“Good Cops, Safe Malaysia” is as good a campaign theme as any. It is easily communicated across, digestible and reflects the anxiety of the rakyat/voters – cutting across all races, religions and culture – on the grave problem of escalating crime in this country.

Personally, (just my 2 cents) I would have preferred “Good Governance, Safe Malaysia” instead of “Good Cops, Safe Malaysia”.

The reason is because having Good Governance necessarily encompasses, as a part of it, having Good Cops.

However, theoretically, on can have Good Cops alone without Good Governance.

Again this is my personal opinion – we all know as a matter of fact and reality that having Good Cops is only part of the escalating crime equation. Having Good Cops will stem the tide of crime but Cops don’t generate the tide.

It is unsatisfactory political, socio-economic policies of the BN government reacting on circumstances of widening disparities of income, inflation, urban rural drift, influx of foreigners, Corruption as HB Lim said that are providing the impetus for the crime wave. In short it is governance or rather mis-governance that is the root cause.

It is therefore better if as a matter of strategy to link the crime wave that everyone is anxious about to misgovernance with the campaign theme “Good Governance, Safe Malaysia”.

In that way, there are two advantages:

1. It is not so lopsided and unfair to the police as a corp/body when we all know that whatever its failings it is not the sole or even the main cause of escalating crime;

2. the Opposition has more ‘bullets’ to expand and explain wider aspects of misgovernance than just police inefficiency and the IPCMC versus Special Complaints Committee theme.

Under 2, it depends on how one could devise a step-by-step strategy to link escalating crime with various aspects of government’s policies that aggravate it. I believe there’s no shortage of materials and examples on the latter on bad policies or misgovernance.

Cheers and best of luck! :)

Actually, the only reservation I had about ‘Good Governance” as opposed to “Good Cops” is that “Good Governance” may be a trifle too “abstract” to explain to the voters on the ground.

HB Lim has come out with another angle – that ‘Good Governance’ would not be as racially, culturally or religiously neutral as ‘Good Cops’, and in relation to the government, may be construed as including “its racially-based, religion-biased policies” by “certain sectors of the citizen” which will be “on their guard as to the propaganda’s motives….”.

It is disheartening to think that there may be an element of truth in what HB Lim said – that the state of our affairs is sad one where we cannot garner votes – indeed we may even repel – “certain sectors of the citizen” when we call a spade a spade, and point to the real malaise (mis-governance) that afflicts the nation in all sectors, and not just in the area of crime; that to better the chances of getting some of their votes, we dare not push for and openly talk about good governance in an election campaign, almost as if this “certain sectors of the citizen” would prefer mis-governance to governance!

What is disconcerting in this quest for something racially, culturally or religiously neutral in theme like “cops” instead of “governance” is basically this :

Throughout the year the Opposition highlights and condemns the government’s mis-governance in a whole range of issues including its “racially-based, religion-biased policies”.

This highlighting and condemning is justified on high principles.

Come election time and campaigning, the Opposition says ‘no’ lets not campaign on high principles of governance – lets not even point out the obvious truth to the rakyat of the problems the nation is facing from the government – misgovernance (even though there’s an obvious need to do so because only certain urbanised internet savvy minuscule section of the rakyat have access to enlightenment of blogs and on line news but not the majority).

And why is it so that we cannot tell the truth, and need to seek a politically neutral theme like “cops”?

Answer is because we need, as HB Lim said, not to alienate that “certain sectors of the citizenry” that don’t like any party, especially Opposition Party, to oppose “racially-based, religion-biased policies”.

To which the fundamental question must necesarily be asked : aren’t we not playing along the gallery and encouraging these “racially-based, religion-biased policies” to continue by being afraid to even indirectly allude to them via the use of the word “Good Governance”?

For the Opposition to take on the BN, it must seize a higher moral ground than present the same nuance of opportunism that it accuses the BN of!

The BN could turn around now and accuse the Opposition, yes it is equally as opportunistic, choosing the “neutral” theme of “crime” (away from its customary behaviour of accusing BN of mis-governance) just because Malay public sentiments are now incensed with “crime” especially in wake of the highly publicized case of Sharlinie after Nurin.

They will also say that the Opposition is, of late, championing the Cause of Marginalised Indians after Hindraf to reach out for Indian votes, where it had not so actively or vociferously do so in the past.

The key word here is to reach out for Malay and Indian Votes since traditionally the Chinese votes are with the Opposition (DAP) – in other words, to reach out on basis of race, the same communal approach that, in other times, it accuses BN component parties of taking! The same opportunism!

The elite 20% here control more than 51% of the nation’s wealth; 40% are middle classes and balance of 40% are the down trodden poor of all races (Malay, Indian Chinese) in Peninsula and especially the various groups in East Malaysia.

The question posed is : Why can’t Opposition reach out to the 40% poor of all races and complain directly about misgovernance, the main thing that is wrong for everything else that is wrong in the country ?

By seeking a racially, culturally or religiously ‘neutral’ theme like “cops” instead of the real McCoy (mis-governance) – by actively canvassing “certain sectors of the citizen” that will be “upset” and guarded by any party attacking “misgovernance” directly – wouldn’t the Opposition be perceived to be paying greater weightage on expedience than principles, playing the same communal card as BN, when it comes to garnering votes instead of proceeding on the higher ground of principles?

That is the question for us to reflect.