Mahathir's tenure for 22 years has ensured that money and politics is closely entwined.There is no denial that it was during his time that money politics was prevalent and political patronage through the dispensation of contracts to his cronies was a common occurrence.But this need not be the case if we had honest politicians. Only dishonest politicians need to resort to such dishonest practice of using money to secure support.
For most of mahathir's tenure he had used money politics to win elections by the common practice of promising his electorates money to build schools, roads and other incentives in order to secure their votes. This old practice was continued with the present P.M , Najib with a disappointing result.It seems the voters are now wiser. Offering tax payers money to obtain their support in no longer tenable.We can only hope this corrupt legacy of Mahathir will no longer be acceptable by Malaysians.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Is It True that it is worse to Give than to receive?
I refer to the NST article dated 2nd may 2010.
I beg to differ with the writer's opinion that it is worse to give than to receive.For them to conclude such an opinion confirms their ignorance of the subject matter they are discussing.
One should understand that no one in his right mind would be foolish enough to part with his hard earned money if given the choice. To imply that the giver is such a willing participant to give a bribe is a reflection of the MACC ignorance of the reasons why people are forced to give bribes.
Just put yourself in the position of the giver and ask yourself why you want to give the bribe.The answer is simple. The person taking the bribe in most instances are making life so difficult that you really have no choice but to give. When your livelihood is involved there is really no choice but to give unless you are prepared to call it a day and closed shop so that you can avoid giving to the person seeking a bribe.
One businessman, a friend of mine made four applications to the State govt for a Quarry licence to operate on his own private land which had vast quantities of quarry. On each occassion his application was rejected by the State Exco without any reasons being given. On further enquiries he was told that his application would not be approved unless he greased the politicians in the State Excos. Left with no recourse, he did just that and paid the politicians in charge of the approval and presto his application was approved in the next exco sitting.
Without giving the bribe his application was in limbo and there was no hope of him getting a licence to operate or do business . A corrupt free govt would have given him a licence freely and willingly because it would have brought additonal revenue to the state. Instead he was forced to part with 100k to the politicians who said it was for a political donation. Can someone now tell me that it is worse for the giver to give than the receiver to receive in such an instance?
I beg to differ with the writer's opinion that it is worse to give than to receive.For them to conclude such an opinion confirms their ignorance of the subject matter they are discussing.
One should understand that no one in his right mind would be foolish enough to part with his hard earned money if given the choice. To imply that the giver is such a willing participant to give a bribe is a reflection of the MACC ignorance of the reasons why people are forced to give bribes.
Just put yourself in the position of the giver and ask yourself why you want to give the bribe.The answer is simple. The person taking the bribe in most instances are making life so difficult that you really have no choice but to give. When your livelihood is involved there is really no choice but to give unless you are prepared to call it a day and closed shop so that you can avoid giving to the person seeking a bribe.
One businessman, a friend of mine made four applications to the State govt for a Quarry licence to operate on his own private land which had vast quantities of quarry. On each occassion his application was rejected by the State Exco without any reasons being given. On further enquiries he was told that his application would not be approved unless he greased the politicians in the State Excos. Left with no recourse, he did just that and paid the politicians in charge of the approval and presto his application was approved in the next exco sitting.
Without giving the bribe his application was in limbo and there was no hope of him getting a licence to operate or do business . A corrupt free govt would have given him a licence freely and willingly because it would have brought additonal revenue to the state. Instead he was forced to part with 100k to the politicians who said it was for a political donation. Can someone now tell me that it is worse for the giver to give than the receiver to receive in such an instance?
Why Sport betting licence is given to ascot?
Can someone ask the Finance Minister why is the sport Betting licence being given to Ascot company belonging to Vincent Tan?There is no such thing as a free lunch. Vincent Tan sold 70%of Ascot shares to public listed company Berjaya Group for $375 million. Surely the Finance Minister is not so generous as to see Vincent Tan getting this huge largesse without coughing it out for someone else?It doesnt take a geniuse to know that someone is benefitting from this deal from Vincent Tan because nobody is going to be just happy to see Vincent Tan pocketing this huge largesse.
If the issuance of this sporting licence had been transparent and if there were no one benefitting from this deal would it not been a better deal for the country's coffer that the licence was openly tendered to the highest bidder?If it was tendered openly to the highest bidder it would benefit the country's coffers to the tune of at least $500 million since the value of the licence based on the sale to Berjaya group was $525 million.From this dubious issuance of licence to Ascot company belonging to Vincent Tan, I am quite confident that it is not only Vincent Tan alone laughing his way to the bank.
If the issuance of this sporting licence had been transparent and if there were no one benefitting from this deal would it not been a better deal for the country's coffer that the licence was openly tendered to the highest bidder?If it was tendered openly to the highest bidder it would benefit the country's coffers to the tune of at least $500 million since the value of the licence based on the sale to Berjaya group was $525 million.From this dubious issuance of licence to Ascot company belonging to Vincent Tan, I am quite confident that it is not only Vincent Tan alone laughing his way to the bank.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Sodomy ll: Anwar Loses Final Appeal
To the man in the street, the decision of the Federal court in dismissing opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim's appeal to strike out his sodomy charge did not come as a surprise. With a former UMNO man as the head of the judiciary, Anwar has no chance to win any appeal.
It must not be forgotten that Zaki was parachuted to the Federal court without serving a single day in the High Court and the Court of Appeal and his subsequent appointment as the Chief Judge was to ensure that any legal proceedings against the govt or in its interest would be decided based on the wishes of its political master.
From the way the Judiciary has been upending judicial precedents , there is no doubt that the UMNO govt is hell bent in wanting to put Anwar away for good. But that could be its fatal mistake because in place of the incarcerated Anwar will be 1000 other Anwars to replace him.
It must not be forgotten that Zaki was parachuted to the Federal court without serving a single day in the High Court and the Court of Appeal and his subsequent appointment as the Chief Judge was to ensure that any legal proceedings against the govt or in its interest would be decided based on the wishes of its political master.
From the way the Judiciary has been upending judicial precedents , there is no doubt that the UMNO govt is hell bent in wanting to put Anwar away for good. But that could be its fatal mistake because in place of the incarcerated Anwar will be 1000 other Anwars to replace him.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Opposition Facing an Uphill task in Sibu Election.
Once again we are faced with another By-Election because of the demise of five-term SUPP member of Parliament, Robert Lau.The by-election this time will be contested in the Land of the Hornbill between DAP stalwart Wong and SUPP Lau.
What perhaps irks neutral voters is the blatant open support of the Election Commision in trying to lend a helping hand for B.N to win the by-election. Like in the Hulu By- election the election commission was fiddling with the electoral rolls by transferring eligible voters from the Sibu constituency to another constitiency.Quite obviously this electoral exercise was to deprive certain voters from voting in the coming by-election.It seems the Election Commission has this habit of carrying out such transferring exercise whenever there is an imminent by-election and the reason for this is only best known to the Electoral commission.And no prize for guessing which voters are transferred out from the constituency.
However, now we see another branch of the govt apparatus also getting into the act of giving the B.N govt some moral support in the form of issuing warnings to the campaigning parties that the act of even mentioning the 'Allah' issue was now off limits.
Sarawak OCCI SACll Huzir Mohamad has declared that all political parties should stop using the 'Allah' issue during the campaign period.One may ask who are the police to dictate to the political parties what issue should and and what issues should not be used for the political campaign?Should the opposition stop using the 'Allah' issue because it will put the govt in a bad light? Against such formidable foes like the Election Commission and the PDRM, it is not difficult to envisage an impossible and herculean task for the opposition candidate to win the Sibu by-election.
What perhaps irks neutral voters is the blatant open support of the Election Commision in trying to lend a helping hand for B.N to win the by-election. Like in the Hulu By- election the election commission was fiddling with the electoral rolls by transferring eligible voters from the Sibu constituency to another constitiency.Quite obviously this electoral exercise was to deprive certain voters from voting in the coming by-election.It seems the Election Commission has this habit of carrying out such transferring exercise whenever there is an imminent by-election and the reason for this is only best known to the Electoral commission.And no prize for guessing which voters are transferred out from the constituency.
However, now we see another branch of the govt apparatus also getting into the act of giving the B.N govt some moral support in the form of issuing warnings to the campaigning parties that the act of even mentioning the 'Allah' issue was now off limits.
Sarawak OCCI SACll Huzir Mohamad has declared that all political parties should stop using the 'Allah' issue during the campaign period.One may ask who are the police to dictate to the political parties what issue should and and what issues should not be used for the political campaign?Should the opposition stop using the 'Allah' issue because it will put the govt in a bad light? Against such formidable foes like the Election Commission and the PDRM, it is not difficult to envisage an impossible and herculean task for the opposition candidate to win the Sibu by-election.
Monday, May 03, 2010
Teen Shooting
Shooting first and asking questions later is certainly not the proper way for the police in uniform to act.Since when have they been authorised to be the Judge jury, and executioner?unless there is an imminent threat to their lives there is no justifiable reason for them to open fire on any criminals.
It is preposterous for the police to claim that the car was used as a weapon to crash into them when the fact of the matter was that they were actually pursuing the teen driver.And if as claimed that a parang was found in the car how could that be a threat when it posed no danger to their lives? Of late it seems the police have resorted to taking the law into their own hands with several ex-judicial killings.The ordinary citizens would have no qualms if the killings were indeed directed at hardcore criminals hell bent in committing murder and robbery. But when innocent lives are sacrificed for the mere sake of slipshod policing then there is something wrong with our people in uniform.
It is preposterous for the police to claim that the car was used as a weapon to crash into them when the fact of the matter was that they were actually pursuing the teen driver.And if as claimed that a parang was found in the car how could that be a threat when it posed no danger to their lives? Of late it seems the police have resorted to taking the law into their own hands with several ex-judicial killings.The ordinary citizens would have no qualms if the killings were indeed directed at hardcore criminals hell bent in committing murder and robbery. But when innocent lives are sacrificed for the mere sake of slipshod policing then there is something wrong with our people in uniform.
Ezam now a senator
How questionable it can be for the B.N govt to appoint Ezam, a former political secretary of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim as a senator.What did he do to deserve such an appointment? He has achieved nothing more than running down his former boss and for that act of betrayal he was rewarded with the senatorship.
Sometime ago another 'frog' from Perak was rewarded with a datukship.Now Malaysians are beginning to wonder what criteria is the govt looking for in awarding Datukship and senatorship to its citizens? Is the govt sending the wrong message to our young citizens that to betray one former allegiance is an act deserving to be recognised and rewarded so long as the benefactor is the B.N govt?One can only surmise that the B.N govt has really lost its moral compass and need to be put to pasture in order for it to spend sometime examining its morality.
Sometime ago another 'frog' from Perak was rewarded with a datukship.Now Malaysians are beginning to wonder what criteria is the govt looking for in awarding Datukship and senatorship to its citizens? Is the govt sending the wrong message to our young citizens that to betray one former allegiance is an act deserving to be recognised and rewarded so long as the benefactor is the B.N govt?One can only surmise that the B.N govt has really lost its moral compass and need to be put to pasture in order for it to spend sometime examining its morality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)