Who can tell me the email addresses of Hishammuddin Tun Hussein Onn and Abdullah Zin?

For the past few days, I have been searching for the email addresses of both Education Minister Dato’ Hishammuddin and Minister in the PM Department, Dato’ Abdullah Zin, which bears no fruitful results. I had once contacted the assistant of Abdullah and is promised a return call which is not returned to date. As for Education Ministry, I have been contacting the ministry but I am still no where to reach his PA or secretaries for the answer.

Such phenomenon is totally unthinkable in information era. Do our Ministers really IT-savvy? Why do they have to hide away their email addresses? The PM had called for a people-oriented and clean government, but are we any nearer to his pledge when some Ministers tend to hide their email address from public domain?

The Parliamentary Opposition Leader YB Lim Kit Siang had on 8th November emailed all Cabinet Ministers on the Higher Education crisis that this country is facing. In order to confirm that each and every Minister have received the email, I had first emailed all Cabinet Ministers also on 13th November. In the email, I have requested the Minister to confirm receipt the previous emails sent by YB Lim Kit Siang.

A few of the emails were then bounced back due to errors and over quota. These included emails addresses of the Second Finance Minister Nor Mohd Yakcop (mk2@treasury.gov.my), Minister of Rural and Regional Development, Dato’ Aziz Samsuddin (aziz@rurallink.gov.my), Minister of Domestic Trade and Consumers Affairs Dato’ Shafie Apdal (shafieapdal@kpdnhep.gov.my) and Minister of Higher Education, Dato’ Shafie Salleh (shafie@mohe.gov.my).

As such, I had on 19th November 2005 emailed these for the second time which to my dismay were bounced back again by email account of Nor Mohd Yakcop and Shafie Apdal. As for Aziz Samsuddin, my emails finally reaches his inbox when he has replied my email yesterday, probably because he was bombarded by YB Lim Kit Siang in the Parliament last week related to this issue.

Utilization of email address is certainly something should be put on higher scrutiny by the Prime Minister himself. It is for sure that there are certain Ministers who are not so keen in utilizing their own email address, which can be witnessed by “errors and over-quota” if Ministers seldom check and read emails sent to their inboxes.

While continue to check whether the email addresses of Nor Mohd Yakcop and Shafie Apdal are functional or not, I will, as for Dato’ Hishammuddin and Dato’ Abdullah Zin’s email addresses, continue to follow up today and if there is no answer from their assistants or secretaries, I will consider to lodge an official complaint with the authority.

Lau Weng San

教长及阿都拉辛的电邮是什么？

过去数日，本人一直查询教育部长和首相署部长阿都拉辛的电邮地址，但却无功而返。本人也曾一度联络上阿都拉辛的助理，但其助理仅表示将会致电本人。迄今该助理还没有告诉本人部长的电邮地址。至于教育部的电话，本人一直联络不上，也无法联络教长的助理或秘书。

这种现象在资讯世界里是完全无法想象的。到底我们的部长是否真正理解资讯世界的运作？为何部长的电邮地址必须隐秘起来？首相在初上台时要求部长高官落实亲民廉政的作风，但是现在部长却把电邮地址隐秘起来，这又如何称为“亲民廉政”呢？

国会反对党领袖林吉祥是在11月8日针对我国所面对的高教危机再次寄发第二封电邮给所有的部长。为确保有关电邮顺利寄送到各部长的电子邮箱，本人在11月13日致第一封电邮给所有部长。在电邮中，本人希望他们能够回邮表示已经收到林吉祥的电邮。

当时有数封电邮回弹。这包括第二财政部长诺奥玛耶谷（mk2@treasury.gov.my）、乡村与区域发展部部长拿督阿兹三苏丁（aziz@rurallink.gov.my）、贸消部部长拿督沙菲益阿普达（shafieapdal@kpdnhep.gov.my）以及高教部部长（shafie@mohe.gov.my）的邮箱。

有鉴于此，本人在11月19日再次发出第二封电邮。此次回弹之电子邮箱还是第二财长诺奥玛以及贸消部部长沙菲益阿普达的电邮。乡村与区域发展部部长拿督阿兹三苏丁经过多次回弹之后，似乎已经开始检查邮箱了，因为部长在作日已回邮本人表示已经收到林吉祥的电邮，或许这是因为上周林吉祥在国会针对此事轰炸阿兹三苏定所致。高教部长的正确电邮地址为drshafie@mohe.gov.my。

首相此时此刻应该加紧关注部长对电邮的使用。很肯定的，我们有一小撮内阁部长并不热衷于使用电邮信箱。这可从一些部长的电子邮箱出现塞满的现象而看得出来。因为信箱塞满乃因为一些部长没有定时检查电邮信箱所致。

除了继续查询沙费益阿普达和诺奥玛耶谷的电邮地址出现什么问题，本人将会在今日继续追问教育部长希山慕定和首相署部长阿都拉辛的电邮地址。如果一直没有答案，本人将会考虑采取进一步行动，包括向有关部门作正式投诉。

刘永山

The Thais are catching up!

(Ten of thousands of people attend the ‘Muang Thai Rai Sapda’ show by Sondhi Limthongkul at Lumpini Park after reports that the government would shut down his website and his programmes on cable television.)

It was another day in Malaysia and things were certainly quite different in Bangkok yesterday when thousands of Thais yesterday moved to Lumpini Park in Bangkok to listen to Sondhi Limthongkui’s rally against Thai PM Thaksin. Those who couldn’t make their way to Lumpini Park stayed in their home and watch the live telecast from ASTV1 cable channel broadcast via satellite.

Sondhi, boss of the Manager Group, has launched what seems to be a solo campaign to oust Thaksin’s dictatorship. He first banked on the theme of “Fighting for His Majesty the King” to create a movement to oust the Thaksin regime and to write a new constitution. He has been now shifting his strategy of exposing the government’s conflicts of interest via business dealings and shady privatisation deals.

The government’s attempt to silence Sondhi from slamming the premier has been futile in the face of new, sophisticated technologies that are proving to have a profound impact on the Thai political landscape.

The government may control the broadcast media, but it has yet to effectively control the proliferation of the local cable news networks and the Internet, which has become a fertile ground for anti-Thaksin campaigning.

While you can read more from The Nation, one thing that I am certainly sure is that such gathering was a rare occasion on Malaysia. Are Malaysians not brave enough to voice out their dissatisfaction against government irregulaties and unjust in this nation? Or Malaysians are too generous that they can easily forgive the authority?

Civil awareness is always directly proportionate to how advanced a country is, although this is not a scientific way to measure it. But the high civil awareness of Thais has already proven that they are on the right track to overtaking their neighbours – The Malaysians – in more areas in time to come.

Opposition leader yesterday has blogged that “Thailand is fast catching up from behind, having edged out Malaysia in automotive industry and established itself as the “Detroit of the East”. The latest bad news for Malaysia is that for the first time also, Thailand’s Chulalongkorn University has bested University of Malaya in the World’s Top 200 Universities Ranking!

Thailand is now challenging Malaysia on IT and if we do not watch out, Thailand may one day even beat Malaysia in the population’s mastery and use of English, the international language, a notion which would have been completely unthinkable two, three decades ago.”

With this, I remember last year when I was working in a Malaysia-Thai JV gas platform offshore Kota-Bharu/Songkhla when I was first alerted of the openness of Thai Media, I immediately had an instinct that the Thais are catching up. Immediately when I came back, I have shared this views with others and some of my friends commented that the Thais are still lagging behind in terms mastery and use of English, which is a major stumbling block for Thais to move any further to overtake Malaysia.

Within one year, the Thais are moving fast. And they almost outdo us in almost every aspects. Look at sport, Thai female weightlifter, Pawina Thongsak created three world records (snatch, clean & jerk and mixed events) in World Weightlifting Championship in Doha on Saturday. While we are still dreaming for our first Olympic gold metal, the Thais have already grabbed several Olympic gold metals and Pawina is one of the Thai gold metallist.

Do you know the Thais are catching up?

Majlis Perwakilan Mahasiswa UPM harus dibubarkan

Majlis Perwakilan Mahasiswa UPM harus dibubarkan dan digantikan dengan nama Kelab Penyokong HEP Mahasiswa UPM kerana kenyataan MPMUPM tidak dapat lagi diyakini ramai bahawa ianya satu badan yang mewakili mahasiswa-mahasiswi UPM, malahan MPMUPM seolah telah menjadi “jurucakap” kepada pihak HEP UPM.

MPMUPM telah mengadakan satu sidang media dua hari yang lepas bahawa mereka akan menyerah satu memorandum kepada YAB Perdana Menteri terhadap tindakan Solidariti Mahasiswa Malaysia (SMM) di kampus UPM. Yang Di-pertua MPMUPM Manaf telah menyatakan bahawa “seorang Ahli Parlimen DAP yang berucap pada perhimpunan haram di kampus UPM pada 11 November 2005 telah mengganggu persediaan para mahasiswa UPM untuk menghadapi peperiksaan” dan beliau meminta pihak berkuasa untuk “menyiasat serta mengambil tindakan terhadap mahasiswa-mahasiswi dan pemimpim Solidariti Mahasiswa Malaysia (SMM)” serta “meminta pemimpim-pemimpim Persatuan Mahasiswa Islam UPM untuk letak jawatan kerana telah melanggar AUKU”.

Naib Yang Di-pertua MPMUPM Hafiz turut mengatakan kepada Malaysiakini.com (Versi Bahasa Mandarin) bahawa apabila pihak pengurusan/pemimpim ingin meminda AUKU, maka ianya perlu dipinda. Kami tiada cadangan, semua terserah kepada pengurusan/pemimpim/”

Hafiz turut mengatakan bahawa mahasiswa tiada suara untuk meminda AUKU, hanya pihak pengurusan/pemimpim sahaja yang berhak untuk berbuat demikian. Kami percaya selama ini pihak pengurusan/pemimpim telah menjaga hak mahasiswa dengan baik. Sekiranya ianya adalah bermanfaat kepada mahasiswa, maka kami akan menerimanya.”

Adalah menjadi pendirian DAPSY bahawa kenyataan yang dikeluarkan oleh barisan pemimpim MPMUPM ini amat membimbangkan kita semua. Mahasiswa merupakan harapan kepada masyarakat kita dan emreka seharusnya mempunyai untuk memperjuangkan hak dan autonomi mereka sebagai mahasiswa. Walaupun begitu, adalah mengesalkan apabila MPMUPM boleh mennyatakan bahawa hak mereka boleh diserahkan kepada pihak pengurusan/pemimpim. Apakah perbezaaan perbuatan mereka ini dengan pengabdian dan penghambaan mahasiswa kepada pihak HEP?

Kenyataan ini telah menimbulkan persoalan kepada kita semua, iaitu adalah MPMUPM ini masilh lagi memperjuangkan hak mahasiswa di UPM? Adakah mereka betul-betul mewakili mahasiswa ataupun mereka telah membelot mahasiswa? Sekiranya tidak, maka tiada sebab untuk MPMUPM untuk terus wujud di bumi ini. Adalah lebih baik MPMUPM ini dibubarkan sahaja dan digantikan dengan nama “Kelab Penyokong HEP Mahasiswa UPM” supaya ianya dapat menunjukkan muka sebenar mereka dan tidak lagi menyalahgunakan nama “Majlis Perwakilan Mahasiswa”.

Selain itu, adalah lebih baik sekiranya MPMUPM ini mendapat fakta yang benar dan kukuh sebelum melemparkan sebarang tuduhan songsang kerana tiada seorang Ahli Parlimen yang hadir di perhimpunan di kampus UPM pada 11hb November 2005. yang menghadiri perhimpunan pagi itu ialah ADUN Lobak (Negeri Sembilan) merangkap Ketua Pembangkang DUN Negeri Sembilan YB Loke Siew Fook dan ADUN Sungai Pinang (Selangor) merangkap Ketua Pembangkang DUN Selangor YB Teng Chang Khim, yang mereka YB Loke Siew Fook dan YB Teng Chang Khim masing-masing merupakan Setiusaha Kebangsaan DAPSY dan bekas Ketua DAPSY.

Mereka menghadiri perhimpunan berkenaan atas nama ADUN dan mereka tidak dihalang oleh Pegawai Keselamatan UPM apabila mereka memasuki kampus UPM dengan plat kereta yang memaparkan Identiti ADUN mereka. Malahan apaibila kedua-dua daripada mereka sedang berucap, mereka juga tidak diganggun oleh pegawai keselamatan UPM dan pasukan polis. Tuduhan MPMUPM bahawa tindakan mereka memberi ucapan di khalayak ramai dalam kampus telah menggangu emosi mahasiswa-mahasiswi UPM yang perlu menduduki peperiksaan pada hari itu adalah tidak adil terhadap mereka dan DAPSY dan kami berharap pihak MPMUPM dapat memperjelaskan kenyataan mereka, malahan meminta maaf daripada DAPSY.

Lau Weng San
18hb November 2005.

博大学生代表理事会应该自我解散。

博大学生代表理事会应该自我解散，然后改名为博大校方学生啦啦队，因为其言论已经无法让人相信它是代表博大生的合法组织，反而已经沦为傀儡组织，成为校方的传声筒。

博大学生代表理事会是在前日通过报界表示将准备备忘录提呈给首相。该学生会主席玛纳夫表示当天“在校园发表演讲的一名行动党国会议员已经破坏博大生之间的和谐”、要求当局测查和对大专生团结阵线（SMM）的学生和领袖采取行动，以及要求支持该阵线的博大穆斯林学生会领袖引咎辞职，因为他们已经触犯大专法令。

该理事会副主席哈菲兹翌日更向《当今大马》表示，“如果领袖们认为需要检讨法令，那就应该检讨，反之亦然，我们没有任何的建议，由领袖们去决定”。

哈菲兹更表示：“学生没有资格建议如何修改法令，只有领袖们才有资格那么做，我们相信领袖们一直以来都在维护学生的福利。只要是有利于学生福利的，我们都乐于接受”。

社青团认为，博大学生代表理事会的言论也令人感到汗颜。大专生作为时代的眼睛，理应该积极争取自身的权益，但是号称代表全博大生的博大学生代表理事会竟然表示权益可以“交由领袖决定，并且相信领袖能够为学生维护学生的福利“。

这种言论不禁令人怀疑，到底博大学生代表理事会是代表博大校方还是代表博大学生？所谓名不正则言不顺。如果该理事会已经无法代表学生向校方争取权益，那么该理事会的存在已经没有意义。与其继续挂羊头卖狗肉地以博大学生的名义到处招摇撞骗，该理事会应该自我解散，然后组成博大校方学生啦啦队（Kelab Penyokong HEP Mahasiswa UPM），因为这才更能突显其现在的精神面貌。

此外，该理事会应该应该掌握真相才向外发言。当天并没有任何一名行动党的国会议员在校园内演讲。当天出席的行动党议员是森美兰州罗白区州议员（兼森州州议会反对党领袖）陆兆福和雪兰莪州双溪槟榔区州议员邓章钦（兼雪州州议会反对党领袖）。他们两人分别是社青团现任总秘书以及社青团前任团长。

他们是以州议员的名义，没有被校园保安阻挠下，堂堂正正挂着州议员的车牌驾驶进入校园。既然在驱车进入校园没有保安阻挠，演讲时更没有保安的干扰，博大学生代表理事会指控行动党议员扰乱当天博大生的应考情绪对行动党来说是不公平的。我们希望该理事会能够对此作清楚交代，甚至向社青团致谦。

刘永山

Immediately withdraw all disciplinary charges against six UPM students.

There should be no obstacles from the government to stop UPM students from meeting outsiders especially local community leaders when the students plan to have briefings and dialogue with them on the disciplinary cases charged against them by the authority. The campus authority should also immediately withdraw all the disciplinary charges against the six students as the charges are all of arbitrary charges with ill intentions to create a culture of fear among students in standing up for truth and students rights in the campus.

It has been highlighted in the press that the briefing organized by UPM Students Progressive Front (Gerakan Mahasiswa Maju UPM) with Seri Kembangan Small and Medium Industries Federation had to be called off at the eleventh hour due to interference from Special Branch from Bukit Aman Police Headquarters that such briefing, which is scheduled to be held in the office of Seri Kembangan Small and Medium Industries Federation, is an illegal gathering.

Such interference from Special Branch (which is another state machinery) other than the campus authority is indeed another ill-intention effort to kill off the struggle of students rights struggle in the campus.

Such interference from the Special Branch must be strongly condemned as we must regard these UPM students are also mature citizens whose constitutional rights are preserved and protected by the Federal Constitution. The members of the Seri Kembangan SMI Federation are also taxpayers like other normal Malaysians whose money are utilized to support all expenses in UPM. It is their constitutional right to know what exactly are happening in the campus.

More importantly, if campus authority keep suppressing the genuine struggle from the students for their rights as citizen of Malaysia, manipulating students representatives election and resort to various suppressive and oppressive methods to threathen students, what are the difference between our universities with secret societies? What is the difference between our Vice Chancellors and Deputy Vice Chancellors with the Tai Ko in secret societies?

And it is very disappointing that the Special Branch of Police Headquarters in Mukit Aman even went further to deny the rights of commoners and members of public to understand the real situations taken place in the campus. As such, there is no reason for us not to feel worried, especially on the future development of human rights in Malaysia.

Is the campus authority of UPM trying to ‘bonzai’lised our students? Or they merely want students nowadays to be quiet followers? Else, UPM should not only allow members of public to attend the disciplinary proceeding of the six, allow the six to bring in their lawyers, but also to immediately withdraw all disciplinary charges against them, while there should be no interference from the police against any briefings or dialogue organized by the students with outsiders.

The police should to uphold and not to suppress the struggle for justice.

Lau Weng San

立即撤销对6名博大生的纪律控状

政府应该正视博大生作为大马公民的权益而不应阻挠大专生对外交流，并且谕令博大立即撤消对6名博大生的纪律控状。

媒体日前报道11月15日八时正，假史里肯邦岸中小型工商业联合会会所、由博大前进阵线主办的“博大校园打压事件”的汇报会被迫展延。因为史里肯邦岸中小型工商业联合会在当天早上接获武吉安曼警察总部政治部的来电，并以未获得准证为由，企图阻吓该会对学生的热心帮助。

大马人民强烈谴责武吉安曼警察总部政治部的干预。博大生是大马的合法公民，而博大的拨款也是来自大马人民的税收，因此，身为纳税人之一的史里肯邦岸中小型工商业联合会有权了解博大校方压迫学生权利的来龙去脉。这是他们身为纳税人和公民的权益。

更重要的是，大学就是社会的缩影，如果大学当局一味压迫学生，操控学生会选举，并且使用种种威吓的方式来压制学生，我们的大学和黑社会有什么分别？大学的校长副校长又和黑社会老大又何不同？

今天，武吉安曼的警察总部竟然连校外人士－史里肯邦岸中小型工商业联合会－要求了解校园状况的权利也要否决，这让我们不能不对大马的人权状况感到担忧。难道博大校方和武吉安曼要把大专生变成盆栽（bonzai）不成？难道他们要大专生变成一群唯唯诺诺的应声虫？

如果不是，那么博大校方允许公众人士出席听政会，允许6名博大生的代表律师进入听政会，甚至应该立即撤销对6名博大生的纪律控状。警方更应该允许社会人士与大专生交流，而不是与博大校方助肘为虐。

IPTAs- Do away with denial syndrome!

There must be courageous actions from local public universities, especially University of Malaya to do away with denial syndrome, which is the first crisis of higher education in Malaysia, in order to rectify its problem to improve its ranking in the Times Higher Education Supplement, so that there could be meaningful efforts launched to proceed with real reform on higher education in Malaysia.

Being listed as the first 200 universities, and being placed at the 45th, 82nd and 83rd place in Art/Humanities, Biomedicine and Social sciences respectively does not qualify the erections of 7 giant billboards and at least 150 buntings in the campus of University of Malaya, which is clearly an syok sendiri boastful act.

This clearly shows that the UM Authority is infested with serious denial syndrome, and it is spreading fast in Malaysia as a epidemic disease until Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia yesterday published a full page advertisement in page 7, News Straits Times yesterday, not only to commemorate the 35th anniversary of the university but to also celebrate UKM being enlisted as top 100 science universities in the world.

Such act should not be made as example to other public universities in Malaysia, in fact, civil societies and alumni of all public universities should push campus authorities to confess their shortcomings in running the universities and take concrete actions to improve performance of their universities in different aspects. To do away with denial syndrome will be the first and foremost efforts in dealing with the alarming crisis facing our public universities.

The Ministry of Higher Education should also be alerted on the continued portray of denial syndrome by our administrations in the campus. When UM VC openly claimed that he is not worried with the declining ranking of UM in Time Higher Education Supplement 2005 Report, it is clear that he himself also doesn’t even aware of the seriousness of the situation and he should be expelled from his current position as he himself is also infested with acute denial syndrome which will be a stumbling stone for UM to face its own weaknesses and to proceed with real reform on higher education.

Only with their (universities administrators who failed to realized the seriousness of the crisis) removal, then can our universities move forward for greater achievement in various aspect, including the revival of campus autonomy to enable academicians, administrators and students in the campus to play proactive and leading role in determining the future and the direction of the universities without political and bureaucratic interferences.

Lau Weng San
14th November 2005.

摒弃否定症候群是打造世界级大专教育的第一步。

要提升大马大专在《泰唔斯报》高教大专排行榜，各国立大专，尤其是马大必须有勇气面对自身的弱点。各大专首先必须检讨的就是摒弃泛滥成潮的否定症候群，作为迈向世界级大专教育的第一步。

马大校方近来由于名列世界首200名大专，以及在人文艺术、生物医学以及社会科学科系方面排名第45、82和83名而沾沾自喜，以致在校园各处树立7个大型广告牌以及多达150个布条，以宣扬其在改该排行榜的排名。

马大校方的这种举动，突显马大校方患上严重的否定症候群。而这个否定症候群正在泛滥为害，以致在昨日的《新海峡时报》，国大也在第7页刊登一幅全版广告，以欢庆该大学成立35周年，并在《泰唔斯报》高教大专排行榜名列世界100名大学科学大学。

马大和国大的这种举动实不应成为一种典范，反之公民社会和各大专毕业生应该要求有关大学用于承认自己的不足之处，并且勇以卧薪尝胆，大力提升各大专在各方面的表现。正视自身的弱点，勇以抛开否定症候群正是我国大专教育的第一危机。

高教部也必须正视这种否定症候群的泛滥。马大校长对马大排名的滑落竟然可以表示“不担忧”，这是令人垢病的态度。社青团呼吁高教部应该开除马大校长，因为马大校长显然无法正视马大排名滑落的严重性。这清楚显示马大校长已经患上严重的否定症候群，如不将之革职，必将严重拖慢大马高教的改革步伐。

只有将患上严重否定症候群的校方管理人员革除，校方才能拟定各方面的措施，包括恢复校园自主，让校园内的学术人员、行政人员和大专生在大学的各项事务扮演领导的角色，而不是让官僚制度和政治影响在校园内到处为害。

刘永山
（2005年11月14日）

IIUM should promote a true spirit of Malaysia.

I am sure some of us may have heard of a recent incidence whereby a Chinese law graduate from International Islamic University of Malaysia (IIUM) was barred from attending her convocation as IIUM rules all female gradutes is compulsory to wear tudung as part of the official convocation suit.

The graduate is FooYueh Jiin and with the helps of Parliamentary Opposition Leader and DAP MP for Batu Gajah YB Fong Po Kuan, who is also a law graduate from IIUM, held a press conference in the Parliament yesterday to openly lament IIUM as insensitive to the feelings of non-muslims.

Below is her statement:

IIUM should promote a true spirit of Malaysia

It is most regrettable that the decision of the Cabinet in its Wednesday meeting regarding the International Islamic University of Malaysia (IIUM) regulation requiring non-Muslim students to wear a tudung especially during the convocation ceremony was not made clear to the press and thus created unnecessary confusion among the Malaysian society at large.

Yesterday, the New Straits Times reported that according to several ministers, Cabinet reached a consensus that students, regardless of their religion, should not be coerced into wearing the tudung. It quoted one minister as saying that the Cabinet has also agreed that the tudung should be made optional at graduation ceremonies or convocations.

This is in direct conflict with the The Star report, where the Higher Education Minister, Dr Shafie Salleh was quoted at his post-cabinet briefing as saying that the IIUM convocation garments which comprise tudung are compulsory attire for all female graduates. Dr Shafie Salleh also added that for non-Muslim, they are not required to wear tudung litup (a cloth covering the whole head) but scarves will do.

The same was reported in the Malay Mail, the Berita Harian and Sin Chew Jit Poh, where tudung is described as part of the official dress code for female graduates - either Muslim or non-Muslim - during convocation. Nanyang Siang Pau on the other hand reported Dr Shafie as saying that non-Muslim students are not compelled to wear tudung during the convocation.

We do not know what the Cabinet has actually decided on Wednesday and this is most regrettable in view of the importance of the issue.

The compulsory donning of tudung rule is most insensitive to non-Muslim with regard to their religions, customs and cultures. Since wearing tudung is a distinct symbol of Muslims women in our country, forcing non-Muslims to don a tudung is imposing Islam the religion onto the non-Muslims, and such arbitrary act will not help in promoting a peaceful and tolerance plural society that we so cherish.

Speaking from my personal experience, I was required to wear a proper tudung in the first two years of my studies and a scarf in the later two years. The change from donning a tudung to a scarf came only after the issue of non-Muslims being forced to don a tudung in campus was made public in the Parliament.

There was no option available to me however when the convocation ceremony was held in August this year. All female students were provided with a tudung and whoever that refuses to wear it are not allowed to go into the Hall to receive her scroll. I missed my convocation because I refused to submit to such arbitrary rule.

According to the Rector of IIUM, Prof Dr Mohd Kamal Hassan, non-Muslims female students are required to wear a scarf as “a sign of respect to the religion and the university”. Sadly, by imposing Islamic attire on the non-Muslims, the professor is in fact demanding respect instead of showing the spirit of mutual respect. As long as we dress decently and respect each others’ sensitivities, an attitude all non-Muslims students in IIUM always abide to, we cannot be said to have shown “disrespect” to another by not wearing a tudung. In fact, IIUM as a public institution should be sensitive towards its non-Muslim students, who are the minority in the campus, by demonstrating its openness and inclusiveness according to the true spirit of Islam.

We can see the example in the Cambridge University, where a graduate may request the authority to omit the citing of Trinitarian Formula (a Christian prayer) when his turn come to receive his scroll at the graduation ceremony. Such request is in no way a show of disrespect towards the university, and the University does not suffer from any disrespect when its students of different faiths made such request.

I truly hope that IIUM will review its arbitrary rule and make the donning of tudung during convocation and within the campus an option for its students especially the non-Muslims. This will help in promoting the true spirit of Malaysia as a multi-religion, multi-culture and multi-ethnic society.

Foo Yueh Jiin
11/11/05
Parliament, Kuala Lumpur

国际回教大学应该展示真正的马来西亚精神

针对一名国际回教大学华裔毕业生通过国会反对党领袖揭发该大学强制性要求所有非穆斯林女毕业生在出席毕业典礼上台领取毕业状是必须佩戴头巾。

该名法律系毕业生符月瑾昨日通过国会反对党领袖林吉祥和华都牙也区国会议员冯宝君的协助下在国会召开记者招待会，正式对该大学这项不合理的条规表示不满。

以下是符月瑾的文告：

国际回教大学应该展示真正的马来西亚精神

针对国际回教大学要求非穆斯林学生，尤其在出席毕业典礼时佩戴头巾，内阁周三的决定并没有得到报章清楚的报道，因此在大马社会引发不必要的混淆。这是非常令人遗憾的。

昨天的《新海峡时报》引述一些部长的谈话，即内阁已经达致一项共识，即学生们不管其宗教信仰，是不应该被强制行地佩戴头巾。该报章引述一名部长的谈话，表示内阁赞成在毕业典礼佩戴头巾应只是一项选择。这则报道却与《星报》的报道大相径庭，因为高教部部长沙菲益沙礼博士在其内阁会议后指出国际回教大学要求毕业生在毕业典礼时佩戴头巾是所有女毕业生的正式服装。沙菲益沙礼博士也指出穆斯林学生无需佩戴tudung litup（一种完全把头部遮盖的头巾），而只需佩戴一般头巾。同样的报道也出现在《马来邮报》、《每日新闻》以及《星洲日报》，即头巾在毕业典礼时是女毕业生（不管是穆斯林还是非穆斯林）的官方服装之一。南洋商报则引述沙菲益沙礼博士的谈话，指穆斯林毕业生无需在毕业典礼时佩戴头巾。

我们不知道到底内阁在周三的会议里作出什么决定。有鉴于此事的重要性，这种状况是非常令人遗憾的。

强制性要求非穆斯林学生佩戴头巾对她们的宗教、习俗和文化来说来说是极之敏感的事。尤其是当佩戴头巾是大马穆斯林女性的服装象征，因此强制要求非穆斯林佩戴头巾无异于把伊斯兰元素强加在非穆斯林的身上。如此不合情理的做法对促进一个多元社会的和谐与容忍来说是百害无一利。

以我本人的经验来说，我在第一年和第二年的大学生涯时必须佩戴象样的头巾，在尔后的两年学涯中，我佩戴的是一般的头巾。如此的改变是因为非穆斯林学生在校园需强制性佩戴头巾一事在国会被提起。

然而，在今年8月举行的毕业典礼，我没有其他选择。校方为所有非穆斯林女毕业生提供一件头巾。如果没有佩戴这头巾，那么该名学生将不允许步入礼堂接获毕业证书。由于拒绝从令，我错过我的毕业典礼。

根据国际回教大学校长，拿督莫哈末卡玛哈山博士的谈话，强制非穆斯林女生佩戴头巾“对宗教和该大学来说是一种尊敬”。令人悲哀的是，该教授如此说法与其展示一种互相尊重的精神，其实他是要求得到别人的尊重。只要我们的穿着端庄，并且互相尊重大家的敏感度（这也是所有在国际回教大学的非穆斯林学生），我们不能因为没有佩戴头巾而被说成是“不尊重”其他人。其实，国际回教大学作为一个公立大学应该依循伊斯兰的真正教义，即展示其开放性和包容性，进而对校内少数的非穆斯林学生的感受保持敏感。


我们可以看见在剑桥大学的例子中，当一名毕业生上台领取毕业证书时, 他/她可以要求校方免除念读基督教讼词。这种要求并没有被视为对该大学的不敬，而大学也不会因为不同信仰的毕业生作出如此要求而觉得不获尊敬。

我真诚希望国际回教大学能够重新检视这项不合情理的规则，并且把强制性要求女毕业生在毕业典礼和校园内佩戴头巾改为选择性，尤其是针对非穆斯林。这样才能协助打造真正的马来西亚精神，即马来西亚是一个多元宗教、文化和族群的多元社会。

符月瑾
2005年11月11日
吉隆坡

Unjustifiable Tariff Hike.

Minister of Energy, Water and Telecommunications Datuk Seri Lim Keng Yaik has on yesterday hinted that there could probably a tariff hike next year and that he can only guarantee that tariff will remain unchanged only until the end of this year.

Though Lim Keng Yaik has raised the issue of tariff hike which will create an adverse impact on the country’s economic, fariff hike for Tenaga is not justifiable as the root cause of the problem is the high payment given by Tenaga to Independent Power Producers (IPPs) which lowers the profit margin of Tenaga.

Currently, Tenaga’s payments to Independent Power Producers (IPP) comprising 40.5% of its total costs. Besides, staff (9.9%), fuel (19%) and depreciation (17%) are the other main components of costs.

It is clear that the high and unreasonable payments to IPPs are the main obstacles to higher net profits for Tenaga.

The government should review agreements between IPPs and Tenaga which were made not for the benefit of Malaysians but for the few cronies of BN, in which Tenaga has to purchase power from IPPs and guarantee payments for power generated that Tenaga does not need, which is proven by Tenaga’s reserve margin of 40%, amongst the highest in the world.

IPPs also enjoy subsidized rates for purchase of gas from Petronas, resulting in Petronas subsidizing RM 14 billion for such IPPs. Since May 1997, Petronas has supplied processed gas to Tenaga and the independent power producers (IPPs) at a regulated price of RM6.40 per mmbtu (British thermal unit) as compared to the current market price of more than RM 30.

As IPPs are private companies enjoying special rates for generating electricity that Tenaga is forced to purchase, there is no reason for IPPs to enjoy such huge subsidies of RM 14 billion to profit at Tenaga and Malaysians’ expense. All these have even allowed some IPPs to enjoy rates of return of more than 12% much higher than Tenaga’s 5.2%.

Therefore, tariff hike for Tenaga is not justifiable as the root cause of the problem is the high payment given by Tenaga to Independent Power Producers (IPPs) which lowers the profit margin of Tenaga.

Instead of asking consumers to pay more, Tenaga should ask the government to review these unfair compulsory power purchase agreements contracted at higher than market rates to make it fairer and more balanced to both parties.

(7th November 2005)

国能提高电费不合理。

能源、水供和电讯部部长拿督斯理林敬益昨日暗示电费明年可能会调涨，并表示他只能保证电费只在今年尾维持不变。

林敬益所提出的电费调涨将肯定对大马经济造成巨大的影响，社青团因此认为国能欲调高电费是不合理的，而其中最大问题的根源是国能现在付还过高的费用给独立发电站，导致国能的盈利大打折扣。

国能现在付还独立发电站的费用占国能的整个运作成本的40.5％。除此之外，员工、燃料以及贬值也是运作成本的主要部分，分别占了运作成本的9.9％、19％以及17％。

很明显地，付还予独立发电站的高额款项是国能不能创造更高盈利的主要阻碍。

政府应该检讨国能与独立发电站的协约，因为这些协约并不造惠大马人民，而只是让少数国阵朋党受益的协约。国能因为这样而被迫向独立发电站购买国能并不需要的电力。这可以从国能逾40％后备电力（可说是其中世界储备电力最高）看得出来。

独立发电站也享有国油的津贴天然气，造成国油必须津贴独立发电站逾140亿令吉。自1997年5月以来，国油已经供应每MMBTU马币RM6.40的控制价格售卖天然气予国能和独立发电站。而市场价格是超过30令吉。

既然独立发电站享有特别燃料价格以生产电力，而国能有必须以更高的价格来购买这些电力，因此在牺牲国能和大马人民的利益的当而，独立发电站理应不能再享有140亿令吉的燃料津贴。就因为这些事件导致一些独立发电站享有高达12％的回酬率，远远比国能的5.2％来得高。

因此，国能要申请调高电费的决定是没有道理的，因为根本原因就是国能必须偿还高数额的费用予独立发电站，影响国能的盈利幅度。

与其要求消费人付还更高的电费，国能应该要求政府检讨其与独立发电站的不公平合约，公平对待国能和大马电力消费者。

2005年11月7日

Ministers' email address must be published and easily found and not hidden in the website.

IT Bureau Chief of Ministry of Rural and Regional Development Isa yesterday claimed during an interview with a Mandarin Press that his Ministry’s website does have a public complaint portal and consultation system whereby internet surfers can lodge complaints online. There lies the question of whether it is sufficient only for ministries to have such system incorporated in the official websites of ministries.

One must admit that we are living in the era of internet, whereby information is transferred within seconds. This is well-described by the phrase “one click away”. Under such scenario, providing online public complaint portal is not much different from attending conventional counters, except that people nowadays do not have to go straight to the ministry’s office to lodge report.

Disclosed Ministers’ email addresses, let internet users to directly interact with Ministers.

Broadband internet service has been picking up its popularity among internet users nowadays, people have been doing away with the conventional dial-up internet connection slowly. One can say that data transmission speed do determine the quality of one’s works and one’s efficiency. If public complaints cannot be directly conveyed to the ministers, and if the complaint lodged through the ministry’s website have to go through all the conventional bureaucratic filters, then it will be meaningless to set-up such facility.

What is needed by the rakyat is to convey their message directly to the mailbox of the Ministers in lightning speed, in order to enchance the interaction between government officers, Ministers, Deputy Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries with the Rakyat, especially when it has been the ambition of the government to turn Malaysia into a IT Hub with MSC. Furthermore, Ministers are also wakil rakyat who are also directly answerable to the Rakyat.

The Press Secretary of Minister of Energy, Water and Communications Datuk Seri Dr Lim Keng Yaik, Mr Tan Chuan Koon yesterday issued a statement to demand an apology from Lim Kit Siang for “saying Lim Keng Yaik does not have an email address. There is no ground in Tan Chuan Koon’s demand as Minister would be reasonably doubted of whether they have their own email addresses, when one has been trying to search the website upside down, just to look for their email address, which has ended up in failure!

Tan Chuan Koon must do his homeworks first.

Tan Chuan Koon should at least have a read on Lim Kit Siang’s official blog statement before he demanded an apology. Another good thing he should have done first is to visit at least 2 websites. The first one is DAP official website (http://www.dapmalaysia.org/), the second one is Lim Kit Siang web-blog (http://www.limkitsiang.blogspot.com). If possible, Tan Chuan Koon should follow the following link (http://limkitsiang.blogspot.com/2005/11/some-10-years-after-msc-most-ministers.html) to personally understand who Lim Kit Siang means.

In the first and the second paragraph of his posting entitled “Some 10 years after MSC, most Ministers still don’t use email”, he said, “It is unbelievable that some ten years after the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) initiative, most Ministers still don’t use email. It has been quite a hassle just to get the email addresses of the Ministers of our jumbo Cabinet.”

Tan Chuan Koon should also read the last paragraph which sounds,

“It is clear that there are at least four categories of Ministers with regard to use of email:
(1) Ministers who have no email address for the public to access.
(2) Ministers whose public email are not functional.
(3) Ministers who do not open their own email.
(4) Ministers who do not open their own email or read the email opened for them”

In the first and second paragraph, it is mentioned that “most Ministers still don’t use email”, and “it is quite a hussle to get their emails addresses”. “Don’t use email” should not be equalized with “not using email addresses”. The last paragraph also narrates different conclusions of how Ministers use emails in our government.

It is clear that Lim Kit Siang did not mention anything like “Lim Keng Yaik does not have email address”. And the main focus should go back to whether any commoner can easily search for the email addresses of Ministers’ email addresses in their official websites? Why can’t the Ministers just publish their email addresses on their official websites? Are email addresses of Ministers an official secret which are not allowed to be disclosed publicly?

Therefore, Tan Chuan Koon should be amply prepared before he demand anyapology from anybody else. As such, he should withdraw all his allegations and his demand for apology.

Welcome Tan Yew Chong to email me

Principal Private Secretary of the Minister of Plantation Industries and Commodities (Datuk Peter Chin Fah Kui), Mr Tan Yew Chong informed that his email address is available online, but I am personally interested to know from Tan Yew Chong of the URL of the websites? Tan can personally email me the URL my email address is lauwengsan@gmail.com or lauws@dapmalaysia.info.

Email addresses of DAP leaders are easily found.

In fact, Cabinet Ministry should somehow follow the comparatively easier and simple web design of DAP website, and everybody can find email addresses and other contact details of DAP leaders from the following hyperlinks:
1. DAP Central Executive Committees, (http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/cec04-07.html)
2. DAPSY National Executive Committees, (http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/dapsy05-07.htm).
3. Member of Parliaments (http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/mp.html)
4. State Assembly persons (http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/sa.html)

Lau Weng San
9th November 2005.

公开部长的电邮地址，让网民能够直接与部长交流。

乡村和区域发展部资讯工艺组主任依萨昨日表示该部门的网站设有公共公共投诉与咨询系统。然而，大马人民必须质问的是，内阁部门如果仅仅在官方网站上提供公共投诉与咨询系统是不足够的。

在这个资讯高度发达的爆炸时代，仅仅提供在网络上提供一般的门面投诉设施与一般的柜台投诉并没有什么两样，不同的只是人们无需前往部门的柜台作投诉。

公开部长的电邮地址，让网民能够直接与部长交流。

随着宽频的逐渐普及化，网络技术已经远远抛弃90年代中期的拨号上网技术。速度可说是决定效率的先决条件。如果公众的投诉不能直接向部长反映，反之必须通过种种官僚过程来过滤，那么设立部门网站无意是没有意义的。

公众人士需要的是能够快捷地利用网络世界的便利把意见和看法直接传到部长的电子邮件信箱，以促进部长、部门、官员和人民之间的互动，尤其是政府正要雄心蓬勃要把大马打造成一个世界级的资讯工艺中心（IT Hub）。

能源、水务及通讯部长拿督斯里林敬益医生新闻秘书陈全坤昨日发表文告要求林吉祥针对所谓的“林敬益没有电邮一事”而道歉一事是毫无根据的，因为这些部长的电邮地址确实无法在部门的网站中搜寻得到，以致让人质疑到底这些部长是否使用电邮。

陈全坤应该了解：如果连部门的官方网站也没有刊登部长的电邮地址，难道人们不能质疑：到底部长是否拥有或使用他的电邮地址？

陈全坤应先做足功课

本人奉劝陈全坤应该先阅读林吉祥的正式文告，才来要求别人道歉。本人也建议陈全坤在要求他人道歉之前，应首先浏览至少两个网站。第一个就是行动党的正式网站（http://www.dapmalaysia.org/），第二个就是林吉祥的个人部落格（http://www.limkitsiang.blogspot.com）。如果可以的话，陈全坤应该按此连接，亲自到林吉祥的个人部落格文章（http://limkitsiang.blogspot.com/2005/11/some-10-years-after-msc-most-ministers.html），以亲自了解林吉祥的意见，

如果陈全坤能够查询清楚，林吉祥在其部落格提到：

“It is unbelievable that some ten years after the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) initiative, most Ministers still don’t use email. It has been quite a hassle just to get the email addresses of the Ministers of our jumbo Cabinet.（第一和第二段）”

以及最后一段，

“It is clear that there are at least four categories of Ministers with regard to use of email:
(1) Ministers who have no email address for the public to access.
(2) Ministers whose public email are not functional.
(3) Ministers who do not open their own email.
(4) Ministers who do not open their own email or read the email opened for them”

林吉祥在第一段和第二段表示一些部长还是没有用电邮（“还没有用电邮”并不表示“部长没有电邮地址”），因此必须大费周章搜寻部长的电邮。林吉祥的最后一段则针对部门在运用电邮方面所持有的态度而列出各项结论。

显而易见，林吉祥并没有表示林敬益没有电邮地址，而问题也不是部长有没有电邮地址，而是到底为何部长的电邮地址无法在部门的官方网站中轻易地搜寻得到？为何部长不把电邮地址直接刊登在部门的网站上？难道部长的电邮地址是官方机密以致不能随便泄漏？

陈全坤应该先查询清楚、做足功课，而不是在毫无查证之下胡乱要求他人道歉。因此，陈全坤应该收回他要求林吉祥道歉的言论。

欢迎陈耀宗电邮本人

至于种植与原产业部长拿督陈华贵私人秘书陈耀宗受报界访问是表示部长拥有本身官方邮址，而且也有在官方网站上公开。本人非常有兴趣进一步向陈耀宗进一步询问，到底刊登部长电邮地址的网页URL是什么？如果可以的话，本人欢迎陈耀宗能够亲自电邮有关URL到本人的电子信箱：lauwengsan@gmail.com或lauws@dapmalaysia.info。

行动党领袖电邮地址一目了然

其实，内阁部门应该效仿行动党的网站。行动党网站设计相对简单，也轻易让网民搜寻行动党各级领袖和代议士的电邮地址、通讯地址、电话号码以及传真号码。：
行动党中央领袖（http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/cec04-07.html）
社青团全国领袖（http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/dapsy05-07.htm）
国会议员（http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/mp.html）
州议员（http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/sa.html）

刘永山
（2005年11月9日）

所有政府官员，包括部长的电邮地址必须公开予公共领域。

所有部长、副部长，政务次长、政府总秘书以及总监的电邮地址必须公开予公共领域，以方便公众人士可以针对政府政策向有关部长直接反应看法，而不是把有关电邮地址收藏起来。

本人于昨日以一天的时间来收集所有内阁部长的电邮地址，以便反对党领袖林吉祥能够直接电邮部长们，以告诉他们马大和理大在2005年《泰晤斯报》大学排行榜的排名剧降的事件中必须承担集体的责任。

整个搜集电邮地址的过程是非常耗费时间的。第一个方法就是尝试从首相署网站中收集所有部长的电邮地址，因为本人记得该网站曾经刊登部长的电子邮件。

本人从32名部长中成功收集22名部长的电邮地址，这包括首相和副首相的电邮地址。本人过后立即把所收集到的电邮地址电邮给国会反对党领袖。

当时还有10名部长还没有得到他们的电子邮件。这10名部长是拿督阿都拉辛，拿督沙菲益阿普达，拿督希桑慕丁，拿督斯理林敬益，拿督斯理赛哈密阿巴，拿督斯理黄家定，拿督威拉冯镇安，拿督斯理拉菲达以及拿督陈华贵。

为了得到这10名部长的电邮地址，本人在早上11时继续尝试从各自部门的网站亲自搜寻他们的电子邮件。首先本人尝试能够在首半小时之内进行一个短小的搜寻，这包括拿督威拉冯镇安的个人网站（http://www.fong.net.my/）。本人还是无法搜寻他们的电邮地址。

本人过后决定致电逐个部门，希望籍此能够与他们的个人助理或高等机要秘书通电，以便能够得到他们的电邮地址。反对党领袖林吉祥也在中午12点致电本人以亲自致电每个部门，以便能够得到部长的电子邮件。

这也是另外一个艰巨的工作，因为大部分部门的电话号码仅仅是该部门的主要电话号码。如果该部门的电话接线员请假，那么有关电话将无法接通。一些部门的电话号码甚至已经不复存在。有鉴于此，本人唯有通过首相署和国会的网站来搜寻所有内阁部长和国会议员的联络资料。

而以下就是本人的搜寻记录：
- 拉菲达的办公室本来只愿意提供其办公室的电邮地址予我，即pejmenteri@miti.gov.my。今天，其部门致电行动党总部，并告诉我们部长的电邮地址是raziz@miti.gov.my。该部门致电的原因是为了要避免任何误会。
- 林吉祥致给拿督慕斯达化和拿督阿兹三苏丁的电邮弹回来。本人然后致电慕斯达化的助理法奥西亚。她表示部长的电邮地址出现问题，并建议本人也把有关电邮再传给她。阿兹三苏丁的办公室则没有任何回应。
- 本人成功在下午联络上高教部部长的办公室。其中一名职员告诉本人部长的电邮地址是drshafie@mohe.gov.my但是本人还是无法与他的助理联络，以确保该电子邮件能够顺利寄送到部长的电子邮箱。当《南洋商报》今天刊登部长的电邮地址时，本人才惊觉部长的电邮地址却变成shafie@mohe.gov.my.
- 至于能源、水供和通讯部部长拿督斯理林敬益医生，本人成功联络上部长办公室，但是其办公室也仅仅提供其助理的电邮地址，即kmlim@tak.gov.my。跟我谈电话的官员表示他不知道部长的电邮。直至今天，本人从《南洋商报》才知道原来部长的电邮是lims@ktak.gov.my 。
- 本人也联络上种植工业和原产业部（部长拿督陈华贵），但是本人也只是得到其助理的电邮地址： pybm@kppk.gov.my。
- 房屋与地方政府部部长拿督斯理黄家定的秘书告诉本人部长的电邮地址是menteri@kpkt.gov.my，但是他也建议本人把林吉祥的电邮传真到他的部门。本人过后照办。
- 贸消部部长沙菲益阿普达的助理只愿意告诉本人他的电邮地址，即izhar@kpdnhep.gov.my，并拒绝提供部长的完整电邮地址予本人。
- 至于人力资源部，该部没有任何人士接听本人的电话，而本人在该部的网站只得到ksm@mohr.gov.my的这个电邮地址。至于刊登在《南洋商报》的电邮地址，即fongco@mohr.gov.my，本人无法在该部或部长个人网站中搜寻得到。
- 教育部的网站（http://www.moe.gov.my/）拥有一个称为电邮通讯录（webmail directory）的特别连接（http://10.22.70.10/direktori/carian2.cfm），但是这个连接却是一个无法展示任何内容的网页（dead-link）。
- 至于首相署部长拿督阿都拉辛，本人周一一整天无法接通其办公室的电话。

至于其他本人成功获得部长电邮地址的部门，本人也尝试致电到部长办公室以确保他们确实收到有关电子邮件。虽然如此，很多时候本人的电话如果不是接不通，要不然相关人士还在放假，或者是部长的特别助理暂时跑开一会儿。

一些部门的网站与其把部长的电邮地址刊登在网站内，他们选择开始另一个网页以让浏览者通过该网页把意见和联络资料输入该网页，然后交由网站负责任处理。本人唯一成功的例子只有第二副财长诺莫哈末耶谷，即其助理正式向本人确实在周一已经收到林吉祥的电邮。

在今日早上，本人继续尝试联络教育部、外交部以及首相署部长拿督阿都拉辛的办公室。本人最后只联络上外长拿督斯理赛哈密的助理。其助理只愿意提供他的电邮（ahamed@kln.gov.my），但却不愿意透露部长的电邮地址。这是预料中事。至于阿都拉辛的电邮地址，本人手上拥有其办公室的三个号码，但是这三个号码都无法接通。其中一个更直接转入留言箱（Voicemail）。

这整个过程是一项烦琐的经验，因为大部分部门的官方网站都没有刊登部长的电邮地址。内阁部长应该以身作则，身体力行地配合首相的呼吁，那就是要缔造一个开放、透明和亲民的政府，这首先应从部门的官方网站刊登部长的电子邮件。

刘永山
2005年11月8日

Email addresses of all government officers including Ministers should be published in public domain.

Email addresses of all Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries, Chief Secretaries (Ketua Setiausaha), Director-General (Ketua Pengarah) should be published in public domain for members of public to drop in any comments and opinions related to their jobs, and should not be hidden away from the public.

I had on yesterday spent one whole day to collect email addresses of all Cabinet Ministers for Parliamentary Opposition Leader, Lim Kit Siang to send an email to them, highlighting to them that they have collective responsibility for the disastrous plunge of University of Malaya (UM) and Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) in the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) World University Ranking 2005 on the Top 200 Universities.

It was altogether a time-consuming effort. My first try was to collect those email addresses from the Prime Minister’s Office website as I recall that most Minister’s email addresses are published in that website.

I managed to collect 22 email addresses from a total of 32 Cabinet Ministers, including the Prime minister and the Deputy Prime Minister, which I immediately emailed to Opposition Leader.

The other 10 ministers are Datuk Dr. Abdullah bin Md. Zin, Dato’ Shafie bin Haji Apdal, Dato’ Hishammuddin bin Tun Hussein, Dato’ Seri Dr. Lim Keng Yaik, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid bin Syed Jaafar Albar, Dato’ Dr. Haji Mohd. Shafie bin Salleh, Dato’ Seri Ong Ka Ting, Datuk Wira Dr. Fong Chan Onn, Dato’ Seri Rafidah Aziz and Dato’ Peter Chin Fah Kui.

It was about 11am when I then continue to try my luck with the websites of all these ministries. I spent about half an hour to do a quick check on their websites, including the personal website of Datuk Wira Dr Fong Chan Onn (www.fong.net.my). Their email addresses remained unavailable.

I then decided to personally called-up their offices with hopes to get their Personal Assistants (PAs) or SUSKs (Setiausaha Sulit Kanan) for the email addresses. Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang called me at 12noon to instruct me to call them also.

It was another heavy task as telephones numbers obtained from ministry websites are merely main lines for the respective ministries. Nobody will answer the call if the receptionists are on leave. There are also a few ministries whereby the numbers are no longer exist, as such I have to either look up for another numbers with PMO website or the Parliament Website, which keep also keep a records of all contact details of Cabinet Ministers and MPs.

So, these are the results:
- Rafidah’s office was only willing to release this email address to me: pejmenteri@miti.gov.my. Her office just called me up and informed that Rafidah’s email is raziz@miti.gov.my to avoid any misunderstandings.
- Emails to Datuk Mustapa and Dato’ Abdul Aziz bin Shamsudin were bounced back. And I took up the matter to call both Ministers’ PA. Datuk Mustapa’s PA, Fauziah said there is some problem with his email (datopa@epu.gov.my) and advised me to forward the email to her as well at fauziahmad@epu.jpm.my. There was no response from Aziz Shamsudin’s office.
- I managed to ring up Ministry of Higher Education in the afternoon. An officer gave me Shafie’s email address (drshafie@mohe.gov.my) but his PA remained unavailable for me to confirm whether they received the email or not. I am shocked today that Nanyang Siang Pau managed to get his email address to be shafie@mohe.gov.my.
- It is the same for Ministry of Energy, Water and Communications (Datuk Seri Lim Keng Yaik) whereby I only managed to get his officer in his office only gives me his PA’s email address (kmlim@tak.gov.my). The officer does not know the complete email address of the Minister. I only know about the Minister email address from today Nanyang Siang Pau (lims@ktak.gov.my)
- I called up the Plantation Ministry (Peter Chin Fah Kui) as well but I was only given his PA’s email address: pybm@kppk.gov.my.
- Ong Ka Ting’s secretary only gave me menteri@kpkt.gov.my but advised me to fax the the email to him. I faxed it out accordingly.
- Shafie Apdal’s PA only gave me his email address (izhar@kpdnhep.gov.my) and refused to give me the minister’s full email address.
- Nobody from Ministry of Human resources picked up my call and ksm@mohr.gov.my is the only email address published on their web. The email address published in today Nanyang Siang Pau, fongco@mohr.gov.my is neither found in the ministry’s website nor his personal website.
- Ministry of Education website (http://www.moe.gov.my) appears to have a special link (http://10.22.70.10/direktori/carian2.cfm) for webmail directory but it is a dead-link unfortunately
- Nobody from Education Ministry, Foreign Affairs Ministry and Datuk Abdullah Mohd Zin (Minister in the PMD) answered my call yesterday.

For the rest of the ministries which I managed to get their ministers’ email addresses, I did a follow up call but there was either no response, probably their staffs are still on leave or the PAs were unavailable for confirmation.

Instead of publishing ministers’ email addresses on the web, some ministries prefer to ask visitors to leave their contact details and complaints with the ministries' websites.The only success that I have so far is Nor Mohamed Yakcop, whereby his PA confirmed yesterday that they had received the email. The only positive news so far.

This morning, I continue to call the Education Ministry, Foreign Affairs Ministry and Datuk Abdullah Mohd Zin (Minister in the PMD). I only managed to talk to Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar’s PA, Hamed. I am only given his email address, ahamed@kln.gov.my. As expected, he refused to give me Syed Hamid Albar’s full email address. I have on my hand three numbers on Abdullah Zin but there is no response on calls made to these numbers. One of the numbers even went straight into voicemail.

It was althogether a troublesome and hectic experience as most ministries do not publish minister’s email address on their official websites. Prime Minister’s call for an open, transparent and people-oriented government should be echoed well by Cabinet Ministers by publishing their email addresses in the public domain, in particular their ministries official website.

Lau Weng San
(8th November 2005)

Antara Kayveas, PBT dan Kongsi Gelap.

I found this article in Utusan Kota dated 21st October 2005. The article was written by Radzuan Hassan in his column Macam-macam hal.

In his article, Radzuan condemned the attitude of local councillors of not sensitive to the problems faced by the people.

He described this councillors as "Pak Angguk".

I would like to share a few para of what he said. Those who wish to have a detailed reading can refer to his article published on the day.

Aduan terhadap MPPJ kerana gagal mempertahankan kepentingan para pembayar cukai.

Saya telah pergi ke Biro Pengaduan Awam pada pagi ini dan membuat satu laporan aduan denagn BPA berkenaan dengan kegagalan MPPJ untuk mempertahankan kepentingan para pembayar cukai MPPJ. Surat berkenaan adalah seperti di bawah:

=====================================================================

KETUA PENGARAH,
BIRO PENGADUAN AWAM,
JABATAN PERDANA MENTERI,
ARAS 6, BLOK B1,
PUSAT PENTADBIRAN
KERAJAAN PERSEUTUAN,
62502 PUTRAJAYA. 2hb NOVEMBER 2005

Tuan Pengarah,

ADUAN TERHADAP KEGAGALAN MPPJ UNTUK MENJAGA KEPENTINGAN PEMBAYAR-PEMBAYAR CUKAI.

Kami sebagai pembayar-pembayar cukai Majlis Perbandaran Petaling Jaya (MPPJ) ingin membuat aduan rasmi dengan Biro Pengaduan Awam terhadap MPPJ berkenaan dengan kegagalan MPPJ untuk memastikan pegawai-pegawai dan ahli-ahli majlisnya supaya mematuhi undang-undang yang diperuntukkan dalam merancang projek-projek pembangunan di sesuatu tempat

Mahkamah Tinggi Shah Alam pada hari Isnin yang lepas memutuskan bahawa MPPJ perlu membayar pampasan kepada sekumpulan 86 penduduk dari Taman Desaria, Petaling Jaya akibat arahan daripada Hakim Datuk Alizatul Khair Osman Khairuddin apabila MPPJ mengeluarkan kebenaran pembangunan kepada Mentari Properties Sdn. Bhd untuk membina dua blok rumah pangsapuri kos rendah dan gerai-gerai di Taman Desaria, Petaling Jaya.

Antara keputusan-keputusan penting Hakim Alizatul Khair Osman Khairuddin ialah:

1, Keputusan MPPJ untuk memberi kebenaran pembangunan tanapa mengadakan perjumpaan bantahan (objection hearing) dengan penduduk setempat adalah tidak sah dan perjumpaan-perjumpaan seterusnya tidak boleh digunakan untuk mengesahkan kebenaran ini.
2, Perjumpaan bantahan (objection hearing) bukanlah satu formaliti semata-mata tetapi merupakan satu platform yang penting untuk penduduk-penduduk terjejas untuk menyuarakan pendapat-pendapat mereka.
3, Bahawa Majlis Tindakan Ekonomi Selangor (MTES) hanya merupakan satu jawatankuasa di bawah kerajaan negeri dan dengan itu tidak mempunyai kuasa untuk mengeluarkan sebarang pengecualian di bawah Akta Perancangan Bandar dan Desa.
4, MPPJ adalah diarahkan untuk membayar kerugian dan kosnya perlu ditanggung bersamaoleh Mentari Properties Sdn Bhd, defendan yang kedua. Kerugian ini dinilai pada satu tarikh yang akan ditentukan kemudian.

Kami yang juga merupakan pembayar-pembayar cukai kepada MPPJ amat prihatin terhadap kes ini dan kami berpendapat bahawa pampasan MPPJ itu tidak seharusnya datang daripada poket pembayar-pembayar cukai MPPJ, tetapi ianya mesti dibayar oleh mereka yang bertanggungjawab dalam meluluskan projek pembangunan ini.

Dalam satu kolum yang ditulis oleh R.Nadeswaran (The Sun, 25 Oktober 2005), telah dilaporkan bahawa mesyuarat untuk membuat keputusan bagi meluluskan kebenaran pembangunan ini dipengerusikan oleh Yang Di-Pertua MPPJ pada masa itu, Datuk Abdul Karim Munisar dan lima orang lagi ahli-ahli majlis iaitu Dr Wong Chee Yong, Yusoff Hanif, N. Krishnan, Nor Azman Mohd Nor dan Fauziah Mohd Shani. Turut menghadiri mesyuarat itu ialah Pengawai Undang-undang MPPJ Abdul Mutalib Abdul Ali dan Pengarah Perancangan Bandar Sharpiah Marhaini Syed Ali.

Kami berpendapat bahawa pegawai-pegawai dan ahli-ahli majlis di atas yang perlu memikul tanggungjawab yang paling besar kerana kesilapan mereka telah menyebabkan MPPJ terpaksa membuat pampasan kepada penduduk-penduduk ini, yang mana pampasan yang diarahkan oleh Mahkamah Tinggi Shah Alam itu tidak seharusnya ditanggung oleh para pembayar cukai di Petaling Jaya sekiranya pihak MPPJ ingin menjelaskan bayaran pampasan itu dengan menggunakan duit pembayar-pembayar cukai dan bukannya duit daripada mereka yang melakukan kesilapan ini.

Kejadian ini juga merupakan satu lagi contoh di mana ahli-ahli majlis tempatan yang dilantik tidak kompeten dalam melaksanakan tugas mereka sebagai ahli majlis tempatan. Ini disebabkan mereka ini tidak memikul sebarang mandat daripada rakyat melalui pihanraya majlis kerajaan tempatan.

Berkenaan dengan kes ini, Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Mustapha Mohamed telah mencadangkan dalam sidang Dewan Rakyat pada 26hb Oktober 2005 bahawa pembayar-pembayar cukai MPPJ boleh membuat aduan kepada Biro Pengaduan Awam dan beliau juga bersetuju akan melihat ke dalam perkara ini.

Dengan itu, kami berharap pihak Biro Pengaduan Awam dapat menjalankan siasatan terhadap perkara ini dan mengarahkan tindakan diambil terhadapmana-mana pegawai atau ahli-ahli majlis yang melakukan kesilapan ini.

Siasatan segera pihak tuan amat dinantikan dan dihargai. Sekian, terima kasih.

Lau Weng San
Pengerusi PJ Action Team, merangkap Setiausaha Publisiti DAP Selangor.

投诉八打灵再也市议会无法保护纳税人的利益。

我在今天早上前往布城首相署公共投诉局，以针对八打灵再也市议会无法保护纳税人的利益而正式向该局投诉灵市再也市议会。以下是我的投诉信的内容：

＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝

布城联邦政府行政中心
首相署公共投诉局总监 2005年11月2日

总监先生，

无法保护纳税人而针对八打灵再也市议会作正式投诉。

我们作为一群八打灵再也市议会的纳税人，谨此向公共投诉局投诉八打灵再也市议会，因为八打灵再也市议会无法确保其属下的官员和市议员在规划某一个地方的发展时遵守现有的条规和法令。

在上周一，莎亚南高等法院法官拿督阿利查图·凯尔·奥斯曼在一件由灵市Taman Desaria一群86名居民所发起的案件中判决八打灵再也市议会败诉，并且指示灵市市议会必须赔偿居民的损失。法官是判决灵市市议会给予Menteri Properties私人有限公司在一块（供国能兴建转驳站及一间母语学校）的保留地上兴建两幢廉价组屋及摊位的发展指示为不合法。

法官的判决重点是：

一、八打灵再也市政局（MPPJ）在没有召开反对听证会下给予规划批准是不合法的，过后的听证会并不能使它合法化。
二、听证会不应是应景的官式礼仪，而是一个真正让受影响的居民有机会表达他们心声的平台。
三、即雪州经济行动理事会是一个附属于州政府的委员会，因此它没有权力发出任何豁免城乡策划法令约束的指示。
四、MPPJ被令作出赔偿，而赔偿金将由第2答辩人的 Menteri Properties分担。赔偿金额将在较后时估计。

我们身为灵市市议会的纳税人非常关心此事，因为我们认为灵市市议会所必须作出的赔偿不应该由我们这些无辜的纳税人去承担，而应该由那些负责策划和批准这个发展计划的官员和市议员去负责。

在英文《太阳报》撰写专栏的R·Nadeswaran在其2005年10月25日的专栏中报道指出当时在会议上负责通过这项计划的包括当时主持会议的市议会主席Datuk Abdul Karim Munisar以及其他5名市议员，即Dr Wong Chee Yong、Yusoff Hanif、N. Krishnan、Nor Azman Mohd Nor以及Fauziah Mohd Shani。一起出席该会议的还包括灵市市议会所法律官员Abdul Mutalib Abdul Ali以及城市规划总监Sharpiah Marhaini Syed Ali。

我们认为以上的官员和市议员应该负上最大的责任，因为就是他们的失误导致市议会被莎亚南高庭判为败诉，而且被迫作出赔偿。这项赔偿不应由无辜的灵市市议会纳税人来承担，而应该由这些失误的官员和市议员来承担。

这起事件也是另外一个地方议员在履行任务时失责与疏忽的最佳例子。这是因为他们本身并不受人民的委托，而是通过走后门的方式进入地方议会。

针对此事，首相署部长拿督斯理慕斯达化在2005年10月26日在下议院的一项回答中建议灵市市议会的纳税人向公共投诉局投诉，并答应将会亲自处理这项问题。

因此，我们希望公共投诉局能够针对此事进行调查，并指示有关方面采取行动对付任何任何被发现失责和疏忽的市议会官员和市议员。

我们谨此希望您方能尽速调查此事。谢谢。


刘永山 谨启
八打灵再也火箭行动队主席
兼雪州行动党宣传秘书

MPPJ must explain reasons for the delay of the Jalan Universiti road upgrade project

I had on 29 October 2005 faxed and emailed a letter to the YDP of Majlis Perbandaran Petaling Jaya (MPPJ), Dato’ Ahmad Termizi requesting him to explain the delay of the road upgrade project along Jalan Universiti, Petaling Jaya.

The project, which involves the design, construction and completion of an elevated junction at Bulatan Universiti and involving Jalan Dato’ Abu Bakar (Jalan 16/1), Jalan Universiti and Jalan Kemajuan, was started on October 2003 and was expected to be completed by October 2005. However, the project has been idle since one year ago.

DAP Selangor and several PJ branch members have been visiting that area regularly and discovered that the situation is worsening where the left-behind construction site is now covered with grass and trapped water can be seen in many spots along the road where the road widening is supposed to take place.

We have raised this issue with MPPJ and we believe that the current site is an eyesore to Petaling Jaya, especially when PJ will be declared a “city” next year. In view of this, Ahmad Termizi must give a full explanation as to why the project was left idle. Is there any compensation paid by the contractor IJM Construction Bhd to MPPJ for the delay? Or is there any variation order (VO) issued by the contractor, which would prolong the whole construction process? And if so, will there be any temporary precautions taken by the contractor to ensure the safety of road-users?

These questions have to be answered by MPPJ as soon as possible. Most newspapers last Sunday carried reports that work will continue after Hari Raya and that a budget has been approved by the authority to remove underground pipelines and cables. But DAP Selangor has yet to receive any response from MPPJ. We call on the MPPJ to ensure the prompt resumption of the construction work and to give a proper written reply on the delay.

Lau Weng San

Jalan Universiti道路提升工程－八打灵再也市议会必须解释工程延迟的原因。

Jalan Universiti道路提升工程－八打灵再也市议会必须解释工程延迟的原因。

本人已经于2005年10月29日通过传真和电邮的方式致函八打灵再也市议会主席拿督阿末特米斯，以要求他解释八打灵再也Jalan Universiti道路提升工程延迟完工的原因。

这项道路提升工程的承包商是IJM Construction Bhd。有关工程包括在Jalan Dato’ Abu Bakar（Jalan 16/1）、Jalan Universiti及Jalan Kemajuan建筑一项高架天桥。该工程是在2003年10月开工，预计在2005年10月竣工。然而，该工程在大约一年前就已经停工。

雪州行动党和八打灵再也的行动党党员经常在该处观察，并发现因为该工程的搁置，导致施工之处出现积水，导致蚊虫滋生及生锈铁枝暴露在路旁。

我们已经就此事通知市议会，我们相信现有的施工之处有损八打灵再也的市容，尤其是八打灵再也将会在明年升格为市。有鉴于此，市议会主席必须解释为何有关计划会被搁置至如此长。承包商IJM Construction Bhd是否将会针对有关延迟作出赔偿？还是承包商已经发出任何Variation Order（VO），以致延迟整个工程？如是这样，承包商是否将会采取任何临时措施以确保道路使用者的安全？

这些都是地方当局必须在最短时间之内，以恰当的书面回答来解答的问题。其实大部分报章在周日报道市议会已经获得当局拨款以迁移该处的地下电缆和水管，但是直至今日，雪州行动党并没有获得当局的正式回函，表示他们会开斋节过后施工。如果这是市议会的确实答案，那么我们呼吁市议会应该尽速正式回函通知我们。

刘永山

博大以七宗罪再控一学生

以下新闻乃从《独立新闻在线》转载过来。看来我们必须严厉看待校园内违反人权的事件。

＝＝＝

博大以七宗罪再控一学生
《独立新闻在线》记者林宏祥 2005年10月26日 11时32分

博特拉大学又提控另一名学生，传召一名电脑与通讯工程系二年级学生黄思敏出席11月10日召开的听证会。

博大在信函中列出黄思敏的七大罪状，其中包括在9月21日前往国会呈交备忘录、分别在9月26日的校园选举提名日及9月29日的投票日杯葛校园选举、在9月26日至29日期间参与筹款活动、10月7日抬棺游行呈交备忘录给马来西亚人权委员会、在10月7日游行时出现在ntv7镜头，以及曾经出席法庭声援七名因参与反对《内安法令》集会而遭校方开除的学生。

黄思敏是在今天上午十时陪同农业系二年级生黎祖万奥斯曼（Ridhuan bin Othman）前往学生事务处出席听证会时接获此信。黎祖万奥斯曼向校方呈交抗议书，不满校方对本身的三项控状。

黎祖万面对的三项控状包括：9月21日前往国会呈交备忘录、9月29日投票日当天煽动学生杯葛校园选举，以及参与10月7日抬棺游行呈交备忘录给马来西亚人权委员会的活动。校方指他触犯了博特拉大学校规，而校规条文源自《1971年大专法令》。

周一（10月24日）上午，外语系（中文）第二年生林仕妆也受传召出席听证会，她面对两项控状，包括 在9月29日投票日当天煽动学生杯葛校园选举以及参与10月7日抬棺游行呈交备忘录给马来西亚人权委员会的活动。

林仕壮要求由律师、监护人及记录员陪同她出席听证会，唯学生事务处拒绝此要求。林仕壮进一步追问，学生事务处回应：“这是博大的风格！”无论如何，校方同意林仕壮延后听证会的要求，却将日期改在11月10日。据《独立新闻在线》读者miu miu透露，11月10日是博大考试期。

由此看来，不排除校方以此计分散学生注意力，减少当天前来聚集声援的人群。

Usul tolak gaji Ketua Pengarah BPS ditolak hari ini di Dewan Rakyat.

Ketua Pembangkang Parlimen YB Lim Kit Siang telah membawa satu usul untuk menolak gaji Ketua Pengarah BPR sebanyak RM10 daripada Bajet 2006 sebagai satu tindakan simbolik untuk menggesa BPS supaya mempertingkatkan usaha membanteras rasuah dan tidak menjadi seekor Harimau Tidak Bergigi (A Toothless Tiger).

Usul itu adalah seperti berikut:
“Bahawa perbelanjaan diluluskan dengan syarat dikurangkan sebanyak RM10.00 daripada Maksud Bekalan 9 - Ketua Pengarah Badan Pencegah Rasuah, Butiran 010000 Khidmat Sokongan, iaitu dengan memotong gaji Ketua Pengarah Badan Pencegah Rasuah sebanyak RM10.00 di bawah Maksud Bekalan 9, Butiran 010000 Khidmat Sokongan.”

Seperti biasa, usul ini ditolak oleh suara majoriti walaupun cukup panas diperbahaskan oleh Yang-yang Berhormat Ahli-ahli Parlimen sekalian.

Butir-butir akan dibekalkan nanti.

More IT cities, more housing projects or more broadband penetrations?

I think one of the main arguments here is the availability of high speed internet access to all citizens in Malaysia.It is saddening to see that even in place like Ara Damansara, Subang (as described by "Anonymous", where the place he/she stays is part of Klang Valley) does not have broadband access.

If this can happen in Malaysia, something is very wrong with our IT policy. And the only reason that we can have is the monopolization of broadband market by TM Net.During his winding-up speech this evening, Minister Of Science, Technology And Innovation, Y.B. Dato' Dr. Jamaluddin bin Dato' Mohd. Jarjis mentioned that there will be several IT cities set-up in future.

In his reply to a question raised by YB Chow Kon Yeow (DAP-Tanjong), JJ claimed that Bayan Baru is identified for IT development in Penang. (Correct me if I am wrong.)He even claimed that his ministry is trying to secure affordable computers for rural families (about RM500 per unit), in which these computers would be run in Malay to enable kampung folks to use ICT.

I think JJ has somehow missed the point as what is needed by Malaysia to be a fully IT savvy nation is to have an equitable IT development for all. Having a few more IC cities or MSCs, or sourcing affordable computers for kampung folks will not improve the problem as long as there is no commitment from the government to break the internet service monopoly by TM Net, thus creating competition among different ISPs to help the government to boost broadband penetration in Malaysia in a competitive price.

Having a few more IT Cities or MSCs may end up with more profiteering chances for housing developers.

Who is the "Damn Bloody Stupid Old Man" in the Dewan Rakyat?

If somebody pop into you and ask you who is the "damn bloody stupid old man" in the Malaysian Dewan Rakyat (House of Representatives), you could be puzzled by what is this person trying to ask you...

But of course, nobody can ever think that an MP (who is a BN MP from Kedah, who can speak some Hokkien and was once the Speaker of Dewan Undangan Negeri Kedah) can use such word in the chamber during the house meeting to attack another MP who is from the opposition party.

This is the same MP who has asked MPs from the Oppositions to "Get out of Malaysia" if they are not happy with the facts that Malaysia is already an Islamic State.

I would like to let the readers of this blog to guess who is the "damn bloody stupid old man" this BN MP was refering to at the time of his speech. Definitely speaking, to voice out such words to attack somebody personally is not an act that can be accepted in the holy month of Ramadan.

Probably, you all can have some guess. I let you all to guess.

Ask the correct question to the correct ministry.

It was another marathon session tonight when the Parliament today (18th October) was only adjourned at 11pm. And the last minister to serve his wonding up speech was Datuk Wira Fong Chan Onn (BN-Alor Gajah), our poor Human Resources Minister who had to take care of some many "minta penjelasans' from the ground.

Of course, the biggest problem he had probably will be questions from Backbenchers especially on unemployed graduates, and also the retraining programmes.

Some backbenchers doesn't seem to be satisfied with his rhetorical answer and continue to pursue the issue even though it was about 10:45pm, 15 minutes more before adjournment. Some of their questions were quite sharp and the Minister seemed to be shaky in his reply.

Finally, Chong Eng (DAP-Bukit Mertajam) stood up to ask him a question...he rejected in the beginning, but Chong Eng kept pursuing:

"Soalan terakhir sekali...terakhir...satu sahaja...terakhir"

"Jangan bimbang, saya mau tolong Menteri."

"Satu soalan terakhir sahaja. Untuk tolong menteri."

So, after a few assurance, Fong Chan Onn finally gave way, and there's when the Parliament was heated up again when Chong Eng pointed to the House that questions from fellow backbenchers should better be directed to Ministry of Higher Education and Ministry of Education as these two ministries are responsible for the low quality of graduates produced by our education institutions while Fong's ministry is merely doing the final dirty job to clear the mess.

Of course, Hishammuddin (BN-Sembrong), the Education Minister was quite frustrated to hear this.

I am quite agreed with what Chong Eng said, that the poor Minister of Human Resources is doing the dirty jobs for the other two Ministers. And of course, all members of the house may as well ask the correct question to the correct ministry, else this will be a great blunder.

A funny video clip.

I think this video clip reflects the real face of our multi-ethnic society. Worth watching!

Video Clip - War of Tongue in Parliament

Bertikam Lidah Di Parlimen 1 (4/10/2005)

Bertikam Lidah di Parlimen 2 (4/10/2005)

Bertikam Lidah di Parlimen 3 (4/10/2005)

Bertikam Lidah di Parlimen 4 (4/10/2005)

Shahrir's stand on Parliament autonomy questionable.

Perhaps you should have a read on today's Utusan Mingguan Wawancara (Interview) with Datuk Shahrir Samad, UMNO MP for Johor Bharu and Backbenchers Club Chairman.

Let me quote from what he said as followed:
"Pengumuman itu menimbulkan reaksi yang kuat di kalangan semua ahli Parlimen, cuma tindakan masing-masing berlainan. Pihak pembangkang terus menyerang dan menyifatkannya sebagai tindakan yang boleh menggugat kedudukan Parlimen. Kami yang menjadi penyokong kerajaan sebaliknya mengambil sikap yang lebih halus dan berlapik. "

"Kami mengadakan satu pertemuan dengan Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Isnin lepas untuk menyuarakan kebimbangan kami. Kami mencadangkan supaya nama itu ditukar kepada sesuatu yang lebih sesuai dengan kedudukan Parlimen, supaya tidak mengikut acuan perkhidmatan awam. Timbalan Perdana Menteri kemudian bersetuju untuk membawa perkara itu kepada perhatian kabinet."

I am not sure if this is the reason why the name of Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Parlimen is changed to pejabat, and further changed to jawatan Ketua Pentadbiran (This is the so-called sotry about capital "J" for Jabatan and the small letter "j" for jawatan).

If it is so, then Datuk Shahrir may have made the biggest by asking for a change of name of the post, instead of pursuing in full swing to remove the post, whether it comes in the form of Ketua Pengarah or Ketua Pentadbiran, whether it is in the form of a Jabatan Parlimen or just a small jawatan.

Of course, another big mistake is that on what basis Shahrir to consult Najib, who is part of the Executive? Shahrir as BBC Chairman should at least display the little dignity he has as a Parliamentarian by not submitting to the Executive. I understand that being an MP from the government side, he may need to consult the Executive before any move from the backbenchers, but judging from the report, it does not seem that Shahrir was talking to the Executive in an equal basis as a Legislative.

While Shahrir's move to urga MPs to stand up as sign to support the re-establishment of Parliamentary Service Act 1963, but Shahrir's stand on Nazri's suggestion to have a Parliament Department has been quite unstable since Nazri announced the Cabinet's decision to establish the department. Maybe fellow Malaysians could put a closer watch on him and his chaps in the Parliament in days to come.

The night when Wa! FM became a history...

Ahli Majlis "Pak Angguk".

Inilah apa yang terpapar pada Harian Metro hari ini (13/10/2005). Di fahamkan bahawa MPPJ pernah berjanji kepada penduduk di sekitar SS7, Petaling Jaya bahawa tasik itu tidak akan dibangunkan setelah dibantah hebat oleh penduduk setempat.

Kalaulah PBT tidak beroperasi seperti kongsi gelap(seperti yang dikatakan oleh M Kayveas), mengapa pula MPPJ sanggup makan janji sendiri?

Wa!FM – Menuntut penjelasan daripada Effendi Norwawi

Penutupan Wa!FM, iaitu stesen radio Mandarin sukaramai, telah mencetuskan kegelisahan orang ramai. Isu ini mempunyai tiga aspek yang saling berkaitan. Yang pertama, kerajaan berperanan penting untuk mengelakkan operasi stesen radio ini daripada berhenti. Kedua, hakmilik jenis monopoli ke atas media harus dikaji semula. Ketiga, kerajaan sepatutnya menjalankan siasatan ke atas skandal yang melibatkan ntv7 dan Synchrosound Studio.

Sudah waktu berakhirnya “KL Spring”?

Terlebih dahulu, kita perlu membuat andaian bahawa stesen radio dan televisyen adalah institusi dan barangan awam. Walaupun kesemua stesen radio dan televisyen dimiliki penuh oleh syarikat swasta, ini tidak bermakna stesen-stesen tersebut sekadar pencetak wang tunai. Jadi, kerajaan dan dewan yang mulia ini seharusnya mengambil sikap yang lebih serius terhadap isu tersebut, termasuk juga soalan-soalan yang berkaitan dengan pemilikan dan monopoli ke atas media.

Menteri Tenaga, Air dan Komunikasi Datuk Seri Dr. Lim Keng Yaik memberitahu dewan yang mulia baru-baru ini bahawa meskipun terdapat 1 juta orang yang menandatangani petisyen dan terserah kepadanya, kerajaan tidak berdaya untuk menghalang pemilik swasta Wa!FM, iaitu Synchrosound Studio Sdn. Bhd. daripada menutup stesen radio itu.

Seperti yang saya dapat tahu pagi tadi, terdapat 10,903 orang yang menyertai petisyen melalui laman web (http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?WAFans). Memang boleh diakui bahawa bilangan pempetisyen tidaklah banyak sangat. Namun demikian, adakah kerajaan Barisan Nasional bersedia untuk tidak mengendahkannya, sehingga akhirnya memudaratkan kepentingan sendiri.

Dalam isu ini, apa yang lebih penting bukannya perasaan yang diluahkan oleh peminat-peminat radio tersebut, tetapi reputasi keseluruhan pentadbiran kerajaan yang dipimpin oleh Datuk Seri Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi. Salah satu program yang paling popular dan dialu-alukan adalah sesi perbualan yang diudarakan dari pukul 5.30 petang sehingga 7.00 petang. Program ini mengizinkan pendengar membuat panggilan “call-in” untuk mengutarakan pandangan mereka masing-masing terhadap isu-isu politik yang serius. Keadaan ini sungguh dihargai ramai, dan mereka selalunya menjadikan program ini sebagai gambaran terhadap keterbukaan relatif yang ditunjukkan oleh kerajaan pimpinan Abdullah Badawi, dan juga dibandingkan dengan era kepimpinan Tun Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad. Memandangkan ruang dan saluran adalah terhad untuk orang awam mengutarakan pandangan mereka dengan cara yang tidak tersekat seperti dalam program Wa!FM tersebut, maka penutupan Wa!FM yang bakal terjadi dapatlah diibaratkan sebagai “the end of ‘KL Spring’ ”, atau dalam kata lain, berakhirnya sesuatu zaman yang lebih terbuka malah juga paling singkat dalam sejarah.

TV tontonan percuma: Monopoli yang terjadi-jadi

Penutupan Wa!FM adalah amat berkaitan dengan persoalan-persoalan mengenai pemilikan media yang lebih luas. Perhatian orang awam ditumpukan ke atas isu Wa!FM adalah disebabkan stesen radio tersebut bebas untuk mengutarakan pandangan awam, dan pada masa yang sama, hanya terdapat segelintir stesen radio yang menggunakan bahasa Cina sebagai bahasa pengantaraannya. Di antara 56 stesen radio yang diluluskan untuk beroperasi di Malaysia, hanya terdapat 4 stesen radio yang berbahasa Cina. Memandangkan permintaan masyarakat terhadap isi kandungan radio yang berbahasa Cina adalah semakin tinggi, maka kerajaan berperanan untuk menghalang Wa!FM daripada ditutup, dan pada masa yang sama, meluluskan lebih banyak lesen untuk tujuan penyiaran tersebut.

Berita yang melaporkan bahawa The Star yang dimiliki oleh MCA telah mengambilalih sebuah lagi stesen radio adalah mengejutkan. Parti-parti pemerintah seperti MCA dan UMNO semakin ghairah untuk melibatkan diri dalam urusniaga media sehingga ke suatu tahap yang tidak mungkin berputar balik. Buat masa sekarang, MCA telah memiliki Nanyang Siang Pau dan China Press, dan juga dua buah stesen radio, iaitu RFM 98.8 dan RED 104.9.

Garisan yang memisahkan media dan parti politik dalam negara kita adalah semakin mengaburkan. Apa yang lebih membimbangkan kita adalah percubaan parti-parti politik BN yang meruncing ke arah untuk memonopoli pengaliran maklumat melalui pemilikan media, terutamanya dalam era globalisasi ini.

Kita mengimport istilah “GLC” atau “government-linked corporations” dari Singapura untuk merujuk kepada syarikat-syarikat yang sahamnya sebahagian dimiliki oleh kerajaan. Saya ingin memperkenalkan istilah “ULC” atau “UMNO-linked corporations” untuk merujuk kepada syarikat-syarikat yang dimiliki oleh UMNO, seperti Media Prima Bhd.

Kes perolehan ntv7 oleh Media Prima adalah satu contoh ketara yang menunjukkan sikap UMNO dan BN tidak mengambil peduli serta tidak menghormati kebebasan media. Pada bulan Julai ini, Media Prima mengumumkan bahawa syarikat itu akan membantu Natseven TV dan dua buah syarikat yang berkaitan dengannya, iaitu Synchrosound Studio Sdn. Bhd. and Questseven Dot Com Sdn. Bhd., untuk menyusun semula hutang mereka yang tidak diketahui jumlahnya. Synchrosound and Questseven adalah pemegang lesen dan operator Wa!FM masing-masing.

Media Prima telah memiliki TV3 dan 8tv, dengan gabungan saham iklan TV (adex) sejumlah 53% dan penonton yang sejumlah 56%. Media Prima baru-baru ini telah membuat pengumuman untuk mengambil alih CH-9 Media, iaitu pemilik Channel 9 dengan RM41.44 juta. Sudahlah dengan lauk-pauk yang begitu banyak dalam piringnya. Ekoran daripada tindakan ini, Media Prima bakal akan menjadi pemilik tunggal kepada semua TV swasta tontonan percuma di Malaysia. Pemilikan monopoli ke atas media adalah sesuatu gejala yang tidak sihat, lebih-lebih lagi dikuasai oleh ULC.

Skandal-skandal

Alasan-alasan yang sering disebutkan dalam kes penutupan Wa!FM adalah kerana Media Prima sedang menjalankan proses penjenamaan semula, dan Wa!FM adalah bertanggungjawab ke atas kerugian terkumpul sebanyak RM 55 juta yang dialami oleh Synchrosound. Ini adalah tidak benar sekali. Mengikut laporan tahunan Synchrosound yang terakhir yang dikemukakan kepada Pendaftar Syarikat pada tahun 2000, hutang syarikat itu telah berjumlah sebanyak RM 23 juta. Dalam kata lain, sekurang-kurangnya setengah daripada hutang itu telah terkumpul sebelum kemunculan Wa!FM pada tahun 2003.

Terdapat beberapa soalan yang saya harapkan kerajaan dan individu-individu yang berkenaan untuk menjawab:

(1) Jumlah hutang yang ditanggung oleh Synchrosound dan ntv7 adalah banyak. Saya tidak berminat untuk mempersoalkan urusan keperibadian, tetapi adalah munasabah untuk saya bertanya bahawa adakah perceraian di antara Datuk Seri Mohd Effendi Norwawi, Wakil Khas Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi yang berstatus Menteri dengan isterinya yang sudah berkahwin 33 tahun, Farida Hashim yang melibatkan beberapa juta ringgit, turut melibatkan ntv7 dan Wa!FM. Dalam laporan Sunday Mail bertarikh 10 Julai 2005, adalah didakwa bahawa penyelesaian kes antara dua orang ini melibatkan wang di antara RM 25 juta dan RM 100 juta. Tiga hari kemudian, Media Prima mengumumkan bahawa bermula prosesnya untuk mengambil alih ntv7. Kebetulan pada waktu adalah memeranjatkan. Adakah Effendi menjual ntv7 untuk menyelesaikan kes perceraiannya? Adakah dia pernah berfikir tentang kebajikan beberapa ratus pekerja yang berkhidmat dalam stesen televisyen dan radio? Kebanyakan mereka kemungkinan besar hilang pekerjaan dalam tempoh beberapa tahun berikutnya apabila selesainya penggabungan dengan TV3.

(2) Gabungan saham iklan TV (adex) untuk ntv7 adalah sekitar 30%. Unjuran pendapatan tanpa diskaun adalah sekitar RM 90 juta dan dijana melalui pendapatan kasar dengan diskaun yang amat rendah diberikan. Dalam apa-apa keadaan sekalipun, sungguhpun pihak ntv7 tidak berupaya untuk menjana keuntungan daripada adex tersebut, namun adalah memeranjatkan jikalau hutang ntv7 untuk tahun-tahun kebelakangan ini adalah lebih daripada RM 200 juta. Saya mendesak Badan Pencegah Rasuah untuk menjalankan siasatan ke atas kes ini, untuk mengenalpasti sama ada terdapat kejanggalan dalam pelaksanaan syarikat tersebut, terutamanya hubungan di antara ntv7 dengan sebuah syarikat yang bernama Air7 Sdn. Bhd.

(3) Adalah didakwa bahawa Wa!FM berhutang kira-kira RM 8 juta kepada TM dalam tahun-tahun kebelakangan ini. Sebagai sebuah syarikat GLC yang berkepentingan awam, TM perlu membuat penjelasan mengapa syarikatnya mengizinkan Wa!FM untuk terus berhutang dan tidak mengambil sebarang tindakan dengan lebih awal?

(4) Adalah didakwa bahawa ntv7 dan Wa!FM telah berhutang EPF pekerja lebih daripada RM 1 juta secara tunggakan. Adalah menyalahi undang-undang bagi sesiapa yang tidak membuat sumbangan kepada Kumpulan Simpanan Wang Pekerja. Perlu diambil perhatian bahawa EPF memegang ekuiti sebanyak 14.9% dalam Media Prima. Dengan itu, EPF perlulah menjalankan siasatan dengan serta-merta ke atas ntv7 dan Synchrosound Studio Sdn Bhd. Sebagai sesebuah perbadanan yang melindungi dana persaraan pekerja, adalah sesuatu yang aneh bagi EPF terus melabur secara tidak langsung dalam sesebuah syarikat yang langsung tidak menunaikan kewajipannya terhadap EPF.

(Teks ucapan Ahli Parlimen DAP untuk Cheras, YB Tan Kok Wai ketika membahas Bajet 2006 di Parlimen pada 13 Oktober 2005)

MCA Youth should take concrete action for the repeal of UUCA to prove that they are not indulging in plain talk.

DAPSY urged MCA Youth to take concrete action to repeal the University and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA) to prove that they are not indulging in plain talk.

Deputy Minister for Higher Education Datuk Fu Ah Kiew had on Monday informed the press that the government is in the process of reviewing all acts and regulations relating to the universities and colleges, including the contentious University and University Colleges Act 1971 to allow more freedom and democratic space for undergraduates.

Although the announcement was warmly welcomed by MCA Youth, there is very little response from other youth organizations. DAPSY certainly does not have any intention to undermine the “good intention” of MCA Youth. However, MCA Youth should take cognizance that the Act contravenes the spirit of the Federal Constitution, in which the basic civil liberties of Malaysian citizens are enshrined. MCA Youth should instead demand that the Act be repealed in full.

In our struggle to fight for greater democratic space in our campus, DAPSY is currently working on the following:

1. Drafting a memorandum entitled “Memorandum from Political Party Youth Wings to Repeal the UUCA”. In several campus elections held recently, campus authorities were said to have misused their power in providing support to candidates who are pro-authority to secure victory. The campus authorities reportedly even bypassed rules and regulations provided under the UUCA. Such action clearly violates the principles of fair play and democracy and is a reflection of the diminishing campus democracy. The memorandum will be submitted to the Ministry of Higher Education. For this purpose, we would welcome constructive input from MCA Youth in drafting the memorandum and hope that they would be one of the first signatories of the memorandum.

2. Arranging the formation of a Parliamentary caucus to repeal the UUCA. We will invite various political party youth wings, NGOs and youth organizations to be members of the caucus. In order to pursue the legislative process in Parliament to repeal the Act, MPs who are part of the youth wings of their respective parties are also invited to be core members of the caucus.

DAPSY believes that only through these steps can the 300,000 undergraduates currently pursuing various courses in public universities enjoy greater liberty, as expressed by MCA Youth Chief Secretary, Wee Ka Siong. Otherwise, what Wee said will remain as plain talk devoid of any concrete action.

Councillors appointed from local community leaders?...No lah, where got?!

Parliamentary Secretary of Ministry of Housing and Local Government, S. Subramaniam was wrong to state that local councilors are appointed from community leader during questions and answers time yesterday in the Parliament. He was also wrong to comment that Kayveas has his own political agenda to say that local governments as mere rubber-stamp operating like a secret society and there should be an end to locally-appointed councils.

Firstly, the current practice of appointing local councilors is neither transparent nor people-oriented as not all councilors are appointed from community leaders. S. Subramaniam should have correct his answer that it is the local BN component parties leaders who are appointed as councilors and to some extent, some of the councilors are not even living in the respective area under the ruling of their respective local councils (a check on MPPJ shows that 13 of its councilors are not staying in PJ) which is a clear violation of the Local Government Act 1997. If local councilors are not staying in their respective areas, how can they claim themselves as “local community leaders”?

Secondly, If Kayveas has his own agenda in his comments, then that will be an agenda to give back the right of the people to elect their local councilors under a democratic country. This is a genuine people-oriented agenda as spelled out by the Prime Minister's pledge of a clean, incorruptible, efficient, trustworthy and people-oriented administration to create a just, prosperous and progressive Malaysia.

DAP has run a nation-wide to restore the third vote by giving back the right of the people to elect their local councilors as the present appointive system works against the pledge of the Prime Minister, and our views and opinions on local governments’ performance has received various positive feedback not only from the public but also from government officials as Health Minister Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek revealed that 80% of dengue cases come within the jurisdiction of local authorities

Clearly the local authorities have failed to deliver and carry out their basic duty to look after the health, hygiene and safety of the people’s neighbourhoods. Perhaps money spent on such junket trips (as mentioned by Kayveas in News Straits Times, 4th October 2005) can be better spent on providing better drains to reduce the dengue threat. An elected council answerable to the people is the only solution and not the present “rubber stamp” appointed local council operated like a “secret society”.

Beberapa clip video perang lidah di antara LKS dengan Kak Pidah di Parlimen

Perang Lidah di Parlimen 1 (From nanyang.com)

Perang Lidah di Parlimen 2 (From nanyang.com)

Perang Lidah di Parlimen 3 (From nanyang.com)

Perang Lidah di Parlimen 4 (From nanyang.com)

令人担忧的连续第9年赤字预算案。

无可否认，此次预算案是大马政府连续第9年的赤字预算案。这无疑是令人担忧的状况。政府在各个领域大量给予税务回扣，并且在施贫增老的领域给予大量津贴和协助，但有鉴于这是政府连续第9年的赤字财政预算案，社青团认为政府在行政开销方面谨慎小心。

在这个星期，国会辩论了2005年财政预算案的附加预算案。附加预算案的出现显示政府部门在规划各自的财务运用方面出现不协调的状况，导致各政府部门必须提呈各自的附加预算案。这是没有效率的财务规划和运用，这也间接把去年的财政预算案的赤字进一步提高。

政府必须坚决提升公共服务的输送系统，并且大刀阔斧改善行政部门的办事效率。社青团也认为政府应该在公共领域进行大型的去芜存菁的计划，因为大马公共行政部门所录用的公务员人数非常多

国内投资环境、私营化计划与政联公司业绩

塑造更友善的投资环境是大马目前所面对的挑战。市场自由化与开放化，政治民主化与去官僚化是当下大马在吸引外资所面临的巨大挑战。

由于私营化与政府应承担的社会责任有所冲突，因此社青团认为《财政预算案》应该反映出私营“公共化”的精神，即利用市场的运作机制来提升公共企业的效率。私营化本来要为政府减少亏损，反而现在变成少数朋党得益，这是不符合市场效率的。

烟草与国民健康

政府平均提升烟草税务13％。社青团认为这并不能起阻吓的作用。烟草商可以把有关税务转嫁在烟民的身上。社青团认为政府必须提高烟草税务至30％以上，同时把有关税收用以帮助烟草农民转行，以便卫生部能够尽快禁止小包装香烟的出售。

卫生部在8月23日决定将每包14支装香烟（也是年轻烟民喜欢购买的香烟包装）在市场的售卖期限延长至2010年，以确保丹登两州约1万3千名从事烟草种植活动的农民能够获得充足的时间转种其他农作物，因为他们需要更长的时间来调整。卫生部的这项决定是不能接收的。

社青团认为政府的这项言论不仅宣示政府再次在公共政策规划上的失策（以致政府在进行“Tak Nak”运动的第一年竟然花费高达2千万令吉的拨款），而且这也间接显示政府在整个打击吸烟运动上遭遇打了第一次的败仗。

正如媒体近来所报道，当“Tak Nak”运动在2004年2月开始进行以来，当局在全国各地树立许多广告牌和在报章上打广告。这些都花上许多纳税人的金钱。对于政府耗费巨资进行这项运动，大马人民期待的是政府在反烟运动能够取得积极的成果，尤其是能够降低烟民人数。

教育拨款

政府应认知其责任为强化我国的教育系统。要达到这点，这些拨款是必须的。教育是培育国家英才之大事业，如果缺乏有素质的人才，我国的种种建国议程将荆棘满布，建国路程势必艰辛无比。

根据政府在国会所公布的数据，从2001年到2005年，国内5755间国小得到当局高达49亿令吉的发展拨款，而半津贴的华小和淡小则获得1亿3360万令吉和5760万令吉的发展拨款。

这就是说49亿令吉的发展拨款如果平分给5755间国小，那么每间国小平均每年获得17万令吉的发展拨款。1287间华小则平均每年获得2万761令吉的拨款，525间的淡小则平均每年只分获2万2千万令吉。

如果要平衡国小和非国小的发展拨款，那么每一间非国小则必须在接下来的5年之内得到额外15万令吉的发展拨款，也就是说政府必须在接下来5年内拨出额外15亿令吉作为非国小的的发展拨款（一年平均是3亿令吉。）

政府应该为国内非国小在未来5年内争取至少15亿令吉的发展拨款。如果政府缺乏经费，国油应从其去年所赚取的355亿令吉抽取一部分以作为非国小的教育发展拨款。

此外，政府应该把大专教育开放化。让学术人员和大专生发挥高度的批判精神，培养和开发具有创意思考的大专生。政府必须了解我国高企不下的失业大专生人数乃是因为当前高等教育沦为填鸭式教育的恶果，如果政府不解决这个根本性的问题，尤其是在校园选举方面允让学生自由参选，并且启动司法程序以废除大专法令，要不然政府即使投入再多的资金，最终也将徒劳无功。

人口问题、交通规划与汽车政策

要把人口从高度密集的巴生谷地区转移到巴生谷外围地区。社青团认为州政府不仅要把人口从巴生谷疏散至其他地区，甚至必须与国家硬体发展委员会协调以便能降低从外州移民。

中央政府应该平衡各州的发展，以便在各州提供和制造更多的就业和升学机会，舒缓巴生谷河流域人口爆炸的压力。中央政府应在预算案中明确指出，在建设任何收费高速大道之前，有关私人公司所提呈的计划书必须公布让公众人士审核，并且定下听审会，以示透明。

社青团建议政府在发展国内城市交通系统时应该把焦点集中在改善城市的交通规划系统，尤其是如何在新兴城市地区建设轻快铁交通系统。社青团认为，政府在《2006年财政预算案》中所提及的策略并没有新点子，因为许多措施已经实行，譬如推行统一的车票制度、在人口密集的地方研究增设公共交通服务和路线等等。

社青团认为，政府应该拟定策略，要求各州城乡规划单位现行拟定每一个新兴发展地区的人口分布、流动量以及对公共交通的需求。这个研究最后必须与一套宏观的交通规划指南接轨。因此政府必须落实一套全面的公共交通规划指南或政策

宽频网络

在资讯工艺方面，社青团感到非常失望，因为政府并没有设下任何目标以增加全国各地的宽频用户数量。社青团认为，政府应该定下目标以便巴大马的宽频渗透率在2020年时达到30％的宽频渗透率。

不要把哗！FM事件过渡简单化

读了纪照君于9月28日所撰写之〈哗！FM停播评论流於片面〉一文之后亦有所感言，即舆论界多半对此事的意见相当一般，那就是该台之关闭将导致华社失去一个华语电台，也有评论人因痛惜哗！FM因《哗！下班红绿灯》开创听众叩应讨论时事的风气而挺身支持该台。

持平而论，听众如此反应，乃是基于一片关爱。纪照君在其文章中对这些流于表面的评论不以为然，并认为“他们根本不明了商业问题，或贸易买卖是无法以大义或道理想当然尔来解决的。”

我不否认在现实世界里，确有不少流水式、我手写我口的随便式评论文章。套用纪照君的用语，这些是“拿来讲”的文章。但我们看到的是，公众人士在保哗！FM事件中所发动的舆论压力（暂且不理到底他们是否了解内部的商业决定运作过程）或许并不能仅以此角度来判断。

我更不能赞成纪照君所言，即“哗FM停播与否，只有它的老板与股东，才能解决与决定，局外人多说，无补於事”。

虽其是商业决定，但是人们不应忘记的就是哗！FM也是一所带有公共性质，扮演一定程度公共性质的电台。这就好比华文报章，华文报章归根究底还是由私人企业所出版、印刷和发行，但是报章既然自我定位为社会的传声筒，那么它本身就持有一定程度的公共性质。既然如此，哗！FM的存亡多少都关系到公共利益，至少是其忠实听众的利益－这就说明为何哗！FM的存亡并不能只是以一句“你要它不停播，就请拿钱出来投资吧！”来交代那么简单。

纪照君也不应忘记，我们所听闻的 “这家华文电台每个月蒙受至少马币50万元的亏损，或自开台以来这家电台累积亏损高达马币五千万元”迄今还未获证实。另一边厢，来自内部消息却表示如此天文数字的亏损是不可能的，因为该台仅有8名全职工作人员。这两种说法都不能证伪或证实。如果哗！FM的帐目一日没有公开，人们也一直无法知道到底该电台真正蒙受的亏损是多少。

问题的症结还不是回到以下问题：到底管理层是否愿意公布哗！FM的财务状况，让人们清楚知道该台的财务状况？管理层是否已经尽其全力挽救哗！FM，但仍然回天乏术，以致最后必须开出如此重药？还是这又要回到我国广电政策的不足之处，以致大马广播界处在一个界限模糊的境界操作，即没有政府在政策上的规划（网络设备提供者、频波分配、内容等规定），也缺乏真正开明和自由的运作环境？

或许纪照君认为这些流水文章没有什么意义可言，但是一旦我们说：“你要它不停播，就请拿钱出来投资吧！”，我们更必须在这些问题里得到答案。否则，以上言论也是流水式之言论，因为它也把这事件过渡简单化了。

刘永山