Screenshots

Sounds like if any of the opposition member sees a fire in Parliament during a session, it would not beadvisable for him to move a motion that there is a fire and that they should all adjurn. Nazri and all the BN MPs would rather die in a fire than to have to support a motion to save themselves!..How honourable of them.

"Asked if action could be taken against the MP concerned, Najib said nobody was above the law."
(Today's NST). Bet you Najib talks nonsense here.
Even as Deputy PM he does not know the culture of his people!

You've got to remember that Shahrir is the same dude that contested the JB seat as an independent after the '87 UMNO leadership contest.

He was in Team B, and instead of hopping over to S46, he chose to stay in UMNO (Baru). The Team A guys didn't trust him and didn't want him to contest the '88 elections. The guy went ahead anyway and essentially showed the finger to the non-believers.

This is also the same dude that had been on record as saying that DSAI was the greatest conspirator in UMNO before his fall.

I don't know whether Dato' Shahrir is a nice chap or what, but in many of his actions, he's been consistent and wilfully unwilling to toe *any* line if he didn't believe in it.

I'll give him the benefit of doubt anytime.

Imagine a state call Yutopia-100 yrs ago where a member of an opposition called for a motion to outlaw lying, murder, slavery, stealing etc.

As members of the ruling party, you cannot support such motion because it was called by the opposition!

What kind of respect we'll have for the ruling party?

Correct me it I am wrong. Let me start with this sentence because the following remarks were taken from the media and made into my personal opinion.

1. Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad announced he was resigning as Chairman of the BBC because a motion to investigate a case of clear and blatant corruption within the Customs Department, involving an MP, was put down by the government.

2. In stating why the motion was opposed, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz states that it was because the motion was brought up by the Opposition, and the government usually rejects their motions.

Does this sound logical to anyone else?

So, what he is saying, is that even if the Opposition is right, we have to say they are wrong?

Why is that?

3. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz then added that the motion was a "newspaper report, which did not even name the MP, could not be referred for action in the House."

And yet, today we also see Jasin MP, Datuk Mohd Said Yusof, stating that it was he who asked the Customs Department to "pejam mata".

Datuk Shahrir's resolution is to be commended, as it has been proven throughout his political history, as stated by gier's earlier comment.

I think it s quite unfair to say the government put down the motion. I believe it is more of a case where the MPs are protecting their kind. The 'we don’t support opposition motion' excuse is more of an afterthought. Btw, any chances we get to know who voted for and who voted against the motion.

MPs can express their views and to agree or disagree, but only when debating the issues (but of course our MPs prefers to main sarkas during that time). But come voting, it is another thing altogether, it is either you are with ruling party or you are not with them. Your personal opinions don’t count. Or else the party can issue show cause letters, suspend or even sack you. Tak dapat lah jadi calon MP lagi next term. So, still wanna trust the MP elected by you to be your voice and your representative in the Parliament? I don’t.

Folks

You should know by now why these bunch of incompetent UMNO MPS behave the way they behave.

1. They treat Parliament like UMNO General Assembly or rather they could not understand that Parliament is present to legislate on the governance of the country and to oversee the running of the country by the Cabinet

2.They could not distinguished between their role as MP and their role as UMNO politician elected by their constituency which may be around 5,000 or less.

3. They could not readjust their brains to think like Members of Parliament and not like UMNO candidates when talking about business of government.

4. We elected them. And that is the mistake

5. Malaysian voters either have short memory at election time or simply we are gullible fools to always elect the same type of idiotic candidates to Parliament every 5 years.

6, Malaysian voters are easily bought by the fear propaganda of UMNO against PAS, Keadilan, DAP,and on racial issues mischievously played out by UMNO in the media.

7. We were treated like fools by UMNO and as a result we acted like one, electing some of the most undeserving ones into Parliament.

8. UMNO has too little candidates with principles.

On above note, we need more politicians like Shahrir, at least he stood his grounds against these silly fools.

6.

this Nazri guy is a joke...wasn't he the one that screamed "racists" in parliament. his performance in Parlaiment as an MP is mediocre. Gangsterlike if I can use the term.

Shahrir is entitled to his decision to resign..and that was certainly the only decision he could make when backbenchers do not support him. I respect that stand.

Now..next...what is the police going to do about the Jasin MP...is his act by asking the Customs to "close one eye" not similar to Anwar Ibrahim..and AI was subsequently charged with corruption/abuse of power.

And why have not the Customs not made any police reports...no balls or wait for permission to report.

And meanwhile as usual AAB keeps mum.

art chan

you asked.... what is the police going to do about the Jasin MP.

Nothing. UMNO has a strangle-hold on our Bukit Aman boys.

As they say in the media, the hunt-dogs to search and catch corrupt politicians will only be let off the lease by the PM, not by Parliament.And Pak Lah will not have the guts to do it. The famous 18 names of Ministers and politicians that made big news last year orso, and who are suspected for high level corruption and wrong doings are yet to be brought out into the open or charged.

UMNO will never allow ACA to be under the jurisdiction of Parliament, because then there will be too many by-elections in UMNO-held seats.

When you are part of the problem, how can you become the solution. That is the dilemma for UMNO, even in this current fiasco with the Jasin MP.

//I do not want to see the ACA going into the Parliament, investigating or taking action against our MPs. I think Parliament can manage itself. This is democracy.//

Can anyone tell me why this is so? Why can ACA not investigate MPs? Correct me if I'm wrong but ACA stands for Anti-Corruption Agency? I'm a bit sceptical about Shahrir's motives here. Why refer MPs to the Privileges Committee when ACA has a job to do? Is the PC some sort of MP club where they slap each other on the back, wink wink nod nod? Anyone explain?