©The
Sun (Used by permission)
by Derek John Fernandez
(In the first of a two–part article on local government elections that ran on Wednesday, the writer argued that Pakatan Rakyat state governments have the legal grounds to introduce such elections without the Federal Government’s consent. He concludes his case in this second and final part.)
HOWEVER it is likely that this (enactment of fresh laws allowing local government elections to be held) would take at least two years to do and in the meantime the appointment of the local government’s councillors would have to take place under the Section 10 (S10) of the Local Government Act 1976. The criteria under S10 (2) of Local Government Act 1976 make political affiliation irrelevant to the appointment of councillors. The criteria require a majority of councillors to be ordinarily resident in their area. They must have a proven wide experience in local government or have achieved distinction in any profession, commerce or industry.
They must be capable of representing their community; therefore more professionals, NGOs and resident leaders should be appointed as councillors. They, however, should have an ability to learn and some knowledge of local government.
In order for the new governments to fulfil their election pledges for a more transparent and accountable local government pending the holding of elections, the appointment of councillors cannot be based on political party patronage. Edward Lee, the state assemblyman for Bukit Gasing in Selangor, had publicly proposed the 888 formula which seems to have received good support from the ratepayers. This means that about one–third of councillors should be from the ranges of NGOs, residents associations (RA), community leaders or local business leaders in the area; one–third professionals from various relevant professions and one–third qualified political appointees. There is much merit in this proposal and in order to implement this proposal, the following method may be considered:
» All candidates must strictly meet the criteria of S10 of the Local Government Act 1976.
» All candidates must submit to the office of the Mentri Besar a detailed CV with supporting statutory declaration that the contents of the CV are true and accurate and that the candidate is not a bankrupt or convicted criminal or facing any action that could substantially affect his/her ability to carry out his/her function as a councillor.
» The councillors shall be well balanced and the 888 proposal appears to be a fair interim measure.
» The councillors should all ideally be ordinary residents in the area or at the very least a majority should be. For the professionals who would serve as councillors, the professional bodies can nominate the proposed candidates who have met the criteria. For the political appointees the relevant political parties can propose (of course all these candidates must meet the criteria of the S10 of the Local Government Act 1976 and the ordinary resident in the area of the local authority).
» For the NGOs, RAs and others, an independent panel can interview the candidates and make recommendations. The panel should ideally be made up of outstanding persons preferably from another state. Alternatively the recommended candidates can be questioned by the public in public forums conducted by the state government and their suitability established.
» The resumes of all candidates and their statutory declarations should be made public in the local authority website. In the event information is false then the councillor should be removed.
Despite the call for greater public participation there appears to be a great concern about the will to implement a fair system for the appointment of councillors. At the heart of this matter lies the fear that the ugly head of political party funding and corruption will again surface. What has happened in the past is that as a political party expands it requires more funding. For example the more service centres are opened, the more party money is needed to fund them. Those who donate large sums of money to the party usually will want something in return. That return has in the past meant that special favours are given at local authority level. One sided contracts, unsustainable development orders, licences, permits, etc become the currency of corruption to indirectly fund party matters. In the process a toll is also charged for personal gain by the individual master brokers involved and the various officers involved in the process. They justify this by saying to themselves that they are working hard for the party, doing more then their miserable wages and allowances require. Therefore the temptation to stack politically appointed councillors in a local authority, many of whom don’t even live in the area (even though there are no elections), is very great because the party has to survive. Is it not surprising that in small local authorities where putting a majority of political appointees is more justified because you cannot get qualified people, nobody wants the job? Why do those political appointees all want to serve big city councils, especially when they don’t even live there? Is not the will to serve the public the same whichever the council?
The local authority in the past has always been a vital source of funding. What starts off as a noble pursuit is slowly corrupted by the creeping corruption in misusing taxpayers money under the self–created delusion that one is serving the greater good of the people.
Stealing and cheating is justified for party survival. It is therefore imperative that political appointees do not dominate local councils and there be reform in party funding so that members can be fairly remunerated for their work and the party can grow without stealing. As I write the dinners and special meetings go on as the business interests begin the journey to corrupt the new leaders, for it’s “the usual business as usual”. The lessons in George Orwell’s book Animal Farm, will become a reality if nothing is done. The dream of a new government both transparent and accountable to the people will be just another lie. The temptation is great because the money is large. There can be no justification for stacking big local authorities with a majority of political appointees, not then and not now. What the new governments are facing now in their fight for reform against corruption is best captured in the words of Oliver Stone, who played Pvt. Chris Taylor in the war movie Platoon, that as he looked back, he saw that they were not fighting the enemy, but were fighting for the possession of their souls.