Thursday, December 28, 2006

Sign online petition against unfair toll hike!

Please sign online petition to register your strongest disagreement to the unfair toll hike in GCE, Karak Highway, Kesas Highway, LDP and Cheras-Kajang Highway with effective from 1st January 2007.

English version:
Malay version:

Sign it as soon as possible and spread the words around so that we can create a huge force in the internet to force the government to defer the hike!

Every signature counts! We need to collect as many signatures as possible in the shortest time to exert pressure on the Ministry and the UMNO-led government. The petition will eventually be submitted to the Ministry if we have collected enough number of signatures, say 10,000 signatures!

Monday, December 25, 2006

Floods in Segamat, the aftermath

Johari, wake up and do your work

I cannot agree more with Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Mohd Johari Baharum when he said that snatch thefts usually occurewhen the victims carry expensive handbags and wear clothes that invite trouble.

Although I agree with him that snatch thieves will normally target on those who are careless with their properties, women who carry expensive handbags and clothes shall not be blamed for snatch thefts.

More to say, most snatch thieves are not interested on the handbags but the monies and expensive items in the handbags such as handphone etc.

To say so is equal to asking the women not to dress sexily as they could be raped.

Certainly, those who believe so have barked up the wrong tree as the main problem is not the women or the victims but the enforcement.

Johari as Deputy Internal Security Minister whose Ministry is in charge of the Royal Malaysia Police Force should not run away from his duty and responsibility to enhance social security level in this country. He should not put the blame on women when the problem is not with the victims but the law enforcement unit.

I remember what DAP MP Chong Eng said once in a country of law and order, you cannot rape a woman even when she is naked on the street.

Come on, Johari, wake up and do your work.


Public blamed for snatch thefts

THE public is partly to be blamed for snatch thefts, said Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Mohd Johari Baharum.

He said snatch thefts usually occurred when the victims were careless with their property.

“Such an attitude gives snatch thieves the opportunity to strike,” he said when replying to a question from Senator Siw Chun Eam.

Earlier, while replying to a question from Senator Datuk Rizuan Abd Hamid on snatch thefts, Mohamad Johari also placed the blame on women.

“Sometimes, women like to carry expensive handbags and wear clothes that invite trouble,” he said.

Meanwhile, Finance Ministry parliamentary secretary Datuk Dr Hilmi Yahya told the Dewan Negara that the Government had spent RM8bil on oil subsidies this year.

He said that although oil prices had dropped to US$60 (RM213) per barrel, the Government still spent a lot to subsidise petroleum-based products.

“Besides that, the Government also has to give RM8bil in tax exemption, which made the total oil subsidies RM16bil this year,” he said.

Saturday, December 23, 2006

Online petition to protest against the unfair toll hike

In lieu of the recent toll hike announcement by the Minister of Works, the DAP Petaling Jaya Action Team (PJAT) today officially launch an online petition to register our strongest protest against it.

The petition in English is accessible through while the Malay version is accessible through

The UMNO-led Government had announced tolls will be increased in five main highways in Klang Valley with effective from 1st January 2007.

These five highways are Guthrie Corridor Expressway (GCE), Shah Alam Highway (KESAS), Damansara-Puchong Highway (LDP), Kuala Lumpur-Karak Highway and Cheras-Kajang Highway.

The recent 20%-60% toll rates hike must be condemned as it is of no difference from “highway robbery in broad daylight that sells out” the rights of motorists, consumers and ordinary Malaysians to big corporations, especially when the construction cost does not appear to justify the toll rates to be paid as follows:-

• RM 1.42 billion Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong (LDP) with a concession period of 1996-2030, its toll rate rise from RM1 to RM1.60, an increase of 60 percent.
• RM 1.3 billion Kesas Highway with a concession period of 1993-2024, the toll rate increased from RM1.50 to RM2.20, a 46.7-percent hike.
• RM 336 million Cheras-Kajang Highway's with a concession period of 1995-2026, the toll rate increased by 30 cents - a hike of between 42.9 and 50 percent.
• RM 568 million Kuala Lumpur-Karak Highway with a concession period of 1994-2032, its toll rate increased between 20 and 25 percent; and
• RM 501 million Guthrie Corridor Expressway with a concession period of 2005-2035, its toll rate went up from RM1 to RM1.40 - a 40-percent increase.

The petition is to register our dissatisfactions over the toll hike when it is proven that the service quality provided by the concessionaires is unacceptable and unjustifiable for a toll hike. Everyday, thousands of users of the highways often endure congestion at toll plazas which is a nightmare for motorists. It is outrageous that motorists in Klang Valley have to pay increased toll rates when there are in fact more traffic jams, poorer services and deterioration of roads on the highways.

The petition is also to press for a full and complete review of such unfair privatization concession agreements, or demand that road tax be reduced to reflect the reduced financial commitments by the UMNO-led Government to building roads.

In September 2004, Works Minister, Datuk Seri Samy Vellu said the UMNO-led Government had paid out RM 1.04 billion in compensation to highway concessionaires as part of efforts to offset toll increment over a five-year period from 1999.

Therefore, the petition suggests that instead of compensating these concessionaires untransparently in 5 to 6 years time in 2011 – 2013, it is more economically feasible to buy back the highways at cost, which would not only save the highway operators from going bankrupt, but also ensure a reasonable toll rate for all motorists as well as good service that is accountable to everyone.

In the petition, we would like to remind the UMNO-led Government that they should not abuse the huge mandate given by the people to the UMNO-led Government during the last General Election. When the Prime Minister pledged for a clean, effective and people-oriented government, he must make sure he and his Cabinet really walk the talk.

Therefore in our petition, we also demand that the UMNO-led Government must respect public opinion by agreeing to a deferment of the unfair toll hike to allow for a full public study and understanding of its socio-economic and long-term implications of the toll hike.

For those who share the same aspirations with us, please also send this message to the relevant government authorities and highway concessionaires to protest against the unfair toll hike. Their telephone numbers and email addresses are as followed:

1. Guthrie Corridor Expressway: 603 - 6038 5052, 603 - 6038 5270,
2. KESAS Hotline: 603-5633 7188, email:
3. LDP Hotline: 603-7494 7333, 603-7494 7020, 603-7494 7000, email:
4. MTD Capital: 603-6120 3322, 09-233 0100,
5. Grand Saga Hotline: 603-9075 0505
6. Dato Seri S. Samy Vellu, Ministry of Works, 603-27714004,
7. Dato' Syed Jamal bin Syed Jaafar, Secretary-General of the Ministry of Works, 603-27714020,
8. Malaysia Highway Authority (Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia), 603-8737 3000 / 8738 3000,





• 耗资14.2亿令吉的白蒲大道的特许经营权是1999至2030年,过路费从1令吉调高至1.60令吉,涨幅达60%。
• 耗资3.36亿令吉的蕉赖加影大道的特许经营权是1995至2026年,过路费调高30仙,涨幅达49.2至50%。
• 耗资5.68亿令吉的加叻大道的特许经营权是1994至2032年,过路费涨幅达20至25%。
• 耗资5.01亿令吉的牙直利大道的特许经营权是2005至2035年,过路费从1令吉调高至1.40令吉,涨幅达40%。

这份请愿书也要传达我们对这些特许经营权大道公司不合理及不能接受的服务素质是。每一天,数以万计的大道使用者必须在大道和收费站忍受塞车之苦。令人难以接受的是,当驾车人士从1月1日开始必须缴付更高的过路费时,驾车人士却同时必须忍受越来越严重的交通阻塞、越来越恶劣的服务素质和路面状况,耽误驾车人士宝贵的时间。 这份请愿书也要求政府公开政府和私营公司所签署的特许经营权合约,要不然政府应该降低路税,因为随着更多私营大道出现,表示政府所需承担的‘建路’责任自然降低。





1. 牙直立走廊:603 - 6038 5052、603 - 6038 5270,电邮
2. 莎亚南大道:603-5633 7188,电邮
3. 白蒲大道:603-7494 7333,603-7494 7020,603-7494 7000,电邮
4. MTD资本:603-6120 3322、09-233 0100
5. Grand Saga葛兰赛佳公司:603-9075 0505
6. 工程部长拿督斯里三美威鲁:603-27714004,电邮
7. 工程部总秘书Dato' Syed Jamal bin Syed Jaafar:603-27714020,电邮
8. 马来西亚大道局:603-8737 3000 / 8738 3000,电邮

Friday, December 22, 2006









Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Satu lagi kes penyalahgunaan kuasa oleh pegawai-pegawai PBT

Majlis Perbandaran Subang Jaya (MPSJ) harus mengambil tindakan disiplin terhadap dua orang penguatkuasanya, iaitu Abu Samat bin Harun dan Encik Mohd Redzuan bin Azizan.

Pada 13hb November 2006, kedua-dua orang pegawai ini berada di TAK Engineering Work yang beralamat di No. 62, Jalan SS14/2A, 47500 Subang Jaya, Selangor untuk menyemak lesen perniagaannya. Pada masa itu, tuanpunya kedai, iaitu Encik Chan Chee Tak tiada di dalam kedai dan hanya isterinya, Puan Lee Siew Fong dan anaknya Cik Chan Choy Lee yang berada dalam kedai.

Oleh kerana permohonan lesen perniagaan Encik Chan masih dalam pemprosesan, maka atas permintaan kedua-dua orang pegawai ini, Cik Chan Choy Lee telah menunjukkan satu dokumen daripada MPSJ yang bernombor siri MPSJ.186/9/7-330BSJ. Walaupun begitu, kedua-dua orang pegawai ini tidak mengiktiraf dokumen ini dan mengatakan bahawa mereka akan mengeluarkan saman kepada tuanpunya atas sebab menjalankan perniagaan tanpa memohon lesen daripada MPSJ.

Cik Chan Choy Lee kemudian tidak berpuas hati dengan tindakan kedua-dua orang pegawai ini dan bertelingkah dengan mereka dengan mengatakan bahawa surat daripada MPSJ itu sebenarnya telah menjelaskan bahawa lesen perniagaan telahpun dikeluarkan kepada mereka dan apa yang berlaku sekarang ialah mereka masih menunggu lesen perniagaan itu untuk dikeluarkan kepada mereka. Kedua-dua pegawai ini tidak menghiraukan penerangan cik Chan Choe Lee dan terus mengeluarkan kata-kata kesat dengan mengugut untuk membunuhnya dan meminta Puan Lee Siew Fong untuk menghisap kemaluan suaminya, iaitu Encik Chan Chee Tak.

Encik Chan Chee Tak kemudian telah membuat laporan polis berkenaan dengan kejadian yang tidak adil ini. Perisitiwa ini juga pernah dibangkitkan oleh Encik Chan Chee Tak sendiri dengan pegawai-pegawai atasan MPSJ tetapi mereka masih belum memohon maaf daripada Encik Chan Chee Tak.

Saya juga telah mengefaks dan mengemel satu surat kepada MPSJ pada 1hb Disember 2006 untuk meminta MPSJ memberi satu penjelasan terhadap perkara ini. Saya juga menyebut dalam surat saya itu supaya satu surat minta maaf rasmi boleh dikeluarkan dalam masa dua minggu kepada Encik Chan Chee Tak supaya Encik Chan Chee Tak boleh membatalkan kes ini dengan pihak Polis. Sehingga sekarang, saya masih belum menerima apa-apa berita ataupun panggilan telefon daripada MPSJ.

Ini sudah pasti merupakan satu peristiwa yang mengecewakan dan boleh dikatakan bahawa kita seringkali mendengar kejadian penyalahgunaan kuasa oleh pegawai-pegawai PBT tetapi ini mungkin merupakan kali pertama apabila seseorang peguatkuasa MPSJ sanggup mengeluarkan kata-kata kesat yang begitu tidak sopan untuk memalukan pembayar cukai.

Saya menyeru supaya MPSJ memandang serious terhadap peristiwa ini dan memohon maaf daripada Encik Chan Chee Tak, isterinya dan anak perempuannya kerana tindakan kedua-dua orang penguatkuasa ini sebenarnya telah melanggari Kanun Keseksaan.

Saya juga ingin memuji Encik Chan Chee Tak atas keberaniannya untuk berdiri memperjuangkan haknya sendiri apabila beliau telah dilayani dengan tidak adil. Saya juga berharap orang ramai dapat mencontohi Encik Chan Chee Tak atas keberaniannya dan berharap mana-mana individu yang dilayani dengan tidak adil oleh mana-mana pegawai PBT tidak mendiamkan diri tetapi tampil ke hadapan untuk menegakkan keadilan.


梳邦再也市议会应该采取纪律行动对付两名执法组官员。这两名官员是 Abu Samat bin Harun和Encik Mohd Redzuan bin Azizan.

在2006年11月13日,这两名官员前往TAK Engineering Work(地址:No. 62, Jalan SS14/2A, 47500 Subang Jaya, Selangor)检查该商店的商业执照。当时,店主(陈智德先生/Chan Chee Tak)不在,负责看管店内事务的是陈智德的妻子Lee Siew Fong女士和他的女儿Chan Choy Lee。







Monday, December 18, 2006











Sunday, December 17, 2006




开路委员会也抗议大马大道局、经营蕉赖加影大道的Grand Saga大道公司及发展商,虽早已在2005年10月知晓此事,却无诚意解决封路事件,导致居民成为牺牲品。






不过,在集会结束后,部分居民依然留在现场,在雪州宣传秘书刘永山的带动之下,情绪高涨地高呼“buka jalan” 等开路口号。1小时半后,人群才慢慢离开现场。

蕉赖皇冠镇(Makhota Cheras)位于蕉赖吉隆坡大道旁边,是一个新兴的住宅区,拥有一条连接蕉赖吉隆坡大道的新路。由于连接处是在收费站之后,因此这条新路可以让蕉赖皇冠镇及双溪龙镇(Bandar Sungai Long)的居民,避开其中一个蕉赖吉隆坡大道收费站的情况下,使用该大道。

不过,虽然该新路已经建竣,蕉赖皇冠镇居民也已经迁入,但是Grand Saga大道公司却要皇冠镇发展商作出赔偿,否则不得开放该新路。双方之间的纷争导致该新路迟迟未开放,居民被迫通过双溪龙镇进入蕉赖吉隆坡大道,不仅需要缴付多一个收费站的收费,还得面对堵车的问题。






委员会也抗议大马大道局、经营蕉赖加影大道的Grand Saga大道公司及发展商,虽早已在2005年10月知晓此事,却无诚意解决封路事件,导致居民成为牺牲品。


蕉赖皇冠镇(Makhota Cheras)位于蕉赖吉隆坡大道旁边,是一个新兴的住宅区,拥有一条连接蕉赖吉隆坡大道的新路。由于连接处是在收费站之后,因此这条新路可以让蕉赖皇冠镇及双溪龙镇(Bandar Sungai Long)的居民,避开其中一个蕉赖吉隆坡大道收费站的情况下,使用该大道。

不过,虽然该新路已经建竣,蕉赖皇冠镇居民也已经迁入,但是Grand Saga大道公司却要皇冠镇发展商作出赔偿,否则不得开放该新路。双方之间的纷争导致该新路迟迟未开放,居民被迫通过双溪龙镇进入蕉赖吉隆坡大道,不仅需要缴付多一个收费站的收费,还得面对堵车的问题。

Saturday, December 16, 2006








梳邦与沙阿南消费人协会主席兼法律顾问杰克(Jacob George):“它再次证实消费人的担忧,即政府与大道特许经营公司签订的合约,是完全偏向一方的。消费者的利益完全不受考虑。”

大马消费人联合会(Fomca)宣传主任莫哈末尤索夫(Mohd Yusof Abdul Rahman):“联合会反对大道涨价,我们重复要求政府公开大道特许经营权合约,这些合约对消费人利益不利。政府应成立皇家调查委员会,检讨所有大道和约。”


大马职工总会(MTUC)主席赛沙里尔(Syed Shahrir Syed Mohamad):“我想政府指消费人必须向大道公司作出赔偿的说法并不公平,是谁草拟合约?谁在怪谁?没有人知道合约里的内容。公众有权利知道合约内容,你高谈透明度,那公众就有权利知道所有的资料。我想公众应该认真行动,你不能让这个政府涨了又涨。”









其次,政府应主动公开所有私营化大道和约,让人民了解到底政府和私人公司所签下不平等和约的内容 ,并自由让人民发表意见看法,以解决这些问题。其中在上面的引述中,各阶层人士均有提出数个相当不错的建议,如设立皇家调查委员会、设立独立监督小组监督大道公司的收费和投资、献议政府以成本价格收购高速大道等等,为何政府不能正面看待这些建议,反之却要求媒体低调报道此事?这完全不符合首相初上台要听真话的承诺。


Wednesday, December 13, 2006










Do you have vested interest, Dr Wong??

A group of six residents from Jalan 20/24, Tama n Paramount yesterday attended a public hearing held by the Department of Town Planning of Petaling Jaya City Hall (Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya, MBPJ) which was chaired by Dato’ Haji Mohd Mokhtar bin Haji Ahmad Dahlan, the Selangor State Government Exco for Housing, Building and Squatters Management, on the 23 proposed draft amendment on the Petaling Jaya Structure Plan 1 (Rancangan Tempatan Petaling Jaya 1, or RTPJ1).

The residents had voiced out their angers to MBPJ and its councilor, YB Datuk Dr Wong Sai Hou, who is also the MCA State Asemblyman for Kampung Tunku on two reasons below:

1. that the council ignore the will of the residents to grant approval to the developer to construct a two-storey service centre in Lot PT 6947 of Jalan 20/24 of Section 20, although the residents had officially voiced out their disagreement with the Council twice, one in late 2003 and another one in late 2005.

2. that the council is trying to put the horse before the cart when they allow the construction to kick off without amending the structure plan. The draft proposal to amend the structure plan so that that plot of land can be converted form housing purpose to build service centre is made much later.

On 1st September 2006, Petaling Jaya City Hall or Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya (MBPJ) released its proposed draft changes on PJ Local Structure Plan (RTPJ1). City folks are given one-month time to view and raise their objections with the City Hall before 29th September 2006.

There are altogether 23 changes proposed by the City Hall in which I had briefly elaborated on the changes in my statement issued on 26th September 2006.

Of all these changes proposed I would like to focus on item Number 18 (the conversion of Lot PT 6947 of Jalan 20/24 of Section 20 from Housing purpose to Public Hall/Service Centre). Residents from Jalan 20/24, Paramount Garden, Petaling Jaya has complained that MPPJ has granted Planning Approval to a person named Quah Peng Chin @ Quah Paik Sze to build a service centre and office on a piece of vacant land along that road.

They were notified about this by MPPJ in a letter dated 6th February 2006 [Reference Number: (34) dlm.MPPJ/JPB331/T/P23/S21/1819/2003]. The residents had objected to the project twice in 2003 and 2005. Instead of building a public hall or service centre, which would be an eyesore, as illustrated in the proposed changes on the Local Structure Plan, they wish that the City Hall could retain the empty lot as greenery.

The residents had picketed once and had even tried to seek for a meeting with the then President of MPPJ, Datuk Termizi Puteh when works started about half a year ago. Due to heavy pressure mounted by the residents, construction was temporarily put on hold.

Even though construction is still on hold, the remained wreck is an eyesore to the residents there. They had tried to seek help from their State Assemblyman, YB Dr Wong Sai Hou to resolve this matter, especially when Wong Sai Hou is also a Councilor in MBPJ.

The City Hall now comes with proposal to convert the same piece of land into Service Centre/Public Hall purpose. It is mind-boggling to witness that the City Hall putting the cart before the horse, whereby conversion should logically be adopted and reflected in the Local Structure Plan before any construction for the new purpose kicks off.

The whole incident has been dragged on for months and Wong Sai Hou, although being an MBPJ Councilor at the same time and has openly said in the press that he does not agree on this project, he must openly clarify whether he has vested interest in this project, as under this project, a new service centre will be constructed. I had never seen any person who needs a service centre except elected representative. In order to clear our doubt, it is advisable for him to clarify now.

Simultaneously, if Dr Wong Sai Hou is sincere enough with his word and in order to demonstrate his sincerity, he does not have to wait for the State Town Planning department to take action or to make any decision which could be made months or years later as he himself can ask the Council to demolish the wreck right now, without having to involve any authority from the State Government ‘to correct the wrongs’.


大约六名来自八打灵再也百乐花园第20/24路的居民做日聚集在八达灵再也市政厅,出席针对灵市市政厅最近公布的23项大蓝图(Rancangan Tempatan Petaling Jaya 1,或 RTPJ1)更改的抗议听证会。这项听证会由雪兰莪州政行政议员拿督莫达达兰所主持,八打灵再也四名国阵州议员也同时出席。

一、 市政厅违反居民的意愿,而一意孤行在该路段未的一片土地Lot PT 6947兴建一所服务中心。居民表示他们曾经在2003年年尾以及2005年年尾向市政厅反映他们的看法,但是市政厅依然我行我素地在今年年初施工兴建该服务中心。

二、 市政厅居然在还没有通过修改大蓝图之前就兴建有关建筑物,显示该建筑物在该法令下属于非法建筑物。到底黄世豪医生身为市议员和该区周议员是否出现任何利益输送的状况?



在众多修改建议中,我要把焦点放在第18项的修改(把Jalan 20/24的Lot PT 6947地段从房屋用途转换成民众会堂或服务中心)。针对这项修改建议,百乐花园第24路的居民其实已经针对市政厅的建议,即在他们的住家附近兴建一座服务中心和民众会堂,而做出两次反对(第一次是在2003年,第二次则在2005年年尾)以及一次的公开抗议(2006年3月间),原因是居民希望能够保留这一小片的绿肺,因为在这之前这片土地是一片空地,并种有一棵大树。

虽然如此,市政厅依然发出策划准证(Kebenaran Merancang)给发展商发展该片土地。有关工程早已经在半年前开始施工。居民当时指责当时的八打灵再也市议会绕过居民的意愿,批发策划准证予Quah Peng Chin @ Quah Paik Sze,以在该路尾段的一片狭小的空地建设一座服务中心。

灵市市议会是在2006年2月6日的一封公函中通知居民市议会的决定(参考编号:(34) dlm.MPPJ/JPB331/T/P23/S21/1819/2003)。虽然居民曾在2003年和2005年两次反对该计划,但是市议会依然坚持己见。经过一连串的民意反弹之后,有关工程才暂时停止。





Najib asked Editors to downplay toll hike issue

This is a report from Malaysiakini Mandarin version.

It is reported in the report that the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak today met chief editors for all major newspapers, television and radio stations to 'downplay' the issue of toll hike for all five toll concessionaire which will be made public in a day or two.

It is heard that the toll may increase for more than 10% and it will be an increment of more than 50% for Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong.

Below is the original report in Mandarin:

06年12月12日 晚上9:23 调整字体大小:












Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Is Wee Ka Siong prepared to withdraw his article published in Nanyang Siang Pao?

Is Wee Ka Siong prepared to withdraw his statement made against the fiery speech and Hishammudin’s Keris wielding when Ka Siong said that the DAP is tarnished the good intention of the MCA Youth to explain to UMNO Youth about the uneasiness of the non-Malay community to UMNO Youth?

He said this in a statement issued yesterday which attack the DAP as ‘political squid’ but he himself forgot that he in an article written by him, which was published in Nanyang Siang Pao on the 19th November 2006.

In his article published in Nanyang Siang Pao on the 19th November 2006, he said that



which means:

“the major characteristics of the (UMNO) General Assembly this year is that there are people asking to review the status of non-Malay BN component parties, even more so when they openly mentioned the names of BN component parties leaders, one senior Minister and a Chief Minister are even called as “biadap”, it is hurting the feeling of their friends but benefiting their opponents.”

“……what is he going to show when he want to ‘use’ the Keris? What are his motives? Does he want other races to shed-blood?”

Since MCA Youth had already met UMNO Youth Chief and Wee Ka Siong was one of those attending, and since MCA Youth and Wee Ka Song had said that they understand the intention of Hishammudin using the Keris during the UMNO General Assembly, then is Wee Ka Siong prepared to withdraw what he wrote in his article published in Nanyang Siang Pao?

MCA Youth should know that UMNO Youth’s saying that the Keris is meant to ‘protect the all Malaysians and not only Malay’ is a self-manufactured reason to escape from their original intention when UMNO Youth Chief wielded the Keris Panca Warisan for the second time.

If this is the reason, why don’t UMNO Youth explain it publicly last year when the Keris was wield for the first time by Hishammuddin? If this is so, why all other UMNO forefathers did not explain it this way when they wielded their Keris in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s? Why, for example, the Deputy Prime Ministery, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, when was the UMNO Youth Chief in 1987 threathened the Chinese with a Keris when he wielded a Keris, shouting to ‘soak it (the Keris) with Chinese blood’ and not to ‘protect the Chinese and the Malay with the Keris in my hand’?

MCA Youth Chief, especially Wee Ka Siong should not self-consoling themselves when Hishammuddin has already said clearly that he will wield the Keris again next year but to speak up if they themselves are also not happy or they feel neglected by UMNO Youth.















Saya ingin nyatakan lagi bahawa masalah Ah Long ini sebenarnya ialah terletak di bawah kuasa Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan, dan yang mengeluarkan lesen untuk peminjam-peminjam berlesen ini ialah di bawah Kerajaan Tempatan. Kita lihat bahawa kita juga berharap pihak berkuasa tempatan, kalau boleh rujuk dahulu kepada polis untuk kita vetting aktiviti ataupun latar belakang seseorang yang memohon lesen sebagai peminjam berlesen ini. Terima kasih.

Saya percaya Yang Berhormat telah bangkit perkara ini dalam Dewan dan mungkin Kementerian Perumahan sedang mengkaji dan pihak PDRM juga sedang membuat kajian, ingin mencadangkan supaya Akta Peminjam yang kita buat pindaan pada tahun 2003 ini harus dikaji semula, kerana ada beberapa seksyen di dalam itu yang harus diperbaiki.

Sebagai contoh, tindakan untuk kita mengambil kepada seseorang Ah Long sebagai contoh, polis tidak ada kuasa untuk kita tangkap. Polis bila dapat laporan, kita kena rujuk kepada pihak berkuasa tempatan. Pihak berkuasa tempatanlah yang akan menyiasat sama ada peminjam ini melanggar ataupun tidak peraturan-peraturan lesen yang telah diberikan.

Jika didapati Ah Long ini ataupun yang ada lesen ini melanggar peraturan-peraturan, maka pihak berkuasa tempatan kena mohon waran daripada Majistret ataupun polis, kena mohon daripada pihak majistret untuk mendapatkan waran. Jadi, dia punya prosedurnya begitu ada liku-liku tertentu dan agak sukar untuk kita laksanakan. Polis hanya datang apabila Ah Long ini dia melakukan kekerasan, dia menggunakan kongsi gelap, gengster dan sebagainya. Polis akan datang, barulah polis akan mengambil tindakan di bawah Kanun Keseksaan ataupun kalau kita tidak ada bukti, kita akan tangkap mereka ini di bawah EO, tangkap tanpa bicara. Kalau didapati mereka ini tidak menggunakan kekerasan, tetapi dia melakukan aktiviti-aktiviti pelacuran dan sebagainya yang terlibat dengan kegiatan-kegiatan peminjam Ah Long ini, maka kita akan menggunakan RR untuk menahan mereka. Terima kasih.



Wednesday, December 06, 2006


虽然第十一届国会下议院第三季第三次的会议将于12月13日落幕,但是高教部尚未向下议院会议提呈《大专法令》修改草案一读。 这令人怀疑高教部是否打算在最后一分钟提呈该修改草案,然后让下议院匆匆忙忙地通过该修改草案?





根据国会下议院的会议书(Order Paper),国会迄今(12月4日)仍然有15条法令或修改法案必须在这一次通过。除非国会把这些法令挪后辩论,要不然国会议员很可能被迫挑灯夜辩,最终由91%国阵国会议员掌控的下议院必定会匆忙通过这些法令或修正案。即使高教部在这个星期提呈该法令,该法令也只是下议院此次必须通过的第16条法令。这样一来,如果这条修正法令必须在这一次的国会下议院会议通过,国会议员就更加缺乏充足的时间来研究该法令的内容。


Don't protect the rotten system

Ong Ka Ting’s reply to a RM10 salary cut motion moved by DAP MP for Cheras YB Tan Kok Wai on 28th November 2006 in Dewan Rakyat was not only unconvincing but it was this reply that gave a grave impression to the public that Ong Ka Ting is protecting the current rotten system and has shown a bad example for others as he allows law-breakers to become lawmakers in local level.

Recently in Klang, although there are eight BN leaders who broke local by-laws, for example not paying assessment, did not submit building plan to the council for approval before construction and etc, are appointed to be Klang Municipal Councilors. And one of the eight is Datuk Song Kee Chai, MCA Youth Kapar Divisional Chairman. Song’s factory was discovered as not submitting any plan for the extension of his factory but he sworn in as Klang Municipal Councilor on 24th November.

Song’s appointment as councilor reveals the ugly and hypocrite side of MCA when the party top leadership has been calling for clean leadership. How can MCA appoint a law-breaker like Song to be councilor when they clamed that all names submitted by MCA are vetted through and candidates are all called up to pass their interview sessions before they can be appointed as councilors.

This only shows that the system and the so call internal vetting system in MCA is equally problematic when they can let Song escaped scot-free when he at the end of the day is still councilor. When there are law-breakers sitting in the legislative hall as law-makers, what legal and moral authority we have to ask the public to obey law? How are we going to explain this to foreign investors who expect their monies and investment protected by laws and orders?

What Ong Ka Ting should do is to utilize his position as MCA chairman to knock out law-breakers from our councils. Else, all MCA councilors’ integrity are highly questionable. Ong Ka Ting and MCA should be responsible for bad governance in local councils as they are the supporters for a rotten system.

LDP to charge RM2.10?

Is LITRAK, the toll concessionaire for the 40 km-long Damansara-Puchong Expressway or Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong (LDP) going to increase the toll from RM1.00 to RM2.10, an increment of RM1.10 or 110%?

Is the government going to give in to the demand from LITRAK?

There is an exclusive report in Sin Chew Daily today that LITRAK has applied for an increment of RM1.10, which will allow it to collect toll at RM2.10 from the highway users starting from January 2007.

According to the report, LITRAK justified this with the reason that out of the daily traffic volumes of one million vehicles which travel along LDP everyday, only 36% or 360,000 are toll payers whereby the rest are not but contribute to the traffic jam along the highway, more so when there are a number of highly populated residential areas opened along LDP for the past few years.

Another justification is that LITRAK is only allowed to review their toll charge two times despite granted a concessionaire of 33 years. The first is in 2007 and the second is in 2016. LDP started operation in 1999 and it cost LITRAK RM1.13 billion to construct the highway. Net profit generated from LDP has increased to RM79.7 million for this financial year ended 31st Mac 2006 which is equivalent to an increment of 42.7% from net profit recorded for the previous financial year.

Road users in Klang Valley have been heavily burdened and victimized with unbearably, unreasonably and not transparently charged highway tolls. The government is likely to give in to the demand of LDP as the government has been mentioning several times since mid-2006 that the government is not prepared to compensate highway concessionaires or to expand their concessionaire periods as they government has been paying huge amount of compensation to highway concession companies.

There are altogether 20 private highway and the government compensated them RM175 million and RM104 million to all highway concession companies in 2004 and 2005 respectively. Till 2005, the government compensated a total of RM38.5 billion to all the 12 concession companies and therefore draining a huge sum of monies from the government’s coffer which will likely prevent the government from further compensating private highway concessionaires anymore.

Anyhow the first remedy that the government should do is to be transparent by revealing the content of the privatization contracts so that the people can know what exactly is hiding behind the contract as to prepare the people with the knowledge of where exactly the people’s money spent.

This action shall be followed up by justifications and explanations from the government on first, why the government signed such contract with these 12 private companies, and second, are there any long term solution from the government to rectify the problem, and third, whether the government is prepared to hold a dialogue with various stakeholders and civil society to discuss any future planning to prevent the people from continuing suffered, victimized and burdened by unfair toll charge.

Else, if the new toll rate of RM2.10 is approved, the frustrations and dissatisfactions of the people, especially those residing nearby and using the toll on a daily basis, will reach a higher boiling point with or without the participation of any opposition.

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

OKU rights - Shahrizat highlights the importance of MNKT

Rights of the disableds are always not looked into by the authority and they staged a protest two days ago against Rapid KL, a government-controlled public transportation service provider in Klang Valley for not taking good care of the needs of public transportations for the disabled or Orang Kurang Upaya (OKU) in town.

Ministry of Women, Family and Society Development Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil today during her winding speech in the Committee Stage debate of her ministry in the Dewan Rakyat criticised local governments in Malaysia for not being senstive to the needs of the disabled when a lot of facilities provided by local councils are not OKU-friendly.

Shahrizat even warned them (local councils) that the Ministry will go after them, if they are still ignorant or neglecting the rights of the disableds although there are already by-laws which are supposed to be followed to create a disabled-friendly environment.

She said she will bring this matter up to the National Council for Local Government chaired by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and she will push the National Council to push local governments to fully implement what has been legislated in their by-laws to take good care of the needs of the disableds.

She also said that if local councils are still ignorant on orders and decision from the highest authourity from the Federal Government, the Ministry will not let local councils to run away scot-free and promised to give them some teachings.

"Saya nak bagi amaran kepada semua PBT, kalau by-law tidak diikuti, rasakan nanti." She said without any compromise.

Her remark reminds me of what Ong Ka Ting said a few days ago when he said :

"Soal pokok di sini kata kelemahan PBT. Kelemahan PBT memang betul, di bawah perlembagaan, dia adalah di bawah the nine schedule state list. Kuasa PBT memang adalah di bawah jadual kuasa negeri dan di bawah Akta Kerajaan Tempatan amat jelas sekali kerajaan negeri yang menjaga PBT. Itu pun saya tidak menolak, cuba hendak elakkan tanggungjawab.
Yang Berhormat sudah bangkitkan Perkara 95, saya juga terima dalam Perkara 95 ada satu fungsi Majlis Negara bagi kerajaan tempatan. Telah pun disebut siapa pengerusi, ialah Timbalan Perdana Menteri. Saya salah seorang Menteri yang menganggotainya, tetapi pada masa yang sama, terdapat 13 Ketua Menteri dan Menteri Besar yang juga sama dengan keahlian saya.

Di situ, secara kolektif, kita bincang, ada apa-apa kelemahan kita buat bersama untuk melakukannya. Macam mana pula hari ini saya seorang sahaja kena dipotong gaji. Tidak pernah kita berhenti cuba guna majlis ini untuk melakukan apa yang betul, yang terbaik. Jadi, saya tidak pernah kata saya apa pun tidak payah buat, kerana itu bukan kuasa saya.

You can read his remark from the Parliament Hansard on 29th November 2006. His remarks give us an impression that he does not have the power to do (it) as the council makes collective decision, though he is a Minister responsible for the portfolio.

However, Shahrizat's remark differs a lot from Ong Ka Ting's statement made when he debated the RM10 salary cut motion tabled against him by DAP MP for Cheras, YB Tan Kok Wai.

Can we expect a further explanation from Ong Ka Ting?

Dirty cops - IPCMC or Police themselves to curb it?

The New Straits Times yesterday put up a front page story on a directive from Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan that he has asked all Officers of Command for Police District (OCPDs) in the whole of Malaysia to watch out for the slightest "hint of abnormal spending habits and lavish lifestyles".

Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan said for starters, any officer who failed to declare his assets would be asked to produce a show-cause letter and face disciplinary action.

Suspected policemen are followed from the time they get into their vehicles until they reach home. A senior OCPD said under the assessment system, all police personnel were required to declare their assets.

Well, this is of course an applauded approach from the Police force to clean up the force, however, would not it be better if the Independent Police Commission on Misconduct and Corruption (IPCMC) be formed to handle the job, rather than putting it on the hand of a fews in the force's discplinary unit?

To date, the government's reply on the formation of IPCMC is quite standard, that "it is still under study by the Attorney-General Chamber".

I wonder why it takes the Chamber so long to present the bill to the Parliament.

Monday, December 04, 2006

No clear direction from Ka Ting

MCA top leadership is currently running their national roadshow to explain to their grassroots on several current issues which may affect MCA in the coming general election.
Unfortunately, when speaking to reporters at a press conference later, MCA President, Ong Ka Ting refused to elaborate on issues which could be sensitive to handle, including the demolishing of Tou Boo Temple in Bukit Mertajam by Seberang Prai Municipal Council (MPSP).
Ka Ting said that MCA will focus fully on national development agenda, the role of MCA in carrying out the national mission or misi nasional as well as the 9th Malaysia Plan (9MP).
If this is what was conveyed during the roadshow, I am sure their grassroots must be disappointed as Ka Ting did not give them a clear direction ahead in dealing with the coming general election.









Friday, December 01, 2006

Give us lights in SS2 at night

The PJ Action Team (PJAT) had decided about two months ago, that instead of having numerous dialogues with police, which to date has not been proven its effectiveness in tackling high crime rate in Petaling Jaya, we rather try our best to rectify the lacks of street lamps and the increasing malfunctioned street lamps in Petaling Jaya, which itself is a long overdue problem known to a lot of us who stay in Petaling Jaya.

One of the major suggestions for local governments to adopt towards a safe city is to ensure that there are enough and bight lightings provided in major areas in each municipality. This is outlined in Point 16 of Safe City Programme – an Illustration of 23 Steps For Crime Prevention by the Town and Country Planning Department of the Peninsula of Malaysia.

An announcement was made earlier and we received some complaints from time to time. Eventually, we took up the task to kick off the first patrol in SS2, Petaling Jaya as the complaints we received main come from this area.

We spent roughly two months to complete the patrol with photos in which some of the photos are provided by the residents who complained to us. These photos were taken in October and November and show the deplorable conditions of street lamps in that area.


SS2/4&6 : Street lamps malfunctioned along the roads. (PB210023, 26, 27, 28, 30, 32, 36, 37, 40)
SS2/7 : No light at Taman Bahagia Garden (PB210038)
SS2/12 : Two lamp posts malfunctioned near park at junction with Jalan SS2/25 (PB210019)
SS2/14 : Lack of lamp posts along the street (PB210010, PB210013)
SS2/17 : Lamp post malfunctioned (PB210043).
SS2/18 : No light at park (PB210016)
SS2/21 : No light along the street (PB210022)
SS2/22 : Lack of lamp posts (PB210010)
SS2/24 : Lamp post malfunctioned at junction with SS2/43 (PB300014)
SS2/24 : Lamp post malfunctioned at junction with SS2/41 (PB300013)
SS2/24 : Lamp post malfunctioned in front of junction with SS2/65 (PB210047)
SS2/25 : two lamp posts malfunctioned. (PB210016)
SS2/30 : Lamp post malfunctioned. (PB160029)
SS2/34 : No lamp post at entrance from Jalan SS2/39 (PB160034)
SS2/35 : Lamp post malfunctioned (PB160030)
SS2/38 : Lack of lamp posts (PB160021)
SS2/43 : Lack of lamp posts (PB160022)
SS2/44 : No lamp post at entrance from Jalan 21/3 (PB160020)
SS2/45 : One light functioning only. No light at park. (PB210045)
SS2/49 : No light at park. The street is lacking of lighting (PB210042)
SS2/52 : No light at park. (PB210045)
SS2/54 : No light at lamp post. (PB160018)
SS2/75&80 : No light at the corner road (PB300018), Lamp post malfunctioned in front of Murni Restaurant. (PB300015).
SS2/80 : Lamp post located at junction with Jalan SS2/77 malfunctioned. (PB300019)
SS2/80 : Lack of lamp posts at junction with Jalan SS2/91, nearby the park. (PB300020)

Our finding shows that there are at least 30 lamp posts malfunctioned and more than 10 black spots in SS2 alone as illustrated in our descriptions with photos above. It has been a rule that electric posts surrounding all parks and playgrounds must be equipped with lamps but a check around all parks and playgrounds in SS2 reveals the opposite, i.e. the parks in Jalan SS2/80 whereby there is a black spot at its junction with Jalan SS2/91. This poses danger towards for those who exercise in the morning.

There is an urgent need for Petaling Jaya City Hall (MBPJ) to work in collaboration with Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) to rectify the problems. We will hand in our findings to the area manager of TNB for him to take immediate actions to rectify the situation. The finding will also be copied to Datuk Bandar of Petaling Jaya for his attention.







SS2/7:靠近Taman Bahagia轻快铁车站的街灯失灵。(PB210038)
SS2/12:两个靠近Jalan SS2/25 路口的公园路灯失灵。(PB210019)
SS2/34:从Jalan SS2/39 进来的入口处路灯失灵。(PB160034)
SS2/44:从Jalan 21/3进来的入口处没有路灯(PB160020)
SS2/49:公园灯光不足。 街道缺乏路灯。(PB210042)







然而,当蕉赖区国会议员陈国伟提交一份减薪黄家定10令吉动议之后,马华和马青衮衮诸公基于护主的心态便在这数天发动一连串令人哭笑皆非的文告示众 。







一、 当查氏事件今年年初被揭发之后,为何黄家定身为房屋及地方政府部部长以及身为国家地方政府理事会副主席,但是却以他的地位、身份和影响力来要求政府严厉查办查卡利亚以及其他贪污滥权的巴生市议员?
二、 联邦宪法第95A(5)条文中阐明国家地方政府理事会的权限,即在征求联邦政府以及州政府的意见之后,规划全国各地地方政府的晋升、发展和管制的国家政策,以及任何有关法律的行政管理;联邦政府以及州政府必须以旬该理事会所规划的政策行事。黄家定是该理事会的副主席,他自然就有权利和责任去纠正任何有关地方政府的课题,更何况是查卡利亚事件从爆发到现在一直都是闹得满城风雨的全国课题。既然如此,为何黄家定不使用这个权力,为何黄家定一言不发?
三、 黄家定不能逃避的另外一个问题就是宋奇才的委任。查卡利亚事件发展的最后,宋奇才的工厂被人揭发没有呈交图测给巴生市议会。既然马华衮衮诸公口口声声说要‘清清白白做官’,但是为何宋奇才却能够顺顺利利当上市议员?众所周知,马华的县市议员是经过面试核准之后才呈交予州务大臣批准通过。有时候,黄家定本人亲自主持县市议员候选人面试。既然这样,黄家定根本难逃其责。