MIC leaders back Palanivel’s ‘back-to-estate’ call

By Clara Chooi

March 12, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, March 12 — Several MIC leaders have come out to back their president Datuk G. Palanivel’s “back-to-estate” call on the Indian urban poor, chiding party Youth chief T. Mohan for spinning the issue out of context.

The leaders said as a wing chief, Mohan should have consulted Palanivel (picture) for a clarification instead of turning to the media to rebut his statement.

“The president did not mean that all Indians must go back to the estates. He was just referring to the few families living in nearby towns and cities who are suffering from a lack of good jobs and income to survive. We are talking about those below the poverty line here, not everyone.

“It is these types of families that he said could go back to work in the estates and government-linked companies like Sime Darby where they can have better income and not suffer from the burden of having to pay for daily amenities like water and electricity supply,” said central working committee member Datuk R. Ganesan.

The Perak Speaker and former Sungkai assemblyman reminded Mohan that Palanivel was an experienced leader and politician who was well aware of the plight of the Indian community.

“We know that some live comfortably while some are suffering so of course Datuk Palanivel was not telling all Indians to go back to the estates,” he said.

Ganesan added that even then, Palanivel’s suggestion was only as a temporary measure to enrich those living below the poverty line.

“Here, they can earn up to RM1,500 at least and they have all the facilities. Once they are better off, they can come out.

“Mohan should have just clarified the president’s statement. We are all very clear about it except for him. He should know that MIC cares for the community,” he said.

Another CWC member, M. Madhu, agreed with Palanivel, saying that by working in the plantation sector, the poor would be given the opportunity to find financial stability.

“The poor who are struggling to make ends meet and have no chance for raising their skills should be given a second chance to rebuild their lives.

“With an opportunity to live in a condition with minimum income, rent-free accommodation, it will be able to alleviate the urban poor from the high cost of living in the city, stressful life as well as higher exposure to social issues that have plagued the Indian community,” he said in a statement.

Madhu drew an example from his personal experience, pointing out that he was born in Sungai Buaya Estate in Banting, Kuala Langat, while both his parents were also from the estates.

“My father was an estate kangani whilst my mother was a rubber tapper. My parents could see the light at the end of the tunnel.

“Though we did move out from the estate at a later stage, the foundation of estate living and my parents’ endurance, hard work, motivation and foresight gave me the opportunity to be a chartered accountant today,” he said.

He added that his parents managed to have savings by doing additional work during their spare time like farming and animal husbandry.

Mohan, he agreed, had taken Palanivel’s statement out of context.

“As a member of the CWC, he should have just asked the president what he had in mind before making his own statement,” he said.

Palanivel was recently reported as saying that members of the Indian community who were unable to make a living for themselves in towns and cities should go back to work in the plantation sector, including estates owned by GLCs.

Palanivel, who is also the deputy plantation industries and commodities minister, said the government had agreed to a minimum wage of about RM700 per month for those working in the sector, a RM400 rise from the previous RM300 wage.

His statement however irked several members of the Indian community, particularly Mohan, who lashed out at the MIC president in the media.

National news agency Bernama quoted the Youth leader as saying that working in estates would not guarantee a bright future for the community and that it was improper to cajole those who had left the estates to return.

“RM700 is too small but if there are plans for a Felda-like scheme then we have no problem agreeing to it because it will help create entrepreneurs among the Indian community,” he said.

In response, Palanivel yesterday urged all parties not to take his statement out of context, and explained that he was referring to those involved in odd jobs in the informal sector and earning less than RM500 a month.

“My suggestion was aimed at people doing odd jobs in the informal sector and earning less than RM500 — people working in the informal sector without a guaranteed monthly pay, EPF, Socso, medical benefits and unable to pay their rental, electricity, water, bus transport fares for school and who are facing real hardship,” he was quoted as saying by Bernama.