Dr Maszlee Malik, the Minister of Education, may be the most controversial figure in the Government to day. He is much disliked by the Chinese, and on the other side the Peninsular Malays are probably warming up to him.
Immediately beneath the surface is one of the most racially charged issue over education: the Matriculation quota. The quota figure of 90:10 in favour of the Bumiputera admittedly looks lopsided, and is actually difficult to defend as a permanent feature of the Malaysian Education Policy. I was full of sympathy over the plight of an indian taxi driver I met in KL not too long ago. He had four children, but the elder ones had already missed opportunity for university education. “Abang” he said to me, “ life has been too difficult for me raising my children, but now none of them have managed to enter university. We Indians feel there are no hopes for us in Malaysia now”.
Such sentiment drove Indians away from Barisan Nasional. The Chinese undoubtedly have similar sentiment as they are more vocal, though they have a system of safety net in the form of Chinese Education and a large number of companies in the private sector that provide employment for them.
However, the Cabinet decision of maintaining the 90:10 quota, while at the same time increasing the total matriculation intake from 25,000 to 40,000 is understandable. Obviously it is intended to appease both the Malays and the Chinese. Dr. Maszlee must have felt that all races should be happy as their respective figures increase, though the quota remains unchanged. But there is still a problem as the increase in Matric student intake may crowd out the STPM intake to universities.
So, there is no quick fix to this issue. Furthermore, it has the effect of giving more opportunities for Matriculation system, which is widely viewed as a short cut and inferior qualification compared to STPM. Therefore, asking for a larger Matriculation quota does not look right for DAP, the party that prides itself as a fighter for merit based system.
PAKATAN HARAPAN particularly DAP and PKR has been trying to champion merit and need based system away from the race based one adopted by Barisan Nasional all this while. Now this policy is put to the test and they realise that it is easier said than done. PPBM being the youngest member with only a small number of MPs is the stumbling block. Yet it has proven to be the lyinchpin to PH power in the government.
Even how vocal the Chinese based parties condemn Dr Maszlee , it is not likely to change anything, at least not in the near future; my random checks on views of Malays in Peninsular Malaysia, find them to be rather defensive and prefer to skirt around the issue. This could mean only one thing, ie. generally Malays support the stand taken by Dr. Maszlee.
For that matter, the decision was actually made by the Cabinet and not by Dr. Maszlee alone. This could mean that Tun Mahathir was himself behind this decision.
In fact Tun Mahathir has come out in defense of Dr Maszlee as reported in the New Straits Times.
The reason for this decision is quite obvious. PPBM does not wish to appear out of step with the prevailing Malay opinion. After all, though small, it cannot afford to be seen as being bullied; it is a Malay based party and struggling to keep its constituents. Look at the U turns that Tun Mahathir took recently; ICERD and Rome Statute being the most notable ones.
It is interesting to note who voted those PPBM MP’s related to this issue. Our estimate put Dr Maszlee as being voted by Malay/Chinese in the ratio of 41;59. However, this is a majority Malay area and not considered a safe seat unless he is sensitive to Malay sentiment. This is more so given the background of recent cooperation between UMNO and PAS. The same case happens with Syed Sadiq and Rina Harun, two PPBM MPs who have been Dr Maszlee’s most vocal supporters in this issue.
For the people in Sarawak, it may be better to keep aside this issue that we cannot influence. Under the existing arrangement where Education is under Federal, either way we will lose. If we opt to do away with the matriculation quota, there would not be enough candidates from Sarawak to qualify for University entry. On the other hand, if we support the 90:10 quota, it does not look fair to the Chinese community.
Perhaps, we have more reasons now to strengthen our resolve to fight for autonomy of education in the state. We would be more free to work out on our own destiny.
As widely reported, YAB Abang Jo has stated that Sarawak Government will seek decentralisation or devolution of authority over education due to Federal Government’s unsatisfactory performance in the state.
Indeed, there is sufficient authority under article 95C(1) read with article 80(4) of the Federal Constitution for the federal government to transfer certain executive functions, including Education, as well as to provide funding to the state to discharge these functions.
This should be a dream for us Sarawakians; however, it will only remain a dream if funding is not forthcoming. Sarawak’s claims for 20% Petroleum Royalty should be handy for this purpose or at least a further increase of Sales Tax may be a good option. Cost of operating all existing education establishments in Sarawak has been estimated in an earlier article at RM 4.26 bil based on 2016 Federal Budget figures. The current estimate should not be less than RM 5.0 bil.
Upon implementation of these executive functions, Sarawak would have more leeway to plan for our own future which would depend to a large extent on the standard of education and human resource development in the state.
With that, the way should be open for us to upgrade our education facilities and curriculum, reintroduce English along side Bahasa Malaysia as a medium of instruction as well as provide for a more conducive atmosphere in Sarawak’s multi racial and multi religious environment. With this, Sarawak will definitely develop as model for the rest of the country.
.
.
DAH IKHWAN
