Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
| The Battle of Election Manifesto (WITH CHINESE TRANSLATION) Posted: 07 Apr 2013 07:14 PM PDT
Nonetheless, there are weaknesses in both PR's and BN's Election Manifestos. In order to woo the voters both sides have made promises that are beyond their current capability to fulfill. For example, they both vow to provide different types of subsidies and welfare but they never explain how they intend to implement that without hurting the country's economic health. Original text by Tay Tian Yan, Asst. Chief Editor, SinChew Daily Translated text by Gilbert Yeoh-Tan Following PR's declaration, BN has recently come out with their own Election Manifesto covering 17 different categories with over 100++ subcategories. Women's rights, public welfare, automobile, housing …… etc, BN have had a hard time summarizing their Manifesto even after several advertising pages in newspapers have been used to publish their promises. To be frank, I am a bit dazzled at this. This is just like Malaysia's Mega Sales season all over again: every shop in every shopping mall puts on their flashy "SALES" or "Buy-1-Free-1" posters. The consumers do not know where to begin shopping, and whether the deals are really as appealing as advertised. Many beautiful promises are made in the Manifesto with aim to project a happy, harmonious future in the voters' minds. However if you are to erase the word 'BN' or 'PR' from the front page of their Manifestos, I will honestly tell you that I won't know which Manifesto belongs to which party. What I am trying to say is, there are many promises of considerable quality coming from both sides trying to capture the 'customers', but 'Whatever they offer, we will match it' is the main theme of these Manifestos. PR vow to subsidize the needy, BN of course react by beefing up the BR1M; PR promise to reduce car tax, BN simply announce that they will reduce car price by 30%. PR pledge to abolish the highway toll fees, BN will …….. well, this is a tough case, so they just promise to reduce the number of toll stations. Other issues like protecting women's rights, reinforcing the anti-corruption agency, building more affordable housings, improving security etc., both sides basically offer the same package. And for as long as I can remember, the Election Manifestos have never been this 'cheap' and 'grand' at the same time. There is a good analogy to describe what is happening; before there was only a supermarket in the town, so the consumers had to buy the products that supermarket was selling at the fixed prices. Now another supermarket has emerged, the competition is present and to win over the consumers both have to bring out their promotions. Furthermore, the items sold have to be of good quality as well. The good thing of these Manifestos is that both sides have stated their policy agendas and since both are selling their policies they have to compete on coming out with the better policies. I think this can indeed benefit the society; their goal is to gain more support from the people, and in order to do that they will have to agree to the good policies put forth by the people that involve society welfare, anti-corruption, transparency, improvement of traffic system, improvement of security etc. These demands can also help shifting focus from negative issues such as differences (and disputes) between races and religions to other greater issues that are beneficial to all races and religions. This also serves as a good indication that our society is taking the correct direction towards a better, more matured democracy. Nonetheless, there are weaknesses in both PR's and BN's Election Manifestos. In order to woo the voters both sides have made promises that are beyond their current capability to fulfill. For example, they both vow to provide different types of subsidies and welfare but they never explain how they intend to implement that without hurting the country's economic health. I do not know how much money and resources will be needed to materialize these welfare policies, but the bottom line is, both sides have not put forth a concrete strategy to increase national income to cope with the sudden increase in spending resulting from these policies. Just like some supermarkets that offer fire-sales with steep price-cutting, although they may get all the business, they are making huge loses as well. And in the end, they have but to declare bankruptcy and close down their shop. ***************************************** 鄭丁賢‧競選宣言，互別苗頭 繼民聯之後，國陣發表了競選宣言；17個領域，項目應該過百。 從婦女、福利、汽車、房屋……，連報章都要用好幾版面，才勉強呈現一個大概。 老實說，我有點眼花繚亂；這就好像馬來西亞購物節來到，購物中心大減價，每一家商店和攤位，都貼出大平賣、大促銷、買一送一的特惠。 購物者不知如何買起，也不知是否真的如此好康。 政黨的競選宣言，同樣也是美麗承諾很多，未來是一幅幸福美滿的景象。 然而，老實說，如果把宣言之前的"民聯＂和"國陣＂字眼拿走，我大概也分不清楚誰是誰。 我的意思是，承諾很多，但同質性很高，你有的，我也要有，為了爭取顧客……，噢，選民，絕對不能輸陣。 民聯要給弱勢群體津貼，國陣當然是"一馬援助金＂加碼；民聯要取消汽車國產稅，國陣干脆宣佈車價要降30%；民聯要廢除過路費，國陣……唔，這個有點困難，那就減少收費站吧。 其它如提昇婦女地位，加強反貪措施，興建可負擔房屋，改善治安等等，也差不多。 印象中，競選宣言從來未曾那麼大平賣，也沒有那麼盛重其事。 當然，這就好比之前鎮上只有一家購物中心，它賣甚麼，消費人就得買甚麼，賣多少價錢，大家也得掏腰包。 而今購物商場增加了，競爭激烈，彼此搶顧客，就要有各自的大促銷；此外，賣的東西，品質也要有保障。 民聯和國陣的競選宣言，優點是各自提出施政綱領，賣的是政策，雙方必須在政策上一較高下。 我覺得這是大馬政治趨向好的發展。一旦彼此在政策上競爭，就必須爭取更多的群眾，而提出對多數人都有好處的政策，包括社會福利、反貪和清廉，透明和公平、改善交通和治安。 競爭的層面擴大之後，可以把種族和宗教的分別淡化，把重點放在不同族群和不同宗教的共同需要之上。 這也顯示民主發展朝向正面的發展。 不過，民聯和國陣的競選宣言也都有共同的弱點。 為了爭取選票，雙方可能都做出了超過能力和本份的承諾；譬如提供林林總總的福利固然誘入，但是，如何在不傷害國家經濟體質的情況下落實，卻缺乏說明。 我無從計算這些福利政策究竟要消耗多少資源和成本，問題是，雙方的競選宣言都沒有具體說明執政之後，如何增加國家的收入，以應付這些開銷。 這就好像購物中心的跳樓大促銷，拚命削價賣，然而，即使做到生意，結果卻是虧大本，到時一樣要結束營業。 |
| PR & HINDRAF: The Missed Opportunity Posted: 07 Apr 2013 12:31 PM PDT
And because the blueprint is couched in terms of "Indian demands" as MIC has traditionally done so, it is easy for BN to accede to their blueprint. In fact, it is back to the quintessential "Alliance formula" of 1957 except that BN will then have a new associate tagged onto the MIC.
Dr Kua Kia Soong, SUARAM Adviser
I attended one of HINDRAF's dinners a few weeks ago at which they explained their blueprint for the 13GE. After the presentation, I posed the hypothetical question which seemed like quite a likely scenario: "What if the BN embraces your blueprint? What then?"
Waythayamoorthy's reply was clear: "We would rather PR accepts our blueprint after all we have gone through under BN since Independence…" or words to that effect.
Well, now the election has been called and what is the scenario? BN is at the point of embracing HINDRAF's blueprint, whether in toto or in part.
What is politically bewildering is that PR has rebuffed HINDRAF and has not included any proposals from the blueprint in their manifesto or that challenges the institutional racism (in particular, the NEP) that has been part of BN policy since 1971. The rationale was that HINDRAF's blueprint was based on race while their manifesto was based on need of all classes.
After HINDRAF's criticism of the PR manifesto, the Indian leaders in PR gave the lame excuse that they were not in the drafting committee of the PR manifesto. This was hardly convincing, while giving the public a poor image of the way in which policies are made within the PR coalition.
Soon after that, the DAP has seen fit to include several "pro-Indian" proposals in their post facto "Gelang Patah Declaration" and after they had done that, HINDRAF accused the DAP of plagiarising from their blueprint.
The bizarre and total inconsistency of this Gelang Patah Declaration is the fact that it was promulgated as a DAP rather than a PR policy statement! Why wasn't it a PR declaration? Is the declaration only acceptable by the DAP but not PKR and PAS? Why was this not "racist" when the PR had said that the HINDRAF blueprint was racist? Politically, it looked ridiculous while providing more grist for BN fire against the PR coalition.
Whatever happens to this blossoming BN-HINDRAF romance, we will have to see if the union is eventually solemnised. It should not if the HINDRAF leaders have any political nous and honesty regarding UMNO's cynical use of institutional racism through their 56 year reign, which is the root cause of national oppression of the ethnic minorities.
If BN can accept HINDRAF's blueprint, something's wrong with the blueprint
I have pointed out in an earlier article that the main failure in HINDRAF's blueprint is its failure to demand the eradication of Institutional Racism. I have shared several fora with HINDRAF leaders at which we have condemned institutional racism in Malaysia. And despite their efforts in recent years highlighting the entrenchment of racial discrimination in the Constitution, I am surprised that the Hindraf Blueprint does not call for the abolition of the "New Economic Policy".
PR cannot claim to be holier than thou because neither does PR condemn this institutional racism and announce their readiness to abolish the NEP in their manifesto.
Any corrective action in all economic and education policies must be based on need or sector or class and not on race with priority given to indigenous people, marginalised and poor communities. Since their blueprint extols human rights, Hindraf should put forward their demands for all minorities and not just the Indian community. Thus we find a gaping "disconnect" between Hindraf's noble challenge to racial discrimination entrenched in the Constitution and their "Indians Only" proposals in the blueprint.
And because the blueprint is couched in terms of "Indian demands" as MIC has traditionally done so, it is easy for BN to accede to their blueprint. In fact, it is back to the quintessential "Alliance formula" of 1957 except that BN will then have a new associate tagged onto the MIC.
I have also earlier pointed out that to be consistent in their human rights stand, Hindraf should also call for: • the repeal of Amendment (8A) of Article 153 that was passed during the state of emergency in 1971 and was not in the original 1957 federal constitution; • institutionalizing means testing for any access to scholarships or other entitlements; • implementing merit-based recruitment in civil & armed services; • enacting an Equality Act to promote equality and non-discrimination irrespective of race, creed, religion, gender or disability with provision for an Equality & Human Rights Commission; • institutionalising equality and human rights education at all decision-making levels, including state and non-state actors/ institutions; • ratifying the Convention on the Eradication of Racial Discrimination (CERD).
If the HINDRAF blueprint was couched in these human rights terms, do you think BN would accept it? Certainly not because BN has always been a "racial formula", the coalition is the sum of its racialist parts – "UMNO, MCA, MIC and associates".
Is PR suffering from a mental block on the National Question?
But why is PR averse to coopting HINDRAF's blueprint and now losing the opportunity of a historic alliance with HINDRAF? Is it because PR is more purist than BN on the national question? I don't think so because if the PR manifesto can take into account "FELDA settlers", there is no reason why it cannot make considerations for "displaced plantation communities" or "the stateless", etc. that is in the post facto Gelang Patah declaration. The DAP, as usual, are "wise after the event", a euphemism for opportunism!
Or could it be that incorporating HINDRAF would pose a threat to the jostling for seats among the Indian leaders in PR? If this "realpolitik" is indeed one of the reasons for the PR-HINDRAF fallout, it is a let-down of serious proportions for all Malaysians who hope for change in the 13GE.
And having been spurned by the PR manifesto, we could only expect the fury of the HINDRAF backlash against the plagiarism by DAP…
No, in the end it boils down to PR's failure to come to terms with the national question, and that involves taking a stand on the NEP. Isn't it time for change? Isn't it time for real change that will set our nation on a new footing of reconciliation and reconstruction, when we are no longer divided into "races" and progressive policies can be put in place to help the truly needy? Alas, I am afraid the "Ubah" in PR does not go far enough. (And I would ask all the homespun political philosophers to spare me their pearls of wisdom about the "pragmatic" reasons for "not frightening the Malays" in this 13GE!)
Ultimately, a nation that is unequal can never be free or be at peace. HINDRAF has already announced that they will be putting up candidates in several seats. Likewise, PR's ambivalence toward the left, namely PSM, will likely see 3-corner contests in those constituencies that PSM will be contesting. I am afraid this historic non-compromise between PR and HINDRAF in the 13GE will probably go down in Malaysian history as one of the most unfortunate missed opportunities in the overthrow of BN rule…
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan