Let economic technocrats take the steering wheel

AFTER half a month without a national cabinet as the nation faces grave threats — from an epidemic to an oil-price slump and all the economic headwinds in their wake — Malaysians should heave a collective sigh of relief that Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin finally unveiled his list of ministers this week.

It is a thoughtful and creditable line-up — considering the political constraints facing the prime minister — and ought to reassure most Malaysians that our low-key new leader is a safe pair of hands.

As others have commented, perhaps exactly what the country needs at this critical juncture.

We need to move on.

I have written about how Malay political angst triggered this change in government.

As if on cue, non-Malay angst has come to the fore now. It is perhaps unavoidable but if we really care about this nation, it is incumbent upon us all to make breaking this vicious cycle a priority.

And I seriously doubt political multiracialism perceived to be heavily-driven by minority segments of the populace is the answer.

We tried it but perhaps those pushing it failed to recognise what a slender mandate the 14th general election (GE14) for reorganising our politics actually was.

Had political multiracialism become entrenched, the Gerakan candidate in the Tanjong Piai byelection ought to have reaped the rewards of anti-incumbency rage by-elections often manifest.

Instead it was MCA that won and an almost audible nationwide cheer rang out among Pakatan Harapan (PH) and then opposition sympathisers alike!

We can fault our politicians with many things but carefully sensing the shifting political sands is certainly not one of their faults, nor should it be.

Politicians’ disenchantment — long in the gestation but well dammed-up — inevitably broke loose in Tanjong Piai’s aftermath.

So GE14 was no political revolution. It’s best we now settle back with the hard slog of evolutionary political changes.

If the idea of a national-unity government was unfortunately still-born, the second-best is one where Sabah and Sarawak feel they have important, even vital, stakes in national governance.

The somewhat tortured debate in Sarawak about the new national government — whether the state should be in or out or somewhere in-between — ended in rather artful compromise: a Perikatan Nasional (PN) plus Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) grand coalition. Or make that a PN+GPS+PBS (Parti Bersatu Sabah) coalition.

One thing we can thankfully say good-bye to now is the incessant political sniping by leaders of Sarawak’s governing coalition against those of the PH national government.

Political disagreements can be healthy but in the past two years, Sarawak’s often ill-disguised contempt for Putrajaya made one wonder if the baby might not have been in danger of getting tossed out with the bathwater!

Which is not negating that huge issues — some reverting back to the foundations of federation itself — remain unresolved.

But with sufficient political will (and goodwill), the challenges are not insurmountable. As with most things, compromise will be the key to any equitable resolution.

The fundamental issue between Putrajaya and Sabah and Sarawak is over an eminently reasonable argument that goes right to the heart of federalism: that both states should be left as much as possible to govern themselves.

Recalibrating federalism today inevitably requires fresh thinking on how national revenues ought to be re-apportioned to the two Borneo states as they take on tasks until now handled directly from Putrajaya.

Particularly contentious has been how fairly (or otherwise) Sabah and Sarawak have been served by the financial arrangements over revenues from national hydrocarbon resources, the bulk of which is derived from both states.

Also unsettled is whether what both states demand is only a larger slice of revenues derived from such resources or if the states actually want to take back control and managing of those resources, with all the attendant huge capital investments (and risks) this entails.

Also, the public messaging over such important issues has been badly skewed and muddled, possibly needlessly painting both state governments into corners they may now find hard to get out of without some public backlash.

Perhaps, it will be best now that federal and state politicians take a backseat and let the economic technocrats come up with workable compromises all can live with?