How many more will be killed, LTA?

I had promised in an earlier post that I would lay into Raymond Lim on the matter of cycling. That was a year ago and I failed to make good on it. Then a few months ago we had a new minister and I thought I’d give the guy a chance to prove himself.

Then two things happened: the anticipated rise in public transport fares and this morning I read this.

I’ve never heard such crock in my entire life. Well, OK I have but this one certainly sits near the top of the shit pile.

From the short report I gather the chaps who transport their foreign workers on the backs of their trucks as if they were worth no more than sacks of rice, spoke with LTA and said ‘Eh, you ask us make more space ah, means we can take less people you know. Like that very hard do business lah. Already everything so expensive, profit very low lah - you know we not like SMRT can make millions every year’ and LTA capitulated and said ‘OK lah, we’ll review the law’ or something…

There is absolutely no reason to continue to risk people’s lives when options are available. And it doesn’t take a year to act on it.

I see enough dangerous practices on the roads nowadays by drivers who have poor spatial awareness and too much aggression. We don’t need to compound matters by allowing unrestrained passengers on the load bays of inherently unstable vehicles. How many more will be killed before the LTA understands this basic fact?

Your Turn.

I think I’ve given enough reasons why Bersih 2.0 is a cause worth supporting. As of tonight, we have almost 500 people liking our Facebook page. Which indicates at least that support for what we believe in is quite encouraging.

Now I hope that in the last sprint to the finish, we can translate some of that support into contributions to our campaign.

For those who don’t know, we have decided to work within the confines of Singapore law while trying to get a message to our High Commissioner for Malaysia. We figure we have no issue with the Singaporean authorities and, being guests in this country, have no wish to confuse the issue with a distracting side-battle.

What we want to do is this:

1. Send a nice letter to the High Commissioner, describing the Malaysia we all yearn for and seeking his representation to Putrajaya to convey our thoughts and feelings.

2. Attach a poster with this letter which contains as many portraits of Malaysians living and/or working in Singapore as possible, each one bearing a sign proclaiming their love for Malaysia.
Simple, really.

Drafts of the letter are available from our Facebook page.

Now, if you want to be a part of this - and there’s no reason not to if you like our page - then simply do this:

i. Make a sign that says ‘I (heart) Malaysia’ How the heart looks is up to you. Heck, how the entire sign looks is up to you.

ii. Snap a picture of yourself holding this sign up. If you need help, use one of the ready-made signs in the photo albums, put it on your computer/tablet screen and hold that up when you take a picture of yourself.

iii. Send it to us at BersihSingapore@gmail.com. Mark the subject header ‘I (heart) Malaysia portrait.

iv. Tell us if it’s OK to use the picture on Facebook too or just the poster.

That’s all! Couldn’t be simpler, right? Much simpler than going out and marching in KL, right? So, no excuse not to spend the 3 minutes or less which you will need to do this, right?

Thank you - I look forward to seeing your portraits beside mine and the rest of the committee’s as well as the people who have done this already.

"I can't be political - for my kids" Pt 2

I guess I can be a little schizophrenic - zen-like peaceful at times, even armed with a benign smile when some people do silly, angry things. And then I can switch to searing-anger at other times which I reckon might even put Alex Ferguson to shame.

Going through some feedback however, filled me with a whole spectrum of feelings including disappointment, irritation, impatience right through to quiet suffering and on to resigned acceptance.
So many of us are driven or controlled by fear of some form of reprisal. Funny thing is, I can’t help but think that in leaving Malaysia to work here, some of us have left behind the gumption, strong-will and independent streak that most Malaysians possess. We’ve become even more fearful and unwilling to stick our necks out even that little bit.

And it seems that the little bit required to add their face to the campaign is just too much for many to hurdle. They create all sorts of justifications for their actions - or rather their lack of action.
Here’s one point that came up which I thought was rather lame - that even western democracies don’t have free and fair access to the media.

5. Free and fair access to media
Full text of demand:
It is no secret that the Malaysian mainstream media fails to practice proportionate, fair and objective reporting for political parties of all divide. BERSIH 2.0 calls on the EC to press for all media agencies, especially state-funded media agencies such as Radio and Television Malaysia (RTM) and Bernama to allocate proportionate and objective coverage for all political parties.


Well, as I see it, western democracies actually do allow fair access to the media. At the very least they don’t restrict it. And I see one major contributing factor to be the lack of the Printing Presses and Publications Act. This act gives absolute power to the Minister of Home Affairs to grant or revoke licences not just for publishing but also for the very operating of a printing press.

Political parties who wish to publish their own newspapers, or private organisations who exercise some partisanship for opposition political organisations may simply not be able, legally at least, to publish their side of things.

And it doesn’t stop there - to reach the more remote places, one would think of radio and TV as options but these are restricted too. To have completely free and fair access to the media would mean, among other things, repealing this law.

Then let market forces take over. One of the reasons any politician, regardless of affiliation, can get extensive media coverage elsewhere is that it makes sales for the publication. Everyone wants ‘the scoop’. If we applied that idea to Malaysia just imagine what would happen when Utusan published one of their infamous totally fictitious and slanderous reports (of which there are many examples). In the current situation, we get a lot of lamenting by the aggrieved and nothing much else. In our ideal situation, the newspapers would be rushing to get ‘the alternative viewpoint’ and the other side of the story then emerges. Freely and fairly. To some extent at least.


Some ask what Nos 6 through 8 have to do with Bersih’s aims. And aren’t they outside of the purview of the Electoral Commission, or at least the scope of Bersih?
Well, in a word, ‘No’.

6. Strengthen Public Institutions
One refrain you hear is that these institutions must be doing their job fairly or the opposition wouldn’t have won 5 states in the last elections. Well, they didn’t. And if they did, the opposition might well have won every state. I’m not going to touch on the Judiciary, AG, MACC and even the Police. I think I would be hard-pressed to find, even among Bersih’s detractors, one person who can claim honestly, sincerely and openly that those institutions are beyond reproach.

Let’s instead focus on the EC.

The reality is that the EC has not consistently, speedily and committedly acted in the people’s interests. The about-turn on the use of indelible ink is just one instance. The reluctance to act on cleaning the electoral roll is another. The cowardly backing down from acting on clearly documented (recorded on video no less) cases of bribery (including by the PM no less) is indication enough that the EC fails to act independently and impartially.

Full text of the demand:
Public institutions must act independently and impartially in upholding the rule of law and democracy. Public institutions such as the Judiciary, Attorney-General, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency (MACC), Police and the EC must be reformed to act independently, uphold laws and protect human rights.
In particular, the EC must perform its constitutional duty to act independently and impartially so as to enjoy public confidence. The EC cannot continue to claim that they have no power to act, as the law provides for sufficient powers to institute a credible electoral system.


This segues nicely into No 7.

7. Stop Corruption
Someone said ‘good luck - this will never happen’

OK let’s forget about all the crap about police speed traps and so on. Those who know me know I have never paid a bribe.
Let’s focus on corruption in elections. I ask you only this: ‘Do you think it happens?’ If you replied ‘Yes’ then what possible objection could you have to having this as a goal of Bersih? The idea that we can never fully clear our system of corruption is fatally flawed - for if we do not set lofty targets, we never leave the ground.

We know the ‘western democracies’ are not totally clean. But when instances of corruption are uncovered, they are dealt with by an impartial court. Impartial. That word again. Didn’t I mention it, oh, maybe a few times? Somewhere a few paragraphs up, maybe in close proximity to another ‘i’ word - independently. Oh, and close also to ‘government institutions’.

Click here to read up on one case where ‘western democracies’ have acted on corruption.

Back to my earlier question - if you had instead answered ‘No, corruption never happens in elections in Malaysia’ I’d ask that you read more than just the Utusan. No, first of course I would throw my hands up in the air, roll my eyes back in my head, maybe scream a little…

Full text of demand:
Corruption is a disease that has infected every aspect of Malaysian life. BERSIH 2.0 and the rakyat demand for an end to all forms of corruption. Current efforts to eradicate corruption are mere tokens to appease public grouses. We demand that serious action is taken against ALL allegations of corruption, including vote buying.


OK? Understand? Now let’s move on to the last point…

8. Stop Dirty Politics.
This brought a laugh from a few people and I realised why - they fail to understand this point entirely. Of course you will still get some low-down comments and stories. Of course someone will dig up some dirt here and some dung there. But we need to rise above what is sensationalist or destructive and demand more.

Such as proper debates of policies by the candidates. Such as a proper scrutiny of candidates’ track records and personal wealth - both of which may require a freedom of information act if certain details are not readily volunteered. Such as proper analysis of policies in the media.

I want to be assured the chap who is seeking to represent me in Parliament is visionary, capable, driven, proven and most of all, I want him to be clean. Yes, Bersih.


So now we come to one last comment I received. ‘I can’t be political. There are implications for me and my kids’

Of course there are.

And that is why we need to do this.

Sure I have the luxury of being self-employed and making my own rules. And I appreciate some of you work for companies which discourage you from taking part in ‘political activities’.

Well, I ask you then to look around your organisation and see if anyone there sits on the board of a PAP driven organisation. Or maybe he does grassroots work? Maybe the People's Association - which comes under the Prime Minister’s Office? Often wears white? OK let me be factual rather than facetious...

Fact is when most organisations discourage their employees or staff from being active in politics they are really saying don’t support the opposition. If you chose to support the incumbent, chances are neither the CEO nor someone from HR will call you up for tea and give you some good advice.

So… think about that for a bit. Then try to resolve that with what you would LIKE to do.

Yes, this is indeed about implications for you and your kids - presuming you want to live in Malaysia again one day. You can stand by and do nothing for any of the reasons mentioned before. Or you can stand up and be counted. And make a difference.

I’ve shot down all your possible objections - and others, more eloquent than I, have covered other objections not listed here. The last step is yours.

Just ask yourself which of these you would prefer:
Five years from now if Malaysia is doing badly would you look your children in the eye and say “I wish I had stood up with x-thousand other Malaysians and made a difference. Things would be so much better now.”?

or this:
Five years from now if Malaysia is doing very well indeed would you look your children in the eye and say “I am so proud I stood up with x-thousand other Malaysians and made a difference! Things are so much better now!”

"I can't be political - for my kids" Pt 1

Bersih is apolitical. What this means is that it has no allegiance to any political organisation. And it serves no direct political purpose. What it does serve though is social justice. This is a basic tenet of a democracy so ultimately, Bersih serves a democratic purpose.

Now although Bersih has no political allegiance, political organisations may agree with and align themselves to Bersih’s goals. And why shoudn’t they?

To examine that question, we need to look at some of the goals again and address some of the responses I have received in my emails out encouraging people to join our positive action.

1. Clean the electoral roll
Simple enough really. There are more than a handful of cases where multiple people are registered in one address - an address they do not reside at even. Cases of phantom voters also include a disproportionate number of names of people over 100 years old (including one aged 118!)

Then there are migrated Malaysians who have given up their MyKads and passports at foreign embassies and still have their names registered as voters. And many more stories - just do a quite internet search for ‘Phantom Voters malaysia’ and see what comes up. In my case it was 2,210,000 search matches.

If you still haven’t figured out the problem yet, consider what would happen when phantom voters actually turn up to vote. Anyone who has control of or access to the system can abuse this issue by letting imposters (‘phantoms’) turn up on polling day and vote for a particular party.

Now I ask - what’s the point of taking the trouble to turn up to vote when your legitimate vote can be wiped out by 20 phantom ones? 

To be fair, no one I have spoken to has disputed this as a good, just and fair demand.

The full text of this demand is:
“The electoral roll is marred with irregularities such as deceased persons and multiple persons registered under a single address or non-existent addresses. The electoral roll must be revised and updated to wipe out these ‘phantom voters’. The rakyat have a right to an electoral roll that is an accurate reflection of the voting population.
In the longer term, BERSIH 2.0 also calls for the EC to implement an automated voter registration system upon eligibility to reduce irregularities.”

So let’s move on to number 3 and get it dispensed with as it is linked to this. I’ll get back to No 2 in a moment.


3. Use of indelible ink

Indelible ink is used elsewhere in the world to prevent, among others, phantom voters from turning up and casting the same vote 10, 20, 30 times, using different identities each time. It is simple, affordable, effective, and more importantly, it has been used elsewhere including Afghanistan, Benin, Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Gambia, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Lebanon, Mauritania, Peru, Philippines, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Tchad, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

There really is very little argument against the use of the ink. It gets the job done, and done well.

The full text of the demand:
“Indelible ink must be used in all elections. It is a simple, affordable and effective solution in preventing voter fraud. In 2007, the EC decided to implement the use of indelible ink. However, in the final days leading up to the 12th General Elections, the EC decided to withdraw the use of indelible ink citing legal reasons and rumours of sabotage.
BERSIH 2.0 demands for indelible ink to be used for all the upcoming elections. Failure to do so will lead to the inevitable conclusion that there is an intention to allow voter fraud.”


2. Reform postal ballot
Due to various reasons I will not get into here, many, many, many Malaysians live abroad. And most cannot make it back to vote. They are, however, entitled to vote and a reform of the postal vote allows them the chance to exercise their democratic right.

Besides this, there have been claims of abuse of voting where uniformed personnel have had their votes cast by their superiors. Doesn’t take a genius to figure out what’s wrong with that, and the full text here then becomes quite clear.

Note that the reform means some who have not been able to vote before will now be able to do so, while others will experience tighter controls on their postal voting.

‘The current postal ballot system must be reformed to ensure that all citizens of Malaysia are able to exercise their right to vote. Postal ballot should not only be open for all Malaysian citizens living abroad, but also for those within the country who cannot be physically present in their voting constituency on polling day. Police, military and civil servants too must vote normally like other voters if not on duty on polling day.
The postal ballot system must be transparent. Party agents should be allowed to monitor the entire process of postal voting.”

Again, not much objection here from anyone I wrote to or spoke with.


OK, No 4 is interesting and some can’t understand the need for this.

4. Minimum 21 days campaign period
Malaysia isn’t small and in some areas we’re not any closer to being a developed country now or in 2020 than years ago when the objective was first mooted. There are parts of Sabah and Sarawak where it takes more than just a short drive to get to. 21 days means even the remotest villages get access to all the information they need to make informed choices.

There are well over 1600 polling stations for 71 seats in Sarawak alone - with ballot boxes sometimes being transported by helicopter and boat. Just imagine how remote some of these places are. The residents deserve to vote as much as any Peninsular-based Malaysian. And to vote, they need to know as much as they can about the choices they have, including, hopefully, meeting the people hoping to represent them.

21 days doesn’t seem that long now does it?

I did get a response which puzzled me. The writer claims that 21 days is too long and can lead to social unrest. I can’t figure this one out. On the one hand I can see some of the logic in that, but then I immediately think of the lead-in to the US presidential elections and how long that takes and can see no social unrest resulting from the protraction.

Therefore, the ‘unrest’ must come from somewhere else. Wait a minute… what about law-enforcement? I mean, the guys in blue who are supposed to keep law and order. What if they didn’t do the job they were supposed to, such as standing idly by while people threaten to burn down buildings and so on. Isn’t that more likely to be a potential cause of social unrest?

I say that if the guys whose job it is to maintain public order did the jobs they swore to do, we wouldn’t even be talking about this point.

Oh, and if they failed to do so (which, frankly, has been the case for too long) then I reckon it’s only going to take a day for ‘social unrest’ to happen.

Full text of demand:

“The EC should stipulate a campaign period of not less than 21 days. A longer campaign period would allow voters more time to gather information and deliberate on their choices. It will also allow candidates more time to disseminate information to rural areas. The first national elections in 1955 under the British Colonial Government had a campaign period of 42 days but the campaign period for 12th GE in 2008 was a mere 8 days.”

OK, more about the 8 points and our positive action in my next post.

Let Me Come Clean

Some time ago I was posting all sorts of stuff during the Singapore General Elections. Might have seemed strange to some especially since one hot topic then was the impact of foreigners. Of which I am one here of course. Thing is I understand the problems faced by average Singaporeans and I appreciate how their frustrations could be targeted at PRs and foreigners.

Some people asked why I was even bothered - more bothered (I prefer the term someone used - ‘engaged’) it seems than many Singaporeans.

The answer is simple. Almost everywhere we go, we interact with the society there. We cannot avoid this. Even if we choose to avoid greater society, our act of seclusion means we are interacting with that society - through being an uncontributing component. Think of it as a speed hump or rock-in-the-middle-of-the-road in that society’s journey.

I believe that when we are part of something, we have a responsibility towards that something. If you’re the passenger in a car being driven by someone else, you have a responsibility to do anything from looking out in dangerous conditions to engaging the driver to stave off sleepiness on a long journey.
Well, Singapore happened to be on a difficult journey to many, and it seemed too that the people who mattered had fallen asleep at the wheel. And that happens when society fails to engage fully with The People Who Make Decisions, not just the other way around. And so I needed to be a passenger in that car engaging with the driver - or, to stretch the metaphor even further, the other passengers for I could not vote.

So now we come to the Malaysian scene. Yes I have now lived away from longer than I have lived in Malaysia. However, I still have very strong ties and I still have our family home which some in my family still occupy, 54 years after they moved in. I carry my MyKad and Malaysian Passport with some degree of pride and of course there was my CelebrateMalaysia! bicycle ride of 2007.

So despite the 350km distance, I still feel very much a part of Malaysian Society, and thus the rationale applies yet again.

So, let me come clean. In fact, let me come Bersih.

Yes, I support Bersih. For these simple reasons:

Bersih 2.0 is an apolitical coalition of NGOs coming together to ask for 8 things which will ensure that every Malaysian - that's you and me - has a voice and a chance to vote for the people who will lead us.
This means that an UMNO supporter gets an equal chance to a DAP supporter. Everyone, who is of legal voting standing will get a fair chance - without intimidation or coercion, and without dealing with the imbalance of corruption - to cast a vote in favour of the candidate of their choice.

Now, I don't care which political party you support - I only care that you and I both get to vote in free, fair and clean elections.

This is why a few of us here in Singapore have set up Bersih 2.0 Singapore.

Over the last few days we’ve been busy signing people up for our positive ‘I (heart) Malaysia’ campaign. I’ll tell you more about this in the next post.

I’ll also deal with some of the responses I have received. You see, I sent out emails asking people to support what we are doing and some of the responses have not gone down too well with me. So, I will address them here in this blog and let you work out who makes more sense.

Stay tuned.