Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu
Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu

Saturday 13 June 2015

CHAPTER 17: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS NEED FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Economic development is an increase in productivity which means an increase in the amount of output produced per worker per unit of time, whereas economic growth is simply an increase in the output of goods and services as a result of an increase in the size of labour force or the labour force working longer hours. Economic develop­ment is necessary because developing countries generally suffer from:
(a)fluctuations in export earnings.
(b)low productivity, particularly in agriculture.
(c)a high proportion of the working population is engaged in agriculture and other rural industries and the economy depends heavily on one or two primary products.
(d)rapidly increasing population which is backward.
(e)underdevelopment of economic resources due mainly to shortages of capital and technical know-how.
(f)lack of specialisation and advanced technology in most of their economic sectors and most production is labour intensive.
(g)a high degree of inequality in income distribution based on a combination of social customs and a firmly entrenched class system.
(h)disguised unemployment in the agrarian sector because of the surplus of un­skilled labour and extended family system.

PLANNING
Planning has emerged as a tool of policy in countries differing widely not only in their stages of economic development but also in their economic and social systems. Most countries today adopt some form of economic planning.
The term 'economic plan' was first used by the Communist Government of the Soviet Union in 1928. The plan was a set of proposals for industrialising the country, backed by systems of rewards and penalties, including imprisonment and death, to make the plan work. National economic planning also spread to most capitalist countries during and after the Second World War. During the war it was necessary to reallocate resources to fight and win the war, and after the war there was the need to overcome the problems of reconstruction and rehabilitation. Developing countries after gaining independence adopted planning as a tool of policy to accelerate their pace of economic development and also bring about structural changes in their relatively backward economies.
In general, planning refers to the conscious allocation of resources either directly or indirectly by the Government to achieve national goals.  The basis of planning is to ensure utilisation of resources in a rational manner to achieve national goals. A set of national targets is an essential part of a national economic plan. There cannot be a plan without targets, but targets by themselves do not make a plan.

TYPES OF PLANNING
Types of planning differ from country to country. However, we can in general classify all forms of planning into three groups:
1.centralised or normative planning
2.socialist competitive planning
3.indicative planning
Let us now briefly look at these three forms of planning, one by one.

Centralised or Normative Planning
This form of planning is widely practised in communist countries like the Soviet Union and most East European countries. Under this type of planning, all enterprises (except small scale household farming, retailing and services) are owned and managed by the State or State run cooperatives. These enterprises are not guided by market forces and profit-motive. Instead they are directed by the State to achieve certain targets set in the national plans. The allocation of almost al) resources is done by a State Central planning body. The type of goods to produce, the method of production, the quality of inputs to be used by each enterprise, the prices of the goods sold, and the wages paid to workers, etc. are all decided by the central planning body. In a market economy all such functions are taken care of by the price mechanism operating in the market. The prices prevailing in the centralised planning system are fixed and so are known as administered prices. Prices determined by market forces of demand and supply are known as market prices. Centralised planning is usually rigid, involves an enormous amount of work for planners and is not sensitive to changing market forces.
Socialist Competitive Planning. This type of planning is practised in Yugoslavia. It encourages competition but the ownership of resources lies with the State. The State planning agency does not allocate resources directly or set targets for each industry in terms of inputs and output. Allocation takes place through the provision of loans, foreign exchange and other assistance to individuals and groups of individuals who can start an enterprise. All enterprises are free to sell their produce and buy their inputs as they wish. The measure of efficiency, as in a market economy of capitalist economies, is the amount of profits made, and the reward for those who manage and run the enterprise is a share of the profits with the State. Prices are generally determined in the market by the forces of supply and demand. However, the State does place some restrictions on the prices of some essential commodities — as is also done in capitalist free market economies like Singapore, U.S.A., Malaysia, etc. The targets of the Plan are achieved through licensing and the allocation of foreign exchange and investment funds to the type of industries the State desires to promote.
Indicative Planning. This form of planning is widely practised in most capitalist or free enterprise economies. The distinguishing feature of this form of planning is the participation of decision makers from various fields and industries and from both the public and private sectors in the formulation of the targets and objectives of the Plan. The economy is run on a free enterprise system with a large degree of private ownership of the means of production. The State normally owns and operates key and strategic industries and also actively participates in joint ventures with the private sector in a wide range of activities.
Another feature of indicative planning is the application of a suitable mixture of inducement and coercion to the private sector to adhere to the plan targets. Induce­ments include the provision of incentives, licensing and other preferential treatment to industries fulfilling the objectives of the Government.
In such a system both the Government and the private sectors have important and complementary roles to play in the development strategy of the country. Both Government and industry have to plan several years ahead and there are clear cut advantages to be gained by coordinating the set of estimates involved. A knowledge of the Government's intentions about the level of public spending five years ahead is a useful indication to industry because it enables forecasts of future to be made with greater confidence and accuracy. The Government gains because the information provided by industry about its expectations gives useful indication about likely sources of strength and weakness in the economy in the future. It also provides an indication of the margin available for financing the social services. A 'plan' in this context is a set of policies which attempt to weld together the expectations of the public and private sectors into a strategy for the future development of the country.
From the above discussion it is obvious that "Socialist competitive planning" and "indicative planning" try to incorporate the. advantages of planning and free competition. The basic difference between these two forms of planning lies essentially in the degree of State ownership of the means of production.

PLANNING IN MALAYSIA
In Malaysia the form which economic planning has taken is known as 'indicative planning'. The practice in Malaysia has been to prepare five-year plans which are reviewed and revised at mid-term. In the preparation of the plan, the view of the private sector are sought through the various Consultative Committees and dialogue sessions between representatives of the private sector and the Government. The five- year plan is supplemented by an annual plan or budget. The annual plans (or budgets) have concrete budgetary provisions detailing the size, allocation and type of ^expenditure the public sector would undertake during the year. The advantage of such '<a procedure is that it adds flexibility and focuses the attention of administration to the need to take remedial measures if annual progress is not in line with the overall plan target. Planning in Malaysia also incorporates a 20-year perspective plan stretching from 1971—1990. It outlines major trends of developments that are desired in relation to the achievement of long-run national goals. Its chief purpose and advantage is to facilitate the setting and evaluation of the targets of the five-year plans.
Planning in Malaysia dates back to 1954, when a World Bank Mission was invited to undertake a comprehensive study of the Malaysian economy. The outcome of the mission was the formulation of the First Five Year Plan, 1956—60, for the Federation of Malaya. Since then, a number of five-year plans have been adopted. Over these years, the plans have become more sophisticated in terms of planning techniques, are more comprehensive in coverage and provide in a greater detail, the Government's policies and programmes for the years ahead. Today, the plan has become a symbol of the Government's commitment to economic and social progress in the country.

VARIOUS FIVE YEAR PLANS OF MALAYSIA
1.Yellow Book (1951 —1955)
Before 1950 there was no formal planning at all. The first formal plan was the Draft Development Plan (sometimes known as the Yellow Book) 1951—55. This so called plan mainly listed all the development projects for which the various departments were responsible for implementation. It was a very poor plan. It neglected the private sector, excluded important public enterprises and established no machinery for the coordination of projects. However, it saw the beginning of some form of planning in the country.
2.First Five-Year Plan (1956—60)
In 1954 World Bank Mission visited Malaysia and made its recommendations in the 'Report on Economic Planning in the Federation of Malaya'. This was later known as the First Five Year Plan. This plan was no better than the earlier one. It too just enumerated the varous departmental projects.
3.Second Five Year Plan (1961- 65)
In 1961 the Second Five Year Plan was launched. This plan was also limited in scope for it was not comprehensive and integrated. However, it did identify the problems facing the nation and formulated measures to remedy such problems.
4.First Malaysia Plan (1966-70) (FMP)
1966 saw the advent of the First Malaysia Plan. This was a plan in the true sense of the word. It was comprehensive and integrated, covering all the States of Malaysia. In a sense, we can say that 1966 marks the beginning of modern form of planning in Malaysia.
It was admitted in this plan that though Malaysia had made notable progress in a number of sectors of the economy since achieving independence in 1957, there were still certain socio-economic problems being faced, namely:
(a)a heavy dependence upon two export products: rubber and tin,
(b)a high rate of population increase, imposing a high social cost,
(c)an uneven distribution of income between rural and urban dwellers, between inhabitants of Peninsular Malaysia and the Borneo States and among various social groups,
(d)low level of human resource development.

In order to attack and solve the above problems, the objectives of FMP were:
(a)to promote the integration of the peoples and states of Malaysia by embarking upon a development plan explicitly designed to promote the welfare of all,
(b)to provide steady increase in levels of income and consumption per head,
(c)to increase the well being of Malaysia's rural inhabitants and other low income groups, primarily by raising their productivity and thus their economic earning capacity,
(d)to generate employment opportunities at a rate sufficient to provide productive work for new entrants to the labour force and lower the rate of unemployment,
(e)to stimulate new kinds of economic activity, both agricultural and industrial, so as to reduce the nation's dependence on rubber and tin,
(f)to educate and train Malaysians from all walks of life in order to equip them for effective participation in the proses of economic and social development,
(g)to lay the groundwork for less rapid population growth by instituting an effective programme of family planning,
(h)to open for development sufficient new land to keep pace with the formation of new farm families and reduce the number of landless people desiring land for agricultural purposes.
(i)to provide electric power, transportation facilities and communications services adequate to keep ahead of foreseen demands
(j) to progress with health and social welfare development, low cost housing and a wide range of other projects.
During the period of the FMP there was substantial improvement in her develop­ment. Rapid advances were made in all sectors of the economy, and all regions contributed to the growth of the national product. The growth in output and productivity brought about a rise in the general standard of living and the provision of more jobs for the growing labour force. The economy embarked on a substantial programme of rural development, an expansio^i of health, housing, education and other services and the extension and improvement of the transport system, public utilities and other infrastructure needed for development.
The progress made in expanding production and economic diversification enabled the economy to withstand the problem of price declines in its major export commodities and to meet essential security requirements without sacrifice of important development needs.

ACHIEVEMENTS FROM 1956-70
In the period 1956—70, the main objective of planning was to accelerate the pace of growth in income and employment through agricultural expansion and diversification to overcome the major problems of low productivity and income in subsistence agriculture, exports instability, the deterioration in the terms of trade for Malaysia's export, and the inadequate growth in income and employment opportunities from the rubber and tin industries. The role of public sector activities was directed at supporting private sector enterprise in the commercial and industrial sectors. Consequently, public sector expenditure was mainly directed at agricultural development and the expansion of physical infrastructure facilities like roads, ports, telecommunications, utilities and drainage and irrigation as well as towards the expansion and improve­ment of social services such as education and health care to improve the quality of the labour force. Public sector participation directly in commerce and industry was minimal.
Expenditure on supportive infrastructure facilities like transport, communications and utilities accounted for the largest share of public sector development expenditure.
On the average it took up nearly 45% of the total public expenditure during the period 1956—70. The amount of funds expended on agriculture and rural development was also large, averaging over 20% during this period. Resources devoted to commercial and industrial development, on the other hand, were small, accounting for only around 2% of the total public sector expenditure.
This strategy of the Government assisting and providing a conducive atmosphere for private sector initiative and participation in most aspects of the Malaysian economy was successful in generating a rapid pace of economic growth in Malaysia. During the period 1956—70, real output in the Malaysian economy expanded at an average annual rate of over 5% per a;inum. The real rate of output growth also accelerated over the period of the three plans. Significant changes also took place in the broadening of the composition of output in the economy. In agriculture, output of padi rose and oil palm expanded in importance. The manufacturing sector expanded and a wide range of import substituting industries were established.

THE NEW ECONOMIC POLICY (NEP)
While during 1956—70 the per capita income rose and the standards of living of the majority of the population improved, the benefits of income growth were, however, distributed in a less equitable manner than were socially desirable. The unequal distribution of income and wealth between the rural and urban areas and between different groups of people in the Malaysian society was further compounded by th2 fact that it was along racial lines.
It is strongly contended that the racial riots of May 1969 resulted from inadequate efforts to reduce socio-economic balances which had characterised Malaysian society for so long. Coming on top of political independence, economic growth itself in the sixties irretrievably affected the values, attitudes, aspirations and expectations of Malaysians from all walks of life and in particular those who were less advantaged. A society marked by significant economic imbalances was no longer acceptable.
The outbreak of racial riots in 1969 showed clearly an area of weakness which undermined the very foundations of the nation. The trauma of racial riots led to a critical self-analysis of what went wrong and the formulation of new approaches. There was a fundamental shift in national policies and priorities. The New Economic Policy (NEP) was enunciated and embodied in the Second Malaysia Plan (1971—75). The NEP represents a new approach for dealing with the economic and social problems through emphasising the importance of achieving a better distribution of income, wealth and employment among the various ethnic groups and regions in the country in the context of an expanding economy. The overriding objective of the NEP is to achieve national unity. A two-pronged development strategy was conceived to:
(i)reduce and eventually eradicate poverty, by raising income levels and increasing employment opportunities for all Malaysians, irrespective of race.
(ii)accelerate the process of restructuring Malaysian society to correct economic im­balances so that the identification of race with economic function and geographical location will be reduced and eventually eradicated.
These objectives have been set within the framework of 20 years for their achieve­ment. To provide the nation with a long run perspective, within which Government policies and programmes would be formulated, an Outline Perspective Plan covering a 20-year period, 1970-90, was also prepared. The SMP marked the first five years of this perspective plan.
The process of achieving the objectives of the NEP involves the modernisation of rural life, a rapid and balanced growth of urban activities and the creation of Malay commercial and industrial community in all categories and at all levels of operation so that Malays and other indigenous people will become full partners in all aspects of the economic life of the nation. The two objectives of the NEP are not mutually exclusive. They are, in many respects, interdependent and mutually reinforcing. For example, the measures to raise incomes in rural areas, where Malays and other indigenous people predominate, will not only help to eradicate poverty but also serve the objective of correcting racial economic imbalances. Similarly, projects to correct racial economic imbalances by increasing the participation of Malays and other indigenous people in new urban activity will also contribute to the eradication of poverty by generating increased employment opportunities.

THIRD MALAYSIA PLAN (1976-80)
The main thrust of the SMP was to lay the foundations for the implementation of the NEP. The SMP was the first in a series within the Perspective Plan, 1971—1990, aimed at accelerating economic change designed to bring about a more equitable distribution of economic opportunity, income and wealth among the population. Progress was generally favourable in all these resepcts.
The Third Malaysia Plan (TMP) constitutes the second phase in the implementation of the NEP. The plan is a bold, imaginative an«i positive effort to meet the socio­economic and political challenges of our time. I{ is the biggest ever undertaken by the Government. A major assault on poverty, a vigorous and continuous effort in the task of restructuring society as well as the strengthening of our national security, are the triple thrusts of the TMP.
In advancing the implementation of the NEP, the major objectives of the TMP are, in summary, to:
(1)reduce th§ incidence of poverty in the rural areas throughout the country among padi cultivators, rubber smallholders, coconut smallholders, shifting cultivators, fishermen, estate workers, residents of New Villages, agricultural labourers and the Orang Asli by:
(i)expanding employment opportunities through new land development, establishment of new growth centres and the absorption of excess labour in other sectors of the economy;
(ii)enhancing the productive role of the rural poor by increasing their access to land, water supplies, credit, markets, extension advice and other public facilities including electric power;
(2)reduce the incidence of poverty among the urban poor by:
(i)expanding employment opportunities in manufacturing and construction including the promotion of small-scale industries;
(ii)improving their real income through the provision of low-cost housing and other public services;
(3)enhance the quality of life of all Malaysians and in particular the poor through the expansion of education, health services, family planning facilties and housing;
(4)increase the share of the Malays and other indigenous people in employment in mining, manufacturing and construction and the share of other Malaysians in agriculture and services so that by 1990 employment in the various sectors of the economy will reflect the racial composition of the country;
(5)raise the share of the Malays and other indigenous people in the ownership of productive wealth including land, fixed assets and equity capital. The target is that by 1990, they will own at least 30% of equity capital with 40% being owned by other Malaysians;
(6)foster the development of entrepreneurship among the Malays and other indigenous people so as to effectively contribute towards the creation by 1990 of a strong and viable commercial and industrial community among them;
(7)encourage and support private investment both domestic and foreign;
(8)promote further utilization of the country's abundant human and natural resources; and
(9)develop and expand the social and physical infrastructure of the economy to effectively support the attainment of the above objectives.

DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
The NEP will be implemented in the context of a rapidly expanding economy so that no particular group will experience any loss or feel any sense of deprivation. Within this perspective improving the economic conditions and quality of life of the poor of all races by directly increasing their access to land, physical capital, as well as training and other public facilities, thereby permitting them to share more equitably in the benefits of economic growth. In addition, the NEP also seeks a fairer distribution among the races of the opportunity to participate in the widening range of economic activities. The second prong of the NEP is also accordingly aimed at providing such assistance as may be necessary for the various racial groups to find employment, secure participation and acquire ownership and control in the various sectors of the economy.
In carrying out these policies, equal priority is to be given to the twin objectives of growth and distribution since measures to eradicate poverty and restructure society complement and reinforce each other. Measures aimed at benefitting the poor would significantly enhance their living standards if they were also provided with opportunities to move into the more developed sectors and regions of the economy. In this process, progress towards a more equitable distribution of income and owner­ship of wealth will be simultaneously affected.
A dangerous misconception about the national goals of poverty eradication and restructuring society is that these objectives are intended to benefit only the Malays and other indigenous people. This is not true. The poor in Malaysia involve other races as well, although the majority are the Malays and other indigenous people living in rural areas. Another misconception is in respect of urban poverty. With the migration of the Malays and other indigenous people to the urban areas, this problem is no longer limited to the other Malaysians. Urban poverty is, therefore, a multiracial problem.
Similarly, the goal of restruturing society does not Involve increasing the participation of the Malays and other indigenous people in commerce and industry alone. It involves the achievement of a multiracial structure in all sectors and at all levels in order to correct past imbalances and their inadequate representation in various fields. This will certainly imply an inter-sectoral movement of people and ownership on a multiracial basis if all sectors of the Malaysian economy are ultimately to reflect the racial composition of the nation without detracting the role of the private sector, both local and foreign in the economy.
An essential element of the development strategy in Malaysia involves the active participation of the private sector, including foreign expertise, since the economic system remains basically one of free enterprise. The private sector would continue to be relied upon to provide the major source of output, income and employment creation. But, in order that economic growth is accompanied by the desired amount of economic restructuring, the government would participate actively in the following areas:
(i)in the labour market, to promote a better racial balance in the pattern of employment in all sectors of the economy,
(ii)in education and training, to ensure the supply of skills among the various racial groups in order to meet the requirements of the employment targets,
(iii)in the capital market, to promote restructuring of ownership in the corporate sector, including the holding of shares in trust for Malays and other indigenous people, and
(iv)in general market activity, through the operation of public enterpises in order to achieve the desired overall employment and ownership patterns.

PROGRESS AND ACHIEVEMENTS SINCE 1979
For a developing country, the progress and achievements made by Malaysia in the field of socio-economic development have been remarkable. Overall growth of the economy has consistently exceeded the targets set in the Plans. Growth in employ­ment, which was behind target before 1970, accelerated in the Second and Third Malaysia Plan periods, so that by 1985, indications are that Malaysia may be moving away from a labpur surplus economy characterising most developing countries. The agricultural sector has become more diversified. Malaysia's agricultural sector has become a leading world exporter of palm oil, tropical hardwood and pepper. The prospects of cocoa becoming an important agricultural crop are also bright. Within subsistence agriculture, modernisation has progressed rapidly with the large expan­sion in drainage and irrigation facilities in the major rice growing areas, the intro­duction of double cropping, high yielding varieties and farm mechanisation. Re­planting of rubber with high yielding clones has almost completed one cycle in the estate sector. While in the smallholders' sector, the pace of replanting has accelerated with the expansion of public development programmes of RISDA.
Industiralisation has progressed at a remarkable pace. The manufacturing sector has become the leading and most dynamic growth sector of the Malaysian economy. In the last decade, it has progressed from the initial stages of industrialisation based on simple consumer goods, import substituting industries to the production of durable goods and light machinery and equipment for both the domestic market and for export. Of significance is the rapid expansion of labour-intensive and export oriented industries like wood products, textiles and electronics. The manufacturing sector, which contributed to only 8.2% of the GDP in 1955, accounted for 19.8% of GDP in 1979. Exports of manufactured goods, which were insignificant in 1956 accounted for around 20% of the total value of gross exports in 1979.
Concurrent with the rapid growth and structural transformation of the Malaysian economy is the progress made in reduction of poverty and the inequitable distribution in the ownership of wealth in the country. The overall incidence of poverty in Peninsular Malaysia declined from 49.3% in 1970 to 36.6% in 1978. The incidence of poverty in agriculture also declined from 68.3% in 1970 to 54.6% in 1978.
' In terms of employment, Malays and other indigenous people have made significant progress in increasing their share of employment in the secondary sector since 1970. It rose from 30.8% to 39.5% in 1978 in the secondary sector and from 37.9% to 45.3% in the tertiary sector. Significant improvements were also made by the Malays and other indigenous people in their share of professional, technical, administrative and managerial jobs in the country.
In terms of ownership of assets, Malaysian residents increased their shareholdings from 38.3% of total corporate equity in 1971 to 54% in 1978. In particular, the equity holdings of the Malays and other indigenous people, including trust agencies, increased from 4.3% of total in 1971 to 10.3% in 1978. The share of foreign onwership corres­pondingly declined from 61.7% in 1971 to 46% in 1978.

MALAYSIA'S STRENGTH
Malaysia is well placed to make positive progress in implementing the objectives of the NEP. It has many assets some of which have been inherited while others have been the result of past development. They provide it with a strong foundation for further socio­economic progress. The basic elements of strength in the economy are:
1.A young, adaptable and dextrous population and work force supported by a vigorous public sector programme on education and training. They constitute not only a strong motivating force for social and economic advancement but also a potential reservoir of employable skills which can be harnessed for the develop­ment effort
2.A strong private sector, comprising dynamic and capable entrepreneurs, both local and foreign.
3.Abundant natural resources of land, forestry, petroleum and gas, and a strong and diversified export sector.
4.Strong financial situation, with high credit worthiness of the Government inter­nationally, strong balance of payments position, healthy level of external reserves and comparatively small external debt.
5.High rate of savings and the availability of sufficient financial resources to finance investment, both public and private.

CONCLUSION
Since Independence, the role of the Malaysian Government in the economic develop­ment has been expanding and undergoing rapid changes. The role of the Government was initially confined to the provision of infrastructural facilities. As a result, a massive investment programme for the 'development of human resources and physical infra­structure of the economy was initiated and sustained by the public sector. The emphasis of the public sector programmes was towards agricultural modernisation and industrialisation. With the launching of the NEP, the direct involvement of the Govern­ment in commerce and industry has expanded to facilitate and accelerate the greater participation of the Malays and other indigenous people in the modern sectors of the economy. At the same time, the achievements of the socio-economic objectives of the NEP also depend on the active participation of the private sector. Therefore, high priority needs to be given on a continued basis to the expansion of the private sector. It is the belief that with the public and private sectors working together and complementing each other, the pace of economic development could be accelerated and the targets of the NEP achieved for the betterment of all Malaysians.

ESSAY TYPE QUESTIONS
The examination consists of two papers. In both the papers there are objective type > and essay type questions. The first section in each of the papers contains objective questions of the multiple type to be completed in 30 minutes. Each of these sections are allocated 40% of the total marks. In section two of both the papers are essay type questions and candidates are required to answer four questions out of six. Time given is 2% hours and they each carry 60% of the total marks.
The type of questions that have been asked are and are likely to be asked are:
1.Discuss the general background to the Rukunegara and what are its principles and objectives?
2.Explain the basic principles of Rukunegara and what is the ultimate aim of these principles?
3.What functions does the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong perform?
4.Trace the constitutional development in Malaysia.
5.What do you mean by 'parliamentary democracy'?
6.What are the ways of gaining citizenship of Malaysia?
7.Discuss the 'fundamental liberties' that a citizen of Malaysia can enjoy.
8.How are judges (a) appointed and (b) removed from office?
9.Discuss the relationship between the Federal and State Governments of Malaysia
10.What are the differences between the Government departments and public agencies?
11.What are the main sources of Government revenue and what are the merits/ demerits of each of these types of sources?
12.Explain the role of Bank Negara as Government Bank.
13.What role does the Treasury play in the control of public expenditure?
14.Discuss some of the agencies that have been established with the aim of re­structuring Malaysian society.
15."The National Education Policy of Malaysia is aimed at building a united, disciplined and skilled society." Discuss.
16.What do you mean by efficiency and quality of service in the public service?
17.Discuss.the objectives of the book "Guide to Excellent Service".
18.What steps have been taken and are being taken to upgrade the efficiency and quality of service of (a) Government machinery and (b) Government servants?
19.What do you consider are the merits and demerits of the incentive system as discussed in General Circular (No. 9) of 1980. "Panduan Melaksanakan Peng- hargaan Perkhidmatan Cemerlang"?
20."Service for the Country" is the motto of the Public Service. What do you mean by this?
21.Write short notes on 2 or 3 of the following:
Essay Type Questions
-Economic Planning Unit (EPU)
-National Family Planning Board
-Malaysian Administrative and Modernisation and Manpower Planning Unit (MAMPU)
-Implementation Coordination Unit (ICU)
-Socio-economic Research and General Planning Unit (SERGPU)
-National Unity Board
-Elections Commission.
22.What factors determine the efficiency of a public servant?
23.If a clerk has been absent from work for 10 days without leave, what disciplin­ary action can be taken against him?
24.Write short notes on:
(a)a Government servant is in serious pecuniary indebtedness
(b)a government servant is in outside employment
(c)a government servant receives presents
(d)a government servant lives beyond his means
(e)a government servant indulges in politics.
25.What are the types of punishments that can be imposed on a Government servant for breach of General Orders?
26.What do you understand by (a) public interest, and (b) national interest? On what grounds and how can a government servant be made to retire in public interest?
27.What are the different forms of ecoryjmic planning practised in different econo­mic systems? What are the advantages^and disadvantages of each type?
28.What is the role of economic planning in Malaysia.
29."The overriding objective of the New Economic Policy is to achieve National Unity". Discuss.
30.'The New Economic Policy is aimed at correcting economic imbalances and is for the long term benefit of all Malaysians, irrespective of race". Discuss.
31.What is the development strategy of Malaysia?

REFERENCES
Bank Negara Annual Reports, Malaysia, Various Issues.
Economic Reports, Ministry of Finance, Malaysia, various issues.
Five Year Plans, Malaysia, since 1956.
General Orders 1980, Government Printers, Kuala Lumpur, 1980.
Modern Economics, Published by Khera Sdn. Bhd., Kuala Lumpur 1980.
Negara Kita, Diberbitkan oleh Institut Tadbiran Awan Negara, Malaysia, Kuala Kumpur, 1980.
Panduan Perkhidmatan Cemerlang, Diterbitkan oleh Jabatan Menteri Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, 1979.

Official Year Books, Malaysia, Various issues.

No comments:

Post a Comment