LETTER | MPs should be made to attend Parliament

LETTER | Attendance of parliamentary sessions should be looked into as one of the institutional reforms under the new government. Past records of poor attendance by members of Parliament (MPs) have aroused adverse reactions from the general public, with many showing an attendance as low as 25 percent.

We, the general public, feel that this is a sheer waste of public funds as well as an abuse of the parliamentary system.

MPs are elected to attend Parliament so that they can participate in debates and contribute to nation-building in a fruitful way. They are highly paid to do so, along with a whole range of allowances and perks.

By staying away from parliamentary sessions most of the time, it is akin to being paid for not working. Something needs to be done to curb this shirking attitude of MPs. Being paid for not working is a sheer waste of public funds and they get away with this without any hint of guilt.

Many universities impose a minimum of 80 percent attendance as a prerequisite for graduation on top of passing all exams. Private companies too have set minimum attendance, failing which the staff would be hauled up by the Human Resources Department. Only lawmakers get away with poor attendance, probably because they can be lawless by virtue of being lawmakers.

What an irony and a laughing stock! An effective mechanism to curb this abuse needs to be formulated. MPs should not only show loyalty to their party but also to the people who elected them, and the minimum is for them to attend parliamentary sessions. Even attending the sessions and listening to debates on issues itself is an enlightening process.

Parliament is very similar to a big company, with the PM and his ministers as the head and management staff whilst all other MPs are the general staff, regardless of whether you are in the ruling party or opposition.

Although MPs are voted in by their respective constituents, all your allowances, salary, and the whole array of attractive perks and allowances are funded by the taxpayers. Hence, your lavish lifestyle is funded by us, the rakyat.

Thus, we have the right in highlighting what are the dos and don’ts. Ministers who perform badly often receive wide adverse publicity. Why then should other MPs be allowed to do as they wish?

An MP’s position in Parliament is nothing less than holding public office. As such, your conduct is subject to public view and comments.

The days where MPs can do as they like are over. Those were the days when the majority of the populace was poor and most of them were more concerned with earning a living. The media was primitive and we only had the privilege of the government-controlled radio station through which propaganda dissemination was the most important objective.

The arrival of the black and white TV in 1963 was no different, except that the government could reinforce its propaganda by showing political leaders making speeches and enhancing what they wanted us to know and see.

The world has changed. We are more educated now and we are more discerning and critical. To MPs who think that they are beyond public scrutiny and criticism, you are free to abstain from being elected. We are your real employers.

We are aware that the ideal dream of “A government of the people, by the people and for the people” is an ideal. Despite this being an ideal, our system should be geared towards the direction of this ideal. The closer we are to this ideal, the rakyat would enjoy better care and welfare, thus improving the happiness index of the rakyat.

To avoid having deadwood in Parliament, the government should formulate a set of regulations governing the conduct of MPs. We already have such regulations, such as an MP who is charged in court and if found guilty and sentenced to jail for more than a year or if fined more than RM2,000, he loses his seat.

Amend this to include a clause requiring MPs to attend at least 75 percent of parliamentary sittings, failing which he loses his right to offer himself as a candidate come the next general election.

The 75 percent attendance threshold is an “interest” prerequisite and a necessary one. The days of the lazy and indifferent MP are over. Taxpayers’ money can be channeled to better use.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.