Hardly surprising as the prerogative for "recommending" to HM The Agong to dissolve parliament (and thus initiating fresh elections) belongs to the current PM - a legitimate process sanctioned by the Constitution, a process no different to any Westminster styled constitutional democracy - who as we know (and he too knows) hasn't enjoyed the confidence of the majority of the people to call for one as yet. Yes, why rush to commit political suicide.
 |
| kepala-sakit Najib |
When you're as politically as f* up as poor Najib, and you have the constitutional rights to hold off for a wee while longer, why not, as the time until the final moments will permit you to:
a. work out some salvaging policies and programs (though I don't see any),
b. device some politically nefarious schemes, wakakaka,
c. hope the opposition will balls up through fighting among themselves or shooting themselves in their own feet (Hudud vs Secularism),
d. etc.
Regarding subpara 'c' above, the DAP is currently showing its internal division over the Karpal Singh's proposal of 'one person, one seat only at either federal or state level'.
 |
| DAP's loose cannon M Manoharan supports Karpal Singh's proposal |
I both agree and disagree with Karpal's proposal.
I agree with Karpal because I opine that the DAP has grown exponentially in membership numbers where, as different from yesteryears, it now has more than adequate numbers of good and capable pollies to take on its share of state and federal seats with a different individual representative in each constituency.
If a senior DAP pollie hangs on to both a state and a federal seat, such an approach will deny and frustrate another capable party member who wants to make direct contributions as a people's representative. Frustration among party members in politics will ensure the DAP remains a small player.
OK, some new jump-on-wagon-ers to the party, having rushed to join the party since March 2008, may not be desirable (being seen as opportunists) while some new wannabes may also be moles. The DAP is notorious in its apprehension about such a possibility (of moles) which has been why its vetting process for pre-selection candidates is as tight as Midas' fist.
But look, there is no 100% guarantee in politics as demonstrated by the remarkable Madam Hee, who despite DAP's over-accommodation of and for her, went on to betray the party. Win some, lose some, and preferably win more than lose ... but in the end, there cannot be any watertight assurance of a party member's indivisible party loyalty.
But being apprehensive about some dodgy members like Madam Hee or another remarkable erstwhile (former-UMNO) member in Jelutong(?) doesn't mean there's no one else in a great party to call upon to take up a state of federal seat to be vacated by an existing MP-ADUN. The DAP should, nay, must increase its represenatives' gene pool.
However, I disagree with Karpal on his proposed sole exception, that Lim Guan Eng be allowed to stand at both state and federal levels. WTF for when Lim GE will again be the CM of Penang which automatically rules him out from federal ministership.
According to Article 43 of the Malaysian Constitution,
ADUNs who are also MP cannot have it both ways, that is, by continuing to be
ADUNs (and thus possibly MBs or CMs or State Exco members) while becoming
federal ministers or deputy ministers. They have to choose between being a
federal minister (or deputy minister) or an ADUN.
Thus, if Lim Guan Eng wants to continue being CM of
Penang (thus has to an ADUN first), and most Penangites want him to, and I am confident he
will be re-elected in the next state election to be an ADUN and consequentially the CM, then he
can’t be appointed as a federal minister (assuming Pakatan takes Putrajaya),
though he may be an ordinary MP.
Even if Pakatan takes over Putrajaya, what is the point of Lim GE being an ordinary MP?
Lim GE as DAP party sec-gen can influence policy development at federal level through the DAP party caucus without even being an MP.
I hope we are not suggesting that Lim will abandon Penang to become a federal minister if Pakatan takes over Putrajaya?
There must be total commitment, not just mere involvement, to either federal or Penang politics. I want Lim GE to be as "committed" as the pig in a breakfast dish of ham and eggs. In that breakfast dish, the pig is totally "committed" while the chicken is merely "involved".
By making an exception for Lim Karpal has unwittingly signalled double standards, a highly volatile source of internal party dissent, so my dear Bhai, unless you have a damn good reason, your proposed policy must apply to Lim GE as well.
The same argument applies to Dr Rama, Ngeh and his cousin Ngah, Teresa Kok, etc. They must choose to play in state OR federal arena, but not in both.
The same argument applies to Dr Rama, Ngeh and his cousin Ngah, Teresa Kok, etc. They must choose to play in state OR federal arena, but not in both.
For example, let's say that Pakatan captures Putrajaya, ahem! Will Teresa want to be a federal cabinet minister or remain as a Selangor exco member?
Which one she may eventually choose, she'll invariably let down the other, by default of not allowing someone of talent and capability to stand in the one she ought to surrender to the party.
Time for DAP to grow up!
DAP has grown
ReplyDeleteIts membership jumps
Many have known
Where the party will go
The party leadership
They have to decide
With the members pool
So many to pick and give
They should pick the proven loyalty members
They shouldn't forget to learn from history
Of party members crossing over to the other side
Of money and benefits and a little power game
Once a decision make
It should apply to all structures of party leaders
One candidate one seat
There shouldn't be any exception clause
For me there is a benefit especially in the pwerhouse names going for 2 seats federal n state but they cant have their cake n eat it lar.
ReplyDeleteIf people like lge wong ho leng ngeh n nga and teresa want to go for state seats fine , put them in the dice-est of seats! Ie no puchong or sitiawan those should go to junior dap or first time potentials.
Sunwayopal
Oh, wakakaaka is finally here! Welcome back KT.....
ReplyDeleteYes, no exception should be made...one rule for all. What you've outlined about LGE's being able to weigh in at federal level re policy development is spot on, so he ought to remain as CM, and thus he's sort of having his cake and eat it too. Hopefully, people like Teresa should lighten up and spread the 'goodies' around and not hog all to themselves.
There's a tempest brewing in the teapot of DAP's "One-Person-One-Seat" wrangling now.....
ReplyDeleteThe question is : would this be resolved quickly and will the Bhai prevail ? There are definitely more capable talents available in DAP now and for a party to truly grow and continue to attract even more such people of calibre, then this one person one seat is the only way to go.
The problem with DAP is that its leaders, esp LGE and TK, are now so arrogrant that they will sufffer the same fate as BN in the coming years. DAP will win the 2013 GE but the honeymoon will last for ten years only. then they will lose. Malaysia will then move to a genuine two-party system where the govt changes every ten years, or approx. Genuine democracy will come only then. till then, we all have to live with DAP's arrogrance
ReplyDeleteTo add to Anon 8.33am, we will have to live with not only DAP's arrogance, but also that of UMNO, PAS etc.
ReplyDeleteYes we should have the 2 party system to keep all the politicians in check, both BN & PR, in 2 ways - 1) to break the long spell that leads to entrenched interests, and 2) each time there is a switch, there is a risk of exposure of previous regimes misdeeds, this to serve as a disincentive to those politicians thinking of mischief.
There is still a long way to go to achieve this. Even the efforts of Penang to stem the frog practice is under threat of being unconstitutional (frogging is one of the guaranteed freedom of association).
when a pollie stands for election under a party banner, he/she is entering into a contract with the voters, telling them he/she will represent them under that banner.
ReplyDeleteIf he/she chooses to abandon that banner, then enter a new contract with the voters. You cannot use the argument of freedom of association to renege on a contract.
KT said "...You cannot use the argument of freedom of association to renege on a contract..."
ReplyDeleteTell that to the judges who made this ruling, which, I believe were made in 2 cases - Kelantan & Sabah. Very soon, Penang will be the third as surely BN will drag the state to court.
However strongly we detest the betrayal of the trust of the voters by the frogs, the courts see it differently, as one of the cherished freedoms of association.
And BN too, judging by their record.
GE 13 is the mother of all elections in Malaysia. It's a make or break for the opposition. So imagine how dirty the bn will do. It is better to field tried and trusted candidates for the DAP. It is not the time for experiments or to show generosity until after Pakatan wins and consolidates.
ReplyDelete