Johor State Assembly Not Professional in Answering Questions
Press release by Stulang State Assemblyman Chen Kah Eng on
27/2/2015
The state assembly providea a platform for state assemblymen
to debate government policies. State assemblymen can make use of this platform
to debate issues related to public. In this process, It is essential for the
government to provide official information with full transparency and with
accurate official statistics. If the information is either not transparent, or the
statistics is not clear, state assemblymen will not be able to debate / discuss
certain issues effectively and accurately and thus the real problems faced by
people cannot be reflected.
Opposition party and ruling party backbenchers can raise
questions according to the problems faced by people in their constituencies
during state assembly. Menteri Besar and Exco are obliged to answer accordingly
in order to explain government policies to people and to answer people’s
questions.
If the state government cannot answer the queries raised by the
state assemblymen, it means that the state government is negligent / delinquent
/ not working properly and professionally. As a result, state assembly is losing
its legislative function and is a waste of
public funds.
I am very disappointed with the written reply provided by
Johor state assembly during the last session of state assembly. The written reply
provided by authority is not attaining the standard of assembly and very
unprofessional.
Below are the examples of unprofessional replies :
1) The statistics given is ambiguous
I asked Johor state government or Federal government to provide the statistic of Malaysians working in Singapore. The authority stated that there are 150,000 to 300,000 Malaysians mainly working in manufacturing and servicing jobs in Singapore.
Sadly, the estimated range of statistic given was too big. It raises large imagination as we cannot get the real picture from it. In the written reply, there was no clear government unit stated to indicate the source of statistic. In other words, the source of statistic was ambiguous too.
I also questioned state government and federal government regarding how many Malaysians leave Malaysia through JB Custom and Second link respectively annually.
The statistic given was again unclear. I asked about the departure number of Malaysians at JB custom and second link, but the authority provided the lump sum clearance number of Malaysian passing through both the immigration.
Obviously, state government was not answering what I asked for. The statistic given were not representative at all and I doubt that the authority was trying to hide the statistic intentionally.
The statistics given could not portray the real situation. People are confused with more question marks.
2) Avoid direct reply
I also raised questions regarding the numbers of residential and commercial
units sold by Country Garden since its launching until January 2015.
Besides, I also asked state government to provide the gross income of JPO, Legoland and Hello Kitty theme park for financial year of 2012,
2013 and 2014.
The written reply by the authority was : "relevant Exco will reply to me later".
The state government did not mention clearly that when the Exco will give me the answer. The time stated in written reply is
“later”, which is without a specific deadline. This obviously showed that the state government was trying to avoid answering the
questions. They tried to delay the time and did not give clear answer for my questions.
3) Use confidentiality as excuse and refuse to disclose
I also asked about annual salary of the Director Board members of Johor
Corp and SAJ, but the state assembly / state government use confidentiality as
an excuse to refuse to disclose.
I think they had violated the people’s right to know. While
these two corporations are related to public interest, the board of director's annual salary should be made known to the public so that people can monitor whether the members of Director Board are well-performed.
4) Provide long irrelevant reply
I requested to know the legal custodian of one reserved land
and explicitly required the authority to disclose the identity of the
legal custodian.
However, the state government gave a long reply on the
status quo of reserved land without disclosing who is the legal custodian.
5) Use the limitation of administrative power as excuse to avoid disclosure of relevant information
Regarding Johor Causeway annual maintenance fee, the
state assembly rejected to answer because it is under the
federal government's administration.
However, the State Assembly Standing Order stated clearly that if the
Speaker feels that the issue has great interest to Johorean, the
Speaker may direct the state government to consult the federal government and answer to the issue in the state assembly.
Conclusion
State government gesture of not answering questions in any forms is
intended to confuse the people, making it difficult for people to accept. If
the state government continues to reply to state assemblyman in similar way, it
will degrade the quality of state assembly. It is a waste of people’s money.
Do not answer questions raised by elected
representatives, means or equivalent to not answering the questions concerned by the
people. I believed the way the state government handled the questions
raised by state assemblyman is very unprofessional. It is the “professional
political trickery” played by ruling party.
In fact, people enjoy the right to know. People elected
representatives to question state government in state assembly on behalf of
them. The questions are related to the issues of public interest so that the
people can understand the content and details of relevant issues through Q
& A session of the state assembly.
I urged the state government to take advantage of state
assembly as a platform to respond to people’s questions about the government’s
policies in order to clearly explain policies content, as well as the pros and
cons of each social strata.
The state government should tell the people the positive and
negative effect of policies factually and deliver relevant studies and data
rather than playing "Tai Chi" by avoiding the questions of representatives to
evade the responsibility as the state government, which is an incompetent, or
even negligent performance.
I want state government to reply to my questions again. The state government had
responded to my question unprofessionally. This situation cannot be
continued, otherwise the state assembly will become an international laughing stock.
柔州議會書面答覆不专业及答非所問
士都蘭區州議員曾笳恩2月27日新聞稿
州立法議會的功能是提供議員們辯論國家政策的平台，議員們在此平台辯論與人民相關的課題。在辯論過程中，資訊的公開透明，官方數據的準確性，都是必須的，因此如果數據不明確，資訊不公開，議員們將無法準確地就課題進行辯論，更無法真實反映人民面對的問題。
在州議會，反對黨和執政黨後座議員都可根據其選區人民面對的問題提問，而州務大臣和州行政議員有義務在議會上，回答人民代議士提出的問題，藉此向人民解釋政府政策，回答人民的疑問。
若州政府無法回答議員們提出的詢問，是州政府失職的表現，同時也失去州立法議會的實際意義，沒有執行應有的議會功能，形同浪費人民公款。
我對柔佛州政府在上一季的州議會提問環節中，所提供的書面答覆感到非常失望，當局給予的答覆，根本不符合議會水準，此舉非常不專業。
以下針對我提出的書面提問，和柔州政府在上一季州議會上，給予的書面答覆，做系統整理，歸納出數項州政府在書面答覆環節上，犯下的不專業例子：
例子：
１）數據模稜兩可、不精準
我詢問柔州政府或聯邦政府，估計有多少馬來西亞公民在新加坡工作，得到的回覆是15萬至30萬人，主要從事製造業和服務業。但是，此數據想像空間大，同時也沒有確切數據顯示製造業和服務業的數據多寡。此外，答覆沒有明確說明數據來自政府哪個單位，數據來源模糊。
我也詢問州政府或聯邦政府，在2012年和2013年有多少馬來西亞公民經由新山關卡和第二通道出境(keluar daripada Malaysia)，答覆卻僅提供從2012年至2014年經由新山關卡和第二通道的通關人數(melalui)。
此數據模稜兩可，我是詢問離境人數，當局卻給我通關人數，至於離境和入境人數分別多少，則無法從提供的數據中查知，明顯答非所問，州政府並沒有提出我所要求的數據。我認為當局有意隱瞞數據，因為通關人數的數據並不具有代表性，無法讓人民了解真實情況，使人感到混淆，延伸更多問號。
州政府提供的數據無法使用，相關單位若要從事有關課題的研究，從而擬定政策，將無法有效執行。
２）推諉搪塞，避開正面答覆
我要求知道碧桂園開始發售單位後，至今年一月已成功售出多少住宅與商業單位，回覆指房屋及地方政府委員會主席將答覆。
我也要球州政府，提供JPO、Legoland和Hello Kitty主題樂園分別在2012年、2013年和2014年的總收入，回覆指旅遊、商貿及消費事務委員會主席將答覆。
但是，州議會卻沒有明確說明有關的行政議員將在何時回覆，顯然迴避問題，推諉搪塞，拖延時間，沒有針對我的提問做出答覆。
３）以秘密為由，不肯透露相關資訊
對於柔佛州控股及柔佛州水務局的董事會年薪，議長辦公室回函援引議會常規第25(2)(h)條文，指這涉及機密，拒絕回應。
我認為州政府此舉已侵犯人民的知情權，因為這兩個機構和公眾利益有關，機構董事會的年薪應公開透明，人民有權利知道，從而檢視董事的表現是否達標。
４）以長篇大論的方式，答非所问
我針對某保留地的合法管理人做出提問，並相當明確地要求政府透露合法管理人的身分。政府卻對此土地的現狀長篇大論，就是不肯透露誰是合法管理人。
５）以非職權管轄範圍為由，迴避透露相關資訊
我詢及新柔長堤每年的維修費時，州議會選擇拒絕回答，原因是此項目是由聯邦政府管轄。
可是，議會常規第25(6)條文清楚說明，如果議長認為有關課題對柔州人民有密切的利益關係，議長可以指令州政府諮詢聯邦政府，並在州議會回答有關課題。
結論
州政府任何形式的迴避，答非所問，是有意混淆人民，敷衍了事，此舉難以讓人民接受。若類似的回應方式再繼續下去，將拖垮議會素質，浪費公款。
同時，不回答代議士所提出的問題，就等同於不回答人民所關心的問題。我認為，州政府對議員提問的處理方式，所展現的不專業，是執政黨的「專業政治權術」。
其實，人民享有知情權，人民代議士代表人民向州政府在州議會上，提問涉及公眾利益的問題，讓人民了解相關課題的內容和細節。
州政府若持續下去，州議會將無法維持素質，失去應有的議會水準，使議會淪為橡皮圖章。
州政府給予正面回答或正確數據，將讓人民及代議士們更清楚狀況，大家更能集思廣益，間接提升議會辯論的水平。
我呼籲，州政府應利用州議會作為平台，來回應人民對政府施政的疑問，向人民清楚解釋施政內容，以及利惠人民的各種利弊，就事論事地提出政策對人民正面和負面的影響，甚至是相關的研究報告和數據，而不是耍太極，通過迴避議員們的問題，來逃避作為州政府的責任，這是一種不稱職，甚至是失職的表現。
我要求他們重新回覆我提出的問題。州議會之前已以這種方式回覆議員問題，上一季仍如此，此舉不能再繼續下去，否則州議會將如兒戲，成為国际笑柄。
No comments:
Post a Comment