The roots of tragedy
QUESTION TIMEBy P. GUNASEGARAM
Banning development on hillsides is the wrong prescription to prevent landslides. The right one is to ensure that standards are set and adhered to.
YOU don’t ban cars because of accidents. You make sure that people drive carefully, roads are built better, cars are safer and in good condition, people use safety belts and only qualified people drive, to mention just a few measures to reduce road deaths.
Short-circuiting any of these, or compromising on these standards, results in higher accident rates and a greater number of deaths and injuries when accidents happen. Like all public concerns, road safety has to be managed.
The recent hill-slope tragedy at Bukit Antarabangsa just outside Kuala Lumpur is yet another example of management of the process of property project assessment and development going awry.
Just as banning cars is not the solution to death on the roads, stopping hillside development is not the answer to the problem. It will only compound what is already a difficult situation in the country with regard to property projects given the looming economic crisis, which has made potential buyers rather cautious.
Lest we be accused of insensitivity and an uncaring attitude towards the plight of those killed, their families and those who are homeless because of the landslide, let us reassure them that concern for them and their worries is uppermost in our minds.
To arrive at the correct solution to problems requires emotions to be calmer and a proper perspective of the issues at hand. Otherwise, in the haste to appear conciliatory to those affected we can make decisions which will benefit no one at the end of the day and potentially harm others.
The problem in this case is not hillside development but the wrong kind of hillside development. The solution is not banning hillside development but ensuring that hillside development takes place under carefully controlled and supervised conditions to reduce the danger of landslips.
What are the prerequisites for that? First and foremost we need honest and competent local councils and authorities. Honesty is all important, because if the integrity of councillors and council heads can be compromised, the decision-making is going to be bad and in favour of the developer, no matter what.
Next is competence. That’s necessary at least at two levels. First, you need it to be able to establish what are the standards for hill-slope development. Next you need that to be able to monitor and establish for certain that developers adhere to the standards agreed upon.
For those who want to find the root cause of the tragedy, that’s a good place to start.
The questions to ask are these: Are our local authorities honest enough to turn down inducements that developers may offer and stick to professionalism and integrity? Are they competent enough to ensure that proper safety standards are set and adhered to?
If our answers are “no” to both those questions, then we should go about taking measure such that the answers are affirmative soonest. Honesty and integrity come first. If that can be established, competence can be bought.
There are enough consultants and experts on all kinds of construction methods and standards set in other parts of the world.
It will be quite straightforward, from a technical point of view, to set standards for hill-slope development. Perhaps this can be done federally and the standards made a requirement under the law for all local authorities to adhere to.
That will mean that all construction will be governed by a set of uniform standards no matter where in Malaysia the construction takes place.
On the second point of enforcement and supervision, one should merely send a thief to catch a thief. Developers have their own consultants to ensure projects are carried out to specifications. All the local authorities need to do is to have their own to ensure the same.
The cost of these consultants can then be charged back to the developers, who probably will pass the increased costs to the consumer. But such increased costs, in relation to the size of the
project, are likely to be small and constitute a form of insurance to house buyers.
These measures are basic and are a matter of routine in developed countries around the world – and to be sure there are many safe hillside development projects around the globe, too. Why they are not adopted here is a matter of some amount of conjecture, but not much, and it is possible for the reader to draw his own conclusions.
Even if all these measures are implemented, there is no absolute guarantee that landslides won’t take place. Just like car accidents can’t be completely stopped, we can’t completely stop landslides.
But without a doubt, we can take many measures to reduce their incidence, and the chances of them happening again, and cut the number of fatalities when they happen.
Which is what government, both local and federal, should be doing instead of theatrically thumping their chests and crying out in anguish each time such a thing happens.
P. Gunasegaram is managing editor of The Star. He thinks that corruption is responsible for a lot more ills than we sometimes realise.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Thank you, Zaid!
Once in a while, a voice of sanity surfaces:
Zaid: Chinese Malaysians Have Made Great Sacrifices
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/16969
KUALA LUMPUR: Former minister in the prime minister's department Datuk Zaid Ibrahim said true Malays need not be afraid, or feel lack of a sense of security.
"Take myself as an example. I'm a pure Malay, but I have a sense of security. I feel proud of my own race and culture."
However he said, the problem is that many people do not understand or respect history. Indians, Chinese and Malays have been participating in the nation-building process since a few centuries ago. The Indians used to work in the estates, while the Chinese and Indonesians have all made valuable contributions and sacrifices for the nation too. But we have all forgotten this.
Zaid Ibrahim quit his Cabinet post because he did not agree to the government's decision of detaining civilians under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
He said during an exclusive interview with Sin Chew Daily that the Chinese used to work here as miners, and they made great sacrifices during the confrontation with the communists, adding that we must understand history and what they have done for the nation.
"The rights of every individual must be respected and taken care of by everyone else."
"We are only talking about Malaysia as the 19th largest export country in the world, and that we have the twin towers and are a developed country... Do you think we have done all this ourselves? You're wrong. This achievement has been made after so many people from different ethnic groups have sacrificed for the nation.
"We are not talking about the positive things, but instead discussing how we should get worried because the Chinese have opened how many more new stores here.
"As a matter of fact, the first feeling we should have is not about worry. We should work harder to keep up with them instead.
"I've never been worried about the Chinese. In my legal firm, my partner is a Chinese, and we trust each other. Do you think I have built up my success all on my own?
"I'm not scared that the Chinese are smart, for I'm also very smart. I'm not scared that the Chinese are hard working, for I'm also very hard working. We have bad guys in every ethnic group, and you're cheated simply because you're not smart enough. We must educate young Malaysians to look at things from a positive perspective."
Zaid said certain people have kept on mentioning May 13 to blackmail the people. However he felt that given our current situation, this thing would never happen again.
"I am thinking, for a better future, all Malaysians should stand up and speak out bravely. The Chinese must defend the rights of the Malays, and the Malays must also defend the rights of the Chinese. Everyone must be properly taken care of here."
He felt that we should not rely on a single political party to take care of a particular community. It should be that the rights of every individual must be respected and taken care of by everyone else.
(By HOU YALUN/Translated by DOMINIC LOH/Sin Chew Daily)
Zaid: Chinese Malaysians Have Made Great Sacrifices
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/16969
KUALA LUMPUR: Former minister in the prime minister's department Datuk Zaid Ibrahim said true Malays need not be afraid, or feel lack of a sense of security.
"Take myself as an example. I'm a pure Malay, but I have a sense of security. I feel proud of my own race and culture."
However he said, the problem is that many people do not understand or respect history. Indians, Chinese and Malays have been participating in the nation-building process since a few centuries ago. The Indians used to work in the estates, while the Chinese and Indonesians have all made valuable contributions and sacrifices for the nation too. But we have all forgotten this.
Zaid Ibrahim quit his Cabinet post because he did not agree to the government's decision of detaining civilians under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
He said during an exclusive interview with Sin Chew Daily that the Chinese used to work here as miners, and they made great sacrifices during the confrontation with the communists, adding that we must understand history and what they have done for the nation.
"The rights of every individual must be respected and taken care of by everyone else."
"We are only talking about Malaysia as the 19th largest export country in the world, and that we have the twin towers and are a developed country... Do you think we have done all this ourselves? You're wrong. This achievement has been made after so many people from different ethnic groups have sacrificed for the nation.
"We are not talking about the positive things, but instead discussing how we should get worried because the Chinese have opened how many more new stores here.
"As a matter of fact, the first feeling we should have is not about worry. We should work harder to keep up with them instead.
"I've never been worried about the Chinese. In my legal firm, my partner is a Chinese, and we trust each other. Do you think I have built up my success all on my own?
"I'm not scared that the Chinese are smart, for I'm also very smart. I'm not scared that the Chinese are hard working, for I'm also very hard working. We have bad guys in every ethnic group, and you're cheated simply because you're not smart enough. We must educate young Malaysians to look at things from a positive perspective."
Zaid said certain people have kept on mentioning May 13 to blackmail the people. However he felt that given our current situation, this thing would never happen again.
"I am thinking, for a better future, all Malaysians should stand up and speak out bravely. The Chinese must defend the rights of the Malays, and the Malays must also defend the rights of the Chinese. Everyone must be properly taken care of here."
He felt that we should not rely on a single political party to take care of a particular community. It should be that the rights of every individual must be respected and taken care of by everyone else.
(By HOU YALUN/Translated by DOMINIC LOH/Sin Chew Daily)
Friday, November 28, 2008
The Backyard Environmentalists of Petaling Jaya
It’s fantastic how residents associations have stood up in 2008 to make known their grouses, especially about the poor performance of the Klang Valley’s various municipal authorities. Banding together into one of many Joint Action Committees, Petaling Jaya ("PJ") and Kuala Lumpur ("KL") citizens in particular have conducted public demonstrations, filed suits and led the way in exploiting the media and local press to further their causes, ranging from complaints about out of control advertising billboards, poor sanitation and traffic woes to broader issues such as environmental protection. It goes to prove that the best way to get asses off couches is to bring the cause into our backyards.
The ongoing saga of Bukit Gasing in Kuala Lumpur is a classic example of the power of NIMBY (“Not In My Back Yard”) activism. Back in 2006, residents living in the foothills of what used to be colonial rubber estates, got wind that development was being contemplated by owners of undeveloped portions of the area, which these residents have been enjoying as a green backdrop for several years.
For those who aren’t aware of the situation, a group of PJ residents living in the foothills of Gasing Hill conducted an effective campaign in 20006/2007 to mislead members of a very gullible Malaysian press corps into believing that a forest reserve was about to be developed by unscrupulous developers in cahoots with corrupt city officials. By recasting their neighbour as a mysterious agent of politicos bent on the destruction of forests, these residents managed to garner a huge swell of public support, with its calls for demonstrations drawing participants even from other towns.
It subsequently surfaced that the so-called forest reserve was actually overgrown residential lots with corresponding titles dating back to the 1970’s, before anyone came to live in the area. In effect, these residents were trying to deprive their neighbours of their right to build after they the present residents had themselves happily bought homes in the “forest reserve”. It’s a pity that the same amount of energy isn’t being applied to the true destruction of rainforests in rural Peninsular Malaysia: simple math would suggest that saving thousands of acres of virgin jungle will do the world a lot more good than defending 38 acres of a dilapidated rubber estate in the city. But therein lies the rub: those thousands of acres aren’t in the backyards of these activists.
The ongoing saga of Bukit Gasing in Kuala Lumpur is a classic example of the power of NIMBY (“Not In My Back Yard”) activism. Back in 2006, residents living in the foothills of what used to be colonial rubber estates, got wind that development was being contemplated by owners of undeveloped portions of the area, which these residents have been enjoying as a green backdrop for several years.
For those who aren’t aware of the situation, a group of PJ residents living in the foothills of Gasing Hill conducted an effective campaign in 20006/2007 to mislead members of a very gullible Malaysian press corps into believing that a forest reserve was about to be developed by unscrupulous developers in cahoots with corrupt city officials. By recasting their neighbour as a mysterious agent of politicos bent on the destruction of forests, these residents managed to garner a huge swell of public support, with its calls for demonstrations drawing participants even from other towns.
It subsequently surfaced that the so-called forest reserve was actually overgrown residential lots with corresponding titles dating back to the 1970’s, before anyone came to live in the area. In effect, these residents were trying to deprive their neighbours of their right to build after they the present residents had themselves happily bought homes in the “forest reserve”. It’s a pity that the same amount of energy isn’t being applied to the true destruction of rainforests in rural Peninsular Malaysia: simple math would suggest that saving thousands of acres of virgin jungle will do the world a lot more good than defending 38 acres of a dilapidated rubber estate in the city. But therein lies the rub: those thousands of acres aren’t in the backyards of these activists.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Hypocrisy at the Zoo
The Singapore Zoo recently unveiled a new show “The Rainforest Fights Back”, in which a fat and gaudily bejewelled man claiming to be a land developer attempts to “cut up” precious tracts of rainforest to be developed into a hotel, resort and various other projects. In proceeding to the targeted site deep in the forest, he gets lost but is able to hoodwink an innocent native girl to guide him in excahnge for a bag of candies. She is of course dismayed when his intentions to transform her forest become known but luckily, the animals of the forest get into the act, and repel him by throwing nuts at him.
Perhaps the Zoo ought to have consulted with Capitaland, presently the largest developer in South East Asia, (and a major sponsor) of the Zoo when the show was being planned. Had they done so, they would have more accurately portrayed the villainous developer as a highly educated, expensively bespoked graduate of NUS with connections to the Singapore government instead of the uncouth bumbling red-neck portrayed on stage. I don’t think any self respecting developer would be caught dead either dressed like or behaving like that actor.
On a general level, it’s been perpetually interesting to observe how conservationists generally come from highly developed nations which have already chopped down their own forests. Statistically, more forests are actually cut down for farmland, timber, dams and subterraneous natural resources rather than for development. However, it probably wouldn’t resonate as well with a gullible audience to be presented with the notion that forests are being cut down so that they can get hamburgers from their fast food outlets, furniture for their apartments, and fuel for the powerplants generating electricity for their TV’s and computers. Nor would it be politically correct to suggest that the natives are themselves burning rainforests in order to create farmland, build new villages and in general eke out a better life for themselves. It is indeed more convenient to appeal to this affluent audience’s sense of righteous indignation by portraying that forests are being destroyed for luxurious holiday destinations which would be beyond even their ability to pay for.
The test of true concern which citizens of developed nations have time and again failed at is found in their unwillingness to provide sustained support for those whose lot in this world is pathetic. We’re ok when it comes to occasionally giving a donation, but we balk at the notion of providing regularly to undeveloped nations. And don’t even think about asking us to drive around less, or not switch on our air-conditioners so often, or eat less beef, or shop less at our malls.
Incidentally, the Singapore Zoo is great. Everyone with the opportunity should pay it a visit.
Perhaps the Zoo ought to have consulted with Capitaland, presently the largest developer in South East Asia, (and a major sponsor) of the Zoo when the show was being planned. Had they done so, they would have more accurately portrayed the villainous developer as a highly educated, expensively bespoked graduate of NUS with connections to the Singapore government instead of the uncouth bumbling red-neck portrayed on stage. I don’t think any self respecting developer would be caught dead either dressed like or behaving like that actor.
On a general level, it’s been perpetually interesting to observe how conservationists generally come from highly developed nations which have already chopped down their own forests. Statistically, more forests are actually cut down for farmland, timber, dams and subterraneous natural resources rather than for development. However, it probably wouldn’t resonate as well with a gullible audience to be presented with the notion that forests are being cut down so that they can get hamburgers from their fast food outlets, furniture for their apartments, and fuel for the powerplants generating electricity for their TV’s and computers. Nor would it be politically correct to suggest that the natives are themselves burning rainforests in order to create farmland, build new villages and in general eke out a better life for themselves. It is indeed more convenient to appeal to this affluent audience’s sense of righteous indignation by portraying that forests are being destroyed for luxurious holiday destinations which would be beyond even their ability to pay for.
The test of true concern which citizens of developed nations have time and again failed at is found in their unwillingness to provide sustained support for those whose lot in this world is pathetic. We’re ok when it comes to occasionally giving a donation, but we balk at the notion of providing regularly to undeveloped nations. And don’t even think about asking us to drive around less, or not switch on our air-conditioners so often, or eat less beef, or shop less at our malls.
Incidentally, the Singapore Zoo is great. Everyone with the opportunity should pay it a visit.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Internal Security Act
What could possibly have been going on in the heads of the our leaders to have sanctioned the arrest of 3 persons under the Internal Security Act? I can understand Raja Petra: his attacks on the Deputy Prime Minister Rosmah Najib and her husband were getting to be a little too close for comfort. But why Teresa Kok – an inexperienced politician - and why the reporter Hoon Cheng Tan – one of dozens who have been covering the seditious antics of UMNO’s Datuk Ahmad Ismail?
Speculation 1: Najib had to get Raja Petra out of the way, but to detain him alone would be too obvious. So pick a couple of other targets- ones which aren’t too high profile – to get a mixed bag and attempt to spin it as a general initiative to calm the growing waves of unrest in the country.
Speculation 2: Same as above for Petra, but overtly attack a member from each of the Opposition and the Media, as a warning sign that Badawi and Co are willing to use brute force to stay in power.
Speculation 3: Imagine this… A cramped closet. Inside are Badawi and his closest allies. All except the PM are fretful, sweating nervously and emitting BO as the news of the Opposition courting members of parliament in Taiwan zip in on their latest HSDPA handphones. Pak Lah, the epitome of calm, nods off as usual, but owing to the dim lighting, his nodding was interpreted as acquiescence to proceed by the others present. Enter… the Malaysia Zone! Da Da Dee Dee Da Da Dee Dee
Speculation 4: Badawi and the leader of the Opposition, Anwar Ibrahim (a real hypocrite, bless him!) are secretly in league. This scheme, which any political monkey could have foreseen as being fraught with more downside than upside, was cooked up because Anwar’s efforts to woo enough MP’s over to topple the government on Anwar’s (rapidly approaching) boasted date of September 16 wasn’t working. And so, Badawi had to do something spectacularly stupid to push public opinion back towards Pakatan Rakyat. Ta Daa!
The reported response from the police regarding Hoon Cheng’s arrest was a classic: they claimed to be attempting to protect her. But what can you expect from wise guys who walk around collecting protection money: they didn’t know what else to say and so used the same line that they apply to local shopowners. Wise guys in uniform: aren’t there a few movies along this line? And so we come full circle: greek actors wearing masks on a stage: Hypocrites.
Speculation 1: Najib had to get Raja Petra out of the way, but to detain him alone would be too obvious. So pick a couple of other targets- ones which aren’t too high profile – to get a mixed bag and attempt to spin it as a general initiative to calm the growing waves of unrest in the country.
Speculation 2: Same as above for Petra, but overtly attack a member from each of the Opposition and the Media, as a warning sign that Badawi and Co are willing to use brute force to stay in power.
Speculation 3: Imagine this… A cramped closet. Inside are Badawi and his closest allies. All except the PM are fretful, sweating nervously and emitting BO as the news of the Opposition courting members of parliament in Taiwan zip in on their latest HSDPA handphones. Pak Lah, the epitome of calm, nods off as usual, but owing to the dim lighting, his nodding was interpreted as acquiescence to proceed by the others present. Enter… the Malaysia Zone! Da Da Dee Dee Da Da Dee Dee
Speculation 4: Badawi and the leader of the Opposition, Anwar Ibrahim (a real hypocrite, bless him!) are secretly in league. This scheme, which any political monkey could have foreseen as being fraught with more downside than upside, was cooked up because Anwar’s efforts to woo enough MP’s over to topple the government on Anwar’s (rapidly approaching) boasted date of September 16 wasn’t working. And so, Badawi had to do something spectacularly stupid to push public opinion back towards Pakatan Rakyat. Ta Daa!
The reported response from the police regarding Hoon Cheng’s arrest was a classic: they claimed to be attempting to protect her. But what can you expect from wise guys who walk around collecting protection money: they didn’t know what else to say and so used the same line that they apply to local shopowners. Wise guys in uniform: aren’t there a few movies along this line? And so we come full circle: greek actors wearing masks on a stage: Hypocrites.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Do trees falling make a sound?
My friends in Penang were inconvenienced over the weekend by a landslide which blocked a principal road they often use. There were several other landslides in the state brought on by the continuous rain over the past few days. These incidents bring to mind an old philosophical question: does a tree falling deep in the forest make a sound if nobody hears it?
The response from some of the affected residents is classic. As reported in the Star “Landslides in Penang being cleared”, September 8, 2008), one of them managed to highlight the idiocy of living next to hills in two concise sentences:
“Lee Wai Tuck, 46, said landslides in their area were common. He said he was shocked to see his backyard covered with mud and rocks right up to his back door.”
Now, if I were living in an area where landslides were common, it wouldn’t at all surprise me if an abundance of mud and rocks were to appear suddenly in my living room. Moreover, I wouldn’t be looking to point fingers.
Penang’s Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, on visiting the residents said the Government would identify the ownership of the hilly area. “If it is privately owned, the state will ask the owners to do remedial work”.
However in Selangor, vocal critics aligned with Lim’s Pakatan Rakyat (“PR”) party colleagues are doing everything they possibly can to ensure no works take place on hillslopes, even if those slopes need stabilizing. One of PR’s more famous MP’s, a certain R. Sivarasa (defender of alleged Malaysian sodomists), reportedly ran around earlier this year vapidly and repeatedly saying “Not one cangkul in the ground” in seeking to publicize his efforts on behalf of various residents living around Gasing Hill. (For you non-Malaysians, a cangkul is akin to a spade. This is actually a great study of hypocritical owners telling other owners why the former should have the right to live dangerously but not the latter. More on this another day).
Another interesting case study which I've ben tracking is the hillside project called Damansara21 where work has been halted as the result of complaints by its neighbours: the owner, Selangor Dredging Berhad, is in a Catch-22 situation: do works, risk landslides and be condemned; don’t do works, risk landslides and be condemned.
I’ve been told, and it makes sense to me, that just as trees fall naturally without human interference, landslides also occur naturally without human interference. The residents living on and around hillslopes voluntarily choose to do so with this knowledge and should move out if they are concerned about landslides. However Malaysians, being what we are, are clearly capable of building our houses on sand without foundations and then scratching our head in wonder when the rains come.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Pakatan Rakyat or Pakatan Hutan
The Malay Mail published an article entitled "Rape of forest reserve continues unabated" on 3 September 2008. It was topped (as usual) by a provocative photo of an excavator next to a mess of fallen trees, bearing the caption "Deforestation: Illegal land clearing taking place in the Raja Muda Musa Forest Reserve. This picture was taken last May"
This was a great expose containing multiple instances of hypocrisy:
State executive councillor Elizabeth Wong continues to display her utter disregard for the poor and disenfranchised. It's easy to shout "Save the forest" from her air-conditioned office and comfortable home, but who gives a shit about the farmers who eke out a living from huts next to the forest. “Officers in charge of enforcement should act firmly. We cannot be selective about when we want to carry out preventive action because this is a serious problem,” she added.
The best part of this latest nonsense from the immature state government of Selangor is that it was another State executive councillor, Yaakob Sapari, who was in charge of Agriculture and Natural Resources who stopped the enforcement officers. "Yaakob told Malay Mail that he wanted to give those who have encroached into the forest reserve more time to move out and find an alternative site... Almost all these farmers have been lurking in and around the forest reserve for many years and have refused to leave, simply because they have no where else to go."
On a general tack, this article is one of so many others by the Malaysian media that obviously pander to the public's desire for scandal at the expense of accurate and fair reporting. I've had the pleasure of chatting with various editors who have at various times separately commented that what sells newspapers is sex, violence and scandal; truth doesn't figure into the picture. Let the readers be misled, so long as they keep buying our paper!!
The entire barrage of articles accompanying the recent landslide in Damansara Heights provided a vivid study of how wildly differing accounts can be of just one, manifestly observable event: some reported that mud had flowed into the house while others claimed that whole houses were completely destroyed; some claimed that the residents were fearfully relocating while another emphasized that residents want to move back or are staying put, etc etc.
In this case, having failed to find tantalizing and current photos to back the article, the Malay Mail dug out a photo which was not only outdated, but not even of the affected areas and parties. Contrary to the title and photo, it turns out that there was in fact not just one excavator at the forest reserve, but three, all of which were driven by officers from the Selangor Forestry Department going about their duties! It's getting so bad that the newsstand looks like it only has tabloids on offer: next thing we'll see is pictures of little green men running about on the front page.
To the State Government of Tan Sri Khalid, I say: GROW UP! Life is complex and the last thing you ought to be doing is behaving as if there is only one solution to every problem. And while you're growing up, stop hypocritically calling yourself Pakatan Rakyat, and start calling yourselves Pakatan Hutan. At least we'll know what we're voting for.
This was a great expose containing multiple instances of hypocrisy:
State executive councillor Elizabeth Wong continues to display her utter disregard for the poor and disenfranchised. It's easy to shout "Save the forest" from her air-conditioned office and comfortable home, but who gives a shit about the farmers who eke out a living from huts next to the forest. “Officers in charge of enforcement should act firmly. We cannot be selective about when we want to carry out preventive action because this is a serious problem,” she added.
The best part of this latest nonsense from the immature state government of Selangor is that it was another State executive councillor, Yaakob Sapari, who was in charge of Agriculture and Natural Resources who stopped the enforcement officers. "Yaakob told Malay Mail that he wanted to give those who have encroached into the forest reserve more time to move out and find an alternative site... Almost all these farmers have been lurking in and around the forest reserve for many years and have refused to leave, simply because they have no where else to go."
On a general tack, this article is one of so many others by the Malaysian media that obviously pander to the public's desire for scandal at the expense of accurate and fair reporting. I've had the pleasure of chatting with various editors who have at various times separately commented that what sells newspapers is sex, violence and scandal; truth doesn't figure into the picture. Let the readers be misled, so long as they keep buying our paper!!
The entire barrage of articles accompanying the recent landslide in Damansara Heights provided a vivid study of how wildly differing accounts can be of just one, manifestly observable event: some reported that mud had flowed into the house while others claimed that whole houses were completely destroyed; some claimed that the residents were fearfully relocating while another emphasized that residents want to move back or are staying put, etc etc.
In this case, having failed to find tantalizing and current photos to back the article, the Malay Mail dug out a photo which was not only outdated, but not even of the affected areas and parties. Contrary to the title and photo, it turns out that there was in fact not just one excavator at the forest reserve, but three, all of which were driven by officers from the Selangor Forestry Department going about their duties! It's getting so bad that the newsstand looks like it only has tabloids on offer: next thing we'll see is pictures of little green men running about on the front page.
To the State Government of Tan Sri Khalid, I say: GROW UP! Life is complex and the last thing you ought to be doing is behaving as if there is only one solution to every problem. And while you're growing up, stop hypocritically calling yourself Pakatan Rakyat, and start calling yourselves Pakatan Hutan. At least we'll know what we're voting for.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
I generally confine my views to the Malaysian scene and will return to it shortly after some additional research. However, it's always good to take note of hypocrisy when it happens on a large scale. And surely nothing can be grander than committing a blatant act of hypocrisy on the Olympic stage. At this point, you're probably thinking about the idiotic games officials who invoked the gods of Milli Vanilli (did I even spell his name right?) when they allowed a little girl to be impersonated during the Opening Ceremonies. But I'm thinking more of Putin and his cronies (yes, they have cronies in super powers too): Send a contingent to Beijing to profess unity, fraternity, human excellence, etc., etc., etc., while launching an attack on Georgia AT THE SAME TIME! Wow! Now THAT'S what I call hypocrisy! It doesn't quite rank up there with Nazi Germany hosting the games, but it's close.
And always in the background is the Grand Master of Hypocrisy. For those of you that are blinded by the razzle dazzle of Hollywood, pay attention to the small print which points to the acts of the US in fomenting discord all around the world. As it relates to the theme of this post, American reporters were sent to Sichuan Province just as the games started to casually question victims of the earthquake whether they resented the Chinese government for spending billions on the Olympics instead of rehabilitating cities and villages ravaged by the quake. To their dismay, they encountered national pride and faith. By some lucky quirk of editorialism, the interviews were allowed to be broadcast, including an off the cuff admission by the reporter that Americans are whiners when compared to the bravery and confidence expressed by true victims. Ain't it amazing how the Games brings out the best?
And always in the background is the Grand Master of Hypocrisy. For those of you that are blinded by the razzle dazzle of Hollywood, pay attention to the small print which points to the acts of the US in fomenting discord all around the world. As it relates to the theme of this post, American reporters were sent to Sichuan Province just as the games started to casually question victims of the earthquake whether they resented the Chinese government for spending billions on the Olympics instead of rehabilitating cities and villages ravaged by the quake. To their dismay, they encountered national pride and faith. By some lucky quirk of editorialism, the interviews were allowed to be broadcast, including an off the cuff admission by the reporter that Americans are whiners when compared to the bravery and confidence expressed by true victims. Ain't it amazing how the Games brings out the best?
Monday, July 28, 2008
PR REPORT CARD: D, MAYBE F
So I’m talking to a young friend of mine working on a class project, for which he’s been reading various reports and wondering why the new Selangor Exco is so anti-commerce. He pointed out the following in particular:
State assemblywoman Elizabeth Wong has said, “Local councils should be the first filter to ensure that there is a sustainable environment, which is why local elected representatives should be on the board… The positions would be filled by non-governmental organisation members, community leaders and some political representatives.” (The Star)
Her partners in the DAP seem to be bent on nationalizing everything:
“Among the initiatives, they [DAP’s Edward Lee Poh Lin (Bukit Gasing state assemblyperson), Elizabeth Wong (Bukit Lanjan state assemblyperson), PKR’s S Sivarasa (Subang MP) and Hee Loy Sian (PJ Selatan MP)], will undertake is to ask the Federal Territory MPs to raise the matter with DBKL to halt the work and to re-purchase the land from the developer before gazetting it as a green lung… “The question of the compensation will be done in detail but it should not be done at the profit of the developer,” said Lee. (Malaysiakini)
The State Exco has put various projects on hold. MPAJ was reported as a state acquisition of one of these two properties for RM290 million (The Sun)
First, it’s interesting to observe that the business sector appears to have been sidelined: the assemblypersons don’t seem interested in what local businesses have to say. Second, I work with about 30 colleagues; if the company can't make a profit, well, that would be 30 families without a breadwinner in short order. Is it the intention for the State government to hire the people who will lose jobs as companies go out of business?
Indian industrial leader Tarun Das’ reaction to the momentous fall of the Berlin Wall was cited by TL Friedman in his book “The World is Flat” through an insightful description of the state of India from independence to 1989:
“Nehru had come to power [after the end of British colonial rule] and had a huge country to manage, and no experience of running a country: The US was busy with Europe and Japan and the Marshall Plan. So Nehru looked north, across the Himalayas, and sent his team of economists to Moscow. They came back and said that this country [the Soviet Union] was amazing. They allocate resources, they give licenses, there is a planning commission that decides everything, and the country moves. So we took that model and forgot we have a private sector… That private sector got put under this wall of regulation. By 1991, the private sector was there, but under wraps, and there was mistrust about business. They made profits! The entire infrastructure from 1974 to 1991 was government owned… [The burden of state ownership] almost bankrupted the country… We were always at 3 percent growth, the so-called Hindu rate of growth – slow, cautious, and conservative. To make [better returns], you had to go to America.”
I wouldn’t of course compare BN’s recent election losses to either the fall of the Berlin Wall or Indian independence; or the PR coalition to Nehru’s administration, but there are some interesting parallels. It has been shown again and again that government controls will not lead to the utopia that many social democrats envision. Just look at the state of our steel sector which is rife with profiteering and the size of our government bureaucracy which absorbs a crushing 51% of our GNP.
Can you imagine how many schools RM290million will build? How many impoverished families could be fed if we could reduce some of the resources used to fund our umpteen ministries? Can it be argued that spending monies to buy back pieces of private land is justifiable? At this pace, any time I’m upset about what my neighbour is doing on his land, I’ll petition the government to acquire his property! After all, why should only the residents next to vacant lots be entitled to public funds to expand their backyards?
I’m all for reviewing fishy projects involving persons connected with the old authorities. But it seems like some of our new reps are going on a witch-hunt: Are we going to throw out the baby with the bathwater?
Anyways, I told my friend that it is still early days. After all, there are lots of other hypocrites in the assembly: maybe they'll cancel each other out.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
MOOKL - (Coalition to) Move Out Of KL
Here’s a useful suggestion. Move out of KL.
Those who make the most noise about the increasing population in Kuala Lumpur should be the first to volunteer to move out.
Population increase is inevitable. According to Department of Statistics, there is one baby born every 58 seconds in KL. By 2020, there will be over 377 million more people simply by birth.
KL City Plan NOT Flawed
The National Physical Plan (NPP) anticipates population increase, development and refurbishment and there are plans for these.
Featured in NST recently, Derek Fernandez claimed that the KL Draft Plan is flawed because it contradicts the NPP (25 persons per hectare) as stated below:
Those who make the most noise about the increasing population in Kuala Lumpur should be the first to volunteer to move out.
Population increase is inevitable. According to Department of Statistics, there is one baby born every 58 seconds in KL. By 2020, there will be over 377 million more people simply by birth.
KL City Plan NOT Flawed
The National Physical Plan (NPP) anticipates population increase, development and refurbishment and there are plans for these.
Featured in NST recently, Derek Fernandez claimed that the KL Draft Plan is flawed because it contradicts the NPP (25 persons per hectare) as stated below:
“…However, in line with NPP objectives to achieve higher levels of land use efficiency, better use of infrastructure, in particular public transport and to create a higher quality urban environment with more parks and recreation areas,the present overall gross urban density of approximately 29 persons per hectare will need to decrease slightly to 25 persons per hectare. This target gross urban density has been adopted to establish a macro level assessment of the need to provide urban land.”
If DBKL were to follow the NPP guidelines strictly, all residents would have to live in detached homes and not terrace/link homes, apartments and condominiums - which is practically not achievable.
A quick check on the NPP’s website revealed that Fernandez conveniently left out the subsequent paragraphs that states:
“For the individual states, this figure will need to be adjusted to account for the development characteristics of each area. The present overall gross density of Kuala Lumpur is for example higher than 25 persons per hectare. At the Kuala Lumpur conurbation level however, 25 persons per hectare is an applicable average even though individual components of the conurbation, such as Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur have been developed at higher
densities.
Accounting for the increase in urban population to the year 2020, a further 331,520 hectares of land will be required for urban uses. This results in a total commitment for urban land in 2020 of some 768,610 hectares; an area equivalent to approximately 5.8% of Peninsular Malaysia’s land area.”
Source: NPP Town Plan
Scroll down to 4.5.4 Urban Land -> i. Requirements
Isn’t it a coincidence that his career has grown (and the number of clients) by leaps and bounds in light of these issues? Are lawyers allowed to ‘advertise’ and 'sell' their service via the media?
The lazy mainstream, alternative media and blogs who don’t bother to do their own research, preferring to conveniently quote him blindly, contribute to his rising popularity.
Taking advantage of such issues for career advancement is just way below ‘low’.
Implication of No-Development and No-Population Increase
Cities should be allowed to grow, given proper development plans. By saying no to development and to population increase, the noisemakers are in fact implying that:
* Children cannot live close to their elderly parents
* Young couples should buy houses outside of KL if they want a home of their own
* Outstation folks and foreigners cannot marry and live with KL-lites
* Outstation and foreign students who come to study in the city cannot stay on to work after they graduate
* Anyone from outstation cannot find employment in the city
* Expatriates are not welcomed
* No one other than existing residents can move to / live in the city
* It’s ok for prices of property to rise due to property shortage
Take Action
Everyone should contribute by taking action, and not just pay lip service. Citizens should do their bit by moving out of the city. The government must do their bit by improving public transportation and building better public roads. Toll rates must be reduced. And City Hall must ensure strict compliance by developers.
Many others have already moved further from the heart of the city because they can get a more comfortable home and a better living environment for a lesser value. I for one am moving my family to Sg Buloh.
The noisemakers should set an example by being the first to move out.
If not, don’t expect any support for exercising hypocrisy.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
“Hill-slope development: Planners must have flexibility to decide”
After so many “against-hill slope-development” articles on the papers, finally... I see a letter (in NST which dated 22 May 2008), written by S.S.S from Kuala Lumpur, which offers a different point of view. I hope more of the silent majority would come forth and speak against the ‘noisy’ minority.
“Hill-slope development: Planners must have flexibility to decide”
I AM an engineer and would like to clarify some misconceptions highlighted in the media regarding hill-slope development.
While I do recognise the Highland Towers tragedy as a lesson for all of us, we must also acknowledge that if proper precautions and technical plans are put in place, there is also nothing wrong in building houses or apartments on hill slopes.
What is important is for the engineers and builders to put in place the right plan and technology to ensure that the safety aspects of the development are given attention.
In this regard, I urge the public to not oppose all forms of hill-slope development.
As long as safety precautions are taken into consideration, city planners must be given the flexibility to decide.
“Hill-slope development: Planners must have flexibility to decide”
I AM an engineer and would like to clarify some misconceptions highlighted in the media regarding hill-slope development.
While I do recognise the Highland Towers tragedy as a lesson for all of us, we must also acknowledge that if proper precautions and technical plans are put in place, there is also nothing wrong in building houses or apartments on hill slopes.
What is important is for the engineers and builders to put in place the right plan and technology to ensure that the safety aspects of the development are given attention.
In this regard, I urge the public to not oppose all forms of hill-slope development.
As long as safety precautions are taken into consideration, city planners must be given the flexibility to decide.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
“Pakatan reps could have done better” ??
The residents of Bandar Mahkota Cheras are caught in the middle of a right- of- way tussle between Cheras- Kajang Expressway concessionaire Grand Saga Sdn Bhd and Bandar Mahkota Cheras’s developer, Nurajaya Sdn Bhd.
A reader of NST had voiced his opinion regarding the “Bandar Mahkota Cheras Crisis” saying:
“Pakatan reps could have done better”
IF the incident at Bandar Mahkota Cheras is an indication of the post- March 8 political maturity of Malaysians, then I must confess that I am completely underwhelmed by it all.
The utter disrespect for the law, inept crisis management skills and weak leadership are not the hallmarks of a progressive society.
Many Malaysians understood the difficult situation the Bandar Mahkota Cheras residents were in. But despite my sympathies, I find it hard to accept the complete lack of respect for law and ignorance of the legal process by these residents.
They not only took the law into their hands but also continually resorted to illegal means to demolish the barricade put up by highway concessionaire Grand Saga.
If the residents' actions were disappointing, then the behaviour of DAP's elected representatives can only be described as loutish. Anxious to portray themselves as defenders of the people, they behaved in a highly unethical, reprehensive and undemocratic manner.
Instead of helping to find an amicable and legal solution, these members of parliament were guilty of prolonging and worsening the crisis. It is clear that these MPs had resorted to populist actions to promote their personal and party agendas.
The police, too, did not cover themselves in glory by certain of their actions and inactions, either.
In their misplaced zeal to maintain "law and order", they acted in a manner that was not consistent with their ultimate objective of serving the nation and people.
But I was happy to note that they later changed their approach to a more practical, people-friendly and non-confrontational one that was more appropriate for such a crisis.
The most disappointing performance of this incident must surely be that of Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim. Not only did he fail abysmally as a leader but the former corporate bigwig also allowed his executive council, state assemblyman and MPs to hijack the incident and turn it into a political drama that almost turned tragic.
Khalid seems to have failed to grasp the fact that despite the complexities of the matter, as the leader of the state, he should have been at the forefront in solving the issue rather than issuing contradicting and confusing statements from Shah Alam.
I shudder to think of the consequences if the federal government had not stepped in to solve the problem. My confidence in the leadership of Khalid and the Pakatan Rakyat government is eroding day by day.
NST, Letters Section, Page 27,
Published on 6 June 2008
I agree with the writer that more often than not, the PKR subscribes to populist actions. They pick and choose issues that have high media visibility for example this Bandar Mahkota Cheras issue and several hill slope developments.
Aside from making noise from rallies and demonstrations, nothing constructive has been proposed for matters that affects the nation. What are their recommended solutions for the increase in fuel price, food shortage, etc?
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Petrol to cost RM2.70 from midnight
As I was driving back home this evening, I noticed scores of cars lining up at jam-packed petrol stations. All are scrambling to fill up at least one tank-full of petrol before the price increase by midnight. The same kiasu behavior was noted during the last price hike.
The fact is, there is only so much you can save from one pump. In the long run, what we all need to do is to change our lifestyles.
Based on a survey conducted (up to 2004) by the German Agency for Technical Co-operation, fuel price has been on a gradual rise (as below). Of late, the rise has been more dramatic. If anyone can find a comparison table from 2005 to 2007, please share! I think toll operators should subsidize our fuel price. What say you?
Malaysiakini posted this Malaysia-only table charting the spectacular price increase. Everything is increasing and my clients are not paying me more!
Sunday, May 25, 2008
The Rule of Law
In Tun Mahathir's blog yesterday, he wrote:
The rule of law, in its most basic form, is the principle that no one is above the law. Thomas Paine stated in his pamphlet Common Sense (1776): "For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other."
However, procedures of court are still subject to manipulation and seasoned politicians cum lawyer have every opportunity to 'play the gallery' feeding clueless journalists with information leading to 'trial-by-media.'
Although the law is king, unfortunately, perception is truth.
Governments, serving Prime Ministers and Ministers are well placed to initiate action against others. But when the Government, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister do something wrong, like cover-ups for example, then police reports may be made against them. But how can the person reporting be sure that the police will investigate without fear or favour. I believe some reports have been made but so far there have been no results. Public confidence would be undermined if investigations by the proper authorities are not made. If the investigation is only to clear the name, then can we say the rule of law is being properly practised?Malaysia is a country which practices the rule of law. Our laws must cover every aspect of our societal life, so we will know exactly what we can do and what we cannot do. Prime Ministers in particular must have everything spelt out for them in this respect. This will enable them to be charged if they had breached the rule of law long after they had retired.
We therefore need to have more Royal Commissions manned by people of impeccable character like the ones on the Lingam tapes. The Commissions can then make proposals based on speculations and possibilities can then investigate the possibilities and probabilities and help clear those in power. When this is done we can say that this beloved country practises the rule of law.
The rule of law, in its most basic form, is the principle that no one is above the law. Thomas Paine stated in his pamphlet Common Sense (1776): "For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other."
However, procedures of court are still subject to manipulation and seasoned politicians cum lawyer have every opportunity to 'play the gallery' feeding clueless journalists with information leading to 'trial-by-media.'
Although the law is king, unfortunately, perception is truth.
Pulau Batu Putih
Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim must be kidding. 12 to 4 is NOT a win-win judgment. For an island that is only 14.3km from Tanjung Penyusop in Johor and 46.3km from Singapore, the outcome is a national embarassment.
We have a long history and culture of 'tidak-apa' attitude as seen from this case. The loss is our own undoing. UMNO and BN also has a habit of losing Malaysian land without a fight. The biggest example is the loss of Singapore!
Monday, May 19, 2008
'You are a mouse!"
In response to Dr M's intention to quit UMNO, some veteran UMNO members have only this to say (in thestar.com.my, 19 May 2008):
PM Abdullah: ShockedMeanwhile, Abdullah said he was shocked by the decision and, despite their differences, had not expected him to leave.
Umno Deputy President Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak expressed his shock ...
Umno veteran and stalwart Tan Sri Aziz Tapa, 85, said that he was shocked at the news and was at a loss for words.
Umno supreme council member Tan Sri Rahim Thamby Chik said, "It's shocking news to me."
In Narnia: Prince Caspian, Prince Caspian was taken down by a courageous talking mouse named Reepicheep while running away from some Telmarines. With a sword pointing at the princes' neck, Reepicheep said, "What are your last words?" And the bewildered prince replied, "...you are a mouse!" To which the exasperated Reepicheep said, "You guys have no imagination."
'No dogs and Blacks allowed’ = ‘Only 10% non-bumis are allowed’
I was one of those who took the STPM route and got into a public university. During my orientation, a bumi senior asked me in a casual chat, "You dapat berapa principle ah?" I stammered in disbelief, "Errr... lima lah." We were required to take five subjects and the obvious answer would be to pass all of it.
I was appalled at the question because it implied that he did not pass all his subjects to get a place in the university. A more reasonable question should have been "How many A's did you get?" Or, a less kiasu question could sound like, "How did you score?"
I was appalled at the question because it implied that he did not pass all his subjects to get a place in the university. A more reasonable question should have been "How many A's did you get?" Or, a less kiasu question could sound like, "How did you score?"
Not much has changed I gathered, from all the top scorers crying foul over their failure to get scholarships (or even placements in courses of choice).
Disappointed Student wrote to Malaysiakini.com on April 25, 2008 venting her frustration of failing to clinch a scholarship despite getting 11A1s for her SPM. She said, in a response to other similar rants:
To ‘Schoolteacher, I would like to share with my case which is very similar to your case. I am a SPM leaver with an SPM result of 11A1s and I have a mother, whose is also a teacher in a government primary school. I am also the eldest daughter and I have two more younger brothers. With my family middle-class income, it's impossible for me to further my studies at a private college/university or overseas unless with a scholarship. I am pretty confident with my achievements as I hold extra-curricular posts eg, ,vice president, secretary, school prefect and I even went for the National Service programme.
I understand your daughter's feeling pretty well because I also was rejected for matriculation also for most of the scholarships that I've applied for (Petronas,Yayasan TNB,Yayasan Telekom,Yayasan Khazanah). Until now, I've only been called for an JPA interview.
Honestly, I don't really feel surprised I got rejected for those GLC scholarships and matriculation. As we know, matriculation is only open 10% for us, the non-bumis. Just imagine, out of 100 students, there are only 10 seats for us, the non-bumis. Frankly, I would feel surprise if I got an offer for matriculation.
In my school, there are about 20+ straight As scorers and they also did not get any offer for matriculation or other scholarships. We have only gone for the JPA interview so far. Even for the Petronas interview (they called it Petronas Educamp), out of the 20+ top scorers, only two managed to get selected. (One of them scored 11 A1s and one A2, another scored 11As and one B3, both non-bumis)
However, some of my Malay got an offer to do matriculation even with an SPM result of only 5As. I felt so hurt. I am so sad because I seem to be discriminated against. Nobody appreciates my talent, nobody appreciates my ability. As if our country has more than enough talented scholars.
So, to our country’s leaders, don't blame those talented scholars who do not want to come back to serve Malaysia. Don't forget who ‘threw’ them away before treating them as if they were rubbish. Frankly, sometimes I do question myself, why bother to torture myself? Why bother to wake up at 4am, sometimes even 3am to study? Why bother to score a straight A1s?
My mother once told me she is so disappointed with the Malaysian education system. Although I strived hard to score well in the SPM, but in the end, I ended up with no scholarship offer. Well, I am left the one and only hope- JPA. But my mother advised me not to put to much hope on this government scholarship.
Come on, after 51 years of independence, racism still exists in our country. We, the non-bumis, are like the blacks in US. In the past, US white people detested and discriminated against the blacks. They even put notices like,’No dogs and Blacks allowed’ in public places. Now, our government is putting up notices like ‘Only 10% non-bumis are allowed’ for matriculation. (And who knows if the figure of ‘10%’ is true? They might take 7% of non-bumis only, who knows?)
Our government also puts up notices like ‘These courses are only reserved for the bumiputera’ for IPTA course with SPM qualifications. For your information, courses like,’Asasi Sains’, ‘Prepatory courses for medicine’ at local unisare only for bumiputeras. Non-bumis, wait until your next life!
Most of my friends and me will choose to challenge of the tough STPM if we really don't get any scholarship offer.And I believe, STPM is the last choice but is it is also the choice of most non- bumis after a series of disappointments. I observed a few batches of my own Form 6 seniors and there were almost zero bumis in the Form 6 Science Stream. Of course, since they got into matriculation with 5As,or even with 2As from SPM, why bother to take the STPM?
Thursday, May 15, 2008
The Karpal Investigation
A reader of The Sun has written in to the local newspaper to voice out his opinion in relation to Karpal Singh’s “offensive commentary” which gave him the lime light quite recently.
The following is the letter written by Param Cumaraswamy to the Sun, published on 14 May, 2008, under the Speak Up! Section, pg17.
“Why undue haste in Karpal investigation?”
Datuk Seri Mohamad Nazri’s Abdul Aziz’s statement reported in the media yesterday that the government does not practice double standards against anyone who makes seditious remarks against the Malay rulers is very commendable.
He was further quoted as having said “I do not care whether the person is an elected representative from the Barisan National or Pakatan Rakyat.” These are stirring remarks of principle.
However, Nazri should be called upon to answer where he was in 1992/93 when then prime minister and UMNO president (Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad made virulent and highly seditious public statements against the Malay Rulers including the then Yang di Pertuan Agong, questioning their immunities, privileges and withdrawing some. Police reports were lodged all over the country against Mahathir, yet there was no action taken against him. Was not double standards applied then? Was not Mahathir then seen to be above the law?
Why all this undue haste in having the investigation on Karpal Singh expedited? In this regard we should be mindful of the remarks of the Regent of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah, reported in the media on Dec 12, 1992. He was reported to have said that “it was a misconception to think that anyone or any institution in the country was exempt from the law because there was not a single system in this modern age which denies the people’s basic rights and freedom”. The Regent made those remarks in the context of the institution of the Sultanate some 15 years ago.
Today Malaysia should be and seen to be in an enlightened era with a robust market place for reason dialogue, the exchange of ideas and opinions. Karpal’s remarks must therefore be seen as an expression of his right to an opinion on a constitutional matter and should not be viewed as an offence.
The following is the letter written by Param Cumaraswamy to the Sun, published on 14 May, 2008, under the Speak Up! Section, pg17.
“Why undue haste in Karpal investigation?”
Datuk Seri Mohamad Nazri’s Abdul Aziz’s statement reported in the media yesterday that the government does not practice double standards against anyone who makes seditious remarks against the Malay rulers is very commendable.
He was further quoted as having said “I do not care whether the person is an elected representative from the Barisan National or Pakatan Rakyat.” These are stirring remarks of principle.
However, Nazri should be called upon to answer where he was in 1992/93 when then prime minister and UMNO president (Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad made virulent and highly seditious public statements against the Malay Rulers including the then Yang di Pertuan Agong, questioning their immunities, privileges and withdrawing some. Police reports were lodged all over the country against Mahathir, yet there was no action taken against him. Was not double standards applied then? Was not Mahathir then seen to be above the law?
Why all this undue haste in having the investigation on Karpal Singh expedited? In this regard we should be mindful of the remarks of the Regent of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah, reported in the media on Dec 12, 1992. He was reported to have said that “it was a misconception to think that anyone or any institution in the country was exempt from the law because there was not a single system in this modern age which denies the people’s basic rights and freedom”. The Regent made those remarks in the context of the institution of the Sultanate some 15 years ago.
Today Malaysia should be and seen to be in an enlightened era with a robust market place for reason dialogue, the exchange of ideas and opinions. Karpal’s remarks must therefore be seen as an expression of his right to an opinion on a constitutional matter and should not be viewed as an offence.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Draft Local Plan - Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Piss
Pissed-off residents now have 6 weeks to raise their objections (if any) on the Draft Kuala Lumpur Local Plan 2020 (DKLPT2020). The Draft will go on display at the lobby area of the Kuala Lumpur City Hall starting 15 May 2008.
This is a significant event because it concerns the future of the city as every KL resident, home owner and rate payer will be inadvertently effected by it as it has the ability to either improve their quality of life or destroy it.
The residents who are likely to be affected by the proposals from the DKLPT2020 are those living in Sri Hartamas, Mont Kiara, Bangsar Hill, Bukit Tunku, Bukit Damansara, Damansara Heights, Federal Hill and Segambut/Jalan Duta.
This is a significant event because it concerns the future of the city as every KL resident, home owner and rate payer will be inadvertently effected by it as it has the ability to either improve their quality of life or destroy it.
The residents who are likely to be affected by the proposals from the DKLPT2020 are those living in Sri Hartamas, Mont Kiara, Bangsar Hill, Bukit Tunku, Bukit Damansara, Damansara Heights, Federal Hill and Segambut/Jalan Duta.
KL-Singapore High-Speed Train
One Horsepower - AP PhotoBuild the KL-Singapore high-speed train
-------------------------------------------------------------
Malaysia's fuel subsidies have reportedly ballooned to some RM43 billion a year. That's more than three times the Treasury's forecast revenue from personal income tax this year of RM13.4 billion, and over 20% more than the forecast corporate tax of RM34.8 billion. And, it is almost half the total estimated federal government revenue of RM102 billion.
Why avoid a one-time capital investment of less than RM8 billion that improves the country's land transport infrastructure, when the country is already spending five times as much on fuel subsidies in a single year that yield no long-term economic benefits?
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Edge Malaysia, May 10, 2008
By Ben Paul
News last month that Malaysia had dropped plans to build a high-speed rail link between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore was a major disappointment for me. As a Malaysian who works in Singapore, being able to get to the centre of KL within 90 minutes would have improved my life enormously - mostly by putting the food I desperately miss within easy reach. In my view, Malaysia should not only build a high-speed rail link to Singapore, but also invest heavily in expanding rail infrastructure between its major 'cities as well as between its industrial areas and its sea and air transport hubs. But it should drive these projects itself, with private sector companies limited to playing the role of contractors and suppliers.
The rail link proposed by YTL Corp was touted in news stories over the past year as a significant improvement over the existing trains that take as long as seven hours to make the journey between Singapore and KL, and road travel that can take as long as four hours. In fact, it would have been an improvement over flying too. While the flight time is about 40 minutes, travelling to and from the airports as well as the lead time required to check in for the flight typically extends the travelling time between the centre of the two cities to as much as three hours. That might have made the rail link the preferred mode of transport for regular business travellers, who currently have no other practical means of making the trip except by air.
A highly developed rail system that spans the country would also reduce the risk that the economy faces from rising oil prices. Malaysia's fuel subsidies have reportedly ballooned to some RM43 billion a year. That's more than three times the Treasury's forecast revenue from personal income tax this year of RM13.4 billion, and over 20 % more than the forecast corporate tax of RM34.8 billion. And, it is almost half the total estimated federal government revenue of RM102 billion.
If oil prices continue rising, which some market watchers say is likely, Malaysia will really have little choice but to shunt the burden onto its citizens. And, unless there are more efficient alternative modes of land transport available when that happens, the impact on the economy could be dramatic. High fuel prices besides surging trade volumes and choked highways are now also spurring investment in railways in many other countries around the world.
So, why is Malaysia's government backing out of the high-speed rail link project? Its stated reason is that it would have had to bear a significant portion of the project's cost. But compared to what it is already spending to shield its citizens from the full weight of fuel costs, that sounds like a lame excuse. Why avoid a one-time capital investment of less than RM8 billion that improves the country's land transport infrastructure, when the country is already spending five times as much on fuel subsidies in a single year that yield no long-term economic benefits?
In my view, a bigger obstacle to the government backing the high-speed rail link than cost is the scrutiny the deal will face from the country's resurgent opposition. Malaysians are understandably leery of the government providing funds for projects conceived and promoted by the private sector. Too often, the infrastructure assets are over-designed and expensive. And, the potential returns and risks of the project tend to be unfairly distributed between the government and its private sector partner.
The reality, however, is that financial support from governments is often necessary to make affordable rail transport viable. That's because the upfront costs are high, the lifespan of the assets are very long, and the economic benefits they generate are hard for private sector investors to capture. On the other hand, these positive "economic externalities" are difficult to measure, making it tough to determine the extent to which these projects deserve government funding.
Malaysia isn't the only country that's grappling with the problem of finding the right balance between private enterprise and government funding that gets railroads built, allows private companies to earn a fair return and protects the public from getting ripped off. Even in the US, some railroads are asking for government support for their investment in new tracks, arguing that the new lines create wider economic and social benefits, like taking the pressure off roads and highways and making land transport more efficient. But their detractors point out that the railroad sector is already so profitable that it is attracting the attention of savvy billionaire investors like Warren Buffett and Carl kahn.
Rather than struggle with these issues and delay much-needed investment in new railways, Malaysia would probably be better off if the government took over as the owner and financier of these projects. Indeed, when infrastructure projects are heavily reliant on public sector funding, the involvement of a private sector player seems to make little sense. Sure, engineering, procurement and construction contracts can be parcelled out to the private sector through competitive tenders. The government could even appoint a private sector operator to run the rail service for a fee, if it felt its civil servants were not up to the task. But there seems little point in allowing a private company to own railways that are built largely with government funding.
Working with experienced consultants, there is no reason the government couldn't come up with designs and plans for new railways that are as good as any private sector player's. It would certainly be able to obtain long-term financing on more attractive terms than the private sector. And, being in no hurry to recoup its capital investment, it would be in a position to price its rail services at levels that attract large numbers of passengers, quickly achieving the economic aims of the project.
This is something that other countries are beginning to discover for themselves. New Zealand's government agreed last week to buy the country's rail and ferry services from Australia's Toll Holdings for NZ$66s million (about RM1.6 billion), paving the way for more investment in the industry. New Zealand wants to encourage rail transport to take the pressure off its roads, but it found that enormous government support of the private sector owner was necessary to achieve this. In the end, it made more sense for the New Zealand government to repurchase its railroads, ending what some of its officials called the "painful lesson" of I5 years of private ownership of these assets.
Malaysians too have endured painful lessons in the development of the country's physical infrastructure. But that shouldn't be a reason to stop building now. Instead, they should just push for change in the way the ownership and funding of infrastructure projects is organised. Ultimately, their lives will be improved by high-speed rail links that quickly get them where they want to go. I know mine will.
Ben Paul is the executive editor of The Edge Singapore
-------------------------------------------------------------
Malaysia's fuel subsidies have reportedly ballooned to some RM43 billion a year. That's more than three times the Treasury's forecast revenue from personal income tax this year of RM13.4 billion, and over 20% more than the forecast corporate tax of RM34.8 billion. And, it is almost half the total estimated federal government revenue of RM102 billion.
Why avoid a one-time capital investment of less than RM8 billion that improves the country's land transport infrastructure, when the country is already spending five times as much on fuel subsidies in a single year that yield no long-term economic benefits?
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Edge Malaysia, May 10, 2008
By Ben Paul
News last month that Malaysia had dropped plans to build a high-speed rail link between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore was a major disappointment for me. As a Malaysian who works in Singapore, being able to get to the centre of KL within 90 minutes would have improved my life enormously - mostly by putting the food I desperately miss within easy reach. In my view, Malaysia should not only build a high-speed rail link to Singapore, but also invest heavily in expanding rail infrastructure between its major 'cities as well as between its industrial areas and its sea and air transport hubs. But it should drive these projects itself, with private sector companies limited to playing the role of contractors and suppliers.
The rail link proposed by YTL Corp was touted in news stories over the past year as a significant improvement over the existing trains that take as long as seven hours to make the journey between Singapore and KL, and road travel that can take as long as four hours. In fact, it would have been an improvement over flying too. While the flight time is about 40 minutes, travelling to and from the airports as well as the lead time required to check in for the flight typically extends the travelling time between the centre of the two cities to as much as three hours. That might have made the rail link the preferred mode of transport for regular business travellers, who currently have no other practical means of making the trip except by air.
A highly developed rail system that spans the country would also reduce the risk that the economy faces from rising oil prices. Malaysia's fuel subsidies have reportedly ballooned to some RM43 billion a year. That's more than three times the Treasury's forecast revenue from personal income tax this year of RM13.4 billion, and over 20 % more than the forecast corporate tax of RM34.8 billion. And, it is almost half the total estimated federal government revenue of RM102 billion.
If oil prices continue rising, which some market watchers say is likely, Malaysia will really have little choice but to shunt the burden onto its citizens. And, unless there are more efficient alternative modes of land transport available when that happens, the impact on the economy could be dramatic. High fuel prices besides surging trade volumes and choked highways are now also spurring investment in railways in many other countries around the world.
So, why is Malaysia's government backing out of the high-speed rail link project? Its stated reason is that it would have had to bear a significant portion of the project's cost. But compared to what it is already spending to shield its citizens from the full weight of fuel costs, that sounds like a lame excuse. Why avoid a one-time capital investment of less than RM8 billion that improves the country's land transport infrastructure, when the country is already spending five times as much on fuel subsidies in a single year that yield no long-term economic benefits?
In my view, a bigger obstacle to the government backing the high-speed rail link than cost is the scrutiny the deal will face from the country's resurgent opposition. Malaysians are understandably leery of the government providing funds for projects conceived and promoted by the private sector. Too often, the infrastructure assets are over-designed and expensive. And, the potential returns and risks of the project tend to be unfairly distributed between the government and its private sector partner.
The reality, however, is that financial support from governments is often necessary to make affordable rail transport viable. That's because the upfront costs are high, the lifespan of the assets are very long, and the economic benefits they generate are hard for private sector investors to capture. On the other hand, these positive "economic externalities" are difficult to measure, making it tough to determine the extent to which these projects deserve government funding.
Malaysia isn't the only country that's grappling with the problem of finding the right balance between private enterprise and government funding that gets railroads built, allows private companies to earn a fair return and protects the public from getting ripped off. Even in the US, some railroads are asking for government support for their investment in new tracks, arguing that the new lines create wider economic and social benefits, like taking the pressure off roads and highways and making land transport more efficient. But their detractors point out that the railroad sector is already so profitable that it is attracting the attention of savvy billionaire investors like Warren Buffett and Carl kahn.
Rather than struggle with these issues and delay much-needed investment in new railways, Malaysia would probably be better off if the government took over as the owner and financier of these projects. Indeed, when infrastructure projects are heavily reliant on public sector funding, the involvement of a private sector player seems to make little sense. Sure, engineering, procurement and construction contracts can be parcelled out to the private sector through competitive tenders. The government could even appoint a private sector operator to run the rail service for a fee, if it felt its civil servants were not up to the task. But there seems little point in allowing a private company to own railways that are built largely with government funding.
Working with experienced consultants, there is no reason the government couldn't come up with designs and plans for new railways that are as good as any private sector player's. It would certainly be able to obtain long-term financing on more attractive terms than the private sector. And, being in no hurry to recoup its capital investment, it would be in a position to price its rail services at levels that attract large numbers of passengers, quickly achieving the economic aims of the project.
This is something that other countries are beginning to discover for themselves. New Zealand's government agreed last week to buy the country's rail and ferry services from Australia's Toll Holdings for NZ$66s million (about RM1.6 billion), paving the way for more investment in the industry. New Zealand wants to encourage rail transport to take the pressure off its roads, but it found that enormous government support of the private sector owner was necessary to achieve this. In the end, it made more sense for the New Zealand government to repurchase its railroads, ending what some of its officials called the "painful lesson" of I5 years of private ownership of these assets.
Malaysians too have endured painful lessons in the development of the country's physical infrastructure. But that shouldn't be a reason to stop building now. Instead, they should just push for change in the way the ownership and funding of infrastructure projects is organised. Ultimately, their lives will be improved by high-speed rail links that quickly get them where they want to go. I know mine will.
Ben Paul is the executive editor of The Edge Singapore
Saturday, May 3, 2008
YB Unruly?
YB unruly, our new MPs? There are many ways to get 'excited', as Teresa Kok puts it, than to act like a bunch of hooligans. Playing down bad behavior is just bad excuse. It is far better to get down to business than to talk Kok. There is really no such thing as 'first day' blues. Once elected, MPs are expected to hit the ground running.
I for one am pleased that Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek declared that live telecast of proceedings in the Dewan Rakyat will continue. In the live circus performance, we can clearly see for ourselves the cast of Big Foots, Big Monkeys and of course, stars of the show, the Big Mouths.
Please lah. Address real issues.
I for one am pleased that Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek declared that live telecast of proceedings in the Dewan Rakyat will continue. In the live circus performance, we can clearly see for ourselves the cast of Big Foots, Big Monkeys and of course, stars of the show, the Big Mouths.
Please lah. Address real issues.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
The Hills Are Alive with the Sound of Hypocrites
In my humble opinion, I think lawyers representing residents of developments should not be talking to the press and having their name, face and expertise advertised in the media - print, electronic, and online. Who do they think they are? Politicians?
A lawyer should not advertise or solicit business except to the extent and in the manner permitted by the rules of the jurisdiction to which that lawyer is subject. A lawyer should not advertise or solicit business in any country in which such advertising or soliciting is prohibited.
It is difficult enough for seasoned laywers to rebut a conniving lawyer in court. Set a lawyer loose amongst laymen and the legally-ignorant journalists, and you get the media spinning headlines earning public emphaty.
What more, campaigning (public gatherings disguised as 'Family Day'), granting press interviews (there is always the option to decline) before, during and after court hearings.
Why not choose a lower profile case? Certainly there are many more resident-worthy cases. I certainly do not know if, other than mandatory fees, personal legal fees apply. If not, then what other motive? Career advancement? Love of the limelight?
For developments that are located in private land, and have gone through proper technical appraisal, surely the lawyers must know that it is a losing battle right from the start.
And yet, such lawyers play to the residents' sentiments, allow funds and false hopes to be raised. Such funds can be better used to build retaining walls to prevent landslides, or even to buy back the land from the landowner.
You, my learned friend, betray your profession and worst of all, the naive residents.
At the face of it, you are the hero and champion of the residents. But really, you are just another low-down hypocrite.
Monday, April 7, 2008
The Prime Minister Speaks (PMS)
The Prime Minister Speaks. Finally.
It was a rare PMS occasion where Pak Lah came forth after the UMNO meeting slamming his critics and nemeses. As reported in NST on (April 7, 2008), Pak Lah speaks:
On Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
"In 2004, when we won, he said we were too powerful and this was not proper, and that we should have some opposition. When the opposition gained ground, we thought he was going to celebrate but, instead, he hit out at us.... He says there is no freedom but calls me soft. Are they afraid of this softie?
On Tengku Razaleign Hamzah
"Ku Li needs to look at himself. He was the reason (in 1990, through Semangat 46) why we lost and Kelantan fell to Pass.... While Pas controlled Kelantan, did he try to return it to BN? That failed too."
On Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim
"He considers himself the leader-in-waiting... Let him wait. I am the prime minister now... He will say anything and do whatever is necessary, but it is a form of bribery if the transaction (of trying to engineer defections) involves money."
To me, all these are coming in a little too late. These things are not new and should be mentioned, if deemed important and requires necessary address, during Pak Lah's first term.
Blogger AC_Here talks about the 'unspoken'. But Lim Kit Siang notes the key point underlying the shoot-out session, and that is, a successor was named.
It was a rare PMS occasion where Pak Lah came forth after the UMNO meeting slamming his critics and nemeses. As reported in NST on (April 7, 2008), Pak Lah speaks:
On Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad
"In 2004, when we won, he said we were too powerful and this was not proper, and that we should have some opposition. When the opposition gained ground, we thought he was going to celebrate but, instead, he hit out at us.... He says there is no freedom but calls me soft. Are they afraid of this softie?
On Tengku Razaleign Hamzah
"Ku Li needs to look at himself. He was the reason (in 1990, through Semangat 46) why we lost and Kelantan fell to Pass.... While Pas controlled Kelantan, did he try to return it to BN? That failed too."
On Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim
"He considers himself the leader-in-waiting... Let him wait. I am the prime minister now... He will say anything and do whatever is necessary, but it is a form of bribery if the transaction (of trying to engineer defections) involves money."
To me, all these are coming in a little too late. These things are not new and should be mentioned, if deemed important and requires necessary address, during Pak Lah's first term.
Blogger AC_Here talks about the 'unspoken'. But Lim Kit Siang notes the key point underlying the shoot-out session, and that is, a successor was named.
A Malaysian Godfather ... Out in Cinemas Soon!
"A Malaysian version of the highly acclaimed 'Godfather' is currently in the making and will be out in the cinema by end of the year," said local filmmaker who only wants to be known as 'Y'. While the film is in progress, she would like to remain anonymous for fear of getting shot before the film is completed.
The multi-award winning filmmaker said that the storyline is loosely based on the acquittal of former Sabah minister Datuk Conrad Mojuntin. She said that this story is entirely Made-In-Malaysia and she is sure that there would be no censorship issues. After all, it has already been widely reported in all the major dailies.
On April Fool’s Day, The Star published a report saying that Mojuntin, 61, has been acquitted of a charge of criminal intimidation in connection with the fatal shooting of a 20-year-old man, Anthony Chang Kim Fook, outside Penampang near here about three years ago.
Some believed that former Youth and Sports Minister of the state from 1982 till 1885 was innocent. After all, how could the 'champion' of Youths possibly had any reason to shoot a young man just past his teens? Surely he can't be such a hypocrite?
Well, with elements of mystery, murder, and gang fights, Y is certain that this movie would be an instant hit, especially for those in East Malaysia.
Movie Synopsis:
(Names have been changed to protect identities of individuals)
In 2005, the local newspapers reported the death of a Sabahan youth, who was found dead outside a library at the Penampang area (nearby Kota Kinabalu). The deceased was identified as Anson Chen Ah Fook, a fishmonger, and the third of seven siblings.
At least three versions of Anson’s death popped up in the local newspapers. Although there are variations, one common theme is found in all the stories that had arose in the days after his death - feud. It was believed that the young Sabahan was killed as a result of some “gang fight” which was said to be resolved, until news of Anson’s death proved otherwise.
A fight outside of a local pub in Penampang was the interlude before Anson’s sudden demise. El Macino, from an elite family among the Sabah community, was part of the scene outside the discotheque which turned him from a respected ex-politician to a man who could be a murderer of a local fishmonger.
Fast forward to April 2008, and Macino was finally acquitted, after a three-year court battle. The story ended, of course, with Macino, as the victor whereas for Anson’s side, therein lies the downside of the case which were grief and disappointment.
But which version of the story is really true? The flashbacks reveals startling insights into the underground world of East Malaysia and the gripping truth about issues of justice and safety in the Malaysian community.
According to Y, their designers are already working on the film's merchandise. She believes there would be high demand for their "Shoot and Run" T-shirts.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Al Gore the Hypocrite
On politicians and environmentalism ....
Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9PRrjWa-eI
Do we have such people in Malaysia? Please share with me!
Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9PRrjWa-eI
Do we have such people in Malaysia? Please share with me!
Elizabeth W'r'ong on Bukit Gasing
It's shocking how politicians make claims without first checking their facts. Or perhaps, they do know their facts but choose to twist the information for whatever the reason?
According to an article in The Sun dated 28 March 2008 titled "Clearing work begins on Gasing hillslope", Bukit Lanjan Assemblywoman Elizabeth Wong who lives in the area, said that "there is now a significant clearing in the area on the Kuala Lumpur side of Bukit Gasing. They just started. I don't know how many trees have been chopped down, but the point is that they should not even be touching it."
According to The Star that also featured an article on this issue on the same day, residents of Bukit Gasing received letters from the developer. Elizabeth, who lives in the Bukit Gasing area must also have received this letter:
According to an article in The Sun dated 28 March 2008 titled "Clearing work begins on Gasing hillslope", Bukit Lanjan Assemblywoman Elizabeth Wong who lives in the area, said that "there is now a significant clearing in the area on the Kuala Lumpur side of Bukit Gasing. They just started. I don't know how many trees have been chopped down, but the point is that they should not even be touching it."
According to The Star that also featured an article on this issue on the same day, residents of Bukit Gasing received letters from the developer. Elizabeth, who lives in the Bukit Gasing area must also have received this letter:
A Community Relations Initiative
Greetings from Gasing Meridian Sdn Bhd! We are the developer of Sanctuary Ridge Kuala Lumpur City, a low-density, luxury residential development in Kuala Lumpur.
As development will shortly commence and as part of our program, clear and informative postings will be issued to keep you informed of our progress from time to time.
Sanctuary Ridge Kuala Lumpur City Website
Firstly, we are delighted to inform you that this website is the best source of up-to-date information on our development. If you haven’t done so already, do take some time to read more about current and future launches, details of the development such as the location, home designs, and other exciting features in the section called ‘The Development.’ Should you need someone to attend to you personally, please call any of our sales consultants in ‘Contact Us,’ and they will respond to you promptly. The ‘Community Relations’ section addresses the information needs of neighboring communities and other communities at large. In here, the ‘FAQ’ section provides answers to questions on safety, environment, approvals, and other areas of note and interest.
Erection of Site Hoarding
Secondly, you may be interested to know that we will commence hoarding at the perimeters of the Sanctuary Ridge Kuala Lumpur site over the next several weeks. The hoarding is being erected pursuant to approvals dated 2 October 2007 (ref no.(185) dlm.DBKL.JPRB.5114/77PT.1) and 16 November 2007 (ref no.BGN BS S1 2007 SEM 6).
Public Safety Announcement
Hoarding is a barrier which is required before the start of any work involving construction, alteration, repair or demolition of buildings. For safety reasons, we strongly advise that the general public refrain from any movement into the construction site. If you have children and/or pets, please keep them away (from the construction site) at all times.
Sustainable Hoarding Method
Shrubs will be cleared to make way for the perimeter fencing. To reduce the need to fell trees, we will hoard around trees that fall on the pathway of the perimeter. This will increase the time and effort needed to complete the entire hoarding process. However, as responsible developers, we feel that this effort is necessary to reduce unnecessary felling.
Sanctuary Ridge Kuala Lumpur City is a high quality, low-density residential enclave that will be the catalyst to transform and enhance the Bukit Gasing area. We thank you for giving us the opportunity to practice sustainable and responsible development for this positive transformation.
Thank you.
K. C. Tan
General Manager
Saturday, March 22, 2008
No Apology in the Media
I would say bravo to Berita Harian for being the only newspaper to highlight Lim Kit Siang's apology to the Sultan of Perak on March 18, 2008. I went around asking friends who read various papers and below is the summary of papers that covered the story (and not) based on their input.
Featured
1. Berita Harian - Yes, Main, Pg 1
1. Berita Harian - Yes, Main, Pg 1
No Apology
2. Guang Ming Daily
3. Sin Chew Daily
4. NanYang Siang Pau
5. China Press
6. Kosmo
7. Harian Metro
8. Utusan Malaysia
9. The Malay Mail
10. New Straits Times
11. The Sun
12. The Star
However, in the days that ensued, probably due to criticism by the public, the apology was mentioned in some papers but the manner it was presented suggests that the apology was mentioned in passing or that it was meant to be buried in obscurity. Quite a stark contrast compared to the wide coverage lambasting Lim Kit Siang on the boycott.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Fine Example
Admittedly, I had my share of traffic summonses from being a little heavy-footed occasionally. Once I pile up a stack worth a trip, I would then troop over to pay my fines. If I 'merayu' successfully, I could event get a 'discount.'
With the recent decision by the CM of Penang and Perak (who stupidly followed suit) to waive off summonses, there is no need for me to make such trips any more. Just wait till the next election and see what happens lah!
I totally agree with the Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) that this is the wrong move and that the message it sends out to the public is wrong. People (like myself) who paid our fines dutifully, are most unhappy.
Thursday March 13, 2008
CAP: Reconsider summons waiver
PENANG: Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has been asked to reconsider the decision to waive summonses issued by the local councils.
The Consumers Association of Penang expressed shock that Lim had made such an announcement before the state executive council had been formed.
He has no power to bend the law« S.M. IDRIS“We believe he has no power to bend the law,” president S.M. Idris said in a statement yesterday.
He said Lim should not “reward” the lawbreakers and discriminate against the law-abiding citizens who had settled their summonses.
....
I strongly urge that the decision be reversed. WTF!
Why I Love TVSmith
He really has a talent for political satire. I envy his ability to just simply extract the nuances and quirks of human behavior and put it plainly and hilariously. Mockery served with 2 tight slaps.
I'd like to share a good laugh:
http://www.tvsmith.net.my/duasen/190308_plsb.html
Adios.
I'd like to share a good laugh:
http://www.tvsmith.net.my/duasen/190308_plsb.html
Adios.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Lose Heart Zakaria
Former Port Klang assemblyman Datuk Zakaria Md Deros died after suffering a heart attack early Tuesday morning.
It is disheartening to know that there are people who are above the law and have extra special privileges. Not to sound cold or anything, but no one actually thought he deserved an eulogy.
Annie Freeda Cruez of NST today wrote:
Annie Freeda Cruez of NST today wrote:
KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Zakaria Mat Deros, 62, was unknown to most Malaysians until 2006 when he became the most controversial figure in the land.
Relatives, supporters and friends at Zakaria’s mansion yesterday.The media focus was on him after it was revealed that a piece of land worth RM1.3 million had been alienated to his wife, Datin Zizah Ngah, for just RM180,000.Then it was discovered that he had begun work on a palatial home, later dubbed Istana Zakaria, without planning approval.Despite being summoned by the sultan of Selangor and being chastised by all segments of society, Zakaria was unrepentant.He hosted a dinner for orphans at his mansion a day after he moved in on Oct 9. Reporters who were invited to cover the event were stunned when they were taken on a tour and saw for themselves the sheer size of his home.
Zakaria's mansion sits on a 43,000 sq metre plot. On the grounds are a large koi pond, a swimming pool and a mini golf course, among other facilities.In the house, the floor of the main hall is of top quality marble. Chandeliers hang from the ceiling. As the media spotlight continued to be trained on him, it was discovered that he had been operating a popular satay restaurant in Klang without a permit. The restaurant was subsequently demolished by the authorities. It was also revealed that he had defaulted on RM45,000 in assessment for three properties. When this became public, he paid up.He was rebuked by the prime minister and also summoned by the sultan to explain his actions.
Zakaria, who rose from a railway gate keeper to political strongman, said: "It was never my intention to boast or show off by building a bigger house. My wife and I merely wanted a more comfortable dwelling for our 11 children, seven daughters- and sons-in-law as well as 11 grandchildren."
He said the grounds had facilities for the community such as a surau and a tuition and community activity centre.Zakaria, who was Klang division Umno chief, came under more fire when his son Zainuri, the acting Klang Umno Youth chief, and daughter-in-law Roselinda Abdul Jamil, the Klang Puteri Umno chief, were appointed as MPK councillors. He himself was not re-appointed.
On Aug 24 last year, Zakaria made the headlines again when he and six other company directors escaped 37 charges under the Companies Act 1965. They were fined RM1,400 for various offences that included the failure to submit their financial statements and not holding annual general meetings.
Nothing seemed to be going right for Zakaria as last Nov 1, his name came up again over the Selangor Badminton Association's successful application for land from the Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor (PKNS). Zakaria was the association president and PKNS chairman.Tragedy struck Zakaria's family on Jan 16 when his brother-in-law, 45-year-old Fathil Ahmad, a general worker at Northport in Port Klang, was found hanged in his home in Kampung Idaman, Pandamaran. On Feb 21, Zakaria was not picked to re-contest the Port Klang state seat but the nomination of his daughter-in-law, Roselinda, 32, sparked an outcry as well.Roselinda lost to Parti Keadilan Rakyat's Badrul Hisham Abdullah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
