NOVEMBER 5 — Happy Guy Fawkes Day!
Before I get into the joys a dead white man — and his explosive load — can bring, a sojourn to the debate that never was.
Contrary to hype on social media and mainstream news, the names mentioned so far to have a great exchange over a maligned state investment vehicle are not names of pedigree debaters.
Having spoken in a shoddy schools' competition in the old millennia really does not count as a permanent testament to quality in tying shoelaces let alone debating.
Observers might ask why all of them were never debating for their universities when they did attend their privileged ivory towers all across the British Isles. One day someone might have to point out that leading Malaysian-only student organisations in the UK is so-so as an achievement. Just like being born in blueblood families.
The top notch debaters — for instance those who actually debated with Oxford and Cambridge’s finest, not just went to classes there — are in circulation but not in Malaysian politics. It is probably an indictment of what type of talent rises to the top of Malaysian politics, from either side of the aisle. Sycophancy is the true currency in the parties.
The fiasco of the debate that never happened is that naivety of opposition politicians was exposed and all of us fell into the trap of letting the government and 1MDB buy time. While sycophancy promotes you, time powers incumbency.
So how to sate the Malaysian public, well the ones who are interested anyways? Call Arul Kanda Kandasamy — a name reminiscent of ex-UN secretary-general Boutros-Boutros Gali, and similar in both being repetitious and ineffectual during tragedies — to hold a townhall.
Man stands. Man faces question, man answers it, on “live” TV. After all, that’s all the people want, answers. We are quite used to boring speakers.
That’s all a townhall constitutes, a lengthy non-stop Q&A between CEO and the curious masses, represented by those in attendance.
RTM, our national broadcaster, can invite a cross section of Malaysians — NGOs, politicians, think-tank analysts, noodle-sellers and accountants — and let them ask the questions. Arul — in his infinite wisdom that has taken him from Sungei Besi to Abu Dhabi’s financial markets via London School — and continues to claim that nothing went amiss at 1MDB during and before his time, can then educate the rest of the country why they are wrong.
The man on the street will not attend the Public Accounts Committee hearing in Parliament, and Arul has offered to appear on TV to debate, why not just explain? In a townhall, he will get oodles and oodles of time. With the quality of programming at RTM, they can spare an hour or even two on a Tuesday evening.
Why the debate would have gone awry
It is good in a way that the Speaker of Dewan Rakyat called off the debate. Little of use would have emerged. Just examine the 10 questions Tony Pua forwarded to 1MDB as a precursor to the debate proper.
They are multi-layered, context rich and conditional to other facts and opinions that if one did try to piece them together in a five-minute speech, there is a risk of causing brain aneurysm among viewers.
The debate would have been about how assured and composed Arul looks while Pua seeming to be aggressive and pleased with the facts he has in its notes. Most viewers won’t be able to follow the proceedings as they will be complex, the truth will rely on how true the speakers appear, and after Arul opens up with “Assalamualaikum” the trustworthy scores are going to bounce up and up and away.
1MDB is a colossal issue but it is equally mind-boggling.
Don’t go chasing waterfalls
Every scandal has a timeline. 1MDB is a tricky little bugger. From changing CEOs, board members, auditors and assets, it embodies the living question of whether a construct can become so labyrinthine that no one can be accused of criminal behaviour, that only criminal intent can be suggested.
With the debate shenanigans, 1MDB bought more time. Rules, scheduling and appropriateness were discussed while the company floats on.
A healthier judiciary, legislature, executive and mainstream media would be my preferred solution to 1MDB, but since they are at least a general election away I would have settled for a townhall.
I did say there would be mention of Guy Fawkes, and here it is. He tried to blow up Parliament so that a Catholic King would die. Today, he is a universal symbol of defiance, not to mention the face of international hackers. While it is easy to be slightly suicidal looking at how things are slipping off the rails in Malaysia, the spirit of defiance is only growing around the world.
It appears the Internet's greatest lesson to mankind may be that disagreeing is not a crime and many around the world share that opinion with passion.
So debate, don’t debate. Show up for a townhall, don’t show up for a townhall. Just keep dishing out sanitised pieces of information and sully us with your brazen disregard for our rights to truths. Defiance is not going away anytime soon. You are buying only time.
*This is the personal opinion of the columnist.
