Sunday July 20, 2008
Rakyat losing out in the end
By SIM LEOI LEOI
It was not the first, nor will it be the last time Parliament was distracted by events beyond its gate but it must be remembered that this comes at a heavy price.
HAVING debated so much in Parliament, one would think MPs might not have turned up for the debate between Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek and PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
But they were there in the audience, visible in the background to millions of television viewers as both Ahmad Shabery and Anwar argued their points in the historic live telecast.
This only showed that, just as the public keenly follows the daily meetings of the august House each day, so are the Parliamentarians entranced by the shape of politics taking hold of the nation at this time.
Some of these “politics” even had a direct impact on the running of Dewan business – like the tip-off on an illegal rally in front of the Parliament building in anticipation of an Opposition no-confidence motion against the Prime Minister, prompting the police to close down several roads, which resulted in a traffic snarl.
The traffic congestion compounded the “Monday blues” effect for many Malaysians, including MPs trying to debate the mid-term review report on the 9th Malaysia Plan – which was into its last legs – and journalists covering the daily sittings.
By now, everyone would have known that the request for the motion was subsequently rejected by Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia and the Opposition walked out of the Dewan in protest.
However, walking out meant walking away from any debate as well as the chance, only given to an MP, to make the Government accountable for its actions. It meant walking away from asking questions, demanding action, giving suggestions, scrutinising public accounts and highlighting the needs of voters.
Emptied of the Opposition bloc, the ministers got away with minimal answers.
Ministers in Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz and Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, wrapped up their replies in about a minute. Usually, they would have been grilled, as would have Human Resources Minister Datuk S. Subramaniam and Deputy Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Noriah Kasnon. They all chose to say they were only replying to the MPs present that day.
About the only MP present on the Opposition bloc was Datuk Ibrahim Ali, who is actually an Independent candidate.
Perhaps they had a point to get across to the Opposition, just as the latter was hoping to convey its own displeasure with the Chair’s decision when it staged its boycott.
Boycott and you don’t get the answers.
Tony Pua (DAP - Petaling Jaya) must have expected that because, to the surprise of the backbenchers, the first-term Parliamentarian, wearing a rather sheepish grin, came back just as business was winding down in the evening to deliver his adjournment speech on the Education Ministry obstructing a student and teacher’s private activity.
For this valiant effort, he received resounding applause – and some catcalls.
When approached in the Parliament lobby the day after for his feelings about the motion, Pua had this to say:
“I would have rather sat in the hall. I thought we had made a statement (on the motion) when we walked out.”
In making his decision to come back, the blogging enthusiast was certainly mindful of his constituents.
“I promised them in my blog that I would raise this matter with the ministry concerned. I told them I would expect a reply that evening. If I didn’t come back, I would have failed them.
“The deputy minister has got my reply ready,” he said.
In fact, Pua was not the only Opposition MP who felt this way as DAP stalwart Karpal Singh also seemed somewhat reluctant to leave after the decision to boycott was taken. The former Lion of Jelutong was itching to take on the Prime Minister’s Department.
Although notice for the motion had originated from Opposition Leader and PKR president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, the entire bloc had agreed to the boycott as a mark of Pakatan Rakyat solidarity.
Privately though, some Opposition MPs would have much preferred to remain.
Similarly, when Anwar was arrested on Wednesday, Azmin Ali (PKR - Gombak) told the press that all Pakatan Rakyat MPs had been told to speak up on the issue during their debate time on the Supplementary Supply Bill, which was to seek the Parliament’s permission for an additional allocation of RM20.2bil.
The funds are intended to finance subsidies by the Government due to the recent increase in the price of fuel, as well as provide for the payment of rebates to eligible motorists and motorcyclists.
Considering the fuel crisis has been making headlines recently, some Opposition MPs would have understandably wanted to talk about the plight of their own constituents.
Senior Opposition officials confessed that some of their MPs felt their voices were being drowned out by all the emphasis on one man. With only a day to debate the Bill and each MP’s time cut down to just 10 minutes, priority should have been with their voters.
“But they have to toe the party line.
“Those feeling it the hardest are the MPs who have tried so hard to get picked out by the Chair for debate,” said one such official, who hoped the current political scene was not going to drag on.
Several Opposition MPs, among them PKR members, ignored Azmin’s request and chose to focus their debate on the voters’ immediate needs.
Last week was not the first, nor will it be the last time Parliament was distracted by events beyond its gate but it must be remembered that this comes at a heavy price.
Case in point. Despite having sat for 16 days and until late hours, the House only managed to pass three Blls – the Supplementary Supply Bill, the Geologists’ Bill and the Judges’ Remuneration Bill.
The Malaysia Tourism Promotion Board (Amendment) Bill has been on the Order Paper since the first meeting in April but until Parliament closed on Thursday, it had yet to see the light of day.
If business in the Dewan is to be slowed down for more public scrutiny, that’s fine. But slowing down and the voices of the people’s representatives not being heard in the din were surely not fine.
The price is heavier still for those voters who live within urban poor pockets or are plagued by hardcore poverty in rural areas where access to education or employment is hard.
“The MPs should have been debating the food and fuel crisis so they can be responsible to their voters. Instead, our attention has been diverted by a political crisis,” said Deputy Minister S. K. Devamany.
It is a fair conclusion that in Tuesday night’s debate, while Anwar was said to have won the verbal fight, Ahmad Shabery’s victory was in creating new history for the country’s political landscape. This means that nobody actually lost.
However, while the political game continues to hold the nation’s attention, it is the voters who may actually lose out in the end.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Awards for honorific titles or 'Horrific'
2008/06/24
Mahathir’s record: More negatives than positives
By : NORAMTAZ ABDULLAH, Petaling Jaya
The explosion in the number of awards for honorific titles among Malaysians happened during his premiership, so much so that cynical remarks were made by everyone that if someone throws a stone on the street or at any public function, the chances are that you would hit a Datuk, Datuk Seri or Tan Sri.
The scramble for such titles became paramount, as they provide tremendous mileage in terms of securing preferential treatment of sorts and access to the corridors of power, all which adds a new dimension to Malaysian culture and way of life
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is associated with many mega projects in the country
I REFER to P.C.A. Lee's letter on Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's record ("Good, bad or plain ugly?-- NST, June 18).
To me, the Petronas Twin Towers, the Sepang F1 Circuit, Kuala Lumpur International Airport and the tolled highways are not projects coming out of brilliant ideas or initiatives. These can only come from those who think and behave as if the country's resources are unlimited and that "money is no problem".
It was during his administration that another "brilliant" idea was mooted which thankfully did not materialise: to build a bridge linking Malaysia and Sumatra. Just imagine the consequence to the country's financial resources and the ballooning budget deficits had the project proceeded.
His yearning for mega projects was indeed insatiable, especially when these become synonymous with his name. He wanted to create his own history, especially for the young generation. After all, those who were born at the time Dr Mahathir became prime minister were adults when he retired.
This generation knows only him as prime minister and this is the memory he wants to perpetuate, even to the extent of dismantling parts of the historical past.
Remember Merdeka Stadium, which was on the verge of being demolished to make way for a commercial project? Had it not been for the public outcry, we would have lost this historical place where our first prime minister read the proclamation of our independence.
The availability of oil money and Petronas under his control had no doubt become the driving force behind his thirst for mega projects, including the heavy industry, as well as for bailing out public and private companies from the fallout of the 1997/1998 Asian financial crisis.
The national car project was developed at high social cost to the country and people, when it could have been done differently and at a lower cost and yet still meet our national objectives and aspirations.
Just look at what Thailand did to its automotive industry, which is robust and competitive compared with ours. And we were ahead of Thailand at one time. Perwaja is another disaster that has to be salvaged.
Is the Formula One circuit financially viable and self-financing or still dependent upon the continuing injection of public money or Petronas money?
What did the country get substantively out of the Twin Towers apart from having the tallest building in the world, though not any more now? Was the Twin Towers fully occupied upon completion?
Did our construction industry or contractors gain any technological mileage in terms of expertise and skills when we engaged foreign labour for its construction?
I tried to list down his positive contributions to the country, especially to the ordinary citizens who may remember him in their hearts for a long time. We are not talking of the few hundred families or individuals who were direct beneficiaries of his 23-year administration through negotiated contracts, privatisation deals, business monopolies, exclusive supplies and services, but the millions of ordinary low-income and poor people in the rural and urban areas throughout the country.
Frankly, not much can be documented for their direct well-being and welfare, except the widening disparity of incomes among the major races and within a race and between urban and rural areas during his administration. The gap between the rich and poor is widening.
I only see more and more negatives than positives, as enumerated by P.C.A. Lee, like the thriving corruption, the erosion of public confidence in the judiciary, racial polarisation, wastage of public funds, substandard buildings, schools, roads implemented through direct negotiations and consequently abandoned, but later salvaged by the new administration at tremendous cost to the nation.
To add to the list of negatives is the declining respect for our laws because "you can do wrong things for the right reason". Or you can be spared of your wrongdoings before the law if you can tell the judges what to do. Anything is possible at the right price.
.However, we must be fair to Dr Mahathir. Let us hope as time goes on, more and more of his good deeds and not his misdeeds will be revealed. As the saying goes, elephants leave behind their tusks and the tigers their stripes when they die. Human beings leave behind their names.
Mahathir’s record: More negatives than positives
By : NORAMTAZ ABDULLAH, Petaling Jaya
The explosion in the number of awards for honorific titles among Malaysians happened during his premiership, so much so that cynical remarks were made by everyone that if someone throws a stone on the street or at any public function, the chances are that you would hit a Datuk, Datuk Seri or Tan Sri.
The scramble for such titles became paramount, as they provide tremendous mileage in terms of securing preferential treatment of sorts and access to the corridors of power, all which adds a new dimension to Malaysian culture and way of life
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is associated with many mega projects in the country
I REFER to P.C.A. Lee's letter on Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's record ("Good, bad or plain ugly?-- NST, June 18).
To me, the Petronas Twin Towers, the Sepang F1 Circuit, Kuala Lumpur International Airport and the tolled highways are not projects coming out of brilliant ideas or initiatives. These can only come from those who think and behave as if the country's resources are unlimited and that "money is no problem".
It was during his administration that another "brilliant" idea was mooted which thankfully did not materialise: to build a bridge linking Malaysia and Sumatra. Just imagine the consequence to the country's financial resources and the ballooning budget deficits had the project proceeded.
His yearning for mega projects was indeed insatiable, especially when these become synonymous with his name. He wanted to create his own history, especially for the young generation. After all, those who were born at the time Dr Mahathir became prime minister were adults when he retired.
This generation knows only him as prime minister and this is the memory he wants to perpetuate, even to the extent of dismantling parts of the historical past.
Remember Merdeka Stadium, which was on the verge of being demolished to make way for a commercial project? Had it not been for the public outcry, we would have lost this historical place where our first prime minister read the proclamation of our independence.
The availability of oil money and Petronas under his control had no doubt become the driving force behind his thirst for mega projects, including the heavy industry, as well as for bailing out public and private companies from the fallout of the 1997/1998 Asian financial crisis.
The national car project was developed at high social cost to the country and people, when it could have been done differently and at a lower cost and yet still meet our national objectives and aspirations.
Just look at what Thailand did to its automotive industry, which is robust and competitive compared with ours. And we were ahead of Thailand at one time. Perwaja is another disaster that has to be salvaged.
Is the Formula One circuit financially viable and self-financing or still dependent upon the continuing injection of public money or Petronas money?
What did the country get substantively out of the Twin Towers apart from having the tallest building in the world, though not any more now? Was the Twin Towers fully occupied upon completion?
Did our construction industry or contractors gain any technological mileage in terms of expertise and skills when we engaged foreign labour for its construction?
I tried to list down his positive contributions to the country, especially to the ordinary citizens who may remember him in their hearts for a long time. We are not talking of the few hundred families or individuals who were direct beneficiaries of his 23-year administration through negotiated contracts, privatisation deals, business monopolies, exclusive supplies and services, but the millions of ordinary low-income and poor people in the rural and urban areas throughout the country.
Frankly, not much can be documented for their direct well-being and welfare, except the widening disparity of incomes among the major races and within a race and between urban and rural areas during his administration. The gap between the rich and poor is widening.
I only see more and more negatives than positives, as enumerated by P.C.A. Lee, like the thriving corruption, the erosion of public confidence in the judiciary, racial polarisation, wastage of public funds, substandard buildings, schools, roads implemented through direct negotiations and consequently abandoned, but later salvaged by the new administration at tremendous cost to the nation.
To add to the list of negatives is the declining respect for our laws because "you can do wrong things for the right reason". Or you can be spared of your wrongdoings before the law if you can tell the judges what to do. Anything is possible at the right price.
.However, we must be fair to Dr Mahathir. Let us hope as time goes on, more and more of his good deeds and not his misdeeds will be revealed. As the saying goes, elephants leave behind their tusks and the tigers their stripes when they die. Human beings leave behind their names.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Let’s kick the addiction
Sunday June 8, 2008
Let’s kick the addiction
The Jakarta Post
JAKARTA: From our air-conditioned homes, we enter our air-conditioned cars and drive to our freezing offices just so we can wear suits and blazers in the tropics. It’s just like the now widely-condemned habit of smoking: we know it is not a very politically correct practice – but what to do? We’re addicted.
When Indonesians began acquiring more wealth, they bought a TV, refrigerator, then a car and an air-conditioner and another TV; when they became even richer, along came the bathtub. By the time many were aiming for a two-car family, the green activists were criticising the wasteful ways of their own countries. But they were just party-poopers with only a handful of converts here.
Now, all the buzz is about climate change, brought about, we’re told, by the demands we’ve created to live the most comfortable lifestyles possible. Just as billions of Chinese and Indians are catching up on this purpose for living, others warn of food and energy crises.
To halt the plunge into further environmental damage, World Environment Day centres around the campaign “Kick the Carbon Habit”.
As those who quit smoking know, this gets extremely hard before it gets extremely rewarding.
To leave the car at home and start using the train would require immense willpower even though motorists know they would save a fortune on gas – not to mention reduce their carbon footprint.
With today’s higher temperatures, longer droughts and other weird whims of nature, the average person the world over is now being forced to a new awareness – that there might be some truth in the slogans which say kicking our wasteful habits is needed not only to save the planet, but also to save ourselves.
Soaring fuel prices, however, may be the only factor capable of waking Indonesians up from the cheap fuel dream, in which we thought the fuel subsidy was our birthright.
We can blame our leaders in part for leading us this way.
Former industry and trade minister Hartarto Sastrosoenarto described on Monday in Kompas how former president Soeharto suggested that plans to follow in the steps of South Africa’s self-sufficient energy needs be put on hold, given a seemingly bottomless supply of fuel in the early 1980s.
This perception also justified the preference for cars rather than trains, through cheap parking fees and the building of more roads than railways.
But that was then. Now green campaigns are all around us and yet few are taking notice of the need to make that personal sacrifice to end a wasteful mindset, spread it to family and neighbours and push the habit change drive to the corporate and political levels.
It would be much faster and easier if all levels were involved at once. It is high time the state ministry for the environment was changed into a portfolio ministry, after years of complaints by successive ministers they have little effect when it comes to the implementation of state policies.
Much like the frustrated state minister for women’s empowerment who is supposed to mainstream gender equality across all government sectors, the environment minister has few resources to “mainstream” the efficient use of fossil fuels.
Indonesia hosted the historic international climate change conference late last year in Bali. It was hoped the country would not only be a good host, but also be inspired to change its ways.
While that may be wishful thinking, the green campaign in developed countries may slowly help tame our voracious cutting down of forests.
But apart from China’s insatiable appetite, there is another addiction which makes the environment watchers wonder how and whether we can stop the disappearance of even more forests by 2010.
The name of this addiction is corruption, blamed for continued illegal logging. This, then – waste and graft – is our legacy to our children. Unless we can somehow kick the habit.
Let’s kick the addiction
The Jakarta Post
JAKARTA: From our air-conditioned homes, we enter our air-conditioned cars and drive to our freezing offices just so we can wear suits and blazers in the tropics. It’s just like the now widely-condemned habit of smoking: we know it is not a very politically correct practice – but what to do? We’re addicted.
When Indonesians began acquiring more wealth, they bought a TV, refrigerator, then a car and an air-conditioner and another TV; when they became even richer, along came the bathtub. By the time many were aiming for a two-car family, the green activists were criticising the wasteful ways of their own countries. But they were just party-poopers with only a handful of converts here.
Now, all the buzz is about climate change, brought about, we’re told, by the demands we’ve created to live the most comfortable lifestyles possible. Just as billions of Chinese and Indians are catching up on this purpose for living, others warn of food and energy crises.
To halt the plunge into further environmental damage, World Environment Day centres around the campaign “Kick the Carbon Habit”.
As those who quit smoking know, this gets extremely hard before it gets extremely rewarding.
To leave the car at home and start using the train would require immense willpower even though motorists know they would save a fortune on gas – not to mention reduce their carbon footprint.
With today’s higher temperatures, longer droughts and other weird whims of nature, the average person the world over is now being forced to a new awareness – that there might be some truth in the slogans which say kicking our wasteful habits is needed not only to save the planet, but also to save ourselves.
Soaring fuel prices, however, may be the only factor capable of waking Indonesians up from the cheap fuel dream, in which we thought the fuel subsidy was our birthright.
We can blame our leaders in part for leading us this way.
Former industry and trade minister Hartarto Sastrosoenarto described on Monday in Kompas how former president Soeharto suggested that plans to follow in the steps of South Africa’s self-sufficient energy needs be put on hold, given a seemingly bottomless supply of fuel in the early 1980s.
This perception also justified the preference for cars rather than trains, through cheap parking fees and the building of more roads than railways.
But that was then. Now green campaigns are all around us and yet few are taking notice of the need to make that personal sacrifice to end a wasteful mindset, spread it to family and neighbours and push the habit change drive to the corporate and political levels.
It would be much faster and easier if all levels were involved at once. It is high time the state ministry for the environment was changed into a portfolio ministry, after years of complaints by successive ministers they have little effect when it comes to the implementation of state policies.
Much like the frustrated state minister for women’s empowerment who is supposed to mainstream gender equality across all government sectors, the environment minister has few resources to “mainstream” the efficient use of fossil fuels.
Indonesia hosted the historic international climate change conference late last year in Bali. It was hoped the country would not only be a good host, but also be inspired to change its ways.
While that may be wishful thinking, the green campaign in developed countries may slowly help tame our voracious cutting down of forests.
But apart from China’s insatiable appetite, there is another addiction which makes the environment watchers wonder how and whether we can stop the disappearance of even more forests by 2010.
The name of this addiction is corruption, blamed for continued illegal logging. This, then – waste and graft – is our legacy to our children. Unless we can somehow kick the habit.
Time to walk the talk and get public transportation moving
Sunday June 8, 2008
Time to walk the talk and get public transportation moving
By LEONG SHEN-LI
THE math is quite simple. With as little as RM7, you can travel almost anywhere on Klang Valley’s RapidKL’s buses and light rail transit for the whole day. With a monthly pass for RM135 – just a little more than a full tank of petrol for a Proton Wira – your month’s transport needs should be taken care of. The cost should be lower in other parts of the country.
But of course, the current state of our public transport obviously cannot take care of anyone’s needs satisfactorily.
Unreliable buses and trains, sardine-packed LRTs, delayed buses because of traffic jams, safety concerns and a host of other negative issues make public transport hardly desirable as an alternative to private cars.
Here are some crucial improvements needed before public transport can become a true option for people.
1. More trains and buses
It is as basic as this! Not only will service become more reliable, more trains and buses will make public transport less packed and more attractive.
No one, especially women, will trade the comfort of a car for a situation where one is pressed all over by other humans in a train, even if it costs more.
Promises were made for more LRT vehicles and buses under the RapidKL and Rapid Penang regimes. How much longer do we have to wait?
2. Get the new lines going
The new Damansara-Cheras LRT line, as well as the Subang Jaya and Puchong extensions, were announced by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak in 2006. Till today, we have not heard about when work will start.
We do not even know where they will run. It is crucial to also think beyond these new lines.
Singapore already knows where its new Mass Rapid Transit lines will run in 2020.
3. Cash for maintenance
The KTM Komuter, after running for 13 years, is now suffering from years of “postponing” maintenance due to funding issues. The LRT system is about 10 years old now, which is about the right time for an overhaul.
RapidKL is also facing issues with keeping its buses on the road because of breakdowns. Other private companies can hardly afford regular maintenance, what more, overhauling. The Government must come to their aid.
Get the allocations disbursed quickly, get the tenders out without delay and pick the correct people to do the work. Remember, keeping enough buses on the road is not just about buying new buses. It is about keeping the existing ones in working condition.
4. Low fares through subsidies
Low fares are crucial, especially when we are putting the case for public transport in the context of rising living costs. Most people who rely on public transport cannot afford any other means of travel.
If there is a group of people who should benefit from subsidies, this should be the one. Subsidies can come from taxing private car users – either through road tax or road pricing. The World Bank says that private car users are generally “undercharged” for using urban roads and for their impact on the environment.
5. One or two companies enough
Competition in public transport is not about having many companies running the same route, it is about competing for the right to run on a particular route.
An operator is selected on the basis of being most able to satisfy the requirements of commuters and other parties (reliable service, safe buses, lowest subsidy) and once selected, it should enjoy a monopoly of the route.
The Government will have to regulate to ensure service is up to the mark. The benchmark should be the best-run route in the system.
6. One regulatory authority
It is a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth, as each cook has his own ideas and conflicting interests. Now, 13 government departments and agencies have a say in public transport.
There should just be one to plan the system, dish out the permits (to control the number of operators), organise the routes (to curb duplication) and ensure that the trains and buses run according to time.
It should also be the one dishing out subsidies. The single authority should have only one objective and no other – to ensure that the public gets good public transport.
7. Bus lanes and other facilities
Buses should have their own “track” so that they can be faster than private cars. That is the only way public transport can be more attractive than cars.
Modern bus lanes such as those in Curitiba, Brazil, and Jakarta – where they are virtually separate special roads just for buses – have made bus transport a success. And don’t worry if road users complain. The one lane taken away from them is making the movement of thousands of people more efficient. Bus lanes are also cheaper than train systems and can be just as efficient.
8. Ensure safety of passengers
It should be a basic right of commuters to be able to travel safely. An unsafe system will only turn people away.
9. Good customer information
There is no point in having hundreds of beautiful buses on the road without commuters knowing where they are going. Many rather drive than take buses because they are in control of their journey. The more people know how the system works, the more they will use the system.
10. Please walk the talk
All the above initiatives and problems have been recognised, considered and studied. Announcements are regularly made of moves to improve the system. Yet this comment still has to be written in such a tone. There may ultimately just be one paramount suggestion – don’t just talk, please get things moving!
Time to walk the talk and get public transportation moving
By LEONG SHEN-LI
THE math is quite simple. With as little as RM7, you can travel almost anywhere on Klang Valley’s RapidKL’s buses and light rail transit for the whole day. With a monthly pass for RM135 – just a little more than a full tank of petrol for a Proton Wira – your month’s transport needs should be taken care of. The cost should be lower in other parts of the country.
But of course, the current state of our public transport obviously cannot take care of anyone’s needs satisfactorily.
Unreliable buses and trains, sardine-packed LRTs, delayed buses because of traffic jams, safety concerns and a host of other negative issues make public transport hardly desirable as an alternative to private cars.
Here are some crucial improvements needed before public transport can become a true option for people.
1. More trains and buses
It is as basic as this! Not only will service become more reliable, more trains and buses will make public transport less packed and more attractive.
No one, especially women, will trade the comfort of a car for a situation where one is pressed all over by other humans in a train, even if it costs more.
Promises were made for more LRT vehicles and buses under the RapidKL and Rapid Penang regimes. How much longer do we have to wait?
2. Get the new lines going
The new Damansara-Cheras LRT line, as well as the Subang Jaya and Puchong extensions, were announced by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak in 2006. Till today, we have not heard about when work will start.
We do not even know where they will run. It is crucial to also think beyond these new lines.
Singapore already knows where its new Mass Rapid Transit lines will run in 2020.
3. Cash for maintenance
The KTM Komuter, after running for 13 years, is now suffering from years of “postponing” maintenance due to funding issues. The LRT system is about 10 years old now, which is about the right time for an overhaul.
RapidKL is also facing issues with keeping its buses on the road because of breakdowns. Other private companies can hardly afford regular maintenance, what more, overhauling. The Government must come to their aid.
Get the allocations disbursed quickly, get the tenders out without delay and pick the correct people to do the work. Remember, keeping enough buses on the road is not just about buying new buses. It is about keeping the existing ones in working condition.
4. Low fares through subsidies
Low fares are crucial, especially when we are putting the case for public transport in the context of rising living costs. Most people who rely on public transport cannot afford any other means of travel.
If there is a group of people who should benefit from subsidies, this should be the one. Subsidies can come from taxing private car users – either through road tax or road pricing. The World Bank says that private car users are generally “undercharged” for using urban roads and for their impact on the environment.
5. One or two companies enough
Competition in public transport is not about having many companies running the same route, it is about competing for the right to run on a particular route.
An operator is selected on the basis of being most able to satisfy the requirements of commuters and other parties (reliable service, safe buses, lowest subsidy) and once selected, it should enjoy a monopoly of the route.
The Government will have to regulate to ensure service is up to the mark. The benchmark should be the best-run route in the system.
6. One regulatory authority
It is a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth, as each cook has his own ideas and conflicting interests. Now, 13 government departments and agencies have a say in public transport.
There should just be one to plan the system, dish out the permits (to control the number of operators), organise the routes (to curb duplication) and ensure that the trains and buses run according to time.
It should also be the one dishing out subsidies. The single authority should have only one objective and no other – to ensure that the public gets good public transport.
7. Bus lanes and other facilities
Buses should have their own “track” so that they can be faster than private cars. That is the only way public transport can be more attractive than cars.
Modern bus lanes such as those in Curitiba, Brazil, and Jakarta – where they are virtually separate special roads just for buses – have made bus transport a success. And don’t worry if road users complain. The one lane taken away from them is making the movement of thousands of people more efficient. Bus lanes are also cheaper than train systems and can be just as efficient.
8. Ensure safety of passengers
It should be a basic right of commuters to be able to travel safely. An unsafe system will only turn people away.
9. Good customer information
There is no point in having hundreds of beautiful buses on the road without commuters knowing where they are going. Many rather drive than take buses because they are in control of their journey. The more people know how the system works, the more they will use the system.
10. Please walk the talk
All the above initiatives and problems have been recognised, considered and studied. Announcements are regularly made of moves to improve the system. Yet this comment still has to be written in such a tone. There may ultimately just be one paramount suggestion – don’t just talk, please get things moving!
Walk the talk
Mualaikummusalam Pn,
Yeah ,I was walking nak pi ambik Ashraf. I had to walk now coz my car dah kena jual kati. Its a relieve in a way as I don't have to think of car maintainance,arguing with mechanics and all.But ok lah walking in Putrajaya is not that bad after all,tak derita la. I guess blessing in disguise,with the fuel hike,global warming and all. You know now some friends too dah mula jalan kaki ke masjid dan tempat lain. Banyak orang kita segan sebab pikiran nak senang saja,tapi kalau kita pikir pasal environment ,always ask yourself what have you contribute to the environment?,even for a second,try to achieve to that contribution! Pn tak boleh lagi. You need at least 6th month to a year before you 're really ok. But public transport must be efficient. The other day the bus did't come after 45mins wait, I had to walk really fast to catch my appointment at P8,berpeloh juga. Taxi is convenient too in Putrajaya just hope they don't increase the fare saja. Monorail must come fast here as its a good public transport as my experienced in Sweden 25 yrs ago. My friend kerja Pos office kat sana pun dah millionaire after his retirement,all the time using public transport. Yang tu I kata all politician kat sini must go on public transport for a week to experience it for themselves,baru diaorang tau what the public needs.
Jumpa kat meeting nanti
Wassalam
Borhann
> Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 13:02:02 +0800
> From: fish2010@gmail.com
> To: borhann55@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: Feelings......oh...ohh my feelings
>
> Assalamualaikum En Borhann,
>
> I saw you walking yesterday afternoon. You were walking towards the
> stairs leading to the apartments and I was in my car, stopping at the
> traffic lights. I was thinking about the school (of course) and the
> steps we have to take to adjust to the petrol price hike. You were
> walking forlornly and I was thinking that soon many more M'sians would
> have to walk. I know that you choose to walk and you like walking.
> But not all of us can walk - OKUs who depend on their vehicles for
> instance. Since the operation, I am a semi OKU - mobile on my feet
> but definitely can't walk very far or cycle. Macamana nak jimat?
> I read Dr M's comment on the petrol price hike in his blog, it is very
> interesting. The comments that followed his comment are doubly
> interesting. But one thing for sure - There are many angry Malaysians.
>
> Regards,
> Nafishah
>
Yeah ,I was walking nak pi ambik Ashraf. I had to walk now coz my car dah kena jual kati. Its a relieve in a way as I don't have to think of car maintainance,arguing with mechanics and all.But ok lah walking in Putrajaya is not that bad after all,tak derita la. I guess blessing in disguise,with the fuel hike,global warming and all. You know now some friends too dah mula jalan kaki ke masjid dan tempat lain. Banyak orang kita segan sebab pikiran nak senang saja,tapi kalau kita pikir pasal environment ,always ask yourself what have you contribute to the environment?,even for a second,try to achieve to that contribution! Pn tak boleh lagi. You need at least 6th month to a year before you 're really ok. But public transport must be efficient. The other day the bus did't come after 45mins wait, I had to walk really fast to catch my appointment at P8,berpeloh juga. Taxi is convenient too in Putrajaya just hope they don't increase the fare saja. Monorail must come fast here as its a good public transport as my experienced in Sweden 25 yrs ago. My friend kerja Pos office kat sana pun dah millionaire after his retirement,all the time using public transport. Yang tu I kata all politician kat sini must go on public transport for a week to experience it for themselves,baru diaorang tau what the public needs.
Jumpa kat meeting nanti
Wassalam
Borhann
> Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 13:02:02 +0800
> From: fish2010@gmail.com
> To: borhann55@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: Feelings......oh...ohh my feelings
>
> Assalamualaikum En Borhann,
>
> I saw you walking yesterday afternoon. You were walking towards the
> stairs leading to the apartments and I was in my car, stopping at the
> traffic lights. I was thinking about the school (of course) and the
> steps we have to take to adjust to the petrol price hike. You were
> walking forlornly and I was thinking that soon many more M'sians would
> have to walk. I know that you choose to walk and you like walking.
> But not all of us can walk - OKUs who depend on their vehicles for
> instance. Since the operation, I am a semi OKU - mobile on my feet
> but definitely can't walk very far or cycle. Macamana nak jimat?
> I read Dr M's comment on the petrol price hike in his blog, it is very
> interesting. The comments that followed his comment are doubly
> interesting. But one thing for sure - There are many angry Malaysians.
>
> Regards,
> Nafishah
>
Monday, June 2, 2008
Mukhriz claims certain Umno leaders 'block' entry of new members
Mukhriz claims certain Umno leaders 'block' entry of new members
Noor Hayati Muda, BERNAMA
KUALA LUMPUR, Mon:
As Umno members discuss the applications of three former Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) leaders to join the party, there are also those who allude to the difficulty of ordinary people becoming members.
They charge that Umno is an elite organisation that only allows a certain group to join it while other applications can take up to months if not years to be accepted.
Umno Youth executive council member, Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, said this was due to the existence of "blocking" elements among lower echelon leaders who worry that their standing will be affected with the inclusion of new members.
"There were many such instances. Don’t assume that by filling a form, paying a RM1 membership fee, you can be an Umno member. Applications that I myself sent through the Jitra (Kedah) division in 2000 took six months to be accepted,” Mukhriz told Bernama here.
He said normally the problem arises when the applicant is a young person who is successful either in business or in education.
"Recently, when I was in Malacca, some people told me they only got accepted before the general election although they had applied six years ago,” said the Jerlun member of parliament.
Elaborating, Mukhriz said as a matter of policy, to join Umno a person had only to fill a form, pay RM1 membership fee and get the endorsement of the branch leadership.
"There should not be elements of bureaucracy as Umno is an open party for all Malays and the issue of difficulty of obtaining membership should not arise,” he said.
There are some, he said, who join the opposition parties after being frustrated of not getting their membership in Umno which they label as ’elitist’.
"As far as I know, joining opposition parties is very easy, some do it online. Not many whims. Umno should also be like that,” he said.
Umno Cheras division chief, Senator Datuk Syed Ali Alhabshee, admits hearing such complaints.
"I have heard of application forms being stuck at certain branches. I don’t know why,” he said.
He did not reject the possibility there were leaders who were worried that their positions would be adversely affected by new members and said the matter should be addressed as it especially blocked the entry of young new members.
"What is there to fear? If a leader discharges his duties and reposnsibilities sincerely there is no reason to worry about people wanting to join Umno,” he said.
However, he said, if there were former opposition party members, especially former Umno members, who wanted to re-join Umno they have to go through a different process.
"They should be called for an interview by the party’s management committee and questioned about their intention to re-join Umno. We do not want them to become thorns in the flesh,” he said.
He was referring to the applications of former PKR Youth chief, Mohamad Ezam Mohd Nor, and former Permatang Pauh PKR division chief, Anuar Shaari, both of whom had left Umno to join an opposition party.
Syed Ali said if both these leaders were accepted easily by the Umno leadership, there would be dissatisfaction among members who had been loyal to the party. — BERNAMA
Noor Hayati Muda, BERNAMA
KUALA LUMPUR, Mon:
As Umno members discuss the applications of three former Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) leaders to join the party, there are also those who allude to the difficulty of ordinary people becoming members.
They charge that Umno is an elite organisation that only allows a certain group to join it while other applications can take up to months if not years to be accepted.
Umno Youth executive council member, Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, said this was due to the existence of "blocking" elements among lower echelon leaders who worry that their standing will be affected with the inclusion of new members.
"There were many such instances. Don’t assume that by filling a form, paying a RM1 membership fee, you can be an Umno member. Applications that I myself sent through the Jitra (Kedah) division in 2000 took six months to be accepted,” Mukhriz told Bernama here.
He said normally the problem arises when the applicant is a young person who is successful either in business or in education.
"Recently, when I was in Malacca, some people told me they only got accepted before the general election although they had applied six years ago,” said the Jerlun member of parliament.
Elaborating, Mukhriz said as a matter of policy, to join Umno a person had only to fill a form, pay RM1 membership fee and get the endorsement of the branch leadership.
"There should not be elements of bureaucracy as Umno is an open party for all Malays and the issue of difficulty of obtaining membership should not arise,” he said.
There are some, he said, who join the opposition parties after being frustrated of not getting their membership in Umno which they label as ’elitist’.
"As far as I know, joining opposition parties is very easy, some do it online. Not many whims. Umno should also be like that,” he said.
Umno Cheras division chief, Senator Datuk Syed Ali Alhabshee, admits hearing such complaints.
"I have heard of application forms being stuck at certain branches. I don’t know why,” he said.
He did not reject the possibility there were leaders who were worried that their positions would be adversely affected by new members and said the matter should be addressed as it especially blocked the entry of young new members.
"What is there to fear? If a leader discharges his duties and reposnsibilities sincerely there is no reason to worry about people wanting to join Umno,” he said.
However, he said, if there were former opposition party members, especially former Umno members, who wanted to re-join Umno they have to go through a different process.
"They should be called for an interview by the party’s management committee and questioned about their intention to re-join Umno. We do not want them to become thorns in the flesh,” he said.
He was referring to the applications of former PKR Youth chief, Mohamad Ezam Mohd Nor, and former Permatang Pauh PKR division chief, Anuar Shaari, both of whom had left Umno to join an opposition party.
Syed Ali said if both these leaders were accepted easily by the Umno leadership, there would be dissatisfaction among members who had been loyal to the party. — BERNAMA
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Penganiayaan GLC's terhadap SME's Melayu
Penganiayaan GLC's terhadap SME's Melayu
Dilulus terbit pada Wednesday, May 14 @ 14:09:37 MYT oleh SongkokPutih
Oleh mose
"
Adakah benar Dasar Ekonomi Baru membantu Melayu. Dasar yang dicanangkan oleh Kerajaan sekian lama sememangnya benar membawa perubahan kepada orang Melayu. Akan tetapi mereka yang menikmati dasar ini adalah dikalangan tokoh Korporat-korporat Melayu yang mempunyai kepentingan politik dan proksi dikalangan pemimpin negara. Apa pula yang telah terjadi kepada pengusaha-pengusaha dan usahawan-usahawan Melayu yang digelar SME / IKS?
Dibawah Kementerian Pembangunan Usahawan dan Koperasi berbagai skim latihan diperkenalkan untuk melatih usahawan Melayu dan bumiputra. Mungkin kementerian berjaya melahirkan banyak usahawan dari program yang telah dibuat.
Akan tetapi apakah langkah kementerian selama ini untuk membantu usahawan yang dibentuk oleh mereka hasil latihan program mereka sendiri. Ini belum melibatkan syarikat-syarikat SME yang beroperasi tanpa bantuan atau didikan kementerian. Kita boleh lihat mengapa kebanyakkan syarikat SME telah gulung tikar selepas 2 – 5 tahun mereka beroperasi. Kementerian tidak langsung membantu mereka dalam mengembangkan perniagaan mereka. Selama ini pihak kementerian hanya memerhati sahaja syarikat Melayu rebah menyembah bumi. Kita akan lihat apa pula akan berlaku dibawah kepemimpinan menteri yang baru.
Permasalahan yang ingin saya timbulkan disini kenapa sering sahaja syarikat SME's yang ada seperti 'Hidup Segan Mati Tak Mahu'. Berbagai usaha telah dilakukan oleh mereka untuk menyelamatkan syarikat masing-masing. Ada yang mengadu kepada Dewan Perniagaan Melayu Malaysia (DPMM), SME Bank dan terbaru sejak setahun dua ini ialah GABEM. Apakah tindakan mereka dalam membantu syarikat-syarikat SME's ini.
Seperti DPMM, mereka hanya tahu bercakap sahaja, habuk pun tak ada. Pemimpin atasan seakan kehilangan punca dan idea untuk menyelesaikan masalah atau sekurang-kurangnya membantu SME's dalam perniagaan mereka. Mungkinkah pucuk pimpinan DPMM tidak berkaliber atau tidak langsung mempunyai kekuatan atau pengaruh terhadap kerajaan. Mungkinkah suara DPMM tidak sekuat mana? Jika benar DPMM kuat sudah tentu kita tidak memerlukan GABEM yang hanya 1 - 2 tahun baru beroperasi. Sedangkan DPMM sudah sekian lama mewakili syarikat Melayu. Betulkah DPMM lemah?
Mungkin juga faktor dalaman DPMM yang lemah dibantu pula oleh pegawai-pegawai atasan kerajaan yang langsung tidak ingin membantu pihak Dewan juga. Pegawai-pegawai ini semuanya Melayu, tetapi apa yang telah mereka buat? Kebanyakkan pegawai-pegawai yang ada cukup mahir mengenakan TOL. Dari maklumat yang saya terima, sekiranya ingin membuat temujanji dengan menteri pun terpaksa membayar sekian TOL. Inikah sifat Melayu yang ingin membantu Melayu. Dahulu setiap menteri mempunyai sekurang-kurangnya 3 setiausaha. Bayangkan jika setiap setiausaha mengenakan tol hanya untuk membuat temujanji. Urusan belum lagi dibuat tetapi bayaran sudah dikenakan. Ini belum lagi syarikat-syarikat ini mendapat kontrak dari bantuan mereka. Kalau dah dapat kontrak pun belum tentu syarikat-syarikat SME's ini berjaya. Hasil titik peluh mereka terpaksa di dahulukan kepada pegawai-pegawai yang terlibat dalam kerja mendapatkan kontrak itu tadi. Sama macam tak yah bantu?
Petronas, PROTON, TNB, dan banyak lagi GLC's dibawah kerajaan. Adakah benar mereka membantu SME's. Banyak sekali kes-kes penganiayaan yang telah dilakukan GLC's terhadap syarikat Melayu SME's. Sebagai contoh ada beberapa syarikat yang telah sekian lama menjalankan jalinan urusniaga dengan GLC's diberhentikan kontrak mereka. Adakah ini adil bagi SME's. GLC's langsung tidak fikirkan kerugian yang bakal dihadapi oleh SME's jika kontrak diberhentikan. Mana hendak bayar 'leasing' mesin-mesin, mengekalkan pekerja-pekerja yang kebanyakkan Melayu dan bermacam-macam permasalahan lagi. Bila mengadu kepada SME Bank untuk bantuan kewangan berbagai prosedur-prosedur yang dikenakan seakan langsung tidak membantu. Segala tekanan diletakkan keatas bahu-bahu SME's ini. Kadang-kadang komuniti bank juga pandai mengenakan TOL. Entahlah apa dah nak jadi dengan Melayu? Rasuah di sana dan rasuah di sini.
Kontrak-kontrak telah diberhentikan. Adakah SME's akan diberikan projek gantian bagi mengelakkan kerugian mereka. Tanpa pampasan atau kerja-kerja gantian SME's di biarkan Gantung Tidak Bertali. Banyak sudah pengaduan dibuat kepada agensi-agensi dan Jabatan Kerajaan yang berkaitan tetapi tiada langsung tindakan diambil. Mereka hanya tau 'Memekakkan Telinga dan Membutakan Mata' sahaja. Kekadang permasalahan ini ada yang sampai kepada pengetahuan pemimpin tertinggi tetapi masih juga tidak ada tindakan yang diambil. Menteri-menteri yang terlibat langsung tidak prihatin.
Ada kes-kes dikalangan SME's yang telah berjaya berjumpa PM dan mendapat minit sokongan daripada PM pun masih tidak berjalan. Penekanan ini terutama kepada Kementerian Kewangan. Tidak ada langsung 'follow-up' daripada pihak MKII dalam membantu SME's Melayu ini. Adakah beliau hilang rasa hormat kepada PM atau kerana beliau sendiri bukannya Melayu. Ini mungkin membuat beliau rasa berat hati untuk membantu Melayu. Anda jawablah sendiri. Segala minit yang dicatatkan oleh PM sebelum ini tidak di layan sewajarnya. Mana PM nak letak muka jika hal ini diketahui oleh rakyat. Sekiranya berasaskan Islam tidak timbul lagi samada kamu Melayu ataupun Mamak.
Kebanyakkan SME's yang ada semuanya berkebolehan dalam bidang masing-masing. Ada diantara mereka terpaksa mencari pasaran luar bagi memulihkan syarikat dan juga terus berada dalam pasaran. Kedangkalan GLC's kita boleh lihat dalam senario yang ingin saya nyatakan disini. SME's yang ada telah berjaya memasarkan produk masing-masing sehingga keluar negara. Produk-produk ini juga mendapat pengiktirafan yang sewajarnya daripada badan-badan berwajib samada luar dan dalam negara. Oleh sebab karenah birokrasi dan menjaga proksi-proksi masing-masing. Syarikat SME's yang sememangnya berkeupayaan atau lebih pakar dalam bidang itu tidak diberi peluang langsung menyertai kerja-kerja yang ditawarkan oleh GLC's. Mereka sanggup memilih syarikat '2 ringgit' berbanding segala pengalaman dan keupayaan kilang-kilang pengusaha SME's.
Ada juga kes-kes seperti contoh TNB yang sanggup memberi kontrak pembekalan dan perkhidmatan kepada syarikat luar negara sedangkan SME's yang ada berupaya mengeluarkan produk yang setanding dari luar negara. Bahkan syarikat dan pengguna dari luar negara juga menggunakan produk dari syarikat tempatan. Bukan Melayu tidak boleh, Melayu sudah berada dimana-mana di atas dunia ini, dan mereka berjaya. Orang Putih atau Mat Salleh itu bukanlah bijak sangat pun, mereka sebenarnya bodoh. Tetapi Mat Salleh yang bodoh ini boleh mendapatkan urusniaga berjuta-juta ringgit di negara kita. Mengapa? SME's langsung ditolak ketepi. Zalim, sungguh zalim.
Perangai kita orang Melayu suka mengagung-agungkan orang luar. Sikap kerajaan yang tidak mempunyai komitmen dan inisiatif untuk melihat sendiri kebolehan dan kepakaran anak tempatan terutama Melayu. Melayu yang bernasib baik yang dipandang oleh kerajaan pastinya untuk kepentingan politik..
Adakah ini yang dikatakan membantu Melayu. Malu sungguh malu. Dewan Perniagaan Cina atau Persatuan-persatuan Peniaga Cina dimana-manapun berupaya membantu peniaga dikalangan mereka. Tanpa bantuan kerajaan sedikit pun, mereka mengorak langkah dan memperbesarkan perusahaan masing-masing. Sikap tolong menolong dan bantu membantu dikalangan mereka cukup kuat. Kita bagaimana pula?
Kera di hutan disusukan, anak sendiri mati kelaparan. Betullah kata pepatah tadi, sesuai sangat ditujukan pada GLC's dan kerajaan amnya. Perdana Menteri hanya dijadikan boneka oleh penyokong-penyokong setianya. Melayu menjadi peminta sedekah di tanahair sendiri, ini memang benar berlaku. Lihatlah apa terjadi kepada peniaga-peniaga Melayu di Suria, KLCC sebagai contoh. Siapakah penjajah yang menguasai pengurusan Suria KLCC?
Sudah banyak kali kita mendengar cerita kerajaan terpaksa membiayai sepenuhnya dan menanggung kerugian GLC's. Bantuan daripada kerajaan (wang rakyat) bagi menyelamatkan syarikat GLC's untuk meneruskan urus tadbir syarikat. Tetapi pentadbiran yang ada hanya pandai menghabiskan duit tanpa membuat sebarang keuntungan kepada kerajaan. Yang kenyang hanyalah CEO mereka yang bergaji puluhan ribu ringgit sebulan. Itulah yang telah berlaku kepada Proton Holding, SYABAS, TNB, MAS dan lain-lain.
Israel satu bangsa yang dilaknat oleh Allah S.W.T. Kezaliman Israel tak usahlah nak kita panjangkan. Sejahat-jahat Israel mereka tidak menganiayai bangsa mereka sendiri. Kita Melayu, yang mempunyai tanahair sendiri ditindas dan dibunuh secara diam oleh Melayu yang telah lupa asal usul mereka. Yang lemah terus ditindas. Haram bagi mereka yang menjalankan urusan secara ikhlas, amanah dan jujur. Terlalu gilakan wang ringgit, tamak haloba dan kuasa menyebabkan bangsa sendiri terpinggir.. Apakah tindakan kerajaan seterusnya? Berubahkah nasib SME's sekiranya kerajaan bertukar? Kita nantikan bersama.
"
Dilulus terbit pada Wednesday, May 14 @ 14:09:37 MYT oleh SongkokPutih
Oleh mose
"
Adakah benar Dasar Ekonomi Baru membantu Melayu. Dasar yang dicanangkan oleh Kerajaan sekian lama sememangnya benar membawa perubahan kepada orang Melayu. Akan tetapi mereka yang menikmati dasar ini adalah dikalangan tokoh Korporat-korporat Melayu yang mempunyai kepentingan politik dan proksi dikalangan pemimpin negara. Apa pula yang telah terjadi kepada pengusaha-pengusaha dan usahawan-usahawan Melayu yang digelar SME / IKS?
Dibawah Kementerian Pembangunan Usahawan dan Koperasi berbagai skim latihan diperkenalkan untuk melatih usahawan Melayu dan bumiputra. Mungkin kementerian berjaya melahirkan banyak usahawan dari program yang telah dibuat.
Akan tetapi apakah langkah kementerian selama ini untuk membantu usahawan yang dibentuk oleh mereka hasil latihan program mereka sendiri. Ini belum melibatkan syarikat-syarikat SME yang beroperasi tanpa bantuan atau didikan kementerian. Kita boleh lihat mengapa kebanyakkan syarikat SME telah gulung tikar selepas 2 – 5 tahun mereka beroperasi. Kementerian tidak langsung membantu mereka dalam mengembangkan perniagaan mereka. Selama ini pihak kementerian hanya memerhati sahaja syarikat Melayu rebah menyembah bumi. Kita akan lihat apa pula akan berlaku dibawah kepemimpinan menteri yang baru.
Permasalahan yang ingin saya timbulkan disini kenapa sering sahaja syarikat SME's yang ada seperti 'Hidup Segan Mati Tak Mahu'. Berbagai usaha telah dilakukan oleh mereka untuk menyelamatkan syarikat masing-masing. Ada yang mengadu kepada Dewan Perniagaan Melayu Malaysia (DPMM), SME Bank dan terbaru sejak setahun dua ini ialah GABEM. Apakah tindakan mereka dalam membantu syarikat-syarikat SME's ini.
Seperti DPMM, mereka hanya tahu bercakap sahaja, habuk pun tak ada. Pemimpin atasan seakan kehilangan punca dan idea untuk menyelesaikan masalah atau sekurang-kurangnya membantu SME's dalam perniagaan mereka. Mungkinkah pucuk pimpinan DPMM tidak berkaliber atau tidak langsung mempunyai kekuatan atau pengaruh terhadap kerajaan. Mungkinkah suara DPMM tidak sekuat mana? Jika benar DPMM kuat sudah tentu kita tidak memerlukan GABEM yang hanya 1 - 2 tahun baru beroperasi. Sedangkan DPMM sudah sekian lama mewakili syarikat Melayu. Betulkah DPMM lemah?
Mungkin juga faktor dalaman DPMM yang lemah dibantu pula oleh pegawai-pegawai atasan kerajaan yang langsung tidak ingin membantu pihak Dewan juga. Pegawai-pegawai ini semuanya Melayu, tetapi apa yang telah mereka buat? Kebanyakkan pegawai-pegawai yang ada cukup mahir mengenakan TOL. Dari maklumat yang saya terima, sekiranya ingin membuat temujanji dengan menteri pun terpaksa membayar sekian TOL. Inikah sifat Melayu yang ingin membantu Melayu. Dahulu setiap menteri mempunyai sekurang-kurangnya 3 setiausaha. Bayangkan jika setiap setiausaha mengenakan tol hanya untuk membuat temujanji. Urusan belum lagi dibuat tetapi bayaran sudah dikenakan. Ini belum lagi syarikat-syarikat ini mendapat kontrak dari bantuan mereka. Kalau dah dapat kontrak pun belum tentu syarikat-syarikat SME's ini berjaya. Hasil titik peluh mereka terpaksa di dahulukan kepada pegawai-pegawai yang terlibat dalam kerja mendapatkan kontrak itu tadi. Sama macam tak yah bantu?
Petronas, PROTON, TNB, dan banyak lagi GLC's dibawah kerajaan. Adakah benar mereka membantu SME's. Banyak sekali kes-kes penganiayaan yang telah dilakukan GLC's terhadap syarikat Melayu SME's. Sebagai contoh ada beberapa syarikat yang telah sekian lama menjalankan jalinan urusniaga dengan GLC's diberhentikan kontrak mereka. Adakah ini adil bagi SME's. GLC's langsung tidak fikirkan kerugian yang bakal dihadapi oleh SME's jika kontrak diberhentikan. Mana hendak bayar 'leasing' mesin-mesin, mengekalkan pekerja-pekerja yang kebanyakkan Melayu dan bermacam-macam permasalahan lagi. Bila mengadu kepada SME Bank untuk bantuan kewangan berbagai prosedur-prosedur yang dikenakan seakan langsung tidak membantu. Segala tekanan diletakkan keatas bahu-bahu SME's ini. Kadang-kadang komuniti bank juga pandai mengenakan TOL. Entahlah apa dah nak jadi dengan Melayu? Rasuah di sana dan rasuah di sini.
Kontrak-kontrak telah diberhentikan. Adakah SME's akan diberikan projek gantian bagi mengelakkan kerugian mereka. Tanpa pampasan atau kerja-kerja gantian SME's di biarkan Gantung Tidak Bertali. Banyak sudah pengaduan dibuat kepada agensi-agensi dan Jabatan Kerajaan yang berkaitan tetapi tiada langsung tindakan diambil. Mereka hanya tau 'Memekakkan Telinga dan Membutakan Mata' sahaja. Kekadang permasalahan ini ada yang sampai kepada pengetahuan pemimpin tertinggi tetapi masih juga tidak ada tindakan yang diambil. Menteri-menteri yang terlibat langsung tidak prihatin.
Ada kes-kes dikalangan SME's yang telah berjaya berjumpa PM dan mendapat minit sokongan daripada PM pun masih tidak berjalan. Penekanan ini terutama kepada Kementerian Kewangan. Tidak ada langsung 'follow-up' daripada pihak MKII dalam membantu SME's Melayu ini. Adakah beliau hilang rasa hormat kepada PM atau kerana beliau sendiri bukannya Melayu. Ini mungkin membuat beliau rasa berat hati untuk membantu Melayu. Anda jawablah sendiri. Segala minit yang dicatatkan oleh PM sebelum ini tidak di layan sewajarnya. Mana PM nak letak muka jika hal ini diketahui oleh rakyat. Sekiranya berasaskan Islam tidak timbul lagi samada kamu Melayu ataupun Mamak.
Kebanyakkan SME's yang ada semuanya berkebolehan dalam bidang masing-masing. Ada diantara mereka terpaksa mencari pasaran luar bagi memulihkan syarikat dan juga terus berada dalam pasaran. Kedangkalan GLC's kita boleh lihat dalam senario yang ingin saya nyatakan disini. SME's yang ada telah berjaya memasarkan produk masing-masing sehingga keluar negara. Produk-produk ini juga mendapat pengiktirafan yang sewajarnya daripada badan-badan berwajib samada luar dan dalam negara. Oleh sebab karenah birokrasi dan menjaga proksi-proksi masing-masing. Syarikat SME's yang sememangnya berkeupayaan atau lebih pakar dalam bidang itu tidak diberi peluang langsung menyertai kerja-kerja yang ditawarkan oleh GLC's. Mereka sanggup memilih syarikat '2 ringgit' berbanding segala pengalaman dan keupayaan kilang-kilang pengusaha SME's.
Ada juga kes-kes seperti contoh TNB yang sanggup memberi kontrak pembekalan dan perkhidmatan kepada syarikat luar negara sedangkan SME's yang ada berupaya mengeluarkan produk yang setanding dari luar negara. Bahkan syarikat dan pengguna dari luar negara juga menggunakan produk dari syarikat tempatan. Bukan Melayu tidak boleh, Melayu sudah berada dimana-mana di atas dunia ini, dan mereka berjaya. Orang Putih atau Mat Salleh itu bukanlah bijak sangat pun, mereka sebenarnya bodoh. Tetapi Mat Salleh yang bodoh ini boleh mendapatkan urusniaga berjuta-juta ringgit di negara kita. Mengapa? SME's langsung ditolak ketepi. Zalim, sungguh zalim.
Perangai kita orang Melayu suka mengagung-agungkan orang luar. Sikap kerajaan yang tidak mempunyai komitmen dan inisiatif untuk melihat sendiri kebolehan dan kepakaran anak tempatan terutama Melayu. Melayu yang bernasib baik yang dipandang oleh kerajaan pastinya untuk kepentingan politik..
Adakah ini yang dikatakan membantu Melayu. Malu sungguh malu. Dewan Perniagaan Cina atau Persatuan-persatuan Peniaga Cina dimana-manapun berupaya membantu peniaga dikalangan mereka. Tanpa bantuan kerajaan sedikit pun, mereka mengorak langkah dan memperbesarkan perusahaan masing-masing. Sikap tolong menolong dan bantu membantu dikalangan mereka cukup kuat. Kita bagaimana pula?
Kera di hutan disusukan, anak sendiri mati kelaparan. Betullah kata pepatah tadi, sesuai sangat ditujukan pada GLC's dan kerajaan amnya. Perdana Menteri hanya dijadikan boneka oleh penyokong-penyokong setianya. Melayu menjadi peminta sedekah di tanahair sendiri, ini memang benar berlaku. Lihatlah apa terjadi kepada peniaga-peniaga Melayu di Suria, KLCC sebagai contoh. Siapakah penjajah yang menguasai pengurusan Suria KLCC?
Sudah banyak kali kita mendengar cerita kerajaan terpaksa membiayai sepenuhnya dan menanggung kerugian GLC's. Bantuan daripada kerajaan (wang rakyat) bagi menyelamatkan syarikat GLC's untuk meneruskan urus tadbir syarikat. Tetapi pentadbiran yang ada hanya pandai menghabiskan duit tanpa membuat sebarang keuntungan kepada kerajaan. Yang kenyang hanyalah CEO mereka yang bergaji puluhan ribu ringgit sebulan. Itulah yang telah berlaku kepada Proton Holding, SYABAS, TNB, MAS dan lain-lain.
Israel satu bangsa yang dilaknat oleh Allah S.W.T. Kezaliman Israel tak usahlah nak kita panjangkan. Sejahat-jahat Israel mereka tidak menganiayai bangsa mereka sendiri. Kita Melayu, yang mempunyai tanahair sendiri ditindas dan dibunuh secara diam oleh Melayu yang telah lupa asal usul mereka. Yang lemah terus ditindas. Haram bagi mereka yang menjalankan urusan secara ikhlas, amanah dan jujur. Terlalu gilakan wang ringgit, tamak haloba dan kuasa menyebabkan bangsa sendiri terpinggir.. Apakah tindakan kerajaan seterusnya? Berubahkah nasib SME's sekiranya kerajaan bertukar? Kita nantikan bersama.
"
Right to speak
Sunday May 18, 2008
Fight for the right to speak
By Shahanaaz Habib
Lawyer Haris Ibrahim became a blogger a year back with his People's Parliament Blog. In the general election, he wanted to kick Barisan Nasional "out on its backside". Thrilled with Pakatan Rakyat winning five states, he nevertheless condemns any attempt to topple the Barisan federal government through crossovers without going back to the voters to seek their blessing first. Not to do so is committing fraud on the voters.
Haris: ‘We have a civil society that has been numbed into silence by fear’
Q: What exactly is the People's Parliament?
A: For me personally it is my attempt to retrieve my voice back from a government that refuses to give me the right to speak through forums.
If I could backtrack a little, I was part of the Article 11 initiatives. We launched our first forum in March 2006 in PJ, in April we went to Malacca - both very successful.
In May, the one in Penang was disrupted by protestors outside. At that time, we were comforted by the fact that (Prime Minister) Pak Lah and (the then minister in charge of law) Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz said we had the right to speak and the protestors were chastised.
But the July forum in JB was again disrupted by protestors. This time Pak Lah said "no more". So the People's Parliament is the culmination of so many hurdles and obstacles to give civil society a voice.
I suppose I must also say thank you to the NST. When they sued Rocky and Jeff Ooi, it forced me to look into blogs and realise this was a powerful opportunity for me to share the little messages that I have with fellow Malaysians. That was the humble beginnings of the People's Parliament.
Q: One of the things the People's Parliament did was keep tabs on MPs?
A: My complaint of the electoral process is that when parliament is dissolved, you have only an average of 9 to 14 days between nomination and polling day. How does the average voter get to know the candidates?
It doesn't help either that the media doesn't give balanced coverage to all the candidates.
I was also rather disillusioned with the elected representatives inherited from the 2004 election. My personal feeling is that they weren't living up to expectations.
We started the Get to Know Your MP with 10 constituencies in the Klang Valley.
PJ Selatan and PJ Utara took off very well. The others - didn't take off the way I had hoped.
Q: Why focus only on MPs and not Aduns (assemblymen)?
A: It's simply a resource issue. I can only do so much at any one time. When I first started Get to Know Your MP, I was just a one man band.
I could only confine myself to 10 constituencies. I couldn't take on overseeing the Aduns as well.
It's a lot of work. But Post March 8 (general election), we have moved from MPs to initiating The Representatives Watch (Rep Watch) Committee.
We are trying to put in place committees which would buddy with MPs, Aduns, as well as local councillors simply because people are now reacting very positively and there seems to be a greater willingness to participate in this.
I don't know how far it will go. But if you don't try then you don't get anywhere. The experience we have had over the one year is that voters must be educated as to the function of their various elected representatives. In particularly the Pakatan Rakyat states and constituencies we want to help 'our MPs' function the way they are supposed to.
We will buddy them and try to make sure that they toe the line.
Q: It's interesting you mentioned help 'our MPs' when you mentioned Pakatan? Does this mean the People's Parliament supports the opposition?
A: Let me make this very plain. Right up to the 12th General Election, I worked very hard to send Barisan Nasional out on its backside. I will not make any effort to even apologise for this.
Post-GE, we have heard a lot of talk (from Barisan) about wanting to reform. But I have not seen any real indicator of a real will to change.
When we see that, I will be the first to stand and say 'I will help in this BN reform." But until then, I think I want to work with the new kids on the block. I want to make sure they don't go the way of Barisan.
These are new enthusiastic elected representatives. We want to keep them on the straight and narrow.
Q: Why are you so insistent- in your words - on "sending Barisan out on its backside"?
A: I have always voted opposition until 2004 when I was so taken in by the promises of Pak Lah.
I have always been anti-Mahathir simply because I have never agreed with his policies, with how he has dismantled our constitutional structures, institutions particularly the judiciary.
So for myself - like a lot of other people - Pak Lah appeared to be a breath of fresh air and a lot of promises were made.
Go look at his one page manifesto (of 2004). But by 2007, I was convinced that this man was not going to deliver. I was extremely concerned about how the judiciary was dealing with some of the controversial cases. We were getting nowhere in seeing justice for the likes of Lina Joy.
We are supposed to be a civilised society but look at how Revathi (Massosai) was dealt with. The PM kept promising us that he was looking into it but nothing was forthcoming. I had reached breaking point.
I felt by April 2007, Barisan had become so arrogant with the mandate that has been given (in 2004 ). The fault really was ours. We gave them a 90% mandate in parliament and this is how we were being repaid. I felt it was enough.
Q: What would you do if a Pakatan Rakyat MP or Adun is not up to mark?
A: We are linking our initiative with the Citizen Think Tank blog. They are going to give us space for report cards.
I'm going to be less merciful with the Pakatan reps that don't meet the mark because we got higher expectations for them. There's going to be no preferential here. As far as we are concerned, we are of this agenda that people are the boss. You undertook to work for us.
We don't call you 'Yang Berhormat' anymore but we call you 'Yang Berkhidmat'.
And you are supposed to serve. And if you are not up to the mark, then we will kick you out on your backside the next time around -Pakatan or Barisan.
Q: Are you going to monitor only the five Pakatan Rakyat states?
A: Oh no. People's Parliament is extended to any constituency. We are encouraging civil society to take ownership of their constituency.
I don't see why we should exclude the Barisan constituencies. We are prepared to try in any constituency where there are enough people to try and get that initiative off the ground.
Q: How do you pick the constituencies?
A: I don't pick. I put my posting up on the blog and invite anyone from any of the constituencies who is prepared to help me get the committee together.
To give you an example, Bukit Katil in Malacca, I don't know anyone there. But someone writes in and says I wanna try. I'll say ok.
The Rep Watch Committee framework requires a minimum of 9 people. But this is not cast in stone. If you think you need 12 or six is enough - great because you guys are in the drivers' seat.
I am just helping you get it off the ground. But we've got a very stringent disqualifying criteria.
We want non-partisan, non-political party affiliates , in fact not just non-card-carrying members. If you are too closely connected, if you have got business interests with the government or state agencies, if you are contemplating or being employed or engaged by any of the state agencies - you are out.
Based on that criteria, even I wouldn't qualify based on my close proximity to DAP.
Q: Parliament has been sitting for 2 weeks, do you like what you've seen so far?
A: Barisan is not consistently disappointing me - read that as you will. And it's early days yet for the Pakatan Rakyat MPs. I think we should give them a 100 days appraisal and then a 6-month appraisal.
Q: Are there any Barisan MPs that you have regard for?
A: (Datuk) Zaid Ibrahim (the law minister who is an appointed senator but not an elected MP) . I still have respect for Datuk Shahrir (Abdul Samad), Datuk Shabery Cheek - not withstanding some silly statements off and on because maybe he's under pressure - but I have always thought he was one of the better one. I can't think of anyone else.
Q: How effective has the People's Parliament been?
A: I think Malaysians by far and large are a caring lot. But we had 22 years of Mahathir's rule. The fear culture has set in. People need to find their voice.
People need to be bold enough to articulate their cares and concern. I would like to think we have had some success in getting people to speak up and getting people to be prepared to come out and be counted. I'll give you an example.
The petition to the Agong on the judiciary - two years ago, I wouldn't have dreamt of insisting people give their names and IC numbers. Until then, Malaysians were very happy to sign anonymously.
But (this time) we got over 5,000 signatures where people put their names and IC numbers down. That to me is civil society coming out. I'd like to think perhaps that's the little success that we have had.
Q : Civil society is interpreted in a lot of ways. What does civil society mean to you?
A: Rakyat.
Q: But the rakyat has been there all the time?
So have we had civil society all this time?
A: Yes, we have. But we have a civil society that has been numbed into silence by fear. I have been pushing for civil society defined by the power that has been entrusted to the people by the Federal Constitution.
Simplistically, under the constitution the power rests with the Agong and his power sharers, the rakyat. We are the civil society. But you can be robust or you can be silenced.
Mahathir very effectively silenced us for 22 years. It's the same corpus but people now are willing to believe in themselves.
Q: Do you think Malaysia is ready for a civil society now?
A: The 12th general election results speak for itself.
I think we are far more mature than the government has cared to credit us for. And certainly the government shouldn't take any credit for the maturity we have achieved up to now.
Q: So you are quite pleased with the results of the general elections?
A: We are two states short of what my prediction was.
I said (we'd win) seven states. That's the disappointment. But I also said that if there wasn't the cheating, the double voting, the abuse of the postal votes, we would have formed a simple majority government.
Q: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has talked about toppling the Barisan Federal government through crossovers?
What are your views on this?
A: If there are going to be crossovers, the MPs must go back to the voters to get the mandate because otherwise it would be tantamount to a fraud.
While I wanted Barisan out on their backside, I must be prepared to respect that there were voters that preferred Barisan.
If a candidate got in on a Barisan ticket and now for whatever reasons thinks perhaps he wants to throw his lot with Pakatan he needs to go back to the voters and hear their views because they voted for him on a Barisan ticket.
If they say 'no, you stay put' then you stay put.
Q: But in politics you don't show your hand. Surely it is difficult to expect 30 MPs to go back to voters for a mandate to crossover?
A: If that's not practical, then I'd rather wait another four years to take the federal government!
Because I don't think those who voted Pakatan should do such a disservice to those voted for Barisan.
If we want our vote to be respected, we must respect the vote of voters aligned to Barisan.
I abhor the notion that politicians can undermine the voters' choice.
Q: But Anwar argues that if the elections were free and fair, then Pakatan would have formed the Federal government?
A: Free and fair like the 1994 Sabah elections (when PBS won but the state government fell weeks later when PBS assemblymen defected to Barisan)?
I posed Anwar that question when he was complaining about the Ijok by-election.
My question was I wonder how clean it would have been if he (Anwar) hadn't been sacked in Sept of 1998 and he was the Prime Minister now. He was in several elections in this country which were bloody dirty.
Q: What do you think about PKR MPs who offer to resign to 'force' a by-election so that Anwar can make a political comeback?
A: Just before the elections, when I was asked if I would speak at Loh Gwo-Burne's ceramah in his support, I asked him if he was 'planted' to hold the seat for Anwar because if that's the case I wouldn't speak in the forum.
Or if I spoke I would speak against it because to me that too would be a fraud on the voter. If you are merely 'planted' there to hold the seat, then you must tell the voter this is the game plan.
The voters must know. He assured me that there was no such plan. I told him if after the event, it turned out otherwise, he would rue the day he ever met me!
He knows me well enough to know I meant what I said. It's not enough to explain to the voter after the event.
Candidates owe us an obligation to be honest and transparent.
Q: In the event Anwar tries to make a comeback through a 'forced' by-election, what would your stand be?
A: You'll find me condemning him. I'll certainly be condemning the fraud on the voter. If a vacancy is contrived - if that was the game plan before - well before the general election, I will condemn it.
Q: If Anwar were to stand in such a by-election, you wouldn't offer yourself as a candidate against him would you?
A: Don't discount it. All things are possible.
Q: So you do have political ambitions?
A: None at all. But I have political statements which I think must be made.
If I feel there is a need for take a position in a by-election simply to alert the voters to think with their brains in operation then I will. I got nothing to lose.
Q: Pakatan Rakyat sees Anwar as their potential PM. Do you?
A: I say it with reluctance because I look at what's available before us. That speaks very sadly of the state of things here.
My grouse with Anwar is that he was part of the administration for 16 years.
When he was released in Oct 2004 and had a dialogue with the Bar, I was the first to ask him why he hadn't resigned like (Tun) Musa Hitam had done rather than stick with the regime that did all the things that he now complains about.
Till today he has not given me a satisfactory answer! My contention is very simple. Tell this nation "I was wrong. I am sorry and I want to work with you" and I think we can move forward.
But the fact is I have been tracking this man's (Anwar) public statements for the last few years and I haven't seen that unqualified apology to the nation. I haven't.
Q: Do you trust him?
A: No.
Q: You said a lot of negative things about Mahathir. Is there anything you like about him?
A: That he retired! I have great passion for the law. When I was in England in 1987 and 1988, it was very painful to watch what he was doing to (Lord President) Tun Salleh Abbas and then the amendments to the constitution in 1988. We have never recovered from those days up to now.
All the Protons, twin towers and KLIA - that was one man's ego. We didn't need that. We could have had first class hospitals in all states and residential schools instead of building monstrosities. We could have done so much more for the rakyat but we didn't.
Q: Pak Lah has tried to make amends by recently introducing reforms of the judiciary?
A: Unless he tells me that the Judicial Commission recommends directly to the Majesty and not to the PM who still maintains his discretion!
Why are we talking about judicial commission now?
Because we had one PM who misbehaved. Even if you tell me Pak Lah is putting these reforms in place and would never do what Mahathir did, what if in the future this country is blighted with another Mahathir? I am saying don't leave that discretion to one man.
Let the Judicial Commission make the recommendation directly to the Majesty, then I will say 'hats off' and I will forgive you (Pak Lah) some of the promises you made in 2004 and did not deliver. Don't give us this little flirtations simply because your own party is turning the heat on you. Don't give us this little dangles with the hope that people will still say we still want him . It's not going to work.
Ads by Google
Fight for the right to speak
By Shahanaaz Habib
Lawyer Haris Ibrahim became a blogger a year back with his People's Parliament Blog. In the general election, he wanted to kick Barisan Nasional "out on its backside". Thrilled with Pakatan Rakyat winning five states, he nevertheless condemns any attempt to topple the Barisan federal government through crossovers without going back to the voters to seek their blessing first. Not to do so is committing fraud on the voters.
Haris: ‘We have a civil society that has been numbed into silence by fear’
Q: What exactly is the People's Parliament?
A: For me personally it is my attempt to retrieve my voice back from a government that refuses to give me the right to speak through forums.
If I could backtrack a little, I was part of the Article 11 initiatives. We launched our first forum in March 2006 in PJ, in April we went to Malacca - both very successful.
In May, the one in Penang was disrupted by protestors outside. At that time, we were comforted by the fact that (Prime Minister) Pak Lah and (the then minister in charge of law) Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz said we had the right to speak and the protestors were chastised.
But the July forum in JB was again disrupted by protestors. This time Pak Lah said "no more". So the People's Parliament is the culmination of so many hurdles and obstacles to give civil society a voice.
I suppose I must also say thank you to the NST. When they sued Rocky and Jeff Ooi, it forced me to look into blogs and realise this was a powerful opportunity for me to share the little messages that I have with fellow Malaysians. That was the humble beginnings of the People's Parliament.
Q: One of the things the People's Parliament did was keep tabs on MPs?
A: My complaint of the electoral process is that when parliament is dissolved, you have only an average of 9 to 14 days between nomination and polling day. How does the average voter get to know the candidates?
It doesn't help either that the media doesn't give balanced coverage to all the candidates.
I was also rather disillusioned with the elected representatives inherited from the 2004 election. My personal feeling is that they weren't living up to expectations.
We started the Get to Know Your MP with 10 constituencies in the Klang Valley.
PJ Selatan and PJ Utara took off very well. The others - didn't take off the way I had hoped.
Q: Why focus only on MPs and not Aduns (assemblymen)?
A: It's simply a resource issue. I can only do so much at any one time. When I first started Get to Know Your MP, I was just a one man band.
I could only confine myself to 10 constituencies. I couldn't take on overseeing the Aduns as well.
It's a lot of work. But Post March 8 (general election), we have moved from MPs to initiating The Representatives Watch (Rep Watch) Committee.
We are trying to put in place committees which would buddy with MPs, Aduns, as well as local councillors simply because people are now reacting very positively and there seems to be a greater willingness to participate in this.
I don't know how far it will go. But if you don't try then you don't get anywhere. The experience we have had over the one year is that voters must be educated as to the function of their various elected representatives. In particularly the Pakatan Rakyat states and constituencies we want to help 'our MPs' function the way they are supposed to.
We will buddy them and try to make sure that they toe the line.
Q: It's interesting you mentioned help 'our MPs' when you mentioned Pakatan? Does this mean the People's Parliament supports the opposition?
A: Let me make this very plain. Right up to the 12th General Election, I worked very hard to send Barisan Nasional out on its backside. I will not make any effort to even apologise for this.
Post-GE, we have heard a lot of talk (from Barisan) about wanting to reform. But I have not seen any real indicator of a real will to change.
When we see that, I will be the first to stand and say 'I will help in this BN reform." But until then, I think I want to work with the new kids on the block. I want to make sure they don't go the way of Barisan.
These are new enthusiastic elected representatives. We want to keep them on the straight and narrow.
Q: Why are you so insistent- in your words - on "sending Barisan out on its backside"?
A: I have always voted opposition until 2004 when I was so taken in by the promises of Pak Lah.
I have always been anti-Mahathir simply because I have never agreed with his policies, with how he has dismantled our constitutional structures, institutions particularly the judiciary.
So for myself - like a lot of other people - Pak Lah appeared to be a breath of fresh air and a lot of promises were made.
Go look at his one page manifesto (of 2004). But by 2007, I was convinced that this man was not going to deliver. I was extremely concerned about how the judiciary was dealing with some of the controversial cases. We were getting nowhere in seeing justice for the likes of Lina Joy.
We are supposed to be a civilised society but look at how Revathi (Massosai) was dealt with. The PM kept promising us that he was looking into it but nothing was forthcoming. I had reached breaking point.
I felt by April 2007, Barisan had become so arrogant with the mandate that has been given (in 2004 ). The fault really was ours. We gave them a 90% mandate in parliament and this is how we were being repaid. I felt it was enough.
Q: What would you do if a Pakatan Rakyat MP or Adun is not up to mark?
A: We are linking our initiative with the Citizen Think Tank blog. They are going to give us space for report cards.
I'm going to be less merciful with the Pakatan reps that don't meet the mark because we got higher expectations for them. There's going to be no preferential here. As far as we are concerned, we are of this agenda that people are the boss. You undertook to work for us.
We don't call you 'Yang Berhormat' anymore but we call you 'Yang Berkhidmat'.
And you are supposed to serve. And if you are not up to the mark, then we will kick you out on your backside the next time around -Pakatan or Barisan.
Q: Are you going to monitor only the five Pakatan Rakyat states?
A: Oh no. People's Parliament is extended to any constituency. We are encouraging civil society to take ownership of their constituency.
I don't see why we should exclude the Barisan constituencies. We are prepared to try in any constituency where there are enough people to try and get that initiative off the ground.
Q: How do you pick the constituencies?
A: I don't pick. I put my posting up on the blog and invite anyone from any of the constituencies who is prepared to help me get the committee together.
To give you an example, Bukit Katil in Malacca, I don't know anyone there. But someone writes in and says I wanna try. I'll say ok.
The Rep Watch Committee framework requires a minimum of 9 people. But this is not cast in stone. If you think you need 12 or six is enough - great because you guys are in the drivers' seat.
I am just helping you get it off the ground. But we've got a very stringent disqualifying criteria.
We want non-partisan, non-political party affiliates , in fact not just non-card-carrying members. If you are too closely connected, if you have got business interests with the government or state agencies, if you are contemplating or being employed or engaged by any of the state agencies - you are out.
Based on that criteria, even I wouldn't qualify based on my close proximity to DAP.
Q: Parliament has been sitting for 2 weeks, do you like what you've seen so far?
A: Barisan is not consistently disappointing me - read that as you will. And it's early days yet for the Pakatan Rakyat MPs. I think we should give them a 100 days appraisal and then a 6-month appraisal.
Q: Are there any Barisan MPs that you have regard for?
A: (Datuk) Zaid Ibrahim (the law minister who is an appointed senator but not an elected MP) . I still have respect for Datuk Shahrir (Abdul Samad), Datuk Shabery Cheek - not withstanding some silly statements off and on because maybe he's under pressure - but I have always thought he was one of the better one. I can't think of anyone else.
Q: How effective has the People's Parliament been?
A: I think Malaysians by far and large are a caring lot. But we had 22 years of Mahathir's rule. The fear culture has set in. People need to find their voice.
People need to be bold enough to articulate their cares and concern. I would like to think we have had some success in getting people to speak up and getting people to be prepared to come out and be counted. I'll give you an example.
The petition to the Agong on the judiciary - two years ago, I wouldn't have dreamt of insisting people give their names and IC numbers. Until then, Malaysians were very happy to sign anonymously.
But (this time) we got over 5,000 signatures where people put their names and IC numbers down. That to me is civil society coming out. I'd like to think perhaps that's the little success that we have had.
Q : Civil society is interpreted in a lot of ways. What does civil society mean to you?
A: Rakyat.
Q: But the rakyat has been there all the time?
So have we had civil society all this time?
A: Yes, we have. But we have a civil society that has been numbed into silence by fear. I have been pushing for civil society defined by the power that has been entrusted to the people by the Federal Constitution.
Simplistically, under the constitution the power rests with the Agong and his power sharers, the rakyat. We are the civil society. But you can be robust or you can be silenced.
Mahathir very effectively silenced us for 22 years. It's the same corpus but people now are willing to believe in themselves.
Q: Do you think Malaysia is ready for a civil society now?
A: The 12th general election results speak for itself.
I think we are far more mature than the government has cared to credit us for. And certainly the government shouldn't take any credit for the maturity we have achieved up to now.
Q: So you are quite pleased with the results of the general elections?
A: We are two states short of what my prediction was.
I said (we'd win) seven states. That's the disappointment. But I also said that if there wasn't the cheating, the double voting, the abuse of the postal votes, we would have formed a simple majority government.
Q: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has talked about toppling the Barisan Federal government through crossovers?
What are your views on this?
A: If there are going to be crossovers, the MPs must go back to the voters to get the mandate because otherwise it would be tantamount to a fraud.
While I wanted Barisan out on their backside, I must be prepared to respect that there were voters that preferred Barisan.
If a candidate got in on a Barisan ticket and now for whatever reasons thinks perhaps he wants to throw his lot with Pakatan he needs to go back to the voters and hear their views because they voted for him on a Barisan ticket.
If they say 'no, you stay put' then you stay put.
Q: But in politics you don't show your hand. Surely it is difficult to expect 30 MPs to go back to voters for a mandate to crossover?
A: If that's not practical, then I'd rather wait another four years to take the federal government!
Because I don't think those who voted Pakatan should do such a disservice to those voted for Barisan.
If we want our vote to be respected, we must respect the vote of voters aligned to Barisan.
I abhor the notion that politicians can undermine the voters' choice.
Q: But Anwar argues that if the elections were free and fair, then Pakatan would have formed the Federal government?
A: Free and fair like the 1994 Sabah elections (when PBS won but the state government fell weeks later when PBS assemblymen defected to Barisan)?
I posed Anwar that question when he was complaining about the Ijok by-election.
My question was I wonder how clean it would have been if he (Anwar) hadn't been sacked in Sept of 1998 and he was the Prime Minister now. He was in several elections in this country which were bloody dirty.
Q: What do you think about PKR MPs who offer to resign to 'force' a by-election so that Anwar can make a political comeback?
A: Just before the elections, when I was asked if I would speak at Loh Gwo-Burne's ceramah in his support, I asked him if he was 'planted' to hold the seat for Anwar because if that's the case I wouldn't speak in the forum.
Or if I spoke I would speak against it because to me that too would be a fraud on the voter. If you are merely 'planted' there to hold the seat, then you must tell the voter this is the game plan.
The voters must know. He assured me that there was no such plan. I told him if after the event, it turned out otherwise, he would rue the day he ever met me!
He knows me well enough to know I meant what I said. It's not enough to explain to the voter after the event.
Candidates owe us an obligation to be honest and transparent.
Q: In the event Anwar tries to make a comeback through a 'forced' by-election, what would your stand be?
A: You'll find me condemning him. I'll certainly be condemning the fraud on the voter. If a vacancy is contrived - if that was the game plan before - well before the general election, I will condemn it.
Q: If Anwar were to stand in such a by-election, you wouldn't offer yourself as a candidate against him would you?
A: Don't discount it. All things are possible.
Q: So you do have political ambitions?
A: None at all. But I have political statements which I think must be made.
If I feel there is a need for take a position in a by-election simply to alert the voters to think with their brains in operation then I will. I got nothing to lose.
Q: Pakatan Rakyat sees Anwar as their potential PM. Do you?
A: I say it with reluctance because I look at what's available before us. That speaks very sadly of the state of things here.
My grouse with Anwar is that he was part of the administration for 16 years.
When he was released in Oct 2004 and had a dialogue with the Bar, I was the first to ask him why he hadn't resigned like (Tun) Musa Hitam had done rather than stick with the regime that did all the things that he now complains about.
Till today he has not given me a satisfactory answer! My contention is very simple. Tell this nation "I was wrong. I am sorry and I want to work with you" and I think we can move forward.
But the fact is I have been tracking this man's (Anwar) public statements for the last few years and I haven't seen that unqualified apology to the nation. I haven't.
Q: Do you trust him?
A: No.
Q: You said a lot of negative things about Mahathir. Is there anything you like about him?
A: That he retired! I have great passion for the law. When I was in England in 1987 and 1988, it was very painful to watch what he was doing to (Lord President) Tun Salleh Abbas and then the amendments to the constitution in 1988. We have never recovered from those days up to now.
All the Protons, twin towers and KLIA - that was one man's ego. We didn't need that. We could have had first class hospitals in all states and residential schools instead of building monstrosities. We could have done so much more for the rakyat but we didn't.
Q: Pak Lah has tried to make amends by recently introducing reforms of the judiciary?
A: Unless he tells me that the Judicial Commission recommends directly to the Majesty and not to the PM who still maintains his discretion!
Why are we talking about judicial commission now?
Because we had one PM who misbehaved. Even if you tell me Pak Lah is putting these reforms in place and would never do what Mahathir did, what if in the future this country is blighted with another Mahathir? I am saying don't leave that discretion to one man.
Let the Judicial Commission make the recommendation directly to the Majesty, then I will say 'hats off' and I will forgive you (Pak Lah) some of the promises you made in 2004 and did not deliver. Don't give us this little flirtations simply because your own party is turning the heat on you. Don't give us this little dangles with the hope that people will still say we still want him . It's not going to work.
Ads by Google
Friday, May 16, 2008
Build on what the people have created
Friday May 16, 2008
Build on what the people have created
I REFER to “Show the critics that Umno is not arrogant, says Pak Lah” (The Star, May 12).
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s call to Umno members at the 62nd anniversary of Umno to counter the notion that they are arrogant and corrupt is apt and timely.
Instead of heeding his call and trying to win back the hearts of the people, Umno is trying to use all forms of tactics, including racial, to break up the Opposition that is promoting multi-racialism. Its attempts to resurrect sensitive issues of the past are very disturbing and go against the aspirations of the rakyat themselves.
Due to some losses in the recent polls, Umno claims that the special rights of the Malays are being threatened. This is absurd, as we all know there is no way anyone can take them away as these rights and the special privileges are enshrined in the Federal Constitution and accepted by all races. It would be unfair for Umno to harp on these imaginary external threats for political mileage.
The accusation against DAP chairman Karpal Singh appears to be an attempt to imply that non-Malays are disrespectful and not loyal to the Malay Rulers. This is not only utterly false but unfair and malicious.
The Institution of the Monarchy has become part of the Malaysian culture, for Malays and non-Malays alike. Loyalty to the Rulers is a tenet of the Rukun Negara that is held dearly by all. It is a known fact that the non-Malays have also turned to the Rulers for help, pardon and protection of their rights from time to time.
It is unfair for Umno to question the loyalty of non-Malay Malaysians after 50 years of working together in building the nation, not as Malays, Chinese or Indians, but as Malaysians. The people have demonstrated this unprecedented unity by rising above their racial divide to vote for a multi-racial system of governance.
It is the duty of the political parties to ensure that these aspirations of the people are achieved. Politicians must build on, not destroy, what the people have created all these years together.
It is ironical that when we are outside the country, we are identified as Malaysians but within our own country we are constantly being reminded of our ethnic origins. It is time for us to change the mindset to accept each other as Malaysians and work to create leaders who can represent the interests of all races.
The only way to eradicate this race-based politics is to open up ethnic-based parties to all races to become truly multi-racial where everyone’s rights are guaranteed as provided for by the Constitution. There should not be a need for any particular community to “fight” for its fundamental rights that are already guaranteed by the Constitution.
Umno should not regard fellow non-Malay Malaysians as a threat to their well-being. It should not succumb to some imaginary external threat that is non-existent. It should instead get its acts together, regain its power and influence to get back the support of the people of all races. Umno may have its duty towards the Malays but being the dominant party in the ruling coalition, it also has the responsibility to ensure the minorities are treated fairly as rightful citizens.
Umno might have been formed by a strong spirit of Malay nationalism that prevailed at the time of independence but the time has come for it to adopt and radiate a true Malaysian nationalism that incorporates all the races of the peninsula and east Malaysia. The MCA, MIC, Gerakan and others have all called for multi-racialism. Umno should take heed and lead the Barisan to embrace a multi-racial approach to champion the rights of all regardless of race or creed.
DR CHRIS ANTHONY,
Butterworth.
Build on what the people have created
I REFER to “Show the critics that Umno is not arrogant, says Pak Lah” (The Star, May 12).
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s call to Umno members at the 62nd anniversary of Umno to counter the notion that they are arrogant and corrupt is apt and timely.
Instead of heeding his call and trying to win back the hearts of the people, Umno is trying to use all forms of tactics, including racial, to break up the Opposition that is promoting multi-racialism. Its attempts to resurrect sensitive issues of the past are very disturbing and go against the aspirations of the rakyat themselves.
Due to some losses in the recent polls, Umno claims that the special rights of the Malays are being threatened. This is absurd, as we all know there is no way anyone can take them away as these rights and the special privileges are enshrined in the Federal Constitution and accepted by all races. It would be unfair for Umno to harp on these imaginary external threats for political mileage.
The accusation against DAP chairman Karpal Singh appears to be an attempt to imply that non-Malays are disrespectful and not loyal to the Malay Rulers. This is not only utterly false but unfair and malicious.
The Institution of the Monarchy has become part of the Malaysian culture, for Malays and non-Malays alike. Loyalty to the Rulers is a tenet of the Rukun Negara that is held dearly by all. It is a known fact that the non-Malays have also turned to the Rulers for help, pardon and protection of their rights from time to time.
It is unfair for Umno to question the loyalty of non-Malay Malaysians after 50 years of working together in building the nation, not as Malays, Chinese or Indians, but as Malaysians. The people have demonstrated this unprecedented unity by rising above their racial divide to vote for a multi-racial system of governance.
It is the duty of the political parties to ensure that these aspirations of the people are achieved. Politicians must build on, not destroy, what the people have created all these years together.
It is ironical that when we are outside the country, we are identified as Malaysians but within our own country we are constantly being reminded of our ethnic origins. It is time for us to change the mindset to accept each other as Malaysians and work to create leaders who can represent the interests of all races.
The only way to eradicate this race-based politics is to open up ethnic-based parties to all races to become truly multi-racial where everyone’s rights are guaranteed as provided for by the Constitution. There should not be a need for any particular community to “fight” for its fundamental rights that are already guaranteed by the Constitution.
Umno should not regard fellow non-Malay Malaysians as a threat to their well-being. It should not succumb to some imaginary external threat that is non-existent. It should instead get its acts together, regain its power and influence to get back the support of the people of all races. Umno may have its duty towards the Malays but being the dominant party in the ruling coalition, it also has the responsibility to ensure the minorities are treated fairly as rightful citizens.
Umno might have been formed by a strong spirit of Malay nationalism that prevailed at the time of independence but the time has come for it to adopt and radiate a true Malaysian nationalism that incorporates all the races of the peninsula and east Malaysia. The MCA, MIC, Gerakan and others have all called for multi-racialism. Umno should take heed and lead the Barisan to embrace a multi-racial approach to champion the rights of all regardless of race or creed.
DR CHRIS ANTHONY,
Butterworth.
Know your people, MPs
Friday May 16, 2008
Know your people, MPs
A LOT has been said, mostly negative about the performance of our Members of Parliament, and I think they deserve all the bad comments.
It was disappointing to many to see seasoned and experienced parliamentarians as well as those with good oratory skills waste time on trivial technical matters. It was however hardly surprising to me as our legislature has been consistently deteriorating in quality throughout the years.
It has in the past been largely due to the legislative assembly being considered and perceived as rubber stamp to the ruling party who overwhelmingly controlled Parliament with a vast majority.
But with the changed political scenario after March 8 and a more balanced representation in Parliament, the people had expected the Opposition to seize the opportunity to start improving the standard of our legislative as one of the highest political institutions in the country.
The essence of a good Parliament in a representative democratic system is quality debate of what the people want the politicians to speak for on their behalf. This is where the problem arises.
Firstly, good quality debates require a reasonable amount of research on the subject matter to be debated. From what we have seen so far, it was obvious that not many MPs had taken the trouble to do some research before speaking up.
To be fair to them, this may be due to time constraints and lack of resources on their part. It is normally only the executive, ministers and deputy ministers who have enough resources in the form of allocation and staff at their disposal to conduct sufficient research on any subject.
I suggest that we adopt the American system of inviting independent experts on relevant matters to give their opinions and briefings in Parliament, so that a more meaningful debate among the parliamentarians can take place before a law is being passed.
Secondly, to speak on behalf of the people requires regular interaction with the people they are representing.
I have not come across (at least as far as my own area is concerned) any MP who has organised interactive sessions with the people to get feedback on the subjects to be debated in Parliament or to get the people’s opinion on current issues affecting the country.
Perhaps the MPs, as “trustees of the people”, should start having more meetings with their constituents, not just to attend to their local infrastructure problems and needs but also to gather information on what the people really want them to speak about in Parliament.
As it is now, the parliamentarians are acting more as agents or voices of their political parties rather than as the people’s representative or wakil rakyat.
AHMAD ALI,
Bayan Baru, Penang.
Reader Comments
Allow
Don't allow
Post date and time
Know your people, MPs
A LOT has been said, mostly negative about the performance of our Members of Parliament, and I think they deserve all the bad comments.
It was disappointing to many to see seasoned and experienced parliamentarians as well as those with good oratory skills waste time on trivial technical matters. It was however hardly surprising to me as our legislature has been consistently deteriorating in quality throughout the years.
It has in the past been largely due to the legislative assembly being considered and perceived as rubber stamp to the ruling party who overwhelmingly controlled Parliament with a vast majority.
But with the changed political scenario after March 8 and a more balanced representation in Parliament, the people had expected the Opposition to seize the opportunity to start improving the standard of our legislative as one of the highest political institutions in the country.
The essence of a good Parliament in a representative democratic system is quality debate of what the people want the politicians to speak for on their behalf. This is where the problem arises.
Firstly, good quality debates require a reasonable amount of research on the subject matter to be debated. From what we have seen so far, it was obvious that not many MPs had taken the trouble to do some research before speaking up.
To be fair to them, this may be due to time constraints and lack of resources on their part. It is normally only the executive, ministers and deputy ministers who have enough resources in the form of allocation and staff at their disposal to conduct sufficient research on any subject.
I suggest that we adopt the American system of inviting independent experts on relevant matters to give their opinions and briefings in Parliament, so that a more meaningful debate among the parliamentarians can take place before a law is being passed.
Secondly, to speak on behalf of the people requires regular interaction with the people they are representing.
I have not come across (at least as far as my own area is concerned) any MP who has organised interactive sessions with the people to get feedback on the subjects to be debated in Parliament or to get the people’s opinion on current issues affecting the country.
Perhaps the MPs, as “trustees of the people”, should start having more meetings with their constituents, not just to attend to their local infrastructure problems and needs but also to gather information on what the people really want them to speak about in Parliament.
As it is now, the parliamentarians are acting more as agents or voices of their political parties rather than as the people’s representative or wakil rakyat.
AHMAD ALI,
Bayan Baru, Penang.
Reader Comments
Allow
Don't allow
Post date and time
Sunday, May 4, 2008
SUVs,you mean like Porsche shylah Honk .Money power
Youth wing faces new dilemma
INSIGHT
By JOCELINE TAN
Whoever takes over will have to seriously revamp the wing and bring in a new political culture.
Umno Youth has become rather too pro-establishment over the years. It has to try to reflect young Malay priorities rather than constantly defend the top leadership's stand on issues.
The next Youth chief also has to realise that he cannot be a Malay ultra in the party and still hope to be seen as a national leader to those outside. He will have to learn how to strike a balance.
It is also a known fact that many young people were turned off by politics because they see politicians as self-serving and politics as dirty and corrupt. Many of the Umno Youth politicians probably do not realise how off-putting it is to see young politicians arriving for village functions in a convoy of expensive SUVs.
Given that, many young Malays if not Malaysians, are likely to be drawn to the idealism and less conventional style of the new and young faces on the Pakatan Rakyat side.
These new wakil rakyat from the other side will be Umno Youth's biggest rivals for the support of Gen X.
Umno Youth will have to match the new talent from the other side if it wishes to re-establish itself among a wide spectrum of young Malays, be it rural youth or thinking professionals like those in the Sekretariat Melayu Muda. Going for it: Mukhriz, seen here with Hishammuddin in Parliament, is making a concerted bid to become the new Umno Youth chief but his dilemma is that his appeal outside the party does not match that inside the Youth wing. Khairy: The Rembau MP has
support in Youth wing but public opinion is against him. Salim: Up to the grassroots to evaluate Hishammuddin's apology about the keris.
INSIGHT
By JOCELINE TAN
Whoever takes over will have to seriously revamp the wing and bring in a new political culture.
Umno Youth has become rather too pro-establishment over the years. It has to try to reflect young Malay priorities rather than constantly defend the top leadership's stand on issues.
The next Youth chief also has to realise that he cannot be a Malay ultra in the party and still hope to be seen as a national leader to those outside. He will have to learn how to strike a balance.
It is also a known fact that many young people were turned off by politics because they see politicians as self-serving and politics as dirty and corrupt. Many of the Umno Youth politicians probably do not realise how off-putting it is to see young politicians arriving for village functions in a convoy of expensive SUVs.
Given that, many young Malays if not Malaysians, are likely to be drawn to the idealism and less conventional style of the new and young faces on the Pakatan Rakyat side.
These new wakil rakyat from the other side will be Umno Youth's biggest rivals for the support of Gen X.
Umno Youth will have to match the new talent from the other side if it wishes to re-establish itself among a wide spectrum of young Malays, be it rural youth or thinking professionals like those in the Sekretariat Melayu Muda. Going for it: Mukhriz, seen here with Hishammuddin in Parliament, is making a concerted bid to become the new Umno Youth chief but his dilemma is that his appeal outside the party does not match that inside the Youth wing. Khairy: The Rembau MP has
support in Youth wing but public opinion is against him. Salim: Up to the grassroots to evaluate Hishammuddin's apology about the keris.
Its about the people,people
Sunday May 4, 2008
It’s about the people, people
STRAY THOUGHTS
By A.ASOHAN
As far as the rakyat is concerned, what they want is the best man for the job and hang his political affiliations.
GIVEN that there is a yawning chasm between thought and deed, or words and action, it was still heartening to read what Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdulah Ahmad Badawi told Barisan Nasional MPs before the first sitting of the 12th Parliament on Monday.
Restore voters’ confidence in the coalition by working hard for the people’s welfare, he told his fellow Members of Parliament.
These voters exercising their right are choosing their government so the government should fear the people, not the other way round.
He then added that they should also defend the Government, the party and the leadership (The Star Online, April 28).
Finally, somebody’s got it in the right order: It’s the people first, then the Government of the day (as chosen by the people), then the party, and last of all, the leadership ... if at all, I might add.
While some (usually on the right side of the political divide) may put in a good case for the need for stability in a newborn nation, more than 50 years of single-party rule has created a lot of misconceptions within the electorate and especially the elected.
“Government” is not synonymous with the ruling party. They are not one and the same. The ruling party has only been given the mandate, by the people, to form the Government. It’s a mandate they can revoke in the next election.
It’s only temporary, folks.
Prior to the March 8 polls, it was obvious that many of our politicians still hadn’t grasped this simple concept, the pillar – nay, the keystone – of democracy. There were speeches reminding the people of Malaysia to be grateful for what the Government had done for them; how generous it has been with ... hmm, our money; et cetera, et cetera.
Some of our leaders at least had the wisdom to temper such speeches with a certain degree of humility – look how well we’ve served you, and let us keep doing so. Others, however, made them seem like threats.
We all have to take some measure of blame for this. When Abdullah’s premiership was validated by the overwhelming mandate he got at the 2004 general election, he said, “Don’t work for me; work with me.”
We were so euphoric over his anti-corruption agenda, which hinted at much-needed reforms, that few pointed out that as Prime Minister, and thus the highest-ranking public servant, it was actually he who was supposed to work for us. Are things going to get better now that there has been a wake-up call?
Only if the Prime Minister manages to translate thought into action. The biggest barrier to that would be the politicians who still haven’t woken up to this new reality.
And there are many, going by the finger-pointing and denial still prevalent in these post-election times.
It’s not the Barisan Nasional tradition to work with the Opposition? Why not, if it’s for the sake of people?
Someone took up a post at a state agency under Pakatan Rakyat rule because he wants to continue serving? That’s no betrayal of a party that says it’s there for the people.
All those calls for self-examination after the shocking results of the 12th general election? I’d be more assured if they were not done on the basis of reviving the party’s fortunes, but on how to become relevant to the people again.
You shouldn’t be asking how to reform the party to win back seats. No, the questions you should be asking yourself are: How did we lose the people’s confidence? How did we lose touch with their concerns? How can we change ourselves to better serve their needs?
I am waiting for the day when a Barisan MP votes against a Federal Government initiative because he believes it would adversely affect his constituency, and he isn’t slammed for it and forced to either recant or resign.
Don’t blindly toe the party line, toe the people line.
Our former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who, in one of his numerous calls for Abdullah to step down, said that it had to be done now before the party is further weakened. He said that if the four new Opposition-led state governments end up serving the people better, they would get re-elected and that would be a disaster for Umno.
Sir, if these governments do end up serving the people better, shouldn’t you be happy for the people of these states?
I hope that unlike his predecessor, Abdullah keeps in mind that he is first and foremost Prime Minister of Malaysia; his post as party president of Umno is only secondary.
I’m not necessarily promulgating anarchy (which is not synonymous with chaos, by the way), but I think Parliament should have its first ever movie screening, and all our politicians should have a chance to watch the Wachowski brothers’ 2006 V for Vendetta with its tagline, so relevant in these trying times: “People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.”
True, it’s probably a paraphrase of Thomas Jefferson’s “Does the government fear us? Or do we fear the government? When the people fear the government, tyranny has found victory. The federal government is our servant, not our master!”
A pity that Western filmmakers and the third US president have a better understanding of democracy, which is, after all, an Asian concept.
Don’t believe me? Check out Wikipedia, which notes that the world’s first republics, known as the Maha Janapadas states in modern Bihar, appeared in India a couple of centuries before the Greeks even started philosophising about it.
Now that the euphoria of change from the 12th GE is slowly dissipating, A. Asohan, New Media Editor at The Star, is going to get apolitical for a while.
It’s about the people, people
STRAY THOUGHTS
By A.ASOHAN
As far as the rakyat is concerned, what they want is the best man for the job and hang his political affiliations.
GIVEN that there is a yawning chasm between thought and deed, or words and action, it was still heartening to read what Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdulah Ahmad Badawi told Barisan Nasional MPs before the first sitting of the 12th Parliament on Monday.
Restore voters’ confidence in the coalition by working hard for the people’s welfare, he told his fellow Members of Parliament.
These voters exercising their right are choosing their government so the government should fear the people, not the other way round.
He then added that they should also defend the Government, the party and the leadership (The Star Online, April 28).
Finally, somebody’s got it in the right order: It’s the people first, then the Government of the day (as chosen by the people), then the party, and last of all, the leadership ... if at all, I might add.
While some (usually on the right side of the political divide) may put in a good case for the need for stability in a newborn nation, more than 50 years of single-party rule has created a lot of misconceptions within the electorate and especially the elected.
“Government” is not synonymous with the ruling party. They are not one and the same. The ruling party has only been given the mandate, by the people, to form the Government. It’s a mandate they can revoke in the next election.
It’s only temporary, folks.
Prior to the March 8 polls, it was obvious that many of our politicians still hadn’t grasped this simple concept, the pillar – nay, the keystone – of democracy. There were speeches reminding the people of Malaysia to be grateful for what the Government had done for them; how generous it has been with ... hmm, our money; et cetera, et cetera.
Some of our leaders at least had the wisdom to temper such speeches with a certain degree of humility – look how well we’ve served you, and let us keep doing so. Others, however, made them seem like threats.
We all have to take some measure of blame for this. When Abdullah’s premiership was validated by the overwhelming mandate he got at the 2004 general election, he said, “Don’t work for me; work with me.”
We were so euphoric over his anti-corruption agenda, which hinted at much-needed reforms, that few pointed out that as Prime Minister, and thus the highest-ranking public servant, it was actually he who was supposed to work for us. Are things going to get better now that there has been a wake-up call?
Only if the Prime Minister manages to translate thought into action. The biggest barrier to that would be the politicians who still haven’t woken up to this new reality.
And there are many, going by the finger-pointing and denial still prevalent in these post-election times.
It’s not the Barisan Nasional tradition to work with the Opposition? Why not, if it’s for the sake of people?
Someone took up a post at a state agency under Pakatan Rakyat rule because he wants to continue serving? That’s no betrayal of a party that says it’s there for the people.
All those calls for self-examination after the shocking results of the 12th general election? I’d be more assured if they were not done on the basis of reviving the party’s fortunes, but on how to become relevant to the people again.
You shouldn’t be asking how to reform the party to win back seats. No, the questions you should be asking yourself are: How did we lose the people’s confidence? How did we lose touch with their concerns? How can we change ourselves to better serve their needs?
I am waiting for the day when a Barisan MP votes against a Federal Government initiative because he believes it would adversely affect his constituency, and he isn’t slammed for it and forced to either recant or resign.
Don’t blindly toe the party line, toe the people line.
Our former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who, in one of his numerous calls for Abdullah to step down, said that it had to be done now before the party is further weakened. He said that if the four new Opposition-led state governments end up serving the people better, they would get re-elected and that would be a disaster for Umno.
Sir, if these governments do end up serving the people better, shouldn’t you be happy for the people of these states?
I hope that unlike his predecessor, Abdullah keeps in mind that he is first and foremost Prime Minister of Malaysia; his post as party president of Umno is only secondary.
I’m not necessarily promulgating anarchy (which is not synonymous with chaos, by the way), but I think Parliament should have its first ever movie screening, and all our politicians should have a chance to watch the Wachowski brothers’ 2006 V for Vendetta with its tagline, so relevant in these trying times: “People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.”
True, it’s probably a paraphrase of Thomas Jefferson’s “Does the government fear us? Or do we fear the government? When the people fear the government, tyranny has found victory. The federal government is our servant, not our master!”
A pity that Western filmmakers and the third US president have a better understanding of democracy, which is, after all, an Asian concept.
Don’t believe me? Check out Wikipedia, which notes that the world’s first republics, known as the Maha Janapadas states in modern Bihar, appeared in India a couple of centuries before the Greeks even started philosophising about it.
Now that the euphoria of change from the 12th GE is slowly dissipating, A. Asohan, New Media Editor at The Star, is going to get apolitical for a while.
Simple life less headache
Yusmadi’s got lots of drive
By LEE YUK PENG
KUALA LUMPUR: Most others would get their driving licence while awaiting their SPM results, but Mohd Yusmadi Yusof could not as he was just too busy making ends meet as a waiter to bother with driving lessons.
He needed the money to attend English classes at the British Council.
And he wasn't going to bother his parents for cash as the family was poor and there were seven children to look after.
Today, at 33, as the newly-elected Balik Pulau MP, Yusmadi still does not possess a driving licence, let alone own a car.
Driven politician: Fahda, who dropped off Yusmadi at Parliament House for the swearing-in ceremony on Monday, says he’s more into politics and books.
However, he can happily rely on his wife Fahda Nur Ahmad Kamar, a lawyer like himself, to drive him around.
On Monday, Fahda dropped him off for the swearing-in ceremony. On Tuesday, however, they had to park because Fahda was attending the opening of the 12th Malaysian Parliament by the King as Yusmadi's spouse.
If Fahda is unable to ferry him around, Yusmadi takes a taxi, bus or gets a ride from friends.
When the Balik Pulau boy returned to contest as the PKR candidate in his hometown, he had to rely on party workers and friends to take him around.
He caught the attention of the media when he rode a bicycle around Balik Pulau to campaign during the elections.
The International Islamic University law graduate says that on any normal day, his wife would drop off their two-and-a-half-year-old daughter at her mother’s before heading to work in a legal firm in Petaling Jaya Old Town.
Yusmadi either hitches a ride with friends or takes a taxi to work from their home in Gasing Indah.
“We stay near Pantai Dalam, and he has many friends among the squatters there. So, he has lots of friends willing to pick him up. One of his regular taxi drivers also lives there,” said Fahda.
“It is a case of different priorities,” explained Yusmadi, who got his L-licence in 2005.
He was unable to take the driving test as he went to the United States on a fellowship and the two-year licence lapsed.
“On days when he needs to rush, he will take a cab. On days when he can only afford to take the bus, he will do so. You must know how to budget-lah,” said Fahda.
“We lead a very simple life. I married him because he is the only mentally-stimulating man I met,” added Fahda, who described her husband as one who was more into politics and books than cars and video games.
By LEE YUK PENG
KUALA LUMPUR: Most others would get their driving licence while awaiting their SPM results, but Mohd Yusmadi Yusof could not as he was just too busy making ends meet as a waiter to bother with driving lessons.
He needed the money to attend English classes at the British Council.
And he wasn't going to bother his parents for cash as the family was poor and there were seven children to look after.
Today, at 33, as the newly-elected Balik Pulau MP, Yusmadi still does not possess a driving licence, let alone own a car.
Driven politician: Fahda, who dropped off Yusmadi at Parliament House for the swearing-in ceremony on Monday, says he’s more into politics and books.
However, he can happily rely on his wife Fahda Nur Ahmad Kamar, a lawyer like himself, to drive him around.
On Monday, Fahda dropped him off for the swearing-in ceremony. On Tuesday, however, they had to park because Fahda was attending the opening of the 12th Malaysian Parliament by the King as Yusmadi's spouse.
If Fahda is unable to ferry him around, Yusmadi takes a taxi, bus or gets a ride from friends.
When the Balik Pulau boy returned to contest as the PKR candidate in his hometown, he had to rely on party workers and friends to take him around.
He caught the attention of the media when he rode a bicycle around Balik Pulau to campaign during the elections.
The International Islamic University law graduate says that on any normal day, his wife would drop off their two-and-a-half-year-old daughter at her mother’s before heading to work in a legal firm in Petaling Jaya Old Town.
Yusmadi either hitches a ride with friends or takes a taxi to work from their home in Gasing Indah.
“We stay near Pantai Dalam, and he has many friends among the squatters there. So, he has lots of friends willing to pick him up. One of his regular taxi drivers also lives there,” said Fahda.
“It is a case of different priorities,” explained Yusmadi, who got his L-licence in 2005.
He was unable to take the driving test as he went to the United States on a fellowship and the two-year licence lapsed.
“On days when he needs to rush, he will take a cab. On days when he can only afford to take the bus, he will do so. You must know how to budget-lah,” said Fahda.
“We lead a very simple life. I married him because he is the only mentally-stimulating man I met,” added Fahda, who described her husband as one who was more into politics and books than cars and video games.
Leadership by example
Sunday May 4, 2008
Travellers impressed to see Lim flying economy class
PENANG: Some things have not changed with Lim Guan Eng, although he is now the Penang Chief Minister.
And among that is his penchant for economy class air travel.
As the chief executive of Penang, Lim is entitled to a business class seat but he is having none of it.
Ning posing with Lim at KLIA on Wednesday in a photo taken from Jolly's blog.
As travellers queued to get into the airplane, many are surprised to see Lim standing in line with them, just like in the days before the DAP wrested Penang from the Barisan Nasional in the March general election.
Among those who were surprised to see the Penang CM in economy class were songbird Ning Baizura and her manager Vernon Kedit Jolly, who were at KL International Airport last Wednesday.
Jolly was so moved that he wrote about it on his blog, which spurned off reactions among other bloggers.
Lim, who has adopted a “no formalities” approach since assuming the CM’s post, said he said he had told his staff to book him economy class tickets whenever he needed to fly.
“I hope to lead by example. If I can reach my destination and save some money at the same time, why not?” he asked.
That is not all. The Chief Minister also does not check into luxury-class rooms in hotels.
“I usually request for a room that is at least one level down from what I am accorded,” Lim said.
Jolly, who flew in First Class with Ning on that flight to Penang, said Lim had earned their deepest respects.
Travellers impressed to see Lim flying economy class
PENANG: Some things have not changed with Lim Guan Eng, although he is now the Penang Chief Minister.
And among that is his penchant for economy class air travel.
As the chief executive of Penang, Lim is entitled to a business class seat but he is having none of it.
Ning posing with Lim at KLIA on Wednesday in a photo taken from Jolly's blog.
As travellers queued to get into the airplane, many are surprised to see Lim standing in line with them, just like in the days before the DAP wrested Penang from the Barisan Nasional in the March general election.
Among those who were surprised to see the Penang CM in economy class were songbird Ning Baizura and her manager Vernon Kedit Jolly, who were at KL International Airport last Wednesday.
Jolly was so moved that he wrote about it on his blog, which spurned off reactions among other bloggers.
Lim, who has adopted a “no formalities” approach since assuming the CM’s post, said he said he had told his staff to book him economy class tickets whenever he needed to fly.
“I hope to lead by example. If I can reach my destination and save some money at the same time, why not?” he asked.
That is not all. The Chief Minister also does not check into luxury-class rooms in hotels.
“I usually request for a room that is at least one level down from what I am accorded,” Lim said.
Jolly, who flew in First Class with Ning on that flight to Penang, said Lim had earned their deepest respects.
The Public day or week
Umnocian are so focus on getting"Titles' and 'Networth' so much so they forgot the raayat needs. The raayat really need food to eat,public transport needs to improve ie a lot of public transports than private transport. All leaders in the government must make' A public day' or a 'Public week' a must on the first week of every month to find raayats needs. That means they refraim using their cars and drivers, avoid 5 star hotels and go down and take public transports ie buses airlines(economy only)no luxury SUVs,low cost housing area( go and sleep there and feel what the raayat is feeling)All politicians must lead by getting rid of all their luxury cars( heard also one minister in UMNO has a Hummer or hamvey that cost 2m) and palaces. Selfish attitude is not The Raayat attitude.
Pls visit :
http://theraayat.blogspot.com/
Pls visit :
http://theraayat.blogspot.com/
Putrajaya,gracious living for the raayat
I must say this ,Putrajaya is a real living comfort for the raayat. I think every states should follow this concept. Plan driven and very well administered. Of course there are slight problems every now and then but with every thing 'e' it is taken care quite fast. Everything is within reach and it makes it convenience for raayat Putrajaya. The bus is good,the school,supermarkets,hospitals,clinics,firebrigade and yes cinema at alamanda is really cool. The police are efficient, will arrive at your place within 5 minutes. Of course no where is safe nowadays but prevention here is practise by neighbours as there are no gates in the housing estate. Community halls almost at all precinct with class badminton courts(Proffessional coach available),swimming pools,beautiful horse riding clubs with nice restaurant, first class convention center, boulevard looks superb like the Manhattan in New York( we need to plant trees there as soon as possible). I hope it will turn to be into a great shopping center like Orchard road,Singapore and Oxford street in London. Cycling is great fun with family as you will find 3 metres footpath all over Putrajaya. Lake Club is ready at Precinct 8 and Precinct 6 with nice swimming pools,and you can learn sailing too. The Putra Mosque is must visit to all,really beautiful. Go down below the arcade you will find great food courts and nice view. Get on the cruise and experience the lake breeze that will take you to all the almost 35 small and big bridges design to capture your heart. Taman Warisan and Taman Botani is where you and family can learn all about trees anf herbs and enjoy all the food you can. Family day too can be held at the wetland in Putrajaya on a private island...barbecue..hem.
My sister in law came to visit us and said it is like coming into another country. Another says it is like London and another like Australia. The embassy enclave is almost ready at Precinct 15. In fact all architecture and designs are superb. Great superstructure and infrastructure.
My sister in law came to visit us and said it is like coming into another country. Another says it is like London and another like Australia. The embassy enclave is almost ready at Precinct 15. In fact all architecture and designs are superb. Great superstructure and infrastructure.
Saturday, May 3, 2008
GLCs,are they really helping the malays?
I am in the mid of finding out weather GLCs is really helping the malays. All I can say is it is control by some heavy duty political party headed by some political group only and the vehicle may be being used as a vehicle to profit some 'Sdn Bhd' people and its close supporters only. Some of this GLCs is paying out a hefty some of salaries,allowances and claims to their top executives. Lets compare them between eg TMB the then Jabatan telekom malaysia! Or who actually controls MRCB and the list goes on. Are this GLCs being abused?
Umno will disintegrate ifs
UMNO WILL DISINTERGRATE IF!
I refer to TheStar(Insight) article dated 30th March 2008 “Keeping up with the new politics” and Rita Sim statement.
I can say not only the Chinese are angry with Umno’s arrogance but the Malays too are very angry with Umno’s arrogance. The individual arrogant umno members that we voted in have caused Umno to be in trouble and disintegrate.
Sighting my personal experience with Umno Putrajaya…. I was the first one to initiate the setting up of Umno Putrajaya and how I and my friends were sidelined and intimidated by them. When I knew that Umno Putrajaya had not been set up, I thought this would be a good thing to do i.e. To try create activity for the community.
After distributing thousands of umno’s application forms I managed to collect 400 members. My friends and I met Tun Mahathir during the Kad Ucapan Day and he said go ahead and he asked me where are your branches?. I tried to see him after that but to no avail. This is the nightmare when I started to feel the “BLOCKED” when I tried to see Tg. Adnan (then Umno Sec Gen). After a few times of “Blocked”, by his private secretary, I decided to see Datuk Johari Baharum. He listened but again I was not entertained. He copied a letter to me he sent to Tun Khalil Yaacob which Tun Khalil Yaacob never received. Then we went to see Tun Khalil Yaacob but nothing happened. We followed up again with Tun Khalil yaacob at KLIA but he was aloof and arrogant until I told him I am son in law to Dato Abu Kassim his good old buddy. Of course nothing happen too. All I wanted to do was to register my members. Not giving up we went to see Dato Seri Najib, and all he told us to do was to pass everything to Tg Adnan. Dato Seri Najib was then a chairman of the membership drive and he can’t be bothered to even look at the forms. I attempted to see Tun Mahathir again and all this while carrying the 400 application forms trying to register them as umno members. As I am still facing the empty wall at PMs office,I let myself in to meet Dato Bad.So as you guess it right,it was as bad like meeting others. Then I decided to see Pak Lah , but instead met Dato Sharif Ibrahim and was told politics is not for me. Then we tried to see Mahathir Khalid but we were brushed off. Tried to see Tg Adnan again and still the blocked is in situ and it is till today. The people in there are just plain hypocrite and arrogant. So how do you expect us to feel? Later on I found out that all these above people are all their good friends. Only with ‘titles” like Tun, Tan Sri, Dato Seri and Dato will be entertain.
At one time I waited for Datuk. Tajuddin for 3 hours to seek appointment with Pak Lah and he can’t be bothered. Dato Osman Desa was pleasant as a political secretary but nothing happened too. Once I remembered one gentleman who was the Timbalan Ketua Bahagian of one of the division who came all the way from Sabah and waited for Datuk Tajuddin for 4 hours and he was also not entertained. So you see this is only my part of the story. Can you imagine what’s happening to the rest of the story for others?
Arrogance, Arrogance and Arrogance. I voted for all these people for the pass 30 years and they choose to be arrogant. So tell me where could Umno go wrong? They have ignored their grassroot supporters, a plain simple communication defect. I AM BEAT.
Borhann Putrajaya
The Raayat
I refer to TheStar(Insight) article dated 30th March 2008 “Keeping up with the new politics” and Rita Sim statement.
I can say not only the Chinese are angry with Umno’s arrogance but the Malays too are very angry with Umno’s arrogance. The individual arrogant umno members that we voted in have caused Umno to be in trouble and disintegrate.
Sighting my personal experience with Umno Putrajaya…. I was the first one to initiate the setting up of Umno Putrajaya and how I and my friends were sidelined and intimidated by them. When I knew that Umno Putrajaya had not been set up, I thought this would be a good thing to do i.e. To try create activity for the community.
After distributing thousands of umno’s application forms I managed to collect 400 members. My friends and I met Tun Mahathir during the Kad Ucapan Day and he said go ahead and he asked me where are your branches?. I tried to see him after that but to no avail. This is the nightmare when I started to feel the “BLOCKED” when I tried to see Tg. Adnan (then Umno Sec Gen). After a few times of “Blocked”, by his private secretary, I decided to see Datuk Johari Baharum. He listened but again I was not entertained. He copied a letter to me he sent to Tun Khalil Yaacob which Tun Khalil Yaacob never received. Then we went to see Tun Khalil Yaacob but nothing happened. We followed up again with Tun Khalil yaacob at KLIA but he was aloof and arrogant until I told him I am son in law to Dato Abu Kassim his good old buddy. Of course nothing happen too. All I wanted to do was to register my members. Not giving up we went to see Dato Seri Najib, and all he told us to do was to pass everything to Tg Adnan. Dato Seri Najib was then a chairman of the membership drive and he can’t be bothered to even look at the forms. I attempted to see Tun Mahathir again and all this while carrying the 400 application forms trying to register them as umno members. As I am still facing the empty wall at PMs office,I let myself in to meet Dato Bad.So as you guess it right,it was as bad like meeting others. Then I decided to see Pak Lah , but instead met Dato Sharif Ibrahim and was told politics is not for me. Then we tried to see Mahathir Khalid but we were brushed off. Tried to see Tg Adnan again and still the blocked is in situ and it is till today. The people in there are just plain hypocrite and arrogant. So how do you expect us to feel? Later on I found out that all these above people are all their good friends. Only with ‘titles” like Tun, Tan Sri, Dato Seri and Dato will be entertain.
At one time I waited for Datuk. Tajuddin for 3 hours to seek appointment with Pak Lah and he can’t be bothered. Dato Osman Desa was pleasant as a political secretary but nothing happened too. Once I remembered one gentleman who was the Timbalan Ketua Bahagian of one of the division who came all the way from Sabah and waited for Datuk Tajuddin for 4 hours and he was also not entertained. So you see this is only my part of the story. Can you imagine what’s happening to the rest of the story for others?
Arrogance, Arrogance and Arrogance. I voted for all these people for the pass 30 years and they choose to be arrogant. So tell me where could Umno go wrong? They have ignored their grassroot supporters, a plain simple communication defect. I AM BEAT.
Borhann Putrajaya
The Raayat
Call for 'Abolishment of 'Tuns,Tan sris,Dato Seris and Datos
Call for Abolishment on Conferment of Tuns, Tan Sris, Dato Seris and Datos
I propose to our government to abolish the conferment of all these ‘Titles’. Award may be given but not necessary to carry ‘Titles’.
Firstly it’s detrimental to our society and it has created a caste system among us. Let us all Malaysians be at par without ‘Titles’ and that we are all called by our birth names.
Secondly ‘Titles’ like these have caused so much tension and people are merely going after ‘Titles” for status purposes. They have lost their focus on their actual responsibility to our country. I have met and noticed that people with these ‘Titles’ behaved and acted rather differently (not being themselves). I understand these ‘Titles’ were a brain child of our first prime minister.
They automatically become egoistic, arrogant and over confident. Now even many government servants are being conferred with this ‘Titles’ as such that you can only meet them if have ‘Titles’. Maybe this ‘Titles’ has been promised to them for some collaborative reasons. Maybe that’s why corruptions eradication is near impossible.
Thirdly, pretty young ladies or maybe even gentlemen are after those people with ‘Titles’ causing wreck in our society. This symbol status ‘Titles’ glamour and branded attires have grouped themselves as ‘Society Sdn Bhd’, which the media fondly called them socialites.
Fourthly, unrecognized and “con Titles” are also rampant. Politicians and all government servants were elected and voted to serve the public, not to manipulate their voters and the tax payers They are not supposed to be spoilt with ‘Titles’ and positions .Here is the opposite,where the public has to ‘Bodek’ the politician and the government servant for appointments and other public matters. I know there are a number of people who have rejected these titles conferred upon them as they view that it does not serve any purpose, except status, which we all do not need in a Malaysian society. Award recognition is a yes with incentive and gifts.
Without all these titles I believe all these so call people without names but only ‘Titles’ will work without prejudice. Hence improving public services and a stable society i.e. politically stable Malaysia.
This is indirectly affecting business people and economy of the country. ‘Titles’ ceremony has also wasted so much time of YDP Agung and public funds.
Borhann Putrajaya
The Raayat
I propose to our government to abolish the conferment of all these ‘Titles’. Award may be given but not necessary to carry ‘Titles’.
Firstly it’s detrimental to our society and it has created a caste system among us. Let us all Malaysians be at par without ‘Titles’ and that we are all called by our birth names.
Secondly ‘Titles’ like these have caused so much tension and people are merely going after ‘Titles” for status purposes. They have lost their focus on their actual responsibility to our country. I have met and noticed that people with these ‘Titles’ behaved and acted rather differently (not being themselves). I understand these ‘Titles’ were a brain child of our first prime minister.
They automatically become egoistic, arrogant and over confident. Now even many government servants are being conferred with this ‘Titles’ as such that you can only meet them if have ‘Titles’. Maybe this ‘Titles’ has been promised to them for some collaborative reasons. Maybe that’s why corruptions eradication is near impossible.
Thirdly, pretty young ladies or maybe even gentlemen are after those people with ‘Titles’ causing wreck in our society. This symbol status ‘Titles’ glamour and branded attires have grouped themselves as ‘Society Sdn Bhd’, which the media fondly called them socialites.
Fourthly, unrecognized and “con Titles” are also rampant. Politicians and all government servants were elected and voted to serve the public, not to manipulate their voters and the tax payers They are not supposed to be spoilt with ‘Titles’ and positions .Here is the opposite,where the public has to ‘Bodek’ the politician and the government servant for appointments and other public matters. I know there are a number of people who have rejected these titles conferred upon them as they view that it does not serve any purpose, except status, which we all do not need in a Malaysian society. Award recognition is a yes with incentive and gifts.
Without all these titles I believe all these so call people without names but only ‘Titles’ will work without prejudice. Hence improving public services and a stable society i.e. politically stable Malaysia.
This is indirectly affecting business people and economy of the country. ‘Titles’ ceremony has also wasted so much time of YDP Agung and public funds.
Borhann Putrajaya
The Raayat
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
