Home, away from home

THERE may be ‘some problem at home’ judging by the recent public spat between three tourism ministers, one federal and two states (The Borneo Post June 8, and thesundaypost, June 9, 2024).

There may be more than meets the eye: possibly, policy differences or poor policy alignment between the ministries.

Unless there is some satisfactory explanation to the contrary, we shall assume there are some rough patches between the policymakers. Any policy deviance must be realigned soon, for the sake of the tourism industry in Malaysia.

The bone of contention is the Malaysia My Second Home (MM2H) programme, which allows well-heeled foreigners to settle down in Malaysia for their retirement.

According to the federal Tourism, Arts and Culture Minister (MoTAC) Datuk Seri Tiong King Sing, there have been ‘prevailing problems of agents subleasing their (MM2H) permits, or disappearing with collected agency fees (thesundaypost – June 6, 2024).

This state of affairs came to light when Datuk Christina Liew, the minister in charge of tourism in Sabah, was openly questioning the decision of MoTAC in not allowing the registration of new agents for Sabah-MM2H programme.

Sabah was all geared up to launch the programme on June 1, but that circular from MoTAC dated May 31, 2024, had ‘derailed’ it.

A blow below the belt, to say the least.

The ruling

The MoTAC’s ruling must have also affected similar programme in Sarawak in terms of registration of agents.

Judging by the general tone of the statement made by Sarawak’s Minister for Tourism, Creative Industry and Performing Arts Dato Sri Abdul Karim Rahman Hamzah, the impression one gets is that there has been some unfair pressure on the state ministry to toe the federal line.

“They haven’t changed, have they?”

When I was with the Tourism Development Corporation (TDC) in the early 1970s, I had problems with the lobbyists – tour operators in Peninsular Malaysia – who insisted on diverting all foreign tourists to Kuala Lumpur, Melaka and Penang, and to Singapore or Bali.

There was little thought for the needs of Sabah and Sarawak at the time, for reasons of poor air connectivity to Borneo and lack of publicity on tourism products overseas.

That should not be the problem now, but the bias against the Borneo states does not seem to have gone.

There should not have been any problem had MoTAC consulted Sabah and Sarawak over the relatively simple procedure of registering agents, and keeping them under control if necessary.

Ministries do have these powers!

I agree with the Honourable Minister on this score.

Every state or region of Malaysia wants a piece of the tourism pie – a good source of revenue for the country.

The MM2H, initiated by the federal government in 2002, is a special tourism product. It is called by the grand name ‘My Second Home’ in order to attract foreigners with money, but who do not know what to do with it.

They wish to retire and reside in Malaysia, among other countries, for an extended period, say, not more than 10 years, then back home, ‘First Home’, or go elsewhere.

The visa is a tourist visa capable of being renewed with certain conditions tailored to the needs of the individuals within the validity period of their international passports.

It is a good scheme for any region in Malaysia because the foreigner brings money to the local economy. He does not rely on the welfare system of the host country (Malaysia), and should he need medical services, he will go to the (pricey) private hospitals.

He buys his own food and other provisions, eats out at the local food outlets, pays for his own transport, and supports himself with his own money.

These people, mostly 50 years old and above, have their own funds from the proceeds of insurance policies or pensions, and other sources acquired overseas.

They buy cars or hire vehicles, buy houses or condominiums or apartments – good business for the local real-estate companies.

Those below the age of 35 years often have a child in a Malaysian school; the fees are paid for by the parents.

Not a financial burden to Malaysia at all.

Before they were accepted to retire or reside in any part of this country, the applicants to participate in the MM2H had undergone a full examination or vetting in terms of health, security and the like.

Into Sarawak or Sabah, they had to go through the routine checks at the Immigration counters. Each resident under the scheme must have a clean criminal record before he or she is allowed to live in the country.

The ones whom I know love Sarawak so much for a number of reasons. They say that it is a peaceful place. There are several advantages too: from Sarawak, they can travel any time they like to Singapore, Peninsular Malaysia (Melaka), Indonesia (Bali), Thailand, Vietnam, the Philippines, Cambodia, Myanmar, or India or Pakistan or China.

And they always come back to the oasis of tranquillity – their second home in Kuching, Sibu, Bintulu or Miri.

Perhaps, they lavish all the praise on their host country to please me – I don’t know. I think they are being sincere about being happy here.

The public quarrel between the ministers rather worries them.

The messages that they send home to their family members or friends is free advertisement for Malaysia as a tourism destination. Malaysia, now No 5 out of 10 countries being most favoured by the foreigners in which to retire or live.

If there is a problem with the MM2H programme because of new regulations and policies oriented towards Peninsular Malaysian states, perhaps it is time to think of a separate scheme for each region – one for the peninsula, one for Sabah, and one for Sarawak.

After all, the purpose of the whole scheme is the same: the pursuit of the tourist’s dollar, whether he stays here for a week, or for 10 years.

Competition is not necessarily bad for the industry without chimneys.

* The opinions expressed in this article are the columnist’s own and do not reflect the view of the newspaper.