480% Johore causeway toll hikes absurd, presumptuous and preposterous – giving Najib a bad name as a Prime Minister whose word is not his bond

The sudden imposition of the 480% Johore causeway toll hikes is absurd, presumptuous and preposterous, giving Datuk Seri Najib Razak a bad name as a Prime Minister whose word is not his bond.

ABSURD
  because the astronomical, unreasonable and unconscionable toll hikes clearly for the Eastern Dispersal Link (EDL) are being imposed on the majority of the thousands  of vehicles and the 200,000 people crossing the Johor  causeway daily who do not use the EDL for them to reach the Johor Bahru Customs, Immigration and Quarantine (CIQ).

Isn’t it absurd that the majority of daily vehicles and commuters of the Johor causeway who do not use EDl are being penalized in having to pay  the unfair and astronomical  causeway toll hikes  for upkeep and maintenance of EDL?

Can the Federal or State government cite another instance in the country where vehicular traffic using one highway or access have to pay toll for another highway that they are not using?

Is the reason why there is no full and proper consultation before the Johor causeway toll hikes are implemented because those in authority realize the height of absurdity of such an imposition, and they have no confidence in facing the legitimate and righteous wrath of those who are made victims of such bureaucratic absurdity – having to pay toll hikes  for the EDL when they are not using the EDL?

PRESUMPTUOUS
 for those in authority to believe that they can get away with the most unconscionable,  unjustifiable and astronomical causeway toll hikes by implementing them in double-quick time of less than a week of announcement during Hari Raya holidays without any full and proper public feedback and consultation.

Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Mohamed Khaled Nordin said last weekend that the state government will hold talks with bus companies to provide express services for locals working in Singapore so that people will not have to drive across the Causeway to work and to pay for tolls.

The Johor Baru MP, Tan Sri Shahrir Samad has suggested that buses and taxis should be exempted from paying toll at the CIQ Complex to encourage more people to use public transportation to commute between Johor Baru and Singapore as well as to reduce traffic congestion at the Johor Causeway.

These and other proposals should have seriously studied and implemented if feasible, before any implementation of the unconscionable and astronomical causeway toll hikes on August 1.

In fact, up to now, the Malaysian Highways Authority which sprung the surprise announcement of the causeway toll hikes on July 26 has not been able to explain the reason for the sudden hike or the rationales for the astronomical and unconscionable hikes for the five classes of vehicles ranging from 469% hike for private cars, 453% hike for small lorries, 446% hike for heavy lorries; 486% hike for taxis and 478% hike for buses.

PREPOSTEROUS
 because it will give the sixth Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak  a bad name as a Prime Minister whose word is not his bond, especially as Najib would have broken two solemn pledges – firstly, his pledge at the 10,000-People 1Malaysia dinner in Johor Baru on March 9, 2012 that people who do not use the EDL will not be required to pay toll; and secondly, his commitment in Parliament on Sept. 24, 2012 that the EDL will remain toll-free.

In fact, Najib would have broken a third pledge implicit in his Government Transformation Programme (GTP) that he will uphold the highest standards of transparency and accountability which would not have permitted such astronomical and unconscionable causeway toll hikes without any proper public feedback and consultation.

Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee Chairman and MP for Pulai, Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamad is right when he criticized the toll hikes and said he did not understand their rationale, and that it did not make sense that the toll hikes were needed to bear the cost of EDL.

Najib should take his public commitments and pledges whether in Parliament or outside seriously, and I want to remind him of his dual  undertakings that people who do not use the EDL will not be required to pay toll and that the EDL will be toll-free.

For this reason, Najib cannot remain silent or passive, and must intervene to direct an immediate suspension of the astronomical and unconscionable Johor causeway toll hikes to allow for full and proper public feedback and consultation, which should also take into account his dual undertakings on the EDl that people who do not use it will not be required to pay toll and that EDL will remain toll-free, as well as considering the issues of Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) on Singaporean vehicles and   a comprehensive public transport plan in Johor Bahru to resolve the problem of traffic congestion, improve local public transport and enhance the local economy.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 August 2014, 11:39 am and is filed under
Johor Bahru
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Follow the World Bank procurement guidelines to prevent corruption and abuse

— Koon Yew Yin

The Malay Mail Online

August 2, 2014

AUGUST 2 — The World Bank has procurement guidelines which all the borrowers of Bank funding have to follow. The guidelines include the system of calling tenders. It is a system which has helped to prevent corruption even in the most corrupted countries in the world.

Malaysians are getting fed up with the government’s failure to reform the tender system as well as to check corruption and abuse which is costing us billions of ringgit annually, and bleeding the country’s finances dry.

Although the Government has appointed a minister, Paul Low, to take charge of the implementation of transparency in the government, it is clear that he is getting nowhere. Senator Paul Low has claimed that he is highly motivated in promoting and implementing new transparency procedures in order to curb corruption and cronyism. Well, being motivated is one thing but running around in circles and establishing another layer of bureaucratic smoke and mirrors has been the main outcome of the Minister’s more than one year in office.

Implement the World Bank’s procurement guidelines

From my experience in business there is a simple way to curb corruption, abuse and leakage in Malaysia.

This is by totally abandoning the system of negotiated tenders and by having true transparency but not transparency of the Paul Low or bogus MACC kind.

In its place we should follow the guidelines for open tenders and procurement laid down by the World Bank and other international development bodies.

When my colleagues and I successfully bid for a few of the contracts in the huge Muda Irrigation scheme project financed with World Bank funding in the 1960s, this was the system which we had to follow.

The government engaged a reputable engineering consulting firm which has had experience with similar projects to put up a proposal and to open the project bidding to all contractors to tender. The most important thing to note is that the consulting company responsible for the tender process should be independent and should have no interest whatsoever in the project implementation. This ensures that there is no hanky panky or “insider trading”. After the contract is awarded, the consultant makes sure that the project is completed within cost and scheduled time.

All the contractors must be prequalified based on their technical and financial ability. All contractors must submit tenders conforming to the original design so that the cheapest tender can be selected. If all the contractors are prequalified, the government tender board has only to look at the tendered price.

It is important not to allow anybody from the government to negotiate with any contractor to avoid corruption.

Transparency and accountability requires that all documents on the proposal be placed in the public sphere – not just limited information but detailed and full breakdowns in accordance with international best practices. This will ensure public monitoring and curbing of cost overruns which have plagued all mega projects in the country.

On the tender opening day all contractors and the representatives of press should be invited to witness the opening of bids and their tender prices should be publicly announced.

All contractors have to submit their tender according to the original design provided by the appointed consultant.

A contractor can also submit an alternative design provided that the price is cheaper and the quality is not inferior.

Additional safeguards

Besides the Bank’s guidelines, I would like to propose the following safeguards since open tenders alone will not ensure a fool proof no-abuse procurement system for mega projects. These additional safeguards are based on my experience as a Chartered Engineer and as a member of the Malaysian Board of Engineers for three two-year terms

Never invite contractors to submit project proposals for any mega project because each contractor will submit his own planning and design which will be impossible for the tender board to evaluate. You cannot compare the cost of an apple with the cost of an orange, a banana or a pineapple.

A contractor should not be permitted to take on the role of the engineering consultant responsible for design as well as that of the role of a construction contractor responsible for the project implementation as the two roles are of conflicting interest. If the company is permitted to do so, it will lead to public perception of abuse and corruption.

For mega projects, it is cheaper to employ a really qualified consultant to design the whole project rather than to ask each contractor to provide designs for different phases. The latter is false economy and will result in ballooning of costs.

Just say “No” to negotiated tenders

In summary, the whole procedure of prequalifying contractors, calling tenders, evaluating and awarding the contracts must be carried out in a transparent way to avoid any suspicion of corruption. Such a system of open procurement is effective and can bring change even to the most corrupt country.

Why is it not followed and why do we still have the system of negotiated tenders which was established by former Prime Minister, Dr. Mahathir, and which opened the door to corruption on a grand scale in the country is a question any fool can answer. It can be safely said that hundreds, if not thousands of billions of ringgit have been lost because of this system of negotiated tenders and its associated abuse and cronyism.

Pakatan state governments must also say “No”

It is important for the public to ask this question not only for federal government projects but also for state initiated projects of the Pakatan governments. Take for example the recent news report that the construction giant Gamuda Bhd is the favourite to land the job as the project development partner (PDP) to oversee the implementation of key components of the integrated transportation plan on the island of Penang. Firstly, it is clear that Gamuda and all the other companies reported to be in the running for the massive multi-billion dollar project do not have any experience to be in the position of the overall design consultant.

They all are not engineering consultants. They all are construction contractors. Gamuda might have constructed the tunnel in Kuala Lumpur but they did not design it.

Secondly, CIMB Research has found it “pleasantly surprising” that the Penang state government opted for the Project Development Partner (PDP) structure similar to that of the Klang Valley MRT which has been heavily criticised for cronyism and abuse. From the rakyat’s experience, what is “pleasantly surprising” to contractors will definitely be unpleasant and disastrous for the public.

Alarm bells must be raised and concern expressed if such projects are given out even if supposedly on an improved or modified system of negotiated tender. Such a system has been defended by those in power to be more accountable or transparent and free from abuse or corruption. This is patently false.

Conclusion

Nothing less than a truly open, fully transparent and fully accountable tender system and process is, in my opinion, going to work if Malaysia is to check corruption and abuse.

If the Najib administration, Paul Low, and the Pakatan state governments, really want to curb corruption and ensure good governance, accountability and transparency, they should stop farting around. The system to help bring it about is easily available – just follow what I have provided here.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 August 2014, 11:29 pm and is filed under
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Height of irony Utusan Malaysia complaining about selective prosecution and investigation when it has been the major beneficiary enjoying immunity and impunity for series of seditious articles inciting racial and religious hatred and tensions in the country in recent years

It is the height of irony that Utusan Malaysia is complaining about selective prosecution and investigation when the UMNO-owned daily has been the biggest beneficiary of such criminal  oversight and abuses of power by various enforcement agencies particularly the police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers as Utusan continues to  enjoy both “immunity and impunity” for a series of seditious articles inciting racial and religious hatred and tensions in the country in recent years.

Now Utusan alleges that non-Muslims are becoming blatant in demeaning Islam because authorities are not pursuing them with the same vigour applied to Malays.

Utusan Malaysia further alleges that “the eagerness of non-Muslims to insult Islam can no longer be ignored” because of the “hesitance or fear on the part of the authorities to punish non-Malays for such activity”.

This is utter bunkum.

However, if Utusan Malaysia can produce evidence of selective prosecution and investigation in favour of non-Malays and non-Muslims to the detriment of Malays and Muslims, DAP supports a full investigation for we stand firmly and unabashedly for the constitutional guarantee in Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution on equality before the law and entitlement to equal protection of the law to all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region, gender or socio-economic status.

In fact, DAP would fully support a Royal Commission of Inquiry to conduct a no-holds-barred wide-ranging inquiry into all cases and instances of selective prosecution and investigation by the enforcement agencies which counter, contradict or diminish the constitutional guarantee of equality before the law for all Malaysians in the past one, two or even three decades going back to the 22-year Mahathir premiership.

Will Utusan Malaysia support this proposal?

Can the authorities (or even Utusan) explain the selective non-prosecution of Utusan Malaysia for some of the most irresponsible and seditious lies appearing on its front-pages  (turning Utusan into a Lies-Paper instead of a Newspaper) falsely  accusing the DAP of wanting to form a Christian State and have a Christian Prime Minister or the front-page headline and story of “Haram sokong DAP”?

But what takes the cake in the “Bising-bising Awang Selamat” in today’s Mingguan Malaysia is the comment that Islam is more “protected” in Singapore than in Malaysia, saying that the republic acted  against all incidents of sedition firmly and consistently.

Awang Selamat demanded those responsible for policing the Internet to be courageous in protecting the interests of the Malay majority, whom he said were entitled to live peacefully, or to resign for failing to perform their duties.

The Utusan editors must be faulted for it should be the right of all Malaysians, and not just the majority or minority, to live peacefully and to have their religion, customs and way of life to be respected and accepted as an integral part of the diversity of the  Malaysian national mosaic.

Utusan would have shown its inclusive Malaysian focus of loyalty instead of its narrow  exclusive communal mindset  if it had spoken up against all forms of selective prosecution and investigation against all religions and all Malaysians.

I have for several years been a victim of UMNO cybertroopers on  the Internet and social media who  make false, baseless, defamatory and even seditious allegations against me for being against the 3Rs – the Malay Race, the Islamic Religion and the Malay Rulers –  including horrendous lies that I had caused the May 13 riots in 1969 and killed Malays.

Would Utusan agree that all the UMNO cybertroopers who had made these seditious and dastardly lies and attacks against me on the Internet and the social media should be hunted down by the authorities and brought to book?

If Utusan is not prepared to answer in the positive, then we are only witnessing a cynical display of hypocrisy and double-standards.

Selective prosecution and investigation are still being  used as  noxious and undemocratic  weapons  against dissent and the Opposition, which is why certain individuals, NGOs  and groups continue  to enjoy immunity and impunity for their seditious rhetorics of hate to incite racial and religious conflict and tensions while the Sedition Act and other repressive laws are used to cow or suppress  peaceful and legitimate voices of dissent.

This is why in Kuala Lumpur  tomorrow morning I will  give a statement to the police in its investigations against me for committing the  offence of sedition, when I said at the recent  forum to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the death of Teoh Beng Hock at the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) headquarters in Shah Alam on 16th July 2009 that Beng Hock had been murdered and that the killers are still at large.

No less a personage than the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar had ordered a police investigation against me on the ground that I had committed the offence of sedition.

When will the IGP show personal interest and stir the police from their  slumber to conduct  sedition investigations against  Utusan Malaysia and the chorus of seditious utterances and threats by extremist individuals and NGOs inciting racial and religious hatred, including May 13 threats about racial riots uttered at least thrice this year alone?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 3 August 2014, 3:31 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
DAP
,
Media
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Do Umno Baru men fear women?

Mariam Mokhtar

Malaysiakini

August 4, 2014

The WikiLeaks ‘RM5 banknote gagging order’ has revealed that we cannot look to the West (read Australia) for an example of a nation which upholds democratic values, rule of law and a free press. Similarly, Malaysians cannot look to some men, principally Malay men in Umno Baru, as role models for equality, fairness and justice.

Last month, an Umno Baru constitutional law ‘expert’ said that PKR president Wan Azizah Wan Ismail could not become menteri besar because her menstruation was an “obstacle which would prevent her from accompanying the sultan, at functions”.

A few decades ago, when working in the petroleum industry, some men tried to discourage women with comments such as, “How can you go offshore, or climb ladders? Your clothing is an ‘obstacle’.”

These men had not heard of overalls. In their opinion, high-flying women were either stenographers or shop assistants. Things have not progressed much, in Malaysia.

Perhaps, Umno Baru men are trapped in a time warp, in which women are subservient and docile. Do they hanker for the good old days when a woman was a maid at home, a cook in the kitchen and a whore in the bedroom? We are not living in an Islamic caliphate nor are we living in the dark ages.

Umno Baru lawyer Mohd Hafarizam Harun, Umno Baru Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin and Universiti Islam Antarabangsa (UIA) lecturer Shamrahayu Abdul Aziz forget how they arrived in this world. For nine months, women carry a foetus, suffer weeks of morning sickness, have eating and sleeping problems, to climax in the pain of delivery.

Even if miracles could be performed, these men would not be willing to sacrifice nine months of their lives, nor endure the pain of childbirth.

In many families, the son receives preferential treatment. He gets the choice cuts of meat, the more expensive present and he need not do the chores. He gets to go out and party. Girls learn the meaning of tolerance and the importance of sharing. They experience the effects of discrimination from an early age.

Women know how to make others feel good, and bring out the best in people. See how girlfriends mollycoddle their boyfriends. Observe how mothers whip up the best meals for the son-in-law, when he visits.

As girls help their mothers to cook and keep the house clean, they learn about deadlines, such as preparing meals on time. They keep to a budget, when buying groceries. They observe healthy eating habits and realise the importance of cleanliness. One needs to look into one’s teenage son’s room, to realise that males have a different concept of tidiness.

Good at multi-tasking

What happens at home is translated to the workplace. Perhaps, that explains why government departments, which invite potential bidders for a tender, usually lay on a good spread before the meeting. Women would get straight to the point and hold the meeting, to thrash out the job requirements. Women celebrate after a job has been done well, not before.

Girls learn to feed their younger siblings whilst loading the washing-machine, the curry is simmering and the rice is cooking. They may be busy, but all the while, their minds are on the complex algebra which teacher has set them for homework. Women are good at multi-tasking.

The boy who parties late, is not up on time for school. He bullies or bribes his sister to finish his homework. Girls love mental challenges. This may explain why girls perform better at school and college. At university, more women take up professional courses like engineering, science and medicine. Malay men prefer religious studies courses.

After years of helping in a busy kitchen and answering to a mother who demands excellence, girls handle stress better than their brothers. Dealing with a demanding mother also equips women with good survival instincts.

With better communication skills, women make better listeners than men and tend to speak their minds. To get the job done, they may have to scream and shout, a lot. Men mistake this for nagging. Women call it constructive criticism.

Women are not afraid of tackling difficult situations. The housewife who wants a particular do-it-yourself (DIY) job done, or wants to know how her husband got a lipstick stain on his collar, knows that men can be very evasive.

Women have very good memories. Just ask any man who has just been nagged by his wife. She will remind him that he made the same mistake 20 years previously, or that he forgot her birthday 32 years ago.

Women pay regular visits to their doctors, because they know that if they fall ill, the whole household suffers. Men are reluctant to address their health issues. Men don’t just have a common cold, they have ‘man-flu’ and are at death’s door.

Older women have learnt to manage their time. Many are childminders for their grandchildren, they control the family finances and retirement fund, besides organising the annual holidays. They dread the day when their husbands retire, because after a lifetime of being told what to do at work, newly retired men act like lost puppies. They follow the wife around and are a nuisance, questioning her every move.

The woman who is unlucky to be someone’s first wife, can expect the arrival of her husband, when he has been chucked out of the youngest wife’s house. The arm-candy wife may be good to look at, but she cannot cope with her husband’s dementia, his double incontinence nor his demand for ‘soft-foods’.

On top of this, the menopausal woman who cannot sleep, can cram additional items into her schedule and get more work done.

Despite all this, Umno Baru men have the cheek to say that a woman is incapable of becoming a menteri besar. Why don’t they simply change the constitution and bar women from holding the highest office in the state, and the nation? Do Umno Baru men fear women, or just Pakatan women?

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a defender of the truth, the admiral-general of the Green Bean Army and president of the Perak Liberation Organisation (PLO).

– See more at: http://www.malaysiakini.com/columns/270501#sthash.hdrqNxxo.dpuf

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 August 2014, 2:19 pm and is filed under
Mariam Mokhtar
,
UMNO
,
women
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should visit Johor Bahru to explain the reasons why he had broken two solemn EDL pledges to people of Johor – “no toll charges for motorists who don’t use EDL” and “No toll on EDL”

The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak should visit Johor Bahru to explain the reasons why he had broken two solemn EDL (Eastern Dispersal Link)  pledges to the people of Johor in 2002 – “No toll charges for those who don’t use EDL” and “No toll on EDL”.

Najib made the first pledge of “No toll charges for those who don’t use the EDL” at the 10,000-People 1Malaysia Dinner in Johor Bahru on March 9, 2012 which was also attended by the then Johor Mentri Besar, Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman, and then MCA President Datuk Seri Chua Soi Lek and the then Gerakan President Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon.

Najib said that the matter was discussed at a recent meeting of the National Economic Consultative Council which was attended by representatives from the Johor state government.

Najib made the second pledge of “No toll on EDL” six months later in Parliament in September 2012.

As Prime Minister of a government whose motto and slogan is “People’s First, Performance Now”, Najib cannot take his public pledges lightly and  must go out of his way to explain and justify flagrant breaches of his public pledges.

So far, Najib has kept silent on his breaches of “No toll charges for those who don’t use EDL” and “No toll on EDL” pledges, which have both been violated since August 1 with the sudden imposition of 480% causeway toll hikes, causing hardships to the causeway commuters as well as adversely affecting business and economy in southern Johor.

Has Najib no explanation or justification whatsoever for his breaches of his two pledges on the EDL to the people of Johor in 2012, and his motto and slogan of “People First, Performance Now” is just an empty and hollow one?

Is Najib going to be known as a Prime Minister whose public pledges cannot be believed or trusted like his two broken  EDL pledges?

It is astounding that although four of the six MPs in Johor Bahru region come from the Barisan Nasional, even BN MPs and State Assemblymen had not been consulted before the breaches of Najib’s two EDL pledges.

Until Najib can visit Johor Baru to give convincing and acceptable explanation and justification for his breaches of two Prime Ministerial pledges on EDL, he should immediately suspend and defer implementation of the astronomical causeway toll hike increases.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 August 2014, 1:27 pm and is filed under
Johor Bahru
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


On authorities’ alleged selective prosecution

 – Lim Chee Wee

The Malaysian Insider

5 August 2014

Recent attempts to question the authorities’ purported inaction over cases involving non-Muslims’ alleged disrespect for Islam will only heighten racial tension. This is most irresponsible and unnecessary at a time when we can do with more goodwill among the different races.

On Sunday, Mingguan Malaysia in a column by Awang Selamat and Federal Territory Umno Youth chief, Mohd Razlan Muhammad Rafii had suggested that the authorities practiced selective prosecution by not acting against those who had insulted Islam. The argument was that Islamic preacher Shahul Hamid was swiftly picked up for questioning after a video of him insulting Hindus went viral on social media. Meanwhile, two individuals who had made disparaging remarks about Islam are still on the loose.

Such comments raise two issues: firstly, prosecutorial discretion and secondly, what is the solution to interfaith differences. It is a universally accepted practice and policy that not all suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution. The dominant consideration is whether it is in the public interest to prosecute and another consideration is whether there are mitigating circumstances such as admission of guilt/apology. Sometimes, prosecutorial discretion is perceived to result in double standard prosecution.

Neither Mingguan Malaysia nor Mohd Razlan provided empirical evidence to back its argument about rise in anti-Islam behaviour and how Singapore was swift in managing interfaith differences. Such emotive generalisation does not serve to improve the discourse. Perhaps, they have forgotten that Alvin Tan and Vivian Lee were charged last year under the Sedition Act for insulting the Muslims.

On the second point about solution to interfaith differences, it is time for us to move beyond prosecution and punishment. We must start debating the role of education, understanding, engagement, mediation and civil law remedy in resolving interfaith differences. – August 8, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 August 2014, 6:38 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Islam
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


10 Ogos bukan hari penentu bagi Khalid, tetapi hari penentu Pakatan Rakyat

Ahad 10 Ogos 2014 bukanlah sangat hari penentu bagi Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim sebagai Menteri Besar Selangor, bahkan sebenarnya hari penentuan bagi Pakatan Rakyat yang berusia enam tahun sama ada ia mampu untuk terus menjadi simbol aspirasi dan harapan rakyat Malaysia ke arah perubahan politik demi membawa politik baru dengan keadilan, kebebasan, akauntabiliti, ketelusan, urustadbir yang baik, perpaduan dan keharmonian rakyat Malaysia menggantikan hegemoni, korupsi dan ketidakadilan yang diamalkan Umno.

Majlis Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat dalam mesyuaratnya pada 23 Julai 2014, dengan melibatkan pimpinan daripada ketiga-tiga parti komponen PAS, PKR dan DAP, telah memutuskan dua perkara:

i) Menukar-ganti Menteri Besar Selangor Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim; dan

ii) PAS dan DAP akan mengadakan mesyuarat di peringkat jawatankuasa pusat masing-masing untuk memutuskan mengenai pencalonan PKR untuk meletakkan Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Ismail sebagai Menteri Besar Selangor yang baru.

Perkembangan sepanjang dua minggu lalu mengenai isu Menteri Besar Selangor selepas mesyuarat Majlis Pimpinan pada 23 Julai telah melemahkan keyakinan rakyat terhadap kesatuan tujuan, perpaduan dan masa depan Pakatan Rakyat sebagai alternatif yang memberi saingan terhadap Umno-Barisan Nasional demi membawa perubahan politik seperti yang diharapkan oleh rakyat Malaysia, seperti yang ditunjukkan melalui keputusan Pilihanraya Umum ke-13 pada 5 Mei tahun lalu, dengan lebih 52 peratus undi popular memihak kepada Pakatan Rakyat.

Pakatan Rakyat berdepan krisis terburuk sejak ia dibentuk selepas PRU ke-12 pada April 2008.

Mampukah Pakatan Rakyat bertahan di saat krisis keyakinan yang paling dahsyat?

Ini bergantung kepada komitmen semua pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat terhadap aspirasi asal pembentukan Pakatan Rakyat dan Dasar Bersama yang telah dipersetujui oleh parti komponen Pakatan Rakyat dalam tempoh enam tahun lalu, terutamanya dalam kenyataan pertama Pakatan Rakyat pada 1 April 2008 yang berjanji untuk menjunjung tinggi hak dan kepentingan semua rakyat Malaysia, tanpa mengira agama atau keturunan seperti yang termaktub di dalam Perlembagaan.

Sekiranya semua pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat, sama ada DAP, PAS, atau PKR terus berpandukan kepada prinsip-prinsip dan kerangka Dasar Bersama demi memberikan harapan kepada rakyat Malaysia terhadap perubahan yang telah lama diperlukan dalam lanskap politik negara supaya Malaysia boleh mencapai perpaduan, keadilan, demokrasi, berdaya saing dan makmur dan menjadi contoh sebuah negara berjaya yang berbilang kaum dan agama kepada seluruh dunia, maka Pakatan Rakyat mesti terus berjuang dengan segala kekuatan demi mencapai tujuannya mengambil tempat perikatan Umno/BN dalam PRU ke-14 akan datang.

Keadaan sebaliknya adalah terlalu dahsyat untuk difikirkan kerana Pakatan Rakyat pastikan akan terasing ke sudut nota kaki sejarah Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 7 August 2014, 3:04 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


August 10 is not D-Day for Khalid but D-Day for Pakatan Rakyat

Sunday, August 10, 2014 is not so much D-Day for Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim as Selangor Mentri Besar but D-Day for the six-year old Pakatan Rakyat whether it could continue to embody the hopes and aspirations of Malaysians for political change to usher in the new politics of justice, freedom, accountability, transparency, good governance, Malaysian unity and harmony after decades of UMNO hegemony, corruption and injustices.

The Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council at its meeting on July 23, 2014  with the participation of leaders from all three PR component parties of  PAS, PKR and DAP, agreed on two things:

(i)	The change and replacement of Selangor Mentri Besar, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim; and

(ii)	PAS and DAP to convene meetings of their respective Central Committees to decide on the PKR nomination of Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Ismail as the new Selangor Mentri Besar.

The developments in the past two weeks pertaining to the issue of the Selangor Mentri Besar after the July 23 meeting of  PR Majlis Pimpinan have gravely undermined public confidence in the unity of purpose, cohesion and future of Pakatan Rakyat as a viable alternative coalition to  UMNO-Barisan Nasional to bring about the political changes as hoped for by Malaysians as demonstrated in  the results of the 13th General Elections on May 5 last year, with over 52 per cent of the popular vote supporting PR.

Pakatan Rakyat is faced with the worst crisis since its formation after the 12th General Elections in April 2008.

Can Pakatan Rakyat survive its worst crisis of confidence?

This will depend on the commitment of all Pakatan Rakyat leaders to the original aspirations in the formation of Pakatan Rakyat and the common policy framework agreed by Pakatan Rakyat component parties in the past six years, particularly in the first PR statement on 1st April 2008 which pledged “to uphold the rights and interests of all Malaysians, regardless of religion or race, as enshrined in the Constitution”.

If all Pakatan Rakyat leaders, whether DAP, PAS or PKR, continue to be guided by the PR common policy principles and framework so as to give hope to Malaysians for the long-needed changes in the political landscape in the country so that Malaysia can become a united, just, democratic, competitive and prosperous nation which holds itself out as beacon of light of a successful multi-racial and multi-religious nation to  the rest the world, then PR will forge ahead  from strength to strength to its destiny to replace the UMNO/BN coalition in the 14th General Elections.

The alternative is too horrendous to contemplate for PR will be relegated to the footnotes of Malaysian history.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 7 August 2014, 12:47 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Islamic State persecution of Yazidi minority amounts to genocide, UN says

By Jane Arraf, Correspondent

AUGUST 7, 2014

Christian Science Monitor

Tens of thousands of Yazidis have taken refuge on a mountain in Sinjar province after Islamic State fighters overran their town and other areas, pushing out Kurdish paramilitary forces.

BAGHDAD — Sunni Arab militants in northern Iraq are hunting down and killing large numbers of minority Yazidis, acts which amount to genocide, according to a senior United Nations official.

On Sunday, fighters from the self-declared Islamic State overran the city of Sinjar, part of a widening offensive that on Thursday saw IS take control of other Christian and Yzedi towns on the Nineveh plains. According to UN officials and Yazidi elders, the militants have killed hundreds of Yazidis, a secretive faith with pre-Islamic roots. Others have been taken as slaves. Tens of thousands have taken refuge on Sinjar Mountain, their traditional refuge over centuries of persecution, and are appealing for emergency aid.

Unlike Christians, who have been told they must either pay a religious tax or convert to Islam to avoid death, the Yazidis are considered by Sunni militants to be infidels who deserve extermination.

“We believe that what they have done may be classified as genocide and a crime against humanity,” Gyorgy Busztin, the deputy special representative in Iraq of the UN secretary general, tells the Christian Science Monitor. “Regrettably the information indicates that they are not even given the choice of life or conversion but they are being treated as a group to be eliminated from the face of the earth.”

Busztin says the UN is still gathering numbers but it believes hundreds of Yazidis have been killed while others, primarily women, have been abducted and taken into slavery.

The labeling the campaign against the Yazidi as genocide carries some weight and could spur international relief efforts. But it has no immediate practical implications, nor is it likely to sway the militants in their assault on other sects and faiths in Iraq and Syria.

Busztin says the UN still needs to collect more data to substantiate the allegations of genocide. He said there were isolated cases where Yazidis were given the option to convert, as opposed to being killed for their beliefs.

With its latest offensive, IS, which was formerly known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), now controls one-third of Iraqi territory, including a 1,200 miles-plus de-facto border with Kurdish-held territory. The Kurdish peshmerga, which has appealed for heavy weapons and US military help, is now regrouping. On Monday, the Iraqi government, which is at odds with semi-autonomous Kurdistan, launched air strikes on IS-held targets in Mosul.

Yazidi elders say their men, armed only with rifles, tried to hold back the IS fighters while tens of thousands of men, women and children fled on foot higher onto Sinjar mountain – a rocky outcrop without shelter or water. The United Nations’ Children’s Fund (UNICEF) says it believes at least 40 children died either in the initial attack or from dehydration on the mountain. Photos posted on social media show parents trying to bury their children beneath the rubble and rocks. UNICEF says up to 25,000 children and their families are stranded on the mountain.

“They consider us infidels so they are killing us and taking away the women,” says Vian Dakhil, a Yazedi member of parliament, her eyes filling with tears after taking a call from a Yzedi man who told her three of his five children had died on the mountain. She says she spoke this week with one of several hundred women and children held in an IS-run prison near the city of Tel Afar who told her taht small groups of women were being taken away in vehicles. On Tuesday Dakhil broke down in tears in a parliamentary session in Baghdad as she appealed for help for her community.

Relief efforts flounder

The US State Department says it is “actively monitoring the situation in Sinjar.” While plans for expanded military support to Iraq contingent on a new Iraqi government being formed, the US is exploring ways to get aid to displaced Yazidis – including the possibility of US military air drops to the mountainside.

Iraqi relief efforts to the mountain have fared poorly: Many of the packets of food and water dropped from Iraqi helicopters this week broke when they hit the ground. With the water in plastic bottles not cushioned by wooden pallets normally used for air drops, the bottles exploded upon impact.

“Please tell the Americans and the Europeans and the UN we need help,” says Ayid Rasheed, his voice rising in panic as he spoke from a phone charged by a car battery carried up the mountain. “We are starving and dying of thirst.”

Mr. Rasheed, speaking Thursday, said IS fighters were now closing in on Shaikhan south of Dohuk – the site of a shrine to a 12th-century saint that is one of the Yazidis holiest sites.

Two years ago, Rasheed’s liquor store in central Baghdad was bombed. Only Christians and Yazidis, who unlike Muslims have no prohibition against alcohol, are allowed to sell liquor in Iraq. Yazedis say selling alcohol is one of the few businesses which is open to them.

A secretive faith

Ethnically Kurds, the Yazidis’ faith combines elements of Zoroastrianism from ancient Persia, Sufi Islam, Judaism and Christianity along with beliefs from ancient Mesopotamia. It’s a closed and still secretive religion – members have to be born into the faith and cannot marry outside of it.

Yazidis believe that God entrusted the world to seven angels – the chief angel known in earthly form as the peacock angel who refused to bow down before Adam. While Yazedis see it as proof of his devotion to God, the narrative’s parallels with the fallen angel have led some Muslims to accuse them of devil worship.

In 2007, al-Qaeda in Iraq, the precursor to the Islamic State, issued a religious ruling calling for the killing of Yazedis. A suicide truck bomb attack on a village in northern Iraq killed 800 people that year in what is still the most lethal bombing of the war.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 8 August 2014, 7:23 am and is filed under
International
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib must personally speak up and explain why he had reneged on two specific promises of “no toll charges for non-users of EDL”  and “No toll for EDL” and whether future Prime Ministerial pledges are any more credible and believable!

The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Abdul Wahid Omar, failed big time in Johor Bahru on Tuesday when he tried to explain the rationale for the astronomical, unconscionable and unjust 480% causeway toll hike at the Johor causeway from August 1.

All he could say was that the decision to increase the Johor causeway toll at the Customs, Immigration and Quarantine (CIQ) Complex at the Sultan Iskandar Building in JB  was made after a two-year study following the government’s decision not to impose toll at the Eastern Dispersal Link (EDL).

Wahid said toll collection at the EDL by its concessionaire, Malaysian Resources Corp Bhd (MRCB) was supposed to have started in 2012, and the government is paying the concessionaire RM11 million a month in compensation.

After a two-year study,  it was decided that there was no requirement for the government to take over the EDL.

Wahid has not given any rationale or reason whatsoever to justify the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak breaking two public and solemn pledges to the people of Johor Bahru in 2012, viz “No toll charges for non-users of EDL” and “No toll for EDL”!

What is the  new discovery  from the government’s  two-year study which Najib and the authorities had not known about when the Prime Minister made the two pledges of “No toll charges for non-users of EDL” and “No toll for EDL” in March and September 2012 respectively as  to justify the reneging of these two solemn EDL pledges by Najib?

If there is nothing new in the two-year study which the government had not known or no good reason why it should not have known before the two EDL pledges were made by Najib, what then is the reason for the reneging of these two EDL pledges apart from the factors of sheer bad faith, insincerity, dishonesty and rank irresponsibility?

Will Najib admit that he was guilty of bad faith, insincerity, dishonesty and/or rank irresponsibility when he made the two EDL pledges in 2012 of “no toll charges for non-users of EDL” and “No toll for EDL” – as Najib never meant to honour the two EDL pledges when he made them in 2012?

Wahib also  failed abjectly to give any  rationale for the astronomic, unconscionable and unjust causeway toll hike of 480%, the indecent haste for the imposition for the toll hikes in less than a week of their announcement and  why there was no proper public consultation or feedback before the astronomical and unconscionable toll hike were imposed.

It is clear that only Najib can address these questions about the violation of the two Prime Ministerial pledges on the EDL in 2012, and Najib should not tarry any further but make a special trip to Johor Bahru to personally speak up and explain why he had reneged on his two specific promises of “No toll charges for non-users of EDL” and “No toll for EDL”, and most important of all, whether any of his future Prime Ministerial pledges are credible and believable!

                This entry was posted on Friday, 8 August 2014, 1:51 pm and is filed under
Johore
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pilots Say U.S. Failed to Assess Ukraine Threat

By ANDY PASZTOR

Wall Street Journal

Aug. 7, 2014

WASHINGTON—U.S. pilot union leaders alleged that federal agencies failed to promptly assess and publicize potential threats posed to airliners flying over eastern Ukraine before the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 last month.

The criticism comes as several federal agencies have begun in recent days to look at possible improvements to the process for identifying and responding to significant threats to civilian aircraft, people familiar with the talks said.

It isn’t clear what changes are being discussed, and officials of the Federal Aviation Administration and intelligence agencies declined to comment on the discussions.

In a speech and separate interview on Wednesday, Lee Moak, president of the Air Line Pilots Association, asserted that U.S. and other governments didn’t properly fulfill their “duty to warn” airlines about the possible hazards of flying over areas where fighting between Ukrainian forces and Russian-backed separatists raged on the ground.

Flight 17 was “a watershed event” and was “uniquely different” from other airliners brought down by hostile fire in earlier decades, Mr. Moak said in the interview. As a result of what occurred over Ukraine last month, he said, “the federal government has to come up with a dynamic process” to alert airlines about such future threats.

When intelligence is available about flying over hostile airspace, he added, “there has to be a timely process to notify” the industry, and then carriers have to more effectively share information between themselves.

In response to the shootdown, Mr. Moak said that labor and airlines representatives have joined forces to prod the FAA and U.S. intelligence community to streamline and accelerate the threat-assessment system.

Some of these people said U.S. national-security officials had intelligence about threats from Ukrainian rebels at least a day before Flight 17 went down.

Reiterating the FAA’s previous position, the agency said: “Before the Flight 17 incident there was no intelligence to indicate separatists intended to target civil aircraft.” The FAA also said: “Our first indication that they had an operable SA-11 [antiaircraft system] was July 17, the day of the crash.”

The FAA reiterated that “agency officials work with counterparts in the U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement communities on a continuous basis to monitor and analyze intelligence.” The agency said it provides guidance or imposes restrictions when it receives “specific and credible actionable intelligence of a threat.”

U.S. intelligence officials on Thursday largely echoed the FAA’s comments, and their own previous explanations, saying that the U.S. hadn’t confirmed the extent of the threat to airliners before Flight 17’s downing on July 17.

In a briefing for reporters last month, intelligence officials said they didn’t know for certain when the SA-11 system was transferred into eastern Ukraine.

There were U.S. suspicions that the Russian-backed separatists had an SA-11 when a Ukrainian military cargo plane traveling at a lower altitude was shot down on July 14, the officials said at the briefing. Some officials also have voiced suspicions that the separatists may have had possession of an inoperable SA-11.

However, the crash of Flight 17 was what confirmed the presence of an SA-11, they said.

Questions about what the FAA knew before the downing—and steps it subsequently took to impose temporary restrictions on U.S. airlines flying into Israel—were highlighted Thursday at the pilot union’s biggest annual safety conference.

Claudio Manno, the FAA’s assistant administrator for security and hazardous materials, told the conference on Thursday that the fate of Flight 17 “demonstrates that we are now faced with an increasing safety concern” about more-sophisticated weapons in the hands of both “state and nonstate actors.”

He said it is a concern that is emerging now, and “it’s a different dynamic” than dealing with traditional terrorist groups.

In the past year, he said, the FAA has issued, reviewed or updated more than a dozen notices or special regulations focused on airspace threats, including regarding Iraq, Libya, Mali, Ukraine and Israel.

The agency declined to make Mr. Manno available for additional comment.

Ukraine barred commercial aircraft from flying below 32,000 feet over the region before the downing of Flight 17 as combat continued on the ground and Ukrainian rebels previously shot down two military aircraft.

The Ukrainian government did that without giving the U.S. or the International Civil Aviation Organization, an arm of the United Nations, a detailed explanation, according to U.S. and air-safety officials. Countries are responsible for controlling and monitoring threats to their own airspace, and they traditionally haven’t been obligated to provide such explanations to the ICAO or other governments.

The FAA has barred U.S. commercial flights over Ukraine after Flight 17 went down.

The downing of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 has prompted widespread debate about the broader role of both the ICAO and the U.S. in analyzing airspace threats stemming from hostilities on the ground. ICAO has set up a government-industry task force to study the matter and make recommendations in several months to its policy-making body.

ICAO has set up a government-industry task force to study the matter and make recommendations in several months to its policy-making body.

Mitchell Fox, chief of ICAO’s flight operations office, on Thursday emphasized that individual countries are responsible for alerting airlines about airspace threats. But when conflict is under way, he told the safety conference, some countries “can’t always carry out, for obvious reasons,” such warnings. Governments involved in a conflict, he said, “may not always have the ability to do that.”

If the U.S. and the industry wait for ICAO to dramatically change its procedures, “we will end up waiting forever,” Mr. Moak said in the interview.

But in the U.S., he said, government officials are “going through a process” to identify ways to improve and speed up the warning system. “I hope that they’re going to announce something in the near future,” Mr. Moak said, without providing specifics. The union has been involved in some of those discussions.

“ICAO does need to have a role,” according to Mr. Moak, but “it would be better if the U.S. government is a leader here and they get out in front.” Then he said “we don’t have any confusion.”

Randy Harrison, corporate security director for Delta Air Lines Inc., said carriers increasingly are making decisions about where to stop flying based largely on their own risk assessments. “Airlines are now often acting quicker than the government agencies,” he told the conference.

In the case of halting service to Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport, “we saw a number of airlines step out” and temporarily suspend flights “well ahead of the [U.S.] government.”

—Felicia Schwartz contributed to this article.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 8 August 2014, 11:23 am and is filed under
MH 17
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Putrajaya salah strategi isu kenaikan tol Tambak Johor: Bahagian 2

Nur Jazlan

The Malaysian Insider

8 August 2014

Kenyataan Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Abdul Wahid Omar, Selasa lalu, mengenai kajian untuk menaikkan kadar tol Tambak Johor pada 1 Ogos, sudah dilakukan sejak dua tahun lalu bagi menampung kos pembinaan Lebuhraya Penyuraian Timur (EDL) sebenarnya, membuktikan betapa kerajaan terus ‘berahsia’ kepada rakyat.

Pada masa sama kenyataan menteri yang bertanggungjawab untuk Unit Perancang Ekonomi (EPU) itu mengesahkan segala telahan dan andaian rakyat Johor selatan sebelum ini, mengenai kenaikan kadar tol Tambak Johor adalah untuk menampung pembinaan EDL yang siap sepenuhnya pada 2012.

Bagaimanapun, timbul pula persoalan mengapa syarikat MRCB yang diberikan konsesi membina EDL tidak dibenarkan mengutip tol pada lebuh raya sepanjang 8 kilometer itu? Sedangkan menjadi amalan dalam konsesi lebuh raya di negara ini, syarikat yang membina lebuh raya boleh mengenakan tol kepada penggunanya.

Dasar ‘flip flop’ kerajaan Barisan Nasional (BN) ini, sebenarnya terus mengundang tanda tanya kepada rakyat yang memberikan mandat kepada parti untuk memerintah selepas Pilihanraya Umum (PRU) 13, walaupun hanya memenangi 133 kerusi Parlimen dan terus kehilangan Selangor serta Pulau Pinang untuk penggal kedua berturut-turut.

Selama ini, Johor dianggap sebagai tiang seri kepada Umno dan BN tetapi tidak dalam PRU13 lalu, apabila DUN Johor menyaksikan pertambahan kerusi Pakatan Rakyat (PR) serta pertambahan juga dalam kerusi Parlimen.

Abdul Wahid bagaimanapun, tidak boleh dipersalahkan dalam keputusan untuk menaikkan kadar tol Tambak Johor kerana beliau baru bertugas sebagai menteri EPU dan status EDL sudah berada dalam keadaan ‘kabur’ sejak tiga tahun lalu.

Malah difahamkan, menteri yang bertanggungjawab terhadap kenaikan kadar tol ini, tidak mempunyai kebebasan untuk menjelaskan perkara ini, kepada rakyat dan terpaksa menunggu serta mendapat arahan daripada pihak ‘atasan’.

Ia menunjukkan betapa menteri Kabinet tidak boleh bertanggungjawab atas segala keputusan yang dilakukan kementerian masing-masing kerana mereka hanya melaksanakan serta mengikut telunjuk pihak ‘atasan’.

Jika ini, benar-benar berlaku bagaimana pula dengan pandangan daripada wakil rakyat biasa seperti saya, adakah apa yang dinyatakan dan disuarakan ahli Parlimen biasa untuk kepentingan rakyat didengari pihak ‘atasan’.

Secara dasarnya, kerajaan sudah bersetuju untuk EDL dijadikan sebagai projek penswastaan kerana ia jelas menunjukkan kerajaan mengakui tidak mempunyai wang untuk membina infrastruktur berkenaan selain ia hanya berfungsi sebagai laluan alternatif kepada pengguna lalu lintas yang tidak mahu menempuh kesesakan di Jalan Tebrau.

Selaku pengerusi Jawatankuasa Kira-Kira Wang Negara (PAC), keputusan kerajaan yang berubah untuk membeli semula EDL daripada syarikat swasta, lari daripada matlamat asalnya, dan ia sudah pasti merugikan wang rakyat kerana pengguna lalu lintas mempunyai pilihan untuk menggunakan jalan Persekutuan iaitu Jalan Tebrau.

Tindakan kerajaan seperti ini, yang terus melakukan keputusan secara reaktif bukan dengan terancang menyebabkan rakyat menjadi tidak yakin terhadap kepimpinan yang ada sekarang.

Ramai termasuk rakan-rakan saya dalam BN yang mempersoalkan mengapa selaku ahli Parlimen Pulai pada 2011 lalu menyokong EDL dikenakan tol tetapi kemudian menentang kenaikan tol Tambak Johor.

Mereka ini sebenarnya, yang tidak memahami persoalan sebenar serta gagal menyelami isu sebenar mengenai kenaikan kadar tol Tambak Johor, EDL dan Kompleks Kastam, Imigresen dan Kuarantin (CIQ) Bangunan Sultan Iskandar.

Ketiga-tiga ini, adalah komponen yang berbeza sama sekali dan jika kenaikan kadar tol Tambak Johor sehingga lebih 400% adalah untuk menampung pembinaan EDL, kerajaan ternyata salah sama sekali dalam melaksanakan dasar serta strategi itu.

Yang lebih menghairankan apa sebenarnya dasar kerajaan dalam menaikkan kadar tol Tambak Johor kerana jika Singapura menaikkan kadar Permit Kemasukan Kenderaan (VEP) bagi mengawal kenderaan Malaysia masuk ke negara itu, apakah rasionalnya kenaikan kadar tol ini.

Di manakah kewajarannya untuk menaikkan kadar tol Tambak Johor bagi membayar balik apa yang sudah dibelanjakan syarikat konsesi EDL bagi membinanya?

Sepatutnya, kerajaan membenarkan syarikat konsesi mengenakan tol di EDL barulah ada keadilan untuk semua pengguna lalu lintas dan sudah pasti, syarikat konsesi EDL mempunyai perancangan asal untuk meletakkan plaza tol di lebuh raya berkenaan bagi mengutip tol, mengapa tidak digunakan sahaja perancangan asal membina plaza tol berkenaan.

Seperti yang saya kupas dalam artikel saya sebelum ini, bertajuk Putrajaya salah strategi dalam isu kenaikan tol Tambak Johor, pengguna lalu lintas yang terjejas teruk adalah mereka berpendapatan rendah yang cuba mencari rezeki lebih baik di negara jiran berikutan pertukaran wang asing.

Walaupun, kerajaan menyatakan pengguna Tambak Johor yang menggunakan motosikal tidak dikenakan tol, tetapi bagaimana pula mereka yang menggunakan perkhidmatan awam serta bas kilang untuk berulang alik seawal jam 4 pagi dan pulang jam 9 malam.

Sudah pasti syarikat pengangkutan ini, akan menaikkan kadar tambang mereka disebabkan kenaikan tol berkenaan begitu mendadak dan dahsyat sekali sehingga tidak pernah berlaku dalam sejarah kenaikan kadar tol di negara ini.

Untuk pengetahuan, kadar tol Tambak Johor untuk perjalanan pergi dan balik Johor Baru ke Singapura naik daripada RM2.90 kepada RM16.50 untuk kereta, kenaikan 568%; lori kecil, RM4.90 kepada RM24.90 (607%); lori besar, RM5.50 kepada RM33.30 (605%); teksi, RM1.30 kepada RM8.20 (630%) dan bas pula daripada RM2.10 kepada RM13.30 (607%).

Akhbar Sin Chew Daily dalam rencananya, baru-baru ini, turut memberikan kiraan mudah dengan mengambil contoh seorang rakyat Malaysia yang bekerja di Singapura dan menggunakan kereta serta bekerja 22 hari sebulan, kadar tol yang perlu ditanggung mereka akan meningkat kepada RM2,400 sebulan.

Mengapa dinaikkan sebegitu rupa, apakah justifikasi untuk kenaikan yang begitu mendadak? Jika untuk menampung kos pembinaan EDL, biar saja pengguna yang menggunakan EDL dikenakan tol.

Namun dalam isu ini, pengguna yang tidak menggunakan EDL juga dikenakan kadar tol, dan ia bermakna mereka tidak mempunyai laluan alternatif. Bukankah menjadi dasar kerajaan untuk membina laluan alternatif kepada pengguna jalan raya yang tidak mahu menggunakan lebuh raya dan membayar tol seperti kenyataan seorang pemimpin dulu, ‘jika tidak mahu bayar tol, guna jalan biasa’.

Namun dalam isu tol Tambak Johor, pengguna tidak mempunyai pilihan sama ada mereka menggunakan EDL atau Jalan Tebrau, tol Tambak Johor tetap perlu dibayar, jadi di manakah keadilan kepada rakyat, dimanakah slogan ‘rakyat didahulukan’ ?.

Masalah kesesakan Tambak Johor tidak mungkin dapat diatasi dan ia juga penyebab mengapa kadar tol di laluan berkenaan tidak boleh dinaikkan disebabkan pengguna terus terpaksa mengharungi kesesakan lalu lintas yang teruk.

Jika kerajaan dapat mengurangkan kesesakan lalu lintas di Tambak  Johor, saya berpendapat kadar tol Tambak Johor boleh dinaikkan tetapi tidaklah dinaikkan pada kadar yang ada sekarang.

Timbulnya isu kenaikan kadar tol Tambak Johor ini, menyebabkan saya terfikir juga mengapa Plus sebagai sebuah syarikat yang diswastakan terus mengutip tol di Tambak Johor sejak berpuluh tahun sedangkan lebuh raya syarikat konsesi berkenaan bermula dan berakhir di Skudai dan Pandan, Johor Baru dan lebih menghairankan, Tambak Johor tidak mengalami sebarang perubahan sejak mula dibina hampir seabad yang lalu.

Ke mana wang kutipan tol itu hendak dibelanjakan dan apa manfaatnya kepada pengguna lalu lintas selama ini, sedangkan kesesakan Tambak Johor terus berlaku sehingga kini.

Atas sebab itu, langkah konkrit bagi menyelesaikan masalah kesesakan Tambak Johor perlu dilakukan dengan segera bagi memberikan justifikasi terhadap kutipan tol Plus di Tambak Johor dan antara langkah segera yang boleh diambil adalah dengan memindahkan operasi lori ke Laluan Kedua Malaysia-Singapura (Linkedua).

Persoalannya yang ditimbulkan ketika ini, adakah kerajaan tunduk pada desakan mana-mana pihak untuk tidak mengenakan tol di EDL atau kerajaan terpaksa menelan janji untuk tidak mengenakan tol EDL yang dibuat pada 2012.

Saya difahamkan, akibat janji untuk tidak mengenakan tol di EDL, kerajaan terpaksa membayar pampasan kepada syarikat konsesi EDL berjumlah berjuta ringgit setiap bulan walaupun, pada awalnya, kerajaan berhasrat untuk mengambil alih atau kata lain membeli lebuh raya berkenaan.

Disebabkan tidak mampu, kerajaan tidak meneruskan hasrat membeli lebuh raya berkenaan serta tidak mampu membayar pampasan setiap bulan. Berikutan itu, pakar-pakar strategi dan ‘punahsihat’ di Putrajaya membuat keputusan untuk menaikkan kadar tol di Tambak Johor sebagai jalan paling mudah dan cuba untuk mengaburi mata rakyat dengan memberikan pelbagai alasan lemah.

Kerajaan perlu sedar rakyat sebenarnya, mahu sebuah pasukan membela nasib serta kesejahteraan mereka yang mantap, sentiasa mendahulukan mereka dan dengan apa yang berlaku pada kerajaan PR di Selangor, inilah masa terbaik untuk membuktikan segala slogan untuk rakyat bukan sekadar ayat-ayat manis.

Saya tidak mahu rakyat Johor terus menuduh kerajaan BN sebuah kerajaan zalim yang mungkir janji seperti yang dilaungkan Ahli Parlimen Gelang Patah Lim Kit Siang kerana inilah, yang cuba dipermainkan pembangkang ketika ini.

Suatu keputusan berani dan konkrit perlu diambil sebagai jalan tengah bagi meredakan kemarahan rakyat Johor selatan dalam isu kenaikan kadar tol ini, kerana ia sudah pasti akan menjadi modal politik terbaik buat pembangkang dalam PRU14 kelak.

Jadi sudah sampai masanya, kerajaan berterus terang kepada rakyat, dan jika terpaksa membuat keputusan pusingan U untuk mengenakan tol di EDL, ia amat perlu dilakukan, bukannya mengenakan tol di Tambak Johor bagi melindungi sebuah janji yang sebenarnya, tidak dapat ditepati. – 8 Ogos, 2014.

Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed is a three-term MP for Pulai, three-term Umno Pulai Divison Chief and the new PAC chairman. Apart from being in the new politics, he also writes for The Malaysian Insider while debating other matters at www.nurjazlan.net

                This entry was posted on Friday, 8 August 2014, 8:09 am and is filed under
Johore
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Nothing more unprincipled or dishonourable than to reduce the PR Selangor MB  crisis into a game of numbers when the greatest challenge is to restore public trust and confidence in  Pakatan Rakyat

There is nothing more unprincipled or dishonourable than to reduce the Pakatan Rakyat Selangor Mentri Besar crisis into a game of numbers when the greatest challenge facing PAS, PKR and DAP leaders is to restore the badly-damaged public trust and confidence in the Pakatan Rakyat through a reaffirmation of the PR common policy platform and principles of justice, freedom, accountability, transparency and good governance as the basis of new politics in Malaysia.

It is most repugnant and obnoxious for anyone to try to fish in the troubled waters of the PR Selangor MB crisis by entertaining the proposition that Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim join PAS or DAP so that PAS or DAP can lay a claim to the post of Selangor Mentri Besar, even with Khalid continuing as Selangor Mentri Besar.

No self-respecting political party or political leader would ever consider such a dishonourable proposition which would be the final straw to destroy all public credibility in the Pakatan Rakyat and I am most gratified that all the three Pakatan Rakyat component parties of PAS, PKR and DAP have reaffirmed their commitment to Pakatan Rakyat after the expulsion of Khalid from PKR yesterday.

This is the time to save Pakatan Rakyat, when PR  leaders, whether from PAS, PKR and DAP must exercise even greater discipline to demonstrate their commitment to the principles and objectives of Pakatan Rakyat,  and not to do or say anything which could be used by the enemies of Pakatan Rakyat to undermine and destroy the alternative political coalition, which won 52 per cent of the popular vote in the 13th General Elections in May last year, winning three state governments of Kelantan, Penang and Selangor, 89 Parliamentary seats and 229 State Assembly seats in 12 states (not including Sarawak).

Undoubtedly, Pakatan Rakyat is faced with its worst crisis since its formation after the 12th General Elections in April 2008 and  whether PR can survive and resolve the Selangor MB crisis in the shortest possible time will depend on the political integrity and  sense of honour of PR leaders to stay true and loyal to the original principles and aspirations in the formation of Pakatan Rakyat “to uphold the rights and interests of all Malaysians, regardless of religion or race, as enshrined in the Constitution”.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 10 August 2014, 6:27 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


With UMNO declaration of support of  12 BN  Selangor Assembly representatives for Khalid, urgent and imperative for immediate clarity of stand of all 43 Selangor PR Assembly reps

With the declaration by the Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin that the 12 Barisan Nasional Selangor Assembly representatives will give its unconditional support to Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim to continue as the Selangor Mentri Besar, it is urgent and imperative for immediate clarity of stand of all 43 Pakatan Rakyat Selangor Assembly representatives from PKR, DAP and PAS on the issue.

Time is of the essence following the rapid pace of developments of the political situation in Selangor and the country, and all processes of political decision-making have no choice but to be accelerated  if Pakatan Rakyat is not to be seen as incapable of responding to fast and high-speed political changes.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 11 August 2014, 6:43 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What happens in the next 24 hours in the Selangor MB crisis  may upstage the August 17 PAS leadership meeting and set the seal for the irretrievable break-up of Pakatan Rakyat

The meeting of the PAS national leadership on August 17 will have a critical bearing on the future of the six-year-old three-party coalition Pakatan Rakyat.

However, the August 17 meeting of PAS may be upstaged by what happens in the next 24 hours in the Selangor Mentri Besar crisis which may set the seal for the irretrievable break-up of Pakatan Rakyat.

The break-up of Pakatan Rakyat will cause consternation and even despair among Malaysians over the betrayal of their high hopes that change has finally come to Malaysia after more than half a century of political stagnation and even regresson but welcomed as a boon and relief by Umno/BN leaders and apparatchiks as a “salvation” to  spare them from political rejection and repudiation in the country.

This is the reason why the Deputy Prime Minister and UMNO Deputy President, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, had been so fast in declaring unconditional support of 12  UMNO/Barisan Nasional State Assembly representatives in Selangor to Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim as  Mentri Besar of Selangor although he has lost the mandate of Parti Keadilan Rakyat and Pakatan Rakyat to continue as Selangor Mentri Besar.

UMNO/Barisan Nasional strategists are working overtime to exploit the Selangor Mentri Besar crisis, working on the scenario of 12 UMNO + 15 PAS + Khalid and a high-powered campaign to undermine the loyalty of DAP and PKR State Assembly reps to betray the Selangor voters and  their respective parties.

This campaign gains strength with the open support in some quarters for a UMNO-PAS “Unity Government” although couched under another terminology like “national consensus”.

Pakatan Rakyat leaders must act promptly and decisively and not be blind-sided by the pace of  developments in the Selangor Mentri Besar crisis when time is of the essence, allowing what could happen in the next 24 hours to upstage not only the PAS leadership meeting of August 17 but determine the survival of Pakatan Rakyat.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 12 August 2014, 5:08 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
PKR
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why Khalid must go

Nik Nazmi

The Malaysian Insider

12 August 2014

PKR has sacked the menteri besar of Selangor, Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim, from the party.

This has caused a great deal of shock to many.

Everybody – whether it was my relatives over Hari Raya, constituents at mamak stalls or my friends over WhatsApp – wanted to know why we wanted him out.

Quite a number were critical and this was not surprising.

Having known and worked with Khalid for some time, I personally found the deterioration of his relationship with the party and his removal very sad.

Nevertheless, PKR has made the right decision.

Khalid had to be removed from the party.

He must also be made to leave the MB’s position.

The first time I met him was during my stint as Anwar Ibrahim’s private secretary in 2006. In the middle of that year, I went to Khalid’s residence in Bukit Damansara to hand him the party’s membership form. He was then announced as the party’s treasurer, in a move that shocked many. Despite the fact that he had previously sought office in Umno as a division chief, supreme council member and branch chief (all unsuccessfully), he was largely known to most Malaysians as a corporate captain.

Two years later, on the day after the historic 12th general elections, Khalid asked me to help him as he had been nominated to be the new Selangor MB. I had just won the Seri Setia constituency then. I remember drafting the letter to the Selangor Palace, confirming the support of the three parties for Khalid.

I accompanied Khalid to meet the state secretary and state financial officer to take over the reins of power. After Khalid was confirmed as MB, I was then formally appointed as his political secretary. Things started reasonably well as we rolled up our sleeves to implement our pledges to the public.

We focused on creating a people-oriented economy while balancing the need to grow the economy and clean up the mess left by Khir Toyo’s administration. Khalid’s clean image stood in stark contrast to the scandals of the previous BN governments and the inefficiency of the local councils.

After a while though, tensions emerged.

One Wednesday night, I received a call from the party leadership asking me where Khalid was. It was the night of the weekly PKR political bureau meeting which key leaders – including Anwar, the president, deputy president, vice-presidents, secretary-general and senior leaders – attend. Khalid was part of the bureau. I replied that as usual it was keyed in Khalid’s schedule. But Khalid did not show up.

The political bureau is not a talking shop, nor is it a cabal where politicians demand or trade favours and kickbacks. Important issues – including the direction of the party and how we manage ties with our Pakatan Rakyat allies – are discussed there. It is not a very good idea for a PKR representative – especially our only MB – to absent themselves from it unless he absolutely has to.

His staff would put the political bureau meetings in his schedule, making sure that it never clashed with his other duties. We would give him ample notice and reminders of them. He would agree to go but I would invariably find out that he did not. This episode repeated itself time and time again. It came to a point where I basically ended up having to go on his behalf, becoming a liaison of sorts between the MB and the party. Similarly, I attended to public complaints at Khalid’s Kuala Selangor division as well as with the various divisions in Selangor.

I would make sure to brief Khalid on what had transpired at all these meetings. What was shocking to me was that he would not only dismiss the issues raised as trifles but also make disparaging remarks about the party.

His attitude was basically that the party was always wrong about everything and he was always right.

I found his stance very perplexing. Perhaps he is naturally adverse to politicking, or thought that attending the political bureau would expose him to unwarranted pressures in his job as MB. But his attitude suggested a very cavalier, even hostile, attitude towards the political process and democracy.

It was as if he viewed the party as merely a vehicle for him to use and dispose of as he pleased. But Malaysia practises the Westminster form of democracy where executives like Khalid must also command the support of his colleagues to gain and remain in office. He is primus inter pares, not the be-all, end-all.

And for that matter, politicians – even in Malaysia – are not exactly strangers to what the public wants and needs.

Indeed, such criticisms were often over policies his administration adopted which the public did not like. But Khalid was and is not much of a team player in this regard. This made things extra difficult when you consider the onslaught – including over racial and religious issues – that Umno/BN visited upon PKR and Pakatan post-2008.

After two years of this, I finally had enough and decided to leave. I felt I could not convince him to cooperate with the party and it was time for someone else to give it a go.

I was proud of what the Pakatan government had achieved at that time. Though I felt frustrated working under him, I was still fond of him and even considered him a father figure. I thought that with a different political secretary, things might change.

In the 13th general election, Pakatan increased its seats in the Selangor State Assembly from 36 to 44. PKR however lost one seat, meaning that our tally fell to 14. This was due to three-cornered fights in Kota Damansara with PAS and Semenyih in with PSM. The performance of the Selangor Pakatan government, together with the hope of taking over Putrajaya undoubtedly contributed to the overall increase.

However, it has to be stated that Khalid hardly campaigned outside his Bandar Tun Razak parliamentary seat and Port Klang state seat. It was Anwar, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, Azmin Ali, Nurul Izzah, Tian Chua and Rafizi Ramli who hit the streets not only in Selangor but nation-wide to campaign for PKR and Pakatan. Many party leaders and grassroots were also upset that Khalid abandoned his original seat of Ijok and went to Port Klang. But the party made the decision as there was too much rumblings from the grassroots in Ijok. Indeed, PKR ended up losing the Bukit Melawati state seat in the same parliamentary constituency as well.

At this point, some readers might be thinking: “Okay, so he doesn’t like to go to party meetings and he was a bit selfish with his campaigning time. So what? Lots of politicians are like that. Why should they remove him? Shouldn’t he be praised for refusing to bow to political pressure? And anyway, why didn’t they give him the boot sooner if they didn’t like him?”

It is true that many leaders in PKR were not willing to replace him after the 2013 general elections. While there were grumblings, there was a sense was that we could get by if the status quo prevailed.

This year however, serious question marks appeared over what was before seen as his strongest suit – his personal integrity. One can read in detail the party’s dossier and supporting evidence of this.

I would encourage Malaysians – particularly residents of Selangor – to read it and decide on this matter themselves. I am confident that this document will bring them to the same conclusion as the party.

I am only highlighting the most worrying issues raised in it.

Khalid and his supporters have been very adroit in crafting an image of him as a disinterested technocrat.

He is supposedly “above politics” and “puts the people first”. However, the document highlights some very disturbing lapses in this regard.

Chief among this was his controversial settlement of his RM59.5 million debt with Bank Islam. Despite repeated court judgements in the past that went against him, Khalid in February 2014 was able to obtain an out-of-court settlement for far less than the sum in question.

The fact that one Rashid Manaf apparently brokered the deal heightened the party’s suspicion. Rashid – as the record shows – is closely linked to Umno. Indeed, Khalid had repeatedly refused to clarify the debt issue despite being given the opportunity by the party to do so. He cannot claim that this was purely a private matter.

As an elected official, his debts are a public issue as he could have been disqualified for office had he been declared bankrupt as a result of them. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that after the settlement was agreed to, EcoWorld Berhad – a company Rashid is a director of – was then rewarded with land contracts by the Selangor state government worth hundreds of millions of ringgit.

Indeed, Khalid has made the Selangor state government party to two very controversial land deals involving Ecoworld.

On March 19, 2014, Tropicana Corporation Berhad announced the sale of 308.72 hectares of land it had bought from Selangor to Ecoworld Berhad in April 2013. The initial sale to Tropicana was controversial because it was done after state assembly had been dissolved to pave the way for the 13th general elections.

This means that the state government at the time was only a caretaker and it was hence improper for it to have agreed to such a deal.

Tropicana furthermore was granted extremely unusual and generous terms, including only being required to pay an RM50 million deposit and having to pay the remaining RM537 million over 12 years. The political bureau raised the matter but it was very difficult to get clarity over what was going on when he rarely attended the bureau’s meetings.

The second deal, signed on March 25, 2014 awarded EcoWorld a contract to build 2,400 affordable apartments for the state government worth RM591 million. This contract was awarded without open tender. This goes very much against the principle of transparency and accountability which Khalid’s administration was supposedly championing.

Shortly after that incident as well, Khalid signed a MoU over Selangor’s water resources with the federal government. As he himself admitted, this was done without PKR and Pakatan’s input. Indeed, it was presented as a fait accompli of sorts to the Selangor state exco.

This MoU – as has been argued elsewhere – is manifestly unfavourable to the interests of the people of Selangor, principally because it forced the state government to accept the controversial Langat 2 dam project without any legal obligations on the part of the federal government.

In August 2014, Khalid again acted on his own by signing a Heads of Agreement deal with the federal government. Again, he did this without consulting PKR or any of the other parties in Pakatan. It was not even brought up to his exco prior to the signing.

Despite his earlier resolve, Khalid gradually softened his stand on the water issue. Indeed, the MoU that was signed with the federal government was almost wholly favourable to the concessionaires. It basically left all the cards in the hands of the federal government and the concessionaires without guaranteeing the state government the ability to realistically restructure Selangor’s water assets.

Then of course we have the controversy over the proposed Kidex Highway. Residents of Petaling Jaya from all ethnic groups and walks of life have come out against the project, which is of doubtful utility and linked to pro-Umno corporate interests. At the same time, the creation of a new toll road goes against Pakatan’s principle of gradually eliminating such concessions to reduce the burden on the people.

The chronology of these events also raises concerns.

Many of the above-mentioned controversial actions occurred shortly after Khalid got wind of the “Kajang Move”, which was essentially to strengthen the state government by replacing him.

Doesn’t it seem suspicious that Khalid suddenly chose to become so accommodating with the federal government just after it was made clear to him that the party felt he needed to be replaced?

The interesting thing is that Khalid and his camp have never denied the substance of the allegations against him. They have never taken legal action against the many people who have spoken out over these issues.

Indeed, the only thing they did was to basically impinge the integrity of their critics – suggesting that these have political motives or designs on Selangor’s exchequer.

But these are serious shortcomings on Khalid’s part from an administrative standpoint – whatever one’s political standpoint is.

Khalid’s actions are not of a disinterested public servant. Indeed, it is hard to see how anyone could benefit from these actions except himself and the vested interests enabling him.

Party politics aside, his actions over Selangor’s land and water have damaged the same public interest he claims to be upholding.

We understand that many voters will be confused and angry by all that has transpired. Many efforts were made for a smooth transition to avoid the long-drawn episode Selangor is in today.

For someone who was there when he signed up for the party and served him loyally as his political secretary, this is a doubly sad ending.

But what we did was for the greater good of Selangor.

We had no other option.

Khalid Ibrahim must go. – August 12, 2014.

Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad is the state assemblyman for Seri Setia and Deputy Speaker of the Selangor state assembly. He is also author of two books, Moving Forward: Malays for the 21st Century and Coming of Age: A Decade of Essays

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 12 August 2014, 12:06 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PKR
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Quo Vadis, Pakatan Rakyat?

It is unbelievable that Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim could claim that the Selangor government is not a Pakatan government after he himself had said, both in the Selangor State Assembly and outside, for six-and-a-half years that it is a Pakatan Rakyat state government.

But what is even more unbelievable is Khalid’s ridiculous claim  that the Selangor government is not a Pakatan government is  endorsed by the four PAS Excos who appeared with Khalid in  the media conference today – after condoning and endorsing Khalid’s arbitrary sacking of five Pakatan Rakyat Exco members from DAP and PKR by attending the Exco meeting.

Would the four PAS Excos be elected as Selangor State Assemblymen in the first place  if they had not represented Pakatan Rakyat in the 2013 general elections?

The brutal truth is that Khalid is hanging on as Selangor Mentri Besar solely on the strength of the Umno/BN pledge by the Deputy Prime Minister and the UMNO Deputy President, Tan Sri Muhiddin Yassin that the 12 UMNO/Barisan Nasional State Assembly representatives in Selangor will give unconditional support to him plus the support of the 15 PAS Assembly representatives.

Instead of rising to the challenge, the Selangor Mentri Besar crisis in the past four days have destroyed much of the hard-fought gains and hopes for political change  achieved by Pakatan Rakyat, the civil society and Malaysians as a whole  in the past six years.

Quo Vadis, Pakatan Rakyat?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 13 August 2014, 6:30 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Khalid has committed the grave wrong on Monday of misleading the Selangor Sultan into believing that he still commanded the majority of the state assembly when he knew that this was not the case

Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim had committed the grave wrong on Monday of misleading the Selangor Sultan into believing that he still commanded the majority of the Selangor State Assembly members  after being sacked as a PKR member last Saturday, when Khalid knew that this was not the case.

Before his audience with the Sultan on Monday, , Khalid was duty and honour-bound, whether morally, politically and constitutionally, to verify that he still commanded the support of the majority of the State Assembly members to continue as Mentri Besar before making any representation to the Sultan that he still commanded the majority of the State Assembly, so that he would not be guilty of the grave wrong of misleading the Sultan as he had done on Monday.

But despite of being in the midst of a political crisis from being sacked as a member of PKR, Khalid never tried to verify from the Selangor State Assembly representatives, particularly from the 43 Pakatan Rakyat State Assembly persons from PKR, DAP and PAS who had given him the mandate to be the Pakatan Rakyat Mentri Besar of Selangor after the 2013 General Elections, whether he still commanded their support simply because he knew that he could not get such a majority support.

This is one major consequence of the declaration by 30 of the 56 Selangor State Assembly representatives today (15 from DAP, 13 from PKR and 2 from PAS) that they have lost confidence in Khalid as Selangor Mentri Besar and support Datuk Seri Dr. Wan Azizah as the new Selangor Mentri Besar.

The only honourable way for Khalid to purge his grave wrong of misleading the Sultan on Monday that he still commanded the support of the majority of the State Assembly after being sacked as a PKR member  is for him to resign gracefully, as it is crystal clear that he is hanging on the post of Mentri Besar solely on the “unconditional support” of the 12 Umno/Barisan Nasional State Assembly persons, while a clear majority of 30 out of 56 Selangor State Assembly representatives have lost confidence in him, with 13 PAS Assembly members yet to declare their stand.

“You may have the numbers but I’m still MB, Khalid tells Wan Azizah”
, the headline in of the news portals, reflects Khalid’s  state of mind to have a last-ditch stand to cling on to the Mentri Besar’s post for as long as possible, instead of facilitating a democratic transition of power like a  graceful resignation on his part or the convening of an emergency State Assembly meeting on  vote-of-confidence in the Mentri Besar.

As an emergency State Assembly can only be convened by the Mentri Besar, is Khalid prepared to uphold the word and spirit of the Selangor State Constitution to convene such an emergency State Assembly meeting?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 14 August 2014, 5:36 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Khalid’s bluff called that he still commanded majority support in Selangor State Assembly after expulsion from PKR last Saturday

Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim should have gracefully and honourably resigned as Selangor Mentri Besar when he was sacked as a member of PKR last Saturday (August 9), as his appointment as Selangor MB stemmed from the trust and mandate given to him by PKR and the Pakatan Rakyat coalition after the 13th General Elections last May, and once this mandate was withdrawn  by PKR by his expulsion from the party, his continued tenure as Selangor Mentri Besar became completely untenable.

Article 53(6) of the Selangor Constitution is very clear as it states:  “If the Mentri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the Legislative Assembly, then, unless at his request His Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the State Executive Council.”

The only way for Khalid to continue as Selangor Mentri Besar under these circumstances – although it would have been a dishonourable and unethical act –  was for him to establish that he still commanded the support of the majority in the State Assembly despite his expulsion from PKR and to make such a representation to the Sultan of Selangor.

But Khalid misled the Sultan of Selangor in the royal audience on Monday that he still commanded the majority in the State Assembly when clearly this was not the case – and Khalid dared not undertake any verification from the Selangor State Assembly members before meeting the Sultan of Selangor,  knowing fully well that he would not be able to demonstrate that he enjoyed the majority support among the State Assembly members.

As a result, Khalid had continued as Selangor Mentri Besar under false pretences after the false representation to the Sultan of Selangor on August 11 when he had an audience with the Sultan.

The public meeting and declaration of 30 Selangor State Assembly representatives – 13 PKR, 15 DAP and 2 PAS – yesterday that they have lost confidence in Khalid and support Datuk Seri Dr. Wan Azizah as Mentri Besar had called the bluff of Khalid’s pretence and false representation that he still commanded the majority in the Selangor State Assembly.

Khalid should not compound his reckless and outrageous disregard for the fundamental democratic and  constitutional principle that a Mentri Besar who have lost the support of the majority in the State Assembly should tender his resignation to the Sultan, as it is evident there is a clear majority in the Selangor State Assembly for the appointment of a new Mentri Besar to replace Khalid.

There is only one honourable way out if Khalid believes that he still commands support of the majority in the Selangor State Assembly, which is to immediately convene an emergency Selangor State Assembly which could be held in a matter of days for a confidence vote to be taken – and not to resort to the dishonourable, unethical,  unprincipled and undemocratic course of clinging to office for as long as possible until November before facing a confidence vote.

Khalid is confronted with the stark choice of salvaging whatever is left of his personal and political honour by either resigning gracefully or convening an emergency Selangor State Assembly for a confidence vote to be taken OR leaving behind a disreputable political legacy completely bereft of honour, ethics or principle.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 15 August 2014, 5:37 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Did Khalid lie to the Sultan?

 — P.Ramakrishnan

The Malay Mail Online

August 16, 2014

AUG 16 — PKR president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail has established beyond any doubt that she has the numbers to claim support from the majority of state assembly members.

She has 30 signed statutory declarations from the state assembly members backing her bid to be the next Menteri Besar of Selangor replacing Khalid. This has very effectively debunked Khalid’s bogus claim that he enjoys the majority support of the assembly.

In light of this irrefutable evidence, it would appear that Khalid must have lied to the Sultan. He must have deceived the Sultan into believing that he had the majority support of the state assembly members.

If he wishes to extricate himself from this damning situation, he must name names (of the assembly members) and reveal the number of assembly members supporting him. Without such fool-proof evidence, his claim of majority support cannot be taken seriously. His honesty is now in serious question.

Wan Azizah’s evidence has condemned him – of not being truthful. She has nailed his lie in a manner that cannot be refuted. His reputation is in tatters and tarnished beyond redemption. In the circumstance, the only honourable thing left for him is to resign gracefully and go quietly.

But he is stubbornly clinging on to his position and absurdly claiming that “the majority must be decided in a state assembly sitting”. But the next assembly is not due to sit until November which is three months away.

He should not hold on to his office under fraudulent circumstances. He is tarnishing the office of the Menteri Besar by remaining in office when he is not entitled to be in that position any longer.

If he is sincere and indeed wants this majority vote to be tested to reflect Wan Azizah’s support then he is morally obliged to call for an emergency sitting of the state assembly. If he doesn’t do that, it only means that he is afraid to be exposed as being dishonest in his claim of majority support.

It is not very wise of him to challenge “Wan Azizah to table a motion of no-confidence against him at the Selangor state assembly”. He knows very well that Wan Azizah cannot convene the state assembly sitting to move such a motion.

Only he can summon the state assembly sitting; why not call for the assembly meeting and verify Wan Azizah’s claim of support from the majority of assembly members?

In fact, if she doesn’t command majority support and if indeed he has that support, it will strengthen his position and he can continue as MB securely without any challenge to his position.

But will he put to the test his own claim of majority support and put an end to this impasse? Logically this is the only way out. B

If he refuses to call for the assembly meeting, what happens next? In that case, it is left to Pas to bring sanity to this situation.

If the four Pas exco members withdraw their support for Khalid, he can no longer pretend to have a government to run. It will drive him out of office. That is the only solution.

Pas should not be dragging its feet in this matter. Would PAS want to support a person who had misled and deceived the Sultan by falsely claiming to have majority support? It would be unethical and totally unacceptable to Pas’ Islamic credentials.

Pas must not let down the voters of Selangor who voted for a Pakatan government. Its duty is to preserve and protect that government without any hesitation. — aliran.com

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 16 August 2014, 11:17 am and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.