I refer to the many letters criticising our national car and would agree with Peter Ooi's view that quality comes from sheer hard work. Brand name, like respect, has to be earned.

Our former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad has gone against strong criticisms to push through the national car project. The idea was commendable but the eagerness to show the world our capability as soon as possible proved to be short-sighted. We seemed to be more interested in form rather than substance in most of our endeavours, like tallest buildings (even if one is empty), more graduates (even if they still need lessons in English and other employable skills), a Formula One race track (even when we did not have a driver yet) and so on.

When Proton first rolled out their Sagas, then Wiras, the demand was so great that the eager buyers had to accept the conditions such as having no choice in its colour, no right to refuse certain accessories, and to accept poor quality, just to be able to lay their hands on the cars. Under such circumstances, the dealers never had it so good and there was no need to canvass for business. The manufacturers also cannot deliver on time, let alone worry over quality. Herein lay the main reason for the poor quality.

Other reasons include the poor quality parts made by our local manufacturers due to our eagerness to have as much local content as possible. Only those joint-venture companies with reputable foreign partners and long history of high quality products proved reliable. Others seem dubious in quality because of hurried set-ups.

High quality control in manufacturing is a costly process, which only a committed, far-sighted manufacturer with strong cash position and high management culture is able to achieve over many years of painstaking adherence to strict policies.

The defects mentioned in the letters of complaints on Proton cars would not have gotten past strict quality control checks of a good manufacturer or assembler, and the few that got past (which could have happened later) would have been spotted at the pre-delivery inspection stage. A strict quality control policy set by top management would have sent back cars with minor defects like paint scratches, small dents, poor quality weather strips, uneven rims, etc. All these involves time, trouble and money.

A weak or short-sighted manufacturer and/or dealer would try to cover up any defects to unsuspecting buyers and hope for the best. The amount saved from poor QC can be considerable and would be shown in high profits for the company. But these were only short-term as the high incidences of defects would damage the reputation of the manufacturer and it will cost a lot more and take a longer time of undoing the damage before the public will be able to accept it as a quality product.

When faced with impending globalisation, we took the easy way out by buying up Lotus Engineering for its name and high standard of research and development. But were we sure of getting what we wanted? Are the engineers and scientists responsible for R&D work still there? If so, are they going to put in the same effort, and can we tell if they are not?

We cannot escape from the fact that the brain drain stemming from the lack of meritocracy is a factor to where we are today. Though I cannot quote a name in motor industry, but in education, Professor Wang Gung Wu has helped Hong Kong University to become one of the leading institutions of higher learning in Asia, which was a loss to our University Malaya. In the motor industry, I wonder if the quality of cars could have been better if it was led by Kah Motor's expertise in assembling Mercedes and Honda. Instead, Kah Motor lost their hold on Honda - for doing too well!

While I digress, our policy of luring Malaysian scientists back seem like a big joke. Time and again, for over 30 years, we overlooked Malaysians with potential because of the ugly race factor. After they made their name overseas, we want them back, offering extraordinary packages. For a disillusioned person who had been sidelined before, it is not just monetary considerations. What is there to guarantee that the same race factors will not surface again?