MCA president Ong Tee Keat says that groundswell support for him has been growing and daily. He also said that the so-called third solution which does away with the proposed EGM was proposed with someone who has a hidden agenda.

The following is Ong's interview with Malaysiakini:

Malaysiakini: How is the support on the ground?

NONEOng Tee Keat: So far from what we have gauged, the support has been growing and encouraging. On several occasions, I have been overwhelmed by spontaneous support (from the party members).

I chose to have the sessions behind close doors, mainly because at this juncture my very purpose is to keep the party members updated and informed of the scenario in the face of the various lies and half truths that have been propagated.

Recently a news portal reported that your political career is nearly at the end and another Chinese newspaper said that there will be cabinet reshuffle before Hari Raya where a minister and deputy minister from MCA will be axed. You have been mentioned as that minister.

I must be mentally prepared to face all these. We have a lot of doomsayers and a lot of speculators. I can only learn certain things about my own self from news reports - meaning certain things that never came across my mind will all of a sudden be dumped upon me after the report.

Because of your silence over the past few days (Ong corrected: quite a number of days), there seems to be a domino effect (that favours Chua Soi Lek)

Chua Soi Lek and his followers have been telling the people since last year that 800 (signatures) are already in hand, and latter on (gathered) 1,000 or 1,200 and have even got more. But I am strongly convinced people are not easily swept by half-truths. For my part, I choose to speak to the party members behind closed doors.

Do you admit being an underdog or do you think it is an even fight?

Right from the start, I did not identify him as the target of my fight. No doubt, I have put up a fight but this fight is against corruption and malpractice. That explains why I have been so adamant on the PKFZ issue, otherwise I won't go so far.

Notwithstanding that my detractors and opposition have been making all sorts of unfounded or pre-emptive remarks against me when I put my foot down to commission the PWC audit report.

Do you and the party regret sacking Chua?

It is not fair to say that (I sacked Chua), the decision to expel from the party was made by the discipline board and the chairman Ng Cheng Keat, who is fiercely independent.

But you endorsed the sacking?

Yes, but that was not without a lengthy deliberation for more than two hours and everybody spoke his mind. Throughout the process, I spoke the least.

I think it is fair for others to express their view and the nitty-gritty that they went through. I don't think I should use my presidential position to dominate or influence others.

We need to cross the bridge - nobody is above the constitution and code of ethics of the party. The same set of code ethics was adopted several years ago in the presence of Chua Soi Lek himself and others have been brought to book under the same code with Chua Soi Lek's consent.

Some have said that the current crisis is your own making, because you lumped the PKFZ and the sacking of Chua Soi Lek together. They say that you should have dealt with them separately so it won't trigger off a crisis of such magnitude.

Those who said it have their own way of interpretation. The fact remains that PKFZ issue is not something personnel much less is it just a mere government issue; it is something that involves public issues.

Very unfortunately, little did we expect that the entire episode would ultimately involve certain quarters like the KDSB's (Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd) boss (Tiong King Sing) plus some party outsiders who choose to collaborate with Chua Soi Lek in meddling in party matters.

I am a firm believer in what I said, half-truths or mere lies can never ever turn out to be the truth.

Were there any efforts to patch up with Chua before the sacking? Now that he has revealed that he is not asking for a minister's post or a senatorship but instead just wants to be made Johor MCA's chairman?

This is already considered water below the bridge. Of course, he can make his statement. Some of the past happenings were not entirely privy to me were known to certain individuals as well. I am not interested in taking on Chua as an individual for issues that I would consider individual and personnel.

In fact, I just couldn't buy in the argument that this is between me and him. It is just a matter of party discipline, in the party's interest. The basic question we should ask is ‘Did you do it?'

Did your wrongdoing bring about certain ramifications and backlash to the party? Is that a breach of discipline?

For the past 10 months, a lot of things took place behind the scenes. I chose not to brag or discuss it simply because I don't believe in washing dirty linen in the public.

But there was an effort to negotiate a peace settlement but it failed?

Yes.

Who was responsible for that (failure)?

No point pointing fingers. I learn from all these episodes and I wouldn't want to emulate his pattern of behaviour by finger pointing.

But Chua Soi Lek made a serious allegation that you sent SMSs to him allegedly saying that you will ask the disciplinary board to "axe" his supporter Low Teik Hean for interfering in the matter?

Last year, hardly an hour before the party polls began, the same old gimmick was used. My mobile number as well as two other people's mobile numbers had been used or "hacked". We realised this much latter.

I learned that there was such a software available, perhaps in China that people could send out text messages by using your phone number without your knowledge.

So far in dealing with Chua, our interaction through text messages has been cordial. Since I had not considered this (fight) is not between Ong Tee Keat and Chua Soi Lek, why in the first place I do need to scold him or humiliate him?

So you deny sending such an SMS?

Why must I send out the SMS? You think that by scolding him I can gain extra mileage? Or by scolding him, I am going to change him or fulfill what I want from the party?

There are strong rumours that the third option is in the air, asking you and Chua to resign in order to maintain unity in the party?

There are certain quarters attempting to broker all sorts of solution in the name of promoting unity, but deep in their heart God knows what agenda they really harbour?

Has anybody approached you?

As far as we are concerned in the leadership, let me tell them in no uncertain terms that they can harbour whatever rosy talks that they may want to have and they may have their own agenda, but one thing for sure, by spreading half-truths alone will not break the cohesiveness of the leadership.

I know they have been at work, trying to pit certain leaders against one another.

Is there a power broker or party veterans or former minister trying to broker a peace?

Whoever the perpetrator of this peace solution should know better than others who he is.

Looking at the current situation, is the two EGMs scenario inevitable?

That does not arise. In view that Chua and his followers have been going around getting signatures, we were told that in many instances people had been complaining about intimidation and money (being offered) plus many other undesirable and unpleasant experiences. We are concerned that this might bring about a further rift.

What I said exactly was if at all you could not get the sufficient numbers, I am still prepared to facilitate an EGM. Under the constitution, I can invoke the powers vested in me to call for an EGM just like what Tun Ling Liong Sik (2001) did and Ting Chew Pei (the then party secretary) did. How could he (Ting Chew Pei) say that it is an abuse of power?

But they are accusing you of not giving out the resolutions for the EGM and it is turning into a technical fight.

That (claim) by itself is a blatant lie. Whatever things I have done is with the secretariat and the legal bureau and they are following the constitution.

Why in the first place people like Tan Chai Ho and a few others have created unnecessary issues. If they want to petition for an EGM and claim that they have the sufficient number of signatures, you just submit it. I don't see that.

What about the claim that you are delaying the EGM?

Check through the party constitution. Don't ever think that all individuals are totally ignorant and don't understand the party constitution. Enough is enough, lies remain lies.