• Feedback and Clarification on the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL)

    CEO of SPAD
    Encik Mohd Azharuddin bin Mat Sah
    Block D, Platinum Sentral, Jalan Stesen Sentral 2,
    Kuala Lumpur Sentral, 50470 Kuala Lumpur

    Yang Berusaha Encik Mohd Azharuddin,

    RE: Feedback and Clarification on the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL)

    Based on Section 84 of the Land Transport Act 2010, SPAD began the 3-month process of public consultation and seeking public feedback on the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL) on the 8th of March 2017.[1] As a Member of Parliament and a concerned citizen, I hope that SPAD can provide clarification and information on the following points raised below.

    1. Provide detailed breakdown of the cost of the ECRL

    In a report by the Edge in November 2016, Transport Minister Dato Seri Liow Tiong Lai said the following to explain the increase in the estimated cost of the East Coast Rail Line (ECRL) from RM29 billion to RM55 billion. “Previously, the length [of the rail link] was 545km; now it is 600km and this does not include the part from Gombak to Port Klang”[2] But on the 13th of May, 2017, during the signing ceremony of Phase Two of the ECRL project, which covers the track from the Integrated Transport Terminal (ITT) Gombak to Port Klang, the Treasury Secretary General, Tan Sri Irwan Serigar was reported to have said that the construction costs for this section for this section of the ECRL was RM9 billion, which, combined with the RM46 billion cost for Phase One for Wakaf Bahru in Kelantan to ITT Gombak in Selangor, would bring the total cost of the ECRL to RM55 billion.[3] This contradicts what was said by Liow Tiong Lai. In the interest of transparency, the government should publish a detailed breakdown of the estimated cost of the entire ECRL including the cost of the 7 segments of the ECRL and the 6 Spur Lines:

    The government should also provide an estimated breakdown of the land acquisition costs which will involve the government buying 8699 lots of private land covering 8376.88 acres or 3390 hectares.

    2. Clarify if the cost of the project only involves a SINGLE TRACK railway line as it is described in the EIA report

    In the Executive Summary of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report on the ECRL, it is stated that ‘the ECRL will be an electrified single track railway line built on a double track formation, approximately 532.3km for the main line with another 65.9km of spur lines.”  Does this mean that only a single track will be built for the ECRL even though a railway base that is wide enough for two tracks will be built? If this is the case, then the government needs to explain why a project which costs an estimated RM55 billion will only pay for ONE TRACK.

    I would like to point that the promotional video and materials shown in the public display, on the MRL website and in the youtube videos all indicate that the ECRL has two tracks, not one.

    3. Clarify the total length of bridges and viaducts for the ECRL

    In a statement on the 9th of November, 2016 by Minister in charge of the Economic Planning Unit (EPU), Datuk Rahman Dahlan, he said that the ECRL will involve building 110km of bridges.[4] Based on the SPAD public display drawings, a section by section calculation showed 69 bridges with a combined length of 17.7km and 33 viaducts with a combined length of 74.6km. Therefore, the total length of bridges and viaducts (assuming that viaducts are also bridges) is 92.3km. There is a difference of 17.7km between Rahman Dahlan’s statement and our calculations based on the SPAD public display drawings. A difference of 17.7km can translate into billions of ringgit of construction costs. This needs to be clarified by the government.

    4. Explain the rush to sign the agreement for Phase 2 of the ECRL connecting ITT Gombak with Port Klang

    My colleague, ADUN for Damansara Utama, Yeo Bee Yin, had earlier raised the issue of the missing link from ITT Gombak to Klang in the current EIA report available for public display.[5] SPAD responded by saying that there was no missing link and that the link from ITT Gombak to Klang is part of Phase 2 of the ECRL project. SPAD also said that “when the due processes are completed and the extension is ready for execution, SPAD will hold a public display of the conditionally approved railway scheme for this alignment prior to execution”[6] If the due processes have not been completed, why did the government sign a supplementary agreement with the China Communications Construction Company (CCCC) during Najib’s visit to Beijing recently for Phase 2 of the ECRL Project?[7]

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming
    Member of Parliament, Serdang

    [1] http://www.spad.gov.my/media-centre/media-releases/2017/public-inspection-railway-scheme-east-coast-rail-link-ecrl-opens
    [2] http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/liow-explains-big-jump-ecrl-cost
    [3] https://www.nst.com.my/news/nation/2017/05/238867/najib-witnesses-signing-ecrl-phase-two-construction-agreement
    [4] https://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/11/187009/statement-ecrl-project-not-hastily-decided-proposed-2007
    [5] http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/379638
    [6] http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/379772
    [7] https://www.nst.com.my/news/nation/2017/05/238867/najib-witnesses-signing-ecrl-phase-two-construction-agreement

  • 希望联盟将中止PEMANDU并对此过去的所有活动进行会记审查。

    (2017年5月5日)希望联盟宣言和政策委员会所公布的媒体声明

    希望联盟将中止PEMANDU并对此过去的所有活动进行会记审查。

    首相在2010年高调地设立首相署表现管理和履行单位(PEMANDU)。自从成立以来,PEMANDU就投入了大量的资金和力量来用于宣传活动,协作国阵政府自吹自擂多项成果。实际上,它并无法履行多项关键绩效指标,甚至是免于向国会和人民负责,甚至最近也陷入了潜在的利益冲突之嫌。所以,希望联盟承诺若赢得第14届大选后,将废除所有与新成立的PEMANDU Associates私人有限公司的合同,并对PEMANDU所有过去的活动进行全面的会记审核,包括公布PEMANDU董事们的薪酬以及所有财务上的金流。与其从外界聘请昂贵的顾问来提供咨询和指导公务员的工作,希望联盟希望直接向公务员赋能,提供恰当的资源来改革整个制度,以使他们的表现能够更专业,独立,透明和有效。

    (i) 无法为实现高收入国家而提高大马国民人均收入(GNI per capita)的目标

    2010年的经济转型计划报告已阐明要在2020年前必须达到1万5000美元的国民人均收入。(请参阅图表1)


    来源:2010年经济转型计划的大蓝图,第9页

    自此以来,从2011年至2015年的经济转型计划报告都反复阐明了这个目标。然而根据以下图表,已清楚地显示了我们离1万5000美元的国民人均收入的目标还很遥远。事实上,马来西亚的国民人均收入在6年之间仅仅提高了490美元,即从2010年的8,636美元增长至2016年的9,057美元。

    图表1:2010年至2016年的国民人均收入(美元)

    来源:国家统计局的国民人均收入数据,汇率是来自参考世界银行各年美元兌马币的平均汇率

    来自民主与经济事务研究中心(IDEAS)的研究主任Ali Salman过去也曾带出此议题,并质疑马来西亚是否还能在2020年前实现高收入国家的目标[1]

    (ii) 问责上的失败

    在一份Malaysian Insight的报道中,一名PEMANDU的执行员表示:PEMANDU是向经济策划单位(EPU),首相署和国会负责[2] 然而,我们不太了解他口中所说的问责制究竟为何,因为PEMANDU的CEO伊德利斯从未前往国会回答任何有关议题。更明确地来说,他从未在国会上回答或说过任何话。既然他同时领导两项理应为国家带来改革的计划-经济转型计划(ETP)和国家转型计划,却不屑在国家最重要和民主的机构回应任何问题,我们为此感到羞愧。

    另外,就算PEMANDU自2015年就向外界发步ETP和GTP的年度报告,但却不曾在国会上提呈这些报告给国会议员。没有任何有关财务上的资料,也没有告诉大家过去的活动所耗费的资金。根据某些报道,PEMANDU的职员是领着比首相还要高的薪酬[3]

    再来,正当联邦政府大力呼吁审慎开销之际,PEMANDU还大胆地向政府分别索取1000万和1500万令吉来承办2015年和2017年的全球转型论坛。[4]

    尽管穷尽良好和透明化施政等的华丽字眼,PEMANDU并没有以身作则。

    (iii) 利益冲突

    100巴仙由财政部拥有的PEMANDU机构所有职员目前已都被转入伊德利斯所拥有50巴仙的PEMANDU Associate私人有限公司。从2017年起,PEMANDU Associate将销售自己的服务给政府,并安置自己的员工在一些关键部门来继续执行经济转型计划。同时,这间公司还能自由地向其他国内外的政府部门提供自己的服务。再来,伊德利斯在2017年更担任了上市公司,马来西亚喜力有限公司(Heineken Malaysia)的董事会主席。

    因此,伊德利斯兼任上市公司的董事会主席和有机会渗入联邦政府内部运作的私人公司的主席,不禁令人怀疑这是否有涉及利益冲突。[5] 迄今为止,他仍未现身来说明这些有关利益冲突的课题

    有鉴于此,希望联盟一旦赢得第14届选举后,便会马上中止所有PEMANDU Associate私人有限公司的政府合约。我们将对PEMANDU Corp和BFR机构过去的所有开销进行全面的会记审查,包括在2015年和2017年的全球转型论坛向明星讲师所付的薪酬。我们也会进一步地揭露PEMANDU各位董事们的薪酬。

    最后,与其大手笔地聘请外部顾问,希盟会直接将原有的资源投入在公务员的身上,以激励和授权他们表现得更专业和独立。希盟耶呼吁所有退休公务员加入我们,共同改革公务员制度以恢复昔日的廉洁,透明化和有效施政。

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming (DAP) 王建民博士 (行动党)
    Wong Chen (PKR) 黄基全 (公正党)
    Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (AMANAH) 祖基菲里博士(诚信党)
    Dr Rais Hussin (PPBM) 莱益胡欣博士 (土团党)

    [1] http://www.ideas.org.my/news/press-statements/government-intervention-causing-malaysia-to-lose-competitive-edge-as-average-income-of-malaysians-drops-by-15-according-%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B-to-latest-epu-figures/

    [2] https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/s/2430/

    [3] http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/149861

    [4] http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/377108

    [5] http://www.beritadaily.com/idris-position-in-pemandu-and-heineken-questionable-says-dap-man/

  • Pakatan Harapan will terminate PEMANDU and conduct a forensic audit of all of its activities

    Media Statement by Pakatan Harapan Manifesto and Policy Committee issued on the 5th of May, 2017

    Pakatan Harapan will terminate PEMANDU and conduct a forensic audit of all of its activities

    The Performance and Management Delivery Unit (PEMANDU) in the Prime Minister’s Department was launched by the Prime Minister with much hype in 2010. Since its creation, PEMANDU has commandeered much power and resources, spent a lot of money on publicity seeking events and took the lead in ‘spin doctoring’ many of the supposed achievements by the BN government. In reality, it has failed to deliver on its main KPI, failed to be accountable to parliament and the public and most recently, ensnared itself in possible conflict of interest situations. Upon winning GE14, Pakatan Harapan will abolish all government contracts with the newly formed PEMANDU Associates Sdn Bhd and initiate an extensive forensic audit into all of the activities of PEMANDU Corporation including disclosing the salaries of the directors of PEMANDU and all the salient financial terms payable to this private company. Instead of engaging expensive external consultants to direct the civil service, Pakatan Harapan will channel resources directly to the civil service to empower them to do their jobs professionally and to introduce reforms that will make the civil service more independent, transparent and effective.

    (i) Failure to meet its GNI per capita target for a high-income nation

    The key target outlined in the Economic Transformation Program (ETP) 2010 Roadmap Report was for Malaysia to reach a high income nation status of US$15,000 GNI per capita by 2020 (See Exhibit 1 below).


    Source: ETP Roadmap 2010, pg.9

    This target has been referred to in each of the ETP Annual Reports from 2011 to 2014 and also in the 2015 National Transformation Program Annual Report. But what is clear is that we are still very far from the US$15,000 GNI per capita target as show in Chart 1 below. In fact, Malaysia’s GNI per capita has increased by a mere US$490, from US$8636 in 2010 to US$9057 per capita in 2016, or a 4.9% in 6 years. (See Chart 1 below) Based on this statistic alone, PEMANDU has failed.

    Chart 1: GNI per capita current prices (US$) 2010 to 2016

    Source: GNI statistics are from the Department of Statistics, Exchange rate data is the World Bank data showing the average US$ to RM exchange rate for that year (Figures differ slightly from the World Bank GNI data calculated using the Atlas method)

    The issue has been previously highlighted by IDEAS Head of Research Ali Salman and raises questions as to whether Malaysia can reach the high-income nation target by 2020.[1]

    (ii)                Failure of Accountability

    In a piece in The Malaysian Insight, a PEMANDU executive stated the following: PEMANDU also reported to the EPU, the Prime Minister’s Department and was accountable to Parliament.[2] We are unsure as to what the executive’s understanding of parliamentary accountability is, but in his 6 years as a member of the cabinet, the CEO of PEMANDU, Idris Jala, never once appeared in parliament to answer any single parliamentary question that concerned PEMANDU. In fact, he never answered anything or said anything in parliament. Given that he was heading two programs – the ETP and the Government Transformation Program (GTP) – that is supposed to bring about transformational changes in the country, it is disgraceful that he found it unnecessary to answer any questions in the most important elected institution in the country. This is a massive failure from an accountability standpoint.

    In addition, even though PEMANDU published annual reports for the ETP and GTP and starting from 2015, the National Transformation Program (NTP), it di not table any of its reports in parliament nor distribute them to Members of Parliament. It does not table its own financial accounts in parliament nor tell parliament how much PEMANDU has spent for its various activities. And despite many public criticisms, it has not made known how much its staff gets paid, which according to some reports, is higher than the Prime Minister’s salary.[3]

    Furthermore, PEMANDU has the audacity to ask for RM10 million and RM15 million from the government to organize the Global Transformation Forum 2015 and 2017 respectively at the same time as it is preaching values of fiscal prudence on the part of the federal government.[4]

    While it uses the language of good corporate governance and transparency, PEMANDU does not apply any of these standards to itself.

    (iii)              Conflicts of Interest

    All of the staff of PEMANDU Corp, a 100% Ministry of Finance owned entity, has now been transferred to PEMANDU Associates Sdn Bhd, a private entity that is 50% owned by Idris Jala. Starting from 2017, PEMANDU Associates will sell its services to the government by placing its staff in key ministries to continue the NTP. At the same time, this new private entity will be free to sell its services to other government ministries, at home and abroad. Furthermore, since the beginning of 2017, Idris Jala has been occupying the position of the Chairman of Heineken Malaysia, a public listed company.

    The position of Idris Jala as the chairman of a publicly listed company and the president of a private company which is deeply embedded into the inner workings of the federal government via its work in the NTP, raises serious questions with regards to possible conflicts of interest.[5] Until today, he has not even attempted to explain these conflicts of interest.

    For these reasons and immediately upon winning GE14, Pakatan Harapan will terminate all existing contracts with PEMANDU Associates Sdn Bhd. We will initiate a forensic accounting investigation into all of the expenditure undertaken by PEMANDU Corp and BFR Institute, both of which are 100% MOF owned entities, including how much was paid to each and every celebrity speaker for the 2015 and 2017 Global Transformation Program. We will publicly disclose the salaries received by PEMANDU directors.

    Finally, rather than spending obscenely on external consultants, Pakatan Harapan will channel resources directly to the civil service to empower them to carry out its functions more independently and and professionally. Pakatan Harapan will also call upon respected retired civil servants to help us reform the civil service to its former glory days of integrity, transparency and effectiveness.

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming (DAP)

    Wong Chen (PKR)

    Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (AMANAH)

    Dr Rais Hussin (PPBM)

    [1] http://www.ideas.org.my/news/press-statements/government-intervention-causing-malaysia-to-lose-competitive-edge-as-average-income-of-malaysians-drops-by-15-according-%E2%80%8B%E2%80%8B-to-latest-epu-figures/

    [2] https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/s/2430/

    [3] http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/149861

    [4] http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/377108

    [5] http://www.beritadaily.com/idris-position-in-pemandu-and-heineken-questionable-says-dap-man/

  • 有关就业保险计划 (EIS) 的十道问题

    2017428日】希望联盟对就业保险计划所发出的文告

    有关就业保险计划  (EIS) 十道问题

    劳动节即将来临,我们向劳工们为国家的贡献给予承认与肯定。在今年7月至8月的国会里,预料首相将提呈就业保险计划 (Employment Insurance Scheme , EIS)。这项计划对劳工在失业的过渡期时有莫大的帮助。然而,该计划的详细内容还没对外公布,政府也没有设立一个国会委员会,探讨当前马来西亚的工作、就业和经济,因此该计划还有很多疑问需要被解答。

    我们在此列出10道问题,希望政府能够解答,以便让人民更相信这个就业保险计划,能够更有效地帮助我国的劳工。

    1)                  现有的1955年劳工法令 (Employment Act 1955) 和1980年就业停职和离职福利规定(Employment Termination and Lay-Off Benefits Regulations 1980),已经列明裁员赔偿金。请问新的就业保险计划推行后,是否继续保障现有的裁员赔偿金?此外,劳工现有的裁员保障是否会为了推行EIS而被妥协牺牲掉?

    2)                  EIS估计在一年内可以收取7亿令吉至8亿令吉(根据劳工和雇主各贡献0.25%、650万劳工、2千令吉薪金来计算)。请问EIS的行政成本将会是多少?是否像一些报告中所说的,占总收额25%那么高?

    3)                  EIS就像SOCSO一样的保险计划,那是不是表示说如果一名劳工在一生中没有被辞退过,他是否不能领回已缴付的金额?同时,EIS会从一名劳工的一生人薪水拿走多少可支配收入/钱?

    4)                  请问EIS基金的将如何被管理?它是否会像SOCSO一样发放利息,就算它的回率低过公积金?

    5)                  EIS的其中一个目的是再训练和培训失业的劳工。请问这新培训计划和现有的计划有什么区别?比方说政府所推行的 Skim Latihan 1 Malaysia (SKIM)。政府必须举个有说服力的例子来说明在EIS下新的培训计划将会比现有的更有效。

    6)                  其实我们已经有一些培训计划,那些培训是由雇主支付并由人力资源发展基金(HDRF)管理。有报告指出,HRDF管理的培训计划,逾1亿令吉的基金没有使用在再培训计划中。请问要如何确保EIS计划不会演化成HRDF基金一样,许多钱最后并没有用在训练失业劳工上。

    7)                  初步报告显示只有在SOSCO中受保,也就是月薪少于4千令吉的劳工才有资格投保EIS。但是,当今许多中等收入的劳工也面对被裁员的困境,就像金融业和石油业一样。请问政府有什么计划可以帮助在中等收入的劳工?

    8)                  根据马来西亚商业工会的估计,每一年因为公司破产而导致劳工们不能索取赔偿金的损失大约是5千万令吉至1亿令吉。但是EIS每一年将会收取的保险金为7亿令吉至8亿令吉,而当中的一半金额是来自于劳工,那也就是4以令吉左右。请问EIS模式将会是解决劳工索取不到裁员赔偿金最有效的方案吗?

    9)                  普通劳工失业的主要原因之一是因为雇主多倾向雇佣外劳。若政府没有一项完整的计划以减少我们对外劳的依赖,那EIS计划将会有多有效呢?请问在和低薪金的外劳竞争下,本地失业劳工要如何更容易地找到新工作?

    10)              在一些亚洲国家,政府也为就业保险计划提供资金(泰国 – 0.25%,台湾 – 0.1%,越南 – 1%)。请问政府是否也有考虑为就业保险计划提供资金以减少雇主和劳工的经济负担?

    Dr. Ong Kian Ming, DAP (王建民,行动党)

    Sim Tze Sin, PKR (沈志勤,公正党)

    Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, AMANAH (诚信党)

    Dr Rais Hussin, BERSATU (土团党)

Page 4 of 203« First...23456...102030...Last »