Malaysian Chinese News
A new driving force in the Penang state assembly
Writer: Wong Hon Wai
Kwong Wah, May 28, 2015
At 8.30pm on May 15, 2015, I took part in the state assembly debate on the amendments to the Standing Order. It was the last night of the meeting and all of us felt tired after five days and nights in session. Only three assemblymen took part in the debate.
I stood up and explained the long process in making the amendments which lasted 17 months, longer than the 10 months of human gestation period. On Dec 12, 2013, the secretariat of the State Assembly wrote to all state representatives inviting them to submit their views on the amendments to the Standing Order. I regarded this as a rare opportunity to reform the state assembly which has made only three amendments in the last 50 years. The last one was made in 2005.
I did my homework and researched into the Standing Orders of the Malaysian and British parliaments. On Jan 16, 2014, I submitted several recommendations in my reply to the secretariat.
Two of my recommendations were accepted by a standing order committee comprising members of the ruling and opposition parties headed by the Speaker. The recommendations had been adopted by our internal meetings during the last 17 months and were endorsed by the EXCO and finally passed by the state assembly.
When I submitted my recommendations, I was the chairman of Pakatan backbenchers club. My idea was to strengthen the principle of separation of powers, to beef up the state assembly in playing its check-and-balance role and overseeing the EXCO. Such an idea has made my recommendations strong and attractive and eventually, I was able to convince state representatives from both sides of the divide.
We treasured this opportunity because it was a bottom-up process. In other words, the inputs came from the backbenchers and not forced down by the chief minister or EXCO members. By adopting the recommendations, the EXCO on their part had also shown its determination to reform and had fulfilled its promise.
My two recommendations are to expand the question time from three hours now to six hours, which means two hours of question time from the first to the third day and secondly, shorten the oral question time from 21 days to seven.
Question time is an important platform for interactions between EXCO members and backbenchers as well as opposition members. EXCO members will need to provide answers within seconds without a prepared text or the aid of government servants to random questions. It is a real test for the EXCO members in the handling of their work in the past, present and future.
The English media always carry exciting reports on question time by recording the questioner, his party and constituency. For example they will report the question asked by Wong Hon Wai (DAP-Air Itam) and answered by which EXCO member. It is a pity that the Chinese papers only report the answer by EXCO member and omit the name of the questioner. This is not the right way to report state assembly meetings.
I suggested the extension of question time and the number of day to give opportunity to all the 27 government backbenchers and opposition members to ask questions. The standing order committee accepted my view and allowed one-and-a-half hours’ question time every day in session.
The amendment not only increases question time, but also compels EXCO members to attend assembly meeting earlier and prepare themselves for questions. They cannot simply slip away. Of course, assemblymen who raise the question must also be present. This will enhance interactions at the assembly meeting and will result in more exciting media reports instead of seeing the very dull monologue in progress.
My other suggestion was to shorten oral question time from 21 to seven days. There must be new topics in the oral questions. As it is, the 21 days is too long. Some of the topics have become outdated and no more news after 21 days. In the British parliament, oral questions can be submitted two working days before the session begins to ensure that the questions are still hot topics.
The committee, in consideration of the heavy workload of government servants and EXCO members, has agreed to reduce the 21 days to 14. It is still an improvement even though the final decision was different from my suggestion.
What puzzled me was why such recommendations have to come from the chairman of the government backbenchers club and not from the opposition? UMNO showed no interest in the debate of the amendments. I have been the chairman for eight months and I view this as a golden opportunity to push for reformation. My two recommendations have been accepted by my colleagues while my other recommendations have not been accepted yet and still need some convincing.
Recently, I read a report that Pandikar, who has been Dewan Rakyat Speaker for seven years, felt helpless in pushing for parliamentary reforms. He should refer to the Standing Order of the Commonwealth countries
to push for reforms in order to meet the need of modern times.
Of course, all parliamentary reforms must be accepted by the Cabinet as well as the ruling and opposition parties. If there is no such desire by the PM and his Cabinet, there is not much the Speaker can do.
The amendments to the Penang State Assembly Standing Order constituted a small step forward. It will depend on our state assemblymen to make the small step a bigger driving force.
Writer: Wong Hon Wai
Kwong Wah, May 28, 2015
At 8.30pm on May 15, 2015, I took part in the state assembly debate on the amendments to the Standing Order. It was the last night of the meeting and all of us felt tired after five days and nights in session. Only three assemblymen took part in the debate.
I stood up and explained the long process in making the amendments which lasted 17 months, longer than the 10 months of human gestation period. On Dec 12, 2013, the secretariat of the State Assembly wrote to all state representatives inviting them to submit their views on the amendments to the Standing Order. I regarded this as a rare opportunity to reform the state assembly which has made only three amendments in the last 50 years. The last one was made in 2005.
I did my homework and researched into the Standing Orders of the Malaysian and British parliaments. On Jan 16, 2014, I submitted several recommendations in my reply to the secretariat.
Two of my recommendations were accepted by a standing order committee comprising members of the ruling and opposition parties headed by the Speaker. The recommendations had been adopted by our internal meetings during the last 17 months and were endorsed by the EXCO and finally passed by the state assembly.
When I submitted my recommendations, I was the chairman of Pakatan backbenchers club. My idea was to strengthen the principle of separation of powers, to beef up the state assembly in playing its check-and-balance role and overseeing the EXCO. Such an idea has made my recommendations strong and attractive and eventually, I was able to convince state representatives from both sides of the divide.
We treasured this opportunity because it was a bottom-up process. In other words, the inputs came from the backbenchers and not forced down by the chief minister or EXCO members. By adopting the recommendations, the EXCO on their part had also shown its determination to reform and had fulfilled its promise.
My two recommendations are to expand the question time from three hours now to six hours, which means two hours of question time from the first to the third day and secondly, shorten the oral question time from 21 days to seven.
Question time is an important platform for interactions between EXCO members and backbenchers as well as opposition members. EXCO members will need to provide answers within seconds without a prepared text or the aid of government servants to random questions. It is a real test for the EXCO members in the handling of their work in the past, present and future.
The English media always carry exciting reports on question time by recording the questioner, his party and constituency. For example they will report the question asked by Wong Hon Wai (DAP-Air Itam) and answered by which EXCO member. It is a pity that the Chinese papers only report the answer by EXCO member and omit the name of the questioner. This is not the right way to report state assembly meetings.
I suggested the extension of question time and the number of day to give opportunity to all the 27 government backbenchers and opposition members to ask questions. The standing order committee accepted my view and allowed one-and-a-half hours’ question time every day in session.
The amendment not only increases question time, but also compels EXCO members to attend assembly meeting earlier and prepare themselves for questions. They cannot simply slip away. Of course, assemblymen who raise the question must also be present. This will enhance interactions at the assembly meeting and will result in more exciting media reports instead of seeing the very dull monologue in progress.
My other suggestion was to shorten oral question time from 21 to seven days. There must be new topics in the oral questions. As it is, the 21 days is too long. Some of the topics have become outdated and no more news after 21 days. In the British parliament, oral questions can be submitted two working days before the session begins to ensure that the questions are still hot topics.
The committee, in consideration of the heavy workload of government servants and EXCO members, has agreed to reduce the 21 days to 14. It is still an improvement even though the final decision was different from my suggestion.
What puzzled me was why such recommendations have to come from the chairman of the government backbenchers club and not from the opposition? UMNO showed no interest in the debate of the amendments. I have been the chairman for eight months and I view this as a golden opportunity to push for reformation. My two recommendations have been accepted by my colleagues while my other recommendations have not been accepted yet and still need some convincing.
Recently, I read a report that Pandikar, who has been Dewan Rakyat Speaker for seven years, felt helpless in pushing for parliamentary reforms. He should refer to the Standing Order of the Commonwealth countries
to push for reforms in order to meet the need of modern times.
Of course, all parliamentary reforms must be accepted by the Cabinet as well as the ruling and opposition parties. If there is no such desire by the PM and his Cabinet, there is not much the Speaker can do.
The amendments to the Penang State Assembly Standing Order constituted a small step forward. It will depend on our state assemblymen to make the small step a bigger driving force.
No comments:
Post a Comment