Malaysiakini(Chinese) has carried the statement in this link.

Merdekareview carried the statement in this link.

The statements are self explanatory:

1.     I refer to the media reports on the 5^th round table meeting to  discuss the teaching of Science and  mathematics in English which was organized by the Ministry of Education.

2.     Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia Central Education and Knowledge Society Bureau would like to reiterate the stand of Parti Gerakan on this issue; We believe strongly that the teaching of Science and Mathematics at primary level should be conducted in mother tongue.  At the same time, the teaching of English as a subject at primary level should be improved.

3.     English, however, can be used in the teaching of Science and Mathematics at the secondary school and tertiary levels, provided there are sufficient qualified teaching staff to do so.

4.     Our position has been consistent since 2002. We have submitted a memorandum on our position in 2002, and again in 2005 to the present Education Minister. Since this issue is of utmost importance, we  shall submit once again another memorandum on this position of  ours.

5.     Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia, as a people orientated party, has always viewed education as one of the most important elements in nation building, and would be happy to take part in any discussion on educational issues as well as any issue affecting the interest of Malaysian people.

6.     We therefore wish to express our regret that Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia did not receive any invitation to this 5^th  round table meeting, although according to media reports, about 200 representatives from various political parties and NGOs were invited.

7.     While there was no official invitation extended to Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia, we find it strange that according to feedback from other participants, there were seats reserved  for our party.

8.     We discovered that some BN component parties such as SUPP were also not invited despite having designated seats for the parties.

9.     We feel that this will create a negative perception for the parties affected. We would like to  strongly urge the Minister of Education  to carry out a thorough investigation and give us an answer on this matter, and we hope that the same thing would not happen again in future.

10. Notwithstanding this, we shall continue to voice our position directly to the Minister of Education as well as to the public.

文告

1.    有關媒體報道, 由教育部所組辦的第5次英文教數理科政策圓桌會議,已于昨日舉行.  民政黨中央教育及知識社會局, 要在此重申民政黨對這項課題的立場.

2.    民政黨向來主張, 在小學階段, 應以母語教導數理科. 在此同時, 英語的教導和水平, 也需加強和提升.

3.    民政黨也認為, 在中學和大學階段, 如有足夠師資, 則可應用英語教導數理.

4.    民政黨立場, 一貫如此. 我黨曾在2002年, 呈上一份備忘錄, 表明我黨的這一項立場. 也在2005年, 再次的提呈同一備忘錄,給于現任教育部長. 基于這課題的重要性, 我黨將會再一次 的, 提呈這備忘錄給有關當局.

5.    作為一個以民為本的政黨, 民政黨非常關注教育問題, 也非常樂意出席討論有關教育方面的會議.

6.    故此, 民政黨感到非常遺憾, 第5次英文教數理科政策圓桌會議, 我黨并沒有接到邀請.

7.    更奇怪的是, 雖然民政黨并沒有被邀請, 在圓桌會議上, 卻有準備給民政黨代表的席位.

8.    一些國陣成員黨, 如SUPP, 也面對同樣的情形.

9.    我黨認為, 這種情形, 會給人民一種錯覺. 有基于此, 我黨希望我們尊敬的教育部長, 能徹底調查這宗事件, 給我們一項合理的交代. 我們也希望, 同樣事件, 不會再發生.

10.雖然如此, 我黨將繼續直接向我國教育部長和全國人民, 表明我黨對這課題的立場.

English

Press Statement by Dr Hsu Dar Ren,

Chairman ,Education and Knowledge Society Bureau

Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia

1. Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia’s National Education Bureau strongly objects to  the proposal by Datuk Mukriz Mahathir to abolish all  Chinese and Tamil schools, for all to be converted into national schools.

2. We would like to remind Datuk Mukriz that mother tongue education is the right of all Malaysians under Federal Constitution Article 152 (1) (a)and (b). Hence the existence of vernacular schools  is guaranteed under the Constitution. 

3. Racial polarization has more to do with politicians using race to fan feelings of deprivation and discrimination . The purpose is to gain popularity and attention, especially during internal party elections. than to put the blame on the existence of such schools.

4. Putting the blame on the existence of vernacular schools as the cause of polarization is totally uncalled for and would  only cause further  polarization .

5. Datuk Mukriz’s statement also runs counter to the Education Act 1996, which recognizes the fundamental principle of a Malaysian parent’s right to choose vernacular education for his or her children.

6. He has also gone against all manifestos of BArisan Nasional in past elections guaranteeing the continued existence and development of Chinese and Tamil schools.

7. We want to put on record that vernacular schools have contributed much in the process of nation building. To question and negate the existence of such schools is damaging to the concept of unity in diversity, as the very strength and foundation of our nation.

8. We urge Datuk Mukriz to retract this statement in the interest of the unity of the people, as well as unity of BN.

 Chinese version:

民政黨教育及知識社會局主任

徐達人醫生

文告

民政黨中央教育及知識社會局, 強烈反對Datuk Mukriz 的建議 , 要政府采用單一教育制度, 并接管華小及所有類型小學, 改為國小.

我們要提醒 Datuk Mukriz, 華小及所有類型小學的存在, 是憲法下所保障的, 不應一而再的, 受到任何人的質疑.

種族兩極化的原因, 應歸罪于一些喜愛利用種族課題作為政治資本的政客, 尤其在所隸屬政黨黨選期間, 挑起種族課題, 以達到個人目的.

我們要再次的提醒 Datuk Mukriz, 在 聯邦憲法下 152 條 (1) (a)和 (b), 學習母語教育, 是每個馬來西亞公民的基本權力. Datuk Mukriz 的言論, 會使種族兩極化的問題, 加劇惡化.

我們感到遺憾,  Datuk Mukriz 的言論, 違反了1996 教育法令, 和 國陣歷屆大選宣言對人民所作出的承諾, 保障華小及所有類型小學的操作和存在.

華小及所有類型小學的存在,  對于國家和社會, 有極大的貢獻. 我們認為 Datuk Mukriz 的言論, 對于一個多元種族社會, 是具于極大的破壞性.

我們希望Datuk Mukriz, 基于國家團結利益上, 把這建議撤回.

I was shocked to learn of the accidental death of my good friend and Gerakan leader, Dr S. Vijayaratnam, around noon today. I could not believe my ears when a mutual friend called and informed me .

It was just yesterday I met him and spoke to him. Everything was so normal.

The late Dr VJ, as he was fondly by his friends and comrades, was a very  approachable leader, and had been Gerakan National vice president for many years.  . His uncle was none other the late Rajaratnam , Singapore Foreign Minister and one of its founding fathers. His father, the   late Dr S. Seevaratnam, was the DAP MP for Seremban Barat in 1969.

Despite coming from such an illustrous family, Dr VJ was a very humble person. He had never failed to help anyone seeking his advice. He was also a staunch believer of Gerakan’s ideology and  was a prolific writer and frequently contributed to the letters column of the various National english papers commenting on current issues and policies.

I am sad that such a nice person has so suddely left us , and would like to offer my heart-felt condolences to his all family members.

Time for Gerakan to regain  credibility

SEPT 9 — Immediately after the March 8 general election, I wrote in my blog that three options are available for Parti Gerakan which suffered a near total defeat, losing 10 of its 12 parliamentary seats and 27 of its 31 State seats, including all its seats in Penang which had been its traditional stronghold and base.

Out of the two parliamentary seats won, one is in Gerik, which is a seat “borrowed” from Umno when the PPP refused to return the Taiping seat to Gerakan.  In hindsight, it was a minor blessing because if Taiping been returned to Gerakan then, it would have lost that seat too and become a one-MP party.

The three options which I proposed then were:

1. Remain in the Barisan Nasional, where its fate will be decided by whether Umno reforms or not. Gerakan’s fate will be in the hands of Umno. If Umno does not reform radically, and Gerakan is seen to be not able to push for any changes within the BN, Gerakan will probably be wiped out the next round.

2. Opt out of the BN and join Pakatan Rakyat. The caveat here is that Gerakan is too weak now and it will be in no position to bargain for better terms to join Pakatan Rakyat. In the reality of politics, do not expect PKR or DAP to give up seats for Gerakan to contest the next round.

3. It can opt out of the BN and remain independent and be a vigilant watchdog over both the BN and Pakatan Rakyat. It can act as a conscience for the people and give constructive criticism to both sides. It could play the role of the Liberals in the UK, which has thrived between two giants, the Conservatives and Labour. Come the next election, it could probably opt to join forces with either the BN or Pakatan, depending on which is defending the rights of the people. It could then bargain from a position of strength, and not from a position of weakness, during any seat negotiation.

There is, of course, a fourth option for Gerakan: which is to disband.

At that time, out of the three options that I mentioned, the third option was more acceptable since Gerakan then, despite its near complete annihilation, still had a good brand name and the goodwill of the people, especially in their base — Penang.

Subsequently, many members have raised the same points to the leadership.

In reply, the leadership argued that being out of the BN, Gerakan would never gain back its past strength and the best option was to remain in the BN and push for Umno to change.

Now, six months have passed. Let us re-examine the options.

The Permatang Pauh by-election was an eye opener. In spite of the big loss in the last general election and the acceptance of multiracial politics across ethnic lines by the people of Peninsular Malaysia, Umno politicians still used the race card in the campaign.

This has, of course, put Gerakan in a most uncomfortable position. On the one hand, it wants to go back to its non-racial ideology but on the other it has to campaign side by side with Umno and its racial rhetorics, against a party that is campaigning on non-racialism, good governance and people-orientated policies — issues which Gerakan has hoped to bring about since its inception 40 years ago in 1968.

By actively campaigning together with Umno in the by-election, it has shot itself in its foot and further alienated its traditional support base, the older generation of Penangites who had in the past voted for Gerakan. The by-election with its racial rhetorics probably did more harm to Gerakan’s credibility as a non-racial party than anything else since the present leadership took over.

The subsequent drama that has unfolded put the party in an even worse position. The hard stand taken by an Umno division leader over his speech during the by-election campaign, and the subsequent support of all other Umno state leaders for this particular division chief, has once again showed the impotence of the party in trying to influence Umno.

It has once again showed up the arrogance of members of this BN senior partner, which many commentators believe is one of the reasons for the BN losing big in the last general election.

The perception now is that even a third-tier leader of Umno carries more weight and more importance than a component party chief. If Gerakan cannot even push Umno to ask this member to apologise, how is it going to influence Umno’s policies and direction?

Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon, the acting president of Gerakan, mentioned that Gerakan should not quit just because of the antics of an Umno division chairman. However, in my view, this is no longer about this man and what he said. The implication has gone beyond this person.

What is blatantly exposed by this episode is the powerlessness and helplessness of Parti Gerakan to influence the leadership of Umno. With this helplessness and powerlessness, can the party seriously think it can push for reform within the BN and play a significant role? Yes, the deputy PM has apologised on behalf of Umno. But would he have apologised if not for the fear that any loss of a component party would result in a stampede out of the BN and realise the Sept 16 crossover of MPs?

The leadership of Gerakan may want to wait and see if any change within Umno will come about. But looking at this episode and the subsequent softening stand of Umno’s top leadership towards this combative division chairman, any change in Umno would at best be cosmetic, as the perception is that the present leadership is neither strong enough nor possesses the necessary willpower to change an entrenched culture of politics of patronage and arrogance.

If Umno does not reform and Gerakan is seen as an accomplice in Umno’s brand of race politics, and with corruption and abuse of power getting from bad to worse, it would lose whatever little goodwill is remaining of its traditional support base as time goes on. By then, even if Gerakan opts out, it would be too late as it would have lost all its support base and its credibility as a non-racial party fighting for a fair and equal society.

So, the question is can the first option still be the best now? Personally, and many Gerakan members agree with me, the time has run out for the first option. If Gerakan has not been able to reform the BN with its 34 years of membership inside the BN, can it hope to achieve it within these few months or even in the next year or so?

Gerakan’s hope is to go back to its ideology and its roots. That can only mean one thing. It has to come out of this race-based coalition. The third option is the most attractive.

Looking back at its history, Gerakan was formed as a people’s movement to do away with raced-based politics and to bring about a democratic socialist way of lifting the economic standard of the people irrespective of race and religion. Most of its members joined because of this idealism. If this idealism can be achieved by another party championing the same cause, would it really matter that Gerakan would not win any more seats the next round? Should it, instead of helping to achieve this idealism, become a hindrance to other parties fighting for the same ideals?

Furthermore, on the issues of seats — even though it really does not matter whether Gerakan can get any more seats the next round, as long as it achieved its aims — if Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu could win Penang with just 300 hardcore party members and minimal resources at his disposal in 1969, then Gerakan should be able to survive at least as a party outside both coalitions, now that the party has thousands of loyal members and with much more resources at its disposal.

The question, therefore, is no longer about whether Gerakan should come out or not. Rather, it is about whether the leadership has the political will or guts to make such a move.

Malaysia is now at its darkest moment. People has no more trust for the government and government institution. Corruption is so rampant that it is almost the norm rather than exception. Economy is stagnant, despite the rosy figures. Inflation is so high that even our roads are no more as congested as before, bearing in mind that Malaysians like to drive.. Foreign investments are not coming in. Stock market is down. Leaders of both ruling and opposition parties are at each others’ throats. Charges and counter charges of sodomy, murder, corruption, abuse of power are daily affairs.  People has nothing to really look forward too, except to live day by day…And the list can go on and on…………

If the country can be likened to  a plane flying in the sky, it is now on a flight course directly going towards the side of a  high mountain at full speed, and ON AUTO PILOT. The pilot is sleeping and the copilot and flight engineer are at each other’s throat. The passengers are screaming but the screams are falling on deaf ears….

Just that we thought we have seen a glimmer of light, with a 2 party system slowly taking shape and providing a better check and balance, this is now being threatened by the talks between UMNO and PAS. If PAS joins BN, then there will be no hope that UMNO will change. We can expect the night to get darker and longer, with no hope of dawn arriving….Racism , corruption, abuses of power, compromised institution … all these will be back to normal….not for the betterment of the people, but rather, for the self interest of the ruling elites…

Dawn may never come…

Will there be a Dark Knight to our rescue? …..I have no answer !

But one thing I am sure. Whoever won and lost, the ultimate winner is the Malaysians.

This is the right way forward for the nation. Government leaders must be ready to face anyone willing to come forward to query and debate government policies. By having this sort of debate, the people of Malaysia get to listen to the other side of the story too… which is great for stimualting the minds. By listening to different views, the minds of leaders on both side of the divide can actually be stimulated and new ideas may come out. The Prime Minister must be commended for letting this sort of debate take place… the country will be more open with this.

The West is what it is today because of the divergence of ideas, and the freedom to express such ideas are guaranteed in most western countries. With divergence of ideas comes coalescence of such ideas into new thinking which has propelled the nations of the west forward, ever since the The Renaissance. 

Our country , if it really aspires to be a first world nation by 2020, must be prepared to be more open and let dissenting views be not only heard, and be heard over the so-called official channels, in the government controlled press as well as radio and TV stations.

I hope this debate will open up a trend for future debates to be held, in normal times as well as during General Elections.

A commentator from Penang who has voted for Gerakan for the past few elections, romerz, emailed me about an article on Gerakan in Gerakan Youth leader  Lim SI Pin’s blog. I thought it would be good if I  comment in this forum about my views of Gerakan , given that  I have written a few articles on these.

A party’s roots is in its ideology. Gerakan’s ideology is to fight for a fair and equal society where not only every race but every individual regardless of race, sex or creed will have an equal opportunity in  education, employment, socio-economic fields, etc.

It aims to promote an egalitarian society and it is basically a social democratic party.

Under these ideals, the party advocates helping the unfortunate and the poor , not along any racial or religious lines, but rather on social strata and on a ‘needs’ basis.

As correctly pointed in Lim’s blog, Gerakan joined BN mainly to bring Development to the Penang people. In the aftermath of May 13, it also wanted to reduce political friction and promote conciliation among the races. It was in fact one of the founders of BN. It has to be noted that UMNO at that time was a much better respected party than now and money politics, as is  practiced in UMNO nowadays, had not reared itsugly  head yet.

Even then, ideology of Gerakan and most of the BN component parties were very different. Gerakan is a socialist party, whereas the big brothers of BN, namely UMNO,MCA and MIC, are all race based parties; and none are social democrats.

 But it was possible then, in the early seventies and in the aftermath of May 13,  for the people to buy  the reasons that Gerakan could shelf its ideals of a fair and equitable society for a short term, joined BN and  be supportive of the affirmative action based on race, to enable the Malays to catch up in almost all sectors. But this support was not intended to be more than a short term. Tun DR Lim CHong Eu was said not to favour any extension of the NEP beyond its original designated term. (Unfortunately, Tun Lim lost in 1990 election and retired from politics just before the NEP was supposed to come to an end).  In exchange for that shelving of Gerakan’s ideals, Gerakan managed to bring development to Penang and improved the living standard as well as the economy of Penang people.

The leaders then also hoped that by being part of the ruling BN, Gerakan could exert its influence and corrected whatever anomalies from inside.

If Gerakan has a strong voice and is in a position to dictate terms within BN, it could try and change the direction of the whole coalition. Unfortunately, Gerakan is only a small party with not enough clout to really change the direction of this coalition, and in the process, instead of trying to change the other component parties, Gerakan’s ideology was hijacked and the perception was that it has become just another Chinese based party , maybe one with a better conscience than the rest, but nevertheless, one that is impotent to bring about  any significant policy change .

So in reality, Gerakan has become a square peg in a round hole.  How could a square peg function in a  round hole? or put it another way, how can Gerakan exert its ideology within such environment? To continue to hope so, after more than 3 decades inside BN without any success to change BN, is really to lie to one’s own self and conscience. Only when the leaders can break out of this self denial cocoon, can there be objective re-evaluation of the future direction of the party.

Gerakan was truly multiracial in its early days. Alas, it is no longer so. The whole mutliracial and nonracial approach has to be sacrificed under BN’s emphasis of race and the skewed NEP. How to recruit Malay members when the big brother is a Malay based party which views such an act as stepping over its boundary?

As I told one top leader of the party, no matter how good is the reform undertaken by Gerakan, if it still sticks to UMNO, it is signing its own death sentence,  given that UMNO’s present culture will only lead it slowly into  a self destructive mode. In a way, just one racist remark from UMNO will negate all the good works done by Gerakan, no  matter how hard Gerakan tries to reform and change.

By its association with UMNO, Gerakan will go the way UMNO is heading. And To expect UMNo to change when a culture of rot has set in is akin to hope for a habitual gambler to quit gambling.

Pakatan is not so rosy, too. I thought Anwar was an Old wine in a new bottle. But I have to give credit to him for realising many people’s dream of a two-party system, albeit an imperfect one at the moment. But with  many of PAS ’s members still harbouring hopes of an Islamic State, Pakatan can exist only  because of the existence of a common enemy, UMNO. If that common enemy is no more a force to be reckoned with, Pakatan will start to have cracks and fissures sooner or later.

So the best option is still a third force, where it can be free to advance  its ideology. It needs, of course,  to attract people of caliber from all races. It needs to practise what it preaches. A small party in the middle of 2 more or less equally matched coalition fronts, contrary to what many people think, will not split the 2 party system and will be able to exert its influence far greater than its size. By adroitly using its leverage of support, it will actually be able to exert much more influence than if it remains inside either front. And if the party can be managed well as an independent force, it should not be worried about 3 cornered fights come the next round.

(There are many examples of a small third force with great influence… in the West, In UK and Germany).

10 years ago, there was the “Black Eye” incident. A Police Chief, whose duty was to  make sure that humanity is protected by the laws of the country, broke the law and almost broke the eyeball as well of a former DPM .. The incident created waves of disbelief and anger. The person who was supposed to protect you suddenly became the person harming your life…No one felt safe anymore, and credibity of the force became low because of the action of One Man, who was later on charged in Court and jailed for a very short duration, about 40 days.

Many in the Force at that time must have seen and heard of this beating. And these are people who know the law, otherwise they cannot enforce the law. Under the law, it is a crime not to report a crime when a person comes to know about the crime. SO there are many who were in the know who did not come forward to report their knowledge.

Casting aside whether one likes the former DPM or not, this beating is very wrong and those who are in the know and did not report are in the wrong , too. If we want to gain back the credibility of our enforcement and judiciary, we need to really push to have anyone fabricating evidence or covering up  to be charged according to the law of the day. Of course, there must be fair investigation, and there must be evidence. The most important thing is to have No Cover Up.

Truth will ultimately prevail. Anything swept under the carpet and covered by the carpet will not vanish but will one day be exposed. This is the law of the nature. What goes round comes around!

The country really needs to purge all the unlawful ways of doing things, benting the law to suit individuals in high positions or with good connection.. If this trend continues, our children and future generations will suffer. The country will degenerate into a society where  the rich and the powerful will always escape from misconduct whereas the poor and the ordinary peple will have no avenue to address their woes against the rich and powerful.

This is a country ruled by Law and not by Man. Everyone should goes back to the basic of ” All are equal under the law”, and Law should be supreme. Look at Hong Kong. No one is above the law, and that is an Asian society too. There must be no compromise when it comes to crime. Only then can be gain back the trust of our own people. 

How about this year? For 2008,  we are ranked NO. 51 in economic freedom. In the company of Uganda (No. 52), Costa Rica (No.49). So do not laugh at countries of Africa and Central America. We are already in their company, and if we dont buck up, we may be like the African and Central AMerican countries in no time. NO joking matter!!

The top 8 places are occupied by : Hong Kong (No.1), Singapore, Ireland, Australia, USA, New Zealand, Canada, Chile . (ask yourself why are these countries always ranked top? ).The full list can be viewed here .

The Heritage Foundation, in its FAQ, explained why economic freedom is important: “

“Studies in previous editions of the Index confirm the tangible benefits of living in freer societies. Not only is a higher level of economic freedom clearly associated with a higher level of per capita gross domestic product (GDP), but GDP growth rates also increase as a country’s economic freedom score improves. “   

Suppose you are a foreign investor with billion to invest. What is your priority for investing? You want to earn money, but you want to earn money in an environment that gives you the most freedom with your money. You must be able to have a say in how your company is going to be run, the cost of labour must not be too high, the people in the country of your investment must be efficient and have good productivity so that the best returns can be earned. You want to have a impartial  judiciary to guard your rights..meaning your money. You want to have a clean government so that you do not pay extra under the table, as corruption adds costs and time to doing business.

This index of economic freedom, which measures 10 factors, takes all these into account. For the full report on Malaysia, read here.

Malaysia fails miserably under the category : Investment freedom. We get only 40% mark for this category (40% is Fail in most countries, but according to Malaysian marking system, 40% is considered pass, any wonder why we are low down now?).

This is what the report said about this category:

Investment Freedom - 40%

Rules have been eased, but foreign investors still face such restrictions as limited voting shares, prior approval, and mandatory hiring of ethnic Malays. Investment is banned in the news media, lotteries, or security paper. Foreigners may own 100 percent of certain kinds of new companies, but most existing corporate equity requires that a 30 percent stake be Malay-owned, and foreign ownership is capped in most sectors. Certain kinds of investment are screened, though commercial operations can begin before approval. Residents and non-residents may hold foreign exchange accounts, subject in many cases to government approval. Nearly all capital transactions are prohibited, are subject to restrictions, or require government approval.

If you read the report carefully, it is because of the restriction placed… everything needs government approval, and that means red tapes, and possible avenue for corruption.

We get 50% for corruption. This is what the report said:

Freedom from Corruption - 50%

Corruption is perceived as present. Malaysia ranks 44th out of 163 countries in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index for 2006. Bribery is a criminal act, but perceptions of widespread corruption and “crony capitalism” persist.

Any wonder why the economy is half dead, progressing miserably at 5 % growth , which, if you take into account the actual inflation rate ( maybe as high as 4-5% while the official figure is only 3%), means that the economy is not growing at all.

The report also measures the net inflow of FDI.  Malaysia’s FDI is stated as $996 million whereas, the same report put Singapore net FDI as $14.6 billion. Even Thailand, has $3.4 billion of net FDI. Even Indonesia has 2.2 billion worth of FDI. What happened , MITI?

If we do not buck up fast, we will be overtaken by Thailand, that is for sure. But do not be surprised that African countries may overtake us… Uganda is just one rank below us.

Gerakan seeks parliament committee on ISA May 23, 08 3:18pm  Gerakan today urged the government to set up a parliamentary select committee to look into the review of the Internal Security Act, a proposal which was mooted by the government yesterday.Hoping that the ISA review would eventually lead to some significant changes in the colonial-era security law, Gerakan’s acting president Dr Koh Tsu Koon said that the parliamentary committee can play a role in identifying the changes.“This select committee consisting of members of Parliament from both the government and opposition benches can examine in depth various aspects of the Act and achieve some common ground before tabling for open debate in Parliament,” he said in a statement today.

He added that the proposed review of ISA should make it to be in compliance with basic principles of human rights.

“There should be enough safeguard against various possible and actual infringements on basic human rights.

“The review should also provide more specific definitions and listing of offences which relate to genuine threat to national security, including terrorism,” he added.

The former Penang chief minister said that with clear criteria and enough safeguards, the ISA “will less likely be subject to abuse and the perception that it has been used for political purposes to silence dissenters”.

PM was quite receptive

Yesterday the de facto law minister Mohd Zaid Ibrahim told Parliament that the government would review the law which allows for indefinite detention without trial.

He said that the review – to be undertaken by a study involving Zaid, Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar and Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail – will “enhance and update provisions” in it.

“However, as a government that is sensitive towards the public’s demand, it is open to enhancing and updating provisions under the ISA as well as other laws,” he told Parliament.

“Preventive detention is actually still needed in this country. However, there is the possibility of reviewing the Act in future,” Zaid said, without giving a timeframe of when the review will take place.

Responding today, Koh said that Gerakan was one of several parties which have been calling for review or even repeal of the ISA since the 80s.

He also revealed that he has been pursuing Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi since April on the need for ISA review.

“The prime minister was quite receptive,” he said.

Release all ISA detainees

Koh also pointed to another parliamentary select committee which was formed in the 80s to look into changes to be made to the Dangerous Drugs Act which also provided preventive detention without trial, just like the ISA.

He said that committee, of which he was a member, was able to come up with some specific provisions to provide for safeguard and the bill was passed in Parliament.

“That committee which comprised opposition members such as Lee Lam Thye was given a very good insight into the various aspects relating to drug trafficking and preventive detention, including difficulties with respect to evidences and witnesses,” he said.

Koh also revealed that in January and February, and again in early April and May this year, he had appealed to Abdullah for the review and release of existing ISA detainees on health, humanitarian and other valid grounds, including the Hindraf 5.

Last week, the Federal Court refused to release five ethnic Indian activists – dubbed the Hindraf 5 – who were fighting for their freedom after being detained under the Act.

The five, including a newly sworn-in state lawmaker, were detained in December after enraging the government a month earlier by mounting a mass rally alleging discrimination against minority ethnic Indians.

My daughter, who is in her final year medicine in Auckland, told me that a team of SIngapore recruitment officers have just visited Auckland and talked to the Malaysian students there, offering job and training prospect for the final year students once they graduate. My daughter also told me that over the last few years, quite a lot of her Malaysian seniors, after graduating from medical courses in NZ, have gone to Singapore to work as house-officers and subsequently stayed back in Singapore for their postgraduate training.

Similar teams are sent to Australia and UK for recruiting Malaysians there to work in Singapore.

ABout a year ago, in one of the articles in Reuters, this was reported:

Malaysia is counting on bright, ambitious people like Tan Chye Ling for its future, to lead it away from manufacturing and into the knowledge age.

But the 32-year-old scientist, a post-graduate in molecular biology, is not counting on Malaysia to look after her future.

“I felt very suppressed in Malaysia,” said Tan, who moved to neighbouring Singapore, the region’s pace-setter for biotech investment, after a decade of study and research in Malaysia.

“I have benefited from the better research environment and salary scheme here. Things are much smoother,” she said by phone from the National University of Singapore where she is studying dust mites and allergies.

Tan estimates that 60 percent of the research teams she works with in Singapore are from Malaysia, despite her country’s efforts over several years to develop a biotech industry.

The Malaysian government unveiled plans last March to spend $553.3 million over five years to boost research, attract foreign investment and build new facilities. But its efforts are wasted unless it can retain more talented people like Tan.

“By the time we have the research environment in place, every other country would have taken a slice of the biotech investment pie,” said Iskandar Mizal, head of the state-run Malaysian Biotech Corporation which oversees the government’s strategy.

There is a serious problem facing Malaysia and that is the problem of Brain Drain. Why are Malaysians overseas not coming back to work?

Well, pay may be part of the reasons but is not the main reason. Singapore recruitment team offered Malaysian students there a salary which is a few times they would expect to get in Malaysia….S$40,000 a yr for houseman after tax ( equivalent to RM86000) which is about 5 times the pay of a houseman in Malaysia.

But, as I say, pay is not the main problem. The living expenses Overseas is high. And for a person working overseas, the loneliness and the stress level is also high. So not everyone opts to work overseas because of pay. Many would not mind to work for lesser pay if they can stay near to their loved ones.

Why do people choose to work overseas, away from their loved ones ?

Malaysia has many state-of-the-arts hospitals and research centres, which may even be the envy of many overseas countries. But hardware alone would not attract these experts to come home. In the medical fields, I have so many friends /classmates working overseas, many in world renowned centres. Why do they do that?

Some of my classmates and friends did come back as specialists. After working a few years ( many lasted a few months) , most get disillusioned and went off. There is really not much prospect of career advancement. How many can hope to become a professor, even when they are an acknowledged expert in their field? O the other hands , lesser beings are being promoted to professorship for doing much less.

How many of them can have any say about how things are to be run? How many of them can blend into the local team where the work attitude is vastly different from that overseas? 

There is an unwritten rule that even if the person is very good, the head of the team has to be someone from a certain ethnic group who may not even be half as good as him.

In everyday life, some become disillusioned with the corruption, the red tape and tidak apa attitude of the officialdom. For an overseas doctor applying to work home, the application can take up to 6 months to get approved, whereas, SIngapore sends teams overseas to recruit them on the spot, giving them forms to fill and offering them jobs immediately as long as they pass their final examination. See the difference?

It is the sense of being wanted and being appreciated that make these people stay overseas. Back here, they are often made to feel that they are of a lower class; they do not feel wanted and they do not feel appreciated…. That is the main reason.

For those with children , the education system puts them off. Even school children can feel being discriminated, one glaring example is the 2 systems in PreUniversity education.

All these make them pack their bags and off they go again, leaving behind their parents perhaps, siblings, friends they grew up together, favourite food that is often not available overseas. No one likes to be like this; circumstances and a sense of being recognised for their worth make them go away…It is really sad.

Parents spend huge amount of money educating them, but the ones who benefit are the Singaporeans, the Americans,the  Australian, the British and so on. As long as race politics is not done away with, this problem of brain drain will continue and Malaysia will always lack behind the advanced countries, no matter how many twin towers and Putrajayas we build.

Every other citizen is of equal status, regardless of race. Otherwise, it would imply that we have first and second class citizens, or worse, masters and servants. This simply will not do.
In fact, recent remarks by some of the Rulers (e.g. Raja Nazrin, the Sultan of Selang
or, etc.) would indicate that the Royalty are indeed commited to national unity, justice and fairness to all races.

As for the position and rights of the Bumiputras, these are again clearly spelt out in the Constitution, and we are not questioning them.

Let us also not forget the Ibans, Kadazandusuns and other indigenous peoples of Malaysia.

Observer.

Leaders are open to suggestions coming from young people like me and the rest of the group. This is indeed the most forward looking brainstorming session that I have ever attended throughout my years as a Gerakan member.

Among us are the top party leadership, very veteran leaders, enthusiastic young leaders, and normal members. We all came together to spend this weekend together, perhaps with diverse views and opinions at the beginning; but leaving the brainstorming session with hopes and challenges that lies ahead. 

‘Communication’ or ‘communication break down’ appeared to be the most commonly debated issue. Grassroots feel that there is a lack of communication between the top leadership and the members. Then I wonder, is this a convenient way out to explain and justify the ‘problems’ faced by the party to a certain extend when we do not know the answer to the problems? 

Bloggers borne like mushrooms after the 308 election. A Malaysian’s Malaysia agenda appeared to be the main agenda for the brainstorming. We all want to strive for a just and equitable society, for all Malaysians. We will again, pick up the basic ideology that was started by our Gerakan forefathers 40 years ago. I hope that all these are not too late today.

I hope that this brainstorming can be put forth to the whole party structure, and to move the party forward together.

Let’s Work! Let’s Gerak!

It goes to show that with the agreement of law enforcers on the one hand, and protesters on the other, a peaceful, incident-free demonstration can be a reality.

The co-operation of the police ensures that public order and security are not compromised, and traffic flow, uninterrupted. There is no need for water cannon, tear gas, injury and ensuing ugliness.
Of course, the the picketers themselves must reciprocate to police goodwill with appropriate proper behaviour and conduct.

It could have been achieved during the Bersih and Hindraf demonstrations in the past.
A thriving democracy includes the right to peaceful assembly.

Observer.

I was hopeful when the PM announced that judicial reform would be undertaken. I was hopeful when PM announced the formation of an Independent body for fighting corruption, the MCAC, in the mould of the ICAC of Hong Kong. I was hopeful when suddenly  many pro BN politicians started to blog, thinking that  perhaps more freedom of expression would be allowed.

Alas!! My hope was dashed when the Sedition Act was used to charge well known blogger RPK.

Sedition Act is an archaic law  enacted by the British in 1948. The situation then and now is totally different, and this law should have been repealed long ago. It is like using a 1948 car in the formula one race of today, totally out-of -date.  

According to Wikipedia, the act criminalises speech with “seditious tendency”, including that which would “bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against” the government or engender “feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races” .

Is RPK’s writings seditious? I would not want to go into the debate or the merits of the case as the case is before the court now.

But if anyone feels slighted by RPK’s writing, or for that matter, if anyone feels slighted or defamed by any writings of any blogger, there is such a thing called civil law and civil court. The person feeling slighted or defamed could sue in a civil court for libel and defamation, if necessary for hundreds of thousands, if necessary for millions.

It is just like the ISA, another archaic piece. If you feel someone is undertaking activities that may lead to security of the nation being threatened, by all means charged him in open court. So just like ISA, Sedition ACt is out of date and both should have been repealed long ago.

Lee Kuan Yew sued for libel and won many times agianst those who slighted him in either speeches or writings. I do not remember him using the state machinary to charge someone who has alleged defamed him. He has used ISA for security reasons, but not the Sedition ACt for personal vendetta.

I have a feeling of ‘deja vu’; it is like 2004, when we were promised so many things but none came about after 4 years. Is this a repeat of things? Will we ever see the lights of a Judicial Commission or a MCAC, despite the promise? Will it be like the IPCMC? I hope not.

But what RPK case has shown is that, we are taking one step forward , three steps back.

“In a move to stop Malaysian women being duped into carrying drugs for international syndicates, the Foreign Ministry has proposed that all women travelling out of the country alone be required to have a letter from parents or employers. “

Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim said the letter would be a declaration which stated clearly the reason the woman was travelling.

from NST: There are 119 Malaysian women in prisons worldwide for drug offences; the majority are aged between 21 and 27 duped into becoming ‘mules’; and so far this year, 29 have been detained or imprisoned

There is another piece of news in the same paper:

Regressive. Unfair. Biased.

These were some of the words used to describe the proposal by the Foreign Ministry that women leaving the country alone be required to have declarations from parents or employers stating the reason for their travels.

Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim said yesterday he had submitted a proposal to the cabinet.

The proposal drew flak from non-governmental and women’s organisations, with their representatives making clear their outrage.

National Council for Women’s Organisations Malaysia (NCWO) deputy president Faridah Khalid called the proposal “backward and unfair”.

“This is an infringement of our rights,” she said.

The first thing that comes to my mind is that this is gross discrimination against women, which forms more than half the population.

It is like amputating the whole leg for a small boil on the tip of the toe. There is no logic.

I don’t like to be rude, but is it not akin to asking the police to castrate all males just because of a few rape cases?

The English will say, never use a sledgehammer to kill a fly.

How many women travelling overseas are involved in vice? Most would be legitimate travellers.

This is how someone who is brought up with a biased view against women would do. And I am supprised that this comes from an experienced Minister.

Socially, this is not acceptable, when the whole world, with the exception of some countries, is now going towards equality of the sexes.

Politically, this is a disaster. He should know that there would be an uproar from women groups.

Why has UMNO people not learned from the lesson of March 8?

Policies should be people orientated and should not be an encumbrance to people. The people are your boss, Dear Minister. Always look from the angle of the people, not from the top of the ivory tower where the view tends to be narrow and clouded by clouds.

If  government ministers keep going like this, sooner or later, there will be so much red tapes, you have to have a police permit to go out after midnight, because the minister in charge will argue that most crime is committed at night.

See the logic, Dear Minister? 

Koh: Projects must go on

All Federal Government projects committed before the March 8 elections must be carried out for the benefit of the people of Penang, Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon said.

The former Penang chief minister said this included the Second Bridge and the Monorail projects.

He denied the Federal Government was giving the Pakatan Rakyat Government in Penang a hard time and punishing Penangites for voting in the then Opposition.

“I would be the first to disagree if the intention is to punish Penangites,” he told reporters yesterday after chairing the Gerakan central working committee meeting.

The Gerakan acting president said he had already made his stand as early as in the first week after the general election – that all federal projects in the state should go on.

He stressed that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had also made this clear. “As far as the Second Bridge is concerned, it’s already committed, and should go ahead.”

However, he pointed out that in big infrastructure projects like the Penang Second Bridge or the Monorail, there were bound to be technical and financial problems, which would result in some delays regardless of whether the state was under the Barisan or Pakatan.

He said delays to the bridge project started even before March 8.

On Saturday, Second Finance Minister Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop said mega projects in the state like the Monorail and the Penang Outer Ring Road might not take off as they had not reached “approval” stage yet.

To this, Dr Koh said, there was some confusion over the Monorail project.

He said before March 8, the state government spent a lot of time discussing and engaging Federal Government departments on the project, and four companies had submitted proposals, each with different alignments.

In Petaling Jaya, Nor Mohamed said the Federal Government was sincere about working with the Pakatan-led Penang government, and had no intention of cancelling projects announced under the 9th Malaysia Plan.

He said the three-hour Penang Federal Action Council meeting which he chaired on Saturday was to call for more cooperation with the state government, accelerate projects and overcome problems such as land acquisition, and to discuss cost controls.

“The Prime Minister has said that he is the Prime Minister for all. It applies to Penangites as well. The election is behind us now,” he said.

“Projects under the 9MP will continue to be implemented subject to details and procedures, including land acquisition. We will cooperate with the state government in the interest of Penangites.”

I have been vocal in asking for an Independent Commission for corrupt Practices. I have forgotten how many articles and letters I have written on this. I will just quote one of the letters published in Malaysiakini on 18 September 2006 below, since the points are still valid, for the readers who have not read it before.

Before quoting the letter, I have these few points to make:

1. The commission has to be truly independent. It is only answerable to a select committee of the PArliament consisting of government and opposition MPs.

2. To be truly independent, no politicians or businessmen, past or present,  should serve in the commission. Its members have to be those of high integrity, consisting of outstanding people from the academia, from the professions, from the civil service or diplomatic service, NGOs. The appointment should be made by the Agung on the recommendation of the Parliamentary committee.

3. It must have separate power of investigations as well as prosecution, without going through the police or AG chambers.

4. The commissioners must have their assets declared yearly in media such as newspapers as well as internet websites.

5. It should have the power to investigate anyone, perhaps with the exception of the Agung as the Head of the country. It should have the power to call anyone including the PM for questioning and investigation.

6. There should be a new class of investigating officers who should be newly recruited and should be sent to Hong Kong for training. No police officers should be seconded from the police force.

I have also proposed a structure of a ICAC in my of my earlier posts. The commissioners will sit on a supervisory committee overseeing the Chief Investigating Officer.

I hope that the formation of this commission as well as the Judicial Commission can be set up as soon as possible, possibly within 100 days. This will show the resolve of the PM to introduce reform.

For those who want to read my letter published in 2006 , Please click on this link.

This is an article posted by Sdr H’ng Khoon Leng in his blog Putih Hitm Kelabu:

An Independent ACA will be more effective

An independent Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) will make it more effective in combating corruption and enhancing integrity in the public service.

“It will be a concrete mechanism in realizing the objectives of the National Integrity Plan or Pelan Integriti Nasional (PIN) launched by the Prime Minister in 2004.

“It will also give greater confidence to the ordinary people when they want to report on corruption cases,” said Gerakan’s Acting President Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon in welcoming the ACA’s proposal to be an independent body.

“This will also show the seriousness of our Barisan Nasional Government in fulfilling a key promise in our Manifestos in both 2004 and 2008 Elections”

Minister in Prime Minister’s Department Dato’ Seri Nazri Aziz revealed yesterday that the ACA had submitted a proposal to the Prime Minister to allow it to operate along similar lines to Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption.

Dr Koh said that Gerakan has long called for an independent ACA, especially since a workshop and a series of discussion was held in the late 90′s.

Moreover, Gerakan Founding President the late Prof Dato’ Syed Hussein Alatas was an academic authority on the study of corruption. Therefore Gerakan will continue to pursue and support all measures to combat corruption including strengthening the ACA as an independent body.

Party Gerakan urge the government to revamp the system of appointment of judges, as this will certainly restore confidence in our judiciary.

Our judiciary has been the focus of attention in the past 20 years and numerous negative reports have emerged. The latest is of course the “Lingam Tape”.

The present system is not transparent and arouses too much suspicion.

The British appointment system before 2005 invited similar criticisms and it depended too much on individuals’ influence and lack of guidelines.

It cumulated in the enactment of Constitutional Reform Act in 2005 and formation of an independent Judicial Appointments Commission which was officially, launched on 3rd April 2006.

The Commission is evaluates applicants for judicial positions and promotions. It selects candidates and makes recommendations to the Lord Chancellor who can reject the recommendations but he is required to give reasons to the Commission.

The Commission has set up guidelines on procedure and qualities and merits required for appointment and promotion.

The English system is worthwhile for the Malaysian judiciary to adopt as we share a common history in legal development, which is based on common law.

We are confident the proposed system is effective and acceptable to the public. The present political and social circumstances merit the adoption of the proposed machinery which will restore confidence, status and image of the Malaysian judiciary which has received a lot of beatings in the past few years.

Dato’ Chang Ko Youn
Gerakan National Legal Bureau Chairman