Malaysia’s first buy-election (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
And this was when the Pakatan Rakyat people said I was opposed to a change in government. I never said do not change the government, as what I was accused of saying. What I said was just changing the government would not see change unless we can accept the entire concept and full package of change. Changing the government without a revolutionary paradigm shift is merely old wine in a new bottle.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Free fishing nets for fishermen and annual good service incentive for taxi drivers are part of the Penang Pakatan manifesto.
(Free Malaysia Today) – Pakatan Rakyat will give away two free fishing nets annually, one worth RM400 to RM500, to each onshore fisherman in Penang if it gains another mandate to rule the state. In a similar move, Pakatan is also throwing goodies to taxi drivers as well by giving them RM600 annually as a good service incentive.
All these promises will feature in the state Pakatan manifesto scheduled to be launched at Hotel Vistana in Bayan Baru on April 15. Pakatan and PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim is scheduled to grace the event as the guest-of-honour.
In announcing this today, DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said between 5,000 and 6,000 fishermen and registered taxi drivers in the state would benefit from the programme. “These are ‘peek’ information on our manifesto,” he told a press conference at Wisma DAP. Among Pakatan state leaders present were DAP chief Chow Kon Yeow and PKR vice-chairman Abdul Halim Hussain.
All this while, Lim said successive state governments, including his Pakatan administration, have not carried out any welfare programmes to benefit these groups because those economic sectors were under the federal purview. He said Pakatan planned to give away the gifts because it did not want these groups to be marginalised and sidelined from state welfare benefits any longer.
He believes Pakatan’s gestures if implemented would be an incentive booster for both the fishery and tourism sectors. He clarified that taxi drivers would be all those who come under the universal understanding of taxis, which would include hired cars and airport limousines as well.
If re-elected, he said, Pakatan would disburse the goodies correctly to only registered taxi drivers and active fishermen. Under Lim’s administration, cash gifts were given out to senior citizens, single mothers, disabled persons and even for death.
*************************************
It depends on how you want to look at it. Malaysia’s 13th General Election is either the first Presidential Election between Najib Tun Razak and Anwar Ibrahim or it is the first buy-election where both sides are buying votes.
In the past, the buying was very one-sided. It would normally be the government or Barisan Nasional buying the votes. Today, both sides are doing it. In that sense, Malaysia has finally achieved a two-party system.
In fact, this is quite true — that we are seeing the emergence of a two-party system. For the first time in history, Pakatan Rakyat has a real and genuine chance of forming the new federal government. This has never happened in the past. Today, even the top bosses in Barisan Nasional admit that there is a clear and present danger that the ruling party may actually lose power.
The bad thing about this is that the top bosses in Pakatan Rakyat know this. In fact, even the taxi drivers and vegetable sellers in the market know this. And because of this Pakatan Rakyat and its supporters have turned arrogant and over-confident while those from Barisan Nasional have become very worried and extremely cautious.
Arrogance and over-confidence is bad. It causes you to make mistakes. Very worried and extremely cautious is good. You never take things for granted.
If I were asked how I would rate the chances, I would say that Pakatan Rakyat has a chance of winning 95-100 Parliament seats. It also has a chance of retaining Kelantan and Penang but with a slightly reduced majority in both federal and state seats.
Barisan Nasional can win 80-82 Parliament seats in West Malaysia and 30-35 in East Malaysia. The ‘non-aligned’ parties from East Malaysia can sweep about 12-15 seats with about 10-12 going to DAP (from the current two).
For all intents and purposes, we are going to see a hung-parliament of sorts with the ‘third force’, if I may be permitted to call it that, deciding who gets to form the federal government.
Selangor, Perak, Sabah and Negeri Sembilan are, at this point of time, a 50:50 situation (as are the 13 Wilayah Persekutuan Parliament seats where it is 7:6 in Pakatan Rakyat’s favour from currently 10:3). These four states can go either way and there are just too many ‘internal factors’ from both sides that will determine the outcome (selection of candidates being one main factor).
And that is why I say Malaysia, at last, is seeing a two-party system emerging with the third force being the kingmaker.
Is that good?
Well, it depends on your Christmas wish. If you wish to see Barisan Nasional retain power with a two-thirds (or close to two-thirds) majority then it is not good. If you wish to see Pakatan Rakyat take over then it is also not good. But if you want to see a balance of power with no one political grouping having absolute power then it will definitely be good.
If you can remember what I wrote soon after the 2008 General Election regarding a two-party system and a unity government (which the majority of you profusely opposed) then you can see that the last scenario would be very palatable to me.
If you can remember why I mooted the idea of the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) in 2010 and why we launched the ‘Independent Candidates Initiative’ (targeted at a minimum of 10 and a maximum of 30 candidates), and which also many of you profusely opposed, you will also see that the last scenario would be very palatable to me.
Unfortunately, the two-party system, the unity government, the Independent Candidates Initiative, etc., all did not go down well with the majority of you. In fact, the top leadership of Pakatan Rakyat made it very clear that they would not support all these ideas. To add insult to injury, they even said that Barisan Nasional was behind MCLM and that the objective was to trigger three-corner fights to help Barisan Nasional win the election.
I could see that not many could accept new ideas when they feel that Barisan Nasional is finished and that Pakatan Rakyat is poised to take over. Why the need for new ideas when you have practically won the fight? Only if you do not win do you need new ideas on how to win.
No doubt, everyone is talking about change. However, to most people, change merely means changing the government. I do not disagree with changing the government. Hell, even here in the UK I became a member of the opposition party and voted opposition so that we could see a change in government. But what I was trying to impress upon Malaysians was that change means more than just changing the government. Change needs to come in a bigger package than just changing the government.
And this was when the Pakatan Rakyat people said I was opposed to a change in government. I never said do not change the government, as what I was accused of saying. What I said was just changing the government would not see change unless we can accept the entire concept and full package of change. Changing the government without a revolutionary paradigm shift is merely old wine in a new bottle.
But that argument was lost on most people. Hence what I needed to do was to sit back and allow the 13th General Election to play itself out. One of the issues I raised that needed addressing to avoid three-corner fights, inter-party bickering, intra-party bickering, internal sabotage, and so on, was by deciding on the seat allocation and choice of candidates early and not at the eleventh hour.
Today, we are seeing the logic in that appeal we made to Pakatan Rakyat and I really need say no more about the matter.
If the 13th General Election is going to be decided by who can promise the voters more and better gifts and handouts, then we are still a long way away from change. The ‘future’ that we are talking about and fighting for is all about how much money we are going to receive. How long would that money last? Even if it is RM10,000 per voter or per Malaysian is that going to guarantee us a good future?
I am 62. Most of you who are nearing that age will know that at that age we are concerned about our health. Can I be assured of a good healthcare system to look after me until I reach the age of 77 or 82 (if I get to live that long)?
I am a grandfather of five grandchildren and maybe by the time I die I will have 10 or more grandchildren. Will my grandchildren receive the best education to help them survive in a borderless and globalised world?
Malaysia is badly divided racially with a serious problem of religious intolerance. Is Malaysia’s political culture conducive to improving this ethnic and religious divide or does it, in fact, make the problem worse?
Malaysians live in gated communities with security guards patrolling the neighbourhood and iron bars on their doors and windows. They also face the risk of their handbags being snatched as they drive on the highways or walk on the streets. Are you happy with Malaysia’s security situation?
Malaysia’s election fraud plus election violence is beginning to make the country look like one of the tin-pot regimes. How many of you are going to leave town or are going to lock yourselves in your homes on Polling Day on 5th May in case we see another ‘May 13’?
Those are the issues close to my heart alongside good governance, transparency, accountability, eradicating corruption and abuse of power, and so on. And RM10,000 to vote for any particular party is not going to see these issues resolved.
And while we can certainly blame Barisan Nasional and Umno’s 56 years rule for all these problems, Pakatan Rakyat needs to convince us that a change of government is definitely going to see these problems get resolved.
Our worry should not be about winning the election. Our worry should be about what would we do if we do win the election. That is when the work really begins. To most of you, however, winning the election is not when the work begins but when the problems end.
And that is what concerns me because once we make our bed we will have to lie in it.
*******************************************
大馬史上第一個‘買賣選舉’
就此事上，民聯支持者說我反對換政府。這是絕對的誣賴，我從來沒說過我反對換政府，我說的是，只是換政府是做不到真正的改變的。如果我們只是換政府而不是做出革命性的典範轉移那這一切只是新瓶裝舊酒。
原文：Raja Petra Kamarudin
譯文：方宙
免費漁網與年度計程車司機良好服務獎勵是檳城民聯大選宣言内的項目
(Free Malaysia Today) – 民聯宣佈，如果他們保住檳州政權，他們將會每年發放兩個價值400-500馬幣的漁網給州内漁民和600馬幣服務獎勵給州内的計程車司機。
（下文省略）
*************************************
視乎你的個人詮釋，此次大選可以是納吉和安華的首相之爭，也可以是大馬史上第一個‘買賣選舉’，因爲雙方都使盡全力來買票。
在過去，買票是政府/囯陣一方的作爲，但如今這已是雙方的。所以某個層面上，馬來西亞可以説是達成了兩綫制。
這是蠻正確的；我們現在看到的是兩黨制的崛起。現今，反對黨有史以來第一次真正地有出綫的機會。連囯陣上層的頭目們都承認他們面對的是很真實的危機，是有可能讓他們倒臺的危機。
不好的是，民聯的領導人也知道這一點（其實就連巴刹的賣菜阿姨們都知道），而這恰巧會讓民聯和他們的支持者變得目中無人和過於自信。相對的，囯陣就變得很擔憂而步步爲營。
目中無人和過於自信是不好的，因爲你會因此而犯錯。而擔憂而步步爲營是好的，因爲你不會指望不勞而獲。
如果你問我民聯的贏面，我會說他們有機會贏得95-100 個囯席。他們也會保住吉蘭丹和檳城，但總體的支持率會稍微下降。囯陣則會贏得80-82西馬囯席和30-35東馬囯席；東馬的12-15席會落入獨立黨派手裏，而剩下的10-12席則會由行動黨勝出（行動黨現在只贏得2席）。
若上述屬實，我們將會看到一個懸吊的國會，而那個‘第三勢力’（請容許我這麽稱呼）將會決定哪個黨會成爲執政黨。
雪蘭莪，霹靂，沙巴和森美蘭現階段還是處於50-50的狀態（聯邦直轄區也將由以往的民聯10：3囯陣變成現在的民聯7：6囯陣）。其他的四個州屬都有可能落入任何一方，因爲雙方都有太多的内在因數左右這四個州屬的選票去向（候選人為其中一個因數）。
這就是爲什麽我講説馬來西亞終于迎來了兩綫制，而第三勢力終于擡頭成爲造王者。
這是好事壞事呢？
這要看你到底要的是什麽。如果你要的是囯陣取囘2/3的多數權，或民聯入位得權，那對你來講不是件好事。但如果你要的是一個平衡的政治，沒有一方專權，那這絕對是件好事。
如果你還記得我在08年大選后寫的“兩綫制和聯合政府”的文章（你們很多人都吐嘈這個理念），那你應該知道后者才是我的杯中茶。
如果你還記得我在2010年提出的建立 ‘Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM，此譯馬來西亞國民自由運動) ’和‘獨立人選倡議’ （提倡至少有10-30名獨立候選人上陣），那你也一定更清楚后者才是我的杯中茶。
很無奈的，兩綫制、聯合政府、 獨立人選倡議都不是你們要的東西。民聯還表明得很清楚他們絕對不會支持我的提議。他們甚至還往我的傷口上灑鹽，散播囯陣是 MCLM的幕後老闆，且MCLM嘗試在大選中提倡三角戰來使囯陣獲勝。
我看得出來，沒有很多人願意接受這個新的理念，尤其是儅他們認爲囯陣已‘玩完’而民聯接手在即，那我又何必再提出一個新的理念呢？一個人只有在要失敗時才會提出新理念。
很多人是會談到改變，但他們眼中的改變只是改變政府，而這是我所不贊成的。雖然說在英國這邊我爲了要換政府而加入英國反對黨，但我真正要給馬來西亞人民的思想是改變不止是換政府這麽狹隘的，而是比換政府還要重大得多的。
就此事上，民聯支持者說我反對換政府。這是絕對的誣賴，我從來沒說過我反對換政府，我說的是，只是換政府是做不到真正的改變的。如果我們只是換政府而不是做出革命性的典范转移那這一切只是新瓶裝舊酒。
很不幸的，很多人都聼不明白我的論點。所以我現在只能靜觀這屆大選的結果。但我還是想強調，只有趁早圈定上陣區與候選人，（民聯）才可以避免三角戰、黨内紛爭、跨黨紛爭、自相扯後腿等問題。
我希望今天你們可以看到我對民聯的呼籲的邏輯，而我真的無需再重復了。
如果說第13屆大選的輸贏是看誰能夠答應給更多禮物與糖果的話，那我們離改變還有很長的一段路。我們所謂的‘未來’是取決於我們會收到多少錢，但那筆錢會持續多久呢？請問在發放給每位選民1万塊錢后，我們的未來是否會更好呢？
我今年62嵗，如果你和我差不多的話你會很關注你的健康問題。我現在是否有自信，儅我77或82嵗時（如果我有如此長命的話）我國將會擁有良好的醫療系統來照顧我呢？
我現在是5個孫子的爺爺，而有可能我死的時候我會是10個孫子的爺爺。我關心的是，我的孫子孫女們會不會得到最好的教育以便能在現今這無國界的世界裏生存呢？
大馬是個種族間隔很濶的國家，也是個宗教相容很差的國家。請問，大馬的政治文化將會改善這些情況還是會把它們弄得越來越糟呢？
許多大馬人都住在有保衛亭保護的住宅區，他們都依靠警衛巡邏和都裝上鐵窗。無論他們是駕駛在高速公路上還是走在人行道上他們都面臨著被搶奪包包的危險。你是否對大馬治安感到滿意？
馬來西亞的大選舞弊與選舉暴力使大馬逐漸邁向獨裁囯，你們當中有誰因害怕這個5月5號會成爲另一個‘513事件’而決定離開居住地/鎖緊大門呢？
還有很多其他課題，如管理，透明，貪污，濫權等，這些都不會因我們爲了那1万塊錢而投而就會解決的。
在我們責備囯陣在56年掌權期間令國家問題叢生時，民聯應該説服我們，令我們相信在換政府以後他們會根治這些問題。
我們的憂慮不是贏得大選，而是贏了大選以後我們應該怎樣做。贏了大選以後才是我們做功課的開端，但對你們很多人來説贏了大選不是開始工作的開端，而是問題的結束。
一旦我們安好床位以後，我們就得睡在那張床上，這就是最令我最爲擔心的。
