Three issues are slowly coming to head. The Perak state assembly will sit on Thursday. The Economic Planning Unit (EPU) and the Finance Ministry are meeting to decide the master-plan for the Malaysian economy. Five cabinet ministers have met to resolve the long-standing issue of religious conversion but their decision has not received universal approval.
All three issues share some common factors: they each involve fundamental rights of Malaysians, they involve institutions and they need a wider consensus if they are to achieve tangible results.
Many qualified individuals have had their say about the Perak issue, which has yet to resolve itself in the courts. To most people, the best way out is to dissolve the state assembly and return the vote to the people. The BN is not in favour of this and has the power to stay the course even though it might be ultimately pyrrhic. They still have to meet the electorate some time before March 2013.
The debate about Malaysia’s need to be a high-income country is healthy. It is good that we are finally discussing our future. But ultimately, do our views count when the EPU and the Finance Ministry meet?
The PM said the era of ‘government knows best’ is over but his cabinet has yet to learn how to build consensus.We also have the problem of divorce, which is being read as a conversion issue. The reality is that it is a problem of the breakdown of marriages. Emotions are very strong here because the break-up of a marriage is often messy. But when this messy situation is then coupled with religion, it is potentially explosive. It seems the whole nation is being asked to divorce each other on religious sectarian grounds.
All three issues can only be resolved if those in power and those in opposition are willing to sit down and thrash things out. The BN must recognise the reality that its bid for Perak is unpopular. At best, it is a demonstration of naked power. It impresses only BN foot-soldiers but is turning away potential voters.
It will be ammunition for the opposition in the next general election no matter how well Perak is administered.More importantly, two important institutions have been damaged by this power grab. The monarchy and the judiciary are seen by many as instruments of the government. A retired judge has even published well-argued criticism.
How can the BN state government hope to function when its candidate for speaker was someone that the electorate rejected? Better to dissolve the state assembly and take your chances with the electorate now rather than four years later when this will be fodder for a nationwide rejection.
The economy is also integral to how the BN will fare in future elections. Whilst we recognise the need to be a high-income economy, two things have not been made clear. Firstly, how are we going to achieve this? Secondly, what about issues of social inclusion? The government must remember that we have one of the worst income disparities in Asia, how are we to reduce the income gap whilst move up the ‘value chain’?
In the age of the Internet, it might be wise for the Information Ministry to start a campaign to collect diverse views. Here is an opportunity to explain how we ‘developed’ into an open and export-driven economy. But more importantly, it can help the government discover what Malaysians want for the future.
If the government feels that it represents the voices of the economically marginalised, it must first admit openly that past policies had their weaknesses. No one is perfect and voters will understand. But to pretend to ‘know best’ is hubris. In Malay, this is called bodoh sombong.
All three issues share some common factors: they each involve fundamental rights of Malaysians, they involve institutions and they need a wider consensus if they are to achieve tangible results.
Many qualified individuals have had their say about the Perak issue, which has yet to resolve itself in the courts. To most people, the best way out is to dissolve the state assembly and return the vote to the people. The BN is not in favour of this and has the power to stay the course even though it might be ultimately pyrrhic. They still have to meet the electorate some time before March 2013.
The debate about Malaysia’s need to be a high-income country is healthy. It is good that we are finally discussing our future. But ultimately, do our views count when the EPU and the Finance Ministry meet?
The PM said the era of ‘government knows best’ is over but his cabinet has yet to learn how to build consensus.We also have the problem of divorce, which is being read as a conversion issue. The reality is that it is a problem of the breakdown of marriages. Emotions are very strong here because the break-up of a marriage is often messy. But when this messy situation is then coupled with religion, it is potentially explosive. It seems the whole nation is being asked to divorce each other on religious sectarian grounds.
All three issues can only be resolved if those in power and those in opposition are willing to sit down and thrash things out. The BN must recognise the reality that its bid for Perak is unpopular. At best, it is a demonstration of naked power. It impresses only BN foot-soldiers but is turning away potential voters.
It will be ammunition for the opposition in the next general election no matter how well Perak is administered.More importantly, two important institutions have been damaged by this power grab. The monarchy and the judiciary are seen by many as instruments of the government. A retired judge has even published well-argued criticism.
How can the BN state government hope to function when its candidate for speaker was someone that the electorate rejected? Better to dissolve the state assembly and take your chances with the electorate now rather than four years later when this will be fodder for a nationwide rejection.
The economy is also integral to how the BN will fare in future elections. Whilst we recognise the need to be a high-income economy, two things have not been made clear. Firstly, how are we going to achieve this? Secondly, what about issues of social inclusion? The government must remember that we have one of the worst income disparities in Asia, how are we to reduce the income gap whilst move up the ‘value chain’?
In the age of the Internet, it might be wise for the Information Ministry to start a campaign to collect diverse views. Here is an opportunity to explain how we ‘developed’ into an open and export-driven economy. But more importantly, it can help the government discover what Malaysians want for the future.
If the government feels that it represents the voices of the economically marginalised, it must first admit openly that past policies had their weaknesses. No one is perfect and voters will understand. But to pretend to ‘know best’ is hubris. In Malay, this is called bodoh sombong.
The government can ask Malaysians how the country can achieve economic sustainability. Of course, expert opinions will eventually determine our future economic path but the government needs to build consensus. Without the public taking ownership of the policies, “performance now” will be doubtful.
Demonstrate good faith
Demonstrate good faith
The building of a sense of responsibility is very important if we are to restore the integrity of the legislature, monarchy and judiciary. It is also important if we want people to support our economic policies.
If education is the corner-stone of going up the value chain because talent will be crucial, we need to convince Malaysian parents to start setting aside a sizeable chunk of their disposable income to educate their children. Malaysians also need to be assured that a merit-based education system will be in place otherwise they will keep sending their children abroad and talent will flow out.
In short, the government needs to demonstrate good faith by trusting that Malaysians want to live and contribute to Malaysia. It is precisely this good faith that is required when faced with the issue of conversions. The issue will never be solved if Malaysians do not trust each other, the courts and the government. For a person of faith, his conversion to a religion is absolute. It should follow that he wants his wife and children to also share in his faith. But what happens when his faith is not shared by his spouse?
In some societies, couples of mixed religions are allowed to come to an amicable solution. This is not alien in Malaysia except and many mixed-religious couples happen, say, between Buddhists and Christians; Hindus and Buddhists.Notwitstanding that, the issue at hand is very complicated when a spouse becomes a Muslim owing to the bifurcation of our legal system. This is a very complicated issue that involves civil law, Syariah law, the question of faith, the rights of the individual and the complex web of religious doctrines. How then can five ministers decide for the whole nation in less than two weeks?
Whilst we want “performance now”, in this issue, we need to achieve as wide a consensus as possible. That takes time.It does not help that some political parties try to score points on this issue. It shows that these parties do not have the nation at heart and just want to profit from the misery of others. In short,there are some issues that need to be well-thought out; that require the rigour of opposing views; and that needs to achieve a meeting of minds.
Political parties aside, we all need sit down to iron out these issues. Our institutions, economic well-being and social harmony cannot be decided by a government that ‘knows best’.
(First Published on: May 5, 09 11:10am)
In short, the government needs to demonstrate good faith by trusting that Malaysians want to live and contribute to Malaysia. It is precisely this good faith that is required when faced with the issue of conversions. The issue will never be solved if Malaysians do not trust each other, the courts and the government. For a person of faith, his conversion to a religion is absolute. It should follow that he wants his wife and children to also share in his faith. But what happens when his faith is not shared by his spouse?
In some societies, couples of mixed religions are allowed to come to an amicable solution. This is not alien in Malaysia except and many mixed-religious couples happen, say, between Buddhists and Christians; Hindus and Buddhists.Notwitstanding that, the issue at hand is very complicated when a spouse becomes a Muslim owing to the bifurcation of our legal system. This is a very complicated issue that involves civil law, Syariah law, the question of faith, the rights of the individual and the complex web of religious doctrines. How then can five ministers decide for the whole nation in less than two weeks?
Whilst we want “performance now”, in this issue, we need to achieve as wide a consensus as possible. That takes time.It does not help that some political parties try to score points on this issue. It shows that these parties do not have the nation at heart and just want to profit from the misery of others. In short,there are some issues that need to be well-thought out; that require the rigour of opposing views; and that needs to achieve a meeting of minds.
Political parties aside, we all need sit down to iron out these issues. Our institutions, economic well-being and social harmony cannot be decided by a government that ‘knows best’.
(First Published on: May 5, 09 11:10am)
No comments:
Post a Comment