Millions in loans and resources have been allocated for poverty eradication programmes but these programmes lack emphasis on self-sufficiency, independence and personal development. 

YOU have often heard the saying “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.” Perhaps it is time we pay more heed to those words of wisdom, which could be a long-term solution to poverty issues in the country.  

But at the same time, we have to be realistic, that life is not as simple as that. A few pertinent questions need to be addressed first before poverty can be reduced or eradicated. 

Based on data obtained by the United Nations Development Programme in 2002, poverty is defined as a household of four to five people with an income of less than RM600. A survey conducted by the Economic Planning Unit, based on this criterion, indicates that 2% of households in urban areas are considered in the poverty group while it is 11.4% in rural areas. 

The successive Malaysia Plans have effectively reduced poverty from 16.5% in 1990 to only 5.1% in 2002. However, it seems that these statistics only cover three main races – bumiputra, Chinese and Indian. What about the minority such as the Portuguese and the “others”? Despite the vast improvement shown in statistics, there are still pockets of the destitute among the orang asli in remote areas of the country. These studies may not accurately reflect the true situation of different races with regards to poverty. 

Another thing I wish to point out is the perception that poverty reduction programmes seem to be skewed towards one group. A chart on the Poverty Rates by Ethnic Groups prepared by the Economic Planning Unit (1970 – 2002) shows that more should be done to reduce poverty across the board, covering every single minority group.  

The Government has over the decades allocated millions worth of loans and resources for poverty eradication programmes. The basis of these programmes involves doling out aid but do not seem to emphasise enough on self-sufficiency, independence and personal development.  

I have not seen any study done to track the progress of the poor after they received these loans, facilities and services. It is not only the lack of resources which have caused the poverty-stricken to be where they are. If they receive assistance, there is a need for a “hand-holding” process after that to ensure they learn to be self-sufficient long after the initial funds run out. 

I believe the best long-term solution would be to invest the millions in training them to have easily-gained and economically worthy skills and in providing education for their children.  

Those living in poverty could be specifically identified and sponsored for skill-specific short courses to gain employment in the service, manufacturing or industrial sectors. Most of these courses have very low academic entry points and come with financial loans. Among the possible areas for the rural poor to look into would be eco-tourism and agro-tourism.  

The Government has extensive training facilities as well as huge fund allocations for skills training programmes managed by the Human Resources Ministry and the Youth and Sports Ministry. But more often than not, those living in poverty and their children are totally unaware of these opportunities available to them. 

All these efforts should be done impartially to any ethnic group, with more reach extended to remote rural areas and with more focus on self-sufficiency. Otherwise, we are only donating fish to the poor. 

Datuk Clement Hii is Executive Deputy Chairman of LLL Lifelong Learning Network Sdn Bhd which promotes and coordinates lifelong learning among Malaysians.”