Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- A national conversation ― or mere ‘electioneering’? ― Clive Kessler
- Can PM Najib stem the tide?
- ‘Competent, dynamic and progressive’ line-up with 5 candidates having degrees from bogus ...
- BN must change to win big
- Steady as she goes in Penang
| A national conversation ― or mere ‘electioneering’? ― Clive Kessler Posted: 16 Apr 2013 03:59 PM PDT
So neither party, it seems, is ready for, or capable of engaging in, a national conversation of the kind that is needed. Even if they cannot now, they should a least be readying themselves at this time to become engaged in such a national conversation in the not too distant future. That is about the best that, in this connection, one can say about the parties. The Malaysian Insider In a recent commentary ("A Very 'American' Election", The Malaysian Insider April 15) I suggested that what this country now desperately needs, perhaps above all else, is a serious 'national conversation' about itself. About what it is and who its people are, about where they are together headed, and how — following what roadmap. What is the journey? What is the itinerary? What is its logic? Who is to mark out and lead the way? Elections and the 'national conversation' Such a conversation needs, of course, to be sustained, thoughtful and civil. It needs, in any country, be to about 'us', meaning 'all of us together'. About 'all of us here', as one national community of shared fate and common destiny. That is, borrowing a Malay-language distinction, the conversation always needs to be about the 'kita' of the situation — here the Malaysian situation and Malaysian identity — not the 'kami' aspect, the exclusionary and oppositional mind-set, which always poses and pits 'us here' against 'you there', often in face-to-face stand-off. Conversations of this kind generally need to be continuing, a permanent component of national life. What is needed is an unceasing, unfolding and ideally an advancing engagement with a nation's key ideas, a review of its key experiences, an evaluation and reconsideration of its sustaining historical 'narratives' and 'myths'. This engagement takes a number of forms. It is to be found in conversation among citizens, both direct and via their 'new media' gadgetry extensions. In an enlightened and openly accommodating press. In quality television documentaries and debates as well as routine current affairs programming. And in the pages (hard copy or virtual) of high quality weekly and monthly magazines of diverse opinion, political analysis and cultural commentary. In serious scholarly treatises, too, and how they are reviewed, and their implications explained, in the popular press. Conversations of this kind, when they proceed and succeed (as they do in many countries), flow ceaselessly. But they often find focus and gain prominence at certain times, in certain contexts and situations — most notably at the time of national elections. When is there ever a better time? When better than during the 'high political season', as election day approaches and the nation is asked and required to consider its direction and fate seriously? It is then, more than at any other time, that the nation must refresh and renew and also project forward, beyond previously accepted and conventionally received understandings, its own unfolding sense of who it is. That, most fundamentally, is what a nation's citizens are asked to do as they prepare themselves to head to the polling centres to collect and then mark their ballot papers. So when better than at election time to address these questions: to ask 'who are we here?' — and what that 'we' is, on what is it based and how it is to be sustained. How is that key idea, and by whom are we, to be carried forward over the long haul, and over the next political 'term of office', which is the immediate political future? This is what people must consider at election time. Elections serve as the bridge linking present and the immediate future to that longer-term agenda and destiny. Theory and practice. Well, that is the theory anyway. And in practice what happens? In some cases, in the more assured democratic polities and open political cultures, something like this occurs. Reality in those countries approaches and at times even approximates this ideal, even the ideal is never perfectly attained. Here my purpose is not to discuss those political systems or to provide any comparative ranking of which nations arguably comply, and to what degree, with this ideal. My concern is with Malaysia, here, now. With Malaysia today, just ahead of nomination day for GE13 and a little more than two weeks away from the great national festivity that long ago — on seeing how people flocked to the polls in Kelantan in May 1969, and with what enthusiasm and determination and evident pride they did so — I dubbed the third great 'hari raya', Hari Raya Mengundi. Malaysia, I believe, is now really in need that kind of national conversation. That is precisely what these final two weeks of 'full-on' campaigning before election day ought to be. But I do not think that it is going to happen. Why not? Because I fear that the two major parties, or contending power 'blocs' — each in its own way — are unready and unprepared for, or simply incapable of engaging in, any such dialogue or national conversation. I shall be delighted to be proven wrong here. That is a challenge that may be put to both sides, and needs to be. In Malaysia today It seems clear that that challenge is being avoided, by both sides. i. Umno/BN On the side of the long-serving and now outgoing government that is seeking re-election, the entire BR1M strategy, and all that goes with it, serves an important further purpose, I suggested in my previous commentary, beyond its own specific and substantive content. The 'BR1M strategy' is a very convenient way of avoiding these key questions that an open and inclusive national conversation about Malaysian identity and purpose should address. Just consider, if Umno/BN, and especially its guiding elements within Umno, had to provide a straight and direct answer to the question: 'can you affirm now your commitment to the idea of Malaysia as a nation belonging equally to all its citizens?' Challenged in this way to declare how they see and understand the nation, its leaders would find themselves in a difficult position deciding what to say. In a position that they would rather not be in, in short. Here some rescue is now in sight. The 'BR1M barrage' provides, if not a smokescreen or facade then a very useful diversion or distraction, not unlike the magician's trick of 'misdirecting' the audience's attention away from the hand that is doing the work to another hand that is demanding attention. In that way the preferred appearance or illusion is achieved. What is awkward or inconvenient may be shunted aside, hidden from attention in full public view. But if asked or challenged — perhaps by the opposition, or else by some body of serious scholars concerned with national questions — whether or not Umno/BN, and especially Umno itself, stands by the idea of Malaysia as a nation that is equally the possession and birthright, unconditionally, of all its citizens, how would they answer? They would have to answer, if they were being honest, 'no, we do not, that is not our position.' But if they wished to avoid unpleasantness, they might simply affirm their commitment to that idea, saying 'yes, we do — perhaps not now, not yet, but in the long run. But, give us credit where credit is due, we have been trying, we have been working in that direction for 58 years and more.' In which case its challengers might come back and say, "Well, for more than half a century's work, you haven't got very far, have you! 'If that is the best you can do, and why would you not have been doing your best all these many years, why have you not done better?' To which the Umno spokesmen might respond, 'Well, it may not be as far as many of us might have liked to have reached on this journey, but it is a tough road. And what you now see, we can assure you from our own experience, is the best you are ever going to get. It is the best that is realistically attainable. That we know.' They might even want to add, 'It's the best that we are ever likely to get, starting from what we have been given by history. So you, and we all, had better learn to like it. Don't pine for anything more. There can be nothing better. This is Malaysia, like it or leave it!' It is not a very convincing or effective, nor for those who would make it a comfortable, line of argument. So, instead, the Umno leaders might exercise the option of direct truthfulness, or blunt honesty. They might respond by saying, 'A nation equally of all of its citizens? Not really. Umno, to be realistic, is a party that is still, within this socially and culturally complex nation of ours, trying to achieve, even belatedly, as much of the pre-independence agenda of an earlier exclusivist Malay nationalism as can — over time, with patience and with as much political skill as we can muster — be accomplished. 'So what we now stand for is, if not "full-on" and provocative "Ketuanan Melayu", then at least some sort of "Perkasa-lite"'. But this is clearly not what Umno leaders would want to say, not now on the eve of an election where non-Malay sentiments must not be brusquely offended and gratuitously alienated. That is not what Umno leaders want to say out loud. Not yet, anyway. So it would be rather difficult for them to involve themselves in a pre-election 'national conversation' on this subject. To do so even on the basis of an affirmed commitment to the idea of this country as 'Tanah Melayu' — a land inescapably and primarily identified in perpetuity with just one component, the historically longest settled component, of the national population — would not be easy politically. Not at all. Yet that seems to be the basic, minimal position of those Umno supporters who do not embrace the entire Perkasa agenda and outlook. ii. Pakatan Rakyat And what, for their part, about the Pakatan Rayat opposition? How might they proceed? They might well try to say 'Yes, we do affirm and uphold the idea of Malaysia as a nation that is equally the possession and birthright, unconditionally, of all its citizens. We think that all three of our major constituent parties can agree to that. They were ready to do so the last time we checked.' To which the Umno leaders might respond, 'Well, you haven't got very far with it, have you? You haven't been able, for example, to bring yourselves to say so yet unequivocally. To give it prominence by making it the central platform of your manifesto and campaign.' To which the PKR spokesmen might respond, "Well, we are working on it. Not like you for 55 years and more. We are a much younger party. But we are working on it. 'We have no easy answers. We are exploring the question — painstakingly and at times even painfully — not out there in public where everybody can see, but amongst ourselves in our party's leadership councils. We are still working on resolving these questions, finding some workable answers, in the first instance as part of our own internal organizational understandings and basic coalition formula. 'But, unlike you, at least we are committed to the idea in principle,' they might aver. But that, too, is hardly a convincing answer, not one that will persuade the electorate and generate a wave of popular support over the next two weeks.
|
| Posted: 16 Apr 2013 12:04 PM PDT
In taking the risk of upsetting entrenched interests within BN parties only as D-Day approaches on May 5, Prime Minister Najib exposes how difficult and precarious his situation had always been. MOST analysts think the Malaysian general elections will be close. Although Prime Minister Najib Razak is expected to retain a slight edge over his nemesis, opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, the social tide, even if significantly weaker, is still with the latter. How then to find the decisive drop of water that will stem the tide for good? Ever since he replaced Mr Abdullah Badawi as prime minister in April 2009, Mr Najib has seen it as his job to win back the rivers of voters who had turned against his Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition. But despite the long series of measures he undertook to transform the country's slacking economic structure and low quality of governance, what seemed to happen was that only his personal popularity grew while the reputation of his party and his coalition slid further. When institutional changes failed to give the dramatic upswing in support he sought, and legislative reforms were brushed aside as window dressing, he tried to win popularity for his administration by handing out money through an impressive array of channels. To be sure, no one really knows how all these may influence voter affections, but the fact that the effect has not been obvious is reason enough for him to worry. Prime Minister Najib delayed dissolving parliament for as long as he could, hoping for an inspired moment to strike. But in waiting too long, he lost the advantage he had of choosing a date that suited him best and that would catch the opposition napping. However, by keeping the opposition guessing, he encouraged cracks to show in its ranks. This was an unexpected gain. But now the die is cast. Parliament is dissolved, the election date has been set, and Nomination Day is approaching. And ahead of that day, Prime Minister Najib decided to announce his lists of candidates for both the state elections and for parliamentary seats. Here is the most promising place where Prime Minister Najib can find the final drop he needs to be sure that he will win, and win enough to avert any challenge from within his own party after the national elections. Rumours had been brewing for months that he would favour new young faces over tried and tired ones. These rumours turned out to be true. Many of those in the old days who would have been undisputed choices were dropped. In their place, new names appear. But therein lies a big problem that is quite beyond the prime minister's ability to solve. |
| ‘Competent, dynamic and progressive’ line-up with 5 candidates having degrees from bogus ... Posted: 16 Apr 2013 11:47 AM PDT
Candidates who feel as if they had to 'buy' a degree, either at the undergraduate, masters or postgraduate levels, inevitably call their own integrity into question. If these candidates are willing to dupe voters about their academic qualifications, which is an important part of any person's life, what other areas of life would these candidates be willing to lie about? Dr. Ong Kian Ming The BN candidates for Selangor were revealed yesterday with great fanfare. The lineup is crucial for the most economically developed state in Malaysia and also the state which Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, as state chairman and elections director, is under great pressure to wrest back from Pakatan Rakyat. Najib was quoted as saying that "This is the lineup that will not only see us win the state, but also to form a strong government."[1] Mohd Zin Mohamed, BN Selangor coordinator was quoted as saying that "Our candidates are highly competent, dynamic and progressive. They are qualified individuals from various backgrounds who can take the state to greater heights in tandem with the Economic Transformation Program (ETP)."[2] Given these superlatives which were being used to describe the BN Selangor lineup, it is highly disappointing that 5 of the BN candidates, two at the parliamentary level and three at the state level, listed academic qualifications from institutions that can be best described as being 'degree mills' – in other words, fake universities and colleges which issue bogus academic degrees for a payment.[3] The most shocking revelation is the listed qualification of the BN candidate for P103 Puchong – A. Kohilan Pillay A/L G Appu – who received an M.SC in Commercial and Industrial Economy (sic) from the Pacific Western University in the United States. This 'university' was found to be a degree mill, lawsuits were taken up against it and it was subsequently shut down.[4] What is even more shocking is that the candidate is Malaysia's (caretaker) Deputy Foreign Minister! It is a disgrace to the country if indeed our Deputy Foreign Minister is a leader who has 'bought' a degree from a degree mill in order to bolster his own credentials. P103 PUCHONG A. KOHILAN PILLAY A/L G APPU46 TAHUN (670724106491)M.SC COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ECONOMY, PACIFIC WESTERN UNIVERSITY, AS.PENGERUSI PARTI GERAKAN RAKYAT MALAYSIA SELANGORTIMBALAN MENTERI LUAR NEGARA
+0193503806 The second most shocking revelation is the listed qualification of the BN candidate for P110 Klang, Teh Kim Poo, who is also the current chairman of the Port Klang Authority (PKA). Teh is listed as having obtained a PhD in Business Administration from the New Port University in the United States. This is the same university which the caretaker Menteri Besar of Perlis, Md Isa Sabu, obtained his PhD from.[5] My colleague in the DAP, National Publicity Secretary, Tony Pua had blogged about New Port University being a dubious university way back in 2006.[6] Even The Star newspaper reported this university, back in 2009, as a degree mill.[7] What is disconcerting is the fact that Teh's role as PKA Chairman requires him to exercise transparency especially in dealing with the aftermath of the PKFZ scandal, which the PKA and the government of Malaysia is still paying for. P110 KLANG TEH KIM POO62 TAHUN (510826106099)PHD BUSINESS ADMIN, UNIVERSITY NEW PORT, ASPENYELARAS PARLIMEN KLANGAHLI PERNIAGAAN+60122926352 Three other state candidates have listed qualifications from well-known degree mills. BN candidate for N33 Taman Medan, Ab Wahab Bin Ibrahim, is listed as having a PhD in Public Service from the infamous Irish International University. The BBC reported this university as a bogus university as a result of a sting operation in 2008.[8] N33 TAMAN MEDAN AB WAHAB BIN IBRAHIM61 TAHUN (511017015669)PHD. PERKHIDMATAN AWAM, IRISH INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITYPENGERUSI BIRO AGAMA UMNO BAHAGIANLEMBAGA PENGARAH DAN PENGERUSI JAWATANKUASA AUDIT TANJUNG OFF SHORE+60193877508 BN candidate for N47 Pandamaran, Ching Eu Boon, is listed as having a PhD in Network Marketing from the St George University International which has also been reported to be a degree mill.[9] N47 PANDAMARAN CHING EU BOON46 TAHUN (670716105135)PHD NETWORK MARKETING, ST GEORGE UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL, UKKETUA PPMCA BAHAGIAN KLANGAHLI PERNIAGAAN+60193109897 BN candidate for N25 Kajang, Lee Ban Seng, is listed as having received a degree from the Rutherford University (also known as the Senior University International and Stratford International University) which also has been reported as a degree mill.[10] N25 KAJANG LEE BAN SENG43 TAHUN (700228105595)IJAZAH PENGURUSAN PERNIAGAAN, UNIVERSITI RUTHERFORD, ASPENGERUSI MCA BHG. HULU LANGATPENGARAH URUSAN JLF HOLDING SDN. BHD.+60193310439 There is nothing in our election laws and regulations which state that a candidate must have a degree as a requirement for running for public office. Truthfully speaking, having academic qualifications, even at the postgraduate level, from prestigious universities all over the world do not automatically make one person a better candidate than someone without a degree. However, candidates who feel as if they had to 'buy' a degree, either at the undergraduate, masters or postgraduate levels, inevitably call their own integrity into question. If these candidates are willing to dupe voters about their academic qualifications, which is an important part of any person's life, what other areas of life would these candidates be willing to lie about including in areas of public interest such as the management of public funds and the proper and responsible use of public resources? I call upon these 5 BN Selangor candidates to explain and to refute the fact that all of them have listed qualifications from reported degree mills. If they cannot properly explain to the voters, I urge them to withdraw themselves from contesting in the 13th General Election. Dr. Ong Kian Ming
|
| Posted: 16 Apr 2013 11:43 AM PDT
(FMT) - BN should have gone through with a fine toothcomb its list of candidates announced yesterday to ensure that only winnable candidates were chosen. Only by bringing about radical and real changes can BN stand a good chance of retaining power. While there are several reasons why Pakatan Rakyat was able to make gains in the 12th general election, it is now vital for Barisan Nasional to take drastic steps if it harbours any hope of wanting to win the 13th general election (GE13) by a big margin. BN should not in any way underestimate the threat that Pakatan poses in the latter's quest to capture Putrajaya. In the last general election, the BN machinery was not up to the mark and lost ground to Pakatan in a political tsunami that dented BN's invincibility. BN needs to take a good hard look at what happened in the last general election. It needs to study carefully what went wrong and it needs to be brave and bold to make changes if it wants to win the GE13. The probability of Pakatan winning the GE13 is still considered real and BN must pull up its socks to make vital changes. Making these changes quickly will probably help it to garner more votes. But the changes will come at a cost. It is up to the BN leadership to decide whether it wants to make these changes. If BN thinks it need not change because it has been governing the country for the last 55 years without much trouble, then it might be courting danger. The landslide general election victories in the past had lulled BN into a state of complacency. By letting down its guard, Pakatan was able to make political gains when the 12th general election arrived. Social injustices The tactic that Pakatan used and is still using in its war against BN is to portray the ruling coalition as a party of the elite, serving the cause of Umno while the majority of Malaysians are left out of progress and development. This perception that people have of BN has been exploited by Pakatan to great effect. The opposition was able to harp on the social injustices allegedly perpetrated by BN and in the process, whipped up massive public support. BN and all its component parties must now start to reach out to the ordinary Malaysians by promising to spread out the wealth of the nation as equitably as possible. Umno must not be seen as the only beneficiary of economic growth, progress and development. By reaching out to the common folk, by accommodating Malaysians of all walks of life, BN will undoubtedly win greater favour and support from the electorate. While Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has been working hard to change the perception people have of BN, it must not been seen as a mere election gimmick. BN must make it a long-term policy to ensure as many Malaysians as possible enjoy the fruit of development. For this reason, BN's current drive to bolster its image among the people must not be seen by the rakyat as a ruse to secure votes, but as a long-term commitment to ensure equitable distribution of wealth. A root cause of BN's poor showing in the last general election was that it had many candidates who were a political liability to the coalition. Candidates for political office from BN must inspire confidence and trust in order to govern the country. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/04/17/bn-must-change-to-win-big/ |
| Posted: 16 Apr 2013 11:37 AM PDT
It is important to note that compared with the voters of other states, Penangites have been the most adventurous in terms of changing their elected representatives. Goh Ban Lee, The Sun Daily THE general election is the hottest topic these days in offices, markets, even at funerals. The general prevailing feeling is that there is not going to be a drastic change. The Pakatan Rakyat (PR) continues to be the government after the election. The composition of the members of parliament from Penang is not likely to change drastically. But it cannot be taken for granted that this will be come May 5. Election campaigns have not been formally launched yet. At the start of the 2008 election campaign, there was no expectation of a change of the Penang state government until Anwar made his first speech at the Han Chiang College a few days before the election. Besides, it is important to note that compared with the voters of other states, Penangites have been the most adventurous in terms of changing their elected representatives. In December 1957, voters of George Town changed the government in the George Town City Council from the Alliance to the Labour Party. In 1969, they voted for Gerakan under the leadership of Tun Lim Chong Eu and rejected the Alliance led by Tan Sri Wong Pow Nee. It was not only a change of the state government; it was a humiliating defeat for the Alliance when it won only four seats out of 24 contested. Gerakan won 16 seats whereas Parti Rakyat Malaysia won one and DAP three. In 2008, Penangites humiliated both Gerakan and MCA by rejecting all their candidates. Even in their wildest dreams, the DAP leaders could not have expected to win all the 19 seats contested. It may be useful to recall that in the 2004 general election, the DAP won only one state seat while PAS won another. Gerakan won all 13 seats it contested while the MCA lost only one seat out of 10 contested and Umno won 14 out of 15 seats contested. Going back even further, it is interesting to note that the MCA won all the state seats in the 1995 and 1999 elections after losing all its seats in 1990. The voters in Padang Kota even rejected Chong Eu in 1990 and voted for Lim Kit Siang. Fifteen days can be a very long time during election campaigns. The PR government under Lim Guan Eng seems to be on a roll. Even his proposal to build the tunnel from Butterworth to Penang Island is not likely to have drastic negative effects on the voting pattern although it is clearly opposed by many non-governmental organisations. It is an unnecessary agenda in this election campaign. Even if it materialises, it will not be built in the next decade or so. So far, the accusation of negligence of affordable housing on the part of PR state government has not posed a threat to the popularity of Guan Eng and the PR state government. Affordable housing is certainly an important agenda. It has been an important issue for the last three years or so when the price of double-storey terrace houses began to climb from about RM500,000 to above RM650,000. Today, the selling price is above RM900,000. It was clear that houses built to cater to the needs and affordability of the middle income group have become out of reach, unless one has parents who are willing to cut deeply into their retirement savings. There is no doubt that Penang, especially George Town and Bayan Lepas, is having serious traffic jams. The building of new roads only temporarily eases the problems. The long-term solution is an efficient public transport system. Although mass rapid transit or monorail is good suggestion, it will take time and huge amounts of money. For the time being, a good public bus system is adequate. But Rapid Penang is not under the control of the state government, but the federal government. It is surprising that the PR has not used this topic to urge the voters to support its march to Putrajaya. Traffic jams can be mitigated if the police and municipal councils enforce the law strictly. There is little doubt that more issues will be brought up to damage the popularity of PR, especially Guan Eng. But it is clear that the demonstrations in Komtar after Friday prayers only spur ordinary Penangites of all races to support him more. Indeed, the tokong image of Guan Eng, thanks to Deputy Chief Minister Datuk Mansor Othman, is not likely to damage his or the PR government's image. People expect their leaders to be a bit dictatorial. What they do not like is quarrelsome responses. What is worrisome in Penang is the absence of official development plans to show clearly the direction and steps that will be taken to ensure that the state remains competitive, prosperous and sustainable. Existing official development plans are obsolete. Some draft plans have not been officially adopted and are probably dated. The Penang Paradigm is still in its rudimentary stage. Everyone wants a good life. How to achieve this is still obscure. There is certainly a good agenda for the parties to state clearly their views and solutions. Childish and racist accusations are not going to win votes. Datuk Dr Goh Ban Lee is a columnist for theSun.
|
| 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