Strong opposition needed for check and balance
By Viktor Wong
Parliamentary Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has said that a Pakatan Rakyat (PR) federal government would be satisfied with a simple majority in Parliament, citing concerns that a two-thirds majority victory will make the coalition complacent.
The Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Advisor said that a simple majority would ensure a strong federal government as well as opposition, as well as allow a proper-check-and balance system so that the PR does not end up mirroring the current Barisan Nasional (BN) kind of governance.
We applaud these kind of middle-path and power-sharing system being upheld by Anwar. We agreed that giving one party a two-thirds majority or more than that would make the said party complacent, too strong, too powerful and in the end creating an attitude of hunger for power, positions, fame which in turn will lead to mismanagement, power abuses, a phobia of being afraid of losing power, factionalism and so on.
A kind of middle-path and power-sharing which is being forwarded by Anwar is a close and professional relationship between the government and the opposition, where both governing and opposing parties would work side by side, one providing governance, while the other providing check and balance in order to ensure the administration of this country serves our people and in turn the people gets served in an efficient manner too.
Therefore, you could see the definition here, the purpose of the government is to serve and ensure the people enjoys the fruits of service, unity, harmony, economic and financial stability, human dignity, security and safety, good and proper education and other facilities as well.
And the government on the other side therefore should not resort to condemnation of dissidents, the people's voice, criticism, discontent and so on. As a democratic nation, all these should be allowed and tolerated in the spirit of a betterment for all and not for only certain parties, cronies nor individuals.
Apart from that, to conform with a democratic-style of power-sharing, the government must also be inclusive, that means to include members of the opposition bench into various select committees or parliamentary committees according to portfolios that would oversee all the ministries and government agencies.
In this case, an inclusive government will also encourage a free flow of information, unrestricted and fair press reports, no imbalance or monopoly of news or press agencies by one party nor any crony for the benefit of a particular leader or government. That is why an inclusive government should also include press freedom and freedom of speech.
As for the opposition bench, they should be allowed all the avenue and facilities possible in order for them to perform their effective role as oppositions not for the sake of just "opposing" all the time but to provide check and balance, go into whatever areas or means where the government may have overlooked, neglected, ignored and to ensure competency of the administration, accountability of those who are managing it, and transparency of the system (how it manage, how much it is being funded, is the system being followed and so on).
Apart from that, the members of opposition bench also must be denied their benefits like their annual grants and allocations in order for them to serve their constituencies and the people who had elected them in the first place. By denying these opposition members their perks and other financial backing and appointing instead "coordinators" who serves as a de-facto people's representatives (which usually consist of defeated candidates of the ruling party in the past general elections) and getting the allowance and enjoying the allocations of a real elected representative would means denying the democratic rights of our people and the constitutional right of an elected representative to serve his or her people in their constituencies.
Besides, the opposition bench must also perform their effective role by establishing a proper Shadow Cabinet in order to oversee their counterparts on the governing side in order to ensure that each of every ministries or agencies are properly accounted for in their daily management, control and service levels. Those opposition members who are not participating in the shadow cabinet should in turn participate (in collaboration with the government backbenches as well) in various parliamentary committees or select committees overseeing the performance and accountability of various portfolios, to organize regular hearings, scrutinize government spending, appraise department and ministry heads, provide checks, review annual audit reports, to ensure professionalism and competency of the civil service and so on.
Take the examples of established nations like the United States, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, France, Germany, Sweden and Denmark. All these nations' governments has indeed being very accommodating and inclusive on the needs of the opposition parties in their parliamentary institutions, legislative assemblies with proper allowance, allocations, funding and research services. Certainly too, these nations governments or the ruling parties there do not resort to racism nor threats onto the opposition parties.
For the information of all, when these western nations are quoted as examples, it should not be misquoted by any parties or critics as being westernization. This is not at all a westernization as some has thought to be. This is modernization, something which has to do with continuous civilization or should we say continuous improvement, Kaizen and so on.
When these members of parliament, congressmen or members of the legislative assemblies are given all the channels, avenues and facilities possible, it is not about money anymore. It is about the service level and how good can these politicians serve the people who had elected them to the respective institutions, how would the systems of governance benefit the people, the next generation and how are the funds being used spend and so on. There will no such thing of spending nor throwing money onto the ground in order to obtain the people's support. There will be no bribe to buy people's vote, there will be no more of a "you help me, I help you" word during election campaigns.
As such, if the BN government continue to resist such ideas and improvements, let us give our votes to PR in the next general elections and if the later were to come to power then, we hope they could start the ball rolling to show the world that we can indeed develop further.
Parliamentary Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has said that a Pakatan Rakyat (PR) federal government would be satisfied with a simple majority in Parliament, citing concerns that a two-thirds majority victory will make the coalition complacent.
The Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Advisor said that a simple majority would ensure a strong federal government as well as opposition, as well as allow a proper-check-and balance system so that the PR does not end up mirroring the current Barisan Nasional (BN) kind of governance.
We applaud these kind of middle-path and power-sharing system being upheld by Anwar. We agreed that giving one party a two-thirds majority or more than that would make the said party complacent, too strong, too powerful and in the end creating an attitude of hunger for power, positions, fame which in turn will lead to mismanagement, power abuses, a phobia of being afraid of losing power, factionalism and so on.
A kind of middle-path and power-sharing which is being forwarded by Anwar is a close and professional relationship between the government and the opposition, where both governing and opposing parties would work side by side, one providing governance, while the other providing check and balance in order to ensure the administration of this country serves our people and in turn the people gets served in an efficient manner too.
Therefore, you could see the definition here, the purpose of the government is to serve and ensure the people enjoys the fruits of service, unity, harmony, economic and financial stability, human dignity, security and safety, good and proper education and other facilities as well.
And the government on the other side therefore should not resort to condemnation of dissidents, the people's voice, criticism, discontent and so on. As a democratic nation, all these should be allowed and tolerated in the spirit of a betterment for all and not for only certain parties, cronies nor individuals.
Apart from that, to conform with a democratic-style of power-sharing, the government must also be inclusive, that means to include members of the opposition bench into various select committees or parliamentary committees according to portfolios that would oversee all the ministries and government agencies.
In this case, an inclusive government will also encourage a free flow of information, unrestricted and fair press reports, no imbalance or monopoly of news or press agencies by one party nor any crony for the benefit of a particular leader or government. That is why an inclusive government should also include press freedom and freedom of speech.
As for the opposition bench, they should be allowed all the avenue and facilities possible in order for them to perform their effective role as oppositions not for the sake of just "opposing" all the time but to provide check and balance, go into whatever areas or means where the government may have overlooked, neglected, ignored and to ensure competency of the administration, accountability of those who are managing it, and transparency of the system (how it manage, how much it is being funded, is the system being followed and so on).
Apart from that, the members of opposition bench also must be denied their benefits like their annual grants and allocations in order for them to serve their constituencies and the people who had elected them in the first place. By denying these opposition members their perks and other financial backing and appointing instead "coordinators" who serves as a de-facto people's representatives (which usually consist of defeated candidates of the ruling party in the past general elections) and getting the allowance and enjoying the allocations of a real elected representative would means denying the democratic rights of our people and the constitutional right of an elected representative to serve his or her people in their constituencies.
Besides, the opposition bench must also perform their effective role by establishing a proper Shadow Cabinet in order to oversee their counterparts on the governing side in order to ensure that each of every ministries or agencies are properly accounted for in their daily management, control and service levels. Those opposition members who are not participating in the shadow cabinet should in turn participate (in collaboration with the government backbenches as well) in various parliamentary committees or select committees overseeing the performance and accountability of various portfolios, to organize regular hearings, scrutinize government spending, appraise department and ministry heads, provide checks, review annual audit reports, to ensure professionalism and competency of the civil service and so on.
Take the examples of established nations like the United States, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, France, Germany, Sweden and Denmark. All these nations' governments has indeed being very accommodating and inclusive on the needs of the opposition parties in their parliamentary institutions, legislative assemblies with proper allowance, allocations, funding and research services. Certainly too, these nations governments or the ruling parties there do not resort to racism nor threats onto the opposition parties.
For the information of all, when these western nations are quoted as examples, it should not be misquoted by any parties or critics as being westernization. This is not at all a westernization as some has thought to be. This is modernization, something which has to do with continuous civilization or should we say continuous improvement, Kaizen and so on.
When these members of parliament, congressmen or members of the legislative assemblies are given all the channels, avenues and facilities possible, it is not about money anymore. It is about the service level and how good can these politicians serve the people who had elected them to the respective institutions, how would the systems of governance benefit the people, the next generation and how are the funds being used spend and so on. There will no such thing of spending nor throwing money onto the ground in order to obtain the people's support. There will be no bribe to buy people's vote, there will be no more of a "you help me, I help you" word during election campaigns.
As such, if the BN government continue to resist such ideas and improvements, let us give our votes to PR in the next general elections and if the later were to come to power then, we hope they could start the ball rolling to show the world that we can indeed develop further.
Viktor Wong is the Director of Inter-Research And Studies (IRAS), a think-tank dedicated in providing various research and views on socio-political, governance and international affairs.
