What really is the crux of the controversy involving Asia Mobility Technologies Sdn Bhd (Asia Mobiliti), which was selected for a proof of concept (POC) for the demand-responsive transit (DRT) pilot project by the Selangor state government? Is it cronyism or selection based on required specific skills?

Asia Mobiliti was one of two companies which were given the opportunity to implement the POC. The state government has stated that its request for proposal (RFP) was conducted according to the proper procedures. The state government further clarified that Asia Mobiliti was involved through a RFP and not as a result of a direct negotiation.

This looks above board. The controversy, however, did not arise from these facts but from the fact that Asia Mobiliti’s CEO is Ramachandran Muniandy, who happens to be the husband of Youth and Sports Minister Hannah Yeoh.

The question arises as to whether it is cronyism if a government project is given to a close relative or friend of a government official. In this case the project has not yet been offered; only a RFP has been made for a POC.

While it may be argued that Asia Mobiliti was selected because it had the specific skill-sets to undertake the DRT pilot project, and correct procedures were followed, it, nevertheless, raises suspicions as to whether a factor in Asia Mobiliti’s favour was the fact that Muniandy is Yeoh’s husband.

Those involved in the selection process may be aware of it but there would have been no need to mention it and so the minutes would not show it but who is to say it may not have influenced the outcome? While it can’t be proven, the damage is done as the relationship would naturally raise suspicions.

As a politician, and one who used to be vocal about cronyism, Yeoh should know that if she holds to a high moral standard, she and those close to her would be judged accordingly. She and her husband, as very public figures and abiding by a high moral code, should understand that no public impropriety should even be associated with them.

Perhaps, this will be a good opportunity for personal reflection and correction.

In terms of public service, however, what is of greater importance is whether the Selangor state government made a public announcement for a RFP for a POC for its DRT pilot project. Since the project involves very specific skills, it could have advertised in subject-specific magazines or portals to invite participants. This would exclude any possibility for favouritism in awarding contracts.

Governments, whether state or federal, may, as a policy, have a slew of projects which they may want to offer to small businesses to encourage their development. Such policies are noteworthy but the processes of acquiring these jobs must be streamlined and publicised so that there is fair competition.

In all the previous Umno-led and non-Umno-led governments, this has been a common practice, especially to uplift the bumiputra, which to a large extent was misunderstood by the non-bumiputras who, led by DAP and PKR politicians, roundly criticised the policy as being cronyism.

These same politicians are now in government and seem to be engaged in a similar practice and, it is not surprising that the public has raised a hue and cry over this double standards.

The intent — to encourage small business — is good public service, whether executed by the previous or current governments, but clear guidelines need to be implemented.

As a rule, no relative or close friend of any government official should get government contracts. If they hold shares or positions of influence in companies, clear guidelines must be set so that they will be unable to interfere and influence decisions.

It was hoped that the Pakatan Harapan-led government would reform these procurement processes so that the possibility of corruption is removed but that is yet to take place.

In the absence of such reforms, it can only be expected that cronyism will continue to thrive.