• The 2nd public display of the delimitation exercise for Peninsular Malaysia without Selangor is highly questionable and unconstitutional

    Media Statement by Dr. Ong Kian Ming on the 9th of March, 2017

    The 2nd public display of the delimitation exercise for Peninsular Malaysia without Selangor is highly questionable and unconstitutional

    Yesterday, on the 8th of March, 2017, the Election Commission (EC) published a notice to announce the official start of the 2nd round of the public display for the 2016 constituency delimitation exercise. This announcement was published in the mainstream press and as a Federal Government Gazette. This move by the EC is unprecedented in the history of delimitation exercises in Malaysia because it excludes the parliament and state seats in the state of Selangor in the 2nd public display. This move is also highly questionable and very likely, unconstitutional.

    According to Article 113 (6) of the Federal Constitution, there shall be separate reviews undertaken in each delimitation exercise for the “States of Malaya and for each of the States of Sabah and Sarawak”. The Federal Constitution also clearly states that the delimitation exercise for the States of Malaya (or ‘Tanah Melayu’) – in other words, Peninsular Malaysia[1] – must be undertaken as a single unit of review. The delimitation exercise for the States of Malaya cannot be presented in parliament without the inclusion of Selangor.

    This begs the question of why the EC is pushing through with this 2nd public display without Selangor. The delimitation exercise for Selangor is currently being challenged by the Selangor state government in the High Court. This legal challenge – the first time that a delimitation exercise has been challenged by a state government – has prevented the EC from starting the local enquiry process and hearing the objections to the delimitation exercise in Selangor. The legal challenge by the Selangor state government is a highly important check and balance on the ability of the EC to redraw boundaries in an arbitrary fashion, not just in Selangor, but also in other states in Peninsular Malaysia that is part of the same ‘unit of review’.

    Going by past precedent, the EC should wait for the decision of the High Court on the Selangor case before taking the next step in the delimitation process. But in the event that the High Court rules in favor of the Selangor state government, the EC cannot proceed with the public inquiry in Selangor. The EC would instead be forced to appeal the decision in the Court of Appeals and perhaps all the way to the Federal Court in order to seek a favorable ruling. This would delay the EC from presenting the completed delimitation exercise for Peninsular Malaysia to the Prime Minister for parliamentary approval.

    The EC’s decision to announce the 2nd public display for all the states in Peninsular except for Selangor shows that it may want to push through a delimitation exercise that leaves the boundaries in Selangor as it is but with the proposed changes in the other states, many of which favours the BN. If the High Court rules in favor of the Selangor state government, the EC may propose a delimitation plan to the Prime Minister with no changes in the state of Selangor to be passed in the July / August 2017 parliamentary sitting.

    The 2nd public display of the constituency delimitation exercise for Peninsular Malaysia must be challenged in court because it is unconstitutional. The actions of the EC have once again shown that it is not the independent body it should be and that Malaysians must continue to advocate for a strong and independent Election Commission.

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming
    Member of Parliament for Serdang

    [1] Including the Federal Territory of Labuan

  • 政府必须公开颁布甲洞焚化炉工程的合约内容

    (2017年2月10日)沙登区国会议员王建民博士的媒体声明

    政府必须公开颁布甲洞焚化炉工程的合约内容

    针对具有争议性并将每日能处理1公顿固体废料的甲洞焚化炉工程,根据财经报刊《The Edge》报道(2017年1月30日至2月5日),目前有3家公司入选了最后名单,他们包括马资源(MRCB)与韩国Hyundai Rotem公司联营、多元重工业(DRB-Hicom)与马拉克夫机构有限公司(Malakoff Corp Bhd)联营和日本住友(Sumitomo)公司。政府料于2017年3月颁布将兴建和经营此甲洞焚化炉工程的发展商。

    纵观马来西亚的特许经营协议,从不公平收费的大道合约到票价不合理上涨的快速铁路链(ERL)合约,往往都是以牺牲消费者/用户为代价来成全特许协议经营者。公众往往在这些合约被签署后才了解里面的来龙去脉,通常到最后则由政府不得不解释为什么他们必须允许这些特许协议经营者能以如此不合理的涨幅来提高大道收费或火车票价。

    如今,甲洞焚化炉将会是大马最大型的焚化炉。环顾过去的邦洛岛、浮罗交怡及金马伦高原的小型焚化炉工程过去都曾出现问题,并为中央政府带来巨大损失。公账会也曾介入调查XCN科技公司承包商所获颁合约的来龙去脉。如果甲洞焚化炉工程失败,纳税人所面临的亏损将远比上述小型焚化炉来得更大。我们也不能忘记,这次是甲洞焚化炉的第二次的招标工作因为政府在第一轮的时候仅成功收到一家公司的竞标申请。

    因此,我促请首相署部长阿都拉曼达兰,公开工程合约内容,包括公开甲洞焚化炉的兴建费、付给吉隆坡市政厅的费用、公司的废料保证条件、工程期限、表现指标以及其他条款,以避免重蹈过去其他焚化炉的舞弊行为。

    由于吉隆坡已开始进行城市垃圾分离计划,这理应已降低必须处置的整体垃圾数量,所以部长必须说服人民,为何需要甲洞焚化炉。

    如果不这样做,只会招致居民的更多抗议,而吉隆坡的纳税人很可能会为下一个不公平的特许经营协议买单。

    王建民博士
    沙登区国会议员

  • Perjanjian konsesi projek insinerator Kepong perlu didedahkan kepada umum

    Kenyataan Media oleh Dr. Ong Kian Ming, Ahli Parlimen Serdang pada 10 Februari 2017

    Perjanjian konsesi projek insinerator Kepong perlu didedahkan kepada umum

    Menurut laporan Edge Weekly (edisi 30 Januari – 5 Februari 2017), 3 syarikat telah disenarai pendek bagi projek kontroversi insinerator sisa pepejal kapasiti 1000 tan sehari di Taman Beringin, Kepong. Ketiga-tiga syarikat ini adalah Malaysia Resources Corp Bhd (MRCB) dengan kerjasama Hyundai Rotem Co dari Korea Selatan, Cenviro Sdn Bhd (terdahulu dikenali sebagai UEM Environment Sdn Bhd) dengan kerjasama Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd dari Jepun dan DRB-Hicom dengan kerjasama Malakoff Corp Bhd serta Sumitomo Corp dari Jepun. Dilaporkan juga bahawa perjanjian konsesi untuk membina dan mengendalikan insinerator ini akan dianugerahkan pada Mac 2017.

    Perjanjian konsesi di Malaysia seringkali memberi kelebihan kepada pemegang konsesi dengan mengorbankan kepentingan konsumer / pengguna, contohnya kontrak berat sebelah ERL yang membenarkan peningkatan harga secara tidak munasabah. Hakikat sebenar kontrak berat sebelah sebegini hanya ditemui setelah ianya ditandatangani, kebiasaannya apabila kerajaan terpaksa menerangkan mengapa mereka membenarkan peningkatan harga tol atau tiket tren yang tinggi dan tidak munasabah.

    Insinerator ini akan merupakan yang terbesar di Malaysia. Namun, kita harus ingat bahawa insinerator berskala kecil di Pulau Pangkor, Pulau Langkawi dan Cameron Highlands telah menemui kegagalan dan menyebabkan kos besar ditanggung oleh kerajaan pusat. Cara kontrak ini diberikan kepada XCN Techonolgy telah pun dipersoalkan oleh Ketua Audit Negara. Jika projek Insinerator Kepong ini menemui kegagalan, sudah pasti kos yang perlu ditanggung oleh pembayar cukai adalah jauh lebih tinggi daripada projek berskala kecil yang dinyatakan di atas. Ini juga merupakan kali kedua tender projek insinerator Kepong ini dikeluarkan, kerana hanya terdapat sebuah sahaja syarikat yang mengemukakan penyerahan terakhir untuk tender kali pertama.

    Bagi mengelakkan kesilapan lampau berulang kembali, saya menyeru Menteri yang bertanggungjawab bagi Unit Perancang Ekonomi, Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan untuk mendedahkan butiran perjanjian konsesi ini termasuk anggaran kos projek, bayaran ‘tipping fee’ yang dikenakan terhadap DBKL, keadaan jaminan sisa yang diberi kepada syarikat, berapa panjangnya tempoh konsesi, petunjuk prestasi dan terma yang membolehkan kerajaan mengambil alih jika projek tersebut gagal untuk dilaksanakan.

    Tambahan lagi, Menteri perlu meyakinkan rakyat berhubung keperluan membina insinerator memandangkan KL telah mula melakukan pengasingan sisa, dan ini sepatutnya telah mengurangkan jumlah sisa yang perlu dilupuskan.

    Kegagalan berbuat demikian hanya akan mengundang bantahan daripada penduduk dan kemungkinan besar bahawa pembayar cukai di KL akan menanggung kos bagi satu lagi perjanjian yang berat sebelah.

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming
    Ahli Parlimen Serdang

  • Concession Agreement for the Kepong Incinerator project must be publicly disclosed

    Media Statement by Dr. Ong Kian Ming, Member of Parliament for Serdang, on the 10th of February, 2017

    Concession Agreement for the Kepong Incinerator project must be publicly disclosed

    It was reported in the Edge Weekly (January 30 to February 5, 2017) that three companies have been shortlisted for the controversial 1000 ton per day solid waste incinerator in Taman Beringin, Kepong. These three companies are Malaysia Resources Corp Bhd (MRCB) in partnership with South Korea’s Hyundai Rotem Co, Cenviro Sbd Bhd (formerly UEM Environment Sdn Bhd) in partnership with Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd and DRB-Hicom in partnership with Malakoff Corp Bhd and Japan’s Sumitomo Corp. It was also reported that the concession agreement to build and operate this incinerator will be awarded in March, 2017.

    Concession agreements in Malaysia, from lopsided toll contracts to the Express Rail Link (ERL) contract that allowed for unreasonable price hikes, have almost always favoured the concession holders at the expense of the consumer / user. The nature of many of these lopsided contracts were only discovered after they were signed, usually when the government has had to explain why they had to allow these concession holders to increase the price of tolls or train tickets by large and unreasonable increments.

    This incinerator will be the largest incinerator of any kind in Malaysia. Recall that much smaller scale incinerator projects in Pulau Pangkor, Pulau Langkawi and Cameron Highlands have failed in the past, at great cost to the federal government. The nature by which these contracts were awarded to the company, XCN Technology, was called into question by the Auditor General. If the Kepong Incinerator project fails, the cost to the taxpayer will be far greater than the smaller scale failures in the abovementioned locations. Recall also that this is the second time that the Kepong incinerator project has been tendered out because there was only one company that made a final submission in the first round of tenders.

    In order to avoid the mistakes of the past, I call upon the Minister in charge of the Economic Planning Unit (EPU), Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan, to disclose the details of the Kepong incinerator concession agreement including the projected cost of the project, the tipping fee that will be charged to DBKL, the conditions of the waste guarantee to the company, the length of the concession period, the performance indicators and the terms by which the government can take over the project if it fails to deliver.

    In addition, the Minister must convince the raykat the need for the Kepong incinerator given that KL has started the separation of municipal waste which should decrease the overall amount of waste that needs to be disposed.

    Failure to do so will only invite more protests from the residents and the high probability that the taxpayer and the ratepayers in KL will end up footing the bill for another lopsided concession agreement.

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming
    Member of Parliament for Serdang

Page 10 of 203« First...89101112...203040...Last »