NOVEMBER 6 — Birmingham is Britain’s second city in terms of population. At the height of the Industrial Revolution, it would have been just white.

Today, below 60 per cent are white, or in a different way of saying it, seeing two Indian restaurants on the same Birmingham street wouldn’t raise an eyebrow. These demographical numbers — the growth of Islamic community centres or more turban wearing folks at Aston Villa’s home games for example — will continue to shift when considering in the present almost a quarter of the million filling the city are overseas-born.

Which begs the questions, how much must the white population shrink in order to declare the metropolitan has lost its Birmingham-ness?

I ask because, population balance and identity are inseparable when discussing Malaysian. For there are self-declared purists, and they are sizeable, who believe that Malaysia has to be careful not to stop being Malaysia just by who is called a Malaysian.

Few nations are as obsessed about ethnic ratios, and I said as much in “Muthu can leave the stadium” a fortnight ago.

Today, I want to say that Malaysia is missing a massive opportunity because of it colour-race-religion hang-ups.

Malaysia’s stratagem

It’s passé to explain why positive attitudes to the right type of emigrants benefits nations. Malaysia’s in the game, but it is just in it half-hearted.

The Malaysia My Second Home programme has been ongoing for years hoping we become a Florida of the east. While it is commendable, it is hardly setting the imagination alight. A 70-year-old pensioner needs to buy a house and hold a healthy bank balance, but he’s not the 40-year-old moving a financial services unit to Port Dickson from London.

There are expatriates in the country with children, but they rarely believe they are going to make this home. More importantly, they don’t think Malaysia wants them to make this home.

There are minor gains, after decades of battle, the government allows non-national spouses to work here, but the hidden rules, policies and bureaucracies limit its attractiveness.

This is no small matter as are other disincentives, since our economic planners have accelerated efforts to seduce Singaporean families to live in Iskandar Johor.

If we want to aggressively attract talents, we actually have to be aggressive.

These younger families demand more than just landed property. Are they keen to just live and not have a word in over local municipality management? Probably not.

Many modern cities allow non-citizen ratepayers to determine their local councils, is Malaysia ready for that type of evolution?

When Malaysia is just one of the many sellers of dreams in an increasing international homes market, just ignoring the buyers’ discerning needs is an approach waiting for discord.

Compare with India which issues “Persons of Indian Origin” permits, which allows the non-nationals to do anything nationals can do — own land, start businesses, reside etc — except vote.

There is a global race for capital and capacity through immigration, half-measures won’t win the day.

The low-skilled population explosion

Separate from how to attract better prospects with better policies, the question of the eventual naturalisation of millions of low-skilled workers and refugees remains a debate our policy makers avoid.

There are about two million legal migrant workers, and the illegal ones probably are more than them. Add to that the thousands of permanent students, when they all have lived here for decades how will the country not process their citizenship sooner or later?

The state has to rather than rely on mass deportation, begin to consider how to integrate those who can be positive for the economy.

Educate their children and have responsible residents, or shunt them and risk highly volatile ghettoes.

Tough questions confront our policy makers. Framing the question better today can help them arrive at a better decision in the future.

Home, life, exodus and shelter

Nothing is straightforward these days.

Facebook founder Eduardo Saverin calls Singapore home now. Palestinian refugees have been in Jordan for decades that their generation Y cannot understand the right of return is the only future they should envision. African kids born and raised in France want to play for Algeria or Ivory Coast in the World Cup.

Gough Whitlam died last week, and his administration completed the end of White Only Australia in the mid-70s. Australia’s point of view today has shifted thanks to migration.

People in the world want to live where they want, not where they are told to live.

Fluid or not, nations know their fate is intricately tied to the quality of their residents, preferably citizens.

Because if permanent residence and later citizenship is off the table, as a valid choice, then economic migrants will not invest themselves in the country, especially those who are career or business-wise mobile.

Take for instance my sister.

She’s lived in France for the last two years. She grew up, schooled, worked and delivered two kids in Malaysia — over almost 40 years of her life. Her husband has worked away from Australia for the last 17 years. If both their years on this planet were added, Malaysia is over and above where their lives have been; indeed the only property they own is in Kuala Lumpur.

Yet, any long-term decision for the family’s future revolves around, where they are — France — and Australia.

Their children both have Malaysian passports, but the levels in which her husband can actualise his life in her country deter the family from choosing Malaysia long-term.

This is not 1961 anymore.

According to the writer, Malaysia is strategically located, with great people, and he believes the multiculturalism can only grow with newer communities. Not exploiting these to draw talent and capital to the country is misguided. — AFP pic

Malaysia has amazing weather and food. The multiculturalism can only grow with newer communities. It’s strategically located and great people. Not exploiting these to draw talent and capital to the country is misguided. Relying on limited access for migrants in places like Iskandar may struggle once the lack of wholesale adjustments — laws, social cohesion policies, dual citizenship and capital — become apparent.

There are hard questions which need answering when wanting to achieve migrant-driven economic returns. Ones any Malaysian government must tackle with honesty. If they do, the opportunity as stated is massive.

It must be reminded: Home is not where you hang your coat, it is where you forget to remember other places and plan your life.

That and this.

Malaysia like any country, must exist as an idea as much as a land with people and cars. A changing landscape becomes more engaging when you think with that cap on.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.