MCA publicity spokesperson Ti Lian Ker has questioned why Dr Mahathir Mohamad did not review terms of Malaysia’s water agreement with Singapore during his first tenure as prime minister.
As Ti pointed out, the agreement allowed for a one-time review between 1986 to 1987.
"There was ample opportunity for Malaysia to review the water agreement during Mahathir’s tenure in 1986 and 1987, but it is inconceivable as to why he did not.
"Missing out on the grace period for a review placed Malaysia at a disadvantage... Fast forward 11 years later in 1998 with Mahathir still at the helm, the water issue was raised again, but negotiations brought no success.
"Although Mahathir is now reviving this issue after 30 years, it does not negate that he did not exercise Malaysia’s right to call for a review," he said in a statement today.
The crux of the matter is that Mahathir himself failed to review the water agreement as allowed in 1986-7.
"There was ample opportunity for Malaysia to review the water agreement during Mahathir’s tenure in 1986 and 1987, but it is inconceivable as to why he did not.
"Missing out on the grace period for a review placed Malaysia at a disadvantage... Fast forward 11 years later in 1998 with Mahathir still at the helm, the water issue was raised again, but negotiations brought no success.
"Although Mahathir is now reviving this issue after 30 years, it does not negate that he did not exercise Malaysia’s right to call for a review," he said in a statement today.
The crux of the matter is that Mahathir himself failed to review the water agreement as allowed in 1986-7.
Blogging matey Ti Lian Ker, also MCA publicity spokesperson, has been correct to question Mahathir's glaring omission in his responsibility as PM, and on an issue Mahathir himself has talked about with great resentment against Singapore. So why tok-kok now?
I suspect in that period for review, to wit, 1986 to 1987, Mahathir was both busy with far more urgent matters and also fighting for his political career against Ku Li.
Wikipedia informs us:
Mahathir's government employed repression against more extreme exponents of Islamism. Ibrahim Libya, a popular Islamist leader, was killed in a police shoot-out in 1985; Al-Arqam, a religious sect, was banned and its leader, Ashaari Mohammad, arrested under the Internal Security Act. Mahathir comprehensively defeated PAS at the polls in 1986 ...
Memali - 1985
Al-Arqam; GE against PAS - 1986UMNO elections - 1987
Indeed in 1987 he had his conflict with Ku Li in the UMNO presidential elections when it was alleged he only won by a mere 54 votes due to some 'creative' branch stacking. That led to the Constitutional crisis which ended up with his sacking of Lord President and 5 High Court judges in 1988.
Yes mateys, he was a pretty busy boy during that period, thus he might have forgotten about the review of the water agreement or he was just too busy with political 'life & death' issues to bother about the Sing paying 3 sens per 1000 gallons of water.
Be that as it were, why tok-kok now?
My second speculation - now that he is PM again, he just wanted to vent his fury at Najib's pally-buddy-ness with the Sings, selling them the KTM land and cozying up with the lil' red-dot on other joint ventures.
"Sings might wish to vote out PAP government", HSR, Middle Rocks, etc etc etc and water agreement - Penang Hokkien has a word for Mahathir's actions vis-a-vis Sing, to wit, Ch'oot Kh'ee!
That phrase means to vent his frustrated anger. Maybe he may even re-commence his crooked bridge project.
3 sens per 1000 gallons of water.....non-negotiable...it's really funny, if it weren't a fact....
ReplyDelete1986 was 32 years ago lah.
Please don't keep rewinding the old cassette tape.
That is the problem with MCA...totally lost the plot...so irrelevant...
Ti Lian Ker should go home tanam kangkong... he's just so irrelevant these days.
We need to resolve TODAY's issues TODAY.
MCA have been irrelevant since their balls shrinked into an egg cell. They ran screaming and crying to big brother UMNO whenever DAP bullies them. Spineless and spoiled cowards.
DeletePlaying grandmother's story is the pet hobby of kt.
DeleteEspecially those stories rhythm with past legacies of mamak/manmanlai!
In 1986-87 the PM of Singapore was LKY, at the height of his power. Opening another battlefront with Emperor Lee while crossing swords KuLi would be too much, plus he had to nurse an economy in recession. Also I don't remember MCA President Ling Liong Sik kicking up a fuss either.
ReplyDeleteNow in 2018, TDM is reigning supreme in Harapan, his successor is in hospital and little Lee can't even take charge of his family over the 38 Oxley Road family home, not to mention Singapore.
So it's time to talk business.
So najib is ok with the current agreement? Bohsia from cheebye kaytee
ReplyDeleteTruth hurts.....kaytee
Just like Mahathir said he cannot do anything about Najib's dealing, so as Najib cannot do anything with Mahathir's dealings.
DeleteAnd hadi awang just shocked at his discovery.....semua pun boleh right? John....allah teaches u one....hahahaha
DeleteYes Looes, allah teaches us that everything is a gift, even that extrreeemmeeelly long tongue of yours. Pauline certainly thinks so. Hohohoho!
Deletei think some questions have to be directed to bn n not mahathir. n i find it a bit ironic those from bn in the past or present to raise such question. a severing is required in many of the issues.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt was the PM prerogative then, so who was the PM then? BN kah?
Deletei am fine if one who condemn mahathir is either from pas or ph, i think those from bn lack the moral conviction to demand answer from mahathir.
Deleten i take the stance that what mahathir did in the past do represent bn, n what he does today represent ph.
n sorry to say tis, i hope u, hadi, kt, helen n rpk shd develop some sense of shame wrt najib. perhaps dun apply to hadi n rpk since both r obviously a dedak eaters.
Nope. I'm not from BN, but I would at least say that we must be fair in our accusations. If the decision then was by the PM, why bring in unrelated parties?
DeleteA decision on such a strategic resource such as water and involving another country isn't something you leave to the Foreign Minister or the AG to decide. No, this can only be done by the highest authority which is the PM. They might have adviced Mahathir then, but ultimately the decision to forego revising was his alone.
I'm not sure if this was discussed in Parliment because if it were, then the Opposition were as guilty for not voicing it out.
Sorry to say this, but you should be ashamed for trying to separate Mahathir from the decisions done during his BN era. No Government decision done then was made without him knowing about it. Stop being naive or worse, a dedak eater.
u r from bn or no is of no consequences to me, but ti lian ker is from bn. my point is i believe tis is more likely a collective decision under a parliamentary democracy system unless u could prove otherwise.
Deleten i make it clear that, many, n not all issues, need kind of distinction bec mahathir did represent bn, unless u could prove he made the decision without bn knowledge n consent.
aiyo after so long, yr comprehension skill still remain at ck level, i hope u can jiayou n dun give up, i am sure u can surpass ck.
If you were referring to Ti in your comment above mine then i appologise for the confusion, but at the same time perplexed why would you bother what Ti says. He's a nobody from a now-nobody party.
DeleteAnd Mahathir did make a lot of decisions even his own Cabinet are in the dark, not just BN as whole. Take Makuwasa scandal , Maminco scandal, FOREX scandal. These decisions were made by only the PM, the Fin Minister and some, the DPM was involved. Does these 3 position constitutes the whole BN? Does PKR only consist of Papa, Mama & Daughter? 2x5 = 5x2?
This unlike PAS whereby high level decisions are brought up for consensus by Majlis Syura.
WHY bring me into yr discourse with a rd monyet!
DeleteIf u want to argue with me, do it directly lah! I don't have the time to read all comments, especially those with thinking defects.
Because CK is like a pet monkey to bring out for our entertainment every now and then.
DeleteWhy is MCA still in BN? Everyone else have left but this hanger-on still clinging to UMNO like a koala. If it wants to continue its strategy of badgering UMNO and Malays & Islam, then it should just leave and maybe join DAP as their lackey party. Thru 3 elections, this strategy have been proven to be utmost stupidity and thru every elections, the more it fought with UMNO and Malays, the more it lost votes until it only left with Wee Ka Siong. If they still haven't learnt this important and glaring lesson, then they should just leave and die.
ReplyDeleteIf they want to stay in BN, then they should wake up and contribute to it. Stop pussyfooting agendas and be aggressive against the enemy with out, not creating enemies from with in. All the wallflowers, dandies, and spineless cowards should be shoved aside for aggressive and articulated (and young, or even young'ish) members. Get those like PCCC chairman Dr Anthony Chang Wei Lu who can even squeeze LGE's ball-less balls and humiliated him with his 100 dinner table charity gathering. If they can't even take DAP wallflowers to the cleaners, then don't hope they can go toe to toe with DAP hell-hounds like Hew or Nga. The only one capable in MCA is Dr Wee and even then MCA is not a one man show party. To survive in BN, either allow Dr Wee to put MCA on a warpath against DAP or martyr him like they did with Ong Ka Chuan, and thus doomed the party. The choice is theirs.