Why I support Karpal's 'single seat' proposal

COMMENT DAP chairperson Karpal Singh's ‘one candidate, one seat' proposal has been hotly discussed and debated in the media in recent days.

Teresa Kok  ( left ) is right. This is an ‘old story'. Karpal had brought it up on several occasions in the past.

Thus, it begs the question, "Why is this old story still being repeated and not resolved yet within the DAP?".

I think Karpal did right to bring it up again. I also believe he has another reason for doing so, only that he was being diplomatic and did not wish to be seen as interfering in the affairs of other parties.

But Karpal is a senior leader of Pakatan Rakyat. His "single seat" proposal should also be promoted within Pakatan. If it is something good for DAP, how could it be bad for PAS or PKR?

Since the policy has been adopted by DAP, as declared by Karpal, it should also be seriously considered as a Pakatan policy.

Pakatan leaders should also take note that there was overwhelming support for the ‘one man, one seat policy' as indicated in a poll conducted by news portal Free Malaysia Today .

More than 80 percent of those polled are behind Karpal.

I have spoken publicly in support of Karpal's proposal in the past. As the leader of the Movement for Change, Sarawak (MoCS), I had told a press conference in Sibu on May 30 this year that MoCS agrees with the DAP chairman's call for a ‘one man, one seat' policy in the party.

Same rule for Sarawak

I had also stressed that the same rule should also apply to Sarawak because there are many qualified candidates in the state too.

If not, why are two opposition parties in Sarawak still squabbling over seats. It must also be noted that in the 2011 state election, all the 71 seats were contested with many seeing multi-corner contests.

It is therefore incorrect to say that there are not enough credible candidates in Sarawak or Sabah.

In fact, I think there is an overflow of candidates now. The ongoing dispute over seats is because of the "too many candidates, too few seats" situation. There are simply not enough seats to go round.

Can Pakatan leaders in Sarawak honestly say that there are no eligible candidates in Kuching, Sibu, Sarikei, Miri or Limbang that these seats have to be contested by serving state assembly representatives?

If that is the case, then they have failed as leaders themselves for not having groomed even one among their ranks to contest a seat.

If they think that they are only ‘winnable' candidates while others are raw and inexperienced, let me remind them to look at themselves in the past when they were also raw and inexperienced.

They were given the opportunity to be candidates by their less selfish and less egoistic party leaders in years gone by and they should extend the same opportunity to others now.

No support from MoCS

Let me repeat here that for the coming general election, MoCS will not be supporting state assembly reps vying for parliamentary seats.

We are not in favour of politicians going for two seats. MoCS will even ask the people to reject such candidates - it doesn't matter from which party or whether they are from BN or Pakatan.

Karpal had said that the DAP could not risk the rakyat having leaders playing multiple roles as assemblypersons, MP and executive councillors and that party leaders must put the interest of the country and the party before self.

I applaud these bold words of the DAP chief and we can also believe that his intention is sincere and without sinister motives. Many party grassroots have expressed their support for the "single seat" policy as well.

Karpal also attempted to grant an exception for the chief minister of Penang, Lim Guan Eng ( left ), to go for two seats. I would say that the policy should be implemented across the board.

For the information of the DAP chairman, even the all-powerful Sarawak chief minister has given up his parliamentary seat. And if we look closer, none of the BN menteri besar or chief ministers are MPs.

This is something which Pakatab should seriously review. Besides Guan Eng in Penang, Khalid Ibrahim of Selangor is also a double seat holder.

Overly ambitious politicians

Somehow, I have this negative feeling about those going for two seats.

They are overly ambitious politicians who are using the seats as ‘cushions'. If they lose one, there is another to fall back on.

Should Pakatan attain power, they have a choice to serve in the cabinet either at state or federal level. This is an advantage when it comes to lobbying for posts.

This is actually their personal strategy and they can do it because they are kingpins in the various states who could easily push their own names forward as candidates for double seats.

After that, they would hypocritically say it's the party's strategy because of their winnability.

Party strategy, my foot! Remember YBs, self praise is no praise.

Well, it's fine and good to be ambitious but to be overly ambitious in politics is another matter. There is the danger of political ambition replacing commitment and responsibility.

I feel it is also wrong to be paid for two jobs at the same time. The ordinary employee is never allowed to hold on to two paying jobs.

In many cases, employees caught moonlighting have to face severe disciplinary action, including dismissal.

So why should YBs be treated differently? Why should they be paid double or triple salaries for multi-tasking?

I also find it difficult to comprehend the possibility of coping with two or three high pressure, full-time paying jobs, at the same time. Is there a "Superman" or "Wonder Woman" among our YBs?

There are still only 24 hours in a day, as far as I can remember.

Karpal also said that some leaders were against the "one candidate, one seat" policy as they would lose the multiple incomes that could exceed RM40,000 a month. I find this position appalling.

So it is true then, that monetary reward is also a motivation besides pride and ego, for some to go for two seats and for those with two seats and not willing to let go of one. This is unfortunate and sad.

Pawns in a chess game

Are voters being treated like pawns in a chess game? It seems so judging by the way things are played out by some politicians and sadly, by these people whom we have high expectations of.

Here's an unfortunate example. There was a lady politician who was once very popular and respected when she was an ordinary MP. Once she took on three posts, everything changed.

Who could blame her party colleagues and others in Pakatan for being envious or even jealous of her?

Soon, she fell into a state of restlessness, having to consciously watch her back, more for ‘enemies' from within, than without.

At times, she didn't realise she was merely fighting her own shadows.

Meanwhile, her fellow female YBs in the party like Fong Po Kuan ( left ), Chong Eng, Hannah Yeoh, Teo Nie Ching and Jenice Lee continue to earn much respect and adulation for their diligent and conscientious work as public servants. All are single seat holders.

See, all you need is one seat to be an effective and responsible elected representative.

If you were to ask me whether I would vote for her if she still goes for double seats in the coming elections, my answer is a firm ‘No'.

Why? A candidate like her can never be a playmaker in the evolution and change I've advocated and wish to see in the country.

This message goes out to others in the same position and let this be a word of caution as well to those about to fall in the same trap of salivating for multiple posts at the same time.

FRANCIS PAUL SIAH is a true blue anak Sarawak and leader of the Movement for Change, Sarawak (MoCS).