Debate on Motion to Amend Standing Orders

DEBATE Speech by Wong Ho Leng, ADUN Bukit Assek, on 19th Nov., 2007 on MOTION by Deputy Chief Minister I & ADUN for Piasau George Chan TO AMEND STANDING ORDERS

We are proud to have the oldest legislature in the country. But we cannot be proud that the Government is trying everything possible to stiffen the Opposition’s voice.

Half a year ago, the Government moved The Dewan Undangan Negeri (Privileges and Powers) Bill, 2007. As we said, that was designed to gag the Opposition.

As if that was not enough, in the space of 6 months, you still look for blood. This time, you move this Motion, in the name of maintaining decorum in the Dewan.

Sarawakians ought to be ashamed of our Government for habouring the tenacity to stifle and gag the Opposition members. How shameful it is that stifling Opposition voice has become institutionalized in this Dewan?

True, this is the first time that this Dewan has seen a true Opposition, but there is no reason for you to labour day and night to try kill the legitimate voices of the Opposition members. Like all of you, we were elected by the people, only that we are definitely more clean because we could never be involved in money politics. We had always been victims of money politics.

We are duty bound to voice out. When BN backbenchers cannot speak the plight of the people due to Party whip or you are too scared to antagonize your leaders, we can, and we promise to do it well. We are able to do well because we subscribe to our inner belief and our inner conscience that we can speak without fear or favour.

You don’t expect the DAP wakil rakyat to take oppression and intimidation lying down. We are not yes men. We are not puppets. We are not apple polishers. We talk as people of principles.

We tell the truth. In Parliament we speak the truth to Pak Lah. Here we speak the truth to all of you. You may not like to hear what we say, but you can go home, look at yourself in the mirror, and ask whether you have done justice to the voters who elected us, to the Sarawakians who treasure us to be their mouthpiece.

We are not lepers. Until I bring in more of the peoples’ choice, we are small in number in this Dewan. Therefore, you do not have to be so terrified as to deem it necessary to amend the Standing Orders. What an excuse that the stifling is to be done in the name of the need to maintain decorum.

You can stand assured that we have abided by decorum in this Dewan more than the BN front and backbenchers. Who first shouted “kurang ajar” in this dewan? … (Speaker disallowed proceeding along this line and ordered me to sit down …)

We do not have a level playing field. But we will soldier on.

The Standing Orders is full of lacunae. Mr. Speaker, you are the keeper of both the hansards and the Standing Orders. It is your job to see improvement by filling these lacunae. Why don’t we spend time to study them and improve them? Improvise, that must be the philosophy of life.

The following are the lacunae which have to be improved:

1. On Oral Answers:

Why don’t we amend the Standing Orders so that Oral Questions that lapse should automatically generate written answers? As of now, the questions are recycled, year in and year out. Out of 250 questions, only 50 normally became answered. That is 20%. 200 are old stuff. These are Recycled. No wonder the life as BN ADUN is so “senang”. You are not burdened, nor eager, to know how the Government works. How can our Government and administration improve, when the Dewan is reduced to regurgitating old, stale oral questions year in and year out? Much energy and time are wasted for nothing as the answers were all prepared, and they are ditched. Come next sitting, the answers are recycled to recycled questions.

As elected representatives, we owe the people of Sarawak a duty to provide check and balances. Have our administration and the Ministers who head them performed up to standard? How much money has been squandered due to inefficiency and corruption? We need to know, because every sen belongs to the tax payers. Yet, do we care whether duties have been discharged? How many of you BN backbenchers seriously ask questions? How many of the BN backbenchers complained that answers are not given to them? They keep quiet because BN backbenchers do not understand the plight of the people. Also they are bound by BN Party whip and therefore cannot ask the Ministers nasty questions. Also, they don’t know how to ask. They also dare not ask. So the Standing Orders allow the recycling of stale questions.

2. On Motions:

Why don’t we redefine the Standing Orders to allow Motions on Chinese education to be moved in this Dewan, instead of at least 5 times rejecting my Motion on it? And, 3 times rejecting Padugan’s Motion on it.

We have a Minister overseeing education here, but that is beside the point, because there is nothing to stop the state Government to allocate financial grants to Chinese Schools, without having anything to do with the federal Parliament.

3. On Live telecast:

Why don’t we amend the Standing Orders so that proceedings in this Dewan can be telecast live over the TV and the Internet? With Malaysia talking so much about the Multimedia Super Corridor and even going to space with so much waste of money, we still cannot see proceedings in this Dewan telecast live over the TV and Internet. Perhaps the reason was we are not ready because the people here are rowdy. Now that the Standing Orders are amended, can we telecast live now? Sarawak boasts to be the first in the country for having Video conferencing and Technology courts. When are we in this Dewan going to leap out the circle of the dinasaurs? Would you allow members to skype? Where is it in the Standing Order?

4. On Supplementary Supplies:

Why don’t we amend the Standing Orders so that all Supplementary Supplies Bills may be debated without giving the impossible 2 days notice? Why do we allow the Government to hide documents till the last minute, ie, documents are only laid on our table on the very morning of the debate and to be passed on the same day, yet whoever wants to debate the Supplementary Supply Bills need to give 2 days’ notice in advance? Mr. Speaker, you should know by now that this 2 days’ notice required is impossible to comply and illogical.

5. On Ministers’ Replies:

The Speaker had said before that whatever way a Minister addressed a question that was raised, he will be deemed to have answered the question. With respect, this decision cannot be right because there must be certain standard which a Minister must attain. If the Minister answered that a deer is a horse (指鹿為馬), according to speaker he has answered, but that is no standard or decency.

Instead of spending time on unnecessary amendments, why don’t we consider amending the Standing Orders so that a Minister must answer questions to a certain standard of decency?

By The Dewan Undangan Negeri (Privileges and Powers) Bill, 2007, we were not allowed to comment on decisions made in the Dewan. What if the decision is obviously wrong? We can comment on the decisions of judges, why is this Court different?

The former Court of Appeal Judge NH Chan wrote a book, “Judging the Judges”. The cover says, “It is only when you know of the Judge’s craft that you will be able to Judge the performance of the judges: only then will you know the difference between the good and the bad judges”. So, the Deputy Chief Minister is wrong in saying in the press that lawyers are not allowed to comment judgments of judges. Similarly we are entitled to comment on decisions made in this Dewan. The Dewan is also a Court of law.

These are the drawbacks when the Government is getting too strong, and yet arrogant not to listen to the small Opposition. The Motion is tainted with bad faith, and I am not going to be tainted.

My Party and I Oppose the Motion.