DEVELOPMENT IN THE RURAL AREA.

DAP Piasau - David Balan.
 Supported by the idealogy of Dr.John Brian.

What Jabu Says about development in the rural area? Jabu comment on, the Opposition resist the government effort to develop rural Sarawak. The Opposition is the main stumbling block and that jabu will be the champion to fight for rural Sarawak. But is this true that opposition opposed the government to develop rural Sarawak. Is this true? I say it is simply cause by the government uncaring attitude towards rural Sarawak. I provide the line of thinking below to prove the answer i provide is objective.
Firsly, we talk on timber Indusry.
Time to time again, the BN government promised to develop the rural area. First they said that logging is good for Dayak as it provides jobs. Today, forestry is  not practices is not sustainable. Large tract of land are given to timer tycoon for planting and this also have failed to live up to expectation. There are simply too many excuses given by the non performance on tree planting but no one speak about releasing the land back to government on the areas that fail to be replanted. Just by keeping land, the company would be able to derive income from it as that would act as important collateral and asset for the company. From timber logging did the rural area get to be develop? The answer is NO. Sawmill and veneer factory or timber based industry sprout up in some Sarawak town but then the main EMPLOYEE are foreign worker and NOT local population.
Second, we talk on oil Palm Plantation.Then some of these deforested timber areas are given to investor in plantation. The designated ares is develop with unfold destruction to rivers, streams, fresh water feed stock, general agriculture, soil erosion, chemical contamination of water etc. Did this plantation company benefit the rural people? These companies do not practice sustainable practice.They look for profit but then where is the schools and health clinic to support he thousand of plantation workers? Mind you, the workers are also mostly foreign workers. How did the rural people benefit and increase their income?
Third, Dam Construction. These dams are constructed in rural ares. Large track of  land are used and as we already know, it wipe out large track of NCR land and the Dayak heritage. The Dayak were forced to change  their life. Did these development brought extra income to rural people? Most of the workers are foreigners and in the actual running of the dam it is not labor intensive. James Jemut Masing advise the people of Bakun to take apportunities  from eco- tourism is Bakun and leave it at that.m Can the rural people grrasp this concept of eco -tourism business and the required knowledge and skill to do it, I doubt that very much.
Back to the story of timber industry. Did the government provide QUOTA to the rural people like 30 percent of the transportation of timber should be using Dayak barge? Where will the Dayak get the barge? Did the government insist that timber operator worker together with the care taker of the forest the Dayak and help them to earn decent income? Why can't the government stipulated a certain QUOT for Dayak busniness with Government and timber company support. Now this is history but because we never spoke of it the government never learn. Let us move to oil Palm Plantation.
The Plantation. There is so much work in infrastructure development in the plantation. The bridges, the irrigation drain, roads, etc are all business. Did the government state that business QUOTA must be given to local and that agency that encourage bumiputera must provide business capital assistance and expertise for Dayak to be involved in business.Non that i know off an the government do not have an idea on how to help rural Sarawak.
The Dams. Now we are battling the Baram dams. Why? We have seen poor management in Batang Ai and Bakun for resettled population. The Government offer is so minimal and it has no long term objective for the affected population. Promised of land remain EMPTY promises and still the population did not enjoy the electricity generated from the Dam. Did the road infra-structure improve and did the government help the Dayak to improve their income? The answer to all the above question is NO. The government cannot think of giving business opportunity to rural Dayak. The YB upon the advise of business men grab SOME opportunities and the rest is lost. Tourism need ingra-structure like good road, service industry training, capitals, skills, knowledge, marketing and promotion and a strong and continuous government involvement. Do you seriously think that the government is prepared to put in all these infra-structure to help the rural Dayak to increase their income?
The above three example is enough to highlight what the government did not do to help Dayak business and what are the possible thing that is totally within the government framework to prosper the Dayak that BN government did not do.Talking about new development so that it can help rural people is empty talk when the government has no specific plan om what course of action they must follow in order to help Dayak. All these speak volume of what BN never thought off to help the Dayak to develop in business. What is the use of NEP and Article 153 without the hand of BN government helping the people to achieve the intention of our country's independence?