Q&A: Restructure BN to just five or six parties

MCA vice-president Donald Lim Siang Chai said Barisan Nasional’s huge losses at the polls was a culmination of being an unwieldy coalition and called for it to be restructured so as to consist of only five or six parties.

Lim sat down with Malaysiakini this week for an interview.

Malaysiakini: What are your comments on the unprecedented losses by MCA-Barisan Nasional at the 12th General Election?

Donald Lim: Malaysia has been doing well but we can do better. This is what the people have in mind. Based on what we know, people are looking for things being more transparent, more open. They are looking more at human rights, democracy, and other (fundamental) freedoms.

This is because of the increase of the middle class, and the larger role played by information and computer technology, bloggers and the media. This is something that is happening worldwide. Because of this scenario, BN has to rethink its approaches.

MCA must change. If MCA doesn’t change drastically, our ‘product’ may be removed to the lower level of the political ‘market’ shelves or even removed from the shelves completely.

I look at it this way: Umno is calling the shots because of its numbers and history and so on. But when it comes to Chinese issues, they will refer to MCA. After that, they will have to go and refer to Gerakan and ask them, ‘What do you all think?’ Gerakan will say, ‘Aiyo, if MCA says plan ‘A’, I must definitely say plan ‘B’ or plan ‘C’. Then Umno has to go back to MCA and say, Gerakan says ‘B’, do you agree or not?

Similarly with Indian issues. Many Indians are divided over PPP and MIC. In Sarawak or Sabah there are many small parties, but each has high-level representation in BN.

So we spend a lot of time because of red tape and other such ‘bureaucracy’. Because of this, sometimes when there’s a meeting, we cannot discuss the big issues that affect most people in the country because we have to discuss the small issues.

This is why BN has to reconsider its membership structure. Over the past 30 or so years, its present structure has outlived its usefulness. I’m proposing that Gerakan and MCA merge. If that does not happen, BN should consider only MCA (as the sole representative party for the Chinese community), because it makes life simpler for everyone.

The same thing goes for the Indian community. Eventually, there should be only five to six parties in BN. Then, decisions would be made very fast.

As the MCA vice-president, I think I have to raise this in MCA meetings. I think we have to have a re-look at the structures so that we can make decisions very fast. Presently, just on Chinese issues, you have to ask so many people.

We are fighting among ourselves. In the recent elections, my parliamentary constituency contest had a Gerakan candidate for a state seat. I made sure my people voted him. However, he has been telling his people not to vote me. This is something that is very bad. In a situation like that, I’d be surprised if you don’t lose.

You’re claiming that the Gerakan state assemblyperson (former Bukit Gasing state representative Dr Lim Thuan Seng) asked his people to vote against you?

Maybe they have an inferiority complex because they find we have a lot of friends. This is one of the things my people told me. I don’t do all this, lah. I always help him. But he lost more votes than I did....

Are you suggesting that Gerakan be kicked out?

I am not suggesting that. I’m suggesting that if we merge the two parties, it would be good. If we can’t, then we have to take another action. What is the best action? It’s not for me to say. I’m just throwing out the idea for discussion. If there’s no change within MCA and within BN, we definitely will not see a brighter day.

Gerakan Youth has suggested BN parties merge into one.

I think that cannot be very successful. DAP and Gerakan are multiracial, but they cannot go very far. Keadilan can go a bit further because while it is multiracial, but its chief is Malay. It is attracting many middle class Chinese and Malays who speak English and Bahasa Malaysia, but a majority of them are English-speakers. What about the kampung Malays? So you see, Keadilan cannot get a big membership volume.

So I think race-based parties are still relevant at this juncture, at least until the language barriers are cut. A lot of people in the new villages in Petaling Jaya Selatan cannot speak English. Their Bahasa Malaysia, also, is hopeless. They all speak Mandarin only.

In MCA, a lot of older party members do not speak either English or Bahasa Malaysia well. It would take time to phase this problem out. Other people are entitled to their own opinions, but at this juncture, I think we still have to bear with race-based politics.

Eventually, I think there will be two (political) groupings. Eventually, these two groupings of political parties will merge to become two parties.

As opposed to the structural issues you mentioned, what are the issues of substance that may have contributed to the losses for BN?

It was issues that involved human rights, democracy, good governance. How can a lawyer, they asked, write a court judgment? They asked about the Lingam tape issue. Why detain the five Hindraf leaders under ISA? How could (former Klang state assemblyperson accused of abuse of power) Zakaria (Mat Deros) be let off the way he was? For just one person, why did you amend the Federal Constitution to extend the retirement age from 65 to 66? Why was the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) promised so many times but still has not been implemented? They asked about local issues and local councils, like in PJ the issue of billboards. They were concerned about some statements of Umno Youth chief, his deputy, on the (New Economic Policy) NEP, and on many other things. These are the things that are influencing voters in Bangsar, PJ, Subang Jaya, Shah Alam, Puchong, Kota Damansara and so on.

Those on the outskirts of urban areas, they are concerned about local issues. For all these reasons, they said, ‘I’m not going to vote you’. All these issues were big issues. We overlooked these things.

Why do you think people voted against MCA? Do you think there is a problem of leadership, of leadership style?

MCA members may have thought that we’re not doing enough. They know we’re trying our best and working hard. But sometimes working hard is not good enough. Bigger issues affecting people are causing them change their minds.

They’ve lost confidence in MCA. They feel that they cannot trust the leadership. The only way to overcome all this is to change. We have to listen to what the rakyat wants. I think many of the rakyat are very vocal and voice out their opinions especially.

Unfortunately, many top leaders within MCA, their constituencies are in the rural areas. They wouldn’t listen to all these (grouses). Sometimes even when talented people approach them, they would just walk away.

As for me, I’m wakil rakyat here and I know a lot of these issues. I have sat down and listened. But sometimes it’s not easy even for me to pass over these problems to the next (leadership) level. I was deputy minister, but there are limitations.

People get angry (due to the inaction), so they voted for opposition. Each time such problems are raised, a few votes would be deducted.

There are some who say that there should be a leadership change in MCA.

That’s why after the results were announced, I called for quick party elections because I said that the present central committee has lost the mandate given by party members and delegates. We need to have a new mandate, because this last batch that got the mandate went into battle and we lost.

We must all be responsible for the losses, and the one holding the highest post has to be more responsible. That’s the rule of the game. But if you resign suddenly, there will be a vacuum created. That’s why I called for quick party elections to get a new mandate from members. Let the new leadership continue. If the delegates (MCA president) elect Ong Ka Ting to be president again, then we wish him good luck.

What do you think of the Save MCA campaign?

I think members should be entitled to the right to voice their opinions. I think we have to accept it. If you have party elections earlier, then all these things probably would not have happened.

If people want to voice their opinions, we can’t do anything. It’s their right. Anyone with a good heart to save the party, I think, ‘Why not?’ It’s up to them.

What if they ask you to endorse?

At this moment, I don’t know what their final motive is. So it’s not right for me to comment at this juncture.

Party secretary-general Ong Ka Chuan said the Save MCA campaign is like washing MCA’s dirty linen in public.

It’s up to the members to judge. Like I said earlier, if they had the party elections earlier, they could have prevented this from occurring. In the meantime, I think such people are entitled to voice their opinions.

What if your division members come to you and say they you want to join the Save MCA campaign? What would you say?

I think at this juncture, because the party elections is another six months away, let me have a little bit of time to take a break and think of my next move. I’m taking a break next week. I will think about it.

I’ll only decide after the July division meetings. I have said it earlier to the media: I will not disappoint you all.

So in the meantime, will you just avoid the Save MCA campaign or you will say wait for the party elections?

They have not come to me, so I cannot give them advice. If they come to me, then I’ll give them advice. I’m going off for a week.

You said you will consider contesting in the party elections. For the presidential post, can you make it clear whether you will contest or not?

I have not made up my mind.

Is it one of your options?

As I mentioned earlier, I will not disappoint you all. I will tell you after July.

You are now quite vocal on the issue of party elections. Are you now on the anti-Ong Ka Ting side?

I’m on my own side. I’m entitled to my own opinion. I’ve been MP for PJS for three terms. A lot of my voters are very vocal.

How do you rate Ong Ka Ting’s performance? He has served for two terms.

I think for me to comment on his performance is not right, because the people and MCA members should be the judges. All of us in the leadership are responsible for the election losses.

But those at the ones with higher posts should be more responsible. When a big corporation like Citibank lost money, its CEO stepped down. He could not tell the shareholders, ‘Sorry, lah, during my studies in school and college, I never came across such thing as sub-prime mortgages. Can you give me one more chance? I’ll make sure this time I’m more careful.’

But it’s up to the leaders to think about whether they should resign or not. It’s not up to me to tell them. There are a lot of good people in the MCA leadership, and I’ve met a lot of people and party members, who want the party (leadership) to continue serving the MCA members and the Chinese community and the country.

As a veteran leader, what is your criteria of a good MCA president?

He has to know what the people want and are concerned about, what the Chinese community wants. He must know how to handle problems, because there are leaders who can talk but cannot do things practically. It’s very difficult to find such people.

I cannot comment or make judgment on Ong Ka Ting. I would prefer that you do a survey. Eastern cultural values would demand that we do not talk bad about people or say they are no good. I think they must think for themselves. It’s not up to me to say whether they’re good or not good. There’s no point for me to judge a person. If I can pass judgment on you, you can also pass judgement on me. It’s not very fair, especially at this juncture, even if people are critical of the leadership.

What about based on Ong Ka Ting’s own criteria of ‘healthy political culture’? People have asked, for example, about the issue of him allegedly setting up a political dynasty. There have been complaints that he’s not listening to people on the ground and to members of the party. We’re not judging him as good or bad, but his actions.

Actions do speak louder than words. I believe people would not simply say such things without a basis for it.

I feel that a political party belongs to everyone of its members, which is different from a company. A shareholding company, if you want to put your 18-year old son to be general manager, you can do it. If Robert Kuok wants to put his 18-year old son to be a general manager of his own company, he can. But you can’t do that in the MCA. When you do it, you can see the results.

So you’re saying that MCA should not be treated as a private company?

MCA is not a private company, it’s a political party.

Ong Ka Ting said the appointment of his brother Ong Ka Chuan as secretary-general was the decision of the Central Committee.

In Malaysia, be it Umno or MCA or Gerakan or PPP, presidents have a lot of power. The MCA president can even control the media. You will not allow the news to come out. A lot of people who wanted to be chosen as candidate or have some other position, they all become quiet, lah.

But I think, we have to admit one thing. Ong Ka Chuan is quite capable. That one I have to admit. Of course, to what extent, I leave it to others. It’s not for me to judge.

But people say that Perak MCA’s loss of so many seats shows he’s not capable.

I think everyone also has their own capabilities. If you feel you are more capable, you contest for the post.

People in Ipoh are saying that based on the fact that Perak MCA lost big, how can Ong Ka Chuan be said to be capable?

It’s not totally his fault, lah! I think I’ll reserve my judgements on the matter at this juncture. We are waiting for the consultants to give us the results of the survey they are conducting. MCA engaged the consultants to do a (post-election) survey. However, it will be confidential until it’s finished.

There are claims that there exists a ‘spy group’ working for an MCA top leader to identify who in the party is against him and who is for him. Can you comment on these claims?

I was informed that there is (such) a group. It is something that has made me very concerned. Definitely, I will want to find out more. I am checking around to see whether this is true or not. If it is true, then those who are responsible will definitely be taken to task by MCA members because this is something that is bad, especially if you go looking into people’s private affairs.

I was informed not long ago that I am one of the targets of this spying group. I will check it out. I’ll probably be able to give you more information after I do my checking.

You were dropped last May as MCA Selangor deputy chairperson. How did you feel?

I wasn’t dropped as Selangor deputy chairman. When the president appointed the chairman, I decided to quit because I wanted to make life easier for the chairman. Under the constitution, the president can appoint anyone. If I continued to be the deputy chairman of Selangor, it would have looked very bad on the party and on me. So I was saving the party’s face. I was not dropped.

Do you think the state chairperson should be elected?

Some people have mentioned it. If the state chairman was elected, there might be more in-fighting. Electing the state chairman, I think, is a good proposal. You would have to amend the party constitution with the support of a two-thirds majority. If they want that, I’d say, ‘Go ahead. I’m in support of that’.

For the time being, while the president has the power to appoint, at least consult the division heads when appointing. They would know who are the ones who can do work. They would also know who are the ones who are only ‘yes men’.

I think that whoever the president wants to appoint, he should do it after having sat down with all the division heads and consulting them. If required, do it by way of secret ballots.

Democracy says you have to look at the majority. In some countries, when electing party president, they elect based on the one person-one vote system. I think we have to keep changing.

In the party’s current central committee, do you think many on it have their own minds or is there a herd mentality?

For me to judge is a bit difficult. We always tell our delegates to make sure that every state has some representatives, but of course, the president’s men will have the advantage. For many years, MCA has the practice the Cai Dan (bloc voting, menu politics) system. The leadership claims there is no Cai Dan, but we know that it is not true.

You’ve said there should be grassroots change. What kind of change are you talking about?

We have to be more realistic. We must look at all issues. The Chinese would think of it simply in terms of Zheng (politics), Jing (economics), Wen (culture), Jiao (education).

At this juncture, education seems not to be a very big issue. We have some shortcomings here and there, but people from hundreds of other countries are studying in Malaysia. I think Malaysia as a whole is not a bad place for education compared to previously. It’s so much better now compared to my time.

On culture, I think we are quite open to a lot of things: we have lion dances and a lot of other things everywhere.

Economics, however, is one of the things we have to address. The NEP, the quota system, the open tender system, all these things you need to address.

The government should consider awarding contracts to those companies that are joint ventures between the different races instead of giving them to those only of a single race so that a lot of these projects be completed faster and better. We notice that a lot of projects have failed because only a people of a certain group are doing it.

When it comes to political issues, I think there are quite a number of things we have to address, but that’s up to the president of MCA and deputy president.

I have suggested in previous MCA central committee meetings that the MCA president and deputy president should not be state chairmen because each of us has got only 24 hours a day. You want to be chairman here and chairman there, but sometimes the big things you don’t address because of the small things you have to address.

You fly here and fly there, that takes time. You can get tired. A lot of people who reach top party levels are not young any more. Their engines are used, overused.

Regarding your defeat in Petaling Jaya Selatan, do you think that people voted against you as an individual, against MCA as a party, or against BN as the coalition?

I admit that in the last two years I spent less time in my constituency. In the last two years, I was in the Ministry of Tourism where I was assigned to bring in the Asia market. I needed to travel a lot to attend a lot of meetings, especially as last year, it was Visit Malaysia Year. We managed to bring in close to six million more tourists within two years - from 15 million to 21 million. The hotels, restaurants transport industries were all happy. A lot of people made a lot of money. It brought close to RM45 million into the country.

If I were to bring in tourists into the country, I would have to spend time outside. So I admit there were some issues that I couldn’t settle or solve.

Friends whom I have known for 30 years said they ‘cannot stand’ the BN logo. A friend of mine told his wife, ‘I vote for Donald, you vote for the opposition.’ Another friend told me, ‘Sorry, lah, I voted for you and I told my wife to vote for you. But my three kids, aiyaa, I told them to vote for Uncle Donald, but they voted against Uncle Donald.’

In the Klang Valley, if (former Women, Family and Community Development Minister) Shahrizat Abdul Jalil and me cannot cross the hurdle, then a lot of things are going to change. We have a lot of friends (in our constituencies), we were fair when we did things, and we were very professional. We know the people and we think we were quite fair. But when Shahrizat lost, I thought, ‘It’s no wonder Selangor lost’.

You think the incident at the church where you were booed had an effect on your vote count?

The church incident where I got booed, it was actually mostly the media’s fault. I don’t think I really got booed (by many people).

The father that I spoke to said it would be just the church people in the forum. But the media went in. TheSun newspaper picked on me. They were very unreasonable. The church had a duty (to keep its word). When the moderator started the forum, he said, ‘This is for our own people. No outsiders’. But then the newspaper report came out. I know these people are against the government They pick on me. They should have been more courageous and approached me.

Whoever did the reporting on that one, his heart is black. I think it’s not fair for him to be a reporter. I don’t know who he is, I don’t want to find out who he is.

But why should I get angry at him? If you are a politician, you are subject to all this. I’m ok with that.

I can tell you that a lot of the church members are members at the Subang Golf Club where I am a member. A lot of my relatives are church members there. There are a lot of lawyers there, but they are quite OK.

(Some people at) the church were not fair with me. When you invite people to a forum, you let people talk, then you can ask the person to answer your questions. But when I started comparing Malaysia with Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand and Burma, they could not agree with the word Burma. I said, ok, you don’t agree with the word Burma, never mind. Let’s just talk about Burma ... What is the big deal. It’s not really boo...

On why some (other) people booed me, well, I could have brought in 500 (of my own) people to go inside, but I didn’t want to do it. You think I cannot bring 500 people to go in? There were a few NGOs there who were not from PJS.

Some people were from Kota Damansara, some were from NGOs. They can come and discuss with me. I gave them my name card, I said,’Contact me to discuss things’. I can have such a forum every few months. Not just during that campaign period. Maybe next time I’ll bring 500 people there. Each time they speak, they will clap. It was they (the NGOs) who booed me. I said when you compare the countries, you have to see how Malaysia is. They cannot do that. I’m prepared to have a debate with them now.

At St Francis's Xavier Church, I have a lot of friends there. In fact, we helped them to do a lot, like solving the traffic problems, especially the church, incoming and outgoing. We have done that for them last year.

Why didn’t you compare Malaysia with, for example, Singapore?

People expect Malaysia to be compared to countries like Singapore, but you must understand for a multiracial country like Malaysia, it’s different. But if you don’t agree with me, then ok, you want to compare Malaysia to Japan? But Japan has got only one single race. Same as in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore. Singapore is just one island.

But people are saying Singapore has nothing in terms of resources. We have everything.

That’s why I said earlier: People expect us to do better. We are doing quite well, but people expect us to do better. It’s very subjective. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. But the fact is, we have tourists coming to the country. People think Malaysia is a very fair country. You can check around, ask, ‘Is Malaysia a bad country?’

People feel there needs only to be a leadership change. Ok, fair enough. You have decided that is your opinion. But I as an individual am entitled to speak. As a candidate, I’m entitled to speak. Those who booed me, they can come and talk to me. I know one or two of them.

On deputy-president Chan Kong Choy stepping down right before nomination day, some people have speculated it’s because of the Port Klang Free Trade Zone (PKFZ) issue. Is that true?

The transport minister has mentioned quite a fair bit, so I’ll leave it to the transport minister to answer the questions. From what I understand, it was the initiative of our former Prime Minister (Dr Mahathir Mohamad) who visited Dubai and found that it was a good project for Malaysia.