MP Allocation - BN MP back up the wrong tree

It's not how you announce it, but the sincerity and the political will to announce it.

Several BN MPs are shying away from announcing how they spend their RM2million constituency development allocation, which Opposition MPs are denied of it, citing reasons as poor internet connection and penetration in their respective constituencies etc.

I believe the argument is not about where you announce it. You of course can announce it on the internet, the best place for people to check on the details anytime and anywhere during the era of ICT, but I would agree that if they do not have a website, they can always call for a press conference and just announce the list.

After all, it is not a matter of how they want to do it, but it is a matter of whether they have the political will to do it.

RM2m allocation: TI tells MPs to bare it all
Soon Li Tsin
Feb 16, 07 5:13pm

There is no reason why parliamentarians cannot disclose the allocation for their respective constituencies on the Internet, said Transparency International (TI) Malaysia president Ramon Navaratnam.

“There is no excuse for hiding information from constituents. If you deny people information, people would wonder where the money is going to," said the head of the anti-corruption body when contacted today

“The rakyat can legitimately ask where the money has gone. Has it gone back to the rakyat or into somebody else’s pockets?”

Ramon was responding to excuses given by some MPs who refused to follow MCA vice-president Ong Tee Keat’s move to disclose information on the RM2 million allocation for his Selangor's Pandan constituency on his personal website.

Several MPs who spoke to malaysiakini cited lack of resources, poor Internet penetration and the unnecessary need to disclose such information as among the reasons for not doing so.

In such cases, Ramon said MPs can use newspapers and other means to announce as to how they were spending the money.

“I’m sure the press would be more than happy to publish (the information). They can also put up a sign on their branches or distribute leaflets, all of which are inexpensive measures,” he added.

BN MPs receive RM2 million for their respective constituencies. The ruling party controls 198 out of the 219 parliamentary seats and the total allocation amounts to RM396 million.

However, constituencies held by the opposition do not get the annual allocation.

Unfair practice

Commenting on this, Ramon said it is unfair for the funds to be only allocated to government MPs.

“It’s unfortunate that public finds are channelled through the government. Taxpayers expect their funds distributed regardless of any political leaning.

“I wish his (Ong’s) example showing such transparency, integrity and accountability is shared by all MPs and that they too would reveal how the money is spent,” he added.

The MCA vice-president’s move had ignited a heated debate and even drew flak from his own party.

On Jan 23, the MCA central committee decided that its elected representatives - for both state and parliament - should not reveal their constituency allocations on the internet.

The party leaders are concerned that such revelations could be "sensitive", especially in allocations for religious and education purposes.

Apart from Ong, MCA Subang Jaya state assemblyperson Lee Hwa Beng has also been revealing the information on his personal website for several years.

Despite the controversy, Ong maintained that he did the right thing and has not removed the details from his website.

Ramon supported Ong on this and urged other BN representatives to follow suit.

“I strongly commend him for being absolutely transparent for publishing what he’s given out. I hope the government quotes his example to be followed by others in the interest of transparency,” he said.

He also reminded MPs that it is in their interest to assure voters have confidence in them.

“If voters have doubts, they won’t give the same support to the same party come election time. So it’s in the interest of the MPs to divulge all information or suffer lack of confidence on the part of the constituents,” he said.

李天祥的自杀是政治问题

博士失业4年，所以自杀？

为何他会失业长达四年之久？

如果经济真的那么好，如果股市真的那么妙，李天祥以他的硕士资格难道早不到一份养家活口的工吗？

李天祥自杀并不是一般的自杀，他的自杀除了是社会问题，也是经济问题，更是政治问题。

博士杀儿女后服毒死
遗书∶失业4年倍感压力
不想儿女步后尘

updated:2007-02-15 19:00:04 MYT

（吉隆坡讯）杀死儿女再服毒自杀的39岁博士生李天祥，留下一份4页长的遗书，其中一页是注明给两名儿女的。警方因此推测，李天祥原本并不打算杀害亲生儿女，只是忽然面对太多压力，在冲动之下狠下毒手杀死他们，自己再服毒自尽。

李天祥的4封英文遗书分别注明给妻子、儿女、父母和其他朋友。

他在遗书中道出他虽硕士毕业，但从2002年开始失业至今，让他倍感压力。他说不希望儿女步上他的后尘，所以才选择走向绝路。

遗书中也道出他很爱妻子，也疼爱儿女，但是他却选择了自杀，所以他必须向所有爱护他的人道歉。

吉隆坡刑事调查主任阿末依布拉欣受询时说，男死者在遗书内容中透露，他在2002年开始失业，自此就变得闷闷不乐，经常“生闷气”，而且也对人间感到失望。

但是，李天祥并没有在遗书透露他到底面对甚麽问题，及不希望儿女步他甚麽后尘。他仅仅表示，这是家庭悲剧。

警援引谋杀突然死亡处理

警方将分别援引刑事发典302（谋杀）条文和突然死亡条文，处理这个案件。

冼都警区主任古玛兰表示，被杀害的两名小孩，警方会援引谋杀条文，至於李天祥的自杀案，警方将暂时以突然死亡处理。

古玛兰说，警方目前还在调查案件案件的来龙去脉，调查报告也还没有完毕，暂不方便透露太多案情。

妻子从母亲家里拿伙食

李天祥的妻子梅慧娴，每天傍晚都会到母亲家里拿一些伙食，让他们一家大小享用。

消息说，在外当兼职保险经纪的梅慧娴，无法每天回家煮饭，因此他们一家四口的晚餐，大多数都是为从她母亲家拿回来的。

李天祥的岳母也同样在彩虹花园，距离他们公寓不超过5分钟车程。

妻子兼职帮补家用

李天祥失业期间曾经投身地产业、保险业等行业，但都不成功。

多年来，他们一家人都是依靠著梅慧娴兼职保险经纪，以及李天祥的岳父间中帮补一点家用，来维持多年的生活。

消息说，案发的公寓单位并不是在李天祥的名下注册，反而是在他岳父的名下注册。

消息表示，李天祥可能认为自己身为一个男人，竟然要靠外家和妻子，觉得“生无可恋”，在多重压力之下选择结束自己和儿女的性命。

服毒前撕掉罐子标签

李天祥在服下漂白剂、清洁剂等化学物品前，撕下了所有罐子上的标签，让警方对他的行为如丈八金刚，摸不著头脑。

市警刑事调查主任阿莫依布拉欣说，警方抵达现场后，除了发现遗书和盛装著“毒药”的桶子外，就只有厕所内的漂白剂和清洁剂的罐子。

“但是，警方发现这些罐子外面的标签贴纸，全部都已被男死者撕开了。”他表示，警方根本不知道他撕开贴纸的目的。

患有轻微精神病

根据警方调查，初步证实李天祥患有轻微的精神病症。此外，警方也在他身上找到一张精神病患的医药片。

市警刑事调查主任阿莫依布拉欣透露，警方已向死者家庭的数名亲属录取了初步口供，而李天祥的妻子供称，她丈夫的确患有轻微的精神病症。

剖验报告∶2小死者遭勒死

剖验报告证实，两名小死者是遭勒死的。

3名死者的遗体是送进吉隆坡中央医院。周四早上10点，院方开始为3具尸体剖验，下午3点半剖验报告出炉。男死者李天祥的剖验报告指他灌毒死。

新闻背景
博士杀儿女后服毒死

李天祥得了硕士后，曾在纽西兰攻读博士学位，但却在考试中不及格，结明心情变得越来越沮丧，最后回来大马。

在多重压力之下，他最终忍受不住，於周三晚上在吉隆坡怡保威拉安沙娜公寓的住所与妻子梅慧娴发生口角后自杀，并在自杀前杀害自己的亲生儿女，酿成3尸命案。 （光明日报·2007.02.15）

Toll Hike - Cabinet today must decide to reveal toll contracts

I had yesterday received a formal letter from Datuk Seri Samy Vellu, the Works Minister in regard to an Online Petition submitted by me to the Minister on 18th January 2007 to protest against the unfair toll hike for five major expressways in Klang Valley with effective from 1st January 2007 (The petition is signed by 16,455 people).

Samy Vellu in his letter briefly explained that the government has to abide by certain obligations as outlined under the contracts and that the toll hike is unavoidable.

DAP Selangor believes that the Minister’s reply has in no way help to clear the air on why the government can sign such lopsided and unfair agreements with private companies, more so when the government is also reluctant to reveal the content of the agreement publicly and that the Minister had earlier warned four Opposition leaders, namely Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim and Tian Chua of PKR, Ronnie Liu of DAP and Dr. Hatta Ramli (PAS) to “pay the price” and be jailed for at least a year under the OSA for revealing that the government had guaranteed profits to Litrak in the Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong (LDP) concession agreement.

Yesterday, Samy Vellu was full of the “milk of human kindness” when he said he would seek the Cabinet's approval to declassify the toll concession agreements when only ten days ago, he was so “bloodthirsty” in demanding that actions to be taken against the four.

Is Samy Vellu the advocate for a regime of openness, accountability, transparency and freedom of information, or he is a defender for the cult of government secrecy, where the OSA is used to shield and protect corruption and abuses of power?

We would like to remind Samy Vellu that he shall not apply double-standards where Cabinet Ministers want whistleblowers to be prosecuted and jailed for revealing information about the lopsided contents in the concession agreements to protect the interests of 26 million Malaysians, while they are blissfully unconcerned about the disclosure of information from the concession agreements to equity analysts, rating agencies, bondholders and the investing public to flog the shares, bonds and loans of concession companies?

On September 22 last year in Parliament, Samy Vellu revealed that the government had RM38.5 billion in compensation to the 20 highway concession companies. The first toll collection began at the Shapadu highway in Klang in 1984 followed by the North-South Expressway in 1988.Of the total RM38.5 billion, the government paid RM1.76 billion in cash while the remainder was in tax exemption and extending the concession period.

Clearly the RM38.5 billion in compensation to the 20 highway companies does not include the toll collected from motorists using the highways. In that, the RM38.5 billion compensation paid by the government alone is enough to pay for the construction cost without including the tens of billions ringgit more collected from motorists.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has disappointed Malaysians by failing to fulfill his promise to be transparent and accountable in justifying why the government paid compensation of RM4,864 million or RM739 million more than the construction cost of RM4,125 million for the 5 Klang Valley highways. Again the RM4,864 million in compensation paid does not include the toll collected directly from the public by the highway companies, which would be extra profits earned by them.

There is no economic rationale or financial sense for the government to refuse to buy over the highways when buying it over is cheaper and more cost-effective. Why let the 5 highway companies make RM739 million mid-way through their concession period ending between 2024-2035? By allowing the 5 Klang Valley highway companies to impose a 20-60% toll rate hike on 1 January 2006 despite already getting back their investment cost, the government is “abetting” these companies to reap huge profits at public’s expense.

There is mounting public anger over the toll hikes seen as “highway robbery in broad daylight that sells out” the rights of motorists, consumers and ordinary Malaysians to big corporations. Privatization should result in efficiency gains as well as reduction of costs to government. However this has not happened in the privatization of our highways where the costs to the government continues to escalate until it exceeds the construction costs.

The government should during the Wednesday Cabinet Meeting today comes out with a clear and complete explanation in explaining all sorts of accusations and questions thrown to the government on this matter to uphold accountability and transparency as pledged by the BN government during the previous general election.

大道起价—内阁需今天需决定公开合约

我昨天收到工程部长拿督斯里三美威鲁的一封公函。这封公函是部长针对我在2007年1月18日连同雪州行动党主席欧阳捍华以及副主席陈福财前往部长办公室所提交的一份网络抗议联署声明（联署签名的驾车人士迄今已经达致16,455名），以抗议政府决定在2007年1月1日开始，调高巴生谷河流域5条高速公路的过路费。

三美在他这封志期2007年2月9日的公函中简略地指出，政府必须准遵守相关合约下的种种规定，因此这5条高速公路的过路费的上涨是无可避免的。

雪州行动党认为部长的答复并没有解决当下驾车人士所面对的问题，即为何政府会和私营公司签下如此不公平的私营化合约，以及为何政府不仅迟迟没有公开和私营大道公司所签署的私营化合约，同时三美也在更早之前以坚决的语气，在官方机密法令下采取行动对付揭发白沙罗—蒲种高速公路私营化合约的四名反对党人士（回教党的哈达南里医生、公正党的蔡添强、丹斯里卡里依布拉欣以及民主行动党的刘天球）？

三美威鲁前天突然大发慈悲的说，他准备寻求内阁批准，将大道合约内容解禁；但在仅仅10天前，他却要4名反对党领袖付出代价。

究竟三美威鲁是倡议开明、负责任、透明化及资讯自由风气的拥护者；或是维护政府机密，企图透过官方机密法令来保护贪污及滥权的捍卫者？

迄今，我们尚未知晓到底三美会否在内阁争取把所有大道的合约列为非官方机密，进而公开合约的内容。今天的内阁会议相信自有分晓。

我们要提醒三美的是，他不能持有双重标准，即一方面要将揭发具有偏差内容合约者被起诉及被判坐牢，声称要保护2600万国人的利益；另一方面却视若无睹地将同样的合约内容透露予资产分析员、评估机构、债券持有人及投资人士，以炒高有关特许公司的股票、债券及凭单。

三美於去年9月在国会揭露，政府至今已赔偿20间大道公司385亿令吉。国内首条收费大道是坐落在雪州巴生的Shapadu大道，它於1984年开始收费，接着是1988年通车的南北大道。在这385亿令吉赔款当中，其中有17.6亿令吉是现款，其馀的是税务豁免。

国人必需知道的是，这385亿令吉赔款尚未包括20家大道公司所鸠收的过路费。如果这笔过路费也一并加入，那么其总数将会是一个天文数字。其实，政府所付出的385亿令吉赔偿金其实已经足以支付大道建筑成本，而且这还未把数以百亿令吉计过路费计算在内。

首相拿督斯里阿都拉无法透明与负责任地交待，即为何政府付出的48.64亿令吉赔偿金会比巴生谷5条大道的41.25亿令吉建筑成本高出7.79亿令吉。这点已经让人民大为失望。更何况的是，48.64亿令吉的赔偿金尚不包括有关大道公司向公众直接鸠收的过路费，它是有关公司赚取的额外利润。

这种形同“光天化日之下在大道抢劫”做法已引起公愤，因为政府把使用者、消费人及百姓的利益出卖给大财团。私营化本来应带来经济效益及降低政府的财政负担。然而，在大道私营化上，政府却必须不断地付出比兴建成本更高的代价。

针对对政府最近接二连三针对私营大道过路费高涨一事所面对的种种指责和质问，我们强烈呼吁政府在今天的周三内阁会议作出一项完整详细的交代。

Meet the Mayor...

I went to MBPJ today, trying to meet the Mayor (Each Friday is "Meet The Taxpayers" Day for Mayor).

The officer who received us is the Deputy Secretary of the City Hall, Hj. Ahmat.

We discussed a lot of issues in PJ, including the high crime rate, the abandoned SS1 community hall and the issue of eyesore in Jalan SS9A/4.

As for the latter two issues, Ahmat said that he will report to the Mayor, as for the abandoned SS1 Community Hall, Ahmat implied that the City Hall may choose to demolish the structure as it will be too costful for the City Hall to continue the project.

Below is my letter:

9th February 2007

Y. Bhg. Tuan Haji Mohamad Roslan Bin Sakiman,
Datuk Bandar,
Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya,
46400, Petaling Jaya, Selangor.

Y. Bhg. Datuk Bandar,

A comprehensive Crime Prevention Action Plan for PJ must be in place to prevent PJ from becoming a criminal city

In view of the increasingly serious crime rate in Petaling Jaya, we would like to suggest to MBPJ as a local government to spearhead the drafting of a comprehensive Crime Prevention Action Plan for Petaling Jaya is urgently needed to prevent PJ from becoming a criminal city.

It was revealed by the Police on 28th January 2007 claimed that crime index in Petaling Jaya rose 22.6%, an alarming rate which not only surpassed Selangor’s 14.3% but also national average of 15.7% last year.

The increment of crime index by 22.6% last year as compared to 2005, a percentage even higher than the state and national level clearly shows that PJ is heading to be a city of crime.

There have been efforts from various parties and stakeholders in PJ, i.e. political parties, residents associations, rukun tetangga, business communities, enforcement units like Police Force, City Hall and other government agencies like RELA to fight crime but these efforts, if left uncoordinated, will not be optimized to fight crime in PJ.

The 22.6% increase in crime index in PJ is an alarming signal that it shows that police efforts to fight crime have not achieved any success. Several dialogues between the police and the residents held by local elected representatives have not been very effective in reducing crime rate in the local level. In fact, the situation has been worsening for the past two to three years.

Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan had even made a commitment to the public to fight crime especially the 3 priority areas of snatch thefts, armed robberies and drug trafficking. He had even attended a dialogue with PJ residents last year but unfortunately nothing effective took place after the dialogue to enhance social security in PJ.

However, the ratio of 1 policeman for every 5,500 citizens in PJ is a ratio too high from international standard of 1 to 250 citizens.

Therefore, a Crime Prevention Committee of Petaling Jaya must be formed with the initiatives from various government authorities i.e. Petaling Jaya City Hall, which would be the best body to serve as a coordination unit among various stake holders in running the Committee and drafting of the Crime Prevention Plan.

This committee shall work as a working committee whose membership encompasses various stakeholders in PJ to formulate a long-term crime prevention action plan.

The Future of “SS1 Community Hall”

The issue was brought up in 2003 when the construction of a Community Hall in SS1 came to an abrupt end when the then Petaling Jaya Municipal Council (MPPJ) spent about RM4 million to construct the structure on a piece of land which is not owned by the Council.

It has been three years already since the sudden stop of the construction works and we would like to ask if the City Hall plans to move forward to acquire the land under Ninth Malaysia Plan.

Checks were carried out and the Land Office confirmed that the land belongs to SPPK. So, RM4 million of the people's money has gone down the drain, and word has it that the council is now trying to include an allocation of RM8 million in the Ninth Malaysia Plan to acquire the land.

We hope that the Mayor can enlighten us on the future of this structure as we do not wish to see another eyesore as such to be erected in PJ while the community hall, if completed, will be a good venue to serve the benefit of the people.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Lau Weng San
DAP Selangor Secretary

会见市长……

我今天上午前往市政厅，尝试会见市长（每周五是八打灵再也市政厅市长会客日）。

前来接见我们的是市政厅副秘书阿末赛义。

期间我们针对许多关系八打灵再也民生问题，尤其是居高不下的罪案率、SS1搁置的民众会堂以及双溪威火界限事件向阿末赛义作简单汇报。

对于罪案率和火界限的问题，阿末赛义答应将禀告市长。至于SS1搁置的民众会堂，他说市政厅可能给予经费高昂的问题而选择不继续这项计划。市政厅也可能主动拆除这座废楼，以免成为瘾君子追龙的温床。

以下是我提交给市长的公函：

2007年2月9日 八打灵再也市政厅市长，
Haji Mohamad Roslan Bin Sakiman先生

尊贵的市长先生，

建议拟定全面的防范犯罪行动计划，避免灵市成为罪犯之城

鉴于八打灵再也越趋严重的罪案率，我们谨此呼吁八打灵再也市政厅拟定一个全面的防范犯罪行动计划，避免灵市成为罪犯之城。

八打灵再也警方是在1月28日表示，灵市在2006年的罪案率飙升22.6%，增长幅度非常惊人，甚至超过雪州14.3%和全国15.7%的犯罪率增长！如果有关方面没有拟定一项全面的防范犯罪行动计划，灵市将逐渐成为一个犯罪之都。

虽然灵市各阶层人士（包括朝野政党、居民协会、睦邻原则计划、社团商团、包括警方和市政局执法组在内的执法单位以及其他政府机构如自愿警卫队等等）在防范罪案方面投入大量的人力、物力和财力，但是如果这些努力没有获得良好的协调，它们最终将付诸东流，无法在打击罪案方面做出最大的贡献。

其实，八打灵再也居高不下的罪案率显示警方最近的种种努力并没有达致重大的功效。过去一年由当地人民代议士所举办的数项警民对话也无法降低地方上的罪案率。更严重的是，地方上的治安在过去两三年似有恶化的迹象。

虽然全国总警长慕沙虽然曾经向公众承诺，要打击攖夺、持械抢劫及贩毒3大领域的罪案，而且在去年也曾经亲临八打灵再也再也出席一场警民对话，但是对话过后警方依然无法增加人手，加强八打灵再也的治安。

其实，如果以8000名警员来对比2600万人民，其警民比例是1对3250，这个比例比起国际警民比例，即1对250来的低。在八打灵再也，其情况更为严重，因为八打灵再也的警民比例是1对5500人，除了比国际警民标准比例低之外，也比起全国的警民比列还要低。

有鉴于此，各政府机构如灵市市政厅应该采取主动成立八打灵再也防范罪案委员会，并且让灵市各阶层人士成为这个委员会的成员，共同拟定八打灵再也防范罪案行动计划。


“SS1民众大会堂”的前途

这项课题发生在2003年。当时的八打灵再也市政厅决定要在SS1的一片空地上兴建一间民众会堂，以充作人民的休闲和活动用途。

当时市政厅耗费400万令吉兴建这件民众会堂。 可惜的是，市政厅过后发现有关土地并不属于政府地，而是由一间成为SPPK的私人公司所拥有。结果市政厅被迫停工，当时更传出新闻指市政厅打算在第九大马计划下申请拨款购买这片土地。

当时这片土地的市价大约是800万令吉。我们希望市长办公室能够解释市政厅会否拨款购买这片土地，然后完成尚未完成的工作，因为这个废置的建筑物已经成为瘾君子‘追龙’的温床，影响当地的治安。

谢谢。

雪州行动党秘书

刘永山 谨启

市政厅当初不应该草率铲除火线界的民宅，留下一片废墟，破坏双溪威新村的容貌。

如果市政厅没有办法清楚双溪威火线界的废墟，那么市政厅根本不应该在2006年便铲除这一带的民宅，反之市政厅应该网开一面，允许受影响的村民继续在该地居住。

双溪威火线界位于繁忙的联邦大道旁，被梳邦与八打灵商业中心及工业区包围。火线界在1974年由当时的房屋及地方政府部长丹斯里曾永森协助下成立，至今拥有超过30年历史。

该地段之所以称为火线界，主要由于早年该地段本为电源转驳站，到处布满电缆，直到电缆被电源公司拆除后，土地才移交给雪州政府管理。

州政府后来把有关土地让双溪威村民建立141间住屋，范围内拥有相当完善的房屋规划和基本设施，但由于土地属于州政府所有，因此居民多年来不获申请地契。

火线界居民在4年前，即2003年开始正式着手申请地契，申请过程中却传来该区人民代议士指火线界将被挪为另外的发展用途，呼吁居民尽快办理申请廉价屋的手续，引起居民恐慌。

灵北区国会议员周美芬曾经在2003年7月29日的《南洋商报》承诺“双溪威火线界的地契申请工作已进入尾声，她已把相关计划书呈交雪兰莪州政府，目前只等待雪州政府的批准。”

可悲的是，周美芬完全无法履行她在2004年大选前所许下的承诺。州政府后来决定重新发展该地，导致原本居住在该地的141户人家被迫迁移他处，市政厅也着手在2005年铲除该地的民宅。

遗憾的是，市政厅和州政府并没有处理该地的废墟，导致这片土地成为蚊虫孳生地温床，一些不负责任的认识更把该地变成他们的垃圾场。最令人担忧的是，有关地段距离双溪威华小仅有不到一公里的距离。

如果市政厅和州政府当初并没有打算清理该地，我们不明白为何州政府和市政厅不允许原本居住在这片土地的141户人家继续居住下去。

更甚的是，市政厅在去年9月才着手建议在八打灵再也地方发展大蓝图上把该片土地的通途从‘高压电缆保留地’转换为房屋地。目前，雪州城乡规划局还在研究有关建议。这是不是说明州政府和市政厅点到工作秩序，即先动工才规划？

为何市政厅不能等到所有规划工作完成之后，才来作出相关的拆除工作？如果该地最后将成为房屋地，为何原本居住在该地的141户人家不获得地契？如果市政厅要铲除该地，为何市政厅没有考虑到新村整洁的问题，即市政厅必须尽快清除流泻来的废墟？有鉴于火界限的废墟非常碍眼，并且非常靠近民宅和学校，为何市政厅现在有无打算委任承包商清除当地的废墟，还是市政厅计划把有关工作交由发展商去处理？

我们已经在昨日致函给市长，并且打算在明天上午的市长会客日直接向市长反映民情，并尽量从市长办公室得到一个明确的答案。

双溪威火线界居民二度开会 受委代表允诺解决难题

双溪威火线界居民二度开会 受委代表允诺解决难题
2004/09/17 17:25:25
●南洋商报

八打灵再也17日讯- 因申请地契事宜闹得沸沸扬扬的双溪威火线界居民二度召开集体会议，要求人民代议士出面协助解决问题，尽管居民邀请出席的马华八打灵再也南区国会议员拿督林祥才未刻出席，但受委列席的代表即场承诺与居民会面，协助居民解决难题。

居住在双溪威火线界木屋区超过30年的居民由于近年传出火线界将被雪兰莪州政府作为其他发展用途，引起居民恐慌，纷纷要求人民代议士代为处理申请地契，惟居民的申请手续进行至尾声时，却传来有人从中作梗的消息，矛头直指火线界所属国会议员和州议员。

超过50名火线界居民出席星期四在马华双溪威支会会所召开的会议，受邀出席的林祥才因有要事在身，因此委派代表潘秀成出席会议。

申请地契出现问题

双溪威火线界木屋区委员会主席林沾荣在会议上指出，居民多年来尝试申请地契，但没有采取积极和实际的行动跟进地契申请程序，直至3年前才组织木屋区委员会申请地契，同时获得马华、民政党、雪州行政议员等多名人民代议士协助处理申请程序，过程一直相当顺利。

林沾荣说，双溪威火线界原本属于八打灵再也北区，但在今年大选的新选区划分后，变成八打灵再也南区，导致申请地契方面出现问题。

据了解，林沾荣等人从某方面获得消息，指该区国会议员和州议员在一场会议中反对发出地契给火线界居民，让居民感到愤怒，纷纷表示对该区人民代议士感到失望，但林沾荣在接受记者访问时坚决不愿透露消息来源。

林沾荣指出，由于林祥才作为该区的人民代议士，因此希望林祥才能够出面为居民解决问题，一圆居民希望获得地契，不要拆屋的最大心愿。

潘秀成较后向出席者指出，今次主要为搜集双溪威火线界居民申请地契的详细资料，由于他本身也是透过报章才获悉居民的问题，因此仍无法针对事件发表意见。

潘秀成说，火线界的地契问题向来由八打灵再也北区国会议员周美芬协助处理，林祥才尚未完全接手，因此他需收集详细资料，同时会向雪州政府了解州政府是否已针对火线界地段的发展和地契申请问题，作出任何决定。

潘秀成指出，居民所谓人民代议士或雪州大臣“原则上”同意的言论，不能作为批准地契的标准，希望居民不要被人混淆视线，误以为地契一定会获得批准。

无论如何，潘秀成承诺会在了解情况后，在近期内安排居民与林祥才举行对话会，协助居民解决所面对的问题。

双溪威火线界历史

双溪威火线界历史
2004/09/17 17:25:25
●南洋商报

双溪威火线界位于繁忙的联邦大道旁，被梳邦与八打灵商业中心及工业区包围。

火线界在1974年由当时的房屋及地方政府部长丹斯里曾永森协助下成立，至今拥有超过30年历史。

该地段之所以称为火线界，主要由于早年该地段本为电源转驳站，到处布满电缆，直到电缆被电源公司拆除后，土地才移交给雪州政府管理。

州政府后来把有关土地让双溪威村民建立141间住屋，范围内拥有相当完善的房屋规划和基本设施，但由于土地属于州政府所有，因此居民多年来不获申请地契。

火线界居民在3年前正式着手申请地契，申请过程中却传来该区人民代议士指火线界将被挪为另外的发展用途，呼吁居民尽快办理申请廉价屋的手续，引起居民恐慌。

尔后，此事再经不少人民代议士出面调解，今年传出有人从中作梗，导致居民无法获得地契的消息，但消息来源不可考。

尽管如此，雪州政府至今仍未就双溪威火线界地段的发展计划或地契申请发表任何正式谈话。

双溪威火界线木屋区申请地契无下文

双溪威火界线木屋区申请地契无下文(http://archive.nanyang.com/index.php?ch=12&pg=49&ac=405929)
2004/09/10 18:28:08
●南洋商报

双溪威10日讯-双溪威火界线木屋区申请地契约3年仍然无法获得批准，该委员会要求八打灵再也南区国会议员拿督林祥才出席会议，共同商讨申请事宜。

双溪威火界线木屋区申请地契委员会将于下个星期四（9月16日），晚上8时，在马华双溪威支会召开会议，邀请林祥才出席，讨论申请地契事项。

委员会主席林沾荣指出，当地居民于3年前集体申请地契，一切主要的图测、表格、文件已经准备妥善，原本过程极其顺利，可是之后却听说有发展商看中这块地段，所以批准地契工作停滞不前。

温和方式争取

他说，这数年来，委员会一直努力争取，也获得房屋及地方政府部长拿督斯里黄家定、雪兰莪州务大臣拿督斯里基尔、雪州行政议员拿督庄祷融、拿督邓诗汉、拿督林传盛、八打灵再也北区国会议员周美芬等人的协助，以为申请过程顺利，可是最近却听说出了问题。

他说，无论如何，委员会将继续努力，如果以温和的方式争取，一直无法成功申请，不排除以更加激烈的方式，或向反贪污局投报。

林沾荣星期四晚在一项记者招待会上，发表上述谈话。

双溪威火线界木屋区分布在SS9A/4A、SS9A/4、SS9A/18和SS9A/18A，141户家庭，有30多年历史，当年是房屋部长丹斯里曾永森申请有关地段，当时是属于电火局地段，之后移交给雪州政府成为州政府地。

林沾荣指出，当地虽然称为木屋区，其实都是砖瓦屋，排列整齐，各个单位面积同样，有卫生厕所、柏油路、沟渠、垃圾收集服务等，居民多年来缴交门牌税给八打灵再也市议会，也交地税给八打灵县土地局。

他说，当地141户还包括群乐俱乐部和双溪威青年俱乐部、一间九皇爷神庙，居民约2千人。

双溪威火线界地契申请进尾声

双溪威火线界地契申请进尾声(http://archive.nanyang.com/index.php?ch=12&pg=48&ac=278333&uc=1)
2003/07/29 18:12:29
●南洋商报

〔八打灵再也29日讯〕八打灵再也北区国会议员周美芬指出，双溪威火线界的地契申请工作已进入尾声，她已把相关计划书呈交雪兰莪州政府，目前只等待雪州政府的批准。

她说，马华有信心透过各州议员解决这个问题，而她如受影响的居民一样，希望雪州政府尽快颁发地契给居民。

她是于本月27日，在双溪威群乐俱乐部33周年庆典晚宴上，给该区火线界居民稍来这项好消息。

“我也曾与甘榜东姑区州议员黄世豪讨论过，觉得双溪威巴刹须要维修，而今天我要再向大家宣布一项好消息，政府已同意拨出6万零吉作为双溪威巴刹的提升工程费用。”

她说，政府曾在去年拨出10万零吉维修双溪威巴刹，但经过1年时间的洗理，巴刹又开始呈献残旧的现象。

“我曾与巴刹小贩谈过，大家都觉得须要维修巴刹，所以我就向国会争取拨款，而据我了解，相关当局很快便会派出工程师前来了解巴刹的情形。”

议员大派拨款

在宣布这项6万零吉的拨款后，周美芬意犹未尽，再向双溪威市民宣布两项好消息，即政府拨出4万零吉提升该区的基本设施及她拨出国会议员拨款3千零吉，充当该俱乐部的慈善基金。

周美芬一次过给双溪威市民稍来4大好消息，台下的嘉宾当然是以如雷掌声来回报，但是此刻，这名国会议员却给大家来个当头棒喝，提醒众嘉宾不要从此抱着“请国州议员出席就有钱拿”的观念不放。

除了周美芬，与会的百乐镇州议员林春景及黄世豪也分别宣布拨出州议员拨款3千零吉，给双溪威群乐俱乐部充当慈善基金。

林春景也是该俱乐部的法律顾问，他致词时表示，教育是华裔同胞未来的立足点，他呼吁大家继续努力，关注孩子的教育。

此外，他也赞扬双溪威俱乐部醒狮团的表现，尤其是在我国著名醒狮教练萧斐弘的带领下，呈献出不凡的气势。

“俱乐部醒狮团成立23年，而如今，醒狮也被我国政府认可，而且在全世界流行，我希望大家可以再接再厉，把我国的醒狮艺术水平提升至更高的境界。”

该俱乐部主席冯天来致词时说，他们可以在这33年来不断成长是因为有一班合作且思想成熟的理事。

他希望众理事可以继续秉持这种团结的精神，为俱乐部贡献，带领俱乐部朝更宏观的方向发展。

承认中国北大清大中文系——马华不应混淆华社视听

雪州民主行动党呼吁马华公会在争取承认中国北大清大中文系方面不应以模棱两可的言论混淆华社视听，图谋廉价宣传。

黄家定今天说内阁已经‘在原则上同意承认中国北京大学及清华大学的中文系文凭’，但是任何政府在教育文凭上的承认，只有承认或不承认。承认就是承认，不承认就是不承认，没有所谓的承认一半或者是条件性的承认。所谓的‘原则上承认’根本是完全不存在的。

如果是‘原则上的承认’，这表示政府还没有正式承认这两所历史悠久大学的中文系。反之，如果政府机构—包括高教部学术鉴定局和公共服务局等等—还没有对这两所大学中文系做出详细的学术性研究，这意味着马来西亚政府还没有正式承认这两所大学的中文系学位。

如果内阁作出‘原则上的承认’之后，发现其中一些细则并未符合有关方面的标准，又或者出现一些官员进行种种刁难，以致后来的‘全面和正式的承认’未能如愿实现，马华公会如何面对华社？

如果马华公会认同踏实从政的理念，那么马华公会应该在内阁内外积极争取内阁以堂堂正正的方式全面和正式的承认这两所中国大学的中文系文凭，而不是以诸如‘原则上承认’等说词来敷衍华社，更不应该以如此模棱两可的言论混淆来华社视听，图谋廉价宣传。

Not transparent, nonnegotiable, unfriendly and unserious attitude – Disappointing attitudes of the government

We would like to register our grave disappointment with the government’s not transparent, nonnegotiable, unfriendly and unserious attitude in dealing with various issues arising from unfair highway toll hike.

First, the government is not transparent with the public when signing highway privatization concessionaire agreement with private companies, causing not only the bleeding of motorists’ pockets but also government coffer.

On September 22 last year in Parliament, Datuk Samy revealed that the government had RM38.5 billion in compensation to the 20 highway concession companies. The first toll collection began at the Shapadu highway in Klang in 1984 followed by the North-South Expressway in 1988.Of the total RM38.5 billion, the government paid RM1.76 billion in cash while the remainder was in tax exemption and extending the concession period.

Clearly the RM38.5 billion in compensation to the 20 highway companies does not include the toll collected from motorists using the highways. The Police has recently initiated investigation under 1972 Official Secret Act (OSA) to investigate four prominent Opposition leaders namely Ronnie Liu Tian Khiew (DAP), Tian Chua (PKR), Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim (PKR) and Dr Hatta Ramli (PAS).

Hiding behind the OSA can not cover up the fact that the RM38.5 billion compensation paid by the government alone is enough to pay for the construction cost without including the tens of billions ringgit more collected from motorists.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has disappointed Malaysians by failing to fulfill his promise to be transparent and accountable in justifying why the government paid compensation of RM4,864 million or RM739 million more than the construction cost of RM4,125 million for the 5 Klang Valley highways. Again the RM4,864 million in compensation paid does not include the toll collected directly from the public by the highway companies, which would be extra profits earned by them.

There is no economic rationale or financial sense for the government to refuse to buy over the highways when buying it over is cheaper and more cost-effective. Why let the 5 highway companies make RM739 million mid-way through their concession period ending between 2024-2035? By allowing the 5 Klang Valley highway companies to impose a 20-60% toll rate hike on 1 January 2006 despite already getting back their investment cost, the government is “abetting” these companies to reap huge profits at public’s expense.

There is mounting public anger over the toll hikes seen as “highway robbery in broad daylight that sells out” the rights of motorists, consumers and ordinary Malaysians to big corporations. Privatisation should result in efficiency gains as well as reduction of costs to government. However this has not happened in the privatization of our highways where the costs to the government continues to escalate until it exceeds the construction costs.

Second, the government ignores the constitutional right of the people to hold legitimate political activities including peaceful gathering to express disagreement against unfair, unjustified and not transparent highway privatization concessionaire agreement.

We witnessed more police brutalities and human right violations on 4th February 2007 – when 15 people were arrested in front of Puchong’s IOI shopping mall in the fourth peaceful demonstration against the unfair toll hikes.

Police brutalities and trampling on human rights started two weeks ago at the previous peaceful protest against the toll hikes at the Cheras-Kajang Highway Batu 11 toll booth where 21 people were arrested.

As the first two anti-toll hike protests at Subang’s Sunway City on Jan 7 and Gombak’s KL-Karak toll booth on Jan 14 had been conducted peacefully without any incidents, it would appear that the Police and the Abdullah administration have taken a policy decision to disregard human rights and given the greenlight for police violence and brutality to clamp down on the peaceful protests against the unfair toll hikes, organized by various organizations including PROTES and Opposition parties. This is more prevalent when there was an incident on the Jan 21 demonstration when an untagged and unidentified plaincloth policeman beaten demonstrators.

We felt gravely disappointed with such unfriendly and nonnegotiable attitude of the police which ignores the basic constitutional right of the people to hold peaceful gathering.

Third, if the government and the police have no intention to prosecute demonstrators, they shall not arrest them in the first place.

11 demonstrators participated in a peaceful demonstration in Cheras 11th Mile were summoned to attend the Kajang Magistrate Court on 5th February 2007. What is disappointing is that they were then told that the Mogistrate and the Prosecuting Officer are not notified and ready for the prosecution.

Selangor DAP Chairperson Ean Yong Hian Wah expressed his disappointment when he was notified that the Magistrate was on sick leave on that day. Their representing lawyer, Mr. Lim Lip Eng, who is also the Selangor DAP Publicity Secretary also criticized the Kajang Police Station for failure in submitting the investigation paper on time to the Magistrate.

He said that the eleven attended the Magistrate with the intention to cooperate with the Police and the court in the prosecution.

What we would like to ask is that, if the police have not finished their investigation, shall they be issued any summon to attend the court, more so when it is believed that there is no sincere intention from the police to prosecute them? Does this prove that the police does not mean business when they arrested the 21 persons high-handedly to prevent them from carrying out legitimate political activities.

Does this also mean that the Police should not clamp down on the peaceful protests against the unfair toll hikes, organized by various organizations including PROTES and Opposition parties, as the Police have no intention to prosecute them?

If that is the case, then we urge the police of not to interfere such peaceful gatherings organized by the people more.

不透明、不妥协、不友善、不认真-政府态度令人失望

我们对政府最近接二连三针对私营大道过路费高涨一事所采取的不透明、不妥协、不友善、甚至不认真的态度感到非常遗憾。

第一、政府在毫无透明度的状况之下和私营大道公司签署大道私营化合约。这除了平白牺牲驾车人士的利益，也导致政府每年耗费数以亿计的公款赔偿大道公司。

三美於去年9月在国会揭露，政府至今已赔偿20间大道公司385亿令吉。国内首条收费大道是坐落在雪州巴生的Shapadu大道，它於1984年开始收费，接着是1988年通车的南北大道。在这385亿令吉赔款当中，其中有17.6亿令吉是现款，其馀的是税务豁免。

国人必需知道的是，这385亿令吉赔款尚未包括20家大道公司所鸠收的过路费。如果这笔过路费也一并加入，那么其总数将会是一个天文数字。目前，警方已经援引《1972年官方机密法令》开始对揭发白蒲大道特许经营权合约的四名在野党领袖，即刘天球（民主行动党）、蔡添强（人民公正党）、丹斯里卡里•伊不拉欣（人民公正党）以及哈达•南利医生（回教党）展开相关的调查。

虽然政府可以躲在官方机密法令背后，却无法阻止这项事实曝光，即政府所付出的385亿令吉赔偿金其实已经足以支付大道建筑成本，而且这还未把数以百亿令吉计过路费计算在内。

首相拿督斯里阿都拉无法透明与负责任地交待，为何政府付出的48.64亿令吉赔偿金会比巴生谷5条大道的41.25亿令吉建筑成本高出7.79亿令吉。这点已经让人民大为失望。更何况的是，48.64亿令吉的赔偿金尚不包括有关大道公司向公众直接鸠收的过路费，它是有关公司赚取的额外利润。

这种形同“光天化日之下在大道抢劫”做法已引起公愤，因为政府把使用者、消费人及百姓的利益出卖给大财团。私营化本来应带来经济效益及降低政府的财政负担。然而，在大道私营化上，政府却必须不断地付出比兴建成本更高的代价。

第二、政府无视人民通过正常、合法以及合理的管道针对不公正、不透明以及不合理的私营化合约所展开的抗议集会。

反对过路费不合理上涨联盟在1月21日以及上周末所举办的两场和平集会皆遭警方的暴力干扰。其中1月21日在蕉赖11英里举办的和平集会中更发生没有佩戴证件的警员殴打参与集会的人士。

在上周末于蒲种IOI广场举办的和平集会中，警方也以粗暴拉扯的方式骚扰攻击集会参与者，其中遭暴力逮捕的不乏许多毫无攻击能力的年轻女性。

我们对警方在最近的两场示威活动中所表现的不妥协、不友善以及忽视集会自由等基本人权的态度而感到非常失望。

第三、政府和警方如果没有意愿控告参与示威的人士，那么警方就不应该逮捕这群人士。

11名参与1月21日在蕉赖11英里及蕉赖皇冠镇主要通道和平请愿行动的数名行动党党员在2月5日受传召出庭，以协助警方的调查工作。遗憾的是，他们竟然在法庭吃闭门羹。

雪州行动党主席欧阳捍华说，11名被传召出庭的人士在抵达布城司法宫加影推事庭之后，才知道加影警察局并没有完成调查报告，再加上推事因病告假，查案官也没有出席，以致他们白跑一趟。

11名人士的代表律师林立迎（也是雪州行动党宣传秘书）表示主控官并不了解此案的进展，加影警察局也表示调查报告还没有完成，令人大感失望。

如果警方没有完成调查报告，甚至是没有意愿要把这群人士控上法庭，那么警方从一开始便没有必要逮捕这群人士。这是否显示警方的逮捕行为只是纯粹要恐吓参与示威的人士，从而阻止合法政治活动的进行？

在未来的日子里，如果还有类似的活动，这是不是说警方不应该再逮捕参与和平集会的人士，因为警方根本没有意愿把他们控上法庭？

我们呼吁警方不应再干扰和平集会的进行。这项集会只是公众人士行使宪赋权利以进行合法政治活动。

Photos at Anti Toll Hike Protest, IOI Mall, Puchong 4/2/2007

COME ON LAH! RELAKS LAH!

I don't want to provocate anybody whenever I participate in any demonstration, not even anyone of the police officers, but unfortunately it was them who always be the first to act provocatively on the people.

I use to tell them :"Relaks lah!". And this is the same I told them when I attended another anti toll hike demonstation in front of Puchong IOI Mall on 4th February 2007 4pm.

Why not the police to be "relaks lah" in facing the people? There are many bad guys in the streets nowadays and who know there could be another goldsmith or bank robbed in Subang Jaya area (two goldsmiths were robbed in fact yesterday in Subang Parade, which fall under the supervision of Subang Jaya Police District - and Puchong is also under this Police District). There were easily over 500 police officers on that day and one good question that we shall ask is that:

If your house is broken in, will you be able to have the police to arrive in time?

That's why I say, COME ON LAH! RELAKS LAH! WE AREN'T GANSGTERS LAH! YOU GO AND CATCH THOSE GANGSTERS AROUND AND DON'T KACAU US LAH!

雪州民主行动党发动反收费站涨价运动

雪州民主行动党发动反收费站涨价运动

自今年一月起，雪隆区的五条主要收费大道开始涨价，其涨幅从20巴仙至60巴仙不等。

白蒲大道的收费是其中涨幅最高的大道，从原本的1零吉，涨至1零吉60仙，高达60巴仙。

吉隆坡-加叻大道的鹅麦收费站，从原本的5零吉，涨至6零吉，而文冬收费站则是涨50仙，至3零吉。

其他涨价的大道包括沙亚南大道，蕉赖-加影大道及牙直利大道。

大道	之前 RM	之后 RM	涨幅 RM	巴仙率
Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong (LDP)	1.00	1.60	0.60	60%
Lebuhraya Cheras-Kajang: Batu 11	0.60	0.90	0.30	50%
Lebuhraya Shah Alam	1.50	2.20	0.70	47%
Lebuhraya Cheras-Kajang: Batu 9	0.70	1.00	0.30	43%
Lebuhraya Koridor Guthrie:	1.00	1.40	0.40	40%
Lebuhraya KL-Karak-Gombak:	4.00	5.00	1.00	25%
Lebuhraya KL-Karak-Bentong:	2.50	3.00	0.50	20%

反对大道涨价-政府只造福收费站公司

1． 此项运动的主要目的：

a. 让人民了解收费站涨价的真相。

b. 向政府反映百姓对大道涨价的不满。

c. 抗议政府滥用官方机密法令。

2． 我们的传单将以4种语言发出，包刮马来文、华文、淡米尔文及英文。传单强调两项重点：

a. 政府对大道公司的赔偿比大道实际的建筑费高达18巴仙，即超出7亿3千900万零吉。

b. 政府将大道和约内容归类为官方机密法令是没有必要和不切实际的。

3． 我们将会在雪州境内分发传单，尤其是那些受影响的地区。

4． 21名于一月廿一日在蕉赖11里收费站示威被逮捕的人士，将在明天早上8.30am前往布特拉再也地方法院报到。

5． 此外，雪州民主行动党领袖也将于明日陪同刘天球同志前往武吉阿曼警察总部报到，协助警方以官方机密法令调查公布大道和约内容的事件。

欧阳捍华

雪州民主行动党主席

Selangor DAP launches Anti-Toll Hike Campaign

Selangor DAP launches Anti-Toll Hike Campaign

Beginning Jan 1, the toll rates for five major highways in the Klang Valley increased between 20 to 60 percent.

Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong (LDP) saw the highest rise with its toll rising from RM1 to RM1.60.

The Kuala Lumpur-Karak Highway's Gombak toll is now at RM5, an increase of RM1, and Bentong toll was increased by 50 sen to RM3.

The other affected highways are Shah Alam Highway, Cheras-Kajang Highway and the Guthrie Corridor Expressway.

The new toll charges are as following:

Highways	Before RM	After RM	Additional RM	Percentage
Lebuhraya Damansara-Puchong (LDP)	1.00	1.60	0.60	60%
Lebuhraya Cheras-Kajang: Batu 11	0.60	0.90	0.30	50%
Lebuhraya Shah Alam	1.50	2.20	0.70	47%
Lebuhraya Cheras-Kajang: Batu 9	0.70	1.00	0.30	43%
Lebuhraya Koridor Guthrie:	1.00	1.40	0.40	40%
Lebuhraya KL-Karak-Gombak:	4.00	5.00	1.00	25%
Lebuhraya KL-Karak-Bentong:	2.50	3.00	0.50	20%

Oppose Toll Hikes- The Government is Guaranteeing Huge Profits for Toll Companies

1. The campaign objectives:
1. Provide a real picture and analysis on toll hike.
2. To express the dissatisfaction of ordinary Malaysians on toll hike.
3. To protest the government abuses of Official Secrets Act laws.

2. The leaflet consists of four languages, Malay, Chinese, Tamil and English. The leaflet highlights two major issues:
1. The compensation to highway companies is 18% higher than the actual construction cost, which is RM 739 million.
2. Classified highway contracts under OSA is unnecessary and unjustified.

3. We will distribute the leaflet around Selangor, especially in affected areas.

4. The 21 demonstrators arrested at anti-toll hike protest at the Cheras Batu 11 toll plaza will be reported to the Magistrate Court in Putrajaya on 8.30am tomorrow.

5. The Selangor DAP leaders will accompany Sdr. Ronnie Liu to report to Bukit Aman Police Headquarters, who summoned by the police under OSA investigation over the disclosure of the toll concession agreement (Lingkaran Trans Kota Sdn Bhd- Litrak).

Ean Yong Hian Wah

Selangor DAP Chairman

轰埠（Kuang）村民迫天天吸尘

300罗厘川行尘土飞扬

轰埠村民迫天天吸尘

报导：叶爱云

骑脚车的小童与罗厘擦身而过，令旁人为他们的安全捏一把冷汗！
（万挠3日讯）每日超过300辆沙石罗厘川行轰埠道路，尘土飞扬阻挡尾随摩哆骑士的视线，小学生更因为吸入灰尘而生病，轰埠村民寝食不安，惟恐有朝一日酿成伤亡！

村民指出，周六情况更严重，因为逢周六马登巴加道路禁止罗厘川行，致使他们只能使用轰埠道路，前往万挠丶根登丶瓜雪及吉隆坡等地。

沙石厂数量骤增

“平均每日300至400辆罗厘川行，周六数量增至1000辆，他们几乎全天候川行，给村民造成很大的威胁！”

村民翁才顺向《今日隆雪》指出，自从5丶6年前，轰埠的沙石厂数量骤增后，罗厘也与日倍增。

“目前，这里拥有约20间沙石厂及5丶6个炸石场，它们集中在轰埠的瓜里路（JalanKuari）里面，距离轰埠新村约1公里。”

威胁小学生安全

翁才顺说，由于瓜里路是泥路，罗厘川行时必定粘上厚厚的尘埃，它们驶至轰埠路时，沿途掉落尘埃，导致道路非常肮脏。

无论如何，他相信是业者获知记者今日到访，因此今早已在轰埠道路及瓜里路冲水，减少灰尘。

他指出，轰埠淡米尔小学位于大路旁，也是罗厘必经之路，严重的尘埃造成小学生生病，家教协会曾致函国大党主席兼工程部长拿督斯里三美维鲁求助。

他说，除了卫生问题，令村民担忧的还有安全问题。

“瓜里路拥有许多园坵，轰埠村民常出入，他们尾随罗厘后面，完全被尘埃蒙蔽视线，如果一不小心，必定酿成意外。”

翁才顺指出，去年10月曾收集村民签名，联署给当地国州议员及涉及政府单位，但没有获得令人满意的回应。

他认为，既然政府允许多间沙石厂营业，那就应该确保拥有良好交通规划，不能漠视村民的安危。

缺德者丢猪骨猪皮
小河臭气冲天

缺德者把猪骨丶猪皮抛入瓜里路小河，臭气冲天，非常恶心！
缺德者把猪骨丶猪皮丢入轰埠瓜里路小河，臭气冲天，非常恶心！

村民翁才顺指出，瓜里路犹如弃婴，大量的罗厘川行破坏道路丶扬起滚滚灰尘，最近更发现河流有一包包的猪骨丶猪皮。

他怀疑，这是巴刹小贩或非法宰杀场所为。

“我住在附近的甘榜大红花，上周突然嗅到臭味，但一直不知道从什么地方飘来，后来才接获村民投诉，河边发现一包包的猪只残骸。”

为了证明所言不虚，他今日携同本报记者到场，使用木枝拨开河边的垃圾袋，果然露出腐烂的猪肉及流出血水，非常恶心。

翁才顺认为，当局必须严厉执法，取缔这些缺德份子。

“如果任由事件继续发生，那一定破坏自然生态，也打击村民的环境卫生。”

河床变窄又浅
30户频遭水劫

轰埠沙石厂业者使用石头支撑桥梁，结果阻碍河流流水及河床变浅，数年来附近30户住家频遭水劫，今年已发生3次大水灾，大家苦不堪言！

村民翁才顺向《今日隆雪》指出，依据图测，位于瓜里路的小河原本宽66呎，但经过多次破坏后，越变越窄狭，如今根本无法负荷雨量。

“尘土掉落河流，使它的河床变浅。”

他说，更重要的是，罗厘多次压断桥梁，每次压断后，业者就会使用石头来加强它的支撑力，结果石头越加越多，最终导致河水不能顺畅流通。

他今日携同记者实地了解情况。

记者向在场的印裔村民了解，附近拥有约30户住家，近年来逢雨必灾，即使雨水不大，但还是无法逃过水灾命运。

他们透露，单单是今年内，已发生3次水灾，水高4丶5呎，村民的家园被浸泡在水中，欲哭无泪。

因此，他们希望当局能重修桥梁，以及还原河水的原貌，解决水灾问题。

州议员多次反映民声
申请拨款建交替路

报导：许紫菁

（吉隆坡3日讯）轰埠州议员苏海米已向州政府申请，要求雪州经济发展理事会，拨款兴建交替路，以供运载沙石罗厘川行，一劳永逸解决居民长期的困扰。

他指出，身为人民代议士，他已多次向州议会及市议会提出轰埠居民的投诉，即罗厘川行轰埠瓜里路的次数剧增，衍生尘土飞扬丶其他道路使用者安全受威胁丶桥梁损坏等问题。

“我建议州政府展开一项一劳永逸的解决方案，即兴建交替路。”

他说，目前，首要工作便是先聘请1名顾问，为该项工程进行评估，了解工程的经费后，再向州政府作出该申请。

“一旦申请获批，我们便交由士拉央市议会召集马来西亚大道局丶工程局丶县议会及罗厘承包商开会商讨有关事宜，包括讨论徵用哪个地段兴建该交替路等。”

“惟目前这一切都只是在向州政府提出申请的阶段，一旦申请获批后，相关单位便可以开会商讨工程事宜。”

他今日接受《今日隆雪》访问，针对有关万挠轰埠区内沙石罗厘川行，引起许多民生问题一事，这么回应。

询及当局会否暂时限定罗厘的川行次数时，他说，由于一旦限定罗厘的川行次数，将有许多工作人员会失去工作，因此，当局目前仍不会限定罗厘川行的次数。

他也提及，一旦该交替路建竣后，瓜里路桥梁损坏丶河床变浅及水患问题也会陆续获得解决。

投诉议员没下文
★陈亚文（轰埠新村村民）

较早时，我儿子开车经过，1辆鲁莽驾驶的罗厘越位拐弯，撞到其车辆，司机也没有理会，扬长而去。

我认为，罗厘川行，对村民构成巨大安全威胁，但是我们向国州议员及涉及政府部门反映问题多次，依然没有下文，使我们很失望。

业者应冲洗道路
★张亚狗（轰埠新村村民）

我常常使用轰埠路，进入瓜里路探望朋友，每次都尾随在罗厘后面，被灰尘阻挡视线，根本看不见前方的道路。

沿途的灰尘非常多，也威胁摩哆骑士的安全。

今早相信是记者来访，因此沙石厂业者马上来冲洗道路，减缓灰尘。

希望业者能常期冲洗道路，并非面对媒体时才出此下策。

河床变浅酿水灾
★凯兰（甘榜大红花村民）

沙石罗厘曾经压断瓜里路的小桥，后来业者重新建桥，在桥梁下堆积许多石头，以加强它的支撑力。

此举导致河流的流水受阻，灰尘也使河床变浅，结果使甘榜大红花频频发生水灾！

每次水淹4丶5呎高，村民被逼到地势高的地方避难，家园被摧毁！

A comprehensive Crime Prevention Action Plan is needed for PJ

A comprehensive Crime Prevention Action Plan for Petaling Jaya is urgently needed to prevent PJ from becoming a criminal city.

Assistant Officer of Command for Police District (AOCPD) of Petaling Jaya Superintendent Sugu on 28th January 2007 claimed that crime index in Petaling Jaya rose 22.6%, an alarming rate which not only surpassed Selangor’s 14.3% but also national average of 15.7% last year.

The increment of crime index by 22.6% last year as compared to 2005, a percentage even higher than the state and national level clearly shows that PJ is heading to be a city of crime.

There have been efforts from various parties and stakeholders in PJ, i.e. political parties, residents associations, rukun tetangga, business communities, enforcement units like Police Force, City Hall and other government agencies like RELA to fight crime but these efforts, if left uncoordinated, will not be optimized to fight crime in PJ.
The 22.6% increase in crime index in PJ is an alarming signal that it shows that police efforts to fight crime have not achieved any success. Several dialogues between the police and the residents held by local elected representatives have not been very effective in reducing crime rate in the local level. In fact, the situation has been worsening for the past two to three years.

Musa had even made a commitment to the public to fight crime especially the 3 priority areas of snatch thefts, armed robberies and drug trafficking. He had even attended a dialogue with PJ residents last year but unfortunately nothing effective took place after the dialogue to enhance social security in PJ.

Insufficient manpower to fight crime in the police force is also another major factor contributing to the worsening situation in PJ. When Christopher becomes the CID Director, he claim that he is taking charge of only 8,000 criminal investigation department officials protecting the public from criminals throughout the country. With only 8000 CID officers, how many of them are deployed to safeguard PJ folks?

The ratio of 1 policeman for every 5,500 citizens in PJ is a ratio too high from international standard of 1 to 250 citizens.

A Crime Prevention Committee of Petaling Jaya must be formed with the initiatives from various government authorities i.e. Petaling Jaya City Hall. This committee shall work as a working committee whose membership encompasses various stakeholders in PJ to formulate a long-term crime prevention action plan. Would this be more meaningful compared to just organizing countless dialogues with the police?

PJ需要防范犯罪行动计划

八打灵再也需要一个全面的防范犯罪行动计划，避免灵市成为罪犯之城。

八打灵再也副警区主任苏古警监在1月28日表示，灵市在2006年的罪案率飙升22.6%，增长幅度非常惊人，甚至超过雪州14.3%和全国15.7%的犯罪率增长！如果有关方面没有拟定一项全面的防范犯罪行动计划，灵市将逐渐成为一个犯罪之都。

虽然灵市各阶层人士（包括朝野政党、居民协会、睦邻原则计划、社团商团、包括警方和市政局执法组在内的执法单位以及其他政府机构如自愿警卫队等等）在防范罪案方面投入大量的人力、物力和财力，但是如果这些努力没有获得良好的协调，它们最终将付诸东流，无法在打击罪案方面做出最大的贡献。

其实，八打灵再也居高不下的罪案率显示警方最近的种种努力并没有达致重大的功效。过去一年由当地人民代议士所举办的数项警民对话也无法降低地方上的罪案率。更严重的是，地方上的治安在过去两三年似有恶化的迹象。

全国总警长慕沙虽然曾经向公众承诺，要打击攖夺、持械抢劫及贩毒3大领域的罪案，而且在去年也曾经亲临八打灵再也再也出席一场警民对话，但是对话过后警方依然无法增加人手，加强八打灵再也的治安。

当尹树基去年出任全国刑事调查主任时，他曾经表示他领导的是一个只有8000名人员的刑事调查部。试问只有8000名警力的刑事调查部又如何能够有效防范罪案？

如果以8000名警员来对比2600万人民，其警民比例是1对3250，这个比例比起国际警民比例，即1对250来的低。在八打灵再也，其情况更为严重，因为八打灵再也的警民比例是1对5500人，除了比国际警民标准比例低之外，也比起全国的警民比列还要低。

有鉴于此，各政府机构如灵市市政厅应该采取主动成立八打灵再也防范罪案委员会，并且让灵市各阶层人士成为这个委员会的成员，共同拟定八打灵再也防范罪案行动计划。这难道不会比举办警民对话更有意义吗？

选区拨款应该透明化

马华公会中委会在1月26日的中委会会议上决定该党领袖在处理选区拨款方面必须行动一致，不能私自公布在网络上公布。

《南洋商报》在1月27日报道一些中委班丹区国会议员兼高等教育部副部长的翁诗杰，在本身的网站公布国会选区拨款用法的做法不以为然，并认为这种做法太趋向个人色彩，无法反映马华领袖们步伐一致的团队精神。

虽然报道指出马华中委会议决党领袖今后不可再这么做，但是马华总秘书拿督黄家泉翌日便向媒体澄清马华中委会并没有发出禁令，禁止议员公布拨款详情。

马华公会做出这项决定，乃是因为在野党至少在过去半年以来一直对执政当局，针对选区拨款事项穷追猛打所致。

虽然在野党一直无法享有选区拨款所带来的‘便利’，但是选区拨款既然是公款的一部分，监督其发放过程、发放机构、受惠对象、发展项目以及经济效益等等自然成为在野党工作的一部分。翁诗杰能够大方把拨款项目和款项的详细清单张贴在其个人网站上，诚属国内在朝议员之首，也是其他在朝议员应依循的典范。

可惜的是，基于这样的做法会令马华其他议员‘尴尬’，黄家泉和马华中委会过后议决不鼓励议员这么做。尤其是这种做法将会导致来自乡村地区的马华议员可能因拨款分发不公而被迫面对不必要的责问。

公布拨款推动廉政

换个方式来思考，要求议员公布选区笔款的用途，除了因为人民有权利知道拨款的用途之外，这也是推动施政廉正透明的一大步骤。如果连选区拨款项目都不能透明化，我们岂能期望政府能够在其他方面透明化吗？

另一点我觉得必须纠正的是，要求议员公布拨款下落并不是要求议员公布到底他们提交争取的拨款，而是政府机构正式批准的拨款、项目以及数额。由此以来，议员无需担心公布之后会引来部分没有获得资助团体的迁怒。其实拨款是来自人民的口袋，议员为民争取拨款，理应不分种族、宗教、 语言或者地区。官方机构批准的准绳更不应以此作为类分，否则则予人感觉政府出示作风故意偏袒某方。

民间团体尤其是宗教团体，如果在议员上书争取拨款之后依然分文不得，那么他们应该迁怒政府机构的偏袒性政策，而不是议员本人。（当然，议员或其本身的政党是否愿意为民据理力争则是另一回事）。

因此不管是马华中委会喜欢与否，如果这些钱是来自人民的口袋，那么马华还是应该鼓励，甚至是要求旗下的国州议员公开议员拨款的去向，打造透明施政的健康政治文化，为国阵其他成员党树立一个良好的典范。

首相在2004年大选时曾经作出肃贪整廉的作风，并许诺打造一个‘杜绝台地交易’的政府。如果马华中委会决定议员拨款不可向外透露，这个决定不就是公开违背首相当初所许下的大选诺言？