Sunday, June 29, 2008

Show cause letter to explain what?

The BN supreme council has issue its member, Sabah Progressive Party (Sapp), a show-cause letter on the party's decision to back a no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Sapp will be given 30 days to respond and after which the ruling coalition will decide on whether to suspend or expel the Sabah-based party.

28 comments:

  1. Another tactic by BN!!!

    Parti Keadilan Rakyat de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was left fighting for his political credibility, calling a press conference at 1.20am today to deny allegations that he sodomised his aide.

    Do you believe it? BN denies they are behind it. Anybody buys it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Greetings Mr.Yong and Supreme Council Members Of SAPP.

    While Sabahans hail your strong advocation in the events that led to this "Love Letter" and the desperate retaliation of the Government in fabricating sodomy charges against Anwar Ibrahim,we do not envisage that you would require an encyclopedia or magnifying glass on choice of words in responding to this letter.

    Perhaps,allow me to assist you in the first paragraph of your respond,hopefully it will inspire you further.

    YAB Dato'Seri Najib Tun Razak,

    Merujuk surat YAB,adalah dengan sukacita dimaklumkan bahawa sa-telah mendengar suara iklas daripada warga Malaysia di-Sabah,SAPP dengan sebulat suara mengambil keputusan meningalkan Barisan Nasional dengan serta merta.

    We await the posting of your reply in SAPP Blog...Cheers.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well... SAPP just need to explain (vote of no confident).
    As YTL said not against BN!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I thought the charge of sodomy was over long time ago and that Anwar had served a jail sentence for it. Is this another new charge? Nobody believed the truth of the first charge. Everybody believed that it was nothing more than a tactic to get rid of Anwar. So, who is going to believe it again?

    But this shows the danger that is faced by those who are opposed to UMNO-BN. The beast is still dangerous unless totally overthrown. This means PR must make greater efforts to motivate the Sabah and Sarawak MP's to get out of BN. As I explained before, if all 53 BN MP's from Sabah and Sarawak get out of BN, that would reduce the number of UMNO-BN MP's to only 87. Then only 6 MP's from Sabah or Sarawak can join BN to increase the number of PR to 88 and the majority to once and for all replace the UMNO-BN and form a new government. Then Anwar will be safe from malicious prosecution. Instead, he can start proceedings to find out who had maligned him and put those criminals in jail for defamation and other crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. MUST READ!!!!


    http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/Columns/2279982/Article/index_html

    ReplyDelete
  6. Once again!

    Anwar comes to close for comfort and......there it is the same old thing!!

    But is it going to favour BN this time? I do not think so, because ppl did not believe it the first time and no one will now! Everyone thinks he is comming to close to become PM WITH THE POWER TO CHECK CORRUPTION! And this is far to close for some!

    Thats the way ppl will see it and this is not what BN needs right now! Not much of trust in the first place and now this equals to lesser trust in the future. Even if BN stays in power for this term, ppl will not forget all this and will act responsibely in the next election! BN can count on it!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Alamak,
    buduh gia ni bN ni. Siapa labah ada masa mau main blakang time2 politik tengah hot ni. kalu ya pun buat labah cerita yang boleh dipercayai sikit. Ini kes liwat. Seems like org BN ada fetish sama kes liwat. dorang suka mangkali, abis balik2 tuduh anwar benda yg sama.

    Mmg tidak logik. Skrg semua rakyat m'sia ikut perkembangan anwar sebab janji2 dia mau kasi turun harga petrol & mungkin ganti pak lah jadi PM. Mesti dia mau jaga image dia kan. takkan skarang dia mau pigi liwat org kan? Buduh!!

    Sia tau ni...ini satu gimik supaya org tidak tertnya2 pasal tuduhan ke atas najib dan bininya and instead divert their attention to anwar.

    Bodohhhhhh.....hohohohoho

    apa pun kita tgk saja...sepandai2 tupai melumpat, last last kana lastik juga tu.

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/9361/84/


    http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/

    http://anwaribrahimblog.com/

    http://anwaribrahimblog.com/

    ReplyDelete
  9. http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/85267
    PKR: Nyawa Anwar dalam bahaya
    Muda Muhd Noor & Jimadie Shah Othman | Jun 29, 08 2:13pm
    Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) memutuskan untuk 'menyembunyikan' Ketua Umumnya, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim di tempat yang selamat kerana nyawanya dalam bahaya.

    Timbalan Presiden PKR, Syed Husin Ali berkata, apa yang berlaku bukan sahaja satu cara untuk membunuh politik Anwar tetapi "kalau boleh untuk membunuh beliau sendiri".

    Menurutnya, keputusan untuk meletakkan Anwar di tempat selamat dibuat oleh parti dan bukannya keputusan Anwar sendiri.

    Ditanya mengenai desas-desus yang mengatakan Anwar berlindung di sebuah kedutaan, beliau berkata menegaskan Anwar berada dalam negara.

    Katanya, Anwar menafikan dakwaan liwat terhadapnya. Syed Husin menyifatkan dakwaan tersebut sebagai "satu percubaan yang paling jelik dan hina".

    Manakala Presiden PKR, Datin Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail juga berkata Anwar berada dalam negara dan nyawanya dalam bahaya.

    "Kita akan bincang dengan peguam. Apa yang beliau hadapi adalah ancaman kematian. Perkara ini serius. Ini merupakan konspirasi politik yang kedua dalam negara kita.

    Buka mata

    "Sebelum ini, pada 1998. Apa mereka buat, badan kehakiman, polis. Kami keluar IPCMC, tiada apa yang berlaku. Kami dapati tiada sebab untuk percaya badan kehakiman. Jadi apa pilihan? Kami mesti membuat pilihan ini. Kami mesti melindunginya.

    "Ramai rakyat Malaysia mencari pemimpinan Anwar dan kita mesti melindunginya. Bukan sebab dia suami saya dan bapa kepada anak-anak, tetapi dia pemimpin kita semua," katanya.

    Beliau yang juga isteri Anwar berkata, ketua umum PKR itu tidak percaya kepada pihak polis dan badan kehakiman.

    "Kali pertama ia membuka mata bahawa kehakiman kita tidak boleh dipercayai dan polis. Bukan semua, saya tidak kata semua sebab sekarang sudah ada hakim macam Ian Chin. Pada masa dahulunya menunjukkan kita tidak boleh percayai sistem kehakiman," tambahnya.

    Wan Azizah turut mendedahkan gambar pembantu Anwar, Saiful Bahari dengan pegawai khas Datuk Seri Najib TUn Razak - Khairul Anas Yusof - yang berlatarbelakangkan pejabat timbalan perdana menteri (TPM).

    Gambar tersebut diambil dari blog Malaysia Today.

    Ditanya sama ada TPM terlibat dalam konspirasi itu, Wan Azizah hanya berkata: "Gambarnya berlatarbelakangkan pejabat TPM."

    ReplyDelete
  10. http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/9351/84/

    Why are Sabah MPs so unhappy? What do they want from the federal government? And is Project IC still ongoing? ANIZA DAMIS speaks to Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Bernard Dompok, a Sabahan

    Aniza Damis, New Straits Times

    Q: Many Sabah members of parliament have been vociferous in bringing up issues regarding Sa-bah. Why?

    Tan Sri Bernard Dompok calls for the formation of a royal commission of inquiry into illegal immigrants



    A: If you look back at the last two decades in Parliament, or at least, since I started as an MP in 1986, voices from Sabah and Sarawak have always brought up the shortcomings in Sabah and Sarawak, the lack of infrastructure and the issues important to them.

    The voices have become louder, but the issues are the same.

    The feeling is that Sabah is off the beaten track, and in the early 1990s, government leaders from Semenanjung (the peninsula), especially from Umno, went there mainly to conduct political meetings,

    Not enough attention was given to issues raised by Sabah. So, now, they have come out in the open. Also, this is partly due to the new "mood" created by the prime minister, allowing discourse or discussion on issues.

    Giving latitude to MPs or individuals to talk has given the opportunity for more issues to be discussed and not hidden away. So, people are more expressive, and this is now what we see in Sabah.

    Q: When you say they are now "not hidden away", does it mean they were hidden away before this?

    A: In the early days, people were in denial about poverty. Even as late as last year, there were some leaders in Sabah who were disputing the United Nations Development Programme figures.

    Now people want the truth and remedies taken.

    Q: Some Sabah MPs have said that since the formation of Malaysia in 1963, poverty statistics in Sabah have not gone down. But only now do we hear Sabah leaders speak about poverty in Sabah in sad tones, almost weeping, which we haven't heard before this.

    A: After decades, you can't blame people for being vocal now, because it had not been noticed by the decision makers. A lot of these programmes are put on the table by government officers who assess the situation and recommend remedies for policy makers.

    It's probable that not much work has been done to assess the situation at ground level.

    People are now more demanding, and people know, by comparing with Semenanjung, that the disparity is not small.

    Even the government recognises in the Malaysia Plan that there is a disparity between the regions in the country.

    That is the cornerstone of the prime minister's development philosophy.

    Q: You say, "This issue had not been noticed". It's been 45 years. Isn't that a long time?

    A: I know. It may not be correct to say it has been totally unnoticed, but it was not, perhaps, important, to the people who decided the development policies.

    When I got into the Federal Cabinet, this has been one of the things I have been harping on. To the extent that, when people from Sabah like us continuously bring these things up, we are looked upon as being parochial, kenegerian. But we cannot but raise them.

    Q: Are you raising this now because Sabah has more clout in Parliament?

    A: The ground is pushing the leadership of Sabah to ask why the issue is unresolved and why representatives did not bring this up. Public opinion is strong on the neglect, perceived or otherwise, by the government.

    Q: Before this, did Sabah MPs or leaders feel that if they tried to push the issue, they wouldn't be heard or that they would be punished for it?

    A: MPs from Sabah believed in doing things the quiet way before. The proper channel had always been the preferred route. But, of course, it did not seem to bring the desired results.

    People are trying another road and, in some ways, it has brought the desired result, in that they are heard, the issues are recognised and the government is trying to solve the problem.

    Q: The government says there are only about 70,000 illegal immigrants in Sabah. How many are there actually?

    A: Nobody can give authoritative figures. Seventy thousand would be too low a figure for that.

    Q: "Illegal" means without identity cards (IC)?

    A: People who come into the country illegally, who have no permission to be in the country and should not be here. They are not citizens of the country, stay and don't have documents.

    And by documents, I mean those given by the immigration authorities. Given properly, valid.

    Q: So, when you say that 70,000 is too low, how much is the estimate on the ground?

    A: I don't know. How do you do a head count on this?

    Q: If you don't know, then why do you think 70,000 is too low?

    A: In 1970, Sabah had 636,431 people and Sarawak had 979,269. And Sarawak has always had more people than Sabah.

    In 1980, Sabah's population went up to 929,299 and Sarawak's was 1,235,553.

    In 2000, Sabah's population had increased to 2,499,389 while Sa-rawak's was 2,012,616.

    The population from 1970 to 2000 went up by 285 per cent in Sabah, compared with 106 per cent in Sarawak. And the national population growth was 113 per cent in those three decades.

    In the 2005 consensus, Sabah's population was 3,313,000 while Sarawak's was 2,340,000.

    So, in 35 years, Sabah's population had over taken Sarawak's by nearly a million. Where did these people come from?

    Q: It's not possible that Sabahans are just happy and productive people?

    A: I don't know. How productive can you be? You can't have twins all the time.

    Q: Where do you think these people came from?

    A: From the Philippines and Indonesia.

    Q: You have said you believed that Usno under Tun Fuad Stephens and Berjaya under Harris Salleh were responsible for this. Why was nothing said during the Project IC exercise?

    A: Because figures are not accessible. That's why I wanted the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on Integrity to dwell on the figures, to get them out of the National Registration Department and the Immigration Department.

    They (officers from these departments) came in for a while, and then they stopped coming. I think their bosses told them not to come.

    Q: You couldn't compel them?

    A: They refused to come. How do you compel them?

    Q: Couldn't you ask the court to charge them with contempt?

    A: No. The PSC didn't have that sort of role. We were there to collect information.

    You see, the PSC was intended to gather opinions and information, and then make recommendations to Parliament.

    The reason why I wanted to call the officers in front of the PSC is to make sure that there is integrity in the system of administration and the system by which it is dealt with. However, they decided not to call for it.

    Q: Why do you think those officers did not give you that information?

    A: I don't know. I can only speculate that they might have something to hide.

    Q: At the time, one of your fellow cabinet members said that you had overstepped your boundaries when you asked for that information.

    A: The problem here is that this is a select committee of the legislature. I happened to be also a member of the executive. So, the expectation is that I am an executive member supervising the select committee.

    I didn't agree that this was the role. It's a committee of Parliament. It's as good as Parliament itself.

    Why can't information be given to Parliament? Parliament has the right to know the figures and to know how things are done.

    Q: (MP and DAP adviser) Lim Kit Siang has said he wants a royal commission on the illegal immigrant issue.

    A: He is repeating what we have been saying all along.

    We don't want a cabinet committee, or another PSC. I know the shortcomings of a PSC; there is a tendency for it to be looked upon as a committee of the executive, which it should not be.

    In the case of the cabinet committee, this has been tried before, and it didn't work.

    So, we feel the right course is for a royal commission of inquiry, so that they can devote their time to the issue, give recommendations to the government, and then it's up to the government to decide.

    When the Royal Commission on the Police was set up, it brought up positive results and most of the recommendations were accepted by the government and implemented, and I think it's one of the reasons why the police force is improving.

    Q: Even so, now a cabinet committee has been set up. Has Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, who is in charge of that, approached you about this?

    A: Until today, I think a committee has not been formed, not to my knowledge, anyway.

    I think he must be in the process of forming it. But I have not been informed about it yet.

    [Note: At the same time that this interview was taking place in Parliament, unbeknownst to Dompok, Najib had convened the cabinet committee meeting, not too far away.]

    Q: You don't think a cabinet committee is the answer. So, when that committee is formed, what are you going to do?

    A: If the cabinet committee is formed, views will have to be given, and my view would be that one of the things the committee should recommend is to go for a royal commission.

    Q: Are you going to discuss that on Friday?

    A: I don't know whether it's in the agenda (for the cabinet meeting).

    The easiest way for the government to engage the issue is to have a royal commission of inquiry, so that the public is assured of an independent investigation into the causes and the recommendations to the government and the authorities to put things right .

    Q: Besides yourself and Sabahans, do you think anyone else is interested in getting to the bottom of this?

    A: People should be interested. I would be disappointed if people are not interested in illegal immigration.

    We're not just talking about illegal immigration per se, but also about the charges (allegations) that people can get an identiy card or a MyKad through the back door.

    I'm not saying this without evidence. There is evidence.

    Two people admitted publicly in a newspaper in Sabah that they got ICs through these means. I asked this in the PSC, and the government officers admitted that this has indeed been given.

    I'll be surprised if my colleagues are not interested in backdoor-citizenship issues, especially when so many people who have been applying for citizenship over the years are not getting it.

    Q: You said you believed so many immigrants were given citizenship because the federal leadership wanted to change the demographics to influence voting patterns. Why would it be advantageous to the government to admit to such a thing?

    A: We have to come clean, and move on. (If the government were to deny this) all the time, this would stay in the hearts and minds of people who are distressed by such an action. And it will remain there for a long time.

    We don't want this to linger in the minds of Sabahans, and therefore, coming out with it has been a good thing.

    Q: Of the 3.3 million Sabahans, how many of these do you think got backdoor citizenship?

    A: I don't know. I wouldn't put a figure to it, because I don't know. These are things I am hoping to uncover.

    Q: So, if you had a royal commission, what would you want it to find out?

    A: To begin with, what are the statistics? Why does it happen? And what are the solutions to these problems?

    Q: Is Project IC ongoing?

    A: I don't know. How would you know?

    Q: A lot of these people may have been naturalised, and are now citizens. If it was found they were given backdoor ICs, what action should be taken against them?

    A: We have to go by the law. What are the provisions in the law? You cannot take any action that is not within the ambit of the legislation.

    It is premature to discuss this topic, which has yet to be established properly. The law has to be examined to see what are the avenues and choices available.

    Q: You have said that there are some places in Sabah where the immigrant community is larger than the local community. What is the effect of this on Sabah society?

    A: First of all, the question of jobs, space and residential areas. Local Bumiputeras who were once open and receptive are now concerned that they are fighting for the same piece of land to build houses and plant crops. So, it affects them economically and socially.

    In my own constituency, I attended a funeral of this guy who was decapitated by immigrants.

    Q: What was the issue in that?

    A: I don't know. Police are investigating. They have not briefed me yet.

    Q: In any community, there are good people and there are bad people. It's got nothing to do with whether they are immigrants or not.

    A: No, but in that community, I've never heard of anybody being slashed before.

    Q: Has the influx of immigrants affected religious ties in Sabah?

    A: As far as that is concerned, issues of religion have not surfaced to the extent that there are feelings of being sidelined.

    But the voting demographics has changed. And this is a concern for local Bumiputeras.

    But of course, I hope people realise that it's not always so that immigrants, once they are citizens, will vote according to how they said they would at the onset of getting the citizenship.

    Q: During one meeting in Parliament at the last session, one MP said there were so many immigrants in Sabah now that there actually was a danger of these naturalized citizens asking for Sabah to become a part of the Philippines, or to vote not to have Sabah as part of Malaysia. Is that a realistic fear?

    A: I suppose we can laugh about that now. But we cannot tell what's in the hearts of men or what's in the future.

    Don't forget that the Philippines has not given up its claims on Sabah. If you look at the Philippines map, Sabah is part of the Philippines.

    The Philippines has refused to set up a consulate in Sabah, because that would be seen as acknowledging that it is Malaysian territory.

    When people talk about this, they are talking about a future fear. We cannot dismiss it outright. And, therefore, we must have prudence in our immigration policies and our policy towards citizenship.

    I would welcome workers to the country; I would even welcome people who apply for citizenship. But a clear-cut policy must be made: how many can we accept?

    And they must get citizenship through the front door, not the back door.

    Look at the people who become citizens of Australia and America. It's a proud day for a citizen; there's a tea party to welcome you, you recite the oath of allegiance and you sing the national anthem.

    But we don't hear of these sort of things in Sabah. Overnight, they become citizens.

    Q: Having brought up all these issues again now, how confident are you the Federal Government is going to address them.

    A: How would the Federal Government not address the issue? It will come up every time a federal leader comes to Sabah.

    Every time there is a meeting, it will be brought up. Every election, it becomes an issue.

    How can the government not look at it?

    Q: But as (independent MP) Datuk Ibrahim Ali cynically said: "Every time a federal minister goes to Sabah now, Sabah gets RM1 billion." Are you going to stop once you get enough billions?

    A: No. Those are separate issues. Those are development issues. This is the issue of national sovereignty, and the integrity of the government and the system.

    If the government cannot maintain integrity on this issue, then it's going to reflect badly on the government.

    Q: Do you support the move by SAPP to table a motion of no-confidence against the prime minister?

    A: We prefer to exhaust all avenues. The government was set up in March, and now it's just June; so, it's only been in power three months.

    So, I'm interested in seeing how we go through all these issues and resolve them.

    Q: Upko has said it is sympathetic to SAPP. Why?

    A: All these issues are the same. All the things that we have brought up, such as development and immigration, have also been brought up by them.

    We cannot deny that we do not concur on basic issues that we feel should be solved.

    Q: If, somehow, SAPP were to table that motion, would you support it?

    A: That's a hypothetical motion, because there's no way that it can be brought up.

    If you look at the Standing Orders in Parliament, there's no provision for that.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think our Parlimen should dissolve to proceed the 13th general election,
    let our beloved coutry lead by new government, all the BN leaders just get lost because we the rakyat felt very sick to listen all the lies and bullshit from them, aspecially pak la , najib and sammy!

    We couldn't see our future as long as our govn still in BN's hand, they only know how to play politic gimmick and using dirty tactic against pupils in opposition site.

    Malaysian pls help urself!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Maybe BN leader's really stupid and IQ below 0 to understand what Sabah ppl wants, Those 14 points Sabah issues lar what else need to explain? no wonder Sabah issues never get resolved since every voice by its Party need to give show cause letter, so if every point mentioned by SAPP need to show cause letter then 14 points need to give 14 show cause letter then?

    The reason SAPP vote for no confidence on PM is because PM never pay attention to what Sabah ppl facing now, everything only talk and meeting but where is the action? maybe all BN minister should be given an academy award every year for their best performance actor.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Politikus dari negeri Sabah ini susah sangat di percayai terutama para pemimpin dari UMNO. Mereka sanggup jual negeri kita demi kepentingan peribadi. Tanyalah sama Bung MUKTAR, jawapannya konsisten iaitu UMNO adalah tunjang Kerajaan dan jujur memajukan negeri kita Sabah ini. Kerajaan Persekutuan memperuntukkan berbilion ringgit. Kenyataannya sedangkan Jalan raya masuk kampong dia sendiripun belum diturap. Tanya Saama MP semenanjung kenapa jalan raya dibandaraya KK serupa dengan jalan kampong di Semenanjung mereka kata MP Sabah Tak ada minta, Mereka minta poket money saja.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dompok said:
    So, in 35 years, Sabah's population had over taken Sarawak's by nearly a million. Where did these people come from?
    ==========================

    What Dompok did not say was that the population of the Chinese went from some 30% or more in 1963 to less than 10% in 2006. According to one source the Chinese population in 2006 was only 287,712 or a growth of only some 90,000 or 45% in 45 years since 1963. In the meantime the total population of Sabah has grown from 600,000 in 1963 to some 3 million or 400% in 2006. This is the best evidence of deliberate racial cleansing. This is done by systematic discouraging the Chinese like the denial of permanent residence to Chinese even though they are much more qualified than the Indonesians and Philippinos.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Actually, the non-Chinese population of Sabah in 1963 was some 400,000. The non-Chinese population of Sabah in 2006 was 2,709,288. So the increase of non-Chinese Sabahans from 1963 to 2006 was some 577%. Compare this with only some 45% increase of the Chinese Sabahan population from 1963 to 2006.

    Therefore, if there is any justice at all, the immigration laws must be changed immediately to encourage the immigration of the Chinese into Sabah. This will not only redress the heinous inequality but will also promote economic growth as the Chinese will bring in capital and talents to expand the economy and provide many high paying jobs to the Sabahan citizens.

    Therefore, encouraging the influx of the Chinese will serve two purposes. First to redress the population inbalance. Second to expand the economy that will ultimately benefit the Sabahan citizens. Therefore, encouraging the influx of Chinese is not only justice but economically sound and beneficial to the Sabahans.

    ReplyDelete
  16. UMNO is irrelevant in Sabah in the first place and should get lost from Sabah asap. This umno is a deadly virus and will cause the Sabahans in havoc in terms of racial harmony, peace and tolerant.

    They are bringing in more illegal muslim immigrants in order to outnumber the local and also encourage the dusun to convert to islam. In addition, they encourage the muslim to marry the local kadazandusun in order to convert them quickly. So many examples we had seen but the Sabah native leader especially "Pai Lin" still mabuk with his tapai and do nothing to help the poor native.

    I pray to LORD to cast this evil minded umno out from Sabah and let the righteous one prevail. Amen!

    ReplyDelete
  17. while many in Sabah still worry and put focus about "so-low-miles" in filling fuel with higher cost, what another irrelevant news of "so-do-my"
    tricky game in play?
    Show cause letter must have been posted to YTL and Sapp as mistake with "no confidence" in response to hear real voices from many Sabahan!
    Sometimes,even politically many couldn't believe it does make sense to happen again in Malaysia.
    A small "slapping" by Yong still couldn't wake one up to feel rightly! What else?

    ReplyDelete
  18. http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/85184

    Dr M: 22 fiascos in 22 years of power
    Batman | Jun 27, 08 4:45pm
    Many of those who worshiped Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad cannot understand why Malaysians blame TDM for the woes of the country. I have compiled excerpts of reports which were published in the media in past years to refresh the memories of Malaysians, as to why many Malaysians feel that TDM did more bad than good for the country in his 22 years.

    These 22 fiascos were published in the form of questions directed to TDM:

    1. On clean government

    You came to power in 1981 and introduced the slogan Bersih, Cekap dan Amanah (Clean, Efficient and Trustworthy). What did you do to further that? Did you make the Anti-Corruption Agency more independent and effective? Did you ensure that the police and judiciary did their jobs properly and reduce corruption in their ranks? Did you ensure that ministers and chief ministers not have incomesbeyond their legal means? How many big guns were prosecuted for corruption offences during your tenure? What happened to Bersih, Cekap dan Amanah?

    2. Press freedom

    Your criticism of the present government got plenty of coverage in the local media whereas, during your time, criticisms against you by two former prime ministers were muted in the mainstream newspapers. Editors in Umno-linked newspapers, too, were removed for not toeing the line. What did you do to advance the cause of responsible press freedom?

    3. Proton

    You went ahead with the national car project in 1983 despite a number of experts disagreeing with you, especially with respect to the lack of economies of scale. Isn’t it true that Proton’s profits over the past 20 years came from the vastly higher prices that the Malaysian public has had to pay to subsidiseProton, resulting in considerable hardship for Malaysians who need cars because of the poor public transport system? Why was it necessary for Proton to buy a stake in a failed Italian motorcycle manufacturer when it could not even produce cars competitively?

    4. Heavy industries

    Why did you push into heavy industries such as steel and cement in the 1980s, ignoring studies which suggested developing natural resource-based industries instead? They caused major problems and billions of ringgit in losses.

    5. Immigration

    Why did you allow hordes of people to emigrate, mainly from Indonesia, in such an unregulated way that there are as many or more illegal immigrants than legal ones now, accounting for some three million or more people? Did you not realise that this would cause serious social problems?

    6. Operasi Lallang

    Why did you have to resort to this move in October 1987, when you used the Internal Security Act (ISA) to detain over 100 people, close down four newspapers and cause a wave of fear throughout the country? Was it to consolidate your tenuous hold on power then by using an oppressive law?

    7. Judiciary

    What was your motive to take action in 1988 to remove the then Lord President and several Supreme Court judges from their positions under allegations of judicial misconduct, a move which was heavily criticised by the Bar Council and other bodies? Was it because you needed more compliant judges whose rulings would not threaten your position of power in a number of cases in court?

    Was this the first step in dismantling the judiciary’s role as a system of check and balance against the legislature and the executive? What have you to say to repeated assertions by many, including prominent ex-chief justices, who maintain that this led to the erosion of judicial independence?

    8. Education

    Why did you allow our national school system, which is the ideal place to develop ties among young Malaysians, to become so divisive? Why is it that our local universities, once the preferred choice of tertiary education, have deteriorated to a level that even students who gain admission prefer to enroll into local private universities.

    9. Malaysia Airlines

    Why did your government sell MAS (private sale) to Tajuddin Ramli who had no knowledge whatsoever about running an airline? Why did your government then later bail out Tajuddin by paying RM8 per share when the shares were trading at only RM3.60 in the open market, costing close to RM1 billion of the rakyat’s money.

    10. Privatisation

    Why did you allow privatisation to take place in such a manner that the most profitable parts of government operations were sold away like Telekom Malaysia, Pos Malaysia and Tenaga Nasional? Tolled roads had guaranteed toll rate increases and compensations in the event traffic projections were not met. Independent power producers (IPPs) had contracts that guaranteed them profits at the expense of Tenaga Nasional. What was the justification of privatising the government medical stores to Southern Task Sdn Bhd, and the resulting increase in the prices of medicines?

    11. Putrajaya

    What is the justification for spending RM20 billion on a grandiose government city at a time when office space was available in Kuala Lumpur? Could the money not have been put to better use, such as improving educational resources?

    12. Indah Water Konsortium

    What was the basis of granting Indah Water Konsortium a concession to manage the national sewerage system? Could you explain the RM1.4 billion soft loan to IWK which clearly has irrecoverable losses?

    13. Konsortium Perkapalan Berhad

    Why did you rescue Konsortium Perkapalan Berhad (then owned by your son Mirzan) and which had debts of RM1.7 billion using funds from Petronas? Was it not your administration which forced Malaysian International Shipping Company (MISC) to acquire the assets of Konsortium Perkapalan Nasional?

    14. Time Dotcom Bhd

    Why did your administration bail out Time Dotcom Bhd which was saddled with a RM5 billion debt? Why did your government use RM904 million from Kumpulan Wang Amanah Pencen to buy up 273.9 million of unwanted Time Dotcom shares incurring an instant loss of RM280 million?

    Did you not force the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) to buy 81.6 million of the unsubscribed public portion of the initial public offering (IPO) of Time Dotcom Bhd at RM3.30 per share when the shares were trading at only between RM1.95 and RM2.10 and in the process incurring an instant loss of RM100 million?

    15. LRT

    Why did you bail out the light rail transit operators Projek Usahasama Transit Ringan Automatik Sdn Bhd (Putra), which belonged to Renong, and Sistem Transit Aliran Ringan Sdn Bhd (Star) using almost RM600 million from the EPF, which still resulted in EPF having to write off RM135 million with a share loss of RM96 million?

    16. North-South Expressway

    Why did your administration award the North South Expressway concession to UEM (which then formed Plus) and then provide them with a loan of RM1.6 billion which was half of the tender price of RM3.2 billion? What was the justification for your administration to grant Plus such over-generous terms, which included annual increment of toll rates and guaranteed traffic volumes?

    17. PSC Industries Berhad

    Why did your administration in 1998 award a RM24.3 billion contract to PSC Industries Berhad, together with an advance of more than RM2.5 billion to build naval patrol boats? Why were they also given exclusive rights to service the Malaysian navy’s entire fleet? Could you confirm that the first two ships built by PSCI could not even pass pre-delivery trials? How would you answer to the Public Accounts Committee’s revelation that it will cost the government another RM120 million just to salvage the first two vessels nearing completion after seven years?

    18. Bakun Dam

    Why did you award Ekran Bhd the contract to build the Bakun hydroelectric dam in Sarawak? Why did your administration take over the construction of the dam by bailing out Ekran by almost RM200 million for ‘work done’?

    19. InventQjaya

    What was the basis of inviting Libyan-American Sadeq Mustaffa to Malaysia to set up InventQjaya Sdn Bhd and to also give him a grant of RM440 million? What was the benefit for Malaysia and how has Malaysia benefitted? What has happened to InventQjaya now?

    20. Forex losses

    Why did your administration dabble in speculation in the international money market which ultimately cost Bank Negara almost RM9.3 billion in losses?

    21. Bank Bumiputra

    Why did you allow the mismanagement of Bank Bumiputra, to the extent that it had to be bailed out three times, costing the country a total of RM3 billion? Again, by dipping into Petronas’ funds?

    22. Perwaja Steel

    Why did your administration allow Perwaja Steel to be mismanaged resulting in RM2.9 million of the rakyat’s money being squandered?

    There you are - 22 fiascos in 22 years. The bad news is that there are actually more than 22. Remember the APs, Maminco, Renong and many more. Those who remember, please add on to this list.

    ReplyDelete
  19. President SAPP and Members,

    I hope you and party members will not be
    distracted or go astray from your
    original and true objectives.
    SAPP is given ample time to give a show
    cause letter why disciplinary action
    should not be taken against the party.
    Pse use this opportunity wisely.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Do NOT waste YOUR valuable time to reply to 'what a childish and stupid act from those moron BN leaders' to ask SAPP to 'EXPLAIN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY A SIMPLE STAND'

    Let those corrupted BN leaders initiate and take the inevitable decision to expel SAPP from the BN family.

    SAPP will become and emerge stronger than ever before.... feedbacks from Sabahans from all walks of life are testament to the 'SAPP FOR SABAHANS' STRUGGLLES for a peaceful. harmonious, clean, accountable and caring State Government unlike the "YES, PM. YOU ARE THE BEST PM & YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT IN ALL DECISIONS MADE" syndrome of the current BN MPs.

    SAPP FOR ALL SABAHANS....LONG LIVE SAPP !!!

    ReplyDelete
  21. You are damned right, fellow Sabahan 'Bryan'.

    It is a common practice in any democratic government to pass a vote of no-confidence against a leader who had failed in his duties to run a government.

    What has some of those BN leaders or rather the 'major CONSPIRATORS' got to be scared of a mosquito party like SAPP.

    Look into 1994 when Yong TL, Dompok and Bumburing led a large number of PBS leaders to form SAPP and UPKO.

    WHY?????? Simple.... that dictator Pairin was then already planning to rid Yong & Dompok from PBS esp. with his 'wife's nagging & pestering' to beware both. then his 2 deputies coz Yong & Dompok is getting more and more popular by the day.

    The end result ??? UMNO was formed and BN formed the government. The current Sabah BN leadership had maybe forgotten "WHO PLAYED THE MAJOR ROLE IN HELPING BN GOVERN SABAH TILL TODATE?" !!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  22. WTF !!! MAXIS NO LINE EMERGENCY CALL !!!! KK WO NO LINE MAY DIU... SIAL MAXIS ! TAKUT AR ????? SOI BN !

    ReplyDelete
  23. VK Liew, you are a dirty licking bantat..cheers! when are you coming over to Strawberry? The girls are waiting for you..come and lick.
    your drinking partner

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hey VK's drinking partner,

    I thought VK likes gambling only.. wow! Also womanising in Strawberry's in KK ???

    That is news to Sabahans esp. for Sandakan voters.

    So this guy's credibility and integrity as a true Sabahan leader is suspect... Kah Kiat had passed his baton to the wrong successor. Chee Kang should have been a better choice.

    Your spy in London, VK.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I sincerely hope SAPP will abide by the verdict of the polls set up. Currently the wish of the people is for SAPP to leave BN and join Pakatan Rakyat. Please do not disappoint the people again.

    Do the right thing by leaving BN.

    If the SAPP do not leave BN, then please don't set up polls to deceive the people next time and then dash their hopes.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Hai-yah, Alan.

    Why u so naive ??

    SAPP are not katak-men but show concern and are responsible for SABAH problems thru' negotiations aa partner of BN mainstream politics.

    Let corrupted BN top leaders or even 'YOU' Alan (r u PBS or LDP traitor) do the sack on SAPP, why so hasty to jump camp??

    The time will come and tell you the TRUTH when SABAHANS go to the polls again.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Memang setuju dan berasa tidak wajarnya ambil tindakan “show cause” kepada SAPP dalam jangka masa pendek tempoh 30 hari oleh BN ( jika tidak ada tujuan lain bagaikan “udang bersembunyikan di sebalik batu”)! Apalagi BN Pusat pun tak boleh memenuhi segala permintaan untuk kebaikan Sabah dalam jangka masa pendek juga?

    Selepas “vote of no confidence” oleh kerana segala permintaan keperluan majoriti sabahan telah disuarakan oleh Datuk Seri Yong dan SAPP kemudian baru nampak langkah yang ditimbangkan seperti masalah PATI dan sedikit subsidi tambahan oleh kerajaan pusat tapi tiada kandungan yang terperinci! Maka apa sebabnya bertindak “show cause” jika bersetuju ambil langkah yang sama? Sangat berpolitik oleh siapakah dengan tujuan nak
    melemahkan perjuangan SAPP untuk rakyat?

    Oleh demikian perlu di ingati agak masa lama sekurang-kurangnya jangka masa 30 tahun kebelakangan ini mulai dari tahun 1978 berapa banyak kali tambahan subsidi royalty minyak untuk Sabah?Lagipun berapa projek atau rancangan yang telah betul-betul dijalankan demi menaikkan taraf hidup rakyat di Sabah?

    -Inikah perancangan yang betul?-
    Misalnya, biarpun ada juga projek tambahan faciliti dan bangunan di KK iaitu “hospital besar QE” yang dibina akibatnya macam projek dirancangkan “setengah-masak” atau bermasalah ambil masa panjang bertahun-tahun. Ini memang wujud antara sebahagian sebab-sebab kerana peranan lemah kementerian kerajaan pusat atau tanggungjawab jabatannya dahulu! Apa lagi masalah pendidikan untuk luar bandar?

    Sekarang rakyat Sabah di KK hanya melihat satu bagunan baru di tapaknya tetapi juga ada sebahagian tanah kosong ketinggalan di antara bagunan baru dan lama itu tanpa aktiviti (mungkin jawapannya-pelan belum ada ke!!!). Ketika melawat ke QE hospital nampak pesakit-pesakit dan doktor-doktornya sentiasa susah payah apabila terpaksa ikut jalan jarak jauh dengan berjalankaki dari satu tempat pergi ke tempat lain antara bangunan baru dan lama! Adakah ini satu perancangan yang beres dan syabas yang telah diusahakan selama ini? Lebih membebankan jika OKK atau orang tua akan
    menghadapinya! (YB YB terutama MP MP di Sabah boleh buatkan rombongan untuk melawat ke tapak dan merasai bersama-sama jika prihatin-berjalan-jalan di tapak)
    Macam yang sentiasa dikatakan:”jangan buang masa berangan-angan dan membazirkan pembelanjaan duit rakyat”! Turun padang dan bersuarakan pendapat bersama rakyat.

    -Inikah fikiran betul seorang MP atau sebaliknya?-
    Seterusnya, baru baru ini di parlimen MP (Pasir Salak) telah menyatakan “orang bukan melayu bukan rakyat Malaysia”! Dia bukan saja salah dipilih dan juga buang masa cemas pada hal tak betul sebagai MP mengwakili rakyat Malaysia. Tindakan memang patut tak ditolakkan sama sekali terutamanya ini bukan budaya diamalkan SAPP dan rakyat Sabah yang tolak fikiran “racisma”. Apa lagi rakyat di Sabah yang berbagai kaum biar -bumi atau non-bumi tapi bukan hanya melayu? Mana suara pemimpin dan MP macam ini patutlah disingkirkan keluar tanpa masa oleh berkaitan tapi bukan apa yang disebaliknya
    tindakan ke atas SAPP!

    Tahukah anda?
    Sabahan Bukan Tak BerRukun Negara!

    ReplyDelete
  28. >>-Inikah fikiran betul seorang MP atau sebaliknya?-<<

    Apa kelakuan bagi seorang MP yg dipilihkan oleh rakyat kita?

    Selalu orang mengajar kita yang muda,
    "tempat yang suci,baiknya untuk sembahyang. Budi yang baik memang budaya bangsanyo!"

    Kalau otaknyo bengkang,maka lehernyo pon bengkok! Jika orang yang bukan melayu dikata pendatang asing boleh disepakkan MP begini dalam sungai buaya.
    Patutlah MP MCA macam si YB "WEEKS"-Ka Siong pon hemtan dia kuat-kuat.

    ReplyDelete