A bill to ‘outlast any minister or government’ – Nik Nazmi answers burning questions on Malaysia’s climate change legislation

Malaysians have less than a month to send in their comments on Malaysia’s draft climate change bill, which has already garnered significant interest from civil society.

Non-profit climate advocacy group Klima Action Malaysia (Kamy), for instance, has prepared a guide to help members of the public submit their feedback on the draft bill before the closing date of 4 November.

“Like any major legislation, [the Climate Change Act] might affect various aspects of life in Malaysia,” the group said on its website.

Top of mind for many Malaysians at press time are the flash floods affecting pockets of capital city Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday. As Malaysia heads into the northeastern monsoon season, the country’s meteorological department has warned of thunderstorms accompanied by heavy rains and strong winds until early November.

Malaysia’s draft climate change bill does not directly address adaptation to extreme weather events, nor other key concerns Eco-Business has gathered from civil society and observers. These include the rights of Malaysians affected by climate change and the need for more detailed regulations.

Eco-Business put forth these concerns to Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, Malaysia’s Minister of Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability (NRES) in an exclusive interview last Thursday on the sidelines of the International Greentech & Eco Products Exhibition and Conference Malaysia (iGEM). The ministry is overseeing the draft of the upcoming Climate Change Act and is planning to table it in Parliament early next year.

Can you walk us through some of the key components of the draft bill and what they mean for Malaysians?

We’re just starting our public consultation, so let us go through that process first because it’s not the final bill yet. What is most important is that we’ve made commitments in Paris [in 2015] and made submissions to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) for our Nationally Determined Contribution. These commitments are not just an aspirational policy document or international treaty that we signed – how do we actually legislate them? How do we meet our targets?

Malaysia’s Minister for Natural Resources and Envrionmental Sustainability, Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad (right) spoke to Eco-Business regional correspondent Samantha Ho about the ministry’s process of drafting the climate change bill. Image: Jason Tan/ Eco-Business

We have done consultations from the beginning of this legislative process with consultative and advisory panels comprising businesses, non-governmental organisations, youths and indigenous peoples. We’ve even met with different ministries and state governments. Through the consultation process, we are gauging the public’s understanding of the importance of this bill, and how different stakeholders – states, private, public, civil society, women, youth and so on – understand their role in it.

The critical part is that at the end of the day, people accept that it is the federal government which is party to the Paris Agreement and other international treaties. That is where this bill is relevant. Some were asking: why should it be a federal bill? We know some states [such as Sarawak, which passed a climate change bill last year] have moved very fast with regards to carbon-based legislation – we’re learning from them. I met with the premier of Sarawak and I think it was a very positive meeting. We are being respectful [of what state governments have done] and referencing our federal constitution in order for us to advance this bill.

We will finalise the other details as we embark on this public consultation and go through the feedback.

The draft bill allocates new powers to the Minister of NRES and a new ‘regulatory entity’. There aren’t many details on the checks and balances between these powers, or the exact laws that will be used. How much of this still needs to be ironed out?

The way legislation works, as we’ve seen with other legislation that governs, for example, the Multimedia Commission, Energy Commission or Water Commission, is that an act (of law) is quite general in nature. It will be followed by regulations, directives and whatnot, which is where the details you asked about come in.

I understand the concerns from the public with regards to this, but the Act needs to be broad enough so that we have room to manoeuvre. If we make it too detailed or too rigid, then any amendment will have to be an amendment in Parliament, and we don’t know whether that will go through. But if we use regulations – and we have gone through this process before, so it’s not something that is unique – then we have room through the regulations [for new rules] to be instituted immediately.

“

The purpose is to have [climate] legislation that can truly be bipartisan and accepted by everyone.

Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, Minister of Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability, Malaysia

Not every legislation goes through this broad consultative process, but I have made a point of taking this approach for the climate change bill. We met with businesses and civil society from the beginning, when we just had about three line items of what the bill should be. Then as the team gathered and drafted the legislation, we brought them back again to share their views. And now we’re opening it to the public. I think that shows our commitment.

If we wanted it to be simple, I would say – politicians being politicians – “I delivered this climate change bill within my one year in office and passed it quickly.” But that is not the purpose of this bill. The purpose is to have legislation that can truly be bipartisan and accepted by everyone. It’s not about who [is in power], it is about something that should outlast any minister or any government, because we are talking about a 2050 net zero target. So that’s the intention, and that’s my assurance to everyone with regards to how we’re going to finalise and bring this bill to Parliament.

You said that everybody in Malaysia should be able to understand their roles better in the context of climate change, but there does not seem to be any provision of rights for specific groups of people [such as inidgenous peoples, local communities or individuals affected by climate inaction] in the draft bill. Is that something that will be included in the final bill?

We have been exploring – there’s even talk, for example, about a constitutional amendment for the right to a clean environment. Ideally, things like a bill of rights on the environment are really good, aspirational ambitions.

This climate change bill is very focused; it is geared towards Malaysia’s climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. But we are also going to do a thorough, substantive revision of the Environmental Quality Act 1974 (EQA). Climate change and the right to a clean environment overlap, but they are not necessarily the same thing.

Malaysia’s Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability is conducting a more thorough review of the country’s Environmental Quality Act 1974, said minister Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad. Image: Edelman

I think that [an EQA amendment] will be more substantive because in 1974, our perspective of the environment was very different. Not many people spoke about climate change back then. Now we are in a different era.

To be fair to the previous administration, when we raised penalties [for offences such as water pollution and illegal waste disposal] earlier this year, that was their legacy. We just brought it back to Parliament because the legislative process had not been completed. But now we need to look at the substantive part [of the EQA] – penalties are fine, but how does it address the environmental challenges of 2024? 

I think that is [the context in which] we can discuss things like a constitutional amendment for rights. I would love to have it, but it’s not straightforward. We have the challenge of harmonising it with the Malaysia Agreement 1963 [a legal contract which grants the states of Sabah and Sarawak rights over matters such as land and immigration] and other laws.

I wish I could do a hundred things as a minister, but I think I need to look at maybe 10 important priorities that I believe are realistic enough and can achieve far-reaching change. [A bill on rights] could bring about far reaching change, but whether that’s realistic [is another thing].

I’d like to ask about how Malaysia as a nation can adapt to some of the extreme weather that we’re already seeing, such as floods. Could you share more about the National Adaptation Plan that is being developed?

The target completion is 2026. There are a few focus areas, for example, the impact of climate change on agriculture and cities, and how to deal with natural disasters.

I agree that there is a lack of [conversations about adaptation.] People like to talk about mitigation because it seems that you can solve the problem if you reach net zero. But we have already crossed the 1.5-degree (global temperature rise threshold a few times, so adaptation is a must. [According to the US-based National Resources Defense Council, the world has seen temperatures rise more than 1.5 degrees Celcius above pre-industrial levels a few times. However, there is debate over how to best continue measuring temperature rises.]

Malaysia is surrounded by huge seas and we’ve experienced floods and landslides. I’ve never doubted climate change – reading the science, you believe it’s real. But one of the most touching parts of [the job]…has been going to see villages that are being swallowed by the sea. Shorelines and beaches are disappearing. You see impacts on farming, kids dying from heat waves in Malaysia. It’s really quite scary.

Heavy rain caused flash floods along major roads in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on 15 October 2024. Image: Traffic camera

The adaptation plan is crucial to address all these things. Governments can’t go on giving aid every time there’s a major flood – governments can’t afford that. There is a limit to how much money that we have. But if we make [the adaptation plan] in such a way that risks are properly taken into account…insurers, for instance, can act.

For instance, the [provision of] flood hazard maps was passed in Cabinet, so that data can be available and insurers can better insure [properties] based on their flood risks. Those are things that we want to do. But there is obviously resistance – some developers do not like that because it will make insurance on houses cost more and people will be aware of the risks. There is always pushback – this is reality, it would affect the prices of their homes. But we have to address it. If our infrastructure and power generation are swallowed by the sea or flooded every year, it will be damaging.

Malaysia received US$3 million from the United Nations-backed Green Climate Fund to develop its national adaptation plan. Is that enough funding?

For the rest of the funds we need, we will look for our own money within Malaysia. We are appreciative of the money given, since the challenge for Malaysia has always been that we are upper-middle income and as our income grows, we become less qualified when it comes to financial assistance. As you become a wealthier economy, you get less from international organisations. So, it is fortunate that we got the US$3 million – we would love more but I am realistic and I don’t think that the amount received should be a stopping point or a hurdle to a good and effective adaptation plan.

This interview was edited for brevity and clarity.