Muhyiddin said Anwar must explain the matter and correct the situation, as the issue shows that the government leaders are at odds.
“(The unity government) is showing cracks. These cracks portend a split … when we ask the prime minister, he says he does not know. What does that mean, does he want to wash his hands (of the matter)?
“This shows the lack of unity, and irresponsibility among government leaders. The prime minister cannot keep his hands off in whatever situation. He must fix matters,” he told reporters after a Bersatu Hari Raya Aidilfitri open house in Kuala Kubu Baharu today.
He was commenting on Anwar’s refusal to be involved in the conversation about the “supplementary order” purportedly issued by the former Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Al-Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah, during the Federal Territories Pardons Board’s meeting on Jan 29.
“I don’t want to be involved in discussions about the addendum (supplementary order). This falls under the jurisdiction of the pardons board, over which the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Malay Rulers have absolute authority,” Anwar had been quoted as saying.
Muhyiddin said Anwar’s statement was “worrying”, given the statement released by investment, trade and industry minister Tengku Zafrul Aziz that he will apply to file his own affidavit to correct certain “factual errors” in Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s affidavit.
“You cannot play around with what is said in an affidavit or in court. (Yet) the prime minister can say that he does not know, even though the rakyat needs to get accurate information on the matter.
“To us, this is a big matter. Unfortunately, the Cabinet and the prime minister have not taken an official stance. We don’t even know what is happening,” he said.
Muhyiddin also questioned the government’s sincerity in giving allocations to opposition MPs, noting that it is still bound by a memorandum of understanding.
He said that during PN’s time in Putrajaya, all MPs were given allocations unconditionally to help the people in their constituencies.
“(The government) did not say that they agree, they said that they agree to consider (giving the allocations). There’s a difference between the two.
“If they were sincere, an MoU would not be necessary,” he said.