Malaysia is a federation in which exists two levels of government, the federal and state government that are conferred different powers by the constitution. The state governments are given the sole power to create policy and legislation in areas such as Islamic and personal and family law of Muslims, land, agriculture and forestry, local government and state works among many others.
They also share power with the federal government to form legislation in areas stated in the concurrent list such as water, town and country planning, public health, etc.
These areas are important parts of our daily life and in the current state of our democracy, parts that are not discussed enough.
Debate and scrutiny on federal policies and legislation take place consistently these days. But, we are yet to see that happening at the state level. The two occasional instances have been the Selangor water issue and the Penang housing issue.
Why the need for debate and scrutiny at the state level? The reasons for this are simple.
Firstly, scrutiny on policies will result in better and more effective policies. When the rakyat start basing their votes on state government policies, state governments are forced to craft more effective policies and strategies to combat problems faced by the people.
The demand for good policies will also push the opposition to come up with their own set of policies. This results in policy competition in which both sides will try to outdo each other to win the rakyat’s votes. Competition always generates the best services for customers, and in this case, better policies for the people.
Secondly, there will be greater accountability among state governments. If there is no attention paid to state governments, promises by political parties during campaigning periods will be forgotten. When the rakyat starts sitting up to take notice, election promises will have to be fulfilled in order not to lose votes among the rakyat.
Also, heightened scrutiny from the people and progressively, the opposition will make sure that accountability and transparency of state government funds will improve. This results in lesser risk of corruption and leakages as both these problems may result in popularity declines of incumbent governments. Chua Tee Yong raising questions over Talam is a good example of such scrutiny.
Thirdly, this shift to increased debate on state policy will result in a much more effective democracy. This is due to the fact that a whole host of policy areas will now enter the rakyat’s consciousness and they will be able to have a say in these issues through the voting in state elections.
In fact, this is one of the main advantages of a federation which Malaysia has not benefited from. It is time to change that.
At this juncture, we should ask two questions. Why have we not reached a stage where state policies are frequently debated and how do we change that?
We have not reached the stage simply because Malaysians are still not aware of the fact that there are many areas of state policies and that they can and should be influenced by our votes. Because of this, Malaysians do not demand political parties to form policies on various state issues. As such, we still vote our assemblypersons based on national issues.
There needs to be a change in this and political parties across Malaysia should take the first step by bringing up issues and such policies. Current incumbent governments will no doubt already have policies in place to govern the state. The onus is on the opposition to study them, point out their flaws, attack and also craft better ones.
I would point to the state of Kedah where a Gerakan leader, Tan Keng Liang, has been attacking the Pakatan government on its lack of open tender policies.
One way to study and attack effectively would be to form a shadow exco. This is consistent with what both sides have been calling on each other to do in recent weeks. Such an exco will feature individual opposition politicians specifically focusing on policies in particular areas.
Such specialisation over the long term will lead to the opposition having the expertise in a wide range of policy areas. They will then be able to provide solutions to not only state but national problems as well.
In addition to crafting policies, the opposition should also come up with a state alternative budget. Forming a budget is a way showing the total cost of opposition policies and how they will be funded. It also gives people the confidence that the opposition is a capable alternative that has much expertise in administering the nation.
Secondly, the whole notion all that has been said above is to give the rakyat a choice. What good is it if the rakyat is not aware of such a choice? Therefore, the circulation of information through different forms of media is extremely important.
The national media alone cannot cover all the issues faced by all states. State governments need to form their own media as well as ensure that its circulation covers the whole state. Selangor state newspaper, the Selangor Times is a pretty good example of this.
It is ideal for the opposition to do the same. However, funds for establishing media might be a problem. One thing that can be done to mitigate this is using online media as a platform and to print booklets and pamphlets for rural areas without internet access.
In conclusion, Malaysia aims and is now moving towards being a much more democratic state that emphasises on debate on policies and not dirty politics. Because of our increasingly established two party system, there has been no more appropriate time than now for state policy debate to play a major part in Malaysian politics and contribute greatly to such an aim.
