Khairy-Ambiga Debate a Disappointment as Ambiga Falls into Partisanship

Bring back Rafizi.

We had perhaps been spoiled by Khairy Jamaluddin's prior debate, with Rafizi Ramli in London some months ago. There, the two debaters -- on opposite sides of the parliamentary divide, and dedicated to vanquishing the other's party in GE13 -- were polite, respectful, jovial, and intelligent. While we awarded the debate to Khairy on points, we appreciated Rafizi's tone, approach, and substantive approach.

Dato' Ambiga Sreenevasan could learn a thing or two from Rafizi.

We are discussing, of course, The Malay Mail's Spark the Debate, held between Ambiga and Khairy. Although the debate began on friendly terms -- after a painfully long series of introductions -- the debaters had a brief moment of surprise at the musical choice The Malay Mail chose to begin the debate -- but the two debaters' sides rapidly coalesced.

Ambiga began with her usual, somewhat stilted, but determined recitation of the same statistics Bersih and Pakatan Rakyat -- insofar as there is a significant difference -- have been broadcasting for some time. Phantom voters, dead voters, voters over 100. She showed initial flashes of humour, and at first seemed to take this as a sincere debate on the issues. She was very classic Ambiga: Staid, solid, determined. She nevertheless claimed that there was widespread voting fraud.

Khairy was his usual self -- comfortable, relaxed, eschewing the notes that Dato' Ambiga clutched through her presentation. He asked why Bersih was determined to pre-empt the reforms the Parliamentary Select Committee had undertaken. He responded by attacking the phantom voter issue. He noted that the Election Commission (EC) publicly advertised the 42,051 voters who were determined to be questionable, broadcast them to the world, and asked them to come forward -- and many did. He asked why this would be fraud if the Election Commission had broadcast those same numbers for months.

In short, he asked, again and again, why Bersih was determined to cry 'fraud,' when the Government and the EC were working to address the very reforms Bersih demanded.

It is here that Ambiga either lost her cool or let her mask slip. She found her emotional rhythm and began, "I'll tell you where the fraud lies," and began to recite many of her prior points, including the alleged movement of voters from their constituencies. She went on in this vein for some time, demanding a face-to-face with the EC and, apparently, some MPs.

Khairy was again relaxed in response. He made a point designed to answer two Bersih demands at once. He noted that Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim -- whom Bersih has used as an example of the switched-constituency demand -- had indeed had his constituency changed. The Government had undertaken to make certain that the electoral boundaries were correct, using Google Earth, and had found they were not. They did not move someone out of the correct constituency, they corrected decades-old errors from when voters, like Khalid, had been mis-assigned.

Khalid's constituency was also changed because he has not updated his residence since 1985, and, as Khairy noted to some laughter, not only has he moved some times since then, but he no longer resides in Petaling Jaya -- he is now in Shah Alam.

From there, Ambiga's presentation and demeanour degenerated. In response to Khairy's calls to review the EC's work and to actually meet with them instead of having press conferences at them, Ambiga stated that she did not and could not trust the EC. Khairy, in some frustration, asked if Ambiga could not trust the EC, why was Bersih demanding so much of them. For this, Ambiga had no direct answer.

Again and again, Khairy showed a fluent command of facts and figures, including anecdotal evidence of many of the benign explanations for Bersih's claimed errors. (One telling example was his assistant receiving an ID card identifying him as a woman.) For this, Ambiga had no response.

Ultimately, after additional back and forth, and after Khairy had offered the olive branch of stating that Ambiga was upset with Pakatan hijacking Bersih, Ambiga could not bring herself to treat with him levelly. She demanded that he guarantee a host of reforms before GE13 (Khairy's response: "As much as you want me to be the PM, I don't know when the elections are."). Her somewhat confused position was that the EC cannot be trusted, but that Bersih should have a hand in doing its work ... while meeting with them.

Perhaps nothing sums up the night better than its conclusion. Khairy offered that every Malaysian wanted free and fair elections, and offered the olive branch of a joint review of the electoral rolls at the EC. He was relaxed, but sincere, in calling on Malaysians to act as a people in resolving this dispute.

Ambiga was stiff, and clearly upset that she had not been able to overcome Khairy. She began by claiming that not every Malaysian wanted free and fair elections. She brought herself under better control by the end -- closing on a final statement that she demanded a delay in elections ("like in Bangladesh, where they delayed for a year") to clean up the electoral rolls.

The crowds were variable. Khairy's supporters were -- with a few unfortunate exceptions, such as when Ambiga closed with a demand to delay elections for a year -- generally well-behaved, if overly enthused by Khairy's presentation. The Bersih crowd openly booed and jeered Khairy at odd times throughout.

This debate was never going to be as enjoyable as the Khairy-Rafizi debate, and given Bersih's relative lack of importance, would never carry the same long-term import. But we had hoped for as much substance, as much seriousness, as much politeness.

We got it from Khairy. But not from Ambiga.