Straight Talk

Lim Kit Siang Should Hand Out an Olive Branch to Abdul Ghani & Appoint Him as a DAP Senator

2013-05-16T20:55:00.000+08:00

DAP veteran Lim Kit Siang has expressed disappointment over Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's decision not to admit former Johor menteri besar Abdul Ghani Othman into his new cabinet.

"It is most unfair and ungrateful for Umno leaders to drop Ghani like a tonne of bricks after he failed to defeat me in Gelang Patah," said Lim (right).

Lim garnered 54,284 votes in the May 5 general election, while Ghani, in his first ever electoral defeat, drew 39,522, votes.

Lim said he had openly acknowledged that Ghani had made an invaluable contribution to the development of Johor and that his experience should be tapped as a cabinet member.

He said he was surprised that there are those within Umno resisting Ghani's return to national politics, citing Former Barisan Elected Representatives Association (Mubarak) as an example.

Mubarak had raised its objection to appointing those who lost in the general election to government posts, which Lim argued was aimed at Ghani.

If Kit Siang thinks so highly of Abdul Ghani, he should seek the permission of his party's CEC to appoint Abdul Ghani as a Senator on his party's quota in Penang.

I am sure the appointment would allow Abdul Ghani to continue contributing to nation building and help the DAP to reach out to the Malay community.

It would be a waste and a mistake to watch such a good leader fading away from the national politics.

It would be more productive and the right thing to do for Kit Siang to hand over an olive branch to Abdul Ghani and to save his political career for our common good.

I trust the good judgement of Kit Siang.

Democratic Reforms: Recognize Opposition Leaders & PR Can Take the Lead

2013-05-10T22:17:00.002+08:00

DAP has urged that sweeping parliamentary reforms be put at the top of the agenda following the 13th general election, including making the position of opposition leader equal to that of a minister in the cabinet.

“The parliamentary opposition leader should be provided with adequate staff to carry out his duties - at least two political secretaries, one private secretary and three search assistants,” said DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang at a press conference in Kuala Lumpur this afternoon.

He added that the opposition leader should also enjoy the same perks and privileges accorded to a minister, on top of being consulted in the arrangement of parliamentary businesses.

“The elevation of the position and status of the parliamentary opposition leader is in keeping with those of a normal democratic country, where alternation of power in every general election is taken as a routine exercise of the democratic rights of voters and not as a national catastrophe...” he said.

I support Lim's call to accord the necessary recognition, perks and privileges to the Opposition Leader in Parliament. If PM Najib is serious about his reform pledge post 13th GE, this should be an easy step to take.

The provision of resources to employ research assistants can help to enhance the quality of debate in the Parliament.

Hence, I would like to urge both PR and BN state assemblies to adopt the same approach too and accord the right recognition to the Opposition Leader of the house.

To take it a step further, I would like to urge PR state assemblies to make the first step. I am sure this might nudge BN harder to make the same move. This is definitely the right stet to take.

PM Najib & UMNO Must Take The Right Steps Towards Real Reform

2013-05-09T12:36:00.001+08:00

I would have to agree that it is important for PM Najib and UMNO to take the right steps towards reform.

First, please ensure that Dr M no longer interferes with the national politics.

Second, cut off the nexus between Perkasa and UMNO.

Third, revamp the entire Utusan editorial board and editorial direction.

Fourth, restructure the whole EC and start to map out the right process to restore electoral credibility including considering the proportionate representation proposal which is more democratic.

Fifth, start the journey of real reform by cutting off the nexus between political parties and the media.

Sixth, set up a bipartisan committee together with esteemed retired judges and really non-partisan credible individuals to address the 13th GE petitions and complaints.

Give an assurance that the Election Court will be fully impartial and whatever the court rules shall be accepted by all.

Post GE Observation - Penang

2013-05-07T19:35:00.001+08:00

I was reflecting on the post-GE political situation in Penang. There are some observations and advice to all:

1) Do not attempt to corrupt. The ruling party will abet the people to take it. The people will take it, enjoy your free food and curse you for doing so. They shout corruption, you shout charity.

2) Penang people are the best actors in the world. They will shake your hands during these free dinners, smile and give encouraging words but go online to really give you a piece of their mind.

3) BN should really stop insulting the people of Penang with BR1M. They had voted overwhelming against you because you gave them RM500 a year. The people will take your money, claimed that you had insulted them and the ruling party will take credit for it. So, BN should learn the lesson and stop all BR1M to Penang next year.

4) People went out to vote because it is the GE. This is something they need to do but they do not think you should really contest as a candidate from the Corrupted, Racist and Dirty coalition. They can already get a two party system from the three parties in the ruling coalition. They can do their own check-and-balance. Sometimes, they can contest against one another too. BN non-UMNO candidates should really CLOSE down all their service centres in Penang

5) BN candidates should learn a new reality as an opposition. There is no need to serve for 5 years and try get elected. With the current political situation, even if you spend 50 years of community work, you will still be called a prostitute and a lap dog during the campaign. Even your neighbour will vote against you. So, if Penang needs an opposition 2 weeks can kautim them already.

6) If you are smart, you should start to copy right these slogans: Tetap UBAH!, Sekali Lagi Lah! Kita Kena Rompak 2013! Tiap Tiap Kali Lah! UBAH 2.0! and as many variations you can think of. It will make you a small fortune!

7) The results? You should go straight to the majority. Duh! Which non-UMNO candidates stand a chance? Even a crooked undersea tunnel will be seen as an icon of Penang. Penang Tetap Boleh!

My Reflections on the Penang Undersea Tunnel & 13th GE

2013-05-06T12:29:00.004+08:00

It was not an easy decision or task to campaign against the Penang undersea tunnel. The decision to push the Penang undersea tunnel forward as a campaign issue in Pulau Tikus was to achieve these objectives:

We hope to achieve a greater public awareness of the project and other high rise development projects in the area. On this part, I hope we have managed to draw greater public awareness to these projects. But we have failed to impress the voters and residents on the need to get the DAP state government to release the Local Development Plan before the elections. Personally, I do not think the state government will release the plan before approving a few more high rises in Pulau Tikus and other parts of Penang.
We wanted to discourage the state government especially the CM from making irrational decisions and act impulsively on the undersea tunnel. We wanted him to listen to all expert advice and feedback before embarking on it. He did not appear to be willing to listen and had insisted that he had the support of the people to go ahead. On this part, we have failed to convince him to change him mind and to accept a more holistic approach. We do not not know if he is going to conduct the necessary studies before going ahead with the project or not. There are signs of reclamation of land starting at the E&O Straits Quay.
We supported the BN candidate for Pulau Tikus, Ms Rowena Yam, because we believe that NGOs will have to work with a local assemblyman who is sympathetic to the cause and will do her best to ensure that all procedures and guidelines are met before construction works start for the undersea tunnel. Sadly, the residents and voters do not see it this way. A lot of them are too caught up with other issues to be concerned about check-and-balance and the need for public scrutiny. You already know the verdict. Again, we have failed to get the right candidate elected into the state assembly.

The people of Penang has given Lim Guan Eng a bigger majority. His administration is successfully returned with an additional seat and a super majority. We believe he is going to take his mandate as a solid approval for the undersea tunnel project.

I leave it to the people of Penang. You will have to stand up for your own interests and rights now. On the Penang undersea tunnel, we have given you enough information and questions you need to ask the state government.

The rest is really up to you since you have decided. From now on, you are on your own.

Bring Out the Best in Lim Guan Eng: You Can Spoil Him or Help Him Build a Legacy We Can Be Proud Of

2013-05-03T18:05:00.001+08:00

I have been reading about how some bizmen in Penang are going against Lim Guan Eng. It is sad that it had turned out to be so vindictive.

LGE is both an asset and a risk for his party. I still remember he told me on the night his party won the GE and he was anointed the CM that he will focus on building up the state's process and institutions so that the next govt that comes in will not be able to reverse them. This is for the purpose of check and balance. I told him I was happy that the state govt was in good hand now.

He could have done great things for Penang with his popularity and mandate. He could get people to take the public transport by just showing an example and promoting it. He could get the people to support his transformation plans if he had the vision.

The first term of LGE is a lost period and a mediocre one by his standard and popularity. He shouldn't have misled the people on the public transport and the undersea tunnel. He should have managed the Bayan Mutiara land sale differently and draw up a Master Plan for the new George Town that is modern and knowledge focused. But he had chosen to sell it to a developer friend.

He will win another 5 years but we must help to bring out the best in him. He needs to listen better and he has to be challenged in the state assembly to push the limit and to bring out the best in him and his team. If we do not send 2 non-UMNO representatives in the state assembly, we might spoil and not help LGE.

He is a friend but I would prefer him to be a better CM than a good friend. He is surely angry with me on my tunnel protest. But I am helping to ensure that he has a choice to avoid the history from judging him cruelly or celebrate him as an inclusive visionary. It will become a white elephant and we do not want to name the white elephant; the Tun Lim Guan Eng Tunnel!

Please vote for Ms Rowena Yam (Pulau Tikus) and Dr Thor Teong Gee (Sungai Pinang). They will give him a run for his money and keep him alert.

Some Thoughts For the GE 13 & World Press Freedom Day

2013-05-03T14:46:00.002+08:00

For your consumption & consideration:

1) It is not true that you should vote blindly for a party. Voting for a party without evaluating your candidates is going to deprive you and other voters the best choice.

2) It is not true that a party is bad. There is no such thing as a bad party, only bad and unscrupulous politicians. They should be rejected. Once you elect better candidates, they will be at the forefront of change.

3) It is time for all race based and religious based parties to change or be changed. No political party or politician should manipulate race and religion for their own political expediency.

4) For a better check-and-balance, please do not allow any coalition obtain two-thirds majority at state assemblies and the parliament. No party is able to do its own check-and-balance. You need a strong opposition.

5) Reject political and cyber bullies. Today is World Press Freedom Day. We must use our access to the Internet and free media to convey the voices of the people and fight injustices and bullies.

6) Canvass and vote for whoever you want but you must remember that the one u supported or rejected could be your neighbour. We are all Malaysians and we must show enough restraint. We vote for a better governance and not just to replace the political regime.

ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY!

CM Lim Guan Eng Should Seek a Clearer View for His Tunnel Vision

2013-05-02T17:16:00.001+08:00

I refer to The Sun's exclusive interview with CM Lim Guan Eng on his vision for Penang. I am particularly very interested in his view on the highway and undersea tunnel. Here's his response to the question on the project:

Sun: Penang PR is basing its election campaign on the three highway and undersea tunnel projects which have received mixed response. How do you think the electorate will react to these mega projects?

LGE: "This is just one of our pro-active measures to resolve traffic congestion. Before we took over, 60,000 vehicles per day were using the Penang Bridge, but now the volume has increased to 80,000.

The federal government wants to sabotage us by not providing public transport ... they want to choke us to death with traffic congestion. Do we sit down to wait to die? I refuse to wait to die. I want to be proactive. We need to look for alternatives, need some road improvements, not only the tunnel but also three highways, (are) all done without paying cash.

The Tanjung Pinang land deal can help resolve the traffic problems and get us the highways we won't normally get.

There is no choice for us because the previous administration had signed away the rights to build bridges. We cannot build bridges, but they forgot about the tunnel, so we have no choice but to use the loophole."

I hope LGE could rethink his decision and seek a clearer view for his tunnel vision. I would like to point out some of the discrepancies from his response:

If he wants to take a proactive measure to solve traffic congestion, he should be focusing on moving people and not vehicles. Although the traffic volume has increased on the first bridge, the growth is expected to be mitigated when the second bridge is fully operational by August this year. Together with the first bridge, second bridge and the ferry service, it should be adequate to accommodate the volume for many years to come.
It is a fallacy to claim that the federal government is sabotaging Penang by refusing to provide the public transport. Rapid Penang, owned by a federal agency Prasarana, operates around 240 buses throughout Penang. At present, the bus operator is only charging on average RM1.40 per head compared to the operational cost of RM1.80 per head. It needs RM600 a day to run a bus. At present, the bus operator is losing approximately RM12 million a year on the back of RM43 million revenue. The losses are being absorbed by the federal government. If it is true that the federal government is sabotaging Penang, it should have closed down the Rapid Penang since 2008 once the Dap captured the state government. Why should the federal government continue to subsidize the public bus system in Penang?
It is pointless for LGE to keep blaming the bus operator and the federal government. I know his motive is to extract the maximum anger of the people against the federal government. But we must call a spade a spade and be fair to the Rapid Penang team led by Jamali Soaidin, the COO. Jamali is an Ampang boy who is a trained infrastructure engineer.
In order to create a good public transport system, the bus operator, the state government and the local councils need to work together. The operator has to depend on the local councils to help upgrading the roads to allow for better access for its 10 meter buses. It needs the cooperation of the state government and the local councils to help allocate land for them to build transport hubs and substations. In fact, the Rapid Penang has taken over the initiative to build more bus stands to accommodate the commuters' demand. From my dialogue with the Rapid Penang, I must praise Chow Kon Yeow for his support and good rapport with the bus operator. His team has been very efficient and quick in approving applications to add more bus stands and other facilities.
Lim Guan Eng has criticized the bus operator for refusing to accept the state's RM10 million to provide free buses during peak hours. Does he know that 70% of the bus operator's revenue comes from peak hours e.g. passengers attending schools, going to work, returning from school and after work. Offering free buses during the peak hours would have cost the operator RM30.1 million in revenue. Does LGE understand this predicament? As a commercial company, it still need to pay bonuses to staff and offer an attractive pay package to its drivers. The operator has been facing difficulty in recruiting and retaining drivers despite paying more than RM2,000 in gross pay plus medical benefit for the whole family.
Even if the state government wants to run its own bus services, it has to answer a few questions. Bus commuters have peaked at 87,000 on any single day. Without the necessary policy intervention from the state government, how can these operators find more passengers to use fill up their buses? It needs a holistic approach to help migrate private vehicles' users to the public transport. How can this be done if Lim Guan Eng has rejected taking the Singapore approach, as proposed by the Transport Master Plan, to impose peak hours fee on private vehicles entering the city or using the highways? How can these buses meet their SLA of 7 minutes waiting time if the local councils are not doing their job to fine and tow vehicles that are parking indiscriminately along narrow secondary roads and major roads in the city? Building more roads and tunnels without a comprehensive strategy is an action in futility.
It is misleading to claim that these projects do not involve any cash. Logically, no commercial company will accept any project without the possibility of making a profit. What is the market value for the 110 acres of land in Tanjung Pinang? What is its current and future valuation? Land is gold. In a place like Penang, it keeps going up in value. Whatever we are paying today using land means we are paying for the project plus interest! (land appreciation). Moreover, the cash is going to be paid by the people through the 30-year concession for the developers to collect toll equivalent to the second bridge toll rates.
Finally, a government should not just build an undersea tunnel because it can't build a bridge. I really hope LGE is saying this in a jest and to run down the BN during the campaign period. The decision to build an undersea tunnel must be properly thought out and it must be justified with real needs. Proper studies as DEIA, Traffic Impact Assessment, Feasibility Study and Cost-Benefit Analysis must be carried out. We should learn from other PPP experiences world-wide where undersea tunnel projects had to go into receivership because the operators could not sustain them. The main question we must ask is why do we need an undersea tunnel? There are too much as stake for Lim to make his decision on the basis of 'sabotage' and 'uncooperative' federal government.
There are many things for his government to do if he does not want to be a "do-nothing' government. First, he can try to sit down with the bus operator, the Traffic Council and the local councils to explore ways to improve the bus service around the state. He should release the Local Development Plan to ensure that high rise developments are approved within the city planning guidelines. We cannot just build high rises without major infrastructure improvements. Unfortunately, a large part of Penang island especially George Town was built before the war. Its roads are narrow. He can explore other public transport and mobility solutions to help reducing carbon dioxide and pollution by reducing the number of private vehicles. He can start to think about ways and means to rehabilitate our beaches and seafronts. There are many things that his government can do but building the undersea tunnel should be the last thing on his list.
Again, if his administration is serious I am sure many of us would be willing to collaborate and help the state government to think out of the box to solve the traffic congestion issues. I have the commitment of Jamili and his Rapid Penang team to help out if LGE can stop politicizing this issue and place the blame on them.

What say you Mr Lim Guan Eng?

Irrational Voters & Check-and-Balance: SAY NO TO 2/3 MAJORITY !

2013-04-30T13:40:00.000+08:00

I watch the 13th GE with a sense of sadness and concern. It is obvious that there is a growing irrationality amongst voters and supporters leading to the polls on 5th May. I hope the irrationality will not lead Malaysia into another era of backwardness.

It is sad that voters are so absorbed with slogans and propaganda that all good senses have been thrown out of the window. In this regard, both coalitions are at fault.

On the part of BN, their campaign has been marred with senseless and reckless flags, banners and billboards competition that are not only wasteful but causing great inconvenience to the public. Support for any party is not judged by the number of flags being put up. Candidates need to be persuasive, able to engage on public policy and present an attractive manifesto.

On the part of PR, the coalition's supporters have shown a great deal of intolerance and disrespect to those supporting the BN. This is a democratic country. If Malaysia has descended to the level of an autocratic country, the PR coalition would not have gain so much momentum and strength as it is able to demonstrate today. A political debate and discourse should be based on mutual respect, must be non-personal and fact based.

Whichever political party we pick or support, the motive is the same. We want to pick those who can represent us the best. We should put these politicians to the strictest scrutiny so that we, the voters, play the role of quality bearers. We set the standards and the politicians are expected to meet or surpass.

In a mature democracy, candidates who are keen to contest are often encouraged to serve in their respective constituency for years before being nominated to stand as a candidate. As voters and observers, we should help to moderate, control, influence and persuade our politicians to campaign more positively.

For the 2013 GE, it is important we evaluate these aspects before voting:

If you support a two-party system, please choose a better candidate. The more good candidates you put into the state assemblies or parliament the better quality of parliamentary and assembly debate you get. After elections, those elected have to become policy makers. Fiery speeches are of little use;
Do not allow any political coalition/party to gain a 2/3 majority. In the last 5 years, the reforms that we enjoy is a result of a strong opposition. A good check-and-balance needs a good government and a strong and constructive opposition
Evaluate the candidates based on their service record, background, manifesto and good conduct
Reject candidates who are abusive, making personal attacks and do not have a good plan to serve you

I hope we can come to our senses and avoid being indoctrinated by any political parties. When we vote, we are all voting for a better Malaysia.

Never trust a political party with reforms. We have to walk through the reforms with them. It can only come with a good check-and-balance system.

Say NO to 2/3 majority for all assemblies and parliament.

Prime Time Asia, Channel News Asia on Malaysian 2013 GE - Khoo Kay Peng

2013-04-22T12:20:00.000+08:00

Documentary: Penang Undersea Tunnel & Its Impact

2013-04-17T23:33:00.002+08:00

With little resources and time, I have produced a short documentary with the help of the NGOs to explain the impact and implications of the Penang undersea tunnel.

Please watch and share it.

Lim Guan Eng Has Performed a Flip-Flop on the Undersea Tunnel Project

2013-04-16T13:56:00.001+08:00

Lim Guan Eng has performed a flip-flop on the undersea tunnel project.

Previously, he has promised to conduct the DEIA before going ahead. Now, he says if DAP is re-elected, he is going ahead. This is one of the most unscrupulous politicking I have seen in years in Penang.

NGOs, even those who confessed loudly that they are staunch supporters of LGE must tell us what and how they can persuade the DAP strongman to consider his decision and to respect all rules and regulations concerning the building of a mega infrastructure project that may cause social, economic and environmental implications.

Once started, Gurney Drive property prices are going to drop 30%. Construction works will drive people, residents and visitors away from the area due to congestion and inconvenience.

Can Lim Guan Eng push through the project without even giving us detailed information? I hope LGE does not push his popularity too far.

He told The Star:

"The DAP-led state government will go ahead with the proposed undersea tunnel if re-elected.

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said the rocket DAP's symbol represented courage, progress and unity and that the party would stand by its vision for the benefit of future generations.

“We dare to make policies for the future Penangites, including building the country's first undersea tunnel.

“Some people do not agree with the project but we must think of our children we must be courageous enough to do this for them,” he said."

His administration has chosen to keep mum on all pertinent technical and probing questions regarding the project. His insistence of using his supermajority and God-like popularity to push through the project is most unscrupulous of a leader.

I hope concerned Penangites and NGOs will continue to put pressure on the super popular and populist leader to consider and stick to his promise to conduct all necessary studies before starting the project.

Is this smart courage or misguided egoism?

Moulmein Rise: A Sore Thumb and a Headache for Residents in Pulau Tikus. Where is the Real CAT?

2013-04-11T15:19:00.001+08:00

Moulmein Rise is going to stand like a sore thumb at the centre of the Moulmein residential area and the Pulau Tikus wet market. It is a 27 storey Commercial & SOHO luxury property project comprising of 2-storey of commercial spaces, basement car parks with 90 lots, 2-storey of car parks with 200 lots and 22-storey of 84 units of Small Office Home Office and facilities floors. The speculated developer price for the units is RM1,300.00 per square foot or RM2.5 million per unit. An average size per SOHO unit is 1,700 sq ft.

Why am I concerned? I grew up and lived in one of the houses located at Jalan Moulmein for 7 years. The roads around the site where Moulmein Rise is located are two lanes and are not suitable to serve as service roads. Moreover, there is a provision of public carparks at one side of the roads e.g. Jalan Moulmein & Solok Moulmein.

If you take a look at the project info board, a significant thing is missing: the MPPP approval reference. I spoke to some residents and friends and they told me that they were not given a "Notice of Objection" to allow them to state their disapproval and concern.

From what I understood, the developer has launched it as a SOHO to circumvent the stricter requirements under a residential or commercial development. If it is a residential project, they have to comply by a 1:5 ratio and the building will stand no more than 5-6 storey, consistent with buildings around the area. If it is a commercial project, the develop needs to provide a building line setback and a service road. It would have rendered the plan not feasible.

Hence, what was launched and approved is a SOHO, which the MPPP said the guidelines are debatable and grey. So, this is a way to get around any guidelines in Penang. In line with the CAT policy, the state government and the local authorities should provide a clarity to such cases. SOHO, a concept promoted in 2007, means serviced residential units sitting on commercial land. If it is used for residential purposes, the MPPP should define it as a residential project and not assist developer to circumvent the rules and regulations.

The developer has not made clear any development details and project layout. MPPP has not been able to give clear answers on the requirements and address the adverse impacts on the residents and market goers. The state government is happy to just allow the developers to flaunt all rules and strict local council guidelines. As an example, the S.P Chelliah affordable housing project announced by the state is going to break all density records in the country: 160 units per acre! It is worse than even downtown Hong Kong! By acting this way, isn't the state government inviting more developers to flaunt and circumvent guidelines?

Even on a non-peak, at 3pm, the Jalan Pasar one way street is filled to the brim with vehicles and hawker stalls. What would happen when the Moulmein Rise construction goes full steam? It will create a chaos and massive congestion around the whole residential area. Market goers and shoppers will avoid coming to the market because of a lack of parking space and some of the traders are going to close shop.

The manner the project is conceived and approved does not help to allay fears and concerns that our city planners are sleeping on the job and the state government is keeping its eyes closed.

How to achieve the status of livable city if the project is going to sacrifice livability, community lifestyle and the decades old wet market that is such an important landmark in Pulau Tikus?

We need a real CAT!

Forum on Undersea Tunnel & Its Impact by Dr Peter R. Jensen @ E&O Hotel, Date: 16 April Time: 8.00pm, All are Welcomed!

2013-04-09T14:54:00.002+08:00

NGO: Details of tunnel project still vague (The Star)

GEORGE TOWN: The proposed 6.5km Gurney Drive-Bagan Ajam undersea tunnel project has come under another round of criticism from a non-governmental organisation here.

Penang Citizens Awareness Chant Group (Chant) member Khoo Kay Peng (pic) questioned the state government on its contingency plan should the construction cost of the tunnel escalate.

He said people were still in the dark about the whole project although the tender has been awarded.

Khoo asked at a press conference here yesterday if the tunnel would be able to get enough traffic and toll collection to maintain it.

He also asked what would happen to the compensation agreement between the state government and Consortium Zenith BUCG, which was awarded the tender, if the project was aborted during construction.

“The public expects meaningful feedback on the project. The technical details, project alignment, layout, im-pact and implication and land re-clamation have got to be explained thoroughly.

“The public dialogue organised by the state should not be in the form of informing or selling the public the project,” he said.

He said the state should also reveal the tender documents in accordance with the state's Competency, Account-ability and Transparency (CAT) policy.

Chant adviser Prof Dr Jimmy Lim talked about the impact on the Gurney Drive seafront promenade should the tunnel be built there.

A public forum on the tunnel and its impact will be held at the E&O Hotel Penang in Farquhar Street by the group at 8pm on April 16.

The speaker for the forum is architect and town planner Dr Peter R. Jensen from Australia.

The undersea tunnel is one of the four infrastructure projects announced by the state government.

The mega package consists of the 6.5km Gurney Drive-Bagan Ajam undersea tunnel, the 4.2km Gurney Drive-Lebuhraya Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Bypass, the 4.6km Lebuhraya Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu-Bandar Baru Air Itam Bypass and a 12km Tanjung Bungah-Teluk Bahang paired road.

The Malay Mail:

A NON-GOVERNMENTAL organisation (NGO) has invited an Australian town planner to give his insights into the undersea tunnel project proposed by the state government.

Penang Citizens Awareness Chant Group (Chant) member Khoo Kay Peng said it was getting an "outside" opinion "since the voice of the NGOs in Penang is not loud enough to be heard" by the state government and the people.

He said a forum would be held at the E&O Hotel next Tuesday to hear the views of the Australian, who was born in Johor.

Admission to the forum would be free as the group had been collecting donations to fund the event.

Khoo told a press conference that since the state government had kept the public in the dark over the project, the forum would help shed more light on the tunnel and its impact on the people.

The tunnel is one of four infrastructure projects costing a total of RM6.3 billion announced by the state government to help ease the traffic problem in the state.

The others are the 4.6km bypass linking Air Itam to the Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Expressway, a 12km Tanjung Bungah-Teluk Bahang paired road and a 4.2km stretch between Gurney Drive and Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Expressway bypassing the city centre.

Khoo questioned the contingency plan for the tunnel should the cost escalate as the tunnel would only be ready in 20 years time.

"Do Penangites have to suffer for another 20 years while waiting for the tunnel to be ready?" he asked.

"The state contradicted itself when it promoted the Cleaner Greener Penang campaign. It should promote the usage of public transportation instead of building the tunnel without first conducting an Environmental Impact Study (EIS).

"The tender for the project has been awarded to a consortium but many people are still in the dark.

Has the state locked the value of the project and if the price increases, what will happen?

"What if the project is aborted half way through the construction? What will be the quantum of compensation be? What assurance can they give to Penangites that the contractor is an expert in underwater tunnels?"

Another environmental expert and chartered architect, Prof Dr Jimmy Lim, said the Penang government should shelve the project as it would affect the seafront, especially along Gurney Drive and Straits Quay.

"The whole dredging process will damage the seafront, especially during low tides," he said.

The Free Trade Zone (FTZ) would be badly hit with manufacturers having to ferry goods by land.

"We might even see the FTZ or, worse, Penang Port closing down," he said.

NGO urges Penang to reveal undersea tunnel details

Read more: NGO urges Penang to reveal undersea tunnel details - Latest - New Straits Times http://www.nst.com.my/latest/ngo-urges-penang-to-reveal-undersea-tunnel-details-1.250801#ixzz2PwkP1QL3

GEORGE TOWN: A non-governmental organisation (NGO) has urged the caretaker state government to reveal technical details on its proposed undersea tunnel linking Persiaran Gurney here and Bagan Ajam on the mainland.

The Citizens Awareness Chant Group (Chant) is stressing that it is important for the people to know the facts before the state could conclude that Penangites were supportive of the multi-billion ringgit project.

Chant member Khoo Kay Peng said the people's acceptance of the project must be based on facts and evidence.

He questioned whether the people who were supporting the tunnel project were doing it because of their political emotions and affiliations.

"We do not want political emotions to influence the judgement and views of the people on the tunnel.

"Due to this, the chief minister (Lim Guan Eng) must provide details and answer questions to give better clarity to the project," he said in a press conference today.

Khoo, who is also a political analyst and blogger concerned about developmental issues and policy decisions made by both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat governments, said all tender documents on the proposed RM6.3 billion undersea tunnel and highway projects should also be made public.

He said that would be consistent with the state's Competency, Accountability and Transparency (CAT) principles and its recently passed Freedom of Information Act.

DON'T SUPPRESS AND SUBJUGATE': Group says Guan Eng's 'public consultations' used to sell, not get feedback on Penang undersea tunnel, road projects

GEORGE TOWN: THE general election cannot be used as the platform to determine whether the people of Penang are supportive of the proposed multi-billion ringgit undersea tunnel project.

Non-governmental organisation Citizens Awareness Chant Group (Chant) said there were issues over Penangites supporting the project based on their emotions and political affiliations, and not according to facts and evidence derived from studies.

Chant member Khoo Kay Peng said the people would not want to see the project politicised and Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng should not use the coming polls to claim the people's acceptance because a host of other issues would be raised during the election as well.

He said the project must be judged objectively and the state government here should conduct studies to explain about the tunnel.

"Guan Eng had said that 6,000 people at a dinner and 300 people at a forum agreed to the project. He had made a series of such references. However, the people cannot be misguided by emotions.

"We are not saying 'smash the project' but pertinent questions must be answered to clarify the project.

"Support or objection must be according to facts and evidence, which is why the state government has to provide the technical details, project layout and alignment, and traffic and environmental impact studies," he told a press conference here yesterday.

Khoo, who is a political analyst and blogger, said it was worrisome that the state government had previously tried to "suppress and subjugate" public consultations, with Guan Eng saying that Pakatan Rakyat was willing to lose voters over the tunnel.

He said it would be better if the state focused instead on giving the people the technical details so they could have a more thorough understanding about the project, its impact and why it was critical to build it before it made any policy decisions.

He also said the public dialogues on the tunnel organised by the state so far had been to inform and "sell" the project to the people, rather than gathering feedback to determine whether the tunnel was necessary in the first place.

"This is not about the election or a contest between two coalitions. Policies are policies... be fair to the public."

Khoo also raised questions on whether the tunnel would help solve traffic problems in Pulau Tikus and the George Town inner city, where many roads could not be further expanded, without any plans to improve the public transport system.

"The state has used Hong Kong as an example, where tunnels work well, but Penang is geographically different and Hong Kong does not have a heritage city.

"Its tunnels are for an entire underground commuter system linking the island with the New Territories up to the Chinese border. If our tunnel is to improve public transport, then it is different."

Khoo also asked the state government to make public all the open tender documents for the RM6.3 billion proposed tunnel and highway projects, in line with its CAT (Competency, Accountability, Transparency) principles and Freedom of Information Act.

If the state government promoted open tenders, he also asked why the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the projects was signed before the Request for Proposal (RFP) was called.

It was reported that the RFP was called from July 6 to Oct 15 last year while the MoU was signed between Penang and China in April 2012. The winning bidder, Consortium Zenith BUCG Sdn Bhd, a Malaysian-Chinese joint-venture, was given the letter of intent on Feb 6 this year.

"In an open tender process, it is also usually announced why the winning company won the bid while the bids by the other participants were rejected," Khoo said, adding that the role, background and track record of the companies that made up the consortium should be revealed as well.

On the tunnel affecting the Penang Port's future expansion and the deepening of the Northern Channel to allow larger container ships to enter the port, he warned that the project could also potentially harm the manufacturing sector in the state.

He said trading and manufacturing costs would increase if ships could not deliver goods to Penang and have to send them to Port Klang.

Asked what the NGO would do if Guan Eng did not listen to issues raised against the tunnel, Khoo said Chant was still committed to giving people information and a voice in addressing public policies and pushing for better alternatives.

"The people deserve options and we are willing to help create awareness on issues, regardless of which side is in the government.

"NGOs are not dangerous as we cannot do anything... so the chief minister and the state do not need to throw accusations and labels at us, or claim that we support a certain party."

Chant adviser Professor Jimmy Lim Cheok Siang, who was present, said the NGO was holding another public forum on the tunnel next Tuesday at 8pm at the Eastern and Oriental Hotel's Victory Annexe to raise the people's awareness on the matter.

Bayan Mutiara Revisited: What is the Use of FOI and CAT if the State Government Refuses to Respond to Questions & Concerns?

2013-04-06T15:45:00.001+08:00

There are still several questions left unanswered by the Penang government over the sale of the prime property.

SEVERAL Penang-based analysts and local community leaders have questioned the Penang government for selling a 41.5ha plot of prime state land to a private developer, Ivory Properties Group Berhad, for RM1.07bil.

Their concern is understandable due to scarce availability of state-owned land on the island which may hinder the ability of the state government to drive a balanced development and ensure it does not drive out the lower middle-income group from the area.

Most private property projects on the island are focused primarily on premium and luxury property which have driven up prices beyond the reach of most Penangites. There is worry that the sale of the state-owned Bayan Mutiara land to a private developer may end up in a similar fate.

Apart from escalating property prices, there is a concern that the land may have been sold below the prevailing market value. The state government had explained that the current selling price was above market value at the time of transaction.

However, it does not explain if it is usual to allow the purchaser a period of five years to settle the full payment. Did the transacted price factor in any interest payment accrued by the five-year payment period?

The opportunity cost derived from a potential increase in land premium over the next five years should be included to ensure that it is a fair deal.

Accusations and allegations of a lack of transparency in the tender process should be comprehensively addressed by the state government. Critics had alleged that the sale was done through direct negotiations between the state government and the purchaser.

Without justifying the five-year payment period, these allegations will create doubt over the much acclaimed transparency and accountability of the state government.

Moreover, the allegations are peppered by talk that a bidder who is prepared to make a full payment for the purchase was not selected during the tender process.

Some analysts have questioned how can the sale benefit the people? They wonder why the development of Bayan Mutiara cannot be taken up by the Penang Development Corporation (PDC) which has the capacity and experience to handle people-centric development projects such as the Penang Free Trade Zones, housing estates, Komtar and others.

Regrettably, the issue of public accountability and good governance has been grossly politicised by certain parties.

Politicians have gone to the extent of throwing down the gauntlet of challenging each other to resign over false allegations related to the land sale. We expect such showmanship from politicians but we deserve straight and accurate answers from them.

Politicising this issue is going to deprive many concerned stakeholders a chance to ask relevant and legitimate questions about the decision to sell the land to a private developer.

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng had described allegations of wrongdoing over the tender award for the Bayan Mutiara mixed development project by PDC as “a pack of lies”.

While some of these allegations may be malicious, it is pertinent for Lim's administration to identify legitimate concerns over the sale. He should acknowledge that the state government controls less than 5% of total land size on the island and this calls for a prudent and strategic management of state-owned prime land.

Hence, it is best for his administration to address these issues immediately in order to convince the people of Penang that it has taken the best interests of the people into consideration before agreeing to the sale. Major issues include:

What was the rationale to allow a five-year payment period to the purchaser? It gives an impression that the purchaser may not have secured financing for the purchase.
Is it true there was another bidder who was prepared to pay an upfront full payment for the asking price?
Did the transacted price factor in any interest charges or projected land price appreciation over the next five years?
Is there any restriction or precondition between the state government and the purchaser to discourage any sub-sales? If the purchaser were to divide and resell some parcels of the land to other developers at a higher premium, it may further drive up property prices on the island. If such sales were allowed, is the state government entitled to a share of the higher premium?
Is price the only factor to determine who is the winning bidder? Does the state government evaluate and consider other aspects as well such as Master Plan and provision for public space, public library, R&D centres and affordable housing?
Is it true that the developer is paying the state government in phases, what happens if there is a default or the project abandoned?
It is understood that the government would like to use the proceeds from Bayan Mutiara land to finance its low-cost housing scheme in Batu Kawan. While the low-cost housing scheme is welcomed and encouraged, the state government needs to justify if the sale of Bayan Mutiara land is the best option to help finance the project.
Lim said part of the RM500mil financing for the housing scheme came from the state coffers. If this is the case, what is stopping the state from raising money through external sources to fund the entire project and carefully weigh all options to optimise the use of the Bayan Mutiara prime land bank?
If the state government only need RM500 million to fund the affordable housing scheme, why sell the whole land bank? Shouldn' t the state keep the other half (50 acres) to take advantage of future land value appreciation? Land price has escalated to RM450 per sqft compared to the sale price of RM240 per sqft.
Compared to the GDV of RM10.1 billion, is the state getting any share of profit from the project?
The first project in Penang World City has been launched, is there a 30% provision for affordable housing, as promised by CM Lim Guan Eng, between RM180k to RM250k per unit?

Bayan Mutiara is no longer about selling above the current market value but the use of scarce prime land on the island for the purpose of socio-economic transformation. Ownership of prime land is very crucial for the state government to drive the state's economy.

We do not want a repeat of high premium-reclaimed lands being sold to private developers who in turn inflate property prices in Penang and raked in billions in profit at the expense of the people.

Bayan Mutiara could be what the state government needs to help transform the landscape of Penang and create new attractions to boost its attractiveness as a tourism and cultural destination and a services hub.

Time will judge if the current state government has made the right decision on Bayan Mutiara and if the proposed plan is not going to turn out to be just another expensive commercial project by a private property developer.

Between the Snobs and the Opportunists; Penangites Are Caught Between a Rock & a Hard Place

2013-04-03T00:39:00.003+08:00

I feel sorry for my fellow Penangites. The 13th GE is going to be one of the hardest elections for them to decide on the winners and the losers. It is hard because we are caught between the snobs and the opportunists.

On one hand, remnants of the past regime, through the control of federal power, still act like the state government is in their firm control and they are merely punished by the voters by temporarily handing over the administration to the Opposition. They never get down to accept the reality that they had been outvoted by a large majority.

As a result, the person whom they had chosen to lead the charge to retake the government in the next GE is himself enjoying the grandiose of being a leader of the 'ruling regime'. He is a man for the big occasion. Instead of going to the ground humbly to ask for a chance from the voters he chose to spend millions to bring in a superstar, believing foolishly that the entertainer was able to win him support and favour. He failed to understand that Penang is not Bollywood.

This is the tough part for the newly appointed 'CM designate' and leader of the BN coalition in the state. He is given a large war chest and resources to support his task to retake the administration and he believes that by throwing his resources around through handouts, dinners, activities and advertisements he would be able to fulfill his task and objective.

Without being an elected representative is another barrier and disadvantage to him. He cannot directly control the behaviour of members on the Opposition bench who come from a senior partner in his coalition. The eleven members of Opposition are not able to frame the context of their political response and responsibility to embrace all ethnic representation because the coalition is not able to function this way. The interest of a particular ethnic community is always been taken care by a race-based political party. Without a multiracial representation means, the interest of other ethnic communities may not be given the right attention.

Civil and constructive critical opposition is also something alien to them. As a result, a number of bad or poor policies were not thoroughly debated in the state assembly. The only thing they can do best is to send a group of noisy supporters to the state administration office every friday to hold a meaningless protest or demonstration.

These people especially leaders and supporters whom I have describe above are the snobs that we have to tolerate on one side.

The fact that Penangites, largely the middle-class, hate and dislike them so much that they will continue to reject these snobs in the next GE. It has come to a point that we are willing to lower our expectations and increase our tolerance of the state government.

It has never happened in Penang that our NGOs are so one-sided that most of them would choose to still support the state government for fear of allowing these snobs to come back to power too quickly. We are determined to overlook the state government's faults and weaknesses (intentional or not) so that we do not appear to be overly critical.

Leaders of NGOs who are not satisfied with some of the major policy decisions made by the state government have been very careful to choose their words when voicing out their displeasure. I was at one of the forums discussing issues concerning the controversial RM6.3 billion roads and underwater tunnel project and observed that the speakers were quick to remind the audience after each criticism that they still support the ruling regime and the Chief Minister.

The quantum of the policy decisions is nothing less that what would have triggered a mass protest of these NGOs if the same decisions were made by the past regime.

Important questions regarding a controversial land sale, Bayan Mutiara, were never answered by the state government but the NGOs were surprisingly quiet and understanding. Until today, the state government hasn't confirm if the bidder has fulfilled their commitment to pay for the land or not. It has chosen to stay mum over a number of questions posed to its administration. In the past, these NGOs would have gone to the streets to show their displeasure, the Opposition (now the Government) would have worked hand-in-hand with these NGOs to organize fiery speeches and forums to criticize the government and the people would have been so worked up and angry.

Because of these snobs, the people are facing a hard time to stand up against the newly minted state government under the populist leadership of an opportunistic leader. The opportunistic leader is now using our dislike and aversion against these snobs to push through controversial projects like the Bayan Mutiara land sale and the RM6.3 billion infrastructure project in Penang.

By making these projects political and by linking the opposition to these projects as an opposition against their rule and governance, Penangites cannot help but to choose these projects instead of seeing the return of the snobs.

Between the snobs and the opportunists; Penangites are caught between a rock and a hard place.

The losers can only be us, the voters who have chosen to allow our political prejudice to blind our good sense. We should wake up to our senses that we do not owe politicians any favour. They come and go but the impact and implications of their decisions are here to stay and some of these major decisions are going to leave a long lasting effect and damage on the state and our future generations.

We should start to realize that some of these politicians are really mercenaries who are parachuted here to win power, enjoy the spoil and go off to target other states for the same. They are only interested in power, fame and influence. Nothing else and nothing more. We should take out our measurement tape and start to seriously measure their contributions over the last five years. We need to ask ourselves what is the main purpose of exercising our votes once every five years.

Some of these mercenaries are so daring to even call us 'attention seekers' and 'cry babies' for speaking up and probing into their projects; using public resources.

To them, it is a simple deal. They take care of the snobs and keep them off our back. In return, we should not question, probe or even criticize what they do. This is precisely their line of thinking which is acceptable and lauded by their supporters.

But what is it really in store for the non-partisan majority who just need a reliable, responsible and trustable government?

We should start thinking seriously on how we intend to deal with the snobs and the opportunists.

After the elections, whoever win and if we continue to allow them to play their game and extract the advantage on us, the snobs or the opportunists are going to ruin our life and our state.

The fate of Penang remains in the hand of the thinking ones and not those who continue to allow blind loyalty, biases and ignorance to rule their heart and head.

We have to start asking ourselves simple questions. Should we allow the snobs and the opportunists to decide everything for us without having to comply by our rules and expectations and we are simply happy to become bystanders in the whole political process as long as our preference is fulfilled?

We should spend some time to ponder over our options before it is really too late. As a fellow Penangite, I wish you luck. I am doing my part so that history will not judge me cruelly.

There is Only ONE WAY for CM Lim Guan Eng to Find out if Penangites Support His Project - Call a Referendum

2013-03-30T17:01:00.001+08:00

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng claims Penangites supported his government’s plan to build the RM6.3 billion mega road infrastructure projects to alleviate traffic congestion on the island.

His cited the reaction of attendees, mostly young voters, at various dialogue and briefing sessions, particularly at two public gatherings last week, as proof that the people backed his plans to build three new bypass highways and an undersea tunnel.

At a dinner with the Chinese community in Butterworth last Saturday, Lim claimed that “6,000 people stood up and supported the projects”.

This argument is quite simplistic coming from a chief minister.

There are 1.6 million people living in Penang; not 300, 600 or 6000 people. A better way to find out if surely through a state wide referendum. By playing the number games, CM Lim has to be a bit more serious and logical than these claims. What if the NGOs or BN organize their own gatherings of thousands and claim that Penangites do not support the project? Should we conclude that Penangites rejected the project?

Moreover, there are many questions regarding the project's Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment, Traffic Impact Assessment, technical feasibility of the underwater tunnel, cost-benefit analysis, project alignments and experience and profile of developers which would have to be addressed.

It is absurd to suggest that the project must 'desperately' be implemented because his administration does not want to be a 'do-nothing government' or a lack of cooperation from Federal government to help address the permit issues.

CM Lim has not even exhausted the action steps which can be done by his state government. He should start answering serious questions posed to him by the NGOs and critics like myself.

There is only a way to find out if Penangites do really support his project.

Call a REFERENDUM!

Arms Deal Worth RM4.2 Billion is Irresponsible & Controversial

2013-03-28T23:59:00.001+08:00

Defence Minsiter Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said 24 deals involving defence assets and services worth RM4.2 billion have been signed between the ministry, local and international defence firms, and the Pahang government at the ongoing Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace Exhibition (Lima 2013).

He said these include six government contracts, three letters of acceptance by the ministry, 11 Memorandums of Agreement (MoAs) and four Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs). These deals are aimed at strengthening the country's defence industry and creating places for European firms at the Malaysian Defence & Security Technology Park (MDSTP) in Sungkai, Perak.

According to Ahmad Zahid, Malaysia has shortlisted five manufacturers as it seeks to buy 18 combat aircraft by 2015 to replace its ageing fleet of Russian-made MIG-29s, the defence minister said today.

The British-backed Eurofighter Typhoon, Sweden's SAAB JAS-39 Gripen, France's Dassault Aviation Rafale, Boeing's F/A 18E/F Super Hornet and Russia's Sukhoi Su-30 have been shortlisted.

It is a shame that BN is committing the same sin again. When most Malaysians are expecting the ruling regime to call for a GE soon to renew its mandate, the nearing expiry government has struck again with deals worth RM4.2 billion.

Arms procurement has been the most controversial in the recent years. The high profile case of the purchase of two Scorpene submarines is still hanging like a dark cloud over the minister's head and nothing has been done to review and audit the process.

Both PR and BN should not enter into any such deals at the eve of a GE. This is the least we can expect from politicians who are accountable and responsible.

If any, the reluctance of the ruling regime to set a date for the dissolution of the 12th parliament and the irresponsible manner in which the ministry of defence enters into multi-billion deals are examples of blatant disrespect for the democratic process.

Malaysians who are sick of such actions must speak up loud and clear to criticize these recalcitrant politicians or elected representatives.

Koh Tsu Koon's Warp Logic on the Screening of Tanda Putera

2013-03-28T23:42:00.004+08:00

What is Koh Tsu Koon really trying to say on the selective screening of Tanda Putera, a controversial film by producer Suhaimi Baba? He defends private screenings of the film but what is his stand on the film; which according to the Minister of Information Rais Yatim who had previously said that Tanda Putera’s premier has been deferred because of ‘inappropriate’ scenes in the film.

Rais added; “The cabinet has decided for the benefit of the people, that the official premiere of the film be postponed as it contains scenes that may cause conflicts. This is because it shows the tragedy of May 13 which is disputed by various parties.”

As a minister looking at the interfaith affairs, what is Koh Tsu Koon's stand on Tanda Putera? His lack of conviction on his party's own ideology which supports non-racialism is exposed from his inability to decide where he stands on this issue.

The fact that Tanda Putera is shown and screened to selective groups of students and Felda villagers is already going against the directive of the Ministry of Information and Puspal. How can these screenings be considered private? These selective public screenings contained an ill intention to distort and manipulate public opinion to go against a certain group of people and community.

If Koh is a true defendant of democracy and freedom of expression, he should support the screenings of Tanda Putera to the masses. Let the film be judged on its accuracy, intention, content and so-called 'creativity'.

For better or worse, Suhaimi Baba should be prepared to accept all criticisms and feedbacks on her film. The government, through Finas, should be ready to justify why a grant is being given to produce a movie which contains "scenes that may cause social conflicts".

It appears to me that Koh's warp logic is disturbing and doing him no good as a leader of a non-racial political party. He sounds more like a confused civil servant than a political leader.

Penang NGOs Must Adopt a Common Platform on the RM6.3 billion Highways/Tunnel Project

2013-03-27T00:47:00.001+08:00

When engaging with a hostile and authoritative government, it is wise for NGOs to stand together and adopt a common platform spelling out clear objectives, counter arguments and alternative solutions to replace the projects which are deemed not beneficial to the stakeholders they represent.

Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has warned members of the public to be wary about NGOs that have adopted the BN line in opposing the proposed RM6 billion integrated road system.

"Some so-called independent NGOs have adopted the BN line and aligned themselves with the BN - you know which organisations these are, they are playing on the sentiments of the people," Lim said at the launch of the Bukit Bendera election centre last night.

"We invited them to come and talk, we had dialogues since 2011; they never attended once and yet they criticise us for doing these projects in a rushed manner," he added.

It was reported that the formal agreement for the (Transport Masterplan) TMP was signed in mid 2011. In the same week, the CM announced the signing of MOUs for four major road projects with Chinese companies. This could be the sore point why some NGOs had refused to attend any dialogues with the state government.

CAP president SM Mohamed Idris was quoted to have said; “In any case, a meeting will be futile and not serve any purpose since, according to press reports, the state government has already awarded the project to a private company despite opposition from many NGOs."

Penang Forum has voiced its displeasure on the manner the highways and tunnel projects were tendered and awarded before the conclusion of the TMP. It asks; "Does it make sense to have the solution before the study has started? Does this not ignore evidenced based analysis and policies?"

Earlier, CM Lim Guan Eng has insisted that the projects, consisting of an undersea tunnel connecting the island (Gurney Drive) to the mainland (Bagan Ajam) and three highways, be implemented despite protests and criticisms by NGOs. Lim said his coalition (PR) is willing to lose votes over the RM6.3 billion mega project.

The CAP president is right, it may be futile to attend any dialogues with the state government if the CM has taken such a strong position on the projects.

Those who are unhappy with the projects have given their clear and comprehensive reasons to reject them:

1. Any policy decisions must be based on evidence and thorough analysis. Any long term solutions to address congestion problems must be decided holistically by considering all aspects, issues, challenges and needs.

2. Large scale infrastructure projects should be put through rigorous feasibility studies, DEIA assessments, traffic impact assessment, density and development projections and cost benefit analysis to ensure that they are viable and appropriate.

3. Politicians should start to accept the new political reality in the country. A two-party system would not have been a reality and a success if both coalitions continue to bicker and sabotage each other long after the voters have given them a mandate to share power.

4. Any policy decisions should taken and implemented with the best interest of the people these policies are supposed to serve.

5. Any government of the day must not attempt to use its electoral advantage or super majority to try to push through any projects which are ultimately using public resources.

6. In line with the FOI and CAT pledges, the state government should make available all information and data to any parties/persons who wish to gather more understanding of the public projects.

Like any other political parties, CM Lim's party had joined hands and collaborated with NGOs all over the country to protest against projects supported by or approved by the BN federal government. It is ironic for him to allege that these NGOs are dangerous and hostile if they are really working with the state Opposition to protest against the projects. Aren't this the modus operandi of the Dap too?

I would like to urge all NGOs who are against the RM6.3 billion highways/tunnel project to create a common platform to address the issue. This is necessary to ensure that they are not being subdued, subjugated and pressured into submission by powers directly controlled by the state.

Those who are against and for the projects are welcomed to attend a public dialogue:

"A Vision For An International Livable City", - A TUNNEL AT LIVABLE GURNEY ?

DATE & TIME: 27 MARCH 2013, 8PM

VENUE ; HOTEL 1926

227 BURMA ROAD, PENANG
TEL 04 2271926
http://www.1926heritagehotel.com/

Speakers:

Dr Lim Mah Hui Phd. MPPP councilor
http://limmahhui.wordpress.com/

and

Professor Jimmy Lim
esteemed architect, former PAM PRESIDENT
winner of the Aga Khan Award for Architecture
http://www.akdn.org/architecture/PLEASE COME IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS AT STAKE.

ADMISSION IS FREE.
REFRESHMENTS AND DRINKS WILL BE SERVED.

A Vision for an International Livable City with a Tunnel at Gurney Drive? Come for a Public Dialogue!

2013-03-25T17:54:00.002+08:00

PUBLIC DIALOGUE:

"A Vision For An International Livable City", - A TUNNEL AT LIVABLE GURNEY ?

DATE & TIME: 27 MARCH 2013, 8PM

VENUE ; HOTEL 1926

227 BURMA ROAD, PENANG
TEL 04 2271926
http://www.1926heritagehotel.com/

Speakers:

Dr Lim Mah Hui Phd. MPPP councilor
http://limmahhui.wordpress.com/

and

Professor Jimmy Lim
esteemed architect, former PAM PRESIDENT
winner of the Aga Khan Award for Architecture
http://www.akdn.org/architecture/
PLEASE COME IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS AT STAKE.

ADMISSION IS FREE.
REFRESHMENTS AND DRINKS WILL BE SERVED.

PLEASE SHARE IT OUT!

GE13: Analysing the apolitical

2013-03-25T17:12:00.003+08:00

WHO are these apolitical people, who can’t be bothered about the upcoming elections?

Political analyst Khoo Kay Peng says it’s “very difficult” to pin down the precise demographics but he believes there are two main groups.

The first comprises certain sections of the poor. “Their main focus is to ensure that there’s a roof over their head and three meals on the table,” notes Khoo. “These people often feel helpless and do not believe that they can make a difference by voting. They do not believe that the politicians (of either side) care for their plight or their needs.”

The second group consists of those who are planning to leave the country no matter which side wins.

“They do not believe that this country has a future regardless of which party forms the government,” he explains. “They are likely to be not interested to vote nor take much interest in local political developments. Unfortunately, this group of people, aged between 18 and 45, is growing in number.”

What about the upper and upper-middle classes of professionals and businessmen? Does their wealth make them apathetic about politics?

Khoo says this is a misconception as, ironically, these richer professionals and businessmen are actually quite interested in local politics, especially if they are still working or doing business and living in the country.

“These are the groups most vulnerable to any change of policy or model of government. Their stake in this country is high and they are very keen in monitoring the local political situation. In fact, a number of professional and business groups and associations are getting more vocal in presenting their expectations to the politicians.”

Being outspoken on public interest issues is too often mistaken as being “anti-government”.

Nevertheless, as can be seen in Khoo’s blog called Straight Talk (khookaypeng.blogspot.com), he has criticised both sides of the political divide, as can be seen in postings such as Anti-Hop Law: Both Coalitions Should End Hypocrisy.

How can political parties try to engage those who are politically disinterested?

“They can reach out to these people by addressing their issues directly,” he suggests. “Politicians often speak an elitist language. A lot of policy decisions are not made specifically to address issues faced by them.”

The Star. Click here to read more.

Penang Forum Opposes Tunnel Vision

2013-03-21T23:10:00.001+08:00

The Penang Forum Steering Committee opposes the proposed road-based undersea tunnel and the state government’s emphasis on highway construction over improvements in public transport.

(The tunnel would be the fourth cross-channel link, after the ferries and the first and second Penang bridges.)

There are just too many unanswered questions (see the list below) that throw the viability of this mega project into doubt.

While it is true that public transport comes under the jurisdiction of the federal government, we feel that ‘do-the-wrong-thing’ approach (promoting dependency on private motor vehicles over the long term) is worse than the ‘do-nothing’ approach.

A more sensible and visionary approach would be to come up with a comprehensive plan for sustainable transport while educating the public and pressuring the federal government to realise that change.

It is true that the federal government now has overbearing jurisdiction over public transport but that may not be the case if there is a change of government in the coming general election or the one after that. Jurisdiction over public transport would then be decentralised.

In the meantime, the state government should lay the ground work for integrated sustainable public sustainable transport in the state. The state government can do the following now:

Kick off a campaign to promote the widespread use of public transport among ordinary commuters. State government leaders could show leadership by example by taking the bus or cycling to work wherever possible.

Prevent illegal parking (by clamping) to decongest key routes so that bus lanes can be created along certain stretches. A trial run could be carried out at Burma Road, for instance. These bus lanes may also be used by taxis, emergency vehicles and multi-occupancy vehicles.

Buy RapidPenang season tickets in bulk and distribute them to target groups such as school children, working adults and senior citizens. Alternatively, the state government could provide full or partial reimbursements to those who show proof of purchase of these season tickets.

The public can be enlisted to do the following:

Pressure the federal government through petitions and letter-writing campaigns to increase the number of buses in the state and decentralise public transport decision-making.

Turn the quest for improved public transport in the state into a major general election campaign issue.

Take public transport to work at least once a week for a start.

Here are our reasons for opposing the tunnel project and our reservations about the highway building spree.

Questions

About the vision:

Shouldn’t important public policies be based on evidence and analysis?

Will building more roads solve traffic problems?

Is the public being given an alternative based on sustainable transport?

Are we moving to the 21st century or moving back to the 20th century with the state government’s emphasis on building infrastructure for private motor vehicles?

Does creating dependency on private transport help the poor?

About the process of making public policy

The formal agreement for the (Transport Masterplan) TMP was signed in mid 2011. In the same week, the CM announced the signing of MOUs for four major road projects with Chinese companies. Does it make sense to have the solution before the study has started? Does this not ignore evidenced based analysis and policies?

Concurrent negotiations for the tunnel and highway projects started in 2011 held while the TMP study was underway. Why were awards for the projects given out even before the TMP is finalised and made public? Doesn’t this pre-empt the significance of the report’s recommendations?

TMP calls for a balanced approach to solving transport problems. It suggested short and medium term measures and recommended major road construction as longer term solutions commencing after the short/medium-term measures. Are we putting the cart before the horse by reversing the priorities suggested in the TMP?

Have there been independent feasibility studies, cost benefit analysis, traffic demand simulation etc done for ALL the four projects before they were tendered? Isn’t it standard best practice to conduct such studies BEFORE tender and award, rather than after?

The TMP is based on the assumption that the population will be 2.5m by 2030 and that by this time a sea tunnel may be justified. The Department of Statistics released a population projection last year which projects a population of 1.8 million by 2030. It appears that Halcrow has not done any modelling of the population; they have just assumed historical growth rates will continue, which would suggest that the tunnel will not be required even by 2030.

How is the public expected to provide meaningful feedback when they are hazy about the precise alignment of the routes? All the precise proposed alignments should be displayed to the public for their comments. The state government should practice transparency especially now that the Freedom of Information Act has been passed?

About the tender

If there was an MOU with the China government, how can there be an open tender? Is that why only two bids were received for the tunnel - both involving firms from China? Why were there no other bids from other countries? Because of the earlier MOU? If so, is this really an open tender?

Who are the parties behind the three small local companies that were in the winning tender bid? Has there been an evaluation to look into their track record and expertise? Do these companies have any political connections?

What kind of performance bonds will the local companies give?

Can the state government under the competency, accountability and transparency (CAT) policy make publicly available all the tender documents and acceptances and the decisions of the tender award.

About the reclaimed land

What are the plans for the 110 acres of land; how is the use of this land going to contribute to or solve some of our existing problems. Is it going to add to traffic congestion? Is it going to address shortages in public space and how is it going to influence the property market and the price of housing. How much affordable housing will be built on this land?

Who is going to develop the land - the local companies within the consortium, the China companies or an external developer? If so, who is the developer and the contractors and do they have any political connections?

Can the state government guarantee that there will be a really independent detailed environmental impact assessment for this land? Can it also guarantee that there will be a reliable independentt hydrological study for the entire island and mainland?

What is the market value and gross development value of the reclaimed land? Where exactly is this located?

The financial considerations

Who will pay for the cost of acquisition of private lands that are in the way of the proposed highways?

How was it decided to award 110 acres of reclaimed land to the project proponents along with a 30-year concession for tolls? Was there a financial projection of future revenue for both the reclaimed land and the tunnel toll collection? If so, how many billions in profit is the consortium estimated to make? If there is no financial projection, why not and how was it decided to award them reclaimed land in addition to a 30-year tunnel toll concession?

Misguided priorities

The TMP puts public transport at a much higher priority than the tunnel. In fact, the TMP consultants diplomatically (given that the tunnel was probably the state government’s idea) suggested that the tunnel would only be something to consider for 2030 and beyond. Why is this being brought forward to “2025-2030” and even earlier now?

If a tunnel or other cross-channel link is necessary, shouldn’t it be a rail link? A cross-channel rail link is more important given the completion of the dual tracking to Butterworth and the future high-speed rail linking Singapore to KL and Penang.

Why is the north coast pair road from Teluk Bahang to Tanjung Bunga a priority now? Is it being driven by property development considerations? According to the TMP (and it’s clear to everybody), the Outer Bypass between Farlim and Tun Lim Expressway should be built first instead of the north coast pair road. Why is the state government putting it the other way round?

Focusing on building roads without addressing the demand for road use will NOT solve the problem. In fact, it might worsen the problem. Have all the highways, tunnels and flyovers in KL and Bangkok solved traffic congestion? If not, why are we going down that path?

There are two sides to the equation of traffic problem: the Supply Side (building more roads) and the Demand Side (the demand for those roads caused by more vehicles). What is being done to tackle the rising demand for motor vehicles and road space?

Do we realise that greenhouse gas emissions from road transport is one of the biggest contributors to global warming? How are more highways and a road-based tunnel compatible with the state government’s slogan of ‘Cleaner, greener Penang’? Shouldn’t we be laying the ground work for sustainable public transport now?

The Penang Forum is a coalition of progressive public-interest civil society groups based in Penang, Malaysia.

So PM Najib, When is the Transition You Promised the People of Sarawak?

2013-03-19T19:20:00.002+08:00

Taib Mahmud is the Asbestos For Sarawak BN

2013-03-19T13:24:00.002+08:00

This is a story about corruption...the opening of the video speaks volume of the problem in Sarawak. It is a shame that all Taib Mahmud can do is to direct his lawyers to issue a denial.

So much that I am taking a neutral stand as a political analyst, I cannot bring myself to stay neutral in corrupt cases involving politicians and their kins. If BN keeps Taib Mahmud, then BN has to go but I am not sure if the Opposition there is strong enough to do the job. But we must support whoever and whichever parties in the state who want and are doing their duty to stop the plundering.

Whatever it is, actions must be taken against those who are involved in the video. This is modern time robbery by the ruling dynasty. It must be stopped!