Indelible ink was actually food colouring

Indelible ink was actually food colouring, Shahidan tells MP

Food colouring, not chemicals, was in the indelible ink used in the general election, the Election Commission (EC) admitted in the Dewan Rakyat.

"No chemical was used in the ink but it was instead replaced with permitted food colouring," said Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim in his reply to Segambut Member of Parliament Lim Lip Eng.

His statement was in stark contrast with the EC's claim that it used silver nitrate in the ink. He said the absence of the required chemical was the reason the ink was easily washed off.

Shahidan also said that the expiry date of the ink was four months from the date it was issued but blamed voters for purposely trying to wash off the ink as the reason why it was not permanent.

"How long the ink remains depends on the individual and the efforts put in to wash it off."

In a written response, Shahidan also told the Dewan Rakyat that RM6.9 million had been spent on the ink, with an additional RM200,000 spent on transportation, packaging and storage, bringing the total expenditure to RM7.1 million.

 -------------------------------------------------------------

Parliament: EC did not fix how much silver nitrate in indelible ink, says Shahidan Kassim

Barisan Nasional secretary-general Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor said the call for the use of the indelible ink was made by the Opposition with Parliament approving its usage in the polls although there was no necessity.

"The Opposition asked for it and Parliament approved it so we follow.

"Actually we don't need the indelible ink as we are not a third world country where its people do not have identity cards for voting verification purpose," he told reporters in Parliament lobby.

He chided the Opposition for insisting the use of the ink, claiming some of their supporters within the EC had advised voters to use the ink to mark their ballot papers.

It's amazing to see government leaders arguing over a bottle of ink. Don't they have better things to do, like running the country perhaps?

First of all, I think it is a silly idea. It was a nuisance. And troublesome to hold and fold the ballot paper, for fear of smudging it. Despite claims that it could be wiped off easily, mine could only be washed off with soap and some scrubbing. Not completely gone as there were some traces under the nail and creases.

It's ugly. I don't enjoy walking around with a stained finger. Think about those serving or preparing food. What about those in the medical profession?

It was proposed by Bersih and Pakatan Rakyat to ensure clean and fair elections. Well, the election is over, why are we still discussing the ingredient of ink? Does it mean that if the ink is permanent or stick on for a month, Pakatan would have won?

I hope they will not be using ink next time. It's a waste of time and money.

I'm sure there are other more effective ways than this.