It’s colonialism under another name. Why do we have different states in Malaysia?
The states cannot implement a sales or income tax, so their ability to raise revenue is almost non-existent. They get whatever crumbs the federal government sees fit to toss them; Putrajaya makes a big deal of giving money to the states, as it did this week with Kelantan’s oil royalties, but the fact of the matter is, each state should be entitled to at least a portion of the revenue which accrues from its people. At the moment, Penang and Selangor, the two most prosperous states in our federation, each contributing billions of ringgit to the economy, have annual budgets on the order of a few hundred million — smaller than some of our universities.
Summing up, the states have no power and no money. They have some small freedom to do things, but this is limited by how little funds they have, how obstinate their federal-seconded civil servants are, and how much the federal government feels like overruling them. This is not a tenable constitutional arrangement — not when there is so much diversity in our country, and not when our federal government is so unaccountable.
Having different policies from state to state not only lets each state govern itself according to its own needs, but lets each state learn from the successes and mistakes of others. If Penang’s competency, accountability and transparency policies prove successful — as the Auditor-General’s latest report suggests — then other states will consider following suit. If the policy does not work out and cannot alleviate corruption, then the rakyat of Penang will vote for something better, and the consequences of the mistake are only limited to Penang. With a central government imposing top-down policies, we are completely screwed; the consequences of any mistakes — of which there will definitely be many, in light of how big and diverse our country is — will affect us all, and as we all know, it is difficult to get enough momentum to change the federal government.
