Statement Released by Dong Zong

December 20, 2017

UEC Holders Can Apply for CLP Examination—

LPQB’s Decision Relieved Dong Zong

Through various channels, Dong Zong was informed of the decision of the Legal Profession Qualifying Board (henceforth LPQB) to continuously let UEC holders sit for the Certificate in Legal Practice (henceforth CLP) examination. In regard to this, Dong Zong comments as follows:

(1) Dong Zong had separately written to the LPQB on 23 and 30 November requesting a meet-up to find out the reason of revoking the requirements of the UEC and SPM as prerequisites to sit for the CLP examination. Administrators from Dong Zong simultaneously had met the president of the Malaysia Bar Council Mr George Varughese on 8 December and submitted some data on “UEC holders passing the CLP examination” to reflect the reality.

Attributed to the fact that many UEC holders had successfully sat for as well as passing the CLP examination with UEC certificate and SPM certificate and turning eventually into practicing advocates and solicitors, we wish to convey our appeal through Mr George Varughese urging the LPQB to revoke their decision and let UEC holders sit for the CLP examination using the UEC certificate and SPM certificate as prerequisite requirement.

(2)  As updated by the president of Malaysia Bar Council Mr George Varughese, before 23 September 2005, all UEC holders applying for CLP examination must have the UEC certificate plus the SPM or STPM certificate and LLB (Bachelor of Law). To unify requirements to sit for the CLP examination as a practice, the LPQB had made adjustment and thus MICSS candidates sitting for the CLP examination must have (1) UEC certificate plus two credits in STPM/A Level; or (2) SPM certificate plus two credits in STPM/A Level.

In the capacity of president in the Malaysia Bar Council, Mr George Varughese is the ex-officio member of the LPQB. On 8 December, Mr George Varughese had promised to convey Dong Zong’s request in their impending board meeting to be held on 19 December to postpone the decision revoking all UEC holders to sit for the CLP examination in 2005.

In the meantime, Dong Zong had simultaneously written to all MICSS principals to collect and provide the information of UEC holders attending LLB currently on 22 November. Besides, Dong Zong likewise organised a forum on 12 December inviting advocates and solicitors, including affected students and parents to collect relevant information for further negotiation with the LPQB. In addition, Dong Zong also submitted a memorandum to the LPQB which attached information on the standard of the UEC urging the LPQB to revoke their decision accordingly on 18 December.

As it goes, Dong Zong has hitherto collected the information of 33 successful UEC holders sitting for the CLP examination of which 16 had become practicing advocates and solicitors. For the time being, 143 UEC holders are reading the LLP programmes or in the process of sitting for the CLP examination.

Dong Zong is indebted to Malaysia Bar Council president Mr George Varughese for his full support in conveying its views during the December 19 LPQB board meeting. Similarly, Dong Zong also would like to acknowledge all independent Chinese secondary schools, practicing advocates and solicitors, current LLB students and parents, etc. for their help in the provision of information, opinions and relevant matters during this indecisive period. Besides, Dong Zong will keep in touch with the LPQB for further updates on the development.

Statement Released by Dong Zong

December 12, 2017

MICSS History Coursebooks Are Relevant to International History Education Trend

In respect of the Deputy Minister of Education Datuk Chong Sin Woon’s statement that it is beyond reproach to request the increase of proportion in local history in MICSS curriculum as one of the requirements thus to recognise the UEC as “not any one country will allow their students to study more world history than its own”, Dong Zong herewith responds as follows:

(1) Currently, the weightage of junior level History and World History in MICSS curriculum is 53.73 percent and 46.27 percent respectively and it belies what Datuk Chong has claimed, viz., local history in MICSS curriculum is less than one thirds of its contents.

(2) At senior level, there are three History coursebooks employed in MICSS curriculum: Malaysia and Southeast Asia History, China (renamed East Asia History in 2020) and World History. In actual fact, the redaction and compilation of these coursebooks are in consonance with the trend of international History education. Accordingly, lower level History coursebook emphasises on local history, whereas higher level History covers periphery regions and World History aiming to concurrently nurture nativeness and world view. Take the coursebooks used in Singapore, China and Australia as examples, it is evident that in Singapore History coursebooks, histories of Southeast Asia, India and China are warranted and half of their contents are history of the world; whereas there are six topics in China History coursebooks, three of them are Ancient History of the World, Modern History and Contemporary History. In Australia, the major task of elementary History coursebook is to teach about local history while from junior level onwards the contents are almost entirely about world histories.

(3) As revealed by pundits in 2011, only 20 percent of world histories and histories of other countries are found in the SPM History curriculum. Obviously, this approach is against international History education trend and in actual fact inadvisable. As such, Dong Zong opines, the government’s directive to amend MICSS History curriculum is an ignorable move towards the History profession as it defies international trend and thus unacceptable totally.

Statement Released by Dong Zong

October 28, 2017

The Budget 2018 Is One of Unoriginal—

Dong Zong Laments over the Run-of-the-mill Budget

With respect to the unoriginal Budget 2018 submitted in the House of Representatives by the Prime Minister cum Finance Minister Mohammad Najib bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak, Dong Zong sorely regrets and is disappointed hereat, a responsive statement is thus forwarded:

(1) Dong Zong understands that all types of schools in the country are precious resources and preponderances as they contribute profusely in nurturing polymaths as well as upholding prosperity and advancement for the country. To our great regret, the Budget 2018 is one of unoriginal in terms of increase in appropriation for Chinese vernacular schools, etc. and it continues “skipping” appropriation for national-type secondary schools, including independent Chinese secondary schools.

(2) In the Budget 2018, RM 550 million is appropriated for the promotion and maintenance of seven types of schools. Of which, national primary schools are allocated 250 million, yet Chinese and Tamil vernacular schools, Catholic schools, full-boarding schools, government-funded religious schools, MARA Junior Science Colleges are each appropriated 50 million respectively.

(3) Records show that in both the Budget 2012 and 2013, a special funding of RM 100 million is appropriated to Chinese vernacular schools annually, yet the Budget from 2014 to 2018, merely RM 50 million is appropriated (see attached Table 1). In actuality, the appropriation distributed to Chinese vernacular primary schools has never been sufficient and just. With the acceleration of inflation, the meagre sum Chinese vernacular schools received cannot satiate their developmental needs and hence fund-raising events are staged constantly.

(4) Over time, it is a normalcy that Chinese independent secondary schools are not appropriated in the Budget pronounced every year. As such, Dong Zong had submitted a memorandum of understanding to the Malaysia Chinese Association, urging the alliance government to appropriate the least a total of RM85 million to all 60 Chinese independent secondary schools in the country, taking a RM1,000 allowance for each MICSS student as appropriation base. To our regret, in the Budget 2018 newly pronounced, as anticipated, no appropriation was budgeted to all the 60 independent Chinese secondary schools.

(5)  Let alone there was appropriation given to reformed secondary schools (national-type secondary schools) in 2016, record shows in the Budget from 2012 to 2015, no special appropriation was allocated. Though after some efforts, in the Budget from 2012 to 2015 and 2017, appropriation was incorporated to national-type secondary schools as wished. Yet in the Budget 2018, the government’s former practice re-dominates and eventually no special appropriation was given to all national-type secondary schools.

(6) In view of the inconsistency, we earnestly hope the government will redress the practice., viz., to appropriate fairly to institutions inclusive of Chinese vernacular schools, independent Chinese secondary schools and national-type secondary schools, etc. Moreover, we wish the government will complete releasing the monies to the schools in the first half year so as to avoid serious impacts incurred due to delays in appropriation.

Table 1: Special Appropriation in the Budget from Year 2012 to 2018 (in RM)

Notes:

1. Budget 2012: six types of schools received a special appropriation totalled RM1 billion. National primary schools received RM500 million; whereas SMJK (Chinese), SMJK (Tamil), Catholic schools, government-funded religious schools and MARA junior colleges received RM100 million each.

2. Budget 2013: seven types of schools received a special appropriation totalled RM1 billion. National primary schools received RM400 million; whereas SMJK (Chinese), SMJK (Tamil), Catholic schools, government-funded religious schools, full-boarding schools and MARA junior colleges received RM100 million each.

3. Budget 2014: eight types of schools received a special appropriation totalled RM450 million. National primary schools received RM450 million; whereas SMJK (Chinese), SMJK (Tamil), Catholic schools, full-boarding schools, MARA junior colleges, government-funded religious schools and people’s religious schools received RM50 million each.

4. Budget 2015: nine types of schools received a special appropriation totalled RM800 million. National primary schools received RM450 million; whereas SMJK (Chinese), SMJK (Tamil), Catholic schools, full-boarding schools, government-funded religious schools and MARA junior colleges received RM50 million each. Private religious schools (registered) and national-type secondary schools received RM25 million each.

5. Budget 2016: nine types of schools received a special appropriation totalled RM500 million. National primary schools, SMJK (Chinese), SMJK (Tamil), Catholic schools, full-boarding schools, government-funded religious schools, MARA junior colleges, private religious schools (registered), and national-type secondary schools were appropriated respectively but no figures were disclosed.

6. Budget 2017: eight types of schools received a special appropriation totalled RM600 million. National primary schools received RM250 million; whereas SMJK (Chinese), SMJK (Tamil), Catholic schools, full-boarding schools, government-funded religious schools, private religious schools (registered) and MARA junior colleges received RM50 million each.

7. Budget 2018: seven types of schools received a special appropriation totalled RM550 million. National primary schools received RM250 million; whereas SMJK (Chinese), SMJK (Tamil), Catholic schools, full-boarding schools, government-funded religious schools and MARA junior colleges received RM50 million each.