By Cheong Suk-Wai
One of Tengku Razaleigh’s most vivid memories from boyhood is that of following the funeral procession of his father’s Hainanese cook through the streets of Kota Baru, Kelantan.
The cook had died from an infected wound sustained after his employer’s pet tiger swatted his hand while he was retrieving meat from the man-eater’s cage.
Tengku Razaleigh (picture), 72, the scion of Kelantan’s first post-independence chief minister, told this story in his blog recently to stress how well Malaysians of all races used to get along with one another.
The still youthful Kelantanese prince, who is married with no children, was one of Malaysia’s ablest finance ministers. He almost became its premier too, but lost the post to Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad by a whisker in a bitterly contested race for Umno’s presidency in 1987. The old Umno was deregistered after that and Tengku Razaleigh — affectionately known as Ku Li - led Semangat 46 (The Spirit of ‘46) from October 1989 to October 1996, when he rejoined Umno.
Over sweet tea and chocolate chip cookies last Thursday, he told me why Malaysia as it is currently constituted has no future and why it has to change.
Why did the political system work when you were a minister, but not now?
Because there’s so much accent on materialism now that people have lost their moral fibre.
When did Malaysia give way to materialism?
It started with so-called influence peddlers who became commission agents through their connections with party bosses. They acquired bad habits and the people around or below them copied their habits and that soon became part of the culture. Even people in government departments, such as peons, expect something, which is not good.
Why is it that Umno always seems to play the race card when in a tight spot?
Not only the race card, but also the religion card — anything. It’s about putting fear into the minds of the people. And fear that they may lose their positions.
Why do you insist that Umno’s very structure has to change to make Malaysia better?
Because... it’s becoming less democratic. When Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Abdul Razak were the leaders of the country, we sensed that anybody could hope to rise to the top — not that everybody wanted to... There were contests, yes, but they were among friends — but, of course, in politics, there’s no such thing as contests among friends! You have to be ambitious.
The one point I want to stress is that there was comradeship. If you went anywhere and met a fellow party member, you felt he was like your brother.
So what’s changed?
(Those contesting party polls these days) are going in because they want power and because of power, they want money. Their cronies band around them so in return they will be well off. But that’s not politics... If you wallop the country’s resources, that’s not the way to build leadership.
What brought about such a mindset?
I think the patronage system is at fault. You go to villages and encourage people there to work hard and be self-reliant. But you start giving them subsidies. And so the minute subsidies are withdrawn, they find it difficult to make ends meet and, naturally, get angry. I think we have to teach our people slowly so that we all buck up.
The No 1 problem anywhere in the world is poverty. In countries like mine, education, proper nourishment and health care are still wanting. The main means of overcoming poverty is education and ensuring that people earn enough so they don’t expect handouts.
Where would you begin?
The leaders must be disciplined. If they cannot discipline themselves, they cannot discipline the people... I’m not being critical here when I say that Singapore leaders are seen to be very clean people who are leading the way by being hard-working, competent and efficient. Those under them have to emulate otherwise they cannot keep in step with the standards set by their leaders.
If other countries can become developed, why can’t Malaysia? And we are rich compared to Singapore. What has Singapore got?
Our central bank lost RM32 billion (S$13 billion) in six months dabbling in foreign exchange. Where in the world have you heard of a central bank losing over RM30 billion and not going bust? But Malaysia’s so rich, it can support such losses.
What will happen when its oil runs out?
We have not restructured our economy... If we want to provide for the future, we have to choose industries so as to find niches in the market. That’s going to take up to 15 years. Will the resources now supporting us last until then? If we don’t think quickly, a lot of our young will be unemployed.
I think we have depleted a lot of our oil resources which should have been kept underground for the future. Do we need to exploit all that oil?
What of Premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s moves to free the economy of affirmative action requirements?
The New Economic Policy (NEP) ended in 1990, but overzealous civil servants and politicians continued to impose it. Tun Dr Mahathir had thrown the NEP out when he introduced the National Development Policy (NDP) of 1990 and he sometimes implemented the NEP as if it were part of the NDP. But don’t forget that Dr Mahathir was never involved in the formulation of the NEP.
And you were?
Yes, but not directly. It was for a noble cause.
What was so noble about it?
Well, the NEP was to bring everybody together. But people took advantage of it, exploited it and abused it for their own personal, or sectional, gains.
And yet you’re hopeful about Malaysia?
I believe in people. They have faith in themselves, are generally good and can be taught... We as children learnt very quickly, didn’t we?
But as adults?
Quicker still! But the leaders must show the way. I’m not so sure they will. But we’ve got to keep trying.
We hope to push for reforms — not just for Umno — to fight corruption, provide security and make sure that education is reformed so that Malaysians will be more competitive globally.
But they’re losing out already!
Yes, but they don’t feel it yet. They’re always in a state of denial.
Looking ahead to future Umno polls, what are your plans?
It’s too early to talk about that.
If you’re called upon to lead again, would you heed it?
If I could be of use to the party and country, I’m available.
Would you try for the top party post again?
Well, I don’t know about trying again — it’s another three years down the road. But even at this juncture, I’m prepared to offer my services — to serve in, say, an advisory role. But not necessarily for a post in the party.
Why are you still in Umno?
Because I have hope! I believe in what Umno stood for — fair play, justice, equality — not what the present Umno is doing.
But the Umno you believe in is long gone?
Well, the other parties don’t offer much choice either. They’re in disarray and don’t exercise leadership.
Do you regret founding Semangat 46?
Semangat 46 was not founded by me. That’s the propaganda of Umno Baru. It was founded by Tunku. He wanted a new party formed since he, Tun Musa Hitam and I were not allowed to join Umno Baru. Tunku said: “Let’s form a party because otherwise our supporters would go to Parti Islam SeMalaysia.”
I was asked to lead Semangat 46 to bring all these people under one wing. They said: “If Dr Mahathir is prepared to talk to you after a while, you bring everybody together again and become one.” So when we were able to talk, an agreement was reached, we disbanded Semangat 46. It was there not to fight anybody, but to provide a home (for us and our supporters).
Someone once said that it’s better to be the man whom everyone wants as premier than a premier whom nobody wants. What say you?
The position doesn’t matter. What matters is what happens to the people. China had Deng Xiaoping. He was not Communist Party chairman. He was not prime minister. He was not president. But he was able to effect change. And I’d like to do that, if it’s possible. — The Straits Times
No comments:
Post a Comment