Posts Tagged ‘Selangor’

SJKT Effingham land issue crops up again

September 9th, 2011
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


This issue was first raised in September 2008, and 3 years down the lane, it pops up. Interestingly, this time its being raised by a member from the offending party itself.

From what I understand, the land taken by MIC has been developed as a commercial plot, so I’m not sure how this will turnout. Maybe like the Bakun dam case – “the land under question is already under water, so how to return it back” answer given by the court. Delay long enough and your case becomes invalid.

Anyway, this guy says got “solid proof” but didn’t show it. Hope the proof can stay “solid” after this.

 

A local MIC leader today asked the party to return a piece of land that he said was originally alienated for a Tamil school.

V Thiagarajan, who heads the Taman Mujur MIC branch, said party president G Palanivel should “do the right thing” by ensuring that the Effingham Tamil School get back the three acres of prime land.

The school is located in Bandar Utama, Damansara. The accusation about the land grab first surfaced in 2009, with former students and residents of the area claiming that the developer of Bandar Utama had set aside six acres for the school in 1999.

They said the late K Sivalingam, an MIC leader and an executive councillor in the then BN-led state government, decided that only three acres should be given to the school and the rest to the party.

There was also an allegation of mismanagement of RM300,000 in developer contributions to the school. MIC was accused of trying to channel the money to its Maju Institute of Education Development (MIED) although the developer disagreed.

MIC has claimed that there was an error in the description of the proprietor in the land title and that the party is the rightful owner of the three acres.

Currently, the school has 600 pupils, but the number is expected to increase steadily.

Thiagarajan told FMT he had “solid evidence” that all six acres belonged to the school.

“I plead with Palanivel to use his veto power to give back the land to the school,” he said.

“I have all the evidence to show clearly that the land MIC claims as its own should be part of school.”

source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/09/08/give-back-school%E2%80%99s-land-mic-told/

 

 

Video of Robbery at Restoran Subur Section 15 Shah Alam

September 7th, 2011
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I think I’ve passed by this place few times.  Robbers target the laptops and cash register. At 4am it was towards sahur time for the Muslim folks.

So, should we ban motorbikes that travel in a group? Or have more roadblocks? Or allow people/businesses to own firearms? Have alarm linked to police station? Don’t eat in mamak shops (or other exposed restaurants?)? Don’t carry laptops/valuables? Don’t go out after dark? Get more policemen to patrol? How to prevent this crime?

YB Manoharan’s seven motions for Indian community

August 29th, 2011
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


The seven motions:

1. Felda-like scheme involving 2000 acres of land for 200 hardcore families.

2. RM10 million fund to be set up to assist Indians in small and medium enterprises.

3. set up an Indian affairs bureau under the purview of the menteri besar.

4. at least 10 acres of land for all Tamil and Chinese schools in the state.

5. renaming Jalan Barat in Petaling Jaya to Jalan V David to commemorate the late unionist.

6. seven percent discount for all poor Malaysians who are purchasing homes from the Selangor State Development Corporation (PKNS).

7. “no demolition” order or shifting of temples erected in the state before 2008.

Number 7 was accepted with a modification:  no demolition or shifting a temple without the approval of the executive council in charge.

Motion number 1 is difficult due to land scarcity, but I believe Selangor still got plenty of land outside Klang Valley which can be utilised for agriculture. The state government can even consider reserving certain percentage for the poor Indians in any schemes being implemented/planned.

Motion 2 is not a big problem. Can easily be set up.

Motion 3 is even easier.

Motion 4 is noble indeed. Must be supported.

Motion 5, well, not exactly top of my list. Can even consider naming some of the new projects being done by the state government instead of renaming, if its an hassle.

Motion 6, totally agree. Not sure if anyone in the right mind will disagree to this.

Motion 7, as it has been amended, we can hold the executive councillor in charge responsible if any demolition happens.

Out of the 7, 3 are outright motions to help Indian community, while the other 4 are mixed or of no direct help.

Gotta agree with the YB, this kind of motion was unheard of before this. I hope its retabled and let’s see how the state government responds.

I’m not sure what the senator Barat Maniam meant by saying that MIC representatives will support the motion if BN wins Selangor. Someone need to table the motion FIRST, before you can support it. So, would MIC representatives make promise to table such a motion?

 

Just days after Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers conceded that the opposition pact, which rode to victory in five states on the wave of Indian support in 2008, had failed the community, a legislator revealed that several motions beneficial to Indians had been dismissed by the Selangor State Legislative Assembly.

According to Kota Alam Shah state assemblyman M Manoharan, the assembly has dismissed seven motions which he had tabled in July.

He said if the motions had been passed and become law, not only would the Indians have benefited but all the poor in Selangor would have also found reprieve.

Explaining the motions, Manoharan said he had moved for a Felda-like scheme involving 2,000 acres of land to be set up for 200 hardcore Indian poor in Selangor.

He had also moved for a RM10 million fund to be set up to assist Indians in small and medium enterpries in the state.

“I also tabled a motion to set up an Indian affairs bureau under the purview of the menteri besar and asked for at least 10 acres of land for all Tamil and Chinese schools in the state,” he said.

The other three motions he had tabled were renaming Jalan Barat in Petaling Jaya to Jalan V David to commemorate the late unionist, a seven percent discount for all poor Malaysians who are purchasing homes from the Selangor State Development Corporation (PKNS) and a “no demolition” order or shifting of temples erected in the state before 2008.

“But the only motion that was accepted by the assembly was the temple order.

“But that too they (Pakatan lawmakers) tweaked to read no demolition or shifting a temple without the approval of the executive council in charge,” said Manoharan, who added that he will again table the same motions in October sitting of the assembly.

Land and housing

Manoharan, who was upset with the dismissal of his bids, said it was “high-time Indians enjoyed the benefits denied to them since Independence”.

“About one-third of the entire Indian population in Malaysia lives in Selangor.

“If the motions had been passed and become law, they would not only help Indians but also all those who are poor in the state.

“I asked for the land so that we can teach the Indian community to cultivate it for agriculture or livestock.

“This would also empower our youths and deter them from joining criminal activities,” said Manoharan,who is from the DAP.

On the housing issue, he said owning a house was a basic necessity for everyone.

He added that PKNS was in a position to assist Indians and the low-income earner acquire homes.

“PKNS is an established property company and it makes money from its housing projects.

“Surely, it can help our low-income people by offering discount.

“Besides, the Menteri Besar (Khalid Ibrahim) is the chairman of the government-linked agency and he can monitor it directly,” said Manoharan.

Malay votes

Asked why the other Pakatan state assemblymen refused to support his motion, Manoharan said it could be due to fear of losing Malay votes.

However, he added that even the Malay assemblymen were aware that the Indians were left behind in many areas.

“Some lawmakers did come to me after the state assembly meeting and said my ideas were good.

“But when I asked why they didn’t support it then, they kept mum,” he said.

However, Manoharan stopped short of criticising the Pakatan state government, saying the assemblymen now enjoyed more freedom to table their motions unlike in the previous state government.

“The Indian representatives then would not even dare to table such motions.

“I must thank our current speaker (Teng Chang Khim) for allowing more freedom in the assembly.

“And I am going to table the motions again in the next state assembly sitting in October. I’m confident my fellow Pakatan assemblymen will support me,” said Manoharan.

‘Good ideas’

Meanwhile, newly appointed Senator V Subramaniam, however, supports Manoharan’s motions, saying the ideas “were good”.

Subramaniam, however, conceded that allocating 10 acres for Tamil schools in Selangor would be tough as some schools were located in densely populated areas like Petaling Jaya where land is scarce.

“However, the rest of the motions are good. The (state assembly’s) rejection shows that Pakatan is not sincere in helping the Indians despite riding high on the community’s votes in 2008,” said Subramaniam, who is better known as Barat Maniam.

Subramaniam, who is Petaling Jaya MIC’s division chief, said if BN wins Selangor in the next polls, MIC representatives will support the motion to improve the Indians’ lot in the state.

“The ideas are in line with the 1Malaysia concept. If we win in the next polls, we will look out for the welfare of all Malaysians.

“Besides, that is why we are elected into the post,” he said.

Last week, Indian DAP leaders conceded that the opposition pact had failed the community after having a closed-door meeting involving 50 DAP members, including lawmakers.

One DAP member said that Pakatan is doing “another BN” for Indians in Selangor, Penang and Kedah.

Among those present at the meeting were DAP national vice-chairman and Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran, Penang DAP deputy chairman and deputy Chief Minister II P Ramasamy, Perak DAP deputy chairman and Tronoh assemblyman V Sivakumar, Perak DAP vice-chairman and Sungkai assemblyman A Sivanesan and former ISA detainee V Ganapathirau.

source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/08/29/sgor-rejected-motions-to-improve-indians-lot/

4 Malaysian Indian ministers?

August 18th, 2011
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Personally, I think this will backfire on Dr Xavier. As pointed out in the article below, even in Selangor, there’s only 1 EXCO, while PKR claims not to follow raced-based appointments. So Dr Xavier’s statement is contradictory. I think whoever forms the government should focus on consolidating and run a lean government that reduces unnecessary expenses, not simply create more positions.

What’s the point of having many  ministers? MIC President appointed as Minister on 9th August, but no portfolio till today.  Isn’t that embarrassing?

 

MIC secretary-general S Murugesan has dismissed a claim that Pakatan Rakyat will appoint four Cabinet ministers should it form goverment as an empty promise.

He was responding to Selangor state exco Dr Xavier Jeyakumar’s statement which appeared in the Malaysian Nanban Tamil daily today.

Murugesan believes that Pakatan was caught in a bind after the recent appointment of MIC president G Palanivel as a minister.

“So they are attempting to confuse the Indian community by claiming that Pakatan will appoint four Indian ministers,” he told FMT.

Xavier, the Seri Andalas assemblyman, also slammed MIC for the woes faced by the Indian community.

In view of this, the PKR leader said the community had little to rejoice about Palanivel’s appointment.

Meanwhile, Murugesan asked why the Selangor state government only had one Indian exco instead of two for the benefit of the community.

When the state itself refused to give an additional portfolio to an Indian leader, he said, Pakatan would definitely not appoint four federal ministers if it seized power at the federal level.

Who is he in Pakatan?

 MIC CWC member KP Samy also lashed out at Jeyakumar over his ‘empty talk’.

“Who is he in Pakatan Rakyat to give such an assurance? He even failed to get a strong support in his own (PKR) division elections.

“Forget appointing four ministers. How about making an immediate appointment of another Indian exco member in Selangor? Can he do that?” asked Samy.

He also challenged Jeyakumar to appoint more Indians to state-owned companies and subsidies first before talking about ministerial appointments.

‘Ask Anwar to say it’

Also taking Jeyakumar to task was former PKR leader S Kotappan, who challenged the exco to get his boss Anwar Ibrahim to publicly state that four Indian ministers would be appointed.

He alleged that the PKR leader’s statement was made due to a personal agenda since he was expected to contest in a Parliament seat in the next polls.

It is learnt that there would be a swap with Kapar MP S Manikavasagam, who would vie for the state assembly seat and be made exco if he wins.

“Recently, in Johor, Jeyakumar challenged Palanivel that he will stand against the MIC president in the general election. So it is clear that he is aiming for a MP seat,” said Kotappan.

He claimed that Jeyakumar was now eyeing a federal post if Pakatan takes over Putrajaya.

source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/08/18/mic-scoffs-at-pakatans-4-indian-ministers/

Temples in Section 19 PJ get land from developer

August 15th, 2011
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


One good thing is that the developer is made to fulfill their application conditions. However, I’m not sure of the pro and cons of allowing developer to keep the lease and the impact of perpetual lease agreement between land owner and temple. Who will determine the rate for rent of the land (if got any rent)? Is it possible the land given free, but later may be charged to temple? Can the land be revoked and used for other purpose by the land owner?

 

TWO temples that have been operating for more than 40 years in Section 19, Petaling Jaya, will be allocated 0.09ha (10,000sq ft) of land in the same area.

The Tow Boo Keong Taoist Temple and the Arulmigu Sri Maha Mariamman Hindu Temple had in May received notices from a developer of nearby condominium project to move out of the land that they have been using as places of worship at the former squatter area.

During a press conference at the Hindu temple on Saturday, Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua said Petaling Jaya city councillors had the planning approval for the Ameera condominium on March 29, 2007.

“One of the conditions in the planning approval signed by developer Selangor Dredging Bhd (SDB) states that they must provide 10,000 sq ft of land to each temple so we have asked them to comply,” said Pua.

Also present were temple chairmen Tan Kam Piew and Tanasakaran Rengasamy and MBPJ councillors R. Selvarajan, Mak Khuin Weng and Jeyaseelan Anthony.

Pua said after discussions with the developer, SDB had agreed to give 0.09ha to each temple but would be keeping the land title.

“The temples will enter into a perpetual lease with the land owner and it is now up to the committees of both temples to negotiate the location of the plots with the developer,” said Pua.

He said the DAP had a team of lawyers who could oversee the negotiations but he advised the committees to appoint their own to finalise the agreement.

Tanasakaran said they were relieved that they would not have to relocate the temple and his committee would be meeting the developers to discuss the matter.

SDB communications and corporate affairs manager Yeoh Guan Jin confirmed that they would be allocating a 0.09ha to each temple to build their place of worship and SDB would hold the land titles.

source: http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2011/8/15/central/9299361&sec=central