Kampung Baru Sungai Way field project - challenge MCA to show evidence to prove their accusations
challenge Barisan National (BN) liaison officer for DUN Kampung Tunku Kelvin
Chong to present his evidence that Pakatan Rakyat government and Majlis
Bandaraya Petaling Jaya (MBPJ) will demolish the only green lung in Sungai Way
New Village. Else, I will not respond his unreasonable accusations.
Chong held a press conference on 18th and 25th March criticising
Pakatan Rakyat State Government for approving the development plan, causing the
only green lung at Sungai Way New Village to be developed.
March 2012, Sin Chew Metro reported that "Kelvin Chong demanded ...
explanation to local folks about 'Green lung for Commercial centre' and at the
same time demanded the withdrawal of such development plan."
newspaper also quoted Kelvin Chong that he accused MBPJ for selling said land
to a developer in return for RM 75 million.
same date, China Press also quoted his remarks: “the above spanning of 4 acres
of field, including the reserve land located beside the river, with estimated
value of RM 75 million, and had already sold to the developer.”
said that “it is the only public field for 35,000 villagers in Sungai Way New
Village and also the only green zone in the district converted into commercial
Daily reported that “Kelvin Chong found out that the 4-acre green lung was
converted by MBPJ into commercial area for RM 75 million, resulting some 35,000
villagers losing the only green lung.
newspaper also quoted the director of MCA Selangor Public Complaints Bureau of Theng
Bok: “Generally, development order issued by local council lapses after two
years. If developer does not start work during this time frame, they need to
re-apply. Therefore, after 2009, the developer again received approval by the
Selangor Pakatan Rakyat government to develop such land."
same date, Nanyang Siang Pao also reported the same and quoted his remarks: “it
is a field catering the needs for 35,000 villagers and is the only green zone
in the district converted into commercial development.
state assembly opening ceremony on 19th March, I have rebutted the
two of them on these accusations on a point-by point basis.
Kelvin Chong alleged such project at Sungai Way New Village will cause the only
green lung at the said area to disappear, this is an untrue statement. I hereby
condemn Kelvin Chong for deliberately deceiving the media and local folks for
the sake of cheap politic publicity. If what Kelvin Chong said is true, I
challenged him to show evidence within 48 hours to prove that the green lung
challenged him within 48 hours to show that the developer intend to build
residential project at the said area. If Kelvin Chong unable to tender any
evidence, then he should immediately apologize and retract his rubbish
Kelvin Chong accused MBPJ for selling the said land to a developer at a price
of RM 75 million. I want Kelvin Chong to tender evidence to prove that MBPJ had
already signed such kind of sale and purchase agreement (SPA) with the
developer. Again, if he failed to tender any evidence upon the released of this
statement in 48 hours, then he should immediately retract his untrue statement
and public apology!
as a lawyer and head for MCA State Public Complaint Bureau, Theng Bok accused
that if the green lung was to be upgraded, then the green lung will no longer
be a public area. Since he is a lawyer, he should know that statement made must
be subject to availability of evidence. Therefore, I challenged him to tender
evidence within 48 hours upon the released of my statement.
Bok said the green lung will no longer be a public area upon its upgrading
work. Does it mean the green lung will still be preserved, but Kelvin Chong on the
other hand said the green lung will be disappeared? In the end, who are telling
the truth? Why such contradiction among the two of them? Can they provide an
explanation to the local folks and readers within 48 hours?
Bok said Pakatan Rakyat government had the right to stop such plan, because
when the planning permission was given but no work was done in two years, then
reapplication will be necessary. As a lawyer for himself, i am really impressed
with his bravery for such ridiculous statement.
since the State government had already approved the whole development package
in 2007, if PR government changes its mind, does it mean that PR government will
lost its creditability? Whose money should the government use to compensate the
developer? Secondly, according to Section 24(1) of Town and Country Planning
Act 1976, the validity of planning permission is one year, not two years as
alleged by Theng Bok. Thirdly, since the lapse of one year validity period,
developer has the right to reapply for such planning permission, but this
doesn't mean the whole development package will be rejected. It is similar like
when the government had issued a land title to a person for development
purposes, if the said person only develops the land after 10 years, this does
not mean that the government can rightfully take back the land, because the
legal ownership of such land is vested upon the land owner.
all the planning permission needs to be traced back to the development plan by
previous government administration during a year in 2007. Therefore, I shall
disclose the details of such development plan to enable the media to understand
the nature and content of the plan.
Barisan National (BN) state government had already approved the policy for squatters
eradication by relocating the squatters at Road 4 of Sungai Way New Village.
The previous state administration policy is to request the private developer to
build low cost flat to relocate the squatters, in return the state government
will provide "cross subsidy" to any private developer who can assist
the state government to achieve such aim.
implementation of such policy, the state government at that time had provided a
series of cross subsidy to those private developer who had successfully
relocate 1400 unit of residents from Kampung Baiduri and 550 unit of residents
from Sungai Way. The developer had promised to build nearly 2000 unit of low
cost flat to accommodate all this residents.
order to solve the traffic congestion problem at Sungai Way New Village, the
state government at that time requested the City Council to survey the number
of illegal hawkers at Sungai Way New Village and requested the private
developer to relocate nearly 150 illegal hawkers. Therefore, the state
government at that time had reserved the green lung and land located adjacent
to the riverside to be a well planned development area. The state government also
hopes to solve the traffic congestion problem at Sungai Way New Village.
the state government did not approved such land to the private developer, but
to MBPJ instead and requested the MBPJ and private developer to jointly develop
the said plan (Such form of cooperation is a typically used by the former state
government. Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, the Selangor Chief Minister had repeatedly
criticized such form of joint-venture as detriment to the state government
interest during state assembly). Therefore, Kelvin Chong accused the MBPJ for
selling the land to private developer at a price of RM 75 million is actually
incorrect. Where is the statistic for RM 75 million actually come from?
development plan approved in year 2007, the working paper clarified that the
private developer and MBPJ will redevelop the green lung and the river reserve land
adjacent to the riverside. The private developer will build a type of
commercial center for MBPJ, raise the ground level of green lung, provide extra
300 parking spaces, upgrade the green lung facilities (playground, jogging
track, basketball court) etc). Private developer will hence obtain a special
concessionary of 20 years. It was said that the private developer will need to
bear the cost of maintenance for 20 years (Include playground and other facilities).
later, the private developer will need to hand over the properties back to MBPJ.
According to the development plan in year 2007, the property’s value is estimated
at RM 12.50 million (ie, RM 7.5 million worth of properties value and 20 year
of maintenance fees worth RM 50 million). This type of BOT cooperation method,
called Built-Operate-Transfer, is also the typical method used by the federal
government for privatization purposes. The highway/expressway toll also used
this kind of method for privatization.
where did RM 75 million came from? Only Kelvin Chong knows it.
the press conference, Kelvin Chong and Theng Bok, they keeps on saying they
have gone through a series of investigation and possessed substantial evidence,
and also challenged me to debate with them. In regard to this matter, I am
willing to debate with MCA, however there must be precondition to be set straight,
that both side needs to tender evidence to prove their accusation. Otherwise
the debate will be deformed into plain political talks.
I challenge them for reply my questions and come up with hard evidence to give
an explanation. If they cannot provide any evidence within the time limit, this
proves that they are just fabricating news to earn cheap political propaganda.
I urge them to withdraw their remarks to the readers and get the villagers
unless they present their evidence I would not entertain or answer any further
accusation or press conference called by them in relation to this matter.