Kuasa autonomi universiti

Tahniah kepada UIAM dan UUM kerana diberi kuasa autonomi dlm urus tadbir, kewangan, sumber manusia, pengurusan akademik dan pengambilan pelajar. Perkara itu diumumkan oleh Menteri Pengajian Tinggi, Datuk Seri Khalid Nordin pada 29 januari 2013. 

Untuk rekod tahun 2012 yang lepas, lima universiti awam mendapat status itu iaitu Universiti Malaya (UM), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) dan Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), sementara Universiti Teknologi Malaysia menjadi IPTA pertama diberi kuasa autonomi awal bulan Januari 2012.

Dengan adanya kuasa autonomi, IPTA berkenaan bukan sahaja boleh menentukan urus tadbir dan menjana kewangan sendiri, malah meliputi pengurusan sumber manusia, pengurusan akademik serta kemasukan pelajar.

Walaupun permohonan kemasukan ke IPTA tetap diuruskan oleh UPU, pihak IPTA diberi kuasa penyemakan kriteria, pemilihan dan pengumuman keputusan berdasarkan pilihan utama pelajar.

Moga ia dimanfaatkan oleh pihak universiti untuk perbaiki apa yg patut dalam usaha melahirkan insan yang hakiki, bukan sekadar mencetak graduan.

PRINSIP ASAS AUTONOMI DI IPTA

* Amalan kebertanggungjawaban, ketelusan, akauntabiliti dan nilai serta kualiti yang dibelanjakan dalam semua urusan

* Pemantapan sistem dan struktur tadbir urus, pewujudan peraturan yang jelas bagi mendukung pelaksanaan autonomi dan memastikan wujudnya elemen `check and balance’ serta ketelusan

* Pemakaian semua pekeliling perbendaharaan sebagai asas peraturan berkaitan pengurusan kewangan dalaman, dan Lembaga Pengarah Universiti ialah pihak berkuasa yang mengambil alih peranan perbendaharaan dalam memantau dan bertindak melindungi kepentingan pelaburan kerajaan di mana berkaitan

* Pemakaian semua Pekeliling Perkhidmatan Awam sebagai asas peraturan berkaitan pengurusan sumber manusia, dan LPU ialah pihak berkuasa yang menggantikan peranan Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam di mana berkaitan.

* Bebanan serta pendedahan kewangan kerajaan hanya dihadkan kepada peruntukan belanja mengurus tahunan dan peruntukan pembangunan yang diluluskan kerajaan melainkan diputuskan sebaliknya oleh Kerajaan Pusat

* Penjanaan pendapatan IPTA hendaklah mengutamakan dan memastikan perlindungan serta (insulate and protect) kepentingan universiti dan kerajaan

* Skim saraan berasingan, jika perlu diwujudkan IPTA berasaskan peruntukan Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti yang berkuat kuasa, dan sistem ini hendaklah berasaskan prinsip kesaksamaan, kelestarian dan tidak langsung membebankan kerajaan

* Tindakan tegas mengikut peruntukan tatatertib semasa sepertinya surcaj, turun pangkat, buang kerja dan yang berkaitan boleh diambil terhadap pegawai dan kakitangan IPTA yang gagal mematuhi tatacara dan peraturan serta cuai semasa melaksanakan tugas.

Parti Buruh menang Pilihanraya kecil Timur Punggol

SINGAPURA - Para pengundi di sini membuang undi semalam (Sabtu 26/1/2013) dalam satu pilihan raya kecil yang sekali gus menguji pendirian orang ramai terhadap parti pemerintah iaitu Parti Tindakan Rakyat (PAP) selepas ia mengalami prestasi terburuk dalam pilihan raya umum di republik tersebut.

Kerusi kawasan Timur Punggol kosong apabila bekas Speaker, Michael Palmer meletak jawatan dan keluar daripada PAP selepas mengaku menjalin hubungan sulit pada Disember tahun lalu.
Kempen pilihan raya didominasi oleh isu sosioekonomi seperti kenaikan kos sara hidup. Para penganalisis menyatakan kehadiran tiga calon pembangkang pasti memecahkan undi pengundi anti-PAP.

Pusat-pusat pengundian dibuka seawal pukul 8 pagi selama 12 jam dan keputusan diumumkan pada waktu malam. Keputusannya Parti Buruh menang!. (Lihat gambar dibawah untuk maklumat lanjut)

Lebih 31,000 pengundi layak mengundi dalam pilihan raya kecil itu. Ia merupakan pilihan raya kecil kali kedua sejak pilihan raya umum pada Mei 2011 yang menyaksikan PAP hanya memperoleh undi sebanyak 60 peratus.

Doktor bedah, Koh Poh Koon yang mewakili PAP dicabar oleh Lee Li Lian dari Parti Pekerja, Desmond Lim (parti Perikatan Demokratik Singapura) dan Kenneth Jeyaretnam (Parti Reformasi). -

BERITA BERKAITAN:

CHANNEL ASIA

SINGAPORE: The Workers' Party's (WP) secretary-general Mr Low Thia Khiang has said that the results of the Punggol East by-election show that Singaporeans expect the government to work harder for them.

At a news conference on early Sunday morning held after results were announced, MP-elect Ms Lee Li Lian also spelled out her priorities for the constituency.

Flanked by party leaders, she thanked residents and pledged to stand up for them in Parliament as well as manage Punggol East diligently.

The 34-year-old won 16,038 or 54.52 per cent of the valid votes - up from the 41 per cent she garnered in the last election.

She said: "My most immediate task is to build up the town council, as we are all aware the current Punggol East Town council is actually under the Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council, so that will be the most immediate thing that I need to do, after which I will also need to build up a group of volunteers to help lead grassroots as well as community events at Punggol East."

With the victory, she becomes the first woman opposition party candidate to have won a single member constituency since 1965. History too, for the Workers' Party, as it captures another constituency from the ruling People's Action Party (PAP).

Mr Low said: "The results of the by-election show that Punggol East voters as well as Singaporeans still expect the government to work harder. Although many policies have been reviewed... the results show that (its) effect has not really trickled down to the ground and people still feel the pressure of high cost of living," he said.

"So I would expect the government to work harder on that and the Workers' Party would assist whenever we can," he added.

Party leaders are also well aware of the expectations that come with the victory.

Chairman of WP Ms Sylvia Lim said: "This is also an important episode for Singaporeans to take note of, the value of political competition in getting the government to sit up and take notice.

"Despite this victory, the Workers' Party is still a small party with much to do and improve upon. The Workers' Party will continue to serve residents in Hougang SMC and Aljunied GRC and now the residents of Punggol East SMC on the ground and in Parliament."

Party leaders added that the victory is as much a vote against the ruling People's Action Party as it is a vote for the Workers' Party.

Work will start almost immediately for Ms Lee, with her first Meet-the-People session slated for the 4 February at Block 135 Rivervale Street.

Liquidity Trap vs Inequality Trap?

As I watched Paul Krugman Sunday night on Bill Moyers, I felt a familiar sense of despair. Krugman cares deeply about unemployment and inequality, as did John Maynard Keynes before him. Yet like Keynes, Krugman seems caught in the inequality-free neoclassical paradigm.

I study the "classical" economists, starting with Adam Smith. Inequality loomed large in their world. They divided society into three broad classes: First, the landlords: the original One Percent, the Downton Abbey crowd, the "great proprietors" of vast estates. Then the capitalists: the merchants and manufacturers. Last: the workers. The classical economists asked, what determines the distribution of income between these classes? But around the end of the 19th Century, the "neoclassical" paradigm swept in. Gone were the three social classes with dramatically different wealth and income. There were only consumers -- from old Aunt Esther on Social Security to Donald Trump; producers -- from Harry's Shoes to General Motors; and government. Business cycles were best left to play themselves out.

During the Great Depression, to his credit, Keynes bucked his colleagues by claiming that government spending could revive a depressed economy. But, caught in the neoclassical paradigm, he got the mechanism wrong. Keynes argued, as does Krugman today, that the problem is a lack of consumer demand. Consumers want to save instead of spend. Lacking demand, businesses won't invest. So there's a "savings glut" or "liquidity trap" -- billions in cash sloshing around seeking in vain for investment opportunities. The solution: government should borrow some of that loose cash and spend it, no matter on what: war, high-speed rail, fixing potholes, or education. Deficits be damned.

In my view, we don't have a "liquidity trap"; we have an "inequality trap". What's that? An "inequality trap" happens in a downturn, when the One Percent, big corporations and banks hoard cash, starving small businesses for capital. The greater the inequality and deeper the downturn, the tighter the trap.

The multinationals are indeed awash in cash. In an article appropriately titled, "Dead Money," The Economist reports how major corporations trim real investment -- such as new technology -- while piling up cash. For example, firms in the S&P 500 held about $900 billion in cash at the end of June, up 40 percent from 2008. The Economist dismisses the conservative claim that "meddlesome federal regulations and America's high corporate-tax rate is locking up cash and depressing investment." Why? All big multinational firms have been hoarding cash, not just U.S.-based ones; it's been a growing trend since the 1970s.

The big banks are also awash in cash. For example, JP Morgan's September 2012 balance sheet shows that out of $2,321 billion in assets, JP Morgan holds $887 billion in "Cash and Short-Term Investments" -- over a third! (The "short-term investments" are gambles in the international money markets, but that's a different story.)

To the One Percent, the cash bath may look like Krugman's liquidity trap: a lack of investments yielding the high returns they enjoyed before the 2008 crash. But try telling small businesses there's not enough demand and too much cash! They face drastic "credit rationing" by the banks. The banks are of course super-cautious these days, which is why they pile up cash. But in addition, the collapse in home values has reduced small business owners' collateral for loans. And following the failure of many small banks and the consolidation of giant banks into megabanks, far fewer banks can or will lend to small businesses.

Today's depression is a small business depression. Don't forget, small businesses are the nation's employers, providing far more jobs per dollar of assets or sales. According to Census data, in 2008, the 99.7 percent of U.S. firms with fewer than 500 workers accounted for 49.4 percent of U.S. employees. In 2007, comparing firms with under half a million in sales to those with over $100 million, the small firms averaged 15 employees per $100 million sales while the big ones averaged only three.

I respect and admire Paul Krugman for fighting the good fight. I just wish he would question the inequality-free neoclassical paradigm. An "inequality trap" requires different measures from a "liquidity trap." It requires raising taxes on the One Percent and the big corporations -- instead of borrowing from them and running up the deficit. It requires protecting ordinary workers and small businesses from the impact of payroll taxes like Social Security, for example by greatly increasing the earned income credit. In the short run, it requires avoiding capital-intensive spending like military or high-speed rail. Instead it requires extra spending to maintain education, health care, unemployment insurance and other urgent public services. In the long run, it requires enforcing anti-trust legislation and breaking up the big banks.

SOURCE: PROFESSOR MARY MANNING CLEVELAND