The Truth About Indelible Ink - Fong
Today’s session started with the motion by the government to seek support for the increase of fuel price and related measures. I heard interesting points raised with figures to support their arguments. If it was live telecast, it would be useful for all to assess the arguments, perhaps, then, you may not be so angry or angrier.
Indeed it was to some extend a very intellectual debate, for a person like me, who is not good at figures.
This Parliament session, I submitted questions related to indelible ink. I have said earlier that I would pursue this issue. The first question and here is the written reply.
The truth unveiled. The government has no intention all this while to use indelible ink for a more transparent election. Read the reply by the Prime Minister’s Department.
Now, it has nothing to do with Election Regulations and Federal Constitution for the inability to use the said ink in the last general election! The reason given now is because the government finds it “troublesome” and “worrisome”, if implemented would delay the smooth running of the election. This is utter nonsense! If other countries can implement it, why not Malaysia? Or, are we really having many troublemakers and difficult to handle typed of voters?
If you read the first part of my question, I wanted to know, who actually was given the “privilege” to purchase the ink and not the name of the company which has repurchased the ink from Election Commission. Hmmm…. or I did not put the question clear or they were trying to avoid to answer the said question?
Earlier, we were told, the “life” of the ink is only 6 months. If no buyer, what happen?
To my reader, donplaypuks®, you may be right, I am now getting more suspicious about the purchase of the ink. Perhaps, a visit to the store room of the Election Commission to verify it. Alternatively, write to the Auditor General.
Puan Fong Po Kuan (Batu Gajah) minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan syarikat yang diberi kontrak pembelian dakwat kuku, nilainya dan harga jualan semula oleh SPR. Bilakah Perkara 118 dan 119 Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan peraturan yang berkaitan akan dipinda bagi memastikan dakwat boleh digunakan pada pilihan raya .
Jawapan: YB Dato’ Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri
Tuan Yang Di Pertua,
a) Untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat, pihak-pihak yang berminat untuk membeli semula dakwat kekal dari Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR) belum lagi membuat keputusan untuk membeli dakwat kuku berkenaan, oleh yang demikian SPR tidak dapat memberikan nama syarikat yang diberi kontrak pembelian dan harga jualan yang ditawarkan.
b) Soal pindaan Perkara 118 dan 119 Perlembagaan Persekutuan tidak berbangkit. Untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat, bagi melaksanakan penggunaan dakwat kekal, Perkara 118 Perlembagaan Persekutuan tidak perlu dipinda kerana ianya adalah berkaitan dengan petisyen pilihanraya dan tidak ada kaitan dengan kelayakan untuk mengundi. Kerajaan percaya ada pilihan lain selain daripada penggunaan dakwat kekal untuk memastikan seseorang pemilih hanya boleh mengundi sekali sahaja. Penggunaan dakwat kekal juga boleh menimbulkan banyak masalah seperti melewatkan proses pengundian dan menimbulkan ketegangan jika ada pihak-pihak yang enggan untuk menggunakannya. Sekian, terima-kasih.
I cant believe it! now they said they havent even buy it yet!! meaning if so, they hoodwinked the rakyat by saying they will use it with all MSM showing pictures of those girls with the ink!! lies lies lies!!
YB, thank you for this expose. more reasons to kick this corrupted and flip flopping govt out once and for all!
Comment by shiver — June 23, 2008 @ 8:43 pm
I think you may be mistaken shiver. The ink has been bought by SPR. What Nazri is saying is that the supposed buyer has not made a decision whether to re-purchase the ink from SPR yet.
Comment by True-Leaders.com — June 23, 2008 @ 9:48 pm
Dear YB
The Minister has deliberately avoided answering your direct question as to who originally was given tne contract to buy the ink buy answering another imagined question.
This is called misdirection and attempted obfuscation.
We are not interested in who they are going to sell the ink to.
Please be persistent. In necessary you can lodged a police report and/or write to the ACA, PAC and Auditor General to investigate, in the interest of the public, fair play at GE, transparency and accountability for RM 2.4 million oftaxpayers’ hard-earned money.
Thank you.
Comment by donplaypuks — June 23, 2008 @ 10:28 pm
For all the crap you politicians have been spewing around.. I’d wish you improve your writing in English to begin with!!!
Comment by M. — June 23, 2008 @ 10:31 pm
You are doing a good job, YB. Thank you for taking up this matter. Please continue to push for the truth and to bring it to light. Nazri sounds like he is trying to practice some very creative tai chi to mislead you and the House with answers that are not really answers, but nevertheless, throws suspicion on earlier statements given by the government and the EC chairman. If there were so many problems with the indelible ink, why did was it purchased in the first place and why did the government trumpet its case so loudly in the media? It suggests that the decision to purchase the ink was done hastily and without much thought to the pros and cons (which in turn, suggests that the EC did not do its job and is contrary to what I was led to believe from reading the pre-election news in the mainstream national newspapers). So who authorised the purchase? Very suspicious indeed. Something tells me we can expect even more creative ‘tai chi’ing by the EC chairman and Nazri on this matter.
But eventually, twisted forked tongues will get caught in webs of their own making and the truth will be revealed. Truth-speakers and truth-seekers have nothing to fear. Keep going for the truth, YB!
Comment by seeking accountability — June 24, 2008 @ 12:54 am
is our MP asking the minister a question in a strange foreign language ? it seems the minister had problems understanding it “wen fei suo da” , “wen dong da xi” :
well i shall rephrase it on behalf of our MP :”Who gave ‘permission’ to those group of people to buy indelible ink” ? we are not interested to know the ink will be sold which 3rd parties …..
Comment by Cookie Monster — June 24, 2008 @ 10:08 am
Hmm.. The Minister seems like giving an answer way off from what the question asked. On purpose??
Untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat, pihak-pihak yang berminat untuk membeli semula dakwat kekal dari Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR) belum lagi membuat keputusan untuk membeli dakwat kuku berkenaan, oleh yang demikian SPR tidak dapat memberikan nama syarikat yang diberi kontrak pembelian dan harga jualan yang ditawarkan.
He is talking about who they are going to sell the ink to, totally off from the question posted. Probably you should rephrased the question. You want to know whether SPR actually bought the ink or who they are going to sell the ink to?? Because, the question posted also not very clear. Why we want to know who are they going to sell the indelible ink to?
..menyatakan syarikat yang diberi kontrak pembelian dakwat kuku, nilainya dan harga jualan semula oleh SPR.
We want to know whether SPR actually bought the indelible ink.
..minta PERDANA MENTERI mengemukakan bukti pembelian dakwat kekal oleh SPR. Minta maklumat syarikat yang diberi kontrak oleh SPR untuk membeli dakwat kekal bagi pihak SPR, nilai dakwat kekal dan di manakah simpanan dakwat kekal tersebut sekarang.
Comment by bongkersz — June 24, 2008 @ 10:29 am
Bravo. MP Fong.
Comment by Robert Gan — June 24, 2008 @ 11:01 am
Event of election has passed for more than 3 mths..Now, even the Monkey Mohd…explained about their so-called apprehensive points had nothing to do with us- Malaysian. What can be seen thru the monkey’s explaination is sounds that they actually had the thought to ‘practice fraud’ about the election result, thru the cancellation of use of the indelibe ink…buddy stupid & idiot behavior!
Comment by dap admire — June 24, 2008 @ 8:58 pm