8œ theSun | WEDNESDAY JUNE 10 2009

speak up!

thesun says

Our children’s future should come first

THE COUNTRY’S education system
has undergone so many changes
that not many people, including sev-
eral Education Ministry officials and
even teachers, can trace the evolu-
tion of the system over the last half
century. The name of the last public
examination students have to sit after
six years of primary school and five
years of secondary school has also
passed through a series of changes,
from Cambridge School Certificate
Examination, FMCE, MCE, SPM and
the present Open Certification SPM.
We had the comprehensive school
syllabuses and such curricula as the
KBSR and KBSM. We moved from a
time when getting a credit in English
was compulsory to a time when it is
no longer so. So Education Minister
Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin should be
forgiven for apparently not knowing
that a pass in English is no longer
compulsory to qualify for an SPM cer-
tificate. Under the Open Certification
System that commenced in 2000 only
a pass in Bahasa Melayu is required for
a certificate, recording the results of
the other core subjects and electives,
to be awarded.
It is apparent Muhyiddin, who is also
deputy prime minister, was only think-
ing out aloud when he suggested that
a pass in English should also be made
compulsory for an SPM certificate to
be awarded. And now ministry officials
will have to scramble to study whether
the suggestion could be implemented
and also to determine whether the
English that students have to pass in
order to obtain their SPM certificate is
the present communication English or
the English where grammar is formally
taught.
Be that as it may the minister is a
very courageous man indeed even to
just suggest to make English important
again. This is especially so when even
the policy of teaching mathematics
and science in English is under severe
pressure. Politicians of all hues, gov-
ernment as well as opposition, have
been voicing their opposition to it and
so have a number of organisations
especially the Movement for the Aboli-
tion of Teaching and Learning Science
in English.
This paper supports the suggestion
by the deputy prime minister just as
it has always been supportive of the
policy of the government concerning
the teaching of mathematics and
science in English. The suggestion if
implemented could complement the
learning of mathematics and science
in English and take the effort to help
young Malaysians mastering the global
language to a new level.
This seems to be too good to
be true. There is, thus, a nagging
suspicion that the suggestion of a
compulsory pass in English, no matter
how it came about, may be just the
way out the government has been
looking for should it decide to end the
teaching and learning of mathematics
and science in English. Should that be
the case then it is clear that the future
of our children has to be subordinated
to politics.

WE have been “advised” that harping on

Stand up, speak up!

the audit report on the Port Klang Free Zone
(PKFZ) amounts to an over-kill. “Enough has
been written and what more can you do?” is the
often repeated question. The answer is simple:
“We have to highlight the shortcomings and
make those responsible for the colossal loss to
answer for their shortcomings.”
After all, the PKFZ is not a private sector
initiative. Taxpayers’ funds were used and
those who held office have to provide plau-
sible answers to the public. This issue is of
public interest – yours and mine – and we
have a right to know who, how and why our
money was squandered.
More importantly, theSun’s investigative
team broke the story five years ago, and it is
our duty as responsible journalists to see that
this saga comes to a rightful end, as deemed
by the people who funded this project – the
rakyat of Malaysia.
Hence, dear readers, you will have to bear
with this and future columns which will con-
tinue to point out errors, acts and omissions
that have now cost you and me a
few billion ringgit.
Going through the audit report
has turned from being a chore to
an insight on the mindsets of those
who were tasked with safeguard-
ing public money. Reading it over
and over again gives rise to various
possible scenarios that could have
taken place ever since the project
started.
Two key points in the report
keep hounding the investigative
mind:
» There was a general lack of
board oversight and governance over the
project. Several matters indicated
that the board had limited involve-
ment in implementing the project.
» Several government checks
and balances were bypassed.
You keep asking yourself
repeatedly: What were the board
members of the Port Klang Au-
thority (PKA) doing? Weren’t they
entrusted with the task of being
policymakers and the staff being
CitizenNades the implementers? Did they fail
in their duties? Why was there an
by R. Nadeswaran
oversight? Why were they kept in
the dark? Why didn’t they ask for
regular briefings on the project? The irony
is that these representatives of government
agencies like the Treasury, ministries and
even the state government were on the board.
Didn’t it occur to them that something was
amiss? Weren’t they aware that they have to
agree and endorse any agreement that was
entered into?
A reasonable man would agree that the
board was not made up of carpenters, fork-
lift drivers and mechanics (no disrespect to
them or their professions). Most of them were
highly qualified and are respected and held
in high esteem in their respective vocations.
They were knowledgeable about the laws,
rules and the requirements that they act as
“ordinary men of business”. And yet, they
allowed the contracts, the variation orders
and all kinds of other escalated costs without
even cautioning the people responsible for the
ballooning costs.
Among those on the board were a former
minister, a deputy minister and even a five-
term MP. Then there were senior civil serv-
ants and those from the trade unions. Didn’t
it occur to them that they would have to ulti-
mately provide answers and be accountable
to the taxpayers for the money?
No one can answer that question, but the
list of directors who served from 2001 to 2007
are:
» Datuk Dr Ting Chew Peh (former housing
and local government minister and former
chairman of PKA);
» Abdul Rahman Mohd Noor – representative
of the Transport Ministry;
» Datin Paduka O.C Phang – former general
manager, PKA;
» Zubir Abdul Aziz – representative of the
Economic Planning Unit, PM’s Department;
» Datuk Mohd Sinon Mudzakir – representa-
tive of the Selangor state secretary;
» Mohd Bashir Maskijo – representative of
the trade union;
» Tan Sri G. Gnanalingam, executive chair-
man of Westports;
» Datuk Abd Rahman Palil, Umno representa-
tive;
» Mohammad Ismail – representative of the
Treasury (replaced by Abdul Rahim Mokti);
» Choong Tow Chong – MCA representative;
» Datuk Dr Abdul Munip Kasmin – repre-
sentative of the Selangor state secretary;
» Ahmat Abu – representative of the trade
union;
» Datuk Yap Pian Hon (former MP and former
chairman of PKA);
» D. Chandrasekaran – representative the
Transport Ministry (replaced by Datuk Muhd
Safaruddin Muhd Sidek);
» Datuk Ahmad Bhari Abd Rahman – Umno
representative;
» Loh Chew June – MCA representative;
» V. Ravindran – representative of the Treas-
ury;
» Nor Rizan Mohd Thani – representative of
the Economic Planning Unit, PM’s Depart-
ment;
» Shamsul Azri Abu Bakar – representative
of the Selangor state secretary (replaced by
Datuk Noorrdin Sulaiman);
» Tan Boon San @ Tan Hock Guan – MCA
representative;
» Datuk Chor Chee Heung – (deputy finance
minister and former chairman of PKA);
» Datuk Zakaria Bahari – secretary-general of
the Transport Ministry;
» Mohamad Nor Taib – representative of the
Economic Planning Unit, PM’s Department;
» K. Tarmalingam – MIC representative; and
» Mohd Zainuddin Ahmad Rashidi, Treasury
representative
So, ladies and gentlemen who appear in
the list above, could you please tell us what
went wrong and why you have remained
silent. For the sake of transparency and good
governance, you have to speak up individually
or as a group. The government has indicated
in strong terms that this matter will not be
swept under the carpet. And, all right-thinking
Malaysians will support such an endeavour,
in the hope that it will set a benchmark for
good governance and correct use of public
funds.
We hope to hear from you soon.
R. Nadeswaran believes that directors are the
soul and body of a corporation and hence, have
to be answerable to the action or inaction of
those who report to them. He is editor (special
and investigative reporting) at theSun. He can
be reached at: citizen-nades@thesundaily.com

letter
letters@thesundaily.com

Tighten rules for maids on leave

MY maid returned to Bali for a week’s holiday on
April 20. To ease her return to Malaysia, I renewed
her passport for another three years in order to
renew her work permit for another year.
However, once back home, she decided not to
return. I had to lodge a police report and paid a
fine of RM250 to cancel her work permit as she is
deemed to have “run away/left without a check-
out memo by our Immigration Department.
I would like to appeal to the Immigration De-
partment to allow the transfer of the work permit
(costing RM445) to another maid; and waive the
compound of RM250 in cases like this.
The Immigration Department should require all
foreign workers who leave the country to have a
check-out memo.
The saving of RM695 from work permit and
compound can help tremendously in these trying
times as not everyone who has a foreign maid is
“rich” and can afford to “lose” this amount without
feeling the pinch.
KL Chen
Kuala Lumpur