| LRT lobbying tests Najib’s resolve to push public tenders Posted: 26 May 2011 12:34 PM PDT By The Malaysian Insider KUALA LUMPUR, May 27 — The award of a contract to upgrade the light rail transit (LRT) line to European engineering powerhouse Balfour Beatty has sparked intense lobbying which is testing Datuk Seri Najib Razak's commitment to public tenders. According to a report in today's Singapore Straits Times, the intense lobbying over the contract could also delay the PM's plans to upgrade the chaotic transport network and inject fresh vigour into Malaysia's economy. It is also shaping up to be a test of Najib's resolve to make public tenders a hallmark of his administration, as opposed to the opaque system of the past, the Straits Times said. Syarikat Prasarana Negara has just completed an international tender for upgrading the LRT. But Prasarana's yet-to-be publicised decision to award the contract to the lowest bidder — a consortium led by European engineering powerhouse Balfour Beatty — is being hotly contested behind the scenes by the losing bidders, executives familiar with the situation told the Singapore Straits Times. "The rivals include Bombardier, which installed the city's existing light rail system, and Britain's Colas. According to executives close to the tender exercise, the lowest bid was Balfour Beatty's at RM590 million. The highest was Bombardier's at RM850 million," the Straits Times reported. How Najib handles the Prasarana award will signal whether he can break away from past practices and introduce a more level playing field in the award of contracts, analysts and private economists told the Straits Times. If the government decides to review the contract, it could raise speculation that the intense lobbying prompted him to step in. "There is a strong lobby with people close to the PM to change the decision," one industry executive closely involved in the tender exercise told the Straits Times. This executive said the Balfour Beatty consortium could face problems integrating with the existing systems installed by Bombardier. But parties close to Balfour Beatty said those concerns were misplaced. "These issues were considered by the Prasarana board before it came to the decision," said one engineering consultant familiar with the tender exercise. Prasarana had been forced last week to cave in to pressure from Malay rights groups when it revised pre-qualification criteria for several construction packages for the Klang Valley Mass Rapid Transit (KVMRT). The project owner said last week that contractors who wish to tender for elevated civil works, stations and depots work construction packages will be allowed to form joint ventures or consortiums among local companies. Prasarana had on March 30 imposed additional criteria on contractors taking part in the project tender which disallowed them from forming joint ventures or consortiums. But Perkasa was quick to accuse Prasarana of blocking Bumiputera contractors from participating by enforcing "strict" guidelines that would only benefited "rich non-Bumis", saying that MMC-Gamuda was "looting and monopolising" the project. READ MORE HERE. |
| Truth buried in the printed pages Posted: 26 May 2011 12:24 PM PDT By Jeswan Kaur, Free Malaysia Today Not so long ago "don't believe all that you read in the newspaper" was said in jest. Now, unfortunately there is a ring of truth to this statement. Ask just about anyone what they think about the mainstream media and chances are you will get a look of disgust. The mainstream media is owned by political parties and their glossed-over news coverage has given rise to the alternative media. The Barisan Nasional (BN) has a stake in all the country's premier' newspapers such as New Straits Times (NST), The Star, Utusan Malaysia, Tamil Nesan and Sin Chiew Jit Poh through its investment companies The Utusan Melayu Group is owned by Umno and publishes three Malay language dailies. The major English newspapers, The Star and New Straits Times, are also owned by the political parties. The Star is owned by the MCA while NST is owned by Umno. Besides The Star, MCA also controls four other dailies – Sin Chew Jit Poh, Nanyang Siang Pau, China Press and Guang Ming Daily. Private interests aligned with the MIC control Tamil newspapers such as Makkal Osai and Tamil Nesan. Under such tight leash, the mainstream media are left with no space to engage in a fair and free reporting. They end up parroting all that the government of the day says. Take, for example, the incident in 1995 where an investigative team from The Sun newspaper investigated the circumstances leading to the deaths of 59 detainees, mostly Bangladeshis, in an illegal immigration detention camp. These detainees died of beri-beri, a symptom of malnutrition and typhoid, which is easily preventable. The team's report stating that it was a case of criminal neglect on the part of the police who ran the camp was spiked hours before it went to print. Bias reporting continues
More recently, the lopsided reporting by the mainstream media was evident during Sarawak's April 16 state election. The NST had nothing but only "nice" things to report about BN, including why the people should dismiss the opposition alliance of Pakatan Rakyat. But what the NST did is nothing new. Be it the by-elections or general election, these mainstream newspapers do a good job of serving their political masters and betraying the trust of their readers. The NST is not the only culprit. The government-owned Radio Televisyen Malaysia (RTM) channels have long forgotten the importance of reporting without fear or favour. RTM1's Berita Wilayah aired at 5pm daily is a classic example of how reporting is manipulated by the "powers that be". The one-hour news has all things good to say about the BN government's "remarkable" job in serving the people when the truth really is otherwise. Likewise, the television stations including those owned by Media Prima do not have the guts to report the truth. At best, they do a fantastic job of glossing over BN and condemning the opposition parties.
READ MORE HERE. |
| No Chinese Reps in Cabinet After GE13? Posted: 26 May 2011 12:16 PM PDT By Dajmarizal Zolkipli. Malaysian Digest In a country that is currently working hard to push for a racial unity, the cohesive pronouncements from BN 's two main honchos somehow emphasized BN's obsession with race politics.
Following the big Chinese vote swing in the Sarawak state election which has helped the DAP gain huge momentum leading to the 13th General Election (GE13), Barisan Nasional (BN) chairman Najib Razak warned Chinese voters that they are risking their right to have Chinese representatives in the government in the next term. Najib's message was aggrandized by MCA president Chua Soi Lek who had announced that MCA will not accept any position in the government should the party underperform in the upcoming GE13.
It is obvious that the statements by Najib and Chua were meant to restore the confidence of Chinese voters towards BN. However, both proved to be counterproductive as by making such remarks, the two BN leaders have only made their Pakatan Rakyat rivals look better. The remarks only confirmed that BN is getting more and more jittery over the fact that a growing number of Chinese Malaysians are turning against BN as we could see in the recent Sarawak election and past by-elections hence something drastic needs to be done.
Chua's daring announcement was supposed to be a signal to Chinese voters that MCA will be rolling up their sleeves to ensure that Chinese reps have a place in the Cabinet. However, most see it more of a threat now that the Chinese are left with a predicament: vote for MCA or you'll be left with no voice in the Cabinet.
The same goes for Najib's statement. Now the Chinese are forced to be more obliged to vote for MCA or else there will no longer be Chinese ministers in the Cabinet. This also has given rise to the question of whether we need to have Chinese representatives in the government for their voice to be heard.
BN must come to terms with the present reality and that the acclamation they had received for championing a particular race in the yesteryears is over. The rakyat now are partial to be called Malaysians rather than Malay, Chinese, Indian, Orang Asal etc. The rakyat is also more aware on the importance of maintaining unity among races and BN has lost touch with this collective standpoint even with Najib's introduction of 1Malaysia. While the rakyat is crying out for unity, BN leaders have failed to make significant progress to strengthen the camaraderie among the diverse cultures of this country.
READ MORE HERE.
|
| Najib explains why fuel prices remain unchanged Posted: 26 May 2011 12:13 PM PDT By Mergawai Zulfakar, The Star "This means the Government will have to consider alternative measures when we decide not to increase the price of fuel," he added. (the 11.13am online version) TOKYO: The plight of the rakyat was uppermost in the Government's mind when it decided not to increase the price of RON 95 petrol, diesel and liquefied petroleum gas. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said the decision was made despite the heavier financial burden on the Government. "I hope the rakyat will appreciate the Government's decision because we are only thinking of their plight although from the macro economic point of view, maintaining such a huge subsidy does not constitute good governance. "It may be a bit difficult for the people to understand this but for those who know elementary economics, they will understand," the Prime Minister told reporters here yesterday at the end of his trip to Japan where he delivered an address at the Nikkei International Conference and met Japanese captains of industry. Asked how long the Government would be able to sustain the subsidy, Najib said: "I don't know, nobody knows. It will depend on the price of oil on the world market." He said the Government would do its best to look at creative ways of managing the increase in subsidy. Najib said the Government had initially budgeted RM11bil for subsidies this year but with the increase in global oil prices, the amount in direct subsidies had ballooned to RM20bil. "This means the Government will have to consider alternative measures when we decide not to increase the price of fuel," he added. On claims that the Government's decision pointed towards a general election soon, Najib replied: "People can always connect these two. That is the normal game in Malaysia anyway. "So it does not surprise me. What is important is that we are always concerned about the plight of the rakyat and that is always uppermost in our mind." Najib also said that during his meeting with Japanese businessmen, he told them the Government would continue to maintain its investor-friendly policies. He also announced that Japanese companies would invest RM3.8bil by the end of next year. "These are confirmed investments although I cannot reveal the details yet. "For long-term investments, Japanese companies will invest RM5.22bil between 2013 and 2015 in various projects," he said.
|
| Merit v manpower needs Posted: 26 May 2011 12:09 PM PDT By Terence Fernandes, the Sun DEPUTY Education Minister Datuk Wee Ka Siong has been on the receiving end of brickbats on "Twitterjaya". Unlike his minister, Wee is an active member of the social media network and has been fighting a losing battle trying to convince some of his 5,500-plus followers and others that all is above board in the awarding of Public Service Department scholarships to top SPM scorers. Wee took pains to explain that full PSD scholarships would be given to straight A+ students Рnot merely straight A's. However, he also put himself out there by stating that 363 straight A+ scorers had failed to secure scholarships, taking the PSD to task for denying Malaysia's cr̬me de la cr̬me the opportunities they deserve. The government promised last year that all students who scored eight 8A+ and more in the 2010 SPM will get a PSD scholarship. The problem is, it did not specify what courses they will be offered, hence there are bound to be disgruntled students who did not get their chosen field of study despite doing their part Рstudying hard and acing their exams. Hence, there is this perception that every year, there are more than a few who slip through the cracks. One example is Selwyn Jong of Kuching who scored 9A+ but instead of a university placement, was given matriculation Рa place he could have secured with 5As. Another example is P. Kugnethran from Selangor who scored 12A+. Instead of getting the medical course he so wanted, Kugnethran was offered a diploma in animal husbandry from Universiti Putra Malaysia while those with less than stellar results won choice courses at top varsities abroad. Selwyn and Kugnethran approached the MCA and MIC respectively to intercede for them and get them the courses they feel they deserve. It is learnt that Selwyn's case is pending while Kugnethran has managed to secure a spot to do medicine. While one lauds those who helped this youth to fulfil his dream, such episodes are repeated every year. The announcement of the SPM results is followed by dissatisfaction over the awarding of PSD scholarships. Accusations of biasness make its rounds at this time every year. Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz explained the awarding of PSD scholarships this way: There are two primary categories Рthe overseas degree programme (PILN) for 1,500 selected students and the local degree programme (PIDN) for 2,500 students. From the 4,000 PILN and PIDN scholarships awarded, 2,183 spots (55%) were allocated for bumiputras and 1,817 (45%) for non-bumiputras. He was reported as saying that only 8,857 from the 16,900 students who applied for PILN scholarships met the PSD requirements, with 7,277 (43.1%) of them being bumiputras and 9,623 (56.9%) non-bumiputras. Only 1,500 PILN scholarships were offered and 300 were given on merit. "Unsuccessful applicants have the PIDN option which offers 2,500 spots," he said. Should they fail both, students will still be eligible for the 8,000 scholarships at matriculation or diploma levels. Question is, what exactly are the PSD scholarships criteria? They cover extra curricular activities and aptitude tests including an interview Рwhere it is learnt non-bumiputra students often do not do as well. While one agrees that limited seats would mean not everyone will get what they ask for, PSD director-general Datuk Seri Abu Bakar Abdullah's explanation that scholarships are offered based on "manpower needs" leaves much to the imagination. It also illustrates that each official Рminister and public servant alike Рhas his or her own reasons and interpretation about what constitutes an eligible PSD applicant. If manpower needs is the criteria, it does not explain why there are top scorers who do not get the best courses and underperformers who do. Granted, an all-rounder who scores 6A+ may be more eligible than a kaki bangku who scored full marks; but is it right to penalise a child who's only calling is the classroom and not the football field as well? And does 8A+ by a son of a tapper in a rural estate have more value than 12A+ by a son of a doctor in the big city? Is it therefore acceptable that there are limited spaces for PSD scholarships Рto the tune of only 4,000 spots when there are double that number who qualify? If we check the leakages in public procurement, could we not have enough to ensure all our top scorers have a shot at being the best that they can possibly be? Is it illogical to expect your government to ensure that everyone has a chance? After all, what message are we sending to our youth when we say: "Study hard and you'll get a place in university to study whatever you want"? In Brunei, the cream of the crop are sponsored for overseas studies while the rest are given spots in local varsities. OK, so this may not be the best example, but one gets the drift. Every year, we lose top students to Singapore which uses the carrot of the prestigous Asean Scholarships to attract the best brains of other countries. Due to the additional incentive of secured jobs and attachments in the public and private sectors, many Asean scholars continue to live in and contribute to Singapore's growth. The fact that there are 600,000 Malaysians (of course not all of them are Asean scholars) living in and contributing to the island republic's growth is an indication that we have not been doing enough to keep our best at home. As the bar for excellence is raised and the government is spending time, effort and money to stop the brain drain, it is unfathomable how some policies contradict these efforts. It seems that some people are not talking to each other, leaving a confused state of affairs for our children. |
| PKR facing eviction from HQ Posted: 26 May 2011 01:40 AM PDT Since the landlord has failed to service the bank loan, the opposition party finds itself in a lurch. (Free Malaysia Today) - Facing possible eviction from their party headquarters in Merchant Square Tropicana here because the landlord failed to service the bank loan, PKR is now planning to buy the premises when the bank auctions it next month. If that fails, the opposition party would seek to rent it from the new owners. But even if that did not work out, then PKR might have to find itself another office. Party treasurer-general William Leong said this was the contingency plan. "We are only a tenant, we plan to bid in the coming June 9 auction and buy the building. We have an idea in mind of how much we will like to bid. "If that is not successful we can talk to the new buyers if they wish to continue with the tenancy. If the new owner is not agreeable then of course we will move," he told FMT. The Selayang MP stressed that the problem was not with the party but with the landlord. "It is the landlord, the banks are going after them. A lot of people have the wrong notion that we are the owners. We are just the tenant and not responsible for the loan. We have never failed to pay the monthly rental," he said. It is learnt that PKR was paying close to RM20,000 monthly to a company called Ainb-Tech Sdn Bhd to rent the premises. The PKR headquarters takes up eight floors. Leong said it was inevitable that the issue would be exploited by certain parties. "This has nothing to do with the party and we are not in trouble but the nature of politics is such… look at the ROS (Registrar of Societies) wanting to de-register us. "We have got (party vice-president) Tian Chua being fined and possibly losing his (Batu) parliament seat. Every chance they have, Barisan Nasional will exploit it," he added. Asked who forked out the money for the rental, Leong said that PKR was dependent on friends and contributors. "We are of course dependent on people to help us, but there is no such thing as one person coming out and bailing us out. We welcome anyone to assist us, either in funding the office or looking for another," he said.
Nurul questions the timing Meanwhile, PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar said the party was cognisant of being up against various apparatuses of the state. "We are operating in a hostile environment. The date of the ROS hearing and auction is the same (June 9) but I don't want to speculate on that. We are doing all we can to fulfill our obligations (to the people). Certainly our political enemies will exploit this issue," she said. READ MORE HERE |
| MCA wants review of PSD scholarship quota Posted: 26 May 2011 01:38 AM PDT MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek urges the government to take a second look at the race-based quota. (Free Malaysia Today) - MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek today urged the government to review the racial quotas for Public Service Department (PSD) scholarships for overseas courses. However, he said that MCA supports quotas for the socially disadvantaged groups, students in Sabah and Sarawak and those based on merit. "We support the quota for socially disadvantaged groups and students in Sabah and Sarawak. That's only fair because school facilities in Sabah and Sarawak are not of the same standards as those in Kuala Lumpur or even Ipoh. But he suggested that the 60% racial quotas should be reviewed. Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Aziz, who is in charge of the PSD scholarships, said that the government had allocated 1,500 overseas scholarships to top students. Of this, only 300 or 20% of the total were given based entirely on merit to students who score straight 9A+. The rest of the scholarships are divided under the categories of Sabah and Sarawak (10%), the socially disadvantaged (10%), and race-based (60%). "We fully support the 60% quota but there is a need to review it," Chua said. READ MORE HERE |
| Less anger in Perak, but… Posted: 25 May 2011 07:27 PM PDT It's still not easy for BN to win in a free election. A random survey in Ipoh indicates that most voters would again vote for Pakatan Rakyat, more because of dissatisfaction with BN policies than the desire to punish it for ousting the government they voted into power. (Free Malaysia Today) - Although public anger over the 2009 power grab in Perak appears to have dissipated, Barisan Nasional still has some way to go before it can be confident of winning the state in a free election. A random survey in Ipoh indicates that most voters would again vote for Pakatan Rakyat, more because of dissatisfaction with BN policies than the desire to punish it for ousting the government they voted into power. Their main concern seems to be to choose the party that is more likely to be sensitive to their needs and concerns, and several participants in the survey said the short-lived Pakatan government showed some promise in this regard. "The BN ruled for 50 years before 2008, and we had no means of measuring its performance," said Wong Hoe Hong, who operates a camera shop. "When Pakatan took over, at least we could see the difference. "To me the important factor is that we need to have this benchmark to keep the BN in check." The subject of the power grab seldom came up during the FMT interviews, seeming to confirm what a Pakatan survey found out last January—that voters had calmed down somewhat since early 2009. According to the Pakatan findings, the opposition alliance would win 33 of the 59 seats in the state assembly if an election were held last January, fewer than the number it could have won if an election were called immediately after the power grab. A similar Pakatan survey in February and March 2009 found that it could have won 40 seats. But 33 is still better than 31, the number of seats Pakatan won in the 2008 election. BN sleeping on the job
Several participants in the FMT survey said they would vote Pakatan even though they were not sure it could do a better job than BN. A 60-year-old man who sells bread for a living said one could not demand too much from Pakatan because its hands would often be tied for lack of funding and other forms of support from the federal government. He feels this was why Pakatan could not fulfil some of its promises during the short time it was in power. He said national issues, rather than local ones, would help determine which party he would support. "BN has been sleeping on the job," he said. "How serious is it about wanting to change? You see how it handles PSD scholarship matter? Fire the officers in charge if you are serious." Joanna Selvi, a pharmacist in her 20s, echoed his sentiments. She said she would give Pakatan a chance because she was frustrated with what was happening on the national front. "You don't only look at Perak. On the national front, the same issues are coming up over and over, like scholarships or Anwar's sex trial. It's the same old thing and it is very frustrating." Jeslyn Amarasekera, 25, said even voters of parents' generation would want to give Pakatan a chance to prove itself. "Most of the voters from the older generation have lived here all their lives. They have seen time and time again what the BN can—and especially cannot—offer, and they tend to romanticise what the other side can do. But what do they have to lose?" READ MORE HERE |
| Anwar is lying, says SNAP Posted: 25 May 2011 07:14 PM PDT There was no written agreement with PKR or Pakatan Rakyat on seat allocations 'few months' before the April 16 Sarawak elections, says Sarawak Nasional Party. (Free Malaysia Today) - Sarawak Nasional Party (SNAP) has strongly rebutted PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim's claims that it had signed an agreement with the party, to contest only in three seats a few months before the recent Sarawak election. SNAP Youth chief Dayrell Enterie said Anwar's statement was "totally incorrect". "This statement of his (Anwar) is totally incorrect as neither SNAP nor its president (who was erroneously named Stanley Jugol in the Malaysiakini article) had entered into any written agreement whatsoever on seat allocations with PKR. "SNAP wishes to reiterate that it is not a push-over party for any West Malaysian entity nor is SNAP a Pakatan stooge," he said in a statement mailed to FMT. Dayrell was responding to Anwar who had reportedly said that "there was an agreement in writing, where SNAP only agreed to contest three seats, and then they asked us if it is possible to have another three". "It was signed a few months before the election by (SNAP president) Stanley (Jugol)," Anwar had said. Anwar had also said that Sarawak PKR chief Baru Bian and his "Dayak boys had strong issues against SNAP". "It was not just about being from a different party… (it was also about) whether or not this group of people (from SNAP) can be trusted," Anwar said. Inherent right Expressing SNAP's frustration, Dayrell said the party was fed up with the insinuations and allegations PKR has slapped it with. "As a Sarawak-based Party, SNAP has an inherent right to decide its own direction. Being a local party, it has the legitimate obligation to care for Sarawakians. "SNAP is fed up with the allegations by a Pakatan party that it is Umno-funded, and an agent for BN. "We left because SNAP was not accorded any respect," he said, adding that in view of PKR's treatment of SNAP in the last state election, there is now a strong desire for SNAP to be unencumbered by any political collaboration. This, however, did not mean that SNAP will not collaborate with anyone. READ MORE HERE |
| Umno and its farcical morality Posted: 25 May 2011 07:06 PM PDT The public can perhaps accept the punishment meted to Anwar. Indeed, the public does not really care about Anwar anymore. But what does the government in, is the collateral punishment unjustifiably meted out to his family: his wife, his children, his grandchildren. Public disapproval of this unjustifiable tyranny visited upon the family is what will do in the government. Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz, The Malaysian Insider I wrote a short article about Anwar Ibrahim volunteering going to jail. The term volunteer, I used in a wide sense, including Anwar conceding to whatever fate the Barisan Nasional government metes out to him. That action, if he so chooses, is to serve a purpose. The purpose is to hasten the downfall of the present national government. But Anwar is a recalcitrant and stubborn is his middle name. That short article was actually meant for Umno people, to get them familiar with sophisticated thinking. The message is: Send Anwar to jail, we will hasten the downfall of the Umno government. The weight of evidence this far indicates that Anwar's next stop will be the jail. He will spend maybe 10 years in it, by which time he will be in his 70s. He won't see his children grow into adulthood and perhaps will not see a number of his children getting married. The public can perhaps accept the punishment meted to Anwar. Indeed, the public does not really care about Anwar anymore. But what does the government in, is the collateral punishment unjustifiably meted out to his family: his wife, his children, his grandchildren. Public disapproval of this unjustifiable tyranny visited upon the family is what will do in the government. Anwar will succeed in portraying the government as a tyrant and heartless ogre. Umno is not handling Anwar the right way. I have written some time ago, of the option of using outside experts from the FBI or Interpol. At that time, the idea was laughed off. We could have subjected the forensic investigation under the terms of a royal commission of inquiry. That way, right from the beginning, Umno would have cut off any inferred linkage to the production of the video. In effect, that action if taken would signal to everyone the three jokers were acting on their own driven by personal agenda. Umno shouldn't have gotten involved by default at all. That would also stop the spin undertaken by the audio visual and print media linked to Umno. That would have also stopped the opposition from crashing in with their own spins. At that time, what I wrote was received with much scepticism. There were accusations that such a proposal would suggest that our police experts at home are not as skilful as foreign experts. That wasn't the inference at all, but it would demolish any accusations about our local police being bought over by the government. The opposition parties would seize on this point. Now it's too late. The media frenzy that accompanied the revelation of the trio turned what initially could have been an advantage into a general rejection of the veracity of the story. Now, even if we can prove that it was indeed Anwar who is the actor in the porn clips, general distrust and cynicism would destroy any balance of truth in the sex scandal. We actually don't care whether Anwar is the sex culprit or not. The videos shown were probably old film clips. He is morally culpable. He answers to the people whose faith in him is somewhat shaken. He answers to his loving family. The public cannot find the stomach to tolerate the injustice forced on Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and her family. What the government has done as a result of its own sluggishness and mental blockage is to allow itself to be regarded as a tyrannical bully. READ MORE HERE |
| PAS Needs More Warriors If It Wants To Replace Umno Posted: 25 May 2011 06:49 PM PDT (Bernama) -- PAS needs more "warriors" than religious leaders if it wants to unseat Umno in the 13th general election. Political analyst Prof Dr A. Aziz Bari said that PAS led by its president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang needed to undertake more transformation in the party by bringing forth more "warriors".
"The party should not be looking for 'tok imam' but 'warriors' and 'fighters'. It should not be delusional but offer alternatives to the people. If PAS still wants to discuss on how many ulama to be placed at the top party leadership, what's the use?
"If it continues to be like this, it is in no position to replace Umno," he said at a forum on "Charting PAS' Future" organised by the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS) at the Selangor and Kuala Lumpur Chinese Assembly Hall, here Wednesday.
The other speakers at the forum were PAS Member of Parliament for Shah Alam Khalid Samad, and party Central Committee members Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad and Datuk Kamaruddin Jaafar.
Aziz said although PAS claimed to have more than one million members, it should stop thinking that its top leaders must come from the ulama group, that it should be more open to accept change although there were leaders among them who were uncomfortable with change.
"Some want things to remain the same while others are edgy about new developments, and there are also those who feel uneasy when the party opens its doors to non-Malays," he said.
Khalid, however, said that it was not the main issue from the party constitution aspect, as the ulama leadership referred to the Syura Council and there was nothing in the constitution which said that the leadership must come from the ulama.
"Such thinking may be influenced by the media and those with vested interest in the party who say that the PAS president and deputy president must be from the ulama group."
Khalid's views were supported by Kamaruddin who said that there were no leaders in the party who viewed the top leadership as being divided into two groups - the pro-ulama and the pro-professionals, or better known as the Erdogan group.
PAS, which was established in 1951, will be holding its election next month to choose the top leaders for the 2011-2013 term.
So far, party president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang has retained his post unopposed. |
| ‘Cops beat me, told me to die’ Posted: 25 May 2011 06:29 PM PDT 
A 20-year-old student claims that he was assaulted and verbally berated after knocking into a policeman's motorcycle. (Free Malaysia Today) - "The policemen kept beating me and called me 'keling'. They also shouted at me, saying I should just die so that they can close the case." A 20-year-old student was allegedly beaten up and verbally berated when he knocked into a policeman's motorcycle at a roadblock in Rembau, Negri Sembilan, during the wee hours of the morning. After the Monday incident, S Ganesan was also warned against lodging a complaint before he was put into an ambulance and sent to the Tuanku Jaafar Hospital. However, Ganesan summed up the courage to lodge a report with the Chembong police station on the same day. In the report, he stated: "I want the authorities to take action against the errant policemen. I don't understand why they treated me like an animal although I repeatedly apologised for the accident." Ganesan said that he fell to the ground when his motorcyle collided with the policeman's bike, and an officer identified only as Hisham allegedly started raining blows on him. "Soon, several other officers joined him to beat me up," he added. Ganesan claimed that he was kicked in his stomach, arms and back. The policemen, who also used a helmet to assault him, then allegedly tore his shirt, threw him into a drain and stomped on him. Apart from the beating, the student claimed that the policemen had also hurled racial insults, among others, calling him "keling" (a derogatory term used on Indians). "They also said I should just die so that they can close the case," he alleged. Despite several attempts, FMT failed to reach Negeri Sembilan CID chief ACP Hamdan Majid for comments. READ MORE HERE |
| A New Alliance Posted: 25 May 2011 05:52 PM PDT Zaid Untuk Rakyat Like many Malaysians today, I think our country's politics is on the verge of breakdown. The Pakatan Rakyat has not managed to play a meaningful political role as a federal Opposition. The checks and balances they are supposed to provide have given way to so much hostility that they will shoot down everything the Barisan Nasional proposes, even good ideas. This behaviour automatically triggers equally vicious reactions from the BN and there is so much mutual hatred even in Parliament that we wonder whether good laws are being made. How can there be? There is so little real debate. There is almost no engagement between the two sides. Leaders in the BN and Pakatan seem interested only in annihilating each other. One side can "gain" only if the other side "loses", but the reality is that no one wins in this kind of system. It is unhealthy and it is certainly not democratic. This endless acrimony brings no benefit to the Rakyat. They are disappointed by all the broken promises, the absent leadership, and the blind pursuit of power that puts party politics above all else. Many openly say the BN is no longer a working coalition. Some of the major component parties nolonger enjoy the support of their constituents and they cannot come to the table as equal partners as they once did. Only UMNO continues to wield its traditional influence—but without the strength of its partners to bring balance, UMNO too has changed. It has become autocratic and fixed in its ways. It is unaware, or afraid, of the need to change. It has become deaf to the needs of others. Even now there is a movement within UMNO that wants more seats at the next General Election at the expense of the component parties. If this happens, the BN will cease to be a coalition even in name. It will no longer represent Malaysians. It will represent only its own interests and I fear for my country and my fellow citizens should that day ever come. What about the Pakatan? Not only has it failed to provide a real and constructive Opposition to the Government, it has positioned Anwar as beyond question and reproach. He can do no wrong and his "coalition" follows him blindly out of politically expedience. Anwar is a convenient figurehead, and he is the only person holding the Pakatan together. PAS and the DAP are still utterly divided on the issue of the Islamic state. They have merely postponed their differences—not resolved them—for the sake of achieving political power. In situations like this, basic questions of right and wrong get lost in the mud of ambition. Why should a coalition depend exclusively on the cult-status of one man alone? How can we expect the Pakatan to provide responsible leadership if it simply ignores its own internal differences? Have we even seen any evidence that the Pakatan is a real coalition and not a marriage of convenience? No, we haven't, and because they are locked in the endless death-struggle with the BN, we can'texpect anything more of them either. So, what about the rest of us who are sick of this endless political feuding? There are many of us who adhere closely to the founding principles of our nation regardless of the political leadership of the day. We put national unity first, and we work tirelessly to ensure, as Tunku Abdul Rahman wanted, a place in the sun for everyone. We yearn for real debate on policies that affect us because we know that this is the process through which we make good laws. We want to engage all sides because we recognise that good ideas exist everywhere, regardless of creed, colour or political affiliation. We never dismiss an argument simply because we don't like the person who says it—we evaluate proposals on their own merit for the benefit of all Malaysians, not just a particular party, ideology or interest. READ MORE HERE |
| Longing For A Free Mind (Part 12 of 14) Posted: 25 May 2011 05:36 PM PDT What would be worse than losing our special privileges? By M. Bakri Musa [Presented at the Fifth Annual Alif Ba Ta Conference at Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, organized by UMNO Club of New York-New Jersey, January 29, 2011.] Q& A (Cont'd): Pakatan, UMNO, and Mahathir Q4: Pakatan declared that it will take away Malay special privileges. Why should I vote for that coalition? A4: Your greatest fear, and reason for not voting Pakatan, is the possible loss of your special privileges. Thanks to the agitations of leaders from the increasingly shrill Mahathir down to the ever-frothing Perkasa's Ibrahim Ali, affirmative action is now an existential issue for Malays. It need not be. Let me suggest to you and others who share your view that the way to deal with a fear is to imagine the worse possible scenario and then be prepared for that. What would be worse than losing our special privileges? Imagine the descendents of Chin Peng or someone of his persuasion gaining power either legitimately or through corrupt means. After all if UMNO can bribe voters to vote for it, why not Chin Peng's party? Make the scenario even scarier; imagine that this party is determined to make Malaysia a province of China as indicated in some moldy maps in the musty tombs of its emperors. How do you prepare for that? Take to the streets and challenge those Chinese army tanks a la Tiananmen Square? If the Chinese government had little sympathy for its own kind, do you imagine it would be more sympathetic to Malays demonstrating? Let me suggest another and more productive way for preparing for this worse case scenario. Equip yourself and your children with the best education and the most useful skills. Then whoever is in charge of the country would beg you to stay; they need you! Besides, if you do not like working for the new power, you can always find ready takers for your talent elsewhere. Every year thousands of Chinese, Indians, Irish and Italians leave their country for far lesser fears and problems. So do not worry about losing your special privileges. There are worse things. Instead prepare yourself by being well educated and trained. Tunku Abdul Rahman once said if Malaysia were to be invaded by China or any major power, then he would be the first to raise the white flag. His point was not that he was a coward, rather that he viewed human life as precious and that you should not waste it over such dubious things as "patriotism." Instead you should learn to accommodate to reality if you cannot change it.
Q5: Which party will win the next election? Barisan or Pakatan? A5: If I could see the future, I would not waste it on predicting which party will win; I would instead pick some winning stocks! That flipping remark aside, I do hear you! Answering your question however, requires some downstream analysis. Imagine if Barisan, specifically UMNO, were to win and win big. Will that trigger change? Far from it! It would merely reaffirm their arrogance that what they have been doing all along is being approved by Malaysians. So if you like where the country is today, with rampant corruption, endemic inefficiencies, and deepening polarization of the races, then you will certainly get more of those things with another UMNO victory. For Pakatan, a major loss would trigger much soul searching. Perhaps that would make them focus on their commonalities (like getting rid of corruption and intrusive laws like the ISA) instead of on their differences. Now imagine the alternative, with UMNO suffering major defeat. The party would implode. It would be left to only true believers and those not in it for material gains. They will rebuild UMNO to its humble origin in the decades of the 40s, 50s and 60s. The party emerging from the ashes would be better and cleaner. If Pakatan were to win, yes there will the inevitable squabbles especially on whether the Deputy Prime Minister should be a Malay. Such squabbles over the fruits of victory are predictable. My view on the specific question of a Malay Deputy Prime Minister was expressed earlier in response to a question on a Muslim versus non-Muslim leader. I go for competence. I believe Pakatan has its share of talents, and I am all for giving them a chance.
Q6: Do you agree with Tun Mahathir's relentless criticism of his chosen successor Abdullah Badawi to the extent of undermining his (Abdullah's) authority?
A6: If Mahathir had not been relentless – and merciless – in his criticisms of Abdullah, the old man (Abdullah) would still be in power today and busy running the country to the ground. Actually it would not be him as he would be dozing off, rather his assorted hangers on who would be ruining Malaysia. I disagree with Mahathir on many substantive areas, but on Abdullah I not only agree with his actions but also grateful for what he did. Malaysians too owe Mahathir a deep debt of gratitude for he was very instrumental in getting rid of Abdullah. I applaud Mahathir on two points. First, he had the courage to admit his error, in this case, choosing Abdullah as his (Mahathir's) successor. Not many of us would readily admit to our mistakes and do so publicly. Score one for Mahathir. Second, and more important, is that he went beyond that and actively corrected his mistake. That took more than just courage. Mahathir's harsh criticisms of Abdullah also broke new grounds for Malay culture. Again here is an example of his successfully changing Malay culture, contrary to his assertion elsewhere. The Malay cultural taboo of criticizing our leaders is broken; we now do not hesitate doing it, as Najib is finding out much to his chagrin. That is good. Elsewhere I cheekily suggested that maybe Mahathir had a hidden motive in choosing Abdullah – to provide Malaysians practice in this exercise of criticizing our leaders. Abdullah was so inept that he practically invited contempt and criticisms. Now that Abdullah is out it is easy to belittle or even dismiss Mahathir's effort. Remember when Mahathir was doing it, the mainstream media under Abdullah's cronies were ignoring Mahathir; likewise senior UMNO leaders and leading corporate figures and senior academics. They all quickly aligned with their new master, conveniently forgetting the man (Mahathir) who put them there. If not for the alternate media (specifically Malaysia-Today) and the Internet (Mahathir having his own very popular blog) Mahathir would have been silenced. My praising Mahathir on this matter notwithstanding, I still have a nagging unanswered question. Why did he pick Abdullah in the first place? Surely he has known Abdullah for decades and thus should have a very good assessment of the man. How could a simpleton like Abdullah hoodwink a seasoned politician like Mahathir? I live 10,000 miles away and have never met Abdullah, yet I can see through the man's hollowness. I am not trying to be wise after the event; I have publicly stated my doubts on Abdullah in front of a sophisticated international audience long before he assumed office. Why did Mahathir (and so many other seasoned observers in Malaysia) missed what was obvious to me? Even after Abdullah had clearly demonstrated his ineptness there were still many toadying praises for the man. One respected scholar gushed Abdullah was a "social engineer par excellence!" This phenomenon cannot simply be attributed to our senior people eagerness to bodek (suck up), although that is a significant factor. We have to look elsewhere for a fuller explanation. My theory is this. Abdullah was a simple, courteous and humble man, that is, until he tasted power and all its vanities. (Having seen his performance, Abdullah has every reason to be humble!) Having not met the man I was not the beneficiary of those fine qualities of his; thus my judgment of the man was not clouded. In Malay culture those traits are highly valued. One could hide one's other inadequacies, including incompetence and corruption; hence Abdullah's successfully concealing his! As can be seen, he successfully deceived many, even Mahathir.
Q7: Tun Mahathir recently admitted that his greatest failure was his inability to change Malays and the Malay mindset. How confident are you that the changes you advocate would topple our metaphorical coconut shell?
A7: I totally disagree with Mahathir's self assessment; it is totally self-serving with a barely disguised tone of pseudo humility. On the contrary, he has changed Malays, in profound and irreversible ways. It is just that he does not like the changes that he has wrought. He has turned Malays into corrupt, insular, rent-seeking and dole-dependent citizens. He does not like what he sees and consequently concluded that he has not succeeded in changing us. To him apparently we have always been that kind of people. I disagree. There was a time when we were honest, open and tolerant. We may be poor in our villagers but at least what we earned was honest, the result of our effort and not our being parasites on the rest of society. He recently labeled UMNO as "the party of contracts, APs, and licenses." Since to UMNO folks UMNO is Malay and vice versa, he thinks that all Malays are like those UMNO folks. I do not know whether the strategies I discussed here will work, but I do know the current policies championed by UMNO has led us to where we are to day. Even Mahathir does not like where we are today. The only way forward is to ensure that Malays are liberated mentally, that is, we have a free mind. Once we have that and see where we have been led to, then we will become angry and demand actions be taken or else take it upon ourselves to change things. We have to be competitive, only then can we find our rightful spot whether in Tanah Melayu or elsewhere. There are no short cuts. So forget about 1Malaysia, 100-storey tower, multibillion-dollar GLCs and all those alphabet soup of acronyms that promise miraculous transformation. Improve our schools, have trained teachers, and get rid of corruption. There is nothing secret or magical to my prescription. The Irish, Japanese, South Koreans, and now the Chinese are doing it. That is the only workable recipe.
Q8: Has (UMNO Youth President) Khairy Jamaludin a future in his party and country?
A8: The future of UMNO Youth or Khairy Jamaluddin specifically is peripheral to my interest. Meaning, I could not care less about what happens to him or the organization he leads. The future of Malaysia and that of Malays specifically is far divorced from that of UMNO or Khairy. Your question however prompts me to make a more general observation on Malay youths, specifically those few bright ones. Too many of them are like Khairy, poorly mentored and not so wisely counseled. Far too many think that graduating from a top university with an undergraduate degree was the height of intellectual achievement. Thus they eschew further education or the broadening of their experience. As so few of our youths end up at those elite institutions, these fortunate few acquire a sense of special destiny. They feel destined to lead us. They are imbued with undisguised confidence in their innate ability and without having to gain further experience or training to helm a major corporation or organization. If there are so few Malays graduating from elite universities today, there were even fewer a generation or two ago. So these bright young graduates lack proper role models or mentors to guide them. Thus unless they have a sterling core they are too readily susceptible to flattery. This is especially so for those who have connections to important people as Khairy is. You add to this our cultural penchant for effusive praises, and things can get very heady for a young man or woman. There was a young Malay student who, like Khairy, graduated from a top university. Unlike Khairy he graduated from an American university and furthered his studies beyond the undergraduate level. He worked in America and was later posted to Malaysia. With his expatriate pay and Malaysia's relatively low cost of living, he was ready to live it up. Fortunately for this young man, the head of the Malaysian branch of the American company was also a Malay. On his first day at work, the young man was taken aside by the local CEO for a friendly fatherly talk. Aware that the young man was being paid as an expatriate, the local head said, "Young man, many of our clients are GLCs and public agencies. They are paying your salary, and you will be dealing with civil servants who will be paid a fraction of your salary. It would not look good if you were to flout your fabulous income in front of them." He then suggested to the young man to instead have his luxury condo and Porsche in New York but to live more modestly in Kuala Lumpur. That was the best advice that young man ever had. Unfortunately far too many fast-rising young Malays today have been deprived of similar valuable advice. Bright young Malays are no different from other bright students. In America however, these students have plenty of role models and mentors to give them such guidance; not so with our boys. Thus our Khairys believe that their undergraduate degree is their ultimate achievement and not the beginning, as with bright American kids. Indeed the measure of excellence with American universities is the percentage of their graduates who go on to graduate or professional schools. Those few who opt for work would choose companies or organizations where they would get the best experience, including best mentoring. Our problem is compounded by our institutional rigidity. A year ago one of the students here was accepted to the graduate program at one of the top universities. Every year literally thousands of bright eager students from all over the globe apply to this and similar programs. Yet when our student was accepted, the folks at the ministry with their rigid bureaucratic mindset would hear nothing of it. She had to return home. If I were to advise the Khairys of today (meaning, some of you), this is what I would offer. First, congratulations for having graduated from a top university. You should be justly proud of your achievement. Explore how you could leverage that to even greater heights. Sit for your GRE, GMAT or whatever and get yourself enrolled into a quality graduate or professional program. Then when you are suitably qualified, work with some reputable corporations or organizations where you will have capable leaders and executives to be your role models and mentors. Better yet, set up your own enterprise. If you are pursuing your doctoral work, stay back for some postdoctoral experience and have a few papers under your belt. If you are related to a VVIP, all the more you should take my advice. If you were to bank on your connections to achieve your goals, your achievements will forever be tainted, as Khairy is belatedly finding out. Unfortunately there are many Khairys out there who look upon their connections as durian runtuh, and exploit that relationship. That will definitely make you rise very quickly as long as your patron is in power. It would not however, be enduring. While you are on the rise they will shower you with superlatives. Khairy was once called "the best investment banker!" Really! Those things can go to the head of even the most humble. It helps to remember that when they shower you with such extravagant praises, that reflect more on them than on you. As for Khairy, he is now a damaged brand; he cannot recover. My advice would be to get out of politics, possibly out of Malaysia too, and find your niche elsewhere. There are many ways to serve your country besides being in politics or even being in Malaysia. Next: Q&A (Cont'd): Islamic State and Leaders |
| Voter registration this weekend Posted: 25 May 2011 05:35 PM PDT DAP FT/Selangor is having a mega statewide (Selangor & FT) voter registration exercise this weekend, 28-29 May, at 12 locations. We're hoping to hit 10,000 new voters!
Venues include markets (for the semi-urban areas) and shopping centres for the urban areas, locations are: 1. KAJANG: Metro Point (near Old Town White Coffee); 11am-9pm 2. KEPONG: Waterfront, Desa Parkcity (near Coffee Bean); 10am-8pm
3. KLANG: Klang Parade (Renren Book Store); 10am-10pm
4. KUALA KUBU BHARU: KKB Market; 8:30am-10:30am
5. PANDAN: Pandan Perdana Morning Market (Sat) & Taman Muda Market (Sun); 8am-11am
6. PETALING JAYA: 1Utama (1st Floor, Oval); 10am-10pm & Digital Mall, Sect 14; 10am-9pm
7. PUCHONG: IOI Mall (Guardian, Old Wing); 10am-10:30pm
8. SEKINCHAN: Restaurant Sheng Hui (Sekinchan Market); 8am-12pm
9. SERDANG: The Mines Shopping Mall ; 11am-9pm
10. SUBANG JAYA: Empire Shopping Gallery (P1 Travelator); 10am-10pm |
| Three parties can’t form the federal government Posted: 25 May 2011 04:58 PM PDT 
If Barisan Nasional can't make it with just three political parties even with everything working in its favour (plus election fraud and vote rigging thrown in), what makes you think that Pakatan Rakyat can do so when the playing field is extremely far from level? NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin Way back in 1969, Umno already realised that it can't form the federal government with a coalition of a mere three political parties. At that time the coalition of Umno, MCA and MIC was called the Alliance Party. That was why Barisan Nasional was formed a few years later -- so that they could enlarge the three-member coalition to include more parties. A total of 7,944,274 Malaysians voted in the 2008 general election. Umno garnered 2,381,725 votes while MCA and MIC garnered 840,489 and 179,422 votes respectively. Combined, the 'Alliance Party' managed only 41.89% of the votes. In terms of parliament seats, Umno, MCA and MIC won 79, 15 and 3 respectively. But we must remember that Umno's 79 seats included 11 from Sabah. Therefore, minus Sabah, Umno won only 68 seats -- which means the 'Alliance Party' minus Sabah won only 86 out of the 222 seats in Parliament (or 97 seats if including Sabah). With or without the 11 Umno Sabah seats, the 'Alliance Party' of Umno, MCA and MIC can't get enough seats to form the federal government. They need Barisan Nasional to be able to form the federal government. And, today, Barisan Nasional is a coalition of 14 political parties (if you do not include the Election Commission, Police, Judiciary, AG's Chambers, etc. -- which would then make it a coalition of 20 or more members). The bottom line is: with a mere three political parties, Barisan Nasional can't form the federal government. It needs 14 political parties to do that. Now let us look at Pakatan Rakyat. It is also a coalition of three political parties. If Barisan Nasional can't form the federal government with just three political parties (even with the help of the Election Commission, Police, Judiciary, AG's Chambers, etc.) can Pakatan Rakyat do so (with the Election Commission, Police, Judiciary, AG's Chambers, etc., all working against the opposition)? I have said this before and I am going to say it again: Pakatan Rakyat must enlarge the coalition to include more political parties. It can't expect to form the federal government with just PKR, DAP and PAS. It needs more parties to join Pakatan Rakyat, not only from West Malaysia but also, and in particular, from East Malaysia. Pakatan Rakyat, in particular PKR, must not be sombong. It can't make Pakatan Rakyat an 'exclusive club' of three parties. It has to reach out to more parties and invite them to join Pakatan Rakyat. If not Pakatan Rakyat is never going to form the next federal government. The 2008 general election was the peak for Pakatan Rakyat. Pakatan Rakyat can't expect to better the 2008 general election result with just three parties. Even if Pakatan Rakyat can just maintain its 2008 election result that would be a consolation enough. My fear is that in the next general election Pakatan Rakyat will drop from its 2008 height of 82 parliament seats to a mere 52 seats or so (a repeat of what it did in 1999 when it used to be known as Barisan Alternatif). Pakatan Rakyat, in particular PKR, should stop making enemies and start making friends. It should remove that chip from its shoulder and stop looking down on those who share the common agenda of seeing change in Malaysia. There are many who share this aspiration for change. But Pakatan Rakyat acts like only it has that exclusive right of fighting for change. That is very sombong. Let me repeat that: if Barisan Nasional can't make it with just three political parties even with everything working in its favour (plus election fraud and vote rigging thrown in), what makes you think that Pakatan Rakyat can do so when the playing field is extremely far from level? There are ten non-Barisan Nasional political parties. But only three are in Pakatan Rakyat. Why can't Pakatan Rakyat become a coalition of at least seven parties even if it can't be a coalition of ten parties? |
| Villagers cry foul over fraudulent logging deal Posted: 25 May 2011 04:04 PM PDT By Joseph Tawie, Free Malaysia Today KUCHING: Bidayuh landowners from four villages in the Lundu district – Kampung Stum Muda, Kampung Stungkor Baru, Kampung Stungkor Lama and Kampung . Bokiah – have claimed that a Miri-based timber company has cheated them through an 'undated, unsealed and improperly attested agreement'. They claimed the agreement also had not been stamped with the term 'hasil'. On May 3, the villagers lodged a report, at the Lundu police station, against Bagos Anak Gaok and Kampung Stim Muda village chief Labob Anak Sindeh for allegedly selling their forest in their native customary rights (NCR) land to the timber company, Malaystar Sdn Bhd. Villagers Jemat Anak Tikek and Manis Anak Nundod of Kampung Stungkor Lama, lodged the report on behalf of the residents from the four villages. They told the police that various species of timber in their NCR land near Gunong Undan have been felled. "We found that an illegal agreement had been made between the timber company with Ketua kampong (village chief) Stum Muda, Laboh Anak Sindeh without the agreement of AJK (Development Action Committee) of the four villages. "We made this report for information and action to be taken by the Lundu District Council, Forest Department, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the police and other relevant authorities," Jemat said. Jemat believed that illegal loggings are being carried out on 1,000 acres of their NCR land at Gunong Undan that belonged to the communities of the four villages. "The majority of the people in these villages are opposed to the illegal loggings carried out by the loggers who were given consent to do so by a village chief of Kampung Stum Muda . "He has not been given the mandate by the people," Jemat said. False documents Jemat alleged that the village chief could have based his authority on two points; i) an undated, unsealed and improperly attested agreement without stamp of the phrase 'hasil' and (ii) a written prior demand from the villagers which is attested by the agent of the loggers and not by any of the village elders. "Upon perusal of these documents we found them to be false, void, and invalid by misrepresentation, and contravened laws governing NCR lands," Jemat said. READ MORE HERE. |
| Government says to review subsidies if oil rises to US$110 Posted: 25 May 2011 04:03 PM PDT (The Malaysian Insider) - KUALA LUMPUR, May 26 — Malaysia will review fuel prices if the price of oil is at US$110-120 per barrel, Deputy Finance Minister Donald Lim said today. He did not specify the brand of crude but the government had said yesterday it would keep fuel prices unchanged for now, taking into consideration the people's interests. Brent crude held steady around US$115 a barrel today due to a softer dollar and as an unexpected drop in US distillate stocks overshadowed gains in gasoline and crude inventories. US crude for July delivery rose 38 cents to US$101.70 this morning, adding to a US$1.73 gain yesterday. Investment research firm AmResearch recently estimated Putrajaya is now subsidising at least 90 sen per litre of RON95 versus the intended 30 sen per litre after global crude oil prices surged to US$99 per barrel from US$79 per barrel last year, matching the US$100 per barrel recorded in 2008. Petrol subsidies will push the government's fiscal deficit over the projected 5.4 per cent of GDP towards six per cent if RON95 is kept at the current price of RM1.90 per litre for the rest of the year, AmResearch noted. Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin has said the government expects the subsidy burden to double from RM10.32 billion to RM20.58 billion this year. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak also said fuel subsidies were "like opium" to the Malaysian economy and would have to be gradually slashed as the initial bill of RM11 billion had soared to RM18 billion for the year due to escalating crude oil prices. The government also announced today that the National Economic Council will decide tomorrow on any revision to the electricity tariff. Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Datuk Seri Peter Chin said the Cabinet had directed the council to deliberate the matter and make a decision on a new tariff. "We know at this juncture, a lot of other things have also increased, including food prices and housing. So the government decided not to increase (fuel prices)," Lim told reporters today after a function here.
READ MORE HERE.
|
| AR RIDHA DESAK GUGUR PERTUDUHAN EMPAT ANGGOTA SYIAH Posted: 25 May 2011 03:57 PM PDT PRESS STATEMENT Ar Ridha, sebuah badan bukan kerajaan (NGO), membantah tindakan Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (Jais) menyerbu majlis jamuan makan dan kesenian yang di adakan di kawasan lapang, Taman Sri Gombak dekat Kuala Lumpur hari ini, 25 Mei 2011. Majlis tahunan itu diadakan sebagai memperingati hari ulangtahun kelahiran Fatimah Zahra, puteri Rasulullah saw. Ketika serbuan itu berlaku, lebih 1,000 tetamu daripada pelbagai bangsa dan agama dalam konteks 1Malaysia sedang menjamu selera dan tindakan ini adalah sesuatu yang memeranjatkan dan tidak wajar. Ini kerana pihak penganjur telah mendapat kelulusan daripada Majlis Perbandaran Selayang, Polis Diraja Malaysia dan Kementerian Dalam Negeri (Rela) untuk menganjurkan majlis tersebut.
Dalam serbuan tersebut, empat anggota bermazhab Syiah telah ditahan dan dilepaskan dengan ikat jamin pada petang tadi. Mereka ialah Mohd Kamilzuhairi Abdul Aziz, Radin Ahmad Faizul, Syed Mohd Shafiq Syed Husin dan Mohd Asyraf Ahmad. Mereka dituduh menyebarkan ajaran mazhab Syiah walaupun majlis itu hanya sekadar majlis jamuan makan yang biasa diadakan setiap tahun.
Tindakan Jais ini dilihat sebagai satu tindakan yang biadap dan merupakan suatu penindasan kerana Jais bertindak tanpa waran dan tidak mengikut saluran undang-undang yang betul. Oleh yang demikian, kami mendesak Jais menggugurkan segala pertuduhan ke atas mereka kerana majlis itu dianjurkan dengan mendapat kelulusan daripada pihak berkuasa.
Tindakan Jais dalam membuat serbuan dan menahan empat anggota Syiah adalah bercanggah dengan Artikel 11, Perlembagaan Malaysia, yang menyebut agama Islam sebagai agama rasmi dan penganut-penganut agama lain bebas untuk mengamalkan ajaran agama mereka.
Mereka akan dihadapkan ke Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Gombak Timor, Kuang, Selangor pada 7 Jun depan. Sementara itu, Ar Ridha telah membuat laporan polis petang tadi berhubung dua artikel berunsur fitnah tulisan Hasliza Hassan di akhbar Berita Harian pada 23 Mei 2011 bertajuk "Masyarakat mesti disebar luas bahaya Syiah" dan bertajuk "Tiada sebab terima Syiah di Malaysia" pada 24 Mei 2011.
Ar Ridha
Pengarah
Mohd Kamilzuhairi Abdul Aziz |
| Bleeding bus companies honk for aid Posted: 25 May 2011 03:55 PM PDT Bus operators are pleading with the government for monetary aid. They warn that if no help comes forth, their services will grind to a halt. (Free Malaysia Today) - Private bus operators are pleading with the government to disburse the RM4 billion stored under the Public Transportation Fund. Pan-Malaysian Bus Operators Association (PMBOA) president Mohamad Ashfar Ali said the financial aid would give the companies a new lease of life. "We have problems applying for loans because the banks look at our accounts and see our losses. "We would like to ask the government, who collected this fund under (former premier) Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to disburse it to us," he told FMT after meeting with Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD) officials yesterday. In March 2006, Abdullah said that the RM4.4 billion gleaned from oil subsidy reductions would be placed in a Public Transportation Fund. At the time, the premier said that the fund would be used to improve public transport in all states. However, it was not clear if this fund had been used so far. Solutions to their problems Meanwhile, Ashfar said that PMBOA members also suggested other options to SPAD officials during their meeting. These included a further reduction on their partial diesel subsidy from RM1.48 to RM1.00 per litre, and for the option to use buses that were older than 15 years. Failing that, the operators also requested a cost-per-kilometre measure, where the government would subsidise buses according to the routes they took. But as far as PMBOA was concerned, these solutions were still short-term remedies, and pleaded for the government to buy them out, lock, stock and barrel. Even so, yesterday's meeting did not appear to be fruitful. Although listening to their cries for help, SPAD chairman Syed Hamid Albar allegedly told the bus operators that the commission could only make recommendations. The final decision, Ashfar said, rested in the hands of the Cabinet. Companies in dire straits Ashfar said that bus companies across Malaysia were in dire straits. "We are shutting down slowly. It's not going to be like a television channel where we just turn off, but it's going to be like a domino effect," he added. He said that bus services in many rural and small towns were slashing their schedules or shutting down altogether. Negeri Sembilan Bus Operators Association president Hardev Singh Gill said the Seremban Town Service (STS) company, which had 25 buses running a few years ago only had four left now. He added that operators servicing other towns in the state such as Port Dickson and Nilai had closed down completely. READ MORE HERE |
| Malaysia's use of cane raised in refugee swap debate Posted: 25 May 2011 03:46 PM PDT By Jeremy Thompson, ABC News The Federal Government is facing more criticism of its Malaysian asylum seeker swap deal, with Opposition, Greens and independent MPs questioning Malaysia's human rights record. A press report today quotes Amnesty International saying 6,000 detainees in Malaysia each year suffer the rattan cane, which "shreds the victim's naked skin and turns tissue into pulp". Opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison says Immigration Minister Chris Bowen cannot give a rock-solid undertaking that 800 asylum seekers Australia plans to send to Malaysia will not be caned. "I would have thought this is a fairly fundamental, basic check-off in terms of the human rights issues that will need to be squared away if you were going to conclude this sort of deal," Mr Morrison said. Liberal Senator Eric Abetz says the Government should restore the so-called Pacific Solution. "If you have offended against the law of Nauru or Malaysia, where would you prefer to be? It's quite clear the Howard government's Nauruan solution, the Pacific solution, worked, and what's more, was more humane," Senator Abetz said. "All the people we sent to Nauru, none of them were submitted to caning." Greens MP Adam Bandt says sending asylum seekers to a country that has not agreed to abide by international law is not something his party can support. And independent Senator Nick Xenophon says he cannot understand why the Government will not send asylum seekers to Nauru because it has not signed the UN Refugee Convention, but will send them to Malaysia which is not a signatory either. He says Malaysia has a history in relation to human rights issues that is "less than exemplary". "I think the Government needs to get assurances, because it's not going to be a good look that we send people who have sought asylum back to a country where they are subject to inhumane punishment," Senator Xenophon said.
READ MORE HERE.
|
| Remember May 13? (UPDATED with Chinese Translation) Posted: 12 May 2011 04:11 PM PDT On 24 September 1999, I wrote a very long article on May 13 for the PAS party newspaper, Harakah. Those who may not have read it yet can read it below. It was republished in the Free Anwar Campaign website in January 2003. Also read what Tunku Abdul Rahman had to say in 'The Tunku Tapes'.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin The Tunku on how "May 13" began
From his residence in Penang, 1972:
"It was clear to me as well as the police that in the highly charged political atmosphere after the police were forced to kill a Chinese political party worker on May 4th, 1969, something was bound to happen to threaten law and order because of the resentment towards the Government by the KL Chinese on the eve of the general election. This was confirmed at this man's funeral on the 9th May when the government faced the most hostile crowd it had ever seen.
Therefore, when the opposition parties applied for a police permit for a procession to celebrate their success in the results of the general election, I was adamant against it because the police were convinced that this would lead to trouble.
I informed Tun Razak about this and he seemed to agree. Now, without my knowledge and actually "behind my back," there were certain political leaders in high positions who were working to force me to step down as a PM. I don't want to go into details but if they had come to me and said so I would gladly have retired gracefully.
Unfortunately, they were apparently scheming and trying to decide on the best way to force me to resign. The occasion came when the question of the police permit was to be approved.
Tun Razak and Harun Idris, the MB of the state of Selangor, now felt that permission should be given knowing fully well that there was a likelihood of trouble. I suppose they felt that when this happened they could then demand my resignation.
To this day I find it very hard to believe that Razak, whom I had known for so many years, would agree to work against me in this way. Actually, he was in my house as I was preparing to return to Kedah and I overhead him speaking to Harun over the phone saying that he would be willing to approve the permit when I left. I really could not believe what I was hearing and preferred to think it was about some other permit. In any case, as the Deputy Prime Minister in my absence from KL, he would be the Acting PM and would override my objection. Accordingly, when I was in my home in Kedah, I heard over the radio that the permit had been approved.
It seems as though the expected trouble was anticipated and planned for by Harun and his UMNO Youth. After the humiliating insults hurled by the non-Malays, especially the Chinese, and after the seeming loss of Malay political power to them, they were clearly ready for some retaliatory action. After meeting in large numbers at Harun's official residence in Jalan Raja Muda near Kampong Bahru and hearing inflammatory speeches by Harun and other leaders, they prepared themselves by tying ribbon strips on their foreheads and set out to kill Chinese. The first hapless victims were two of them in a van opposite Harun's house who were innocently watching the large gathering. Little did they know that they would be killed on the spot.
The rest is history. I am sorry but I must end this discussion now because it really pains me as the Father of Merdeka to have to relive those terrible moments. I have often wondered why God made me live long enough to have witnessed my beloved Malays and Chinese citizens killing each other."
The REAL Story of May 13 (Part 1) http://www.freeanwar.net/jan2003/article020103.htm
The REAL Story of May 13 (Part 2) http://www.freeanwar.net/jan2003/article080103.htm
The REAL Story of May 13 (Part 3) http://www.freeanwar.net/jan2003/article170103.htm
The REAL Story of May 13 (Part 4) http://www.freeanwar.net/jan2003/article300103.htm
Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2011/05/blog-post_5160.html |
| The day Big Dog demanded RM400 million from Ku Li (UPDATED with Chinese Translation) Posted: 11 May 2011 04:02 PM PDT 
In that sense Ku Li maintained his principles although after the meeting Big Dog grumbled that Ku Li is so rich but so kedekut (stingy). He could afford RM400 million easily, lamented Big Dog. If he hopes to win the Umno Presidency without paying any money then good luck to him, said Big Dog.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin Pro-Umno blogger Zakhir Mohamad a.k.a. 'Big Dog' a.k.a. 'Christian PM basher' is actually quite a delightful character. Many a time have we met for dinner and drinks together with Sallahuddin Hashim a.k.a. 'A Voice' a.k.a. 'Another Brick in the Wall'. Wow, everyone is using a.k.a.s nowadays. (For the less English proficient readers of Malaysia Today, a.k.a. means 'also known as').
Big Dog is not only a delightful character but highly intelligent as well. And I have this penchant for intelligent people. Whether they are from the opposition or Umno/Barisan Nasional, I enjoy meeting up with them to eat, drink and shoot the breeze. And Big Dog is one such 'enemy' I used to love to meet and spend hours with to stuff our faces and talk about politics and other issues.
Anyway, there was this one fasting month (Ramadhan) when John Pang (Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah's strategist) phoned me and asked me to arrange a meeting (followed by a buka puasa) with Umno and opposition bloggers and political activists. The number of 30 was agreed on -- the number of people who should be invited.
I then sat down and worked on the invitation list to make up that figure of 30 and passed it to Tengku Razalaigh Hamzah's (a.k.a Ku Li) office for them to invite these people.
Almost everyone we invited came. And it was great to see bloggers and political activists from both sides of the political divide sitting in the same room to discuss how to make Ku Li the next Prime Minister of Malaysia.
Nik Azmi Nik Daud a.k.a. Bulat a.k.a. Bul gave his opinion -- which was actually quite a stupid idea and I could see Ku Li cringe with a 'can you sit down and shut up' look on his face.
I thought Bul's idea was most stupid and it sounded as if he had just learned politics yesterday. No wonder Ku Li has never done well in politics. With Bul as one of his strategists I doubt Ku Li could even win the post of Chief Dog Catcher.
Big Dog then asked Ku Li whether he was prepared to spend RM400 million to win the premiership. That, according to Big Dog, was what it was going to cost Ku Li.
Earlier Big Dog had told me that it is going to cost at least RM400 million to 'buy' 40 Umno divisions if Ku Li wants to become Prime Minister. I said that that was quite a lot of money and Big Dog replied that Ku Li could afford it. He is worth much more than that, said Big Dog.
Ku Li looked hard at Big Dog -- as if he could not believe his ears -- and said that he is not prepared to 'buy' the premiership. If he spends RM10 million to buy each of the 40 Umno Divisions (total RM400 million) just to get 40 nominations so that he can contest the Umno Presidency, then what difference would he be to the other Umno leaders who play 'money politics'?
He wants to become the Umno President and Prime Minister so that he can clean up the party and the government. If he gets in by using bribery, then how can he later clean up the party and the government when he himself is dirty?
So Ku Li rejected Big Dog's proposal, not because he could not afford RM400 million, but because it would not have been ethical to buy the party elections on a platform of trying to get in to rid the party of corruption. You can't get in using corruption and then scream that you are against corruption.
Some of you may remember that I wrote about this some years back. I said then that the task ahead of Ku Li is to get his 40 nominations. If he can get 40 nominations, winning the Presidency is easier. It is getting the 40 nominations which is difficult.
In that sense Ku Li maintained his principles although after the meeting Big Dog grumbled that Ku Li is so rich but so kedekut (stingy). He could afford RM400 million easily, lamented Big Dog. If he hopes to win the Umno Presidency without paying any money then good luck to him, said Big Dog.
Big Dog and I met Ku Li a couple more times, once around midnight in his private residence. But try as we may, we could not get Ku Li to agree to all the different ideas that were bandied about on how he could get his 40 nominations and go on to contest and win the Umno Presidency, which would be the route to becoming the new Prime Minister of Malaysia.
Some ideas were actually quite seditious and treasonous and Ku Li once chided one of the chaps who proposed it and told him that what he was proposing could end up with all of us being charged for treason with a death sentence thrown in. (Yes, some of the ideas were actually quite dangerous and could have ended with us sitting in death row if someone had talked).
Anyway, in the end nothing happened and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi a.k.a. Pak Lah resigned and Najib Tun Razak took over as Prime Minister and Ku Li continued sitting in his house waiting for the day when he would become Prime Minister.
Well, at least he is not RM400 million poorer, which would have happened had he listened to Big Dog.
I must admit that Umno politics is far more interesting compared to opposition politics and I must also admit that I enjoyed myself immensely running with that pack of wolves. Learned a lot as well, which of course we can now use against them. 
Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2011/05/blog-post_14.html |
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
