DAP’s Su says he has proof temples will be demolished
Monday, 06 July 2009
(The Star) IPOH: The rift between Kedah Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Azizan Abdul Razak and the DAP is widening with state DAP chief Thomas Su claiming he has proof that illegal Hindu and Chinese temples would be demolished.
Expressing regret that Azizan had accused him of stirring up racial issues, Su said the Mentri Besar should have checked his facts first.
“If the Mentri Besar wants to know, he just needs to call the Alor Setar Datuk Bandar or the exco member in charge,” he said at his service centre in Pasir Pinji, here, yesterday.
Showing a letter, purportedly from the Alor Setar Municipal Council (MBAS), ordering a Hindu temple to move, Su said Azizan should give his undertaking that the temple would not be demolished.
“The DAP never plays race politics,” he said. “We defend issues of people’s interest regardless of race.”
On Saturday, Azizan accused the DAP of stirring up racial issues with allegations that the state would demolish illegal temples.
Azizan claimed that neither the state government nor the MBAS had discussed this.
Su said issues affecting illegal places of worship should be handled sensitively.
“They are not illegal by choice. The authorities have refused to legalise them,” he said.
He also pointed out that the illegal pig slaughterhouse that was demolished recently was built in the 1970s.
Su also claimed that the party had the support of the people in Alor Setar.
When asked if the Kedah DAP would reconsider its decision to pull out from the Kedah Pakatan Rakyat government, Su said: “There is no turning back.”
--------------------------------------------
It's so laughable.
People can be so blind, yet be so arrogant about their blindness!
DAP's Thomas Su has suddenly come out to be the defender of all Kedahans in various issues. Yet, is it only me who finds it peculiar that he seems to be a lone voice in all these issues?
This really begs the question: just whose champion is he, really?
Let's take a quick look at his 3 pet peeves with MB Azizan.
1. Demolishing ILLEGAL Hindu and Chinese temples.
In the first place, they are ILLEGAL are they not? If Thomas Su is constantly yodelling about DAP's stance of upholding Rule of Law, why is he now yodelling that the law should not be taking its course? ILLEGAL structures should be demolished should they not? What legal standing do they have NOT to be demolished?
Oh...but Thomas gives a flimsy justification that issues affecting illegal places of worship should be handled sensitively.
Thomas, what principle is a country run by: religious and racial sensitivities or the Law?
OK-lah, Thomas. Let's give you some benefit of doubt la. Let me just ask one simple question:
How to handle it sensitively?
It's easy to point out this and that as wrong. But when that is all you are capable of doing, and you are incapable of coming out with a viable solution, you are nothing more than a kopitiam bullshitter. And the fact that a kopitiam bullshitter can get elected into the state government is a sad, sad state of affairs.
No wonder the PR state govts are facing such problems. Not only they have to deal with the BN's leftover shit and their constant sabotage, their ranks are filled with kopitiam bullshitters who have nothing to offer except their loud voices!
(note to PR: Start grooming new capable leaders now. Next GE, seriously vet your candidates, or else we'll never get rid of BN!)
We have a situation where the past authorities had closed one eye to all these ILLEGAL structures being put up. Nothing was done because of so-called "religious sensitivities". So we see the mushrooming of ILLEGAL shrines all over town on sidewalks, under trees, etc. These mini-shrines eventually grow to become large shrines and eventually become full-fledged temples, with committees and expansion plans.
These committees, emboldened by the official Close One Eye policy, eventually go ahead with their building expansion plans. So what started out as a small altar under a neighbourhood tree becomes a large temple 15 years later, causing massive traffic jams and pollution during festivals.
I think it is right for authorities to finally regulate these temples so that the town planning is not disrupted and everyone can enjoy peace of mind.
But oh...according to wise Thomas: “They are not illegal by choice. The authorities have refused to legalise them.”
Again, Thomas...why? There must have been some reason - either it was not feasible or there was a discriminatory policy in place.
Let's examine. If it was a discriminatory policy, who approved it - the present or past administration? If it was the past (BN) administration, why is the blame being showered on the present PR administration who are finally trying to uphold the Rule of Law? If it was the present administration, sila kemukakan bukti bahawa adanya polisi sebegini!
If however approval was not given because of feasibility issues, then the temple committees should not have gone ahead to build, should they? By doing so, they are blatantly disobeying the law. And they are thick-skinned enough to scream that their rights are being trampled when the authorities take action! The principle is so ridiculous, like the police constable who made a police report that he wasn't getting his fair share of all the bribes collected!!
If the Rule of Law was allowed to be twisted and selectively imposed according to one's whims, then our country is nothing more than a gangster state, where might holds absolute right! Where the authorities are castrated by mere lobbyists. Where government provides no leadership, only bending to the will of the shrillest voices. Where justice is defined as the weak giving in to the strong.
Is that what you're agitating for, Thomas?
2. Demolishing the ILLEGAL pig abbatoir.
Again, this is an ILLEGAL structure that the authorities had allowed to operate for almost 40 YEARS!! I think that's more than enough grace period, doncha think?
If the abbatoir owners cannot find a suitable replacement site, is it the fault of the authorities? The authorities also cited pollution concerns raised by the nearby residents of the proposed replacement site. Who can blame them, with the appaling level of cleanliness of our largely unregulated abbatoirs?
If only the abbatoir can produce their building plans to prove that there will be zero pollution from the abbatoir and a proper public hearing held, I doubt that this would be an issue at all. Just be transparent and honest and legal and safe about it la. Why all this political hoo-haa?
As it is, the issue has been blown up to be not a health and legal issue but a race issue.
Does our dear Mr Thomas expect that with the racial pressure he is putting on, the Kedah State govt will now capitulate on the health and legal concerns and go back to the Close One Eye policy?
Gosh darn it! Are we so conditioned to the "Boleh Settle" and "Close One Eye" way of government that when the Rule of Law is implemented we feel we need to strike back? Are Malaysians so illegal-minded that we cannot grasp the concept of doing things legally and properly?
And to have such a person in the STATE GOVERNMENT openly displaying such a mentality is absolutely shameful to say the least. To hang his desire for a government that "Boleh Settle" and "Close One Eye" for all to see and hold it up as if it is a banner for "justice" - is there no shame and honour among our politicians?
3. 50% Bumiputra quota for all housing developments.
I really don't understand what the big hoo-haa about THIS issue is about. Especially since the Kedah REHDA has already said that it has no problem adhering to this policy.
Let's examine it further.
Developers are business people and they are not stupid. They know how to count money, that's why they know how to make money. If they didn't, they would have quickly become bankrupt a long time ago. The fact that they are still around means they have brains.
And if they ave brains and they say OK to this policy, that means it won't hurt their business interests too much la.
So far, that's obvious.
Now on the buyer's side. People point to the policy and state that the 50% of non-Bumi buyers will be subsidising the other 50% of the Bumi buyers.
Such a stupid argument. To prove how stupid it is, let's do a bit of number-crunching.
Out of 100 units, 30 units reserved for Bumiputras. Conventional thinking is that these 30% if sold is a bonus, otherwise...considered unsellable. Which means 70% sold must cover 100% costs + profits.
Now let's say it costs a developer RM150k (all-inclusive average price) to build 1 unit of terrace house. Total costs for building 100 units is RM15 mil. He then sells the house for RM270k each, making a RM120k profit before tax per house (not counting under-table money la, of course). So out of a book value RM27 mil for 100 units, the developer expects to sell 70 units, i.e. about RM19 million. The NEP requires that 5% discount be given to bumiputras as well. This is a non-issue as the asumption that any sales from the Bumi block is a bonus.
So does the developer make a profit? Yes! RM4mil is nothing to sneeze at!
Are people willing to buy the houses at these prices? Well, look around KL and see how many developers are still selling houses as low as RM270k? Even some condos cost more than that now!
But RM270 is a price that is beyond many non-bumis as well! I for one cannot afford a house costing that much, and don't foresee myself being able to anytime soon.
So what will happen if the Bumi quota is raised to 50%?
"Oh, we will be paying double for the house because I'm paying for another house that's unsellable by the developer."
Is that true?
I find there is a flaw in this kind of thinking. (1) Even housebuying has become a racial issue. (2) Has anyone noticed whether their housing estates suffer from 30% unoccupancy? No? So what's the issue about paying for "unsellable" Bumi lots? (3) People who think like this is missing the point - it's all about economics la!
It's very simple: Would developers simply jack up their prices to cover for the "unsellable" Bumi lots and risk antagonising their buyers?
Or would they find a way to make it a win-win for all? Quick example: bring the house prices down to such an extent that the have-not-too-much's (regardless Bumi or non) can afford the houses? This would also make the 50% Bumi quota moot, would it not?
It's a win-win - developers still make money (although maybe not as much), Bumi's get their affordable housing and the off-shoot is that the nons also get to enjoy more affordable homes. I would think that this is one of the simplest and most viable solutions.
And the fact that the Kedah REHDA agreed to the 50% quota means that they have got a solution. It remains to be seen what it is.
As I said, it's a matter of economics. Let's wait and see how this policy will affect Kedah's housing supply and demand, shall we? REHDA's not complaining, why should the politicians who are NOT developers?
It's easy for people like Mr Thomas to point out this and that as wrong. But when that is all you are capable of doing, and you are incapable of coming out with a viable solution, you are nothing more than a kopitiam bullshitter. And the fact that a kopitiam bullshitter can get elected into the state government is a sad, sad state of affairs.
No wonder the PR state govts are facing such problems. Not only they have to deal with the BN's leftover shit and their constant sabotage, their ranks are filled with kopitiam bullshitters who have nothing to offer except their loud voices!
(note to PR: Start grooming new capable leaders now. Next GE, seriously vet your candidates, or else we'll never get rid of BN!)
No comments:
Post a Comment