South KL Waste Transfer Station in Kampung Bohol – It’s the time for DBKL and Ministry for Local Government to explain

DAP Selangor believes that now is the right time for the government to decide on the fate of South KL Waste Transfer Station (SKLTS)

The people affected have organized themselves to protest this project when the media announced this project earlier this year.

We have to bear in mind that it is a general perception that Puchong has increasingly became the dumping site of Klang Valley, resulting in severe environmental problem in Puchong. If the government proceeds to construct this transfer station in Kampung Bohol, this perception will certainly deepen.

Parliamentary Secretary of the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, Dr S. Subramaniam said in the Parliament on 4th April, Monday that the Ministry of Housing and Local Government only serves as a technical consultant whereby the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) will be managing the South Kuala Lumpur Transfer Station, which will be collecting solid waste from households in Southern Kuala Lumpur before sending to Bukit Tagar Landfill or Broga incinerators for thermal treatment.

Dr S. Subramanian also said that his ministry will convey the grouses, complaints and opinions of the affected people in that area to DBKL.

It is disappointing that the Ministry was unable to deliver a full and proper explanation pertaining to the construction of the transfer station which is believed to have an adverse impact on people’s livelihood in that area.

Being the manager of the transfer station, the failure of DBKL to provide a public explanation is equally disappointing especially when the issue has been several times highlighted by the press and that the people are eagerly waiting for an answer from DBKL?

Far from being a convincing answer, Subramaniam’s explanation that his Ministry is only serving as a Technical consultant is widely regarded as mere rhetoric without addressing the following issues:
• The EIA report has mentioned that the area is one of the largest residential area in Kuala Lumpur with 79,323 houses in this area in 2000. It is questionable that the area is still regarded as “suitable” for a solid waste transfer station.
• The Selangor state government has claimed that they are not informed of any proposal to build any solid waste transfer station nearby the boundary of Kuala Lumpur – Selangor.

These are among some of the arguments included in a official objection to the DEIA report submitted to the Department of Environment on 24th February 2006 filed by DAP Selangor, in which DAP Selangor has yet been informed any decision on the DEIA report to date.

Despite the technical parts of the EIA Report, the second question that would raise many queries is that there are only a total of 487 people interviewed on the acceptance of the proposal. This is reported in the press which it itself is already a question as to how the views of 487 persons can represent the views of an estimated 100,000 people residing around the area? To carry out any public survey, it is normal that a sampling of 1000 interviews is the minimum in order to reduce errors.

The public survey generated form the EIA report also informed that a total of 226 out of 487 residents (or 66.9% of the total residents) had expressed their disagreement towards the project. Cy-waste, the project proponent of SKLTS also claimed in it’s EIA report that the public used to misunderstand that SKLTS is a solid waste incinerator or landfill project, and that they will “employ professional PR firm to undertake the dissemination of correct information and to educate the public on the positive impacts of the project has on the environment”

This is not the impression given when according to the Star dated 20th January 2006, Cy-waste Sdn. Bhd. Chief Executive Officer Daud Ahmad was reported as saying “We held a dialogue with residents from the area in December and they must be satisfied with our answers, which is why there is no objection so far''.

I had earlier on late February 2006 asked that if Cy-waste had organized the said dialogue with residents from the area in December 2005, why now the residents would turn their back on them roughly one month later. Who exactly had Cy-waste met on December 2005? How did they conduct the dialogue?

It would seems that my earlier question coincide well with the findings in the EIA, which unfortunately affect the credibility of Cy-waste as there are inconsistency in their answer.

As to now, will DBKL proceed with this project? Is DBKL fully empowered to put aside this project which has triggered the anger and frustration of the people?

The people are longing for a decision, and it is the right time for DBKL and the Ministry of Housing and Local Government to come out with a full explanation without any delay.

甘榜波何兴建隆南固体废料集运站—是时候要求政府交代

针对政府计划在吉隆坡甘榜波何兴建隆南固体废料集运站，雪州行动党认为，现在已经是时候要求政府针对这个计划的去留做出全面的交代。

随着这个计划在今年年初通过媒体公告天下后，受影响的居民已经组织起来，大力反对这项计划。
蒲种一带已经因为Bukit Nanas土埋场而每天必须忍受各项环境污染问题，如果政府一意孤行要在原地兴建这项计划，政府无疑是要把蒲种当作是把巴生谷河流域的垃圾场。

房屋及地方政府部政务次长S.苏巴马廉于4月3日在国会表示在隆南固体废料集运站计划中，该部仅扮演技术顾问的角色，反之吉隆坡市政局才是真正管理该废料集运中心。S.苏巴马廉表示该部将会把民间的投诉与不满传达给吉隆坡市政局。

该部显然无法针对这项关系地方居民日常作业和生活的计划提供令人满意、全面和详细的解释。

作为该垃圾集运中心的管理人，吉隆坡市政局迄今无法给予人们一个合理的解释。这也是同样令人失望的，尤其是这课题已经多次出现在报章上，而且人民一直殷切等待市政局的回应。

苏巴马廉表示该部该部仅扮演技术顾问的角色。与其说这是一个令人满意、全面和详细的解释，倒不如说它是一个忽略以下争议的官腔：
• 该计划的环境评估报告书表示该计划位处吉隆坡最大的住宅区之一。吉隆坡士布爹－甘榜波何一带在2000年已有79,323间屋子。在人口如此稠密的地区兴建一座垃圾集运中心是否恰当呢？
• 雪州政府表示他们由始至终并不知道当局要在雪兰莪－吉隆坡边界兴建一座垃圾集运中心。这显示吉隆坡市政局不仅没有咨询当地的吉隆坡市民，市政局也没有咨询雪州的任何一个官方单位。

这些争议都一一列入在雪兰莪州行动党于2006年2月24日提呈给环境局的正式抗议书。迄今雪州行动党尚未接获有关方面的回应。

除了技术性细节之外，该报告也提及一共有487名人士针对这项计划而接受访问调查以了解他们是否接受这项计划。问题在于这487名人士的看法又如何能够代表该地区大约十万名居民的看法呢？必须知道的是，一般民调所采用的访问调查人数是最少一千名。这份报告又如何确实487名人士的看法会比1000名人士的看法更具代表性？

更惊讶的是，487名受访居民中的226名居民（或总数的66.9巴仙）表示他们反对该计划。承建这项计划的Cy-waste有限公司在环境影响评估报告书中指出居民经常误解隆南垃圾转运站是另一个垃圾焚化炉计划或土埋场计划，因此他们‘将会雇佣一个专业公众关系公司以确保公众人士能够获得正确的资讯，并且同时教育公众，以让他们知道该垃圾转运计划所带来的正面好处。’

这与之前在2006年1月20日《星报》引述Cy-waste有限公司道勿阿末的谈话有所出入。他说该公司在2005年12月已经和受影响的居民举办一项对话会。他说：“居民必须满意我们的答案，这就是为何迄今没有反对声音。”

我曾经在2月下旬提问：为何事隔一个月之后，蒲种以及金銮镇居民现在却通过报章表达他们的反对声音？到底Cy-waste和居民的对话会是如何进行？Cy-waste到底又和谁对话？

这显示我之前所提出的质疑和这份报告书里面提到居民反对这项计划是一致的。很不幸的，这也恰好显示Cy-waste公司的言论似有误导之嫌。

到底吉隆坡市政局会否继续这个计划？市政局是否拥有绝对的权利搁置这项计划？

有鉴于此，现在已是时候让房屋及地方政府部以及吉隆坡市政局针对隆南固体废料集运中心的去留做一个交待，而不是一再拖延此事。

Three major steps to resolve Pest Control Agreement fiasco

Subang Jaya Municipal Council MPSJ has recently clarified their stand on the pest control ruing fiasco, claiming that the several pest control firms that collected money from business operators, but did not rid their premises of the pests and police are monitoring and investigating such firms. The council also added that there were firms that closed down after operating for only a few months.

This is a weak reason as the council cannot justify its reason to hire a consortium which is neither accredited by the Pesticide Board (Under the Department of Agriculture) nor recognized by Pest Control Association of Malaysia, to run the required pest control exercise for business operators under its jurisdiction.

Whether it is a genuine intention from the Council to “protect the rights of the business operators” or to maintain the cleanliness of areas under the Council’s jurisdiction, the core question is whether the assigned pest-control companies are selected through a professional, transparent and fair procedure.

The Sun dated 10th August 2006 has carried a headline repot on the issue. It is reported that:
“Replying to queries from the Sun, an official of the Pesticides Board confirmed that the 10 companies do not have pest control operator licences as required under the Pesticides Act 1974 - and have not applied for it.”

“And yet, all business premises under the jurisdiction of these two councils are forced to appoint these companies under the council's two panels - at a standard cost of RM600 - to fumigate their premises before they can renew their business licenses annually.”

“It is noted that some of these companies have only a RM2 paid-up capital and were set up recently.”

“To justify its selection, the MPSJ had said in a statement last Friday (Aug 4, 2006) that the companies in their panel have pesticide applicator licences.”

“To this, the board official said having a pesticides applicator licence does not mean one can run a pesticide or fumigation business.”

“To do that, he said, one needs a pesticide operator licence. However, one can get this; one needs sales and storage licence for one's premises, and a premise licence from the local authority.”

“A pesticide aplicator can only be licensed once he has passed the Pesticides Board annual examination.”

“MPSJ president Datuk Mohd Arif Ab. Rahman, when told of this revelation, expressed surprise and said he would check on it.”

It is prevalent to us that there are serious confusions and contradictions between Lee Hwa Beng’s comment and the Council’s statement:

1. If the Council were to assign a designated pest control companies, why companies registered and recognized by the PCAM and Pesticide Board not selected?

2. Lee Hwa Beng claimed that the Council only appoint companies accredited by Pesticide Board, but later in a statement issued by the Council, out of the seven companies mentioned, there are only five accredited by the Board (please refer to a newspaper report published in The Sun dated 8th August 2006, page 11). The rest must ‘get one in one to six-month time’.

a. If there are companies not yet accredited by the Board, why does MPSJ appoint them? Could MPSJ not wait until the other two companies accredited before they are appointed by MPSJ?

b. If there is any accident occurs when these companies are conducting pest control exercises, causing casualties, will the Councils bear any responsibility?

c. What is more serious, why is it that none of these seven companies appointed by the council are registered and accredited with the Pesticide Board after checking as claimed by the Board? Who is not telling the truth?

3. Why did the Councils appoint these companies in a rush without carrying out an detailed background searching? A lot of these companies are newl established and their directors are very young, what sorts of track records they have until MPSJ can appoint them?

4. Lee Haw Beng clained that during th Council’s Full Board Meeting in July, he has suggested to the Council not to appoint companies which are not recognized b the Pesticide Board.

However, Lee Hwa Beng was reported as saying in Malaysiakini.com that companies not accredited by the pesticide board under the Agriculture Ministry would not be recognized by the Subang Jaya Municipality Council (MPSJ) to provide business premises with certificates of pest control treatments. So, apparently, has Lee’s suggestion finally adopted by the council? Why are there contractions between his statement as Councilor and the Council’s statement?

Will the Council’s President and Lee Hwa Beng clarify this during their “Meet The People” session tomorrow in MPSJ?

MPSJ and MPSepang shall adopt three major steps to resolve the fiasco – suspend the order, hold a dialog and re-elect the companies transparently and openly.

Pest Control companies which entered an agreement with MPSJ and MPSepang are not only unrecognized by Pest Control Association of Malaysia but also th

With concern to the recent ruling from Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ) which requires all commercial outlet owners under its jurisdiction to sign up with a consortium (SJ Pest Control Consortium Sdn. Bhd.) for pest control services with charges higher than market price prior to renewal or new application of trade license, Subang Jaya ADUN cum MPSJ councilor YB Datuk Lee Hwa Beng claimed in a Malaysiakini report that the council will not employ companies which are not recognized by the Pesticide Board under the Agriculture Department.

Since Lee Hwa Beng mentioned about Pesticide Board under the Agriculture Department, I have tried to obtain the approved companies list from the Board, initially done through the website.

The website shows that any person who is employed to conduct pest control exercise in others’ compound using pesticides, the person must obtain a license issued by the Pesticide Board. The license is subjected to renewal every two years and it is non-transferable.

There is also a list of approved companies in the website. Although the list is almost the same as the list issued by Pest Control Association of Malaysia, it is ensure that the consortium approved by MPSJ (Konsortium SJ Pest Control Sdn. Bhd.) and it’s members (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.) and the four companies approved by Majlis Perbandaran Sepang or MPSepang (Salak Pest Control Sdn. Bhd., Wismanis Sdn. Bhd., Lembah Dahlia Sdn. Bhd. and Koswasta Asia Sdn. Bhd.) do not appear on any of the lists.

This only means that these companies are not only unrecognized by PCAM, but also Pesticide Board under the Department of Agriculture. If this is the case, is Lee Hwa Beng’s statement contradicting the decision of the Council?

More important is that these unrecognized companies can be charged under 1975 Pesticide Act. Will MPSJ and MPSepang be charged as well, ending up with both councils have to fork out taxpayers’ money to pay fines?

Before this, we have written to the Presidents of both Councils, urging them based on the principles of accountability, transparency and good governance to:
1. Immediately suspend the implementation of this ruling until there is a clear and acceptable explanation from both Councils on this matter. Both Councils should also explain when it enters into an agreement with private consortium/companies without consulting the taxpayers.
2. Immediately reveal the contents of the contracts in order to avoid both Councils from entering any unjust contract with any private entity which will cause damage to both Councils and their taxpayers.
3. Immediately arrange for a three-party negotiation between the owners (the taxpayers), the consortium/private companies and both Councils to reach for a solution, so as to avoid innocent owners to sign any contract with the consortium/companies without adequate consultations on what have happened behind.

Unfortunately, there are no proper replies from any of the Councils’ officers. What is more worrying is that other than the three reasons mentioned above on why the Councils should immediately suspend this ruling, there seems to be another reason why the two Councils should suspend the ruling as they could be held liable under 1974 Pesticide Act when they allowed unrecognized pest control companies to operate within their jurisdiction.

Therefore, we urge Lee Hwa Beng to seriously answer the question of why the council could only recognize one consortium to handle pest control exercise within the council’s jurisdiction, which is the core question remain unanswered to date.

内阁特别会议应该拟定一项长期的防范罪案大蓝图，制定五大策略打击罪犯，而不是一再头痛医头，脚痛医脚

国内各大城小镇的治安日益败坏已经是不争之事实。就在这两天，全国至少发生四宗罪案。

案例（一）：一名19岁的拉曼学院生王子阳昨日下午在旺沙玛朱上学途中，遭两名穿著黑衣黑裤、手持棍子和小刀的攫夺匪跟踪。王子阳在发现情况不对劲后拔腿就逃，两名匪徒追到一个嘛嘛档附近时，才因档口有人而逃离现场。相信攫夺匪已经知道“马青先锋队”的巡逻时间是介於晚上8点至午夜12点，所以他们才会刻意选择在白天干案，以避开先锋队。

案例（二）：25岁华裔女郎黄秋玲前日在关丹购物广场内的楼梯间被打抢，结果在纠缠间与攫匪双双摔下楼梯后不治。死者是在8月6日晚上8时许被送入邻近的关丹医药中心（KMC）抢救后，最终因脑部严重撞伤而与8月7日早上11时15分左右，证实不治身亡。

案例（三）：发生在亚罗士打。一名16岁的电员诺达郁在上周六晚上（8月5日）外出没有回家。结果尸体作日中午在吉北瓜拉尼浪波卡村一个胶园被人发现。死者双手有伤，警方初步相信死者是遭人捆绑而后奸杀。

案例（四）：发生在今天八打灵再也加星路。六名持械匪徒今早闯入一间洋房抢劫，抢走事主50万令吉的财物，过后还尝试驾走事主的明车，但是却不得而尝。

两天之内，我国各地发生四宗轻重不一的罪案、抢劫案和企图抢劫案，严重突显我国治安日益败坏，即使保安一再加强的旺沙玛朱和国安部副部长拿督胡亚桥的选区也无法幸免，证明假如我们不从整顿警方的破案效率夏收，即使马青派遣一百名先锋队配合自愿警卫队人员到所谓的‘黑区’巡逻也是于事无补。

虽然我国在两年前曾经掀起一股全国性的反攫夺和防范罪案的运动，但是却无奈后竟不足，加上政府只是即席性的回应和加强警队在黑取得巡逻，没有全面落实一套完整详细的计划，结果全国各地的罪案率，尤其是攫夺案率再次飙升。

报章与媒体报道罪案是希望通过报道让人民即时掌握国家治安状况的最佳管道，但是长短期来说，我们需要政府拟定给类措施，加强国内各大城镇的治安。要达致这个目标，人民需要一名全职的国安部部长领导和整顿警队，打击罪案，改善治安，恢复人民及外资对我国治安的信心。

目前国安部部长是首相本人。除此以外，首相也同时担任财政部长。一人兼任三个繁重职位显然是下下之举。首相若不能拔出更多的时间和精力领导内安部，为了国民及国家的利益，应辞去内安部长职，另委一名全职的部长领导该部门。

政府有必要体现更大的决心改善国内治安，因此呢个特别会议应该拟定一项长期的防范罪案大蓝图，制定六大策略打击罪犯，而非只在发生引起民愤的案件时说说话，但却没有具体的行动，等到另一宗案件发生再引起人民不安吋，又再一次的发表同样的说话。全国人民所期待的是打击罪案，改善治安的行动，而非一次又一次的光说不做，让人民一再失望。

这五大策略就是：
一、 全面提升大马皇家警察部队的运作，以便能够在两年之内，无论是从仪器配备、破案率、人权醒觉和尊重等等很亮京对服务素质的各种指标达致先进国家的水平。
二、 善用警力打击罪案活动。虽然目前全国有9万名警员，但是只有不超过6%的警力（或7千名警员）是花在打击罪案。目前是警方把这个巴仙率提升至至少20%的水平。
三、 拟定全国警察打蓝图，并且根据这个蓝图在各个警区拟定警区治安蓝图。除了拟定特定的指标来处理警区警员的工作量和表现之外，也拟订降低罪案的指标。这个蓝图也必须着重人民的参与，让人民在防止罪案方面能够成为警方的耳目。
四、 赋权地方上的查案官更大的权利。地方查案官往往是最熟悉地方事宜的人士，也是在防范罪案上位处最前线的警员。如果在查案方面地方警局需要请示警区总部的总查案官，那么这无形中将降低警方破案的效率。
五、 教育及防范工作。政府必须通过媒介和各级政府机构推动民众教育功。这里的政府指的不仅是联邦政府，同时也包括州政府和地方政府的机构。地方政府也扮演重要的角色，尤其是在打造安全城市方面，我国许多地方政府上有许多不足之处。

A feeling of being ignored by the Council

I was in Menara MBPJ, participated in the Budget Dialogue 2007 and 2008m organised by the City Council. Frankly, it was a commendable experience for me as I don't remember of any councils in Selangor or even any councils in my homestate, Perak does this.

Well I submitted a nine-point queries cum proposal to the council. For your information, these are probably the most last-minute kind of skatches that I have ever done, thanks to the last-minute kind of materials given by the Council.

I therefore raised one point in my speech, that I hope the dialogue will be a continuous one, and not a one-off PR exercise just to fulfill the requirement of Local Agenda 21, as most of us who attended the meeting are not adequately supplied with any information for us to provide fruitful inputs to the Council to prepare the Budget. This is why I asked a lot of questions in my submission as I believe the answers to the questions are very important to enlighten us in understanding more about the budget. Moreover, the Council is talking about "Self-sustaining based on a balance budget".

I just wonder how they can appreciate my questions, judging from the eye-contacts I have with the council officer who chair the meeting....she did not jot down what I say (or she is expecting me to write in to her afterwards?). When I was speaking, coincidently, the Mayor was sitting behind, I saw him, and I purposely tried to have eye-contact with him when I talked about billboard, about periodic announcement from his office on the number of billboards taken down every week, he did not seem to be happy with my talks, and he just ignored any eye-contact with me....

Well, these were what I experienced....perhaps the officers are shocked: how come we have one DAP fellow to kacau our show? (I was informed much later that there were attempts from the ground to stop me from talking. Reason being that I am not representing any RA/RT)

Well, I mentioned right from the beginning that I came in my capacity of a resident in SEA Park and a person who works in Paramount Garden. As long as I am a taxpayer to the Council, I think I deserve all the rights to be there. Probably, the problem started when I also mentioned loud and clear that I am also a member of DAP.

However tough it is, I think this is what we should do, we are merely carrying out our responsibilities as a responsible political party.

As a result of the lacks of accountability and transparency, the residents have retaliated. Of course, this is a commendable courageous move. PJ shall take the lead to change, and it's residents are doing a good job.

Seruan Kepada Pihak Polis Untuk Mempertingkatkan Prestasi Polis Dalam Memerangi Aktiviti-Aktiviti Jenayah

Memorandum yang diserahkan kepada Ketua Polis Negeri Selangor....

4hb Ogos 2006

DCP Dato’ Yahya bin Udin,
Ketua Polis Negeri Selangor
Ibu Pejabat Polis Kontinjen Selangor
Seksyen 9, Persiaran Kayangan,
Peti Surat 7036,
40912 Shah Alam,
Selangor. Melalui Tangan / Tanpa Prejudis

Y. Bhg Dato’

Seruan Kepada Pihak Polis Untuk Mempertingkatkan Prestasi Polis Dalam Memerangi Aktiviti-Aktiviti Jenayah

Salah satu sebab Suruhanjaya Diraja Penambahbaikan Perjalanan dan Pengurusan Polis Di-Raja Malaysia ditubuhkan selepas Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi menjadi Perdana Menteri adalah kerana kebingungan dan ketidakpuasan hati rakyat terhadap kejadian jenayaj yang semakin terjadi seperti perogolan dan pembunuhan Canny Ong pada Jun 2003 serta kematian-kematian yang disebabkan oleh peragut-peragut di mana kes-kes jenayah sebegini boleh dielakkan.

Berbanding dengan keselamatan awam negara kita pada tahun-tahun 50-an, 60-an dan 70-an, keadaan telah menjadi semakin serious sejak kebelakangan ini, di mana rakyat tidak mengira bangsa, agama, budaya dan jantina berasa semakin terancam, sama ada dari segi nyawa mereka ataupun harta benda mereka.

Pembunuhan yang langsung tidak berperi-kemanusiaan sepeti apa yang terjadi pada pelajar 18 tahun yang bernama Lee Kean Yip dari Ipoh di Wangsa Maju sekali lagi menimbulkan tanda soal terhadap keberkesanan polis dalam pembanterasan jenayah.

Perlu diingatkan bahawa kualiti kehidupan tidak harus diukur dari segi pendapatan wang ringgit sahaja, tetapi ianya juga harus meliputi kadar jenayah kerana kadar jenayah yang tinggi boleh menjejaskan kualiti kehidupan sesebuah masyarakat.

Sebagai sebuah negeri yang telah mengiystiharkan dirinya sebagai salah sebuah negeri yang tinggi, keadaan jenayah yang melampung tinggi bukan sahaja merupakan satu senario yang tidak sihat, malahan ianya juga akan mendatangkan beban tambahan dari segi fizikal, mental dan kewangan kepada rakyat.

DAP Selangor berpendapat bahawa:
1. Cara utama yang paling efektif untuk mengesan dan membanteras kegiatan jenayah adalah untuk mengadakan satu pasukan polis yang moden, profesional dan berdaya saingan tinggi yang mampu memberi perkhidmatan polis dunia pertama untuk mengurangkan kegiatan jenayah, ketakutan terhadap jenayah dan memberi keyakinan kepada rakyat bahawa jalanraya dan tempat-tempat awam di Malaysia adalah selamat.

2. Kedua, polis perlu menyusun semula penggunaan sumber manusia pasukan Polis. Pada masa sekarang, walaupun hanya terdapat 90,000 orang anggota Polis, hanya lebih kurang 7% ataupun kira-kira 6,000 anggota polis daripada mereka yang terlibat dalam kerja-kerja pembanterasan jenayah. Peratusan ini perlu dipertingkatkan kepada 20 peratus dengan serta-merta dan beransur-ansur ke paras minimum iaitu 30% dengan membebaskan anggota-anggota polis daripada kerja-kerja kekeranian dan kerja-kerja lain yang tiada kaitan langsung dengan membanteras jenayah seperti Cawangan Khas.

3. Satu Pelan Polis Kebangsaan perlu diadakan. Pelan ini perlu disokong pula oleh Pelan Polis Tempatan di setiap Daerah Polis. Pelan ini adalah penting untuk menetapkan keutamaan dalam kerja polis, bagaimana kerja-kerja polis ini boleh dilaksanakan dan penunjuk-penunjuk tertentu untuk menilai prestasi seseorang anggota polis. Pelan ini harus ditentukan dengan penglibatan orang ramai memandangkan adalah mustahil untuk mana-mana pasukan polis di dunia ini dapat menjalankan tugasnya dengan efektif tanpa penglibatan daripada orang ramai.

Pelan ini juga wajar menetapkan sasaran-sasaran dan jangka masa untuk pengurangan kadar jenayah seperti kes ragut. Sebagai contohnya, kawasan-kawasan hitam di setiap IPD perlu dikenal-pasti supaya tindakan cepat boleh dilakukan apabila sesuatu kegiatan jenayah dilaporkan. Kawasan hitam ini perlu diumunkan kepada orang ramai dan usaha perlu dipergiatkan untuk menjadikannya sebagai kawasan putih.

4. Memberi kebebasan dan kuasa kepada pegawai-pegawai penyiasat di setiap lokaliti untuk menjalankan kerja-kerja siasatan mereka kerana merekalah yang berada di barisan hadapan untuk memerangi penyenayah dan mereka juga merupakan anggota-anggota polis yang paling memahami dinamik kawasan tugasan mereka. Oleh itu, potensi mereka dalama memerangi jenayah tidaka harus diabaikan oleh pegawai-pegawai di Ibu Pejabat. Pemetaan jenayah (Crime Mapping) juga harus diguna untuk menganalisa kadar jenayah yang berlaku di sesuatu tempat dengan komprehensif di mana data-data dan statistik ini merupakan maklumat yang penting untuk merangka cara-cara pembanterasan jenayah yang terbaik.

Harapan kami adalah supaya pasukan Polis Malaysia dapat berubah menjadi antara pasukan polis yang berwibawa dan unggul.

Sekian, terima kasih.

Yang benar,

DAP Selangor.

Nine-Point Proposal And Enquiries On MBPJ's Budgets

I had attended a dialogue with MBPJ on their 2007 and 2008 budgets. Below are my questions and suggestions.

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

5th August 2006

Mr. Lee Lih Shyan,
Assistant Director,
Development Planning Department
Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) By fax and email

Dear Mr. Lee,

DAP PJ Action Team Nine-Point Proposal And Enquiries On The Drafting Of The City Council’s 2007 And 2008 Budgets

On behalf of DAP PJ Action Team, I welcome very much the good effort from the Council to organize a dialogue with the residents on the up and coming budget of the council for 2007 and 2008 this morning in your office. It is always our belief that good governance, transparency and accountability shall be always upheld in the grass-root level especially in the level of local councils.

However, it is our opinions that concrete and detailed figures shall be provided so as to facilitate our discussion this morning so that we (the community, the public sector, the private sector, the environmental sector and the social sector) can identify exactly the problems.

The answers towards questions raised below could be of good use to enlighten all of us in order to give us some practical and pragmatic inputs for the budget.

1. Would there be an announcement of a list of taxpayers, especially industrial and commercial taxpayers who delay in paying their assessments to the council for years? Although the officer who did the powerpoint presentation this morning mentioned that the amount has not been changing very much for years, it also shows that there are some taxpayers who constantly ignore their payments to the council.

2. Would the council announce a list of compensations to be paid by the council as this is not reflected in the presentation just now? For example in 2005 Shah Alam High Court had ordered MPPJ to compensate 86 residents from Taman Desaria due to the council’s fraud on issuing Development Order.

Another good example is that the MPPJ Football club is just involved in a lawsuit with Football Association of Perlis regarding to a transfer of two players. Perlis Football Association is requesting for a compensation of RM60,000.

Are there any direct and indirect relations between the football club and the council? This is very serious question. For your information, MPSJ is now sued by a private outdoor advertising company for not applying TOL for the companies to set-up outdoor billboards. The whole exercise had caused a lot of financial damages to the council in terms of advertisement revenue. We certainly do not wish MBPJ to be ordered to pay huge sum of monetary compensation which will be channeled from the taxpayers money.

3. For 2006, we are informed that RM166.49 million out of RM200.28 million revenue received by the council is spent for council’s administration. We were later informed that some of these monies were spent for the benefit of the people, for example payment to Alam Flora etc.

Could there be a more accountable explanation, for example an itemized payment under this RM166.49 million is made on how the council spends this RM166.49 million, as well as the RM33.72 million spent for development in PJ?

4. Could there be full release of the number of staffs employed by MBPJ according to departments in year 2006 and the estimated numbers of new staffs to be employed/added by the Council?

5. The expected revenue for the council for year 2007 and 2008 is RM208.85 million and RM214.41 million respectively. Is it true that the council considered that the long overdue unpaid assessment to be paid up by those errant taxpayers in order for the council to reach these numbers?

If not, are there not any worries from the Council that these numbers could be some arbitrary figures?

6. The public is informed that each councilor is allocated RM100,000 every year as revealed by YB Yong Dai Ying (BN Gerakan ADUN for Bukit Lanjan) who is absent in the meeting this morning. Could there be a proper account made available in the public domain?

7. Since the Mayor has claimed that the council had demolished some illegal billboards in PJ, would the Mayor like to report weekly on the numbers, sizes of the billboards as well as the owners of the billboards in order to uphold transparency and good governance?

8. The council officer has mentioned that the budget must be prepared based on a balance budget concept. Would there be any contingency budget allocated for special amenities repairing projects?

To wait for one year is certainly a time too long to wait. The excuse of “not enough budget” is another example of the lacks of consultations with the people

9. Conceptual suggestions – tourism in PJ shall be based on cultural development and integration. Museum is just another construction project which can be meaningless when the most elementary attraction to make PJ a tourism city is the essence of the culture we have. Although PJ has a limited history, the residents are of highly educated, instead of concentrating on shopping complexes which will eventually create more traffic jams, the Council can turn PJ into a city of academics and culture integration.

We certainly hope that the Council can provide us with a proper, accountable, professional and accurate answer (even though written answers) towards all our queries here. We also certainly hope that this is not a one-off PR practice and more dialogues must be done continuously.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Lau Weng San,
Chairman of DAP PJ Action Team.
(016-3231563/lauwengsan@gmail.com)

S.K.:

1. Y. Bhg. Dato’ Ahmad Termizi,
Datuk Bandar,
Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya,
46400, Petaling Jaya, Selangor.
Tel: 603-79563544, Faks: 603-79581494

2. Mr Edward Lee,
Chairman
All PJ Pro Action Committee (APPAC)

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.