To put it simply, I have a devouring reproachful acrimony toward the ruling government of Malaysia. I do not have the “I Love BN/Pak Lah” sticker on the car. And I have long decided that my attempt to boost my social life will never go as near as filling up a membership form of the “Pak Lah Fan Club”. Also, I had since shunned The Star, the people’s government’s paper, whose portrayal of the government as the holiest group of people in the country does not seem to work on me.

The animosity was by virtue of the incompetence that had reared its ugly head in the so-called ministers, who had retarded the country in so many ways, causing it to lose its competitiveness.

If I have to name my least favourite minister, it has to be the Education Minister. His incompetence affects me and in a domino fashion, the flawed education system in turn produced many other incompetent ministers in the cabinet. He virtually retarded the schooling system, and our schools have been producing shit in recent years. And what the future lies? A nation of shit. Quite a stark contrast to the “future” that was portrayed in the BN advertisements.

Work Minister is also one of my least favourite. Apparently buildings and structures can collapse at any time. That caused me to worry and feel insecure. Question is, why should I feel insecure and unsafe in my very own country?

The Local Government Minister is the reason our cities and homes are ugly. Urban spaces are in a complete mess, like a giant hairball. Navigation is a nightmare for a person who ain’t local. Pedestrian pavements are as scarce as a good politician. The city is not integrated, lacking in a distinctive identity. Our spaces have serious brand identity problem. My perception of this country is that is filled with ugly buildings (with the exception of some parts), roads are poorly maintained, rubbish is everywhere, beaches are dirty etc. There is seriously no place that resembles a world class city to which I can be proud bringing a foreigner.

Transport Minister is also an incompetent lot. Buses sucks, trains never come on time.

————————————–

Tomorrow is d-day. And of course, I should be singing the chorus of other bloggers out there, urging the public to vote for the so-called “Barisan Alternatif” and “deny BN the two-third majority”. Part of the chorus is about getting rid of the sexist, racist and incompetent people in the parliament - the Member of Parliament, whose job is to communicate to the government the problems face by the people in his/her constituency.

But my discontent however was not about the Members of Parliament. The MPs ultimately serve no purpose, so to speak, under the BN’s regulation that they must not oppose the decisions of made by a fellow BN decision maker. I don’t care what party is he from, as long as he can give me service, I am happy to give him my vote. I am more concern about the capability of the ministers, the decision makers who shape policies for growth and development of the country.

But of course, the two are related in many ways. A minister is after all selected amongst the MPs.

And hence, what I am not OK with, and what I am really questioning is, the established modus operandi of the appointment of ministers.

Reasons I’m not OK with the status quo:

1. Take Minister X for example, who will be defending his parliamentary seat in Area Y. So he will be going to Area Y to campaign to seek a fresh mandate. Upon winning, he will, barring any unforeseen circumstances, resume being a minister, who makes decisions affecting the nation. So the question goes: Why is he making decisions affecting me, while I did not vote for him, given that I am not from Area Y. Only a small group of people from Area Y (which is a tiny fraction of the entire Malaysian population) gave him the mandate. So how can Minister X claim that he was elected by the people of Malaysia, while the fact is that he was elected only by a small group of people?

1. The people elect Minister X based on his ability to do the job of establishing a communication channel between the people and government. I believe if the status quo is to be maintained, his ability and capacity as a Minister in previous term should be evaluated, because ultimately, if Minister X is elected, he will (more often than not) resume his position as Minister X. But hey, the MP’s performance as a minister wasn’t raise in the election, all that was raise is the usual racial issues, economic issues, etc, which might or might not be relevant to the jurisdiction of the ministry that the elected MP will soon helm. My point is, he is elected based on other criteria (his ability to do work, voice the grievance of the people), and not at all of his capacity to be a good policy maker.

————————————–

And because of this, we don’t really get good policy makers in our cabinet line-up. Because I have been reading business articles for years now, the concept of “getting the best people to do the job” has been deeply inscribed in my mind.

I believe the best people are definitely not the MPs. A good candidate for Transport Minister could be a frequent commuter of public transport who is frustrated with the poor state of public amenities. A good Environment Minister can be someone from the indigenous tribe whose place of birth has been destroyed and made way for concrete developments. Likewise, a student can be the Education Minister, a recovered cancer patient can be a good Health Minister.

The present ministers, who are at its core MPs who won seats by means of playing up racial issues, etc, have no demonstrated capacity as a person capable of making decisions on many issues affecting Malaysians. And I believe the method of appointment of the cabinet ministers is an utter flaw.

That is really what I am not OK with. Of course, my hypothesis is just a preliminary one. I shall keep my eyes open to further refine this notion of mine.