Ramasamy: Shouldn’t PMX resign following withdrawal of the URA Bill 2025?

 

WHATEVER the interpretation of the withdrawal of the Urban Renewal Bill 2025 (URA Bill 2025), it was a defeat of the government in the Parliament despite having a parliamentary majority.

I don’t think the opposition needs to pass a vote of non-confidence in the Parliament against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

The withdrawal of the URA Bill 2025 is itself an admission that the government has no support for the legislation from the public.

Anwar doesn’t have to wait for a parliamentary motion on non-confidence from the opposition for the withdrawal of the URA Bill 2025 was an admission of a defeat for his Madani government.

Given this, shouldn’t Anwar and Housing and Local Government Minister Nga Kor Ming tender their resignation?

The URA Bill 2025 was a clear case of how badly it was prepared to suit the need of certain interested parties in the country. Amending the consent threshold is not sufficient to render the bill as acceptable.

Opposition intervention

The bill is problematic and it should be permanently withdrawn. Anwar, who blindly supported the bill before its withdrawal, must address the question of its withdrawal.

Or alternatively, he should resign his position as the prime minister of the country. Is he prepared to take the honourable way out of the present imbroglio with the urban renewal bill?

For a man who talked about the bill alleviating the problem of urban decay through urban development, re-development and rejuvenation, he should address the question of whether the law was appropriate and timely to address the phenomenon of urban decay.

I am sure that URA Bill 2025 would not have been withdrawn without topposition from the opposition parties, civil society members and those right-thinking MPs from the government side. In other words, the opposition to the bill was across the board.

I think Nga should take the blame for trying to present a shoddy bill in the Parliament. If this was some other country, the minister would have resigned.

Withdrawing a bill in the Parliament is tantamount to the defeat of the government of the day despite having a parliamentary majority.

The problematic aspect of the bill was the three kinds of consent threshold that were set: consent threshold of 80% for buildings 30 years old; 75% for buildings more than 30 years old; and 51% for abandoned buildings.

Before the bill was finalised and presented to the Parliament, the bill should have been vetted by public engagements.

I am unsure whether this was done or not. But the question is why withdraw the bill in the last hour before its second reading in the Parliament? Why use the parliamentary majority to ride roughshod over the opposition in the Parliament?

Clearly – without question – the criticisms raised by the public seem vindicated as a result of the withdrawal of the bill. 

Former DAP stalwart and Penang chief minister II Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy is chairman of the United Rights of Malaysian Party (Urimai) interim council.

The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of  MMKtT.

- Focus Malaysia.