P Ramasamy
ADUN SPEAKS | Two wrongs don't make them right. In fact, Pakatan Harapan as a whole should have vehemently opposed the entry of Umno leaders into Bersatu at the time when Dr Mahathir Mohamad was the prime minister.
It was not just DAP that was not opposed to it but also PKR and Amanah. All three parties went along with Mahathir's decision. The frogs from Umno were brought into Bersatu and given plum positions.
Whatever was said and done, DAP did the right thing to oppose the inclusion of the four assemblypersons who ditched the Malacca government. The state election would not have been called in the absence of the withdrawal of their support.
It is not that the four wanted an election, but things proved to be beyond their control enabling Umno to have a hand in the call of the election. Even if the four did not want an election, the very act of hopping cannot be forgiven.
The acceptance of even one of the four dissidents would have contradicted the need for a national anti-hoping law at the federal level, an outcome of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) on transformation and political stability.
While Harapan has been firm against party hopping, the act on the part of PKR and Amanah to accept the two party hoppers into the fold is not acceptable.
PKR president Anwar Ibrahim cannot justify the acceptance of the two leaders saying that was not something akin to the treacherous Sheraton Move.
It is the question of the degree of betrayal, but not the betrayal itself.
The Sheraton Move brought down the legitimately elected government of Harapan, the move by the four brought down the Malacca government. Anwar as the chair of Harapan should have been firm in not accepting even one of the four who deserted the government.
ADUN SPEAKS | Two wrongs don't make them right. In fact, Pakatan Harapan as a whole should have vehemently opposed the entry of Umno leaders into Bersatu at the time when Dr Mahathir Mohamad was the prime minister.
It was not just DAP that was not opposed to it but also PKR and Amanah. All three parties went along with Mahathir's decision. The frogs from Umno were brought into Bersatu and given plum positions.
Whatever was said and done, DAP did the right thing to oppose the inclusion of the four assemblypersons who ditched the Malacca government. The state election would not have been called in the absence of the withdrawal of their support.
It is not that the four wanted an election, but things proved to be beyond their control enabling Umno to have a hand in the call of the election. Even if the four did not want an election, the very act of hopping cannot be forgiven.
The acceptance of even one of the four dissidents would have contradicted the need for a national anti-hoping law at the federal level, an outcome of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) on transformation and political stability.
While Harapan has been firm against party hopping, the act on the part of PKR and Amanah to accept the two party hoppers into the fold is not acceptable.
PKR president Anwar Ibrahim cannot justify the acceptance of the two leaders saying that was not something akin to the treacherous Sheraton Move.
It is the question of the degree of betrayal, but not the betrayal itself.
The Sheraton Move brought down the legitimately elected government of Harapan, the move by the four brought down the Malacca government. Anwar as the chair of Harapan should have been firm in not accepting even one of the four who deserted the government.
Ex-Umno and Bersatu assemblypersons Idris Haron, Nor Azman Hassan, Norhizam Hassan Baktee and Noor Effandi Ahmad
What is so crucial about accepting the two, one for PKR and the other for Amanah? Are PKR and Amanah so hard up for candidates that the two needed to be brought in?
What were the prior engagements with PKR before the decision was made to abandon the Malacca government?
Anwar is not just the leader of PKR, but the head of Harapan and the prime candidate to be the next premier.
He should be above petty politics to ensure unanimity in Harapan. The DAP cannot be outvoted just because it was two against one.
Amanah might be in Harapan but its role is disappointing, to say the least. The party is the weakest link in the coalition.
A matter of principles
In the turbulent world of politics in general and in Malaysia in particular it is difficult to live by principles. Political opportunism is so rife that even the most principled party might be swayed to subordinate principles in anticipation of winning.
Is there really a choice whether to abide by principles or to abandon them to political expediency?
Is Harapan going to fudge the differences between Perikatan Nasional or BN by compromising on principles?
Harapan seems to preach one thing to the rakyat but does something else for political expediency. How can Harapan as a whole convince the rakyat that the alternative coalition is the best thing for Malaysia when some basic principles cannot be adhered to?
If Umno or BN can go alone in the state election, why is Harapan fumbling and wants to bring disgraced leaders to its fold?
Winning the election is important but not at the expense of abandoning basic political principles.
I am a DAP member, but a staunch supporter of the coalition as the alternative future government of the country. I have defended Anwar when there were calls for his resignation. I am not a blind supporter of the DAP, the party has its share of weaknesses.
But when it comes to the question of the four assemblypersons, I am dead against their admission into Harapan.
Both PKR and Amanah have made their decisions to admit the two frogs or toads. I don’t think there will be any last moment decision to rescind the decision.
DAP, a formidable member of the coalition, is hurt. I think their leaders have made it known their stand on the acceptance of the frogs.
Following the state election, there is a pressing need to do a post-mortem to ensure past mistakes are not repeated.
It is not about the Malacca election, but also the coming Sarawak election and ultimately the next general election possibly next year.
It is not just the quarrel about accepting or not accepting the frogs but whether the MOU in existence means anything anymore to Harapan.
Time is certainly not on the side of Harapan, the MOU rightly or wrongly seems to be the albatross around the neck of the alternative coalition.
P RAMASAMY is Perai assemblyperson and Penang deputy chief minister.
What is so crucial about accepting the two, one for PKR and the other for Amanah? Are PKR and Amanah so hard up for candidates that the two needed to be brought in?
What were the prior engagements with PKR before the decision was made to abandon the Malacca government?
Anwar is not just the leader of PKR, but the head of Harapan and the prime candidate to be the next premier.
He should be above petty politics to ensure unanimity in Harapan. The DAP cannot be outvoted just because it was two against one.
Amanah might be in Harapan but its role is disappointing, to say the least. The party is the weakest link in the coalition.
A matter of principles
In the turbulent world of politics in general and in Malaysia in particular it is difficult to live by principles. Political opportunism is so rife that even the most principled party might be swayed to subordinate principles in anticipation of winning.
Is there really a choice whether to abide by principles or to abandon them to political expediency?
Is Harapan going to fudge the differences between Perikatan Nasional or BN by compromising on principles?
Harapan seems to preach one thing to the rakyat but does something else for political expediency. How can Harapan as a whole convince the rakyat that the alternative coalition is the best thing for Malaysia when some basic principles cannot be adhered to?
If Umno or BN can go alone in the state election, why is Harapan fumbling and wants to bring disgraced leaders to its fold?
Winning the election is important but not at the expense of abandoning basic political principles.
I am a DAP member, but a staunch supporter of the coalition as the alternative future government of the country. I have defended Anwar when there were calls for his resignation. I am not a blind supporter of the DAP, the party has its share of weaknesses.
But when it comes to the question of the four assemblypersons, I am dead against their admission into Harapan.
Both PKR and Amanah have made their decisions to admit the two frogs or toads. I don’t think there will be any last moment decision to rescind the decision.
DAP, a formidable member of the coalition, is hurt. I think their leaders have made it known their stand on the acceptance of the frogs.
Following the state election, there is a pressing need to do a post-mortem to ensure past mistakes are not repeated.
It is not about the Malacca election, but also the coming Sarawak election and ultimately the next general election possibly next year.
It is not just the quarrel about accepting or not accepting the frogs but whether the MOU in existence means anything anymore to Harapan.
Time is certainly not on the side of Harapan, the MOU rightly or wrongly seems to be the albatross around the neck of the alternative coalition.
P RAMASAMY is Perai assemblyperson and Penang deputy chief minister.
No comments:
Post a Comment