National Integrity Plan an abysmal failure – public hearings in JB, Malacca, Ipoh, Alor Setar

I have received public inquiries as to whether the second series of public hearings of the Parliamentary Select Committee of Integrity will be held in Johor Baru and Malacca on Wednesday (8th August) and Thursday (9th August) respectively.

As many seems to be in the dark, I want to publicly confirm that the second series of the public hearings of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity will be held in Johor Baru, Malacca, Ipoh and Alor Star this week and next on the following dates and venues:

  • Johor Baru – August 8 – 10 am
    (Bilik Gerakan Tun Razak, Dewan Undangan Negeri Johor, Johor Bharu)

  • Malacca – August 9 – 10 am
    (Bilik Gerakan Tun Mutahir, Dewan Undangan Negeri Melaka, Melaka)

  • Ipoh – August 15 – 10 am
    (Bilik Gerakan Negeri, Dewan Undangan Negeri Perak, Ipoh)

  • Alor Setar – August 16 – 10 am
    (Bilik Gerakan Dewan Undangan Negeri Kedah, Alor Setar, Kedah)

The announcement of these public hearings is also available at the parliamentary website, http://www.parlimen.gov.my/, inviting organizations, associations and individuals to the public hearings to give their views and proposals on integrity, in particular the National Integrity Plan.

This is an opportunity for Malaysians to express their views on the betterment of the nation on grave issues of integrity, corruption, abuses of power and lack of good governance, particularly on the occasion of the 50th Merdeka anniversary, which should not be missed. Organisations and individuals from Negri Sembilan who wish to appear before the Select Committee should make it to the JB or Malacca public hearing as it is unlikely that there would be a separate public hearing date for the state.

The National Integrity Plan (NIP) was launched by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in May 2004 to implement “in a systematic and planned manner involving the co-operation of all sectors and institutions in the country”.

It sets five-year objectives to be a “catalyst for enhancing integrity among leaders, administrators, businessmen, politicians, youths, students, women, people of different faiths, members of NGOs and others”.

The first five-year target of NIP, Target 2008, for the first five years (2004-2008) is reaching its end, providing an opportune occasion for a review of its success and failures to date.

The first and most important of the five “targets” of Target 2008 is to “effectively reduce corruption, malpractices and abuse of power” with the specific objective — to improve Malaysia’s ranking in the Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI) from 37th place in 2003 to at least 30th position in 2008, and the score of 5.2 for Malaysia in 2003 to at least 6.5 by 2008. (10 being the best and 1.0 the worst).

We have been heading in the opposite direction in the past three years, falling to 39th placing in 2004 and 2005 and plunging to 44th placing in 2006, with all signs of further drop this year. Malaysia’s TI CPI score for the past three years were also dismal, being 5.0, 5.1 and 5.0 for 2004, 2005 and 2006 respectively — a far cry from the target score of 6.5 for 2008.

The message is clear — the NIP had been an abysmal failure.

The other four targets of NIP are:

2. Improve efficiency in the public service delivery system and overcome bureaucratic red tape.

3. Enhance corporate governance and business ethics.

4. Strengthen the family institution.

5.. Improve the quality of life and people’s well being.

Target 5 is particularly pertinent at the present time which is witnessing the escalation of the crime wave where Malaysians have lost their fundamental rights to be free from crime and the fear of crime.

The NIP stated that achievement of Target 5 will be measured among other things “Reduction in the incidence of crimes in the society, especially serious crimes, crimes against property and sexual crimes. Such reduction is a measure of safety in the community.”

When Abdullah became Prime Minister about four years ago, he promised to make the war on crime one of his administration’s top agendas.

As a result, he established the Royal Police Commission to make recommendations to create a world-class police force which can keep crime low.

In its report, the Royal Police Commission expressed shock that there had been a 29 per cent increase of crime in the eight years from121,176 cases in 1997 to 156,455 cases in 2004, and sounded the warning that unless this trend was checked and reversed, there would be “major social and economic consequences for Malaysia”.

It recommended a major police crackdown on crime and the “immediate target of a minimum of 20 per cent decrease” in the incidence of crime within the first 12 months.

Instead of a 20 per cent reduction of crime in the first 12 months after the Royal Police Commission Report, there had been a 27 per cent increase in the crime index from 156,455 cases in 2004 to 198,622 cases in 2006 — when it took eight years for the crime index to increase 29 per cent from 1997 to 2004 which the Royal Police Commission had found completely unacceptable.

In the first six months of this year, the crime index worsened by 5.11 per cent when compared to the same period last year. Just to illustrate the gravity of the worsening crime problem, there were 8.2 cases of rape a day in the first six months of this year as compared to 4 cases a day in 2003!

This is clear proof that the crime situation had got very much worse after the Royal Police Commission Report, although the reverse should have taken place — as the government had given up to 42% increase in salaries for police personnel, RM2.5 billion for police housing, as well as hundreds of millions of ringgit of other allocations for improvements in police service as recommended by the Royal Police Commission Report.

CategoriesUncategorized

3 Replies to “National Integrity Plan an abysmal failure – public hearings in JB, Malacca, Ipoh, Alor Setar”

  1. Kit:

    Did the first series of public hearings proceed as originally scheduled at Parliament House ? I had not heard anything, and I thought the Bilik Taklimat was locked out by the BN goons.

  2. In order to achieve its objectives, the NIP has identified a set of priorities and targets. For the first five years (2004-2008), the NIP has identified five priorities known as Target 2008

    TARGET 2008

    For the first five years (2004-2008), five priority targets have been identified.These targets known to as Target 2008 are:

    Target I: Effectively reduce corruption, malpractices and abuse of power;

    Target 2: Increase efficiency in the public service delivery system and overcome bureaucratic red tape;

    Target 3: Enhance corporaie governance and business ethics;

    Target 4: Strengthen the family institution; and

    Target 5: Improve the quality of life and people’s well-being.

    Measurement of Targets

    Target I: Effectively reduce corruption, malpractices and abuse of power

    In order to achieve this target, the NIP will use both international and national benchmarking, as follows:

    The international rating based on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) developed by Transparency International. The score of 5.2 for Malaysia in the year 2003 will be improved to at least 6.5 by 2008 (10 being the best and 1.0 the worst), as well as the ranking of Malaysia improved from 37th to at least 30th position;

    The national indicator measuring the success of efforts by the Anti- Corruption Agency (ACA) in investigating and resolving cases related to corruption; and

    Other indicators to be developed from time to time .

    Target 2: Improve efficiency in the public service delivery system and overcome bureaucratic red tape

    The achievement of Target 2 will be measured as follows:

    Improvement in the public perception index of service providers in the Government sector, by ensuring the score falls below 2.5 (1.0 being the best and 5.0 being the worst);

    The number of public complaints made to the ACA and the Public Complaints Bureau, the Auditor-General’s reports and other feedback from clients of government departments and agencies as well as other sources; and

    Other benchmarks used by international and national agencies which measure administrative efficiency of the Government.

    Target 3: Enhance corporate govemant and business ethics

    Achievement of Target 3 will be measured based on the following:

    Increase in compliance of the conditions sets by Malaysia Securities Exchange Berhad (MSEB) by companies;

    Reduction in cases of corporate fraud;

    Increase in the number of open tenders undertaken in a transparent manner and reduction in the number of negotiated tenders;

    Adherence to Rukuniaga Malaysia by the business sector;

    Reduction in cases of violation of the Consumer Protection Act 1999; and

    Other benchmarkings used by national and international agencies, wherever relevant.

    Target 4: Strengthen the family institution

    As a measure to reflect the resilience of the family institution and the happy and peaceful life of the family, the following indicators will be taken into account:

    Reduction in divorce rates;

    Reduction in family conflicts arising from disputes over inheritance and child custody rights;

    Reduction in domestic violence;

    Reduction in cases of child abuse and neglect;
    Increase in assistance given to single parent families; and

    Reduction in neglecf of the elderly.

    Target 5: Improve the quality of life and people’s well-being

    Achievement of Target 5 will be measured based on the following:

    Reduction in the incidence of crimes in the society, especially serious crimes, crimes against property and sexual crimes. Such reduction is a measure of safety in the community;

    Reduction in social problems such as drug addiction, illicit sexual relations that result in the spread of HIV and AIDS, as well as the incidence of couples staying together outside of wedlock. The reduction of these problems reflects a healthy and moral way of life;

    Reduction in road accidents. Such reduction reflects better driving ethics and improvement in the enforcement of traffic laws and regulations;

    Reduction in the incidence of misconduct or delinquency among students. This reflects the effectiveness of civics education as well as enforcement of discipline among students; and

    Reduction in environmental degradation. Such reduction reflects improvement in public awareness for sustainable development.

    Well, what have we achieved since April, 2004 when the NIP was lauched? We have gone from bad to worse.

Leave a Reply