In 1970, 49.3% of Malaysians were poor but, according to the Economic Planning Unit (EPU), government initiatives managed to reduce it to 0.4% in 2016. That is a magnificent achievement, of course, and Malaysia has won praise for it.

In terms of ethnicity, the percentage of Bumiputeras classified as poor in 1970 was 64.8% but this figure dropped drastically to 0.5% by 2016. For the Chinese it was 26.0% (in 1970) and 0.1% (in 2016); for the Indians it was 39.2% (1970) and 0.1% (2016) and for those classified as Others it was 44.8% (1970) and 1.5% (2016).

Magnificent indeed. What a success!

In fact an EPU report titled “Malaysia Success Story in Poverty Eradication”, updated on April 18, 2017, says:

“As a result of continuous Government efforts supported with resilient and sustainable economic growth, hard core or extreme poverty among all ethnic groups, based on national poverty line measures has been virtually eliminated with the overall incidence of hard core poverty reduced significantly from 6.9% in 1989 to 0.1% in 2014. The incidence of general poverty also reduced tremendously from 49.3% in 1970 to 0.6% in 2014….

“In terms of extreme poverty, which is measured by the proportion of people living on less than US$1.25 a day, Malaysia has registered zero level. Even with the use of US$2 a day, which is commonly used by middle income countries, only 0.7% of the Malaysian households in 2014 were deemed poor.”

Magnificent indeed. What a success!

In terms of the states, if we look at Selangor, the richest state, according to the EPU the incidence of poverty in 1970 was 29.2% but in 2016 it was 0%.

Magnificent indeed. What a success!

But try telling that to Kanmani Chinapan of Selangor. Or to people like Ansan Othman of Kampung Manis in Perai, Penang, and the woman called Ng in Kampung Sinompuru, Sabah.

Kanmani, at only 48, is taking care of six grandchildren all under 12 in Sungai Buloh estate, about 5km from the Pantai Remis coastline, in Jeram, Selangor. According to a report in FMT yesterday, they live in squalid conditions, with the overpowering stench of a blocked toilet, mouldy walls, leaking roof and rubbish strewn around the house.

She has been forced to take care of the grandchildren because her son and his wife, together with her daughter, had been arrested two months ago for drug-related offences.

Their meals, the FMT report says, consists mostly of crackers dipped in watered down curry.

And I understand that there are several more families living in that very condition in that very same estate in the state where, official statistics show, there is zero poverty.

Penang, too, which boasts of being developed has pockets of poor. On Jan 17, 2018, The Star reported about Kampung Manis in Perai and how poor the 1,000 or so residents were despite being right smack in an area of development.

This is one village that I had personally gone to several times in the 1980s and 1990s – and written about. Apparently hardly anything has changed.

The report spoke about grass cutter R Gunasegaran lamenting that his house would turn into an “island” during downpours. It quoted fisherman Ansan Othman as complaining about the floods and the lack of electricity, despite the fact that the Prai power plant is nearby – something that I had highlighted in the 1980s.

This Jan 22, The Sabah Times wrote about one 66-year-old granny named Ng living in abject poverty in a dilapidated house in Kampung Sinompuru on the west coast of Sabah.

The report quoted a resident who lives in the area and who is helping Ng as saying: “I was stunned to discover how she has been living in a dilapidated house; holes all over the walls of the house, tree sprouting inside the house itself, no electricity and even water!”

So, are the statistics lying? One can perhaps argue that Kanmani, Gunasegaran, Ansan and Ng fall under the 24,700 households that the mid-term review of the 11th Malaysia Plan says earn less than RM980.

But, having been on the field for so many years, I believe that statistics do not accurately portray ground conditions. Also, statistics can, and often are, massaged to make the government of the day look good.

I believe 24,700 is a very, very conservative figure. I hope it is not a massaged figure.

It is, therefore, good that the Pakatan Harapan government has decided not to confine itself to measuring poverty using the old Poverty Line Income method but is also planning to use the Multidimensional Poverty Index which takes into account non-income factors such as health and education.

More importantly, the government must ensure that whatever support and opportunities it offers to the poor should reach the target groups.

We can easily see the vicious poverty cycle at work in the estate in Jeram. The FMT story corroborates what most of us know or have heard of: poverty is the kinsman of drugs, early marriages, domestic violence, poor education and gangsterism.

The report quotes social activist Revathy Karunanithy, who has been helping Kanmani and others in the estate, as saying that most of the children stop schooling after Standard 6, start working in the estates, are lured into gangsterism and start taking or selling drugs at an early age; and the girls get married as young as 12.

Revathy said something very telling, and scary: “They think it is normal to live this way. Which, for them, it is.”

Whenever a story of this nature appears in the media the many kind Malaysians tend to respond generously and it is no different this time: already several readers have contacted FMT to ask for Kanmani’s address. I believe the welfare department would visit the family too.

This is, of course, commendable. But it will not solve the problem in the long term. The problem is not that we do not have policies and plans – we have many of these.

Better brains than mine have offered solutions to the problem of poverty so I will only say here that proper implementation and monitoring of these plans would help tremendously, as would a sincere pursuit of poverty eradication without politics in mind. And, yes, those implementing the measures should remember that poverty does not recognise race or religion.

Grassroots groups, penghulus and village security and development committees can be roped in to more effectively identify the poor in their areas and monitor implementation of programmes.

And the government’s overall poverty eradication policy should be anchored on this clichéd but useful quote: “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.”

A Kathirasen is executive editor at FMT.

The views expressed by the writer to not necessarily reflect those of FMT.