Malaysiakini readers are now training their guns at Pak Lah for his failure to walk the talk on fighting against corruption over the 'close one eye MP' issue.

Joe Public: Just as when we hope Pak Lah is going to be different from his predecessor, his uncompromising stance against Shahrir shows he is no different. If it was meant to be a show of authority, it was misguided. It only shows, he lacks the courage to be different and still needs the support of Umno chiefs by 'toeing the line' himself according to past practices. This invariably means 'no rocking the boat', and that is, by not taking action against any Umno MP, if the initiative comes from the opposition.

I am sure there are a substantial number of MPs in Umno who are quite fed up of being lumped together when the public criticised some of the current unfair policies of the government. We salute those like Shahrir and Zaid who are brave enough to voice out, even if their attempts had not been entirely successful. At least, we know there are reasonable and fair people in Umno.

It is a pity that because of the political structure of how our PM is chosen, there is no room for the public to do anything otherwise. Even if backed by popular support and if the incumbent PM wants a major change in policy affecting the Umno division leaders and their supporters, it will be at the expense of his own survival as PM.

Disappointed Rakyat: I am truly ashamed to have a prime minister with no stature. At first our new PM did shed a ray of light to reform our country's administration. It did give us some hope when he pledged to do this and do that. However, so far do we see anything happening?

In fact, I see the situation has gone from bad to worse. I felt really sad because we are losing good and respectful people like Datuk Shahrir whom we should keep. What is the difference between a human being and an animal when we cannot have our conscience? We are really fed up with all you MPs (especially from BN) who just know how to oppose without conscience, names calling, tabling petty issues on attire of MPs.

With this kind of inferior people in the country's administration, no wonder our country is not progressing as expected when we are blessed with rich natural resources. Although Dr M wasn't perfect, I think we all really miss the era of our gutsy and outspoken ex-PM. He at least had made us Malaysian proud in some aspects. With this new premier, I don't really know what we can be proud of.

Boleh Negotiate (BN): For the prime minister to say that BN parliamentarians "do not have the liberty to vote based on conscience on the motions tabled in Parliament" only indicates that he holds obtuse Third World views on democracy and the role of parliament.

Since BN parliamentarians are only elected "to follow party rules and discipline", I can only surmise that all BN parliamentarians are not allowed to think, and once elected, must only behave like stupid cows in Parliament while the PM and BN whip behave like cowherds.

Does this mean that the principles of 'Islam Hadhari' are secondary to that of the BN agenda even if it means condoning flagrant wrongs?

Dhammika: It is a sad day for the people because MPs that they elected is not allowed to support the truth in the Dewan Rakyat. Does it really matter if motion is move by the opposition like in the case of the Jasin MP involvement in the timber import. The PM decision for not allowing the MP to speak out and support motion of conscience is deem undemocratic and deprive of human rights in the Dewan sitting.

All MPs have the vested interest to speak up and condemn issues that affect the people and country reputation when it involves corruption, ethics, transparency and conflict of interest issue. What the PM said is unwarranted and muscle flexing his authority for disallowing the Barisan MPs to support the truth. If this is what he wants then he must stop advocating the stamping out corruption in this country. Since he took over, how successful was corruption reduced? It is still blatant.

Mikelim: Is this not the height of poetic justice? Shahrir was supporting a motion to advance the cause of anti-corruption and yet he was not supported. Is it not the prime minister's declared policy to wipe out corruption yet in a simple motion the promote the cause of anti-corruption, the MPs voted against the motion.

Why does it matter whether the motion was proposed by the opposition? In this case, the opposition happens to be in agreement with the government. How stupid to use the whip argument in such a different circumstance.

Aaron Yap: Most probably you're quite right in saying that our present PM will very soon be a one-term PM. In the next general election, I supposed that there will be higher votes for the opposition parties, be it PAS, Keadilan or DAP, unlike the previous vast majority won by the ruling coalition. At those present rate, where we see cases of abuse of power by our Mps, more abuses of the human rights, a sharp rise in our cost of living and so on, the people will very soon lose trust in the present administration, and most importantly, in our PM.

HJ Angus: It is better for MPs to ask the authorities to "close both eyes" so that corrupt practices can be eliminated. If they "close one eye", the other eye and two hands will be available to accept bribes.

As for the debate to protect the integrity of MPs, perhaps the majority do not know the meaning of the word or they are mere morons. In this instance, the whip should have been withdrawn and MPs allowed to have a serious debate. Or is that impossible with the current batch of Yang Tidak Berhormats?

Luk: Barisan MPs have no choice and cannot vote according to their conscience - let's call them 'prisoners of conscience'.