Thursday, September 30, 2010

過度投資導致房地產泡沫

八打靈再也市政廳
過度投資導致房地產泡沫
靈市民恐難置產業
(八打靈再也29日訊)八打靈再也產業價值持續高漲,位于SS2的雙層排屋就叫價75萬至100萬令吉,被認為是“房地產投資泡沫”,令八打靈再也市政廳擔心市民難以購買產業。
八打靈再也市長拿督羅斯蘭指出,巴生谷現有的產業持續漲價,加上“過度投資”,令產業市值被推向高峰,令真正有需要的購屋者沒有能力購買。

他舉例,據當局的調查顯示,靈市北C巷的產業每平方呎470令吉,而雙溪毛糯縣也被炒至每平方呎342至334令吉。

“在租金方面也是相當昂貴,例如Jasmine Tower公寓每月租金1700令吉。”

因此,他認同,國家銀行目前正在研究數方案制止產業價格高漲,以避免出現房地產泡沫,包括只允許貸款產業總值80%款項。

火化爐符合衛生

他今日主持八打靈再也市政廳常月會議時,這么指出。

他說,市政廳目前正審查2011年財政預算案,以確保所有開銷都依據各組的需求分配,達至社會的需求。

“財政預算案辦論環節已在本月27日開始,預計下月初結束。”

此外,詢及靈市政廳期內的火化爐是否達至衛生指標,市長說,靈市區內所採用的火化爐都是先進儀器,從運送棺木至火化過程皆密封,並由機器操作,不會發生骨灰外溢或燒屍味彌漫問題。

曲棍球體育館引發舌戰
市長限週內達協議

八打靈再也市政廳眾市議員就八打靈再也曲棍球體育館提升一事引發口舌之爭,市長羅斯蘭限定眾人在一週內達成協議,解決問題。

市議員拉蒂花在會議上提出,為何曲棍球場在沒有經過正常程序下作出批准,尤其是在沒有與居民交代下,同意把曲棍球場改為曲棍球場兼多用途體育場。

她說,據她了解,居民的意願,是改為多用途體育場。

她更不滿小組委員會進行小組會議時,沒有邀請她一同出席,並認為至少需有7名市議員在場方能下決定。

惟官員表示已發電郵邀請她出席有關會議,但拉蒂花堅稱沒接獲通知。

有的市議員則表示已和當地市議員達成協議,並認為單列為曲棍球不適合,應增加更多設備供民眾使用。

也有市議員指該曲棍球屬于靈市,每位市民都可使用,應邀請所有市議員代表參與會議。

在爭執不會上下后,羅斯蘭下令各造在一星期內開會解決問題,方結束這場為持約15分鐘口舌之爭。

此外,羅斯蘭在接受記者詢問時指出,該曲棍球場在提升后依舊以曲棍球為主,只是額外附加其他用途,以節省空間。

“我要求各造,包括居民在一星期內召開會議,商討此事后,我們還有許多的提升工作有待進行。”

他也指出,曲棍球的草坪需200萬令吉來保養。

清理名家鎮廢礦湖
尋策解決臭味問題

靈市政廳已派員清理名家鎮廢礦湖,並將諮詢雪州政府意見,以解決該湖長期以來發出臭味問題。

羅斯蘭指出,該廢礦湖屬于私人地,只有一部分歸州政府擁有,目前市政廳將成立一個小組,與州政府及雪州行政議員黃潔冰共商此事及尋求解決方案。”

他說,當局也會要求移民局配合,取締聚居在廢礦湖一帶及在該處收廢鐵的非法外勞。

八打靈再也南區國會議員許來賢早前曾在會議提及,該廢礦湖處近來聚居許多非法外勞。同時,他指出,該處也有10多家廢鐵商在該處駐守,形同外勞大本營。

租用廣告牌
向市廳查證

羅斯蘭促請商家在租用廣告牌時,先向靈市政廳查詢,以免觸法,而一般牌合法的廣告牌都有一個小廣告牌確認。

他說,至于早前65個非法廣告牌早已拆除,不過有兩家公司因不滿他們的廣告牌被拆除(共9個),起訴市政廳,案件已帶往法庭。

無論如何,他指出,一般合法的廣告牌都有一個小牌子辨認,不過也並不代表沒有的就不合法,可能廣告商還在申請程序中。

他希望有意租用廣告牌者,事先向市政廳查證,以免非法租用而遭取締。

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

DAP Fund-Raising Concert

There will be a fundraising concert for DAP Selangor. Money collected from the sale of tickets will go directly into DAP Selangor account for the preparation of the next General Elections.

The price of the tickets are as follows: RM100, RM200 and RM300 per ticket

Tickets can be purchased from my office:
16A, Jalan 21/12,
SEA Park,
46300 Petaling Jaya,
Selangor
Tel: 03-78754724
Fax: 03-78738017

Opening hours:
Monday to Friday : 9am to 6pm
Contact person : Mary Joseph / Dariff Din

You can also get your tickets from YB Hannah Yeoh's office at:
24A, 1st Floor, Jalan SS14/1A
47500 Subang Jaya
Selangor Darul Ehsan
Tel : 03 5631 2768
Fax: 03 5631 2757

Opening hours:
Monday, Wednesday, Friday : 1pm to 7pm
Thursday nights : 8pm to 10pm
Contact person : Debbie Phang

Thanking you in advance for your support! Please pass the word around.

New street-lights in SS1 and SS3.

Congratulations to Petaling Jaya Municipal Council (MBPJ) and Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) for installing a total of 198 150kW new street lamps on existing TNB lamp posts in SS1 and SS3 recently.
This is part of the effort from the council in collaboration with TNB to enhance street-lightings in SS1 and SS3 to combat rising crime rate in the two places.
Budget was approved by the council last year to improve street-lightings in SS1 and SS3 and the council is tasked to install 32 units electricity meters together with its casings.
TNB will be carrying out installation works including wiring works and it is targeted to finish in one month depending on the weather.
I was at Jalan SS3/39 this morning observing the installation work. Together with me are Petaling Jaya councillor Darren Tiong, his assistant Mr. Yap Chai Huat, my assistant Mr. Ning Sang and TNB Senior Technician for Petaling Jaya district, Encik Raduan Abdul Rahman.
I am satisfied with the works carried out by TNB and I wish the council can continue its good effort to improve street-lightings in other places of the council.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

保存乡音乡语,维护大马华人身份认同

(My article published in Sin Chew Daily Opinion Page)

上个月,海内外华侨对中国广州和香港两地掀起的保护粤语热潮为之震惊。事情过后虽然冷静下来,但是对于普通话(华语)和广东话(粤语)之间的关系,海内外华人同胞依然议论纷纷。

马来西亚舆论界也出现同样的讨论,但由于马来西亚华裔社群的多元性,其讨论空间不仅局限在华语—粤语的关系,也涉及华语—方言的关系,甚至粤语—其他方言之间的关系。

虽然马来西亚粤系籍贯人口粤语成为马来西亚华裔的强势方言,但是在这近500万的华裔人口当中,福建籍华裔占大多数约40%(约5%为福州话为主的闽东方言、约0.6%包括莆田、仙游和福清为主的闽中方言和35%以厦门话为标准的闽南方言),接着是客家人(24.5%)、广东人(18.3%)、潮州人(11%)和海南人(3.7%)。

一般非粤语系的马来西亚华裔普遍认为马来西亚一般不需捍卫粤语,因为粤语是“强势语言”,反之其他方言则长期被边缘化。

粤语成为其中一支主流方言,除了因为口操粤语的华裔大多集中在工商重镇的中马之外,早期香港的粤语娱乐文化也成功让粤语成为马来西亚华裔的主流方言。

虽然粤语在马来西亚根本谈不上捍卫,但是马来西亚华裔身份认同不能仅仅依靠主流的华文教育而已,反之祖先南来马来西亚所带来的风俗习惯、精神文化、乡音乡语和宗教信仰都是我们文化的一部分,必须获得华社的保留和传承。

我所担忧的是,华语(普通话)已经静悄悄地迫使传统方言离开马来西亚许多新生代华裔家庭。许多新生代华裔家庭已经不再以方言和孩子沟通。居住在城市地区的华裔家庭甚至以英语和孩子交谈。其他地区的华裔新生代家庭则以华语和孩子沟通。

由于学校一般都教导华语和英语,因此一般的家长都希望尽早让孩子在入学之前就掌握这两种语言。但是,这种做法间接导致乡音乡语逐渐远离华裔社会的新生代。这对马来西亚华裔社会的文化认同会造成什么样的影响?恐怕是弊多于利。

而且,我对所谓的‘方言’存疑。对我来说,从来就没有什么所谓的方言,每一种语言都是方言。只有当一个语言获得官方位置之后,有关方言才升格成为“国语”或一个民族的代表语言。因此,一个民族的代表语言和一个国家的国语,简单来说只不过是一个政治决定。这和北京语称为中华民国成立的‘国语’和当初秦始皇统一全国文字语言都具有一样的意义。

因此,我认为本地舆论界在谈论这个课题而已不应只讨论广东话或粤语的存亡而已,而是马来西亚各籍贯方言的保存。

可能因为香港作为东亚电影和娱乐文化的先驱,再加上海外华侨多为粤闽两地侨民,同时台湾闽南语电影和娱乐文化在上世纪中尚未起步,结果港式粤语为主导的娱乐潮流间接维持了粤语在东南亚,尤其是马来西亚半岛西海岸中部大城市华裔社群的主流地位。

与其说粤语是强势语言,倒不如说它是因为港式粤语娱乐潮流成功让它成功度过这些挑战。过去十年,新加坡和台湾制作闽南语(或台词带有闽南语风味和韵调的)电影和电视剧逐渐流行,如长篇连续剧《意难忘》以及著名导演梁智强的电影等等。寰宇电视也开创全马第一个福建娱乐电视台《欢喜台》。很肯定的,这反映闽南语将会崛起成为其中一个强势语言。

值得高兴的是,马来西亚官方华语电台爱FM也专设《乡音乡语》节目,让不同方言群有机会在空中与华裔听众交流。然而,马来西亚华裔更必须思考的问题是:在普通话(华语)逐渐成为主流语言的当而,我们还要如何加强努力又如何保护各个籍贯的方言,让这些处在生死存亡的的乡音乡语能够大放异彩?

刘永山

Monday, September 27, 2010

Pulau Pinang Tidak Akan Tunduk Kepada UMNO Mengganggu-gugat Program Penghargaan Warga Emas

Kenyataan Akhbar Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang Lim Guan Eng Di Komtar, George Town Pada 27 September 2010.

Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang Tidak Akan Tunduk Kepada Usaha UMNO Mengganggu-gugat Program Penghargaan Warga Emas Sebanyak RM 100 Setiap Tahun.

UMNO sekali lagi meneruskan fitnah dan tohmahan terhadap kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang dengan mendakwa bahawa program penghargaan warga emas dibiayai oleh sumber judi haram dan bila ini dibuktikan palsu mengalih kepada program Rakan Anti-Miskin(RAM) untuk membasmi miskin tegar. Taktik jahat seribu jahat bertujuan menggagalkan program ini daripada kerajaan berjiwa rakyat PR yang bermenafaat rakyat.

Kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang tidak akan tunduk kepada usaha UMNO mengganggu-gugat program penghargaan warga emas yang membayarkan RM100 setiap tahun kepada semua yang melebihi 60 tahun. Sehingga sekarang hampir 110,000 warga emas di Pulua Pinang telah mendaftarkan diri dan akan mendapat bayaran RM 100 setiap tahun demi mengenang budi atas sumbangan warga emas. Di samping itu si waris warga emas yang mendaftarkan diri akan menerima RM 1,000 sekali sahaja bila warga emas meninggal dunia. Sebanyak RM 20 juta telahpun diperuntukkan untuk program ini dalam Belanjawan 2010 pada tahun lepas.

Wang yang dibayar oleh kerajaan negeri untuk program ini tidak datang daripada mana-mana derma atau sumber kerajaan persekutuan. Ia adalah penjimatan hasil urustadbir CAT yang cekap, akauntable dan telus serta langkah anti-rasuah yang bukan sahaja dipuji oleh Lapuran Ketua Audit Negara tetapi juga disanjungi oleh badan antarabangsa anti-rasuah terunggul, Transparency International.

Urustadbir CAT dan langkah anti-rasuah telah membolehkan Pulau Pinang mencatatkan lebihan Belanjawan yang paling besar dalam sejarah sebanyak RM 88 juta pada 2008 dan RM 77 juta pada 2009. Oleh itu, tidak wujud langsung program ini dibiayai oleh sumber luar. Keseluruhan kos program ini dibaiyai sepenuhnya oleh hasil lebihan Belanjawan. Dengan kata lain, program penghargaan warga emas adalah dividen “anti-rasuah” yang dapat dinikmati oleh rakyat kerana mempunyai sebuah kerajaan negeri yang bersih dan tidak makan duit.

Ini bukan kali pertama program ini diserang kerana sebelum ini BN pernah mendakwa bahawa pemberian RM 100 kepada warga emas adalah serupa bagi rasuah! Untuk BN, bagi wang sama rakyat adalah rasuah tetapi lain pula bagi wang ke dalam kocek sendiri.

Sekiranya kerajaan negeri tak makan duit maka rakyat boleh dapat duit! UMNO jangan harap akan mengganggu-gugat program dividen anti-rasuah RM100 setiap tahun kepada warga emas dengan fitnah dan tohmahan.

Program Rakan Anti-Miskin(RAM) Membasmi Miskin Tegar Di Pulau Pinang Tetap Diteruskan.

Selepas gagal membuktikan program penghargaan warga emas terbabit dengan hasil judi haram, UMNO pula cuba mengalikhan perhatian daripada fitnah mereka dengan menyatakan program RAM membasmi miskin tegar datangnya daripada sumber judi haram. Bukti UMNO adalah derma RM 2 juta daripada Kelab Lumba Kuda Pulau Pinang.

Program RAM adalah inisiatif murni kerajaan negeri PR untuk membasmi miskin tegar di kalangan keluarga yang berpendapatan kurang daripada RM 400 sebulan di Pulau Pinang dan memastikan setiap keluarga mendapat sekurang-kurangnya RM 500 sebulan. Menerusi RAM, kerajaan negeri PR telah berjaya membasmi miskin tegar dalam tempoh masa setahun sahaja, apa yang tidak dapat dilakukan oleh BN dalam 51 tahun. Menyedari tentang sensitiviti wang derma daripada Kelab Lumba Kuda untuk orang Islam, maka ia diasingkan dan tidak diberikan kepada orang Islam tetapi hanya kepada orang bukan Islam.

Malah Pegawai Kewangan Negeri Dato Farizan bin Darus telah mengesahkan kepada saya semalam bahawa wang derma RM 2 juta ini daripada Kelab Lumba Kuda diasingkan dan dikhususkan kepada orang bukan Islam dan tidaknya kepada orang Islam. Perlu diingati bahawa ada juga orang bukan Islam yang miskin tegar, bukan semua bukan Islam kaya macam pemimpin BN. Adakah salah untuk menyalurkan wang derma ini kepada orang bukan Islam?

Bukankah lebih salah dan haram untuk UMNO luluskan lesen judi bola? Atau adakah UMNO dendam sama Kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang yang merupakan negeri pertama mengharamkan judi bola dan sekaligus merosakkan rancangan baik UMNO untuk membenarkan lesen judi bola di Malaysia? Yang jahat pula tuduh orang lain.

Bantuan RAM kepada keluarga miskin tegar Islam dibiayai daripada hasil kerajaan negeri menerusi lebihan Belanjawan yang disebut tadi. Memang BN dan UMNO irihati atas kejayaan kerajaan negeri membasmi miskin tegar dan program penghargaan warga emas. Walaupun terus difitnah, kerajaan negeri tidak akan berganjak atau tunduk langsung ke atas anasir jahat ini yang mahukan dua program ini dihentikan.

Rakyat terus dibela, hak rakyat terus diperkasakan dan undang-undang terus didaulatkan.

LIM GUAN ENG

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Hit out without checking – Wong Koon Mun is making a mockery of himself!

MCA ADUN for Kuala Kubu Baru Wong Koon Mun commented on a statement I did not make regarding to the repair works done for blocks of low cost flats in Bukit Sentosa and Bukit Beruntung.

He was reportedly saying in today’s Star Metro that,

‘Kampung Tunku assemblyman Lau Weng San in his Facebook saying the Federal Government spent RM19mil for repairing roofs for 78 blocks of low-cost flats in Bukit Sentosa and RM1.5 million to repair its lifts.

‘Wong pointed out the Federal Government only spent RM17.7 million to repair the roofs and there were no lifts at the low-cost flats.

“Lau should get his facts rights before accusing the Federal Government of doing such things, We will make a police report soon’’ said Wong."

I wish to clarify that I did not post anything related to the flats repair works in my Facebook account. All I did was to provide a copy of a written answer given to me by the State government in relation to low cost flat. I asked the Mentri Besar:

(1) Whether the state government is providing allocation to repair low cost flats of the poor people which suffer from damages after liability defect period as there are some units built with very poor quality?
(2) What are the programs from the state government to reserve low cost flats?

I have never mentioned anything about the damaged flats in Bukit Sentosa and Bukit Beruntung. This question is asked simply because I have such flats in my constituency and I want to know if there is any assistance from the state government.

Secondly, the document I gave to the press are all the written replies I received from the State government and not my personal press statement. The press will have to choose and publish.

Thirdly, Selangor state government has never hijacked the contributions from the Federal government. In the reply, the state government has never promised to allocate RM15 million for lifts maintenance jobs for flats in the two areas. I have also never mentioned about the state government allocating RM19.11 million to repair damages in 78 blocks of low cost flats in the two areas.

In fact, the state government has in its reply clarified that that it never provides any allocation to repair damaged low cost flats after liability defection period. According to the 1985 Starta Title Act, strata development including low cost flat are classified as private development and all maintenance and repair works are the responsibilities of the management corporation, joint management body, the house-buyers and any agents appointed by the Commissioner of Buildings (CoBs)

The state government only allocated RM396,192 in 2009 out of goodwill to conduct a detailed study on the damaged roof-tops of low cost flats in Bukit Beruntung and Bukit Sentosa. The Selangor Public Works Ddepartment (PWD) then followed up by putting up an estimation of RM19.11 million to repair the damaged roof-tops of all the 78 blocks of low cost flats in the two areas.

In 2010, the state government first allocated RM500,000 to repair damaged roof-tops. Since the Federal government then announced to allocate some RM15 million for the repair works, the state government later withdrawn the allocation.

But the state government never stops there. In return, the state government launches a RM1 million grant to repair lifts in all low cost flats in Selangor.

It is very clear that from the written reply provided that the state government does not hijack contributions from the Federal government. Therefore I feel rather confused when Wong Koon Mun accused me of lying to the people by saying that the state government allocated funds to repair lifts of the low cost flats in Bukit Beruntung and Bukit Sentosa when there is no lift at all.

I also wish to clarify that I have never said that the state government allocated RM1.5 million to repair damaged flats. Perhaps it will be good if Wong Koon Mun can produce evidence to prove it.

I hope Wong Koon Mun in future can doubly or triply check and verify his statement before he throws any baseless allegations to me. Else he is making a mockery of himself and his party by becoming the first icon of irrelevance in MCA Selangor.

Unfounded claims and petty issues make Selangor MCA irrelevant


I would like to refer to a news article published by The Star Metro on 23rd September 2010 entitled “Kg Tunku rep under fire for statement”.

Federal Development coordinator for Petaling Jaya Utara Dr Wong Sai Hou blamed me for my lack of action in dealing with a landslip that occurred on Jalan 229 at the Petaling Jaya cemetery.

He also said that “when the Petaling Jaya Chinese Cemetery Association (PJCCA) approached him (Lau Weng San) for assistance, he told them that the problem was a private matter and they had to build a retaining wall themselves.”

I would like to categorically deny the blame and that the PJCCA has never approached me for any kind of financial assistance to rebuild the retaining wall. If I have never received complaint from PJCCA or application for financial assistance from PJCCA, how would I reject them in the first place?

The chairman of PJCCA, Mr. Yap Chin Ho also clarified that his association has never approached me for any financial assistance. I hereby attached the news report published by China Press Metro Edition dated 23rd September 2010 for reference.

I therefore challenged MCA to produce the evidence that I refused to assist PJCCA. Else MCA should tender their apologies especially to PJCCA.

Selangor MCA public complaints bureau deputy chairman Kelvin Chong also hit out at me on class F contractors under the purview of the Finance Ministry.

I think Kelvin Chong does not understand the essence of my press conference on 16th September. I did not comment on which ministry handles class F contractor licenses. My concern is that the issuance of class F license was frozen years ago by the Federal Government and Selangor state government and local governments in Selangor are relying on the existing batch of class F contractors when calling for biddings for infrastructure works below RM20,000.

Non class F contractors are not allowed to bid though they could have the financial and technical strength. In order to salvage the situation, Selangor state government tried to launch their own contractor list in 2009 but it could not take off simply because it is put under the purview of the Federal government.

I believe the if the Federal government can re-open the license, the state government will be able to save even more money and we will be paying something value for money.

It is certain that Kelvin Chong’s focus is too petty as he does not realize the problem that we are facing now is not about what licenses a ministry issues but it is about whether the government can tender out a job transparently and fairly.

I therefore urge Kelvin Chong and other MCA leaders to check and verify their facts before they hit out at anybody and not hitting out for the sake of gaining cheap publicity.

Such unfounded claims and petty issues will just make Selangor MCA more and more irrelevant.

继张胜富的‘搞’调问政,黄冠文又针对武吉圣淘沙组屋维修工程进行‘搞笑’问政



继张胜富前日的‘搞’调问政,黄冠文昨日又针对武吉圣淘沙组屋维修工程进行‘搞笑’问政。事情起因是因为我在州议会所提出的一道口头问答。我当时提问州务大臣:
一、 由于发生劣质廉价组屋在保养期之后出现严重损坏,州政府因此会否提供拨款维修这些穷人居住的廉价组屋?
二、 州政府已经实行什么计划来维修廉价组屋?

我的提问完全没有提到武吉圣淘沙和武吉柏伦东年久失修的廉价组屋。我提问这个问题是因为我的选区出现这类情况的廉价组屋,因此我提问州政府是否提供拨款进行维修。

第二,我在记者会上并没有发表任何文告。我只是提供州政府的书面回答给记者,然后让记者挑选刊登。

第三,州政府的答复并没有抢联邦政府的功劳,也没有说拨款1500万令吉维修该区的廉价组屋的升降机。我也没有提到州政府拨款1911万令吉维修该区78座组屋屋顶。

事实上,州政府在书面答复上就开宗明义表示政府并没有提供任何拨款以维修任何在保养期结束后损坏的廉价组屋。

州政府也说,根据1985年分层地契法令,包括廉价组屋在内的分层发展项目属于私人发展地段。因此所有在私人发展地段公用财产的维修与管理工作,如屋顶、电梯、楼梯等等必须由购屋者、联治管理机构、管理公司或任何由建筑物专员(Commissioneer of Buildings)所委任的代理负责维修和把保养。

州政府是基于关心民声疾苦,才决定在2009年拨款39万6192令吉针对武吉圣淘沙和武吉柏伦东两地廉价组屋所面对的屋顶破损的问题进行详细研究,决定如何协助居民重建屋顶。接下来,雪州公共工程局预算须花费1911万令吉维修该区所有78栋廉价组屋的屋顶。

州政府在2010年决定先拨款50万解决屋顶破损的问题。但是随着中央政府决定拨款1500万令吉解决该区廉价组屋的之后,州政府最后决定收回这笔拨款。

但是州政府并没有这样不了了之,反之州政府在今年推出100万令吉的拨款协助维修全雪州廉价组屋的破损的电梯。

由此可见,州政府所提供的书面答复并没有抢走国阵联邦政府的功劳。黄冠文指责本人欺骗选民,说该区根本没有电梯,民联政府如何拨款维修电梯而啼笑皆非,本人同样对他的指责觉得莫名其妙。

黄冠文说民联抢走国阵拨款1500万令吉拨款维修组屋的功劳。我要质问黄冠文:请问我何时说过民联拨款1500万令吉维修组屋?因此,我希望黄冠文能够先阅读州政府提供的书面回答才指责本人。

黄冠文也说该区居民不曾见过刘永山。当初州政府批准39万6192令吉针对屋顶破损的问题进行研究,该工作是由公务员以及相关的技术人员进行,而不是本人。该区居民肯定不曾见过本人,请问黄冠文这又有什么问题呢?

我吁请黄冠文在贯彻总会长高调问政的同时,也确保本身先做好功课,不要针对子虚乌有和错误的数据抨击他人,要不然黄冠文的高调问政将会变成‘搞笑’问政。

Weeding out illegal banner menace

VALLEY VIEW by TAN KARR WEI

LOCAL authorities around the Klang Valley seem to be fighting a losing battle against illegal banners that are being put up at every nook and corner.

From SS2 in Petaling Jaya to Bandar Puchong Jaya and all the way to Old Klang Road and Cheras, these illegal banners are being put up by irresponsible people opting for a cheap method to advertise their products.

While illegal money lenders have been boldly putting up their banners and stickers all around the city, the latest product to make its way into the scene are sex toys and sexual enhancement creams.

If you think only these shady businesses put up illegal banners, then you would be in for a surprise.

All around towns and cities, there are banners for kindergartens, restaurants, warehouse sales, tuition centres and language courses, to name a few.

Even big-name developers, shopping malls and electronic brands have put up professional looking banners without a license.

To identify legal banners, most councils issue a license in the form of a sticker that is attached onto the banners that would be put up.

Local authorities have pumped in a lot of resources to remove these illegal banners and stickers but none seem to have found a workable and effective solution.

Most have a schedule for taking down these banners but new ones would be put up almost as soon as the truck full of banners leaves the location.

In Petaling Jaya, the task of taking down these banners was first given to Alam Flora but it could not cope and the Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) has since taken back the responsibility.

Kampung Tunku assemblyman Lau Weng San had in 2008 started a programme where residents were rewarded between RM1 and RM5 (from his constituency development fund) for each banner taken down and brought to his office.

The programme was fairly successful and helped to rid commercial areas like Sea Park of the unsightly banners but Lau had since stopped the programme when the MBPJ came up with their own to tackle the issue.

To try to nip the problem in the bud, MBPJ offered a reward of RM250 if the public informed the council when they saw someone putting up banners and the perpetrator is caught red-handed.

While it showed MBPJ’s effort in tackling the problem, catching these sneaks red-handed is not as easy as it sounds and so far, only a handful have been caught and charged.

Last year, the Subang Jaya Municipal Council teamed up with the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) to cut off the lines of numbers found on illegal banners and other councils like MBPJ and the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) followed suit.

The move has yet to show any signs of effectiveness because it takes some time for the lines to be cut off.

More importantly, prepaid phone lines are available cheaply in Malaysia, with most telecommunication companies offering a start-up pack for less than RM10.

Perhaps the root of the problem is that banner printing services are available very cheaply.

Even these printing companies have been aggressively advertising their services on illegal banners put up all around neighbourhoods and commercial centres.

Maybe the local authorities should make it harder for these companies to print banners by making it mandatory for them to see a banner license before printing, failing which they should be fined heavily.

Another method is to impose stringent guidelines for these banner-printing businesses when issuing a license to them.

With no effective form of measure in sight so far, the councils need to look at the problem from all angles and work together with the relevant agencies to come down hard on those involved in putting up illegal banners.

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

雪州马华高调问政,变成以毫无事实根据发言的‘搞’调问政

雪州马华公共投诉局副主任张胜富昨日召开记者会抨击本人拒绝协助八打灵华人义山公会位于229路挡泥墙倒塌的问题坐视不理,甚至没有能力解决有关问题。

对此,本人郑重澄清,八打灵华人义山公会从来没有向本人或本人助理投诉有关事项。既然公会不曾向本人投诉,那么本人从何协助?

因此,我呼吁张胜富应该本着良心讲话,而不是故意制造课题来博取廉价宣传。他也不应该为了高调问政而随便拿一些不是课题的课题向本人开炮,尤其是义山公会不曾向本人求助解决挡泥墙倒塌的事情。

如果张胜富所言属实,那么我挑战他拿出证据,证明华人义山公会曾经向本人求助,而本人拒绝协助。要不然,他应该针对这指责向本人和义山公会道歉。

第二,张胜富抨击本人分不清财政部管理的供应商执照和工程部管理的F级承包商执照。其实,问题出在张胜富并不明白我当天的谈话,我的问题并不是哪一个部门管理什么执照,而是由中央政府控制的F级承包商在若干年前就已经被冻结,导致民联执政雪州之后,雪州政府因为受限于的基建工程依然只能公开给现有的F级承包商招标,无法公开给没有F级执照的承包商下标。

为此,雪州政府曾经在2009年尝试注册本身的承包商(俗称雪州F级承包商或“Selangor F”),但是碍于这方面的权限是由中央政府控制(不管是财政部还是工程部),因此这个建议最终还是无法落实。

如果联邦政府能够开放F级承包商执照,我相信这将会为州政府省下更多金钱。

而且,张胜富的着重点实在太小了。马来西亚面对的问题不是哪一个部门管理哪一个执照,而是政府能否公平和透明地透过投标发放基建工程。

我奉劝张胜富以及其他马华头头在发言之前能够先调查清楚,而不是为了高调问政,最终变成以毫无事实根据发言的‘搞’调问政!

Monday, September 20, 2010

针对双溪威新村4路和18路衔接口课题的交代



一群来自双溪威新村4路的居民最近建议把新村4路和18路的Y型衔接口封掉。这意味18路将永远和4路被切割。

我认为这不是一项可行的方法。

现在将会被提升的18路地段是道路保留地。在这之前,这段路被非法木屋居民占用。

在前朝国阵政府所推动的“零度木屋”计划下,这些木屋都被拆除。所有非法木屋居民将会搬迁至附近移动即将建竣的廉价组屋。

有关发展商Taipan Focus有限公司也必须提升附近的道路,即4路和18路。

无论如何,18路本来就不是一条新路,这是一条旧路,而且将会随着这项发展计划而加宽和提升。

这群居住在Y型衔接口附近的村民起初针对道路安全和交通问题表示关心,事关有关衔接口的路口将直接面对其中一家村民的门口。

经过和发展商以及村长的数轮讨论,以及听取其他村民针对有关衔接口所引起的问题之后,我在9月14日介入此事。

当时决定有关Y型衔接口将会作修改,变成T型衔接口,以免有关路口之间面向受影响村民的门口。

此外,我们也建议承包商和市议会提升有关衔接口的安全措施,包括在=该处适合地段建立中间隔离岛、分界柱、分界杆、安全讯号灯、降速斑马线以及路峰。

我在过后并没有收到任何人的投诉,知道两天前一名村民发短讯给我,表示他们改变主意,要求把有关衔接口封掉,并指出这是我的建议。

我立即回答表示我不曾向居民作出如此建议,我也说各造在两天前已经达成协议,各造也应该发挥妥协的精神,不应得寸进尺,避免邻里之间出现隔阂。

我也说没有人能够单方面封掉这个衔接口。更何况,现有的18路本来就是道路保留地,它应该依据现有的城乡规划条规来建造。

此外,我们也很难交代,为何一条以前能够自由进出的公路,现在却必须封掉,虽然以前这条路是一条小路。

即使村民要求获得咨询,我们也不能只限制这群村民而已,反之居住在4路、18路以及16路的村民都有权获得咨询,因为他们的权利同样受到影响。

另外,我们也不能忘记数百名即将迁入这栋廉价组屋的购屋者(他们之前是非法木屋居民,也是双溪威新村的村民)。我们必须聆听他们的意见。

肯定的,如果有关衔接口被封掉,这对他们来说是一种歧视。难道他们是低收入的一群,所以我们能够随心所欲地把他们从整个双溪威新村社区切割出来?

封掉这个衔接口也将肯定增加1路和14路的车流量和加剧这两条道路的堵车情况。

我召开这个记者会的目的就是要针对此事向媒体交代,以便媒体接获这投诉时能够获得更全面的理解。

Clarifications on issues relation to a junction between Jalan SS9A/4 and Jalan SS9A/18



There is a suggestion from a group of villagers from Jalan SS9A/4 of Sungai Way New Village to close off the Y-junction between Jalan SS9A/4 and Jalan SS9A/18, meaning that Jalan SS9A/18 will be disconnected from Jalan SS9A/4.

I would like to comment that such suggestion is not a working solution.

The location where the Jalan SS9A/18 will be upgraded was a road reserve previously occupied by squarters.

Under BN state government, all squarters were relocated under “Zero Squarters” scheme to a new block of low cost flat which is currently under construction.

The developer, Taipan Focus Sdn. Bhd., is required to upgrade roads surrounding the development area, i.e. Jalan SS9A/18 and Jalan SS9A/4.

Nevertheless, Jalan SS9A/18 is not a new road, it is an existing road to be upgraded, and it is being upgraded now.

A group of villagers from area surrounding the Y-junction have initially voiced their concerns on road safety and traffic problems when the Y-junction was designed to face directly the house of a villager.

After several rounds of discussions with the developers and the village head and after taking into considerations the views of other villagers in relation to the road, I intervened on 14th September 2010.

It was then decided that the Y-junction to be slightly modified to become a T-junction so that the connection point will not be directly facing the gate of the affected villager’s house.

It was also suggested that median kerbs, road partitions, bollards, safety beam light, street lightings, speed breakers and road humps will be installed at selected location surrounding the new T-junction as added safety precautions.

I did not receive further complaints on this solution until two days later a villager sent me a text message that they had changed their mind that they wanted to close the junction, claiming that it was my suggestion.

I immediately replied that I had never put forward this idea to the people and I further clarified that a solution had been achieved two days ago and that all parties shall “give and take” to avoid further clashes among the residents of the same neighbourhood.

I also said that nobody can single-handedly close the road as it was already been approved by the council. Moreover the land where Jalan SS9A/18 is located now is a road reserve and it has to be constructed based on town and country planning guidelines.

It is also very difficult to justify closing the junction when previously the junction was opened for villagers, though the roads were smaller then.

Even if there is a consultation, it should not be limited to villagers (stakeholders) currently residing surrounding the junction and those suggesting to close the junction. Villagers from Jalan SS9A/4, Jalan SS9A/18 and possibly Jalan SS9A/16 are also stakeholders who are equally affected.

Moreover, hundreds of house-buyers of the low cost flat (who are former squartters and villagers of Sungai Way New Village as well) are also stakeholders and their views should be sought after.

Certainly the closure of the junction will be seemed as a kind of discrimination towards the less fortunate (the low cost flat residents) by disconnecting them from the rest of the Sungai Way new village which is very much regarded as part of their community.

The closure of the junction will definitely increase traffic loads along Jalan SS9A/1 and Jalan SS9A/14 which are sometimes quite congested during peak hours.

The purpose of this press conference is to first clarify with the press in case such issue is brought up to the attention of the press.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

Christians & politics

The Star Online > Lifefocus
Sunday September 19, 2010
Christians & politics

By ANDREW SIA

Opinions are divided on Christian involvement in politics, but most people agree on the need to fight for justice.

starmag@thestar.com.my

SINCE the “political tsunami” of March 8, 2008, Christians have become increasingly vocal on national issues. However, according to the Malaysian Census of 2000, only 10% of Malaysia’s population is Christian, with the majority being in Sabah and Sarawak (where they make up 40% of the population).

But what Christians lack in numbers, they may make up for in influence. As one local Christian politician put it, “Christians may not be so numerous but we are usually well-educated, middle-class and well-connected, especially in urban society. The moment something happens, it will be widely discussed in cell group meetings or put up on the Internet.”

Malaysian Christians praying for the Pope John Paul in 2005. Prayer aside, Christians in the country have begun to speak up and take action to contribute towards nation-building. – File photo
A minor awakening

“I have never had so many political discussions with Christians than in the past two years,” says Sivin Kit, pastor of the Bangsar Lutheran Church in Kuala Lumpur. “We are swept up by the currents of the political climate.”

Political analyst Ong Kian Ming, a Christian himself, notes that “since March 8, more Christians are voicing their concerns about political issues. However, other Malaysians are doing so too.”

In 1992, the late Tan Sri Dr Tan Chee Khoon, a staunch Methodist, wrote in the book, Challenge of Vision 2020: Christian Involvement in Politics:

Pastor Sivin Kit ... we want to contribute to the common good.
“To be involved in politics, the Christians have to increase the level of political consciousness. By this I do not mean that Christians should form political parties as is the practice of Europe.

“We are a multi-racial and multi-religious nation and the injection of politics may well disrupt the religious harmony that now prevails. But there is no harm in Christians taking an interest in the politics of our country.

“By all means they should join political parties and even join the component parties of the Barisan Nasional if they so desire. If Christians so desire they may also join Opposition parties. If Christians do so, let us hope that the level of politics in this country will improve with honesty, neighbourly love and charity amongst the political leadership in our country.”

Eugene Yapp, research executive secretary of the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (or NECF, an umbrella group that includes the Assembly of God, Full Gospel, Brethren, Baptist and Sidang Injil Borneo denominations) notes that after the last general elections, churches are speaking out more.

“This is part and parcel of the process towards a just and righteous society,” Yapp says.

Indeed, those who want to improve and help society face a dilemma: Should they try to apply short-term first aid to the symptoms (the so-called welfare approach)? Or should they address the long-term root causes of those problems (the advocacy approach)? Or do both?

Kit explains that “Christians want to contribute to nation building and the common good of society. We want to be a blessing to our country.”

Traditionally, the church has done this through social (welfare) work. “But, as many NGOs have experienced, one cannot ignore the structural problems in our (socio-political) system, causing problems to arise. So it’s about working towards long-term solutions.”

Dr Ng Kam Weng, research director at Kairos Research Centre, a Christian think tank, says: “There are Christians who think politics is rotten, so let’s not get into trouble and hope to migrate. But now, more Christians are very concerned about the state of the nation.”

For instance, churches have been holding talks or forums on issues of the day, like the Perak political crisis last year, he adds.

Kit observes that while the Catholics have always spoken up more on socio-political issues, the Protestants had been more quiet – until recently.

“Just before March 8, there were very well attended one-day events (around KL) with titles like ‘The Christian and the General Election’ and ‘Was Jesus Political?’”

After the elections, several “concerned Christians”, himself included, set up a Christian socio-political discussion website called The Micah Mandate.

Ong says since then, “more young Christians want to get involved, be it through Pakatan or Barisan. It doesn’t really matter which side they choose as long as their hearts are sincere.”

However, he observes, many of the older Christian leaders are still wary of anything political, to the extent of declining to promote voter registrations.

Roman Catholic Bishop of Penang Antony Selvanayagam raising an issue at a dialogue session between Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and representatives from the various Christian churches and groups in the state.
Is it right?

I asked a few times on my Facebook account if Christians should speak up on political issues and got numerous strong comments for and against. One person cited the verse in which Jesus told his followers to “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, render unto God what is God’s” as “proof” that Christians should steer clear of politics.

Yapp says if one defines politics in the “broader philosophical sense” of how best to manage a nation’s collective life for the common good, then, “naturally, God calls us to be righteous citizens of the country. And so we do have a role to play by speaking out against all forms of evil.”

Kit admits that there is a genuine fear among some church leaders. “Since there are already so many restrictions, why should we speak out and incur the wrath of the authorities? But do we fear God more than men?”

He advocates a good balance.

“There is respect for authority. We don’t advocate a disrespectful, violent approach. As Martin Luther King Jr said, the church is the conscience of the state. In Malaysia, all religious communities should be that conscience.”

Dr Ng emphasises the “need to recover the teachings of the Old Testament where the prophets always denounced injustice whenever they saw it.”

In Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger, author Ronald Sider recalls that his survey of over 1,500 church leaders showed that the conservative ones spoke out only against “personal sins” such as sexual misconduct, but not “social sins” such as unjust economic stuctures and militarism.

Indeed, many commentators have noted that President George W.Bush won his second term because of the votes from the so-called “Christian Right” which condemned abortion and homosexuality, but not the American invasion of Iraq.

Bishop Hwa Yung of the Methodist Church in Malaysia says some Christians have what he calls “life boat ethics”.

In his book Bribery and Corruption, released in April, he explains that some 20th century evangelical Christians withdrew from engaging the world as it is sinful, like a sinking ship.

“Hence, there is no point in trying to save it. Instead we are to jump into the life boat, namely the church, and leave the world to sink!” he writes.

Hwa also explains that the so-called separation between “church and state” or between “spiritual and secular” is actually a bias of Western European Christianity and Augustine (one of the church fathers), who in turn was influenced by Greek philosophers like Plato and Descartes.

Cheryl Lee, president (2008-2010) of the Independent Christian Renewal Society (ICRS), a local Catholic discussion and advocacy group, says: “The cross does not only have a vertical dimension, between you and God. It also has a horizontal element, which is about how you care for your brothers and sisters, including non-Christians.”

She thinks that is why the Catholic church has always been vocal, even in the past.

“We are called upon to embody the joys and hopes of the majority of people. The Catholic church has a ‘preferential option’ for the poor. In Matthew 25, God often comes in disguise as the poor, the powerless and the marginalised. When you help them, you are helping God Himself.

“For instance, Michael Chong (head of the MCA Public Complaints Bureau) is a Catholic who witnesses his faith by doing a lot of good work.”

The ICRS has organised talks at Assumption Church in Petaling Jaya on topics such as human trafficking and corruption. “Far from staying away, politics is a moral responsibility for Christians,” Lee adds.

Bishop Paul Tan, who oversees the Malacca-Johor Catholic Diocese, says all parishes have set up an Office of Human Development to spread the social teachings and organise programmes like giving free tuition to poor students.

Not anti-government

Tricia Yeoh says there are many challenges to overcome.
However, before imagining any great “awakening” on socio-political issues, it’s worth remembering that all this is not the mainstream practice among Malaysian Christians. Dr Ng notes that this limited activism is usually found in the Klang Valley.

What about Sarawak, where there are many more Christians?

“The state has traditionally been almost 100% Barisan and with the usual carrot and stick policies, the churches there don’t publicly criticise the government,” he says.

Tricia Yeoh, a policy analyst and Christian, says her personal view is that “churches are beginning to wake up. They are aware of all the issues and pray for those involved in politics. But real action, the wave of reformation across Malaysian churches, has not taken place yet.”

Lee adds that “it’s not like in the past when you had NGOs versus the police. We have also invited the police for talks on topics such as migrant workers. And ministers like (Tan Sri) Bernard Dompok (Plantation Industries and Commodities) have spoken at our group events and will do so again.”

One result is that after these talks, all the Catholic churches in PJ have conducted voter registration excercises.

“It’s not just about criticising. There are good things that the government does and we support that. It’s about going against wrong-doing.”

While direct political participation may not be for all, there are many other forms of indirect involvement. After all, what is politics anyway?

“Let’s be honest, the church also has politics, so we are not immune,” says Kit, who elaborates on the verse about “rendering unto Caesar”.

“Everything is political, but politics is not everything. For instance, when we pay taxes, that is political. When we invite a politician to officiate at a church event, that is political. So what is the appropriate level of involvement?”

He points out that some scholars believe Jesus was crucified for political reasons.

“People tried to make Him a king, but He refused. The politics of Jesus was not the gutter politics of domination. It was one of non-violence, peace and justice ... a broader definition of politics.”

Christians must go beyond the narrow definition of politics as Barisan versus Pakatan, or Democrat versus Republican, Kit stresses.

“There are many types of involvement. When a residents’ association discusses community concerns with the local wakil rakyat, that is political involvement too. Some may want to write to newspapers or websites, or join a group. Others may want to support quietly behind the scenes.”

Dr Ng hopes that churches can be more “big-hearted” about their talented members who want to do “God’s work”.

“Apart from working in church, they should also give them the option to join NGOs (that advocate socio-political issues). Similarly businessmen are not just there to contribute to the church building fund. They can also help bring social changes.”

What about supporting political parties?

Kit says some individual Christians may choose to contribute as a politician of any party. As for the church itself, the “textbook answer” is that no, as an institution, they should be politically non-partisan.

“I prefer that word to saying the church should be neutral. There may be specific issues on which the church many need to make a political stand. No one will say that the church should have been neutral about Hitler or apartheid. Or about corruption.”

Kit adds that, historically, the Bible has also been “abused” by certain parties to justify slavery and even apartheid.

“And part of the German church (tacitly) supported Hitler as well. But there were others like Dietrich Bonhoeffer who resisted by insisting that Christ was the true Führer (leader), not Adolph Hitler. The moment politicians demand our total allegiance and obedience, we need to pause and reconsider our priorities.”

Why did Malaysian Christians not engage in socio-political issues in the past?

One reason is historical. As a former Methodist pastor once explained to this writer, “the church came with the conquering colonial powers. Naturally, it was reluctant to speak out against colonialism and exploitation.”

In contrast, in 19th century Britain, Chris-tian politicians such as William Wilberforce and his friends were at the forefront in the struggle to abolish slavery throughout the empire. They also spoke out against the exploitation of the Industrial Revolution, when child and women workers were literally chained to their machines for up to 15 hours a day by greedy factory owners.

Some Christian evangelicals (charismatics) also subscribe to the concept of what they call “The Last Days” before Armageddon.

“Since the world is getting worse, leave it to the Devil and let’s focus on saving souls (for Heaven),” quips Ng.

Reports in The Star in November 2009 and March 2010 had it that a renowned charismatic church in KL had allegedly mismanaged church funds. Plans for a lavish “spaceship-like” RM150mil Christian “convention centre” had also split the congregation.

After some 400 church members, who called themselves the Truth, Transparency and Good Governance Group (TTG), demanded accountability for church funds, their names were mysteriously removed from the membership rolls. They then staged a demonstration against the church’s leadership and lodged police reports.

Conservative middle class

Ng thinks the other reason for Christian passiveness is cultural. “Sociologically, since Christians are a minority, they prefer to keep to themselves and not ‘get into trouble’.

There is also the inherently conservative nature of middle class people.

“Urban English- and Chinese-speaking churches can be a comfortable and conservative middle class institution,” says Kit. “They shy away from rocking the boat.”

So why are they speaking up more now?

Traditionally, the church has played a big part in social work. Malaysian Christian Association for Relief (Malaysian Care), for example, has programmes for those with special needs.
“It’s the Internet that has led the change in Christian thinking, not the church, unfortunately,” he adds. “There was some discussion on socio-political issues back in the 1990s. The Church as an institution has been conservative, but it has been pushed to respond. Now, different leaders are more vocal.”

Dr Ng observes that “Dr Mahathir’s regime was very authoritarian. Then came Pak Lah. People felt there was more room to speak up and everybody, not just Christians, did so.”

Kit, who was trained at the Malaysian Theological Seminary in the 1990s, says local theologians have been discussing socio-political concerns for at least 20 years, “but it did not go down to the grassroots”. In recent years, however, the Lina Joy case and the Allah issue have raised Christian awareness.

“More Christians are asking questions. The climate of the country is such that the church has no choice but to discuss social and political issues.”

“For me, the turning point was the M. Moorthy incident (in which his Hindu family members and the Muslim authorities tussled over the ‘right’ to bury him),” says Kit. “I was struck by the whole idea of arguing over a dead body.”

He thinks the younger Christians “who are not caught up in the old way of thinking” are more willing to participate in socio-political change.

Spreading the message

While many Christians on the ground are still apprehensive about speaking up, the organisations which represent them (at least in theory) have issued a few press statements on current socio-political concerns.

These groups are the NECF, the Council of Churches Malaysia (or CCM, whose members include the “mainline Protestant” churches such as the Methodists, Lutherans, Anglicans and Presbyterians) and the Christian Federation of Malaysia (or CFM, which includes all Christians both Protestant and Catholic).

In January, the CCM criticised those trying to provoke religious conflict by throwing pigs’ heads into mosques, using a cow’s head in a protest, or burning churches.

In September 2008, when blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin, MP Teresa Kok, and journalist Tan Hoon Cheng were detained under the ISA, NECF said: “As a national body that represents some one million evangelical Christians in Malaysia, NECF Malaysia is deeply concerned over the use of the ISA and printing laws against newspapers and individuals who are performing the vital duty of bringing critical issues to the attention of the Malaysian public for constructive debate.”

And in July 2009, after the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock, CFM head Bishop Ng Moon Hing said Christians were “appalled” by the “strange circumstances” of his death.

So if organisations representing Christians are speaking up, why does it seem strange for ordinary Christians to do so?

Bishop Tan notes that Christians have made “statement after statement” through groups like CFM and also the MCCBCHST (Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism).

“The press picked up a few but most of the statements were not published,” he observes.

If the mainstream media has certain “limitations”, should the church then employ its own means to spread the word on such issues?

Kit says: “Sometimes Christians see that it’s the role of such organisations to speak out while they continue the normal religions activities at church level. On the ground, there is not much conscious talk about it.

“This makes some young people feel that the church is not relevant to the changes happening around them. My view is that these issues should be included in sermons, prayer items, church newsletters and group discussions.”

Muslim-Christian relations

Recent religious controversies have also stoked Christian socio-political awareness. Christians have long felt uneasy about the authorities’ decisions on the approval of church buildings and the limitations imposed on (and recent confiscation of) Bahasa Malaysia Bibles.

In more recent years, there have been contentious cases (eg Lina Joy), as well as raucous protests against the Article 11 inter-faith dialogue and the Bar Council forum on religious conversion. Then came the Allah issue and various incidents of churches being set on fire.

As the authorities are perceived to be Muslim-controlled, there are questions about sensitivities.

“When you say sensitivities, that actually depends on which Muslim I am talking to,” says Kit, pointing out that the Muslims themselves have different opinions on the Allah issue.

Dr Ng believes Christians should not become more politically active only because of issues.

“I always tell church people, don’t seek justice only for Christians. Seek justice for everybody, including Muslims,” he says.

Edward Lee, the DAP State Assemblyman for Bukit Gasing, PJ, who is well known as a Christian politician, adds, “One municipal councillor from PAS told me, ‘The way you do things is like us Muslims.’ We should be magnamimous and give people a chance, not just criticise them. Malay culture has a softer way of speaking.”

Of course, it is naturally easier for Malaysian Christians to speak out for their “own” interests. But a higher and nobler move would be to speak out for everybody’s common interests, on issues like corruption, the environment, economics and education.

Kit agrees that this is a better demonstration of Christian love – which is why he is one of the few local pastors to speak out in support of Palestinians.

In January, Archbishop Murphy Packiam, the leader of Malaysian Catholics, issued a call for prayer vigils for Gaza so that “God will soften the hearts of the leaders to avoid the sledgehammer tactics of Israel or the acts of Hamas, which only further the sufferings of innocent people in Palestine.”

Bishop Hwa writes that Christians who live in an Islamic context need to be more “socially engaged”. This is because the Muslims affirm that their religion is relevant to all of life and does not separate the spiritual and secular realms.

“As long as Christians hold on to a dualistic worldview which leads us to forget about our socio-political responsibilities ... our Muslim friends will always see Christianity as an other-worldly faith that has no relevance in the real world,” he says.

In short, if Christians spoke out more, they would be on the same page with Muslims since Islam advocates fairness and justice, not just in religious matters, but as an addeen (total way of life) that encompasses the moral, devotional, social, economic and political aspects of a community.

Perhaps Christians can follow the example of, and indeed join hands with, their fellow Muslims to speak up for a better society?

Kit notes that in Western countries like Germany, there is a “rich tradition” of Christians espousing positive political values and even forming political parties such as the Christian Democrats.

“This is similar to PAS. For instance, Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (Pas Central Working Committee member) has described his party as Islamic Democrats. My stereotyped view of PAS has changed.”

However, in practice, bridging the divide is not always so easy.

“We can disagree, but with respect,” says Kit. “Sometimes in inter-faith dialogues, I sense that no one is really listening and we’re all talking past each other.”

The future

Yeoh says there are many challenges to overcome.

The Klang House of Victory, a drug rehabilitation centre, was set up by a Christian organisation.
“I suppose people are inherently self-involved, preferring to prioritise their own spiritual health and needs instead of others’. Living in a materialistic and urban (consumer culture) setting does not help either.”

Bishop Paul Tan admits that the Catholic Social Teachings have reached very few people. “As someone said, it’s the most well kept secret of the church!”

Lee believes many people are still conservative; she recalls how one Catholic priest inPJ was asked to “lay off” political issues by his parishioners.

“Things don’t usually improve with a big bang. We are planting seeds of change. And we leave it to the conscience of members to decide how to respond.”

And how should Christians respond?

In the heat of online political discussions, things can sometimes get confrontational and aggressive, with name-calling and rough language involved. “This reflects real sentiments, and we cannot ignore the frustrations displayed there,” says Kit.

“But as Christians we are called to model ‘speaking the truth in love’. To me, this means we focus on the issues at hand and refrain from getting sucked into mud-slinging and personal attacks.

“While we may get into hot debates, we must not demonise the other person. We must recognise his humanity, warts and all.

“It’s a delicate balance. The challenge is that Christians may come across as sounding too nice and therefore unclear because we are not critical enough.”

He adds that a good example of this balance between forgiveness and frankness was seen during the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, held after the fall of apartheid.

Lee says that getting politically involved is an expression of Christian love.

“The essence of people is to love, otherwise they will die unhappy. I have visited sick people in hospital and I find those who have lived a full life, given and served well, tend to die peacefully. Those who are self-centred are often more scared to die.”

Yapp adds: “We believe our actions are transformational in nature rather than revolutionary. We seek to be the ‘salt and light’ to the world by being a voice and a conscience of the nation to bring about real improvements. May God bless Malaysia!”


© 1995-2010 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd (Co No 10894-D)

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Laporan polis terhadap fitnah Utusan Malaysia dan Mohd. Azhid Md. Arip


Laporan polis oleh Setiausaha DAP Selangor dan ADUN Kampung Tunku Lau Weng San pada 18 September 2010 di Petaling Jaya:

Laporan polis terhadap fitnah Utusan Malaysia dan Mohd. Azhid Md. Arip

Saya di sini ingin membuat satu laporan polis terhadap Utusan Malaysia dan bekas Naib Ketua Angkatan Muda Parti KeADILan Rakyat (PKR) Mohd. Zahid Md. Arip yang cuba mengaitkan pembunuhan jutawan kosmestik Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya dan tiga yang lain dengan DAP dengan memfitnah bahawa suspek kes pembunuhan ini merupakan ahli seumur hidup DAP.

Saya ingin membuat laporan polis bahawa tuduhan yang dilemparkan oleh Mohd. Zahid Md. Arip dan yang dilaporkan oleh Utusan Malaysia adalah tidak berasas dan bertujuan memburuk-burukkan DAP melalui fitnah.

Suspek itu tidak pernah menjadi ahli DAP, apa lagi menjadi ahli seumur hidup, sesetengah pihak cuba menjadikan pembunuhan itu sebagai isu perkauman di negara ini.

Oleh itu, saya membuat laporan polis dan meminta pihak polis menyiasat akhbar itu dan Mohd Zaid yang meninggalkan PKR pada tahun 2006 mengikut Seksyen 500 Kanun Keseksaan.

Di sini, saya melampirkan laporan Utusan Malaysia pada 16 September lalu memetik Mohd Zahid yang melabelkan DAP sebagai “hiprokit” kerana lambat membidas pembunuh Sosilawati dan tiga yang lain.

Berikut petikan dua perenggan yang menjadi pertikaian itu:

Dalam pada itu, Mohd Zahid mempersoalkan kenapa DAP langsung tidak bersuara bagi mengutuk pembunuhan kejam tersebut, sedangkan sebelum ini parti berkenaan gah mendakwa organisasi mereka sebagai sebuah parti yang memperjuangkan hak semua pihak.

Mohd Zahid juga dilaporkan berkata: "Apakah tindakan membisu ini mempunyai kaitan dengan dakwaan yang mengatakan bahawa suspek utama adalah ahli seumur hidup parti tersebut. Jika benar (dakwaan itu), ternyata DAP sebuah parti hipokrit yang hanya memperjuangkan kepentingan kaum tertentu sahaja."

DAP berpendapat bahawa semua pihak tidak harus menggunakan isu sosial ini sebagai isu politik dan polis harus diberi peluang untuk menyelesaikan siasatan mereka. Lebih-lebih lagi, polis telah menahan suspek yang berkenaan dan siasatan masih berjalan dan semua pihak harus membiarkan proses perundangan berjalan lancar.

Lau Weng San

乌雪新古毛亚三古邦村委会和叻思村委会联办中秋园游吸引500人出席



(新古毛9月17日讯)乌雪新古毛亚三古邦村委会和叻思村委会今日联合主办中秋园游活动,吸引两村近500名村民扶老携幼参与其盛。出席者包括乌雪县议员以及乌雪县各新村村长。同时甘榜东姑州议员刘永山也莅临现场主持开幕,并拨款3000令吉给主办单位。

大会主席庄文来表示,这是两村村委会第一次联合主办这项活动,目的就是要发扬中华民族的传统文化。

刘永山也在致辞时指出,中秋节不仅是中华民族的文化节日,也是全体马来西亚人民的节日,华裔社会应该在庆祝中秋佳节之际,拉近各民族之间的关系。

他也指出,马来西亚虽然最近才庆祝831独立日和916马来西亚日,可是国内一些极端种族主义分子却在这个节日纷纷发表破坏族群关系的言论,导致马来西亚的种族关系陷入新低。

刘永山也抨击国阵和《马来西亚前锋报》以张念群出席回教堂活动不停地煽动种族情绪。他也揭发国阵乌雪国会议员卡马拉纳登在乌雪国席补选期间也身穿国阵标志的衣服进入回教堂参与回教堂的活动。一些国阵的政治人物包括当地的州议员更是大摇大摆地进出回教堂发表演讲。

他说:“如果国阵说非穆斯林不能进入回教堂,以及政治人物不能在回教堂发表演讲。那么为何国阵本身却这么做?这显示国阵极为虚伪的一面。”

刘永山也呼吁,华裔社会应该大胆告诉这些极端分子,即马来西亚是一个多元民族和宗教的国家,马来西亚是600万华裔的祖国。

大会也邀请双文丹威武龙狮团以及巴东加里国中华乐团现场呈现舞龙表演和华乐演奏。大会也在现场颁发8架由一名来自万绕的热心人士报销的轮椅给乌雪各地区的穷苦人家。

Thursday, September 16, 2010

TANGLUNG FESTIVAL



PRESS RELEASE

16th September 2010

TANGLUNG FESTIVAL

In conjunction with the Mid-Autumn Festival, the office of State Assemblyman YB Lau Weng San will organize a Tanglung Festival for the local community.

Details are as follows:

Date: 18 September 2010 (Saturday)
Time: 7:30pm
Venue: Taman Aman, Section 22, Petaling Jaya
(near Sri Aman Secondary Girls’ School)

The event will start only at 7.30pm, as we would also like our Muslim friends to join us for some fruits and halal mooncake.

The event is also aimed at promoting community relations and goodwill, and we encourage those who live in the area surrounding Taman Aman to come and participate in this community event. We especially would like our friends from the Indian and Malay communities to join us too, as it is not just aimed at those who celebrate the Mid-Autumn Festival.

The activities lined up include several performances from various NGOs and orphanages from DUN Kampung Tunku and a walkabout around the lake with lit lanterns (if weather permits).

We look forward to seeing you at Taman Aman on Saturday night.

YB Lau Weng San
State Assemblyman of Kg. Tunku

For further information, you may contact Evelyn Gan at 016-267 5006

举报贪污滥权的民联议员,国阵须掌握确实证据

雪州反对党领袖基尔透露,数名因反映领袖涉嫌滥权,而被雪州政府撤换县市议员职位的县市议员,目前已向国阵提供民联议员涉嫌滥权的情报,国阵将适时公告天下。

基尔如果掌握民联议员和领袖贪污滥权的情报,我本人欢迎他立即向执法单位举报这些议员或领袖,而不是躲在背后,或者是利用网络引述来历不明的指责在背后进行匿名的映射报道。

本人目前留意平面与电子媒体针对雪州民联,尤其是雪州行动党的议员或领袖的负面报道,发现部分报道甚至触及赵明福事件。这些匿名的报道不仅妨碍司法公正,也严重伤害赵明福家人。

县市议员被撤换的原因非常多,其中不外是部分议员无法配合国州议员以及其他县市议员一起工作。此外也有部分议员经常缺席会议、无暇照顾选区工作、民生服务奇差、无法掌握良好的语言沟通能力等等而被撤换。

我们不否认部分被撤换的县市议员因为不满被撤换而选择报复,向国阵提供不确实或似是而非的'情报',或者向基层党员和社会人士散播谣言,意图鱼目混珠。

如果这些被撤换的前任县市议员对任何雪州民联领袖或议员有任何投诉,他们除了可以向各自政党的纪律委员会投诉之外,也可以上书州务大臣,甚至向各执法单位如警方、反贪污委员会等等机构报案要求彻查,条件是他们必须掌握确实的证据,无需以匿名的方式发表似是而非的言论,或者是向国阵领袖提供'情报'。如果仅仅向国阵提供情报但不敢向警方举报,这无疑是懦夫之举。其'情报'与'线索'也难以取信与人。

以马来西亚现有的政治现实环境,任何人士如果拥有确实的证据向执法单位投报民联议员,相信有关执法单位必能在最快的时间调查,甚至控告民联议员。

我们也吁请媒体在报道在野党所提供的'情报'和'线索'时,能够多加研究和追查,以求公平报道。

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

种族主义气焰高涨的国庆月——是时候检讨国家干训局的存在

国内许多公务员最近一再发表充满种族歧视的偏激言论,严重破坏国民团结。现在是时候向联邦政府施压,要求重新检讨国家干训局的存在,因为国家干训局自十多年前便开始向公务员洗脑,注入种族主义课程。

我国每年从8月15日至9月16欢庆一年一度的国庆月。在这短短的一个月,国人将欢庆8月31日国庆日以及9月16日马来西亚成立日(俗称"马来西亚日")。今年是马来西亚庆祝53周年国庆,但是和以往更加不同的是,民间根本感受不到各族之间互相尊重的融洽气氛,反而是种族气焰高涨。

首相前特别助理纳西尔发表不负责任的种族言论还言犹在耳,朝野各界谴责声浪不断,不到一年时间在校园又发生了类似事件。以前发表这类言论者多为政客,现竟连一校之长也发表如此言论,让人觉得种族主义的气焰似乎已经无孔不入,连神圣的学府也被侵占。

国人不能把这事件看成是独立个案而已,因为发表种族主义言论的政客和公务员大多曾经接受国家干训局的训练。

在马来西亚公共服务,争取升职的公务员必须接受国家干训局的训练,同时必须通过该局所设下的考试,才符合资格申请升职。不仅是公务员,即使是接受政府奖学金的优异生也必须接受国家干训局的'训练'。

虽然民间和媒体也曾经多次报道国家干训局的训练内容充数种族主义、歧视其他族群的教材,但是联邦政府始终无动于衷,拒绝检讨内容。直至去年年尾,由于国家干训局的课程内容再次引起人民的不满,联邦政府才肯妥协修改内容。当时也是第一次出现巫统的部长认为该局所办的课程内容出现种族主义内容,违反"一个大马"的精神。

问题在于,到了今时今日,虽然干训局的内容以作修改,为何这种歧视他族的言论还继续出现呢?这是否证明当局即使修改内容也是于事无补,反之必须大刀阔斧改革甚至废除国家干训局?

Monday, September 06, 2010

Public Forum: "What Does It Mean To Be Malaysian? - Thoughts & Reflections Menjelang Malaysia Day"

The office of Kg Tunku assemblyman Lau Weng San will be organising a public
forum entitled "What Does It Mean To Be Malaysian? - Thoughts & Reflections
Menjelang Malaysia Day".

Venue: Crystal Crown Hotel, 12 Lorong Utara A (Off Jalan Utara), Petaling Jaya
Date: 8 Sept 2010
Time: 8pm

Speakers:
• Hannah Yeoh - State Assemblyperson for Subang Jaya
• Rafizi Ramli - Chief Executive of Selangor Economic Advisory Office
• V. Ganabathirao - Former ISA detainee
• Azmi Sharom - UM law associate professor
• Leon Donald - DAP Sarawak State Committee member
• Tony Pua - MP for Petaling Jaya Utara

All are welcome. Enquiries: 019-2865858.

Please spread the word!

Saturday, September 04, 2010

雪马华自误误人

马华雪州联委会针对雪州反对党网站指控林吉祥前政治秘书李继香控制雪州行动党的选区拨款和工程合约,进而导致赵明福被反贪委会调查一事是不正确和误导性的指责。
有关网站也于昨日郑重澄清并向李继香道歉。其更正启示已经于昨日张贴在其网站上。读者可浏览http://www.pembangkangselangor.com/?p=830以阅读详文。
因此,雪州马华联委会针对此事发表文告应该事先调查清楚,避免自误误人。更甚的是,雪州马华联委会更把赵明福事件扯进来,这对赵明福家属、反贪污委员会的调查以及验尸庭的审讯造成影响。
更方必须知道,反贪污委员会是于2009年年中接获投报指责雪州民联36名州议员滥用选区拨款,因此展开调查。赵明福的上师,即斯里肯邦岸州议员欧阳捍华是反贪污委员会调查的其中一名州议员。
在同一时候,八打灵县12名民联州议员的拨款记录也被反贪污委员会取走。在赵明福被传召以证人身份前往反贪污委员会大厦问话的同一天,我的选区助理也在同一天被传召问话,根本不出现赵明福因为被指示发出虚假的报货单而殃及池鱼被反贪污委员会调查。
此外,赵明福案件以及反贪污委员会调查民联议员拨款案件尚在进行之中,雪州马华联委会此时此刻发表文告大肆散播不正确的消息,其实已经违反法律。
反贪污委员会法令清楚阐明所有正在调查的贪污案件不得渲染。至于所有正在审讯的法庭案件也不得在法庭意外讨论以免干扰调查工作和法庭的审讯。我们支持言论自由,但是有关方面也必须掌握正确无误的资讯才发表文告,而不是随意从下载网络的匿名小道消息就大作文章。这肯定是最愚笨、最不专业和最懒惰的‘高调问政’。