Dr Chua Soi Lek did not stop at taking on Donald Lim last night in a debate over what candidates bring to the contest for the MCA deputy presidency on Saturday.
After the hour-long session in Petaling Jaya, which Chua appeared to have ‘won’ comfortably, he went on to taunt a third aspirate, incumbent secretary-general Ong Ka Chuan
(left),
for failing to put in an appearance.
Ong had reportedly declined on the basis that there was no need for a debate as this was only a party election .
“His argument is a contradiction in terms. We claim that MCA leads the Chinese community, so it has an interest and the right to know the ideals of candidates,” said Chua
(holding document),
a former elected vice-president.
“We claim that MCA is the second-largest party in Barisan Nasional and is part of the government, so our leaders’ insight is relevant to the nation.”
Next in Chua’s sights was the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), which had banned the planned ‘live’ telecast of the debate organised by Chinese daily Nanyang Siang Pau and private television stations ntv7 and TV8 .
“There is nothing sensitive about the debate. (Opposition Leader) Anwar Ibrahim and the information minister (Ahmad Shaberry Chik) have debate (‘live’) before, and (Penang Chief Minister) Lim Guan Eng and (former chief minister) Koh Tsu Koon have done so too,” said Chua.
“So I think there is an invisible hand behind the MCMC decision ... he must be someone with an official post, as you and I don’t have this kind of power.”
Chua said the government should be more transparent in its dealings or its credibility could be further eroded.
Asked to comment on the MCMC decision, former Petaling Jaya Selatan MP Lim steered clear of controversy, saying he did not want to speculate on the reason.
“I don’t know the reason for decision; I think you should ask them,” was all he would say.
Instead, he focused on the “absent candidates” in the debate, the format of which was changed to a ‘town hall meeting’ to accommodate the last-minute MCMC directive.
“Only two (of the four) candidates were present. The most important person (Ong) was absent. I don’t want to talk about this, you decide for yourself. I think we all know....”
The other absent candidate was former Pengkalan Kota state assemblyperson Lee Hack Teik.
The clear winner
It was evident that Chua, 61, with straightforward and organised arguments, made a better impression on some 180 mainly middle-aged people who attended the debate at the Nanyang Auditorium.
In contrast, Lim, 53, appeared to assume a defensive posture.
He later said he had a sore throat, which affected his “thinking” as well.
Lim was slow in his speech and frequently unable to finish his points within the 1-2 minutes allocated.
Chua was quick, giving his answers in clear and simple language.
Both were given time to put across their points and to challenge the other’s manifesto in the first round of the debate.
They were allowed to speak in Mandarin and English.
In the second round, they answered questions from invited guests - including reporters, MCA elder Michael Chen and community representative David Chuah.
The third round saw the candidates answer one another’s questions and, in the final slot, they delivered concluding remarks.
Here’s how they fared:
Round 1
Chua and Lim concentrated on their own manifesto, so there were no sparks. Lim even congratulated Chua on the wide media coverage of his manifesto, before going on to suggest with some sarcasm that Chua should run for the party presidency.
Round 2
In response to a reporter’s question on private moral versus public morals of politician, Lim seized the chance to attack Chua who was forced to relinquish his party and government posts in January, after a sex scandal was exposed.
“If I were involved in a private moral issue, I would just (quit),” said Lim.
Chua was obviously better prepared for the question. He replied leadership is more important than private morals, taking pains to point out that MCA central delegates will decide his fate in the polls.
When Chen asked how MCA’s problems had contributed to the party’s poor performance in the March general election, Lim rambled in his reply and went on to talk about “20 reasons why BN lost”.
Chua attributed the losses to “weak leadership”, especially with party leaders being perceived as unable to stand up to BN dominant partner Umno.
“MCA was like an apologist for the government. It was unable to respond to the Chinese community’s needs,” he said.
He further put the blame on the party for having ‘parachuted’ election candidates into various constituencies, much to the unhappiness of the grassroots supporters.
Round 3
Lim attacked Chua’s seeming weak spot when he asked how his rival plans to attract young people to join MCA when he has an “infamous image”.
Chua did not rise to the bait, saying age has nothing to do with recruitment and that it is more important to have leadership qualities and the ability to understand young people.
“We have a very young president (Ong Ka Ting,
right,
who is not defending the post). He was only 40 years when he became the president, and yet MCA was unable attract young voters,” he said, taking a dig at the out-going president and winning a round of applause.
When Chua challenged Lim over his suggestion that MCA and Gerakan should merge, the latter only stressed the need to have one Chinese-based party in BN.
Chua interjected that Gerakan is not a Chinese-based party: “I must interrupt, because it’s not fair to Gerakan.”
Round 4
Chua ended his remarks with a reminder to delegates to “vote for No 4 Dr Chua Soi Lek”.
Lim’s spiel ended with his usual smile, but he noted that the debate was “unfair” to him and Chua, as they have had to face their challengers.
‘We were (also) against one another ... we are good friends, it’s not good to criticise one another,” he said.
Ong, Lim complained, has “gained” because he has not been put on the spot over his views and contributions to the party.
