The recently concluded IPF annual general assembly and results from the referendum held to ascertain the delegates' wishes for the future of the party and its members have turned out to be a sham.

The Indian community are generally disappointed with the choice of IPF delegates to stick together to push for acceptance into Barisan Nasional and continue with their so-called struggle . The issue of rejoining MIC had actually surfaced soon after the Teluk Kemang by-election and had since become a hot topic among the Indian community, resulting in IPF's referendum.

As the most influential Indian leader, Samy Vellu should set aside personal differences and invite MG Pandithan for a discussion and follow through with an official invitation to IPF members. By issuing statements and invitations through the media, he has failed to show sincerity in wanting to unite the two Indian parties. He even refused to put the invitation on paper, giving the excuse that it was a gentleman's agreement.

On the other hand IPF leader MG Pandithan was also guilty of not sincerely in favour of holding the referendum. He even went overboard by including the People's Progressive Party in the referendum as an option to joining MIC.

Pandithan had actually influenced the delegates well before the referendum. Although he did not vote, he had in fact indicated in his opening address that he was not in favour of joining MIC.

The referendum was an avenue for him to show MIC as well as other Barisan Nasional component parties that IPF is strong and he does have very loyal followers. Samy Vellu and M Kayveas was right: It was a show of strength, a well-staged one too. But it is hard to believe that IPF has 500,000 members as claimed.

Now IPF has called for an Indian unity talk with MIC a la PAS-Umno 'Malay Unity' talks, but Samy Vellu does not seem to be interested. The clash of egos between these two Indian political heavyweights doesn't augur well for the Indian community which is already small. Eventually the losers will be the Indian community and not Samy Vellu or Pandithan.

Samy Vellu claimed in a TV interview that MIC too helps the downtrodden Indians and it did a better job in helping the poor compared to any other party. He further added that only MIC has the capability to reach every section of the Indian community from the rich to poor. Pandithan responded by saying that in MIC, the poor never get the chance to become leaders as it is always the domain of the upper-class Indians.

Personally, I reject Samy Vellu's claim. In my seven years in Kuala Lumpur, I have not met any MIC or IPF leader in my daily life. No one approached me and I don't even I know who the MIC or IPF leader is in my area. They had never shown their face, not even during the elections. This shows how ineffective both MIC and IPF are to the extent that a member of community does not even know any of the leaders in his neighborhood.

And so far, I have never sought any assistance from MIC or its leaders. From what I have heard, the beneficiaries of MIC's assistance are their leaders, friends and families. This shows many Indians do not rely on MIC for anything and survive on their own.

Generally, both MIC and IPF leaders are selfish for refusing to act in view of the future of Indians and I have no regrets about not becoming a member of any of these Indian-based parties. So much noise but yet not much done for the community and in the end only a small privileged section benefits. I feel sorry for those poor Indians who have pinned their hopes on these two parties. I can only wish them luck.