Categories
Politics & government

[2352] What if I spam with my 1Malaysia email?

I am still on the 1Malaysia email controversy. I must admit, this is starting to get ridiculous because its investment cost is only RM50 million. That is nothing compared to other big projects announced which on the surface and without being too ideological at least, are a-okay. For such a small project, maybe I am criticizing PEMANDU too harshly.

Nevertheless, I find the way the whole issue has been handled infuriating. Each piece of information makes me angrier: as it turns out, the email will cost the government RM0.50 per unit. It is not free, as it was promoted earlier.

A PEMANDU director justified the cost by stating it would save the government money. He compared the RM0.50 per unit cost to the cost of sending out actual mails, which is RM1.00 per unit.[1]

Saving or not, I am unconvinced that there is a need for that email, as with a lot of other Malaysians out there. Do we even need to pay for the RM0.50 in the first place, hence saving even more, if saving is a concern?

Another other concern — out of many unstated here — and the driver of this post is the director’s comparison of the RM0.50 per unit cost to the RM1.00 per unit of sending out actual mail. The director’s logic is completely sound, if each comparable actual mail is replaced by exactly one email and that there is no additional email sent out.

The 1Malaysia email at the moment however appears like any normal free email out there, except that it is authenticated. Supposedly, that is the main point. The question is, what if a person uses the 1Malaysia email for everyday use?

I typically send out between 5 to 10 emails per day. I receive even more daily. If I use the 1Malaysia email exclusively (I hate having multiple email accounts), these everyday emails will add to the cost of running the program.

Who will pay the cost of sending out email?

Also, there will be a breakpoint where saving turns into additional expenditure. The breakpoint will not be too big, which makes the chances of incurring additional cost highly likely. This is based on the assumption that the government typically does not send out too many letters to citizens. I personally have not received a letter from the government so far this year. In the previous years, if I am not mistaken, I received only one yearly.

Now, what if a spammer gets his hand on the account?

In short, I doubt this will be a cost-saving exercise. And again, who will pay for it?

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — Fadhlullah Suhaimi said he expected agencies to pay Tricubes about 50 sen per e-mail, cheaper than the RM1.00 printing, stationery, postage and dispatch cost of sending a regular letter.

He said that, as the per unit cost of regular mail might double to RM2.00 if a misaddressed letter was sent back on the taxpayer’s dime, the government stood to save between 50 sen to RM1.00 per e-mail.

”The poor taxpayer, without realising, is actually allowing wastage of RM2.00 per post that goes out,” Fadhlullah Suhaimi said.

He cautioned, however, that these expected savings were based on Tricubes’ own estimates. He said the actual cost per unit would vary depending on the volume and complexity of the transaction, as well as the number of people who eventually sign up. [Pemandu: Government agencies to pay for 1 Malaysia email database. Yow Hong Chieh. The Malaysian Insider. April 21 2011]

Categories
Politics & government

[2350] DAP’s tilt at inclusiveness

There is a common denominator to any kind of respectable democratic system. The side with the most votes generally wins. There lies the importance of inclusive politics in a diverse society typical in Malaysia.

It is not enough to appeal to only one specific community in a competitive democracy as a whole. There is always an extra vote somewhere outside of the community that can make a difference. The communal divides have to be crossed just because those who fail will lose the democratic competition.

One of those divides in this country is language. There is no doubt that this divide exists in Kuching.

I have been in the Sarawak capital for nearly two weeks now and I have been trailing the state election campaigns of the DAP very closely. This gives me the opportunity to observe the party’s strategies and operations firsthand with respect to the election.

Kuching of the south bank — Padungan, Pending, Kota Sentosa and Batu Kawa — are Chinese-majority areas. In two of those areas, the Chinese make up no less than 90 per cent of the total voters. At the same time, it is inevitable for an impartial observer to conclude that the DAP is primarily a Chinese-based party. It is ethnically more diverse than any other political parties in Malaysia, with the exception of its Pakatan Rakyat partner PKR.

That does not negate its Chinese characteristic, however. This statement cannot be any further than the truth in Kuching, where its active membership reflects the demography of the city.

The composition of Kuching makes it only natural for Chinese to function as the primary language in the city. It is not a wonder that the DAP had used only Chinese for its political communication here in the past. There were not too many reasons for the local chapter to change.

While Kuching is so, the overall situation in Malaysia is more diverse. For a party with national aspirations, it has to widen its appeal beyond the Chinese community. It has to face the Malaysian diversity.

Continued reliance of the DAP on a single community that is also shrinking in terms of percentages will have the party boxing itself in a corner and eventually lose the democratic game at the national level. The DAP knows this and the party is addressing it. Kuching is a perfect example of the party’s try at inclusive politics.

The impression I get so far is that there is a remarkable swing against the Barisan Nasional government here in urban Kuching. Local reception to the DAP’s political rallies in the city has been impressive. In Sibu and Miri, news of more impressive turnouts was reported. Donations to the DAP meanwhile skyrocketed.

In stark contrast, the rallies of the SUPP have yet to make a mark. It is no exaggeration that the SUPP is lagging badly. The BN component party that is an MCA of Sarawak — the DAP’s foremost rival in the state — faces the possibility of becoming as irrelevant as the MIC, Gerakan and PPP.

With the big swing, Chinese votes alone could possibly guarantee the DAP seats in Kuching’s south bank. Yet, the party is not merely focusing on Chinese votes. It is trying to be inclusive.

For the first time in Kuching, the political messages of the DAP are done in languages other than Chinese. The English, Malay and Iban languages are now being used more widely in its pamphlets and posters.

Concurrently, the party is penetrating Bidayuh and Malay villages on the outskirts of Kuching for the first time ever. These areas were hostile to the DAP previously. This hostility, or perceived hostility, is absent today. Taib Mahmud and his allies are such a lightning rod that there is no anger left for anybody else.

Quite clearly, the situation is just right to grease the advance of the DAP’s inclusive initiatives.

The level of support for the DAP in Kuching has been tremendous so far. Members and volunteers of the DAP are showing exuberant confidence. It is hard not to.

In some small pockets within the DAP, however, there is a call for caution. Whether those supports will translate into actual votes will only be known after the polls close tomorrow.

After a tiring day campaigning criss-crossing Kuching from the relatively modern Batu Kawa shops and to the ill-equipped Kampung Tematu, a high-ranking DAP member sighed with face in his hands, saying: ”I hope these efforts with the Bidayuh work.”

It would be a shame for the DAP to lose. Even if it loses though, at least the act of reaching out itself is a brilliant beginning. It is not just a brilliant beginning for Kuching or Sarawak, and not just for the DAP itself. It is simply excellent for Malaysia.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

First published in The Malaysian Insider on April 15 2011.

Categories
Photography Politics & government

[2349] Rain or shine…

The last day of campaigning finished with a bang for the DAP of Pakatan Rakyat in Kuching. It was Superfriday. Internal estimates of the attendance hover over 20,000 persons. The more upbeat hazarded 30,000. Whatever the actual figure was, it was a massive rally, bigger than anything Kuching — either by Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat — has seen in the last two weeks.

No rumor of cancellation deterred their determination to be there. Words were going around the the police cancelled the permit for the rally.

No police intimidation dispersed them. The police insisted that the permit applied and approved was for a much smaller venue — a venue that would fit only 20 persons. The authority said they would arrest anybody that would speak on stage. They tried to arrest the first speaker, which was the founder of DAP Sarawak, an old man over 60 years ago. The police then however realized that they were surrounded by thousands of angry crowd booing the police. Amid folly, wisdom hit them and so they relented and decided to let the show to go on, as it should be.

And no rain would deter the crowd’s spirit. It was a beautiful sight.

This picture reminds me of a paragraph in Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward. I am not a fan of Bellamy, but that particular paragraph of his is beautiful.

In any case, if you are a Sarawakian, do not forget to vote for members of the Pakatan Rakyat on Saturday.

Categories
Photography Politics & government

[2348] Tony Pua prepping for Superfriday

As the polling day looms, life becomes absolutely hectic.

This is Tony Pua prepping the crowd on Thursday’s night in Kuching, for the mother of all rallies on Friday. Party workers are calling it the Superfriday.

Meanwhile, somewhere else, behind the scene…

Ubah!

Categories
Politics & government

[2347] SUPP the Petty Party

In one of DAP’s rallies in Kuching, a fiery orator accused SUPP as a party of orangutans. It was a good laugh. Although the accusation is not within the realm of straight mature politics, it is hardly a major point of the orator’s speech. The orangutan statement was made in passing. The major issues were abuse of power and corruption.

Several days later, a band of SUPP and BN supporters, along with SUPP candidates for Kuching seats came to the headquarters of DAP to protest against the labeling of SUPP as a party of orangutans. A size of the protest was greater than the average size SUPP has managed to attract so far to their political rallies.

Imagine that. Of all things to voice out, SUPP chooses the orangutan as the main issue. Not land, not electrification of rural areas, not water supply, not road condition, not freedom of conscience, not loss of green cover, not abuse of power, not…

One word: petty. It is petty but SUPP is making it their main issue for this state election.

A petty party deserves to become an irrelevant party.

How did DAP handle the pettiness of it all?

They sent in a full-size mascot of Ubah the Hornbill to greet the SUPP protesters.