THE NEW CABINET - HOW GOOD IS IT?

"The new cabinet line-up is good". Or so I had thought upon it being announced, although there were a few immediate question marks.

Why were those not chosen to stand for elections brought into the cabinet? While this makes perfect sense in the case of “technocrats”, it is a real puzzle in the case of full time politicians. Even if the candidates well merit the appointments, the process made it seem like a sudden about-turn somewhere along the line, making one wonder if the whole planning and selection basis for both the elections and cabinet formation had been well planned and fully thought through.

Why was Tan Sri Mohamad Taib included in the cabinet? Although a giant of an UMNO stalwart no doubt, he is also someone who had had his share of adverse publicities and controversies, even well beyond the country’s borders. He cannot be that indispensable to the new cabinet (no one is, including Pak Lah) that he had to be included despite the risk of the stigma of his unfortunate past controversies. His services could have been used and recognised in some other less than such an obvious and almost “I don’t give a damn what the people may say” manner.

Why is it necessary to have an Advisor (of ministerial status) for the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry? How will this “Advisor with ministerial status” operate? Given that the named Advisor, Dato’ Sri Sharizat, was the previous minister in this ministry, her appointment will most likely make it very awkward for Dato’ Dr Ng Yen Yen as a first-time full minister – and might create unnecessary conjectures on the reasons for this unprecedented move, including the trust in Dato’ Ng to do a “fair” job particularly in the area of “race interests”. Is it fair to Dato' Ng? Or is this simply a back-door ministerial appointment to salvage a much regretted “innocent casualty” of the general elections while bypassing the so loudly brandished ruling of “no losing candidate to be appointed”?

These are a few of the more obvious question marks. Then there are perhaps the less obvious, which would probably become more apparent as the days go by.

I sense that apart from the so-called “balance”, “integrity”, “lean” and “giving what the people want” considerations, one other element strongly influencing the selection of the cabinet was the “personal loyalty and trust” consideration. But then perhaps this is only to be expected, especially under the present circumstances when the services of the “Hang Tuahs” might be needed. The problem I see though is that not all the “Hang Tuahs” could be included and satisfied. And those left out, especially those who worked so hard for the general elections and felt they had defended the leadership strongly during some difficult times might feel abandoned – and there’s no telling what they might do.

The other likely problem source is the recognition of the contributions of Sabah and Sarawak in the recent general elections. I sense this cabinet line-up might not be seen as sufficient recognition by the two states, although Tan Sri Taib Mahmood might be satisfied especially when his son was made deputy minister. As for the rest – even Dato’ Shafie Apdal might be seen as having been moved to a lesser ministry. What about the very high representation from Johore? And what about the under-representation of Wanita UMNO? Let's not forget they make up more than 50% of UMNO membership!

Thus, while the new cabinet might seem tentatively "lean and mean" and make us somewhat hopeful, its formation might actually cause some complications for the BN. In the worst case scenario it could trigger a further downward spiral of the BN into uncharted territories. If this were to happen, no BN cabinet could really be effective.

.

So, in the final analysis, what do I think of the new cabinet? What a mess!