WHAT is new after May 9, 2018? Quite a few things, actually, despite a number of prominent shortcomings against the background of an ambitious manifesto, particularly on pledges related to cost of living relating to fuel, taxes and the dreaded toll.
The new cabinet’s goals have mostly digressed towards matters concerning corruption and rule of law. The former prime minister, for instance, is facing a slew of charges now; something that some did not expect would even materialise back then.
Notwithstanding, of course, we have yet to see a flying car darting across our skyline. Nevertheless, Malaysians are generally pragmatic when it comes to adapting to a new landscape; some view changes as improvements, a few see them as a bitter pill to swallow, while others consider certain aspects in the political landscape to be not moving.
The latter pertains to a great number of politicians who unfortunately remain to embody a stereotype which portends to the axiom — “those who cannot do, talk”.
Contextually, they are excellent at providing lip service and it is a characteristic which cuts across the divide. And best of all, the Dewan Rakyat or Lower House is undoubtedly their Colosseum.
Disruptions during a sitting will either guarantee an entertaining verbal spar or wincing, depending on the incorrigibility rate of a lawmaker’s attempt at holding a filibuster.
There is a parable about a DAP member of parliament who has the tenacity of a hawk and will spot his prey from hundreds of metres above. And his modus operandi is to consistently question the opposition members of their knowledge on Datuk Seri Najib Razak and 1Malaysia Development Bhd.
The topic has motivated him to be tactless and relentless. It has made the opposition hapless. And the Speaker presiding over the sitting that day will always become breathless, trying to pacify the two sides before him.
His opposition equal is an Umno MP. The unstoppable meets the unmovable. Life and death in the Schrödinger’s cat scenario. DC versus Marvel. Airbus versus Boeing. Coke versus Pepsi.
And the fact that both men will be incensed for being equated with each other makes their similarities all the more palpable. The incumbent Umno MP has never failed to stand up during the commotion or to stir one, whenever his opponent shoots a salvo from across the floor.
His songkok will tilt to the side as he growls with gusto to convey his argument. Verbose shouts will subsequently fill the august house.
Outside in the Parliament lobby, where the goings-on are televised live, newsmen are rolling their eyes and visitors wear a curious look as if it was all shown on LiveLeak.
As incumbents, the two are very much liked by a majority of their respective constituents due to the services rendered on the ground. But as federal lawmakers, rhetoric and inane shouts have no place in discussing real issues affecting the common people daily; it is rudderless and pointless to be in the house if MPs are only interested in raising their voices thoughtlessly.
It is not unlike the nonsense of disagreeable lawmakers who decided on a walkout in protest of the Speaker’s particular rulings on certain days, only later to resign to their reserved lounge to chat over nasi campur, kuih, coffee and gossip.
Consequently, some of the amendment bills pass through with little debate. These are the real issues that merit substantial debate but are dropped without any credible scrutiny.
MPs are accorded a host of perks. These are what taxpayers, who had elected them to work, are paying for. Some may claim that the exuberance for an ideally constructive politician has no place even in the New Malaysia. But one begs to differ since there are also a number of those who sit in the same house, but are committed to playing their roles as lawmakers, sans the pomp and galore of a rowdy representative.
But it does not matter how many times we frown upon this dereliction of responsibility, some things will just remain unchanged.
The writer is an NST specialist writer