Barisan MPs get wake-up call
Malay Mail (29/5/08): The first rumblings of a two-party parliamentary democracy were heard in the House yesterday when the MPs, sitting as a committee, divided unexpectedly during a vote on the debate on the Supplementary Supply Bill.
Made complacent perhaps by its long possession of the majority, the government had undoubtedly expected voting to proceed in the fashion of a rubber stamp — and indeed, members had been voting orally without much ado for most of the morning.
Also, noses on both sides were still bloody from the controversy of the previous day, and they were worn down badly by the spate of late-night sittings caused by the over-indulgence in speeches, which left little time for the Bills.
With no Question Time, the morning was, in a word, dull. Both sides were in a state of heavy-lidded lethargy, save for the immaculately groomed and annoyingly alert Pas frontbench, which seemed intent on pursuing all its questions from the perspective of forensic accounting — laudable, but for the most part rather dull.
After a few procedural votes, however, it became clear that the opposition voices were drowning out the government. The various chairmen (as the Speaker and his deputies are called during committee sittings) seemed content all the same, and went about their business without much thought.
“More voices agree,” chairman Datuk Ronald Kiandee (the Deputy Speaker) said each t ime. The voi ces seemed evenly matched, however, and members on both sides laughed at what they considered a fine lark.
Tian Chua (PKR-Batu), however , was awake enough to realise that a Supplementary Supply Bill was a serious enough matter (“Supply” being synonymous with “Budget”) and rose to call for a division by which members’ votes are registered individually.
Should the opposition have defeated the Bill, or even a part of it, the government would have been prevented from funding whatever branch of the civil service that needed the money — and at least one Commonwealth government, the Labour government of Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, was dismissed in this way in 1975.
Sadly, Tian Chua’s colleagues either didn’t understand what he was playing at, or they were too new to Parliament; and in the ensuing half-hearted booing from the government backbench, the activist MP sat down again.
By this time, however, opposition Chief Whip Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak) sensed something amiss, and finally presented a properly formed motion to divide. Finding the necessary support of 15 members, the chairman complied.
The bell rang. Government MPs lounging about outside came bounding in like rabbits.
Others waddled. Most were confused. Red faced and flustered, MCA ministers Datuk Liow Tiong Lai (BN-Bentong) and Datuk Ng Yen Yen (BN-Raub) were the first to be jeered at for arriving late.
Unfortunately, worse was to follow. Counting was well under way when the prime minister rushed into the House. He was outdone by his deputy some long minutes later — apparently after the count — and there was a great deal of whooping from the other side, prompting inane calls of “phantom votes” from Datuk Shamsul Anwar Nasarah (BN-Lenggeng).
In the event, the government won with 92 votes versus 60 against (there was one abstention, that of Datuk Ibrahim Ali, Ind- Pasir Mas, who probably felt that the division wasn’t important enough to warrant his attention).
While government MPs thumped their tables in triumph, the day’s lesson will remain etched in their memories for some time to come. The government Chief Whip, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak (BN-Pekan), himself not the best example of discipline, may now have to implement the three-line system to compel members’ attendance.
Or, if his duties prevent him, he should perhaps consider ceding that authority to Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz (BN-Padang Renggas) who, as de facto minister of Parliament, is a much better enforcer of party discipline.
Made complacent perhaps by its long possession of the majority, the government had undoubtedly expected voting to proceed in the fashion of a rubber stamp — and indeed, members had been voting orally without much ado for most of the morning.
Also, noses on both sides were still bloody from the controversy of the previous day, and they were worn down badly by the spate of late-night sittings caused by the over-indulgence in speeches, which left little time for the Bills.
With no Question Time, the morning was, in a word, dull. Both sides were in a state of heavy-lidded lethargy, save for the immaculately groomed and annoyingly alert Pas frontbench, which seemed intent on pursuing all its questions from the perspective of forensic accounting — laudable, but for the most part rather dull.
After a few procedural votes, however, it became clear that the opposition voices were drowning out the government. The various chairmen (as the Speaker and his deputies are called during committee sittings) seemed content all the same, and went about their business without much thought.
“More voices agree,” chairman Datuk Ronald Kiandee (the Deputy Speaker) said each t ime. The voi ces seemed evenly matched, however, and members on both sides laughed at what they considered a fine lark.
Tian Chua (PKR-Batu), however , was awake enough to realise that a Supplementary Supply Bill was a serious enough matter (“Supply” being synonymous with “Budget”) and rose to call for a division by which members’ votes are registered individually.
Should the opposition have defeated the Bill, or even a part of it, the government would have been prevented from funding whatever branch of the civil service that needed the money — and at least one Commonwealth government, the Labour government of Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, was dismissed in this way in 1975.
Sadly, Tian Chua’s colleagues either didn’t understand what he was playing at, or they were too new to Parliament; and in the ensuing half-hearted booing from the government backbench, the activist MP sat down again.
By this time, however, opposition Chief Whip Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak) sensed something amiss, and finally presented a properly formed motion to divide. Finding the necessary support of 15 members, the chairman complied.
The bell rang. Government MPs lounging about outside came bounding in like rabbits.
Others waddled. Most were confused. Red faced and flustered, MCA ministers Datuk Liow Tiong Lai (BN-Bentong) and Datuk Ng Yen Yen (BN-Raub) were the first to be jeered at for arriving late.
Unfortunately, worse was to follow. Counting was well under way when the prime minister rushed into the House. He was outdone by his deputy some long minutes later — apparently after the count — and there was a great deal of whooping from the other side, prompting inane calls of “phantom votes” from Datuk Shamsul Anwar Nasarah (BN-Lenggeng).
In the event, the government won with 92 votes versus 60 against (there was one abstention, that of Datuk Ibrahim Ali, Ind- Pasir Mas, who probably felt that the division wasn’t important enough to warrant his attention).
While government MPs thumped their tables in triumph, the day’s lesson will remain etched in their memories for some time to come. The government Chief Whip, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak (BN-Pekan), himself not the best example of discipline, may now have to implement the three-line system to compel members’ attendance.
Or, if his duties prevent him, he should perhaps consider ceding that authority to Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz (BN-Padang Renggas) who, as de facto minister of Parliament, is a much better enforcer of party discipline.
0 comments:
Post a Comment