Pakatan’s loss in Semenyih: Reasons or excuses?

As usual, in all defeats, the losers will always have some say on why they lose, whether offering genuine reasons or providing excuses.

Listening to reasons will probably serve the losers better, but giving excuses is easier and more convenient.

Losing Semenyih is not the end of the world for Pakatan Harapan (PH). Most voters, Malays as well as non-Malays, are probably still not comfortable with Umno/Barisan Nasional (BN) returning to power so soon. But they know this was only a by-election and they are comfortable to put PH on notice, which I think is a right thing to do.

Earlier, some said PH’s defeat in Cameron Highlands was due to “Chinese” DAP. But what are they going to say now in Semenyih? Was it due to “Malay” PPBM? The same predicament is likely to happen next in Rantau if PH were to remain complacent.

What then is the first lesson for PH? It must show unwavering solidarity and diligently work toward its election manifesto whatever the difficulties faced. Right now, PH is alienating its loyal supporters fast, while trying to entice voters who had never supported them in the first place.

It is useless to keep talking about the Malay agenda and insecurity when nothing tangible is done on the ground to make life better for all. Such rhetoric is counter-productive because it annoys everyone, Malays and non-Malays. Was this not what Umno/BN had been doing since before GE14?

Second, PH component parties must let the sleeping dog lie and not try to punch above one’s weight. They have come together with certain understanding and since they have won the general election, they should let the present arrangement work, i.e. to carry out the reform, fulfil the manifesto and bring tangible benefits to the people.

But this is not to be. We have seen a common issue being handled and muddied by at least two or three ministers making statements that were contradictory or not congruent at all.

We have seen subtle reneging of promises made earlier due to politicking and vested interests rather than inability to fulfil them.

We have also seen the government indulging in grandiose projects which are so out of this world and have nothing much to do with people’s life.

Third, I think it is frustrating to see component parties within PH trying to outdo each other by recruiting more horses into their respective stables. There are things we do which are obvious in intention. It is futile to be pretentious – PH component parties value power more than service to the people.

Fourth, I think PH has not been discerning and careful when it comes to assigning people to important positions. Although the debate is centred on whether it should be politicians or technocrats holding those positions, my take is we have skewed the attention to the wrong
direction.

The most important consideration is one’s capability and astuteness, not whether he is a party loyalist or a technocrat. Good governance can’t make a dense person smart but good governance can control the abuse of a politician. Between politicians and technocrats, we just have to choose the smarter ones.

It is not fair to totally discredit PH. Regardless of our political leaning, PH has saved this country from fiasco. However, that is now in the past. Winston Churchill led Great Britain to victory in World War II  only to lose power subsequently. It is a fatal mistake to bask in one’s past glory, Malaysians being forgiving notwithstanding.

TK Chua is an FMT reader.