk, will be glued to this by-election since this is the biggest test for both sides.

For Umno and PAS, this is the time to prove, beyond reasonable doubt and the lofty promises, that they truly embrace multi-culturalism and inclusiveness.

Their pact, while strategically sensible, is viewed as an alliance that campaigns only for the interests of the Malays and Islam.

That has spooked many Malaysians, and is certainly not going to help their cause in winning in the next general election, especially if they don’t stop their aggressive approach.

The right thing for Umno and PAS to do is to support a candidate from an Opposition party, in this case MCA, and prove that politics transcends race.

Not all the 222 Parliamentary constituencies are Malay-Muslim majority, and no party can form the next government without Sabah and Sarawak, which have 25 and 31 seats respectively. In Sarawak, from the 31 seats, 10 are Malay-Melanau majority, while 21 are non-Malays, and for Sabah, 11 of its 25 seats are in non-Muslim areas.

It’s not far-fetched to assume that PAS has near-zero appeal in these two states, and that the voters there have little patience for firebrand politicians who preach race and religion.

In the case of Umno, it won 88 Parliamentary seats nationally, with 14 in Sabah and one in Labuan. Of the 73 seats in the peninsula, about 30 are small constituencies in rural areas, reads a report.

The 40-plus other seats are mostly Malay-majority, with mixed ethnicity seats, which have a sizeable number of non-Malay voters within the constituency. It would be foolish for a politician to write off these non-Malays.

Statistics indicate that there are 83 mixed Parliamentary seats where Pakatan won in the 2018 general election. Pakatan apparently secured 88% of these racially mixed seats, while Barisan National only managed 10. PAS failed to win a single ethnically mixed Parliamentary seat.

Last week, the Selangor government-linked think tank Institut Darul Ehsan reported that support for PAS in Selangor has fallen to a mere 8% – almost half of the 15% vote it received in 2018. But, of course, the findings will be questioned with the think tank being state funded.

It claimed that PAS has three kinds of supporters – the hardcore, non-members who back the party’s ideals, and PAS voters who are neither members nor supporters but vote for the party based on personal reasons or are attracted to the party’s alternative offer.

Increasing the number of racially mixed Parliamentary seats will be the best way to sustain moderate politics.

It will end the use of race and religion because candidates will know it would be foolhardy on their part.

But it would be challenging, too, since the Malay-Muslim population has shot up while the Chinese and Indian electorate is shrinking. There are more foreigners than Indians in Malaysia, and that’s a fact. The result is there are absolutely no Indian-majority seats.

It would also be more difficult to carve out racially-mixed seats in east coast states like Kelantan, Terengganu and, to some extent, Pahang, as they are predominantly Malay.

So, Sabah and Sarawak must continue to be the bastion of moderate and multiracial politics, and these two states will likely be the ones to hold the fort.

However, there is a suggestion that Malaysia can have up to 140 mixed seats out of the 222, and it would be up to the Election Commission to draw up such boundaries to ensure there are no clear racial majorities.

The dynamics of politics will change, and politicians would have no choice but to campaign across ethnic lines. The appeal of communal politics will also be neutralised, and that can only be good in the long run.

After six decades of independence, we are heading down a slippery slope if our politicians continue to harp on race and religion.

Harking after a home: Officials have acknowledged that the lack of affordable housing is one of the issues that sparked the unrest in Hong Kong, which has been going on for months. — AFP

Owning a house is the standard ambition of any individual, however, getting there is increasingly becoming not only a local, but global struggle.

THERE’S a lesson to be learnt from the protests in Hong Kong – politics is about selling hope. So if the young people living in a depressing environment feel they have no future, then the alarm bells should ring loudly.

In the case of Hong Kong, the leaders – mostly technocrats and government officials – didn’t see it coming, or maybe they were just indifferent.

Many young people in Hong Kong feel they stand no chance of becoming a homeowner in their lifetime, and officials have acknowledged that the issue is one of the causes that sparked off the unrest.

The controversial Extradition Bill, which allows a Hong Kong resident to be sent to mainland China to face trial, was merely a catalyst. Those protesters couldn’t all possibly believe they’d fall on the wrong side of the law and face the consequences, could they?

Last week, former Hong Kong chief executive Leong Chun-ying was in Kuala Lumpur for appointments with businessmen, opinion leaders and officials, to update them on developments on the island.

I was among the lucky Malaysians picked to hear his thoughts and views on Hong Kong, while he, too, listened to our concerns during the two-hour closed-door meeting.

My co-host and meeting organiser, Datuk Seri Azman Ujang, and I both feel that of all the problems faced by any country in nation-building, none deserves greater priority than housing the people.

What expectation could be more basic than having a roof over our heads, and with it being a decent and affordable one at that? And when we talk about affordable, it should be truly attainable by the low-income people who form the bulk of the population in most countries.

Azman, the Bernama chairman, rightly outlined the consequences of the failure that stems from a lack of will in resolving the housing problem of the masses. And as he said, this could easily lead to people pouring into the streets protesting issues not even directly related to housing.

It’s a fact that many poor Hong Kong people live in a room less than 75sq ft, and millions live in deplorable conditions.

More recently, “nano” flats – tiny apartments less than 200sq ft – have fast become the norm in overcrowded Hong Kong.

According to a South China Morning Post report, the cost began at HK$2.85mil (RM1.52mil) for an apartment no bigger than an average Hong Kong car park space, but the lack of interest forced a rethink by the developer.

But what’s mind-boggling is that while there are plenty of poor people in Hong Kong, or many who feel poor, Hong Kong’s fiscal reserves stood at HK$1.16tril (RM620bil) as at the end of January.

In a report, Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau said there was a surplus of HK$86.8bil (RM46.2bil), bringing the cumulative year-to-date surplus up to HK$59bil (RM31bil).

All this wealth belongs to Hong Kong and not mainland China, so a lot can be done with that money for a population of just seven million people, especially low-cost housing!

In comparison, Malaysia’s official reserve assets amounted to US$102.03bil (RM425bil) as at end November 2018, while other foreign currency assets stood at US$51.6mil (RM215mil) for the same period, Bank Negara said. Malaysia has a population of 32 million.

It can’t be denied that Singapore has done well in housing its population, with over 90% of the seven million population reportedly living in homes of their own, and the home-ownership ratio is said to be the world’s highest.

The Singapore Housing Development Board (HDB) deserves global recognition for its feat in solving the housing problem of the people, especially the poor.

The middle-class and poor must be able to have a roof over their heads. That’s an essential human need. No country can have peace and stability if the poor are not able to own a home in their lifetime.

A prosperous and satisfied middle-class will lead to political stability. A huge middle class will also mean greater purchasing power, and this will lead to a better economy with spillover effects for everyone.

When there are angry citizens protesting everything from the escalating food prices to housing, then even the elite (including politicians and businessmen) will not feel safe. In South Africa, the rich live in houses with high walls and electric fences to protect themselves, but that’s not the best way to live. It’s living dangerously.

Malaysian politicians who still wield the race and religion card will realise that at some point, these will be “dead issues”.

With well-documented shrinking numbers, the Chinese and Indian population will no longer be the proverbial bogeymen in the future. Instead, it is class stratification that will be a matter of concern.

Last year, it was reported that the gap in income between the rich, middle class and poor in Malaysia had widened since 2008, according to a study by Khazanah Research Institute (KRI).

In its “The State of Households 2018” report, the research outfit of sovereign wealth fund Khazanah Nasional Bhd noted that the gap in the real average income between the top 20% households (T20) and the middle 40% (M40) and bottom 40% (B40) households had almost doubled, compared to two decades ago.

The report, titled Different Realities, pointed out that while previous economic crises, in 1987 and the 1997/98 Asian Financial Crisis, saw a reduction in the income gap between the T20 and B40/M40, post-2008/09 Global Financial Crisis (GFC), those disparities had not reduced.

But the Gini coefficient, which measures income inequality in the country, had declined from 0.513 in 1970 to 0.399 in 2016, denoting improvement in income inequality in Malaysia over the past 46 years.

Explaining the phenomenon, Allen Ng, who is the lead author of the KRI report, said income of the T20 households had continued to grow, albeit at a slower pace than that of the M40 and B40 since 2010.

“However, because they (the T20) started at a higher base, the income gap between the T20 and M40/B40 had continued to grow despite the fact that the relative (income growth) is actually narrowing post-GFC, ” Ng explained at a press conference after the launch of the report yesterday.

In his bestselling book The Colour Of Inequality: Ethnicity, Class, Income And Wealth In Malaysia (2014), economist Dr Muhammed Abdul Khalid wrote that “the future does not look rosy for Malaysia; the current policies are encouraging wealth disparity between rich and poor, and between ethnicities.

“Unless bold and drastic actions are taken urgently, a harmonious future for Malaysia is uncertain. There must be an urgency to give every Malaysian economic security, a better and sustainable future.”

Muhammed, the managing director of the research and consulting firm DM Analytics Malaysia, said last year that contrary to popular belief, most Chinese (70%) are wage-earners, as are most Malays (72%). In fact, the poverty gap between races has dropped compared to 40 years ago, though the disparity remains.

And what about Malaysia? We have a disastrous, if not scandalous, record, particularly the pathetic business activities, dealings and performance of the 1Malaysia People’s Housing Programme’s (PR1MA) set up to build affordable homes.

More than RM8bil has gone up in smoke because PR1MA’s management failed to meet its targets, despite all the assistance and facilities accorded to their projects by the previous federal government and most state governments.

PR1MA reportedly built only 11,000 homes, compared with its target of half a million residential units to be delivered by the end of 2018. That’s less than 5% of the original plan.

PR1MA Malaysia was set up to plan, develop, construct and maintain high-quality housing with lifestyle concepts for middle-income households in key urban centres. Its homes are priced between RM100,000 and RM400,000.

PR1MA is open to all Malaysians with a monthly household income of RM2,500 to RM15,000.

A total of 1.42 million people registered for PR1MA, a promise of one million homes by 2020, but only 16,682 units, or 1.6%, of the target, were completed between 2013 and 2018, costing the government billions in public funds.

Poor management, exorbitant land acquisition costs and unsuitable sites have turned the people’s housing project into a major financial flop. PR1MA’s failure, which could cost the new government billions, is apparently already saddled with ballooning debts, rendering the loss-making company untenable.

It’s the responsibility of the government to build affordable homes – not the private developers. Private developers, especially those who helm public listed companies, have profits and dividends to answer for to shareholders. They are in the business of making money, and with the expensive land bank they have acquired, they need to build expensive homes, too.

Even if there are requirements with the obligated mixed homes for social housing needs, it still won’t resolve the problems.

Our politicians shouldn’t pass their responsibilities to them. They just need to have qualified and competent professionals with integrity to run a set-up like HDB. Obviously, the people who ran PR1MA didn’t do their jobs. We can help Malaysians own homes, or at least rent them at affordable rates, if we’re truly committed. The question is, are we?

As for Hong Kong, there is another lesson the young protesters need to learn: a full democracy doesn’t guarantee you a home and a decent job. Just ask the homeless in the United States and Britain.

Forest fire in Palangka Raya, Central Kalimantan province, Indonesia on September 14, 2019. -Reuters

IT’S now decades into this rinse and repeat story, and miraculously, little has changed. The familiar sound bites of promised action are as hazy as the sickening weather this region continues to suffer from every year.

Honestly, it’s disgraceful that people in these parts have to put up with the smoke from the forest fires in Indonesia’s Kalimantan and Sumatra.

Since 1997, the slash-and-burn practices there have led to debilitating haze problems in Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei and the surrounding region.

Last week, Malaysia had to close more than 400 schools, as smoke and ash spread to more areas, stretching from Thailand to the Philippines, plunging air quality to unhealthy levels in their wake.

This annual transboundary problem has environmental, health and business implications. The difference now is that, incredibly, Indonesia has the audacity to blame Malaysia for the smoggy hazard.

And this time, the situation is more worrying because reports indicate the number of blazes in Indonesia’s rainforests has jumped sharply, as satellite data showed last week.

As the fires rage on, spreading toxic fumes across South-East Asia, concerns are arising about the impact increasing worldwide wildfire outbreaks have on global warming.

This has happened at a time when huge blazes are also singeing their way through the Amazon in South America because of the same reason – clearing jungle land for agriculture.

Slash-and-burn is the cheapest and fastest way to prepare land for cultivation, but it produces haze which is harmful to humans and wildlife.

Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change Minister Yeo Bee Yin has rightly said that her Indonesian counterpart, Siti Nurbaya Bakar, is “in denial” after Jakarta insisted fires in Malaysia had caused the smog there.

“Let the data speak for itself,” Yeo said in a Facebook post, sharing figures from the Asean centre which showed only a handful of hotspots in Malaysia compared to the hundreds in Indonesia.

The number of “hotspots” – areas of intense heat susceptible to fire that’s detected by satellite – jumped sharply in Indonesia on Wednesday, according to the Singapore-based Asean Specialised Meteorological Centre.

Reports reveal that there were 1,619 hotspots detected on the Indonesian part of Borneo and in Sumatra, up from 861 a day earlier, according to a tally from the centre which monitors forest fires and smog outbreaks.

In 2002, Asean members devised and settled on a transboundary haze agreement – which Indonesia is part of – in response to the catastrophes of 1997 and 1998.

At that time, fires burned some 45,000sq km of forests in Kalimantan and Sumatra, and like today, the wind reportedly swept the acrid smoke across the region, polluting the air in Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand in the process.

What was even worse was the timing of the haze crisis, with it happening during the devastating Asian Financial Crisis. Many of us can recall how the gloomy skies mirrored the sombre mood of Malaysians, with barely any optimism in sight.

It took 11 years after the treaty came into effect for Indonesia to ratify the agreement in 2014, but has our neighbour effectively enforced or enacted regulations at the national and local levels?

The problem with agreements, laws and rules is that they mean nothing if there is no proper enforcement. The voluminous agreement merely ended up a useless stack of papers which no one has paid serious attention to.

If this pact was properly executed, we wouldn’t be here choking our lungs away, and wearing those fiddly face masks which are more Hong Kong protester gear than ours.

I am not an expert on Indonesian law, and I could be wrong, but I have been told that none of Indonesia’s national laws make special reference to haze or pollution resulting from slash-and-burn activities.

In fact, Indonesia doesn’t categorise the spread of haze from forest burning as a disaster, say the media outlets there.

A news report said that for Indonesia, haze is merely the result of forest burning, especially when it’s manmade. Not categorising haze as a disaster prevents the country’s national and local disaster agencies from either responding accordingly or effectively.

Astonishing as it may sound, Asean has set a goal for a haze-free region by 2020 – that’s next year – as part of the agreement. No one can be blamed for thinking this a lofty goal. Truth be told, it’s even laughable.

Rightly or wrongly, the perception is that Indonesia has not been serious in its efforts to curb the problem. Many feel the country has maintained a “noncompliant” stance, and with the burning continuing every year, Indonesia has no one to blame but itself. It shouldn’t get overly sensitive because it deserves a dressing down.

“Local administrations throughout Indonesia should be informed about the policy. Only this way can we ensure that policies are synchronised and implemented effectively at national and local level,” reads academic portal The Conversation.

The writer, Dio Herdiawan Tobing, a research associate at the Asean Studies Centre at Universitas Gadjah Mada, detailed his trip with his research team to Palangka Raya, Central Kalimantan, one of Indonesia’s hotspots for land and forest fires.

“We wanted to know how local administrations view an agreement between ASEAN countries on haze pollution that Indonesia ratified two years ago.

“We were surprised to hear that the acting head of Central Kalimantan Environmental Agency, Humala Pontas, admitted he didn’t know much about the agreement. He asked: ‘What is contained in the agreement? Which part of the haze does it regulate? Are there any provisions that contain economic or other means?’”

He wrote about how the Environment and Forestry Ministry – the government body responsible for tackling threats to the environment – barely seems interested in enforcing the Asean haze agreement. It’s more focused on “project- based” action, such as distributing firefighting pump machines to the community.

“It was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in charge of international agreements, that actively supported Indonesia’s ratification of the haze treaty.

“As a consequence of the discord between the two ministries, two years into Indonesia’s ratification of the agreement, and local administrations are still not aware of it.”

But this isn’t the time for finger -pointing, and if Indonesia feels that it can put out the fires with its thousands of soldiers, then we must just place our faith in them. It’s very unlikely they will accept assistance from other Asean countries, including Malaysia.

The Indonesian government may also wish to consider an incentive programme to help discourage the slash-and-burn practise because penalties alone may be insufficient in nipping this once and for all.

More importantly, it’s not good enough putting out the fires. Asean wants a sustainable solution to this. We don’t want to go through this time and again. We’ve just had enough!

REGARDLESS of their nationality, race and religion, it’s irrational and impractical for anyone to still talk about boycott in the age of global economy.

Wake up, the world has changed! So, there’s no need to pretend or pose as defenders and champions of your race or religion.

Boycotts along racial, religious and nationalistic lines are not just unviable, but hypocritical in the modern-day economy, given that we use products from all over the world. It doesn’t matter if you are Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu or atheist, because ultimately, the products we use are likely to involve someone from another faith along the assembly line or supply chain.

The compliance, involving religious and health requirements, would probably be met, since any rational businessman would want to live up to the demands of their customers. That’s how businesses work.

From clothing to food, or technology to transport, almost every single item we use or consume can be traced back to producers, manufacturers and suppliers of various races, religions and nationalities.

It would be naïve for anyone to think otherwise.

So, the Muslims who initiate a boycott against non-Muslim companies obviously aren’t thinking hard enough and are oblivious to reality, or just ignoring the facts.

The minority Muslims involved in this campaign are likely doing this more for political reasons, and it’s apparent the targets are the Chinese and Indians – the euphemism for non-Muslims. Maybe I don’t know better, but somehow, I don’t think they ever mean the Americans, Japanese, Koreans or Thais.

That’s very unfortunate because their actions only hurt our fellow Malaysians, and we all know that in plural Malaysia, the staff of these companies include Muslims, especially in manufacturing. Often, most of the staff are Muslim.

Just count the number of Muslims who work in our hotels and restaurants, or even those in Genting Highlands.

Even in road accidents, or road rage incidents, Malaysians can’t pick their victims because this is a multi-racial and multi-religious country.

All it takes is a little spark of ethnic indifference, and with tempers fraying, such incidents are recorded and quickly make their social media rounds. And like clockwork, the accusatory finger of racial marginalisation is waved, with another purported example made of a race under siege.

But every day, we have Malaysians helping each other, in all forms, yet we take this good grace for granted. Instead, we let racial bigots hijack the agenda and allow them to amplify isolated cases.

We use and buy a product based on its quality, price and availability – that’s our consumer behaviour. So, it would be strange to expect us to buy a product simply because they are produced by someone from our race or religion.

Supermarkets and grocery stores said to belong to Muslims have appeared on a list in various towns – as has been actively circulated on social media – implying Malays should buy from these outlets.

That’s well and fine, but ultimately, the products sold in these supermarkets or grocers can’t entirely be manufactured by Muslims, so, the purpose of the move is a head-scratcher.

Of course, the products will be halal compliant, but they could be made by non-Muslim companies, yet would most likely involve Muslim staff, too.

Let’s take the argument further. Many of us, Muslim or otherwise, feel strongly about the treatment of Palestinians.

As someone who has visited Jerusalem on a pilgrimage, I have listened first-hand to the grievances of Christian Arabs living there. I saw the injustices Palestinians are subjected to in their daily lives.

My fellow travellers have also learnt to differentiate between secular Jews, atheists Jews, and Zionists, and are aware that we can’t lump everyone under the “Jew” category because many Israelites sympathise with Palestinians.

But can any of us honestly think it’s possible to boycott products created or manufactured by Israelis, or Jews?

Let’s start with Waze, a software developed by an Israeli company. I am sure it is widely used by many Muslims around the world, including Muslim politicians with the loudest rhetoric.

Then, there’s Intel Pentium and Celeron computer processor chips in personal computers (desktops, laptops and notebooks), which are either developed or manufactured in Israel. Likewise, the Windows XT operating system. All current Microsoft operating systems are heavily reliant on its Israel R&D centre.

Most anti-virus software and personal firewalls originate from Israel, and the algorithm (code) that’s used today for sending e-mails, was reportedly made by an Israeli who worked at the Ben-Gurion University in Be’er-Sheva in 1980. Many in-built and add-on applications on Facebook are Israeli developed.

The list is endless, ranging from medical equipment to life-saving drugs, and they are used by many of us.

Airlines operated by the Arab states, such as Qatar and Emirates, are surely among the best in the world now, and it will be silly for non-Muslim travellers to overlook these options because of religious prejudices.

And what about the choice of our transportation? Most of the cars we use are products of non-Muslims, and even if they include a national car, like Proton, most of the components and applications are the handiwork of non-Muslims.

Likewise, China-made mobile devices also rely on Western technology, and if their business with these tech companies ceases, the impact is great, as exemplified by the recent Huawei debacle. Without the Google search engine, YouTube and Gmail, and other applications, modern-day telecommunication loses its lustre.

It says a lot when American companies want to continue selling telecom equipment to Huawei, because the Chinese company is an important customer for many US tech firms, including Qualcomm, Intel and Micron.

It has been reported that from the US$70bil (RM293bil) in parts it bought last year, US$11bil (RM46bil) went to US suppliers. None of them have been convinced by their government that the Chinese tech giant is a national risk, a charge Huawei has repeatedly denied with no real evidence forthcoming.

Even the burqa and other religious items are now made in China and readily available for online shopping, and that’s a fact!

The bottom line is that the economy has changed dramatically with its layers of inter-connectivity, which could only increase in the digital age.

Malaysians will be labelled myopic and narrow-minded if the narrative of some politicians continues to be on race and religion.

And when global leaders address trade, artificial intelligence, digital enhancement and climate change, many of our politicians are instead still harping on divisive and unproductive issues, which is just lame and pathetic.

Spirit of Malaysia: Good friends (from left) Aimi Nurjannah Ahmad Fadilah, 10; N. Bhagawathy, 11; and Ong Chui Juang, 10; chatting by a Jalur Gemilang hung up at their school, Sekolah Kebangsaan Sultan Abdullah. — Bernama

THERE is a certain degree of apprehension, even uneasiness, this year as we celebrate National Day. Race relations in this country isn’t anything to be proud of, what with manufactured fears fuelled by groups with political interests.

There is a deliberate attempt to instil the perception that the Malay race and Islam are being challenged.

That belief is accepted not just by segments of the community in the lower leagues but, surprisingly, even in the upper echelons – by people we assumed would know better.

However, the ethnic equation of authority hasn’t shifted, and the Malays still constitute the anchor of power.

But the new government, a year into its service, must now grapple with this fear and is being forced to re-instil assurances that it remains the protector of the Malays and Islam, as well as other Malaysians.

It’s easy to be in the Opposition but much harder to be in the government of plural Malaysia, as many ministers are now starting to realise.

But Malaysia isn’t on the verge of breaking up. Far from it, in fact, because Malaysia is a middle-class country, with most of its people moderate and rational.

Sure, the weak economic sentiments haven’t helped, and when people have less money to spend, they have less patience, and perhaps, become easier to exploit.

This malaise has been so amplified over social media that some of us have been consumed by hate remarks spewed by unknown people and those served by political and religious platforms.

And they cut across all races and religions.

But there are many, many Malaysians out there helping each other regardless of race and religion every day. They include the police, army and firemen – service men and women who put their lives on the line every day to protect us.

We often take this for granted, assuming it’s their job to do so, since that’s what they get paid for, but they have families too, and their job really isn’t easy.

Let’s hope their wellbeing becomes one of the more positive narratives to look forward to.

This National Day 2019, I wish to pay tribute to my fellow Malaysians, who I believe are inherently sharing, giving and colour blind.

This has been in our DNA since our nation was born in 1957 as the Federation of Malaya, and reborn as Malaysia in 1963. I urge Malaysians not to be baited by divisive forces, and instead, safeguard the diversity that defines us.

Our founding father Tunku Abdul Rahman understood the importance of all races coming together. The delegation that went to London to seek independence comprised all races, and Malaysia wouldn’t have been possible without Sabah and Sarawak.

And to reiterate, Sabah and Sarawak didn’t join Malaysia – those states helped form Malaysia!

Malaysia is a product of all races coming together to make diversity a reality, with Malay leaders steering the ship.

Sixty years later, and this beautiful land remains one of the best countries to live in. This is our home. To put it into context, most of us would be itching to reach home after an overseas assignment, or even a holiday trip. It’s telling when those who emigrated can’t even give up Malaysia.

Many are so often here one wonders if they truly ever left, and their many postings on their tanah air in social media on various issues indicate their hearts have never really left the country.

Malaysia is crying out for an upturn, because there are many good people around us, who have been doing good things.

We have many good examples to take from, so why be derailed by people who don’t matter, and by things that shouldn’t either?

Tunku laid the foundation of our great culturally diverse nation based on the spirit of compromise.

He may have faltered at times, but he did things for the greater good, and that can’t be denied. Much has been written about his contributions, most notably in The Star, where he was a columnist penning his thoughts well into his twilight years.

I had the privilege of meeting him when I was a reporter in Penang, where he stayed. He was also once the chairman of our company.

He always strove to buy hardware materials from my father’s stall – not even a shop – at Cheapside, off Chulia Street, because he could talk to my father in the Kedah accent. My 95-year-old dad was born in Kuah, Langkawi.

His aides preferred him shopping in more comfortable places, but he always insisted on returning to my father’s humble roadside stall. That was our Tunku.

Then, there is our prime minister twice over, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, whose tryst with destiny means Malaysia has been given a second chance to become a model nation.

Love him or loathe him, Dr Mahathir’s role as nation builder is well-documented and his legacy will remain.

Then, there is the silent majority doing wondrous things in Malaysia and internationally. Many of them are Merdeka babies who grew up with the nation and witnessed its ups and downs.

Another Kedahan, Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Albukhary, is surely one of the most reclusive Malaysian businessmen.

He avoids social functions, even his own corporate events. He is more comfortable in his long sleeve batik shirt and sandals than his suit, which explains why he’s one of the most misunderstood tycoons.

He shuns the limelight and seldom speaks to the media, and much of his charity work also goes under the radar.

Syed Mokhtar couldn’t care less what people say about him. He has often found himself in the unenviable position of responding to unsavoury remarks made by those who have never even met him.

His critics say he has too many business interests, but none of the rich in Malaysia can match the magnitude of his charitable clout.

He grew up in a kampung with a Malay neighbour on one side, and a Chinese one on the other.

“We came from many places in different boats, but we are now in the same boat. We have to keep going to stay on course. We are all in the same tongkang (a native boat used in the East Indies in fishing and in local trading), ” he would often tell younger Malaysians.

He went to school in 1958, the first post-Merdeka batch of students who represented the breadth of Malaysian society.

He started his business when the New Economic Policy was launched in 1971, seizing all the economic opportunities it presented. Syed Mokhtar feels his country has been good to him, and he still has much to give.

The donations underscore his personal philosophy rooted in the Muslim values of taqwa (submission to God) and Ihsan (compassion).

I met the media-shy Syed Mokhtar for the first time some years ago, and was struck by his simplicity, charitable spirit and positivity.

He dropped out of school to work and support, not only his family, but also several poor neighbours. Many of us give when we have plenty, but he did it when he barely had anything. This became the starting point of the Albukhary Foundation.

His parents taught him to provide for the poor, with those lessons bearing fruit through his philanthropic values at 23, when he started a small business dealing in rice.

When he received his first monthly pay packet of RM1,500, his mother urged him to share half his earnings with the poor.

“So, I kept half for my family while the other half was donated to 15 needy families in my village,” he revealed in an interview.

When looking for Malaysians to list in the inaugural philanthropy issue in 2008, Forbes Asia selected Syed Mokhtar, and again and again thereafter.

By then, Syed Mokhtar was a business tycoon whose charitable contributions were felt across five continents.

As at end 2018, he had contributed over RM4bil, mainly to various education, health and welfare projects that have benefited hundreds of thousands of Malaysians

He has donated huge amounts of money to Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, the Asian Institute of Medicine, Science and Technology University and Wawasan University, for example – and these universities have high non-Malay enrolment.

Earlier this month, the Albukhary Foundation came to the rescue of a bright young Sarawakian who had gained admission to study medicine in Cambridge, where each year, only 21 places are offered to international students to study medicine.

His father, a site supervisor, is the sole breadwinner, and with his mother a homemaker, the family simply couldn’t afford to accept the offer. Also, there was a 33% slash in government scholarships, which surely reduced his chances of being selected.

At school, when his friends enjoyed their holidays, he had work to pay his school fees, but he knew it would help reduce his parents’ burden.

Then he applied to private foundations for a scholarship. Despite his Cambridge offer, his application was rejected by 10 different foundations in Malaysia and abroad. He even wrote to Warren Buffet, one of the richest men in the world, never to hear from him. But he caught the attention of Syed Mokhtar.

The applicant is a Chinese boy from Kuching, but for Syed Mokhtar, he is a Malaysian who deserves a helping hand.

To benefit from these initiatives, the Foundation sets one main condition: you must be poor.

For example, when he found out that poor kidney patients in his home state Kedah couldn’t afford dialysis treatment, he built the full-fledged Albukhary Dialysis Centre, with medical and nursing staff to provide free medical treatment for them.

Located in the Sharifah Rokiah Centre of Excellence in Alor Setar, the dialysis centre has 18 machines and 40 patients, mainly rubber tappers and casual workers with no fixed income. Future plans include acquiring more machines and increasing patient capacity.

The Sharifah Rokiah Centre of Excellence, named after his beloved mother, is best known for its Albukhary International University.

Baby boomer Syed Mokhtar knows the future belongs to the youth. And he wants to pass on to them values that have stood by him through good times and bad. He calls them the 5As: Adab (good manners), Akhlaq (ethical), Aqidah (faith), Amanah (trust) and Amalan (practice). The 5As have become the core values of the Albukhary International University. They are also values he has shared with his children, who are set to follow in their father’s footsteps.