opinion
No political system can side-step the question of meritocracy. It finally looks like the Malaysian government is moving in the right direction in trying to phase out the quota system in the intake of university students.In a very specific sense, the government has come to a situation where there is feeling that the quota system is not helping Malay students and many of them are not interested in pursuing their studies. Alternatively, an impression is created that students in institutions of higher learning are more keen to engage in activities that can be described as anti-government.
It is not that the government has suddenly seen the light at the end of the tunnel. A variety of factors have conditioned the government to adopt measures to dilute the present quota system.
Poor performance of Malay students, their inability to compete with Chinese students, the tendency on their part to develop anti-government orientation, the brain-drain factor and others have been largely responsible for pushing the government in this direction.
While meritocracy is welcomed, there however, are no larger indications from the government of the day to wipe out the racial system. In fact, one could argue that the present method of diluting the quota system is merely a piecemeal measure that might have no effect in wiping out the political, social and economic system that is so racially entrenched.
Broader-based system
While it is significant for the government to adopt the meritocracy model for the education realm in general and in the intake of university students, the real question is whether such a measure will be effective.
The question of effectivity is difficult to measure at this juncture, but the problem with the present method is that it is very highly selective, in other words, focuses on a small area of concern. What the government should do is have an overall plan to introduce meritocracy not only in the intake of university students, but also in terms of employment both in private and public sector besides liberalising the intake of students in government sponsored colleges where the present recruitment is merely confined to one race and others.
Unless a much broader-based system is adopted, it is feared that present ad hoc method might not be effective in bringing about a desired situation.
For instance, while the government is concerned about the performance of Malay students in public universities and is taking the measures to introduce the criteria of performance, it has not touched on the nature of employment in these places.
As it is, employment of lecturers and general staff is overwhelmingly confined to one ethnic group. Appointment of heads of department, deans, deputy vice-chancellors and vice-chancellors is based on the criteria of ethnicity.
Such appointments and the lack of recognition for non-Malay lecturers has resulted in a considerable brain-drain. The academia in Singapore have benefited from this brain-drain. Unless and until there are measures to introduce meritocracy at all levels, universities in Malaysia will not be able to excel academically.
Name of the game
Meritocracy cannot be introduced on the basis of whims and fancies of the ruling regime. It should not be introduced to punish Malay students for developing sympathies for the opposition. Certainly there is an element of this in why the government has all of sudden taken the meritocracy issue very seriously.
By and large university students in this country, particularly Malays, have merely followed the path laid down by their protector, Umno.
But then today the so-called protector blames those protected for being protected too much. Now there is tendency on the part of the protector to desist from some of its traditional functions that have led to its political ascendancy. Alternatively, the protector should also engage in some self-reflection as how, when and why it went wrong.
Meritocracy should be the name of the game. It cannot be postponed for too long for there is a heavy price to pay. But special privileges and affirmative action programmes to prop-up communities and groups should be stopped.
If at all there is a need for an affirmative action programme, then this should be merely assigned to help the needy, poor and marginalised, immaterial of their ethnic or religious origins.
But unfortunately, there is one opposition party in this country that simply does not understand the progressive principle behind the programme of affirmative action.
Recently, a spokesperson for the party went to the extent of saying that the government should not tamper with this principle because of its constitutionality. In other words, he said that the special privileges and quotas on the basis of ethnicity should not questioned because it has the endorsement of the constitution. PSM has given a very fitting reply to this kind of argument.
It is not very certain as to how successful the government will be in sustaining the measures in the campuses. But one thing is certain, as long as the organising principle of politics in the country is centered around ethnicity or any other hegemonic feature, then attempts at meritocracy are doomed to fail.
P RAMASAMY is a professor of political economy at the Political Science Department, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and has academic interests in Malaysian politics and labour. He has written quite extensively and is currently focusing on conflict management in Sri Lanka.
