Forex-affluence built on poverty?
Thursday, 21 June 2007
Qazi Azad
ONE young reporter of a local TV channel enthusiastically claimed in one of his news reports last week, "This country offers a good opportunity for the micro-credit". What he was actually saying is that poverty is still so dismally widespread in this country that it would require micro-credit operations on a vast scale to help the poor to salvage them. Is there any room for enthusiasm in stating it?
However, if there were no poverty in this country to require him to launch his now famous micro-credit programme, Dr. Yunus might not have received the Nobel Prize for Peace. Seen in that narrow context, one may say that the dismal poverty of this country has been an opportunity for him. Similarly, apartheid or racial discrimination under the erstwhile minority white rule in South Africa, which Bishop Desmond Tutu resolutely fought, was an opportunity for him. His fight won him the Nobel Peace Prize. Without there being the cruel state system of apartheid in his country in the particular period, it is doubtful whether he could win the prize.
But poverty in this country has driven many of our fellow citizens away from their homes on employment or in search of jobs abroad. Unless we are more interested in their remittances than about themselves, we cannot say that poverty has also been a blessing in this case. They toil hard in many instances in deplorable conditions abroad. But they remit about half a billion dollar home every month now.
The Bangladesh Bank, which is elated by the higher inflow of remittances from the expatriate workers, mentions about it and also about how this has contributed to a healthy balance of payments position, in spite of the sustained trade deficit, and to a good and growing foreign exchange reserve and a comfortable macroeconomic stability.
The governor of the bank might have meanwhile read a news story in a local English daily last Sunday, which informed that some Bangladeshi workers in Malaysia are not getting their contractually agreed salaries. The greed of some local recruiting agents and some outsourcing companies in the host country has been held responsible for it. The report partly quoted from a statement, sent by the affected workers to the Bangladesh High Commissioner to Kuala Lumpur. It explains how the sordid cheating is done. According to the report, the contractual salary of a worker is Ringgit 900. But it reduces to a cash payment of Ringgit 50 to Ringgit 150 to him on deduction by the pertinent employers of expenses on account of food, accommodation, transport, light and sewerage and medical attention. The cash received by a worker at the end of the month is thus less than US $15 at the minimum and about $ 43 dollar at the maximum. About 50 per cent of Bangladeshi workers, employed by some little known companies of Malaysia are reportedly facing similar exploitation.
The governor who counts the money sent regularly by these workers when it reaches home, as we all do, has nothing to do to resolve their problems. That is not his job. He can only regret. But how far will those whose job it is to help out any group of affected workers abroad, succeed in resolving the problem? The pertinent recruiting agent in Bangladesh has been quoted as saying, "If the allegations are true, the Malaysian government will take action". The secretary to the ministry of expatriate's welfare and overseas employment also echoed a similar view. He is reported to have said, "If the allegations are found true, the Bangladesh High Commission and the Malaysian government will certainly take action".
If the genesis of the problem is looked into, it would appear that our High Commission has to share a good part of the responsibility for the sordid occurrence. A Malaysian human rights organisation has been quoted in the report as saying that the Malaysian rules required that a representative of the High Commission would inspect the prospective workplaces of the would-be workers and would give approval for their arrival on being satisfied about the conditions. How then would the mission explain and complain now about the reported ill treatment?
The ministry is said to have earlier on June 11 cancelled the recruiting license of the agency concerned on charges of irregularities. The punitive action against it prior to publication of the pertinent report on the sufferings of the affected workers is an encouraging proof that the ministry is awake to one of its major tasks, which is monitoring the activities of the local recruiters. A question can be yet asked whether the particular punitive action is sufficient in view of the reported sufferings brought about by the alleged irregularities of the agency to the affected group of workers.
The ministry concerned has also meanwhile asked the labour wing of the High Commission in Kuala Lumpur to prove the allegation of maltreatment of the particular group of workers by their employers, in difference from their contractual obligations. The wing has been asked to send its report within seven days. While on-the-spot verification is supposed to suffice for collecting information from the workers to complete the prove, it is doubtful whether officials of the wing would get easy access to the relevant workplaces or the residential accommodations of the workers to talk with them. If they do not, which is more likely as the employers concerned are evidently notorious, as suggested by their behaviour with the workers, the mission may have to recourse to consultation with the host government.
Unlike foreign diplomats in Dhaka, diplomats in other places do not enjoy much access to high levels in the host countries. If the top diplomat of our Kuala Lumpur mission would ring up a big boss in the host country to talk about the problem, he may have to immediately talk about the issue with some one like the deputy assistant executive to the private secretary to that big boss. Or, he will have to hang on for a few days, if not weeks, to have an appointment with the big boss to appraise him or her about the urgent problem. Unlike us, other nations are protocol conscious. How then would they immediately resolve the problems of those suffering workers? In all likelihood, the workers would suffer for quite some time.
We have paid much attention to our national cricket on a sustained basis. If we had paid as much constructive attention to a few of our public universities, perhaps we could have attained better results in education than we have achieved in cricket. Many of our nationals could then do without going abroad for seeking fragile fortune.
A tempo could then be created for competing in knowledge with other nations. The resultant advancement at home then with education as a flourishing service sector, which would have attracted many foreign students, could ensure a cash flow to nearly equal or surpass the remittances from our expatriate workers. There could be also simultaneous economic development through rapid industrialisation and progress in other service sectors, like health care.
An enormous upsurge in growth could have precluded the need for our poor people to go abroad for doing mostly bad jobs. It is time when the ignominy of having our fellow citizens engaged in inferior jobs abroad in precarious conditions should whip us all to senses for behaving constructively in politics and all other spheres. It would alone release for us the key to enduring fortune.
ONE young reporter of a local TV channel enthusiastically claimed in one of his news reports last week, "This country offers a good opportunity for the micro-credit". What he was actually saying is that poverty is still so dismally widespread in this country that it would require micro-credit operations on a vast scale to help the poor to salvage them. Is there any room for enthusiasm in stating it?
However, if there were no poverty in this country to require him to launch his now famous micro-credit programme, Dr. Yunus might not have received the Nobel Prize for Peace. Seen in that narrow context, one may say that the dismal poverty of this country has been an opportunity for him. Similarly, apartheid or racial discrimination under the erstwhile minority white rule in South Africa, which Bishop Desmond Tutu resolutely fought, was an opportunity for him. His fight won him the Nobel Peace Prize. Without there being the cruel state system of apartheid in his country in the particular period, it is doubtful whether he could win the prize.
But poverty in this country has driven many of our fellow citizens away from their homes on employment or in search of jobs abroad. Unless we are more interested in their remittances than about themselves, we cannot say that poverty has also been a blessing in this case. They toil hard in many instances in deplorable conditions abroad. But they remit about half a billion dollar home every month now.
The Bangladesh Bank, which is elated by the higher inflow of remittances from the expatriate workers, mentions about it and also about how this has contributed to a healthy balance of payments position, in spite of the sustained trade deficit, and to a good and growing foreign exchange reserve and a comfortable macroeconomic stability.
The governor of the bank might have meanwhile read a news story in a local English daily last Sunday, which informed that some Bangladeshi workers in Malaysia are not getting their contractually agreed salaries. The greed of some local recruiting agents and some outsourcing companies in the host country has been held responsible for it. The report partly quoted from a statement, sent by the affected workers to the Bangladesh High Commissioner to Kuala Lumpur. It explains how the sordid cheating is done. According to the report, the contractual salary of a worker is Ringgit 900. But it reduces to a cash payment of Ringgit 50 to Ringgit 150 to him on deduction by the pertinent employers of expenses on account of food, accommodation, transport, light and sewerage and medical attention. The cash received by a worker at the end of the month is thus less than US $15 at the minimum and about $ 43 dollar at the maximum. About 50 per cent of Bangladeshi workers, employed by some little known companies of Malaysia are reportedly facing similar exploitation.
The governor who counts the money sent regularly by these workers when it reaches home, as we all do, has nothing to do to resolve their problems. That is not his job. He can only regret. But how far will those whose job it is to help out any group of affected workers abroad, succeed in resolving the problem? The pertinent recruiting agent in Bangladesh has been quoted as saying, "If the allegations are true, the Malaysian government will take action". The secretary to the ministry of expatriate's welfare and overseas employment also echoed a similar view. He is reported to have said, "If the allegations are found true, the Bangladesh High Commission and the Malaysian government will certainly take action".
If the genesis of the problem is looked into, it would appear that our High Commission has to share a good part of the responsibility for the sordid occurrence. A Malaysian human rights organisation has been quoted in the report as saying that the Malaysian rules required that a representative of the High Commission would inspect the prospective workplaces of the would-be workers and would give approval for their arrival on being satisfied about the conditions. How then would the mission explain and complain now about the reported ill treatment?
The ministry is said to have earlier on June 11 cancelled the recruiting license of the agency concerned on charges of irregularities. The punitive action against it prior to publication of the pertinent report on the sufferings of the affected workers is an encouraging proof that the ministry is awake to one of its major tasks, which is monitoring the activities of the local recruiters. A question can be yet asked whether the particular punitive action is sufficient in view of the reported sufferings brought about by the alleged irregularities of the agency to the affected group of workers.
The ministry concerned has also meanwhile asked the labour wing of the High Commission in Kuala Lumpur to prove the allegation of maltreatment of the particular group of workers by their employers, in difference from their contractual obligations. The wing has been asked to send its report within seven days. While on-the-spot verification is supposed to suffice for collecting information from the workers to complete the prove, it is doubtful whether officials of the wing would get easy access to the relevant workplaces or the residential accommodations of the workers to talk with them. If they do not, which is more likely as the employers concerned are evidently notorious, as suggested by their behaviour with the workers, the mission may have to recourse to consultation with the host government.
Unlike foreign diplomats in Dhaka, diplomats in other places do not enjoy much access to high levels in the host countries. If the top diplomat of our Kuala Lumpur mission would ring up a big boss in the host country to talk about the problem, he may have to immediately talk about the issue with some one like the deputy assistant executive to the private secretary to that big boss. Or, he will have to hang on for a few days, if not weeks, to have an appointment with the big boss to appraise him or her about the urgent problem. Unlike us, other nations are protocol conscious. How then would they immediately resolve the problems of those suffering workers? In all likelihood, the workers would suffer for quite some time.
We have paid much attention to our national cricket on a sustained basis. If we had paid as much constructive attention to a few of our public universities, perhaps we could have attained better results in education than we have achieved in cricket. Many of our nationals could then do without going abroad for seeking fragile fortune.
A tempo could then be created for competing in knowledge with other nations. The resultant advancement at home then with education as a flourishing service sector, which would have attracted many foreign students, could ensure a cash flow to nearly equal or surpass the remittances from our expatriate workers. There could be also simultaneous economic development through rapid industrialisation and progress in other service sectors, like health care.
An enormous upsurge in growth could have precluded the need for our poor people to go abroad for doing mostly bad jobs. It is time when the ignominy of having our fellow citizens engaged in inferior jobs abroad in precarious conditions should whip us all to senses for behaving constructively in politics and all other spheres. It would alone release for us the key to enduring fortune.