The Battle of Election Manifesto (WITH CHINESE TRANSLATION)

Nonetheless, there are weaknesses in both PR’s and BN’s Election Manifestos. In order to woo the voters both sides have made promises that are beyond their current capability to fulfill. For example, they both vow to provide different types of subsidies and welfare but they never explain how they intend to implement that without hurting the country’s economic health.

Original text by Tay Tian Yan, Asst. Chief Editor, SinChew Daily

Translated text by Gilbert Yeoh-Tan

Following PR’s declaration, BN has recently come out with their own Election Manifesto covering 17 different categories with over 100++ subcategories.

Women’s rights, public welfare, automobile, housing …… etc, BN have had a hard time summarizing their Manifesto even after several advertising pages in newspapers have been used to publish their promises.

To be frank, I am a bit dazzled at this. This is just like Malaysia’s Mega Sales season all over again: every shop in every shopping mall puts on their flashy “SALES” or “Buy-1-Free-1” posters. The consumers do not know where to begin shopping, and whether the deals are really as appealing as advertised.

Many beautiful promises are made in the Manifesto with aim to project a happy, harmonious future in the voters’ minds. However if you are to erase the word ‘BN’ or ‘PR’ from the front page of their Manifestos, I will honestly tell you that I won’t know which Manifesto belongs to which party.

What I am trying to say is, there are many promises of considerable quality coming from both sides trying to capture the ‘customers’, but ‘Whatever they offer, we will match it’ is the main theme of these Manifestos.

PR vow to subsidize the needy, BN of course react by beefing up the BR1M; PR promise to reduce car tax, BN simply announce that they will reduce car price by 30%. PR pledge to abolish the highway toll fees, BN will …….. well, this is a tough case, so they just promise to reduce the number of toll stations.

Other issues like protecting women’s rights, reinforcing the anti-corruption agency, building more affordable housings, improving security etc., both sides basically offer the same package. And for as long as I can remember, the Election Manifestos have never been this ‘cheap’ and ‘grand’ at the same time.

There is a good analogy to describe what is happening; before there was only a supermarket in the town, so the consumers had to buy the products that supermarket was selling at the fixed prices. Now another supermarket has emerged, the competition is present and to win over the consumers both have to bring out their promotions. Furthermore, the items sold have to be of good quality as well.

The good thing of these Manifestos is that both sides have stated their policy agendas and since both are selling their policies they have to compete on coming out with the better policies.

I think this can indeed benefit the society; their goal is to gain more support from the people, and in order to do that they will have to agree to the good policies put forth by the people that involve society welfare, anti-corruption, transparency, improvement of traffic system, improvement of security etc. These demands can also help shifting focus from negative issues such as differences (and disputes) between races and religions to other greater issues that are beneficial to all races and religions.

This also serves as a good indication that our society is taking the correct direction towards a better, more matured democracy.

Nonetheless, there are weaknesses in both PR’s and BN’s Election Manifestos. In order to woo the voters both sides have made promises that are beyond their current capability to fulfill. For example, they both vow to provide different types of subsidies and welfare but they never explain how they intend to implement that without hurting the country’s economic health.

I do not know how much money and resources will be needed to materialize these welfare policies, but the bottom line is, both sides have not put forth a concrete strategy to increase national income to cope with the sudden increase in spending resulting from these policies.

Just like some supermarkets that offer fire-sales with steep price-cutting, although they may get all the business, they are making huge loses as well. And in the end, they have but to declare bankruptcy and close down their shop.

*****************************************

鄭丁賢‧競選宣言，互別苗頭

繼民聯之後，國陣發表了競選宣言；17個領域，項目應該過百。

從婦女、福利、汽車、房屋……，連報章都要用好幾版面，才勉強呈現一個大概。

老實說，我有點眼花繚亂；這就好像馬來西亞購物節來到，購物中心大減價，每一家商店和攤位，都貼出大平賣、大促銷、買一送一的特惠。

購物者不知如何買起，也不知是否真的如此好康。

政黨的競選宣言，同樣也是美麗承諾很多，未來是一幅幸福美滿的景象。

然而，老實說，如果把宣言之前的“民聯＂和“國陣＂字眼拿走，我大概也分不清楚誰是誰。

我的意思是，承諾很多，但同質性很高，你有的，我也要有，為了爭取顧客……，噢，選民，絕對不能輸陣。

民聯要給弱勢群體津貼，國陣當然是“一馬援助金＂加碼；民聯要取消汽車國產稅，國陣干脆宣佈車價要降30%；民聯要廢除過路費，國陣……唔，這個有點困難，那就減少收費站吧。

其它如提昇婦女地位，加強反貪措施，興建可負擔房屋，改善治安等等，也差不多。

印象中，競選宣言從來未曾那麼大平賣，也沒有那麼盛重其事。

當然，這就好比之前鎮上只有一家購物中心，它賣甚麼，消費人就得買甚麼，賣多少價錢，大家也得掏腰包。

而今購物商場增加了，競爭激烈，彼此搶顧客，就要有各自的大促銷；此外，賣的東西，品質也要有保障。

民聯和國陣的競選宣言，優點是各自提出施政綱領，賣的是政策，雙方必須在政策上一較高下。

我覺得這是大馬政治趨向好的發展。一旦彼此在政策上競爭，就必須爭取更多的群眾，而提出對多數人都有好處的政策，包括社會福利、反貪和清廉，透明和公平、改善交通和治安。

競爭的層面擴大之後，可以把種族和宗教的分別淡化，把重點放在不同族群和不同宗教的共同需要之上。

這也顯示民主發展朝向正面的發展。

不過，民聯和國陣的競選宣言也都有共同的弱點。

為了爭取選票，雙方可能都做出了超過能力和本份的承諾；譬如提供林林總總的福利固然誘入，但是，如何在不傷害國家經濟體質的情況下落實，卻缺乏說明。

我無從計算這些福利政策究竟要消耗多少資源和成本，問題是，雙方的競選宣言都沒有具體說明執政之後，如何增加國家的收入，以應付這些開銷。

這就好像購物中心的跳樓大促銷，拚命削價賣，然而，即使做到生意，結果卻是虧大本，到時一樣要結束營業。