On Pointe

Growing Grey: Who Will Care For Our Old?

2012-02-09T08:35:00.011+08:00

By: Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (pg 13)

February 9th, 2012

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/289751

“I’m four years old and seven months,” she blurted. Funny how at that age, you know exactly how old you are and every additional month counts. Once gravity hits, things change. Rarely do you hear someone say I’m 35 and a half. On the other hand, I know of a few people who have the power to stop the clock claiming to be 59 for many years, citing “Age is just a number ... mind over matter”. As the saying continues, “if you don’t mind, it doesn’t matter!”, though sometimes your knees remind you of how old you are.

When the United Nations Population Fund christened the seventh billionth person, the figure was repeatedly drawn on as a shock-warning statement by various well-meaning factions. While most policymakers focused on the issue of over-population and the burden on resources, highlighting issues such as access to food, housing, education, jobs and impact on the environment, one main concern continued to remain on the back bench – an ageing population.

Indeed the world’s population is increasing. However the issue has shifted. In many parts of the world, a demographic transition has taken place. Population growth has recorded a decline in birth rates and an increase in longevity, pointing to a rapidly growing greying population – and only some are noticing.

In the developing world, most government policies are concentrated on issues of development and target the younger generation – understandably, especially since the general philosophy is that the young are the future of the nation. However, if a country is faced with a rapidly growing aging population and does not have the foresight to provide adequate infrastructure, healthcare benefits and sufficiently address welfare issues, this shift in demography will detrimentally affect and impact the nation’s workforce and economy.

When we in the developing world think about aging societies, we think of them as a predicament of wealthier, more developed countries, citing the examples of Japan and England. Our understanding of the issue is framed against the backdrop of aging being a rich country’s problem. If only it were.

Perhaps it is for this reason that the developed world has better provisions for the aged. That is because it became rich before it became old, while the developing world became old before it became rich. But this does not omit the fact that Asia and Malaysia have a growing aging population with needs that have yet to be addressed.

Our changing cultural norms have led to a decrease in birth rates and a growing older population. To add, it was reported as at 2011 that one in three elderly people in Malaysia are abandoned.How are we going to cope when we are already in the third stage of the demographic transition according to Unescap with the projection of over 3.4 million older persons by 2020?

Fundamentally the issue of a greying Asia and Malaysia cannot be put on hold until we reach a percentage knighting us a geriatric society. The issues need to be addressed now so as to avoid a danger-zone era of hyperaging and the consequences of it.

Thankfully in Malaysia we do not have too much of a skewed sex ratio caused by selective abortions or a “4-2-1” society where a one-child policy leads to a child providing for two parents, caring for four grandparents and himself. However we are not out of the red as we do not have adequate healthcare facilities, well-equipped aged-care homes, elderly-friendly housing and public spaces that cater to the elderly.

Furthermore, we have become trapped in a sedentary lifestyle which means not only are the aged needing more and better healthcare, so are the younger generation. Then the question remains – who will look after the aged in a society that values filial piety but has inadequate provision especially in a changing society where families are smaller, salaries are insufficient and the setback of brain drain runs deep.

The reality is that we are all getting older – if you’re still counting months, perhaps you don’t feel it, but our parents and grandparents do. An aging population inevitably affects us politically, economically and even militarily, according to American demographer Phillip Longman.

This century is touted as the Asian Century, but what many Asian countries are neglecting is the very real issue of a spiralling aging population and the reality that a neglected greying population reads trouble on so many levels.

Natalie feels her knees too often and hopes our government puts into action its slogan of “people first” and not “pockets first” in assessing healthcare reforms and policies for a greying society.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Disclosure 0f Assets And Ethical Leadership

2012-01-26T10:03:00.011+08:00

By: Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (pg 14)

January 26^th, 2012

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/276390

"Rotten Parliament” was the name given to British parliamentary elects after more than half the MPs were found guilty of over-claiming expenses. Some appealed stating that they did nothing wrong and that what they did was within the legal parameters of the system. In other words, the system allowed it. However not only was the system abused, the system was flawed and these politicians took advantage of it. Voters were disgusted by MPs flipping houses to avoid paying capital gains tax; one even had the audacity to use taxpayers money to pay for a duck house. The outcome – many lost their seats in the following elections. Sound familiar?

There has been a strong call for people in public office to disclose assets, an appeal that has been long heard around the world and is now being echoed on our shores. More and more countries have adopted ethics and anti-corruption laws requiring full disclosure of assets by public officials, some taking it further requiring that spouses and dependent children do the same. Many a time such disclosure is not made public but instead made to a public agency.

Compulsory disclosure of assets is a means to curb corruption and in the past has exposed unjust enrichment by people in public office. In many instances, such practice has curbed corruption levels (perceived and real), attracted foreign direct investment and improved public confidence in the government. In a loosely tied conclusion, not only is this form of transparency lauded and desired by the people, it also counters weakening public trust in the government and improves the economy. Yet there is opposition in our country to full disclosure of assets even after multiple cases of gross misuse of public funds have been exposed in abundance.

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Ethical leadership means accountability and when in public office, one is automatically subject to public scrutiny and rightly so. If a substantial chunk of my salary is paid to Caesar, don’t I have a right to know how it is spent? Especially when children and spouses of people in public office seem have inflated bank accounts and outlandish salaries.

All this is abuse – abuse of power, abuse of people’s trust and abuse of public funds – and in the current economic climate it becomes something hard to forgive or justify. One can declare innocence and present counter arguments, but the people are not looking for leaders who work an already flawed system. They look for ethical leaders who will stand clean against a flawed system, expose its weaknesses and say I will not abuse it, even though I can. Yet our politicians hide behind absurd excuses such as disclosure being “dangerous”. What about the danger of running the country bankrupt by corrupt practices and risking becoming a rotten parliament?

We seem to like going against the flow – not in a good way. While two Supreme Court magistrates in the Philippines disclosed their statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SLAN) to the public earlier this month, some of our politicians seem vehemently against the practice. Even royal families in Europe are declaring assets, yet we are still debating whether to be transparent or not. In Japan, public officials are required to declare gifts that excess 5,000 yen (RM205), while in the US post Watergate, the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 requires high-level employees of all three branches of federal government to declare assets. And who can forget India’s anti-corruption crusader Anna Hazare’s hunger strike demanding strong anti-corruption legislation?

The rest of the world is heading in a direction that counts. Why aren’t we? Our evasion of such practices strongly alludes to gross negligence and a determination to hide corrupt practices.

This against the grain mentality translates across other serious issues too. While ministers across the border are taking pay cuts, we are increasing the salaries of top public officials. Can a monthly salary of 60-80 thousand be justified when a large chunk of society earns a small fraction of that sum in a year? Imagine what the pension burden will be if salaries are this inflated. Clearly the system is flawed and sadly many are taking advantage of it.

Today’s informed society does not take kindly to injustices, abuse and corruption. Maybe their displeasure won’t be broad-cast on the streets but if politicians fail to change, they risk being changed.

Natalie believes that full disclosure of assets in private equates to non-disclosure.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Balancing The Scales

2012-01-12T08:56:00.000+08:00

By: Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (pg 14)

January 12^th, 2012

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/263908

Flip- flops are the new protest symbol in Indonesia. In response to a guilty verdict handed to a 15-year-old for stealing a pair of $3 sandals from a police officer, over 1,000 used flip-flops have been dropped off at a police station in an initiative by the National Commission on Child Protection.

Having confessed after a said beating the teenager faced a five-year jail sentence but no evidence was provided in court. He was declared guilty and released without punishment but left with a possible criminal record.

The anger is not about the so-called crime but that the case of such triviality with little evidence went to court while more serious cases are treated lightly. In a region where corruption levels are high, the trend of excessive sentencing for smaller crimes is becoming more and more indefensible and such judgments are less and less accepted by people.

In Victor Hugo's novel Les Miserables, Jean Valjean was imprisoned for stealing bread for his starving sister a story comparable to Gregory Taylor an American, who received a 25-year life sentence for trying to break into a church kitchen because he was hungry.

Similar cases have gone through our courts like that of a 22-year-old hawker who was jailed a month for stealing two packets of coffee worth RM31. By no means should he not be penalised, committing a crime warrants legal retribution, however, the scales seems tipped when juxtaposed against much larger corruption charges like that of a corruption case involving a former chief minister who bought a bungalow worth millions. His sentence? A slap on the wrist with a 12-month jail sentence.

Corruption is just a fancy word for theft. Therefore if we were to use simple maths to come up with a jail sentence, the question would sound something like … "If a hawker spends one month in jail for stealing RM35, how many years will a politician spend in jail for stealing RM5 million?"

It's one thing to steal but the heartache is that the money cannot be recovered. It's as if on a shopping spree, I ended up buying a diamond bracelet for RM24 million and I tried to sell it afterwards. No jeweller worth his salt would pay me the same amount for it.

The same goes when trying to return a luxury condominium bought with borrowed money. Some of the funds might be returned but not all of it. A great deal is lost. Yet in these cases, the law does not seem to be harsh enough.

Year after year, entrusted power is abused by politicians and year after year, the attorney-general scrapes the tip of the iceberg revealing such corrupt practices.

Yet it seems only the small fish are caught or made an example of while the masterminds go free with padded pockets, real estate in different latitudes and thick trust funds that accord luxury living for their children.

The suggestion here is proportionality weighted on responsibility – balancing the scales of sentencing. The analogy of Goldilocks and the Three Bears is often used – is the sentence too heavy, too light or just right (Thomas, T).

Perhaps another question is whether a case should be tried like that which has caused a flip-flop revolution in Indonesia. Not only is time wasted but resources are unnecessarily exhausted, something that is less and less forgivable in today's economic and political climate.

This week we tout the independence of our judiciary. Set against the backdrop of pending verdicts of corruption cases, the judiciary is presented with repeated opportunities to prove itself to be impartial upholding the principle of proportionality.

In 1957, Tunku Abdul Rahman spoke of the ideal Malaysia "founded upon the principles of liberty and justice", perhaps now is the time to give back the blindfold to justice so that the scales might be balanced and power restored accordingly.

Natalie hopes that we can move on as a mature democracy, society and people.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Dream That Became A Nightmare

2011-12-29T05:35:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 15)
December 29th, 2011
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/251497

Yale law professor and writer Amy Chua, midfielder Yossi Benayoun, singer Rihanna, designer John Galliano, football coach John Terry and student Alexandra Wallace, to name a few, have either been chastised as racist or have had to bear the brunt of derogatory remarks in the past year.

It seems that the overarching theme of 2011 besides the obvious economic uncertainty, multiple global protests and natural disasters has been race relations. It’s been a rather racial year not just globally but also locally and we in Malaysia take it further to include religion in this prickly mix. It’s such a contested topic that clearly divides, yet not a day goes by when race or religion is not discussed in the public sphere.

A simple example. My Christmas shopping this year included multiple purchases at bookstores, so much so I ended up with free loyalty cards. This process included filling up an intrusive form that not only required details of my income bracket but in true Malaysian fashion – provided a list of ethnicities to choose from. I abstained and wrote a note on the form which the customer relations officer refuted saying that the information was merely for the company’s database. Yet I found my Christmas buzz interrupted by the topic of race by a silly form and the backwardness of these bookstores.

How do we move forward when even our social lives and what books we purchase are analysed through the sieve of which race box is ticked or not ticked? To take it further, we are revisiting the Race Relations Act.

Britain, Hongkong, Australia and Canada are among the few countries that have anti-discrimination laws to prevent hate speech and hate crimes. Ours is said to follow that of the British. However the question remains, with local legal frameworks including our Constitution (the much debated Article 153), the NEP and the Sedition Act to name a few, will this Race Relations Act truly champion anti-discriminatory practices or will it protect those who discriminate under the guise of protecting national interests?

It’s a pity that the biggest problem of a country that boasts about being one, is the issue of race. Yet what is happening is that our politicians are having one-way conversations and patting themselves on the back in a false sense of victory. Not only are they inciting racial disharmony, they are also the ones making up the laws with little consultation with the people most affected – the rakyat. Fortunately, Malaysians have drawn a line in the sand, something Mark Mykleby calls the “democratisation of expectations”, highlighted in a recent New York Times article by Thomas Friedman. He describes it as “the expectation that all individuals should be able to participate in shaping their own career, citizenship and future, and not be constricted”.

For a year filled with racist remarks from politicians, is the proposed Race Relations Act one that will punish the real perpetrators and instigators? Or will it go against the democratisation of expectations and feed off the discriminating comments of our politicians?

The past year alone has shown that we have not matured, rather we are doing a Benjamin Button and becoming dangerously juvenile. Instead of growing up to face the real challenges of corruption, urban and rural poverty, brain drain (it is a long list), the focus is on perceived and imagined threats. So instead of addressing real problems, race is attached to every issue, causing us to digress and lose focus.

There is no doubt that tempers flare and voices rise when we speak of race. However when the discussion is about discrimination, there is no grey matter – it is just wrong and should not have place in a country such as ours. Yet if anything, this year has proven to be one of missed opportunities for our leaders to ensure just that. Their silence and condoning of discriminatory events and bigoted statements from various factions have proven an inherent insincerity when speaking about a united Malaysia – a 1Malaysia.

There comes a point when you have to hold politicians accountable and the ballot box has always been the place where the rakyat read the riot act to errant politicians.

This year started as a year of dreams and hopes but quickly turned out to be a spiralling nightmare and a telltale of what 2012 will be, especially with the possibility of an election. On my wish list for 2012 is the hope that solidarity between the races is enhanced because without it we cannot call ourselves Malaysia.

Natalie is hoping for a better 2012 - perhaps after the election.

Happy New Year Malaysia!

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Wisdom of Foresight

2011-12-27T10:31:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 14)
December 15th, 2011
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/239158

A few years ago there was a landslide along Jalan Duta after a downpour. For weeks it was covered with tarpaulin and sealed off with cautionary tape. It was alarming and personally worrying. Each year there are mini landslides, erosion and siltation around the Damansara Heights-Jalan Duta area. Fast forward to today and a short distance from the said landslide area, acres of land have been cleared for development – development in an area already highly congested and clearly prone to landslides. It’s considered prime land today, but what will it be in years to come?

Certainly when the Honda factor in Rojuna Industrial district, Ayutthaya in Thailand was built, no one could foresee the whole factory sinking in flood waters – or could they? We cannot change the weather or confidently predict swelling rivers and the breaking of riverbanks, but the wisdom of foresight might caution against building in a low-lying area or on a hillside that is already unstable.

Foresight is necessary in development and in the progress of every country. Post independence, our leaders made a calculated decision to shift from an agriculture based economy to an industrial one, not foreseeing the need to be able to self-sufficiently feed ourselves. Of course that shift has made us the third largest Asean economy and ranked 30th in the world, but what good is it if food supply is low and people cannot feed themselves because floods in neighbouring countries have affected not only the supply of electronic goods but basic daily foods – fruit, vegetables and even chillies?

When we talk about foresight, it doesn’t just stop at predicting what may happen but the courage to make painful yet necessary decisions to forfeit immediate gain for long-term collective stability. Such great foresight can be found in country constitutions and certain UN declarations – the blueprints of society.

I have always wondered in admiration of those who wrote these documents and the wisdom they possessed to include sections that perhaps at the point of writing were not needed but for the future may be extremely necessary. If we look at the Malaysian Constitution, one has to wonder why the founding fathers included a whole second section to protect Fundamental Liberties. Perhaps they had a “crystal ball” or the pure genius foresight to imagine its imperative need in today’s Malaysia where civil liberties are being taken away.

Sadly, instead of safeguarding the sanctity of the Constitution, today’s politicians have made it a scapegoat to promote their own personal agendas and beliefs. They have been allowed to do so also because we the people do not know our own Constitution as we should nor do we confidently know our rights and exert them. We choose to be ignorant and let a handful contest, thanks to scaremongering, yet with every new bill passed, our freedom net gets pulled in, further limiting our constitutional liberties.

Not only do our government and policy makers need foresight – we the people do too. When new laws and bills are deliberated, it is our business to know them well because they affect us, our children and our children’s children. Maybe today the Peaceful Assembly Bill does not affect you personally, but some day it will, just like the impending Computing Professionals Bill 2011. We have to remember that tomorrow is built on what we allow to happen today.

We can tell ourselves that laws enacted will not be enforced; they are just there because they need to be – but some day someone will dig them up and use them. What then can we do when we are bound by the law – all because years past we didn’t have foresight.

Natalie believes that the Constitution may be an “elastic compilation of rules” easily manipulated; yet those who pervert it should rightly be deposed.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Reading The Tea Leaves

2011-12-01T07:57:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 13)

December 1st, 2011

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/225812

A change in the political system, the release of 230 political prisoners, the halting of a US$3.6 billion (RM11.6 billion) Chinese-funded dam project, silence in the face of criticism, and extending an olive branch to Aung Suu Kyi all add up to an equation of reform and change for Myanmar. These “flickers of progress” for some come across as a laundry list of things to do for a desired outcome and it is not just the short-term 2014 Asean chairmanship seal of approval that is the prize – more is at stake and more will be done, but based on the tea leaves of the past, one wonders if this is real reform.

Every country has a laundry list of righting past wrongs to make amends for a desired outcome and we too have been ticking off a transformation to-do list.

If we read the tea leaves in advance of things to come in Malaysia, the outcome is clear – an election is looming and politicians are upping their game. So if you want anything done – expedite your requests before the general election as politicians do their utmost to grant wishes oh, so quickly.

Political analysts are speculating on election dates – it was thought at the end of this year, but after the 11 reasons news piece published on 11-11-11, some say March next year even though technically, a general election in Malaysia is held every five years, and can be held as late as even May 2013.

The real test, however, is not who wins but what happens afterwards. Are we able to progress beyond the 13th general election and even beyond 2020? It seems for now our vision is short, blurred and inward looking.

At the core of it, the people are not concerned with how well our economy is doing, if growth rate targets are being met and how we fare in world rankings – that is what the suits and those in the corridors of power are concerned with and not what the majority deems critical. Their two main concerns are whether there is enough to eat and how free we are to carry on with our beliefs and “business”. Who wins the election is secondary – how our daily lives are affected is at the core.

So when floods in Thailand drastically spiked food prices on our shores, questions arose concerning the RM5.6 billion allocated to agricultural development between 2008 and last year under the National Food Security Policy. These questions are set against the backdrop of a national beef production project awarded to a politician’s family who used some of the RM250 million loan for other purposes. This has left the lingering bitter taste of a recurring theme in the country’s record books – abuse of public funds with little consequence for those involved.

In the past year alone, we have witnessed wastage and mismanagement of public funds and the creation of new enemies playing on our sensitivities and leveraging on our short attention spans. From issues of sexuality to harmful statements demonising the universality of human rights; subsidies to hudud laws; Christianity and the teaching and learning of science and mathematics in English to the highly sensitive issue of racial and customary rights and clean and free elections. This week’s enemy limits our freedom further – the 2011 Peaceful Assembly Bill that was passed in three hours.

We need to elect politicians with foresight who can see past the next election and who have in mind the best interest of the people who gave them the mandate.

Instead, what we have now are either those who vote based on party interest or politicians who think that walking out solves issues. The very reason bills are to be debated extensively before they become acts is that one day the very people who voted-in the bill will be at the mercy of it.

Governments around the world are implementing reforms and transforming policies; however, questions remain with regard to how these paper reforms reflect what is actually happening on the ground.

In the case of Malaysia, two important issues – the increased cost of living and the right to freedom in all spheres – have been carelessly toyed with too often to garner political support, not realising the extensive damage done. The divide and rule agenda is a selfish one and sadly it seems to be at the thrust of Malaysian politics. Clearly the people have made a mistake by blindly giving up our power. Only time will tell once the tea leaves have settled, but hopefully our politicians realise their folly before it’s too late.

Natalie wonders if our politicians voted with the wisdom of knowing that the laws created to protect them today can turn against them so quickly and easily.

Feedback: letters@thesundaily.com

Humanising Development

2011-11-17T08:47:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 12)

November 17th, 2011

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/211066

During the Rugby World Cup, a major highlight was Te Rauparaha's war chant – more popularly know as the All Blacks Haka. This pre-game tradition has been in place since 1905 and belongs to the Ngati Toa tribe. What is most interesting though about the All Blacks performing thehaka is how well the culture of the first peoples to the land of the long white cloud has been integrated into New Zealand culture, something not many countries have been as successful at doing.

In many countries, these indigenous minorities are subjected to poverty and social exclusion and are marginalised. The development of many countries has not taken into account the rights of the original peoples. At best when we look at tribal culture, what we experience is surface awareness – that of traditional dance, food and clothing; but deeper questions such as land rights, natural integration and the right to self-determination need to be addressed and not just dialogued about.

Tribal sovereignty is an extremely sensitive issue, but what more important an issue for those who have seen their land taken away from them by the “new comers” and colonisers. Globally there are about 300 million indigenous people, according to the World Bank. A relatively small number compared to the now 7 billion world population; yet 4.5 % of the global population is a significant number and important part of our humanity. These distinct communities are not homogenous, even if from the same country. Their identities and cultures are inextricably linked to natural resources – their land. So when their land is taken away or given to middlemen to manage, not only does it cause a loss of identity, it also threatens their cultural survival and is a failure on our part to look after our heritage.

Indigenous people make up 10% of the world’s poor and in Malaysia they account for 20% of the nation’s hardcore poor. When we speak about the orang asli in Malaysia, many sensitivities surface. We have come from a thinking that development has one framework – it deals with ecological and economic perspectives. However, a social structure needs to be in place – a humanising factor in development efforts.

Successful development efforts occur when real dialogues takes place. When the needs of the people affected spearhead the discussions. Borrowing from a speech made by Colin Nicholas, coordinator of the Centre for Orang Asli Concerns, the nature of development has to be decided by the ones affected the most – on their own terms and on their own land. But what happens when their land is taken away or there is no security tenure to their lands, and concerns brought up with the government go unaddressed for years? Instead of valuing the heritage of our multiethnic country, we promote social disintegration of the original people of this land.

When we discuss social structures of sustainable societies, there is a great emphasis on social equity, justice and liberation. Societies that are unjust are not sustainable, and so how we treat the first peoples of our country determines how sustainable we are as a country. Social, economic and ecological development have to move forward simultaneously to include participation of the communities that are being “developed”. As such, the orang asli have to be the primary participants in the development process rather than objects that an external body pawns for projects or charitable purposes. Not only is participation necessary, but tools of empowerment crucial. Those marginalised need to be given decision-making positions so that they are empowered, know their rights and know how to assert these rights. Empowerment is the journey and the outcome of development. So how well are we doing?

Indigenous peoples rights is a sensitive issue in many parts of the world because the majority fail to acknowledge that we have played the role of colonisers too. According to our prime minister’s budget speech in October, Malaysia has 190,00 orang asli – the question is: what have we done for them, is it enough and is it fast enough? There may not be a social contract, but there sure is a moral obligation at the very least.

Natalie is humbled by the good work of the Centre for Orang Asli Concerns and congratulates them on being awarded the United Nations Organisation of the Year award 2011. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Universality Of Human Rights: Challenges

2011-11-03T12:05:00.004+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose theSun, Malaysia (page 14) November 3^rd, 2011 http://www.thesundaily.my/news/196906

The issue of human rights is very much contested and everyone from former prime ministers and IGPs to migrant workers, civil society and even you have opinions on the issue not just in terms of what freedoms you should have but what others should too. So I tread carefully as an advocate for the universality of human rights, acknowledging that there are real challenges and realities of it becoming a certainty for every human being including myself.

Having presented a paper in Kyoto University last week discussing various perspectives of human rights within Asean, I feel it most apt to share the following story in light of recent statements made on the issue.

Anna served as associate professor in the largest local university for over 30 years and yet her children were never allowed admission into that university on the basis that they were considered migrants, though many foreigners call this university their alma mater. If Anna’s children wanted to attend local university, it meant two extra years in high school which wasn’t a guarantee of university or degree choice. Bella, her daughter, had aspired to be an architect since young and with great effort went through those two extra years. After doing well and fulfilling the requirements for architecture school, Bella was told instead that the only spot available for her was in interior design – the quota system had failed her. Now not only did Bella have to start university two years later, she was two years behind many other students in a course the system chose because she was considered a migrant. It didn’t matter that her parents are citizens, her grandparents citizens and her great grandparents citizens – Anna and Bella were both born with a generational debt that they can never repay no matter how hard they tried.

This story narrates the reality of an age old dilemma of cultural diversity and universal human rights coexisting. Now one can argue that when it comes to human rights, one size does not fit all and that culture, philosophy, belief and history should be taken into consideration and the margin of appreciation apply when implementing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). To take the point further, many governments in this region in particular attest that such universality of human rights is a western precept and does not resonate with the values of the east; but are not all of Adam’s decendents born equal regardless of race, doctrine and creed? Most religions subscribe to this fundamental belief and many developed minds do too.

Some believe that fundamental rights are the outcome of a developed economy, yet there is no evidence of countries that progress economically automatically according all their citizens basics rights. Neither is there a prescribed level of development to be achieved before fundamental rights can be accorded.

It’s a dangerous line to tread when trying to make a convincing argument on the merits of blatant discrimination for the preservation of human rights for some. The simple equation of continual oppression, as we have witnessed around the world in the last year alone, has the potential to equal a real threat – for some the threat is violence, but in the case of Anna and Bella, the threat is brain drain and mass migration which are extremely detrimental to any economy.

Countries in which the four fundamental freedoms (Roosevelt) – freedom of speech and expression, freedom of worship, freedom from fear and freedom from want – are violated do not develop evenly and breed deep insecurities. An analysis of countries that did not fare well in the United Nations Human Development Index, showed them tending to have a weakened state of human security and human rights.

Hence, in order to have a positive functioning economy, achieving human rights for all (not relative human rights) is necessary as there are no substitutes for good governance and the rule of law to make a functioning state.

The reality is there are many variations when discussing human rights. Some prescribe to it being a gift based on descent, religion and cultural relativism. Then there are the generations of extremists, moderates, liberalists, absolutists, progressives and contextualists with varying intensities of conviction. However, there are no half rights or half truths.

Rights should not exclude groups of people but include rights of the aged, minorities, the displaced and so forth which are all embodied in the UDHR.

Anna’s story is not uncommon but closer to home. Anna’s story is my story, Anna my mother and Bella my sister; a Malaysian family who have lived and served this country for generations and for generations have never had equal rights to education, employment, land and the full privileges of being a citizen.

If the debate in Malaysia today is still against universality, I guess then the question should be is there such a thing as half torture and half discrimination? I’m still not convinced.

Natalie believes that the protection of human rights is a unifying ethic and should not be misused to cause divide. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Our 99%

2011-10-20T08:23:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 14)

October 20th, 2011

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/183434

Many in the US have taken to the streets asserting that they are the 99% of America who are not pleased at the power and influence of the financial sector and corporations. Protesting against corporate greed and inequality both social and economic, the battle cry of the growing number of protesters is that the spoils of the top percent are obscene and that something needs to be done about the disparity in salary packages which is extremely wide. Similar cries are being heard around the world and the Occupy Wall Street protests have expanded into many forms of “Occupy”, from a sit-in outside St. Paul’s Cathedral in Bank, London to one outside 101 Tower in Taiwan.

What echoes clearly is that growing income inequalities and the rising cost of living have affected the 99% around the world and people are past weary and not afraid to say so. In the US, the richest 20% of Americans own 84% of all wealth. Picking up our jaws from the floor, the disconnect between value placed on the financial sector and what is generated to society is too large. This cannot be healthy for any economy. Yet in 2010, corporate America profits were at an all-time high as was Wall Street compensation. All this fresh out of a financial crisis caused by errant bankers who did not face criminal charges, with CEO salaries instead rebounding strongly (Sachs, 2011). Surely things do not tally especially when unemployment is high for the rest of America.

In his book Price of Civilisation, Jeffery Sachs points out the importance of governments to do better. Decoding major government failures in the largest democracy that have not only shattered American confidence in the country’s leaders but have also left most of the world wondering why such careless government decisions continue to ruin not just America but the global economy as well, he listed ways in which an effective government should function. Sachs’ lists his Seven Habits of Highly Effective Government, after Stephen Covey’s famous self-help book of a similar title – set clear goals, mobilise expertise, make multi-layer plans, be mindful of the far future, end corporatocracy, restore public management, and decentralise.

These habits should be the essence of all governments, but that’s being idealistic. The recent people-friendly 2012 Budget was announced with a lot of oohs and ahhs from the crowd but it certainly lacked foresight. It felt like Christmas came early with various gifts distributed to the different societal layers. It’s easy to give away money, but what about long-term solutions? Of course a budget is not the place to announce structural reforms, just opposition potshots. However such reforms need to be made beyond the next election in order for us to achieve our collective aim of efficiency, equity and sustainability.

Certain policies such as an inheritance tax need to be imposed in order to narrow the rising wealth inequality gap. Furthermore, RM500 in assistance for households earning less than RM3000 is positive, but a one-off ang pow has a limited shelf life – and a quick one at that with the rising cost of living.

The question that needs to be asked though is why are 53% of households or rather 3.4 million Malaysians earning so little and how is RM500 going to help in the long run. Our long-term economic goals need to be clearly defined especially since inflation has persisted at over 3% since the beginning of the year.

Indeed RM1.8 billion is a lot of money to give away, but what is that compared to the large sums for individual bailouts borne by the government. Each year when the Attorney-General’s Report is made public, one thing resonates clearly – that our public administration system needs to be reformed, not just with better window dressing but real reforms and unyielding anti-corruption penalties so that we are equipped for the greater complexities of the future.

Competent public administration structures and great foresight are necessary foundations of a respectable government. We want to be a high-income nation, one that is developed, yet we are still debating the details of a minimum wage. Indonesia, Mongolia, Vietnam, China and Cambodia have either introduced a national minimum wage standard or stipulated an industry or region-based minimum wage. Thailand just increased its minimum wage by 40%, while we play catch up when we should be setting the bar.

The 99% started their sit-in because they believe their government can do better. Ours needs to do better too.

Natalie hopes that the concerns of the 99% don’t just stay on placards but turn into a platform for sustainable and meaningful change.

Comment: letters@thesundaily.com

Can You Afford It?

2011-10-06T10:11:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 11)

October 6th, 2011

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/167775

Internationally acclaimed Suzie Ormon’s interactive TV segment Can I afford it? is hard hitting. A woman who doesn’t mince words, Suzie will tell participants who have been dreaming of doing or owning something if they can afford it or not. Expenses detailed, savings listed, the dream stated – and within minutes Suzie will scream DENIED, tell you off for lousy budgeting habits or reward you accordingly.

So in Suzie Ormon fashion and in view of tomorrow’s budget revelation, let’s see if Adam, a 25-year-old engineer living at home with his parents, can afford to live independently in Kuala Lumpur.

Adam earns RM5,000 a month. Once he is done with the basic contributions – tax and EPF – our version of superannuation, Adam’s take-home pay a month is slightly more than RM4,000. Now out of that, he needs to eat, clothe and house himself before he sorts out his wheels – just the bare necessities. Will Adam make ends meet?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Food RM25 a day: RM 750 (RM8 per meal, three meals a day)

Clothes: RM 200

Rent and Gym: RM1,000 (for a master bedroom)

Car Instalments: RM 500 (Proton Saga)

Petrol and Car Service: RM350 (city driving consumption)

Amenities: RM 400 (Electricity, broadband, phonebills)

Toiletries and Household necessities: RM100

Insurance: RM250 (Automobile and life)

Contribution to parents: RM200

Groceries: RM200

Social Activities: RM100

Appliances/ Gadgets: RM200

_______

RM4250

Savings: RM 0000

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now this is a modest budget for someone like Adam who grew up in a middle-class family, enjoyed meals at restaurants, satellite TV, the comforts of living in a house with a small garden and not just room. On his salary and based on this modest budget, Adam lives in continual rising debt each month and has zero savings – nor can he afford a holiday, buy a computer or meet with any accident – hospital bills and car repairs would cost too much.

Furthermore, in order to afford property and the mortgage, he would not be able to eat in order to save for the 10% down payment and lawyer’s fees. With banks offering 30-40 year loans, Adam at 25 should already have a home loan with a 35-year tenure, meaning he would have to work until he was 60 to pay off that loan.

It’s proven that single people end up paying substantially more proportionally towards basic living costs compared to married people. So what happens if Adam gets married, has a child and his wife becomes a homemaker? How will he afford to feed two more mouths, milk formula, diapers, baby clothes, insurance, save for the child’s education, maternity care and the list does go on.

The face of Malaysia’s urban poor has evolved and now includes different segments of society. Imagine if Adam were on a tight budget, what other Malaysians earning less are living without. The experts and politicians say we need to live within our means and save 30% of our income. In Adam’s case, saving RM1,500 is next to impossible unless we cook the books and he stops eating. We can argue that he should take public transport – but our public transport system is not very reliable nor does it connect well – so Adam will be spending more time waiting for the bus that is either too packed or has missed a stop, then heading to the train station, and then taking a cab to work – all of which will cost quite a bit in time also. If Adam works late, or if torrential rains hit, he will be stuck.

Adam should live closer to his office, but the cost of real estate in the city is not at all affordable. We haven’t even discussed issues of safety, work-life balance and the occasional splurge, or say McDonalds.

If we do basic calculations – the cost of a Double Cheeseburger in Malaysia is RM6.55, while it costs US$1 (RM3) in the States. The cost of a whole uncooked chicken in England is £4 (RM20) compared to RM15 here. Now if we take the percentage of wage earned to cost of living, Malaysians bear a very high cost of living. The 2010 Prices and Wages report by Swiss Bank UBS AG states that Malaysians have 33.8% purchasing power compared to New York, and 42% that of London, 31.6% that of Zurich and 33.7% of Sydney. Imagine how much better Adam’s classmates working overseas are doing – and we wonder why the brain drain figures are so high in this country.

Now, how much more can Adam tighten his belt and live within his means if his salary doesn’t allow him to live independently. In the words of Suzie Ormon, Adam has been DENIED living on his own.

Who knows when Adam will be able to afford to live independently, provide for a family and look after his parents. Instead his aging parents who paid for his education so that he wouldn’t have a study loan to service, will have to continue supporting him if the cost of living continues to head upwards and salaries remain as they are.

In view of tomorrow’s budget, I’m glad it’s touted to be one that cares for the people. I would also hope that instead of just pumping more and more money from a deficit budget, greater efforts are concentrated on curbing corruption and frivolous spending, so that the real benefactors of the budget would be the people.

Natalie hopes this budget will live up to its promises and that Adam’s generation will be able to provide like their parents did.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

The Art Of Window Dressing

2011-09-22T09:13:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 11)

September 22nd, 2011

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/152620/

Perusing through a department store, a stunning dress caught my eye. Peeking around the mannequin, to my disappointment, a paperclip held the dress to create the very silhouette which made the dress stunning in the first place.

The window dressers definitely scored an A+ for the "Made You Look!" effect but it turned out to be a bout of bad PR for the designer trying to market an ill-fitted dress. Though in the designer's defence, not everyone has a lanky far from realistic Barbie-like figure but in all honesty, a paperclip does not scream "Buy Me!" nor does it make for a tasteful fashion accessory.

Window dressing is a serious business because it is an important point of contact with potential customers. In high-end shops on London's Oxford Street, window displays are envisaged months before.

Plans are drawn up and precise details disseminated to the stores for perfect execution. One shop in particular puts much thought into the three different lifestyle price markers it's catering for – not-too-shabby, good and fabulous.

You decide which lifestyle suits you or what lifestyle you want – skint but can afford plastic cutlery, middle-class with glass tableware or obscenely rich eating off bone china holding a crystal champagne glass with a designer suit to boot.

If window dressing is done right, it gets you to enter the store and at least check for paperclips. What it really has done is sell you an illusion.

The same goes to window dressing in mutual funds. In this regard, window dressing is executed to make funds appear more attractive. A fund manager might sell stocks with significant losses to improve the appearance of the fund's portfolio just before the quarterly report is sent to clients.

No harm I suppose, after all most people like me don't really know in detail where the money is being invested – we just want to see profits. To make us happy they window dress. It doesn't seem harmful at first but the problem with this public relations mechanism is that poor performance cannot be hidden for too long – window dressing can only do so much and has a short lifespan before the truth shows its ugly head.

There's a lot of good window dressing going around these days. Lots of PR companies making various politicians shine, become more personable and relatable. Everyone wants to look good – and that's what keeps spin doctors in business; selling an image. Though what we really need is to be told the truth.

It's easy to be caught up in spin – the difficult part is tearing away the suave charisma and theatrics to reveal what is real and what is the truth. Spin doctors don't only spin positives; they spin negatives of others to make their clients look good – either way – good or bad, an illusion has been created and the idea without its back-story sold to the multitude.

It's worrying, especially with a general election looming. What happens when we vote based on an illusion – within months things will fall apart or revert to what was or worse and it's another four long years before we can vote again.

The reforms being promised and transformation programmes scream window dressing. Such reforms like the promise to repeal the Internal Security Act are praiseworthy though for now it remains a promise.

Face-lifting an old draconian law into multiple security laws to include monitoring race and religion needs to be done carefully with the wisdom of a blindfolded judiciary and neutrality on the part of the lawmakers which is something we need to drastically improve on.

The real test about repealing the ISA is not how loud the cheers are now but how well things hold up months after the general election.

Natalie knows that everyone can make promises – what we really need are promise keepers.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Good Deed Gone Bad

2011-09-16T07:40:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 14)
September 8th, 2011
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/136402/

"Dear Radio DJ, I've got a dilemma, should I accept a work opportunity for a better paying job in a different part of the world or forgo it because I'm not sure how my relationship will do long distance. Please help!"

My morning drives seem to include these "please solve my problem" segments. If it doesn't, there's an advertisement about it and it's not just one station, it seems to be a growing trend.

One segment in particular made me cringe as the call was made by a woman being cheated on and in her desperation wanted to find resolution. Something so private and delicate was now repeatedly aired by the radio station.

I felt really bad for the woman who had called up. In her time of need and despair, she had no one to turn to and thought she'd get advice the best she knew how but instead it was used as an advertising gimmick.

With the little information given, and no training or proper credentials, these hosts and listeners weigh in with their good advice. They mean well and some do have sensible advice to give but many times a careless discussion ensues.

Imagine the damage they are causing by being well meaning. The damage may not just be to the person who called in but those involved in the situation or to someone listening who might be in a similar situation.

It's in our nature to be well meaning and concerned but not all good intentions end up being for the good of the person we're trying to help.

This well meaning trait is rather evident in Malaysian culture. With numerous non-governmental organisations and charity homes run by volunteers, we Malaysians often enough give in to that good Samaritan tug.

We teach our young to give loose change to the beggar, we oblige the tissue paper seller that comes around the stalls, we even might have a standing order with the bank for monthly donations to be dispersed to various charitable organisations.

During the festive season or when we're overwhelmed by our blessings, in thanksgiving we send one-off gifts to orphanages – like a fast-food meal treat or we organise an excursion to spend time with kids for a few hours or a day. If we don't have time to do these things we might be diligently donating instead.

Though these acts seem noble and make us feel good, we need to question how much real good is it doing to the receiver or are we causing more damage. It's difficult for these organisations to screen volunteers or have rules.

At the end of the day, a charity is a charity and there is a heavy reliance on public donations for their survival. If those in charge start declining one-off meals or good deeds because of the wrong message it sends then it won't be long before they cease to exist and those in their care ultimately suffer.

Not only should we be consistent and both parties responsible and accountable, proper training is imperative. It is one thing to want to give but we need to be aware and go beyond how we feel and do what is right for those we're trying to help.

This includes overseas missions and aid efforts overseas. Are people trained before being sent off? Are they equipped well enough to enter war-torn countries or unsafe territories? Are they also mentally able to process what they witness?

Many volunteers end up as disaster tourists which causes more damage than help because they are not trained and use scarce resources.

Last week's tragedy in Somalia has driven home the importance of proper training and support for volunteers.

It's sad that we had to lose a life before stringent guidelines could be drawn up. Though the mission was meant for good, the fact remains that there was little foresight in the importance of suitable training.

Not only is training required for international volunteer missions, but local charities and homes need to be empowered to not just take scraps and create proper guidelines for volunteers and volunteering efforts. It's not about volunteers feeling good, the good deeds need to benefit and not cause burden or severe damage.

Volunteers too have the potential to cause long-term damage if they do not have the right credentials, proper training and support – even if it's well intentioned advice shows on the radio.

Hopefully the next time we give well meaning advice, play Dr Counsellor or decide to volunteer for a charitable mission we realise that our good deeds can go bad without the proper training.

Natalie hopes that radio stations will be more sensible and believes that we need to start being responsible volunteers and advice givers.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Injecting Equity Into Our Tax System

2011-08-25T09:27:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 14)

August 25th, 2011

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/122661

“Stop coddling the super rich", billionaire Warren E. Buffett's Op-ed piece last week hit a few raw nerves especially its timing after a tug-of-war for an increased US debt approval that has made many nervous.

Buffett who is estimated to be worth US$47 billion is of the opinion that he and his super rich friends should pay more taxes as their taxable income is half of what the average middle-class wage earner pays. That is because most of Buffett's taxable income goes through the capital gains tax sieve which is at a much lower rate than what typical wage earners are taxed.

If Buffett was Malaysian he'd have paid next to nothing as our capital gains tax is 0% for equities and 5% for real property gains. What does all this mean to the layperson? Clearly, those with a disposable income surplus have the luxury of dabbling in capital gains activities and even when they do make a profit no matter how big or small, no Malaysian is taxed.

Now to naively put it, the more loose change you have, the more you've got to play with, and so potentially, the more you're going to make (or lose).

Come April when tax forms are due, you'd have made more money in a year than the wage earner who is dependent on a salary, yet you will not be taxed for any of the money you made at the stock market even if you made a million bucks.

Now we take that un-taxable profit and invest part of it in a few condos, and a few friends do the same which then causes the prices of property to sky rocket like it has. Some already own houses and investments and yet get a discount on all the newly-acquired property including luxury homes.

It doesn't matter that this discount was put in place to balance out socio-economic disparity many years ago, but has now translated into assisting lavish lifestyles inevitably raising the cost of living for those paying more taxes and living from hand to mouth.

If you were to sell any one of these newly acquired property within five years of purchase, you pay a 5% real property gains tax on what you made and still get a RM10,000 discount.

However if you decide to hold on to the property (noting that prices generally appreciate) and sell it after five years, you make a clean profit – that's right, not taxable.

Now compare that to what your friends made – some still made more thanks to the 5%-7% discount. What if the profit was RM100,000 or RM1 million?

We may not have Buffet magnitude billionaires just yet but according to the Malaysian Business we have companies paying RM455.6 million in a board payout with one director being paid RM106 million making all the other high earners look like paupers with RM12 million payouts. Imagine if they invested their bonus in equities without having to pay tax or bought multiple property at a discount.

Our tax systems need to focus on narrowing budget deficits and looking out for the wellbeing of every Malaysian citizen not just a select few.

Our country's affirmative action needs to evolve. Instead of a quota system based on race, it needs to be based on alleviating poverty and income levels. This does not mean wealth is being taken away – it means that wealth can now be distributed equally.

In the long run, looking after the wellbeing of those that need help will benefit everyone. Having a layer of super rich, does not translate into a community of high earners. It just means a select few are growing their wealth faster by taking advantage of a lopsided tax system and other biased mechanisms.

In order to have a united Malaysia, we need reforms that view citizens as Malaysians first, promoting equality across the board. We can start with revamping our tax system and include good governance in that equation. Maybe then we can truly say we are headed towards a 1Malaysia.

Natalie thinks that our tax system needs to be revamped into a progressive tax system.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

** Note:
This article has been heavily edited and does not accurately reflect the original work submitted.

The Haves & Have-Nots

2011-08-11T09:08:00.003+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 12)

August 11^th, 2011

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/108243

Unrest in the Middle East, protests in Europe and now London burns. The global climate is in unrest with most parts of the world experiencing some sort of chaos – riots, plunging stock markets, famine, natural and man-made disasters.

Groups of people are unhappy about something – totalitarian rule, austerity measures, targeted police brutality, empty pockets, unclean elections – all pertinent issues that have been ignored for too long and now the people have reached their tipping point and are doing something about it.

Too many are tired of being marginalised and as a last resort taken to the streets to demand a change in their situation. Of course not all who are marginalised have the luxury of going to the streets though.

No one really thought about Egypt’s political situation until the Egyptians started massing in Tahrir Square. Then the world took notice and their Mubarak who once ruled with an iron fist is now bed-ridden and seen wheeled into a holding cage at trial. Their situation changed drastically – perhaps not yet for the better but a revolution is now progressing in that country.

There is a saying that “when people fear the government there is tyranny and when the government fear the people there is liberty”. One can only hope the new leaders of Egypt, realise how strong their people are and rule justly.

In London, however, there is no excuse for such mindless thuggery destroying the city, though one has to wonder who these multiracial looters are and what is their cause? Have they been marginalised, have they been treated with respect, do they have jobs, do they feel like they are part of society or is all this carnage dedicated to Mark Duggan?

As history points out Tottenham in the 80’s experienced Broadwater Farm riots so is this the second wave of such horror or is this the doing of those who are “trapped in the system”, utterly bored opportunists?

Whatever the cause, what we have seen is how socially excluded groups of people have taken to the streets and for that suddenly been given the time of day by the media, those in authority and the world is paying attention – willingly or unwillingly.

Such political and social activism stems from a frustration and hunger for more. Not all activism is justified in the case of London but in other parts of the world people want change and are not just hungry for change but for food and basic necessities. A common factor in the different unrest experienced around the world is the fact that there is a great disparity between the haves and the have-nots. Income disparity that is so wide ends up becoming a major point of contention for the masses.

Looking at our country, the NKRA’s and GTP’s have been put in place to show that the government is doing something to improve living standards – it even added a 7th NKRA –to tackle living costs. Though with every glowing report, we are told that things are getting better – without it translating to my bank account or community.

Yes, food prices are high, yes we should let go of subsidies, yes we need to “tighten” our belts – but there’s nothing left to tighten and nothing left but debt. According to Mercer’s 2011 Cost of Living survey, our cost of living has overtaken cities such as Washington DC, Boston and San Francisco – surely this is a telling tale. Yet, money is easily dispersed and getting a government contract causes one to upgrade from middle income to instant tycoon.

What happens to those trapped in the middle income bracket? Those in charge of pay scales need to start being realistic. Some employers have the audacity to not pay proportionally because the presumption is that the employee being local will have lower living costs staying with their parents.

Clearly, many Malaysian employers no matter how highly educated have not graduated from the mentality that employees are not slaves to own and need to be treated with dignity. Large generations of Malaysian young adults enter the workforce with a heavy load of debt for basic needs and are unable to buy homes and cars without their parents help.

What will then happen to the next few generations? Will they have to pay off a generational debt? These are factors that caused people to walk the streets of other countries. A widening income disparity has never benefited any economy or government.

When people are hungry for basic necessities, have worked hard and still do not make enough to live, it is only a matter of time before they reach their tipping point – and then what?

Natalie is not an advocate of violence but knows of the reality that people are capable of anything when they have nothing to lose.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Measuring Peace

2011-07-28T06:03:00.003+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 14)
July 28th, 2011
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/92170

In the latest Global Peace Index (GPI), Malaysia ranked 19th out of the 153 countries reviewed – an achievement that was touted in the last week. Ironic for a week that saw continual reprimand, threatening and anger over calls for basic electoral reform. It has also been the week where the much anticipated findings of the Royal Commission of Inquiry on the untimely death of Teoh Beng Hock was announced. There is a public outcry for Parti Sosialis Malaysia leaders held under the ISA to be released, and the Economist article on the Bersih rally was blacked out.

All this begs the question, how is peace really measured?

Is peace measured by our military capability or sophistication, the level of democracy, the level of disrespect for human rights, violent crime rates, police capacity and influence, potential for terrorist acts and/or the perception of criminality within society?

Which leads to the question, can peace really be measured? What would be the components, who would be the sample size, what documents will be analysed and interpreted by whom and how? It seems a perplexing and complex concept to index.

Further to that, is this form of peace a Western perception? When calling for human rights reforms and democratic practices, often what sprouts out is the cowardly response that these concepts are Western in nature and do not sit well with our Asian heritage – then what’s good for the West is not necessarily good for us in Asia stand is continuously reiterated. How then does the definition of peace according to the GPI fare with our Asian heritage?

We’re patting ourselves on the back for ranking above countries like Singapore, the UK, Netherlands, France and the US because it suits us, but are we just bragging about an index instead of dealing with reality. What is the pulse on the ground? Are the people happy or are we an angry lot?

On a recent cab ride from KLIA, I was surprised at how young the driver was. We struck up a conversation which lasted the whole journey and what he said resonated with me. We were not in the same age bracket, ethnic group, gender box and everything else. We were poles apart. However, his unhappiness at the state of affairs was clear and shared.

At 25, with a diploma in automotive mechanics, he struggled to find a job in the field. He worked at McDonalds to avoid being lumped in the unemployment glut and now has found his way into driving an airport budget cab even though he is not qualified. He works long hours just to make a few trips a day. If he doesn’t work, he doesn’t get paid. If he takes a sick day, he doesn’t get paid. We did not get into details of superannuation and benefits – though I doubt it’s much to shout about. He spoke passionately of how it’s not about race anymore but about a Malaysian society that is worried about how things are being run, with the lack of transparency, the lack of respect for voters, the lack of justice and the level of inequality. I wondered what he would think of this peace index ranking. Would he too question how peace is measured?

If peace is measured by passive submission to authority, then we rank high on Hofstede’s Power Distance Index which measures the extent to which less powerful members accept and expect inequality in the distribution of power. Malaysia comes tops in the high-power distance culture category which suggests that the inequality within society is endorsed by both sides – the leaders and the people. I do, however, wonder how long our Asian passive nature will hold up against the rising anger of society at how concerns close to our hearts are being mismanaged, twisted and hijacked.

When a young man in the prime of his life, about to get married, with his firstborn on the way is falsely accused and is said to be interrogated to the point he loses perspective and chooses to commit suicide, giving up on the life he was looking forward to and prepared for – one has the right to question, to get angry and wonder if this happens in a peaceful country?

Natalie believes in the quote “the price of peace is eternal vigilance”.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

ASEAN 방식(ASEAN Way): 서로 간섭하지 않는 공동체?

2011-07-23T08:20:00.003+08:00

http://news.mofat.go.kr/enewspaper/subarticle/pre_print_article.php?paid=3639

ASEAN 방식(ASEAN Way): 서로 간섭하지 않는 공동체?

o불간섭주의를 근간으로 하는 ASEAN 방식을 생각한다면 평화, 안정, 번영, 정의, 민주주의 등의 가치를 지향하는 2015 ASEAN 공동체가 너무 이상적인 목표로 보임. 각국의 자주권을 보호하고 대내외 일에 간섭하지 않으며 대화와 타협으로 협력을 강화한다는 내용의 ASEAN 방식은 국제사회의 질타를 받아옴.

o2015 ASEAN 공동체 형성을 위해서는 불간섭주의에서 벗어나 지역거버넌스(regional governance)를 지향해야 함. ASEAN 공동체와 같은 조직체를 제대로 운영하려면 회원국들이 여태까지 그래왔던 것처럼 정도를 벗어난 국가에 심각한 부당성이 존재하는 데도 불구하고 불간섭, 자주권 존중이라는 전통적 가치 뒤에 숨어선 안 됨.
oASEAN 공동체 형성에 장애가 되고 비효율적이라는 단점이 있지만, 사실 불간섭주의는 UN헌장에도 모든 회원국들의 주권적 평등을 누린다고 명시되어 있는 바, 국제관계에서 지켜야하는 근본 원칙임. 그러나 만약 대량학살이나 인권 침해와 같이 인간생명의 존엄성이 무시되는 상황이라면 주권평등보다 상위에 있는 법규가 적용이 되어야 함. ASEAN의 어떤 나라들은 인권을 침해하더라도 국가주권과 불간섭을 내세우며 자신들이 하고픈 대로 하지만, 국제사회는 강행규범(jus cogens)을 들며 그들의 주장에 반박하고 있음. ASEAN은 여태껏 회원국들 내부에서 인권침해가 발생해도 침묵해왔지만 작년에 UN 재판소가 캄보디아 장군들을 재판하였음. 이는 인권침해의 경우에는 불간섭 원칙이 무시될 수 있다는 것을 보여준 예임.

o만약 공동체의 개념이 공유되는 가치에 기반을 두고 있는 것이고, ASEAN이 진정으로 ASEAN 공동체를 달성을 원한다면 ASEAN은 공동체내 어느 한 국가에서 탄압으로 고통 받는 사람들이 있을 때 불간섭 원칙 존중이라는 ASEAN 방식을 내세우며 방관해서는 안 됨. 이제는 언제 어떤 방식으로 ASEAN이 그러한 문제들에 적극 개입할지를 고민해야함.

o절대적이었던 자주권 보호 시대는 지나감. 이제는 국경을 넘어서 이웃국가에서 벌어지고 있는 일에도 우려를 하고 관심을 가져야함. 미래에 모든 ASEAN 국가들이 민주화를 이룩한다면, 오늘날의 ASEAN 공동체를 돌아볼 때 공동체가 인권침해에 침묵했던 것을 비난할 것임. 그렇게 되기 전에, ASEAN은 그 동안의 방관자적 위치에서 벗어나 적극적인 견지에서 지역거버넌스(regional governance)를 해나갈 필요가 있음.
※ Natalie Shobana Ambrose 말레이시아 국제전략문제연구소, 애널리스트

Secret Court Of Our Hearts

2011-07-14T08:16:00.004+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 14)

July 14th, 2011

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/78464

In Harper Lee’s famous book To Kill a Mockingbird, one of the main storylines is of Atticus, a lawyer defending Tom Robinson, an innocent black man falsely accused of raping Mayella, a white woman during the Great Depression. Having fought the case with substantial evidence for Tom’s acquittal, they lost because societal norms came before legal obligation. Even though Atticus had convinced a court of law of Tom’s innocence, in reality he had failed to win his case “in the secret courts of men’s hearts”.

It’s amazing how at the end of the day, our personal judgments and convictions are what we hold true to – not what we are told to believe. With everything going on in the past few weeks alone, I wonder what the secret courts of our hearts have decided.

The thing with justice is there’s a benchmark and it doesn’t move. We can tug at it, we can twist and package facts whichever way we want to get the desired verdict, but the bar never moves and the scales of our hearts magnetise towards an accurate equilibrium – it is never neutral because innate human nature causes us to try and put things right – to find justice. We tend to be uncomfortable otherwise. No matter what the popular trend is, ultimately we have to be at peace with the decisions and stand we take. In the words of Atticus, “the one thing that doesn’t abide by majority rule is a person’s conscience”.

That is why it so important that we do our duty. That we live up to the agreements we have made and measure ourselves not by what we do well but what we have failed to do. Only then will we become better. As a country, we share the responsibility of being part of the 47 states that make up the United Nations Human Rights Council. Part of our duty is to strengthen the promotion and protection of human rights around the world – which includes our country.

That bar does not move. Out of the 192 UN member states, Malaysia was chosen as the forerunner in upholding the tenets of human rights. Our duty? To not just be a good example but an outstanding one. But what does our report card have to say? In 2013 when we are up for re-election, how will we fare? Will we be humiliated by our score sheet and give excuses as to why we were not re-elected?

Personally, Malaysia seems caught in a different generational thinking. On one hand, we want to be a traditional society, respectful, obedient, peaceable. On the other hand, these traits have created a social layer of powerful, deaf opportunists who’s skewed perception holds the rest of the nation to ransom.

The problem is that a huge chunk of society has been exposed to something different, another option, and so the traditional traits are traded for what is deemed ungrateful, disrespectful and argumentative – all needing to be taught a lesson. In other words problematic.

However for those who dare to dream for a better country, that burden for change is heavy and cannot be dimmed. It’s not about which party wins – let’s face it, our options are limited. As clichéd as it sounds, it really is about change – positive change, real change, necessary change – and it doesn’t matter who does it, it just needs to be done.

If we have transitioned from a guided democracy to a full-fledged democracy, upholding all fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights along with the absence of intimidation is crucial.

This is what will win points in the court of public opinion – not machinery that on paper raves of improved living standards, but which shows a stark difference in reality. We can close our eyes, put our hands to our ears and scream at the top of our lungs to drown out the noise, but it will only grow louder. Our heads need to come out of the sand to face reality. It’s time to listen and change.

The conflicting reports, heart-tugging photos and strong statements that have followed from either side of the divide continue to fill our newsfeeds and will do so for a long time to come. No matter how much convincing either cause red, blue, yellow, government, opposition, print media or online media has done, in the privacy of our consciousness and the quietness of our convictions, each one of us has decided what happened, what the truth is, who the guilty verdict falls on and where to cast our votes – all in the secret court of our hearts.

Natalie thinks that if you have an opinion and a conscience, you don’t just register to vote, you exercise your right to vote.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Minimum Wages For Maximum Impact

2011-07-13T08:17:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
News Straits Times, Malaysia (page 17)
July 13th, 2011
http://www.nst.com.my/nst/articles/17minw/Article/

The National Wages Consultative Council Bill going through Dewan Rakyat is part of the government's effort to provide long-term economic empowerment to the less fortunate.

For the poor, an increased wage or one that is fair and proportionate to the work undertaken means living a little further from the edge of the economy.

If Malaysia had sound labour laws and provided welfare for the poor, then one could debate the legitimacy of having a minimum wage and the appropriateness of government interference in the relationship of employer and employee.

However, labour laws in Malaysia are inadequate and this is one way of protecting the rights of the underprivileged.

Instead of debating whether there should be a minimum wage, perhaps we should discuss whether the minimum wage will translate into a living wage or whether this kicks that hope further out of reach.

The minimum wage does not include healthcare coverage, days off, superannuation and vacation time.

There are many concerns about the implementation of a minimum wage in Malaysia.

However, what is being implemented by the government is a mechanism that endeavours to improve the standard of living of the most vulnerable to a tolerable level.

Furthermore, with the reduction of subsidies and increase in tariffs, the minimum wage seeks to cushion the difficulty of making ends meet.

The debate that minimum wage reduces employment, increases poverty and puts a strain on business is in sharp contrast to conventional wisdom and compassion that we should be looking after the poorest in society.

Implementing a minimum wage is a tool to improve the economy, increase productivity and wage growth.

Wages in Malaysia have been based on market forces. However, it has not benefited the country or the people as expected.

Setting a minimum wage level will help the poor put food on the tables of their families

Salaries have been suppressed and do not match the rising cost of living in the country. Enforcing a minimum wage will allow for higher purchasing power and improve the standard of living.

To become a high-income nation, wage inequality needs to be reduced.

However, employers are concerned that this will cause retrenchment and affect the country's competitiveness.

To calm such fears, certain factors need to be considered in finalising the end figure of a minimum wage. Issues such as the cost of living, threats to profitability, the cost of running businesses and the strategy to become a fully-developed nation in nine years have to be taken into consideration.

Other issues that the National Wage Consultative Council will take into consideration before coming up with the minimum wage rate is the adequate wage range, living costs, productivity, employment sectors and who is exempted -- seasonal employees and companies that record a minimal revenue.

Another issue is the standardising of the minimum wage across the country. In the United States, there are 13 minimum wage ranges based on region and divided by occupation, sector and region.

However, the US is larger than Malaysia and this segregation method has worked for them but might not translate as well with us.

Having one national rate within our country though might not be the answer either.

It does not seem feasible now as wages and the cost of living vary across the country, and a drastic change in employer spending will likely cause companies to fold due to a sudden increase in wages paid and inevitably trigger job losses.

As inequitable as it sounds, remuneration between the east and west of the country is very pronounced and this will be a factor is determining whether to have distinct rates within the country.

Alternatively, varying rates could spark large amounts of internal migration. For these purposes, and to ensure that the proposed minimum wage does not stagnate, the council will review the rates once every two years.

The bill, which mandates the formation of the National Wage Consultative Council, includes an employee protection mechanism that allows for employers to be fined RM10,000 for each employee that is not paid the minimum wage.

Paying people proportionately is not just a deserved right but a sign of respect and an empowering tool in acknowledging their hard work in building up businesses and our country.

The question is, how long will the wait be until there is a minimum wage sum and how long until it is implemented?

The poor, underprivileged, unskilled and foreign workers have been mistreated by the lack of a minimum wage and, therefore, the bill is a welcome start and will only be as effective as its implementation.

Now, the next step is to ensure a liveable minimum wage.

Natalie Shobana Ambrose is an analyst with the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia

Our Duty To Treat Refugees Better

2011-06-30T13:45:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 14)

June 30th, 2011

"If anyone comes here, they risk being sent to Malaysia and go to the back of the queue,"
"For every refugee we send there we will take five.
"You spend your money, you get on a boat, you risk your life and you don’t get to stay,"
"You go to Malaysia."

-Julia Gillard, Prime Minister of Australia

I’m not sure about you but when I heard these statements on television, I had chills up my spine. So this is what the Australian government thinks of us? Perhaps rightly so, but who came up with the idea of swapping people anyway?

Pertinent questions arise on why these people would give thugs their savings, leave behind everything and everyone they know, risk their lives on stormy seas in rickety boats, and not to mention being packed like sardines. It’s not one decision that makes them place themselves in that situation; but a series of decisions. Surely one has to wonder how much worse the situation is back home for them to put their lives in such grave danger. Many do not make the journey, and how many reports have there been of capsized boats?

I can only assume it to be as horrible as the escape story from the book Half the Sky, of a young girl smuggled into Malaysia on the pretext of finding her decent work only to be sold into prostitution and housed in crammed spaces in the heart of KL. The situation was so bad that she and a friend used a makeshift clothes hanger, put it over the balcony of two blocks of flats and “tight-rope” walked their escape. At that point, she felt that falling and dying would have been a better option than staying in such a place. Mind you, this is a true story and the only consolation is that it happened years ago before KL was “cleaned-up” and the girl escaped.

That is the kind of wretchedness these people face. What type of desperation do they face each day in detention camps? As Malaysia is not a signatory of the United Nations conventions on refugees and against torture, asylum seekers are not legally recognised and cannot seek employment. There is also no structure for these undocumented people to obtain redress when treated irregularly. The only body in the country that can offer assistance is the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees which recognises refugees.

There were 93,000 registered refugees in Malaysia, and the assumed number of refugees not registered is double that. What irks most people is the fact that Malaysia has a poor human rights record. It’s not new news, it’s a fact, but nothing more can be done until the authorities fully accept and fulfill their responsibility.

Imagine being subject to harassment by those in authority, risking beatings and living in overcrowded conditions. When there is little food and no money, what can be traded for a bowl of rice every day? These camps don’t just house men; they are home to women and children – children who should be in school.

There are many sides to this debate; it’s not just about empathy but also how well refugees naturalise, the cost of providing them housing, education and work, and what kind of refugees they are? A burden on government spending for sure, but there has to be a humane solution and what we have to offer is far from that.

The reality, however, is we are getting a bad name overseas because of how we tackle the refugee issue. All the economic growth and conventions overseas showcasing Malaysia’s abilities are tainted with reports of the conditions refugees in our country are subject to. Something civilized needs to be done and done fast. Refugees can’t be told “please go back to where you came from” or risk ending up in Malaysia.

Natalie believes that swapping refugees is a terrible idea and that whoever came up with it should be ashamed.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Good Thing We Are A Democracy

2011-06-30T13:41:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
The Malaysian Insider (TMI)
June 29th, 2011

In some countries, people get put in jail for speaking up against injustices. They then get left there for years and are sometimes forgotten. Good thing this doesn’t happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, the media constantly practices self-censorship to avoid being shut down. Still they are regularly cautioned to ‘behave appropriately’ in accordance to government propaganda when unbiased reporting is what the media is trying to provide. Good thing this doesn’t happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, citizens are told what to believe. Their religion has to be the religion of the state, if not bad things happen to them. So they hide and practice their faith in secrecy. All they want is their basic human right to religious freedom. Good thing this doesn’t happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, there is no such thing as equality. Some tribes are considered better than others and more deserving because of the race they were born in to. So the others get oppressed and are not given the same opportunities, education benefits, housing benefits, investment benefits, and the list goes on. Institutionalised racism is condoned and part of the government system. Good thing this doesn’t happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, the judicial system is rigged. The blindfold of justice has been removed and there is little separation of powers between the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. Too much meddling and a lack of neutrality in the courts allowing for the privileged, influential and titled to influence decisions on who sits on the bench and the outcome of cases. Good thing this doesn’t happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, fear and intimidation are the modus operandi. People are not allowed to legitimately express their concerns. Water bombs and tear gas are used to stop rallies and protest marches even if they are peaceful. Good thing this doesn’t happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, ballot boxes go missing, voter registration is inaccurate, phantom voters get a ballot paper and there is no such thing as a secret ballot. Good thing this doesn’t happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, the leaders squander the wealth of the country and believe in a system of ‘one for you, five for me’ making them instant multi-billionaires with property peppered all over the world and businesses ventures for each of their children. The immense wealth accumulated while in power and wasted while in power could have benefited the country and made it more prosperous than it is. Good thing this doesn’t happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, many promises are made before an election and forgotten once the seat is won. So during the few days of campaigning, the people living in that area without basic necessities for many years suddenly find themselves between a rock and a hard place – vote for the people who put you there and get all the basic benefits they should have given you years before or not vote for them and continue living they way they made you live all these years. Votes are exchanged for basic necessities like running water, roads and access to electricity. Good thing this doesn't happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries the people in uniforms are thugs in masquerade. Their guns are not to pre-empt crime but to cause one. Once they don on a uniform, they automatically get immunity from the crimes they commit all in the name of protecting the security of the country. So much so the people know that if uniformed personnel ask for something, it’s best to comply – even if it’s a naked squat. The power of the uniform outweighs any logical, legal reasoning. Good thing this doesn't happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries, certain people can incite racial and religious hatred with little reprimand while those with legitimate concern for the state of affairs get chastised. Good thing this doesn't happen in Malaysia, especially since we’re a democracy.

In some countries the will of the people is not the basis of the authority of the elected government. The protection of human rights and the fundamental freedoms of all are just rhetoric and not a reality. Good thing this does not happen in Malaysia, especially since we are a democracy.

Natalie believes in the freedom of being a pedestrian, wearing yellow and writing poems.

*The is the personal opinion of the writer or publication.
The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

Cheating Spouses: Who's to Blame? (Lipstick On Your Collar)

2011-06-30T13:07:00.002+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 14)
June 16th, 2011

The sign on the back of the Malaysian taxi advertised a local website: “Catch A Cheating Spouse”. At first it was amusing. Clearly there was a growing need for this service, seeing as how some people were making enough money for their services to be advertised behind a taxi – and I’m guessing not just one taxi. Then it struck a chord, having known of quite a few people who have been subjected to a cheating other half and the deep pain of betrayal that comes with it. In recent times, there have been many stories of infidelity. A slew of famous wives have unwillingly become part of a growing club of cheating influential husbands. So who’s to blame? If I were to use the logic of a local wives club, the fairer sex in the relationship would be blamed for not fulfilling her duties as a chef in the kitchen, a maid in the living room and a “first-class prostitute” in the bedroom, to quote the leader of this club. If anything, this logic proves that women are their own worst enemies.

This form of misplaced blame feeds into a culture of fear surrounding marriage. On one hand, we so easily get caught up in a fairytale wedding like that of the recent royal nuptials (though both Kate and Diana omitted the word obey from their wedding vows, the former’s decision was met with praise while the latter’s caused disdain). Yet at the same time, we know that wedding rings can easily be removed, so some now tattoo their rings so as to imply that ink on skin carries more weight than ink on a legal document, forgetting that a promise is far more than legal paperwork.

While others might not believe in getting married, saying “why change what we have?”, the reality is that most people know the pain of a lipstick-stained collar and how easy it is to be a cheating heart. Though infidelity is not restricted to men, they are the more common perpetrator. It takes a lot to protect a relationship and be faithful especially when temptation is rife.

From being amused at the advertisement at the back of the taxi to it being a sad reminder of the level of integrity we have especially in our personal relationships. We seem to laugh thinking that infidelity is rampant in Hollywood and the western world but not in our Asian societies, but surely it is, if not the Obedient Wives Club would not have been formed. Perhaps the attention stemmed from the audacity and misguided implication that women are to be blamed for their husbands straying. The ugly truth is though, at the end of the day, if a person wants to cheat – nothing is going to stop them. Blame shifting and citing the spouse as a reason for infidelity is a coward’s approach.

Relationships today come with different challenges. The role of men and women is constantly evolving. In the past, women generally stayed at home, but today many work and don’t cook or clean or even know how to change a nappy. Are these signs of a disobedient wife? What about men who are stay-at-home dads? Traditional roles are being challenged and we have to change with the times.

I would like to think a good marriage includes mutual respect, not a laundry list of what a spouse can, cannot or should do. We all have things we can’t stand doing. I love to cook but I seem to be allergic to washing up. It doesn’t mean I won’t do it, it just means that I’d be happy if someone else did it. Perhaps this may be interpreted as a lack of submission or that I do not know my place. I say wake up!

The world has changed. Marriage shouldn’t make maids out of wives and errand boys out of husbands. Life on its own is hard enough and marriage has to enhance an already good life, not make it any more miserable. But that doesn’t mean we quit when it gets tough. In order for any relationship to flourish and sustain, there needs to be balance, mutual respect, trust, validation, and there has to be integrity – all of which require immense daily hard work from both partners. Perhaps that’s too tall an order to place on anyone in today’s society and that in itself is heartbreaking. One thing’s for sure though – if you marry a person who cheats, then you marry someone who will cheat on you and no number of prostitution classes can change that!

Natalie believes that it’s not only important to find the right mate but for each mate to be right for the other.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

** Note:

This article has been heavily edited and does not accurately reflect the original work submitted.

Apathy Or Lack Of Information?

2011-06-02T10:42:00.002+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 14)
June 1st, 2011
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/57485

Everyone is a chef these days. Thanks to the multiple cooking shows and celebrity chefs, our general culinary skills have improved in some senses. A few years ago in Malaysia there weren’t many aspiring chefs; however with the airing of these programmes on Malaysian television, we aren’t shy to showcase our newfound talent. Previously, one would be hard-pressed to tick all the ingredients off one’s shopping list because we weren’t exposed to the variety of global foods.

What has changed in the past few years, however, is the availability of the different ingredients in supermarkets instead of having to find a suitable substitute. It wasn’t that there was no such thing as buttermilk or pecorino cheese –there just wasn’t a demand because we either didn’t know these ingredients existed, or if we did, we didn’t use them in our cooking.

Our lack of exposure and in some senses lack of interest was seen as a form of apathy and economically not fruitful. Therefore, there was little demand for these "exotic" ingredients due to our so- called indifference – though one has to wonder if it is really apathy, or the lack of information available which is the problem. If information is power, then the people who have information are powerful. What is deemed apathy is really the lack of information not just in terms of access but also in quality. Many times there are obstacles that stand in the way of quality information being disseminated to the masses which causes frustration and after a while, we don’t even bother trying to get the information. One has to wonder if the withholding of information is intentional or purely coincidental.

Community activist Dave Meslin explained it plainly using the example of a food review. If you were to look at a food review, all the information needed would be readily available in a separate text box. However, when it comes to more complex issues such as selecting local councillors, there is little information available. The same goes for scholarship application processes and selection criteria. This lack of information is frustrating and makes one wonder if those with the information really want people involved, really want people to apply or only a chosen few are given the information needed to apply.

If we are serious about transformation, being transparent about processes, elite group applications, selection committees and tenders, or even more trivial concerns like who is in charge of repairing potholes needs to be addressed to avoid a state of indifference so easily confused with apathy, when the real problem is the lack of information and available information.

The lack of information for those who have some information can cause a lot of misinformation to spread, breeding unnecessary speculation. That is why it is important to be transparent, to actually be of the mindset that people do care and are interested in knowing.

When there is a tariff hike or a subsidy cut, what is needed is clear and precise facts, not a sway of conflicting information which breeds cynicism. A tariff hike in any part of the world is not welcomed. However, people need information to back up the validity of the price hike. No one willingly parts with their money without first investigating the facts. Without balanced information, transparency of contracts and the allowance of competition, the people are forced to become mere spectators not only of what happens to the country but also their pockets.

In the Malaysian context there is a great void in the availability and access to basic public information. When a tariff is increased or a subsidy reduced, inflation automatically sets in. The reality is, when there is price hike of 20 sen for 1kg of sugar, the price of a teh tarik disproportionately increases by 20 sen even though logically it shouldn’t. So to the average person, a tariff hike does not just cause the belt to tighten; it also directly affects the price of other goods.

So the question remains, do we want people to be engaged in what happens in the country? If the answer is yes, then we need to dismantle the obstacles and provide clear and precise information.

Natalie understands the need for subsidy reduction. However the contradiction of wastage of public funds and the level of corruption needs to be addressed concretely and simultaneously.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Permission To Dream

2011-05-19T10:03:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 14)
May 19th, 2011

Sitting on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, overwhelmed by the deep history of my surroundings, I gazed across the reflecting pool and paused. A few steps across from me was where Martin Luther King in 1963 delivered his famous civil rights speech that is quoted so frequently. So in the spirit of the atmosphere, I gave myself permission to dream.

First I dreamt for me. What I wanted for my life and my future. I was tired of dreaming only small dreams. So often, we aren’t allowed to dream beyond borders. There are limits that get in the way – not just our own fears, but people whose opinions place barriers, and laws that don’t allow us to even dare dream of certain things. So I allowed myself to dream big.

Then I started to dream for my country, my home. My dream was for the generational debts to be no more, for race politics to stop being a hierarchy of norms, for politicians to end primaeval rhetoric, for those who lead to shed their superiority complex and serve, for promotions based on meritocracy, for the divide and conquer rule to cease, and for us as a country to thrive and be united as a people.

What I realised after was the importance of remembering those limitless dreams, to stay focused and to pursue them relentlessly. The easiest part about dreams is the dreaming. The difficult part is translating the illusive into something real. There needs to be a plan, there needs to be belief and there needs to be determination, but most of all there needs to be support.

King’s speech was not just about one race fighting for equality – even he knew it wasn’t a walk they could do alone. It was about people of different ethnicities coming together because they knew in order for their country to be a country that is successful, its people need to stand united to end discrimination. It wasn’t just one man’s dream, it was a dream realised by different people.

The American reality is far from perfect, but at least they are allowed to dream – though I think the bigger victory was the realisation that it was not something they could do alone. Inequality and discrimination is something that will continue to haunt the world. Every country has a group of people or peoples that is seen as lesser and sometimes not just based on ethnicity.

Though in Malaysia sadly, we are still stuck in the mentality of slave and master, just couched in a different and perhaps more polite manner. We are trying to sell our country as one that lives in harmony, when on the inside the reality is far from that. When racist soapbox oratory is allowed with little reprimand because it is the norm, how does one marry racial harmony with such medieval actuality? Asking Malaysians to ignore the racial rhetoric is not the answer, but the effect of that is that Malaysians have and continue to leave the country and the government is having the tough job of wooing them back. Though the notoriety of local politics does not help, another factor that works against people returning home is the high cost of living in relation to salaries drawn.

However the promise of competitive salaries is not the golden ticket to winning our talents back. Other factors need to be considered. Living in a gated community should not have to be the norm, but with rising crime rates, it seems to be a necessity. Private schools should not be the only acceptable option, but when a video of a young girl being bullied in school goes viral and the debate that ensues is whether cell phones should be banned in school to avoid such videos from becoming public knowledge, one has to wonder what the local education system has to offer.

One part of King’s dream was for his children to not be judged by the colour of their skin but the depth of their character. If Malaysia can promise that not just in rhetoric, then we will be on the right path to fulfilling our dreams.

Natalie hopes every Malaysian will one day be allowed to dream without limits and know that they can achieve them.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Taking Leave Of Our Good Senses

2011-05-05T08:27:00.004+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 14)

May 5th, 2011

Where was President Obama born? That was the BIG question discussed last week on American television. Only persons born within America’s borders can hold positions of high office , hence the whole ‘birther’ debate ensued. The Apprentice big boss, Donald Trump who has implied intentions to run for president, was “so proud” and “so honoured” that his persistent prodding led to the disclosure of Obama’s birth certificate and even then, cast doubt over its authenticity. So what did the president do? Addressing the media, he chided those involved, saying “We do not have time for this kind of silliness” and made it very clear that he will not discuss this matter again, ending the press conference without taking any questions.

Indeed there were far more important matters to discuss. After all, America is involved in three wars and has one pending, part of the country was hit by tornadoes, they nearly had a shutdown, the economy hasn’t been doing too well and the soaring price of oil seems to be on their shoulders. These are serious issues, and there was the media going crazy over where the man was born.

Fast forward to this week, while the media were going berserk over the birther debate last week, one of the many things Obama had to deal with besides the White House Easter egg hunt and staff dinner was actually determining whether the administration had sufficient intelligence to bring Osama bin Laden to justice and they did. Indeed there were far more important matters to discuss than whether Obama was a natural born citizen.

On our side of the world, we’ve had our own share of silliness. Unfortunately, instead of serious issues outweighing the occasional silliness, the reality is we have taken an extended leave of our good senses.

Should nasi lemak be sold in schools? Seriously? Is this what our politicians in high office are discussing? Personally, I am all for healthy eating but I also believe in teaching self discipline and the role parents/ caregivers play in a child’s eating habits. The point is, are there not more important issues that need the attention of our politicians?

I guess they are busy trying to convince us how paying for a local email account will benefit us even though that money could be used to build better facilities, be poured in to education or put to paying consultants and advisers to come up with a solution for minimum wage in our country.

Instead, we run camps for children to become more ‘manly’ when really we should be more concerned about whether our young are being taught to become decent grown ups. Instead we allow politicians to discuss the state of women drivers in parliament. Is there really a lack of items on the agenda I wonder?

Perhaps addressing the serious brain drain problem in our country should be added to the agenda. It’s not just about catering for those who have left but it’s also about providing for those who are equally qualified and living in the country – something Talentcorp needs to address to avoid more qualified Malaysians leaving the country. The World Bank’s economic monitor report on Malaysia’s brain drain problem shouldn’t be taken lightly just because Talentcorp has started chugging; we should instead be pouring our efforts into minimising our loss and not focusing on the authenticity of a sex tape.

Malaysia has a lot of potential and capable citizens – that is a fact. The problem is that we give in to our silliness more often than we should. We spend more time on the nonstory than we do tackling important issues. Telling the people through a one-page weekly advertisement in major dailies how life is improving, does not translate to the reality that inflation is too high and Malaysians households spend half their income to pay off debts .

How shall we stay relevant when the bulk of what is being discussed by our politicians should be filed under silliness? With everything that is going on within our country and around the world, do we in Malaysia really have time to be taking leave of our good senses? I think not.

Natalie can only hope our politicians pursue that which is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent and praiseworthy.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Freedom Cage

2011-04-21T00:19:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia (page 14)

April 21th, 2011

Miss Muffet and I share a common 8-legged foe. Spiders, cockroaches and flying bugs make me extremely uncomfortable and yes I do cringe at their sight, to put it mildly. I’ve been known to have broken a 2 foot tall window because of this fear and recently came too close in contact with one that was the size of my hand. Though it was a fraction in size to my whole being, I feared it… a lot. Who knew what it could do to me?

Many of us fear the unknown. For some it might be something as small as creepy crawlies, others fear public speaking, death, heights and even fear being alone, hurt, taken advantage of. Most of us fear something. Ironically though, we are actually only born with two fears, the fear of falling and the fear of loud noises. Other fears are learned as we mature through life.

However most adults end up having a lot more than these two fears in life. The problem with fear is that it causes us to make harmful and unwise decisions – like breaking a window or standing on a chair screaming uncontrollably for someone to get rid of a tiny bug. Fear can be paralyzing and can cause us to not trust others.

A lot of times, it is our fear that causes misunderstandings. Fear that someone might take advantage and fear of the unknown can cause us to be adamant to not wanting to understand another’s point.

When it comes to matters closer to our hearts, issues such as religion, tempers flare faster and sensitivities run very deep that we sometimes fight blindly in honour of what we believe in, all because we fear that which is different and we fear being taken advantage of.

So instead, we make rules to contain that unknown and allow freedom for those within that enclosure. Many of us do not know a lot about other religions even though we are a multi everything nation. I remember a few years ago, as I was heading out for a Good Friday service, an extremely educated and well read person smilingly said to me “Happy Good Friday”, and I just looked at him puzzled that he had no idea Good Friday, was indeed a very sad day for Christians and Easter which was a couple of days later, is the happy occasion.

Many of us pay little attention to other religious observances. We’re more grateful for the public holiday then actually knowing why we get the day off. In a country such as ours, where we are to live in harmony and given the freedom to practise our beliefs, it seems wise to know what each other believes in and why certain things are observed at certain times.

Knowledge of these things does not mean we are any less Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or Christian. In fact it then allows us to better understand one another and recognise each other’s world view instead of treating one another’s beliefs as a threat.

The Federal Constitution states that there is freedom to peacefully practice one’s religion, yet there are many who do not have that freedom and continuous legal battles go against what is enshrined within the Federal Constitution. Those who speak up against it are deemed difficult citizens of the state or seen to be taking advantage. But how can that be, if you’re fighting for a fundamental right?

The problem lies when religion is politicised causing a shift in the religious freedom debate. From being able to practise one’s belief without fear and interference, politics has allowed for these tenets to be disrespected under the pretext of maintaining public order or garnering votes.

We can make rules that cage people in and believe that it is acceptable when in reality it is not. James Webster observed it succinctly “We think caged birds sing, when indeed they cry.”

If most fears are learned, it also means that we can then unlearn them if we wanted to. We can make rules and provisions that web restrictions around freedom of religion and think that the citizens are happy about it. The reality is, no one is going to be happy when their basic rights are meddled with.

Natalie hopes that we start seeing each other as equals instead of threats.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

The Rabbit Hole of Bad Decisions

2011-04-08T14:13:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 20)
April 7th, 2011

Morpheus: This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill – the story ends; you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill – you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

The Matrix was a movie that triggered a generation to question decisions. The red pill-blue pill monologue became so popular everyone seemed to be quoting it. Instead of the question being will Neo take the red pill or choose the blue pill. It became a question of what we would do and how we would make decisions.

We make decisions everyday, from whether we’ll get out of bed, what we’ll eat, or how we’ll spend the weekend to more weighted decisions about our future, finances and sometimes even important medical decisions. Then there are the more one-off decisions that is more collective which allows us to be a little apathetic when making them, decisions like voting. It’s easy to feel that – at the end of the day, our vote only goes so far. After all, our opinions aren’t taken too seriously especially in local politics. The people voted in, end up handing over their positions, die or jump ship. So why bother right, just tick any box, or better still why waste time. Besides, you’re not consulted when decisions have been made and if you were to disagree with unwise decisions, it doesn’t matter, the decision has already been made for you. Quite like how censorship works on television.

As a nation, candidates fielded lack quality and have made some pretty questionable decisions but keep at it just because a decision was made and changing their minds might be deemed weak. The people only find out once it’s too late. There are multiple bad decisions that were made and stuck to, just because some big shot said so. It doesn’t matter if it was a bad decision; what happens is the "because I said so" mentality kicks in once people are elected. The Port Klang scandal is one such bad decision after another and now that the whistle has been blown, investigations are moving slightly faster than turtle speed.

We don’t learn from our mistakes we just continue making bad decisions like allowing the MACC to continue when there are grave issues surrounding the manner in which it conducts investigations. How many people have to die for change to happen?

What about the proposed nuclear plants. For a country that can’t ensure bridges are built properly or that the ceiling in Parliament doesn’t leak, or that a stadium won’t collapse, how capable are we to handle not one but two nuclear plants? As the rest of the world who have a better track record with implementing proper procedures are rethinking their nuclear energy plants, we’re pressing on – why? All because someone with a lot of power says so and has forgotten that we even managed to lose two fighter jet engines. What’s to ensure the nuclear plants are safe from theft? Sometimes I wonder if our politicians are bored and need more of a rabbit hole experience.

The rare earth plant being built in Pahang comes with the risk of radioactive pollution is another such case. Yes RM700 million is a great deal of money but at what cost and who’s cost? All because someone has made the decision, and we have to go ahead with it because someone chose the red pill and we got the blue one.

We have politicians accused of scandals who insist on staying in power instead of picking other candidates. If the goal is for a better country, a better future, then decisions of who to field has to be based on the principle of higher authority.

If we are the God-fearing nation we keep saying we are, perhaps our decisions should be based on the principle of pleasing God. Maybe then we might start making the right decisions.

Natalie wishes Sarawak all the best in making the right decision.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Get Off My Road

2011-03-24T09:54:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 13)
March 24th, 2011

Use the indicator when turning. Queue up for your turn. Always give way to those on your right. Stopping at a stop sign is not a sign of defeat. Traffic lights are not suggestions. The amber light really means slow down.

Giving way allows for traffic to flow. Do not cut in, no buts or ifs, it’s just not polite. Speeding upon seeing a car turning up ahead doesn’t get you far. Tailgating might be fun for you but not the car in front. High beam headlights are for desert roads and jungle driving not for lighted highways. Yes, it is blinding, get new prescriptions for your glasses if you can’t see.

If you think your car is too expensive to get hit, or too shiny to give way and wait in the jam with other not so nice looking cars, think again. So you’re one of those monster-looking cars that drinks diesel, you don’t have a licence to annihilate everyone in your way. Boy racers, modified cars and motorbikes that need their exhaust checked, please get attention from somewhere else, we really don’t need the extra noise pollution. You talking on the phone while driving, you’re either going too slow, swerving, stuck in the middle of two lanes or just being a hazard to everyone else. Yes, texting and driving has caused many deaths – there’s a movie about it, and even Oprah has a petition against it.

Give way to ambulances, fire engines and those with a siren – something more important than you is happening. Honking in a traffic jam is only allowed for rude drivers who cut in. Don’t hold up traffic; get your tyres, engine, carburettor checked regularly instead of stalling traffic at rush hour.

Pedestrian crossings are not another word for accelerate; stop, let people cross the road without feeling like you’re going to knock them down. Believe it or not, the seatbelt is actually there because you’re not made of steel – it does save lives. Cheating the breathalyser doesn’t mean you’re clear-headed. If you have a death wish, do it on your own time and don’t involve other drivers.

Is it possible for motorcyclists to not swerve in and out of traffic? When it rains, be considerate and try to not splash puddles onto other people’s windscreens and those on foot or bike. Yes, traffic is slow and you’re not the only one who dislikes traffic jams – the person next to you is equally unimpressed.

If you don’t have the right disability, stupidity is not an excuse to park in space reserved for the handicapped. Neither is standing on a vacant parking lot in a bid to book it for a friend.

Cutting in front of me at the traffic light and speeding off before it turns red is not cool. Someone else will only do it to you when you least need it. Try and park within the drawn lines, and don’t fling the car door open hitting the car next to you. "Oops" does not erase that dent or pay for it to be fixed. Sliding in a car park and sticking out on the road only gives women a bad name, even if you’re a man. So don’t do it.

Sunday morning drivers should only take to the roads on Sundays outside the city and not in front of me. And no, I don’t want to see your collection of soft toys and interior decorating skills, I’d much rather you have a clear view of the road in front of you and the big vehicle tail-gating you. Neither do I want to see you picking your nose or putting on mascara; the windows are lightly tinted not blackened – yes people can see you.

Buses that overtake cars have an earth moving effect which is very frightening, so stick to your speed limit. It is wrong for lorries to spill sand and stones on the road, cement mixers to over take and diggers to be on the middle lane holding up traffic. Tankers carrying highly flammable content should have their speedometer limit at 40km. No one wants to deal with that much flammable content.

Finally, roundabouts are not traffic islands – remember always give way to those on your right and not everyone go at once and see who makes it out first or ever.

Natalie is not a fan of bad drivers but concedes that sometimes you have to be one to get to your destination in one piece.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Estrogen Wars

2011-03-10T10:07:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 19)
March 10th, 2011

“There is a special place in hell for women who don’t help other women” says Madeleine Albright, the former U.S. Secretary of State. Ironic isn’t it, for all the progress women have achieved through the years for equality and yet we ourselves have sabotaged our own progress.

We’ve just celebrated International Women’s Day centenary. One hundred recorded years of acknowledging the equality agenda. The right to vote, to work, own property, impartiality in the work place, the right to education, bodily autonomy, fair and equal pay and engaging in constant disgruntle discussion against sexist oppression. The fight is about gender parity for women and against being dominated by the opposite sex, yet something that is seldom addressed in the open is how women mistreat other women.

For all that has been achieved, women are often mean spirited towards other women, damaging the competition in a personal capacity. Though, not all women display this behaviour, there are so many women who end up exchanging notes about how mean other women have been to them in the work place or in social settings. It’s puzzling, yet not uncommon. Let’s just take a look at popular television. People are making money over cat fights especially on reality based TV shows. Just the shorts of these programmes speak volumes of how women sabotage each other and it is deemed ‘entertaining’- but it doesn’t mean it’s just happening on TV.

Sure, we have our sisterhood of friends discussing personal details of our lives yet our solidarity for other women in general is low. We blame men for the bad state of women’s standing in society, or society for our inferiority complex but in many ways, women are partly responsible. Women bully other women with passive-aggressive behaviour, manipulation, backstabbing, gossip, poor undeserved rating, limiting access to important meetings and information, or blocking access to bosses and mentors, and sabotaging other women’s careers is widespread.

Instead of being supportive, often enough it is women who derail other women’s careers. We seem to have a jealousy gene which we don’t control too well. This unprofessional behaviour seems to be a taboo topic and goes unaddressed. You’ll find courses on improving women’s leadership skills, breaking the glass ceiling and so many other types of women power courses and conferences but hard-pressed to find one encouraging women to go beyond our innate nature, to value and be supportive of each other.

There are many theories of why this is so – scarcity of women in top positions causing more competition, the ‘it’s not intentional’ reason, or the ‘I got here on my own, so why should I help you’ syndrome, the ‘why help someone who could be my replacement?’, or being supportive of another women is showing favouritism. If we want to find an excuse there are plenty but it all boils down to bad destructive behaviour.

It’s seems petty to call one out on such behaviour and the all to common gender stereotype blame on Aunt Flow and how our hormones get the better of us, might deter women from shedding light on the issue. It almost feels like we’re taking giant leaps backwards if we do so, undoing the work of feminine unity of the past. As a result, instead of being accused of being overemotional, best just endure the wrath of false sisterhood solidarity.

Women are in constant contradiction of the feminist movement. On one hand we advocate equality, respect and assume solidarity with one another. Yet at the drop of a hat, there are women who are willing to mistreat another woman to get what they want – be it a career move, popularity or the affections of a desired person. Clearly we have become a barrier in our quest for equality and need to end the estrogen war.

Decoding the reasons why women seem to carry on the mean-girl behaviour from secondary school into adulthood is not important. What’s important is putting a spanner in our misconduct and not letting others get away with it too.

Natalie doesn’t expect special treatment from other women- just treat me as well as you do the guys.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Knocked For Six

2011-02-24T09:49:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 12)
February 24th, 2011

I get knocked for six at the supermarket. If I want to get shocked these days, I just go grocery shopping. A common phenomenon at the cashier is me trying to hide my stunned expression, puzzled how a bag of necessities can cost so much.

Forget about foreign cheese and pasta ingredients, I’m talking about local fruit, local veggies, local meat. How did the humble banana become so expensive? And no, I’m not talking about the plastic looking imported bananas, I’m talking about the spotted pisang mas and rastali grown on Malaysian soil.

Globally, the price of food has increased. According to the World Bank food price index, there has been a 15% increase in the four months from October 2010. That’s a big jump. The demand for food globally has increased especially with the growth of economies such as China and India. It’s not only growing economies but human induced climate change that has led us to be in this situation. Droughts, flooding, heavy snowfall, cyclones have contributed to shortages in grain, maize and other agricultural goods.

World Bank president Robert Zoellick said last week that food prices globally are at dangerous levels. The UN Food and Agricultural Organisation has marked red the global food market as "critical". Even France has placed food security on high priority in the recent G20 meeting. I would think these were calculated warnings and one to heed. Yet, Malaysian economists boldly stated that we don’t have to be concerned because our economy is doing well and the price increase is "not too significant". Not too significant for whom?

The reality is, when food prices go up, it is not the people who earn a comfortable living that feel the pinch. After all if a bunch of bananas increased by one ringgit, what would that mean to the privileged compared to the majority? The ones who suffer are those that have to count their pennies, who don’t feel the trickle down effect of a stronger stock market or economy but who take on the bout of increasing inflation.

We might be told that food is cheap in Malaysia and we have the privilege of eating out often enough. However, in comparison to local salaries, the cost of living is extremely steep. One does not have to be an economist to know that food prices are not coming down anytime soon, and even if they do, it’s hard for suppliers to reduce their prices.

Food subsidies are helpful but in the long run not conducive either. I understand why there are high taxes on imported goods; the government needs the money to fund its projects. However when we see negligence, wastage and corruption eating away what we pay in taxes, it becomes unacceptable that the price of food keeps on spiralling upwards with little address. We can’t keep tightening our belts.

On the street I live on, there used to be a roundabout with beautiful casuarina trees. It then turned into a traffic light junction, causing a bigger jam. The trees were cut. Then big coloured plastic balls were placed on each corner to decorate the empty space. A few months later, they landscaped and removed the balls. They planted palm trees, removed them, planted flowers, removed them, and this has been going on every few months for the past few years. Who is benefiting from all this landscaping? It is no wonder why Malaysia is rated poorly at 4.4 on Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index.

Rising food prices have been one of the main triggers why people in the Middle East have taken to the streets. It is a serious problem globally and does warrant concern.

Natalie doesn’t know much about cricket but is flabbergasted at the rising cost of food and the RM500 price tag to watch cricket at home.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Voting Alone Is Not Enough

2011-02-10T07:39:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 12)
February 10th, 2011

As the judges verdict was locked in, the audience chanted “Change your mind” “Change your mind” at the two judges that weren’t convinced. The crowd kept chanting louder until one judge caved in. I didn’t think he would, but he did. I was a little surprised even if it was just a television show.

In real life I wonder if there were a crowd repeatedly shouting, “Change your mind!”, how many would stand their ground and why.

Some would argue that, you never negotiate with a mob, even if they make sense. You can’t talk to a mob without the threat of being mobbed, so best not to negotiate, it only sends the message that the next time, you will change your mind in their favour if they have a demonstration. Water cannons and tear gas might send the right message instead. Such is the ideology on which dictatorships are formed on. The truth is once intoxicated with power, who would ever willingly abdicate?

This made me think about the latest people power movements in Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan and other parts of the world who are wanting a change, wanting a better life for themselves, a better future for their children.

Of course the chants on Tahrir Square aren’t for a change of mind, but a change of leadership. As the rest of the world keeps watch, experts comment, professors expound analysis and the History channel airs a biography of

Hosni Mubarak that perhaps two months ago wouldn’t have even been considered kosher, the automatic response is an instant election remedy.

After all, that’s what we think that part of the world wants and needs. Elections are a start, but is it enough?

Does a one-time democratic vote equal a democratic political system?

It’s easy to believe it does. It sure would be easier if democracy was magically established by the ballot box alone. But the reality is it isn’t.

Look at how the world seems to have accepted Myanmar’s 2010 elections illusion because the Aung San Suu Kyi has been released from house arrest conveniently after the election. Can we claim then that because an election was held in Myanmar, therefore it is democratic? Her release for our silence was the strategy and it seems to have worked. Though it only reiterates that true democratic freedoms require hard work, vigilance and a fighting spirit.

In our euphoria of Suu Kyi’s release, we have forgotten the people of Myanmar who have been begging for change. Somehow we allowed ourselves to be confused and now, another part of the world demands our attention.

Democratic tenets include freedom of speech, free and fair elections, the right to have and discuss opposing views, press freedom and among others the right to vote out political leaders. Yet in many democracies, this is lacking.

Regardless of who wins elections, as a people we cannot be swayed by rhetoric and promises. Instead we should be informed, concerned and be active citizens. We should want to know what pledges have been kept by our representatives, who benefits from the elections and when it floods again and there are no by-elections, will something substantial be done for your wellbeing when there isn’t a TV crew or journalist hovering.

Sometimes though, democracy gets hijacked, when there is a power shift towards the unelected. We need to be careful of those that guise themselves under the cloak of democracy be it ruling or opposing.

The cost of democracy is high. Institutions need to be built, attitudes need to be changed, policies need to be implemented and people need to be vigilant. The reality is, this takes years, demands persistence, costs money and takes a toll of the people. But then who can put a price on freedom?

Voting is a powerful tool but it needs to be coupled with change, it needs to be coupled with action and it needs to be coupled with the tenets of democracy and most of all, the process needs to be respected.

Winning doesn’t equate success, doing the job promised and doing it well equates success.

For these new wave of countries seeking change, there are so many forces that will threaten a country’s transition to democracy. As the people are fatigued chanting for democracy, voting for change doesn’t guarantee change.

Natalie believes in true freedom for everyone and admires the tenacity of the people who fight for democracy and a better tomorrow.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

2011-01-27T08:43:00.003+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 18)
January 27th, 2011

Only polite conversation was allowed, no talk of politics, religion or sex. However, it seemed impossible after a while to follow that rule and impossible while writing today’s column.

In America a number of teenage suicides sparked the nationwide campaign ‘It gets better’ which saw politicians, religious leaders and celebrities record blips saying it gets better and that people should be free to decide their sexual orientation. A common thread in these suicides – the issue of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgendered commonly known as lgbt.

That openness triggered a local to tell the world that he’s gay and it’s OK which sparked outrage and now he fears for his life after he received death threats. All this happened in the same month of the same year, in two different parts of the world, with two very different reactions.

Here in Malaysia we practise the don’t ask, don’t tell routine. Even if we know someone is out rightly gay, we pretend, avoid talk of it to their face and carry on. If in a more arty farty setting, it’s the norm and probably shoved in your face. So better just don’t ask, don’t tell or sometimes, we kid ourselves and ask when an out rightly gay person will be heterosexually married. We contradict ourselves so often in being pious, yet as a nation we are fed too much detail about sodomy cases in our papers.

In some countries it’s easier to be gay because if a man is seen with a woman other than his wife, mother or sister, it becomes a big problem. However if a man has a male guest in his house, no one questions or intrudes. While women hanging out together is quite natural so who would even question?

We condemn people who come out and say they are gay, yet we have extremely feminine men on local television. It may be two different things but one has to wonder what the guidelines for condemnation are.

Personally I don’t know if sexual orientation is something we’re born with or something we’re taught or even if it’s a combination of both. I do know what the holy books say and yet I also know that judgement is God’s right not ours and that bullying is not condoned by any religion. There are far worse acts that are a daily occurrence in our society - child pornography, paedophilia, incest, rape where perpetrators roam free. Shouldn’t these be the monsters we judge and punish?

Further more, if we believe that we have the right to condemn such acts, then there are other laws that govern what can and cannot be done with regards to sex but how many people actually follow them? And being heterosexual does not grant anyone immunity from such sins.

If one is being indecent then stop it but who’s to say what is indecent. We are extreme, either we condemn or we pretend it doesn’t exist. Foreign television programmes with lgbt storylines are not censored, while Malaysian productions are not to have such storylines. We can pretend all we like, or think that it only happens in foreign countries because in Malaysia, people on tv end up becoming heterosexual. Why are we kidding ourselves?

These issues are real and in real life we can’t just censor it. It would be easier if everything was black and white and clear, but it isn’t. We have to deal with it, we have to cut our prejudices and ask ourselves, if someone we love deeply told us they were gay how would we react.

Would you love them any less? Would you bully them to the point of suicide?

At the end of the day, what happens in the bedroom of consenting adults is nobody else’s business, how we treat others is what matters.

Natalie knows that it’s easy to ignore or pretend difficult issues don’t exits but the reality is they do, and we need to address them compassionately.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Accountability & Charities

2011-01-13T10:52:00.003+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
January 13th, 2011

We were enjoying a meal, when someone came up to us with a random mix of things insisting we have a look and buy their goods. A few minutes later the same thing happened, and again, when finally someone actually came up and asked us for money. So we politely said no, but that only made the person ask again motioning that she was hungry. So we said, we’ll buy her a meal, we’ll buy her what we were eating. She declined. We gave her the menu to choose what she’d like, she declined continuing to ask for money. After a long stubborn exchange of words, she had no choice but to agree to the meal. Shortly after, in true Malaysian fashion we continued our meal, this time at a more upmarket restaurant when midway during conversation, the same now-not-so-hungry woman walks in, not to solicit money but as a customer.

Soliciting money is a common scene. There are the able-bodied that come around selling things: be it children selling knickknacks or foreigners who pull out shiny fake watches out of their bags or those who come selling tissue paper packets or those with a cup asking for money. If you sit there long enough, you’ll experience round two of the usual suspects. It happens so often that most people become numb. They either decline to part with their money or just to ease their conscience they give a token not asking why those asking for funds are in such a position.

Then there are the charities that come around with mini-laminated booklets. Some seem devious by standing outside banks and ATM machines, cornering the unsuspecting.

Why is this such a common scene? There are three groups. The first are the people who beg: They range from the disabled who mysteriously are brought to pasar malams to beg to the ones who frequent restaurants with a beggar’s cup. It’s not that there is no welfare, sometimes people just don’t want state help for whatever reason. And since the problem is rampant, there’s only so much that can be done but it still does not make it acceptable.

You might think I have a heart made of tin, but sometimes, giving money is really for our benefit, so that we feel like we’ve done something good. Little do we know if that money is actually going to be used to buy milk for a hungry child and not drugs or alcohol for a user parent? Then there are the syndicates that run a business using beggars.

The second are the opportunists: They range from those selling the RM10 gift set to the foreigner trying to sell some bling. The authorities should clamp down on such entrepreneurs and restaurants need to clearly be opposed to such solicitation but there is little enforcement.

The third are the so-called charities whose accounts are not questioned. One does have to wonder though, who the stakeholders are? Is it the beneficiaries? If so, are they allowed to question how the money is spent? Who are the accountants responsible, who is doing the book keeping, are they qualified, and to whom are the reports going to.

Basically, I’m asking where is the accountability. In some cases, there is some sort of accountability to the board of directors but what about the donors? Under Malaysian law, charitable organisations are to submit an annual report to the registrar of societies, but the problem is, most do not have the means to hire qualified auditors or accountants, getting by with unskilled accounting staff and at the end of the day, submit inaccurate accounts or fail to submit it all together. So what happens then? We continue to give money not questioning if it’s going to the intended cause or people. We fool ourselves into believing we’re helping when in fact, we’re not.

In Malaysia, most charities are run by volunteers. There are many good people who do a lot of work for charities and there are a lot of charities doing good work. The problem though is that there are some that abuse that trust.

It is not pleasant to be approached for funds and I’m sure it’s not pleasant having to ask for donations but I guess that’s the only way of getting money for some.

Natalie wishes there were better rules and guidelines for charities and capable volunteers to do the accounting.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Best Of Times, The Worst Of Times

2010-12-30T00:24:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia

December 30th, 2010

We’re not just starting a new year; we’re waving a whole decade goodbye. In that vein, let’s look back at some of the stories that defined Malaysia’s decade. For 20 years we had one Prime Minister who in 2001 shocked the nation with the announcement of leaving office and since then we’ve had 2 more Prime Ministers govern within the decade and gone through the 8th and 9th Malaysian plans. The introduction of the MyKad, saw our little blue laminated IC’s put to rest, while the launch of Malaysia’s conscription training program National Service had many 17 year olds not only anxious about SPM results but also being chosen for NS training.

City traffic has become as notorious as Bangkok’s, the KL Monorail doesn’t connect to the well used LRT, SMART tunnel becomes a monsoon drain when KL floods and we’ve said goodbye to the pink minibuses, welcoming the red, blue, beige Rapid KL busses. We also have had to add to the acronyms of SPRINT, PLUS, Guthrie, DUKE and whatever else which all come with tolls and confusing signboards but thankfully we have the Touch ‘n’ Go and the SmartTAG only to zoom into a jam or a lane that has a system glitch. We’ve also started flying low-cost with FireFly, Air Asia and it’s X thanks to the Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT). We’ve bought jet fighters, submarines, had many helicopter deaths and lost a few engines in the process.

We’ve sent a cosmonaut to the International Space Station to have a look around, while reverting back to the slow march version of the Negaraku, recognizing Malaysia day and celebrated over 50 years of independence and not so good judgment.

The International Court of Justice gave us Sipadan and Ligitan, though we lost Pulau Batu Puteh to Singapore. We’ve since been aware of disputes for Limbang and Spratly Islands. Though within our boarders, we’ve seen an influx of unskilled foreign workers to the point that now I’m not sure if Malaysians are to speak Burmese, Bengali or Khmer when ordering food or at a petrol station.

The public became more vocal, aware and took their disapproval to the streets from issues of water to teaching math’s and science in English. There was the BERSIH and HINDRAF rally and then other marches that should not have happened with a cow head.

Religious tensions have increased this decade witnessing the defacing of religious houses and an increase of apostasy cases. We’ve become more aware of fatwa, sharia law, Islam Hadhari and what words can and cannot be used to keep the peace. There was also the much talked about Imam Idol and Malaysia’s first Islamic channel TV Al-Hijrah.

From a handful of universities to colleges sprouting out ever so often in the hopes to be the education hub of Southeast Asia, though with it comes a different set of problems – culture shock for foreign students and Malaysians to militant training.

We hoped that if we closed our eyes, the stories of victims of– Canny Ong, Nurin Jazlin, Aminulrasyid Amzah, Teoh Beng Hock, Kugan Ananthan, Sosilawati might not be true.

New media, online news portals, bloggers have created awareness and also gone into hiding. We’re more aware of the Federal Constitution after March 8th; by-elections have not fazed us while ISA has become a point of contention for many.

Some of our sportsmen and women - Nicol David, Lee Chong Wei and the Malaysian football team have come out tops and brought big cheers.

We’ve added to our vocabulary buzz words, acronyms and general knowledge– BTN, corridors, statuary declarations, baby hatches, MACC, loan sharks, PEMANDU, sodomy, police brutality, ETP, GTP. Malaysia Boleh, Correct! Correct! Correct! 1 Malaysia, pendatang and learnt that Mahidol University was one of Asia’s top five universities.

The Malaysian 5 ringgit note cannot grow on trees and subsidies were reduced, increasing the price of petrol, sugar and regulated the price of the humble roti canai while prices of basic goods have skyrocketed. Though we now have to wear seatbelts even as a rear seat passenger and plastic bags may soon be banned.

Malaysian cinema boomed but we lost quite a few pioneers – Krishen Jit, Yasmin Ahmad, Tony Kasim and Loga Arumugam of Alleycats fame to name a few.

Pudu Jail torn down, Bukit Bintang Girls School torn down, too many heritage mansions torn down and talk of a mega tower – the gains don’t balance out tearing down history.

We’ve had to deal with multiple floods, landslides, bus crashes, state assembly sitting under trees, political bickering, party hopping and so much more.

Looking back it’s been an eventful decade, as a friend summed it up quoting Dickens “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times”. The next ten years is critical because at the end of it, we should be celebrating a vision fulfilled – 2020.

Natalie couldn’t recap everything within the world limit but hopes that we can somehow move forward maturely into the next decade. Happy New Year Malaysia!

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Sticks & Stones

2010-12-16T00:38:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
December 16th, 2010

“Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me” must be high on the lie barometer. The tongue has got to be the most vicious weapon. A careless word does sting and now we know what some people think of us – thanks to Wikileaks . But is it a surprise? There’s an old saying about how if we all knew what others thought of us, there would be no two friends left in the world. Though the question remains- is this really a surprise?

On our side of the causeway, we’re told to focus on our achievements and ignore snide remarks while Singapore attempts damage control trying to cover multiple elephants with a tissue paper. In a few days or weeks, the scenario might be reversed- who’s to say? And Singapore might be the ones sending us a protest note.

I do however like the high road we’re told to take especially since we’ve fallen two spots on the Human Development Index (HDI) and now sit quite comfortably on the 57th place while our not so favourable neighbour is 30 countries ahead of us at the 27th spot in a whole different category named ‘very high human development’. So let’s focus on our achievements and not theirs.

The HDI now in its 20th year, started with the quote ‘people are the real wealth of a nation’. We in Malaysia have over 27 million people in our country according to the World Bank but for some Malaysians, it is not the number of people but their level of patriotism that ultimately matters. Perhaps the HDI should have carried out studies on patriotism just like in Malaysia to be doubly sure that the wealth is legitimate. Ironically, just last month the comment questioning the level of patriotism was met with disdain and within a month there’s been a 180 degree change citing studies and a 9% jump. How is patriotism even measured? And we wonder why our neighbours see us as simpletons.

Maybe we’re confused about patriotism because history textbooks are being meddled with . If we ourselves aren’t sure about our history, about who is responsible for what and where we’ve all come from, it’s no wonder that patriotism is being questioned.

But back to the HDI. Three new indices were included in this year’s report Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index, the Gender Inequality Index and the Multidimensional Poverty Index , however, Malaysia did not have the necessary data available according to the Economic Planning Unit.

In order to focus on our achievements, we need to know where we are and pan out a strategy to get us to where we are to be. If developed status is what we are after, should we not be most concerned about poverty levels in our country and gender inequality instead of patriotism levels so that we know what needs to be done for the poor and the marginalised? We are only as rich as the poorest among us.

The fundamental truth about development has to do with people, not patriotism, tall towers or how Malaysians abroad give our country a bad name. Development is about people and how well we look after them. If we care about the people and invest in the people, allow creativity and not limit talent we then head in the right direction.

On a recent trip to Johor, a friend lamented as we looked across to the other side, “Amazing how just on the other side, they got it right”. One has to wonder, why we are still playing catch up to a country that shared our history and if there is some truth in what was leaked about Malaysia. Giving credit where it is due, Singapore has done well and we only have ourselves to blame for our bad press. Instead of just focusing on our achievements, we should take this as a wake up call to stay focused on our 2020 goal and so not dwell on what has been said.

It is good to know where we stand but we cannot stop people from speaking ill of us. Retaliating never looks good. The best revenge is to be successful and we have ten years. Just ten years to achieve what we’ve set out to do.

Natalie wonders how patriotism is measured while untangling the Christmas tree lights! Merry Christmas!

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Broken Windows & Crime Rates

2010-12-02T07:49:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
December 2nd, 2010

“My neighbour was stabbed around 6pm, house got broken into! Be careful and alert wherever you are!” wrote a friend 2 days ago.

No, this did not happen in the UK where knife crime is rampant, it happened in affluent Bangsar, where some street have guard quarters and barrier and police make spot checks ever so often.

Everyday there is a report in the paper about someone being held at knife point, slashed or raped after a robbery. So we put our handbags and lap tops under the seat, hoping that at the next red light no one tries to smash the window to steal our belongings. Or when we reach home, no intruder slips in as we open the main gate. Security guard fees, CCTV cameras, alarm systems, chunky padlocks with safety keys add to our monthly expences. Gated communities seem a necessity and not a luxury anymore. We build taller fences, try not to go for walks and become more paranoid when carrying out everyday chores because our personal security is at risk even when we’re at home.

I dare say without a doubt crime has become an epidemic in urban areas around Malaysia. Perhaps I feel strongly because too many people have fallen victim.

There’s a saying that “hunger makes a thief of any man” but is it really hunger or is it greed in today’s context?

The Broken Window theory suggests that when a building has a few broken windows that are not repaired, there is a tendency for increased vandalism and perhaps even brake-ins. The underlying factor is that we need to care enough to prevent crime.

Zero-tolerance seems to be the answer but what do we do with the criminals? Shooting them in police raids is not the answer. Clearly there is a reason why all this crime is happening.

There is opportunity. If they are Malaysians, why are they not gainfully employed? What has the state not done and how do we rectify it? If they are foreigners, what are they in the country to do? Were they given what they were promised in the first place and does this crime supplement their wage to equal it out to what was promised? Surely our system has failed us and we need to care more as this epidemic grows.

Having more police patrols, is only a deterrent, the police are not omnipresent. Community safety is far more than preventing crime. It includes social and economic change.

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs states that security is one of the most basic needs of every human being – and right now we in Malaysia don’t have that. Not only are we not safe, simple things like our cheques are intercepted in the mail and fraudulent cheques are allowed to be banked.

It has come to a stage where we feel there’s nothing that can be done because the cycle is so deeply intertwined and the whole system has failed and nothing can be done and no one seems to care enough to do something about it.

Perhaps what is needed now is for a strong community uprise to say ‘enough’ but who has the time to do all this community things?

Once your stuff has been stolen does anyone believe it will be found? Chances are unlikely. Perhaps if those in charge of fighting crime, make us believe that our broken windows are fixed, we might stand a better chance at having a safer community.

But for now, I’m not sure what we can do except to continue to be careful and alert wherever you are but that you might get stabbed at 6pm!

Natalie can’t always be alert but is often paranoid.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Where Hard Work Is A Dirty Word

2010-11-18T09:18:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
November 18th, 2010

When I think of nasi lemak, there are a few absolute non-negotiables. So on my flight back from London, I ditched the boring omelette for my favourite - nasi lemak. After ten hours of delayed gratification thinking about nasi lemak, I peeled open the foil to find some chicken, rice and sambal. That can’t be it. I manoeuvred the chicken thinking there must be more. I found nothing else… this is not nasi lemak. Where is the ikan bilis, kacang, cucumber and egg? I was not pleased, though I did eat it but felt quite cheated.

See at the very least nasi lemak must have ikan bilis, kacang, cucumber, sambal and coconut rice. Whether it’s the Rm1.50 packet nasi lemak or one at a high street restaurant, that is what nasi lemak is. If not give it another name.

You might be laughing thinking that I take my nasi lemak too seriously, but the truth is I feel that we are constantly lowering our standards when we should be striving for better and expecting more – and it’s not just about nasi lemak.

If we look at the general work ethic in this country, I dare say, we are slackers and sometimes cheat. Not much is done well. Why can’t people just do the job they are paid to do? It’s not even about going above and beyond, it’s about doing what you’re paid to do. We have a mentality that has no consciousness about making excuses, blames everyone else and that thinks doing the job is really doing every one else a favour.

It ranges from the simple things like when the dustbin lorry comes round – there is always a trace of ‘juice’ or a rubbish trail left behind. When it comes to road works, how many potholes do you avoid each day, or how often are you caught in a traffic jam because our public transport system does not work efficiently.

We think we are headed towards developed status but really our mentality has not caught up. Hard work is a dirty word and better for some else to do but everyone wants the big bucks without having to work for it – after all there are so many cheats who get away. The lack of integrity has become our culture and now a long standing tradition.

The Auditor-General’s Report is not just peppered with such indecency but teeming with outrages exploitation of the rakyat’s funds. Children were sold sardine sandwiches without the sardines. Where is the integrity that people choose daily to rob children of food that they pay for? I am only touching the surface. Our politicians think it is acceptable to spend stimulus funds on chandeliers and wall paper, so I must be delusional if I’m expecting the fish monger not to cheat me!

It is almost like we are heading on a blind path thinking that if we continue the way we are we’ll fool the rest of the world into thinking that mediocrity equals excellence. Wrong!

Integrity is not conditional and singing songs about it on national television does not make it magically appear. If we are aiming to become a developed nation, we need a shift in mentality and not more towers or shopping malls. Instead, focus on being towering personalities, focus on creating policies that advocate equality, focus on giving justice her blind-fold back, focus on giving the rakyat their dignity and focus on providing basic freedoms.

I probably sound like a broken record, so perhaps I’ll just keep hoping that I find a complete nasi lemak soon.

Natalie is tired of the ‘tidak apa’ attitude of irresponsibility that plagues our society.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

The Language Of Multiculturalism

2010-11-04T02:30:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
November 4th, 2010

Multiculturalism can be romantically described as the beautiful colours of the batik design on a sarong, the strokes of the tjantings and how the intertwined patterns of the wax unite. I’ve also heard it described as the myriad colours of the kasut manek-manek worn with traditional outfits. It’s heart-warming to define multiculturalism through rose coloured glasses. It’s the feeling you get when you see photos of a dog and a panda playing, or a rhino and a turtle keeping each other company or a cat snuggling up under a sleeping dog’s ear.

German Chancellor Merkel had identified that multiculturalism or the concept of ‘multikulti’ in which people of different heritages would live happily together had ‘utterly failed’ in her country . There are many that didn’t agree with her statement but she was daring enough to address the issue as unpopular as it sounds. Merkel had a few suggestions, one was that immigrants needed to adapt to the host country, learn the language and the customs.

Most times, our human nature is to gravitate towards that which is familiar, this of course can pose a problem and if not addressed, countries end up having pockets of immigrants who basically imported everything from their country of origin and set up camp in the new country – refusing to integrate. It can be hard to integrate but these are the challenges of choosing to move.

In Malaysia we have some who choose not to speak Bahasa Malaysia or English while we have others who have totally integrated into the melting pot of cultures that we boast about. I have found myself frustrated many times not being able to understand conversations because I do not speak ethnic languages of other dominate races in Malaysia and I’m not the only one to echo this dissatisfaction.

Most all Malaysians are multilingual and that is a great advantage however we have to have the wisdom in our multicultural society to know that not everyone is able to understand ethnic languages. And though it is everyone’s right to speak in their mother tongue it does not help to ostracise those who do not understand it especially when a common language can be spoken in the midst of those that do not understand.

I recently spent some time in Spain. Prior to me heading there, I spent a few weeks learning Spanish so that I would be able to travel comfortably and independently without looking too lost. Also, I felt it important that I make an effort to understand Spanish instead of expecting the locals to accommodate me.

In the company of friends, I found that my beginners level Spanish could not fully comprehend the quick tongued Spanish or the complex Basque language . However, most people I met tried very hard to translate or keep me in the loop of what was being said which I appreciated very much especially since it was a huge effort on their part.

It saddened me though that in my own country, on many occasions, I have found myself lost because pockets of people end up speaking their own mother tongue not realising that there are those that do not understand. It is even more disheartening when it is deliberately spoken to exclude.

I understand the need to preserve the sanctity of one’s mother tongue and to converse in it out of respect to one’s fellow ethnic buddies. Believe me, many a time, I’ve found myself wishing I spoke a foreign language only so that I could nit-pick another or secretly tell someone the prices of goods in the store were too high. But more often than not, I wished we respected each other because I understand the frustration of constantly feeling ostracized.

So how far do we embrace our multi-ethnic-cultural-lingual inheritance? All this talk about unfair policies, unjust plans, affirmative action are serious issues heavily weighted in a multicultural society such as ours, however, simple things like being courteous might go further in making a difference to everyday life.

We already have politicians who constantly play the race card but in our own capacity we could be more cohesive by speaking the positive language of multiculturalism in our everyday lives.

Natalie believes in a multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual Malaysia. She also believes in the right of comprehension for a more unified Malaysia. Happy Deepavali.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Budgeting My Unemployment

2010-10-21T06:02:00.004+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose

theSun, Malaysia

October 21st, 2010

Ironically when the 2011 Budget was being read out, I was busy looking at my finances and budgeting my unemployment.

No, I did not get fired and no theSun is not my full-time employer (in case you’re wondering). I must admit I was glad someone had money as I looked at my depleting bank balance.

The 12 National Key Economic Areas (NKEA) are going to generate more than RM1.3 trillion and create 3.3 million jobs. Perhaps I could have one of those jobs. Let’s just say this budget cared that I owned my own home and that my shopping habit was being fed especially since I’m sure the new Warisan Merdeka would house yet another much needed shopping mall. Basically it was “enhancing” my quality of life.

So, back to my unemployment status. Over a year ago, I resigned and headed back to university to re-equip myself. The British government was kind enough to indulge in my wants and off I went back to “studenthood” and now upon completion I’m scouring the newspapers, clicking every employment/careers/opportunity tab on websites, looking for a job.

It has been a while since I’ve had to look for a job. I served my previous boss for almost six years and before that, well, we don’t need to go into too much detail unless you’re a potential employer of course! So though I decided to head back to university not to reinvent myself but rather enhance my skills in the hope of further advancing my career and contributing back to Malaysia, I find myself in the very unfortunate position of being unemployed.

There are a few of us in this conundrum- Malaysians wanting to head back home and work, as a result, as we hunt for potential jobs, we pass on anything that might suit another, but all we keep coming up against are some what ridiculous requirements. So much so, some job advertisements strangely resemble marriage requirements of more traditional societies.

Once such advertisement on a famous Malaysian employment website under the education section was for a PA to a Datin. The position requires the potential candidate preferably be single, female, between the ages of 27-45, look pleasant but be aggressive, strong, hard working and posses 3 years relevant experience. Not only must this candidate speak both Malay and English well, speaking Cantonese or Mandarin is an asset and to top it all, a photo must be included in the application. I would say this comes very to close an arrange marriage ‘application’.

Another application required the candidate to basically jump over the moon for pittance requiring him or her to come up with an unreasonable number of publications within the year which can only humanly be done if one were to duplicate someone else’s research which took years to complete. The deadline for this application is at the end of the month but in brackets it states till the position is filled. Perhaps, these employers too know that cats only play the fiddle in fairytales.

Some organisations’ detailed, long, personal history form requires the educational background of my parents and all my siblings on top of their employment history. Not only is my family being vetted, I have to provide the names and contact details of three referees not to mention starting and ending salary history. All this part of an application without the guarantee of an interview and since I’m unemployed I have the time to sit down and painstakingly volunteer such information.

So here I am, wondering if my new qualification will advance my career and if heading home under these circumstances is the best option. It’s not only about getting a job, it’s about being able to have a decent living, to be compensated for my abilities and be able to walk down a street without being wolf-whistled or my bag snatched.

Perhaps the Economic Transformation Programme that is set to create 3.3 million jobs might woo us back home but then again, this year’s budget alone will allow me to afford shampoo, perfume, talcum powder and lingerie while I wait for employment!

Natalie hopes to be employed soon but is accepting funds in the mean time.

Comments: letter@thesundaily.com

My Half Of The Sky

2010-10-08T00:38:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
October 6th, 2010

Every century has been marred by ghastly injustices that perhaps today make little sense why they were even allowed to occur. Slavery in America, ethnic cleansing in Nazi camps, Pol Pot’s regime, genocide in Bosnia and Rwanda – this list sadly has too many entries. One of the 20th century’s moral challenges was battling totalitarianism that saw the falling of dictatorships and the rising of democracy – a challenge that continues into the 21st century. However, this century though working on the challenges of the past, has its own challenge – battling inequality.

A book I’ve been reading entitled after the Chinese proverb "Women hold up half the sky", talks about the injustices endured by women. For more developed countries it may be unequal pay, while for countries struggling to develop, these injustices might mean, honour killings, or not having the same access to medication or education because they are girls.

Malaysia has its share of gender inequalities. However, according to the New York Times Malaysia has made inroads in enabling women to progress particularly in financial sectors citing examples such as Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz, governor of Bank Negara, while Jamelah Jamaludin can boast of being the first woman to head an Islamic bank. The list for Malaysia in this sector is extensive including Fozia Amanulla who heads Eoncap Islamic Bank and Raja Teh Maimunah Raja Abdul Aziz, Bursa Malaysia’s global head in Islamic markets.

So maybe for Malaysia, gender equality is not our biggest moral challenge. Perhaps our half of the sky is segregated more by race and less by gender.

Countries such as India have recognised one main contributing factor to China’s economic boom has been a shift in gender inequality and providing opportunity by merit. China has realised the benefits of educating females and giving them the autonomy to run businesses instead of the suppression faced in the past where babies were not favoured to say the least. India is trying to follow suit admitting their shortcomings in not using their half of the sky sooner.

If the problem in Malaysia is race-based inequality, perhaps we should shift our mentality as these countries are trying to and work towards equality in providing education based on merit not race, create job opportunities based on capability not race, construct and review policies based on value not race. Perhaps then we would be able to increase our growth while enticing qualified Malaysians thriving in foreign lands to contribute to the country that raised them. Right now, we have little with which to entice them to return and much pushing them further away.

What we offer are racist comments allowed to be uttered in school corridors right to the corridors of Parliament, a rapidly segmented mono-cultural social strata and elite race-based organisations that occasionally leak how deep the reaches of racism in this country truly are. The excuse that racism is an anomaly is far from the truth especially when most things are divided by race. Why then would one stay knowing there is a limit to what they can achieve no matter how good they are or how hard they work?

Just like gender inequality impedes economic growth, using half the Malaysian sky only damages Malaysia’s own growth in the long run. As it is, our foreign direct investment has plummeted rapidly while international figures such as Sir Richard Branson and Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales have identified stumbling blocks hindering our country’s progress.

The question then is can we afford to ignore half the Malaysian sky? I believe the answer is a strong NO.

Natalie has been moved after reading Half the Sky – How to Change the World by Nicholas D. Kristof and Sheryl Wudunn.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Paying For A Basic Need

2010-09-23T15:40:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
September 23rd, 2010

We all love our food. Malaysians all over the world, have the foodie gene in them. It is just part of who we are. We had gone to a fancy restaurant for lunch in Bangsar. The décor was exquisite and the food came highly recommended. Naturally, it was going to be an expensive meal, but it was a treat, a special occasion that warranted this excursion.

As we perused the menu, I nearly gagged at the price of water that came in a little bottle. Maybe my eyes were playing tricks on me. See, on principle I disagree on being charged an exorbitant fee for drinking water. So I opted for a nice meal and tap water.

“We don’t serve tap water Ma’am”, replied the waiting staff …. “Only bottled water” with a smile.

For some reason, this restaurant only served water from the Swiss Alps or somewhere far far away that has better quality drinking water than we do in Malaysia. Therefore it was justified that I be charged its carbon footprint to fly all the way to this snazzy restaurant.

I was having none of that.

Drinking water cannot be free but it also cannot come with an inflated price tag. Admittedly we are not as privileged to having drinking water flow from our pipes and so, water filter companies profit by demonstrating how polluted our unfiltered water is.

Paying this much for water made no sense to me. It was daylight robbery, kind of like window tax in the 1600’s when William III who was short of money decided that he had the right to charge people for daylight by taxing a household based on the number of windows the house had. It sounds absurd, but so did the thought of bottled water thirty years ago.

There are some things in life that are a necessity. Access to safe drinking water is not a privilege, but a right. An expectation we should have like the right to life, the right to be treated equally and to be born free.

There is an immense need to protect our ground water and catchment areas. The cost of having to import water is unimaginable especially since we have high rainfall in most parts of the country.

So why do so many households have to invest in water filters and why are restaurants allowed to overcharge for this basic commodity?

With the lack of education coupled with greed, rivers are polluted while our tropical rainforests are being culled for their heritage.

Who suffers?

The people who do not have access to clean drinking water. One day that might be you and me.

What then when there is a disease outbreak? Wouldn’t that cost more to manage? Preventing and ensuring that water resources are managed well is vital.

There needs to better protection mechanisms in place, legislation that actually deals with the issues and an overarching agency that manages water concerns within the country.

Recently the Semenyih water treatment plant was contaminated by leachate used in a nearby landfill that polluted Sungai Kembong. Not only are the clean up costs high, there isn’t an institution or legislation that attempts to protect water resources from such errant and greedy behaviour. If allowed to continue without reprimand, only the people who cannot afford water filters and bottled water suffer and lets not forget how rapidly prices will increasing for such basic need.

Charging higher water rates can only be warranted if there is accountability something which we as a country greatly lack making it unjustifiable and really daylight robbery. Water treatment, catchment areas, education, privatization matters need to be addressed before we our demand overtakes the supply.

Parched from my meal, and still refusing to pay for water, I asked for a cup of hot water and some ice on the side.

Natalie doesn’t mind being labelled “penny-pinching” especially when having to pay for a basic human right.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Cast In The Right Light

2010-09-09T03:26:00.005+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
September 9th, 2010

The camera used to be something that only the adults had and could use. I remember wishing when I was younger that our family camera would be a Polaroid camera. Instant! Who could wait months, weeks until a roll of 36 exposures colour film could be used up and then a second wait to when the roll would be taken to the shop by which time when the photos came out, we’d all have grown a few inches.

But everyone’s a photographer these days thanks to technology, from little kids with camera phones to the so-called “camwhores’ and “photogs” who are perpetually glued to their camera.

I have a few friends who actually exercise veto power in deleting photos as soon as they are taken just because they don’t look so good in it. I’m guilty of that too. Though some have even requested photos be deleted once on the web because on second thought, they only approve of two of the 50 taken.

I on the other hand think it’s important to fully represent even when people take photos of me chomping down my food and I look like I’ve just put a whole hamster in my mouth, because some days- that’s what I look like!

On the other hand, the first thing I look at in a photo that has me in it, is me… and how good I look, then I start looking at the other people. I’m sure I’m not the only one who’s guilty.

There are many theories to this. Some say it’s because we are not constantly looking at ourselves, so we want to see what we look like to others. Others subscribe to the opinion that we’re just vain. The people who shy away from the camera are equally vain I believe – just masked in modesty but really vain- because they think they don’t look too great.

Oh lets admit it we’re all vain and like to be cast in the right light.

Some celebrities have clauses- photos from the waist up only or from certain angles, anything else must be destroyed. Some take it further and in interviews or magazine articles prohibit certain topics from being brought up, so they are cast in a better light.

Imagine only permitted to ask questions on their philanthropy efforts and not being allowed to ask Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan about their drug habit or non-habit after their arrests. That would be a form misrepresentation but it does happen.

That interview wouldn’t sell many magazines because it’s been ‘photoshopped.’ But then again that is public relations.

The media has been asked to cast reports in a positive light and the people urged to trust only mainstream papers. You have to wonder, if reporting is controlled are the people really getting the truth?

Of course reporting is also biased based on the stance of the writer and his background and motives and who runs the paper. Though should people not be allowed to make up our own minds and refute, dispute, agree and approve what is true to the individual?

There was a time when I had to read eight newspapers a day for many years as part of my job. Much to my amusement the same article would sound so different depending on which newspaper was reporting it.

I had the advantage of deciding for myself what I believed after reading a few versions of the story and which mainstream media regularly tried to sensationalize or create a divide. Then I’d also read some of the online news portals take on the same story and after piecing everything together, it actually read as if each media outfit was reporting a different story.

Sometimes, the facts of a story change as the days go by. So unless there is someone actually monitoring each story daily, the undiscerning reader would be taken on a joyride.

What I’m saying is nothing new, all you have to do is just get a few mainstream dailies and see how different the truth sounds and don’t forget the online news media.

At the end of the day, we decide what we really want to believe, after all, today’s paper will be tomorrow’s nasi lemak wrapping.

Natalie thought it be nice to be cast in a different light and change the column photo after two years. Selamat Hari Raya, Maaf Zahir Batin.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Having An Opinion

2010-08-26T01:08:00.004+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
August 26, 2010

“Everything is relative” is a common phrase I kept hearing this past year. That’s what happens when you live with anthropologists.

“No, not everything is relative” would be the polite patient comeback. The discussion would ensue, pursue and die down and everyone would go back to their rooms with a differing opinion to think and mull over.

There was an underlying fondness that though we differed in thought, there was mutual respect of each other’s opinion and belief system. We could agree to disagree and still have a cup of tea together afterwards. The thrust was that we dispelled the opinion and not the person. It’s almost like the saying “Hate the sin, love the sinner”.

It’s a bit of a tricky one though; one is the idea that we are entitled to an opinion and the other about how we treat differing opinions.

On the onset if we were to follow America’s First Amendment stance, then we’d be all for the entitlement. What happens when the opinion is not “correct”?

Correct by whose definition though?

A few weeks ago American talk show host Dr. Laura Schlessinger used the N-word multiple times on air to describe double standards of the usage of the word. This sparked great dissent on so many levels - one reason was because she didn’t mask the word in a euphemism. There was an outrage, she apologised and will end her 30-year-old syndicated broadcast.

What was interesting about this is that her viewpoint was being censored; she did have a point, just not diplomatically packaged. Dr. Laura didn’t intend to hurt, she was trying to make a point. She then tried to evoke her First Amendment entitlement – among others her right to freedom of speech.

What came out of it was that more people were willing to blindly hate than to engage in her comment. There was no platform to exchange views, no platform to trade opinions perhaps, all they saw and heard was “different”.

So much so that they missed the point totally because it struck a nerve… Sometimes we’re really oversensitive about issues that we fail to see another view. I’ve been there before, many times.

Two weeks ago, I questioned the transparency of government spending citing extravagance versus the lack of funds in providing justice to the Penan women and children being raped.

I made a mistake in my article, something I must apologise for and was rightly corrected by Tourism Malaysia. The article questioned subsidies of housing the Malaysian Tourism Promotion Board in Trafalgar Square which in fact needed no subsidies as it was a Commonwealth gift from Her Majesty the Queen of England.

The point of the article though remains. I stand by my opinion asking for transparency of public money, because there is extravagance on one hand, billions wasted and on the other, hardcore injustices not being addressed due to the lack of funds and good governance.

Perhaps there are some that disagree with my point and I welcome mature debate that does not include personal attacks. As you would like your opinion to be respected, so would I, even if its ‘correct-ness’ is relative.

The past few weeks, there have been differing opinions floating around, that of the 98.9fm crew and some school heads. If we are for the freedom of opinion, does that warrant school heads to say racists remarks since they have a right to an opinion? While if we are not for freedom of opinion, then what happens to being a thinking nation and freedom of the press?

Which begs the questions, do we really have the right to an opinion? What happens when you have a differing opinion? And who determines what is correct?

Albert Einstein once said “Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly.”

Freedom of speech should not be a passport to verbal diarrhoea and the right to spew hate rants. Freedom of speech is a privilege that comes with responsibility, contributes to discourse and possesses the element of mutual respect of another’s viewpoint regardless of age, race and creed.

Perhaps it could be summed up by what an anthropologist professor in the making smilingly said “It’s my opinion, respect it!” as he continued to sip his tea.

Natalie can’t reconcile everything being relative; there are some universal truths.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Who Foots the Bill?

2010-08-12T03:00:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
August 12, 2010

Standing in the heart of London, I stood admiring the massive lion sculptures that sit guarding Nelson’s very tall column. Looking up to the top of the column where Nelson stands, I imagined all the great things that took place in this space steeped in history from political demonstrations, World Cup victory celebrations, New Year festivities and not forgetting what it commemorates the Battle of Trafalgar.

As I looked further towards the buildings surrounding Trafalgar Square, the sky was peppered with flags of different countries.

Britain, Canada, EU, South Africa perhaps, the Emirates, even Uganda…and “Could it be?” I thought, “No way” I said.

Perhaps my eyes were getting things mixed up and I got my flags mixed up.

It was prime land, not only does it scream rich, it’s deafeningly vuvuzela expensive.

You’ve got to wonder what the price tag on real estate would be so close to Buckingham Palace. Not only was it exclusive, it was posh and yes it was the Malaysian flag, perched high up against the London sky backdrop.

Standing at the crossroads, I waited as the red double-decker buses passed by and right there in the middle of London on prime land is the Malaysia Tourism Promotion Board.

My heart just broke.

Do we really have that much money to spend?

Do we really need a tourism office right there in the centre of London when just last year, there wasn’t enough funds in the budget to investigate the rape accusations of the Penan women in Sarawak?

Or that there are so many living under the poverty line while things like bridges in poorer areas are inadequately maintained, killing school children when it collapsed.

Where are our priorities?

It seems to be that the idea of development means that we build big, we advertise large and we deck ourselves with great portrayals of monetary wealth to show the rest of the world that we are equals in the wealth game while we loose the very essence of what development really means.

Personally, development means a government that works for the people, a justice system that is truly blind, and a people who value each other as equals. Instead we move backwards every time Parliament is in session.

We spend too much dragging out cases that should not even be in court because a sin is mistaken as a crime while there is a foolish need to search for a pure, mighty race when we are all supposed to be one.

Instead of looking after our young, we amend marriage laws to allow teenagers to get married with the excuse of preventing teenage pregnancies, abortions and baby dumping. When the best solution would be to direct funds towards a better education system that includes sex education, and before I get any hate mail, it doesn’t mean advocating practises that go against religious beliefs. It’s about protecting our young not changing laws that advocate shot gun marriages and perhaps even a higher divorce rate in the future.

People are going to sin, that we cannot control. What we can do is to help them avoid committing a crime, committing murder.

Maybe the argument is that we need a tourism board in the heart of London to boost our economy especially since we have lost a huge chunk of our FDI, but surely the logic of putting your own oxygen mask on first before you help anyone else should be a reminder of how the people’s money is spent?

Take care of yourself before you can take care of others is taken too literally. There used to be a time when politicians fought for the country and not themselves. These days it seems the oxygen mask is only for themselves.

Natalie wonders what the subsidy bill looks like to set up house on prime real estate near Buckingham Palace.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

*NOTE: Tourism Malaysia has clarified that The Malaysia House at 57, Trafalgar Square (where Tourism Malaysia office stands today) is a gift by Her Majesty the Queen of England as the Head of Commonwealth to the Malaysian Government in 1957.

It All Comes Out In The Wash

2010-07-29T03:08:00.000+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
July 29, 2010

There were only enough clothes to do one load and I didn’t have the luxury of separating my colours and whites. Worried that this colour mix was going to cause a repeat of the many laundry deaths of my white items, I decided to invest in a box of colour catchers. These little felt-like sheets came with big promises to prevent colour runs and staining while mine also came with the endorsement of a friend.

Dumped in the laundry, put the colour catcher in the machine and hoped for the best while waiting for my clothes to come out smelling like a field of lavender minus the fertilizer.

The colour-catcher did “catch” some colour as it wasn’t its white self anymore but neither were my whites!

Another sad, pitiful and unnecessary death of a beautiful crisp white top and patches of pink styled some of my other clothes, what a tragedy it was.

It reminded me of a phrase a friend of mine recently used as we tried to piece together bits of conflicting information about a situation. It wasn’t a murder mystery but still it was important enough for us to want to solve.

After we kept hitting a wall, failing miserably in a huff of defeat he said ‘Well, it will all come out in the wash.” True enough it did! It took a while but the truth was revealed.

Have you noticed that when you try to cover up something it almost never stays covered up? One lie is neveenough for a full cover up and then by the time you’ve fibbed a few too many, it’s hard to keep up.

Recently Wikileaks a whistle blower website claimed that there is evidence of war crimes in US military reports of Afghanistan. Pakistan objects to the insinuation that it is playing double agent between the US and the Taliban, whilst Afghanistan is shocked by it all, as the rest debunk the accusations as false. Wikileaks however claims to have documented evidence.

I guess it could go two ways, either it is hushed down like most high profile cases in Malaysia and the public are given the run around with no answers or the war crimes tribunal might decide to take these allegations seriously and start charging the guilty as they have done with Pol Pots regime.

Just years before, going against the Khmer Rouge would have cost you your life and standing up or talking about the cruelty would have been out of the question. Their leaders were too powerful, untouchable and off limits. But where are they now?

Years later, the truth has caught up with them. If anything history has proven over and again that cover ups get revealed because too many lies have gone before and it’s pretty hard to keep up with them. One cannot continuously cover-up or camouflage the truth because eventually, the truth reveals itself for it is humanly impossible to keep up with even one lie.

Many organisations and governments of the past have been under the assumption that the public need not know about everything because the public get terribly confused with to much information. It’s somewhat like a parent saying, “I’ll tell you when you’re older” and the kid finds out from someone else.

There are many injustices in our very on country that for now we aren’t allowed to speak about, many accusations that are not investigated because it involves those who are too powerful and many conflicting pieces of evidence that make it hard to piece together an accurate conclusion to high profile cases especially when key witnesses are in far away lands.

However just like Cambodia under the rule of the Khmer Rouge, people were probably silenced and not allowed to talk, question or write about things deemed sensitive because it involved the powerful untouchables. Only years later, the very subject is not off limits and neither are the powerful generals of the past.

We live in a time where there is too much dishonesty, silencing and corruption; when standing upright means rebelling. But I still believe that one day it will all come out in the wash.

Natalie is of the opinion that laundry does tell a tale on you.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Tough Call For Victims

2010-07-15T02:28:00.001+08:00

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia
July 14, 2010

□ “I like the smell of your perfume” says the boss to his female employee.

□ “Can I get a hug?” says the boss to his female staff.

□ “If you want something badly you’ll make sure you’re free to have drinks after work” says the boss to his female staff.

□ “Women should never be above the man, she should know her place” says the boss in charge of his female employee’s promotion.

□ “It’s not an indecent email, I send it to other women too and no one complaints” says the boss to his female staff.

□ “Looking very sexy today” says the boss to the kebaya clad staff.

Which of the above would you consider sexual harassment?

Would you tick all the boxes or are these lines too naive and laughable that it should not even be mentioned under the harassment heading.

Would gender have anything to do with your response?

Or perhaps the situation, tone of voice and industry in which these lines were uttered might change the acceptability level.

Definitions can sometimes be a slippery slide. I mean this year alone we’ve seen how different interpretations of words, teachings, statements, speeches, parliament debates can be taken the wrong way depending on who says what, when, where and from which side of the fence they represent.

Definitions are subjective and open to interpretation, even wrong interpretation.

So let’s talk about this sexual harassment bill that the Human Resource Ministry has just presented to Parliament. First, I’d like to say it’s about high time something be done in attempting to protect the rights of workers regarding this issue. It’s just sad that it has taken this long and it’s going to take even longer before anything is effictive.

Can you imagine having to prove that you were being sexually harassed?

There isn’t a test you can take that would give you a yay or nay answer. Imagine having to find a witness let alone one willing to go against someone in a supervisory role and be interrogated and questioned repeatedly. It’s quite a lot of trouble especially when people would prefer to stay under the radar and hold a job that helps feed the kids, pay the car loan and the occasional vacation.

It’s a painful procedure. Not only does the victim have to endure being harassed, but then the burden of proof can be even more exasperating – powerless during the harassment and powerless in proving the deed.

One option suggested is to collect evidence – so that means, allowing one’s self to be harassed again or repeatedly but making sure you’re not encouraging the behaviour or ‘asking for it’. Remember the victim’s credibility and height of skirt is also on the stand.

All this for a RM10,000 fine- even then only if it’s a maximum sentence given after much deliberation and character bashing.

By which time, everyone would know the latest office gossip, give you funny looks and you’ll be termed trouble maker. People will try to avoid you like the plague- guilty by association or want to be your friend just to get the juicy gossip.

The bosses won’t be happy, it’s bad press. You won’t be the poster girl for standing up, you’ll be shunned as someone who’s making a mountain out of a mole hill and who makes a fuss about something so ordinary, attention-seeking and troublesome.

It won’t be easy to stay in the job, let alone stopping yourself from questioning every outfit or perfume you put on to make sure you’re not the problem.

Finally, every time you look at your CV or are asked at a job interview why you left your previous job, you’ll have to think twice, three times, check yourself and say convincingly ‘I got a better offer’ or ‘I needed a break’.

All not very convincing responses to a new employer though the negative connotation associated with being a victim of sexual harassment won’t get you the job, period.

Would you then bother to stand up, if you were sexually harassed or would it be easier to just move on quietly?

It’s a tough call.

Natalie knows that sexual harassment doesn’t only happen to women but wonders what sexual harassment laws apply to the cigarette and alcohol sales ladies who parade around in teeny tiny skin hugging outfits.

Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

On Pointe

Growing Grey: Who Will Care For Our Old?

Disclosure 0f Assets And Ethical Leadership

Balancing The Scales

Dream That Became A Nightmare

Wisdom of Foresight

Reading The Tea Leaves

Humanising Development

Universality Of Human Rights: Challenges

Our 99%

Can You Afford It?

The Art Of Window Dressing

Good Deed Gone Bad

Injecting Equity Into Our Tax System

The Haves & Have-Nots

Measuring Peace

By Natalie Shobana AmbrosetheSun, Malaysia (page 14)July 28th, 2011http://www.thesundaily.my/news/92170

ASEAN 방식(ASEAN Way): 서로 간섭하지 않는 공동체?

Secret Court Of Our Hearts

Minimum Wages For Maximum Impact

Our Duty To Treat Refugees Better

Good Thing We Are A Democracy

Cheating Spouses: Who's to Blame? (Lipstick On Your Collar)

Apathy Or Lack Of Information?

Permission To Dream

Taking Leave Of Our Good Senses

Freedom Cage

The Rabbit Hole of Bad Decisions

Get Off My Road

Estrogen Wars

Knocked For Six

Voting Alone Is Not Enough

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Accountability & Charities

Best Of Times, The Worst Of Times

Sticks & Stones

Broken Windows & Crime Rates

Where Hard Work Is A Dirty Word

The Language Of Multiculturalism

Budgeting My Unemployment

My Half Of The Sky

Paying For A Basic Need

Cast In The Right Light

Having An Opinion

Who Foots the Bill?

It All Comes Out In The Wash

Tough Call For Victims

By Natalie Shobana Ambrose
theSun, Malaysia (page 14)
July 28th, 2011
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/92170