With Universiti Malaya's report concurring with Asli's (Asian Strategic and Leadership Institute) that the New Economic Policy (NEP) target of 30% bumi equity has been exceeded in the case of the UM's report, the target was reached way back in 1997 the government has been under pressure to come clean on the issue.

After forcing Asli to withdraw its report, the government had since admitted that the target has been exceeded. But while it initially first said that Malay ownership of the country's wealth - in the form of public-listed companies in Bursa Malaysia - stood at 36.64%, this was however retracted yesterday. The official figure now is 21.8%.

Malay wealth remains largely concentrated in the hands of a few. The majority is not much better off after 36 years of the NEP.

The debate on percentages should now end. However if the argument were exclusively about percentages, the debate would not have been so heated. There's more to it than that. Behind the first figure given is the implication that if indeed the target had been reached, there would no longer be justification for the NEP. In other words, the case for a race-based preferential treatment becomes more tenuous.

There is evidence that the majority of Malays remain marginalised. Do we still stick to percentages if large sections of the Malay community are left behind?

Any call to end affirmative action before parity is achieved would be unwise. If we agree with the rationale that narrowing the socio-economic disparity between the Malays and the other races is one of the conditions for racial harmony, then unless parity has been achieved or vastly narrowed in real terms and not just statistically - affirmative action in one form or another must continue.

Surely it cannot be good for the country for any section of the population to be marginalised. That this affects the majority of the population is surely cause for concern.

Legitimate right

Be that as it may, Malaysians have a legitimate right to question the policy if they are expected to put up with it beyond the target percentage. How is it that after 36 years of very aggressive pro-Malay policies, so large a section of the Malay population remains poor? Add to this the increasing marginalisation of the non-Malays, and we have a very large constituency of have-nots that cuts across race. Who has benefitted most from 36 years of the NEP?

From the outset, Umno was determined to create a Malay capitalist class. Revolusi Mental , a book brought out by the party in 1971, argued that the new heroes of Malay society are the wealthy Malays. These rich Malays will be the role models for the rest of their community.

Accordingly, the government set out to create instant Malay entrepreneurs by transferring them to a select few state-initiated enterprises.

But how does creating Malay tycoons help the Malay masses? Granted the 'role model' argument has merit, how does one pick the 'winners'? While there were successes, there were also spectacular failures which needed bailing out with public funds.

This created public misgivings and attracted criticisms across the racial spectrum of the population. The non-Malays who bore the missed opportunities (not just in business but also in education, etc) were unhappy. The Malays who were not amongst the chosen few, cried foul. Cries of cronyism and Umno-putraism rang loud and clear.

'Crutches' syndrome

To try and create instant entrepreneurs (irrespective of race) is unheard of. Transferring thriving enterprises to business novices is the height of absurdity. True entrepreneurs rise from the social and business milieu. Good businessmen are forged in the heat of competition, not cocooned against it. At best governments can give aspiring entrepreneurs the education and training needed to succeed in business and to open to them business opportunities. But ultimately it is left to them whether they succeed or fail.

Governments cannot and should not mollycoddle businessmen. To do so would be to stymie their growth. This is the 'crutches' syndrome which the Malay leaders have often alluded to but do not have the political will to correct because there are too many vested interests within the Malay elite. This probably accounts for the keris drawn in defence of 'Malay rights'. But is it 'Malay rights' or 'elite privileges' that Umno is defending?

The most damning criticism of the NEP is that it has been hijacked by the Malay elite together with their non-Malay cohorts. This explains why after nearly two generations of affirmative action, the Malay rakyat is not much better off.

There have been improvements to be sure, but if the focus had been on uplifting the Malays as a whole and not on creating Malay millionaires we would surely have achieved true parity, not just a statistical one.

So even as we bridge the inter-racial wealth disparity, a new intra-racial wealth disparity has opened up - the most serious of which is within the Malay community. Apparently 5% of Malays own 80% of Malay wealth.

While one can justify continued assistance for the Malay masses, there is no justification for the 'golden crutches' the Malay elite hang on to. It is the greed of those who have made it and yet continue to demand more perks including discounts for house purchases and scholarships for their children that grates with Malaysians irrespective of race. The issue is social justice and fairness not percentages. This is a class issue not a race issue.

Racial sentiments

Focusing on percentages only stirs racial sentiments which have little to do with closing the socio-economic gap between the races. To continue on this path allows unscrupulous politicians to stir up racial sentiments. The debate should focus on why the Malays have still not 'arrived', so to speak. We only have to open our eyes to see that Malays in the urban areas are struggling to make a living (like many non-Malays).

The salary of the average worker is barely sufficient to meet his needs. There are thousands of small traders and hawkers who eke out a living working long hours. It is the same in the rural areas. These are not the 'privileged' Malays we often mistake for the main beneficiaries of an unfair system. The system is just as unfair to the ordinary Malays as it is to ordinary non-Malays. The recent protests were not just about fuel hikes but about the general unsatisfactory condition of the rakyat.

The danger is that the discontent of the Malay have-nots can be exploited by those who have failed them as usual blaming it on the non-Malays. This is the tragedy of race politics: non-racial issues become racialised. To argue the NEP on the basis of percentages will lead us into this trap.

While focusing on the plight of the Malay masses, the NEP should not neglect the growing marginalisation of the other races. While the marginalisation of the Indians comes easily to mind, we must not forget that there are also poor Chinese. More importantly, we must not forget the indigenous communities the Orang Asli and natives of East Malaysia, who, though bumiputeras, have gained very little from the NEP. What in fact is their percentage of the national wealth?

It is better that we focus on how our affirmative action policies can be improved rather than harp on percentages. Ultimately it is in everyone's interest that no community is left behind. But when those left behind are mainly from the majority race, it is politically dangerous.

Fairer policy

The underlying issue is not percentages but whether the NEP is in fact effectively addressing Malay poverty while at the same time being fair to the others. Is it a policy for racial parity or a policy of racial privileges?

Is the NEP in its present form to continue ad inifinitum disadvantaging future generations of non-Malays? Or will it be modified to address a situation where the have-nots of all communities continue to be marginalised, while the elites prosper? Will we have an affirmative policy that is colour blind, transparent and accountable?

It should be clear to the Malays that the non-Malays are not the cause of the plight of the Malay masses. Treating the non-Malays fairly does not take anything away from the Malays. The uneven distribution of the Malay wealth is down to their own Malay leadership not the non-Malays. A fairer affirmative action policy can help the Malays as well as other have-nots.

It is time to replace the much maligned NEP in which the public has lost faith, with a new economic and social agenda which is fair and which delivers justice to all Malaysians.

YIN EE KIONG is a malaysiakini reader with a deep interest in economics.