Cheaper cars wanted

By Azam Aris of theedgemalaysia.com | The Edge Malaysia – Thu, Aug 9, 2012 DO Malaysians deserve cheaper cars? After having to pay so much more than consumers in other countries for so many years to buy a car, the majority would say, "Yes! We want cheaper cars!"

I remember in the early 1980s when my brother bought his first car — a Mazda 323, which only cost about RM17,000. The other options were the slightly-cheaper Nissan Sunny and the slightly pricier Ford Laser.

A fresh graduate's salary then was RM1,200 to RM1,500 — not very much lower than today's starting pay — but he definitely had greater purchasing power.

In addition, cheaper cars and houses — one could find a double-storey house for RM60,000 to RM80,000 in many areas in the Klang Valley then — meant lower loan commitments. The disposable income of a graduate was much higher.

Those were the days when the nation was just an assembler of foreign cars. Later, we decided to venture into the unknown territory of heavy industries to become a car manufacturer, in a bid to emulate the economic quantum leap of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.

Proton, the national car maker, was incorporated in May 1983. By July 1985, along with the lesser-known Japanese car manufacturer Mitsubishi as a partner, the nation's pride — the Proton Saga — was launched at an entry level price of RM17,800.

The price was competitive initially but the national car manufacturer needed to be protected so that it could gradually grow into a regional and, perhaps, global player. An almost sure way of protecting Proton was to increase the duties of its competitors, hence the introduction and imposition of a high excise and sales tax regime for locally assembled foreign cars and fully imported vehicles.

Today, nearly 30 years after Proton was set up, the price of the equivalent of a Mazda 323 is RM100,000, a Ford Fiesta sedan goes for RM80,000, and the Nissan Sentra and Latio cost about RM90,000 — or nearly five times more.

Proton's low-end Saga 1.3, priced at RM38,000, is among the cheapest cars in the country, but still costs more than double what it did when it was first launched.

But wages have not doubled for many, let alone increased five-fold during the same period. Salaries have remained relatively low for the majority of the population, with about 70% of households in the country earning below RM3,000.

As public transport — which is in the midst of an extensive upgrade — is still inadequate, many are still forced to buy a car. Dollar for dollar, the prices they have to pay are among the highest in the world.

A Toyota Camry 2.5 litre that costs about US$30,000 (RM90,000) in the US is priced at about RM182,000 here. A Volkswagen Golf GTI costs RM120,000 in Germany, but RM200,000 here. The sporty Peugeot RCZ 1.6 turbo goes for £21,000 (RM102,000) in the UK, compared with RM223,000 here.

Excise duties for cars can be as high as 105%. On top of that, there is an average sales tax of 10%. According to one estimate, if a Malaysian consumer pays RM100,000 for a car, as much RM55,000 goes to paying for various duties.

So, it is not surprising that Malaysians spend a substantial portion of their disposable income on monthly car instalments and maintenance. That is a high price to pay — 20% of the RM581 billion in household debt is due to cars, the second highest percentage after housing loans.

It was thus not surprising that when the opposition coalition, led by PKR, proposed a massive reduction in excise duties, many supported the move, which would result in lower car prices, lower monthly instalments and higher disposable income.

Ruling party members called it an election gimmick and warned that such a move would result in the loss of RM7 billion in revenue, which is much needed by the government as it has been running a budget deficit for the last 14 years.

Proton will lose a lot of money, a lot of jobs will be lost and the second-hand car market will stall, the critics claim. In short, they say, the proposal will not be viable and cannot be implemented.

Yes, any reduction or removal of duties, if not replaced with new or higher taxes elsewhere, will directly decrease the government's revenue. However, all is not lost if a cut in duties results in higher disposable income for many.

Let us assume that of the RM7 billion in revenue, 50% is cut. That would mean RM3.5 billion would be put back into the pockets of consumers, which they would likely spend and plough back into the economy. In an economy that relies on domestic consumption, the multiplier effect of RM3.5 billion would be immense.

The loss in revenue can also be compensated through a further revamp of the approved permit (AP) system for imported cars, which has been consistently abused in the past. AP documents, which cost nothing, were traded among bumiputera and non-bumiputera car dealers for up to RM40,000 each.

Now, the government has imposed a RM10,000 fee for each AP but a further increase would not hurt those who can afford imported vehicles — the rich and upper middle class.

An open bidding system that has been recommended would give the government higher revenue.

As for Proton, it will not be on the losing end as the prices of its products will also drop and remain the cheapest in the country. Cheaper cars mean a bigger market. That will also get Proton ready to compete in a more liberalised domestic, regional and international market.

The message to Proton should be that if it cannot compete domestically and internationally after 30 years of protection, then it can never be ready to compete even if it continues to enjoy such a privilege for many more years.

Many people feel a gradual removal of duties is doable immediately and this will allow the used car market to adjust accordingly.

In the past few weeks, there has been a lot of debate on the pros and cons of this issue. But after all is said and done, the one inescapable conclusion is that we do deserve cheaper cars, plain and simple. Azam Aris is managing editor at The Edge. This story appeared in The Edge on Aug 6, 2012.

Frequently Asked Questions on Water Restructuring Process

1. What are the Selangor State Government’s intentions in the restructuring of the water industry in Selangor?
o The Selangor State Government intends to restructure the water services industry in Selangor in a holistic manner, ensuring that the four concession companies are consolidated into one entity, which would eventually hold the operating license to manage the water treatment and water distribution in the state of Selangor.
o This single operator would be a company under the Selangor State Government.
o The Selangor State Governments intends to increase efficiency of the water industry, reduce tariffs by up to 24% in the long run, and to maintain the free water for the first 20m3 policy.

2. How does this fit into the Federal Government’s plans?
o The Water Services Industry Act (WSIA) 2006 was passed in Parliament with the intention of renationalizing all water assets in the country.
o The plan is to eventually have all water-related assets transferred back to the Federal Government through its nominated agency Pengurusan Aset Air Berhad (PAAB).
o The Selangor State Government owns 70% of the State’s water assets, whilst the remaining 30% belongs to privatized concession companies.
o If successful, all Selangor water assets will be owned by the Federal Government, but license to operate given to another entity.

3. What is the Selangor State Government’s proposal for a holistic restructuring of the water industry?
o The Selangor State Government is proposing that it would take over the assets of the concession companies, and also pay them their invested equity at a rate of 12% return on investment. This amounts to RM5.7 billion (RM4.6 billion worth of assets and RM1.1 billion worth of equity)
o After this, the Selangor Government would transfer RM4.6 billion worth of assets from the concession companies and RM9.7 billion worth of its own State water assets to PAAB.
o The Selangor Government would then receive RM14.3 billion in cash and bonds from the Federal Government from the sale of water-related assets.
o A special-purpose vehicle would be set up as a corporate entity to consolidate all the four companies together. The State Government owns shares in some of the companies and hence by virtue of these shares would be able to exercise significant decision-making in the consolidation.
o The special-purpose vehicle would apply for an operating license for the water industry in Selangor, leasing the water assets now owned by PAAB to operate at the State level.

4. Why is it important for the restructuring to take place as quickly as possible?
o It is important to expedite the process of restructuring because under the concession agreement, Syabas can increase water tariffs by up to 70%.
o Even if the Federal Government, after giving the operating license back to Syabas (which the Selangor State opposes), decides not to increase the tariffs, the difference will be borne by the State Government and in turn by the people of Selangor.

5. What did the Federal Government do to sabotage the Selangor State Government’s plans?
o Two days before the Selangor State Government’s offer to the concession companies expired, the Federal Government through its regulatory body Suruhanjaya Pengurusan Air Negara (SPAN) announced that it would bypass the State Government to negotiate directly with concession companies.
o Their offers to the concession companies would obviously be a sabotage since they would offer higher prices to the companies, than what the State was offering.
o The Federal Government’s excuse was that the State Government was intentionally delaying the process of negotiation, when in fact the State Government has always provided the Federal Government information every step of the way.
o All four concession companies rejected the offer made by the Selangor State Government, as expected.

6. Why is the Federal Government’s offer to the concession companies considered a bailout of its Barisan Nasional cronies?
o The Federal Government, in paying a hefty amount of money to the concession companies beyond what is reasonable, is effectively bailing out the concession companies from the great debts that they are facing presently.
o After the WSIA 2006 was signed, accounts show that the concession companies made out huge dividends to their shareholders. These large dividends are unacceptable, since the companies are already in debt.
o The CEO of Puncak Niaga was paid RM5.1 million in 2007, and monthly management fee of RM700,000. If the company is in debt, why pay such a high salary to its CEO?
o The Federal Government continues to support its Barisan Nasional crony companies. Syabas sponsors the UMNO General Assembly annually, including in 2009.

7. Why must the Selangor State Government be included in the process of restructuring of the water industry?
o Clause 191(4) and Clause 191(7) of the Water Services Industry Act (WSIA) require that the State Government must be involved in the process of negotiation, as it is a counterparty to the concession agreement signed with the concession companies.
o In a Cabinet decision dated 16th January 2008, it was agreed that the State Government, through its State subsidiary company, Kumpulan Darul Ehsan Berhad (KDEB), would take the lead in negotiating on the restructuring process of the water industry.
o This Cabinet decision has not been revoked, nor any other Cabinet decision made reversing it. Hence, the State still has to be included. Total exclusion is tantamount to being illegal.
o The Selangor State Government by law still has full rights over the State’s raw water. Excluding the State Government is not a wise or practical idea, as it would need to be involved in the eventual outcome of the water industry.
o More than 70% of the state’s water assets are still owned by the Selangor State Government, including those that are being managed by the concession companies now.
o Under the concession agreements, all water-related assets are to be transferred back to the Selangor State Government. If the companies transfer these back to the Federal Government, it would renege on the agreement to have the assets transferred back to the State Government.

8. What is the Selangor State Government asking of the Federal Government?
o The Selangor State Government demands for the Federal Government to terminate the concession agreement with Syabas, based on its mismanagement, corrupt practices, breach of contract and inefficient delivery of services to the people of Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya.
o The Selangor State Government demands that the Federal Government to exercise its powers under the WSIA to do so.
o The Selangor State Government is demanding that it continues to take the lead in the negotiations of water restructuring with concession companies, according to the earlier Cabinet decision and along with the spirit of the WSIA.
o The Selangor State Government is demanding that the operating license is not given back to Syabas but to give it to the State Government.
o The Selangor State Government demands for reasonable action to be taken by the Federal Government. If both Governments were to co-operate, this outstanding issue will be resolved more quickly without it becoming a political issue.

9. What options are available for the Selangor State Government, if the situation reaches a stalemate?
o The Selangor Government has met with the Ministry of Energy, Water and Communications and the situation seems to have met with a stalemate.

o The Selangor State Government has submitted its proposal for the Minister to consider carefully, in the holistic restructuring of the state’s water industry and awaits its feedback.

o If all else fails, the Selangor State Government will have no choice but to take legal action against the Federal Government.

为何魏家祥不抨击汝来市议会要求拉务丘晒园华小进行填泥、辟学校路口、筑排水沟和英达丽水化粪池等基建，反而选择性地抨击梳邦再也市议会？

国阵森州政府领导的汝来市议会要求拉务丘晒园华小进行填泥、辟学校路口、筑排水沟和英达丽水化粪池等基建，为何魏家祥不予以抨击，反而却选择性地抨击梳邦再也市议会？

魏家祥日前在国会下议院回答问题时指责雪州民联政府要求敦陈修信华小拨款200万令吉来兴建行校园前的基本建设，包括行人天桥。他还说这是梳邦再也市议会发出住拥证的条件之一。

我要严厉反驳魏家祥的谎言。

梳邦再也市议会从未强制要求该华小拨款200万令吉来兴建这些基本设备。梳邦再也市议会在批文中指出，该校必须照顾学生的路人的安全，因此必须在该校外面的道路，即Persiaran Putra Perdana兴建缓速器、行人交通灯或（atau）行人天桥等等安全建设。

我们要问，堂堂副教育部长的魏家祥博士难道不了解马来文“atau”是什么意思？他是真不知、还是假不懂？

“atau”这个马来文翻译去华文就是“或者”。意即敦陈修心华小可以选择兴建上述照顾行人与学生安全建设之中的其中一项。

更重要的是，敦陈修心华小建委会主席林金辉已经以法定宣誓书的方式回函答复市议会，答应市议会将会构建上述安全建设以及其他建设。因此，魏家祥没有必要针对行人天桥一事大做文章。

一些马华领袖也趁机抨击为何这些属于校园外的基本建设必须由校方负责。这些人士也指责雪州民联政府刁难华小。

这些言论其实都有政治动机，因为传媒也报道由国阵执政的森美兰州政府管辖下的汝来市议会要求拉务丘晒园华小进行填泥、辟学校路口、筑排水沟和英达丽水化粪池等基建，为何这些马华领袖不予以抨击，反而却选择性地抨击梳邦再也市议会？

我呼吁这些马华领袖尤其是身为副教育部长的魏家祥停止以双面人的把戏来掩盖本身的弱点。尤其是在丘晒园华小迁校事件之中，汝来市议会也是以同样的作业标准来审核有关兴建新校舍的申请。

ADUN Kampung Tunku celebrates lantern festival with residents

ADUN Kampung Tunku state assemblyman Lau Weng San’s service centre organised a Lantern Festival at the open car park next to former Ruby cinema, Jalan 21/19 SEA Park, Petaling Jaya on Saturday October 6, 2012.

About 600 people turned up at the event to enjoy the various activities lined-up which included line dance performance and a lantern riddle contest.

Host Lau Weng San led a lantern walkabout with the children and parents carrying colourful candle-lit paper lanterns.

“This event is held to bring the surrounding community together to celebrate the Mid-Autumn festival that show harmony and unity, especially the children who otherwise would have stay home play online games,” said Lau who used his state constituency allocation to fund the event.

Lau thanked the developer SEA Housing Corp. for use of the car park for the community event at no cost to his office.

MBPJ councillor (zone 19) Jeyaseelen said the event was held to foster closer rapport and strengthen unity among the multi-racial residents. He later handed out free reusable bags cycle bags to the residents to encourage them to use the bags every time they go shopping.

The event brought smiles and cheers to 35 children from Prudential Children Welfare Home. They were seen enjoying the fun of eating mooncakes and lighting the lanterns and walking around the streets during the lantern walkabout.

Also present at the event were representatives from Rukun Tetagga Seksyen 20A Paramount Garden and Rukun Tetangga Seksyen 21 Sea Park.

Guests were entertained by a line dance group and treated to mooncakes and food packed in Styrofoam box of Hainanese chicken rice, nasi lemak ayam goreng and Bak Chang (glutinous rice dumpling).

要动用公款解决私人问题，黄冠文公私不分小题大做

（新古毛9日讯）领养新古毛的民联州议员刘永山今日斥马华公会新古毛区州议员黃冠文公私不分，搞不清楚问题就胡乱指责民联政府。

刘永山是针对黄冠文日前在报章针对峇冬加里新村一颗危及行人安全的树木大作文章，抨击民联没有履行政府的责任，砍除这颗树木。

刘永山说，其实投诉者是在今年1月12号向乌雪县议会投诉有关树木。县议会过后发现有关树木其实是一棵私人栽种的芒果树，并于2月3号回复有关投诉者。

“由于县议会不曾栽种果树，意即这颗树木是私人栽种的树木，因此县议会无法动用公款解决私人问题。”

过后，有关投诉者于2012年2月28号向县议会询问可否私底下把该树锯掉，县议会也在翌日回函不反对投诉者这么做。

刘永山说，县议会以相当有效率的方式来处理这名投诉者的投诉，但是我在新古毛的服务中心于2月29号之后不曾收到来自该名投诉者的投诉。

“我们也没有收到任何要求动用选区拨款锯掉该颗大树的申请。既然没有收到申请，加上投诉者原意自费解决问题，那么黄冠文到底在吵什么？”

刘永山对黄冠文公私不分的做法感到十分遗憾。他说：“黄冠文与其呼吁我善用拨款，倒不如他学学民联政府在网络公布所有拨款的内容。”

刘永山也挑战黄冠文公布联邦政府到底每年拨款给乌雪和新古毛多少钱。

“联邦政府这将近五年来到底拨了多少拨款给乌雪和新古毛？身为新古毛州议员的黄冠文是不是应该给乌雪人民一个交代？黄冠文是不是启应该清清楚楚交代所有拨款的去向呢？”

刘永山也说，欲知雪州政府在新古毛的拨款的去向报告可以到以下网址（http://wengsan.blogspot.com/2012/08/laporan-peruntukan-dun-kuala-kubu-baru.html

）查询。

他也提醒黄冠文应好好利用网络科技带来的便利，尽早公布拨款去向报告。

图解：

Surat MDHS 20120112、Surat MDHS 20120203和Surat MDHS 20120229乃县议会给该投诉者的回函，证明县议会积极处理该项投诉。

Tan Tuan Tat Lied To The Media When It Is DAP Central Executive Committee (CEC) Who Has The Only Right To Dissolve Any DAP Branch Under Clause 20 Of The DAP Constitution

As DAP Selangor Organizing Secretary, I would like to clarify a statement made by a sacked DAP member named Tan Tuan Tat in Sungai Pelek, Sepang two days ago that a group of 400 members have resigned from DAP and seven DAP branches are already dissolved.

Under Clause 20 of the DAP Constitution, the CEC has the sole right to establish and dissolve any branches nationwide in which there are due procedure to be followed by the CEC in dissolving any DAP branches.

Tan Tuan Tat also mentioned that there are 400 members resigning from DAP. As of today, DAP Selangor headquarters has only received resignation letter from Taman Seri Sungai Pelek branch vice chairman, S.M. Manohar a/l Sellan dated 20th September 2012.

Tan Tuan Tat also mentioned that seven DAP branches in Sungai Pelek will be dissolved. This is entirely untrue as Tan Tuan Tat is only the chairman of Taman Seri Sungai Pelek branch and he has no right to announce the dissolution of any DAP branches.

The remaining six branches are yet to be registered with Registrar of Societies (ROS) as we suspect that there are phantom members in these branches which is the reason of him sacked from the DAP.

Meanwhile, DAP Selangor has yet to receive the remaining 398 resignation letters. Some members from that branch has already contacted DAP Selangor expressing their will to stay with DAP and have no intention to resign from the party.

Some mainstream media also highlighted that Tan Tuan Tat was an active DAP member who has been with the party for the past 18 years. I would like to clarify that Tan Tuan Tat’s branch was only formed in 2008. Although Tan Tuan Tat was once DAP Selangor Publicity Secretary in 1996/1997, he left his position in 1997 and has since then been a dormant member until after the March 8th political tsunami.

TV3 also interviewed a person named Mahful Wahid, who claimed himself as DAP member. A check with DAP membership data in Selangor shows that there is no such name at all.

Tan Tuan Tat should stop making excuses for his expulsion from the party. He should also stop fabricating lies to cover his own weaknesses. All these accusations will only make him look bad in the eyes of the party members and public.

民联执政中央，巫统说马来西亚变成基督国，马华则说伊斯兰国，证明马华和巫统欺骗人民

我挑战蔡金星和郑修强两人勇敢地站出来解释为何当马华指责民联执政中央政府之后，马来西亚会成为伊斯兰国，反而巫统却说马来西亚会成为基督国？

如果蔡金星和郑修强无法解释这点，这证明他们两人以伊斯兰国议题来攻击行动党的论调都是一派胡言。

要不然身为国阵第一大成员党的巫统和第二大成员党的马华怎么可能会说出如此自相矛盾的言论？

迄今马华和巫统的都不敢解释这个矛盾。其实，行动党高层领导在这方面的立场已经非常清楚，即行动党反对落实伊斯兰刑事法，因为伊斯兰刑事法不符合马来西亚多元宗教和多元族群的背景。

民联共同政纲也没有提及执政之后会落实伊斯兰刑事法，因此马华所做出的指责都是子虚乌有、空穴来风，无中生有的指责。

蔡金星甚至攻击雪州民联，说民联政府禁止使用一个马来西亚的标志。我挑战蔡金星在24小时之内拿出证据证明民联政府已经禁止使用一个马来西亚标志，要不然蔡金星应该立即向雪州民联政府道歉。

如果蔡金星不知道，那么我可以告诉他，打着一个马来西亚标志运作的一马人民商店在雪州已经有至少8家在运作，可说是全马最多的州属。即使是所谓的国阵堡垒柔佛也只有7家而已，国阵“定存州”沙巴砂劳越只有区区三间，数目更是少得可怜。

如果雪州民联政府禁止一个马来西亚标志，为何这8所在雪州境内开设的一马人民商店却可以得到地方政府的执照运作呢？

这证明蔡金星和马华领袖的论述许多时候都是没有经过分析，也没有任何数据才支撑他们的论点。他们的言论更多时候是讲了算。当他们的谎言被揭穿之后，他们可以不负责任地逃避责问。

经过308政治大海啸之后，马来西亚人民的政治思维逐渐成熟，人民对政治人物的诚信度的要求也更高了。蔡金星和郑修强之辈反而背道而驰、背逆民意，以虚假之辞恶言攻击政敌，这是政治角力中最低俗无耻的手段。针对这类政治人物，我相信选民自然会懂得如何惩罚他们。

派月饼庆中秋，刘永山6号办中秋晚会

（八打灵再也2日讯）为了配合华人传统节日中秋佳节，行动党甘榜东姑区刘永山州议员进行了两次免费派发月饼活动。

首次是在9月27日上午10时30分，于双溪威新村巴刹进行派发月饼给予小贩，共派发了200个月饼。隔天（28日）上午10时30分于东南亚花园巴刹进行第二轮的派发月饼活动，共派发了50个月饼。

刘永山也于上述两场派发免费月饼活动的同时赠阅《东姑CAT》刊物给予小贩与民众。派发月饼与《东姑CAT》刊物的过程当中，刘永山亦与小贩进行交流，气氛融洽。当中，有小贩向刘永山反映要求提升巴刹的基施以方便作业，刘永山都耐心听取民意。

除了上述两场派发月饼活动，双溪威新村村委会已在9月29日（星期六）晚上于双溪威新村足球场举办了欢庆中秋晚会，共获得了逾千民众响应。八打灵再也北区国会议员潘俭伟、刘永山州议员、双溪威新村市议员及村长也给予致词。

主办单位除了提供晚餐与月饼给予出席的民众，也准备了许多项精彩的歌舞表演。村长陈有才也抱病上台高歌一曲，赢得了台下民众热烈的掌声。

上述晚宴除了有歌唱舞蹈的传统活动呈现之外，当中有一项令人动容的娱兴节目，即一班来自单亲家庭的小孩（最小仅有两岁半）手中挥着荧光棒随着歌曲起舞。小孩可爱的表演亦赢得了民众的喝彩。

另一项把晚宴推向另一高潮的是，刘永山与民众提灯随龙狮队游新村。这一天双溪威新村的夜晚气氛与平常很不一样，热闹无比。

倘若八打灵再也民众错失双溪威新村中秋晚宴，刘永山在此诚邀民众出席本月6日（星期六）位于东南亚花园旧戏院旁边空地举办的中秋晚会。

此活动是由行动党甘榜东姑区主办，八打灵再也北区国会议员潘俭伟与市议员惹也西兰将会出席。届时，民众除了能免费吃月饼，亦有娱兴节目呈现。此中秋晚宴的活动时间是晚上7点至晚上11点之间进行。

八打灵再也拨款20万为双溪威铺路

刘永山（左二）陪同市议会官员巡视工程的进行。

左起为双溪威新村村长陈有才。右起为市议员助理叶再发和刘永山助理甯生（右二）。

（八打灵再也26日讯）八打灵再也市议会拨款20万令吉为双溪威新村多个路段进行铺路工程。 

甘榜东姑州议员刘永山指出，该工程已在两个星期前开始动工，涉及的路段是第2、3、5 、6 、7 、8 、9 、10 和11路。当局也会重建这些道路的路墩。 

他说，承包商将会先在施工的路段中间7公尺用重型机器铺路，过后承包商将会用较小型的机器铺路面的其他部分。 

“承包商须要在原本已经铺上柏油路的路面进行铺路，包括住家门前面已有柏油路的部分。因此，若承包商或工人在施工期间私下向村民索取额外费用，村民可以不用理会，同时可以直接向市议会投诉。投诉热线是03-79542020。” 

八打灵再也市议员张文强说，市议会在工程动工前一般都会发函告诉居民无须为住家门前的铺路缴付任何费用。 

他说，市议会曾经接获村民诉承包商向居民收取铺路费用。他强调，村民是无须为原本已经是柏油路的住家门前的部分付钱，但是如果居民想要为住家与住家之间，或其他之前不是柏油路的土地铺上柏油，则须另外付费。