Lack of proper drainage causing floods, hardship

NST (11/7/08): As a first-time member of parliament, every day is a learning process for me as I try to seek solutions to the many problems faced by my constituents in Kuala Selangor.

I also learnt a lot while raising suggestions and proposing changes on national issues in the Dewan Rakyat.

One of the main issues in my constituency is the need for proper infrastructure. There is poor drainage that guarantees flooding in various parts of Kuala Selangor. This causes great hardship for my constituents.

I have a special squad of 65 volunteers who help my constituents affected by the floods. I'm very grateful for their assistance and hard work.

There are also some parts in Kuala Selangor where the roads are not very well lit and are full of potholes. This has caused many fatal accidents.

I hope to resolve this problem soon with help from the relevant agencies and authorities.

I'm also concerned about the youth in my constituency, many of whom are unemployed.

I have initiated some training and motivational activities for them. I have also encouraged them to get involved in small businesses. So far the response has been very encouraging.

In the next few years, I would like to see progress in Kuala Selangor in terms of economic development and quality of life of my constituents.

I believe in helping my constituents, no matter what their religion, race or political beliefs. I do not believe in discrimination, that is not what I stand for.

My involvement in politics is because I genuinely want to make the nation a better place for everyone. (Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad)

MAS cutting cost to remain afloat, says Lajim

Bernama (10/7/08): Malaysia Airlines (MAS) can still afford to operate despite the surging global fuel price as the national carrier had embarked on cost-cutting measures to tide over with rising operational expenses, the Dewan Rakyat was told Thursday.

Deputy Transport Minister Datuk Lajim Ukin said MAS had reduced flight frequency to non-profitable sectors such as from Kota Kinabalu to Tawau from six to four flights a day.

He was replying to a supplementary question from Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) on MAS' survival in the face of skyrocketing fuel prices.

To the original question from Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan (BN-Kota Belud) on the price war between MAS and AirAsia, Lajim said the price competition between the two airlines was healthy as it benefited passengers.

He said passengers had many options now to decide on their choice of travel.

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.

How very ‘British’ of the Opposition MPs to walk out on Najib

NST (30/6/08): First Gobind Singh Deo (DAP-Puchong) was ordered out of the House by the House Speaker for stridently quibbling over relevancy to tenuously tie Anwar Ibrahim with a supplementary question about housing, then his tribe of Oppositionists, led by his mentors Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timor) and his father Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor), stage crafted a wholesale walkout of DAP, PKR and Pas MPs to discompose the House over a procedural feud whether the Datuk Seri Najib Razak can speak or not.

While Gobind was fuming outside the House for his unceremonious ejection, the full complement of the Opposition MPs decided to join him in equal fulmination – perhaps to get back at House and Barisan Nasional for red-carding Gobind – by protesting the Speaker’s decision to permit the Deputy Prime Minister to make a ministerial statement on the Mid-Term Review of the 9th Malaysia Plan tabled by the Prime Minister on June 26.

So what’s the big beef about such a mundane procedure? It would seem that it had something to do with Malaysia’s former colonial master’s ways and means on House conduct and propriety. At best, the walkout was could be pictured as niggardly pedantic and at worst, it bordered on boorish formalism.

Although Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia invoked Standing Order 14 (1) (i) greenlighting Najib to table his ministerial statement, the Opposition MPs wasn’t buying into it, resolutely contending that any correction or addition should be brought forth by the PM. Najib counterargued that he was tabling the ministerial statement because he seconded the tabling of the Mid-Term Review.

It would seem the procedure approved by the Speaker had a contentious consequence – it defiled Westminster and Commonwealth conventions, making Najib’s ministerial statement improper. The whole walkout was for that reasoning?

Kit and Karpal were quick and attentive to alert the Speaker that Najib’s initiative was “hostile” to British propriety. In good form, Kit produced an overblown criticism of the Speaker’s approval – that it tantamount to “reckless disregard of parliamentary practices, procedures and rules.” Najib, he countered, was allowed to misuse the Standing Order.

"He should have made all the remarks he wanted to when he was seconding the Mid-Term Review. Not now. It should have been done immediately. He is trying to have a second bit at the cherry. This is a gross abuse of parliamentary standing orders," Kit charged. “It sets a most dangerous precedent that the government front-benchers can abuse the standing orders at their whim and fancy. It is being perverted to accommodate Najib.”

Kit went on to contend that the proper subject for ministerial statement would be the Government’s position on Anwar Ibrahim, who at the time of this writing, had left the Turkish Embassy after holing up overnight as a precaution against death threat.

The Speaker, unperturbedly, invoked Standing Orders 43 and 99 to make his decision final, challenging dissatisfied MPs to table motions to contest it. In his blog, Kit indicated that substantive motions will be submitted to review the Speaker’s alleged misuse of Standing Orders and also to steer attention to Gobind’s ejection.

Soon after, Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena) launched a leading question to Pandikar Amin, asking the Speaker if he was admitting that the PM had erred when he tabled the MTR on Thursday. "Are you saying that the PM's speech was incomplete?" he said but Pandikar Amin refused to take the bait of Mahfuz’s fishing expedition.

But from there on, all of Pandikar Amin’s efforts to instruct Najib to start addressing the House fell into a vortex of Opposition whirlpool where at one stage, Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad (Pas-Kuala Selangor) told the Speaker he must offer a good reason for allowing Najib floor time. "You have not told us a reason for allowing this. Give us one good reason," beseeched Dr Dzulkifli.

Pandikar Amin ignored the Opposition’s escalating entreaty and still repeated his call that Najib proceed, only for Karpal to interfere as he quoted the British House of Commons convention and practice that if anyone should be allowed to make a ministerial statement, it should be the PM. "That is the House of Commons practise. Should not the Prime Minister be making the statement?" Karpal asked.

It was probably exasperating for Pandikar Amin to sound like a broken vinyl record but he duly repeated his earlier statement that he was using his discretion to allow Najib floor time. "I look at the conventions in Commonwealth countries when I make my decisions. Not just one country. I have to think of everyone's interest," he sighed.

Sensing finally that the Speaker, putting his authoritative weight on the issue, was not going to budge, the Opposition finally relented and waited for the Speaker to instruct Najib to speak. However, when Najib rose to begin his address, Kit, like the great tribal chief that he is, signalled his braves to walk out of the House, muttering that it was pointless to stay inside the House.

Predictably, the BN backbenchers reacted to the affront with loud jeers but the Pakatan Rakyat MPs refuse to be drawn into a reaction and walked out silently, smiling and grinning at the contrived procedural fuss they had triggered.

Opposition MPs walk out of Parliament

The Sun (30/6/08): Opposition MPs staged a walk-out after a 30-minute argument over the Speaker's decision to allow Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak make a "ministerial speech" to elaborate on the 9th Malaysia Plan (9MP) mid-term review (MTR).

At the start of debate time in Parliament today, the House was told that the government was making a statement and Najib stood up and said he wanted to elaborate on the motion tabled by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on Thursday (June 26), specifically on the government's strategy to restructure the society.

Before he could proceed, Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) asked whether Najib was taking part in the debate or making a statement as it is "unusual" for such a statement to be made.

Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia then explained Najib was only making "an additional explanation to the facts made in the speech of the Prime Minister" and it was not against parliament order.

Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena) then asked does this mean Abdullah was not fully prepared when delivering his speech, saying: "This means the Prime Minister was not able to give a clear explanation. He should be prepared with his facts and everything. Why take from our time to debate now?"

Pandikar Amin said it was not for the MPs to debate whether Abdullah was prepared or not but for him to decide whether Najib's speech violates the Standing Order or not and he had decided it was not.

Lim stood up again saying: "This is unusual and unparliamentary. He (Najib) had missed the opportunity to argue his points when seconding the Prime Minister’s speech, so now he wants to compensate for it."

Pandikar Amin disagreed and quoted a point in the order which says Speaker’s decision is final but Lim quickly said the Speaker should not simply use the order to justify all his decisions because parliamentary practices must also be observed.

The Speaker said if Lim was not satisfied with his decision he can bring the matter up as a motion but Lim said it would be meaningless if the Speaker later decides not to accept the motion to be debated.

The exchange continued with Pandikar Amin insisting that his decision is final and saying Lim can bring a motion if he is not satisfied with the latter asking for a guarantee that his motion would be accepted by the House later.

Salahuddin Ayub (PAS-Kubang Kerian), Tian Chua (PKR-Batu) and Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) also stood up a few times to support of Lim.

Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) then raised a point of order, saying according to the House of Common Practice, a ministerial statement can only be made to correct an error in a statement made in the House.

"So, where was the error in the Prime Minister’s speech. He should clarify it, not another minister," he added.

Pandikar Amin disagreed with him, saying it was a matter of interpretation and he also had studied all relevant parliament laws and according to his interpretation, the ministerial statement by Najib was proper and according to order.

When Karpal and Lim tried to argue further, the Speaker started on his lecture, saying: "I shall not jeopardise the authority given to this chair. I really wish to create a world-class parliament here. Please listen to the Speaker.

"In the House of Common, as soon as the Speaker raised from his seat, everyone kept quiet. But here, if I were to interject too much, I will be criticised. I do my job to my utmost. Please."

He then asked Najib to continue but Lim was still not satisfied and tried to interrupt the speech but when it was not entertained by the Speaker and Najib, he said he wanted to leave the House and all other opposition MPs followed suit.

Najib then continued with his speech, saying: "Thank you. It is much easier without the Opposition in the House."

In the lobby, Lim said all Pakatan Rakyat (PR) MPs had walked out because what happened did not adhere to the Standing Order.

"This is unacceptable, unparliamentary and we will table a substantive motion to re-study the decision of the Speaker and also the decision to suspend Gobind Singh (DAP-Puchong) for two days," he said.

Iskandar Malaysia draws RM33b investment

The Edge Daily (26/6/08): The Iskandar Regional Development Authority (IRDA) has registered investments totalling RM33 billion or 70% of the RM47 billion target set for Iskandar Malaysia under the Ninth Malaysia Plan, said Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Amirsham A Aziz.

“This figure is derived from contractual agreements, and not memoranda of understanding (MoU), with the IRDA,” he said in his reply to questions from Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi (Batu Pahat-BN), Tony Pua (Petaling Jaya Utara-DAP), Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (Kuala Selangor-PAS), Khalid Abdul Samad (Shah Alam-PAS), Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed (Pulai-BN) and Hamim Samuri (Ledang-BN).

Amirsham said six foreign companies from the UAE, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon have invested in Iskandar Malaysia.

They include Kuwait Finance House, Aldar Properties PJSC, Mubadala Development Company, Millennium Development Company, Damac and Limitless Dubai.

Local investors include UEM Group, Telekom Malaysia Bhd, Tenaga Nasional Bhd, Tradewinds Bhd and Lido Boulevard.

“All investments, be it local or foreign, are required to follow all policies and regulations set by the federal and state governments. This will be monitored continuously by the state government and IRDA,” Amirsham said.

He also told the House the total investment included RM4.3 billion from the government for infrastructure development while the rest were from the private sector and government-linked companies.

On the rights of landowners, Amirsham assured the lawmakers the government would protect the rights of landowners in all development corridors.

“No landowner will be forced to sell their land, but it must be noted that they are free to sell their land on the willing-buyer and willing-seller concept,” he said, adding all matters related to sale of land in any corridor were under the purview of the state government concerned.

To a supplementary question, Amirsham said efforts were underway to improve security in the Iskandar area.

He said the government has approved an allocation for more police officers and crime prevention in the area.

“We are also negotiating with a joint committee in Singapore for feedback and to encourage Singapore to avoid describing the IRDA or Johor as unsafe,” he added.

M'sia still attractive to foreign investors

The Star (23/6/08): Malaysia remains competitive in pulling in foreign direct investments (FDI) with RM23.9bil already received in the first quarter of this year.

International Trade and Industries Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said although it appeared as if investors had shifted to countries like China, India, Vietnam and Thailand, Malaysia was still very competitive in pulling in FDI.

"For example, last year the investment received was RM59.9bil and in the first quarter of this year, we have hit RM23.9bil. We are projecting to do better than 2007,” he said.

Muhyiddin was responding to a supplementary question by Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor), who said that the country was losing its competitiveness because the Government preferred a domestically driven national gross domestic product (GDP).

Muhyddin said the outflow of FDI last year amounted to RM307mil and that four companies had moved to Thailand, Vietnam and China.

"They shifted because of certain attractions such as cheaper labour in China but I can also prove that some companies which moved there had decided to come back here.

On another supplementary question by Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi (BN-Batu Pahat), Muhyiddin said the Government had taken measures to compete with neighbouring countries.

“We do not have to announce openly our strategies and initiatives, including those which are deemed customised incentives,” he said.

He said a special committee chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister had been set up to look into cases considered as strategic investment projects which involve large investments but increase the investment rate of the country.

Muhyiddin: Malaysia still the destination of choice for FDIs

Bernama(23/6/08): Malaysia is the still the destination of choice for foreign direct investments (FDIs) despite competition from neighbouring countries.

Minister of International Trade and Industry, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, said currently the government has initiated measures to reduce the cost of doing business here.

He said last year Malaysia attracted RM59.9 billion in FDIs and for January-April this year, the amount has reached RM23.9 billion.

"We expect the FDIs this year to be higher than in 2007," he said in reply to a question by Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) at the Dewan Rakyat here, Monday.

On the FDI outflow, Muhyiddin said in 2007 it involved about RM307 million from four foreign companies which decided to shift their operations to Thailand, Vietnam and China.

"Among the factors they cited were the decline in demand for their products and to take advantage of the lower labour costs in the countries concerned," he said.

Nevertheless, he said, many companies who had migrated overseas had also decided to invest here when they compared the tangible and intangible costs which were lower here.

He said the Malaysian Industrial Development Authority has identified about 300 South Korean companies, which had invested in China, decided to change their minds and move them to Vietnam, Malaysia and other countries.

Bumbling minister riles them

Malay Mail (27/5/08): Questions must be asked about the competence of Deputy Health Minister Datuk Dr Latiff Ahmad ( BN-Mersing) during Question Time, even if he has had to face up alone and unaided to an increasingly hostile Opposition in the absence of his Minister.

Last week the diminutive bumbler was charged with being unprofessional for failing utterly to provide an adequate response to the shortage of medical specialists in the country.

Yesterday, with what can only be described as reckless ineptitude, he managed single-handedly to offend the entire medical profession in half a sentence.

Replying to a question from Dr Mohd Hayati Osman (Pas -Pendang) , Latiff observed that doctors had a “licence to heal, and a licence to kill”. Members immediately pounced on the utterly unnecessary pronouncement, sensing that it served no purpose other than to drag Latiff further into disrepute.

Dr Mohd Hatta Ramli (Pas-Kuala Krai) and Dr Lo’ Lo’ Mohd Ghazali (Pas- Titiwangsa), both medical doctors, rose to demand a retraction, but Latiff refused, thinking perhaps that he needed to demonstrate the strength of his convictions to his colleagues.

These convictions swiftly turned to the dumb refusal of a rabbit mesmerised by the headlights of an oncoming lorry, and the Opposition made a big deal of running the honourable gentleman over. In the sudden eruption of points of order, Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia provided Latiff an exit: Promise not to repeat it, and be done.

Latiff, however, was at the moment inspired by a distant Muse unknown to the rest of us, and chose to prevaricate. “I intended no malice,” he said, to a wave of boos and reminders of the Hippocratic Oath.

Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) then raised his rule book for the coup de grâce: Retract the remark, or be sent down for 10 days, or, alternatively, face the wrath of the Committee of Privileges.

Still the Deputy Minister tried with increasing desperation to wriggle out of the unexpected trap of his own making. At length, the verbose Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad (Pas-Kuala Selangor) obtained the floor and nearly upset his bench’s momentum with a rambling account about his teaching days in the field of pharmacology.

Pandikar Amin, realising from bitter experience that Dzulkifli’s point lay somewhere in the distant and unforeseeable future, cut the matter short by forcing Latiff’s retraction.

Finally the Deputy Minister relented, by which time the House had spent 30 minutes debating this urgent matter of obvious national importance.

Later in the day, the House debated a procedural Bill from the Finance Ministry that sought, amongst others, to place the Uni t y and National Integration Department (in the Prime Minister’s Department ) within the Culture, Arts and Heritage Ministry.

This prompted a long series of speeches from both sides about both unity and heritage, and two government backbenchers (Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi, BN-Batu Pahat, and Hamim Samuri, BN-Ledang) rose to condemn Malaysia’s performance in its dispute with Singapore over Pulau Batu Putih as an outright loss and a demonstration of our failure to protect our heritage.

Luckily for Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Utama Dr Rais Yatim (BN-Jelebu), he was absent during the debate and entered the House just as the matter was being put to vote.

(Proceeding s in the House, incidentally, are broadcast on televisions in the Lobby.) Also in the same debate, Datuk Tajuddin Abdul Rahman (BN-Pasir Salak) raised eyebrows on both sides with an impassioned speech about national unity.

The fiery nationalist defended the idea that Malaysians of all races are, as a rule, much closer to each other than politicians are prepared to say.

“We all have friends of other races,” he said, annoyed that he had to state the patently obvious.

“Even in my place, my children have Chinese friends and they sleep over all the time. Is there a problem? No. It’s only politicians who make an issue of it.” The House was stunned, and Tajuddin gracefully resumed his seat. (U-En Ng)

Minister says he does not order ACA to investigate

Bernama (22/5/08): Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz said he had not been ordering the Anti-Corruption (ACA) Agency to investigate any case or to take statements.

He said the ACA, however, did contact him regarding a statement made by a Barisan Nasional Member of Parliament that he was offered money by the opposition to cross over.

"Since the ACA had contacted me, I asked them to get in touch with the Kota Belud MP and make a report.

They did not ask for permission (to investigate). They just informed (about the MP's statement) to facilitate their work," he said in the Dewan Rakyat today when winding up the debate on the King's address.

"If I was not informed about it, how would I be able to reply to Lim Kit Siang's (DAP-Ipoh Timur) questions on the issue," he said in reply to Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena) who had asked whether the ACA had to seek permission each time it wanted to act.

On May 15, Kota Belud MP Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahalan revealed that he was offered a large sum of money "that could last for three generations" if he defected to the opposition.

Nazri was also bombarded with questions, especially from opposition lawmakers, as to why the use of delible ink for voters was cancelled only three days before the March 8 general election, why there were conflicting statements between the prime minister and the Election Commission (EC) chairman on the matter, from where the ink was bought and what happened to it now.

He explained that the cancellation was because of the legal implications if some voters refused to be tainted with the ink (on their finger) while they had the right to vote under the Federal Constitution.

He said the use of indelible ink was to prevent multiple voting by any voter but if some voters refused the ink use, then it would defeat its purpose.

Opposition leader Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail (PKR-Permatang Pauh), Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah), Khalid Samad (PAS-Shah Alam), Dr Zulkifli Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) and Mahfuz all stood up to ask who had lied and who was responsible in the matter.

Nazri said when the Attorney-General informed the cabinet that the use of the indelible ink would have legal implications, it rejected the use and informed the EC about it.

"The cabinet had conveyed its rejection but it did not mean that it ordered the EC not to use the ink. Rejection and ordering are two different things," he added.

Rewriting history must be based on truth

Bernama (20/5/08): Rewriting of the country's history must be based on the truth irrespective whether it was pioneered by revolutionists or accommodationists, the Dewan Rakyat was told Tuesday.

"What is important is that it must be based on truth which will eventually prevail over falsehood.

"We have to study the history and must not view the players as leaning to the left or right," Unity, Culture, Arts and Heritage Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal said when winding up the debate on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's address.

He was responding to a suggestion by Dr Zulkifli Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) that the country's history be rewritten.

Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi (BN-Batu Pahat) then interjected and asked the minister whether he agreed that the communists had also fought for independence just like Mat Kilau and the others did against the colonialists.

"I do not agree with this but if there are write-ups on them and that they are true, then we can accept.

"We (the government) cannot be too dependent on write-ups as we were also involved in the process which later became part of history," he added.

Shafie told Datuk Tajuddin Abdul Rahman (BN-Pasir Salak) that there was a need to focus on history in schools so that students understand the nation's struggle and help foster unity.

On the use of crude language by the media as raised by Johari Abdul (PKR-Sungai Petani), he said it was not only the media that should use courteous language but also the Members of Parliament. "Use language which can contribute positively.

We must be honest in this because sometimes raising the keris can cause problems as it has been politicised. The keris was not meant to be used in that way.

"The same goes for the azan (call to prayers). Some people consider it disturbing but it is only a call for Muslims to pray."

Shafie also said there was no need to re-evaluate the patriotism doctrine, adding that Malaysians should understand the Rukun Negara principles and abide by the Federal Constitution.

It was only a suggestion, says PM

The Star (18/5/08): The Cabinet had merely suggested to the Election Commission (EC) to not use the indelible ink for the general election. It was not a directive, said Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

The Prime Minister disclosed that a week before Parliament was dissolved, the Cabinet had made the suggestion, giving its reasons why it did not want the ink to be used.

“We had received information that some quarters had bought the ink although they had no authority to do so and we were suspicious that it could be used to cause confusion and complications during the voting process,” he told reporters yesterday after delivering his closing remarks at the end of the 11th MSC Malaysia International Advisory Panel Meeting.

Abdullah said the Cabinet believed that the election process would go on smoothly and all eligible voters could cast their votes if the indelible ink was not used.

“It was only a suggestion we made to the EC chairman. It was up to him to think it over and agree or to proceed with the original decision to use the ink,” he said.

When the decision to scrap the ink was announced at the eleventh hour of the general election, Barisan Nasional leaders, including Abdullah, had said that they wanted an explanation from the EC on why it was doing away with the indelible ink.

On why the Government did not come clean on the indelible ink in the first place, Abdullah said that if anything tainted the voting process it would be the Government that would be blamed.

Earlier, EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman said the Cabinet decided not to approve the proposal to use indelible ink “on the day of Parliament dissolution, on Feb 13”.

“They did not approve because of two very strong reasons, and I agreed with them over those reasons.

“One was security and the other was law, relating to Article 119 of the Federal Constitution, which states that it is the fundamental right of a person to vote,” he told the press after opening the National Seminar on Elections 2008: Democracy at Work here yesterday.

Asked if he tried to convince the Cabinet otherwise, Abdul Rashid said “he could not” , adding: “But I took responsibility for it.”

“I was told that the Cabinet had been briefed about an attempt by PAS, that they had bought some ink from Thailand, and were going around to mark old voters. And when Umno came to know, they also went and bought the ink. This was given to me in black and white by the police,” he said.

On May 6, Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said in a Parliament reply to DAP’s Batu Gajah MP Fong Po Kuan that police did not find evidence of smuggled indelible ink and statements made by complainants and witnesses were rumours.

Meanwhile, the Opposition said the revelation that it was the Cabinet that did not approve the use of the indelible ink was the “best proof” that the EC was not independent or neutral.

DAP national adviser Lim Kit Siang said it was unacceptable for the Cabinet to have made such a decision and that it went against the spirit of the Constitution of having an independent EC.

PAS research centre director Dr Dzulkifly Ahmad, said: “This is shocking. With this revelation, we come to realise the reasons and rationale why the indelible ink was withdrawn at the eleventh hour. His remark vindicates our claim all along that this is the underpinning reasons. The jigsaw puzzle is now complete.”

Transparency International Malaysia president Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam said he was not only surprised but confused by the conflicting statements.

Free elections, but make it fair, too

NST (18/5/08): The first concern raised by the report was that the atmosphere of an election campaign should be one of respect for human rights.

This means freedom of expression applies to all parties, candidates, voters and the media.

And while the government has a duty to ensure peace, it should not arbitrarily restrict freedom through the use of laws like the Internal Security Act 1960.

A key point is that the issuance of permits for events, such as a ceramah, should not be discriminatory and rejection should not be based on speculation, suspicion or fear.

"It's the best statement I've heard from Suhakam. I can't concur more," says Kuala Selangor MP Dr Zulkifli Ahmad.

A steering committee member for the mammoth Bersih rally and Pas' research chief, Zulkifli is used to getting applications for permits rejected.

"Sometimes, the reason for rejection is to avoid traffic chaos. But at all our ceramah, we have many traffic wardens who keep things under control."

Zulkifli says the authorities need to recognise that voters have matured and they should not fear that problems that will crop up at public assemblies.

"Look at the potentially turbulent situation now. Divisions within the ruling party, Molotov cocktails thrown at the DAP headquarters in Ipoh, voters aren't getting agitated ... they are handling things with tact.

"When everyone is changing, authorities that keep using draconian laws will become dinosaurs, outdated."

Ong Kian Ming and Bridget Welsh's case study of the 2002 redelineation process for Kedah showed how moving safe areas into vulnerable areas and changing boundaries helped strengthen BN's electoral position in the following election.

They noted that the government consciously reversed a long-standing trend of creating Malay-dominant constituencies in favour of more mixed seats.

There was also a reallocation of state seats into different parliamentary districts, according to the writers of Elections and Democracy in Malaysia.

The political impact in every seat after the redelineation exercise were obvious.

For instance, in 1999, the Pokok Sena parliamentary seat -- made up of the Bukit Lada, Langgar and Tanjong Seri state seats -- was won by Pas with a 3,211 vote majority.

After the redelineation exercise, the large Malay majority seat of Tanjong Seri was swapped for the more mixed Derga seat.

If the result for that parliamentary seat was recalculated after the swap, Barisan Nasional would have won by a majority of 1,805 votes.

This refers to the extension of the right to vote to all adults without distinction of race, gender, belief of social status.

The report makes a particular point about making polling stations accessible to the indigenous people.

For Orang Asli who live in remote areas, it's often a case of "no transport, no vote", says Centre for Orang Asli Concerns' Colin Nicholas.

Communities that live in government-established settlements, where there is a hall or centre that is turned into a polling station, will vote.

Otherwise, it's up to political parties to arrange for transport if they want the votes.

"In many areas in the last general election, the Orang Asli were seen as 'sure BN voters' and candidates didn't bother to campaign there or arrange for transport on polling day.

"So the Orang Asli didn't bother to go and vote. Why vote for people who don't bother about you?" said Nicholas.

He cited an example of a seat in the interior of Pahang where the BN party workers sent lorries to pick up Orang Asli voters on polling day.

The voters refused to get in. Lorries were for cattle, they told the party workers, and insisted on a proper bus or van. Annoyed party workers ignored them and the community did not vote.

That year, said Nicholas, the opposition party won the seat by five votes.

"Voting isn't important enough to drive the Orang Asli to walk from the interior to a polling centre."

Although the most recent elections may have seen an improved coverage of opposition candidates, a fair election requires that all parties are given an equal coverage in the media, which includes the placement and timing of exposure. Coverage should not be partial to any side.

However, Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek feels that in general, the opposition can make use of new media to a greater advantage than if they were to use the traditional mainstream media.

"New media is a part of media as a whole. If you look at some countries, the opposition don't even have access to the new media.

"If you talk about the Internet, for instance, the government has specific controls they can use to block or restrict websites.

"In some countries, if you want to have a portal, you have to register and have a licence. We don't impose those rules in the country.

"The Internet penetration rate is considered high, too. Out of a population of 27 million people, 14 million have access to the Internet and the number is growing.

"Nobody stops anybody from using that. So, you have to look at the matter from this perspective. This is already media."

Ahmad Shabery says in future, opposition candidates may have access to government television channels like RTM1 and RTM2.

However, he does not know when this may be as it is up to the government to decide.

"The rakyat gives the mandate to the ruling party, to decide, in terms of approach, on how you run this country.

"The right to information is just like the right to food. The right for people to eat. We can say that people have the right to eat whatever they like, but sometimes, eating too much is also not good.

"And that's the role of the government. We have to educate the people: on what is poison, what is not good for them and what is good for them.

"You have to educate the people first."

The first-past-the-post system may not truly reflect the will of the people. This is because there can be a big difference between the percentage of votes won by a political party, and the number of seats it is given in the Parliament.

Elections watchdog Malaysians for a Free and Fair Elections (Mafrel) acting-president Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh compares Kapar, the largest parliamentary constituency with more than 112,000 voters, with Putrajaya, which has fewer than 7,000 voters. The difference in population is large yet they each get one member of parliament.

This, says Syed Ibrahim, is disproportionate to the population size.

Instead, he recommends the popular vote system.

"If the opposition wins 40 per cent of the overall votes, and the government wins 60 per cent, then representation in the Dewan should reflect those numbers."

In between the dissolution of the old Parliament and the convening of the new Parliament, there needs to be a government to run the country during the election period. Currently, that caretaker government is the same as the one that was recently-dissolved.

However, this arrangement is open to the potential of abuse of government funds and machinery during campaigning.

Syed Ibrahim believes a policy should be set, either by having a completely fresh caretaker government comprising high-profile personalities like ex-judges who are appointed by the King, or a mixed system of caretaker and present government.

But, if a completely new caretaker government cannot be formed, Syed Ibrahim feels there should be restrictions to what the old (caretaker) government can do.

"There is a difference between running the country and launching things, or declaring projects.

"During (the first prime minister) Tunku Abdul Rahman's day, when he wanted to go out campaigning, he would take time off his job -- take leave -- to make it clear that there is no overlap between him as the party candidate and him as the caretaker prime minister."

How will Anwar play his cards?

As the leader of Pakatan Rakyat, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been described as ‘Prime Minister-in-waiting’, but does he really have the numbers to form the government or is he just playing mind games?

The Star (11/5/08): Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was all smiles when he accompanied his wife Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail to the opening of Parliament recently.

It was quite a reversal of role for the former deputy prime minister because he was there as the spouse of the new Opposition Leader.

It was also his first time in Parliament since his fall from power and he was not quite sure what to expect. Dr Wan Azizah was her demure self but Anwar looked a trifle nervous as he held onto his wife's hand.

Power couple and media frenzy: Anwar is back in the political spotlight amid claims that Pakatan Rakyat will form the government before the year is out.

They are the power couple of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) but given the way the media swarmed around him, there was no mistaking who the star was. Anwar was probably at his most ideal body weight in years, and he looked good in a dark suit and violet tie even though his songkok was slightly tilted.

Some of his Chinese friends joke that his fengshui has changed for the better since he moved out of Damansara Heights to live a simpler life in Segambut in the suburbs of Kuala Lumpur.

The Economist has referred to him as “Prime Minister in waiting” and Time Magazine named him as among the 100 most influential people in the world.

Anwar is back in the political spotlight amid claims that PR will form the government before the year is out.

Talk of crossovers from the Barisan Nasional to PR has been swirling since the March 8 elections.

On Wednesday, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad added grist to the mill when he said that Anwar's threat of taking over should be taken seriously and that he was a force to be reckoned with.

It was a stunning admission that led PKR Youth chief Shamsul Iskandar to quip: “I'm in agreement with Tun Mahathir for the first time in 10 years.”

Khairul: Crossovers may be in the form of an entire party

But it is possible that both Dr Mahathir and Anwar are playing mind-games. They are both such consummate political animals, always a step ahead of the rest and with that innate instinct to seize the political moment. And both have that rare X-factor.

Sources close to Dr Mahathir say the former is using Anwar as the bogeyman to scare Umno members into expediting a leadership transition in their party.

As for Anwar, the endless discussions about his being Prime Minister-in-waiting has burnished his image beyond expectations. Even if he does not make it, he will remain a pivotal political figure.

But still, questions abound about Anwar's claim to forming the government. What and where are the numbers? And if he has the numbers, what are they waiting for? When is he going to contest the by-election that he has been talking so much about?

The PR needs only 30 more seats to secure a simple majority in Parliament.

But there are priorities to be sorted out before Anwar can really lay claim to Putrajaya.

First, he needs more than a simple majority. A government formed on crossovers is unstable enough, what more with only a slim majority.

Second, the Malay composition in the takeover government has to reflect the national scenario if he does not wish to add to the instability. The bulk of crossovers will have to comprise Umno MPs.

Third is the question of having to face a snap general election if he does manage to pull off a coup. Would his coalition be able to face the voters for a fresh and legitimate mandate?

Question of ethics

Finally, there is the question of ethics and principle. The PR had promised a better and cleaner government, a new politics as they call it. Taking Putrajaya by the back door is not new politics. In fact, it would be the very sort of old politics they have been so critical of.

The scenario, as such, is a bit more complicated than just people crossing the floor in Parliament.

Anifah: Sabah treated like stepchild of Barisan Nasional

Some claim he has secured commitment from barely half of the 30 he needs, while others say he has up to 50 names on the list.

The assumption so far is that he has his eye on Sabah and Sarawak MPs but, said former PKR Youth chief Ezam Mohd Noor, his main target is Umno MPs from the peninsula.

“The Malay and Muslim factor is very crucial for him,” said Ezam.

The response in Sabah is said to be quite encouraging but he has limited clout in Sarawak.

At the Sarawak Legislative Assembly this week, PKR's lone assemblyman Dominique Ng announced that there were more than 10 MPs in Sabah who are ready to cross over but “in the case of Sarawak, he was not at liberty to tell as yet.”

The Barisan-dominated House was not amused and erupted in jeers and shouts of, “Never!”

“Give us more credit than that. What makes you think that they won't be coming in one kapal (as a party)?” said PKR Youth exco member Khairul Anuar Ahmad Zainudin.

Anwar’s DAP and PAS partners have maintained an awkward silence throughout all this.

DAP is caught between their desire of federal power and their stand against party hopping.

PAS is even more compromised. Its government in Kelantan had hung on by a thread after the 2004 polls and it had been righteous about Umno trying to lure its assemblymen. It cannot now come out to encourage Barisan MPs to cross to PR.

The younger PAS politicians have no qualms about entering Putrajaya via the back door but the older ones are concerned about what it would mean for their Islamic agenda. They are also uneasy about working with DAP leaders like Karpal Singh and some are still rather unsure about Anwar.

Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, PAS MP for Kuala Selangor, is all for a PR government but admits that when he looks across to the Barisan bench in Parliament, “there are not many faces that look like they will join us.”

There are only 77 Barisan backbenchers and more than half of them would have to cross the floor for PR to become the ruling coalition.

Said a senior PAS leader: “I'm not trying to pour cold water on Anwar's ambitions but it's not easy to get that kind of numbers. People want to cross to a party in power, not an Opposition aspiring to power.”

But several East Malaysian MPs stirred excitement in Parliament on Wednesday when they spoke about being treated like “stepchildren” by the Barisan leadership.

Liew: There will be a domino effect once the crossovers start

One of them was no less than Datuk Anifah Aman, a former deputy minister and younger brother of Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Musa Aman.

“You cannot take what they say lightly. They are genuinely unhappy,” said DAP strategist Liew Chin Tong.

According to PAS secretary-general Datuk Kamaruddin Jaffar whose friendship with Anwar goes back to their Abim (Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia, a Muslim youth group) days, the latter has the numbers to form the government.

“I have no details but the number ranges from 30 to the low 40s. He wants a fair spread of politicians from Sabah, Sarawak and the peninsula and they will join out of genuine desire to help Pakatan Rakyat form the government and not for money or posts. And I see it happening sometime in the middle of the year,” he said.

And contrary to the general expectation that the crossovers will take place after Anwar contests a by-election, Kamaruddin said it is likely that Anwar will only go into a by-election once the crossovers take place.

Anwar is interested in no less than the very top post and, that way, he will not end up as just another opposition MP if the crossovers fall through.

Anwar has set Sept 16, the date when Malaysia was born, as the day the new government may be formed.

Reliable sources said 17 Barisan MPs will jump soon.

“I believe in the domino theory. If it happens, it will happen en bloc and there will be a flood,” said Liew.

It is a prospect that is very possible to some and totally unthinkable to others.Power couple and media frenzy: Anwar is back in the political spotlight amid claims that Pakatan Rakyat will form the government before the year is out (Joceline Tan).