At midweek in Kuching, three women had their belongings forcibly taken by snatchers riding a motorcycle.

In the first attack in front of Tun Jugah Shopping Mall at Jalan Padungan, the pillion rider grabbed the victim’s gold chain worth about RM600.

The second attack near the Sungai Maong Market followed a similar pattern except the victim’s gold chain which was taken, was worth much more — about RM3,000.

In the third attack, along Jalan Kampung Lintang, Petra Jaya, the victim lost her handbag containing about RM400, two moble phones and some personal documents.

More cases could, of course, have gone unreported.

Snatch thieves are hard to nab because their modus operandi is based on the element of surprise. They appear seemingly “from nowhere” to catch their victims completely off guard and are gone just as quickly as they have struck.

It pays to be streetwise while walking about the city nowadays. For instance, if you have bad vibes about a particular area, avoid it. But if you really have to go there, then make sure you have friends to accompany you. Don’t tempt fate by going to the area alone.

Another useful ‘anti-snatch’ tip is being sensible about the handbag you wish to carry in public.  Put aside branded handbags and opt for cheaper ones. This way, you can avoid injuries should your bag get snatched.

How so? As one criminologist explains, since the straps of a relatively low quality handbag snap more easily, the likelihood of the owner getting hurt is much less during an attack as the snatcher will use only minimal force to pull off the bag and flee.

Conversely, expensive handbags are made of tougher materials and, therefore, harder to tear and break. So in a tug-of-war with the snatcher, the owner could get seriously hurt.

While inferior quality handbags could help their owners aviod serious injuries during an attack, it does not mean designer handbags should be kept in the cupboard to collect cobwebs.

The wise thing to do when you go out with your Prada or Gucci is to take due care to not become targets of snatch thieves. Expensive handbags are tell-tale signs that their owners are rich – just what the criminals are looking for. Exercise care when you walk with these branded bags slung over your shoulders. Be smart – that’s bottomline.

Snatch thieves deserve no mercy. They are able-bodied people who can find jobs but choose a life of crime by preying on the innocent and the defenceless, especially women who account for over 70 per cent of victims, and the elderly.

There should be no qualms about putting these criminals who feather their nests with stolen properties, behind bars – and for a long time!

Even as we are trying to grapple with the malaise of snatch theft, it is no comfort to know there are hitmen killing people in our streets.

These assassins on motorcycles wear visor-attached helmets, making them hard to identify even in broad daylight. The question that goes a begging is where did they get their guns so easily from? One shudders to think that firearms could be so readily available in the country these days.

This disturbing trend is accentuated by the recent killing of a deputy director general of Customs in Putra Jaya and the spate of drive-by fatal shootings in both the state and the peninsula.

It’s perhaps time to consider banning helmets with visors. A stipulation for this was in place in the early 90’s but where is it now? Criminals are taking advantage of this lapse and threatening public security and safety.

As their faces are fully covered, their identity is difficult to establish even with CCTV cameras which, under such circumstances, are ineffective.

Police action to prevent crime can include deploying more personnel to the “black” areas. The presence of the police will give the public a feeling of security.

Fighting crime is, of course, no stroll in the park as the threats posed by criminals are as vast and varied as they are dangerous and condemnable.

Since the list of crimes is long, society at large need to join hands with law enforcement in putting criminals and like-minded elements out of commission.

With all parties concerned pulling their weight, there is every reason for the crime rate to be reduced even further.

However, with the scathing political squabbling, a worrying racial divide and the proliferation of partisan hate on the social media in the lead-up to the just-concluded 13th general election, what is important now is to make a serious and earnest endeavour to diffuse the destructive effects of polarisation in the country.

Although two candidates notorious for making remarks with serious racist undertones were defeated, let’s not pretend race-based politics does not exist.

Call it whatever you like – Chinese tsunami, urban tsunami, national tsunami or even triple whammy – the fact remains that under whatever name, a ruinous negativity such as polarisation in a multi-racial society like ours smells just as bad.

The truth of the matter is that at the end of the day, we all still have live together in the country we call home – Malaysia. And as such, it’s imperative that we are receptive to the need to put national harmony, stability and prosperity above all else by reconciling our differences after a bitterly-fought election and move on.

Reconciliation is the wisest course to take. Political leaders from both sides should not be so blinded by personal ambitions that they refuse to see and acknowledge the larger picture and interest of the country.

They owe it to the people to ensure the country continues on the path of peace, stability and progress and NOT taken down the road of perdiction.

Despite objections from some disgruntled quarters, the election results have been well-received on the whole. The DAP has declared its happiness and satisfaction with its huge gains while PAS has expressed similar sentiments, despite losing Kedah.

World leaders have also congratulated the Prime Minister on a hard fought but well-deserved electoral victory.

In this election, what the BN was looking to achieve was regaining the two-thirds majority in parliament that it lost in the 2008 polls. But it won 133 seats – 15 short of the required number.

However, nowadays, governing with the coveted two-third majority no longer gells with the realities of a modern democracy.

For instance in Britain, the Tories have to coalesce in a partnership with the Liberal Democrats to form the government while in Australia, Julia Gillard’s Labour government leads the country with only a very slim majority.

Even in strait-laced Singapore, the all powerful PAP government has been losing by-elections.

Of course, a two-thirds majority is a bonus – if you can get it that is.

The stark reality is that in the present globalised world, people are becoming increasingly aware not only of their rights but also the avowed obligation of the candidates they voted into power to protect such rights.

It is, thus, vital for governments of the day to realise that the onus is on them to provide good governance, stem out extremism, promote transparency and ensure that democracy and citizens’rights are safeguarded.

Elected representatives from both sides of the political divide could, of course, choose to ignore their sworn duty to uphold these sacred principles but with an increasingly discerning electorate quite capable of telling substance from superficiality, elected parliamentarians and assemblymen who break their election promises do so not only at their own peril but also that of their party.

In the Malaysian context, there is no denying the need to address the problems affecting the Chinese community – and for that matter, all the communities in the country.

A critical re-look at the root causes of the gripes – not just the symptoms – is, therefore, not only timely but mandatory as well.

The election is done and dusted. The time for inveigling and fibbing is over.

The successful candidates must now to get down to the brass tacts, roll up their sleeves to fulfill the promises spelt out in their party’s election manifestos.

Anything less will mean a betrayal of the voters’ trust and if this infraction translates into disaster for the present elected representatives in the next polls, they will have none but themselves to blame.

To move the country forward after a highly emotive election, the Prime Minister has called for national reconciliation. His commitment to harmonise race relations in the days ahead should be given all the support in order to move the country forward – and towards greater peace, harmony and unity.

Voters will elect members to parliament and state legislative assemblies nationwide – except Sarawak which will only be holding its parliamentary elections.

A total of 579 parliamentary candidates will be standing in 222 parliamentary seats while a total of 1,322 candidates will be vying for the 505 state seats.

This election is expected to be the closest in the country’s 56-year history.

As such, it is hardly surprising that the states holding their polls today have been festooned with election billboards, banners, buntings and flags, and saturated with nightly political rallies throughout the 15-day campaigning period.

In fact, even before the dissolution of parliament, both Barisan Nasional (BN) and the opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) had released their election manifestos expounding on issues, including, among others, minimum wage, taxation, equitable opportunities and financial assistance to the poor – with a pledge to honour all the promises made if they won the election.

The fulfilment of election promises should, of course, be benchmarked against the maxim – action speaks louder than words.

What really counts is that the government after today must uphold their pledge to keep (NOT break) all the promises vis-à-vis their election manifesto.

Words must be backed up by deeds. And there can be no compromise on this. For with power comes great responsibility.

During the campaigning period, the rhetoric at some of the ceramahs had an air of entertainment about it while at others, it was laced with vituperations.

But even so, none of the verbal vitriol came within a whisker of the enmity spewed by the ‘hate’ postings on the Internet. It’s worrying to see how the social media has been contaminated by unfettered animus that exposes to the world the ugly side of Malaysian society during this particular polls.

On a more sober note, however, this election has seen some significant ‘firsts’ with the introduction of a number of new measures to improve the electoral process.

For the first time, indelible ink will be used to prevent double voting. While civil servants and military personnel were allowed to vote early in place of postal voting, the disabled can bring an assistant into the polling booth help them with the voting process.

Furthermore, Malaysians residing overseas can cast their ballots through postal voting.

However, those residing in Singapore, southern Thailand, Brunei or Kalimantan in Indonesia are not qualified to register as postal voters but must return to their constituency to vote.

Many third parties are in the fray this time around.

The Indian-based party Hindraft will be contesting in several seats in the peninsula.

East Malaysia-based third parties in the mix are Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP), a former BN partner, and the State Reform Party (STAR) from Sarawak.

They will go it alone after talks with PR on facing BN one-on-one fell through. The entry of these splinter parties has set the stage for multi-cornered fights in Sabah and Sarawak.

The first three days of official campaigning were marred by violence, resulting in  a total of 387 incidents being reported and no fewer than 15 people hauled up and investigated by the police.

Additionally, there had been many reports of vandalism where election posters, banners and flags were either splashed with paint or torn down. Damage to vehicles, used by party workers, had also been reported.

These incidents have been condemned by leaders from both sides

Hopefully, cool heads will prevail during voting today so that the people can exercise their rights of suffrage in a peaceful and incident-free atmosphere.

The outcome of the elections will be important. After all the fiery campaigning over the past two weeks, Malaysians will finally get to know who their government will be over the next five years.

It’s also important to remind ourselves that when we cast our votes today, we should do so with equanimity instead of emotions, reason rather than spite.

Our future is at stake here. So vote wisely.

Yes, every child should indeed be special. But children regarded as special – that is they have special needs – invariably also have special reasons to be identified as such.

They are the ones who might need extra attention because of what paediatricians call a medical, emotional or learning problem.

And this extra attention includes medication, therapy or extra help at home or in school – not the typical things normal chidren would need or may only need occasionally.

Mostly, it’s a matter of picking out the ability, limited though it may be, and needs of the special child and be generously forthcoming with the necessary support.

Children afflicted with illnesses such as epilepsy, diabetes or cerebral palsy are considered as having special needs as well. They might need medicine or other help as they go about their daily routine.

As for children with vision problems, Braille books are needed to help them read. Those who cannot hear or speak properly would have special needs as well.

Obviously, a child with hearing problems might need hearing aids but speech therapy is also important since saying words correctly can be difficult with impaired hearing.

Although special children can be spotted, usually most do not attract much attention and are left to their own devices. Moreover, a special child’s problem may not be easily recognisable except to people who know the child well.

For instance, a child could have a certain neurosis – anxiety for instance – but the condition may go unnoticed unless the child talks about it – which is rare because the cognitive processes of young children are not sharp enough yet for them to talk about these things. So it’s up to adults to notice the symptoms and take remedial action.

Some special children may have speech impediment, others may be visually impaired but in milder cases, their intellectual capacity may be unaffected. Take the case of Yap Fang Ling from Selangau in Sibu Division.

The 14-year-old girl is born blind but she is intellectually smart. She sat for her UPSR last year and passed with very high grades – 4A and 1B.

Despite her excellent UPSR results, she, at first, could not find a secondary school to continue her schooling at because there was none equipped with facilities for the visually impaired to be found in Sibu.

But the Education Department’s swift action on a request from well-wishes to set up a secondary school integration class for visually impaired in Sibu – after being informed of Fang Ling’s situation – gave the visually impaired lass a much-needed leg-up.

With the Education Department’s prompt intervention, Fang Ling is now able to carry on her secondary education at SMK Sungai Merah where a secondary school integration class has been set up for her and students like her.

Fang Ling is considered relatively fortunate in that she has only one form of disability – visual impairment. There children out there with more severe afflictions such as multiple disabilities which may include attention deficit, hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autistism.

These are more difficult cases to correct but in dealing with health problems – as with most other problems – the maxim prevention is better than cure can make a big difference.

To prevent a disability from becoming firmly entrenched, what is critical is catching the symptoms early. It is usually too late to seek correction after the affliction has reached an advanced stage.

As Dr Toh Teck Hock, paediatrician and head of Clinical Research Centre, Sibu Hospital, noted, the older special children are sent for therapy, the slimmer their chances of improvement because by a certain age, say six or seven upwards, they will have already developed behaviours usually too complicated for effective correction.

He stressed early intervention is an important preventive measure. And so nowadays, it’s common to see special children getting help at two years old or so rather than six or seven previously.

We should never give up on a child, especially a special child, but render every support where possible so that the child may get a second chance at life instead of facing the future under a cloud of constant neglect, marginalisation and even abandonment.

In this regard, education – not only for the child but also the parents – is paramount. With education, the chances of the special child making progress towards a normal life with his or her parents’ understanding and support would be so much brighter.

It’s certainly worth noting that everytime a special child shows improvement in coping with his or her situation, it’s one giant step forward.

Fire burn and cauldron bubble – that’s the scenario as the political landscape erupts with acerbic verbal sparrings amidst a fast climbing election temperature.

As polling fever takes hold, the rhetoric has pretty much taken on a definitive “us or them” tone.

For GE13, billed as the mother of all elections in the country’s nearly 60-year history, the battleline has been drawn for the supporters of the contending parties.

The exceptions are the fence-sitters. These are a different kettle of fish – still testing the water and waiting to be wooed before deciding which bait to bite.

With the candidates from both sides made public on Nomination Day yesterday, the battle for votes will begin in earnest.

The war of words can be expected to be acrid during the campaigning period for this parliamentary election in Sarawak just as it had been for past elections.

Just earlier this week, we heard the story of karaoke joints and pubs – how these entertainment outlets and social waterholes will disappear if PR wins.

The advertisement putting out this message in a newspaper came in for an almost immediate tongue-lashing with the party making the insertion accused of using “scare tactics” to frighten the voters and being “bankrupt of ideas.”

However, on closer examination, the advertisement is not as “bankrupt of ideas” as claimed. And one need not look far to see why.

Plain as day, it was prompted by the much-touted imposition of hudud law which forbids, among other things, the operations of karaoke joints and pubs.

With all the talks about shutting down this and that – and as one observer puts it tersely – this cannot, that cannot – it’s no wonder people are very wary of hudud law as its imposition will infringe on the rights of others.

This point should rightly be highlighted to show what such a law, which PAS vows to impose if it forms the government, can do to a society like ours that practises and upholds democratic values.

Belated but still a talking point is the hoo-ha over plagiarism after both sides announced their election manifestos.

BN was accused of allegedly copying some of the points from PR’s manifesto. However, as both sides are facing many common issues and if the ideas in their manifestoes appear somewhat similar as a result, then it should have come about by concidence, not design.

Even in mature democracies, there are always similar stands on some issues between the government and the opposition and as a political observer quite rightly pointed out, when the solutions to these issues are patently obvious, how can one side claim ownership of the ideas that both sides have articulated in their manifestos?

It was also a question of timing. In this election, PR happened to put out their manifesto first.

Had they done so after BN and their manifesto contained some ideas similar to BN’s, would it not then be said that they were also copying from BN’s manifesto?

The question of plagiarism should not have arisen at all. It only served to create confusion over a straightforward matter.

Lately, netizens have been asked not to spread lies to smear the candidates contesting in the general elections.

But the call has fallen mostly on deaf ears. In fact, one does not even have to be a candidate to become the victim of the hate-mongers.

A good example is Malaysian actress Datuk Seri Michelle Yeoh, who was targetted by cyber bullies for being invited to an upcoming dinner in Selangor, organised by a group of Selangor Chinese businessmen, and to be attended by BN leaders.

Shouldn’t Malaysians have the freedom to attend a public function if they choose to do so? Indeed, this basic right should be protected by all political parties that openly proclaim freedom for all Malaysians.

For GE13, it’s important for cool heads to prevail in the heat of campaigning, at the voting booths on polling day and after the outcome of election is known.

It is only in this way that the democractic process can be carried out smoothly and incident-free.

That’s what all peace-loving citizens want to see in this general election– and their call for law and order before, during and after voting should respected.

The contending parties are also locked in intense argy-bargy over the merits – and demerits – of the promises set out in their manifestos that they pledge to implement if they won the election to form the next government.

Quarters aligned to the opposition said BN’s manifesto pays little attention to the nation’s real problems, claiming the BN leadership lacks “vision, wisdom and capabilities” as reflected by the priority it is giving to the people’s immediate wants while sidestepping national issues.

According to them, “a true manifesto spells out the current real national issues and measures to tackle them” and that the pledges made during the hustings to deliver all the promises must be honoured.

On paper, all this sounds very well and good.

The opposition have also criticised the 1Malaysia People’s Aid (BR1M) cash vouchers as wasteful and a vote-buying tactic.

Despite the criticisms, economists think differently, concurring that BR1M is actually good for the economy as it increased spending and consumption.

Although PR did not include a BR1M-type initiative in their manifesto, a PKR strategist has reportedly promised PR will retain the cash distribution should they win the election – an ironic U-turn of PR’s stance on the issue.

PR have also pledged, among others, to abolish tolls, reduce oil prices, lower electricity and water charges and halt the rare earth plant in Kuantan.

Analysts said it will cost a lot to make these radical changes and the colossal expenditure involved will affect and even stunt the economic growth of the country.

On the BN side, a youth leader from one of the    component parties has said the ruling coalition’s manifesto is “committed to creating a resilient, dynamic and innovative economy.”

In contrast, he noted, PR made “vague promises” in their manifesto which contained populist policies aimed at winning votes.

“The amount they need to spend to fulfil their populist promises will top the nation’s revenue, forcing the people to pay more taxes,” he added.

Most political analysts are on the same page as to where PR will get the money needed to fulfil all the promises in their manifesto.

According to a political consultant, PR’s manifesto “is merely a political document designed to please voter groups such as housewives, undergraduates, civil servants, retired armed forces members, Felda settlers, orang asli and East Malaysians.”

He noted that the manifesto did not say how the promises made would be fulfilled or from where the funds would come to fulfil them.

“It does not explain how the nation is going to be able to afford some new subsidies, grants, freebies and payouts.

“The opposition coalition left details on revenue streams aside,” he added.

Another political analyst holds the view that PR’s manifesto “is precisely just that — an election manifesto – designed to inform the electorate of their broader position.”

He also pointed out that the opposition did not say how they would fund or implement their pledges.

Ultimately, what matters is that the most acclaimed of goals written into an election manifesto still have to be brought to fruition on the ground.

In G13, it is important to appraise the manifestos from both sides with equanimity instead of clouded emotions.

For example, which of the two sides has been over-zealous in dishing out the goodies?

Will it start welshing on its promises once elected to office because the promises it made are beyond its capacity to fulfill in the first place?

By the same token, which of the two sides is making a more sober and realistic offer in its manifesto to ensure that all the promises made can be fulfilled within the five-year term?

Our future is at stake here. So it is paramount to ensure we do not lose what we have achieved since independence by weighing the manifestos and the track records from both sides carefully and wisely before casting our votes.

It’s our bounden duty to do so as responsible citizens and voters.

Rajagopal was said to have done this following the national side’s 4-1 drubbing by Saudi Arabia in a friendly match on March 17.

Although the vast majority of Malaysians do not think Rajagopal’s observation was out of line, the touchy national football governing body views it as criticism of the national league – and FAM disciplinary committee was quick to take out the sledgehammer.

According to Article 88, only FAM president and general secretary are allowed to comment on the performance of the national soccer team in the media.

Soccer fans have been quite vocal in their reaction to the latest “Article 88” firestorm, going as far as to call for FAM president to step down.

Most feel FAM, while quick to criticise and punish, is “too sensitive” when it comes to facing criticisms.

A former high-ranking FAM council member said Rajagopal was just expressing an opinion and he saw no harm in that.

“FAM is sending out the wrong message by not providing the people in the system some latitude. The gag order on its officials should be rescinded,” he said.

Another former FAM council member noted that the first two presidents – Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tan Sri Hamzah Abu Samah – did not turn a deaf ear to criticisms.

He said their ability to deal with and accept differing views was the reason behind the glory years of Malaysian football (under their watch).

“This kind of draconian provision (Article 88) was never imposed under the Tunku and Hamzah. The rule should be rescinded immediately and the Sports Commissioner’s office should intervene,” the former council member suggested.

While believing that a coach “should bring up any grouse through the proper channel,” a top Malaysian National Cycling Federation official, however, agreed “if the coach had proposed something to rectify a problem and the association did nothing about, then it would be fair for the coach speak up.”

Former Sarawak coach Awang Mahyan who did not always see eye to eye with FAM when he was in charge of the Ngap Sayot team, also disagrees with the use of Article 88 as a muzzle.

According to him, the national football parent body should be more open-minded and without mincing his words, he asked: “Why do people get all worked up when someone tells the truth?”

The truth here is, of course, the dearth of local strikers in the country’s top football league and it does not take Alex, Jose or Roberto to back Rajagopal up on that score.

In recent times, Malaysian football has been moving backward mostly and the “shut up” policy of the game’s power-that-be is a damper rather than a catalyst.

The national team’s FIFA ranking has dipped to 164 out of 209 and instead of looking for scapegoats, steps should be taken to rectify the flaws, including the outdated Article 88, that impede the development of the game.

Not surprisingly, the infamous Article 88 has become the subject of contentious public debate.

In a national daily online poll, 91.74 per cent or 3,677 readers said the rule must go. Only 1.5 per cent or 60 readers felt the rule should be maintained while 6.76 per cent or 271 readers said it should be amended.

Youth and Sports Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Shabery Cheek is rightly concerned by the number of people censured under Article 88 since 2009.

“Of course, a law is a law and nothing much can be done. But my worry is too many people have been red carded under the Article,” he said.

For the record, other high-profile sports personalities punished under Article 88 are former national coach B Sathianathan, FAM deputy president Tan Sri Annuar Musa, Perlis FA president Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim and the latest, Johor FA president Tunku Mahkota Johor Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim.

The furore over Article 88 took a new twist when the High Court ruled on Friday that FAM’s 30-month suspension of its deputy president Tan Sri Annuar Musa was “correct and valid.”

Annuar, who allegedly breached Article 88 by making a negative remark on the national footbal team on Feb 12, 2012, said he accepted the court’s decision with an “open mind” but pointed out that the effort to right a wrong, particularly on Article 88, had not ended but only just started.

“Any effort to do so (right the wrong) will be done according to regulations,” he added.

Due to the latest development, it appears Article 88 will still be around for a while and whether or not it will be abolished – in the face of weighty public opinion against it – remains to be seen.

By then, students who flunk their SPM English paper will not receive a full certificate but are entitled to a re-sit the following year.

When first mooted, the proposal elicited strong support from many quarters. The firm endorsement, especially from parents, has given rise to lofty optimism that the proposal will be implemented according to schedule.

“I don’t see why this cannot be done by then (2016) since so many people are supportive of the proposal,” Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin has said.

In fact, the show of strong support is proof of the keen anticipation that the proposal could be implemented even sooner.

To lay the groundwork, the Education Ministry has started training over 60,000 teachers in English proficiency this year in two waves under the Malaysia Education Blueprint.

The first will cover the period between 2013 and 2025 while the second will start in 2016 when the proposed ruling to make passing English compulsory in SPM will be implemented.

Muhyddin, who is also the Education Minister, has reaffirmed the government’s commitment to promoting the use of English in schools.

“Our target is for students to be bilingual — proficient in both Bahasa Malaysia and English,” he said.

The effectiveness of English as a communications tool is reflected by the very large number of people learning the language – about one billion throughout the world.

After Mandarin, English is the most widely spoken than any other language. It’s the native language of more than 350 million people worldwide as well.

Moreover, English is the lingua franca of diplomacy, business, science, technology, banking, computing, aviation, tourism and also the UN.

Spoken English is the norm in the best careers and the best universities. It’s also being used increasingly at job interviews. So like it or not, mastering the language pays high dividends in most sectors of the economy.

In terms of developing technology, English has been playing a prominent role in many areas, including medicine, engineering and, of course, education where use of the language is needed the most.

A major consideration for securing high-quality jobs nowadays is the ability to work in English. This comes essentially from acquiring a command of the language through the education system. It has been shown that multi-national companies generally employ graduates proficient in English.

Students who know English can access foreign websites through the Internet. The cornucopia of information flowing from the global system of interconnected computer network is mainly in English. Most of the softwares are also written in that language, hence making it virtually indispensible for worldwide communication.

To gain a competitive edge and excel in the era of globalisation, it is imperative for our students to acquire language skills.

Recognising the importance of such requirement, Public Health Assistant Minister Dr Jerip Susil said people who had knowledge of various languages, especially English, would find it easier to get jobs and work anywhere in the world.

Presenting 1Malaysia Book Vouchers at a college in Kuching at mid-week, he advised the students to improve their English not only through lessons in school but also by reading good books.

Dr Jerip urged them to cultivate the reading habit as it would help improve their English as well as broaden their knowledge, both of which are important not only for their schooling but also their future careers.

In an interview with a national tabloid lately, a former cabinet minister had called for a review of the education system.

“Make English compulsory in all national schools. Without English we cannot compete. We must insist on English as a second language,” he said.

According to him, it was not a mistake to change the medium of instruction from English to Bahasa Malaysia which is the language of the nation and of unity.

The mistake, he pointed out, was in the policies which were to promote Bahasa Malaysia but it had to be at the expense of English.

It’s fair to say the vast majority of Malaysians support the learning of English as a language that is universally recognised for its proven efficacy in the field of education, diplomacy and trade.

More crucially in the Malaysian context, the duality of fluency in the National Language and English will serve to propel the country towards an industrialised and high-income society by the year 2020 and beyond.

Richard III made this desparate plea in Act V, Scene IV of William Shakespeare’s eponymous play (Richard III) after the king fell from his horse in the Battle of Bosworth.

The battle ended with Richard’s death, effectively closing the Wars of the Roses and heralding the Tudor Dynasty with the ascension of Henry Tudor to be Henry VII. The last Tudor was Elizabeth I.

Interestingly, after being flung to the ground from his mount in the thick of battle, Richard’s first act in the moment of hopelessness was to put the horse before his kingdom.

Even in his dire situation, he had asked for a horse (my kingdom for a horse) instead of a sword and a shield to defend himself.

According to scholars, this shows the high regard in which the horse has been held by some cultures through the ages, especially in the western world.

Because horses had figured prominently in the history of civilised society as both work animals and pets, many cultures are putting the noble steel on a pedestal and would consider it repugnant to ever think of eating horsemeat.

So when the European horsemeat scandal broke, it turned the meat market topsy turvy not only in the Continent but also right across the Atlantic to the US.

The scam was exposed after traces of horsemeat were found in beef products. In its early test results for 2,501 beef products, the UK Food Standards Agency found 29 samples had horsemeat at levels of one per cent or above.

US burger makers reacted by dropping their European suppliers. Amid an uproar from consumers, European meat companies recalled their beef products found to contain horse DNA.

The scare also spread east with Hong Kong authorities ordering one of the territory’s biggest supermarket chains to remove all contaminated meat products.

Horses are revered in many European countries and the US. That’s why eating horsemeat for many people there is disgusting because it goes against the cultural grain.

Some even say it’s dangerous, claiming that most former thoroughbred racehorses, forming the bulk of horsemeat being consumed, ran on drugs without FDA approval.

As such, they argue, there is no way of knowing what is being ingested into the body system through the consumption of the meat.

Some cultures, however, consider horsemeat quite healthy to eat. The meat is said to be lean, finely textured, slightly sweet, protein-rich and tender.

Researchers say horsemeat is very low in fat and cholesterol and a good source of polyunsaturated fatty acids. Compared to beef, it has more iron and less fat. Horsemeat is reportedly also an important source of omega 3 and iron.

Furthermore, horses are said to be immune to mad cow disease (bovine spongiform encephalopathy. The BSE scare in recent years had kept occidental butchers busy selling horsemeat as minced meat, sausages, steaks and brochettes.

We are, of course, not trying to spark a frenzy for horsemeat in the local supermarkets with all this talk about the goodness of horsemeat although we won’t mind betting our bottom dollar there isn’t any to be had at these places, anyway.

Horsemeat is hard to come locally because of the negligible equine population here. Apart from the 40-odd ponies at the local turf club and a handful found in the other Divisions, the equine stock is alien to the state.

While most Americans cringe at the idea of eating horsemeat, especially after discovering Kentucky Derby winner and Horse of the Year Ferdinand was sold for slaughter overseas, horsemeat on the dinner table is said to be common in South America and European countries.

In France for instance, horsemeat has been eaten for some centuries. Historians say Napolean’s surgeon-in-chief, Baron Dominique-Jean Larry, had suggested during one of their campaigns that starving French troops cook and eat the meat of horses killed on the battlefields.

Meat products sold in Malaysia do not contain horsemeat, the Veterinary Services Department (VSD) has assured.

Malaysia does not import meat or meat products from EU countries and it’s also unlikely for our meat suppliers to mix their products with horsemeat since we import animal-based foods mostly outside the Euro zone.

“Even if local equine farms were to slaughter their horses, they must first inform us so that we know where the meat is going,” VSD director general Abdul Aziz said.

He pointed out that restaurants and eateries were not allowed to sell horsemeat without informing the department.

The most likely reason why people abhor eating horsemeat is that for centuries, horses have shared a close relationship with human owners.

To most people, horses are regarded as companions, not food. Yet, as one observer notes, there many others who consider horsemeat a delicacy – proof that one person’s pet can be someone else’s protein.

Out of 121 countries covered in the latest edition of the Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI), 86 have discriminatory inheritance practices or laws.

In some countries like Niger or Mali, over half of girls between 15 and 19 are married. This is a huge obstacle for women to get an education and contribute to their own well-being and their countries’ progress.

In Malaysia, the good news for women is that pro-women legislation is being given the attention it deserves by the government with the assurance that “there will not be a repeat of waiting at least seven years for a bill to be passed as what had happened with the Domestic Violence Act.”

For the record, the National Council of Women’s Organisation (NCWO) submitted a memorandum of the draft law on domestic violence in 1987 but it was only passed by parliament in 1994 and implemented in 1996.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak had affirmed at the NCWO golden jubilee celebration in January that “for something good, it will not take seven years.”

He promised the government would fast track pro-women bills by expediting changes to legislation, regulations, practices and thinking that hindered the progress of women in the country.

Laws, policies, structures and administrative processes need to be reviewed and changed to keep discrimination against women at bay, especially when gender sensitivity is still lacking in three curcial areas – public, private and political sectors.

As is widely advocated, a law on sexual harassment is needed –  instead of just a code of conduct – to enable the judiciary to impose the minimum five years imprisonment for rapists.

Another important point is that children should be made aware of the law on statutory rape through education so that they will not succumb to this social ill out of ignorance or be victimised.

There is also a need to bridge the income gap between men and women, given that 60 per cent of the lowest income earners among women take home less than RM3,000 a month.

The prime minister has said the situation warrants a closer study, in particular, how women can improve and add value to their skills for the good of the organisation that employ them and in turn be as justly rewarded as men for their efforts.

Among women’s rights issues in the country yet to come under the microscope for modification, improvement or repeal and, more importantly, delivery, are marital rape which is still not a crime under the law; Malaysian women still being considered the property of their husbands, according to Section 498 of the Penal Code; women still liable to whipping under Syariah Law; under-representation of women in politics and decision-making positions; increase in street crimes involving women and marriages of under-age girls.

There are also calls to address two other women’s rights issues. First, the amendment to Article 15 of the Federal Consitution to allow women the same rights as men with regards to citizenship status of foreign spouses and secondly, the amendment to Schedule II of the Federal Constitution to allow women to confer citizenship status on their children even when the child is born outside Malaysia.

Two other rights issues women in the country have been fighting for are the enactment of the Gender Discrimination Act incorporating the Convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women into national law and a Sexual Harrassment Act.

Such matters have been discussed and debated along
the corridors of power but legislation has yet to be put in place to address them with a singular view to quashing the gender bias that is preventing women from contributing fully to the social and economic life of the country.

Violence against women takes many forms but none is acceptable.

While we are working to make the country safer and more equal – and despite the progress made – cases of domestic violence, sexual harassment, incest and rape are still quite rampant.

Between 2008 and 2012, the Women’s Development Department recorded 8,653 cases requiring guidance and counselling because of domestic violence.

The victims or their families are usually left to deal with such ordeals on their own – an obvious anomaly, considering the safety of all citizens is a moral duty of national importance.

Women should be empowered in the workplace so that they can become more independent and less likely to be subjected to abuse.

Issues of violence and discrimination against women in the country have frequently been highlighted in the media and since the government has given a firm undertaking on pro-women legislation, perhaps it’s time to start putting words into action.

Despite making the ultimate sacrifice to repel the intruders, it is sad to note that the gallantry displayed by our security forces in confronting an external threat has been belittled as mere drama by certain quarters who also view the hostile act against our country as a laughing matter.

These quarters have suddenly waxed military strategists, police chiefs and army generals – all with a self-opinionated version of how frontline action against the intruders should be conducted – from (as one observer noted) transport that should be used to bring our troops to the conflict areas to “the whens, hows and wheres of launching a counter-attack.”

Some even sarcastically suggested calling in Rambo to do what they think our police and army aren’t capable of – that is driving the Sulu intruders out of our country.

What a reprenhensible insult this is to our security forces who are fighting to shield the people (including those who ridicule them) from the perils of foreign aggression.

Those who mocked our security forces’ handling of the situation in Sabah should volunteer for frontline duty in the conflict zones. This is certainly more honourable than continually chastising the very people who are laying down their lives to protect them from the enemy.

It is easy to apportion blame after the fighting has erupted. For example, there are claims that the lives of the police officers killed by the intruders could be have been spared if the government had acted quickly to verify and defuse the situation.

Appraising a situation is, of course, easy after it has happened. It is always easy to say this should have been done instead of that in the aftermath. Why, even a fool can appear to offer wise counselling AFTER the event.

To all intents and purposes, the Sabah claim is archiac and antiquated. Sulu is no longer recognised as an independent kingdom. The sultanate will be better off regaining independence from the Philippines than claiming Sabah.

Historians point out that in a 1930 treaty, the US and Great Britain demarcated the islands in their “possession” off the northern-east coast of Sabah by drawing a clear-cut boundary to separate them.

The allocation of islands defined in these treaties was enshrined in Aricle 1 of the Philippine Constitution of 1935.

In fact, as early as 1885, a reciprocal accord was reached whereby Spain renounced all claims of sovereignty over the whole of Borneo in exchange for Great Britain’s recognition of Spanish sovereignity over the entire Sulu archipelago. This placed Sabah under the British sphere of influence.

Sabah (then British North Borneo) became a Crown Colony in 1946 and after gaining independence, joined Malaya, Singapore and Sarawak to form Malaysia in 1963.

Another salient point put forth by scholars is that the Sabah claim has no known international support while Malaysia is morally supported by Great Britain and the Commonealth of Nations in rejecting the claim.

Even the US has remained neutral while the other Asean countries also seem to tacitly acknowledge Malaysia’s right to the disputed territory.

It is also to be noted that Sabahans had agreed to the formation of Malaysia in a referendum held by the Cobbold Commission in 1962. This means Sabah is an integral and legitimate part of Malaysia and cannot be claimed by others.

Historians insist the question of claim by any party should not arise at all as the referendum on Sabah (and Sarawak) by the Cobbold Commission is similar to the Singapore Referendum on the formation of Malaysia in 1962.

The reality is that the Sulu sultanate has no solid basis to its claim of Sabah. The Siam government had also handed Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan and Terengganu over to the British but it cannot claim these states.

Sabahans have rallied to sign an online petition rejecting claims by the self-proclaimed Sultan of Sulu to their state.

The petition categorically states: “We appeal to the international community to acknowledge the people of Sabah’s right to self-determination, to endorse the state’s constitutional sovereignty of the Malaysian government as valid and the desire of Sabahans
to permanently reject the Sultanate of Sulu’s claim on our home.”

The petition will be handed to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Philippine President Benigno Aquino III.

Malaysia has lost its brave sons in the fight against the intruders who violated our territorial sovereignty unprovoked.

This is truly a time to support our brave men who are risking their lives to keep us out of
harm’s way. To show that their sacrifice is not in vain, we must stand united in eliminating a subversive external threat in our midst.

And for goodness sake, stop exploiting the Sabah situation to score cheap political points.

In their smear campaigns, these groups have even claimed oil palm cultivation destroys rainforests and their wildlife habitats  and also lays to waste large swathes of otherwise productive agricultural land.

However, studies show oil palm is one of the most productive of all the oilseed crops with an enviable yield of more than 4.5 metric tons per hectare as against the miniscule 0.5 metric tons yield typical of its competitors such as soy, rapeseed and sunflower.

Such high productivity means less land is required for oil palm to produce the same amount of oil as the competing oil seeds. The oil palm tree is also sturdy, remaining productive for 20 to 30 years and harvestable annually without replanting whereas the other oil crops have to be replanted annually.

In Malaysia, an oil palm plantation — because it is highly productive — can be established on legitimate agricultural land without the need to clear forests indiscriminately. That is why Malaysia still has a forest cover close to 70 per cent despite planting oil palm for more than a century and being hitherto the world’s largest palm oil producer.

In stark contrast, the industrial west from where the self-styled paragons of conservation originate can hardly claim 20 per cent forest cover.

World Growth, a non-profit NGO, agrees that palm oil is highly sustainable in developing economies. Only 0.26 hectare of land is required to produce a tonne of palm oil whereas soybean, sunflower and rapeseed need 2.2 hectares, two hectares and 1.5 hectares, respectively, to produce the same quantity of oil.

What this means is that soybean requires eight times more  land to produce the same quantity of oil compared to palm oil.

Oil palm cultivation has also been blamed for the imminent extinction of the orangutan but such finger-pointing is as spiteful and as it is illogical since the primates’ population in the wild in Borneo alone is estimated between 45,000 and 69,000.

So how is it possible, even remotely, for the orangutan to become extinct within the next three or four years as claimed. The numbers just don’t add up, especially with on-going efforts to protect the big apes in conservation enclaves set up in both Malaysia and Indonesia.

The lobbyists have stooped to the chicanery of making ludicrous claims to advance their agenda but people are no longer easily fooled by their ulterior motives.

In a recent development regarding palm oil, the French Senate threw out a budget containing a proposal to increase tax on the commodity.

The reason for the rejection was that the proposal not only had no scientific basis but also contained an “inflammatory and baseless” tax on palm oil — up by 300 per cent from around 100 British pounds (RM397) to 400 British pounds (RM1,587).

Shorn of its selective perception, the proposal is tantamount to an unwarranted and unjustified attack against hundreds of thousands of small farmers across our country. Its rejection is, thus, wholly justified.

The French senator, Yves Daudigny, who tabled the proposal, claimed palm oil was “most rich in saturated fats and its harmful effect on health has already been established.”

Such frivolity does not stand up to well-founded research showing that palm oil, being a vegetable oil, is actually cholesterol-free
and good for heart health as it is rich in heart-friendly anti-oxidants.

The French senator is also ignorant of a proven fact — that the bulk of saturated fats consumed in France comes from animal sources such as meat, milk, cheese and butter – NOT palm oil. In fact, consumption of fats from animal sources amounts to 34.4 kg a year while palm oil consumption per capita in France is only 2kg.

Despite the scientifc proofs and solid stats, the lobby groups continue to discredit palm oil. Is it about the environment or plain economic jealousy?  Obviously, the latter.

The upside is the opportunity presented for Malaysia and France to work together in returning to a science-based discussion and countering public perception of palm oil, currently based on hyperbole instead of truth.

We should look forward to working with those of our enlightened overseas partners — through a government-sponsored joint task force — to check the lies being spread about palm oil.

And hopefully, the proposed inflammatory tax on the commodity will be consigned to the dross of history.

Some politicians think it gives them the licence to make all kinds of outlandish claims, whether it be promises they cannot keep, accusations they cannot prove or excuses they cannot justify.

A tiresome task as it is, it still falls on the rakyat to sieve through all the hoopla, noise and spam to extract the information necessary to help them make the best possible decision when the time comes to tick the ballot box.

In short, the rakyat have a duty to settle for nothing less than fact, truth and justice for their own good. Sadly, fact, truth and justice often don’t seem to be forthcoming from our politicians during the silly season.

It is expected for politicians on one side to point out the failings in their opponents at every opportunity but the situation becomes ridiculous when the flaws they so gleefully point out in the other are just as enthusiastically ignored when it comes from within their own party ranks.

Take for example Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s recent signing of Transparency International-Malaysia’s Election Integrity Pledge.

Bernama said the PM also made a public declaration to support integrity and be fully committed in curbing corruption in the country and during the 13th general election.

The prime minister had also given his commitment that as soon as the names of the BN candidates were announced at the nomination, he would ensure that all of them signed the pledge.

On Tuesday (Feb 26), The Borneo Post carried a report quoting two Sarawak BN politicians as saying the opposition’s refusal to sign the pledge proved they had failed to walk the talk in calling for transparency.

It should be noted that DAP veteran Lim Kit Siang claimed on a blog entry dated yesterday (Feb 26) that several Pakatan Rakyat leaders have already signed the pledge well before the PM.

In the same post, he stated his desire to sign the pledge as a meaningful exercise, and thus, proposed a 10-point addendum (http://bit.ly/13dZvG3), implying that he would sign the pledge if the points were incorporated into the pledge.

Political showmanship aside, the main thing Sarawakians will take away from this latest exchange is that politicians on both sides are not exactly tripping over themselves in a race to imprint their John Hancocks on the pledge, despite being audacious enough to claim a moral victory over those on the opposite side who have not done so.

It would be inherently more meaningful to the common folk if all leaders, regardless of political creed and colour, were to take the initiative to lead by example, instead of only doing something in the interests of the rakyat when it is politically expedient or they are forced into a corner to do so.

Why the need to wait until the PM has announced the candidate list or for the pledge to be amended before signing it? It would be a point in any politician’s favour to sign the pledge on their own free will and as soon as possible, regardless of whether they are candidates in the general election or not.

Feel free to milk as much goodwill and publicity from such as event as possible but please don’t indulge in the doublespeak which is so prominent during the silly season.

Of course, as the cynics will pounce on, just because someone has signed the integrity pledge doesn’t mean he or she intends to keep to the word and the spirit of the word. But that is a topic for another day.

While getting all politicians and leaders to sign the integrity pledge before the GE may not do much to improve Malaysia’s dismal score of 49 out of 100 on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index results in 2012, it would be a good starting point to improve public perception over the integrity of those who claim to hold the moral high ground.

Starting with the 2020 Summer Games, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) will delete wrestling from its list of core sports.

Later this year, the Committee will pick one of eight shortlisted sports — wrestling, baseball-softball, climbing, karate, roller sports, squash, wakeboarding and wushu – to add to the 2020 programme.

The IOC did not give any reasons for its action apart from saying it wants to remain relevant to sports fans of all generations.

Eliminating wrestling which has been in every modern Olympics since the inaugural 1896 Athens Games (except in 1900) is, therefore, a conspicuous IOC attempt to add to its TV audience younger viewers who, it feels, may consider wrestling an irrelevant sport in modern-day context.

And to give the Games a “young” appeal, the Olympic governing body had, in recent years, included emerging sports such as beach volleyball and BMX cycling.

The axing of Olympic wrestling is not altogether unexpected as it has been under threat for the past decade.

In 2002, an IOC-commissioned review of Olympic sports claimed wrestling had a “lack of global popularity” as well as “relatively low broadcast and press coverage.”

The problem arose from public confusion between wrestling’s two disciplines — Greco-Roman which forbids holds below the waist, and freestyle which allows them.

The review recommended dropping one of the disciplines from the 2008 Beijing Games but it did not happen.

In fact, as early as 2001, the IOC, under its new president Dr Jacques Rogge, had already started a process to limit the size, cost and complexity of the Games.

Initially, the IOC decided to have a maximum of 28 sports — roughly 10,500 athletes and 300 events. But to keep the Olympics fresh, the Committee finally agreed on 25 core sports and three slots for new or revived competitions.

In 2009, golf and rugby were approved for 2016 and 2020.

For the final slot, the IOC decided one of its 26 existing sports would have to compete against the new applicant sports. And for 2020, the axe has fallen on wrestling.

Athletes and fans of the longtime Olympic sport were dumpfounded by the IOC’s move.

Rulon Gardner, the American who upset Russian legend Aleksandr Karelin to win Greco-Roman gold in the 2000 Sydney Games, said he heard rumours one style of wrestling might be dropped but did not expect a “death penalty” for the enitre sport.

Buvaisar Saitiev, a three-time Russian gold medal winner, said it would be a shame if the Olympics excluded wrestling.

He said he could understand if officials wanted to change the rules, reduce the number of wrestling medals awarded or even pare the number of weight classes, but expelling the sport altogether is “completely wrong.”

In the 2012 London Games, 29 countries won medals in men’s and women’s wrestling.

The sport also produced one of the most enduring images of the Olympics when American gold medalist Jordan Burroughs and Iranian silver medalist Sadegh Goudarzi embraced each other on the rostrum.

To be accepted back into the fold, the task for the international wrestling federation now is to figure out how to improve its presentation to give wrestling a fresh feel.

Archery, for instance, has to make its competitions more appealing and viable in the modern Olympics by changing its scoring so competitions often come down to a final arrow.

Fencing is also staging matches under a spotlight while modern pentathlon has compressed its competition to a single day.

The IOC plans to hear presentations on all the eight shortlisted sports in May
before making a decision in September.

There is a case to be made for keeping wrestling in the Oylmpics. Apart from being one of the sports of the original Greek Olympics and also of the first modern Games, it is one of the world’s most diverse sports with nearly 200 nations from all continents participating in it.

As the IOC’s decision to drop wrestling is still tentative, hopefully, there will be a meaningful opportunity to
discuss the important role wrestling plays in the global sports landscape.

Lobbying to keep wrestling in the Olympics can be expected to be intense in the face of fierce competition from the other shortlisted sports bidding to get a slot in the 2020 Games.

There are pros and cons to the debate but the fact that wrestling is an “Olympic original” can neither be disputed nor denied.

Considering the sport’s universality as well as historic association with the Olympics, its exclusion will inevitably leave a blotch in the escutcheon of the Games. And that would be a damn shame.

It is ironic that those entrused with enforcing it often end up getting the bigger blame than those who deserve the stick but get away with only a slap on the wrist, if not scot-free altogether.

Indeed, nowadays, school disciplinarians have a most unenviable job. If they don’t teach students to respect authority, they get rapped for dumping the hoi polloi on society. But if they do, they are often criticised for behaving like bullies.

Respect for the teacher in the order of the bygone days has become more myth than reality. Time has changed and so has society but not always for the better for the noble profession in turning out responsible citizens through a strict disciplinary code.

However, with the will and wisdom, it should not be beyond the realm of possibility to bring back to the classroom the sort of discipline that had turned immorality into decency and school bullies into respected head prefects — and also laid the foundation to high office for many of our present-day leaders.

Some would say this is easier said than done and they may well be right. Teachers are now required to handle a vastly different generation of students and under very different circumstances as well.

In the age of high tech and so-called open society, teachers are facing greater pressure than their counterparts of yesteryear because they have to be exemplary not only in teaching but also dealing with all kinds of students – not forgetting parents as well. The mettle of teachers has never been so tested than now. Small wonder that given the choice, most people will bypass teaching for a nine-to-five office job. Less hassle and good for the bp!

As there are always two sides (teacher’s and student’s) to a case of punishment over indiscipline, it is important to view each side objectively, without prejudice and, most importantly, without fear. In an atmosphere free from undue tensions and threats, good sense is more likely to prevail in attempting to reach a mutually acceptable solution.

Generally, it’s a specific set of circumstances that triggers the seemingly strange behaviour of either a teacher or a student — the former usually involving meting out overdone punishment while the latter the commitment of an unusually serious offence.

Unless we face up to the root cause and not sweep it under the carpet, no matter how unpleasant the consequence, the problem can only fester and become even more serious later.

Expectations from teachers are high these days. Because of their strong influence in the intellectual and character development of the young, they are looked up to as role models.

However, it has to be admitted that under prevailing circumstances, teachers do not get to have a strong say in matters of indiscipline. They get over-ridden so often that they probably are only too happy to let sleeping dog lie. And don’t blame them if they succumb to apathy.

In any profession, there are bound to be black sheep. Teaching is no exception. Reports of power abuse or moral corruption, especially in cases of student molestation, can only harm the noble profession and all it stands for.

To instill a strong sense of discipline among the students, we can certainly learn from the mission schools of yore. The heads of these schools realised discipline is an indispensible part of learning and they prioritised this well-founded principle in their teaching system.

What’s even more remarkable is they were able to discipline the students with the full support of their parents. Ask any successful alumni of these mission schools and most will tell you the same story – that punishment in school and at home for misbehaving has made them better citizens of the country and also stood them in good stead in their journey through life.

A well-administered school inspires dedication among the teaching staff and discipline among the students. It is firm ground for productive learning and positive development of young minds and attitudes.

Any education that tends not to develop character or instill discipline is not, in the truest sense, education at all. This is as true of those who impart education as those who learn from education.

In the old days, the celebration was more spontaneous but now, due perhaps to change of lifestyle, the Spring Festival is increasingly regarded as a time to let down one’s hair.

It would, of course, be unthinkable if this time-honoured cultural festival were to be relegated to a mere off-day from work or a casual break from the humdrum of the office.

Such an attitude could spell the eventual disappearance of a venerated culture passed down the generations. That would be a great pity, considering culture is central to existence – without it, one could lose one’s identity.

The Chinese community in the state should make it a point to celebrate the New Year even on a small scale. Apart from fostering racial and religious understanding and respect, celebrating households will also be keeping their culture of sharing alive through the open house concept.

Gratifyingly, non-observance of the Lunar New Year on the part the Chinese community here is still the exception. Most families continue to celebrate with a lot of enthusiasm.

In fact, over the past fortnight, or even earlier, there had been a pell mell rush for New Year essentials – both gastronomic and sartorial.

Business has reportedly been briskier than the previous year. The roads were certainly busier and the traffic congestion denser (phew!) Shopping malls and food centres, salons and even tailor shops were getting steady streams of customers. And for the oomph in spending power, many said they have the BRIM 2.0 windfall to thank for.

Revellers want to roll out the red carpet and put on their New Year’s best to welcome a tradition-steeped festival with joyous celebration.

Over in the peninsula, a gangnum-style concert will be held in Penang to celebrate the Lunar New Year on the Second Day of the festive occasion. What seems rather bizarre is that people have been asked to wear red, yellow or green to the concert to reflect, of all things, their political leanings.

But are we not trivialising the Lunar New Year when even what we wear to a New Year musical concert has to mirror politics for the mere sake of spicing up the hustings in the face of an imminent general election – while those who goad you into doing so are not even bothered to visit your open house? Surely, we should not allow ourselves to be somebody’s fools here.

The Lunar New Year will be incomplete without letting off firecrackers, especially at midnight on New Year’s Eve and after dinner on the 15th Day (Chap Goh Mei), the last day of the celebration.

Of course, indiscriminate playing of firecrackers and fireworks is not to be encouraged. But if it’s done at specific times when people are made aware of it, then the din may still be tolerable. Otherwise, the sudden blasts of present-day firecrackers can be an ear-splitting nuisance and even dangerous.

Indeed, children have frequently been hurt playing ‘bomb-type’ firecrackers. They blew up a finger if they were lucky – or it could be more serious like scarring a pretty face or injuring an eye, and worse, setting a house on fire.

For public safety, banning firecrackers may be the right thing to do although some leeway should be considered during Chinese New Year, especially at midnight on the Eve, the early part of the 15th Night and during lion dance performances.

Controlled playing of firecrackers to celebrate these special New Year activities should be allowed as it adds to the joy of the season and revelers will certainly welcome such a consideration.

While Lunar New Year predictions are usually made with more than a little tongue in cheek, there are claims some of them have accurately foretold past economic world events and trends.

And speaking of economics, it’s customary to settle all outstanding debts before midnight on New Year’s Eve. Failure to do so is considered an ill omen.

For this New Year, there is still time to pay off outstanding debts — less than 24 hours to be precise! As the saying does, better late than never unless one’s prepared to defy tradition and risk living with the Sword of Damocles hanging over one’s head for the next 300 days or so.

All festive celebrations have their do’s and dont’s. The Lunar New Year is no exception. These taboos (or superstitions) can be taken at face value or as the Gospel truth. It’s up to the individual. But generally, there should an attached caveat that warns – Don’t take them all too seriously.

Gong Xi Fa Cai everybody.

Health Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai has said this is not a glorious title as we are outweighing our Asean neighbours and ranked number six in the whole of Asia – only behind some Middle Eastern countries.

Citing data from the National Health and Morbidity Surveys, he revealed that 15.1 per cent of Malaysians, aged 18 and above, were suffering from obesity as of 2011 – an increase from 14 per cent of the same demographic in 2006.

Over 2.6 million adults are also reportedly obese while over 477,000 children below 18 are overweight.

“We are increasingly becoming cough potatoes; we are not leading an active enough lifestyle to prevent obesity which is a precursor of many health problems,” Liow noted.

Over the past 10 years, the number of fat people in country has gone up more than twofold, resulting in more Malaysians contracting diseases such as hypertension, diabetes as well as kidney and heart problems.

According to statistics, 48 per cent of Malaysian men and 62 per cent of Malaysian women are fat. Malaysian Indians are the fattest at 63.4 per cent, followed by Malays (53.5 per cent), Chinese (50.8 per cent) and others (45.2 per cent).

Obesity should not only be seen as a medical problem but also a social problem. For instance, it is common for people to say, whenever they see their friends slightly overweight, that they (their friends) are looking healthier. They say this not to appear disrespectful but may not realise what they are trying to tell their friends.

A direct, albeit less tactful, approach such as saying I don’t think you are healthy is more helpful in jolting the obese into recognising the morbid state of their health than trying to be nice but untruthful.

Treat obesity as a social problem, then slowly people will look at it in a more serious manner and take action.

Oddly enough, there are societies that tend to look more kindly on obese males than females. Apparently, in such societies, discrimination against women, as bizaare as it may sound, is not confined only to the political and cultural spheres but also that of the anatomy.

A study, conducted among a group of university students, found that overweight women are far more likely to be convicted in a criminal trial than their slender counterparts.

But the conviction rate of men is not affected by their girths.

And, as the study uncovered, slim men are the worst offenders at judging women by their weight while there is no significant fat bias shown by women towards either sex.

The study also cited the perception that overweight women are more likely to belong to a lower socio-economic class than overweight men and, therefore, more likely to commit crimes.

Some say the history of stigmatisation of overweight women is to blame since being fat is still considered to be morally wrong in certain societies.

A team of psychologists also found that perception of female guilt by male – not female – jurors is proportionate to how fat the defendant is. In other words, you are literally more likely to get away with murder if you are a thin woman and a dude is behind the stand.

One argument has it that attractive defendants (usually not obese) are found guilty less often, claiming the halo-effect has an almost century-long canon of research behind it.

Another deeply embedded cultural stereotype is that “obese people are perceived as greedy and selfish.”

Such a pre-conceived notion usually cannot stand up to closer scrutiny. It sounds more like a generalisation and is, therefore, refutable.

While it would be irresponsible to gauge innocence or guilt by waistline size in a court of law, what is indisputably relevant though from the health angle is that a person’s fitness and wellness can easily crumble under the sheer weight of obesity.

It is for this reason that people should make it a point to exercise and stay within acceptable body weight in order to remain healthy.

Being obese or extremely fat does your health no favour. It applies to both genders, notwithstanding  judicial prejudice – perceived or otherwise – against fat women in societies yet to see the light.

Such harmonious inter-communal co-existence, built up through mutual understanding and tolerance, must be safeguarded at all costs.

This is especially crucial in the face of brazen attempts by extremists in our midst to spread fears, distrust and disunity through religious bigotry and “hate” speeches. We are familiar with the offensive remarks on race and religion made by pressure groups in the peninsula. And lately, the leader of one such group was at it again, uttering words that have no place in
a peaceful plural society like ours.

The leader in question had called on Muslims to “seize and burn copies of Bibles which contain the word Allah or other Arabic religious words.”

He said it was the only way to stop non-Muslims from “stirring the sensitivities and sentiments of the majority of population in the country,” adding that he was not trying to instigate communal tension but only “to show our anger against disrespect for our sensitivity.”

How could the leader concerned not be seen as fanning the flames of religious discord with the sort of fiery (and unwarranted) outbursts he was making. It would have more than sufficed to explain the issue in a civil and rational manner. There is absolutely no need to resort to fear-mongering and making threats.

Malaysians who cherish peace, harmony and tolerance, and oppose all forms of extremism that bode the country ill must reject the said leader’s inflammatory rhetorics which also run counter to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s 1Malaysia Concept and transformation programme. In fact, provocative utterances from all opportunistic quarters should be similarly repudiated.

Malaysia has been acknowledged as a moderate Muslim country where Islam goes hand-in-hand with democracy, development and inter-communual harmony.

This stand was reaffirmed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong when he declared open the national 1434H Maulidur Rasul celebration on Thursday. His Majesty called on Muslims to practise moderation and balance in their lives to foster unity among all Malaysians.

“I am confident that should we follow the practice of moderation, we would be able to foster unity and achieve success,” the King said.

The Prime Minister himself has advocated the formation of a global movement of the moderates from all faiths to work together to fight extremism. He had told world leaders at the UN General Assembly that such a movement will “save us from sinking into the abyss of despair and depravation.”

Adding his voice to the call for moderation, Chief Minister Pehin Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud has urged Muslims in Sarawak to be judicious and temperate in practising their religion, saying there is no place for extremism in the state with its multi-religious make-up.

Celebrating the state-level Maulidur Rasul in Betong, he stressed that moderation would create a conducive environment in every facet of life and allow the people to complement each other’s needs and accommodate differing views.

“In the end, what we get, in return, is unity through understanding which will not only satisfy both sides but also create a stronger bond,” he said.

Although Sarawak is, gratifyingly, free of racial and religious tension, there is a need to remain vigilant against any form of bigotry that might have been imported. The people must preserve the prevailing unity and political stability and also be wary of rumour-mongers out to create trouble.

Extremism is destructive and the antithesis of temperance and moderation which, in turn, is guided by the rule of reason. Most of the things provided for us by Nature are good but only so if we do not indulge in extremism or excesses.

Peace-loving Malaysians should reject extremism and embrace moderation which, in all things, is a masterpiece of human attainment. Our future will be jeopardised if we let our guard down and allow extremist elements to rare their ugly heads and gain a foothold in our state. This is something we must work together to prevent come what may.

There are lots of things, especially about ourselves, that we have been meaning to fix. As the saying goes – new year, new you.

But how do we go about embarking on this life-changing voyage? For many of us, it’s the time to think about making New Year resolutions.

Continuous failure to keep New Year resolutions has probably left many of us wiser. But if we go on the science, we are not alone.

In a recent study, it was found that about 90 per cent of the 5,000 people monitored failed to make good their resolutions.

The outcome was even gloomier in another study which showed only about 10 per cent of people were successful in achieving their resolutions (with nearly 30 per cent flunking out within the first week).

However, there is a silver lining. Many of the studies have also documented the steps taken by people who successfully achieved their New Year resolutions.

One goal at a time. According to a psychologist, the willpower of most people is so limited and easily taxed that if they do one thing, they find it hard to do everything else. So the solution is quite obvious – focus on one resolution at a time, and when it becomes a habit, work on something else.

Another study that looked directly at how people achieved their goals found that they all had one common strategy – breaking their resolutions into smaller steps.

This had a monitoring effect of letting them know exactly how they were doing as well as making the goals easier to achieve by allowing people to focus on one thing at a time.

The study also found that “simply visualising the end goal dooms people to failure.”

Many such ideas were frequently recommended by self-help experts but test results suggest they simply don’t work.

“If you are trying to lose weight, it’s not enough to stick a picture of a model on your fridge or fantasise about being slimmer. To achieve your goals, plan how you’ll get there,” the study noted.

Tell family and friends. Making New Year resolutions known to friends and family has two effects – first, they’re more likely to support you if they know what you’re trying to do (the carrot) and secondly, you’ll feel bad if the next time they ask you about your resolutions, you say you failed (the stick).

A psychology professor once tracked 270 businesspeople as they tried to achieve certain goals. He divided them into five groups and gave each a different method to use.

The professor found that those who shared their goals with a friend (through sending weekly updates) were over 30 per ceht more successful in accomplishing their goals.

Eating unhealthy food or sitting around watching TV is immediately rewarding whereas the reward from working out at the gym might not come until many months where you notice weight loss.

Most of us are aware of this but to stay motivated when changing behaviour, psychologists say we need to make sure that the new, healthy behaviours are rewarded regularly. Pick activities that are rewarding by themselves or add rewards.

Now, for motorists in Kuching, orderly parking is one New Year resolution they should make and try to fulfill.

The reason is that illegal parking in the state capital has reached nightmarish proportion.

One blatant incidence of indiscriminate parking that occurred at Kenyalang Park market earlier in the week is a good example.

Patrons were upset with vendors who converted the front drop-off zone at the market into a permanent parking space.

According to reports, to make matters worse, some of the vendors made this drop-off zone their free personal private parking.

Apart from causing traffic congestion, these vendors were also alleged not to have taken kindly to anyone trying to park at “their spots.”

And this despite the local council having provided ample parking lots at the lower ground floor of the market and negotiated with the parking contractor to provide vendors with special reduced price season parking.

This is just one of the many instances where the by-laws on parking had been deliberately breached. There must have been heaps of similar cases that have gone unreported.

Illegal parking has always been a headache, especially in Kuala Lumpur, but the problem has caught up in Kuching.  It is against the law everywhere to park illegally.

The authorities should act without fear or favour in napping the culprits. In fact, they should make this their number one New Year resolution. If they do – there is no reason why they should not – they can be assured of support from all law-abiding citizens.

This can be attributed to unsustainable management of water resources rather than the quantity of water available for domestic, industrial and agricultural uses.

As water is a non-renewable resource, efficient management of its quality has become increasing critical and is expected to take on even greater socio-economic significance as the population of the country continues to grow.

In Selangor, the supply of treated water is a worrying issue in the face of depleting reserves which have dropped to critical levels and are likely to get worse in the long run as demand increases.

For this reason, the federal government is standing by its decision to proceed with the Langat 2 treatment plant to forestall a highly potential water crisis in the opposition-controlled state. Although there is a federal-state stalemate over the project, there are indications that implementation may go ahead.

Prioritising Langat 2 is a far-sighted move. Partisan politics aside, taking proactive measures to prevent a water-related calamity is certainly better and wiser than gambling with adequacy of this vital live-sustaining commodity not only for Selangor but the whole country as well.

Sarawak, even with its many rivers and abundant rainfall, is not spare the problem of water shortage. Indeed, the state is facing mounting challenges in meeting the surge in demand for treated water in the cities as well as the rural areas.

Under the Federal government’s NKRA (national key result areas) programme, Sarawak has been allocated RM1.73 billion for 477 rural water projects. So far, 393 projects have been completed with the rest expected to be ready by August this year.

However, despite the huge amount of money already spent to ensure sufficient supply, demand continues to rise each year throughout the state. According to one estimate, meeting future demands for uninterrupted water supply statewide could cost more than RM16 billion. This does not include the costs of building new treatment plants and upgrading existing ones.

To avoid water shortages and all the attendant problems, not forgetting the colossal expenditure involved to keep the taps running, profligacy in useage should be eliminated. It is well to remember that if unnecessary wastage is not checked, water security in the state (and country) could become exponentially fraught.

As it is, a number of rural areas frequently run dry during prolonged drought, necessitating water relief. And apart from fire risks, the possibility of dry spells wreaking havoc on water supply in drought-prone areas needs constant monitoring.

Admittedly, where Sarawak is concerned, problems of water shortage have always been given the attention they deserve.

Keeping close tabs on the supply (and demand) situation is crucial to avoiding a water crisis.

How much water do we need for daily use?

According to a study by the Federation of Malaysian Consumers’ Association (Fomca), the average Malaysian needs only 80 litres a day, including three litres for drinking, to sustain a reasonable quality of life.

Its findings on wastage show almost 50 per cent of households rarely took action to fix leaks while 70 per cent did not have dual-flush systems which could reduce 30 to 60 per cent of water usage.

And worse, 70 per cent of those surveyed are not likely to reduce home water usage over the next two to three years.

Water has been deemed an inexhaustible resource but we know this is fallacious notion. In fact, a landmark UN Report has warned of an impending global water crisis due to surging population growth, climate change, reckless irrigation and chronic waste.

While water sufficiency can determine prosperity and stability, lack of access to it helps drive poverty and deprivation and breeds the potential for unrest and conflict.

Presently, there are no plans to raise our water tariffs despite escalating production costs but this does not mean water should be used in a wasteful manner.

Prudence must be exercised even when there is no shortage to avoid wastage and save costs. While households must use water responsibly, the water authorities too must be proactive in carrying repairs, especially plugging leaks so as not to needlessly drive water revenue down the drain.

While wastage can be prevented with efficient management, ultimately, it is  still prudent and responsible usage that is key to ensuring adequate supply.