By Joseph Tawie
Is the Sarawak United People’s Party really united to face the 54,695 voters, 67% of whom are Chinese in the Sibu by-election?
SUPP president Dr George Chan believes so, when he said: “All leaders have the motivation to forget their differences and work together for the party in the by-election.”
But many regard, however, that the party is ill-prepared for the by-election as the untimely death of MP for Sibu Robert Lau Hoi Chew on April 9 caught the party leadership in the midst of internal bickering and infighting.
Only weeks before the death of the MP, Malaysian Mirror published an article detailing the internal crisis and issues that have bogged down the party to the point that it did not have any time to talk about the interests of the people it was supposed to represent.
Sore points
For instance, the ultimatum given by the Bidayuh members of the Bengoh branch was that if the party did not appoint Dr Jerip Susil as the chairman of the Padawan Municipal Council, then the party was expected to lose two Bidayuh majority seats of Bengoh and Opar in the coming state election.
And adding to this “Bidayuh” ultimatum was another demand from Bidayuhs that the party’s five-term MP for Serian Richard Riot should be appointed as deputy minister to replace the late Robert Lau.
The Bidayuhs, who form about 71.6% of the electorate, wanted Riot appointed as deputy minister to show that SUPP not only practises multi-racialism, but also recognises the role the Bidayuhs play in the party.
And another issue of some significance to the party is the quarrel among the Engkilili branch committee members over an issue of whether or not to nominate the independent state assemblyman for Engkilili Johnichal Rayong to contest the seat as a SUPP candidate in the coming election.
The branch chairman, Toh Heng San and some committee members like Jonathan Krai who was defeated by Rayong in the last election, are strongly against Rayong using a SUPP ticket.
But the deputy chairman, Sibat Krutap and the secretary, Nyambong Maweng wanted the party leadership to accept Rayong as a candidate, because Rayong has now become “BN-friendly”. Using Sarawak National Party’s ticket, Rayong defeated Krai in the Engkilili seat.
Dudong factor
At one time, the disagreement went out of control so much so that the party leadership had to intervene.
But the biggest threat to SUPP’s unity is the three-year old problem regarding the formation of the Dudong branch when two SUPP strongmen are trying to control it.
The “Dudong” problem arose when Dr Soon Choon Teck (right), the state assemblyman for Dudong, wanted to form the Dudong branch some three years ago, but his decision was strongly objected to by Wong Soon Koh, chairman of Sibu branch which has been overseeing it since the formation of the Sibu branch.
However, Soon who claimed to have the support of about 3,000 members went ahead with its formation and had himself elected as the chairman.
Soon’s action angered Soon Koh, who accused him of forming an illegal branch, as he had not followed party procedures.
But why was Soon Koh so adamantly against the formation of the branch? In fact like everyone else, he should have welcomed it as an effort to expand the party. But no, he and his “visionary team” including the late Lau would not allow its formation.
Reason
Soon Koh does not want Dudong to break away from Sibu. It is all about delegates, because once Dudong becomes a branch, it can send a number of delegates to the party general assembly and this may affect Soon Koh’s position later on. But if Dudong is still under Sibu, it cannot send any delegate. Even if it does send, it will be “controlled”.
Before the Dudong branch “crisis” there was another leadership crisis brewing after the 2004 parliamentary election when the Foochow group was trying to topple Chan after he allegedly failed to honour his promise to the former federal minister Lau Hieng Ding.
Lau who had earlier indicated his desire to step down was persuaded by Chan to defend his Sarikei seat. Lau agreed on the condition he continued to serve as federal minister. Lau retained the seat for the party. However, he was not recommended to the federal cabinet. Instead Peter Chin was made the federal minister.
Lau and the Foochow group in the party felt that they had been betrayed and accused Chan of not honouring his promise. The Foochow group engineered the downfall of Chan as president of the party.
So serious was the crisis that had partly contributed to the poor showing of the party in the 2006 state election where it lost eight seats to the Opposition.
Crisis festers
The crisis continued for some time until Chan promised to step down before the party general assembly in December 2008. However, the Foochow group softened their stand and allowed Chan to continue to lead the party until today.
The problems regarding the formation of the Dudong branch was part of this crisis as Soon is pro-Chan.
Soon has the support of leaders from 28 SUPP branches throughout the state who earlier on had jointly submitted a requisition calling on the party to have a special delegates conference as a way to solve the problem.
Initially, the party leadership agreed and had in fact decided the date would be on Oct 25 last year. But it was cancelled at the eleventh hour. No reason was given.
This made the leaders of the 28 branches furious.
Since the efforts by the SUPP president and his central committee to solve the problem had ended disastrously, it threatened to tear apart the state’s oldest party.
To the public, SUPP was seen as weak, bogged down by infighting and internal problems so much so that it has no time to fight for the interests of the Chinese community as a whole.
“They are more interested in protecting their own interests and their positions in the party,” said a former SUPP leader who has joined the Opposition DAP.
Chinese interests
“The coming Sibu by-election is really a litmus test for the SUPP leadership – not on how much SUPP has done for Sibu, but how effective the party is able to represent the Chinese community,” said the former SUPP leader.
“The issue is not about Sibu being turned into a modern city equipped with first class infrastructures – that is the government’s duty to do, but we want to know how much SUPP can fight for the Chinese interests especially in terms of education and business opportunities.”
For sure, the “Dudong branch problem” will have some repercussions on the ongoing Sibu by-election.
For example, the notable absence of Soon, David Teng and leaders from the 28 branches, which are aligned to Soon in the involvement or preparation of the by-election is something that is worrying the BN leadership.
It was left to Soon Koh, chairman of the Sibu branch and Vincent Goh, state assemblyman for Pelawan.
As Soon reportedly told his friends: “We are not in the list. That means we are not wanted to help in the by-election.
According to one observer, the result of this by-election may have a tsunamic effect in the state election that must be held before July next year.
Hornbill Unleashed 
Malaysians, not only the Chinese or urbanised voters, are increasing fed up with the UMNO controlled BN and its brand of politics which are increasingly corrupt and authoritarian. Rule of law is openly and unabashedly flouted, Judiciary, MACC and PDRM reduced to political stooges.Even our religious freedom enshrined in our constitution has been trampled, with the ban on the use of Allah by Christian in the national language.
Our economy is semi-paralysed by racist protectionism and cronyism. The future generations will be made to pay for our massive national debts accumulated as a result of wastage and blatant corruption.
Malaysians can accept that infrastructure projects and other socio-economic developments need proper planning but with prudent financial management , responsible, committed and corrupt free government, all the major and necessary developments would not have taken over 50 years to be completed and most are yet to be implemented especially in over 70% of the rural constituencies.
Malaysians who do not support the UMNO controlled BN are certainly not anti- government or anti- development. We value and love our nation and enjoy living in peace and harmony. The concern about all races in Malaysia living in harmony and mutual respect for one another are the least concern but UMNO controlled BN is determined to divide all Malaysians and rule with absolute power and remain in power at all cost. Make no mistake, UMNO is effectively BN and BN is effectively UMNO.
Malaysians look to Sibu voters now more than ever for them to realise that Sarawak and sabah are very much an equal partner of Malaysia and national policies and direction are equally important to Sarawak and Sabah.
This Sunday, Malaysians voting in the Sibu by-election must make a historic vote to set the pace for a nationwide change of government. Vote out the corrupted regime controlled by UMNO.
Vote decisively for Pakatan-DAP candidate YB Wong Ho Leng
Comment by Mata Kuching — May 12, 2010 @ 7:06 PM |
Thuan Chye Responds to “Orang Cina Malaysia, apa lagi yang anda mahu?”(Utusan Malaysia article)
By Kee Thuan Chye
COMMENT Every time the Barisan Nasional gets less than the expected support from
Chinese voters at an election, the question invariably pops up among the petty-minded: Why are the Chinese ungrateful?
So now, after the Hulu Selangor by-election, it’s not surprising to read in Utusan Malaysia a piece that asks: “Orang Cina Malaysia, apa lagi yang anda mahu?” (Chinese of Malaysia, what more do you want?)
Normally, something intentionally provocative and propagandistic as this doesn’t deserve to be honoured with a reply. But even though I’m fed up of such disruptive and ethnocentric polemics, this time I feel obliged to reply – partly because the article has also been published, in an English translation, in the Straits Times of Singapore.
I wish to emphasise here that I am replying not as a Chinese Malaysian but, simply, as a Malaysian. Let me say at the outset that the Chinese have got nothing more than what any citizen should get. So to ask “what more” it is they want, is misguided. A correct question would be “What do the Chinese want?”
All our lives, we Chinese have held to the belief that no one owes us a living. We have to work for it. Most of us have got where we are by the sweat of our brow, not by handouts or the policies of the government.
We have come to expect nothing – not awards, not accolades, not gifts from official sources. (Let’s not lump in Datukships, that’s a different ball game.) We know that no Chinese who writes in the Chinese language will ever be bestowed the title of Sasterawan Negara, unlike in Singapore where the literatures of all the main language streams are recognised and honoured with the Cultural Medallion, etc.
We have learned we can’t expect the government to grant us scholarships. Some will get those, but countless others won’t. We’ve learned to live with that and to work extra hard in order to support our children to attain higher education – because education is very important to us. We experience a lot of daily pressure to achieve that. Unfortunately, not many non-Chinese realise or understand that. In fact, many Chinese had no choice but to emigrate for the sake of their children’s further education. Or to accept scholarships from abroad, many from Singapore, which has inevitably led to a brain drain.
The writer of the Utusan article says the Chinese “account for most of the students” enrolled in “the best private colleges in Malaysia”. Even so, the Chinese still have to pay a lot of money to have their children study in these colleges. And to earn that money, the parents have to work very hard. The money does not fall from the sky.
The writer goes on to add: “The Malays can gain admission into only government-owned colleges of ordinary reputation.” That is utter nonsense. Some of these colleges are meant for the cream of the Malay crop of students and are endowed with the best facilities. They are given elite treatment.
The writer also fails to acknowledge that the Chinese are barred from being admitted to some of these colleges. As a result, the Chinese are forced to pay more money to go to private colleges. Furthermore, the Malays are also welcome to enrol in the private colleges, and many of them do. It’s, after all, a free enterprise.
Plain and simple reason
The writer claims that the Chinese live “in the lap of luxury” and lead lives that are “more than ordinary” whereas the Malays in Singapore, their minority-race counterparts there, lead “ordinary lives”. Such sweeping statements sound inane especially when they are not backed up by definitions of “lap of luxury” and “ordinary lives”. They sound hysterical, if not hilarious as well, when they are not backed up by evidence. It’s surprising that a national daily like Utusan Malaysia would publish something as idiosyncratic as that. And the Straits Times too.
The writer quotes from a survey that said eight of the 10 richest people in Malaysia are Chinese. Well, if these people are where they are, it must have also come from hard work and prudent business sense. Is that something to be faulted?
If the writer had said that some of them achieved greater wealth through being given crony privileges and lucrative contracts by the government, there might be a point, but even then, it would still take hard work and business acumen to secure success. Certainly, Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, who is one of the 10, would take exception if it were said that he has not worked hard and lacks business savvy.
Most important, it should be noted that the eight Chinese tycoons mentioned in the survey represent but a minuscule percentage of the wider Chinese Malaysian population. To extrapolate that because eight Chinese are filthy rich, the rest of the Chinese must therefore live in the lap of luxury and lead more than ordinary lives would be a mockery of the truth. The writer has obviously not met the vast numbers of very poor Chinese.
The crux of the writer’s article is that the Chinese are not grateful to the government by not voting for Barisan Nasional at the Hulu Selangor by-election. But this demonstrates the thinking of either a simple mind or a closed one.
Why did the Chinese by and large not vote for BN? Because it’s corrupt. Plain and simple. Let’s call a spade a spade. And BN showed how corrupt it was during the campaign by throwing bribes to the electorate, including promising RM3 million to the Chinese school in Rasa.
The Chinese were not alone in seeing this corruption. The figures are unofficial but one could assume that at least 40 per cent of Malays and 45 per cent of Indians who voted against BN in that by-election also had their eyes open. So, what’s wrong with not supporting a government that is corrupt? If the government is corrupt, do we continue to support it?
To answer the question then, what do the Chinese want? They want a government that is not corrupt; that can govern well and proves to have done so; that tells the truth rather than lies; that follows the rule of law; that upholds rather than abuses the country’s sacred institutions. BN does not fit that description, so the Chinese don’t vote for it. This is not what only the Chinese want. It is something every sensible Malaysian, regardless of race, wants. Is that something that is too difficult to understand?
Some people think that the government is to be equated with the country, and therefore if someone does not support the government, they are being disloyal to the country. This is a complete fallacy. BN is not Malaysia. It is merely a political coalition that is the government of the day. Rejecting BN is not rejecting the country.
A sense of belonging
Let’s be clear about this important distinction. In America, the people sometimes vote for the Democrats and sometimes for the Republicans. Voting against the one that is in government at the time is not considered disloyalty to the country.
By the same token, voting against UMNO is also voting against a party, not against a race. And if the Chinese or whoever criticise UMNO, they are criticising the party; they are not criticising Malays. It just happens that UMNO’s leaders are Malay.
It is time all Malaysians realised this so that we can once and for all dispel the confusion. Let us no more confuse country with government. We can love our country and at the same time hate the government. It is perfectly all right.
I should add here what the Chinese don’t want. We don’t want to be insulted, to be called pendatang, or told to be grateful for our citizenship. We have been loyal citizens; we duly and dutifully pay taxes; we respect the country’s constitution and its institutions. Our forefathers came to this country generations ago and helped it to prosper. We are continuing to contribute to the country’s growth and development.
Would anyone like to be disparaged, made to feel unwelcome, unwanted? For the benefit of the writer of the Utusan article, what MCA president Chua Soi Lek means when he says the MCA needs to be more vocal is that it needs to speak up whenever the Chinese community is disparaged. For too long, the MCA has not spoken up strongly enough when UMNO politicians and associates like Ahmad Ismail, Nasir Safar, Ahmad Noh and others before them insulted the Chinese and made them feel like they don’t belong. That’s why the Chinese have largely rejected the MCA.
You see, the Chinese, like all human beings, want self-respect. And a sense of belonging in this country they call home. That is all the Chinese want, and have always wanted. Nothing more.
The Utusan Malaysia article: Orang Cina Malaysia, apa lagi yang anda mahu?
Dramatist and journalist Kee Thuan Chye is the author of ‘March 8: The Day Malaysia Woke Up’. He is a contributor to Free Malaysia Today.
Comment by Mata Kuching — May 12, 2010 @ 10:52 AM |
ROBOT Wong Soon Koh was again insulting the intelligence of Malaysians including my children who are still in secondary school when he told YB Lim Kit Siang that he would only debate with YB Lim on condition YB Lim Kit Siang gets PAS to change its constitution. This merely shows how grey he is as a politician and a representaive of the people .
As a Malaysian and a registered voter let me issue this simple challenge to ROBOT Wong Soon Koh. In a debate SUPP is not assured of gaining any votes but if ROBOT Wong Soon Koh tells Taib Mahmud openly and publicly to step down as CM today SUPP is assured of gaining one precious vote from me.
ROBOT Wong Soon Koh..be a real man. ROBOT Lau Hui Yew..be a real man too. Lend each other the courage and together hold your hands and stand your ground to tell Taib Mahmud to step down as CM today and I will vote SUPP and many more voters might follow suit.
Stop insulting the intelligence of Malaysians and Sibu voters. Even our students will find your empty statement a reflection of your grey matter.
Comment by Mata Kuching — May 12, 2010 @ 9:08 AM |
In one of the news portal, there was a photo of a church congregation singing in Bahasa Malaysia and the word ‘Allah’ could be seen on the screen next to the altar. SUPP say, “You see we have no problem using the word ‘Allah’ in churches here.” Let me say this as a Catholic from Semenanjung. This is not something new. In fact since the ban was on and churches were being burnt, we were doing the same thing as our Sarawakian brethren, singing hymns in BM and using the word ‘Allah’ until today. So what’s the big deal, anyway. The crux of the issue here is that UMNO will not have the word printed in The Herald and neither will they allow bibles printed in BM to be imported here, especially when they contain the word ‘Allah’ SUPP should clarify the following :
1. Can they get UMNO’s approval for the importation of bibles in BM? NO!
2. If that is the case, can they get UMNO’s approval for a printing permit to print the bibles locally in BM? NO!
If SUPP cannot do the above, then for heaven’s sake – SHUT UP!!!
Comment by Billy — May 11, 2010 @ 9:40 PM |
No problem abt printing bible, lah!
Get it downloaded and xerox it. I suppose they’ll ban the photocopy machine next! Gila jerks!
Comment by Watcha — May 12, 2010 @ 2:00 PM |
SUPP is no longer relevant. George Chan says that their principles follow the BN principles. In other words they no longer have a stance, they do not represent chinese interests. They are a social club, permitting only the elite of society to come through the ranks. Thence they practice a perverted type of democracy.
They smile a lot but do nothing.
Comment by homeboy — May 11, 2010 @ 7:45 PM |
To date SUPP and BN Sarawak have not declared their stance on the ban by the Minister of Home on the use of Allah by Christians in all their religious publications and church services in Bahasa Malaysia language. The Pakatan coalition has strongly condemned the action of Hishammuddin for disallowing Christians to use Allah when referring to God in Bahasa Malaysia, our national language. PAS in living to its universal Islamic values and principles has publicly declare the word Allah is Arabic and not exclusive to Muslim and that other faiths can use the word when referring to God.
Hence SUPP’s contention that DAP supported PAS Islamic state is yet another “berita lama”. PAS in Kelantan has prudently applied true Islamic values into their governance and received great admiration and support from non-Muslims living in Kelantan. It is a known fact that PAS has also given out development fund to Churches, Temples and the largest Buddhist Temple is built in the state of Kelantan.
To all Malaysians even with the simplest of minds they will have full faith instinctively that PAS, a coalition of Pakatan, a party that adheres to true Islamic values and principles is a party that Christians and other non-Muslims can trust compared to UMNO.
SUPP asks, “Who can protect the Christians better?”. It is so obvious to all Christians that the party that banned the use of Allah is the party that has no respect for the freedom of worship. And the parties like SUPP and other BN coalition which never protested over the ruling are obviously endorsing the action of UMNO for imposing the ban. Nik Aziz the spiritual guru of PAS had publicly declared that it is not wrong for Christians to use Allah when referring to God in our national langauge.
PKR, DAP and PAS had collective condemned UMNO’s action in banning the use of Allah by Christians but SUPP and all BN component parties in Sarawak had never ever protested. Who is SUPP trying to fool now by asking who could protect the Christians better and also challenging DAP to state their stance on PAS Islamic state? Malaysians in Sarawak and Christians in particular are not stupid and cannot be fooled by SUPP or BN Sarawak.
Comment by Mata Kuching — May 11, 2010 @ 7:06 PM |
If not for the big ‘Buaya’ putih, Georgie is zilch!
SUPP is headed for doomsday, has lost its relevance, enmeshed in UMNO, PBB credo and doing self-abuse.
You reckon soup buaya is palatable?!
Comment by Watcha — May 11, 2010 @ 10:41 AM |