• Pakatan Harapan will terminate PEMANDU and conduct a forensic audit of all of its activities

    Media Statement by Pakatan Harapan Manifesto and Policy Committee issued on the 5th of May, 2017

    Pakatan Harapan will terminate PEMANDU and conduct a forensic audit of all of its activities

    The Performance and Management Delivery Unit (PEMANDU) in the Prime Minister’s Department was launched by the Prime Minister with much hype in 2010. Since its creation, PEMANDU has commandeered much power and resources, spent a lot of money on publicity seeking events and took the lead in ‘spin doctoring’ many of the supposed achievements by the BN government. In reality, it has failed to deliver on its main KPI, failed to be accountable to parliament and the public and most recently, ensnared itself in possible conflict of interest situations. Upon winning GE14, Pakatan Harapan will abolish all government contracts with the newly formed PEMANDU Associates Sdn Bhd and initiate an extensive forensic audit into all of the activities of PEMANDU Corporation including disclosing the salaries of the directors of PEMANDU and all the salient financial terms payable to this private company. Instead of engaging expensive external consultants to direct the civil service, Pakatan Harapan will channel resources directly to the civil service to empower them to do their jobs professionally and to introduce reforms that will make the civil service more independent, transparent and effective.

    (i) Failure to meet its GNI per capita target for a high-income nation

    The key target outlined in the Economic Transformation Program (ETP) 2010 Roadmap Report was for Malaysia to reach a high income nation status of US$15,000 GNI per capita by 2020 (See Exhibit 1 below).

    Source: ETP Roadmap 2010, pg.9

    This target has been referred to in each of the ETP Annual Reports from 2011 to 2014 and also in the 2015 National Transformation Program Annual Report. But what is clear is that we are still very far from the US$15,000 GNI per capita target as show in Chart 1 below. In fact, Malaysia’s GNI per capita has increased by a mere US$490, from US$8636 in 2010 to US$9057 per capita in 2016, or a 4.9% in 6 years. (See Chart 1 below) Based on this statistic alone, PEMANDU has failed.

    Chart 1: GNI per capita current prices (US$) 2010 to 2016

    Source: GNI statistics are from the Department of Statistics, Exchange rate data is the World Bank data showing the average US$ to RM exchange rate for that year (Figures differ slightly from the World Bank GNI data calculated using the Atlas method)

    The issue has been previously highlighted by IDEAS Head of Research Ali Salman and raises questions as to whether Malaysia can reach the high-income nation target by 2020.[1]

    (ii)                Failure of Accountability

    In a piece in The Malaysian Insight, a PEMANDU executive stated the following: PEMANDU also reported to the EPU, the Prime Minister’s Department and was accountable to Parliament.[2] We are unsure as to what the executive’s understanding of parliamentary accountability is, but in his 6 years as a member of the cabinet, the CEO of PEMANDU, Idris Jala, never once appeared in parliament to answer any single parliamentary question that concerned PEMANDU. In fact, he never answered anything or said anything in parliament. Given that he was heading two programs – the ETP and the Government Transformation Program (GTP) – that is supposed to bring about transformational changes in the country, it is disgraceful that he found it unnecessary to answer any questions in the most important elected institution in the country. This is a massive failure from an accountability standpoint.

    In addition, even though PEMANDU published annual reports for the ETP and GTP and starting from 2015, the National Transformation Program (NTP), it di not table any of its reports in parliament nor distribute them to Members of Parliament. It does not table its own financial accounts in parliament nor tell parliament how much PEMANDU has spent for its various activities. And despite many public criticisms, it has not made known how much its staff gets paid, which according to some reports, is higher than the Prime Minister’s salary.[3]

    Furthermore, PEMANDU has the audacity to ask for RM10 million and RM15 million from the government to organize the Global Transformation Forum 2015 and 2017 respectively at the same time as it is preaching values of fiscal prudence on the part of the federal government.[4]

    While it uses the language of good corporate governance and transparency, PEMANDU does not apply any of these standards to itself.

    (iii)              Conflicts of Interest

    All of the staff of PEMANDU Corp, a 100% Ministry of Finance owned entity, has now been transferred to PEMANDU Associates Sdn Bhd, a private entity that is 50% owned by Idris Jala. Starting from 2017, PEMANDU Associates will sell its services to the government by placing its staff in key ministries to continue the NTP. At the same time, this new private entity will be free to sell its services to other government ministries, at home and abroad. Furthermore, since the beginning of 2017, Idris Jala has been occupying the position of the Chairman of Heineken Malaysia, a public listed company.

    The position of Idris Jala as the chairman of a publicly listed company and the president of a private company which is deeply embedded into the inner workings of the federal government via its work in the NTP, raises serious questions with regards to possible conflicts of interest.[5] Until today, he has not even attempted to explain these conflicts of interest.

    For these reasons and immediately upon winning GE14, Pakatan Harapan will terminate all existing contracts with PEMANDU Associates Sdn Bhd. We will initiate a forensic accounting investigation into all of the expenditure undertaken by PEMANDU Corp and BFR Institute, both of which are 100% MOF owned entities, including how much was paid to each and every celebrity speaker for the 2015 and 2017 Global Transformation Program. We will publicly disclose the salaries received by PEMANDU directors.

    Finally, rather than spending obscenely on external consultants, Pakatan Harapan will channel resources directly to the civil service to empower them to carry out its functions more independently and and professionally. Pakatan Harapan will also call upon respected retired civil servants to help us reform the civil service to its former glory days of integrity, transparency and effectiveness.

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming (DAP)

    Wong Chen (PKR)

    Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (AMANAH)

    Dr Rais Hussin (PPBM)

    [1] http://www.ideas.org.my/news/press-statements/government-intervention-causing-malaysia-to-lose-competitive-edge-as-average-income-of-malaysians-drops-by-15-according-%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B-to-latest-epu-figures/

    [2] https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/s/2430/

    [3] http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/149861

    [4] http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/377108

    [5] http://www.beritadaily.com/idris-position-in-pemandu-and-heineken-questionable-says-dap-man/

  • 有关就业保险计划 (EIS) 的十道问题


    有关就业保险计划  (EIS) 十道问题

    劳动节即将来临,我们向劳工们为国家的贡献给予承认与肯定。在今年7月至8月的国会里,预料首相将提呈就业保险计划 (Employment Insurance Scheme , EIS)。这项计划对劳工在失业的过渡期时有莫大的帮助。然而,该计划的详细内容还没对外公布,政府也没有设立一个国会委员会,探讨当前马来西亚的工作、就业和经济,因此该计划还有很多疑问需要被解答。


    1)                  现有的1955年劳工法令 (Employment Act 1955) 和1980年就业停职和离职福利规定(Employment Termination and Lay-Off Benefits Regulations 1980),已经列明裁员赔偿金。请问新的就业保险计划推行后,是否继续保障现有的裁员赔偿金?此外,劳工现有的裁员保障是否会为了推行EIS而被妥协牺牲掉?

    2)                  EIS估计在一年内可以收取7亿令吉至8亿令吉(根据劳工和雇主各贡献0.25%、650万劳工、2千令吉薪金来计算)。请问EIS的行政成本将会是多少?是否像一些报告中所说的,占总收额25%那么高?

    3)                  EIS就像SOCSO一样的保险计划,那是不是表示说如果一名劳工在一生中没有被辞退过,他是否不能领回已缴付的金额?同时,EIS会从一名劳工的一生人薪水拿走多少可支配收入/钱?

    4)                  请问EIS基金的将如何被管理?它是否会像SOCSO一样发放利息,就算它的回率低过公积金?

    5)                  EIS的其中一个目的是再训练和培训失业的劳工。请问这新培训计划和现有的计划有什么区别?比方说政府所推行的 Skim Latihan 1 Malaysia (SKIM)。政府必须举个有说服力的例子来说明在EIS下新的培训计划将会比现有的更有效。

    6)                  其实我们已经有一些培训计划,那些培训是由雇主支付并由人力资源发展基金(HDRF)管理。有报告指出,HRDF管理的培训计划,逾1亿令吉的基金没有使用在再培训计划中。请问要如何确保EIS计划不会演化成HRDF基金一样,许多钱最后并没有用在训练失业劳工上。

    7)                  初步报告显示只有在SOSCO中受保,也就是月薪少于4千令吉的劳工才有资格投保EIS。但是,当今许多中等收入的劳工也面对被裁员的困境,就像金融业和石油业一样。请问政府有什么计划可以帮助在中等收入的劳工?

    8)                  根据马来西亚商业工会的估计,每一年因为公司破产而导致劳工们不能索取赔偿金的损失大约是5千万令吉至1亿令吉。但是EIS每一年将会收取的保险金为7亿令吉至8亿令吉,而当中的一半金额是来自于劳工,那也就是4以令吉左右。请问EIS模式将会是解决劳工索取不到裁员赔偿金最有效的方案吗?

    9)                  普通劳工失业的主要原因之一是因为雇主多倾向雇佣外劳。若政府没有一项完整的计划以减少我们对外劳的依赖,那EIS计划将会有多有效呢?请问在和低薪金的外劳竞争下,本地失业劳工要如何更容易地找到新工作?

    10)              在一些亚洲国家,政府也为就业保险计划提供资金(泰国 – 0.25%,台湾 – 0.1%,越南 – 1%)。请问政府是否也有考虑为就业保险计划提供资金以减少雇主和劳工的经济负担?

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming, DAP (王建民,行动党)

    Sim Tze Sin, PKR (沈志勤,公正党)

    Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, AMANAH (诚信党)

    Dr Rais Hussin, BERSATU (土团党)

  • 10 Soalan Mengenai Skim Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP)

    Kenyataan Media oleh Pakatan Harapan pada April 28, 2017 mengenai Skim Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP)

    10 Soalan Mengenai Skim Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP)

    Menjelang Hari Pekerja yang berlangsung pada 1 Mei, kami mengiktiraf sumbangan golongan pekerja di Malaysia terhadap negara. Skim Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP) yang dicadangkan oleh Perdana Menteri, yang dijangka akan dibentangkan di Parlimen pada sidang Julai / Ogos 2017, mempunyai potensi untuk membantu golongan pekerja Malaysia melalui proses peralihan apabila mereka hilang pekerjaan. Namun memandangkan butiran skim ini belum didedahkan dan tiada jawatankuasa parlimen yang ditubuhkan untuk meneliti isu pekerjaan, tenaga kerja dan ekonomi, masih tinggal banyak soalan yang perlu ditanya mengenai SIP.

    Di sini, kami membangkitkan 10 soalan untuk dijawab agar kami boleh lebih yakin bahawa SIP akan menjadi satu program yang berkesan dalam membantu pekerja di negara kita.

    1)                  Pampasan pemberhentian telah pun dinyatakan dalam Akta Kerja 1955 dan Peraturan Kerja (Faedah-faedah Penamatan dan Rentikerja Sentara) 1980. Adakah pampasan pemberhentian masih terus dibayar oleh majikan selepas SIP diperkenalkan? Adakah kebajikan pekerja-pekerja akan lebih merosot dalam jangka masa panjang jika faedah pemberhentian dipotong / dihapuskan sebagai sebahagian daripada pakej untuk memperkenalkan SIP?

    2)                  Anggaran jumlah yang dikumpul adalah antara RM700 juta hingga RM800 juta setahun (berdasarkan sumbangan 0.25% daripada majikan dan pekerja, 6.5 juta pekerja, gaji RM2000). Berapa banyak kos pentadbiran? Adakah ianya akan setinggi 25% daripada jumlah yang dikumpul, seperti yang diagak oleh beberapa laporan?

    3)                  Memandangakan SIP adalah skim insurans seperti PERKESO, adakah ini bermakna bahawa pekerja-pekerja tidak akan mendapatkan kembali dana ini jika mereka tidak diberhentikan dalam seumur hidup mereka? Berapa banyak pendapatan boleh guna yang akan diambil skim SIP daripada seseorang pekerja dalam sepanjang hayat mereka?

    4)                  Bagaimanakah dana SIP akan diuruskan? Adakah ia akan diuruskan dengan cara yang sama seperti dana PERKESO yang telah menghasilkan pulangan yang, secara purata, lebih rendah daripada pulangan KWSP?

    5)                  Salah satu tujuan SIP adalah untuk membantu memberi latihan semula dan latihan kemahiran kepada pekerja yang hilang pekerjaan. Bagaimanakah program-program latihan semula dan kemahiran ini akan berbeza daripada program-program kerajaan yang sedia seperti Skim Latihan 1 Malaysia (SKIM) dan lain-lain? Kerajaan perlu menyediakan hujah yang meyakinkan bahawa peruntukan skim latihan semula di bawah SIP akan lebih berkesan daripada program-program semasa.

    6)                  Terdapat skim latihan sedia ada yang disediakan dan dibayar oleh jumlah dana yang dipungut daripada majikan dan diuruskan oleh Kumpulan Wang Pembangunan Sumber Manusia (HRDF). Terdapat banyak laporan bahawa lebih daripada RM100 juta dana ini masih belum digunakan oleh majikan bagi tujuan latihan semula. Bolehkah skim HRDF yang sedia ada digunakan dengan lebih baik untuk tujuan latihan semula? Apakah jaminan bahawa skim SIP yang dicadangkan ini tidak akan menjadi seperti skim HRDF di mana adanya banyak dana yang tidak digunakan yang tidak dimasukkan ke dalam skim latihan semula?

    7)                  Laporan awal menunjukkan bahawa hanya pekerja-pekerja yang sedang dilindungi oleh PERKESO iaitu mereka yang berpendapatan kurang daripada RM4000 sebulan akan layak untuk skim SIP ini. Namun kini ramai pekerja berpendapatan sederhana juga diberhentikan kerja termasuk di industri kewangan dan industri minyak dan gas. Apakah jenis rancangan dan program yang dipakai oleh kerajaan untuk membantu pekerja-pekerja ini yang berada dalam kategori M40?

    8)                  Anggaran oleh kesatuan sekerja-kesatuan sekerja Malaysia menunjukkan bahawa pekerja-pekerja hilang antara RM50 juta hingga RM100 juta setahun disebabkan oleh pampasan hilang apabila syarikat bankrap. Namun RM700 juta hingga RM800 juta akan dikutip daripada skim SIP, di mana separuhnya datang daripada pekerja-pekerja. Adakah pendekatan ini berkesan dalam menyelesaikan isu pampasan hilang ini?

    9)                  Salah satu sebab utama mengapa pekerja di peringkat bawahan spektrum ekonomi hilang pekerjaan mereka adalah kerana majikan memberi keutamaan kepada pekerja asing. Jika kerajaan tidak mempunyai pelan yang komprehensif untuk mengurangkan kebergantungan kepada pekerja-pekerja asing, sejauh mana keberkesanan skim SIP? Semudah mana pekerja-pekerja yang telah hilang pekerjaan mereka untuk mencari pekerjaan baru, terutamanya apabila mereka perlu bersaing dengan pekerja-pekerja asing yang dibayar lebih rendah?

    10)              Beberapa negara di Asia yang mempunyai skim insurans pekerjaan juga menggunakan sumbangan kerajaan untuk skim ini (Thailand – 0.25%, Taiwan – 0.1%, Vietnam – 1%). Adakah kerajaan telah mempertimbangkan untuk turut memberi sumbangan sendiri kepada skim ini untuk mengurangkan beban kewangan ke atas para majikan serta pekerja?

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming, DAP

    Sim Tze Sin, PKR

    Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, AMANAH

    Dr Rais Hussin, BERSATU

  • 10 questions on the Employment Insurance Scheme (EIS)

    Statement by Pakatan Harapan on the Employment Insurance Scheme (EIS) on the 28th of April, 2017

    10 questions on the Employment Insurance Scheme (EIS)

    As we approach Labour Day on the 1st of May, we acknowledge the contributions which the workers in Malaysia have made to the country. The proposed Employment Insurance Scheme (EIS) by the Prime Minister, which is expected to be tabled in parliament in the July / August 2017 sitting, has the potential to help Malaysian workers through a transition process when they have lost their jobs. But given that the details of this scheme have not been disclosed and there is no parliamentary committee set up on look at the issue of jobs, employment and the economy, there remains many questions to be asked about the EIS.

    Here, we pose the following 10 questions to be answered so that there can be greater confidence that the EIS will be an effective program to help the workers in our country.

    1)                  Retrenchment compensation is currently spelled out in the Employment Act 1955 and the Employment Termination and Lay-Off Benefits (ETLB) Regulations 1980. Will the retrenchment compensation continue to be paid out by the employer after the introduction of the EIS? Will workers be worse off in the long run if retrenchment benefits are cut / abolished as part of a package deal for introducing the EIS?

    2)                  The estimated amount collected will be between RM700m to RM800m a year (based on 0.25% Employers and Employees contribution, 6.5m workers, RM2000 salary). How much will the administrative costs be? Will it be as high as 25% of the amount collected as some reports have indicated?

    3)                  Since the EIS is an insurance scheme like SOCSO, does this mean that employees won’t be able to get back these funds if they don’t get retrenched in their lifetime? How much disposable income will the EIS scheme take away from the regular worker over their lifetimes?

    4)                  How with the EIS funds be managed? Will it be managed in the same manner as the SOCSO funds which has delivered returns that, on average, are lower than EPF’s returns?

    5)                  One of the purpose of the EIS is to help retrain and reskill workers who have lost their jobs. How will these retraining and reskilling programs be different from existing programs which are being implemented by the government such as Skim Latihan 1 Malaysia (SKIM) and others? The government must provide a convincing case that the provision of retraining schemes under EIS will be more effective than current programs.

    6)                  There are already existing training schemes provided and paid for by the sums collected from employers and managed by the Human Resources Development Fund (HRDF). There have been numerous reports that more than RM100m of this fund has not been used by employers for retraining purposes. Can existing HRDF scheme be utilised better for retraining purposes? What is to say that the proposed EIS scheme will not end up like the HRDF scheme i.e. lots of unused funds that are not put into retraining schemes?

    7)                  Initial reports indicate that only those workers who are currently being covered by SOSCO i.e. those earning less than RM4000 a month will be eligible for the EIS scheme. But many middle-income workers are also being retrenched these days including those in the financial industry and the oil and gas industry. What kinds of plans and programs does the government have to help these workers who are in the M40 category?

    8)                  Estimates by Malaysian trade unions show that workers lose between RM50 million to RM100 million a year from lost compensation as a result of companies going bankrupt but RM700 million to RM800 million will be collected from the EIS scheme, half of which are coming from workers. Is this an effective approach to solving the non-compensation issue?

    9)                  One of the main reasons why workers at the lower end of the economic spectrum are losing their jobs is because of employer preference for foreign workers. If the government does not have a comprehensive plan to reduce our reliance on foreign workers, how effective will the EIS scheme be? How easy will it be for the workers who have lost their jobs to find new jobs, especially when they have to compete with lower paid foreign workers?

    10)               Some countries in Asia which have employment insurance schemes also feature government contributions to these schemes (Thailand – 0.25%, Taiwan – 0.1%, Vietnam – 1%). Has the government considered having its own contribution to this scheme to decrease the financial burden on employers and employees alike?

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming, DAP
    Sim Tze Sin, PKR
    Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, AMANAH
    Dr Rais Hussin, BERSATU

Page 3 of 20012345...102030...Last »