Speech by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Petaling, Lim Kit Siang, at the DAP 1,000-People Serdang Bahru Branch dinner at the Serdang Bahru new village community hall to mark the Party 15th Anniversary on Saturday, 15th August 11981 at 8pm
DAP will protest strongly in the October meeting of Parliament against the appointment of a Deputy Education Minister who is committed to the implementation of Clause 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act convert Chinese and Tamil primary schools into national primary schools
New Straits Times of Tuesday, August 11, 1981, reported that the UMNO Youth leader, Datuk Haji Suhaimi bin Datuk Kamaruddin, had declared that he would not change his stand on the National Education Policy from what he had said in the past, especially with regard to Clause 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act.
Haji Suhaimi said :” I will not add to or subtract any of the things which I had said concerning the policy in the speeches which I had made.”
If Haji Suhaimi is not prepared to change his stand on Clause 21(2) if the 1961 Education Act that it should be implemented, and Chinese and Tamil primary schools should be converted into national primary schools, as he openly and publicly advocated in his UMNO Youth Presidential Address in July last year, then Malaysians must make it very clear to Haji Suhaimi that they cannot accept a Deputy Education Minister who is so contemptuous and disregardful of the legitimate and constitutional aspirations of the majority of Malaysians about mother-tongue education, in particular with reference to Chinese and Tamil primary schools.
The promotion of Haji Suhaimi from Deputy Agriculture Minister to Deputy Education Minister within the short period of one year has created grave anxieties and doubts about the future of Chinese and Tamil primary schools in the country.
The MCA, through its ghost writers and controlled-media, want the people to believe that it was because of the MCA’s behind-thesscene pressures that Haji Suhaimi was not made a Cabinet Minister. Haji Suhaimi was appointed Deputy Minister only in 1990, and for him to rise from Deputy Agriculture Minister to Deputy Education Minister is already a very swift promotion.
Of course, Haji Suhaimi’s Deputy Education MInistership cannot be equated with Datuk Chan Siang Sum’s Deputy Education Ministership – as the latter’s office is virtually a sinecure without real powers and responsibilities.
In fact, many are wondering whether Datuk Haji Suhaimi would be elevated to become full Minister of Education after the next general elections expected to be held next year.
So long as Haji Suhaimi is not prepared to publicly modify his views on Clause 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act, and is committed to its implementation to convert Chinese and Tamil primary schools into national primary schools, then Haji Suhaimi is n unfit to be hold any office or appointment in the Education Ministry.
I want the MCA, Gerakan, SUPP, MIC to explain why they could accept as Deputy Education Ministery who is publicly committed to the implementation of Clause 21(2). Will they then accept a full Education Minister who is similarly committed to implement Clause 21(2), and bring it into effect? /a leader
In fact, in calling for the implementation of Clause 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act, Haji Suhaimi has committed the offence of sedition. It is most deplorable that the Attorney General, Tan Sri Abu Talib Osman, has failed to carry out his duties to bring to book those who transgress the law, without fear or favour, in utter disregard of rank, status or office. It appears that the Attorney-General has double standards/the /as public guardian of law.
With or without MCA, Gerakan, SUPP or MIC support in Parliament, the DAP will protest strongly in the October meeting of Parliament against the appointment of a Deputy Education Minister who is committed to the implementation of Clause 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act to convert Chinese and Tamil primary schools into national primary schools.
Call on Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee to bestir itself and hold emergency meeting on the Auditor-General’s Report on the
1977 Federal Government Accounts and present a report to Parliament in October.
After a spate of press publicity about the Auditor-General’s Report on the 1977 Federal Government accounts, with its catalogue of government financial irregularities, negligence, misappropriations and downright fraud, the Chairman of the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee, Datuk Lee Boon Peng, said that the PAC would meet urgently to look into the Report.
Datuk Lee Boon Peng had been rather late in the day, for the Auditor-General’s Report on the 1977 Federal Government Accounts was tabled in Parliament more than six weeks ago in June. Datuk Lee Boon Peng, as the Chairman of the Parliamentary PAC, should have bestirred himself then and not wait until the spate of press publicity about the Auditor-General’s Report. Could it be that Datuk Lee did not know about the Auditor-General’s Report although it was tabled way back in June, or his sense of urgency was aroused only after the spate of press publicity about the Report – and not by his own reading of the Report?
Be that as it may, there could only be an effective check and control of government expenditures if the Public Accounts Committee bestir itself and play its role as the Parliamentary watchdog on public finances.
I am glad that there has been considerable national publicity about the Auditor-General’s Report, and this national interest must be sustained, and not dissipate away like ‘fireworks’ in the skies.
To sustain this public concern and interest about proper financial stewardship of the government, the Public Accounts Committee must call hold emergency meetings, lasting the entire September month if necessary, to complete examination of the Auditor-General’s Report of the 1977 Federal Government Accounts, and table a Report to the Dewan Rakyat in time for debate in the October session meeting of Parliament.
The Public Accounts Committee has been delegated by Parliament to examine the Auditor-General’s Report in the first instance, and I hope that the PAC Chairman, Datuk Lee Boon Peng, will be able to rise up to the occasion.
Datuk Lee Boon Peng said that the PAC has the powers to summons not only government servants, but also Ministers, to appears and explain rinsi financial irregularities and improprieties. It is no use Datuk Lee Boon Peng talking about what the PAC could do in theory. What Parliament and the people are interested in is what the PAC could do in practice.
Let the PAC meet in September and summon the various Ministers responsible for the various Ministries given ‘dishonourable mention’ in the Auditor-General’s Report, and report to Dewan Rakyat – for otherwise, the PAC would prove to be the weakest link in the chain of financial accountability of government to the people on expenditure of public funds.