Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

So, one year on, how are you doing?
There have been changes but not to the extent people have hoped for. And one of the difficulties lies in the poor relationship between the federal and state governments, and the civil service – those guys need serious structural reform as they’re used to certain practices and are not willing to change.

The vision of the new government requires massive change in thinking in terms of who you serve – the rakyat – they must come first in everything but these people are not ready for that. They pay lip service but in truth they’re not ready. And there are powerful interest and lobby groups that continue to feel it’s business as usual.

Is the public expecting much after one year?
Many don’t know how to differentiate between local, state and federal governments. They think everything is the same, we can get it done. So because of the inability to compartmentalise whose duty is what, it sometimes leads to over-expectations. Look at crime. They shout at the local authority when policing crime is the function of the police. All this neighbourhood watches are a lot of garbage because if you don’t have enough manpower no amount of effort by the community will solve the problem.

The police must have more manpower but the people get angry with the local authorities. They want to put up barricades. I understand, they’re frightened but they must know whom to blame.

The problem is lack of deployment of sufficient policemen.

Crime aside, you can’t fault the people for demanding basic services.

Of course, it’s understandable. They wake up, see garbage uncollected for three days. They expect it to be collected. So I don’t think it’s over expectations but sometimes they blame the wrong people. In that sense, their expectations are high. I suppose they expected sudden change.

There’re also issues of equitable distribution, they expected things to be done faster but they must understand this system has been built over many years. Even if you take over a public company which is badly run, you’ll not be able to turn it over in a year. It’ll be some four to five years before you see some improvement, so they have to be patient.

Why did you agree to be a councillor?
I often spoke about planning and development controls. I often protested. And I thought the best way to implement change is by being there. Instead of fighting them, work with them and try to implement change. In areas where I’ve been allowed to operate, we’ve seen significant change, like in town and country planning. Most of our problems are related to old problems but as far as new problems are concerned, there is the highest level of public participation in planning matters.

The decisions are  balanced, they are more transparent. We invite everybody to come – they can speak and ask questions. So certainly, in those areas there has been improvement. But generally, the management of people’s money is still at a risky level. There is not enough oversight and many people are resistant about changing financial accountability. A lot of resources are being spent to cure problems of the past.

So I hope people are patient. They must understand that 30 years of doing something one way can’t be undone in a year or two. It requires a more sustained pace and people who are not performing have to be removed. The government must no longer rely totally on civil servants. They must bring in outside professionals.

Especially at local council level?
Yes. You cannot rely anymore on civil servants. They’re too used to doing things a certain way.

You need outside consultants. We need to run a modern city with some expertise. And there is a lot of expertise in Malaysia.

What are some of the biggest challenges facing good governance?
The equitable distribution of wealth is becoming a hot issue in terms of contracts and employment. The government must decide whether there is going to be an affirmative action policy.

What about development?
Planning control is one of the biggest headaches. Petaling Jaya is over-developed. Infrastructure has collapsed. Everybody wants to build there. The public transport system is not functioning and again this is a problem with the federal government. It should realise that the inability to provide an effective public transport system will inhibit development of land. I do not know why the federal government has not addressed this matter. There are lots of interest groups who don’t want a good public transport system. They benefit financially from a failed transport system.

And privatisation agreements?
This is the biggest challenge faced by local governments – one-sided agreements that do not give any benefit to the government but all the liabilities. I call them “piratisation” agreements where all the benefits go to the special interests groups.

We have substantial agreements in Selangor where we see a lot of the cream of the non-rate revenue subcontracts has been taken out and the local authority does not enjoy the income and has to suck on the ratepayer.

The government should take a strong stand to cancel all contracts against public policy.

Redistribute the wealth equitably.

Do you think some services should be re-nationalised?
There’s absolutely no justification for privatisation in the Malaysian context. When you privatise the profit making and leave the loss making to the local government, that’s “piratisation”. We’ve been running all along our rubbish services, our sewage services, and the government was running water. There’s no reason to have given it out. These should all be taken back and a commission of inquiry be established to see whether there was anything improper. If necessary, this thing should be taken back, but not to the extent of bankrupting the public.

So MBPJ has no money?
PJ is not too bad as we have enough revenue but smaller councils can’t balance their books. So the political will must be there and the government should take top advice. They should look at people who can give independent advice and question every information disseminated.

What has happened to the implementation of local council elections?
I don’t know why the delay. The first way is to elect the mayor and that can be done easily. At least there is some form of election because this was a change that was promised so it should be done.

But the state government’s excuse is that it needs federal approval.

There’s no need to fiddle with all the laws because the guys who are against this will say there’s some law that says we can’t do it.

Speaking of which, you have a lot to say about legislation …

There are a lot of rubbish laws which have to be amended. There should be a full-time job to un-do a lot of things. Leasehold, freehold is another issue, handling of land ownership. There are viable models whereby government can make a lot of money.

People are willing to pay a premium to convert their leasehold into freehold. The government is being ill-advised by civil servants who say “oh you’re mortgaging the government’s long-term revenue by giving freehold”. That is  rubbish because if you allow a conversion fee of say 50% the difference in market value, the government would get billions in cash upfront. In 99 years that money will be worth tons more and you can increase assessment and quit rent. Make it optional and everybody will be happy because they feel they’ve got a stake.

Aren’t these ideas put forward to the decision makers?
A lot of good ideas are turned down because people have vested interests. I called for the revamp of the tender board system. There should be civil servants; there should be members of each political party, the NGOs, even residents associations. The more people look at the problem, the less likely there’ll be abuse. But this will be done in the next term.

What about spending controls?
Very poor. There are lack of priorities in budget allocation. I give this department this much money, it should prioritise what is important. And excess money should be saved. The sort of government policy to spend all the money in one year is ridiculous. The tools for change have not been put in place after a year.

It would be unfair to pin the blame solely on civil servants. You should blame the lack of political will on the new guys at the top.

The civil service and its inability to reform urgently is a factor but the political will must be there.

The political (will) seems to be lacking and I don’t  understand why because this is a simple matter. For example, when you spend money at a local council, who decides how much you spend on an item? This is left to people without proper checks done.

That’s where councillors are supposed to come in.

The idea of having part-time councillors is a joke. You can’t run a modern city with part-timers.

You need full-time, salaried individuals. Paying your councillors RM750 to put in four days a week will ultimately create a system where corruption will thrive. Basically the system is designed to make people corrupt. Because no person can stand putting in the kind of hours and the kind of work they do. PJ has dedicated councillors but I don’t know how long they can stand. I’ve been fortunate because I have a professional practice but how long can my partner sit down and say ‘Why you’re spending four days a week there, not sitting and doing your business?’

So your business is affected since you became councillor?
Everybody’s business is affected. Of course you say public duty, sacrifice but if you keep this up, you’re going to get a lot of people who are not going to make ends meet and are going to be susceptible to corruption.

One of the biggest issues in MBPJ is asset management.

First of all, I don’t think MBPJ has got a list of assets. Coming from the private sector, we’re laughing. How on earth did you manage so far without these basic tools? Basic management tools, basic audit tools. We have formed an audit and corporate governance committee this is the first of the many firsts. In terms of public participation, in the planning processes, we’re one of the first. We not only inform the neighbouring landowners, we allow everybody to comment.

We’re one of the first to open town hall meetings. So certainly we’re doing a lot but we’re not getting the kind of backup that we need. There’re too many obstacles and I suppose the obstacles are artificial because there’s a lack of knowledge and political will. Knowledge is a factor because much of the leadership does not know what’s going on at the grassroots. How money is stolen, how books are manipulated and what are the necessary mechanisms and tools to stop this. The constant referral to federal government guidelines on financing is a joke because those guidelines are not implemented effectively. There’s no oversight function to stop this kind of money from going out.

Thirty years on, people are asking the same questions: How come the drains are not cleaned? How come the garbage is not collected? We should not be having councillors looking at drains, like I do. These should have been done by the heads of department failing which, just sack the fellows, that’s all. They need to change, if not get another job. Nobody is irreplaceable.
 
Are you implying that you’ve got incompetent people running the council?
Certainly! When I need to get a job done, there’s a lot of bureaucratic rubbish and at the end of the day, you can’t get the job done. If I want to get it done, I have to sit there everyday, call the contractors, shout at them. This is not the way to solve problems. Basically all the old practices are being continued and there’s no substantial change.
 
Well if they continue like this, the people will kick them out in the next elections!

Maybe after a year now, they are aware that time is running out. One of the major things is no expenditure, no buying of anything unless approved by the finance committee and individual council members.

You’ve got a bunch of dishonest people then?
We’ve got a bunch of people who couldn’t care less. They are just sitting there. Some people are dishonest, some people are honest but frustrated because they’ve seen government change, they’ve seen people change but practices continue the same way. And I hold this by the fact that there seems to be a lack of command. Who do the officers answer to? Do they answer to the mayor? Do they answer to the mentri besar? There seem to be too many bosses. So there are too many conflicts.

I can sense a tinge of frustration on your part!

Obviously, because where I come from, these problems are easily solved but the structure is such that it does not allow it to be solved. I can’t answer my residents when they ask me ‘Why is there a pothole? Why are the drains dirty? Why is there rubbish outside my house?’ In the private sector if I catch the guy doing that, I will terminate his contract and get someone else to do it. But those mechanisms are not there so residents get frustrated because they pay assessment but don’t get service.

What do you tell them when they come to you?
I run, I get a message at 6.50 in the morning, I run, I shout, I bang on tables and get it done. But I can’t be doing this everyday. We have 1,500 staff who should be handling these problems effectively. Datuk Bandar, poor fellow, he’s got too much work. Everyday he’s got to chair meetings, attend ceremonies, he’s got no time to concentrate on the operations management which he leaves to his people.

So a CEO should be appointed from outside to check, hire, fire and manage.

We don’t have a CEO, that’s the problem. How do you run a city of half a million people without a CEO? The local authority is like a giant corporation which is bigger than any first-world company (but) no CEO. And the problem with having a civil service structure is one civil servant will never like to scold another because one day that guy might be his boss. Everybody’s got to cover each other. It’s a failure in management. For instance our public complaints system… how does a public complaints officer handle a complaint when he or she is junior to the person who’s supposed to be responsible for the complaint?

All they can do is take the complaint, and pass it on. Even the follow up he dares not disturb that person because that person is senior. The person who sits in public complaints, must have a rank, higher than any of the persons who are tasked to finish the job.
 
I understand MBPJ just appointed a director for public complaints.

Yes. We’re looking at (becoming) the first council to appoint somebody from outside the civil service to handle public complaints, reporting to the mayor. But you don’t expect him to handle public complaints and pay him a pittance. We have the money. For us, it’s cost effective. The audit committee has saved millions. Just the savings alone, when you look at the cost benefit analysis, you should be able to pay your councillors well as long as they perform. You pay them well so you get top people.

The council spends millions every year on legal fees. That means they continue to do the wrong thing.

When you’re in the council, everybody wants to be your lawyer, and in most cases the practice would be if you’re a lawyer for a corporation there’s a set of standard skills rate. It’s ad-hoc. And some of the fees are exorbitant. Again, audit committee is looking into this problem but we spend a lot of resources looking into problems of the past. We don’t have time to look at what we’re supposed to do.

Do any sanctions exist to address this?
The contract provides for it but it’s not being implemented.

Is this going to be a first step?
Yes, we’re doing but you see, everything is done on a committee level. Committees only meet once or twice a month. So technically speaking, we meet on one issue 12 times a year, so everything is delayed. (If) something happens today, the response is 30 days if we shout. If it is overlooked, it takes 60 days. So we need full-time councillors. Three or four competent persons, full-time salaries so they’re there daily. Then they report to the main council as committee members. This has got to be done but there seems to be tremendous resistance, all kinds of regulations are cited. It’s  simple give the guy a contract for one year, ask him to perform as a councillor, give him his scope of work, his performance indicator, and hold him to it. Pay him well but if he fails, sack him.

Individual political agendas also make it cumbersome right?
True … we’ve got a good bunch of councillors in PJ, the finest fellows I’ve worked with. But they’re being pushed to their limits. Politics is an issue. For instance, if you say you don’t want illegal hawkers and you clamp down on illegal hawkers, politicians get worried over the votes. It’s difficult because you want to follow the law but you want to make exceptions to that law. This of course is frustrating.

Enforcement is a big problem too?
There’re issues of corruption, selective enforcement, then there’re issues of lack of clarity on the laws, lack of political will and leadership. Technically speaking, the CEO of MBPJ should be ordering and getting things done. It doesn’t have to keep coming back to the councillors. Another thing is the political leadership has not decided to resolve the most important problem in Selangor.

What do you do about injustices of the past? What do you do about corrupt practices in the past that are now affecting people today? These may pertain to land alienation, development issues, privatisation contacts. I don’t see any direction in this matter. Do we have a policy that once we find out that these contracts are unfair or there were elements of coercement or enticement we can terminate them? Do we throw these guys out and reform? Nobody wants to make that decision.