_______________
Media Statement
by Dr Tan Seng Giaw
__________________

(Kuala Lumpur, Tuesday) : I call on the National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) to improve its administration and enforcement, so that it will be able to play a more efficient part in higher education.

PTPTN must enhance the coordination with the Inland Revenue Board. Many had hoped that the board would be able to collect with ease the payments from the borrowers who have graduated from institutes of higher learning.

I made the call while taking part in the debate on the bill to amend the PTPTN Act in Parliament on 7 May, 2007.

This bill seeks to amend a few clauses such as to change the memberships of the Board of Management, to receive deposits from a Malaysian citizen and, most importantly, to introduce a new section 22A into Act 566 to empower the Chief Executive to issue certificate to the Inspector General of Police or the Director General of Immigration to prevent any recipient student from leaving Malaysia in certain circumstances especially when an educational loan is not paid or in arrears.

On principles, I agree with the Higher Education Minister Dato' Mustapa Mohamed concerning the stricter action against borrowers who do not pay their debts. We cannot entertain graduates who are not grateful for the loans.

[PTPTN action must be based on compassion and humanitarianism towards those borrowers who are genuinely poor. Can a really poor person afford to go overseas, unless he or she has financial help? Will he or she be ready to pay back in instalments of RM50 or RM100 a month?]

Many MPs took part in the debate on the bill. Although they have differing views, I am pleased that they pay attention to higher education.

On 8 April, 2007, the media reported that the total debts of recipients of loans from PTPTN, Public Service Department and Mara were RM12.5 billion. The minister said that until 31 March, 2007, the debts that should have been collected by PTPTN were RM1.37 billion, involving 438,775 recipients. At the same time, PTPTN had filed summonses in court against 395 defaulters.

It is reported that over 75 graduates of Universiti Tun Abdul Razak (Unitar) complained that they were asked to pay back the loans by PTPTN. [Dato' Mustapa satated that PTPTN sent the money to Unitar, but an investigation had shown that it was not given to the graduates. The university had returned the money to PTPTN.]

It is necessary to streamline PTPTN administration and to improve its enforcement. Although it is reasonable to learn from New Zealand and Australia that had a longer history of student loans, we have to be careful. The conditions in Malaysia are different from those in the two countries. For example, New Zealand has a population not more than 6 million, whereas Malaysia has 26 million.  Misalnya, New Zealand mempunyai kependudukan tak sampai 6 juta, berbanding dengan 26 juta di Malaysia. Kedua-dua negara
tersebut berjaya mengutip balik lebih 80% daripada jumlah hutangnya.

Kita menumpukan kepada Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negara untuk mengutip balik ansuran pinjaman penerima. Di New Zealand, cara ini berkesan. Tetapi di Malaysia, penyelarasan di antara PTPTN dengan lembaga ini mestilah diperbaiki.

Para pemohon untuk pinjaman PTPTN sering meminta ahli parlimen menjadi saksi. Saya setuju dengan syaratnya bahawa mereka membayar balik kelak.

Dengan langkah-langkah tersebut PTPTN boleh memainkan peranan yang lebih berkesan di masa depan.

(YB Dato' Mustapa mengakui bahawa adanya kelemahan-kelemahan pentadbiran dan penguatkuasaan PTPTN. Setakat ini, 61,016 surat peringatan dan 17,382 surat permintaan dikirimkan kepada para peminjam yang ingkar, tetapi hanya 4% yang menjawab.

YB Menteri memberi jaminan bahawa PTPTN akan mengambil 11 tindakan sebelum pasport penerima akan ditahan. Hanya selepas semua tindakan diambil, barulah tindakan rampasan pasport diambil sebagai tindakan yang terakhir.)

(8/5/2007)