1.Aliran (http://www.aliran.com)
(1) Christian vote set to swing to Opposition, 29 February 2008
Judging by the number of election talks held in churches across the country and the enthusiastic response to critical speakers and opposition candidates, it appears likely that Christian voters will swing to the opposition this time, in sharp contrast to 2004. Our special correspondent reports on a lively forum held at the St Francis Xavier Catholic Church in Petaling Jaya during which the BN candidates were heckled and jeered.
I attended the closed-door debate between the Incumbent and Opposition parties at Loyola Hall, St. Francis Xavier’s Church (SFX) in PJ on Wednesday, 27 February 2008. The speakers were Margaret Martinez, chairperson; Hee Loy Sian, the PKR Candidate for the PJ Selatan parliamentary seat; Donald Lim Siang Chai, the BN (MCA) candidate for PJ Selatan; Dr. Lim Thuan Seng, the BN (Gerakan) candidate for the Bukit Gasing state constituency; and Edward Lee Poh Lin, the DAP candidate for Bukit Gasing.
Now, this isn't the first time that there has been such a debate at SFX. I also attended the one in 2004. But what a sharp contrast. In 2004, the SFX parishioners asked a lot of questions in a very civil manner. Although the PKR candidate outshone the DAP candidate plus the two BN candidates in the debates then, it would be the two BN candidates, Donald Lim and Lim Thuan Seng, who would actually win in the 2004 election.
This time, in 2008, the DAP candidate outshone the PKR candidate, plus the same two BN candidates. But it remains to be seen who wins the actual 2008 election. The crowd, which consisted of more than 300 SFX parishioners, was very vocal. People clapped when Thuan Seng mentioned that the Opposition lawyer who campaigned against him in the 2004 election won 40 per cent of the vote!
On the other hand, Lim Thuan Seng and Donald Lim were booed, heckled and even laughed at. It reached a point where Lim Thuan Seng commented that this was "not a sympathetic crowd"! At one point, he was so flustered by the questioning that he even handed the microphone to the DAP candidate to answer.
Now, a lot was discussed, but let me highlight a few issues, though not necessarily in chronological order:
“Compared to Myanmar..”.
Donald Lim, who is also the Deputy Minister for Tourism, attempted to explain how Malaysia had gone from an agricultural to an industrial and now to an information-based country. He spoke about how per capita income was increasing. While he was saying this, someone started heckling him saying that "A vote for BN is a vote for corruption".
But this wasn’t the worst. Donald hit a raw nerve when he started comparing Malaysia with Myanmar. The audience started booing him over this, and told him to compare Malaysia with Singapore! To make matters worse, Donald made the same mistake of mentioning "Myanmar" a second time, later in the debate. This time, the audience laughed.
Thuan Seng tried to explain that oil prices were increasing globally, giving statistics on oil prices/barrel from 1971 to 2008. He explained that this was beyond their control. Still, he said that Malaysia was doing better than "other countries". (He obviously learned from Donald not to mention "Myanmar" to this crowd.) He said that while Malaysians may not be happy, "to outsiders we are doing well"!
Brain drain
Now, one of the parishioners mentioned that the BN candidates were making "fantastical" remarks about how the country was doing, but highlighted that many people have migrated, and this was causing a brain drain. He asked the candidates what they would be doing to retain talent.
Donald brought the house down in laughter when he said that even his two sisters-in-law had migrated! He also said that many migrated leaving behind those who are "not so well qualified". He later tried to say that many foreigners do come to Malaysia via the "Malaysia, my second home" programme. By this time, the audience was laughing at poor Donald.
Thuan Seng did say that migration was a loss to the nation. He did try to back Donald up in the "Malaysia my second home" policy, but this didn't go down too well with the audience. At some point during the debate, I did record Thuan Seng as saying "If you put Lim Kit Siang as Prime Minister, even I will migrate!"
Edward Lee mentioned that all this reflected a crisis in leadership, integrity, honesty, and good sound judgment
Rising crime rate
Thuan Seng acknowledged that the crime rate is increasing and said that he himself had "felt scared" as he himself was a victim. He said that he would fight for this issue to be addressed and that it was in his manifesto.
Edward Lee mentioned that the solution was not CCTV cameras or Rakan Cop (which is what I assume the BN is proposing), but rather a better-qualified police force. He said that the low salaries made cops hungry for bribes, and that one way to counter it was through better salaries. This met with audience approval.
Hee Loy Sian spoke about the Royal Commission report for police reform and the need for the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) to be set up.
Jalan Gasing jam
Now, all politics is local. Given that, questions about the constituency were clearly going to be raised. Sure enough, there was the issue about how some new highway that was leading into Jalan Gasing was causing a traffic jam. I am not sure if Thuan Seng had anything to do with the decision to allow the highway through or not, but one thing was for sure: he came late for the debate, as he was stuck in the jam on Jalan Gasing!
Edward Lee did say that the authorities did not take into consideration the views of the people when they did that. He then asked the parishioners if they agreed there should be an elected council system in the country. Thunderous applause greeted his statement.
Gasing Hill development
One lady highlighted that they had been fighting against the development of Bukit Gasing for the past few years, but that their pleas were being ignored. Note that Bukit Gasing is viewed as a green lung. The BN candidates gave some evasive answers, but promised to look into it.
Later, an elderly man came up and said that a study of Bukit Gasing revealed that it comprised mostly of soil and sand, and not granite. It was therefore unstable for development. He added that any development in the area could potentially result in another Highland Towers-type tragedy.
This old man then asked the BN candidates to take a pledge - not a verbal pledge but a written one. He whipped out the document and passed it to the candidates to sign. He received a standing ovation for his actions!
The BN candidates responded that they would not sign it, but pledged verbally to speak to DBKL about it. Donald told the old man that he'd have a private talk with him and that he would teach him how to go about it! This brought some heckling from the audience..."close one eye”!
People’s Declaration
A blogger named Bernard Khoo, who was not an SFX parishioner, made a few comments about corruption at Port Klang. He asked why BN had listed many things as price controlled items, but not pork. This brought laughter from the audience.
Bernard also said something to the effect that BN was about to lose. He therefore wanted to address the candidates in the losing party. He then asked why the BN had not endorsed the "People’s Declaration" when every opposition party had.
Thuan Seng made some noise over the fact that this was a blogger who was gate-crashing an SFX do, to which Bernard gave him a piece of his mind that this was a free country.
This rattled Thuan Seng, who could not even remember what the question was. Once the question was repeated, Thuan Seng said that he'd "try to bring it up". It was obvious to Thuan Seng that his answer didn't meet with the audience’s approval, as many in the audience could be seen shaking their heads.
Another lady in the audience again brought up the People's Declaration, stating that had the BN adopted it, then it wouldn't belong to any party but to everybody. She then went on to try and explain why the BN should endorse it.
People in the audience demanded that Donald answer her question as he was a Minister and that this was a Federal issue.
Donald did respond to this, but it was such a lame answer that I didn’t bother to record it.
I did however record Edward Lee's response. He said that DAP had endorsed the People’s Declaration. He said something about the ACA being a lame duck and that the Judiciary was under the government’s control, to which the audience loudly responded, "Correct, correct, correct" (you may recognise those words from the Lingam tape)!
Breaking ranks with the official party line
Another parishioner summed up everything by saying it all boiled down to the erosion of individual rights. He then asked whether BN candidates would break ranks with the official party line, if it were in the public interest.
Thuan Seng said yes. It would have been interesting to see what position Thuan Seng and other Gerakan member took when their fellow colleague, Paramjothy, broke ranks with the BN over the Hindraf issue.
Why BN?
Someone in the audience asked why he should keep voting for BN, if they continue to take away his rights. Donald started his answer with "In life...”. He said something about some people being comfortable and uncomfortable...whatever.
The few parishioners whom I did speak to in the audience after the debate weren't at all impressed with the BN. It's obvious where their vote is going.
I picked up a copy of the Catholic Asian News special on Elections 2008 after the debate. It’s pretty clear where the Church stands on whom to vote for - just based on the articles written in the magazine. I sense from speaking to quite a few Christians that the Christian vote, irrespective of whether it is Catholic or some other denomination, will swing to the Opposition this time around.
(2) BN "clowns" undermining national unity , 29 February 2008
Barisan leaders are constantly calling for national unity - plenty of pronouncements and platitudes - but their deeds do not match their words, notes our special correspondent.
The British successfully adopted a divide-and-rule policy. Therefore, at independence the people were severely fragmented along ethnic lines - Malays, Chinese and Indians. The Barisan has indeed improved upon this strategy. Political parties are organised strictly along ethnic lines and keris-kisser Hishamuddin has called upon Malaysians to sensitise themselves to ethnic politics. It has never occurred to him to sensitise himself to non-ethnic politics in the interests of national unity, which will remain an impossible dream.
As if this division were not enough, a further division - bumiputera and non-bumiputera - was institutionalised, resulting in further deterioration in ethnic relations which led to severe polarisation at workplaces, schools and universities. The destroyers of national unity did not stop at that. They introduced the poison of ethnic politics into Sabah by establishing Umno there. Sabah was a state that was really united and where ethnic feelings and rivalry hardly existed. As if these was not enough, even the Malay population has been sub-divided into bumputera and Umnoputera, the latter generously helping themselves to the nation’s wealth through highly-priced projects, preferential share allotments, APs for imported cars etc. at the expense of the rakyat. Let alone national unity, these corrupt practices have divided the Malay community and increased the income differential - the highest in this region - within the community.
I wish I could believe Najib who stated only the Barisan can look after the interests of the Chinese and Indian Malaysians. Really, it is with the collusion and connivance of both the MCA and the MIC that the Constitution has been amended many times. For example, they remained dumb when the Constitution was amended in 1988 eventually resulting in a half-past-six PM claiming that Malaysia is an Islamic State. These same dumbos have the audacity to criticise the DAP for coming to an electoral understanding with Pas in respect of seat allotment! These same clowns decided to send a memorandum to the PM and got hammered by Umno. These cowards withdrew the memorandum and apologised profusely for their sin! There is no doubt that the Umno-dominated government at all levels has bullied them into submission, emasculated them and made them into political eunuchs. Would a political party interested in national unity permit the destruction of Hindu temples and churches built for Orang Asli?
There is a ban on bibles in the Indonesian language in this country - though the Qur’an has been translated into Mandarin and Tamil. Recently, bibles from bookshops as well as travellers were confiscated. Though the word “Allah” was used for six centuries before Islam came into existence in 622 AD, Malaysia has banned the use of the word by non-Muslims. The word “Allah” is widely used by Jews, Christians and Muslims in the Middle East. The Muslims have persistently refused to be part of the Malaysian Consultative Council consisting of Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Sikhs and Taoists. Reason? To sit together with other religious leaders would mean that every religion is of equal worth, something unacceptable to Muslims because they claim Islam is superior.
Sadly, the Barisan government has gone along with this view. The PM, in the view of many, has successfully sabotaged the formation of an Inter-faith Commission. Have you wondered why Tamadun Islam (Islamic civilisation) is rammed down the throats of non-Muslims from school to university and no attempt has been made to educate Muslim students about the religion and culture of non-Muslims? Have you wondered why Ramli Ibrahim does not perform Indian dances on RTM?
The Barisan continues to claim that they are building national unity. The government is supposed to be guided by Islam Hadhari, which is touted as a modern, liberal and progressive form of Islam. Ironically, the position of non-Muslims has become worse after the introduction of Islam Hadhari. Non-Malays converting to Islam and then wanting to reconvert to their original religion have found it impossible. The civil courts, in total contravention of constitutional provisions, have denied this right granted in the Constitution. In Egypt, converts to Islam are permitted to leave Islam and return to their original faith. Remember Arafat married a Christian and was in a church with her on Christmas Eve. That is modern, liberal and progressive Islam. Indonesia has legislated to make every Indonesian citizen indigenous. In my opinion, primitive practices will ruin the glory of any religion.
Malaysia is light years away from being a truly secular democracy guaranteed by the Constitution.
“ ... Dear Friend,
The one, free nation we
imagined,
Remains a distant
truth,
My anger becomes
bitterness,
When we are forced
apart,
The distance ever
wider,
Now that I am
proclaimed
“bumiputra”
and you not”
Usman Awang: Sahabatku
(for Dr M K Rajakumar)
1979/1983
2. Malaysia Today (http://www.malaysia-today.net)
MALAYSIAN CHURCHES ENTER UNTESTED WATERS, ENCOURAGE POLITICAL DEBATE , 29 February 2008
by Raja Petra
Malaysian churches are opening their doors to politicians from both camps in an unprecedented way as they strive to explore their political voice, perhaps for the first time in Malaysian history.
Traditionally apolitical here, the churches have so far generally still stopped short of endorsing any party or camp, perhaps for fear of being perceived as seeking to be a political power block in this religiously sensitive country.
But they are encouraging political debate, which itself is unusual.
For example, at the Loyola Hall at Saint Francis Xavier Church in Petaling Jaya, 300 parishioners gathered a couple of nights ago to hear the incumbent Gerakan state assemblyman for Bukit Gasing Dr Lim Thuang Seng and another Barisan National representative face off with Mr Edward Lee from the Opposition DAP.
The toughest words came from the floor when the panellists took questions.
Many issues were brought up, most of them reflecting secular concerns, from overpriced land assessment fees and concern over corruption and other rising criminal activities to oil subsidies and the brain drain from Malaysia.
The parishioners did not mince their words when it came to sharing their opinions.
“In the last five years, I find that my religious and fundamental rights have been encroached and eroded. Are you recommending that I vote for Barisan Nasional so that my rights can be further eroded over the next five years?” asked a Chinese man in his 30s, stumping the two Barisan Nasional representatives.
The highlight of the evening remained a rather more secular concern from Mr Victor Oorjitham, Maxwell Towers PA chairman, who requested the two BN men to make a pledge "to support that no development on Bukit Gasing takes place".
Mr Oorjitham has been campaigning for the past three years to preserve the green lung.
He received a standing ovation.
Despite the tide against him, Datuk Dr Lim was firm: "I'm not going to sign this pledge... because I don't want to make empty promises. God has put me here to serve you, and serve you well.”
Another parishioner Mr Martin, 57, declared himself unconvinced.
“Pretty much what I expected. The incumbent politicians will never give direct answers and the Opposition will always give promises. I have already decided whom I will vote for. The talk didn't change my mind. I hope to deny the ruling government the two-thirds majority. It's a wake up call – time for change,’’ Martin told The Malaysian Insider.
Driving the churches to discover even a limited political role in encouraging such debate is a widespread sense of disillusionment over the way the Government has managed religious interests in past years, say analysts and political observers.
The response at a higher level is mild, but still clear.
The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism issued a statement this week asking their followers to pray for candidates that live up to common religious values and who strive for greater national unity.
On the ground, there appears to be tide of desire to register a point.
But one long-time political observer, who requested anonymity, pointed out that this could backfire as the demographics were against the church – Christians make up fewer than 10% of the population.
“Any move that is perceived as building a power block will draw a negative reaction from the Muslim majority so they will have to think through what they’re doing,” he told The Malaysian Insider.
A noted political commentator Professor Shamsul Amri Baharuddin echoes that view, saying that if the largely urban non-Muslim population choose to sent a negative signal to the ruling Barisan National, it could lead to polarisation of the Malaysian electorate. “On the one hand, a predominantly Malay rural population will support BN and a growing urban non-Muslim population will support the Opposition. This cannot be good for the country.’’
But he adds he still believes the emotion that is driving some of the anti-establishment feeling will be replaced by reason and pragmatism by March 8, polling day.
“The defining question is whether non-Muslims believe that a vote for the Opposition will bring a solution to all their concerns. Deep down they know the answer is no.’’
THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER
(End)
