It’s a political game….


KUALA LUMPUR, 30 Julai: Gerakan menyifatkan penguguran jawatan Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri sebagai satu “permainan politik” sehinggakan kepentingan rakyat dan ekonomi di negara ini diketepikan.

Menurut Timbalan Ketua Pemuda Gerakan, Andy Yong, adalah cukup melampau sekiranya Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak menggunakan kuasa sebagai seorang pemimpin untuk mengukuhkan kedudukan dirinya sendiri.

“Perdana Menteri harus sedar bahawa pada zaman kini, rakyat yang memutuskan siapakah pemimpin negara yang sesuai untuk mereka.

“Kuasa seseorang pemimpin tidak kira latar belakang, ada hadnya. Jikalau ia digunakan semata-mata untuk menguatkan kepentingan diri, ia amat melampaui batasan,” katanya dalam satu kenyataan kepada The Malaysian Times (TMT).

Beliau berkata demikian merujuk kepada pengumuman yang dibuat oleh Najib pada Selasa bahawa Muhyiddin dilucutkan jawatan sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan jawatannya itu kini digantikan oleh Menteri Dalam Negeri selaku Naib Presiden Umno, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Selain itu, Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal yang juga merupakan salah seorang Naib Presiden Umno turut digugurkan dari Kabinet.

Bagi Andy, beliau berpandangan sekiranya terdapat mana-mana pihak yang mengambil kesempatan dan juga keuntungan dalam hal ini, maka pihak tersebut mestilah disingkirkan serta-merta.

“Diharap Kabinet baru sedar dan akan utamakan politik ikhlas demi negara dan rakyat. Mereka yang ambil kesempatan untuk ambil keuntungan, haruslah disingkir serta-merta,” tegasnya.


Can PGRM claims exclusivity in the word ‘GERAKAN’?



BN party files complaint with RoS over new movement’s use of ‘Gerakan’ – The Malaysian Insider –

Khalid Samad dismisses Gerakan’s worry over word in new GHB movement –

Putting aside political support or any cognitive bias, let us look at the legal aspect of whether Gerakan Harapan Baru (GHB) can register its proposed new political party at the Registrar of Societies.

The Societies Act 1966 regulates the registration of any political party in Malaysia.

Section 7 (3)(d)(i)-(iii) of the Act states if the name under which the [party] is to be registered—

(i) appears to the Registrar to mislead or be calculated to mislead members of the public as to the true character or purpose of the [party] or so nearly resembles the name of such other [party] as is likely to deceive the members of the public or members of either [party];

(ii) is identical to that of any other existing local party; or

(iii) is, in the opinion of the Registrar, undesirable.

So in general, it is an objective test ie would an ordinary person be misled between Gerakan Harapan Baru (GHB) with Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (popularly known as Gerakan)?

As far as I am concerned, there is yet to be any case decided by our local Court concerning dispute of a political party’s name.

Referring to the case of Woollard v. Australian Electoral Commission and Liberal Party of Australia (WA Division) Inc [2001] AATA 166 a Tribunal considered an appeal against an AEC refusal to register the party “liberals for forests” because the name was too similar to that of the Liberal Party of Australia and its abbreviation “Liberal”.

The Tribunal, comprising three federal court judges, directed the AEC to register “liberals for forests” and held that the names were not so similar as to prohibit the registration of “liberals for forests”. The Tribunal stated that political parties use in their names generic words such as “Australia”, “liberal”, “labour”, “democrat”, “national”, “christian”, “progressive”, “socialist” and the like.

Apparently based on the ratio decidendi of this case, it is in favour of GHB to register it’s name.

In another case of The Fishing Party v. Australian Electoral Commission and Australian Fishing and Lifestyle Party [2009] AATA 170; one of the matters raised and considered was the similarity of the names and whether the new party’s name should therefore be prohibited. The Tribunal stated that the AEC “has previously formed the opinion that the two names of the Fishing Party and the Australian Fishing and Lifestyle Party are not sufficiently similar as to be misleading or confusing. No argument was advanced by [the applicant] in support of this contention. We agree with this determination because the words “and Lifestyle” are sufficient to aurally and visually distinguish the two parties as separate entities without risk of confusion or mistake, and would prevent a reasonable person from thinking there was any connection or relationship between the two parties.”

However subsequently the AEC has refused a party called the “Country Liberals” (unrelated to the Liberal Party) as it could be seen to be the branch of the Liberal Party of Australia which addresses the needs of country Australia.

The party was eventually registered using the name Country Liberals (Northern Territory).

So is GERAKAN a contentious name?

Time to regulate political funding


Undoubtedly funding is an essential part of any political parties in Malaysia.   Over the years we know both Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) parties have resorted to contribution and donation by individuals or corporations. However such political funding has always shrouded in secrecy.

It is not something new.  Political parties and politicians need money to serve in their respective constituencies or to fund their campaign during an election.  For obvious reason both BN and PR had been quite reluctant to push for a reform to regulate political financing.

If there is a law to regulate the fundings; corruption, abuse and undue influence in politics can be curbed in order to secure a sustainable financial base and healthy political environment. Hence the issues whether BN or PR parties are financially supported by government linked companies or private corporations and individuals can be resolved once and for all. Rumours such as whether 1MDB or certain developers actually funded BN or PR respectively will be known and seen as an accountable and transparent process in a mature democracy.

In addition by amending the political funding laws such as the Election Offences Act 1954 , it will also promotes clean and credible candidate to stand for election instead of for money only. This is because all forms of contributions must be channelled to an official account instead of personal account. This may also well resolves the issue of warlords.  As a result all related expenses can be independently audited to promote a conducive political environment.

Lastly it will also reduce the capacity of those with private agenda to influence the election outcomes. Parti Gerakan should consider the same for the next general election.

The importance of youth in Malaysia


As the National Deputy Youth Chief of a political party, I am inclined to write something about our nation’s youth. The value of a country is assessed not by the riches or assets it possesses, but by its people. A nation may be wealthy, but what’s more important than the actual wealth is the collective intellect and intelligence of the people who contributed towards earning that wealth. As we can see from this, wealthy nations can go to ruin if their newer generations are unable to keep pace with their forefathers and drive innovation and growth, and developing nations can boost their welfare with insightful planning and an enthusiastic youth.

Undeniably we have been moving backward be it in education, sports, currency, political maturity, racial understanding and tolerance.

The youth of a nation determine how it shapes up a few years into the future; they are the future of the country, and their actions and inaction both contribute to the state of the nation. In developing and promising countries like Malaysia, the youth of the nation should contribute positively.

Malaysia is proud of the fact that it is a growing nation of diversity but if the country has to be governed properly, it has be done by people who are responsible and who don’t abuse their positions of power for their own betterment instead of helping to better the nation. When the youth of a nation realize the value of good governance, they ensure that they vote for the people who they believe can make a difference to the nation’s prosperity and future. By exercising their franchise and encouraging their peers to do so too, they also prevent their votes from being misused by political parties who wish to win by hook or by crook.

Malaysia is plagued by various social ills like corruption from the lowest to the highest levels. It is not only few isolated cases (an excuse where some leaders are fond of giving) but the main obstacle that deter the country from being mentally progressive. Our youth must believe there is an incentive to succeed with hardwork and honest living.

Politicians and bureaucrats wind so much red tape around simple processes that they complicate them and make it impossible for progress to take place (though we can’t deny improvement exists in some departments which is long overdue). The youth of the country can use their education to battle these problems that plague their country — they can fight corruption, bribes and every other social ill that keeps a nation down and prevents it from progressing at the speed it should. They must recognise the importance of knowledge and togetherness for the good of the country.

Countries develop and become better when more of their youth are educated, and when this education is used for the greater good of the nation. Malaysia is leaping ahead of most neighbouring countries in terms of infrastructure and opportunities, but the basic mindset of the people is yet to change. They still don’t know how to adhere to basic societal propriety like following traffic rules or being punctual or truly patriotic and treating all races equally. They must strive to get people to follow their lead instead of following herd mentality and joining the majority.

If the youth of a country are educated and willing to go the extra mile to effect positive change, a truly developed nation can happen.

Impossible to move away from race-based politics?


Whether it is Malaysia Malaysian or Bangsa Malaysia or 1Malaysia, it will be a gimmick to move forward as one if Umno or MCA or MIC or Pas still believe in race-based politics.

Though dominated by Chinese, Gerakan has been advocating non-ethnic based approach, one that is based on needs and merits. It is never easy to encourage other races to join so long as race-based parties exist. And I must admit, since Syed Hussein and Chong Eu era, we have not been pushing hard or not proven ourselves to be a worthy party for all races.

A country with a multiracial population like Malaysia should not have race-based political parties, which over the years are glaringly becoming a setback to the country’s unity. It should not be the numbers game anymore but togetherness as a nation.

Perlu jelaskan dengan terperinci mana RM4.2 billion hutang 1MDB itu…


Yes, if it is really #nothingtohide or political sabotage, prove it! By now most people (esp from the urban) are skeptical about PM Najib and the 1MDB crisis.

Regardless of the outcome, they won’t trust the investigation whether it is by the Auditor-General, PAC, MACC etc. Press releases explained by 1MDB, PMO or others will be futile.

Unless facts and figures can clearly show where is the siphoned monies (as alleged by Pua or Rafizi) gone to or a truly independent commission is set up to investigate, nothing will change people’s perception/belief. Opposition (like Pua or Rafizi) and Tun M will likely to add salt to the wound even if it is spinned and twisted information.

High time to be transparent if there is nothing to hide. Then arrest and charge all those idiots. Same goes to the Melbourne properties purchased by Mara and all the suspicious dealings whether it is for 13GE, bailouts or embezzled by Minister, BN/PR politician, Rosmah or Tun M. Fear of no one, be it warlords or little napoleons. Honesty and integrity is still the best policy; for the people and country.

Otherwise an uphill battle for PM…

By the way ignore those bigots or extremists who utter rubbish or implement foolish policies. Shouldn’t waste time on people with such narrow mentality.

G’kan Youth to PM: Prove ‘nothing 2 hide’ with facts –

Malaysia’s Fitch rating upgraded, so what?


Do the people on the street care about the Fitch (or Flinstone) rating? Or do they feel better after the assurance given by the Bank Negara Governor or a Minister? They don’t give a damn. After all they feel the pinch of GST, petrol hike, possible higher toll charges etc. This is especially so to those who are under employment…semua naik tapi gaji tak naik…

Simply put, many Malaysians who have a decent job cannot find a decent quality living especially in the city.

As for now forget about the government or politicians; one of the main reason the economy is not doing well (as everyone says it nowadays) is that companies or individuals are hoarding cash and “maximizing profits” instead of investing in their people and future projects.

This behavior is contributing to record income inequality in the country and starving the primary engine of an economic growth — the vast middle class purchasing power.

If average rakyats don’t get paid living wages, they can’t spend much money shopping (or may incurred more credit card debts). And when they can’t buy quality products and services or urban properties, the companies that sell products and services to average citizen can’t grow. So the profit obsession of these companies is, ironically, hurting their ability to accelerate revenue growth.

One obvious solution to this problem is for big companies to pay their people more — to share more of the vast wealth that they create with the people who create it.

The companies have record profit margins, so they can certainly afford to do this.

But, unfortunately, over the past three decades, what began as a healthy and necessary effort to make our companies more efficient has evolved into a warped consensus that the only value that companies create is financial and that the only thing employers should ever worry about is making more of it.

This view is an insult to anyone who has ever dreamed of having a job that is about more than money. And it is a short-sighted and destructive view of capitalism, an economic system that sustains not just this country but most countries in the world.

This view has become deeply entrenched, though.

These days, if you suggest that great companies should serve several constituencies (customers, employees, and shareholders) and that companies should share more of their wealth with the people who generate it (employees), you get called a “socialist.” You get called a “liberal.” You get told that you “don’t understand economics.” You get accused of promoting “wealth confiscation.”

They say in Malaysia, people get paid what they deserve to get paid.

Anyone who wants more money should go out and “start their own company” or “get a better job.” (Some see no incentive to earn an honest living due to bureaucracy, cronyism and corruption; this is another issues that I would discuss in future).

In other words, you get told that anyone who suggests that great companies should share the value they create with all three constituencies instead of just lining the pockets of shareholders is an idiot.

After all, these folks say, one law of capitalism is that employers pay their employees as little as possible. Employees are just “costs.” They should try to minimize those “costs” whenever and wherever you can.

This view, unfortunately, is not just selfish and demeaning. It’s also economically stupid. Those “costs” you are minimizing (employees) are also current and prospective customers for your company and other companies. And the less money they have, the fewer products and services they are going to buy.

Obviously, the folks who own and run big corporations want to do as well as they can for themselves. But the key point is not a law that they pay their employees as little as possible.

It is a choice made by employers who want to keep the highest possible percentage of a company’s wealth for themselves.

It is a choice that reveals that, regardless of what they say about how much they value their employees, regardless of what euphemism they use to describe their employees (“associate,” or “partner”), they, in fact, don’t give a damn about their employees. (not me of course :) )

Employers or CEO, after all, are earning profits while choosing to pay their employees so little in many cases that the employees have to live in poverty (including minimum wager of RM900)

Solution? I am no economist but met a young man yesterday who works as an agent for ah longs and promotes vice activities said this is his solution in order to live comfortably in Malaysia.

Anyway Confucius said: “In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of”.

Blog at

Up ↑