PRIME Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been at the receiving end of the Indian community’s irritation and disappointment for the lack (some would say absence) of “Indian representation” in his recently reshuffled Cabinet.
With newly appointed Digital Minister Gobind Singh Deo being the sole representative of the three million-plus Indians (who make up 6.6% of the population), PMX has been accused of sidelining the community with criticisms that his song and dance routine – ala Indian film legend MGR – was merely to court votes in the last elections.
By contrast Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had four cabinet ministers and one deputy minister of Indian origin. (Some may joke that including Mahathir there were five ministers of Indian origin).
Even Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob had the Tamil-speaking and temple-going Datuk Seri M. Saravanan in their respective cabinets.
When Anwar took over in 2022, he appointed DAP’s V. Sivakumar as Human Resources Minister, being the Madani Government’s sole Tamil-Hindu representative in cabinet.
Sivakumar was dropped in this week’s reshuffle, with Gobind filling the oft referred to “Indian quota”.
PKR’s Datuk R. Ramanan and K. Saraswathy, along with DAP’s M. Kulasegaran were appointed as deputy ministers.
Kulasegaran was previously Human Resources Minister in Dr Mahathir’s administration.
Non-Indians may not be able to understand the fuss over the lack of Indians, particularly Tamil-Hindus in Cabinet.
A single minister, one would reason, is proportionate to the population of the community.
However, the sensitivities of the majority in the community – the Tamil-Hindus – must not be taken lightly.
Indians come in many shapes and sizes: Tamils, Gujuratis, Malayalees, Telugus, Sikhs to name a few – and they represent three of the main faiths: Hinduism, Islam and Christianity.
But Tamil speaking Indians make up over two million of the population, with about 75%% of them members of the Hindu faith.
Hence, one can understand why Gobind – a Sikh – may not be endearing enough to the majority of Indians in the country. They may not have the confidence that he understands the plight of Malaysian Tamils – who make up most of the government’s statistics of marginalisation.
However, this would be unfair to Gobind, whose Damansara constituency has almost 469,000 people of whom 9.9% are Indians.
His previous constituency of Puchong had him serve 375,000 people of whom 11% were Indians.
A number of the Indians in these two constituencies are grassroots Indians – second or even third generation former plantation workers who were displaced by the redevelopment of the rubber and oil palm estates in which their parents and grandparents worked.
Gobind is the son of the late Datuk Seri Karpal Singh, regarded by many Indians and non-Indians alike as a national hero.
As a lawyer and MP Karpal fought for justice for the marginalised, where he and four of his five children who are also lawyers, defended many poor Indians in criminal cases pro bono.
They championed the issue of deaths in police custody, where the deceased were alarmingly mainly ethnic Indians.
Hence, the issue of a lack of Indian representation may be a myopic argument. So what if there is no such representative in the Cabinet?
The Indian community has had Indian representation (specifically Tamil Hindu reps) for a good part of the last 60 years.
Has the lot of the Indian community with regards to jobs, education, university placements, and share of the equity improved drastically because we had an Indian minister in Cabinet?
Sivakumar was the sole Indian representative last year, yet drew controversy to himself and his ministry when the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) launched investigations into his ministry and his officers for graft, leading to Sivakumar having to sack five close aides.
DAP must be asked as to why their most senior Tamil-Hindu representative Kulasegaran was not forwarded as a ministerial candidate. Party politics?
Would Indians be better off if there was an Indian – particularly Tamil-Hindus in Cabinet?
Certainly Indians need to be at the table. But non-Tamil-Hindu ethnic Indians may ask if their interests have been adequately championed by Indian leaders all these years.
Just look at what has been achieved for the community and ask if having an Indian in cabinet will bring significant change and improvement.
Perhaps the question that should be asked is who should be championing the cause of Indians in the cabinet?
Self-serving Indian politicians?
Indian leaders who believe the fallacy that Malayalees, Gujuratis and Ceylonese are “better off” than their Tamil cousins and do not need assistance, where non-Tamil speaking Indians are regarded as second class Indians?
Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, who has been maligned for the 1MDB scandal, also received much praise for putting together the Malaysian Indian Blueprint in 2017 – a 10-year plan to uplift Malaysian Indians through education and economic opportunities.
Najib chaired the Indian Affairs Committee himself to channel funds directly towards programmes for Indian upliftment. These included Tamil school allocations as well as jobs, skills training, and university placements for Indian youths.
Najib was also opposed to education quota systems, saying such policies will hurt the already marginalised Indians more.
This is also the stand of the current Prime Minister who passionately explained to a young Indian student the difference between equality and justice – and why the quota system will hurt Indians.
As a self-described Prime Minister for all, perhaps Anwar can take on the responsibility of Indian affairs.
He will not be blinkered by ethno-politics and will be able to look at resolving Indian issues from the perspective of a technocrat.
His handling of the Kampung Rawa, Penang skirmish between mosque and temple worshippers when he was deputy prime minister has been mired in controversy and misinformation. The truth is he was the only government leader who went to the ground to mediate.
Anwar’s tough talk of silencing temple bells, as he articulated in an interview with this writer some years ago, was followed by the admonishment of several members of the mosque committee.
He told them the azan has to be broadcasted five times a day but ceramahs and talks that are insensitive to non-Muslims should not be broadcasted.
Just as he had threatened to silence the bells at the temple which was going off during Muslim prayer times, he also threatened to seize the microphones at the masjid.
Perhaps this cabinet reshuffle should get us to start thinking more like Malaysians than on our respective ethnic lines.
This is still an administration that is most reflective of the nation’s make-up, with eight ministers including a deputy prime minister from East Malaysia; plus 16 deputy ministers of Borneo origin.
At the end of it all, Malay, Chinese, Indian or whatever the ethnicity, the people only want ministers who can deliver. No point having token Indians in the Cabinet if they cannot do anything for their community – or worse use their position to enrich themselves and shore up support to establish a power base.
Perhaps Anwar will want to set up a committee on Indian affairs to look into the macro and micro issues of the community.
In fact he may be able to find better and quicker solutions by looking at issues holistically and subjectively.
Speaking as an Indian, one would rather not have a representative in Cabinet if the choice is a useless one. – December 16, 2023
Terence Fernandez is Group Editor in Chief of Big Boom Media Sdn Bhd which publishes Scoop