A Legacy of Gentlemen Politics

It has been quite some time since Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon appeared and speak in the public. And there he was last week at the Meng Eng Soo open day, speaking in front of a large crowd. There was a sense of astonishment when he was there speaking since he has retired from politics.

It was also a rare occasion as both the former and the current Chief Minister attended the event.

As it is a norm that the Chief Minister attends the annual event, it was unusual when it was heard that only one state exco confirms his attendance.

Hence, the Clan Council decided to invite the former Chief Minister Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon to grace the event.

It was supposed that Tan Sri Dr Koh agreed to attend the event after he was notified that Lim Guan Eng is not able to make it as Dr Koh is not interested in getting into any confrontation.

However, the Clan Council Chairman was caught in an awkward situation when Lim Guan Eng confirmed his attendance at the last minute. Even the current Chief Minister didn’t come prepared in a dress code, possibly because it was an eleventh hour decision. As the organizing committee has clearly published in the news that the attire for the event is traditional attire whether you are Chinese, Malay, Indian or any other race. Lim Guan Eng came wearing a t-shirt.

As said, it was a really extraordinary occasion as both Dr Koh Tsu Koon and Lim Guan Eng was given the stage to speak.

From the speeches, it was very obvious that there is a huge contrast between the character of the two individuals. One is a mild-mannered gentleman with positive and humble words while the other is a skeptic with sarcasms.

In his speech, the Chief Minister kept on boasting on how he have contributed to the names of the road, the allocations and their contributions. His choice of message is to accentuate his importance towards Penang.

On the other hand, the former Chief Minister gave appreciation and tribute to every single person from the former state EXCOs, the government officers, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), individuals and generally the people of Penang towards achieving the UNESCO World Heritage status. His choice of message is to emphasize the hard work of every single person for Penang.

In fact, it seems like it has already been a norm that in almost every speeches that the Chief Minister gave, contain elements of politicking. Even at Jalan Pintal Tali last week, in his usual combative style, he simply cannot avoid talking about the ‘pink diamond’.

That is the huge contrast between the current and the former.

We ought to question ourselves, which type of leader do we prefer?

Or probably we should ask do we want a leader who makes every individual in the community relevant? Or do we want a politician who politicizes everything to make sure he wins the elections?

Do we want a combative culture where we argue and debate every single day?

In ‘New Politics’, we want the right thing to work. We want the right thing to happen. We want the right political culture to be practiced.

As many that know Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon, I believe they would agree that he has left a legacy of positive and gentlemen politics in Penang.

This article has been published in Mandarin in Kwong Wah Yit Poh dated 14th July 2017.

The Change that Changed DAP

Change in the dictionary generally means “the process or end result of becoming different.

When people talks about change, we are always hoping to change for the better. That is what Malaysians were hoping for in the governance of the nation. We wanted a more transparent, effective, progressive and a better government.

It was that hope for a change that has mobilized probably a historic voter turnout in the 2013 general elections.

It was the ‘Ubah’ spirit that DAP has instilled in many people; that has urged our family, friends, neighbours and colleagues to come out and vote.

There were many first-time voters; there were many who drove back to their hometowns to vote; and there were also many who flew back to Malaysia to fulfill their responsibilities as voters. All for the hope of change.

The word ‘change’ in government can be very subjective and have different interpretations. Change can possibly mean a change of leaders. It can also mean a change of different political party governing the nation. Or it means a change of new, progressive ways of governing the nation irrespective of who wins the elections.

Recent happenings on several issues has incited doubts in how people perceived ‘change’ as campaigned by the DAP.

There were cases where DAP’s actions contradicts with what they have fought for in the Parliament.
One of the obvious contradictions can be seen when we compare the Malaysia Stadium Corporation Act which was passed in 2010 in the Parliament and the Penang Stadium and Open Area Enactment that was passed in the State Assembly last May. Both the act and the enactment are pretty much similar which is to further improve the management of sports facilities with the exception of a few sections. The main difference though is that one is a federal law, and the other is a state law.

When the Malaysia Stadium Corporation Act was tabled in the Parliament in 2010, the then DAP Seremban MP, John Fernandez questioned the absolute power of the Minister in appointing the Chairman of the Stadium Corporation; but in Penang, the Chief Minister is the Chairman of the Penang Stadium and Open Area Corporation himself.

In the same Parliament motion, YB Ngeh Koo Ham of DAP objected for the section of the “protection from legal actions” in the Malaysia Stadium Corporation Act; but in Penang, the DAP-led state Government passes a similar law with the section that includes protection from personal liability.
There was so much irony on what they have campaigned for ‘change’, but they were practicing the same thing that they have objected for in the Federal Government.

There is probably one change in the enactment though is that the DAP-led State Government added an “Open Area” as the responsibility of the corporation, which would mean the Chairman who is also the Chief Minister having even more power towards the lands of Penang despite there are already controversies in regards to land matters.

There were also many occasions where we see how the DAP objected when it was the act of the Barisan Nasional, but was considered noble when it is the act of the DAP.

Freedom of Information and speech was one of the agendas when the DAP campaigned in the election. They have also boasted their action when they passed the Freedom of Information (FOI) Enactment in Penang. Today, it seems that the FOI has become a tool to hide documents rather than opening it up. Gerakan has applied to gain access to over 20 documents but we never gain access to any one of it.

The Federal Government was accused of selling the nation to China when huge investments were brought into the country; but when the Penang Government applied for loan from China, it was claimed that it was for the best interest of the state.

The DAP was so against the UMNO that they have vowed not to award the state projects to companies owned by UMNO members. Few weeks back, Zarul Ahmad, the chairman of Consortium Zenith Construction Sdn Bhd which was awarded to build an undersea tunnel and three major roads in Penang admitted that he is an UMNO member.

There are other ironies, such as the open tender in state government projects, the public car park charges, restoring local government elections, cleaner, greener and many others.

It is not about the right or wrong regarding the decisions on the said issues; but it is a matter of the meaning of ‘change’ is perceived by the DAP.

Yes, there is indeed change, the DAP changed.

This article has been published in Mandarin in Kwong Wah Yit Poh dated 30th June 2017.

Challenging the Status Quo

Throughout the years, I’ve written quite a number of times in articles and introduced “new politics” to people that I have met. It is all about participating in a healthier and matured politics. “New politics” is a progress in politics that we should be pursuing at.

As progressive people living in a progressive community, we have always wanted improvements. We have campaigned for change in the government. Yes, I agree that we need a change, or rather, transformation.
In our life, we need transformations; to make improvements in the community, state and nation for the better.

But how do we define real change? I believe it is a good time to review our definition as we have already experienced a change of leadership in the government.

Eight years after the “ubah” factor swept the General Election, we should think again, where are we today? How much have we improved after a different political party took the lead in Penang?

Are we experiencing the type of change that we have sought after? Or is the change only a change of a different political party managing the administration?

Does the political system and way of conducting matters in politics still the same? Are we still facing the same problems as we have faced previously?

I think different groups of people will have different answers as everyone have different needs.

To me, I don’t see changes significant enough. There may be some huge publicity over some changes that have been done. That is because the real change needs to come from a political transformation or changes in the way of Malaysians practice politics.

If we want real change, we need to challenge the status quo in the politics.

Ask ourselves…

Do we Malaysian’s really want politicians who tell us hard truths about what it will take to solve our intractable problems? Or do we want politicians who tell us sweet lies?

Do we really want politicians who, because they are authentic, will sometimes say the politically incorrect thing; but doing the right thing? Or do we want politicians who are so fake that they say one thing, and do another?

Do we want politicians who earn our trust and are not owned by a certain elite group? Of do we want politicians who develop the state for only a special group of people?

Do we want politicians who take governing seriously rather than contesting in the elections for the sake of becoming an elected representative only? And running away to other constituencies when the existing ones do not favour them anymore?

Do we want politicians who are polarizing people into groups due to their race, religion or political beliefs? Or do we want politician who does not look into people’s differences, and instead uniting the people despite of our diversity?

We have to be reminded that we do not need to specifically champion for the cause of a specific race when we champion for Malaysians as one. We do not have to fight for Indian, Malay, Chinese or the rights of any race when we are fighting for the rights of Malaysians.

Today, the era of ‘government-knows-it-best’ is over. With lack of quality education in the past, many of our forefathers leaves the job of governing the nation to the few high educated ones. In those days, our great grandparents may not have the luxury of access to knowledge to know what is governing all about.

And today, with developments of our nation, the literacy rate of Malaysians have improved with the easy access of education and information. Most of us today have a basic understanding of public policies and governance. Many are able to give ideas and suggestions to the government to make a better community and nation.

It used to be a top-down approach. It is now a bottom-up approach. We, the citizens play an important role in making whether our nation is good or bad.

We, the citizen plays and important role in shaping the politics of today and what type of politicians should lead the government.

Coming back to the definition of ‘change’; perhaps change of leadership in the government is not as effective as we can imagine that helps us to improve our community and nation. Perhaps what we need is a group of people with fresh and more progressive minds to challenge the status quo of politics.

Challenging the status quo for the better needs a huge effort. We need to push new frontiers in political practice for the sake of being better together.

We have to do it together.

This article has been published in Mandarin in Kwong Wah Yit Poh dated 19th May 2017.

The Courage to Aspire 2017

It is the end of the year again and another new year approaching.

The end of the year is a time for celebrations and holidays to many. People take breaks to reward themselves after a year of working hard in whatever they do. It is also a time for reflection and looking forward for a fresh start in the new, upcoming year. We reflect on what we have achieved or done wrong over the year so we will learn lessons from it.

A new year, with its new delights and challenges, are upon all of us.

Looking at the politics in our nation for the past year, the problem of politics today is with its tribal, confrontational style. Politicians from different political parties fight with each other for the sake of politicking.

Politics is a process that happens in any nation that nobody can avoids. Our problem is not that we are engrossed with too much politics, but we do not have enough of healthy, constructive politics.

We have come to a point where many of us have become very individualistic.

The political elites strive to stay to gain power.

The middle-class are too busy climbing the ladder, trying to achieve success.

The poors are struggling to put food on the table.

Our nation is in hunger of change. But what are the changes that are needed? Does changing the government really works to change the community and our livelihood?

Politically speaking, making a change to our community does not happen by only changing the government. The more important step is to change the mentality of ourselves and including the political leaders.

It is easy to become cynical or impatient about ‘change’ especially with the current political situation in our nation. However, all is not lost. Change does not happen in a day, week or month. Sometimes, it takes years. I believe that we can make a difference by beginning from ourselves.

I believe that we have come to a certain extent that we need to look for an alternative ideology. We need a politics that encompasses grassroots democracy and collaborative decision-making of the people.

The first step is to change within ourselves; to change our mentality about politics. We need a political innovation; where we innovate our mentality to get into a politics that inspires real progress and development.

Politics is not about competing with each other or who wins the elections and assumes power. Election comes every few years; there will be winners and losers. Whoever wins, we must ensure that the elected ones bring real progress to the nation, instead of taking advantage of the power they hold.

To achieve this; is definitely a rough and tough journey; and requires an effort together to make it a reality. We may be from different political divide, we may have different political stand, we may come from different backgound. But let us not give up, and let me invite you to have this courage to aspire; to walk this journey together; by putting it as our 2017 resolution.

In this coming year ahead, let us begin a political innovation whereby politics is

not about who wins or loses in the elections;

not about who controls more power;

not about who is the lesser devil or who is more corrupted; Instead, we must compare who is able to deliver better as the leader of the nation;

not about political gossip, personal attacks, character assassinations;

not about confrontational debates and arguments;

It is simply about transforming our nation economically, socially, environmentally and politically.

It is simply driven by addressing the real issues and problems faced by the people

It is plainly about working on a journey together for a progressive nation, to be better together.

This 2017, I call for this fellowship towards a journey together. Let this fellowship have the courage to aspire a resolution to craft a new political mentality towards a first-world nation. A mentality to work politics in a new way to be better together.

Happy New Year!

This article has been published in Mandarin in Kwong Wah Yit Poh dated 30th December 2016.

Recuperating Malaysian politics

The year is almost at its end, and we have seen the politics in Malaysia has been upheaval and full of drama. Many unexpected political incidents that was never thought of before has happened in 2016.

Internationally, Donald Trump who began the campaign as a joke is now elected as the next US President winning against the favourites Hillary Clinton. In the east, the South Koreans decided to impeach their President. Back nearby to us, Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte who was elected this year made many controversial and daring decisions whether locally or internationally.

Malaysia politics has also been exciting throughout the year seeing the political landscape that has changed.

In the early of the year, we witnessed the rift in UMNO has widen with Dato’ Seri Mukhriz Mahathir relinquishing his position as Menteri Besar of Kedah and replaced by Dato’ Seri Ahmad Bashah.

Tan Sri Muhiyiddin Yassin then was suspended as Deputy President of UMNO for his continued open criticism of the party leadership. Then we saw Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad quitting UMNO and subsequently launched and signed the Malaysian Citizens’ Declaration to demand the resignation of the Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Najib. Ironically, it was done together with his longtime political enemies.

It was followed by the sacking of Muhiyiddin and Mukhriz from UMNO while Shafie Apdal was suspended. This results with Shafie Apdal quitting the party few weeks later.

Ensuing all this ‘sacking and quitting’ episode, the former PM Tun Mahathir formed a new political party, ‘Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia’ with Tan Sri Muhiyiddin as the President.

It was also bewilderment to many, seeing Mahathir joining the rally organised directly or indirectly by the Pakatan Harapan. In the early April, the anti-GST rally and not so long ago, the Bersih rally.

At the end of the year, we see two political rivals competing for the same pool of Muslim voters sharing the same stage in the name of championing for Rohingya rights. On the same day itself, another two bitter political rivals also shared the same stage with Tun Dr. Mahathir attended the DAP annual national conference in Shah Alam.

Concluding the incidents happened around 2016, the main agenda of politics of today is about survival. With the political uncertainty that has awakens many politicians since 2008, it made them realizes that power is not permanent. Changes of power is possible in Malaysia and in any part of the world. It was then that political parties took measures to ensure their survival or to be objective, to make sure they continue to win the elections.

To me, the most ironic incident is the remarks that Tun Dr M has made towards the DAP. With all due respect to the contributions he has made to the nation, these remarks has made us seen the ‘political animal’ side of him.

Dr. Mahathir, who had once described DAP as “racist and anti-Malay” told the DAP members at its’ annual convention that he was badly wrong about the DAP. Some of the leaders were even jailed during his administration as the PM. He has also mentioned the party anthem of DAP which is in national language shows its multiracialism.

The comments by the former PM is so ironic that for 22 years he leads the nation and has been condemning the DAP since its formation; and all of a sudden he realised that he was so badly wrong about the party. By saying this, does he mean that for 22 years in his leadership, he was wrong about DAP?

And for DAP especially Lim Kit Siang who has been attacking Mahathir for that same amount of years; who has campaigned to ‘save Malaysia’ from the Barisan Nasional administration under the then Tun Dr M. Today, they sat together and forged a ‘partnership’ to save Malaysia?

On the other side, Dato’ Seri Najib brought together two Malay-Muslim majority party together for a religious cause; despite being rivals politically.

It is apparent that today, political survival is a priority to many political parties and politicians. Most of them are no longer putting the survival of the people as the priority instead. Without a doubt, there are also many decisions that have been made to ensure the people’s survival. But we have to start pondering whether which is the priority.

Are the political leaders trying to survive politically first then only to ensure the survival of the people? Or are the political leaders first to make sure the people survive so they can survive politically?

Many Malaysians is in the opinion that politics has become very individualistic whereby it is merely about the politicians’ or the political parties’ gain rather than a cause for the general Malaysians. Many see that the politics is sick now and needs recuperation.

Today, we need a fresh political mentality for youth especially for upcoming young politicians. In this coming year, let us set a resolution to bring in and innovate politics to a healthy and constructive one. We need a resolution to be better together.

This article has been published in Mandarin in Kwong Wah Yit Poh dated 16th December 2016.

Small issues matter too

Tun Musa Hitam, our former Deputy Prime Minister published a biography, “Frankly Speaking” which tells about his life in politics and serving the people. It has been an inspiring and interesting book to learn about governance, politics, serving the people as well as about knowing more about the history of our country.

One of the lessons that politicians should learn from the former Deputy Prime Minister is to put his priority to serve the people and get things done above politics. Despite being the second most powerful man in the Government, the decisions and actions that he has taken in office shows that he doesn’t politicise issues and forsaking the needs of the people.

Few good cases on how Tun Musa has handled was during the inflation, sugar crisis and consumer protection issues when he was the Deputy Minister of Trade and Industry. He has also played an important role in dealing with the Baling demonstrations due to the low rubber prices which affects the rubber industry. There are also many other incidences which proves his good political leadership in his biography which I think should be read by many.

While I believe that it is difficult to avoid politicking in the current political arena, I think that we have the options to prioritize on which is more important. I believe that matters that affect the needs and necessities of the people must not be ignored for the sake of populist agenda.

Last Sunday, 11 of Gerakan’s Residents Representative Committee (Jawatankuasa Perwakilan Penduduk or JPP) have made uproar in the news when they called for press conferences at the same time and same day, but different places.

Various issues were raised ranging from cleanliness to public infrastructure problems. Clogged drains, garbage all over public parks, missing ditch covers, bird’s droppings and many more.

It could be only be a small matter if each of the issue is raised alone. It is because each issue mostly affects the nearby residents only; comparing to bigger issues like petrol prices that affects generally all Malaysians.

As in the issues that we have raised in the press conferences, it is obvious that there are many local issues throughout the whole Penang including the island and mainland which is unresolved and probably ignored.

It shows that the slogan “Cleaner, Greener Penang” stays just a slogan and merely a political rhetoric.

We know that bigger issues are important; for instance, corruption, economy, social issues. These issues are matters that couldn’t be solved within a day or a month. It could probably take years to fix it. As the issues could be on-going for a long term, it could be easily politicised by certain politicians to make the current government look weak as the matter cannot be fixed.

Coming back to the local problems that the JPP has raised; those issues were matters that could have been solved in one day. And why weren’t the matters taken care of? Why was it ignored and left a problem for such a long time?

Why these politicians keep on talking about big issues only? Is it because it garners more attention and it is easier to manipulate? It is due to the populist agenda?

Cases of corruption may have affected us as a country in terms of reputation and economy; but clogged drains in front of our home may have risked our lives through the breeding of Aedes mosquitoes.

If such small issues still cannot be handled by these politicians, why do we trust them to help us fight for bigger issues?

As a quote I read in the internet before, “Be faithful in small things because it is in them that your strength lies.”

This article has been published in Mandarin in Kwong Wah Yit Poh dated 7th October 2016.

How do we judge a Government?

The latest political controversy have put DAP’s ADUN, YB Lim Siew Khim through sleepless nights, perhaps. As many would have knew about this latest and hottest controversial issue through the news, it was reported that YB Lim’s father has been offering the ‘approval’ of low-medium cost houses for a sum of money.

The case is now new though. About a year back, few people came to the Gerakan office to ask for advice on getting their low-medium cost houses approved and if not, to get their money back from the agent that they have paid for it. But due to lack of knowledge on the government paper works, these poor people did not have any documentation to prove for it.

The case was then put on hold until the video of the negotiation between victims and YB Lim’s father was uploaded on the internet. The next thing we see, war of words happened in the social media. Attacks and defence were made by supporters and cybertroopers.

The Sungai Pinang ADUN responded that she is not aware of the issue despite happened since a year ago. I believe these victims who have paid the sum of money must surely had find numerous ways and people to make their money worth paid for; and that would have include approaching YB Lim’s office. It is not an issue that happened a week ago, and to say that the YB is not aware of it is simply amusing.

Even when Malaysians still haven’t received their Bantuan Rakyat 1 Malaysia (BR1M) payments within a week, they already knew how to contact several different offices to obtain advice on how to get it.

Of course, many cybertroopers debated that there are so many other cases of corruption at a bigger and higher level, and why wasn’t action taken against them. Comparisons were made; attacks and hatred were incited over many individuals or political parties over the social media.

It is very unfortunate that Malaysians tend to get excited over controversial and negative news. When news of corruption, hatred, racial and other negative ones arises, Malaysians talked about it, share it, commented and argued over it especially on the social media.

It has come to a point that in Malaysia or I would say in many parts of the world, people are more concerned of negative news compared to the positive ones. In politics, Malaysians are comparing who is the worst leader or politician and not who performs better. People compares who are more corrupted, who are more racist, who are the weaker ones.

We should be comparing who performs better in managing the government, who are the moderate and fair leaders, and who are the more honest politicians. Usually these people are the ones who are forgotten and neglected in the news or conversations.

In the recent cover of the Times magazine, “Why we’re losing the Internet to the culture of hate” is a good example of how we are judging the political and governance world.

We may not aware of it, but many were excited and tend to discuss about negative issues when they heard any of it. How many of us always immediately share to our friends when we heard news about people were killed, when some leaders uttered racist remarks, when news of corruption surfaced? And how many of us share when we receive news of how good our country has performed at the international level, when our country’s GDP or FDI increases? We know ourselves better.

In life, all of us have always learned that we should look at the positive side, the bright side and the good side of people. There are many quotes about it, it’s written in self-improvement books, it was taught in motivational seminars.

It is time that we put all these into practice. It is time that we compare who does better in governance. Low corruption rate is one key towards a good nation. But good governance is the main key towards developing a great nation.

I am not saying that we should ignore all cases of crimes and corruption. If elements of corruption is proved whether it is the issue of low-medium cost housing and YB Lim’s father or the 1MDB issue or any other cases; action should be taken on culprits.

Penangites ready for public debate?

Penang debate 290616


Debate between YB Liang Teck Meng & YB Lim Hock Seng on the “Three Highways and Underground Sea Tunnel” two weeks ago was a waste of time.

I was there throughout the whole debate and watch the whole scene; that has happened on the stage and on the floor.

The debate begins with a quite a peaceful manner with cheers and hand clapping to each of the YB by their respective supporters. There were some occasional small jeers by small group of supporters though. It started quite well.

But the chaos starts after both YBs presented their points in the first round of fifteen minutes; when the question session begins.

YB Lim Hock Seng did not answer all three questions imposed by YB Liang Teck Meng. Not only that, he has diverted the topic to 1MDB, RM2.6 billion donation issue, GST and many other national issues.

Then and there, the audience begins to get frustrated as they were waiting for answers about the 3 highways and underground sea tunnel but it was not given.  They started to jeer louder at YB Lim. One of the audiences who were so irked kept on shouting “ask him to talk about the tunnel”.

To my shock, YB Lim Hock Seng responded to the audience on the floor, and with a harsh way, and stirred up the anger of the audience. Words like “kalau tak tau, jangan bising. Tau tak, bodoh?”, “Eh, samseng!”, “CIlaka punya GST, GST cilaka!” came out from the mouth of YB Lim. You, I and everyone else know, such words will only provoke the crowds even more.

 

“Ask him to talk about the tunnel!”

The debate yesterday shows how unprofessional YB Lim Hock Seng is; provoking the emotions of the BN supporters instead of answering the questions about the tunnel and highways imposed by YB Liang Teck Meng.

Posted by Gerakan Penang 檳州民政 on Tuesday, June 28, 2016

YB Lim Hock Seng as a four- term people’s representative didn’t acted professionally as the debater. First, he didn’t answer the questions imposed and tries to divert the topic to other national issues.

When many were waiting to listen for the truth about the highways and tunnel right from the mouth of the Public Works, Utility and Transport Exco to make things clear, all they got is some other information.

Besides that, in the debate YB Lim should only respond to YB Liang. Instead, he responded the audience. If anyone is there that night, one would have seen clearly how YB Lim kept on chiding the audience with strong expressions. It has definitely arouses their anger and therefore, the people shouted back. YB Lim has forgotten that it was a debate; not a ceramah, dialogue session, not concert.

To make things worse, a senior and respected people’s representative who has served the people for nearly two decades is urging the people to NOT respect others. YB Lim clearly stated in the debate that YB Liang should not be respected. That event is supposed to be a professional debate, not an argument on the street.

Despite not answering the questions and diverting the topic, at the end of the day, I still believe that YB Lim and the DAP achieved their objective.

Barisan Nasional supporters were again tainted with being rowdy and harsh. DAP manage to strengthen their existing support base by reminding them about the controversial national issues.

I agree with many though that the people on the floor should attend the debate with an open and mature mind. If everyone was quiet and just listens to the debate, I am sure the people in and out of the hall, will judge the debate purely on the content.

Looking at how the YB acted as a debater and how the audience on the floor responded; I am convinced that many Penangites are not ready for a public debate yet.

Unfortunately for those who attended hoping for a matured debate, maybe we will have to wait for another 10 or 20 years?

We, Penangites have to ask ourselves whether we want such a leader for our state, one that cannot act professionally as a leader. There are many quotes that states “Leaders should lead by example”. Maybe the people should be leading the politicians instead by being more matured, politically.

Funny though, at the end of the debate, the DAP state leaders even carried YB Lim Hock Seng and him holding a drinking water bottle as if it is a trophy, “indicating” that he is the winner of the debate.

We all know that this particular debate will not determine any winner, but to enlighten the public on the facts of the issue. But witnessing the whole debate and the after-effects, I guess it is just one of the political play by DAP to strengthen themselves.