Federal gov't: The case for Pakatan
I refer to the letter Anwar, Pakatan should play it a step at a time .
I am more inclined towards the notion that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) should just go for the federal government. From a purely political perspective, I do not see a better time for us to ‘go for the kill’. The ‘enemy’ is weak and slowly disintegrating due to the increased infighting not only within Umno but also amongst its component parties as well. If the ‘killer blow’ is not delivered now, we run the risk of allowing the ‘enemy’ the time and opportunity to regain its strength, a strength that mind you is not based on any noble or positive values but instead on corruption and manipulation.
Lest we forget at our peril, as much as we despise the ‘enemy’, his strength should still be respected. As it stands, the impressive gains we made in the last general elections were still won in the face of all the gerrymandering and manipulation (eg, unfair delineation of constituencies, cancellation of the indelible ink which led to ‘phantom’ voting, manipulation of the postal votes, biased and unjust media reporting, vote-buying, refusal of the election commission officials to issue the Form 14 to opposition party agents etc.)
In the face of such adversity, who’s to say that if the elections were conducted in a free and fair manner, we would not have formed the federal government today? Hence, even if we perform brilliantly in ruling the five states that we have now been entrusted to govern, what’s to stop the ‘enemy’ from carrying out the same tactics to ensure its victory in the next general elections? This is the ‘political reason’, if I may term it as such, as to why I believe PR should just go for it.
I also believe that the writer is being presumptuous or imposing his/her personal view when he/she stated ‘Many people voted you in not because how good you were or will be, but more because they just wanted to throw out the other guy and deny a two-thirds majority to the ruling coalition.’ I think this is a point that unless supported by some strong, credible statistics will remain a point that does not hold water.
I, for one, did not cast my ballot as a ‘protest vote’ but I voted the opposition with the hope that they would form the new federal government. There are many others who also had the same intention when they went out to vote that day but it would not be fair for me to claim that this was the intention of the majority. Without strong, credible statistics or figure, we will not be able to state that with certainty. So let us not make assumptions one way or another and instead drop this particular line of argument.
Now what about the citizens of this country? Clearly it is the impact on us all that holds much more significance compared to any political reasoning. Ong Kian Ming states that PR should focus on the governing of the five states to demonstrate that it can ‘indeed work together as a coalition’. I believe we have already surpassed that stage. If indeed PR forms the federal government, it would no longer be an issue of proving that they can work together; they would simply have to. Would this lead to disagreement amongst the PR members? Yes, there certainly will be from time to time.
We have grown so accustomed to having a scenario where all the other component members of the BN play ‘kowtow’ to Umno that we seem to have lost sight of the fact that the essence of democracy is where everyone has his/her say and a consensus is reached by taking into consideration all these views. The government and country can only benefit as a whole with this development of healthy debate and participation in policy-making and other decisions made by the government.
Now let us consider the point of experience in governing. Let’s look at this objectively. Comparing the MP’s from BN and PR in terms of academic qualification, contributions towards society, recognition for work done, can we honestly say that the BN MP’s are better equipped to govern as opposed to those from PR? With a line-up of MP’s and leaders that includes the following highly capable individuals, it becomes rather difficult to argue that PR lacks the required experience.
- Teresa Kok (three-term MP for Seputeh; Secretary of the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus),
I can continue to expand the list above but I shall leave that to those of you who are curious to carry out your own little research to find out more. The composition of the elected representatives and leaders within PR is also a healthy mix of professionals, NGO leaders, members of civil society groups, corporate figures and politicians which will result in the benefit of having a wider representation for society at large in policy formulation at the federal level.
Many of these individuals have been long-serving members of their communities at grassroots level and are clearly more in touch with the needs and issues affecting the average man/woman on the street.
As for the doubt about the sincerity of the BN MP’s who crossover, I think the same applies to any politician we elect. What we must no forget is at the end of the day, it is us, the voters, who are in control. If we are not satisfied with the performances of these MPs, or any elected representative for that matter, we simply vote them out in the next general elections. If we are willing to retain a government which has plundered the wealth of this nation and curtailed our fundamental civil liberties for the past 50 years, would it not be a better option to give these ‘crossover MPs’ the benefit of doubt for 4-5 years? I, for one, certainly prefer the latter.
Some of us also want to gauge the performance of PR in governing the five states before deciding in the next general elections. What we fail to realise is by retaining BN for the federal government, we are increasing the likelihood of sabotage against the five opposition states. It has already begun with the ‘mature’ BN minister, Azalina Othman, announcing the cancellation of all tourism MOUs with these states, preferring instead to channel the allocations to BN- controlled organisations. She even had the audacity to say ‘..if they join BN, it would be better’! Statements have also been made mooting the implementation of the wang ehsan model adopted in Terengganu when the state fell into opposition hands in 1999.
In this model, federal funding and income such as oil royalty is no longer channelled to the state government but are instead disbursed by a committee at the federal level. This essentially means that the state governments have no say in the use of this funding in their respective states. Even more worrying is the trend that has developed after the formulation of this wang ehsan model. In Terengganu, the parties that benefitted after this change were the Umno chiefs. Until today, the expenditure of almost RM3 billion of this wang ehsan is still not properly accounted for.
Such a model is also insulting to the people of this country as it implies that only the BN can ensure that federal funds are used for the people’s benefit. At the end of the day, it is us, the people of this country, who will continue to lose out on revenue that belongs to us.
Finally, to summarise, allow me to pick a few lines from the letter Federal gov't: Go for it, Pakatan : ‘Each day the federal government continues to be under BN control is another day of momentum lost in the direction of genuine reform. One thing we can be sure of: every move the BN makes from now on will be aimed at undermining the Pakatan Rakyat instead of seizing this historic moment to genuinely reform itself.’
‘So, even though it (BN MP’s crossing over) will spawn a measure of ethical ambiguity, the pragmatic wisdom of dealing the BN government a death blow NOW - before they have time to drag us deeper into irreversible ruin - holds a strong appeal. Instead of fearing contradiction, let us embrace it as the only way to organic truth’.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.