Sunday July 20, 2008
Rakyat losing out in the end
By SIM LEOI LEOI
It was not the first, nor will it be the last time Parliament was distracted by events beyond its gate but it must be remembered that this comes at a heavy price.
HAVING debated so much in Parliament, one would think MPs might not have turned up for the debate between Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek and PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
But they were there in the audience, visible in the background to millions of television viewers as both Ahmad Shabery and Anwar argued their points in the historic live telecast.
This only showed that, just as the public keenly follows the daily meetings of the august House each day, so are the Parliamentarians entranced by the shape of politics taking hold of the nation at this time.
Some of these “politics” even had a direct impact on the running of Dewan business – like the tip-off on an illegal rally in front of the Parliament building in anticipation of an Opposition no-confidence motion against the Prime Minister, prompting the police to close down several roads, which resulted in a traffic snarl.
The traffic congestion compounded the “Monday blues” effect for many Malaysians, including MPs trying to debate the mid-term review report on the 9th Malaysia Plan – which was into its last legs – and journalists covering the daily sittings.
By now, everyone would have known that the request for the motion was subsequently rejected by Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia and the Opposition walked out of the Dewan in protest.
However, walking out meant walking away from any debate as well as the chance, only given to an MP, to make the Government accountable for its actions. It meant walking away from asking questions, demanding action, giving suggestions, scrutinising public accounts and highlighting the needs of voters.
Emptied of the Opposition bloc, the ministers got away with minimal answers.
Ministers in Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz and Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, wrapped up their replies in about a minute. Usually, they would have been grilled, as would have Human Resources Minister Datuk S. Subramaniam and Deputy Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Noriah Kasnon. They all chose to say they were only replying to the MPs present that day.
About the only MP present on the Opposition bloc was Datuk Ibrahim Ali, who is actually an Independent candidate.
Perhaps they had a point to get across to the Opposition, just as the latter was hoping to convey its own displeasure with the Chair’s decision when it staged its boycott.
Boycott and you don’t get the answers.
Tony Pua (DAP - Petaling Jaya) must have expected that because, to the surprise of the backbenchers, the first-term Parliamentarian, wearing a rather sheepish grin, came back just as business was winding down in the evening to deliver his adjournment speech on the Education Ministry obstructing a student and teacher’s private activity.
For this valiant effort, he received resounding applause – and some catcalls.
When approached in the Parliament lobby the day after for his feelings about the motion, Pua had this to say:
“I would have rather sat in the hall. I thought we had made a statement (on the motion) when we walked out.”
In making his decision to come back, the blogging enthusiast was certainly mindful of his constituents.
“I promised them in my blog that I would raise this matter with the ministry concerned. I told them I would expect a reply that evening. If I didn’t come back, I would have failed them.
“The deputy minister has got my reply ready,” he said.
In fact, Pua was not the only Opposition MP who felt this way as DAP stalwart Karpal Singh also seemed somewhat reluctant to leave after the decision to boycott was taken. The former Lion of Jelutong was itching to take on the Prime Minister’s Department.
Although notice for the motion had originated from Opposition Leader and PKR president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, the entire bloc had agreed to the boycott as a mark of Pakatan Rakyat solidarity.
Privately though, some Opposition MPs would have much preferred to remain.
Similarly, when Anwar was arrested on Wednesday, Azmin Ali (PKR - Gombak) told the press that all Pakatan Rakyat MPs had been told to speak up on the issue during their debate time on the Supplementary Supply Bill, which was to seek the Parliament’s permission for an additional allocation of RM20.2bil.
The funds are intended to finance subsidies by the Government due to the recent increase in the price of fuel, as well as provide for the payment of rebates to eligible motorists and motorcyclists.
Considering the fuel crisis has been making headlines recently, some Opposition MPs would have understandably wanted to talk about the plight of their own constituents.
Senior Opposition officials confessed that some of their MPs felt their voices were being drowned out by all the emphasis on one man. With only a day to debate the Bill and each MP’s time cut down to just 10 minutes, priority should have been with their voters.
“But they have to toe the party line.
“Those feeling it the hardest are the MPs who have tried so hard to get picked out by the Chair for debate,” said one such official, who hoped the current political scene was not going to drag on.
Several Opposition MPs, among them PKR members, ignored Azmin’s request and chose to focus their debate on the voters’ immediate needs.
Last week was not the first, nor will it be the last time Parliament was distracted by events beyond its gate but it must be remembered that this comes at a heavy price.
Case in point. Despite having sat for 16 days and until late hours, the House only managed to pass three Blls – the Supplementary Supply Bill, the Geologists’ Bill and the Judges’ Remuneration Bill.
The Malaysia Tourism Promotion Board (Amendment) Bill has been on the Order Paper since the first meeting in April but until Parliament closed on Thursday, it had yet to see the light of day.
If business in the Dewan is to be slowed down for more public scrutiny, that’s fine. But slowing down and the voices of the people’s representatives not being heard in the din were surely not fine.
The price is heavier still for those voters who live within urban poor pockets or are plagued by hardcore poverty in rural areas where access to education or employment is hard.
“The MPs should have been debating the food and fuel crisis so they can be responsible to their voters. Instead, our attention has been diverted by a political crisis,” said Deputy Minister S. K. Devamany.
It is a fair conclusion that in Tuesday night’s debate, while Anwar was said to have won the verbal fight, Ahmad Shabery’s victory was in creating new history for the country’s political landscape. This means that nobody actually lost.
However, while the political game continues to hold the nation’s attention, it is the voters who may actually lose out in the end.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Awards for honorific titles or 'Horrific'
2008/06/24
Mahathir’s record: More negatives than positives
By : NORAMTAZ ABDULLAH, Petaling Jaya
The explosion in the number of awards for honorific titles among Malaysians happened during his premiership, so much so that cynical remarks were made by everyone that if someone throws a stone on the street or at any public function, the chances are that you would hit a Datuk, Datuk Seri or Tan Sri.
The scramble for such titles became paramount, as they provide tremendous mileage in terms of securing preferential treatment of sorts and access to the corridors of power, all which adds a new dimension to Malaysian culture and way of life
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is associated with many mega projects in the country
I REFER to P.C.A. Lee's letter on Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's record ("Good, bad or plain ugly?-- NST, June 18).
To me, the Petronas Twin Towers, the Sepang F1 Circuit, Kuala Lumpur International Airport and the tolled highways are not projects coming out of brilliant ideas or initiatives. These can only come from those who think and behave as if the country's resources are unlimited and that "money is no problem".
It was during his administration that another "brilliant" idea was mooted which thankfully did not materialise: to build a bridge linking Malaysia and Sumatra. Just imagine the consequence to the country's financial resources and the ballooning budget deficits had the project proceeded.
His yearning for mega projects was indeed insatiable, especially when these become synonymous with his name. He wanted to create his own history, especially for the young generation. After all, those who were born at the time Dr Mahathir became prime minister were adults when he retired.
This generation knows only him as prime minister and this is the memory he wants to perpetuate, even to the extent of dismantling parts of the historical past.
Remember Merdeka Stadium, which was on the verge of being demolished to make way for a commercial project? Had it not been for the public outcry, we would have lost this historical place where our first prime minister read the proclamation of our independence.
The availability of oil money and Petronas under his control had no doubt become the driving force behind his thirst for mega projects, including the heavy industry, as well as for bailing out public and private companies from the fallout of the 1997/1998 Asian financial crisis.
The national car project was developed at high social cost to the country and people, when it could have been done differently and at a lower cost and yet still meet our national objectives and aspirations.
Just look at what Thailand did to its automotive industry, which is robust and competitive compared with ours. And we were ahead of Thailand at one time. Perwaja is another disaster that has to be salvaged.
Is the Formula One circuit financially viable and self-financing or still dependent upon the continuing injection of public money or Petronas money?
What did the country get substantively out of the Twin Towers apart from having the tallest building in the world, though not any more now? Was the Twin Towers fully occupied upon completion?
Did our construction industry or contractors gain any technological mileage in terms of expertise and skills when we engaged foreign labour for its construction?
I tried to list down his positive contributions to the country, especially to the ordinary citizens who may remember him in their hearts for a long time. We are not talking of the few hundred families or individuals who were direct beneficiaries of his 23-year administration through negotiated contracts, privatisation deals, business monopolies, exclusive supplies and services, but the millions of ordinary low-income and poor people in the rural and urban areas throughout the country.
Frankly, not much can be documented for their direct well-being and welfare, except the widening disparity of incomes among the major races and within a race and between urban and rural areas during his administration. The gap between the rich and poor is widening.
I only see more and more negatives than positives, as enumerated by P.C.A. Lee, like the thriving corruption, the erosion of public confidence in the judiciary, racial polarisation, wastage of public funds, substandard buildings, schools, roads implemented through direct negotiations and consequently abandoned, but later salvaged by the new administration at tremendous cost to the nation.
To add to the list of negatives is the declining respect for our laws because "you can do wrong things for the right reason". Or you can be spared of your wrongdoings before the law if you can tell the judges what to do. Anything is possible at the right price.
.However, we must be fair to Dr Mahathir. Let us hope as time goes on, more and more of his good deeds and not his misdeeds will be revealed. As the saying goes, elephants leave behind their tusks and the tigers their stripes when they die. Human beings leave behind their names.
Mahathir’s record: More negatives than positives
By : NORAMTAZ ABDULLAH, Petaling Jaya
The explosion in the number of awards for honorific titles among Malaysians happened during his premiership, so much so that cynical remarks were made by everyone that if someone throws a stone on the street or at any public function, the chances are that you would hit a Datuk, Datuk Seri or Tan Sri.
The scramble for such titles became paramount, as they provide tremendous mileage in terms of securing preferential treatment of sorts and access to the corridors of power, all which adds a new dimension to Malaysian culture and way of life
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is associated with many mega projects in the country
I REFER to P.C.A. Lee's letter on Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's record ("Good, bad or plain ugly?-- NST, June 18).
To me, the Petronas Twin Towers, the Sepang F1 Circuit, Kuala Lumpur International Airport and the tolled highways are not projects coming out of brilliant ideas or initiatives. These can only come from those who think and behave as if the country's resources are unlimited and that "money is no problem".
It was during his administration that another "brilliant" idea was mooted which thankfully did not materialise: to build a bridge linking Malaysia and Sumatra. Just imagine the consequence to the country's financial resources and the ballooning budget deficits had the project proceeded.
His yearning for mega projects was indeed insatiable, especially when these become synonymous with his name. He wanted to create his own history, especially for the young generation. After all, those who were born at the time Dr Mahathir became prime minister were adults when he retired.
This generation knows only him as prime minister and this is the memory he wants to perpetuate, even to the extent of dismantling parts of the historical past.
Remember Merdeka Stadium, which was on the verge of being demolished to make way for a commercial project? Had it not been for the public outcry, we would have lost this historical place where our first prime minister read the proclamation of our independence.
The availability of oil money and Petronas under his control had no doubt become the driving force behind his thirst for mega projects, including the heavy industry, as well as for bailing out public and private companies from the fallout of the 1997/1998 Asian financial crisis.
The national car project was developed at high social cost to the country and people, when it could have been done differently and at a lower cost and yet still meet our national objectives and aspirations.
Just look at what Thailand did to its automotive industry, which is robust and competitive compared with ours. And we were ahead of Thailand at one time. Perwaja is another disaster that has to be salvaged.
Is the Formula One circuit financially viable and self-financing or still dependent upon the continuing injection of public money or Petronas money?
What did the country get substantively out of the Twin Towers apart from having the tallest building in the world, though not any more now? Was the Twin Towers fully occupied upon completion?
Did our construction industry or contractors gain any technological mileage in terms of expertise and skills when we engaged foreign labour for its construction?
I tried to list down his positive contributions to the country, especially to the ordinary citizens who may remember him in their hearts for a long time. We are not talking of the few hundred families or individuals who were direct beneficiaries of his 23-year administration through negotiated contracts, privatisation deals, business monopolies, exclusive supplies and services, but the millions of ordinary low-income and poor people in the rural and urban areas throughout the country.
Frankly, not much can be documented for their direct well-being and welfare, except the widening disparity of incomes among the major races and within a race and between urban and rural areas during his administration. The gap between the rich and poor is widening.
I only see more and more negatives than positives, as enumerated by P.C.A. Lee, like the thriving corruption, the erosion of public confidence in the judiciary, racial polarisation, wastage of public funds, substandard buildings, schools, roads implemented through direct negotiations and consequently abandoned, but later salvaged by the new administration at tremendous cost to the nation.
To add to the list of negatives is the declining respect for our laws because "you can do wrong things for the right reason". Or you can be spared of your wrongdoings before the law if you can tell the judges what to do. Anything is possible at the right price.
.However, we must be fair to Dr Mahathir. Let us hope as time goes on, more and more of his good deeds and not his misdeeds will be revealed. As the saying goes, elephants leave behind their tusks and the tigers their stripes when they die. Human beings leave behind their names.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Let’s kick the addiction
Sunday June 8, 2008
Let’s kick the addiction
The Jakarta Post
JAKARTA: From our air-conditioned homes, we enter our air-conditioned cars and drive to our freezing offices just so we can wear suits and blazers in the tropics. It’s just like the now widely-condemned habit of smoking: we know it is not a very politically correct practice – but what to do? We’re addicted.
When Indonesians began acquiring more wealth, they bought a TV, refrigerator, then a car and an air-conditioner and another TV; when they became even richer, along came the bathtub. By the time many were aiming for a two-car family, the green activists were criticising the wasteful ways of their own countries. But they were just party-poopers with only a handful of converts here.
Now, all the buzz is about climate change, brought about, we’re told, by the demands we’ve created to live the most comfortable lifestyles possible. Just as billions of Chinese and Indians are catching up on this purpose for living, others warn of food and energy crises.
To halt the plunge into further environmental damage, World Environment Day centres around the campaign “Kick the Carbon Habit”.
As those who quit smoking know, this gets extremely hard before it gets extremely rewarding.
To leave the car at home and start using the train would require immense willpower even though motorists know they would save a fortune on gas – not to mention reduce their carbon footprint.
With today’s higher temperatures, longer droughts and other weird whims of nature, the average person the world over is now being forced to a new awareness – that there might be some truth in the slogans which say kicking our wasteful habits is needed not only to save the planet, but also to save ourselves.
Soaring fuel prices, however, may be the only factor capable of waking Indonesians up from the cheap fuel dream, in which we thought the fuel subsidy was our birthright.
We can blame our leaders in part for leading us this way.
Former industry and trade minister Hartarto Sastrosoenarto described on Monday in Kompas how former president Soeharto suggested that plans to follow in the steps of South Africa’s self-sufficient energy needs be put on hold, given a seemingly bottomless supply of fuel in the early 1980s.
This perception also justified the preference for cars rather than trains, through cheap parking fees and the building of more roads than railways.
But that was then. Now green campaigns are all around us and yet few are taking notice of the need to make that personal sacrifice to end a wasteful mindset, spread it to family and neighbours and push the habit change drive to the corporate and political levels.
It would be much faster and easier if all levels were involved at once. It is high time the state ministry for the environment was changed into a portfolio ministry, after years of complaints by successive ministers they have little effect when it comes to the implementation of state policies.
Much like the frustrated state minister for women’s empowerment who is supposed to mainstream gender equality across all government sectors, the environment minister has few resources to “mainstream” the efficient use of fossil fuels.
Indonesia hosted the historic international climate change conference late last year in Bali. It was hoped the country would not only be a good host, but also be inspired to change its ways.
While that may be wishful thinking, the green campaign in developed countries may slowly help tame our voracious cutting down of forests.
But apart from China’s insatiable appetite, there is another addiction which makes the environment watchers wonder how and whether we can stop the disappearance of even more forests by 2010.
The name of this addiction is corruption, blamed for continued illegal logging. This, then – waste and graft – is our legacy to our children. Unless we can somehow kick the habit.
Let’s kick the addiction
The Jakarta Post
JAKARTA: From our air-conditioned homes, we enter our air-conditioned cars and drive to our freezing offices just so we can wear suits and blazers in the tropics. It’s just like the now widely-condemned habit of smoking: we know it is not a very politically correct practice – but what to do? We’re addicted.
When Indonesians began acquiring more wealth, they bought a TV, refrigerator, then a car and an air-conditioner and another TV; when they became even richer, along came the bathtub. By the time many were aiming for a two-car family, the green activists were criticising the wasteful ways of their own countries. But they were just party-poopers with only a handful of converts here.
Now, all the buzz is about climate change, brought about, we’re told, by the demands we’ve created to live the most comfortable lifestyles possible. Just as billions of Chinese and Indians are catching up on this purpose for living, others warn of food and energy crises.
To halt the plunge into further environmental damage, World Environment Day centres around the campaign “Kick the Carbon Habit”.
As those who quit smoking know, this gets extremely hard before it gets extremely rewarding.
To leave the car at home and start using the train would require immense willpower even though motorists know they would save a fortune on gas – not to mention reduce their carbon footprint.
With today’s higher temperatures, longer droughts and other weird whims of nature, the average person the world over is now being forced to a new awareness – that there might be some truth in the slogans which say kicking our wasteful habits is needed not only to save the planet, but also to save ourselves.
Soaring fuel prices, however, may be the only factor capable of waking Indonesians up from the cheap fuel dream, in which we thought the fuel subsidy was our birthright.
We can blame our leaders in part for leading us this way.
Former industry and trade minister Hartarto Sastrosoenarto described on Monday in Kompas how former president Soeharto suggested that plans to follow in the steps of South Africa’s self-sufficient energy needs be put on hold, given a seemingly bottomless supply of fuel in the early 1980s.
This perception also justified the preference for cars rather than trains, through cheap parking fees and the building of more roads than railways.
But that was then. Now green campaigns are all around us and yet few are taking notice of the need to make that personal sacrifice to end a wasteful mindset, spread it to family and neighbours and push the habit change drive to the corporate and political levels.
It would be much faster and easier if all levels were involved at once. It is high time the state ministry for the environment was changed into a portfolio ministry, after years of complaints by successive ministers they have little effect when it comes to the implementation of state policies.
Much like the frustrated state minister for women’s empowerment who is supposed to mainstream gender equality across all government sectors, the environment minister has few resources to “mainstream” the efficient use of fossil fuels.
Indonesia hosted the historic international climate change conference late last year in Bali. It was hoped the country would not only be a good host, but also be inspired to change its ways.
While that may be wishful thinking, the green campaign in developed countries may slowly help tame our voracious cutting down of forests.
But apart from China’s insatiable appetite, there is another addiction which makes the environment watchers wonder how and whether we can stop the disappearance of even more forests by 2010.
The name of this addiction is corruption, blamed for continued illegal logging. This, then – waste and graft – is our legacy to our children. Unless we can somehow kick the habit.
Time to walk the talk and get public transportation moving
Sunday June 8, 2008
Time to walk the talk and get public transportation moving
By LEONG SHEN-LI
THE math is quite simple. With as little as RM7, you can travel almost anywhere on Klang Valley’s RapidKL’s buses and light rail transit for the whole day. With a monthly pass for RM135 – just a little more than a full tank of petrol for a Proton Wira – your month’s transport needs should be taken care of. The cost should be lower in other parts of the country.
But of course, the current state of our public transport obviously cannot take care of anyone’s needs satisfactorily.
Unreliable buses and trains, sardine-packed LRTs, delayed buses because of traffic jams, safety concerns and a host of other negative issues make public transport hardly desirable as an alternative to private cars.
Here are some crucial improvements needed before public transport can become a true option for people.
1. More trains and buses
It is as basic as this! Not only will service become more reliable, more trains and buses will make public transport less packed and more attractive.
No one, especially women, will trade the comfort of a car for a situation where one is pressed all over by other humans in a train, even if it costs more.
Promises were made for more LRT vehicles and buses under the RapidKL and Rapid Penang regimes. How much longer do we have to wait?
2. Get the new lines going
The new Damansara-Cheras LRT line, as well as the Subang Jaya and Puchong extensions, were announced by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak in 2006. Till today, we have not heard about when work will start.
We do not even know where they will run. It is crucial to also think beyond these new lines.
Singapore already knows where its new Mass Rapid Transit lines will run in 2020.
3. Cash for maintenance
The KTM Komuter, after running for 13 years, is now suffering from years of “postponing” maintenance due to funding issues. The LRT system is about 10 years old now, which is about the right time for an overhaul.
RapidKL is also facing issues with keeping its buses on the road because of breakdowns. Other private companies can hardly afford regular maintenance, what more, overhauling. The Government must come to their aid.
Get the allocations disbursed quickly, get the tenders out without delay and pick the correct people to do the work. Remember, keeping enough buses on the road is not just about buying new buses. It is about keeping the existing ones in working condition.
4. Low fares through subsidies
Low fares are crucial, especially when we are putting the case for public transport in the context of rising living costs. Most people who rely on public transport cannot afford any other means of travel.
If there is a group of people who should benefit from subsidies, this should be the one. Subsidies can come from taxing private car users – either through road tax or road pricing. The World Bank says that private car users are generally “undercharged” for using urban roads and for their impact on the environment.
5. One or two companies enough
Competition in public transport is not about having many companies running the same route, it is about competing for the right to run on a particular route.
An operator is selected on the basis of being most able to satisfy the requirements of commuters and other parties (reliable service, safe buses, lowest subsidy) and once selected, it should enjoy a monopoly of the route.
The Government will have to regulate to ensure service is up to the mark. The benchmark should be the best-run route in the system.
6. One regulatory authority
It is a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth, as each cook has his own ideas and conflicting interests. Now, 13 government departments and agencies have a say in public transport.
There should just be one to plan the system, dish out the permits (to control the number of operators), organise the routes (to curb duplication) and ensure that the trains and buses run according to time.
It should also be the one dishing out subsidies. The single authority should have only one objective and no other – to ensure that the public gets good public transport.
7. Bus lanes and other facilities
Buses should have their own “track” so that they can be faster than private cars. That is the only way public transport can be more attractive than cars.
Modern bus lanes such as those in Curitiba, Brazil, and Jakarta – where they are virtually separate special roads just for buses – have made bus transport a success. And don’t worry if road users complain. The one lane taken away from them is making the movement of thousands of people more efficient. Bus lanes are also cheaper than train systems and can be just as efficient.
8. Ensure safety of passengers
It should be a basic right of commuters to be able to travel safely. An unsafe system will only turn people away.
9. Good customer information
There is no point in having hundreds of beautiful buses on the road without commuters knowing where they are going. Many rather drive than take buses because they are in control of their journey. The more people know how the system works, the more they will use the system.
10. Please walk the talk
All the above initiatives and problems have been recognised, considered and studied. Announcements are regularly made of moves to improve the system. Yet this comment still has to be written in such a tone. There may ultimately just be one paramount suggestion – don’t just talk, please get things moving!
Time to walk the talk and get public transportation moving
By LEONG SHEN-LI
THE math is quite simple. With as little as RM7, you can travel almost anywhere on Klang Valley’s RapidKL’s buses and light rail transit for the whole day. With a monthly pass for RM135 – just a little more than a full tank of petrol for a Proton Wira – your month’s transport needs should be taken care of. The cost should be lower in other parts of the country.
But of course, the current state of our public transport obviously cannot take care of anyone’s needs satisfactorily.
Unreliable buses and trains, sardine-packed LRTs, delayed buses because of traffic jams, safety concerns and a host of other negative issues make public transport hardly desirable as an alternative to private cars.
Here are some crucial improvements needed before public transport can become a true option for people.
1. More trains and buses
It is as basic as this! Not only will service become more reliable, more trains and buses will make public transport less packed and more attractive.
No one, especially women, will trade the comfort of a car for a situation where one is pressed all over by other humans in a train, even if it costs more.
Promises were made for more LRT vehicles and buses under the RapidKL and Rapid Penang regimes. How much longer do we have to wait?
2. Get the new lines going
The new Damansara-Cheras LRT line, as well as the Subang Jaya and Puchong extensions, were announced by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak in 2006. Till today, we have not heard about when work will start.
We do not even know where they will run. It is crucial to also think beyond these new lines.
Singapore already knows where its new Mass Rapid Transit lines will run in 2020.
3. Cash for maintenance
The KTM Komuter, after running for 13 years, is now suffering from years of “postponing” maintenance due to funding issues. The LRT system is about 10 years old now, which is about the right time for an overhaul.
RapidKL is also facing issues with keeping its buses on the road because of breakdowns. Other private companies can hardly afford regular maintenance, what more, overhauling. The Government must come to their aid.
Get the allocations disbursed quickly, get the tenders out without delay and pick the correct people to do the work. Remember, keeping enough buses on the road is not just about buying new buses. It is about keeping the existing ones in working condition.
4. Low fares through subsidies
Low fares are crucial, especially when we are putting the case for public transport in the context of rising living costs. Most people who rely on public transport cannot afford any other means of travel.
If there is a group of people who should benefit from subsidies, this should be the one. Subsidies can come from taxing private car users – either through road tax or road pricing. The World Bank says that private car users are generally “undercharged” for using urban roads and for their impact on the environment.
5. One or two companies enough
Competition in public transport is not about having many companies running the same route, it is about competing for the right to run on a particular route.
An operator is selected on the basis of being most able to satisfy the requirements of commuters and other parties (reliable service, safe buses, lowest subsidy) and once selected, it should enjoy a monopoly of the route.
The Government will have to regulate to ensure service is up to the mark. The benchmark should be the best-run route in the system.
6. One regulatory authority
It is a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth, as each cook has his own ideas and conflicting interests. Now, 13 government departments and agencies have a say in public transport.
There should just be one to plan the system, dish out the permits (to control the number of operators), organise the routes (to curb duplication) and ensure that the trains and buses run according to time.
It should also be the one dishing out subsidies. The single authority should have only one objective and no other – to ensure that the public gets good public transport.
7. Bus lanes and other facilities
Buses should have their own “track” so that they can be faster than private cars. That is the only way public transport can be more attractive than cars.
Modern bus lanes such as those in Curitiba, Brazil, and Jakarta – where they are virtually separate special roads just for buses – have made bus transport a success. And don’t worry if road users complain. The one lane taken away from them is making the movement of thousands of people more efficient. Bus lanes are also cheaper than train systems and can be just as efficient.
8. Ensure safety of passengers
It should be a basic right of commuters to be able to travel safely. An unsafe system will only turn people away.
9. Good customer information
There is no point in having hundreds of beautiful buses on the road without commuters knowing where they are going. Many rather drive than take buses because they are in control of their journey. The more people know how the system works, the more they will use the system.
10. Please walk the talk
All the above initiatives and problems have been recognised, considered and studied. Announcements are regularly made of moves to improve the system. Yet this comment still has to be written in such a tone. There may ultimately just be one paramount suggestion – don’t just talk, please get things moving!
Walk the talk
Mualaikummusalam Pn,
Yeah ,I was walking nak pi ambik Ashraf. I had to walk now coz my car dah kena jual kati. Its a relieve in a way as I don't have to think of car maintainance,arguing with mechanics and all.But ok lah walking in Putrajaya is not that bad after all,tak derita la. I guess blessing in disguise,with the fuel hike,global warming and all. You know now some friends too dah mula jalan kaki ke masjid dan tempat lain. Banyak orang kita segan sebab pikiran nak senang saja,tapi kalau kita pikir pasal environment ,always ask yourself what have you contribute to the environment?,even for a second,try to achieve to that contribution! Pn tak boleh lagi. You need at least 6th month to a year before you 're really ok. But public transport must be efficient. The other day the bus did't come after 45mins wait, I had to walk really fast to catch my appointment at P8,berpeloh juga. Taxi is convenient too in Putrajaya just hope they don't increase the fare saja. Monorail must come fast here as its a good public transport as my experienced in Sweden 25 yrs ago. My friend kerja Pos office kat sana pun dah millionaire after his retirement,all the time using public transport. Yang tu I kata all politician kat sini must go on public transport for a week to experience it for themselves,baru diaorang tau what the public needs.
Jumpa kat meeting nanti
Wassalam
Borhann
> Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 13:02:02 +0800
> From: fish2010@gmail.com
> To: borhann55@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: Feelings......oh...ohh my feelings
>
> Assalamualaikum En Borhann,
>
> I saw you walking yesterday afternoon. You were walking towards the
> stairs leading to the apartments and I was in my car, stopping at the
> traffic lights. I was thinking about the school (of course) and the
> steps we have to take to adjust to the petrol price hike. You were
> walking forlornly and I was thinking that soon many more M'sians would
> have to walk. I know that you choose to walk and you like walking.
> But not all of us can walk - OKUs who depend on their vehicles for
> instance. Since the operation, I am a semi OKU - mobile on my feet
> but definitely can't walk very far or cycle. Macamana nak jimat?
> I read Dr M's comment on the petrol price hike in his blog, it is very
> interesting. The comments that followed his comment are doubly
> interesting. But one thing for sure - There are many angry Malaysians.
>
> Regards,
> Nafishah
>
Yeah ,I was walking nak pi ambik Ashraf. I had to walk now coz my car dah kena jual kati. Its a relieve in a way as I don't have to think of car maintainance,arguing with mechanics and all.But ok lah walking in Putrajaya is not that bad after all,tak derita la. I guess blessing in disguise,with the fuel hike,global warming and all. You know now some friends too dah mula jalan kaki ke masjid dan tempat lain. Banyak orang kita segan sebab pikiran nak senang saja,tapi kalau kita pikir pasal environment ,always ask yourself what have you contribute to the environment?,even for a second,try to achieve to that contribution! Pn tak boleh lagi. You need at least 6th month to a year before you 're really ok. But public transport must be efficient. The other day the bus did't come after 45mins wait, I had to walk really fast to catch my appointment at P8,berpeloh juga. Taxi is convenient too in Putrajaya just hope they don't increase the fare saja. Monorail must come fast here as its a good public transport as my experienced in Sweden 25 yrs ago. My friend kerja Pos office kat sana pun dah millionaire after his retirement,all the time using public transport. Yang tu I kata all politician kat sini must go on public transport for a week to experience it for themselves,baru diaorang tau what the public needs.
Jumpa kat meeting nanti
Wassalam
Borhann
> Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 13:02:02 +0800
> From: fish2010@gmail.com
> To: borhann55@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: Feelings......oh...ohh my feelings
>
> Assalamualaikum En Borhann,
>
> I saw you walking yesterday afternoon. You were walking towards the
> stairs leading to the apartments and I was in my car, stopping at the
> traffic lights. I was thinking about the school (of course) and the
> steps we have to take to adjust to the petrol price hike. You were
> walking forlornly and I was thinking that soon many more M'sians would
> have to walk. I know that you choose to walk and you like walking.
> But not all of us can walk - OKUs who depend on their vehicles for
> instance. Since the operation, I am a semi OKU - mobile on my feet
> but definitely can't walk very far or cycle. Macamana nak jimat?
> I read Dr M's comment on the petrol price hike in his blog, it is very
> interesting. The comments that followed his comment are doubly
> interesting. But one thing for sure - There are many angry Malaysians.
>
> Regards,
> Nafishah
>
Monday, June 2, 2008
Mukhriz claims certain Umno leaders 'block' entry of new members
Mukhriz claims certain Umno leaders 'block' entry of new members
Noor Hayati Muda, BERNAMA
KUALA LUMPUR, Mon:
As Umno members discuss the applications of three former Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) leaders to join the party, there are also those who allude to the difficulty of ordinary people becoming members.
They charge that Umno is an elite organisation that only allows a certain group to join it while other applications can take up to months if not years to be accepted.
Umno Youth executive council member, Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, said this was due to the existence of "blocking" elements among lower echelon leaders who worry that their standing will be affected with the inclusion of new members.
"There were many such instances. Don’t assume that by filling a form, paying a RM1 membership fee, you can be an Umno member. Applications that I myself sent through the Jitra (Kedah) division in 2000 took six months to be accepted,” Mukhriz told Bernama here.
He said normally the problem arises when the applicant is a young person who is successful either in business or in education.
"Recently, when I was in Malacca, some people told me they only got accepted before the general election although they had applied six years ago,” said the Jerlun member of parliament.
Elaborating, Mukhriz said as a matter of policy, to join Umno a person had only to fill a form, pay RM1 membership fee and get the endorsement of the branch leadership.
"There should not be elements of bureaucracy as Umno is an open party for all Malays and the issue of difficulty of obtaining membership should not arise,” he said.
There are some, he said, who join the opposition parties after being frustrated of not getting their membership in Umno which they label as ’elitist’.
"As far as I know, joining opposition parties is very easy, some do it online. Not many whims. Umno should also be like that,” he said.
Umno Cheras division chief, Senator Datuk Syed Ali Alhabshee, admits hearing such complaints.
"I have heard of application forms being stuck at certain branches. I don’t know why,” he said.
He did not reject the possibility there were leaders who were worried that their positions would be adversely affected by new members and said the matter should be addressed as it especially blocked the entry of young new members.
"What is there to fear? If a leader discharges his duties and reposnsibilities sincerely there is no reason to worry about people wanting to join Umno,” he said.
However, he said, if there were former opposition party members, especially former Umno members, who wanted to re-join Umno they have to go through a different process.
"They should be called for an interview by the party’s management committee and questioned about their intention to re-join Umno. We do not want them to become thorns in the flesh,” he said.
He was referring to the applications of former PKR Youth chief, Mohamad Ezam Mohd Nor, and former Permatang Pauh PKR division chief, Anuar Shaari, both of whom had left Umno to join an opposition party.
Syed Ali said if both these leaders were accepted easily by the Umno leadership, there would be dissatisfaction among members who had been loyal to the party. — BERNAMA
Noor Hayati Muda, BERNAMA
KUALA LUMPUR, Mon:
As Umno members discuss the applications of three former Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) leaders to join the party, there are also those who allude to the difficulty of ordinary people becoming members.
They charge that Umno is an elite organisation that only allows a certain group to join it while other applications can take up to months if not years to be accepted.
Umno Youth executive council member, Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, said this was due to the existence of "blocking" elements among lower echelon leaders who worry that their standing will be affected with the inclusion of new members.
"There were many such instances. Don’t assume that by filling a form, paying a RM1 membership fee, you can be an Umno member. Applications that I myself sent through the Jitra (Kedah) division in 2000 took six months to be accepted,” Mukhriz told Bernama here.
He said normally the problem arises when the applicant is a young person who is successful either in business or in education.
"Recently, when I was in Malacca, some people told me they only got accepted before the general election although they had applied six years ago,” said the Jerlun member of parliament.
Elaborating, Mukhriz said as a matter of policy, to join Umno a person had only to fill a form, pay RM1 membership fee and get the endorsement of the branch leadership.
"There should not be elements of bureaucracy as Umno is an open party for all Malays and the issue of difficulty of obtaining membership should not arise,” he said.
There are some, he said, who join the opposition parties after being frustrated of not getting their membership in Umno which they label as ’elitist’.
"As far as I know, joining opposition parties is very easy, some do it online. Not many whims. Umno should also be like that,” he said.
Umno Cheras division chief, Senator Datuk Syed Ali Alhabshee, admits hearing such complaints.
"I have heard of application forms being stuck at certain branches. I don’t know why,” he said.
He did not reject the possibility there were leaders who were worried that their positions would be adversely affected by new members and said the matter should be addressed as it especially blocked the entry of young new members.
"What is there to fear? If a leader discharges his duties and reposnsibilities sincerely there is no reason to worry about people wanting to join Umno,” he said.
However, he said, if there were former opposition party members, especially former Umno members, who wanted to re-join Umno they have to go through a different process.
"They should be called for an interview by the party’s management committee and questioned about their intention to re-join Umno. We do not want them to become thorns in the flesh,” he said.
He was referring to the applications of former PKR Youth chief, Mohamad Ezam Mohd Nor, and former Permatang Pauh PKR division chief, Anuar Shaari, both of whom had left Umno to join an opposition party.
Syed Ali said if both these leaders were accepted easily by the Umno leadership, there would be dissatisfaction among members who had been loyal to the party. — BERNAMA
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Penganiayaan GLC's terhadap SME's Melayu
Penganiayaan GLC's terhadap SME's Melayu
Dilulus terbit pada Wednesday, May 14 @ 14:09:37 MYT oleh SongkokPutih
Oleh mose
"
Adakah benar Dasar Ekonomi Baru membantu Melayu. Dasar yang dicanangkan oleh Kerajaan sekian lama sememangnya benar membawa perubahan kepada orang Melayu. Akan tetapi mereka yang menikmati dasar ini adalah dikalangan tokoh Korporat-korporat Melayu yang mempunyai kepentingan politik dan proksi dikalangan pemimpin negara. Apa pula yang telah terjadi kepada pengusaha-pengusaha dan usahawan-usahawan Melayu yang digelar SME / IKS?
Dibawah Kementerian Pembangunan Usahawan dan Koperasi berbagai skim latihan diperkenalkan untuk melatih usahawan Melayu dan bumiputra. Mungkin kementerian berjaya melahirkan banyak usahawan dari program yang telah dibuat.
Akan tetapi apakah langkah kementerian selama ini untuk membantu usahawan yang dibentuk oleh mereka hasil latihan program mereka sendiri. Ini belum melibatkan syarikat-syarikat SME yang beroperasi tanpa bantuan atau didikan kementerian. Kita boleh lihat mengapa kebanyakkan syarikat SME telah gulung tikar selepas 2 – 5 tahun mereka beroperasi. Kementerian tidak langsung membantu mereka dalam mengembangkan perniagaan mereka. Selama ini pihak kementerian hanya memerhati sahaja syarikat Melayu rebah menyembah bumi. Kita akan lihat apa pula akan berlaku dibawah kepemimpinan menteri yang baru.
Permasalahan yang ingin saya timbulkan disini kenapa sering sahaja syarikat SME's yang ada seperti 'Hidup Segan Mati Tak Mahu'. Berbagai usaha telah dilakukan oleh mereka untuk menyelamatkan syarikat masing-masing. Ada yang mengadu kepada Dewan Perniagaan Melayu Malaysia (DPMM), SME Bank dan terbaru sejak setahun dua ini ialah GABEM. Apakah tindakan mereka dalam membantu syarikat-syarikat SME's ini.
Seperti DPMM, mereka hanya tahu bercakap sahaja, habuk pun tak ada. Pemimpin atasan seakan kehilangan punca dan idea untuk menyelesaikan masalah atau sekurang-kurangnya membantu SME's dalam perniagaan mereka. Mungkinkah pucuk pimpinan DPMM tidak berkaliber atau tidak langsung mempunyai kekuatan atau pengaruh terhadap kerajaan. Mungkinkah suara DPMM tidak sekuat mana? Jika benar DPMM kuat sudah tentu kita tidak memerlukan GABEM yang hanya 1 - 2 tahun baru beroperasi. Sedangkan DPMM sudah sekian lama mewakili syarikat Melayu. Betulkah DPMM lemah?
Mungkin juga faktor dalaman DPMM yang lemah dibantu pula oleh pegawai-pegawai atasan kerajaan yang langsung tidak ingin membantu pihak Dewan juga. Pegawai-pegawai ini semuanya Melayu, tetapi apa yang telah mereka buat? Kebanyakkan pegawai-pegawai yang ada cukup mahir mengenakan TOL. Dari maklumat yang saya terima, sekiranya ingin membuat temujanji dengan menteri pun terpaksa membayar sekian TOL. Inikah sifat Melayu yang ingin membantu Melayu. Dahulu setiap menteri mempunyai sekurang-kurangnya 3 setiausaha. Bayangkan jika setiap setiausaha mengenakan tol hanya untuk membuat temujanji. Urusan belum lagi dibuat tetapi bayaran sudah dikenakan. Ini belum lagi syarikat-syarikat ini mendapat kontrak dari bantuan mereka. Kalau dah dapat kontrak pun belum tentu syarikat-syarikat SME's ini berjaya. Hasil titik peluh mereka terpaksa di dahulukan kepada pegawai-pegawai yang terlibat dalam kerja mendapatkan kontrak itu tadi. Sama macam tak yah bantu?
Petronas, PROTON, TNB, dan banyak lagi GLC's dibawah kerajaan. Adakah benar mereka membantu SME's. Banyak sekali kes-kes penganiayaan yang telah dilakukan GLC's terhadap syarikat Melayu SME's. Sebagai contoh ada beberapa syarikat yang telah sekian lama menjalankan jalinan urusniaga dengan GLC's diberhentikan kontrak mereka. Adakah ini adil bagi SME's. GLC's langsung tidak fikirkan kerugian yang bakal dihadapi oleh SME's jika kontrak diberhentikan. Mana hendak bayar 'leasing' mesin-mesin, mengekalkan pekerja-pekerja yang kebanyakkan Melayu dan bermacam-macam permasalahan lagi. Bila mengadu kepada SME Bank untuk bantuan kewangan berbagai prosedur-prosedur yang dikenakan seakan langsung tidak membantu. Segala tekanan diletakkan keatas bahu-bahu SME's ini. Kadang-kadang komuniti bank juga pandai mengenakan TOL. Entahlah apa dah nak jadi dengan Melayu? Rasuah di sana dan rasuah di sini.
Kontrak-kontrak telah diberhentikan. Adakah SME's akan diberikan projek gantian bagi mengelakkan kerugian mereka. Tanpa pampasan atau kerja-kerja gantian SME's di biarkan Gantung Tidak Bertali. Banyak sudah pengaduan dibuat kepada agensi-agensi dan Jabatan Kerajaan yang berkaitan tetapi tiada langsung tindakan diambil. Mereka hanya tau 'Memekakkan Telinga dan Membutakan Mata' sahaja. Kekadang permasalahan ini ada yang sampai kepada pengetahuan pemimpin tertinggi tetapi masih juga tidak ada tindakan yang diambil. Menteri-menteri yang terlibat langsung tidak prihatin.
Ada kes-kes dikalangan SME's yang telah berjaya berjumpa PM dan mendapat minit sokongan daripada PM pun masih tidak berjalan. Penekanan ini terutama kepada Kementerian Kewangan. Tidak ada langsung 'follow-up' daripada pihak MKII dalam membantu SME's Melayu ini. Adakah beliau hilang rasa hormat kepada PM atau kerana beliau sendiri bukannya Melayu. Ini mungkin membuat beliau rasa berat hati untuk membantu Melayu. Anda jawablah sendiri. Segala minit yang dicatatkan oleh PM sebelum ini tidak di layan sewajarnya. Mana PM nak letak muka jika hal ini diketahui oleh rakyat. Sekiranya berasaskan Islam tidak timbul lagi samada kamu Melayu ataupun Mamak.
Kebanyakkan SME's yang ada semuanya berkebolehan dalam bidang masing-masing. Ada diantara mereka terpaksa mencari pasaran luar bagi memulihkan syarikat dan juga terus berada dalam pasaran. Kedangkalan GLC's kita boleh lihat dalam senario yang ingin saya nyatakan disini. SME's yang ada telah berjaya memasarkan produk masing-masing sehingga keluar negara. Produk-produk ini juga mendapat pengiktirafan yang sewajarnya daripada badan-badan berwajib samada luar dan dalam negara. Oleh sebab karenah birokrasi dan menjaga proksi-proksi masing-masing. Syarikat SME's yang sememangnya berkeupayaan atau lebih pakar dalam bidang itu tidak diberi peluang langsung menyertai kerja-kerja yang ditawarkan oleh GLC's. Mereka sanggup memilih syarikat '2 ringgit' berbanding segala pengalaman dan keupayaan kilang-kilang pengusaha SME's.
Ada juga kes-kes seperti contoh TNB yang sanggup memberi kontrak pembekalan dan perkhidmatan kepada syarikat luar negara sedangkan SME's yang ada berupaya mengeluarkan produk yang setanding dari luar negara. Bahkan syarikat dan pengguna dari luar negara juga menggunakan produk dari syarikat tempatan. Bukan Melayu tidak boleh, Melayu sudah berada dimana-mana di atas dunia ini, dan mereka berjaya. Orang Putih atau Mat Salleh itu bukanlah bijak sangat pun, mereka sebenarnya bodoh. Tetapi Mat Salleh yang bodoh ini boleh mendapatkan urusniaga berjuta-juta ringgit di negara kita. Mengapa? SME's langsung ditolak ketepi. Zalim, sungguh zalim.
Perangai kita orang Melayu suka mengagung-agungkan orang luar. Sikap kerajaan yang tidak mempunyai komitmen dan inisiatif untuk melihat sendiri kebolehan dan kepakaran anak tempatan terutama Melayu. Melayu yang bernasib baik yang dipandang oleh kerajaan pastinya untuk kepentingan politik..
Adakah ini yang dikatakan membantu Melayu. Malu sungguh malu. Dewan Perniagaan Cina atau Persatuan-persatuan Peniaga Cina dimana-manapun berupaya membantu peniaga dikalangan mereka. Tanpa bantuan kerajaan sedikit pun, mereka mengorak langkah dan memperbesarkan perusahaan masing-masing. Sikap tolong menolong dan bantu membantu dikalangan mereka cukup kuat. Kita bagaimana pula?
Kera di hutan disusukan, anak sendiri mati kelaparan. Betullah kata pepatah tadi, sesuai sangat ditujukan pada GLC's dan kerajaan amnya. Perdana Menteri hanya dijadikan boneka oleh penyokong-penyokong setianya. Melayu menjadi peminta sedekah di tanahair sendiri, ini memang benar berlaku. Lihatlah apa terjadi kepada peniaga-peniaga Melayu di Suria, KLCC sebagai contoh. Siapakah penjajah yang menguasai pengurusan Suria KLCC?
Sudah banyak kali kita mendengar cerita kerajaan terpaksa membiayai sepenuhnya dan menanggung kerugian GLC's. Bantuan daripada kerajaan (wang rakyat) bagi menyelamatkan syarikat GLC's untuk meneruskan urus tadbir syarikat. Tetapi pentadbiran yang ada hanya pandai menghabiskan duit tanpa membuat sebarang keuntungan kepada kerajaan. Yang kenyang hanyalah CEO mereka yang bergaji puluhan ribu ringgit sebulan. Itulah yang telah berlaku kepada Proton Holding, SYABAS, TNB, MAS dan lain-lain.
Israel satu bangsa yang dilaknat oleh Allah S.W.T. Kezaliman Israel tak usahlah nak kita panjangkan. Sejahat-jahat Israel mereka tidak menganiayai bangsa mereka sendiri. Kita Melayu, yang mempunyai tanahair sendiri ditindas dan dibunuh secara diam oleh Melayu yang telah lupa asal usul mereka. Yang lemah terus ditindas. Haram bagi mereka yang menjalankan urusan secara ikhlas, amanah dan jujur. Terlalu gilakan wang ringgit, tamak haloba dan kuasa menyebabkan bangsa sendiri terpinggir.. Apakah tindakan kerajaan seterusnya? Berubahkah nasib SME's sekiranya kerajaan bertukar? Kita nantikan bersama.
"
Dilulus terbit pada Wednesday, May 14 @ 14:09:37 MYT oleh SongkokPutih
Oleh mose
"
Adakah benar Dasar Ekonomi Baru membantu Melayu. Dasar yang dicanangkan oleh Kerajaan sekian lama sememangnya benar membawa perubahan kepada orang Melayu. Akan tetapi mereka yang menikmati dasar ini adalah dikalangan tokoh Korporat-korporat Melayu yang mempunyai kepentingan politik dan proksi dikalangan pemimpin negara. Apa pula yang telah terjadi kepada pengusaha-pengusaha dan usahawan-usahawan Melayu yang digelar SME / IKS?
Dibawah Kementerian Pembangunan Usahawan dan Koperasi berbagai skim latihan diperkenalkan untuk melatih usahawan Melayu dan bumiputra. Mungkin kementerian berjaya melahirkan banyak usahawan dari program yang telah dibuat.
Akan tetapi apakah langkah kementerian selama ini untuk membantu usahawan yang dibentuk oleh mereka hasil latihan program mereka sendiri. Ini belum melibatkan syarikat-syarikat SME yang beroperasi tanpa bantuan atau didikan kementerian. Kita boleh lihat mengapa kebanyakkan syarikat SME telah gulung tikar selepas 2 – 5 tahun mereka beroperasi. Kementerian tidak langsung membantu mereka dalam mengembangkan perniagaan mereka. Selama ini pihak kementerian hanya memerhati sahaja syarikat Melayu rebah menyembah bumi. Kita akan lihat apa pula akan berlaku dibawah kepemimpinan menteri yang baru.
Permasalahan yang ingin saya timbulkan disini kenapa sering sahaja syarikat SME's yang ada seperti 'Hidup Segan Mati Tak Mahu'. Berbagai usaha telah dilakukan oleh mereka untuk menyelamatkan syarikat masing-masing. Ada yang mengadu kepada Dewan Perniagaan Melayu Malaysia (DPMM), SME Bank dan terbaru sejak setahun dua ini ialah GABEM. Apakah tindakan mereka dalam membantu syarikat-syarikat SME's ini.
Seperti DPMM, mereka hanya tahu bercakap sahaja, habuk pun tak ada. Pemimpin atasan seakan kehilangan punca dan idea untuk menyelesaikan masalah atau sekurang-kurangnya membantu SME's dalam perniagaan mereka. Mungkinkah pucuk pimpinan DPMM tidak berkaliber atau tidak langsung mempunyai kekuatan atau pengaruh terhadap kerajaan. Mungkinkah suara DPMM tidak sekuat mana? Jika benar DPMM kuat sudah tentu kita tidak memerlukan GABEM yang hanya 1 - 2 tahun baru beroperasi. Sedangkan DPMM sudah sekian lama mewakili syarikat Melayu. Betulkah DPMM lemah?
Mungkin juga faktor dalaman DPMM yang lemah dibantu pula oleh pegawai-pegawai atasan kerajaan yang langsung tidak ingin membantu pihak Dewan juga. Pegawai-pegawai ini semuanya Melayu, tetapi apa yang telah mereka buat? Kebanyakkan pegawai-pegawai yang ada cukup mahir mengenakan TOL. Dari maklumat yang saya terima, sekiranya ingin membuat temujanji dengan menteri pun terpaksa membayar sekian TOL. Inikah sifat Melayu yang ingin membantu Melayu. Dahulu setiap menteri mempunyai sekurang-kurangnya 3 setiausaha. Bayangkan jika setiap setiausaha mengenakan tol hanya untuk membuat temujanji. Urusan belum lagi dibuat tetapi bayaran sudah dikenakan. Ini belum lagi syarikat-syarikat ini mendapat kontrak dari bantuan mereka. Kalau dah dapat kontrak pun belum tentu syarikat-syarikat SME's ini berjaya. Hasil titik peluh mereka terpaksa di dahulukan kepada pegawai-pegawai yang terlibat dalam kerja mendapatkan kontrak itu tadi. Sama macam tak yah bantu?
Petronas, PROTON, TNB, dan banyak lagi GLC's dibawah kerajaan. Adakah benar mereka membantu SME's. Banyak sekali kes-kes penganiayaan yang telah dilakukan GLC's terhadap syarikat Melayu SME's. Sebagai contoh ada beberapa syarikat yang telah sekian lama menjalankan jalinan urusniaga dengan GLC's diberhentikan kontrak mereka. Adakah ini adil bagi SME's. GLC's langsung tidak fikirkan kerugian yang bakal dihadapi oleh SME's jika kontrak diberhentikan. Mana hendak bayar 'leasing' mesin-mesin, mengekalkan pekerja-pekerja yang kebanyakkan Melayu dan bermacam-macam permasalahan lagi. Bila mengadu kepada SME Bank untuk bantuan kewangan berbagai prosedur-prosedur yang dikenakan seakan langsung tidak membantu. Segala tekanan diletakkan keatas bahu-bahu SME's ini. Kadang-kadang komuniti bank juga pandai mengenakan TOL. Entahlah apa dah nak jadi dengan Melayu? Rasuah di sana dan rasuah di sini.
Kontrak-kontrak telah diberhentikan. Adakah SME's akan diberikan projek gantian bagi mengelakkan kerugian mereka. Tanpa pampasan atau kerja-kerja gantian SME's di biarkan Gantung Tidak Bertali. Banyak sudah pengaduan dibuat kepada agensi-agensi dan Jabatan Kerajaan yang berkaitan tetapi tiada langsung tindakan diambil. Mereka hanya tau 'Memekakkan Telinga dan Membutakan Mata' sahaja. Kekadang permasalahan ini ada yang sampai kepada pengetahuan pemimpin tertinggi tetapi masih juga tidak ada tindakan yang diambil. Menteri-menteri yang terlibat langsung tidak prihatin.
Ada kes-kes dikalangan SME's yang telah berjaya berjumpa PM dan mendapat minit sokongan daripada PM pun masih tidak berjalan. Penekanan ini terutama kepada Kementerian Kewangan. Tidak ada langsung 'follow-up' daripada pihak MKII dalam membantu SME's Melayu ini. Adakah beliau hilang rasa hormat kepada PM atau kerana beliau sendiri bukannya Melayu. Ini mungkin membuat beliau rasa berat hati untuk membantu Melayu. Anda jawablah sendiri. Segala minit yang dicatatkan oleh PM sebelum ini tidak di layan sewajarnya. Mana PM nak letak muka jika hal ini diketahui oleh rakyat. Sekiranya berasaskan Islam tidak timbul lagi samada kamu Melayu ataupun Mamak.
Kebanyakkan SME's yang ada semuanya berkebolehan dalam bidang masing-masing. Ada diantara mereka terpaksa mencari pasaran luar bagi memulihkan syarikat dan juga terus berada dalam pasaran. Kedangkalan GLC's kita boleh lihat dalam senario yang ingin saya nyatakan disini. SME's yang ada telah berjaya memasarkan produk masing-masing sehingga keluar negara. Produk-produk ini juga mendapat pengiktirafan yang sewajarnya daripada badan-badan berwajib samada luar dan dalam negara. Oleh sebab karenah birokrasi dan menjaga proksi-proksi masing-masing. Syarikat SME's yang sememangnya berkeupayaan atau lebih pakar dalam bidang itu tidak diberi peluang langsung menyertai kerja-kerja yang ditawarkan oleh GLC's. Mereka sanggup memilih syarikat '2 ringgit' berbanding segala pengalaman dan keupayaan kilang-kilang pengusaha SME's.
Ada juga kes-kes seperti contoh TNB yang sanggup memberi kontrak pembekalan dan perkhidmatan kepada syarikat luar negara sedangkan SME's yang ada berupaya mengeluarkan produk yang setanding dari luar negara. Bahkan syarikat dan pengguna dari luar negara juga menggunakan produk dari syarikat tempatan. Bukan Melayu tidak boleh, Melayu sudah berada dimana-mana di atas dunia ini, dan mereka berjaya. Orang Putih atau Mat Salleh itu bukanlah bijak sangat pun, mereka sebenarnya bodoh. Tetapi Mat Salleh yang bodoh ini boleh mendapatkan urusniaga berjuta-juta ringgit di negara kita. Mengapa? SME's langsung ditolak ketepi. Zalim, sungguh zalim.
Perangai kita orang Melayu suka mengagung-agungkan orang luar. Sikap kerajaan yang tidak mempunyai komitmen dan inisiatif untuk melihat sendiri kebolehan dan kepakaran anak tempatan terutama Melayu. Melayu yang bernasib baik yang dipandang oleh kerajaan pastinya untuk kepentingan politik..
Adakah ini yang dikatakan membantu Melayu. Malu sungguh malu. Dewan Perniagaan Cina atau Persatuan-persatuan Peniaga Cina dimana-manapun berupaya membantu peniaga dikalangan mereka. Tanpa bantuan kerajaan sedikit pun, mereka mengorak langkah dan memperbesarkan perusahaan masing-masing. Sikap tolong menolong dan bantu membantu dikalangan mereka cukup kuat. Kita bagaimana pula?
Kera di hutan disusukan, anak sendiri mati kelaparan. Betullah kata pepatah tadi, sesuai sangat ditujukan pada GLC's dan kerajaan amnya. Perdana Menteri hanya dijadikan boneka oleh penyokong-penyokong setianya. Melayu menjadi peminta sedekah di tanahair sendiri, ini memang benar berlaku. Lihatlah apa terjadi kepada peniaga-peniaga Melayu di Suria, KLCC sebagai contoh. Siapakah penjajah yang menguasai pengurusan Suria KLCC?
Sudah banyak kali kita mendengar cerita kerajaan terpaksa membiayai sepenuhnya dan menanggung kerugian GLC's. Bantuan daripada kerajaan (wang rakyat) bagi menyelamatkan syarikat GLC's untuk meneruskan urus tadbir syarikat. Tetapi pentadbiran yang ada hanya pandai menghabiskan duit tanpa membuat sebarang keuntungan kepada kerajaan. Yang kenyang hanyalah CEO mereka yang bergaji puluhan ribu ringgit sebulan. Itulah yang telah berlaku kepada Proton Holding, SYABAS, TNB, MAS dan lain-lain.
Israel satu bangsa yang dilaknat oleh Allah S.W.T. Kezaliman Israel tak usahlah nak kita panjangkan. Sejahat-jahat Israel mereka tidak menganiayai bangsa mereka sendiri. Kita Melayu, yang mempunyai tanahair sendiri ditindas dan dibunuh secara diam oleh Melayu yang telah lupa asal usul mereka. Yang lemah terus ditindas. Haram bagi mereka yang menjalankan urusan secara ikhlas, amanah dan jujur. Terlalu gilakan wang ringgit, tamak haloba dan kuasa menyebabkan bangsa sendiri terpinggir.. Apakah tindakan kerajaan seterusnya? Berubahkah nasib SME's sekiranya kerajaan bertukar? Kita nantikan bersama.
"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
