The NEP and Corruption: Why Malaysia is Lagging Behind

By Koon Yew Yin | 13th April 2013

My object in writing this is to support Professor Dato Dr. Woo Wing Thye’s lecture on 12th April in Syuen Hotel, Ipoh.  In his lecture he listed 5 root causes for our poor performance in comparison with South Korea and Taiwan.

Prof. Woo, possibly because of the election fever, tried to be politically correct and made little mention of the New Economic Policy role in our failure to keep up with our neighbours.  In fact it is not only Prof. Woo who is silent on the NEP – most analysts appear to have sidelined this policy in the election debate to date.

 This is a mistake as the real policy culprit explaining our failure to devlop as quickly as our neighbours (see table attached) is the New Economic Policy (NEP) and the abuse of power in the B.N. Government’s implimentation. As a result, our neighbours are doing much better than us in spite of the fact that they all did not have the natural resources such as oil and gas.

The culture of corruption in this country is systemic and built into the policy framework of the NEP. Over the years, this ethnic-based policy has been abused to benefit only a select group of Bumiputera, although the policy was originally targeted at helping the larger community of poorer Bumiputera. Despite the government’s strong defence of the NEP and its attempt to demonise those who are critical of it, no less an authoritative source than the government appointed National Economic Advisory Council has admitted that although ethnic-based economic policies have worked by reducing poverty and addressing interethnic economic imbalances, its “implementation has also increasingly and inadvertently raised the cost of doing business due to rent-seeking, patronage and often opaque government procurement,” which “has engendered corruption.”

This analysis is the same as the one that I have been making in my public writings and speeches. In the profession where I have worked for many years, a system where contractors get jobs because of their ethnicity will invariably breed a culture of ethnic-based cronyism and inefficiency.

For example, IJM Corporation Bhd of which I was one of the founders, did most of their highway contracts as sub-contractors to some Bumiputera Concessionaires. Yet IJM could win a few highways toll concessions on open competitive tenders in India.  It is ironical for IJM with a market capitalisation of more than 7 billion ringgit to work primarily as a sub- contractor in our own country.

The same applies in the procurement policies of Petronas.  Because of this race based requirement, contracts and concessions were awarded to Bumiputeras who do not have the expertise to carry out and complete the projects. As a result project costs balloon due to the number of layers of sub-contractors required to complete the job.

The percentage mark-ups imposed by each layer are, in essence, a leakage in itself. This has created an underground economy of rent-seekers, which the government has finally acknowledged. However, it still refuses to discuss this matter in an open and transparent manner or seek solutions to it.

Hence, it is not surprising that the culture of corruption has become the norm rather than the exception. Malaysians are accustomed to the culture of having to pay a sum of money (or in kind) to complete a certain transaction, whether in business or in other sectors. Large-scale corruption as mentioned above is rarely caught by the authorities. The Malaysian Anti- Corruption Commission (MACC) prefers to target lower-level corruption and harass opposition members instead of going after the big fishes which enjoy immunity because of their political affiliation with the ruling elite.

It is frustrating for many Malaysians that the BN government has not learnt from the past mistakes and persist in making decisions that bleed the nation of increasingly scarce resources.  Hopefully the Pakatan Rakyat will do better.  For them to get the country out if its deep hole, they must recognise that the NEP is a crucial road block in our road map to development that must be redressed immediately. We cannot become a fully developed nation by even the 22nd century let alone 2020 if the NEP remains the main policy framework , corruption continues on the same scale and if corrupt leaders keep abusing their powers for self-gain.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 13 April 2013, 10:20 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Economics
,
NEP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


21-Day Countdown to 13GE Polling Day – Attorney-General Gani Patail given opportunity to arrest and charge Mahathir for sedition and criminal defamation before I instruct my lawyers to institute legal proceedings against Mahathir for defamation in connection with his blog on “Gelang Patah”

As the former DAP MP for Segambut Lim Lip Eng has lodged a police report this morning in Kuala Lumpur against the former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad for sedition and criminal defamation, I will give the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail the opportunity to arrest and charge Mahathir for sedition and criminal defamation before I instruct my lawyers to institute legal proceedings against Mahathir for defamation in connection with his blog, “Gelang Patah” last Thursday, 11th April 2013.

I had given Mahathir two opportunities to withdraw and apologise for his chauvinistic and seditious blog which made irresponsible and baseless attacks on my reputation and character or face legal action for defamation for his lies and falsehoods, but the former Prime Minister had been totally unmoved and unrepentant.

Mahathir had disgraced and dishonoured the office of the former Prime Minister, which is provided by Parliament every year with a princely allocation from the annual Federal Government budget for its upkeep, by spewing downright lies and falsehoods to make the 13th General Elections the dirtiest in the the nation’s history which is most unworthy and unfitting for a former Prime Minister whose living and maintenance expenses is billed to the public purse.

Two days ago, the latest “black operation” in the 13GE surfaced with the appearance of a sex video purportedly involving the PAS Secretry-General Mustapha Ali, which has been categorically denied by Mustafa who said that UMNO was desperate enough to lie in order to drop him from the country’s arena.

It is on public record that the previous occasion when the country’s general elections plummetted to its lowest depths for being the dirtiest election campaign in the nation’s history was under Mahathir’s premiership in 1990, when Barisan Nasional faced its first serious challenge from two political coalitions, Gagasan Rakyat and Angkatan Perpaduan Ummah (APU) led by Semangat 46, DAP and PAS.

Two dirty tricks were played by UMNO/BN in the 1990 general election campaign from its armoury of the politics of fear and blackmail to incite racial sentiments with highly inflammatory propaganda based on lies and falsehoods, viz:

Firstly, the depiction of Semangat 46 President, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah on radio, television and the printed media as having sold out Malay honour and race and betrayed Islam by showing him with a Kadazan headgear alleging that it bore the symbol of the cross – as final and ultimate proof that Tengku Razaleigh had sold out Islam to Christianity in Sabah.

In fact, the so-called cross on the Kadazan headgear is tapioca shoot (pucuk ubi) and most headgears of this sort are made by the Bajau community which is largely Muslim. A few days before Tengku Razaleigh’s visit to Sabah in the 1990 GE, Dr. Mahathir had worn the same Kadazan headgear with the so-called cross when visiting Sabah.

Secondly, full-page advertisements in the mainstream media to create fear and panic among voters, with the full-page advertisement in Utusan Malaysia under the heading “Sokong Membawa Rebah” while the Nanyang Siang Pao advert carried the heading “Recollection of History” – with both carrying the same picture depicting bloodshed, violence, arson and carnage.

The visual impact of the picture was manyfold greater than the wordings under the picture, which immediately conveyed the message that if the Barisan Nasional and UMNO lost in the 1990 general elections, there would be another May 13 of bloodshed, violence, arson and carnage.

I remember asking Mahathir during the first Parliamentary debate after the 1990 GE whether he had given the “green light” for these two despicable and deplorable UMNO/BN “dirty tricks” in the 1990 GE.

Now, I am more than convinced that Mahathir was behind these two “dirty tricks” when he could now concoct such lies and falsehoods in his blog on “Gelang Patah” which among other things, accused me of wanting to contest in Gelang Patah because

I want the Chinese in Gelang Patah and Johor to “reject working together and sharing with the Malays”;

urge the Chinese in Johor “to dislike and hate the Malays” to create “conflict and antagonism between the races”;

create “an unhealthy racial confrontation” between the Malays and Chinese in Johor, which will be “disruptive and will not be conducive to the development of Malaysia”.

I reiterate that all these three allegations by Mahathir are downright lies and falsehoods, which I had never uttered in Gelang Patah and Johore since the announcement on March 18 that I would be contesting in Gelang Patah, and that I had never uttered such scurrilous lies and falsehoods in my 47 years in politics, as they run counter to the grain of  my political beliefs fostering greater inter-racial co-operation to build a united Malaysian nation.

Sections 499 and 500 of the Penal Code on criminal defamation states:

Defamation

499. Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read or by signs, or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person, intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.

Punishment for defamation

500. Whoever defames another shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both.

I await action by the Police and the Attorney-General.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 14 April 2013, 12:51 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Law & Order
,
Mahathir
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Chance for change? The possibility is there

By
Bridget Welsh
 | 8:40AM Apr 13, 2013

Malaysiakini

GE13 SPECIAL Well, the dates have finally been set and Malaysia heads towards the most competitive electoral contest in the nation’s history. It is important to step back and look at how and why GE13 is competitive.

The broad reason is clear: this election offers the possibility of an electoral transition of power. More power is in the hands of ordinary Malaysians than ever before. The underlying dynamics that might make this change happen however, are more obscure.

This article – as part of a special series of pieces on the polls – maps the contest nationally and draws attention to fundamental shifts that are making the May polls historic, whatever the outcome.

The grey seats

The fierceness of the contest is evident in the numbers of seats that are “grey” – seats that can go either way.

Looking at a combination of factors in individual seats, the patterns of margin of victory and history of vote swing, the changing number and composition of voters, the candidate choices and infighting as well as macro national and state shifts in voting behaviour drawn from my fieldwork, I currently estimate that 42 percent of the parliamentary seats nationally are ‘grey’.

The BN can securely hold onto 32 percent of the total of 222 seats, while the opposition has the other 26 percent in the bag. We are looking at a contest where the results cannot be predicted with certainty and where multiple factors will affect the results in the remaining 23 days before polling. The situation is indeed fluid, and either side can win power.

There are two important observations to make about these grey seats. The first is that many of the seats for the opposition are not secure, especially in places such as Perak, Kedah and to a lesser extent, Selangor.

The reasons have to do with the fact that many of the opposition victories were with slim margins in 2008, such as Sibu and Sungai Siput. The other decisive factor is that opposition seats disproportionately have a large number of new and postal voters, some of these in questionable proportions.

The classic example is Lembah Pantai, a parliamentary constituency in Kuala Lumpur of 72,000 voters – it has a whopping 18,000 new voters.

The second and perhaps most important observation is that over the past few years the overwhelming majority of grey seats have come from the BN base, including that of Umno.

As Najib Razak waited (and waited) to call the polls, he has unwittingly increased the electoral competitiveness and given the opposition more chances to gain seats. Indeed, he is facing a case of diminishing returns.

Had Najib opted to hold the election in November 2011, he would have walked into a more favourable environment. Now, he and the BN coalition face serious fights everywhere.

New frontiers, old stomping grounds

Make no bones about it, the BN holds a structural advantage in these polls. This advantage is shaped by incumbency, the unevenness of the electoral field, legitimate concerns about electoral irregularities and dominance of state resources, especially money.

How much of an advantage these are will be determined in the days ahead. What distinguishes GE13 from earlier polls however, is the broadening of the national contest, outside of the traditional competitive areas.

The distribution of these ‘grey’ seats varies across the country, as shown in the table below. More than a third of the competitive seats are in the ‘fixed deposit’ states – Sarawak, Johor and Sabah. The latter has mistakenly been categorised as secure for the BN, but has a history of risk-taking and voting for alternatives.

What makes this campaign interesting in Sabah, among the many factors at play, is that at question is whether Sabahans will continue to accept the means the incumbent government has chosen to keep Sabah in their political orbit, the dominance of Umno and weakening of the voices of non-Malay bumiputera voters and the use of illegal immigrants, money and vote-buying to shore up their position. These issues are very much being tested.

In neighbouring Sarawak, concerns over corruption may be centre stage with the video from Global Witness, but behind the scenes there are increasing concerns with the rights of the Dayaks over land, governance and representation which make the election more open.

Beyond the dynamics in East Malaysia, the increased competitiveness nationally comes in the very seats the BN delineated as its secure seats – seats which are ethnicly mixed. The more mixed they are, the more likely they offer an option for change. The various ethnic groups in Malaysia will now collectively determine the nation’s path ahead.

A second observation is that the grey seats are all over the country, including in Najib’s home state of Pahang where problems in his own party, differences in the BN coalition over seats and a blossoming environmental movement have redefined loyalties. GE13 is truly about issues, with developments in each state affecting the outcome.

While there are indeed new political frontiers, what happens throughout Malaysia – including East Malaysia – will determine the results on May 5. Keep in mind we are talking about 35 seats changing hands for a new government. In other words, this involves a change of around 15 percent of Parliament and an average change in support of less than 10 percent nationally.

These gains are difficult given the constraints in the electoral process and sharp battle lines, but not completely outside the realm of the possible.

Redefined state-federal relations

The battleground is not just at the federal level. Of the 12 states going to the polls, seven of these could go either way. They are Kedah, Perlis, Negri Sembilan, Sabah, Selangor, Terengganu and Perak.

While the majority of these tilt toward BN, such as Terengganu, dynamics at the state level are fluid and changing. The BN has a chance of winning two states back – Kedah and Selangor – but at the same time, it is facing a possible loss of nine state governments. The balance of power in state governments has the potential to shift.

Whatever the result, there is a reality of increasing decentralisation of power. Since 2008, there has been more power in the hands of state governments. In Penang and Selangor, leaders have adopted new policy frameworks and individual states have been working to promote investment and growth through state government-led initiatives.

This election is a test of whether this trend will continue. Given the promises of greater resources to be placed in the power of individual states, in the promise of oil revenue for example, this election will set the course for further greater decision-making at the state level.

For ordinary voters, this means that the votes they cast for state assemblies are potentially as transformative as those at the national level.

The prospects of change underscore these polls. The words ‘transformation’ and ‘change’ are also framing this election.

Najib has systematically worked to cast his non-mandated government as one that offers the greater possibility of a different Malaysia. The irony in this messaging is stark, as a person who has been in the system for nearly 40 years keeps casting himself as an agent of change.

He has placed a high premium on voters to judge his mixed record of four years in office as ‘reform’ and at the same time accepting the idea that change can come from within the system.

The reason Najib has opted for this route is that he knows that the underlying driver in the last three elections has been the call for reform and a desire for a better Malaysia. This is high risk political messaging in that is assumes that voters can distinguish Najib from the system he has been an integral part of.

The opposition for its part has the ‘change’ momentum, but faces the challenge of clarifying what the reforms they will bring and whether they can work together to get them done.

Their biggest obstacle, however, is winning over those who are cautious about change and convincing voters to invest in a new path for the nation. As the election campaigning proceeds, the battle over ‘change’ will only intensify, and the numbers in the table above will shift.

Malaysians will ultimately decide the chances for change, but the political landscape shows that change is already shaping the campaign.

DR BRIDGET WELSH is associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University. She is travelling around Malaysia to provide her GE13 analyses exclusively to Malaysiakini. Bridget can be reached at
[email protected]
.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 14 April 2013, 11:06 am and is filed under
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Dr M should campaign honourably

 ― Ravinder Singh

The Malaysian Insider

April 13, 2013

APRIL 13 ― Dr Mahathir Mohamad is obviously very unhappy that Lim Kit Siang is contesting in Gelang Patah. That is his right: to be unhappy and say so.

In his recent write up on this, he says “when Kit Siang wins Gelang Patah” ― here, he is acknowledging that this candidate is going to win.

What is regretted is that Dr Mahathir then goes on to say that this candidate’s win would result in racial confrontation and “even if there will not be violent clashes as seen in many countries where people are divided by race or religion, but confrontation between the three major races in Malaysia will be disruptive and will not be conducive to the development of Malaysia.”

Instead of making such irresponsible statements that can give wrong ideas to some people, he should take the honourable way of neutralising this candidate’s chances of victory.

Dr Mahathir has volunteered to go to Kelantan and campaign for Ibrahim Ali. Why not take on this candidate in Gelang Patah by the horns?

Go and campaign against him using facts and figures to convince the electorate there that a vote for him would be a vote for the bad of the country. Show and explain, point by point, how this could happen (leaving race and religion out).

With his 22 years of experience as PM, Dr Mahathir should be able to argue his case hands down.

No one should play the race and religion card in campaigning for public support. Parliament must have considered very carefully when it drew up a whole chapter on OFFENCES RELATING TO RELIGION in the Penal Code (Chapter XV).

No one is above the law, and surely not the law makers themselves, past or present.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 14 April 2013, 2:18 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
DAP
,
Elections
,
Mahathir
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s general election:  A time of gifts

The benefits of incumbency versus the lure of the unknown

The Economist

Apr 13th 2013 | SINGAPORE |From the print edition

SINCE Malaysia’s independence from Britain in 1957, the main question answered by general elections has been the size of the government’s majority. The poll that the election commission this week announced would be held on May 5th, is the first the government faces a real possibility of losing. Even if it does not—and the odds must still be in its favour—the election is likely to have a profound impact on Malaysian politics.

The ruling coalition, Barisan Nasional, is dominated by the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), whose leader, Najib Razak, is prime minister. He has never led the party through an election, having taken over in 2009 after the humiliation of his predecessor, Abdullah Badawi, in the election the previous year. For the first time, Barisan lost the two-thirds parliamentary majority that enabled it to change the constitution. Ever since, the opposition Pakatan Rakyat, a three-party alliance, has sniffed power. Its most prominent figure, Anwar Ibrahim, was once in line to lead UMNO.

Helped by a strong economy, Mr Najib has been doling out goodies: cash handouts for poorer families; pay rises for civil servants; and promises of affordable housing and new highways. A lot is at stake: simultaneous assembly elections will be held in 12 of the 13 states. In 2008, five elected opposition administrations. More largesse is promised in Barisan’s manifesto. Since its own is equally open-handed, Pakatan accuses its opponents of plagiarism.

The shape of the constituencies gives greater weight to more conservative, pro-government voters in the countryside who are predominantly Malay. To gain a parliamentary majority, the opposition would need to win considerably more than half the popular vote. Accusations of gerrymandering and rigged voter lists are common. But both Mr Najib and Mr Anwar have promised to honour the result.

Pakatan complains Barisan is abusing the perks of office to help its campaign. It is true it has been in power so long that the dividing line between party and government has become blurred. In fact Pakatan’s whole campaign is an onslaught on UMNO for its corruption, which is exacerbated by affirmative-action policies to benefit the Malays and other “indigenous” groups over the Chinese minority (25% of the population) and ethnic Indians (8%). These policies have been debased into vehicles for patronage and cronyism. Mr Najib has chipped away at some Malay privileges, but the strength of UMNO’s right wing has stopped him abolishing them altogether.

Barisan includes ethnic-Indian and Chinese parties, but wracked by scandals, they seem likely to do badly. Pakatan allies Mr Anwar’s multiracial party with a Malay Islamic party and one dominated by Chinese. Whatever the outcome of the election, Barisan’s claim that it represents all of Malaysia’s ethnic groups may become hard to sustain.

If Mr Najib scrapes home, he could still face a challenge from within UMNO. Its right wing would want him out. As for Mr Anwar, he has said that defeat would mark the end of his political career. A controversial but charismatic figure, he has managed to keep his improbable alliance together, but has no obvious successor.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 14 April 2013, 10:46 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘Soi Lek a tiger or political eunuch?’

By
Ho Kin Chai
 | 11:50AM Apr 13, 2013

Malaysiakini

COMMENT Following its poor performance in the 2008 general election, MCA is at the crossroad – to take the bull (its rival) by the horns or sink into the road of oblivion.

The current MCA leadership, particularly president Dr Chua Soi Lek, has failed to seize this opportunity to take on Lim Kit Siang in Gelang Patah.

Lim (left) has taken a bold gamble by thrusting himself into the traditional BN and MCA stronghold.

Johor is the backyard of MCA which won seven out of eight parliamentary seats it contested in 2008.

The DAP wrested Bakri, causing a dent. As the MCA president, Chua should seize this golden opportunity to take up this challenge.

By not taking up the challenge, he was sending a negative signal to its senior partner, Umno, and the MCA candidates and general membership.

Being the MCA supremo, he must rise up to the occasion to give Lim the strongest possible resistance.

Chua was reported to have said that he was a winnable candidate.

It is obvious that Lim is trying to create a momentum in the Pakatan Rakyat’s quest to wrest Putrajaya.

The 2008 general election showed that Johor was the last bastion of Umno and BN in Peninsular Malaysia.

Lim’s coattail effect for DAP

This is not the first that Lim has made such a bold move. Previously, he had left his safe seats – Kota Melaka, Petaling Jaya – to make inroads for the DAP in Penang as well as in Perak.

In each case, he had created a coat-tail effect for the other DAP candidates.

It was also true that Lim was not invincible. He was defeated by Gan Boon Leong in a state seat in Melaka.

In Penang, he had mixed results in his quest to wrest the state government.

His greatest prize was defeating the sitting Chief Minister Lim Chong Eu in the latter’s stronghold.

He defeated Koh Tsu Koon (right) in Tanjong parliamentary seat.

Perhaps, the lowest ebb of his political career was losing both the state seat (to Koh Tsu Koon in Tanjong Bungah) and Bukit Bendera parliamentary (to Chia Kwang Chye) in the same general election in 1999.

Lim did not fade away. In 2004, he made a comeback by ousting the MCA incumbent Thong Fah Chong in Ipoh Timor and the coattail effect helped M Kulasegaran to defeat Ho Cheong Sin in Ipoh Barat.

At 72, one would have thought he would retire as MP for Ipoh Timor. But Lim appears to think he still has an unfinished task to complete.

Gelang Patah was an MCA stronghold held by Johor Wanita MCA chief deputy national vice-chairperson Tan Ah Eng, who is not seeking re-election.

Signal to the Chinese community

It would be a shame that no MCA strongman has the courage to face Lim in the MCA stronghold. It would be a mockery for MCA to get an Umno strongman to defend its own fortress.

What sort of signal the MCA would be sending to the Chinese community?

If the party needs the Umno to defend its stronghold, it undermines the raison d’etre of its existence.

It also becomes an irrelevant partner or liability to the BN just as Italy’s National Fascist Party leader Benito Mussolini’s inability to hold southern front for Hitler in World War II.

A contest between Johor caretaker Menteri Besar Abdul Ghani Othman (left) and Lim may carry an undesirable racial undertone.

The Chinese may view this as another attempt by Umno to interfere in the community’s democratic choice of its representative.

A defeat of Lim by Abdul Ghani will perhaps send him into political retirement in a glorious, if not dignified manner. It will further boost the image of the DAP as real champion of the Chinese community.

On the contrary, a defeat of Abdul Ghani by Lim will cause a big dent to the image and psyche of Umno – a very heavy price for Umno for pay.

To either man, it may not matter that much as they have reached the retirement age and they both can look back with pride as they have served their parties and the nation well.

HO KIN CHAI is a former journalist and lawyer. He is lecturing law and politics at a local university college.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 14 April 2013, 10:57 am and is filed under
Elections
,
MCA
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What will it be for BN — Ibrahim Ali or 1 Malaysia?

By Jahabar Sadiq

The Malaysian Insider

April 08, 2013

COMMENT

April 8 — The Barisan Nasional (BN) has unveiled a centrist manifesto that fits its 1 Malaysia philosophy but Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s endorsement of Datuk Ibrahim Ali as a coalition candidate would appear to be at odds with the concept.

The stout Perkasa chief has been anything but centrist or even 1 Malaysia in his approach to push for Malay rights at a time when BN chairman Datuk Seri Najib Razak has been advocating a gradual economic liberalisation and equity for Malaysians.

But why would the country’s longest-serving prime minister, who spoke in 1991 of a future Bangsa Malaysia plump, for an ethno-centric Ibrahim (picture), who ran on a PAS ticket in Election 2008 only to turn pro-Umno after winning the Pasir Mas seat?

“I hope BN will give Ibrahim Ali a spot. If he is made a candidate, I will go to Pasir Mas to campaign,” Dr Mahathir pledged over the weekend, adding: “If we have more individuals like Ibrahim Ali, Malaysia will be safe.”

Is Dr Mahathir promoting the Ibrahim Ali who threatened to burn Malay-language bibles? The Ibrahim Ali who wanted guaranteed Bumiputera involvement in infrastructure projects even after Putrajaya said it must be on merit.

How safe will Malaysia be with Ibrahim still in politics? Or is this a joke?

One thing can be said about Dr Mahathir. He backs his men. He backed Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik in his corruption trial. And he is now backing Ibrahim whom he once made a deputy minister in charge of law.

Dr Mahathir is also Perkasa’s patron. After all, Ibrahim has been the veteran politician’s attack man from the time he ended Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s political career in Umno and the government.

And Ibrahim could also be useful if the need arises to shake up the top Umno leadership in the event BN performs poorly in the closest election ever.

Both also share a dislike for Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Ibrahim left Umno after Abdullah became party president and prime minister. But Ibrahim has been in and out of political parties, earning the sobriquet “Katak” or frog.

But the simple fact is that both Dr Mahathir and Ibrahim probably resonate with old-style Umno members and voters, who believe in personalities not policies. And not with the new and younger voters who seek a better Malaysia through inclusiveness rather than exclusiveness.

BN will have to think long and deep about Dr Mahathir’s advice to consider giving Ibrahim a seat under its banner. Because Malaysia is made up of more than just the apparently 400,000-strong Perkasa seeking Malay rights already enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

Four years of 1 Malaysia has shown how much BN can gain by keeping to a moderate and centrist path. Any deviation to the fringes will lose them votes, despite the brimming ideas in their manifesto.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 14 April 2013, 6:47 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Elections
,
Mahathir
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


20-Day Countdown to 13GE Polling Day – Gelang Patah will be my “life-and-death” political battle as I will be fighting not just popular four-term Johore Mentri Besar, but the PM, Najib Razak, former longest-serving PM Mahathir and future PM hopeful Muhyiddin Yassin

Finally the die is cast. From all accounts, MCA has surrendered the Gelang Patah parliamentary seat to UMNO and the Barisan Nasional (BN) candidate will be the popular four-term Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman.

When I decided to leave the Ipoh Timor parliamentary seat where I had won with over 21,000-vote majority in the 2008 General Elections to contest in the BN fortress of Gelang Patah (which was won by BN with a 9,000-vote majority in 2008 and 31,666-vote majority in 2004) and which had never been won by the Opposition in the past 12 General Elections in 56 years, it was a high-risk decision.

But I was prepared to take the calculated risks for at least four reasons:

To target the six Parliamentary and 13 State Assembly seats in south Johore to pave the way for Pakatan Rakyat to Putrajaya in the 13GE. The six Parliamentary seats are Johor Bahru, Pasir Gudang, Tebrau, Gelang Patah, Kulai and Pulai. The 13 State Assembly seats are Stulang, Tanjong Puteri, Johore Jaya, Permas, Puteri Wangsa, Tiram, Skudai, Nusajaya, Pengkalan Rinting, Kempas, Senai, Bukit Batu and Bukit Permai.

Johor Baru is the only State capital which had been able to maintain UMNO/BN political hegemony since Merdeka in 1957, when other State Capitals and urban centres have come under strong Opposition/Pakatan Rakyat influence, namely Kuala Lumpur, Kajang, Ipoh, Klang, Subang Jaya, Kuching, Petaling Jaya, Seremban, George Town, Malacca, Kota Baru, Kota Kinabalu, Kuantan and Sungai Patani.

To target a total of 19 Parliamentary and 30 State Assembly seats in the State of Johor, including the six Parliamentary and 13 State Assembly seats in South Johore. The additional Parliamentary seats in the rest of Johor are Tanjong Piai, Kluang, Batu Pahat, Bakri, Labis, Segamat, Sekijang, Ledang, Muar, Ayer Hitam, Sri Gading, Simpang Rengam and Sembrong. The additional 17 State Assembly seats are Pekan Nenas, Mengkibol, Penggaram, Layang-Layang, Parit Yaani, Maharani, Gambir, Tenang and Pemanis.

This is to ensure that the 13GE will complete the partial “political tsunami” in the 2008 General Elections, which saw the fall of BN in five states and the deprivation of BN’s two-thirds parliamentary majority – propelling the Pakatan Rakyat to win power to form the new Federal Government in Putrajaya after the 13GE.

I am not claiming that Pakatan Rakyat can score a bullseye and win all the 19 Parliamentary and 30 State Assembly seats in Johore mentioned. In fact, if Pakatan Rakyat can achieve 50 per cent of this target, it is already a “phenomenal political revolution” in Johor, bearing in mind the arrogant boasts of Barisan Nasional leaders just five years ago before the 2008 general elections that they would ensure that Johore would become a “zero Opposition” state!

I am of course expecting hitting a more than 50% success for the PR target of 19 Parliamentary and 30 State Assembly seats in Johore in the 13GE.

In fact, it would be easier to achieve the objective of winning more than one-third of the Parliamentary seats in Johore and help propel Pakatan Rakyat to Putrajaya to form the new Federal Government than to win a simple majority in the State Assembly seats to form the next Johore State Government in the 13GE.

To end and transform the three BN “fixed deposit” states of Johor, Sabah and Sarawak as the new “fixed deposit” states of Pakatan Rakyat, as these three states hold the keys to Putrajaya in the 13GE.

In the 2008 General Elections, PR won 82 parliamentary seats while BN won 140 seats. If in the 13GE, PR can win at least 40% of the total of 83 parliamentary seats in these three states, i.e. 33 out of a total of 83 seats in Johore, Sabah and Sarawak, PR would have exceeded the magic number of 112 for a simple majority of the 222 parliamentary seats.

To ensure that Pakatan Rakyat can win with a good and comfortable majority by winning at least 125 parliamentary seats (i.e. with a majority of 28), comprising say 45 seats for PKR, 40 seats for DAP and PAS by targeting a total of 25 parliamentary seats in the rest of the states which BN had won with less than 55% of the popular vote, seats like Arau in Perlis, Alor Setar in Kedah, Kuala Nerus in Terengganu; Larut, Kuala Kangsar, Kampar and Lumut In Perak; Bentong, Raub and Jerantut in Pahang, Sabak Bernam and Pandan in Selangor; Rembau in Negri Sembilan and Bukit Katil in Malacca.

These seats are already marginal seats to begin with. Many of these seats have experienced a sizable increase in the number of new voters, many of whom are younger voters who are more attracted to Pakatan’s hope for the future than to be threatened by BN’s scaremongering references to the past.

I had expected to meet a MCA “big gun” in Gelang Patah ( and who could compare with MCA President Datuk Seri Dr.  Chua Soi Lek as a MCA “big gun” with his unforgettable boast of “I consider myself a winnable candidate anywhere I go” during the MCA 58th annual general assembly in Kuala Lumpur on Oct. 1, 2011”) and had not expected to meet any UMNO “big gun” at all.

This is because Gelang Patah had been a historic MCA fortress, with a voter racial make-up of 53 per cent Chinese, 34 per cent Malay and 12 per cent Indian voters.

If MCA has to surrender to UMNO an electoral constituency where there  is a majority 53% Chinese voters, then MCA will have to surrender to UMNO another 25 parliamentary seats and 33 State Assembly seats with a Chinese voter percentage of less than 52%!

These 25 parliamentary and 33 State Assembly seats which MCA will have to surrender to UMNO are:

MCA Seats Less than 52% Chinese voters

25 parliament seats 52% Chinese or less (other than Gelang Patah)

                    NEGERI

                    PARLIAMENT CODE

                    PARLIAMENT NAME

                    MALAY%

                    CHINESE%

                    INDIAN%

                    OTHERS%

                    KEDAH

                    P9

                    ALOR STAR

                    61.2%

                    33.6%

                    4.6%

                    0.5%

                    KEDAH

                    P17

                    PADANG SERAI

                    55.5%

                    21.4%

                    22.5%

                    0.5%

                    PULAU PINANG

                    P52

                    BAYAN BARU

                    39.1%

                    49.0%

                    10.9%

                    1.0%

                    PERAK

                    P71

                    GOPENG

                    42.8%

                    46.0%

                    8.8%

                    2.4%

                    PERAK

                    P74

                    LUMUT

                    51.1%

                    35.4%

                    12.0%

                    1.5%

                    PERAK

                    P77

                    TANJONG MALIM

                    53.3%

                    27.2%

                    13.9%

                    5.5%

                    PAHANG

                    P80

                    RAUB

                    49.7%

                    40.3%

                    6.4%

                    3.5%

                    PAHANG

                    P83

                    KUANTAN

                    62.4%

                    33.1%

                    3.8%

                    0.7%

                    PAHANG

                    P89

                    BENTONG

                    44.4%

                    43.9%

                    9.0%

                    2.6%

                    SELANGOR

                    P97

                    SELAYANG

                    45.1%

                    36.1%

                    17.2%

                    1.5%

                    SELANGOR

                    P100

                    PANDAN

                    44.2%

                    48.1%

                    6.5%

                    1.2%

                    SELANGOR

                    P102

                    SERDANG

                    39.4%

                    48.6%

                    11.0%

                    1.0%

                    SELANGOR

                    P104

                    KELANA JAYA

                    37.8%

                    41.7%

                    18.5%

                    2.1%

                    SELANGOR

                    P105

                    PETALING JAYA SELATAN

                    40.1%

                    41.5%

                    16.7%

                    1.7%

                    SELANGOR

                    P110

                    KLANG

                    32.2%

                    45.8%

                    19.8%

                    2.2%

                    W.P KUALA LUMPUR

                    P116

                    WANGSA MAJU

                    53.2%

                    36.2%

                    8.5%

                    2.2%

                    W.P KUALA LUMPUR

                    P124

                    BANDAR TUN RAZAK

                    52.4%

                    37.4%

                    8.5%

                    1.6%

                    NEGERI SEMBILAN

                    P128

                    SEREMBAN

                    43.6%

                    41.1%

                    13.5%

                    1.8%

                    NEGERI SEMBILAN

                    P130

                    RASAH

                    27.8%

                    48.3%

                    22.1%

                    1.8%

                    MELAKA

                    P135

                    ALOR GAJAH

                    58.4%

                    27.8%

                    12.8%

                    1.0%

                    JOHOR

                    P142

                    LABIS

                    36.3%

                    46.5%

                    15.0%

                    2.2%

                    JOHOR

                    P148

                    AYER HITAM

                    55.8%

                    38.0%

                    3.9%

                    2.3%

                    JOHOR

                    P152

                    KLUANG

                    39.1%

                    49.3%

                    9.7%

                    1.8%

                    JOHOR

                    P158

                    TEBRAU

                    46.6%

                    38.2%

                    13.2%

                    2.0%

                    JOHOR

                    P165

                    TANJONG PIAI

                    50.4%

                    46.5%

                    1.1%

                    2.0%

33 state seats 52% Chinese or less

NEGERI

STATE CODE

STATE NAME

 MALAY%

 CHINESE%

 INDIAN%

 OTHERS%

                    PERLIS

                    N1

                    TITI TINGGI

                    76.1%

                    20.8%

                    2.4%

                    0.7%

                    PERLIS

                    N8

                    INDERA KAYANGAN

                    47.7%

                    46.8%

                    4.1%

                    1.4%

                    KEDAH

                    N22

                    GURUN

                    55.9%

                    26.5%

                    17.1%

                    0.6%

                    KEDAH

                    N28

                    BAKAR ARANG

                    42.9%

                    41.5%

                    15.0%

                    0.6%

                    KEDAH

                    N35

                    KULIM

                    60.0%

                    22.4%

                    17.2%

                    0.4%

                    KELANTAN

                    N9

                    KOTA LAMA

                    63.7%

                    34.0%

                    1.5%

                    0.8%

                    TERENGGANU

                    N14

                    BANDAR

                    62.4%

                    36.2%

                    1.1%

                    0.2%

                    PERAK

                    N30

                    BUNTONG

                    5.8%

                    44.0%

                    47.9%

                    2.3%

                    PERAK

                    N45

                    TEJA

                    31.6%

                    50.1%

                    10.4%

                    8.0%

                    PERAK

                    N46

                    CHENDERIANG

                    36.0%

                    30.6%

                    12.5%

                    20.8%

                    PAHANG

                    N4

                    CHEKA

                    69.9%

                    24.1%

                    4.8%

                    1.2%

                    PAHANG

                    N10

                    DAMAK

                    56.5%

                    34.3%

                    5.8%

                    3.4%

                    PAHANG

                    N13

                    SEMAMBU

                    56.6%

                    33.2%

                    9.5%

                    0.7%

                    PAHANG

                    N30

                    MENTAKAB

                    51.9%

                    40.1%

                    5.8%

                    2.2%

                    SELANGOR

                    N6

                    KUALA KUBU BAHARU

                    32.7%

                    42.7%

                    20.8%

                    3.8%

                    SELANGOR

                    N14

                    RAWANG

                    23.0%

                    50.1%

                    25.3%

                    1.6%

                    SELANGOR

                    N25

                    KAJANG

                    48.3%

                    40.5%

                    10.0%

                    1.2%

                    SELANGOR

                    N52

                    TELUK DATUK

                    29.0%

                    44.8%

                    20.2%

                    6.0%

                    SELANGOR

                    N56

                    SUNGAI PELEK

                    45.4%

                    32.8%

                    20.6%

                    1.2%

                    NEGERI SEMBILAN

                    N1

                    CHENNAH

                    42.6%

                    50.8%

                    2.2%

                    4.4%

                    NEGERI SEMBILAN

                    N10

                    NILAI

                    30.6%

                    45.5%

                    22.1%

                    1.9%

                    NEGERI SEMBILAN

                    N22

                    RAHANG

                    30.7%

                    45.8%

                    21.0%

                    2.5%

                    NEGERI SEMBILAN

                    N36

                    REPAH

                    36.7%

                    43.0%

                    19.4%

                    0.9%

                    MELAKA

                    N8

                    MACHAP

                    40.8%

                    43.0%

                    14.3%

                    1.8%

                    MELAKA

                    N14

                    KELEBANG

                    60.2%

                    36.6%

                    2.3%

                    0.8%

                    MELAKA

                    N21

                    DUYONG

                    50.3%

                    44.3%

                    4.8%

                    0.6%

                    MELAKA

                    N24

                    BEMBAN

                    58.9%

                    24.5%

                    16.1%

                    0.5%

                    JOHOR

                    N10

                    TANGKAK

                    37.7%

                    51.2%

                    9.7%

                    1.5%

                    JOHOR

                    N21

                    PARIT YAANI

                    54.0%

                    43.1%

                    1.1%

                    1.9%

                    JOHOR

                    N30

                    PALOH

                    37.3%

                    43.6%

                    17.1%

                    2.0%

                    JOHOR

                    N42

                    JOHOR JAYA

                    42.8%

                    47.1%

                    7.5%

                    2.7%

                    JOHOR

                    N46

                    PENGKALAN RINTING

                    42.5%

                    44.7%

                    10.6%

                    2.1%

                    JOHOR

                    N54

                    PULAI SEBATANG

                    61.8%

                    34.5%

                    1.4%

                    2.2%

Will MCA surrender to UMNO these 25 parliamentary and 33 State Assembly seats? Malaysians are entitled to an explanation from the MCA leadership.

Gelang Patah will be my “life-and-death” political battle as I will be fighting not just popular four-term Johore Mentri Besar, but the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, former longest-serving PM Tun Dr. Mahathir and future PM hopeful Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin

This is probably the first time in Malaysian electoral history where an Opposition candidate will have to face four such UMNO heavy-weights all in one go.

Whether I survive or perish, whether Gelang Patah will end up as my political “kubur” as exhorted by Mahathir to the people of Johore, I do not know, but I shall not withdraw from the Battle of Gelang Patah, for it has become the Battle of Johore and even the Battle of Malaysia.

I will develop these themes during the election campaign of the 13GE, in Gelang Patah, Johore or all over Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 12:49 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Johore
,
MCA
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A Barisan Win is No Victory for Malaysia

by Bakri Musa

(Second of Four Parts)

There can only be three possible outcomes to the next election:  Barisan to win with a comfortable victory; Pakatan Rakyat to prevail; and a hung parliament. A comfortable victory is one where the expected hopping of a dozen or so successful candidates would not materially affect the political balance. A hung parliament is where the buying or the shifting of allegiance of a handful of elected members would significantly alter the political balance.

            Contrary to the pronouncements of many, the worst possible outcome would not be a hung parliament but a Barisan victory. The best possible outcome would be for Pakatan to secure that majority. A hung parliament is not the worse but then also not the best possible outcome either.

            I begin with Barisan being returned to power, not with a supra majority for not even Najib Razak is predicting that, not in his wildest dream. In his speech dissolving Parliament, he implicitly conceded the possibility of defeat. Only his fanatic supporters are fantasizing big victory, but only after they have been high on their free tapai (fermented rice).

            If you relish precious public funds being squandered through bloated contracts (think of the scandalous “commission” that slimy “Datuk T” secured for the non-existing crooked bridge) and outright pilferage (as with the “cow-gate” scandal and the Scorpene submarines that would not submerge), then expect more of the same with another Barisan victory. Only this time the scale would be even more outrageous both in scope and amount, difficult though that may be to imagine. Barisan, and UMNO specifically, would look upon their victory as approval if not vindication of their corrupt and wasteful ways. That is what Najib meant by not changing horse midway. He and his cronies wish to remain on their gilded saddles.

            With a Barisan victory we would never get to the bottom of the “cow-gate” scandal or the outrageous civil settlement between Khazanah and ex-Malaysian Airlines’ boss Tajuddin Ramli. Consider that had Barisan won Selangor in 2008, that Khir Toyo character would still be its Chief Minister and not the convicted criminal that he is today. There are many Khir Toyos at the federal level; only a Barisan defeat would expose these scumbags. Only with a Pakatan victory could they be held accountable and be prosecuted.

            For those expecting political stability as their reason for voting Barisan, that delusion would quickly be shattered. There is little chance for Najib to better his predecessor’s performance of 2008. If they started to scheme for Abdullah’s downfall before the total votes were tallied in then, this time the power struggle to replace Najib would be even cruder, more vicious, and utterly destructive. Forget about the old Malay budi bahasa (niceties); it would be the Mat Rempits gone amok, complete with the roar and gore.

            After the 2008 electoral fiasco Muhyyiddin unhesitatingly turned on his erstwhile patron, Abdullah Badawi. The temptation for Muhyyiddin to topple Najib post-election 2013 would be irresistible. Being seven years older than Najib, this is the only opportunity for Muhyyiddin to do it. By the time the next general election comes he would over 71 years old, a spent force.

            Muhyyiddin’s body language all along could barely conceal his contempt for Najib, both the man and his policies. So expect Muhyiddin to launch an even more emboldened and naked challenge. I disagree with veteran UMNO observer Abdullah Ahmad who noted that Najib would more likely to be challenged by younger leaders, not Muhydddin. It would only appear that way, at least initially.

            This vicious do-or-die battle between Najib and Muhyyiddin would have all the trappings of classic class rebellion of feudal times, between orang bangsawan (aristocrats) and orang hamba (peasants). Expect the royal class to be actively involved; no marks for guessing which side they would favor.

            At the personal level, it would be a brawl between a street-wise pugilist who has survived many such encounters, versus a soft-cocooned brat long used to having his way by hiring others to do the dirty work for him. The irony this time is that Najib would be at the receiving end of those calculating leaders who weigh things on what they would gain personally, an art Najib had perfected throughout his political career.

            The junior members of Barisan, the Chinese and Indian parties as well as those from East Malaysia, would be reduced to being anxious spectators and helpless prey. Prey because their members would be vulnerable to tempting offers to switch side. There would be no political stability, instead endless scheming and changes of alliances. The ensuing looting of the public treasury to finance such shenanigans would be on an unprecedented scale.

            Najib’s ballyhooed promise of transforming his administration is just that – hot air. He will again field his sclerotic ministers and they will all be back in his cabinet. Nothing would have changed.

            We are already getting a preview of Barisan’s shenanigans during this campaign with Najib furiously bribing voters with our (taxpayers’) money! Make no mistake, after the election he will be expecting and collecting his dues. That would be the ugly scenario that awaits a Barisan victory.

            The RAHMAN prophecy has it that the “N” refers to Najib; he would be the sixth and last UMNO Prime Minister. If Barisan were to return to power this coming election, then that RAHMAN prophecy would have an even more ominous meaning. It would mean the end of Malaysia as we know it. As National Laureate Samad Said put it, this is our only chance to spare Malaysia such an awful fate.

Next:  (Third of Four Parts) Pakatan Victory Best Possible Outcome

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 6:56 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A very ‘American’ election

by
Clive Kessler

The Malaysian Insider

APRIL 15 — So far it has been, as a friend remarked the other day, “a very American election”.

With its mobilising and symbolic focus on PM Datuk Seri Najib Razak, the GE13 “pre-campaign” has been nothing if not “presidential”.

“Presidential” campaigning: PM Najib and BR1M

If Umno/BN is now a brand, Najib is its face. Its trademark.

Not unlike a certain avuncular colonel and his own certain brand of fried chicken.

And if Umno/Bn now has a strategic approach, it is Najib’s own iconic BR1M.

Umno/Bn now relies upon communicating an irresistible sense of party and government largesse that, in a very personal way, the prime minister distributes and also symbolises.

The outgoing government of the last four years — since Pak Abdullah Ahmad Badawi stood down — has largely placed its trust in, and now entrusted its political fate to, BR1M.

And the BR1M promises keep flowing. Endlessly, it would seem. “Our cup overfloweth,” the government might well say, spilling over its generous brim.

It has been “brim-full” of subtle inducements and beguiling “goodies”.

The election, it seems, will be a referendum on BR1M, and the prime minister will live or die politically on the people’s verdict upon this measure, this key strategic device.

When an election is focused, through one key initiative, upon the fate of the national leader who is uniquely identified with that measure, we may well characterise the campaign as presidential.

Targeting the Malaysian “political market”

But there is more to be said. When the present campaign is typified as “very American”, much more is involved than its presidential style and personalised “symbolics”.

Let us return to the BR1M payments.

These are part of a very sophisticated strategy or political approach.

And the entire approach which the BR1M initiative suggests, and of which it is a part, seems to have a clear “genealogy”, or readily identifiable origins.

It seems directly traceable to the “new approach” to election campaigning that has been pioneered in the US over the last quarter-century — especially and initially but now no longer exclusively by the “political right” — by such innovative political consultants,  strategists and “operatives” as Lee Atwater, Roger Ailes and their more recent successors, most notably Karl Rove Jr.

This is the approach that sees not a single nation — “a community of common destiny and shared national fate” — to be addressed, but a series of special interests and constituencies.

A discrepant array of groups that are to be reached, each specifically in its own way: with finely tuned and closely targeted messages, with its own special “tailor-made” policies, and its specifically targeted benefits and promises.

It is an approach that does not presume, nor seek to address, a “nation that is ever in the making”, one continually engaged in the process of discovering and renewing itself, but merely a segmented and fragmented  political “market”.

It is an approach that, so to speak, neither hears nor wishes to sing a national anthem voicing widely shared aspirations, but one that is instead eager to respond to a cacophony of discordant voices, all calling out “me , me!” and “remember us!”

“Do not forget us,” they cry out, “do not leave us out of your official gift-giving at this special political festive season!”

And, guided by the consultant political marketers, the politicians — well, some kinds of politician — hear and respond. They do as the clamourers and the clamour-monitors suggest, they do what they are entreated and told to do.

The idea of a “political market”

This is an approach that assumes, and which orients itself towards, a highly differentiated market in which each component or “strategic actor” is little concerned with what is in the interest of “the whole”.

To the “crackpot realists” (to use an expression of C. Wright Mills) who champion this piecemeal approach, such notions as “the common interest” are quite fanciful, even delusional and dangerous.

Those whom they and their preferred strategies address are interested in, and care only about, their own demands, their own insistent question (and the tangible political answers proffered to it!): “what is in this for me, what’s the specific benefit for us over here?”

It is an approach that creates and promotes the very social and political fragmentation, the centrifugal drives, the sectional division of diverging interests that it presumes.

This approach, together with its calculating practitioners, is in the business of promoting a “self-fulfilling prophecy” — serviceable to some including its creators — that becomes real, and may become the dominant reality. But it does so, increasingly, to the neglect, and even at the expense, of any common national purpose and agenda.

It does so since it presumes that that is what human nature is like, and what human nature really and most authentically likes. (And when people say so, they maintain, you can believe it, they are “for real”, since self-interest never lies, deceives or pretends. It is honestly self-regarding. It is never “fake”, it is always trying it best.)

On the other side of the same coin, this approach holds to the view, or conviction, that co-operation and consensus and “the negotiation of differences” — because they do not come easily — are unnatural, while socially “autistic” or heedless self-interest is no mere default position or moral “last resort”, no token of social failure, but natural, commendable and “as good as you can get”. That there is nothing better or higher.

It is therefore an approach that, when faced with the challenge of nation-building, always starts from the assumption — the often unexpressed and suppressed assumption — that the whole can never be more than, or achieve a reconciled accommodation among, the sum of its parts.

So people should not even try to seek any such common purpose, or imagine that one may be identified and realised. Any such exercise must be delusional, “chimerical”, and even dangerous.

Dangerous because, or so the champions of this approach believe, such efforts — even if unsuccessful, and even if they are merely attempted — violate what they hold to be the most basic, sacred and authentic human realities. They interfere with personal preferences and individual choice and so distort market processes.

The limits of this view

What is wrong with this approach?

True, societies are a complex interplay of co-operation and individualism.

And, like the United States, and others in its wake, the more modern societies become, the more individualistic they also are.

We are all caught up, generally most happily, in this dynamic.

It is the dynamic of human emancipation and self-realisation.

And, again true, markets are arenas in which people — even when they are members of larger social aggregates and groups — think and strategise, choose and act, individually, as separate and independent individual agents.

So, in the short run, you can do so-called “retail politics” by treating the members of political society as nothing more than players in a market, even if it is a rather special kind of market called a political market.

Yet there is more involved than just that.

So that approach can be taken only “so far and no further”.

Beyond that point, the idea of the “political market” collapses, becomes dysfunctional and, in practical terms, not helpful.

Why? How?

What we call “political society” these days, even when it has international dimensions and outreach and ramifications, is still largely something that resides, and is accommodated, within states.

And these states are, by and large, what we call “nation-states”.

That is to say, they are identified not so much with foreign imperial masters (who may choose to colour large parts of the world map red, or blue or yellow or green, as was once the case) nor primarily with their former traditional sacred rulers but with their own people as citizens.

Whatever their different historical background, and the diversity of their origins and the various but converging paths by way of which they became citizens, these people are now and together members of what we call, and are generally understood as, “nations”.

That, meaning cohesive and viable national communities, is what these people, or citizens, must together become and create if political society, and with it all social and economic development, are not to collapse.

That is why people these days, even in the age of rampant and unstoppable globalisation, still talk about “nation-building”.

And why, even if its members come into citizenship from differing origins and via different but converging paths, we must speak of them as together “sharing the nation”.

States, their institutional arrangements and resources are the common, shared property of all their citizens, as equal stakeholders in the nation. They are the common birthright and inheritance of all their citizens’ children.

Political markets, citizens, states and nations

What this means, the first implication of this fact, is that there is more to political and national life than merely political marketing. A nation is not just a political market.

It may be that too — sometimes, at certain moments or phases of its own and citizens’ lives — but it is so much more than that.

A nation may at times be a political market, or may be seen and treated as one. That may be one part of what is involved in its common life.

It is the part that the political consultants know, and the part that the campaign strategists who follow and apply the latest “American” technical innovations know how to address.

But that market and those who are involved in it are “subsumed” (or contained and enfolded) within the common life of a nation that finds its expression, its instruments for pursuing common purposes and also its arena for “the negotiation of difference” in state structures and institutions.

So more, much more, is needed in politics, especially in the “election season”, than a good marketing strategy.

The nation: Its story, its common agenda

Transcending, and drawing together, the tangle of individual wills and the clash of group interests of its diverse citizens there must be a sound and viable “national idea”.

And who else but the contending rivals in the election process at fateful moments — an outgoing government that seeks to be returned to power, and a prospective alternative governing group that seeks to replace it — has the obligation and also the wonderful opportunity to make clear what it thinks the national idea is, and how it is to be pursued and ultimately achieved?

Both sides now need to make clear who they are and what they stand for; what they think the nation is and needs and where they think it is heading, or may be intelligently directed; and how what they themselves are and stand for and propose to do will help promote that national idea — in the interest of all the nation’s citizen-members.

Political marketing to the interests of individuals and groups certainly has its place. But its place is within that broader national context.

Within the life of the nation, and attuned to its needs and purposes.

So, yes, BR1M if one must, and “American”-style political marketing too, if one must have it.

But some national conversation, some intelligent dialogue, even some thoughtful contestation between the two opposed sides over the character and purposes of the nation are also, and no less, essential.

Both sides, to use the dreaded postmodernist jargon, need in the next two weeks to spell out, and to argue coherently for, their version of the national “narrative”.

They need to show that their policy commitments and proposals can serve as the enabling mechanisms for the realisation of the nation’s common purpose, as they see and understand it.

That is a major task, an urgent task.

And one that goes far beyond clever, even very subtle, political marketing.

It is the national interest, and a persuasive view of it, that needs now to be promoted, not simple political “products” and enticing messages.

* Clive Kessler is Emeritus Professor of Sociology and Anthropology at The University of New South Wales, Sydney.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 3:26 pm and is filed under
Articles
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


BN settles on Ghani to defend Gelang Patah from Kit Siang

By Jahabar Sadiq

The Malaysian Insider

April 15, 2013

KUALA LUMPUR, April 15 — Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman will defend Gelang Patah against the DAP’s Lim Kit Siang while the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) now seeks a safe state seat for his potential successor as Johor mentri besar, Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin, in Election 2013, say coalition sources.

Despite BN’s pledge to put new faces, The Malaysian Insider understands that the 66-year-old MB is the best bet against the 72-year-old Lim as the ruling coalition is depending on the Malay vote to carry it in the May 5 general election.

“It has been decided that Ghani will defend Gelang Patah as BN doesn’t want to risk losing its fixed deposit in Johor,” a source told The Malaysian Insider.

He said the MCA has agreed to give up the seat to Umno, under a strategy where the BN war room believes Umno candidates can beat back the DAP attack in Johor and other Malay-majority states rather than MCA hopefuls.

“There will be a number of veterans being asked to stay on and defend their seats because DAP and PAS together can cause trouble,” the BN source added, referring to the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) parties that also includes PKR.

BN chairman Datuk Seri Najib Razak is due to give out the final candidates’ lists to state coalition chiefs today, with the full list to be announced within the next 24 hours. The unprecedented announcement is to give time for the coalition to introduce new faces before the April 20 nomination day.

BN is now looking for a safe seat for Khaled as he is likely to be the mentri besar if the coalition keeps Johor.It is learnt that Umno was ready to drop Ghani, who has helmed the party bastion state for four terms since 1995, but Lim’s candidacy has forced a rethink.

“There was going to be a lot of changes but plans have been revised to keep PR out of Johor.

“We think Ghani can win against Kit Siang by at least a few thousand votes,” the source said, adding the coalition has given up on getting any substantial votes from the Chinese community.

PKR ran in Gelang Patah in the past two general elections, but lost both times to Johor Wanita MCA chief Tan Ah Eng. Tan kept the seat in Election 2008 with a majority of 8,851 votes, a smaller majority than the overwhelming 31,666-vote majority in 2004.

Chinese voters make up 54 per cent in the constituency, while Malays and Indians make up 34 per cent and 12 per cent respectively.

Another source said BN is now looking for a safe seat for Khaled as he is likely to be the mentri besar if the coalition keeps Johor.

The two-term Pasir Gudang MP might not contest in the federal seat of Permas and Johor Jaya state seat as both have large numbers of Chinese voters.

“Chinese voters are a problem and we can’t rely on MCA to get support,” said the source.

Khaled has appeared unperturbed by the speculation over his next political career change, 23 years after he was first elected as a Johor MP in 1990.

“I do not know where I am going to contest and will have to wait for the final word from the prime minister,” he was quoted as saying by The Star on Saturday.

A total of 13.3 million voters, including 5,200 abroad, are expected to cast their ballots for 222 federal and 505 state seats in the May 5 general election. Sarawak had its state elections in 2011.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 7:24 am and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Have no fear, PAS is near!

by Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 3:17 pm and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lost Legitimacy & Leadership!

by Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 9:45 am and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mission almost impossible for Kit Siang

Free Malaysia Today

April 15, 2013

JOHOR BARU: For DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang to win the Gelang Patah parliamentary seat in Barisan Nasional’s fortress in Johor, he not only needs to win the “hearts and minds” of the Chinese electorate, who are the majority voters in the suburban seat, he must also work hard to woo votes from the Malay electorate.

A substantial 54% of the eligible voters in Gelang Patah are Chinese while the Malays account for 33% and Indians make up 12%.

Judging from the electoral composition, it is clear that to win the rapidly-developing Gelang Patah seat, the candidate, either from BN or DAP, must romp home with the support of the Chinese and Malays, the bulk of the electorate in the constituency, adjacent to Pulai and Johor Baru parliamentary seats.

But with the irremovable stigma that Kit Siang and DAP are “anti-Malays” and “anti-Islam, it is a big question mark whether the Malay voters in the constituency will accept or welcome the veteran DAP politician.

No doubt Kit Siang and the DAP election machinery in the area are already facing an uphill task. In fact, some party campaigners were heard lamenting that it was indeed an arduous mission to win over the Malay voters in the once Malay-heartland area.

The difficult task to woo Malay voters was readily acknowledged by DAP election workers with the “anti-Malay” and “anti-Islam” stigma deeply etched in Kit Siang and DAP, a predominantly Chinese-based urban party.

“Surely, the stigma will be a big hurdle for my party campaigners when talking to Malay voters in the area.

“The stigma is purportedly created and highlighted that the DAP and I are ‘anti-Malay’ and ‘anti-Islam’,” laments Kit Siang.

The DAP adviser says the “anti-Malay” and anti-Islam” stigma was a mere slander and a big lie, adding that the DAP’s and his political struggle was for all Malaysians regardless of race and religion.

‘I want to win’

Although the acceptance of Kit Siang by the Malay voters was difficult to gauge since the March 18 announcement that he was the Pakatan Rakyat’s candidate for Gelang Patah, Kit Siang and DAP firmly believe that they will be well-accepted by the electorate to break BN’s stronghold in Johor.

Johor has been BN’s bastion for many years.

“I don’t know about the Malays’ acceptance of me but I want to win in Gelang Patah with the support of all races,” said Kit Siang, who has moved from Ipoh Timur in Perak to try his luck in Gelang Patah.

Although Kit Siang and his well-oiled election machinery are working round-the-clock to win over Malay voters, the machinery by far and large is focusing attention on densely-populated Chinese areas like in Taman Ungku Tun Aminah in Skudai, where the DAP’s Gelang Patah parliamentary election operations headquarters is based.

A local political observer said the DAP’s strategy was to secure at least 80% Chinese votes, 5% Malay and 5% Indian votes in Gelang Patah.

To Gelang Patah Umno division chief Abdul Aziz Sapian, Kit Siang and DAP are sure to fail miserably in garnering Malay votes in their untiring efforts to win over Malays’ support in the constituency.

In fact, Kit Siang’s surprise move to contest in Gelang Patah would only work in favour of the BN with more Malays rallying behind the ruling coalition to retain the stronghold seat, he said.

“We expect Malays’ support for BN in Gelang Patah to swell by more than 90%. We’re confident that Malay voters will reject Kit Siang and DAP, widely regarded as a Chinese chauvinist party,” he added.

Political ally

Kit Siang and DAP vehemently questioning “everything about the Malays”, including Malays’ special rights and privileges bears testimony to the “true colours” of Kit Siang and DAP’s real perception of the Malays.

“It only reinforces the stigma that the DAP is ‘anti-Malay’ and ‘anti-Islam’,” Abdul Aziz said.

With 90% Malay votes, 60% Indian votes and at least 30% Chinese votes in hand, the BN confident of retaining Gelang Patah, the BN’s bastion for many years, he said.

He said Kit Siang was fully relying on his political ally, PAS, to help him approach Malay voters in Gelang Patah.

“The DAP has entirely left it to PAS to woo Malay voters in Gelang Patah. We believe only hardcore PAS supporters will support Kit Siang,” he added.

In the last general election in 2008, BN’s Tan Ah Heng from MCA retained the seat, defeating PKR’s Zaliha Mustafa by a comfortable 8,000-vote majority.

-Bernama

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 5:59 pm and is filed under
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Shame on you, EPF!

by
P Gunasegaram

Malaysiakini

6:16PM Apr 12, 2013

Whatever possessed the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) to throw in the towel way before the fight had finished, leaving other minority shareholders aghast at its surrender even before the battle had started in earnest? Shame on you, EPF!

We are referring of course to the national provident fund’s meek capitulation by accepting national oil company Petronas’ revised offer of RM5.50 per MISC Bhd share yesterday, eight days before the offer was due to close.

By accepting the offer it has made it that much easier for Petronas to reach its target of acquiring 90 percent of MISC shares, a condition for Petronas’ takeover offer for MISC, and the level at which the oil company can delist MISC from Bursa Malaysia. Petronas has just under 80 percent of the shares now after EPF’s acceptance, 10 percent short of the offer becoming unconditional.

Considering that EPF holds some 9.5 percent of MISC’s shares, if it had refused to play ball with Petronas and held out, it is extremely unlikely that the offer would have succeeded without Petronas revising substantially upwards its paltry offer.

If  EPF held out for a better offer and refused to sell at any price below RM8 per MISC share – the top end of analysts’ valuation – the additional amount it would have for the same block of MISC shares would have been RM1.06 billion.

And if in the process, Petronas did not increase its bid any further and the bid fails, then all EPF needs to do as a long-term investor is to wait it out for the full impact of the restructuring – basically the fire sale of its non-core, non-LNG shipping and other businesses which have been pulling it down. That would result in better value for MISC shares.

That means EPF was too hasty in accepting the offer a week and a day ahead of the deadline and therefore sacrificing any possibility of haggling further with Petronas for a better offer. Not just that, it has put pressure on other shareholders, including national unit trust fund manager Permodalan Nasional Bhd (whose units have the next highest stake at 6.35 percent at last count) to accept the offer.

One would have thought that EPF, a major minority shareholder in virtually all prime blue chips listed on Bursa Malaysia, will play a very proactive role in protecting minority shareholders’ rights under all conditions.

This should especially be so since it is the custodian of over half a trillion ringgit of funds belonging to workers in Malaysia, making it one of the largest such funds in the world and the single largest investor in the local stock market.

As a matter of principle it should have refused to play ball with Petronas and stuck it out for the best possible deal for MISC minority shareholders. Instead it sold out of MISC, one of the bluest of blue chips on the market (if you ignored the deleterious effects of unwise diversification measures undertaken during Petronas’s stewardship) for a song at virtually one of its lowest share price over the last 10 years (see chart). Shame on you, EPF!

Unfair but reasonable

Despite the 20-sen revision upwards of its initial offer of RM5.30, analysts were almost unanimous that the Petronas offer still substantially undervalued MISC, which is now on a recovery path after it sold off its loss-making businesses.

Almost all analysts believed the offer was unfair because even current valuations mostly indicated a price above RM6, with one or two even putting the value at over RM8 a share, which is 50 percent higher than the latest offer.

But strangely, despite the substantial undervaluation of MISC shares at RM5.50 a piece, many analysts considered it “reasonable” in what has become a near standard advice for advisers appointed for minority shareholders: unfair but reasonable.

Never mind that there is a contradiction in terms, especially for MISC which has never hitherto been a trading stock but a favourite of long-term funds because of its “boringly consistent” earnings and high dividends which gave predictable returns to them and therefore is very valuable.

Until of course, MISC, under Petronas’s stewardship, started diversifying out of the core LNG carriage business and entering into other shipping areas. In its search for “excitement”, it got its fingers badly burnt when the cyclical shipping downturn happened.

Its major shareholder Petronas had neither the stomach nor the experience to bear the losses and turn it around but instead is in the process of selling them cheaply – a fire sale. It’s yet another expensive lesson for Petronas about venturing into areas which it knows little about and bears no relation to its core functions..

Much of the restructuring is already done and we have examined the situation in some detail
here
 where we said that EPF should not accept Petronas’ offer.

But for some reason only known to itself, Petronas is keen to restructure MISC behind closed doors and avoid the public scrutiny that would take place otherwise as it would have to disclose measures to investors via Bursa Malaysia.

If the privatisation of MISC by Petronas is successful, then it would mean a RM20 billion plus company will be delisted to the detriment of  long-term investors who would have liked to have benefited from Petronas’ turnaround plan for MISC.

Sole beneficiary of turnaround

Instead Petronas, with EPF’s connivance and cooperation, is now likely to succeed in the bid, meaning Petronas becomes the sole beneficiary of MISC’s turnaround, denying longstanding shareholders who have suffered with MISC the same benefit while hiding what might be potentially embarrassing details from the public. Shame on you, EPF!

How could you do these to your fellow minority shareholder investors who include PNB-related funds, Felda, Kumpulan Wang Amanah Pencen, Lembaga Tabung Haji and Penang Development Corp, amongst others.

If all these funds had cooperated, Petronas would have failed in its bid unless it increased its offers substantially. If it did not, then these funds would have the option of holding on to their MISC shares for future appreciation as most of them would have preferred to instead of facing the possibility of illiquidity if the stock was delisted.

As the largest of MISC’s minority shareholders and the largest fund in the country EPF should have taken the lead and defended minority shareholders’ interests to the hilt. But it did not. Shame on you, EPF!

Can we ever have confidence that you will invest the RM500 billion plus of our funds wisely and only in our own best interests? You latest action gives us no such assurance and we doubt that as currently structured you will be able to. Shame on you, EPF!

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 7:04 pm and is filed under
Articles
,
EPF
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why I shall vote in GE13

— Philip Yeoh

The Malaysian Insider

April 15, 2013

APRIL 15 — I shall vote to give Malaysia a better chance of stemming the bleeding of our public finances and downward spiral in our standard of living.

I shall vote to protect our land and people from policies, practices and businesses that threaten our ecological safety and integrity.

I shall vote to open the door for reforms in our institutions of governance particularly the judiciary, MACC, police and the central bank.

I shall vote to introduce mechanisms to ensure proper behaviour and professionalism in civil servants and institutions of public order. These will include the long-awaited IPCMC that should be under the direct oversight of the Parliament, not a Cabinet minister.

I shall vote to empower leaders who champion issue- and rules-based governance as well as needs-driven resource allocation in place of race-driven expediency.

I shall vote to signal my thirst for justice long denied to our Beng Hocks, Kugans, Ahmad Sabrianis, Orang Asal, the marginalised Indian community, exploited guest workers as well as my disgust at the culture of impunity underlying today’s political gangsterism, abuse of authority and sheer disregard for citizens’ rights.

I shall vote for governments at state and federal levels that are truly interested to upgrade the delivery of public services without fear, favour nor hidden agenda for filthy lucre.

I shall vote to punish and eradicate politics of race-baiting, muck-raking, salacious libel, hate incitement and religious chauvinism.

I shall vote to give Malaysia a viable Second Force (which I define to be an alternative administration that has served at least a term in government), whose first 300 days in government will then become the baseline for the growth of a credible Third Force as a deterrent against misbehaviour by the incumbent or opposition.

I shall vote for change.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 April 2013, 1:06 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Election
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


19-Day Countdown to 13GE Polling Day: Vision 2050 – A Thriving Democratic Nation

On April 11, 2013, I unveiled my
Vision 2050 for Malaysia to replace Vision 2020
.

I believe that Malaysians need a new vision for a bolder, brighter and better Malaysia especially since the aspirations of Vision 2020 has been tarnished, perhaps irrevocably so, by the actions and words of the very person who outlined this vision, Dr. Mahathir.

I unveiled 10 points for my Vision 2050 which I very much hope can start a national conversation about new aspirations for the country and the course which we must chart in order to achieve these aspirations.

The mother of all election battles which is the Battle of Gelang Patah, where I will face off against the popular Johor Menteri Besar, Abdul Ghani Othman, is more than just a contest to determine the results in one seat.

It is more than just a contest for Johor. And it is most definitely more than just a contest for Putrajaya. It is a contest for the heart, soul and mind of Malaysia.

As such, as part of the 24 day countdown to polling day on May 5, 2013, I want to share my thoughts on each one of these points.

While I most likely will not live to see 2050, I sincerely hope that I will be able to witness our beloved country moving in the right direction. Win or lose, this battle to achieve Vision 2050 must go on.

A thriving democratic nation with new and adaptive forms of public engagement and accountability structures at all levels of government where technology will be harnessed to fundamentally transform the decision making process.

We have waited for more than 50 years to exercise our God-given democratic rights including the right to have a peaceful transition in government.

Other governments in in Africa, South America and other parts of Asia have steadily made themselves accountable to the people but we still allow our public servants and political masters to behave like feudal lords.

We have made it too easy for those in power to say, “We are already accountable to the people. We are listening to you.”

I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the average Malaysian’s great stumbling block toward a thriving democratic nation is not the racist politician spewing bitterness and hatred toward others but the moderate Malaysian who has decided to settle for less: a lesser form of democracy, a diluted version of accountability, a willingness to live with a false sense of stability.

We prefer the absence of political conflict rather than the presence of freedom.

To create an adaptive, accountable government requires citizens — you and me — who are adaptable and willing to make ourselves accountable to others.

Three decades from now, I envision a nation where we exercise effective-decision-making at two levels.

On one hand, there must be constant and meaningful dialogue to strengthen citizen participation at the local level.

Why not make it possible for local resident associations to have the powers to ‘raise’ revenues from their own area to do minor things like repair and resurface roads or to receive an allocation from the local council to do the same?

Such technology by 2050 could be used by local residents to pose problems, propose answers, vote on the decisions, and raise the funds and energy required to implement the solutions.

On the other hand, there must be clear, transparent and courageous decision-making at the higher levels of state and national government.

Not everybody must be involved in every part of the decision making process. In legislation, whoever decides must be empowered to decide on behalf of society.

But there should be new and constantly evolving channels whereby interested stakeholders as well as experts and academics in various fields can positively and meaningfully contribute to the decision making process.

We must not confuse the two.

In Switzerland, a model of modern democracy, too much citizen participation in the form of referendums — which require approval and feedback from its citizens — have overwhelmed the government from truly governing.

In California, the lack of courageous decision-making has resulted in the proliferation of propositions can cause massive legislative problems.

There is no reason why Malaysia cannot create its own uniquely democratic system of governing that harnesses and accentuates the strengths of our diverse people.

There is no reason why this distinct system cannot gain international commendation similar to the much touted ‘Scandinavian’ model. There is no reason why we Malaysians cannot have our day in the sun for the right reasons.

I have traveled the length and breadth of Malaysia. I have seen the yearning for freedom manifest itself in a toddler who runs to his parents saying, “Look, see what I can do.”

I have seen the yearning of freedom flow in conversations between old and young, people of all races, men and women.

The fundamental posture of democracy is evident in all: we want the freedom to decide, and we need the magnanimity to listen.

We want to have a democracy that is mature enough to allow for voices on the extreme but be robust enough never to let these extreme voices become part of the mainstream.

It is my fundamental assumption that new forms of public engagement and accountability in Malaysia must use technology to create dialogue between the central government and the people.

The interactive tools of technology will not be used for surveillance, command and control, but as a tool for listening to people, answering their questions and addressing their concerns.

In a democracy of the future, decision-making by the people will be carried out constantly and in meaningful ways — not just a vote once every five years.

I harbour no illusion about democracy for democracy’s sake.

The ultimate end of a thriving, adaptive democracy is to lift our great nation from fear and prejudice into hope and compassion.

The means to this end is a government who empowers every Malaysian who wants to be active and useful to carry out their aspirations — as good workers, good parents, good children — for the greater good of Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 April 2013, 2:18 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Ghani Othman’s candidature in Gelang Patah – implementation of Mahathir’s first directive in the 13GE: “End Kit Siang’s political career”

The announcement of Datuk Ghani Othman, the Johor Mentri Besar, as the candidate of the Barisan Nasional parliamentary constituency of Gelang Patah in the 13th General Election has not created any surprises as this has been an open secret for the past fortnight.

This was both the request of the MCA President, Datuk Seri Dr. Chua Soi Lek who was even prepared to unilaterally surrender the Gelang Patah seat, traditional fortress of MCA, as well as the directive of the former Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir who came to Johore on April 1 and called on the people of Johor in the 13GE to end my political career.

Ghani’s candidature is the implementation by the Prime Minister and UMNO President, Datuk Seri Najib Razak of Mahathir’s first directive in the 13GE, “End Kit Siang’s political career”.

Nobody doubts that the most powerful man in UMNO and Barisan Nasional today is not the Prime Minister and BN Chairman but Mahathir, the de facto power behind the throne in UMNO and BN.

In fact, Najib is very afraid of Mahathir as the former longest-serving Prime Minister had proved that he was capable to both setting up UMNO/BN Prime Ministers as well as toppling them, as happened to Tun Abdullah after the 2008 general elections.

Although Ghani tried to deny the “undeniable” by stating that his candidacy was not to “bury” my political career but to defend what Johor had achieved all this while including the harmony among the different races, everyone in Gelang Patah, Johore and Malaysia know the real reason and agenda for Ghani’s candidacy in Gelang Patah.

In fact, after Mahathir’s open call on April 1, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin publicly stated that I was “trapped” in Gelang Patah saying categorically that I was “finished” politically.

There can be no more powerful evidence that the UMNO leadership, under Mahathir’s directive have worked out a strategy to ensure that Gelang Patah becomes my “political grave”.

I leave my political future in the hands of the voters of Gelang Patah who will decide whether I am politically buried in the 13GE.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 April 2013, 6:25 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Johore
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Invitation to Ghani Othman to make Gelang Patah the model constituency of clean, free and fair elections in whole country in the 13GE which is expected to be dirtiest in election history in Malaysia

Firstly let me deplore and condemn in the strongest possible terms the uncivilised and inhuman two explosions at the Boston Marathon which have killed three persons and injured some 30 people in one of the world’s best known marathons.

The Boston Marathon was held on Patriot Day, the third Monday of April, since 1897 and attracted an estimated half-million spectators and some 20,000 participants.

Although the criminal incident happened far-way in Boston, the people of Gelang Patah, Johore and Malaysia, like all human beings throughout the world, are shocked and revolted by such inhumanity and utter disregard for human lives.

The world has become a global village and what happens in one part of the world attracts the concern and attention of people in other parts of the world, like the two explosions of the Boston Marathon.

The Boston Marathon explosions is particularly pertinent to Malaysians, facing the 13th General Elections, as Umno/Barisan Nasional leaders have been warning about chaos and bloodshed ala-Arab Spring.

Let all political leaders, whether BN or PR, stand as one to condemn the violence and inhumanity of the Boston Marathon as well as to reaffirm that what we want to witness in the 13GE is not the bloodshed and chaos of Arab Spring but the peaceful and democratic transition of power like the South Korean Spring in 1997 if the verdict of the 13.3 million voters on May 5 is for a change of government in Putrajaya, with Pakatan Rakyat replacing Barisan Nasional as the new Federal Government of Malaysia.

The four-term Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Ghani Othman is as good as the BN candidate for Gelang Patah with the MCA surrendering the MCA/BN fortress to UMNO.

If this is the case, I invite Ghani Othman to join me in making Gelang Patah the model constituency of clean, free and fair elections out of 222 parliamentary and 505 state assembly constituencies in the country in the 13GE as it is expected to be dirtiest in election history in Malaysia.

Already, the most unscrupulous and unprincipled “dirty tricks” have been used coupled with unspeakable lies and falsehoods that is spread anonymously.

I invite Ghani to join me in reaching an accord to make Gelang Patah the most gentlemanly contest where:

No personal attacks or character assassination, not only by the candidates, but their election teams and workers;

No playing the race or religion card, as the 13GE should be an occasion to promote and foster greater and closer race relations among the races to promote national unity, and not an occasion divide and polarise further the diverse races and religions in the country.

No politics of money or the use of money to buy votes, which is the root cause of the rampant corruption in Malaysia.

Commitment by both of us to condemn and dissociate ourselves from “dirty tricks” perpetrated in Gelang Patah, even by anonymous quarters.

Ghani and I should sign the Transparency International-Malaysia’s Election Integrity Pledge (EIP) with the establishment of a EIP Watchdog Commission in Gelang Patah constituted by Malaysians of impeccable character.

I await the response from Ghani

Media Conference Statement by Lim Kit Siang after walkabout at Taman Ungku Tun Aminah on Tuesday, 16th April 2013 at 9 am

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 April 2013, 11:01 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Johore
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.