The recognition of the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC) for entry into public universities has become a hotly debated topic in recent weeks.
Commentary appears to have intensified following the poor showing of a political party in a recent state election.
Whether there is any direct connection is mere conjecture.
Perhaps the winds are simply blowing in the same direction, reigniting passions to resolve past agendas that have been left dormant.
Some opinions carry racially motivated undertones.
This is disheartening, given our 68 years of independence, built on the premise of three major races and other smaller groups coming together to form a unified nation.
Other views, expressed rationally, highlight the global rise of Mandarin, China’s emergence as a political and economic superpower, and, closer to home, the potential loss of talent to other countries.
This column will not rehash the merits or drawbacks of the UEC.
Suffice to say that it stands on par with other academic qualifications, including Cambridge A-levels, matriculation, and foundation programmes offered in Malaysia and abroad.
In Malaysia, however, where the Chinese population is sizeable, the UEC carries a racial slant.
Mandarin serves as the lingua franca for certain segments of this community, and preserving the language inevitably evokes strong emotional attachments.
The Federal Constitution does not prohibit education in Mandarin.
Chinese-medium schools have always been free to operate without government interference, a policy formalised in 1961 when a Chinese education group “liberated” itself from the national education system.
By definition, the national education policy did not prioritise Mandarin instruction, but it also did not obstruct those who chose it.
Sixty-four years later, a robust Mandarin-based education system runs in parallel with the national curriculum.
Private universities accept the UEC for tertiary entry, and state-run universities in East Malaysia do the same.
So why the obsession with public university entry and public-sector employment?
It is difficult to fathom. Perhaps a political stunt to attract votes?
Already, admission to public universities is challenging: some students enter via the matriculation track, while others rely on STPM or A-levels.
All are part of the national education policy. Now, proponents want to fold another cohort — one that has historically chosen a separate, private Mandarin-based path — into the mix.
Whether Mandarin — or Tamil, spoken by another community — is a global language is irrelevant.
Ultimately, politicians are fanning the flames.
Vote-bait tactics are at play, suggesting that a race-based party can achieve what it could not in government, simply by being elected.
This mirrors other controversial strategies used to attract votes, such as in the Teoh Beng Hock case.
Short-term political games have already caused harm, exemplified by the scrapping of GST and the implementation of the less effective SST, along with the complications of changing e-invoicing thresholds.
UEC proponents chose their path in 1961.
The focus now should be on streamlining public university admissions and placing matriculation, A-levels, and other qualifications on an equal footing.
Political parties pursuing short-term, racially charged agendas are detrimental to the nation, particularly those claiming to be non-race-based.
Flogging the UEC is self-defeating.
The prime minister is to be commended for taking a firm stance in the interest of all Malaysians.
The nation has far more pressing matters to address and should not be distracted by the theatrics of a minority.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.