Former Malaysian leaders were clear on Secularity of the Constitution but their successors today seem unclear!

Former leaders were clear about the secularity of the Constitution. Today, however, not all their successors in the political and judicial worlds seem to agree.

CONTROVERSY over our country’s position as a secular or Islamic state has flared again, motivated by politics, of course.

Headlined in this newspaper in 1983 were statements by Tunku Abdul Rahman (former Secretary-General of the OIC) and former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn that Malaysia was and should continue to be a secular state.

Former Lords, President Tun Suffian Hashim and Tun Salleh Abas, were also clear about the secularity of the Constitution.

Today, however, not all their successors in the political and judicial worlds seem to agree.

The recent provocations have triggered recent forums on Muslim history and political philosophy, asking the fundamental question of whether Islamic text and tradition mandate a particular form of government, or merely describe the qualities and virtues that a Muslim society should have.

Even amongst proponents of the latter, there are arguments as to what extent the state should use its power to coerce citizens to mandate or promote Islamic values.

Indeed, Muslim political philosophy is just as lively as Western political philosophy, with lineages of thinkers promoting order and obedience on one side and individual liberty and responsibility on the other.

The historical record, too, shows huge diversity in Muslim governance structures, and still today there are Muslims who justify communism, dictatorship, republican democracy and constitutional monarchy – though in country comparative indices, Muslim monarchies usually fare better than republics, a distinction the Arab Spring seems to reinforce.

Some have pointed out that in drafting our Federal Constitution, our monarchs initially opposed including a declaration that Islam should be the religion of the federation.

Alas, the reason for this has not been properly explained. It has been claimed that it shows that the Malay Rulers were themselves “secular” (which some then incorrectly define as “hostile to religion”).

No, they merely accepted the co-existence of secular institutions alongside religious ones – nothing new, as the Ottomans amply showed.

More crucially, the Rulers and their predecessors had, in law and reality, been Heads of Islam in their own states for centuries.

The Federal Constitution would not, it was thought, affect that, and thus Justice Abdul Hamid’s recommendation to insert Islam as the religion of the federation for ceremonial purposes prevailed.

This idea that religion was a state matter was re-emphasised when Malaysia was created: the first of the 18 and 20 points that Sarawak and Sabah agreed as a condition of merger was that they would have no state religion.

Alas, the Rulers and founding fathers could not foresee how politics would alter the nature of religion in our country, nor predict how check and balance institutions would be weakened in favour of centralising ever more powers in the federal executive.

The administration of Islam was no exception, becoming concentrated in institutions at the federal level controlled by politicians and bureaucrats.

This is the main reason why Islam in Malaysia has become so prone to politicisation.

You can still experience the beauty of non-political Malaysian Islam: the meticulously maintained mosques and cemeteries, the tastes and smells of Raya, the blessings invoked at wedding kenduri, and the harmonies of accompanying nasyid.

The heirs of Al-Idrus, Al-Attas, Al-Habshi, Al-Qadri, Alsagoff and others continue to produce champions of Islamic leadership, philosophy, philanthropy and entrepreneurship.

Despite the noises of those who want to ban concerts on one side and those who support theatre on the other (I recommend Nadirah at KLPac), there is also space for the Maulids of the legendary Haqqani Maulid Ensemble and less famous ones like last week’s session at Istana Hinggap Seremban organised by Persatuan Asyraaf Negri Sembilan.

For centuries, Muslims here have known that Islam can flourish without politics.

The Rulers for their part have continued pushing for progress in this vein: in Perak one of the most exciting recent appointments to the royal court was of Oxford Fel­low in Islamic Studies Datuk Dr Muhammad Afifi Al-Akiti; in Negri Sembilan the palace has hosted efforts leading towards Egypt’s Al-Azhar University establishing a local faculty; and in Perlis the Raja recently hosted Prof Tariq Ramadan’s dialogue with 2,000 religious officials, and last week the Raja Muda graced an unprecedented interfaith forum in the state.

This is the kind of Muslim leadership the country is crying out for, rather than the ostentatious politicisation of religion which has only caused consternation and division.

In the meantime, there is not going to be a political resolution on the Islamic state issue at the federal level anytime soon, and thus it seems sensible to instead re-affirm the intentions of the Rulers and the founding fathers.

Only in this way can we rejoin the dynamic, intellectual, spiritual and moderate narrative of Islam that we were long a part of.

ROAMING BEYOND THE FENCE  By TUNKU 'ABIDIN MUHRIZ
newsdesk@thestar.com.my

 > Tunku ’Abidin Muhriz is President of IDEAS

Related posts:

Malaysia is a Secular state or an Islamic country? Oct 31, 2012

Malaysia a transit point for terrorists or a terrorist recruitment centre? Oct 31, 2012

Property market here skyrocketing demand; calls to make Malaysia a real estate investment hub

Homes prices in Malaysia are expected to be stable, thanks to solid domestic demand and ample purchasing power, said Datuk FD Iskandar (pictured), Deputy President of the Real Estate and Housing Developers’ Association of Malaysia (REHDA).

“With the implementation of the Economic Transformation Programme and the Greater Kuala Lumpur, the real estate sector is set to experience skyrocketing demand in the coming years,” he told The Borneo Post.

Compared to other property segments, landed houses saw the highest demand this year and the same is expected for 2013 and 2014. One of the factors that contributed to the domestic demand was the country’s growth rate of between 2.2 and 2.3 percent, as well as the rapid urbanisation of Malaysia.

“In the 70s, the degree of urbanisation in Malaysia was only about 30 percent and it increased to 40 percent in the 80s. Now, the degree of urbanisation in the country is between 55 percent and 56 percent,” he said, adding that 200,000 houses were sold in 2011, of which 50 percent were new properties, with the rest being resale properties.

At the same time, people need not worry that a property bubble is looming. Of all the properties sold in 2011, only 1.8 percent was bought by foreigners, unlike in Singapore, where over 39 percent of properties were sold to expatriates, he said.

In addition, property prices in Malaysia are still one of the lowest in the ASEAN region.

“The best that we have is the KLCC area, with an average selling price of US$500 psf (RM1,525 psf). In Singapore, you will be paying US$2,000 (RM6,103) for the same area, while in Jakarta, you will get it in between US$700 and US$800 (RM2,136 to RM2,441),” he added.

By Cheryl Tay 
 

Calls to make Malaysia a real estate investment hub

 
By Andrew Batt:

The Malaysian government should amplify efforts to promote Malaysia as an international property investment hub, according to property developers in a report by The Business Times.

At present, 2 percent of the total property sales in Malaysia come from foreigners, compared with Singapore’s 30 percent. Taking into account that about 120,000 new units enter the market each year, this translates to 2,400 properties.

The government has also introduced measures to cut red tape and enhance the delivery of public service at all government agencies both at federal and state levels.

Moreover, Malaysia is eyeing to attract thousands of expatriates to Iskandar. Three times the size of Singapore, this region will feature an education hub, leisure facilities, a financial district, as well as residential and commercial areas.

European expatriates based in Singapore are planning to relocate to Malaysia due to its cheaper property and low cost of living. Many have already purchased homes in the southern part of the country.

According to Jason Thoe, Head of Marketing at PropertyGuru.com.my, investors are flooding in to Malaysia from Singapore, China, Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong snapping up residential properties in Johor, Kuala Lumpur and Penang.

Ho Hon Sang, Managing Director (property development division) at Sunway Bhd, added that Chinese, Japanese and South Koreans are coming back to Malaysia to invest in properties.

“The country’s leadership and branding is important to attract foreigners here. The government is (also) addressing the issue of affordability so that all Malaysians could own a property,” added Ho. 

South-East Asia in the frontline of US containing China rise?

The US presidential contest will make very little difference to us. American policy in the Asia-Pacific has already been reconfigured. The die has been cast.
DON’T wait up. As the world’s second-largest (and most expensive) democracy elects a president, South-East Asians might as well switch off. The US presidential contest will make very little difference for us.

Obama or Romney? Republican or Democrat? Who cares? American policy in the Asia-Pacific has already been reconfigured. The die has been cast.

After a decade-long obsession with Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States has finally switched its focus further east.

In essence, Washington has acknowledged Asia’s centrality both economically and now, politically.

The move has been dubbed the “pivot” as a steady shift towards Asia (and especially the “containment” of China) becomes more deeply-institutionalised in Beltway thinking.

Another less well-known development is accelerating this shift.

Basically, the United States after decades of being a net importer of energy is emerging as a new exporter.

This trend – driven by the shale gas revolution (powered by the “fracking” technique by which gas is extracted from rock) – will reshape the way Americans view the world.

Certainly, petro-powers such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates will see their influence dipping in Washington DC.

According to the US Energy Information Administration, the world’s second-largest energy consumer after China has huge shale gas reserves (some 860 trillion cubic feet).

Indeed, The Economist in July 2012 estimated that shale gas currently contributes one third of America’s gas supplies and by 2035 this could rise to 50%.

Moreover, these new developments could create three million jobs in the United States by 2020.

There’s also the possibility – controversial and hotly-debated– that America might start exporting its LNG surplus, generating, according to Michael A. Levi of the Council on Foreign Relations in an August 2012 New York Times article, an additional US$3bil per year for the American economy.

It’s hard to imagine how an energy-independent America will behave.

There’s no doubt that the Middle East will no longer be so central to US foreign policy. Instead, a resurgent America may well have greater wherewithal to check China in their common Asia-Pacific backyard.

Moreover, an influx of American LNG imports could strengthen its influence on countries like Japan (which is seeking to step away from nuclear power) and radically upend Asian energy markets, including in South-East Asia.

For starters, Indonesia’s coal will be less sought after.

At the same time, the region’s large and costly LNG facilities may well end up experiencing a drop in profitability as long-term contracts lose their attractiveness.

Ironically, America’s new-found energy independence is contrasted by China’s increasing energy import-dependence.

In July, Beijing’s National Energy Administration reported that the Middle Kingdom imported 81.09 million tonnes of coal (up 70.6% year-on-year), 30.2 million tonnes of crude oil (up 30.2%) and 4.08 million tonnes of LNG (up 100.2%) in the first half of 2012 alone.

China’s demand for energy is vast.

Imagine then a super-power that views its energy security with mounting unease, if not “paranoia”: watching developments in the South China Sea, the Strait of Malacca and Myanmar as a series of deliberate moves to limit its reach.

So, while the US presidential elections won’t have any direct bearing on our lives, South-East Asians are going to have to get used to being an important geopolitical stage as the two great superpowers jockey for pre-eminence.

For starters, our hitherto uneventful Asean meetings (durian fests, golf, silk batiks and bad karaoke) will become argumentative, testing all of us.

What happened recently at the Asean Foreign Ministers meeting in Phnom Penh when the Cambodian hosts refused to sign off on a joint communique will become a regular occurrence as Great Power rivalry courses its way through our association.

Having said this, the region barely featured during the actual campaign.

The third and final Obama-Romney debate on foreign policy was merely a set-piece of China sabre-rattling.

Still, Obama’s “pivot” towards Asia and Romney’s talk of a “Reagan Economic Zone” of “free trade”-oriented nations to combat China’s influence underlines the shift.

Of course, all of this is not surprising. We all know that economic gravity is shifting to Asia which in turn will also boost the strategic importance of South-East Asia.

So, like it or not, the next American president’s main foreign policy challenges are likely to come from South-East Asia as anywhere else.

Let’s not forget that China will also have a new leadership in place by then as well, fronted by that princeling extraordinaire Xi Jinping.

As I said earlier, South-East Asia is likely to be at the frontlines of the next global contest for supremacy. Let’s hope we’ll be able to cope with all the attention.

CERITALAH By KARIM RASLAN

Related posts: 

The role that the US plays in Asia: Containment of China! Nov 27, 2011 
China advises ASEAN to be independent Jun 26, 2012

Singapore warns US on anti-China rhetoric! Feb 11, 2012

China warns US on Asia military strategy Jan 07, 2012

US Military Strategy to Asia: Poke a Stick In China's Eye Jan 22, 2012

US threat: superpower gun barrels pivot east Aug 12, 2012

Why Failure is so important to Success?

Failure and more importantly studying others’ misfortunes is one of the most important educational tools we have. In fact there is an entire convention in the Bay Area for technology entrepreneurs, investors, developers and designers to study their own and others’ failures and prepare for success, thefailcon.com. We had the amazing opportunity to chat today with Caroline Cummings, VP of Marketing at Palo Alto Software. As the former co-founder and CEO of two technology companies, she’s experienced both start-up failures and successes, and has raised close to $1 million in investment capital.

Her first venture, OsoEco.com (healthy social shopping), dissolved in 2009. Her second venture, RealLead (mobile marketing for real estate) sold in early 2012. She has co-founded several successful entrepreneurial programs for the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce, including Smart-ups Pub Talks and the Southern Willamette Angel Network. Not only has Caroline had an amazing career where she has had the opportunity to be both entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial, she strongly believes in paying it forward through mentorship. “I think the secret to the universe is mentoring,” said Cummings.

She has created what she calls “The 10 Reasons Why a Startup Fails” to help other entrepreneurs avoid some of the detrimental mistakes that she has made and witnessed over the years.

1. The Wrong Team – as Jim Collins noted in his book Good To Great, “start by getting the right people on the bus, the wrong people off the bus, and the right people in the right seats.”

2. The Single Founder – finding the right co-founder is critical. To find the right partner you have to be able to recognize the skills that you do not posses and be willing to admit that you have shortcomings.

3. The Wrong Legal Team – Caroline found that having legal counsel that was not well-versed in business law was one of the biggest mistakes that her failed business encountered! Make sure you have sound, credible counsel and do your due diligence.Caroline suggests that you need to trust your gut when it comes to your legal counsel but also has laid out some questions that you should ask any legal representative you are considering:

• Have they worked with your industry?
• How much time do they have to spend with you?
• Who else do you go to if they cannot be available to you (partners)?
• Have they raised rounds of financing before?
• If so, have they created/read a Capitalization Table?
• Have they done compensation packages?
• Do they have experience with IP protection?
• Do they have experience with Global Expansion?
• Do they have experience with exits, M&A’s, IPOs?

4. Boiling the Ocean – Is your concept completely new? Will you have to teach your potentials consumers about your product, will there be a learning curve? Can you borrow techniques that have already been created or partner with companies that already exist?

5. Not Talking to Customers – often entrepreneurs do all of their concepting and creation within a bubble either because they are afraid someone will steal their idea or because they want it to be perfect before releasing it to the world. Lean Start Up methodology has taught us to find our MVP (Most Viable Product) and roll with it. Test the product, concept or service to see if it is viable. It doesn’t have to be perfect right out of the gate, get feedback, make changes, pivot where necessary. Include your customers in your research and development.

6. Stealth Too Long – If you are too slow to draw, you may miss your opportune time to launch or worse yet, someone else might beat you to the finish line. Take advantage of all of the tools and information out there to help you get your business up and running (like www.chic-ceo.com and many easily accessible books like “The Art of the Start” for example.)

7. Stuck on Original Idea – although it is important to have a clear direction for your company, you must be nimble when it comes to having a successful startup. Opportunities arise, projects fail and situations change.

8. Taking Dumb Money – when you are raising capital and spending money other than what your company has generated, you get a say in the transaction. Don’t just take a deal because you need the money, be smart about what the money brings with it. Look for investors that are willing to mentor you, introduce you to contacts and take a significant interest in the success of your organization.

9. Founder-itis – “An organization faces founder’s syndrome or founder-itis as the scope of activities widen and number of stakeholders increase. Without an effective and inclusive decision making structure and process there is potential for conflict between newcomers who seek effective involvement with organizational development and the founder(s) who seek to dominate the decision making process. This can be very disruptive both to the organization and to the individuals concerned and should be carefully and clearly diagnosed and addressed quickly and decisively.^“

10. Spending Too Much Money – Often startups think that once they hit a certain threshold they can become less frugal. Frugality is a virtue that many startups have a hard time managing. It is important to be willing to spend where necassary but to manage the bottom line. Luxuries like fancy office spaces may not be necessary in the startup phase.

By Jody Coughlin, Forbes Contributor 
Jody Coughlin is the CMO and co-owner of Chic CEO – a free resource for female entrepreneurs. You can follow her and Chic CEO on twitter at @ChicCEO.

You might also like…
 Seven Steps to Negotiating Success
 

Seven Steps to Negotiating Success

Almost half of all professionals on the globe feel uncomfortable when it comes to negotiating, so don’t beat yourself up about it. Instead, try these tried-and-true tactics from author and negotiation expert Selena Rezvani.

Taking a loan is fine, but if you can’t pay back your loans ...

HAVING gone through a few recessions and occasional global financial crisis in my lifetime, I have seen enough suffering by genuine business owners and their families.

When the going gets tough, the banks call in the loans and their cash-strapped business just fold up. The bank will then sell their pledged collateral and sue them till they are declared bankrupt. Standard operating procedures (SOP) for the bank and sobbing by the poor chap.

Then you have property speculators and big-time stock market manipulators bankrolled by greedy bankers until the bubble burst and the market crash. All hell will break loose as all parties scramble to damage control mode. The cash rich speculators will survive but the bankers always end up with having to take an unwanted haircut. High margins come with high risks. Fair game.

To get a loan, small businessmen have to charge to the bank whatever properties they have as collateral. At all times, they have to sign a personal guarantee too, just in case the bank cannot fully recover their loan sum from the forced sale of the property.

Unless you are someone special with VVIP status, the bank will come after you. Trust me, bankers are sticklers to SOP and they will make sure your name appear in the classified pages for bankruptcies if you don't pay up.

So, I am sure everyone is watching with great interest the latest promise in parliament by our Agriculture and Agro-based Industries Minister on the full recovery of the RM250mil loan from the National Feedlot Corp.

It looks like there were no properties charged to the Government as the 600ha in Gemas was leased from the Negri Sembilan government for RM200,000 a year and the condominiums were bought with the loan money. Did the borrowers provide the Government with any personal guarantees?

As with all loans, recovery of the loan sum will start with a demand letter saying that the bank/government is recalling the loan and you are given three months to pay back in full, principal sum with interest. Or else they will take you to court and sue you. Once they get judgement against you, the court will appoint a liquidator to salvage whatever assets you have and sell whatever cows and bells left to any interested cowherd with a big haircut. If you have signed a personal guarantee, you will be a bankrupt. Nothing personal, just SOP.

Now you are really on your own, with nobody to turn to. All your so-called friends are avoiding you like the plague. What can you do?

As an experienced restructuring expert and part-time lipstick salesman, my advice to you is not to hire sleazy advisors to solve your problems or you will end up suing him for unsatisfactory service levels filled with lies and empty promises.

There is no bypassing the SOPs. When the shit hits the fan, it is every man for himself. You still have to pay back... in full. Stay calm and meditate and God will show you the way.

First step is to look for a friendly tycoon who can buy over the cow business for RM250mil in the name of national interest. It is only petty cash to the tycoon but it will blend in nicely into his portfolio of staple food businesses.

Do not worry if nobody wants to talk to you now because the concerned ministry is already talking to a few parties for a friendly takeover. Maybe an attractive haircut might work.

If the first step doesn't work, I suggest you take the next step with caution. You can borrow RM250mil from Ah Longs but make sure you pay the high interest rates or your house will be splashed with red paint and your neighbours will know about your non-payment. That would really be embarrassing.

Ok, maybe that was a wrong step to recommend. As a last resort, when in court, plead ignorance, blame everybody else for your ills. Be a man like William Hung, admit you have no experience and you did not know a bull from a cow. Since you have not signed any personal guarantees, they will only take whatever is left in the company which should be fine with you. It was never yours in the first place.

My simple advice to entrepreneurs who need bank loans to expand the business, make sure you treat the approved loans with utmost respect. The loan officers have put their heads on the chopping block when they recommended your loan application.

If you failed them due to mismanagement and misinformation, you can bet your last dollar they will come after you and make sure your next four generations will continue to pay your debt.

Oh yeah, another piece of an advice. Do not wear V neck pink t-shirts when you meet your bankers. Just play it straight.

There are just too many issues raining down on our heads nowadays and we do not need another downpour.

ON YOUR OWN
By TAN THIAM HOCK

To access earlier articles of On Your Own, log on to www.thiamhock.com. Honest comments welcomed and approved.

Related posts:
Ten Point Plan For Social Entrepreneurs to Change the World
Money talks or advice?

Ten Point Plan For Social Entrepreneurs to Change the World

Devin Thorpe, Forbes Contributor

Using social entrepreneurship or impact investing to leave your mark.

Here it is:

1.  Save every penny.  Social entrepreneurs as a general rule can make a bigger difference with less money than entrepreneurs without a social mission.  Scrimp, save and devote your own resources to your cause.  Whether your venture is for profit or not, start with putting your own money to work with you.
2. Keep your day job.  One of the key lessons I learned while writing Your Mark On The World was how much impact one person can have if the money she raises for her venture doesn’t have to go to paying her living expenses.  Steven Dee Wrigley, about whom I posted a few weeks ago, is a great example.  He’s a social entrepreneur who works nights to fund his day-time charitable work.  You won’t keep that job forever, but keep your job as long as possible; let your current employer help fund your new gig.
3. It won’t be easy.  If you are going to change the world, it won’t be easy.  Get that notion out of your head right now.  The idea may be simple, but that is only likely if the problem is huge and others have deemed it impossible.  For instance, it makes no logical sense that 1 billion people in the world are hungry when there is ample food available.  Solving that problem is proving not to be as easy as it would seem.  I’m confident that you won’t quit just because changing the world is hard.
4. Start Something That Matters.  Blake Mycoskie, founder of Toms, the shoe company that gives away a pair of shoes for every pair someone buys, wrote an inspiring book that gets at the heart of social entrepreneurship.  His book’s title is the message:  Start Something That Matters.  It may be harder to find something that matters and much harder to figure out how to pull it off, but if it doesn’t matter, it isn’t worth your time.
   
   Blake Mycoskie at SXSW 2011 (Photo credit: eschipul)
5. Focus on social issues.  There is money to be made, if that’s what you’d like to do, even when tackling big social problems.  The Tom’s model of social entrepreneurship has created a movement around the concept of “one for one.”  Countless businesses now offer products and services for sale on that basis.  Worldhaus is a for-profit venture that is creating homes for the market  of a billion or so people who don’t have a safe place to live but who can afford a $2,000 or $3,000 home.
6. Make it great.  All the marketing hype in the world can’t make something that doesn’t matter, that isn’t great or that doesn’t change the world into something that lasts.  Your impact will be tied to your ability to create something that grows beyond you, that exceeds your involvement and creates change.  Focus on your product or service.  You can only hope to change the world by bringing a zealot’s passion to your deliverable.  Anything short of that is likely to leave your audience underwhelmed.
7. Build a team.  If you can’t assemble a team of followers who will throw their lot on with you—not people you’re paying (at least not well) but people who are investing their time and energy along with you, you’ve either failed to create a compelling idea or you’re not a compelling leader.  A great team is early evidence of a great product or service and a great leader.
8. Use crowdfunding.  After you’ve exhausted your own ability to fund your venture, use crowdfunding to raise the money you need for your projects.  With each effort at crowdfunding, you can build an audience of followers and fans who will support each new project.  Don’t think of crowdfunding as something you do once and then forget it.  You can find a list of crowdfunding resources here (be sure to see the comments for more ideas).  In 2013 you will even be allowed to raise equity for your for-profit ventures using crowdfunding.
9. Have an impact.  With a team, a passion, and a product greased with funding, you are ready to actually have an impact, to make a difference.  Focus on action that leads to results. The more you actually achieve with your resources, the more likely they are to compound.  Whether you have a high impact, for-profit social venture or a nonprofit , focus on the difference you make.  By measure and reporting on your impact, new customers and supporters will come out of the woodwork to make your social enterprise grow.
10. Change the world.  Once you demonstrate your impact, you can grow your enterprise to have world-changing scale.  You won’t measure your results in profits, even if you make them.  That’s not what you’re about.  You’ll measure your impact in the ways you’ve made the world a better place.  Changing the world is its own reward.  Making a living at it is a bonus.

This ten point plan won’t appeal to as many people as the last one.  I recognize that some people were disappointed to read my last list when they recognized that it was meant to be funny and was not meant to be real advice.  (I just hope no one bought an Italian sports car before they figured out I’d meant that as a joke!)  If you’re still reading, I’m hopeful that you’ll join the community of people focused on leaving a mark on the world.

One final note: I don’t ever remember a time either in my life or in history when the world’s wealthiest were more committed to philanthropy and solving social problems than they are now.  The Forbes 400 Issue this year was devoted to the social good the Forbes 400 are doing.  More power to them.

My Ten Point Plan to Get Rich Quick as an Entrepreneur Devin Thorpe Contributor

10 Reasons To Stay At A Job For 10 Or More Years David K. Williams Contributor

It's A Dirty Business: The Green Entrepreneurs Who Create Treasure (And Profit) From Trash Cheryl Conner Contributor

The Real Reason The World Will Remember Bill Gates (Hint: It's not Windows 8) Devin Thorpe Contributor

I’m launching into more research about crowdfunding to write a book about best practices for social entrepreneurs.  If you have a connection to crowdfunding, please click here to share your wisdom.  I’m sure my research will also lead to more posts on that topic here on Forbes.

Please share your thoughts in the comments below, at my site, yourmarkontheworld.com, on Facebook, or @devindthorpe.

Newscribe : get free news in real time 

World Bank: Singapore, Hong Kong and New Zealand still ‘easiest’, most business-friendly, Malaysia ranked 12th

Singapore, Hong Kong and New Zealand continue to be the easiest countries in the world to do business in, while local entrepreneurs in developing nations are finding it easier to do business than at any time in the last 10 years, according to the World Bank and IFC's latest Doing Business report. 

The improvement in the ease with which people are saying they are able to do business in the world’s developing countries highlights “the significant progress that has been made in improving business regulatory practices across the globe”, according to a summary of the 282-page report’s findings.

The study looks at 185 countries, and examines such indicators as how long it takes to start a business, and how difficult and time consuming it is to submit tax returns, export or import goods, obtain credit and register a property.

Year's 'most improved'

Topping the list of economies that registered the biggest improvements in the ease of doing business over the past year were Poland, Sri Lanka, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Burundi, Costa Rica, Mongolia, Greece, Serbia, and Kazakhstan.

Australia moved up to 10th place from 15th, Malaysia to 12th from 18th, and Taiwan to 16th from 25th. (See chart, below.)

Also moving up were the UAE (to 26th from 33rd), Italy (to 73rd from 87th), and the Russian Federation (112th from 120th).

Decliners incuded Saudi Arabia (22nd from 12th), Israel (38th from 34th), Argentina (124th from 113th) and Kenya (121st from 109th).

The report, Doing Business 2013: Smarter Regulations for Small and Medium-Size Enterprises, is the tenth in the World Bank/IFC’s Doing Business series.

Since the reports were first published, they have recorded “nearly 2,000 regulatory reforms implemented by 180 economies”, a summary of the findings notes, adding that such reforms have resulted in such improvements as a 20-day decline in the average time it takes to start a business since 2005 – to just 30 days, from 50.

And in low-income economies,  “the average [time required] has been reduced by half”.

All of the five countries at the bottom of this year's ranking are in Africa. In descending order, they are the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Republic of the Congo, Chad, and the Central African Republic. Mauritius, in 19th place, emerges as Africa's most competitive economy, while South Africa, in 39th place, was down four places from last year's report.

Officials in such countries might take some comfort in some data included in the report that shows how countries compare in certain areas of business activity, for it reveals that even some of the countries considered the "easiest" to do business in have weaknesses. Although Hong Kong ranks second-easiest overall, for example, it is the 60th easiest country in which to register a property; while the United Kingdom, in seventh place, is the 62nd easiest in which to obtain electricity, behind such countries as Estonia, Chile, Bahrain, Thailand, Malaysia and Brazil.

To view the report, click here.

Ease of doing business rankings 2013
Country	Rank	2012 rank
Singapore	1	1
Hong Kong	2	2
New Zealand	3	3
United States	4	4
Denmark	5	5
Norway	6	6
United Kingdom	7	7
Korea, Rep.	8	8
Georgia	9	16
Australia	10	15
Finland	11	11
Malaysia	12	18
Sweden	13	14
Iceland	14	9
Ireland	15	10
Taiwan	16	25
Canada	17	13
Thailand	18	17
Mauritius	19	23
Germany	20	19

                  World Bank/IFC
Sources: International Adviser

Taman Manggis land issue in Penang, a ‘Robin Hood story' or soap opera?

The twists and turns in the Taman Manggis land issue in Penang is starting to resemble a soap opera but it has also raised the question of whether the legal procedures are observed in the sale of state land.

THE showdown over a plot of land known as Taman Manggis or “mangosteen garden” in the heart of George Town is about to erupt in another slanging match on Nov 3.

Dubbed by some as the “Robin Hood story”, the Taman Manggis land has become one of the most controversial issues in Penang.

It has also become a rather entertaining saga of gamesmanship between Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and his political secretary Ng Wei Aik on one side and the state Barisan Nasional Youth on the other.

The 0.4ha of land had been designated for affordable housing but before the project could take place, Barisan was toppled.

Lim’s administration has since reportedly sold the land for RM11mil to a Kuala Lumpur company that is planning to build a health tourism facility that includes a private dental hospital and hotel on the site.

That was how the Robin Hood thing came about, but with a twist where Barisan is accusing the Pakatan Rakyat government of being a distorted version of Robin Hood by taking land meant for the poor to give to the rich.

When Barisan accused the state government of selling the land at below market rate, Lim challenged it to buy the land for RM22.4mil. Lim probably thought Barisan would not take up the dare. After all, RM22.4mil is not small change.

But Barisan agreed and announced that it had set up a special purpose company to buy and develop affordable homes on the land.

Caught on one foot, the state government was forced to respond and Ng issued an offer letter to Barisan. And that was when the soap opera began.

The Barisan side led by its State Barisan Youth chief Oh Tong Keong proceeded to pay 1% earnest money as is called for in such transactions.

The next step, as anyone would know, is for the lawyers from both sides to draw up a sales and purchase (S&P) agreement.

Once that is signed, the buyer would pay the balance of the requisite 10% and depending on the terms and condition, the full amount is usually paid within three months or more.

This is to enable the buyer to raise funds or secure a loan from the bank.

However, following the 1% payment, Lim demanded that the Barisan pay up the rest of the amount within a month.

The outlandish demand saw a few jaws drop on the Barisan side. First, it is not possible for Barisan to cough up that kind of money in so short a time.

Another was the audacity of the demand.

“There is no S&P agreement in sight and the seller is demanding the full amount. Do they understand the laws of transaction? Without an S&P agreement, no one would want to pay RM22.4mil,” said architect Khoo Boo Soon.

Khoo, who was the former building director of the Penang Island Municipal Council (MPPP), is quite appalled at the frivolous way that state property is being treated.

He is incredulous that state land is being sold based on an offer letter by a political secretary on the instruction of the Chief Minister.

“I have been a government servant for more than 17 years. As far as I know, land transactions have to be discussed and decided by the state exco, the state legal adviser has to be consulted, the state secretary has to be involved. It cannot be a one-man decision, both parties need to sign an S&P agreement,” said Khoo.

The Barisan side was more direct. “This is government land, it belongs to the people. The land does not belong to the Chief Minister’s grandfather. We are not buying a bicycle or a car, this is about public land costing millions of ringgit,” said Oh.

The Barisan side had on Oct 3 written to the state government requesting for an S&P agreement before they proceed to pay up the rest of the money.

On Oct 8, the state secretary wrote back asking them to refer to the offer letter and to pay up within a month.

To compound this half-past-six state of affairs, rumours abound that the land has actually been sold to the Kuala Lumpur company.

No one can tell for sure because the state government has been tight-lipped about the issue.

Requests for information on the actual status of the land has run up against a stone wall.

On top of all that, the house that Lim is renting in Penang reportedly belongs to the wife of the major stakeholder of the Kuala Lumpur company.

The lady is also the cousin of state exco member Phee Boon Poh. The implication of all this is unclear but it does add spice to the story.

Many people following this soap opera are quite confused but that is what makes soap operas so addictive – there are lots of twists and turns.

The more discerning think Lim has no intention of selling the land to Barisan, hence the conditions and obstacles put in the way.

Some suspect the delay tactics are aimed at making Barisan give up.

But it would be a blow to Lim’s administration if the Barisan people actually purchased it and proceeded to build low-cost housing.

Lim would lose face, particularly given that his administration has failed to build any affordable housing since coming into power.

To make matters worse, this is happening amid an inflated property market on the island and where house prices have soared beyond the reach of 80% of wage earners.

Lim should be transparent about the issue. If the land has been sold, he should admit it.

If it is still in the state’s hands, then he should do the decent thing and use it for its original purpose.

Instead he is angry at being criticised and is punishing those who want to build affordable homes by doubling the price of the land.

A Penang lawyer said he is not surprised about the “Robin Hood issue”.

“What shocks me is the silence on the part of the Penang NGOs. They used to be so vocal on issues affecting public interest,” said the lawyer.

In the meantime, the countdown to Nov 3 has begun.

ANALYSIS BY JOCELINE TAN The Star/Asia News Network

P/S:  Landlady of CM’s residence is not wife of company stakeholder

Regarding the Taman Manggis land, the Star and State exco member Phee Boon Poh clarified yesterday that the woman in question is his cousin, she is not married nor is she the wife of the company stakeholder.

“My cousin and the stakeholder are just business partners,” he said.

The Taman Manggis land which had been designated for low-cost housing by the former Barisan Nasional government, became an issue when the Lim administration decided to sell it to a Kuala Lumpur company to develop a health tourism facility that includes a private dental hospital, hotel and multi-storey car park.

Related post:
Land sold for a song? Aug 11, 2012