LETTER | Let us be clear. The Prime Minister's Office said the main aim of the Economic Action Council (EAC) is to encourage and stimulate sustainable economic growth, equitable distribution of wealth and further enhance the well-being of the people. It will also look into issues related to the cost of living, employment, poverty and home-ownership.

But some people reminded us of the National Economic Action Council (NEAC) set up in 1998 by the same person. Remarks back then like “the state provided support for favoured firms linked to bumiputera capitalists, banks encouraged to lend more to bail out troubled firms and Khazanah taking over the assets of the failed companies owned by the crony capitalists”, are now making their rounds again.

There is also an assertion that the EAC was set up as the cabinet was unable to handle issues related to the economy, finance and welfare of the people.

But then, there are ministers who disagree with this assertion. Their justifications include that it is not the first time the council was set up and asking “Are you saying that previously when it was implemented the cabinet did not function?”

Another one said, the council is made up of experts and the prime minister wanted to create an EAC that is action-orientated to plan effective implementation strategies for the long and medium-term policies. But isn’t that the responsibility of ministers and actions can only be taken by ministers who have executive powers and not the council?

I prefer to reserve my other comments on the above.

I think it is more important to focus on how we should deal with the main aims of the EAC. It is encouraging and inspires hope that things can get better with the immediate response and many ideas from various parties. But sadly, they are primarily re-runs.

Let us visit a few of them and at the same time, I will attempt to suggest how “Malaysia Baru” should deal with it. Since they are reruns and have not achieved the desired results, we should look at them from a different angle and take some drastic actions.

Associations representing different industries have listed their wish lists.

Among them are for the EAC to focus on ways to reduce the cost of doing business, enhance industries' competitiveness and boost productivity. Also, to focus on introducing initiatives to lower the cost of living as it will improve the well-being of the people by allowing the public to have better purchasing power.

The EAC should also improve investors confidence by focusing on creating a conducive and friendly business ecosystem and find ways to improve the currency value as it will be good for imports and reduce the cost of production. They say, lowering of costs can also be passed down to consumers.

One said the EAC should focus on building up the economy and investor confidence by immediately laying out the transition period for economic policies before preparing for the master policy. Another said it is imperative for the EAC to revisit the tourism fundamentals including up-skilling manpower for a more healthier and sustainable tourism environment that would be regionally competitive once again.

One action council hoped the EAC will work on re-jigging the procurement process to enable more participation by businesses and more transparency in deals. It admitted that a lot of bumiputra businesses deal with government-linked companies and the government and it seems there are numerous complaints previously that payments were delayed.

A restaurant owners association wanted the EAC to focus on smaller business owners and work to resolve pressing issues like the foreign labour shortage and difficulty in getting bank loans.

One chamber of commerce wanted the council to advise policy-makers to help steer the nation’s economy because things are not moving as they should.

All of the above are good proposals but as said earlier, most are re-runs.

Since we are in Malaysia Baru, why don’t we move to the other side of the table and ask ourselves what can the associations, action councils and chambers of commerce themselves do to help achieve the main aims of the EAC.

My suggestion is for them to draw up realistic standard operating procedures (SOP) and key performance indicators (KPI) for their members. For the sake of transparency, they have to submit regular reports to the EAC and errant members should be reprimanded and be disqualified from enjoying the benefits and incentives provided by the government.

They should also monitor how serious their members are in trying to reduce the cost of doing business, boost productivity and to employ automation. Do members practice import substitution? Are there controls on “entertainment” expenses and efforts to reduce wastage? And if there are cost savings, are they willing to pass it down to consumers?

Do their members prepare short and long-term plans and strategies? What steps were taken to ensure proper training and up-skilling of manpower for a healthier and sustainable environment? How is the working condition in their member companies? Why are their members still dependent on government-linked companies and the government and are steps being taken to prepare them to compete with the rest?

How about the quality of their products and is their pricing comparable with others around the region? What about the income disparity (Gini coefficient) in their respective organisations and the habit of employing foreigners?

The Asli Centre wanted smaller government involvement in business. Frankly, is the time right after the failure of the previous government in enhancing the general bumiputra economic pie but only for some people? No point blaming others. The bumiputera themselves must rise and be competitive and inculcate a culture of meritocracy and competition.

I was attracted to the statement made by the economic affairs minister when disagreeing on the assertion that the cabinet was unable to handle issues. He said: “In Pakatan Harapan, we work collectively, even cabinet decisions are done collectively with all ministers”. I do hope this is religiously followed including the decision to proceed with the third national car project.

After having said all of the above, what lingers in my mind is how could Malaysia lose up to US$33.7 billion in illicit outflows from 2006-2015, as reported in the latest 10-year report by Global Financial Integrity (GFI). GFI attributed it to “trade mis-invoicing” - a form of money-laundering where the value or volume of an export or import is “deliberately misstated” to evade tax and shift huge amounts of money across borders.

The question is, are members of the associations, action councils and chambers of commerce party to these illicit outflows, and if so, what needs to be done? Is it for the EAC or the associations, action councils and chambers of commerce to take action?

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.