exclusive Malaysian legislators want out. They want to rid Parliament of the civil service mindset. They crave freedom from bureaucratic control including the hand over their purse-strings.

Barisan Nasional Backbenchers Club (BNBBC) chairperson Shahrir Abdul Samad says MPs clearly want self-administration of the House.

His 'blueprint' aims for structural and mindset reform.

The 56 year-old political veteran's declared mission is to improve the legislative process and the perception of Parliament as "an entity independent of the executive yet not completely severed from political party roots".

For a start, he wants Parliament to be made and seen as independent from the executive in terms of its administrative and financial functions.

"Essentially, a strong legislature as a political institution is when it has control over its own finances and the hiring and firing of its staff," he told malaysiakini in a recent interview.

"Presently, the House is a department under the Prime Minister's Department based on the budgetary allocation."

Herein lies the problem, said Shahrir, because Parliament is now technically an extension of the bureaucracy.

"It doesn't help in projecting an image of integrity, strength, openness or transparency as long as Parliament remains within the PM's Dept."

PSA mystery

Enter the Parliamentary Services Act (PSA) 1963 which allows for self-administration, staffing and financing but it was repealed 13 years ago under mysterious circumstances.

The Dewan Negara or Senate House Committee, in pushing for its revival , has asked the government to shelve the idea of a director-general for parliament, a surprise move which drew widespread protest within and outside the House.

The repeal in 1992 was due to a rumoured tiff between then Dewan Rakyat Speaker the late Zahir Ismail and Parliament's secretary, but the mystery remains unravelled.

"There was self-accounting but there was also a reluctance to discipline, to hire and fire. Maybe because it was such a small group and people wanted to be the good guys. But it slowly took on a government department culture."

Shahrir is confident the revived PSA would boost the campaign for integrity and set the mood for the implementation of the National Integrity Plan besides "weeding out rotten apples".

A decision on whether the original PSA should be revived or a new draft tabled is expected when the Dewan Rakyat reconvenes next March.

He is also pleased that MPs see the PSA as playing a pivotal role in injecting integrity and quality into the legislative process.

Rethink priorities

"Having been elected and formed by the people's mandate, Parliament must be able to perform its role in an independent way, or at least be perceived to do so without distractions or influences from the executive."

As an acute observer from the sidelines of mainstream politics for over three terms, he said that structural reform must go together with a mental shift requiring MPs to rethink their priorities and role in Parliament.

"They should be happy and contented being ordinary parliamentarians and take pride in serving those who handed them the mandate because they are only good when effective and know their role.

"We don't want to be told to put the House in order first or run it ourselves before criticising others for their shortcomings."

They should not be distracted or driven by ambitions of moving up the echelons of power into the cabinet, he added.

The Johor Baru MP, who re-entered mainstream politics in style by winning a parliamentary seat last year after a 15-year hiatus, noted the present blurring of lines between the government and opposition MPs.

"There is no longer a discernible demarcation between both sides."

However, he recognised the danger in the BN's "overly-huge majority" which could easily turn it into a rubber-stamp but happily noted that the MPs were trying to prove otherwise.

Nevertheless, he was optimistic about changing MPs' mindset, insisting that each MP should be left to choose his or her own debating style.

"They may like the cool style that I have, without having to shout at the top of my voice, or they may like a more robust and rambunctious style. It's a matter of personal taste and preference.

"We have the entertainers, the court jesters, the queens... they add a lot of colour to Parliament inspite of what everyone says."

Highlight weaknesses

On media coverage, he took issue with a particular newspaper's coverage in the first year of the 10th Parliament on issues he felt were less important such as attendance and report card.

Referring to English newspapers, he said they have always been critical of MPs and contended that the issues highlighted were less significant to the legislative process.

"For example, is attendance the most important aspect of a functioning Parliament? (It would be relevant) if bills don't get passed because there's no quorum but that has never happened."

Instead of implying that MPs were not good or smart enough for a ministership, he said the media should have highlighted weaknesses in the government's performance.

"This goes to my point about having parliamentarians who are not only ambitious to be a member of the executive but also proud to be parliamentarians. If I can get to that situation within this term, I would have achieved my objective."

Shahrir said it was also no longer feasible to consider a parliamentary candidacy merely in terms of the person being an important member of the party.

"We had a situation where you needed to be at least a division chief or no one will listen to you. I am one, so I know how it works but we've been able to slowly get rid of that.

"It's also about making the role of a parliamentarian attractive and an incentive strong enough that the political party will have to be very careful as to who will be fielded.

"When you strengthen the institution, work becomes more demanding and the party will have to send the right people. They know that the demands placed on an MP is not the same as on the grassroots leadership."

Elaborating on structural reform, he said the executive and the legislature cannot be completely separated due to the system which is modelled after Westminster.

Parliamentary party

"The executives come from Parliament where the party's role is also present. Based on this, the political parties would still have control and a great influence on how members behave."

This, however, was different from the UK Parliament where the same person leads both the parliamentary party and the ruling party, he explained.

"In countries like the UK, it is the leader of the parliamentary party who becomes the leader of the House and the prime minister. He doesn't head the political party per se, for instance as president or chairperson of either the Conservative or Labour party."

Shahrir sees the BNBBC as coming the closest to the UK's parliamentary party and yet not completely a political party.

He said it was impossible to be "completely independent and separate" like the US presidential system where the president and the members of Congress and House of Representatives are elected in separate nationwide polls.

"(But) not having a complete separation of power doesn't mean we can't have a strong and independent Parliament. Just think of it in terms of a university administration."

He said the ongoing parliamentary reform was not meant to "completely dismantle or put us in an antagonistic situation".

"We're not saying that Parliament must control the executive or vice versa because our system does not allow for that. The idea is not about who has more power but about working together."

Anything else, he concluded, would destroy the political system.