The myth behind the 30% thingy

Reading it the first time,


http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/7/1/nation/4233151&sec=nation


I applauded the bold move by Najib on the economic reforms. Of course the most telling change is that the 30% bumiputra quota requirement for companies seeking to list on the Bursa Malaysia has been done away


However, I wonder what you make of this.


".....All Malaysian companies seeking listing would have to offer 50% of their public offering to bumiputra investors, which would work out to 12.5% of the total stake;...."

To me it means the promoters only (i.e. the entrepreneurs seeking to list the companies; usually they develop the business to a size sufficient to qualify for listing) are able to reap the benefits of deregulation. Typical of BN policies as it benefits the privileged minority.


However, for the non-bumi man, woman and tengah-tengah in the street, their chances of succeeding in IPO application is immediate cut down by 50% “officially” as compared to previously, no such limiting of their “official” chances because before this, public offering is public offering.

The 12.5% quoted above assumes the IPO company is offering 25% for public floatation. If, however, the company decide to offer either 40%, 50% or 70% for public, then the bumi quota will be 20%, 25% or 35% respectively.


Hello! There goes the apparent favourable development in terms of “more equal opportunities for non-bumi"; something Najib is working hard on to re-gain non-bumi support.


Since we have a 50% to be set aside from public offering for bumis only, it is more appropriate, and grammatically correct to split the term “public spread” into “bumi public spread” and “non-bumi public” spread. Najib’s concept of 1 Malaysia illustrated.


"....Saying that the emphasis now was on participation instead of equity, Najib also announced the setting up of Ekutinas (Ekuiti Nasional Bhd), a private equity fund to make strategic investments for bumiputras, especially in companies with high-growth potential...."


Why not a fund for the poor and under privileged instead? Anyway, that is another angle.....


I prefer the approach to groom bumis and also non-bumis into having the right attitude to work, education, financial management and competitiveness. Turn Malaysians into efficient, effective, productive and thinking workers as well as powerfully consumers that make businessmen smile.


Throwing an enormous amount of tax payers’ money into “private” equity fund is falling back on the old model of shareholding and rent seeking mentality. Also, does “private” mean “private club concealed from public viewing and accountability"? If the records of BN administration’s investment vehicles are to go by, we can expect huge losses, unaccountable transactions and evaporation of funds.


I rather put the fund into SMI loans, education and training facilities so that bumis and non-bumis alike can have access to training, financial support and opportunity to compete in an open economy. If Najib wants to open up competition by letting Johnny Foreigners to come in, then equip all Malaysians with the skill, backing and support, please.


Look at Singapore, the flow of foreign equities, manpower, brainpower and business are fluid and dynamic but are Malaysians equipped with the right mentality, work ethnic and awareness to deal with this after decades of competition and information restrive environment?


Oh, by the way, where are the defenders of ethnic rights from Pewaris, UiTM etc as this ground shaking announcement is made? Compared to opening up UiTM for 10% non-bumi seats, isn’t this more significant? Their silence reinforce my impression that they are consistent not in their purported ideas, belief and principles but rather in their support for a particular side of the political divide.