Pest Control Scandal – Sepang Municipal Council is also involved, raising question of whether there are any ‘big guys’ behind the scene

Not enough with Subang Jaya, Sepang Municipal Council is also involved in the same scandal. Same as what happened in Subang Jaya, owners of the commercial outlets under the jurisdiction of Sepang Municipal Council are all required to sign a contract with four designated companies to carry out pest-control exercises.

I have a copy of the leaflet with me and I had confirmed this with the council’s president office and the four designated companies. These companies are Salak Pest Control Sdn. Bhd., Wismanis Sdn. Bhd., Lembah Dahlia Sdn. Bhd. and Koswasta Asia Sdn. Bhd.

From our detailed scrutiny, we discover that:

1. The content of the two leaflets (MPSJ and MPSepang) are literally the same. The differences are only on the name of the councils and the name of the companies.
2. The contract are also run based on consortium in which all the four companies are given the concessionaire to run pest-control exercise. While Koswasta Asia is also involved in the MPSJ’s concessionaire and is thus confirmed to be a pest-control company not recognized by the Pest Control Association of Malaysia, we are still in the midst of investigating the backgrounds of the other three companies.

In lieu of all these happenings, DAP Selangor would like MPSepang to come clear to all our questions here:
1. What are the jurisdictions for MPSepang to require non-eatery commercial outlets to conduct pest-control exercise? It is of course reasonable for MPSepang to come out with the ruling to eateries and restaurants as well as food-processing factories but MPSepang is certainly lacking transparency in it’s policy making when requiring owners of non-eatery commercial outlets to do the same.
2. Even though if pest control exercise is compulsory for all commercial outlets, why do MPSepang only designate one consortium to conduct the exercise for more than 10,000 commercial outlets under MPSepang’s jurisdiction? Is this consortium more experienced than other companies in the market, or it’s charges are more economical than the rest? Is the awarding of the concessionaire conducted based on open-tender system?
3. One of the companies, Koswasta Asia is said not a member of the Pest Control Association of Malaysia (PCAM). If that’s the case, why MPSepang does not select a company registered, recognized and accredited by the association? Are the services provided by this consortium guaranteed and accredited by the association? Will it be held liable legally for any losses or accidents by its personnel when conducting pest-control exercises, especially when pest control personnel must be well-trained to handle insecticides and poisonous materials which could also be carcinogenic?

Besides, we are very much concerned of whether there could be some ‘big guys’ behind the scene trying to strike a deal with all 13 local councils in Selangor to monopolise pest-control business in Selangor. As for this stage, we hope that based on the principles of good-governance, transparency and accountability, the presidents of MPSepang and its councilors should be held liable and answerable to the taxpayers. We therefore urge the following:
1. MPSepang to immediately suspend the implementation of this ruling until there is a clear and acceptable explanations from the council on this matter. The council should also explain when it enters into an agreement with a private consortium without consulting the taxpayers.
2. MPSepang to immediately reveal the contents of the contracts in order to avoid MPSepang from entering any unjust contract with any private entity which will cause damage to the council and the taxpayers.
3. MPSepang to immediately arrange for a three-party negotiation between the owners (the taxpayers), the consortium and the council to reach for a solution, so as to avoid innocent owners to sign any contract with the consortium without adequate consultations on what have happened behind.

Billboard scandal – who demolished the billboard we complained?

On Tuesday (1st August), I as my capacity as DAP PJ Action Team Chairman held a press conference in Jalan Universiti Petaling Jaya to highlight a huge billboard constructed by Spectrum Marketing Sdn. Bhd. nearby the junction of Jalan Universiti and Jalan 17/41 which is not only unsafe, but also not in accordance with the concept of a ‘safe city’ and ‘pedestrian first’ when the billboard was too close to the road and it occupied the pedestrian walkway.

To my surprise, I discovered yesterday evening that the bill board was taken down by somebody. Although this is a delighting news, but we do not know who are the authority who took down the billboard (Please refer to the two photographs that I took yesterday night).

It is believed that it was the work of the council, but I had lodged a police report at 7pm yesterday night to seek police’s investigation on the matter.

Actually, if the mayor can be transparent and accountable in his work, he can announce weekly on the numbers, sizes, identities of the owners and the locations of illegal billboard demolished.

This is indeed one of the three demands that I put forward to him. The other two demands are:
1. To demand the Mayor to come out with an order to stop constructions of any new billboard in PJ until there is an accountable, satisfactory and acceptable official explanation given by the council in order to prevent irresponsible outdoor advertising companies from constructing billboards that endanger public safety.
2. To demand the Mayor to draw up a policy for a dialogue must be conducted with the residents before any billboards are constructed in any area.

We do not need to beat around the bushes, if the Mayor can work transparently and accountably.

雪邦市议会也卷入害虫控制风波。该风波似有扩大的可能性。

针对最近闹得满城风雨的梳邦再也市议会强制规定管辖范围之内的商家，不管是否是饮食业者都必须向市议会制定的害虫控制公司签署合约的风波，本人接获投保，指责雪邦市议会也涉及其中。

本人手上拥有一份来自雪邦市议会的传单。本人已经致电雪邦市议会主席以及传单内注明的公司联络电话，确认雪邦市议会已经做出这样的决定。

我们从投保者所得到的传单显示：

1. 雪邦市议会的传单与梳邦市议会的传单内容几乎一百巴仙一样。不同的只是地方议会和公司名称有所更改。
2. 雪邦市议会的合约也是以财团方式来经营。雪邦市议会所承认的四家公司是Salak Pest Control有限公司、Wismanis有限公司、Lembah Dahlia有限公司以及Koswasta Asia有限公司（其中Koswasta Asia有限公司也是梳邦再也市议会指定的其中一件公司）。我们正在调查其他三间公司的背景。至于Koswasta Asia有限公司，正如我们在之前的记者招待会中所言，大马害虫控制协会不承认这家公司的服务。

有鉴于此，雪州行动党希望雪邦市议会能够交待以下事项：
第一、 雪邦市议会是基于什么理由要求市议会管辖范围之内的所有商店进行害虫控制？如果是饮食业者，这还情有可原，但是为何从事非饮食业生意的商店和工厂也受当局规定呢？
第二、 即使必须进行害虫控制，为何市议会硬性规定商家们必须向这间财团公司签署和约，进行害虫控制？难道其他比这家公司更加有经验、收费更低廉的公司不符合资格吗？市议会是否以公开招标的方式来颁发这项特许经营权？
第三、 在这四间公司当中，有至少一间公司并不是大马害虫控制协会的成员公司，其他的尚在调查当中。既然如此，为何市议会不选择该协会属下的成员公司？这间公司的服务素质是否得到该协会的核准和保证？万一发生意外（如杀虫剂外泄、或非法使用致癌药物等等），这些公司是否愿意承担法律上的责任？

除了这些疑惑，雪州行动党也恐怕这一连串的事件发生后，背后可能有一股势力在进行市场操纵，我们担忧这最终将会蔓延至全雪州13个县市议会和市政厅。就这阶段而言，我们希望这不是雪邦市议会另一项自肥朋党的丑闻。由于这影响雪邦市议会数以万计商家的利益，基于公信力、良好和透明施政的原则，我们希望雪邦市议会主席和市议员能够：
第一、 展缓实行这项措施，直至市议会能够详细交代整起事件的来龙去脉，解释为何市议会在纳税人毫不知情下和私人公司签署这项和约。
第二、 立即公布和约内容，避免市议会在缺乏充足的法律咨询下和私人公司签署不平等和约，损害纳税人和市议会的权益。
第三、 立即展开三造对话，解决疑惑，避免商家在毫无头绪下，贸贸然和该公司签署和约。

广告牌风波——是谁拆毁我们投保的广告牌？

在周二（8月1日），本人通过记者招待会现场在Jalan Universiti和Jalan 17/41交界处举报一个不符合‘安全城市’和‘行人至上’概念危害路人与驾车人士的广告牌。

令人惊讶的是，昨日下午本人发现有关广告牌已经遭人拆除。虽然这是一项令人惊喜的消息，但是我们无从知道到底是谁拆除这个广告牌。（请参阅本人通过电邮传过来的照片。这两张照片是本人昨晚拍下来的）

初步估计，这是是市政厅的人员拆除，但是为了避嫌，我已经于昨日晚上7时向警方报案，要求警方介入调查。

其实，如果市长能够展示透明度，那么他大可以每周公布这些被拆除广告牌的位置、尺寸以及它们是哪一家广告公司所竖立的。

这项诉求也是本人在本周二记者会上所提出的三项诉求之最后一项诉求。其他两大诉求尚包括：
第一、 要求市长公布，在有关风波尚未获得圆满结束之前，暂时停止广告公司在到处建立巨型广告牌，以避免某些不负责任的广告公司随处设立不合法的广告牌，破坏市容、对行人构成性命威胁。
第二、 要求市长拟定一项政策，即市政厅在批准任何广告公司在其管辖范围内建立广告牌，必须事先和居召开对话。

我们希望市长能够展示透明度，每周公布拆除广告牌的详情，不要让人猜测。

Laporan Polis Terhadap Penurunan Papan Tanda Iklan

Nama: Lau Weng San
No Kad Pengenalan: 78XXXX-XX-XXXX
Jantina: Lelaki
Alamat: No: 24, Jalan 20/9, Taman Paramount, 46300 Petaling Jaya.
Jawatan: Setiausaha Publisiti DAP Selangor dan Pengerusi DAP PJ Action Team.

Saya telah mengadakan satu sidang media pada pukul 11 pagi pada hari Selasa yang lepas (1hb Ogos 2006) di mana saya telah menunjukkan satu papan tanda iklan yang besar yang terletak di sepanjang Jalan Universiti dan bersimpang dengan Jalan 17/41 didapati menggandu penglihatan pengguna-pengguna jalan raya, menduduki lorong pejalan kaki sehingga mendatangkan kesusahan kepada para pejalan kaki khususnya warga tua dan orang kurang upaya. Di samping itu, saya juga mendapati bahawa papan tanda iklan ini tidak selamat kerana ianya terletak terlalu dekat dengan jalan raya dan jikalau ianya jatuh, ia boleh menyebabkan kemalangan dan kecederaan.

Pada pukul 6 petang 3hb Ogos 2006, saya telah mendapati bahawa papan tanda iklan itu sudah diturunkan. Saya tidak pasti siapa yang menurunkan papan tanda iklan itu dan saya berharap pihak Polis boleh menyiasat.

Sebelum itu, saya telah berkata kepada media bahawa Datuk Bandar Petaling Jaya harus:
1. berhenti mengeluarkan permit kepada syarikat-syarikat iklan untuk mendirikan papan tanda iklan ini, khususnya papan tanda iklan yang mengancam keselamatan jiwa orang ramai, sehingga mereka memberi satu penjelasan yang memuaskan kepada para pembayar cukai di Petaling Jaya.
2. menggariskan satu dasar di mana sebelum mana-mana satu papan tanda iklan didirikan di sesuatu tempat, satu dialog dengan penduduk-peduduk setempat perlu dijalankan.
3. mengumunkan bilangan, saiz ukuran dan pemilik papan tanda iklan yang telah diturunkan oleh MBPJ setiap minggu memandangkan Datuk Bandar telah mengumumkan di dalam media bahawa MBPJ telah menurunkan beberapa papan tanda iklan tanpa mengumumkan bilangan, saiz ukuran dan siapa pemilik papan-papan tanda iklan ini.

Oleh itu, dengan berlandaskan prinsip ketelusan dan tadbiran baik, saya berpendapat Datuk Bandar harus mengumumkan angka ini bukan sahaja kepada saya tetapi kepada semua pihak termasuk polis untuk memudahkan kerja-kerja siasatan polis. Sekian laporan saya.

Lau Weng San

专业化处理警方的人力资源管理，以及赋权予地方上的警官打击罪案。

社青团以及八打灵再也火箭行动队对拉曼学生利建业在文良港被冷血杀害事件深感愤怒，并向他的家属致哀。

最近我们看到许多执政党热衷于举办声讨大会、警民对话等等活动。可悲的是，这些大会很多时候成为市民的宣泄大会。前来出席的警方代表往往成为居民宣泄不满的对象。这显示市民对日益败坏的治安愈表不满，这是众人可以理解的自然反应。

我们虽然乐于看见警民能够加强对话，联手打击地方上的罪案，但是任何声讨大会必须要有具体的方案。这就好比马华公会要向拉曼学生讲解如何在治安黑区保护自己的用意是好的，但这种措施只属表面及没有效率，治标而不治本。只要劫匪仍在，只要警方没有很好地履行他们的任务，那么地方上的治安问题局对不会得到根治。说到底，要一劳永逸地根治这个问题，警方依然扮演最重要的角色。

虽然马青总团团长廖仲莱说，该团的先锋队将在晚上派出一百名队员到高风险区巡逻，但是社青团要质问的是：马青先锋队可以巡逻几个黑区？一百名先锋队队员能够被派遣到多少个黑区？马青可否派遣五十名先锋队队员前来八打灵再也的犯罪黑区巡逻巡逻？又有谁来保护先锋队队员的性命安全？调动马青先锋队来执行警方的工作，难道不是证明警方的无能吗？

社青团认为，警方应该在扑灭罪案方面扮演主动性的角色。全国总警长丹斯巴克里於3月25日在警察日献词中说，2005年一共发生15万7459起刑事案，其中暴力罪案佔了14.6％，其余的是产业罪案。攫夺案比2004年下降了16.63％。2005年的破案率是48.45％（自1969年来最高者），而2005年是46.46％。

在扑灭罪案方面，大马皇家警察部队或许可以参考纽约市警察部门的运作。在八、九十年代，纽约市是著名的罪案城市。刚上任的纽约市长朱利亚尼为打击居高不下的罪案率而大胆赋权予地方警官，让地方警官能够随着地方上的独特状况拟定地方上的罪案防范系统，并且通过独特设计的电脑系统每周针对地方上的罪案趋势进行分析研究，然后再通过会议和其他地区的警官讨论和分享，进而得出结论让地方上的警员执行。

可悲的是，目前我国九万名警员当中，只有大约七巴仙（或六千名警员）的警力是用来处理罪案，其他则负责文书和非罪案处理性质的工作（如政治部警员）。这非常明显是在浪费警力。

社青团认为，除了推介著如‘警察之友’、加强巡逻、增设警亭之外，警方也必须以专业化的方式来处理人力资源管理，并定时让地方上的人民认识当天执勤的警员，以及定时公布地方上的罪案状况，并拟定综合系统处理这些资料，进而拟定一套完整的措施让居民、地方上的警员/警官以及警区主任办公室的调查官相互协调。

Police must manage their human resources professionally and empower their investigation officers with more power to curb crimes in their locality.

DAPSY and DAP PJ Action Team would like to express our deepest condolences to the family members of Lee Khian Yip.

Recently, there have been outpours of anger and outrage from the public which can be seen in a lot of dialogue between the people and the police as well as public gathering organized either by the media or by public organizations. The outrageous emotion as witnessed in a lot of such dialogue can only be interpreted as a sign of public intolerance against worsening public security in their residential areas as well as their working places.

These emotions should not be washed off as merely some outburst of angers but there must be some actions to be taken from the authority to restore a safe and secure environment for the people, regardless of races, religions and regions.

Although MCA has mentioned that they will explain to KTAR students of how to protect themselves from criminals and snatch thieves, such move does not solve the problem in the long run. As long as there are still inefficiency in the Police Force, the situation will not get any better. So to say, if we need to restore public safety, the police will still play a vital role in curbing crime rate in the country.

Even though MCA Youth Chief Liow Tiong Lai said that MCA Youth will deploy their 100 of their action team members to patrol ‘black areas’, there are also questions of whether they can cover all the black areas in town? Can MCA Youth send another 50 members to patrol high crime rate area like Petaling Jaya? Who will be looking after the safety of the action team members? By deploying their MCA members to look after the safety of the public is not different from proclaiming to the world that the Malaysian Police has failed in keeping social order of the society.

It is the will of DAPSY that the police should play a pro-active role in curbing crime rates. The Inspector-General of Police Bakri has mentioned during the National Police Day on 25th March that out of 157459 criminal cases in 2005, violent crimes has come about 14.6% of the total crimes recorded and the rest are commercial crimes. Snatch thefts has dropped 16.63%.

In terms of curbing criminal activities, DAPSY would like to propose the police force to look up to the operation of New York Police Department whereby the department has succeeded in turning New York from a city of criminal activities to a safe city, thanks to the efforts of the previous New York City Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, which incorporated CompStat system which empower police officers in precinct level to deal with local dynamics when comes to handling criminal activities in their area concerned. The system will also provide crime mapping analysis for the all police officers in New York to combat criminal activities by studying the behaviors of criminal activities in their areas concerned.

Unfortunately, this has not been in place in Malaysia and what is more worrying is that out of the 90,000 strong police force in Malaysia, only 7% of them (or about 6000) are deployed to resolve criminal activities whereas the rest are involved in handling non-police tasks such as administration, clerical works and works of the Special Branch. This is of course a blatant waste of human resources.

Besides having public partner programmes like ‘Rakan Cop’, increasing patrol frequency and building more pondok polis, the police must also adopt a more professional approach in managing human resources among the force. It is also recommended to the police that it is important for the people in a particular area to know who are the police officers on duty that particular day, and there shall be periodic announcement of criminal activities took place in a particular area so as to aware the public of the happenings. This shall slowly evolve into a comprehensive and integrated system which enables close working relation between police officers in a locality, police officers in the headquaters as well as residents in a particular area.

Strongly condemn arrogant statement from MPSJ President

DAP Selangor strongly condemn arrogant statement from MPSJ President, Arif when he asks unhappy owners no need to apply or renew trade license if they refuse to sign pest-control contract with designated company.

Arif’s statement is also most disappointing. I had on 31st July issued a press statement, among others which calls for transparency and accountability in which:
1. MPSJ to immediately suspend the implementation of this ruling until there is a clear and acceptable explanations from the council on this matter. The council should also explain when it enters into an agreement with a private consortium without consulting the taxpayers.
2. MPSJ to immediately reveal the contents of the contracts in order to avoid MPSJ from entering any unjust contract with any private entity which will cause damage to the council and the taxpayers.
3. MPSJ to immediately arrange for a three-party negotiation between the owners (the taxpayers), the consortium and the council to reach for a solution, so as to avoid innocent owners to sign any contract with the consortium without adequate consultations on what have happened behind.

The President’s statement has certainly deepened our worries that the President will not compromise. Such statement is actually a blatant disregard of elementary democratic principles. The President shall withdrawn his ignorant statement and at the same time gear up his effort to resolve the matter diplomatically by at least conducting an initial dialogue.

BN Councilors shall also at this time intervene and portray their ‘negotiation skills’. Looking at the attitude displayed by the Presideny, one will easily draw a conclusion that such skill has failed miserably while one does not actually know whether the councilors have ever tried it before.

Therefore, the councilors must start doing something and not keep remaining silent even though their councillorship is appointed and not elected because their allowances are paid by the taxpayers. It is their natural responsibility to serve the benefits of the people and not the other way round, the benefits of their immediate boss.

强力谴责梳邦再也市议会主席阿里夫的嚣张言论

针对梳邦再也市议会规定在其管辖范围之内规定所有商家必须和制定害虫管理公司签署和约，进行害虫控制工作，才能向市议会申请更新执照，雪州行动党对于梳邦再也市议会主席拿督阿里夫昨日面对记者访问所展现的嚣张态度表示失望及遗憾，并且强力谴责市议会主席如此不理民怨的谈话。

市议会主席阿里夫在接受记者访问时拒绝向商家解释今次强制签约的条例，并表示如果商家不愿意和当局制定的害虫控制公司签约，商家们‘大可不用更新执照’！

我在7月31日的一篇新闻发布会文告中曾经指出:：

“我们希望这不是市议会另一项自肥朋党的丑闻。由于这影响梳邦再也市议会数以万计商家的利益，基于公信力、良好和透明施政的原则，我们希望梳邦再也市议会主席和市议员能够：
第一、 展缓实行这项措施，直至市议会能够详细交代整起事件的来龙去脉，解释为何市议会在纳税人毫不知情下和私人公司签署这项和约。
第二、 立即公布和约内容，避免市议会在缺乏充足的法律咨询下和私人公司签署不平等和约，损害纳税人和市议会的权益。
第三、 立即展开三造对话，解决疑惑，避免商家在毫无头绪下，贸贸然和该公司签署和约。”

从市议会主席的言论和态度，我们担忧市议会主席将会坚决实行这项措施。市议会主席的这种言论和态度已经违法基本民主原则。我们要求市议会主席收回这项言论，并着手以处理商家的投诉，召开对话决问题。

除此以外，马华民政的市议员也应该在这个时候展示他们的‘协商功夫’。如果马华民政市议员和州议员的‘协商功夫’到家，为何市议会主席会如此嚣张？

为何他们到现在针对此事不仅一言不发，甚至没有积极处理人民的投诉？纵然他们的议员身份是官委的，不是民选的，但是他们应该负责的对象是广大的纳税人，不是他们的顶头上司。发生这类不公平和不合理的事件，为何他们没有在上一次的月常会议里提出来，要求市议会主席收回成命？

Three demands to PJ Mayor and at the same times urge MBPJ to show seriousness in curbing illegal billboard by carefully scrutinizing new billboards.

Although MBPJ is facing strong criticism from the residents on issues related to how the council handles billboard concessionaire in PJ, there are still several new billboards sighted around PJ recently. Some of the billboards are occupying pedestrian walkway and is too close to main road, which are not only endangering public safety but also not in accordance to a city built based on “safety city concept” which should be “people-oriented”.

One of these billboards is a billboard located along Jalan Universiti, Petaling Jaya, in front of Sin Chew Daily News Head Office, which is cnstructed by Spectrum Marketing Sdn. Bhd. with MBPJ approval serial number “MBPJ 78873”.

Although this is a billboard only erected months ago, there are apparently still no lighting facilities installed for the billboard, thus raising question of whether the billboard had already gone through tight scrutiny. (pleas refer to photos attached).

Normally, when an advertising company wishes to set-up billboard in any area, the company needs to apply for an advertising permit from local council and sign an agreement to build billboard in which the company is required to pay a certain amount of licensing fees. The contract will normally outline the rules and regulations the company has to follow but unfortunately such crucial document is not always available in the public domain, causing difficulties to identify what are the rules and regulations that had been breached as well as difficulties to identify any malpractices of the council.

As for the billboard mentioned in Jalan Universiti, it is certainly a billboard not only suspected to have violated the rules but it is also a billboard constructed on pedestrian walkway. For example, there must be a certain safety distance between the board and the roadside, in which in most cases in PJ, the distance shall be around 3 to 5 metres. Unfortunately, if we have a check on the board, it is basically erected just next to the road. What is more annoying is that the board occupies pedestrian walkway, causing difficulties for pedestrian especially senior citizens and handicapped.

It is our concern that MBPJ seems to continue with its on-going planning to build more billboards while the questions raised by the people remained unanswered. In the mean time, some unknown but irresponsible companies are trying to buy time to build new billboards. We believe that MBPJ should exercise careful securitization whenever there are new applications to construct new billboard in the city.

Therefore, we would like to put forward our three demands to the mayor, which we wish:
1. the Mayor to come out with an order to stop constructions of any new billboard in PJ until there is an accountable, satisfactory and acceptable official explanation given by the council in order to prevent irresponsible outdoor advertising companies from constructing billboards that endanger public safety.
2. the Mayor to draw up a policy for a dialogue must be conducted with the residents before any billboards are constructed in any area.
3. since the Mayor has claimed that the council had demolished some illegal billboards in PJ, we would like the Mayor to report weekly on the numbers, sizes of the billboards as well as the names of the companies which own the billboards in order to uphold transparency and good governance.

Meanwhile, we would like to announce that the DAP PJ Action Team is in the process of collecting billboards which are affecting public safety in Petaling Jaya. We welcome any information provider to contact either me (016-3231563 / 03-79578127) or Ronnie Liu (012-2013656), regardless of whether the billboards are legal or illegal.

市政厅应采取谨慎小心态度批准新的广告牌

虽然八打灵再也市政厅最近针对广告牌风波面对居民的强力质问，但是市政厅管辖范围内最近依然出现许多崭新林立的广告牌。这其中有一部分的巨型广告牌侵占行人道，并且太过靠近大马路，除了对路人和驾车人士构成的性命威胁之外，也完全不符合‘安全城市’和‘以人为本’的概念。

其中一面就是位处大学路，在灵市17区附近，靠近《星洲日报》总社的广告牌。这面广告牌是由Spectrum广告公司承建，市政厅批准号码是MBPJ 78873。虽然这个广告牌已经设立许久，但是迄今该广告公司还没有为这面广告牌增设灯光设备，因此夜间不能照亮路面情况。（请阅附图）

一般广告公司如果要在某一个地方设立广告牌，它必须向地方议会申请准证，并且必须和地方议会签署和约，缴付一笔执照费之后，才能正式兴建广告牌。一般来说，合约的内容阐明广告公司必须遵守的条规，这包括广告牌的安全距离、尺寸和数量等等，但是问题在于这份合约并不是公共文件，一般人士不容易获得有关和约。这就容易导致黑箱作业的事件。

虽然八打灵再也的广告牌风波一再闹大，但是八打灵再也的广告牌数量一直都在增加。我们对这种趋势表示担忧，因为当市长还没有针对这一连串的问题给予满意答复之际，市内各种来历不明，并且对行人安全构成威胁的大小广告牌到处林立。如果市政厅有诚意减少市内的非法广告牌，那么市政厅应该在这事件不宜过于宽松，而应该采取谨慎小心态度批准新的广告牌。

有鉴于此，我们向市长提出以下三大诉求：
第一、 要求市长公布，在有关风波尚未获得圆满结束之前，暂时停止广告公司在到处建立巨型广告牌，以避免某些不负责任的广告公司随处设立不合法的广告牌，破坏市容、对行人构成性命威胁。
第二、 要求市长拟定一项政策，即市政厅在批准任何广告公司在其管辖范围内建立广告牌，必须事先和居召开对话。
第三、 市长曾经表示市政厅已经拆除部分不合法的广告牌。为示透明，我们希望市长能每周公布这些被拆除广告牌的位置、尺寸以及它们是哪一家广告公司所竖立的。

与此同时，我们也宣布八打灵再也火箭行动队目前正在收集威胁路人和驾车人士的广告牌，我们希望八打灵再也市民能够向行动队列举他们地方上这一类型的广告牌，不管这些广告牌是合法的还是非法的。市民可以联络本人（016-3231563 / 03-79578127）或刘天球（012-2013656）。

Pest Control fiasco - Urge MPSJ to halt new regulation, to reveal the contents of the contract and to organize a three party negotiation

Subang Jaya Municipal Council (Majlis Perbandaran Subang Jaya, MPSJ) has come out with a directive to all owners of commercial outlets under it’s jurisdiction that starting from 2009, they are required to sign pest control contract with a private consortium to get a pest-free certificate in order to apply for new trade license or to renew their current trade license.

Although the president of MPSJ, Datuk Arif Abdul Rahman has clarified that it will be implemented in 2009 till 2026 (in which the concessionaire will terminate in 2026), we have received complaints that owners are already required to sign up with this consortium before they can renew their license. I have also personally called up the Licensing Department of MPSJ and that the complaints are validated by the officers.

The name of the consortium is Konsortium SJ Pest Control Sdn. Bhd. The members of the consortium include Koswasta Asia Pest Control Sdn. Bhd., Damai Pest Control Sdn. Bhd., Vetga Sdn. Bhd., Inspirasi Asia Sdn. Bhd., Suria Sakti Resources Sdn. Bhd. and Denmas Sdn. Bhd.

DAP Selangor is outraged on the decision made by MPSJ based on the following five reasons:

1. What are the jurisdictions for MPSJ to require non-eatery commercial outlets to conduct pest-control exercise? It is of course reasonable for MPSJ to come out with the ruling to eateries and restaurants as well as food-processing factories but MPSJ is certainly lacking transparency in it’s policy making when requiring owners of non-eatery commercial outlets to do the same.

2. Even though if pest control exercise is compulsory for all commercial outlets, why do MPSJ only designate one consortium to conduct the exercise for more than 10,000 commercial outlets under MPSJ’s jurisdiction? Is this consortium more experienced than other companies in the market, or it’s charges are more economical than the rest? Is the awarding of the concessionaire conducted based on open-tender system?

3. This consortium is said not a member of the Pest Control Association of Malaysia (PCAM). If that’s the case, why MPSJ does not select a company registered, recognized and accredited by the association? Are the services provided by this consortium guaranteed and accredited by the association? Will it be held liable legally for any losses or accidents by its personnel when conducting pest-control exercises, especially when pest control personnel must be well-trained to handle insecticides and poisonous materials which could also be carcinogenic?

4. DAP Selangor has also conducted a company search for the companies under the consortium and discovered that some of the companies are not only newly established, but also led by directors in their 20s. This raises a question of whether these companies are capable to conduct proper pest-control exercise.

5. The lowest available charge of the consortium is RM600, which is twice the market price. If all owners of commercial outlets under the jurisdiction of Subang Jaya were to sign a contract with this consortium till 2026, that will be a great fortune for the consortium.

We do not hope that this will become another exercise which only benefits cronies of those in power, and since the decision will definitely affects the benefits of the owners, based on the principles of good-governance, transparency and accountability, we believe that the presidents of MPSJ and its councilors should be held liable and answerable to the taxpayers. We therefore urge the following:

1. MPSJ to immediately suspend the implementation of this ruling until there is a clear and acceptable explanations from the council on this matter. The council should also explain when it enters into an agreement with a private consortium without consulting the taxpayers.

2. MPSJ to immediately reveal the contents of the contracts in order to avoid MPSJ from entering any unjust contract with any private entity which will cause damage to the council and the taxpayers.

3. MPSJ to immediately arrange for a three-party negotiation between the owners (the taxpayers), the consortium and the council to reach for a solution, so as to avoid innocent owners to sign any contract with the consortium without adequate consultations on what have happened behind.

要求梳邦再也市议会立即暂缓实行新条例

梳邦再也市议会日前发出指令，即从2009年开始，梳邦再也市议会管辖区内全部共约万名业者，必须使用由市议会委任的私人害虫控制公司检查环境卫生，才能获准更新商业执照。虽然市议会主席阿立夫表示这项特许经营权从2009年开始，直到有关公司的特许权于2026年结束，但是我们接获投保，指即使现在要申请商业执照、或更新商业执照者，都必须向该公司签署和约。我本人也曾经向梳邦再也市议会执照组证实有关消息。

这间公司是一件财团公司（Consortium）。其名称是Konsortium SJ Pest Control Sdn. Bhd.，旗下的成员公司是Koswasta Asia Pest Control有限公司、Damai Pest Control有限公司、Vetga有限公司、Inspirasi Asia有限公司、Suria Sakti Resources有限公司以及Denmas有限公司。雪州行动党是基于以下五大原因对梳邦再也市议会的这项措施表示不满：

第一、 梳邦再也市议会是基于什么理由要求市议会管辖范围之内的所有商店进行害虫控制？如果是饮食业者，这还情有可原，但是为何从事非饮食业生意的商店和工厂也受当局规定呢？

第二、 即使必须进行害虫控制，为何市议会硬性规定商家们必须向这间财团公司签署和约，进行害虫控制？难道其他比这家公司更加有经验、收费更低廉的公司不符合资格吗？市议会是否以公开招标的方式来颁发这项特许经营权？

第三、 这间公司并不是大马害虫控制协会的成员公司。既然如此，为何市议会不选择该协会属下的成员公司？这间公司的服务素质是否得到该协会的核准和保证？万一发生意外（如杀虫剂外泄、或非法使用致癌药物等等），这些公司是否愿意承担法律上的责任？

第四、 这间财团公司的收费比市场上一般害虫控制公司的收费贵。据称，最低收费是六百令吉，这是其他公司收费的两倍。

第五、 部分公司的董事年龄非常年轻。他们是否拥有足够的经验经营这行业？

我们希望这不是市议会另一项自肥朋党的丑闻。由于这影响梳邦再也市议会数以万计商家的利益，基于公信力、良好和透明施政的原则，我们希望梳邦再也市议会主席和市议员能够：

第一、 展缓实行这项措施，直至市议会能够详细交代整起事件的来龙去脉，解释为何市议会在纳税人毫不知情下和私人公司签署这项和约。

第二、 立即公布和约内容，避免市议会在缺乏充足的法律咨询下和私人公司签署不平等和约，损害纳税人和市议会的权益。

第三、 立即展开三造对话，解决疑惑，避免商家在毫无头绪下，贸贸然和该公司签署和约。

Yong Dai Ying should start to lead the charge to expose more wrong-doings of the council and it’s councilors to carry out her duty as elected represen

Two UMNO’s PJ councllors, Halimaton Saadiah Bt. Hj. Bohan dan Megat Firdouz B. Tan Sri Megat Junid had on last Wednesday MBPJ Full Board meeting criticized Bukit Lanjan State Assemblywoman (ADUN) YB Yong Dai Ying for bringing up petty matters in the full board meeting.

The two had accused Yong that the Council’s ful board meetings are meant to discuss issues related to the Council’s policy, not any other petty matters.

They were of the opinion that Yong should instead bring these matters to the different departments or committees set-up by the Council to look into, and that she should not numerously bring these matters up in the full board meeting, as if they are not discharging their duties as councilors entrusted to look after that area.

Halimaton, Megat Firdouz and another councilors from MIC, Krishnan a/l Narayan Redy are responsible to look after Kota Damansara and Bukit Lanjan, in which Datuk Mokhtar Dahlan and Yong Dai Ying are ADUNs for these two state seats. Datuk Mokhtar Dahlan is even the Selangor Government Executive Council (Exco) members.

Yong was later interviewed said that she had highlighted these matters to the different departments and committees but there was no actions being taken by the council to tackle the problem until she has to keep raising these matters several times in the full board meeting.

She even mentioned that: “Even though issues on policy is important, but do you also mean that a community hall which is left idle for years is not important? Policy when discussed is the same, you see, is there any solutions for the billboard fiasco?”

She claimed that the community hall is left idle very long. Although the residents had complained to Megat Firdouz and Halimaton, they have to switch to her as no actions had been taken by the two.

She also implied that although she and Mokhtar Dahlan are allocated three councilors to help them (Halimaton, Megat Firdouz and Krishnan), she have never seen them serving her constituency. Instead she found that they were more focused on Kota Damansara. Yong also disclosed that although each councilors is allocated RM10,000 as councilor allocations, but she has never saw them putting these money in use for the people in Bukit Lanjan.

I am disturbed and shocked by Yong’s statement as this has exposed MBPJ’s inefficiency and at the same time exposed another failure of appointed local councilors who failed miserably to discharge their duties.

Among the questions that we need to ask are:
1. Why there is not action taken against the many complaints made by Yong Dai Ying when Yong is an elected representative? If there are no actions taken on the complaints made by an elected representative, then what about complaints made by others?
2. Can Yong release a list of abandoned projects from MBPJ in her area? Though Halimaton and Megat Firdouz claimed that Yong should not discuss petty matters in full board meeting, the people still deserve the rights to know more on any abandoned projects and poor services of MBPJ.
3. Yong also claimed that each councilor is given RM 100,000 allocation every year to serve the people. Therefore, it must be made accountable that:
a. Whether other councilors, especially non-UMNO councilors are also given the same amount of money?
b. Where does the money come from? From MBPJ, state government, federal government, internal allocation from their parties or personal allocation from MPs or ADUNs?
c. Can the two councilors and other councilors come out with an itemized bills of how they utilize the allocations since these are public funds?

As an elected representative, since Yong has taken the initiative to expose part of the wrongdoings in the council and the councilors, Yong should continue to expose all these wrongdoing and malpractices by trying to find an answer for the above-mentioned queries.

武吉兰樟区州议员杨带英遭巫统市议员炮轰 — 杨带英应带头揭发更多八打灵再也市政厅和市议员的败笔和内幕。

两名巫统八打灵再也市议员，即掌管武吉兰樟区和哥达白沙罗区的市议员（哈里曼敦和梅格）在上周三举行的市政厅月常会议上炮轰武吉兰樟区州议员杨带英。

这两位市议员指责杨带英不应在每次月常会议都带出选区内的民生问题。他们认为杨带英应该把问题带去市政厅的各个委员会或官员处理，而不是一再在月常会议提出这些问题。他们更指出月常会议应该是讨论市政厅政策的场合。他们还指责杨带英这么做似乎在反映他们这些市议员没有为民服务。

杨带英在接受记者访问时说，由于她曾经把问题带去小组委员会，但却毫无下文，所以她被迫在月常会议再次提出。

她指出：“难道政策重要，一件又犹如独立式的礼堂荒废不重要吗？政策讨论来讨论去都是一样，你看，广告牌风波有结论吗？”

她说，有关礼堂已经废置很久，居民曾向哈里曼敦和梅格投诉，但却一直没有下文，才转而向她投诉。

她也暗喻，虽然她和莫达达兰共分配到三名市议员的协助，即哈里曼敦、梅格和来自国大党的克里斯南，但是却从未看见这三名市议员到她的选区服务，他们只看重哥达白沙罗区。杨带英也透露，虽然每名市议员可获得十万令吉拨款，但是却从未看见他们共现在武吉兰樟区。

我对杨带英的言论感到震惊和愤怒，因为杨带英的言论赤裸裸地暴露八打灵再也市政厅的败笔，同时也揭发官委市议员滥用政府拨款，没有进行职责的一面。

有鉴于此，我们要质问的是：
一、 为何八打灵再也市政厅在接获多次投诉依然无动于衷，尤其是投诉者并非一般市民，而是人民代议士？如果市政厅也无法积极处理人民代议士的投诉，更何况是一般市井小民？八打灵再也市政厅在处理民生投诉是否出现双重标准？

二、 虽然梅格和哈里曼敦职责杨带英所带出的民生课题是琐碎小事，因为市政厅月常会议是用以讨论重要政策，但是杨带英可否通过媒体公布一个清单，罗列八打灵再也市政厅在其选区内延迟耽误解决的民生问题？

三、 除了被废置的礼堂，身为纳税人的达八打灵再也市民也有权利知道其他尚未解决的民生问题以及遭耽误延迟的发展计划。因此，身为人民代议士，如果杨带英知道任何被搁置的计划，那么她可否公布这些计划，向市政厅施压，要求市政厅交待原因并要求市政厅赶紧施工？

四、 更重要的一点是，杨带英表示这两名市议员每人每年获分十万令吉作为拨款。杨带应必须交待的就是：

a. 是不是只有这两名市议员获得这笔拨款？其他市议员，尤其是其他政党推介的市议员是否也获得同等数目的拨款？

b. 不管是不是每一名市议员能够获得这笔拨款，纳税人有权利知道：到底这笔拨款是从哪一个政府机构申请？是中央政府直接批发下来的，还是州政府机构，还是另有管道（如州议员的拨款或政党内部拨款）？

c. 如果证实这两名市议员每年可以获得十万令吉的拨款，那么这两名市议员必须交待他们如何使用这笔拨款。我们也要求这两名市议员出示一个清单，让人民知道到底人民所缴纳的税收用在什么地方。

我们固然对于杨带英在报章上的发言表示赞赏，但是既然杨带英已经向外暴露市政厅的部分败笔和内幕，基于良好施政的原则我们希望杨带英能够带头揭露更多内部黑幕。

Ethnic Relations Guidebook – the Ministry is taking time to vet it, but will the teaching of the subject be suspended until further notice?

The Minister of Higher Education Datuk Mustapa Mohamed was reported as saying in the Sun front page on 28th July 2006 that the Ethnic Relations Guidebook is under “thorough and careful review” by the Ministry.

Datuk Mustapa also said that they will not rush it, and that they will take their time perusing the contents of the guidebook.

One main question that the Minister has to answer is that whether the subject will still be taught in local universities pending on the study results of a panel of experts chaired by the Higher Educational Institution Management Department Director-General Prof. Datuk Hassan Said.

And if the answer is ‘yes’, and since the original guidebook is already withdrawn, it will leave with us a situation that the teaching of the subject, at least in UPM, will be a guideless subject, moreover when the Minister himself admitted that his Ministry is taking time to vet it.

If this is the situation, will not it be appropriate to also suspend the subject for the time being, pending on a full and comprehensive studies completed by the review panel chaired by the Higher Educational Institution Management Department Director-General Prof. Datuk Hassan Said?

Unless the Ministry is able to come out in time with a complete review of the subject for all public universities to adopt for teaching in this semester, otherwise the subject shall also be suspended temporarily pending on the study results.

Mustapa must be reminded that during the emergency motion tabled by DAPSY MP for Bandar Kuching YB Chong Chieng Jen, this is the last question that he has avoided to answer. Although he has later clarified that the subject will still be taught and that it is the content of the guidebook to be reviewed and rectified, it is definitely the time for him to come clear before he is questioned again on the matter in the next Parliamentary Seating.

《种族关系》指南书—部长表示其部门需要时间检讨其内容，但是这个科目是否会因此而暂时吊销，直至另行通知？

7月28日的《太阳报》封面新闻报道高教部长拿督幕斯达化的谈话，即起部门正在全面和小心地研究《种族关系》指南书的内容。

部长也表示他们不会匆忙行事，因此他们会小心翼翼的研究书本的内容。

其实，部长必须回答的一个主要问题就是：到底该科目是否会继续在国立大专开办？虽然高教部长表示国立大专将会继续开办这个科目，但是既然高教部已经收回这本指南书，并已经成立由高教部管理局总监拿督哈山赛益教授为首的研究委员会来重新研究指南书的内容，那么博大的这个科系岂不是成为‘没有指南书的科目’，尤其是高教部部长已经表示他的部门需要花费一些时间研究其内容？

如是这样，为何高教部不暂停这个科目？我们认为，除非高教部能够及时检讨指南书的内容，并及时拟定最新的修改的内容，要不然高教部有必要暂停开办这个科目。

当社青团古晋市国会议员张健仁在国会下议院提呈紧急动议辩论这个课题时，幕斯达化回避了这最后一个问题。虽然他过后表示该科目将继续在国立大专开办，但是有鉴于该指南书尚被检讨，因此他有必要在下届国会下议院开会之前向外界澄清，到底在指南书还没有拟定好的状况下，高教部是否一意孤行继续在国立大专开办此科目。

Change lifestyle – How to change lifestyle when there are no proper public transportation system in place?

On Monday evening, some 1200 Putra LRT passengers were stranded after several trains came to a halt near Masjid Jamek, Pasar Senia and Kampung Baru due to the failure of the computer system, causing at least five passengers fainted form the stuff condition in the train.

The Putra LRT service was disrupted for more than two hours on Monday after both the central computer system which controls the movement of trains and the backup computer system failed simultaneously.

Despite an open apology and promise to prepare an internal report within 48 hours and a comprehensive report on the incident within 30 days from Putra LRT operator Rapid KL’s CEO Rein Westra, the incident is certainly another alarming signal showing that public transportation system in Malaysia, especially rail services in Klang Valley is in a deplorable condition whereby passengers do not enjoy quality services they should deserve while at the same time they have to pay higher and higher fare.

Since the announcement of the 30 sen petrol price hike on 28th February 2006, the government has been urging the public to change lifestyle to accommodate for the higher fuel price and subsequently higher cost of living.

One of the many advices from the government to the people is to switch to public transportation to reduce dependence on gasoline-guzzling private vehicles. Despite similar calls from various government officers, the government should at the same time improve the quality of public transportation service in order to promote public transportation in Klang Valley.

It is important that the ‘pull and push’ factors are in place to ensure that public transportation system in Malaysia can become an added value to city life, not ending up of becoming a liability to the community.

One very serious problem that has to be overcome is the punctuality of public transportation system especially KTM Komuter and feeder bus services. Many commuters and passengers in Klang Valley are suffering from the lacks of punctuality from Komuter trains and Rapid KL buses.

For the past few years, DAP Selangor has been receiving numerous complaints on the service of KTM Komuters, either on late trains or on-the-spot cancellation of trains sevice without earlier notice which caught many innocent commuters in shock during peak hours. We even have complainants that complained KTM did not take actions despite several official complaints been made.

We view this as a serious matter which will definitely deteriorate the quality of life in Selangor, and certainly this is another reason why encouragement from the government to the people to switch to public transportations has always been poured with cold waters, simply because these systems are not reliable.

A major overhaul on our current public transportation in Klang Valley is a long-waited public exercise and must be conducted without wasting any time.

Therefore, we would like to suggest that:
1. An overhaul on public transportation in Klang Valley be conducted, which include a review right from the conceptual planning to construction of any public transportation facilities.
2. The implementation of the concept “Public transportation before development” which includes a mandatory public transportation be in place (including rail system) before developing any new areas.

3. Full disclosure of the said comprehensive report from RAPID KL on the incident to the public after 30 days, including the disclosure of the party responsible for the incident. The report should not also be made available to the Minister as the public deserve the right to know the real of the break-down.

如果我们没有良好的公共交通系统，我们如何能够改变我们的生活习惯？

在周一晚上，大约1千200名轻快铁搭客被困在布特拉轻快铁位于Masjid Jamek，Pasar Seni以及Kampung Baru车站的车厢。据称这是因为轻快铁公司的电脑控制系统出现的问题所导致的。这也造成该公司的五名搭客因长时间困在车厢，面对呼吸困难而晕倒。

布特拉轻快铁方面过后表示这场意外是因为控制轻快铁跑动的中央电脑控制系统和后备控制系统同时发生故障。

虽然吉隆坡综合交通网络有限公司总执行长雷恩威斯特已经公开向搭客道歉，并将会在48小时内完成一份内部报告书，然后在30天内提呈一分完整报告书予交通部，有关事件无疑再次提醒我们巴生谷河流域差强人意的公共交通系统。虽然搭客必须承担逐年增加的车资，但是他们却无法享有逐渐改善的服务素质。

虽然政府在今年2月28日宣布石油产品价格一律上涨30仙，并呼吁公众人士改变生活习惯，以应付逐渐上涨的石油价格和生活费，但是政府在做出这样呼吁的同时也应该逐渐改善巴生谷河流域的公共交通系统。

雪州行动党认为，如果我们要确保马来西亚的公共交通系统能够为我国的都市生活增值，那么政府除了大力推动公众多使用公共交通系统之外，也应同时改进该系统，吸引公众人士使用。只有通过这种双管齐下的方式，大马公共交通系统才能成功。

其中一个有关方面必须迫切解决的就是公共交通系统的准时程度。公共系统如果要取信于搭客，那么其准时成都扮演非常重要的角色。可悲的是，目前巴生谷河流域大多数的公共交通系统，尤其是马来亚铁道局提供的电动火车服务的行程除了经常耽误，导致上班一族和学生无法准时抵达目的地之外，有时甚至在最后一分钟取消整个火车行程，加剧搭客对该服务的信心。

在过去数年，雪州行动党接获无数次的投诉，有些投诉者更苦诉马来亚铁道局对他们所作出的正式投保无动于衷。

我们非常严重和认真看待这些事件，因为这反映雪州虽然贵为一个先进州，但是州内公共交通系统经常耽误，已无形降低州民的生活素质。这就是为和民众对政府‘改变生活习惯’的呼吁无动于衷的原因。

显而易见，我国的公共交通系统必须尽快动一场大手术。雪州行动党建议：
1. 从最初步的公共交通系统概念拟定到后期的承建工程，有关方面必须为巴生谷河流域的公共系统进行全面检讨和重整的工作。
2. 落实‘现有公共交通系统，后有发展计划’的概念，规定任何发展计划在获得有关方面的批准之前必须拥有完善良好的公共交通系统服务该地区。
3. 在三十天后全面公布吉隆坡综合交通网络有限公司提呈给交通部的完整报告书。我们认为这步骤是必要的，因为人民，尤其是搭客们必须知道到底当晚事发原因。

Assaults on SPF members – The management of UPM should have the courage to listen to opinions from civil society and the people

We strongly condemn the bureaucratic attitude of UPM management of not accepting a memorandum submitted by a group of NGOs and political parties. It is clear from here that the management of UPM is trying to push this issue as an internal issue rather than a national issue that concern the rights and benefits of the rakyat.

23 NGOs and political parties gather this morning in front of the Administration Building of UPM in order to submit a memorandum to UPM Deputy Vice Chancellor (Students Affairs) as well as to have an open dialogue with him concerning various issues that took place in UPM, topping the list is the most recent assault on several SPF students by another group of UPM students, claimed to be the leaders of UPM Students Representatives Council and Residential College Students Representative Committee.

Though we had earlier made an appointment, that a group of 20 people, representing various sectors and stakeholders would like to meet the Deputy Vice Chancellor, we were stopped and limited with only three persons to enter the office. Much to our dismay is that we are only received by a normal staff while reporters and representatives from the media are not allowed to follow to cover the event.

The management of UPM has portrayed an unacceptable attitude towards public scrutiny on what happened in the campus recently. It is the stand of DAPSY that right from the beginning, the issue should not be treated as a trivial issue in the campus as it has a very serious and far-reaching impact on the development and image of Malaysian Higher Education, especially those of the Public Institutions of Higher Education. More over, the students who alleged to behave unruly are claimed to be the leaders from the Students Representative Council, which is the highest students body in the university.

It is equally sad to witness that the bureaucrats in UPM refused to “turun padang” as urged by the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. The PM has openly called for high ranking government servants to go to the field (turun ke padang) in order to understand the problem of the general society as well as concerns of the grassroot communities. What we encounter today is definitely not in accordance with the PM’s call.


Much to our dismay, when we were addressing the groups of NGOs and political parties who came to the campus to submit the memorandum, there were a group of people disturbing the progress of our activity this morning, either by shouting or laughing at us. I went upstairs to check for their identities only to find that they were wearing UPM tags, which I failed to identify whether the tags are student tags or staff tags as the two are almost the same.

Regardless of whether they are students or staffs, we need to stress that the gathering we have this morning is a peaceful gathering and that there is no intention to disturb anybody. If the group of people who disturb us upstairs are students, and if it is so unfortunately that they are from the UPM Students Representative Council, what we can say is that the culture of gangsterism is already deep-rooted in the campus until these students do not even know the basic courtesy of respecting the rights of other people to organize activities. Their behaviors certainly do not fit in the definition of the conduct of a university student.

By witnessing all these ugly incidents, let us ask ourselves a question of whether this is the like of the university students our universities are teaching? There is so much stress on human capital from the government but are all these just meaningless rhetoric since these unruly students are unfortunately part of the “human capital” we have on hands?

Therefore, we call on the management of UPM to be courages to listen to opinions from civil society and the people. Public Institutions of Higher Learning is the hope of the country if we were to be a fully developed nation. The tolerant attitude put up by the administration such unruly and uncivilized acts will only deteriorate the higher education crisis that we are encountering now and we certainly would not like to witness this disease from spreading into other universities.

博大生动粗事件—博大校方应该勇敢接纳来自社会各团体的意见，聆听人民的意见

我们批评博大校方今日拒绝接纳23个的政党团体和非政府组织针对博大校园发生学生动粗事件随呈交的联合备忘录。很显然的，博大校方还是认为这是博大校园内的行政，外人不宜插手干预。

今天早上，23个政党团体和非政府组织的代表团前往博大校方行政楼会见掌管学生事务的博大副校长。虽然我们事前已和其办公室预约，即我们一行人将会前往成交备忘录，并要求和他本人对话，但是当我们一行人抵达现场时，博大校方只是派遣一名普通职员前来接见我们，并且限制我们只能委派三名代表进入楼上的办公室，而且不允许媒体和记者随同采访。

博大校方这种不重视公民社会意见的态度是不能令人接受的，社青团认为任何人士，包括博大校方，不应该把这事件视为校园内的小风波。博大学生动粗事件已经严重破坏马来西亚高等教育的形象。更深的是，涉事者更是博大学生代表理事会的成员。

首相曾经指示政府高级官员要‘Turun Padang’（意即要官员‘深入民间，体会问题的严重性以及亲自处理问题’），但是博大校方的态度显然和首相的呼吁相互违背。

更令人失望遗憾的是，当刚才一些团体代表在发言时，一群来历不明的人士在行政楼向我们发出各种干扰和揶揄声音。我刚才上楼查询，只看到他们佩戴博大人员的证件。由于博大学生和工作人员的身份证几乎一样，我无法认出到底他们是学生还是博大工作人员。

姑且不论他们是学生还是工作人员，我们要强调，今天早上的集会是和平集会，我们没有干扰任何人士的意图，但是如果这群学生恰好是博大生，如果他们同时也是博大学生代表理事会的领袖，那么我们只能说博大校园内的‘流氓文化’已经根深蒂固，以致这群学生根本不知道什么是礼仪廉耻。他们的行为举止根本不符合大专生的定义。

难道马来西亚培育的大专生就是这个样子？首相一直强调人力资本（Modal Insan）的培训，难道这些大专生就是我们要积极栽培的人力资本？

博大校方应该勇敢接纳来自社会各团体的意见，聆听人民的意见。高等学府是国家未来的希望，是国家培育人才的场合。校方不能一再纵容这群学生的举动，更不能一直袖手旁观，甚至是采取漠不关心，企图把问题扫入地毯下。

博大学生动粗事件—人权委员会应介入调查

任何曾经观看博大学生动粗短片的人士都会质问：到底我们的大专院校何以能够败坏知如此严重的地步，以致校方能够办上一场‘握手言和’的舞台剧，企图制造假象让人民以为学生动粗事件一经解决？

到底我国的大专院校还是不是追求卓越成就、寻找知识泉源的圣地，以致那些号称是博士教授的学术人员能够为了掩人耳目而制造假象和谎言？

博大校长聂幕斯达化昨日宣布成立由七名博大教授组成的调查委员会，以调查发生在博大校园的学生动粗事件。聂幕斯达化也公布这个调查委员会的七大调查方向。聂幕斯达化也呼吁和这起事件无关的人士不要参与其中。这七个调查方向就是：
• 对发生的事件进行调查
• 提问和会见有关人士，并参考和涉及者有关的所有资料或文件。
• 收集任何资料或文件用作调查用途。
• 根据收集到的证据和谈话内容分析及考虑。
• 确认涉及违反纪律的人士，并针对有关行为建议适当的纪律行动。
• 建议可资采纳的步骤，以确保类似事件不再发生。
• 提成调查委员会的报告予校长聂幕斯达化。

我们要质问的是，如果校方能够自导自演这出‘和解言和’，我们如何能够取信于这个调查委员会？调查委员会是否能够真正确认违反纪律的学生，即前进阵线的学生不会反过来被指为是违反纪律的学生，反之真正动粗的学生却继续逃之夭夭？

社青团恐怕校方企图通过调查委员会的七大调查方向，把调查焦点集中在短片中多名无辜的博大前进阵线学生，然后对他们施加惩罚性的。我们的担忧并不是没有根据的，因为这并不是博大校园第一次发生这样的事件，校方在这些案件中也多次采取偏袒‘亲校方阵线’学生的立场。

此外，针对聂幕斯达化的呼吁，即其他和这起事件的人士不要参与其中，社青团完全不能够明白什么是‘其他和这起事件的人士不要参与其中’。难道博大所发生的学生动粗事件与社会无关？难道这只是博大的家事，外人不宜插手？

社青团必须提醒聂幕斯达化，即博大学生动粗事件是一起涉及公众利益，以及必须紧急处理的特定事项。这起事件涉及的不仅是博大生的权益，它也同时影响马来西亚高等教育的素质和声望。聂幕斯达化不应忘记，博大学生动粗事件以及之前的《种族关系》教科书风波已经把马来西亚高等教育名誉扫地。如果他以为这是件还是博大‘自家儿的事’，那么他肯定大错特错。

虽然这个调查委员会已经在22日晚上召开第一次会议，但是有鉴于这个调查委员会是博大校方的内部调查委员会而失去其公信力，因此社青团这个调查委员会应该的调查方向应只局限于耿出当时滋事的学生。与此同时，我们建议大马人权委员介入调查，并且从人权、学生在校园的安全以及举办活动的自由和平等权利这三个角度，针对此次校园学生动粗事件进行更深入的研究和调查。

Unruly UPM students act - Conduct Open Investigation Now

DAPSY strongly condemn the latest students assault conducted by the a group of 40 students led by the UPM student representative council president who surrounded a group of Students Progressive Front (SPF) members and scolded them harshly for setting up the counter when the SPF is not a registered group.

Such unruly and uncivilized act is not only saddening, heart-brokening but also embarrassing the whole country, as well as students and graduates of other local public universities especially those from UPM!

Although university is a place to pursue higher level knowledge, it does not seem that the managements of public universities are concerned about academic freedom, excellence and student activism.

Previously we were talking about whether our students and children can perform academically or not in university studies, later we are worried of whether they are capable to secure a job after graduation. While we are still worried about this, it seems that some how we had to even worry for the safety of our students in the campus, maybe because of the “Samseng” students in high school have probably enrolled in local public universities.

Damage had been done and remedies must come fast to salvage the situation before more students are victimized and situations get deteriorated.

It will be most shocking if those who acted unruly are members of the Students Representative Council of UPM. As member of the Students Representative Council, instead of suppressing student’s rights, they should protect the right of the students. Even if they do not like activities organized by SPF, the best they can do is to stay away, or at least not to interfere and not to interrupt the running of the activities.

Therefore, DAPSY calls on the Office of UPM Deputy Vice Chancellor (Students Affairs) to conduct an open and immediate investigation against those who are involved in the unruly conduct and assault against “anti-establishment” students in UPM, as the tragedy has not only tarnished the image of Malaysian Higher Education, which is fast losing it’s academic shine, but also jeopardized efforts and calls from the government to established first world mentality, towering universities, promoting human capital etc.

立即公开调查博大校园内粗暴攻击博大生的粗暴行为

社青团强力谴责有博大学生代表理事会主席所领导的40 余名学生干扰博大前进阵线的活动，并无理粗暴对待前进阵线的学生。

这种粗暴、野蛮和物力的干扰不仅令人痛心疾首，甚至也在世人面前丢尽国家的脸。其他博大生和博大毕业生也会为他们这种举动而感到羞耻！

大学本应是追求学问和知识的地方，但是国立大专似乎对学术自由、学术卓越表现与学生运动表现的漠不关心。我们认为大专院校应该是弘扬学术自由、推动学术卓越表现和让学生运动充分发展的最佳场所。

在这之前，社会人士和父母们担心孩子能不能在大学的课业上有所表现，过后，我们担心的不再是表现，而是孩子在毕业后是否能够找到一份工作。当我们还在为他们但有时，我们现在也同时必须担忧孩子们在校园的安全，因为最近屡屡见报的流氓中学生很可能已经潜入大专学府。

有关当局必须在情况尚未恶化前从速采取补救行动。

如果这些举止粗暴的学生被查出是学生代表理事位的成员，这将会是令人相当震惊的事。身为学生代表理事会成员，他们的责任不是压制学生的权益，而是积极捍卫学生的权益。即使他们不喜欢前进阵线的活动，他们至少也可以不参与，何必干扰活动的进行呢？即使是《大专法令》或博大校规也没有赋权博大学生理事会这种权利去干扰他人在校园内的活动。

因此，社青团呼吁博大副校长办公室（学生事务）立即展开公开调查，耿出那些据此粗暴无礼学生的身份，因为他们的举动不仅严重损害在学术表现上逐渐退色的大马高等教育形象，也严重打击政府意欲打造第一世界思维，培养一流大学和人力资源的努力。

Something is very wrong with UPM

I am saddened by what I see in a video clip which shown the unruly, uncivilised act and assault on a group of UPM students from Students Progressive Front recently.

It is event more annoying that those "samseng" are claimed to be elected representative from UPM students council and Residential College Students Representative Council.

Elected students representatives should stand up to protect the democratic rights of each and every students, not the other way by standing by the adminisration of UPM to suppress the students.

If they do not like the activities organised by SPF, the best they can do is to stay away, or at least not to interfere. Who are they to interupt the running of the activities? What rights they have to do that? Such crazy rights are not even provided under the current draconian UUCA or the Tatatertib!

Something must be done to rectify this, the best UPM can do at the moment is to suspend these samseng from holding any elected posts in the campus pending on a full investigation.

呼吁州务大臣实行地方议员民选制，让地方议员肩负人民的委托进入地方政府，监督地方施政

让地方居民以选举的方式推选地方议员是当下大马丧失已久的草根民主。政府应该在这届国会大选之前逐步恢复地方议会选举，而不是以其他方式来掩盖地方施政的失败。雪州行动党呼吁州务大臣实行地方议员民选制，让地方议员肩负人民的委托进入地方政府，监督地方施政。

雪州州务大臣拿督斯里莫哈末基尔昨日在安邦再也市议会早会宣布州政府将会在9月15日遴选出的新届县市议员将破天荒委任多五名不具备政党背景的专业人士出任县市议员。州务大臣耶严厉谴责那些‘霸着舒服位子，只讲不做’的县市议员。

我们欢迎州务大臣谴责那些‘霸着舒服位子，只讲不做’的县市议员，但是我们认为，通过委任制度被遴选党人县市议员的专业人士毕竟没有得到人民的委托进入地方议会，这个制度还是违背基本的民主精神。

要把那些‘霸着舒服位子，只讲不做’的县市议员耿出县市议会，最好的方式就是通过票箱。

此外，虽然这些地方议员没有政党背景，但是我们能够确保他们在县市议会里能够完全独立吗？或许可以，但这并没有一定的保障。在任何一个正常的民主议会，执政党和在野党的声音必须同时存在，才能有效地把人民的心声上传下达。

就如其他奉行议会民主制度的国家，大马有三层政府：即联邦政府、州政府及地方政府。这三层政府本来应由人民选出，但是政府在1965年3月1日以马印对抗及国家安全为由暂时终止地方政府选举。

但是局势平静后迄今，政府不但没有落实承诺，恢复地方政府选举，还进一步修宪夺走人民票选地方政府的权利，改由州政府来委任地方议员。

这意味着人民手中应有的三张选票只剩下两张，人民的民主权利被削减，但是地方政府依然向人民征收门牌税。换言之，人民没有权利选代表，却有义务纳税，这完全不符合民主原则。

没有在野党监督的地方政府犹如一言堂，或一家没有查账员的公司。更糟糕的是，官委地方议员把职位当政治跳板，服务的对象是政治主子而非人民。在这之下，民权受践踏，民意不受尊重是必然的后果。

中止地方政府选举40年后的今天，地方政府沦为最腐败的公共部门之一。从各地人民所面对的种种民生问题，证明失去第三票对人民不利，也防碍国家发展。

如果要建设一个尊重民意及负责任文化，进而改善地方政府效率、减少贪污滥权、提高生产力与竞争力，我们只有恢复地方政府选举，打造健全的民主制度，归还这民主第三票予人民。州务大臣应该正视问题的症结，大刀阔斧推行地方议会选举，选出属于人民的代议士进入县市议会。

Open call to all elected representative in Petaling Jaya to support the initiatives and struggles of the residents

What is the meaning of obtaining the status of a full city when the residents of the city do not even have the opportunity to know the account of the governing body safeguarding the environment and basic amenities of the place they live?

This is the irony of the Petaling Jaya city day celebration on this coming 20th June 2006. MPPJ City Day Celebration Budget Committee officer Ikhwan Salim Sujuk claimed that “PJ cannot claim to the world that it has become a city” with the reduction of the City Day celebration budget reduced from RM 7.5 million to RM 2.0 million.

Accountability and transparency are the two major elements towards good governance in any public administration.

One of Abdullah’s trade-mark slogans as Prime Minister in the past three years was for the eradication of the “First-World infrastructure, Third-World Mentality” Malaysian malaise, which he elevated into a major national mission in the Ninth Malaysia Plan by calling for a “first-class mentality” among Malaysians.

If Ikhwan’s view can be a representative view for majority of the officers running the offices of MPPJ, then it is a gross dismay that local government office bearers have to date failed to understand the real substance of celebrating a City Day is the enhancement of accountability and transparency.

MPPJ can actually become a role model for, not only local councils in Selangor, but also local councils nationwide, that by becoming a City, MPPJ itself is willing to provide greater accountability and transparency in any aspect of its administration, as well as providing greater consultation with the residents regarding to any local projects.

It's sad to note too that not much MPs or ADUNs in Petaling Jaya have come out openly to support the movement which seeks for greater transparency from MBPJ. Moreover, the movement is initiated by the residents who had granted them handsome victory during the last General Election. Their silence will inevitably lead PJ residents to believe that they are on MPBJ's side.

People representatives in PJ should be the leading force to advocate for good governance and transparency in local government. Being MPs and ADUNs for constituencies which are located under the management of MBPJ administration, BN ADUNs and MPs in PJ should explain their deafening inactions.

公开呼吁八打灵再也得国州议员支持居民的斗争，即向八打灵再也市政厅争取更大的透明度和公信力

虽然地方政府向地方居民鸠收门牌税以及其他各类税务，同时管理地方居民的居住环境，提供基本的服务，但是如果居民无法了解到底地方政府如何使用居民所附环的各项费用，那么即使是升格为市，那又有什么意义呢？

这就是今年6月20日即将举行的八打灵再也城市日的吊诡之处。八打灵再也市政厅城市日（City Day）预算委员会主席伊科万萨林曾向《太阳报》表示，一旦庆典仪式的预算由当初的750万令吉一减再减至200万令吉后，“八打灵再也就无法告诉全世界，我们已经是一个城市了”。

在任何公共领域，透明度与公信力是两大良好施政的重要元素。

阿都拉出任首相三年来的其中一句名言就是要求大马人改变与去除‘第一世界基建、第三世界思维’通病。他在第九大马计划中，将建立起‘第一流思维’列为国家使命之一。

如果伊科万的看法也同时代表着市政厅高官的想法，那么这将是极度令人失望，因为地方政府高官似乎还不明白城市日庆典的真正意义在于透明度与公信力是否获得强化。

其实，八打灵再也升格为市一事可以为不仅全雪州其他地方议会，甚至是全国其他地方议会树立一个良好典范，即八打灵再也市政厅愿意在各项公共领域加强施政透明度与公信力，同时针对任何地方发展计划愿意与居民展开互动和对话。

此外，我们对八打灵再也的国州议员在这事件上选择保持沉默而感到失望，尤其是这项运动主要由居民推动的。这些国州议员不应忘记，就是灵市居民在上届大选让他们高票中选成为国州议员，他们的沉默无疑让人以为他们不是代表人民，而是代表市政厅。

身为人民代议士，他们其实应该在争取良好地方施政和透明度方面扮演带动的角色。对这些国阵国州议员来说，由于他们的选区属于市议会的管辖范围的重镇，因此他们更加积极扮演这角色，而不是保持沉默。

他们的持续沉默只是让人民愈发感觉它们并非是站在人民的那一边，而是站在政府的那一边。

政府这次修改1971年大专法令，跟巫统所成立的少年团（Putera UMNO）有莫大关系

政府这次修改1971年大专法令，跟巫统所成立的少年团（Putera UMNO）有莫大关系，而解除大专法令的紧箍咒，可以让更多在藉的国立或私立大学生，尽早加入巫统。

所有大专生可别高兴得太早，否则最后只会落得一场空。政府这次修改大专法令，主要跟巫统所成立的少年团（Putera UMNO）有莫大关系。

巫统少年团自成立以来，截至去年6月为止，在63万名巫青团员当中，有10万7千32人介于18至25岁，即隶属于少年团的成员。为了使这个人数急遽增长，让巫统领导的国阵能在来届大选取得突破，政府急切要修改1970年大专法令。

每一年，约有43万人在中学阶段毕业离校。若扣除20万名进入国立或私立大学深造者，意味着有23万人直接到社会工作。在这些人当中，有许多就是巫统所要招揽的对象。然而，巫统并不满足于这样的人数。为了确保能招纳更多有素质、受过高深学识的人才，唯一的方法就是先解除大专法令的紧箍咒，让更多还在国立或私立大学的学生，能够尽早加入巫统。

社青团认为，上述举动并不符合大专生的利益。高教部最终将依循执政党的意愿，展开修订大专法令的工作，让大专生可以顺利成为巫统或是国阵的成员；反之，他们要加入其他在野党，却被大专法令所限制。

因此，为了彰显自然公正的立法原则，高等教育部受促开放所有禁令，并公平对待朝野政党，让大专生可以自由选择加入任何政党。唯有这样，我们才能塑造具有第一流思维，以及具有批判精神的大专生。

在2005年7月，当时的高等教育部长沙菲益沙礼（Shafie Salleh）还在国会指政府不会检讨1971年大专法令。他当时说，大专法令并没有限制学生的言论自由和集会自由。然而，同年的11月，当时的高教部副部长胡亚桥就宣布政府要成立一个委员会，以检讨现有的大专法令。

既然政府宣称大专法令，没有限制大专生的言论和集会自由，但这个立场却在短短4个月内倒转过来，如今还急在不到一年的时间内提交国会修改。短短一年内内阁对大专法令的立场，竟然会出现这180度的转变，背后是否有不可告人的动机？

政府计划在今年9月提交到国会修改大专法令。这是大专法令自1971年成立出以来，第5次提交到国会修改，而最近一次则是在1996年修令。这些年来，大专生组织一直要求修改大专法令，但始终不得要领。

Pindaan AUKU harus berlandaskan keseimbangan kuasa di antara Mahasiswa-mahasiswi, ahli-ahli akademik dan pentadbiran Universiti

Pindaan AUKU harus berlandaskan keseimbangan kuasa di antara Mahasiswa-mahasiswi, ahli-ahli akademik dan pentadbiran Universiti serta prinsip “hakmilik sama” di antara ketiga-tiganya.

Fasal 15, 15A, 15C, AUKU telah menidakkan hak asasi manusia mahasiswa-mahasiswi yang diperuntukkan di bawah Artikel 8 dan 10 Perlembagaan Persekutuan, dan dengan itu mesti dimansuhkan. Fasal 15B dan 15D perlu dipinda supaya mahasiswa-mahasiswi yang dituduh melakukan kegiatan jenayah diberi layanan selaras dengan undang-undang jenayah di Malaysia. Fasal 16, 16A, 16B dan 16C AUKU harus dipinda untuk mengelakkan kuasa pembubaran dan penggantungan mana-mana persatuan Mahasiswa tidak terlalu tertumpu pada Naib Canselor.

Peranan yang dimainkan serta pengaruh oleh Menteri Pengajian Tinggi dalam AUKU harus dikurangkan. Menteri hanya bertanggungjawab untuk menetapkan dasar pembangunan pengajian tinggi di Malaysia secara makroskopik, manakala pengurusan dan pentadbiran mikroskopik Universiti harus dikendali sepenuhnya oleh Lembaga Pengarah Universiti.

Ahli-ahli Lembaga Pengarah Universiti harus terdiri daripada wakil ketiga-tiga pihak Pentadbiran, Ahli-ahli Akademik dan Mahasiswa-mahasiswi, yang dipilih oleh pertubuhan masing-masing untuk menganggotai Lembaga Pengarah Universiti melalui pilihanraya. Pindaan harus dijalankan terhadap fasal-fasal dalam AUKU yang menakrifkan penubuhan Lembaga Pengarah Universiti.

Perlantikan Naib Canselor harus ditentukan sepenuhnya oleh Senat Universiti tanpa pengaruh daripada mana-mana pihak sama ada secara langsung atau secara tidak langsung demi mempertahankan kebebasan Universiti.

Pengerusi Lembaga Pengarah Universiti harus dilantik oleh oleh Senat di kalangan ahli-ahli Lembaga Pengarah Universiti selepas melalui pemilihan dalaman Lembaga Pengarah Universiti. Beliau akan terpilih jikalau beliau mendapat undi majoriti.

Ahli-ahli Senat harus dianggotai oleh mereka yang tidak berkepentingan politik dan majoritinya mestilah terdiri daripada Ahli-ahli Akademik yang sudah bersara, disegani masyarakat akademik antarabangsa serta disanjungi masyarakat awam.

Semua Dekan Fakulti harus dipilih oleh mahasiswa-mahasiswi dan para akademik Fakulti berkenaan dan kemudian dilantik oleh Senat Universiti.

Majlis Perwakilan Mahasiswa Universiti harus diberi nafas, jiwa, peranan dan fungsi baru. MPM harus dijadikan sebagai badan mahasiswa induk yang berautonomi dan mempunyai sumber kewangannya sendiri.

Pindaan AUKU – Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi harus bersikap liberal terhadap pendapat dan pandangan daripada pelbagai pihak

Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi dalam meminda AUKU harus bersikap liberal terhadap pendapat dan pandangan daripada pelbagai pihak termasuk pertubuhan-pertubuhan mahasiswa yang tidak berdaftar kerana mereka juga merupakan sebahagian daripada masyarakat kita

Timbalan Menteri Pengajian Tinggi Datuk Ong Tee Keat telah menyatakan bahawa beliau hanya bertanggungjawab untuk mengaturkan dialog and taklimat dengan Ahli-ahli Parlimen dari BN dan pembangkang, oleh itu tidak dapat memberi ulasan terdapat perjumpaan dengan pertubuhan-pertubuhan mahasiswa,.

Ulasan Ong Tee Keat ini menunjukkan mentaliti beliau masih berada di paras dunia kelas ketiga. Mana-mana menteri yang responsif dan peka terhadap pandangan rakyat akan pasti mengambil tindakan segera untuk menyelesaikan sebarang masalah dan persoalan yang tertimbul akibat pelaksanaan mana-mana dasar kerajaan.

Walaupun Ong bukan seorang Menteri penuh dan tugasnya hanya untul mengadakan dialog dan taklimat dengan Ahli-ahli Parlimen, tetapi kami berpendapat Ong tidak harus dikekang dengan birokrasi ini. Jikalau pihak Kementerian ikhlas untuk mendengar pandangan-pandangan daripada pelbagai pihak, maka Ong sebagai Timbalan Menteri harus merujuk perkara ini kepada Menteri untuk dibawa berbincang bersama sama ada perjumpaan harus diadakan dengan pertubuhan-pertubuhan mahasiswa yang tidak berdaftar.

Sementara itu, Kementerian telah mengeluarkan surat jemputan kepada semua Ahli Parlimen BN dan Pembangkang bahawa mereka dijemput untuk menghadiri satu taklimat yang akan diadakan di Parlimen berkenaan dengan Rang Undang-undang Pemindaan AUKU. Taklimat untuk Ahli-ahli Parlimen BN dijadualkan pada esok, Hari Isnin, 10hb Julai 2006 manakala taklimat dengan Ahli-ahli Parlimen Pembangkang dijadualkan pada 13hb Julai 2006, iaitu Hari Khamis yang akan datang.

Dengan itu, kami berharap pihak Kementerian akan mengumunkan juga Ahli-ahli Panel yang membuat pindaan-pindaan terhadap AUKU, termasuk mereka yang menyandang jawatan Pengerusi dan Ahli-ahli Jawatankuasanya, serta mengumumkan terma-terma rujukannya (Terms of Reference).


Ini berikutan dengan jawapan bertulis daripada Menteri Pengajian Tinggi, Datuk Mustapa Mohamed terhadap pertanyaan lisan Ahli Parlimen DAP untuk Batu Gajah dan Naib Pengerusi DAPSY berkenaan dengan perkembangan terbaru pemindaan AUKU. Menteri pada masa itu hanya menjawab bahawa Kementerian telah menubuhkan sebuah Jawatankuasa Panel Penilaian Semula (Review Panel) dan ahli-ahlinya terdiri daripada pensyarah-pensyarah kursus undang-undang dari IPTA tempatan seperti UM, UiTM, UIA dan sebagainya.

Adalah menjadi satu tanda soal besar terhadap kandungan pindaan yang akan dibuat apabila orang ramai tidak mengetahui terma-terma rujukan dan siapa yang menganggotai Review Panel itu. Apa yang membimbangkan kami ialah jikalau ini tidak dilakukan, kemungkinan besar AUKU yang dipinda nanti akan menjadi lebih draconian dan menindas, sekaligus memusnahkan kecermelangan dan kebebasan akademik di IPTA-IPTA.

MBPJ billboard issue – Expect not only Termizi to explain, but also ADUNs and MPs in PJ to explain their deafening inactions.

Newly appointed Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya (MBPJ) mayor Datuk Termizi Ahmad Puteh not only has assumed a totally new job for him, but also has an all new question for him to answer – whether the MBPJ has already completed on the total number of billboards in Petaling Jaya under the administration on MBPJ?

This is the question raised when the Mayor was quoted by China Press KL/Sel Section through a tele-conversation that the City Hall is in still in the process of investigating the total number of outdoor advertising billboards in the whole Petaling Jaya under its jurisdiction.

This was inconsistent with some documents sourced from an anonymous party that the city hall has already issued warning letter to one of the many advertising companies. It will be mind-boggling to notice that the city hall “is still in the process of investigation” in July 2006 when the city hall had as early as July 2005 issued warning letter to outdoor advertising companies, alerting them to demolish illegal outdoor advertising billboards or the city hall will take actions against them.

How would the city hall be able to warn companies on illegal outdoor advertising billboard in July 2005 when the investigation is yet to be completed in July 2006?

Termizi should think twice in finalizing his reply to His Majesty the Sultan of Selangor, Sultan Sharafudding Abdul Aziz Shah. Otherwise, he will commit a serious crime of not speaking the truth to His Majesty.

It's sad to note too that not much MPs or ADUNs in Petaling Jaya have come out openly to support the movement which seeks for greater transparency from MBPJ. Moreover, the movement is initiated by the residents who had granted them handsome victory during the last General Election. Their silence will inevitably lead PJ residents to believe that they are on MPBJ's side.

People representatives in PJ should be the leading force to advocate for good governance and transparency in local government. Being MPs and ADUNs for a constituency which is the heartland of MBPJ’s administration, YB Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun, Bukit Lanjan ADUN, YB Ms. Yong Dai Ying, Taman Medan ADUN, YB Abdul Wahab Ibrahim, Bukit Gasing ADUN, YB Datuk Lim Thuan Seng (State Exco) cannot afford to be seemed missing from action. (Kampung Tunku ADUN and Damansara Utama Adun, YB Datuk Dr. Wong Sai Hou and YB Datuk Lim Choon Kin are MBPJ Councillors, PJ Selatan MP YB Datuk Lim Siang Chai has voiced out his grouses on MBPJ yesterday)

In relation to MBPJ billboard issue, we expect not only Termizi to explain, but also ADUNs and MPs in PJ to explain their deafening inactions. A letter will be issued to them to highlight the issue and to urge them to take up the issue.

Police report against MPPJ on City Day.

I have lodged a police report against MPPJ on City Day (20th June 2006). Below is my police report. Hopefully, this can create another round of public pressure against MPPJ, now MBPJ, to be more accountable to taxpayers.

Below is my police report:

Saya ingin membuat satu laporan polis berkenaan dengan maklum balas yang diberi oleh Majlis Perbandaran Petaling Jaya (MPPJ) terhadap satu memorandum yang diserahkan oleh All PJ Pro Action Committee (APPAC) yang telah diserahkan kepada yang Di-Pertua MPPJ, Datuk Termizi pada 9 Jun 2006.

APPAC merupakan satu gabungan persatuan penduduk dan badan bukan kerajaan di Petaling Jaya. Dalam memorandum yang diserahkan kepada MPPJ itu, terdapat tiga perkara yang telah dibangkitkan untuk mendapat penjelasan daripada MPPJ.

Antara isu-isu yang dibangkitkan di sini ialah:
1. Cadangan oleh MPPJ untuk memberi konsesi papan tanda iklan di Petaling Jaya selama 15 tahun kepada sebuah konsortium yang diketuai oleh sebuah syarikat iklan iaitu Seni Jaya Snd. Bhd.

APPAC telah menyatakan bahawa mereka telah meminta MPPJ untuk membuka akaun mereka untuk menjelaskan pendapatan yang akan diperolehi oleh MPPJ melalui penyewaan ruang papan tanda iklan kerana industri papan tanda iklan ini dikatakan merupakan satu industri yang mampu mendatangkan pendapatan yang lumayan.

MPPJ telah memberi maklum balas yang samar dan ringkas dengan menyatakan bahawa rundingan konsesi tersebut masih sedang berjalan dan mereka akan mengambil kira satu pendapatan yang bersesuaian, waktu konsesi yang bersesuain, aspek-aspek keselematan dan perundangan.

2. MPPJ juga diminta untuk membuka akaunnya demi membuktikan bahawa perlunya MPPJ untuk menaikkan cukai taksiran sebanyak 10% pada awal tahun ini.

APPAC dalam beberapa sidang akhbar dan surat-menyurat dengan MPPJ telah meminta MPPJ untuk memberi maklumat penuh dan terperinci terhadap akaun MPPJ. Walaupun Yang Di-Pertua pada mula-mulanya bersetuju untuk memberi maklumat terperinci kepada APPAC, tetapi beliau kemudian memakan janjinya sendiri dalam satu laporan akhbar The Star bertarikh 5 Mac 2006 di mana YDP dilaporakan berkata bahawa akaun MPPJ tidak perlu didedahkan kepada mana-mana pun kerana MPPJ sendiri mempunyai sistem pemantauannya untuk memeriksa akaun MPPJ.

3. APPAC juga bertanya MPPJ berkenaan dengan cadangan daripada Kementerian Kerja Raya untuk memberi kontrak pembinaan jejantas kepada Polydimension Sdn. Bhd.

APPAC telah meminta MPPJ untuk memastikan bahawa sebarang cadangan yang serupa perlu mendapat rundingan sepenuhnya dengan penduduk-penduduk setempat mengikut peruntukan dalam Akta Perancangan Bandar dan Desa 1976.

APPAC juga meminta MPPJ untuk memastikan bahawa semua tapak pembinaan dikekalkan ke tahap pra-pembinaan supaya pendengaran umum (public hearing) dapat dijalankan sebelum kebenaran merancang dikeluarkan oleh MPPJ secara rasminya.

MPPJ memaklum balas dengan meminta APPAC menghubungi Kementerian Kerja Raja untuk mendapat maklumat terperinci.

Maklum balas yang diberikan oleh MPPJ adalah tidak memuaskan, tidak selari dengan prinsip ketelusan dan pentadbiran beramanah yang telah menjadi seruan YAB Perdana Menteri semasa beliau menyandang jawatan Perdana Menteri.

Selari dengan semangat dan prinsip keterlusan dan akauntabiliti, MPPJ harus membentangkan satu laporan terperinci akaunnya bukan sahaja kepada APPAC, tetapi kepada pembayar-pembayar cukai di Petaling Jaya dan bukannya menyembunyikannya daripada pemantauan umum.

Selain itu, selaras dengan Local Agenda 21 (di mana MPPJ merupakan salah satu PBT yang dipilih untuk menyertai program ini), MPPJ harus berunding dengan penduduk-penduduk terlebih dahulu dalam mana-mana projek sebelum ianya bermula, khususnya dalam penswastaan papan tanda iklan kerana tiada peruntukan undang-undang di bawah Akta Perancangan Bandar dan Desa 1976 kepada mana-mana PBT untuk menswastakan papan tanda iklan.

Berkenaan dengan cadangan daripada Kementerian Kerja Raya untuk memberi kontrak pembinaan jejantas kepada Polydimension Sdn. Bhd, MPPJ harus berpendirian tegas untuk menolak sebarang percubaan daripada mana-mana pihak untuk menjalankan mana-mana projek pembinaan tanpa menjalankan rundingan / pendengaran umum dengan penduduk-penduduk terlebih dahulu.

Oleh kerana MPPJ enggan memberi maklumat terperinci terhadap akaunnya, saya meminta PDRM untuk menjalankan siasatan terperinci terhadap akaunnya. Sekian laporan saya.

Lau Weng San

PJ City Day celebration can only be meaningful if good governance, transparency and accountability are enhanced.

What is the meaning of obtaining the status of a full city when the residents of the city do not even have the opportunity to know the account of the governing body safeguarding the environment and basic amenities of the place they live?

This is the irony of the Petaling Jaya city day celebration on this coming 20th June 2006. MPPJ City Day Celebration Budget Committee officer Ikhwan Salim Sujuk claimed that “PJ cannot claim to the world that it has become a city” with the reduction of the City Day celebration budget reduced from RM 7.5 million to RM 2.0 million.

Accountability and transparency are the two major elements towards good governance in any public administration.

One of Abdullah’s trade-mark slogans as Prime Minister in the past three years was for the eradication of the “First-World infrastructure, Third-World Mentality” Malaysian malaise, which he elevated into a major national mission in the Ninth Malaysia Plan by calling for a “first-class mentality” among Malaysians

If Ikhwan’s view can be a representative view for majority of the officers running the offices of MPPJ, then it is a gross dismay that local government office bearers have to date failed to understand the real substance of celebrating a City Day is the enhancement of accountability and transparency.

MPPJ can actually become a role model for, not only local councils in Selangor, but also local councils nationwide, that by becoming a City, MPPJ itself is willing to provide greater accountability and transparency in any aspect of its administration, as well as providing greater consultation with the residents regarding to any local projects.

And it is the failure of MPPJ of doing so that turns the celebration into a meaningless, non people-oriented official fiesta with very little participation from the residents as they grossly does not feel the significance of obtaining City-ship if their voices, concerns and demands are not properly looked into.

Yesterday, it was reported from The Sun (http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=14436) and The Star (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/6/16/central/14553356&sec=central) that “The All PJ Pro Action Committee (APPAC) will go ahead and lodge a police report against the Petaling Jaya Municipal Council (MPPJ), after the latter failed to give a satisfactory explanation and response to a memorandum raising concerns on alleged mismanagement of taxpayers' funds”.

All PJ Pro Action Committee (APPAC) chairman Edward Lee was also quoted as saying, “In compliance with the Local Agenda 21 precepts and as stakeholders and taxpayers, we are asking MPPJ to be allowed to attend the meeting for the hearing to consider the concession terms and conditions. This will give residents an opportunity to voice their objections to any unfair conditions that may slip through before approval is given for signature.”

Although the Mentri Besar had once advised MPPJ “not to go to wars with the residents”, the response from the residents clearly shows that MPPJ is heading for wars with MPPJ.

Therefore, in regards to the 15 years concession to be given to Seni Jaya Sdn. Bhd as well as issues concerning the agreement between the ministry and Poly Dimension Sdn Bhd to build overhead bridges and gantries along the Federal Highway in Petaling Jaya, DAP PJ Action Team will lodge a police report to demand full disclosure of the details from MPPJ.

The City Day celebration can only be meaningful if good governance, transparency and accountability are enhanced.

只有强化地方政府的良好施政、透明度与公信力，八打灵再也城市日庆典才会变得有意义

虽然地方政府向地方居民鸠收门牌税以及其他各类税务，同时管理地方居民的居住环境，提供基本的服务，但是如果居民无法了解到底地方政府如何使用居民所附环的各项费用，那么即使是升格为市，那又有什么意义呢？

这就是今年6月20日即将举行的八打灵再也城市日的吊诡之处。八打灵再也市议会城市日（City Day）预算委员会主席伊科万萨林曾向《太阳报》表示，一旦庆典仪式的预算由当初的750万令吉一减再减至200万令吉后，“八打灵再也就无法告诉全世界，我们已经是一个城市了”。

在任何公共领域，透明度与公信力是两大良好施政的重要元素。

阿都拉出任首相三年来的其中一句名言就是要求大马人改变与去除‘第一世界基建、第三世界思维’通病。他在第九大马计划中，将建立起‘第一流思维’列为国家使命之一。

如果伊科万的看法也同时代表着市议会高官的想法，那么这将是极度令人失望，因为地方政府高官似乎还不明白城市日庆典的真正意义在于透明度与公信力是否获得强化。

其实，八打灵再也升格为市一事可以为不仅全雪州其他地方议会，甚至是全国其他地方议会树立一个良好典范，即八打灵再也市议会（以及随后的八打灵再也市政厅）愿意在各项公共领域加强施政透明度与公信力，同时针对任何地方发展计划愿意与居民展开互动和对话。

也就是八打灵再也市议会无法做到这点，这才导致后来的城市日庆典沦为毫无疑义、非民为尊、无法吸引市民踊跃参加的官方活动。既然市民的声音和要求无法获得当局的重视，那么市民自然而然也会对市议会的官方活动不感兴趣，甚至避而远之。

昨日《太阳报》（http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=14436）和《星报》报（http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/6/16/central/14553356&sec=central）报道全八打灵再也行动委员会（All PJ Pro Action Committee - APPAC）基于市议会无法针对纳税人款项处理事项提供令人满意的解释，准备向警方报案。

该委员会主席Edward Lee表示，他们希望当局能够依循地方议程21的原则，允许居民出席广告牌经营权的谈判事宜，以便居民能够在市议会批准任何计划之前，针对任何不合理条件，向市议会提出建议或反对意见。

虽然雪州州务大臣曾一度要求市议会不要‘与居民开战’，但是从市议会针对居民备忘录的答复来看，市议会已经向市民开战。

有鉴于此，针对市议会打算与Seni Jaya有限公司签署长达15年的广告牌经营权一事；以及工程部与Poly Dimension有限公司要在联邦大道建立行人天桥和广告牌事件，八打灵再也火箭行动队将会向警方报案，要求市议会针对这两个课题提供详细的资料。

只有在当局强化良好施政、公信力与透明度的当儿，城市日庆典才会变得更有意义。

Ulu Kelang Kampung Pasir Tambahan landslide - Menteri Besar should table a white paper in the coming state legislative assembly meeting to explain of

The state government should table a white paper in the coming state assembly to provide a full explanation on whether the state government agencies and local governments had failed in conducting proper maintenance, observation, monitoring and surveillance works in the recent Ulu Kelang Kampung Pasir Tambahan landslide incident.

The statement of the Menteri Besar is of no difference with the statement of the state government made in 12 years ago during the occurrence of the Highland Tower tragedy. The statement is also almost the same when the Bukit Cahaya fiasco was exposed one year ago.

The state government also did not reveal the numbers of complaints made by the residents. The residents are also not advised adequately on any precautions to be taken to avoid such tragedy. Instead of pointing fingers to the developers, the state government to date has not even mentioned a single word on the responsibilities the state government agencies and local government have to bear.

This is most irresponsible as the government cannot push away the responsibility to developers. In fact, local government should be the main body to monitor all works ranging from planning to construction as they are the custodian of local by-laws. It is questionable when local government and state government agencies had failed to take any actions against any parties, including irresponsible developers. Corrective actions should be taken before any tragedy happens, not after it happens.

As for the case of Taman Zooview which was constructed more than 20 years ago when it was later transferred to local government, it was the responsibility of local government to look after the residential area. Moreover, local government also collects assessment fees from the residents and it is the responsibility of local government to monitor the environment.

The conditions for local government to take over any completed projects are that the local government must be satisfied that the projects are safe for human habitation. How can the state government discover that houses in Taman Zooview are not issued CFs and there is no proper drainage system in place? This clearly shows that there is also negligence from the government in which the government failed to provide proper monitoring in protecting the environment.

Therefore, the state government should table a white paper in the coming state assembly to provide a full explanation on all these matters and queries.

What would happen if they did not come to DAP?

Pak Lah will pay a visit to Hulu Yam Vege Farm today, and this was the same farm that seeked helps from DAP Selangor about more than a year ago when the state government development arm, Permodalan Negeri Selangor Berhad wanted to take back the land for housing development projects. Eviction notices were issued to the farmers.

After several campaigns from the DAP, including press conferences, visits to the farms and even a petition to MPs in the Parliament, the state government finally decided to rent the land to the farmers to continue their faming activities.

And now, they managed to secure their land for farming...I wonder what would happen if they did not come to DAP in 2004.

SEA Park police took bribe to release stolen car

From Sin Chew Metro:

寻获失车须付钱取回
稽查员投诉警方滥权
updated:2006-06-09 11:33:14 MYT

（八打灵再也讯）欲取回失窃车辆困难重重，华裔稽查员投诉警员故意刁难，付钱后才让他取回失车！

投诉者庄耀辉（31岁），来自百乐花园。他在行动党雪州宣传秘书刘永山及行动党非政府组织秘书刘天球的陪同下召开新闻发布会，作出上述投诉。

於今年5月4日早上，当他发现其国产威拉失窃后，他马上到东南亚花园警局报案。

警员致电索拖车费

5月11日，一名声称是哥打白沙罗警局的警员致电给他，指已在白沙罗找到其车子，要他给拖车费。

“我认为这不合理，又怀疑他的身分，盖了电话后就叫保险公司去处理。”

过后，车行的人致电那名警员，但对方否认知道车的下落。

他表示，过后他亲自致电对方，问他车子的下落，但对方再一次否认，且态度恶劣，还骂他神经病，并挑战他找律师起诉他。

接待警员劝不要报案

在5月14日，他针对这件事向东南亚花园警局报案，但当初接他案子查案官不在，接待他的警员劝他不要报案，同时若他怀疑那名警员的身分，叫他自己去追查。

他非常不满意警方的这种办事态度。

到了5月17日，保险公司通知他找到失车，并可以到SS2警局去取车。不过到了警局，警方却故意刁难，拒绝让保险公司拍照，也不让他取回车辆。

他指出，当时拖车员给了这名警员100令吉，但对方生气他被当成乞丐而拒收。

他说，那时僵持了很久，对方都不让他拿回车辆，不过最终同意让保险公司拍照。

给250令吉取回失车

在庄耀辉向其老板求助后，老板派了另一个拖车员陪他到到警局取车。由於不够钱，这一次拖车员替他给了警员250令吉，终於把车取回了。

他明白这样给钱警方是不对的行为，但是为了要用车，他实在没有办法。

令他更震惊的是，在取回车以后，竟然发现车内的驾驶盘及里程表不翼而飞。

刘永山∶将陪事主反贪局报案

行动党雪州宣传秘书刘永山表示，他将在下星期陪同庄耀辉前往反贪污局报案。

他说，行动党对这起事件深表关注，并吁请政府成立警察独立调查委员会，遏止警方的害群之马继续犯下贪污滥权的恶行。

行动党非政府组织秘书刘天球表示，警方的行为让身为受害者的升斗小民两次受到伤害，发生了很多不合理的事情。

他表示，政府绝对有必要成立警察独立调委员会，来遏止警方贪污滥权的恶行。

反贪污局投诉热线是1800 8888 44。 （星洲日报／大都会·2005/06/08）

呼吁雪州州务大臣立即下令所有地方政府，停止所有高山地区发展计划

雪州州务大臣基尔必须立即下令所有地方政府，停止所有高山地区发展计划，并重新研究每一项计划对环境所造成的破坏，以确保雪州的高山发展计划没有违反各项政府指南和法令。

州务大臣一开始便把矛头指向发展商。我们固然认为发展商也必须负上一部分的责任，但是由州政府管辖的地方政府以及其他州政府机构，如州环境局、州环境委员会也因为监督不力而必须负上一部分的责任，尤其是地方政府。

州务大臣在报章上表示：“我将确保未来的山区发展计划将会得到更严厉的研究” 。他也表示他将会‘锁紧螺丝’，确保发展商不会轻易发展山区。（《星报》2006年6月1日）。

我们固然欢迎州务大臣措词强烈的批评无良发展商，但是州务大臣不应该忘记，不管发展商怎么贪婪，市议会如果能够严厉监督或执行法令的权限，发展商最终还是必须根据法令行事。市议会扮演的就是法令执行者的角色。

如果州务大臣言出必行，那么我们吁请州务大臣至少能够解释一下两宗高山发展计划：

1. 士拉央邓普勒公园－发展商近年来大肆发展位于雪州士拉央巴鲁新镇（Bandar Baru Selanyang）的邓普勒公园附近的山区（拉贡山－Bkt Lagong和莫达山－Bkt Botak）。这则新闻首先刊登在2005年2月27日的《大马前锋报》，过后中文报章也进行跟进报道。当地居民表示，有关发展工程在年初时正进行如火如荼地进行，当农业公园事件爆发过后，发展工程便宣告暂停。

直至今天，有迹象显示诸如推泥铲山的工程正在进行。居民也多次观察到有数辆铲泥机和“神手”在山区推泥铲山。虽然州政府批准有关发展计划，但是这并不代表有关计划就可以坦然进行，因为该区除了是隆北重要的绿肺之外，也是重要的积水区之一。著名的巴都水坝（Empangan Batu）就在该山林附近。森林一旦被铲平，那么隆北的人民就失去一个宝贵的水源。

由于发展商蓬勃的发展计划，该地区原有的森林已经被发展商大肆破坏。州务大臣是否愿意介入此事？

2. 蒲种爱以淡森林保留地边缘地带的发展计划－来自Sri Penaga、D’Palma、Saraka、Sri Cempaka、Desa Tanjung以及D’Kiara公寓的居民已经在2006年3月28日所举行的一场公听会上联署上书予梳邦再也市议会规划与发展局，表示他们反对在该森林保留地进行任何发展计划。

根据市议会发给居民的通知信，申请发展该森林保留地的是雪州资本有限公司（Syarikat Permodalan Negeri Selangor－该公司也是雪州州政府的投资翼膀），Citrasama有限公司以及Benua Ehsan有限公司。这三间公司已经向梳邦再也市议会申请规划批准书（Kebenaran Merancang）以发展该片土地。

由于该地区倾斜度超过35度，州务大臣是否将下令梳邦再也市议会重新检讨有关发展计划。

除此以外，雪州行动党不能苟同安邦再也市议会主席拿督阿末沙菲依的言论，即如果市议会发出停工令，那么土崩将会更快发生的言论。（见《星洲日报》6月3日，第17面）。

我们认为这是不负责任的言论。市议会主席并不了解土崩之发生，除危及财产安全，也将会害及人命。危险的工程如果一日延续下去，那么其将会进一步破坏周照环境，导致土崩更容易发生。

市议会主席的言论让我们更加相信州政府在处理这事件也应该同时向地方政府下手。由于事态严重，病入膏肓，州政府必须下重药。首先应该处理的就是要求所有地方议会冻结所有在高山和倾斜山区进行的发展计划，然后成立委员会逐个发展计划翻案调查每一项发展计划是否遵循合法的程序。我们也要求州政府能够在州议会颁布一份白皮书。毕竟，这不是第一次雪州发生类似事件，我们需要知道到底州政府计划采取、或正在、已经采取什么行动，确保历史不再重演。

Mandarin dalam pengambilan pekerja: Dasar kerajaan yang perlu diubah dan bukannya dasar pengambilan pekerja swasta

Kerajaan BN tidak harus melihat perkara syarat pengambilan pekerja yang fasih berbahasa Mandarin dari sudut perkauman.

Tuduhan bahawa syarat yang dikenakan oleh syarikat swasta bukan Bumiputera ini juga tidak wajar dilihat sebagai langkah “bias”. Apa yang perlu difahami ialah syarikat swasta bukan Bumiputera ini juga merupakan syarikat swasta yang mempunyai hak mutlak untuk menetapkan mana-mana syarat yang dirasakan diperlukan oleh syarikat itu dengan berpandukan keperluan dalaman dan keperluan pasaran syarikat.

Oleh itu, adalah amat tidak wajar untuk kerajaan BN melihat isu ini dari sudut perkauman. Syarikat swasta bukan Bumiputera ini bukan syarikat GLC yang akan dibantu oleh kerajaan dari segi kewangan apabila mengalami kerugian, oleh itu, sebarang keputusan dan dasar syarikat swasta ini perlu ditetapkan dengan berpandukan keperluan dalaman dan pasaran, termasuk dasar dan syarat pengambilan pekerja baru.

Seperti mana-mana syarikat multinasional yang lain yangf beroperasi di Malaysia, kebanyakkan syarikat ini memestikan pekerja-pekerjanya menguasai Bahasa Inggeris dengan bagus, sama ada dari segi menulis, membaca dan memahami. Iklan pengambilan pekerja syarikat-syarikat ini turut disiarkan dalam surat khabar tiap-tiap hari. Dengan itu, adakah kerajaan akan beranggapan bahawa tindakan syarikat-syarikat ini sebagai “bias” terhadap mereka yang tidak fasih dan pandai berbahasa Inggeris? Adakah kerajaan akan turut meminta syarikat-syarikat ini menurunkan syarat pengambilan pekerja mereka?

Kerajaan BN perlu memahami bahawa apabila penguasaan bahasa tertentu diletakkan sebagai syarat tertentu dalam pengambilan kerja adalah disebabkan oleh keperluan dalaman dan pasaran. Misalnya di beberapa syarikat Jepun yang beroperasi di Malaysia, penguasaan Bahasa Jepun disyaratkan kerana mereka ini perlu berurusan dengan ibu pejabat di Jepun ataupun mereka ini perlu memahami dokumen-dokumen dari Jepun yang ditulis dalam Bahasa Jepun.

Oleh itu, masalah pokok bukan sama ada syarikat itu syarikat bumiputera atau tidak atau bahasanya, tetapi masalahnya ialah penguasaan bahasa asing oleh mahasiswa-mahasisiwi kini. Daripada perspektif yang lebih luas, ianya adalah berkaitan dengan daya saingan mahasiswa-mahasiswi kita.

Kerajaan perlu mengubah dasar pendidikan dengan menggalakkan lebih ramai pelajar sekolah dan penuntut universiti untuk menguasai lebih daripada dua bahasa dan bukan meminta syarikat-syarikat swasta untuk menurunkan syarat mereka. Keengganan kerajaan untuk mengubahsuai dasarnya dan pada masa yang sama meminta syarikat-syarikat swasta untuk menurunkan syarat mereka hanya akan menjejaskan keyakinan pelabur asing untuk melabur di Malaysia dan seterusnya akan menjejaskan aktiviti perniagaan swasta di Malaysia.

与其向私人公司的征聘，政府倒不如修改政策，提升国内毕业大专生的语文能力，加强他们的竞争能力

国阵政府不应该以种族眼光来看待非土著公司在征聘广告注明大学毕业的应徵者必须懂得华文一事。

把这认为‘是一种偏见思想’的说法也是不正确的。非土著公司也是私人公司，私人公司在征聘政策上列入任何条件和要求，是有关公司为了符合市场或内部需求的决定。

因此政府不应该以简单的种族眼光来看待私人公司征聘广告的内容。私人公司并不像一般的政联公司（GLC），在亏损时能够获得政府的资助，因此私人公司的任何决策必然以市场和盈利为导向，包括在聘用人才为公司效劳方面也必须顾及市场的需求。

就好比许多跨国公司一样，许多在大马操作的跨国公司大多规定应聘者（不管是否具备大学文凭）必须掌握良好的英语会话、书写和理解能力。这些私人公司的征聘广告每日见报，难道政府也认为这是偏见？难道政府也将会要求这些私人公司废除这个条件不成？

私人公司在语文方面的要求除了基于市场的需求之外，有时候也是因为内部需求。例如一些在大马操作的日本公司要求本地雇员掌握基本的日语会话、书写和理解能力，因为他们经常与日本的总公司交涉，以及阅读日本总公司的日文文件。

因此，问题的焦点不是在于这些公司是否是土著还是非土著公司，也不是规定的是华文或者是马来文，而是我国大专生的语文能力。宏观来说，这也牵涉到我国大专生的竞争能力。

与其向私人公司的征聘，政府倒不如修改政策，提升国内毕业大专生的语文能力，加强他们的竞争能力，而不是本末倒置，要求商家改变征聘政策。

要做到这点，政府应该鼓励各族群学生学习外语，尤其是国立大专院校的学生，进而加强他们的竞争能力。光要求私人公司降低要求，最终将会打击国内的私人商业活动，进而打击外国投资者对我国的信心。

Protest on oil and tariff hikes on 28th May 2006

A man was hand-cuffed and brought to the police car.








The FRU started shooting water cannon to the crowds.








I was barred from taking photos by this FRU member. I almost fall down because of his pushing!








"Look! You guys better get off my sight! Or I will bite you!"











Dr Hatta was addressing the crowd. He was the first speaker.








I have seen the copter a few times, but never it is so close to my eyesight until I can see the word "POLIS" beneath it. It was trying to fly low to interupt the demonstration with strong wind.






A group of protestors came out with a banner.








"Come on lah! Respect my right! Look at the Constitution! Read what it says!"

Tough fights in Kuching

For those who has been following my blog for the past one week, I am sorry for not being to update it as I am now in Kuching helping out our three candidates in Kuching to fight their way to the Sarawak State Legislative Assembly Hall.

It is a tough and close fight in Kuching as SUPP is facing the toughest fight in almost every town and city in Sarawak.

Sarawak urban Chinese seems to demand for a wind of change, of course, Chong Chieng Jen (35, lawyer, MP for Bandar Kuching) is a well known face in Kuching and he will fight SUPP’s Alfred Yap in Kota Sentosa. Yap is also a well-known figure in Kuching and it is alleged that he was ordered by CM to come to Kota Sentosa in order to prevent Chong to be elected as ADUN.

According to Chong, it is important for him to be elected to the State Legislative Assembly Hall so that he can continue to expose all the wrong-doings and malpractices in the State Government.

The warfare in Kuching is quite organized and the morale of the members here are very high. All are expecting either two or three seats from Kuching.

The other two DAP candidates are Violet Yong Wui Wui (29, lawyer, DAP candidate for Pending) and Voon Lee Shan (51, lawyer, DAP candidate for Batu Lintang). Violet Yong will face incumbent Sim Kheng Hui, an old guard in Pending while Voon will be fighting incumbent Chan Seng Khai who is also the Mayor of Majlis Bandaraya Kuching Selatan.

All there warfare are tough fight and we shall see if the Rocket can fly high in Kuching on 20th May.

卢永平是否只满足于一间从霹雳州搬迁过来的华小，还是要一劳永逸地解决城市华小长期爆满的问题？

卢永平是否只满足于一间从霹雳州搬迁过来的华小，还是要一劳永逸地解决城市华小长期爆满的问题？

行动党大脚区国会议员章瑛在4月26日迫问教长希山慕丁政府在第九大马计划下将会建多少间华小和淡小时，民政党浦种区国会议员卢永平当时站出來，竟然以syabas称赞教长勤奋，感谢教长批准将一所华小搬到他的选区！

希山慕丁当时并没有回答章瑛的问题：在第九大马计划下将兴建多少所华小和淡小；反而说章瑛只为了捞取政治利益，没有为落后的国小争取拨款。

令人震惊的是卢永平甘做希山慕丁的鹰爪，提高声量要求章瑛坐下，不要纠缠不清，并且还站起来为希山慕丁辩护，以个案说教育部批准其他州属的华小搬迁来蒲种为例，因此希山是照顾全民的部长。

对于是否在第九大马计划下增建新的华小和淡小，虽然部长迄今依然没有做出正式的答复，但是行动党必须提醒卢永平，即国家独立宪法保障各民族学习和传授母语教育的权利。如果国阵政府诚心诚意维护各族群的利益，那么国阵政府应该依据需求增建华小和淡小，以及依据学生人数比例分配教育拨款。

从八十年代到2005年，华小生增加100%，但是华小却从1312 间降至1287间；董教总的统计显示，单在吉隆坡、新山和巴生谷这三个华裔集中的地区，根据官方的标準，就欠缺 137间华小，如果从现在到 2020年政府却不增建华小，那么可预测屆时华小不足的问题将会更严重。

在教育拨款方面，副教育部长拿督诺奥玛在国会表示，在第九大马计划下，当局一共拨出1亿7千430万令吉和6千480万令吉的发展拨款给华小和淡小。直至去年六月，全国共有645,669名学生和98,579名学生分别在华小和淡小就读。

第九大马计划一共拨出48亿3730万令吉的发展拨款予所有小学。基于公平的原则，华小和淡小应该分别获得10亿2550万令吉（或占总数的21.2巴仙）和1千5480令吉（或占总数的3.2巴仙）的发展拨款。

然而，根据以下图表，在第九大马计划下，华小仅仅获得1亿7430万令吉（或发展拨款总数的3.6巴仙）的拨款，而淡小则只获得6480万令吉（或发展拨款总数的1.3巴仙）的发展拨款。


2005年小学学校总数以及在第九大马计划下所拨出的教育拨款

所有学校　 国小　 巴仙率　 华小　 巴仙率　 淡小　 巴仙率　
学生总数　 3,044,977 2,300,729 75.6 645,669 21.2 98,579 3.2
第九大马计划拨款（百万令吉） 4,837.3 4,598.2 95.1 174.3 3.6 64.8 1.3

华小本应获得10亿2550万令吉的拨款，但是现在仅获得1亿7430万令吉的拨款；淡小本应获得1千5480万令吉的拨款，但是现在却只享有6480万令吉的拨款。这根本无法应付华小和淡小的发展需求，而且是非常不公平、不合理、不负责任，同时也违背国阵公平对待所有族群的大选宣言。

搬迁华小只是治标不治本的权宜之计。它并非是长远解决华小爆满之策。部长赞同从霹雳州搬迁一间华小至蒲种区，但是我们挑战卢永平到底这是否会解决蒲种区华小爆满的问题？这又是否能够解决全国各地城市华小爆满的困境？

民政党自称是个多元种族的政党，却也公认是华基政党，在槟城以华裔首席部长诉求华裔的支持，但是它的国会议员卢永平却无视华社所面对困境，只因为教育部批准一间华小搬到他的选区，他就不理会其他地区的人民所面对困境。

这么见树不见林的短视之见，如何负起为民争取公平的政策责任？我们希望卢永平能够向在2004年支持他的华裔选民清楚交代：到底他是否只满足于一间华小，而且还是一间从霹雳州搬迁过来的华小，而不是一劳永逸地解决城市华小长期爆满的问题？

Public Rally in Singapore, More Than 10,000 - Believe it or not??

Frankly speaking, I have never imagined that this will happen or this can happen in Singapore - a public rally organised by opposition party, Worker's Party, which drew more than 10,000 voters in a pseudo-democratic society like Singapore.

Malaysians can no longer tolerate reason that Public Rally is a threat to public safety, unless we admit that we are less capable than Singapore to preserve public safety and order, which I believe is not the case here in Malaysia.

If Singapore's Opposition can be granted permit to organise such public rally, there's no reason why Oppositions in Malaysia not allowed so.

So, where is our permit, Pak Lah?