marahfreedom

Archive for the ‘partial asset declarations’ Category

3 Articles on Vote Buying In both Pakatan and Barisan – repostedby @AgreeToDisagree – 5th February 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, 3rd Force, 99%, Abuse of Power, Assemblymen have not declared assets, asset declarations, Bad By-Laws, bad laws, Bumiputera Apartheid, failed asset declarations, hegelian dialectic, Invasive Laws, Malaysia, MPs have not declared assets, out of context, partial asset declarations, unprofessional behaviour, vested interest, voting methods on February 5, 2012 at 6:29 am

ARTICLE 1

GEORGE TOWN – The DAP-led Penang government proposal to give cash aid of RM100 for each newborn baby has been described as vote buying for the general election.

Penang Barisan Nasional deputy chairman Zainal Abidin Osman condemned the state government’s ‘Program Anak Emas Pulau Pinang’ as it is clearly politically motivated.

“The proposal to give money to voters with new born babies is not a good way to govern the state,” he told reporters after a walkabout by Penang BN leaders at Air Itam market here yesterday.

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said on Sunday the state government proposed to give RM100 for each new born baby provided one of the parents was a voter with income not exceeding RM4,000 monthly.

‘Program Anak Emas Pulau Pinang’ is expected to cost the state government up to RM10mil annually.

Zainal said the plan could cause dissatisfaction among those not registered as voters and proposed that the cash aid be given to all parents with new born babies.

(Bernama)

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Very cynical move. A child will cost FAR MUCH MORE than $100 from the basic necessities needed from age 0 to 1 alone. This is a very cynical and calculative consumerist you have as CM. This is typical influence from PAP and a mockery of new parents.Taking from the taxpayers to indulge DAP’s ego if anything. Who was consulted in the giveaway?  Institutionalized bribery rather than improvements to the system itself that should be instead of grandstanding at the taxpayer’s expense :

Hey idiot voters, vote for someone who will remove the bridge concessionaire usage fees for those earning below $4000, or lower the Election deposit from 15,000 to 150 ringgit. Remember that this is the same party who would assign itself (actually LGE and Wife) tax payer monies of 750K (Chiefminister LGE himself) and 120K (Assemblyperson LGE’s wife) respectively for their own funerals. Or similarly the old folks giveaway cash which some old folks out of ethical concerns refused?

Penang could go independent as a state from Pakatan and the policies could be the same – WITHOUT the egomania with YOUR tax funds. Just look at the red take based abuse cases under LGE’s hatchetmen Ng Aik Wei and Chow Kow Yeow since recent times :

It’s no nirvana for cafe – The Star Online (help them not take away their livelihood)
http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2011/7/19/north/9126779&sec=North

Buah Pala Ethnically Cleansed
http://www.humanrightspartymalaysia.com/2011/07/18/kg-buah-pala-ethnically-cleansed-dap-pockets-and-party-coffers-filled-and-now-wayang-kulit-for-some-villagers-by-dcm-ii-indian-mandore/

Gas Tank Spat
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/1/14/nation/20110114162244&sec=nation

Foul of Law
http://mychiefministerlimguaneng.blogspot.com/2011/07/anti-cm-protesters-bring-traffic-to.html

 

ARTICLE 2

Funding Social Welfare Schemes In Breach Of EPF Act 1991 – Tony Pua – Saturday, 04 February 2012 07:57

Both the Prime Minister and the Minister of Federal Territories tried to justify the use of RM1.5 billion from Employee Provident Fund (EPF) to provide loans for social housing yesterday after being criticised for abusing workers’ retirement funds for political purposes.

Najib claimed that RM1.5 billion needed was “not substantial compared to EPF funds”. He further added that “the scheme does not undermine the interests of the EPF because the value of the housing units in the market is far higher than the purchase price… If a buyer is unable to or does not repay the loan, the unit can be sold for a higher price.”

Raja Nong Chik also explained that “To the EPF, this is a secured business transaction, a secured loan, it is more secured than other corporate land property which is guaranteed by a government agency – the DBKL (Kuala Lumpur City Hall).”

Firstly the Prime Minister must be castigated for having the cheek to claim that the RM1.5 billion is an insignificant amount relative to the EPF fund size. Regardless of whether it is RM1.5 million or RM1.5 billion or even RM15 billion, the EPF funds must be managed stringently and not be subjected to abuse. Similarly whether the amount is a RM100 or a RM1 million bribe, if its a crime, being the lesser amount provides absolutely no justification.

Secondly, if the low-cost properties are so collateral-worthy, that the market price is much higher than the purchase price, then why can’t these loans be made via commercial banks and not through EPF social lending programmes? If DBKL is able to provide the guarantee, and the guarantee is even “better than normal corporate property”, then surely, banks will be rushing to provide the loans and not shy away from them.

The EPF on its website says that it “aims to provide financial security for its members’ retirement purposes. The fund is committed to preserving and growing the savings of its members in a prudent manner in accordance with best practices in investments and corporate conduct.”

Therefore the EPF is not a lender of the last resort for the poor and neither is it a social welfare organisation.

Finally, the social housing loan scheme is in breach of the EPF Act 1991 which regulates the fund in terms of permissible investment activities. Under Clause 26 the Act, the EPF may lend money to Federal and State governments. It can also provide loans to and subscribe to bonds of registered corporate bodies in the country.

It may even provide loans to members of the Fund “for the purpose of purchasing or building a house”. The EPF housing loan to its members is based on a proportion of the worker’s contribution to the Fund.

However, no where in the Act does it say it can provide loans to individuals to acquire low-cost apartments using the property as a collateral. Despite the “guarantee” from DBKL, the loans are being made out directly to the property owners who may or may not have contributed to EPF.

We fully support measures by the Government to assist the poor to own their own properties. However such measures cannot be at the expense of abusing Malaysian workers’ retirement savings as specifically outlined in the EPF Act.

The Federal Government if need be, can borrow directly from EPF as it does normally, for its social welfare programmes. The EPF should not however be directed to provide loans directly to the general public and put itself at risk of default by the individual borrowers.

Najib who is also the Finance Minister must stop the social housing loan scheme in its current form to not only ensure compliance with the EPF Act, but more importantly, ensure that the workers’ hard-earned savings will not be jeopardised in the guise of politically motivated charity.

 

 

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Pot calling the kettle black Pakatan? As mentioned in a comment elsewhere, scrap ALL handouts and ‘steal-outs’ (like Toll Concessionaires) and give only to the poorest of all races. There is no pie for the 99% when the 1% toll keepers keep taking money from the voters. Meanwhile lower the election deposits so that the POOR can take seats, join politics and write policies. Have you declared your assets yet Tony Pua? People in Pakatan? But you still want to keep election deposits high eh? WHys should anyone vote for a ‘new’ coalition that doesn’t change anything yet? Almost an entire term has passed but no local council elections or asset declarations BY POLITICIANS, EXCO declarations do not count in the context spoken of by Pakatan when wooing voters in 2008.

Meanwhile though loathe to quote ‘ . . . “Unhappy things” happening in states under opposition rule . . . Mahathir” . . . ‘

Try the below : Article 3 for details . . .

 

 

ARTICLE 3

Workshop Operator Fails In Bid To Embarrass Guan Eng – Thursday, 12 January 2012 06:38 – Bernama

GEORGE TOWN — An operator of a workshop which was allegedly torn down by the Municipal Council of Penang Island failed in his attempt to present a replica of the workshop, a toilet and a bulldozer to Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng on the first anniversary of the alleged incident in Jelutong here.

Mohd Yacoob Mohd Nor, 23, arrived at the lobby of the state government office on the third floor of the Tun Abdul Razak Complex (Komtar) at 2.40 pm, yesterday accompanied by several members of the Penang branch of the Malay right-wing group Perkasa.

Security guards denied them permission to enter the office and they left after waiting for 45 minutes, leaving the items wrapped in red cloth at the counter of the guards.

Mohd Yacoob said he was unhappy with the alleged demolition of his workshop, Mega Xtreme Motor, claiming that he had a licence to operate the facility located on his own land. “The demolition should not have taken place, and prior notice should have been given,” he told reporters.

He said that following the alleged demolition on Jan 11 last year, he wrote to the council president requesting the reason for its action but said he has yet to receive a reply.

(Bernama)

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

DAP has a habit of destroying people’s livlihoods or harrassing people about their property. Though racism and apartheid typify PERKASA, I am on Nor’s side here. It’s his private property and he’s just making a simple living you Gambier Threat, KOMTAR Lockdown, Beachboy harrassing, gas tank stealing, Condominium staircase trashing political party! Whats wrong with DAP? Even if someone was racist (wich DAP did not address so far), you cannot invade their property and destroy their livlihood. Take heart Nor, this news is already embarrassment in itself, your bid succeeded because most people detest such behaviour by political parties, regardless of race, and with the nepotism and limitless term issue, DAP is as bad a guy as PERKASA this day.

DAP has a habit of destroying people’s livelihoods or harrassing people about their property. Though racism and apartheid typify PERKASA, I am on Nor’s side here. It’s his private property and he’s just making a simple living you Gambier Threat, KOMTAR Lockdown, Beachboy harrassing, gas tank confiscating, Condominium staircase trashing political party! Whats wrong with DAP? Mentally ill? Want to control which people are allowed to make a living?

Even if someone was supportive of apartheid and racist (which DAP did not address in any clarity with intent to end so far), a political party cannot invade their property and destroy their livelihood.

Take heart Nor, though most of us equal minded citizens detest you for being associated with PERKASA, we sympathise with what you faced, and this news is already embarrassment in itself. Your bid to embarrass DAP succeeded simply because most people detest such behaviour by political parties, regardless of race, and with the nepotism and limitless term issue, DAP is as bad a guy as PERKASA this day.

Both Pakatan (misrepresenting campaign promises, nepotism) and Barisan (apartheid, corruption, nepotism) are different sides of the same coin in many ways, vote 3rd Force (possibility of corruption but no nepotism and will have no choice but to use ending APARTHEID to win GE13 and the 40% non-Malay vote to end the sin of Asabiya and abuse of Article 1 of the UNHCR)  instead : KITA, MCLM, PCM, Borneo Front, Konsensus Bebas, HRP, PSM to achieve the below 3 items.

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

Will MCA/MIC/Gerakan/PPP leave BN to support 3rd Force and perhaps survive on the liberal ticket that legislates rather than keep things one eye closed? Stop being an APARTHEID accepting lapdog and by leaving BN endorse and grant the 3 items. It’s just equality where Najib has the mandate to grant the above 3 items to ensure BN coalition wins but has not . . .