Discrepancy in MBPJ Council List

This is an update to the post I wrote a few days ago with regards to a press statement issued by my DAP colleague, ADUN for Kg Tunku with regards to certain potential discrepancy in the local council appointments in MBPJ.

In MBPJ, it was announced that there will be a total of 24 new councilors of which four of them are from PAS, seven from PKR and six from DAP, with the remaining seven councilorship to be appointed from non-partisan nominees, i.e. NGOs and RAs in Petaling Jaya.

It is an important change, when compared to the previous Barisan Nasional Government, that NGO members are appointed to the local council to ensure increased transparency and good governance, and to ensure special and needy interest groups are taken into account, such as the appointment of Anthony Thanasayan, president of the Animal Assisted Therapy for the Disabled and Elderly Association.

However, I have been informed that a member of a political party replaced a non-partisan local Petaling Jaya residents' association president under the NGO quota in MBPJ. In addition, I've been made to understand that this was done at the very last minute to avoid possible objections to the move.

I'd like to express my regret and disappointment that such action has blemished an otherwise excellent step taken by the Selangor state government to include NGO participation while waiting for the local government to be democratically elected in the near future.

I'd like to call upon the Selangor state government to review its decision, to ensure that all party members are placed strictly within the party quotas i.e., 7 from PKR, 6 from DAP and 4 from PAS and only genuine and reputable NGO members as well as leaders of local residents' associations are given strict priority.

I would also be interested to find out if the above is happening to other local councils as well in Selangor.

Vote on Price Hike Policies

A vote has just been called on the Government's motion by the Minister of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs to move his motion on the recent oil price hikes. (Warning: Long Post)

Bahawa mengikut peruntukan Peraturan Mesyuarat 27(3) Dewan ini mengambil ketetapan-ketetapan berikut:

"Bahawa Dewan ini,

Prihatin akan kenaikan mendadak harga minyak, makanan dan komoditi lain di pasaran dunia, yang merupakan fenomena global di luar kawalan Kerajaan.

Menyedari bahawa fenomena kenaikan harga ini membawa impak negatif yang besar kepada kesejahteraan rakyat serta kemajuan ekonomi negara.

Memahami dan menyokong langkah Kerajaan untuk menstruktur sistem subsidi minyak dan gas yang menjejas kewangan Kerajaan dan tidak dapat ditanggung tatkala harga minyak di pasaran global terus meningkat tinggi, agar beban ke atas ekonomi negara dapat dikurangkan dan subsidi dapat diagihkan dengan lebih saksama kepada mereka yang benar-benar memerlukannya yakni golongan miskin dan berpendapatan rendah dan sederhana.

Menyokong langkah-langkah yang dilaksanakan oleh Kerajaan untuk mengurangkan beban ke atas rakyat yang disebabkan oleh kenaikan harga minyak, makanan dan komoditi, agar kesejahteraan hidup rakyat terus terjaga.

Menyedari keazaman dan usaha Kerajaan untuk terus mempertingkatkan pertumbuhan ekonomi dan memperjuangkan agenda pembangunan nasional, walaupun persekitaran di peringkat global semakin mencabar.

Bahawa Dewan yang mulia ini menyeru kesemua lapisan rakyat Malaysia termasuk pekerja dan pengusaha agar tabah dan bersatu padu dalam menghadapi cabaran global ini serta memelihara keamanan, kestabilan dan kesejahteraan kita bersama”.

I have voted against the motion together with my other Pakatan Rakyat colleagues. The Government won the vote with 129 votes against 78 votes. The high profile pair from SAPP were missing from the Parliament.

My reasons to vote against the motion was to be expressed in my speech, attached below, which unfortunately didn't get to see the light of day as I didn't get a chance to speak. 9 MPs from the opposition got to speak - 4 from PAS, 2 from PKR, 2 from DAP and 1 supposed Independent.

My speech is as follows (a large part of which I have taken from my earlier blog post here.)

Tuan Yang DiPertua,

Saya ingin menyatakan bahawa walaupun kenaikan harga minyak sudahpun dijangka dan memang susah dielakkan, kerajaan tidak mengambil langkah yang mencukupi untuk mengurangkan beban rakyat Malaysia dalam menghadapi masalah kenaikan harga petrol dan elektrik.

Saya akan membangkang usul yang dikemukakan kerana Kerajaan tidak menyediakan mekanisme yang sempurna dan mencukupi untuk membantu rakyat Malaysia yang memerlukan bantuan dan menghadapi cabaran yang besar dan payah.

Kerajaan telah menggurangan subsidi minyak yang menyebabkan kenaikan harga minyak dan elektrik setinggi 63%.

Pada masa ini, Kerajaan telah mengumumkan pemberian wang tunai mengikut saiz kenderaan. Ini menglibatkan pemberian setahun sebanyak RM625 untuk kenderaan dengan kapasiti engine 2L ke bawah, RM150 untuk motorsikal dengan kapasiti engine 250CC ke bawah. Cukai jalan juga diturunkan sebanyak RM200 bagi kenderaan 2L ke atas dan sebanyak RM50 bagi motorsikal 250CC keatas.

Walaupun cara ini nampaknya adil dan innovatif, cara penyelesaian ini adalah untuk jangka pendek dan tidak dengan sepenuhnya menyelesaikan isu-isu lain yang penting sekali:

1.Usaha-usaha ini akan terus menggangu (distort) corak pengangkutan, harga-harga, dan kemahuan tetapi tidak menggalakan kegunaan pengangkutan awam. Tiada insentif bagi rakyat Malaysia, terutamanya rakyat di kawasan urban, untuk berubah kepada pengangkutan awam, yang akan mengurangkan kegantungan kepada minyak, mengurangkan kesesakan jalan raya, dan juga mengurangkan impak terhadap persekitaran apabila subsidi diberi mengikut pemilikan kenderaan.

Sebaliknya, terdapat khabar bahawa subsidi bas akan dikurangkan dan kos pengangkutan awan akan dinaikkan. Negara kita dijangka menjimat RM13.7 billion daripada pengurangkan subsidi-subsidi, tetapi kejimatan ini telahpun dirancangkan bagi kepelbagaian guna kecuali memperbaiki pengangkutan awam yang akan menolong Negara kita dalam jangka masa panjang.

2.Kenaikan harga minyak seharusnya diumumkan seiring dengan pelan-pelan konkrit untuk mempercepatkan pembinaan rangkaian pengangkutan awam (mass transportatation networks), seperti membesarkan rangkaian LRT dan "bus feeder system" ataupun memperbaiki rangkaian sedia ada. Kekurangan pelan-pelan tersebut adalah sesuata kemuradaratan kepada penduduk Lembah Klang dan juga kawasan bandar di mana kesesatan jalan raya adalah kebiasaan dan system pengangkutan awam kurang baik.

Kerajaan telah lama membincangkan dan menjanjikan pelan system pengangkutan awam komprehensif. Namun, tiada langkah-langkah konkrit telah dilaksanakan dan negara kini kian bergantung kepada kenderaan-kenderaan persendirian. Akibat kelalaian kerajaan dalam merancangkan pembangunun, peningkatan harga minyak baru-baru ini sangat menyusahkan raykat Malaysia, terutamanya rakyat berpendapatan rendah.

Namun, kerajaan hanya mengumumkan RM100 juta untuk mereka yang ingin mengambil pinjaman untuk menjadi pemandu teksi. Tiada lagi langkah konkirt buat masa ini. Raykat tidak berdaya menunggu sehingga tahun depan untuk kerajaan mengumumkan pelan serta langkah pelaksanaan untuk memantapkan pengangkutan awam Malaysia. Rakyat memerlukan reaksi positif dari kerajaan sekarang juga.

3.Akhirnya, kenaikkan harga tenaga akan menyebabkan inflasi sekunder barang-barang penggunaan dan servis harian. Pemberian wang tunai kenderaan yang disyorkan cuma membantu mereka yang memiliki kereta atau motorsikal tetapi tidak membantu mereka yang masih menghadapi masalah-masalah kenaikan harga keperluan harian.

Secara kebetulan, golongan ini lebih mungkin adalah dari golongan berpendapatan rendah yang paling memerlukan pertolongan dalam menghadapi kesan-kesan sekondari inflasi yang disebabkan reduksi subsidi.

Saya mengulangkan pengesyoran DAP untuk menimbangkan skim geran sebanyak RM3000 kepada setiap pekerja ataupun RM6000 bagi setiap keluarga yang kurang keupayaan dan pendapatan. Wang ini boleh diberi melalui mekanisme EPF (KWSP) di mana kita terus dapat maklumat gaji pekerja.

Konsumer-konsumer seterusnya akan mempunyai pilihan untuk mengguna wang dengan sebaik mungkin mengikutan keperluan masing-masing. Di samping itu, konsumer-konsumer ini akan mendapat wang gran ini sama ada mereka memiliki kenderaan.

Membantu rakyat melalui sistem yang sedia ada juga lebih murah dan kurang bermasalah untuk menghantar wang balik kepada rakyat, jauh lebih murah dan effisien berbanding dengan skim money order ataupun kad subsidi yang dibentang kerajaan.

Kerajaan memang mampu memberikan bantuan yang dicadangkan ini kerana sumbangan Petronas kepada kerajaan kian meningkat, dan mencapai sebanyak RM55 bilion tahun lalu. Wang Petronas adalah wang kepunyaan rakyat dan ianya perlu dikongsi supaya beban rakyat dapat diringankan.

Negara Hong Kong dan Singapura dan, dua-dua ekonomi yang langsung tidak ada sumber semulajadi seperti minyak, gas, balak, tanah untuk tanaman komersil seperti minyak sawit, dapat mengendalikan polisi grant tunai kepada rakyat mereka yang kurang berupaya dari segi kewangan. Malaysia sebagai antara sebuah negara yang terkaya dengan sumber minyak di seluruh dunia, patut mengikut teladan yang baik dimana nasib rakyat diutamakan, apatah lagi minyak yang digali Petronas adalah minyak kepunyaan semua rakyat Malaysia.

Akhir sekali, saya menyeru supaya kerajaan memberikan kuasa persaingan harga kepada setiap syarikat petrol. Dua belas tahun yang lalu, apabila sebuah syarikat petrol memberikan diskaun kepada pengguna, pihak Petronas membantah langkah tersebut and kerajaan mengambil keputusan menyokong bantahan tersebut dan persaingan harga petrol dilarangkan.

Demi meringankan beban rakyat, kerajaan mesti membatalkan larangan tersebut supaya persaingan harga minyak antara syarikat seperti yang ada di luar negara boleh digalakkan. Hanyan dengan kebabasan persaingan, rakyat jelata Malaysia akan bermanfaat.

Tuan Yang Dipertua, saya memohom menolak usul yang dikemukakan oleh Menteri.

Despite voting enbloc with my other opposition colleagues, I voted with my consciences with only the interest of Malaysians in my mind. We could only have hoped that our honourable members on the other side of the fence can do the same.

Banned From School Reunion?

No, I haven't yet been banned from any official school reunions in Malaysia, well, it can only be from my primary school in Batu Pahat as I studied in Singapore for my secondary school. (Incidentally, my fellow alumni will include Sdr Lim Guan Eng, now Chief Minister of Penang as well as (if I'm not wrong), Sdr Lim Kit Siang)

But my colleague, the DAP state assemblywoman for Subang Jaya, has not only been prevented from stepping into official school functions (all DAP, PKR and PAS representatives will have problems getting into schools), she has even been "banned" from attending a school prefects' reunion to be held outside the school!

Few months ago, I was invited to the Prefects' Reunion of SMK Subang Utama to be held next week. I just received news that I could no longer attend the function because I'm an assemblyman from Pakatan Rakyat.

Two prefects have confirmed that the teachers have issued a threat to the prefects to withdraw their invitation to me and if not, the event would be cancelled.

She was actually the Head Prefect for her school back in 1995. Read her full comments on her blog here.

This clearly comes from a Barisan Nasional government mentality which obviously has not come to terms with the fact that they have lost the trust of the people in these constituencies and these voters/residents have a right to meet and hear from their elected representatives.

I think the responsible administrators are still stuck in dinosaur age, and are obviously not helping the country move forward, particularly in creating a first class education system. I'm pretty disgusted actually.

New Petaling Jaya Councillors List Out?

I've received several calls from reporters and friends after reading a leaked list of councillors in The Star Metro yesterday. I couldn't comment much on the list as I wasn't directly involved in the final selection process.

However, my colleague, ADUN for Kampung Tunku has issued a press statement as copied below from his blog, and it's makes for some concerned reading.

A mockery for PR if partisan nominees appointed as councilors under NGO quota

It has been negotiated that there will be an average of 6 non-partisan councillors in each local council in Selangor excluding Orang Besar Kaya Besar Daerah (OKBD). In Selangor, there are altogether nine OKBDs in each local councils except for Petaling Jaya City Hall (MBPJ), Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ) and Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ).

In Petaling Jaya City Hall, there will be a total of 24 new councilors of which four of them are from PAS, seven from PKR and six from DAP, with the remaining seven councilorship to be appointed from non-partisan nominees, i.e. NGOs and RAs in Petaling Jaya.

The Star Metro has published a list of councilors for MBPJ today and I was requested to comment on it. For a city with various active NGOs in town, political parties should not hijack councillorship reserved for NGOs and RAs in MBPJ.

Sad to say, from the list of unconfirmed names reported in the Star Metro today, I can notice that there are efforts by certain party to insert party members as councilors in MBPJ under NGO quota as there are only six NGO and RA councilors in the list, namely Richard Yeoh (TI), Anthony Thanasayagan (Coordinator of Malaysians Against Discrimination of the Disabled), Dr Melasutra bt Md Dali (Town Planner), Cynthia Manonmani a/p Michael Gabriel (Suaram), Derek Fernandez (prominent lawyer on local governance) and Paneer Sivam (labourer activitist) with no representatives from residents association.

It is my stand that the seven non-partisan nominees should be purely reserved for non-partisan nominees, i.e. NGOs and RAs in Petaling Jaya. Else it will be a mockery for Pakatan Rakyat.

Will possibly blog more should I obtain more information.

Free Water

This topic has been hanging in the air for a fairly long time, but I've yet to comment on it - partly because, the DAP MP for Klang, Charles Santiago has repeatedly given his views on this issue which I share wholeheartedly.

The Selangor Government has made it a point as one of the first 100 days target and achievement to be providing 20 cubic metres of free water to all households. And the Selangor Government achieved it through the simplest of means, the state government footing the bill for it to the water concessionaire.

I do not believe that this is the right policy prescription towards creating a more compassionate state, particularly for the lower-income groups - an objective which I share wholeheartedly. And providing free water to all households, without conditions, is a fairly inefficient way of achieving such an objective.

First of all, everyone, whether they can afford it or otherwise, gets the free water and hence the solution isn't targeted at all towards the lower income group. Secondly, so a policy typically encourages wastage despite water (particularly in Selangor) being a precious and scarce resource.

I remain consistent in my position that the best way to approach the problem of assisting the lower income group is to provide the cash benefits directly to them. That way, they can choose to spend the benefit according to their own personal needs, be it water, fuel or other basic necessities. Overall, for the same amount of money poured on subsidies, the poor will benefit more (as the wealthier groups will not get the subsidy). Or alternatively, for the same amount of subsidy per individual, the state will save more as they don't have to subsidise the wealthier households.

The government, both federal and state must re-look into the traditional ways by which we have forked out subsidies, their distortionary impact and untargeted mechanism in meeting their welfare objectives.

Below are some quotes from Charles, as reported in The Star and The Sun:

Coalition Against Water Privatisation (CAWP) coordinator Charles Santiago said the Selangor government should have done a comprehensive study before carrying out the move as the cost to be borne by the government would be too high.

“To subsidise 1.5 million households in Selangor, the government would have to fork out almost RM11mil per month and more than RM132 million a year,” he said.

He suggested that that the Selangor government should consider rain harvesting instead as it would save the people more than the RM11 they enjoy with the rebate.

“Through water audits, the water bills can also be reduced by up to 30-40%,” he said.

Santiago, who is also Klang MP, added that the rebate would also cause people to waste water as “people would waste anything that comes free”.

“In five years time, we will be facing a water crisis just as how we are facing an oil crisis now. We can live without petrol, but we can’t live without water,” he pointed out.

---

DAP’s Klang MP Charles Santiago said Selangor government’s first 20-cubic-metres (20,000 litres) free water policy was not properly well-thought before it was announced.

Santiago, who is also Coalition Against Water Privatisation (CAWP) coordinator, said: “I will maintain that households earning a monthly income of RM1,500 and below should still get free water. No question about it. I think those in the rich category would consider it an insult for not being charged.

“But the monies may have been better used for other facilities like helping buildings set up rain-harvesting systems which encourages conservation of processed water,” he told theSun when contacted.

It is worth noting that this "free water" policy will cost the Selangor state government RM10.4 million per month, or RM128 million a year. State governments are not known for their wealth, despite Selangor being the richest state in the country. RM128 million works out to a little more than 10% of the state's annual income. Is that the best way to expend a very substantial portion of the state's very limited funds and resources?

Dress Code Again?

There's a serial love affair between PAS and dress codes, particularly those of the fairer sex.

We have heard the Kelantan Menteri Besar raised the issue many a times in the past, and now, the PAS Youth Movement wants the same thing implemented in the Pakatan Rakyat state governments.

Malaysiakini reported that "PAS Youth moots Islamic law in Pakatan states".

PAS Youth is keen on implementing hardline Islamic laws that ban gambling, limiting sale of liquor and introducing dress code for office workers in all Pakatan-ruled states.

In taking the first step towards introducing such laws, PAS Youth will organise a seminar in August to discuss the possibility of doing so.

And the Deputy Youth Chief, Azman Shapawi Abdul Rani went to the extent of saying that DAP will be willing to consider such laws since "not all leaders in DAP have the same position (against such laws)". He quoted the example that:

“If we look at the DAP leadership in Penang, they are very open and tolerant. They also raise the allowances of religious teachers,” he said.

Ummm... sir, the DAP leadership in Penang is indeed "very open and tolerant". We have raised the allowances of religious teachers because we believe in religious freedom, we recognise that Islam is the official religion in this country, and religious teachers have their place in society.

Hence by the very very same reason that we are "very open and tolerant", it'll necessarily mean that we cannot implement laws which are clearly "closed and intolerant", e.g., Malaysians fined up to RM500 for wearing "offending clothes" such as tight fitting blouses, jeans, shorts and mini-skirts as per Kota Bahru.

There are a lot of common issues which Pakatan Rakyat component parties can focus their energies on, including ethical and moral issues such as fighting drug abuse, crime and Mat Rempit menace, as well as building a kind and compassionate society which are clearly more important than issues such as "how tight is your blouse".

If there is continued and increased lobbying by PAS leaders for implementation of laws such as the above, it will at some point make Pakatan Rakyat coalition untenable. I for one, dare say that despite having won Petaling Jaya Utara parliamentary seat with nearly 20,000 majority, it will be among the first to fall in the next elections, should an "open and tolerant" society which we strongly believe in is threatened.

PAS & Prohibition

The storm over the issue of severely restricting the sale of alcohol in Selangor has since come to pass when the proposal which was to be tabled in the Majlis Perbandaran Klang (MPK) meeting this morning was withdrawn, and the Selangor Menteri Besar, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim gave a press conference to douse the fire later in the afternoon.

I had issued a media statement earlier in the morning with headlines on the issue appearing on all Chinese press. While, the matter may have come to a momentary pass, some of the points, which were also reported in Malaysiakini and The Malaysian Insider remain valid, so I'll repost my entire statement below.

PAS Selangor Needs A Crash Course on Coalition Politics

The Chinese vernacular press today had headlines screaming that PAS Selangor intends to impose a ban on the sale of alcohol throughout the state, which will involve stopping the sale of these products in 7-11 outlets, mini-markets as well as 'open' coffee shops.

It also appears that despite not having obtain approval for such a proposal in the Selangor state executive committee (EXCO), PAS Selangor has attempted to subvert the EXCO's authority by introducing such regulations in Selangor by instructing its municipal councillors to table such motions for approval at the local councils.

While PAS Selangor has every right to propose any regulations it feels is necessary, they must not forget that in Selangor, they are part of a coalition comprising of 2 other parties in the state whereby they possess 8 seats out of 36 seats won by the Pakatan Rakyat coalition. Therefore, any attempts by PAS Selangor to flex its muscles without due regard to its fellow coalition partners will be deemed as arrogant and uncooperative, which will only serve to weaken the governing coalition which was voted in by the Selangor citizens.

More critically, PAS must understand the fact that Selangor, perhaps more than any other state is one of the most multicultural and cosmopolitan states in the country, with non-Malays and non-Muslims comprising at least 49% of the population. PAS Selangor leadership under State Executive Councillor, Datuk Dr Mohd Hasan Ali must realise that it has won many seats in Selangor which are mixed constituencies such as Kota Raja parliamentary seat. PAS has won with a sizeable 8,329 votes majority, despite the fact that more than 50% of the population are non-Muslims – a feat which was previously unimaginable before March 8th.

Hence, if PAS Selangor choses to ignore the spirit of the multi-racial and multi-cultural mandate granted by the people of Selangor in the last elections, its continued unilateral attempts to impose its views in the Selangor administration will only lead to the break up in the state Pakatan Rakyat.

The DAP does not and will never support the sale of “haram” goods such as alcohol and spirits to Muslims, giving full respect to each their religious beliefs. However, the DAP will never support the blanket banning on the sale of alcohol in retail outlets, not because we encourage the promotion of alcohol consumption but because the proposed ban in essence infringes on the rights of others in state of Selangor.

We call upon the state PAS leadership to listen to the voice of reason not only from its coalition partners but also from within its own party which is not unanimous with the decision. PAS Selangor must understand that it is part of a coalition led by the Selangor Menteri Besar, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim and learn quickly the intricacies of the Pakatan Rakyat coalition which is vastly different from the Barisan Nasional, where UMNO lords over its coalition partners.

Supporting PAS?

I'll be honest. After nearly a year in a coalition partnership with PAS, have I managed to satisfy myself that I'm completely comfortable with PAS and all their principles and philosophy? No. There are issues of politics which I'm not so happy with in Selangor PAS, and there are of course issues which I've blogged often in relation to narrow views of "morality" (e.g., rock concerts are immoral) that pops up every now and then.

However, have there been a greater understanding of PAS as a political organisation, as well as much improved relationship with some of the leaders within PAS? Absolutely. I'll go so far as to say that I'm proud to be sitting on the same side of Parliament with some of these PAS leaders, whom I've grown to have tremendous amount of respect for.

As an example, I am completely impressed by PAS Member of Parliament for Shah Alam, Khalid Samad (for those who may not know, he's also Datuk Shahrir Samad's younger brother). If he is my MP, I'll give my vote to him any time, irrespective of who is challenging him from Barisan Nasional, be it UMNO, MCA or Gerakan. I can also say with utmost certainty that he will be one of the PAS candidates whom I'll be personally campaigning hard and actively for, in the next general elections - whenever and wherever he chooses to stand.

Checkout for example, one of his recent column contributions to The Malaysian Insider, entitled "A Question of Morality". It's certainly no ordinary piece, if you were to have a stereotypical impression of PAS leaders.

On differences on morality:

For Pas we have a clearly defined set of right and wrong, moral and immoral and although it may have similarities with some universal values, there are some huge differences particularly in that of the “personal arena”. What Pas and Islam see as immoral may be something quite acceptable in the eyes of other cultures. Take the question of drinking wine, for example. Similarly, there are items which Islam accepts, which to other cultures is not quite as acceptable. The easiest example here would be polygamy.

And on over-zealousness:

Actually it is this kind of zealousness which the non-Muslims fear from Pas and this is where we must emulate the spirit of the Islam more accurately. We should not become zealous moralists who wish to enforce their moral code on others. As I always say, preach, reason and argue with them in the best of ways. Never give them the impression that we wish to impose something on them irrespective of how noble the intentions. That was the way of the Prophet and that too must be our way.

Read of course, the full article for context. With enlightened leaders such as Khalid Samad, I certainly see no reason why the Pakatan Rakyat "shotgun" coalition cannot withstand the test of time. Instead, I can possibly imagine that the coalition partners can increase their mutual respect for each other with better understanding, which will ultimately deliver a better and brighter Malaysia in time to come. ;-)

Investors' Faith in Barisan Nasional

Further to my blog post last night with regards to a letter I have received defending the interests of investors and bondholders in the water concessionaire issue, there was a comment which highlighted that these investors and lenders who 'invested' blindly (without sight of the concession agreements) should not be protected.

Actually, chances are the bondholders do have "special access" to these supposed OSA agreements and documents (its only when opposition politicians get their hands on them, there's a problem ;-)).

But more importantly, these "investors" invested on the basis that the BN Federal Government would always act in the interest of the concessionaires as most of whom are cronies to UMNO. Hence, in all probabilities, many of them invested based on "faith".

Nobody expected the result of the March 8 elections last year and the subsequent focus of the Pakatan governments to give the people a "new fair deal".

Should the investors (or their advisors) then, be compensated for their blind faith in the BN government, at the rakyat's expense? You tell me.

(Remember the days when people invested and lent heavily in UEM, Time and Renong because they believed that BN will always back and bail them out - should these investors and lenders be compensated not only for their losses but also additional profits? BN bailed out UEM, Time and Renong alright, they rescued their cronies - remember Halim Saad? but left everyone else high and dry)

Perak Coup D'etat:: What Say You

Klang MP Charles Santiago will be holding a forum on the Perak coup d'etat as follows:

Date : 17th Feb 2009 (Tue)
Time : 8:00pm
Venue : Dewan Hamzah, Majlis Perbandaran Klang, Klang

Speakers include Ngeh Koo Ham, A. Sivanesan, Lim Kit Siang, Khalid Samad, Dr. Dzulkifli Ahmad, Haris Ibrahim, Charles Santiago

Please contact Yap (016-2026300) / Sarah (016-6267797) if you have any further enquiries.

Lawan Tetap Lawan

MEDIA STATEMENT BY V.SIVAKUMAR PERAK STATE ASSEMBLY SPEAKER AND DATO NGEH KOO HAM PERAK STATE SENIOR EXCO MEMBER, 5 FEB 2009

The Speaker of the Perak State Assembly and the Perak State Government will be filling a suit this morning at the Ipoh High Court to declare that the 3 State elected representatives namely Puan Hee Yit Foong, Encik Jamaluddin bin Mohd Radzi, Kapt(B) Mohd Osman bin Mohd. Jailu for Jelapang, Behrang and Changkat Jering are no longer elected representative for the said constituencies respectively. The speaker have already accepted the resignations of the said elected representatives and the state Government also recognizes that they are no longer elected representatives for the said constituencies.

This declaration is sought to compel the Election Commission to recognize that the said 3 seats have fell vacant and by-elections must be called. BN also cannot claim that it has the majority in the State Assembly as The Pakatan Rakyat has 28 members while BN also only 28 members. The position of 3 other elected representatives will now have to be determined by the court.

In view of the hung situation the Speaker and the Perak State Government are in full support of the requests by YAB Menteri Besar that the State Assembly be dissolved. We sincerely hope that HRH the Sultan of Perak will grant the dissolution of the State Assembly as requested.

In situation of doubt, it is best to go back to people to seek a fresh mandate as such practice is an inherent part of parliamentary democracy. We do not know why BN is so fearful of seeking a mandate from the people if it purports to rule with the people's support.