by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Kota Melaka, Lim Kit Siang, in Malacca on Wednesday, 4.6.1986:
Lim Kit Siang offers to meet with Dr. Lim Keng Yaik before the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council meeting tomorrow to advise him on policy issues and political principles Gerakan should take a stand on, instead of more or less seaats
I am prepared to meet Dr. Lim Keng Yaik before the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council meeting tomorrow to advise him on the policy issues and political principles the Gerakan should take a stand on, instead of focusing on the selfish question of more or less seats.
It is clear that Gerakan leaders are talking about fighting on their own symbol in the coming general elections, because they feel that they are treated unfairly in the distribution of seats vis-a-vis the MCA. They are not bothered about the people of Malaysia being treated unfairly under the Barisan Nasional policies.
Both MCA and Gerakan seem also to be in agreement that it is fair that UMNO should have a lion’s share of the seats, although this violate the government’s policy of restructuring of Malaysian society which must include the restructuring of political power to reflect more closely the country’s multi-racial composition. Why is it Gerakan has not asked that both Gerakan and MCA should get a fairer allocation of seats vis-a-vis UMNO, instead of concentrating on their division with MCA only?
In tomorrow Barisan Nasional Supreme Council meeting, Dr. Lim Keng Yaik and Gerakan representatives should raises fundamental issues, and not seen to be greedy for a few extra parliamentary and state assembly seats only.
They should for instance demand a restructuring of the political distribution of power in the Barisan Nasional, where UMNO reduce it’s lion share control of the seats. For instance, in Peninsular Malaysia, at least 45% of the parliamentary and state seats should be allocated to non-Malay parties.
Secondly, Dr. Lim and Gerakan should demand policy changes in the Barisan Nasional, without which, a few extra seats is utterly irrelevant. These policy changes must include the public abandonment of the One language, One Culture Policy; the Islamisation process; the extension of the New Economic Policy after 1990; the equitable distribution of political power by having fairer delineation of parliamentary and state assembly constituencies; a new education policy which places mother-tongue education in the mainstream; and an end to the policy of dividing Malaysians into bumiputras and non-bumiputras.
Dr. Lim Keng Yaik and Gerakan leaders will be a great disappointment to the people if they are only interested in a few more seats so that, for instance, Dr. Lim can become a Minister again.
It is no use Dr. Lim and Gerakan raising the various policy issues and political principles after they had been thrown out of Barisan Nasional because of tactical mistakes of Dr. Lim.
Dr. Lim must raises the policy issues and political principles to be the make or break test in Barisan Nasional, and make clear that if there are policy changes in Barisan Nasional, Gerakan is prepared to forgo additional allocation of seats in coming general elections in keeping with a party with political principles which is not greedy for seats.
Why should MCA and Gerakan get excited over UMNO Youth’s statement on Section 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act if the Prime Minister had already given his promise?
Gerakan and MCA leaders and branches came out in fierce criticism of UMNO Youth for its stand the 1961 Education Act is ‘part and parcel of the Education policy should therefore remain as it is’, implying opposition to any amendment to Section 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act.
MCA and Gerakan leaders should regard the UMNO Youth as ‘dumb’ and just ignore them for wasn’t it the MCA President, Tan Koon Swan, who declared in Kota Bahru that the Prime minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamed, had given the promise that Section 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act would be amended in the JULY meeting of Parliamentary? And didn’t Tan Koon Swan say that if the MCA is ‘buffed’ again, the MCA would leave Barisan Nasional?
And wasn’t it Dr. Lim Keng Yaik who told the Gerakan delegates’ meeting from Kuala Lumpur, Selangor and Negri Sembilan in Kuala Lumpur on Sunday that the Gerakan was the one which deserves the credit for the coming amendment to Section 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act, and that the MCA should not falsely snatch away this ‘credit’ from Gerakan?
Since the Prime Minister had given his promise, and Gerakan is really responsible for the proposed amendment to Section 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act, there is no need for MCA or Gerakan leaders or branches to get excited about the UMNO Youth Statement on Section 21(2).
The MMCA and Gerakan should just tell UMNO Youth to ‘shut up’, as this matter had already been resolved with the Prime Minister.
Or have the MCA and Gerakan leaders been bluffing the Chinese community, and the Prime minister had never promised to amend Section 21(2) of the 1961 Education Act? And are MCA and Gerakan fighting to claim credit for something which had not been achieved?
We will know very soon, for I have received notice from Parliament summoning a meeting of Dewan Rakyat for two weeks, from 14th July to 25th July. Tan Koon Swan said in Kota Bahru that Parliament would meet in July 4. He has been proved wrong. Would he be proved wrong again about the amendment to Section 21(2) of the Education Act?
DAP challenge Daim Zainuddin to set up a Public Inquiry to clear all doubts and allegation about conflict of interest in the two UMBC transactions resulting in his family company having 51% control
Finance Minister, Daim Zainuddin, told an Indonesia weekly, Tempo, that three was no conflict of interest in his being Finance Minister and the two UMBC transactions resulting in his family companies acquiring 51% control of the third largest bank in the country.
Daim Zainuddin should realise that a bald and off-hand denial, without giving the fullest accounting of the two UMBC transactions, is not good enough. If Daim is so sure that Asian Wall Street Journal article on his two UMBC transactions raising political, ethical and legal questions are ‘trash’, and ‘dirty untruths’, why won’t he take the Malaysian public into his confidence by letting Malaysians know the full circumstances of those two deals.
Daim Zainuddin is Finance Minister of a government which makes ‘clean, efficient and trustworthy’ its watchwords, and he should therefore not just claim to be ‘clean trustworthy’, but must seen to be ‘clean’ and ‘trustworthy’.
This is why I challenge Daim Zainuddin to set up a Public Inquiry Committee to clear all doubts and allegations about conflict-of-interest questions about the two UMBC transactions involving his family companies. This is not just an issue between Daim and Asian Wall Street Journal, it is a matter of vital interest and concern to all Malaysians.
If Daim Zainuddin had acted above-board, and was nothing to hide, he should be the first to demand such a Public Inquiry Committee. As Minister of Finance, he has the power to set it up. His refused to give a full public accounting, how could only further undermine public confidence and widen the credibility gap as to what government leaders say and what they actually do.