I have now moved!

Please visit www.triciayeoh.com to continue following my thoughts, writings, and observations as I ruminate about Malaysia and its future.

Though I did not have a text, I was asked to prepare a summary of what I wrote for the purposes of their record-keeping and report. So here we go. A rough outline of what I said last Friday evening at MBPJ, with about 30-odd young people sacrificing their night out to have some solid discussion on the religious-political sphere in Malaysia.

The Relationship between Faith and Politics

Tonight I will speak on two over-arching topics in relation to faith and politics; the first will outline my personal background and the reasons for which I subscribe to the principles I believe in today, and thereafter I will try to address the problems that are currently being faced in Malaysia.

I’d like to firstly put a caveat that I am not speaking on behalf of the state government. However, because I do wear that particular hat, I do have a certain amount of experience and exposure in the realm of policy-making from a state government’s point of view. Hence, I speak as a policy analyst, one with experience in government, and one who happens to have been brought up in the tradition of the Christian faith.

My heritage is therefore one of Christian tradition. Having grown up in an environment of relative conservative spirituality, the ‘church’ had us believe that much of what constitutes Christianity is essentially to do with one’s spiritual health – the relationship between self and God, the divine. Most of our teachings were centred upon how to improve one’s spirituality, with a particular focus on the afterlife. However, as I started becoming exposed to public issues such as corruption, injustice, cost overruns (such as the Istana we are now faced with), abuse of power, discrimination of minorities and a host of other issues, I realised that the public-private divide was a myth, for someone whose faith so fundamentally describes the personhood of someone.

Again, I am only speaking based on my own experience. The division between the public and private spheres in this instance was difficult, especially since the ethos that drove me as a person – those very principles of justice, honesty, truth, accountability – were the same things that I would project onto the public sphere. Faith and politics were hence intimately intertwined insofar as social justice was concerned. For example, the efforts to fight slavery in the past stemmed precisely from faith principles (or the interpretation of what those religious principles were to that particular group of advocates).

My premise is therefore that for those whose faiths so intensely drive their being, it is not possible to extricate one from the other. The problem arises, however, when there are varying interpretations of opinions on public morality; or when policymakers begin to take it upon themselves to consciously legislate public morality. This, again, is entirely possible, if and only if, the leader concerned is able to rationally consider what is the greater good for all. This means that policy decisions must be made for ALL from different backgrounds, and these differences must be taken into consideration.

Living in Southeast Asia and Asia, for example, it is inevitable that any of us would have had some sort of exposure to religion growing up and even at present. To say strictly that there IS a separation of the two is utopian for some but impractical for most. Given this reality, how then do we approach decision-making for the public at large?

Let’s focus on Malaysia right now. The problem in our country is that there is a tight and interrelated nexus between the issues of race, religion and politics. Race and religion so fundamentally describe identity. The nexus is therefore between identity and faith, identity and power, which are extremely strong ties. Without delving too deeply into history, the Iranian Revolution in 1979 without a doubt spurred Muslims in Malaysia towards a religious wave. Again, this is too sweeping a generalisation and I am not doing justice to historical political discourse, but what resulted from these trends were the emergence of political parties in a race towards being more Islamic than the other: UMNO and PAS. I do not doubt the genuine intentions of many, but there have certainly been strategic steps taken for political expediency purposes, on both sides. Therefore this establishes that religion in Malaysia ties too closely with politics for us to have a rational discussion on the theoretical relationship between faith and politics – or rather, the prescriptive notion of what ought to be in place.

In addressing the issue of a secular vs. an Islamic state, I believe the definition of the term secular or secularisation is interpreted differently by different quarters, and therein lies the difficulty of discourse. A secular state does not necessarily mean one that is completely non-religious. This just means that the country is not legally defined or shaped or dictated by those religious principles, for example as mentioned above the legislating of public morality. In any case, even without those legal tags that we place upon Malaysia, can we not be satisfied to say that the country is in fact Muslim in ethos nevertheless?

The more interesting question to me, therefore, is then to what extent can personal beliefs inform our policy decisions? Should they at all? In the courts, through government administration? I believe that faith can inform and influence our decisions, but only to the extent that it benefits the greater good for all. The important consideration is that of people of multiple religions being affected as a result of any public policy decision.

And yet, more and more issues besiege us daily. There are the issues of the “Allah” controversy, temple relocation, church-burning, Kartika and caning as a result of alcohol consumption, apostasy and the list continues. My personal conviction is that we ought to ask ourselves where we are at the cross-roads, where we want to go and how is it we are to get there? We must be able to work on faith principles and common values that can be applied to the public sphere. I can think offhand of initiatives such as working on poverty, the right to water, refugee issues, humanitarian aid, and so on. There is a need to recognise common ground, that of respect, dignity, trust. The Common Word Document that was sent by leading Muslims around the world to the Church community was an epitome of such respect for a common belief in one God and that of loving thy neighbour.

This work has to begin with the young, as I believe some would be too encumbered with baggage of their own beliefs and that of their heritages (including that within the Christian faith) to progress further. More people of such thought projections should be empowered to speak up and express their opinions, without the religious agenda being hijacked by a select few. More avenues must be given, such that religious views are not exclusive to those who are legally or administratively given the right to speak or define one’s personal beliefs. We must be able to break free from the insecurities, fears of identity that have burdened our own communities for far too long.

What are the right avenues to work on this agenda? Through profession (the vocation that one chooses to take up i.e. law, policy), involvement in civil society (NGOs like Perkasa are powerful but to speak up means forming and joining other NGOs to have a critical mass and show voice and power), politics (being involved in actual decision-making or supporting those in politics who share your views), the media and Internet (Web 3.0 is powerful as a source of influencing opinions far and wide). Ultimately, it’s about education and opening of the mind. Remember this. Leaders make decisions based on what they believe the people want. Enough people believing and displaying publicly that they desire traditional, classical religion to be less defined within the law, will eventually lead the way to that end. This, after all, is democracy.

The idea for a Freedom of Information Act is not a new one. Many a conference and public forum has called for such an enactment even prior to the March 8th General Election. In other countries, it varies from being known as a “Freedom of Information” to a “Right to Information” Act (the latter is true for countries in India). When Pakatan Rakyat stepped into power in Selangor, this was a prime opportunity for the state government to put into practice what it has always called for at the Federal level.

The process was not necessarily an easy or a direct one. The enactment was drafted by several parties, and went under the scrutiny of the State Legal Advisor in its final stages. The issue of the Official Secrets Act (OSA) and how that would work was one issue on everyone’s minds. Administratively, which agencies would be covered? What would the mechanisms be? Who makes the decisions? All these questions are hopefully answered in the draft enactment…

Which has been finally tabled for first and second reading TODAY at the Selangor State Legislative Assembly! Let today be a historic day, with an unprecedented enactment, either at the State or Federal levels. The next step is for the newly elected Select Committee (chaired by YB Saari Sungib) to decide on how to proceed, which would include several rounds of public consultation. After collating the feedback and having various (thorough I am sure) discussions, table it for the third and final reading.

We must ensure that the implementation of this FOI enactment takes place efficiently, lest it becomes a mere justification for living up to our own self-imposed standards of transparency and public accountability. Officers with traditional and conservative views will need to be given training and exposure, to operate on the principle of information availability with only narrow exceptions.

We should also now include as a clarion call for the Federal Government to take up the initiative. In the very least, some reform must be done to address the archaic laws of the OSA, Printing Presses and Publications Act, and a slew of other Acts which have continuously served to restrict and muzzle freedom of expression and of media.

Thanks to YB Elizabeth Wong (Chair of the FOI Taskforce) and team, they’ve compiled the Media Reports below here. Enjoy:

S’gor tables ground-breaking FOI Bill (Malaysiakini)
Enakmen kebebasan maklumat (Malaysiakini)
‘Bil kebebasan maklumat ‘ceroboh’ perlembagaan’ (Malaysiakini)
Selangor merakyatkan informasi (Malaysiakini)
BN says FOI encroaching on Federal powers (TheEdge)
Amid media clampdown, S’gor tables FOI Bill (Malaysia Chronicle)
巫统议员批雪资讯自由法违宪 黄洁冰：阳光是最好的消毒剂 (Malaysiakini)
雪政府提呈资讯自由法 决策与行事摊在阳光下 (merdekareview)
指大臣有解密权无必要立法 国阵：雪州资讯自由法违宪 (merdekareview)
《资讯自由法令》让人民监督政府 拯救被腐蚀的机制 (Therocknews)
BN opposition attacks Selangor’s Information bill (TheMalaysianInsider)

Democratising Women

Tricia Yeoh and Cecilia Ng

Part of the excitement associated with the post-political tsunami of March 8^th 2008 when Pakatan Rakyat (PR) took over four (now three) state governments was that it signalled a greater democratisation of the country’s polity. This process certainly includes the transition towards making the practice of deeply entrenched public power more transparent and accountable, the debates of which have indeed since flourished at both Federal and State levels. Today, we have both the Barisan Nasional and PR component parties championing the labels of transparency and accountability in a political market competition of sorts, the evaluation of which is at the public’s disposal, and the results of which are tabulated at elections – or so the process ought to be.

That said, another fundamental aspect of this process of ‘greater democratisation’ is that of inclusive citizenship, where all individuals in society should be empowered to contribute to the formation and practice of public policy – the drawing upon private citizens into public spheres so to speak. Academics have argued that although democracy is premised on the idea of universal citizenship where everyone has the right to be treated equally under the law, it tends to reflect the male and heterosexual citizen. The redefinition of politics is therefore necessary to challenge the practice of it being essentially male-dominated and heteronormative.

And Malaysia?

The same is true of Malaysia, whose male-dominant political representation has resulted in gender-skewed policies and practices. Who can forget, for example, one Parliamentarian’s brash remarks referring to a fellow woman Member of Parliament’s menstrual cycle in utterly distasteful humour? More serious, however, are the impacts of such similar strains of thought upon the laws that govern the country, and in turn, the implications of those on women. One of the solutions has been through a model of ‘fast-tracking’ to redress the historic exclusion of women, where more and more countries are adopting quotas, as temporary measures, for increased political representation for women. The goal is to ensure both descriptive and substantive representation of women in the political arena.

There are 13.9 million women in the country, making up % of the national population. The participation rate of women in the Malaysian labour force increased from 44.7% in 1995 to 46.4% in 2009, which is relatively low compared to neighbouring countries like Thailand (70%), Singapore (60.2%) and Indonesia (51.8%). In positions of decision-making, the number of female Members of Parliament increased from 5.3% to 10.4% between 1990 and 2009. Women now account for 30.5% of top public sector management positions in 2010, a rise from 6.9% in 1995. However, in the private sector women only make up 6.1% of Malaysia’s corporate directors.

The Tenth Malaysia Plan (2010-2015) announced recently addresses this by announcing a policy of at least 30 percent women in decision making positions in the country (the original target over the Ninth Malaysia Plan period) but this has not yet been legislated for. In addition, the 2007 Malaysian Gender Gap Index conducted by the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) revealed that women were still far behind in economic and political development despite having better educational opportunities and improved health status. Although women may have equivalent educational qualifications – enrolment of women surpasses that of men at local universities  – this does not therefore necessarily translate to decision-making positions in society both private and public.

Women in State Politics

The 12^th General Elections in 2008 resulted in an increase of women as elected representatives, both within the Federal Parliament as well as the respective State Legislative Assemblies. What have been the experiences of these women politicians in this democratisation process as well as challenges therein within the two new state governments of Selangor and Penang?

Selangor has 51 state assembly persons of which eight (15.6 percent) are women, while Penang has 40 state assembly persons of which three (7.5 percent) are women. Each state has 10 Executive Committee (Exco) members who are basically the state cabinet representing various portfolios. They make executive decisions at the state level. Selangor has a woman Exco in charge of Welfare, Women’s Affairs, Technology and Innovation while the counterpart in Penang is the Exco portfolio of Youth and Sports, Women, Family and Community Development. There are 12 local councils in Selangor with a total of more than 288 councillors out of which about 10 per cent are women, while in Penang there are two local councils with eight women (16.6 per cent) out of a total of 48 councillors.

Table 1: Women’s representation in Selangor and Penang State Governments

With the coming in of more activist-oriented women in the two state legislatures, significant achievements were installed under the new state governments in both Selangor and Penang. For example, International Women’s Day was celebrated in style by both governments in 2009 and 2010. In Selangor, one of the “Merakyatkan Ekonomi Selangor” or people-based economy programmes launched in 2008 was its One Stop Crisis Centres (OSCC), which provides support for victims of violent and sexual crimes. Its second phase now includes public education on household violence, child and sexual abuse, and protection of women through infrastructure, counselling and legal aid. Women civil servants in Selangor are now entitled to 90 days maternity leave and men are given 14 days paternity leave. Women whose husbands pass away also obtain 30 days leave compared with three days emergency leave under previous policy.

The Penang government with civil society groups organised the first state-level Women’s Day Carnival in 2009. The State exco for women is currently being advised by a women’s council comprising a mix of women’s non-governmental organisations (NGOs), which is unique as it is the first time NGOs are part of the state’s decision-making process. A women’s centre and childcare centre have been set up, while various gender equality trainings have been conducted through such collaborations with women’s NGOs. A major conference on gender mainstreaming will be organised towards the end of July 2010.

Although there is no clear gender policy outlined in either state, some progress has ensued. The Selangor government sponsored a women’s leadership convention of 2000 women in community and grassroot organisations in January 2010, and there has been a soft launch of the Selangor Women’s Welfare Agenda, an action plan for women’s development and empowerment. Penang conducted a similar programme during its month-long International Women’s Day celebration. Apart from these, the Selangor Menteri Besar announced its target of at least 30 percent women in decision-making in the state administration, whilst Penang has had its first woman leading a local authority in the country.

Personal Voices

In an attempt to examine women’s experiences in the democratisation process, Cecilia Ng (co-author of this piece) conducted primary qualitative research of elected women representatives in Selangor and Penang through the use of semi-structured interviews. More specifically, the objective of the study included understanding their desires, challenges and obstacles faced as women especially in the areas of gender equality. These states were deliberately chosen as these were the places where civil society actors including women activists won at state and parliamentary elections, or appointed as local councillors through application or under recommendation by civil society or political parties.

Most of those interviewed said they had entered the political arena in order to contribute to the country and do the right thing to that end. However, major obstacles stood in their way to accomplish these goals, primary of which were in relation to the unfriendly Federal-state relationship. For example, where the relevant ministries previously provided financial and logistical support to state programmes, those resources were no longer readily available. Fiscal federalism therefore has an impact on the efficacy of state programmes being rolled out – including those targeted at women’s communities and school children. Some councillors, however, felt there were administrative improvements such as open tenders, public consultation and revamping of procedures, which helped in their ability to get their jobs done.

One barrier consistently faced by especially the younger women representatives was the condescending view of others with respect to their age and gender. Women felt like they had to fight harder to prove their significance and worth in a male dominated governance structure. One woman councillor experienced strong resistance regarding women’s representation “as they think it’s funny that there is a women’s agenda”. Although in general most did not feel they were directly discriminated against, it was obvious that there lies a need for holistic gender-streaming into all policies and programmes initiated by the state and local governments. (To read this study’s findings in detail, please visit http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/docs/wps/wps10_136.pdf)

Other studies have shown evidence that a high number of women in public office leads to increased gains for women in the areas of employment and access to social services and benefits, to name a few. Interestingly, a United Nations Fund for Women (UNIFEM) report shows that women in government and low levels of corruption are linked with liberal democracy, lending weight to the hypothesis that having more women in government would perhaps increase transparency.

Whilst both PR state governments in Selangor and Penang have made significant strides in advancing gender equality, more could be done by having a clear gender policy and action plan for each. However, these efforts would come to nought if the BN government continues to stultify state programmes to gain political mileage. For example, the national efforts are commendable, such as the commitment – as outlined in the 10^th Malaysia Plan – by the Government to incorporate principles on combating gender discrimination outlined by the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), Beijing Platform for Action, Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and National Women Policy 2009. If the Federal government and its corresponding Women’s Ministry were therefore serious about women’s empowerment as they claim to be, then surely co-ordinated efforts between Federal and State governments on women’s issues is the way forward. Till then, these PR state governments will continue to be forced to independently craft its policies and implement them in ways they consider best for women in Selangor and Penang.

BFM Radio interviewed me earlier in the week (it was aired on Monday 7.30am, which I unfortunately missed). The podcast is available here. I spoke about our plans to table the enactment, as well as what the draft roughly contains.

One of the issues was whether or not the Official Secrets Act would interfere with our enactment. The answer (broadly speaking, since there are many technical details that one could write on) is no: Only state-agencies’ information will be made transparently available to the public. Federal agencies’ documents, classified by the Federal Government, are not relevant in this case. However, the Selangor Menteri Besar has the authority under Section 2A of the OSA to declassify certain documents, the power of which he has already exercised numerous times over the past two years (on issues like Bukit Botak etc.).

This is not the final draft yet and there will be several stages to go, like a Select Committee to be formed, public opinion gathered based on the existing document, and then second reading after taking those recommendations and suggestions into account.

I was invited to contribute a piece on the last Quarter Final match, between Paraguay and Spain. Yes, Spain won. And yes, my piece lacks football punditry (I am not a football pundit), and is bone-dry as it analyses history and policy somewhat. But here it is for your consumption.

Paraguay vs. Spain

by Tricia Yeoh

The world is flat, and so is the football field. But the international flavour of any World Cup offers other historical sub-themes that are unseen at face value. Here you have the gathering of once-upon-a-time colonisers and their former colonies, put together in the spirit of apparent sporting unity and brotherhood. Never mind that their forefathers once had you under their thumb for centuries, putting you in a position of subordination. No, the World Cup erases all national memory. Come to the pitch and think about the game. Nothing else matters.

Or does it?

This psychological love-hate relationship of coloniser-colony is something Malaysians have equally struggled with. The British left us with infrastructure, schools, language, and a legal and constitutional framework of governance, which were positive contributions. But they also initiated a divide-and-rule system, conveniently classifying our wide variety of ethnicities into categories of ‘race’, which we have inherited today, causing us to think of Malaysians as largely homogeneous definitions of “Malay, Chinese, Indian”. We have not been able to rise above this particular negative effect the British left behind. In fact, this tragedy and its political consequences may be the singular cause for all other problems faced, including Malaysia’s inability to shine in international football.

This quarter-finals pitted Spain against its former colony, Paraguay. Although Paraguay achieved its independence relatively early compared to other Spanish conquests in South America, almost 300 years of authoritarian Spanish rule had a detrimental effect on their people, in terms of poverty, lack of access to education and undemocratic practices. Paraguay would thereafter succumb to dictatorship and civil unrest, leading it to a struggling economy which still exists today, with about 60% of its people living in poverty.

But their fighting spirit at Ellis Park tonight bore no resemblance to these conditions. Although the first half ended with no goals on either side, Paraguay showed its brute confidence and bravado in pushing forward, never giving up despite their disadvantaged position. They were, after all, up against the team that topped the bookmakers’ odds in winning the World Cup (that is, before Spain’s first game).

The Guatemalan referee then upped the drama on the game in the second half by calling for penalty kicks for both teams within several minutes of the other. First for Paraguay, which was painfully missed by Cardozo, then for Spain, where Alonso’s goal was disallowed and its repeat saved by the Paraguayan goalie. Spain eventually emerged the victor when the popular David Villa rescued the pole-bouncing ball seven minutes before full time. It was a brilliant manoeuvre by the Spanish. The winner takes it all, but Spain’s otherwise sloppy finishes will have to be polished up before meeting the technically concise Germans in the semi-finals.

The Paraguayans were the heroes of the day, still, to me. It was the furthest they had ever come to in the World Cup, only qualifying up to the round of 16 in 2002. They fought with all their might, despite the odds against them – Spain reached the semi-finals once in 1950. This display reminded me of how possible it is for a nation under subjugation to rise above and beyond what is given to them. They could, for example, have accepted their fate as the inferior team, and worse, unnoticed as a global economic player.

But the ball, as they say, is round. And this the Paraguayan team understood fully. History may not have been kind or fair to them, but when the chance arose for the grabbing, they took this as an equal opportunity to perform excellently. When life gives you lemons, don’t sulk. Instead, make lemonade. And sell it.

The same can hardly be said of a Malaysia that continues to be weighed down by its colonial and post-colonial past, and its annoyingly mindless bickering on ethnicity and rights attached to it. Histories are important insofar as they teach us valuable lessons. But once accepted, it is more imperative that we rise above the past and reach for the stars. Paraguay showed this to us today. When will Malaysia show this to the world?

But it’s alright. You guys can go ahead and centralise solid waste management. People may end up paying higher fees if the one private company you choose eventually has to hire other sub-contractors, creating greater layers and in effect making people pay more. You’re probably going to get people to be more dissatisfied.

But hey, not everyone on our side understands Federalism too. There is an interesting post by a friend entitled “Khalid Ibrahim and his enemies” here. His two points raised are interesting, which are below, followed by my thoughts on his points.

1. The practice of separating party and state is indicative of a healthy democracy.

When I was doing research for the Integrity Index, one of the key indicators of a healthy integrity score is exactly this: the separation between party and state. Maybe I am being too idealistic. Am I? In our context, there are already those from the party who are nominated in positions representing an interest in the state government and given a decision-making role.

The culture, however, is for the state to provide other recognition to the party. If it is finances, I think the answer is pretty clear: there ought to be separation. If it is nominated positions in state GLCs: this should be done only if the people are professionals, competent and possess the necessary skill sets required. Even so, preference shouldn’t be given purely on the basis of one’s party affiliation, should it? It should be based on whether the person is able to deliver. If the persons are excellent and able and happen to be affiliated to a party, then fine, by all means. The key determinant of being selected into a position is the ability to deliver and make wise, informed decisions.

2.  Parliamentarians and state assemblymen have separate and distinct functions.

In our country, we also have to accept the reality that people are not educated on the varying roles of MPs, State assemblypersons and local councillors. Whenever there is a problem of longkang tersumbat or botched-up roads, people will turn to whichever representative they can get access to. So, because MPs get called on to solve state-related problems, they therefore feel they have a stake in the governing of the State. This is an unfortunate reality. MPs should actually be focusing their attention on national-level affairs, the drafting and debating and passing of Bills into Acts.

Having said that, the principle of federalism also calls for there to be a separation of jurisdictions. So ultimately, it should legitimately fall on State Assemblymen to make the call for matters relating to the state. But there should always be the culture of openness, consultation, participative discussion, inclusiveness of all who have concerns and recommendations. MPs have access to people because of the multitude of people they meet. They too are the eyes and ears, and have valid perspectives that are valuable to the state administration. So, i) State Assemblymen have a legitimate State function; and ii) There must be room for MPs to express their valid views.

Having weighed all the concerns, let us remind ourselves the reason we are fighting this fight. Let’s go beyond the farcical sandiwara, the games, the lobs made between different sides whether internally or externally. What are the principles upon which we stand?

There are lots of problems and issues that we must continue to iron out. And this is true. So much to change. So much work to do. In the meantime, this is a painful but necessary process of educating ourselves on how to “do” democracy. Living so many years under one government, we have to be re-educated. Mistakes will be made. But we must do this together. Call it cliched, but a rope with many cords is much stronger than a rope of only one.

But on this count, on the count of relying on state for the interest of anything non-state, let us be alert. And err on the side of caution, because without caution, we run the risk of sliding down the slippery slope… which would then bring us to the pits of UMNO. And who wants that, really?

The Nut Graph was kind enough to interview me for their section on “Found in Malaysia“, where they interview public personalities about their paths and histories. (I thought, hmm, am I one?) Anyways, here is the interview. Enjoy!

Precisely Malaysian

Posted on 24 June 2010 By Ding Jo-Ann.

(All pics courtesy of Tricia Yeoh)

TRICIA Yeoh is not one to shy away from a challenge. Despite being warned that joining the state government would not be smooth sailing, the 28-year-old took on the job of research officer to Selangor’s Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim in January 2009.

Yeoh has been at the forefront of public policy discourse since completing her Masters and joining Asli’s Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS) in 2006 as a research analyst. She has become a familiar face at public forums, often speaking about the need for national unity, good governance and better implementation of democratic principles. Yeoh was appointed CPPS director in 2008, filling the shoes of former director Dr Lim Teck Ghee, who resigned in 2006 in protest over a corporate equity ownership report. She remains on CPPS’s advisory panel.

Yeoh says despite the challenges in her current job, she has learnt a lot about how government works from the inside. “Having written and analysed policy issues from the outside for a while, taking up the job with the Selangor government allowed me an opportunity to put those ideas into action. It gives me a chance to be part of demonstrating an alternative to running the country, that good governance is possible,” Yeoh says in an 8 June 2010 interview at her office in Shah Alam.

TNG: Where were you born and where did you grow up?

Tricia Yeoh: I was born in Singapore in 1982. I grew up in different parts of Petaling Jaya – SS2, Taman Megah. I still live in Petaling Jaya now, so I guess I’m very much a Selangor citizen. I went to primary school in Sekolah Rendah Taman Megah and then to Sri Aman Girls’ School in secondary school.

With her parents

What are some of your strongest memories of the place where you grew up?

I remember the neighbourhood playground in Taman Megah well. It’s where all of us who lived nearby would come together, even those from different schools. We had a lot of social activities there – playing with candles and lanterns during the mooncake festival, for example. There were really huge trees with big roots, so whenever it rained, we would splash around in the puddles formed by the roots.

Everything centred around the neighbourhood – there was an ethos of sharing, knowing each other well. There were many different races … it was very communitarian. Every evening, we would congregate. We would play on the streets, play badminton, go cycling, play basketball, five stones or getah. I don’t know whether children do these sorts of things nowadays.

I think it’s important to create such public spaces. At the end of the day, neighbourhoods and communities are where social interaction takes place. Where people draw their perceptions about different races and religions. If friendship and interaction doesn’t start at a young age, then once you grow up into teenage and adulthood, certain impressions would already be formed.

Can you trace your ancestry?

My maternal great-great-grandfather came to Malaya from Swatow in China to work as a coolie at a godown, carrying gunny sacks of rice. He put his son, my great-grandfather, into a Peranakan home to work as a servant.

NS Buck

My great-grandfather, Ng Seo Buck, or NS Buck as he preferred, was very bright; he picked up languages and cultures easily. He learnt Malay in the Peranakan family and English in school, and in fact spoke English with a clipped British accent. He was so particular about speaking good English that whenever his grandchildren wrote letters to him, instead of replying, he would return their letters with grammar and spelling errors marked in red.

He eventually became a teacher and [school head] at Kajang High School, and was temporary [school head] at Victoria Institution at one time. He also learnt Japanese and worked as an interpreter when the Japanese came.

On my mum’s side, my great-grandmother and her parents came from Java to Singapore, bringing with them a lot of Javanese kebaya and beaded shoes. They integrated with the Peranakan in Singapore as they had similar languages and culture. The maternal influence is strong in Peranakan familes. Our family is Peranakan due to my great-grandmother’s influence. We have never spoken Chinese as a family, and we’ve always worn kebaya. Even for Chinese New Year and Christmas, we eat nasi lemak and Peranakan food like sayur lodeh.

On my dad’s side, they also came from China and they landed in Perak. They were involved with brick making and tin mining. My paternal grandfather was a police officer and became the Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) in Ipoh, quite rare in those days for a Chinese in public service.

Are there any stories that you hold on to from your family?

The Peranakan side of the family strikes a chord with me. Not just as a person, but also my vision for Malaysia. For a long time, I wondered why I didn’t really feel Chinese. I went through this identity crisis about why my family didn’t teach me Chinese. When I went to the UK for studies, my Chinese friends were celebrating the winter solstice festival and eating “tang yuan”. I asked, “What is that?”, and they were shocked. They asked, “How can you not know about this? Are you Chinese?” Questions like that made me think, “Oh, what am I then?”

Great-grandparents’ Peranakan wedding

I thought I had to learn Chinese culture, listen to Chinese songs, learn the language. Later, I realised I didn’t need to push myself into a mould or be ashamed of not fitting a stereotype [that others imagined of the Chinese]. My family and I have lived all these years in Malaysia, and my identity is precisely that – it’s precisely Malaysian. I speak and dress Malay more comfortably than Chinese, and again, it’s not something I should be ashamed of because that’s who I am.

That’s the beauty of it, we’re a multitude of different people. Just because you look a certain way doesn’t mean you must behave a certain way. I do celebrate Chinese New Year, but with a different flavour, a different lens. That’s how history is; culture changes with the times, or is interpreted and reinterpreted according to families and geographical location.

The same is true about how Chinese I am. I wish Chinese [Malaysians] understood that there are different types of Chinese. Sometimes, they can be as culturally ethnocentric as the other races they criticise.

How do you connect to these stories as a Malaysian?

[My ancestors have a history of being open to possibilities and challenges.] One grandmother escaped to India during the war. Her father, a doctor, gave medical treatment to local Indians. They returned to Malaya with a love for Indian movies, music and food.

My grandfather escaped to China by trekking from Hong Kong to Chungking, passing through Kunming, Shanghai and Burma and doing odd-jobs. One of my great-grandfathers was a Chinese Kapitan (head of the Chinese clan) who travelled from Fuchien, China to Labuan and then to Malaya. There’s always been this fighter spirit in my family. New cultures, new languages have never been a problem. Hopefully, I have inherited the fighter spirit, too.

I appreciate the different journeys my ancestors took to get me where I am, to get us here. It makes me more aware of how I lend my time and my life into this part of history. Especially in a Malaysia which is [struggling at a crossroads].

Tricia as a child, in red dress, with relatives

Describe the kind of Malaysia you would like for yourself and for future generations.

I feel that as children, we’re born into a country which is so rich with beautiful things. Your teachers tell you good things about the country in moral or religious classes. You have co-curricular activities with different races. This was my experience, there were no problems.

And then, children grow up, and at university or pre-university, thoughts suddenly creep in about how we’re treated unequally. And then, to be dramatic about it, the torrent of dirt just descends upon them as they become exposed to the realities of Malaysia. They realise that there are things not right with the country. And it is that moment of awakening which is the saddest part of someone’s life. Everything you’ve been taught is challenged.

I want a day where that moment of rude awakening doesn’t happen, whatever race, religion or socioeconomic background you come from. I would like to see a Malaysia where everyone can continue feeling fully accepted as 100% Malaysian based on their citizenship.

At the Selangor Government, one project my team and I worked on was to compile all of Selangor’s policies and programmes accomplished over the past two years into a booklet. This gives a complete overview of ALL the Pakatan Rakyat policies and programmes that we have been working hard on. This covers all the portfolios that the State Executive Council (Exco) is in charge of, namely, the list below: 

You can also download the files available in both Malay and English here.

1. Merakyatkan Ekonomi Selangor (People-Based Economy)
2. Economic Stimulus Package
3. Transparent and Accountable Government
4. State Finances
5. Trade, Industry and Investment
6. Tourism
7. Islamic Affairs and Malay Customs
8. Non-Muslim Affairs
9. Local Government
10. Poverty Eradication and Caring Government
11. Environment
12. Consumer Affairs and Orang Asli
13. Land
14. Gender and Women’s Issues
15. Youth Issues
16. Entrepreneurial Development
17. Science, Technology and Innovation
18. Holistic Development
19. Education
20. Culture
21. Agriculture
22. Plantation Workers
23. Housing
24. New Villages and Illegal Factories
25. Healthcare

As you can see, there has been quite a bit of work done to deliver upon all the various portfolios. Sometimes it is just that the Selangor State Government has lacked the communication tools necessary to ensure these policies and programmes’ information is filtered to the ground, to people like you and me! Us netizens deserve a lot of info and trust me, we are working hard at this. 

Again, you can download it from my makeshift google site here.

Share the document far and wide if you can!

Safety In The Cities

A horrific incident occurred in April in Shah Alam, Selangor, that will sadly be merely an additional statistic in the growing list of police shootings recorded in recent times.

Fifteen-year-old Aminulrasyid Amzah was shot to death by police manning a roadblock. He was driving without a licence at 2am and, to avoid the police check, he reportedly backed into several policemen instead. He was shot dead whilst a passenger in the car managed to escape. The death of this teenager sent shockwaves throughout the country.

Whilst it is true that the public has been clamouring for greater police surveillance to improve safety and security in the cities, the “trigger-happy” behaviour by our men in blue is not helping to combat crime. In fact, it hurts further public confidence in our law enforcers.

In a survey conducted by the Merdeka Center for Opinion Research released in January 2010, “crime and public safety” was listed as one of the top five concerns in Peninsular Malaysia. In November 2009, the Home Ministry’s website opinion polls showed that 97 per cent or 9,729 out of 10,060 respondents felt unsafe because of the high crime rate, and 95 per cent felt that their safety was not guaranteed. This has been a consistent concern, corresponding to the alarming rise in crime figures over the last 10 years. For example, violent crime increased by 8.7 per cent in the first five months of 2007 compared with the same period the previous year. Violent crime increased by 85 per cent between 2003 and 2006. Rape cases increased by 95 per cent in 2009. Selangor records the highest crime rates for both petty and violent crimes.

There is also a worrying increase in house burglaries in 2009, a year that recorded a relative jump of such crimes taking place in broad daylight compared to night-time.

The “Crime Index”, a measure kept by the Royal Malaysian Police, rose by 45 per cent between 2003 and 2007 from 156,315 to 224,298 cases. (Note: It was not possible to obtain more recent crime index figures). Crimes that are reported with sufficient regularity and given sufficient significance are considered meaningful to the index. An occurrence is considered a crime when it is reported either by the victim or a witness, or on the initiative of the police upon discovery of a criminal activity. The index describes two categories of crime, namely violent and property crime, with snatch thefts being considered a separate and unique category due to its frequency. Although this index is the only possible means of measuring crime in the country, the police also recognise “dark figures”, which is the gap between reported and unreported crime.

The government’s efforts

Given our dire situation, how should policies be shaped to ensure safety in our cities?

In response to the very real concerns its population has over the issue of safety, the government has adopted crime reduction as one of its National Key Result Areas (NKRAs). This is divided into three parts: street crimes, improving public perception of voluntary organisations such as Rela (the People’s Voluntary Corps) and upgrading the performance of enforcement agencies. Street crimes are a targeted area as they made up 17 per cent of the 2008 crime index. Kuala Lumpur, Selangor, Penang and Johor recorded 72 per cent of overall street crimes that year. The government’s target is to reduce street crime by 20 per cent and lower the Crime Index by 5 per cent by the end of 2010. According to latest statistics released by the government, street crime rate has fallen by 7.6 per cent in the fourth quarter of 2009 and Kuala Lumpur’s crime rate has dropped by 30 per cent in the first two months of 2010.

One of the initiatives for crime deterrence taken by the Government Transformation Programme (GTP) is to increase the number of police at 50 hotspots, backed by 3,000 trained Civil Defence and Rela personnel and 500 closed-circuit cameras in those areas. The Home Ministry has a “nerve centre” operations room that is streamed with data and visuals of crime hotspots which are linked to police stations nationwide. The team has also attempted to reach out to the public, with an NKRA crime lab Facebook page, and intends to work with local councils in Kuala Lumpur, Selangor, Penang and Johor, with auxiliary policemen roped in.

The role of state governments

In the New Economic Model, part one of which was recently unveiled by the government, “decentralisation” is prominently featured throughout, stating the need to change the archaic policy of centralised decision-making and to ensure that state governments and local authorities are given more say. This means that every policy should be closely discussed and implemented with state and local governments, regardless of political leanings.

One way is to double-check crime figures between authorities, especially when there is conflicting data. For instance, in January 2010, the police announced that Penang’s street crime rate had dropped “dramatically” just before New Year’s Eve, with only 30 reported crime cases compared to the daily average of 55. However, street crimes, which make up 40 per cent of all crime in Penang, increased by 27 per cent in 2009. All in all, 3,786 crimes were recorded that year compared to 3,523 cases in 2008. Crimes such as motorcycle thefts, snatch thefts, robbery and illegal racing contributed to this increase. Certain areas in Selangor, like Ara Damansara, have apparently seen its crime rate drop by 30 per cent after more CCTVs were installed. An updated statistic on overall crime in 2010 has not yet been released.

Since the federal government desires to devolve powers to state and local governments, one would think it necessary for state governments to have greater input in both the planning and implementation stages of the NKRA on crime reduction. Since crime is local, it is the local authorities that would be most familiar with the issues involved within their jurisdiction.

However, the central government seems reluctant to do so in reality. For example, the Petaling Jaya City Council (Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya, or MBPJ) applied recently to the Royal Malaysia Police for approval to set up an Auxiliary Police Force in the Petaling Jaya area. This was turned down by the Inspector-General of Police, who cited “overlapping responsibilities” as the reason. Similarly, the Penang government wrote to police headquarters to request for auxiliary police for the City Council (MPPP) in George Town but was rejected without any reason being given. The Seberang Perai Municipal Council (Majlis Perbandaran Seberang Perai, or MPSP) already has a police-help unit tied to its municipal court.

Despite the rejection, the MPPJ took it upon itself to independently announce the setting up of the auxiliary police unit under the enforcement department. After all, Petaling Jaya has the highest crime rate in Selangor (together with Klang), and the council had already approved RM4.29mil from its 2010 budget for the unit, covering emolument, services equipment, assets and other expenses. The application is being resubmitted, the outcome of which is expected soon.

Both the Penang and Selangor state governments do not seem to feature prominently in both the planning and implementation of measures to combat crime. Their powers they possess are limited to the approval of additional CCTVs at selected hotspots. The Selangor administration allocated a total of RM3mil in its 2010 budget for the installation of CCTVs in suitable locations within each district in the state.

The right solutions?

The direction taken by the government to solve security woes in Malaysia seems to be simply to increase surveillance via additional personnel and CCTVs, although there has been no research to confirm that the latter can sufficiently reduce overall crime rates. Whilst these are certainly welcome moves, and the public looks forward to positive reports of crime reduction, the reality is that people are still very much living in fear. The number of gated communities has rapidly increased in Selangor and Penang. Foreign expatriate communities cite safety as a primary concern for their families. This affects decisions by foreign experts on whether or not to move to Malaysia, and a bad reputation on safety certainly affects foreign direct investments.

Image problems that enforcement agencies suffer do not help. Stories about Rela members extorting foreign migrant workers and refugee communities continue to circulate (see this issue’s cover story). Rela’s membership stands at 682,749 today and its role will continue to expand, given the NKRA’s goals for the year. This in itself is an area of concern, for Rela members require little qualification, receive inadequate training, yet are allowed to carry firearms and are entrusted with the heavy task of assisting the police. The reputation of the police also suffers as a result of deaths in custody cases. In 2008, 82 persons were killed while being apprehended by the police; 50 died in 2009, and the Selangor police have been charged with acts of criminal intimidation.

Sadly, the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) proposed by the highly reputed members of the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysia Police was rejected by the government. In its place, a Special Complaints Commission was formed, which was later changed by Parliament in 2009 to the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission.

The vision we all — both state and federal governments — have of Malaysia is one in which our cities are safe and relatively free from danger. Today, women clutch their handbags in fear, parents are anxious about their children’s safety, and families fork out hard-earned cash to pay for extra private security guards and gated communities.

Surely, it is the role of government — any government — to ensure that its citizens live in a safe environment. It is equally justified to expect that law enforcement agents keep their cool and are not overzealous in stopping any of us driving home without a licence.

In the final analysis, citizens must simply feel safe, and not fearful, in the presence of the very policemen employed for their benefit, and paid for by their taxes.

* This article is taken from the June issue of “Penang Economic Monthly”, published by the Socio-economic and Environmental Institute (SERI), Penang, now out at all good bookshops and newsagents.