Loss of direction and lost ideals

Independent MP Wee Choo Keong is a 25-year veteran of the Opposition who has seen it all. Sacked from the DAP and later estranged from PKR for his outspokenness, the lawyer and now independent MP for Wangsa Maju rues the demise of a constructive political discourse which he says has been hijacked by the politics of hatred.

> You have been MP for Bukit Bintang under the DAP for two terms until 1995 and in 2008, you won Wangsa Maju under a PKR ticket before going independent. What was it like being an Opposition MP?

Our role is to change bad laws and policies and to tegur (speak up to) the authorities, not just oppose everything the Government does. When I was MP for Kuala Lumpur Bandar (now Bukit Bintang), there was no animosity between government executives and myself because if your arguments are factual and based on research, they will listen.

> What is it like nowadays?

Now the situation is very scary. We are told we must change the Government but there is no proper explanation why. We have people who say “we must get rid of so-and-so and get rid of the Government, system-wise never mind, that comes later”. What is happening now is a power struggle instead of constructive engagement to put right the system.

> Improving the system is more important than replacing the Government?

A good system will determine the leadership of the country, the political landscape, how government agencies and government-linked companies operate. I believe our Prime Minister is trying very hard to deal with this but he has not been able to push through his policies as fast as I would like to see because I think he feels the need to first have a social contract with the people (through a general election mandate).

> Isn’t replacing the Government what Opposition movements are all about?

It should be more about building a credible and constructive Opposition. Not merely to overthrow the present government but to put right the system, because in the process of improving the system, people will come to support you and a change in government will happen. But our Opposition is mainly talking about “the road to Putrajaya” and people are getting tired of this.

> There is not enough focus on actual policies and improving the system?

The Opposition’s manifesto and saying things like “if we come into power you don’t have to pay for your child’s education”. They are not looking at the system, which involves a policy based on an ability to study rather than pay, and how they plan to implement that.

Everything also boils down to allegations, never mind if it is not true, just sling enough mud and hope that some of it will stick.

When you question the 2008 Selangor Pakatan Rakyat manifesto on why some items were not implemented, they say a manifesto is not a promise. Really, then what is it? To me, a manifesto is a binding social contract, and this applies to the Barisan Nasional as well.

> What should the political discussion be more about then?

For example, how we could cut subsidies in urban areas and channel it to rural areas, and introduce a means test to determine reci­pients. Rather, they’re saying BR1M is for election purposes. Well, even if the Government introduces nine rounds of the aid payment, there will be an election that will follow afterwards, right?

> In your view, how will Pakatan Rakyat fare in the coming general election?

They will not do better than 2008 as a lot of factors that helped them back then are now absent. In 2008, people were angry because a lot of things promised by the Government was not done and it was not limited to the Chinese and Indians but across the board.

Plus, there was Tun Dr Mahathir expressing his unhappiness about the leadership. Every­thing that could have gone wrong for Barisan went wrong and they were running around like a headless chicken.

Now, we have a Prime Minister who listens. It took me eight months to research and argue why the Malaysia Airlines and AirAsia share swap deal was not right, but in the end, the Government took action.

So, the next general election results will not be as clear-cut a case as the Pakatan is making it out to be. They are saying let’s change, but let’s be honest – change for who?

It is more to change the Prime Minister because the premiership is apparently someone’s right, so I prefer to refer to them only as the Opposition, because if it really was a Pakatan (agreement) then there would be no dissent and they would speak with one voice.

We cannot, for example, say one day, that the term “Allah” can be used for non-Muslims, then tomorrow say it cannot be used, then turn back again and say something else, that is incoherent.

> Why were you sacked by the DAP?

When I was the editor of the DAP organ, the Rocket, in the mid-1990s in my capacity as DAP national publicity secretary, I had problems even buying a computer for the office because the leaders made it hard for me. They wanted a “yes man” to do 100% propaganda but at the same time, they demanded more freedom from the Government. It was a case of “do as I say, not as I do”.

I was also asked at party meetings why the leadership did not really highlight my plight when I got hit with the MBf Holdings Bhd case which got me disqualified as an MP in 1995, whereas the full party machinery stepped in to defend Lim Guan Eng when he got charged in court (under the Sedition Act).

My answer to them was, “because I’m not Lim Choo Keong”. I was sacked for not showing love and affection for the party. In the DAP, things won’t get better as long as you get the same doctor who keeps on prescribing Panadol all the time.

> The DAP, however, is very confident it will do well in the coming election.

They are thriving on the politics of hatred so, of course, they are pretty confident, so much so that they are not even bothered to explain the issues. Questions remain unanswered about illegal sand mining in Selangor and in Penang, many things have happened which they have not answered. What they’ve mainly done is to accuse the Barisan of being worse. You cannot keep on saying the other side is bad. Have you provided a real alternative?

> You later joined PKR. Why did you leave?

I joined PKR only about a year after winning the Wangsa Maju seat in 2008. The moment I signed up, I began to see the party’s brand of politics – the politics of “let’s get to Putrajaya at all cost”. That includes saying one thing while doing the other. It was a politics of expediency, where everything is geared to “let’s get to Putrajaya first, then we deal with other things later”. I couldn’t stomach it. I’m not about blind loyalty and they are intoxicated with the notion of getting to Putrajaya.

> Will you defend your seat and, if so, under which ticket?

I have done my best for my constituents and I believe the area has gotten better as a result. If people see that you are working for them, ultimately they will give you their support. I feel very encouraged and will defend my seat. If it ends up being a three-way fight, then so be it. We see who goes out first.