- Selayang MP Blasts Government Over Power Tariffs Rise
- Mixed feelings as Lynas panel wraps up meetings
- PKR files for court order to bar deregistration
- Najib: IPPs won't benefit from tariff hike
- Intimidation spooks anti-Lynas group - Part 2
- Memo demanding oil royalty as promised
- Intimidation spooks anti-Lynas group
- More Malays In Australia Now, Says Academic.
- IMF Chief
- A RETIREMENT HOME OR A RETIREMENT VILLAGE?
- OBAMA MUST GO AFTER MAHATHIR MOHAMAD FOR HIS INKS WITH ABU SAYYAF HOMEGROWN BEHEADING HOSTAGESTERRORISTS
- 'The Muslim dilemma', rebutted
- Selamat Ari Gawai 2011
- Pasir Mas MP CORRECT CORRECT CORECT Suspend Rais Yatim and Najib Razak Murderer and Rapist
- Why Muslim cultures lag behind- the Muslim perspective
- Anwar Ibrahim’s Western Public Relations Effort Failing?
- Kittar’s Name That Nipple & Pussy Contest our President Dabble in Gay Sex
- ‘If They Are Fit, Let Them Work’ - By Kay Wee Tan.
- Perlu Ambil Calon Timbalan Presiden yang "Kebal UMNO"
Posted: 31 May 2011 03:50 PM PDT
From the MEDIA RAKYAT:
William Leong: THE BN GOVERNMENT'S DECISION TO INCREASE POWER TARIFFS IS AN ABDICATION OF ITS DUTIES TO THE PEOPLE
May 31st, 2011 by Admin | 0
The BN Government's decision to pass the burden of the increased gas prices from TNB and the Independent Power Producers (IPPs) to Malaysian consumers is an abdication of its responsibility owed to the people. The cause of the increased in the tariff which is about 7% higher from 1st June 2011 and increased every 6 months until 2015, is due to the Government's unwillingness to review the grossly unfair contracts entered into by the Government with the IPPs and the manifestly improper long term gas supply agreements between Petronas and the IPPs.
The grossly unfair power purchase agreements require TNB to purchase all electricity produced by the IPPs, regardless of TNB's requirements and at a cost that is more expensive than the power produced by TNB itself. As a result, TNB pays the IPPs a capacity charge which is payment for power produced by the IPPs not required by TNB. There is a 40% excess capacity for which TNB pays capacity charges to the IPPs since 1993.
Under the gas supply agreements, the IPPs purchased gas from Petronas at the price of RM6.40 per Million Metric British Thermal unit (MMBtu) when the production cost is RM15.00 per MMBtu. This was reviewed in 2009 to RM10.70 per MMBtu. It is now increased by RM3.00 to RM13.70 per MMBtu. The Government has agreed with TNB and the power companies for the increase cost of gas to be passed through to the consumers.
By reason of the grossly unfair power purchase agreements and the highly improper use of Petronas to sell its gas production below cost to the IPPs, the IPPs have made super profits since 1993.
The Barisan Nasional Government backed down from reviewing these unfair contracts and also surrendered to the IPPs' demand by not proceeding with the imposition of windfall taxes in 2008. The Prime Minister's brother, CIMB Group Chief Executive, Datuk Seri Nazir Razak, described the imposition of the windfall tax as "shooting the golden goose". It is certain that Malaysian consumers are not reaping the golden eggs from the IPP goose. They are paying the cost of maintaining the goose.
In backing down from the review of the unfair contracts and not proceeding with the windfall tax, the Barisan Nasional Government has therefore chosen to protect the profits of the IPPs over the people.
I call upon the Barisan Nasional Government to immediately declassify and make public the power purchase agreements and the gas supply agreements. The public has a right to know the terms of these agreements and to take action to correct the wrongs if the Barisan Nasional Government does not have the courage of conviction to do the right thing.
WILLIAM LEONG JEE KEEN
Member of Parliament Selayang
Posted: 31 May 2011 07:21 AM PDT
Posted: 31 May 2011 07:08 AM PDT
Posted: 31 May 2011 04:08 AM PDT
Posted: 31 May 2011 03:35 AM PDT
Posted: 31 May 2011 03:21 AM PDT
Posted: 30 May 2011 11:14 PM PDT
Posted: 30 May 2011 10:11 PM PDT
Posted: 31 May 2011 09:04 AM PDT
Thousands of Malays have migrated to Australia, citing career and business opportunities as reasons for their decision, said a Malaysian academic.
Universiti Utara Malaysia's Dr Ahmad Zaharuddin Sani said in the in the state of Victoria alone there were about 5,000 Malays, three-fourths of them either permanent residents or Australian citizens, according to a Bernama Online report today.
He said they were both professionals — doctors and engineers — and support staff.
The fellow at University of Melbourne's Asia Institute said most of them arrived after 1981 under family, skilled workers or business provisions for migration.
The increase coincided with Australian policy changes allowing overseas students to apply for stay extensions. Ahmad Zaharuddin explained this led to many students staying on indefinitely.
His research resulted in the book "Malays in Victoria", which was the idea of Victorian Malay Organisation president Zulkifli Ahmad. The Australian Multicultural Foundation released it last week.
Ahmad Zaharuddin said further that educational opportunities for their children also encouraged the migration, together with better work benefits, healthcare and Australia's multiculturalism.
The academic however was unhappy with Malays abroad who dissociate themselves from their ethnicity. He feels Malays should be proud although he admitted the term "Malay" was difficult for people abroad to understand.
Ahmad Zaharuddin gained his PhD from Universiti Malaya and has a Master of Theology degree from University of Nottingham.
Courtesy of The Malaysian Insider
Posted: 31 May 2011 08:45 AM PDT
Posted: 31 May 2011 07:22 AM PDT
Explore townships for the elderly
THE Government should consider planning and building small, special townships for the elderly. This is what I have in mind:
The township and its special apartments should be built in such a way that they facilitate the movement of the disabled and the slower pace of the elderly. The apartments should be sold to the elderly at specially discounted prices based on a 30-year lease, with a stipulation that they cannot be resold in the market.
The purchase of these units should be restricted to citizens aged 55 and above. It would be good if they have proper security such as fencing and alarm systems, with access to township restricted to registered residents. The township should include its own health-care centres, medical clinics, pharmacy, library, training centres, and Internet and entertainment centres.
It should have an elder-care system manned by employed nurses and volunteers. There can also be a small hospice nearby. Such an initiative would capture a substantial number of the elderly who have reached the age where they need to live within their means and comfortably, without imposing on their children.
Chin Cheng Yeong
Sounds like a retirement utopia. But seriously, would you want to live in a town where all your neighbours are aged 55+?
Posted: 31 May 2011 06:54 AM PDT
However, his attack against the Time magazine over the article was moderate as he was not personally mentioned and wanted to keep a lid on the possible links, said US diplomats.
DEALING WITH MISUARI
Manila's inability to play straight in the matter of deporting Muslim rebel leader Nur Misuari indicates that it is still not clear on how to tackle separatism in Mindanao.
NUR MISUARI and his Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) are in the news once again. A peace accord that Misuari signed with the Philippines government in 1996 came unstuck and his followers staged a rebellion at the end of November.
On November 24, Misuari, 60, was detained in the Malaysian state of Sabah on Borneo island after he fled the southern Philippines, and since then Manila and Kuala Lumpur have been engaged in a ping-pong battle on his deportation.
More than 100 people were killed in clashes between MNLF supporters and government troops after the Philippines President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo decided to dump Misuari and support one of his opponents for the post of Governor of the Muslim autonomous region on Mindanao island. Arroyo is also engaged in peace talks, facilitated by Malaysia, with the larger Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).
One would have expected that Manila, which has charged Misuari with rebellion, would be keen on getting the Moro leader back from Malaysia as soon as possible. But that was not to be. Filipino leaders sent out conflicting statements on whether or not they wanted him back, giving rise to speculation that Arroyo would prefer to let Misuari remain outside the Philippines.
The Misuari issue has put some strain on the Philippines' cordial ties with Malaysia; it led to statements from Kuala Lumpur that Misuari may have to be sent to a third country if Manila refused to take him back. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, however, put the blame for the problem on Misuari rather than on Manila: "It is Misuari who has put Malaysia in a spot. Why can't he run away somewhere else… It (his presence) sours relations with neighbours."
CHARLIE SACEDA/REUTERSA recent picture of Philippine Muslim leader Nur Misuari.
Manila's flip-flop on Misuari, however, was in a special category. After Misuari was arrested on Arrival at Sabah, the Malaysian authorities stated that he was not wanted for any crime. The only charge, a minor one, was of entering the country without valid travel documents.
On December 11 Arroyo made a strange statement: "What the (Malaysian) police said is they don't have enough evidence. (The report) doesn't say they cleared him… We also checked with Malaysia last night. That (report) is at the level of the police. That's not at the level of the Prime Minister." She went on: "I have said before that we are ready to take Misuari back… we are already preparing his jail cell, his charges and the mode of arresting him."
The statement can only be interpreted as one full of hope. That Mahathir Mohamad would disagree with his police officers and arrest Misuari on some charge appeared to be Arroyo's fervent hope.
For reasons not yet spelt out, the Philippines government is of the view that Misuari at home can be a bigger problem than Misuari abroad. The government possibly believes that Misuari's return could lead to more violence and a trial could be used for political purposes. However, after linking Misuari with terrorist Abu Sayyaf, it is surprising that the Arroyo government does not want him back. Without doubt, the Philippines under Arroyo is a leading partner of the United States in countering terrorism and U.S. military advisers are working closely with Filipino security forces.
Misuari's links with Abu Sayyaf are doubtful, and if he does have any ties with Sayyaf, should not Arroyo and her government be keen on securing his immediate deportation to Manila? Finally, after even considering Libya as a possible asylum destination for Misuari, the Foreign Ministers of Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines met in Manila on December 20 and agreed that the MNLF leader should be returned to the Philippines.
A joint statement issued by the three Foreign Ministers said: "The Philippines recognises the need to treat Nur Misuari with humanitarian consideration that he deserves as a signatory to the 1996 peace accord, even as he will be subject to the judicial process."
Just before the solution was announced, Roilo Golez, National Security Adviser to the Philippines President, said Libya was seen as a possible destination for Misuari. It is apparent that a "law and order" approach to the issue of 'Muslim' separatism in the southern Philippines has not worked. Playing one group against another has not worked' nor has it led to the creation of a viable authority in Mindanao in which the Moro people have trust.
By opening talks with the MILF, the Arroyo government has taken a positive, first step. But the 1996 peace accord with Misuari and his MNLF is dead. That is not a good sign for the Philippines – the November violence would indicate that Misuari and his supporters still have fight left in them.
While Misuari's critics say that he has achieved very little for the Moro people in the years he served as Governor, others believe that the "Christian" government in Manila did not provide sufficient resources to the autonomous authority. Whatever the truth, the fact remains that the Arroyo government continues to face a serious challenge to its authority in Mindanao. A political settlement must be inclusive, one which includes all factions to the conflict barring Abu Sayyaf's, which specialises in kidnapping, extortion and murder.
A distinction must be made between the terrorism of Abu Sayyaf and the problems of the Moro people. The movement for autonomy and a genuine demand for rights cannot be treated as a law and order problem.
Waffling on Misuari has revealed the contradictions in Manila's approach. Its inability to play straight in dealing with the Misuari issue reveals that the Philippines is still not clear how to tackle separatism in Mindanao
Mahathir Mohamad was unusually moderate in his attacks against two articles which appeared to criticise his government in the Time and Fortune magazines in early 1995 as he was "not personally mentioned in the stories".
Also, Mahathir was not keen to pursue his attacks against the Time magazine article in particular as it involved his government's alleged links with the Abu Sayyaf movement from the Philippines.
Posted: 31 May 2011 06:04 AM PDT
Today's edition of The Star has an article from an esteemed Muslim 'scholar' and 'thinker' on the causes of the malaise of Malaysia and other Muslim nations.
If the author, one Dr Wan Azhar Wan Ahmad, Senior Fellow/Director Centre for the Study of Syariah [Shariah], Law and Politics proves anything, he proves how hopeless the Muslim world really is. As we Islamophobes are well aware, making Muslim societies both pious and progressive is a sisyphean task.
I've taken this writer's arguments apart over at Jihad Watch. Have a look.
Posted: 31 May 2011 04:31 AM PDT
Audie61 and the management team would like to take this opportunity to wish all our friends,supporters,allies,FELLOW SARAWAK BLOGGERS a very ' Happy Gawai Dayak ″ Gayu Guru Gerai Nyamai"
Its also a time for reflections and to move on to a more healthy lifestyle and also to share the love of the community spirit and togetherness to everyone.
HAPPY GAWAI HOLIDAYS………..
Posted: 31 May 2011 04:29 AM PDT
But I am not afraid.
Pasir Mas MP CORRECT CORRECT CORECT Suspend Rais Yatim and Najib Razak Murderer and Rapist
Your Case is not Over Minister, Scandalous Minister Raped his Indonesian Maid
Posted: 31 May 2011 03:50 AM PDT
By the Anti Jihadist
Recently, in a discussion at Jihad Watch as to why Muslim cultures noticeably lagging behind much of the rest of the world, the following eight traits were summarised as characteristics of the dysfunctional societies of Islam:
I started reading Doctor Azhar's article eagerly, hoping that the distinguished, esteemed writer (at least to Muslims) and 'Islamic scholar' would have had the decency to be plainspoken and the courage to let loose at least a little of the truth. It's probably hardly surprising to the 'Islamophobes' reading this, but I was soon to be disappointed. Worse than that, I found the good Doctor's words plainly wrong-headed and disturbing, in yet another instance of denial and self-deception.
Regardless, the good Doctor's words are worth analysing, deconstructing and given a thorough debunking. The analysis is especially needed because Doctor Azhar, as a quasi bureaucrat, writes in encoded bureaucratic language that will baffle many outsiders who try to follow his thinking.
First, the doctor starts by saying this:
MUSLIMS, regardless of times and locations, have been facing a varied magnitude of challenges since the very inception of Islam. This will never cease to happen.
But how could all these 'challenges' happen? After all, Islam is supposed to be the perfect 'deen', the perfect religion and the best way of life for everyone. That's the pitch, at any rate. So why is life so hard for Muslims? Maybe because Islam is not all that it's cracked up to be? But never mind that for the moment.
The first sentence is true enough. But while the first part is blindingly obvious, the second sentence is an oblique nod to the usual Islamic sham; namely, any difficulties for Muslims are either due to the scheming of evil outsiders (i.e. non Muslims) or due to the fact that many Muslims are insufficiently pious. This typical Islamic drivel should warn the clear-thinking that this 'doctor's' writing is not to be taken seriously.
In terms of politics, Muslims basically rule the country, but have been perceived as compromising too much, even on fundamental matters, at the expense of their own interests and dignity.
The references to 'compromise' and 'dignity' are not explained, so allow me to elucidate. It means anytime when Muslims treat the followers of other belief systems in Malaysia (Christians, Buddhists, Hindus) too much like equals. Namely, if a Buddhist is ever treated as the equal of of a Muslim, or anything approaching equal terms, then this is seen as a 'compromise' to Islam's/Muslims' 'dignity'. And note the author's use of passive- perceived as compromising by who? This bureaucrat of a writer fails to specify, but I strongly suspect he is referring to the various Muslim pressure groups in Malaysia (Perkasa et al) who constantly agitate for more Islamic 'purity' and 'devoutness' for Malaysians (i.e. more Shariah).
On with the good Doctor's argument.
Remember those scheming evil nonbelievers? According to Doctor Azhar, these 'foreign influences' are extraordinarily dangerous to Believers (Muslims), a position which adheres quite well to Muslim orthodoxy. What Azhar has primarily in mind is probably the influence of Western culture, which naturally is harmful to Muslims and their supposed 'perfect' way of life. And since everyone is failing to show up at the mosque every Friday, that's the 'disunity' he is lamenting about.
It is this foregoing disintegration of internal qualities of the Muslim ummah that causes confusion and disunity.
The most disturbing part of Doctor Azhar's argument is his closing, in which he states:
[Muslims should] give priority to religious consideration or interests and put aside differences in facing their common enemies.
Who are those enemies exactly, Doctor Azhar? Of course, he's keeping it vague here, but Islamic scripture makes it quite clear who he is referring to. So, if you're a non Muslim and you're reading this, you are one of those "common enemies" that he means. Doesn't this sound peace-loving, open-minded and tolerant?
So, to recap, here's Doctor Azhar's list for why the Ummah is stumbling so badly:
Doctor Azhar, with all due respect, I suggest a different remedy for you and your co-religionists. Recognize the equality of the so-called 'infidel', embrace your 'common enemies' as 'fellow humans' instead, and acknowledge the universal brotherhood of mankind. As these are all inherently unIslamic ideas, I am sure devout Muslims will not take heed. But there's a chance that the "ignorant, secular and non-practising Muslims" will.
Posted: 31 May 2011 03:33 AM PDT
In the West, we tend to ignore the Muslim countries of Southeast Asia too often in favor of the more rambunctious Middle East; whether this is because we are concentrating our limited energies on the larger problem spot, or ignoring places where things are going well, is probably a function of one's particular outlook on life. Regardless of the source of this disregard, it is an error as great as choosing to ignore the safe streets in city planning in favor of the bullet-ridden ones. The good things don't last without some tending of their own.
That leads to Malaysia, a moderate Muslim country with strong trade ties to the United States, that we too often ignore along with its other, moderate neighbors in favor of a pointless bombing campaign in Libya and other adventures in futility. Malaysia has done well for itself, holding fast to a moderate strain of Islam while continuing to grow energetically. It is not heaven on earth, but it is better than most Muslim nations, with religious minorities freely practicing their faith, and calls for extremism loudly and roundly denounced by most Malaysians. It is in and from this fertile ground that Malaysia's current prime minister, Najib Razak, boldly decried the practice of suicide bombing, eschewing the usual Islam-means-peace pablum for a concrete denunciation of murder and suicide, explicitly calling them contrary to Islam and a mark of barbarism.
This is especially significant because English is the lingua franca of Malaysia, and so Najib's Oxford speech was reported and understood at home. He cannot — and to his credit, does not — play the all-too-common game of tell-the-non-Muslims-what-they-want-to-hear, revert-to-death-to-the-Jews-death-to-America at home.
His political opposite cannot say the same.
I'm on the record having a low opinion of Anwar Ibrahim, but that's only because he's a virulent anti-Semite with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood who formed an opposition coalition in his country by recruiting a political party best known for calling for volunteers to fight with the Taliban against the United States. So, you know, little things. But what's worse is how he has played the nasty demagogue at home, then played the good democrat in the West; and what's worse than that is how the Western policy establishment has historically tolerated this.
This is one of those critically easy policy rules: If someone is blathering about the Jews being the source of the world's problems, or, more particularly, his own, he is a very bad man, a nutter, or both. You don't need to be a failed painter with a nasty little mustache, a figurehead president with alleged (and hastily denied!) Jewish ancestry, or a former military juntaist whom we have unaccountably not snuffed as he has gone on to destroy one of the most vibrant and productive economies in Latin America for this to be so. You can be an opposition leader trying to wrest control of your country's parliamentary system from someone you casually describe as being controlled by the Jews.
Indeed, given his ready trafficking in old anti-Semitic (and anti-Christian) tropes, it is a wonder the extent to which Anwar has retained so much of the goodwill he managed to rack up in the late Nineties. People whom many of us (I include myself) have respected for years tend to shock us by excusing away Anwar's disturbing tells. Probably the best, single example of this I've seen has been Jackson Diehl excusing the anti-Semitism as an unfortunately necessary means of political survival (while giving Anwar an on-the-record opportunity to explain away his minutes-long rant as the result of a slip of the tongue), and giving Paul Wolfowitz, who really should know better, a chance to provide Anwar some same-themed cover. That neither man would tolerate this sort of doublespeak out of, say, a Saudi prince is a telling indictment of their willingness to suspend their disbelief at inconvenient times.
Diehl and Wolfowitz are hardly alone. For years — since at least 2008, when Anwar first explained his failure to win a national election as the result of the American Jewish Lobby doing … something — Western policymakers and opinion makers have given the man a free pass, ignoring each round of particularly vicious anti-Semitism as it occurs. Anwar has helpfully made himself available without pause or cessation, ready to say one thing to any Western voice that would listen, and another at home; he has been his own best press agent.
A strange thing seems to have happened of late, though. Anwar is on trial for forced sodomy (mistakenly described by Diehl and others who should know better as consensual sodomy), and the judge presiding over the case has allowed it to go forward. In a matter of days, Anwar will have to present his defense, and will doubtless explain again to Western ears that he is a beleaguered democrat facing a political charge (something the Washington Post seems inclined to believe credulously), and tell audiences at home that this is because of the Jews, the Israeli special ops, and/or the Americans.
But as yet, there is no groundswell of spontaneous opinion writing in his defense. There is no remarkable wave of excuses and dire warnings about democracy in Malaysia. There is, instead, silence.
I would submit this is the result of two, critical factors.
First, Anwar's political touch is turning out to make a lot more lead than gold. Most recently, he has taken to excusing away his inability to move the needle in local elections, in the process doing critical damage to his coalition's efforts in advance of the upcoming national elections by insulting a vital, potential ally. He compounded this by accusing the people of Sarawak — where he carefully hid his ties with radical Islam during the local elections, to no avail — of racism for failing to support his ticket, a charge that is not merely not helpful, but has the added bonus of being based on a complete misunderstanding of the facts on the ground.
The Western press likes winners and canny underdogs. It's not quite so hot on fools who cannot keep their feet from their mouths.
The second, critical element here is the Obama Administration's approach to Malaysia. I have been a not-infrequent critic of the Obama Administration's foreign policy — confused, overt deference to the genocidal People's Republic of China, and a willingness to snub the world's most populous democracy are not actually achievements of which Americans should be proud — but this is one area in which the Administration seems to have caught on more quickly than its outside supporters and critics. Not only is the Secretary of State praising Najib's call for religious moderation, but the Administration as a whole is treating Anwar as a matter of secondary importance.
And as we learned during the 2008 Presidential campaign, the media are nothing if not sensitive to the directions open and implicit of this President.
The next few months will be interesting to watch. Anwar's trial will conclude with a verdict of some kind, and Malaysia will move toward its next national election. In the face of dual pressure, it would seem reasonable to assume that Anwar will step up his availability and his lobbying of the Administration to build support either for his appeal (if convicted) or his election efforts (regardless of the trial's outcome).
Whether his one-man public relations campaign yields the same willingness to ignore rank anti-Semitism and tolerance of Islamist lunacy will rest on the Administration's willingness to stand by its prior positions (an open question) and whether Anwar continues to inject his foot into his mouth when blood libels are not leaving it.
Posted: 31 May 2011 03:01 AM PDT
THIS NIPPLES ARE MINE
There are two ways that you can experience the intoxicating joy, profound peace and ecstatic wakefulness of the Ground of Being: spontaneously or through effort.
Spontaneously, like an unexpected visit from God, for no particular reason the doors of perception can open, expanding your awareness to reveal a higher and deeper dimension of consciousness. This kind of event often happens in the company of an enlightened master who has access to this unmanifest ground, or in a group of dedicated individuals who have come together for a higher purpose. But you can also experience the ground of being simply through your own disciplined effort, through choosing to step beyond the conditioned mind.
A spontaneous experience is a source of tremendous inspiration because it proves something to you, directly. When you unexpectedly discover the shocking clarity of bliss consciousness, without having made any effort to attain it, it compels you to acknowledge the existence of a deeper, higher dimension of your own self. But extraordinary and miraculous as they are, spontaneous experiences are rarely enough to finally liberate us from an unenlightened relationship to the mind and emotions. More often, they will simply reveal how extraordinary our potential for liberation is, here and how, and simultaneously expose how deluded we are most of the time.
A spontaneous experience of higher consciousness is like a free ride to heaven. But to stay there we have to be willing to pay the price. That means that at a moment's notice, we have to be willing to do battle with the demons of fear and doubt. True liberation is something we all have to be willing to fight for. Sometimes it may be easy, but at other times you will find yourself overwhelmed by fear, doubt, confusion, narcissistic concerns and materialistic desires. So the willingness to make effort has to be unconditional in relationship to your own mind. That willingness is what creates receptivity to higher consciousness in each and every one of us. When you are willing to make the noble effort to liberate yourself, to consistently struggle to make the right choices for the right reasons, it creates a receptive inner atmosphere. Through the disciplined practice of meditation, the conscious, consistent renunciation of the mind and emotions, you create a fertile ground within you for higher consciousness.
Posted: 31 May 2011 12:51 AM PDT
Trade unions feel that the term brain drain should also apply to senior citizens. They feel that once a healthy individual with vast experience is told to leave when he or she reaches retirement age, the company will face a brain drain.
Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC) secretary-general Abdul Halim Mansor said those in their late 50s and 60s are hardworking, healthy and an asset to any company.
"In the private sector they are forced to retire at 55 even though they can work for another 10 years," Abdul Halim said.
In January, MTUC proposed to the Human Resouces Ministry to extend the retirement age of workers in the private sector to 58 to be on par with the public sector.
In April, Human Resources Minister Dr S Subramaniam indicated that the retirement age of those in the private sector may be raised to 58 .
"We feel that 58 is still too early to retire and want the age increased to 60," Halim said.
"First World countries like Belgium, United Kingdom and Japan have set the retirement age at 65. Unfortunately in Malaysia, the retirement age is still below 60 and we are in the same bracket as Guyana, Bangladesh and Nepal," he added.
No healthcare plan
National Council of Senior Citizens Organisations Malaysia has said that the life span of the two million senior citizens in Malaysia are 72 for males and 75 years for females.
From a financial point, increasing their retirement age will give them more security.
Unlike civil servants, private sectors employees do not receive pensions. They only have the Employees Provident Fund (EPF ).
According to many studies, retired employees use up the EPF within five years.
"They need to keep on working because the cost of living has gone up and unlike the public sector, there is no healthcare plan for them," Halim said.
A former banker said that he completely finished the EPF fund in three years. He said that he has to work part-time as an accountant to keep going.
Halim also said that employers should not wait for the government to make a move. They should on their own re-employ those who are capable and are an asset to the company.
Courtesy of Free Malaysia Today
Posted: 30 May 2011 10:56 PM PDT
Abg Mat Sabu seorang yang telah menghabiskan hampir seluruh umur beliau melawan UMNO. Bak kata orang tua-tua, kalau Abg Mat dicincang 30 pun, beliau tetap tidak akan duduk bersama dengan UMNO dalam satu saf.
Di zaman UMNO gagah dan perkasa dan di zaman PAS lemah dan ditindas (antara pilihanraya 1982 ke 1995), Abg Mat dengan berani melawan dan menentang UMNO sehingga merengkok dalam ISA sebanyak 2 kali.
Ada pun calon2 lain untuk jawatan Timbalan Presiden masih belum teruji.
Komitmen Ustaz Nasaruddin kepada agenda PERPADUANG dengan UMNO adalah satu fakta yang tidak dapat dinafikan lagi.
Adapun Ustaz Tuan Ibrahim bukanlah terkenal dengan agenda ini.
Namun, Ustaz Tuan Ibrahim terkenal dengan sikap "wala'" beliau.
Apa akan jadi sekiranya Tok Guru pergi meninggalkan kita dan Majlis Syura Ulama pula dikuasai oleh mereka2 yang jelas komited dengan agenda PERPADUANG?
Adakah Dato Tuan Ibrahim akan menolak arahan Syura untuk "BERPADU" dengan UMNO?
Tulang Besi sendiri merasakan ianya tidak akan berlaku.
Lebih lebih lagi Dato Tuan Ibrahim mempunyai hubungan rapat dengan PAS TErengganu.
Tidak hairanlah akhbar2 harian serta MUBARAK (persatuan yang 100% UMNO) juga menyokong Dato Tuan Ibrahim sebagai Timbalan Presiden PAS.
Bukan kerana Dato' Tuan Ibrahim ini PRO PERPADUANG sangat. Tapi, mereka amat arif dengan sikap WALA' Dato Tuan Ibrahim yang akan membantu agenda PERPADUANG mereka.
Adapun, Abang Mat Sabu, kita boleh harap untuk memastikan AGENDA PERPADUANG tidak menjadi kesampaian.
Kalau Ustaz Nasa, memang confirm akan terjadi PERPADUANG, tak payah wala'2.
Itu sahajalah "reservation" Tulang Besi berkaitan Dato Tuan Ibrahim. Bukan Tulang Besi kata dia jahat atau PRO UMNO. Tapi, tak konfiden beliau mampu melawan agenda PERPADUANG atas sikap beliau yang wala' itu.
|You are subscribed to email updates from ☪ Journal Sociopolitical Blogs |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email delivery powered by Google|
|Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610|