It is hard for me on how to put these in words.
Frustration. Upset. Question. Disappointment. Crushed. Heartbroken.
Those are the things which plays in my mind right now. Even I’ve tried to find the answers along with the reasons, yet the doubt do not want to fade away.
It’s all began during the selection for the Borneo Cup 2010 last Monday.
After I just finished my class around noon, I bumped into B.J who said to me that there will be a try-out for the tournament at that night; he received a text earlier on. Along came Paul telling the same thing; he too received the message.
It was quite weird to have everyone being notified except for me but I just put it aside since I knew that everyone is trying to keep even a single cent in their credit.
Earlier on, I thought that I would stay in the campus by Tuesday the very next day but due to the try-out, I have to go through the heavy rain in the midst of January to get my stuff at home and come back again to campus before 8.00 p.m.
Here I was; after being soaked in the rain, rushed to packed my none-complete stuff, go through the horrible traffic jam; in the room B430 getting all pump up, thanks to the adrenaline to give all my best.
Since it is an Asian Debate style; hence it is 3 vs. 3 people in that round. The debate start on the motion;
THIS HOUSE BELIEVES THAT GREEN TECHNOLOGY SHOULD BE TAX DEDUCTABLE
On the Government side;
- 1st Speaker (Prime Minister) : Yours truly, Rahman Sallehin
- 2nd Speaker (Deputy Prime Minister) : Yan
- 3rd Speaker (Government Whip) : Hando
Meanwhile on the other side of the bench, the Opposition were represented by;
The adjudicators for the try-out were;
- 1. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Simon “Faizal Hakeem” Botley
- 2. Syed Nizamuddin Sayed Kassim a.k.a Swinburne
- 3. Sharifah Shazzea bt. Wan Akil Tuanku Abdullah (Yaya)
- 4. Jeff Johamson
Time Keeper;
Arthur Kulow
I, as the Prime Minister has set a very good and solid case indeed. Let me break it down to you on my case setup.
- Title :
-
THBT Green Technology Should Be Tax Deductable
-
Definition:
- Green Technology
- 1. Any technology that reduce the rate of carbon emission
- during the production of a product.
- 2. Any types of method which is “environmental-friendly”
- Tax Deductable
- 1. Reduce the corporate tax
- Perimeter:
- Malaysia
- Problem:
- 1. Copenhagon accord has failed to meet 7 continue the Kyoto
- Protol.
- 2. Up to us (Malaysia) to make & start our own effort.
- Stance:
- To ensure the environment is protected from a long term effect for the sake of nature & humankinds. Plus, our goal is to reduce the carbon emission by 1/2 the amount during the 90s by 2050.
- Mechanism:
- 1. Reducing the corporate tax from 25% to 18% along with
- insentive such as a cutting from their utilies bill (water &
- electrical bill)
- 2. It is open to all SMEs, big companies, plantations & factories.
- 3. Every company will submit an application form that will be
- provided by Ministry of Enviroment (MoH).
- 4. After the form being submitted, inspection of the technology
- and method will be enforce by the Department of Health.
- 5. A certificate will be given out to the company who meets the
- requirements (refer to the Definition) and by using e-
- government, the list of the companies will be given to the
- Ministry of Finance & to the Inland Revenue Board (LHDN).
- 6. If any mishap happen, i.e they do not receive the benefit due
- to unavailable of information in the LHDN system, they can
- show the cert as a prove and LHDN will refer to the MoH.
- Points:
- Our step will encourage other nation especially in our region to follow our footsteps.
- Summary:
- I have said, mentioned and elaborate all the things that you need to know. If we do not do anything, we will put our nature in jeopardize and it will certainly will give a long-term effect to the nation itself. Hence, I beg to propose
That was my case setup. I have it all structured and gave the layout on what I would say to the adjudicators.
As for the opposition side led by B. Terrence, they came out with a radical approach (Simon Botley, 2010).
Instead by arguing the nature of the debate which is about principal, the opposition side has came out with an idea by giving a counter proposal;
- 1. Rather than deduct the tax, we give the companies including the international companies FREE TAX.
- 2. From there, they would use their profit to be invest in the R&D of green technology.
- 3. Thus, these companies can sell their green technology invention to other companies in the country by having the government controlling the market.
- 4. Government will adopt some of these companies (pre-GLC) and set up new companies which then the government would inject funding for the companies R&D of green technology.
- 5. It will act as a catalyst; by having these companies (reinvest 0% tax income & pre-GLC companies) as the first player in the green technology.
- 6.Plus, it would trigger the newbie to involve in the entrepeurnership.
- 7.The opposition has stated that they would gain back the money in 20 years time.
As you see, there are some fatal flaw in their arguments which my whip successfully pointed out. Kudos for that. For my DPM, she has done a very good job by giving out points on the reasons why we need to approve the motion even though she’s not that well in delivering speech but she could improve on that; job well done, Yan.
FYI, these try-out is for selecting the second team that will come along with the first team.
I swore that I just knew this thing when they want to start for the debate. As for the record, during the previous tournaments, I always being putted (assigned) in second group; hence I do not mind about who’ll be in the first team which they has already sorted it out.
In my mind, the first team would consisting of Swinburne and Jeff (duh, like obviously). As for the third person, I thought it would be either Paul or Terrence.
After the debate has come to an end, the time of truth were finally reveal.
Dr. Simon said that due to the misfortunate experience during the last Borneo Cup, UiTM Sarawak will be sending two adjudicators consist of Yaya and himself.
Afterwards, he announced the people who would be the first team;
- 1.Swinburne
- 2. Jeff
- 3. Hando
It was a bit shocking indeed seeing Hando in the first team but honestly, I do not mind due to the fact that Hando is a really good whip and having him with Swinburne; who is the best 1st speaker; alongside with Jeff; fantastic 2nd speaker; I personally think that it is a very dynamic team indeed. For that matter, I rest my case upon it.
Having the expectation and those excitement rumbling in my chest, Dr. Simon announced the names for the second team.
- 1. B. Terrence
- 2. Paul Racha
And by then he said something which makes my feeling starting not to feel good.
“Now, this may upset some people but I hope you can take this thing well. As for Yan, I’m sorry that you are not being chosen for the team due to the fact that you’re still lacking in delivering speech and we think that you need some more training.”.
Hence, it narrowed down to only B.J and me myself.
- .
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
.
B.J is selected for the third slot instead of me and the decision has been made anonymously.
The reason that has being given by the adjudicators to support their selection for the third slot is because;
1. B.J hardly involve in any major debate tournaments where as I already involves in some plus already acquiring many experience throughout the previous tournaments.
2. B.J has shown a lot of improvement compared to me which the adjudicators said “still at the same level”.
Now, I couldn’t argue more about point No. 1. Thus, I’m willingly stepping myself aside and having him in the seat. He deserves it and no hearts taken.
But, for the point No. 2, I hardly disagree with that statement due to the fact the adjudicators always seeing me debating where as for B.J, I couldn’t recall when the last time he debated.
In other words, if they want to make a comparison, please take standard of comparison and improvement when both of us; B.J & myself; last debating together.
For your additional information, the winning has fell to the Government side and I got the Best Speaker during the try-out.
Hence, taking the method of improvement from that night is not a really good way to determine the level of self-improvement due to the fact that Swin and Jeff has seen me debating less than a month ago compared to B.J which I think is more than 3 months.
Thus, the first question arise on the method by determining the debaters improvement method.
Now the second question arise on the selection of Yaya as the second adjudicator.
I myself earlier on questioning about this decision having the fact that she rarely come for debate training the also the question of her commitment towards the club last semester also can be brought up.
Even though she is the Vice President of the Debate Club but she was not acting as one. I remember what Swin said last semester on how he himself will be using meritocracy system of determining which debater will be coming along for any tournaments based on skills, self-improvement, commitment & presence record.
From here, I’m right now have a doubt in his meritocracy method which I fairly can question about Yaya’s appointment.
But there is no use to question these things right now as these people, these team would represent UiTM Sarawak and I believe that they will give their 100% effort to make things happen and come up with success.
Last but not least, this is my last chance to get a ticket for me to represent UiTM Sarawak in the Borneo Cup since this is my last year. Thus, the dream that I hope of can be fulfil and become true has been gone with the wind.
I totally respect the decisions. No doubt in that. I accept the judgement.
I would support them by giving any means of ways especially training B.J since he will be in the same team with Terrence and Paul.
All the best, guys!!!
Note: All the comments and thoughts is personally strictly from yours truly point of view and do not make any assumption on what has been said as my commitment in Debate Club is totally unquestionable.
