Aarvidi’s Weblog

Kit Siang’s ‘richest unemployed’ riles up Khairy

The ‘richest unemployed (person) in the world.’

This remark riled up Khairy Jamaluddin (BN-Rembau) who locked horns with veteran politician Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timor) in the Dewan Rakyat today.

The shouting match started when Khairy interrupted Lim’s debate on the royal address, where the DAP supremo was stressing a point on the government’s anti-corruption fight.

Khairy asked Lim whether the other four states under the Pakatan Rakyat rule will follow Penang’s footstep and practise open tender for state projects.

“Are we going to see an uniformity in Perak, Kedah, Selangor and Kelantan as well for an open tender system?” asked the first time MP and son-in-law of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

This led Lim to ask Khairy if he agreed with the Penang state government’s move and a ruckus erupted when the DAP leader took a swipe at the Umno Youth deputy chief.

The backbenchers joined in the fray.

“It seems he (Khairy) agrees and supports (Penang’s move), so we thank you. Whether this will be done in other states, we will discuss but what is most important is the principle of accountability, transparency and good governance.

“Among others we want to know how did a person who has declared himself as unemployed can become the richest unemployed in the world? How an unemployed can sell off his shares in ECM Libra with losses? Unemployed? Where did the money come from?” said Lim.

‘A simple, constructive question’

Although Lim did not mention names, this was an obvious reference to Khairy, who gave up the stake in the investment advisory group two years ago.

The Rembau MP then cited the standing orders to defend himself. He however appeared calm and composed in rebutting Lim.

Khairy: Standing order 36 (9) states that no reference shall be made in any debate to the conduct or character of any MP other than the conduct in the capacity of MP… I ask a question which can be easily answered but I’m dragged into a question which is out of my conduct as a MP.

Deputy Speaker Ronald Kiandee: The standing order applies, we shall move on to another topic.

Lim: He is indeed the richest unemployed!

Nga Kor Ming (DAP-Taiping): Isn’t this is a case of siapa makan cili, siapa rasa pedas (the person who did wrong feels guilty)

Khairy: Ipoh Timor continues having the same attitude … I was only asking a constructive question, a simple question…

Deputy speaker: You can’t debate on a MP’s conduct (outside the House).

Lim: This is not about the conduct, this is someone who is the richest unemployed in the world!

Deputy speaker: Please proceed with other topics.

“Don’t become the richest unemployed then,” replied Lim, ending the shouting match and proceeding with his debate on the royal address.

Is there a division?

Despite being a rookie in Parliament, Khairy repeatedly interjected Lim’s debate since this morning and took on the seasoned politician, stealing much of the limelight in the process.

As Lim moved on to the post-election political scene, Khairy again interjected and questioned whether there was a division among the Pakatan component parties.

Citing Perak as an example, he said Menteri Besar Mohamed Nizar Jamaluddin from PAS has reinstated a state religious top official following the palace’s request, a move which was however questioned by Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) as unconstitutional.

“This (Parliament) is not the fourth floor,” retorted Lim, saying the BN-led state government had also faced a crisis with the palace over the Terengganu menteri besar post after the March 8 polls.

Earlier this morning, the duo had crossed swords over blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin who was charged with sedition today.

Kit Siang’s ‘richest unemployed’ riles up Khairy

PM: No further probe on oil-for-food scam

Thank you Prime Minister.

Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said there is no reason to set up a royal commission to investigate the illicit oil-for-food scandal, which he was implicated in by a United Nations inquiry but cleared later.

“The statement that the companies (implicated in the scandal) are closely linked to me is not true at all,” he said in a written parliamentary reply to Wee Choo Keong (PKR-Wangsa Maju) today.

This is believed to be his first rebuttal since the allegation surfaced.

According to Abdullah, the UN inquiry report has among others stated clearly that it has found no evidence to show the premier has benefitted from the deal.

“The only connection between (me) and the Iraqi government then was a letter to recommend a Malaysian delegation to then Iraqi vice-president Taha Yassin Ramadan,” he stated in the three-page reply.

Single-largest bribe-giver

Abdullah was implicated in a 2004 UN inquiry where one ‘Abdullah Badawi’ was found to have gained illegal financial benefit from deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in the illicit oil-for-food scandal.

He was also implicated over his links with a Malaysian trading company called Mastek, controlled by Abdullah’s in-laws, which was alleged to be the biggest bribe-giver in the scandal.

However, in a subsequent UN inquiry in 2005, Abdullah was cleared from any involvement but his two in-laws, Noor Asiah Mahmood and Faek Ahmad Shareef continued to be implicated.

Faek, an Iraqi immigrant, was married to Noor Asiah, a sister of Abdullah’s late wife Endon Mahmood but the couple has since divorced.

According to the UN report, the duo via Mastek had allegedly paid a whopping US$10 million (RM38 million) to Saddam’s regime for the single largest oil allocation under the UN-administered programme.

The report also stated that Faek’s oil allocations were “tied to political consideration as Iraqi officials perceived him as someone who could assist in countering the effects on sanctions by improving Iraq’s ties with Malaysia”.

The Parliament was told previously that the government has no information on any Malaysian companies which had breached the conditions stipulated by the UN under the programme and that it was up to the UN to take any action.

PM: No further probe on oil-for-food scam

Welcome to Sun2Surf

In Malaysia when you blog, you have to be careful. Every sentence you type can lead you into problems. The sentence has got to be re-read a few times, to ensure that the hero of the piece you are writing, is not vilified, made to look small in the eyes of the public, or plainly criticised. This is so because the ruling class think they are perfect, what they utter and do, is beyond criticism. If that be so, then there is no need for blogs, the actions of the Ministers and civil servants are self regulatory and everything done is good. Fellow Ministers of the same kind as well as civil servants dare not criticise, until that action has run into their jurisdiction, then they make noise, otherwise no weaknesses are brought out. Then, who are the people who can bring out these atrocities the Ministers and civil servants do. If the Police and the ACA are proactive, mistakes won’t be done, but strange it may sound, somebody must make a complaint before these agencies act. Instead of being the guardians of good governance, they are waiting for directives, or feed back before acting. Even when complaints are made, such complaints do not see the light of day, but filed away for posterity. Basically there is no check and balance. Audit reports are just reports, is anybody held responsible - no, it is noted and the same thing is repeated the next year.

Very seldom Ministers say that from feed back it is found this is so and so. This feed back is so important for the Minister to make a decision. But is this feed back a majority thinking of the man in the street - or is it just a tool for the Minister to act in the way he wants it to be.

Look at the example of Rais Yatim the Foreign Minister, insisting that woman who travel alone must have letters of approval from the parents. Thousands do every day and not all are drug carriers. He made a statement without thinking of the implications, when bamboozled with criticism, he is not brave enough to admit his mistake, but does a turn around, I meant permission from parents, only for woman under 21, and so forth. What is he trying to prove, is he infallible, which he is not, but why can’t admit his error. No doubt the Home Minister and the Prime Minister ticked him off, - at the onset Rais even said his intentions were made known to the Home Ministry, but in addition to this the bulk of the bashing came from bloggers. Bloggers did their part and reacted to tell Rais this is wrong. Who would appreciate this valuable service.

The King of Bloggers is in prison today, and Raja Petra is a source of information for people who are denied information from the press. I am apprehensive that we may not have an alternate source of information if bloggers like Raja Petra are incarcerated and in the end all small time bloggers, like me, will not touch anything on politics, give up everything, or even if they do write on mundane things, like eating ice-cream. But the government will sorely miss a valuable source of information, which they deem as feed back.

Now coming to the report of Citizen Nades in the Sun online newspaper, I was surprised to read this:

Investigative Journalists. MP from Ipoh Timur told the Parliament that two award-winning investigative journalists, namely theSun’s R Nadeswaran and Terence Fernandes, are now being questioned by the Police over their reports on controversial multi-million ringgit fund transfer to Bakti by Balkis.

As usual they are shooting the informants or the messenger. If R.Nadeswaran and Terrence Fernandes, had not revealed the nonsense of Balkis, a cool RM 10 million would have gone to the dogs. Toyo and his wife must be investigated and not the messengers.

Read on. See what is happening to this country.

Is my posting seditious. I don’t know.

Waiting in vain for change

THE TELEPHONE in the sports minister’s office has been ringing incessantly ever since he was appointed. Some call to extend their congratulations, others to touch base, but some with ulterior motives, One caller, a former minister’s son is desperate. He had a contract to undertake some projects, but with the changing of the guards and more importantly the policies, the money-making machine has come to a standstill. Another, from Singapore, wants to seek an appointment to “sort out matters”. ESPN wants to continue its lucrative arrangement in which the ministry pays millions for “Sports Centre Malaysia” – a 30-minute programme aired on weekdays. In short, the ministry has been buying airtime so that footages of power-hungry people can be seen by a selected few, and someone can collect hefty fees as the middleman in such deals. Has anything changed?

Back in the Selangor State Secretariat, members of the executive council walked into bare offices, save for a table, after they were sworn in. Everything was missing – from staplers to fax machines. So, they all got new ones. The state government paid more than RM1,500 each for the fax machines. You could get the same model for one-third the price at any electrical shop. But then, the purchases had to be made from “registered contractors”. So, what the contractor does is walk to the shop, pick it up for RM500 and sell it for three times the price. No questions asked.
Despite all the publicity given to the Auditor-General’s annual report, no one is bothered about getting quotations or seeking the cheapest possible price. By the way, who cares what he says in the report? After all, for a few days, all kinds of statements will be made and then, it’s business as usual.
And don’t blame the exco members. They make their requisition and the civil servants do the procurement. It’s not their money and what is the incentive for practising prudence? Has anything changed?

In Putrajaya, the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) has taken umbrage to my comments on its efficacy even after it is granted “commission” status. The director-general was quoted as saying that with such a status, the ACA will be “really independent”. He let the cat out of the bag by implying that all the while, the agency was not independent! The telephone call from the agency was flattering indeed. “You mould public opinion. You cannot write about us like that …” Sorry sir, you took six months to investigate and close the files on attempts to cheat the government. Yet it took five days after media reports on extravagance by the Women in Sports Fitness Foundation Malaysia to close the case and issued a statement.

Part of the statement read: “ACA investigations revealed that the Minister of Youth and Sports at that time acted only as the patron of the foundation and was not involved in any expenditure.” Well, who ever said or accused the minister of wrongdoing? So, why go out of the way of your terms of reference? Is it the new “really independent ACA” or the old “independent ACA”? Did anyone bother to check on other aspects of the expenditure, including conflict of interests and the RM800,000 on rental of equipment? No, the investigators were ordered to wear blinkers when carrying out the probe. Will anything change?

In Shah Alam, an unemployed dentist is occupying a bungalow at a rental of RM25,000 per month. His last drawn salary was RM12,000. He is now drawing a couple of pensions not exceeding RM9,000. But he needs to feed himself and the family, maintain a fleet of cars and pay for treatment to look “fair and lovely”. So, how does he balance his budget? But this chap has come a long, long way from the days of selling ice cream … Has anything changed?

Welcome to Sun2Surf

<b><i>THE MALAYSIAN</i></b>: <b><FONT COLOR=#808000><center>Non-Malays Need Not Fear Congress, Says Muhyiddin</center></FONT></b>

Thank you The Malaysian for this posting.

Non-Malays Need Not Fear Congress, Says Muhyiddin

Non-Malays need not feel their rights are being infringed by the recent resolution adopted during a congress consisting of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) calling for Malay privileges to be upheld.
Umno vice-president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said Kongres Permuafakatan Melayu, which concluded in Johor Baru over the weekend, was an expression of the perception held by the NGOs that their rights had been eroded.
He added that the Government and Umno needed to take note of the situation and not take things lightly.
“They feel that their rights are being less fought for by the Government and they want attention to be given.
“But non-Malays should not feel threatened. There is no taking away the rights of any race,” he told reporters yesterday.
“Maybe, they feel the current Umno leadership is not being seen as giving the due attention. We accept their resolution with an open heart,” he added.
On Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah going on a nationwide road show to garner support from Umno’s 3.4 million members in his bid for the presidency, Muhyiddin said it was the Gua Musang MP’s right to do so.
“It is up to him to contest for the party president because it does not go against the party constitution,” he added. (The Star)

***** To the non-Malays please do not worry. These Malay NGOs are merely concerned we are not doing enough for them despite the fact that the very existence of our party, Umno, is hinged upon pleasing these begging bowl carrying, greedy group of vultures found all over the country. But basically, they’re a harmless lot. All that these dimwits want are a few more freebies, that’s all. At least you guys know what it means to work hard and earn a living. These poor chaps are in a way terribly handicapped and have survived on handouts for decades. So you have to pity them.

Non-Malays please bear with us if you feel that we’ve not done enough for you people. Blame the MCA, MIC, Gerakan and the others for that. It’s not an easy task to please everyone, but look at the bright side. At least we gave you citizenship fifty years ago. That must count for something, right?

So once in a while we brandish a keris or two, scream ‘ketuanan Melayu’ loudly and make veiled threats of a bloodbath. But hey we don’t mean it. Just part and parcel of our sandiwara-style politics, you see. Please continue to place your faith in us and more importantly do not ever, ever trust Pakatan Rakyat. We in Umno don’t trust them and nor should you.

THE MALAYSIAN: Non-Malays Need Not Fear Congress, Says Muhyiddin

Continuing with my Parental Approval saga, there is yet further news from the originator of this ingenious certificate, a first in the world, adding another feather to the cap of Malaysia Boleh. Seeing that the first proposal of his has hit a snag and realising he has made enemies of the woman folk in Malaysia, he defends himself not with a sword and armour, but with ’smart talk’ yeah, I only was referring to women under 21. He is smart, worthy of a Foreign Minister, and perhaps including all woman was a mistake, but if the girls can be categorised above 21 and below 21 the blunder may go unnoticed. But the problem is, the second statement leads to more blunders and he will wish he had never made the statement in the first place.

The New Straits Times reports that the girls involved are between the ages of 21 and 27, there exists the possibility of yet another statement, ‘what I meant was those under 27′. Good work Rais.

This same report says that the Home Ministry feels the same about obtaining Parental Approval certificates, as quoted by Rais, and he I feel stepped hard on the toes of Hamid the Home Minister, who clarifies that Rais might have been throwing ideas. Did Rais really consult the Home Ministry?

Only God knows.

Another somersault, apparently Rais meant not letters but guidance, sinking further into the mud pool of deception, when first he said a letter.

And finally a parting shot, sour grapes, okaylah you don’t to listen let your own children get involved. My grandmother could have made a better statement.

JAKARTA, May 5 (Bernama) — Malaysian Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim clarified here Monday that his proposal for Malaysian women to show a consent letter from their family or employer before travelling out of the country alone was only meant for those below 21 years of age.
“There’s some misunderstanding. I was referring to boys and girls who travel on their own, especially those below 21 years old and are still subject to the supervision of their parents. Women above 21 years old are adult enough.
“But for those below 21, it’s only fair that parental guidance be given,” he told reporters at a press conference here at the end of his working visit to Indonesia Monday.
Rais said it need not necessarily be papers or letters of declaration as that would be a big hindrance.
“What I meant was those below 21 should be guided; parents should ask questions why they wanted to go to Venezuela or why they wanted to go to Spain. Parents should know where their children are going,” he said.
Rais said he only had good intention for those who travelled alone overseas, especially children.
“But if this is regarded by human rightists to be against human rights, wait until their own children get into trouble,” he said.

Consent Letter Proposal Only For Women Travellers Below 21, Says Rais :: Bernama.com

While reading Wikipedia on Sedition, came across this: worth reading and informative.

By BHAG SINGH
The Star
SPEECHES made by some speakers at the recently concluded Umno General Assembly have come under scrutiny for their content that has been viewed by many as capable of causing discord and disrupting racial harmony.
People do think in different ways. Some say that this is mere rhetoric at the assembly to play to the gallery and should not be taken seriously. Others, of course, view such statements with grave concern and take the view that some such statements border on, if not, constitute sedition.
Our Prime Minister is on record prior to the assembly as asking the delegates “to be fair, just and careful and not to hurt the feelings of component party members when raising issues”.
However after the assembly, in response to public unhappiness with speakers who touched on racial and religious issues, he reminded everyone that race and religious issues are still very sensitive matters.
Whether any of the statements were seditious would no doubt depend on what was actually said and the effect of those words. But many readers are curious to know whether if what was said was seditious, is it permitted just because it was said at such an assembly?
A statement becomes seditious if it has a seditious tendency. And the Sedition Act 1948 says that it is such a tendency if it promotes feelings of ill will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia. It is also seditious to touch on the sensitive issues namely citizenship, the national language and the languages of other communities, the special position and privileges of the Malays as well as the natives of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interest of the other communities in Malaysia and the sovereignty of the rulers.
Whilst many parts of the Sedition Act 1948 are inherited from the British legislation, the provisions above referred to are unique to Malaysia and are intended to curb and prohibit public discussion of sensitive issues after the events of May 13, 1969.
At the time this was done, the late Tun Abdul Razak, our then Prime Minister, referred to this event as marking “the darkest period in our national history” and went on to say that the purpose of the legislation was to remove “certain sensitive issues from the realm of public discussion so as to ensure the smooth and continuing function of Parliamentary democracy in this country”.
Therefore, it is relevant to remember the often restated reminder by the Courts that the light of freedom of speech recedes where the darkness of sedition begins. The line is drawn as was said by Raja Azlan Shah J (as he then was) in the following words: “The right to free speech ceases at the point where it comes within the mischief of the Sedition Act”.
It is not open for a person making seditious statements to say that such words are only for the consumption of the assembly and that there was no intention to promote feelings of ill will and hostility because Section 3(3) of the Sedition Act 1948 states: “For the purpose of proving the commission of any offence against this Act the intention of the person charged at the time he …. uttered any seditious words …., …. shall be deemed to be irrelevant if in fact the act had, or would, if done, have had, or the words, publication, or thing had a seditious tendency.”
It is in the light of this when sitting in judgment in a prosecution instituted under the Sedition Act that Raja Azlan Shah J said more than 30 years ago that: “It is impossible to spell out any requirement of intention to incite violence, tumult or public disorder in order to constitute sedition under the Sedition Act.”
Almost 35 years ago when the Utusan Melayu in its issue of April 6, 1971 published an article based on a speech given by member of Parliament Musa Hitam (now Tun) at the National Education Congress, a successful prosecution followed against the sub-editor of the newspaper for creating a sub-heading which read “Abolish Tamil or Chinese medium school in the Country”.
Most statements made in Parliament at least enjoy immunity from prosecution or civil suit. This allows statements to be made in Parliament which would not be permissible elsewhere. No doubt there are Parliamentary rules and regulations to regulate inappropriate language and conduct within the House. But even in Parliament there is no immunity against seditious words or statements.
Thus when Mark Koding in his speech in Parliament on Oct 11, 1978 advocated that Chinese and Tamil schools should be closed and to prohibit the use of Chinese and Tamil words in road signs and if necessary to achieve this to amend Article 152 of the Federal Constitution, he was prosecuted and convicted for breaching the Sedition Act.
It will therefore be appreciated that our Sedition law has been worded and modified with particular regard to the circumstances and conditions prevailing in the country with a view to ensuring inter racial and inter religious harmony.

Malaysia Today - News & Commentaries » Seditious speeches