Vote of No confidence. Part 2/2.

1. Before we tear into what the speaker said about Government bills taking precedence, we shall discuss about some other issues.

2. An oft quoted fetter that is placed on the King's appointment to ask for the resignation of a current PM who ceases to command majority support, is that he can invite the king to dissolve parliament.

3. The King must listen to the PM. He's the PM. He who rules on life and death. Moreover, he's the patron of GOLF.

4. Many will die if Muhyi is not the patron of a many golf event. Many more will be walking the streets like zombies. The PM is omnipotent.

5. He can try and indeed he will. But the King is not obliged to follow. He is after all a King.

6. If the king can smell that's it's just a ploy to preserve the position of the PM then he can refuse the PM.

7. There is a provision in our Constitution that says the King shall first appoint as PM someone in his mind would likely command the support of the majority of MPs unless provided otherwise by parliament.

8. Where is it otherwise provided? In our Constitution is the answer. The king may exercise his discretion in the appointment of a PM and to accede to a proposal to dissolve Parliament. It is clear he can refuse the PM.

9. Next are the question of cost and public health not envisaged by the loyar buruks. Is holding a snap election not costly compared to the easier resignation of the PM? And is it wise to hold a country wide election amidst the pandemic COVID-19?

10. A parliament, speaker and mp subservient to a Minister of the Crown is a new law to me. But that is what the made for u tube speaker is talking about.

11. Asking the minister of law to move a motion of no confidence against the PM is like asking the minister to shoot himself in the foot. I don't think the minister has that kind of testicular fortitude in him.

12. Have we forgotten that it's the PM who appoints the law minister? How can we ask somebody to bite the hand that feeds him? Only Muhyi did that to Mahathir.

13. A motion of no confidence is usually moved by the leader of the opposition. If the minister won't do it, it's like asking the leader of the opposition asking permission from the minister.

14. That's making a mockery of parliament and its process. It's making the whole of parliament subservient to the crown minister.

15. When the 222 MPs were voted in, they swore to uphold the constitution, uphold the rule of law, served the people. The people want a PM serving them not golfing and goofing around. They want their voice heard. Their voice is heard loudest when the vote of no confidence is heard.

16. A parliament subservient to a minister in the discharge of their electoral duties is unheard of. Yet this is what the timid speaker wants parliament to be.

17. He wants a straight-jacketed and taped at the mouth parliament. So he strenuously cites the limp excuse that government businesses must take precedence.

18. What do parliamentary practices, say about this? For this we have to look at what Erskine May say about it. Thomas, Erskine May who was a clerk at the House of Commons wrote a book actually, entitled Parliamentary Practices. I have a copy bought online. I assumed the speaker who is a lawyer has one.

19. The speaker shames the office he is in. He is not subservient to a minister. He is the one who presides on the day business of parliament. He is higher ranked than anyone else in parliament. By saying that such a motion must be moved by the law minister or that the leader of the opposition must get his permission (the minister's) the speaker is just passing the buck.

20. He is a timid and timorous soul who runs away from making tough decisions. When he took office, he swore to defend the constitution and uphold the rule of law. Obviously he won't do these things.

21. Erskine May says a confidence vote must be acceded to and a day allocated to it. That is to test whether the sitting PM has majority support or not. It's so important that a day must be allotted it. It is in recognition of the fact that the opposition is a government in potential. Therefore, it justifies an intrusion in the hearing of government bills only.

22. I would also argue for the motion of confidence on account of natural justice. To act without bias and the general duty to act fairly. The motion is so important that to deny it goes against a sense of natural justice.

23. We take note of the following. There are legal reasons that allow the King to not necessarily heed the advice of the PM. There are conventional reasons for the speaker to allow the motion. Finally, there is the reason of natural justice. We shall wait what the speaker does.

24. The king can also summon Parliament within 6 months of the last sitting. In that session he can prorogue or dissolve parliament. Only in this case he can summon parliament to discuss the issue of confidence. On which side will the King stand?

Tweet

Read more...

Vote of No confidence. Part 1

1. I listened to the arguments of the Speaker of the Malaysian parliament. That is the kind of argument which retains the tyranny of the status quo.

2. If that is the way he argues the reason for disallowing a vote of no confidence I am afraid his tenure as speaker will be a short one.

3. His reasons for saying the vote of no confidence will not be possible are
(a) government bills must take precedence and
(b) it must be promoted by a minister.

4. I shall not argue the urgency of such bills purely from a legal outlook per se. The more we get into legal quicksand arguments the farther we get to solve the problem. Legal sophistry only clouds the issue.

5. Because if you were to ask lawyers they will come out with all sorts of answers none of which are right. The speaker is one and his answer is not right. It can always be debated and a bill follows it later.

6. A doctor, an engineer and a lawyer rode a train to Scotland. The doctor looks out the window and saw a black sheep on the hills.

7. The doctor says hey the sheep in Scotland are black. The engineer says you can't say that about sheep in Scotland. You can only say ONE of the sheeps are black. Then the lawyer says. You can't even say that. You can only say one SIDE of the sheep is black!

8. Back to the issue. It's really up to the discretion of the speaker. The Standing Orders and the Constitution are just guidelines. MPs used them to provide locus standi for their protestations.

9. A motion of no confidence is a game changer. The RUU is just a game add-on. The former must be accorded priority.

10. The application of common sense is in order here not a recourse to some archaic legal mumbo jumbo.

11. This is no ordinary motion. It is a litmus test. It's to test whether the PM enjoys support from the majority of MPs. If he does not then he and the entire cabinet must resign.

12. Then the refusal of the speaker to accede to the motion is easily understood. It's an attempt to perpetuate the tyranny of the backdoor government, the demise of the cabinet and to save his own position.

13. These are the logical conclusions otherwise there is no need to bunker up under the nebulous Standing Orders and the Constitution. He's saving the government and his position.

14. So don't take his explanation as a given. As the Malay saying says he's just trying to straighten a wet thread. Or while the index finger is straight, his pinky is hooked.

15. It's illogical to expect a Minister of the Crown to move a motion of no confidence. It won't happen in a million years. We might as well wait until the cat grows horns.

16. It's also ridiculous to think the originator of the motion must first seek permission from the Minister of Law. This is not a judicial review. Did the mover of the RUU motion ask permission from the law minister? No he did not and there was no need to. That would be a blockage on his role as MP. An MP owes a duty to the electorate not to the law minister or even the PM.

17. So if the PM ceases to command support from the majority of MPs, he and the entire cabinet must resign. I have no doubt the current speaker will also lose his job(as speaker)

18. The whole of his arguments were meant to preserve the PMs and his interests which are against the interest of the people.

19. That to me is more cogent than to say it's against the rule of law, Convention, Standing Orders or even the Constitution. The Speaker and Parliament must give voice to the people.

20. An interesting fact is the provision in the constitution that says the King must first appoint someone whom he thinks is LIKELY to command the majority support of the majority of the MPs.

21. To me this is interesting. It means the King may not select the person who claims he has the majority. Secondly the claim is verifiable. It ought to be tested in the dewan rakyat.

22. "Is likely" seems to me is an after the fact thing. Choose first and see whether he has majority support. Muhyiddin has majority support because of the office. Because he was chosen support comes into line.

23. The more preferable choice is to test the claim in the dewan rakyat. This wasn't done in Muhyiddin's case.

Tweet

Read more...

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. Beyond the Myths.

1. The house at Bukit Chekati must have been greatly ravaged by the floods some time ago. It is by the river. Needless to say Ku Li must have put it right.

2. The country is now ravaged by political upheavals. TRH maybe the right person to put things right. He's got the right credentials.

3. Some people will say a nation is not like a house. But I know of many MPs who cannot walk and chew gum at the same time. Why can't I compare a house and the nation then?

4. Every Friday some close friends would congregate at his house for Friday prayers. Prayers are usually at a mosque in kampung Pandan. He would be driven in an old BMW 2002. He still keeps a black bulletproof Mercedes-Benz given him by the government amidst rumours that the CIA were out to assassinate him for having introduced the PDA.

5. He values the past and is well grounded to the contemporary and is tuned to the spiritual. A person who doesn't forget the past is likely not to repeat the mistakes therein.

6. That means he keeps tradition as long as it is functional. But he also submits to the inevitable, the spiritual omnipotence. If something has outlived its usefulness it is abandoned.

7. Perhaps we need that kind of person who keeps a balance, as PM. We have no need of a person likely to put us on a road of mindless revolution and reformasi. That balance is forged by useful experience and right temperament.

8. Every year during fasting month, without fail invited guests mostly friends, are invited for breaking fast and prayer sessions. Local imams or invited Arab imams lead the prayers. The congregation prays for Ku Li's continued success and health.

9. The presence of these people indirectly accorded Ku Li important lessons in life. Most notably trust because he has been betrayed and played out so many times. Never trust a person who has played you out more than 2 times. The first is a warning, the second is a bitter lesson and the third is just taking advantage. I am sure these observations do not escape the perceptive Ku Li. He has wizened up. He is 83 years old for God's sake.

10. It has taught him to be circumspect of the fickle minded person. This type of people are likely to give in to different opinions. These people are undependable. They have a see-saw character-more specifically the person on the opposite side who will dismount when you are on the way up and let you fall. Didn't Najib dismount when TRH was up and let him fall?

11. Yet in all my meetings with Ku Li, he has not spoken ill of the blasted Najib. Not even once. Or of anyone else for that matter.
Even during the heated issue of 1MDB. It made me wonder whether he has a soft spot on the son of Tun Razak.

12. I am limited in that respect. I will blast Najib or whoever I think deserves it in my blog. But I know to clam up in front of someone else.

13. Because TRH cannot trust someone who speaks ill of someone else in front of him because that fellow is likely to blabber about TRH infront of others.

14. An important lesson one learns from a study of people, is that you can't trust people with competitive streaks. They will seize the first oppurtunity to topple you.

15. TRH cannot trust people like Mustapa Mohamed who thinks he is PM material. He definitely can't trust Anuar Musa who is a legend in his own mind. And Sabery Chik? The nut who forgets its skin.

16. I can write on BMF, decoupling of the Malaysian Ringgit from the Singapore Dollar, his move to the Trade Ministry etc. But that would involve hurting the feelings of someone I respect and that of a close friend. So let others better than I do it.

17. Suffice to say at that time BBMB was under the purview of the then PM. The decoupling needed to be done to avoid spending huge amounts of money to remain on par with the Singapore Dollar. His move to the Trade Ministry was the prerogative of the PM. Furthermore, the then PM wanted to place a more palatable friend at the Finance Ministry. Anyway anything written by the CIA must be taken with a little pinch of salt.

18. The achievements of Ku Li are undisputed. How many know that he is the only Malaysian and Malay to be the chairman of the World Bank and IMF?

Tweet

Read more...

The Common Thief and the Political Thief

This is an article I received from my brother. Its not written by me but the subject matter is a bitter truth worth sharing.




What is the difference between an Ordinary Thief (OT) and a Political Thief (PT)?* ..v

1.The Ordinary Thief steals your money,
bag,
watch,
gold chain etc.
But,
The Political Thief steals your future,
career,
education,
health and business!

2. The hilarious part is: ..
The Ordinary Thief will choose whom to rob.
But, you yourself choose the Political Thief to rob you.

3. The most ironic one: ..
Police will chase and nab the Ordinary Thief.
But,
Police will look after and protect the Political Thief!
That’s the travesty and irony of our current society!
And,
we blindly say we are not blind!
4. The stupid part of the whole issue is that we insult and fight the Ordinary Thief but we Fight each other for the Political Thief.

Tweet

Read more...

Masaalah Ekonomi Malaysia.

1. Penggunaan pendapatan negara kasar(kdnk) untuk menilai ekonomi kita menyampaikan kita pada konklusi-konklusi yang tidak betul. Dalam bahasa Inggeris dipanggil GDP.

2. Penggunaan GDP menyembunyikan konsentrasi kekayaan negara dalam tangan 20% teratas. 20% teratas mengusai 64% kekayaan negara. Golongan tengah menguasai mungkin 30% kekayaan. Manakala golongan terbawah 20% menguasai 5.% kekayaan.

3. Di kalangan 20% teratas kita tidak nampak penguasaan olih keluarga-keluarga. Goh Tong, Kwek, Arumugam Syed Mokhtar, Liew Kee Sin dll.

4. Kita tidaklah menyarankan perampasan kekayaan mereka tapi kita bolih mempengaruhi dimana mereka berbelanja dan melabur.

5. Ertinya sebagai dasar yang sengaja, kita mesti mengadakan premis-premis perbelanjaan dan pusat-pusat pelaburan di pedesaan.

6. Kita tidak iri hati mereka kaya dari kita tapi kita marah jika kekayaan tersebut diperolehi melalui penindasan dan pemusnahan alam.

7. Kerana konsentrasi kekayaan semestinya dicapai melalui penindasan dalam pelbagai bentuk. Perbedaan pendapan, pembungunan antara desa dan bandar, perniagaan dan pertanian dll.

8. Sebab itu kita mesti mengenyahkan segala bentuk penindasan. Ini untuk mengurangkan konsentrasi kekeyaan.

9. Perniagaan milik keluarga juga tidak diurus secara profesyional. Kesan nya ialah ekonomi kita tidak mencapai potensi yang lebih tinggi. Ia memberi kesan pula pada pengagihan kekayaan.

10. Keterbelakangan kemajuan luar bandar yang mengakibatkan perbedaan kekayaan, menghakis kemajuan Malaysia. Pemimpin kita bercakap mengenai kelembapan kemajuan luar bandar tapi kurang melakukan sesuatu.

11. Kegiatan mencari sewa atau rent seeking menghakis kemajuan kita. Kegiatan ini tidak mencipta kekayaan baru. Ia berlaku terutama dalam hartanah dan lesen-lesen yang diberi kerajaan.

12. Berkait rapat dengan kegiatan rent seeking ialah kegiatan mendapat monopoli. Yakni seorang penjual saja. Ramai peniaga menjadi kaya raya sebab mendapat lesen atau monopoli dari kerajaan.

13. Leraikan segala pemonopolian. Petronas, LLN Astro LPN dll. Nama boleh kekal tapi entiti nya mesti dipecah pecahkan. Setiap merekw mesti berfungsi sebagai profit centre yang berbeda.

14. Rasuah atau korapsi adalah masaalah besar dalam negara kita. Kita tahu apa itu korapsi. Yakni suatu bentuk jinayah kriminal oleh mereka yang berkuasa atau pertubuhan atau mencabul kuasa untuk mendapat imbuhan atau faedah peribadi.

15. Rasuah menyebabkan orang-orang yang tidak berbakat jadi pemimpin. Rasuah menyekat sumber-sumber disalurkan pada tempatnya.

16. Terlalu bergantung kepada pemberian kerajaan. Ini menghalang kemunculan peniaga tahan lasak.

17. Terlalu bergantung kepada sumber ekonomi yang boleh berkurangan - logam-logam dan minyak serta pertanian yang tertaklok kepada manipulasi pasaran.

18. Prodakviti pertanian yang rendah, kurang kepelbagaian pertanian dan kurang perhatian pada sekuriti pemakanan.

19. Pelaburan yang terlalu cost conscious. Ini menghalang pelaburan yang berani.

20. Kurang R&D dalam negara. Ini menyekat perjumpaan produk dan kaedah-kaedah baru.

21. Pemusatan kuasa yang mencengkam dalam tangan PM dan terlalu banyak pemerintahan melalui dikri.

22. Perdangan yang terlalu caucasian centric. Kurang perdagangan dengan negara Islam, Indonesia dan China.

23. Demikian kita melihat beberapa masaalan terencatnya ekonomi Malaysia. Kita tidak menghuraikan masaalah-masaalah tersebut.

Tweet

Read more...

Amar Makruf Nahi Mungkar dan Iman. Sedikit Pandangan.

1. Secara umumnya orang Melayu cakap saja banyak. Jati diri Melayu sebetulnya tiada. Jati diri Melayu itu mestilah diwarnai oleh agama Islam. Dalam banyak segi perbuatan mereka berasaskan nilai2 bukan Islam.

2. Saya melihat perwatakan Melayu yang sebenarnya menjelma apabila Najib didapati bersalah keatas semua 7 pertuduhan menyonglap duit SRC.

3. Ternyata sebagian orang Melayu mendukung kemungkaran. Ini bukan nilai orang Melayu yang beriman tebal. Ini tanda orang Melayu yang longkah iman mereka.

4. Apakah kemungkaran yang dilakukan oleh Najib didukung oleh orang Melayu? Kalau ya mereka mendukung, mereka berfikiran kacau.

5. Bukankan dalam al quran dinyatkan bahawa kita adalah bangsa yang terbaik bila kita menyeru kepada kebaikan dan melawan kemungkaran?

6. Ayat 143 al Baqarah mengatakan bahawa umat Islam itu umat wasathan. Yakni yang tenang dan examplary.

7. Berdemo mendukung kemungkaran bukanlah tingkah laku yang exemplary. Bahkan kita patut mendukung pengutukan kemungkaran. Kemungkaran yang dilakukan Najib aka al munafik patut di hibahkan dan dikutuk.

8. Ia patut menerima universal condemnation. Bagaimana umat Islam bolih menjadi contoh teladan jika kita umat yang mendukung perompakan?

9. Orang akan membenci kita kerana kita umat yang bersekongkol dengan kejahatan. Kita menjuarai kejahatan.

10. Ambil contoh berjimat dan belanja berhemah. Najib dan isteri selalu bercakap hal ini. Bolihkan mereka menjadi teladan belanja berhemah dan berijimat bila Najib beli jam berjuta dan isteri beli cincin jutaan ringgit. Orang Melayu berpendapatan 200-300 Ringgit sebulan.

11. Ternyata bila kita mengistiharkan bahawa sibghah Allah menwarnai kehidupan kita, ia hanya omongan kosong.

12. Sebaliknya kita melakukan perkara2 yang bertentangan dengan wasatha. Kita simpati dengan Rosie yang muka bengkak dan meratapi mengapa amirulmunafik kena 12 tahun.

13. Sepatutnya menteri penerangan komisyen dokumentari mengenai SRC dan 1MDB.

14. Kita tahu Quran mengatakan aib orang jangan diketengahkan tapi kalau kemungkaran tersebut menyebabkan penderitaan dan kezaliman awam maka ia patut dihebahkan. Apa yang dilakukan olih pasangan Bonie dan Clyde ini bukan aib peribadi lagi.

15. Nabi Mohammad bersabda kita melawan kemungkaran melalui 3 fasa. Pertama, dengan tangan atau perlakuan. Kedua, dengan lisan. Ketiga, penentangan dalam hati. Dan yang akhir adalah serendah rendah iman.

16. Apa itu memberitahu kita mengenai keimanan orang Melayu? Kemungkaran yang dilakukan olih Najib tak ada penentagan dalam hati pun. Malahan sebagian orang Melayu bertindak secara fisikal menyokong kemungkaran. Ya ampuun!

Tweet

Read more...

The PM we should have.

 

1. I have described Ku Li as the PM we never had. People forget that he has waited longer than Anwar Ibrahim to be the PM. He has been betrayed by many people and played out so many times. Many people were literally living off him. But he is too principled and forgiving to retaliate.

2. He is not regal because he is born into an aristocratic family. He is one because he behaves with propriety. He is defined by his conduct.

3. Has anyone seen how he treats his elder sisters and brothers? His nephews and nieces? They reciprocate by their genuine affection towards him. He treats them with filial piety.

4. He is MP of provincial Gua Musang in Kelantan. A few R&R, hotels and Kesedar. I am amazed Gua Musang has traffic lights. It has a large Police Camp. But how many know the idea of a Putrajaya originates from Gua Musang?

5. The idea of a Petronas, PDA, BBMB Bank Islam came from him. But no many know that he permitted the creation of bonded area for Malay car dealers. So that these bozos do not have to pay taxes until the cars are sold.

6. Do you know the land on which the UMNO HQ building sits was given by him?

7. Undoubtedly he has got Malay interests at heart. But he is no bigoted racist. He has many non-Malay friends. His idea of governing Malaysia is therefore eclectic.

8. When Wak Jahid says he didn't know of Ku Li's audience with the Agung, that tells me a few things. Chief, being that TRH tells UMNO on the need to know basis. He marches to the beat of his own drum. On the same reasoning it's not correct to say that he is Mahathir's proxy. To say so means you don't know TRH.

9. When Ku Li says that it's better for UMNO people to resign from PN it's a matter of principle. When you don't agree with the government its right that you resigned. Even he did not accept it when he was offered the post of advisor of Petronas. He resigned when he did not agree with Mahathir last time. It's a matter of honour.

10. Now he agrees with Mahathir on one thing. That Anwar Ibrahim should not be PM. That's not a crime. You can't force all people to agree with Anwar.

11. He doesn't have to explain himself to anybody. Those who agree with him do not need any, those who do not agree with him won't believe it. It's a catch 22 thing. So like the Italians say, forget about it!

12. When he met the Agong he is asking for the removal of any hurdles to a vote of no confidence. It's clear that Muhyi doesn't have the support of the majority of MPs. He's asking for the claims of anybody to be verified by Parliament.

13. Obviously he does not support Anwar. Anwar is not the solution to Malaysia's political impasse.

14. He may have been asked to give advice, and he has given so. It's befitting to ask of him as he is the longest serving MP. He has vast experience.

15. He may be or may not be the right person to helm the nation but the Agong can arrive at a judicious decision.

16. So for the prince who's trained as an economist in Belfast and who would have become a lawyer if not for his father's passing his time maybe now.

17. He's got the right temperament, his heart is in the right place, he's got Malay interests at heart, he's not a bigot, and he is not corrupt. He is PM material.

Tweet

Read more...