I would like to respond to Russell Ng's letter which appeared in malaysiakini .

In Mr Ng's letter, he had erroneously described affirmative action as practised in the United States as that of a 'race-based' numerical system, and then went on to justify the current Malaysian race-based quota system as sui generis .

As I understand it, the US does not practice affirmative action based on racial quota, despite erroneous popular belief. Instead, the US Supreme Court has consistently struck down explicit quotas in education, employment, housing and publicly funded programmes on the basis of race. However, race or ethnic association may be taken into account as one of many other equally compelling reasons as consideration by public institutions in an effort to ensure equal access and equal opportunity for all.

This is clearly illustrated in the latest US Supreme Court's rulings on affirmative action in access to higher education (Grutter v Bollinger, and Gratz v Bollinger), the court has defined the compelling reasons for affirmative action, and once again, rejected an outright and explicit use of racial numerical quota (first affirmed in Regents of University of California v Bakke) as the sole or main determinant in public policy decision-making process.

This is not a nuance reading of the affirmative action as practiced in the US but one of clear distinction from that which is practiced in Malaysia. And even if the US did practice a racial quota system, it does not mean Malaysia should do likewise - a moral wrong is always a moral wrong.

Proponents of 'meritocracy' often failed to note the social and political implications of their well-meaning positions. Within the notion of 'meritocracy' therein lies equal and fair access to opportunity and resources. For meritocracy in higher education to be realised, primary and secondary education must be of equal quality in delivery and access. Clearly this is a near impossibility in a country like Malaysia where resources are limited, and disparate socio-economic factors play a greater determinant in long-term education access and success of a school-going child.

Russell Ng's proposed solution is not any different from what is currently practiced in Malaysia. Proportioning university access based on racial quota is once again 'weeding' out well-qualified students on the basis of racial identity. It is unhealthy for the long-term goals of nation building, and of cultivating good citizenry.

Affirmative action should never be used to right past wrongs, but as a social-political tool to ensure fairness and equal access to opportunity. However, we must recognise that affirmative action is merely a means to an end, and that we must nurture all of our young to excel in education. Only then will the dignity of a recipient in affirmative action be honoured, and his/her achievements be celebrated.

The main culprit in Malaysian tertiary education system isn't about 'meritocracy', but limited and rationing of access. Furthermore, many of the current problems can be alleviated if we expand access to tertiary education, and complete revamping the STPM (lower and upper six) syllabus to better reflect real pre-university education needs, and tied that to a realistic first-year university academic requirement.

Our STPM syllabus has not changed that much from that of the HSC's and 1960s A Levels. Furthermore, we should focus more on ensuring quality in the delivery of secondary-level education to ensure a semblance of meritocracy is adhered to at the tertiary education level. As I see it, we are weeding out way too many well-qualified students for all the wrong reasons and that means our current limited access to higher education limits our full economic potential.

So what then is the current popular lament on 'meritocracy' all about? If I may be so bold, perhaps, this is merely another facade which the politically disenfranchised seek as redress for a well-meaning political grievance? And on another point, are those who are clamouring for 'meritocracy' be willing to put money where the need is the greatest, namely rural schools?