ALL of us can remember most of the things we said, no matter how long ago. Not every word but certainly most of the main thrusts. But not Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng.
Why? Because he says he makes like a few of them everyday. So it's up to you whether you want to believe Lim when he said that he could not remember if he had taken a dig at Johor at a luncheon in Singapore only some weeks ago.
To be absolutely certain Lim wants to get a tape of what transpired at the event but in the meantime he has apologised to the Johor Sultan and his subjects. This Lim did today at a press conference at his office in Penang, adding that he meant no ill intent. That's a cliche, to be sure.
By the way TV3 aired a tape of what it said contained Lim's remarks at the luncheon but for now Lim is disputing this, saying that "suddenly a tape appears....." Don't know if he is suggesting the TV station concocted this but it seemed to imply exactly that.
What you notice about Lim is he doesn't waste anytime in claiming credit and is just as quick in having a go at his foes. The problem is he sometimes claims credit where it is due to others. When it's positive to him you can see the glow on his face, an eagerness that comes out of a bloated ego. An gentlemanly leader leaves it to others to heap praises on him.
In this case, even if Penang has the country's best crime index, all the credit is due to the police -- a federal agency over which Lim has no say and control.
There's also this little issue of the manner the apology was done. Under normal circumstances a person would first ask to be granted an audience, during which the apology is made in person. That's the general understanding of the requirements of Malaysian protocol.
Friday, September 30, 2011
Thursday, September 29, 2011
ONE THE CABINET, THE OTHER A LIM
MOST unusual decision this -- and taken by none other than the Cabinet!
No one should doubt that it's well-intended but how could the government decide on something that involves others not under its jurisdiction? The issue is one of training in safety procedures for journalists on assignment in conflict zones and disaster areas.
One is sure the local press will be more careful in how it prepares its journalists for such assignments after the shooting death of Bernama TV cameramen Noramfaizul Mohd. Nor on September 2 in Mogadishu but compulsory training by the government?
Willing editors should not have too many problems adhering to this if it's about coverage of an ongoing conflict but a disaster is a completely different scenario. It usually strikes without warning, thus giving editors almost no time to make advanced preparations. Often the journalists assigned have only hours to pack their backs and pick up their passports before making their way to the airport. So when do they train?
Question is: Doesn't the government have enough on its plates already?
NOTHING IS PRIVATE THESE DAYS
JUST saw a headline quoting Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng as saying that whatever he uttered at a luncheon in Singapore last week, including some uncomplimentary comments about Johor, was a "private conversation". My foot......
You speak at an event organised by journalists and attended by journalists and you say it's private? Worse still insisting so in this age of the new media, where almost nothing is secret and left to the imagination.
Lim hasn't denied saying all those things which have offended Johoreans and others and now that what he said in that supposedly private environment has gone public, Lim should be man enough to bite the bullet and deal with the consequences. That's what leadership is all about and it's time Lim shows if he has it.
No one should doubt that it's well-intended but how could the government decide on something that involves others not under its jurisdiction? The issue is one of training in safety procedures for journalists on assignment in conflict zones and disaster areas.
One is sure the local press will be more careful in how it prepares its journalists for such assignments after the shooting death of Bernama TV cameramen Noramfaizul Mohd. Nor on September 2 in Mogadishu but compulsory training by the government?
Willing editors should not have too many problems adhering to this if it's about coverage of an ongoing conflict but a disaster is a completely different scenario. It usually strikes without warning, thus giving editors almost no time to make advanced preparations. Often the journalists assigned have only hours to pack their backs and pick up their passports before making their way to the airport. So when do they train?
Question is: Doesn't the government have enough on its plates already?
NOTHING IS PRIVATE THESE DAYS
JUST saw a headline quoting Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng as saying that whatever he uttered at a luncheon in Singapore last week, including some uncomplimentary comments about Johor, was a "private conversation". My foot......
You speak at an event organised by journalists and attended by journalists and you say it's private? Worse still insisting so in this age of the new media, where almost nothing is secret and left to the imagination.
Lim hasn't denied saying all those things which have offended Johoreans and others and now that what he said in that supposedly private environment has gone public, Lim should be man enough to bite the bullet and deal with the consequences. That's what leadership is all about and it's time Lim shows if he has it.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
LACKING FINESSE IN PROMOTING PENANG
GOOD if the crime rate in Penang has gone down but in trying to entice foreigners to flock to your backyard, must you also run down another state?
Apparently that's what Lim Guan Eng did at a foreign correspondents luncheon in Singapore recently, picking up on Johor which is heavily promoting its Iskandar region to foreign investors.
Let's just leave it to the police to confirm if their statistics back up Lim's claim or clear Johor's good name. But regardless of the public safety situation, is it right for any Malaysian to speak ill of his country when overseas and when fronting a mainly foreign audience?
Singaporeans most likely to be kidnapped when in Johor compared to Lim's supposedly very safe Penang? He may have said this in jest but we haven't heard many stories of Singaporeans being grabbed in the streets in Johor, to be released only after a huge ransom is paid.
Promote the state you lead if you must but you don't have to run down your competitor at the same time........
Penang wasn't such a safe place in the late 80s. As a journalist based in the north then, I remember often receiving stories from our guys on the island about one serious crime after the other, so much so that my assistant P. K. Bala, now deceased, kept asking what exactly was wrong with his home state.
"KLpun (Kuala Lumpur) tak teruk macam ni...." (Even KL is not this bad), was his oft-repeated moan.
Not only that, but just a few weeks into our transfers there from KL we saw the kind of flare-ups in and outside the bars of the kind we never saw in KL and other parts of the Klang Valley in 12 or 15 years. We saw those who felt they were unfairly treated calling for reinforcements who came with tools like baseball bats! The gangs had female members too.
But if the crime situation has indeed improved, then all credit must go to the police, an absolute federal agency over which Lim has no control or say whatsoever. So too having more CCTVs to help the police control crime, as boasted by Lim in Singapore, unless these are put up by the state government.
Apparently that's what Lim Guan Eng did at a foreign correspondents luncheon in Singapore recently, picking up on Johor which is heavily promoting its Iskandar region to foreign investors.
Let's just leave it to the police to confirm if their statistics back up Lim's claim or clear Johor's good name. But regardless of the public safety situation, is it right for any Malaysian to speak ill of his country when overseas and when fronting a mainly foreign audience?
Singaporeans most likely to be kidnapped when in Johor compared to Lim's supposedly very safe Penang? He may have said this in jest but we haven't heard many stories of Singaporeans being grabbed in the streets in Johor, to be released only after a huge ransom is paid.
Promote the state you lead if you must but you don't have to run down your competitor at the same time........
Penang wasn't such a safe place in the late 80s. As a journalist based in the north then, I remember often receiving stories from our guys on the island about one serious crime after the other, so much so that my assistant P. K. Bala, now deceased, kept asking what exactly was wrong with his home state.
"KLpun (Kuala Lumpur) tak teruk macam ni...." (Even KL is not this bad), was his oft-repeated moan.
Not only that, but just a few weeks into our transfers there from KL we saw the kind of flare-ups in and outside the bars of the kind we never saw in KL and other parts of the Klang Valley in 12 or 15 years. We saw those who felt they were unfairly treated calling for reinforcements who came with tools like baseball bats! The gangs had female members too.
But if the crime situation has indeed improved, then all credit must go to the police, an absolute federal agency over which Lim has no control or say whatsoever. So too having more CCTVs to help the police control crime, as boasted by Lim in Singapore, unless these are put up by the state government.
Friday, September 23, 2011
TO CHARGE OR NOT TO CHARGE
HERE we have it again, the issue of whether a person deemed by the prosecutors to have commited an offence should be charged.
This time the person concerned is Mohamad Sabu, a.k.a. Mat Sabu, the Pas No. 2 who went on an adventure back into history about who's the good guy and who's the crook during the country's troubled times 61 years ago.
For picking out a certain Mat Indera as the hero instead of the 25 cops at the Bukit Kepong police station who were killed in a fire-fight, Mat has been charged with criminal defamation. Wrong call by the prosecutors?
Herein lies the dilemma. Countless reports were lodged with the police against Mat by all kinds of characters and NGOs. So the police had to investigate, right? Having completed this, the police must have concluded that Mat had committed an offence. Off the investigation papers went to the Attorney-General's Chambers, which decided that Mat had in fact done wrong. But this is not the end of the story because eventually it will be for the court to decide, whatever the opinions of the police and the AG.
This is how the system works in this country and a lot of people know this, certainly the legal trained.
But now some are saying that Mat should not be charged, especially since the prime minister had only very recently announced plans for more liberalisation and that after the ISA is repealed and replaced by other laws, no one would be punished solely for having dissenting political views. Correct but the PM was being specific about provisions in the new legislation. Other laws covering other offences will remain. Those questioning the wisdom of charging dear Mat must be able to draw a line somewhere. If they feel that what Mat said didn't deserve a charge, the way to go about it would be to ask that the law on this offence too be amended or repealed.
What everyone against the decision by the AG seems to have ignored is the need for the investigators and prosecutors to be truly independent, going about their work only guided by what the law says and provides for.
Using the political perspective to ask that someone is not charged only translates into interference in the work of the police and the prosecutors. Isn't this what many people don't like to see happen?
This time the person concerned is Mohamad Sabu, a.k.a. Mat Sabu, the Pas No. 2 who went on an adventure back into history about who's the good guy and who's the crook during the country's troubled times 61 years ago.
For picking out a certain Mat Indera as the hero instead of the 25 cops at the Bukit Kepong police station who were killed in a fire-fight, Mat has been charged with criminal defamation. Wrong call by the prosecutors?
Herein lies the dilemma. Countless reports were lodged with the police against Mat by all kinds of characters and NGOs. So the police had to investigate, right? Having completed this, the police must have concluded that Mat had committed an offence. Off the investigation papers went to the Attorney-General's Chambers, which decided that Mat had in fact done wrong. But this is not the end of the story because eventually it will be for the court to decide, whatever the opinions of the police and the AG.
This is how the system works in this country and a lot of people know this, certainly the legal trained.
But now some are saying that Mat should not be charged, especially since the prime minister had only very recently announced plans for more liberalisation and that after the ISA is repealed and replaced by other laws, no one would be punished solely for having dissenting political views. Correct but the PM was being specific about provisions in the new legislation. Other laws covering other offences will remain. Those questioning the wisdom of charging dear Mat must be able to draw a line somewhere. If they feel that what Mat said didn't deserve a charge, the way to go about it would be to ask that the law on this offence too be amended or repealed.
What everyone against the decision by the AG seems to have ignored is the need for the investigators and prosecutors to be truly independent, going about their work only guided by what the law says and provides for.
Using the political perspective to ask that someone is not charged only translates into interference in the work of the police and the prosecutors. Isn't this what many people don't like to see happen?
Monday, September 19, 2011
SHOW RESULTS & QPR WILL GET COVERAGE
YA we've seen it, the Malaysia Airlines ad on the QPR jersey. And Air Asia having theirs on the away jersey in an arrangement where the former picks up about 60% of the tab over two seasons, which comes to about RM18 million says one report.
Apart from the deal announced by Khazanah Malaysia last month that gives Air Asia 20% of the national airline which in turns gets a 10% stake in the latter, this decision to advertise with QPR is one that is still being discussed by sports enthusiasts and others alike.
The main talking point is if it's money well spent and secondly, why MAS is paying more than its "partner" when the main publicity thrust on live TV for a newly-promoted team like QPR would be when it's playing away against the big boys in the Premier League.
QPR majority shareholder and Air Asia big boss Tony Fernandes thinks that our Astro should be showing more of QPR here -- and I'm sure he was talking about live coverage -- because he says he has received many messages which indicates a growing interest amongst Malaysians for the club. You don't expect him to say otherwise, would you?
But surely Tony knows that's not how TV coverage works, at least when the key words are commercial interests. In other words, for the TV operator, return on investments. What QPR needs to do before it can hope for more prominent media coverage here or anywhere else for that matter is to first show results. That's the way it goes.
Another point being asked: Tony the QPR controlling shareholder is also a board member of MAS following the deal under Khazanah. Is there not a conflict of interests there somewhere?
Apart from the deal announced by Khazanah Malaysia last month that gives Air Asia 20% of the national airline which in turns gets a 10% stake in the latter, this decision to advertise with QPR is one that is still being discussed by sports enthusiasts and others alike.
The main talking point is if it's money well spent and secondly, why MAS is paying more than its "partner" when the main publicity thrust on live TV for a newly-promoted team like QPR would be when it's playing away against the big boys in the Premier League.
QPR majority shareholder and Air Asia big boss Tony Fernandes thinks that our Astro should be showing more of QPR here -- and I'm sure he was talking about live coverage -- because he says he has received many messages which indicates a growing interest amongst Malaysians for the club. You don't expect him to say otherwise, would you?
But surely Tony knows that's not how TV coverage works, at least when the key words are commercial interests. In other words, for the TV operator, return on investments. What QPR needs to do before it can hope for more prominent media coverage here or anywhere else for that matter is to first show results. That's the way it goes.
Another point being asked: Tony the QPR controlling shareholder is also a board member of MAS following the deal under Khazanah. Is there not a conflict of interests there somewhere?
Saturday, September 17, 2011
EVERYONE SHARES THE CAKE IN MALAYSIA
THE thing about writing is that you can always manouvre the arguments to suit your preferences or biases.
The foreign press has widely reported on the prime minister's announcement to repeal and amend the country's preventive laws, many positive especially on the Internal Security Act. But there's always the ifs and the buts.
In this case The Economist says Najib Razak can only claim to be a true reformer if he changes the "most profound sources of oppression and grievance in the country". By this the paper means what it calls the "institutionalised ethnic discrimination that privileges the Malays over the other races, mainly Chinese and Indians".
The government has since long ago been explaining to the world the reasons for Malaysia's social engineering programme which, it cannot be argued, favours the Malays and other indigenous groups. But it maintains that in so doing the other races have not been denied opportunities.
Don't have the statistics here but everyone knows that although in the minority, the Chinese especially dominate and hold a majority in many sectors of the economy. Talk trading and they are the ones you have to deal with. Scrutinise the real estate market and who owns most of the upmarket properties, both residential and commercial? Strip the stock exchange company by company and who owns a majority of the shares? Who controls the lorry transport business, the used-car trade, money-lending business, pawn-broking, cafes and restaurants, the bars and karaoke lounges, the flesh trade? Is the list long enough?
Agreed that most of the Chinese and Indians have to look for places in private universities but they too have not been denied the right to set up colleges and universities owned by the race-based political parties. Which other country in the world allows schools to teach mother tongue education? Discrimination in education?
Wall Street Journal also included the sodomy trial f opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim as another blot in Najib's administration, saying that "it continues to cast a pall over Najib's bid to become a reformer". Why should this trial be any different from other trials? Why should any indiscretion by Anwar be treated differently from that by someone else?
We often read the foreign press saying sodomy is an offence in Malaysia even if between consenting adults. What that seeks to imply we cannot be sure but one pertinent point these reports leave out is that sodomy is one of most heinous sins in Islam.
The foreign press has widely reported on the prime minister's announcement to repeal and amend the country's preventive laws, many positive especially on the Internal Security Act. But there's always the ifs and the buts.
In this case The Economist says Najib Razak can only claim to be a true reformer if he changes the "most profound sources of oppression and grievance in the country". By this the paper means what it calls the "institutionalised ethnic discrimination that privileges the Malays over the other races, mainly Chinese and Indians".
The government has since long ago been explaining to the world the reasons for Malaysia's social engineering programme which, it cannot be argued, favours the Malays and other indigenous groups. But it maintains that in so doing the other races have not been denied opportunities.
Don't have the statistics here but everyone knows that although in the minority, the Chinese especially dominate and hold a majority in many sectors of the economy. Talk trading and they are the ones you have to deal with. Scrutinise the real estate market and who owns most of the upmarket properties, both residential and commercial? Strip the stock exchange company by company and who owns a majority of the shares? Who controls the lorry transport business, the used-car trade, money-lending business, pawn-broking, cafes and restaurants, the bars and karaoke lounges, the flesh trade? Is the list long enough?
Agreed that most of the Chinese and Indians have to look for places in private universities but they too have not been denied the right to set up colleges and universities owned by the race-based political parties. Which other country in the world allows schools to teach mother tongue education? Discrimination in education?
Wall Street Journal also included the sodomy trial f opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim as another blot in Najib's administration, saying that "it continues to cast a pall over Najib's bid to become a reformer". Why should this trial be any different from other trials? Why should any indiscretion by Anwar be treated differently from that by someone else?
We often read the foreign press saying sodomy is an offence in Malaysia even if between consenting adults. What that seeks to imply we cannot be sure but one pertinent point these reports leave out is that sodomy is one of most heinous sins in Islam.
Friday, September 16, 2011
TELL US YOU'RE KIDDING MANO
NEW ideas can be refreshing, especially if well thought-out and free of any hidden motives. And the fact is we have seen many in recent years, now that people have embraced a new medium, cyberspace.
Malaysians are no exception. Those who thought they could never ever get any writing published are now relishing the opportunity to write and write, with many seemingly unaware that there are also rules and laws to be observed in so doing.
Our politicians, specifically those not aligned with the ruling party, are getting more vocal especially because of the better than expected results in the 2008 general elections. You get the feeling that some, with the realisation that the government has had to take a few steps backwards, are constantly pushing the parameters.
Mohamad @ Mat Sabu's romance with Mat Indera looked like one. For that he has been well and truly lynched verbally.
Now you get the feeling that the Dap's Selangor state assemblyman M. Manoharan is another. If Mat chose to try and rewrite history, his opposition minded colleague may be thinking of something worse.
After all these years -- 54 years to be exact -- Manoharan suddenly thinks there is a lot wrong with our national flag, also referred to as the Jalur Gemilang, and has refused to have anything to do with it even as we celebrate today the 48th anniversary of the formation of Malaysia. So instead of giving due respect to our national flag, Manoharan decided that it was more appropriate for him to honour his party's flag.
And if the opposition Pakatan Rakyat wrests control of Putrajaya in the next polls Manoharan will move to have the Jalur Gemilang replaced because "it looks too much like the American flag". It's not so much that he wants it replaced that sounds so unpatriotic but rather the fact that he chose to ignore it for another on a day when most citizens try to feel patriotic.
Imagine the number of national flags to be replaced if others share his wave length. There's Singapore, Indonesia and Poland; Britain, Australia and New Zealand; France and Italy; and god knows how many more.
And maybe our own KL City Hall and faraway Colombia. Who decided against having the present DBKL flag anyway?
Malaysians are no exception. Those who thought they could never ever get any writing published are now relishing the opportunity to write and write, with many seemingly unaware that there are also rules and laws to be observed in so doing.
Our politicians, specifically those not aligned with the ruling party, are getting more vocal especially because of the better than expected results in the 2008 general elections. You get the feeling that some, with the realisation that the government has had to take a few steps backwards, are constantly pushing the parameters.
Mohamad @ Mat Sabu's romance with Mat Indera looked like one. For that he has been well and truly lynched verbally.
Now you get the feeling that the Dap's Selangor state assemblyman M. Manoharan is another. If Mat chose to try and rewrite history, his opposition minded colleague may be thinking of something worse.
After all these years -- 54 years to be exact -- Manoharan suddenly thinks there is a lot wrong with our national flag, also referred to as the Jalur Gemilang, and has refused to have anything to do with it even as we celebrate today the 48th anniversary of the formation of Malaysia. So instead of giving due respect to our national flag, Manoharan decided that it was more appropriate for him to honour his party's flag.
And if the opposition Pakatan Rakyat wrests control of Putrajaya in the next polls Manoharan will move to have the Jalur Gemilang replaced because "it looks too much like the American flag". It's not so much that he wants it replaced that sounds so unpatriotic but rather the fact that he chose to ignore it for another on a day when most citizens try to feel patriotic.
Imagine the number of national flags to be replaced if others share his wave length. There's Singapore, Indonesia and Poland; Britain, Australia and New Zealand; France and Italy; and god knows how many more.
And maybe our own KL City Hall and faraway Colombia. Who decided against having the present DBKL flag anyway?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
