Fixed deposits? No, Pakatan considers Indians as liabilities!
Najib and his administration have been rolling out initiative after initiative for the Indian community in quick succession over the past few years. It therefore came as no surprise that a recent poll showed that 74 per cent of Indians now back Najib.
PM Sivalingam
I refer to M. Manoharan’s article in Malaysiakini on 27 February 2013, titled ‘Indian M’sians are nobody’s fixed deposit’
I couldn’t agree more with M Manoharan when he says Malaysian Indians are nobody’s ‘fixed deposit’. The Indians have a mind of their own and have the wisdom to evaluate the claims and promises of BN and Pakatan Rakyat. I also agree with him that they will exercise their votes judicially in GE-13.
But I couldn’t DISAGREE more with him when he claims to know the Indian mind. He gives them no credit when he says Najib’s plans for the community are not being appreciated. Najib and his administration have been rolling out initiative after initiative for the Indian community in quick succession over the past few years. It therefore came as no surprise that a recent poll showed that 74 per cent of Indians now back Najib.
If Manoharan wants more evidence, he need look no further than the Unity Pongal celebrations organised by MIC at Dataran Merdeka last month. A record crowd of 120,000 attended the function where Prime Minister Najib was also present. That was an historic occasion, by any measure. Dataran had never before seen such a large crowd for any event, before or since independence. The rapturous roars that greeted Najib’s speech spoke volumes about how Indian support was returning to Najib, MIC and BN.
The crowds came from the length and breadth of the peninsula. Numbers like that don’t lie, but people like Manoharan do when they claim otherwise.
Indians in droves are giving the thumbs up for Najib. Indians, in equal numbers, are abandoning the Pakatan. In 2008, Indians thought their future would be safe with Pakatan but four years later their interests have not been promoted by any of Pakatan-ruled states.
Instead, whatever they had had, were taken away. See what happened in Kampung Buah Pala in Penang in 2009. When Anwar failed the residents, it was Najib who came to their rescue. The Selangor State government has destroyed seven temples, and grants to Tamil schools have been nominal at best, compared to the large contributions by Najib.
If more proof is needed about the marginalisation of Indians by Pakatan, look no further than the Pakatan Rakyat convention in Shah Alam a few days ago when the coalition unveiled its manifesto.
On the main stage during this political facade, not a single Indian was present. There were no place even for the handful of Indians leaders within the opposition coalition. There was no room in the proverbial Inn even for Manoharan, a State Assemblyman in Selangor.
If the Indian leaders can be so rebuffed, what chance does the average Indian have for his grievances to be heard?
It’s not difficult to understand Pakatan leaders’ aversion to Indian causes. Pakatan is reluctant to be drawn into a position where they may feel obliged to give equal billing to Indians, alongside their dominant ethnic communities.
It is therefore in the interest of these dominant communities to keep Indians at arms’ length. So, the Indians are not Pakatan’s ‘fixed deposit’. They must therefore be permanent liabilities.
