Better MPs, not ‘Arab Spring’
There is no necessity to follow Tunisia with a the symbolic unveiling of the statute of an unknown fruit seller whose tragedy sparked off ‘Arab Spring’. Nor is there a need to repeat over and over again in certain media, small negative incidents as if the readers are all pea-brained. After 50 years of trying and progressing, the current situation before us is how can this chrysalis morph into a more desirable butterfly.
Daphne Loke, Malaysiakini
Malaysia has developed into having a political stature far ahead of the countries referred to in the metaphor ‘Arab Spring’. These countries were Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, Israel, Iraq and Syria.
Recent write-ups of the first anniversary of the Arab Spring contained a common phrase, “uncertain outcomes that hold both promise and despair”. By “promise” it referred to national conditions of the states which participants of the uprising had wanted, situations that they were denied, which subsequently caused the uprising. By “despair” it referred to the new state of affairs of how these nations had deteriorated since the uprising.
Since gaining independence in 1957, Malaysians have lived and prospered from the benefits of democracy. I cannot find the opportunity to use the word “deterioration” when describing the progress of this nation since independence.
As a federation, we have evolved to seeing the 6th prime minister in office. And soon, we will witness the installation of the 14th Yang di-Pertuan Agong. These regimes had nurtured many firsts for Malaysia. In contrast to the occasion that an American in Las Vegas had asked me, “Malaysia? Where’s that?”, we now have Malaysian companies changing the lifestyles of other people living in New York, in London and in many other places.
Malaysia had developed by leaps and bounds, too fast to some, and perhaps too slow for others, because we have been blessed with the ability to practice democracy to its true meaning. We had done away with the condition where “kings, sects and families feel they should rule forever” – a situation which is still haunting some of the countries affected by the ‘Arab Spring’.
Even the most democratic government of developed nations faces the wrath of its people for various reasons. Malaysia, although yet to attain developed nation status, is no exception. With more than 2 million foreigners visiting this country every month, Malaysia is a nation to watch – not for disasters and protest rallies, but for shooting stars in academic fields, in sports or in business innovations such as Islamic banking, to name a few.
There is no necessity to follow Tunisia with a the symbolic unveiling of the statute of an unknown fruit seller whose tragedy sparked off ‘Arab Spring’. Nor is there a need to repeat over and over again in certain media, small negative incidents as if the readers are all pea-brained. After 50 years of trying and progressing, the current situation before us is how can this chrysalis morph into a more desirable butterfly.
Reflecting what voters expect a party to be
Getting 50-year old political systems to change are indeed mammoth tasks. How, how much and when to change are not party matter per se. With ready access to information, rising levels of education among the electorate and exposure to global developments, how a political party changes should reflect what the voters expect it to be, IF the party still wants to represent these voters in the government.
Social scientists observed that wobbling coalition governments could be due to the high percentage of voters who did not belong to any political party. In the United Kingdom, 98 percent of the population were not members of any political party. Coupled with poor turnouts during elections, this is indeed an important observation.
The younger generation made the call for change in Singapore during last year’s elections. They demanded that politicians put their ears to the ground and establish sincere and genuine public engagement. They chose their representatives “intelligently, voting for individuals whom they reckon could get the job done effectively and efficiently”. It was said that politics in Singapore had evolved into a “balancing act between idealism and realism”.
Who can stand as a candidate in GE13? Is the candidate’s membership of a party a deciding factor to the voter? Yes and No. Someone recently commented that contesting under the flag of a certain political party could well be a burden rather than adding value to the candidature. By current electorate demands, most important would be the candidate’s own ability to deliver the desired results.
Martin Turner’s website on ‘Practical Politics’ summarised the qualities for a Member of Parliament neatly into the five vowels, viz. A for Availability ; E for effective; I for Inspiring; O for One of us, and U for Upright. The Bell Principles called for Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty and Leadership.
Without doubt, the recent months’ onslaught on the establishment in the online media was caused by certain MPs falling out of these qualities.
A voter is often reminded that he or she is an independent voter, not a part of the herd. Such a message penetrates straight into the virtues of honesty, ethics and faith, of which belief is a part, of both the voter and the candidate, particularly independent candidates. Independent candidates, in most cases, were first elected on individual tickets.
This happened because these individuals believed they should not represent a certain party due to differences in ideology which could arise out of party policies or public image of that party. There were those who upon being elected, set up their own parties.
There were also incidents of MPs elected under party ticket but left the party to become Independents. Such cases were rare as political parties often caused their candidates to sign undated letters resigning from their elected seats so that those resigning from the party could not still remain in Parliament as Independent MPs.
‘X party is not your Mafia’
Perhaps, social scientists would like to examine the democratic value of this kind of party practice. Like ordinary citizens, the multitude of party members want to see their own party practicing what it preaches. As the reminder went, “X party is not your Mafia”.
How does the public view independent MPs? A 2009 Ekklesia survey in the UK conducted by ComRes revealed that 78 percent of the public believed that independent candidates should stand for election where “ MPs have behaved unethically”. Sixty three percent of the people felt that democracy could be enriched if more Independent MPs could be elected to Parliament.
The author subscribes to the findings of the Ekklesia survey. Rather than fumbling at trying to change party systems, the rise of Independent MPs could provide a powerful driving force for moulting the party, particularly in a coalition scenario. With an abundance of examples around the world, like George Galloway, once known as MP (Independent Labour), Independent candidates should be allowed to retain his loyalty to the coalition.
DR DAPHNE LOKE, author of ‘Political Sojourn’, has been a life member of MCA since 1975.
