Friday May 16, 2008
Know your people, MPs
A LOT has been said, mostly negative about the performance of our Members of Parliament, and I think they deserve all the bad comments.
It was disappointing to many to see seasoned and experienced parliamentarians as well as those with good oratory skills waste time on trivial technical matters. It was however hardly surprising to me as our legislature has been consistently deteriorating in quality throughout the years.
It has in the past been largely due to the legislative assembly being considered and perceived as rubber stamp to the ruling party who overwhelmingly controlled Parliament with a vast majority.
But with the changed political scenario after March 8 and a more balanced representation in Parliament, the people had expected the Opposition to seize the opportunity to start improving the standard of our legislative as one of the highest political institutions in the country.
The essence of a good Parliament in a representative democratic system is quality debate of what the people want the politicians to speak for on their behalf. This is where the problem arises.
Firstly, good quality debates require a reasonable amount of research on the subject matter to be debated. From what we have seen so far, it was obvious that not many MPs had taken the trouble to do some research before speaking up.
To be fair to them, this may be due to time constraints and lack of resources on their part. It is normally only the executive, ministers and deputy ministers who have enough resources in the form of allocation and staff at their disposal to conduct sufficient research on any subject.
I suggest that we adopt the American system of inviting independent experts on relevant matters to give their opinions and briefings in Parliament, so that a more meaningful debate among the parliamentarians can take place before a law is being passed.
Secondly, to speak on behalf of the people requires regular interaction with the people they are representing.
I have not come across (at least as far as my own area is concerned) any MP who has organised interactive sessions with the people to get feedback on the subjects to be debated in Parliament or to get the people’s opinion on current issues affecting the country.
Perhaps the MPs, as “trustees of the people”, should start having more meetings with their constituents, not just to attend to their local infrastructure problems and needs but also to gather information on what the people really want them to speak about in Parliament.
As it is now, the parliamentarians are acting more as agents or voices of their political parties rather than as the people’s representative or wakil rakyat.
AHMAD ALI,
Bayan Baru, Penang.
Reader Comments
Allow
Don't allow
Post date and time
Know your people, MPs
A LOT has been said, mostly negative about the performance of our Members of Parliament, and I think they deserve all the bad comments.
It was disappointing to many to see seasoned and experienced parliamentarians as well as those with good oratory skills waste time on trivial technical matters. It was however hardly surprising to me as our legislature has been consistently deteriorating in quality throughout the years.
It has in the past been largely due to the legislative assembly being considered and perceived as rubber stamp to the ruling party who overwhelmingly controlled Parliament with a vast majority.
But with the changed political scenario after March 8 and a more balanced representation in Parliament, the people had expected the Opposition to seize the opportunity to start improving the standard of our legislative as one of the highest political institutions in the country.
The essence of a good Parliament in a representative democratic system is quality debate of what the people want the politicians to speak for on their behalf. This is where the problem arises.
Firstly, good quality debates require a reasonable amount of research on the subject matter to be debated. From what we have seen so far, it was obvious that not many MPs had taken the trouble to do some research before speaking up.
To be fair to them, this may be due to time constraints and lack of resources on their part. It is normally only the executive, ministers and deputy ministers who have enough resources in the form of allocation and staff at their disposal to conduct sufficient research on any subject.
I suggest that we adopt the American system of inviting independent experts on relevant matters to give their opinions and briefings in Parliament, so that a more meaningful debate among the parliamentarians can take place before a law is being passed.
Secondly, to speak on behalf of the people requires regular interaction with the people they are representing.
I have not come across (at least as far as my own area is concerned) any MP who has organised interactive sessions with the people to get feedback on the subjects to be debated in Parliament or to get the people’s opinion on current issues affecting the country.
Perhaps the MPs, as “trustees of the people”, should start having more meetings with their constituents, not just to attend to their local infrastructure problems and needs but also to gather information on what the people really want them to speak about in Parliament.
As it is now, the parliamentarians are acting more as agents or voices of their political parties rather than as the people’s representative or wakil rakyat.
AHMAD ALI,
Bayan Baru, Penang.
Reader Comments
Allow
Don't allow
Post date and time
No comments:
Post a Comment