I received a copy of the Order Paper of the current Parliament Session which started yesterday to 13th December 2006. The Order Paper is a print out of all written and oral questions raised by MPs during this Parliament session. I am informed that each MP is allowed to raise 10 oral questions and 5 written questions which will be answered by the relevant Ministry. MPs are allowed to raise any question based on their own discretion.
During the last Parliament session, Gerakan MP for Puchong Lau Yan Peng raised a question on 4th April 2006 on the future of Puchong Bukit Nanas Landfill. The question was answered by Parliamentary Secretary of the Ministry of Housing and Local Governments. Lau also put up a supplementary question on the fate of South KL Transfer Station (SKLTS).
It was at that time that the Parliamentary Secretary answered that the there is no exact date of when the landfill will be closed and that the Ministry is merely acting as technical consultant in SKLTS project. The decision of whether the waste transfer station will be built in Kampung Bohol will eventually be decided by Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL)
According to newspaper report of Nanyang Siang Pau and China Press dated 13th August 2006, it was reported that State Assemblyman for Bandar Kinrara, YB Kow Cheong Wei announced in a press conference, which was attended by representatives from No Sampah Station Pro-Tem Committee, that the proposed South KL Waste Transfer Station (SKLTS) project will be scrapped based on unofficial information he obtained from various government departments.
This was further verified when reporters contacted Parliamentary Secretary of Ministry of Federal Territories, YB Datuk Yew Teong Lok, that the project is already cancelled.
What is most mind-boggling in this incident is that nobody from the government, especially concerned ministries, are capable to come out with a proper and official black-and-white, not even Datuk Yew Teong Lok, to CONFIRM that the project is scrapped, as the residents have been waiting for an official answer from the government since months.
I would believe that it will be good if Lau Yan Peng can put up an oral question to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government or Ministry of Federal Territories to seek for a more updated and authoritative answer with regards to the fate of SKLTS. I am however disappointed that Lau Yan Peng had failed in carrying out his responsibility when he did not put up any question on this issue, as well as the final closure date of Bukit Nanas Landfill. I would like to re-write Lau Yan Peng’s questions brought up in the current Parliament session, as printed in the Parliament Order Paper in Malay:
1. 22/8/2006, Soalan Ke-7, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah rancangan dan langkah-langkah positif kerajaan untuk mengekalkan pertumbuhan ekonomi negara melebihi unjuran 5% bagi tahun 2006 berikutan penurunan prestasi ekonomi negara kesan daripada kenaikan harga petroleum, tarif elektrik dan kadar faedah bank.
2. 24/8/2006, Soalan Ke-24, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah jaminan dan ‘contingency plan’ Kerajaan bahawa pelaksanaan 880 projek RMK-9 bernilai RM15 bilion yang diumumkan baru-baru ini tiada kemungkinan terbengkalai dengan penubuhan Badan Bertindak Pelaksanaan Negara (BBPN) yang telah diluluskan.
3. 28/8/2006, Soalan Ke-24, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI SUMBER ASLI DAN ALAM SEKITAR menyatakan adakah Kementerian mempunyai program khas untuk menaik taraf sistem pengairan dan salian terutamanya membabitkan kawasan kampong tradisi memandangkan banjir teruk melanda setiap kali musim tengkujuh. Jika ada, berapakah jumlah projek dan kos yang diperuntukkan dalam RMK-9.
4. 30/8/2006, Soalan Ke-3, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI KERJA RAYA menyatakan apakah punca utama masalah Projek Menaiktaraf Jalan Batu 12 hingga Batu 16 Puchong di bawah kawal selia JKR Selangor yang dijadualkan siap penghujung tahun 2005 tetapi gagal disiapkan hingga kini. Adakah Kementerian tiada kuasa apabila suatu projek dijalankan oleh JKR negero atau daerah.
5. 6/9/2006, Soalan Ke-3, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah pendirian Kerajaan berkaitan percanggahan pendapat antara Kementerian Pelancongan dan Kementerian Keselamatan Dalam Negeri berhubung cadangan melanjutkan masa operasi pusat hiburan di lokasi-lokasi tertentu yang menimbulkan kontroversi baru-baru ini.
6. 12/9/2006, Soalan Ke-25, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI TENAGA, AIR DAN KOMUNIKASI menyatakan adakah Kerajaan bercadang untuk memperkanalkan penggunaan meter air berasakan plastik sebagai langkah menangani kecurian meter air besi, justeru adakah Kerajaan bercadang untuk membuat pemasangan meter air secara berasingan bagi pangsapuri pada masa akan datang.
7. 19/9/2006, Soalan Ke-3, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI SAINS, TEKNOLOGI DAN INOVASI menyatakan statistic kes jenayah siber di negara ini membabitkan transaksi perniagaan dan urusan Kerajaan bermula dari awal tahun 2005, justeru apakah persediaan Kerajaan untuk melaksanakan Institut Kerjasama Pelbagai Hala Antarabangsa Memerangi Keganasan Siber (Impact) dalam masa terdekat ini.
8. 7/11/2006, Soalan Ke-22, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI KERJA RAYA menyatakan komitmen Kementerian berhubung cadangan pembinaan sebuah ‘interchange’ di laluan persekutuan 3215 Jalan Putra Permai dan Lebuhraya Putrajaya – KL. Adakah kesesakan teruk di laluan antara Pasar Borong Selangor dan Pasaraya Jusco menghala ke Pekan Sri Kembangan tidak cukup untuk cadangan ini dipertimbangkan
9. 13/11/2006, Soalan Ke-21, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah langkah dan tindakan keseimbangan yang dilaksanakan oleh Kerajaan untuk menyeimbangkan dasar-dasar ‘affirmative action’ seperti DEB dan dasar keterbukaan ekonomi negara dalam era globalisasi supaya kepentingan dan kesejahteraan rakyat tanpa mengira kaum terjamin.
10. 21/11/2006, Soalan Ke-7, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI TENAGA, AIR DAN KOMUNIKASI menyatakan adakah Kementerian mempunyai program khas untuk mendidik rakyat untuk menjimatkan penggunaan tenaga elektrik dan air. Adakah Kementerian bercadang untuk mengurangkan bayaran atau diskaum ke atas tunggakan sedia ada bil IWK.
It is very clear that Lau Yan Peng did not ask any question on the issue. If Lau Yan Peng would have asked this question, then Kinrara folks who has been living in anxiety since early 2006 could have know the answer before 2007.
Is this another classic example of dereliction of responsibility?
During the last Parliament session, Gerakan MP for Puchong Lau Yan Peng raised a question on 4th April 2006 on the future of Puchong Bukit Nanas Landfill. The question was answered by Parliamentary Secretary of the Ministry of Housing and Local Governments. Lau also put up a supplementary question on the fate of South KL Transfer Station (SKLTS).
It was at that time that the Parliamentary Secretary answered that the there is no exact date of when the landfill will be closed and that the Ministry is merely acting as technical consultant in SKLTS project. The decision of whether the waste transfer station will be built in Kampung Bohol will eventually be decided by Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL)
According to newspaper report of Nanyang Siang Pau and China Press dated 13th August 2006, it was reported that State Assemblyman for Bandar Kinrara, YB Kow Cheong Wei announced in a press conference, which was attended by representatives from No Sampah Station Pro-Tem Committee, that the proposed South KL Waste Transfer Station (SKLTS) project will be scrapped based on unofficial information he obtained from various government departments.
This was further verified when reporters contacted Parliamentary Secretary of Ministry of Federal Territories, YB Datuk Yew Teong Lok, that the project is already cancelled.
What is most mind-boggling in this incident is that nobody from the government, especially concerned ministries, are capable to come out with a proper and official black-and-white, not even Datuk Yew Teong Lok, to CONFIRM that the project is scrapped, as the residents have been waiting for an official answer from the government since months.
I would believe that it will be good if Lau Yan Peng can put up an oral question to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government or Ministry of Federal Territories to seek for a more updated and authoritative answer with regards to the fate of SKLTS. I am however disappointed that Lau Yan Peng had failed in carrying out his responsibility when he did not put up any question on this issue, as well as the final closure date of Bukit Nanas Landfill. I would like to re-write Lau Yan Peng’s questions brought up in the current Parliament session, as printed in the Parliament Order Paper in Malay:
1. 22/8/2006, Soalan Ke-7, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah rancangan dan langkah-langkah positif kerajaan untuk mengekalkan pertumbuhan ekonomi negara melebihi unjuran 5% bagi tahun 2006 berikutan penurunan prestasi ekonomi negara kesan daripada kenaikan harga petroleum, tarif elektrik dan kadar faedah bank.
2. 24/8/2006, Soalan Ke-24, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah jaminan dan ‘contingency plan’ Kerajaan bahawa pelaksanaan 880 projek RMK-9 bernilai RM15 bilion yang diumumkan baru-baru ini tiada kemungkinan terbengkalai dengan penubuhan Badan Bertindak Pelaksanaan Negara (BBPN) yang telah diluluskan.
3. 28/8/2006, Soalan Ke-24, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI SUMBER ASLI DAN ALAM SEKITAR menyatakan adakah Kementerian mempunyai program khas untuk menaik taraf sistem pengairan dan salian terutamanya membabitkan kawasan kampong tradisi memandangkan banjir teruk melanda setiap kali musim tengkujuh. Jika ada, berapakah jumlah projek dan kos yang diperuntukkan dalam RMK-9.
4. 30/8/2006, Soalan Ke-3, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI KERJA RAYA menyatakan apakah punca utama masalah Projek Menaiktaraf Jalan Batu 12 hingga Batu 16 Puchong di bawah kawal selia JKR Selangor yang dijadualkan siap penghujung tahun 2005 tetapi gagal disiapkan hingga kini. Adakah Kementerian tiada kuasa apabila suatu projek dijalankan oleh JKR negero atau daerah.
5. 6/9/2006, Soalan Ke-3, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah pendirian Kerajaan berkaitan percanggahan pendapat antara Kementerian Pelancongan dan Kementerian Keselamatan Dalam Negeri berhubung cadangan melanjutkan masa operasi pusat hiburan di lokasi-lokasi tertentu yang menimbulkan kontroversi baru-baru ini.
6. 12/9/2006, Soalan Ke-25, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI TENAGA, AIR DAN KOMUNIKASI menyatakan adakah Kerajaan bercadang untuk memperkanalkan penggunaan meter air berasakan plastik sebagai langkah menangani kecurian meter air besi, justeru adakah Kerajaan bercadang untuk membuat pemasangan meter air secara berasingan bagi pangsapuri pada masa akan datang.
7. 19/9/2006, Soalan Ke-3, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI SAINS, TEKNOLOGI DAN INOVASI menyatakan statistic kes jenayah siber di negara ini membabitkan transaksi perniagaan dan urusan Kerajaan bermula dari awal tahun 2005, justeru apakah persediaan Kerajaan untuk melaksanakan Institut Kerjasama Pelbagai Hala Antarabangsa Memerangi Keganasan Siber (Impact) dalam masa terdekat ini.
8. 7/11/2006, Soalan Ke-22, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI KERJA RAYA menyatakan komitmen Kementerian berhubung cadangan pembinaan sebuah ‘interchange’ di laluan persekutuan 3215 Jalan Putra Permai dan Lebuhraya Putrajaya – KL. Adakah kesesakan teruk di laluan antara Pasar Borong Selangor dan Pasaraya Jusco menghala ke Pekan Sri Kembangan tidak cukup untuk cadangan ini dipertimbangkan
9. 13/11/2006, Soalan Ke-21, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta PERDANA MENTERI menyatakan apakah langkah dan tindakan keseimbangan yang dilaksanakan oleh Kerajaan untuk menyeimbangkan dasar-dasar ‘affirmative action’ seperti DEB dan dasar keterbukaan ekonomi negara dalam era globalisasi supaya kepentingan dan kesejahteraan rakyat tanpa mengira kaum terjamin.
10. 21/11/2006, Soalan Ke-7, Tuan Lau Yan Peng [ Puchong ] minta MENTERI TENAGA, AIR DAN KOMUNIKASI menyatakan adakah Kementerian mempunyai program khas untuk mendidik rakyat untuk menjimatkan penggunaan tenaga elektrik dan air. Adakah Kementerian bercadang untuk mengurangkan bayaran atau diskaum ke atas tunggakan sedia ada bil IWK.
It is very clear that Lau Yan Peng did not ask any question on the issue. If Lau Yan Peng would have asked this question, then Kinrara folks who has been living in anxiety since early 2006 could have know the answer before 2007.
Is this another classic example of dereliction of responsibility?
No comments:
Post a Comment