Saturday, June 14, 2008
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Shock and Awe
May 24, 2008
MELAKA, May 24 (Bernama) -- The government has no plans to increase fuel price despite the price hike of petrol by 30 per cent in Indonesia beginning Saturday, Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad said. - Bernama
June 4, 2008
PUTRAJAYA, June 4 (Bernama) -- Petrol and diesel prices will go up by 78 sen and RM1 per litre respectively at midnight tonight, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced Wednesday. - Bernama
June 9, 2008
GEORGE TOWN, June 9 (NST): The current prices of petrol and diesel will be maintained until next March even if world oil prices touch US$200 (RM660) a barrel, said Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad. - NST
June 10, 2008
PUTRAJAYA, June 10 (NST): The government has not decided whether the prices of petrol and diesel will stay at the current rates until March or if they will be reviewed monthly. - NST
July, 2008 ?????
It's as good as anybody's guess but the rakyat better be ready for another "shock and awe" move from the government.
Meanwhile, Anwar Ibrahim says that fuel price will be cut if the opposition gained power. Read more here
MELAKA, May 24 (Bernama) -- The government has no plans to increase fuel price despite the price hike of petrol by 30 per cent in Indonesia beginning Saturday, Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad said. - Bernama
June 4, 2008
PUTRAJAYA, June 4 (Bernama) -- Petrol and diesel prices will go up by 78 sen and RM1 per litre respectively at midnight tonight, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced Wednesday. - Bernama
June 9, 2008
GEORGE TOWN, June 9 (NST): The current prices of petrol and diesel will be maintained until next March even if world oil prices touch US$200 (RM660) a barrel, said Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad. - NST
June 10, 2008
PUTRAJAYA, June 10 (NST): The government has not decided whether the prices of petrol and diesel will stay at the current rates until March or if they will be reviewed monthly. - NST
July, 2008 ?????
It's as good as anybody's guess but the rakyat better be ready for another "shock and awe" move from the government.
Meanwhile, Anwar Ibrahim says that fuel price will be cut if the opposition gained power. Read more here
All cabinet members and deputy ministers will take a 10 per cent cut in their entertainment allowances
By referring to Malaysiakini report on the 10% cut off their entertainment allowance, we can derive that a Minister will have, on average about RM 10,000.00 per month "to play" while a typical rakyat has to fork out an extra RM 200 to RM 300 from his only source of income. Mind you, a typical rakyat does not get any "entertainment allowance" from his employer.
RENUNGILAH WADAH MUFTI PERLIS
Lihat negara kita yang kaya dengan berbagai hasil. Sepatutnya kita akan tetap kukuh dan setiap rakyat akan menikmati kekayaan ini dengan adilnya. Namun, disebabkan pembaziran, harta negara yang sepatutnya dapat dimakan puluhan tahun, tetapi surut mendadak dalam masa beberapa tahun.
Maka, yang patut mendapat bantuan dan hak, tidak cukup untuk sampai kepadanya. Barang keperluan pula bertukar menjadi mahal. Pembaziran memusnahkan kehidupan rakyat bawahan dan menghalang hak yang sepatutnya sampai kepada mereka.
Maka betapa wajar untuk para pembazir itu dipersaudarakan dengan syaitan. Apatah lagi dalam banyak keadaan, pembaziran itu lahir dari keangkuhan dan kesombongan. Sifat-sifat itulah jua yang menjadi asas kepada kekufuran syaitan.
Soalannya, mengapakah apabila kita membicarakan tentang pembaziran, kita hanya terbayang orang-orang bawahan di kampung ataupun bandar. Jika kita ingin meminta supaya setiap warga negara ini berjimat dan jangan membazir, maka bermulalah daripada atas. Bukan sekadar untuk mengenakan si miskin yang sekian lama telah berjimat dan sudah tidak tahu apa yang hendak dijimatkan lagi. Mengapa kita hanya terbayang rakyat yang berada dalam rumah persendirian dan berbelanja dengan wang poketnya yang sudah lelah?
Kita sepatutnya terlebih meneliti semula bagaimana perbelanjaan yang menggunakan harta negara dan rakyat yang sedang berjalan di istana-istana, kediaman-kediaman rasmi kerajaan di peringkat negara dan negeri? Apakah wajar di kala ini keraian untuk orang-orang besar sama ada sultan atau menteri begitu mewah? Makanan yang dihidangkan untuk mereka, harga satu meja kadang kala boleh dimakan oleh ratusan rakyat bawahan. Karpet yang dipijak oleh mereka harganya ribuan bungkusan nasi yang dimakan oleh ‘orang biasa’.
Apakah patut pada saat yang sebegini, ada istana atau kediaman rasmi menteri yang hendak ditambahmewahkan? Apakah patut orang-orang besar ini diraikan dengan hiburan atau pertunjukkan dan konsert yang menelan puluhan ribu ringgit sempena sesuatu kunjungan mereka?
Wang itu, wang negara. Wang itu, wang rakyat. Apakah dalam masa yang sebegini mereka masih mendapat peruntukkan untuk bersantai, bermain golf dan ‘berhiburan’ dengan menggunakan wang rakyat bawahan yang disuruh menjimatkan nasi lemak dan air kopi mereka?
Maka, yang patut mendapat bantuan dan hak, tidak cukup untuk sampai kepadanya. Barang keperluan pula bertukar menjadi mahal. Pembaziran memusnahkan kehidupan rakyat bawahan dan menghalang hak yang sepatutnya sampai kepada mereka.
Maka betapa wajar untuk para pembazir itu dipersaudarakan dengan syaitan. Apatah lagi dalam banyak keadaan, pembaziran itu lahir dari keangkuhan dan kesombongan. Sifat-sifat itulah jua yang menjadi asas kepada kekufuran syaitan.
Soalannya, mengapakah apabila kita membicarakan tentang pembaziran, kita hanya terbayang orang-orang bawahan di kampung ataupun bandar. Jika kita ingin meminta supaya setiap warga negara ini berjimat dan jangan membazir, maka bermulalah daripada atas. Bukan sekadar untuk mengenakan si miskin yang sekian lama telah berjimat dan sudah tidak tahu apa yang hendak dijimatkan lagi. Mengapa kita hanya terbayang rakyat yang berada dalam rumah persendirian dan berbelanja dengan wang poketnya yang sudah lelah?
Kita sepatutnya terlebih meneliti semula bagaimana perbelanjaan yang menggunakan harta negara dan rakyat yang sedang berjalan di istana-istana, kediaman-kediaman rasmi kerajaan di peringkat negara dan negeri? Apakah wajar di kala ini keraian untuk orang-orang besar sama ada sultan atau menteri begitu mewah? Makanan yang dihidangkan untuk mereka, harga satu meja kadang kala boleh dimakan oleh ratusan rakyat bawahan. Karpet yang dipijak oleh mereka harganya ribuan bungkusan nasi yang dimakan oleh ‘orang biasa’.
Apakah patut pada saat yang sebegini, ada istana atau kediaman rasmi menteri yang hendak ditambahmewahkan? Apakah patut orang-orang besar ini diraikan dengan hiburan atau pertunjukkan dan konsert yang menelan puluhan ribu ringgit sempena sesuatu kunjungan mereka?
Wang itu, wang negara. Wang itu, wang rakyat. Apakah dalam masa yang sebegini mereka masih mendapat peruntukkan untuk bersantai, bermain golf dan ‘berhiburan’ dengan menggunakan wang rakyat bawahan yang disuruh menjimatkan nasi lemak dan air kopi mereka?
ONE
I am only one
But still am one
I cannot do everything
But still I can do something
And because I cannot do everything
I will not refuse to do the something that I can do
-Edward Everett Itale-
But still am one
I cannot do everything
But still I can do something
And because I cannot do everything
I will not refuse to do the something that I can do
-Edward Everett Itale-
Johor DAP Vice Chairman Wore Songkok.
This is a photograph of me in my younger days. Note the headgear / songkok.
Monday, June 09, 2008
"TO WEAR OR NOT TO WEAR THE SONGKOK" - THE STAR SUNDAY 9, JUNE 2008.
PRESS STATEMENT
VICE CHAIRMAN DAP JOHOR
NORMAN FERNANDEZ
ISSUE: REPORT IN THE STAR SUNDAY 9, JUNE 2008
“TO WEAR OR NOT TO WEAR THE SONGKOK”.
The Sunday STAR 9th June, 2008 reported at pg N4 “ To wear or not to wear songkok”. Having read the news, I wish to clarify the issue and also make my personal stand.
1. My statement as appearing in the STAR would seem to imply that I am questioning the wisdom of DAP Central Executive Committee and that Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau, Johor DAP State Chairman/Adun Skudai and myself are of the same view. That is far from true. I have not and wish not to criticize the CEC.
2. I wish to make it clear that what I meant and was referring to, is the stance by the DAP National Legal Advisor Sdr Dr Chen Man Hin who had been quoted in the paper as saying that the songkok ought not to be worn. As such Sdr Dr Chen Man Hin’s statement runs contrary to the decision of the CEC. The CEC had already decided with regard to the wearing of the songkok. I wish to make it very clear and reiterate that I hold steadfast to the decision of the CEC meeting held in Penang after the election which left to the respective state committees to decide the decision whether to wear or not to wear the songkok.
3. In the recently concluded 12th General Election, DAP Johor won the Parliamentary seat of Bakri while winning the State seats of Skudai, Senai, Mengkibol and Bentayan.
4. The Member of Parliament for Bakri is Sdr Er Teck Hwa. The State Assemblymen are Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau, Skudai, Sdr Ong Kow Meng, Senai, Sdr Ng Lam Hua, Mengkibol and Sdr Gwee Tong Hiang, Bentayan.
5. In the aftermath of the election, the wearing of the official attire (No.1 Suit) in the Dewan Undangan Negeri Johor became an issue. The official attire or the No.1 Suit as it is known consist of a Jacket and a songkok with the crest.
6. The CEC of the DAP in its meeting held in Penang after the general Election, decided that the decision on whether or not to wear the songkok will be left to the individual state committee to decide.
7. In accordance with the directive of the CEC, the Johor DAP State Committee thereafter at its meeting held on the 20th April, 2008 discussed the issue of wearing the formal attire, namely the No.1 Suit and more importantly the wearing of songkok.
8. Save for the Assemblyman for Bentayan who was absent, all other Aduns and the State Committee members present expressed their views.
The wearing of the songkok was an emotive issue and the Committee Members were reminded of the unfortunate events of 1990. There were a diverse of views. The pros and cons of wearing the official attire and more importantly the wearing of the songkok was freely debated. The State Committee also took into account the unfortunate events which happened to the then DAP Aduns namely Pang Hok Liong and Wong Peng Sheng in the Johor State Assembly in 1990 The Johor state DAP remained steadfast in its stand that the events and incidents and the use of force to the then DAP Aduns had no justifications.
In the end, the state committee taking account of the winds of change and the new politics brought about by the 12th General Election, in its meeting on 20th April, 2008 resolved that that all Aduns shall and must wear the official attire together with the songkok.
It was the general consensus that the wearing of the songkok was not or ought not to signify cultural submission or capitulation of principles but instead the wearing of the songkok with the state crest state crest was as a sign of respect to His Highness Sultan of Johor who will be present for the opening of the Dewan Undangan Negeri. In any event, the wearing of the songkok was only for the period when His Highness Sultan of Johor was present.
9. Thereafter on May 13, 2008, at an informal meeting held at the Gelang Patah Parliamentary Liasson Office and attended by among other by all the DAP Aduns save for the Adun of Bentayan, the two DAP State Vice Chairmen namely Norman Fernandez and Ahmad Ton and the DAP State Secretary, Sdri Gan Peck Cheng. A brief discussion on the issue was held once again it resolved to maintain the decision of state committee of April 20, 2008.
10. At the said meeting, the Johor State DAP Chairman then directed the Johor State DAP Secretary to send a formal letter to all Aduns to remind them of the decision and compliance of the state committee’s decision of April 20, 2008. A draft of the said letter was immediately prepared by Norman Fernandez and given to the Johor State Secretary for her action.
11. Yesterday, 7 June, 2008 the State Chairman made a shocking revelations claiming that apparently the CEC on April 21, 2008, that is a day after the Johor DAP State Commmiteee had resolved to wearing the official attire, the CEC had revoked its decision to let the individual state committee to decide on whether or not to wear the formal attire and more importantly the songkok.
If it was true that the CEC had revoked the decision of the Johor State DAP, then I have to also question why the Johor State DAP Chairman did not to inform the Johor DAP State Committee until yesterday. Regretfully, I am made to understand that the CEC did not and never had revoked the decision of the Johor State DAP.
Further, had the CEC revoked the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee, question also arises as to why the Johor State DAP Chairman on May 13, 2008 had given a directive to the Johor State DAP Secretary to send out to a formal letter of reminder to all the DAP Aduns notifying the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee of April, 2008. Was it play acting by the Johor State Chairman?
12. Today’s report in the Star “To wear or not to wear the songkok” has left me no opportunity but to clarify what has indeed transpired so far and also to make my personal observation and stand public.
13. Sdr Gwee Tong Hiang (Bentayan) from the onset had said he will not wear the official attire and the songkok and is prepared for any consequences arising. While I do not agree with Sdr Gwee, nevertheless I must say that at the very least he has stated his stand openly, never mind rightly or wrongly his decision may be.
14. Sdr Ng Lam Hua (Mengkibol) has steadfastly stated that he will wear the official attire and the songkok. The Sunday Star reported the reason for his decision and I salute him for his courageous and forward thinking.
15. Sdr Ong Kow Meng (Senai) has expressed his concern and stressed the importance of the DAP Aduns being united. He has repeatedly said openly that has no objection to wearing the songkok.
16. Since the stand of the other three Aduns are clear, what then is the stand of Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau (Skudai). From Sdr Dr Boo’s statements and conduct, I am now of the view that it is plainly clear that he do not wish not to wear the songkok but instead is and has been seeking an excuse or rather any excuse for justifying not being able to wear the songkok. Blaming it on the decision of the CEC ( when there was none) would naturally be a good cover. Little wonder that he prefers to ignore the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee of 20 April, 2008 and instead finds refuge and reasons on statements by certain DAP leaders as justification in not wanting to wear the songkok.
I am made to understand that the Secretary General had made it clear that the final decision on the wearing of the formal attire and the songkok is with the respective individual state committee. That’s precisely what the Johor DAP State Committee in its meeting on April 20, 2008 did – agreeing to wear the official attire and the songkok. As such I am deeply dissapointed by Sdr Dr Boo’s attempt to drag the Secretary General into this issue.
Dr Boo Cheng Hau must find courage to state his stand openly whether he will or will not be wearing the official attire and the songkok. The shilly shalling has to stop and he should not divert blame or justification not to wear the songkok on the Secretary General or the CEC. The onus is on Dr. Boo to prove that the CEC had on April 21, 2008 revoked its earlier decision. Until then the directive of the CEC must be held to be true and remain.
17. I had from the onset been firm in my conviction that the wearing of the songkok should not be viewed as cultural submission and the capitulation of principles but to view the wearing of the songkok with the state crest as a sign of respect to His Highness Sultan of Johor. Rightfully, the Aduns ought to be play the role of his Majesty’s Loyal Opposition representing the subjects of the Sultan and not instead behave as bunch of defiant protagonist.
18. It has been 18 long years since DAP had any representation in the Johor State Assembly. During this time politics and peoples perceptions on many issues have changed. Sad, that for some Aduns, despite the winds of change as seen in the 12th general election, small mindness still remain. Perhaps these Aduns ought to have been forthcoming during the election campaign by telling the voters that if elected they will defy the Sultan and not wear the songkok. I wonder if they would still be elected.
19. I am most upset that the proud occasion of the opening of the Johor State Assembly on June 19, 2008 is going to end in one ugly saga. I call upon all the Johor DAP Aduns to wear the official attire and the songkok.
Norman Fernandez - the opinion expressed are the writers’ personal opinion. Norman Fernandez would welcome readers comment on this issue at anfalaw@streamyx.com.
VICE CHAIRMAN DAP JOHOR
NORMAN FERNANDEZ
ISSUE: REPORT IN THE STAR SUNDAY 9, JUNE 2008
“TO WEAR OR NOT TO WEAR THE SONGKOK”.
The Sunday STAR 9th June, 2008 reported at pg N4 “ To wear or not to wear songkok”. Having read the news, I wish to clarify the issue and also make my personal stand.
1. My statement as appearing in the STAR would seem to imply that I am questioning the wisdom of DAP Central Executive Committee and that Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau, Johor DAP State Chairman/Adun Skudai and myself are of the same view. That is far from true. I have not and wish not to criticize the CEC.
2. I wish to make it clear that what I meant and was referring to, is the stance by the DAP National Legal Advisor Sdr Dr Chen Man Hin who had been quoted in the paper as saying that the songkok ought not to be worn. As such Sdr Dr Chen Man Hin’s statement runs contrary to the decision of the CEC. The CEC had already decided with regard to the wearing of the songkok. I wish to make it very clear and reiterate that I hold steadfast to the decision of the CEC meeting held in Penang after the election which left to the respective state committees to decide the decision whether to wear or not to wear the songkok.
3. In the recently concluded 12th General Election, DAP Johor won the Parliamentary seat of Bakri while winning the State seats of Skudai, Senai, Mengkibol and Bentayan.
4. The Member of Parliament for Bakri is Sdr Er Teck Hwa. The State Assemblymen are Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau, Skudai, Sdr Ong Kow Meng, Senai, Sdr Ng Lam Hua, Mengkibol and Sdr Gwee Tong Hiang, Bentayan.
5. In the aftermath of the election, the wearing of the official attire (No.1 Suit) in the Dewan Undangan Negeri Johor became an issue. The official attire or the No.1 Suit as it is known consist of a Jacket and a songkok with the crest.
6. The CEC of the DAP in its meeting held in Penang after the general Election, decided that the decision on whether or not to wear the songkok will be left to the individual state committee to decide.
7. In accordance with the directive of the CEC, the Johor DAP State Committee thereafter at its meeting held on the 20th April, 2008 discussed the issue of wearing the formal attire, namely the No.1 Suit and more importantly the wearing of songkok.
8. Save for the Assemblyman for Bentayan who was absent, all other Aduns and the State Committee members present expressed their views.
The wearing of the songkok was an emotive issue and the Committee Members were reminded of the unfortunate events of 1990. There were a diverse of views. The pros and cons of wearing the official attire and more importantly the wearing of the songkok was freely debated. The State Committee also took into account the unfortunate events which happened to the then DAP Aduns namely Pang Hok Liong and Wong Peng Sheng in the Johor State Assembly in 1990 The Johor state DAP remained steadfast in its stand that the events and incidents and the use of force to the then DAP Aduns had no justifications.
In the end, the state committee taking account of the winds of change and the new politics brought about by the 12th General Election, in its meeting on 20th April, 2008 resolved that that all Aduns shall and must wear the official attire together with the songkok.
It was the general consensus that the wearing of the songkok was not or ought not to signify cultural submission or capitulation of principles but instead the wearing of the songkok with the state crest state crest was as a sign of respect to His Highness Sultan of Johor who will be present for the opening of the Dewan Undangan Negeri. In any event, the wearing of the songkok was only for the period when His Highness Sultan of Johor was present.
9. Thereafter on May 13, 2008, at an informal meeting held at the Gelang Patah Parliamentary Liasson Office and attended by among other by all the DAP Aduns save for the Adun of Bentayan, the two DAP State Vice Chairmen namely Norman Fernandez and Ahmad Ton and the DAP State Secretary, Sdri Gan Peck Cheng. A brief discussion on the issue was held once again it resolved to maintain the decision of state committee of April 20, 2008.
10. At the said meeting, the Johor State DAP Chairman then directed the Johor State DAP Secretary to send a formal letter to all Aduns to remind them of the decision and compliance of the state committee’s decision of April 20, 2008. A draft of the said letter was immediately prepared by Norman Fernandez and given to the Johor State Secretary for her action.
11. Yesterday, 7 June, 2008 the State Chairman made a shocking revelations claiming that apparently the CEC on April 21, 2008, that is a day after the Johor DAP State Commmiteee had resolved to wearing the official attire, the CEC had revoked its decision to let the individual state committee to decide on whether or not to wear the formal attire and more importantly the songkok.
If it was true that the CEC had revoked the decision of the Johor State DAP, then I have to also question why the Johor State DAP Chairman did not to inform the Johor DAP State Committee until yesterday. Regretfully, I am made to understand that the CEC did not and never had revoked the decision of the Johor State DAP.
Further, had the CEC revoked the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee, question also arises as to why the Johor State DAP Chairman on May 13, 2008 had given a directive to the Johor State DAP Secretary to send out to a formal letter of reminder to all the DAP Aduns notifying the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee of April, 2008. Was it play acting by the Johor State Chairman?
12. Today’s report in the Star “To wear or not to wear the songkok” has left me no opportunity but to clarify what has indeed transpired so far and also to make my personal observation and stand public.
13. Sdr Gwee Tong Hiang (Bentayan) from the onset had said he will not wear the official attire and the songkok and is prepared for any consequences arising. While I do not agree with Sdr Gwee, nevertheless I must say that at the very least he has stated his stand openly, never mind rightly or wrongly his decision may be.
14. Sdr Ng Lam Hua (Mengkibol) has steadfastly stated that he will wear the official attire and the songkok. The Sunday Star reported the reason for his decision and I salute him for his courageous and forward thinking.
15. Sdr Ong Kow Meng (Senai) has expressed his concern and stressed the importance of the DAP Aduns being united. He has repeatedly said openly that has no objection to wearing the songkok.
16. Since the stand of the other three Aduns are clear, what then is the stand of Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau (Skudai). From Sdr Dr Boo’s statements and conduct, I am now of the view that it is plainly clear that he do not wish not to wear the songkok but instead is and has been seeking an excuse or rather any excuse for justifying not being able to wear the songkok. Blaming it on the decision of the CEC ( when there was none) would naturally be a good cover. Little wonder that he prefers to ignore the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee of 20 April, 2008 and instead finds refuge and reasons on statements by certain DAP leaders as justification in not wanting to wear the songkok.
I am made to understand that the Secretary General had made it clear that the final decision on the wearing of the formal attire and the songkok is with the respective individual state committee. That’s precisely what the Johor DAP State Committee in its meeting on April 20, 2008 did – agreeing to wear the official attire and the songkok. As such I am deeply dissapointed by Sdr Dr Boo’s attempt to drag the Secretary General into this issue.
Dr Boo Cheng Hau must find courage to state his stand openly whether he will or will not be wearing the official attire and the songkok. The shilly shalling has to stop and he should not divert blame or justification not to wear the songkok on the Secretary General or the CEC. The onus is on Dr. Boo to prove that the CEC had on April 21, 2008 revoked its earlier decision. Until then the directive of the CEC must be held to be true and remain.
17. I had from the onset been firm in my conviction that the wearing of the songkok should not be viewed as cultural submission and the capitulation of principles but to view the wearing of the songkok with the state crest as a sign of respect to His Highness Sultan of Johor. Rightfully, the Aduns ought to be play the role of his Majesty’s Loyal Opposition representing the subjects of the Sultan and not instead behave as bunch of defiant protagonist.
18. It has been 18 long years since DAP had any representation in the Johor State Assembly. During this time politics and peoples perceptions on many issues have changed. Sad, that for some Aduns, despite the winds of change as seen in the 12th general election, small mindness still remain. Perhaps these Aduns ought to have been forthcoming during the election campaign by telling the voters that if elected they will defy the Sultan and not wear the songkok. I wonder if they would still be elected.
19. I am most upset that the proud occasion of the opening of the Johor State Assembly on June 19, 2008 is going to end in one ugly saga. I call upon all the Johor DAP Aduns to wear the official attire and the songkok.
Norman Fernandez - the opinion expressed are the writers’ personal opinion. Norman Fernandez would welcome readers comment on this issue at anfalaw@streamyx.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
