Speech by Penang Opposition Leader, DAP and Assemblyman for Padang Kota, Lim Kit Siang State Assembly on the 1992 Supplementary on Thursday, July 1, 1993 at 3 p.m.
Tsu Koon’s announcement that the Penang State Government would not mind if accusations about abuses of power and corruption are made against it most shocking
Firstly, I wish to express my shock at the statement by the Chief Minister, Dr.Koh Tsu Koon this morning during an exchange in his reply on the debate on the Yang Di Pertua Negeri’s speech that the Penang State Government would not mind if accusations are made against it about abuses of power and corruption.
The Penang Barisan Nasional State Government must be the only Barisan Nasional Government to have this new policy, as other Barisan Nasional State Governments or the Federal Government has never adopted such a policy.
Tsu Koon made this stand just to defend the Deputy Chief Minister, Dr.Ibrahim Saad, who had been accused in the book by Yahaya Ismail, Anwar Ibrahim-Antara Nawaitu and Pesta Boria of being a 10 per cent Executive Councillor and various abuses of power and support his refusal to take action to clear his name.
Instead answering the accusations either by establishing a Committee of Inquiry to clear his name ot take legal action against the writer, Dr.Koh Tsu Koon had adopted the ridiculous stand that the State Government would not mind if accusations of abuses of power and corruption are made against it.
This is most pathetic and why Tsu Koon tried to make ‘a mountain out of a molehill’ this morning, when I said that I had not read the book by Yahaya Ismail.
This issue is not whether I had read the book by Yahaya Ismail, but the two pages containing allegations against Dr.Ibrahim Saad- which was read out in the Assembly by the DAP Assemblyman for Bagan Jermal, Phee Boon Boh during the debate, and what action Dr.Ibrahim Saad would take to clear his own name and what action Dr.Koh Tsu Koon would take as the good name of the Penang State Government has also been implicated.
1992 Supplementary Supply Bill most improper as it is not presented to State Assembly in accordance with the Standing Orders and parliamentary requirements
The 1992 Supplementary Supply Bill moved by the Penang Chief Minister, Dr.Koh Tsu Koon, is most improper as it is not presented to State Assembly in accordance with the Standing Orders and parliamentary requirements.
A Supplementary Supply Bill must be accompanied by a supplementary estimates giving particulars for the additional votes which the Government is requesting from the State Assembly, and such supplementary estimates should show four items:
(i)the total sums already authorized under that head;
(ii)the additional expenditure required under any sub-head;
(iii)the amounts of any savings from other sub-heads under the same head which can be applied to reduce the supplementary appropriations required to meet such additional expenditure;
(iv)the amount of the supplementary appropriation requested for the head.
These four items which should be separately shown in the supplementary estimates are clearly spelt out in the Parliamentary Standing Orders 67(1)-and as stated in our State Assembly Standing Order 117, the Dewan Rakyat Standing Orders should be the first reference for parliamentary practices.
The Chief Minister has presented a Supplementary Estimates to accompany the 1992 Supplementary Supply Bill, but the Supplementary Estimates only contain two of the four items required to be shown.
The first item, the total sums already authorised under that head, and the third item, the amounts of any savings from other sub-heads under the same head which can be applied to reduce the supplementary appropriations required to meet such additional expenditure, are missing.
These requirements are important for it serves as a check and reminder to the Government that it must be prudent in the management of public funds, requiring it to first think of whether there are ways to save from other sub-heads to meet any additional expenditure not budgetted originally.
This is why whenever the government presents a supplementary supply bill, it must satisfy the Assembly that it had exercised financial prudence and not been guilty of waste, negligence, irresponsibility, abuses of power and even corruption.
In the PAC Report on the Auditor-General’s Report on the Penang State 1998 Accounts, which was tabled in this House of 2nd June 1992, the PAC said:
“Jawatankuasa memandang berat tunggakan perumahan yang meningkat iaitu $6.9 juta pada penghujung tahun 1988 menjadi $7.4 juta pada tahun 1989 dan $8.5 juta pada akhir tahun 1990.”
However, the Auditor-General in his Report in the 1991 Penang State Accounts which was tabled in the State Assembly on June 23, has returned to the same subject as the low-cost housing rental arrears had reached a new peak. Thus the Auditor-General’s Report on the 1991 Accounts states:
“21.Tunggakan hasil sewabeli pada 31 Disember 1991 berjumlah RM9.12 juta. Sebanyak 467 daripada 2,059 penyewa di lima rancangan menpunyai tunggak antara RM3,000 hingga RM14,000. Walaupun pelbagai tindakan secara pentadbiran diambil ia tidak berkesan. Kerajaan Negeri patut mengambil tindakan lebih tegas termasuk tindakan undang-undang untuk memungut tunggakan tersebut.”
The RM9.2 million could be used to build 360 low-cost houses costing RM25,000 each, providing a roof for over a thousand people.
The Governor, when opening the State Assembly on June 12, also used this figure of RM9.2 million housing rental arrears.
The Penang Chief Minister, who is responsible for the drafting the Governor’s Address as it represent the policy statement of the State Government, had been most dishonest in using the figure of RM9.2 million as the arrears for housing rentals.
This is because this RM9.2 million is the figure from the Auditor-General’s Report on the 1991 Penang State Accounts, giving the position as at the end of 1991. What is the latest position of housing rental arrears as at the end of last year and in May or April 1993? From the rising curve of the housing rental arrears, from RM6.9 million in 1988 to RM7.4 million in 1989 to RM8.5 million in 1990 and RM9.2 million in 1991, it would have exceeded the RM10 million mark by the end of 1992 and by now could be in the region of RM11 million!
Dr.Koh Tsu Koon should explain why he has refused to give the latest figure of the low-cost housing rental arrears, which must have exceeded the RM10 million mark last year, and instead relied on an out-dated figure as at the end of 1991?
Is this because such a figure will spoil the image he is trying to build for himself as a young, dynamic and efficient Chief Minister? Is it also because he cannot pass the buck and put the blame on the previous Chief Minister, Tun Dr.Lim Chong Eu, for the low-cost housing rental arrears because its passing the RM10 million mark would have taken place after he had been Chief Minister for more than a year?
This does not match Tsu Koon’s claim that he is fully committed to public accountability and transparency.
Tsu Koon should make public the latest low-cost housing rental arrears, unless he is suggesting that the State Government is so inefficient that it does not have any later figures?
The Auditor-General’s Report on the 1991 Accounts does not give a very impressive picture of an efficient and competent administration under Dr.Koh Tsu Koon.
For instance, it said this about government’s low-cost housing projects:
“Surat Perjanjian.
22.Kesempurnaan surat perjanjian sewabeli penting bagi menjamin kepentingan Kerajaan dan penyewa. Sebanyak 1,114 daripada 2,059 surat perjanjian yang diperiksa bagi lima rancangan menunjukkan kedudukan seperti berikut:
*292 surat perjanjian sahaja sempruna iaitu ditandatangani oleh pihak Kerjaan Negeri dan penyewa;
*729 surat perjanjian ditandatangani oleh penyewa sahaja;
*93 surat perjanjian tidak ditandatangani oleh mana-mana pihak.”
Dr.Koh Tsu Koon’s State Government needs to take amore serious attitude in the whole question of low-cost housing, not only in collecting the rental arrears, but also in launching a massive low-cost housing plain in the state as housing is the greatest failure of the Barisan Nasional State Government in Penang.
Had Tsu koon hidden the huge quit rent arrears, which are three times bigger than the low-cost housing rental arrears, as he is not in full control of what is happening in the Penang State Government
The Auditor-general’s Report for the 1991 Accounts again returned to the perennial issue of tunggakan hasil cukai tanah, giving the arrears for the following years:
1989-RM26.06 million
1990-RM25.30 million
1991-RM25.98 million
These are huge sums of public monies and it must stand as a example of government inefficiency and incompetence. What exactly is the problem with the Land and District Offices that such colossal arrears of quit rent keep piling up every year-especially as sistem pungutan hasil tanah dikomputerkan pada tahun 1982!
Here we see another example of Dr.Koh Tsu Koon not being honest and transparent. As far as I can remember, in all the years I have been in the State Assembly during the period Dr.Lim Chong Eu was Chief Minister, a regular feature in the Yang di Pertua Negeri’s Address is the serious problem of the quit rent arrears which have impeded greater development expenditures in the state.
In the latest Yang di Pertua Negeri’s Address, however, there is no mention of the problem of wuit rent arrears although it is three times more serious than low-cost housing rental arrears.
Why? Is this again because Dr.Koh Tsu Koon does not want to spoil his carefully-groomed image as a efficient and dynamic Penang Chief Minister? Has Tsu Koon hidden the problem of the quit rent arrears which is even bigger than the low-cost housing rental arrears because he is not in control of what is happening in the Penang State Government?
One reason that is always given for the arrears is that here are not enough staff in the Land and District Offices. This is a completely unacceptable excuse, for it is the height of idiocy to forgo Rm25 million to Rm26 million a year because there were not enough staff. This is collecting revenue not spending money. The intelligent thing will be to increase more staff as the additional salaries needed will be more than recovered by the arrears to be collected.
How many staff are there in Penang in the Land and District Offices working on the quit rent-and how many more staff are needed so that all or nearly all the quit rent arrears could be collected. Another 100 staff? I don’t think such a big staff increase is needed, but even if there is an increase of 100 staff, costing say an additional emolument of Rm500,000 a year, it is fully justified if it could recover over RM 20 million of quit rent arrears every year!
Land Office has become more inefficient with greater quit rent arrears as a result of computerisation
Going through the PAS Report on the 1989 Accounts, another reason given for the huge quit rent arrears is the problem with the computer system-that it is ‘out of date’.
This is most ridiculous, for the whole idea of computerising the land office records is to rpoduce a more efficient system-but we have opposite effect, where the computerisation of the land office in Penang has created a more inefficient system leading to such colossal arrears in quit rent. Computerisation is to enable the staff to do away with manual records and to ‘go on-line’, but after 1- years, the Land Office Records have gone back to ‘manual’-operating both system, both computer and manual! This is indeed mind-boggling.
I was attracted by this comment by the PAS Chairman, Dato Mohd.Zain bin Haji Omar at a PAC meeting on 27th October 1992 on this issue, when he saidp.34_”Kalau dia out of date lagi, hendak suruh cepat macam mana hendak cepat. Itu pandangan sayalah, kecuali tukar semua sistem, untuk komputer pun, komputer tahun 1982, hari ini sudah berubah computer lain pula, komputer tahun 1992. Tahun 1992 dengan tahun 1982 dia tidak akan sama. Munkin sikit hari lagi tahun 1999 pun dia main lagi canggih lagi pula.”
This was of course missing the whole point, as it is not the computer system in the land office which is out-of-date, but because it was never up-to-date from the very first day it was installed in 1982. It is not the computer which is at fault, but the human element-for it is the computer programme, the soft-ware, which is the root cause of the trouble.
The computer can only produce what it is programmed to do, and as the Assemblyman for Bayan Lepas, Lim Chien Aunm another PAC member, rightly pointed out in the PAC meeting, if in the computer programme, what you key in, in computer language, ‘garbage in’ all you get is ‘garbage out’.
Kelemahan sistem berkomputer ialah, pertama, dari segi sistem maklumat programme yang direkabentok oleh USM dan telah dipraktikkan dalam tahun 1982 adalah sistem kutipan cukai sewa sahaja tetapi sistem hakmilik tidak ada. Sistem pendaftar hamilik masih lagi manual sedangkan antara hasil dan pendaftaran hakmilik ada pertalian.
Kedua, penyata penyesuaian tidak dimaksukkan dalam program berkomputer dan penyata penyesuaian adalan berkait rapat dengan kutipan hasil, sebab itulah merupakan angka-nagka yang sebenarnya. Jadi oleh sebaba tidak ada penyata penyesuaian secare berkomputer dan penyata penyesuaian manual tidak dibuat sejak tahun 1982 sehingga 1990, apabila penyata penyesuaian manual dimulakan kembali.
Utter failure of the State Computer Centre in the Chief Minister’s Office
This is not only a failure of the computerisation of the Land Office but a failure of the State Computer Centre in the Chief Minister’s office as well.
The Auditor-General’s Report into the 1989 Accounts had this following comment:
“21. Satu kajian kawalan persekitaran komputer yang telah dijalankan di Pusat Komputer Negeri pada awal tahun 1989 menunjukkan beberapa perkara seperti berikut:
*Jawatankuasa Pemandu
Kekerapan Jawatankuasa Pemandu bermesyuarat sejak penubuhanny pada tahun 1981 adalah kurang memuaskan. Walaupun pada mulany Jawatankuasa bermesyuarat 12 kali pada tahun 1981, kemudiannya ia hanya bermesyuarat dua kali pada tahun 1982, tiga kali pada tahun 1983 dan sekali pada tahun 1988. Sebagai satu jawatankuasa yang bertanggungjawab untuk menentukan dasar-dasar dan mengesan perkembangan dan pelaksanaan sistem komputer, adalah perlu bagi Tawatankuasa ini bermesyuarat dengan lebih kerap.”
This lackaidasical attitude of the Chief Minister’s office and in aprticular the Steering Committee in the State Computer Centre where after 1984 it had hardly bothered to meet although it had been entrusted with the responsibility of monitoring developments had ensuring the effectiveness of computer systems in the state is the greatest cause why the computerisation of the land office had resulted in, the LanD Office becoming more inefficient and even more quit rent arrears-and the retrograde development where the Land Office had now to go back to ‘manual’ to back up the computer system!
DAP proposes a 12-month amnesty to clear the quit rent arrears which is consistently exceeding RM25 million every year
Is there no way to break the back of the whole perennial problem of quit rent arrears? Is it beyond the imagination of the State Government to find a solution or are we condemned to live with such colossal quit rent arrears year-in and year-out?
I am attracted by a statement which the Ketua Penolong Pegawai Daerah, Seberang Perai Selatan, Tuan Haji Mat Tuselim bin Kasimon, made to the PAC on this issue. He said:
“… bagi pandangan saya, selepas kita mendengar segala perbincangan ini, masalah pungut hasil ini, saya rasa, akan berterusan, oleh kerana pada pandangan saya, pada ketika ini tumpuan prestasi daerah itulah dalam pembangunan, tidak dalam segi kutipan hasil, tidak seperti masa zaman dulu, Dato’ Pengerusi sendiri pun tahu, kalau zaman dulu tumpuannya kepada kutipan hasil, siapa yang kutip hasil yang banyak, daerah itu dikira daerah toplah, tetapi sekarang tidak, jadi sampai bilapun memanglah tunggakan itu akan berterusan.”
The solution is to again give the land and district offices incentives in collection of quit rent, in particular in clearing the quit rent arrears-even a commission system.
Tuan Haji Mat Tuselim raised another point about the problem of arrears of quit rent-bukan yang bertunggak itu tidak mahu bayar, tetapi kerana sistem denda lewat itu. Denda lewat itu kadang-kadang melebihi daripada tunggakan.
I would urge the State Government to declare an amnesty for denda lewat for 12 months as the main feature of special programme to clear the quit rent arrears which is consistently exceeding RM25 million every year.
Six-month rule that State Assembly must meet at least once in six months an important democratic principle to protect the rights of the people
This brings me back to the important democratic principle and constitutional rule of the six-month rule requiring the Chief Minister to convene a State Assembly at least in every six months. The Auditor-General’s Report for the 1991 Penang State Accounts was completed on 10th January 1993, but it had taken six months just to get it tabled because the Chief Minister had tried stretch the six-month rule to its limits, until he broke it.
If the State Assembly had met say in February or March this year, the Public Accounts Committee would probably have met already to examine it and to deal with the various problems of weaknesses of the administration which had undermined the effectiveness and productivity of the state government.
The six-month rule, therefore, is not a high-faluting or technical rule concerning political theory, but an important democratic rule to protect the rights of the people by holding the State Government to account, and by breaking the six-month rule, the State Government is not only denying the people of Penang the right to have their grievances and injustices ventilated and rectified at the first opportunity, but also a denial of the whole check-and-balance process which is the essence of a democratic system!
Challenge to Dr.Koh Tsu Koon to table the notes of the MPPP Interview Board on June 16 to prove that Gerakan Municipal Councillors had not abused their influence to set aside the earlier decision to appoint Lim Cheng Kee and to pick Koo Say Boon instead
We want government officials who can continuously upgrade their efficiency and productivity, who are always conscious of their trust to serve the people and who dare to perform their public duties even if this displease the political bosses.
This is why it is important that the civil service, whether at the state of local authority levels, should not be politicised.
An unhealthy trend had started with the politicisation of the MPPP of the Gerakan, in the case of the appointment of the successor to Ong Chin Lee following his retirement as Pengarah, Engineering Department in the MPPP.
The Exco in charge of local government, Dr.Goh Cheng Teik, in his reply yesterday, dare not challenge the veracity of the facts I had presented in the Assembly, that the MPPP Interview Board, comprising MPPP President, Tan Ghim Hwa, MPPP Secretary, Mohsin bin Mohd Khir, and MPPP Gerakan Councillor Lau Kok Chew, had interviewed nine applicants on Wednesday June 16 and both Tan Ghim Hwa and Mohsein had signed in favour of Lim Cheng Kee. MPPP staff were informed verbally of this decision as well as UMNO quarters.
However, the next day, Lau Kok Chew convened a meeting of MPPP Gerakan councillors and had a meeting with Tan Ghim Hwa where the decision to appoint Lim Cheng Kee ws revoked in favour of Khoo Say Boon.
On Friday June 18, at about 3 p.m., Khoo Say Boon received his letter of appointment.
Goh Cheng Teik said yesterday that his information was different. Goh Cheng Teik, although the Exco Member in charge of local government, is clearly in an invidious position as his information had come from the MPPP President who is his political boss in the State, as Tan Ghim Hwa is Penang Gerakan State Chairman.
Goh Cheng Teik is presently like a person who had received a ‘death sentence’ in Parti Gerakan, which had paralysed his functions, duties and responsibility as State Exco for Local Government who dare not query the going-on in the MPPP. In theory, he MPPP President is answerable to the State Exco for Local Government, but the practice in the Penang State Government today, it is the State Exco for Local Government who is answerable to the MPPP President.
So Goh Cheng Teik stand up in the State Assembly yesterday to read out what the MPPP President had instructed him to read, which he dare not dispute or query.
This is most unsatisfactory-showing not only a politicisation of the MPPP but politicisation of the State Exco!
I challenge the Penang Chief Minister, Dr.Koh Tsu Koon to table in the State Assembly the notes of the MPPP Interview Board on June 16 to prove that Gerakan Municipal Councillors had not abused their influence to set aside the earlier decision to appoint Lim Cheng Kee and to pick Koo Say Boon instead.
Tan Ghim Hwa has violated the undertaking he had given on his appointment as MPPP President that there would be no politicisation of the MPPP administration. The Gerakan politicisation of the MPPP adminstration has reached such a stage that at least two heads of MPPP departments are card-carrying members of Gerakan.
DAP warns Gerakan that the politicisation of the MPPP adminisation will result in UMNO-isation and not Gerakanisation of the MPPP staff as the real power on Penang lies in UMNO and not Gerakan
The three-man MPPP Interview Board has become a Gerakan Interview Board, where two of the three members come from the Gerakan.
I must warn that if this dangerous precedent of the politicisation of the MPPP administration is allowed to be set, eventually it will not be Gerakanisation of the MPPP administration but the UMNO-isation of the MPPP administration, for the UMNO Big Brother will have more political muscles to politicise the MPPP administration and the Gerakan leaders would not dare to stand in their way-especially as the real power in the Penang State Government does not lie in the hand of Dr.Koh Tsu Koon but Dr.Ibrahim Saad.
Why did PBA abandon its RM79,000 claim to PLUS for damage to the Sungai Dua water treatment plant mains last August causing a 36-hour disruption of water supply in the State
Is the political factor the real reason why the Pihak Berkuasa Air (PBA) has abandoned its RM79,000 claim to PLUS for damage to the Sungai Dua wter treatment plant mains last August causing a 36-hour disruption of water supply in the State?
When u demanded last August that the State Government should seek compensation from PLUS for the losses and inconveniences suffered by the PBA as well as the 250,000 consumers, the Chief Minister, Dr.Koh Tsu Koon, who had earlier only appealed to PLUS “to be more careful”, said that “PBA tidak perlu bimbang untuk mengambil tindakan terhadap mana-mana pihak yang bertanggung jawab menyebabkan saluran paip air pecah”.
In last December’s Penang State Assembly meeting, I was informed during question time that PBA had submitted a claim to PLUS for RM79,615.71 to compensate the State Government for damaging a water-pipe mains at Kampong Teluk in Sungei Dua.
In this Assembly meeting, I submitted the following written question to the Chief Minister:”Nyatkan keputusan tuntutan pampasan yang dibuatkan oleh Pihak Berkuasa Air kepada PLUS kerana kerosakan yang dilakukan kepada paip-paip air di Sungai Dua pada bulan Ogos, 1992”. This was the onbe-paragraph reply from the Chief Minister:”PLUS enggan membayar bil yang dikeluarkan oleh PBA untuk pembaikan paip yang dirosakkan di Kg.Teluk, Sungai Dua, Seberang Perai Utara atas alasan bahawa mereka tidak bertanggungjawab bagi kerosakan berkenaan dan pihak PBA tidak mempunyai bukti yang kukuk mengenai perkara ini.”
If the PBA had no proof that PLUS caused the damage to the Sungai Dua water-pipe mains, then why did it submit a claim to PLUS?
Is PBA seriously claiming that it did not know the cause of the damage to the 1.4 metre water-pipie main as if this is a routine occurrence?
Or is this because of the political background of PLUS, with its connection to UMNO and UMNO leaders-another consequence of the ‘politicisation’ of the administration in Penang?
But while vested interests which have UMNO connections are given special treatment and exemptions, the ordinary man in the street who have no political connections received the full rigours of the law.
In answer to another one of my written questions, the Chief Minister said thaht the total amount of fines imposed on hawkers in MPPP was 2,293 cases totalling RM23,773 for 1990; 4,315 cases totalling RM38,663 in 1991; 3,733 cases totalling RM53,882 in 1992; and for the first three months of 1993, 1,709 cases totalling RM25,382.
At this rate, the MPPP is going to set a record of imposing fines exceeding RM100,000 on the hawkers on the island for this year alone.
But why is the Barisan Nasional State Government so hard on the hawkers, seeking to impose fines exceeding RM100,000 from the hawkers on the Penang island alone this year, while so soft on PLUS, to the extent t the PBA has abandoned its claim for compensation amounting to only RM79,000?
Such policy, where the State Government is high-handed, harsh and oppressive in its treatment of the ordinary men in the street like the hawkers who are earning a decent and honest living, while it is so soft and sycophantic where powerful companies and interests are involved, does not speak well for a Chief Minister who claims to care for the people.
Why is the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding in China last year for the RM180 million Telok Bahang Water Scheme shrouded in such great secrecy that even the PBA Board did not know about it beforehand?
In this connection, I want to ask why is the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding in China last year for the RM180 million Telok Bahang Water Scheme shrouded in such great secrecy that even the PBA Board did not know about it beforehand?
Is ‘politicisation’ again the culprit here? The Chief Minister should explain the reason for the shroud of secrecy behind the MOU for the Teluk Bahang water dam, and whether a national Gerakan leader will be involved in the consultancy project for the Teluk Bahang dam-which could come to some RM10 million if the engineers’ consultancy fee is about five per cent of the total cost.
The Chief Minister should confirm whether it is true that according to a feasibility study undertaken by Syed Mohd, Binnie & Partners on the Teluk Bahang Scheme, which involves the construction of a dam, treatment plant and distributkon water trunk mains, the cost of untreated water would come to RM1.23 per cubic metre (or 1,000 litres). Currently, water in Penang is sold at only 22 sen per cubic meter.
Johore is currently supplying Malacca treated water at 20 sen per cubic metre.
This means that the people of Penang will have to pay very heavily for water after the completion of the Telok Bahang water dam-and is this why there is all the talk about the privatisation of the PBA, when it is a very successful corporation?
The costing of RM1.23 per cubic metre of untreated water in the Telok Bahang dam is based on the following calculation: Based on he current estimated cost of the scheme to be RM180 million, and assuming interest only at 10% pa, the interest would be RM18 million a year.
The total estimated output is 3,200 million galloons, which will produce 14,528 million litres per annum (3,200 x 4.54 as one gallon is equal to 4.54 litres). This means that it would cost RM18 million a year (interest only) to produce 14,528 million litres, or RM1.23 per cubic metre (or 1,000 letres).
Questions had been raised about the suitability of constructing such a dam in Telok Bahang instead of the Prai River Basin for instance. A water dam in the Prai River Basin would definitely be very much cheaper-may be half the cost-than one in Telok Bahang because the terrain is less prohibitive for the construction, there is higher water volume and a better distribution system because of available water trunk mains and pipes.
The Chief Minister should explain when the MOU for the Teluk Bahang Water Scheme was signed in China last year, when the State Exco gave its approval for the signing of the MOU, why the PBA Board of Management did not know about it beforehand and had not given its approval, and why the MOU was shrouded in secrecy from public knowledge all these months!
I understand that the signing of the MOU in China for the Teluk Bahang Water Scheme is partyly to offset the balance of payments between China and Malaysia, as Malaysia currently enjoys a trade surplus. This however is no explanation for the secrecy shrouding the MOU, the y-passing of the PBA Board of Management or why a better site at about half the price for the dam instead of Telok Bahang could not have been chosen.
The Chief Minister should also explain why the Telok Bahang dam, which was supposed to be nine times bigger than the Air Itam Reservoir which has a capacity of 550 million gallons of water, is now going to be six times bigger, while the cost of the scheme had already escalated from the initial estimated of around RM100 million to RM150 million and now RM180 million.
When will Local Plan for Penang Hill development be made public?
Penang Chief Minister, Dr.Koh Tsu Koon had promised to make public the local plan for the Penang Hill, commissioned last May, in May or June this year.
This is now July 1 and the Chief Minister should state specifically when the Local Plan for Penang Hill development would be made public and exhibited for public feedback.
Under the Town and Country Planning Act, it is mandatory that the Local Plan be presented for public scrutiny and reaction so that the people of Penang have a say in what they want for Penang Hill. The Local Plan should examine topics crucial to the hill environment- ecology, hydrology, geology, land-use, topography, infrastructure, transporation, tourism potential and hill management.
The public wants assurance that the local plan would ensure balanced development of the hill which is consonant with its natural features-rather than artificial developments like shopping complexes or ice-skating rink.
In this connection, Tsu Koon should give a full explanation as to why the State Government had abandoned the idea of setting up a Penang hill Authority- and surrendering the jurisdiction of the Penang Hill to the MPPP President, Tan Ghim Hwa.
DAP calls for Pulau Jerajak to be declared a free port to restore Penang’s pre-eminent position as a tourist destination
Before I conclude, I want to know the status of the development of Pulau Jerajak, when the Federa; Government would hand over the island to the Penang State Government, and what development plans have been to make Pulau Jerajak an important breakthrough for Penang to retain its tourist attraction as it is now facing stiff competition from both local and international tourist destinations like Langkawi, Pangkor, Tioman, Phuket, Bali.
Pulau Jerajak should be declared a free port like Pulau Langkawi to restore Penang’s pre-eminent position as a tourist destination as having a 50 ha free trade zone, as is now proposed, is not good enough.
Finally, the people of Penang want a clear explanation as to whether the development of Pulau Jerejak and the proposed establishment of Jerajak Development Authority (JEDA) is the sole responsibility of the Deputy Chief Minister, Dr.Ibrahim Saad, while the Chief Minster, Dr.Koh Tsu Koon has been allocated the development of Pulau Tikus!