IN two days’ time, it would be one year since the nation hollered “May Day” and brought a new government to Putrajaya. The ebullience was palpable. Understandably so.
It was a one-party rule for 60 years. Or more accurately, a one-coalition administration. Time-worn tiredness had set in. For the people and the government, too. And understandably, people wanted change. The present government will do well to keep such political somnolence in check.
Truth be told: a year is too short in politics. But we, creatures of habit, have turned it into a convention by measuring performance against 100 days, a year and some such time tellers. Such expectations do not serve the people well.
They invariably lead politicians to dish out short-term sweeteners. Known as “low hanging fruits” among political circles. We as a people must not encourage such brief political horizons.
We should not harm our souls thus. It is neither good for us nor the nation. Let us not tempt politicians to favour us with the flavour of the month consumer price indexes and gross domestic product figures.
Let us look elsewhere for a long view. For the government must not only do good by us, but also by the future generation.
A week after Malaysia elected a new government, Muslims welcomed Ramadan. Malaysian Muslims will do the same, but two days before the new government crosses the 365-day mark. We wish our Muslim readers a happy Ramadan. Let us aim to be better human beings than we were last Ramadan.
Likewise, have we had a better government than the one before? Let’s begin at the beginning. Not many of us believed a new government was heading our way. The victor didn’t.
Nor did the vanquished. We must be thankful for the way the change took place, though. If not for this, we would not have known the things we know today. Firstly, the debt that our nation was manacled with.
We were told that we are in the red for RM1 trillion, though others have said it to be anything between RM600-RM800 billion. Either way, we would not have known how far south our nation had gone.
There are other unsavoury stories, but these are for the courts to unravel. The media cannot try them. We just do not have the remit. And it will be unjust for the media to do so.
Pakatan Harapan made 60 promises in its Buku Harapan book of hope. Out of this, 19 deal with institutional reforms. In hindsight, 60, or even the 19, must seem too many to PH to handle. The reason is, institutional reforms do not take place in isolation.
Change one, you disturb the other. Like the zero-rating of the Goods and Services Tax on June 1 last year. It was politically expedient, but had an adverse impact on government coffers. But this does not mean that the government should put the reforms on hold.
Certainly not. What it means, though, is that the government should tread studiedly through what remains of the 60 promises. With the right time horizon in mind. This will be our counsel.