MCA: Between Largesse And Being Intellectual
With one stroke of a pen by the Finance Minister allowing football betting, tycoon Vincent Tan is RM525 million richer. His Ascot Sports sold 70 per cent of the business to his corporate vehicle, Berjaya Group. If that’s not gargantuan largesse, I don’t know what is.
A Kadir Jasin
THE MEDIA on May 18 quoted the MCA president, Dr Chua Soi Lek, as saying that the Chinese community is no longer concerned with bread and butter issues, but with “intellectual” issues such as fair implementation of policies.
The Malaysian Insider news portal headlined it “Soi Lek says Chinese drawn to fair policies, not largesse.” Largesse is defined as (1) generous giving, as from a patron, (2) a gift or gifts given in a generous, or sometimes showy or patronizing, way and (3) nobility of spirit.
From the outset, I agree with him on the part about fair implementation of policies. Had government policies been implemented fairly and effectively, there would not have been the gaping income gaps among the races, states and regions.
The Bumiputeras would have achieved their modest 30-per cent wealth ownership target and our society would have been more equal and egalitarian. The top 20 per cent would not continue to suck up the wealth.
Unfortunately, the opposite might be the case. Poverty is creeping back and the income gaps among the races have widened. Official statistics that accompanied the launching of the New Economic Model, show that 60 per cent of households earn below RM3,000 a month, and 80 per cent of them are Bumiputera households.
Thanks to their stronger economic position at the outset of the NEP and their monopoly of the economic supply chain, the Chinese were able to beat all the targets set for them but the Bumiputeras and the Indians lag behind.
While the Bumiputeras and the poor Chinese and Indians benefited modestly from official largesse, the Chinese mercantile and professional classes benefited more substantially.
With one stroke of a pen by the Finance Minister allowing football betting, tycoon Vincent Tan is RM525 million richer. His Ascot Sports sold 70 per cent of the business to his corporate vehicle, Berjaya Group. If that’s not gargantuan largesse, I don’t know what is.
The Chinese enjoyed official largesse by way of large monopolies, concessions, contracts and subsidies – anything from sugar monopoly to large timber concessions, gaming franchises, IPP licences, massive contracts and billion ringgit worth of direct and indirect subsidies.
In fact, official largesse not only helped to prosper the well-connected Malay-, Chinese- and Indian-controlled conglomerates, but also in some instances saved them from bankruptcies.
The YLT official website tells of the company nearly going bankrupt in the 1970s, forcing family members to chip in to rescue it. By the 1980s, the YTL Group took off on a grand scale on account of large government contracts to build schools and modular hospitals and later on privatisation of railway land and the award of the first Independent Power Producer (IPP) licence.
Vincent Tan’s Berjaya Group took off when it was awarded the privatisation of Sports Toto in the 1980s while Ananda Krishnan became an overnight sensation when he was awarded the super-lucrative privatisation of the Jalan Ampang Race Course and a series of gaming and telecommunications franchises plus considerable seed capital from state-owned funds.
He is survivor, always enjoying the patronage of powerful Malay political figures. Today he is a master market maker known for taking his prized assets private only to re-quote them at handsome premiums.
