Affirmative action (NEP): A simple story

 

Nazir Razak, son of the architect of the New Economic Policy (NEP), said on March 30 that the NEP had led to dysfunctional politics and growing divisions among Malaysians.

Warning that “festering issues” would boil over if leaders failed to quickly institute reforms, the corporate figure said: “It’s not surprising because the system that was put in place was meant to be an experiment and to be temporary.”

His father Razak Hussein, the second prime minister, introduced the NEP after the 1969 race riots to eliminate the identification of race with economic function and eradicate poverty regardless of race. The overarching goal was harmony in the nation.

However, the affirmative action policy favouring the majority race went off tangent, which is why many Malaysians have criticised it over the years.

Those implementing the NEP began concentrating on promoting Bumiputera preference programmes in all fields, forgetting or refusing to see that poverty knows neither race nor religion. The NEP as implemented did help some Malays, especially those connected to politicians, move up the economic ladder. More Malays became graduates and the civil service became filled with Malays.

But some of those who were involved in drawing up the NEP or in the early years of its implementation have called it a failure, as have many others.

One reason is that many rural Malays still remain poor while a coterie of connected Malay individuals and their families have become super rich. Another is that by creating a Bumiputera and non-Bumiputera dichotomy, the NEP has further divided the nation.

The NEP was to have ended in 1990 but has continued in one form or another till today. I don’t think any Malay political leader has the guts to put a stop to it even though they may acknowledge that it has gone wonky.

But there is a way for such a policy to work and I would like to explain it by telling you a simple story of a simple man who became a success in life and continues to contribute to society because of “affirmative action”.

This is the story of Dr I Lourdesamy who runs the Asia College of Technology (ACT) and who introduced the concept of the community college to Malaysia and popularised the American degree transfer programme.

He would not be one of the nation’s leading educationists if not for “affirmative action”.

Lourdesamy joined Anderson School Ipoh in 1945 where his father M Iruthayasamy worked as a gardener earning about $60. Two years later, the headmaster, AF Hunter, waived his school fee of $2.50 for two reasons: one, his father was the school gardener and two, Hunter had noticed Lourdesamy’s love for books.

When he was in Form Three, headmaster GED Lewis, pleased with the good marks scored by Lourdesamy and noting his poor financial background, got him a scholarship from the Lions Club. He was to be given $40 a month for a year but Lewis, with foresight, placed the entire $480, which he collected upfront, in a savings account under the name of his student.

After showing Lourdesamy the bank book, Lewis kept it. He told his student: “I will give it to you when you need to pay the Senior Cambridge Examination fee.” However, Lewis was transferred to Victoria Institution and just before he left, he called Lourdesamy to his office and handed over the bank book. He advised his student not to withdraw any money and to keep it to pay his exam fee.

After completing his Senior Cambridge in 1954, Lourdesamy was selected for teacher training at Brinsford Lodge under the University of Birmingham in the UK. Returning as a teacher, he enrolled for Form Six under the government’s Further Education Classes programme.

He completed the two-year programme in one year, on the urging of Anderson School teacher N Selvamany, and was accepted into the University of Malaya (UM).

But he had no money.

Selvamany advised him to write to a European officer at the education ministry who was in charge of scholarships in 1959. He received a reply saying the closing date was over and to reapply the following year.

In 1960, Lourdesamy reapplied based on his outstanding results and secured a federal scholarship to study at UM. Later, he secured a seat at the University of Pittsburgh in the US under a fellowship from the Ford Foundation.

He went to the University of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public and International Affairs to do his Masters and then his PhD but he was so good that after finishing the second semester of the Masters programme, the university allowed him to move straight into the PhD programme. Which is why today he has a PhD but no Masters.

“Throughout my education, someone stepped in to provide financial support. If this money had not come my way at the right time, I would probably not have gone to the university or have a PhD to my name.

“It was based on merit. I was from a poor family and I was good in my studies,” Lourdesamy told me.

And that is how any affirmative action should be: it should be based on need and merit, not on race.

The reason the NEP has, instead of bringing the races together, caused the racial divide to widen is because it is based on race.

This is a globalised world and we need young people who can face up to the challenges; we need to nurture the best talents possible. Race-based considerations should be completely dropped, especially where education is concerned.

If Lourdesamy had gone to the University of Malaya or any public university in the 1990s, or even now, it is highly likely that he would not have received a federal scholarship, even with his good scores. He may not even have got a place in the university.

And Malaysia would have lost a wonderful talent simply because those in power chose to reject him based on race.

So, yes, let’s have affirmative action but a needs-based affirmative action. This is especially important in education. If you want a progressive nation, you need to invest in education and you need to invest in financially poor students who show promise – regardless of their race or religion or creed.

Let Lourdesamy serve as an example to our policy makers and implementers. He is who he is today because those in authority then not only recognised his talents but also knew that the gardener’s son needed to be supported financially to realise his potential.

At 85, Lourdesamy the educationist has more than repaid those who had faith in him by educating thousands of students from the time he was in government service to the time he ran Vanto Academy, the Petaling Jaya Community College and now ACT, and helping countless more find their path in life.

In between he did other things, including serving as deputy general manager of Bank Buruh, chairing the national wages council and being a consultant to the National Institute of Public Administration or INTAN. - FMT

Dr Lourdesamy is a leading educationist today because financial aid in earlier days was based on need and merit

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.