What the public expects of parliamentarians

 

After proving his majority in Parliament, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has urged everyone to move on. That is sound advice.

The question of legitimacy has been answered loud and clear on the floor of the Dewan Rakyat, although, due to the voice vote, we won’t know exactly how many MPs voted for confidence in him.

The opposition was crafty enough to not call for a bloc vote as that would probably show that Anwar had 148 MPs in the 222 member Dewan Rakyat backing him. A bloc vote can only be called by the opposition, according to lawyer and former Sungai Buloh MP R Sivarasa.

The PKR legal bureau chief was quoted by FMT as saying: “It was clear from the vote for the Dewan Rakyat Speaker that the opposition would only get 74 votes. The votes in support of the prime minister would be 148, exactly two-thirds of MPs in the Dewan Rakyat.

“It was an opposition tactic not to call for the bloc vote as they did not want the 148 votes, a two-thirds majority (backing Anwar), to be on record. Hence, they did not call for a division (bloc vote) which only they could do.”

We can assume that 148 voted for Anwar, given that 148 was the highest number of votes the government received on Dec 19 in Parliament. This was during the election of Barisan Nasional’s Cameron Highlands MP Ramli Md Nor as one of the two deputy speakers.

Earlier, 147 MPs voted for former Sungai Petani MP Johari Abdul as the new Dewan Rakyat Speaker. One MP from the government coalition – Hanifah Hajar Taib (GPS-Mukah) – was absent. It was later explained that she was ill that morning and arrived late.

But if Anwar expects the majority vote to signal smooth sailing for his administration, he is mistaken.

Leaving aside the problems confronting the nation – such as the need to address the rising cost of living and the humongous national debt – Anwar should know that there are some in his coalition of coalitions and parties whose sympathies lie elsewhere.

Just because he has majority support does not mean there’ll be no move to destabilise this “unity government”. Five years is a long time in politics and anything can happen in between.

The Anwar administration can also expect the opposition to hound and torment it whenever the opportunity presents itself.

The tone for this was set on Dec 19 when the motion of confidence in Anwar as prime minister was moved by Deputy Prime Minister Fadillah Yusof of GPS.

Opposition leader Hamzah Zainudin of Perikatan Nasional called the confidence vote a “gimmick”.

Hamzah also quoted an Italian news agency – Agenzia Nova – as saying that Anwar was Malaysia’s first “full-blown homosexual” prime minister.

The blow below the belt resulted in several Pakatan Harapan MPs demanding a retraction. Hamzah went on to say that the government should act against the agency for insulting Anwar.

PN whip Takiyuddin Hassan said PN did not want to call for a bloc vote as it believed the motion of confidence in Anwar was unnecessary as he had already been appointed by the King.

He said the opposition also did not want to be involved in the vote.

At two points during the debate on the motion of confidence, the debate degenerated into shouting matches.

Certainly, some MPs kept clear of insults and insinuations and debated in a praiseworthy manner. These were among the voices that called for an end to political games so that the government could be given space to attend to more important issues such as putting the economy on track.

Former second finance minister Johari Abdul Ghani, for instance, hoped the vote of confidence in Anwar would end the politicking that has stymied the nation’s progress over the past four years plus.

“Political stability is an important ingredient in developing a country’s economy. If we continue to question the premiership and argue about issues that are not relatable to the people, then we will waste our time by repeating whatever has happened in the past four-and-a-half years, while neighbouring countries continue to develop and Malaysia is left way behind.”

Giving figures, the BN MP noted that Malaysia’s gross domestic product per capita showed no growth from 2018 until last year, adding: “Our growth is -0.1% compared with Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand and the Philippines.

“For example, Indonesia’s GDP per capita grew 11.8% from 2018 to 2021, Vietnam’s increased 24.2%, Thailand 9.7% and the Philippines, 19.3%.”

Dzulkefly Ahmad of Pakatan Harapan, in calling for an end to politicking, said: “This country must be rebuilt. Whatever is the name of this government, the priority should be on improving the country and the wellbeing of the people.”

Even Bung Moktar Radin of BN, who is known for controversial statements, showed a serious side by saying: “We have gone through too much in the last few years. We had three prime ministers in a single (parliamentary) term… We need stability because foreign investors need to feel confident with us. If we can’t get enough investors, how can we properly help the people?”

These MPs, and several others, were but voicing the appeal of the rakyat to politicians to desist from playing games or scoring points and to get on with the governance of the nation.

What we the people hope for from MPs in Parliament is debate, not shouting matches as in the past and even as happened on Dec 19.

I noticed however, that the “noise” was largely from the so-called veterans. I hope to see younger MPs and first-timers participate more actively – and engage in clean debate rather than name calling or indulging in insinuations – in Parliament as befits the august house.

We expect better from the opposition, especially the opposition leader. Learn from the late “Mr Opposition” Tan Chee Koon.

We also expect ministers in Anwar’s administration to answer questions raised and not skirt them as ministers in previous administrations did. We expect transparency and accountability.

MPs, especially ministers, should remember that they are not in Parliament to further their own party or financial interests. They are in Parliament to voice the needs and aspirations of their constituents who come from various racial, religious and cultural backgrounds.

We expect backbenchers to refrain from simply praising the government and to criticise when criticism is needed. We expect the opposition to offer constructive criticism and not just use a sledgehammer.

We don’t expect all MPs to debate intelligently, but we do expect them to show common sense and desist from uttering unparliamentary language or shouting at each other.

We also expect them to debate issues and not use Parliament as a platform to win likes from their followers by scoring points with their actions or remarks.

We expect them to do some research before taking the floor and to offer suggestions for resolving problems, keeping in mind the needs of their constituents.

We especially would like them to stop using race and religion to argue their cases and to use language that fosters unity.

Would that be asking for too much? - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT