Bernama should own up to the charges of plagiarism
I was intrigued by the admission by the Bernama editor-in-chief Zulkefli Salleh that there was some basis in the accusation made by the Indonesian newspaper Jakarta Globe that two of its articles published online pertaining to the ongoing Indonesian presidential debates had been plagiarized by Bernama.
As a result, I read in detail the allegations by Indonesian Globe.
The most recent incident occurred on Sunday when Bernama plagiarised “word for word” an article published on the Jakarta Globe website entitled “In Closing Debate, Joko Promises Bureaucratic ‘Breakthrough,’ While Prabowo Strives for ‘A Dignified Nation.’”
The article was part of Jakarta Glob’s live coverage of the fifth and final Indonesian presidential debate which was published on July 5.
Bernama published a similar article the next day under the heading, “Joko Promises Bureaucratic ‘Breakthrough,’ While Prabowo Strives for ‘A Dignified Nation.’”
Jakarta Globe alleged that Bernama had copied the Globe’s piece verbatim, attributing one of the many quotes in the article to the newspaper.
Bernama also removed the names of Globe reporters Josua Gantan and Andrea Wijaya, the original authors of the story, replacing the byline with a Bernama journalist, Elmi Rizal Alias.
The Jakarta Globe also accused Bernama of plagiarising an earlier story by its reporter Basten Gokkon on the fourth debate “Hatta Says Indonesia Should Take Advantage of Its ‘Demographic Bonus.’”, which was published by Bernama under the headline “Indonesia Should Take Advantage of Its ‘Demographic Bonus’ - Hatta”. Bernama claimed it was written by its reporter Elmi.
As the four articles, two by Jakarta Globe and two by Bernama, can be downloaded easily, it can be immediately established that Bernama had indeed been guilty of plagiarism as accused by the Indonesian newspaper and not just “there was some basis” in the plagiarism allegations.
The Bernama editor-in-chief should be frank and forthcoming in keeping with journalistic ethics and traditions and own up to the two charges of plagiarism and make the necessary amends, instead of playing tai-chi claiming that Bernama does not condone plagiarism but yet want to buy time with the plea that an immediate investigation needed to be held.
It is clear from a quick read of the four articles concerned that the episode marks an international disgrace for Malaysian journalism, and Bernama should not prolong the shameful episode but should instead own up to the charges of plagiarism together with taking the necessary remedial action, including apology, retraction and action against the journalist concerned who had brought disgrace not only to Bernama but to Malaysia as well.
Sumber HD - 7-7-2014
As a result, I read in detail the allegations by Indonesian Globe.
The most recent incident occurred on Sunday when Bernama plagiarised “word for word” an article published on the Jakarta Globe website entitled “In Closing Debate, Joko Promises Bureaucratic ‘Breakthrough,’ While Prabowo Strives for ‘A Dignified Nation.’”
The article was part of Jakarta Glob’s live coverage of the fifth and final Indonesian presidential debate which was published on July 5.
Bernama published a similar article the next day under the heading, “Joko Promises Bureaucratic ‘Breakthrough,’ While Prabowo Strives for ‘A Dignified Nation.’”
Jakarta Globe alleged that Bernama had copied the Globe’s piece verbatim, attributing one of the many quotes in the article to the newspaper.
Bernama also removed the names of Globe reporters Josua Gantan and Andrea Wijaya, the original authors of the story, replacing the byline with a Bernama journalist, Elmi Rizal Alias.
The Jakarta Globe also accused Bernama of plagiarising an earlier story by its reporter Basten Gokkon on the fourth debate “Hatta Says Indonesia Should Take Advantage of Its ‘Demographic Bonus.’”, which was published by Bernama under the headline “Indonesia Should Take Advantage of Its ‘Demographic Bonus’ - Hatta”. Bernama claimed it was written by its reporter Elmi.
As the four articles, two by Jakarta Globe and two by Bernama, can be downloaded easily, it can be immediately established that Bernama had indeed been guilty of plagiarism as accused by the Indonesian newspaper and not just “there was some basis” in the plagiarism allegations.
The Bernama editor-in-chief should be frank and forthcoming in keeping with journalistic ethics and traditions and own up to the two charges of plagiarism and make the necessary amends, instead of playing tai-chi claiming that Bernama does not condone plagiarism but yet want to buy time with the plea that an immediate investigation needed to be held.
It is clear from a quick read of the four articles concerned that the episode marks an international disgrace for Malaysian journalism, and Bernama should not prolong the shameful episode but should instead own up to the charges of plagiarism together with taking the necessary remedial action, including apology, retraction and action against the journalist concerned who had brought disgrace not only to Bernama but to Malaysia as well.
Sumber HD - 7-7-2014
Ubah Malaysia melalui idea
SENARIO setahun selepas PRU13, khususnya selepas PRK Teluk Intan menjadi detik terburuk untuk politik Malaysia. Tetapi ia mungkin juga menjadi detik terbaik. Ahli Jawatankuasa Pusat DAP, Pemuda Sosialis DAP, dan Ahli Jawatankuasa Wanita, bersama wakil rakyat - ahli Parlimen mahupun Adun - telah mengadakan mesyuarat pada 13 hingga 15 Jun di Kuala Lumpur. Mesyuarat sebegini bukan kali pertama diadakan, padahal ia pernah diadakan pada tahun 2013 selepas PRU13. Namun pemimpin DAP hanya bermesyuarat untuk sehari pada kali pertama ia diadakan. Dengan masa yang lebih panjang, mesyuarat kali ini memberi ruang untuk perbincangan yang lebih terperinci.
PRK Teluk Intan memberi isyarat bahawa "bulan madu" antara pembangkang dengan masyarakat bukan Melayu telah berakhir. Bulan madu bermula apabila Hishammuddin Hussein selaku Ketua Pemuda Umno pada tahun 2005 menghunus keris dalam Perhimpunan Agung Umno, dan apabila Umno menunjukkan kecenderungan ke arah politik yang konservatif dan pelampau.
Bagaimanapun, undi Melayu, terutamanya golongan anak muda mula memperlihatkan "kelonggaran". Populariti Najib Razak dalam soal selidik yang terbaru gagal melepasi 50 peratus, untuk kali kedua. Malah Umno yang kononnya parti mewakili Melayu, hanya mendapat sokongan sedikit lebih 50 peratus, dalam kalangan Melayu. Dengan kata lain, hampir 50 peratus Melayu tidak percaya kepada Umno.
DAP mahu mengukuhkan kubunya, malah perlu menerokai kemungkinan baru dalam senario politik Malaysia yang sedang berubah. DAP tidak boleh lagi melihat dirinya sebagai "parti yang mewakili bukan Melayu", tetapi juga mewakili bumiputera bukan Muslim dari Sabah dan Sarawak, malah bumiputera Muslim. Bukan itu sahaja, DAP perlu menjadi wakil kepada pengundi Melayu.
Dua sesi diperuntukkan untuk perbincangan isu Hukum Hudud dalam mesyuarat kali ini. Perbincangan diperincikan bahawa masyarakat kita sebenarnya berlapis-lapis. Hukum Hudud bukan sekadar isu setuju atau tidak, tetapi juga apakah Malaysia bersedia untuk pelaksanaannya pada masa sekarang. DAP bukan sahaja perlu menampilkan pendirian yang diiktiraf bukan Muslim, tetapi hujahnya juga perlu meyakinkan masyarakat Muslim.
Kita mahu mengetengahkan dasar seluruh rakyat, iaitu tatkala menerokai sumber undi, kita perlu menjadikan rakyat Malaysia sebagai asas ketika memikirkan penggubalan dasar. Contohnya, belia kaum India berdepan dengan masalah yang agak ketara ketika mencari peluang pekerjaan. Begitu juga, belia Melayu, malah belia Cina kelas menengah bawah juga berdepan dengan peluang pekerjaan yang tidak mencukupi, atau gaji yang rendah. Penyelesaian masalahnya adalah memenuhi keperluan ekonomi setiap kaum. Semua kaum harus difahamkan bahawa masalahnya bukan kaum, tetapi kroni dan kapitalisme yang menceroboh peluang ekonomi rakyat jelata dan menjejaskan keadilan ekonomi.
Peserta mesyuarat kali ini juga terbahagi kepada empat kumpulan untuk meneliti dasar pembangunan jangka panjang dalam isu pentadbiran bandar, separa bandar, impian Malaysia (bukan penyokong tradisional) serta wanita dan belia.
Sungguhpun DAP agak selesa dengan pengundi bandar, permintaan pengundi bandar semakin hari semakin tinggi. Dasar kita di negeri Pakatan Rakyat, dan idea kita untuk membangunkan bandar yang lain, perlu selari dengan permintaan pengundi terhadap pentadbiran bandar.
Kawasan separa bandar adalah tempat yang agak sukar untuk DAP pada masa lalu. Tetapi dalam dua pilihan raya umum yang lalu, terutamanya PRU13, DAP telah memperoleh kemenangan di banyak tempat separa bandar. Kebanyakan kawasan ini tidak terpisah dari aktiviti pertanian, perikanan dan tanaman, dan hubungan antara pengundi juga tidak sama dengan bandar. Kita perlu mencurahkan lebih tenaga untuk mengusahakan kawasan-kawasan sebegini. Penyokong bukan tradisional juga merupakan golongan yang harus diterokai DAP yang kini dalam proses transformasi. Untuk golongan wanita dan belia pula, DAP berharap boleh menjadi parti politik yang diutamakan anak muda semua kaum, dan kita juga berusaha untuk menjadi parti politik yang mampu mengetengahkan dasar wanita yang progresif.
Dasar hijau juga sesuatu yang harus kita fikirkan secara mendalam. Dari gerakan anti Lynas oleh Himpunan Hijau, Malaysia memiliki penyokong penjagaan alam yang amat besar bilangannya. Tetapi kita belum mempunyai parti hijau yang menjadikan penjagaan alam sebagai agenda utama. Seandainya DAP boleh berfikir secara menyeluruh dari segi dasar nasional, mungkin kita juga boleh menyasarkan golongan ini - supaya DAP menjadi pilihan utama pencinta alam.
Pada masa yang sama, jikalau dahulu DAP hanya sebuah kedai runcit yang kecil, kini pengundi menaruh harapan agar DAP menjadi "hypermarket". Transformasi organisasi adalah antara tugas yang penting selepas ini.
Kami memutuskan untuk mengadakan mesyuarat seperti ini pada 16 -18 Januari 2015, dan mendalami isu yang dibincang dalam tempoh setengah tahun akan datang. Kami menaruh harapan agar DAP boleh menjadi parti idea, dan mengubah Malaysia melalui idea.
*Liew Chin Tong adalah ahli Parlimen Kluang, merangkap Pengarah Biro Pendidikan Politik DAP. Beliau oleh dihubungi di supportlct@liewchintong.com
Sumber HD - 1-7-2014
Uphold academic freedom to improve academic research and excellence
I read with concern today’s news that Professor Datuk Dr Mohamad Redzuan’s term as the Director for the Universiti Malaya’s Center for Democracy and Elections (UMcedel) has not been renewed. This news report also speculates that this non-renewal was due to political pressure over Professor Redzuan’s survey research which showed the BN in a bad light and also programs which involved politicians, including Members of Parliament, from Pakatan Rakyat.
I was invited to be part of a forum just after the 13th General Election in 2013 by UMCedel to share my analytical findings. This forum was chaired by Professor Redzuan and other invited panellists included Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah, the former MP for Temerloh and Shamsul Iskandar, the newly elected MP for Bukit Katil. Nurul Izzah was also invited to this forum but did not participate as a panellist. This kind of engagement with BN as well as Pakatan Rakyat politicians should be part and parcel of the research agenda of any institute or center that examines and does research on elections in Malaysia.
In addition, the survey research work done by UMcedel, under the leadership of Professor Redzuan should be applauded for pushing the agenda on elections survey research which is still in its infancy in Malaysia. It should be noted that UMCedel was accurate in predicting a win in the popular vote for Pakatan Rakyat in GE13 but that the BN would win the majority of seats. While there is legitimate room to criticize the methodology used by UMcedel in arriving at its survey results, there is no legitimate reason to target Professor Redzuan just because the results are not seen as favourable to the BN.
It is unfortunate that this decision not to renew Professor Redzuan’s tenure as the Director of UMCedel comes on the back of the good news that 3 Malaysian Professors – Prof Dr Abdul Latif Ahmad from USM, Prof Dr Ishak Hashim from UKM and Prof Dr Saidur Rahman from UM – were listed in the World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds 2014. Academic freedom, especially in the social sciences which is interpreted as some as touching on more politically sensitive subjects, is an integral part of pushing the research agenda in any university setting.
If it is true that the Chief Secretary II of the Education Ministry, Datuk Dr. Zaini Ujang, is responsible for the decision not to renew Professor Redzuan’s tenure at the Director of UMCedel, then it is indeed a sad day for academic freedom in the country since Dr. Zaini as a former academic at UTM, of all people, should know the value of academic freedom.
I call upon the Minister of Education, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Dato Seri Idris Jusoh, to give their full commitment towards upholding academic freedom in all our public and private institutions of higher learning and to make it clear to all civil servants and vice-chancellors that this academic freedom is a crucial part of improving our academic standards and rankings. Academics should not be punished for pursuing legitimate academic research including in the field of politics and political science even if the results do not seem favourable to the ruling party.
Sumber HD - 30-6-2014
I was invited to be part of a forum just after the 13th General Election in 2013 by UMCedel to share my analytical findings. This forum was chaired by Professor Redzuan and other invited panellists included Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah, the former MP for Temerloh and Shamsul Iskandar, the newly elected MP for Bukit Katil. Nurul Izzah was also invited to this forum but did not participate as a panellist. This kind of engagement with BN as well as Pakatan Rakyat politicians should be part and parcel of the research agenda of any institute or center that examines and does research on elections in Malaysia.
In addition, the survey research work done by UMcedel, under the leadership of Professor Redzuan should be applauded for pushing the agenda on elections survey research which is still in its infancy in Malaysia. It should be noted that UMCedel was accurate in predicting a win in the popular vote for Pakatan Rakyat in GE13 but that the BN would win the majority of seats. While there is legitimate room to criticize the methodology used by UMcedel in arriving at its survey results, there is no legitimate reason to target Professor Redzuan just because the results are not seen as favourable to the BN.
It is unfortunate that this decision not to renew Professor Redzuan’s tenure as the Director of UMCedel comes on the back of the good news that 3 Malaysian Professors – Prof Dr Abdul Latif Ahmad from USM, Prof Dr Ishak Hashim from UKM and Prof Dr Saidur Rahman from UM – were listed in the World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds 2014. Academic freedom, especially in the social sciences which is interpreted as some as touching on more politically sensitive subjects, is an integral part of pushing the research agenda in any university setting.
If it is true that the Chief Secretary II of the Education Ministry, Datuk Dr. Zaini Ujang, is responsible for the decision not to renew Professor Redzuan’s tenure at the Director of UMCedel, then it is indeed a sad day for academic freedom in the country since Dr. Zaini as a former academic at UTM, of all people, should know the value of academic freedom.
I call upon the Minister of Education, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Dato Seri Idris Jusoh, to give their full commitment towards upholding academic freedom in all our public and private institutions of higher learning and to make it clear to all civil servants and vice-chancellors that this academic freedom is a crucial part of improving our academic standards and rankings. Academics should not be punished for pursuing legitimate academic research including in the field of politics and political science even if the results do not seem favourable to the ruling party.
Sumber HD - 30-6-2014
UMCEDEL: Muhyiddin should resign as Education Minister
The person who should resign for the plight of higher education in Malaysia today is not Professor Datuk Dr. Mohamad Redzuan Othman as head of University of Malaya’s Centre for Democracy and Elections (UMcedel) and his removal as dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences in the university, or former deputy Education Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah as senior research fellow from University of Malaya, but Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin as Education Minister.
What has Muhyiddin to show in more than a year as the powerful Education Minister gobbling up the former Ministry of Higher Education, in the field of tertiary education apart from the latest disgraceful episode of interference with and violation of academic freedom resulting in the resignations of Redzuan and Saifuddin from the University of Malaya?
It has become a heart-rending occasion for Malaysians whenever there is a publication of world university rankings, for it is not to find out how well Malaysian universities compare with the best in the world but how badly Malaysian universities fared in international university comparisons and benchmarkings.
Less than two weeks ago, the release of the Times Higher Education Asia University Rankings 2014 provided latest testimony of the continued decline in global rankings of Malaysia’s public universities, with no local tertiary institution in the top 100.
Five countries were represented in the top 10 of the Asian university rankings – Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea and China. Even India made outstanding progress with 10 institutions in the top 100, compared with only three last year. Thailand was in the top 100 list.
The Middle East was also well represented, with universities from Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Turkey making the list.
University Of Tokyo emerged top among Asian universities followed by the National University of Singapore.
University of Hong Kong, Seoul National University and China's Peking University clinched the third, fourth and fifth spots respectively.
Thailand has two universities in this year's ranking, King Mongkut's University of Technology, Thonburi, which rose five places to joint 50th, and Mahidol University, which dropped 21 places to 82nd spot.
Singapore has two highly placed universities in the ranking, NUS at second spot and Nanyang Technological University at 11th position.
Hong Kong was named the star performer by THE, given its size, and the fact that it had six universities the top 50 of the ranking.
In April, Malaysian public universities were also left out of this year’s ranking of the annual Times Higher Education Top 100 Universities under 50 years old.
Four Asian universities were ranked among the top 10 of the world’s young universities, including South Korea's Pohang University of Science and Technology which took the top spot, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) (third placing), Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (4) and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (5).
The country was also absent from the Times Higher Education World Reputation rankings list released in March, losing out to other Southeast Asian countries.
Will Redzuan and Saifuddin’s resignations from University of Malaya, and the failure of Malaysian universities to regain world-class academic standards and standing, which is so critical and crucial to Malaysia’s international competitiveness, be on the agenda of the Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, and is this one of the “taboo” subjects which no Minister dares to raise in Cabinet?
Sumber HD - 30-6-2014
What has Muhyiddin to show in more than a year as the powerful Education Minister gobbling up the former Ministry of Higher Education, in the field of tertiary education apart from the latest disgraceful episode of interference with and violation of academic freedom resulting in the resignations of Redzuan and Saifuddin from the University of Malaya?
It has become a heart-rending occasion for Malaysians whenever there is a publication of world university rankings, for it is not to find out how well Malaysian universities compare with the best in the world but how badly Malaysian universities fared in international university comparisons and benchmarkings.
Less than two weeks ago, the release of the Times Higher Education Asia University Rankings 2014 provided latest testimony of the continued decline in global rankings of Malaysia’s public universities, with no local tertiary institution in the top 100.
Five countries were represented in the top 10 of the Asian university rankings – Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea and China. Even India made outstanding progress with 10 institutions in the top 100, compared with only three last year. Thailand was in the top 100 list.
The Middle East was also well represented, with universities from Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Turkey making the list.
University Of Tokyo emerged top among Asian universities followed by the National University of Singapore.
University of Hong Kong, Seoul National University and China's Peking University clinched the third, fourth and fifth spots respectively.
Thailand has two universities in this year's ranking, King Mongkut's University of Technology, Thonburi, which rose five places to joint 50th, and Mahidol University, which dropped 21 places to 82nd spot.
Singapore has two highly placed universities in the ranking, NUS at second spot and Nanyang Technological University at 11th position.
Hong Kong was named the star performer by THE, given its size, and the fact that it had six universities the top 50 of the ranking.
In April, Malaysian public universities were also left out of this year’s ranking of the annual Times Higher Education Top 100 Universities under 50 years old.
Four Asian universities were ranked among the top 10 of the world’s young universities, including South Korea's Pohang University of Science and Technology which took the top spot, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) (third placing), Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (4) and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (5).
The country was also absent from the Times Higher Education World Reputation rankings list released in March, losing out to other Southeast Asian countries.
Will Redzuan and Saifuddin’s resignations from University of Malaya, and the failure of Malaysian universities to regain world-class academic standards and standing, which is so critical and crucial to Malaysia’s international competitiveness, be on the agenda of the Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, and is this one of the “taboo” subjects which no Minister dares to raise in Cabinet?
Sumber HD - 30-6-2014
Karpal Singh diberi Anugerah Perkhidmatan Awam
SHAH ALAM: Mendiang Karpal Singh akan diberi Anugerah Perkhidmatan Awam sebagai pengiktirafan terhadap perkhidmatan beliau yang penuh dedikasi kepada negara selama lebih 40 tahun, kata Pengerusi Gandhi Memorial Trust (GMT) S.Radhakrishnan. Beliau berkata anugerah anumerta itu akan disampaikan GMT pada satu majlis khas di Royal Selangor Club, Kuala Lumpur pada 30 Jun.
Radhakrishnan menyifatkan Karpal Singh, bekas pengerusi kebangsaan DAP dan anggota Parlimen Bukit Gelugor, sebagai peguam yang bijak, ahli politik dan anggota Parlimen yang pintar dan paling istimewa, seorang aktivis hak asasi manusia yang berjiwa kental.
"Sepanjang hayatnya, Karpal Singh memperjuangkan keadilan sosial serta menjunjung tinggi Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan Kedaulatan Undang-undang.
"Beliau adalah harta negara dan akan amat dirindui serta diingati kerana sumbangan dan pengorbanan besarnya untuk menjadikan Malaysia sebuah negara yang menjadi kebanggaan kita semua di Malaysia," katanya kepada Bernama.
Karpal Singh, yang digelar 'Harimau Jelutong', meninggal dunia dalam nahas jalan raya di KM 306.1 Lebuhraya Utara-Selatan berhampiran Gua Tempurung, Kampar pada awal pagi 17 April. Beliau berusia 74 tahun.
Radhakrishnan berkata GMT mengundang empat individu terkemuka dalam bidang guaman untuk memperkatakan tentang pelbagai sisi kehidupan dan kerjaya Karpal Singh sebelum penyampaian anugerah itu.
Mereka ialah bekas Hakim Mahkamah Rayuan Datuk Mahadev Shankar, bekas Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri yang bertanggungjawab bagi undang-undang Datuk Mohd Zaid Ibrahim, bekas Presiden Majlis Peguam Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan dan peguam Datuk Jagjit Singh, katanya.
Isteri Karpal Singh, Gurmit Kaur dan semua anak beliau akan menghadiri majlis itu di samping 20 duta dan pesuruhjaya tinggi serta beberapa hakim dan bekas hakim.
Mereka yang ingin menghadirinya atau ingin mendapatkan maklumat lanjut boleh berbuat demikian dengan menghantar emel kepada radhakrishnan@shearndelamore.com . - Bernama
Sumber HD - 26-6-2014
Tanpa YTL, laksana tender terbuka
Pengarah Eksekutif Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS) Wan Saiful Wan Jan (gambar) berkata, pengunduran YTL itu tidak seharusnya menyebabkan projek itu dianugerahkan kepada Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) seperti dicadangkan sesetengah pihak.
“Pengunduran (YTL) itu tidak sepatutnya mendorong projek itu diberikan kepada TNB. Monopoli seperti itu tidak akan memberi faedah kepada pengguna,” katanya.
Menurut beliau, pengunduran YTL itu membuka peluang untuk Suruhanjaya Tenaga mematuhi janjinya untuk melaksanakan proses tender terbuka bagi projek janakuasa demi kebaikan rakyat.
Wan Saiful memetik kajian Institut Kajian Strategik dan Antarabangsa (ISIS) awal tahun ini bertajuk ‘Reforming Peninsular Malaysia’s Electricity Sector’ yang menunjukkan bahawa persaingan pembidaan projek tarif loji gas telah membawa kepada penurunan tarif yang sepatutnya memanfaatkan pengguna elektrik di rumah.
“Desakan agar projek janakuasa diberikan kepada satu syarikat sahaja bertentangan dengan Model Ekonomi Baru (MEB) dan hanya mengembalikan kita kepada amalan monopoli masa lalu. Kita tidak boleh membiarkan tadbir urus dijalankan secara samar kerana ia akan menyebabkan kronisme terus berlaku,” katanya lagi.
Pada 18 Jun lalu, YTL menarik diri daripada projek kontroversi itu dengan alasan "mengelak kesangsian terhadap komitmen tadbir urus dan ketelusan kerajaan".
Suruhanjaya Tenaga menganugerahkan projek itu kepada konsortium yang dianggotai YTL, TNB dan SIPP Energy secara rundingan terus.
Sebelum ini, Ahli Parlimen Petaling Jaya Utara Tony Pua mengecam Suruhanjaya Tenaga yang tidak memberikan projek itu secara tender terbuka, dan menyifatkan badan itu memanipulasi proses penganugerahan agar memihak kepada syarikat tertentu.
“Projek 4A bukan saja dirunding secara terus, malah termanya juga samar-samar, tidak spesifik dan disediakan secara tergesa-gesa. Lebih buruk lagi, perjanjian konsortium antara YTL, TNB dan SIPP Energy – syarikat yang dikaitkan dengan Sultan Johor – masih belum selesai.
“Ini menunjukkan Suruhanjaya Tenaga memanipulasi proses penganugerahan keseluruhan untuk memihak kepada syarikat konsesi tertentu dengan tidak mengambil kira prinsip ketelusan, tadbir urus yang baik dan tender berdaya saing,” katanya dalam satu kenyataan yang dibuat pada 20 Jun lalu. – Roketkini.com
Sumber HD - 25-6-2014
Larang masuk Sarawak jejas nama baik Adenan
KUALA LUMPUR: Ahli Parlimen Seputeh, Teresa Kok Suh Sim menyifatkan larangan yang dikenakan ke atas beberapa Ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat untuk memasuki Sarawak hanya menjejaskan nama baik Ketua Menteri, Tan Sri Adenan Satem.Menghargai keputusan Adenan menghentikan sementara larangan itu bagi membolehkan pimpinan Pakatan menghadiri majlis pengebumian mendiang Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri (Adun) Bukit Assek Wong Ho Leng, Teresa tetap menggesa Adenan membatalkan sahaja larangan tersebut, lapor Roketkini.
“Memberikan penghormatan kepada Ho Leng adalah tanda ‘gentleman’ dan mesra oleh Ketua Menteri dan kerajaan negeri.
“Saya mengambil kesempatan untuk berterima kasih kepada beliau yang membenarkan saya masuk ke Sarawak. (Namun) apabila saya tanya kenapa saya dilarang masuk, beliau tidak menjawab.
“Bukankah lebih baik jika beliau membatalkan (sahaja) larangan itu? Larangan tanpa alasan ini hanya menjejaskan nama baik beliau,” kata Teresa menerusi laman Facebooknya.
Ketika kempen Pilihanraya Kecil (PRK) Balingian Mac lalu, Teresa dan beberapa pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat lain, antaranya Ahli Parlimen Pandan Rafizi Ramli dan Setiausaha Agung PKR Datuk Saifuddin Nasution Ismail dilarang masuk ke negeri itu.
Namun, Teresa diberi ‘pas istimewa’ selama tujuh hari bagi menghadiri pengebumian mendiang Wong Ho Leng semalam.
Selain pemimpin DAP, Adenan, Speaker Dun Datuk Amar Mohamad Asfia Awang Nassar, dan beberapa Menteri Sarawak turut hadir memberikan penghormatan terakhir di kediaman mendiang, petang semalam.
Sumber HD - 24-6-2014
Pembangkang boleh tentukan dasar kerajaan
Memasuki gelanggang persaingan idea, pembangkang memainkan peranan utama dalam menentukan agenda untuk “dicuri” kerajaan. Tetapi kita tidak seharusnya berhenti di situ. Kita perlu meneruskan desakan, dengan idea baru yang lebih baik, dipandu dengan kerangka falsafah yang kita dukung.Sejak Ketua Pemuda Umno Hishammuddin Hussein (kini Naib Presiden Umno) menghunus kerisnya pada Julai 2005, pembangkang telah dimanfaatkan dengan “bulan madu” yang agak panjang dari pengundi bukan-Melayu. Penurunan mendadak sokongan Cina dalam PRK Teluk Intan barangkali sebagai petanda bahawa keghairahan “anti- Umno” selama sembilan tahun ini telah menyurut.
Mungkin setakat itulah yang boleh dibawa sentimen “Kami bukan Umno”. Apabila keghairahan ABU (Asal Bukan Umno) menyurut, maka pembangkang perlu mencapai kemenangan dengan menawarkan idea yang lebih baik di peringkat nasional, dan mentadbir dengan idea yang lebih baik di peringkat negeri.
Ramai di kalangan pembangkang berpegang kepada idea bahawa tidak usah kita mengajar Barisan Nasional untuk menjadi “celik” dengan menawarkan dasar kita untuk ditirunya. Dengan kata lain, kita tidak perlu bekerja keras untuk mencanangkan idea. Bagaimanapun, saya tidak bersetuju dengan pandangan sedemikian. Mengapa?
Pembangkang di Malaysia tidak berpeluang untuk terlibat dalam penggubalan dasar – tapi ini bukan bermakna bahawa wakil BN memiliki peluang tersebut.
Jika dahulunya pegawai kakitangan awam kanan yang memainkan peranan penting dalam pembentukan dasar, kini tugas “pemikir” telah di-”outsource” kepada badan swasta. Vendor, kontraktor dan perentir memaklumkan kerajaan apa yang harus dilakukan. “Alat mainan” pertahanan dibeli oleh kerajaan dengan mengengkari nasihat daripada angkatan tentera. Bandar dibina atas nasihat pemaju. Lebuhraya dibina untuk memenuhi keperluan pemegang konsesi. Rangkaian LRT dan terowong saluran air dibina kerana tokoh kroni telah membeli sebuah jentera membina terowong pintar – yang bertujuan untuk meredakan situasi kebanjiran tetapi tidak begitu pintar ketika berfungsi.
Maka tugas pertama pembangkang Malaysia adalah untuk menuntut kembali ruang awam daripada badan swasta berkepentingan dan BN. Kita perlu mencurahkan kesungguhan yang setara untuk membincangkan soal pendemokrasian dan keadilan ekonomi, sebagaimana kesungguhan kita berperang dengan Umno dan kumpulan yang sewaktu dengannya seperti Isma dan Perkasa dalam dasar identiti (kaum, agama dan raja).
Banyak persamaan dikongsi oleh parti-parti komponen Pakatan Rakyat dalam bidang pendemokrasian dan keadilan ekonomi. Barangkali dalam bidang ini juga BN boleh “mencuri” dasar kita, tetapi sekadar bentuk luaran tanpa menghayati jiwa dan roh di dalamnya.
Contohnya BR1M. Jawatankuasa Dasar dan Manifesto Pakatan Rakyat telah mengadakan mesyuarat mingguan antara Julai dengan September 2011 untuk merangka belanjawan alternatif. Ini antara usaha kita, setelah berjaya merangka satu dasar bersama pada Disember 2009.
Pada Julai 2011, Pakatan mengumumkan untuk memberi tumpuan terhadap peningkatan mutu kehidupan 60% warga Malaysia terbawah dari segi pendapatan. Pakatan menekankan betapa pentingnya untuk menghapuskan monopoli, rasuah dan kegiatan merentir (rent-seeking) – agar ‘pendapatan boleh guna’ bagi golongan 60% terbawah ini boleh ditingkatkan.
Kita menganjurkan bahawa kerajaan perlu menawarkan kesihatan awam, pengangkutan awam dan perumahan awam yang lebih baik. Kita juga menekankan dasar gaji minima, mengurangkan kebanjiran pendatang asing yang tidak berkemahiran, disusuli dengan usaha membantu usahawan kecil dan sederhana untuk menaiktaraf industri mereka dengan teknologi dan daya pengeluaran yang lebih tinggi – lantas menawarkan lebih banyak peluang pekerjaan berkemahiran yang pendapatannya lebih tinggi secara perbandingan.
Sejurus selepas pengumuman Pakatan itu, Timbalan Perdana Menteri Muhyiddin Yassin berkata kerajaan BN akan bersaing dengan Pakatan Rakyat untuk meningkatkan kehidupan golongan 60% terbawah. Keesokannya, seorang kawan daripada kerajaan memberitahu saya bahawa pasukannya diminta untuk berusaha ke arah itu tanpa mengubah kerangka ekonomi yang memanfaatkan kroni. Hasil produknya bernama BR1M.
Kita boleh mendakwa bahawa berkat usaha Pakatan, kerajaan terpaksa memberi tumpuan terhadap golongan 60% terbawah, tetapi kita perlu terus menerokai dasar yang pelbagai untuk memperbaiki kehidupan 60% dari bawah – bukannya dasar bersifat sementara semata-mata yang boleh diibaratkan seperti menghulurkan candu apabila wang tunai dihulurkan sekaligus.
Begitu juga dengan royalti 20%. Pakatan yang menjuarai isu itu dan akhirnya ia menjadi sesuatu yang diperkatakan semua orang. Mungkin pada satu hari nanti, seseorang daripada kerajaan yang mahu dirinya kekal relevan dan popular akan terdorong untuk bertindak, atau sekurang-kurangnya berjanji untuk bertindak, bagi menangani isu ini.
Jadi, pembangkang tidak seharusnya berhenti sekadar menjana isu. Kita perlu mendalami asas ekonomi yang sebenar kerana adalah penting untuk kita menentukan agenda. Seandainya kita gagal menentukan agenda, maka Umno dengan badan-badan NGO sekutunya yang berkepala keras serta propagandis Biro Tata Negara tajaan kerajaan akan terus menjadikan perkauman, agama, dan raja sebagai isu yang mencuri perhatian, tatkala kroni terus merompak khazanah negara tanpa dipantau sesiapa.
Akhirnya kita mahu menggegar kroni-kapitalisme Umno-BN untuk menunjukkan kepada semua warga Malaysia bahawa satu paradigma pembangunan yang berbeza adalah mungkin. Kita boleh meruntuhkannya sistem kroni ini seandainya kita menggali dengan cukup dalam. Alternatif yang kita dukung bakal membawa Malaysia ke arah sebuah negara yang lebih dinamik ekonominya dan menghasilkan pembangunan yang lestari.
Sumber HD - 22-6-2014
Khairy perlu usaha arah JPA tarik balik surat tunjuk sebab
KUALA LUMPUR: Menteri Belia dan Sukan Khairy Jamaluddin perlu meyakinkan kabinet untuk menarik balik surat tunjuk sebab yang diberikan kepada pelajar Canberra, Aslam Abdul Jalil.Setiausaha Publisiti DAP, Tony Pua berkata, sebagai seorang menteri yang menyokong keterbukaan, Khairy harus berusaha memastikan surat tersebut ditarik balik.
“Saya memohon pertimbangan Khairy yang selama ini menyokong agar pelajar lebih bersikap terbuka demi meningkatkan pemikiran kritis serta kemahiran analisis mereka, selain bagi menyuburkan nilai-nilai demokrasi, agar beliau berusaha memastikan Kabinet mengeluarkan arahan supaya JPA (Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam) di Australia menarik balik surat tunjuk sebab yang tidak wajar itu,” ujar Tony dipetik Roketkini.
Pada 18 Jun lalu, Aslam seorang pelajar tahun akhir Universiti Nasional Australia (ANU) telah diberikan surat tunjuk sebab oleh JPA kerana mengambil bahagian dalam forum bersama Tony dan Fello Jabatan Politik & Perubahan Sosial ANU Dr John Funston.
Forum bertajuk ‘Race, Religion dan Royalty’ itu telah dianjurkan oleh Canberra Malaysia Interest Group di ANU pada 22 April 2014.
Menurut Tony, perbincangan dalam forum itu langsung tidak mempunyai sebarang unsur hasutan, penghinaan terhadap mana-mana kaum, agama mahupun raja.
Justeru itu, beliau percaya bahawa “surat tunjuk sebab kepada Aslam jelas telah diberikan dengan niat jahat untuk menakut-nakutkan dan menindas pelajar kita di luar negara”.
Tony yang juga Ahli Parlimen Petaling Jaya Utara menjelaskan bahawa beliau ke Australia kerana mendapat jemputan untuk berucap di Sidang Kemuncak Australia Malaysia (MASA) di Melbourne.
Namun, jemputan kepada beliau telah dibatalkan oleh pihak penaja MASA kerana khuatir ia tidak selari dengan kepentingan beberapa pihak.
Pembatalan jemputan itu telah mendapat respons daripada Khairy, yang menentang langkah tidak mencerminkan berprinsipkan demokrasi tersebut menerusi akaun twitter beliau: “@ Tonypua For what it’s worth I raised the matter last cabinet & said your ‘disinvitation’ was wrong & shouldn’t happen again”.
(Saya telah membangkitkan perkara ini dalam kabinat lepas & menyatakan ‘pembatalan jemputan’ itu salah dan tidak harus berulang.)
Menurut Tony, langkah yang diambil ke atas Aslam jelas menunjukkan bahawa Kabinet tidak menghargai pandangan Khairy.
“Perkembangan terkini jelas menunjukkan bahawa Kabinet tidak menghargai pandangan Khairy," ujarnya.
Ini, katanya kerana tindakan memberi surat tunjuk sebab kepada seorang pelajar adalah lebih berat daripada sekadar ‘membatalkan jemputan’ kepada seorang ahli politik pembangkang.
Sumber HD - 21-6-2014
DAP dakwa rencana akhbar berniat jahat
GEORGE TOWN : DAP Bukit Bendera semalam membuat satu laporan polis berhubung rencana terbitan akhbar Berita Harian 7 Jun lalu yang didakwa cuba menimbulkan kebencian orang Melayu terhadap parti itu.
Rencana tersebut bertajuk “DAP Api-apikan Sejarah Hitam”, dengan tajuk kecil “Sikap Biadap, Provokasi Berterusan Terhadap Melayu Tak Dijadikan Iktibar”, ditulis oleh Juhaidi Yeah Abdullah.
Menurut Roketkini, laporan polis dibuat Ketua Pemuda DAP Bukit Bendera Haris Zuan di Balai Polis Jalan Patani pagi semalam.
Turut bersama adalah Setiausaha Pemuda Bukit Bendera Rozaimin Elias dan Naib Ketua Pemuda DAP Negeri Chris Lee Chun Kit.
Haris Zuan berkata, rencana tersebut jelas tidak disokong apa-apa fakta dan berniat jahat untuk mengelirukan rakyat Malaysia, khususnya masyarakat Melayu, terhadap DAP.
“Dalam rencana itu, Juhaidi memfitnah DAP sebagai parti yang tidak henti-henti menghina orang Melayu, serta mendakwa matlamat DAP adalah untuk menimbulkan kebencian terhadap Umno, menghapuskan hak istimewa Melayu dan mengurangkan pengaruh Melayu dalam politik dan negara.
“Penulis juga menuduh DAP sebagai ‘rasis-cauvinis’ kerana cuba menghapuskan satu kaum untuk kepentingan kaum lain, selain menghina institusi Raja-raja Melayu menolak undang-undang syariah, mempertikaikan kontrak sosial dan hak istimewa orang Melayu,” katanya dipetik portal DAP itu.
Beliau berkata, sepanjang penubuhan DAP pada tahun 1966, banyak pemimpin Melayu diangkat untuk bertanding dalam pilihanraya, antaranya sembilan calon yang mewakili DAP ketika kali pertama parti itu menyertai PRU pada tahun 1969.
“Kini kami mempunyai perwakilan Melayu di semua peringkat membuat keputusan di Malaysia. Antaranya Senator Dr Ariffin Omar (Dewan Negara), Zairil Khir Johari dan Mohd Ariff Sabri (Dewan Rakyat), Tengku Zulpuri (Ketua Pembangkang DUN Pahang) dan saya sendiri di peringkat kerajaan tempatan.
“Maka adalah tidak munasabah apabila DAP dikatakan bermatlamat mengurangkan pengaruh Melayu-Bumiputera dalam politik negara, melainkan yang penulis rencana itu maksudkan adalah Melayu Umno,” katanya lagi.
Justeru itu, beliau menggesa polis supaya menjalankan siasatan yang adil berhubung fitnah tersebut. - HARAKAHDAILY 21/6/2014
Sumber HD - 21-6-2014
Setting the record straight on the Auditor General Report briefing
On Tuesday, 17th of June, 2014, a briefing was held for the media at the Integrity Institute of Malaysia on the latest release of the National Auditor’s Report. This meeting was organized by the office of Senator Datuk Paul Low, Minister in charge of anti-corruption initiatives and attended by all the Secretary-Generals of all the Ministries including the Chief Secretary, Tan Sri Ali Hamsa.
Before the start of this briefing, the Minister asked all who were not civil servants or members of the media to leave the briefing room. He specifically asked for MPs to leave the room. The MP for Bayan Baru, Sim Tze Sim and the MP for Kuala Terengganu, Dato’ Raja Kamarul Bahrin Shah bin Raja Ahmad, who identified themselves as MPs were then asked to leave the briefing room. I did not identify myself as an MP and hence, was not asked to leave the room. I stayed on for the entire briefing.
The invitation to the briefing which I received from another source stated that this was a public briefing or ‘taklimat umum’ (Appendix 1). Nowhere was it stated that this briefing was only restricted to the media and that MPs were not allowed to attend. In the reply slip, there was no mention that this briefing was only for the media (Appendix 2). Furthermore I had emailed my registration for this event and had gotten a positive reply from the office of Datuk Paul Low (Appendix 3). I attended this event in good faith and was surprised that the Minister asked MPs in attendance to leave the room. Given that I had already registered for this event and received a positive reply from the Minister’s office, I did not see any need for me to leave the event and as such, I did not identify myself as an MP. Even if the Minister’s office had made an error in not clarifying that this was event was only open to the media, he acted in bad faith when he asked for MPs already present to leave the room.
In a subsequent statement, the Minister tried to explain why the MPs were asked to leave the room.Among the reasons was the following:
“It was a matter of principle. MPs already have a legitimate platform to raise questions on the AG’s Report during each sitting of Parliament. Again, this event was meant solely for the Press – and we hope that the boundaries of this promising platform will be understood and respected by all parties concerned.”
The Minister should be aware that the AG’s report was tabled only one week after the current parliament sitting started. Our parliamentary questions are submitted 2 weeks before the sitting starts which means we have no way to include the items found in the AG’s report in our questions. Furthermore, there is no separate or special session in parliament to debate the AG’s Report. Each MP does not have the opportunity to raise specific questions to specific Ministers or the Sec-Gens in parliament. The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is only comprised of a small number of MPs and even then, the PAC hearings are not open to the press nor to other MPs who are not part of the PAC. Hence, such an event would have been an excellent opportunity for MPs from both sides to ask their specific questions on the latest AG report.
The Minister, at this briefing, said that he would organize a similar session with the MPs. We hold him to his word that he would organize another briefing comprising of all the Sec-Gens of all the Ministries including the Chief Secretary for all the MPs. His failure to do so would signify the lack of desire to have an open, transparent and honest discussion and debate about the National Auditor’s Report and to combat corruption and wastage more generally.
Sumber HD - 19-6-2014
Dyana hargai semangat Muslimat PAS bantu kempen
KOTA BHARU: Bekas calon DAP pilihan raya kecil (PRK) Teluk Intan, Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud mengucapkan terima kasih kepada aktivis Muslimat PAS seluruh negara kerana telah membantu kempen pilihan raya beliau.
Menurut Dyana, Muslimat PAS dan Wanita PKR khususnya dari Kelantan telah bersungguh-sungguh berkempen untuk membantu beliau yang mewakili Pakatan Rakyat.
Berucap pada majlis ramah mesra bersama Muslimat PAS Kelantan, Rabu lalu, Dyana berkata walaupun tewas di Teluk Intan, usaha bersungguh-sungguh yang ditunjukkan Muslimat PAS dan wanita Pakatan Rakyat membuatkan beliau begitu terharu.
"Semangat kesepakatan dalam Pakatan Rakyat yang ditunjukkan Muslimat PAS membuatkan saya kuat.
"Kesepakatan kita ketika berkempen baru-baru ini membuktikan perpaduan kita dalam Pakatan Rakyat benar-benar utuh," ujarnya.
Turut hadir pada majlis itu anggota Ahli Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan Negeri, Mumtaz Md Nawi, Adun Tanjung Mas, Rohani Ibrahim dan para pemimpin Muslimat PAS negeri. - HARAKAHDAILY, 13/6/2014
Sumber HD - 13-6-2014
Hudud not the reason behind DAP's loss in Teluk Intan – Kit Siang
DAP advisor Lim Kit Siang denied that PAS and the hudud controversy were the main factors behind the party defeat in the Teluk Intan by-election.
“DAP never blamed PAS, this is not true. Gobind (Singh, Puchong MP) made the statement, and in the statement he stated our thanks to PAS for their support and effort in the Teluk Intan by-election,” Lim told the press following a private meeting with PAS Murshidul Am Tuan Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat at his office yesterday.
Lim was referring to a previous statement made by Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo, which he claimed that it had been sensationalised by certain quarters to highlight hudud as the main factor behind DAP defeat in Teluk Intan.
“Gobind did say hudud was part of the factor, but he stated it was not a big issue, we don’t deny it will be a big issue in the future, but it is not a big factor in our defeat.
That’s why we wanted to explain it here, in fact, our explanation today caught Tok Guru (Nik Aziz) in surprise as he believed what was written in the media was the truth,” Lim further explained.
DAP’s Teluk Intan by-election candidate, Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud, who is also Lim’s political secretary was also present during the meeting.
According to Lim, the party is still studying the real reason behind the party’s defeat in Teluk Intan.
It was not known whether DAP would agree to the findings of Merdeka Centre, which pinned the party’s defeat in Teluk Intan on miscalculated strategy, instead of hudud as claimed by detractors.
Sumber HD - 13-6-2014
Why the Total Secrecy about the Prevention of Crime Act Panel and detainees
In my question to the Prime Minister dated 9th June 2014, I asked the Home Minister to state:-
a. Who the people are on the panel of Prevention of Crime Act (PCA), their names and their background
b. How many people had been arrested and for what crime since the PCA was gazetted
c. What was the reason for the arrest of Tengku Arif Bongsu
In his answer to me, the Home Minister stated that (a) the members of the Crime Prevention Board are consists of individuals of high integrity with more than 27 years of experience in the field of security. They are also law practitioners of good credentials.
(b) Since the enforcement of the Prevention of Crime Act (Amendment and Extension) 2013 (PCA) from 2nd April 2014, as many as 132 individuals had been detained. However, the Home Minister suggested not to reveal the details of the ongoing investigations because of the concerns about interfering with the police investigations. The reason for the arrest of Tengku Arif Bongsu was similarly not to be revealed.
This is indeed very worrying. Why is there such total secrecy concerning the panel members of the Prevention of Crime Act? Senator Paul Low openly stated in October 2013 the government may consider putting in personalities that people trust into the three member panel. He offered to appoint Bersih 2.0 leader, S Ambiga. However, she declined the offer straightaway. So now we have three members on the panel that the Malaysian citizens are denied knowledge of their names and their background? Who are these people of high integrity, vast experience and good credentials?
The first thing the government can do to win our trust in the implementation of PCA is to inform us who the esteemed members are on the panel. Why? This is because in a short period of 2 months, 132 individuals had been detained for two years without trial. That equates to approximately 2 individuals every day.
Again the people were denied to know even why and for what crime these people were detained. We are not asking for every individual details. We are only attempting to reassure ourselves that the police are putting the PCA to “appropriate” use. The Home Minister claimed that this would interfere with the police investigations! This is absolutely incredible, if not outrageous. Shouldn’t police investigations be done before people were detained without trial for two years? Rather than lock up first, then investigate at your leisure? Can the Home Minister please enlighten us on the ground of arrest for Tengku Arif Bongsu, whose wife is pregnant with two young children?
If the government is serious about winning the trust of the people over its implementation of PCA, there must be more transparency and accountability in the whole process. Right now, even the “esteemed members” of the PCA panel are shrouded in total secrecy, which does not bode well for the time ahead.
Sumber HD - 13-6-2014
a. Who the people are on the panel of Prevention of Crime Act (PCA), their names and their background
b. How many people had been arrested and for what crime since the PCA was gazetted
c. What was the reason for the arrest of Tengku Arif Bongsu
In his answer to me, the Home Minister stated that (a) the members of the Crime Prevention Board are consists of individuals of high integrity with more than 27 years of experience in the field of security. They are also law practitioners of good credentials.
(b) Since the enforcement of the Prevention of Crime Act (Amendment and Extension) 2013 (PCA) from 2nd April 2014, as many as 132 individuals had been detained. However, the Home Minister suggested not to reveal the details of the ongoing investigations because of the concerns about interfering with the police investigations. The reason for the arrest of Tengku Arif Bongsu was similarly not to be revealed.
This is indeed very worrying. Why is there such total secrecy concerning the panel members of the Prevention of Crime Act? Senator Paul Low openly stated in October 2013 the government may consider putting in personalities that people trust into the three member panel. He offered to appoint Bersih 2.0 leader, S Ambiga. However, she declined the offer straightaway. So now we have three members on the panel that the Malaysian citizens are denied knowledge of their names and their background? Who are these people of high integrity, vast experience and good credentials?
The first thing the government can do to win our trust in the implementation of PCA is to inform us who the esteemed members are on the panel. Why? This is because in a short period of 2 months, 132 individuals had been detained for two years without trial. That equates to approximately 2 individuals every day.
Again the people were denied to know even why and for what crime these people were detained. We are not asking for every individual details. We are only attempting to reassure ourselves that the police are putting the PCA to “appropriate” use. The Home Minister claimed that this would interfere with the police investigations! This is absolutely incredible, if not outrageous. Shouldn’t police investigations be done before people were detained without trial for two years? Rather than lock up first, then investigate at your leisure? Can the Home Minister please enlighten us on the ground of arrest for Tengku Arif Bongsu, whose wife is pregnant with two young children?
If the government is serious about winning the trust of the people over its implementation of PCA, there must be more transparency and accountability in the whole process. Right now, even the “esteemed members” of the PCA panel are shrouded in total secrecy, which does not bode well for the time ahead.
Sumber HD - 13-6-2014
Call for a Joint Ministerial Working Group to tackle the problem of Homelessness
It was reported yesterday that the government will be planning a major crackdown on the homeless and beggars in KL starting next month in July, 2014.This major operation will be initiated by the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry (KPWKM), aided by the police, the Immigration Department, the City Council (DBKL) and the National Anti-Drug Agency (AADK).
The statements made by the Minister, Dauk Seri Rohani Abdul Karim, that were reported in various news reports demonstrated a severe lack of understanding and empathy on the part of the Minister regarding the problem of homelessness.
This operation, entitled “Ops Qaseh” will firstly entail bringing the homeless and beggars to the Sungai Buloh ‘reintegration’ center where they will be given ‘food and lodging, counselling, recreational facilities, healthcare and practical training such as agriculture, vocational skills and handicraft’.
Apart from the fact that this basically amounts to imprisonment for the homeless - which is not a crime - there is no guarantee that the comprehensive list of ‘services’ listed by the Minister will be adequately provided for in these halfway homes. The example of Anjung Singgah, a Ministry sponsor homeless shelter at Jalan Hang Lekiu which is run by the National Welfare Foundation is not encouraging. Harian Metro reporters, who were posing as homeless people, were turned away by the staff at this shelter including a person who claimed to be a RELA officer.
The fact that the minister found that many of the homeless were ‘able-bodied and aware’ and that ‘some were trying to save as much money as possible to send home and eating food provided by good Samaritans in order to keep costs low’, all discovered when the ‘went down to the ground’ clearly shows that she does not understand the complexity of the homelessness problem. As this article indicates, there are many reasons why someone is homeless, including people who are seem physically fit and healthy. These include mental illness, falling into debt as a result of gambling, drug problems and alcoholism, being abandoned by children, escaping from abusive spouses, ex-convicts who cannot find jobs and foreigners whose visas have expired, just to name a few. Many of them cannot speak BM or are illiterate which means they cannot have access to government resources and help such as BR1M. Some of them don’t have proper identification.
Hence, for the Minister to assume that they can just get jobs at supermarkets and hypermarkets which are currently filled by foreigners after they have been ‘rehabilitated’ is clearly a mistaken assumption. Just because some of these jobs are low-skilled such as ‘arranging stock, arranging trolleys and sweeping’, does not mean that each and every homeless person can take up these jobs.
Finally for the Minister to ask the NGOS who are currently giving food and other types of assistance to the homeless in KL to ‘redirect their charity to our homes and other places that need help, not on the streets’ clearly shows that the Minister is not interested in working together with and to take advantage of the knowledge and experience of the NGOs in order to deal with the homeless issue. The same two Harian Metro reporters who were turned away from Anjung Singgah found better treatment in shelters run by NGOs which goes to show that the government should support these NGO efforts rather than trying to stop what the NGOs are currently doing.
I call upon the Malaysian government to set up a Joint Ministerial Working Group in order to coordinate a comprehensive and systematic effort to understand and then tackle the homeless issue rather than to take the heavy handed approach of declaring ‘war’ on the homeless on the streets of KL. For example, in the UK, a Joint Ministerial Working Group comprising the Minister for Housing and Local Government, the Ministry of Justice, the Minister for Defense, the Department for Education, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Department for Work and Pensions, the Department of Health all came together to come up with a comprehensive plan to end ‘rough sleeping’ in the UK.
In this plan, the Prime Minister, David Cameron acknowledged that:
“In these pages is the recognition that tackling rough sleeping is not just about providing homes. It is about dealing with the wider causes of homelessness, from family breakdown and mental illness to drug addiction and alcoholism. This is a complex, multi-faceted problem, which is why it is so important that Ministers from across government have come together in this Working Group. We are bringing together all the relevant Whitehall departments to try and crack this problem collectively.”
The Minister for Housing and Local Government at the time of the report also acknowledged that:
“But in the end it’s not people working in Whitehall who keep people off our streets – it’s people working at the sharp end that make the difference. The most successful action to tackle homelessness is rooted in local communities – local authorities working together with local community groups, charities and businesses. We must free people from unnecessary bureaucracy so they can work together and become an even better example of Big Society in action.”
In the Malaysian context, this Joint Ministerial Working Group should consist of the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development Ministry, the Home Minister, the Minister of Health, the Ministry of Human Resources, the Minister for the Federal Territories and the office of the Mayor of Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur. This working group must engage with the relevant stakeholders including the NGOs who are working with the homeless on a daily basis. Without a well thought out strategy, what will inevitably happen is that the same homeless people who will be rounded up next month, in July, will end up back on the streets of KL before long, perhaps in a worse condition compared to before they were hauled up.
Sumber HD - 13-6-2014
Pengalaman, strategi kempen antara punca Dyana kalah
KUALA LUMPUR: Kajian terbaru Merdeka Center terhadap keputusan Pilihan Raya Kecil (PRK) Teluk Intan mendapati kekalahan calon DAP Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud antaranya kerana dirasakan kurang berpengalaman berbanding calon BN Datuk Mah Siew Keong.
Dalam kajian yang ditanggung The Malaysian Insider itu, Merdeka Center merumuskan secara keseluruhannya DAP silap strategi dalam menggerakkan kempen mereka yang dikatakan hanya memfokuskan kawasan bandar.
Kajian dijalankan secara rawak pada 6 hingga 8 Jun lalu, terhadap 404 responden yang terdiri daripada pengundi Teluk Intan.
43% daripada responden merupakan Cina, 38% Melayu dan 19% India. Lelaki dan perempuan ditinjau secara seimbang dan semuanya berumur 21 tahun ke atas.
Kajian mendapati 14.7% merasakan DAP kalah kerana Dyana Sofya tidak berpengalaman sementara 9.4% mengatakan ia adalah kerana beliau bukan anak tempatan dan 11.7% percaya ramai pengundi muda tidak pulang mengundi dalam PRK itu.
Iannya ditambah lagi dengan faktor DAP yang dirasakan tidak berjaya memberikan penjelasan di semua tempat mengapa mereka meletakkan calon tidak berpengalaman.
72% daripada responden yang ditinjau dari 6 Jun hingga 8 Jun berkata mereka menerima mesej daripada pasukan kempen BN melalui telefon bimbit mereka berbanding hanya 31% yang menerima daripada DAP.
Sementara 35% pengundi berkata mereka berinteraksi dengan pasukan kempen BN di Teluk Intan dan hanya 23% berinteraksi dengan pasukan kempen DAP.
Kajian juga menunjukkan DAP tertinggal di belakang kerana Mah yang pernah dua penggal menjadi ahli parlimen di kawasan itu, sudah biasa dengan penduduk Teluk Intan.
65% peratus responden yang mengundi Dyana Sofya melakukannya kerana parti dan bukan kerana Dyana, manakala hampir separuh (45%) responden yang mengundi BN berbuat demikian kerana faktor Mah itu sendiri.
Dari sudut isu pula, 55% daripada responden juga merasakan BN bercakap mengenai isu yang mahu didengar oleh penduduk Teluk Intan berbanding 33% yang merasakan perkara sama dengan DAP.
Kajian itu mendapati kos sara hidup dan isu tempatan memberi kesan kepada pengundi berbanding isu seperti hudud atau skandal rasuah.
Kesempatan itu dilihat digunakan sepenuhnya oleh Mah berbanding Dyana dan DAP yang lebih memfokuskan isu-isu nasional.
Pada PRK Teluk Intan 31 Mei lalu, Dyana kalah tipis kepada Mah dengan majoriti hanya 238 undi. - HARAKAHDAILY 12/6/2014
Sumber HD - 12-6-2014
Dalam kajian yang ditanggung The Malaysian Insider itu, Merdeka Center merumuskan secara keseluruhannya DAP silap strategi dalam menggerakkan kempen mereka yang dikatakan hanya memfokuskan kawasan bandar.
Kajian dijalankan secara rawak pada 6 hingga 8 Jun lalu, terhadap 404 responden yang terdiri daripada pengundi Teluk Intan.
43% daripada responden merupakan Cina, 38% Melayu dan 19% India. Lelaki dan perempuan ditinjau secara seimbang dan semuanya berumur 21 tahun ke atas.
Kajian mendapati 14.7% merasakan DAP kalah kerana Dyana Sofya tidak berpengalaman sementara 9.4% mengatakan ia adalah kerana beliau bukan anak tempatan dan 11.7% percaya ramai pengundi muda tidak pulang mengundi dalam PRK itu.
Iannya ditambah lagi dengan faktor DAP yang dirasakan tidak berjaya memberikan penjelasan di semua tempat mengapa mereka meletakkan calon tidak berpengalaman.
72% daripada responden yang ditinjau dari 6 Jun hingga 8 Jun berkata mereka menerima mesej daripada pasukan kempen BN melalui telefon bimbit mereka berbanding hanya 31% yang menerima daripada DAP.
Sementara 35% pengundi berkata mereka berinteraksi dengan pasukan kempen BN di Teluk Intan dan hanya 23% berinteraksi dengan pasukan kempen DAP.
Kajian juga menunjukkan DAP tertinggal di belakang kerana Mah yang pernah dua penggal menjadi ahli parlimen di kawasan itu, sudah biasa dengan penduduk Teluk Intan.
65% peratus responden yang mengundi Dyana Sofya melakukannya kerana parti dan bukan kerana Dyana, manakala hampir separuh (45%) responden yang mengundi BN berbuat demikian kerana faktor Mah itu sendiri.
Dari sudut isu pula, 55% daripada responden juga merasakan BN bercakap mengenai isu yang mahu didengar oleh penduduk Teluk Intan berbanding 33% yang merasakan perkara sama dengan DAP.
Kajian itu mendapati kos sara hidup dan isu tempatan memberi kesan kepada pengundi berbanding isu seperti hudud atau skandal rasuah.
Kesempatan itu dilihat digunakan sepenuhnya oleh Mah berbanding Dyana dan DAP yang lebih memfokuskan isu-isu nasional.
Pada PRK Teluk Intan 31 Mei lalu, Dyana kalah tipis kepada Mah dengan majoriti hanya 238 undi. - HARAKAHDAILY 12/6/2014
Sumber HD - 12-6-2014
Should taxpayers’ money be used to fund the Deputy Prime Minister’s “beach holiday”?
During the last Parliamentary sitting in April 2014, we revealed leaked documents that showed Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin’s “working visit” to Dubai, UAE from 8 to 12 April 2014.
According to the documents, which were later not denied but instead refuted as a “draft,” Muhyiddin and his over-sized delegation flew on a “special aircraft” to Dubai, where he spent five days. Besides only a few official engagements, most of his time was spent on “private programmes,” informal events including with notable Malaysian construction companies Ahmad Zaki Resources Bhd and Eversendai Corporation, as well as golfing sessions. However, Muhyiddin’s office later stated that the golf games were also part of his official programme.
Extravagant and leisurely “working visits” a norm?
According to the latest leaked documents by the same whistle-blower blog (peniupwisel2020.blogspot.com), it appears that the Dubai trip was not an isolated case, but that Muhyiddin has a tendency for such extravagant “working visits.”
In 2012, the Deputy Prime Minister had apparently gone on a similar leisurely trip on taxpayers’ expense, this time to Gold Coast, Australia.
The itinerary (attached) shows that the trip from 10 to 18 November 2012 began with two days at
Melbourne where Muhyiddin officiated the 4th World Chinese Economic Forum. After the conference, it would appear that Muhyiddin decided to treat himself, his wife and his team to a four days, five nights (4D5N) trip to Gold Coast, Brisbane, which is a world-famous holiday destination.
Four days’ trip, only two hours of “work” a day
In the four full days spent in Gold Coast, Muhyiddin’s activities only took up an average of only two hours a day. Most of these activities were one-hour briefings and dinners, including a meeting with Kelab Umno students. In fact, his third day in Gold Coast consisted of no official programme at all.
Throughout the trip, Muhyiddin and his entourage stayed at the luxurious five-star Hilton Surfer’s Paradise Hotel.
“Company trip?”
To top things off, Muhyiddin’s entire entourage consisted of 17 members, made up of six bodyguards, five special officers, two press secretaries, a political secretary, a private secretary, his wife and himself.
In other words, they were no career civil servants or ministry officials accompanying him, just like in the Dubai trip recently. Is this because the Deputy Prime Minister does not trust his ministry officials, or is this because the trip to Gold Coast was nothing more than a glorified “company trip” for his staffers?
Gold Coast for ministers, kangkung for the people
With the latest revelation, it is obvious that more and more Malaysians, especially civil servants, are determined to expose the extravagant spending of BN leaders involving the public purse.
Instead of investigating the ministers involved, the government has instead threatened to take action against whistle-blowers, as clearly stated by Chief Secretary Tan Sri Ali Hamsa who has been reported to have said that the government “will take firm action including sacking civil servants found leaking its secrets,” just shortly after the Dubai trip documents were initially revealed.
Perhaps, Ali Hamsa should spend less effort defending his political masters’ imprudent ways and put more initiative into saving public funds. This is all the more important considering the government is now telling Malaysians to tighten our belts as it cuts subsidies, increase prices and implementing a new consumption tax in the form of the GST (Goods and Services Tax).
After all, why should Malaysians pay for our ministers’ leisurely holidays at the beach while ordinary Malaysians are forced to face inflation and increasing income disparity?
Sumber HD - 9-6-2014
Response to Dr Wee Ka Siong’s opinion piece
In an opinion peace entitled “Make Teluk Intan the end of hate politics”, MCA Deputy President Dr Wee Ka Siong lobbed a few baseless accusations against the DAP and Pakatan but ended up implicating and highlighting the failures of his own party and his own BN coalition.
Firstly, he accuses DAP for failing Dyana Sofya and of “trying to push the limitations of tolerance and create discord among races”. I fail to comprehend how the DAP can be guilty of this in any aspect of our campaign in Teluk Intan unless Dr. Wee is somehow implying that the fielding of a Malay candidate in a non-Malay majority constituency can create discord among the races. Of all people, Dr. Wee should appreciate the benefits of having a minority representative since his very own parliament seat of Ayer Hitam is a 56% Malay majority constituency. Rather than criticize the DAP, Dr. Wee should have congratulated DAP for taking a bold step in breaking down racial barriers and stereotypes in the decision to field Dyana in Teluk Intan.
Secondly, Dr. Wee accused the DAP of hubris by saying that the party would win Chinese majority seats like Seputeh and Cheras even if we fielded a goat as a candidate. Disregarding the fact that a goat is not a Malaysian citizen and therefore is not eligible to contest as a candidate in any Malaysian elections, the DAP has never made such a claim. Others may have used such an example as a way to describe seats which are DAP strongholds but to say that DAP has publicly made such a statement clearly shows that Dr. Wee is deluded. Moreover, right from the announcement of Dyana Sofya as DAP’s candidate in Teluk Intan, we have been saying that she is the underdog in this by-election. How can this be consistent with a hubristic attitude as described by Dr. Wee?
Thirdly, Dr. Wee claims credit for himself and for MCA when he mentioned that his presence in the Teluk Intan by-election ensured that there was no inter-party sabotage between MCA and GERAKAN for the ‘first time since 1974’. The fact that Dr. Wee can take pride in such an ‘achievement’ is frankly laughable. It is an open admission that the BN has been practicing a culture of internal ‘sabotage’ for 40 years (if not more) which required a hero of Dr. Wee’s status in order to be solved.
This naturally leads to the next question of how many other GERAKAN seats did MCA sabotage since 1974 and whether it will require Dr. Wee to practice his ‘magic’ in all of these seats in the next general election if GERAKAN is to stand a chance of winning these seats. Can he station himself again in Teluk Intan in GE14 seeing that his own Ayer Hitam seat seems quite secure? Will he also travel to the other GERAKAN seats such as Batu Kawam, Beruas, Taiping, Puchong, Batu, Kepong and Segambut to ensure total MCA cooperation with GERAKAN in these seats?
Fourthly, Dr. Wee accused the DAP of not being able to get-out-the-vote in Malay areas which “Umno took advantage of and quickly mobilized itself to garner support”. If UMNO was so good in mobilize support, why was it that voter turnout in the Malay areas dropped by 14% which is the same drop in turnout as the Chinese areas? If DAP was so poor in reaching out to the Malay areas, why did we win a larger percentage of votes in 7 out of the 10 Malay majority polling districts and how did we, together with very strong support from PAS, increase the level of Malay support from 25% to 28%?
Fifthly, Dr. Wee attributed the increase in support among Indian voters in the Nova Scotia estates where over 1500 Indians live as a result of MIC managing to acquire funds to ‘fix some of the run-down infrastructure abandoned since 2008’. In making this statement, Dr. Wee is admitting that the BN controlled federal government and the state government in Perak has failed to fulfil their responsibilities since 2008.
Furthermore, it took political party funds in order to solve this problem which is a further indictment of the failure of the BN federal and state governments to take care of the infrastructure needs of the people of Teluk Intan.
Despite this sudden infusion of MIC funds, the DAP still managed to win a respectable 40% of votes in Nova Scotia.
Sixthly, Dr. Wee implies that the young voters are not necessarily supporting the opposition. He gave the example of Kg Selamba, a Malay majority polling district where the BN received 266 votes compared to the DAP’s 74 votes in the youngest polling stream which is Saluran 4. This translates into the DAP winning only 21.8% of the total votes in this stream. But Dr. Wee failed to point out that the DAP only won 18.9% of this polling stream in GE2013 which means that DAP’s support actually increased by 2.9% in this polling stream during the by-election!
Dr. Wee also conveniently ignores the fact that DAP’s support in the younger polling streams is significantly higher than in the older polling streams, even in Malay majority areas. For example, in the Kampong Bahagia polling district which is 95.5% Malay, 23.9% of voters in the oldest polling stream, which is Saluran 1, voted for the DAP. In Saluran 7, the youngest polling stream, 48.8% of votes went to the DAP. Furthermore, this was an increase of 4.5% from GE2013! In the Batak Rabit polling station, which is 61.3% Malay, only 28.6% of voters in Saluran 1 voted for the DAP compared to 50.1% of voters in Saluran 5, the youngest saluran. The younger Malay voters clearly have less qualms about voting for the DAP compared to the older voters because they have access to more information and are less swayed by the negative propaganda and lies that have been spewed out against the DAP in the mainstream media. If this trend continues, spurred on by the DAP’s commitment to field more young Malay candidates in GE14, it is the BN which has to be worried.
If Dr. Wee is serious about ending hate politics, as his opinion piece implies, he should look no further than to his own coalition member, UMNO, who allowed Perkasa’s Zulkifli Nordin and Ibrahim Ali to contest in the Shah Alam and Pasir Mas parliament seats in GE2013; whose Bukit Bendera division chief Ahmad Ismail was suspended for three years for calling Chinese ‘pendatangs’ and later returned as the unanimous choice for division chief in the party elections in 2013; whose KLFT Youth Chief Razlan Razii recently threatened to burn down the DAP Headquarters in KL, just to name a few examples.
Sumber HD - 8-6-2014
Firstly, he accuses DAP for failing Dyana Sofya and of “trying to push the limitations of tolerance and create discord among races”. I fail to comprehend how the DAP can be guilty of this in any aspect of our campaign in Teluk Intan unless Dr. Wee is somehow implying that the fielding of a Malay candidate in a non-Malay majority constituency can create discord among the races. Of all people, Dr. Wee should appreciate the benefits of having a minority representative since his very own parliament seat of Ayer Hitam is a 56% Malay majority constituency. Rather than criticize the DAP, Dr. Wee should have congratulated DAP for taking a bold step in breaking down racial barriers and stereotypes in the decision to field Dyana in Teluk Intan.
Secondly, Dr. Wee accused the DAP of hubris by saying that the party would win Chinese majority seats like Seputeh and Cheras even if we fielded a goat as a candidate. Disregarding the fact that a goat is not a Malaysian citizen and therefore is not eligible to contest as a candidate in any Malaysian elections, the DAP has never made such a claim. Others may have used such an example as a way to describe seats which are DAP strongholds but to say that DAP has publicly made such a statement clearly shows that Dr. Wee is deluded. Moreover, right from the announcement of Dyana Sofya as DAP’s candidate in Teluk Intan, we have been saying that she is the underdog in this by-election. How can this be consistent with a hubristic attitude as described by Dr. Wee?
Thirdly, Dr. Wee claims credit for himself and for MCA when he mentioned that his presence in the Teluk Intan by-election ensured that there was no inter-party sabotage between MCA and GERAKAN for the ‘first time since 1974’. The fact that Dr. Wee can take pride in such an ‘achievement’ is frankly laughable. It is an open admission that the BN has been practicing a culture of internal ‘sabotage’ for 40 years (if not more) which required a hero of Dr. Wee’s status in order to be solved.
This naturally leads to the next question of how many other GERAKAN seats did MCA sabotage since 1974 and whether it will require Dr. Wee to practice his ‘magic’ in all of these seats in the next general election if GERAKAN is to stand a chance of winning these seats. Can he station himself again in Teluk Intan in GE14 seeing that his own Ayer Hitam seat seems quite secure? Will he also travel to the other GERAKAN seats such as Batu Kawam, Beruas, Taiping, Puchong, Batu, Kepong and Segambut to ensure total MCA cooperation with GERAKAN in these seats?
Fourthly, Dr. Wee accused the DAP of not being able to get-out-the-vote in Malay areas which “Umno took advantage of and quickly mobilized itself to garner support”. If UMNO was so good in mobilize support, why was it that voter turnout in the Malay areas dropped by 14% which is the same drop in turnout as the Chinese areas? If DAP was so poor in reaching out to the Malay areas, why did we win a larger percentage of votes in 7 out of the 10 Malay majority polling districts and how did we, together with very strong support from PAS, increase the level of Malay support from 25% to 28%?
Fifthly, Dr. Wee attributed the increase in support among Indian voters in the Nova Scotia estates where over 1500 Indians live as a result of MIC managing to acquire funds to ‘fix some of the run-down infrastructure abandoned since 2008’. In making this statement, Dr. Wee is admitting that the BN controlled federal government and the state government in Perak has failed to fulfil their responsibilities since 2008.
Furthermore, it took political party funds in order to solve this problem which is a further indictment of the failure of the BN federal and state governments to take care of the infrastructure needs of the people of Teluk Intan.
Despite this sudden infusion of MIC funds, the DAP still managed to win a respectable 40% of votes in Nova Scotia.
Sixthly, Dr. Wee implies that the young voters are not necessarily supporting the opposition. He gave the example of Kg Selamba, a Malay majority polling district where the BN received 266 votes compared to the DAP’s 74 votes in the youngest polling stream which is Saluran 4. This translates into the DAP winning only 21.8% of the total votes in this stream. But Dr. Wee failed to point out that the DAP only won 18.9% of this polling stream in GE2013 which means that DAP’s support actually increased by 2.9% in this polling stream during the by-election!
Dr. Wee also conveniently ignores the fact that DAP’s support in the younger polling streams is significantly higher than in the older polling streams, even in Malay majority areas. For example, in the Kampong Bahagia polling district which is 95.5% Malay, 23.9% of voters in the oldest polling stream, which is Saluran 1, voted for the DAP. In Saluran 7, the youngest polling stream, 48.8% of votes went to the DAP. Furthermore, this was an increase of 4.5% from GE2013! In the Batak Rabit polling station, which is 61.3% Malay, only 28.6% of voters in Saluran 1 voted for the DAP compared to 50.1% of voters in Saluran 5, the youngest saluran. The younger Malay voters clearly have less qualms about voting for the DAP compared to the older voters because they have access to more information and are less swayed by the negative propaganda and lies that have been spewed out against the DAP in the mainstream media. If this trend continues, spurred on by the DAP’s commitment to field more young Malay candidates in GE14, it is the BN which has to be worried.
If Dr. Wee is serious about ending hate politics, as his opinion piece implies, he should look no further than to his own coalition member, UMNO, who allowed Perkasa’s Zulkifli Nordin and Ibrahim Ali to contest in the Shah Alam and Pasir Mas parliament seats in GE2013; whose Bukit Bendera division chief Ahmad Ismail was suspended for three years for calling Chinese ‘pendatangs’ and later returned as the unanimous choice for division chief in the party elections in 2013; whose KLFT Youth Chief Razlan Razii recently threatened to burn down the DAP Headquarters in KL, just to name a few examples.
Sumber HD - 8-6-2014
No comments:
Post a Comment