PETALING JAYA: While the proposed Fixed-term Parliament Act (FTPA) could greatly benefit voters, the Election Commission and political players, it is unlikely to pose any significant or positive effects on the economy, say experts.
They said what matters most to a country’s economy is its ability to have continuity in its policy implementation as well as separating administrative work from politics.
Al-Madinah International University’s Prof Emeritus Dr Barjoyai Bardai said new “tenants of Putrajaya” should not keep changing the country’s agendas and policies.Complementing a fixed parliamentary term with the separation of the work of both politicians and civil servants would be a better solution, said the economist.
“We agree with the fixed-term idea since it will add more years to allow certain policies to grow, but still, five years is not enough because it takes about 20 years for a policy to be successfully and effectively implemented.
“Of course, we shouldn’t keep a non-functioning government because that is even worse, so what we should do is separate the duties of civil servants and politicians. Ministers and MPs should play their own roles, but civil servants should be the ones that ensure the continuity of policies.
“We cannot always change the country’s agenda after every election; otherwise, when are we going to be a developed country?” he said when contacted.
Malaysia University of Science and Technology’s Prof Dr Geoffrey Williams said a fixed election cycle will give some assurance that policies will be implemented and seen through.
On the other hand, he said, prolonging the life of an ineffective sitting government would mean that bad policies would remain.
“It also means that when waste, leakages and corruption become part of policy, then it is difficult to change the government to stop them.
“When policy designers follow the same mindset and create cascades of patronage, these also cannot be changed easily.
“This will damage investor confidence and create a sense of an undemocratic economic environment captured for five years by an elected dictatorship,” he said.
Having the fixed parliamentary system alone, Prof Dr Mohd Nazari Ismail of Universiti Malaya pointed out, would only allow more abuse of power.
“Having fewer frequent elections can save money, but the danger of prolonging fixed terms is that leaders may abuse the system to continue to remain in power by using undemocratic means.
“The economic system that we practice will always produce periods of crises, so it does not matter whether you give the leaders a long period to manage the economy. There will always be a crisis down the road,” he said.
Centre for Market Education chief executive officer Dr Carmelo Ferlito said if the government wants to proceed with the fixed-term proposal, it should go through the plan properly so that there is still a mechanism that allows the change of government or prime minister without going through a general election.
“It is important that the political system of a country remains flexible because that is one of the conditions of a well-functioning democracy; changes must still be possible,” he added.
On Jan 13, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi suggested an FTPA to allow the country to go through a scheduled election cycle.
The Bagan Datuk MP’s proposal has so far been positively received by various lawyers and groups, including Bersih, but dismissed as a “desperate attempt to remain in power” by Opposition leaders.
On Sunday, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reforms) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said the government will look into the suggestion.
