The police force, it seems, is finally ready to crack down on serious crime. They're starting this crackdown with (shock!) yet another crackdown on 'illegal immigrants'.
This is, because, they say that illegal immigrants are involved in 'a lot' of serious crime. Such as murder. Now, I remember seeing statistics a few years back when we had another 'argh they're out there' scare - foreigners attacking our way of life. And in terms of crime, foreigners were under-represented in convictions. The stats I found today only had the number of prisoners - around 40% were foreigners in 2003, but that includes those who are in detention camps for illegal migrant workers which pushes up the number tremendously.
Illegal immigrants, or preferably, undocumented migrant workers tend to be among the worst off in any society. They have no protection against exploitation and abuse, they tend to have to work on daily rates of pay with no job security, and the last thing they want is the police on their backs. Yes, they operate outside the law (but, according to a lot of the undocumented workers, so do the police who harass them). This doesn't make them violent or evil. It tends to make them desperate.
If we are serious about tackling the crime that involves undocumented workers, we could try having more humane policies. First off would be signed the UN convention on refugees. At one sweep, this would help 10s of thousands of undocumented refugees. I know one case where an engineer and his family are living on their life savings, which are almost exhausted. They have been granted refugee status, but desperately need a country to take them. They haven't resorted to crime, but are in the unenviable state of being reliant on the goodwill of others - for a place to live, for medical care. They are just one family among many. I'm amazed how many refugees and other undocumented workers resist the temptation of petty crime. It must require huge will power. After all, they're already on the wrong side of the law... going to jail isn't really a deterrent, they're faced with that every day anyhow.
Second would be stronger protections for migrant workers, and more transparent processes on visas, stronger penalties for agents who abuse migrant workers... a whole host of recommendations that human rights and workers' organisations have been recommending for years. Refugees are just one category of 'illegal' workers. There are those who came over knowing it was against the immigration laws, and there were those who came over because they were tricked into coming. Either way, they face the same problems.
Third, and this has been discussed by the Government, could we have some laws to protect those who are actively trafficked, please?
Though, to be honest, none of these is the ultimate change that we need. Ultimately, the problem lies in an economic disparity. We have free movement of capital, but we don't have free movement of labour. If people could come and go as they wished, it would have beneficial impacts all round. People who have to undergo lengthy migratory regulations etc are more likely to engage in fraud, to want to move to the country they go to, more likely to be exploited etc. Probably not a move Malaysia is going to make unilaterally, but one we really should be discussing....
PS... Came across an interesting related statistic, we have the highest number of jails (in absolute terms) of any of 62 nations surveyed by NationMaster - and 5th in terms of jails per capita. It works out at about one jail per thousand people.
Friday, 28 March 2008
Tuesday, 25 March 2008
Corruption
The disappearance of papers from the Penang State Government building leads me to some very unsavoury conclusions.
If all had been well within the hallowed halls of government, the former state government should have left all in good order. It is one of the hallmarks of both good governance and good grace (though maybe this is where the other state ADUNs were when Lim Guan Eng was being sworn in as CM!). IF you have faith in your own abilities, there is no need to sabotage the new government - they will do a good enough job without your help.
But if you lack confidence in what you did, or worse still, if you deliberately misled, deceived or abused the public and their trust, you would want to hide the evidence.
Which is why it is a shame we don't seem to have great laws on corruption. Now, I'm no ACA expert, and I don't understand all the definitions of corruption - but it seems to me that it is possible that a contract could be legally granted, without pay-offs, bribes or other overt methods of corruption, without being in the public interest.
In the Philippines, they account for this. Alongside extensive definitions of what constitutes proper procedure for the awarding of contracts, freedom of information legislation and a comparatively free media, they include in their definition of corruption signing a contract or award that grossly or manifestly disadvantages the Government. I can think of whole swathes of contracts (privatisation awards in particular) which have this trait.
Until we can declare that such a contract - one that is grossly to OUR, the people's, disadvantage - is a sign of corruption, and therefore null and void, all our Governments seem to be likely to be locked into deals that prevent them from serving the public interest, and instead serving private purses.
If all had been well within the hallowed halls of government, the former state government should have left all in good order. It is one of the hallmarks of both good governance and good grace (though maybe this is where the other state ADUNs were when Lim Guan Eng was being sworn in as CM!). IF you have faith in your own abilities, there is no need to sabotage the new government - they will do a good enough job without your help.
But if you lack confidence in what you did, or worse still, if you deliberately misled, deceived or abused the public and their trust, you would want to hide the evidence.
Which is why it is a shame we don't seem to have great laws on corruption. Now, I'm no ACA expert, and I don't understand all the definitions of corruption - but it seems to me that it is possible that a contract could be legally granted, without pay-offs, bribes or other overt methods of corruption, without being in the public interest.
In the Philippines, they account for this. Alongside extensive definitions of what constitutes proper procedure for the awarding of contracts, freedom of information legislation and a comparatively free media, they include in their definition of corruption signing a contract or award that grossly or manifestly disadvantages the Government. I can think of whole swathes of contracts (privatisation awards in particular) which have this trait.
Until we can declare that such a contract - one that is grossly to OUR, the people's, disadvantage - is a sign of corruption, and therefore null and void, all our Governments seem to be likely to be locked into deals that prevent them from serving the public interest, and instead serving private purses.
Sunday, 23 March 2008
Ooo, the excitement
So we have new governments in some states. What difference is it going to make?
Well one factor is going to be how far the new governments - including those of Perlis and possibly Terengganu - can show independence from the Federal Government. It's interesting that a key debate is centring on the choice of MB - whether the PM's choice or the Sultan's. It shows the slavishness of UMNO's candidates and members that the PM is considered to have paramount power to appoint a MB, regardless of the wishes of State legislative members (as in the case of Perlis).
Looking at other Federal systems, it is clear that at the State level, it is possible for the party to act (to some extent) independently of the Federal level party. Obviously, there are areas where both should be expected to act in concert. But surely, in choice of leadership, the role is for the elected State representatives, not for either PM or Sultan? This is why Terengganu is particularly interesting - it follows none of these models. It would appear the Idris has the support of the majority of his fellow ADUNs (22 out of 34). Yet the Sultan is refusing to appoint him MB. Any alternative would be almost by definition a lame duck Minister.
What, I wonder, does the public in Terengganu make of all this? Do they wish Idris or Ahmad to lead their state into the next decade? Or do they feel, as those who stopped the buses entering into the state presumably feel, that their voices are muted and irrelevant? That perhaps their votes haven't been reflected in the make-up of the State legislature and whether Peter or PAul is chosen by the Sultan, neither reflects the choice of either ADUNs or rakyat. Idle speculation I'm sure - but I can tell you that if I was an UMNO supporter in Teregganu, I would be seriously annoyed at the Sultan's actions. Unless, unlesss... weird how we've seen no UMNO Youth rallies of support for Idris, when they've been so quick to act elsewhere. Speculation, speculation.
This was going to be a post on corruption... but that can wait till I get my books in front of me... Till then.
Well one factor is going to be how far the new governments - including those of Perlis and possibly Terengganu - can show independence from the Federal Government. It's interesting that a key debate is centring on the choice of MB - whether the PM's choice or the Sultan's. It shows the slavishness of UMNO's candidates and members that the PM is considered to have paramount power to appoint a MB, regardless of the wishes of State legislative members (as in the case of Perlis).
Looking at other Federal systems, it is clear that at the State level, it is possible for the party to act (to some extent) independently of the Federal level party. Obviously, there are areas where both should be expected to act in concert. But surely, in choice of leadership, the role is for the elected State representatives, not for either PM or Sultan? This is why Terengganu is particularly interesting - it follows none of these models. It would appear the Idris has the support of the majority of his fellow ADUNs (22 out of 34). Yet the Sultan is refusing to appoint him MB. Any alternative would be almost by definition a lame duck Minister.
What, I wonder, does the public in Terengganu make of all this? Do they wish Idris or Ahmad to lead their state into the next decade? Or do they feel, as those who stopped the buses entering into the state presumably feel, that their voices are muted and irrelevant? That perhaps their votes haven't been reflected in the make-up of the State legislature and whether Peter or PAul is chosen by the Sultan, neither reflects the choice of either ADUNs or rakyat. Idle speculation I'm sure - but I can tell you that if I was an UMNO supporter in Teregganu, I would be seriously annoyed at the Sultan's actions. Unless, unlesss... weird how we've seen no UMNO Youth rallies of support for Idris, when they've been so quick to act elsewhere. Speculation, speculation.
This was going to be a post on corruption... but that can wait till I get my books in front of me... Till then.
Saturday, 22 March 2008
More details: The wedding
For friends that missed my wedding, first off, don't worry! We'll be having a ceremony/ party in KL next year, hopefully around July.
In typical Sonia-fashion, things were a little topsy-turvy, and rather last minute. We had problems booking a venue - having tried various places that seemed incapable of returning phone calls/ sending menus/ keeping appointments, the whole schebang. We finally settled on Dante's, a restaurant on Gertrude Street. I'm afraid I can't tell you much about the food - what I had was good, but I just didn't seem to get anything!
We had about 50 people, so it was fairly small by Malaysian standards, but large by Aussie ones, and it included various people I hadn't met before. My mum, R (the best man), D and of course me all gave speeches. There was dancing until the end of the night (with friends, D and me making up the hard core!), and a small soiree of the hardcore dancers afterwards - minus sis, who had made a less than graceful exit!
The room was decorated in a theme inspired by 1920s Shanghai - a lovely tacky purple door curtain, fake cherry blossom on the walls and tables, a few posters of seductive Chinese girls touting products... (thanks Mum!) combined with more traditional red Chinese lanterns, 'double happiness' symbols and other wedding paraphernalia (thanks J!).
There was also, perhaps inevitably, some last minute panic - needing to make alterations to my dress, finding that the amazing wedding cake would only JUST fit into the car (!), and there being an event in the room at Dantes that afternoon (we had thought it would be empty from Friday afternoon).... but all was smoothed and sorted.
On Monday, we had the wedding itself. As a wedding present,some friends had given as a night at the Adelphi, a hotel in Melbourne. This was convenient, not least because D could go and change there, while I got ready at home. It also led to me being concerned about him making it to the Registry on time! My mum, sis and I arrived first, then the groom and others arrived together.
Again, there were a few things that didn't quite work out - I couldn't make an entrance to 'Here Comes The Sun', as we couldn't plug Sharon's iPod in to the sound system, so we had to make some last minute choices from the Registry's CD collection. NO, we did not choose any of the 569 Celine Dion songs that were on offer! Half of these, if not more, were versions of that Titanic song. Pah. Not sure what it was in the end we did have, but not quite at upbeat as what we'd wanted... then actually got married to some nice Chinese flute music.
Friends who are interested can get in touch with my mum for a copy of the order of service - we wrote our own vows, with D doing the design n layout of the souvenir leaflet thing. After the wedding, we went to a small bar for drinks, then we bid goodbye to the guests and went off to the hotel.
And after that, boys and girls, the shutters go down for the night :P
In typical Sonia-fashion, things were a little topsy-turvy, and rather last minute. We had problems booking a venue - having tried various places that seemed incapable of returning phone calls/ sending menus/ keeping appointments, the whole schebang. We finally settled on Dante's, a restaurant on Gertrude Street. I'm afraid I can't tell you much about the food - what I had was good, but I just didn't seem to get anything!
We had about 50 people, so it was fairly small by Malaysian standards, but large by Aussie ones, and it included various people I hadn't met before. My mum, R (the best man), D and of course me all gave speeches. There was dancing until the end of the night (with friends, D and me making up the hard core!), and a small soiree of the hardcore dancers afterwards - minus sis, who had made a less than graceful exit!
The room was decorated in a theme inspired by 1920s Shanghai - a lovely tacky purple door curtain, fake cherry blossom on the walls and tables, a few posters of seductive Chinese girls touting products... (thanks Mum!) combined with more traditional red Chinese lanterns, 'double happiness' symbols and other wedding paraphernalia (thanks J!).
There was also, perhaps inevitably, some last minute panic - needing to make alterations to my dress, finding that the amazing wedding cake would only JUST fit into the car (!), and there being an event in the room at Dantes that afternoon (we had thought it would be empty from Friday afternoon).... but all was smoothed and sorted.
On Monday, we had the wedding itself. As a wedding present,some friends had given as a night at the Adelphi, a hotel in Melbourne. This was convenient, not least because D could go and change there, while I got ready at home. It also led to me being concerned about him making it to the Registry on time! My mum, sis and I arrived first, then the groom and others arrived together.
Again, there were a few things that didn't quite work out - I couldn't make an entrance to 'Here Comes The Sun', as we couldn't plug Sharon's iPod in to the sound system, so we had to make some last minute choices from the Registry's CD collection. NO, we did not choose any of the 569 Celine Dion songs that were on offer! Half of these, if not more, were versions of that Titanic song. Pah. Not sure what it was in the end we did have, but not quite at upbeat as what we'd wanted... then actually got married to some nice Chinese flute music.
Friends who are interested can get in touch with my mum for a copy of the order of service - we wrote our own vows, with D doing the design n layout of the souvenir leaflet thing. After the wedding, we went to a small bar for drinks, then we bid goodbye to the guests and went off to the hotel.
And after that, boys and girls, the shutters go down for the night :P
And what gives you the right?
It's been a momentous while since I updated the blog. Apart from the earth-changing events of my marriage and ill-timed honeymoon, I understand there have been a few changes in the Malaysian political landscape .
It is the right time for all those who wish to say 'I told you so', to do so - I do stand by my earlier comments on flawed electoral systems, but gleefully admit I was wrong about the 2/3 majority being unshakeable.
One person who doesn't seem to get it at all, though, is Dr Mahathir.
I am fed up with his 'I chose the wrong person', 'You were supposed to step down' carping on.
He doesn't seem to realise that his mistake was NOT in choosing the wrong person. It was in thinking that he had the right to choose in the first place. Yes, yes, he had the power to choose - due to manipulation of the UMNO electoral system. But power and right are not the same thing.
Dr Mahathir is still labouring under his most precious delusion - that he and he alone knew how to govern the country. And that he, and he alone, could choose his successor. If he hadn't been so arrogant, perhaps the people would have chosen wiser, and possibly sooner as well.
It is the right time for all those who wish to say 'I told you so', to do so - I do stand by my earlier comments on flawed electoral systems, but gleefully admit I was wrong about the 2/3 majority being unshakeable.
One person who doesn't seem to get it at all, though, is Dr Mahathir.
I am fed up with his 'I chose the wrong person', 'You were supposed to step down' carping on.
He doesn't seem to realise that his mistake was NOT in choosing the wrong person. It was in thinking that he had the right to choose in the first place. Yes, yes, he had the power to choose - due to manipulation of the UMNO electoral system. But power and right are not the same thing.
Dr Mahathir is still labouring under his most precious delusion - that he and he alone knew how to govern the country. And that he, and he alone, could choose his successor. If he hadn't been so arrogant, perhaps the people would have chosen wiser, and possibly sooner as well.
Tuesday, 4 March 2008
So the wedding bells chimed
On Saturday night, D and I held our wedding reception, and yesterday we actually got married. Some people say this was tempting fate, others sigh and resign themselves to the idea that we enjoy doing things topsy-turvy.
There are photos available, so I'll try and post some soon... but generally a good time was had by all, much was eaten, much was drunk, and there were many murmurs of something that through the haze of wine and other alcohol could be interpreted as interpretation of the fake cherry blossom adorning the walls.
There are photos available, so I'll try and post some soon... but generally a good time was had by all, much was eaten, much was drunk, and there were many murmurs of something that through the haze of wine and other alcohol could be interpreted as interpretation of the fake cherry blossom adorning the walls.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)