Elections, other than political

School House Captain - where an elected candidate was not the best, but most popular?

When I was in Form 5, my classmate suggested that we should nominate each other for the post of House Captain. I went along, not knowing that I would end up being the House Captain! I was the most unlikely one, being the reserved type and especially not a sportsman. I must have been the first non-participating House Captain!

Another classmate, one of those bright ones (among the top 5 in our A class) who must have thought that he could have sailed through the elections, actually was shocked at my victory and complained to our house master that it was unfair as the majority of those who voted for me were from Forms 1 and 2, who did not know who they were voting for!

In fact, our House came close to winning the championship and would have capped my so-called leadership (actually, the lack of), because of good sportsmen and able committee members.

The moral of the story is that in the case of political elections, there are those who are charismatic and able to draw crowds and if the majority of them are actual voters showing their support, then such candidates are likely to be successful in the elections. Whether he is really able or not as a politician, does not matter to the public.

Each eligible person is entitled to one vote, and it does not matter who he is, who voted for a certain candidate. They might be fans of famous personalities, say women or young girls, attracted to actors or singers. In America, personality counts and we have seen former actor, Ronald Regan being elected President, and Arnold Scharzeneger as Governor.

There are those who are good political analysts but would rather be behind the scenes and they are likely to work for those who prefer publicity. Just like in business, there are good managers who cannot be good businessmen themselves.

Election of Liaison Committee for a Golf Club

As far as this is concerned, the candidate for President is likely to canvass among relatives and friends for proxy votes, which would make a big difference to his advantage at the Annual General Meeting.

The perks as President would normally include free food and drinks for himself and friends that he is entertaining. He is likely to represent the Club at competitions in other clubs within the country as well as in foreign countries, expenses paid. Besides, he is likely to be well known among the local community and gets to rub shoulders with VIPs and even royalties. The competition can be stiff if there are other candidates who have strong support. The incumbent is likely to try his level best to keep his position.

I had been approached, through a third party, to give my proxy vote to somebody but somehow, I found the system unfair as it would encourage cliques and cronyism whereby the President would reward his supporters by inviting them where there are occasions which could not be opened to all members. Sounds familiar?

Election of committee members of a Joint Management Body for apartments

My wife happened to own an apartment in a seaside (almost) resort in Perak. It guaranteed a return of 7% net for the first 3 years. Then, the developer proposed a ‘profit-sharing’ arrangement for 3 years with an option for extension for another 3.

It was share of losses for the first 4 years or so and the latest accounts showed a small profit for a change. Last Sunday, we attended a meeting to elect office bearers for a Joint Management Body, which is a new requirement.

The developer’s representative who chaired the meeting was earlier friendly towards us when he introduced himself. Somehow, I couldn’t resist voicing out my unhappiness that from the outset, I had reservations over such profit-sharing scheme as we would be left at the mercy of the management.

Owners had to check their names against the register and a tag given for the purpose of voting. This was to differentiate from those who tagged along like myself.

It was held in the company’s hotel premises in KL and I told my wife that it was a bit odd that the day chosen was a Sunday and the time 9.30am. We parked our car at a public car park across the road, not knowing they had arrangement for free parking within their premises.

Light snacks and beverages were available and the staff were exceptionally polite.

After the Chairman of the meeting and a lawyer in attendance briefed us on the details of the JMB, we were told to vote for the size of the committee ranging from 5 to 12. Then names were proposed and seconded. It was a good job that my wife asked that the candidates introduce themselves and describe their background before we actually voted.

After the introductions, we discovered that except one who is a private owner (intentionally proposed by my wife), the rest were in one way or other, connected with the management! As a result, the exception was outvoted easily and the whole committee consisted of people from the group of companies.

During the meeting, I innocently asked for the breakdown of private owners and those under ‘profit-sharing scheme’. The Chairman was quick to point out that it was not in the agenda, perhaps later when they move on to the other matters.

I could sense the coolness and the reluctance to reveal what I asked for. As soon as the agenda was covered, the Chairman adjourned the meeting without asking me if I wish to continue on the subject I raised earlier.

At the end of the meeting, my wife was discussing with a couple of owners in the same boat who were generally dissatisfied with the return (if any) and the buy-back price offered, which was a huge discount from the original. At least, we were offered the original price but on condition that we buy from one of their projects in KL!

Anyway, SP was glad that she had attended the meeting which helped her in making up her mind to manage the apartment on her own which if properly managed, is likely to generate a better return or at least it would provide us with the convenience of deciding when to offer to any of our relatives or close friends. The present arrangement allows us only 7 free nights a year, subject to availability.

When we were having our refreshments and chat with some owners, the management’s staff who were friendly earlier on, pretended not to know us!