JAN 26 — Who’s your favourite? Ahmad Fuad Ismail, Mohmad Shaid Mohd Taufek, Yaacob Latif or Ruslin Hasan?
Since one-fourth of Malaysians live in the Klang Valley, a fair number of readers might be well-acquainted with these personalities, enough at least to pick the best mayor Kuala Lumpur has ever had in its 40 years as a city.
Ahmad Fuad who again? Just the current mayor and he has been on the job since 2008.
Ninth man to fill the appointed post since 1972.
All nine of them being civil servants and not politicians, they have arduously served the interest of the federal government and the prime minister during their tenures. There is no way around it, since their position has been predicated on Putrajaya liking them. It is an elaborate BFF (best friend forever) scheme of the highest order.
It might be asked of this column to be far more considerate of these fine gentlemen, but there is so little information about those who preceded Ahmad Fuad, as very little was written about them. They pass through the job as any civil servant is expected, with no pomp or occasion.
One exception might be Elyas Omar, the Penang-born mayor, who was more memorable for his role in sports — as the Badminton Association of Malaysia president when Malaysia won the 1992 Thomas Cup.
Shockingly, there is more information readily available on Thomas Knollys, a certain unexciting mayor of London in 1399.
This might be connected to the fact most of the nine are not Kuala Lumpur-born, on top of them being technocrats. Unlike Knollys, it is difficult to write about men who’ve never had the mandate to succeed or fail on their own ideas.
Vote-then, vote-direct
It is Federal Territories Day next week. There was just one territory in 1974 when the city of Kuala Lumpur — overwhelmingly populated by ethnic Chinese who apparently voted in a certain way in the 1969 general election — was carved out of Selangor and ceased to have a say in future elections of representatives to that state’s assembly.
Since then Labuan and Putrajaya have been added.
This year, 2012, is the 60th anniversary of the first election in Malaysia, held in Kuala Lumpur. The British decided that the natives could now choose those they want to run the town municipal. There were other local elections afterwards, but KL was the testing ground.
In 1952 Umno and the MCA decided to come together as the Alliance and count their support base. They won 11 of 12 seats and Omar Ong Yoke Lin was made leader of the Alliance councillors.
Therefore irony is at an all-time high, as the very people who started their mandate to national political power from local elections today in the avatar of Barisan Nasional (BN) — Umno and the MCA are the two most senior members of the 14-party coalition — oppose vehemently local elections.
It was brilliant and still bragged about, about them winning conclusively the Kuala Lumpur elections 60 years ago, but it is seen as unnecessary, undemocratic, too complicated and dangerous to have those elections again in the 21st century. Kafka would have died even sooner if he was born in this Malaysia.
This column continues to advocate strongly for the reinstitution of local elections, and as a child of the city of Kuala Lumpur, I want the city to directly elect its mayor. Politicians, not civil servants.
The concept of electing not appointing city and municipality leadership is not new. Rather than relying on councillor elections only, London moved to a direct election of a mayor, with Ken Livingstone the first winner in 2000.
There are various ways to go about electing leadership, no less meaningful what was already in place in Malaysia prior to 1964 when local elections were suspended.
Though any resumption of local elections in Malaysia should include the direct election of mayors for all towns and cities.
Let’s see some examples from the developing and developed world.
Melbourne directly elected John So as mayor in 2001. The Hong Kong-born Victorian went on for two terms, till 2008.
Sri Lanka’s Colombo, after almost 30 years of conflict over ethnicity, religion and regionalism, must have been a place inundated with caution. Yet the predominantly Buddhist nation voted in a Muslim, Ahamed Jamaldeen Mohamed Muzammil, last year.
The thing is there is nothing to study. Because if there is one over-abused excuse for not doing the right thing in Malaysia, it is this one, that there needs to be more “study”. Really?
Policymakers study the experimental and new/untested cynically. Pass that they consider track records, pitfalls and extreme cases.
Malaysia is a federation. Many of the arguments for local elections are subsumed in the argument for the federation itself. Therefore the extending concerns are only method and process.
A mayor and local councillors are just as loyal as anyone in the federal seat of power. All are Malaysians.
However, as parties with different mandates they will differ when interacting on decisions and developments.
The mayor will consider the will of Kuala Lumpur’s people, for they are the ones who put him or her in office, first. The same voters who are in a position to kick that mayor out.
The tone of discussion between Putrajaya and KL will change for the better. Why better? Because no one person has the best answers in life, let alone in a democracy. By allowing opposing perspectives to collide a better set of decisions will appear. And even if they fail, they are more considered, better debated and carry the will of the people who are directly affected by the decision.
That’s empowerment.
The elephant in the room
The emotional element will be the high possibility of an ethnic Chinese mayor for the actual capital of Malaysia. The lucid answer might be after nine Malay gentlemen, if the people of KL decide to vote for a Chinese, that’s not the maddest thing to happen.
But emotions are always about dealing with changes, not accepting changes. Those elected must choose to engage those who failed to choose them.
The practical element has to be taxation. There cannot be taxation without representation. Equally when there is valid and democratic representation, they must have the appropriate tax revenue.
As partisanship drives the rates of handouts to states and municipalities, laws of just redistribution to states and municipalities must be enforced. It cannot just be about political expediency, then all local governments will be at the mercy of Putrajaya.
This day in Kuala Lumpur
Popular vote is not about banishing those who are not from Kuala Lumpur. Cities, by their nature, champion mobility and house all.
As written on New York’s Statue of Liberty, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”, a message echoing that cities are cosmopolitan because everyone is welcome.
KL is just as colourful as all those cities, which romances and journeys are written about.
The buzz of Pudu Market on any morning, and the main street with electronic stores engineers are advised to frequent for anything and everything. Getting your late-night and early-morning dim-sum on Jalan Ipoh, where late-night revellers cross paths with those starting the day early. And for some random madness there is Puduraya, a place where everyone is waiting for something. The rush to pay traffic summonses at the Jalan Bandar traffic police HQ during discount season as the hustle-bustle of Petaling Street draws bargain hunters around the corner.
The length of Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman (TAR), marked at two ends by dating couples at Dataran Merdeka and find-a-date Chow Kit area. On the road itself, shop after shop disguising little the changing faces of the city. The Golden Triangle, stripped of its central jail but not its potent mix of businesses, shopping centres and nightclubs.
Setapak, Kampung Pandan, Ampang, KLCC, Keramat, KL Sentral, Bangsar, what have you.
KL has enough going for it. It just now needs its own people running. Someone who feels the city, and not just someone’s point person. A mayor who is in love with the city, not just continuing a career in the civil service.
* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.
3 comments