Is it true that using our car for 5 years will be cheaper if compared to using same car overseas, due to fuel subsidy?
Let’s say car cost is RM80,000 while in overseas it costs an equivalent of RM60,000 (25% cheaper). Assume petrol price is RM3.40. After subsidy the petrol is RM1.90 in Malaysia. Assuming your mileage per year is 25,000 km and fuel consumption is 17km/litre.
5 year subsidised = (25,000/17 x RM1.90) x 5 years = RM15,833.37
5 year unsubsidised = (25,000/17 x RM3.40) x 5 years = RM28,333.39
Cheaper car price + subsidised petrol price 5 years = 80k + 15.6k = RM95.6k
Expensive car price + unsubsidised petrol price 5 years = 60k + 28.3k = RM88.3k.
So, with unsubsidised fuel price, the cost is cheaper by RM7k.
The above depends on car price difference, fuel consumption, petrol price subsidy amount. For example, in Thailand, car prices are lower between 30 and 40% while its about the similar in Indonesia and Philippines. Fuel is not subsidised in Thailand.
The actual cost of owning a vehicle also need to consider insurance, road tax, maintenance cost, and loan rates in addition to car price and fuel price.
The above is just a simple example I created after I heard the following mentioned by PM:
Najib also insisted that middle class Malaysians do reap indirect benefits from government policies, through subsidies such as for RON95 petrol.
“Although we pay slightly more (for car purchases) initially, but because of the large amount of subsidies, you end up paying much less than your counterpart after five years of use,” he said.
Sad to hear the unfulfilled wishes of MP Kapar Manickavasagam’s mother. 56 years and still didn’t get citizenship.
At least my mother in law fared better, after trying for so long, will be getting her citizenship hopefully by next month. She was born in Malaysia (but lived in India for a short while), married a Malaysian school teacher, and all her kids are Malaysians. She applied during MyDaftar again, but surprisingly, her name was missing in the successful applicants list. After checking with NRD, it seems like some documents were lost in translation and we did not get the letter. Anyway, all issues settled and hope to hear good news soon. And yeah, while should thank NRD and MyDaftar campaign, the resentment is still there on why it took so long and special program to settle it.
S Manickavasagam (PKR-Kapar) today put a human face to a long-standing issue by sharing with the Dewan Rakyat how his mother died without a Malaysian citizenship after 56 years of waiting.
He said that despite migrating from India to the Federated Malay States before 1957, she died last year only a permanent resident.
“I am an MP and I brought her to Putrajaya several times, and yet they didn’t give her an identity card.
“She was able to sing Negaraku, (speak) fluent Bahasa Malaysia and even English. Why?” he said while debating the budget.
According to the National Registration Department website, a holder of the red identity card is a permanent resident while a blue identity card denotes that the holder is a citizen.
His Sabak Bernam born mother-in-law, too, is facing the same conundrum and has also waited 56 years for her citizenship.
“I also did a search and found Tan Kim, aged 77 and born in Pahang who is still waiting for her identity card,” he added.
This, Manickavasagam (above) said, is despite 42,493 people awarded citizenships from 2008 to Mar 2, 2012.
Citing a written reply to him by Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein, he said as of Feb 29, there are 225,222 people who hold Malaysian permanent residency.
Of this, 162,233 are Indonesians, 35,856 are Filipinos, 8,950 Thais, 4,412 Cambodians and 13,771 are from other countries.
Speaking to Malaysiakini later, Manickavasagam said that the fact that his mother had died without gaining citizenship had really saddened him.
“That is why I am fighting for all mothers to have blue identity cards,” he said.
I wonder if he applied through the MIC initiated MyDaftar campaign which was started since last year February. Talking about MyDaftar, I can’t find detailed statistics but according to reports published in various sources:
9,529 people especially Malaysians of Indian descent had applied for citizenship. Of the total, 5,593 applicants were successful (I assume they’ve got citizenship, and that’s about 59%).
The MyDaftar programme has received 9,529 documentation applications from the Indian community since May said Coordinator of the Special Implementation Taskforce (SITF) of the Cabinet Committee on Indian Community in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk N. Siva Subramaniam
He said from the total, 6,527 were applications involving citizenship while the remaining was for other documentation registration such as birth certificate, marriage and identity card.
“The application for citizenship involving foreigners with entry permits numbered 3,770 and from the total, 2,016 were approved by the Home Ministry (KDN).
“We also received 1,922 citizenship registration applications from the Indian community born in Malaysia after independence and 1,479 [77% success rate] were approved by the NON,” he added.
He said MyDaftar also received 708 citizenship applications from those who were married to Malaysians and from the total, 600 applications [about 85% success] were approved by
KDN.
MyDaftar also received 12 citizenship applications from the children of such citizens and from the total, eight were approved by KDN.
On documentation of late registration of birth, Siva Subramaniam said there were 1,778 applications and from the total 1,459 applications were approved by
Interestingly, PKR highlighted two cases where the documents were issued under MyDaftar, but upon checking the citizenship status in the documents were “yet to be determined” (refer http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/199660).
It would be good if proper statistics are revealed.
Comments Off on MP Kapar mom passed away without getting citizenship »
MP Kubang Kerian YB Salahuddin (PAS) during a debate on the Public Assembly bill with Deputy Higher Education Minister YB Saifuddin (shown live on Astro Awani. Caveat: I DID NOT watch it), mentioned about Thaipusam (along with Maulidur Rasul festival) as example of procession or demonstrasi jalanan. He mentioned perarakan Thaipusam and also said “secara separa sedar” (semi conscious” and “walaupun ada Kavadi” (even though got Kavadis), and also tanpa perlu gas pemedih mata (without need of tear gas). The clip below extracted the part about Thaipusam statements.
These statements were picked up by YB Kamalanathan and blogged at his website:
I think saying that the participants are semi conscious is not appropriate and lacks sensitivity. In fact its a bad example as in our social climate, we can easily misunderstand and get angry. Most of the devotees walking along the chariot or at Batu Caves are perfectly conscious! He should apologise for this wrong statement, possibly due to his ignorance. Next time invite him to join Thaipusam festival as observer to see how things are. Anyway, this coming from PAS is expected. They aren’t really into understanding all faiths.
The YB tried to justify and explain, but I think he should just apologise and move on:
“The point that I was making was not about religion.
“I was talking about Article 10 of the Federal Constitution. I highlighted Thaipusam to make a point about how Malaysians throughout the years, even before independence have gathered and organised themselves in large numbers.
“This was part of a list of other examples that I used to put my point across,” he said.
The Kubang Kerian MP stressed that he had no intention to insult the religious event which is a major Hindu celebration here.
Salahuddin, who met with Kamalanathan, to explain his comments on the matter said that to drive his point across, he used the examples of the gathering against the Malayan Union led by Onn Jaafar (1946), the Perarakan Kerandah 152 (2009) which demanded for the importance of the Malay language, Thaipusam and Maulidur Rasul celebrations to commemorate the prophet’s birthday.
“I did not mean to insult any religion. Why then did I bring up the example of Maulidur Rasul?” he asked.
Kamalanathan, who is the Hulu Selangor MP, took Salahuddin to task yesterday for his comments on Tuesday during a debate entitled “Street demonstrations: Does it build or destroy democracy?” organised by Malay daily, Sinar Harian.
Salahuddin reportedly said that thousands of Hindus gathered during Thaipusam peacefully without the intervention of the authorities.
The PAS leader was also alleged to have said that some Hindus carrying kavadi were semi-conscious and yet they do not need tear gas to keep the situation calm.
Calling Salahuddin “naive”, Kamanathan said his comments were both “insulting and hurting” to the Hindus.
“Belittling the practices of another religion and calling the devotees semi-conscious street demonstrators show lack of understanding and respect for the Hindu devotees,” he added.
‘Just stating facts’
Salahuddin, however, stressed that he was not insulting but merely stating facts about how the public could organise themselves.
“It was only to show that the public is capable of organising themselves. We have the devotees who are semi-conscious but still controllable,” he said.
“Then I also mentioned the large crowds that march during the Maulidur Rasul. You don’t need to use tear-gas to control the crowd.
“That is the point I was making that as long as excessive force is not used, the gatherings have always been peaceful,” he added.
Note: YB Kamalanathan forgot to mention about the Maulidur Rasul part on his blog. In spirit of 1Malaysia, he should also stand up for fellow Muslims and demand apology from the YB for insulting/desecrating/slighting/hurting their feelings.
Now, the part about Thaipusam being street protest or street demonstration (demonstrasi jalanan).
“assembly” means an intentional and temporary assembly of a number of persons in a public place, whether or not the assembly is at a particular place or moving;
“counter assembly” means an assembly organized to convey disagreement with the purpose for which another assembly is organized, and held at the same time, date and place or approximately at the same time, date and place as the other assembly;
“simultaneous assemblies” means two or more assemblies to be held at the same time, date and place, but which have no relationship to each other;
“participant” means a person intentionally or voluntarily present for the purpose of an assembly;
“street protest” means an open air assembly which begins with a meeting at a specified place and consists of walking in a mass march or rally for the purpose of objecting to or advancing a particular cause or causes;
“prohibited places” means— (a) the protected areas and protected places declared under the Protected Areas and Protected Places Act 1959 [Act 298]; and (b) the places as may be specified in the First Schedule;
These are the locations specified in First Schedule:
Dams, reservoirs and water catchment areas
Water treatment plants
Electricity generating stations
Petrol stations
Hospitals
Fire stations
Airports
Railways
Land public transport terminals
Ports, canals, docks, wharves, piers, bridges and marinas
Places of worship
Kindergartens and schools
And this is the Third Schedule:
ASSEMBLIES FOR WHICH NOTIFICATION IS NOT REQUIRED
Religious assemblies
Funeral processions
Wedding receptions
Open houses during festivities
Family gatherings
Family day held by an employer for the benefit of his employees and their
families
General meetings of societies or associations
Para 11: Consent of owner or occupier of place of assembly
11. The organizer of an assembly, other than a religious assembly or a funeral procession or an assembly held at a designated place of assembly, shall obtain the consent of the owner or occupier of the place of assembly for it to be used for the purpose of the assembly.
Reading the above extracts from the Act, some questions arise:
1. What is the difference between assembly and street protest? Street protests is defined to be an assembly that is “open air” and for purpose of a cause (for or against). Assembly can be stationary or moving, while street protest involves marching (moving la..). So, if its (i) indoor or (ii) assemble for no reason or (iii) assemble and don’t move, its assembly. Quite ridiculous. Even people want to assemble to lepak also got reason or cause – melepak.
2. Note the phrase “street protest”. If you take basically any event involving thousands of people, it will fall into the “street protest” category. The definition doesn’t mention that “not including religious activities”. Example, gathering of million youths at certain location, people marching during uniformed bodies activities, event parades, religious events, and yes, even funeral procession (you are support the cause of sending of the person on his last journey).
The only exemption given is that religious event or funeral need not provide notification to authorities. That’s all. It doesn’t say its not street protest. Yes, common sense will tell you obviously a religious parade or funeral procession is not a protest. But this law doesn’t specifically state so? So does that mean a religious procession can be a street protest per the definition above?
3. Why is place of worship is prohibited? Does it mean we can’t “assemble” at Batu Caves or the local shrine any more? Need to get approval? Sounds contradictory to the “no notification needed” clause.
Conclusion: If you don’t know what you are talking about, better don’t talk about it. Give other example that you really know of. If not, end up like this la.
Comments Off on Thaipusam, Street Demonstration and Peaceful Assembly Act »
Alamak, what’s a difference it makes! Earlier MIC President said its 400 matriculation seats. Yesterday it become foundation seats.
IPTS foundation and government matriculation is two different things la. One is free, the other one is not. MIC says can apply PTPTN loan, MIED, Tan Sri Manikavasagam loan etc. From saying they will work out the funding, now become loan. Where got same la.
Rather than waste time doing foundation and waste time sourcing funds, why not get the 400 seats in matriculation? Push a bit la. Play some drama. If can get 1000 seats extra, sure can push another 400 more. This is Malaysia la, semua boleh. 1Malaysia!, 1Malaysia1, 1Malaysia! Errr.. sorak 3 kali cukup ka?
In my opinion: If don’t know what you are talking about, better don’t announce it. Let other people who understand the issue announce it.
Footnote: Does it really need the president of a political party to give out free bus pass sponsored by bus company to 70 primary school students? This is like division level program. Why not give chance to local leaders to handle? I think better to focus on other things.
Yup, in KL which under federal government. And this pisses off Deputy FT Minister Dato Saravanan. Because now they (MIC) can’t say no temple demolished under BN since PM Najib took over. Yup, its that serious.
Yup. (Just wanted to make it three “yup”s).
Interestingly, a directive was issued saying temple issues in FT was to be referred to Deputy Minister, but wonder why it was not adhered to this time. Looks like not only in PR-managed states have this problem.
And according to article below, the land has been gazetted to be used for non-Muslim religious purpose. So, what gives?
DEPUTY Federal Territories Ministry Datuk M. Saravanan was incensed by the demolition of the Maha Veppan Kaliamman temple in Kepong early yesterday morning.
Saravanan said he was made to “feel like a fool” negotiating with the group of government officers despite being in charge of non-Islamic religious land issues in the Federal Territory after a directive was sent out two years ago.
“The FT Land and Minerals Department went on with the demolition despite the directive that no temples should be demolished without prior discussion with me, Federal Territories Minister Datuk Raja Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin and FT Secretary-General Datuk Ahmad Phesal Talib,” he said.
Taking control: Saravanan discussing the temple demolition issue with some of the devotees.
When he was informed about the demolition process that morning, he contacted the FT Land deparment director Hashim Ismail.
Saravanan said he had asked for the demolition process to be postponed until he could discuss the issue with Nong Chik but Hashim said he could not do anything.
Temple priest Periasamy Batumalai said 40 devotees tried to stop some 50 officers from DBKL and the police force from demolishing the temple.
Roads leading to the temple wereclosed off and devotees were barred from entering despite pleading with the officers.
According to the temple’s laywer Datin Anit Kaur Randhawa, the temple was not issued any order to vacate.
The officials used the notice from the Land and Minerals Department dated June 19, 2012 and the bulldozers moved in the very next day at 9am, barely 20 minutes after pasting the unsigned notice on the two gates of the temple.
“The DBKL officers and the police came at 8.30am and pasted the notice on the temple before proceeding to demolish it within 20 minutes. They only managed to tear down the fence surrounding the temple as the devotees formed a human barricade to halt the proceedings,” she said.
The demolition was later stopped by Saravanan who arrived at 10am.
The temple was initially located at the Jalan Kuching roundabout before moving to its current site in 2011.
The land in Kepong had been gazetted as religious land and set aside for non-Muslims.
“When I called Nong Chik, he said he was unaware of the demolition. I am surprised at the arrogance of the officers. They seemed to be in a rush to demolish the temple,” he said.
He added that the small plot of land was useful for the temple.
Anit Kaur said letters of support were sent to the Prime Minister’s Department on May 31 last year to apply for the land.
MIC Taman Fadason branch chairman K. Jayaraman said the demolition move was disrespectful.
Non-governmental body, the New Indian Welfare and Charity Malaysia, will donate RM2,000 to put up a barricade and secure the temple.
| 
Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email 
