1-CARE: The way I would do it (Part IV)
February 6, 2012 by Dr R@28
- Other than the broad framework of NHS, I have no clue on how the government plans to operationalize it. I am still hoping to get a preview on what the government plans to do. Everyone is talking the high level stuff that the public does not see it. I don’t know whether the government would do it my way or otherwise but I felt it is time that I write how I felt it should be done. The way I see it the government needs to set up several entities under the public trustee system. Let us call them H1, H2, H3 and H4.
- H1 would be the NHA i.e. the National Health Authority. As with any authority their primary role is to regulate the outpatient and clinical services within the country. The public health services and regulation is kept within MOH. The NHA must function as entity to regulate outpatient and clinical charges under the new NHS structure. It is given specific powers under the law. Under the authority the government would setup H2, H3 and H4.
- All the government outpatient treatment care (OPC), hospital services and infrastructure is parked absorbed under H2. They would plan and develop new structure. The staff remains within the ambit of MOH at the initial stage. At a specified time frame after the absorption of all facilities and infrastructure, the staff will be given the option to remains within MOH or join H2. HR experts work out the remuneration scheme for those who wished to join H2. H2 would look into the areas of raising funds via billings and securitization. They would also continue to receive annual grant from the FG via MOH annually.
- H3 would be the entity that develops hospital insurance products. The products sold are similar to private insurance health products. They will be different structure of products from a basic to and advance scheme. The government buys insurance cover for its employees and government retirees. The government would buy a basic insurance cover for the poor and for those above age 60 years old. Those who can afford can opt to buy a higher grade products offered by H3 or the private insurance provider. H3 will complement the nation private health insurers scheme.
- H4 would be a healthcare administrator or in the insurance terminology it is known as TPA. It manages the cashless treatment services between hospitals, clinics and the public. Basically, the people would carry a H3 healthcare card and it can go to the any hospital and clinics for treatment without making any payment. H4 basically collate the billings and bill the H3 and pays H2.
- EPF would create a new sub account known as a health account. The employers and employees contribute during their working days to this account. The account holder can use the money to buy health insurance when they retire or unemployed. If these funds are not utilized they are returned to the owners of next of kin with dividends. The government must reduce the income tax accordingly for those who contribute for the health fund.
- The question now is where do we start? I would start with H1 and follow up with H2, H3 and H4. In the first few years the scheme is limited to government servants and subsequently to the retirees. Once the organization has matured and runs well, it is then extended to the rest of the population.
0.000000
0.000000
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
Posted in Malaysia My Home | 67 Comments
Leave a Reply
Dear Doc,
Your H1 is long overdue for the private sector. Let’s not cover H1, H2, H3 or H4 for Kerajaan only, as long as it is relevant to the private sector, it has to be implemented.
The is no systematic control or regulations on charges and fees for the private sector. We need to disburse some patients to the private sector as the government sectors are overrun and stretch to the limit. Most doctors are burn out. Hence, reflected in the poor PR service and long waiting list.
We can put the above into immediate effect, it seems, non of the legislative authorities is forward coming on the matter.
It always easy to milk a person dry when the person is close to death. They need some protective measures.
.
.
.
.
Not having a clue as to what the 1-care plan ,
I guess it appeared as a result of a scenario like
this…
At time t=o, scene at a golf course
——————————
[some towkay and frens playing golf with the pm]
whisper, whisper, whisper….
continuuing at the golf club house
more whisper, whisper.whisper…
At t=0 +6 months, moh announced the 1 – care plan
At t=0+ 1 year, moh will launch the half baked plan based on a
mock model
At t=0+2 year PM happily announced that 1 -care had been
swastakan to X Bhd and with that H1,2,3,4
are now reorganised into 1 regulatory body
based on the ‘helpless’ SKMM Commission.
,
,
,
Final Outcome 1 malaysia transformed 1 – malaysia-sundalised
Raffick,
OMG! I rest my case.
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/1-care-10pc-medical-levy-just-a-proposal-says-tiong-lai/
Dear looes74,
“OMG! I rest my case”… I can see that there will be issues/resistances at H3. I think the contribution as Doc said should be from the EPF account and should not burden the people. Agree with Doc to leave the premium for the individual to choose for either a basic cover or for a full comprehensive ++ cover.
I also think that there would be issues/resistances at H2.. i.e. to transfer staff from MOH to corporation. I think most would want to stay with MOH. It would appear to be more secured. It should be all should be abosorbed by H2 or otherwise.
I am more concerned on the and cost and quality of medicines where the profit margin can be as high as 1000%… somebody tell me it can be up to 1500%. Don’t they have that “guilty conscious” feeling/?
Zul,
I have replied to Raffick before. Our contribution is significant lower than those in singapore. EPF is used for retirement purposes. If such money kenna sucked for medical insurance, where to find funds for retirement. Remember, government plans to use EPF for housing loan too. Funds are already limited there. Sooner or later, you either need to contribute more to EPF or need to pay extra tax.
What happens to those who doesn’t have EPF? Especially those self propreitors. Then how? It’s not as simple as ABC. The worst culprit is the present government……Barisan Nasional…..is so corrupt……..devoid of trust & accountability of ensuring it work……That brings back to the main objective is
1) Get Rid of UMNO-BN
2) Ensure there is an equal playing field for all political parties in everything including the media, the funds
Zul,
I am not concerned about the corporatisation move. Not when they are promised higher salary & bonuses. As for the cost & quality of medicine, tell me which businesses don’t wanna maximise profit. I bet that sub-human Ellese might even agree
Looes,
From what limited I know, Singapore government has long been using the CPF for public housing (directly or indirectly). If your beloved adopted country been doing so, whats the big fuss if Malaysia follow the similar path?
Observer,
Why don’t you quote something from Zimbabwe.
And say… “whats the big fuss if Malaysia follow the similar path?”
If you have any ideas or comments or suggestions, please share.
Stop being a blind partisan supporter.
Tell us why you support.
Can you do that Observer?
You have anything in your brain that you can share?
Good! Just mock the bugger! Learn from Hishamuddin Rais
Dear Singaporean,
Are you sore you have not been approached by Johan Merican?
You have to understand, the Talent Corporation only approach those having talent only, so please don’t take it too heart when Johan hasn’t contacted you.
One has to learn not too be a sore loser and have a “live and let live” outlook in life.
Wave,
Does Zimbabwe have a superior system? If so, maybe you can elaborate and tell me why I should quote from Zimbabwe.
Are you just objecting just for the sake of objecting?
Tell us why are you objecting?
Why don’t you suggest a better system that would enable those in the lower income can benefit?
Do you have anything in your brain that you can share? or are you just a blind partisan supporter?
I think you got your concept wrong again. EPF is obligated to lend to government for the most secured investment. Why? It doesn’t have the lowest risk. In its portfolio they can take higher risk but major portion must be secured. This is what most people want. Secured investment for retirement.
Your beloved Singapore does this. That’s why their debt is 100 %. The government must mobilize its savings for the rakyat. On this score bn has been doing the right thing. In fact if you can follow my previous argument is that the government should incur more debts provided it can be used into productive or rakyat beneficial project. Develoed countries incur much much more debt. We should incur higher local debts to increase our standard of living. It’s a win win for all. We should leverage on this.
I bet you PR will do the same as examplified by their budget.
Erratum:
“It doesn’t have the lowest risk.” Should be ” it has the lowest risk”
So…lending money to Felda Global…? Also Ok.., joker..? MOOW…MOOW…The cows don’t want to come back after grazing. Apa nak jadi…., just shows, we you and me are IDIOTS…!
You’re lying again. Epf has never lent to Felda global. There is no record as such. Epf has been very prudentso don’t defame.their lending is always securedby a minimum of sovereign risk and for yor infor that’s the reason it has lower return.
ellese
dont jump the gun so soon and call others as liars.
its written all over that felda has borrowed billions (think > 5b) from epf. may not be felda global but definitely felda group.
It’s to the felda authority which is part of government. Credit worthiness is not an issue. Further Felda Authority has healthy assets and good performance record with plenty of surpluses n guarantee the payment. The problematic co is Felda Global. Felda holdings is another good company. All three are different entities. Unless you can show otherwise as far as EPF is concerned the non payment should not be an issue.
Ps . A certain portion of loan I understand was on lend to Felda global. However this does not detract the obligation that Felda Authority is to pay for the EPF loan. It’s like giving loan to Petronas who on lend to its sudsidiaries. As far as credit risk is concern it’s still Petronas risk which is like a sovereign risk.
Ellese,
It was uttered from your mouth….Felda Global is problematic…, then why LIST this Shit..? Care to disown….that they owe RM 6b to EPF…, lama lama anak Felda will all become mat Rempit aka Mat Fit …aka mat Lupus.
Gohblok, You’re changing goalpost. So I categorize.
Argument 1
I said Epf has to invest in “secured” investment.
You then argued the investment by Epf to Felda global is not.
Told you there’s no investment to Felda global but only to Felda authority which is thus a “secured” investment.
Thus going back to my first statement it’s still correct and your contention incorrect.
Argument 2.
Felda global being problematic and will affect kpf and anak peneroka.
Weved had this round of debate where I and doc depart.
For your info despite being problematic Felda global is still profitable if not mistaken in hundreds of million. If not for their foreign foray it could be much more.
The listing structure is fluid. But what is clear is if all businesses reside in global and Felda authority be a mere regulator it will benefit kpf. There’s a massive injection of good profitable business assets to global. I believe it will only benefit kpf (the anak peneroka). The info I have with doc departs. But I believe upon listing this would be clear then. Believe if picture is disclosed in prospectus many will want to buy including me. Possibly you too if you put pure investment thinking cap on.
No la… I don’t think he is changing goalpost. Just shifting it a bit.
By how many feet
ellese
i am not debating the creditworthiness of felda group. all i am saying is that epf has lent money to felda group. i dont claim to know which unit but i am asking you not to jump the gun and called others liars.
lets settle at that, ok?
No MMC. The allegation was EPF spend money foolishly affecting depositors. Please read above. This is far from the truth. Epf investment is secured. It’s a lie. Similar to the misleading statement by nurul and tony Phua.
This is interesting. Read http://www.economist.com/content/global_debt_clock
There is a debt comparison tool on the right side of the page. Try it out
Thanks Doc… From Islamic angle I am quite impressed with China and Russia…
can elaborate a little? low debt u meant?
Yup… u r right HY.
Can explain pls
Please look at “Public Debt Per Person” figures of Malaysia, China and Russia.
agree with you.. should we bring back chin peng?LOL
May be no need… as our country has DAP, which has been labelled as party komunis by UMNO/BN since a long time ago… so support DAP is enough
ROTFLOL
chin ping know anything about white cat black cat? i dun think so.
Yup, considering the size of China’s GDP and population, I agree that their average debt per population is quite low. There is definitely some merits to absence of democracy or autocratic rule!
Their corruption level is quite high too. What more the income disparity is quite wide.
We can be better then all these countries put togather….If we never had Idiots from BN running this country..!
NOW AFTER 22 YEARS OF ABUSE FROM A MAMAK…., they reel like silk to reveal…they are just about Bastards.
We are no idiots like the like in MCA/MIC and some stupid BN crony parties…, it about time we give them a ” RAIN SHOWER “.
“There is definitely some merits to absence of democracy or autocratic rule!”
Hmm…North Korea?
I think the answer lies in capitalism. Anyway, anything that multiply or divide by 1.3 billion doesn’t tell much. Interesting part is why China do not require much (high) debt to progress.
HY,
“….anything that multiply or divide by 1.3 billion doesn’t tell much.”
Should we all start to make more babies?
An efficient economy should be where a country is able to tap its resources to achieve a higher goal of development. Most developed country seems to reach a higher debt to get where they are. In particular Singapore. Lky and dr mahathir saw that and I still believe its the right way to manage. I can agree that we use for productive sector like cyber jaya n southern corridors etc but have reservation if we incur debt for unlimited consumption/ direct handout. We should sustain this policy. The scaremongering policy of pr is misleading the public. The many handsout by bn n pr is worrisome.
I don’t see the causal link between high debt and development. Most developed countries do not progress by utlilising borrowing, i think it is a recent phenomenon when politician want to be a populist among the voters and big corporation.
Yes and no. I was looking at US historical GDP data for one century (gosh they have it) the GDP has always increased over the years. But their deficit does not correlate with it meaning to say there are deficits and surpluses. On that score you’re absolutely correct. But on the flip side of it, we can also argue that without the many deficit budget US couldn’t achieve it’s ever increasing growth in GDP they achieved to date. Say for example had they not resorted to deficit spending circa 1940s the country would be in a worse off scenario which definitely affect their GDP growth. The last ten years for example and the latest crisis, all saw deficit spending and had they not resorted to it, I contend that they would not be able to have the growth they had for the last ten years. For sure I think since 30s n 40s they believe in Keynesian dogma in deficit spending to spur growth.
Having said that, I think I’ve not come across any writing saying you have to reach a certain debt level in order to be developed. That was purely my contention.
My assertion lays in the simple notion that many developed countries have sustained their current GDP status by incurring deficits after deficits. The US data above indicated that. The deficit budget is small every year but keep increasing from time to time and accumulated to 80/90% of the GDP. In fact one economist named rogoff wrote that it’s only after 90% that you will see some shaving of the GDP.
On the other extreme I see many low debts gdp ratio countries but most of them are undeveloped or resource rich.
Coming closer to home we see Singapore. They certainly has high debts of 100% yet maintaining their tremendous growth. The debts are mainly local debts.
On Malaysia, we bear much resemblance to spore. Both of us are essentially savings nation. We generally save a lot and we have institution like Epf pnb etc which capitalize on our savings. Singapore has CPF( which includes huge contribution from malaysians:-)). Since we are a savings nation we must and should leverage on this. The government should issue papers to mop this up either through Epf or directly to the public. It’s already doing so by various bonds issuance. The billions bonds issued recently by plus tnb Sarawak etc shows we have much liquidity in the market. Thus my thinking for us to be efficient we can incur more debts to leverage on our savings.
The key thing is that these money should go to productive sector or sectors which create further growth and income to the nation. Of late we’ve seen too much populist welfarism which I think we should have a limit. If we plan properly we should grow steadily.
We have done this many times before. Stick to it and just follow the Singapore GDP debt model. I’m not saying we should run deficit all the times. We should strive for surpluses. But main goal of policy must always to create growth and in achieving this we should not be shackled with deficit spending dogma stunting growth. Pr budget comes to mind. Even with their best effort of what they think as removing the “corrupt element” in bn budget, they still believe in deficit spending to achieve growth. I’m fine with both bn and or deficit budget to spur growth. What I’m not fine is the ever populist demand of welfarism which were getting into.
hmm.. more govt debt for better standard of living for the people provided the money is well spent?
hope you can provide some empirical data.
btw, i hope we wouldnt be another greece with borrowing binge.
singapore govt havent run a budget deficit since 1980s and their debt is 100%? really beats me. hmm. you and komentenmelodie the one and the same?
Not the same. If I’m allowed I will always use my name here. I have one other Name which contains a specific name which I do not wish to disclose here.
On Greece, it’s possible if both parties bn n pr rack up deficits for consumption like Greece did. There’s systematic problem of euro where Greece gets similar weight to say like German and they have been capitalizing on the easy credit. It’s a moral hazard.
My contention of increasing debt is simple. Say you want a better life. You can purchase things as you own from your salary or you can obtain loan to purchase now. Thus you can wait n pay later for a house or take a loan from now. Modern capitalism has allowed us to leverage on our future income. So we need to balance it between debt and earnings.
How capitalism work is that the more money we have the more we can leverage. You see these huge excesses in subprime issues. On a more acceptable manner our banks gets our deposits and leverage this a few times for lending.
So we don’t have to be reckless in incurring debts sesuka hati. But we cannot be too dogmatic affecting our standard of living. You must find the prudent balance. Maastricht deems it at 60% ratio but for me looking at Singapore we are ok to do more provided we have a limit on consumption spending.
ellese,
singapore has not run a budget deficit since 1980s but their standard of living has by-pass us by miles. remember we were equal cousins in early 1970s.
may be singapore is just a small red dot?
msia has seen budget deficits for the last decade (or more). what has been the REAL growth rate of income? Less than 2+% per year. we aint gonna become a high income nation if such growth rate persists.
i am still not convinced that there is a strong correlation between budget deficits and rate of growth.
notwithstanding the above, i am sure we are on the same page that we have to grow our income at more than the present clipper speed for a better standard of living.
MMC,
“singapore has not run a budget deficit since 1980s but their standard of living has by-pass us by miles. remember we were equal cousins in early 1970s.”
Yes indeed, S’pore has moved from the third world status to the first in just a few decades… what a mighty accomplishment indeed.
Mmc,
Why do you have a penchant using outdated misleading data. Just did a simple google search and Singapore is having deficit budget for 09/10 n 2011. Otherwise how could you get a debt GDP ratio of 100%.
I think you’re too partisan. Why not start admitting in terms of economy we have done well by many economic measures. Only then you can appreciate. Otherwise you keep misleading people just to show we are bad. Please. As of now I can never take any of your data as being accurate and correct.
True… If the present government is as less corrupt as the Singapore government, then the idea may work successfully.
Abdul,
Singapore debt to GDP is 102.1% and average of USD42k per person; Malaysian debt to GDP is 52.2% and average of USD 4.1k per person.
I believe EPF is run quite professionally and has well protected our savings. Their problem is trying to find secure investments to guarantee returns to the contributors.
I think we should consider looking at CPF model to allow our EPF to be used monthly to pay our housing instalments as that being used in Singapore for HDB apartments.
By doing so, it helps guarantee our lower income group to be able to own their houses.
Dear dr,
I like to read your posting coz you think analyze propose and defend ideas. This is examplified by the above posting.
I’ve taken up insurance for whole of my family but what the nagging issue I have is that I havent used it even once for past 10 years. My thinking is if one has money there’s no necessity to take up insurance as you’re paying for the risk which in many cases I believe don’t materialize. Actually I believe the insurance company’s actuaries have calculated all this risk between risk happening and using the insurance and still come up with a profitable business. On hindsight now I put a bit too much money on insurance. I could have put some similar money aside and gain income for that with better coverage than my insurance.
Point is. I don’t understand why government must take insurance for govt civil servants. Were just adding costs to the government. Governments can pay so it pays directly. With insurance scheme government is paying for additional profits of the insurance company. That’s not necessary.
Dear Ellese
The concept of insurance is pooling.
A few hundred thousand people pool resource is the benefit of everyone at time of need. Think about it. If you had actually need it, you could have use it and it only cost you a few thousand ringgit. The cost of healthcare is rising exponentially and it is not due to so many people become sick but because everyone wants to make money! From the doctors, the hospitals and insurers. In this cycle, I would say that eventual victim is the public as at one time they made not be able to buy any more insurance.
The best would be mutual cooperative insurance but there isn’t a company in Malaysia that is doing it i.e. Takaful or Coventional.
On the question that related to government buying insurance for civil servants- it is not as what you are experiencing in the last 10 years. The actual cost of insurance in the private sector is probably 30%-40% of the amount you actually pays.
From the model that I have presented, it is basically accounting purpose only between ministry. All the entities i.e. H1-H4 are government entities. By doing this the government is merely moving money from right pocket to left pocket. Each ministry would need to maintain an allocation for insurance just as private companies does.
It would give a clear measure on how much each ministry is spending money on healthcare.Once we know that we would find ways to optimize cost.Once they are insured and the private hospitals and government hospitals are of equal standing than the government servant has access to both facilities
Agree with you on doctors hospitals and insurance are adding costs to the detriment of public.
On H3 being a national insurance provider wholly owned by government I can agree with you only to the extent that they don’t reinsure. My thinking is that typically this risk even being run by a govt subsidiary will need to be reinsured. All this is still additional cost for which government can pay for. And I think it’s more efficient to use existing insurance companies rather than to set up a new insurance company tailoring to this. It can develop products but not sure it should develop another new business.
Dear Ellese
When a government run entity owned an insurance entity like H3, it would be a very thin organization. Their role is to collect premiums, pool it, invest it, mitigate risk by suitable reinsurance methodology and pay claims. H3 would go into an agreement with H4 and H2.
Reinsurance is good risk management tool but somehow people dont understand the value. For years, I have been telling SOCSO to explore RI but they dont want because they dont know anything about it and dont want to learn about. They could have save alot of money, improve their cash flow if they use RI. Similarly it should be done with H3. It wont cost the government anything more as the cost of RI is paid from the collection of H3. If you actually knows how much RI charge for risk premium you would fall of from your chair>>> It is so cheap.
My only condition in dealing with RI is that they must be KL based, with high rating of AA and funds must be retained in a local bank.
Didn’t realise that doc. My impression is that reinsurance spreads the risk further. They may spread it at Lloyd’s for example. Along the way everyone shares the spread margin. That’s how I understand it. Btw what’s the margin like?:-)
Your understanding is inaccurate. I can sit down with you to explain in detail if you want to. To illustrate on the cost
Male/age35 buying RM100,000 death cover for one year. Actual RI cost for healthy person is about (0.65/1000)x100,000 =RM65. May I suggest you call up an insurance agent and ask him to buy a term cover for the same sum/age. You will see the “GROSSLY INFLATED COST” to cover expenses and profit
Doc,
The minister of MOH, DG of MOH and many others in that ministry are either your varsity mates and contemporaries. Be good to share your thoughts with them and get the framework on this NHS right. The implementation will always be an issue but the GOM should tackle the basic first. I for one feel that good healthcare service is beyond the financial means of many in the private sector and those working on their own. At the same time, tax alone is not sufficient and some other forms of contributions from eg. EPF, pension funds, etc must be sourced such that every citizens be they from government servantsor otherwise can receive affordable healthcare.
Dear AK
Already initiate the discussion with them
And the results……..what makes you think this time they would listen? They have 50 years…..Unlike you, I demand MORE from them……Being in singapore nong nong time, just like singaporeans, expecting better results from government…….especially in power for 50 years……Not just a cheap cheap resolution & expect us to vote for them
Nah! Just read this!
http://dnightcaller.blogspot.com/2012/02/of-enclosed-bersih.html
Looes74
What if BN wins PRU13 ? Continue with this hate politics and not work to change for the better. Many will still stay in this country we call home unlike some who talk bad of our country but making a living overseas.
How much more do we have to wait? It’s like Adolf Hitler suing for peace during WW2. For once, just press the nuclear button……Ctrl +alt+del
AK,
I totally agree with you.
People who just spew hate politics without coming up with something constructive should just shut up.
I am truly tired of reading these sort of comments:
1. Everything is wrong!
2. Nothing is right!
3. Change government.
4. Insult our country
I won’t be surprised if next I hear “I have a problem shitting – change the government”.
A better discourse would be to look at things globally and to weigh the good and the bad.
By the sound of some comments, people may even think out country is no better than Somalia.
Betul la.. aku pun dah naik bosan!
Observer/AK/ Doc,
As much as you all think you are wise.., you must give a shit of your’s to some thoughts.
You all claim you are engaging..yet you set term’s over norms.
Bro’s…let engage till we shit bricks…, and stir shit on our own faces…if ..this act can make this jewel of a country worth fighting for.., I mean ..calling ourselves ..” Stake Holders..”.
You can come out with the best system and procedures but when come to implementation and practice is totally different!
Look at the MACC has the best system or procedures copy from HK but when come to implementation and practice is Suck! They either uselss or do not dare to touch big fish!
The problem is sincerely and honestly which we could not find in the current UMNO lead government. They are more interested in contracts than anything else.
what you say has merit
Doc,
Why do we need to reinvent the wheel? Don’t we already have enough policies & schemes, but in whatever field, it has always been the implementation that is weak.
Whatever that you have suggested is already in existent in one form or another, just coordinate and improve on the efficiency. Have KPIs on all stakeholders, maybe have a 10% improvement for starters. The motor insurance industry comes to mind as something similar. Not so long ago, it was a ‘free-for-all’ anything goes industry. Fraud, corruption and what not, literally the whole works. Today, the competent stakeholders are actually making profits in a transparent manner despite premiums not being adjusted for 2+ decades. Efficiency is the key!
YS,
Yip, Implementation is the very key! Perhaps, Raffick is banging the hope that BN would implement his ideas. After Nor Omar has done the honour on the UK Bestari thingy……That’s also after 10 more years. Then, BN was the selangor state government
YS
You said “Whatever that you have suggested is already in existent in one form or another” … That is not true. Is there H1, H3 and H4 today? I don’t think so
The current is government and being government it is bound by rules and regulations. In government there is a saying that says ” you need approval just to move a brick” In today’s world, time is money. Government cannot move fast enough because government servant cannot do it without breaking archaic rules.
The fastest way is to revamp with setting up new organization.
Korea -> Hyundai -> Successful
Malaysia -> Proton -> Asyik Rugi
Singapore -> SIA -> Untung
Malaysia -> MAS -> Hampir lingkup
Mana Koridor Pak Lah? Islam Hadhari pula tak didengar… sekarang 1Malaysia… sekiranya Mahathir lembut macam Pak Lah, Vision 2020 dah lama hilang di dunia… sekarang 1-CARE pula… what will happen if Najib is ousted after GE13 and Muhyiddin jadi PM? what will happen if PR jadi kerajaan selepas GE13?
True… Implementation is the key… Unfortunately many have no confidence in UMNO/BN led government anymore…
Don’t forget Samsung