Ong Tee Keat: I won't be swayed to cross over
Submitted by Najiah on Thursday, July 8th, 2010
Pearl Lee Thursday, July 8th, 2010 14:07:00
ONG: Joined politics strictly for the people
"People may think now that Ong Tee Keat has been dropped from the Cabinet, he should weigh other options to survive politically."
Ong, who lost his ministerial post in the minor Cabinet reshuffle on June 1, said he was reminded of why he entered the political arena in the first place.Ong said he joined politics for the people and such idealism was still in him.
"When I joined politics, I've never had any intention or ever contemplated a full-time political career. I had humble beginnings and grew up in a tough environment. I joined for the rakyat as I remember making a vow to do my part to help the people."
Ong said he would continue to speak the truth despite not being part of the Cabinet. He also insisted he would stick to his principles and would not be swayed."It was a vow I made since young. Even before I became a portfolio holder, I've always done things for the people. It is not just for Barisan Nasional or MCA."
On his thoughts on the current state of the MCA and whether he harboured any regret and bitterness in the way he was voted out of the party leadership, Ong said making such thoughts public would be unhealthy and invited all sorts of unnecessary speculations.
"Let the present leadership prove its worth and relevance. But I would never give up on my pursuit for transformation. If it cannot be done in MCA, I would still pursue it elsewhere, not just on a political platform. It can also be done on a non-governmental organisation platform."
The Pandan MP said with more time on his hands, he was now more focused on his constituency.
"I am still conducting the weekly Sunday morning mobile clinic service, rain or shine, around my constituency.
We have a multi-racial crowd responding to our call and participating in our programmes and we also have plans to extend the services to other States."
Asked whether he would stand for the MCA presidency again, Ong said it was too premature to say.
"The party leadership must be aware of the public's views and opinions for the party to go for direct presidential elections.
"This is not just my view. In fact, I've said that quite openly in my manifesto. And so did (current MCA president) Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek."
The former minister who wants to prove his worth...
DESPITE being dropped from the Cabinet as Transport Minister on June 1, following his defeat at the MCA presidential elections on March 28, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat does not see such setbacks as an obstacle in his drive to serve the people.While he has more time now for his family and the chance to enjoy his collection of oldies, classical and jazz music, Ong still feels the urge and need to serve the people.
In an exclusive interview with The Malay Mail's PEARL LEE recently, the Pandan MP says he still feels the fire in his belly to serve the people and to speak up for the truth.
Q: Were you taken aback at the decision by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to no longer offer you a Cabinet position? Why do you think this was so?
A: I was not really taken aback. I was in Yokohama (Japan) when I received a phone call from the PM. The Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Community leaders in Yokohama had treated me to dinner after I had secured 38 sets of used car trains from the Japan Metro that very morning. We had every reason to celebrate as the 38 sets of used car trains were in good condition with a reasonably long lifespan. I didn't expect to receive such a call at about 5.30pm Malaysian time. Of course, in politics, anything can happen. More so, this is part of the PM's prerogative.
Q: What was running in your head the first five minutes after getting the news from the PM? Did you feel panic, was there grief, etc.?A: I told myself there was still time for me to reposition myself. Also, it was time for me to think about my career and future. I managed to compose myself and sit through the entire dinner function. There is no feeling of panic or grief in people like me. To me, politics is not everything in my life. My life is not equivalent to only politics.
Q: Was it something you had seen coming?
A: Earlier, there had been various conflicting speculation on the ground. But, I managed to stay focused on my work, notwithstanding these various schools of speculation. Of course anything can be done in the name of partisan politics, more so in BN coalition politics. There was one school of thought claiming 'the loser loses all'. Since I had lost in the party elections, it is understandable I should leave the Cabinet. On the other hand, this is the PM's prerogative. Until today, it is common knowledge the Cabinet lineup has portfolios ministers without any party post. But, I don't want to name anybody. Like my wife said, life has got to go on. I will prove my worth in some other fields.
Q: Moving on Datuk Seri, do you believe the Transport Ministry, your former portfolio, is in good hands under the stewardship of Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha?
A: I don't have any comments on him. After all, his appointment is the PM's prerogative based on perhaps the party president Dr Chua Soi Lek's recommendations. Perhaps it is too premature for anyone to make any conclusive remarks on this.
Q: Do you think you had achieved all you had set out to within the ministry until the minor Cabinet reshuffle?
A: There is still a long way to go. The Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) issue is just one of many and I wouldn't consider the PKFZ debacle closed. If you look at the bigger picture,as far as transformation for this ministry is concerned, the touchpoints shouldn't be just confined to urban public transport. Rather, transportation reform should also cover other sectors like aviation and maritime.
Prior to the Cabinet reshuffle, I was in the midst of constituting the new National Port Council. For land transport, I had - at that point of time - just completed my plan for revamping the one-year-old Road Transport Department (JPJ) stakeholders committee. Just one year ago, I set up the JPJ stakeholders committee. Before the reshuffle, I wanted to empower it further and transform it into a consultative council for the land transport stakeholders. This, in fact, took place in May.
After my defeat in the party election on March 28, I never stopped doing my work in the ministry. One thing which had boosted me up before the Cabinet reshuffle was the positive score card I received as the minister in-charge for the NKRA (National Key Result Areas) for public transport as my team did reasonably well.
Q: You had raised the issue of the Electric Multiple Units (EMU) trains in your blog. In your posting, you had suggested those behind the previous tenders may have had an agenda in raising the issue in the Dewan Rakyat. Could you please elaborate?
A: Not quite. I did say it’s good we showed our concern. I also dived into the subject matter of public spending. We need to be thrifty and have to make sure every sen of public funds spent is justifiable. But again, we must make sure our deliberation is based on facts and figures, and not vendor-driven. In my blog, I had argued that in the deliberation on points raised by legislators, there were quite a number of key matters linked to the subject matter were somehow, surprisingly, not mentioned at all. I really don't understand, but this was my observation.
Q: Do you think it was deliberately left out?
A: I raised in my blog, for example, the KTM (Keretapi Tanah Melayu) tender was not awarded; it was superseded later in light of the NKRA needs which seemed to be much bigger than what was anticipated at first. Even the number of train sets had increased from eight sets of 3-car EMU trains to 38 sets of 6-car set EMUS. It is not just about adding more wagons or more coaches to make up a number. Rather, the eight car sets and 38 car sets would involve different magnitudes of power to drive them. And people made no mention of this fact.
Also, I would have expected the debaters or legislators involved in the debate should have known the KTM tender had been scrapped. It has never been awarded. But, the way they put it to the public was as if the present procurement for 38 sets of EMU trains is part of the tender. It is not true. It could be done inadvertently or deliberately, I wouldn't know, of course. They know best.
Q: There is a massive difference in the quantity previously demanded for the EMU train sets when compared to the amended one under the NKRA for Urban Public Transportation. You had cautioned such comparisons must be viewed in the context of technical specifications as well, lest it be an 'apples and oranges' issue. Why do you think there is a clear lack of understanding on the issue?
A: Well, at the same time, I was also surprised to learn someone raised during the debate China-made EMU trains should not be given due consideration as several years ago, there were some China-made locomotives procured by KTM which turned out to be units of inferior quality. But again, this is what they say and had been saying since a few years ago. The Chinese trains were proven to be of poor quality, but they did not elaborate further.
Now, it is my turn to tell the true story. Their argument is the China-made trains were low quality and now we shouldn't consider them at all. The problem was made public in May 2008 and The Malay Mail had probed the matter. There were 20 sets of China-made locomotives from Dalian, which were found to be out of service immediately after having been commissioned.
I was then and still until today very appreciative of The Malay Mail's pro-activeness, which prompted me to probe further as I had earlier come across such rumours. The fact remains the trains were in the graveyard. When the story was headlined by The Malay Mail, that prompted me to visit the site. To cut the story short, and much to my chagrin, I found out the report was true. More than 15 sets out of 20 were then found in the dumpsite. The reason given was such units were beyond repair.
When I probed further, I found out the principal in China had been kept in the dark. They had never been informed of the necessity for them to conduct repairs immediately. Under such circumstances, those units were then deemed to be beyond repair. A few months after my visit, then new KTM managing director Datuk Razak Malik took the trouble to fix the problem and he even managed to liaise with the principal to cross-check the facts. The principal from China then came down immediately to initiate the repairs. By the end of January 2009, all 20 sets were brought back to the track again and the repairs were done free of charge as we managed to argue these were still under warranty.
In this respect, it is clearly not just a case of miscommunication. Rather, it is case where people involved were inactive instead of handling the situation. Who said the train sets were beyond repair? The Chinese engineers came here and turned it around after working on the trains for three months to get them back to the tracks. As far as this is concerned, regarding the Dalian locomotives, I think we must know the real story. The Dalian principal is a different entity compared to the manufacturer of the 38 sets of 6-car set. There is a difference of localities and provinces, they are different items altogether. Also locomotives and EMU's are different things. Sadly, people often just say locomotives or EMUs, itu semua keretapi (they are all trains).
Q: How do you suggest we can change people's working attitudes and mindsets?
A: Let's just put it this way. Now that I'm no longer the minister, I've got no intention to play spokesman for any party. But I can't help but speak the truth. When I mentioned the Dalian issue, I have to speak the truth. In partisan politics, time and time again, the truth has been distorted deliberately and I have reasons to be upset.
Q: You had also said the procurement was the result of direct negotiation with the Finance Ministry (MOF) and not the Transport Ministry. Is this normal for such matters to be left in the hands of the MOF? Do you see it as being detrimental to the progress of the transportation industry/system here? If so, what are the changes needed?
A: Direct negotiations have been a common practice, it has got to be something from the then Finance Ministry. I think the government of the day would have the intelligence to know what is best for the nation. But the fact remains any procurement involving technical specifications would always require technical expertise and experience from the user ministry concerned, which in this case was the Transport Ministry.
Q: Datuk Seri, people have always labeled you as someone who stands up for the truth and the truth must prevail. But is it worth it? Some have said that perhaps you are no longer in the Cabinet as you are too honest.
A: We need the truth. Those locomotives, do you know how big the amount was? It was US$50 million. Imagine if we dumped all this in the dumpyard, apa akan jadi (what will happen)? Whether or not I am a portfolio holder, that should not be the excuse deterring me from telling the truth. Even if I’ve lost everything in my political career, I think, it is my principle to speak the truth. How can I keep silent over something I know?
I must say I have no vested interest whatsoever in the Dalian locomotives, which had been procured well before I became a Cabinet minister. I will speak up even more if such issues were distorted for certain untold agendas.
Q: You are now more focused on your constituency, Pandan. Can you share with us a little about your work here?
A: I am still conducting the weekly Sunday morning mobile clinic service, be it rain or shine, around my constituency. We have a multi-racial crowd responding to our call and participating in our programmes. People are also coming up to me with all sort of proposals and now people are suggesting maybe we should extend to northern and southern states and also in Sabah. People are all coming to me with all sort of proposals, such as having dentists and acupuncturists on board.
We plan to role out more vehicles, people are now making demands and I need to roll out more vehicles, including two more to service the other states. People may think I do it because I want to get a seat here and, in fact, but there are certain party bosses who have quite openly said they are going to likely field other candidates here, meaning I will be dropped. But given this scenario, I am still doing it, I am not doing it to save my seat. I have a political belief I need to stay committed to the people. I do it to cater to the needs of the people. I am not doing it in the name of the party and I also have no locus to do it for MCA.
Q: What are your thoughts on the current state of MCA? Do you harbour any regrets or bitterness at the manner you were voted out of the MCA leadership?
A: Of course, I am out of the leadership. Any thought of mine, if at all I were to make public, would certainly invite all sorts of unnecessary speculations. So now my only answer is let the present leadership prove its worth and relevance. But I would never, never give up my pursuit of transformation. If it cannot be done in MCA, I would still pursue it elsewhere, not just on a political platform, it can also be on an NGO platform.
Q: Your goal during your presidency was to institute changes within the MCA. Yet, not enough time was given to you to implement these changes. Given the benefit of hindsight, do you think that 'change' is really what MCA members have wanted all along?
A: I do understand any change would bring about transformational pain in certain people. Of course, some may be inclined to opt for status quo rather than taking the risk to go through the transformational pain as they see it as a risk. To me, the logic is very simple. If we don't go for change, we are doomed.
Q: Are we doomed now?
A: I am not a doomsayer per se, but I can see if a political party chooses to not change, then ultimately, it is going to be irrelevant. Time is running out. Time cannot wait for us, we have to keep abreast with the changing times. The younger generation is now in the midst of initiating changes, they are not just keeping abreast of changes, but initiating changes. If we can’t initiate changes, we should at least keep abreast of changes. But, if we fail in both, what more or what else we can do?
Q: Given all that has happened in the MCA, would you have done anything differently?
A: In hindsight, within such a short span of time, ever since I was elected president till I was defeated in the fresh polls, I had opened up too many battle-fronts at the same time. As an example, when I was initiating transformation within the party, I had also embarked on a comprehensive probe into PKFZ. That is tantamount to disturbing the hornets' nest, as thereafter, we could see the coalition of opposing forces came into play. That was very untimely.
Of course, now I would have liked to have a longer time to prioritise the various initiatives because you can't do it concurrently. At the end of the day when you initiate changes, you need time for cohesion in the minds of people, the delegates and members. And I was racing against time.
The PKFZ issue, for example, had been deliberately distorted in the party by certain quarters with some saying it had nothing to do with MCA because it was part of the Transport Ministry's job. But, they forgot that it involved public money and anything involving public money should be a national concern. With MCA, as a mainstream coalition partner, you cannot ignore that.
Q: Do you harbour any regrets in manner you left the leadership?
A: I always keep on reminding myself if I want to emerge stronger, I must be able to overcome the hurdles. Even if I stumbled along the way, I must be able to rise again from the fall and make sure I will never fall again.
Q: Do you foresee yourself returning to battle for the MCA presidency again? If so, when?
A: It’s too premature to make any prediction. It's still too early, but certainly, I think the party leadership must take cognisance of public's view it is time for the party to go for direct presidential elections involving all valid and registered members. This is not just my view. In fact, I think I've said that quite openly in my manifesto. And so did (current MCA president) Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek.
Q: The views on scholarship allocation has landed MCA Youth chief Wee Ka Siong in trouble with Perkasa, even to the extent of them calling for him to be detained under the Internal Securities Act (ISA). What are your views on the scholarship issue, Perkasa and the ISA call?
A: The scholarship allocation is, in fact, an issue which has been raised time and time again. Even when I was (MCA) Youth chief. I also raised it when I was a deputy minister. It has always been a touchy issue. To me, our society should now be mature enough to allow for any public discourse on such issues. On the ISA call, there are many more views in Malaysia which may not be palatable to (Perkasa president Datuk) Ibrahim Ali if he wants to put people in detention.
No comments:
Post a Comment