Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #15

By
M Bakri Musa

Chapter 2:  Why Some Societies Progress, Others Regress

The Seminal Role of the Individual

The preceding discussion focused on society.  It is the function of society and its culture to mould its members into a preexisting pattern through socialization and acculturation.  The intention is to maintain the status quo; it is necessarily static to ensure that the values and nature of that society are propagated and maintained; it is a mechanism to ensure societal stability.

            Individuals are by nature unique, each of has our own preferences and choices, our likes and dislikes.  Left to our own devices, human society will not be possible.  We would be like a bunch of wild cats, marauding on our own.  Ever try to corral a bunch of them?  But even with wild animals a certain pack behavior is identifiable – a primordial societal form.

            Thus we are faced with a dilemma.  On one hand culture and society have essentially statist tendencies, but for progress to occur there must be change, and change inevitably threatens the status quo.  Consequently throughout history progress has been the result of the works of individuals, not society.

            When the first hunter-gatherers made the conversion to become farmers, this was not the result of a communal decision.  Their pack leaders did not sit down and decide that they had had enough of the hunting life and wanted to settle down.  More than likely there was one individual, probably an inquisitive young kid who discovered that he could plant wild seeds and at the end of the season found that he could enjoy a bountiful harvest.  He probably related his discovery to other members of his family or they, on seeing that he was suddenly well fed and contented, went about to discover the secret of his newfound joy.  Success is its own reward, and soon the idea spread.  And like any other human inventions, others began improving on the idea, perhaps trying to plant other grains like corn.  Yet others would develop the concept further by storing some of the seeds for planting in the next season, or trying to preserve them by storing in the ground or drying in the sun.  Not long after that would emerge the idea of planning for the next growing season.

            Wild animals too were probably domesticated in a similar fashion.  Again, a group of primitives did not suddenly have a gathering and decide they would capture and tame some chosen wild sheep and goats.  More than likely, a doting father gave his son a pair of baby wild sheep that were orphaned after he killed their mother.  The little boy grew attached to them and when they were grown up he would not let his father kill them.  The pair subsequently bred and suddenly the family had additional sheep without having to go out and hunt.  Then the boy discovered that he could also drink what the lamb suckled from the mother’s teats.  Voila!  Milk was discovered, and the idea of a primitive dairy industry took hold.

            It did not take long from there for ancient Homo sapiens to discover the utility of keeping baby sheep.  Not only did they prove to be ideal toys for their children, those cuddly animals also provided a ready source of meat and milk.  Further, they did not have to lug the meat around or preserve it in any way.  It was made readily available fresh on the hoof at any time.  Soon they would discover that the milk could be converted to cheese, the wool woven into blankets, and the hide into foot coverings and clothing.

            All these developments started with one inquisitive individual with one novel idea, and with success, that idea was copied, amplified, and improved.  A millennium later we have fancy Florsheim shoes and Armani woolen suits, their ingredients all coming from the ever-useful domesticated animal.

            This pattern is repeated throughout history.  The modern integrated circuit, the brain of the computer, was designed not by some high profile national committee or the brainchild of a farsighted leader, rather by an engineer tinkering around in the laboratory pursuing his imagination.  From that basic invention, others would improve and capitalize on it.  But it all began with the imagination of one person.

            In the Malay legend Hikayat Abdullah, a story is told of a bright young boy who suggested that the sultan plant banana trees along the coast to absorb the impact of flying fish storming upon the beaches and impaling the citizens.  The idea worked wonderfully, and many citizens were spared.  Unfortunately, the sultan’s advisors warned that such a bright young man could prove to be dangerous.  What other brilliant ideas would he come up with when he would be older?  The sultan, sensing a threat, ordered the boy beheaded.

            Imagine had the sultan and his hangers-on reacted differently.  Suppose he had rewarded the bright kid, given him half the treasury, offered him the princess’s hand, and showered him with glamorous royal titles?  That would certainly impress the kid; he would then think very highly of the sultan.  It would also motivate the young man to come up with other innovations to benefit the sultan and his kingdom.  More importantly, others would be encouraged to come up with similar brilliant ideas.  One might suggest collecting the impaled fish and selling them in the market, or to convert them into animal feed.  Or he may cut the snouts and convert them into artistic carvings of swords and daggers for sale to tourists.  Yet another would develop the entire coastline into banana plantations and sell the fruit to passing ships.  The possibilities are limitless.  But by killing the boy the sultan effectively stifled any original ideas coming from his subjects.  As for offering the princess’s hand to the bright young boy, at the very least that would have introduced much-needed “smart” genes into the royal family!

            Thinking and creating are solitary activities; the work of individuals, not groups or committees.  Great works of art, beautiful music, and creative insights are the accomplishment of individuals.  The progress of human society depends on such persons.  One innovation begets another, with no predictable outcome.  The first man who tried domesticating wild animals could have been killed by strange bacteria like anthrax.  Or he could have mistakenly tried to domesticate some primitive rattlesnakes, with equally fatal consequences.  The man who tried to tame the rattlesnake probably thought he could solve his food problem and take care of the rat infestation in his cave at the same time.  The hunter-gatherer who first planted the seeds could have harvested fruits that turned out to be sour or even poisonous.  And the first man to chisel out a tool from a rock could have been blinded by the resulting flying chips, thereby discouraging others from pursuing that lead.  Occasionally however, there will be success, and such discoveries would then spread and be improved upon.

            Modern inventors may make fortunes out of their inventions.  The man who designed the internal combustion engine may have raked in millions in profits and royalty fees, but the benefits to society of his invention are even greater.  Bill Gates may be collecting billions for his software, but the value of his programs to society is many times more.  Regardless of what his motivations were to write all those wonderful software – greed, curiosity, or a desire to be famous – he has nonetheless created a useful product that enables millions to be more productive in their work.  In doing something for himself he has done a great deal for mankind.

            This applies to all those ingenious inventors, past and present.  We should not envy the bounty they received; rather we should consider the value of their inventions on society.  Gates’ word processing software helped me not only in my personal writings but also in my office.  In the past I would have to dictate my letters, my secretary would then transcribe them, and I would recheck the final form.  If there were errors she would have to retype all over again.  Now I do not even transcribe but simply pull down a template, change a few items here and there, and a new personalized letter is produced.  Imagine the increased productivity!  I do not have to depend as much on my secretary anymore for correspondence.

            As for my bookkeeping, I thank Scott Cook, the man who designed the accounting software, Quicken.  In the past I would spend literally days at the end of every year trying to balance my books and figure out my taxes.  Now these data are readily available with the click of the mouse.  The value of the software to me far exceeds whatever fortune Cook received.

            Even if these inventors do not have a charitable motive, nonetheless through their inventions they have contributed immensely to society, much more than the average charity giver.  I have little tolerance for those do-gooders who want to save society but in the end they themselves need to be helped.  I hear ad nauseam Malay leaders out to “fight and save our race.”  Often these national “heroes” could not even take care of themselves and their own children – their primary responsibility.  In trying to save the nation they could not even save their own family.

            To me the best contribution you can make is to take care of yourself and your family first so that you and they do not burden society.  By being productive, a “maker” in the economy, you make your contributions.  If each of us is a producer, then we can take better care of those amongst us who truly deserve our charity:  the aged, the infirmed, and the disabled.

            The problem today is that many are content with being “takers” of the economy.  Amongst the worse culprits are the modern-day Robin Hoods who righteously proclaim their noble intentions to help the less fortunate by taking from the producers.  Many of the social welfare programs of Western democracies are nothing but variations of this sophisticated Robin Hood-type redistributionist mentality.

            In his book Makers and Takers, Edmund Contoski suggested modifying President Kennedy’s famous inaugural line:  “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.”  Instead he suggested that the President should have said, “Ask what you can do for yourself.”  I agree.  After you have taken care of yourself and your family, then ask what you can do for your country.

            When I was in high school in the 1950s there was much consternation on the lack of Malays in science.  Malay politicians and leaders were exhorting the young to pursue the sciences.  Many senior Malay science students then were under great pressure to mentor and tutor younger pupils.  Many showpiece time-consuming tutoring programs were started.  Unfortunately with their time taken up with mentoring, many of the mentors themselves suffered and failed in their own studies.  Had those students concentrated on their own “selfish” personal goals of first excelling in their own studies, they would not only have helped themselves immensely but also at the same time furthered the cause of Malays much more effectively.

            Today I still see many bright young Malay scientists and professionals consumed with trying to better the lot of their race at the expense of their own professional development.  One scientist recently declined a prestigious post-doctoral appointment because he was in a rush to return “to serve his country.”  I argued that he would serve Malaysia better by being as well trained as possible.  He would advance the cause of Malaysian science much better by first being an accomplished scientist.  In one’s eagerness to help society one sometimes shortchanges oneself, and ultimately the greater society.  Sadly today that young scientist languishes in a remote corner of academia, the nation deprived of his full potential.

            Thousands of Malay undergraduates today are diverted from their studies in their desire to “better their race.”  They are consumed with political campaigning and ugly street demonstrations to the detriment of their studies.  Little did they realize that they would serve society better by first excelling in their studies and then making their own contributions with the skills and knowledge that they have acquired.  These students’ behaviors are conditioned by our culture.  We can tell much about the values of a culture by seeing upon whom it bestows its honors and rewards. In Malay society we do not reward the producers, rather the takers.  Peruse the royal honors lists.  Rarely are our scientists, entrepreneurs, builders, and inventors honored.  Instead we have these political do-gooders and assorted royal hangers-on.  Societies progress best when they reward the producers.

            Man has existed for over a million years, but 99% of the achievements of human civilization have occurred within the last millennium.  The pace was even steeper within the last century.  It is unlikely for humans to have changed greatly biologically within the last 1,000 years.  Neither has the global climate and geography radically changed during that period.  Yet during this time there have been phenomenal inventions and progress.  Such advancements can only be attributed to human ingenuity, and not a function of geography or biology.

            For Malaysia to advance, we must pay attention to our most valuable resource:  our people.  Society progresses best when it allows full expression and freedom for its individual members.  And for every member of the community who is a producer, there would correspondingly be one fewer taker.

            Totalitarian societies can never aspire for greatness; they seek total control of their members.  Every significant progress in human civilization has been the result of the contributions of individuals.  The Age of Renaissance that spawned modern Western civilization was a record of exemplary individual achievements in the arts and sciences.

            I firmly believe that Allah in His wisdom and justness endows every society with its share of the gifted and talented.  What a particular culture or society does with this divine gift will chart its future.

            There is a natural aristocracy among men, observed Thomas Jefferson, and the grounds for this are virtue and talent.  There is also the artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talent.  Malaysia should aspire that its aristocratic class be made up of the virtuous and talented.  It must ensure that its policies nurture this noble goal.  Equally important we must enhance those elements in our culture that strengthen this ideal and at the same time negate those forces that place obstacles on the path of our natural aristocrats.

            In the next two chapters I will cite examples of societies in the past and present to illustrate and amplify the points discussed here.

Next:   Chapter 3:  Lessons From The Past

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 May 2010, 8:35 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
globalisation
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Putrajaya dream not far-fetched, says Kit Siang

By
G Vinod | FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: Pakatan Rakyat’s victory in the recent Sibu by-election proved that all is not lost for the coalition in its hopes of winning the 13th general election, and forming the next federal government.

In his blog, DAP veteran Lim Kit Siang also said the days Barisan Nasional considered Sabah and Sarawak as its “fixed deposits” are over.

“The BN survived the onslaught of the 2008 political tsunami due to the support from Sabah and Sarawak.

“However, it must have realised now that it cannot take the voters of the two states for granted by disregarding their legitimate grievances and discontent,” he said.

Last Sunday, DAP’s Wong Ho Leng defeated BN’s Robert Lau Hui Yew by a wafer-thin majority of 398 votes, in a seat that is purpotedly a “BN stronghold”.

Lim said the victory had also halted BN’s move to regain its two-thirds majority in Parliament following a series of defections by PR lawmakers earlier.

He added that the Sibu by-election also saw Pakatan component parties displaying a sense of maturity and effectiveness in its political alliance.

“ It was the first foray for the team of DAP, PKR, PAS and SNAP. The leaders of all the parties have demonstrated to all Malaysians of the quality and the nature of the new politics for a new Malaysia,” he said.

Lim also heaped praises on PKR supremo Anwar Ibrahim, PAS president Hadi Awang, Bukit Gantang MP Nizar Jamaluddin, Zaid Ibrahim and many other Pakatan leaders for their contribution to the victory.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 May 2010, 8:37 am and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Surprising signals from Sibu

By
Bridget Welsh

The real measure of change among the electorate is how they mark the ballot paper.

This analysis explores how people voted in Sibu, drawing from the polling station results and local interviews. The results from the Sibu by-election point to major transformations in voting behavior in Sarawak.

T?hey show swings among voters of all the different ethnic communities towards Pakatan and consistent youth disenchantment with the BN.

The results also reveal a crack in the rural-urban divide in Sarawak voting. Even the composition of the low voter turnout under close scrutiny points in Pakatan’s favour.

The findings suggest that not only has the opposition gained a seat in a historic upset, there is now a major challenge on BN’s ‘fixed deposit’ hold on national and state power.

Impressive Chinese swing for Pakatan

The most obvious development this round is stronger locally-based Chinese support for the opposition. Traditionally Chinese voters have been swing voters, moving toward the government in 1995 and 2004, for example, and away from the BN in 2008.

Within the national picture, Sibu has not experienced the same level of movement. Local factors have driven contests more than national ones. This by-election was an exception.

Moreover, traditionally, the Chinese in Sibu have favoured the BN in greater numbers than in West Malaysia or even Kuching. This contest they moved, and did so, for Sibu, in historic proportions.

There are 46 polling stations in Sibu. Of these, 20 are majority Chinese areas, over 77% Chinese. In March 2008, Chinese support for the opposition was 62%. This time round it jumped to 69%, a gain of 7%. Chinese turnout overall remained the same, at 65%.

?The fact that many younger Chinese voters – who were already more inclined in 2008 towards the opposition – did not return home for the by-election in large numbers suggests that more Chinese voted this round.

This is to say that the potential Chinese swing could have been even higher, as Chinese Sibuans showed increasing alienation from the BN.

What were the factors beyond those discussed yesterday that affected the Chinese? Foremost were concerns over religious freedom and the ‘Allah’ issue. Sibuans want to be able to read the Bible in Bahasa Malaysia and to practice one’s religion without political interference.

Sibu has a high concentration of Christians, over half the Chinese voters, like other parts of East Malaysia. Concerns were also expressed about Perkasa and ultra-Malay nationalism. Prime Minister Najib Razak made a wise move to cancel the May 13 rally, otherwise the majority for the opposition would have been much larger.

The concerns about racial discourse and ethnic exclusion run deep among Chinese Malaysians, and in Sibu these issues were percolating with the same level of intensity that one finds in West Malaysia.

Sadly, the ultra-Malay chauvinism of Perkasa challenges the credibility of 1Malaysia, which was the rallying cry for the BN symbolically in the Sibu campaign. Many Sibuans asked for more substance for the laudable 1Malaysia goals.

?Chinese Sibuans also voted for the opposition due to the sense that their interests are not protected within BN and in government.

There is a real feeling of discrimination and second-class citizenship that does not rest well. This was not helped by perceived weaknesses of SUPP in Sarawak and MCA nationally as advocates.

Compounding the party shortcomings in deliverables to and representation of the Chinese community was a failure in the BN camp to engage in its usual outreach to Chinese social organisations, from clans to secret societies. This vacuum was filled by DAP.

Finally, and perhaps most damning of all, many Chinese Sibuans lost faith in the ability of the federal and state government to create security and opportunities for their children. Many are sending their children abroad for school and work.

They are looking outside of Malaysia for opportunities and the future. They are angry that they cannot live in the home where their family has lived for generations with respect, inclusion and opportunity.

The BN faces an uphill task to win back the confidence of deeply alienated Chinese voters. Economic growth will help, but it will not be enough to substantively address the psychological and structural factors that underlie the raw wounds of exclusion.

Pakatan Delivers the Malays/Melanau

Both sides organised their campaign strategies as a battle for ethnic support upfront. Recognising its disadvantage, the BN concentrated on its base, the Malay and Iban areas. They have always had the advantage in these communities.

This had to do with the shortcomings of the DAP in Sibu, which has not traditionally engaged with these communities, largely due to a lack of familiarity, machinery and resources. In Sibu, and arguably in Sarawak as a whole, the DAP has been seen as a Chinese party.

In this campaign, the DAP was able to engage reach out through Pakatan. At issue was a test for whether the Pakatan partners could deliver the bumiputera base, and whether the DAP could shed its Chinese chauvinist image.

Nationally the crucial contestation is over the Malay vote since it goes to the heart of legitimacy to govern. Since March 2008, the contestation for Malay votes has become fierce. For the BN and Najib, they have worked to increase Malay support to strengthen their mandate, largely by portraying the view that the opposition has betrayed Malays in their supposed control by the Chinese.

?Sadly, this strategy has worked on the ground in places such as Hulu Selangor. Pakatan has faced a growing Malay deficit, as Malay support has declined.

This Pakatan Malay deficit has national implications in that the level of Malay support shapes Anwar Ibrahim’s (left) appeal for national power and connects into PAS’ role within the opposition coalition. More Malay support for Pakatan strengthens the cooperation among the opposition component parties and enhances Pakatan’s multi-ethnic credentials.

In this context, any movement in the Malay vote in Sibu was to be sign, a sign of PAS’ ability to deliver for DAP, and even more important, a sign of the appeal of either national Malay leader Najib or Anwar to represent the majority ethnic community in the country.

The field was not even as the Malay/Melanau communities have had much stronger support for the BN in Sibu traditionally than in West Malaysia. Personal patronage and relationships plays a much larger role in harnessing support in Sarawak as well.

Dissimilar political dynamics

Political dynamics in the Malay community in Sarawak are not the same as in West Malaysia. They are comprised of a more diverse group, including the politically powerful Melanau based in Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud’s PBB.

Few appreciate that there are the differences and tensions between the Malay and Melanau communities, as each has their own individual ties to the federal and state governments.

?While patronage is a prominent feature of the relationship to both during elections, how they identify and connect with state and federal actors differ.

What makes the issues even more complex is that many Sarawakian Malays/Melanau have different feelings about the importation of West Malaysian parties – namely Umno and PAS, both of which played major roles in contest for Malay votes this round.

The PBB was overshadowed by the penetration of a more prominent Umno-PAS campaign. Given the importance of the contest to Najib/Umno and Pakatan, this contest reflected a growing “national” transformation of the actors contesting for the Malay/Melanau ground.

When the results came in, the two majority Malay polling stations, the BN lost (yes, lost) support among Malays/Melanau on the margin of 3%. In real terms, they picked up a few votes in numbers, since these areas had a greater increase in the number of voters over the last two years, but the BN lost their overall share.

What is most striking is the massive drop in Malay turnout, from over 68% in 2008, dropping to 50% this round. This was especially the case in Datu Nyabor, where turnout only hit a paltry 40%.

?Rather than vote for BN, and Taib (right) in particular, they stayed home. Given the stakes at play, this was a substantive gain for Pakatan.

The presence of PAS, who camped out in the Malay/Melanau areas, was unprecedented, and suggests that the contestation for Malay votes will be more heated in the future, as networks form.

One has to ask what would have been the dynamic if there had not been the financial wherewithal of a by-election campaign.

The BN gains among Malays in West Malaysia did not extend to Sibu. While the BN wins the overwhelming majority of Malay votes, 78%, the Sibu Malay swing suggests that Pakatan has made inroads into what was seen as an impenetrable community.

Pakatan made inroads among the Iban

The gains for Pakatan in the Malay community were unexpected. The hope for the opposition was to make inroads among the Iban. Here the remoteness of the longhouses and link between the government and rumah tuai puts the BN with an advantage upfront.

The contest for the Iban speaks less to national power, but to state control in Sarawak. Throughout the campaign there were reports of intimidation in Iban areas, blockades against the entry of opposition leaders, and of course, intense vote-buying for each pintu and offers of development projects for the longhouses.

This community, comprising 17% of the vote in Sibu, was seen as critical in the outcome of this contest and the state as a whole.

?When the votes were counted, the BN won more, with a positive swing of 3.5% in the three majority Iban areas overall. Turnout was high in these areas as well, over 80%, which was surprising given the upcoming Gawai festival two weeks away which would have prevented many young voters from returning just to vote.

Yet a closer look at the polling station results show that the actual share of voter turnout cast for the BN and Pakatan remained on par with the 2008 polls, and there was interesting variation in the Iban vote.

The BN won most of its support in Penasu and lost support in Rassau and Bawang Assan in the range of 2-3%. Here too, this suggests that Pakatan made inroads, although only marginally and inconsistently. Yet, considering the amount of money thrown, this can only be seen as a Pakatan victory.

In real terms, Pakatan stemmed the tide of support for BN in these areas, as it will be difficult for the BN to repeat the financial incentives in the state and national election. This may, however, prove to be a wash as Pakatan also faces the challenge of maintaining its machinery and engagement in Iban areas.

Generational transformations

The ethnic transformation highlights some dark clouds for BN. Looking at the saluran results indicate a real storm. They did not pick up support among younger voters in the overall share. In fact, among the areas where there is a range of saluran (although not a large number), there was a drop of support among younger voters by 2 percent.

?Turnout among younger voters also dropped. This was expected since many could not return home to vote.

The disenchantment extends across ethnic communities, although much less in the Malay and Iban areas than in the Chinese. It is important to note that in these areas, BN still commands the majority.

What was the most surprising from the results were the gains for the opposition among older voters, usually the diehards for SUPP.

While the oldest voters stayed more loyal to the BN camp, those under an estimated 55 years moved toward the opposition, especially among Chinese. This indicates a move toward Pakatan across generations in Sibu.

New urban-rural dynamics

The usual dichotomy in Sarawak points to strong urban support for DAP, with BN commanding the rural heartland. This round there are cracks here for BN as well. Pakatan gained an estimated 6% in rural areas overall, particularly among rural Chinese.

This rural swing was the product of better machinery and more engagement with these areas, but it is on par with the swing ethnically by the Chinese overall. This fact only further suggests real political changes in the Sarawak landscape.

It will be a challenge for Pakatan to maintain this momentum, but it shows that the rural ground is no longer as hard as it was in the past.

More broadly this suggests that the nature of Sarawak politics is shifting, as money is no longer as effective as it was in the past. It appears that as messages connect, exposure widens and engagement deepens, the BN loses support in Sarawak.

Assessing decreasing voter turnout

BN even lost support in who turned out to vote. On the surface, the voter turnout suggests a disengagement with the process. No question, both sides could do more to mobilise voters.

A close look, however, indicates that the composition of this drop was concentrated in one community, the Malays, and among younger voters, who did not return home.

Many Malays opted not to vote – some expected the win for BN, others pointed to neglect and yet others pointed to real reservations with BN in this contest, especially concerns over land, flooding and corruption. This indeed should be really worrying for BN.

Political upshot of voting trends

So what does all this mean politically? It is important to understand that this is a by-election and conditions are fluid. It is also important not to read too much into one contest.

This said, Pakatan has gone beyond expectations in gaining support. While Hulu Selangor still sting for Pakatan and suggests a real need to reevaluate the West Malaysia campaign, Sarawak has opened up.

The opposition has now a chance of breaking the BN iron hold on power in Sarawak, perhaps more than doubling their seats, and buttressing the defections with seats from East Malaysia, with more parliamentarians nationally.

It will be a major challenge for the opposition to replicate the machinery and cooperation in East Malaysia, but the terrain across the South China Sea has transformed since March, making the possibility of Putrajaya stronger than it has been since March 2008 and East Malaysia now more important politically than ever before.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 May 2010, 5:01 am and is filed under
Election
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


What more do we want from the Chinese?

BY
HOWL PILLAI | CPI

I find myself in a strangely odd position – an Indian speaking up for the Chinese. It has recently been asked of them: “What more do the Chinese want?”

If it were merely rhetorical, I will defend the right to ask questions of such a nature in the name of free speech and healthy discourse. Unfortunately it is not a question. It is a blatant threat. The politicians behind the threat have clearly identified themselves. They have also now shown their hand. They are shamelessly indulging in the gutter politics of communalism.

A demonstration 10,000-strong had been planned for May 13 in Terengganu. We should reject this threat for the same reason we reject a bribe. Racial politics and corruption are slowly and surely destroying the very fabric of nationhood. A country that was put together carefully with effort, toil and sacrifice deserves better.

We must therefore entirely reject the threat and answer the question only in its rhetorical form: What more do the Chinese want?

Post-May 13

Since 1969, the Chinese have seen the New Economic Policy (NEP) at work and not at work. But for all its faults, the NEP has distributed great wealth and provided unheard of opportunities to create a Malay middle class and super-rich elite of Umnoputras.

It has also allayed the fears of the Malay man-in-the-street that he/she will be ‘lost in the world’ (Tak akan Melayu hilang di dunia).

The Chinese with much public grace and equally much private grumbling have largely accepted the pain of economic restructuring. They still account for easily 80% of the income tax revenue of the country. But in this same period, true to their kind, they have girded their loins and redoubled their efforts.

Ever so quick to seize new opportunities, they have continued to prosper in spite of the excesses of the NEP. Surely there is nothing in this world and no religious or secular law that prevents a man or woman from prospering economically through the sweat of his brow or the straining of his sinews or the mental acuity of his business dealings.

We may not like the Chinese trait of applying themselves diligently to the task at hand and to the exclusion of all others; or their fiercely competitive nature; their kiasu-ness; their calculative frugality; their risk-taking; their business shrewdness; their culinary indulgences and their relentless pursuit of investments, returns and wealth in all its myriad forms.

But remember, they too may not like our traits of indifference, impracticalness, lebih kurang-ism … the list both ways is endless.

But we must respect them for their singular ability to create new wealth and not be merely consumers of old wealth. We must respect them for their resourcefulness and for their incredible pertinacity in the face of adversity. We must compliment them their innate understanding of the importance of personal savings in the economic life of an individual and of the investment opportunities that arise out of deferred gratification. We must thank them for showing us in practical terms what self-reliance and self-sacrifice really means.

Planning for the future

Surely, they more than anyone else have shown that the secret of capitalism lies in its unsurpassed ability to promote capital formation that fuels ever more new ventures and so ad infinitum.

They have shown us also that wealth has a generational purpose and that it is linked to a vision of the future we have for ourselves, our families, our society and the country we live in.

To me they are the least nihilistic of people. There is much we have learnt from the Chinese economic model based on hard work, perseverance and skills development. True, the pursuit of wealth and economic success is often accompanied by greed and avarice. Which race in the world is free from such follies and frailties?

The fact that the Chinese migrant is a prized economic asset is indisputable. That this prized asset cannot be got for free is also indisputable. It is also indisputable that he comes with the political rights of a human being – the right to prosper with dignity.

But No! All this is not ‘what more the Chinese want’. It’s more, much more than that!

I have every reason to believe that the Chinese, who so often go about their tasks with one eye on the future, have come to the inevitable conclusion that if left unchecked, the politicians of this country will be the ruin of us all.

The Chinese are not Neros to helplessly fiddle while Rome burns.

‘What more the Chinese want’ is for the rot to stop.

They can clearly see with eyes teared by 5,000 years of the painful tide of relentless history. A history filled with upheavals, turmoil and revolution has given them an inbuilt ‘antenna’ that warns them when a society is approaching decay, decline and disaster.

They know that a rotten tree will not bear good fruits for long. They know there will be nothing left to share with or without the NEP and its sketchy successor, the NEM.

They know that zero, simply put, is indivisible.

The Chinese have sounded the alarm bell for all of us. What more do we want from them?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 May 2010, 8:33 am and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will IGP try to understand the public and agree to a public inquiry into police shootings now that there is another police report lodged by port worker Sharil Azlan?

The Malaysian Insider headline “Understand cops, IGP tells public” sums up what the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan has to say on TV3 last night.

I would be the first to agree with him, and this is the reason why I had consistently advocated and supported improvement in the wages and working conditions of the Malaysian police force in my four decades in Parliament.

But can the IGP fathom that the Police must understand the public who want to have an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service singled-mindedly focused on three core functions: to keep crime low, to eradicate corruption and to uphold human rights –  the very words used by the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission in its report released in May 2005?

Musa said: “The people must understand that if there was a police road-block, they must stop and not ram into a road-block. By doing so, police will become suspicious, because they might be criminals or drug traffickers or they just want to run away from the law.”

Musa said police would act according to the law when handling such situations, including using deadly force, when trying to defend themselves (police) or others.

He said: “We will take action based on our justification. If there was justification for action and for the use of force when carrying out our duties, we will do it. But during investigations, if we come across an individual using excessive powers, we may recommend such individuals to be charged in court.”

Musa has completely avoided the question uppermost in the minds of all Malaysians, i.e. how the police could shoot-to-kill a fleeing 14 year-old Form III student Aminulrasyid Amzah some 100 metres near his Shah Alam home in the early hours of  April 26 though driving his sister’s car without licence and underaged?

The standard response that the police couldn’t know whether the driver of the car was teen or thug is not acceptable because the police were not under any form of threat  to life, as whether visible or not, Aminulrasyid was “fleeing” and not endangering the life of any policeman.

Furthermore, can Musa explain why, despite possessing all the full facts,  he publicly asked for an inquest into the killing of Aimulrasyid and had to be overruled by the Attorney-General who decided to initiate prosecution against one police officer?

Yesterday, a police report was lodged by Port Klang operator, 25-year-old Sharil Azlan Ahmad Kamil, who was shot at a roadblock in Shah Alam in April last year.

The Port Klang Northport  worker said the bullet slug, which hit his arm and penetrated his ribcage, remains lodged close to his spine. He said doctors told him there was a high risk of him being paralysed if surgery is performed to remove the slug.

Sharil, who  lodged the report at the Shah Alam district police headquarters yesterday, said he was driving back home to Kapar with a friend after a drink at a restaurant in Section 7, Shah Alam  at about 12.30am on April 16, 2009 when he came across a police roadblock.

Realising his road tax had expired, he said he panicked and pulled over to evade the police.

Sharil alleged that two plainclothes policemen armed with sticks approached them and on seeing this he turned off at a lane. He said he then heard at least three gunshots fired and he and his friend ducked inside the car to avoid the shots.

However, the last gunshot which went through his car door hit him.

He said the policemen approached them and ordered them to step out of the car at gunpoint. Sharil said a policeman also smashed the front passenger’s window. He then dragged his friend out through the window.

“I asked them who they are and they did not answer but asked me why I was trying to run. I told them my road tax had expired. I begged him to call an ambulance as I had been shot and was in terrible pain.

“Another police officer in uniform told me to be patient and an ambulance only arrived an hour later. I was also accused of carrying drugs, ” he said.

He said he was taken to the Tengku Ampuan Rahimah Hospital where he was warded in the intensive care unit and the following day transferred to the Kuala Lumpur Hospital (HKL).

“A policeman turned up at the HKL and offered me RM200 for my medical bills but my mother turned it down. The next day two officers came over and recorded my statement and asked me if a parang found in my car was mine. I denied it. The officers also assured me that they will take action against the policemen involved if it is found that they were trying to ‘fix’ me”, he said.

Sharil  said his father had also lodged a police report on the same day of the incident but to date, no action has been taken against the policemen.

Sharil’s account sounds very familiar in cases of police abuses of firearms and reminds Malaysians of Aminulrasyid’s case.

Why was no action taken by the police for more than a year on the police report lodged by Sharil’s father ?

How can cases of police reports about police shootings in (i) Shah Alam and (ii) the country had been lodged and how percentage of these reports had been investigated and what is their outcome?

Can Musa provide answers to these questions?

Can  Musa explain why in the four years he was  IGP, public confidence in the police have reached such a low ebb that instead of being the protector of the public, Malaysians have come to fear policemen as never before in the history of the police force?

Or as one twitter-visitor on my twitter put it:

“Who will understand the civilian? When we civilian c Police we r supposed to feel safe but all this time we feel the other way!”

Will the  IGP try to understand the public and agree to a public inquiry into all  police shootings, fatal as well as those which did not lead to deaths, from 2005 now that there is another police report lodged by  port worker Sharil Azlan?

Furthermore, as a parting contribution to the  restoration of public confidence in the police and the establishment of a new chapter in police-public relations, will he spearhead a  movement for the establishment of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC), as proposed by the Police Royal Commission headed by a  former Chief Justice and a former Inspector-General of Police?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 20 May 2010, 12:19 pm and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Kit Siang chides EC over ‘disrespectful’ and ‘rude’ claim

By
Rahmah Ghazali
 | FMT

PETALING JAYA: DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang chided the Election Commission (EC) for saying the party was “disrespectful” and “rude” during the tallying of the Sibu by-election results.

“As far as DAP is concerned, we were very civil,” he told FMT, in response to EC deputy chief Wan Ahmad Wan Omar’s statement in Malay-daily Utusan Malaysia today.

Lim stressed that DAP was only aiming for a free and just election and said that the party has been fully cooperating with the EC to ensure such objective being achieved.

Wan Ahmad was quoted as saying that the opposition party was “rude” and “disrespectful” to the EC and accused them of obstructing their workers during the tallying of the postal votes.

He claimed that the DAP leaders and supporters, including the winning candidate Wong Ho Leng had accused the EC of being deliberately slow in their vote counting.

Wan Ahmad also said commission workers who were bringing in the ballot boxes to the tally centre were heckled and booed at by DAP supporters.

The controversy started when DAP leaders questioned the delay by the EC in announcing the result which was initially to be made by 9pm. Instead, it was made about two hours later.

“They said that our workers were deliberately slow in counting the votes. Actually, they (DAP) were the ones who had caused the delay,” Wan Ahmad was quoted as saying.

However, Lim today justified the party’s action as the EC had “a displayed gross blunder” by delaying the announcement for more than two hours.

“They held back the result for more than two hours and they will have to explain the delay…we were suspicious. We could not ignore it and keep quiet about it,” he said.

EC mulls new rule

Then EC came under intense scrutiny by Pakatan Rakyat leaders and supporters during the vote counting as they sensed that the DAP was edging towards a historic victory.

When the result was finally announced, DAP’s Wong Ho Leng defeated BN’s Robert Lau with a slim majority of 398-vote.

Wan Ahmad also was quoted as saying that the commission is mulling a new rule which will prevent such an incident like the one in Sibu from happening again.

This, he said, will be discussed at the by-electing post-mortem meeting that will be held next week.

Responding to this, Lim countered that whatever new rule the EC comes up with must show “fairness, impartiality and independence”.

“If not, the public will lose confidence in the integrity and the professionalism of the EC,” he said.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 21 May 2010, 12:44 pm and is filed under
Election
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should present a preliminary White Paper to  the June 7 Parliament on the RM1-2billion Sime Darby cost overruns which have already led to the fall of its group chief executive Ahmad Zubir

The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak should present a preliminary White Paper to the June 7 Parliament on the RM1-2 billion Sime Darby cost overruns which have already led to the fall of its group chief executive Datuk Seri Ahmad Zubir and growing calls led by former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad for the whole Board of Directors including Chairman Tun Musa Hitam to resign.

This is because the Malaysian people and taxpayers are the final shareholders of Sime Darby, hitherto the biggest and most successful government-linked company (GLC).

I welcome the announcement by Musa yesterday that the ongoing internal probe by Sime Darby Bhd to find out how it made staggering losses has now been expanded to cover all its six business divisions.

The probe was previously confined to the conglomerate’s energy and utilities division and is now expanded to its five other business units, viz: plantations, property, healthcare, automotive and industrial divisions.

Mahathir is right to ask why only the CEO is made responsible, when he  (Mahathir) was told of the cost overruns and delays from the four energy and utilities projects, including the Bakun dam project,  three year ago.

There is also the question of the actual cost overruns from the four energy and utilities projects – with reports giving a total loss of RM1.8 billion.

It is not good enough for Musa to evade the issue and say that he will “stick to the figure” of RM964 million as given in the May 13th Sime Darby statement, if all the facts showing that the total cost overruns from the energy and utilities units have ballooned to RM1.8 billion.

Musa owes the Malaysian public the latest updates on the Sime Darby losses or he is  falling short of the high standards of accountability and good governance which he had always set for himself and the country.

I will ask for a meeting with Musa on the colossal losses suffered by Sime Darby under his chairmanship.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 21 May 2010, 8:04 am and is filed under
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Senior MBPJ officials own low-cost flats

by R. Nadeswaran, Terence Fernandez and Llew-Ann Phang

The Sun

PETALING JAYA (May 20, 2010): SHE is chauffeur-driven in an official four-wheel drive on duties and states her address in official documents as a double-storey corner terrace house in Kota Damansara. But Sharipah Marhaini Syed Ali is also the owner of the low-cost apartment in Ara Damansara and happens to be the planning director of the Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ).

She is not the only senior official owning a low-cost apartment.

MBPJ’s senior assistant engineer, Hanizah Katab, owns one in the same block – and so does about 500 other MBPJ employees, many using the names of wives, husbands and relatives to own low-cost homes in Petaling Jaya.

By her own admission, Sharipah is not the only director who owns a low-cost flat. Questioned by a councillor, she charged that there are other “directors and deputy directors” who own such properties.

In a reply to a memo from Deputy Mayor Puasa Md Taib dated Feb 4, Sharipah argued that “if the policy is that those earning above RM2,500 are not eligible, then all the other officers involved should be asked to explain”.

Going by the state government’s guidelines on eligibility for low-cost units, they would not qualify by a mile because only those having combined family income of less than RM2,500 a month can apply.

However, according to Sharipah, there was a policy introduced in 2001, when the council took over squatter eradication efforts from the state, to allocate low-cost units to council staff.

This decision, however, was in contravention of the state’s policy, which restricted the sale of low-cost units to those with a household income of not more than RM2,500.

Executive councillor in charge of poverty eradication Dr Xavier Jeyakumar said the policy still stands. “The state government’s policy on first-time ownership of low-cost units has not changed, and any exemption by the housing department must be sanctioned by the Exco,” he said.

However, documents made available to theSun revealed how the RM2,500 criteria could be circumvented (see also page 8).

Most, if not all, the low-cost units are not owner-occupied. Instead, they are an extra source of income because they can fetch rentals of up to RM500 a month.

Sharipah’s monthly bank loan repayment is RM322. Her apartment has been unoccupied for two months. According to neighbours, the Indonesian construction workers who were renting it had left for Kuantan after finishing a development project nearby.

Hanizah is collecting RM400 a month from an Indian family of six.

However, a search at MBPJ’s Valuation Department showed that in her application for the low-cost flat, Sharipah gave her address as a double-storey corner house on Jalan Nuri, Section 7 Kota Damansara, estimated at about RM450,000. Hanizah gave an address in Nilai.

The issue of MBPJ staff owning low-cost flats was first raised by councillor K.W. Mak in February when he asked the State Select Committee for Competency, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat) to investigate the non-compliance and malpractices in the sale of such apartments to non-eligible applicants.

In a statement last week, Mak said he had written to Mayor Datuk Roslan Sakiman on April 29 to also conduct investigations.

Mak raised the issues after receiving complaints from former squatters who were promised low-cost units but never received offers once the construction of the low-cost flat was completed.

“These former squatters have shown me proof that they were interviewed and given alternative accommodation prior to waiting for the demolition of their village to make way for development and subsequent relocation to the completed flat in their former locale,” he said.

Last week, two residents who had complained to Mak turned to theSun claiming that MBPJ officers had taken away apartments meant for them.

Mak said he has yet to see documents supporting the so-called policy to open up low-cost units to council staff.

In a statement today, MBPJ said developers offered excess units in eight low-cost housing schemes, on private lands, to its management team from year 2000. — theSun

                This entry was posted on Friday, 21 May 2010, 7:19 am and is filed under
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should not dodge questions but should answer frankly whether the Bakun Dam project has cost overruns of RM1.7 billion and that the government will be asking Parliament for a RM700 million bailout package for Sime Darby

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak has dodged questions about the Sime Darby costs overruns scandal since the GLC-conglomerate’s May 13 admission of RM964 million losses for the second half of FY2010, comprising:

1.

Qatar Petroleum (QP)

RM200 million

2.

Maersk Oil Qatar (MOQ)

RM159 million

3.

MOQ marine project

RM155 million

4.

Bakun Dam

RM450 million

Total

RM964 million

These are however only a part of the losses suffered by Sime Darby from these projects, for instance:

the RM974 million QP project which was awarded in April 2006 and scheduled for completion in August 2008 incurs losses exceeding RM500 million;

the RM2.2 billion MOQ Project, awarded in January 2007 and due for completion in October 2009 incurs RM526 million losses.

The Bakun Dam is a different kettle of fish altogether. It has been reported that Sime Darby has incurred more than RM1 billion in cost overruns from carrying out a civil works contract for the hydroelectric project, with one estimate putting the total cost overruns at RM1.7 billion, which is almost the same size as Sime Darby’s actual Bakun contract of RM1.8 billion.

It has also been reported that the government has agreed to reimburse around RM700 million to Sime Darby, leaving the group with around RM1 billion to deal with.

Najib said publicly that Sime Darby should determine the cause of its RM964 million losses first before the issue of responsibility.

This is far from correct as RM964 million losses are for the second half of the FY2010 and small porton of the total losses of Sime Darby in its history of some RM3.5 billion write-offs, and with more to come.

Star today carries the following table:

History of write-offs in Sime Darby group

Description

Period

Estimated quantum (RM)

Provision for costs overruns for Energy & Utilities projects

3 QFY2010

964 mil

Provision for cost overruns for the RM2.2 bil Maersk Oil Qatar project

2 QFY2010

210 mil

Provision for costs overruns for the RM1 bil Qatar Oil Project

4 QFY2010

80-100 mil

Futures trading loss due to trading of palm oil

FY2008

120 mil

Provision for vehicles sales receivables in China

FY2005

164 mil

Provision for cost overruns in Bakun hydroelectric project

FY2004-FY2005

132 mil

Losses due to Sime Bank

FY1998

1.8 bil

While investigations are ongoing to determine the causes of the losses and the persons responsible, Najib should not shirk responsibility from giving Parliament and Malaysians answers which are available to him now, viz: whether the Bakun Dam project has cost overruns of  RM1.7 billion and that the government will be asking Parliament for a RM700 million bailout package for Sime Darby.

Former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad is gloating over the Sime Darby and Bakun Dam fiascos, and it seems to be “sweet revenge 25 years later” when he called on Tun Musa Hitam and the entire Sime Darby Board to resign over the cost overruns.

The 2M government of Mahathir and Musa (Mahathir had later claimed that 2M really stood for Mahathir Mohamad) lasted less than five years from 1981 before it broke up, with Musa teaming up with Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah to challenge the Mahathir premiership – but it is only now we see the return of the “2Ms”, with Mahathir going for Musa’s jugular.

But it must be conceded that Mahathir raised a most legitimate question when he asked:

“Is it only the CEO  (Datuk Seri Ahmad Zubir Murshid) who was responsible? Who are the others who were involved with the project and failed to see that the cost overrun was very high and the project has been delayed by almost 3 years.

“I think responsibility should be shared. I was told of this cost overrun and delay three years ago.”

However, Mahathir should not be overhasty in his bombardment of Musa and Sime Darby, as during the Sime Bank Bhd financial crisis when it incurred losses amounting to RM1.8 billion during the 1997/8 Asian financial crisis, only the banking head Datuk Ismail Zakaria resigned while the group president and chief executive Tan Sri Nik Mohamed Nik Yaacob retired only in 2004. Zubir took over the position of chief executive after that.

Who was the Prime Minister during the Sime Bank crisis of 1997/8?

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 22 May 2010, 11:15 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Never before in Sibu

By
Wee Wui Kiat

[UPDATED with photos from the ground] A musing on the many firsts for Sibu that took place in the few weeks leading up to last Sunday’s by-election, that reflects a changed Malaysia.

Sibu Miracle – May 16,2010

Never before in Sibu have we seen such a strong line of a multi-ethnic opposition coalition working together hand in hand way into the wee hours of the night to bring about change.

Never before in Sibu have we seen so many Malays proudly wearing DAP caps and shirts on the streets.

Never before in Sibu have we seen a Malay woman donning the tudung, hoisting a huge DAP flag.

Never before in Sibu kopitiam have we seen Chinese men inviting Malay PKR men (who are strangers to them) to engage in an amicable and spirited conversation about political issues and problems.

Never before in Sibu have we witnessed such a wide range of topics previously thought of as “taboo” and “sensitive”, being analysed and discussed in front of a huge multi-racial audience eager for change, in such peace, non-hostility, and good faith.

Never before in Sibu have we witnessed such a huge display of support for the opposition – a 15,000 strong public attendance at an opposition grand-finale ceramah on 15th May 2010, where the public stayed for six consecutive hours, from 6.00p.m. to midnight. Not only were they there on their own accord, they did not leave when it drizzled, they were not paid to turn up, and they even donated on the spot for the cause.

Never before in Sibu have we witnessed large crowds gathering to listen to speeches on issues instead of watching fireworks and helicopters whizzing in the sky.

Never before in Sibu have we witnessed our Malaysian Prime Minister flying in to Sibu three times in a week to campaign for one single Parliamentary seat (the ruling coalition had alleged that the opposition would not be able to do anything about) – this shows us how important getting hold of even one seat has become.

Never before in Sibu have we seen night after night, throngs of Malaysians of all races attending ceramahs with total devotion to listening to every word spoken without the incentive of BBQs, jamuan makan malam, rumah terbuka, lucky draws, beauty contests, karaoke singing competitions, and all that rubbish.

Never before in Sibu has the Election Commission (headquartered at the Sibu Civic Centre) been cordoned off by so many police and FRU personnel, all surrounding roads blocked off, traffic jam due to the massive crowd gathering in the rain to await the final outcome of an election.

Never before in Sibu have so many of my friends come to realise the value of being a registered voter and cherish the ability to vote.

Never before in Sibu have I heard young people telling each other “I am going to register as a voter, fly home, and vote next time to do my part.”

Sibu by-election 16th May 2010 is a day of so many “Firsts” for Sibu and I wish it will also trigger many more “Firsts” for the rest of the Central Region of Sarawak.

It is indeed a miracle.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 22 May 2010, 5:00 am and is filed under
Election
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sarawak By-Election: Old Habits Die Hard

By
Tunku Abdul Aziz

Sibu, that remarkable town on the mighty Rejang that the Foochows built all those long years ago with sweat, blood and tears, notched another milestone: the Chinese community decided that May 16 was to be the day when they would show the rest of Malaysia, and indeed the world, that Najib’s largesse however packaged had all the smell of moral decay, or not to put too fine a point on it, undisguised vote buying. This illegal and immoral practice is apparently endorsed and encouraged by both the Election Commission and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. Sibuans on the other hand would have none of it.

What was so distressing was that the EC and MACC were ever so quick to affix their “No Action” tab on what clearly was corruption committed by Najib who offered financial inducements to the voters of Sibu to return the Barisan Nasional candidate.  Similarly they took no action against Najib for his shenanigans in the Hulu Selangor by-election. Most surprising of all, there was not even a whimper from the self-proclaimed anti-corruption fighter, Transparency International Malaysia. Have they decided to flow with the tide of political corruption as well? Najib’s practice of bribing voters into supporting his election agenda shows a complete and utter disdain for public opinion and the law.

What is the point of spending hundreds of millions on beefing the MACC up, already bloating and bursting at the seams with gross inefficiency, when the prime minister bribes the voters of Sibu, with complete arrogance and impunity? To our complete surprise, the good citizens of Sibu, unlike some of their fellow citizens elsewhere, turned up their collective nose and gave Najib the elbow, more or less telling him to “take a running jump into the Rejang.”

I had misjudged the mood and the strength of character of the people of Sibu, thinking that the dangling by Najib of the millions of ringgit from his slush funds would be enough to overcome any moral scruples they might have had. I spent six days in Sibu shaking hundreds of Chinese, Malay and Iban hands. And never for a moment did it dawn on me that the Foochows of Sibu would stand up to Najib, who in the end was reduced to a figure of fun and ridicule, being described as Santa Claus dispensing ill-will instead of good cheer. Money may buy some of the people some of the time, but in Sibu principles won the day. They had had a surfeit of corruption, in all its manifestations, in their dealings with the Taib administration, and they did not need anymore of it.

It took a lot of courage and determination to withstand the onslaught of raw power of a prime minister, particularly one of indeterminate ethical provenance. As if that was not intimidating enough, they had a chief minister, so I was told who rules with an iron fist in a silken glove to contend with and whose voracious appetite for self-enrichment has long been whispered about by people too frightened to speak up against grand corruption at the top. His unbridled excesses would make Robert Mugabe look like Mother Teresa.  And where is the much touted independent corruption commission?

To all those who voted for change for a better Sibu, a Sarawak free from the shackles of wonton, unremitting greed of one man and his family, and a Malaysia fit for all, regardless of who we are, I have this to say. You have, by your robust, ethical response to Najib’s unprincipled behaviour, earned for yourselves an honourable place in the pages our country’s history. Sibu has restored my faith in my fellow citizens who possess in large measure attributes that once inspired my old English headmaster at the Sultan Abdul Hamid College in Alor Setar to coin the phrase “the excellency of man.”

What Sibu has done will resonate in the weeks, months and years to come in the rest of this country.  Najib’s approach to the Sibu campaign was unbelievably crude as well as insulting to the dignity of the Sibuans, particularly the proud Foochows. For him to apply the principle of one size fits all when he merrily parachuted into Sibu on what he thought was a his  fail-safe  “vote for money’ mission was totally ill-advised and insensitive. Najib is a believer in the exercise of power through the money bag.

The voters of Sibu knew Najib’s weaknesses more than he was prepared to concede, and while they were happy enough with the goodies he threw at them, they were suspicious of the proverbial “Greek bearing gifts.” In the event, the citizens of Sibu shut the city gate in his face, having taken the money and voting for the opposition. Good try, Najib. Winning the hearts and minds with your heart and not your pocket is a better option; it is more honourable and less likely to get you into trouble with the MACC, if and when it finally decides to open its eyes.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 22 May 2010, 5:05 am and is filed under
Election
,
Sarawak
,
Tunku Abdul Aziz
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why MACC dare not announce it will probe Najib if corruption is suspected in the Prime Minister’s infamous RM5million “deal” at Rejang Park, Sibu on the eve of Sibu by-election polling?

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) does not want to be left out in the nation-wide furore over the latest financial scandal in the country – the RM964 million Sime Darby losses from cost overruns from four projects in its Energy and Utilities Unit, in particular the Bakun Dam project.

Thursday’s New Straits Times carried this headline: “MACC; Sime probe if graft suspected”.

My instant thought is when there is going to be a newspaper headline: “MACC: PM probe if graft suspected”.

Not that there is not enough cause. The recent Sibu by-election provides the MACC ample evidence for investigation against the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, whether he had been guilty of corrupt practices particularly in the infamous RM5 million “deal” at Rejang Park, Sibu on the eve of Sibu by-election – which is on YouTube for all to see.

Has the MACC the guts, commitment and professionalism to investigate the Prime Minister for corruption?

I am not even talking about arresting and charging the Prime Minister for corruption – just to open a probe on the Prime Minister.

The answer to this question explains why the MACC has failed to secure public confidence that it has independence, professionalism and integrity to wage an all-out battle against corruption.

It is no use the MACC announcing, like recently, that it had arrested 263 people between January and April this year for corruption when these are “small fishes” and the handful of “middling fishes” also get scotfree when landed up in court trials.

The MACC has now  lower public confidence and esteem than the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) which it replaced in order to become Malaysia’s version of Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC).

This is serious food for thought for MACC.

[Speech at the DAP Cheras Solidarity Dinner in Kuala Lumpur on Friday, May 21, 2010]

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 22 May 2010, 11:40 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Election
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Baram residents fear a repeat of Bakun fiasco

By G Vinod | FMT

MIRI: The Borneo Resources Institute Malaysia today said the residents of longhouses near the proposed Baram dam in Sarawak do not want to see another repeat of the Bakun resettlement fiasco.

Its executive director Mark Bujang said that the people in the affected area want the project to be scrapped altogether.

Bujang said this was clearly expressed by the locals during a two-day seminar organised by the Baram Residents Action Council at Telang Usan Hotel here.

“The residents have voiced concerns of their fate once the dam is built.

“They are wondering what will happen to their land once its waters inundate their villages… how are they going to be resettled and how much it will cost them,” he said.

He added that a main concern was a potential repeat of what had happened to the locals who were displaced for the Bakun dam since 2001.

The Bakun dam saw about 10,000 natives being forced out from their land by the government for a project to generate an energy surplus for the state. The ruckus has fuelled anger among its natives who have been deprived of their native customary land.

In addition, those affected by the Bakun dam were also not properly compensated for their losses.

Bujang also queried the need for another dam as he feels Bakun itself is sufficient to cater for the needs of Sarawakians.

“There is no reason why another dam is needed as Bakun itself generates about 2,400MW of energy, which is more than enough for the state in years to come,” he added.

In a letter signed by representatives of the residents and concerned citizens, they have asked the Sarawak Natural Resources and Environmental Board to provide them access to a copy of the Environmental Impact Assessment and Social Environmental Impact Assessment reports and any other relevant documents for their study.

“The agency should also give us enough time to verify, study, comment or make objections on the reports before it decides on anything,” Bujang said.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 May 2010, 8:32 am and is filed under
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP Sibu MP Wong Ho Leng will lead DAP policy debate on 10th Malaysia Plan in June Parliament to spell out the triple implications of the Sibu Miracle

For the past week, Sibu was on the lips of every Malaysian, igniting excitement and rekindling new hopes among Sarawakians and Malaysians that Sarawak and Malaysia are capable of far-reaching political changes in the near future.

The hard-fought DAP and Pakatan Rakyat victory in Sibu, where we turned around the 40%-60% odds on Nomination Day in the eight-day campaign to achieve a miraculous victory, has given to Sarawakians and Malaysians a glimpse of the possibility of New Politics and the replacement of the Barisan Nasional governments in Petrajaya and Putrajaya with  Pakatan Rakyat governments in the next 12 to 24 months.

The seismic Sibu by-election victory, akin to a Sibu Miracle, has brought with it great challenges and responsibilities to the Sarawak DAP state leadership.

Forget about “rest” until the two great battles of the next Sarawak state general elections and the 13th General Elections are over.

The DAP Sarawak state committee, which  must from today plan and work to build on the political momentum created by the Sibu victory, has three immediate challenges:

To fully harness the political advances made in Sibu in the by-election by widening our support base, in particular enlisting young, idealistic and like-minded Ibans and Melanau/Melayu to join the DAP cause;

To  strengthen and expand the DAP organisation and political presence in Sarawak; and

To forge and project a strong Pakatan Rakyat profile and presence in Sarawak.

The Sibu by-election victory does not belong to DAP alone. It is the victory of the great people of Sibu. It is also the victory of Pakatan Rakyat Sarawak as Ho Leng is the first  PR candidature in Sarawak, with PKR, PAS and SNAP leaders working closely hand-in-hand with DAP to create the first PR Sarawak victory in history.

The forthcoming session of Parliament will be Sibu, Sarawak and even Sabah session as the Sibu by-election result serves notice to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak that Sarawak and Sabah can no longer be regarded as “deposit states” – and Sarawakians and Sabahans are fully entitled to demand fair and just treatment of their rights as equal citizens of Malaysians 47 years after the formation of Malaysia.

As I said in my two tweets this morning:

#Sibu Miracle 2Parliament @wongholeng will lead DAP Parl policy debate on 10th Msia Plan begin on 14//6 2highlight triple meaning of #P212

#Sibu speaks 4all @wongholeng bring Voice of Sibu loud n clear 2Parl on frustrations nightmare hopes dream of Sibu/Swak/Msia Sibu stands tall

In his maiden speech in Parliament, Ho Leng will speak not just for Sibu or Sarawak but for all Malaysia.

In fact, Ho Leng was at work as MP for Sibu within 12 hours of the announcement of his election before he could catch his breath to get some rest from the hectic by-election campaigning.

This was because the very next day  of 516 – which has joined 308 as symbolic milestones in Malaysians’ struggle for change – was the last day for MPs to submit  questions for the June meeting of Parliament.

Ho Leng had put in questions close to the heart of Sibuans,  Sarawakians and Malaysians.

I have also put in questions highlighting the need for the Barisan Nasional government, whether national or state, to redress many of the long-standing  grievances of Sarawakians and Sabahans since the formation of Malaysia 47 years ago.

This is why two  questions I am asking the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak next month are:

To ask the Prime Minister whether he would set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry on the broken  promises to Sabah and Sarawak on the formation of Malaysia in 1963, in particular just and equitable development of the people from the two rich states.

to give the amounts of Federal allocations to Sarawak for each year since 1963, giving a breakdown of their uses.

I will visit Sabah next week and will discuss the parliamentary questions I have submitted highlighting why Sabahans are so aggrieved about the present political system which have made them feel that they are strangers in their own homeland.

[
Speech at the post-Sibu by-election meeting of the Sarawak DAP State Committee in Sibu on Sunday 23rd May 2010
]

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 May 2010, 1:37 pm and is filed under
Parliament
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Reading between the lines in Sibu

By
Pushparani Thilaganathan
 | FMT

COMMENT Plaza Inn, atop a coffeeshop in Sibu, is flanked by a ‘skyscraper’ and a string of nightclubs on the other end. Evenings are short and the streets are mostly deserted by 9pm.

Life is a straight road. Dawn breaks around 6am, shop shutters rise and the first whiff of brewing coffee reaches up to the hotel room if the windows are open.

If it rains, like it did most nights and some mornings, the mesh of scents is refreshing! Here, where churches are rampant, work is god and toil is truth.

There is no room for perceptions. Only impressions.

But somehow this truth seems to have eluded Barisan Nasional if news reports of how and why they lost their grip on a constituency after a quarter century of presence, is anything to go by.

BN lost because people couldn’t stand the arrogance and power they exuded – from the bag carrying errand boy all the way up the ladder to the ‘kiss my hand’ homage-yearning ministers.

And neither did the voters believe the opposition, Pakatan Rakyat Sarawak – a coalition of DAP, PAS, PKR and SNAP –  to be righteous and blameless.

Sibu simply voted for what they believed to be the better of two evils.

The known devil

It was Saturday, the eve of the by-election. I came downstairs to the coffeeshop for my regular ‘cuppa’.

Just as I was being served, sirens rang and a Mercedes Benz ferrying an important BN official whizzed pass.

”Celaka…hari hari bising,” mumbled Misra and carried on with her work.

You can tell a local from a Peninsular Malaysian, said Misra who works at the coffee shop and earns RM400 a month.

“They have a lot of money. They talk loudly..they walk differently,” she said.

In the run-up to the Sibu parliamentary by-election last Sunday, Peninsular Malaysians accompanying their political warlords arrived in droves.

?Their arrival was a boon to business but a bane to the social fabric of this small town community which had never ever seen the likes of ministers, much less the prime minister and his deputy at such close quarters.

Notwithstanding, this money-muscled entourage came with extensive baggage and police protection. Reports said Sibu had 1,000 policemen in town.

High on the list of baggage and most pertinent to the locals was the contentious ‘Allah” issue and Chief Minister Taib Mahmud’s continuity.

Both issues the BN and its candidate refused to talk about or explain. Every door that BN closed was a window to be opened for the opposition.

According to church-going Joseph, a Chinese, “(we have) so many questions to ask…”

But only the opposition coalition was prepared to answer.

PAS’ Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad and Kota Raja MP Siti Maria Mahmud had met up with several church groups to explain PAS stand on the issue.

The open discussions was a thirst-quencher and believed to have been among the turning points for the Chinese votes. Majority of Sibu’s voters are Christians.

The unknown angel

They say life is not without its risks.

When you ride the mighty Rajang river and battle the voluminous waters that perennially flood your waking hours, risks is in the blood and fear a momentary hiccup.

Testing out an unknown angel in the form of the Pakatan Rakyat Sarawak coalition is a small risk especially in view of the fact that the state elections is imminent.

Sarawak has to hold its state elections before June 2011.

As such any ensuing discomforts as a result of their collective decision is seen as only temporary.

?Yes, Pakatan has its share of baggage, but fortunately for them, it was not directly relevant to local life.

Sibu is a quiet community. The Ibans speak softly, sometimes you sense shyness and inadequacy but they warm to honesty.

The Malay Melanaus are more confident than the Ibans.

They live closer to the city and are more exposed to the Chinese community. More often than not they are prioritised by government-run agencies over the Ibans.

The Chinese lord the town in terms of numbers but they too are deeply divided.

There is very little real interaction on a social front between the baseline communities.

People are reticent but considerate, often making sure you’re aware of what you are eating, as both pork and Muslims are bedfellows.

Watching and listening help one read between the lines in this community.

In the recent by-election, what was most obvious was the grassroots acceptance of the opposition.

Many of the opposition parliamentarians and state executive councillors of Penang and Selangor were seen coming in taxis, eating at coffee-shops and living in mediocre hotels.

Many flew AirAsia, and word got around very quickly about how ordinary they were.

?But perhaps the most telling of all was Penang Chief Minister Lim Guang Eng’s persona.

Lim was an equal to ‘god-like’ Chief Minister Taib Mahmud. Equal to the federal ministers who visited Sibu during the by-election. But unlike them he had no entourage, police protection or formality about him.

He was warm, approachable and popular with the local Chinese community. They saw him as fearless and endearing, like a tiger.

With him, at the final ceramah on Saturday, were 60 other Pakatan grassroots leaders from all walks of life hailing a ‘common Malaysia, Malaysia for all’.

Here was the elusive 1Malaysia that premier Najib Tun Razak is struggling to achieve, but which he will not see given his own people’s fear of unity.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 May 2010, 1:43 pm and is filed under
Election
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


RPK dares Malaysia to fight him in UK

By
Shannon Teoh
 | The Malaysian Insider

May 23, 2010

LONDON, May 23 — Fugitive blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin has thrown down the gauntlet to Malaysian authorities, challenging them to bring standing charges against him to the courts in the United Kingdom.

Swaggering into a packed hall in the UK capital yesterday and flanked by two burly men in dark glasses, the controversial Malaysia Today writer insisted that he would fight charges of criminal defamation and sedition as well as the appeal against his Internal Security Act (ISA) detention, given a level playing field.

“I will take on the government and I will fight them but I will do what Sun Tzu said, ‘Fight him in your territory.’

“So my territory is here in the UK,” he declared to applause from a largely partisan crowd of over 300, who had their bags searched before entering the hall at the BPP Law School.

Many had to stand for the two-hour talk by the blogger, who repeated what he had written over the years, in his first formal appearance after over a year in self-imposed exile.

Raja Petra wore his now signature beret and immediately refuted the notion that he should return home to prove his innocence of the charges levelled against him.

“A first year law student can tell you that it is not the job of the accused to prove his innocence. It is the job of the prosecution to prove guilt.

“There is the UK court here. There need not be phone call or phone call from someone’s wife,” he said in a thinly-veiled jibe against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his wife, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, whom he has previously accused of interfering with institutions such as the judiciary.

Despite calls from various BN lawmakers to bring Raja Petra to justice, the government has so far not followed up on suggestions that they apply to extradite the runaway blogger who has made many claims, including the involvement of Najib and Rosmah in scandals such as the murder of Mongolian translator Altantuya Shariibuu.

Police have said they were looking into reports that he was seen in several countries, including the UK and Australia, after he absconded but have not reported any success.

Raja Petra, widely known by his initials RPK, also explained that Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is facing a sodomy charge which Pakatan Rakyat insists is trumped up, was in a different boat.

“Anwar has accepted the fact that he has to stay (in Malaysia) as he aspires to be the next prime minister. I have no political aspirations.

“I’ll probably be a free man longer than Anwar,” he quipped.

The member of the Selangor royal family referred to several incidences in his previous brushes with the law to back his claim that the Malaysian judiciary was not independent.

He questioned why the Federal Court had yet to decide on the government’s appeal against his release from the ISA, after more than a year.

He also said that he had tried to obtain a full bench of nine judges and “thought that maybe we will get seven but we ended up with just three.”

“We were told it was an administrative decision but nobody told us who made the decision or who were the judges until the day of the hearing.

“On the morning of the hearing, we found that one of them was Augustine Paul,” Raja Petra said, repeating what he had written about the hearing.

The late judge had in 2001 denied a habeas corpus application by Raja Petra to declare his first ISA detention illegal. Raja Petra had also written numerous articles criticising the judge who had also presided over Anwar’s first sodomy trial, which saw the sacked deputy prime minister being jailed for six years.

“I’ve written a lot of nasty things about him and called him all sorts of names. Even I would cite myself for contempt of court! How will he give me a fair trial?” Raja Petra said.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 May 2010, 9:40 am and is filed under
Raja Petra Kamaruddin
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sarawak for Change – The Sibu Declaration

(Adopted by DAP Sarawak State Committee on 23rd May 2010 In Sibu, Sarawak)

The Sibu Miracle on 16th May 2010 is the beginning of the awakening of Sarawak. From now on, no one will take us – the people of Sarawak – for granted. One small step in winning Sibu is one big step to winning power in Petrajaya, and a giant step forward to winning power in Putrajaya.Sarawak is rich. It has the largest land mass in Malaysia and an abundance of resources such as timber, land, palm oil, gold, oil and gas.

But the people of Sarawak are among the poorest in Malaysia because of low pay, poor employment opportunities and a business environment which is monopolised by a selected few.

It is the only state in Malaysia where one family – that of the Chief Minister’s – practically has complete power over the state’s entire economic and political activities.

It’s time that we say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Let’s chart a new future for Sarawak and Malaysia.

GOOD GOVERNANCE = NO MORE TAIB

Chief Minister Pehin Sri Abdul Taib bin Mahmud will be in office for three decades by next year. It’s time that we take the mandate back from Taib and herald a new era of reform and rejuvenation for Sarawak.

DAP and Pakatan Rakyat stand for good governance. Taib Mahmud’s BN has a track record of bad governance. Taib’s family through Cahaya Mata Sarawak (CMS) and other crony companies control the most lucrative contracts and businesses, impoverishing the rakyat while making life difficult for small businesses.

EQUAL PARTNERSHIP
– DAP and Pakatan Rakyat believe in equal partnership in political coalition and in federal-state relations. The sole purpose of the existence of Sarawak BN is to prop up Taib’s empire whereas Pakatan Rakyat practices equal political partnership for the betterment of the rakyat. Nationally, resource-rich Sarawak has been given a raw deal.

CAT GOVERNANCE
 – DAP believes in Competency, Accountability and Transparency (CAT) governance. We listen and engage with all citizens, not just those with the money. Less corruption means more for everyone. Sarawak is rich. By having open tender to all government procurements, timber extraction licenses and alienation of state lands for commercial and plantation purposes, all Sarawakians will be richer.

SENIOR CITIZENS’ BONUS
– When DAP and Pakatan Rakyat become the Government of Sarawak, all Sarawakians above 60 years of age will receive a minimum of RM400 per annum in appreciation of their contribution to the state.

HARDCORE POVERTY
– An annual RM 80 million allocation from the State budget will be set up to eradicate hardcore poverty in Sarawak.

EDUCATION
 – When DAP and Pakatan Rakyat become the government in Sarawak, all schools regardless of background will be given allocations according to needs as practised in Penang, Selangor and Kelantan so that our children can have a bright future.

OIL ROYALTY
– Pakatan Rakyat National Common Policy Platform commits to provide Sarawak 20% in oil royalties from Petronas, instead of the current 5%, if Pakatan Rakyat wins federal power.

LAND REFORM
– When DAP and Pakatan Rakyat become government in Sarawak, all NCR land will be surveyed and titles (communal and individual) issued while all expiring leases will be unconditionally renewed. With lands accessible to the people and not cronies, we believe that the great economic potential of Sarawak will be unleashed.

INVESTING IN THE FUTURE
– The flood problems in Sarawak needs serious attention while long term investment in human capital and infrastructure is needed to make Sarawak a great economy. WIFI will be provided free to move Sarawak into a knowledge state.

BN will not and cannot change. For BN to change spells destruction for its leaders.

But without change spells certain doom for all Sarawakians. The choice is clear. Sarawak for Change.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 23 May 2010, 6:12 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should haul up and reprimand SUPP President George Chan for his “barbarians at the gate” speech which makes a total mockery of the Prime Minister’s  year-old 1Malaysia Policy

I am shocked to read today’s
Sunday Star
whose Sarawak edition carried the screaming  front-page headline
“Miri target”
 and report:

Miri target

By Stephen then

MIRI: “Outsiders” who have infiltrated the state to stir up problems among the people are now targeting Miri, said Deputy Chief Minister Tan Sri Dr. George Chan.

He warned the people yesterday that these “outsiders” with ulterior motives were trying to destroy Sarawakian values by planting the seeds of hatred and anger among the people.

The president of the Sarawak United People’s Party (SUPP) said the “outsiders” had already infiltrated the state and were trying to make inroads into Miri.

“These outsiders with their street culture have come to spoil the good nature of Sarawakians,” he said.

“They want to introduce their culture in Miri now.  We Sarawakians are nice and peaceful people, but we are also very protective of our way of life.  We will fight these ‘outsiders’ if we have to.  I am warning them.  Don’t make me angry.”

He did not name the “outsiders” or where they were from but he was obviously referring to the recent Sibu by-election in which Pakatan Rakyat was accused of using unsavoury tactics that led to the victory of Sarawak DAP chairman Wong Ho Leng in a three-cornered fight.

Calling on Miri folk to join SUPP in keeping the “outsiders” out, Dr. Chan said SUPP would do all it could to ensure that the “outsiders” do not gain a foothold here.

“The people here must remain loyal to the government and trust the state’s leaders to bring great socio-economic progress,” he said at the earth-breaking ceremony for the Miri City Council’s new RM80mil building on the beachfront.

I am shocked and outraged by George Chan’s “barbarians at the gate” speech, reminding me of Gibbon’s great study, “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”.

Who are these “outsiders” that George Chan was railing against?  Was he referring to West and Sabahan Malaysians?

If so, isn’t he openly repudiating and denouncing Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s signature policy theme of 1Malaysia, which states very clearly that its objective is to create a Malaysia where every Malaysian regards himself or herself as Malaysian first and his or her race, religion or region second?

Najib should haul up and reprimand George Chan for his “barbarians at the gate” speech which makes a total mockery of the Prime Minister’s  year-old 1Malaysia Policy, as what George Chan espoused (we ignore for the moment the gross distortions of his speech)  is completely antithetical and inimical to everything that 1Malaysia could mean or represent.

I have said that the biggest enemy of Najib’s 1Malaysia comes from within his own government and party and not from outside.  I had earlier referred specifically to the enemies and detractors of Najib’s 1Malaysia concept from within Umno, but George Chan has shown that these enemies of 1Malaysia are not confined to Umno but are also to be found in the other Barisan Nasional component parties.

How can Najib convince Malaysians that his administration is serious about the 1Malaysia concept and campaign when its greatest critics and detractors are to be found in Umno and Barisan Nasional, like the SUPP President?

[
Speech 2 at the DAP Sibu Thanksgiving Dinner for Pakatan Rakyat Sibu by-election campaigners at Sungai Merah, Sibu on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 8pm
]

                This entry was posted on Monday, 24 May 2010, 7:19 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan Rakyat leadership council will meet next month to chart a strategy to remove Sarawak and Sabah as the Barisan Nasional’s “fixed deposit” states

The 308 political tsunami of the March 2008 general elections two years ago broke the myth of the invincibility of the Barisan Nasional as an unbeatable coalition, with the fall of Barisan Nasional in five states (although one was recovered by BN through illegal and unconstitutional means) and the removal of the hitherto unbroken BN two-thirds parliamentary majority.

The 516 Sibu Miracle, where the Sarawak Pakatan Rakyat made its debut and fielded the first PR candidate in Sarawak winning a seat which the Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin had described as a BN “fortress”, is a clear and unmistakable message of the deep-seated aspirations of Malaysians, including the people of Sarawak and Sabah, for change and the possibility of the 308 “political tsunami” being taken into its  full flush nationally in the 13th General Elections.

Despite strenuous public denials by Barisan Nasional leaders, not only nationally but also in Sarawak and Sabah, there is no doubt that they are fully aware of the far-reaching implications of the Sibu by-election result – explaining the recent panicky reaction, both in statements and conduct, of top BN leaders in the two states.

The Pakatan Rakyat leadership council will meet next month to chart a strategy to remove Sarawak and Sabah as the Barisan Nasional’s “fixed deposit” states.

One important meaning of the Sibu by-election result is that Barisan Nasional cannot take Sarawak and Sabah for granted, which have rendered the next general elections a more level playing field in the contest for national power in Putrajaya between Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional.

[
Speech (3) at the DAP Sibu Thanksgiving Dinner for Pakatan Rakyat Sibu by-election campaigners at Sungai Merah, Sibu on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 8pm
]

                This entry was posted on Monday, 24 May 2010, 8:47 am and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why MACC “may” and not “shall” call Najib in  for investigation over  his infamous RM5 million “let’s make a deal” speech in the Sibu by-election?

At the Cheras DAP Solidarity Dinner in Kuala Lumpur on Friday night, I had posed the question – Why the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) dare not announce it will probe Datuk Seri Najib Razak if corruption is suspected in the Prime Minister’s infamous RM5million “deal” at Rejang Park, Sibu on the eve of Sibu by-election polling?

I posed this question as the New Straits Times had on Thursday carried the headline:
 “MACC; Sime probe if graft suspected”
 following nation-wide furore over the latest financial scandal in the country – the RM964 million Sime Darby losses from cost overruns from four projects in its Energy and Utilities Unit, in particular the Bakun Dam project.

I asked the MACC, why the double-standards in its reaction to these two cases, especially when there is ample evidence for investigation whether the Prime Minister had been guilty of corrupt practices in the recent Sibu by-election campaign particularly in his  infamous RM5 million “deal” at Rejang Park, Sibu on the eve of Sibu by-election.

The YouTube video of Najib’s Rejang Park’s “let’s make a deal”  speech, promising to allocate RM5 million for flood-mitigation in Rejang Park provided the BN candidate was elected, had been the hottest site for the past week.

Outrage and disbelief are the common reactions of Malaysians and even foreigners  who saw the YouTube video, with Najib declaring in his  own words:  “If Robert Lau becomes the MP on Sunday, on Monday I will ask [for] the cheque to be prepared. Do we have a deal or not? We do! You want the RM5 million, I want Robert Lau to win.”

The MACC has bowed down to unrelenting public pressure to  declare earlier today that it has opened a file into Najib’s infamous RM5 million “let’s make a deal” speech in Sibu on May 15, 2009.

MACC investigation director Mustafar Ali admitted that complaints had been lodged against Najib’s RM5 million “deal” speech, adding that the MACC may consider calling Najib in for investigation.

The question all Malaysians want to ask is why the MACC “may”  and not “shall” call Najib in for investigation  over his RM5 million “let’s make a deal” offer in the Sibu by-election?

Although Mustafar claims that the MACC is “colour blind” and “will take action whenever we receive information”, nobody is impressed unless and until MACC dare categorically declare that they will  interrogate Najib personally in the RM5 million ‘let’s make a deal” case.

The MACC had shown no qualms when Pakatan Rakyat leaders are concerned, as in the past 16 months, the MACC had provided more than ample evidence that it acted more like the Umno/BN catspaw to further the Umno/BN political agenda than remaining true to its statutory remit to declare an all-out war against corruption.

The mysterious Teoh Beng Hock death at the MACC headquarters in Shah Alam in July last year is an unforgettable example to Malaysians – as MACC did not treat Teoh with kid-gloves like it is now doing with the Prime Minister, although Teoh was only a witness in an investigation involving some RM2,000 ringgit!

MACC must prove that it is party-blind and position-blind, and treat Najib no different as any other suspect for corruption if it is to make any headway to start recovering public confidence in its efficiency, independence, professionalism and integrity from an even lower level of public confidence that had ever befallen its predecessor, the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA).

[
Speech at the DAP Sibu Thanksgiving Dinner for Pakatan Rakyat Sibu by-election campaigners at Sungai Merah, Sibu on Sunday, May 23, 2010 at 8pm
]

                This entry was posted on Monday, 24 May 2010, 7:08 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.