In an exclusive interview with malaysiakini, deputy Umno Kelantan chief Zaid Ibrahim says he is vying for the vice-president post because he wants to sell his idea - which is to let MPs elect a prime minister and Umno members their president.


Malaysiakini: What is the main reason behind your decision to contest for Umno vice-presidency?

Zaid: There are many factors, but the main one is that the Umno culture of discouraging contest is not consistent with what Pak Lah (Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi) wants. I think he wants a more open environment, not just in government, but in the party as well.

It would not be consistent with the idea of having an open government, if the party - as the backbone of the govenment - is not open. I offered myself to contest in order to test how far ordinary party members like myself, and I think I am qualified (for the post), would fare.

But there are many obstacles in contesting party posts, such as the requirement for candidates to have a minimum number of nominations from Umno divisions.

(Candidates for vice-presidency must obtain nominations from 10 percent of the191 Umno divisions while for president and deputy president, hopefuls must secure 20 and 15 percent respectively)

In my view, one of the reasons why there is money politics is because we make the contest so difficult. This leads members to use money to gain party positions. If the contest is open (in terms of less stringent rules), nobody would bother using money.

One aspect that I would like to highlight is that there should be separation of powers between the party and government. To me there are a lot of important issue affecting Umno and the Malays, that should be discussed.

When you are in power, you would not criticise yourself, you would not criticise your colleages in the Cabinet and you would not criticise the prime minister because your position in the government depends on him. I don't mean criticising just for the sake of criticising but on important matters. We should discuss privatisation, awarding of contracts, promotion and appointment of judges, government nominees, government companies and many other important issues.

So, all these things must be transparent. I think Umno must discuss about important issues. But if Umno only has leaders who are cabinet members, they will only endorse what the government wants to do, because they are the government. Furthermore, in a party as big as Umno, if you don't allow free flow of ideas and information, you will create other problems and the party would not be attractive to those with progressive ideas, the young and the professionals. So the party also has to adjust to accommodate this new environment. That's the reason why I am offering myself (to contest).

Are you saying Umno must be run by those not in the government?

Not necessarily, they can be (in both the party and the government), but there must be a proper balance. Some of them are suitable to be in the cabinet because they are technocrats and capable (for the job). But these same people may not be good politicians.

There are those who want to fight for the party and for the Malays, who alert the government if it fails to execute its policies properly. But who will undertake this responsibility if the same people (elected) in the party become ministers as well?

So Umno needs the pressure group?

In those days, Tan Sri Syed Nasir Ismail (former parliamentary speaker) was so effective although he was not in the government. Yes, there are times when we need outspoken and strong leaders at the higher level, who are not necessarily in the government whether you want to talk about economic, social, education etc.

Who is going to do it now? We don't have the forum. In the party's supreme council for example, there are many appointees by the president, and most of them are ministers and menteris besar. It appears to be more like an exclusive club.

I will try to convince Umno members that there is a role for people like me not necessarily myself who are wise enough to talk about education policies or on the implementation of other policies. At times, we have very good policies but they are not implemented accordingly. So there are a lot of issues affecting the Malays, and Umno must continue to fight for them. People are now talking about the Malays lagging behind in education, economy and other social issues.

These reflect the quality of the Malay leadership. The Malays are the product of these policies anyway. If we say the Malays are not competitive, for instance, then we have to ask whether the Malays are not getting enough education or business opportunities, and we have to look at these from the perspective of Umno.

There are a lot of things that Umno can do to help the government if we are prepared to be open on things that I have mentioned earlier. It should not be seen as negative. For party members and leaders, we only have an annual general assembly once a year and this does not give us enough time to discuss many things, whereas ministers meet every week and have a forum among themselves.

But this is also the same group of people (who meet every week). So, why don't we broaden the composition of decision makers in the party and the government. In my view, it is not wrong to do that. However, we have to wait and see whether it is also acceptable to other party members.

Who is going to question the government's decision on education, agriculture, Petronas or Pernas for instance? As such, I think Umno should select new type of leaders to fill-up the party positions.

We are not questioning who the prime minister chooses to be his ministers. We accept that. That is not the issue.

But in Umno, it is the members who elect the leaders. Why don't we elect those who want to serve the party? For example, when (jailed ex-deputy premier) Anwar Ibrahim wanted to challenge Ghafar Baba (for the deputy president post in 1993), Umno divisions nominated Anwar, one after another. The argument then was that Anwar was more suitable as deputy prime minister, more educated, so on and so forth.

But to me that is a separate issue, (former premier) Dr Mahathir (Mohamad) picked Anwar to be deputy prime minister because it was his prerogative do to so if he felt Anwar was good enough for the post. Was Ghafar, who gave his life to the party, not qualified to be deputy president? You mean to say that he was not fit to be deputy president? Why are we confusing the issue? Why are we saying that you have to be deputy president in order to be deputy prime minister?

Of course the system does not say that, (it is) just a tradition. But we make that tradition. We accept the parliamentary system which is, if you want to be prime minister you must get the support of the parliamentarians in the House. Whoever has that support becomes prime minister.

But aren't party positions more important than cabinet positions?

We must accept that the best person to be prime minister does not necessarily have to be the president of Umno. That's what I am trying to say. Why should it be the same person? Why must it be a tradition? Ghafar is the classic example..he has no higher education, he is an ordinary guy, but his loyalty and his struggle ... so he was qualified to be deputy president ... he was part of the (party) history.

And yet we changed him ... why? Because we thought somebody else would be a better deputy prime minister. So what I am saying is that in future, we elect candidates who are suitable and good enough to lead the party. It does not matter if he is not suitable for the deputy prime minister or prime minister positions.

If you look at the parliamentary system in other countries, the prime minister is not necessarily the chief of the ruling party. He is just the best person in parliament from that party... If we equate the two positions, we are limiting (the scope). People would think that the prime minister must be the president of his party so that he can consolidate his (government) position. But why must he consolidate so much power because too much power can be damaging.

So this is what I mean by checks and balance in the party structure and the cabinet structure. The constitution provides for this. The constitution doesn't say the prime minister must be the president of Umno. It states that he/she should be a member of the Dewan Rakyat (Lower House) who has the support of the majority of MPs.

That's why I am worried that if we do not spell out the difference, every time there is going to be contest for the prime ministership, Umno will break-up and there will be another fight. We should not break-up the party just to select the prime minister. The selection of the prime minister must be done by a different caucus, a different group of people, because that is what the law says.

Let's say we have a caucus comprising members of the Lower House and have them elect the prime minister. Why do we have to break-up the party. Why must we involve the branches and divisions as what happened in 1987.

If you look at Australia, when Paul Keating challenged Bob Hawke, Keating won because the selection process only involved about 200 MPs. So you don't break-up the party. Two months later, Keating went to the polls and still won because there was no break-up in the party. This is what democracy in the parliamentary system is all about. You don't involve the entire party structure.

If we don't address this issue, then we are going to face the (1987) problem again. How are you going to overcome the problem. Then you go around saying 'don't contest that post', 'don't contest this post'. But that is not the solution.

The solution is to identify the right caucus to select the right person. You don't involve the branches and divisions. The branches and divisions formulate policies for the party's struggle, and at the supreme council level, present it to the prime minister and it is for the prime minister to decide with the members of his cabinet what can be done or what cannot be done. And I think that is the way to ensure continuity (in the party leadership). What is happening now is that people want to contest for vice-presidency and deputy president so that they can have a shot at becoming prime minister.

So you are saying that Umno is being used as a stepping stone?

That's right and that shouldn't be the way because it will lead to another break-up in the party. It is only a matter of time. You can always say 'don't contest this' or 'don't contest that'... but one day you are going to face the same problem as in 1987. The solution is to separate the party contest from the premiership contest.

Barisan Nasional has 198 MPs, that is the caucus to select the prime minister. So if you have their confidence, you become prime minister.

Some people say that the Wanita chief and Umno Youth chief must be given a seat (in the cabinet). This is like a communist system, we don't have to give them the seats. The cabinet is for those whom the prime minister sees best fit for the job.

Umno of course can put up policies, suggest this and suggest that. It is a separate mechanism, a separate issue. By contesting, I am trying to show a way out of this problem. Let us concede that we cannot avoid the repeat of the1987 crisis. It will happen again, not because there are those who want to be party president, but because they want to be prime minister.

So let's provide a new forum and create a new caucus. If it (the selection process) is separated, nobody is going to do battle or bribe their way through as there would be no assurance of you becoming prime minister if you are president and so forth.

That is why our constitution was drafted like that because 200 MPs would know best who among themselves is best qualified to be prime minister. So if there is a contest, it just involves a small group of educated people. People who are not easy to bribe because they are already well-to-do. There is no money politics involved. But when party positions mean automatic ministerial positions, there will surely be problems.

How do you rate your chances?

My most difficult hurdle is to get the required nominations. It is going to be difficult for people like myself but I will try. I believe there are enough Umno division leaders who are brave and independent (to nominate me).

Candidates for vice-presidency must get nominations from at least 10 percent of the total number of divisions, so I have to get at least 20 (nominations). Why do we create this hindrance if it is to serve the party, unless if these positions mean something else...

So you are confident about nominations?

I think so. I think I have got enough friends ... but I know it is difficult. The most difficult part is to get them to understand that party positions are different from government position. They are different forums.

Why do we consolidate the power in one person? This is not good (for the party). I think I am old enough, I have no big ambition..I even got involved in politics late. I know my capabilities. I want to make sure that Umno can really accept new ideas and criticism.

You are not selling yourself?

Yes, I am not selling myself, but my ideas. Some of my friends say they (my detractors) will kill me (politically), I say they cannot, this is an idea ... it cannot be killed. If it is not accepted now, one day people will see the need for this differentiation

In a nutshell, you're saying that veterans should handle the party while the professionals take care of the government?

Let they (professionals) be in the government, as I have said earlier ... Mahathir picked Anwar as deputy prime minister so why couldn't Ghafar be Umno deputy president?

Do you think its easy to handle the branches and divisions. You end up spending so much time with party matters that you fail to do a proper job in terms of your government position. Let others who want to serve the party be elected.

Only then will the fights cease because there are more opportunities (in the party). And we will have only the best people to serve the party.