THE NEW CABINET - HOW GOOD IS IT?

"The new cabinet line-up is good". Or so I had thought upon it being announced, although there were a few immediate question marks.

Why were those not chosen to stand for elections brought into the cabinet? While this makes perfect sense in the case of “technocrats”, it is a real puzzle in the case of full time politicians. Even if the candidates well merit the appointments, the process made it seem like a sudden about-turn somewhere along the line, making one wonder if the whole planning and selection basis for both the elections and cabinet formation had been well planned and fully thought through.

Why was Tan Sri Mohamad Taib included in the cabinet? Although a giant of an UMNO stalwart no doubt, he is also someone who had had his share of adverse publicities and controversies, even well beyond the country’s borders. He cannot be that indispensable to the new cabinet (no one is, including Pak Lah) that he had to be included despite the risk of the stigma of his unfortunate past controversies. His services could have been used and recognised in some other less than such an obvious and almost “I don’t give a damn what the people may say” manner.

Why is it necessary to have an Advisor (of ministerial status) for the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry? How will this “Advisor with ministerial status” operate? Given that the named Advisor, Dato’ Sri Sharizat, was the previous minister in this ministry, her appointment will most likely make it very awkward for Dato’ Dr Ng Yen Yen as a first-time full minister – and might create unnecessary conjectures on the reasons for this unprecedented move, including the trust in Dato’ Ng to do a “fair” job particularly in the area of “race interests”. Is it fair to Dato' Ng? Or is this simply a back-door ministerial appointment to salvage a much regretted “innocent casualty” of the general elections while bypassing the so loudly brandished ruling of “no losing candidate to be appointed”?

These are a few of the more obvious question marks. Then there are perhaps the less obvious, which would probably become more apparent as the days go by.

I sense that apart from the so-called “balance”, “integrity”, “lean” and “giving what the people want” considerations, one other element strongly influencing the selection of the cabinet was the “personal loyalty and trust” consideration. But then perhaps this is only to be expected, especially under the present circumstances when the services of the “Hang Tuahs” might be needed. The problem I see though is that not all the “Hang Tuahs” could be included and satisfied. And those left out, especially those who worked so hard for the general elections and felt they had defended the leadership strongly during some difficult times might feel abandoned – and there’s no telling what they might do.

The other likely problem source is the recognition of the contributions of Sabah and Sarawak in the recent general elections. I sense this cabinet line-up might not be seen as sufficient recognition by the two states, although Tan Sri Taib Mahmood might be satisfied especially when his son was made deputy minister. As for the rest – even Dato’ Shafie Apdal might be seen as having been moved to a lesser ministry. What about the very high representation from Johore? And what about the under-representation of Wanita UMNO? Let's not forget they make up more than 50% of UMNO membership!

Thus, while the new cabinet might seem tentatively "lean and mean" and make us somewhat hopeful, its formation might actually cause some complications for the BN. In the worst case scenario it could trigger a further downward spiral of the BN into uncharted territories. If this were to happen, no BN cabinet could really be effective.

.

So, in the final analysis, what do I think of the new cabinet? What a mess!

SARIKEI REVISITED

I just realized that my last many postings have all been related to the recent general elections. I really should try to take my mind off that even if the debris in its aftermath have not settled down, and are not showing any sign they will any time soon, making the post-general elections scenario somewhat uncertain. But, enough, no more general elections talk for this posting …

At some late stage when friends get together to reminisce, often we hear laments of how “children today are not like when we were children” or “the present students are no longer the same as when we were students” or “today’s generation is so unlike ours” or “how very different the place was then” or “things are not what they used to be”, and many, many more!

All, of course, are true. After all everything changes and with time everything becomes a little, if not altogether different. The thing about the past, though, is that everything always seems to be better and nicer compared to today; and seemingly the farther back the more so. Somehow things of the distant past seem to exude such magic making them seem so appealing and interesting – well, mostly.

Perhaps this appeal of the past has really little to do with the present. Perhaps the mind has a way of filtering out the negative emotions retaining only the beautiful memories and warm nostalgia, magnified over time making the past more attractive than it actually was. Perhaps too, the increasing blank spots would need to be filled to create recall – and filling them with joyous emotions is probably the most logical thing for the mind to do.

I think that was what happened to me some weeks back when I visited Sarikei after so long. Today, the town is four times bigger, the shops better stocked and freshly painted, and the decrepit police station I knew is now a modern beautiful building with its entrance now facing the river. The river-front itself has been nicely spruced up with partial embankment and rows of palm trees, and no longer just a dangerous untidy steep bank plunging into the swirling yellow water. All the roads are well surfaced, very different from the narrow potholed and dusty stretches they once were; and there are no more stray dogs running loose in the streets – and the public toilets are clean.

All in all Sarikei has been transformed into a beautiful, thriving, and really neat town that is way better than the one I knew and briefly lived in a long time back. Yet as I stood there looking at the neat empty lot where the mess once stood, I actually longed for the old Sarikei!

By the way, the BN won in Sarikei – but by a mere whisker of a majority of just over 50 votes or so! This can mean trouble for the BN the next time around. I wonder how many spoilt votes there were… ... oops!

"TAKING RESPONSIBILITY"

What is “taking responsibility”?

The overall credit for success or the overall blame for failure goes to the one with the overall responsibility. In success, this is the person who receives the accolades. The rest of the organisation can only directly take credit for the specific individual, unit, or sub-unit responsibilities. Similarly, in the case of a reversal, the overall blame must remain with the overall leader and decision maker, the person who is overall in charge; the Supremo. The leader cannot bask in the glory of success and reap the accolades but decline the needed atonement in failure!

That is what “taking responsibility” involves – or at least a big underlying part of it.

Tan Sri Dr. Koh Soo Koon, who himself lost the elections, had offered to resign as Acting President of Gerakan, although the offer was subsequently rejected by the Party. Dato’ Sri Ong Kah Ting, who actually managed to win his seat although his party was thoroughly decimated, had declined to be appointed to the new Cabinet in order to focus on strengthening the MCA – and in atonement for the poor showing of the party he leads.

In both cases, the party presidents clearly demonstrated their readiness to “take responsibility” and to atone for the overall poor showing of their respective parties.

Dato’ Seri Samyvellu and Dato’ Keyveas seem unlikely to do anything of the sort. Keyveas, in fact, having lost Taiping and having caused much irritations and dissensions within not a few component parties on the road to securing the Taiping nomination, I understand, is even eyeing a cabinet post, the senator route. How totally different and wide-ranging the responses are between the four BN component party leaders in reaction to virtually the exact same reversal – from offering to resign the party leadership to eyeing a promotion!

And what about the response of the leader of the most senior BN component party, UMNO – the one who is overall in charge, the supremo of both UMNO and BN, the one person who is supposed to set the example for the rest of the component parties and indeed the whole nation itself, of what is correct and ethical conduct?

Certainly he has repeatedly said he is "in charge"! So, what can I say? Perhaps the full drama is yet to unfold, but as of now it certainly does not look like Pak Lah is ready to, in any way, atone for the BN disaster which, by the way, he has not actually recognized as such, preferring to term the BN performance over the week-end as “still having secured a good majority”.

If I were to compare his response to those of the four BN component party leaders above, it would seem he has chosen to go the Samyvellu way. He has not offered to resign either his party or government post like Koh Soo Koon or Ong Kah Ting – and he cannot possibly go the Keyveas way since, unlike the Keyveas case, there is no higher position than the Prime Minister!

PETRONAS TO FUND SECOND PENANG BRIDGE?

If the new Penang Chief Minister’s first press statement immediately after taking office is any indication of what is to come, perhaps we should be worried – at least mildly for now.

Among other things, he asked the Federal Government to ensure that the construction of the second Penang Bridge proceeds as planned and that PETRONAS could fund the project.

The piling work on the mainland side is already in progress. That’s how advance the project is – already way beyond the financing planning phase. So what was the PETRONAS bit all about? Was it an early try at taking an oblique swipe at PETRONAS to draw it into some future topic for debate or what? What connection is there between the second bridge and PETRONAS?

Was he simply ignorant (after all he is from Melaka and not Penang) of the status of this project and was merely and sincerely proposing a way out for the Federal Government? Or was there some mischief intended?

Perhaps it is too early to tell with one press conference – still, at best, it could just be pure ignorance, or perhaps well-intentioned but very poorly considered try at advising the Federal Government. Neither is reassuring!

.

As for his comments on the NEP, let's first see where he's planning to take it...

THE REMBAU SLEIGHT-OF-HAND

I didn’t actually see it but I’m told by those who did, that Khairy Jamaluddin had actually conceded defeat in the Rembau elections, on TV, only to be officially declared the winner some 25 minutes later.

How could this happen? More perplexing still – why is there not even a single chirp up to now from any quarter? Why is there not even a query over this, to say the very least, unbelievably strange episode – and to happen to none other than one who is arguably the next-most central figure in the BN’s week-end disaster? Could there be a much wider conspiracy actually in play involving even the opposition that they should so accommodatingly accept this “sleight-of-hand” show by this young upstart and his team, and whoever else involved?

What is happening? I thought only Pak Lah had been put under this young man’s spell, but now it would seem that the whole country is totally hypnotized by this “anointed son-in-law and his associates” that no one, not even the opposition, would challenge this ridiculous wayang kulit. Surely we are all not this dumb!

Even if the whole very strange episode was indeed a genuine error (although logic tells us the probability of it happening to this particular person in such circumstances is extremely unlikely) we, the electorate, deserve some explanation.

BEING ETHICAL IS MORE THAN JUST BEING LEGALLY CORRECT

.

Yesterday, 8th March 2008, was polling day.

Unlike any previous elections this one had left in its wake many in a state of shock. The outcome was seemingly so unexpected that it surprised everyone – those from the ruling coalition did not expect to do so miserably while the opposition parties, despite their claims, probably did not think they could have done that well.

However, come to think of it, the trio I overheard discussing the elections at the teh tarik stall under the ketapang tree at Medan Tuanku some days earlier had actually speculated on the possibility of such a result (previous posting). Perhaps, unlike the main political protagonists who were thoroughly absorbed in their things and guided by their own many surveys, the man in the street might have had some inkling of the possibility of such an outcome after all. Even the stock market began trending down before the week-end!

The elections had now come and gone. Over the last 24 hours I must have endlessly listened to half a dozen panel discussions and analysis on the subject since the election results started coming in early yesterday evening.

I thought the discussions were, firstly, too academic and repetitive. Secondly, everyone seemed to be tip-toeing around the real issues as seen on the ground – the sins of the BN in general, and the perceived weakness of its leadership (the top-most and those he had surrounded himself with). The outcome of the elections was more a rejection of the BN rather than support for the opposition – a rejection triggered by loss of trust, respect and confidence in the BN leadership and unhappiness and disgust with the performance of the ruling party since the electorate’s high hopes of 2004.

In many constituencies the spoilt votes were more than the majority won, representing perhaps disillusioned supporters denying their support but yet not willing to endorse the opposition outright. Similarly the low turn-out in many areas, some in the low 50plus percent, could also represent the “abstaining” supporters. Clearly the rejection of the BN was not so much because of any real preference, love, or affections for the opposition or any real hope and trust in them, but more because of the unhappiness and in many cases disgust for the ruling party!

How else could we possibly explain what happened? Unlike political party members the majority non-party independent voters (who were responsible for the massive swing) could not possibly vote in concert in the absence of an obvious and shared cause – a cause that must be triggered by commonly perceived, serious, and unacceptable major failings. Only such a phenomenon can create the degree of emotional alignment within millions of independent voters to achieve such a concerted swing.

Clearly the general elections over the week-end was not just a loss for the BN. In many ways and possibly in many cases, it was also a loss for the electorate. It was probably a very difficult choice and a sacrifice for many among them. Some felt forced to vote against their better judgment because of loyalty; some voted with their heads to make a statement and did what was perceived at this point of time as a “painful necessity” despite the warring conscience. And many even decided to abandon their voting right and stayed home!

What happens next would be interesting to see.

Dr Koh Soo Koon, the hard-working and very able former Chief Minister of Penang, and Acting Party President of Gerakan, had taken full responsibility for the state defeat and had indicated his readiness to resign from the post of Acting Party President. This is the expected conduct of a responsible and ethical leader. Samyvellu, it seemed, had not at all even considered resigning; neither had Keyveas; or Ong Kah Ting – and neither had Pak Lah, the key and central figure in the eye of the BN debacle.

Legally of course they do not have to resign unless told to do so by the party – and our political parties are so cowed by the leadership there is small hope in that. But then what is ethical is not just what is legally correct. And although we have to accept that everyone might have different standards for what is ethical and acceptable, we expect our leaders in high positions to also subscribe to high ethics. Perhaps the Rakyat might again have to voice their common take on this!

Whatever happened and whatever the fall-out of the 2008 general elections, I sincerely hope the lessons that came with it would not be wasted. Sadly though, judging by the words and tone of several BN leaders immediately after the results were known, it would seem as if the lessons had not as yet been recognised, or acknowledged.

Perhaps they just need some space to grieve first!

AS I WAS HAVING MY TEH TARIK

All I wanted was a glass of teh tarik.

The stall under the ketapang tree on the sidewalk at Medan Tuanku was nice and shady in the late afternoon sun, and looked clean and tidy too. There were three other customers who obviously had been there for quite a bit judging by the several empty glasses and plates.

Having ordered my teh tarik, I settled down to wait. The three gentlemen were in earnest discussion over something, with their hands freely and actively helping to drive home their points. And they were seated just two tables away, close enough for me to hear everything they were saying even without trying, given the high excitement. “This is going to be really interesting” I thought to myself – embarrassingly nosy, I know!

As I had strongly suspected they were talking politics – centered heavily, it would seem on the likely outcome of the forthcoming elections. I was starting to get really plugged-in into the discussion, which at that point was about the sins of the ruling party, and why they should be given their performance evaluation through the ballots this time around.

To my disappointment, it was at that point that they had to break up – perhaps, come to think of it, I might just have caught the final summing up of their total discussion. As they were getting up to go, I heard the smallest of the three asking the fat one, who was doing most of the performance analysis, that since he had identified so many major sins of the ruling party how he was going to vote. The fat one laughed out loud, adding “Itu hang tak boleh tanya – hang sendiri kena pikiak habis-habis apa yang betui, apa yang tak betui – apa kita kena buat. Hang tak boleh Tanya aku sapa aku nak pangkah!”

I wished I had arrived much earlier – it sounded like a really lively discussion, with some really interesting perspectives of this coming week-end elections. Made me wonder if we might actually be in for some really big surprises.

And all I wanted was a glass of teh tarik!

A SOLDIER'S SIGH

It is Army Day today.

I scanned The New Straits Times papers this morning thinking that among the big early-page stories might be some prominent mention of this very significant event for our Army and its members, both past and present.

Except for a brief mention in passing under the caption “Army out-sources non-essential products, services to trim costs” way on page 24, there was nothing about Army Day. Perhaps there were just too many other far more juicy and important stories to fill the pages. Perhaps, Army Day, however significant it might be to the Army and its approximately one hundred thousand serving and many more past members, just could not compete with the other more attention-grabbing topics.

Perhaps, also, as reflected in the poem below, it is just in the nature of things that we have different emphasis and priorities under different circumstances.


A SOLDIER’S SIGH

When time is good and banners proudly fly
When fortunes soar high in clear blue sky
Who is there to exhort and sigh
To caution vigilance but I?
The soldier in company yet lonely
Sans comfort sans family
Fulfilling his duty willing to die
In hostile waters, or freezing mountain high

When success abounds and failures at bay
When only wealth and profits hold sway
Who is there to lament and cry
For guarded caution but I?
Always alert ever prepared be
In good and bad, in triumph, in adversity

When all is well and everything seems right
When the stars shine ever so bright –
Night after night ……
I would still be there mind and body
Forgoing comfort, luxury, and bounty,
To give my all for King and Country

Though now buoyed by peace and plenty
My vigil may seem to most so trivial be
Yet fair weather will not forever endure
For dark clouds will some day appear
When my vigilance will then hold the key
Ensuring our future, the nation’s safety

Thus when the battle drums be sounded
Eager and proud I shall step forward
And as compatriots fall dead and wounded
I shall be there with them to be counted
– A willing warrior, the nation’s defender
Fighting off threats willing and ready
To sacrifice my all – my sworn duty

Yet I wonder……
When I have given my all and all is over
When dark clouds are gone, skies brighter
When I am done and can soldier no longer
Will the country my sacrifice remember?
I wonder… truly I wonder


Oh well, I’m sure there will be some extensive coverage in tomorrow’s papers of the events taking place in Port Dickson today, and possibly some other feature stories too about the Army. Then again, as in the poem, I wonder…

I wish all serving and past-serving members of the Malaysian Army who have given us so much “Selamat menyambut Hari Tentera Darat”.