///It is also a sad reflection of the bankruptcy of ethical values that those whom the people of this country, exercising their rights to choose, cast aside in a democratic process, have now been brought back into the cabinet. Who are these recycled seconds supposed to represent? /// – Tunku Abdul Aziz

Whilst we lament the appointment of senate/cabinet positions is based on improper criteria of patronage reward for regime loyalty – instead of the proper criteria of personal, professional merits, track record and contribution to society, nation and peoples and the “Constitutional Criteria”- we’re on “soft” ground if we take the Tunku’s view that without going to the baptism of election and electoral victory, as part of the democratic process, appointment to senate & cabinet is by that alone, disregarded, either improper or an abuse of democratic process.

This is not so. Senators by definition are not elected by rakyat. If they were, they would be in Dewan Rakyat (Lower House of Representatives) – not Dewan Negara (Senate). Senators are within our Federal system recommended by the states, with two senators for every state in the Federation, with rest apppointed by the King on PM’s advice supposedly having regard to Constitutional Criteria. In fact Senate was meant to act as a check and balance on the Dewan Rakyat when bills come out for reading. The Denocratic process is not abused because senators have not been elected by rakyat. It is abused when patronage criteria instead of proper Constitutional Criteria underpins senate appointment. For then instead of being a check against Dewan Rakyat it becomes a “rubber stamp” (based on you ‘sokong me for Senate I sokong you back” quid pro quo exchange system) for both the Dewan Rakyat as well as Executive (Cabinet)!

Same thing with Cabinet appointments. I disagree that per pre-eligibility requirements, appointment to cabinet should be based solely from the ranks of wakil rakyat. Wakil rakyat should be in parliament. If they are under our patronage system of politics usually given to party’s stalwarts with grass roots votes, this it is also part of the patronage reward system within party politics. Its nothing edifying. The one who gets most votes may be a populist demagogue who got his majority votes from making impassioned appeals on race and religion – not necessarily the best criteria to be appointed to cabinet and the government to run a plural and multiracial country!

So theres nothing wrong in the process of Najib’s appointing technocrats like Amirsham or Idris Jala through this Senate-Cabinet route and if we do so we would have to object to tun Pak Lah appointing Zaid Ibrahim to senator and then Minsite of Law via same route! We may argue about the criteria of appointment and qualifications of candidate via this short cut – senator to cabinet route – but not the propriety of the short cut process itself or to label it as inconsistent to democratic process just because the candidate has not won elections and got the peoples mandate so to speak.

Under the so called democratic US system for example the national security adviser position is a cabinet position which President Nixon gave to Harvard Professor Dr Henry Kissinger. Nixon was impressed by his doctoral thesis and book “Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy” thinking in the Age of Cold War with Soviet Union he was best qualified to conduct and manage foreigbn policy. He did help rapproachement between US and China leading to Nixon’s meeting with Mao.

///May I know what is VT’s personal foundation set up for?/// – LimKamPut#30 in reference to the brewing political controversy of the objections from many quarters to the licensing of sports betting, including stand taken by LGE to ban it in Penang and how our tycoon tries to diffuse it by proposing to donate RM525 profit from Ascot Sports to his listed Berjaya Corp to his Charity Foundation.

I am no expert on this – others who know more could elucidate – but generally this is a “smart” way of how to diffuse controversy by showing to public one’s “altruistic” intentions to donate to one’s favourite charity/causes and yet not lose out personally/financially in any way and this is the way how I think it works:-

The Charity Cause is of course real, whether its for handicapped, needy, but if I were the tycoon I’d choose Palestinian/Gaza – so that Muslim objections to betting may be quelled.

When profits are channelled to my Charity Foundation I would appoint myself, shareholders etc as president vice prsident & offcers of the Charity Foundation. I’d incorporate the Charity Foundation in Offshore Labuan because of tax savings – either 4% or RM20,000 max whichever higher! Then whenever I make payouts from this foundation I get further tax exemption/deductions because these payments are for charity. If payments were made to myself (had money been kept at company level instead of being shifted up to Charity Foundation level) I would pay corporate taxes of 28% not to mention dividend tax and personal income tax. The tax savings in a Charity Foundation are then used to fund charity. For easy example we just quantify tax savings at 30%. I don’t lose out because I am giving away tax savings of 30% which I otherwise will not get anyway had the profits been retained at company level and not shifted to Charity Foundation level! So I am not giving away anything that I could have retained had I not done charity, so to speak….The balance of 70% of profits retained in Charity Foundation – not given away – could be used by me without an iota drop in my lifestyle. The Charity Foundation could pay & my business cohorts huge sums by way of pay and other remuneration for Life.

A good illustration is the National Kidney Foundation Singapore scandal in 2005 (“NKF”) centred on sheninegans of its Chief Executive Officer T.T Durai relating to installation of a golden tap in Durai’s private office suite, his salary of $$600,000, use of company cars and first-class air travel. Former NKF patron Tan Choo Leng, wife of Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong, sparked further outrage when she remarked that T.T Durai’s pay of “S$600,000 a year is peanuts” – [courtesy of Wikipedia]. Because of public outrage sparked by Durai’s foolish fight with Straits Times which was in the position of doing investigative reporting, everything was spilled out in open, Durai was arrested on 17 April 2006 and charged under the Prevention of Corruptions Act by the Police.

The advantage of incorporating a Charity Foundation especially one in Labuan under offshore Companies Act is that there is less stringent corporate governance regime as compared to (say) Companies Act regulating normal sendirian berhads, so what can do more things wothout accountability. The fact that it is “charity” means tax savings. You give tax savings to charity. You can’t benefit from them anyway if they reamined as corporate profits and not shifted to Charity Foundation. By doing “charity” you get goodwill and could make profits more in other areas. We all learn these from the Americans –eg Bill Gates & his wife’s Foundation!

Acid test of philanthropy is donating RM525 million profits from Ascot Sports sale DIRECT to other existing charities and not filter by Foundation tier by channelling them to one’s own Better Malaysia Foundation in order to control how they are to be distributed!

Gaming is gambling. Dictionaries define gaming as “the act of playing for stakes in the hope of winning (including the payment of a price for a chance to win a prize)”. Thats why our Act proscribing gambling is called the Common Gaming Act and not common Gambling Act.

The word “game” may be an euphemistic reference to hunting of wild animals in Africa as a sport but even in that context word “gaming” is not used.