Kepada semua rakyat Malaysia yang beragama Islam, saya ingin mengambil kesempatan ini untuk mengucapkan Selamat Hari Raya. Diharapkan segala salah dan silap saya dapat diampuni.
One has to demolish in order to sabotage… 30 September 2008
A Hindu temple in Ampang was demolished recently by the Ampang Jaya Municipal Council.
Of course, it has caused a furore. The MIC yesterday handed a memorandum to the Selangor Mentri Besar in protest.
My views on places of worship are simple; regardless of the religion, they must be respected. Even if they are illegally built, one cannot simply demolish them arbitrarily.
Pakatan Rakyat’s capture of Selangor was helped in no small part by the previous temple demolition episode under the Barisan Nasional government. If I was Pakatan Rakyat, the one thing I will NOT do is to repeat what the BN did with temples.
Thus, it was very suspicious to say the least when this latest temple demolition episode erupted. Pakatan doubters will point this as proof that Pakatan is no different from Barisan. Short sighted and easily excited people will get angry and perhaps turn on the coalition (to re-embrace Barisan?).
It serves the MIC and Barisan Nasional very well, actually.
It is no secret that the Selangor government, under Mr. Khalid, has not gone on a ‘detoxification’ exercise of the government departments and municipal councils. Mr. Khalid prefers to ‘cajole’ the current crop of civil servants to work with the Pakatan government. A commendable effort, I must say.
But such an approach assumes that the previous government is an honorable loser. It assumes that the previous government is comfortable in its role as state opposition. It assumes that the civil servants are now wholeheartedly behind Pakatan.
Maybe the Selangor government should not have assumed such virtues in humans.
The previous government still has ‘fingers’ within the Selangor civil service. It’s quite easy to ‘prompt’ certain high ranking officers to order something with an aim to sabotage the Pakatan government.
Like ordering the demolition of a temple, for example, directly contravening a state directive. A person who ordered something like that either does not know of the state directive, or is paid handsomely well to ‘forget’ the said directive.
Soul-searching in Britain 27 September 2008
I left the United Kingdom in October 2006, after living there for a good portion of 3 years. When I left the country 2 years ago, I was eager to come home. Sure, the UK was a wonderful country to live in, but as the saying goes, hujan emas di negeri orang hujan batu di negeri sendiri, lebih baik di negeri sendiri. I wanted to come home, to start my career and to bring whatever I have learnt back for the benefit of my country and its people.
2 years back in Malaysia has ‘Malaysianised’ me. Whilst I can still remember the good things about the British Isles, I became engrossed with building my life in Malaysia. My perspective became jaded, I started to look into issues the ‘Malaysian’ way, whatever that means. Thus, my recent return to the UK in the past week was a refreshing and I’d daresay soul-searching experience. My ‘Malaysian’ views was put into sharp perspective and I realized how different the two countries are.
None more so than the political scene. At this moment, the current UK prime minister, Mr. Gordon Brown is facing intense pressure from the public as well as members of his own party. The main issue relates to the ‘credit crunch’, a term used to describe the sudden reduction in the availability of loans and/or the sudden increase in the cost of obtaining loans from banks (taken from Wikipedia). In short, the UK is feeling the effects of the subprime mortgage crisis of the US, as the two countries financial institutions are intertwined. The general perception of the UK public is that the current Labour government is weak and is not doing enough to elevate the hardships of the people. The cost of living in the UK is increasing at an alarming rate, and some have even found themselves unable to pay the mortgage of their own homes.
It is with this background that all eyes are focused on the Labour convention held last week in Manchester (think of it as UMNO’s Perhimpunan Agong, without the keris wielding and racial undertones, of course). Specifically, the public are focused on Mr. Brown’s speech, a speech in which he was supposed to reassure the public and his party that he is the right man for the job.
By and large, Mr. Brown seemed to have succeeded in doing so, at least in the eyes of the Labour delegates. He, who was criticized as being too ’serious’, showed a ‘human touch’ in him, to reconnect himself with the people. The speech was intended to show the people that as prime minister, Mr. Brown and the Labour party will continue to fight for the UK and its people.
Mr. Brown and the Labour party needed to do so. Recent polls suggest that Labour is some ways behind the opposition Conservative party, led by its charismatic young leader, Mr. David Cameron. Some commentators suggest that should a general election be held right now, Labour would lose a lot of seats and will not form the government.
We can certainly see many parallels with the situation in our country. The backdrop is essentially the same; rising cost of living, stagnant economy and an under fire prime minister facing pressure from the opposition and members of his own party. Yet, I rediscovered how different the political situation is between their country and ours.
For one, the media in the UK are not politically controlled. Of course, between certain dailies there are certain political ‘leanings’, but it is not so blatantly biased and full of spin as it is right here. No one minces their words when criticizing Mr. Brown and the government. Over here, one would be hard pressed to find the words ‘under-fire’ and ‘Pak Lah’ in the same article, let alone the same sentence.
There is also a huge gap in the maturity of the arguments. The debate over in the UK are about policy issues; the economy, human rights, social issues, welfare, the environment etc. Over here, we are still bickering about race and religion, about succession planning, about crossovers and of course, about a certain 23-year old man’s backside. Politics here are not about issues but about politics, if that makes sense at all. Everytime we try to break the shackles of petty politics, there would be fierce opposition against it. In the UK, if a political leader was to brand British Asians as ‘immigrants’, that would be the end of his political career, not to he would be facing charges in court. Over here, a person saying something similar is sympathized, defended and even supported. Similarly, the Terrorism Act 2006 of the UK faced fierce opposition from many quarters when it was introduced in Parliamant, mainly because it allowed the police to detain a terrorist suspect for a maximum of 28 days before being released. In Malaysia, a draconian legislation allowing arbitraty detention from a limitless period is being justified as ‘necessary’.
It’s quite disheartening, really. We are a good 30 to 40 years behind. We hope that the next generation of Malaysians will transcend these petty issues, yet the response I received from my own peers on my condemnation of the Ahmad Ismail issue and the ISA makes me wonder if we can ever achieve it. If young professionals and university graduates can defend racism and arbitrary detention without trial, what more the general populace?
We cannot even agree on the basic fundamentals, such as good governance, accountability, transparency, human rights, racism and racial prejudice. Matters that cuts across political divisions in the UK. A minister in the UK will resign from his post because of his principles and beliefs and it would not cause a massive stir. In Malaysia, after 50 years of nation-building, only recently have we had a minister resign over the same matters.
I came back to Malaysia after a 10 days hiatus and I’m ashamed. Truly, I am. An undemocratic succession plan is going to be hastened. An equally undemocratic power seizure via crossovers is still being promised. Are these the solutions? So what if we have a leadership change? So what if we have a change of government? If our mindset and our culture still remains the same, how can we move forward?
Yes, change will take time. The UK had centuries of democracy. We are still a young nation, grappling with its growing pains. But they say time and tide waits for no man, and it will certainly not wait for a nation. If the task of trying to bring change in people’s mindset and culture is facing such a fierce resistance, why bother? Deep in my heart of hearts, I know that the only reasons that I choose to come back to Malaysia was because of my family and the love of my nation and my people. Call them unpatriotic or whatever, but I can certainly understand why Malaysians would want to leave the country. Patriotism stems from the connections we build with our country, yet if we feel that our country and our people do not love us, why would we want to stay?
No, I’m not giving up hope just yet. But for the first time since in the 2 years I left the UK, I actually pondered over the possibility of living in the UK.
And the fact that I actually thought about it scares me.
If I was Pak Lah… 18 September 2008
Things are certainly heating up.
Today, Mr. Anwar challenged the Prime Minister again: convene an emergency Parliamentary session by 23 September 2008 and face a ‘vote of no confidence’ motion.
Now, this is the second gauntlet thrown by Mr. Anwar at Pak Lah. The first one, of course, is the meeting between the two to ‘discuss’ power transition.
Of course, we all know Pak Lah’s response; he told Mr. Anwar to reveal the list. But Mr. Anwar has anticipated this earlier, saying that he cannot reveal the names now for fear or harassment, persecution and even detention under the ISA.
Some have ridiculed Mr. Anwar’s ‘fear’, saying that if Mr. Anwar does have the numbers, he would have revealed them already. The ‘fear’ of harassment, persecution and ISA is just an excuse to them. In this, I beg to differ. Just a week or so ago, we saw a reporter being detained under the ISA ‘for her own safety’. If they can do that, what’s to stop them from invoking the ISA again to hold onto power?
In any case, now Mr. Anwar has thrown another challange. Twice now Pak Lah can ‘call Anwar’s bluff’. He could have met Mr. Anwar and called the bluff. And now, he could convene an emergency session and ‘test’ Mr. Anwar’s words. It’s actually quite easy.
But for some reason, Pak Lah refused. Twice.
If I was Pak Lah (a big IF), and if I was confident that Mr. Anwar is ‘talking cock’, I would take up Mr. Anwar’s challenge. If I was confident, I would convene the session. If Mr. Anwar does not have the numbers, his credibility would plummet. And I would be able to neutralize the threat of Mr. Anwar and Pakatan Rakyat in one fell swoop. Leaving me only to deal with my musuh dalam selimut in UMNO.
But I’m not Pak Lah, am I?
September 16 has come and gone… 16 September 2008
As I’m writing this, the time is 2300 hours, 16 September 2008. For all intent and purposes, 16 September 2008 has come and gone.
As we all know, September 16, or now known as ‘916′ was the deadline set by Mr. Anwar Ibrahim himself. He has stated, many months ago, that he will try to take over the Federal government by 916 via defections of more than 30 Barisan Nasional MPs to Pakatan Rakyat.
916 has come and gone, and we still have a Barisan Nasional government.
At a press conference today, Mr. Anwar claims that he has ‘enough numbers’ i.e. more than 31 BN ‘defectors’ that allow him to form a government with simple majority. Yet, he is not revealing the names of these defectors, for fear that they will be harassed, persecuted or even detained by the current government. He says that he wants to meet the Prime Minister, Mr. Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to discuss the handing of power from Barisan Nasional to Pakatan Rakyat. He says he wants to ensure a ’smooth transition’.
I must say that before this, I was sceptical of 916. 30 odd MPs is a big number and its no easy task to entice them to defect. Charming and charismatic Mr. Anwar may be (or with deep pockets), persuading even one MP to defect is difficult, let alone 30 odd. And so, I didn’t think Mr. Anwar could do it. I was more interested in seeing how Mr. Anwar will react to his not obtaining the numbers.
But yesterday, at the Malaysia Day rally organized by Pakatan Rakyat, Mr. Anwar revealed something that caught me by surprise; that Pakatan has the numbers and that he is seeking an appointment with the PM to discuss the matter.
This is a bold assertion, repeated again at his press conference today. An assertion that should not be lightly made unless one has the truth to back it up. To me, it would be politically suicidal for Mr. Anwar to claim something so bold if he does not have the numbers.
Does he really have more than 31 MPs who will be crossing over?
I was quite certain that 916 will not happen a few days ago. Today, I’m in doubt.
Is 916 the precursor? The beginning? The start?
Will we have a new government?
I really do not know. There’s a lot of issues to consider if its true. Can Pakatan Rakyat work togather at Federal level? They seem to be doing just fine in the four states (excluding Kelantan, which is wholly PAS), but Federal is a whole different ball game. Will they be able to balance the composition in Cabinet? How will the the defectors factor in? And of course, there’s the whole ethical issue of crossovers…
Another part of me is willing to give a new government the chance. To me, the Barisan Nasional has gone from bad to worse. They did not seem to ‘get’ the lesson that the rakyat gave them on 8 March. They’re mismanaging the economy. Corruption is still rampant. They raised the fuel prices on flimsy excuses. They, particularly UMNO, continuously played the race and religion card for political mileage. And then, we have the whole ISA episode recently.
Quite the conflict, isn’t it?
In any event, this political instability is not good for the country. I do believe, however, that these are ‘growing pains’ that the country must go through to build a ‘new Malaysia’. Be that as it may, prolonged instability will cause more harm than good.
That is why I hope that the parties concerned resolve this ’stalemate’ fast. The PM has said that he will not meet Mr. Anwar and has challenged Mr. Anwar to reveal the names. If true that Mr. Anwar has the numbers, he should not wait too long. If the PM still does not want to meet Mr. Anwar, then Mr. Anwar must make his move. What that move is I have no idea. Revealing the names? Meeting the Yang Dipertuan Agong? I leave it up to Mr. Anwar. Whatever it is, I hope that he does it fast.
If nothing, the coming days will be interesting indeed.
Barisan Nasional’s ISA Fiesta, part IV 13 September 2008
From the Star:
JOHOR BARU: Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said no more arrests are expected under the Internal Security Act (ISA) but it would depend on the situation of public order.
”We are not making arrests just for the sake of arrests.
”We will not make any more arrests under ISA as long as there is no more disturbance to peace and public order,” he said.
He also appealed to all newspapers to cooperate with the Government and not incite negative feelings or sentiment.
Speaking on the one-day arrest of Sin Chew Daily News reporter Tan Hoon Cheng, who was arrested under the ISA, he said Tan was detained under Section 73(1) of the Act in order to ensure her safety.
He added that police intelligence indicated that there were threats to her life after she reported on Bukit Bendera division Umno chairman Datuk Ahmad Ismail’s allegedly racist remarks.
“We have no intention of holding a reporter as after all she was just taking notes of the comments made by a certain party that led to a public debate.”
Asked on the detention of Selangor senior executive councillor Teresa Kok, Syed Hamid said she was arrested due to her comments on mosques and the Azan recently.
”Her comments have created public disorder and problems,” he said.
Asked whether Kok would be released soon, he said it was up to the police, as they have to access the situation before taking any further action.
So let me get this straight. If my life is in danger, if my safety is in jeopardy, according to the logic of Mr. Syed Hamid, I can be detained under the ISA?
So I can be held under ISA just for being in danger?
Why can’t the police provide me protection? Why can’t I be whisked away to some unknown place for my safety? Why should I be held under the ISA?!
Do they seriously think that Malaysians are stupid?
Barisan Nasional’s ISA Fiesta, part III 13 September 2008
From Utusan Malaysia:
Tahanan ISA Zalimi Diri Sendiri – Ahmad Zahid Hamidi
KOTA BHARU 13 Sept. – Kerajaan tidak pernah menganiayai tiga individu terbaru yang ditahan di bawa Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) semalam, sebaliknya mereka yang menzalimi diri sendiri apabila ada di antaranya tidak mengendahkan pelbagai peringatan yang diberikan sebelum ini.
Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi berkata, dalam tindakan itu, polis tidak menyalah gunakan kuasa mereka kerana ia bertujuan untuk menjaga dan mengembalikan keharmonian masyarakat berbilang kaum dan agama di negara ini.
Sehubungan itu, beliau turut berpendapat agar polis memperluaskan lagi penahanan individu yang menyentuh isu sensitif yang mencabar Perlembagaan Persekutuan mengikut ISA dan tidak mengehadkan kepada tiga orang sahaja.
“Tidak wajar hanya dikenakan (akta ISA) ke atas tiga orang sahaja kerana yang timbulkan perkara sensitif ini ramai lagi termasuk pengendali blog.
“Polis telah beri amaran sebelum ini, tetapi tidak diendahkan dan apabila tindakan diambil, maka mereka mengatakan kononnya bahawa polis dan kerajaan zalim. Mereka yang menzalimi diri sendiri kerana tidak mengendahkan amaran,’’ katanya.
Beliau berkata demikian kepada pemberita selepas menghadiri program Ihya’ Ramadan Tabung Haji (TH) Kelantan di Dewan Balai Islam Lundang di sini hari ini.
Semalam, polis menahan tiga individu di bawah akta itu iaitu Ahli Parlimen Seputeh, Teresa Kok, Pengendali laman web Malaysia Today, Raja Petra Kamaruddin dan wartawan wanita Sin Chew Daily, Tan Hoon Cheng kerana mencetuskan isu perkauman dan persengketaan agama.
I’d like to know from our de facto Menteri Agama Islam on how he reconciles an oppressive law like the ISA with Islamic teachings that clearly prohibits kezaliman.
Barisan Nasional’s ISA Fiesta, part II 12 September 2008
One thing is for sure, after this our government has no moral authority whatsoever to condemn the US’ detention camp in Guananamo Bay.
Pot to kettle, you’re black!
Barisan Nasional’s ISA Fiesta 12 September 2008
By the time you read this, you’d probably have heard the news. Three people have been arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA); prominent blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, DAP Parliamentarian and Selangor exco YB Terasa Kok and Sin Chew daily reporter Tan Hoon Cheng, the person who first reported Mr. Ahmad Ismail’s alleged racist remarks.
These arrrests make no sense at all. RPK has constantly been a thorn in the government’s side, by isn’t he already charged under the Sedition Act? Is he a national security threat? Yes, his posts are reckless and needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, but hardly something that threatens national security. Don’t we have enough laws to deal with such people?
Why is YB Terasa Kok held under ISA? Is it because of the ‘azan’ issue, that YB Teresa supposedly lead a petition to silence the call to prayers in a mosque in Damansara? Yet this issue has been explained by YB Teresa in detail in her blog, that she never did such a thing. In fact, yesterday PAS MP YB Siti Mariah of Kota Raja made a police report against former Selangor MB Mr. Khir Toyo for creating racial tensions by disseminating false stories about the ‘azan’ issue. Also, the keepers of the said Damansara mosque has lodged a police report also against Mr. Khir for slander and attempting to create racial tensions amongst the denizens. Should this case be investigated first by the police? What happened to due process of the law?
And lastly, why in the world is the reporter detained under the ISA? All she did was report what Mr. Ahmad said. By suspending Mr. Ahmad, isn’t UMNO saying that yes, he should have apologized, but he did not? Are they now saying that the reporter is wrong in her reporting? Why suspend Mr. Ahmad? Why did Mr. Najib apologize if it was misquoted? Is there not a police investigation on the matter?
And if these three ‘deserve’ to be held under the ISA, why is Mr. Ahmad and his Penang UMNO cohorts, who are clearly provoking racial tension, still walking free?
I have stated it once and I’ll state it again: the ISA has no place in Malaysia. It is inhumane, it is unconstitutional, it is draconian and it should be abolished. If there is one thing I learnt in law school, it is that all citizens of a democratic country has the right to a fair trial. Detention without trial goes against everything that is sacrosanct in a democracy.
I can only see one reason for the government’s ISA fiesta: fear. This is the backlash that many have been predicting. This is the Operasi Lalang part II that many have anticipated. Those that hold power will do all in their power to keep onto power. Whether Mr. Anwar’s ‘September 16′ takeover plan materialize or not, this clearly shows that the government is rattled. For every action, there is a reaction. This is Barisan Nasional’s reaction.
At this point in time, everyone needs to be patient. We must not play onto their hands. We must not allow them to succeed. Do not give them a cause to declare emergency. We must be patient in facing such trying times.
Let us pray that our country be delivered from those who seek to destroy it.
Artikel 153, DEB dan membela nasib rakyat 10 September 2008
Politik itu adalah suatu seni retorik. Seni cakap-cakap, di mana ahli-ahli politik akan bercakap semua dan segala apa bagi meyakinkan rakyat jelata untuk memberi kepercayaan padanya. Orang politik cakap macam-macam. Lebih-lebih lagi jika apa yang diperkatakan itu dapat memastikan bahawa beliau mendapat sokongan.
Salah satu perkara yang sering dicakap-cakapkan akhir-akhir ini adalah tentang hak orang Melayu. Mengikut teorinya, selepas pilihanraya umum 8 Mac yang lepas, hak-hak orang Melayu kian terhakis. Orang bukan Melayu semakin berani meminta kesamarataan. Jika ini berterusan, adalah dikatakan bahawa suatu hari nanti orang Melayu akan kehilangan hak mereka.
Hairan sekiranya kita melihat bahawa hanya selepas 8 Mac sahaja isu ini dibangkitkan. Tsunami 8 Mac telah menyaksikan parti Barisan Nasional mengalami kekalahan yang teruk. Kebangkitan pihak pembangkang, yang kini dikenali sebagai Pakatan Rakyat, dikatakan menjadi penyumbang utama terhakisnya hak orang Melayu. Yang seringkali menjadi sasaran adalah parti DAP yang dikatakan dipenuhi dengan chauvanist Cina dan unsur-unsur liberal di dalam parti pelbagai kaum, PKR.
Maka retorik ‘Melayu hilang hak’ ini dipermainkan dan diulangi oleh ahli-ahli politik UMNO, dan dibantu oleh media massa yang dikawal oleh parti tersebut. Mulanya dengan tertubuhnya ‘badan bertindak Melayu’ yang kononnya dianggotai oleh sekian banyak NGO dan pertubuhan Melayu, untuk menyatupadukan orang Melayu bagi menghadapai ‘ancaman’. Kemudian timbul isu-isu seperti projek khinzir di Selangor, pemberian tanah di Perak, muzakarah UMNO-PAS dan pelbagai isu-isu lain yang kononnya membuktikan bahawa hak orang Melayu semakin parah dan terancam.
‘Hak’ orang Melayu, atau lebih tepat lagi kedudukan istimewa orang Melayu dan bumiputera Sabah dan Sarawak termaktub di dalam Artikel 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Mengikut artikel ini, adalah menjadi tanggungjawab Yang Dipertuan Agong untuk merisabkan kuota bagi orang Melayu dan bumiputera Sabah dan Sarawak di dalam penjawatan awam, pemberian biasiswa dan tempat-tempat di universiti awam.
Antara perkara yang sering diungkitkan adalah berkenaan dengan komitmen saudara Anwar Ibrahim untuk melenyapkan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) dan menggantikannya dengan Ajenda Ekonomi Malaysia (MEA). Bagi pendokong teori ‘Melayu hilang hak’, ini adalah ‘bukti paling kukuh’ buat mereka bahawa hak Melayu akan lenyap dengan saudara Anwar Ibrahim.
Retorik ini adalah pembohongan nombor wahid di dalam negara pada ketika ini.
DEB tidak sama dengan hak istimewa orang Melayu yang termaktub di dalam Artikel 153. DEB hanyalah dasar penstrukturan sosial oleh kerajaan yang dipraktikkan sejak peristiwa 13 Mei. Malahan, DEB kini telah digantikan dengan Dasar Wawasan Negara (DWN) yang mengambil ’semangat’ DEB.
Oleh itu, sekiranya DEB tidak lagi digunapakai, ia tidak bermakna bahawa hak Melayu telah hilang. Hak istimewa orang Melayu, seperti saya nyatakan di atas, telah termaktub di dalam Perlembagaan Perksekutuan. Malahan, mengikut Artikel 159(5) Perlembagaan Persekutuan, Artikel 153 tidak boleh dipinda tanpa persetujuan Majlis Raja-Raja.
Maknanya, walaupun kiranya satu hari nanti Artikel 153 dipinda atau dilupuskan oleh Parlimen, Dewan Rakyat tidak boleh berbuat demikian melainkan dengan persetujuan Majlis Raja-Raja, yang seperti kita ketahui, dianggotai oleh raja-raja Melayu. Dan sudah tentu raja-raja Melayu tidak akan meluluskan pindaan tersebut dengan sewenang-wenangnya.
Berbalik kepada DEB, ianya hanyalah merupakan dasar kerajaan. Ia tidak ada kena-mengana dengan ‘hak’ orang Melayu, dan tidak akan terhakis atau lenyap hak tersebut sekiranya DEB tidak lagi digunapakai. Ketika dasar ini digubal, situasi pada masa tersebut amatlah memerlukannya. Orang Melayu pada ketika itu ketinggalan dari segi ekonomi dan ini adalah antara punca berlaku rusuhan kaum 13 Mei 1969. DEB telah berjaya mewujudkan golongan kelas pertengahan Melayu yang besar dan juga professional Melayu. Ia telah sedikit sebanyak mengangkat status sosial orang Melayu.
Akan tetapi, kelemahan perlakasaan DEB semakin ketara. Ini terbukti apabila kerajaan sendiri mengakui bahawa sasaran 30% pegangan ekuiti orang Melayu tidak kesampaian, walaupun setelah lebih kurang 30 tahun ianya dilaksanakan. DEB semakin lama semakin disalahgunakan untuk hanya menolong sesetengah orang Melayu yang ‘mempunyai cable‘.
Penyalahgunaan DEB ini paling ketara dalam pemberian kontrak, di mana kontrak-kontrak diberikan kepada kroni-kroni pemerintah yang kadangkala hanyalah proksi kepada orang lain. Ianya juga ketara dalam aspek-aspek seperti pemberian biasiswa kepada mereka yang tidak memerlukannya, pemberian rumah kos rendah kepada mereka dari golongan pemerintah walaupun mereka tidak memerlukannya, opsyen pembelian saham Bursa Malaysia, pemberian AP dan macam-macam lagi. Sekiranya DEB dibiarkan, maka dijangkakan bahawa sasaran 30% itu tidak akan dicapai langsung.
Oleh itu, banyak pihak mencadangkan supaya dasar ini dipinda atau ditukar untuk menjadi lebih adil dan lebih efektif. Cadangan yang diberikan adalah dengan menggunakan means based test, di mana bantuan diberikan bukan bergantung kepada etnik tetapi kepada keperluan. Ini terkandung di dalam MEA yang dipelopori oleh saudara Anwar Ibrahim.
Pendekatan means based adalah lebih adil jika dibandingkan dengan DEB. Dengan menggunakan pendekatan ini, bantuan akan diberikan kepada mereka yang benar-benar memerlukannya. Harta negara akan dapat dibahagikan dengan lebih luas dan bukannya tertumpu kepada sesetengah golongan sahaja. Maka diskaun pembelian rumah tidak perlu diberikan kepada seorang Tan Sri berketurunan Melayu yang tidak memerlukannya. Atau biasiswa kerjaan tidak diberikan kepada anak Menteri yang mempunyai wang yang cukup untuk membiayai anaknya.
Pendekatan ini juga lebih equitable dan lebih adil kepada semua rakyat, tidak kira bangsa mahupun agama. Oleh itu, bukan bumiputera tidak akan merasakan bahawa mereka dianaktirikan oleh negara mereka sendiri, seperti yang berlaku ketika ini.
Bagaimana pula dengan orang Melayu? Orang Melayu merupakan golongan terbesar yang memerlukan bantuan di negara ini. Oleh itu, sekiranya pendekatan means based digunakan, maka orang Melayu yang miskin dan memerlukan akan tetap diberikan bantuan, sama seperti orang Cina, India, Iban dan Kadazan yang miskin dan memerlukan. Di samping itu, perizaban kuota yang telah termaktub di dalam Artikel 153 juga memastikan bahawa orang Melayu dan bumiputera tidak akan terpinggir.
Oleh itu, jika kita kaji retorik ‘Melayu hilang hak’ dan bandingkannya dengan realiti sebenar, kita dapat lihat bahawa sebenarnya ‘momok’ yang sering diungkitkan oleh pendokong retorik tersebut adalah tidak berasas. Hak orang Melayu telah terjamin di dalam Persekutuan, dan tidak ada siapa, walau Anwar Ibrahim, walau UMNO, walau DAP, walau Tun Mahathir sekalipun dapat melupuskannya tanpa persetujuan raja-raja Melayu. DEB pula bukanlah ‘hak’ orang Melayu, tetapi dasar tindakan affirmative untuk pengstrukturan sosial. Jika Melayu masih terpinggir pada waktu ini, ia adalah disebabkan kelemahan perlaksanaan dasar kerajaan yang tidak serata. Mengapa harus diteruskan suatu dasar yang tidak lagi efektif? Mengapa tidak kita tukar dasar tersebut kepada dasar yang lebih adil dan lebih efektif?
Orang Melayu harus sedar bahawa walau apapun hak atau dasar atau keistimewaan yang diberikan, ianya adalah untuk memastikan orang Melayu tidak terpinggir dan ketinggalan. Hak atau keistimewaan yang diberikan ini bukanlah sesuatu hak yang mutlak yang boleh ‘dipertahankan’ untuk selamanya. Orang Melayu harus sentiasa berusaha untuk tidak bergantung kepada keistimewaan atau dasar dan berdiri di atas kaki kita sendiri. Benar, mungkin ketika ini orang Melayu secara keseluruhannya masih sedikit sebanyak memerlukan bantuan. Tetapi dalam kita memberikan bantuan, kita juga harus terapkan ke dalam jati diri orang Melayu supaya apabila mereka tidak lagi memerlukan ‘tongkat’, mereka akan memberikannya kepada orang Melayu lain yang masih memerlukannya.
Mari kita angkat martabat dan darjat masyarakat. Mari kita muliakan agama Islam sebagai agama rasmi. Mari kita bela nasib orang Melayu dan bumiputera dan pada yang sama kita juga bela hak dan kepentingan orang bukan Melayu. Mari kita buktikan bahawa Malaysia ini adalah suatu negara yang benar-benar hebat.
