双溪威草场发展计划——市政厅应该收回指令的5大理由

1. 这个位于SS9A/1路的草场不仅是双溪威华小学生体育的唯一草场，也是双溪威村民唯一一个大型的草场。如果是市政厅决定在这块土地进行发展计划，不仅学生将失去一个良好的体育场所，双溪威村民也将失去一片可贵的绿肥。为何市政厅要破坏这片可贵的绿肥呢？

2. 当局将会在这个地方建议兴建一座高达16层楼高共160个单位的组屋，以及一座3层楼高的公市。这将会加剧双溪威新村交通拥挤的问题。更何况，双溪威新村已经拥有一个现代化的公市，为何还多此一举呢？至于高达16层的组屋，到底双溪威还有多少非法木屋居民，以致当局必须兴建如此高的组屋？这个组屋是否要容纳从其他地方迁移过来的非法木屋居民？

3. 提出发展建议的发展商是Taipan Focus。这是一家负责承建双溪威Impian Baiduri（中文译：英比安拜杜里组屋）的发展商。我与5月曾经在双溪威英比安拜杜里组屋的要求之下前往巡视该地区的民生问题。各报章5月26日的地方版都刊登该组屋所发生的‘五雷轰顶’事件。另一个是Taipan Focus当初承建这座组屋时，没有为每个单位的窗口安装铁枝，导致居民时时刻刻担忧家中的幼儿随时会因为玩耍不小心冲撞窗口而掉出去。居民怀疑发展商是否装置充足的避雷针，以及怀疑该发展商偷工减料。另外，Taipan Focus也在SS9A/4路火线界获得一片土地。当时在拆除火线界的屋子后，发展上没有妥当处理善后工作。这一次Taipan Focus向市政厅建议发展这片绿肺，既然Taipan Focus的纪录如此差劲，为何市政厅还把这项计划颁给Taipan Focus？市政厅是否和Taipan Focus签署怎样的合约？

4. 既然市政厅要发展这片土地，为何市政厅没有依循条规，先发函征询村民的意见，然后才决定是否进行这项计划？而且，市政厅也没有举办任何公听会。根据法令，市政厅如果要进行任何发展计划，那么市政厅必须修改原有的发展大蓝图，进行公听会。可是这一切都没有发生，难道市政厅是要先斩后奏？

5. 黄世毫医生在这事件肩负最大的责任。会议记录提到市议员黄世毫医生在会议上提到这项发展计划的目的。黄世毫医生身为当地的州议员，理应把这项消息告诉村民，而不是静悄悄在市议会通过这项计划。反之，黄世毫医生的做法似乎要把村民蒙在鼓里。这并非首次。2003年至2004年大选前后，黄世毫医生也曾经是用同样的伎俩欺骗SS9A/4路火线界的村民。经过这事件，黄世毫医生此次必须解释这项发展计划的来龙去脉？

唯一綠肺被剝奪建組屋商業中心

疑市政廳擅改土地用途
唯一綠肺被剝奪

地點：八打靈雙溪威
劉永山（左）指雙溪威SS9A/1路草場將興建16層樓組屋及3層樓商業中心。右為潘檢偉。

（八打靈再也27日訊）雪州民主行動黨指雙溪威SS9A/1路草場 ，將興建16層樓組屋及3層樓商業中心，並責斥八打靈再也市政廳剝奪雙溪威唯一草場，造成居民沒有休閒場所。

行動黨雪州秘書劉永山指出，他週一接獲匿名信，指原是草場休閒保留地的雙溪威唯一大型草場，遭市政廳建議更改為混合性用途土地。

他說，經查證，他發現市政廳一站式統辦中心（OSC）已在會議上通過批准這項建議，準備將土地交由私人發展商規劃發展用途。

“一般上，市政廳應先發函通知當地居民、商家及草場對面的雙溪威華小，再召開聽證會聆聽居民意見，在各造同意后，才可提呈給雪州政府批准更改土地用途，惟市政廳沒有根據程序進行。”

他今天帶領記者巡視該草場時，這么說。

他指出，市政廳今年7月通過這項計劃后，居民至今還未接獲通知。

他認為，市政廳不應該打草場主意，不該剝奪該區唯一大型草場。

“根據發展藍圖，這400平方公尺草場是休閒土地用途，市政廳不應在藍圖上選擇土地后，再通過更改土地用途，達到發展計劃。”

他說，根據一站式統辦中心報告所指，草場將興建16層樓組屋及3層樓商業中心，屆時將嚴重加劇當地交通問題。

他透露，雙溪威目前有約3000多名選民，每天擁有大量居民前往草場踢球及運動。

双溪威唯一草场将辟商业中心

（八打灵再也讯）双溪威唯一的社区草场，将被发展成混合商业中心？

行动党白沙罗支部主席潘俭伟指出，他有资料显示，位於双溪威华小旁边即SS9A/1路的草场，日前在八打灵再也市政厅的一项一站式委员会会议通过，在该处和渠道保留地上兴建一座16楼高的组屋，以及一座3楼高的中央市场等建诛物。

他说，有关草场是整个双溪威仅有的绿肺，而且该发展建议已被甘榜东姑区州议员拿督黄世豪支持。

他周四（27日）早联同雪州行动党秘书刘永山，於草场旁召开新闻发布会时表示，他过后就接获匿名人投诉有关发展计划将在该处的绿肺进行。

解决无牌小贩问题

他说，根据该会议议程，有关中央市场发展计划是为了吸引游客，同时也解决无执照小贩在该处四处摆摊问题。

潘俭伟表示，他与刘永山将在周五的市政厅会客日，携带相关资料要求会见市长，反映居民的担忧和进一步了解该计划详情。

5大理由要求收回计划

刘永山说，他有5大理由要求市政厅收回有关双溪威草场的发展计划。

“这包括该草场的面积大概只有400至500平方公尺，是双溪威社区唯一的绿肺，该处一旦被发展，将会令到双溪威华小学生失去一个良好的体育场所。

将加剧交通拥挤问题

“兴建一座16层楼高的组屋和3层楼高的中央市场，将会加剧双溪威新村交通拥挤问题。”

他也对市政厅不透明处理该处的发展计划举动感到疑惑。

“既然市政厅要发展该处，为何没有依循程序，即先发函征询村民的意见才决定该项计划？另外，市政厅也没有举办任何听证会。

他说，根据法令，市政厅在进行任何发展计划时，必须修改原有的发展大蓝图，之后再进行听证会。 （星洲日报/大都会?2007.09.27)

■据了解，红色地带是渠道保留地，已被发展成住宅、小贩中心和休闲公园，至於青色地带的绿肺是否会被发展，就不得而知。

■潘俭伟(右）与刘永山说，他们所指的图测和他们后面的地段就是双溪威社区唯一的绿肺。

High Commission seems like a non-existent office

BABYLENG7,
West Midlands, England.

I REFER to the letter “Lousy treatment at High Commission” by Malu Jadi Orang Malaysia (The Star, Sept 26).

I understand his frustration! When I registered my marriage with my British husband, I tried to contact officers at the High Commission hoping to seek advice on legalising our marriage under Malaysian law.

My numerous attempts to call the office during office hours went unanswered. Not even an answering machine to take my messages. My e-mail to jimlondon@btcon nect.com was futile as well.

One question: Why is the Malaysian Immigration London’s website called http:// jimlondon.net/. Sounds like a retail website.

My second encounter (or near encounter) with the High Commission was when I called to enquire about including my husband’s surname in my Malaysian passport.

Again, there was no answer to my phone calls and no reply to my e-mail. Why did I even try when I failed to get any response in the first case?

I seriously hope that the Foreign Affairs Ministry will review Malaysian officers at the Malaysian High Commission in London. Does the office exist at all? And if it does, do the officers work regular daytime hours?

May I also suggest that the website address be changed to something which shows that it’s a government body and not some funny name which does not even reflect Malaysia.

It’s probably high time that the website is upgraded as well.

Please, someone, do something. They should help Malaysians abroad who want to seek advice, not avoid them!

Lousy treatment at High Commission

MALU JADI ORANG MALAYSIA!
Leeds, Britain.

MY wife and I are currently in Leeds, England, and we had a baby in June. We are planning to register our son at the Malaysian High Commission in London, but are now thinking twice due to the immigration office there.

No one picks up the phone after the call is connected and if it is, there will be a voicemail redirecting the call to a website. Even the operator does not greet you!

What are our immigration officers doing over there that they refuse to entertain calls from fellow Malaysians?

I have heard that Malaysian High Commissions all over the world do not care for Malaysians and I have never believed these stories until now.

I am as patriotic as any Malaysian back home but when the Malaysian High Commission here is acting as if we Malaysians here are forgotten people, so be it.

The country will lose another Malaysian soon!

I proudly fly our Jalur Gemilang and even wear Malaysian football jerseys.

Thus, I don’t take it lightly that my wife and I are treated like sampah sarap where we speak to a machine ALL the time and are asked to go to a website that does not talk to us!

Can the Foreign Affairs Minister kindly ensure that staff serving us Malaysians overseas do a better job?

独立乜都假？

今年是2007年，是马来西亚半岛庆祝从英殖民者手中争取独立的50周年。

本来全体国民应该不分种族和宗教普天欢庆金禧国庆，惟过去数年所发生的数项课题导致民间对金禧国庆热诚不再。

虽然英殖民者已经离开我国50年，但是50年后我依然思考到底我们的生活比过去更好、更坏还是不比别人更好。

独立50年，我们依然看见弱势族群被赶出他们家园。他们之中，有马来人、有印度人，也有华人。吉隆坡双峰塔附近的甘榜伯仁邦村民就是在一夜之间失去他们的家园。

如今重新阅读当天政府重兵‘犯境’的新闻报道，当天悲怜的情景依然历历在目。他们失去的不只是他们的家园，而是他们的栖身之地，即时连神圣的回教堂在逃不过神手无情的摧残 。

可悲的是，甘榜伯仁邦的悲剧并没有停演，万饶新村的村民也面对同样的问题，而且越变越混乱。国能把问题推给州政府，州政府又把问题踢给国能，结果村民就好像人球一样，在州政府、国能、市议会、水源能讯部之间踢来踢去。到最后没有人知道球要踢给谁！

数天前马六甲巴也明光新村也发生类似事件。我们更不要忘记国内数千家已经遭当局拆毁的兴督教庙宇。

50年前的英殖民者大概也没有那么嚣张。他们最多也只是把我们的祖父祖母搬去新村。

国庆对广大的小市民、小村民、小商人等等就是——安居乐业——这不只是‘安全的居所、快乐地作业’这么简单，安居乐业就是：东西不要太贵、出门不怕打抢、有保障的工作、充裕就业升机会、合理的房屋、做生意没有繁文缛节、轻松申请执照、开车不怕塞车、不开车可搭公车、孩子能读好书、毕业之后有工做，不必在外国寄人篱下、生病看医生不必怕还不起医药费，更不用怕被医死或无端端断了一只手、也不用因为马来人华人、土著非土著、回教非回教或者是世俗非世俗的问题而伤感情。

拍拍胸膛问问自己，上面有哪一样是你拥有的？是哪一些坏人让你不能拥有这些东西？要怎么办才能获得这些东西？答案自己收好，不必告诉别人，可是你也应该想想，如果你还是无动于衷，那么你就是纵容坏人。

Lawyers March - Photos and Videos

The upbeat mood at the ‘walk for justice’ in Putrajaya belied serious intent - to protest the erosion of judicial independence in light of claims in the ‘Lingam tape’.

The last time that lawyers took to the streets was during the 1988 judicial crisis, when they protested the sacking of then Lord President Salleh Abas.

This morning, after police stopped buses ferrying the protesters to Putrajaya, some 200 occupants got off and walked to the Palace of Justice.

These pictures are taken by Lau Weng San, DAP Selangor Secretary.

These video clips, are also taken by Lau Weng San.

Walk for Justice: "When lawyers walk, something must be very wrong"

Contributed by Malaysian Bar Council Web Reporter
Wednesday, 26 September 2007, 04:41pm

PUTRAJAYA, Wed: "Lawyers don't walk everyday. Not even every month. But when they walk, then something must be very wrong," said Chairman of the Bar Council Ambiga Sreenevasan when addressing a strong crowd of more than 2,000 members of the Malaysian Bar and some concerned citizens at the Palace of Justice before the commencement of the walk to the Prime Minister's office to hand over the Bar's memorandum urging the government to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry to probe the state of judiciary and memorandum on the establishment of a judicial appointments and promotion commission.

Earlier, seven buses ferrying members of the Bar and public from Kuala Lumpur were denied entry to Putrajaya. Frustrated with the police tactics which included sending a helicopter hovering above the crowd, Bar Councillor Edmund Bon and lawyer Amer Hamzah Arshad then decided to lead the stranded numbering about 200 walking some five kilometres to the Palace of Justice.

When they arrived at about 11.30am, the group was met with a thunderous applause by those who waited patiently for them. The Walk for Justice scheduled at 11.00am then started at about 11.45am with Bar Council members leading the 2,000 plus lawyers and concerned citizens.

As they walked, they chanted various slogans led by Amer holding a loud hailer, shouting: "Who are we?" "Malaysian Bar", the crowd roared. "What do we want?" Amer asked. "Justice" the crowd replied in unison. The humorous part was when Amer shouted, "We are doing this for the sake of the country" and the crowd replied, "Correct, Correct, Correct!" Members also received public support from passers-by who greeted them by sounding their car honks.

The heavily-armed police including the Federal Reserve Unit, however, gave their fullest cooperation with some reporters cheekily remarking that this is perhaps the first time a march like this proceeded without any obstruction.

The press, both local and international including well-known bloggers like Raja Petra, Jeff Ooi and also Patrick Teoh were also there, busy taking pictures of this event of the Bar which happened only for the second time in the 60 years of history of the Bar.

"Today is indeed the greatest day of the Malaysian Bar", declared immediate Past President, Yeo Yang Poh. In fact, early in the morning, Yeo and lawyer Desmond Choi went on to the popular Cantonese FM 98.8 Channel to tell listeners why the lawyers were doing this with most callers calling in to praise the Malaysian Bar Council and members of the Malaysian Bar who decided to do this for justice.

The march stopped at the front gate to the Prime Minister's office at about 12.30pm. The office bearers, Ambiga, Vice-President Raguanth Kesavan, Secretary Lim Chee Wee and Treasurer George Varughese then went to the Prime Minister's office to hand over two memoranda to the Prime Minister's Principal Secretary whilst the crowd continued to stay behind chanting away in support of the four-man delegation.

The weather was perfect when the march started as if God was with us. But when the march ended, the heavens appeared to be crying for the judiciary too pouring down rains of tears whilst members of the Bar and their leaders steadfastly stayed behind, drenched in the rain.

For those who took part in this historical march, they had left Putrajaya today with their heads high for they had done something not just for the Bar but for the country. Most of all, they had walked the talk.

More pictures will be uploaded shortly in the public gallery.

We cannot sweep this major scandal under the carpet and still claim we have a viable judiciary

YB M. Kulasegaran,
Lawyer, DAP MP for Ipoh Barat

We march today to tell Malaysians and the world how low our once vaunted judiciary has fallen in the estimation of lawyers, fellow judges and citizens of the country.

The eight-minute Lingam tape has defrocked and made naked the conspiracy at the highest levels of the judiciary to fix high profile cases and promote like-minded, weak-kneed judges who will be subservient to their masters.

After such a revelation the only way forward is to cut away the cancer and chart a new path. Any other action i.e. closing an eye or sweeping it under the carpet will only prolong the agony and be a great disservice to the next generation.

Malaysians and millions of people in the world have watched the eight minute video clip now freely available on the internet, a clip that has seriously compromised the independence and integrity of the Malaysian judiciary at the highest level.

We cannot sweep this major scandal under the carpet and still claim we have a viable judiciary.

This cancer in our judiciary must be investigated and cleaned up. This is the only way the people can once again begin to have confidence and trust in our judges and the justice system.

It is clear from the eight minute video tape that our judiciary has been compromised for many years and completely made subservient to powerful individuals.

We march to tell the government that an immediate inquiry into the scandal is the only way forward for Malaysia to right the wrongs done and rehabilitate the most important institution in a free and democratic society.

Without a through and open investigation we cannot close one sordid chapter and open a new one.

The rot set in 1998 when we protested but failed to stop the arbitrary and unconstitutional sacking of than Lord President Tun Salleh Abas and Datuk George Seah and the late Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman as Supreme Court judges.

We never recovered from the series of body blows to the independence, impartiality, integrity and professionalism of the judiciary that was inflicted by then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and assisted by a cable of cronies.

The vacuum was filled by less then honourable people. Today we are paying the price of our failure.

Now almost two decades later we are faced with a cancer that has grown and spread its tentacles.

Malaysians had hoped that Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will deliver his promise to restore national and international confidence in the Malaysian system of justice with a truly independent judiciary and a just rule of law – but Abdullah failed to deliver.

After the video expose Ahmad Fairuz is not fit to continue as Chief Justice, as he clearly had never heard and does not understand the meaning of judicial accountability.

National and international confidence in the independence, impartiality, integrity and professionalism of the judiciary is at stake. If addressed, the scandal will have a major adverse impact on Malaysia’s efforts to enhance international competitiveness to face the challenges of globalization.

We march today to ensure that the government address not only the scandal of Lingam Tape but the crisis of confidence in the system of justice by setting up a Royal Commission of Inquiry to repair the damage and heal the deep wounds.

成立司法委员会

大马律师公会上周六晚上召开紧急会议，并针对最新发生的司法黑幕短片作出议决，号召至少500名律师和民众于下周三从布城的“正义殿堂”（Palace of Justice）游行至首相署，以提呈一份备忘录，促请政府设立一个皇家委员会来彻查自1988年起至今的司法界腐败问题。

律师公会果敢迅速的决定在一定程度上不仅反映律师们对我国司法独立日益下滑的不满，同时也是强化成立司法委员会，以公平、透明和具公信力的方式处理法官委任与擢升事项的时候。这也是许多先进国家在处理法官委任与擢升的现代化方式。

还记得大约一个月前我国可能面对的一项宪制危机，既我国司法界第3把交椅——马来亚大法官的职位。自从前马来亚大法官茜蒂诺玛于2007年1月5日退休后，该职就悬空超过7个月之久。

统治者会议召开两次都未能通过新的马来亚大法官人选，主要是首相从首席大法官敦阿末法鲁兹所推荐的人选——哈欣尤索夫——未能通过统治者会议。其中一项原因就是这其中一名最年轻的联邦法院法官自担任高庭法官以来，尚未完成35项民事及刑事判决的判词。

这反映出有关课题带来的宪制危机。

事发不到一个月，我国再发生另一宗司法丑闻。这是一宗涉及司法界最高职位和一名资深律师的丑闻。

令人悲哀的是，为官的一再呼吁人们不要轻易相信短片中的内容，有者语调甚至淡化这部短片，并指短片中显示的仅仅是一名律师和‘另一方’的交谈。

其实，与其证明短片的真伪，倒不如调查短片中所谈到的法官擢升、司法干预、勋衔安排等等丑闻的真伪？如果这些丑闻都是虚构的，短片的真实性不就不证自明了吗？

目前司法界必须进行结构性的改革，已全面恢复人民对司法独立、大公无私及廉正的信心，其中一项重大课题就是法官的委任。现有的制度有许多漏洞与问题，即法官的委任及擢升只由两人，即首相及首席大法官来决定。个中所涉及遴选与委任程序不透明、谘询程序神密化以及没有以预定准则评估人选。

比如说，首席大法官敦阿末法益鲁兹曾经公开指出，任何法官如尚未完成判词将不会获考虑擢升，因为法庭有一项指令说明，如果任何一方要求提出上诉，法官们必须在案件审讯完毕后8周内完成他们的判词。

令人惊讶的是，哈欣尤索夫这名联邦法院法官自从出任高庭法官以来竟累计多达30宗尚未完成判词的案件，而首席大法官诱那边厢并没有否认、也没有发表任何澄清或回应。

如果这名法官累计数达30多宗案件的判词为完成，他如何能够从高庭法官擢升至至联邦法院法官？

成立司法委员会正值此时。

Malaysia sends a space tourist only

My friend, Ronnie Liu, wrote an article on “Astrocannaut” describing that the RM684 million spent by the government to send the first so called “astronaut” into the space in a few weeks time is only described as “spaceflight participant” by USA National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

This is how our Dr Sheikh Muzhaphar Shukor is introduced in NASA website:

The Expedition 16 crew members pose for a portrait at the Johnson Space Center. From the left (front row) are Russia's Federal Space Agency cosmonaut Yuri Malenchenko, flight engineer and Soyuz commander; astronaut Peggy Whitson, commander; and Malaysian spaceflight participant Sheikh Muzhaphar Shukor. From the left (back row) are European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Léopold Eyharts, astronaut Garrett Reisman and astronaut Dan Tani, all flight engineers.

Scrolling down the webpage, you can see more. While Sheikh Muzhaphar’s colleagues, who all are experienced spacecraft engineer and commander, are tasked with numerous duties when in the space, but Sheikh Muzhaphar’s task list seems to be zero.

Before that, we were informed that this first Malaysian in the space will carry out numerous experiments, including how to make the-tarik and roti canai in the space, especially determining the direction of kiblat when in space.

Have a look at Expedition 16’s photos. You can hardly find Sheikh Muzhaphar in action except here, here and here.

I decided to look for a little more about the definition of an astronaut (or cosmonaut in Russian).

The Britannica really have a lot of this.

I just extracted some important part of the article for your convenient reading.

Astronaut training are divided grossly into two system, i.e. the US system and the Russian system.

The US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has selected two different types of individuals as astronaut candidates. One group is required to have extensive flying experience in jet aircraft. These astronaut candidates are trained to serve as shuttle pilots and eventually shuttle mission commanders. The second group is chosen to become mission specialist astronauts. These candidates are not required to be pilots (though some are); rather, they are individuals with advanced scientific, medical, or engineering training or experience. Since 1992, in anticipation of participating in missions to the International Space Station (ISS), a number of individuals from various countries have become international mission specialist astronaut candidates.

Astronaut candidates participate in an intense one-to-two-year training program at NASA's Johnson Space Center, in Houston. They learn shuttle and space station systems, guidance and navigation, orbital dynamics, and materials processing as well as mathematics, geology, meteorology, oceanography, astronomy, and physics. They are also trained in land and sea survival, scuba diving, space suits, and weightlessness. After successfully completing their training, candidates are designated NASA career astronauts.

In addition to pilots and mission specialist astronauts, who expect to fly on several space missions during their time at NASA, there is a third category of individuals who have gone into space on the shuttle. These individuals are designated payload
specialists. The specialists are required to carry out experiments or payload activities with which they are particularly familiar.

And this is the Russian system.

In the Russian space program there have traditionally been two categories of
cosmonauts—mission commanders (who are usually pilots) and flight engineers.

Training for cosmonaut candidates, which happens at the Yury Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Centre in Star City, Russia, near Moscow, includes two years of general topics related to spaceflight, after which they are designated cosmonauts, and then up to two years of training on spaceflight hardware. Only then may an individual be assigned to a specific mission, with one or more additional years of training required before launch.

So, that means a proper astronaut or cosmonaut training programme could eat up to years before you can really take a lift into the space. I am sure Sheikh Muzhaphar does not fall into any of these categories.

What is more outraging is the last paragraph of the article:

A few individuals have traveled into space as private citizens. Some have been sponsored by their employers, as was Japanese television journalist Akiyama Tohiro, who reported from the Mir space station in December 1990. Others, like U.S. entrepreneur Dennis Tito, South African businessman Mark Shuttleworth, U.S. businessman Gregory Olsen, Iranian-born U.S. engineer Anousheh Ansari, and Hungarian-born U.S. computer software executive Charles Simonyi, who made brief trips to the ISS aboard a Russian spacecraft between 2001 and 2007, used their own resources to pay the multimillion-dollar price for the voyage. Such individuals are designated spaceflight participants or “space tourists.”

So, “spaceflight participant” is also referred as “space tourist”.

So, Malaysians spent RM684 million just to send a “space tourist” into the space. If that’s the case, why is so special about Sheikh Muzhaphar for being selected for the task?

So, would this also means that Malaysian government is the first government on earth to sponsor a person to travel in the space when this has always been a luxurious spending for those filthy rich and famous?

It is a real Malaysia Boleh in shame.

Can somebody ask Sheikh Muzhaphar questions on what exactly he has done up in the sky and what kind of technology has he mestered or whether he can handled a spacecraft?

Photos in UPM

For those who wish to see photos taken in UPM this morning, please visit here.

I'm now in UPM

I am now in UPM, attending a memorandum submission to the Vice Chancellor of the Univerisity in protest against the unruly act of the university's special task force head.

I was in the same campus last year when similar action happened in the campus when a group of pro-students students were assaulted by the university's pro-establishment students in one of the hostels.

Memorandum was prepared but the University refused to receive it, not even sending a rep to receive it. Compared it with the many memorandums we submitted to other government agencies, including the Prime Minister Department.

Is UPM authority higher than PMD? Certainly not, but we'll see today if history will repeat or not.

More news to follow.

4000 Malaysians migrated to Australia last year

There were over 4,000 Malaysians with special skills or degrees that migrated to Australia last year.

-- James Yap, Rayford Migration Services

Look at the numbers, 4000!

It means that Malaysian lost 4000 talented citizens to Australia last year. And what about years before last year? How many that we had lost out to Australia? How many more for those migrated to other countries?

I could not dare to think about the number. How about you? Are you going to migrate soon?

There are more write up here.

Nigerian politicians trade punches

Sep. 21 - Nigerian legislators trade punches and insults at a hearing into a 5 million (USD) spending spree by the speaker.

The spending spree by the speaker of the House of Representatives has caused a national scandal and paralysed the House. Speaker Patricia Etteh is under investigation by a committee of fellow members over allegations that she flouted House rules by approving contracts worth 5 million (USD) to renovate her residence and that of her deputy and to buy 12 cars.

让在野党通过媒体发表政见

選委會：應有權規定媒體
讓在野黨發表政見

（布城23日訊）選舉委員會主席丹斯里阿都拉昔認為，選委會應獲權力，規定媒體在選舉期間，確保在野黨候選人也獲曝光和宣傳機會。

他說，在一個民主的選舉國家，選民在投票前，應了解候選人的政綱和計劃等。

“要讓選民了解這些重要事項，意味著所有政黨都應獲曝光機會。”

阿都拉昔接受《新海峽時報》專訪時說，根據國際準則，媒體在選舉期間，雖可進行任何報導，但必須遵守一些條例。

他到底是谁？

传雪一前华裔议员或跳槽
大选代表反对党上阵
updated:2007-09-23 20:33:36 MYT

（巴生讯）可靠消息说，雪州某执政党的一名华裔领袖，有意跳槽反对党。

除了准备跳槽反对党，该名领袖也打算在来届大选，在本身活跃的选区内，代表反对党上阵，与国阵候选人，直接对垒。

政界灵通消息说，他是国阵某成员党的一名领袖，曾受委担任议员，在党内曾领导过党区级组织。

该名领袖不久前，被指私下前往某反对党总部，与该党领导层接洽，密商跳槽事宜。

在会上，他表明准备加入该党，并有意代表该党在来届大选中，在地方上的州议席，与某国阵候选人对垒。

不过，消息指出，有关反对党希望该名领袖先退党，再申请加入该党后，才来谈大选披甲上阵的问题。 （星洲日报?2007.09.23）

Growing up together

By Tun Hanif Omar

GROWING up, I saw the Japanese invasion looked upon differently by the Malays, Chinese and Indians. Many radical Malays welcomed it as a deliverance from British subjugation but many Chinese saw it as an extension of Japan’s war on their Motherland. Many Indians saw in the Japanese support for India’s independence from Britain a possibility of cooperation. Thus the three major races saw the same phenomenon of the Japanese invasion in three different perspectives. On the Japanese surrender, the Chinese-dominated Malayan Peoples’ Anti-Japanese Army exacted vengeance on so-called Japanese collaborators. Many of those they killed were Malays.

Sir David Watherston, a former Chief Secretary to the government, described the period as one of “acute tension … between Malays and Chinese, culminating in massacres in a few instances”.

When the overseas Chinese leader Tan Kah Kee in 1946 demanded that the British hand over Malaya to China as the Chinese had already outnumbered the Malays, it shook up the Malays.

Two years later, the Chinese-dominated Communist Party of Malaya launched its insurrection to seize power. In the words of the same Sir Richard Watherston, “ … If the communists had been successful, the Malays would have found themselves under the control of an alien regime. No doubt some quislings would have emerged, but … the Malays would have lost the power to decide the future of their own country.”

This was not lost upon most Malays, which goes to explain why Chin Peng failed to get Malay support.

The Malays demanded for independence almost as a price for supporting the British in the war against the CPM. The British were fi rm that the three races should work together before full independence could be given. It was against this backdrop that our journey towards Merdeka and a shared destiny begun when Umno, the MCA, and the MIC formed the Alliance party and decided on mutually agreed goals as refl ected in the Federal Constitution. This was the social contract or compact of 1957 and marks the beginning of the nature of our fellow-travelling.

This social contract mirrors the fears, hopes and aspirations of the indigenous Malays and orang asli on the one hand and those of the immigrant communities on the other. The indigenous wanted their special position as the original masters of the land to be refl ected in special rights. Thus, even without the NEP and the NDP, Art. 153 allows the Yang diPertuan Agong to reserve scholarships, civil service jobs, business permits or licences for Malays and bumiputras, provided nothing already in the hands of the other communities can be taken away. This is the origin of the percentage reserved for bumiputras from an expanding cake. The immigrants wanted their special interests such as citizenship, freedom of worship, the right to learn their mother tongues, and ownership of what they already have, etc. to be safeguarded.

Interestingly, in a letter to Tunku Abdul Rahman in 1975, the MCA leader Tun Tan Siew Sin wrote that during the negotiations on the shape of the Constitution he was a lone voice and did not hold much hope that all the MCA demands would be met but he was surprised at the magnanimity of Tunku and his Umno colleagues who, despite being under pressure from their own party, gave him more than he had ever dared to hope for. He thanked Tunku and said he would always support Tunku and his colleagues for this. This presaged the give and take spirit that is the driving force behind the cohesion of the Barisan Nasional.

Fifty years and three days have passed since Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra read out the proclamation of Independence. It gives us an idea of what was our founding fathers’ vision of the country they wanted to create.

The Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It will have safeguards for the rights and prerogatives of the rulers and the fundamental rights and liberties of the people. It will provide for the orderly advancement of the country as a constitutional monarchy based on parliamentary democracy.

It will be an independent state founded upon the principles of liberty and justice and ever seeking the welfare and happiness of its people and the maintenance of a just peace among all nations.

That’s our legacy.

We can agree that for the past 50 years we have remained very independent but, as for the supremacy of the Federal Constitution, in spite of being enshrined as Art. 4 of the Constitution, some ignoramuses have challenged it, espousing that Parliament is supreme or that God’s law is supreme. The one has failed to understand that Parliament is a creature of the Constitution and therefore subservient to it, and the second has failed to see that the Constitution is a solemn compact inter-races and that even the Prophet Muhammad had honoured his compacts.

This confusion has arisen because we do not teach the history of our constitutional development and arrangements to our people. On Merdeka day 50 years ago the Straits Times published a parting advice from Mr H.G. Hammett, Malacca’s Resident Commissioner, that, “to every politician especially, I commend the study of Malayan history, if only to remind him that what had happened before can happen again.” He recalled that an English judge once said that every candidate for parliament should fi rst deposit with the returning offi cer a certifi cate that he had passed an exam in history. (Straits Times Aug 31, 1957)

So we need to entrench this fact of the supremacy of the Constitution in the minds of everyone, particularly the judges who have to decide on constitutional issues, and members of Parliament who will continue to be passing laws and be tempted to continue to amend the Constitution. Many amendments have been made, too many to mention, and some have diminished the power of the rulers and the judiciary – the two moderating infl uences on parliamentary oppression. And there is disquiet in some quarters that a radical lobby in Parliament is cavalier about the importance of fundamental rights. This makes it even more important that our judges are held to their solemn oath to defend the spirit and letter of the Constitution. Our compact, enhanced in 1963 with the inclusion of some of the 20-point safeguards for Sabah and Sarawak, is the basis on which we have agreed we can live and work together to make Malaysia a prosperous and happy nation in which we can all have an equitable share.

Our parliamentary democracy started on a strong footing because the British had prepared our leaders. We had had state legislative councils since before the turn of the 19th century and the Federated Malay States Federal Legislative Assembly came into being in 1896. Apart from these continuing except for the war and occupation years, Tunku Abdul Rahman and his colleagues had further training from 1954 when we achieved self-government and Tunku became the chief minister. So, when Merdeka came with its Parliament, our leaders and offi cials were conversant with the workings and demands of parliamentary democracy. Thus you find that that generation of government leaders appreciated the role of a loyal though hardhitting Opposition in Parliament. Tunku nurtured this by being cordial to opposition leaders. Our fundamental rights and liberties mirror those found in the European and English bills of rights, including the grounds on which they can be restricted. However, we should hew closer to their respect for the rule of law by allowing judicial review in all cases to avoid oppression and to be in consonance with the declaration that we are founded on the principles of justice and liberty.

When we look at our original Constitution and the major national institutions – the Yang diPertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers, Parliament, the judiciary, the Attorney-General’s chambers, the police, etc., many people today have the perception that members of Parliament should be allowed more leeway to vote according to their conscience but I think a coalition government like the Barisan Nasional cannot work unless each component can deliver the support that is expected of it by the coalition.

Many people also have the perception that the judiciary, the AG’s chambers and the police have seen better days in several respects. This is a great pity as our institutions are supposed to improve with time in tandem with developments in the advanced, progressive democracies.

We must always benchmark ourselves against the best countries, their achievements and their best practices. After all we have only about 12 years to reach a developed nation status. We have to make haste to put our acts together.

At the time of Independence the police were responsible for all anti-corruption work. In 1967 we created a new important institution, the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) solely devoted to that function, so important was the fight against corruption. The agency started off very well but had failed us increasingly these past fifteen years. There seems to be a slight awakening with the new director-general but we cannot afford for our institutions to be predicated on personalities:
the system itself must be good, transparent and accountable.

Under present circumstances and with all that have been happening, we need an independent judicial commission, we need an independent police commission on misconduct and corruption so that the people’s confidence in the police can be returned. And we could be better off if the Attorney-General is made accountable in some way. We also need the ACA to be independent of direct or indirect political control. I think once these institutions are set right and function as they should, the other institutions will improve or will be more easily made to improve. The government then would be in a better position to ensure the welfare and happiness of the people.

The feeling today is that the government has failed to deliver effectively on a very important promise of transparency, accountability and anticorruption, and our justice system suffers as a result.

Our multi-cultural milieu makes us a more diffi cult nation to build and unite than many others but for 50 years our leaders and institutions have been able to keep us together in relative comfort, progress and happiness. This is not a paradox of what I have said earlier about our institutional shortcomings. It is merely an acknowledgement of a fact: we have indeed progressed much in the last 50 years in so many fi elds but the important point is that we would be doing better if we can get rid of some major impediments.

Some people say that the government’s affirmative action is a drag and should be done away with. I say that for equity, the affirmative action is still necessary but it should be on a need basis, not a racial basis. That way we would probably be looking more in the direction of the orang asli and the hinterland of Sabah and Sarawak natives and the poor among the Malays, Chinese and Indians, and others. The disadvantaged should be given a leg-up, otherwise the rich and privileged will sweep them aside.

In late 1970 or early 1971, Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Home Affairs, asked for a Special Branch (SB) paper on affirmative action. SB was conditioned by our long battle for hearts and minds in the fi ght against the communists. SB opted for affirmative action based on needs and not on race. To allay Malay concerns SB argued that since most of the poor were Malays, more Malays than anybody else would benefi t but they would be the more deprived Malays. By not making it racial it would prevent the CPM from
exploiting the issue.

Any government except for an out-and-out capitalist government will want to see an equitable distribution of wealth. Our government’s many trust organisations and companies should be an instrument for this. They should always be wellmanaged by the best people and examplary in transparency and accountability so as to assist in giving the have-nots a fair deal and a chance in life. That should be one of their trust objects, i.e. to redistribute wealth and opportunities equitably.

If a regional development approach is the best approach, so be it but we have to beware that development does not overwhelmingly benefit only the same groups again and again and any benefit to target groups is only minimal and transient. There is a perception that when it comes to government expenditure, we do not get our money’s worth.

When the Barisan Nasional pro-development election manifesto for Kelantan did not cut ice with the population, I asked my former Kelantan schoolmates why they did not vote for the BN. Didn’t they want development? Of course they wanted development, they said, if they could benefit from it but, who had benefi tted so far, they asked? So, that’s a point to consider.

This is where a strong civil society can help to dissuade any hanky-panky in development and public projects. By demanding publicity and accountability, fair play and environmental protection, they can make this country attractive to investors, particularly those with a strong CSR culture. Increasingly investors of this kind are becoming the dominant players.

Our civil society has steadily grown. Lately they seem to be more tolerated. This, I think must be due to our prime minister’s relatively tolerant and inclusive attitude. They are playing a great role in helping to check and expose government excesses, lack of transparency and accountability. This is crucial for the development of a good and responsible society. Checking on big government and protecting the interests of the little man, is part and parcel of the rule of law as much as judicial review.

After 50 years of independence the various races, particularly in the peninsula, have not moved closer to each other. It is imperative that we remove all the impediments to having our children in one school system. One system should be devised that can meet with the reasonable expectations of every parent and pupil.

Certain students may have special needs over and above the common system curriculum but they can be met by extra classes. Our children must grow up together, play together, study together. Teachers should be judged by their ability to treat their wards equally and to make each one feel welcomed and wanted. They should not impose their political or religious inclinations on their students.

If we put the children together from an early age, they will develop a feeling of comradeship cutting across racial and religious barriers. It would be second nature for them later on in life to mix and work with, and employ their friends irrespective of race and creed, guided only by their ability and character. This early exposure to each other and to each other’s culture will remove the prevailing prejudices.

We were close to achieving a one school system in the mid 1960’s. Two developments derailed it: the change to the Malay medium from the English medium in all secondary schools post 1969, and the 1969 racial incident which led to racial polarisation by itself and by certain government policies thereafter. The rise of China as an economic power with opportunities for those who can speak Mandarin, and the lack of Mandarin language competencies in national-type schools have contributed to the estrangement of Chinese students from national schools.

The formation of the Barisan National in 1973 with the PMIP in a pivotal role also led to greater Islamisation across the public board including schools. The injudicious and insensitive action of certain bigots among the teachers in imposing their religious preferences on the schools and their students has also exacerbated the problem.

Living together in a multiracial country and forging ahead together call for a lot of mutual understanding and appreciation for diversity and a determined effort to go the last mile to make them work. It would be easier if the leaders of all hues would make a public effort to go the last mile.

Our patriotic songs speak of “satu bahasa, satu bangsa”. Some people want to see satu bangsa but many bahasa. Others, including me, feel that all of us must be fluent in bahasa even if we are fluent in seven or eight other languages; then only can we get closer to one bangsa.

One bangsa – Bangsa Malaysia – should be our goal. We are citizens of one nation so, why can’t we all be Bangsa Malaysia? What does it take for us to move in that direction? We will only know if we poll each other’s views and see how we can come to terms.

There is still a lot of unnecessary emotion here but that is the reality.

马华更民主，大马会更民主吗？

最近报章出现一些评论比较性议题的文章，其中一则令人咋舌的文章就是一则题为‘马华比行动党民主’的文章。

我不想有人指责我以个人身份发表文章，反正‘马华比行动党民主’中牵涉行动党，我也好不避嫌地以我的党职——雪州行动党秘书——堂堂正正发表文章，免得遭人指责骑劫‘自由撰稿人’。

第一点：如果以‘公开让代表们直来直往攻击、批评领导层的举动，然后没有招致任何相关被对付行动’作为更加民主的体现，那肯定是对民主的一大侮辱。

民主除了能够让你畅所欲言，也必须要让你能够在大选、党选在没有任何人士干预的情况下作出你的决定。

如果大选、党选充斥贿选、买票卖票等舞弊行为；或者是菜单文化盛行，这就是更民主的体现吗？这些难道就是健康政治的体现吗？

第二点：马华代表大会能够‘公开让代表们直来直往攻击、批评领导层的举动，然后没有招致任何相关被对付行动’，并不代表行动党的代表们也不能够这么做。

只要没有违反党章，行动党的代表们肯定能够自由在代表大会上发表他们的看法，包括批评中央领导和州领袖的处事作风。但是，即使是这点，也不足以让我们炫耀这是我们‘比他人民主的地方’。

行动党的组织架构是由支部组成。有别于马华（马华的中央代表是由区部代表出席，各区部代表则由支部代表在区部代表大会选出），行动党的中央代表就是支部代表。这样能够说行动党比马华民主吗？你可以说是，也可以说不是，但是，以此贬低他人来抬高自己，只会显示本身技穷的一面。

第三点，也是最重要的一点：即使马华比行动党民主，这重要吗？马来西亚会否因为马华的‘更民主’而变得更民主？马华的‘更民主’会不会直接民主化国阵最大的成员党——巫统？如果不能，那么‘马华更民主’岂不是一个虚假且没有意义的命题？

It's confirmed! It's Nurin!

PETALING JAYA: The police have said that DNA tests on the body found stuffed in a sports bag on Monday in Petaling Jaya show that it is that of missing girl Nurin Jazlin Jazimin.

Petaling Jaya OCPD ACP Arjunaidi Mohamed on Thursday said that DNA tests have so far indicated that the body found in a shophouse at Jalan PJS1, Petaling Jaya Utama is that of Nurin, 8, who had been missing since Aug 20.

Police are waiting for confirmation of the DNA tests.

At Hospital Kuala Lumpur, Nurin's father Jazimin Abdul Jalil, 33, a taxi driver still denied the body was that of his daughter, reports BERNAMA.

"I am Nurin's father ... I know my daughter better than anyone else. My heart is saying the body is not my daughter.

"If police ask me to take the body, I will accept, I will perform the funeral rites and bury it. But I want the police to pursue the search for Nurin because I know Nurin is still safe out there," he said, speaking to reporters outside the HKL mortuary.

Jazimin added that he was sure the body was not Nurin because of the teeth and the scar that Nurin had.

According to Jazimin, Nurin's teeth did not have gaps between them and she also had a scar on her thigh.

Nurin's mother Norazian Bistaman, 35, said she was ready to accept what the authorities tell her.

"What else can I say. The DNA test shows she is my daughter. I will accept the will of God.

"As a mother, I still hope the body is not my daughter's. Which mother will accept the reality that her daughter was raped and killed brutally.

"Only God knows the extent of my sadness and grief," she said in tears.

Norazian said this year's Hari Raya Aidilfitri celebrations would be the most joyous and meaningful in her life in the event Nurin was found safe and sound.

"In fact, we've already bought Nurin's Hari Raya dress and I will patiently wait for her return," she added.

Gaji dan allowances untuk Perdana Menteri, Menteri dan Ahli Parlimen

I got this thru email:-

Gaji dan allowances untuk Perdana Menteri, Menteri dan Ahli Parlimen

Ini semua adalah dibawah Undang-undang Ahli Parlimen (Saraan) pindaan
2005 .

Gaji untuk Perdana Menteri, Menteri, MP adalah seperti berikut,

Perdana Menteri - RM22,826.65 sebulan
Timbalan Perdana Menteri - RM18, 168.15 sebulan
Menteri-menteri Kabinet - RM14,907.20 sebulan.
Timbalan Menteri-menteri Kabinet - RM10,847.65 sebulan
Setiausaha Parlimen - RM7,187.40

Ahli Dewan Negara - RM6,508.59
Ahli Dewan Rakyat (ni kira MP lah) - RM4, 112.79

So, contohnya macam Pak Lah... dia adalah Perdana Menteri dan juga
Menteri Kewangan dan Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri dan juga dia
adalah MP, so monthly income dia ialah

= RM22,826.65 + (RM14, 907.20 x 2) + RM4,112.79 = RM56,753.84.

Elaun Agong, Sultan, Menteri dan sebagainya , Sila lihat berapa duit
tax payers keluar bagi pada mereka ni

Elaun untuk Agong dan Permaisuri Agong Ini adalah dibawah
Undang-undang Malaysia Akta 269 (Akta Peruntukan Diraja 1982)

Aku ada akta ni dalam pdf file. Tapi aku ringkas kan saja lah untuk
info kita. Tapi kalau ada siapa nak akta tu aku boleh letak dalam ni.

Ini budget tahunan untuk Agong. Akan dibayar secara bulanan kepada
Agong. Selain dari elaun untuk Agong ni, mereka masih dapat elaun
Sultan di negeri masing masing.

1. Privy Purse - RM360,000 (bermakna bulanan adalah RM30,000).
2. Elaun keraian - RM120,000 (bulanan sebanyak RM10,000) 3. Elaun
diraja Istana Negara - RM144,000 (bulanan sebanyak RM12,000)

So, total setiap bulan s eorang Agong dapat adalah sebanyak RM52,000.

Elaun untuk Permaisuri Agong ialah

1. Privy Purse - RM67,200 (iaitu RM5,600 sebulan).
2. Elaun keraian - RM21,600 (RM1,800 sebulan).

Total sebulan Permaisuri Agong dapat ialah RM7,400.

Selain daripada tu, setiap tahun Agong dapat lebih RM6 million untuk
perbelanjaan istana, sambutan tetamu dan untuk gaji pekerja dia.
Breakdown nya adalah seperti berikut

1. Perbelanjaan istana dan sambutan tetamu - RM5,259,100 2. Gaji
kakitangan istana - RM1,004,880 3. Bounty Diraja, pemberian dan
khidmat khas - RM50,000

Elaun untuk bekas Agong dan bekas Permaisuri Agong

Aku tak pernah tau wujud nya elaun ni. Bermakna setiap bekas Agong
yang tukar setiap 5 tahun tu akan dapat elaun bekas Agong dan bekas
Permaisuri Agong. Ini adalah dibawah peruntukan Undang-undang Malaysia

Akta 270 (Akta Istana Negara Elaun-elaun Diraja 1982) pindaan 2006.

Dibawah akta ni elaun akan dibayar kepada bekas Agong dan bekas
Permaisuri Agong setiap bulan untuk seumur hidup. Contoh nya lah kan,
macam Sultan Azlan (bekas Agong), selain dari elaun Sultan dia dapat
tiap bulan, dia juga dapat elaun bekas Agong.

1. Elaun Diraja Istana Negara untuk bekas Agong - RM15,180 sebulan.
2. Elaun Diraja Istana Negara untuk bekas Permaisuri Agong - RM4,500
sebulan.

Boleh dikatakan kat Malaysia ni kebanyakan Sultan dah pun jadi Agong,
just imagine berapa banyak kerajaan belanjakan untuk kesemua
bekas-bekas Agong dan bekas-bekas Permaisuri Agong yang masih hidup?

Pencen khas untuk balu Agong

Ini adalah pencen untuk balu Agong. Bermakna kalau Agong tu mati
semasa dia tengah jadi Agong, so balu dia akan dapat pencen ni.
Contohnya pencen khas ni Siti Aishah dapat sebab Sultan Selangor mati
masa tu dia tengah jadi Agong kan. Kira untung lah Siti Aishah ni
sebab dapat pencen khas. Anyway, ini adalah di bawah Undang-undang
Malaysia Akta 223 (Akta Pencen Khas Raja Permaisuri Agong 1979).

So, ini lah yang Siti Aishah dapat.

1. Pencen seumur hidup - RM4,500 sebulan.
2. Kereta (cukai jalan dan bayaran pendaftaran percuma) atau wang
pukal RM250,000 untuk kereta. Juga dapat RM2,590.87 sebulan untuk
driver dan maintenance of car.
3. Rumah Kerajaan yang akan disenggara oleh Kerajaan atau wang pukal
RM750,000.

Elaun Sultan dan kerabat (contoh Kedah)

Elaun untuk Sultan dan kerabat kat setiap negeri adalah dibawah
peruntukan negeri masing-masing. Setiap negeri ada Enakmen Peruntukan
Diraja. Ini contoh untuk Kedah. Basically, kat negeri negeri lain pun
lebih kurang sama juga amount nya.

1. Elaun Sultan - RM52,600 sebulan.
2. Elaun keraian Sultan = RM15,480

So, setiap bulan Sultan (contoh disini ialah Sultan Kedah) ialah
sebanyak RM68,080.

Untuk Sultanah pulak elaun nya adalah

1. Elaun Sultanah - RM12,000 sebulan
2. Elaun peribadi Sultanah - RM2,600 sebulan.

Sebulan Sultanah akan dapat RM14,600.

Elaun lain lain untuk kerabat ialah
Raja Muda - RM13,000
Raja Puan Muda - RM5,200
Tunku Bendahara - RM4,000
Bini Tunku Bendahara - RM1,250
Tunku Temenggung - RM3,500
Isteri Tunku Temenggung - RM900
Tunku Laksamana - RM3,000
Isteri Tunku Laksamana - RM600

Banyak lagi elaun untuk kerabat bergelar.

Selain daripada tu kerabat-kerabat lain pun dapat allowances juga.
Contoh macam anak anak Sultan dapat allowace dalam RM1,000 sebulan and

kerabat jauh sikit (bukan anak Sultan) dinamakan kerabat kategori 2
juga dapat allowace sebanyak RM500 sebulan.

Berapa ramai kerabat? Bayang kan berapa Malaysia habis kan duit untuk
mereka semua ni.

PJ DAP Tanglung Festival 22/9/2007

PJ DAP is going to hold a Tanglung Festival on 22nd September 2007 at 8:30pm in No. 444, Jalan PJU 1/10, Kampung Cempaka 47301 Petaling Jaya.

We would like to invite not only residents of Kampung Cempaka but also residents from adjacent neighbourhood to participate together with children and family members. Light refreshments are prepared.

DAP Selangor Chairman Ean Yong Hian Wah, Economic Advisor to DAP Secretary-General Tony Pua as well as committee members of Kg Cempaka JKKK will be invited to join us.

For more details, please do not hesitate to contact Dr Cheah Wing Yin at 012-2818611 or Mr Chang Pak Hong 012-2554918.

八打灵再也民主行动党922中秋晚会

八打灵再也民主行动党将于2007年9月22日晚上八时半假千百家新村PJU 1/10路门牌444号举办一场别开生面的中秋晚会。

我们谨此诚意邀请千百家村民以及附近花园住宅区的居民携带家眷与小孩共赴这场中秋晚会。现场也准备简单糕点。

我们也将邀请雪州行动党主席欧阳捍华、行动党秘书长经济顾问潘俭伟以及千百家乡村治安委员会同人一起参与其盛。

如有任何疑问，请联络谢永贤医生012-2818611或曾柏雄先生012-2554918。

Statement issued by UPM VC stirs more questions than answers!

Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) vice-chancellor Nik Mustapha R Abdullah yesterday issued an official statement defending the action of campus authorities in seizing a student activist’s laptop and 12 other items during a spot check on his hostel room.

Nik Mustapha told the media that “the action taken by the UPM security department was in accordance with the rules and regulations that relate to disciplinary violations made by Yee. His accusations are lies” and that “on Sept 14, the security department was notified by the Students Supreme Council (MTM) and Dorm 13 of a spate of mobile phone thefts in the dorm.”

Common sense will ask that if it is a spate mobile phone thefts, then the spot check should be conducted mainly to search for stolen mobile phones.

My first immediate question why did the security department bother about other items? Why were there looking for items such as pen drive, MP4 players, laptop, CD etc when they should be looking for unsolicited mobile phones? What’s wrong for students to have these items in their room? How did the security officers know about unlawful items inside these gadgets without opening it? Can a stolen mobile phone be kept inside a laptop?!

Who is lying here?

Parliamentary Opposition Leader, Lim Kit Siang, has described UPM is more famous as a Mat Rempit University than as a Research University. This is correct as this is not the first time public witness such Mat Rempit style of running a university.

During the last campus election in UPM, the university security department also raided rooms of pro-mahasiswa in the campus and confiscated some campaign materials.

The University also acted unfairly to pro-Mahasiswa students when they were rudely assaulted by another group of students from the Students Representative Coucil (SRC) in July 2006.

The University also refused to accept memorandum submitted by 23 NGOs and political parties on 25th July while trying nuisance to disturb the gathering crowd to submit memorandum. When the DAP managed to send numerous memorandum to various government agencies, even to the PM himself, UPM’s refusal to accept the memorandum then was an arrogant act.

Students this time has to lodge police report to protect their rights in the campus show how serious human rights are abused in the Mat rempit-run UPM.

We demand the Ministry of Higher Education to interfere and promise that such untoward incident will never happen.

DAP will definitely bring up this matter in the Parliament through our elected representatives.

大学选举不是考试，应撤销不民主条规

我们对即将举行的校园选举表示关注，并认为高教部应命令各国立大专撤销所有不民主的选举条规。

高教部是否能够公正、透明和开放地处理全国各国立大专的校园选举，将对我国高教的发展扮演重要的角色。

作为开放的第一步，高教部长应该允许大马人权委员会进入国立大专监督即将进行的校园选举。高教部长应该了解，允许人权委员会进入校园观察校园选举并不能被无理及简单地诠释为亲学生阵线的胜利，反之这应被视为正常民主制度运作的常态。

须知道，大马人权委员会是国会通过成立的官方机构，目标是要在大马推广人权概念的认识和尊重。除非高教部长交待为何不允许人权委员会进入校园，否则我们将会在国会内外继续向高教部施压。

第二、高教部在来届校园选举应该恢复使用 2001年之前的选举条规。

去年的马大2006/07年校园选举条例继续沿用一些在之前校园选举中受到争议的条例，如规定学生的投票地点设在各宿舍礼堂和学生活动中心，以方便校方追踪学生的选票，导致学生担心秋后算帐而改变他们的投票倾向、候选人须自掏腰包印制政纲、候选人平均累积学分（CGPA）须高过3.0、禁止候选人公开结盟并提出共同竞选宣言、将竞选期限从以前的五天缩短至现在的两三天、设立电子投票与具有编号的选票、候选人必须通过演讲测验或面试等等。

这些条规仿佛告诉我们校园选举就好像一般的考试或测验。我们认为这是不应该发生的，校园选举选出来的学生代表固然是通过学生运用手上的一票选出来，校方只不过执行选举事务，无权过渡干涉来决定谁可以做候选人。

此外，在2001年以后，校方也惯常以恐吓的手段来威吓学生和候选人，意图制造白色恐怖。2001年之前的校园选举条规相对于现在的条规来得简单，而且这些简单条规并没有带来严重的问题。

校园选举是一个让学生参与校园政治的重要平台。如果连这方面校方也无法让大专生自由发挥他们的才华，这对提升国内大专教育素质来说是一项重大的打击。纵观来届校园选举的条规，校方依然实施打压性的条规，无形中压制学生的基本权利。

博大校方流氓作风非首次，行动党将带上国会

有鉴于博特拉大学校方（博大）在校园选举逼近之际，而在日前凌晨时分以无理和野蛮的方式突击搜查及没收博大亲学生阵线助选团成员俞扬阳的手提电脑和手机，行动党将会针对此事带上国会。

这并非博大校方第一次打压亲学生阵线，数年前博大校方也曾利用宿舍总监，深夜进入亲学生阵线成员的房间搜查和没收宣传品，结果遭受学生权益组织和公民社会团体严厉谴责侵犯学生私隐权，如今却再次恐吓学生，实在过分嚣张。

此外，博大校方在去年7月间发生的亲校方阵线学生向亲学生阵线学生动粗一事也明显倾向于犯规的亲校方阵线学生。

博大校方更在7月25日拒绝接纳23个的政党团体和非政府组织针对博大校园发生学生动粗事件随呈交的联合备忘录。更令人遗憾的是，博大校方允许一群来历不明的人士在行政楼向我们发出各种干扰的声音。

可见博大校方在压制学生活动自由与提倡校园民主方面依然往开倒车的方式行驶。

博大校园一再发生类似的流氓事件，甚至学生必须报警才能保护自己的财产与人身安全，显示流氓文化已经渗透博大校方管理层。

社会人士不能以再允许类似事件继续在国立大专上演，高教部必需采取积极的态度针对博大校方的野蛮行径给予合理交待。

行动党将会通过我们的人民代议士在议会带出这个课题，并且要求高教部作解释。

Child found sexually assaulted and killed

By RASHITHA A. HAMID
rashitha@thestar.com.my

PETALING JAYA: She was just a little girl. But that did not stop some sick monster from killing her after sexually assaulting her.

Her naked body was stuffed into a sports bag and left at the staircase of a shop lot in PJS1/48 Petaling Utama yesterday.

There were bruises on her neck, suggesting that she may have been strangled. There were also bruises on her hands.

The girl, said to be between six and nine, was initially feared to be eight-year-old Nurin Jazlin Jazimin who has been reported missing. But Nurin Jazlin’s parents, who rushed to the Hospital Kuala Lumpur mortuary, said it was not their daughter.

A supervisor with a book distributing company Cheng Yan Fang, 32, found the black-and-blue sports bag at 8.30am outside the premises. She thought the bag belonged to her employer who had just returned from Singapore.

Jack Yeoh Huat Lip, 51, the general manager of the company came in 30 minutes later and said the bag was not his.

When he opened it, he was horrified to see a pair of legs. He immediately called the police.

Gruesome find: The bag (inset) in which the body was found was just outside the premises of a book distributing company in Petaling Jaya.

“Saturday was a half day and the office was closed yesterday,” Yeoh said, adding that the supervisor who left the office at 1pm on Saturday did not see anything near the staircase then.

Petaling Jaya police chief Asst Comm Arjunaidi Mohd confirmed a post mortem report that the killer had placed a cucumber and a brinjal in the girl’s private parts.

“She must have endured so much pain before she died,” he said.

Police believe the girl, whose identity has not been ascertained, had been dead for more than six hours before her body was found.

Police are appealing to those with missing daughters to call the district police headquarters here at 03-79562222. No arrest has been made yet.

Seriously thinking of biking instead of driving

I have been driving a Proton Wira since September 2006. I was a motorcyclist before I bought this car. My Honda EX5 is still with me.

The rising petrol price has always been a burden to me. I was a motorcyclist even before I joined the DAP. My monthly petrol charge then was about RM20. even after I joined the party as members in 2004 (that makes me travel more than before) and even after I joined the party hq in june 2005 (that makes me travel more and more than before), and even after the 30 sen per litre price hike in March 2006, my monthly petrol charge seldom exceed RM50.

But with this car, my monthly petrol charge increased to nearly RM300 per month. Although I can refund my petrol claims, but I still have to bear a big bulk of the monthly petrol charge. I don’t think changing to a more fuel efficient car like Perodua Myvi, Kelisa or Kancil will help.

I am seriously thinking of taking my motorcycle. The second reason for me to consider doing so is because of the times I spent on the road. I can reach any place in KL city centre from PJ in about 10 to 15 minutes even during peak hour but I will never be able to do that if I drive a car. Those who are close to me will find that I have not been that punctual before since I starts driving. My productivity has dropped when I start driving.

I am spending more money on fuel, parking, toll, car wash, maintenance, services, traffic summon etc in return for lower efficiency, lower productivity, more commitment to be the driver for others with poorer time management.

I am seriously thinking of biking instead of driving.

Syed Hamid Albar on BBC Hardtalk

For those who missed the fantastic program or do not subscribe to BBC/Astro, you can view the whole interview online here.

Below are some intro from BBC website:

In a HardTalk programme first broadcast on Thursday 13 September 2007, Sarah
Montague talks to Malaysian Foreign Minister Dato Seri Syed Hamid Albar.

Malaysia has just marked fifty years of independence, and there's much
to celebrate.

Living standards have improved immeasurably over the past
five decades, illiteracy has been virtually eradicated and the economy is doing
well.

But do Indian and Chinese Malaysians have as much to celebrate as
the Malay population?

Sarah Montague talks to Dato Seri Syed Hamid Albar
about whether the law giving preferential treatment to Malay and other
indigenous groups is now outdated.

HARDtalk can be seen on BBC World at
03:30h GMT (not Asia), 08:30h GMT, 14:30h GMT, 20:30h GMT, 23:30h GMT (not Asia)

It can also be seen on BBC News 24 at 0430 and 2330.

Selangor cans of worms – Auditor-General exposed State Government’s malpractices, MB should explain now!

DAP Selangor calls on the Selangor Mentri Besar, Datuk Seri Khir Toyo to respond to urgent issues raised in the two Auditor-General Report on Selangor State Government and its agencies.

The Auditor-General (AG) had on Tuesday released two reports on the state government. The first report is the AG report on the State Government Financial Account in 2006 and the second report is the AG’s audit report on 4 selected activities carried out by various state government agencies.

Both reports exposed numbers of outrages malpractices by the state government/state government agencies/local authorities which should be viewed as signs of worsening good governance in Selangor, which Menteri Besar Khir Toyo has unilaterally announced it to be a “developed state”, which is a soulless “developed state”.

Four major projects have been audited by the State Government are as follows:
1. Privatisation of a Development project of an Orang Asli Settlement in Kampung Air Kuning, Bukit Cerakah, Mukim Bukit Raja, Daerah Petaling,
2. Road construction project from Sekinchan to Ulu Bernam,
3. Collection management and library equipment in libraries under Public Library Board of Selangor,
4. Construction and infrastructure management of a marine park under Sabak Bernam District Council.

In the first project, the State Government has agreed to approve and transfer 273 acres government land in Kampung Air Kuning, Bukit Cerakah to Syarikat Ecoasli Development Sdn. Bhd. In return, the developer is required to return RM18.23 million to the Orang Asli community in Kampung Air Kuning in the forms of 113 residential units, 2 units of shop/office and convenient store.

Besides that, RM6.95 million will be distributed in the forms of investments in Amanah Saham Bumiputera, compensation to the residents and education, while the government will be getting 160 unit low cost flats at RM14.4 million. The implementation of the project was not ideal as there were several terms in the contract not followed, resulting that the Orang Asli community and the State Government only receiving 24.3% of the promised items while no action is taken against the developer for violating the contractual terms.

The second project is the construction of a road from Sekinchan to Ulu Bernam and it was divided into two projects, i.e. Jalan Cross Ban 4 Project (from Sekinchan to Kampung Parit 4, Sungai Haji Dorani) and Jalan B44 Project (from Kampung Parit, Sungai Haji Dorani to Ulu Bernam), which are 20.5km and 9.4km in length.

Original cost for Jalan Cross Ban 4 Project was RM92.5 million and the final cost was RM118.3 million after a variation order of RM25.8 million, meaning that the government spent averagely RM5.8 million to build one kilometer of the road.

The project was chosen by AG due to its high cost.

AG report also pointed out that the awarding of the contracts were not done under tender system but direct negotiation by PWD after obtaining approval from State Financial Office without the information of the State Procurement Board as direct negotiation can only be conducted when the project value worth under RM200,000, while projects awarded under direct negotiation must be deemed as urgently necessary which was not in these two cases.

Checks conducted by the AG also provided alternative pricing for the two projects as follows which are much lower than the price offered by PWD:

Bil Project Name Consultant estimate (RM mil) PWD estimate (RM mil) Contractor offer (RM mil) Price offered (RM mil)
1 Jalan Cross Ban 4 67.12 93.00 110.76 92.50
2 Jalan B44 28.17 33.00 41.03 32.50

As for the third projects, we are regret that the most of the IT equipments in the State Public Libraries are all under poor condition when there are no internet connections and most of the IT equipment are all malfunctioned.

In the fourth project, the AG exposed that a contractor undertaking the RM10 million marine park project received an unexpected "bonus" of RM19.98 million.

The auditor-general said another anomaly in the project at Kampung Sg Haji Dorani was that the contractor, Pembinaan Merak Sdn Bhd, did not go through a tender process.

Five years ago, the state secretariat submitted a letter to the Sabak Bernam District Council president, approving RM10 million for the project from the state government’s special fund.

From the audit, the AG found that the offer letter issued contained the figure RM29.98 million and not RM10 million.

State Financial Status:
We are specifically concerned about the long outstanding default payment to be paid back by the State Government to the Federal Government.

The total debt to date is RM1.04 billion and it was shocking that the State Government is delaying in clearing the debt with the Federal Government since year 2002.

Simultaneously, several state government agencies and state government linked companies are also defaulting their debts to the state government and the amount has reached RM447.03 last year.

The Role of State Legislalative Hall Public Account Committee
After AG has concluded its report, various state government agencies concerned should prepare a formal reply to the State Treasury in which the State Treasury will prepare a memorandum to be tabled together with the AG report in the State Legislative Assembly Hall soonest possible.

Once it is tabled on the State Legilsative Assembly Hall, the State Public Account Committee (PAC) will then scrutinize, study and examine the report and justify whether it is necessary to summon certain department to appear before the PAC and testify.

It was again another disappointing episode when the State PAC only finished the audit report in 2004 and the 2005 report is still pending as the State Assembly Hall only convened 5 days a year.

We call on the Selangor Mentri Besar, Datuk Seri Khir Toyo to respond to urgent issues raised in the two Auditor-General Report on Selangor State Government and its agencies and do not wait until the Auditor-General report tabled in the State Legislative Assembly Hall much later this year.

总稽查师报告——雪州州务大臣必须交待

雪州民主行动党呼吁雪州州务大臣基尔立即针对总稽查师针对雪州政府以及其属下机构的行政弊端立即作出详细交待。

总稽查师是在前天发放两本关于州政府的稽查报告书。第一本报告书是针对雪州州政府的财务稽查报告书。第二本则是针对雪州政府或其属下机构所进行的计划的稽查报告书。

这两本报告书揭发州政府的种种行政弊端。我们认为这些弊端再再显示雪州败坏的良好施政纪录。如果州政府的行政依然弊端处处，那么务大臣单方面宣布雪州为先进州是没有意义的，如果雪州成为‘先进州’之后依然弊端处处，那么这个先进州是没有灵魂的。

总稽查师针对以下四项发展计划进行稽查：
1. 位于Bukit Cerakah Kampung Air Kuning的原住民区重建及安顿计划
2. 适耕庄——乌鲁安南道路工程
3. 雪州公共图书馆的建设及管理
4. 沙白县议会属下的海洋公园与基本建设计划

在第一项计划，州政府把武吉遮拉卡甘榜阿依古宁总共274英亩地段批准于Ecoasli发展有限公司发展。在此重新发展下，发展商必须以宗旨1千823万令吉的产业，即113间住宅、2间店屋/办公室及公共设施予上述地区的原住民，同时，也缴付695万令吉现款并作为土著信托股票投资、搬迁赔偿、生活津贴、福利与教育基金。此外，州政府也获得1千440万令吉兴建160间公共组屋。

这项计划只贯彻24.3巴仙。当局并没有对拖延完工、违反合约的发展商采取行动。

第二项计划就是从适耕庄至乌鲁安南道路工程。这项工程分成两大部分，即第一部分的道路从适耕庄到Sungai Haji Dorani的Kampung Parit 4，名称是Jalan Cross Ban 4。第二部分的道路则是从Sungai Haji Dorani的Kampung Parit 4通往乌鲁安南，名称是Jalan B44。两条道路分别长20.5公里和9.4公里。

Jalan Cross Ban 4工程原本耗资9千250万令吉，但是随着出现工程出现更改，导致超支2千580万令吉，这项工程的最后开价是1亿1830万令吉。意味着这项工程平均每公里耗资580万令吉！

总稽查师针对这项昂贵的工程而展开稽查工作。

总稽查师也指出，这项工程的合约并没有通过公开招标的情况下发出，而是通过公共工程局以直接商讨的方式，在获得州财政署通过但绕过州采购局的情况下发出去。虽然如此，总稽查师指出这已经违反财政部的政策，因为只有工程合约价值低于20万令吉的政府工程才能够通过直接商讨的方式发出去。由于这项工程合约价值以及超过20万令吉，再加上这并不是一项紧迫进行的工程，因此有关当局没有理由不以公开招票的方式处理这项工程。

总稽查师也针对这两项工程和顾问公司所提供的价格作比较，发现顾问公司的价格比公共工程局的价格还要低许多：

工程名字 顾问公司预计（百万令吉） 公共工程局预计（百万令吉） 承包商开价（百万令吉） 最后出价（百万令吉）
1 Jalan Cross Ban 4 67.12 93.00 110.76 92.50
2 Jalan B44 28.17 33.00 41.03 32.50

至于第三项计划，我们对于州内的多个乡区图书馆的资讯工艺设备没有获得完善妥当的维修，甚至没有上网配备而感到非常失望。这些损坏的配备将指挥进一步扩大城乡之间的数码代沟。

在第四项计划，总稽查师揭发一名承包1000万令吉，在Kampung Sg Haji Dorani发展一个海洋公园计划的承包商竟然获得州政府发放额外1千998万令吉的合约。

总稽查师在报告中指出这项工程的承包商Pembinaan Merak有限公司并没有经过公开招标的程序。

州秘书处是在5年前发出一则公函给沙白县议会主席，指出州政府将特别拨出1000万令吉展开这项计划。

总稽查师在稽查报告中指出当局发给承包商的公函却指出工程合约是2千998万令吉，而不是当初的1000万令吉。

州政府财务状况：
我们也特别关注州政府长期拖欠中央政府贷款一事。迄今，雪州州政府拖欠中央政府10亿4000万令吉。令人惊讶的是，州政府自2002年以来便拖欠中央政府这一笔钱。

与此同时，一些州政府机构和子公司也拖欠州政府贷款。在去年，这笔贷款就已经高达4亿4703万令吉。


雪州州议会公共账目委员会所扮演的角色
当总稽查的报告出炉之后，各有关州政府机构必须准备一份回应予州财政署。周财政署在接获这些报告之后将会准备一份备忘录，连同总稽查师报告在最短的时间之内提呈予州议会。

以当这些文件提呈予州议会之后，州议会公共账目委员会将会详细研究这份报告，已确定是否有必要传召相关机构的负责人前来州议会公共账目委员会供证。

州议会公共账目委员会的表现也人大失所望。由于州议会一年开会5天，因此州议会公共账目委员会的效率差强人意，因为该委员会在去年只是完成审核2004年总稽查师报告，至于2005年的稽查报告还在审核程序之中。

因此，我们强烈要求州务大臣本人立即针对总稽查师报告书的内容作出澄清，而非等到数月后召开的州议会才来针对报告书中的内容作交待。

AG and PAC should be given powers to punish errant government officers

DAP Secretary-General
Lim Guan Eng

DAP urges Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to arm both the Auditor-General and PAC with punitive powers to check the alarming decline in standards of public accountability, transparency and integrity in government departments. The exposes of misuse or mismanagement of public funds outlined in the Auditor-General 2006 report has never failed to shock Malaysians even though this has become an annual ritual of shame.

The litany of sad cases of abuse of public trust and cheating the public ranges from the small such as the National Youth Skills Institute(NYSI) buying 2 units of two-tonne car jack for RM 5,471 per unit when the market price is only RM 50 per unit; to the huge expected loss of RM 6.75 billion in the Defence Ministry following the purchase of 6 off-shore naval patrol vessels(OPVs) that were either delivered but not operational(2) or still not delivered(4).

The Youth and Sports Ministry was criticized when the NYSI paid RM 8.39 million more than the market price in 2002 for the purchase of 13 items for the National Youth Skills Institutes (NYSI) programme, such as :-

• 146 sets of screwdrivers bought for RM 224 per set when the market price is only RM 40 per set;
• 82 sets of Staedler Mars technical pens bought for RM 225 per set when the market price is only RM 120 per set;
• 90 sets of Faber Castell technical pens bought for RM 1,147 per set when the market price is RM 160 per set;
• 17 sets of technical books consisting of 10 titles priced at RM10,700 per set when the market price is only RM 417 per set;
• 5 units of 3.1 megapixel digital camera that was bought for RM8,254 per unit when the market price was only RM 2,990 per unit.
• 650 sets of plastic vases bought at RM 42.80 per set when the market price is only RM 5.20 per set:
• 3 sets of settee bought between RM 8,250-RM9.075 per set when the market price is only RM 1,500 per set;
• two tower cranes bought for RM 5.72 million when the market price is only RM 2.98 million
• 60 used cars bought at a price of RM 4.24 million when the market price is only RM 2.8 million an excess of RM 1.44 million;
• 152 desktop computer packages bought for RM 4.5 million when the market price is only RM 1.4 million, an excess of RM 3.1 million;
• 420 sets of cement mortar boards bought at RM 1,027 per set when the market price is only RM 150 per set;
• 3 cabins bought for RM 141,900 per cabin when the market price is only RM 20,000 per cabin; and
• 2 units of two-tonne car jack bought for RM 5,471 per unit when the market price is only RM 50 per unit.

In today’s papers, Youth and Sports Minister Datuk Azalina Othman explained that the contracts dated back to 2002, before she was appointed to the post, and were issued following direct negotiations with the contractors concerned. Azalina can not avoid her responsibility by stating she was not the Minister then but should take the initiative to find out why did the government allowed the contractors to mark up contract prices up to 100 times the market price. As Minister, Datuk Azlina Othman must get to the bottom of this scandal explain why their spending were not in order, and take action against errant officials.

Equally unacceptable is the official explanation by Treasury to the Auditor-General on this scandal which appears to try to cover up rather than seek the truth. On the purchase of equipment at higher than the market price, the Treasury said this was due to the different locations of the IKBN with suppliers also including infrastructure cost in their quotation and included other additional accessory items.

For instance Treasury claimed the purchase of 90 sets of Faber Castell technical pens at RM1,146.56 per set when the market price is RM 160, each set also included a set of spare nibs and other accessories. This is wrong as the original purchase order did not include such accessories. Further such explanations are ridiculous as it would mean that the accessories are more expensive than the original item, as much as almost 10 times the price of the original technical pens. Is this another case of “Malaysia Boleh” where the accessories are more expensive than the main parent item?

Both the Auditor-General and PAC should be given powers to punish errant government officers, especially Treasury, who try to cover up the scandal rather than expose the truth of those who abuse, misuse and mismanage public funds. An example of such cover-up is the claim by Treasury that the Youth and Sports Minister gave a letter of authority to the ministry’s secretary-general to sign eight contracts totaling more than RM 449 million.

The Auditor-General said that the secretary-general had signed 11 contracts on behalf of the Government worth between RM 7.99 million and RM 74.2 million that were related to the National Youth Skills Institute project. Under existing rules, the secretary-general only has the authority to sign contracts worth less than RM 5 million. Anything larger should be signed by the minister or someone to whom the authority has been given. No such letter of authority was produced by the secretary-general during the audit.

It is impossible to expect the PAC which is supposed to investigate, vet and recommend actions to be taken on this report, to be able to cover every item raised in the report. That is why such punitive powers should be given to the Auditor-General to take disciplinary actions and force officers that recommend purchases of items above market price to make good the difference. For bigger scandals and fund mismanagement, the PAC should step in and take action on cases that involved billions of ringgit such as the purchase of 6 naval OPVs for RM 6.75 billion that are either not operational or still not delivered.

Black spots in Sea Park PJ

Some black spots in Sea Park, folks please watch out. This is the small lane (lorong) between Jalan 21/12 and Jalan 21/14. I have received complaints on this dark pitch lane from a few residents who were robbed and attacked here during morning walk.

Budget 2008: Who Benefits?

Who are the beneficiaries of the Prime Minister cum Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's 2008 Budget? What is the prospects like for the economy of the country? What did you receive from Pak Lah's budget?

To understand further on who benefits in the latest Malaysian budget, and to analyse Malaysia's economic prospects, DAP is organising an English forum on the 12th September 2007 at DAP Damansara Branch. The details of the forum are as follows:

Malaysian First: Budget 2008 - Who Benefits?
Date: 12 September 2007 (Wednesday)
Time: 7.30pm
Venue: DAP Damansara Seminar Room
(55-1 Jalan SS21/1A, Damansara Utama, 47400 Petaling Jaya - map below)

The panel of speakers include:
* Lim Guan Eng, DAP Secretary-General
* Charles Santiago, Coordinator, Coalition Against Water Privatisation
* Khoo Kay Peng, Socio-political Analyst
* Jeff Ooi, DAP National E-Campaign Director
* Tony Pua, Economic Advisor to DAP Sec-Gen

For more information, please contact DAP Damansara Hotline at 016-2208867. The seminar room fits approximately 100 people, so please come early to book your seats.

Who can so be lavish in expenditure?

Who can be so lavish in expenditure? The Government!

• 146 sets of screwdrivers bought for RM 224 per set when the market price is only RM 40 per set;
• 82 sets of Staedler Mars technical pens bought for RM 225 per set when the market price is only RM 120 per set;
• 90 sets of Faber Castell technical pens bought for RM 1,147 per set when the market price is RM 160 per set;
• 17 sets of technical books consisting of 10 titles priced at RM10,700 per set when the market price is only RM 417 per set;
• 5 units of 3.1 megapixel digital camera that was bought for RM8,254 per unit when the market price was only RM 2,990 per unit.
• 650 sets of plastic vases bought at RM 42.80 per set when the market price is only RM 5.20 per set:
• 3 sets of settee bought between RM 8,250-RM9.075 per set when the market price is only RM 1,500 per set;
• two tower cranes bought for RM 5.72 million when the market price is only RM 2.98 million
• 60 used cars bought at a price of RM 4.24 million when the market price is only RM 2.8 million an excess of RM 1.44 million;
• 152 desktop computer packages bought for RM 4.5 million when the market price is only RM 1.4 million, an excess of RM 3.1 million;
• 420 sets of cement mortar boards bought at RM 1,027 per set when the market price is only RM 150 per set;
• 3 cabins bought for RM 141,900 per cabin when the market price is only RM 20,000 per cabin; and
• 2 units of two-tonne car jack bought for RM 5,471 per unit when the market price is only RM 50 per unit.

谁会那么阔绰？

谁会那么阔绰？

• 以一套224令吉的价格购买146套市价32令吉一套的螺丝起子
• 以一套225令吉的价格购买82套市价120令吉一套的Staedler Mars工艺笔。
• 以一套1147令吉的价格购买90套市价160令吉一套的Faber Castell工艺笔。
• 以一套225令吉的价格购买82套市价120令吉一套的Staedler Mars工艺笔。
• 以一套（一套有10本）1万700令吉的价格购买17套市价417令吉一套的工具书。
• 以一架8千254令吉的价格购买5架市价2990令吉一架的3.1megapixel数码相机。
• 以一套（一套3个）42令吉80仙的价格购买650套市价5令吉20仙一套的塑胶花盆。
• 以一套8千250令吉到9千75令吉的价格购买3套市价1千500令吉一套的靠背长椅。
• 以572万令吉的价格购买两台塔式起重机，而市价仅是298万令吉。
• 以424万令吉购买60量二手汽车，而市价仅是280万令吉，购买价高于市价达144万令吉。
• 以450万令吉购买152台桌式电脑，而市价仅是140万令吉，购买价高于市价达310万令吉。
• 以一套1千27令吉的价格购买420套市价150令吉一套的水泥砂浆板。
• 以一个4万1千900令吉的价格购买3个市价2万令吉一个的货柜箱。
• 以5千471令吉的价格购买市价仅是区区50令吉的汽车起重泵（2吨）。

Some of the key points for Budget 2008

27. As a measure to enhance the quality of PLCs in Bursa Malaysia, the Government has given stamp duty exemption on instruments related to mergers and acquisitions (M&As) of PLCs, approved by SC up to 31 December 2007. To encourage more PLCs to undertake M&A, the stamp duty exemption will be extended to 31 December 2010.

28. Currently, there are more than 1,000 vendors in the oil and gas sector licensed by PETRONAS. However, many of them operate mainly for domestic market. These companies should merge to be more competitive globally. Therefore, the Government proposes stamp duty exemption be given on all instruments relating to mergers of such vendors implemented by 31 December 2010.

29. To encourage the development of the fund management industry, the following measures will be implemented:
First: Foreign ownership on fund management companies and REITs management companies will be allowed up to 70%. The minimum Bumiputera ownership requirement will remain at 30%;

43. To further promote MSC internationally, the Government will host the World ICT Week in Kuala Lumpur in May 2008. Various international ICT conferences and exhibitions will be held, including the World Congress on Information Technology 2008, the conference on United Nations Global Alliance on ICT for Development and MSC International Advisory Panel Meeting. More than 5,000 domestic and international participants are expected to take part in these programmes. It is hoped that more international ICT companies will invest and collaborate with local companies.

50. I also wish to announce that, beginning the 2008 school session, the Text Book Loan Scheme will be provided to all students, irrespective of their families’ income and with no restrictions on the number of eligible children. With this, 5.7 million students will benefit from this Scheme compared with 4.5 million students currently. With these measures, schooling in Malaysia is now completely free.

57. Currently, the Public Service Department (PSD) and MARA sponsor more than 90,000 students in local universities. However, the number of students sponsored in certain specialised fields is still inadequate. Therefore, the Government will increase the number of undergraduate students sponsored by PSD in local universities from 5,000 students to 10,000 annually, beginning 2008.

78. The Government recognises the importance of an efficient public transportation system, especially for the low income group, overcome traffic congestion and improve productivity. Towards this, the Government has taken several measures to implement a comprehensive public transportation system, including rail and bus network in major cities. Over the next four years, a sum of RM12 billion will be expended to improve the public transportation system in Kuala Lumpur and Penang. To alleviate traffic congestion in Penang, the Penang Outer Ring Road (PORR) will be implemented on a tender basis shortly. Public transportation in other major cities will also be improved.

95. Many pensioners depend on income from their savings to meet their financial needs when they are not working. In order to improve returns on their savings, a RM2 billion bond will be issued by Bank Negara Malaysia to be subscribed by senior citizens aged 55 years and above, who do not have permanent jobs. The maximum limit per person is RM50,000, with a maturity period of three years and a rate of return of 5% per year. Similar bonds have been issued amounting to RM3.5 billion.

96. To reduce the financial burden of the poor and needy senior citizens, the Government will increase their allowance from RM200 to RM300 per month, effective from 1 January 2008.

105. The Government had announced in the 2007 Budget that all PLCs are required to disclose CSR activities in their annual financial reports. Beginning financial year 2008, PLCs will be required to disclose their employment composition by race and gender, as well as programmes undertaken to develop domestic and Bumiputera vendors. The private sector should leverage upon the strength of Malaysia’s diversity by employing Malaysians from all ethnic groups.

110. Police presence and visibility will be increased, particularly in crime-prone areas. In line with this, the capacity and efficiency of PDRM will be enhanced with the recruitment of 60,000 new personnel over the next five years. Investigating officers and assistant investigating officers will be supplied with an additional 2,000 national cars and 1,600 laptops. In addition, 1,900 motorcycles will be provided to increase police presence. PDRM will also set up a Mobile Forensic Unit in each police contingent.

122. As a start, Secretaries General of ministries and Heads of Services will be offered a three-year contract and their performance rewarded based on KPIs. This contract will be offered to officers who are currently serving in the Diplomatic and Administrative as well as in other relevant services. Apart from ensuring excellent service, the contract period of three years will provide adequate time for them to plan and execute projects effectively. This scheme will be effective from 1 January 2008. I am confident that the public will benefit greatly from the enhanced efficiency of government services.

123. To ensure efficiency of administration, the Government has appointed Grade 41 officers to fill up the vacancies on a contract basis. Many of these contract officers have exhibited high work performance and proven their suitability to be appointed to permanent posts. These contract officers will be absorbed into the civil service upon recommendation by heads of departments.

124. Government expenditure will continue to focus on capacity building to support sustainable economic growth through provision of infrastructure, public facilities, education and social services, including health and welfare of Malaysians. For the strategies and programmes which I have announced, I proposed that, a sum of RM176.9 billion be appropriated in 2008 Budget, 10.9% higher compared with 2007. Of this, RM128.8 billion is for Operating Expenditure while RM48.1 billion for Development Expenditure.