YOURSAY | ‘The ‘guilty’ are always afraid of being transparent and the truth.’
Vijay47: I can imagine that Najib Abdul Razak would want to keep secret the holiday-jaunt movements and whereabouts of himself, his wife, his family, and assorted hangers-on from the prying eyes of busybodies like Malaysiakini.
The question is, why would the prime minister of a country want to do that? Privacy? Highly unlikely.
Even if the people of the country were aware of where the whole mob was jetting off to, they could hardly intrude into the seclusion under which the Najib clan would want to enjoy their extravagant holidays.
The greater probability is that Najib and family are totally aware that it is distasteful, not to mention immoral and possibly illegal, for them all to go on holiday on public funds especially when his presence at home during natural calamities like the current widespread floods would have been the honourable and expected preference.
No, nothing can deter Najib and Rosmah Mansor from travelling the world. After all, I suppose, he did tweet some messages of concern to Kelantan and Terengganu.
What's new: We’ve heard of ghost ships, can these be our 'ghost jets'? The only mission is perhaps to remove Malaysian Official 1's (MO1) alleged stolen goods to undisclosed destinations.
Are we to see Najib doing his last mile? All significant signs are pointing to this direction.
Mushiro: Yes, the fact that the tracking was removed as "per request from the owner/operator" shows clearly that they feel guilty but want to hide future information.
Similarly, as "per request from the culprit", the 1MDB report by the police and Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) was also not disclosed.
Many other investigations, too, went unreported on similar “requests”.
Kim Quek: The Najib family’s 13-day holiday in Australia must have cost taxpayers easily more than RM10 million in flight cost alone, keeping in mind that the rate for Airbus 319 is US$15,000 per hour (at such a chartered rate, the cost would have been 13 x 24 x 15,000 x 4.4 = RM20,600,000).
Members of parliament should insist on Najib giving a full account of how much his family’s holidays have cost the nation. In addition, Parliament must request that the PM’s family cease to use government ‘air buses’ for their personal travel.
If families of heads of government of wealthy democracies like the US, Japan, the UK, Canada and Australia are paying for their own personal flight costs, is it sensible for relatively poor Malaysia to indulge its leader’s family with luxurious jet flights on taxpayers’ expense?
Alicescat: Some government officials can now go for jaunts on taxpayers’ money without having to account for their holidays and shopping trips overseas.
Meanwhile, the very people whose money these entitled people are spending because they are ‘entitled’ to spend, will have to scrimp and save to feed and clothe themselves and put roofs over their heads.
P Dev Anand Pillai: Despite knowing all this from their smartphones and the social media sites, there are still a vast number of Malays who will still vote and ensure that this kind of opulence is allowed for their chosen leaders while they suffer to pay for their mortgages, hire purchases, school fees and tuition, and most of all just being unemployable until a government job comes a-calling.
What's new: Are we not, as taxpayers of the nation, owners of the government jet planes? So why can’t we have the right to the flight information?
Demi Rakyat: The ‘guilty’ are always afraid of being transparent and the truth.
Negarawan: "It is within his full rights to use the entitlement that he has in his capacity as prime minister," said Deputy Home Minister Nur Jazlan Mohamed.
The pertinent question here is not about rights or entitlement, but about doing what is right for the people of Malaysia at the most difficult and challenging time in the country's history. Nur Jazlan has completely missed this important point.
Fairnsquare: According Cheras Umno chief Syed Ali Alhabshee, “Najib who works day and night thinking of how to make the people prosper, as well as the future of the Malays.”
How? By selling our assets to China and borrowing more money from them? When will the Malays ever wake up? Spending borrowed money lavishly does not in any way make the people prosper, let alone the Malays.
XED: Syed Ali is misleading Malaysians about the real issue. The real issue is not about whether the PM and ‘the real PM’ and their family deserve a holiday. The real issue is whether they can properly use taxpayer-funded public facilities for a private purpose.
Elected officials in Australia who used government facilities, such as taking a government helicopter to a wedding and bought books irrelevant to their duties, had been made, in a very public away, to repay the money.
Shunyata: I think the problem isn't just that a government vehicle was used for a costly personal trip, but that there was so much pomp in the process.
What is "ending the year in style" on a golf course, unless, of course, "style" is defined as the grand inability to relate to the common suffering masses in dire times while shouting about it through a loudspeaker.
Anyone else in their shoes would have kept a lower profile about all the glitter, of which a portion is definitely from the torn pockets of the masses.
Headhunter: Now you know the main reason the government need to buy a new luxury jet. When it was first questioned, the reasons given were that the PM and the Agong need it for their official duty.
They didn't tell us they need a jet for their family holidays, did they?
Malaysians are taken for a ride. Vote them once, you are a fool. Vote them time and again, you must be out of your mind.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.
These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.