He said former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir’s Mohamad’s claim that Najib refused to quit because he was afraid of possible prosecution did not hold water.
“He is not afraid. He is staying on because he is prepared to face the problems and find solutions,” said Tajuddin, who is also Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry Deputy Minister.
Tajuddin said Najib had admitted that there were issues relating to 1MDB as well as in the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax.
“He has announced that he will fix all these problems so let’s give him time.”
In a video clip taken during a closed door meeting with non-Government groups last week, Dr Mahathir had alleged that Najib was refusing to quit because he was scared by the possibility of facing criminal charges.
On the former prime minister’s earlier allegations that enforcement bodies were afraid to probe Najib, Tajuddin said it was “absurd”.
“Nowadays there is simply nowhere and nothing that one can hide from being exposed.”
Tajuddin said the people should realise that Malaysia faced more problems during Dr Mahathir’s tenure as Prime Minister, including economic downturns in the 1980s and 1997 as well as controversies such as Perwaja Steel and the plan to build the Twin Towers.
“Dr Mahathir stayed on and settled all the problems one by one and as a result what we have today is his legacy.
“Compared with Dr Mahathir who served as PM for 22 years Najib has only been there for six, so what do you expect?” he asked.
On the Wall Street Journal report alleging that money from 1MDB was used to fund Barisan Nasional during the last general election, Tajuddin said it offered no proof that any money used during the election came from the fund.
“Were they even present during the general election and did they calculate how much money was allegedly spent?
“This is not fair as they are wild allegations,” Tajuddin said.
He said Barisan was not desperate for 1MDB’s help, as the coalition had managed to go through 12 general elections before the fund was set up.
Tajuddin said parties slandered by the report could sue the publication if they found the allegations to be damaging.