Leadership management and strategy - failure of Obama Presidency

HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency
  John Mariotti, Forbes Contributor

Image via Wikipedia

BREAKING NEWS—A Series of Excerpts from A Powerful New Book

Much has been written about Barack Obama’s presidency during his first three years. His supporters still adore him. His critics dislike him intensely. The real question is, why has Obama failed—in his own terms: “to turn this country around?” His campaign mantra of “HOPE & CHANGE” created tremendous expectations. The problem is, as our title states, “hope is not a strategy” and the “change” has been change for the worse, and not better.

Now there is a new book which chronicles thirty of Obama’s most notable failures and mistakes from a new perspective: as problems of leadership, ideology and inexperience–combined. Co-author Dave M. Lukas and I have combined the perspectives of two different generations of executive and entrepreneurial success into a series of short, easy-to-read chapters, each of which describes one or more of Obama’s failed outcomes, and goes on to offer valuable lessons for life, career and most of all, for current and future leaders in business and government.

Dave and I are both deeply concerned about America’s future as it struggles under Obama’s staggering budget deficits and imperial power plays, leading to sluggish growth, record unemployment and a general lack of respect for the USA that is growing greater every month he is in office.

When Barack Obama exploded onto the national political stage—literally—during the 2004 Democratic convention, he used his oratorical skills to elevate his thin resume and undistinguished career into national prominence. He stated his conviction that, “There is not a liberal America and a conservative America – there is the United States of America.” Unfortunately, after a masterful campaign, in which he echoed this line in various forms, he did not behave or govern this way. Under his presidency, the divide between the conservative and liberal elements of the US government has grown wider, not narrower. Obama has been a divider, not a uniter.

Why this happened can lead to complex, and contentious arguments. That it has happened is indisputable. In HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency we break down some of the many the problems, mistakes, failures and “misstatements” that Americans encountered during President Obama’s first term.

In this series, I will post excerpts from several chapters of the book, to provide readers a “taste” of what the book contains. It has been called “The most important book of 2102,” and described as, “An insightful guide to leadership and management based on examples of stunning failures and what not to do.” Another assessment of it said it this way: “Every American voter needs to read this book. It will help them see Obama’s many mistakes—prove that style and oratory do not trump substance…”

The book will be available in late March on www.amazon.com in both paperback and Kindle versions, and other on-line booksellers. To sign up for more details of availability, go to www.hopeisnotastrategybook.com and click on the Contact tab.
—————-
John Mariotti is an internationally known executive and an award-winning author. His newest book, co-authored with D. M. Lukas, Hope is NOT a Strategy: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency will be available in March 2012 at www.amazon.com. Mariotti’s 2008 book, The Complexity Crisis was named one of 2008’s Best Business Books. His critically acclaimed 2010 novel, The Chinese Conspiracy, merges an exciting fictional thriller with the reality of America’s risk from Cyber-Attacks. Mariotti does keynote speeches, serves on corporate boards and is a consultant/advisor to companies. He can be reached at www.mariotti.net.

 Newscribe : get free news in real time 

Western Imperial powers overreach, yet again!

From Egypt to Russia, the Western urge to meddle in other countries continues to be troublesome.

Behind The Headlines By Bunn Nagara

THE so-called Arab Spring continues to spring surprises, most of all on its Western backers. With double standards in international politics, just about anything goes.

US, Israeli and European cheerleaders of Arab “regime change” through street politics have realised by now that the naive notion of ousting dictators does not travel in a straight line. Among other things, the new regimes that emerge have tended to be more independent and less Western-friendly.

In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamist Freedom and Justice Party has taken the pivotal role in post-Mubarak political life, including the upper house of Parliament. In Tunisia much the same has been happening with the Islamist Ennahda party.

Shifting the goalposts: When allegations of voter fraud bore no fruit, Moscow’s street protesters switched to accusing Putin of using rough tactics on them as police made arrests. — AFP

 

An element of that plays in the opposition Syrian National Council’s multiple splits. The more cautious Western officials are currently hesitant to provide “hard power” to the rebels battling Damascus, since rebel ranks include al-Qaeda.

Right-wing US lawmakers like John McCain are chiding President Obama for not arming Syrian rebels. It is telling that McCain’s best claim to fame is as a veteran of the Vietnam War, that classic icon of a failed and futile US armed intervention.

Even so, the temptation for a hyperpower to intervene can be irresistible, so Washington covertly dispatches regime-change NGO activists as catalysts instead of the Marines. It is what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calls “smart power.”

However, the double standards when compared to similar situations elsewhere then become glaring. After Western-allied Saudi Arabia sent troops into Bahrain to suppress protesters there one year ago, Western-compliant Qatar has called for supplying troops and weapons to Syrian rebels fighting President Assad.

To an incumbent government in Iran that is also being targeted by Western and Israeli policymakers, all of that is enough to invoke Islamism in defiant response. Although President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remains the convenient bogeyman for the West, his political rivals at home are even more conservative and Islamist as shown in parliamentary elections early this month.

Nonetheless, neither religion nor showy forms of piety is the issue: it is a country’s unwillingness to comply with Western requests and demands that is. The stakes are raised when such a country is oil-rich and occasionally snubs Western concerns as well.

Currently the most conspicuous example of this is Russia, or rather president-elect Vladimir Putin’s Russia. This is a country that happens to channel the West’s worst “fears” today: being big, rich in oil and gas, independent-minded, “uncooperative” with the West over Libya, Syria and Iran, and even opposed to Nato’s eastwards expansion right up to Moscow’s doorstep.

Thus US and some European leaders are as keen for a “Russian spring” as they have been about a political spring-cleaning in Arab and Muslim countries they do not yet control. How the West would respond to anti-Putin street protests was therefore a foregone conclusion.

Russia’s recent presidential election provided the moment for a convergence of anti-Putin posturing. Russian street protesters, then Western media, and then Western governments formed a chorus to denounce Putin’s victory and the electoral process that led to it.

This happened both from a distance, such as the State Department or the Oval Office, as well as from within Russia by a visiting team of OSCE (Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe) election observers. It also occurred from the editorial offices of supposedly liberal Western media.

But what is the substance of complaints, apart from the usual geopolitical power plays?

If indeed the election had been a sham as the protesters and critics have been claiming, the evidence for it would have been presented, analysed, commented on and displayed. The Putin electoral bandwagon would and should have been stigmatised, although the appropriateness of any foreign political action would still be in question.

Russian protesters at least would have been justified in their street demonstrations, and assured of the justice of their cause. Instead, the protesters were already out in the streets denouncing Putin months before the election, which gives some indication about the content of their complaint.

Now weeks later, opposition claims of vote fraud favouring Putin is still without substance. Opinion polls before the election indicated a two-thirds majority support for Putin, and the results have since shown 64%.

Even Putin’s opponents had agreed that he had no problem securing enough votes to win the election. Until now his opponents and critics have not explained why he needed to cheat to win, and furthermore they failed to show that he had cheated.

No evidence 

Interestingly, the OSCE observers indirectly rebuffed opposition claims of multiple voting by Putin supporters, and instead reported on the negative perceptions that attended the voting. The Europeans had no evidence of vote fraud and declared that there were no significant violations, but they still hankered after attaching a negative spin to the election and its result.

They cited no improper motives by Putin’s United Russia party, yet they were not above tainting the election result through implication or by default. Perhaps that was an attempt at smart power too.

If anyone had any “actionable” evidence of fraud it would have been the OSCE observers, yet they served up nothing. Their position would in effect have been a workable endorsement of the election’s credibility.

United Russia had failed to secure a two-thirds majority, yet the CIA-linked Voice of America reported that Putin had won “by a landslide.” Meanwhile, the opposition claim of voter fraud persisted all-round in the face of the absence of any evidence to substantiate it.

That much might have been expected of Putin’s opponents at home and even Western governments averse to his independent ways. But for Western media to chime along without questioning the basis of their presumptions, and even failing to report dispassionately, shows a decline in professional ethics.

At the heart of such reporting and editing is a tendency to approach opposition claims with less scepticism than government ones, although both sides are equally interested parties in an electoral contest. It is an approach typical of the Western media in the Third World.

As for Moscow’s street protesters, they have lately taken to shifting the goalposts. After their allegations of vote fraud bore no fruit, they switched to accusing Putin of using rough tactics on them as police made arrests.

At the same time, protesters say they want neither violence nor a revolution, just more transparency and the rule of law. They have no alternative candidate they prefer to Putin, just an alternative mode of the government’s handling of the election for a better sense of confidence in the process.

Essentially, the protesters did not endorse any particular candidate but were instead just being anti-Putin. The very fact that they have been doing so openly without being packed off to a gulag in Siberia for life shows the distance Russia has travelled since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

For now, Putin’s main rival candidates – a communist, a crypto-fascist and a controversial oligarch – seem to leave little to be desired between them. If the unspoken objective of Russian voters is getting a president who can act competently and confidently to safeguard Russia’s interests, the election might already have been purposeful enough.

The protesters and their Western backers might then just need a little time to reconcile themselves to it. That could be their best option in smart politics yet.

Golf, a good walking game!

Make it a good walk  

Golf is an enjoyable sport as long as there is an element of exercise involved, like walking, otherwise it’s just a parlour game.

Bukit Jambul Country Club in Penang has issues with members now not allowed to walk the course.

The phrase “Golf is a good walk spoilt” is often attributed to the famous American scribe Mark Twain, who was said to have used it to describe his frustration with the game.

The truth is that Twain, whose real name is Samuel Langhorne Clemens, never uttered those words but it seems a US magazine in the 1930s attributed the phrase to him because “it sounded like something Twain would say”.

Regardless of who is the original author, we golf mortals, who find the simple instruction of keeping the ball in a straight direction an impossible task, find so much truth in that phrase.

Even a demi-god like Tiger Woods is struggling to keep his game together and often refers to the present state of his game as military golf because he keeps hitting the ball left and then right and then left and then right again – like soldiers marching.

However, all of us continue to chase after the white dimpled ball because we want to get better at it and it is probably the only form of exercise we get after hours in the office. Thus, it’s a good walk spoilt – a good exercise pursuit interjected by bad golf.

This brings me to the recent controversy surrounding the Bukit Jambul Country Club in Penang where the management company running it has decided to ban golfers from walking.

The actual ruling is not a ban on walking but rather that all golfers taking to the course must rent a buggy.

The clash between the golfers and the club operators – Taiyo Resorts – has descended into all sorts of battles from name calling at press conferences to disciplinary hearing against members who opposed the buggy only ruling which took affect on Feb 1.

It all started when some 100 members voiced their displeasure over the compulsory buggy-use rule at the golf club.

According to the club’s liaison committee chairman, Stanley Park, from that day walking hours were restricted to after 5pm (only on Monday and Tuesday). Many other clubs around the country also restrict golfing to non-peak hours but none have enforced it as strictly as BJCC.

“However, the club has already made known to the members of the Liaison Committee during one of our regular meetings, that BJCC shall be a full buggy course as soon as the renovations of the fairways gets completed,” Park said in an interview.

More than 100 disgruntled golfers protested at the club on Feb 2, saying the ruling was not suitable due to the way the course was built as it was designed for golfers to walk and not intended to be a buggy course.

They also complained about the increase in the buggy rental rates from RM22 to RM37 for the first nine holes.

Taiyo Resorts’ managing director Datuk Eiro Sakamoto argued that majority of the club’s 2,800 members did not object to the new ruling and it was just a few golfers who were making noise.

It cannot be denied that the “buggy only” ruling is a way for the company to increase their ancillary income – after all it had promised the state government, which owns the course an increase in profit.

However, most visitors to Bukit Jambul would rent a buggy as it is quite a commando course with hilly and tight fairways that are quite sapping for those unused to such conditions.

But for golfers, seeking a good workout, Bukit Jambul is the perfect course to keep fit and to test whether you can avoid playing Tiger’s military golf.

Making money from running a golf club is not an easy thing especially when you have a course built into the top of a hill. Maintenance, I expect, would be high and the green fees collection cannot be much.

The subscription is just over RM90 and with 2,800 members, this works out to be RM252,000 per month. The extra revenue from F&B plus ancillary income like golf buggy rental becomes important.

However, the management of BJCC must take cognisance of the importance of walking when playing golf.

It improves your game because it keeps the rhythm going when one walks:

This is how the game is supposed to be played and this way the game finishes faster as the golfer walks straight to the ball.

It improves the fellowship among the flight of golfers because all four of them can walk and talk at the same time.

I hope that the matter can be resolved amicably as golf is a gentleman’s game with proper rules.

So till next month, walk the course and truly enjoy the view.

Keep Walking.. Keep Walking...Keep Walking

Keep Walking.....

Because...
 
The Organs of your body have their sensory touches at the bottom of your foot.

If you massage these points you will find relief from aches and pains as you can see the heart is on the left foot.

Typically they are shown as points and arrows to show which organ it connects to.

It is indeed correct since the nerves connected to these organs terminate here.

This is covered in great details in Acu-pressure studies.
 
God created our body so well that he thought of even this.

He made us walk so that we will always be pressing these pressure points and thus keeping these organs activated at all times.

So, keep walking....... LIVE LONGER !!!!! 

 Golfer or not, you must see this clip...

 http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=aw-nt0eTb2w

It's all in the balance... (He plays off 3!!) And he walks the course!!!!!

Is there something unreal with our fliers at the club?

Hear that members are filing court action for some declaration of rights to play golf the way it was meant to be played?

Perhaps some of you LC members can show this clip to the presiding judge. Thanks

Related posts:
BJCC Golf Club management Fiasco: challenges ...
BJCC management fiasco: 'Outsourcing not the fair way ...

Moody's declares Greece in default of debt

Bond credit rating agency says EU member has defaulted on its repayments as it secures biggest debt deal in history.



Moody's Investors Service has declared Greece in default on its debt after Athens carved out a deal with private creditors for a bond exchange that will write off $140 billion of its debt.

Moody's pointed out that even as 85.8 per cent of the holders of Greek-law bonds had signed onto the deal, the exercise of collective action clauses that Athens is applying to its bonds will force the remaining bondholders to participate.

Overall the cost to bondholders, based on the net present value of the debt, will be at least 70 per cent of the investment, Moody's said.

"According to Moody's definitions, this exchange represents a 'distressed exchange,' and therefore a debt default," the US-based rating firm said.

For one, "The exchange amounts to a diminished financial obligation relative to the original obligation."

Secondly, it "has the effect of allowing Greece to avoid payment default in the future."

Ahead of the debt deal, Moody's had already slashed Greece's credit grade to its lowest level, "C," and so there was no impact on the rating.

Moody's said it will revisit the rating to see how the debt writedown, and the second Eurozone bailout package, would affect its finances.

However, it added, at the beginning of March "Moody's had said that the risk of a default, even after the debt exchange has been completed, remains high."

Source: Agencies  Newscribe : get free news in real time

Bankers and lawyers should know better

FOOD FOR THOUGHT By DATUK ALAN TONG

BUYING a property that eventually becomes abandoned is a painful experience for many house buyers. It not only hurts purchasers who have lost their hard-earned money but also affects the property industry's reputation which has taken a beating due to unethical activities of a few culprits.

This is particularly so when the abandoned project is not caused by factors such as economic downturn or withdrawal of purchasers, but solely due to irresponsible people who claim to be “developers” but do not hold a licence to do so.

It was recently reported that our Housing and Local Government Ministry has identified 195 abandoned developments that were unlicensed in our country. I am puzzled as to how these “developers” are able to start their projects when they do not even have their licence to apply for financing if they require a bridging loan, and is their sales and purchase (S&P) agreement properly attested by a lawyer before they start selling?

In this context, what can be done and who should play a part in reducing these unlawful developers? Assessing our existing housing development process would provide us with some ideas.

When a developer plans for a housing project, he must first get the necessary approvals and licences from the relevant authorities such as the development order, building plan, advertising permit and developer's licence. The developer then may need to source for a bridging loan from a financial institution and this is followed by getting lawyers to prepare the legal documents which include the S&P agreement.

When the project is launched to the market, the developer will require the purchasers to sign the S&P agreements in order to finalise the purchase. Should the purchaser acquire a housing loan from a bank, the bank will come into the picture to process the loan application submitted by the purchaser. Those are the basic procedures involved in developing and marketing a housing project in Malaysia.

For unlicensed development, the regulatory bodies are not in the picture. In such cases, it becomes apparent that the lawyers and/or bankers, both representing the house purchaser, have a role to play as the first line of defence to protect the interest of the purchaser.

Hence, there are questions that begged to be answered. How is it possible for financial institutions to approve the end financing loan for a property development in the absence of all or part of the required approvals and licences? The same questions are posted to lawyers who prepare the legal documents for unlicensed development.

I believe everyone has a role in identifying irresponsible players in the industry, especially the bankers and lawyers with their better access to information and strong regulatory network as compared to the general public. As a purchaser and a customer, you would have expected your banker and lawyer to carry out their due diligence duties to ensure that your interest is not compromised.

In other industries, professional practitioners who do not convey the right message and do not protect customers' interests can be given stern punishment as their action may be deemed as negligence, fraud or even criminal breach of trust.

According to the record of National House Buyers Association, in the case of Keng Soon Finance Bhd (1996), a financial institution had granted a loan to an unlicensed developer, and it was decided that the loan and the security offered were invalid. The bank could not institute the foreclosure proceedings on the land and therefore could not recover its loan.

Under our Housing Development Act, a property developer that engages in, carries out or undertakes housing development without having been duly licensed can be fined between RM250,000 and RM500,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both. This is an avenue to take action against unlicensed developers. While we have the law in place, it is equally important to ensure strong enforcement comes along.

For house buyers, you are strongly advised to purchase property from reputable developers and to do thorough “shopping” and analysis before signing on the dotted lines. Responsible developers are keen to work hand-in-hand with purchasers and appreciate the role of the National House Buyers Association which advocates the protection of house buyers in Malaysia. We should stand together as a team to fight against irresponsible developers.

And for anyone of you who think that you have bought into one of those unlicensed developments mentioned earlier in the article, it is time to write and call your banker or lawyer for clarification.

Datuk Alan Tong is the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties, he was the FIABCI World president in 2005-2006 and was named Property Man of The Year 2010 by FIABCI Malaysia.

Related posts:
Invest in Malaysia's Real Estates 
Houses prices hardly fall 
Malaysian High-end property expected slower
The fear factor in property

Houses prices hardly fall

HOUSING INVESTMENTS By THEAN LEE CHENG 

 On a per sq ft basis, it has risen

THERE was a lot of talk late last year that property prices will tumble in 2012 after the steep rise in the residential sector over the past few years. So far, we have not seen any of that.

What we are seeing is:

● Bank Negara's tightened guidelines on consumer lending have started to work. Loan applications and loan approvals have fallen in January;

● In certain locations, house prices and rental have started to ease; and

● Developers are offering very enticing terms since the beginning of this year.

Keep your finger on these three factors and let us now take a look at today's launches. In some of these launches, buyers need only to pay about 1% downpayment of the property price instead of the required 10% on signing of the sale and purchase agreement. The stamp duty and legal fees are also waived and they need not pay anything else until after the property is completed. Such schemes have attracted many buyers.

The question to ask is: If the market is as good as many claimed it to be, why are developers offering such schemes? When a property is sold, it is registered as a sale. But the absolute revenue of the unit is yet to be paid.

For easy calculation purposes, 10% of a RM500,000 property is RM50,000. If the first 10% is paid, this RM50,000 is registered as revenue by the developer, but in the sales column, a sale of RM500,000 is recorded. That is why the sales and revenue figures vary considerably.

If a developer allows a buyer to pay only 1% of the purchase price, this does not mean he “loses” that other 9%. He will get it back after a certain period of time. The same goes for the waiver of the stamp duty and legal fees. The developer has to pay the lawyers for services rendered. All these charges and fees are packaged into the deal which the buyer will have to bear in due time. In this case, later rather than sooner.

Developers are offering such attractive terms in order to make a sale. Many of these schemes are offered in condominium projects because there is generally a glut in this segment. While such schemes may attract genuine buyers who need a roof over their heads and who are thankful that they can defer payment, it also attracts those who have no problem forking out that 1% downpayment and take a gamble that they will be able to offload it when the project is completed.

If one were to drive around certain parts of the Klang Valley today, there are some completed high-rise with large mobile numbers plastered on windows. It may not be so easy to offload units when there are so many of them.

What is noticeably absent, and which many would like to see are more launches of landed housing. But this is unlikely to happen. Only the secondary market is offering landed units, which may explain to a certain degree why the secondary market was rather robust last year. It applies not only for the Klang Valley, but for Penang as well and is a reflection of strong domestic demand despite the many negative predictions for this year.

When a developer considers a piece of land, he thinks of how much he can make from it. If he were to build a condominium and throw in various facilities, he can sell more houses than if he were to build landed units. That is why most of the launches today are high-rise projects, be it condominiums or serviced apartments.

Developers are also limited by what they have. Increasinlgy, land in city centres and popular areas are getting smaller. Which explains why in highly dense areas, condominium projects continue to be sprout up in the most congested of areas.

The development of landed units can only take place when there is large tracts of land, which also explains why the big boys like Mah Sing and SP Setia are venturing further away from city centres.

The other obvious factor in today's launches are the size and price of the condominium units. Most of the units are small. Studio apartments may be in the 500 sq ft range or thereabouts while those targeted at families may be three-bedroom units with built-up areas of 1,200 sq ft onwards. Most of the launches today are priced close to RM700,000 onwards. On a per sq ft basis, the price is still going up, whether it is a Petaling Jaya address or a Bukit Jalil one.

So, while sales volumes may stagnate in newly-launched projects (which explains why developers are offering units for sale with a 1% downpayment), on a per sq ft basis, prices does not seem to be stabilising. Developers are trying to maintain affordability by having smaller units, deferring payment and leveraging on low interest rates.

Assistant news editor Thean Lee Cheng is glad that Bank Negara is monitoring the household debt and lending in the property sector closely as this year promises to be an exciting one.

Related posts:
Secondary property market set to soar 
The fear factor in property 
Malaysian High-end property expected slower 
Property developers – the real landlords!

Secondary property market set to soar

By DAVID TAN davidtan@thestar.com.my

THE sub-sale prices of landed property in the prime locations of Seberang Prai are expected to increase by 5% to 10% this year.

Henry Butcher (Seberang Prai) senior manager Fook Tone Huat said this was because there was stronger demand for landed property in the secondary market.

“In the secondary market, a terrace property in prime locations such as Bukit Mertajam, Simpang Ampat and Jalan Raja Uda is priced around RM385,000 now, about 10% higher than a year ago but relatively reasonable,” Fook said.

The stricter conditions of bank lending, a weak global economy and a higher pricing of new landed property would see transactions in Seberang Prai rising only slightly in 2012 over 2011.

Fook said: “However, we expect more property transactions in the sub-sales market due to the attractive prices,” he said in an interview.

He added that last year, there were about 18,000 transactions of new and old property in Seberang Prai. About 50% of the transactions were for new property, while the sub-sales comprised about 30%, he said.

Fook said that in general, the Seberang Prai property market for 2012 would be challenging in view of the uncertainty in the global economy and the new set of financing ruling imposed by Bank Negara.

“The take-up rate for those high-end categories is expected to gradually slow down but for those in the medium categories, the sales rate should still maintain,” he said.

“Prices would still be on the upward trend for landed houses priced below RM500,000 and for development land in the prime areas, but the rate would be at a slower pace.

“For those high-end property, prices are expected to be flat. Nevertheless, property prices are not expected to decline in view of the relatively resilient domestic economy and the long-term impact from the new economic transformation programmes,” he said.

Related post:
The fear factor in property

Lawyers must constantly improve skills

By Roger Tan

The Bar Council will be advocating the CPD scheme at the 66th annual general meeting of the Malaysian Bar, and we, as lawyers, must not be averse to change.  

TOMORROW at the 66th annual general meeting of the Malaysian Bar, the Bar Council will attempt for the fourth time, after failing in 2003, 2005 and 2006, to introduce a mandatory Continuing Professional Development (CPD) scheme for all practising lawyers and pupils in Peninsular Malaysia.

Under the proposed CPD scheme, a lawyer will have to chalk up 16 CPD hours or points in each 24-month cycle commencing July 1.

A pupil, on the other hand, has to accumulate eight CPD hours during his nine months of pupillage 
(training). The CPD points can be earned from participating in a variety of CPD activities - ranging from attending courses and seminars, lecturing, writing law books and articles (such as this I hope) to attending Bar’s general meetings and activities in accordance with a set of CPD Guidelines.

This scheme will be implemented on a voluntary basis for the first two years. After that, failure to accumulate the requisite CPD points within the stipulated period may result in the lawyer not being able to renew his practising certificate for the following year and the pupil not being able to be admitted to the Bar.

In addition to this, the non-CPD compliant lawyer may also face disciplinary proceedings as this may be tantamount to a “misconduct” within the meaning of section 94(3)(k) of the Legal Profession Act 1976 (LPA).

It appears that the main reason why the Bar Council is advocating the CPD scheme is that other Malaysian professionals like architects, engineers, company secretaries and accountants as well as other major legal jurisdictions like Australia, Britain, Hong Kong, Ireland, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Singapore, South Africa and the United States all have a mandatory CPD scheme.

However, to me, there must first be in place a proper legal framework and infrastructure for implementing the CPD scheme before it is made mandatory. Perhaps, the Bar Council can successfully come to grips with these matters in a matter of two years.

In this respect, we have much to learn from Singapore how it prepares the legal profession there for the CPD scheme which is expected to be fully implemented by April.

Its CPD scheme will be administered by the Singapore Institute of Legal Education (SILE). No lawyer will be exempted as of right from the scheme, but those who seek exclusion from it may apply to a Waivers Committee established under the SILE.

For this purpose, the Legal Profession Act of Singapore (SLPA) was amended. Section 10(2)(i) of SLPA empowers the Board of Directors of SILE, after consulting the Singapore Minister of Law and Council of the Law Society, to make rules to “prescribe the requirements relating to continuing professional development that must be satisfied by advocates and solicitors … and the measures which may be taken to verify whether those requirements have been complied with and to enforce compliance with those requirements.”

Currently, our LPA does not have a similar provision, albeit it can be argued that such rules can still be made under section 77(1) LPA with the approval of the Attorney General.

Further, if Sections 32 and 10 of the LPA are not respectively amended, it may be unlawful for the Bar Council to deny a lawyer his practising certificate or prevent a pupil from being admitted to the Bar for non-compliance with the CPD Guidelines.

Further, it is arguable whether a resolution of the Bar of this nature can be treated as ‘law’ within the meaning of Article 5 of the Federal Constitution which provides that no one should be deprived of his life (which our courts have interpreted to include livelihood) save in accordance with the ‘law’.

In any event, it is hoped that before the CPD scheme is made mandatory, the Bar Council will resolve these issues as well as consider the idea of incorporating a special purpose vehicle wholly owned by the Malaysian Bar to administer the CPD scheme.

Apart from the above reservations, I would declare my support for a mandatory CPD scheme. In coming to my decision, I find support in the words of Singapore Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong and the then Law Society vice president Wong Meng Meng spoken on May 29, 2010 at a ceremony admitting 248 new lawyers to the Singapore Bar.

“The law is a profession of life-long learning and the best lawyers are those who learn all the time. Unless you work at it continually, it may still not be very much at the end of your career. A lawyer can never truthfully say that he has learnt enough, and the day he says that is the day he should retire from practice,” Chan said.

“If a lawyer thinks that he has absolutely not enough to learn then that is the beginning of his downfall. And that is also part and parcel of arrogance,” added Wong.

Of course, there are various opposing views to making the CPD scheme mandatory, for example, that there should be no interference with a professional’s independence and neither should they be forced and treated like children. Life-long learning is a personal choice and if the lazy and egotistic ones do not improve themselves, they will soon be consumed by market forces. In other words, one can lead a horse to water but one cannot make it drink! The scheme is introduced essentially to address the problem with poor attendance at the Bar’s annual general meetings and law seminars and conferences.

Also, compelling lawyers to attend courses cannot guarantee that they will be attentive during the entire exercise. The CPD points can be easily manipulated as there is no effective mechanism to ensure that members who sign up for the relevant CPD activities will stay on until completion. For practitioners from small firms and in remote areas, they are genuinely concerned about the costs involved and the accessibility to CPD activities in and near the areas where they practise. Most of all, it is not fair to say that those who are against CPD are not for continuing professional development when the whole scheme has not been thought through carefully.

Some of the above views are not without basis. But they are not new. The list will go on for those who are just not interested in it. They had all been employed in the last three mentioned annual general meetings to shoot down this proposed scheme. Of course, in the light of the last three unsuccessful attempts, had the Bar Council gone ahead to legislate and introduce it without first reverting to the members, the entire Council will most likely be hauled up to answer a motion of no confidence in an extraordinary general meeting.

But that should not mean that this time we should resign to fatalism as if we are flogging a dead horse simply because a voluntary scheme would never work. We must not be averse to change and must have the courage to show that we can self-regulate in our interest as well as in the public interest. To my mind, acquiring knowledge is just like drinking water. No doubt, there are bound to be teething problems in its initial implementation, but unless we bite the bullet and go ahead with it, we would never to able to realise its potential benefits.

In fact, this minimal means of maintaining and improving lawyering skills is hardly a painful process. In Singapore, in addition to meeting the requirement of CPD, a lawyer who now intends to practise as a sole proprietor or a partner of a law firm must also successfully complete the Legal Practice Management Course conducted by the Law Society. Section 75C of SLPA also states that only a lawyer or a legal officer of more than three years of experience is allowed to set up or join a law practice as a sole proprietor or a partner. Similarly, in most other jurisdictions, all new law graduates are also required to sit and pass a common Bar examination.

Favouring a mandatory scheme will show that we lawyers are committed to maintain and remain professionally competent in the public interest.

I am sure experience tells us if it is to be left to the individuals to undertake continuing professional development, little will be done. There is also no point to bemoan the declining quality of new entrants to the legal profession if we the current practitioners do not lead the way in raising the bar towards excellence.

It is for this same reason that we say lawyers practise law because we can never be perfect in it, and we have to keep on practising with the hope that someday we will become perfect in what we practise. Hopefully, that day will be day when we retire from law practice.

That said, the biggest concern now is actually how many lawyers will bother to turn up for the meeting tomorrow. With the 2006 amendment to the LPA, the quorum is now set at 500 out of 14,000 lawyers. It is anticipated that not more than 1,000 will attend, and by the time the vote is taken on the motion, there will probably be not more than three to four hundred lawyers left to make a decision that will affect all these 14,000 learned lives.

In those years before 2006 when it was mandatory to meet the high quorum requirement without which the new Council could not be formed to issue practising certificates, thousands of lawyers would somehow with the fine spirit of camaraderie make an effort to meet this mandatory requirement. But tomorrow, when attendance is almost entirely voluntary, will tell whether this motion will be killed for the fourth time or carried for the very first time. Let us hope that the insouciance and ‘tidak-apa’ attitude of majority of members of this honourable profession will not once again take the blame.

Finally, may all lawyers draw wisdom from these inspirational words of Maimonides (1135-1204) in the Daily Prayer of a Physician before Visiting a Sick Man: “When wiser men teach me, let me be humble to learn; for the mind of man is so puny, and the art of healing is so vast … May there never rise in me the notion that I know enough, but give me strength and leisure and zeal to enlarge my knowledge. Our work is great and the mind of men presses forward forever.”

*The writer is a former member of the Malaysian Bar Council.