Of timelines and other cliffhangers

Too much on transition means less of other tales

Timeline talk is not good for the economy. Period.

THIS transition story is getting to be a bit tiring. And tiresome, too. Do such tedious arguments have insidious intent? We venture no answer. But we call for a resolution of the transition issue once and for all. A Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim backer said there was never a timeline. Earlier, Pakatan Harapan secretary-general Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah, who had made mention of the absence of the timeline, showed a document to this effect. Anwar, too, had said as much in Parliament in October. Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad did loosely mention two years and subsequently, three years. The NST Leader thinks this is something for Pakatan Harapan leaders to decide. This notwithstanding, the media is entitled to offer its views. This is what we think: absent the timeline, the prime minister should carry on. Do not misread us. We will be happy with a good leader for the country. This much we care.

Besides, Malaysia is more than the transition tale. The onagain and off-again transition narrative shouldn’t be allowed to trump this. Look at what the uncertainty of Brexit has done to Britain. Do not get us wrong. Our transition narrative isn’t as bad as Brexit. Nor are we saying there is a Boris Johnson at play here. God help us if there is. Let’s keep Bertie Wooster-type comedic acts within the pages of P.G. Wodehouse. Timeline talk is not good for the economy. Period. Plus, it crowds out other concerns from our national conversation.

Take the case of youth unemployment. The Khazanah Research Institute published a report on June 13 — A Statistical Snapshot of Youth Unemployment, 2011 to 2018 — warning of an uptick in youth unemployment. While the national unemployment rate registered 3.3 per cent, youth unemployment increased from 10.8 per cent in 2017 to 10.9 per cent last year. Translation: for every unemployed adult, there were five unemployed youths. Yet, the issue did not get the national attention it deserved. How could we let the bad news that afflicted our young — mostly first-time jobseekers — pass as silently as it did? This is a subject fit for a national conversation.

Admittedly, we in the media, too are not playing our part in pushing the right national conversations. There are so many critical issues — cost of living, private sector investment, graduate employment, shared prosperity — yet the media is tediously transfixed by transition talk. We are bigger than this. Our space must be for issues as big as Malaysia. May be bigger. Perhaps regional. Or even global. Our pages must address these questions.

The media world in Malaysia, like elsewhere, is changing. And expanding, too. A growing media world means increased opportunities for Malaysia. It can get its story out to the world, instead of letting others tell its story. In short: an expanding media business should help catalyse our growth.

Admittedly, too, we cannot conceivably banish transition talk completely. If it doesn’t grab the attention of the media here, it sure does the notice of the newspapers across the causeway. They have space to spare for things such as this. And understandably, too. They wouldn’t dare disturb the universe of political succession there. Even a hint at a clue is a venture too far. Let’s move beyond timelines and other cliffhangers.