'Assailant' dares Wee to sacrifice rooster
A senior citizen, who believes he is being accused of having tried to assault Deputy Education Minister Wee Ka Siong, has denied any violent conduct on his part during last Sunday's Chinese education rally.
Lee Siak Taa, 65, today lodged a police report on the matter, to explain that he was merely giving Wee the thumbs-down gesture and did not assault the minister.
The senior citizen is also challenging Wee to take part in a cockerel sacrificing ritual in order to prove that he is not lying.
Contacted today, Dong Zong deputy president Chow Siew Hong said Lee had met his organisation’s officials this morning to explain himself.
Dong Zong officials later accompanied Lee to a nearby police station to lodge a report. His statement was later recorded.
Met later, Lee admits to scolding and heckling Wee over his failures and sticking his arm out to give the minister a thumbs-down.
‘Did not raise fist’
However, Lee was adamant that he never raised a clenched fist, as claimed by Wee.
After lodging the police report, Lee challenged Wee to slay a cockerel at the Sin Sze Si Ya Temple (near Central Market) together with him for Wee to swear and prove his innocence.
The sacrificing of a white cockerel by two parties in front of the deity’s altar is a tradition used to prove innocence. Devotees believe that harm will befall those who lie during this ritual.
Lee is a retiree who was brought to the rally by a friend, but ended up being photographed within close proximity to Wee when the deputy minister was wading through a hostile crowd.
Wee was photographed touching his left cheek after the close brush with Lee. The minister later claimed he was assaulted by someone who raised a clenched fist.
Despite police claiming that Wee was not assaulted, the deputy minister insists that he did feel a touch and could clearly identify the would-be assailant.
Lee not a party member
However, Wee said he would not lodge a police report because heforgives the attacker and would prefer to let the matter rest.
Lee said that he was very emotional when Wee crossed his path because he was frustrated that the latter kept making “upside down” remarks through the media.
“There are not enough Chinese schools (in the country), and he should go to apply (for more schools). (However) he didn't do so, but just kept talking through the media.
“I became more and more angry after reading this,” he said.
He also clarified that he didn't utter any vulgar remarks against Wee and didn't wear political colours to the rally.
“I do not join any political party and I'm not interested in politics,” he added.
Met later, Lee admits to scolding and heckling Wee over his failures and sticking his arm out to give the minister a thumbs-down.
‘Did not raise fist’
However, Lee was adamant that he never raised a clenched fist, as claimed by Wee.
After lodging the police report, Lee challenged Wee to slay a cockerel at the Sin Sze Si Ya Temple (near Central Market) together with him for Wee to swear and prove his innocence.
The sacrificing of a white cockerel by two parties in front of the deity’s altar is a tradition used to prove innocence. Devotees believe that harm will befall those who lie during this ritual.
Lee is a retiree who was brought to the rally by a friend, but ended up being photographed within close proximity to Wee when the deputy minister was wading through a hostile crowd.
Wee was photographed touching his left cheek after the close brush with Lee. The minister later claimed he was assaulted by someone who raised a clenched fist.
Despite police claiming that Wee was not assaulted, the deputy minister insists that he did feel a touch and could clearly identify the would-be assailant.
Lee not a party member
However, Wee said he would not lodge a police report because heforgives the attacker and would prefer to let the matter rest.
Lee said that he was very emotional when Wee crossed his path because he was frustrated that the latter kept making “upside down” remarks through the media.
“There are not enough Chinese schools (in the country), and he should go to apply (for more schools). (However) he didn't do so, but just kept talking through the media.
“I became more and more angry after reading this,” he said.
He also clarified that he didn't utter any vulgar remarks against Wee and didn't wear political colours to the rally.
“I do not join any political party and I'm not interested in politics,” he added.
**********************************************************
The Real Beef
(New Straits Times) - Chinese education in Malaysia has not received even the basic treatment guaranteed it under the national education system.
CHINESE SCHOOLS: The Chinese community is asking for what is due to their schools as set out in the Razak Report in 1956
LAST Sunday, several thousand people converged on New Era College in Kajang for the "325 assembly" organised by Dong Zong and Jiao Zong to protest the shortage of teachers in Chinese schools.
Some quarters have questioned what the Chinese community has to be angry about and why they are "asking for so much" when Chinese education has already been given plenty of leeway in the country.
However, this is a view that fails to understand the historical context of Chinese education in Malaysia -- the Chinese community is not asking for more, but merely what is due to their schools as set out in the Razak Report in 1956.
The Razak Report saw the ultimate objective of educational policy as bringing together all races under a national education system in which the national language is the main medium of instruction, while preserving and sustaining the growth of the language and culture of other communities living in the country.
This was to be achieved through national primary and secondary schools which used Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction, as well as national-type primary schools which could use vernacular languages for teaching but had to teach Bahasa Malaysia as a compulsory subject. All these government schools would use a common syllabus.
As part of the national education system, therefore, the vernacular primary schools were also to receive similar government assistance given to national schools, including funds and land for development, as well as trained teachers.
However, Chinese education in Malaysia has not received even the basic treatment guaranteed it under the national education system.
A description of national-type Chinese primary schools in the 1970s sounds no different from what it is today: "(the schools) were plagued with a number of problems... insufficient funding, insufficient qualified staffing, insufficient places for students, and a high rate of failure among students who had gone on from primary to secondary schooling," Lee Ting Hui wrote in Chinese Schools in Peninsular Malaysia: The Struggle for Survival.
Rural Chinese schools are under-enrolled and lack proper infrastructure, while urban schools are over-crowded and unable to cater for the vast communities in cities and suburbs.
The Chinese community, consisting of parents and local businesses, often have to raise private funds for the development of their children's schools.
Then there is the lack of trained teachers for Chinese schools and the use of temporary teachers to fill the gap (more than 1,000 employed each year).
These problems persist despite the clear policies set out in the Razak Report, because of poor implementation.
Resources have not been properly allocated and teacher training programmes are not planned well to achieve the required numbers.
The government has tried to address Chinese school problems but we have now reached a critical point where stop-gap measures are not effective anymore.
The Education Ministry's eight-point plan shows that the measures to be taken need not be drastic, simply logical.
What is most crucial is that the long-term measures be implemented urgently and sustainably.
I am optimistic that the plan reflects the government's efforts to look at the teacher shortage problem holistically and systematically.
The ministry's special committee is already holding a dialogue with the stakeholders -- this needs to continue, with the educationist groups explaining the real problems on the ground and proposing solutions.
Politics and emotion have to be taken out of this conversation. Providing fair treatment for Chinese schools will not reduce the integrity of the national language or hinder integration among races.
Chinese (and Tamil) schools are simply asking not to be left behind in terms of resource allocation and development under the national education system.
If the government shows sincerity in going forward with the eight-point plan, there could potentially be a 10 per cent swing in Chinese votes back to the Barisan Nasional. Otherwise, we could be looking in the eye of a perfect storm.
LAST Sunday, several thousand people converged on New Era College in Kajang for the "325 assembly" organised by Dong Zong and Jiao Zong to protest the shortage of teachers in Chinese schools.
Some quarters have questioned what the Chinese community has to be angry about and why they are "asking for so much" when Chinese education has already been given plenty of leeway in the country.
However, this is a view that fails to understand the historical context of Chinese education in Malaysia -- the Chinese community is not asking for more, but merely what is due to their schools as set out in the Razak Report in 1956.
The Razak Report saw the ultimate objective of educational policy as bringing together all races under a national education system in which the national language is the main medium of instruction, while preserving and sustaining the growth of the language and culture of other communities living in the country.
This was to be achieved through national primary and secondary schools which used Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of instruction, as well as national-type primary schools which could use vernacular languages for teaching but had to teach Bahasa Malaysia as a compulsory subject. All these government schools would use a common syllabus.
As part of the national education system, therefore, the vernacular primary schools were also to receive similar government assistance given to national schools, including funds and land for development, as well as trained teachers.
However, Chinese education in Malaysia has not received even the basic treatment guaranteed it under the national education system.
A description of national-type Chinese primary schools in the 1970s sounds no different from what it is today: "(the schools) were plagued with a number of problems... insufficient funding, insufficient qualified staffing, insufficient places for students, and a high rate of failure among students who had gone on from primary to secondary schooling," Lee Ting Hui wrote in Chinese Schools in Peninsular Malaysia: The Struggle for Survival.
Rural Chinese schools are under-enrolled and lack proper infrastructure, while urban schools are over-crowded and unable to cater for the vast communities in cities and suburbs.
The Chinese community, consisting of parents and local businesses, often have to raise private funds for the development of their children's schools.
Then there is the lack of trained teachers for Chinese schools and the use of temporary teachers to fill the gap (more than 1,000 employed each year).
These problems persist despite the clear policies set out in the Razak Report, because of poor implementation.
Resources have not been properly allocated and teacher training programmes are not planned well to achieve the required numbers.
The government has tried to address Chinese school problems but we have now reached a critical point where stop-gap measures are not effective anymore.
The Education Ministry's eight-point plan shows that the measures to be taken need not be drastic, simply logical.
What is most crucial is that the long-term measures be implemented urgently and sustainably.
I am optimistic that the plan reflects the government's efforts to look at the teacher shortage problem holistically and systematically.
The ministry's special committee is already holding a dialogue with the stakeholders -- this needs to continue, with the educationist groups explaining the real problems on the ground and proposing solutions.
Politics and emotion have to be taken out of this conversation. Providing fair treatment for Chinese schools will not reduce the integrity of the national language or hinder integration among races.
Chinese (and Tamil) schools are simply asking not to be left behind in terms of resource allocation and development under the national education system.
If the government shows sincerity in going forward with the eight-point plan, there could potentially be a 10 per cent swing in Chinese votes back to the Barisan Nasional. Otherwise, we could be looking in the eye of a perfect storm.
No comments:
Post a Comment