[RE: DAYAK COMMUNITY MUST WAKE UP, SAYS MINOS – BORNEO POST 31.05.12]

The lamentation by Peter Minos viz: (quote) “with so many parties and leaders, many of my KL friends are saying that the Dayak are asking for trouble and heading for self-destruction”  is a display of archaic mentality, one trying to portray nothing more and nothing less he is supporting UMNO.

To “his UMNO mates were of the opinion that the Dayaks would bemoan and complain about everything” Peter Minos and those thinking like him should better realize it that indeed the Dayaks are complaining, and rightly so.

Yes, complain we must. Given the fact that Malaysia, after almost 50 years of formation, has not brought about better changes to the people of Sarawak, and let alone to the Dayaks, there is nothing wrong in complaining and bemoaning.

The people want the promises of Malaysia which, for the majority of them, are yet unrealized, unfullfilled.

The rights under article 153, benefits to the bumiputras, which term should include Dayaks, in term of ranking appointments in civil service, GLCs, and other Government Agencies, Army and Police, in foreign service, and contracts, licences, quotas, timber concession, land, scholarships,  and many more have not been accorded us.  In the civil service, army and police the Dayaks are mostly of junior rank.

Peter Minos asking of the Dayak community to emulate the Melanau that “had fully utilized political unity” and “making a success in their social and economic development” is very pathetic while unrealistic.

The reality in its proper prospective is the fact that the State of Sarawak has been led, after Kalong Ningkan was toppled and after a short stint of Tawi Sli, by two (2) successive Chief Ministers, Tun Rahman Yakub followed by Pehin Sri Taib, for the better part of almost five (5) decades since Independence.

Both are Melanau although they would probably prefer to be called “Malay”.  From these facts the Melanau Community can be better appreciated in term of “their social and economic development”. The all-powerful office of the Chief Minister has been seeing to it how Sarawak is developed over the years.

The fact that (or if) Dayaks are in so many political parties is not necessary a bad thing. In fact Pehin Sri Taib referring to Sarawak Workers Party (SWP) he said “the more the merrier”. 

And when he was asked if he considered it an act of betrayal for Larry Sng, who is special advisor (Youth Matters) to lead an opposition party, he replied that was not the case because the country practiced democracy and “everyone has the right to form a party”. 

And when “Barisan Club” was formed by the defected former members of SPDP, Pehin Sri Taib was reported to have said that “they are still supporting Barisan by being in Barisan Club” and “that is what matters”. 

So who is Peter Minos who all the years has expressed full complete loyal support to Pehin Sri Taib as Chief Minister of Sarawak to question the “Group of 5” that started the Barisan Club.

Peter Minos’s call for the Dayak community to be under one party and under one leader is ‘utopian’.  It cannot be achieved. Rather more political parties will see Dayaks becoming their members will be on the card, moving forward. Nothing is wrong in that. 

Like Pehin Sri Taib was reported to have said in referring to SWP that “the people will make their choice”. And one thing is true the Dayaks will keep on asking for more. Sarawak has contributed a lot to the Federal Revenue.

Example: our oil and gas and our tax revenue. And returned each year to us is very small amount. And all of that goes to SCORE and to the other of Chief Minister’s pet projects.   And despite Dayaks are well represented in Barisan, the larger of the community is not served well. Our NCR lands remain untitled, unsurveyed, and unalienated, and otherwise state land.

When these lands are resumed by State Government “for public purposes” the compensated values are very small compared to that of a mixed zone land in a same locality which normally could fetch very high and current market prices.  Their participation in land development schemes through SALCRA and Pelita has brought very marginal returns.

Otherwise in truth our community has been fending for themselves.  Maybe as apparent in the state of things, due to the blind loyal support given to Barisan Nasional all these years what the Dayaks get are no more than in the form of minor rural projects, which mostly would come during the period preceding election times only.

Another thing is also true: that is despite the diversity of parties and the Dayaks are found in almost all of them, the Dayaks are still united. In particular in their quest for better representation in government, better share of the bite of the economic cake, and for the right to be heard of their quests as such.

Like they did not weep when Peter Minos was defeated when he tried to bring PBB to Bau and was defeated by Patau Rubis of SNAP in 1983 general election, the Dayak community including those in Bau and Lundu will survive the coming GE13.

STAR will offer itself likewise other parties and including maybe a member of the “Gang of 5”, and or maybe DAP and PKR as well.  Rest assured, like Pehin Sri Taib has said it “the people will make their choice”.

And Peter Minos is better advised to not to be in haste to praise everything of “UMNO”. And certainly it is not for him to call upon the Dayaks to support or emulate of those Malays in Malaya that support UMNO. This time is not opportune. UMNO has nothing to offer to the Dayaks because in Sarawak the Chief Minister is from PBB. And UMNO will not contest in Sarawak as well.

Patrick Anek Uren

Vice-President STAR

Repairing of PM broken fence

The following article was emailed to me:

Three contractors are bidding to fix a broken fence at the PM's residence. One is from MIC, another is from MCA , and the third is from UMNO.

All three go with a PM's House-official to examine the fence. The MIC contractor takes out a tape measure and does some measuring, then works some figures with a pencil. "Well," he says, "I figure the job will run about $900: $400 for materials, $400 for my crew and $100 profit for me."

The MCA contractor also does some measuring and figuring, then says, "I can do this job for $700: $300 for materials, $300 for my crew and $100 profit for me."

The UMNO contractor doesn't measure or figure, but leans over to the House-official and whispers, "$2,700. "The official, incredulous, says, "You didn't even measure like the other guys! How did you come up with such a high figure?"

The UMNO contractor whispers back, "$1000 for me, $1000 for you, and we hire the guy from MCA to fix the fence.""Done!" replies the government official.

And that, my friends, is how our new NEP works.

What NEC stands for "Numbskull's Economic Policy?"

LEE KUAN YEW : AT 85 , THE FIRE STILL BURNS

How a nephew of Tun Mahathir's sees Lee Kuan Yew - MUST READ *

BY *AHMAD MUSTAPHA

* The writer is a nephew of Dr Mahathir.

Singapore's Minister Mentor, Lee Kuan Yew, who was Singapore 's founding father, has always been very direct in his comments. This was the man who outsmarted the communists in Singapore (with the innocent help of Malaya then and the willing help of the British) and who later outwitted the British and outpaced Malaysia in all spheres.

Singapore practices corrupt-free meritocracy and Malaysia affirmative action. The former attracted all the best brains and the latter chased out all the brains. The Singapore cabinet consists of dedicated and intelligent technocrats whereas Malaysia has one of the most unwieldy cabinets. Not only that, brain wise it was below par not even good for the kampong.

With that kind of composition, one that is very brainy, naturally Singapore, with no natural resources could outstrip Malaysia in every aspect of development. Malaysia, on the other hand, was too much preoccupied with its Malayness and the illusory 'Ketuanan Melayu' and was also more interested in useless mega iconic development rather than real social and economic development.

Whenever Kuan Yew utters anything that deemed to be a slight on Malaysia, voices were raised admonishing him. Malaysia would never dare to face reality. That Singapore had shown that it could survive was a slap on those who believed that Singapore would fold up once it left Malaysia. Therefore it was natural that these doomsayers would try to rationalise their utterances to be in their favour to combat on whatever Kuan Yew commented. Its political jealousy.

Singapore achieved its development status without any fanfare. But here in Malaysia, a development that was deceptive was proclaimed as having achieved development status. It was trumpeted as an achievement that befits first world status. This was self delusion. Malaysians are led to believe into a make believe world, a dream world. The leaders who themselves tend to believe in their own fabricated world did not realise the people were not taken in by this kind of illusion.

Lee Kuan Yew believed in calling a spade a spade. I was there in Singapore when the People's Action Party won the elections in 1959. He was forthright in his briefing to party members as to what was expected of them and what Singapore would face in the future. Ideologically, I did not agree with him. We in the University of Malaya Socialist Club had a different interpretation of socialist reconstruction. But he was a pragmatist and wanted to bring development and welfare to the Singaporeans. Well! He succeeded.

Malaysia was so much embroiled in racial politics and due to the fear of losing political power, all actions taken by the main party in power was never targeted towards bringing wealth to all. Wealth was distributed to the chosen few only. They were the cronies and the backers of the party leadership to perpetuate their own selfish ends.

Seeing the efficiency and the progress achieved by Singapore caused the Malaysian leadership to suffer from an inferiority complex. That Malaysia should suffer from this complex was of its own making.

In a recent interview, Kuan Yew said that Malaysia could have done better if only it treated its minority Chinese and Indian population fairly. Instead they were completely marginalised and many of the best brains left the country in drove. He added that Singapore was a standing indictment to what Malaysia could have done differently. He just hit the nail right there on the head.

Malaysia recently celebrated its 50th year of independence with a bagful of uncertainties. The racial divide has become more acute. The number of Malay graduates unemployed is on the increase. And this aspect can be very explosive. But sad to see that no positive actions have been taken to address these social ills.

Various excuses were given by Malaysian leaders why Singapore had far outstripped Malaysia in all aspects of social and economic advancement. Singapore was small, they rationalised and therefore easy to manage. Singapore was not a state but merely an island.

There was one other aspect that Malaysia practises and that is to politicise all aspects of life. All government organs and machinery were 'UMNO-ised'. This was to ensure that the party will remain in power. Thus there was this misconception by the instruments of government as to what national interest is and what UMNO vested interest is.

UMNO vested interest only benefited a few and not the whole nation. But due to the UMNO-isation of the various instruments of government, the country under the present administration had equated UMNO vested interest as being that of national interest. Thus development became an avenue of making money and not for the benefit of the people. The fight against corruption took a back seat. Transparency was put on hold. And the instruments of government took it to be of national interest to cater to the vested interest of UMNO. Enforcement of various enactments and laws was selective. Thus a 'palace' in Kelang, APs cronies and close-one-eye umno MPs could exist without proper procedure. Corruption infested all govt departments, the worse is the police and lately even in the judiciary.

Singapore did not politicise its instruments of government. If ever politicisation took place, it is guided by national interest. To be efficient and to be the best in the region was of paramount importance. Thus all the elements like corruption, lackadaisical attitude towards work and other black elements, which would retard such an aim, were eliminated. Singapore naturally had placed the right priority in it's pursuit to achieve what is best for its people. This is the major difference between these two independent countries.

Malaysia in its various attempts to cover up its failures embarked on several diversions. It wanted its citizens to be proud that the country had the tallest twin-tower in the world, although the structure was designed and built by foreigners. Its now a white-elephant wasting away. It achieved in sending a man into space at an exorbitant price. For what purpose? These are what the Malays of old would say "menang sorak" (hollow victories).

It should be realised that administering a country can be likened to managing a corporate entity. If the management is efficient and dedicated and know what they are doing, the company will prosper. The reverse will be if the management is poor and bad. The company will go bust.

There are five countries around this region. There is Malaysia, and then Indonesia. To the east there is the Philippines and then there is that small enclave called the Sultanate of Brunei. All these four countries have abundance of natural resources but none can lay claim to have used all these resources to benefit the people. Poverty was rampant and independence had not brought in any significant benefits to the people.

But tiny Singapore without any resources at all managed to bring development to its citizens. It had one of the best public MRT transport systems and airlines in the world and it is a very clean city state. Their universities, health care, ports are among the best in the world.

It is impossible to compare what Singapore has achieved to what all these four countries had so far achieved. It was actually poor management and corruption, and nothing more. Everything is done for the vested interest of the few.

Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines and the Sultanate of Brunei need good management teams. They would not be able to do this on their own steam. I would advise that they call on Kuan Yew to show them what good governance is. Why look East to Japan when it is just next door across the causeway.

Editor's Note: The article is published the way we received it by email from another source...We do not know where it was published first.

Jabu, the stooge of Kuala Lumpur, says Jambun

Daniel John Jambun, the leader of the Sabah delegation to Britain, today challenged Deputy Chief of Sarawak Alfred Jabu anak Numpang for an open debate.

“We want to call on Sarawak Deputy Chief Minister Alfred Jabu Anak Numpang to prove that he's a 'somebody' as he implies by briefing the people on his track record in defending the rights of Sabah and Sarawak under the 1963 Malaysia Agreement.

“We challenge Jabu to an open debate on the issues raised by the Common Interest Group Malaysia (Cigma) during their briefing to members of the House of Commons in London on March 9,” Jambun said in a statement emailed to The Broken Shield.

The Broken Shield had earlier published Jambun’s memorandum presented to the House Commons.

Jambun who is the deputy chairperson of Common Interest Groups (CIGMA) said: “Jabu is turning a blind eye to the serious plight of Malaysians in Sabah. Or is it more likely that he is actually ignorant about the horrendous problems faced by Sabahans because he has not been to Sabah often enough.

“Cigma's memorandum titled 'Shattered Hopes and Broken Dreams' detailed Sabah's expectations upon independence as were promised by Tunku Abdul Rahman and under the Malaysia Agreement, the Intergovernmental Committee Report and the 20 Points, the issue of state security and threats to national sovereignty.

“These included 'reverse takeovers' arising from the influx of illegal immigrants, poverty, unfair sharing of oil revenue, lack of fair benefits from land alienation to Felda and Felcra, and other socio-economic problems as a result of the unjust distribution of wealth and opportunities for Sabah from the national economic cake.

“Over the past 50 years 'various modifications and adjustments' to the Malaysia Agreement have eroded the rights and privileges of Sabahans. Forty-six years after independence, Sabah is now the poorest state despite its abundant natural resources.

“Whatever good we had received from Malaysia, it is all totally negated by the fact that we are not secure as a state and that the federal government has reaped a huge economic harvest from Sabah and returned so little to us,” he said.

Since the takeover of Umno/BN in Sabah in 1994, Sabah, he said, had been plundered to the point of becoming the poorest state in Malaysia.

“We are in such dire straits with a very uncertain future, so what is the point of praising the government? Jabu surely knows that Sarawak has had no better deal in Malaysia than Sabah.

“He must not think Sabah is in the same position as Sarawak which still has some of its original rights intact. Even Umno daren't enter Sarawak. But we in Sabah are in a much more different situation. We are under a state government which is under the directive of Kuala Lumpur.

“Brunei, which opted out of Malaysia, and Singapore which later left the federation, are in a much better economic position regionally and globally. In fact, with all the rich natural resources that we have, Sabah should be richer than Brunei.

“We reiterate that we are ready for an open debate on these issues with Jabu anytime at any venue of Jabu's choice. Let the people judge who is a 'nobody in his own country.' At the moment, the consensus of public opinion is that Jabu is a proxy and stooge of the ruling elite in Kuala Lumpur and hence a traitor to our people.

“There is nothing wrong in Cigma calling for the re-activation of the Inter-Governmental Committee on the Malaysia Agreement. The IGC was meant to be a permanent institution to monitor the Malaysia Agreement.

“Jabu must explain why the IGC has fallen into inactivity and disuse over the years. We call upon the Malaysian federal government and the governments of Sabah, Sarawak, Singapore and the UK to return to the IGC as soon as possible, failing which we will relentlessly pursue the matter further in various international forums.

“We appeal that the governments of Indonesia and the Philippines be accorded observer status at the IGC. The presence of Indonesia will ensure that the re-colonisation of Sabah and Sarawak by Malaya, after the departure of the British, is reversed. The late President Sukarno of Indonesia did warn against re-colonisation when he launched his policy of konfrantasi (confrontation) and ganjang Malaysia (hang M'sia) in 1963.

“The presence of the Philippines will ensure that we can bring the so-called Sabah claim to a closure. Following the successful briefing at the House of Commons in London on Mach 9, we intend to pursue the introduction of an EDM

(Early Day Motion) on the Malaysia Agreement in the British Parliament as soon as the forthcoming UK general elections are over.

The writer is deputy chairperson, Common Interest Group Malaysia (Cigma).

Another Malay party?

KUCHING - A group of people led by Affendi Jeman who have been trying to promote the formation of Sarawak UMNO have now submitted an application to form a political party to be known as Anggota Rakyat Bumiputra Sarawak (ARABS), it is reliably learnt.

One of the protem committee members, who refused to be named, said that ARABS was submitted in May this year.

“The party is to be known as Anggota Rakyat Bumiputra Sarawak or ARABS in short. We hope that the party can be registered as soon as possible in view of the coming election and urge the authorities to look into its registration,” he said.

This group has been trying to bring UNMO into Sarawak for years, and UMNO leaders in Kuala Lumpur knew about their plan. But their efforts have been strongly opposed by Parti Pesaka Bumiputra Bersatu (PBB) leaders on ground that PBB being the backbone of the state government is strong and doing well in administering the State.

The idea of UMNO extending its wings to Sarawak has been off and on since the then Chief Minister Abdul Rahman Yakub made the suggestion in the 1970s. In 1980s the former Defence Minister Abang Abu Bakar tried to revive the idea; his efforts too failed.

Then came this group led by Jeman. But now it appears that the group has abandoned the idea. Instead they are trying to form ARABS which will be a Malay-based party.

Meanwhile, Mustaffa Kamil Ayub, chief of Sarawak PKR said that he had heard about Gabriel Adit, a PKR leader and State Assemblyman for Ngemah forming a new party.

“We cannot stop him leaving Keadilan and forming a party of his own. If it is true, then what can we do?

“So far I have not received any letter of resignation from Adit,” he said, adding that Adit’s move would not affect PKR in the state.

PKR, he said, is still intact and it is growing from strength to strength as more and more Sarawakians are joining the party. Early this month, he said some 2,400 applications have been received from people in and around Debak in the Betong Division to join PKR.

Mustaffa also said that he had discussed with Anwar Ibrahim, de facto leader of Keadilan, on the possibility of him relinquishing his post as chief PKR in Sarawak.

“It is up to Anwar and PKR president Wan Azizah Wan Ismail to appoint someone who they think can lead the party in Sarawak. I know that they have found somebody. It is a matter of time when they will announce the name of the person,” he said.

Mustaffa who was appointed last May to head the party in the State said that he had completed his task of team-building and had organised various programmes to strengthen the party.

“It is high time that a Sarawakian be appointed, someone who is ready to serve the party,” he added.

In the meantime, Adit is reported to be leaving for Kuala Lumpur today (Sun, 11 Oct) to see some of those who are involved in the formation of the new party.

He is expected to be back on Thursday, 15 October to announce the name of the party, its objects and aims and the names of the protem office-bearers. – The Broken Shield

Source: www.thebrokenshield.blogspot.com

Have we been fooled all this while?

Kelantan Menteri Besar, Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat is one kind of a leader who dares to say a “spade is a spade” when he labels the term “Bumiputra” as a smack of racism. But to us Dayaks, bumiputra is an illusory word, the application (or non-application) of which has made us Dayaks as the losers in terms of development, business opportunities, contracts and tenders, educational opportunities, recruitment into and promotion in the civil service.

In the political terminology, Dayaks together with Malays, Kadazandusuns and other natives are grouped as Bumiputras. What it means here is that when UMNO needs our support to strengthen its policy on “ketuanan Melayu” the Dayaks are considered as Bumiputras so that bigger “Merdeka cakes” (a.k.a. economic opportunities, rights and privileges) should be accorded to reflect the larger composition of Bumiputras (Malays, Dayaks, Kadazandusun, etc) and as Bumiputras our rights are said to be included in the term.

But in actual implementation of the “Bumiputra policy” the Dayaks have been sidelined or not considered at all for all those privileges, rights and economic opportunities; in fact the Dayaks are officially known as “lain-lain” (others). And as “lain-lain” what do we get? Even Article 153 of the Federal Constitution cannot protect us. In fact, illegal immigrants have better treatment than us.

I recall a friend of mine who is now a member of Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) Supreme council complained that his application for a business was rejected because he was not a bumiputra. Imagine a Dayak Iban’s application for business opportunities is not considered on ground that he is not a Bumiputra. His case is a tip of the iceberg.

The term of “Bumiputra” and “non-Bumiputra” first came into use when the government introduced New Economic Policy (NEP) following the 13 May 1969 racial riots in West Malaysia. That is about 30 years ago.

Following a special meeting with the then Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad with Dayak leaders like Tan Sri Leo Moggie from the defunct Parti Bansa Dayak Sarawak (PBDS) and Dayak non-governmental organisations as well as Kadazandusun leaders like Tan Sri Bernard Dompok of UPKO, Sabah some time in 2000, it was agreed by the Federal government to give a special attention to Sarawak and Sabah people in terms of financial allocation and business opportunities.

And arising from that meeting it was decided to form the Dayak Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DCCI) and Kadazandusun Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI) to look after the interests of the Dayak and Kadazandusun communities. Since then a new terminology, Bumiputra minorities, has been coined to refer to the Dayaks and Kadazandusuns. Legally, of course, there are no such words.

The current debate on the privileges of “Bumiputra” was brought up by an Opposition leader, Dr. Boo Cheng Hau in Johor State Assembly last week when he likened “bumiputralism” as another form of apartheid policy which was experienced by the black Africans.

Nik Aziz labeled it (bumiputralism) as racism and wanted it drop, while the Information Minister, Ahmad Shabery Cheek said the Opposition did not understand the meaning and the history of the word.

It is obvious that we have been lulled into belief that as Bumiputras we enjoy all the rights. What a fool we have been for the last 30 years for continuing to elect BN government? This issue should be one of the issues to be highlighted at the forthcoming Batang Ai by-election. – The Broken Shield

Source: www.thebrokenshield.blogspot.com

'Tuai Rumah' beware of MACC

It is heartening to note that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has swung into action against corrupt UMNO leaders. And from the actions that have been taken, MACC seems to mean business. So far 13 UMNO leaders and members have been arrested over money politics. And more are expected to be hauled in.

The MACC actions are bringing hope to our society that is infested with corrupt practices. And the action is taken without fear or favour. Supporting the action taken by the MACC, Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak said: “The law of the country is the law of the country. No one can escape from it.”

And Najib’s comment is also a welcome news and an assurance to us in Sarawak as it is also bled by the evil of corruption.

But our main concern is the rampant corruption during election times when the use of money clearly puts the Opposition at a great disadvantage.

In two previous elections, the 2006 State and 2008 parliamentary elections, we witnessed a large amount of money being pumped into critical constituencies in order to influence voters and the money was passed through 'Tuai Rumah' (longhouse chiefs).

For instance in the Bukit Begunan and Batang Ai constituencies in the 2006 State election, Tuai Rumah were summoned to district offices two or three days before polling to a “meeting” during which they were handed goodies and ang pows.

When they returned to their own longhouses, the longhouse chiefs distributed the 'ang pows' to their respective “anembiaks” (followers) who were voters and warned them that any one who did not vote for the BN candidates would not be given shares of the goodies and ang pows. The “disobedient” voters might be kicked out from the longhouses.

It is a normal practice for the BN candidates to promise this project and that project for this longhouse and for that longhouse, and warn the longhouse people that the projects may be withdrawn if they do not vote for them. Is this allowed under the law?

The Opposition candidates had evidence of all these and had even lodged reports to Police and to the Anti-Corruption Agency. As usual no action had been taken.

But in the coming election, it is hoped that the recently reformed anti-corruption agency which is now armed to the teeth should play an important role in ensuring a free State election and should take actions against anyone, be they 'Tuai Rumah', Penghulu or ordinary voters for infringing the election law. 'Tuai Rumah' and their “anembiaks” should beware of this as both the givers and receivers are equally guilty under the law.

In MCAA we trust; it is the hope of the Opposition that the next State election will be run fairer, cleaner and smoother. - The Broken Shield

Source: www.thebrokenshield.blogspot.com

More cases of 'bullying' by PBB ~ ref Malaysiakini

Another PRS division leader has come out in support of a colleague’s claim that PBB is ‘bullying’ state component parties, even as speculation swirls that heads could roll. The following article was extracted from Malaysiakini

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Tony Thien Oct 28, 08 11:23am

The Sarawak Barisan Nasional (BN) is abuzz like a hornet’s nest that has been disturbed, following an accusation that Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB) has been ‘bullying’ component parties.

Another Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) division leader has come out in support of the claim - Simanggang division publicity chief Nanta Chaku cited three examples in a statement to Malaysiakini.

On Saturday, the party’s Baleh division publicity head Beginda Minda had revealed two instances of alleged bullying by PBB, led by Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud (right), as well as by Umno.

Nanta said: “To support Beginda Minda's contention... three other examples come to mind immediately:

1. Since 1981 other component parties in the Sarawak BN have been required to send two to three names of candidates for each constituency held by them, for the PBB leadership to pick the ones to contest. In other words, the final selection is subject to PBB's decision.

2. A certain high-ranking Iban personage in PBB who fancies himself as the paramount chief of the (community) always insists on appointing his favourites as Penghulus, Pemancha and Temenggong (even) where PBB does not have elected (representatives).

3. In the contest for top posts in component parties, the election is dependent on close (connections between) the candidates (and) the PBB leadership. In other words, candidates perceived to be supported by the PBB leadership always seems to win. Social and economic issues doesn't seem to matter, but closeness to the PBB leadership does.

”Nanta also said ‘big boys’ in Sarawak BN deny ‘small boys’ any say in the final selection of candidates, whether for a general election, appointment of community chiefs or party leaders.

Since this is subject to final approval by PBB leaders, it makes a mockery of the original concept of the BN power-sharing concept in Sarawak, he said.

“It is perhaps more accurate to say that PBB is not only all too dominant but also domineering in attitude vis-a-vis smaller component parties.”

‘Explore other options’

Nanta urged members of other component parties to examine their options.

In the two examples cited by Beginda, reference was made to selection of candidates for the Sri Aman and Lubok Antu parliamentary seats, held by PRS in the March general election, and to a particular candidate selected for the 2006 state election.

Beginda had reminded the BN top leadership that the coalition must wake up to current political realities and stop being in a state of denial.

“Before, there was only BN which could provide the national leadership. After March 2008, it is clear that PRS has other, perhaps better, options,” he ended with a veiled warning, without elaborating what these options might be.

In an immediate reaction to this, Masing - the state assemblyperson for Baleh - distanced the party from the claim, describing it as Beginda’s personal stance.

Masing said he could not stop members from expressing their views but felt that they should not go overboard in their criticism. He also said he would initiate an investigation.

Beginda is one of Masing’s right-hand men and his comments have irked Taib, who is the state BN chairperson.

It is learnt that Taib has told Masing to take disciplinary action against Beginda.
Rumours are circulating that the latter may already have been sacked, but this could not be immediately verified.

PRS: Umno is a bully, so is PBB

The following article was posted in Malaysiakini which described UMNO & PBB as "bullies" in their dealings with smaller component parties in the Barisan Nasional. I will give my comments on the article in my next posting.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) division leader has described Umno at the federal level and Parti Pesaka Bumiputra Bersatu (PBB) in Sarawak as ‘too dominant’ and indeed are ‘bullies’ in their dealings with smaller component parties in the Barisan Nasional.

Taking a cue from the statement of former MCA president Ong Ka Ting who has expressed similar sentiments, Balleh PRS publicity chief Beginda Minda said this tendency of one party dominance has an adverse impact on public perception and intra BN relationships.

“It is my view that in Sarawak, PRS, a component party inside the state and federal Barisan Nasional has been bullied by what could collectively be called the "BN leadership," he said in a statement to Malaysiakini today.

Elaborating, Beginda explained that in the case of Sarawak, the BN system has generated a state level entity where there has been one dominant party, the PBB which is leading the state BN government.

Very powerful Taib Mahmud

PBB president Abdul Taib Mahmud is also state BN chair and chief minister of Sarawak for the past 27 years.

He has long been described as Sarawak's most powerful personality and is known to be intolerant of dissent within the party's ranks.

“Just as there is a public perception of Umno being too dominant at the national level, there is also a similar perception that in Sarawak, the dominant role of PBB has had an effect on the conduct of smaller parties, such as PRS,” Beginda said.

Prime Minister and national BN chair Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has responded immediately to Ong’s remarks on Oct 18, denying that Umno has bullied others in the BN.

Umno information chief Muhammad Muhammad Taib has also asked for proofs of Umno bullying.

Responding to Muhammad Taib’s request, Beginda cited two recent instances of Umno and PBB bullying PRS.

The first was during the 2006 state election when a component BN party was ‘allowed’ to steal a PRS seat.

“Neither the state nor federal BN intervened effectively to stop a component party from interfering in the affairs of another. Where was BN when effective action was needed?

It was as if the BN was shutting its proverbial "eye" to the intra-BN infighting in Sarawak. By letting the problem fester, it was acting as a bully, not a problem solver,” Beginda pointed out.

The second incident was during the March general election when two of the party’s candidates were rejected without any reason.

Beginda queried why was PBB allowed to choose its candidates to contest on PRS seats.

“Where is the principle that component parties ought to be free to conduct their own affairs and make the selection of candidates themselves? Is this not a case of dominance and bullying?” he asked.

“As a result, PRS was caught in a dilemma. The choices were two: PRS could have rejected the suggested replacements or it could have accepted them.

A refusal to accept the replacement candidates could have left the party open to accusations of being disloyal to BN, a grave enough political sin. Such a move would have put PRS leadership in hot soup and perhaps alienate the party from BN.

“The impact on PRS was that it was a tremendous "let down". To paraphrase Dato Seri Ong, the perception was that a partner in Sarawak BN - the PBB - was being "too dominant".

Despite these internal BN problems, Sarawak managed to deliver all but one of its 31 parliamentary seats to the BN. The ruling coalition only lost Bandar Kuching to DAP.

PRS is led by Dr James Masing who is the party's founder president. He is also state land development minister.

PRS has six members of parliament. Its vice-president Joseph Entulu serves at the federal level as deputy minister for national and rural development.

Other options, other than BN

On the current situation within the Sarawak BN, Beginda said it would seem that “we in PRS are still back in a bad school environment where the weaker students are being bullied by the more senior ones.”

He called for a mechanism in the BN for components parties to be protected from the predation of others, no matter what the excuse.

“Umno and PBB could be strong but that should be so without being dominant up to the level that it could openly ‘interfere’ into the internal affairs of another component party,” said Beginda.

Stressing that the BN leadership must be just, Beginda said the organisational integrity of a component party like PRS must be maintained.

“Its decisions, such as the nomination of candidates, must be respected. Failure to do this could lead to fragmentation at the peripheries and ultimately could spread to the centre,” he warned.

Beginda also emphasised on the need for re-generation, re-vitalization and re-growth within the BN.

“The BN machinery is seen as an ossified body, presently unable to respond effectively to the needs of component parties and that of the country as a whole.

The message is that such dominance need to be rectified and ways be found as a means of resuscitating the rest of the BN partners so that the BN machinery could be energized and respond to the people more effectively, “he said.

Beginda reminded the BN top leadership that the coalition must wake up to current political realities and stop being in a state of denial.

“Before, there was only BN which could provide the national leadership. After March 2008, it is clear that PRS has other, perhaps better, options,” he added with that friendly ‘warning’.