opinion
Yayasan Strategik Sosial executive director Dr Denison Jayasooria's opinion piece entitled 'Moving forward together with MIC' on Jan 13 in malaysiakini was obviously written to rebut the views expressed by two concerned individuals in a New Straits Times article on Jan 9.This is a vintage MIC diversion tactic; question the motive of the writer and publisher, attempt to discredit the dissenters, raise irrelevant matters to mislead readers and avoid discussing the core issues.
One of the concerns raised by lawyer and Tamil educationist S Pasupathi in the NST article was the rationale for MIC to squeeze millions of ringgit out of a poor community to set up a private university while the foundation of pre-school and primary education is still weak.
True, individuals and numerous organisations, including the MIC, have made efforts over the years to improve Tamil schools. But much more needs to be done to lay a stronger foundation at pre-school and primary Tamil school levels. Only with a sound primary education will children from low-income families be able to move-on to secondary and tertiary education.
It is in this context that the plan by MIC to spend over RM400 million on a private university was criticised. This is a lot of money to be raised from a community mired in social problems. A more beneficial step will be to spend such funds in areas of immediate need.
Step one - prepare more children from poor families to qualify to enter existing public universities and private colleges. With better results, they will qualify for scholarships and other loan schemes.
Children from middle class families who want to take up medicine are able to find places in medical colleges in India and Indonesia. There is no urgent need to invest limited funds in a new private medical college. Besides, there is the International Medical College in Kuala Lumpur and the Melaka-Manipal Medical College.
Step two - to provide skills and create employment opportunities for school dropouts who may otherwise be drawn into the world of gangs and crime.
Pride and symbolism
In light of this reality, consider Dr Denison's arguments:
'Why can't these individuals recognise that the Barisan National-led government has given the approval to MIC to set up this Indian Malaysian-owned university? It is the only one in the country with a majority Indian ownership, and where the vice-chancellor will be an Indian.
'Why is it when the MCA received approval for its university, the Chinese community rallied behind it, but in the case of the MIC - some so-called professional Indians decried the achievement? There are many differences of opinion within the Chinese community yet on education they work together. Why can't the Indians do likewise?'
Flabbergasting, indeed! So, it is all about pride and symbolism. Over RM400 million is to be invested just to have the satisfaction of an MIC-owned university and an Indian vice-chancellor.
It is precisely these misplaced priorities that well-meaning members of the community are contesting.
The question is not about 'recognising' the fact that MIC has obtained government approval for a university. It is great that MIC will be setting up the university for the advancement of Indian Malaysians. It will be even better if the university provides free education for Indian Malaysians from poor backgrounds.
But shouldn't the MIC leadership finance the university entirely from their own resources? It is not that Indian Malaysians are unwilling to rise to the occasion. The bone of contention is the further taxing of a poor community to finance the project.
Indian, however, have rallied to the support of such projects for their advancement in the past.
Maika debacle
Take the example of Maika Holdings. There was a groundswell of support for the venture. Ordinary Indian Malaysians sold their goats and cows, pawned their family jewellery and took out loans to invest in the venture.
Over RM100 million was raised. That was about 20 years ago. By now the investment should have grown to over RM1 billion with possible ownership in several public-listed companies.
Sadly, its story today needs no elaboration. The goodwill, enthusiasm and trust of the community was betrayed. The villains: mismanagement, political interference and appointments.
Today, the MIC is back again with its exhausted cry of Indian Malaysian unity and advancement. It is too late to pound any sense into MIC's mandore-style leadership. The project has started anyway.
Hopefully, this time there will be no political interference. And we ask that a more professional management be put in place for the sake of the community.
S NAGARAJAN is a former journalist and currently a research student at the Institute of Postgraduate Studies and Research, Universiti Malaya.