Friday 29 Mar 2024
By
main news image
This article first appeared in Corporate, The Edge Malaysia Weekly, on August 15 - 21, 2016.

 

IT was last year when the voices calling for parliamentary reform seemed to grow the loudest.

Recall that last May, one of those pushing the hardest for parliamentary reform was Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia himself.

Pandikar, who has been the Speaker for more than eight years, had initially threatened to resign but did not go through with it after the government promised to look into his reform proposals.

His suggestions included the reintroduction of the Parliamentary Services Act, which would enable Parliament to handle its own finances and hire its own staff. The 1963 legislation was repealed in 1992 and there have been occasional calls for its return to ensure that Parliament is independent of the executive in running its own affairs.

Pandikar also demanded a special “Minister’s Question Time” slot, the introduction of a second chamber to deliberate on issues as well as the creation of permanent select committees to look into matters of public interest.

Also last year, civil society banded together to push for parliamentary reform.

The 11-organisation coalition, Gabungan Cadangan Penambahbaikkan Parlimen, presented its framework for strengthening Parliament at both the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara. The proposed reforms for the Dewan Rakyat focus on four areas: reintroduction of the Parliamentary Services Act 1963; the establishment of more parliamentary committees; agenda-setting in the Dewan Rakyat and separate allocations for research and constituency development.

The calls for change seem to have worked somewhat.

In March, some 10 months after Pandikar’s outburst, the government agreed to some of the proposed reforms.

These included the establishment of the special chamber to discuss motions on pressing and current issues and a 30-minute “Ministerial Question Time”, during which MPs can question government ministers including the prime minister.

In addition, the Cabinet agreed to reduce the minimum 14-day notice for tabling of a motion to 10 days.

However, the proposal to establish special select committees to investigate specific issues is still being considered and it is uncertain if the Parliamentary Services Act will be re-enacted.

 

Changing mindset the hardest part

Amidst all the ideas for structural reform, the stumbling block remains the human actors in this equation.

Even if Malaysia implements the best parliamentary practices, it would all come to nought if the MPs themselves do not change.

This was one of the matters discussed during the Malaysian Economic Association’s public forum on the role of parliamentary committees last week.

As former Court of Appeal judge Datuk Hishamudin Yunus pointed out, mere structural reform is just half the equation.

“There have to be reforms on parliamentary procedure and practice to remove the general perception that the Malaysian parliament is a ‘rubber stamp’, that it is not independent and under the control of the executive. But to achieve the ideal objectives, there has to be more than mere structural reform. There has to be a change in attitudes and mindset. Nothing is going to work in our parliamentary system if the paramount consideration amongst our MPs is selfish and narrow partisan interests rather than working for justice, democracy and good governance,” said Hishamudin.

This view is echoed by former deputy prime minister and veteran politician Tun Musa Hitam.

“What we need to do is think long term, which is sustainability of economic growth for future generations. Politicians live election to election but responsible politicians think long term,” said Musa.

Political scientist Wong Chin Huat, who is a Fellow at think tank Penang Institute, pointed out that the key issue that is seldom talked about is the imbalances in the contestation of power.

“How do we ensure that ruling party backbenchers can be critical of the government? To what extent are MPs free from party leadership control? With political control over the MPs, it is hard to ensure nice structures would work,” he said.

Universiti Malaya academic Prof Dr Edmund Terence Gomez noted that a lot of the reforms require political will, which is wanting in the case of Malaysia’s power landscape.

The problem, he said, is that MPs generally place more emphasis on their role as politicians who are interested in retaining power as opposed to being elected representatives who are there to serve the people’s needs.

“If there is no political will, what is the next step? The next step may be to build social movements. If politicians are not willing, the point has come where we have to discipline politicians and society has to demand reforms.”

 

A practical suggestion

Wan Saiful Wan Jan, the CEO of the liberal think tank Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas), pointed out that the solution to better oversight and economic governance is rather simple.

The problem plaguing Malaysia for many decades has been corrupt practices, which is nothing new.

“The things we need to do are so basic and not complicated at all. We just need to create more accountability, more transparency for the government. Even my cat would be surprised that we need to organise a conference to discuss such a simple concept!” said Wan Saiful.

“There needs to be oversight from outside the executive.”

Nevertheless, he pointed out that establishing parliamentary committees is a long-term target that requires political will and government approval.

“It is not going to happen tomorrow. We need to be realistic and gradual in our expectations and plans,” he said.

As a short-term solution, he proposed the establishment of an All-party Parliamentary Group as practised in the UK. Wan Saiful had helped establish one in London while he was working in the UK.

The All-party Parliamentary Group is an informal, cross-party group that also involves individuals and organisations from outside parliament. Although the group may not have formal powers to investigate or summon public officials, it can serve as a platform for discussion on issues relating to governance or public interest.

While this is not a perfect solution, Wan Saiful reckons this is a low-hanging fruit that can be immediately implemented if there is sufficient interest.

“We can do it today as long as there are MPs and senators who want to group informally to form it. The group is the first step to facilitate dialogue on a cross-partisan basis prior to having a formal parliamentary committee,” he says.

 

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's AppStore and Androids' Google Play.

      Print
      Text Size
      Share