Gangly and studious, he is still the picture of the nerdy professor and never the politician that breathes fire. Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon (KTK)  left academia in 1982 but his mannerism remains impervious to the wear and tear of the political slanging game even with the near-elimination of Gerakan in the 2008 general election. Critics say the Princeton University-trained physicist would have been an ideal party president in times of peace but is “too soft” in times of hardship. In the last part of The Edge Financial Daily’s interview with the former Chung Ling High School top student, Koh talks to Sharon Tan and Chan Kok Leong about the painful readjustment Gerakan is going through and life for the party beyond its traditional stronghold of Penang.

TEFD: Is Gerakan going through an adjustment period after the last general election?
KTK: The tsunami hit us hardest because all our seats were in the urban and semi-urban areas, the tsunami belt, from Kedah, Penang, Kinta Valley, Klang Valley down to Seremban. We were reduced from a party of 10 MPs and 30 state assemblymen to two MPs and four state assemblymen. Those of us who could not accept the reality left or went into inactivity.

Most of our leaders have devoted a lot of their time to contribute or work in government positions. Some who were very used to working with the government jumped over and they were welcomed (by the other side) because they were well-trained.

In the past, we had over 100 municipal and district councillors and hundreds of JKKK members, (but) suddenly most of them had nothing to do. Some of them even felt angry with the leadership, at BN and the government.

We are not as visible as before. In the past, when our YBs went to dinner functions, they would be seated at the head table and be requested to give a speech. Now, they are seated at No 4 table, just enough to interact, and listen to opposition YBs attack us, not being able to answer.

It is now more stable compared to a year ago and we are getting our feet back on the ground.

TEFD: How is Gerakan going to come back in politics?
KTK: If we are in politics for position, then without position there is no more role in politics. But we are in politics for idealism, for wanting to serve and to be an opposition in Penang in (itself) is a big adjustment after playing the leading role in government for 39 years. We have to tell the members that there is still meaningful life in politics.

TEFD: How can Gerakan play a role as opposition in Penang and Selangor when it doesn’t even have representatives in the state assemblies?
KTK: We have zero. We can do it through press statements or working with NGOs. We cannot sit there and do nothing or theorising. That’s why in Gerakan FT, some of them have gone into environmental work while others have taken up on issues.

For us to be noisy, some of us feel very unnatural. It’s okay for me to debate with Lim Guan Eng but to get me to go on the streets and demonstrate or be noisy over every issue, I say “Hey! That’s not quite right”.

Some of our younger people are taking it up, in Penang especially. In Penang, we are nurturing a group of young people to engage in issues and people again. But it will definitely take a while.

TEFD: Is there any re-strategising for Gerakan as in a direct focus on a particular state or even at federal level?
KTK: I decided to take up a position in the government so that we can also start to play a role, a more effective role. Penang remains our most important base followed by Perak and Selangor. We are rebuilding in these three states. In the last one year, we’ve increased the number of assemblymen from four to seven — two independents from Sabah and one from Pahang. These three are not “katak” (frogs) in the normal definition.

The two from Sabah left SAPP, because of principles after the party quit BN, and remained as independents for quite a long period. The one in Pahang had left MCA even before the election and contested as an independent.

But we are proud that we are now getting thousands of members in Sabah and a lot in Pahang. In a way, we are expanding faster in other states than our three home bases. That’s why we recently amended our constitution to increase the maximum number of branches under a division from 18 to 24.

Gerakan started very frugally as an opposition party with only one branch per state constituency. Even during Tun Lim Chong Eu’s time after he had started being CM and was still president until he handed over to Tun Lim Keng Yaik (in 1980), Gerakan’s headquarters was a mobile headquarters.

It was in the boot of (the car of) our secretary-general. He used to carry all the membership files, typewriter and everything in the back seat. Wherever his car went, that was the Gerakan headquarters. We had the most mobile headquarters of any political party! And we still take pride in that. We need to go back to the basics. Our ideology and political view is most important and that will guide us through.

TEFD: Tun Dr Lim said that Gerakan can never regain Penang…
KTK: We’ve discussed this within the party and with him as our adviser. I guess, as the elder statesman that he is, he wanted to give us some shock treatment and talk about the worst possible scenario.

In a way, I would like to take it positively as it is better to talk and think about this worst scenario and work from there, than to delude ourselves that we are going to win back as many seats as in the 2004 general election, which was a 100% win.

I’ve told the Penang leaders to take this positively. If the Penang leaders are unhappy or disagree, prove him wrong. I’ve spoken to him and I’m sure he will be glad to be proven wrong.

TEFD: If we go into election tomorrow, can Gerakan retake Penang?
KTK: Realistically, it’s going to be quite an uphill battle although I wouldn’t go as far as Tun Dr Lim Keng Yaik to say it is impossible. But let this be a “mission impossible” and make it very exciting. The movie Mission Impossible wouldn’t be so exciting if it was not so impossible!

TEFD: How does Parti Cinta Malaysia fit into all this?
KTK: I think it’s still too early to tell. No doubt that some of their members came from Gerakan but there were others too from other parties, including the opposition. Whether it will turn out to be a party of discontented people or a party with some principles, it’s something which we’ve yet to find out.

TEFD: Let’s talk about the direct membership in Barisan Nasional (BN). How will it affect Gerakan?
KTK: It was already implemented once before in the 1960s in the form of Alliance Direct Membership Organisation or ADMO, headed by (Tan Sri) Michael Chen. He was the secretary-general of the Alliance at that time. It is only one of the proposals to see how to open up BN to be more inclusive.

On one hand, it is good because the loyalists are still fighting for the party, but on the other hand, you find it difficult to get new blood to come in. It is good because they don’t leave to form another party against BN. On the other hand, there is always this moral question, you can encourage a lot of intra-party fights because they say “never mind, I can become (a) direct member”. So these are issues that will be discussed by the special committee headed by Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein.

It is a good idea but not so simple. Moreover, we are also talking about affiliate organisations. For example, in KL, we have the Blue and Green Association which is environmentally oriented. So they are working closely with the party.

TEFD: What do you think of your successor Lim Guan Eng’s performance so far?
KTK: I will leave it to the Penang Gerakan to comment as I’ve tried not to make any comments for the last two years. But unfortunately, he started attacking me two weeks after the handing-over ceremony. Other than defending my record, now I refrain from criticising him.

Our youth and other leaders in Penang have started doing their duties as an opposition and have started to criticise the government. My latest point was during Chinese New Year, I advised him to start governing and stop politicking.

TEFD: What do you make of Guan Eng’s suggestion to restore local council elections in Penang?
KTK: From the point of view of democracy, many people, especially the urbanites, would like to have a direct say in the local government.

The moment we’ve all three layers of election or even four, if you include JKKK (Village Committees), which must be held at different times — we may end up having elections every year. Local council elections should be for two years at the most and not four or five years (like federal and state elections).

Whether that would be disruptive or not, I do not know but eventually, looking ahead 20-30 years from now, when our system becomes more mature, we should head towards that direction.

Before 1969 in Penang, we used to have the Alliance Party in the state government but we had the Socialist Front in the city council and there was a lot of politicking between these two. If there are very different parties in all three layers, there will be even more politicking with each one blocking the other. There may be room for NGO representatives but in an electoral system, the NGOs may not be able to get in unless they join political parties. This is one of those things we have to give further thought to.

TEFD: How is BN going to top some of the populist moves such as CAT (competency, accountability, transparency policy), giving money, etc, by the PR government in Penang?
KTK: We can match them, except for giving money directly to the people which we did not do (other than in welfare cases).

I feel that there is a contradiction. On one hand, we want people to save water but they can have RM100 of free water. Household water bills are only around RM6 per month. But that made people feel good and they can say that it is something BN never did. We did not do it because we felt it was not correct.

As for CAT governance, we’ve actually been practising it. The Penang Water Corporation is the best-run water corporation with the cheapest water tariff and yet it made the most profit. When we were listed nine years ago, the company immediately qualified for the Main Board of Bursa Malaysia.  

The state government kept 55% and 10% by Penang Corporation, 10% by EPF, 25% for the general public and water consumers. That was sharing. And I resisted many attempts by big companies wanting to privatise the company. What we did not do was to make it a fanfare. We announced, stated the principle and maybe it was a bit boring.  

In terms of the state’s finances, when I first became CM, the state reserve was only RM50 million. By the time I left, it was RM400 million. Other than a few years in my 18 years as CM, Penang (state budget) turned deficit into surplus. Now that he (Lim Guan Eng) has two years of (turning) deficit into surplus, he’s talking like he’s the only (one) doing it.

TEFD: Since taking office, Lim Guan Eng has faced protests from Umno and the Malay Chamber for being unfair to Penang Malays. He responded strongly. During your time, you also faced similar protests, but your reaction seemed to be subdued.
KTK: During my time, open protests only emerged in early 2006, almost 16 years after I took office. I attributed this to what I call “the politics of deprivation”, whereby some Malay leaders would posture by highlighting “unfairness to Malays” as an issue, while DAP leaders have often told the Chinese and Indians that they were second-class citizens even in Penang.

During my time, I faced even worse protests, especially during the Rent Control Premises issue, led by Ong Boon Keong’s “SOS” group. The protests against me were even worse than what the Umno Youth had done. The “SOS” used their banners to hit my car and then prevented it from moving by wrapping the car up with their banners.

The police arrested them but then I called the police to release them and invited them (to be part of) the committee to allocate housing for some of the rent control tenants. That was how I treated demonstrators.   

I was taught by Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu to finish a task and then move on to the next one as there were so many things to do. This is better than laying an egg and screaming all over the village, as a Malay proverb goes. Maybe, that was our weakness as we should have done more publicity.

TEFD: Nonetheless, such Umno protests have led to the general perception that you and Gerakan have been subservient to Umno.
KTK: Rivalry and posturing amongst component party leaders within a complex coalition such as Barisan Nasional did not happen just during my time, but even during the time of Tun Lim Chong Eu who was generally perceived as a strong character.

Thirty years ago, Gerakan led by Chong Eu faced direct challenges from the MCA led by the late (Datuk) Lim Kean Siew, who fielded independent candidates in the 1978 general election, and then demanded and obtained equal allocation of state seats in the 1982 general election, with Kean Siew posturing to be the next chief minister. Luckily, Gerakan won more seats than MCA.

In the mid-80s, I remember a senior Penang Umno leader, at an Umno dinner in Penang, openly asserted that Umno wanted to take over the CM’s post, right in the presence of Chong Eu. His response was to give a staid look and refused giving comment to the media.  

In 2009, PKR MP of Balik Pulau, Yusmadi Yusoff, openly called for the rotation of the chief minister’s post between PKR and DAP. Guan Eng also chose to ignore this request, but allowed others to attack Yusmadi.

Objectively, what happened to me was very similar. When an Umno division chief called for the rotation of the CM post, I also refused to comment.  

There was also a call to replace me as the Penang Water Corporation (PBA) chairman on allegations that I was prejudiced as the PBA’s top management was overwhelmingly dominated by Chinese. I responded with a rational explanation of historical legacy and meritocracy.

I was accused by DAP of being soft, while some Umno leaders were upset with my explanation. This happened in 2006 and, coupled with the live telecast of the Umno general assembly debate and the keris-wielding episode, it further heightened emotions.

TEFD: Your predecessor, Tun Dr Lim Keng Yaik, observed that you were the best he had in terms of intellect and integrity, but in terms of politics, you are still struggling.
KTK: I feel humbled. He has perhaps been too generous in his estimation of me in terms of my intellect and integrity. As I have said before, I do not like politicking, both inter-party and especially intra-party.  As I consider Gerakan leaders as comrades in our “Satu Hati” spirit, I find it difficult, in fact, morally wrong, for me to play one against another or run down one in front of another. In that sense, I am more task-oriented rather than politically minded.

Perhaps, I need to learn how to better manage divergent views and feelings of our own party members. But, I will not do anything that is against my principles and personal character.

TEFD: How do you feel to be criticised openly by your predecessor and sifu?
KTK: My Confucian upbringing at home and in school taught me to respect my elders and to take criticism in your stride. What more when we have a leader, and an elder, who has led the party for 28 years, who built up the party from its regional base confined to Penang to a nation-wide party with the third largest number of elected representatives (both MPs and state assemblymen in total) within the Barisan Nasional until 2008. Tun Keng Yaik deserves our respect.

I also observe that capable and committed leaders who have built and achieved a lot during a long service always feel concerned and have opinions about their successors after their retirement.

For example, Tun Dr Mahathir (Mohamad) did it very openly and quite frequently. Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu always confined to private circles his opinions on his successors — Keng Yaik as the president after 1980 and me as the Penang CM after 1990.  

Lee Kuan Yew chose to remain in the cabinet for 20 years after retirement and made occasional critical remarks openly.

Therefore, I take Tun Lim Keng Yaik’s occasional open remarks in good faith and constructively, as I still consider him my sifu, just as Tun Lim Chong Eu remains my si-kong (grandmaster). Now and then, I still call on them to seek their advice as valuable input for my own decisions.

TEFD: Some have alleged that you are too busy being a minister than a party president…  
KTK: There are two portfolios entrusted to me by the PM — national unity and performance management or the government transformation programme (GTP). Admittedly, these are two very challenging and heavy responsibilities.

National unity has to deal with many issues although I handle them with a very low profile as too much publicity may not be too effective. I am also kept very busy with over 4,500 Rukun Tetangga (sectors) throughout the country and we are in the process of strengthening them. I also have to spend a lot of time ensuring the GTP works by organising cabinet workshops, discussing with the consultants and engaging the ministries. I actually set myself one year to get this done.  

Even then, I believe I’ve performed my duties as a president and chair at least one central committee meeting and one central working committee meeting per month, and have travelled around the country quite a lot. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have been able to convince the two Sabah independents to join us.  

But now with the GTP on track and with (Datuk Seri) Idris Jala working as the day-to-day CEO pushing the programme, I will be shifting more time to the party and political work.  

My consideration (earlier) was that all this transformation process, which is very much in line with Gerakan’s ideology and commitment, should take priority.

The party is very important but the focus of work should also be on this transformation of the government. But I think that I’m the most travelled central Gerakan leader in terms of meeting with party leaders from different states and attending party functions.

TEFD: You do have a lot to tell.
KTK: Thank you. With your encouragement, from now on, I’ll tell more and will also try to do more.

This article appeared in The Edge Financial Daily, March 31, 2010.