Give details of all govt aid to Indians in future

 

From Prof Denison Jayasooria

The voices of Malaysian Indian concerns were heard loud and clear at the MIC’s 75th annual assembly on Dec 12 in Kuala Lumpur.

MIC president Vigneswaran Sanasee raised in his speech many critical concerns faced by the Indian community and a number of specific recommendations for change.

Prime Minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob, in his speech, responded to many of the key concerns and recommendations pertaining to the Malaysian Indian Blueprint, Malaysian Indian Transformation Unit (Mitra) and related socio-economic concerns.

What is significant in this discussion is the prime minister is once again addressing community concerns under the theme of the Malaysian Family, noting that no individual or community would be left behind.

The struggle among some policy advocates is to move away from an ethicised approach to a needs-based approach on socio-economic development, which addresses the concerns of all the poor and disadvantaged of any ethnic group.

While this needs-based approach is essential for multi-ethnic societies, there is a place to highlight specific community concerns, where the issues have a historical context of disadvantage, marginalisation and discrimination.

The case of former plantation workers, who are now displaced settlers in the urban poor B40 low-cost flats, needs special intervention.

Enhancing the Malaysian Indian Blueprint (MIB)

The announcement on the revised version of the Malaysian Indian Blueprint is another key aspect of the federal government plan, announced by the PM at the MIC AGM.

This matter was earlier highlighted during the tabling of the 12th Malaysia Plan in Parliament on Sept 27.

The MIB is a comprehensive document which can serve as an effective tool for socio-economic development, in line with the national development agenda by 2030, including the 12th Malaysia Plan (2021-2005).

The MIB was first launched in 2017 but had been sidelined since 2018. It is a comprehensive document prepared through a series of consultations with local communities, professionals and academics.

The revision, which will be released, is welcome but the consultation process is going to be shorter, one reason being the Covid-19 pandemic. However, critics feel the process of consultation and discussions is as important for the final document.

The federal government is advised to host a series of public discussions before the launch to ensure a buy-in for all sectors of the Malaysian Indian community.

Reintroducing the Cabinet Committee

After 14 years, the need for a Cabinet Committee on Indian Concerns was once again raised. The prime minister has indicated he will consider the request.

A Cabinet committee is one which is chaired by the PM or the deputy PM. It brings matters which have a cross-cutting agenda and the implementation of all the key agencies.

Najib Razak chaired the Cabinet committee when it was first set up in 2008 as DPM. Later, when he became PM, he continued it but this was discontinued in early 2018 with the change in the federal government.

If the Cabinet committee is reintroduced, then cross-cutting concerns, which are under different ministries, will be addressed. These would include urban poverty, education at all levels, skills training, entrepreneurship, job opportunities, citizenship concerns, death in custody concerns and health concerns.

The delivery and implementation aspects will be given some key focus.

It will move the development agenda beyond Mitra as some aspects are under the mandate of other agencies and ministries.

Strengthening Mitra

There was specific mention of Mitra to be shifted back to the Prime Minister’s Department. rather than being housed at the national unity ministry.

The main reason was that Mitra’s concerns are socio-economic and not really on ethnic relations or national integration. Furthermore, the mandate of the national unity ministry is not to focus on any one ethnic community but on Malaysians as a whole. The whole machinery is not geared towards addressing urban poverty or socio-economic disadvantage.

Therefore, the shift to the PM’s Department is a better option.

There are concerns that Mitra needs to be strengthened and that it must work closely with the Economic Planning Unit and the Implementation Coordination Unit in addressing the cross-cutting nature of the community needs and concerns.

It is without doubt that Mitra must set up offices or strong networks with coordinating staff in 38 districts in the nine states where 95% of Malaysian Indians live.

A decentralised approach and a stronger presence at the grassroots is most essential.

Field staff made up of graduates from social science fields, such as social work, psychology, sociology and anthropology might be best suited to work at the grassroots.

Address the trust deficit

While all these promises seem impressive, the most essential aspect, which is a major concern, was not addressed by the PM or the MIC president.

This is on how to address concerns of the trust deficit, good governance and accountability.

In politics, it is said that public perception is everything. This cannot be just dismissed as a trial by public opinion, in reference to the recent inquiries and arrests by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.

What is lacking is an assurance given by the federal government and Mitra to foster good governance and more effective methods of transparency and public disclosure on allocation of public resources.

I am surprised to note that although the Cabinet committee began in 2008, and despite the formation of the Special Implementation Taskforce on Indian Community (SITF), Tamil school action committee, SEED Foundation, Sedic and Mitra, there has been no official comprehensive government reports on the total allocations or the impact of these initiatives.

There are some good reports on the Tamil school development blueprint and Malaysian Indian Blueprint.

It is now over 14 years. Some review has taken place at workshops and publications and hosted by KITA-UKM.

However, there was no full disclosure on the funds utilised and who secured them and for what purpose. This is lacking. There are many press reports and a lot of public questions and criticisms on these matters, which have been left unanswered.

There is a need for comprehensive documentation of the BN, PH and PN years when these programmes, projects and allocations were carried out.

There could be a review done on the 14-year period from 2008 to 2021 for the 15th year anniversary of the special Indian intervention programme. Their impact on socio- economic development and social mobility of the community could be discussed.

The PM announced many new allocations via Mitra. Therefore, a good write-up of the governance structure and disclosure of the application process, on who receives the grants and for what purpose, must be in the public domain from 2022 onwards.

Mitra must undertake a much stronger community engagement process. The Mitra staff must work more at the grassroots.

More awareness programmes and greater disclosure of information are needed to win the hearts and minds of the Malaysian Indian community.

There must be a good media and communications team at Mitra.

The mention of the role of opposition MPs in the Cabinet committee or in the Mitra committee or foundation is a key departure from previous practises.

This bipartisan approach is very good for governance and transparency. It is the way forward to instil greater public confidence.

The socio-economic development agenda must be on the basis of both needs and a right to development. It must be accessible to all, irrespective of sub-ethnicity or political affiliations. No one should be left behind.

The Indian voices are being heard in the corridors of power. However, it must have an impact on the socio-economic conditions of the B40 and the grassroots for social mobility and social cohesion.

Trust issues must be resolved and addressed. The challenge is before the federal government in 2022 and beyond. - FMT

Prof Denison Jayasooria was the first secretary to the Special Implementation Taskforce under the Cabinet Committee on the Indian Community (2010-2011).

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.