Opposition stages walkout
The Star (1/7/08): In A day of high drama in Parliament, the Opposition staged a walkout after the House allowed a ministerial statement by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
The statement – which was to explain the Government’s social restructuring policies under the Mid-Term Review (MTR) report of the Ninth Malaysia Plan – was not listed in the Order Paper and took many MPs by surprise when Najib stood up at the end of the question and answer session.
Mass exit: Opposition Leader Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Ismail leading Opposition MPs as they walk out of the Dewan Rakyat yesterday.
The statement provoked a chain reaction from the block as one Opposition MP after another stood up on Point of Order objecting to it.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had last Thursday tabled a motion on the MTR report.
Before Najib had gone beyond reading a few words of the statement, Lim Kit Siang (DAP – Ipoh Timor) stopped him, demanding to know if he was participating in the debate or if he was delivering a ministerial statement.
When Najib said that he was delivering a statement, Lim commented that this was very “unusual” as any explanation should have been given by Abdullah himself during the tabling.
However, despite Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia saying that the House was allowing the statement under Standing Order 14 (1), Mahfuz Omar (PAS – Pokok Sena) stood up to contend that if that was so, then Abdullah had failed in “adequately explaining the government’s policies during the tabling earlier”.
“Any such explanation should have been done then. Why are you taking up our debate time?” he demanded, to which Pandikar Amin replied that Mahfuz could bring up this same concern during his debate on the motion later.
The Speaker clamped down on further protests by Lim, adding that under Standing Order 99, his decision was absolute.
“Standing Order 99 should not be used as a justification for every decision by the Chair. If that is so, what’s the point of the Standing Orders?” Lim said.
When Lim insisted on pressing this further, Pandikar Amin told him to put in a request with the Chair for a motion if he was unhappy about his decision.
The Speaker continued to ask Lim to put in a notice for such a motion despite the party stalwart complaining that it was “meaningless to do so”.
“I have put in several notices but none ever came up,” Lim said, adding that Najib’s statement should be considered as a speech to second Abdullah’s motion and that it was abusing Standing Order 14.
After Salahuddin Ayub (PAS – Kubang Kerian), Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad (PAS – Kuala Selangor), Tian Chua (PKR – Batu) and Mahfuz had stood up in succession amidst grumbling from the backbenchers to get on with the statement, Pandikar Amin said his only agenda was to “protect the Chair.”
“So, please help me to protect it. What’s wrong with allowing the statement if it’s for the interest of the rakyat?
“If Yang Berhormat is dissatisfied or feels this is wrong, you can hit out all you want during debate,” he said.
At one point, when Karpal Singh (DAP – Bukit Gelugor) raised the Standing Order, Pandikar Amin said he would no longer entertain any more arguments after hearing from the former as “he is a famous lawyer”.
To Karpal Singh asking if Abdullah had “made a mistake” in his tabling earlier as a ministerial statement was only allowed in England for this purpose, the Speaker said the Malaysian Parliament had its own House rules.
“Under the Standing Orders, Yang Berhormat, one has to leave the Dewan quietly,” he said as a parting shot as the Opposition bloc stood up en masse to walk out of the proceedings.
In the lobby, Lim said it was unparliamentary and unacceptable of the Speaker to allow Najib to explain further on the Ninth Malaysia Plan.
“This proves that there is an internal problem within Umno, despite the fact that both Najib and Abdullah have been said to be on good terms.
“We will bring up a substantive motion to scrutinise the Speaker’s decision on this,” he said.
Lim added that such an incident had never taken place in the House before, and was a sign of disrespect to the laws of Parliament.
Tian Chua said the Speaker had broken the Parliament convention just to accommodate the “differences” between Najib and the Prime Minister.
“Furthermore, the Speaker refused to explain his decision. This could set an inappropriate precedent,” he said.
The statement – which was to explain the Government’s social restructuring policies under the Mid-Term Review (MTR) report of the Ninth Malaysia Plan – was not listed in the Order Paper and took many MPs by surprise when Najib stood up at the end of the question and answer session.
Mass exit: Opposition Leader Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Ismail leading Opposition MPs as they walk out of the Dewan Rakyat yesterday.
The statement provoked a chain reaction from the block as one Opposition MP after another stood up on Point of Order objecting to it.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had last Thursday tabled a motion on the MTR report.
Before Najib had gone beyond reading a few words of the statement, Lim Kit Siang (DAP – Ipoh Timor) stopped him, demanding to know if he was participating in the debate or if he was delivering a ministerial statement.
When Najib said that he was delivering a statement, Lim commented that this was very “unusual” as any explanation should have been given by Abdullah himself during the tabling.
However, despite Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia saying that the House was allowing the statement under Standing Order 14 (1), Mahfuz Omar (PAS – Pokok Sena) stood up to contend that if that was so, then Abdullah had failed in “adequately explaining the government’s policies during the tabling earlier”.
“Any such explanation should have been done then. Why are you taking up our debate time?” he demanded, to which Pandikar Amin replied that Mahfuz could bring up this same concern during his debate on the motion later.
The Speaker clamped down on further protests by Lim, adding that under Standing Order 99, his decision was absolute.
“Standing Order 99 should not be used as a justification for every decision by the Chair. If that is so, what’s the point of the Standing Orders?” Lim said.
When Lim insisted on pressing this further, Pandikar Amin told him to put in a request with the Chair for a motion if he was unhappy about his decision.
The Speaker continued to ask Lim to put in a notice for such a motion despite the party stalwart complaining that it was “meaningless to do so”.
“I have put in several notices but none ever came up,” Lim said, adding that Najib’s statement should be considered as a speech to second Abdullah’s motion and that it was abusing Standing Order 14.
After Salahuddin Ayub (PAS – Kubang Kerian), Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad (PAS – Kuala Selangor), Tian Chua (PKR – Batu) and Mahfuz had stood up in succession amidst grumbling from the backbenchers to get on with the statement, Pandikar Amin said his only agenda was to “protect the Chair.”
“So, please help me to protect it. What’s wrong with allowing the statement if it’s for the interest of the rakyat?
“If Yang Berhormat is dissatisfied or feels this is wrong, you can hit out all you want during debate,” he said.
At one point, when Karpal Singh (DAP – Bukit Gelugor) raised the Standing Order, Pandikar Amin said he would no longer entertain any more arguments after hearing from the former as “he is a famous lawyer”.
To Karpal Singh asking if Abdullah had “made a mistake” in his tabling earlier as a ministerial statement was only allowed in England for this purpose, the Speaker said the Malaysian Parliament had its own House rules.
“Under the Standing Orders, Yang Berhormat, one has to leave the Dewan quietly,” he said as a parting shot as the Opposition bloc stood up en masse to walk out of the proceedings.
In the lobby, Lim said it was unparliamentary and unacceptable of the Speaker to allow Najib to explain further on the Ninth Malaysia Plan.
“This proves that there is an internal problem within Umno, despite the fact that both Najib and Abdullah have been said to be on good terms.
“We will bring up a substantive motion to scrutinise the Speaker’s decision on this,” he said.
Lim added that such an incident had never taken place in the House before, and was a sign of disrespect to the laws of Parliament.
Tian Chua said the Speaker had broken the Parliament convention just to accommodate the “differences” between Najib and the Prime Minister.
“Furthermore, the Speaker refused to explain his decision. This could set an inappropriate precedent,” he said.
0 comments:
Post a Comment