How can the government encourage more people to adopt public transport so as to solve the problem of traffic jams?
Should local elections – if these are re-introduced – consider the issue of racial composition and representation?
Would the proposal to transform our current healthcare system into a social insurance model enable more people to have accessible and affordable healthcare?
Out of the various models of sustainable development, which would be the most suitable for particular places in Malaysia to adopt, in order to preserve our natural environment and also promote our cultural heritage?
Finally, would changing our country’s electoral system from first-past-the-post to proportional representation give our citizens a more democratic voice?
The questions above involve public policy discussions to a certain extent. Some may be ideologically oriented, while others may be more technical.
The influence and consequences of public policy may vary, from issues with huge implications that might potentially decide your individual rights as a citizen or foreign resident, to basic needs such as a right to shelter and food; or its impact might appear to be so insignificant that you feel it has nothing to do with you.
Some policies could have long-term impacts on groups of people several generations down the line, such as the New Economic Policy (NEP) in the 1970s.
Some policies also could bring about permanent and irreversible changes, such as certain forest land management policies which permit oil palm plantations to convert and replace primary forests.
Knowledge is power
In Malaysia, policymaking decisions seem to habitually stem from a top-down process. Sometimes, it could be rooted in a certain political actor’s will or out-of-the-blue ‘creative’ thoughts, such as the third national car and property ‘crowdfunding’ policy.
To many people, the ability to influence public policy debates seems to be confined to the political elite.
Some may believe that the realm of public policy is out of their reach, leading them to forfeit any opportunity to participate in meaningful public policy discussions.
This self-defeating mentality probably has to do with the impression that policymaking is technically too complex, or that they are unable to fully grasp the nuances of policy debates.
Furthermore, others may have lost faith and hope in the country’s political system. The euphoria that has been generated from witnessing the change of federal government for the first time in history has long gone.
Instead, they are more inclined to believe that policy discussion would change nothing, because it is politics akin to Game of Thrones – whereby politicians would act in a similar way to serve their self-interest by keeping the status quo when it comes to politically advantageous policies.
Former United Nations secretary-general Kofi Annan once said: “Knowledge is power. Information is liberating. Education is the premise of progress, in every society, in every family."
The statement should also apply to our political and civil education. This is because if the people can understand the issues and policies better, then they could be more aware of their own rights, and will not be easily swayed or cheated.
In that way, public opinion could be recognised and turned into a formidable force to oppose and resist unreasonable or unjust policies. It would also help to promote a rational, progressive, democratically mature society.
Policy discussions may take place in a kopitiam, grassroots style, or be held in a posh and premium hotel ballroom and rigorously debated by fellow academics. Despite all that, the outcome still has to go back to the discussant, and whether he or she has conducted any study.
Serious public policy work must show professionalism and integrity in taking account all possible facets of evidence (within a reasonable limitation), that would determine whether the analyses and deductions can convince the public.
If a public policy does not go through a deep and thorough research process, or does not rely on facts and evidence for future projections, it would lack robust theoretical support and a foundation in widely accepted international best practices. The probability of such a policy failing to reach its intended goals is high.
In the end, who should answer for the consequences, cost, and responsibility for such policy failures? Instead of delegating the task of scrutinising government policies to opposition parties, could the public themselves effectively monitor the government’s performance, and directly hold them accountable?
A learning process
Public policy research is a learning process. As a member of the Penang state government’s think-tank and a public policy research analyst, it is my duty not just to amass knowledge but also to spread the seeds of thought, hoping that a new perspective could influence or change society or at least create public discussion.
In order to gain the public’s trust and confidence, what is most important is to be persistent in maintaining the standards of one’s objectivity and professionalism when expressing and defending one’s research outcome in a fair and transparent manner.
If public policy research is publicly funded, it should imply that public interest is very much involved, and thus the research outcomes should be shared with the public. In other words, I believe that I should be seen as an employee of taxpayers, and therefore held accountable to the public.
So, here I am in my position of influence, and therefore I have to honour my obligation as a public intellectual. For that reason, I have to walk out of my ‘armchair and air-conditioned room’ comfort zone and walk into the daily lived experiences of the man on the street. Only then would my proposed policy be worth anyone's salt.
If policymaking were to be compared to a battle of ideas, policy advocates pacing around this ‘battlefield’ must recognise the current situation and be well-versed in the ‘topography’ of issues that one feels strongly about.
He or she could then be in control of the defensive-offensive strategy in winning the battle of influencing and implementing the said policy. There could be room for the omission of menial details, but policymakers or advocates must ensure that the crux of a policy should be steered in the right direction.
Penang is my base, and my work as a public intellectual originates from there. However, my work should not be constrained within the aforementioned locality.
In what is being identified as a strongly federated nation such as Malaysia, the most contentious policy ideas are arguably centred around Parliament in Kuala Lumpur and the corridors of power in Putrajaya.
We have witnessed the historic moment in the 14th general election when the peaceful democratic transition of federal power took place in Putrajaya. The new ruling coalition was named after ‘hope’ and consists of parties which fought for a long period persistently on the ideals of Reformasi and an overarching multiracial philosophy of ‘Malaysian Malaysia’.
The remaining question is, what are the policies and strategies in place to build a progressive and hopeful new multiracial Malaysia?
I would argue that policies that truly solve the needs of the public are the real backbone of reforms that are badly required in a country which had been mismanaged for decades.
For the coming weekends, my colleagues from the Penang Institute will talk about issues and policies, and share their stories in this space, hopefully to continue inspiring new narratives in the new political era of Malaysia.
When the journalist from South China Morning Post wanted to arrange a phone interview with me on a favourite health-related subject which I am doing research and my expertise and interest could offer, I just said yes. And I remember I talked to Meaghan for more than half hour on this when she called from HK and wanted to find out the situation in Malaysia.
Below are the parts she quoted me. For the record, I do praise Singapore for what they deserve. On public health and urban planning, Malaysia could learn quite a lot from them.
***
// While doctors and scientists now know more about the disease than ever, their expertise has not yet translated into effective, coherent policy across the board. As a result, millions remain at risk.
“This challenge reflects what society values,” said Lim Chee Han, senior analyst at Malaysian think tank Penang Institute. “If values don’t change, how can public health change?”
...
In Malaysia, where most citizens rely on public health care, the cost of diabetes is mounting. More than 3 million Malaysians have diabetes, and Lim reports Malaysia spends 16 per cent of its health care budget on treating the disease. Lim’s research identified Malaysia as the most sedentary nation in Southeast Asia.
“Malaysians really love their cars and would prefer to be in a traffic jam instead of walking,” he said.
...
Type 2 diabetes can be prevented or delayed through early detection, healthy diet and exercise. But experts note the diet and exercise decisions people make are often constrained by their environment – proximity to parks, pricing of healthy food versus unhealthy food, and time off from work to cook and work out.
“Behaviour change will not just result from taxes,” Lim said. “It will also result from urban planning, advertising and government interventions in limiting the market for unhealthy food.”
For example, local officials should work together with the Ministry of Housing to build more bicycle lanes and parks.
“Comparing Malaysia with Singapore, there’s a major difference because of urban planning,” he said, noting Singapore prioritised walkability in its urban development, with better connected public transport options.
...
Lim said that in Malaysia, people of all incomes are buying sugary food. His research indicated age, rather than income, determined levels of sugar consumption. Lim said the government should intervene in the market to make healthier options, such as brown rice, more affordable for consumers.
“The government needs to take concrete steps to intervene and not simply let the free market dictate food consumption,” Lim said. “Like cigarette smoking – why not do the same with junk food?” //
Original article: Death by sugar: Can South-east Asia win the war on diabetes?
What did 2018 mean to me? to me it signifies big changes in many ways. To my immediate family: Xiao Hui has finally got back to workforce in June but also undertaken a very challenging (and demanding) job as a country project manager for an international health organisation. My knowledge could help her only a little bit, more was to cover her and shoulder more responsibility in terms of taking care of Yee Chern. She had made quite a number of travels for her project operation, and will continue to do so in the coming year.Likewise, I thanked my wife for covering me at night sometimes when I had to deliver a talk in public forum or make a talkshow appearance or had important activist meeting to attend! Yee Chern was sent to childcare centre when he was barely 2 years old. But he is doing very well there, and widely liked by teachers, staffs and peers. In a way, I dedicated more time to be with Yee Chern on one-to-one basis, and had more bonding time together. His personal development in skills and language has grown leaps and bounds, he never stops amazing and surprising us with his new abilities. Also, now we have to plan for the arrival of Yee Chern's meimei in next May =)
To my country: I have to put this first after my family, because it is the main source of changes to my career, activism, circle of friendship, view of nation, society, people and values. The GE14 on May 9th this year was indeed the watershed moment, which its outcome presented more uncertainties, hopes and fears, opportunities and threats to the current way of doing things in governance and politics. We witnessed a peaceful transition of power for the Federal government and many state governments in Malaysia after 61 years of ruling under the same regime via the collective democratic votes (no thanks to the electoral system, though). Before the general election, I had already seen how the realignment of civil society groups and Pakatan Harapan politicians to the apex leadership of "The-Return-of-King" Mahathir, in the pretext of 'Big Picture' and desperation to get rid of Najib's cohorts. What the Pakatan as well as certain prominent pakatan-friendly NGOs (and individuals) had conceded, are not only the reformed agendas but progressive ideals conceived since the Reformasi-movement in the late 90s. Principles and moral values, they did not think they were important, as if there were no better solutions and choices; some would be even willing to take unethical approaches to get to the seat of power, nevermind shortcuts. Changing the federal government could be one of the means to introduce and implement reformed policies, not the ends itself. The so-called 'New Malaysia' as I observe until now, it has not yet installed the new system yet. I do not want to live in an illusion until I see those very meaningful reforms have taken place. Already I am disappointed with many good policy proposals in the PH GE14 manifesto not being fulfilled (not that I do not have some reservations about the document itself), especially about ICERD and the promise to do away with many draconian and freedom stifling laws. What some activists forewarned about the potential danger and pitfalls about returning Mahathir to the reign, today here I am examining again, yes, they do spot on, and yes, Mahathir is still the same Mahathir. Just look at the recent PPBM AGM, you can see that they gain the political dominance with clever inner-coalition politicking, and worse, the bumiputera/Malay agenda and institutionalised racism have made a comeback to the forefront, with an aim to replace UMNO as the Malay champion. Trust me, it feels like living back in the 90s , and if I take away the speaker names in some of the speeches, you would be mistaken as if that were from UMNO. Mahathir also said the same things strengthening the racial stereotype biases, unashamedly. If the PH coalition is still dominantly/hegemonically governed by Mahathir's party, the 'New Malaysia' has not born, it is just a change of regime name. My vote was given to a PKR MP did not mean an endorsement to Mahathir's way of governance. I am pessimistic and still worry about the rest of the reformed agenda in this PH government, they have to prove me wrong and cannot blame me for my weak faith in them judging on what has been transpired and happened in the country post-509 until today. My personal hope is, there should be a rise of progressive left-leaning political third force, with the aim of overtaking the current defunct and still hopeless UMNO-MCA-MIC pact. Given the current electoral system is prohibitive for the establishment of new political force, I would hope that there would at least be a reinstatement of local elections and perhaps a change of FPTP system to PR system which gives more surviving space for smaller and local political parties.
To my career/ current profession: Policy research is my passion and it is something I consider myself rather competent and excel at. Change is only expected ever after the federal government was put in the grasp of PH. Penang Institute decides to expand its capacity as well as influence, talk directly to the power in Putrajaya while the Penang state government has strengthened their grip on the state DUN. The previous General Manager Dr Ong Kian Ming who was re-elected as a MP and he grabbed the opportunity offered to be a deputy minister, thus he resigned from the position. We do wish him well, and thanked him for the guidance and trust placed on us. I believe that we did perform rather well in raising the profile of the institute. The researchers in KL would be more integrated/streamlined with the colleagues in Penang, on research as well as administration. With a few colleagues would be relocating to the KL office (including my good friends Kenneth and Chin Huat), the current cosy office space we occupied in the Uppercase APW Bangsar was deemed too small. In the coming month, we would be moving to a larger office at KL Gateway, we have to adapt to the new (physical) working environment and administration style. I am also reassigned to the research department called Institutional Reforms and Governance (linked with Political Studies section), given the understanding that the current health-related policy research focus would still be ongoing. I wish that my research works would still be appreciated and supported, for the benefits of the institute, and Penang taxpayers. I had quite an active and productive yet meaningful year to show for my work performance. Below is the statistics of my work for 2018:
8 TMI articles
9 Oriental Daily articles
4 Contemporary Review articles
2 Media statements
2 Penang Institute ISSUES articles
2 subchapter contribution to the Penang Economic and Development Report (yet to be published)
1 article/chapter contribution to a Singaporean Studies publication (in Chinese, yet to be published)
1 ISEAS Trends in Southeast Asia publication
1 Malaysian Studies Conference full proceeding paper
1 UNU-IIGH's SCHEMA case studies paper
1 Penang Monthly cover story
1 Penang Monthly stats
1 Penang Monthly interview feature
3 paper presentation
2 poster presentation
3 public forum in mandarin
1 workshop in mandarin
More than 16 media-interview engagements on various topics, including 2 video appearance on talk shows.
Mentorship guidance provided for 2 interns.
Peer reviewer for my colleagues for the institutional TMI and Oriental Daily columns
The most unforgetable experience was taking the position speaking up for the abolishment of death penalty in Malaysia. I was cursed, humiliated, belittled, scolded by many individuals/netizens whom I never met before, given the public opinion was standing about 80% against the motion. Nevermind that, I NEVER REGRET for doing what I believe in, and I am super glad about an important piece of legal research I managed to conclude and co-author with a prominent human rights lawyer (also my friend) Ms Ngeow Chow Ying and my trusted intern Harchana. The experience of speaking and sharing the same stage with the new MCA president Wee Ka Siong was also something I can never forget... of course any possible last remaining good impression of him has completely gone after the talk. I also did something I could not imagine... I was invited as a panelist and spoke in an online talkshow (hosted by PSM) in almost entirely Bahasa Malaysia for 45 min! I simply just took up the challenge, while it might not be very good but i feel that it was a nice attempt for the first time. Talking about column writing, next year we will be migrating over to Malaysiakini platform, and hopefully we will make bigger impact in readership in disseminating our policy ideas. One paper on medical tourism in Penang is long overdue, I would have to complete the write up to conclude the project. I have also taken up a challenge to co-write a chapter for the UNU-IIGH on a health-related topic, and this will have to be delivered by the 3rd quarter of 2019! I already look forward to another productive work year ahead, although there could be still some uncertainties await me.
To my activism/ social movement activities: Many might not be aware (some do), I co-found a NGO called Agora Society Malaysia with a group of activist friends in Jan 20th, 2018. It is a national-level organisation linking up activists, public intellectuals, writers/columnists across different regions in Malaysia, who support democracy values and good governance, ready to be a voice and an influence for progressive, inclusive, just and fair policies reaching out to the general public and policymakers. We are independent and non-partisan, we believe in rational public discourse and policy debates, and we are critical to the things that did not do right. We feel that it was a right time for doing that because certain rational voices were lacking after the civil society vaccuum created (before and after GE14) when some prominent NGO leaders had either joined/co-opted or become too sympathetic to the new government. Of course, this particular political/activist stand of mine might not be comfortable to some, but I am not apologetic for doing what I believe in. I still keep my cool, rational yet critical head, willing to engage with different political discourse with no bad feelings towards some I still call my friends. I had made my stands clear about the roles of NGO in the post-GE14 Malaysia, in one mandarin public forum representing my NGO. One thing I want to clarify is that, I do not want to interfere certain friendship/relationship with my activist views, so long the person did not speak ill of me in public I would still want to be friendly or diplomatic to him/her (ie. keep my composure).
To my friends: Time is often limited on my side, as much as i would like to maintain good relationship with many of my friends, often i have to prioritise and distribute time well among family, work, activism, personal hobbies, and many other friends! I treasure/cherish my good working relationship with my colleagues, and I always adopt more inclusive stance and make friend with them as much as I could. My KL colleagues are all my friends already, and they are awesome! I do also spend increasingly more time with my activist friends, not only for socialising events and random chit-chats, sometimes we incorporated important organisation strategies discussion during our precious meetings. For long time friends, usually my policy is to engage them now and then, and give them some priorities if I was approached too. I have some really good friends from my high school period, I had only seen them a couple of times in 2018, but each time we meet , our hearts grow fonder. I know that next year it will be even more challenging (especially the latter half year), given that my daughter is expected to be due in late May. I know my true friends would understand me.
More responsibilities and challenges to me in 2019, bring it on. Happy New Year 2019, everyone!
