Prologue: Putting my camera in full use to create a better, more insightful post, now with even more exclusive content! Only from HiddenCloset.
As a continuation from my previous which I touch about the implementation of Student Parliament and a little about USM campus politic, last Wednesday (20/1/2010) I went to the Randau Pemimpin (Leader’s Debate/Exchange/Discussion. *Translator/Linguist note: I only knew about the word Randau when my lecturer Dr. Goh point out regarding the exact term in BM for an high-level, intellectual discussion. Do you know where the word come from? It’s actually a Bahasa Sarawak word. Now I feel so proud of my beloved homestate for contributing in national language, after kudapan or evening tea/light meal. And Fuzah, my coursemate who was involved in this event as well incorporated it into the event itself! Smart! and it’s time to push it for greater mainstream use!), a pioneering programme organized by the Debate and Public Speaking Club USM (Kelab Debat dan Perucapan Umum USM) in emulating the exchange of idea and debates in the olden days’ speaker corner. The theme for the event: Parlimen Mahasiswa Satu Perjuangan (Student Parliament: A Struggle). And I am there to seek some answer regarding the questions and doubts that I posted in my previous post.
First and foremost, let’s talk about the organization of the event itself first. As I can observe from here, it is definitely a last minute event, probably approved (speedily) by the Student Affair (and that’s why the promo banner there carried the statement Anjuran Bersama Anjuran BHEPP) and of course being last minutes means no time at all to do any publicity. In fact, I only know about the event itself when I read it over Fuzah’s Facebook status. In the end, it is Facebook that performed any form of actual communication purpose. The lack of publicity being last minute in turn affected the overall turn out as well as one of the panelist invited who failed to make it due to inevitable circumstances.
Anyway enough with the organization, let’s move on to the content. First and foremost: the panelists: Shafiq (Outgoing YDPMPP), Musliha (PMIUSM representing it’s YDP, Hanif) and Ramanathan (former NYDPMPP 08/09. Why is he still lingering around anyway?) I come with a high hope that I will find my answers regarding my doubt from the all the interactions between the panelists as well as moderator. Unfortunately things does not turn out the way I want it to be and all of the discussion were reduced to merely talks about hopes and dreams and expectations and vision and mission (blergh, enough with the talk.), with occasional jabs towards other universities (Shafiq: “The speaker’s corner in UKM needs application form” and “UiTM’s former TNC HEPP vehemently opposed with the idea of student parliament. We, USM will the first yada yada yada.), thinly veiled sarcasm/criticism towards “certain sectors of students” by Ramanathan (“Early this year, certain sectors of student had sent memorandum to HEPP, opposing to E-voting and UUCA (AUKU). There’s little basis for this memorandum because USM has no intention to use E-Voting anyway and the people who have the power to amend UUCA is the lawmaker, not the university!) and Musliha’s intention to run in upcoming election (“Mudahan-mudahan saya boleh berbincang lagi dalam MPP” which Rama quipped back: I will vote for you.) Granted, there are a few good discussion in there such as if the decision/consensus made in Parliament does not reflect the universities’ interest/against universities’ stand as well as how far the freedom of discussion in the parliament and whether it will be implicated by UUCA. But great discussion did not last too long before it reduced itself into mere talks and vision and mission *repeat whatever thing i wrote previously*. And soon, I got bored and slightly frustrated that the answer does not surface from the discussion itself. There’s only one last place to find out and that’s during Q&A session.
In total there are 4 people who posted questions during the Q&A session and I am the 3rd one (and I was kinda rushed to the microphone that it looks like I am fighting for it as quipped by the moderator). Out of these four aside from mine, only the first question reflects certain sharpness (one of them is: Does the implementation of Student Parliament reflects the failure of of all the previous Student Rep council in voicing out students right in the university, that this has to be formed in order to a voice out our concern in a more vocal way. Sharp indeed.) and the rest of the two (one from Wafi, previous MPP councilmembers and one hobo-looking punk typical of Pro-Aspirasi bootlickers.) are just mere provocation disguised as a question towards Musliha. Hmph. Anyway, with the microphone in front of me, I asked my question albeit very nervous and shaky (I am shaking like a bloody leaf!). Direct, almost exact quote from me:
“Salam sejahtera kepada saudari moderator and ahli panel yanf saya hormati sekalian. Nama saya Liew Zhe Rong, jurusan Terjemahan dan Interpretasi, Pusat Pengajian Ilmu Kemanusiaan. Saya ada dua soalan and kedua-dua soalan ini akan saya tujukan kepada Saudara Shafiq and izinkan saya untuk meneruskan soalan ini dalam Bahasa Inggeris. *moderator nodded* Now, we have heard from all the discussion by all three panelist regarding the vision and mission and hopes and dreams of student parliament. Unfortunately however, I failed to see from these discussion certain core details, missing information that should have talked about instead: the actual details, the actual information, the actual mechanisme, real details about the implementation of the student parliament itself. As far as the discussion goes, the only details about it is that it’s approval is pending…the approval from Attorney General’s office…Peguam Negara is still pending and this leads to my first question. Do you have the exact timeline, timeframe, Jangkamasa in which the student parliament will be implemented. Is it going to happen this semester or coming academic year. And for my second question: you talked about the lack of publicity regarding the effort done by the MPP so in that case, would you divulge or reveal certain details regarding the student parliament now or if it is too hard for you, to be made available for the actual proposal itself for the public to access on. Thank you.”
The answer that I got:
After sieving through all the talks about vision and mission and hopes and dreams, the actual raw answer that is somewhat relevant to my questions:
1) Early or middle of the year. There are confusion in his part of question. How early is early of the year? By the looks of it, it’s not going to be implemented this semester. Pfft.
2) Details will not be revealed just yet because it is just a rough proposal and details will need to be flesh out and refined after workshops and consultation yada yada. So no public access to the proposal then. And his answer even come with a disclaimer that says that “it was his teams effort last time but now its the students turn to make it happen.” Pfft.
Do I feel satisfied? NO. While he is answering I was soo tempted to just stand up and request him to stop but me being courteous and since he still came here despite having fever, let him speak until the end then. It’s the last answer for the night anyway.
And hence, my initial cynicism and doubt pretty much remain as usual. Can’t wait for any actual event of workshop-ping (or dibengkelkan in Shafiq’s own word) where I can chipped in with a piece of my mind hopefully before I graduate.
Epilogue: Phew long post is long~~~~ And I am quite satisfied with it! Uploading video to Youtube was hellishly long though.
No comments:
Post a Comment