Monday 20 April 2015

ADUN Likas Final Speech of April 2015 Debate

Subject: Final speech!

April 2015 Debate (Final - original speech)

Tuan Speaker, 

I'm gonna start off my speech by giving DUE credits to the govt on resolving the SAFMA crisis. 


Govt took quick steps to resolve SAFMA crisis by terminating the bad private company which has been increasing fees indiscriminately, which has resulted to fish supply shortage crisis at KK fish markets. 

Though it should not have been privatized in the first place, due credits should be given. Chief Minister ordered to investigate on the unreasonable charges at SAFMA and subsequently the private company was terminated. Crisis resolved fishermen were extremely happy and went back to sea to end. Good job ! 

To emphasize again:

The fishery players are willing to pay but the charges must be reasonable and just. 


Tuan Speaker, 

Tuan Yang Terutama has touched on housing issues to help rakyat own houses. The biggest challenging is the drastic price hike of houses in Sabah. 

A notable good work by the Local Housing Minister Datuk Hajiji is the efforts to work on feasible studies to explain the causes of upswing in property prices over the past 10 years. Good work.

This study is aimed to better understand the dynamics of the industry and create better policies capable of sustaining the market while at the same time protecting the interest of buyers, by taking appropriate action to implement good housing policy for the society at large.

This is what the people wanted, most worried about, especially the younger generations. 

I believe that the Ministry has also carried out a second study to come out with a white paper on sustainable housing policy to control drastic house price hike.

I hope that the white paper can be table soon, and when it's tabled, can it also address HOW does the govt control and monitor the prices of building materials to ensure no drastic increase, and HOW to ensure minimum GST impact on sustainability housing developments. 


Tuan Speaker, 

I would like to side track abit a little here since we are on housing topic, to touch on outdated housing control enactment 1978. 

I have received too many complaints regarding management corporations from various apartments and condominiums such as Tmn Ganang, Rainfield Court, Angkasa apartment Beverly Hills etc. I am very sure that the govt is aware of all these problems. 

These matters are not governed under Subsidiary land title enactment 1972 ( which many thought were the case ) because the subsidiary titles are not issued yet thus it's actually governed under housing development enactment 1978. 

The housing enactment 1978 is outdated. Though Its updated the Housing Development ( Control & Licensing ) rules 2008, it's not good enough.

Enactment 1978 seems to align with developers more. Purchasers are at the disadvantage only can seek housing controllers / tribunal for help in event of unjust issues but power of house controller in this aspect is very minimal. 


Tuan Speaker, 

- the developer is the sole manager of the common property until the subsidiary titles are out

- there is no obligation to see 100% consensus from the purchasers before the increase or variation of any service charge.

- the house controller has no jurisdiction or statutory powers to control the variation of the service charge. Hence in the absence of legislation, the controller has no jurisdiction or statutory power to impose rules for the variation of service fee.

- the contractual obligation of developer are regulated by schedule H of Rule2008, that is the standardized S & P agreement and that's it. 

Problem is :- 

1) No specific TIME for developer to get subsidiary titles out successfully. Merely applying for subdivision is not good enough. 

2) No specific PENALTY if failed to get subsidiary titles out within given reasonable time period 

3) No specific PENALTY when failed to submit annual audited account

4) law allows developer to disconnect WATER SUPPLY when house owners fail to pay management fee. 

There must be 2 sets of laws to govern this part :

1) failing to pay due initial agreed management fee as per S & P agreement - yes can disconnect WATER .

2) failing / unwilling by majority residents to pay for additional variation of management service fee without justifiable reasons, besides the original initial agreed mgmt fee - it should not be allowed to disconnect WATER. 

These issues can only be resolved by amending the housing development (control & licensing) enactment 1978 ie rule2008. So that the interests of all involved parties will be protected. 

This is especially so in view of many approved condominium / apartment applications and more approvals in near future! 

Datuk Speaker


As the developer is the trustee of the monies collected for the purchasers and has a strict duty to account thus I propose :-

- must apply for subdivision upon issuance of O.C & MUST get out subsidiary titles within 7 (5+2) years failing which will suspend / terminate developer licenses (+2 year failure)

- there must be laws to ensure that the relevant govt agencies / departments do their parts to expedite the process of issuance of subsidiary titles 

- MUST submit audited account failing which developer need to pay penalty. 

- MUST give at advance prior notice ( suggested 3 months ) before any future variation of service charges ( meaning to increase maintenance fees) and such notice MUST be supported by 3 documents 

1) previous year's audited accounts 
2) current management account 
3) certificate confirming the variation by a licensed property manager 
4) house controller acknowledgement letter 

As in now, owners have been bullied by some developers ( I would not say all ) as developers would force the owners to pay the increased mgmt fee without justified audited account, failing which developers will CUT the water supply. And the law permits and encourages such actions. 

I will highlight Angkasa Apartment issue so that the relevant Ministries can understand better & also look into this matter. 

There are 13 blocks in Angkasa Apartment development project clearly stated in the S & P agreement a total of 1664 units. However developer has given privilege to 3 blocks of residents to pay a much lower maintenance fee than the rest of the residents in 10 blocks when they are sharing a common property & facilities. 

The 3 blocks only pay RM4,000 each a month while the 10 blocks pay RM10,200 each. Is that even legal? 

The housing has 2 entrances at two ends which should be given access to all residents. However, the 3 blocks at one end has gated & limited the access, disallowed residents from 10 blocks to use that passage. 

Because that access is not controlled by the 10 blocks management and that entry allows free entry for all and thus has resulted to rampant break ins and alarming security issue in the housing development. 

Does the existing housing enactment address this issue? 

Can the ministry please look into this and help resolve this problem? 


The lack of jurisdiction on the part of the house controller to regulate the interim period between OC and issuance of subsidiary titles, was recognized in West Malaysia where a specific legislation for JOINT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE was enacted through the Building and Common Property (Maintenance and Management) Act 2007 (now superseded by the Strata Management Act of 2013) was passed for this purpose. This Act has not been extended to Sabah. 

And I think it should be adopted to Sabah to resolve all the above problems ! 

Within 12 months after obtaining OC, developer will call for a meeting to form a joint management body with one quarter of purchasers who have paid the management fees. Then the body will select a committee to decide on management fee. 50% from the residents. They also will determine the services & maintenance provided. Determine house rules. They can decide who & how to engage a management agency. 

Every 3 years they re elect a new committee.

Account audited every year with great transparency.

This is more fair in the sense that the purchasers have got a say from the beginning but here in Sabah only developers have full say. Thus subsidiary titles hardly come about. 

Bad management corporation issue, if not dealt with adequately, will affect the values of the condominium / apartment properties negatively, which is unfair to the property purchasers. This will also affect the confidences of investors and interested property buyers to purchase condominium property in Sabah. 


Tuan Speaker 

Local housing Ministry has proposed to reduce SESB capital contribution. I think that is another brilliant proposal by govt but I think we should materialize on it. People of Sabah will be grateful & appreciate the govt if SESB capital contribution is removed !

SESB capital contribution should be removed for 2 precise reasons : 


1) From Shareda report, last year alone developers have paid SESB capital contribution at a staggering figure of RM180million. 
That's the total amount of extra money Sabahans have paid on properties last year. 

SESB was caught lying with it's pant down when Sesb reply statement claimed that they only have received RM72million - capital contribution. 

BUT SHAREDA responded that 34 members alone have paid a staggering capital contribution of RM121million.

So who is lying ? Rakyat has the right to know. 
Sabah Govt must get to the bottom of this. 


2) Why should house buyers or developers in Sabah pay for SESB capital contribution to build their basic infrastructures to provide electricity to the developments when SESB will be the one profiteering from the utility business thereafter ? 

When a developer bought a land, a portion of the land has to be given FREE to SESB for sub station, has to buy their transformer, has to help SESB dig and bury cable under the ground, install the electricity poles and wires, only for SESB to do business and earn profits. It's totally not fair to Sabahans! 

SESB should come out with their own capital to do business ! 


SESB always gives stupid excuses that they are unable get enough capital to finance infrastructure development for electricity connections and that this utility business can hardly earn profits. 

I think that's a LIE! 

I believed SESB has been earning good revenues throughout all these years. 

SESB had earned a lucrative revenue of RM1,427,693,000 in 2013 financial year alone BUT the declared profit after tax was only RM13,861,000 which is less than 1% of the revenue! 

That was the money collected from consumers in Sabah including the capital contribution from developers. We want to know where is the collected revenue of RM1.427 billion? How was it spent? 

With such enormous revenue collected, SESB could still claim that they needed capital contribution and higher electricity tariff to sustain this utility business? 

State govt must demand SESB to come clean by revealing its account publicly to prove that the revenue collected was spent prudently and the high electricity tariffs charge was indeed a fair charge. 

There is nothing wrong to demand this because SESB being the monopolized utility provider has the social responsibility to ensure that Sabahans are not overcharged


The people of Sabah may already start to wonder whether SESB was really running at a loss for the last few previous years and the reasons behind those losses, just like the MAS issue. 

National Union of Flight Attendants president Ismail Nasaruddin wanted Khazanah Nasional to reveal to the people about the RM6 billion allocated to save MAS. 

It's alleged that MAS new CEO is being paid RM19.8 million. It's alleged that MAS’ financial problems were caused by MAS’ top management being paid high salaries and bonuses, as well as leakages. There are still so many questions that are unanswered and if this continues, we will not see a better future for MAS. It will suffer a worse position.

I can only see so many similarities between these two. Due to SESB unwillingness to respond, they can't blame people of suspecting that there could be financial mismanagement.

Why SESB dare not respond if there is nothing to hide? Is it because SESB is also paying super high salary & bonuses to SESB top management ?! 

It is because SESB is worried that it might not secure the funding or grant of RM2.3 billion for the next 5 years?" 

If SESB is not able to run a protected business with such huge revenue of RM1,427,693,000, it only proves that SESB is incompetent. 

CM has answered yesterday that if the GLC is found not performing, is not transparent and not accountable,he would change the CEO.
It's apparently obvious that SESB is not performing up to par and financial management is very questionable. 


I ask CM of Sabah Government not to change the CEO but to demand TNB to return the 80% shares to Sabah State Government and run the utility business on its own. Or consider to let Sabah interested companies to take over SESB with Sabah government as the gatekeeper. 

Either way we must take back SESB ! 

I sincerely ask the govt to make a stand and take this matter seriously. 

Do not let SESB exploit the people of Sabah including the developers when they are already given a protected monopolistic utility business environment. 



Datuk Speaker,

Another example of good work by the Govt, is an Immediate intervention by Minister to stop the decision to increase the rental of Tenom old market and Majilis Daerah Tenom quickly initiated dialogue with the Tenom business owners to resolve the problem. That's an excellent work well done. 

Engaging the people before any decision or implementation of any new policies or by-laws, is the way to go, this is what it takes to understand the people thoughts and difficulties. That's the way to resolve issue.


However quite a contrast in Sandakan municipal council.

Ministry has recently reviewed some by laws and it has affected several related industries such as hairdressing, gym and related small businesses. 
Ministry however promised to look into this matter and hold on to the implementation.
Ministry has also ordered the 24 district councils to issue the 2015 trading licenses first to the affected business owners so that their businesses can carry on as usual first. 

However, Sandakan council has not only disobeyed Ministry instruction to renew the 2015 trading licenses, Sandakan council has been quite stubborn and hasn't taken steps to engage the affected small businesses. Right now the affected businesses are still operating with 2014 trading licenses ! Is this fair? 

President of Sandakan council is no way to be reached or to be engaged to resolve problem. 
What kind of sandakan council president is that !? In Sandakan town, he is now a very hot topic. He has quickly become famous as one being the most lousy president sandakan people have ever had. Am I right fellow YBs from Sandakan. 
He doesn't turun Padang, he doesn't meet people, he doesn't respond to issues, he doesn't face the people of sandakan. He is arrogant with all the wrong attitudes. 
If he wants to remain a person who is only responsible to himself, by all means but he should not hold such important public position. 

This president is not only creating a bad reputation for himself but also giving the govt the bad name. At the end of the day, the govt will pay for all the wrong deeds he did in Sandakan. He should be sacked immediately. 

Can the Ministry please update the latest status of this particular Sandakan issue? 


Tuan Speaker, 

DBKK has performed much better. A widening road enlargement at Taman Jaya has finally been done to help prevent car accident. Residents are extremely delighted with it because this problem has existed for at least past 4 years. Credit to DBKK & JKR.

I would like to propose that govt allocates more funding to DBKK to continue to carry out their works effectively and also to help cope with dengue issue in the city especially in Likas because Likas has been declared a dengue zone. 


Playgrounds at Likas areas need upgrades and repairs as most have been left abandoned since built. Especially so at Likas stadium playground the worn out run down playground facilities are causing dangers to children. I hope govt can take action to fix them soon. 


Datuk Speaker, 

The govt has introduced cut cost measures to cope with difficult financial situations is yet another good move. In view of difficult economic and financial years, it is good to be ready for it.

But Govt must also realize the same difficult financial situations, will apply to the business owners & normal people on the streets. 

While Govt is cutting cost and advised private sectors not to increase prices but govt on the other hand, is increasing the burden of businesses and normal citizens. 

I give you a few examples. First the most obvious apparent example is water tariff hike. Water tariff has increased drastically from RM0.90 per 1000 liters to RM2.10. More than 100% increment. It will not only increase the costs of living but also made many businesses to inevitably increase prices. 

Here I have the bills of a resident who used to pay only RM9.90 to RM13.50 on Oct to Dec 2014 for water bill but he has the shock of his life when he received RM199.37 in total on 12 March 2015. 
Can the relevant Ministry explain this?

I strongly recommend the water tariff hike to be reviewed immediately.


Datuk speaker, 
Other examples of policies increasing the burdens of the people are :


Like I have mentioned before, by laws implementations affecting hairdressing, gym, beautician & small businesses should be put on hold. 


Proposal of parking coupons system in Keningau also should not even be considered. REJECT it outright. 

Keningau is not KK city and there is absolutely no need to control traffic. Can consider a Multi car park. Timing of parking proposal is simply bad. 


I propose that govt to cancel or at least delay the implementation of export tax on fishery items which will be effective on June 2015. I strongly urge relevant ministries to sit down with the fishery stakeholders to understand their difficulties. 

Maybe can negotiate on the rate % while delaying the implementation? 


I believe SAFMA is planning to impose new charges for various services at the jetty now. 

Datuk Speaker, 

The list goes on so as much as I would like to think that there are noble reasons behind all these policies implementation, bottom line is they are surely burdening both the traders as well as the normal people on the streets. 


Tuan Speaker, 

I actually have a proposal to help increase the State Govt revenues without pinching on our people and our business sectors. 

I would like to propose to make changes to the current foreign worker application system to be make more flexible. 


The current system has made it difficult for businesses to engage or maintain their work force legally because the system is not flexible and too expensive.

Let's take services line for illustration. 

One foreign worker permit application under current system is charged at RM2,705 by "middleman" agency for one year. 

When the foreign worker ran away, the RM2,705 paid would be gone without compensation. At the same time, the business owner would get a compound penalty of RM200 in order to renew his quota for another permit application. This is ridiculous!

Due to high turnover rate of foreign workers, many businesses may have rather risked employing illegal foreign workers than to fork out high labour costs on their workers permits. 

Imagined at this difficult economic years. businesses needed to fork out RM27,050 just for 10 workers. 


Datuk Speaker, 

I propose modifications to the existing system by giving an additional option of quarterly permit application instead of yearly permit application. 

Make "middleman" agency or "runner" an option.

That means business owners are given an option to apply for quarterly worker permits. Renew four times a year. 

When business owners opt for this option, they will go apply and renew the permits by themselves at the immigration office without engaging the agency and will bear the costs & troubles for workers' medical examinations themselves.

Sabah government can even consider increasing the workers levy fees to RM120 per month for one work permit, which is equivalent to RM1440 per year for one worker, to increase state revenues. 

Maybe there is some kind of technicality here to channel the revenue to state govt BUT Govt could issue some kind of work permit certificate to make up for the technical matter. We can look into this later.

Currently the immigration office is only collecting a levy of RM960 for service workers and it goes to federal. 

So State Government can propose to increase the levy to RM1440 for one worker and the additional increment shall go to State government. That is RM460 for one work permit. 

This way business owners only needed to pay for RM1440 a year and mode of payment every quarterly at RM360 while both Federal and State Government would receive more revenues due to more applications.

It is a win-win situation. Firstly, the Government gets to receive more revenues while the financial burdens of business owners is lifted off their shoulders. Secondly when the workers run away, the losses are manageable.

I am confident that it will definitely help register more legal foreign worker at least by 100%.

State government could easily been earning an extra revenue of approximately RM200 millions from just 500,000 legal foreign workers. How many foreign workers do we have ? At least 2 millions workers I believe. The potential is huge.

I also propose to make the penalty of employing illegal foreign workers heavier in order to encourage more to apply for foreign workers permits. At the same time, remove compound penalty because it is totally unfair to business owners. 


Datuk Speaker,

I also strongly recommend the government to make it compulsory for foreign workers to bear part of their permit costs, say 50%. 

Every year in Sabah, foreign workers are sending back approximately RM 720 millions, equivalent to 60 millions per month cash outflow to their countries of origin. 

Govt should think hard how to get some revenues from these foreign workers. Why keep target normal people on the streets when we are actually missing out potential revenues of hundreds of millions from the foreign workers? 

This way Sabah government can also monitor the large number of foreign workers more efficiently through proper registration & documented records and thus could effectively reduce social problems by tackling crimes more effectively. 

I therefore sincerely hope Sabah State Government to consider my proposal and work along this concept. Target the foreign workers, not our own people. 


Datuk Speaker,

Saya ingin gulung 

Mari kita memerhatikan bagaimana perniagaan dan rakyat biasa ‘akan atau boleh’ menghadapi perlaksanaan GST. 

Sejak ia dilaksanakan pada April ini, sekarang kita dapat lihat apa yang berlaku adalah huru-hara. Harga barang keperluan naik mendadak.

Kita tidak boleh mengambil mudah membuat jangkaan atau andaian (assumption) sendiri bahawa setiap peniaga dan pengguna mampu untuk menerima dan berhadapan dengan situasi GST yang rumit ini. 

Ia akan memerlukan masa untuk menyesuaikan diri dengan persekitaran baru.

Semua rakyat biasa perlu membayar GST bagi setiap keperluan asas mereka seperti membayar bill telefon, bill internet, insuran kesihatan, insuran awam, bill elektrik yang melebihi 300 unit, bill astro dan sebagainya. 

Ia adalah lebih sukar daripada Kita berfikir.

Bagi golongan peniaga pula, mereka turut tertekan. Lebih-lebih lagi apabila pihak kerajaan mengarahkan supaya mereka tidak boleh menaikkan harga. 

Ini menunjukkan kerajaan bersikap sangat tidak adil. Kebanyakan kos operasi perniagaan bagaimanapun terpaksa meningkat. 

Ia disebabkan kesemua kos keperluan kemudahan asas turut dikenakan GST seperti elektrik, air, sewa, telefon dan banyak lagi. Lebih-lebih lagi dengan kenaikan baru tariff air yang meningkat lebih 100%.

Terdapat ada banyak Persatuan Sudah menyuarakan menggesa kementerian untuk mengkaji Semula kenaikan tarif air. 

Mereka mendakwa bahawa peniaga telah mengalami kenaikan lebih 120% 
Jadi ... Bolehkah kementerian sila menyedarkan peniaga bagaimana untuk boleh tidak menaikkan harga Mereka ? 

Dasarnya adalah, semua golongan pengguna dan peniaga Akan mengalami kesukaran untuk menyesuaikan Diri menerima GST apalagi dengan tahun-tahun ekonomi mencabar. 

Kita boleh lihat, nilai ringgit semakin jatuh, kegiatan ekonomi semakin perlahan, nilai pasaran saham pula tidak menentu, semua tanda-tanda yang jelas sedang berlaku sekarang.

Datuk Speaker,

Adakah kerajaan akan BERPEGANG kepada perlaksanaan pelbagai dasar, yang mana ia memberi kesan negatif kepada kos operasi perniagaan di peringkat negeri mahu pun daerah dan memberikan golongan peniaga sedikit masa untuk menyesuaikan diri?

Adakah kerajaan akan melihat masalah sebenar dan memahami kesukaran yang dihadapi oleh rakyat biasa?

Adakah kerajaan bersedia untuk memimpin dengan tauladan dengan membantu rakyat Sabah melalui waktu sukar ini menyesuaikan diri dengan GST?

Tiada sebarang keraguan lagi bahawa para peniaga dan pengguna sedang rasa dibebankan dan mereka sedang menunggu tindakan kerajaan melakukan sesuatu untuk membantu mereka menghadapi kesan dari perlaksanaan GST.

saya pasti Dan yakin, rakyat akan berterima kasih jika kerajaan Sabah berbuat demikian.

Justeru saya menyeru kerajaan negeri Sabah supaya menunda semua implementasi dasar dan peraturan atau Undang Undang yang berkaitan di semua peringkat, yang memberi kesan terhadap kos operasi perniagaan yang secara langsung Dan memberi kesan terhadap kos sara hidup rakyat biasa. 

Memegang Semua dasar dasar ini

Berilah sedikit tempoh masa kepada golongan peniaga ini sekurang-kurangnya setahun hingga dua tahun untuk menyesuaikan diri.

Sebuah kerajaan yang mengutamakan rakyat (people-oriented) perlulah melayari waktu yang sukar ini bersama rakyatnya. Jangan biarkan mereka tenggelam dalam penderitaan.

Sebelum mengakhiri ucapan saya, saya sekali lagi mengucapkan terima kasih kepada Datuk Speaker atas peluang untuk membahas di bersidang Dewan ini.

Sekian sahaja ucapan saya. Terima kasih

No comments:

Post a Comment