“Suddenly the phone stops ringing. My name no longer appears in  the newspapers, no one seeks my  opinions and, most of all, no one  thrusts the mike and tape recorder to my face now,'' he lamented.

But the media have always been the punching bag of the influential.

When pushed into a corner, blundering politicians often find it easy to shift the blame to the  press.It seems that to accuse the press  of misreporting or misquoting has become a favourite excuse when all else fails.

Recently, one politician blamed  the press for losing a by-election.  Next, he denied having said money was “missing'' from a fund,  claiming he did not even know  what the word lesap, attributed to  him, meant.

Last week, another politician  blamed the foreign media for misquoting him, apparently because he had a poor command of English.

The press was again held responsible for not giving enough publicity to Sukom 98. The media is usually reluctant to reply to such accusations or denials simply because it does not  wish to prolong the issue and see a  strain in ties with the politicians.

In March, one newspaper, however, decided to publish the full transcript of a press conference  given by a minister after his denial on toll-free alternative routes. Another politician, who had once denied a press report, told a  reporter: “I said it but I didn't  mean it'' after being confronted  with a tape recording of his remarks.One opposition politician, who is  in the habit of burning newspapers during elections, slams the  media at every opportunity but  that has not stopped him from  sending press statements to the  newsrooms of the various newspapers almost every day and most  of the statements get printed!

When his statement is not carried because of poor or libellous  content, the press gets blamed for blacking him out.

One reporter may get it wrong  but when all newspapers have the  same report, it is highly unlikely  everyone is wrong. After all, reporters today are armed with tape recorders.

But that does not mean that the  press is always right and free  from blame. Misreporting and irresponsible reporting can be damaging.

A media organisation, especially the electronic sector, in the hands  of young and inexperienced editors may suffer serious consequences.

For example, several months  ago an alleged road bully was  brought to the court by the police for a remand order. The case was given prominent  press coverage. His face appeared on television and in some newspapers without being camouflaged.In fact, he was never charged.Similarly, it was unethical to  show on news broadcasts the identities of minors alleged to be drug  pushers when they are mere suspects.This is because if there is  no case against them the damage  would have been done to them.In all healthy relationships,  there must be lots of love and understanding. I guess it's the same with the  media and the news-makers.

The latest joke making the rounds involves a politician, a self- proclaimed religious expert and a lawyer, all members of a local political party.

The three were given an envelope with RM30,000 each by their pensioner friend. They were told that they must return the money when he died. “Just put the envelopes with the money in my coffin.  Don't ask me what a dead man is going to do with it. I will try to bless you and your family in my  after-life,'' said the old man.

At the funeral, all three did as they were told. On their way home, the religious expert confessed that he had just returned RM20,000.

“I don't think he would mind. I need RM10,000 for my organisation and it's for a good cause after all,'' he said.

The lawyer next confessed that he only left RM10,000 in the coffin.“He won't mind, he's already dead. I need the money to pay my debts,'' he justified.

The Yang Berhormat became upset, scolding the two for their lack  of trustworthiness.

“How can you steal from a dead man? It's pathetic and sinful. I am so ashamed I don't think I can talk to you. As for me, I do everything for the people, for development and for the country. Yes, I took away the entire RM30,000 but I gave the dead man a blank cheque, so my conscience is clear.''

Over the last week, even sceptical Malaysians must have been surprised at the swift action taken against certain public figures and senior government officials for alleged corruption.

They include former Malacca state executive councillor Datuk Sahar Arpan who was charged in court.Deputy primary industries minister Siti Zainab Abu Bakar was sacked for her involvement in the “missing'' RM1.8 million from the  Wanita Umno accounts.

At the same time, the Cabinet has approved heavier penalties sought by the Anti-Corruption Agency against those found guilty of graft.

It is significant to note that Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad has  declared that elected representatives “should not only be clean but also seen to be clean, or we will lose our credibility.''

This is not the first time that Dr Mahathir has spoken against corruption. He brought up the matter at last year's Umno general assembly, stating his views on money politics.

Dr Mahathir's warning of a war against corruption came a day after Acting Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim announced that all new state executive councillors must declare their assets to the ACA before taking office.

The actions of the top two leaders deserve the backing of all Malaysians. A strong political will is necessary to fight corruption. While it is often difficult to gather evidence in such cases, Malaysians want to see clear actions against  unscrupulous politicians.

The leadership should perhaps go a step further by insisting that those holding public office must declare their assets periodically.

To be fair, there are many Malaysian politicians who have given up a fortune to serve the country.

Unfortunately, there are those who believe that they would be in a better position to make more money, either legally or illegally, once they have the authority and right connections.

The time has come to send a strong message to those who spend millions on party political campaigns that there is no guarantee they will be rewarded with a government position.

While Malaysians should retain their “can do'' confidence and even be euphoric over Malaysia Boleh, a line should be drawn over matters involving ethics and public accountability and that's when we say tidak boleh.

Rightly or wrongly, some Malaysians perceive the local media,  particularly the mainstream dailies, as docile and pro-government.

But when some foreign magazines base their reports on rumours and hearsay, these same readers would regard the content as gospel truth.

On the other hand, vernacular newspapers are regarded as bold but the accuracy of their reports are sometimes suspect and they often quote unnamed sources.

Last week, two major English dailies reported on their front pages that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad needed more time to choose a clean person to take over as the new Selangor Mentri Besar.

Two Bahasa Malaysia dailies and another English tabloid reported instead that the Sultan of Selangor did not consent to the choices made by the Prime Minister.

So which is which? The Sultan clarified in a statement that there was no disagreement between him and the Prime Minister while Dr Mahathir said he did not hand in a list of candidates to the Sultan, so the question of a consent did not arise.

Surely, reporters from different dailies cannot be hearing different things from the same person.

Checking what a person said on tape is one thing. An equally important factor to consider is how the questions were phrased and asked, and in what manner or tone were the questions answered.

Was it said in jest or was his reply quoted out of context by reporters?

Sometimes, public figures make vague statements, leaving reporters with the chore of having to interpret what was said.

Further confusion arose when, approached by reporters, several Umno leaders issued statements questioning the Sultan's purported refusal to give his consent.

Their immediate response to the press is commendable but the point is their information came from secondary sources the reporters they spoke to. The politicians were not at the palace to hear Dr Mahathir or the Sultan.

The result has been a suggestion of differences between the Sultan and Dr Mahathir and an impending constitutional crisis.

Misreporting is a serious matter and, as Dr Mahathir said just last week, it's an abuse of power and corruption by the press.

Reporters are only human. They make mistakes and sometimes interpret statements and actions incorrectly, but there is no excuse for being careless. Last week's events are nothing new. Such reporting has happened in  the past.

I recall interviewing a senior minister at the height of a party feud. Being not very fluent in English, the minister often paused and broke off his sentences with “you know what I mean-lah'' during the interview.

Those who had been covering his ministry knew exactly what he meant but one reporter, though experienced, became a victim of misinterpretation because she was unfamiliar with the lingo of the minister.

It was a disaster. Her report, published on the front page the next day, prompted the minister to retort that “she obviously didn't know what I mean.''

In another incident, a minister was asked by a reporter to comment on Malaysia's stand on an international issue. Hard-pressed for time, the minister told the reporter “tunggu-lah.''

The article that was published next day stated that the minister was taking a “wait-and-see attitude'' on the issue.

In a more recent case, all the Malaysian newspapers quoted ministers and sources as saying that the Cabinet wanted a freeze on dealings with Singapore following an unwelcome remark by Senior MinisterLee Kuan Yew  about Johor's security situation.

There was much confusion when a Cabinet minister later issued an official reply, saying that the press reports were “less than accurate.''

The Malaysian press, one may say, is hard-pressed at times but it certainly has no intention of being misleading.

Western reporters have been painting Hong Kong as a place of uncertainty with its imminent handover to China.

China is portrayed as the evil empire a nation burdened with corruption, soaring crime rate and a repressive regime bent on destroying Hong Kong's brand of free-market enterprise.

Almost every news despatch will talk about China's purported plans to curb civil liberties with Beijing's Tiananmen Square incident mentioned in one breath.

Suddenly, these gwai-lo reporters, who have been working and living in Hong Kong without a need for any visa passes, are talking about democracy and freedom of speech.

For years, they made no mention of Governor Chris Patten as  London-nominated but consider it fair game, in the name of press freedom, to label the territory's Chief Executive-designate Tung Chee-hwa as Beijing-picked.

They have also completely ignored the fact that for years the whites dominated the hierarchy of the civil service, especially the police force. Many locals, despite having the qualifications, were passed over in favour of expatriates because of the colour of their skin.

It is unfortunate that most newspapers, including those in Asia, will have to depend on lop-sided reports about the territory in the run-up to the handing over because of financial and manpower constraints.

In such circumstances, Asian newspapers will have to use their judgment on what is news and what is prejudice by these Western reporters. For example, the probable use of the Chinese language after July 1 has even become an issue.

One major news agency incorrectly reported Cantonese as a language instead of a dialect. But the issue of language should actually revolve around the lack of effort by the British to teach Hong Kong folk English.

The inability to speak English deprived many in Hong Kong of jobs and promotions.

At the same time, Martin Lee, the head of Hong Kong's opposition Democratic Party and a Beijing critic, gets the kind of attention given to only selected heads of government a meeting at the  White House with President Bill Clinton.

The United States now sees it fit to lecture China on how it should govern Hong Kong after July 1 when the Chinese have taken back what is rightfully theirs after 150 years.

The amount of misinformation on China is amazing but not surprising because Americans now consider China as its chief potential threat in economic and military terms.

Many of these concerns are rooted in ignorance and misunderstanding. Among the Republicans, liberal mass media and academics, China is a threat to the Americans on the world stage.

Efforts by Asian-Americans, mostly ethnic Chinese, to have some influence in the American political system faced a setback when donations by Asians became an issue.

An article in Newsweek on Feb 17 gave an early indication of what the US media would look for on July 1. Disruptions, protests and decrying of the abandonment of the Western values of freedom and democracy would be the diet of July 1.

It is difficult to impress upon Westerners that Hong Kong is no longer the world of Suzy Wong and that the People's Liberation Army is more involved in trading than military manoeuvres, with investments in over 20,000 companies worth billions of ringgit.

Asian watcher John Naisbitt correctly wrote in Megatrends Asia that the West should talk about how much the rest of China would end up looking like Hong Kong after July 1 and not the other way around.

There is no going back. When Macau returns to China in 1999, i  will be the end of Western dominance for the first time in 400 years, every inch of Asian soil will be controlled by Asians.

The year 2000 will be the Year of the Dragon, an auspicious beginning for Asians in the new millennium.

Following the meeting, at least, two ministers readily put on record  their displeasure of events that had taken place since March 11 when Malaysians first found out the disparaging remarks made by Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew against Johor.

Singapore Foreign Minister S. Jayakumar has much to do if the republic sincerely wants to mend fences.

Beside making the relevant quiet diplomatic approaches, he will have a chance to meet his counterpart Datuk Abdullah Ahmad Badawi next week.

It will be their first meeting after the diplomatic row between the two countries erupted.

The two leaders will attend the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)  ministerial-level meeting in New Delhi from April 48, and an informal meeting of Asean ministers has been scheduled on April 7. Asean countries are also members of NAM.

While Asean matters will be the concern of the meeting, there is nothing to stop Jayakumar from having separate bilateral talks, officially or unofficially, with Abdullah on how Malaysia and Singapore should get on with their relationship.

As chairman of the Asean Standing Committee, Abdullah will chair the informal meeting with discussions centred on the admission of new Asean members and preparation for the summit in December.

And there is nothing to prevent other Asean members from talking about the diplomatic tiff between Malaysia and Singapore and its effect on Asean.

At the summit, which Kuala Lumpur will host, Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Mr Goh Chok Tong will meet and going  by tradition, the two premiers will meet separately.

It will be a heavy task for Jayakumar because Malaysia is in no mood to restore diplomatic ties to the previous level. As Dr Mahathir said, it will take time to heal.

Jayakumar will have a second shot in Kuala Lumpur during the one-week Asean ministerial meeting beginning July 24.

The two foreign ministers will be the ones to assess the situation and  make recommendations to their respective heads of government.

Wisma Putra is fully aware of how Singapore has been reacting to Malaysia's increasing economic competitiveness in the region.

The Straits Times, which often reflects the views of the republic's  political establishment, acknowledged in its recent editorial that growing economic competition was a factor in the squabble that resulted fromLee's remarks.

“The fact is that competition for markets, investments and labour is  increasingly pitting one country against the other. Mr Lee's indiscretion was, in the circumstances, a godsend for those itching to knock Singapore down a notch or two,'' it reported.

While Goh has tried to blame the Malaysian press for inaccurate reports which were supposed to have exacerbated the issue, he should also look at the files of the Singapore media.

For example, the Singapore media has on numerous occasions taken a negative stand against Malaysia for issues such as the proposed land bridge at the Malaysia-Thai border and the East Asia Economic Caucus.

Even the private sector, such as the Genting Highlands resort, a favourite holiday destination for Singaporeans, has not been spared from bad press. Such reporting creates the perception that Singapore does not wish to see its people spend money outside the island.

The Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange, which is far more attractive than its Singapore rival, is another favourite target.

Such finger-pointing by Singapore leaders, instead of admitting their poor handling of relations with Malaysia over recent years, will not help to end the row.

Goh, in reacting to the tiff, quoted a Malay saying Air dicincang tidak akan putus, walaupun dicincang dengan pisau (water cannot be separated, even by a knife) which he said was the nature of Singapore's relationship with Malaysia.

It is good that Goh understands the importance of a good relationship between the two countries but he must move beyond words.

As every schoolboy knows, there is a much simpler Malay saying Sesat di hujung jalan, balik ke pangkal jalan (if you are lost at the end of the road, then you must go back to where you came from). Similarly, sesat surut, terlangkah kembali.

There is a moral to both sayings while a person must admit when he is wrong, he must also correct the mistakes he has committed.

As much as Malaysians support the Government's ban on all roadside stalls in the city, a loud sigh was heaved at the decision to relocate in stages the city's 36,500 hawkers to food courts within complexes.

The Malaysian flavour, character and colour of eating at roadside stalls, which fascinate and probably horrify outsiders, will soon disappear.

The ban on roadside hawking will be carried out in stages Kuala Lumpur first, followed by the states.

That means Penangites will no longer head for the Air Itam market for laksa, and the char koay teow roadside stall in Lorong Selamat will have to seek refuge at a nearby coffeeshop to continue business.

Old habits die hard. Some Malaysians argue that in Paris, for example, the city takes great pains to promote their roadside cafes and patrons prefer to sit outside regardless of the weather.

So why can't our local authorities impose cleanliness rules and enforce them strictly without having to ban street stalls?

It will probably take time for Malaysians to get used to the idea of  having to go to a shopping complex for teh tarik which will come in a  styrofoam cup.

And it will take even longer for many Malaysians to pick up the habit of using disposal bowls and chop sticks for bah kut teh. It may be more hygienic but certainly politically incorrect since they are  environmentally-unfriendly.

But the days of Malaysians eating at roadside stalls, declared rodent breeding grounds by the authorities, will soon be over.

Last week, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim ordered all new complexes to have food courts, saying the relocation of roadside stalls to such centres was a move to reduce littering and ease traffic congestion.

These measures would eventually be applied to towns and cities throughout the country. Anwar said roadside hawkers and petty traders were responsible for 500 tonnes (or 17 per cent) of rubbish collected in the city.

With 200,000 licensed hawkers and countless unlicensed ones in the country, the authorities probably have no choice but to call for an  integrated approach to solve the cleanliness and congestion problems caused by hawkers.

The decision to set up food courts with proper facilities in strategic  areas is based on various factors, including having water supply, proper refuse disposal, and ensuring that stall holders are properly dressed and hygienic.

Malaysians somehow place more importance on the flavour and taste of their food than on the hygiene standards of food vendors.

It will be difficult to argue against the merits of the national hawking policy, introduced by the Housing andLocal Government Ministry. Besides cleanliness and orderliness, the aspects of health, safety and beautification of the country come into play.

No responsible government can allow the existence of uncontrolled  roadside stalls by both locals and foreigners who clog the drains with  leftovers, leaving a trail of health headaches.

With the Asean Summit, Commonwealth Games and Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation summit all taking place in Kuala Lumpur over the next few years, thousands of visitors will converge in the city.

The last thing the city fathers would want to see is Malaysians eating nasi lemak at a roadside stall, which uses only one pail of water to wash 100 plates, next to the Petronas Twin Towers.

So, Malaysians have no choice but to eat roti canai with flimsy plastic forks and spoons.

It will be tough, and too much like eating in Singapore. It's just too clinical for my liking.

Finally, the Aussie lost his cool at his friend's suicidal tendencies,  demanding to know whether he had gone bananas. The Malaysian smiled, reassuring his friend that he was perfectly sound.

Beating the traffic lights, he reasoned, was the Malaysian thing to do  just like having teh tarik or nasi lemak in the morning.

“Don't worry-lah. In Malaysia, every time I see a red light, I try to  shoot straight. Very normal, all my family members do that, sure no  accident-one,'' he told the Aussie.

As they continued their journey the driver suddenly came to a screeching halt when he saw the green light at the next junction.

The confused Australian asked why he stopped abruptly. His friend turned and smiled at him.

“I must stop because my mother is passing on the opposite side. Family thing-what.''

This joke was shared by a listener during a recent Radio 4 talk show hosted by Patrick Teoh about traffic woes.

Funny as it may seem, the police are saying it's no laughing matter when it comes to dealing with Malaysian drivers, who are reputed to be inconsiderate, rude, reckless and dangerous.

Last week, Internal Security and Public Order Director Datuk Ghazali Yacub said police were now just as wary of motor vehicles as they were of guns in the wrong hands.

“Our men are trying to prevent people from injuring themselves and others, Now, they themselves have become victims of accidents they are trying to prevent,'' he told reporters after presenting a cheque for RM10,000 to traffic Kpl Abdullah Mohamed from Kurnia Insurance (M) Bhd at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital.

Kpl Abdullah was knocked down by a bus in an accident at the Seremban-Kuala Lumpur Expressway on Feb 17.

Since 1995, five traffic policemen have been killed and 116 injured when they were knocked down by vehicles while on duty.

With the media highlighting the growing social ills involving teenagers, the road bully issue seems to have received less attention but recent cases seem to suggest nothing has changed.

Many Malaysian drivers still go around bashing up other road users. Age and gender are no barriers.

On Jan 30, a 20-year-old male clerk in Klang was reportedly slapped by a woman motorist when he showed her his fist.

A motorist in Ipoh reported on Feb 17 to the police that he was assaulted by an elderly motorcyclist with a walking stick following a minor accident.

On Nov 8, an unarmed police inspector was beaten up by three bullies in Klang after a row over a parking lot.

No one is quite sure what to do with road bullies. We seem to have  forgotten about such thuggery.

We may not consider the bad attitude of our drivers as a social ill but it's a sad manifestation of our lack of social grace.

The affluence that comes along with our rapid economic development has not helped us to be more courteous on the roads.

Somehow, we do not know how to wave our hand to thank fellow motorists who give way to us. Instead, we are quicker at showing the middle figure on the slightest provocation.

Malaysia may have made quantum leaps in its technological advancements but Malaysians still have a long way to go when it comes to moral and social development.

Suddenly, almost every public figure has become an expert in parenting, lecturing the public on the need to spend quality time with their children.

Everyone seems to have one theory or another. Beyond blaming parents and warning them that the book could be thrown at them for the misbehaviour of their children, no one has actually been able to explain convincingly what they mean by good parenting skills.

There are statistics available on the various categories of social ills  involving the young but there is no real study on why they have resorted to such actions.

There are only sketchy theories and a lot of hot air. Just a month ago, bashing the kids was a favourite national pastime. This time, it's the parents' turn.

The general tone seems to be greater discipline, law enforcement and punishment.

Along the way, as we tried to rationalise the problems, we find ourselves distracted from the real issue, talking instead about whether the police should handcuff juveniles and whether the press has sensationalised the matter.

But what has the ordinary Malaysian to say about the issue, besides the many self-appointed guardians of morality who often get quoted in the press?

Judging from the countless letters and faxes received from the public, most parents believed that punishing parents for their children's crime will not help reduce social ills.

One touching letter came from Madam Chin Hee Fong from Kuala Lumpur. Describing herself as a busy career mother for 13 years, she is now a company manager after seven years of hard work.

“Parents are always exhausted after a long day's work. How much energy is there left to educate the children or undo all their wrongdoings?'' she asked.

Accepting her predicament that she should spend more time with her children, Chin wrote that too many children were left to their domestic maids or baby-sitters.

“Though I have achieved some material success and recognition at work, I found I have also lost so much,'' she said.

According to a report from the National Unity and Social Development Ministry, 60 per cent of Muslim women arrested for vice activities between 1990 and 1995 were divorcees with children.

It's easy to lock them up but who will be responsible for taking care of their children. Certainly not the men who abandoned them.

We seem to have overlooked many things. One important point raised by Chin, for example, is our preoccupation with material success, so much so that many important aspects of life have been neglected.

Simple things in life such as sharing, love, filial piety, honesty,  integrity and character-building are no longer emphasised.

How many parents will encourage their children to be in service-oriented jobs such as teaching, counselling and nursing, which were held in high-esteem in the past?

Despite the push for a caring society, how much more compassionate have we become? We exclude instead of embrace those who fail.

Many Malaysians prefer their children to be “career-minded'' sometimes a euphemism for being materialistic and selfish instead of compassionate and caring.

Thus, joining the Rotary or Lions Club for networking is preferred to  than joining a non-governmental organisation.

Spending quality time is one thing but what we teach our children is another.

At the office, back-stabbing to climb the corporate ladder has almost become a norm.

There are root causes which we seem to ignore. Sending our children to a three-month course will certainly keep them off the streets. Parents will know, at least, where their children are and how they spend their time.

But let us not expect a drastic transformation within that period. Most parents may not want to see themselves accountable for offences committed by their children but they cannot run away from the responsibility of teaching them the right thing.

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim correctly pointed out that the tendency now was to highlight the role of teachers and schools when students have social problems.

Parents have to be the real minders, not the schools or authorities. That aside, our children need good role models to emulate.

As one academician pointed out, what kind of message do we want to send to our children when politicians buy votes and enrich themselves; when civil servants live beyond their means, while men rape their daughters.

Like it or not, leaders have to lead by example. It's time to look at  ourselves honestly before we start blaming parents and children.

Romance,
as the florists would like you to think, is still very much in the air.
Valentine's Day may be a week old but Chap Goh Meh, a milder Chinese
version of it on the last day of the Lunar New Year, was just two days
ago.

Trailers for mushy romance movies are still aired on television.

Last
week, Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs parliamentary secretary Datuk
Tan Chai Ho made a valid point when he said love should not be measured
by how many flowers a person sent.

At a department store in
Damansara Jaya, a stalk of rose was sold at RM49 each while restaurants
in Bangsar charged between RM100 and RM150 per person for a set
candle-light dinner.

And for RM35 each, you could buy red panties folded in the form of roses at a shopping complex in Penang.

Millions of ringgit must have been splashed by lovebirds that day on flowers, cards, dinners and advertisement messages.

The
CNN reported under the headline Valentine's Day Rip-off that a dozen
red roses were sold in London for 24 (RM96) a week before Feb 14 and
later shot up to 36 (RM144). In Singapore,Lianhe Zaobao reported that
giant roses were imported from South America and sold for a fortune.
They were twice as big, more pungent and last longer than ordinary
roses.

These roses, a columnist wrote, were stocked by mail order at a whopping S$138 (RM241) a dozen.

But this one tops it all. One Singapore hotel offered four Paris Romanticism packages at S$3,500++ (RM6,125) each.

The
packages included a cruise on a private yacht, a poolside dinner
serenaded by a strolling violinist, oysters by the jacuzzi and an
overnight stay at a secluded villa with a bed sprinkled with scented
rose petals.

It's unbelievable but someone took up the offer. Nothing was too much for him, I suppose.

An
expression of love is good but it's something else when commercialism
takes centrestage, with businessmen thinking up new, exhorbitant ways
for couples to declare their love for each other.

Malaysians
have not gone overboard yet in this celebration of love but more and
more young people feel that it is the right thing to do.

One local newspaper, quoting several celebrity interviewees, concluded that Malaysian men were mostly unromantic.

It's
debatable.Like most of us, I have never seen my father, who is well
past 70 years old, kiss my mother on the cheek. I cannot recall hearing
him openly declare his love for her, let alone hug her in the presence
of their children.

They have been married for the past 48 years. It's the same with many arranged marriages involving our elders.

The
Westerners, we are told, are more romantic. After all, they introduced
candle-light dinners. We had candle-light dinners, too, when we were
young  we did not have electricity supply then.

It is
Western practice to send flowers and kiss in public but these same
spontaneous people are equally quick at giving up on marriages.

Love
is definitely good but Malaysians should not spend too much money
declaring it, especially when you have Valentine's Day, Father's Day,
Mother's Day, Teacher's Day, Secretaries' Day and what not. The list
never seems to end.

Arguably, Malaysians are celebrating Valentine's Day elaborately now because they have become more affluent.

I
guess we have to come to terms with the fact that it is no longer 
practical for the unmarried to throw oranges on Chap Goh Meh in the
hope of getting suitors, however romantic it may be.

By the way,
I have another confession Feb 14 was also my wedding anniversary.
Again, it had nothing to do with me being romantic.

It's an
unpardonable crime to forget one's wedding anniversary. Nobody, even
someone as absent-minded as me, could miss this “double celebration''
of a Valentine's Day wedding anniversary.

It's worse for Johan, a marketing manager, who lives in
Subang Jaya. He has to wake up at 5am, leave his house by 6am to reach his
Jalan Raja Laut office by 9am.

Subang Jaya, a middle-class residential housing estate with its well- manicured
lawns, has earned a notorious reputation for its traffic  congestion.

Both Tham and Johan have cars. But there are others who are not so lucky. On
Friday, Entrepreneur Minister Datuk Mustapa Mohamed decided to hear for himself
how bad the situation was.

Turning up unannounced at the Jalan Duta government complex at 7am, Mustapa met
about 30 civil servants who travel to work by buses.

One female clerk complained that she now had to fork out almost RM10 daily for
a trip from her Ampang home to Jalan Duta.

First, she rides the LRT which cost her RM2.90 to Jalan Raja Laut, then she
hops into a taxi for a RM5 ride to her office.

"I can no longer rely on buses as the frequency has reduced drastically,'' she
said.

Another clerk grumbled to Mustapa that he had difficulties getting an Intrakota
bus at the squatter area he lives in because the company rarely serviced the
area.

The general complaints were the infrequency of Intrakota's services or no
service at all at certain routes.

In a nutshell, KL's traffic woes boils down to this too many private cars and
not enough public transport.

Stopa, as the minister is popularly called in Kelantan, not only spoke to them
on the spot but invited them to his office in Jalan Raja Laut for more
discussions.

The problems were real as the civil servants poured their hearts out,
expressing their worries over the increasing cost they have to pay in trying to
ensure that they reach their office in time.

The traffic problem in Kuala Lumpur has worsened since Jan 1 as a result of
several factors, including major construction works being carried out for the
LRT, monorail and Linear City, which affects traffic flow and the removal of
many old minibuses.

There were also grouses about the ticket purchasing procedures of the KTM
commuter trains. For example, most stations have only two ticketing machines.
There have also been complaints that KTM commuter trains don't run on
time.

Transport Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ling Liong Sik said the public  transportation situation is a transitional
problem which can only be  resolved in
two or three years.

Bad infrastructure planning, he added, contributed to the current  situation.

We read in the newspapers that the authorities will get tough with errant
taxi-drivers who refuse to use the meter or are choosy over routes; but
enforcement is so lousy that taxi drivers know they won't be caught if they
flout the laws.

KL's traffic woes may not be as bad as those in Manila or Bangkok, where
motorists place urinals in their cars, but we will be heading towards that
situation if things don't improve fast.

On a recent trip to Kota Kinabalu, Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Yong Teck Lee
asked me whether it was true that many KL folk go to an evening function
straight from office.

"I'm told you guys don't have time to go home to change because the traffic is
really bad. Is that so?'' he asked.

The answer, unfortunately, is true. There are also office workers who go for a
drink or stay in the office until 9pm or 10pm before heading home so they can
have a smoother drive.

There is a terrible need to reduce the flow of vehicles into the city,  especially during peak hours. The lack of
parking space has further  aggravated the
problem.

Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, expressing displeasure with the
city's public transport system on Thursday, has given the relevant government
agencies and public transport operators until Feb 3 to come up with the
answers.

The angry public, who has to endure the traffic jams daily, can be  forgiven if they remain sceptical.

First, they had to put up with dangerous minibus drivers, then the pink
minibuses were phased out and replaced with air-conditioned Intrakota
buses.

They were comfortable and good for a while but when they became  monopolistic, they became more selective with
the routes, leaving many commuters in the lurch.

Many bus commuters are now being forced to take taxis to work and as Mustapa
found out, for many including low-ranking civil servants, it means burning holes
in their pockets.

Malaysia's inflation figures and the consumer price index remains  relatively low for a country with strong
consumer spending but more and more people have found that the cost of living
is spiralling.

The extra cost of transportation is something many Malaysians had not foreseen,
even for the middle-income wage earners.

Jane, a fresh Universiti Sains Malaysia graduate, has just become a journalist.
She gets a basic RM1,400 salary with over RM200 as travelling allowance.

She gets extra pay for over-time work and is saving to buy a car, where she
will be entitled to over RM400 in allowances but now, she finds it tough to
save after paying for her room rent and food expenses.

"I use to take the minibus for my assignments but now because of the
infrequency, I take the taxis to be on time but I am spending over RM20 for one
assignment now.

"This does not include the taxi rides to office from home daily. Can you
imagine spending over RM30 a day on transport?'' she asked.

Mustapa must be commended for taking the efforts to talk to the people directly
and to hear their grievances instead of relying on officials and their aides
for information.

We cannot deny the LRT, the monorail and the KTM commuter trains are part of
serious efforts to solve the city's transport and traffic woes but with our
development going at such rapid pace, better remedies are needed.

If we have to stop single occupancy vehicles from entering the city during peak
hours, we will have to do it now. We will have to make parking more
expensive.

But all these will not be feasible unless we have a good transport  system. Unlike the London tube with extensive
links, our LRT is still at an infant stage, so the minibuses and the taxis will
continue to be the principal forms of transport for those who can't afford
cars.

For city folk, the past one week has been a tiring one. KL will attain  its status as a traffic-choked city  ith a bad public transport system but it
cannot claim to be a city that does not go to sleep, as many cities  pride themselves to be.

The city fathers have placed a curfew on us.Leave the discos at 1am, sleep
early. There's a perfectly sound reason you need to get up early to fight for a
seat on the bus, that is, if you get one.