Opportunistic politics not helping country get better
THE fact that Covid-19 been co-opted into domestic politics is not surprising. It is a natural progression to be expected as politics is the art of making hay, or sowing weeds, with what’s out there. Well, why waste a “good” crisis.
That the pandemic is a fact of life these days requires the politically-inclined to look for something else that could rouse our anger and perhaps our infant vaccination programme is rather useful — Why do some other countries pay less? Why is Singapore ahead of us? No Chinese vaccines, please.
It is right to criticise the handling of the pandemic, and all world leaders and governments have had their share. Perhaps the need to make decisions on the fly with limited knowledge of an unprecedented situation is a factor.
That is what opposition politicians are for, which is to hold a watching brief on behalf of the people. However, they should resist the urge to snipe to remain relevant. It is churlish to be faulting everything, though some cannot resist the temptation.
We should not excuse incompetency, of course, but everyone is learning as we go along. We, however, demand sincerity and earnestness in our handling of the pandemic.
Hindsight is always great, but the whole world did not know what hit us. At the outset of the disease in Wuhan in late 2019, and even as early as last year, we did not even consider halting travellers from China, much less the rest of the world
At the same time, as new coronavirus strains are threatening to scupper what we have learned thus far, governments need to restart the economy, kick-start vaccination programmes, work on reopening borders, establish social safety nets, bring back a semblance of normalcy, etc. The list lengthens as we get truly into the second year of Covid-19, and again, there is no sure way of doing things.
For instance, as much as there are people criticising the relaxation given to our movements these past few months, there are also many who criticised the government for being too strict and killing the economy.
I believe it has something to do with some people’s dislike of the current government, about how it came into being, how it has been able to stay in power for a year now despite all odds and the many attempts to discredit it and bring it down, and how it has somehow not been the political pariah with most of the general public as what its detractors are painting it to be.
Yet, while there are many who have issues with Tan Sri Muhyidddin Yassin’s government, people are unlikely now to take to the streets Bersih-like even if there was no pandemic. Malaysians generally loath protesting or perhaps are tired of being used by politicians. The much-maligned Barisan Nasional is no longer in power, and the opposition front is less united than what some make it out to be.
Most people know the biggest detractors of the government are basically individuals eyeing the top job, or to be part of the team replacing Muhyiddin’s administration, who, when they criticise the handling of Covid-19, one could not hide their political outrage by using the oft repeated “backdoor government” when, for instance, discussing the vaccine roll-out programme.
I understand the frustration of some politicians over how they had shot themselves in the foot and caused the implosion of the previous government, and how the new one was formed in its place. But, please, we are in a pandemic.
There was a suggestion that members of parliament be given jabs so that they can convene, an idea stemming from political desperation — once our elected representatives meet, then the support for the present government can be tested.
If Muhyiddin’s government falls short, then it must be dissolved and presumably someone else would present himself as the new prime ministerial candidate and would seek to enter office the same way the present government is being criticised for, via royal decree sans an election.
No, I do not believe MPs should be given priority for vaccination not because they do not deserve it, but because Parliament sittings are not dependent on them being inoculated. It can be done remotely, and, perhaps, it can be more orderly with the Speaker being able to mute those disobeying the standing order.
At the same time, there are allegations that the government stumbled and bumbled its way into the vaccination programme, all the way to being corrupt in the negotiation and purchasing processes. Why do we have a vaccine minister anyway, they asked.
I think many of us are making conclusions based on limited and selective information that we have, and in our anxiety about Covid-19, opportunistic politics sowed doubts and mistrust.
On why we have a minister in charge of vaccine, I speculate it is because there is the need to negotiate with big pharmaceuticals and governments the world over, mobilise domestic resources from public and private sectors, as well as organise a nationwide vaccination programme, all of which include inter-ministry coordination; almost a wartime-like effort.
People may not be too happy with the political situation, but perhaps we should give it a rest at least until we have a better handle on Covid-19. There has already been a suggestion that a general election could be held once, say, half of the population gets vaccinated, which given the current timeline should be not too far away. I think we can wait.
Must politics colour everything we do, especially in times of a national health crisis? Will political retribution and the dissolving of Parliament or holding an election in any way help fight the pandemic? Can’t we limit the political intrigue after we sort our vaccination programme, for instance?