DAP calls on Cabinet to present White Paper why it has decided against  proposal to raise retirement age of civil servants, making public the  PSD study and to welcome a public discussion as to whether there should be an immediate  Cabinet reconsideration

---

Media Statement
by Lim Kit Siang 

---

This Cabinet decision is most disappointing as  not in keeping with changing times or reflective of a millennium mentality.

The  Barisan Alternative in its common manifesto, Towards A Just Malaysia, had proposed increasing the retirement age to 60 years for the public sector consistent with the improvement of health and  life span.

In April 1998, the Public Services Department had agreed to study the proposal by Cuepacs to extend the retirement age of civil servants to 58.

The arguments for raising  the retirement age of civil servants are:
 

• the present retirement age of 55 is relatively a young age and the experience of the officers should not go to waste and they should be retained for a longer period.
• a better life expectancy (72 years for women and 69 for men) and improved  health facilities available allowed employees in general to work beyond 55.   At 55 years, people are not only physically fit and mentally alert but are at the prime of their  working lives.
• the retirement age for civil servants in most other countries had been increased in the past decade. Civil servants in Scandinavian  countries retire at 67, and at 62 in the United States. The  retirement age in Asian countries have also been raised: Singapore (62), Thailand (60) and India (58).
• the retirement age of 55 was introduced in the colonial times by the British in the 1950s.
• Ever since independence, the Constitution provides that the compulsory retirement age for judges is 65. If judges can function effectively up to the age of 65 there is no reason why civil servants cannot do so up to the age of 60.

It is clear from the timing of the announcement on the decision to reject the CUEPACS proposal for raising the retirement age that this is one of the decisions which had been taken by the new Cabinet after the tenth general election on Nov. 29, 1999.

Were all the Cabinet Ministers fully briefed of the pros and cons of the CUEPACs proposal, when was the decision taken by the Cabinet and was there a full and extensive discussion in the Cabinet before a decision was taken. Or did the Cabinet just rubber-stamp the proposal from PSD with no or at most perfunctory discussion?

Malaysians are entitled to know answers to these questions for in the new millennium, the people expect higher standards of Ministerial and Parliamentary performances and accountability.

There should have been an extensive public consultation process before the Cabinet took a decision to reject the CUEPACS proposal as it affects not only the civil service but all Malaysians as well.

The civil service and the public are entitled to know the reasons for the Cabinet decision and the Public Services Department study leading to the Cabinet decision should be made public and subject of public consultation, discussion and debate.

For this reason, I call on the Cabinet to present a White Paper why it has rejected CUEPACS proposal to raise retirement age of civil servants, including making public the PSD study, and to welcome public discussion  as to whether the Cabinet should immediatey review and reconsider its decision.
 
The public discussion should also consider whether the proposal that  heads of department be given powers to  recommend staff whose services can be extended beyond 55, with a maximum extension of three years based on performance and need, is satisfactory and acceptable or is  likely to be open to abuses and arbitrary decision-making process.

(10/1/2000)