Surprisingly, BN has been practising this policy all along. Generally, I get the impression rookies were given state seat to contest to prove their popularity. Then, after 3 terms, he or she is given a chance to try out as parliamentary candidate. This seems logical progression: from track record shown at state level to federal level. Being the ruling coalition, some served as state exco members and later become Assistant or Deputy Minister and then Minister at federal level. But of course, there were exceptions to the unwritten rule or general policy.
What is surprising to this policy of limiting one seat to one person is not practised at the highest level! Now the PM is not only serving as Finance Minister, but also the Women's Affairs portfolio! The burgeoning PM's Department with several ministers within and a huge staff of about 50,000 made it a cabinet within a cabinet. The costs to maintain this vital department must be humongous.
Before GE12 in 2008, the opposition parties had been struggling against all odds. Besides the harassment by institutions controlled by the ruling coalition, opposition leaders faced problems of supporters who refused or avoided to show themselves. Some were willing to contribute money but not their names. Some would not sign any petition even though they were the complainants! All those who chose the opposition route in politics have to be hardened by all kinds of obstacles. But through it all, a few principled leaders shone and managed to catch the imagination of the people, which largely contributed to the unprecedented and unexpected success of capturing 5 states in 2008.
That the success was unexpected was shown by the bickering over Exco positions and even veteran MPs felt envious of some new state assemblymen holding state ministerial posts which came with extra privileges like official cars and drivers. We can imagine the situation to be magnified if they were to take over at federal level. This is only natural and there is no way to avoid it. At best, they can reduce the problem by first introducing '1 Candidate, 1 Seat' rule. Before election, selected candidates are given the chance to decide whether he or she prefers to stand for state or parliamentary seat. At this juncture it can be tricky. As far as the opposition coalition is concerned, they can never be sure of winning at federal level. So an MP may not end up as a minister but a state assemblyman in say Penang or Selangor is likely to be an Exco member.
DAP Chairman, Karpal Singh had singled out Lim Guan Eng as an exception to the '1 candidate, I seat' rule in DAP. This in itself shows the dilemma of the opposition leaders. Though it may appear to be favouritism, I think it should be seen in a different perspective. Opposition leaders have been through thick and thin, and some have shown their mettle under very difficult situations. In other words, they have proven their loyalty, integrity, determination and so on. Some are passionate about politics and are capable of handling more responsibilities while others are not so. Therefore, rules which seem fair may not be practical. So which is better? Taking LGE as an example, it would be difficult if he were to be CM of Penang as well as Federal Minister. Even if he can do it, the people might not be receptive to it. Before 2008, it was out of necessity that some popular leaders stood for state and parliamentary seats because of the lack of credible candidates. I wonder what is the position now. I am actually in favour of some outstanding leaders standing for both.
Link
What is surprising to this policy of limiting one seat to one person is not practised at the highest level! Now the PM is not only serving as Finance Minister, but also the Women's Affairs portfolio! The burgeoning PM's Department with several ministers within and a huge staff of about 50,000 made it a cabinet within a cabinet. The costs to maintain this vital department must be humongous.
Before GE12 in 2008, the opposition parties had been struggling against all odds. Besides the harassment by institutions controlled by the ruling coalition, opposition leaders faced problems of supporters who refused or avoided to show themselves. Some were willing to contribute money but not their names. Some would not sign any petition even though they were the complainants! All those who chose the opposition route in politics have to be hardened by all kinds of obstacles. But through it all, a few principled leaders shone and managed to catch the imagination of the people, which largely contributed to the unprecedented and unexpected success of capturing 5 states in 2008.
That the success was unexpected was shown by the bickering over Exco positions and even veteran MPs felt envious of some new state assemblymen holding state ministerial posts which came with extra privileges like official cars and drivers. We can imagine the situation to be magnified if they were to take over at federal level. This is only natural and there is no way to avoid it. At best, they can reduce the problem by first introducing '1 Candidate, 1 Seat' rule. Before election, selected candidates are given the chance to decide whether he or she prefers to stand for state or parliamentary seat. At this juncture it can be tricky. As far as the opposition coalition is concerned, they can never be sure of winning at federal level. So an MP may not end up as a minister but a state assemblyman in say Penang or Selangor is likely to be an Exco member.
DAP Chairman, Karpal Singh had singled out Lim Guan Eng as an exception to the '1 candidate, I seat' rule in DAP. This in itself shows the dilemma of the opposition leaders. Though it may appear to be favouritism, I think it should be seen in a different perspective. Opposition leaders have been through thick and thin, and some have shown their mettle under very difficult situations. In other words, they have proven their loyalty, integrity, determination and so on. Some are passionate about politics and are capable of handling more responsibilities while others are not so. Therefore, rules which seem fair may not be practical. So which is better? Taking LGE as an example, it would be difficult if he were to be CM of Penang as well as Federal Minister. Even if he can do it, the people might not be receptive to it. Before 2008, it was out of necessity that some popular leaders stood for state and parliamentary seats because of the lack of credible candidates. I wonder what is the position now. I am actually in favour of some outstanding leaders standing for both.
No comments:
Post a Comment