The ten questions to the Alliance candidate for Segamat Utara Parliamentary by-election. Inche Musa Hitam

The DAP Organising Secretary, Mr. Lim Kit Siang, today issued the following statement (3.10.68):

The Alliance candidate for the Segamat Utara Parliamentary by-election, Inche Musa Hitam, has issued a very long statement, in reply to ten questions I asked him at a DAP public rally in Jementah, Segamat Utara, last week.

The voters of Segamat Utara can draw their own conclusions from Inche Musa Hitam’s statement, which has raised more questions.

I hope Inche Musa Hitam will answer these new questions in a clear-cut manner, so that Segamat Utara voters can understand his thinking and outlook.

(1) Bumiputras and non-bumiputras:
Inche Musa Hitam quoted Tunku Abdul Rahman to say that ‘bumiputra’ has no legal definition, and that anyone can call himself a ‘bumiputra.’

How comforting! Will a Malaysian of Indian, Chinese or Ceylonese origin, who calls himself a ‘bumiputra’, be given MARA assistance, scholarship, taxi licences, land, and all other privileges now exclusively reserved for bumiputras?

Were there any non-Malays at the recent Bumiputra Economic Congress.

Inche Musa Hitam’s boss, the UMNO Secretary-General, Inche Khir Johari, said in Sungei Patani at the Central Kedah UMNO annual delegates conference on 16th August 1968 that Thais in Kedah have been accepted as bumiputras. Who decide who is qualified to be accepted as a “bumiputra”? Is it the UMNO?

‘Bumiputra’ means ‘sons of the soil’. Why, then, are foreign-born persons like Syed Jaffar Albar, the Celebes-born former UMNO Secretary-General, regarded as a ‘bumiputra’, while millions of local-born non-Malay Malaysians regarded as ‘non-bumiputra’ and ‘non-sons of the soil?

The Alliance poisonous policy of bumiputraism has created racial friction, misunderstanding and tension. To abolish this racial misunderstanding, would Inche Musa Hitam advocate that all Malaysians regardless of race, who are born in Malaysia, be regarded as Malaysian ‘sons of the soil’ and co-owners of this country?

2. Abolition of racial organizations.
Inche Musa Hitam continues to support the preaching of race and communalism by communal parties like UMNO, MCA and MIC.

He claims however that the direct Alliance party is solving the racial problem. Everybody knows that the direct Alliance party was formed to absorb frustrated Chinese and Indians who cannot get along in MCA or MIC, and to absorb Ceylonese and Eurasians, who until then, could only be associate members, either of UMNO, MCA or MIC. Even persons who have been expelled from the MCA or MIC have been offered membership in the direct Alliance party.

There is not a single Malay member or official in the direct Alliance party, because any Malay disgruntled or frustrated with the UMNO is a persona non grata in the UMNO-dominated Alliance. The direct Alliance party, therefore, is an opportunistic organization to absorb racialists who could not agree with fellow-racialists in the MCA or MIC.

Inche Musa Hitam supports the continued expansion of the Malay regiment, which is open only to Malays. He opposes the DAP call that the Malay Regiment should be absorbed in a Malaysian Regiment, which is open to all races. Would Inche Musa support the formation of a Chinese Regiment or an Indian Regiment?

(3) Multi-lingualism: Inche Musa Hitam claims that Chinese, Tamil and English have freedom of usage and development.

The Deputy Prime Minister, Tun Abdul Razak, has declared publicly that the Alliance policy is to have ‘one nation, one language’. Does he support Tun Razak’s policy?

If Inche Musa Hitam claims that the other languages have free use and development in Malaysia, what does he mean? Does he mean that all four languages are used on government correspondence, announcements, notice boards, television sub-titling?

Why is it that the Penang State Alliance Government put up a huge hoarding board at its state border, declaring “Chakap-lah Bahasa Kebangsaan Sahaja!”? Can’t Malaysians speak in Chinese, English or Tamil?

(4) Rural development programme: Inche Musa Hitam stoutly claims that the Alliance rural development programme has benefitted the ra’ayat, and denies DAP charge that only a handful of Malays benefit and gain admission to the club of the new rich as rentiers, directors and capitalists.

The Minister without Portfolio, Senator Ghaffar bin Baba, announced at a press conference on 25th September 1968 that 13 years after Alliance rule, 73.2 per cent of the Malays are poor farmers.

The political secretary to the Minister of Education, Inche Shariff Ahmad said in Parit Buntar on 30th August that many Malay pupils from the kampongs do not progress in their studies because they often go to school with empty stomachs.

On 8th September, in the Berita Minggu, settlers of the FELDA scheme in Sungei Dusun, denied government propaganda that they are getting $600 a month, when they are in fact getting less than $80 a month.

Is this the Alliance rural revolution?

(5) Government waste

Inche Musa Hitam supports the Alliance extravagant and criminal waste of public funds on unproductive projects like the multi-million dollar Subang International Airport, the National Monument, the Angkasapuri, the Parliament House and the Sungei Way Golf Course.

The Parliament House, for instance, is vacant nine months in a year as Parliament meets only about three months annually. The colossal waste of office space and in maintenance cost is shocking.

Can we expect Inche Musa Hitam, when elected as an M.P. to fight against government waste and extravagance? Or will he be a yes-man?

(6) Corruption:
Can we expect Inche Musa Hitam, if elected into Parliament, to fight against corruption when he dares not support legislation to curb and control corruption in high public official places, including Ministerships, Mentr2 Besar, State Executive Councillors, etc?

(7) Merdeka University; Inche Musa Hitam opposes Merdeka University because he is concerned that there will be too many unemployed graduates. Is this the true reason? Does he support the National University, a project proposed after the Merdeka University? He supports the MCA College, yet opposes Merdeka University. Where is his consistency?

(8) MCA College: Inche Musa Hitam defends the government grant of $10 million to the MCA College because it is named Tunku Abdul Rahman College. What about Merdeka University named in memory of our country’s Merdeka? Will the MCA College, after the 1969 general elections and having served its purpose in winning votes, be converted into a Malay College, as it is a contravention of the Razak and Talib Education Reports which would only allow Malay-medium educational institutions to exist, at all levels?

(9) Labour unrest and Unemployment: Inche Musa said that the rising unemployment throughout the country is not the fault of the Labour Minister or the Alliance. Whose fault is it then? The DAP? From this line of argument, the Alliance can disclaim any responsibility for financial, economic or educational crisis in the country. Is this the quality of leadership?

(10) PPMs. Inche Musa Hitam supports the distribution of PPMs to Alliance, UMNO, MCA and MIC party hacks who have no claim to public service.

Can we expect such Alliance politicians to stand up for justice, equality, right and truth?

Audited by: Ernest, W. & Kieran, L. N.