Friday, May 08, 2015

出家

J: 哈哈,(要)看破红尘的话,(我)就不成功了。要去出家了。



Me: 哈哈,我每天都出家....只是....我有回家而已 xD

大家要重拾希望

希望是珍貴資源,只停留在最堅持的人心中

Monday, March 23, 2015

Farewell, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew

In their position, I found that SDP’s statement is the most graceful of all.
“ Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong
Dr Lee Wei Ling
Mr Lee Hsien Yang,
On behalf of the members of the Singapore Democratic Party, I send you and your loved ones my deepest condolences on the demise of your father, Mr Lee Kuan Yew. In this time of personal grief, our thoughts are with you.
Chee Soon Juan
Secretary-General
Singapore Democratic Party”
---
Here I also would like to add a few more words:
We are all human, we should take care of Mr. Lee family’s and thousands of supporters’ feelings when mourning for the loss of the life of their loved ones.
That is also why at this junction of time, I want to be sensitive also to the feelings of Chia Thye Poh (read ‘Operations Cold Store’), Said Zahari (read ‘Dark Clouds at Dawn’), Lim Chin Siong (read ‘Comet in the Sky’) who co-founded the People’s Action Party with Mr. Lee. Also those names that appear in the documentary of “To Singapore, With Love”: Ang Swee Chai, Chan Sun Wing, He Jin, Ho Juan Thai, Tan Hee Kim, Tan Wah Piow, Shu Shihua, Wong Soon Fong, Ye Wanzhen.
They, too, have their families and comrades who have made the painful sacrifices in the past for an alternative but no less greater nation. For sure they will get far less recognition for their vision unrealised.
Only if Mr. Lee had approached and engaged them fairly, positively and freely, defeated them openly with reasons, utmost respect and freedom afforded to them, I believe all parties including me would sing praise of you highly unreservedly. Then I don’t need to take care of their feelings of their painful losses in the past (because that did not happen). By then Mr. Lee would be a great leader at such height that is truly well-loved by all, well-respected by opponents and would surely be positively accredited by majority of historians, as such accorded to Mr. Mandela Nelson and co. with glorious human values.
In the wake of the mourning of the late Mr. Lee, I sincerely want to thank him for helping me to appreciate more about the values ‘Liberty, Equality and Fraternity’. He constantly reminds me of what I want and do not want for the future nation of mine I want to help build.
To Singapore, with Love~

Sunday, March 22, 2015

謝太寶


謝太寶,全新加坡人都應覺得虧欠了他。
李光耀模式的勝利,是因為他在威權下、沒對手之下的勝利(unopposed victory)
歷史不能做實驗,所以沒有科學實驗下的control(並行)樣本來作比較。歷史確實沒有如果,同時這也無法證明如果是由社陣(包括謝太寶)執政之下,現在的新加坡會不會是東方的瑞士或荷蘭?為何只滿足于李光耀現在和那時的新加坡模式?

---

陳慧思:

老楊說的是,談李光耀,怎能不談謝太寶?
「1963年,谢太宝以22岁之龄中选裕廊区国会议员,1966年10月29日遭新加坡政府援引《内安法令》未经审讯扣留,当时他年方25岁。1989年从樟宜大牢“释放”时,他已是44岁。“获释”过后,他被软禁在圣淘沙岛,需自付生活及住宿费。到了1998年,新加坡政府才解除所有禁令,让谢太宝重获言论及行动自由。当时谢太宝已年届57岁。」---網上資料
2011年謝老先生來馬領林連玉精神獎,那是他獲釋後首度公開演講,我有幸採訪、觀禮,向這位比曼德拉被扣禁的日子還長的政治犯致敬。
當時台上的他精神飽滿、聲若洪鐘,仍可讓人想像他在半個世紀前的群眾魅力。想一睹他風采的朋友可點擊這裡:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UNDm8Ye0Lz8


---
今天下午討論的源起:

楊白楊:

《有多少新加坡人为谢太宝讲过什么话?》
刚才偶然读了一篇有关谢太宝先生的母亲的文章,心有戚戚焉。
很想问一声,几百万样样以WORLD CLASS为荣的新加坡人,李光耀把谢太宝先生囚禁了32年,你们当中有多少人曾经站出来为谢太宝先生讲过什么话?
(杨白杨。2015322日)


原故事:



葉瑞女士——謝太寶最親愛的媽媽

作為一個母親,當她的聰明、前途無量的兒子被秘密逮捕,而監禁時期又被無限延宕,長達殘酷的32年,這將情何以堪?

葉瑞女士在多年倒臥病榻的情況下,終於在星期一(20111226日)去世,享年94歲。在她生命的最後幾個星期,很難得她的大兒子謝太寶能夠日夜陪伴她,該是老懷堪慰了吧。

當謝太寶在風華正茂的25歲被捕時,他還是一個立法議員。他被捕後三個月,他的母親就身患重病,接著多次的中風讓她只能長期臥病在床。直到今天,沒有人能夠忘記她和她的家庭所遭受的苦難。這個家庭默默地承受了三十二年以上的光景。

當李光耀夫人因中風失去行動自由的時候,還有她的丈夫和孩子們隨侍在側,並且接受最好的醫療服務。而葉瑞女士卻不能享有這些。當時的總理李光耀先生和他的內閣想都沒想過基於人道的理由把謝太寶釋放或者公開審判。他真的是被丟進黑牢裡去自生自滅,他的家庭也只能自求生路。

當他57歲被放出來的時候,謝太寶根本在新加坡找不到一份工作,即使他是三語兼通,英語、華語和馬來語,並且還是前南洋大學的物理和數學高才生。他接受一份獎學金,需要到海牙的社會研究院去做更高的研究,所以不得不離開自己的母親。之後雖然他獲得了博士的學位,然而他在海外的學術活動使得他遠離自己的母親和家庭。
葉女士現在終於擺脫了她一生的折磨,希望她安息。也希望行動黨政府有一天體認到它所引用的內安法如何造成千萬個人和家庭的不幸和磨難。最後希望大家都能警覺,並且準備為不公不義的事提出疾呼。


---
好答復:

Madaleine: 
没有任何人的岁月该被无理掠夺,32年不是两个阿拉伯数字,而是有血有肉的生命。如果今天在牢房里的是你、我的孩子,那种痛何止撕心裂肺?如果说谢太宝坐牢就成全了新加坡今日的繁华,那么这个人要是没坐牢,新加坡岂非要更加繁荣进步?或许李光耀看到了这点,Ai Na Wee没看到。

像谢太宝这样的一个人才,或许他在学术上、其他领域中的成就可以造福世界,我们都不知道一个让李巨人惧怕的人,他能带给世界怎样的一种影响、一种震撼,因为那32年再也回不去了。

那天,前辈说往事,最后一句~教书是我唯一的志愿,让人泪水直流。今天,谢太宝若提往事,他的结语会是什么?我不知道,但是可以感受那种悲情~纵使他不语,我也泪先流。


K.S. Lee:

所谓厉害的领导,或是伟人什么的,就是让一大群人心甘情愿无中生有的制造荣耀记忆,以及心甘情愿指鹿为马的齐心协力涂抹掉曾经发生过的暴行以及正在发生着的暴政。

只要暴政让人有饭吃,暴政留活命,是值得感恩;暴政不留活命,是顾全大局。

历史经常是奴才写来歌颂暴政的玩意儿。

Josh:
接受異己的氣度,正是李光耀所缺乏的。還有一位Jeyaratnam,妻子的癌症需要錢治療。李光耀痛恨Jeya屢次在國會讓他難堪,於是法院判Jeya誹謗罪成,罰巨款。Jeya之妻不及治療離世


CWS:

李光耀忌才,只想保住自己的權位。謝太寶三語精通,風華正茂,光芒四射,結果就這樣毀在他手中。昨晚朋友們才談到,李光耀要當的就是皇帝。他就是新加坡的皇帝。

CTP:
我一直觉得李光耀对他的扣留是极度残忍的,毁了一个人的一生。


楊白楊:

我上了这贴文之后,就去吃晚餐。回来看到,哇,这样热烈的讨论。

爱娜是我的世姪,我们只在接近20年前见过一次面。前年尾我才在FB遇到她。我喜欢她讲真心话的性格。她长期住新加坡,因此她对我的贴文的看法,我一点都不奇怪。我的感觉是大部份新加坡人都有她这种想法。所以,我的贴文清楚地要问的,是几百万的新加坡人。

因此,请大家不要针对爱娜来批评,不是因为爱娜是我的世姪,而是因为新加坡李光耀政府长期以来把大多数新加坡人打造成这个样子。我一直相信,几百万富裕的新加坡人,有一天,会为谢太宝先生的事,感到愧疚。几百万有读很多书的新加坡人,物质富裕之余,没有站出来问李光耀:谢太宝犯了什么杀人放火的大罪,要关他这么久?他不过是你的政敌而已!

把一个政治理念和自己对立的人监禁32年,还能够让几百万自己人不出声,太不可思议了,不要怪我对这事耿耿于怀。我不认识谢太宝先生,他也不认识我。我在24岁时坐牢两年,他在25岁时坐牢32年,我不能想像他的勇气从何而来,我只对他充满无限的敬意。对李光耀,他现在病重,我就不多说了。

Friday, March 13, 2015

政策研究提升国会辩论素质

2014年,国会下议院只召开了57天。由于电视没有定期直播国会辩论环节,一般民众未必能看到偶尔真正精彩的辩论,却对国会传出的荒唐闹剧略有所闻。托媒体酷爱捕捉‘充满娱乐性’的国会“原声摘要”(sound bite)之便,「月漏论」、「大脚兽」与「大猴」互呛、「不喜伊斯兰国者滚出国」的闹剧或影响了部份民众对政治人物的观感,觉得国会辩论像在巴刹里吵架。偏偏电视台又爱选播部长们照本宣读答复的沉闷画面,难怪激不起民众对国会辩论的兴趣。

政治人物的口才和演说能力照理不会太差。辩论素质不好,很可能是因为大部分朝野议员对各政策课题的认知、掌握和准备都不足。议员对课题不甚了解却又急于表现,结果不是口出狂言就是彻底暴露他的无知。国会辩论期间另一个常见问题是议员爱节外生枝,不时脱离正题,白白浪费了讨论政策的宝贵时间,导致国会未能及时深入探讨、检验或纠正某些偏颇政策。况且,国阵仗着国会多数议席,过去不少政策就如此草率通过。

固然人民不能要求议员样样精通,但有素质的国会辩论必须伴随认真的政策研究。政党联盟之间或许可分工监督各政府部门,但每个议员皆应从事自己感兴趣的专门领域政策研究。

奈何国会似乎从未认真支援众议员从事政策研究。目前国会仅提供八位研究助理供全体222议员共用,而议员的津贴里不包括聘请助理的费用。目前国会议员的津貼仅RM6,508.59,再加上选区服务中心需要全职员,单靠津貼他们有能力自掏腰包聘请研究助理吗?对不太热衷于政策研究的议员来说,这根本就是奢侈。

要批评政府做得不好似乎比较容易,但要批判者拿出更周全的替代政策就知易行难,尤其是在政策研究方面乏善可陈。在新加坡国会议席阙如的民主党(SDP)能凭一己之力推出多个攸关国家重大课题的详细政策建议书来,与执政党辩论,我国的各大在野党呢?可否让人民端详你们对教育、交通、医药卫生、环境、经济转型等替代政策的详细建议书?

其实,我国朝野政党本身各有智库:马华有策略分析与政策研究所(INSAP),民政党有社会经济发展研究所(SEDAR),人民公正党有人民研究院(Institut Rakyat)。这些智库的共同点是没获得国会或政府拨款,因此研究质量或受影响和局限。相比之下,德国政府长期资助各主流政党成立的基金会,无论该政党在朝或在野都有一笔客观的预算来研究政策和办活动。此举非常有利于各党议员提升专业问政能力。


“又要马儿好,又要马儿不吃草”肯定不行了,再不趁早,迟点议员脑生草。与其给首相专机环游世界‘吃风’,人民绝对乐意把一小部分的税金给议员作政策研究。

本文刊登于《火箭报》2015年2月1日期刊

当个可信赖的专业从政者

从政者给民众的普遍印象似乎不太好。有人觉得他们信口开河甚至有人对他们嗤之以鼻,颇感不屑。在民主成熟的国度里,独立自主、批判力高的媒体会对从政者许下的每个承诺、说过的每一句话,穷追猛打。

随着时代的演变,人民的知识水平显著提高,媒体充斥大量便宜又即时的资讯。英国保守党国会议员史都华(Rory Steward)曾在一场公开演说中表示,这些因素导致现代民主社会对从政者要求苛刻,以致他们没有说真话、承认弱点的空间。一旦坦诚错误得付代价,等于间接鼓励从政者花言巧语、言不由衷,进一步巩固民众对这职业的刻板印象。

事实上,全球民主趋势似乎在倒退,尤其明显地发生在民主成熟的国家。其中最好的指标是大选的投票率、人民加入政党的比率和镇民大会的出席率。在英美德日等国,如今这方面的数据已远比不上1980到1990年代初的高峰。原因除了是这些国家的传统主流政党已无法回应和跟上新时代的思维和脚步,更精明的人民也开始不轻易相信政党和政治人物。

我国有不同的民主和政治体验。两年前,政党竞争最激烈、全民最投入的5.05全国大选,投票84.5%,创下历史新高。当时,政治口号响彻云霄:改朝换代、Ini kalilah, Ubah!可惜,众人的政改梦想没有实现,多少人因此而泄气失落。随后的政党和社运活动不是减少就是停歇。民联三党在去年的雪州大臣风波里的内斗和尔虞我诈,浇灭了不少支持者对政改的浪漫期待。去年的好几场补选再也激不起如5.05时期的火花。

政党与选民之间的信任源自于诚信。政党要选民继续支持,诚信至关重要。负责任的民主政党更要向人民透明且坦诚地交代其重要的政治决定。任何黑箱作业、密谋谈判和利益交换的政治举动,只会加深人民对政党的猜疑。在这年代,若政客还想用似是而非的言论或谎言来打发民众对事情的追究,就大错特错了。林肯给政客的教诲是:你可以有时欺骗所有人或时常欺骗一些人,但你总不能每时每刻欺骗所有人。

正如首相纳吉在刚上任时说:“政府知道什么是最好的”时代已结束了。政府用恶法如《官方机密法令》和《煽动法令》来隐藏和阻止人民探究获知攸关公共利益的资讯,固然是在自打嘴巴;反之,若从政者不知道或不清楚某件事或议题,虚心承认不懂也总好过不懂装懂地吹嘘一番。发表任何言论之前,政治人物切记要做足功课,不然就会闹出“蕹菜降价”和“一蚊鸡”不食人间烟火的经典笑话。


从政者固然也是人,会有人性弱点,但要人民接受和信任,从政者学会尊重人民的意愿和相信他们的智慧。人民经过3.085.05的民主洗礼后变得更加成熟,从政者是时候加把劲、表现得更专业更有诚信。别让人民不开心,好吗?

本文刊登于《火箭报》2015年1月15日期刊

Monday, February 23, 2015

No free political lunch, please sign this!

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-release-malaysian-opposition-leader-anwar-ibrahim-prison-top-priority-us-policy-toward-malaysia/fBrTzvBz

各位親朋戚友,如果政府隨便抓人再來個‘莫須有’罪名把一個個願意為大家仗義執言的在野黨領袖關進牢里,而你又不會生氣,也不愿花一兩分鐘來簽名支持釋放政治犯安華,那麼我們就集體繼續乖乖聽話地生活在一個國家大的牢房里吧!

維繫一個貪腐的政權很容易,就是什麼都不做!繼續讓羅大媽用1200大元理髮洗頭,買包包鑽戒和環遊世界吧,反正錢也是你們的!

何時為正義挺身而出?就是在對的時候做對的事情!

快點點進以上網頁簽名支持釋放安華吧!

I feel rather sad over the fact that the petition could not garner enough signatures after 2 weeks, to get over the threshold to bring to US government attention. 100,000 signatures, a high barrier though, but looking at how many people had turned out at political rallies/ protests prior to 505 General Election, I still find it too surprising the petition campaign falters. Why? In the face of gross violation of justice to the opposition leader of our nation, Anwar Ibrahim, I am aghast why this time not so many people express their anger like last time? To support the call, one just need take a minute or two to fill up the online signature form. It does not even require anyone go down to street nor taken to lokap, why not sign?

The person who initiated this petition is no other than the ex-US ambassador himself John Malott. I know some still are very sceptical and doubt whether this petition would change anything at all. I don’t know, but at least I know every signature is real, at least the online support and the call for justice is also real and solid. This forms the collective voice of conscience and moral authority. Even if Obama-administration chooses to overlook this issue, we can use the petition to go around and signal to the world that we have got a serious issue back home. If the people in the respective nations know that their democratic leaders still hypocritically support a regime who throws their political opponents in jail, what do they think of their leaders? But if we ourselves are not angry enough, seemingly agree with the authority over their political moves and ‘content’ with the status quo, then why would any government and people in the world voice up for us, if not even 100,000 people back in our homeland bother about it?

One issue I can understand is that the language used in this petition is English. This could already be a language barrier to some rakyat who are not so good in understanding the content of this petition and therefore refuse to sign. I hope some would take this to their circle of friends, translate the basic message of this petition in their own native language, and finally urge people to sign! Sign, please just sign. Do it not just for Anwar, but for a free and fair political competition. Don’t make opposition politicians pay any political cost, no one should deserve that kind of injustice.


There is no real reform for Malaysia without having free and strong opposition which can win the election by real support and implement their political visions.

***

Reform is a long march... now the opposition leader is in the lokap, talking about the long term strategy is not timely.

There are people building the nation by strengthening the opposition, not just in terms of political influence, but also substance.

Policy formulating will take time , especially expert consultation. I see that some parties and NGOs are doing that, and there are things still ongoing, to put on the plate.

Not to smear BN, but the federal government is doing the opposite, and earning more and more discredit.

You should also understand that policy reform will go hand in hand with the political power. If the current political power doesn't want to shake our hands, then we should go to another platform which would take our ideas as their vision too and at the same time politically powerful enough to challenge the problematic one.


***

so, at this junction of time, we must do what is required at the crucial moment. I don't mean signing this petition is enough, no it is not, but doing this costs us nothing and can probably bring advancement to the movement

To act or not to act, it is up to the occupant in the White House. But we want the world to see White House's reaction to injustice and anti-democratic measures done by a leader he played golf with

Sunday, February 01, 2015

Short comment on NEP

The true core shortcoming of NEP is not the so-called "crutch mentality" but NEPotism. No one is really depending on the NEP to survive. The proponent of "crutch mentality" is to help sustain the policy by letting some others in society believing that this policy does really help their race and without it their race cannot survive. So criticism using that phrase will nevertheless strengthen rather than weaken the need for such policy. I remember that Dr. M did like to use this phrase many times during his tenure, but never really did anything substantial to do away with this policy (and the similar policies).

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

你愿意住多远?


在德国汉诺威攻读博士学位时,记得有位女同事要搬离市中心。我问她为何不在城市里找房子,她回答说已在20公里外的小镇物色了一间价廉物美的独立式住宅。对她来说,上班通勤不是问题,有好几个方法可选择:乘搭火车加步行40分钟、开车25分钟,或若时间允许骑脚车大概要一个小时多。

回想如今身在槟岛的我,每天从南部往北通勤,区区12公里的路段,开车要45分钟,搭巴士加步行需1小时15分钟,别提可安全骑脚车上下班。

根据经合组织(OECD2011年的报告,成员国人民的平均单程通勤时间为38分钟;爱尔兰、丹麦,瑞典和美国的通勤时间少于30分钟,南非和韩国则需耗时55分钟以上。另外,德国2007年的一份研究报告显示,工作通勤耗时越长,员工的生活满意指数显著下滑。

再看我国吉隆坡-巴生谷一带的交通网,不难发现上下班高峰时间主干道路堵塞到瘫痪,公共交通也无效率。近十年来,都市人口迅速膨胀车辆越多,相信大部分往市中心的上班族通勤都需至少一小时。奈何较能负担得起的新房子距离市中心越来越远,结果年轻上班族陷入困境:如何取舍理想蜗居地点?

我到了适婚年龄有购房需求,但薪水只属于中产阶级。环顾接近工作地点的槟岛东北部房价,甭说排屋,仅是公寓的平方尺价码都让我望房兴叹。

根据槟城研究院同事不久前的计算,如果一家两口仅靠中间40%中产阶级的平均家庭收入,最多只能负担一间30万令吉以下的房屋。

从国家房地产资讯中心(NAPIC)的数据得知,目前全国平均房价为283千令吉,而槟城房价高于全国平均值,达337千令吉。槟岛和威省的房价差别甚大--以中等值来计算,在槟岛东北部买一间排屋或公寓的价钱,足以让我买下隔岸威省的三间排屋或公寓!

记得曾有房地产代理写道,在热门地区房价飙高,购屋者难辞其咎。他说那是市场力量——当购屋者都一窝蜂往相同的热门地点寻求理想房子,房屋需求大增,房价自然船高水涨。他不明白年轻人为何不肯搬远一点。即使不谈搬过去对岸,在岛上只要有人肯越过山岭补上多10公里的路程,浮罗山背仍有远较便宜且大间的房子。

我明白房地产市场的运作道理,但我不苟同购买方要背负房价高涨的原罪。除了发展商和产业投机份子,我认为城市规划才是重点。人民应该诘问政府的是:为何大部分经济活动集中在某个都市地区,而地方没有平衡发展?既然市内的可负担房子少,政府会否增建更多中低廉价屋再确保公平分配给符合资格的人?还有,既然都市化造成大部分人住得远,为何公共交通衔接网和班次频率仍欠理想?


听说在吉隆坡的一般房价就已近百万令吉。友人在面书上笑说,吉隆坡人很多已是百万富翁了。我心想,百万“负翁”应该也还真不少。


本文刊登于《火箭报》2015年1月1日期刊

Wednesday, January 07, 2015

In response to my friend (on FB)

In response to my friend suggesting Selangor Government should run better private schools to show what they can do for education

To me, it is not the state government but the (federal) opposition coalition should come up with a detailed policy paper on education, and that should be served as Pakatan Rakyat’s alternative education blueprint. Should they come to power, this is what they propose to do, with detailed problem-solution analysis approach. Although PR politicians often brag about the Buku Jingga (PR’s common policy framework), many PR representatives never really read through them thoroughly and never seem to cite them often for mentioning the relevant alternative policy.

To me also, that Buku Jingga is simply not enough, and at times I don’t feel it is professional and thoughtful enough for certain policies. One of the bigger problems for the Buku Jingga is that, they distributed the drafting jobs among politicians and think-tanks affiliated with political parties. It would have been so much better if they can allocate more time to rope in relevant experts in thei field and form a consultation panel for each big distinctive policy area. Each panel should come out with a detailed policy paper to show that they have done sufficient analyses and studies, therefore they have better ideas how to tackle the most pressing issues more professionally. Each policy should be set for medium and long term sustainable goal, so this can deter some ill-thought populist measures put out just to fish for votes.

Back to education reform policy, I do not agree with you Kok Boon to set up a competitive private system just to show the state can run better private schools than the federal government runs public schools. You just missed the point. Government is the authority body taking control/care of public matters. Public schools and the central education system are the focus points for reform, not private schools. Private schools are not to replace the public schools.

What Kim Boon said is not wrong in that Education falls under the jurisdiction power of the federal government, but I would argue that that does not mean Selangor state government should just sit there and do nothing without proposing any alternative education policy. For long some number of PR politicians talking about decentralisation of power from the federal government, so what if the next day federal government agrees to do so, then how would the state government run the public schools differently to BN?

Pakatan Rakyat, if they seriously aspire to become the next federal government and now position themselves as the responsible government-in-waiting, should have already a good alternative education plan to convince us that they can run public education system better than BN if they were elected in the next round. I don’t want to see people like Tony Pua, Rafizi and etc. to give their individual opinions,  I want to know what PR exactly is offering us.
To me, important issues to be addressed are i) the deliberate unequal/imbalance of development resources allocated for different streams of public schools,  ii) sliding standard of Maths and Science, English language command, creative and independent thinking skills, iii) Education that fosters learning capability, but not exam-orientated system, iv) academic freedom and professionalism in the tertiary education.

Sometimes I wonder why an opposition party in Singapore like SDP (yourSDP.org), even though they are without a seat in the parliament, yet they can yet come out with a number of detailed policy papers on the most gripping national issues. I noticed also that SDP politicians have such habit: after criticising PAP on various questionable policies, they will propose their party alternative based on their papers to woo support already. Of course no party can win the election just because they have good series of policy papers publication, but this has showed how professional and committed is the political party to offer alternatives to people. People can understand and indeed are given the real political choices, not just different logos.


The Buku Jingga is the common policy framework only, the ‘compromised’ consensus among three parties. It is so common sometimes it sounds just vague and a bit populist. After 505, I have even vague idea about what Pakatan Rakyat is offering to the rakyat, after the infighting among these parties throughout the last year. Are they still serious as the government-in-waiting?