OVER the past one year of Pakatan Harapan rule, the current government has had quite a few openly reported mini-skirmishes with the royals, senior civil servants and government-linked companies (GLCs). Some attempted at being half-hidden, while others completely open. 

Although some may see this as a sign of weakness of the present government, or its inability to control what Barisan Nasional had kept under the rug all these years, it could also be seen as a sign of confidence, in daring to rock the boat, and a sign of commitment to see through its promise of openness of media and the widening of democratic space to dissent and criticise, at the cost of political popularity and perception.

While this new openness is, of course, a reason to celebrate, the extent of wheeling and dealing that has gone on, thus far, behind closed doors, complete unknown to those without the privilege of being in the corridors of power, the inner circles of influence and action.

The youth and sports minister, for example, recently came out to explain the reason for what he believes is the cause of strain in his relationship with the Johor palace, or particularly the Tengku Mahkota. Although he did not go into specifics, he did list out a few demands that he felt were unreasonable and an interference to the business of sports.

Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad himself had gone on record to state incidents where the rulers have not-so-rightly interfered in government decisions, and that he was trying his level best to keep these under control, as with the protocols involved with the royals involved in business and land purchases. This would also safeguard the good name of the rulers and the royal institution.

While this sort of discussion is new and awkward, it could be what is needed to move the reform agenda forward and make it complete.

The ongoing trial of former prime minister Najib Razak also exposed quite a lot about the civil service and government machinery. Decisions by the prime minister back then were largely unchecked, and Najib held unfettered discretion over disbursement of funds, distribution of monies, and movement of people within the civil service and GLCs.

The creation and dissolution of government agencies and units were also done with a stroke of a pen, as were strategic decisions involving GLCs.

This coupling of executive power and the business arm of the government must stop. It is the job of GLCs to provide a public service, advance a particular area of interest, or make money to spur the economic progress of the country. The people heading these units should also have the qualification and dedication to these causes, and not necessarily the political cause of the ruling coalition.  

Neither are GLCs a slush fund for political ambitions for the people helming them, nor their masters.

The open disagreement between members of the administration is also something neither the media nor public may be used to. It can be seen, however, as a healthy sign – democracy is about managing differences, after all.

So long as it does not breach collective ministerial responsibility, members should be allowed to state their opinions freely, speaking for themselves, their constituents, and in the interests they represent – ideological, communal, religious and so on.

With more exposes and clashes of opinion looming on the horizon, more skirmishes can be expected in the coming weeks and months. As they lose novelty in the new Malaysia, it is hoped that such healthy disagreements can help widen the crawlspace and normalise sensitive discussions that would, in turn, help Malaysia mature and grow as a country. – April 26, 2019.

* Emmanuel Joseph firmly believes that Klang is the best place on Earth, and that motivated people can do far more good than any leader with motive.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.