Free Malaysia Today
Penang CM Lim Guan Eng gets a good mark for his manner of governing the state.
By Dan Martin
AFP
GEORGETOWN: Former political detainee Lim Guan Eng wasted no time leaving his mark on Penang after the brash opposition politician won power in the Malaysian state in 2008 general election.
He quickly balanced the books of the former British colonial outpost, which were stained red after a half-century under the control of Malaysia’s authoritarian ruling coalition.
He has virtually eliminated its debt, launched a campaign to halt official corruption, and has, by most accounts, injected new vigour and efficiency into the government of the important economic hub.
Today, Penang — a colorful mix of colonial architecture, pre-war Chinese shophouses, tropical beaches and high-tech factories — is on the up, as property values soar and foreign investment rolls in.
With potentially pivotal new elections expected to be called within months, Lim — a 51-year-old ethnic Chinese former banker with slicked-back hair and a wide chin — says the implications of his record are clear.
“If you can show that you can govern well, it will be a model, a showcase… a precursor of governing the federal government,” he said, pointing to the possibility of the opposition led by Anwar Ibrahim taking power.
Malaysia’s long-ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition faces voter unease over allegations of misgovernance, corruption, and racial tension, the latter often blamed on policies that promote majority Malays over minority Chinese and Indians.
But the BN insists the Anwar-led opposition can do no better.
Lim’s success in Penang has called that claim into question, however, and his outspokenness mark him as the country’s most potent symbol of minority impatience.
Lim earned a one-year jail term in 1998 for sedition after he criticised the dropping of rape charges against a Malay top ruling party politician and he launches regular broadsides against the BN over its frequent financial and other scandals.
His detractors call him a domineering self-promoter who is benefiting from UNESCO’s 2008 listing of Penang’s capital Georgetown as a World Heritage Site, a bid launched before he took over.
But even opponents acknowledge he gets results.
Bureaucracy more efficient under Lim
“He is very clever, very authoritarian,” said Teng Hock Nan, Penang’s top official for Gerakan, the ruling coalition partner ousted by Lim’s DAP in 2008. “When he gives a directive, it gets done.”
One of Britain’s oldest Asian settlements, Penang was a cosmopolitan trading hub in its 19th-century heyday before going into what Lim calls a “graceful decline”.
Today, run-down Georgetown shophouses — the distinctive rows of buildings seen in parts of Southeast Asia — are being transformed into trendy hotels, cafes and art galleries injecting new life into old neighbourhoods.
A federally-backed grant programme provides seed money for such renovations.
Many credit Lim’s attempts to clean up the rampant backroom deals and political patronage that are typical of Malaysia, whose rating by Transparency International on corruption in recent years has steadily sunk.
Lim launched an unprecedented system of open tenders for state projects and his top officials this year took the unheard-of step of declaring their assets.
Business figures privately say once-routine demands for payoffs are now rare and the bureaucracy more efficient.
“What is sad about Malaysia is that things that are the international norm (clean government) are abnormal,” Lim said.
Foreign investors have signalled their approval. Home to much of Malaysia’s high-tech industry, Penang led the nation in luring manufacturing investment the past two years.
Lim’s moves have been “very substantive in managing finances, cleaning up the government, and initiating green policies”, said Bridget Welsh, a Malaysia politics analyst with Singapore Management University.
“I’ve gone there for years and can tell you there is a big difference.”
Australian investors Karl Steinberg and Christopher Ong, who is Penang-born, have restored an Edwardian bungalow and other decaying heritage properties into boutique hotels, lured by the new energy and official “cleanliness”.
“There are places where corruption can make it hard to get things done. Penang is relatively free of that,” Steinberg said.
But Lim’s directness rubs many raw and he faces criticism for overly fast growth as soaring property prices have worsened a low-cost housing shortage. Plans for huge infrastructure projects have fuelled the concerns.
Gerakan accuses him of stoking racial tensions, and national leaders including premier Najib Tun Razak have warned vaguely of threats to Malay dominance, widely seen as referring to ambitious non-Malays like Lim.
Strong grip of Penang
But Francis Loh, head of independent Penang-based democratic rights group Aliran, says Lim’s government has been racially inclusive.
“They represent the opening up of government in Malaysia,” he said.
Leading Malaysia pollster Ibrahim Suffian said Lim looks so secure that the ruling coalition likely views Penang as a “lost cause” in the next polls.
Nationally, the picture is less clear.
Lim doubles as national head of the Chinese-dominated DAP, one of three members of the opposition front, including Anwar’s multi-racial party and an Islamic party.
The alliance won historic gains over the BN in 2008 but remains fractious and its performance is mixed in three other states — Malaysia has 13 — it won four years ago.
But Lim remains hopeful. He relaxes by reading British historian Niall Ferguson’s works on the failures of past national governments through history, in case the opposition wins control.
“If we win… I need to know what are the pitfalls,” he said.
- AFP
Monday, March 19, 2012
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Coming clean on election processes
By Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan | The Malay Mail
THE Election Commission (EC) in Malaysia is constituted under Article 114 of the Federal Constitution. Commissioners are appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.
In appointing them, the Constitution provides that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong “shall have regard to the importance of securing an Election Commission which enjoys public confidence ...” Commissioners cannot be removed from office except on “like grounds and in the like manner as a judge of the Federal Court”.
It goes without saying that the EC is duty bound to act in the interests of the rakyat. They are obliged to act impartially and fairly, such that they enjoy public confidence. And they have all the powers and protection that they need to be fearless and fiercely independent.
Sadly, the reality is otherwise.
This is in part due to the fact that in previous years, the results of our elections were predictable. One party always won with a strong majority.
Although, we have generally had a respectable voter turn-out, the public were resigned to the outcome of our elections and there was an acceptance that the EC ran the elections in accordance with the wishes of the government of the day.
Not until 2008 did the EC come under serious scrutiny by the public. Not until 2008 did the EC face the challenge of having to justify its actions, and prove its independence. Not until 2008 did the public really wake up to the reality that the EC played a pivotal role in determining the outcome of an election.
The often used argument that our elections must be fair because the Opposition had won so many seats in 2008 is flawed. It is not a question of how many seats were won and by whom. It is about whether the electoral system is fair. And if it is fair, it matters not who wins the seats. It only matters that the will of the people is reflected in the results.
It is precisely because our electoral process has not provided an even level playing field for all candidates, that Bersih 2.0 put forward eight demands that are the minimum that must be met before the 13th general election.
Prior to the rally of July 9, 2011, the EC went on a massive campaign to convince the public that none of the demands of Bersih were justified. Not only that, the EC representatives displayed their partisanship when they entered the Barisan Nasional vs Pakatan fray making no excuses for where their loyalties clearly lay.
Nevertheless and to its credit, after Bersih 2.0, the government set up the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) to look into electoral reform. This was a momentous move. One that was progressive and one that met the cries of the people for change.
In fact it is a move that is capable of going down in history as a turning point in Malaysia — but if and only if all the electoral reforms are implemented prior to the 13th general election.
Furthermore, if the PSC recommendations and genuine electoral reform are ignored, it would be an insult to the rakyat and to the PSC.
The government must allow the PSC to finish its work, present a report and implement meaningful electoral reform before the 13th general election. Anything less will leave the rakyat feeling shortchanged.
Yet, whilst I am prepared to assume the good faith of the government to implement genuine reform after the PSC report, the information that is received as to what is happening on the ground gives cause for concern. The reports of unusual movements of voters across constituency boundaries, the inexplicable increase in additions to the electoral roll in certain areas and the registering of foreigners are alarming.
The EC seems to react to rectify errors on the roll only when it is pointed out to them.
Then there is the worrying trend of political violence that appears to be on the increase and seems to have the tacit support of the ruling party.
The open use of public funds to win the affections of the people continues unabated.
So how can we be sure the government is sincere about electoral reform? This is where the EC comes in. If the EC would only do the job it is entrusted to do, electoral reform can indeed be a reality.
Bersih 2.0 has always maintained that the eight demands made by them can be implemented even before the PSC issues its report. Like the implementation of the indelible ink which was a welcome move.
What about overseas votes, postal votes, absentee voters which should include all overseas voters, cleaning up of the electoral roll, a 21-day minimum campaign period and a free and fair media? All of these can be implemented immediately.
What is holding the EC back? Why are they reluctant to allow International Observers when this is a good way to prove our elections are indeed fair?
As to election offences why can’t the EC just see to the implementation of the Election Offences Act? Enforcement teams set up under the Act must ensure that “written laws relating to elections are being complied with” (S27E(a)). Under s4(5) of the Elections Act 1958, an enforcement officer appointed shall have all the powers of and perform all duties given to him for the enforcement of laws relating to elections.
The EC complains they have no powers to prosecute electoral offences. That is true. But they have a raft of legislation to help them ensure compliance and they are fully protected under the Federal Constitution.
Even if they cannot prosecute, they owe it to the rakyat to monitor and lodge police reports if offences are committed. Otherwise why have the legislation at all? Electoral offences include bribery and treating which goes on openly and blatantly with no-one being called to account for it.
Until and unless the EC shows they mean business, electoral offences will continue to occur. If they continue to occur unchecked, it can only mean the EC is allowing it to happen.
The EC in India has issued a Code of Conduct that is interesting. Amongst other things, it makes clear that the party in power cannot use its position for electioneering. For example, ministers are not allowed to use the government machinery and amenities to promote their party. The government is not allowed to promise money for votes or to promote themselves for the purposes of elections using public funds. There are many other salutary provisions in the Indian Code of Conduct.
The EC in Malaysia ought to consider implementing such a Code of Conduct. I dare say that there are many on both sides of the political divide who have enough confidence in their own abilities to accept such a move.
The EC has much to answer for.
One other issue is the 2003 re-delineation exercise which is heavily skewed in favour of the government. Less than 20 per cent of the popular vote is required for the ruling party to obtain a simple majority.
The malapportionment is so stark that, for example, one third of Selangor state constituencies have more constituents than the state’s smallest parliamentary seat, Sabak Bernam.
Another example is that nine parliamentary constituencies and 13 state constituencies in Selangor span two or three local authorities.
This not only violates the guidelines under the Federal Constitution for redelineation but violates the trust of the people.
The EC was clearly complicit in this act of re-drawing constituency boundaries to favour the ruling party. These amendments went through Parliament unnoticed by the unsuspecting public. But it is the EC that must search its conscience on the propriety of its actions.
As it stands, the EC have not inspired confidence in its general attitude that they are only “election managers” and nothing more.
Under Article 113, the EC shall conduct elections to the House of Representatives and Legislative Assemblies and this includes the onerous task of constituency re-delineation. It does not say that they are to only “manage” the elections. Conducting elections requires much more, which explains the important status the EC is accorded under the Federal Constitution.
Often the EC’s response has been that it makes recommendations for reform but the government may not implement them. The answer then is for the EC to make the recommendations for reform public and the rakyat will surely support it if the recommendations are sound.
In an election that may prove to be contentious the EC must all the more demonstrate impartiality. Each and every member of the EC must consider their duty to the rakyat carefully.
I appeal to them individually. Serve the rakyat please. If you cannot, or if you do not like the way the EC is conducting itself but are unable to do anything about it, then come clean and do the honourable thing. If you do, you will at least earn the respect of the people for standing up for them.
Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan is Bersih 2.0 chairman and former Bar Council president
THE Election Commission (EC) in Malaysia is constituted under Article 114 of the Federal Constitution. Commissioners are appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.
In appointing them, the Constitution provides that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong “shall have regard to the importance of securing an Election Commission which enjoys public confidence ...” Commissioners cannot be removed from office except on “like grounds and in the like manner as a judge of the Federal Court”.
It goes without saying that the EC is duty bound to act in the interests of the rakyat. They are obliged to act impartially and fairly, such that they enjoy public confidence. And they have all the powers and protection that they need to be fearless and fiercely independent.
Sadly, the reality is otherwise.
This is in part due to the fact that in previous years, the results of our elections were predictable. One party always won with a strong majority.
Although, we have generally had a respectable voter turn-out, the public were resigned to the outcome of our elections and there was an acceptance that the EC ran the elections in accordance with the wishes of the government of the day.
Not until 2008 did the EC come under serious scrutiny by the public. Not until 2008 did the EC face the challenge of having to justify its actions, and prove its independence. Not until 2008 did the public really wake up to the reality that the EC played a pivotal role in determining the outcome of an election.
The often used argument that our elections must be fair because the Opposition had won so many seats in 2008 is flawed. It is not a question of how many seats were won and by whom. It is about whether the electoral system is fair. And if it is fair, it matters not who wins the seats. It only matters that the will of the people is reflected in the results.
It is precisely because our electoral process has not provided an even level playing field for all candidates, that Bersih 2.0 put forward eight demands that are the minimum that must be met before the 13th general election.
Prior to the rally of July 9, 2011, the EC went on a massive campaign to convince the public that none of the demands of Bersih were justified. Not only that, the EC representatives displayed their partisanship when they entered the Barisan Nasional vs Pakatan fray making no excuses for where their loyalties clearly lay.
Nevertheless and to its credit, after Bersih 2.0, the government set up the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) to look into electoral reform. This was a momentous move. One that was progressive and one that met the cries of the people for change.
In fact it is a move that is capable of going down in history as a turning point in Malaysia — but if and only if all the electoral reforms are implemented prior to the 13th general election.
Furthermore, if the PSC recommendations and genuine electoral reform are ignored, it would be an insult to the rakyat and to the PSC.
The government must allow the PSC to finish its work, present a report and implement meaningful electoral reform before the 13th general election. Anything less will leave the rakyat feeling shortchanged.
Yet, whilst I am prepared to assume the good faith of the government to implement genuine reform after the PSC report, the information that is received as to what is happening on the ground gives cause for concern. The reports of unusual movements of voters across constituency boundaries, the inexplicable increase in additions to the electoral roll in certain areas and the registering of foreigners are alarming.
The EC seems to react to rectify errors on the roll only when it is pointed out to them.
Then there is the worrying trend of political violence that appears to be on the increase and seems to have the tacit support of the ruling party.
The open use of public funds to win the affections of the people continues unabated.
So how can we be sure the government is sincere about electoral reform? This is where the EC comes in. If the EC would only do the job it is entrusted to do, electoral reform can indeed be a reality.
Bersih 2.0 has always maintained that the eight demands made by them can be implemented even before the PSC issues its report. Like the implementation of the indelible ink which was a welcome move.
What about overseas votes, postal votes, absentee voters which should include all overseas voters, cleaning up of the electoral roll, a 21-day minimum campaign period and a free and fair media? All of these can be implemented immediately.
What is holding the EC back? Why are they reluctant to allow International Observers when this is a good way to prove our elections are indeed fair?
As to election offences why can’t the EC just see to the implementation of the Election Offences Act? Enforcement teams set up under the Act must ensure that “written laws relating to elections are being complied with” (S27E(a)). Under s4(5) of the Elections Act 1958, an enforcement officer appointed shall have all the powers of and perform all duties given to him for the enforcement of laws relating to elections.
The EC complains they have no powers to prosecute electoral offences. That is true. But they have a raft of legislation to help them ensure compliance and they are fully protected under the Federal Constitution.
Even if they cannot prosecute, they owe it to the rakyat to monitor and lodge police reports if offences are committed. Otherwise why have the legislation at all? Electoral offences include bribery and treating which goes on openly and blatantly with no-one being called to account for it.
Until and unless the EC shows they mean business, electoral offences will continue to occur. If they continue to occur unchecked, it can only mean the EC is allowing it to happen.
The EC in India has issued a Code of Conduct that is interesting. Amongst other things, it makes clear that the party in power cannot use its position for electioneering. For example, ministers are not allowed to use the government machinery and amenities to promote their party. The government is not allowed to promise money for votes or to promote themselves for the purposes of elections using public funds. There are many other salutary provisions in the Indian Code of Conduct.
The EC in Malaysia ought to consider implementing such a Code of Conduct. I dare say that there are many on both sides of the political divide who have enough confidence in their own abilities to accept such a move.
The EC has much to answer for.
One other issue is the 2003 re-delineation exercise which is heavily skewed in favour of the government. Less than 20 per cent of the popular vote is required for the ruling party to obtain a simple majority.
The malapportionment is so stark that, for example, one third of Selangor state constituencies have more constituents than the state’s smallest parliamentary seat, Sabak Bernam.
Another example is that nine parliamentary constituencies and 13 state constituencies in Selangor span two or three local authorities.
This not only violates the guidelines under the Federal Constitution for redelineation but violates the trust of the people.
The EC was clearly complicit in this act of re-drawing constituency boundaries to favour the ruling party. These amendments went through Parliament unnoticed by the unsuspecting public. But it is the EC that must search its conscience on the propriety of its actions.
As it stands, the EC have not inspired confidence in its general attitude that they are only “election managers” and nothing more.
Under Article 113, the EC shall conduct elections to the House of Representatives and Legislative Assemblies and this includes the onerous task of constituency re-delineation. It does not say that they are to only “manage” the elections. Conducting elections requires much more, which explains the important status the EC is accorded under the Federal Constitution.
Often the EC’s response has been that it makes recommendations for reform but the government may not implement them. The answer then is for the EC to make the recommendations for reform public and the rakyat will surely support it if the recommendations are sound.
In an election that may prove to be contentious the EC must all the more demonstrate impartiality. Each and every member of the EC must consider their duty to the rakyat carefully.
I appeal to them individually. Serve the rakyat please. If you cannot, or if you do not like the way the EC is conducting itself but are unable to do anything about it, then come clean and do the honourable thing. If you do, you will at least earn the respect of the people for standing up for them.
Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan is Bersih 2.0 chairman and former Bar Council president
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
The PM’s excessive contradictions: A disjunction between words and deeds
By Nurul Izzah Anwar | TMI
Some say contradictions are the result of an unsure, insecure or merely a confused mind.
But some say contradictions are a tactic to deflect and distract attention from real issues.
Other times, they are simply the product of a conniving mind.
Does Malaysia today have a confused or conniving prime minister? Or could it be that he is merely under the thrall of a conniving group of PR consultants? It is hard to tell in light of the many flip-flops and sudden policy reversals of the current administration.
Prime Minister Najib Razak’s 1 Malaysia concept was sadly strangled in its infancy thanks to the “Malay first” statements of his own deputy, as well as the continuous sanctioning and sponsoring of the Perkasa extremist group.
In the economic sphere, his colourful ETP has now been exposed as yet another cover for crony capitalism when the latest KIDEX was “awarded” just one week after the project tender was called. The fact that it appears that the main beneficiaries of the KIDEX are linked to the 2009 Perak constitutional crisis makes it looks more like a political reward that the people of Malaysia will have to bear. If we were to add on the MAS out-of-court and opaque settlement along with the billions already lost and the more billions waiting to be lost — it seems to indicate that plundering and not development is the main motive of the powers-that-be.
The other plank in the current administration’s platform, the GTP, will be tested when the new remuneration scheme for civil servants (skim Saraan Baru Perkhidmatan Awam, or SBPA) will be announced, but this has already been criticised in civil society as a flawed scheme that serves as a way to reward the top 4,000 civil servants with a huge pay increase while leaving the other 99.7 per cent to share the remaining crumbs.
In addition, several supposedly “pro-rakyat” schemes have likewise been exposed as mere camouflages for economic plundering such as the proposed FELDA listing, which is tantamount to legalising the acquisition of a profit-making plantation arm by a loss-making entity. Such is the fate faced by Malaysia’s one unique and successful institution of poverty eradication.
And now it has been disclosed that the supposedly “done deal” of using EPF funds to finance a public housing ownership scheme is currently in a state of limbo. But it was always a poorly thought-out idea, not least because of the ludicrous 6.5 per cent interest charged on poor Malaysians dreaming of owning a unit, whilst the going rate for those close to the ruling clique appears to be only between 2 per cent (as the NFC case has proven) to 4 per cent (see Kumpulan Europlus Sdn Bhd’s Westcoast Highway deal). Are these not sufficient examples of a contradictory, confusing and conniving leadership?
The much touted independence of the judiciary that Barisan Nasional leaders have been touting since the 9 January 2012 judgment has been found to be an unfortunately short-lived comic relief when an unwarranted appeal of the accquital was submitted along with the trend of overturning other appeals such as in the Karpal Singh sedition trial, the ISA-15 trial and Bersih 1 trial. This is in contrast to the lack of action over the RCI on the VK Lingam judiciary tampering case, inaction on the RCI recommendations to set up an IPCMC, as well as the prosecution’s failure to appeal the acquittal in the Altantuya case.
The cruellest joke of all however has to be the so-called “Malaysia Day reforms”, including the promise to repeal the ISA, revoke the Emergency Ordinance, as well as amend the UUCA, PPPA and enact electoral reforms. The Najib government has failed miserably or only worked half-heartedly in all of these counts, betraying their real desire to simply perpetuate the status quo.
Furthermore, all hope for holistic electoral reforms is dashed as the chairman of the parliamentary select committee on electoral reforms reneges on the approved interim PSC report pledge to implement all recommendations before the 13th GE. Isn’t going against the promise made by the highest legislative body in our land a conniving act?
Malaysians need and deserve better than the last three years of mendacity, duplicity and disingenuousness than the current government’s lack of ideas and commitment to reform have wrought.
So prime minister, before we accept, can you throw in the beef?
Nurul Izzah Anwar is the MP for Lembah Pantai and vice-president of Parti Keadilan Rakyat.
Some say contradictions are the result of an unsure, insecure or merely a confused mind.
But some say contradictions are a tactic to deflect and distract attention from real issues.
Other times, they are simply the product of a conniving mind.
Does Malaysia today have a confused or conniving prime minister? Or could it be that he is merely under the thrall of a conniving group of PR consultants? It is hard to tell in light of the many flip-flops and sudden policy reversals of the current administration.
Prime Minister Najib Razak’s 1 Malaysia concept was sadly strangled in its infancy thanks to the “Malay first” statements of his own deputy, as well as the continuous sanctioning and sponsoring of the Perkasa extremist group.
In the economic sphere, his colourful ETP has now been exposed as yet another cover for crony capitalism when the latest KIDEX was “awarded” just one week after the project tender was called. The fact that it appears that the main beneficiaries of the KIDEX are linked to the 2009 Perak constitutional crisis makes it looks more like a political reward that the people of Malaysia will have to bear. If we were to add on the MAS out-of-court and opaque settlement along with the billions already lost and the more billions waiting to be lost — it seems to indicate that plundering and not development is the main motive of the powers-that-be.
The other plank in the current administration’s platform, the GTP, will be tested when the new remuneration scheme for civil servants (skim Saraan Baru Perkhidmatan Awam, or SBPA) will be announced, but this has already been criticised in civil society as a flawed scheme that serves as a way to reward the top 4,000 civil servants with a huge pay increase while leaving the other 99.7 per cent to share the remaining crumbs.
In addition, several supposedly “pro-rakyat” schemes have likewise been exposed as mere camouflages for economic plundering such as the proposed FELDA listing, which is tantamount to legalising the acquisition of a profit-making plantation arm by a loss-making entity. Such is the fate faced by Malaysia’s one unique and successful institution of poverty eradication.
And now it has been disclosed that the supposedly “done deal” of using EPF funds to finance a public housing ownership scheme is currently in a state of limbo. But it was always a poorly thought-out idea, not least because of the ludicrous 6.5 per cent interest charged on poor Malaysians dreaming of owning a unit, whilst the going rate for those close to the ruling clique appears to be only between 2 per cent (as the NFC case has proven) to 4 per cent (see Kumpulan Europlus Sdn Bhd’s Westcoast Highway deal). Are these not sufficient examples of a contradictory, confusing and conniving leadership?
The much touted independence of the judiciary that Barisan Nasional leaders have been touting since the 9 January 2012 judgment has been found to be an unfortunately short-lived comic relief when an unwarranted appeal of the accquital was submitted along with the trend of overturning other appeals such as in the Karpal Singh sedition trial, the ISA-15 trial and Bersih 1 trial. This is in contrast to the lack of action over the RCI on the VK Lingam judiciary tampering case, inaction on the RCI recommendations to set up an IPCMC, as well as the prosecution’s failure to appeal the acquittal in the Altantuya case.
The cruellest joke of all however has to be the so-called “Malaysia Day reforms”, including the promise to repeal the ISA, revoke the Emergency Ordinance, as well as amend the UUCA, PPPA and enact electoral reforms. The Najib government has failed miserably or only worked half-heartedly in all of these counts, betraying their real desire to simply perpetuate the status quo.
Furthermore, all hope for holistic electoral reforms is dashed as the chairman of the parliamentary select committee on electoral reforms reneges on the approved interim PSC report pledge to implement all recommendations before the 13th GE. Isn’t going against the promise made by the highest legislative body in our land a conniving act?
Malaysians need and deserve better than the last three years of mendacity, duplicity and disingenuousness than the current government’s lack of ideas and commitment to reform have wrought.
So prime minister, before we accept, can you throw in the beef?
Nurul Izzah Anwar is the MP for Lembah Pantai and vice-president of Parti Keadilan Rakyat.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Courted today, cheated tomorrow
Sakmongkol AK47
The second episode of “Lord Of The Rings” may come on (if Rais allows after reading this).
Watch the flip-flopping schizoid creature Gollum in action. One minute sweet-talking, next minute venomous and scheming. Gollum (aka Preciousss) only wants the Ring. Because the Ring confers power to protect the Evil One. As Umno president, Najib has been flip-flopping from day one. His party has no winnable candidates.
That will explain all the forthcoming cheating at the polls of GE13. It will also explain all past moves and present manoeuvrings. If a party has to monopolise the mainstream media to obfuscate the rakyat and make use of a psych-op warfare unit to try and turn voters, you already know it is finished.
The Ring is to make sure Umno is returned to power so that we can get more cheap meat for the next five years?
Or for Felda settlers to sign off their fields, hearing sweet promises that those fields will never be taken away? After all, how can one move a fixed place? But never tell them that the ownership of the fixed place will change hands — for once in the market, who will own what will always be fleeting. That’s what markets are supposed to do.
Last but not least. Voters must stay focused from now on. Remember only one thing. Everything dispensed to you is but a small fraction of the bigger amount skimmed off for a few.
Shahrizat and Toyo are small fry useful as doorstops, respectively to lead Umno Wanita and Umno Selangor. The big ones are elsewhere. So too the bigger sums of the rakyats’ money siphoned off. It’s all about corruption of rakyat money using federal organisations by a combination of proxy process and coerced suppress.
If Umno tells you the Opposition only makes empty promises, hold Umno to it. Tell Umno to distribute more federal funds to Pakatan-run states so that the voters can see if those state governments will be doing any less than Umno-held state governments for the rakyat. Then come talk.
In fact, the Umno general members should vote for the Opposition wherever they be so that Umno can be put to sit in the opposition bench for one term in order to finalise the list of mistakes it should be apologising for. With what it has been showing all this while, it is only pretending to be sincere, or worse, it doesn’t seem to know.
How else can one explain why the MOE is asking for feedback from the rakyat after half a century spending gruesome amounts of their money to create an education system only best for attracting toxic waste foreign investments and producing BTN-zombies who having been given British-best seats over others more deserving are now only good at badmouthing non-Malays behind their backs?
Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman (2004-2008).
The second episode of “Lord Of The Rings” may come on (if Rais allows after reading this).
Watch the flip-flopping schizoid creature Gollum in action. One minute sweet-talking, next minute venomous and scheming. Gollum (aka Preciousss) only wants the Ring. Because the Ring confers power to protect the Evil One. As Umno president, Najib has been flip-flopping from day one. His party has no winnable candidates.
That will explain all the forthcoming cheating at the polls of GE13. It will also explain all past moves and present manoeuvrings. If a party has to monopolise the mainstream media to obfuscate the rakyat and make use of a psych-op warfare unit to try and turn voters, you already know it is finished.
The Ring is to make sure Umno is returned to power so that we can get more cheap meat for the next five years?
Or for Felda settlers to sign off their fields, hearing sweet promises that those fields will never be taken away? After all, how can one move a fixed place? But never tell them that the ownership of the fixed place will change hands — for once in the market, who will own what will always be fleeting. That’s what markets are supposed to do.
Last but not least. Voters must stay focused from now on. Remember only one thing. Everything dispensed to you is but a small fraction of the bigger amount skimmed off for a few.
Shahrizat and Toyo are small fry useful as doorstops, respectively to lead Umno Wanita and Umno Selangor. The big ones are elsewhere. So too the bigger sums of the rakyats’ money siphoned off. It’s all about corruption of rakyat money using federal organisations by a combination of proxy process and coerced suppress.
If Umno tells you the Opposition only makes empty promises, hold Umno to it. Tell Umno to distribute more federal funds to Pakatan-run states so that the voters can see if those state governments will be doing any less than Umno-held state governments for the rakyat. Then come talk.
In fact, the Umno general members should vote for the Opposition wherever they be so that Umno can be put to sit in the opposition bench for one term in order to finalise the list of mistakes it should be apologising for. With what it has been showing all this while, it is only pretending to be sincere, or worse, it doesn’t seem to know.
How else can one explain why the MOE is asking for feedback from the rakyat after half a century spending gruesome amounts of their money to create an education system only best for attracting toxic waste foreign investments and producing BTN-zombies who having been given British-best seats over others more deserving are now only good at badmouthing non-Malays behind their backs?
Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman (2004-2008).
Thursday, March 1, 2012
We listen to the rakyat, REALLY?
Things are getting from bad to worst daily and I find difficulty to really express my thoughts lately. A few drafts on the table but incomplete. Will try to make adjustment to my mental disorientation and be back to blogging soonest possible.
In the meantime, we have been hearing the cool PM and his Ministries telling us they are listening to the rakyat and are transparent in all government dealings, ARE they?
Nobody knows what or how they are going to improve our education system.
They rush through and passed The Peaceful Assembly Act 2011
How much do you know about the 1Care national health scheme
There are many policies and acts on the way which we do not have details or knowledge off until at the very last stage.
They have been rolling out cash in the billions while the federal coffer is in deficit and are telling us, 'we have the money' but won't divulge where or how these billions came from, Borrowed?
Plus the act of provocations, gangsterism and hooliganism are on the rise and yet the leaders and PDRM are not doing anything about it.
Thousands have turned up in Kuantan and many thousands others at various cities across the nation in protest against Lynas plant but the government still insist that the plant is safe.
I leave you with this latest Namewee video to ponder on:
Nobody knows what or how they are going to improve our education system.
They rush through and passed The Peaceful Assembly Act 2011
How much do you know about the 1Care national health scheme
There are many policies and acts on the way which we do not have details or knowledge off until at the very last stage.
They have been rolling out cash in the billions while the federal coffer is in deficit and are telling us, 'we have the money' but won't divulge where or how these billions came from, Borrowed?
Plus the act of provocations, gangsterism and hooliganism are on the rise and yet the leaders and PDRM are not doing anything about it.
Thousands have turned up in Kuantan and many thousands others at various cities across the nation in protest against Lynas plant but the government still insist that the plant is safe.
I leave you with this latest Namewee video to ponder on:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
