Why are Malaysians still Paying for Mahathir’s Failed Policies and Where Do We Go From Here?

Good morning. Welcome back to the Gutshot podcast. I'm Shamsul and uh Sam here. So we have a extremely um special episode with our returning and popular guest Seawi U and we have a we have a topic that I think will interest both our domestic and our international audience. uh it is uh we want to talk about uh projects and initiatives that has been carried out in Malaysia which is a developing country since I think some of these projects since the 70s and the 80s and lesson learned from all these policies and how actually even uh with these policies after 30 40 50 years

uh we have seen The results of these policies and some of them if for our international audience it will be very reminiscent to what we are seeing into policies that are being set up uh today under the moniker of uh diversity uh uh inclusion and equity DEI so to speak and also u in terms of government involve involvement in businesses and how it works or it does not work. So let's start with that say right I think we were looking at it and talking about um the error of our prime minister Mahade which is the fourth prime minister in Malaysia.

Fourth and seventh. Yeah. He was reelected at the age of 90 plus. Return of the Jedi. I'm not sure whether that's Return of the Jedi or Return of the Sith. So anyway, regardless, um the Jedi um the the the the PR first prime ministership lasted for more than 20 years, I think.

22 years. So I think uh to start off this conversation, let's uh let let's let's have you start off with uh with uh uh with an example of what we are going to touch on um in this subject matter.

Thank you Samul. Good morning. Yeah, it's high time we uh we spoke about this. Uh I think uh there's never been a serious uh uh what do you call this uh analysis post analysis or postmortem

or an autopsy of the new economic policy which has been around as you mentioned which has been around for now over 50 years. the new econom if you don't mind. I mean, I just uh tell people uh that are not familiar with uh Malaysian policy. the new economic policy uh or the NEP for short is basically Malaysia's version of DEI which uh we started off because we felt that the uh at that particular time uh the PE the the the Malay let's call it depending on how you look at it they were probably a marginal majority or a marginal minority depending on whether we count Singapore

into the whole equation or not. But uh they were supposed to be left behind from economic terms and that was how uh the government decided to have uh this group of people by identity uh as Malays and indigenous people to be lifted up into the uh economic strata. Shall I does that about does that about encompass the

description? It uh the underlying uh idea is affirmative action right which uh I agree and I support. I think uh you you need to support you need to help uh people uh who are in need. Just like in any family if you have kids some kids are much you know they're capable than other kids. So you tend to focus a bit more attention on those kids who need more help. That's affirmative action in a nutshell. So affirmative action, it's a good thing. But uh in Malaysia unfortunately uh the affirmative action was uh mixed up with political gimmickry gimmick uh and along the way the gimmick the political

gimmickry overtook the affirmative uh action uh intentions and it became very politicized and ultimately it became almost purely political patronage. That means rewarding political uh associates and allies and things like that which is not illegal in Malaysia because in Malaysia we do not have political funding laws. We do not have laws that regulate political contributions and uh uh contributions for during elections and things like that. So it's not illegal. So uh unfortunately when it's not properly regulated uh it has been uh railroaded and hijacked. So let me let me uh uh just my

brief understanding of what has been going on the last 50 years. Well Dr. Mahade was prime minister for 22 years just by his tenure of such a long tenure. Of course he carried some say he carried the burden on his shoulders. Uh some will say he carry the blame so many things but because of the long tenure of course he was the man in charge the boss huh

the buck stops the buck stops there with him so he he has to bear a lot of the responsibility but uh to me uh the affirmative action became a gimmick now rule number one rule number one uh is that whenever you implement any economic policy it is good if if you can find the policies there's an underlying basis written in some economics textbook you know it's it's found in the books you can go to a library or you can get someone to do some research academic research about this policies and economic ideas you wish to implement but uh there are no there are no economic

textbooks this is purely it was as I said it became gimmickry uh it became very political based more on political emotions and political expediency rather than any solid uh uh underlying economic uh theory, you know. So the problem is when you uh call it an economic policy and indeed it affected the economy of the entire country and then you go ahead and implement it and then like in any other policy there will be the pluses, the minuses, things will go wrong, you know, things like that. So when things started going wrong or there were mistakes made, you could not go back to

the library and open a book and read uh what exactly or why something has gone wrong and how can we fix it because there is no reference point because as I said it is not based on any economic theories in any economics textbooks. So what so how did it evolve then? Basically it was pushed by political factors. If we if you recall in 1969 there was an election in the country

and the election results were not very good for the ruling government at that time or for Malay political power at that time because the the vote swung against the government. There was a possibility of the government was being permanently weakened political power. So there was a knee-jerk reaction and of course we had some uh some troubles on the streets at that time. So there was a knee-jerk reaction to rectify to rectify the situation and the new economic policy was crafted up I think in a bit of a hurry. So again it was to meet a political expediency that's that's how

it started. Sometimes I wonder whether you know what we call today such uh um such political disturbances whether those are what you know today we call red flag you know or so but let's leave it at that I'm just I'm I'm I'm diverging so continue please

so okay let's fast forward a little bit because we have only about over an hour to discuss so Dr. Mahade embarked on this major uh change the map of the earth kind of policies which he thought would fix a lot of things in the country especially to bring up the economy of the Malays and the Bumiutras which you mentioned just now.

Mhm. So he thought that one of the ways to expedite the transformation of the Malays to create what what was called a BCIC the Bumiutra commercial and industrial uh community was to embark on largecale uh governmentowned or government initiated uh industrial projects you know uh which he thought would help to level the playing field and make the bumutras and and the Malays uh comparative and at the same level as uh others in the country. So he embarked on this uh projects you know um industries and so

did we institutionalize that in law? No, we just he just allocated the funds for it and uh and uh got them started. But these things had major impacts. Major impacts. uh like just now I mentioned rule number one they made economic policies without any underlying theory or basis in in in the textbooks there's no theory behind it there was more political gimmickry the other thing that uh uh went wrong is that the use of taxpayers funds of course if the government wants to do anything it it has to use taxpayers funds but here you have a situation where the government

started using taxpayers money to set up industries uh uh to set up industries under the affirmative action, the new economic policy and uh these industries uh ultimately many of them they were kicked off using government funds. More often than not they would provide services or products which were also where the consumer was also the the the government. The government bought back products and services especially uh in services. The government was the customer and uh more often than not um or you know frequently some of these industries and businesses set up by the government ran into

financial difficulty and again they were bailed out using taxpayers funds. So we have three rounds of taxpayers funds here. You have the initial seed capital the startup using taxpayers money. uh often the services are sold back to the government taxpayers money and when they get into financial difficulties they are bailed out again using taxpayers money there's three rounds of taxpayers uh funds

can I add to that a bit as well I think part the other part as well that they become uh somewhat monopolistic and um or or at least uh uh what you call an oligarchy of uh an few the few where actually these businesses had no competition or li being limited uh in terms of competition and therefore they are allowed to actually also be non not as uh vigorously comp comparative and therefore they can lose money for all they care

and then they get bailed out. Exactly. They um uh then the the other point is that over the years uh the presence of GLC's government linked corporations basically government funded enterprise has uh they occupy substantial space in many sectors in the economy.

Yeah. uh like as you mentioned in banking it's igopoly and the government owned banks or government uh GLC owned banks are big players in the banking sector. So so this has created another issue another problem which many people don't see. Oh, it's a big problem. I think

to me it's a problem because what what it has done you see the government collects taxes from taxpayers and uh corporate taxpayers I think are the largest contributors of tax revenue to the government. So the government collects tax revenue from taxpayers and then it uses part of that money to set up businesses and industries which compete against the same corporations who pay taxes to the government. So the the the taxpayers, they are the goose that lays the golden egg. Especially corporations. Corporations are big taxpayers. They are the they are the goose that lays the golden egg. You take

some of those golden eggs and you set up businesses and industries to compete against your taxpayers. So in other words, you're putting your own taxpayers out of business. M so over the years which you mentioned just now 30 40 50 years that's a lot of uh businesses genuine businesses who have been facing um I would say undue competition from governmentowned businesses government licensed igopies monopolies which you mentioned by using their own tax tax contributions so over the years uh I'm sure There were businessmen, entrepreneurs, businesses that did not

happen. There was that steel mill that did not happen. There was that bank that has not happened. The new industry that has not happened because some businessmen, some entrepreneurs, some company or corporation realize that I can't compete with the big boys, government funded GLC's who are already in this industry. So I can't compete with them. So over the years the the the economy has not grown as much as it should have if there was no taxpayers money siphoned out. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. Taxpayers money uh channeled by the government to compete against genuine taxpayers in business. So you

put your own taxpayers out of business. Well, I think New York City is about to find out out from uh they are good old new uh depend on how you how who you talk to socialist or come mayor you know uh Mr. Mam Dani uh when he talks about setting up uh shops uh by the government and uh public transport by the government against uh regular uh regular taxpaying businesses and taxing people more. So we'll find that out from from that side. But we've learned our lesson. Continue please my friend.

This is this is interesting. There are some there are some businesses some industries infrastructure which is extremely difficult for private sector initiative. For example, you rarely find a private sector private company who will be willing to build a hydroelectric dam you know it's just too much money and the risks are very high the returns are extremely low. An airport generates I think when I was a banker it was less about 3% 2% return a year even if if when they became profitable that's very very low returns not the kind of returns I can attract private investors private investors want

returns rule of thumb is if the fixed deposit fixed deposit in your country pays x% if you're a if you're a businessman with any kind of business equipment you should be able to do at least you know three times better than fixed deposit otherwise let's all put money in the in the bankit don't work.

If you can do three four times better, you then you start a business. Uh this is where infrastructure projects their returns about the fixed deposit. It's very low. So uh uh inevitably the government has to pioneer the construction of roads, dams, bridges, highways, power stations. Uh power stations now they're being privatized. So there are certain sectors of the economy where you cannot expect private sector to lead the way. government may have to step in, but you have to do it uh in a way that uh does not uh create uh giants uh cash cash uh not blood sucking cash sucking giants cash sucking

squids, endless bottomless pits, you know, where you have to throw in cash to keep the projects going. Sounds like a vampire because uh what happens is what happens is um always there's only so much resources in an economy. The amount of cash that you have right now in your wallet, the amount of cash that I have in my wallet, the amount of cash that we have in the bank, all these are the resources of our economy of our country.

Each individual's resources totals up to become the the resource of the entire economy. So it's how you allocate these resources such that they generate a fair return on the money. So if you take excessively from from the taxpayer and you invest it in projects and things that you do which does not generate that return or you overpaid for it then uh as a whole that economy has lost uh returns. It's like let me just go back to the the famous national one example

national car project all right the national car project Dr. Mahade set up the national car project. So it it was tax funded. It took completely billions of our ringies. Okay. Right. So he started producing the national car which was a Japanese car rebadged. Okay. Fine. Then to protect this national car uh we impose

what 140% tariffs at least tariffs on other imported cars. Tariffs and excise duties. They had different names for it. tariffs, import duties, excess duties, different names, but it all means the same thing. It's a tax.

So, as a result of which uh the price of imported cars went up to the sky. Yeah. Which enabled the locally manufactured national car to compete otherwise they couldn't compete. So, we didn't know exactly what would have been the real market price of those national cars if they had not been such high tariff protection. It could have been cheaper. So meaning that the Malaysian consumer was being short changed because we were buying cars way above the market price.

We basically subsidized the manufact the the local manufacturer. Money went out of our pocket. Okay. Yes sir. It's like you knowice even the even the even the the national car uh it was wor at a certain it was cheap compared to imported cars because because of the tariffs. Because the tariffs you raise the prices of the imported cars,

but could the the national car have been ch sold at a much cheaper price if it had the volumes the you know the uh uh the sufficient volume to lower it unit cost and things like that.

Uh we do not know but I suspect the we paid a much higher price even for the national car and we certainly paid double triple the market price for imported cars. I think it's practically triple. If I was to take my experience of buying a car in Australia, even with the exchange rate, I found that actually I was paying almost three times more in Malaysia for the same car,

relatively same car, but actually of higher standard y in Australia. Y compared to Malaysia with a lower exchange rate in Malaysia. I have always uh I'm a fan of Mercedes

and Mercedes was has always sold at that time. I think it has improved slightly now but they used to go for as much as three four times the world market price here. So when you buy one Mercedes in Malaysia, it's like buying three Mercedes or four Mercedes in California or Australia or someplace else,

which is nuts. Which was nuts. And uh that policy is still in place because the all the import barriers, the tariffs on import and the non-tariff barriers. Let's not forget about the APS, correct?

Which is in order for you to import a car, you have to have an approved permit license which are only allocated to certain individuals or companies. These barriers and all, they're still there. But what happened was you know the the cartoon or the the we have seen in in uh on TV or the movies American cartoon there's a fat guy he's smoking a fat cigar

and he's lighting his cigar with a $10 bill. Uhhuh. Uh-huh. The rich guy, you know, he's burning money. He can afford to burn money. He lights up a cigar with a $10 $10 US bill. That is what we were doing.

We could have paid uh X and got a car, a fairly decent car, but imported car, but we were paying uh double XX or triple X for the same car as the world market prices. So, we were lighting our cigars with $10 bills. We had money to burn because uh a same person as us who lives in another country, he's just like us. He's got two hands and two legs. He went to school. He went to college. Went to university. He's got a job. He's got a family. He gets up at 9:00 in the morning, works until 5:00 in the evening, earns an income, and he goes home. And a certain portion of

his income goes towards buying a vehicle, a car. Car is absolute necessity, I think, anywhere in the world except Singapore, I think. But, uh, the same guy in Malaysia paid two times and three times the amount as the other person just to own a car. So he his resources as I said just now the amount of money cash you have in your pocket and my pocket is all the total economic resources of the country a substantial portion of these resources were actually being wasted

because we wanted to support this idea of a national car. So we were basically empowering let me ask you a question then we were we were basically if I may finish we were basically impoverishing our own people

to sustain this um Dr. Mah's dream of creating a national car which eventually failed. Yeah. The point that you were saying just now we the second round the third round we bailed it out. Yeah. more.

No, the first time is that we we we we funded the we funded the creation by tax our tax money of that particular industry uh which is a singular uh manufacturing in uh manufacturing owned by the government. All right. And then um we funded it again by um our additional payment of uh the protectionist tariffs uh that protected the uh the car the car and then we funded it again when it failed and it had to be bailed out.

So that's basically three levels of funding that three levels of funding and I think it was bailed out more than once. Oh yeah, obviously. And I think actually and finally we sold it. Yeah. Okay. At at at you know at a song you know and let's put it this way as well. I think you were talking about banking, right? Um there was a after the uh fin Asian financial crisis of uh what

98 2000 98 97 2000 9798 right um they thought that they we needed banks that are too big to fail right and we did a consolidation of a bunch of our banks and we end up with what like five major banks for the whole uh the anchor banks I think uh if I'm not mistaken seven or eight

I can't the numbers may have changed a bit now so we basically also lost a lot of what I would call the second tier banks and the that are closer to the customers closer to the local businesses so what you would call we practically decimated um the u the Community banks, the community banks that understand the businesses that they were funding.

Exactly. You know, exactly. I think we have lost that and actually any economy if you look at it the small and medium industries are the one that actually are powering your economy. It's not the big companies.

Nope. You know, you're right. So, we have lost that as well through this all this uh uh what do you call what was the word you used just now? this these gimmicks.

Yes, gimmicks. Okay, this one uh if I may. Sure. Um I was a banker. Uh I still consider myself a banker. So uh I was there when the consolidation of the banking industry happened. You see before the consolidation up to the 80s late '9s

we had quite a robust uh banking and financial system very robust and if you this is well um from what I have seen you know there's no exact empirical evidence but generally remember those days we had 8% growth and 9% growth that happened before the consolidation of the banking sector Yeah,

I'm not blaming it exactly on the banking on the consolidation of the banking sector. But since we consolidated the banking industry early 2000, we've had this the growth rates that we have now the fives and the you know

threes the plus finance if we get four we happy we don't have those robust growth rates which we had in the 80s and '9s when we were called a tiger economy of Asia because we were regularly doing 7% 8% we hit 9% that was when the banking sector in the country as you mentioned it was very diversified and uh we had a whole spectrum of banks in the country. Yeah. You had the commercial banks the the big boys so to speak who provide a full range of banking facilities. Then you had the smaller players called the finance companies and finance companies were dotted all over the country. You know

they were in every other town. There were local finance companies. You would only find in PA you know a couple of branches in Pinang one ino or Pinang. That's it. Localized what you call community banking. Then you had this even smaller guys uh the credit and leasing companies.

If some lady young woman entrepreneur in some small town wants to set up a hairdressers uh shop you know hairdressing business she will go to the local credit and leasing company and at that time she might get a loan of 10,000 you know 5,000 ringit is small business loans with which she will use to set up her hairdressing salon. you know those swiveling chairs and the haird dryers you might have a couple of those is enough for her to get started. This this system this was niche banking boutique banking because for example the credit and leasing companies they were

localized they were localized outfits you know very small town outfits where everybody knows everybody else. So it is basically people having faith in their own community members and the funds are also derived from the same community. So that the funds circulate inside their community and they know the risk. Is this person a good good risk business risk financial risk? If I give her the loan will she pay it back to me or they might get you know her her dad

and the rates were adjustable to what it is. they might get her daddy or her husband to to be the guarantor because the local community all knows each other. Yeah. So this was like community self-help and this were the smaller banking and financial institutions which existed in this country. So as I said you got credit and leasing companies, finance companies, you had commercial banks then you had merchant banks and things like that. So the economy function very well and you are spot on. The economy isme in any country in the world even at US it is the small medium ind industries which

are the engines of the economy and they need access to quick credit because no credit no economic growth. Now with the consolidation of the banking industry in the early 2000s we wiped out we wiped out the entire uh finance ecosystem of finance companies credit and leasing. There were over 50 commercial banks in the country. We we basically forced them into mergers and you know consolidated them and then now there are so few you know as I said less than 10

and a few people benefit out of it and then we created this huge banking igopoly now. All right. So banking in the country is now an oligopoly uh and very few of these uh big bankers uh operate throughout the country. We have very few banks now in Malaysia which has a which have branch operations throughout the entire country. Uh and and some of them have branches throughout the entire country but only in the state capitals and maybe in some of the the big the larger towns they may not have branches in in

and not just that they're not willing to take the risk today. If you are in in another state like Perak or something or somewhere else and let's say you you want a business loan sometimes uh you have to come to the to KL to the Clang Valley to Koala Lumpo to talk to HQ here to get a loan especially if it's a sizably larger business loan because the local outfit may not have the uh capacity or may not have the expertise or the the p the staff and the staffing to handle such big loans. So, can I tell you something from my own personal experience as an entrepreneur?

I know you have borrowed 10 millions of ring. Yeah. I mean, when I when I first started in the in the small business and when I first started my business, it was a small business. I you know, I started out with about 200,000 ringgit worth of capital, right?

and uh you know it was a smaller bank that actually supported me um and um and and and helped really truly help build it up because they because they took the time to understand the business. The branch manager took the time to understand the business to understand who you are to take the credit risk on you uh and and effectively nurture you. But you don't have this anymore. What I found that with the consolidation is then then they have because I think they were abuses at a higher level that actually this they purportedly wanted to have a hence uh an arms length approach

that actually u certain district level will handle the evaluation and risk assessment. So they were out of the hands of the branch managers already. They don't even know the your business. They and for a lot of time they don't even want to meet you because if they meet you they they seem to the the the letter of the law or the procedure is that then they open themselves up to to being corrupt because they know you. So you see it's it becomes u uh uh what do you call um it becomes completely uh negative to the business ecosystem altogether. Well it's also it's it's

it's not worth their time. You see when you have so few banks in the country and they the bankers are given targets KPIs. Yeah that's another point. You're right. So let's say a bank a bank cannot have thousands and thousands of credit officers. It only has a few maybe few hundreds or whatever. So let's say uh that you are a bank officer and uh two people call you. One fellow wants like a a 20 million ringit loan and the other fellow wants a 2 million ringgit loan or a 200,000 ringit loan and you only have so many working hours in a day. You're going to answer the call of the guy who

wants the the 20 million rig loan or is this 200 million the bigger loan? Yeah. Yeah. The return is bigger. The big bigger your your bonus is secured. You only have so many working hours in a day

and the borrowers cannot go to they don't have much choice because there are not many banks in the country. So this is what we have set up igopoly and we have to link this back to the political gimmickry.

Mhm. this consolidation of the banking sector there was some other thinking behind it which which is tied to politics which in our country we known it as katuan politics somebody felt that you know if the GLC's get involved in banking and the GLC's are the biggest players in banking now you know if you control the banking you get to control many things exactly

because as I mentioned in this country we have political patronage political patronage I I don't think that political patronage is uh is is is uh is uh a special feature of Malaysia. I've seen and I'm going to I I'm going to expound on this. I see political patronage even in a country like America. It is but it is done in a slightly more

but here it is it is it is taken to the extreme. Oh yeah. it is taken to the extreme because uh uh not only if you control the banks, not only can you uh assist people who can assist you, you can also take out your enemies.

Mhm. So uh to make you can bank your enemies as well. That's what I'm trying to say. You can uh to make a long story short, you know, it has become too embroiled with uh politics and who's in power banking industry. Yeah. M

so this is where the idea of business and free market open market competition and businesses deciding what is good for them all that has gone out the window

yeah we are basically everything is decided by the politicians and the political political leadership they determine how many banks there will be in the country can you imagine can you imagine a country where let's say how many shoe stores should you have in a town decided by a politician

because a shoe store selling shoes is exactly the same as a bank is a business. There is risk, there is competition, uh there is organization, there is capital involved, there is uh man, labor, you have you need staff. It's just a business. But here you have politicians deciding on policy. How many banks we should have in the country? How many the business that you are involved in? How many uh oil supply bases? Actually also I I think part of the way they do that is regulation. They pile regulation. They create regulation and this regulation is intentionally due to limit competition

and to funnel uh taxpayers fund on the dot that has become the trademark of the new economic policy or one of the trademarks over the last 50 years uh there is no competition either you remove competition from the equation or you shield the players from competition. So igopies are shielded from full market competition. Uh monopolies, we have massive government granted monopolies which have subsidies and going on and on for decades. Uh we cannot have this conversation without talking about the toll roads, the toll concessions.

I was just reading in Indonesia they had a bridge. So the these we're talking about the highways and our toll highways. In Indonesia, they also built some bridges and they had a toll toll it and I think our former minister Zed Ibrahim was there in Bali somewhere where he he went on this bridge which he says was built you know as a toll as a toll toll bridge but the toll after x amount of time the toll was uh it came to an end there's no more toll abolish because the uh the concession ended and there's no more toll. So now the the bridge is uh is is free to the people. But not in our

country. In our country we had the toll concessions. They went on for the first 20 plus years and then they got extended right and it is extended until today and I think the major toll concessions have been extended uh into late 2050s if I'm not mistaken. It is certainly beyond 2030s and going to 2050s. So uh they seem to be never ending whereas uh uh you know the the original cost of building a certain stretch of toll road they have already collected enough revenue to pay off the bank debt that was they borrowed money from the banks to build a toll road.

Those bank debts have been uh have been paid. They must be otherwise it would have been a it would be a bad debt. So they've paid off. They settled their their bank debts. But then because these companies concession operators, they had other financial requirements and commitments or they became they did other they they bought they need they needed more funds and things like that and uh there were well they they made additions and renovations to the toll roads. Maybe they've added an extra lane and this and that. But ultimately all these things led to the concessions being extended.

Uh to me now it's like quite endlessly you know but we don't have a choice because uh again these are monopolies and oligopies. There are few players and over the years more or less the same players all licensed by the government but it is a people who end up paying endlessly. There's a cost to all this which you will we will discuss later. Um so this has been basically what uh has come to be known as the new economic policy although no one refers to it now because uh let's not forget the new economic policy was the the baby of the barisa national government huh and amno

especially so now other parties do not refer to it anymore but the policies are still in place nothing has changed you know what I Wonder I mean I think if we go back to the root cause of all this is as you said I mean the new economic policy where it was it was masked in a sense of empathy and masked in a sense of affirmative action to bring up a an a group of people right uh that was felt to be underprivileged. Now, um I have a bit of a

That was your original intent which I think has been uh railroaded, gone off the rails. Well, here's the thing that I find very very very interesting in a sense that I don't know how how to put it because um um I think affirmative action has been hijacked in essence in totality right

by the politics right it's no more the original performative action it's not anymore I I think if you were to if I mean we We are about the same age. When we talk about affirmative action, I don't know the only time I remember my affirmative action that has helped me is that I was taken out from uh rural schooling. All right. and and put into better schools with better teachers that provided me with solid education that allowed me to then excel in school and exams and then allowed me to actually go and compete even for places in America without a quota system. So I and then I came back um

in 1986 which was also a period of recession and there were no jobs given out by the government if you remember that period right so you are on scholarship but there were no jobs to hand out to you for you to serve your scholarship uh period. So I had to and uh they were people who were given internship by the government at a minimal level you know just to keep up the happiness of this minority group of people right but I added up because I didn't want to take that route I took the route of actually being a salesperson more doing field engineering sales sales work half

of my time were doing sales you know at about the same amount of money and I've never worked for a a a government linked company or or whatever all this that so-called affirmative action has uh has provided. So I work for multinationals. So my question is this actually as long as I think you provide that fundamental education as affirmative action and allow opportunity for people to be uh hired based on merit I think things work out.

Okay. Well, I mean, but education, education was perhaps uh uh one of the most successful uh areas of the new economic policy at that time.

Now it is debatable and uh what you are describing education that that you benefited from education was that you were not lighting cigars with $10 bills at the time. You see, so the return on the investment was very high.

Yes. Because money was well spent. Yeah. uh if you studied in America you know then it is at at market as you said you have to qualify to get in you have to maintain uh your GPA to to graduate uh you have to pay fees same as everybody else you know is everything is at market so the return on the investment in education that you benefited from has uh multiplied but uh this the same does not apply in in projects and industries and businesses that Dr. they took the country into a

we did that actually even earlier on with education. We lowered the standard of uh education uh for university entrance in Malaysia so that so that uh a certain identity of people can come in. We lower the standard of uh graduation.

Yeah. Uh and then we lower the standard for them to actually enter the civil service and also companies. I I don't know about the lowering the standards for graduation uh is debatable but that only affected a portion of the population with the bumutras the Malays

the bulk of the country the economy was managed by the non non Malays non until today so we need to do some some uh arithmetic there but I um what you're saying is uh you Oh yes. Uh

and then when you talk when you say about this this gimmick of uh of the economic system where we set up these government link companies and we set up these oligopies and all that they all meant by a this segment of people that had this uh standards lowered.

So ultimately ultimately uh yes it is a snowballing effect. it is and the return on investment gets lower and lower. So uh let let's just go back to the banking banking example because uh I I believe it has impoverished the people uh the economy the people you know people like to talk about economy the country economy it's actually human beings

it's impoverished the human beingsh uh when they consolidated the the banking system early 2000 and we've never had those high growth rates anymore since banking consolidation we don't get 7 8% 9% it's not going to come back unless we deregulate and liberalize the banking system to what it was before. Let me give you an example. Uh in Malaysia just now we were talking that uh there are very few of these anchor banks. We have less than 10. I don't know the exact numbers. Was it seven or eight? There are very few anchor banks and they don't care about the little guys anymore cuz it's not

worth their time. It's it's it's not a crime they're committing. If you're a bank officer, as I said, you only have so many hours of working hours in a day. Between a 200 million loan and a 200,000 loan, the 200,000 guy don't don't call me.

They don't have a chance in a snow in hell. And there's so few banks in the country. So you see in Singapore today in Singapore, you have the local banks in Singapore. There are quite a few of them also. There are five big ones, but they have over 100 foreign banks who operate in Singapore. 100. And uh I didn't know that.

And those who qualify can set up they call it the full banking services. That means like if you go to Singapore uh every other MRT station there's a Bank of America. They're everywhere. Just like in San Francisco

in the US they make fun. They say that there's no you know Bank of America is like a pizza and there's one in every corner. Uh they say some other things also. But uh in Singapore there are over 100 banks. When I say banks, I mean uh uh uh se separate banking names, right? Each of these banks may have branches.

I still remember Banhini. So uh so in Singapore they have uh huge number of banks, different banks by name and each one of them may have multiple branches throughout Singapore. City Bank, Bank of America, these all foreign banks. Now in Singapore they have uh their population is about six over a million. Their working population is under 4 million about 3.7 million. And the banking sector in Singapore employs uh over 200,000 people and the banking sector in Singapore is the highest paying industry in the country. The average monthly income in the banking industry in Singapore is about almost

9,000 sing dollars a month. That's about 28 29,000 ringit Malaysian in Singapore. Malaysia with a population of 34 million uh we have those anchor banks there less than 10 anchor banks or seven or eight. We have a few other uh foreign banks. Foreign banks are limited to one branch. Uh to my knowledge that there may be Bank of China may have more than one may one or two branches but uh uh I'm sorry uh uh they're not limited to one branch. They are limited in opening branches. That's right. Very difficult. So anyway, in Malaysia with 34 million people,

we have hardly 200,000 people workforce in the banking industry. It's only about less than 200,000 in the entire banking industry. If we liberalize our banking system, deregulate, liberalize to match Singapore, to match what we had before, 34 million population, I think we can sustain, you can double up the the the banking workforce. You can go up easily half a million workforce in the banking industry, maybe more. And again just like in Singapore the banking industry uh in Malaysia now the uh the average uh income is about it's about 7,000 ringits in the banking sector because nowadays

even a a brand new graduate earns about about 3,000 ringit in the banking sector. So those with the average income is about over 7,000 ringgit. So imagine instead of having less than 200,000 people with average income of 7,000 ringgit, you have 500,000 workers in the banking sector or 600,000 or 700,000 all making the same 7,000.

So why don't they do that? I I don't know why they can't seem to understand this, you know. So we are a country with 34 million people that is underbanked. Yeah. that 22 year old girl who wants to start a hairdressing salon in some little town in Malaysia. Uh she cannot easily find uh someone to finance her 20,000 ringit today's prices or 30,000 ringit.

So they go to lone sharks. They go to lone sharks. They go to families and this and that. Bottom line is is difficult. It's difficult. I know I know a guy a person who I'm sure will be listening to this podcast. He set up an industry to make uh compost, you know, compost material and he was trying to get this loan uh from a bank. It took him years.

Yeah. To to get it processed because they were not really he was not priority for the bank. They took their time. It took him years and finally he he I think he got his loan but his business was you know crawling and he couldn't hire extra stuff he couldn't buy the extra truck he couldn't expand he couldn't get this equipment he had to wait for the financing because of course and he was he's located in a rural area where there no banks very few banks he had to go to the nearest big town talk to the banks there so his choices were limited bottom line bottom line that person who should

have grown his business four years 5 years earlier had to wait four years 5 years later so you multiply that you multiply that throughout the economy and that's why we only getting this measly 4% 5% growth

but then again that also has another impact because the uh the uh what do you the the uh the the situation has the situation has changed you know for for his business as well because four five years a uh uh in in four five years what do you call the business condition change you know and that's one of the things that we don't take into consideration you know you want to go when you go into business you uh timing is important timing is everything you And that's another part part of it that actually uh effectiveness of giving out loans, effectiveness of being able to

invest uh at the right time at the right place is important. So we lose all that as well. We we we have lost so much. Yeah, we have lost so much and our uh politicians cannot seem to be able to connect the dots.

Do you think they don't care? I think they don't understand what's going on. But even if they do, I think the perks, the perks of being in charge, for example, banking, it's government control. It's it's a GLC oligopoly. I think the perks and the macho of being in charge of so much wealth is just too enticing. It's too and and burning the ring on the on the cigar.

They just salivate. They're just drooling at the amount of power that you have. Imagine some something as huge as uh uh the largest bank in the country that I used to work for them. They are huge. They are single borrowers limit is in the billions of ringit and ultimately is answerable to the political masters. So the political masters have tremendous amount of uh of financial muscle in our country in our economy of 34 million people. Would you want to give up that kind of uh that kind of power? You see, this is the question I I want to ask you. You were you were a businessman.

You were a corporate businessman. Did you ever get a loan from Labwan? No. Do you know what Labwan is? I know this lab uh the the it's supposed to be set up

so uh as a offshore. Do you know any of your friends, Malaysians, Malays Bumutra businessmen who have benefited from Lavan? Did they take out any kind of financing or funding?

To be honest, I've never heard of one. Okay. I mean I may be and I mean it may be uh I'm not saying in the affirmative that they are none but for me personally who has actually built from a mediumscale business to even big scale business I've I've never done that. Um in fact my biggest uh funding at the at a point uh when we corporatized the company and we are buying hundreds of million worth of assets uh our biggest funer was actually not from Malaysia. most of the the I would say 100% of the funding at that particular time which was around the around 2000 to 2008

was uh funded from uh uh banks that are actually local uh to Singapore. Okay. But so you see we set up this Laban uh offshore financial center. Again I I call this the gim gimmickry. It's all gimmicks, you know, not love gimmicks, don't we? It's not serious. Not serious, huh?

They set up the Laban Offshore Financial Center and uh I was in banking when they set it up and uh okay, it's still there and a lot of uh well, not too many foreign banks opened up offices in Laban, but it's just a name plate office. It's just a office with a name on the door. uh they have some stuff but the real work was done from out from KL. So a lot of Japanese banks had they call them representative offices they were based here in Koala Lumpur and that's where the real offshore uh banking was carried out. So Laban was just a name plate and until today it's like that it has not

really taken off. But what is what is uh offshore uh banking? Uh offshore financial center. You don't need an island to set up an offshore financial center. Offshore you don't need a island with a beach going around it, a shoreline to to call it offshore.

But offshore banking basically means uh uh being able to do banking in multiple currencies. And Singapore has been in that sense an offshore financial center for a long time. Yeah,

in Singapore you can get loans in multiple currencies. Usually it's US dollars. It's usually most of the time it's US which is what it means. So you don't need an island, you know, to set up uh foreign currency lending. You can you can license local banks here or banks operating here in Koala Lumpur in Malaysia to uh uh to do banking in multiple currencies, US dollars. And uh supposing you have uh Malaysian companies that uh want to invest uh overseas. They want to buy an asset and uh they will earn in uh foreign currency. Uh last week or week before last week, one of our local corporates

is buying a hotel in New Zealand I think for like 300 million or something. So they will be they will be earning they will be spending New Zealand dollars. They will be earning revenue in New Zealand dollars. uh you know if you if you allow them if you allow uh banks in the country to to make foreign currency loans this these are the people who might benefit. So instead of the them having to borrow in New Zealand where they do not they may not yet have a track record, they can go to a local bank who knows them better but is allowed to lend money to them in

foreign currency specifically to invest in assets which will generate that same currency currency ma matching currency matching you don't you don't borrow in US you don't borrow in uh US dollars and earn ring

to build a factory in Malaysia and earn ring along the way you will have to commit suicide because foreign currency risk is extremely high but these are the things that Singapore does you know or if you have a local local uh local exporter who sells microchips yeah to wherever to Taiwan to Korea to US or wherever and they earn US dollars and they need to buy raw materials to manufacture the micro microchips in Malaysia and the raw materials come from overseas. They also pay in US dollars. So you can you can you can you can you can allow them to borrow in US dollars

from a foreign uh foreign currency account borrow in US dollars use the money to buy the raw materials man process it ship it out earn US dollars and then you settle settle off. You see so that's that's what is called

that's the whole thing offshore banking offshore banking. Yeah, you don't need an island for that. Now, we have not done this. If you if you I asked you, have you ever benefited from Laban? What I meant was have you ever taken a foreign currency?

No, because why? We did the foreign currency loan from Singapore. So, so Lwan does not has not helped you. To my knowledge, Lavan has not helped our Malaysian businessmen especially much. Not I think even if their numbers, they are dismal. Nothing compared to let's say Singapore or other places. you have to you know what what it is that actually it goes back to another part maybe you want to touch this or or not I'm not too sure uh say but when you spoke to me about this what what resonate is is is is this part that I had to go through uh during the 2000s

and I see here today as well um which is uh regulation and excessive regulation one secondly is um regulations that are imposed like you say is gimmickry is fetish it's based on trend that they read uh from uh uh you know western uh western journals or you know and then they think that this is the way they have to do it but by the time they do it the the the developed industries have already realized their mistake take.

So, so, so bottom line is bottom line is we have we have we have talked about government intervention in business, in industry, consolidation of banking. You spoke a bit about education. Bottom line is it either restricts maximum

everything restricts restricts maximum growth or impoverishes the people the economy uh prevents us from achieving maximum potential. So today after 30 40 50 years of this uh of these policies unchanging policies we have the many issues and problems that we have in this country now sluggish economic growth is major to me at 4% economic growth 4% or even 5%. Uh it's like just waiting for the sun to shine and the rain to come down from the sky.

Yeah. With the GDP that we have that's not the and the grass to grow. You don't need to do anything. If you don't do anything, as long as there's sunshine, there's rain and the wind is blowing, the sun rises, I think you will get 3% 4% economic growth. You don't have to do anything.

Yeah. What we want is something better than that. We want to be a a tiger. To be a tiger, you have to be proactive. You have to do the right policies. Then you have those 7 8 9%. Otherwise, let's just relax. I

I think that nature takes it take its own course. If we get 3% 4% growth, can you imagine just on uh just on two things based on what you're saying? I I'll contribute one part which has been a very big uh uh uh part of of how I've been looking at what's the problem. You mentioned banking and I totally agree with you on on the that is a major structural problem that we have in the country which basically means allocation of capital right

our resources. Yeah. Yeah. Um the taxpayers money right. The other part that actually really bugs me a lot because I see that as actually um um uh what do you call uh a waste of capital is the cost of doing business and the regulation is cost of doing business. Imagine today. Um I think my biggest probably uh uh my my my biggest pet peeve is this imposition of ESG and ESG compliance to the banking system and also to businesses. The cost of that compliance that provide no productive growth to any business whatsoever. not just growth, it does not provide anything in terms of

the bottom line except for uh increasing costs, you know, and at the same time the developed world led by uh uh America at the moment is to actually deregulate everything. No subsidies or

we have totally we have totally missed the boat on that. You're right. It's uh it's all about deregulation and increasing competition. You really need to have the free market. Exactly.

And you once you don't have the free market, you intervene in the free market, costs go up. Cost go up. We we are just cost go up. We're just piling cost on everything. And it's getting more difficult to to do business. And the worst thing is that the next generation that 25 year old people who want to be entrepreneurs or who who should be entrepreneurs

who want to think up uh new businesses ideas they are thwarted. They are deflected away from doing what they should be doing because of all these constraints and restraints that exist in the economy which you're talking about. So that fellow who would have started that particular business did not start it. So 5 years 10 years later maybe he could have employed 50 people it didn't happen. So today we have increased unemployment among the graduates. Our graduates cannot find jobs. Not all of them uh can find jobs or jobs that are suitable with their qualification. We we

have unemployment issue. We have sluggish growth in the economy. It's not enough to sustain our population which is growing every year. So now you got this gig economy. saying couple of million people or two sad that's sad that means that the economy cannot provide a permanent slot for their skills you know uh like jig

and not just that there is no uh there is no career path and no upscaling of cap of skills we train them we train them you send them to school for for 11 years you send them to university for four years and things like that they've come out and they cannot find a niche in the economy where they can they can sell their skills and move on from there. That gap is getting further further apart. So this is a problem in the country and now with all kinds of wild things going on AI and all this. Yeah.

I was listening to this uh Indian man a few days back. He's a national security adviser for India, you know, quite a uh a guy who knows a lot of stuff. He says it took like a million years. It took like more than a million years for the human race to invent fire, you know, from the caveman days and all that. And it took thousands of years after that. Hundreds of thousands of years for us humans to melt the first metal, you know, the metal age, the bronze age, whatever. I mean, it gets shorter.

Yeah, it gets shorter every time. after the industrial revolution the the it's the pace is accelerating so he says AI is now brand new AI he says the impact of AI will be 24 months

you know there will be major changes in economies in the next 24 months because of AI so that is a pace of change but we are still at the crawling level how many banks in this country um how Many supply bases your industry. How many supply bases we will have in the country? Only four allowed. You know this agar wood in Malay we call it gaharu.

Oh okay. What do you call incense? You need a license to grow a tree. Really? Yeah. You to grow a aar wood plantation. You need a license. And I think there's a restriction on the number of aar wood processing factories in the country. I think before

this is a system that we have in Vietnam. In Vietnam, the entrepreneurs, the plantation owners, they plant aar wood by the thousands of acres. It's free. You want it, go ahead. You plant it. Yeah.

Because it's very expensive. Well, over here they plant durian trees and somebody come take over. So, you see over here you mentioned just now we are overregulated. We are, you know, just restricted left, right, and center. Bottom line, bottom line, it impoverishes our country,

our people. Our people. Let's not forget uh the the beginning the the beginning the middle and the end of it all is the people the people not this industry or that industry we want to be whatever you know this the people the human beings we are impoverishing our people

you know I find because of this ridiculous policy well just not the impoverishing in that way as you mentioned that our tax dollars are being used to fund these government link companies and they all sit very uh comfortably with high salaries and then when they fail they get bailed out again by taxpayers. And then um you have uh you have a bunch of uh younger people that can that has to come out and struggle because why the allocation of capital has gone to all this oligarchy uh uh and and monopoly, right? that you cannot provide a a comparative small and medium scale industries that actually

should be able to be thriving and powering our growth, right? Without without having the need for taxpayers funds. Correct. Right. They can they can go they can go on their own. I know. And I mean I it bugs my it it it it really bothers my mind a lot and I see what uh and and and I see what Trump is doing and why I am so supportive of what Trump policies are. I'll give you one example. Right? For every regulation that you bring to him that you want to implement, he insists that 10 regulations must be dismantled.

Okay? That's that's just a simple simple fact. simple simple uh uh requirement. That's a businessman way of thinking. All right. Secondly, when he came into office, he already warned everybody, I'm going to deregulate. He already warned everybody, I'm not going to give subsidies for renewables because if you are actually economically competitive, you should be able to live without subsidies. I think Elon Musk was pretty pissed off because of that as well. All right. But he doesn't care. Okay. The other part that I find very interesting is as well is that the biggest cost of doing business is

um regulation and energy. So he made sure that the energy cost is low. So hence come the drill baby drill policies. Right? So today we are actually literally looking at the pump price the gas pump price in in America becoming actually maybe 50% lower than what it used to be under Biden. Right? This is a reality and the Democrats don't want to talk about it because why? Um it shows to the people what the hell is happening. So here we are in our own country 20 and and he basically dismantled the whole ESG complex.

Our our problem is um if I if I our problem is in in this country is a bit more uh severe more serious more difficult because because uh it's not it is not the business of government to get involved in business

itself. So here here's the other thing our problem here's the other thing not just that right because we control these GLC's are controlling all these all these businesses that has no competition right imagine how much worse we have made it when 20% of our GDP is coming from our energy from the ground and we put regulations and we put cost on top of it right to comply with requirements that tells us, "Oh, I'm not going to fund you if you're going to drill, baby drill, and if you're involved in this part of the economy, it's totally bonkers to me that we are actually telling our banking

system, telling our financial market that this is an industry that is 20% of our GDP. don't fund them. What the hell is going on, man? So, I don't know. I mean, maybe I mean, we've been talking like this for almost an hour, right? And and we've we've we are very experienced people do people do do the powers that be do policy makers really listen to people like us?

No, they don't. because uh I'll be frank like this might sound a bit uh condescending but I think it's beyond them. They just don't understand. They don't seem to understand but the other thing is they are the perks the perks of power

because this system helps to maintain the the power position and the power equation. So I think the attractiveness of the the the power the position the it is so uh almighty you control so much resources financial resources in the country you don't want to give it up I'm talking about the politicians

right I uh can we come to the the yeah sure let let's try wrap it up and and you know so uh at the end of the day what happens is that there is impoverishment of the people people get poorer. It's it's not actually the money that you have lost. We have lost money. For example, we've been paying through our noses for cars and for a lot of other services. So, it's not just the money that we have lost. But I think more damaging is that money that we did not earn

earn. Yeah. The lost opportunity I think is has cost is costing us more and creating more difficulties for us than the money that went out the window. Our money and from our pocket.

So the lost opportunities is what it's really uh uh capping our future. Our the future looks uncertain. Uh you if you ask you know the famous question they ask in America every time the elections come around. Are you better off today compared to four years ago? Yes.

If you ask Malaysians here, are you better off today than you were five years ago? I don't know. I don't think many people I think we have a consistent answer. Things are not as as great as how they should be.

And you can even ask people, you know, every 5 years you'll get the same answer. Correct. Especially the last 20 25 years. I think from before 2008. We'll come to that shortly. But also now if you ask uh if you ask an American what do you look forward to in the next four years they'll probably go like you know okay things are looking good or better we hope something like that but if you ask a Malaysian what do you expect over the next 5 years I think that they'll go like at the best I don't know few people will say oh I'm looking forward to a great future you ask me personally no I

really don't know we don't see that light at the end of the tunnel because uh it is we have been impoverished the people for some time and as I said it's not just the money that's gone out of our pocket it's the it's a this it's the ringi that we did not could not earn because of all these restrictions

so so at the end of the day now uh let's bring it to some kind of a conclusion what does it really mean and here I hope the politicians are listening and uh we have to talk about the Malay voter,

right? That's my closing closing point. Okay. You see, uh all these things that we've been talking about have were part of the new economic policy under Dr. Mahadev the first 22 years uh uh since the since the Barisa National AMU was in power since independence. Uh so they have been in power like almost forever until 2018. But you see here uh none of the policies have changed even after the Barisan National lost the elections and various prime ministers have come on war nothing has changed in uh in 1999 the BN ANU uh lost their seats in parliament I mean they didn't lose the

elections but their popularity was going down some would argue the their popularity started going down even before that but 99 was like a clear uh watershed their popularity started going down in 2004 there was a change in prime minister Dr. Mahade retired 2003 and there was a new prime minister Abdullah Dawi. So there was a election in in 204 and there was an uptick I think people were hoping for for change

for change. There was a massive win by the ruling government at the time the BN government but within a short time everybody got totally dejected. They actually got pissed off with the new prime minister. As a result in 20008 for the first time since uh independence 1957 the government lost their 2/3 uh majority I think 69 they did not but in 20008 they lost their two/3s majority which was considered a major significant event.

Yeah. For our country that is for our country. So meaning that the Malay voter had lost faith in everything that the Barisa national government had been doing including the new economic policy 208. They lost two/3 majority. Then the prime minister was asked to leave and the new prime minister took over and there was another election in 2013 under the new prime minister Dat Najib. Again, the Visa National lost more seats in parliament, proving that the Malay voter had completely lost had lost faith in whatever policies that had been implemented up to that time,

including the Skatan policies. And then you come to 2018 where they got kicked out. The BN and Amno lost the elections. Yeah. Again, they had lost more Malay votes. It is.

And now what do you think? What is the situation today? It is a Malay voter losing faith in all the policies imple implemented by BN and AMNO in all those years uh 2018. Then in 2018 uh Dr. Mahade came back 2.0 and he was in power for 22 months and he was ousted because he was unpopular. They lost so many you know by elections. They lost by elections. Replaced by the next prime minister was removed after another one year almost two years. Replaced by another prime minister who has also basically lost the election.

And then 2022 2022 which in my view is the the most important general elections we have had in this country to date. I think more important than 208 where the ruling government lost political power after so many years 50 years. To me 2022 was the defining election because in 2022

all the the the the previous players were no more in power and everyone was vying to win the elections. But it was a hung parliament. Nobody won decisively. again proving that the Malay voters I I keep saying Malay voter because it's a Malay voter who decides the outcome of the elections. They are the single largest voting block. The Malay voter rejected all the parties. They did not give a decisive win for anyone neither to a Malay based party uh not to a religion Islamic based party and not to multicultural parties. So, so especially the the Malay based parties, Malay

politics and the religion based parties, none of them could win decisively. At last, the Aong had to step in to uphold his uh constitutional his responsibility to determine the the the government which Aong had to step in. But 2022 proves that all the policies that you have done that have been implemented in this country the previous decades doesn't hold water with the Malay voters anymore. But throughout this time until today, this is November 2025, none of these policies have changed.

Has changed. Yeah. Can you imagine? Imagine Donald Trump, you know, before the elections last year, he went all out to thrash uh Joseph Biden and Kamala Harris. He was calling them names like incompetent. I think he even used the word stupid. You know, he was really going all out and trash them.

Imagine Donald Trump wins the election. he becomes he became president 21st January this year and then he says okay I'm going to continue all the policies of the Biden administration can you imagine can you imagine a situation that will be insane

that is what has been happening despite the Malays rejecting uh the policies of the government ruling party at the time in 2018 20008 2/3 they lost 2/3s finally 2018 they lost They they were kicked out of power. 2022 hung parliament meaning that Malay voters reject all these policies. It doesn't attract them anymore. The ruling click, the ruling politicians still continue with exactly same policies. Nothing has changed.

I think the only reason I can think of is the perks of power. That's what is uh that's what is motivating them and keeping them going. They're not going to change because they like the trappings. They like the gold thread and the silver thread.

So, how do we how how does So, I think the only way how how do how do we go forward as a country? We're a democracy. We're a democracy. The elections are due again a couple of years. Uh we have the Sabah elections coming soon. And I think uh the people who advocate these policies they're not going to win because you see on election day any voter including the Malay voter when he goes to vote he doesn't think like you and me what we're discussing today he doesn't go like what's the price of a car in California versus Malaysia you know uh how many banks are there in the in the in the country the

oligarchy I don't think people think about all this all they know is that my son has graduated. You know, he can't get a job. Yeah. I have to pay so much every month. I, you know, there's a holiday coming. I have to go back home to the Kong. I'm going to need so much cash to pay the tolls,

you know, and all those things. It's life is a challenge. So, they go like, I I have I'm working 9 to5 every day. I obey the laws of the country. I'm a I'm a good citizen. I take care of my family. I contribute. And why is life so difficult? Why can't I just kind of make ends meet compared to let's say people in other countries, other places, our neighbors in Singapore, things like that? Uh why is it that we can't uh it's so difficult for us? That's that's that is what is in their mind. I'm trying to set up a business, you know, I can't get a loan. The bank doesn't want to talk to

me. I I went to another bank and there's not too many banks in in the country. I had issues with my I had an insurance claim insurance claim to change a windscreen you know windscreen. So insurance claim and the insurance company is also owned by the banks. So you know they have their panel of they okay you can fix it you go to this guy. So I called this guy and he charged he asked me twice the twice the cost of the windscreen in the market. So I went to my so and he said I'm only covered for certain x amount like a,000 ringgit but the charge was more than a,000 almost

2,000. So the the remaining I had to pay. So I went to my mechanic and my mechanic said no I can do it for you less than a,000 ringit. So I so at the end of the day I did not claim my insurance. That's a normal um that's a normal story you know.

So what what choice do I have? Do do I say okay I'm fed out with this. I'm going to go to another bank. I doubt it because it's oligarchy. M so this is what people feel every day they wake up they go like there's something stifling us in education uh in healthare in uh business in economics anywhere there's a stifling choking strangle hole on us so people are unhappy so when the election comes they don't vote for the government this is what the politicians

well I'm giving I mean I'm looking at I'm looking at nobody Nobody won a decisive majority in 2022. Well, I mean at the state level, we are looking at a swing to the religious parties in Kada in Tranganu.

Oh, they didn't they want some, but it's yet to be seen. Uh Sabah is going to be an eye opener. I think some I think so. Yeah. You see like they say tomorrow is not promised to anyone. the same thing now the elections in Malaysia are not promised to any one party 10 years ago it was different you know

yeah you can almost take it to the bank 100% the barisan national is going to win that's it you know no more so uh this is what the politicians do not seem to understand they do not seem to understand that the policies that have been placed the economic policies especially in this country the last 50 years has caused a paradigm shift in voter support Malay voter support since uh 2008 when Amno lost the majority two-3 majority and before that and persisting until today with the hung parliament in 2022 there's no more going to be big block winning big blocks in the

parliament because basically it is the Malay voter who is fed up let me ask you a this quick question then as well because I see another paradox to this not a paradigm but a paradox right the non-Mlay uh block voting law is so scared of uh the religious party that that that that they are basically uh entrapped in a situation of a no-win situation. And that to me has become another problem in terms of uh redistributing um uh good policies because when they change from um the BN party to what we have now the policies never change either the the the the non-malas are not happy either

but they are sort of like saying what choice do I have? So how do we get out of this paradox? The Islamic party, the religious party, well we're referring to only one party. Yeah. But I think uh their reach their reach is uh more has been over estimated. You think so?

We give them more credit than is due very simply because in a country of 34 million people the Muslim population is uh less than 60%. I think it's slightly over 50%. I agree

because you take Sarawak which is Bumiutra Saba and Sarawak are Bumiutra states by the populated by the local local indigenous people but Sarawak is only 25% Muslim 75% is non-Muslim largely Christian Sabah is now about 50% Muslim 50% non-Muslim but the Muslims in Sabah they are not majority Malays they are local indigenous people and also So that number is um you know project IC and all that project IC as time passes will sort of disappear by itself because all those project IC people they don't live on the land they live on the

this is let me let me for our international people the our project IC is basically uh the illegal migration problem that uh that was

legitimizing legitimizing illegal immigrants you know for political purposes to make them so so don't think that you are in first world America that you don't have this fraud going on

but these people who are legitimized these migrants from Philippines they are they are the nomadic people who live on the sea they don't have a village

on the land on the land side so over time they will I don't think it is helped them uh anymore I don't think it helps them as So, so you have peninsula the the Malay vote is on the peninsula and the Malay pure Malay population or what is identified as uh indigenous Malays slightly over 50% of the population not counting the

therap so you only have about over 50% Muslims in this country and this vote is highly fractured highly fractured there will always be Malays who will vote for AMNO like the good old days.

Always no matter what. So do you think I think I think this is that the give me a prognostication. I think that the Islamic party the the idea that the Islamic party will somehow take over the government. Uh I think it's not going to happen. My view is very far-fetched because they simply don't have the numbers.

They don't have their policies either. Maybe the other side, the other the non-Islamic parties have policies, but they're crap. If ever the Islamic party is going to take over the government,

they have to win the Chinese vote. And if they want to win the Chinese vote, they have to sit down and talk to the Chinese people. They have to ask a simple question. What can I do for you? So, as long as they don't do that, they're not going to win. So, I'm not really concerned about the Islamic

party. Let's let's let's let's pin that. Okay, I I think we both agree on that part then. Um so let the states that are controlled by them until they realize it that the economy is going to go down the drain they'll they'll get to the same conclusion.

Well uh Clantan hasn't done so in more than 30 I know which is very interesting. You know why I think I think the problem is they there are people go and earn money elsewhere. Yes. And then they go back and they want to they want they all want to go to heaven and they all voted for all these uh for for these religious promises.

But it it that that will only work in their states in Kada and I'm so sad for Kada to be honest. Tranganu even Tranganu swings this way and that way. Kada never used to be that way.

So uh so I think it's a long shot to worry too much about the Islamic party. they will get their fair share. They will get you know whatever seats they have now they may be able to sustain it but to take over the government.

So why do how do you think that the I mean let's say the election plays out a couple of years from now and uh and and it's going to be another round of parliament or nobody or even if somebody forms a majority it will be a very thin majority it will be unstable government. The only way we're going to have a solid government, some party or coalition winning decisively is if they abolish, get rid of all these old policies which we have had in the last 40, 50 years. completely wipe it off the slate, wipe it off the table and start implementing new policies that are

marketbased which open up the economy to market forces. Uh try to get in as much competition as possible. People need really good education skills, faith in themselves. People need faith in themselves. You talk about subsidies. We have to be careful with subsidies. You cannot abolish subsidies overnight. But I would support what you said about education about your story. You went to the US. Those are educational subsidies. We have to maintain those. We need medical and health uh benefits which are subsidies subsidized by the government. We need to have this.

Uh but in industry and business, we have to let market forces play. Let the market decide where it wants to go. M let the businessman and the banker sit across the table and discuss how may I help you? What can I do for you? What do I need? The government has no place.

You know where where the problem lies in our parliamentarian system in my opinion is actually you have uh you have career politicians. I always like to compare with what happens in America. In America you got a congressional system. Okay. And then you have a Republican system run at the executive level by the president which allows for dramatic changes. Right. So what you have just described to me in the words of Dune you know by Frank by by Frank Herbert is actually a charismatic leader comes in like a bull in a China shop which is what has happened with Donald Trump and

say the free market is going to rain. I'm going to deregulate. I'm going to throw out all these policies. Okay. But the in the parliamentarian system where their congress and senate lies, it is still relative quite intractable. They are now running through a congressional I mean a federal shutdown, the longest in history at about what 37 days now. They can't even pass a clean budget. Okay. Now, the why I'm bringing this up is because the challenge that I see for the next election, you're going to have a hung parliament for sure, but the hung parliament is still going to be composed

by the same people. You don't have a charismatic leader that is going to be able to say, I'm going to dismantle all this that you wanted. Right? So, how do you think that can happen in our system? No the the so so politics as a career option becomes less and less attractive because uh if you are a politician now at the best you can look forward to is one term that's it after that you get kicked out because you cannot hold the voters confidence anymore so you know this is a problem in the old days when you became prime minister under the BN and AMNO you're talking about you know

endless like when after Dr. Mahade left after 22 years. The next prime minister was 9 years before he was taken out. I'm talking about Abdul Abadawi. Daladawi 9 years. Yeah, that's right. And then uh the other prime minister Najib was 6 years I think like you know son never get it get shorter and shorter and shorter.

Now it's getting shorter. Yeah. So if you want to think of becoming a politician, a parliamentarian, a cabinet minister or member of parliament, now your your time frame is uh one term. That's it.

Don't you think that makes people want to hoard the treasure uh in the shorter and shorter period? Uh yeah, re what? Make hay while the sunshine while the sunshine. You can do that but there's a huge risk because when the next bunch of guys come in they'll send the the different all the squads after you see so even that option is uh disappearing is receding very quickly this uh this uh this feeling or opinion that you know I can get something out of it in in this one term you can try that but uh when the next fellow comes he'll come after you. So even that option is receding. It has

happened every time there's a change in prime minister now you know they send the people from the the AC the anti-corruption agency will come and knock on your door knock on your door. See, so that is that is a reality now. It's proven. It's proven. It's not a it's not a theory. It's proven.

So now, so now maybe politicians have to think very carefully if they want to develop a career in politics. Uh what exactly do they want to do? So I hope uh that will bring sense into them and they will think really they will think about the most important word in today's discussion the people.

Yeah. Yeah. The human beings. Yes. I mean you have to think you have to stop talking about your party and your issues. You know I listen to all this many of these talks which you know on YouTube on TV you know interviewing politicians and all that there there's so many issues going on now. Yeah. I never hear them saying a single word about the people.

The people or in my constituency I am from let's say I am from I don't know. Oh they they are all talking about the the the the uh the chess game of all these

politics say what is happening even in their own constituency. You must give credit to the American congressman. They're always saying in my constituency there are so many jobs you know have been created or if I do this bill if I bring this bill in Congress it will immediately affect so many people in my constituency. They're always thinking about

because otherwise they're going to get kicked out kicked out. You're going to kicked out. We don't have that here. The member of parliament doesn't consider at all what is going what something how something is going to affect the voters in in his own constituency. forget about the country or the state in his own constituency. You don't hear that.

Say uh before we finish, let's try and wrap it up. But I want to I I I'll tell you why actually. I mean, there's a lot of people who accuse me or or try to put me as a as a as a as a as a Trump fan or something like that. Right? But here's the thing that people don't realize. What I see what I see is actually uh a a a charismatic leader. Take it however you want to take that because he won the election in in that way, right? And and as an executive, what he has done with his cabinet is actually put people of merit in his cabinet posts and actually also at a second layer. And you know how

cabinet works, they tend to work in silos, right? Treasury work in silo, commerce work in silo, uh um uh what do you call defense work in silo but but what I've seen uh with this cabinet is actually the silos are so well integrated and coordinated because why they realize that everything that they do in one silo affects the other silo, right? And the only reason they're doing that is exactly what you're saying because he has to bring a change. Right? So here we are stuck with this hung parliament that is going to happen. So that now I come back to our situation.

That's the only way I see this country and we have such potential if you were to ask me right. Our people are not cookie cutter uh uh are not bred uh like cookie cutters in Singapore. Our people are actually very very innovative because we have to deal with all this nonsense and all this chaos in order to survive. You know, it's the we need a government that can unleash this potential that our people have. you know, so that the rest of the people who can be employed actually follow this uh individual leaders of businesses that actually do not have to compete with their own government.

How do you think then a hung parliament come the next election can achieve the kind of government that actually will deliver these changes? Let's let's let's as I said let's on that

we we are a democracy which is a good thing and uh uh democracy at the end of the day it rewards uh performance and achievement. So if the politicians do not deliver do not perform do not achieve the democracy will kick them out. So it is they who have to decide. You're not you're not going to be able to remain in power or you know uh be in government if you don't deliver like what Trump is trying to do now. You see it's basically you don't deliver you are kicked out. The problem in Malaysia now is we have had such a long time of one party government and frankly even the

players the politicians now in so many parties all came from the same Yeah. They're same they all come from the same DNA. Same DNA. Yeah. So they are the DNA the the thinking that DNA has not changed. It is going to it has to they have to come to it has it is up to them. To answer your question it has to it has it comes to them. It has to come to them. They the politicians have to realize that that DNA does not work anymore. If you want to stick to that, then you're talking about hung parliament, losing the elections, forming weak coalitions, having to say yes to this guy, that guy,

you know, not achieving anything and then losing again. That's what's going to happen. They have to realize that that DNA has to be you have to erase it and start a new. How many election cycles do you think it would take for that to happen?

Wait and see. As I said, to me 2022 is seminal. It is the to me it is the most important election in this country. so far because we thought that in 2018 when uh you know the old system was thrown out and the new guys came in

we thought things would change that's it you know everything this is it a new beginning for us no it didn't 2022 hung parliament and now it's 2025 still nothing has changed so how how many more election cycles is going to take I don't know but rest assured for for an absolute certainty they don't change these old policies you're not going to win. you're looking at one term government and after you're looking at people checking the old

and you know what what we're going to do then if that's the case um you've already said that Sabah is going to be the uh the bell weather of uh let's see what happens yeah let's see what happens maybe what we'll do is uh after the Sabah election let's see it again and analyze whether we're going to get the right direction or who's going to be the the the the uh the change.

You should be able to see a trend. Don't forget we had that state elections in six states uh two years ago, two years ago and the the results were not uh were not good for the ruling government now at all. They lost they lost quite badly. AMO I think they got zero in uh one of the states they got zero they want zero state seats. So these are all the indications that

amno is done. It's done. Amno is done. It's done. But the policy that Amno seeded into the country 50 years ago, but the DNA is still there. The DNA is still there. It's only in a different form,

right? So the politicians seem to be blind. I don't think all of them are blind. They like it because as I said, the perks and the benefits of power, it's too good. The silver threads and the gold threads are just awesome.

Yeah. The only thing I would say as a reminders only only thing is as a reminder to our politics is actually look at what happened in Indonesia. Look at what happened in Nepal. Look at how much our people actually uh empathize with the gig workers in Jakarta that they were willing to send food and whatever uh uh whatever support they could because they felt the same. I I think that is uh that was an interesting phenomena you know uh say I think that was an extremely good illuminating discussion for everybody.

Thank you. I I I hope this Yeah. And I I I think that's exactly what you just said. Um every other podcast doesn't talk like this. We talk like this because we want to be truthful to the audience and we don't cater to politics. We cater to the people. Thank you so much my friend.

Thank you. Welcome. Uh like, subscribe and let's uh get more audience. Thank you very much.