anilnetto.com

So I gather some see this by-election as a proxy battle between Najib and Anwar. Others see it as a mini-referendum on the Barisan Nasional’s performance. Then again, there are many who are totally put off by the way the BN announces millions of ringgit in development allocations in the run-up to polling day. They call it a “buy election”. Where is the morality; does anybody care about ethics?

In the heat of the by-election campaign, there has been much discussion about the ethnicity of the candidates and whether Keadilan did the right thing in appointing Khalid to counter the BN’s candidate from the MIC.

To me, the candidates’ ethnicity is completely irrelevant. What I want to know - and this is what voters should ask - is their stand on the issues that really matter. Of course, it is also important to have a significant opposition presence in Parliament to act as a check and balance.

One of the most critical issues that voters should be concerned about is the ongoing FTA negotiations with the United States. We may have missed the United States’ “fast-track” deadline, but that has not stopped both sides from pressing ahead with the negotiations. That shows us how badly the United States wants an FTA with Malaysia after putting Korea in its pocket. Let’s hear what the two candidates have to say about this.

I am against an FTA with the United States because I believe it will hurt a developing nation like Malaysia in the long run. I want to know why the Malaysian government is pressing on with the FTA when it hasn’t made public a cost-benefit analysis. Has it even prepared a comprehensive analysis? Shouldn’t the public know about these things? Most of us are not aware that the US trade unions themselves have joined forces with the MTUC to oppose the proposed pact.

Why would trade unions in both countries oppose an FTA pact? This is what I wrote for IPS:

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 22 (IPS) - Trade unions from the United States have joined forces with their Malaysian counterparts to strongly oppose ongoing negotiations for bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) until workers’ concerns are first addressed.

The American Federation of Labour and Congress of Industrial Organisations (AFL-CIO) and the Malaysian Trades Unions Congress (MTUC) are poised to ink a joint declaration agreed upon in Kuala Lumpur last week.

The declaration resembles those that U.S. labour federations had previously signed with their counterparts in South Korea in June, Central America (2002) and Australia (2001),

The Kuala Lumpur declaration on the proposed US-Malaysia FTA asserts that economic integration between the two countries must result in broadly shared benefits for working people and communities, not simply extend and enforce corporate power and privilege. It also warns that violations to workers’ rights had reached crisis levels. Full article: US unions oppose free trade with Malaysia

Whenever we talk of marginalised groups, many of us tend to think of migrant workers, Orang Asli, refugees, plantation workers and squatters, people with HIV/AIDS.

Often, we tend to overlook the fact that many of the senior citizens among us are no less marginalised, whether at home or in public life, while the young take centre stage.

It is a sad fact that the contribution of senior citizens to society and their wisdom are rarely recognised. Many of them receive only a few hundred ringgit a month in pension or have long since used up their meagre EPF savings and have to rely on their children for financial support. For most of them, it is a daily struggle to balance their budget.

I had a long chat with William, a sprightly senior citizen, several months ago. He told me about the deep loneliness and insecurity that accompany old age and the alienation that senior citizens often feel. It prompted me to write a piece for the Malaysian Herald, an excerpt of which is reproduced below:

When you consider that the cost of living has soared, it is hard to imagine how retirees make ends meet. This is especially true in the case of health care. On the one hand, private hospital treatment is so expensive, while on the other the queues at government hospitals are so long. If Jesus were around, he would surely have pity on the crowds, many of them senior citizens, waiting to see doctors, waiting at the pharmacy to get their medicines, waiting for buses to take them to hospital. If they need to see a specialist or need specialised tests such as an MRI, they may have to wait for weeks if not months. God help those who need urgent specialist attention and who don’t have the money. Even if the serious ill are admitted to hospital, how are the bed-ridden treated there and what is the quality of nursing care like?

But getting to the hospital itself is another challenge. They either have to rely on family members and friends for transport. Taxis are of course expensive, especially for those struggling to make ends meet. Our public transport, on the other hand, is hardly friendly to senior citizens and the disabled nor does it take you up to the hospital doorstep. For senior citizens to use public transport, it has to be safe, accessible, efficient, caring and inexpensive. Can that be said for the public transport we have in Malaysia?

Moreover, to use public transport, you have to first walk along the road and cross at junctions. Crossing a busy road can be a nightmare for the ailing senior citizen or disabled person as unfortunately, here in Malaysia, motor vehicles rule the road.

The pavements are no easier as many of them are designed without the senior citizens and disabled in mind. They have all kinds of obstacles in their path, with steep steps up and down ever so often. The pedestrian will be confronted with motorcycles (parked illegally), lampposts, telephone booths, signboard stands, tables and chairs. How are senior citizens and the disabled supposed to navigate their way through this obstacle course? This is in stark contrast to more developed countries, where senior citizens often use public transport at discounted rates and walk along or even use wheelchairs along wide empty pavements that are much friendlier to their needs.

Few people are aware that Asean’s ‘Vision 2020’ of economic integration and competitiveness is to be further developed into the concept of an ‘‘Asean Economic Community (AEC)’’. The AEC is seen as the end-goal of economic integration in Asean and it could become a reality by 2015.

So will Asean follow the European Union route? Not quite.

The EU provides for the free movement of goods, services, capital (including investment) and people across the borders of member nations. Aseans seeks to do the same for goods, services, investment, capital and skilled labour. There is no freedom of movement for the poor, including the migrant workers, who have hardly any rights in Asean member countries. There will be no freedom of movement for refugees, either.

In other words, economic integration is to benefit the corporations and its managers and knowledge workers under a regime of neo-liberal policies. Not the lower-income group and the dispossessed.

This is an article I wrote for Inter Press Service last November.

Critics suspect the lack of public consultation over the Charter could be due to the real intention behind the blueprint. They see the Charter as giving a legal personality to Asean, paving the way for a regional economic framework that would facilitate investment and trade in the region, while the interests of ordinary people — workers, the poor and the marginalised — could come a distant second.

They point to the Asean Free Trade Area (AFTA), which will eliminate tariffs on all products in the region, and the Asean Framework Agreement on Services, which aims to achieve a free flow of services, both by 2015. Meanwhile, the Asean Investment Area agreement aims to facilitate a free flow of investment. Full article: Charter for Asean bloc by-passes civil society.