Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud said that the state government was not prepared to open its doors to workers from the peninsula ("S'wak against opening its doors to workers from peninsula", Oct 31). No substantive explanation was given for this view except the need to preserve Sarawak state rights and to protect local workers.

When Sarawak merged with Malaya, Sabah and Singapore to form Malaysia in 1963, it had legitimate fears that it would be disadvantaged by the merger. In recognition of these legitimate fears, the architects of Malaysia agreed to accord certain safeguards on religion, education, language, and immigration to Sarawak. (These safeguards were also granted to Sabah.)

Sarawak was also granted more autonomy over politics and finance compared with the other states of Peninsular Malaysia.

Over the last four decades however, most of these safeguards have been abrogated as both Sabah and Sarawak have become more confident of their achievements and skills, largely due to rapid development achieved under the leadership of the Barisan Nasional government. And overall, Malaysia has benefitted as a result.

Yet, after nearly 40 years of being an integral part of Malaysia, the Sarawak Chief Minister still wants to maintain state control over immigration. For someone who is often quoted in the Sarawak press as encouraging Sarawakians to embrace the new reality of a globalised world, this is a strange statement.

After all, does not a globalised world that embraces free trade also embrace the free movement of workers? The European Union already practises this new reality. So, why not Malaysia?

While I can understand the continued need for immigration controls over international borders in a globalised world, why should there be immigration controls exerted on Malaysian citizens within Malaysia? Maybe the safeguards enacted in 1963 were relevant then. But are they still relevant today? After all, Sarawak today is hardly the Sarawak of 1963!

Statistics show that the present flow of workers is not from Peninsular Malaya to Sarawak, rather it is the reverse. The Borneo Post (June 24, 1999) reported that "For years, the issue of West Malaysians moving to East Malaysia remains a sticky one but the reality of today is that a reverse migration of Sabahans and Sarawakians to the peninsula is on the rise, auguring well for national integration."

The same report noted that in 1997, 12,347 Sarawakians left the state and moved to Peninsular Malaysia while only 8,951 persons from the latter moved into Sarawak. Indeed, more Sarawakians could have moved to the peninsula than has been reported since Sarawakians migrating to West Malaysia for work or for good do not have to undergo immigration controls on their arrival.

Note that the report said that reverse migration is "on the rise". Thus, the reverse migration figures today are likely higher than what is noted above.

Sarawak has already attained a high level of development achievement as well as a good quality of life. It enjoys rapid economic growth and political stability. With these prevailing conditions, surely more unrestricted internal migration will also encourage and promote national integration.

So, what gives? Why is the Sarawak Chief Minister so adamant to protect Sarawak's right to immigration controls when the facts show that Sarawak does not face any threat of worker inundation from the peninsula? Is the Sarawak Chief Minister saying that he is not interested in promoting national integration? I am sure he wants national integration. So, perhaps he has been misquoted by the press.

As someone who believes that unrestricted internal migration promotes national integration and benefits the country, I strongly urge the government to remove immigration controls on Malaysian citizens entering Sarawak. Immigration controls should only be maintained for international arrivals.