Here, Member of Parliament Tony Pua was speaking to Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng before the latter took the stage to address the crowd in Kuching. The CM is a crowd-puller while the MP is one of the minds behind the DAP machinery here.
How big was the crowd?
The opposition is definitely on the offensive here in Sarawak.
I am tired of politics revolving around personality. With it comes excessive feudal culture and ugly mudslinging all too frequently. One can never truly escape it but there are other issues of actual importance if one wants to take a break from the ugliness of it all. These other issues are the ones that truly affect our livelihood. These issues involve our jobs, our savings and our taxes, among others.
Until very recently, Malaysian politics was grazing at the level that makes politics a worthy field to match its name. From military procurement to the mass rail transit system and to nuclear power, things that matter took the limelight.
For a period, there was nuance in the political debate held in the public sphere. It was a breath of fresh air from the stale old stuff of race and religion.
One example that took public debates to the next level was Pakatan Rakyat’s Buku Jingga. Although I do not necessarily agree with some of its points, I can definitely appreciate how the Buku Jingga forced both sides of the divide to raise the level of debates beyond name-calling. That is the greatest contribution of Buku Jingga.
There were other matters running parallel to this. One was the sodomy trial involving Anwar Ibrahim and Saiful Bukhari Azlan, which is still ongoing of course. Ongoing or not, the issue is dead to me. I have lost interest in it.
What made it even more forgettable were the outrageous details. Listening or reading graphic descriptions associated with the trial created a sensation that I call sodomy fatigue.
Yes, there is a feeling that the system is being manipulated at Anwar’s expense. Yes, there is a feeling of injustice committed against Anwar. Yes, he is important. Yes, he has a significant role to play in instituting a competitive democratic system in the country.
Yet, the country is not about Anwar Ibrahim. Too much energy is being invested in defending and discrediting him.
That energy invested towards Anwar can better be harnessed in other areas that affect our livelihood. For a country that censors the slightest hint of two persons kissing each other on television, there has to be something more than sex — in one way or another — to think about.
The issues of MRT, defense and others that involve billions of ringgit of taxpayers’ money are vying for primetime spots. Rather than reading about someone else’s private parts made public, I would rather focus on public goods treated as private property by the paternalistic few who think they can spend my money better than me.
Imagine my disappointment when morality becomes the centre of attention yet again, as a certain somebody with a lion’s courage alleged that a certain politician is involved in a sex scandal.
In scandal-crazed Malaysia with a sense of morality littered with hypocrisy, many simply drop the things that matter to moralize or hypothesize about others’ lifestyles. The same many are probably rushing to the Internet searching for the video of the scandal, and looking for a cheap thrill along the way.
I am sorry if that is crass. Still, is there anything that is not crass in this country anymore? Parliament is full of it. The courthouse is full of it. The boardrooms of some government-linked companies are so full of it. What is crass anyway? The word by its very self has been diluted by a pool of mud, and something else.
Sarawak is having an important election very soon. In the meantime, what does Malaysia have on its mind?
Sex.
Lim Guan Eng sent out the right message recently. He said ignore the scandal.
Ignore it indeed.
Focus on things that matter instead. Do not take your eyes off your public money, that belonging either to Sarawak, or to Malaysia at large.
First published in The Malaysian Insider on March 31 2011.
There are times when Malaysians living abroad can be arrogant, perceiving too highly of their worth to Malaysia. There are Malaysians abroad who are highly skilled and educated, of course, but not all of those living overseas are. Most are architects, professors, financial wizards, etc. Some are cab drivers, cooks at some fast food place, janitors, etc. Some are old people of no clear expertise.
Somehow, I get the idea that the mainstream narrative is all Malaysians living abroad are highly skilled or educated who expertise are prized.
I want to blame the Malaysians media, printed and online for that. The media or even those offering opinion on how to address the brain drain take some details for granted and tend to highlight successful Malaysians abroad only. That in the end paints the picture that all Malaysians living abroad have highly skilled or educated, who could contribute to the development of Malaysia more than others.
The truth is that not all Malaysians living abroad are highly skilled or educated. Not of all of them are successful either. There are those who can be easily replaced by locals cheaply. Some migrated because of their family connection, not so much of skills and attracting them back may only bring indirect benefits, which in the net might not present a convincing case.
There is nothing wrong with migration. I am not condemning those who migrated for whatever reason. There are a lot of legitimate reasons to migrate out of Malaysia: job opportunity, discrimination, politics, family, etc.
What I have issue with is the arrogance of some of these people who migrated, when the arrogance is clearly unearned. Here is an example.
A prominent Malaysian politician was in Sydney some months ago. He gave a talk. He attracted a large crowd. He is after all a good speaker.
At the end, there was a question and answer session, which too many have the tendency to turn that period into a soapbox session.
An old former Malaysian, now an Australian citizen, a retired teacher, probably in his 60s, came up to offer his opinion. He rambled about how if Malaysia wants him to come home, the people in Malaysia need to change first.
The people in Malaysia need to change, he said. As if he was the top candidate for Talent Corporation, whatever that government-linked entity actually does.
Is he ignorant of the fact that many Malaysians are doing what they can to change the system? There are Malaysians who disagree with the system and have to suffer the system in fact.
What is more angering about the arrogance is that he proudly announced his intention at free riding. He expects others to change the country while he lives his retired life comfortably, while possibly on a relatively generous transfer payment the Australian government provides for pensioners in Australia.
I rolled my eyes.
It is completely understandable that some people have no stomach to participate in change personally. There are always opportunity costs involved, if guts is not an issue. It is also fine if one decides to return to Malaysia if the society changes for the better. A lot of Malaysians would likely do that. I personally have a number of friends with that thinking. I do not blame them and it is only natural. I cannot think of a good reason to chastise them.
But that particular person does not have the moral authority to put it so arrogantly. No one in that situation has. The license to arrogance vanishes immediately as one free rides.
The formation of a shadow cabinet in Malaysia is ideal. That demand has been made multiple times to Pakatan Rakyat, especially by those unfriendly to Barisan Nasional. While shadow cabinet formation does indicate the seriousness and the preparedness of Pakatan Rakyat in governing Malaysia when the time comes if it comes, and that itself has some value, one — specifically those who are unfriendly to Barisan Nasional — has to be reasonable.
Although relations between the components of Pakatan Rakyat appear to be on good terms, there have been frictions from time to time. For instance, observe the issue of Islamic state. Members and sympathizers of Pakatan Rakyat have defended some of the frictions by stating that it is part of democratic culture, where there will always be difference of opinions. That however does not cover up the fact that there are groups within Pakatan Rakyat that have different ideals. Gaps exist. Part of the gaps is due to party loyalty. The way Anwar Ibrahim has been managing it is one of the wonders of Malaysian politics.
Now, a shadow cabinet indicates that that person would be the minister if Pakatan Rakyat forms the federal government. In other words, a shadow cabinet hints who is who. Imagine what a shadow cabinet could do in exacerbating those gaps. The amount of goodwill between parties that could be lost for something that might not happen — Pakatan Rakyat as the federal government — is not worth the effort. The bickering that might happen due to who should be whom might even reduce the chance of Pakatan Rakyat winning the next general election.
Right now, the foremost requirement for Pakatan Rakyat is to present a united front, especially when a general election is expected soon. The so-called shadow committee covering the existing ministries should do fine at the moment.
Besides, what is the purpose of a shadow cabinet?
Is it about knowing who is who, or about knowing what are the alternative policies?
Given the current general circumstances, I would say the latter. There is more substance in alternative policies compared to alternative persons. I am interested in issue-based politics, not personality cult.
So, Pakatan Rakyat should cross the bridge, only when they come to it. And the bridge is not in sight yet.
Nevertheless, members of those shadow committees need to raise their game. They are too quiet. Some of the members of the shadow committees have defected, making the members list outdated. It has to be updated.
Here is another case of private gains but socialized losses.
The Star reports that some bus operators wanted the government to bail them out. They reasoned that they would go bankrupt. Fares “that they collect can no longer cover costs.”[1]
That is nice, is it not?
When things go awry, get somebody to pay for you. When the going is good, keep the money for yourselves.
Without any doubt, I prefer bankruptcy to bail out. In fact, bankruptcy is likely to be good for these bus operators.
One, if they face competition along the routes that they serve, then some of them will be out of business, which then grants the surviving operators monopoly power. The fares can be raised after that, subject to other constraints, like train services, cabs or private cars. The government of course should refrain from the temptation of regulating those fares. If they cannot compete with these other means of transportation, then clearly the market does not appreciate the bus service, and thus, no need for this type of bus service.
Two, these bus operators will stop losing money once they are bankrupt. That is the point of bankruptcy, anyway. Coupled with limited liability, bankruptcy can do wonders. Of course, some banks in Malaysia demand individual guarantee, which makes limited liability irrelevant. Still, that is a different issue that requires solution that I cannot think of right now.
Apart from that, the Pan Malaysia Bus Operators Association president Ashfar Ali reasoned that the “government is no longer our proponent, but our competitor.”
This is the only hard point to counter.
I however prefer the government to privatize some of the services instead, like that belonging to Mara, i.e. Transnasional. For others like RapidKL and RapidPenang, I wonder how many of these private bus operators actually compete with RapidKL and RapidPenang?
[1] — PETALING JAYA: Hit by escalating cost of operations, stage bus operators nationwide have asked the Government to take over their businesses and liabilities.
Pan Malaysia Bus Operators Association president Datuk Ashfar Ali has sent a memorandum to Land Public Transport Commission (LPTC) chairman Tan Sri Syed Hamid Syed Albar proposing that the Government buy over their assets. [It’s bailout or bust, bus firms tell Govt. Teh Eng Hock. The Star. February 21 2011]