Monday, 30 September 2013

URBAN POVERTY & COMMUNITY RESPONSES

Progress Report (June to September 2013)

ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT

1          Discussion session                                         
A series of 8 discussions we organised:- Big gathering on June 2, 2013 at Dignity International PJ.  Follow up discussions:- June 19 on developing a monitoring mechanism (UKM).  All other discussions at GII, Brickfields, KL.  On June 23, 2013 on Crime & gangs; also on poverty & low income. On June 30 on Human rights & democracy; also on income generation opportunities. On 7 July, 2013 on education & a review meeting.  

2        Blog                                                                
 A blog was created to post basic information:- http://forumonurbanpoverty.blogspot.com/

3          Field Visits                                                      
A  series of 5 field visits to urban poor flat neighbourhoods were organised:- On July 21, 2013 to Sri Pulai Flats at Balakong; on July 29, 2013 Simpang Lima Tamil School; on August 25, 2013 to Desa Mentari (Block 10); on Sept 8, 2013 at KRT Rumah Pangsa, Taman Harmoni, Buntong; on Sept 25, 2013 visit to Temeggong Flats, Kulai & meeting EWRF Kulai district.

4          Field Visits                                                      
Dialogue with agencies – on August 27, 2013 visit and dialogue with Crime Prevention Department at Bukit Aman. Sept 18, 2013 presentation of the UKM urban poor neighbourhood study to JPNIN Director General at IKLIN, Nilai (9 neighbourhoods)

GENERAL FINDINGS
1          Urban poor – Flat dweller in low cost flats      
A
majority of low income and urban poor families reside in high rise flats. These are high density neighbourhoods with large numbers of Indian families living within walking distance of each other.

2          Needy Communities                                        
These are the most ‘needy communities’ but very few voluntary organisations working at the neighbourhood level in building the local community leadership & capacity building ie building self-help, self-reliance and self-empowerment (citizens’ rights & responsibilities, democracy, human rights & voters rights). There seems to be lots of conflicts at the neighbourhood level and not cohesive communities.

3          Multiple level interventions needed                 
Multiple level intervention is needed including family counselling and support; neighbourhood organisation; assistance toward educational achievement (preschool to post-secondary); skills training and character development to the academically weak; business training, access to credit; employment opportunities; citizens empowerment program (human rights, democracy, legal rights & advocacy); confidence building & awareness to access public sector services

4          Structural Issues                                             
These communities are impacted by many structural neglect and inadequate public facilities (absence of local government elections, lack of halls, community facilities, infrastructure weakness such as maintenance issues as  they must pay for the services and very little public funding to maintain public space unlike rural districts.

5          Public sector disconnect                                 
Public agencies do not have a good appreciation of the urban poor Indian complex situation as it tends to be mono cultural officers on cultural, history of disadvantage, understanding of socio-psychology make up of local communities

Public agencies and institutions don’t have a good presence at these neighbourhood a problem similar to Malay communities except that local authorities tends to provide space for Surau, a kindergarten managed by Kemas and a meeting room for residence committee. Malay communities seem to be better connected with the public sector services and seem better organised at the local community level.

6          NGO weakness                                    
NGOs lack of coordination and cooperation among them each doing their projects with little cumulative impact at the grassroots.

7          Wrong expectations                                        
NGO activity seems to come from outside and the urban poor residents tend to have become passive recipients. Lots of expectation for ‘hand outs’ and also a deep sense of disconnect with other communities and especially of provisions of the government (lacking awareness, confidence to access services)

FUTURE POSSIBILITIES

1          Focus of this informal network                        
This informal network of concern citizens to focus on urban poor neighbourhoods and seek to mobilise voluntary support, facilitate NGO coordination and not duplicate the services, access public sector provision and undertake impact assessment and documentation.

2          New Structure ?                                              
Is there a need to form a NEW Society to coordinate these efforts? Need for funding for sustainability of this project. The current work is coordinated as an action research project of KITA-UKM

3          New Networking                                              
Ministry of Youth & Sports (KBS) has launched a socio economic agenda to assist high risk youths in crime and gangs through counselling, intervention at schools, skills training, micro credit and micro business development, participation in youth organisations and sports and games. A pilot project will be launch at 2 to 3 urban poor neighbourhoods in WPKL and we could assist this initiative. Project is undertaken as a national project and target oriented from a community based intervention strategy.
Our informal group could recruit the support of all Indian based organisations to be partners with KBS

4          New Networking                                              
Department of National Unity & Integration (JPNIN) has asked KITA-UKM to assist in the solving of the problems identified in the first phase of the study at 9 urban poor neighbourhoods. The effort here is to work with the local RT leaders and liaise with all the relevant agencies to solve local problems. Also to mobilise the local community within in a ‘Program Sayangi Komuniti’
Our informal group could mobilise all Indian based social organisations with their specific focus to assist in the reach out to Indian families in the above two projects. If we link up we might be able to reach out to about 10 to 12 densely populated neighbourhoods

---------------------------------
Reflections by Datuk Dr Denison Jayasooria. Principal Research Fellow, Institute of Ethnic Studies (KITA), UKM

No comments:

Post a Comment