MCA Supports Bar Council Forum?

For once, that's very good to hear. But please tell that to your Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and best friend, UMNO!

We have read with interest that the MCA leadership has come out strongly via statements to the media the party was “extremely upset at the protesters' actions” which resulted in the event having to be wrapped up early. They said the forum should be respected by everyone as the council had conducted it in a rational and peaceful manner.

Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting was quoted to say that the “forum never intended to question the special position of the Malays or Islam as the religion of the federation as enshrined in the Federal Constitution. Never once were the organisers, speakers or registered guests critical of Islam”.

However, at the very same time, both the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and other top leaders from UMNO has been unapologetic and even threatening in their condemnation of the forum conducted by the Bar Council.

The Prime Minister said the Bar Council had been advised against holding the forum that touched on sensitive matters like religion and race. He has state that he“hope[s] such an incident won’t repeat itself. Last Saturday’s forum is proof that issues relating to religion and race are sensitive in the country.

The Deputy Minister went further to say that the Bar Council’s persistence in going ahead with a forum on conversion to Islam has triggered extreme reaction from certain quarters, which in turn would threaten the country’s harmony.

The country's top leadership has even not discounted the possibility of utilising the Internal Security Act against the forum organisers, clearly a threat which is no less “extreme” compared to the actions of the demonstrators!

Therefore, while we welcome MCA's views on the controversy, they must face up to their responsibility to challenge the views of the Prime Minister and UMNO, who are clearly abusing the race and religious card recklessly to create an atmosphere of fear. It is noteworthy that while the protesters were condemned, no comments were forthcoming on the opposing views espoused by the UMNO leaders.

Without doing so, it would appear that Barisan Nasional is perpetuating its system of divide and rule, where UMNO stokes the racial and religious sentiments of Malays while MCA plays its subservient role to placate the minority communities. That, will only strengthen the case that MCA has lost it total relevance in Barisan Nasional.

The DAP stands firm that there are probably no better party to organise and lead discussions on the Constitution and the laws of Malaysia than the Bar Council. It was also a constructive forum to ensure that unintended victms as a result our laws will be given humane and justifiable treatment. It will make a complete mockery of our legal and judicial system if its very practitioners are denied opportunities to discuss or explain our laws.

Read more!

A New Era for DAP?

Amidst the much more controversial and exciting political party elections in the country at the moment (think MCA and UMNO), DAP will be holding ours as well in 2 weeks on August 23 at Crown Princess Hotel.

Unlike the rather complicated election structure and mechanisms in many of the other parties which are often difficult to understand, DAP's election processes are pretty straightforward. Nominations are directly by branches, our very grassroots, and only 2 nominations are required to make yourself a candidate for the Central Executive Committee (CEC).

The CEC on the other hand is the only position you will be elected to, and it will comprise of 20 elected members. Between these members, the DAP Secretary-General and other relevant positions will be determined.

CEC members are elected via branch delegates. Each branch is at least eligible to send 1 delegate or more, depending on the number of members (e.g, a 26 member branch will get to send 3 delegates, 51 member 4 delegates etc.). Delegates are voted by the members of the branches itself.

Together with many other new faces in the party, I've been nominated for a position in the CEC. There has been quite a few reports in recent weeks on the upcoming elections. 73 members were nominated, whilst 15 have turned them down leaving a record 58 candidates contesting for the 20 elected seats.

Wan Hamidi of The Malaysian Insider wrote "the political tsunami of March 8 general election is going to sweep DAP too. For its coming party polls later this month, 44 new faces will challenge the 29 incumbents, mostly DAP old guards." After August 23rd, will you see "a new era for DAP?"

Jocelin Tan of The Star thinks that "the new CEC will definitely be a lively mix of experience and youth and newcomers like Pua, Liew and DAP's guitar-playing MP for Jelutong, Jeff Ooi, are quite likely to make their debut in the line-up.

If they succeed, they will lend the DAP a more contemporary image that will help the party connect with the younger crowd as well as change the way non-Chinese perceive the party."

Well, come what may, I have every confidence that while the Party may still come up short in several measurements at the moment, we are certainly heading clearly in the right direction and playing our roles in making Malaysia a better place for all Malaysians ;-)

(Oh, and for you guys out there who are interested in the party's rejunevation process, please join us as a member! Email me for details ;-))

Read more!

Constructive Parliamentary Discussion

OK, this was one of the posts in draft format for a while now. Yes, it's also one of the many Pasir Salak episodes during the last parliamentary session.

I wasn't directly involved in this particular exchange, well, besides laughing out loud, but it occured when my colleague Manogaran who sits just behind me stood up to pose the question the poor quality of graduates from our local universities to the Minister of Higher Education who was holding the floor at that point in time. This is extracted from the Hansard on 9th July 2008.

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Terima kasih Yang Berhormat Menteri dan Tuan Yang di-Pertua. Berbincang tentang pelantikan graduan-graduan ke institut pengajian tinggi ini, tadi Yang Berhormat Menteri katakan adalah amat competitive. Competitive ini kerana tidak cukup tempat atau universiti di negara kita atau sememangnya competitive. Oleh sebab saya tengok ramai graduan-graduan yang keluar dari universiti tempatan kita tidak ada standardlah, tidak ada daya saingan, we are not competitive compare...

Dato’ Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: Saya daripada universiti tempatan.

(I can't possibly tell you how this totally cracked up the opposition bench!)

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Patutlah macam ini, inilah contoh. [Ketawa]

Dato’ Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: What contoh?

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Yang Berhormat Telok Intan, tak
payah respons Yang Berhormat.

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Don’t talk like that, biar saya habis.

Dato’ Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: Dia daripada universiti mana ni? Hebat sangat.

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Kita cakap universiti tempatanlah. India is better-lah.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Yang Berhormat Pasir Mas, duduklah.

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Mungkin you pergi India lebih bagus.

Dato’ Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: Tamil Nadu!

Dato’ Ibrahim Ali [Pasir Mas]: Pasir Salak, bukan Pasir Mas.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Yang Berhormat Pasir Salak,
minta maaf ya Yang Berhormat Pasir Mas.

Seorang Ahli: Ini universiti tempatan ni, contoh.

Dato’ Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: Fasal dia merendah-rendahkan universiti tempatan, you don’t, jangan duduk di Malaysia lah.

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Apa pun berdebatlah di luar. How much do you know?

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Yang Berhormat Pasir Salak, sila duduk Yang Berhormat Pasir Salak. Yang Berhormat Telok Intan, teruskan.

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Yang Berhormat Pasir Salak suka menyalak ni.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Tak payah respons Yang Berhormat, teruskan.

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Suka menyalak, itu yang problem. Yang Berhormat Menteri, jadi saya, I’m concern ...

Dato’ Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: Dia tidak layak untuk jadi rakyat Malaysia kalau duduk macam ni.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Yang Berhormat!

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: I’m concern ...

Dato’ Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: What concern? You are downgrade local university of this country.

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: Jadi apakah langkah-langkah yang akan diambil untuk...

Dato’ Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: [Bercakap tanpa pembesar suara]

Tuan M. Manogaran [Telok Intan]: ...untuk memastikan bahawa penuntut-penuntut kita yang keluar dari universiti tempatan ini boleh saing dengan penuntut dari universiti luar sebab employability mungkin, there is must be employable dengan izin. Itu soalan saya. Terima kasih.

I know many of you have asked that I ignore the honourable member from Pasir Salak, whom I've blogged about quite a few times. I am and I will, but sometimes, the entertainment value is just too high! ;-)

I won't post the reply by the Minister, which was an issue to be blogged about in itself, here but I'll do so at my other blog on Education in Malaysia. Will post the link when it's umm..., written. ;-)

Read more!

Disappointing Protest Against Bar Council

I must express my deepest disappointment at the protest led by Kulim-Bandar Baharu Member of Parliament, Zulkifli Noordin on the forum held by the Bar Council to discuss the issue of Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution.

It has been reported that the "protesters, many of whom are from Muslim welfare organsation Perkida and Islamic party PAS, shouted, “Hancur Bar Council” (Crush Bar Council), “Hidup Islam” (Long Live Islam) and “Batal forum” (Cancel the forum). They are carrying placards saying “Jangan cabar Islam” (Don’t challenge Islam) and “Bar Council, Don’t play with fire”.

I am deeply disappointed because the protest is not only misguided, it was also immature and unconstructive. I had issued the following press statement yesterday to emphasize the fact that if even the Bar Council, comprising of members of the legal fraternity, is not allowed to hold open discussions in relation to our constitution and its laws, then it makes a complete mockery of our legal system.

What what probably most ironic was that when the organisers agreed to end the forum early and "when those who attended the forum made their way out of the building, they were greeted with loud boos, obscenities and vulgar words". This type of behaviour certainly makes a mockery of the very religious principles which they claim to want to uphold.

And when asked by Malaysiakini why should the protesters not participate via dialogue and engagement in the forum instead, Zulkifli said that he was open to dialogues but the Bar Council’s intention was to provoke Muslims. “For us, this forum is merely (for) Islam-bashing.”

Well, for me, the statement is absolutely uncalled for, totally unjustified and provocative and completely brainless. If discussing our constitution and our laws is equivalent to "Islam-bashing", then he needs to have his head inspected. The forum did not create the "hoo-haa". It is "leaders" like him who fail to understand simple principles who misleads others into thinking that the whole world is against them.

The group had earlier threatened "many times to storm into the building if the forum was not stopped." In addition, the police had allegedly "found two bottles of alcohol by the building that were believed to be unlit Molotov cocktails."

Well, it appears that this type of thuggish and loutish behaviour is unfortunately not only limited to UMNO Youth.

Read more!

Bar Council Forum on Article 121 (1A)

In the light of protests made over the forum which was scheduled to be held today, I had issued a press statement defending the forum and the Bar Council yesterday. My comments on what happened at the forum today with protests led by the Member of Parliament from Kulim-Bandar Baharu is blogged here separately.

The Bar Council intends to hold the forum entitled “Conversion to Islam: Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution, Subashini and Shamala Revisited” within its premises on Aug 9.

However, its plans has been met with immediate protests from UMNO Youth, PAS and even the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak himself.

Executive Council member of UMNO Youth, Datuk Pirdaus Ismail was reported to have issued the warning “Don’t play with fire! Don’t ever touch religious and racial (matters)!" He even asserted that “It is pointless to organise forums based on intellectualism, professionalism or controversial issues when the safety, peace, harmony and stability of the country were being compromised.”

PAS party president, Abdul Hadi Awang argued that “although, PAS accepts the freedom of expression of various parties to dialogue and discuss issues of public interest, nevertheless, issues concerning Islam is something already guaranteed in the Federal Constitution.” According to Hadi, any discussion pertaining Islam, said Hadi, should involve those who had sufficient knowledge and are authorities in the subject as it will otherwise “only confuse the real understanding of Islam and cause undue tension.”

At the same time, Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak chipped in that the Bar Council Malaysia's proposed forum entitled Conversion to Islam is unsuitable to held in an open manner.

1. Firstly, the entire basis of such a forum being held is due to the controversies and parties victimised as a result of difference in interpretations of Article 121 (1A). Hence a forum held to discuss these differences is certainly constructive towards setting a foundation for “safety, peace, harmony and stability of the country”, as opposed to the threats issued by UMNO Youth.
   
   
2. Secondly, the question that is discussed is a question of law and not a question of religion. This means that the status of Islam as the official religion of the Federation is unquestioned. The forum does not seek to interpret Islam which is the role of the theologians, but to understand, interpret and make constructive suggestions on the law in the interest of all Malaysians.
   
   
3. Thirdly, by demanding that the forum be “closed” in nature, the Deputy Prime Minister is in fact denying the rights of Malaysians to better understand the laws of the land. If ignorance of the law is not a justifiable excuse in the courts of law, then surely, law-abiding citizens must not be denied opportunities seek a better understanding of the law and its implications.

The DAP stands firm that there are probably no better party to organise and lead discussions on the Constitution and the laws of Malaysia than the Bar Council. It will make a complete mockery of our legal and judicial system if its very practitioners are denied opportunities to discuss or explain our laws.

Read more!

Dikir Barat

Can you find me? I'm the only Chinese in the picture.
(But I'm certainly not the fairest of them all ;-))

Haven't managed to find the time to blog properly, what with the many Hungry Ghost Festival dinners all around Petaling Jaya being held these two weeks ;-)

But I've just reconnected with a friend from school in Singapore via Facebook and he had some old photos that certainly brought back some sweet memories. The one on top is after a Dikir Barat performance, probably on a cultural performance night(?) in Raffles Junior College while the one below is the combined team photo of all the inter-faculty Malay language debating teams. ;-)

You'd hardpressed to identify me in this photo as the faces are quite small.
I'm sort of the back row, 4th from the left.
I was representing the Arts Faculty which won that year ;-)

Read more!

Khairy Face-Off

I've been off only for a few days from blogging and I'm getting complaints already ;-)

Well, besides a day which I took off to quietly enjoy my 36th birthday (and to remind myself that age is certainly catching on...), there just wasn't time to sit down and blog properly despite having at least 7 posts in draft mode(!).

But skipping the drafts and coming to the most recent event yesterday when I had a "face-off" with the honourable Member of Parliament from Rembau, Khairy Jamaluddin as well as the Selangor state assemblyman for Seri Setia, Nik Nazmi. Nik is also the youngest candidate in the last general elections, and is now doubling up as the political secretary to the Selangor Menteri Besar. The forum was held at the Malaysian Student Leaders' Summit, hosted by the UK and Eire Council for Malaysian Students (UKEC).

I won't go into the details of the session which lasted some one and a half hour long, which was certainly lively on the issue of subsidies and the tongkat mentality in Malaysia. Nik has blogged it here, with the Star headlining Rembau here and Malaysian Insider terming the debate as a "stalemate".

(Heh, Nik and I must have done a real crappy job of it if it was 2 against 1 and still ended stalemate ;-))

Khairy gets squeezed in this threesome

And there are other bloggers who blogged about it as well so far, Rajan R with a specific reference to the issue of foreign labour and low wages, and Shannon Shah, who will be writing for the soon-to-be-launched "The Nut Graph", was happy to see a democratic debate alive in Malaysia. I'm sure there'll be other sites which I've missed who have blogged the event.

Khairy revealed that I will be crossing over to Barisan Nasional on September 16th

I've only got a few points to add from the debate.

Firstly, possibly the only bit which I thought I could have answered better when pressed by the moderator with regards to the issue of forcing the hands of the Independent Power Producers (IPPs) to renegotiate the purchasing power agreements (PPAs) versus the concern of upholding the sanctity of contracts.

I had ended the line of argument by saying that the Government must have the political will to act in the interest of the public. I could probably have better express my point by making the Government weigh the cost (if any) of the grossly unfair PPA contracts which benefits very very few, versus the cost to the public and the overall Malaysian economy in the years to come. In my opinion, a mistake has been made by the government, and a responsible government will have to take the side of the people it serves.

Secondly, it was a rebuttal which I had wanted to make while debating a point with Khairy, but I didn't, so that the debate can move on to subsequent points. But I thought, definitely worth putting in the rebuttal here at the very least.

In a gist, Nik and I have argued that gradual reductions in subsidies should be done only after 2 key issues, a comprehensive social safety net as well as a efficient public transport system has been put in place.

Khairy had argued that funds were diverted to other important functions such as the RM4 billion food security fund, hence the savings from the "reduction" in subsidies could not be sufficiently allocated to public transport.

I, in return argued that the overall government budget has increased by some RM40 billion since 2004, hence there is no excuse for the lack of expenditure in essential projects like public transport. This increase was largely contributed by payments by Petronas to the government which increased in tandem with the rise in oil prices.

Khairy then argued that while there was an increase in government budget, the funds were utilised for development projects in the interest of the people, hence it was a question of priorities.

I then replied that the priorities were obviously wrong because over the past 10 years since 1998, the government has increased development expenditure from approximately RM20 billion to RM42 billion (2008), while, operational expenditure which comprises rental, wages, pens and paper, maintenance etc., ballooned from about RM40 billion to RM129 billion (2008)! Hence most of the increase in expenditure, financed by our Petronas money was not going to development.

Khairy responded that I have underestimated the importance of maintenance, as it was certainly critical to upkeep our infrastructure, for there is no point building new schools if we don't maintain them.

I let the argument rest there because I thought my point has been made and the audience should be able to judge it accordingly. But I was certainly eager to add on that the reason why our maintenance cost is so darn high is simply because it costs so much more to maintain our infrastructure than to actual build them! The case in point was the RM120 million MRR 2 flyover, which had cost RM70 million to repair in 2004, and now the pillars are cracking again! Or the countless other examples of bailouts - LRTs, MAS, MATRADE etc. Or the schools maintenance scandal, where RM30,000 was paid for RM3,000 worth of renovations. Not to mention of course, our Proton Perdana repair bills!

Khairy obviously doesn't take "no" for an answer ;-)
(Pictures courtesy of Nik Nazmi)

Well, the debate wasn't ever going to have any clear cut winners or losers. Such debate rarely does, unless one party is completely doofuss. What was important was the fact that a meaningful debate was carried out and the panelist has the opportunity to present their views and the audience gets to make (hopefully), a more informed opinion.

I hope that the 500+ audience who attended the forum yesterday had a good time and as I mentioned during the forum, I certainly hope that more will be inspired to join us in playing our part of change and make Malaysia a more progressive nation, whether with the government or the opposition (DAP preferred of course! ;-)) at some point in their lives.

Read more!

One for You, Two for Me

Barisan Nasional governments tend to set the best examples. On the surface, they'll tell you that the government and its leaders will share the burden of the people, "ringan sama dijinjing, berat sama dipikul" or "有难同当，有福同享", but in practice, it's often "one for you, two for me".

And that cannot be more obvious that what is happening with the Terengganu state government, the state with the second highest poverty rate in Peninsula Malaysia, when the state executive councillors purchased their brand new spanking Mercedes Benz to "cut cost", as blogged here earlier.

And in a remarkable show that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has lost total control over its administration, his directive that these new vehicles shall be used only for VIPs in Terengganu was immediately and totally disregarded with utter contempt by the Terengganu state cabinet. The brand new cars already found their way on the road with their proud new owners.

While the official reason for the switch from Proton Perdanas to Mercedes-Benz was due to "cost cutting measures", it is interesting to note that last minute calculations were made to justify the RM3.4 million expenditure which showed inflated repair figures for their old Perdanas. It took the former Menteri Besar to threaten a legal suit for the current administration to admit that the repair bill was only half of what was proclaimed! Hence was the decision to purchase new Mercedes-Benz made on errorneous figures or was there even a study before the decision was made?

And the state government has the cheek to blame the media for sensationalising the issue!

But the cherry on the pie must be the following announcement, in their attempt to control the damage they have imposed on the reputation of the national car manufacturer, that taxi drivers in Terengganu will receive incentives for switching over to the national car(!)

Criticised for not supporting the national car, the state government has announced special packages for taxi drivers to buy new Proton cars to replace ageing Nissans and Toyotas. The package in the form of monetary aid is for legitimate taxi drivers and those refurbishing their Proton taxis... Under the package, each taxi driver would be given RM10,000 to buy a new Proton Saga or Wira to be used as taxis.

My goodness! If that is not the clearest indication that such inferior products are only suitable for taxis in the state and obviously not good enough for the state government leaders, then I don't know what is. Much good that will do to the reputation of their beloved Proton.

These newly installed state government leaders are clearly intoxicated with the policy of "one for the people, two for us" that has symbolised Barisan Nasional administration over the decades.

Read more!

Expensive Gifts

As Pakatan Rakyat formed the state government in Selangor, its elected representatives have received increasing demands from corporate entities ranging from property developers to slimming centres to be the guest of honour at their launching ceremonies.

Some of the younger assemblymen have asked for advice as to whether they should accept such invitations. I told them to use their discretion, and by all means, if it is a reputable company with no intent of "using" you to endorse their products, feel free to attend such functions.

Corporations and businesses form the backbone of our economy and it is often useful to hear what are the challenges which they face. If some of the requests are valid such as unreasonable delays in processing normal business applications (whether to approve or reject), then we must certainly play our role to assist them in expediting the process. However, if we are asked to help secure approval for a particular project as they do not fully comply with existing by-laws and guidelines, then by all means ask them to follow proper channels.

I was the Guest-of-Honour at one such function last weekend, to launch a commercial property development project in Petaling Jaya. I was asked to replace one of the state executive councillor at the last minute due to certain urgent matters arising.

While I must say that I'm not at my most comfortable position doing so, I took the opportunity to add in my speech that as a part of the local community now, the developer and its management must have more dialogue and consultations with the local residents to ensure a balance between development and livability. While well-planned commercial development promotes vibrancy, excessive development kills livability.

Typically in such functions, the host will present us with tokens of appreciation, often things like plaques, pens or pewter mugs. But after having reached home and opening the gift parcel, I was taken aback by what was given. Yes, as the picture above shows, I received a Nokia E90 Communicator, worth approximately RM3,500.

Make no mistake, I love the phone and have been looking at it ever since it was first launched late last year. But surely, receiving such a "gift" for attending a launching function and saying a few words is more than a little excessive!

Subsequently, I did find out however, that it's not uncommon for certain elected representatives to receive these gifts, which ranges from luxury cars to Rolex watches(!)

The question then is, do I return the gift to the developer with apologies? Or do I sell the phone and use the proceeds for community purposes?

I wasn't the only party who received the gift. Loh Gwo-Burne of Kelana Jaya received the same item for attending the function. I had a quick discussion with him on what's the next best step.

After pondering over the issue for a short while, we agreed to sell/auction off the 2 phones to the highest bidders and use the proceeds to fund our respective service centres. After all, the financing of our service centres (rental, staff, equipment etc.) comes not from the Government (unlike Barisan Nasional MPs, opposition MPs gets zero assistance to set up such offices), but from public donations and out of our own pockets.

So, for all of you out there who are interested in a (or two) brand new Nokia E90 Communicator at a discounted price, please feel free to email me @ tonypua (at) yahoo (dot) com with your bid. Cheques should be written to "DAP Damansara Branch". Its for a good cause too! ;-)

Read more!

Questions for Parliamentary 2008 (III)

Well, I wouldn't say I forgot about it, but the need to submit questions sort of fleeted in and out of my mind over the past 2 weeks. Hence, I didn't have the opportunity to solicit for possible questions for the coming parliamentary session starting August 18.

I did however, review the various posts and comments made here and my Education blog in the past few weeks to come up with the 15 questions which were submitted today. Which also reminds me that I haven't blogged on the replies provided in the last session for my previous set of questions. I'll do so over the next few days but, regardless, here are the questions for the upcoming session.

(Oh, and corrections to any glaring language errors are welcome)

Oral Questions:

1. Tony Pua meminta Menteri Kewangan menyatakan langkah yang akan diambil oleh kerajaan untuk meningkatkan prestasi syarikat Proton sedangkan kerajaan negeri BN telahpun memberi “undi ketidak-percayaan” kepada kereta Proton, yang membuktikan kegagalan dasar automotif negara. Adakah Proton akan terus mengalami kerugian sehingga tahun 2010?

(18 Ogos 2008)

(What are steps taken by the Government to improve the fortunes of Proton given that the Barisan Nasional state governments have also condemned and given the vote of no confidence to Proton's most expensive models, marking the biggest set back for the national car industry? Will Proton continue to be loss-making untuk 2010?)

2. Tony Pua meminta Menteri Kerjaraya menyatakan hasil kajian pakar perunding mengenai perjanjian kerajaan dengan pihak konsesi tol, terutamanya pihak yang telah mendapat peruntungan lumayan ataupun yang telah mendapat kembali kos pembinaan. Adakah pihak konsesi akan dikehendaki mengurangkan tol tanpa memerlukan tambahan wang gantirugi daripada kerajaan.

(19 Ogos 2008)

(What is the outcome of the consultant's study on the contracts of the toll operators, particularly those who made lucrative contracts or have even recovered their cost of construction? Will these toll operators to required to reduce their toll rates, without further compensation by the Government?)

3. Tony Pua meminta Menteri Kewangan menyatakan adakah kerajaan bercadang untuk melaksanakan “windfall tax” untuk syarikat minyak dan syarikat konsesi tol lebuhraya kerana cukai tambahan telahpun dikenakan ke atas syarikat minyak sawit sebanyak 15% untuk keuntungan semasa harga minyak sawit melebihi RM2,000 satu ton. Jika tidak, kenapa?

(20 Ogos 2008)

(Given that the Government has chosen to impose a windfall tax of 15% on oil palm companies for making excessive profits when market-determined CPO prices are above RM2,000 per tonne, should the Government impose a similar tax on oil & gas companies, as well as toll concenssionaires?)

4. Tony Pua meminta Menteri Kewangan menyatakan bila aliran rel RapidKL yang baru Kota Damansara dan aliran tambahan Puchong dan Subang Jaya yang dicadangkan akan bermula dibina, dan siap beroperasi? Apakah pecahan kos untuk pembinaan setiap aliran dan adalah perolehan ini akan dibuat secara tender terbuka?

(21 Ogos 2008)

(When are the proposed new LRT line to Kota Damansara and extended lines to Puchong and Subang Jaya scheduled to commence construction work and begin operations? What is the breakdown of costs estimated for the respective lines, and will there be open tenders called for its construction and procurement of equipment?)

5. Tony Pua meminta Perdana Menteri menyatakan adakah Menteri Pengangkutan akan memimpin Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awan yang dicadangkan dan adakah suruhanjaya tersebut akan termasuk pihak pakar bidang pengangkutan. Apakah kuasa suruhanjaya ke atas 13 jabatan kerajaan yang berkenaan, ataupun mencadangkan gabungan jabatan-jabatan ini ke dalam satu kementerian?

(26 Ogos 2008)

(Will the Minister of Transport lead the proposed new Public Transport Commission and will its members comprise of interested parties and experts in the field. To what extent will the commission have powers to instruct the 13 government agencies involved, or even recommend a consolidation of the agencies in-charge of public transport under a single ministry.)

6. Tony Pua meminta Menteri Kewangan menyatakan sebab kos pembinaan Jambatan Pulau Pinang Kedua adalah RM179 juta setiap kilometer, 20% lebih mahal berbanding dengan jambatan serupa di Shanghai yang bernilai RM149j setiap kilometer. Adakah ianya benar bahawa kos jambatan akan meningkat sehingga RM4.8bilion ataupun RM200j setiap kilometer?

(27 Ogos 2008)

(Why is the cost of constructing the 2^nd Penang bridge at RM179 million per kilometre, 20% more expensive than a similar bridge in Shanghai, which cost RM149 million per kilometre? Is it true that the Government is considering increasing the cost of building the bridge to RM4.8 billion, which means RM200 million per kilometre?)

7. Tony Pua meminta Perdana Menteri menyatakan tindakan yang akan diambil ke atas pihak pensyarah Biro Tatanegara yang menggalakkan fikiran “racist” apabila mendesak bahawa “kalau ular dengan India depan mata, ketuk India dulu” dan menayangan video menuduh pemimpin Teresa Kok dan Ezam Mohd Noor sebagai penyokong “Zionist”.

(Will the Prime Minister take appropriate action against lecturers in Biro Tatanegara who promotes racism in his lectures to Malaysian students with statements such as “Kalau ular dengan India depan mata, ketuk India dulu” and displays videos with Teresa Kok and Ezam Md Noor as “zionist” supporters?)

8. Tony Pua meminta Perdana Menteri menyatakan sebab kerajaan telah menambahkan jumlah pekerja perkhidmatan awam sebanyak 23.5% ke 1.14juta sejak tahun 2000. Nisbah pekerja perkhidmatan awam per capita Malaysia adalah antara yang tertinggi di dunia. Bukankah hakikat ini mencerminkan ketidak berkesanan dan kegagalan pendekatan penswastaan kerajaan?

(Why has the Government increase the number of civil servants by 23.5% to 1.14 juta in 2007 since 2000, making Malaysia one of the civil servants per capita ratio in the entire world? Does this not reflect its inefficiency, as well as the complete failure of Malaysia's privatisation programme to reduce the dependence on civil servants?)

9. Tony Pua meminta Menteri Koperasi dan Pembangunan Usahawan menyatakan sebab kegagalan kerajaan melaksanakan dan mengguatkuasa kegunaan sistem tambang bermeter untuk perkhidmatan teksi, terutamanya di bandar-bandar pelancongan seperti Pulau Pinang, Melaka dan Johor Bahru, dan juga tempat tertentu di Lembah Klang seperti perhentian bas Puduraya dan KL Sentral.

(What are the reasons for the complete failure of the Government to implement and enforce the use of meters for Malaysian taxi operators, particularly in cities which attract many tourists such as Penang, Melaka and Johor Bahru, as well as certain hotspots in the Klang Valley such as Pudu bus and KL Sentral bus terminal?)

10. Tony Pua meminta Perdana Menteri menyatakan sebab kuasa perlesenan syarikat pinjaman wang berada dalam Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan dan bukannya satu fungsi Kementerian Kewangan, yang lebih berpengaruh dan berkepakaran dalam bidang kewangan.

(Why is the licensing of money-lenders the responsibility of the Minister of Housing and Local Government and not the function of the Ministry of Finance when the latter has greater expertise and influence over the financial sector?)

Written Questions:

11. Tony Pua meminta Perdana Menteri menyatakan apakah tindakan yang telah diambil oleh kerajaan terhadap 236 pemegang biasiswa bidang perdoktoran yang enggan pulang berkhidmat di tanahair. Apakah pencapaian tindakan yang telah diambil dan adakah ia berkesan? Berapakah pemegang biasiswa dalam bidang lain yang telah gagal pulang berkhidmat?

(What are the steps taken by the Government against the 236 medical scholarship holders to date and please detail what has been the result of the actions taken so far, and whether they have been effective. How many other scholars in other fields who have failed to return to serve?)

12. Tony Pua meminta Perdana Menteri menyatakan secara terperinci, senarai universiti-universiti luar negeri di mana pemegang biasiswa undergraduate JPA dihantar mengikut pecahan ketiga-tiga tahun yang lalu, jumlah pelajar dan kursus ataupun bidang yang dikaji.

(Please list in detail the overseas universities which JPA undergraduate scholars have been sent to over the past 3 years, with breakdowns by year, number of students and courses undertaken.)

13. Tony Pua meminta Perdana Menteri menyatakan berapa ramai pemegang biasiswa yang telah selesai pengajian pada 5 tahun yang lepas. Antara mereka, berapakah yang telah berkhidmat untuk kerajaan mengikut syarat perjanjian biasiswa, berapakah yang enggan menunaikan perjanjian dan berapakah yang telah dilepaskan daripada tanggungjawab mereka?

(Please provide the figures of overseas and local JPA scholars who have graduated over the past 5 years on how many have been employed by the Government in accordance to their scholarship bond, how many have refused to work in the Government, and how many have been released by the Government from their obligations?)

14. Tony Pua meminta Menteri Pengajian Tinggi menyatakan sebab jumlah pelajar mengikut aliran STPM yang diterima dalam bidang perdoktoran di Universiti Malaya telah merosot dari 63 pada tahun 2000 sehingga 28 pada 2008, walaupun jumlah penuntut yang diterima telahpun meningkat daripada 173 ke 205. Adakah sistem STPM dipinggirkan?

(The total number of students accepted into the medical faculty of Universiti Malaya via the STPM route has declined from 63 students in 2000 to 28 students in 2008 despite an overall increase of intake from 173 to 205 students. Isn't this clear-cut result of the Government's marginalisation of STPM students?)

15. Tony Pua meminta Menteri Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan menyatakan sama ada kerajaan akan membantah ataupun menghalang negeri-negeri yang dipimpin oleh DAP, PKR dan PAS melaksanakan pilihanraya kerajaan tempatan yang merupakan ruang lingkup kuasa kerajaan negeri? Jika ya, sila memberikan penjelasan yang terperinci.

(Will the Government object to or prevent the states led by DAP, PKR and PAS in implementing local council elections which is under the purview of the state government? If so, please explain in detail how and why?)

Read more!

The Maid

This is hilarious. We members of parliament do often trade horror stories of our experiences with some of our constituents on the type of complaints we receive in our respective offices. Having heard many, I dare say, this one by Gobind Singh, MP for Puchong must rank right up there.

This lady walks into Gobind's service centre with a stack of documents to file a complaint. She started the tedious process showing her documents of her maid application, receipts of payments, the maid's photo and medical report made as well as other documentation to Gobind.

After a while, puzzled by the lady, Gobind then asked, "Well, everything looks to be in order, and you have got your maid. So what's the problem?"

The lady replied, "You see, this maid that I got, she wakes up at 7am. How can a maid wake up at 7am? "

Gobind raised his eyebrows, "Yes...?"

"She should be waking up latest 6.30am! Where got maid wake up at 7am one!" the lady complained.

Absolutely stunned, but maintaining his ice-cool composure, Gobind asked, "Ummm... yes, and how may I help?"

Without missing a beat, the lady responded, "Well, I voted for you in the last elections, so you must come to my house and knock some sense into the maid's head!"

"..."



ROTFLOL!!!

And when the lady left later, Gobinds assistants who heard the conversation outside came into his office sheepishly with tears in their eyes. I certainly have tears in mine now!

Read more!

Furry Friends Farm Charity

This is a charity public announcement post, particularly since I'm also a dog lover. ;-)

THE founder of a dog sanctuary is worried that the farm's latest fund raising efforts may be in vain. According to Furry Friends Farm (FFF) founder Sabrina Yeap, only a handful of tickets have been sold for a performance held to raise money for FFF.

"The Operafest Children's Choir, Kuala Lumpur and The Nyonya-Baba Golden Voices will perform at the The Royal Lake Club, Kuala Lumpur on July 25 to raise funds for FFF as well as another animal shelter in Taiping, Perak, but the response has been very slow,'' said Yeap.

She added that besides buying food for the dogs at the farm, the funds raised at the performance was also needed for the medical care of the almost 100 dogs at the sanctuary.

So, kind people out there, please help out by taking your entire family to the performance which is scheduled to start at 8.30pm. Tickets are only priced at RM30.00 each.

For reservations please call:

1. Tracy Ho : 016- 3323382
2. Wong Huai Chiing : 012- 2021008
3. Chris Ng : 012-3112257
4. Chris Chan : 019-3803650
5. Sabrina Yeap : 016-6319018

Read more!

Cost-Cutting Mercedes

The Government tells us to tighten our belts. Prices are up and inflation is at record levels. The Cabinet even made a show of "sacrifice" by cutting 10% of their entertainment allowance. However, it's certainly clear that this philosophy isn't fully subscribed by the Barisan Nasional government.

The Member of Parliament for MUAR, noted in his speech in Parliament supporting the Government's motion to reduce subsidy and increase fuel prices that will share the burden with the rakyat - "ringan sama dijinjing, berat sama dipikul". Lets reflect this against the little drama in Terengganu over Perdanas and Mercedes for state executive councillors.

The state government has defended the purchase of 14 Mercedes E200 Kompressor cars at RM3.43mil for the use of its state executive councillors and senior officials.

The Menteri Besar of Terengganu, Datuk Ahmad Said had the cheek to suggest that the measure to purchase Mercedes cars was a "cost-cutting measure". Does he take Malaysians for idiots?

What is perhaps more enlightening is our UMNO's leaders honesty with regards to the quality of Proton vehicles.

“We are not saying that the national car is not good but in reality we are coughing up more money for maintaining the Proton Perdanas, particularly the gear boxes,” he said.

In essence, what this new MB is saying is that anybody who purchases a Proton Perdana is an idiot as well, because, money will actually be better spent buying a Mercedes which cost double a Perdana. (Great advertisement for Proton, I'm sure)

Despite the Deputy Prime Minister, otherwise also known as Mr "Tighten Your Belt" among other things, insistence that only Proton Perdanas are acceptable, it misses the point of why 4-year old executive cars must all be replaced wholesale.

Is this part of a "new Menteri Besar, new cars" philosophy, regardless of how much the people are suffering?

Without wanting to sound like we are blowing our own trumpets, the move by the Barisan Nasional state government in Terengganu stands in stark contrast to the new government in Penang, where vehicles ordered by the previous administration worth more than RM600,000 were cancelled. And that's barely a-fifh of what Terengganu is spending.

Is this a direct implication of a Malaysian government being flushed with windfall cash, in this case from record petrol revenues?

Besar periuk, besar keraknya.

Or to the right honourable member from Muar, I think the more appropriate description of the Barisan Nasional government's policy should be "ringan kerajaan jinjing, berat rakyat yang pikul".

Read more!

Of Faith and Dialogues

Generally, I try to steer clear of blogging religious issues due to its obvious sensitivity, unless the relevant issue is clear cut or outrageous. But I've read several articles published by The Star, based on opinions of a muslim sociologist, Dr Syed Farid Alatas, which I found plenty interesting, and is certainly fresh knowledge for myself.

So I thought to share some of the points made here. The first, published about 2 weeks ago, was with regards to an "Education System Polarising Us", while the latest one on "Taking it Over is good for all", published yesterday, were all relating to the benefits of dialogues between civilisations. These comments were given at a lecture entitled "An Islamic Perspective on the Commitment to Inter-Religious Dialogue"

On inter-faith dialogues

Dr Syed Farid said although the general impression here was that Islam/Muslims were indifferent to dialogue, he said the Quran and the life of Prophet Muhammad showed otherwise.

Citing verse 64 of Surah Al-Imran and verse 125 of Surah An-Nahl, he said the Quran asked Muslims to engage in interfaith dialogue and in inter-civilisational dialogue with reason and evidence.

He added the prophet entered into agreements with Jews and Christians in Medina and they were referred to as ummah.“The term ummah in Malaysia today, however, is exclusive to Muslims. Imagine if we used it as in the prophet’s time to include all Malaysians and not just a part of.”

On objections to dialogues:

“As for ulamas who are against dialogue, that comes from a misplaced feeling of superiority because they are the majority and Islam is the religion of the state.” He said it should be a requirement for dialogue that one does not have to dilute one’s belief in one’s religion.

“One should be able to hold on to one’s belief while establishing common ground and recognising the differences and even fault lines. Muslims with a deep sense of tradition are always for dialogue. The sufis are more open and have a harmonious view of society. The ulamas against dialogue are usually those who are legalistic in thinking and narrow-minded in their views.”

On helping other religions:

Muslims should help Christians solve their problems, for example, if they want to display a cross on their buildings and it is not allowed.

Asked on what basis a Muslim should do that, he said that being the majority group, Muslims should be committed to help people of all faiths with their problems as Islam provides for the protection of the rights of others.

“It is not just a concession granted to minority groups. Rather, there is a Quranic basis, prophetic tradition and centuries of Islamic practice to support this.

On culture vs religion:

At a public forum on freedom of thought, conscience and religion in June 2004, Harcharan Singh, then president of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism, had disclosed that although many Sikh gurdwaras, including a 100-year-old one in Kuantan, had dome-shaped roofs, they were told new temples could not have one because Muslims might mistake them for a mosque.

Why take this stand when the Hagia Sophia with its dome-shaped roof - which became the inspiration for other mosques after the Ottomans invaded Constantinople - was originally a church during the Byzantine Empire?

“In that case, there should be a campaign to remove domes from mosques because they come from outside Islam,” he said in a rare chuckle.

Such decisions reflected insecurity or a misplaced feeling of superiority and a lack of historical knowledge, he added. “In China, the mosques look like Buddhist temples from the outside. Architecture should not be the central factor. All religions indigenise themselves to culture and climate.

“We should celebrate that diversity. If Muslims want to claim the dome for themselves, then they should stop cultivating logic, refrain from drinking tea, and give up Kentucky Fried Chicken because these are all alien practices!”

Now, that's certainly an enlightening view, and provides plenty of food for thought.

Read more!

Speech on Public Transportation

I had blogged earlier that as the 9th Malaysia Plan review debate time allocation was cut when I had my turn, I had to cut short my speech as well, and left out the portion on the public transportation mess.

On Wednesday, as we were debating the Supplementary Budget for 2008, I got my chance to speak as there was a period just after lunch break whereby many opposition MPs had not yet returned from a visit to the KL Police Station over Anwar's arrest that day. Hence, I was able to deliver my speech on public transportation in Malaysia. This is also the first time I had the opportunity to deliver a speech early in the day (when there are actually more MPs around, than say 10pm in the evening. Heh).

I won't repost my speech here, which was blogged earlier, but I had a few "minta penjelasan"s from Barisan Nasional (BN) MPs which I thought was interesting, which you can also read from the Hansard here, page 73.

The first was a question posed by former Minister, PADANG BESAR.

Dato' Seri Azmi bin Khalid [Padang Besar]: Boleh celah sikit?

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Sikit ya.

Dato' Seri Azmi bin Khalid [Padang Besar]: Saya ingin penjelasan. Petaling Jaya Utara datang ke negeri Selangor, negeri Selangor sudah diperintah oleh Parti Pakatan dan negeri
Pulau Pinang diperintah oleh DAP yang mana Yang Berhormat daripada DAP. Jadi, buatlah saja.
Kenapa dok blame kerajaan yang lama ini? Yang tak buat, tak mengapa, okey tapi kenapa
blame? Buat sekarang kerana kita dah memerintah negeri, tunjukkan teladan. Kita negeri kaya,
bukan negeri miskin. Kalau Perlis itu miskin tapi Penang dan Selangor negeri kaya. Buatlah.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Itu masalah senang saja. Sebab negeri
Selangor, dia punya annual budget, satu budget RM1.3 bilion. Annual budget bagi Pulau Pinang
RM380 juta sahaja. Menteri Pengangkutan, dia punya bajet RM23 bilion. Apa nak buat? Mana
boleh bagi.

Dato' Seri Azmi bin Khalid [Padang Besar]: Itu bajet yang tak termasuk pengangkutan.
Masukkan pengangkutan, besarkan bajet.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Pengangkutan satu tanggungjawab pihak
persekutuan. Bukan tanggungjawab dalam negeri.

Then, it was followed by REMBAU, who sought clarification in the later part of my speech:

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: [Bangun]

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Ya Yang Berhormat Rembau Yang Berhormat. Nak bagi jalan?

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Sikit ya?

(We always ask "sikit ya?" because these interruptions actually eat into your allocated speech time of 10 minutes, so if these "penjelasan" turn into mini-speeches by the other guys, then you will have no time to finish your speech.)

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: Terima kasih. Tadi Yang Berhormat daripada PJ Utara ada sebut tentang penjimatan daripada penstrukturan semula subsidi ini dan
sebahagian daripada itu digunakan untuk pengangkutan awam. Ini soal keutamaan daripada segi
penjimatan yang didapati oleh kerajaan. Sama ada kerajaan akan membelanjakan duit itu untuk
pengangkutan awam ataupun untuk perkara-perkara yang lain. Kerajaan Barisan Nasional telah
putuskan untuk membelanjakan duit tersebut sebahagian besar dalam bentuk subsidi makanan
dan juga dasar keselamatan makanan. Jadi adakah Yang Berhormat daripada PJ Utara
menyarankan agar duit untuk menampung subsidi bagi seluruh rakyat Malaysia untuk memberi
makanan yang cukup dengan harga yang munasabah itu diambil untuk pengangkutan awam bagi
rakyat yang ada di Lembah Kelang. Ini adalah trade-off Saya minta penjelasan daripada YB.

[Fong Kui Lun (BUKIT BINTANG) then interjected here to repeat that the RM4.4b allocated for public transport disappeared since petrol prices were increased 30 sen in 2006]

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: Saya pohon laluan sebab ini dituju kepada kerajaan, saya Ahli Parlimen kerajaan. Saya minta laluan.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Saya dah bagi tadi, saya dah bagi tadi.

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: Sikit saja, sikit saja.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Saya tahu, faham you nak kata harga minyak dah naik sebab itu RM4.4 bilion itu sudah tidak ada. Saya tahu, saya tahu.

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: Ya, memang betul. Jadi jawablah. Tolong didik sikit kepada Yang Berhormat .... sama.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Tadi Yang Berhormat Rembau, Yang Berhormat Rembau....

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Ya, teruskan Yang Berhormat.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: .....telah berkata bahawa subsidi makanan lebih penting. Subsidi makanan yang ditambah hanya tak sampai RM2 bilion, tak sampai RM2
bilion.

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: Dasar Keselamatan...

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Nak bagi Yang Berhormat?

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Tak bagi jalan.

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: ...Makanan Negara adalah sebanyak RM4 bilion.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Subsidi makanan tak sampai RM2 bilion. Mana boleh kata...

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: Dasar Keselamatan Negara...

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Yang Berhormat.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: ...mengutamakan perbelanjaan terhadap subsidi makanan.

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: ...Food Security Policy...

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Yang Berhormat Rembau, cukuplah Yang Berhormat Rembau.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: .....Jangan macam inilah. Saya gentleman selalu. Saya tak bagi, duduk dulu.

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: Kenapa Yang Berhormat PJ Utara tak baca RM4 bilion untuk Dasar Keselamatan Makanan?

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Inilah dia. Tuan Yang di-Pertua.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Ya teruskan, teruskan Yang Berhormat PJ Utara.

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: Tak, saya tak nak orang putar belitkan fakta.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Tak apalah Yang Berhormat.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Eh, saya nak berikan fakta. You tak bagi saya jawab, saya nak jawab ini.

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar [Rembau]: RM4 bilion untuk Dasar Keselamatan Makanan.

Puan Fong Po Kuan [Batu Gajah]: [Menyampuk] Jangan bisinglah Yang Berhormat Rembau.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Ya teruskan Yang Berhormat PJ Utara.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Okey, perkara yang satu. Subsidi makanan tak sampai ....

Tuan N. Gobalakrishnan [Padang Serai]: [Menyampuk] Yang Berhormat Rembau jadi menteri senang. Bapa mertua Perdana Menteri.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Minta jalan Yang Berhormat ya.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: ....subsidi makanan tak sampai RM2 bilion.

Yang kedua, maksud Yang Berhormat Rembau itu sistem pengangkutan awam di kawasan
Lembah Kelang, di Johor Bahru, di Pulau Pinang tidak penting, tidak penting. Oleh sebab itu
dipinggirkan oleh kerajaan Barisan Nasional.

Yang ketiga, walaupun minyak petrol, harga minyak petrol pasaran seluruh dunia telah meningkat, akan tetapi bajet negara kita sejak tahun 2005 telah meningkat sekurang-kurangnya RM40 bilion. Kenapa tak boleh berikan sedikit, lebih sikit untuk pengangkutan awam. Kenapa tak boleh? Kegagalan sistem pengangkutan awam di Malaysia hari ini siapa yang patut bertanggungjawab?

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Gulung Yang Berhormat, gulung.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Okey. Hakikat ini, hakikat yang dijelaskan
Yang Berhormat Perdana Menteri telah mengumumkan satu lagi suruhanjaya yang baru iaitu
Suruhanjaya Pengangkutan Awam. Penubuhan suruhanjaya ini nampaknya lucu sedikit kerana
kita sudah ada Kementerian Pengangkutan. Kenapa pula perlu sebuah Suruhanjaya
Pengangkutan lagi? Sebenarnya Yang Amat Berhormat Perdana Menteri menubuhkan
suruhanjaya baru ini adalah sebab Kerajaan Barisan Nasional ini mempunyai cara
menguruskan...

And now, I don't think I'll ever finish a speech in parliament without our PASIR SALAK friend raising the issue of blogs. It's quite farcical actually... ;-)

Dato' Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: [Menyampuk] Main blog saja lah.

Tuan Pua Kiam Wee [Petaling Jaya Utara]: Terima kasih Yang Berhormat Pasir Salak. Saya tahu [Pasir Salak] tak ada blog.

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Ronald Kiandee]: Ya gulung Yang Berhormat, gulung.

Dato' Haji Tajuddin Abdul Rahman [Pasir Salak]: [Menyampuk] Tak layak jadi wakil rakyat pun. Main bloglah.

Anyway, it's certainly a better speech compared to some others I've made in Parliament (in terms of delivery, the last one being quite poor). Will see if I can put up a video of it somewhere. ;-) As mentioned earlier, the full text of the actual speech is here.

Read more!