Barisan Nasional has won a handsome victory in Sarawak despite political awakening in urban Sarawak. Gerrymandering has effectively rendered Malaysia's federal administration as a kampung elect government responsible for governing all affairs including international relations, investments and urban administration. Therefore, Malaysians are blessed with eloquent parliamentarians such as Bung Mokhtar and Noh Omar.
One wonders how much opportunity costs have been, and will continue to be forgone if parliament is largely made up of MPs of these calibre. If urban areas are given more parliamentary seats, it is possible that more MPs from more educated and demanding areas would improve the quality of grey matter, debates and law making in the august house.
Sarawak as a fixed deposit for Barisan Nasional votes might no longer be absolute, but the BN's fixed deposit in rural areas, both in the Peninsular and the 2 East Malaysian states are still very much in tact.
Therefore it would be in BN's political interest to keep the status quo in rural areas and stem the spread of alternate thinking and mindset flowing from urban areas to rural areas in the era of globalisation and information technology.
Such a strategy, while is great at ensuring political survival, may result in Malaysians with fixed and narrow mindset, unable to adapt to changes, bearing a siege mentality that run against national interest and commonsense.
For example, calling DAP a "communist party" is nothing more than a kindergarten bully with limited vocabulary; as competent adults should be able to differentiate between a socialist and a communist.
Would this polarise the country's democratic influence and political divide into urban and rural? In the Malaysian context, it would be very easy to be mis-interpreted as urban Chinese vs rural Malays hence clouding the basic issues of accountability and competence of elected office bearers with the obsolete racial politics.
Therefore, we might see the continuation, or expansion of the misguided strategy of resorting to emphasizing racial and religious divide, such as church fire bombing, cow head protests, al-kitab issue etc hence unnecessary social unrest and make Malaysia look immature, intolerant and regressive. Gutter politics will continue to be a favoured weapon, as personal attacks would be much easier than engaging in eloquent, informative and insightful public debate.
It is worth pointing out that barring Johor Bahru, the more cosmopolitan the area, the weaker the BN's hold onto power. The top 2 favourite foreign investment destinations are Penang and Selangor, no longer under BN's control.
Therefore, can BN continue to exercise the approach to tamper with development allocation (look towards Kelantan) to justify it's position as the only political power to bring development? In my opinion, it would run counter to the nation's interest and the federal administration would look terribly incompetent and grossly unfair as well as immature to continue with this approach.
Voters should protest against any such allocation bias as there is no discrimination base on political affiliation as far as income tax rates are concerned.
It would be interesting to see how the returning chief minister of Sarawak treat the lost urban areas...would he try to woe them back or punish them for going with the flow of political awareness? It is something new for the grand old man of Sarawak strangle hold.
Najib's approach to all by elections and state elections revealed his hallmark - it's Najib who is contesting all the elections, and not what's his name or who is he that is standing up to be scrutinized and explaining to the voters who are they voting for.
Najib's hallmark in Hulu Selangor and Sibu is impromptu fund allocation; the legend of "you help me I help you " refers. This is a nightmare for accountants. Ad hoc financial allocation can easily make national debts situation and budget deficit worse. Malaysians are already shouldering heavy national debts. Also such ad hoc ang pows could well divert funds from existing allocations and may disrupt original development or maintenance plans.
Reading the report below, I wonder how much longer can the fragile financial position of Malaysia can absorb further haemorraging of tax payers' money and national wealth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/breakingviews/article/five-things-we-learned-in-sarawak-the-malaysia-insider/ *
The power of incumbency Conservative estimates suggest that the BN spent more than RM500 million on these hotly contested elections. Last night, the going rate in Miri was RM1,000 per identity card and apparently RM7,000 in Ba’Kelalan.
In addition to cold cash, the BN election machinery was supported by the impressive government machinery, from Kemas officials watching over longhouses to education officials working the ground.
Even the government-linked companies were out in full force in Sarawak, doling out gifts and opening bank branches, etc.
The point is that when PR go to battle, they are up against Umno, MCA, SUPP, PBB, Maybank, Utusan Malaysia, New Straits Times, PDRM, EC, Pos Malaysia, AirAsia, etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Malaysians are at an interesting junction in its history. Perhaps there is no turning back to the politics of old. Even Indonesia and Phillipines have made more political progress than Malaysia despite the continuing accountability issues. It is something that Malaysians have to decide for themselves.
Showing posts with label Sarawak. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sarawak. Show all posts
Making a case for Pakatan with Perak experience on Sarawak NCR situation
As a Semenanjung dweller, I do not have the full grasp of the NCR issue in Sarawak. However, I do appreciate that this is a key issue in the coming Sarawak GE, sufficient for strong and seemingly undemocratic actions to be undertaken:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.barubian.net/2011/04/swak-stops-ncr-activist-from-entering.html
S’wak stops NCR activist from entering state
Tashny Sukumaran | April 3, 2011
Activist Steven Ng says the refusal to allow him to enter the state was a BN ploy in view of the coming state election.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If that is the case, then I have to make a case for Pakatan administration. Please note that these intiatives were done after polling, not immediately before:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.malaysia-today.net/archives/16583-perak-clearing-land-title-backlog
Perak clearing land title backlog
The Star) - THE Pakatan Rakyat government has cleared about 14,000 of the 16,000 applications for land titles since taking control of Perak in March.
Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin said the state executive council met every Wednesday from 9am to 7pm to clear the backlog.
..........
On a villager’s suggestion that the state government should reduce the quit rent in view of the current reduced rubber and oil palm prices so as to encourage more people to pay up their quit rent, Nizar said this could not be entertained as the National Land Code only allowed a review every 10 years.
He said the villagers would not have a hard time settling their quit rent had they done so when the prices of rubber and oil palm were good.
Instead, some villagers were known to have used the money they gained from the previously higher rubber and oil palm prices to renovate their houses, he said.
Hulu Perak district officer Datuk Abdul Karim Osman told the group that up to December 15, RM7.6mil in quit rent had been collected, exceeding the RM7.4mil collection target.
Abdul Karim said quit rent arrears stood at about RM300,000 and suggested that pay-ment defaulters start paying up in installments.
A cattle rearer, who only identified herself as Kak Ton, lamented that her animals had no grazing ground, claiming that the State Agriculture Development Corporation (SADC) had taken over such a site at her village in Tawai, purportedly to build a bamboo-processing factory.
Nizar said since he also headed the SADC, the latter would have to find another site for the proposed factory. Since the site had been gazetted as a grazing ground, it should remain so and Kak Ton could allow her animals to graze at the site, he said, drawing instant applause from the crowd.
.......
At the gathering, Nizar also handed over more than 40 land titles of which 12comprised permanent new village land titles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am already hearing detractors saying Perak and Sarawak are different states. Yet these same detractors could well be screaming 1Malaysia and Rakyat Diutamakan. Nizar’s administration has already proven to be innovative, determined and action orientated. Even Perak MCA’s Mah Han Soon claimed that PR has solved a problem within a year that BN could not solve in 50 years.
Once Pakatan’s Perak administration hence the people’s choice was dismantled in the most unsavoury manner, it is back to square one.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://ckcounterpunch.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/perak-bn-govt-scorches-pakatan-policies/
Perak bn gov’t scorches Pakatan policies
It looks like the Perak BN government is bent on destroying all people-friendly policies implemented by the previous Pakatan Rakyat administration.
When Menteri Besar Zambry Abdul Kadir took his office in February, he was reported as saying that BN would continue the people-friendly policies implemented during Pakatan’s 10-month rule.
However, this turned out to be a broken promise as about nine people-friendly policies have either been scrapped or put on the back-burner.
DAP state secretary Nga Kor Ming is disappointed with BN’s about-turn on the following Pakatan-implemented measures:
* 3,000 applications from residents of new and planned villages to convert their land titles from leasehold to freehold cancelled.
* 817 elected village headmen had their term of office terminated. The village chiefs have since filed a suit in the Ipoh High Court to be reinstated.
.........
* The open-tender policy for approving government contracts, land and logging concessions reverted to the old system of closed tenders.
* The giving state land to religious schools and Chinese independent schools also scrapped.
* The policy of giving RM1,000 to the dependents of senior citizens who die too has been buried.
* The process of legalising the 134 new villages put on hold.
“Just because Barisan is jealous of our people-friendly polices, it does not mean that they have to penalise the innocent people and make them suffer just to show their anger at us,” said Nga.
Nga also took to task Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin for his “makan angin” trip during his one-day visit to Ipoh on Thursday while the country was facing the worst economic crisis in history.
“He just comes to eat, drink and takes a walk to meet the people in Little India. He can utilise this precious time to plan how to overcome the economic crisis and bring the nation back to a sound economic footing,” he added.
Humayun Kabir, Mkini
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is time for Sarawakians to decide whether systematic, considerate and consistent polices is superior to ad hoc and once off sweets before polling.
It is time for Sarawakians to demand Pakatan Sarawak and Central to affirm if similiar people first approach can be learned, adapted and implemented from Perak to Sarawak.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.barubian.net/2011/04/swak-stops-ncr-activist-from-entering.html
S’wak stops NCR activist from entering state
Tashny Sukumaran | April 3, 2011
Activist Steven Ng says the refusal to allow him to enter the state was a BN ploy in view of the coming state election.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If that is the case, then I have to make a case for Pakatan administration. Please note that these intiatives were done after polling, not immediately before:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.malaysia-today.net/archives/16583-perak-clearing-land-title-backlog
Perak clearing land title backlog
The Star) - THE Pakatan Rakyat government has cleared about 14,000 of the 16,000 applications for land titles since taking control of Perak in March.
Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin said the state executive council met every Wednesday from 9am to 7pm to clear the backlog.
..........
On a villager’s suggestion that the state government should reduce the quit rent in view of the current reduced rubber and oil palm prices so as to encourage more people to pay up their quit rent, Nizar said this could not be entertained as the National Land Code only allowed a review every 10 years.
He said the villagers would not have a hard time settling their quit rent had they done so when the prices of rubber and oil palm were good.
Instead, some villagers were known to have used the money they gained from the previously higher rubber and oil palm prices to renovate their houses, he said.
Hulu Perak district officer Datuk Abdul Karim Osman told the group that up to December 15, RM7.6mil in quit rent had been collected, exceeding the RM7.4mil collection target.
Abdul Karim said quit rent arrears stood at about RM300,000 and suggested that pay-ment defaulters start paying up in installments.
A cattle rearer, who only identified herself as Kak Ton, lamented that her animals had no grazing ground, claiming that the State Agriculture Development Corporation (SADC) had taken over such a site at her village in Tawai, purportedly to build a bamboo-processing factory.
Nizar said since he also headed the SADC, the latter would have to find another site for the proposed factory. Since the site had been gazetted as a grazing ground, it should remain so and Kak Ton could allow her animals to graze at the site, he said, drawing instant applause from the crowd.
.......
At the gathering, Nizar also handed over more than 40 land titles of which 12comprised permanent new village land titles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am already hearing detractors saying Perak and Sarawak are different states. Yet these same detractors could well be screaming 1Malaysia and Rakyat Diutamakan. Nizar’s administration has already proven to be innovative, determined and action orientated. Even Perak MCA’s Mah Han Soon claimed that PR has solved a problem within a year that BN could not solve in 50 years.
Once Pakatan’s Perak administration hence the people’s choice was dismantled in the most unsavoury manner, it is back to square one.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://ckcounterpunch.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/perak-bn-govt-scorches-pakatan-policies/
Perak bn gov’t scorches Pakatan policies
It looks like the Perak BN government is bent on destroying all people-friendly policies implemented by the previous Pakatan Rakyat administration.
When Menteri Besar Zambry Abdul Kadir took his office in February, he was reported as saying that BN would continue the people-friendly policies implemented during Pakatan’s 10-month rule.
However, this turned out to be a broken promise as about nine people-friendly policies have either been scrapped or put on the back-burner.
DAP state secretary Nga Kor Ming is disappointed with BN’s about-turn on the following Pakatan-implemented measures:
* 3,000 applications from residents of new and planned villages to convert their land titles from leasehold to freehold cancelled.
* 817 elected village headmen had their term of office terminated. The village chiefs have since filed a suit in the Ipoh High Court to be reinstated.
.........
* The open-tender policy for approving government contracts, land and logging concessions reverted to the old system of closed tenders.
* The giving state land to religious schools and Chinese independent schools also scrapped.
* The policy of giving RM1,000 to the dependents of senior citizens who die too has been buried.
* The process of legalising the 134 new villages put on hold.
“Just because Barisan is jealous of our people-friendly polices, it does not mean that they have to penalise the innocent people and make them suffer just to show their anger at us,” said Nga.
Nga also took to task Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin for his “makan angin” trip during his one-day visit to Ipoh on Thursday while the country was facing the worst economic crisis in history.
“He just comes to eat, drink and takes a walk to meet the people in Little India. He can utilise this precious time to plan how to overcome the economic crisis and bring the nation back to a sound economic footing,” he added.
Humayun Kabir, Mkini
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is time for Sarawakians to decide whether systematic, considerate and consistent polices is superior to ad hoc and once off sweets before polling.
It is time for Sarawakians to demand Pakatan Sarawak and Central to affirm if similiar people first approach can be learned, adapted and implemented from Perak to Sarawak.
Is it too little and too many tar roads in Sarawak?
My car's road tax is expiring soon and so is the coming of Sarawak GE.
The other day, I picked up the following information from YB Teo Nie Ching's blog:
Sabah & Sarawak possess 60% of land mass of the country but length of tar road is only 6,390km while West M'sia has 21,589km length of tar road
I also chanced upon the audited accounts of UBG Berhad coincidentally.
UGB Berhad has a 15 years road maintenance concession granted by the Sarawak State Government with effect from 1 January 2003 to maintain 4,600km of roads in the state. Given YB Teo's disclosure that there is only 6,390km of tar roads in Sarawak and Sabah, this Road Maintenance Agreement probably granted this happy listed company a monopoly of road maintenance for the entire state.
Revenue recognition policy for this business segment as disclosed in UGB's accounts is"fixed rates subject to revision in accordance with the agreement".
When it is fixed, it is suppose to be fixed. If it is subject to revision then is there an incentive for the concessionaire to keep tight cost control and prevent cost overrun? How hard or how easy is it for the concessionaire to get the rates revised? If abused, this is as good as a profit guarantee or blank cheque. Who approved this Road Maintenance Agreement to be signed with UGB Berhad? Was this tabled and deliberated in the state assembly then?
Does this look like the equivalent of Semenanjung's ever controversial, very politicalized, profit guaranteeing, inflation-inducing toll highways? Before we even contemplate how much money UGB is making out of this deal, I remember in my form 6 economics class, my dear teacher Puan C. (I still remember your full name, cikgu) taught us that theoretically government collect taxes, taxes are used for providing public goods and it is of the interest of the people that such services are provided without profit-motive.
Let's have a look at the numbers in 2009 and 2008. For these 2 years alone, RM76million gross profit was earned from maintaining the roads. These "profits" I suppose were paid from taxes and instead of being channelled back to building new roads, further repairs and improvement of roads, have been channelled into hands of a plc, which may have become dividends, directors' remuneration (including retirement benefits) etc.
That RM242,593,000 worked out to be RM26,369 per year per km. Sounds like Sarawakians have the best tar roads and pavement in the world. Being a Semenanjungite, I really do not know for very sure.
On 12 May 2009, UGB sold the 2 subsidiary companies for road maintenance and pavement for a combined amount of RM75 million, instant cash generation to the holding company, to its other subsidiary Putrajaya Perdana Berhad. A simple case of left pocket to right pocket.
As Putrajaya Perdana Berhad is aggressively creating prominent landmarks in Semenanjung, I do wonder if the collection of road maintenance revenue in Sarawak can be re-invested back into Sarawak.
It is also interesting to note Mr Low Taek Jho joined Putrajaya Perdana Berhad as an advisor (and I have a hard time understanding what "Non-Independent Non-Executive" means).
All said and done, I notice among the domineering shareholder of Putrajaya Perdana Berhad includes Cahya Mata Sarawak Berhad, a company linked to the current chief minister which makes me wonder if Sarawak is not big enough for him. A partnership of Mr Low and Chief Minister Taib could prove to be redoubtable political-economic tie up.
So if UMNO did not cross over to Sarawak as they did to Sabah, Sarawak's finest export to Semenanjung seems to include Tan Sri Ting Pek Khing and Cahya Sarawak via Putrajaya Perdana Berhad then.
The other day, I picked up the following information from YB Teo Nie Ching's blog:
Sabah & Sarawak possess 60% of land mass of the country but length of tar road is only 6,390km while West M'sia has 21,589km length of tar road
I also chanced upon the audited accounts of UBG Berhad coincidentally.
UGB Berhad has a 15 years road maintenance concession granted by the Sarawak State Government with effect from 1 January 2003 to maintain 4,600km of roads in the state. Given YB Teo's disclosure that there is only 6,390km of tar roads in Sarawak and Sabah, this Road Maintenance Agreement probably granted this happy listed company a monopoly of road maintenance for the entire state.
Source: Annual report and accounts of UGB Berhad for 2009
Source : Annual Report and Accounts of Putrajaya Perdana Berhad, 2009
Revenue recognition policy for this business segment as disclosed in UGB's accounts is"fixed rates subject to revision in accordance with the agreement".
When it is fixed, it is suppose to be fixed. If it is subject to revision then is there an incentive for the concessionaire to keep tight cost control and prevent cost overrun? How hard or how easy is it for the concessionaire to get the rates revised? If abused, this is as good as a profit guarantee or blank cheque. Who approved this Road Maintenance Agreement to be signed with UGB Berhad? Was this tabled and deliberated in the state assembly then?Does this look like the equivalent of Semenanjung's ever controversial, very politicalized, profit guaranteeing, inflation-inducing toll highways? Before we even contemplate how much money UGB is making out of this deal, I remember in my form 6 economics class, my dear teacher Puan C. (I still remember your full name, cikgu) taught us that theoretically government collect taxes, taxes are used for providing public goods and it is of the interest of the people that such services are provided without profit-motive.
Let's have a look at the numbers in 2009 and 2008. For these 2 years alone, RM76million gross profit was earned from maintaining the roads. These "profits" I suppose were paid from taxes and instead of being channelled back to building new roads, further repairs and improvement of roads, have been channelled into hands of a plc, which may have become dividends, directors' remuneration (including retirement benefits) etc.
That RM242,593,000 worked out to be RM26,369 per year per km. Sounds like Sarawakians have the best tar roads and pavement in the world. Being a Semenanjungite, I really do not know for very sure.
On 12 May 2009, UGB sold the 2 subsidiary companies for road maintenance and pavement for a combined amount of RM75 million, instant cash generation to the holding company, to its other subsidiary Putrajaya Perdana Berhad. A simple case of left pocket to right pocket.As Putrajaya Perdana Berhad is aggressively creating prominent landmarks in Semenanjung, I do wonder if the collection of road maintenance revenue in Sarawak can be re-invested back into Sarawak.
It is also interesting to note Mr Low Taek Jho joined Putrajaya Perdana Berhad as an advisor (and I have a hard time understanding what "Non-Independent Non-Executive" means).
All said and done, I notice among the domineering shareholder of Putrajaya Perdana Berhad includes Cahya Mata Sarawak Berhad, a company linked to the current chief minister which makes me wonder if Sarawak is not big enough for him. A partnership of Mr Low and Chief Minister Taib could prove to be redoubtable political-economic tie up.
So if UMNO did not cross over to Sarawak as they did to Sabah, Sarawak's finest export to Semenanjung seems to include Tan Sri Ting Pek Khing and Cahya Sarawak via Putrajaya Perdana Berhad then.
Abdul Karim : foot in the mouth?
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/150274
Abdul Karim: Tak adil halang Taib kumpul kekayaan
The full text of the above article is appended below. I do not know whether Abdul Karim is genuinely clueless or resorting to a desperate defense of his boss.
The opening salvo is already an admission of guilt and a desperate defense. Abdul Karim is not refuting that Taib is amassing wealth, merely saying in his personal opinion, there is nothing wrong if Taib is using his position to accumulate wealth (semasa memegang jawatan).
However, he conveniently or by design, left out any saying about whether the chief minister has or has not made his wealth by way of dictating or influencing the relevant administrative processes such as award of tender and contracts. As tax payers, we are even entitled to question whether Taib is spending our time and money to administer state matters or enriching himself during office hours.
Abdu Karim’s line of reasoning defies both logic and commonsense, let alone worthy of a person holding an important public office.
His wishy-washy statement can’t hold a candle next to the well written, well research disclosure website.
http://www.sarawakreport.org/2010/12/corruption-and-abuse-of-power-irrefutable-evidence-against-taib-exclusive/
In a democracy, people are elected into office because of integrity and ability plus a willingness to serve. Elected representatives are remunerated by tax collected and owe a fiduciary duty to tax payers and citizen to ensure the wealth of nation is properly managed for benefit of all. He or she is also subject to public scrutiny over his and her personal conduct.
Amassing a fortune while having the administrative power to decide allocation of economic opportunities, and deciding in one’s own favour, is called corruption.
An elected representative with power to rule and regulation must not put himself and herself in a position of conflict of interest. You can't be given power to approve applications while you are in the business yourself. That is basic good governance practice.
If a political secretary of a chief minister cannot get this kindergarten level idea into his thick skull then one wonders his sanity let alone fitness of office. MACC should call him in for questioning. He can well qualify as a suspect with this funny line of reasoning.
If this is not clear enough, Chen Sui Bien of Taiwan, Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, our very own Harun Idris were all collecting wealth beyond their official means and ended in jail.
He sounds to me like, “yes, my boss is amassing wealth while he is in office but as long as the ignorant Sarawakians keep voting him in, then the voice of the awaken would be drown by the silence of the ignorant ones.” This is a down right challenge to the citizens of Sarawak. Surely our friends in Sarawak won’t stand for this?
The manner in which YB Ting Tze Hui was ridiculously evicted from the State Assembly was a cowardly and brutal act to suppress the voice of reason and truth. She was accused of making unsubstantiated claims despite quoting a collection of numbers from the Auditor General’s report. If anything, Wong Soon Koh & friends should take the AG to task for supplying YB Ting with a lot of “unsubstantiated claims”.
http://wangsamajuformalaysia.blogspot.com/2010/07/case-of-bullying-wrong-person-in.html
I think it is time for tax payers to stop all these leakage. The true extend of the leakages will only be known when a separate group of office bearers come in and open up the old books. That would make interesting reading and potential harvest. MACC Act has given the courts a power to recover lost funds and this represent an interesting option for the tax payers to recover what have been lost previously.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/150274
Abdul Karim: Tak adil halang Taib kumpul kekayaan
Keruah Usit
Dis 8, 10
4:29pm
Abdul Karim Hamzah, ketua setiausaha politik kepada Menteri Besar Sarawak, Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud, memberitahu Radio Free Sarawak (RFS) bahawa adalah “adil” bagi membenarkan Taib mengumpul kekayaan semasa memegang jawatan.
Dalam wawancara dengan RFS, sebuah radio gelombang pendek yang di luar kawalan kerajaan negeri, Abdul Karim menolak laporan sesawang Sarawak Report bahawa keluarga Taib telah mengumpulkan kekayaan yang agak luar biasa. Beliau juga membincangkan Kertas Putih yang kontroversial berhubung 'amalan politik yang tidak sihat' seperti yang dicadangkan oleh Abdul Karim sendiri.
“Secara peribadi, saya lihat mesti ada had kepada segala-galanya, awak tidak boleh ada kebebasan mutlak... kebebasan bersuara, ada batasnya. Maksud saya untuk bertindak (bagi kes fitnah) bukan sesenang yang difikirkan... ada kalanya lebih baik membiarkannya sahaja, selepas seketika, ia akan lenyap.”
Beliau juga menafikan laporan di Sarawak Report yang memaparkan kekayaan Taib dan keluarganya yang dikumpul di Eropah, Amerika Utara dan juga beberapa skim tanah yang dibolotinya di Sarawak.
“Cara saya lihat, tiada masalahlah. Apa masalah Sarawak Report? Adakah mereka memperkatakan sesuatu yang berbentuk fitnah atau berniat jahat? Saya tidak fikir menjadi kesalahan kerana menjadi kaya,” kata Abdul Karim.
Apabila ditanya bagaimana gaji Taib sebagai ketua menteri dan anak-anaknya mampu mengaut kekayaan sebegitu rupa, jawapannya: “Bagaimana anda boleh menggunakan gaji sebagai kayu pengukur? Maksud saya, setiap orang harus diberi peluang, jika Taib adalah ketua menteri, saya tidak fikir kita patut hentikan anak-anaknya daripada menjadi kaya ataupun kelurga itu dari menjadi kaya.”
Abdul Karim: Tak adil halang Taib kumpul kekayaan
The full text of the above article is appended below. I do not know whether Abdul Karim is genuinely clueless or resorting to a desperate defense of his boss.
The opening salvo is already an admission of guilt and a desperate defense. Abdul Karim is not refuting that Taib is amassing wealth, merely saying in his personal opinion, there is nothing wrong if Taib is using his position to accumulate wealth (semasa memegang jawatan).
However, he conveniently or by design, left out any saying about whether the chief minister has or has not made his wealth by way of dictating or influencing the relevant administrative processes such as award of tender and contracts. As tax payers, we are even entitled to question whether Taib is spending our time and money to administer state matters or enriching himself during office hours.
Abdu Karim’s line of reasoning defies both logic and commonsense, let alone worthy of a person holding an important public office.
His wishy-washy statement can’t hold a candle next to the well written, well research disclosure website.
http://www.sarawakreport.org/2010/12/corruption-and-abuse-of-power-irrefutable-evidence-against-taib-exclusive/
In a democracy, people are elected into office because of integrity and ability plus a willingness to serve. Elected representatives are remunerated by tax collected and owe a fiduciary duty to tax payers and citizen to ensure the wealth of nation is properly managed for benefit of all. He or she is also subject to public scrutiny over his and her personal conduct.
Amassing a fortune while having the administrative power to decide allocation of economic opportunities, and deciding in one’s own favour, is called corruption.
An elected representative with power to rule and regulation must not put himself and herself in a position of conflict of interest. You can't be given power to approve applications while you are in the business yourself. That is basic good governance practice.
If a political secretary of a chief minister cannot get this kindergarten level idea into his thick skull then one wonders his sanity let alone fitness of office. MACC should call him in for questioning. He can well qualify as a suspect with this funny line of reasoning.
If this is not clear enough, Chen Sui Bien of Taiwan, Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, our very own Harun Idris were all collecting wealth beyond their official means and ended in jail.
He sounds to me like, “yes, my boss is amassing wealth while he is in office but as long as the ignorant Sarawakians keep voting him in, then the voice of the awaken would be drown by the silence of the ignorant ones.” This is a down right challenge to the citizens of Sarawak. Surely our friends in Sarawak won’t stand for this?
The manner in which YB Ting Tze Hui was ridiculously evicted from the State Assembly was a cowardly and brutal act to suppress the voice of reason and truth. She was accused of making unsubstantiated claims despite quoting a collection of numbers from the Auditor General’s report. If anything, Wong Soon Koh & friends should take the AG to task for supplying YB Ting with a lot of “unsubstantiated claims”.
http://wangsamajuformalaysia.blogspot.com/2010/07/case-of-bullying-wrong-person-in.html
I think it is time for tax payers to stop all these leakage. The true extend of the leakages will only be known when a separate group of office bearers come in and open up the old books. That would make interesting reading and potential harvest. MACC Act has given the courts a power to recover lost funds and this represent an interesting option for the tax payers to recover what have been lost previously.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/150274
Abdul Karim: Tak adil halang Taib kumpul kekayaan
Keruah Usit
Dis 8, 10
4:29pm
Abdul Karim Hamzah, ketua setiausaha politik kepada Menteri Besar Sarawak, Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud, memberitahu Radio Free Sarawak (RFS) bahawa adalah “adil” bagi membenarkan Taib mengumpul kekayaan semasa memegang jawatan.
Dalam wawancara dengan RFS, sebuah radio gelombang pendek yang di luar kawalan kerajaan negeri, Abdul Karim menolak laporan sesawang Sarawak Report bahawa keluarga Taib telah mengumpulkan kekayaan yang agak luar biasa. Beliau juga membincangkan Kertas Putih yang kontroversial berhubung 'amalan politik yang tidak sihat' seperti yang dicadangkan oleh Abdul Karim sendiri.
“Secara peribadi, saya lihat mesti ada had kepada segala-galanya, awak tidak boleh ada kebebasan mutlak... kebebasan bersuara, ada batasnya. Maksud saya untuk bertindak (bagi kes fitnah) bukan sesenang yang difikirkan... ada kalanya lebih baik membiarkannya sahaja, selepas seketika, ia akan lenyap.”
Beliau juga menafikan laporan di Sarawak Report yang memaparkan kekayaan Taib dan keluarganya yang dikumpul di Eropah, Amerika Utara dan juga beberapa skim tanah yang dibolotinya di Sarawak.
“Cara saya lihat, tiada masalahlah. Apa masalah Sarawak Report? Adakah mereka memperkatakan sesuatu yang berbentuk fitnah atau berniat jahat? Saya tidak fikir menjadi kesalahan kerana menjadi kaya,” kata Abdul Karim.
Apabila ditanya bagaimana gaji Taib sebagai ketua menteri dan anak-anaknya mampu mengaut kekayaan sebegitu rupa, jawapannya: “Bagaimana anda boleh menggunakan gaji sebagai kayu pengukur? Maksud saya, setiap orang harus diberi peluang, jika Taib adalah ketua menteri, saya tidak fikir kita patut hentikan anak-anaknya daripada menjadi kaya ataupun kelurga itu dari menjadi kaya.”
A case of bullying the wrong person in Sarawak?
This report in Sarawak Tribune caught my attention:
Meradong’s Ting Tze Fui referred to Committee of Privileges
http://tribune.my/prime/84-meradongs-ting-tze-fui-referred-to-committee-of-privileges.html
Saturday, 22 May 2010 00:17
KUCHING: The people’s representatives at the State Legislative Assembly enjoy privileges and immunities that the august house provides but they must be responsible for their words.
“We welcome constructive criticism or genuine issues concerning their respective constituencies to be brought up for discussion in the Dewan.
“As state assemblymen, they have the right to speak, but rights must come with responsibility and whatever claims are made must be properly substantiated,” said Second Finance Minister and Minister of Environment and Public Health Dato Sri Wong Soon Koh.
He told reporters this after the morning session in which he moved the motion to refer Meradong assemblywoman, Ting Tze Fui, to the Committee of Privileges for failing to substantiate her allegation that “insinuated breach of trust, dishonesty and financial mismanagement of the highest order”, therefore committing a breach of privileges and violating Standing Order 32(6).
During a debate on the state budget on November 12, 2009, Ting alleged that “millions and millions of ringgit were unaccounted for, precisely squandered”.
“Despite ample opportunity given to her to either withdraw or provide proof of her allegation, she failed to do so. Therefore, I reserve the right to move the motion referring her to the Committee of Privileges and let the committee investigate into the charge and present the report to the Dewan for further action deemed fit.
“These are very serious allegations and I categorically deny these allegations in the strongest possible terms.
“Such allegations will spoil the image of Sarawak and will erode public confidence, particularly investors’ confidence in the state. Who would dare to come in and invest?” said Wong who is also Bawang Assan assemblyman.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a disturbing and infuriating development. Dato Seri Wong's explanation, in summary means the following:-
1) YB Ting criticised the BN Sarawak administration of improper financial management in a state budget debate - isn't that what an opposition Wakil Rakyat's job suppose to be?
2) In a debate, you are suppose to defend yourself with facts and arguments, and not
2.1 threaten the opposition to withdraw their argument
2.2. do it almost 7 months down the road after a by-election defeat in Sibu
2.3. re-write arguments you can't counter in a debate as "allegation" in controlled media
Does Dato Seri Wong care to deny the following from the Auditor General's report for 2008 (the latest available in the website) ?
# a 27% budget overrun of RM923 million in state coffers alone
What would concern an investor more - a functioning state assembly loaded with intelligent debates and ideas or failing state investments and mushrooming kangaroo courts suppressing scrutiny and accountability?
I suppose the Privilege Committee would recommend a suspension or even suspension of pay, something YB Gorbind Singh is challenging. By extension, Dato Seri Wong seems like leading a task force to suppress the voices of Sarawakians coming through YB Ting by denying their representation in the state assembly for a period of time.
When I read through YB Wong Ho Leng's blog, more unfair practices emerge
1) YB Ting was only given 10 days to prepare her defense; no later date was allowed because the 6 BN chaps "have their own programmes" - surely set it 1 month down the road or just cancel a golf appointment of two should do the trick?
2) she was to foot all her own expenses for her defense including bringing in 8 witnesses; when this jolly charade out of the blue is not what she or rakyat biasa of Sarawak wanted. If the 6 YBs have their "own programme" what about the 8 rakyat Malaysia who these wakil rakyats are suppose to think, speak and act for?
This looks to me like a clear sign of an attempt to bully the youngest female opposition member. The timing of and the arrangement for the PC hearing sounds suspiciously a reaction to the Sibu by election 3,000 majority drubbing (I believe in spirits but not ghost).
After a 2 hour hearing in a PC comprising exclusively of BN ADUNs....
http://www.malaysianmirror.com/sabahsarawakdetail/12-sabahsarawak/44657-ting-claims-hearing-tinted-with-bias-and-prejudice
Ting, who called a press conference after the two-hour hearing, claimed that "it's just a hearing to protect the chief minister and his cronies."
Second Finance Minister Wong Soon Koh, the complainant, had tabled the motion for her to be referred to the committee. It was supported by all the Barisan Nasional representatives
- Enough said, even the PAC in Parliament comprise both BN and PR Wakil Rakyat
To assess YB Ting's case for her defense, why not hear from the person herself in a DUN sitting on this matter? She certainly come across as a good debater loaded with facts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDvwTS7XOcs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S0Omw2-eSI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S0Omw2-eSI&feature=related
And I pity the 6 chaps on the high bench. I imagine they think it will be a walk over before a lass fretting nervously over her fate and trembling uncontrollably from fright, onthe verge of tears.
However,
I heard from believable source that an expected 30 minutes one side affair turned into a real scrap for 2 hours. It is hard for the 6 chaps to defend against such a fact-laden and eloquent lady and only by sheer brute force in numbers they struggle to passed the already decided verdict (whether still wet in pants I don't know) - if that is not another waste of tax payers' money I don't know what is.
She might have gone down fighting as expected but the 6 gentlemen have left with significant mental scares and missed appointments.
Just spare a thought for YB Ting. At a time when young ladies her age are having the time of their lives, she is there fighting for the rakyat (some appreciative and some very much not so) and enduring gamesmanship, suppressing anger and frustration, and now victimization.
Do you not wonder, what makes people like her and the rest of the sincere YBs do what they are doing?
Are we, ordinary Malaysians who just grumble and complain, able to do a fraction of what they are doing day in day out, fatigued mentally and physically to the bones?
Do we have the presence of mind to ask ourselves, should we assist them and how can we assist them?
Malaysia could be at the threshold of a significant point in the nation's history. Perhaps this is a time when we should not ask what the country can do for us, but what can we do for our country.
---------------------------P.S.-----------------------------------------------------
The following are the points she raised extracted from the link above....certainly sounds more creditable and intelligent than whatever certain hate-inciting, party hopping Wakil Rakyats in the Parliament.
1. Sarawak State Government investment in the First Silicon Sdn Bhd has caused the government to suffer RM2.4 billion losses.
She said on March 22, 2006, the company merged with X-Fab Semiconductor Foundris AG to form X-Fab Silicon Foundries N.V where the state government absorb all its liabilities to the tune of billions of ringgit.
Ting claimed the state government pumped in millions of the taxpayers’ "blood and sweat" money into the company. But its losses still stood at more than RM4 million on June 30, 2009.
2. Sarawak International Medical Centre was constructed by the state government costing more than RM350 million with 168 beds which is equivalent to RM2 million per bed.
Pointing out that the Shah Alam hospital project with 300 beds tendered at RM482 million was still able to pay out a commission of RM77 million which means the 300 beds can be built at around RM400 million.
Ting said the state government approved the project launched in 1998 which was to be completed in three years. To-date the SIMC is still not in operation and stands idle like a white elephant.
3. Titanium Management Sdn Bhd was awarded to built 384 bridges in Sarawak but only 322 bridges were constructed. The amount was supposed to be RM550 million but the state government paid RM947 millions. The cost, she said, was overblown by 72%. The disclosure of this was obtained from the Auditor General’s report in 2006.
A company search of Titanium Management revealed was that one Haji Mahmud Abu Bekir Taib of Wisma Mahmud owns 1,430,000 shares out of 2,400,000 total issued shares, she said.
She added that the Chief Minister’s son is Titanium's biggest shareholder (60%) that she claimed is in clear conflict of interest in getting the awards for building and repairing of all the bridges in the state.
4. After suffering the worst electoral losses in BN history, the then Prime Minister announced a grant of RM1 billion to Sarawak. Ting said up to date, no ordinary Sarawakian has any idea or clue to the whereabouts of the money or how it was spent.
The CM, who is also the finance minister, has failed to tell the House or the people of Sarawak where the money was spend, she added.
On Nov 29, 2009, Ting said The Star, Sin Chew Daily, United Daily and See Hua reported that billions had been siphoned and 60% of government allocation leaked. This report appeared in the front page of The Star.
She said Wong, the complainant, has misled the House and the people of Sarawak by misconstruing without any substantive proof that the MACC Deputy Director had on December 28, 2009 revised the billions to a mere RM6 million.
Meradong’s Ting Tze Fui referred to Committee of Privileges
http://tribune.my/prime/84-meradongs-ting-tze-fui-referred-to-committee-of-privileges.html
Saturday, 22 May 2010 00:17
KUCHING: The people’s representatives at the State Legislative Assembly enjoy privileges and immunities that the august house provides but they must be responsible for their words.
“We welcome constructive criticism or genuine issues concerning their respective constituencies to be brought up for discussion in the Dewan.
“As state assemblymen, they have the right to speak, but rights must come with responsibility and whatever claims are made must be properly substantiated,” said Second Finance Minister and Minister of Environment and Public Health Dato Sri Wong Soon Koh.
He told reporters this after the morning session in which he moved the motion to refer Meradong assemblywoman, Ting Tze Fui, to the Committee of Privileges for failing to substantiate her allegation that “insinuated breach of trust, dishonesty and financial mismanagement of the highest order”, therefore committing a breach of privileges and violating Standing Order 32(6).
During a debate on the state budget on November 12, 2009, Ting alleged that “millions and millions of ringgit were unaccounted for, precisely squandered”.
“Despite ample opportunity given to her to either withdraw or provide proof of her allegation, she failed to do so. Therefore, I reserve the right to move the motion referring her to the Committee of Privileges and let the committee investigate into the charge and present the report to the Dewan for further action deemed fit.
“These are very serious allegations and I categorically deny these allegations in the strongest possible terms.
“Such allegations will spoil the image of Sarawak and will erode public confidence, particularly investors’ confidence in the state. Who would dare to come in and invest?” said Wong who is also Bawang Assan assemblyman.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a disturbing and infuriating development. Dato Seri Wong's explanation, in summary means the following:-
1) YB Ting criticised the BN Sarawak administration of improper financial management in a state budget debate - isn't that what an opposition Wakil Rakyat's job suppose to be?
2) In a debate, you are suppose to defend yourself with facts and arguments, and not
2.1 threaten the opposition to withdraw their argument
2.2. do it almost 7 months down the road after a by-election defeat in Sibu
2.3. re-write arguments you can't counter in a debate as "allegation" in controlled media
Does Dato Seri Wong care to deny the following from the Auditor General's report for 2008 (the latest available in the website) ?
# a 27% budget overrun of RM923 million in state coffers alone
# 100% overrun in hospitality expenses - how many Sarawakians have issues with sufficient and adequate food on the table? Note other above 1/3 cost overruns, any branch manager in private sector will have a lot to answer but for Dato Seri Wong, his administration is immuned from such basic commonsense scrutiny of public funds.
# For 2 years running, more than 50 companies in which state statutory bodies (Badan Berkanun Negeri) invested suffered financial losses compared to 30 or less which is financially viable.
So is there a basis for YB Ting to raise the point in a debate?
What would concern an investor more - a functioning state assembly loaded with intelligent debates and ideas or failing state investments and mushrooming kangaroo courts suppressing scrutiny and accountability?
I suppose the Privilege Committee would recommend a suspension or even suspension of pay, something YB Gorbind Singh is challenging. By extension, Dato Seri Wong seems like leading a task force to suppress the voices of Sarawakians coming through YB Ting by denying their representation in the state assembly for a period of time.
When I read through YB Wong Ho Leng's blog, more unfair practices emerge
1) YB Ting was only given 10 days to prepare her defense; no later date was allowed because the 6 BN chaps "have their own programmes" - surely set it 1 month down the road or just cancel a golf appointment of two should do the trick?
2) she was to foot all her own expenses for her defense including bringing in 8 witnesses; when this jolly charade out of the blue is not what she or rakyat biasa of Sarawak wanted. If the 6 YBs have their "own programme" what about the 8 rakyat Malaysia who these wakil rakyats are suppose to think, speak and act for?
This looks to me like a clear sign of an attempt to bully the youngest female opposition member. The timing of and the arrangement for the PC hearing sounds suspiciously a reaction to the Sibu by election 3,000 majority drubbing (I believe in spirits but not ghost).
After a 2 hour hearing in a PC comprising exclusively of BN ADUNs....
http://www.malaysianmirror.com/sabahsarawakdetail/12-sabahsarawak/44657-ting-claims-hearing-tinted-with-bias-and-prejudice
Ting, who called a press conference after the two-hour hearing, claimed that "it's just a hearing to protect the chief minister and his cronies."
Second Finance Minister Wong Soon Koh, the complainant, had tabled the motion for her to be referred to the committee. It was supported by all the Barisan Nasional representatives
- Enough said, even the PAC in Parliament comprise both BN and PR Wakil Rakyat
To assess YB Ting's case for her defense, why not hear from the person herself in a DUN sitting on this matter? She certainly come across as a good debater loaded with facts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDvwTS7XOcs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S0Omw2-eSI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S0Omw2-eSI&feature=related
And I pity the 6 chaps on the high bench. I imagine they think it will be a walk over before a lass fretting nervously over her fate and trembling uncontrollably from fright, onthe verge of tears.
However,
I heard from believable source that an expected 30 minutes one side affair turned into a real scrap for 2 hours. It is hard for the 6 chaps to defend against such a fact-laden and eloquent lady and only by sheer brute force in numbers they struggle to passed the already decided verdict (whether still wet in pants I don't know) - if that is not another waste of tax payers' money I don't know what is.
She might have gone down fighting as expected but the 6 gentlemen have left with significant mental scares and missed appointments.
Just spare a thought for YB Ting. At a time when young ladies her age are having the time of their lives, she is there fighting for the rakyat (some appreciative and some very much not so) and enduring gamesmanship, suppressing anger and frustration, and now victimization.
Do you not wonder, what makes people like her and the rest of the sincere YBs do what they are doing?
Are we, ordinary Malaysians who just grumble and complain, able to do a fraction of what they are doing day in day out, fatigued mentally and physically to the bones?
Do we have the presence of mind to ask ourselves, should we assist them and how can we assist them?
Malaysia could be at the threshold of a significant point in the nation's history. Perhaps this is a time when we should not ask what the country can do for us, but what can we do for our country.
---------------------------P.S.-----------------------------------------------------
The following are the points she raised extracted from the link above....certainly sounds more creditable and intelligent than whatever certain hate-inciting, party hopping Wakil Rakyats in the Parliament.
1. Sarawak State Government investment in the First Silicon Sdn Bhd has caused the government to suffer RM2.4 billion losses.
She said on March 22, 2006, the company merged with X-Fab Semiconductor Foundris AG to form X-Fab Silicon Foundries N.V where the state government absorb all its liabilities to the tune of billions of ringgit.
Ting claimed the state government pumped in millions of the taxpayers’ "blood and sweat" money into the company. But its losses still stood at more than RM4 million on June 30, 2009.
2. Sarawak International Medical Centre was constructed by the state government costing more than RM350 million with 168 beds which is equivalent to RM2 million per bed.
Pointing out that the Shah Alam hospital project with 300 beds tendered at RM482 million was still able to pay out a commission of RM77 million which means the 300 beds can be built at around RM400 million.
Ting said the state government approved the project launched in 1998 which was to be completed in three years. To-date the SIMC is still not in operation and stands idle like a white elephant.
3. Titanium Management Sdn Bhd was awarded to built 384 bridges in Sarawak but only 322 bridges were constructed. The amount was supposed to be RM550 million but the state government paid RM947 millions. The cost, she said, was overblown by 72%. The disclosure of this was obtained from the Auditor General’s report in 2006.
A company search of Titanium Management revealed was that one Haji Mahmud Abu Bekir Taib of Wisma Mahmud owns 1,430,000 shares out of 2,400,000 total issued shares, she said.
She added that the Chief Minister’s son is Titanium's biggest shareholder (60%) that she claimed is in clear conflict of interest in getting the awards for building and repairing of all the bridges in the state.
4. After suffering the worst electoral losses in BN history, the then Prime Minister announced a grant of RM1 billion to Sarawak. Ting said up to date, no ordinary Sarawakian has any idea or clue to the whereabouts of the money or how it was spent.
The CM, who is also the finance minister, has failed to tell the House or the people of Sarawak where the money was spend, she added.
On Nov 29, 2009, Ting said The Star, Sin Chew Daily, United Daily and See Hua reported that billions had been siphoned and 60% of government allocation leaked. This report appeared in the front page of The Star.
She said Wong, the complainant, has misled the House and the people of Sarawak by misconstruing without any substantive proof that the MACC Deputy Director had on December 28, 2009 revised the billions to a mere RM6 million.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)