Subsidy removal: Malaysia needs ‘reality check’ – Activist

Shah Alam - A community activist has emphasised the need for Malaysia and its people to undergo a 'reality check' in light of the controversial possibility of subsidy elimination.

In the complex landscape of Malaysia's economic challenges, the government is poised to implement controversial subsidy eliminations amid concerns of a deteriorating economy.

This move comes against a backdrop of rising dissatisfaction among Malaysians, who questioned why they should bear the brunt of government mismanagement during these difficult times. As the cost of living escalates and economic stability remains elusive for many, tensions are running high, highlighting the urgent need for nuanced solutions that address both economic realities and public concerns.

In an interview with the Sinar Daily, Liyana Marzuki, a community activist shed light on her recent podcast session with the "Jangan Pajak Otak" to provide accurate information to the public on issues related to public interest. Recently, there was news from Bloomberg about the potential elimination of subsidies in Malaysia, possibly in June 2024. Recognising the importance of obtaining authoritative insights, Nurhisyam Hussein, the economic advisor to PMX was invited to shed light on this matter. Nurhisyam revealed that:

• The potential increase in fuel prices; from the current RM 2.05 per litre to RM 3.50, representing a substantial RM 1.45 increase. The jump raises concerns, particularly considering the impact of subsidy removal in neighbouring countries like Indonesia where riots occurred in 2016;
• To address these concerns, the government plans to implement subsidy rationalisation progressively over time, possibly with incremental increases every six months to mitigate the immediate impact on the public; and
• The approach aims to reassure the public and prevent any adverse reactions by ensuring a clear understanding of the government's strategy.

According to Liyana, she had been discussing the removal of subsidies since last 2023 and her perspective on this matter was influenced by the country's staggering debt, which was now nearly 65 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), amounting to approximately RM 1.7 trillion, the highest in Malaysia's history. When considering on this matter, she always reflects the future generation and reflects the experience of Sri Lanka and Venezuela. Venezuela was once a wealthy nation with abundant oil reserves, faced economic collapse due to prolonged subsidy maintenance and a 'cash is king' mentality since the 90s. Learning from such examples, she believes that addressing the subsidy issue is timely and critical.

Lyana further stated that:

• The previous attempts by the Barisan Nasional (BN) government were clouded by corruption issues like 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), which undermined public trust in subsidy removal efforts. The current government as far as she is concerned has not shown any signs of integrity issues and the timing is right for subsidy rationalisation;
• She did not anticipate receiving the subsidy if it was removed, given that she and many others fall within the M40 middle-class category. It is likely that cash transfers, if implemented, would target the B40 and below, covering 60 per cent of the population. However, it is crucial to grasp the economic reality facing Malaysia after 65 years of independence as we are no longer economically prosperous; and
• She stressed that Malaysia was burdened with significant debts and subsidy liablities with an uncertain economy. Comparing Malaysia to neighbouring countries currently has one of the lowest fuel prices after Brunei. In Indonesia where salaries are lower than ours, fuel prices are higher. 

Liyana emphasised that we must acknowledge that times have changed, and we cannot expect the past to mirror the present. To convey this reality to the public, especially those who may not benefit from subsidies, we need a 'reality check'.

It is essential to recognise this reality and not selfishly cling to subsidies, as failing to address our economic challenges could jeopardise the future for our children and grandchildren, as seen in countries like Venezuela and Sri Lanka.       

The article titled Subsidy removal: Malaysia needs 'reality check' - Activist was written by Wan Ahmad Atarmizi and published in the Sinar Harian Daily on 14 May 2024. The podcast in Malay may be accessed in Youtube, "Penarikan Subsidi Minyak: Rasional dan Impak", Jangan Pajak Otak.    

Citing Indonesia, Dr Mahathir says non-Malays should be assimilated and ‘become Malays’ as part of ‘Bangsa Malaysia’

Kenneth Tee, Malay Mail, 13 November 2023

Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has insisted the non-Malays in the country should have been assimilated into the Malay community, to form the “Bangsa Malaysia” concept of nations he envisioned.

Pointing to neighbouring Indonesia, Dr Mahathir said other ethnic groups such as the Chinese there have “successfully” assimilated and embraced the local culture but not in Malaysia.

“But when the migrants wished to retain their identities and going as far as to dispute the ownership of this country to be not a Malay country but a multicultural one, that meant we have lost our country,” he said in the Keluar Sekejap podcast, referring to the Malays.

He justified his claim by pointing to how part of Malaysia was historically Tanah Melayu, and declared the Malays to be the pioneers of the land.

“The Malaysians I defined are the Malays,” he said, referring to the nation he envisioned.

“They are Indonesians because they have embraced the way of living of the Indonesian people. They do not call themselves Indonesian Malays or Indonesian Chinese but in Malaysia, we got Malaysian Chinese, Malaysian Malays.

“Why do [the non-Malays] want to retain their different cultures, languages and alienate themselves from the locals?” he asked.

Earlier this year, Dr Mahathir caused controversy by claiming that the majority Malays in the country “did not benefit” from the multi-ethnic fabric of the country.

In a lengthy Twitter thread, Dr Mahathir said multi-ethnicism in the country has created a meritocracy where everything went towards those who were most capable, best trained and financially secure — further claiming that this means only non-Malays have benefited from this.

Anwar and the Politics of Language Nationalism

P. Ramasamy, former Deputy Minister of Penang expressed his opinion in MalaysiaNow on 23 October 2023 that whether or not it is sheer hypocrisy on the part of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to jump on the bandwagon of language nationalism to instruct government departments to return or reject correspondence or letters in languages other than Malay remains to be seen.

The question of Malay as the national language has long been settled in the country. There is no reason or rhyme to invoke language nationalism any more other than for political reasons.

• Malay is the language of communication at government departments, and the medium of instruction at public schools, universities, and others. There is no question of other languages creeping in surreptitiously to replace Malay. If there is fear, then certainly it is a misplaced one or based on paranoia.
• However, at schools and certain public universities, English might be used to encourage students to become proficient in the language. Some universities and colleges established to cater primarily Malay students also employ English as the medium of instruction.
• While instruction in English might contradict the national language policy, the requirements of the larger good might be a countervailing factor. For e.g. English is the medium of instruction at the International Islamic University of Malaysia (IIUM) to cater international students and it is a clear contradiction but IIUM being an international university, so the use of English is justified.

He raised two questions about the statement by Anwar Ibrahim on the rejection of government departments to correspondence in languages other than Malay while the use of Malay has been unevenly implemented in public institutions of higher learning:

• Would foreign correspondence be exempted as Malaysia also wants a high international profile? Imagine potential foreign investors intending to pour billions in investments but their letters to government departments get rejected because they were not written in Malay. Would the government departments reject them if they were written in English or languages other than Malay? Are Malaysians that narrow-minded that they would reject letters in English when the latter has become unofficial second language in Malaysia and a language of international communication and discourse?
• What about states like Sabah and Sarawak who agreed to join the Federation of Malaysia with one of the conditions, to use English as one of their official languages. Shall government departments there reject or return letters written in English to their correspondence too? How can Anwar superimpose a language requirement in those states when terms of their entry into the Federation of Malaysia in 1963 clearly allowed the usage of both Malay and English?

On the other hand, Ramasamy agrees that efforts should be taken by the government departments to strengthen and improve the usage of Malay. This should be a routine exercise without any intervention of the prime minister. He further said that there is no question on Anwar's commitment to uphold Malay in Malaysia. However, Anwar as the prime policy maker in Malaysia should not be a fundamentalist in the implementation of Malay or he should be giving speeches in Malay during international events if he is that nationalistic to the Malay language.

He further stated that, Anwar has a pretty good command of English as compared to the former prime minister such as Ismail Sabri Yaakob and the current deputy prime minister, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. Ismail had to deliver speeches in the international platform in Malay not because of his nationalism to Malay but because of his poor command of English. Similarly, it is better for Zahid to keep to Malay in his speeches due to his English is not up to mark.

Ramasamy said that lately, Anwar has been trying to score political points to ingratiate himself to the Malays. The political coalition he leads has lost considerable Malay support to Perikatan Nasional. He wants to last the full term. In order to do so, he is trying his best to be popular with the Malays. Among of his prominent political antics are as below:

• Reminding the non-Malays of their social contract;
• Leading religious conversions;
• Trying to portray himself as the champion of Palestinians as though the earlier prime ministers had failed;
• Giving premature approval for the holding of a Palestinian Solidarity Week in schools; and
• Giving advice to government departments to reject letters written in languages other than Malay.

Ramasamy further stated that he understood the enforcement part of the use of Malay in government departments, but the government also has an open policy in the promotion of English. This could be seen in the dual language teaching programme in national schools that has gained much traction among both Malays and non-Malays.

Ramasamy agrees on the emphasise of the importance of Malay as the official national language of Malaysia. However, he believes that Anwar does not have to go to the extent of micro-managing correspondence in government departments. Ramasamy advises Anwar to focus more on economy such as:

• to address food shortage in Malaysia;
• to address the decline of Ringgit's value against US Dollar;
• the creation of a talented of workforce; and
• to ensure that the pledges of investments being materialised.

Ramasamy ends his opinion that in order for the economy to keep going, Anwar needs a good team in the Cabinet. Some of the deadwood appointed for reasons other than merit must be dropped. It is also about the time that Anwar replaces himself as the country's finance minister.