Malaysiakini : Despite this, Anwar proved his legitimacy by also winning a
motion of confidence at the First Session of the 15th Parliamentary
session, gaining support from his former political rivals, while the top
leadership in Mahathirās Pejuang has left, citing a loss of confidence.
Even Mahathir has left the party he founded.Thus,
as far as the topic of confidence goes, the contrast between Mahathir
and Anwar is like night and day. It is best to digest, contemplate and
accept the reality before commenting on the matter.
As
for being worried about Anwarās ability to navigate and address the
economic issues or claiming Anwar was preoccupied with maintaining
support in the Dewan Rakyat, perhaps Mahathir could not recall ever
being worried about securing confidence because the system he put in
place ensured that his authority will never be questioned.
In
contrast to Mahathirās brand of power concentration and collusion,
Anwar and Harapan are in fact, pushing for the de-powering of the PMās
position by limiting terms, ensuring appointments of the
attorney-general and the heads of other crucial checks-and-balance
organisations are made independently, separating the executive and the
judiciary and many more reforms.
If anything, Anwarās apparent āpreoccupationā involves undoing
the resulting corrupt machinery instilled through decades of Mahathirās
āpreoccupationā with securing power. Anwar couldāve focused solely on
economic issues but he ended up having to juggle cleaning up someone
elseās mess of poor governance and integrity over many decades.
As
for being worried about Anwarās ability to navigate and address the
economic issues, Mahathir should know it has only been a month since
Anwar took office, and even then, his administration has done plenty.
Anwarās
first order of business was (and still is) to focus on addressing the
cost-of-living issues, with short and long terms measures being
implemented. Mahathir should know that inflation is a combination of
various factors, some areas being less within the control of the
government. Itās easy to criticise from the sideline.
Mahathir
is unable to deny Anwarās leadership-by-example which has been shown
through cutting ministerial salaries (in addition to Anwar not taking
any pay), ordering cost-cutting measures and frugality in ministries and
agencies, and not taking a new government car or office renovations.
Helping
the people remains a focus when the electricity tariff was not
increased, giving tax cuts for low-cost housing, direct cash aid for
students and families who are in need, special telco payment schemes for
the youth, veterans and the old, and many more.
All
this while not forgetting to address structural and governance issues
such as ending direct tenders, reviewing costly and questionable
projects and so on.
Perhaps if Mahathir has other
great ideas, he should constructively convey this to Anwar. At least,
Mahathir might maintain some semblance of relevance in that way instead
of unproductive criticisms and comments to the press or ramblings on
social media.
As mentioned in the Emir Research
article āAnwar Ibrahimās (AI) Innovation Agenda (IA)ā dated December 2,
2022, Anwarās administration has a clear and well-defined path.
It will prioritise unity and understanding, while reforms will
target the radical transparency and good governance of institutions and
processes - antithetical to the ādivide and conquerā Machiavellian
administrations that Mahathir is well acquainted with.
After
all, arguably it was Mahathirās changes in the implementation of the
New Economic Policy (NEP) over many decades that have contributed to
widening racial polarisation in Malaysia.
Unlike
before, the implementation of IA involves better accountability by
implementing impact-oriented use of government resources that quantifies
and measures outcomes and results.
Although steps
such as targeted subsidies can help alleviate the impact of inflation
for the ones that truly need it, crucial ecosystem changes are being
done simultaneously, including the removal of inefficiencies,
monopolies, middlepersons, cartels, and syndicates that contribute to
non-competitiveness and bloated value chains.
The
administration tackles this from the macro to micro levels - from rice
production to egg supply, and even ending intermediary monopoly in
business spaces of bazaars, pasar malam, and pasar tani.
Relatedly,
one of the immediate focus of this supply chain and innovation reforms
in the IA would be on food security, whereby government and agricultural
GLCs must take the lead in investing in and promoting the use of
innovative technologies and sustainable practices in farming, fishing
and livestock so that they become innovation industries.
Mahathir
should be aware that although his focus on industrialisation was an
economically-sound decision in line with global change that led to GDP
growth and job creation, the narrow and prolonged emphasis on
industrialisation led to the extreme and unbalanced shift from food
crops to cash crops, contributing to the food insecurity that we face
today.
To reverse the culture of putting political
allies in important organisations to ensure continued political support
and the concentration of power, Anwar is already taking steps to ensure
the right (qualified) people will be positioned in these organisations
by first removing all politically appointed leadership.
Long-term
games such as the nurturing of start-ups, digital transformation and
sunrise technologies will be focusing on developing the local industry,
modernisation, and competitiveness, generating both domestic and foreign
direct investment.
As for the question of capability
and seriousness in doing this, Mahathir should recall his meeting with
Anwar at Yayasan Al-Bukhari back in 2019 where they discussed the
countryās digital economy and efforts to reduce the economic pressures
facing the people.
Has Mahathir forgotten how Anwar
pushed for the intensification of the digital aspect of the economy and
the injection of a new aspect for the continuation of the Multimedia
Super Corridor (MSC), which was inspired by Mahathir?
Anwar
even launched an initiative called the Digital Native Agenda (DNA23) in
that same year. How come we didnāt hear complaints about Anwarās
capabilities then?
Emerging technologies of the
Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), particularly in the renewables
space, cleantech, climate change and the circular economy will not be
missed out under IA as it is obvious that there is an urgent need to
balance its consumption with the environment.
All of
these are meant to create public and private marketplaces and exchanges,
generating growth in the domestic economy, while the reformed agents of
the ecosystem (business, governance, and talents) will compete for FDI,
which Malaysia has been losing to neighbouring countries in previous
years.
Related to attracting foreign investments, IA
will not overlook the revival of Malaysiaās unique intersection between
tourism, art, and culture.
The importance and
magnitude of the combination of Malaysiaās unique amalgamation of
various cultures, the creative industry and natural biodiversity are
potent - a potential waiting to be tapped to its fullest potential.
Lacking
real points to criticise Anwar, Mahathir resorted to age-old issues by
bringing up the topic of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and Anwar
during the Asian Financial Crisis.
Though it has
been acknowledged by many - even by the IMF later on - that Malaysiaās
unconventional response to the crisis, particularly in capital controls
and currency pegging was effective, the blanket criticism of Anwar is
uncalled for and must be carefully understood. We give credit where
credit is due, but enough gloating on this.
Firstly, as explained by Anwar years ago, IMFās recommendations were never outrightly accepted.
Secondly,
what Anwar believed to be correct was regarding IMFās assessment that
Malaysiaās crisis of confidence will require addressing underlying
structural problems.
Evidently, the lack of necessary
reforms has led to the structural crisis of governance that we have
today, which is arguably the core of most problems in Malaysia.
Either
way, Mahathir should let go of this historical event as he too would
know that the topic has long been easy fodder for critics trying to
paint Anwar as a tool of the West, where some even go as far as accusing
him of being an Israeli agent.
Clearly, some people
have forgotten that Anwar was the one who reportedly brought up a
national security issue during the Supplementary Bill debate on April 6,
2010, alleging that the upgrading works of the police forceās reporting
and communications system involved two former Israeli intelligence
personnel as sub-contractors.
The 14th general
election showed how the combination, and therefore, the cooperation
between Mahathir and Anwar was potent and formidable. If only Mahathir
realised this and did not let emotions get in the way.
Mahathir
congratulated Anwar on his appointment as Malaysiaās 10th prime
minister and even wished him well. If the ship of cooperation has long
sailed, then perhaps it is time to end things on a good note,
permanently.
Mahathir has done plenty for Malaysia,
resulting in both good and bad, and we give credit where credit is due.
But itās high time for self-reflection and letting things go. Let Anwar
go.