Since last month, senior Umno leaders had dropped hints that the party polls, scheduled for November 2007, would be deferred. 

By postponing the party elections, the Umno leadership would be able to reduce the tension in the party, particularly the intense campaigning and even the wide use of money.  

In many cases, the heated campaigns have degenerated into open conflicts that would make the healing of wounds difficult, particularly in states like Kelantan and Terengganu, where the voting margins in general elections are narrow. 

Already the opposition, especially PAS and Parti Keadilan Nasional, has become more confident, believing that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has done the job for them with his continuous criticism against Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. 

There is damage, without doubt, and the Barisan coalition certainly has plenty of repair work to do ahead of the general election. 

No one, however, expects Abdullah to call the general election in the coming few months. The political climate at this point is hardly conducive.  

While the economy is strong, particularly in the commodities sector, the general sentiment among ordinary Malaysians is that they do not feel there is a buoyant economy. 

Money is tight and there are many unhappy people around with loud complaints against the Government. 

Despite the hype about the Ninth Malaysia Plan where RM210bil would be spent, the people want to see actual projects being carried out before they are convinced. The many grim-faced contractors in Umno want to hold the offer letters and voters want to see the signboards put up, announcing these projects at the sites, before they can be convinced.  

There would be spillover effects benefiting the people once these projects are rolled out, and the 810 projects named so far are only the preliminary ones.  

A large section of the Chinese voters, who are crucial voters in seats tightly fought between Umno and PAS, are still not in a forgiving mood. Many of these urban voters are still hurt by insensitive remarks made by certain Umno politicians. 

They feel they have been unfairly made the scapegoats in the political crisis – primarily involving Umno leaders – and that their solid backing for Umno candidates in the 1999 election, when Umno was challenged strongly, had been taken for granted, even forgotten. 

Many Umno personalities pulled through with three-digit margins following a strong challenge from the opposition and for these Chinese voters, any suggestion that the Chinese would take advantage of a weak Umno is unacceptable. 

While older Chinese voters understand the necessity of affirmative action and the need for a balanced society, the new generation of younger voters, including first-time voters, may need more persuasion. 

From the availability of places in universities to the implementation of certain government policies, the MCA and Gerakan would surely have a tougher job explaining government policies in the next election. 

No one questions the distribution of wealth and the restructuring of society but when the policy is perceived to benefit even the wealthy and politically-connected, then it is hard to placate those who find themselves shut out of the system. 

But deliver the votes the MCA and Gerakan must. The political structure is such that any punishment meted on MCA and Gerakan candidates would only erode the position of Chinese representatives in the Government.  

There is plenty to be done to pacify these angry Chinese voters in predominantly Chinese areas. For a start, Barisan politicians, regardless of their political parties, need to be more cautious in their statements. Assurances and promises may help in the short run but, ultimately, we need to re-examine policies and decisions that have made some sections of Malaysians feel uncomfortable, even lose out unfairly. 

But it must be stressed that some decisions, perceived to be discriminatory, are merely unilateral decisions, whether at local government or university level, and not even the policies of the Government. 

Chinese politicians, too, must appreciate that they need the Malay votes to win if they are being challenged by the DAP and Keadilan. It is these crucial Malay votes that will swing the results. 

There is room only for champions of Malaysians, not the champions of singular communities. The days of making statements to different audiences, via different language newspapers, are over. If apoliticians think they can get away with it, they had better think twice. 

One year is just about sufficient. It is more reasonable to expect Abdullah to call for the elections in 2008, with at least 12 months for him to prepare the ground for a big win. 

He has to win massively again, as he did in 2004 when the Barisan won 199 of the 219 parliamentary seats. He has to prove that the attacks by Dr Mahathir have not threatened his grip on power and that his predecessor's attempt to question his legitimacy as Prime Minister has not worked. 

As the country celebrates its 50th Merdeka anniversary, the timing is right to bring Malaysians together. It is time to emphasise that the making of Malaysia is the work of all races.  

Malaysia is our home and any reference to any community as an immigrant race, no matter how subtle, would not be tolerated. Any politician who utters such nonsense should be shut out. 

No Malaysian, regardless of his race, should be made to feel that he is treated differently and as we approach the 50th Merdeka and next general election, the time has come for us to take the right steps to make all Malaysians lift their heads high. 

There must be a greater willingness to examine the fundamentals of our economic system as protectionist trade barriers come down and the global market economy becomes more competitive. 

It is no longer about which race should get what slice of the pie but making sure that Malaysians would still get the pie. Decades ago, it was fashionable for politicians to talk about the equity shares of each ethnic group but we had better wake up to the fact that our economic competitors are out there, not among ourselves in Malaysia. 

Politicians will have plenty to say in the run-up to the general election but let's hear fresh ideas and approaches. Most of all, we don't need any communal slant to any issue.  

Walking off in a huff, he received a telephone call from a military officer in Bangkok.
"Thaksin here, I am still at the UN, what is this talk about a coup? Tell me what's happening?

"My ministers and generals told me they loved me, hugged me and kissed my hand.
Some even cried before I left, this can't be true, right?" he shouted angrily.

The reply from the other line was: "Sir, they want me to tell you that UN means You End."

Most Thais have taken lightly the dramatic political event of the year. It's business as usual, even on the night of the coup.

One night in Bangkok was literally just a song to the city folk, as bars and clubs continued their business hours.

It was another case of mai pen rai (no worries) even as the army ended the country's 15 years of democracy.

But there is always a price to everything.  The Thais may have got rid of Thaksin, who started off his leadership with a promise to run his country like a chief executive officer of a company.

Thaksin may know how to make millions but he found out the hard way that his authoritarian populism approach did not necessarily win the hearts of many, especially those in the urban areas.

He is now in exile and the people of Bangkok have demonstrated their support of the military government openly.

But these are early days for rejoicing.  Hours after the military takeover, the press found itself muzzled.

The Internet and telephone connections of newspaper companies were cut off shortly after midnight. Most newspapers only appeared in the afternoon even as the world already knew about the coup.

The army has since banned political gatherings and the formation of political parties. It has also banned the free distribution of information about the coup on websites.
As much as the Thais dislike Thaksin, the fact remains that his was a democratically elected government.

Even the media, which has been critical of Thaksin, would agree that Thailand has been a beacon of democracy in this region.

The press has been more vocal and more daring than many of the media in South-East Asia, with the exception of Indonesia perhaps.

The Thai media continued to challenge, even mocked, Thaksin as he became increasingly powerful, even intolerant, after the 2004 elections.

They hurled allegations of corruption, nepotism and executive interference in other branches of power.Using his influence, many journalists were sacked but many continued their campaign, especially those in The Nation group of newspapers.

The military has promised it would appoint a Prime Minister and a Cabinet within a fortnight and an election in a year.

In short, there will only be a "guided democracy" over the next 12 months. It will be the junta that calls the shots.

The civilian politicians would have little clout, that's the reality.

The likelihood is that a new Constitution, to be drafted by the army, would replace the present one.

In reality, the military government is a serious blow to a civil society.  It's a heavy price to pay for the toppling of one man.

As Peter Alford, who wrote in The Australian, aptly pointed out that "they once again raise the spectre of an activist army claiming for itself a warrant to interfere in politics when, to its leaders' judgment, civilians fail the nation."

Last week's coup may have been a bloodless one but it is another blot on Thailand's political stability, or the lack of it.

The job of running a government should be left to politicians while the army's role is to defend the country from external forces.  Not even fighting crime, which is the policemen's responsibility.

The separation of duties and powers must always be constitutionally clear. In the case of Thailand, the latest coup is a serious setback to democracy.

Democrats have reasons to cry although Thaksin is now in exile.

Although he already has his hands full taking on the criminals, he has promised that he will investigate allegations of corruption and that the public can give information about his officers if they have evidence. 

Musa has asked for evidence so the police can punish them or have the cases referred to the Anti Corruption Agency. He also said he welcomes whistle-blowers, including from within the force. 

This is a tough mission. For a start, Musa can find out how many of his officers are living beyond their means. Policemen must realise that they are not corporate figures and their lavish lifestyles would be questioned by the public since their salary scales are known to all. Their choice of houses, the location, their cars and club memberships must surely be seen as within their affordability. 

But law enforcement officers know the law well. Musa, who has a reputation as a clean cop, will find it difficult gathering evidence and getting witnesses willing to testify, even if he has his suspicions. 

There is nothing, however, to stop Musa from moving officers with tarnished reputations to departments where they will have little chance of getting their monthly envelopes of soiled money. Or for that matter, transferring them to states where gambling or entertainment outlets are almost non-existent. 

From the ordinary traffic cop who stops a foreign worker by the roadside to extort money to the big officer who deals with organised crime, the public have heard enough stories.  

But hearsay is not good enough, as everyone knows, and any action to clean up the force must not be seen as a witch-hunt, which would hurt morale. But if Musa is stern and committed to what he has set out to do, the rank-and-file will get the message and know the consequences of their actions. 

Musa has invited his men to forward information of corruption directly to him. This is something new as the present hierarchy method of reporting a wrong is, in many ways, a deterrent to whistle-blowers. 

How does one report against one's superiors, for example? But if the doors of Musa are opened to his officers, regardless of their positions, he has certainly set a precedent. 

Musa has also started well with his directive to the Public Affairs Department in Bukit Aman to create an interactive website for complaints and suggestions. In this multi-media age, it is much easier to e-mail instead of writing a letter and the website should allow the public to send video clips and pictures as well. 

There should also be templates of the various forms or reports for the public to download from the website to make the force more effective in the Internet age. 

But all the technology would be useless if Bukit Aman does not respond or carry out follow-up action effectively and promptly. Any report sent via e-mail, which must carry the person's full details, including his or her telephone numbers, must be taken seriously. 

Musa may want to consider making his e-mail address public so that Malaysians can send their mail direct to him. He, or at least his aides, can have direct access to the public this way. 

As the new boss, Musa would need to consider doing a revamp to strengthen his position and put in place officers who share his belief in going back to the basics – fighting crime and keeping a force of dedicated and clean officers. 

That is what a police force in any country is all about. The policeman's job is to maintain peace in the country and keeping the streets safe must surely be Musa's priority. 

In an interview with The Star, Musa said his priority would be to reduce major crime and to do that he would introduce more beat patrols and crime prevention rounds by uniformed policemen as well as detectives. 

He has also directed the redeployment of 800 personnel in Bukit Aman whom he found in a recent survey to be doing overlapping duties. He said they should be doing real policing work instead. 

Since a major complaint from the public is the perceived absence of policemen, a more visible presence of policemen, especially in busy areas, will make the public feel safe. We certainly welcome Musa's commitment to have more beat duties. 

Musa also said there were many areas within the force that needed to be restructured to better serve the public. But this cannot be done overnight and he has asked Malaysians to give him time and support 

The new IGP, I am sure, can count on the backing of all Malaysians who want to see him succeed in his mission. We understand his difficulties and the task ahead and, for sure, Malaysians would be realistic in their expectations of him.  

No one expects overnight changes but it is the hope of the public that given enough time, the new IGP will be able to carry out his task well. We wish him all the best.  

We no longer feel safe any more. Robbers and snatch thieves have become more ruthless, no longer satisfied with just escaping with the loot. 

No warnings are given these days, with victims being brutally attacked, sometimes with tragic consequences. 

Snatch thieves and wayside robbers may be seen as petty criminals, but they have become so common that their collective effect can be quite frightening. 

Such crimes are no longer something we read about in the newspapers. It is not uncommon for us and people close to us, be it friends or family, to have a story to tell.  

Once upon a time, it would seem that only the very rich people were at risk, but now even those in the middle-class fear for their safety and that of their children. Think about those abduction cases involving children from ordinary families living in normal suburban homes. 

It does not help when police are seen to be taking their time to respond to such cases and when the traumatised victims are given the runaround when lodging reports. 

Anyone who has made a report of a snatch theft is unlikely to be assured that the police will go all out to solve the case and recover the stolen items.  

And does it not make you wonder that even money from ATM machines can be stolen these days? By that we do not mean criminals lurking nearby to take your money after you have withdrawn it, but physically carting away the ATM machines. 

We also seem to have come to the point where politicians prefer that the press do not report about these crimes or just downplay them because we fear that the country's image would be affected. 

But it doesn't help if we just pretend that this is not a problem and hope that it will eventually go away.  

It won't, and it will only get worse if we do not do something drastic about it. 

Right now, Malaysians have not heard anything convincing on how we are going to combat crime effectively. 

Yes, politicians have told us that "they view seriously" the situation, that more policemen would be recruited and that even Rela members would be roped in. 

Well, next year will be Visit Malaysia Year, and we had better be serious about fighting crime if we want to make everyone feel safe.  

Take a stroll along Orchard Road in Singapore or Oxford Street in London and you will never miss the presence of the policemen on the beat. It is the same at these countries' airports. 

It is understandable that our police do not want our soldiers to fight crime, as the separation of duties must be clearly defined.  

The number of Federal Reserve Unit personnel could, perhaps, be increased and their deployment be made wider. 

But Musa would not be able to deliver if he cannot get extra policemen, better perks and facilities for the 80,000-strong force. 

Everyone, from the people to the politicians, expects the police to carry out round-the-clock work but not many want to talk about giving the force better allowances and incentives.

The police force in Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia and the United Kingdom are among the best paid in the world. 

We cannot expect our constables and their families to live on less than RM1,000 a month in Kuala Lumpur, Penang or Johor Baru. 

Fighting corruption has to be another of Musa's concerns. The force has a badly dented image. Wearing badges and putting stickers on patrol cars proclaiming its commitment to fight graft won't win the battle. 

Malaysia is a country of many slogans but when it comes to actual implementation and producing results, we are terribly bad.  

Musa has come in with a reputation as a clean and efficient policeman. We believe that he is a man of high integrity and credibility. 

Our police force deserves our support and trust but we also want Musa to do what he is trained to do – fight crime. That would mean seeking out all criminals, big or small, wherever they may be.  

For average Malaysians who are mostly wage earners, the decision to abolish examination fees for the UPSR, PMR, SPM and STPM in government schools effective next year is surely helpful. 

So is the decision to provide scholarships for tertiary education to students with 10A1s in the SPM from families with an income of RM1,500 and below, regardless of race, although a slightly higher figure would be more realistic. It is also equally important that they get admitted into universities.  

For many middle-class Malaysians, we are grateful to Pak Lah for his move to increase the tax relief for the purchase of books from RM700 to RM1,000 a year. So too the decision to change the tax rebate of RM500 once in five years for the purchase of computers to a RM3,000 relief once in three years. 

Certainly the two months' bonus for civil servants earning up to RM750 a month is well deserved. This extra money will help them cope with the daily difficulties of inflation. The coming Hari Raya celebrations will be a lot happier. 

More than ever, Malaysia needs policies which emphasise on needs rather than race, if we are to make this country a truly united one. We must never forget that just as there are many rich Malays and non-Malays, there are also many poor Malays and non-Malays. 

The abolishment of examination fees and tax rebates for essential items will help the majority of us Malaysians who depend on our monthly salaries to pay our bills. Certainly, the vast majority of us do not control the economy but merely struggle to cope with the shrinking ringgit and the increasing cost of living. 

That is the real Malaysia. We wish there are more politicians like Pak Lah who speak the language of peace and unity at a time when many of us view with concern the deteriorating spirit of tolerance from an ethnic and religious perspective.  

This is not helped by minorities – whether as individuals or groups – who seem to be able to push their agendas. These are the people who only see the superior aspect of their race and religious concerns, not realising that such an approach would not help to cement peace and unity but only widen unnecessary gaps in the long run for a multi-ethnic, multi-religious nation like ours.  

It is not good enough for politicians to make speeches calling on Malaysians to be united, to stop making racially offensive remarks or to stay away from religious debates. We have heard all these before, each time a politician made a silly racist remark that upset the other communities. 

Such advice, particularly from the Prime Minister, may have some impact on reducing rising political tension but the reality is that we all have to work on national unity.  

Malaysia won't be a united society if we just talk about it. National unity cannot be achieved by putting up flags, reciting poems, spending millions in National Service camps and riding big bikes nationwide. 

If Malaysia is to have a future, we must succeed in making Malaysia truly united because there is no other way for all of us. Sweeping our problems, which we have acknowledged, under the carpet can reduce rising political tension but the root cause of the problems will remain.  

Many brave and lofty words have been made about national unity but, unfortunately, performance does not seem to match promises. National unity, it seems, is merely a slogan to be used once a year during National Day. 

Not many of us would publicly admit that the National Day spirit has been dampened. But for many, the racial remarks made by certain politicians in the run-up to this year's Merdeka celebrations have made the event somewhat sombre. 

Still, we have to rise above this hiccup. Malaysians must continue to espouse on our common values rather than to harp on our differences and to be wary of selfish politicians who attempt to instil racial fears, often imagined ones, on us. 

Through policies and actions, our leaders need to make all of us feel as one country and one people. Our founding fathers, realising that independence could only be achieved through the cooperation of the main races, toiled over the Constitution. 

There are at least 20 articles in our Constitution spelling out the fundamental liberties guaranteed to every citizen. No one should be made to feel insecure in any manner. 

They worked hard to ensure that every Malaysian would have a rightful place in this country. No matter whether our ancestors came from Indonesia, China, India or West Asia, Tunku Abdul Rahman made everyone comfortable and wanted here. 

Negotiations over policies were conducted with honesty, sensitivity and respect for one another. Certainly, no threat, whether subtle or otherwise, was necessary. It was easier then, perhaps, because the Alliance was much smaller and the leaders spent much time socially together. 

But 49 years later, race relations has become an issue. Some of us are pessimistic because we sense a lack of commitment, particularly among some powerful figures, on the need to cultivate and reaffirm our common values. 

While many seem ready to condemn others of communalism, not many of us are willing to express the same sentiments with the same vigour, if it involves politicians of our ethnic group.  

The question to be asked, especially to our political and religious elite, is when will we be ready to stop using race or religion as an issue to further narrow ends. When will orang kita really mean Rakyat Malaysia?  

When will our elites, some with economic and political interests, stop using race to justify economic or education policies, which have kept Malaysians apart?  

When will we be politically brave enough to abolish the need for Malaysians to state their race and religion when they fill up forms without the flimsy excuse that this information is for statistical reasons? 

Much more than ever, Malaysia needs the voices of people with a truly non-communal and universal outlook who advocate the importance of common values and virtues. Sadly, some young upstarts prefer the jaded formula of using race to climb the hierarchy. 

A simple decision by Pak Lah in his Budget, such as the introduction of Chinese and Tamil languages in some national schools, is certainly a big step towards national unity.  

But it should not be merely to attract more Chinese and Indian students to national schools; it is about allowing young Malaysians to learn our languages and make them more marketable and competitive. It should be looked at that way.

Our National Day is a testimony of how three main races came together for a common cause. It is about achieving independence without shedding a drop of blood, unlike in other countries.

On Feb 9, 1957, Tunku Abdul Rahman spoke over Radio Malaya to appeal for funds. He wanted RM1mil for the celebration, a grand sum then, because the occasion needed to be celebrated fittingly.

The money, he said, would not only be used to upgrade roads, buildings and to entertain foreign guests but also to feed the poor at mosques, churches, temples and at the homes of the old and destitute.

He made it a point to mention the places of worship of all three religions. That is the mark of a true Malaysian leader. One may even say that it is a rarity these days for some of our politicians to even see beyond their own faith and ethnicity.

For the Tunku, Malaysia was a celebration of all races. He never forgot that and he made it a point to always remind the people that this was a country for all of us. That is what a great Malaysian leader should be.

The Tunku was not the smartest of Malaysian politicians and he made it known that he had to struggle to pass his Bar exams in London. But he never succumbed to the temptation of playing the racial card to be popular with the Malays.

In that radio address, the Tunku told his listeners that independence was won by "the spontaneous support of all communities in this country – Malays, Chinese, Indians and others who regard Malaya as their home". And certainly he never questioned the loyalty of non-Malays or to even remotely suggest that they were immigrant races. 

This is what our National Day is all about – a reminder to Malaysians, especially the younger ones, that a nation was born because the three main ethnic groups could work together. 

The doomsayers did not give us much of a chance then, predicting that our country would break up when natives fight each other once the British leave. But we will turn 49 years old next week.

We have absolutely every reason to feel proud. We should never be distracted, even if we are sometimes hurt by the remarks of one or two politicians who want to climb the political hierarchy by creating imaginary racial enemies.

Rural Development Minister Datuk Seri Aziz Shamsuddin, for example, aptly reminded Malaysians that all of us should refrain from making remarks that can hurt others. It is a sensible piece of advice from a senior politician.

Seasoned politicians will realise that to win an election, a candidate needs the support of all races. Even in a constituency with a predominant race, it is the minority that would swing the victory. 

In short, a politician must not make the silly mistake of seeing himself as the hero of a community. He has to represent the aspirations of all races. As Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said, even if he is a Malay leader, he is also a Malaysian leader.

Making others out to be the bogeyman is an outdated political tactic. In the past, the opposition used race and religion to incite hatred to gain votes but even these parties have realised that voters are not so easily duped, even if the nation still needs to work harder on race relations.

Barisan Nasional, and previously the Alliance, has a time-tested record of working together. Certainly, no one party has taken advantage of the other.

They have given each other support, even at the expense of losing political support, because the three parties believed in long-term relations. They have stood against many challenges and they continue to do so.

But that is not all. Greater efforts must be made to instil the Malaysian consciousness. The realisation of the sacred positions of Islam and the Malay language is imperative, just as there is a need to appreciate the positive implications of a multi-racial society. Certainly, multiculturalism is not a dirty word. 

Given the communal-based structure of our political system, we hope our community leaders will bridge this gap and work towards Malaysian consciousness if we want to see true national unity.

We can never run away from the fact that in a plural society, there will always be differences. But in a competitive, borderless world, our politicians need to change their mindset of still seeing the economy through coloured lens.

The world outside is our competitors. Our rivals are in Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, China and India. Certainly, it is not Ahmad, Ah Chong and Muthu who should work together as the Malaysian team.

Why are our politicians still talking along racial lines, even as they realise that banks need to be merged to face stiff outside competition and that trading rules will eventually change? 

How should we position ourselves to make Malaysia more attractive to investors when there are plenty of options for foreign funds in this region?

If we are serious about ethnic relations, we certainly must never forget that Merdeka is a celebration of all races working together. When was the last time we heard this line from our leaders?

On the eve of the first National Day, at the Alliance rally in Kuala Lumpur, the Tunku told the crowd: "To the members of my party, the Alliance, Umno, MCA and MIC, I say thank you one and all for having gone through together all the difficult stages of our journey.

"At no moment have you faulted or wavered or lost faith in our cause. We have had anxious moments, which might have taxed the courage. I can never thank you enough for the patience, courage, understanding and unswerving loyalty which you have shown me and which has enabled us to come to the end of our journey together."

And certainly, for all Malaysians irrespective of their race, religion and culture, we will continue to travel the road together. This is our country; there is no other country. 

Rather than stick to a conventional but financially safe approach, Sheila and Tiara Jacquelina have adopted innovative but risky steps to make themselves different and thus make Malaysians sit up and notice them. 

Sheila is known for her classy, jazzy genre while Tiara Jacquelina has created history – Puteri Gunung Ledang: The Musical has enjoyed a successful encore season. 

It is a record in the making for Malaysian theatre to have a second season after the first one; and more so when every night has been sold-out. 

The principal cast has remained the same with Tiara Jacquelina as the gutsy Puteri and Stephen Rahman Hughes as Hang Tuah, the warrior. 

Like the first season, the organisers have noticed that at least 30% of the audience have consistently been non-Malays. 

There are many who watched the movie – and also both runs of the musical – and have not become tired of this RM1.8mil production. It has already set the record for being the longest-running local musical. 

Everyone loves a love story. This one is about forbidden love between Hang Tuah and the mystical princess Gusti Raden Ajeng Retino Damilah. 

When the princess rejected the advances of Sultan Mahmud, she was banished to Gunung Ledang, or Mount Ophir as it is sometimes called. 

As a way of saying no to him, she insisted that she would marry the Sultan only if he built a golden bridge and a silver bridge linking her mountain to his palace. He was also to send her seven trays of mosquito hearts, seven jars of virgins' tears as well as a bowl containing the blood of the Sultan's son. 

The story goes, until today, that the spirit of the princess continues to roam the mountain in Johor. 

But the musical is a truly Malaysian work. The creative team comprises talents like Roslan Aziz, Zahim Albakri, Saw Teong Him and Mac Chan while the musicians are equally multi-racial with names like Jason Voo, Abdul Malek Kanasabathy, Eric Lee, Pearly Ng and Mohd Rizad Mohd Kasim. 

More than 30,000 people watched the first season, and this season's run attracted another 26,000 people. But all are predominantly from the Klang Valley. 

It is a shame because the musical deserves a bigger audience. People, especially those in Penang and Johor Baru, would love to watch it but there are simply no theatres with good acoustic and lighting systems in those cities.  

But Singapore always recognises a good thing when it sees one. While we debate whether we should extend the business hours of clubs in Kuala Lumpur to cater to tourists, we are not even thinking of securing government backing for musicals. 

Singapore is doing just that. They carry out massive publicity campaigns on their world-class theatre shows and concerts but in Malaysia, it is just a private venture. Unless you have deep pockets or you have sponsorship from mobile phone companies, you are entering a risky business. 

Which businessman would want to put a multi-million ringgit deal for a night's concert where you can run foul of the Culture, Arts and Heritage Ministry for even the slightest flaw? 

Well, a 20-man delegation watched PGL: The Musical last week, approached the organisers, and insisted on signing the papers on the spot. There was no need for the series of endless meetings that we are famous for. 

So, PGL: The Musical will soon be performed at the Esplanade in Singapore. This is the sad part. Many Malaysians still haven't watched the musical and are still sceptical when told that it is of West End standard. 

They find it hard to believe – after all it is only a local production – and in any case, we can find millions of ringgit to build a sports training centre in Britain but we will never put money to build good theatres. 

Malaysians who missed the show will now have to travel to Singapore to see it, which is really a pity. Let's hope it will do a third season in Kuala Lumpur, perhaps during the school holidays next year as part of our run-up to the 50th Merdeka anniversary. 

This is a show we can be proud of. Just before the musical's curtains went up last week, the audience stood up to sing the Negaraku. I could feel goose pimples as the crowd sang the national anthem. 

Patriotism does not mean putting up the Jalur Gemilang for the municipal council officers to see. To put it simply, many wrap the national flag around their hearts and we love Malaysia just as much. 

And it is not just listening to politicians but supporting a local project, sometimes just a musical or a CD, but let's do a good job instead of just making empty rhetoric that we want to be of world-class standard. 

THE words have become harsher and louder. There is no longer talk of getting Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to come together to end their feud. 

Over the past one week, both sides have taken their slugging to a different height. For the former premier, the tone has become more personal. No one is spared, not even family members and minor players in the high stakes political spat.  

The usually soft-spoken Pak Lah, too, has become more combative. His choice of words has also become more powerful. He has used words like iblis (devil), fitnah (slander) and hina (insult). Last week, he challenged his critics to prove their allegations and "if there is none, then be prepared to face the consequences". 

He has also served notice to bloggers and political websites who had attacked his leadership on a daily basis. 

The volume has been turned up because the fight has become more intense, even vicious. In short, it has now reached a point of no return. 

There is no more elegant silence as Pak Lah, Khairy Jamaluddin and their supporters take off their gloves. Pak Lah had initially allowed the ministers to do the talking but he has now adopted a forthright approach, taking on even the most difficult issues, including allegations against his family members. 

The many issues brought up on websites were at first ignored but as the rumour mill went overboard, creating doubts and confusion among Umno grassroots members, Pak Lah must have felt that he needed to tackle these head-on. 

On Aug 7, the Umno president appeared on TV3 to answer several allegations that had been hurled at him. His critics have, however, said the answers have created more questions. 

Pak Lah and Dr Mahathir have now taken their cases to the Malay heartland, as Umno's 191 divisions hold their annual general meetings. 

Dr Mahathir has even started to send letters to Umno members to state his case against the administration. 

The campaign to win the hearts and minds of the Umno delegates is crucial as these are the 2,000-over delegates who will attend the annual general assembly. 

Khairy, who has one of the highest numbers of invitations, is certainly one of the most sought after speakers. 

Not only has he answered the allegations directly, bringing these rumours into the open, but he has taken on two key backers of Dr Mahathir – Kelantan politician Datuk Paduka Ibrahim Ali and former political aide Matthias Chang, accusing them of influencing Dr Mahathir. 

In Khairy's own words, answering the allegations has formed a critical part of his presentation, as party members "want to hear it from the horse's mouth". 

Not only do Umno members want to hear from their leaders, many also want to pose questions to those named in websites and blogs. 

But there are also those who want to hear Dr Mahathir. Petaling Jaya Utara division did just that last Saturday. 

They circumvented the directive that only supreme council members and mentris besar could open their meeting by getting Dr Mahathir to speak before they started their meeting. 

Dr Mahathir's backers have pushed for him to speak at the assembly while Pak Lah's men have blamed him for splitting the party. 

His strongest supporter, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, has for the first time described Dr Mahathir as Umno's biggest opposition, pointing out that even PAS, DAP and Parti Keadilan Rakyat have stayed out. 

On Saturday, Nazri called on Dr Mahathir to refute a report in a Singapore newspaper, which alleged that Dr Mahathir wanted to topple the Prime Minister. Not one to mince his words, Nazri revealed there was disunity in Umno now. 

Even certain senior Umno leaders who have been cautious in their remarks, as they had worked under Dr Mahathir previously, now feel that they need to rebuff Dr Mahathir openly. 

The biggest worry is that if Dr Mahathir were left unchallenged, the opposition would benefit the most in the next general election. 

Umno vice-president Tan Sri Muyhiddin Yassin said the opposition could play the tapes of Dr Mahathir's criticism in the next polls. They need not even make speeches, Muhyiddin said. 

They also do not want cracks to appear in Umno, although delegates have traditionally supported the incumbent. 

There have also been worse scenarios previously when Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim brought his campaign to the streets. 

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah went even further. He took several senior Umno leaders to form Parti Melayu Semangat 46, which was supported by Tunku Abdul Rahman. 

What is different this time is that the fight is from Dr Mahathir, a leader who has led Malaysia for 22 years. For many in Umno Youth, this is the only leader they know. 

They have been taught to revere him. He was a man who could do no wrong and now, they find themselves in an unusual position of having to rebuff him. Worse, some who have apple-polished him have taken a different role. 

But there are also those who used to criticise Dr Mahathir for his seemingly dictatorial ways have now paired up with him. 

As they say, there are neither permanent enemies nor friends in politics. The incumbent will always have the upper hand – that is the reality. 

Over the next few weeks, as Umno leaders criss-cross the country, the decibels will get louder. There will be no room for fence-sitters and Umno leaders will be expected to make their stand known.  

But for outsiders, they will follow the statements of Umno leaders closely, even nervously, hoping the feud will not get out of hand. 

The general consensus is that if the squabble is prolonged, the country's economy and political stability will be affected. 

Given the softening of the economy in many sectors, the hope is that we can get on with our attention on the economy. Time waits for no one.  

Last week, the report made it into most national newspapers with one television station interviewing several political figures as a follow-up. One Umno Youth leader questioned the accuracy of the survey.

But a similar finding of the survey, if not the same, had been made last year shortly before the inaugural National Congress on Integrity in July. The report had said that about 31% of students in public institutions of higher learning said they would take bribes if they were in positions of power and had the authority.

The study, it was reported, involved 8,000 individuals, out of whom 650 were university students. The study was commissioned by Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi when he was deputy prime minister and chairman of the Special Cabinet Committee on Government Management Integrity.

It was coordinated by the Anti-Corruption Agency and conducted by academics from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and Universiti Utara Malaysia.

Last week's news reports basically reaffirmed what most Malaysians already know.  We have become so used – if not immune – to corruption that it did not even spark off a controversy.

But herein lies the danger. When corruption is regarded as an acceptable way of enriching oneself, then it becomes a culture. Once that is entrenched, it is much more difficult to fight the scourge.

Let's be frank. The government cannot fight graft by setting up institutes and conducting seminars. The Integrity Institute of Malaysia can create awareness but wrongdoers – the corrupt and those who abuse their positions – need to be fearful of the authorities.

The lack of political will and the seemingly powerless ACA do not help in the battle against corruption.

Legislation can act as a deterrent but real enforcement is the answer. No one can inculcate integrity, that's for sure. Worse still, when low-level civil servants feel that accepting small bribes is justified because they perceive the powerful ones are doing the same and getting away scot-free.

It is not just in Malaysia but in many countries, where individuals whose backgrounds are tainted by corruption and criminal breach of trust, are no longer shunned by society but accepted and even welcomed.

Some continue to keep their titles even after serving jail sentences.

When that happens, what kind of message are we sending to our young people? These actions of ours, rightly or wrongly, give the impression that taking and accepting bribes is all right. Just don't get caught.

A survey by the Merdeka Centre last year reported that one in three Malaysians would pay a RM100 bribe to a traffic policeman to be let off a speeding offence that carries a RM300 fine.

The poll found that two-thirds of bribes involved the police, mostly for traffic violations, and are in the range of RM100 or less, and that they involved mostly low-level personnel.

In another survey by the Kuala Lumpur Society for Transparency and Integrity and the Malaysian Institute of Management a few years back, it found that people with higher incomes were more likely to comply with demands for a pay-off.

But we really don't need these surveys to tell us that corruption has gone from bad to worse. Every time a festival approaches, we cynically tell one another that more road-blocks would be set up to nab motorists who break the speed limit.

Money is asked for in oblique terms. Instead of issuing an immediate summons, there will be "negotiations" on how the traffic offence can be "settled".

In fact, with all the closed circuit television equipment, the police should just send the summonses to the motorists.  Setting up road-blocks along the North-South Highway should be stopped. It is not only dangerous but gives rise to suspicion that there are crooked policemen on our highways, when speed-trap cameras have already been installed.

But corrupt policemen are the least of our problems. We should be more concerned with the loss of taxpayers' money when projects become more expensive because there is a lack of good corporate governance and business ethics.

When businessmen prefer to pay off corrupt civil servants because delays mean an increase in cost and when foreign investors bypass Malaysia because of such delays, that's when the slide begins, and the culture of corruption starts to take root.

The Prime Minister has rightly harped on the importance of the delivery system, which is essential to prevent delays, costs and corruption.

But there is this perception that the fight against corruption has lost its steam. Malaysia was ranked 39th – a drop of two spots – in the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index for 2004.

The 2005 index showed that we are still in the same position.