Monday, July 31, 2006

Pest Control fiasco - Urge MPSJ to halt new regulation, to reveal the contents of the contract and to organize a three party negotiation

Subang Jaya Municipal Council (Majlis Perbandaran Subang Jaya, MPSJ) has come out with a directive to all owners of commercial outlets under it’s jurisdiction that starting from 2009, they are required to sign pest control contract with a private consortium to get a pest-free certificate in order to apply for new trade license or to renew their current trade license.

Although the president of MPSJ, Datuk Arif Abdul Rahman has clarified that it will be implemented in 2009 till 2026 (in which the concessionaire will terminate in 2026), we have received complaints that owners are already required to sign up with this consortium before they can renew their license. I have also personally called up the Licensing Department of MPSJ and that the complaints are validated by the officers.

The name of the consortium is Konsortium SJ Pest Control Sdn. Bhd. The members of the consortium include Koswasta Asia Pest Control Sdn. Bhd., Damai Pest Control Sdn. Bhd., Vetga Sdn. Bhd., Inspirasi Asia Sdn. Bhd., Suria Sakti Resources Sdn. Bhd. and Denmas Sdn. Bhd.

DAP Selangor is outraged on the decision made by MPSJ based on the following five reasons:


1. What are the jurisdictions for MPSJ to require non-eatery commercial outlets to conduct pest-control exercise? It is of course reasonable for MPSJ to come out with the ruling to eateries and restaurants as well as food-processing factories but MPSJ is certainly lacking transparency in it’s policy making when requiring owners of non-eatery commercial outlets to do the same.

2. Even though if pest control exercise is compulsory for all commercial outlets, why do MPSJ only designate one consortium to conduct the exercise for more than 10,000 commercial outlets under MPSJ’s jurisdiction? Is this consortium more experienced than other companies in the market, or it’s charges are more economical than the rest? Is the awarding of the concessionaire conducted based on open-tender system?

3. This consortium is said not a member of the Pest Control Association of Malaysia (PCAM). If that’s the case, why MPSJ does not select a company registered, recognized and accredited by the association? Are the services provided by this consortium guaranteed and accredited by the association? Will it be held liable legally for any losses or accidents by its personnel when conducting pest-control exercises, especially when pest control personnel must be well-trained to handle insecticides and poisonous materials which could also be carcinogenic?

4. DAP Selangor has also conducted a company search for the companies under the consortium and discovered that some of the companies are not only newly established, but also led by directors in their 20s. This raises a question of whether these companies are capable to conduct proper pest-control exercise.

5. The lowest available charge of the consortium is RM600, which is twice the market price. If all owners of commercial outlets under the jurisdiction of Subang Jaya were to sign a contract with this consortium till 2026, that will be a great fortune for the consortium.

We do not hope that this will become another exercise which only benefits cronies of those in power, and since the decision will definitely affects the benefits of the owners, based on the principles of good-governance, transparency and accountability, we believe that the presidents of MPSJ and its councilors should be held liable and answerable to the taxpayers. We therefore urge the following:

1. MPSJ to immediately suspend the implementation of this ruling until there is a clear and acceptable explanations from the council on this matter. The council should also explain when it enters into an agreement with a private consortium without consulting the taxpayers.

2. MPSJ to immediately reveal the contents of the contracts in order to avoid MPSJ from entering any unjust contract with any private entity which will cause damage to the council and the taxpayers.

3. MPSJ to immediately arrange for a three-party negotiation between the owners (the taxpayers), the consortium and the council to reach for a solution, so as to avoid innocent owners to sign any contract with the consortium without adequate consultations on what have happened behind.

No comments: