I told Najib about the frank views expressed by the panellists and what could be done to improve the NS programme.

Najib said the Cabinet had discussed the matter at its weekly meeting and concurred that the programme was advantageous despite the glitches and untoward incidents at some camps.

Last week, Najib assured the public that measures would be taken to address any shortcomings and that problems must be acknowledged and addressed.

It is good to hear Najib, who is the minister in charge of the NS, saying that he was prepared to resolve the problems. He should not, in any circumstances, be defensive against criticisms from the public and media.

Parents have the right to expect that their children would be safe when attending the NS programme.

While there seems to be a few operational problems with NS, the media should give the programme a chance to work. The fact is that the programme was hurriedly implemented, and ran into trouble on the very first day when logistics problems arose.

The press should not be barred from reporting incidents at camps. Besides, it is impossible to stop the flow of news in this age of the mobile telephone and Internet.

Suppression of news on incidents involving the NS would be counter-productive and could brew rumours. Once that happens, minor incidents may become exaggerated.

It is therefore necessary for the NS council to set up a media or public relations unit to respond to public queries.

The media should offer constructive criticism by identifying flaws in the programme and offering solutions to rectify these weaknesses. When the NS programme comes up for review in June, the media should be ready with its list of proposals.

In our panel discussion, everyone concurred that the programme was too big to handle. Even Lee and Loh agreed it should be scaled down because of insufficient qualified trainers.

The NS council should seriously consider having a smaller number of trainees for next year's programme. Trainers and facilitators could be trained at the same time to ensure there are adequate hands.

These trainers should include graduate trainees and youth leaders with experience in uniformed units such as Scouts, Girl Guides and the Red Crescent.

Youth leaders should be recruited into the NS instead of signing up government servants who are not committed to making the NS work.

There is also a need to review the role of facilitators (university students) who help man the NS programme in institutes of higher learning. From my university days, I dare say many are not qualified to run the NS programme.

These campus leaders may have leadership qualities but they lack the maturity and ability to handle crisis situations. Some of them even assume that ragging is acceptable.

No one should be surprised that NS problems crop up in the second month when trainees enter the campuses, where the weaknesses are glaring. The security guards are unable to provide adequate control. Changes in the rules and environment affect trainees, who at times cannot differentiate between trainers and facilitators.

The NS council must impose a code of conduct on facilitators to impress upon the participants that there is no favouritism.

The Defence Ministry must give priority to providing staff and financial allocation to the newly created NS Training Department. I am told that facilities are required at the NS Council secretariat and the department.

Unless there is strong backing, directives from the top to the camps and campuses would be lost. For example, I am told that the NS council repeatedly stressed the importance of food sensitivity but the caterers have not taken these orders seriously.

Unfortunately, the blame falls on the council and government. The camp directors and commandants must focus their attention on the implementation level. Any programme if poorly implemented would not succeed.

Officials, regardless of their positions, should carry out their duties effectively – especially when young people are involved. Once the young lose their respect for the trainers, the programme will never work.

Currently, there are three broad categories of participants – school leavers, young working people including school dropouts, and young adults – at the camps. They come from different education, economic and social backgrounds.

While interaction is necessary to prepare our children for real life, the NS council may want a relook at the modules used.

A dropout who has been working for some years is unlikely to accept some of the lessons. Likewise, a married youth would find it even harder to be in the programme.

All three groups have different needs and it would be advisable to consider having separate programmes to ensure that all trainees benefit from NS.

The NS council may also want to listen carefully to the views of youth development trainers, besides the bureaucrats, on how problematic trainees should be handled. It should also draw up guidelines on ethics and a code of conduct for trainers and trainees, including the kind of punishment to be meted out, instead of leaving it to the discretion of the trainers.

Malaysians have plenty to say about how NS can be improved and we believe that Najib would want to hear all suggestions.

It may not be the best idea but a start has to be made. In the case of the NS, the pioneer batch is about to complete the compulsory three-month programme and the second batch has begun.Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has said that the government was aware of the problems faced by the participants since it was launched, promising the government would look into the problems.

While Abdullah did not go into specific details, the Cabinet has certainly discussed many times the success and failures of the programme on numerous occasions.

Last week, the NS council chairman Datuk Dr Ahmad Fawzi Mohd said the concept and approach of the NS would be reviewed to ensure it achieved its goals, adding that a post-mortem would be held in June following the completion of training for the first batch of trainees. He urged all parties, including parents, the media and non-governmental organisations, to cooperate and come up with suggestions to help the council resolve its weaknesses.

Dr Ahmad's constructive approach is certainly commendable because the fact is that there are problems with the way the NS has been implemented. There have been allegations and reports of fights, theft, extortion, bullying and even sexual harassment.

There is little point in being defensive and getting angry with those who highlight these incidents to the authorities and the newspapers. The authorities can brush aside these problems and pretend they did not take place. What is more important is how best the authorities can prevent such unfortunate incidents from taking place as it has given the NS programme a bad image at the expense of the positive work.

If we wish to make the NS effective, we must be honest in dealing with these problems. Editors at newspaper offices have become counsellors to parents and trainees who complained of problems at these camps.

Many comments sent via e-mail, including some unhappy ones, have been forwarded by the media to those involved in the NS to ensure that these problems are properly addressed.

We agree that glitches and even oversights must be expected in a programme of such magnitude and disciplinary problems can be expected as the participants come from all backgrounds, including those with tough social origins.

Parents would surely prefer their children to interact with peers from the same background but that would deny them the experience of dealing with people from other, diverse economic upbringing.

It is a practical way to work with people from different races, religions and cultures, but we also do not want our young to experience bitter problems at these camps. Every effort must be made to ensure these camps emphasise multi-culturalism, from the way these trainees are taught at classes to the food that is served at the canteens. For example, the camp directors must ensure that there is a good alternative for Hindus who do not eat beef.

>From my discussions with members of the NS council, I learnt that the problems began during the second month of training when the participants were transferred to the institutes of higher learning. Unlike the camps during the first month, where security is better organised, the arrangement is more lax on the campuses.

It will also be reassuring if military personnel can be posted to the campuses to ensure that security is maintained. The police should also run random checks on the backgrounds of the participants to ensure that those with criminal records are made known to the facilitators.

The problem, I am told, are school dropouts and delinquents with records of being bullies in schools. These culprits have brought their bad habits to these camps.

Then, there are even cases of participants who are married but have enrolled at these camps as required under the law. Surely, they must be out of place even if they have behaved well.

The NS council should seriously consider inviting participants, parents, trainers, the media and experts in the various fields to give their assessment when the review begins. Other aspects should even include the logistics and transport arrangements.

The council may also want to consider drawing up a training programme for the trainers themselves to ensure that they are effective in dealing with trainees, although most would already have experience in youth activities.

There have been suggestions that the NS camps be run on a small scale to allow the trainers to have better control over the trainees. It is certainly something for the authorities to ponder.

The programme has certainly not been well-planned from the beginning and even badly implemented, as much as we refuse to admit it. There was no pilot project to determine its feasibility and to identify the possible weaknesses but the powers that be were only too eager to go ahead with it.

But there is a chance to put it right if we are ready to admit the mistakes and move along, perhaps on a smaller scale and shorter duration with better supervision.

It is good that Dr Ahmad, who has experience in reserve army training, has adopted an open attitude as constructive criticism about the NS should not be regarded as a loss of face or being politically motivated. Neither should the media be blamed for reporting incidents that take place in camps.

The majority of Malaysians support the NS programme but there have been genuine concerns about the way it has been managed. An honest review would certainly help to make the programme more effective.

Religious sensitivity is likely to be a factor because
the Censorship Board's guidelines ban the screening of movies with scenes or
images depicting prophets. Then there are the obvious violent scenes in the
movie, which is unlikely to get past the scissors of the censors.

In Singapore,
only those above 18 years old are allowed to watch the movie. In France,
the movie has been banned because of the government's strong secular stance and
concern that it would lead to anti-Semitic feelings.

Malaysians, who have become used to the archaic decisions
of the Censorship Board, are no longer bothered by the workings of the board.

Sometimes, movies are so mutilated after censorship that
they might as well be banned. For instance, kissing scenes snipped off when
there is no sexual passion by the characters.

In short, many Malaysians have given up on the Censorship
Board. After all, even local movies have been given the thumbs down for
questionable reasons.

With its multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural
setting, Malaysia
is more guarded and cautious. None of us would want to be seen to be creating
offence – it's understandable, even commendable.

But sometimes, we tend to over-react. We underestimate
the maturity and openness of Malaysians, regardless of their religion.
Something perceived to be offensive to politicians and bureaucrats may be
acceptable to the public.

Many Malaysians must have watched The Passion by now
because pirated copies of the movie hit the streets a month ago for as little
as RM8.

This is one reason so many of us have always said that Malaysia
is the best place to live in. There is a lot of tolerance and alternatives. The
authorities may have clamped down on a certain movie but you get to watch it in
the comfort of your home.

But, hey, we are Malaysians, so we will not admit it.

In the case of The Passion, the copy I saw was quite
clear except for one scene when a moviegoer at an undisclosed cinema in an
undisclosed country decided to leave his seat – probably for a quick visit to
the restroom – and spoilt the cameraman's otherwise professional job.

The movie, for many, is an education of faith. For the
past few days, Christians including myself have attended church services in the
run-up to Good Friday and Easter Sunday.

Easter is a religious event bigger than Christmas and is
regarded as the basis of the faith – that Jesus Christ rose from the dead on
the third day after his crucifixion on Good Friday.

For Christians, the movie has great significance in its
timing. Many would want to see whether the movie has accurately portrayed the
Bible and which particular scene is the result of director Mel Gibson's poetic
licence.

But as we celebrate Easter today, Christians here must
remember that we have been blessed. We are able to celebrate this festive
season openly when we read of pilgrims flocking to the Church
of Nativity in Bethlehem,
the birthplace of Jesus, in the hope of receiving the much-coveted Israeli
permit to allow them to travel to Jerusalem.

Israel
has imposed a shutdown on the Palestinian territories following the killing of
Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.

In communist countries, Christianity is still banned
while some West Asian countries disallow the Bible from being brought in.

Even as we express some of our frustrations, Christians
must also acknowledge the liberties we enjoy in this wonderful country of ours.

Within the Cabinet and government, we find Christians
being appointed. Heading the list is Minister in the Prime Minister's Department
Datuk Dr Maximus Ongkili, an active Christian leader.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has
certainly made his mark as a great Malaysian leader. Some of us must remember
his decision to lift the ban on the Iban-language Bible. Last Christmas, he
created history when he sent greeting cards to church leaders nationwide.

This is the kind of moderate and fair-minded leader the
country needs. Without saying much, he has sent a message to Malaysians
reinforcing his commitment to minorities that their rights are guaranteed under
our Federal Constitution.

The lower-level bureaucrats and politicians must learn to
appreciate the support of the minorities. There have been cases where churches
have met with obstacles when they sought to build in residential areas.

Some of these obstacles are the result of
over-zealousness and the racist attitude of bureaucrats at implementation
level. They are certainly not the policies of the government leadership.

Whether we agree or not with the contents of The Passion,
there is no denying that morality, moderation and justice are universal values.

We must hold on to these passionately.

I first knew Koh at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
I was a student at the political science department and he was doing a diploma
course in strategic studies, tailored for army and police officers.

A serious student, he would sit alone at the library to
catch up on his reading. After obtaining his diploma, he signed up for a degree
course, majoring in political science. Soon, we were sitting side by side in
the lecture hall.

There are many non-Malays like Koh who have done well in
the police force and their performances are recognised. Their Malay colleagues,
too, hold them in high regard.

As a uniform unit, the police have always been an attraction.
Many school-leavers, perhaps having watched too many movies, dream of donning
the dark blue uniform of a crime-fighter.

The reality is starkly different. The salary scheme needs
to be adjusted to give the officers more dignity and credibility.

Realising the need to inject professionalism into the
force, the royal commission of inquiry is currently looking into the welfare of
officers.

Last week, The Star published a letter from a graduate,
Jackson Chan, who wrote that he applied to join the force as a cadet assistant
superintendent but was worried that his chances were slim because of the small
quota for non-bumiputra applicants.

He returned from Australia
with a business degree but it had been his passion since schooldays to become a
policeman.

According to him, his desire to join the force is based
on a rational analysis of his career and future.

Chan hoped that the Inspector-General of Police would
consider raising the quota and give young non-bumiputras a better chance to
join the force.

I hope the powers-that-be will give Chan a chance, if he
fulfils the requirements.

In fact, the police force is on a campaign to recruit
more non-Malays.

However, it appears that most of them prefer to become
police inspectors rather than constables for various reasons, including the
perception that career prospects are not good.

Chinese applications for constables totalled a mere 0.7%
between 1999 and 2000, and Chinese account for less than 5% of the
86,000-strong force.

On Saturday, Bukit Aman said it was in the final stages
of processing 5,912 applications for cadet ASP but only 50 would be selected.

However, the force stressed that there was no racial
quota.

According to statistics in 2000, the force received 5,209
applications for probationary inspectors from all races with almost 63% of
Indian interviewees picked to become inspectors against Malays (55%) and
Chinese (60%).

For the post of constable, 42% of Indian applicants were
selected, with Malays at 36% and Chinese, 27%.

Last year, the Dewan Rakyat was told that 9,918
non-bumiputras applied to become ASP and constables but only 1,137 were
accepted.

It cannot be denied that a racially balanced police force
would be good for the nation. Applicants like Chan who studied finance and
business would be useful in tackling commercial crimes.

Brawn alone is no longer sufficient. More and more, the
force needs officers armed with various disciplines such as the sciences, law,
computer studies, psychology and communications.

That aside, the successes of the Special Branch during
the Emergency can be attributed, in many ways, to Chinese officers who
successfully infiltrated the Communist Party of Malaya.

Their dedication is recorded by authors like Aloysius
Chin and Tan Sri C.C. Too in their books on the workings of the Special Branch
in fighting the CPM.

The inability of the CIA in the United
States to fight terrorism, it has been
noted, is because it lacks officers of Arab descent.

It is only during a crisis that we understand the need
for readiness. The police force, which is responsible for internal security,
certainly understands this better than other agencies.

During the 1960 racial riots, I was only in Standard Two
but I remember the events clearly.

Staying in Kampung Melayu, Air Itam, in Penang,
many relatives were worried about my family's safety.

We did not have a telephone at home (and no mobile phones
then), so our relatives could not contact us. But they need not worry – our
Malay neighbours helped keep the peace in our area.

Besides, the police sent Federal Reserve Unit officers of
Chinese descent to our village to give us a sense of security.

The presence of the FRU officers was truly appreciated.

Realising the importance of a multi-racial police force,
the authorities are doing their best to correct this imbalance through numerous
campaigns, including getting its top Chinese officers to speak to youth
organisations.

Public perception is as important as reality.

When the journalists asked what Nazri would be doing, an
aide replied: "Nothing so far." When lunch was served after the briefing, the
journalists were asked to give their opinions on the line-up.

A few said they were disappointed, while some said it was good to see fresh
faces. Some said they had thought that one or two politicians including Nazri
would be dropped but the aides were cautious in their replies, more concerned
with gauging the sentiments of the media.

On Thursday, it became clearer: Nazri would be the Minister in charge of
Parliament.

The Entrepreneur Development Minister in the previous Cabinet would now oversee
the running of Parliament – the Dewan Rakyat and the Dewan Negara.

He will also be responsible for the duties of the various committees, Speakers
and Deputy Speakers of the two Houses, scheduling Parliament sessions and
chairing the various committees responsible for Parliament's
administration.

It is certainly a far cry from his previous ministry.

As Entrepreneur Development Minister, he had the power to approve taxi permits,
scholarships and loans, especially for the small businessmen, hawkers and
contractors. For some Umno members, the ministry is even regarded as a
"patronage ministry".

But during his tenure, he found himself in a controversy. He was alleged to
have issued 6,000 taxi permits but the Anti-Corruption Agency and the
Attorney-General's Office cleared him of any wrongdoing.

He was upset with the way some newspapers, especially the Bahasa Malaysia
dailies, had pursued the controversy, but he was vindicated when the ACA
cleared him. Still, the controversy left its mark on him.

The timing was also wrong as it was already near the general election but with
the ACA clearing his name, he was picked to defend his parliamentary
seat.

But it did not end there. The press continued to speculate that his name would
not be on the Cabinet list and when he was retained, many were surprised.

It was certainly not an easy task for Abdullah to draw up the Cabinet list when
he had to take into account many factors including the huge success of Umno and
the sharing of power with other parties. Then, there is also the question of
state representation, which is imperative to all political parties.

But Nazri has maintained his confidence, saying he did not consider his new
portfolio a "demotion" although he felt that his previous ministry was "more
important".

Nazri also reportedly dismissed notions that he lacked the gravity of his
previous posts, saying he had actually survived the "jinx" associated with the
Entrepreneur Development Ministry, pointing out that history had shown that ministers
in the job did not complete their terms.

But Nazri, a qualified lawyer, would be glad to know that he is not the only
minister with such a portfolio, He has his counterparts in democracies like
Scotland, Portugal and Sri Lanka. In Australia, the Special Administrative
Services Minister is responsible for the upkeep of Parliament.

In Malaysia, most of the responsibilities, said to come under the purview of
Nazri, were handled by the Speaker.

There would be a need for Abdullah to define their functions to avoid
duplication of work. It must be remembered that the Speaker is the leader of
the House with sovereign powers and is ranked higher than Nazri.

As a member of the Executive, the minister cannot be interfering in the
functions of the House including the various committees which have
representatives from the Opposition.

The Parliament, which has only about 130 staff, meets three times a year, the
longest session being between October and December, when the Budget is tabled
by the Finance Minister.

Politically speaking, Nazri, an Umno supreme council member, has found himself
in a bind. He needs to prove that all the bad publicity has not affected his
standing in Umno and come June, when the party elections are held, he will have
a chance to prove his critics wrong.

A strong showing at the party elections would strengthen his political fortunes
and image as his political star is no longer shining so brightly.

It had been speculation that at least three ministers
would be dropped and several young politicians named into the Cabinet, but
Abdullah kept his cards close to his chest.

Most of the appointees, like the rest of the nation, were glued to the TV for
the live telecast of Pak Lah's announcement.

When the announcement was delayed for over 30 minutes, many exasperated
politicians started calling newsmen who were waiting on the first floor of the
Prime Minister's Office.

Only one person was told that he would retain his portfolio – Datuk Syed Hamid
Albar, who was informed by Abdullah at the PWTC on polling night.

Except for the Barisan Nasional component leaders who were informed of their allocations
of positions in the government after submitting their name lists, most of the
Umno appointees were not told.

A woman politician called me eight times over the last 48 hours to ask what I
knew. She refused to believe me when I told her I had no specific details in
the appointments.

It was very flattering that she thought I had access to the list. But there was
a happy ending – she was given a high post.

It was only late on Friday night that the picture began to emerge. A colleague
stationed in Putrajaya kept me updated by phone but I was sceptical. In the
end, she was proven right.

The names of some politicians whom we thought would be dropped were on the
list.

Among the reasons given were the need for state representation and political
realities.

One or two names may disappoint Malaysians but we need to look at the list as a
whole.

Abdullah has included many young leaders such as Puteri Umno chief Datuk
Azalina Othman, Baling MP Datuk Dr Masitah Ibrahim, Datuk Dr Awang Adek Husin
and Datuk Zulhasnan Rafique.

It is a serious push to groom these young leaders in high office. The plum went
to Umno Youth chief Datuk Hishamuddin Tun Hussein Onn who was appointed
Education Minister.

All of our prime ministers have had their training at the ministry because
education is regarded as a sensitive area. Having to accommodate the demands of
the various education groups requires plenty of wisdom, patience and
maturity.

The general perception is that the last Education Minister, Tan Sri Musa
Mohamed, did not handle the portfolio well. As an academician, he lacked the
political skills to meet the demands of the various groups.

MCA vice-president Datuk Chua Jui Meng lost his Health Ministry post to his
friend, Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek from Johor.

Dr Chua, the new MP for Labis, is a seasoned politician. As a medical doctor,
he would surely be able to handle the ministry effectively.

From a political aspect, Abdullah has removed a third force in the MCA.  Chua's removal would help strengthen
relations between MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting and his deputy Datuk Dr
Chan Kong Choy. It would pave the way for the two young leaders to consolidate
the party.

Ong and Chan took over the party leadership when party president Datuk Dr Seri
Dr Ling Liong Sik and deputy Datuk Seri Lim Ah Lek resigned after 14 months of
internal bickering.

At least one politician declined to be appointed. Four-term MP Datuk Chor Chee
Heung told me about his decision on Wednesday.

The popular lawyer from Alor Star had informed Ong, was then told to "sleep on
it and not make rash decisions", but had remained resolute.

By Friday, word had gone around that the former Deputy Home Minister had
decided to remain as an ordinary MP.

He will be missed, not just by members of the press but also his ministry
colleagues, including secretary-general Datuk Seri Aseh Che Mat who spoke
highly of him when we met on Friday.

A surprise in the line-up was moving Culture, Arts and Tourism Minister Datuk
Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir, one of Umno's bright sparks, to the Information
Ministry.

The new Tourism Minister is Datuk Leo Michael Toyad. With his extensive
contacts as Deputy Foreign Minister previously, he will be able to give this
important portfolio a boost.

Unlike Kadir, who has a flamboyant personality, Toyad is an introvert but his
deputy, Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, has excellent relations with the media and is
known for his ability to network.

Abdullah may have to consider filling the vacant parliamentary secretary slot
in the Tourism Ministry with someone from a Chinese-based party because the
Chinese market is the biggest.

A Chinese-speaking leader who understands the sentiments of mainland Chinese
would help Malaysia
compete for a slice of the lucrative tourism market.

Abdullah's slightly enlarged Cabinet has taken into account a higher percentage
of new faces, 14 to be exact, but he has also increased non-Malay
representation, reflecting the commitment of the Barisan government to
power-sharing.

But the newsmen need not worry. The results clearly show
the world that Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's moderate and progressive
Islamic approach could win in a democratic election.

Malaysians who follow the Prime Minister's speeches are aware that he never
shows off his Islamic credentials by sprinkling his speeches with Quranic
verses in Arabic. Neither does he keep a beard, wear a turban and boast to his
listeners that he is an Islamic scholar.

There was never a need for all that. Instead, he won the hearts of Malaysians,
including conservative Muslims in the Malay heartland, with his trustworthy
leadership, sound policies and rational arguments.

Abdullah's non-confrontational, non-literalist and non-ideological approaches
were his winning ways. PAS leaders like its president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang and
spiritual leader Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat were more preoccupied with forms and
structures, preferring to emphasise on dressing and imposing Islamic
laws.

When Hadi criticised Abdullah for not leading the prayers during his mother's
funeral, the latter chose not to hit back. It was a costly mistake for Hadi.
But his party has obviously not learnt.

On Monday, after PAS' narrow win in Kelantan, Nik Aziz, in an outburst against
Umno, said: "We will not halalkan (legitimise) the money they received, the
water they drank or the rice they swallowed. They will earn the wrath of God
for their entire life."

At the discussion with me on Monday were Isis chairman Tan Sri Dr Noordin
Sopiee and political scientist Dr Chandra Muzaffar. All of us share the same
opinion – PAS was rejected because Malaysians felt uneasy with the kind of
politics practised by the Islamist party.

PAS gave up on the Chinese and Indian votes, relying entirely on the Muslim
votes, but they had a shock when the majority of Muslims opted for a more
contemporary form of Islam.

That is the difference between Barisan and PAS – the ability of the Barisan to
draw its strength from all Malaysians, irrespective of race, religion or
culture, and not just from one section of society.

Dr Chandra also attributed a large chunk of the votes for Barisan to women and
young people – women who were unhappy with the restrictions imposed by PAS and
young people who believed that Abdullah should be given a chance to pursue his
agenda against corruption.

It was clear that he won a resounding mandate for his initiatives and reforms,
especially the moves for more transparency, efficiency and credibility in the
Government.

It has been a happy ending for Abdullah in what is billed as the greatest
victory for the Barisan since independence, winning more than 90% of the
parliamentary seats but, in his own words, there is plenty of work ahead.

Having given a strong mandate to him, Malaysians expect him to fulfil his
promises. It would not be wrong to say that Malaysians expect him to have a
Cabinet that reflects his pledge for a clean government.

He will certainly be watched closely. Malaysians would want him to appoint
ministers who are not tainted by allegations of corruption and even fresh
faces. It is a new government and the line-up must reflect its freshness.

Without doubt, there must be a blend of experienced people, although those who
have been in the Government for the past two decades should be prepared to pave
the way for younger leaders.

They must be given a chance to prove themselves and, at the same time, be
groomed for bigger roles. After all, they will eventually lead the nation and
that training must begin now. Knowing Abdullah, he will also impose a high
moral standard for his line-up.

As Noordin told the journalists on Monday, Abdullah should be given a free hand
and Malaysians hope he can choose the leaders that he wants. After all, he has
earned himself a massive mandate and he should use it fully.

Abdullah, of course, cannot run away from the reality of having to appoint the
heads of major Barisan component parties. One or two leaders may not be exactly
popular with Malaysians, but the fact is that they had delivered the
votes.

More importantly, the Barisan government upholds the concept of sharing of
power and that has been the winning formula for the coalition. That has been
the basis of the politics of consensus and accommodation, which is admired by
other democracies.

Abdullah will also take into account the huge success in Kelantan and
Terengganu. He will need to reward Barisan voters with key appointments for
leaders who won there.

Datuk Mustapa Mohamed, who won the Jeli parliamentary seat, is likely to be
given a Cabinet post. If the Barisan had captured the Kelantan state government,
then he would have been the automatic choice as mentri besar, but being three
seats short, the Barisan will have to accept that it has to remain in the
opposition.

It will not come as a surprise if women leaders are given a bigger role in the
Cabinet. Their contributions, irrespective of whether they are from Umno, MCA
or MIC, have been tremendous.

Abdullah has been cautious about how he intends to form the Cabinet, saying he
will consider all aspects, but the most important thing is the ability to serve
as good ministers of the country and the Barisan government.

By the time the Isis discussion ended, the foreign reporters were convinced
they could expect a sensible and balanced government, headed by an extremely
popular Prime Minister.

I believe by this weekend, Abdullah will have a fair idea of what the Cabinet
will be like, and by the following Wednesday, he will make known the full
line-up to Malaysians.

To borrow from Noordin's parting shot – Pak Lah is known as Mr Nice Guy, but
Malaysians want him to be firm and, on this occasion of naming his Cabinet, he
can be not so nice to ensure that he lives up to the wishes of
Malaysians.

Over the past week, they have been talking about the
general election. They have enjoyed the attention given by the campaigners as
they hold the privilege of deciding the winner of the fight in Bukit Gelugor
tomorrow.

The battle is between two outspoken lawyers – DAP veteran Karpal Singh and
Barisan Nasional's Lim Boo Chang. Karpal Singh, 63, has a reputation of
challenging the authorities and has lost count of the number of times when he
was thrown out of the Penang state assembly.

At ceramah, he tells his listeners he has eaten kari pooi (curry rice in
Hokkein) – a euphemism for having spent time in prison or a lock-up. In his
case, he was detained under the Internal Security Act in 1987.

Lim is an equally colourful character. Like his late father, Datuk Lim Ee
Heong, Boo Chang, 48, does not care whom he criticises and he has paid a heavy
price for that. His open attacks against the Barisan state government had
landed him in hot soup, resulting in his suspension from the state
assembly.

He also nearly lost his membership in the MCA as his former Gerakan comrades
pressured the coalition leadership to punish him for voting against a
government motion.

Ee Heong, a contemporary of Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu, earned his stripes whipping
the Alliance in the 1969 general election when the Gerakan was an opposition
party.

At rallies, attended by tens of thousands of Penangites, at the Esplanade, he
would ridicule Alliance leaders for their fondness in getting state awards,
describing them as worthless kau pai (dog tags).

Penang voters, known for their independent mindedness, love such controversies.
They want their elected representatives to be humble, hardworking and
outspoken, irrespective of whether they are in the Barisan or opposition.

The fight in Bukit Gelugor is almost a rematch. In 1999, Boo Chang defeated
Karpal Singh for the Datuk Keramat state seat by a 3,148-vote majority. Karpal
Singh lost his Jelutong parliament seat to Barisan's Lee Kah Choon by 775
votes.

It was a painful pill Karpal Singh, dubbed the Lion of Jelutong, found hard to
swallow. On the eve of the 1999 polls, at least 10,000 people had turned up to
listen to the DAP ceramah but this was not translated into votes.

He had kept the Jelutong seat for five terms since 1978 and he thought it was a
walkover but he did not see the writing on the wall. He had neglected his
constituency and he could never be found when needed, busy fighting his legal
battles in courts.

Worse, he apologised to PAS for his famous ''over my dead body'' remark, made
in 1990, on the setting up of an Islamic state. When the DAP and PAS
co-operated in 1999, he said he was sorry.

The apology was front-paged in Harakah, the PAS official newsletter, under the
heading Karpal Minta Maaf (Karpal Apologises). The predominantly Chinese voters
saw the opportunistic side of DAP leaders and rejected him.

While the Malay voters were caught up with the reformasi movement which saw the
likes of Tian Chua and R. Sivarasah staging protests even the
anti-establishment Chinese voters found too radical, it was the DAP which paid
the price on Keadilan's behalf in Penang.

As far as the DAP is concerned, it was all a bad dream. Now, their whipping
target is PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang and Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat. The
salvoes from Hadi have, in many ways, helped the DAP to show the pact between
them is over.

The MCA and Gerakan have tried to remind Penang voters of the past but it is
doubtful whether their advertisements in the Chinese newspapers work. Some have
complained they are offensive but the fact remains these events did
happen.

Karpal Singh, in a recent interview, admitted there was no big issue, pointing
out he would highlight the controversial Penang Outer Ring Road (PORR) project,
aimed at resolving the island's traffic problems but which has caused
dislocation among the residents affected, especially in Bukit Gelugor.

Ironically, the PORR issue was the reason, for Boo Chang getting the boot from
the state assembly.

The sympathy card is being played by the DAP in Penang, as in other areas where
it is contesting, to win the polls. The tactic is that since the Barisan would
win the elections, there was nothing wrong to let the underdogs get some
seats.

It is a clever tactic, as the strategists understand well the psyche of the
kind-hearted Malaysian voters. Sure, they prefer to see the Barisan form the
government but why not have a few opposition Members of Parliament to check on
the government.

It has worked well, especially among the middle-class electorate in Bukit
Gelugor. They take note of the arrogance of some Barisan politicians and their
refusal to listen to their grievances, especially the noisy construction works
in their area.

There is the kesian-them (pity them) factor but irrespective of which party
they vote – whether Barisan or DAP – the voters must believe in what the party
has done and what it can do for them in the future.

It is fine to vote for the DAP because of one's belief in its struggles and
beliefs. If the voters cannot be convinced by the Barisan campaigners, then the
DAP deserves to win.

Similarly, there is no reason not to vote the Barisan if the voters truly
believe in what Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is doing, especially his
personal agenda to fight corruption and to instil accountability, integrity and
credibility.

Many of us want him to do more to deal with corruption and he has pledged to do
so, telling us to ''wait and see for yourself''. There is no reason why we
cannot believe his words.

After all, this is his first election as Prime Minister; he deserves a chance
to prove it to us.

It will be a real kesian (pity) if we say we believe and support what he is
doing but decide not to vote for his party on Sunday, as this will make Pak
Lah's job more difficult.

The world is also watching how we would vote. The Composite Index soared past
900 points on Thursday, indicating the confidence the coalition enjoys. Over
the past one-week, foreign funds have started coming in as they anticipate a
strong government to be formed.

No one can dismiss the business impact on the voting trends and they would
certainly affect our daily lives. Politics involves emotions but voters must
use their head, instead of the heart, when they vote.

Philip Fernandez has voted in previous elections. Like a seasoned voter, he
does not want to talk too much about it. With plenty of free time on his hands,
he has learnt to use the Internet to read opposition websites.

He reads the Aliran magazine regularly, saying he wants some alternative views.
He says the mainstream and independent media are the same, all too
biased.

Knowing that he is talking to a journalist, he complains about his dislike for
some Barisan leaders in the state, singling out one Penang leader for being a
''yes'' man. ''Everyone in Penang knows who I am talking about.''

He named the leader when this writer pressed him.

He challenged this writer to quote him and name the leader if free press exists
in Malaysia. I told him I could but it would be personal and besides, there are
many who like that leader. He accepted the explanation.

But he has no qualms about his admiration for Abdullah whom, he said, deserves
to get the votes for being a moderate and progressive leader.

He wants his candidate in Bukit Gelugor to be able to work and speak up for
him.

He is also concerned about the future of Malaysia, saying he wants his
grandchildren to be able to live freely and practise their beliefs, culture and
lifestyles with no restrictions.

There are many Malaysians like Philip Fernandez. Educated and widely read, they
do not like to be told who to vote for. They prefer to make their own
choice.

They can be critical of the Government at times but that does not make them
anti-establishment. They want to keep Malaysia as it is now but feel more needs
to be done to root out corruption.

They think there are tainted leaders in the Government and they want Abdullah
to remove them from the Cabinet after the elections to prove himself.

But for that to happen, they have to decide whether Pak Lah deserves their
votes. It is not about sympathy for a particular person but whether they truly
want to let Pak Lah clean up Malaysia.

Specific instructions were  given to the guests, particularly the
politicians, not to turn the party into a political forum. But when the karaoke
session started, some guests went on stage to sing the DAP elections theme
song, Must Fight to Win, a popular Taiwanese Hokkein song then.

There were thunderous applause from the ground and, by the time the party
ended, some guests had to be carried out because they were drunk, while some
Barisan politicians left fuming.

Lim was the darling of Penangites. He was the fearless hero in a state, known
for its independent-minded voters, and they voted strongly for him – knocking
off Chief Minister Dr Lim Chong Eu in Padang Kota, in what was known as Tanjung
Two, by 706 votes. He also retained his Tanjung parliamentary seat by a
majority of 17,469 votes.

Caught up in the euphoria in Penang and the political turbulence of the times,
I, too, felt the government deserved a kick on the chin by the DAP.

That was not all. The DAP won 14 state seats, denying the Barisan of its
two-thirds majority and nearly formed a new state government by a whisker. It
was just three state seats short.

Lim had made his move to Penang in 1986, in what was dubbed the Tanjung One battle,
when he wrested the Tanjung parliamentary seat from the Barisan, beating Dr Koh
Tsu Koon by 4,690 votes. Besides winning the Kampong Kolam state seat, he also
helped his party win nine other state seats.

By 1995, the DAP was convinced it was ready for power. Taking a swipe at Chief
Minister Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon for being "submissive" to Umno, the people of
Penang was asked to vote in a Chief Minister With Power – the theme of the DAP
campaign.

Caricatures of Robocop, a popular movie then of a robotic character, was put up
all over the state to project Lim as the protector of the weak. But the Barisan
hit back, saying Robocop was also a killing machine.

The DAP's Try Five Years slogan to Penangites met with Barisan's Die Five
Years. In the end, Dr Koh easily defeated Lim in Tanjung Bungah by 7,487
votes.

The DAP campaign strategy was a flop. It won only one state seat against
Barisan's 32 and fingers were pointed at Penang party chief, lawyer Gooi Hock
Seng.

A fallout in the DAP soon started. Attempts were made to topple Lim, in what
was known as the Knockout Kit Siang (KOKS) campaign and soon one DAP leader
after another left the party.

The internal squabbling took its toll on the DAP and when the reformasi
movement started, the DAP thought a windfall had dropped on their laps. Through
the influence of some young turks in the party, Lim was convinced working with
PAS was the best option.

They had him believed the Chinese community supported the opposition front of
PAS, DAP, Keadilan and Parti Rakyat Malaysia. But they were wrong. The DAP was
punished by the Chinese voters in the last general election.

In a commentary, I questioned the wisdom of the DAP-PAS pact. Lim, upset with
my criticism, issued a press statement and 
telephoned me to express his feelings.

In the end, I was proven right. The DAP retained only one state seat in
Penang.

And now, in 2004, Lim is pleading with the voters of Ipoh Timor to give him a
last chance.

He has travelled to Penang and Selangor telling the Chinese voters if they
reject the DAP candidates  again, as they
did in 1999, the party would have to close shop and they would never be able to
hear them again.

The Islamic state issue, which worked against the DAP in 1999 because of its
pact with PAS, has been ironically repackaged to suit the times – vote DAP to
stop the setting up of an Islamic state ala PAS or Umno.

Parliament, the DAP leaders are saying, is filled with PAS Members of
Parliament with beards and serbans, who only extol religious virtues although Barisan
candidates are reminding their listeners the PAS MPs are there because of DAP
support.

Feedback shows the tactics have worked to some extent. Barisan campaigners have
expressed their worries that the kesian-the-DAP strategy may snowball and cause
the Barisan, especially the MCA and Gerakan, some votes.

The biggest headache for the DAP is Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who is the
Barisan's biggest draw. When MCA and Gerakan candidates go on their walkabouts,
they are often asked by the people whether they will get to see the Prime
Minister.

Pak Lah, remains the Barisan's trump card, and his call for a strong mandate to
continue his fight against corruption and to instil integrity, accountability
and credibility has left the opposition in the corner.

No doubt, there is still plenty of fire inside Lim and DAP deputy chairman
Karpal Singh. Their ability to articulate their views on numerous issues has
put to shame many of the younger DAP leaders.

But much has changed since. The man they criticised for overstaying as Prime
Minister – Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad – has left after 22 years in office but  Lim and Karpal, both 63, are still around,
reluctant to retire.

Their political rivals have also changed with Abdullah leading the Barisan
Nasional into a general election for the first time. One of their favourite
targets, MCA's Datuk Seri Dr Ling Liong Sik has stepped down and taken over by
Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting, who is also, for the first time, heading his party
election machinery.

PAS president Datuk Fadzil Nor has passed away and replaced by firebrand Datuk
Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, who seems bent on turning Malaysia into another
Afghanistan.

Lim and Karpal Singh earned their reputation fighting against corruption. That
thunder has been stolen from them by Abdullah, who is also fighting the same
issue this time. In Karpal Singh's own words, there are no big national issues
now.

Even the architects of the early successful DAP campaigns are gone. They are
now in different parties such as Penang's Gooi Hock Seng and Teoh Teik Huat,
who are in Keadilan or Datuk Lee Yuen Fong @ Tiger Lee of Negri Sembilan who
had joined the MCA.

A new generation, who are more concerned with the video clips on MTV, have
grown up and they know little about Lim or Karpal Singh.

As Lim walked away from us to board the plane at the airport, my daughter
enquired about Uncle Kit.

I told her that he was a brave man who dared to speak out, especially against
the corrupt, and willing to fight against the government.

But she then asked: "Isn't that being done by the Prime Minister and why would
anyone want to fight a nice man like Pak Lah?"

For the voters of Bukit Glugor and Ipoh Timor, that would be the dilemma as
they turn up on Sunday to cast their votes. Do they want to return the DAP
veterans and say no to Abdullah's agenda at the same time?

Kicking off his campaign to about 800 people, an
unusually small audience to Lim, who had spoken to crowds of at least 10,000
people in his Penang campaign, reminded the people of Perak to bring back ''the
glory of Ipoh of the 1950s and 1980s.''

In the 50s, the Seenivasagam brothers, both lawyers, were firebrands from the
People's Progressive Party while in the 1980s, the DAP through big names like
P. Patto and Lau Dak Kee spearheaded the opposition.

But for many young voters, the names mean little. PPP,  headed by Datuk M. Kayveas, is in the Barisan
Nasional now and Malaysians don't know much about the party.

The past week had been tough for the DAP. 
PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang described Lim and Karpal Singh
as ''outdated            medicine whose
shelf life has expired'' while the Barisan has dismissed Lim's style of
confrontational politics, saying it was no longer  relevant.

As Lim walked the streets of Ipoh, he has been telling his listeners he has his
roots in Perak, reminding them of his stay at Kamunting in Taiping when he was
detained under the Internal Security Act.

Barisan Nasional's incumbent Ipoh Timor MP Thong Fah Chong has kept hammering
home the point that he is a local boy, born and bred in the state while Lim is
from Malacca.

The Barisan camp pointed out that Lim had contested in Malacca, Selangor,
Penang, and now Perak, with the DAP splinter group-Malaysian Democratic
Party-describing him as a ''political fly'' but Lim rebutted this, saying he is
fighting for the democracy of the nation.

There is another issue of concern for Lim. Last Saturday, as he attacked the
Barisan, he also had plenty of rockets aimed at PAS' leaders Hadi Awang and Nik
Aziz as well as Parti Keadilan Nasional.

There is good reason for it. The DAP, which lost badly in the 1999 polls
because of its pact with PAS, is taking great pains to dissociate itself from
the Islamist party.

Hadi, the Terengganu Mentri Besar, did Lim a great favour when he openly attacked
Lim.  That has put a spanner into the
strategy of the Barisan, especially the MCA and Gerakan, which wants to remind
the Chinese voters of the ''unholy alliance.''

The reminders include press cuttings showing DAP leaders from Terengganu who
said they had continued working for Hadi even after the DAP left the pact in
1999 and Selangor DAP leader Teng Chang Kim saying the DAP and PAS were still
cooperating.

MCA leaders are pointing out that the open bickering in the press between DAP,
Keadilan and PAS is nothing more than a sandiwara because the statistics showed
otherwise.

The Barisan has taken out advertisements in Chinese newspapers stating that the
DAP had continued to hold hands with PAS despite announcing that it had severed
ties with PAS after 1999.

The Utusan Malaysia reported on Sunday that at least 95% of the fights in this
general election are straight fights between the Barisan and the
opposition.

The allocation of seats have been nicely carved out with PAS contesting 86
seats, DAP 44 and Keadilan 58 at parliamentary level while for state seats, PAS
has 262, Keadilan 118 and DAP 106.

The only problem for the DAP and Keadilan is that they are fighting each other
in constituencies with a Chinese majority.

While Keadilan Malay leaders have found it easier to get their seats,
especially in states where PAS is not strong, it is the other way round for the
non-Malay leaders from Keadilan.

They have been left to fend for themselves, having to square off with the DAP.
In short, it's a fight for the crumbs for these Chinese and Indian
leaders.

Over the next few days, as the political temperature soar, Lim is expected to
emphasise that he will speak up for the people in Parliament but Thong is
likely to counter that he is there for them always.

Thong is also banking on his track record, pointing out that he obtained a
RM6.2mil allocation during his tenure, with 40% going to schools and 30% to
public amenities.

Realising the importance of education, his leaflet also said that through his
work, five premier schools-the Methodist Girls School, the Main Convent, Chong
Tack, Chung Shan and La Salle- which were downgraded from Grade A to Grade B
were restored their original status.

Thong, a full-time politician with five service centres in the constituency,
has also pointed out his 100% attendance in Parliament.

MCA campaigners are also stressing that Lim is probably the country's longest
serving party leader and has refused to make way for younger leaders in the
DAP, despite professing to care about the aspirations of the young voters.  Lim is 63 while Thong is 47.

Lim, on the other hand, is banking on his past reputation as an opposition
politician. His ISA detention is his credential and he is banking on sympathy
votes for support.

There are also voters who feel that Lim would be able to perform the opposition
role better than PAS MPs, who are more concerned with heaven and hell issues
than to check the excessiveness of the government.

But those who back the Barisan feel that Lim is no longer relevant and that his
time is over. His refusal to give way to younger DAP leaders has dented his
image of wanting to voice the aspirations of young people.

The 73,325 voters of Ipoh Timor have a difficult choice. They have to choose a
youthful politician from  the Barisan,
who has served them well and enjoys direct support of the national leadership,
or respond to a call to return Lim to Parlia- ment.