Tuesday, August 16, 2011

The Turning Wheel of Democracy: The story behind the scenes of the NO to Tmn Kemuncak Land Conversion Campaign-

Kah Woh was first engaged by Teresa on the issue, at a breakneckingly swift speed when she first found out about the planning application. Kah Woh was also rather expedient in the speed in which he drafted the petition introduction. The momentum was carried on almost at the speed of professional pressure groups and the efficiency of seasoned lobbyist, by Teresa, under the support and assistance of many more local residents.

At this juncture, there were some very bold, yet underhanded political maneuverings made by certain quarters, in an attempt to ‘hijack’ the issue in claiming it their own. I shall remain cryptic on this issue as those who understands what I’m writing here, can have a little chuckle at the failure of those undignified and cheeky attempts, at seeking glory without contribution.

This was when I had the privilege of meeting with Teresa, when I was immediately touched by her sincerity, assertiveness and focused manner. Moreover, it was the underlying modesty behind her courageous actions that made me work harder with her in making the petition-signing and submission a success.

Signatures came in like hot cakes, and the petition was on track for a respectable number well ahead of schedule. More importantly, what started off as 3-4 letters sent to specific addresses, in the space of 10 days or so, had transformed in to the hot topic discussed by everyone in the entire Ipoh Garden East. Those who knew about it were talking about it; and those who didn’t know about were more than likely being told about it. So, hats off to those who were involved in the dissemination of the message; a big thank you to those did the leg work of canvassing door to door for signatures; and heartfelt acknolwedgements to the likes of Teresa, Alan, Rajiv who kicked off the debate initially.

Like many operators within political folds, I have a multitude of opinions on most topics ad issues I come across. They normally conflict, which is great for academic and political purposes, as it presents the decision making mechanisms more choice, not to mention an ‘objectivity cushion’ for the debater to bounce around unscathed . This availability of choice though, does become a burden upon one’s own conscience and peace of mind as it become very difficult to decide upon a personal stance when the issue at hand affects one’s own life.

It can be said that I’m one of the many affected residents and my wife and I live in Taman Perak. As usual, I can see the many positive arguments and negative arguments in allowing or disallowing the planning application. Sometime, when deliberating within my own on an definitive stance on an issue, my mind goes off on very crazy tangents and almost always end up maiing some kind of political point out of the issue at hand…. (can’t guarantee this won’t happen hereJ)

Before I share with you my vote on the issue, I’d just like to share with you some of my thoughts thorugh my insignificant involvement in getting the ball rolling with the NO campaign...

The main arguments bouncing around the walls of Kopitiams, as well as on the wall of the facebook group is that the residents don’t want to ‘live near the dead’, or ‘be near a place full of death’. Others are citing their dissatisfaction towards the prospective increase in traffic into the area, in the case of the proposal being realized. Some are speculating the drop in the value of their property and others’ in the area if and when the colambarium/crematorium is built.

All of the above are valid arguments against the application. I wouldn’t say any of them are particular strong arguments, but nonetheless, they are how the residents feel and that’s that. A vote by a big strong muscular healthy man, isn’t any more or less of a vote than a skinny, short and fat and ill man. In fact, by going down that chain of thought, the needn’t even be a reason for one’s support or objection of the application. But I’d like to take this opportunity to articulate my personal reasons.

Here goes;

Despite the fact that the proposed project will affect all houses and shops which happen to be en-route to the proposed site when entering the area from all major routes, only 3-4 house were informed of the application. That to me, as a resident who lives one of several routes that will DEFINITELY be affected in more ways than the obvious increase in traffic, is a blatant disregard of the importance of public consent.

Furthermore, If I’m not mistaken, the city councilor appointed to the area would also have been informed. Why did the residents contact Kah Woh instead of the city councilor for assistance as this is within the remit of the city council? More pressingly, why did the councilor not proactively seek feedback on the issue? And VERY importantly, how do we hold the councilor to account for not performing adequately or sufficiently in the proceedings of pushing for the residents agenda on the matter in hand.

Yes…. Lots of questions, isn’t there? But to me, that’s a good thing.

Insufficiency in the required publicity for planning applications

Yes, I realize that according to the planning regulations and legislations, what has been done is well and legally sufficient. That to me doesn’t give the application any more credence, it simply means tthat there are holes in the current legislations and regulations, and naturally need to be CHANGED.

My suggestion is, for a development (very loosely used term for this situation) of this scale and of such geo-social-political impact and sensitivity, there needs to be a much wider public notice mechanism involved in the consent seeking process. With it being a residential area, and therefore full of lamp-posts, how about having a laminated A4 sheet of paper, with a summary of the application cable tied to one in every 3 lamppost. On said summary, it will include details of how to support or object the application. It’s obvious why it’s better, and how it’s better. Every affected will have a much better chance of findng out, and therefore supporting or objecting the project. Greater transparency, with much better community communications; It’s a win-win proposal.

Yes, it’s a great deal more administration than is legally required by the town and country planning act 1976 but I genuinely feel that it’s absolutely crucial. If it wasn’t for the extremely enthusiastic and assertive, not to mention highly efficient way in which Teresa and her neighbours set the right things in motions and placed it in the hands of the right people, the NO campaign wouldn’t see the support it’s enjoying right now.

Holding councilors to task

The economic system that we live in, dictates that everyone who is financially compensated for a service, duty or task must be held to account for his/her performance. Failing that, would mean individuals being paid to do nothing, or worst still, being paid to do the opposite of what they’re supposed to do. That’s bad in any country!

Politics should be the same as any other profession or sector of service. We claim to live in a democratic system, with the different levels of legislative assemblies and representation. In Ipoh, there’s the Ipoh city council, the the Perak State Assembly, the federal Parliament, and the Upper house of Senate. Sounds like quite a robust system of lawmaking, and public interest assurance right? Let me just make the following points;

  • 1) Ipoh City Councillors are all political appointments.
  • 2) The Perak state assembly is chaired by an unelected individual who got there unconstitutionally, and the state executive(government) started this parliamentary term as opposition and have gotten into power without being re-elected. All in all, pretty unconstitutional!
  • 3) The current head of the current federal government, also didn’t start the current parliamentary cycle as our prime minister. He inherited it from either his father, or Tun Adbullah Badawi, depending on how deep you want to dwell.
  • 4) The upper house of the Federal legislature are also all political appointment.

Not so robust and not so democratic after all, is it? At least not here in Ipoh.

Returning to holding councilors to account, it think it’s unfair to blame the councilor directly and entirely for not doing the job. A big part of it is to do with the system, which allows incompetent individuals to be appointed to play an integral role in serving and representing the residents in matters within the remit of the city council.

The solution is simple: Restore the third vote.

At least, by experiencing the difficulties, it has highlighted things that we can bring to the fore to be discussed and suggested. The outcome of those discussions then will and can be put forward for our elected legislative representatives to propose so for it to be debated, and passed through the legislature to become law….. This is democracy at work!

And oh, If I haven’t made it clear enough, MY VOTE IS A NO to the land use conversion!

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Part 1: a study on the approaches of PDRM and the Metropolitans police

30 days ago, in Kuala Lumpur, tear gas, water cannons, the army, different police units, were deployed under the orders of the government to deter, suppress and ultimately stop an organized, peaceful march organized by civil groups, to highlight irregularities and serious flaws in Malaysia’s electoral system. Weeks leading up to the march, Yellow items of clothing were blanket-ly banned, huge numbers were arrested; on the day itself, water cannons were used, tear gas canisters were thrown into open as well as enclosed spaces, including the compound of a fully functioning hospital to name but a few, but still 50,000 peaceful marchers turned up. Many were injured, one was killed, a message was hopefully sent. No satisfactory answers have been given.

In London 30 days later, what started off being a peaceful protest by a very small group of local residents who were seeking answers to the death of an individual purportedly caused by the police, spiraled out of control. Youths turned rioters and looters, rode on the wave of discontent to instigate a series of anarchistic attacks on buildings and individuals the following night. The third and last night, saw the peak of a three night long crescendo of riots, with 13 different towns and settlements within the greater London area seeing extreme violence in the forms of opportunistic looting, entire blocks of buildings being set on fire, people being physically attacked and robbed… what I’ve mentioned is far from being exhaustive…

What happened?

Regular sirens of ambulances, fire engines and police vehicles maybe part of the standard package in most London hotels; and no doubt is inclusive within the inventory of fixtures and fittings if you choose to rent or buy a property in London. It goes without saying, a heightened awareness of your immediate personal space, and a slightly increase base heartrate (…at all times) , and a needless to mention increased level of tetchiness, confrontational behavior, and fear of something bad happening etc etc etc ar all side effects of living in London.

Maybe I’m being a little doom and gloom here. Surely it can’t be any worse than any capital city?

What about the tolerant, multicultural, multinational, creative, cohesive, expressive and most of all PEACEFUL face of the city of London. All the aforementioned were available by the bucket loads… except for the the very last, capitalized and italisiced face. I, along with I’m sure millions of Brits and otherwise, who live in the UK, and have access to a TV saw scenes unfold that would only previously be seen on TV screens.

But last night, it was for real.

The sirens were loud and unrelenting; the calls by the Met Police acting commissioner to ‘clear the streets’, ‘ask the children to go home’, were spin chilling; the images of burning buildings and hoody’ied youths throwing heavy things against breakable things and looting to boot were scary; and the thought of innocent, law abiding, and until very recently peaceful lives being torn apart right before my eyes, not to mention it being only 4-5 tube stops away from where I was, was nothing nothing short of gut wrenching.

All this aside, what was at the forefront o my mind was an intensely uncomfortable debate unfolding as rapidly as the locations being broken on BBC news 24 to be the next affected by riots.

One side of my mind was asking : Why are water cannons, tear gas and more aggressive, if not more assertive force used? Surely the risk of political fall-out and a few injuries of thugs and criminals are negligible collateral damage to protect the livelihoods of people whose property and possessions are being destroyed, burnt down and looted? It doesn’t matter, how great the greater good is, and what political or social implications might be in stall, suppressing violence with equal force, to make an example of those who have offended is and best strategy for containment and prevention. And more importantly, stopping whats in front of our eyes that is stoppable, is more important that any philosophical argument. Some one’s gotto have the balls to make that call, surely!

How come the Malaysian police used watercannons and tear gas so readily with peaceful protesters, but the Metropolitan police wouldn’t move past the passive tactics which is allowing buildings to be burnt down and peoples’ lives being destroyed?

The other side of my mind was objecting loudly and vehemently: Apart from the political arguments that even the lowest grade of political spin doctors would see and obviously use, it’s a much deeper question at stake here. Firstly, the police needed to contain the situation and prevent it from getting even more widespread that it already has. Countering the violence with more violence would be a louder call-to-arms and more fuel for the ‘fence sitting’ potential anarchists out there, to take that leap of faith and tunr their anger into action. Furthermore, an untouched record of being a tolerant, civilized society who seeks the continuation of peace only thorugh peace, and a sudden U turn to suppress violence with further violence is essentially allowing years, even decades of social and political evolution to go up in flames.

To be continued….

Friday, August 5, 2011

Is our fundamental right to vote a bread and butter issue?


I shan't say much here but I’d like to clarify a few key points after reading this healthy exchange. Whilst I'm all for raising policy issues, as those who have been involved with me will know too well, I feel that it certainly wouldn't hurt in highlighting the failures and ailments that plague and divide our people. I say this with all the sincerity, aiming at all and everyone who sit on both sides in the middle of the divide that is only far too apparent.

I see in your profile that you subscribe to the Liberal democrats of the UK. We share that in common. I remember speaking to Simon Hughes, one of the national leaders of the Lib Dems when he came to help me campaign in the constituency that I was standing in as a candidate. We were discussing the then pending voting system referendum in the UK and he told me this:

The legislature is figurative skull of society, which contains the brain, which can be represented by the elected representatives.

The electoral system is the chest, which houses the lungs. We know that the lungs processes the air that we breath, which is the equivalent of votes cast by the people.

The brain needs the lungs to provide it with oxygen to function; likewise, the lungs need to brain co-ordinate it’s operations. Both need each as much as the other.

I agree, that bread and butter issues need to and must be addressed. As a voter in Canning and Ipoh Timor, I will wait for the correct time, namely the next general election, in voicing with my single vote for each the state and parliament, to express my satisfaction or otherwise of whether or not Kit Siang, Kah Woh and DAP has done their job as elected representatives. Of course I have to take into account that DAP and their PR counterparts were originally elected in as the legitimate government, which was subsequently and illegally sabotaged, so I could only judge them on the basis of them being SA and MP in opposition. I must say, they haven’t done too bad a job so far.

Then again, I WOULD say that, wouldn’t I?

Let’s set aside the fact that I am the Campaign Director for DAP Canning and is playing a big part in the Kinta Valley DAP campaign strategy;

let’s set aside the past, with the illegal BN power-grab in 2009;

let’s set aside the fact that right here in Perak, more so than any other state in Malaysia, the people have been blatantly and utterly robbed of their constitutionally enshrined right of being governed by people they elect, with an unelected SA speaker, an MB who was appointed through a coup d’etat, and a prime minster who inherited his position through internal party appointment.

Lets set all that aside, an explore your so-called’ bread and butter issue’.

So, by you implying that my team’s support and involvement in the Bersih roadshow, is us NOT dealing with bread and butter issues of the people, I have to pose a couple of questions to you…

The voting system, which is definitely not fit for purpose, as it definitely doesn’t reflect the fundamental rights of the people to choose their representative to govern, is in dire need of a much needed change. I’m certain I speak on behalf of a lot of people on all sides of the political divide, that our current ‘first past the post’ system is NOT RIGHT and is a serious infringement of the peoples’ fundamental rights as well as an outright disregard of the peoples’ calls for change. With the clearly gerrymandered constituency borders to the advantage of BN (take Ipoh timor VS Putrajaya for example), and the sickeningly obvious attempt to undermine Pakatan stronghold by ‘someone’, I am frankly appalled by anyone who can’t see what is wrong about it.

So, by saying that we are not dealing with ‘bread and butter issues’, are you suggesting that the fundamental right of the vote is not important enough for us to address? Or do you mean it’s too important for us to address?

Showing support for a movement that is highlighting the urgent need for change of that system, and therefore fundamental right of each citizen that is the basis of our democracy, the oil that greases the wheels of society as we know it, in my opinion, can neither be not important enough nor too important for anyone to address.

I’m sure you’ll agree?

If you do, then GREAT. Give me a call, and we’ll discuss how we can work together, as you’re clearly passionate.

If you do, I’m sure you have your reasons. I’d love to hear them. I know I’ll disagree.

How do I know you may ask….

I shall leave you with another couple of questions.

Is breathing any less important than thinking?

Can we sustainably survive and thrive with either a dysfunctional set of lungs or a flawed brain?