Pakatan’s shadow cabinet

It’s long overdue, I would say. Finally, Pakatan Rakyat comes up with a shadow cabinet, something I reckon they should have done eons ago, especially considering the fact that Anwar once proposed to take over the government, and also the fact that they have a total of 80+ representatives in the Parliament.

The full list, in table form can be found on Nat’s blog HERE.

I will not comment much on the appointments, as I don’t know enough of the strengths of most of the MPs. However, I do think that having Fong Po Kuan in the Ministry for Women, Family and Community Development seems to be a good idea, as from what I’ve heard and seen, she’s a strong voice, and that’s precisely what we need at this time.

I find Zulkifli Nordin’s inclusion in the shadow cabinet rather unsettling, given his previous track record of storming into the Bar Council debate. I also find it difficult to understand why till this day he has not been met with any punishment from the party, even though it has been reported time and again that the Discipline Committee is supposed to meet with him and decide on what they would do with regards to the same event mentioned. PKR would do well to remember and keep in mind that not all people are ardent supporters, and not all of us have short memories.

There is also something else that I find rather odd. Previously I had always imagined that PR’s shadow cabinet would be something similar to the Cabinet we have in power today. After all, that’s what shadows are supposed to be. So I’m not quite sure of the reason behind them choosing one representative from each party to take part, so to speak, in each ministry.

Perhaps one out of the three would be named Minister, and the other two would be Deputies, should the time come that they truly take over the reins. I don’t know. I’m just saying, I find it odd.

Postscript/Correction: Just read that it is in fact not a shadow cabinet, but shadow ministerial committees that are being formed. Read HERE. So if what’s being formed are ‘committees’ as such, then I guess it makes a little more sense.

I’m reminded, however, of a quote I read somewhere: A committee is a group of people who individually can do nothing but collectively meet and decide that nothing can be done.

Just being cheeky. =)

*

Still. Great to know that Pakatan Rakyat is finally getting along to doing something. It’s a start.

Now let’s see those shadow cabinets ministerial committees really work.

On electricity generation and global warming

It has been a long time since I’ve last followed the Parliament sessions live online. So this morning, I decided to have a look at what they have planned for the Parliament session today. In actual fact, I was looking to see if they would be debating on the review of the ISA. I did not find that listed for today’s schedule, but I did find the following, which is targeted at the Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water:

“Bahawa Dewan ini mengambil maklum bahawa pemanasan dunia kini berada dalam keadaan yang kritikal dan salah satu daripada penyumbang kepada keadaan ini adalah penjanaan tenaga elektrik. Dan mengambil maklum bahawa bekalan bahan bakar bagi penjanaan kuasa elektrik juga semakin berkurangan“

THAT this House takes into account that global warming is now at a critical stage and that one of the contributors to this situation is the generation of electric energy. And takes into account that fuel supply for the generation of electric energy is also diminishing.

I had found this statement very encouraging, because I was starting to feel like Malaysia is not taking the issue of sustainability and energy efficiency seriously enough. But I was to be deeply disappointed immediately after, because the paragraph that follows is:

Dan mengambil maklum bahawa keperluan bekalan elektrik di negara ini juga kian meningkat dan peningkatan ini sebahagian besar disebabkan oleh pembaziran tenaga elektrik, di mana lampu, kipas dan pendingin udara dipasang walaupun tidak diperlukan. Dan mengambil maklum bahawa isu ini dalah isu global tetapi dapat diselesaikan secara lokal di mana setiap orang mempunyai peranan untuk mengurangkan pembaziran tenaga elektrik dan sekali gus mengurangkan punca pencemaran dan pemanasan dunia. Maka dengan ini dewan hendaklah mengambil ketetapan untuk meminta Kerajaan menggubal satu dasar atau pun undang-undang bagi mendakwa dan menghukum mereka yang sengaja membazirkan tenaga elektrik. Ketetapan juga haruslah diambil untuk memastikan semua ketua Jabatan Kerajaan, Agensi Kerajaan dan syarikat berkaitan kerajaan bertanggungjawab untuk mengurangkan pembaziran tenaga elektrik ini dan dimuatkan sebagai salah satu daripada kriteria indeks petunjuk prestasi mereka.

And takes into account that the need for electricity supply in this country is increasing and this increase is caused in most part by the wasting of electric energy, where lights, fans and air-conditioners are turned on even when not needed. And takes into account that this issue is a global issue but can be solved locally where every one has a role to reduce waste of electric energy and hence reducing the source of pollution and global warming. Therefore this House takes this step to ask that the Government enact an act or a law to sue/bring to court and punish those who waste electric energy on purpose. Steps also have to be taken to ensure that all heads of Government bodies, Government agencies and Government-related companies take responsibility to reduce waste of electric energy and is made one of the criteria of their performance index.

I don’t know if there are actually people who would ‘waste electricity on purpose’, because it’s not like electricity is free. So for whatever that they are wasting, they have to pay extra.

Granted, there are people who are less conscious, or conscientious, about these things, because electricity comes ‘relatively cheap’.

But is enacting a law that allows these people to be brought to court and punished the way to go about global warming? Is reducing waste of electricity through turning on less fans, lights and air-conditioners going to reduce the amount of pollution and global warming?

I don’t think so.

With the parliamentarian bringing up this issue of energy being wasted, perhaps it is also a good idea to look at it at a bigger scale. Let’s not talk about fans and lights and air-cons. Of course, these little things are important. All of us have a role to play.

But in the larger scale of things, shouldn’t we also be looking at the technology that is available to us today, and see if they are energy efficient? Are they using whatever energy that is provided to them to the best of their capacity?

And then of course, there are the electricity generators. Are they generating the maximum amount of energy? What ratio is energy produced to energy wasted at any one particular electricity generation plant?

What about the machines that we use on a daily basis? How efficient are our refrigerators, or our air-conditioners? How much energy do they use up, compared to the amount of energy they produce? And are there any benefits being introduced to the manufacturing companies to invest into R&D so that they can come up with more and more efficient machines?

And then there is green technology. It’s even part of the Ministry’s name. But what are we as a nation doing in terms of introducing Green Technology? Do we have any team of people researching in ways to expand the use of solar technology, which we get plenty of every day of the year? Are we investing in producing clean energy, rather than burning fossil fuels to produce electricity?

Do we actually have green technology in Malaysia?

*

These are probably the questions that I would ask if given the chance.

That there is actually a suggestion to enact a law as that mentioned above is rather beyond me. There are so many other issues concerning energy efficiency and tackling global warming, I would have thought that a law like that would be last on their minds.

“Bahawa Dewan ini mengambil maklum bahawa pemanasan dunia kini

berada dalam keadaan yang kritikal dan salah satu daripada penyumbang

kepada keadaan ini adalah penjanaan tenaga elektrik. Dan mengambil

maklum bahawa bekalan bahan bakar bagi penjanaan kuasa elektrik juga

semakin berkurangan.

Dan mengambil maklum bahawa keperluan bekalan elektrik di negara ini

juga kian meningkat dan peningkatan ini sebahagian besar disebabkan

oleh pembaziran tenaga elektrik, di mana lampu, kipas dan pendingin

udara dipasang walaupun tidak diperlukan. Dan mengambil maklum

bahawa isu ini adalah isu global tetapi dapat diselesaikan secara lokal di

mana setiap orang mempunyai peranan untuk mengurangkan pembaziran

tenaga elektrik dan sekali gus mengurangkan punca pencemaran dan

pemanasan dunia. Maka dengan ini dewan hendaklah mengambil

ketetapan untuk meminta Kerajaan menggubal satu dasar atau pun

undang-undang bagi mendakwa dan menghukum mereka yang sengaja

membazir tenaga elektrik. Ketetapan juga haruslah diambil untuk

memastikan semua ketua Jabatan Kerajaan, Agensi Kerajaan dan syarikat berkaitan kerajaan bertanggungjawab untuk mengurangkan

pembaziran tenaga elektrik ini dan dimuatkan sebagai salah satu daripada

kriteria indeks petunjuk prestasi mereka.”

Some food for thought

I’ve come across several articles by several people that are very interesting, and provide much food for thought. They present, in their own way, several questions that I think are worth pondering, and maybe brought up for discussion.

On 1Malaysia, Hafidz Baharom, The Malaysian Insider:

Just what exactly is the meaning and definition of the “1 Malaysia” concept that our dearly beloved Prime Minister has been promoting since his elevation to office?

[...] The Prime Minister also states, on record, that the 1 Malaysia concept is the guideline on how to achieve “bangsa Malaysia”, which translates into English as a “Malaysian race”.

Now I’m just wondering while reading the Hansard, just how many DAP stalwarts perked up, and how many government MPs frowned?

Besides, is this not an objective for the DAP?

The full article goes on the compare the ‘meaning’ of the 1Malaysia concept as explained by our Prime Minister in Parliament, with Sun Yat Sen’s Three Principles Doctrine. His thoughts are interesting.

*

On Equality, Marina Mahathir, RantingsbyMM:

As Barack Obama himself says, while he benefited from affirmative action, it doesn’t mean that his daughters should also benefit from it. Obviously they are growing up in a very different environment from their parents so they can make it on their own. While the need for affirmative action remains in the US, it now needs to be a needs-based one, that is, one that is aimed at anyone from poor backgrounds, regardless of race. This would still mostly benefit African-Americans because they are still the poorest but would also cover Hispanics, Asian-Americans and also poor whites. (And if anyone is making comparisons with our situation here, it might be useful to remember that the NEP started off as a needs-based affirmative action programme meant for anyone who was poor.)

I think it is interesting that Marina brought up the NEP in this instance. I am one who believes that the NEP started with noble intentions back in those days. A good deal of what is being discussed today is not so much what it was intended to do, but how it has skewed from its initial goal, and the pitfalls that have ensued from there.

It is also interesting to note that although affirmative action in the US is now a needs-based one, it is widely known that the ones who would benefit most would still be African Americans. I think if the NEP were to be reviewed and restructured so as to be needs-based and not race-based (as it was initially intended, according to what Marina wrote), it will still be the rural Malays who will form the majority of the beneficiaries.

The full article includes also gender equality.

*

On Bahasa Malaysia, Dzof Azmi, The Star Online:

We cannot deny that those who support a pro-Bahasa Melayu agenda are themselves Malay. Why should that be? Where are the other segments of Malaysian society in this debate? After all, this is our national language, and any argument that purports to be about saving that element of our national culture should involve all Malaysians. Even the Ministry of Information, Communicate and Culture talks about a “Bangsa Malaysia” in its Vision Statement. Bahasa Melayu isn’t just for the Malays.

I’m waiting for those of other races to stand up and say we should value our national language, and we should be proud to be able to communicate, converse and – yes – teach in it.

Incidentally, he starts his article with this statement:  If we are serious about moving towards a ‘Bangsa Malaysia’, then any argument about saving our national language should involve all Malaysians.

I would find no reason to disagree with him.

In the full article he goes on to say that he think we should be fluent in both Bahasa Malaysia and English. Again, I agree whole-heartedly.

*

On Separating Muslims and non-Muslims right from ‘Hello’, Dr Azmi Sharom, The Star Online:

I’m sure you’ve noticed, it’s never just “Assalamualaikum”, it is almost always “Assalamualaikum dan selamat sejahtera”.

Even when we greet each other, it is as a divided people. “Hey for you Muslims out there; I wish you all peace. And for everyone else; I wish you well being, man”!

Why do we do this?

I’ve been asking myself the same question for quite some time. Indeed, I’ve been asking myself the same question since they started doing this during school assemblies.

We used to greet teachers when we met them in the corridors, or when they entered the class, with “Selamat Pagi”, or “Selamat Petang”. During assemblies, Muslim teachers greeted us with “Assalamualaikum”, non-Muslim teachers with the same “Selamat Pagi/Petang”. There also used to be no doa during assembly.

Then they introduced “Selamat Sejahtera”. I think that was when I was in Form 2, which would be the year 2000 1999 2000 (I seem to keep on mixing up my years..).

With “Selamat Sejahtera”, it relieved me of the momentary fear of not knowing morning from afternoon from evening every time I met a teacher while walking the halls of my school, which was very often.

But with it, came the “Assalamualaikum dan selamat sejahtera”, and the morning doa during assembly which even I could repeat (with some degree of accuracy, but without understanding an iota of it) after some time. As the Muslim students would say Ameen after every line of doa being recited, the non-Muslim students would just be standing there idly, but respectfully quiet, and with their heads (most of them, anyway) bent down.

As for me? I was in the office, handling the PA system. But I digress.

The full article has a humurous touch, but I think it addresses just how deep the divisions have cut into our society today.

Sharizat on Penan investigation: “We’ll look into it”

From the Nut Graph HERE:

KUALA LUMPUR, 18 June 2009: The government is still unwilling to commit to making public the Penan task force report.

Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil continued to be noncommittal when she was asked about the findings of a task force that was set up to investigate reports of sexual violations against Penan girls and women.

“We will look into it,” Shahrizat said, when quizzed during a press conference in Parliament today.

After such a long time, the answer is still “We will look into it”?

To refresh the memory. What happened was that there were allegations that the Penan women and children were being raped by loggers from the logging companies nearby. Apparently, some of these incidents happened when the loggers were supposed to be transporting the young girls to school, but instead brought them some place else and raped them. This has caused much distress and even a few pregnancies.

Those were the allegations.

Then came the denials. Some people (read: politicians) said that there were people out to smear the good name of the state of Sarawak. They said that there was no proof, no evidence, and so none of this ever happened. They said that the Penan community never complained about any of this ever happening, and so couldn’t possibly have happened.

The investigation was carried out some time after public pressure became a little too much for the Ministry to sit and do nothing. The investigation concluded, and the report sent to the Ministry in December.

Asking what has happened from then till now is more like asking what has NOT happened.

There is something not right here. Why is the Ministry so unwilling to expose the findings of the investigation? To whose benefit is it to keep the findings secret?

Comments on this blog

A few days ago, there were several comments, 3 to be exact, that were posted on this blog, under this post HERE. Scroll down to find them under the handles vesewe, miya, and coolooc.

When I read these comments, I was left considerably shaken. I do not agree with the type of language used, nor do I appreciate the kind of vulgarity being so generously used on one particular ethnicity.

However, I decided to allow those comments in the end, because I had not explicitly noted on this blog that certain comments would be censored.

Now, I was prepared to actually ‘let them off the hook’, so to speak. Somehow I think that it’s inevitable that we have certain characters who are adamant about remaining small-minded, and refuse to engage in meaningful dialogue and debate. So I was actually willing to ‘give some space’ to these characters, with hopes that this kind of thinking will die a natural death.

But when I found out that coolooc’s comment on this blog was an exact replica of one that was left on THIS blog, I realised that what I had initially (perhaps also rather naively) believed to be a genuine (albeit irrational) outburst is actually not as simple as it seems. I am not one to indulge in conspiracy theories, but perhaps there really ARE people who are just out to spread ill-will and hatred.

With this, I think I am going to put my foot down, and say that from here on, comments that are aimed or targeted at insulting ANY group of people will be deleted from its existence on this blog.

Comments that run counter to my own opinions and views have always been welcome, and I still welcome such comments with an open mind.

*

Postscript #1: I have grouped the three different comments from my previous post because they were posted within minutes of each other, and with the same IP address.

Postscript #2: Perhaps this posting reveals my naivete when it comes to dealing with the ‘big bad world’, but that’s me. I’ll learn as I go. 

Postscript #3: If there is any feedback regarding my decision to filter incoming comments, whether you think it is a good or bad decision, please do leave me a comment. It is much appreciated.