Tourism Tax Fiasco: Good Policy Turns "Bad"

The recent spat between Minister of Tourism Nazri Aziz and his Sarawak counterpart Abdul Karim Hamzah is not about the Sarawak/Sabah government against the federal government or the people of East Malaysia against the people of Semenanjung as many people think it is. It is about the way Nazri responded to Karim who wanted the Tourism Tax to be deferred in Sarawak as “local concerns” must be taken into consideration before the tax is implemented. The same concern was raised by a senator from Sarawak, Zaiedi Suhaili, during a debate in the senate. As soon as Nazri fired his first salvo against Karim, calling him “samseng” (thug) and “setahun jagung” (greenhorn), all hell broke loose. Sabah and Sarawak leaders, joined by thousands of social media users, criticised Nazri for his remarks against Karim. Some went further by saying that the Tourism Tax is “illegal”, an attempt to undermine the Malaysian Agreement and to erode Sabah’s and Sarawak’s rights in the federation. But is this the case?

Tourism Tax falls under the federal government's jurisdiction after it was included as part of the items in the Federal List in 1994. The federal government has the legal right under the constitution to impose tax in the federation. Sabah, prior to the formation of Malaysia, gave up its right over taxation (except sales tax) in replacement for Special Grant as stipulated in Part Four of the Tenth Schedule of the Federal Constitution. Does the Tourism Tax undermine the Malaysian Agreement? Does it erode Sabah’s and Sarawak’s rights? Some in the legal fraternity don’t think so as there is a clear demarcation of power between the federal and state governments as stipulated in the Federal, State and Concurrent List. The onus is on Sabah and Sarawak to include tourism as part of their jurisdiction in the future through the country’s legal and constitutional process.

The next issue raised by many is, were Sabah and Sarawak properly consulted before the parliament debated the Tourism Tax Bill? If by consultation here we mean providing the avenue for Sabah and Sarawak leaders to give their opinions, there is a platform for them to do so through a debate in parliament. But according to Hansard record, only Darell Leiking, a member of parliament for Penampang in Sabah and Zaiedi Suhaili, a senator from Sarawak, took part in the debate. What could be the reason for the “absence” of Sabah and Sarawak lawmakers from such an important debate? Crucially, only Nazri and the Ministry of Tourism can explain whether Sabah and Sarawak tourism officials/stakeholders were involved in discussions at the departmental/ministerial/grassroots levels prior to the tabling of the Tourism Tax Bill.

It looks like the issue is not about the Tourism Tax per se but the importance of a clearly established and transparent line of communication between federal and state officials in the course of formulating and implementing a policy. By the way, given proper implementation and monitoring, the country will stand to benefit from the Tourism Tax (as explained at length in the Hansard). Knowing Nazri, many are not really surprised by his “legendary” outburst but being a senior minister or “anak jantan” as he likes to call himself, he should by now know that it is not just what you say that matters but how you say it.

Nation has lost a statesman

All he wanted to do was to spend more time with his family and retire gracefully from politics, but the call of duty obligated the late Tan Sri Adenan Satem to leave the comfort of his private life to helm one of Malaysia’s most geographically-challenging and culturally-diverse states. After taking over as Sarawak’s chief minister from “strongman” Tun Abdul Taib Mahmud (now the Yang di-Pertua Negeri) in early 2014, Adenan did not wait long to introduce a slew of people-oriented policies, such as abolishing tolls, lowering ferry fares, reducing electricity tariffs, recognising the UEC (Unified Examination Certificate) and defending Sarawak’s constitutional rights. 

He demonstrated to Sarawakians that he could deliver through his “53 principles and actions”. In less than two years in power, Adenan’s popularity soared and he enjoyed strong support from Sarawak’s multicultural and multireligious communities. He distinguished himself as a people-oriented leader, who was willing to take actions for their cause. He broke barriers by presenting himself as the people’s leader. Adenan could be seen everywhere, be it at a restaurant enjoying his favourite food, at an airport waiting for his flight, or at a pasar just like what the ordinary people do. And, he did this without the company of bodyguards or personal assistants. In short, Adenan could mingle with just anybody, irrespective of race, religion and social class. Having earned the respect and admiration of Sarawakians, Adenan went to the 2016 state polls with the ambitious agenda of winning big for ruling coalition Barisan Nasional (BN). 

Some, however, were pessimistic about Adenan’s chances given the people’s lackadaisical attitude towards BN. Others were not confident that the “Adenan factor” would be decisive enough to bring back the Chinese votes to BN. Despite the attempts by the opposition to undermine Adenan’s popularity, they admitted that he was a formidable force behind BN’s campaign strategy. A seasoned, witty and strategic politician, Adenan capitalised on the opposition’s weaknesses by addressing the issues they raised head on and by cleverly “seizing” their “Sarawak for Sarawakians” sloganeering. Adenan showed that his demands for autonomy were not simply rhetoric by presenting to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak the state’s demand for autonomy in 13 administrative areas. Adenan’s presidential style of campaigning worked like magic. The BN won 72 of the 82 seats contested. The PBB (Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu), the largest party in Sarawak led by Adenan, made a clean sweep, winning all 40 seats it contested. He also proved his critics wrong by winning five seats formerly held by the opposition. The Adenan factor proved to be decisive in breaking DAP’s dominance in the Chinese-majority areas. 

It is not an understatement that BN won in Sarawak because the people trusted and had confidence in Adenan. Indeed, Adenan’s successor will have big shoes to fill. The immediate challenge will be to effectively implementing Adenan’s “53 principles and actions” and fulfilling his autonomy demands for Sarawak. Adenan will be remembered as one of the rare leaders who achieved so much in such a short time. He reminded us that those in power ought to do the right thing for the ordinary people. He will be remembered as the person who broke the barrier between the leader and the led. We will remember his chants of “oh... ha” and “you… you”, which were uttered not without a purpose: Adenan wanted to tell us that he is part of us and without us, he is nobody. For Malaysia, the country has lost a statesman, who despite his persistent demands for autonomy, still believed in the preservation of the federation. Adenan strove to maintain the integrity of the federation by reminding us that Sarawak (and Sabah) did not join Malaysia, they formed (together with Malaya) this beloved country of ours. 

Rest in peace, Tok Nan.

Arnold Puyok
Kuching, Sarawak.

Source: http://www.nst.com.my/news/2017/01/203925/nation-has-lost-statesman