Back to the drawing board governing
If Malaysians are concerned over how decisions are made by the Cabinet, they have reason to be. Shouldn’t issues be thrashed out behind closed doors, cost and benefit analysis done before any announcements are made.
THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER
Announce a decision. Watch it being ripped apart by the Opposition or by critics of the government, however minor or insignificant. Get cold feet.
Take a 360 degree turn and announce a complete reversal of the decision.
Welcome to the four stage process of decision-making by the Malaysian Cabinet. Today, the collection of ministers announced that the government would not go ahead with a decision announced 24 hours ago to sanction the increase of toll charges for five major highways.
This is the third time in recent months that the government has been forced to do a flip-flop after adverse public reaction. Case No 1: After the Cabinet approved a plan by Sime Darby Berhad to take a 51 per cent stake in Institut Jantung Negara.
Case No 2: After the Cabinet approved a plan by Sime Darby and Air Asia to build a low cost carrier terminal in Labu.
There is a clear pattern emerging here and it is this: with a much weakened power base after Election 2008, the Barisan Nasional government is unable and unwilling to risk any political fallout from its decisions.
The Cabinet knows that it has to make unpopular decisions but with four states under Pakatan Rakyat and with the ground still sour, it may not have will to do so.
Cannot imagine this government going against public opinion and instituting something as controversial as the currency controls. Not when the focus is always on the political barometer.
Works Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Zin Mohammed said that the turnaround was prompted by negative public reaction and the limp economic situation.
“When the announcement was made, there was negative public reaction. As a result, the Cabinet decided today to postpone the toll hike till the end of the year,” he said.
Had the new rates been implemented, motorists travelling on the:
* North-South Highway would have had to pay 0.68 sen more per km;
* Sprint Highway would have had to pay between 30 sen and 50 sen more;
* Sungai Besi Highway would have had to pay 10 sen more;
* Ampang-Kuala Lumpur Elevated Highway would have had to pay 50 sen more;
* New Pantai Expressway would have had to pay 40 sen more.
Frankly, it is politics that forced the Cabinet rethink on the toll issue, namely the slew of by-elections in April. Mohd Zin said as much when he noted that the toll hike would be postponed till the end of the year.
If the government was truly concerned about the impact of increased toll charges on Malaysians during these challenging times, they would have put off the hike indefinitely. Not hold the current toll structure in abeyance for nine months.
The economic crisis which has engulfed the world is not ending anytime soon. The most optimistic economists believe that the major economies could recover by the second half of 2010.
No, this turnaround was dictated by political considerations.
No different from the flip-flop over IJN and KLIA East.
If Malaysians are concerned over how decisions are made by the Cabinet, they have reason to be. Shouldn’t issues be thrashed out behind closed doors, cost and benefit analysis done before any announcements are made.
And if this process is followed and government ministers feel that certain policies and decisions are in the national interest, then they should be able to defend it publicly. Criticisms and political fallout are par for the course for any public official. Not everyone in the United States supports President Obama’s stimulus package but he believes that pumping those billions in the system will return the American economy to health.
So he has been prepared to go out and market the stimulus package and live with the fact that he will not be able to win over everyone.
The Malaysian Cabinet appears to be allergic to taking a stand to defend its own decisions. Take the case of IJN. In this case, the Sime Darby management and its chairman Tun Musa Hitam made representations to the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and several other senior ministers.
After hearing them out and being convinced that there were synergies between IJN and Sime Darby’s healthcare division, a paper was put up before the Cabinet.
Apparently several ministers had misgivings but they went along because they did not want to challenge the view of their senior Cabinet colleague. When the controversy erupted over the takeover plan, ministers ran for cover.
Few wanted to take responsibility for the decision, preferring to exert pressure on Sime Darby to end its interest in the venture.
The same situation was played out a month later. Senior ministers were briefed on the plan by Sime Darby and Air Asia to build a new LCCT terminal in Labu. Slides were shown and information packs were handed around and the ministers were thrilled that the private sector was going to spend RM1.6 billion to stimulate the economy.
A letter of approval was given to Sime Darby (the landowner). There was a firestorm of criticism from government backbenchers, the Opposition and the Cabinet got cold feet.
Government ministers forgot the concept of collective responsibility and distanced themselves from their own decision. The KLIA East project has since been called off and the official reason given was that the parties — Sime Darby and Air Asia — could not raise the financing required.
Several nagging questions: Didn’t the clutch of ministers who were briefed by officials from Air Asia and Sime Darby get any assurances on project financing?
Didn’t the Cabinet seek and obtain any assurances from the two companies on financing before issuing the letter of approval to Sime Darby?
Didn’t the Cabinet run through the proposal with Malaysia Airports Holding Berhad, the Department of Civil Aviation and other government agencies before issuing the letter to Sime Darby?
