Penang's contrarian society

COMMENT Penang is the hotbed of Malaysia's non-governmental organisation (NGO) movement. Perhaps it is the water there or the people, who throughout history have been "contrarian".

In Penang, if one has an idea and shares it, chances are, it will be shot down by family members and then the wider community; after this baptism of fire, these ideas become more robust.

Penang is also a bell-weather state where foreign direct investment-based industrialisation first took root in Malaysia.

Perhaps because of its open, multi-ethnic and multi-religious society; there is a sense of the "grating-edge" about the state.

For Malaysians who are not from Penang, this type of critical reception can be a bit shocking.

Over the years, Penang has become a sort of refuge for contrarian movements and personalities. When Dr Sun Yat Sen, the father of modern China, was down and out of friends, he found support, funds and friends in Penang.

Penang is also the kind of place where Rabindranath Tagore, Asia's first Nobel Laureate, was celebrated by his Straits Chinese fans in 1927.

Fertile ground for NGOs

In more recent times, non-governmental organisations of different types, causes and hues have flourished here. From breast-feeding to the World Fish Centre, some of these movements have attained global prominence.

The Third World Network, now based in Geneva, had its humble beginnings in George Town.

In the 1970s and 1980s, just as Malaysia was moving headlong into industrialisation, environmentalism also found strong support among Penangites.

In the political front, Aliran and Utusan Konsumer continue to be committed critics of the "the neo-liberal" economic system.

In its less political mode, voluntary organisations in Penang represent the best in the self-help movement.

The range is bewildering including providing care for factory workers, establishing and managing homes for the aged, training for the blind and the handicap, drug addiction rehabilitation centres, home for single mothers and, one of the most successful in the country, the Women's Centre for Change.

Soapbox politics versus reality

It is, therefore, not quite correct to say that Penang's NGO community is now ranged solidly against the Penang state government.

There is, however, palpable ambivalence towards Lim Guan Eng's proposal to go ahead with highways and the channel tunnel.

This ambivalence is based upon lived experience. Whenever a politician stands on his soapbox painting a utopian vision, the unintended consequences have made life more difficult for the rest of us.

The Consumers Association of Penang's SM Idris, who continues to speak without fear or favour, pointed out very clearly in his open letter to Lim Guan Eng that the latter's proposal to build highways and a channel tunnel as a last resort to "solve" Penang's transport woes will not work and misses the point.

Idris is not a BN supporter nor is he a fan of Pakatan. He is consistent in his view that "neo-liberal" economics is essentially unsustainable and will not lead to the "balanced society" that is at the bedrock of the Penang Paradigm.

In short, it is ideology that is at issue here. CAP does not believe that more of the same will make Penang a better place.

But politicians do not have the luxury of long-term vision. They need to solve traffic problems yesterday and one quick way is to expand existing roads, build more highways and even more roads.

What politicians bank on

These measures will help alleviate the problem for some four or five years and that is enough for them to get re-elected.

Moreover, the electorate has no long-term memory, one can, like the former Penang BN government, genuinely "disowns" the very policies and projects that got the state into the mess it is in now.

One can build 10 tunnels and 100 highways but if there is no alignment with landuse planning and strict enforcement, all efforts will come to nothing.

There is no doubt that both SM Idris (right) and CM Lim Guan Eng have the very best of intentions but the solutions that they seek for Penang's traffic woes cannot be found in a bitter and very public exchange of open letters!

However, this is not an insoluble problem. The Pakatan state government has been very consultative. Civil society activists now sit on various advisory committees. One is even a municipal councillor who speaks his mind at full council meetings without fear or favour.

While this is extraordinary in the Malaysian context, community participation in planning, budgeting and monitoring of state and local governmental policies is practiced in most developed countries worldwide.

Staying consistent to cause

Just as the state government argues against a federal-centric decision-making process that is formulaic and "top-down", at the local level, people who live and work at the district and village level should be part of the decision-making process.

This will undoubtedly slow things down, which is exactly what we need to avoid the leakages and unintended problems.

There is no doubt that Malaysia has nice skyscrapers, beautiful homes and wonderful malls. Malaysia's NGOs have been warning about the social deficits we will suffer as a result of such policies.

When they see that the present state government is pursuing similar policies, they need to stay consistent to the causes they champion.

Opposition to state governmental policy is not a zero sum game as the state government has experienced very cordial working partnerships with NGOs throughout its first five years in office.

The next five years, if the Pakatan is retained, will be crucial for Penang's future development. The question is whether the Penang Pakatan state government has the tenacity and commitment to make difficult decisions.

Pulling in different directions

Their own Transport Master Plan indicates clearly that some form of disincentives will become necessary as more and more cars come into the market and compete for road and parking spaces!

The issue of transport, more than any other, demonstrates the inexorable integration of Penang into the peninsular mainland.

Up till very recently, there were separate local plans for Penang Island and Seberang Prai. This is not only inefficient but flies in the face of greater integration into the rest of Malaysia.

At the federal level, the government of the day sets its guidelines for planning and transport according to the needs of its economic and socio-political policies.

At the state level, Penang needs to be able to draw up policies and have the free hand to implement them based on the specific needs of the state and region.

Whatever the outcome of the 13 GE, Penang's aspiration to be a sustainable international city-region will require closer cooperation at the community, local, state and federal levels.

There is really little need for grand-standing and brinkmanship. The NGO movement is strong in Penang making it a resilient and creative society.

This has been acknowledged as a part of George Town's outstanding universal values. It is a part of the Penang identity, one that all of us must fight hard to preserve.

---

NEIL KHOR completed his PhD at Cambridge University and now writes occasionally on matters that he thinks require better historical treatment. He is quietly optimistic about Malaysia's future.