黄培根：明年市场依旧低靡不振

（诗华日报诗巫26日讯）行动党柏拉旺区州议员黄培根认为，明年本地的经济发展趋弱，民众与商家被迫面对市场低靡不振，又无从摆脱窘境的一年。

他说，事实上，消费市场萎缩的情况早已存在，市场购买力滑落幅度大，下挫幅度甚至接近50％。

他指出，自从政府实施消费税，加上马币贬值，皆带来通货膨胀的负面后果，令民众倍感生活开销吃紧，且商家也遇到生意量大不如从前。

黄培根表示，联邦财政预算案的开支分配，发放给发展的拨款远低于行政领域的拨款额。

他认为，如此的预算案，无助于振兴国家明年的经济发展。

“其他国家面对经济肃条时，他们的执政政府把重点放在启动发展领域来刺激经济活动，而我国的做法却相反，把更多的拨款放在行政开销方面。”

提到州明年财政预算案时，黄培根称，州预算案拨给发展开销80%，行政开销20%，这是理想的比率。

“惟，由于国际石油价格受挫，而砂州的财务主要来源是石油开采税，这令砂州财政损失介于60%至70％之间。”

他接着说，联邦政府拨给砂州的款项又不够多，较大型的仅仅是推行兴建泛婆大道的11亿令吉。

他也认为，不可以乐观看待明年的联邦财政预算案，因为预算案里没有考量到失业率、消费税所引发的后果等等现实问题。

为此，黄培根促请砂州选民认真看待即将来临的州选举，用选票向执政党发声，说出选民的诉求。

“倘若首长阿迪南所领导的国阵阵容狂胜的话，这意味着人民支持联邦国阵的施政。”

“行动党要打破国阵三分之二的优势，而如果要做到这点，按照增加11个议席后的州政局来说，在野阵线必须争取到28个议席或以上。”

他接着说，相对新选区划分来说，在野党阵线如果在下一届州选举攻下至少19席，只能算勉强保持现在反对党目前在州政府，与执政党对垒的局势。

因此，他促请选民善用选票帮助实现打破国阵三份之二优势的局面。

来届砂州选举被定位是下一届国选的战局测温表，因此，他吁请砂州选民扮演起引领改变浪潮的角色。

“让创造大马的明天从砂州开始。”

黄培根：保障援助金申请生效 切记重新登记申请资料

（诗华日报诗巫26日讯）行动党柏拉旺区州议员黄培根促请一马援助金受惠人士要重新登记资料，以确保顺利领取援助金。

他接获不少之前领取过援助金的民众，询问需不需要重新登记资料。

他于今日上午在新闻发布会上说，为了保障援助金申请持续生效，受惠人士能领取到接下来发放的一马援助金，就要重新登记申请资料。

他说，民众可以到行动党各个服务中心，或者支部党所寻求帮助，办理申请以及重新登记资料手续。

“熟悉电脑操作的年轻人，可以通过互联网点击相关网页，自行办理相关手续。”

明年派发的一马援助金，分别为月入3000令吉以下的家庭获1000令吉；月入3001令吉至4000令吉的家庭获800令吉。月入低过2000令吉以上的单身人士，可获400令吉。

政治迫害！

行动党砂州副主席黄培根州议员披露，警方于今天上午在砂州行动党总部发传票给行动党砂州主席兼古晋区国会议员张健仁律师与实旦宾区国会议员陈国彬，针对他们在8月29日参与古晋举办Bersih 4非法集会，他们将于本月14日上午9时面对提控。

他今天在发表文告时指出，张健仁和陈国彬将会在和平集会法令第四（2）（c）下被控，如果罪成将面对罚款，最高罚额1万令吉。

他说，在我国宪法48（1）（e） 下，任何议员如果在刑事案件中被罚超过2000令吉，将丧失议员的资格，以及被判罪后5年之内，不能参与任何的选举。

也是柏拉旺区州议员黄培根在文告中指出，Bersih 4.0在2015年8月29日，在全国各地举行，参与的人数可能高达50万人。

“可是，到目前为止，只有砂行动党的两名议员被提控，我们不禁要问，这是否是有政治议程。”

砂Bersih合法为何提告？

他说，砂州政府宣布允许829的集会在古晋举办，并且主办单位也得到警察的许可证举办和平集会。

“可是，我们却看到警方要控告两名参与的行动党国会议员。他们不是主办单位也不是Bersih的号召人，可是却得到有关当局的‘青睐’。”

文告提到，在距离州选举只有几个月时间，而且又是州议会召开期间，砂州行动党主席被控，给人一种感觉，政治迫害？

“我们有绝对的理由，相信这是一项拥有政治议程的提控，以迫使行动党砂州主席在带领砂州行动党面对来届州选的当儿，要面对这个严重的提控。”

行动党呼吁政府不要利用法律来针对反对党领袖进行政治迫害，也劝告警方把人力和精神放在治安问题上。

“我们也相信国阵视行动党有足够的影响力可以威胁到他们的霸权，所以要在这个时候针对行动党砂州主席进行政治迫害。

砂州行动党呼吁人民作为张健仁和陈国彬两位国会议员的后盾，并和行动党并肩作战来对付国阵的霸权。

2016年砂州财政预算案辩论词

感谢议长先生给予机会参与辩论关于首长在2015年12月7日所提呈的2016年砂州财政预算案。

议长先生，首长在其2016年砂州财政预算案讲词中狠批中央政府给予砂州的拨款不足够。我完全同意这一点。

议长先生，国阵领袖包括土保党，人联党及联民党当被记者问起时都一致的表示支持和称赞首相所提呈的2016年砂州财政预算案。副首相甚至说这是砂州选举的预算案，因此会有许多好康给砂拉越。那为何首长在立法议会殿堂发出不一样的论调？

议长先生，我对首长的反应感到惊讶，如果首长真心觉得中央政府2016年给予砂州的拨款不足够，为什么在首相提呈2016年预算案时首长没有这么说，他为何没有要求首相重新调整预算案或者指示砂州国会议员投反对票来否决首相提呈的预算案？

如果首长对于联邦预算案给予砂州的拨款感到不满意，为何来自砂州的联邦部长没有在内阁里针对这不公平的预算案提出抗议来引起首相的关注？拥有多少位砂州的联邦部长在联邦内阁里？他们全部是否都在睡觉？

现在国会已经透过议员表决来通过由首相提呈的2016年财政预算案，首长现在才说“不足够”又有什么用？是否首长要表演政治秀给砂州人民看，因为砂州选举近在眉睫？理性的砂州人民将看清州政府的真面目，来届州选砂国阵将会为本身的失责付上代价。

请认清事实，当所有砂州行动党及所有行动党国会议员在国会对2016年财政预算案投反对票时，所有砂州的国会议员都投票支持2016年财政预算案。砂州人民要问“是谁出卖了砂州的权益？”答案非常的清楚，议长先生，那就是砂州国阵。

议长先生，砂州人民相信只要国阵政府继续执政的一天，砂州与西马半岛的发展差距将无法获得平衡，因为造成砂州沦为贫穷州属的元凶是国阵政府。

我们不要砂州政府只做嘴唇服务，如果砂州要追上西马半岛的发展步伐就必须有所行动。单是将“不足够”或“我们砂州要与西马半岛享有共同的发展待遇”挂在嘴边是不足够的。虽然这些言论听起来不错，好像首席部长很有勇气。

砂州政府必须站出来向联邦政府表达我们的不满而不是任人鱼肉。我们不仅面对联邦政府不公平的待遇，而是砂州国阵在过去50年来允许这样的事情发生。

砂国阵甚至无条件的将联邦宪法赋予我们的特殊权利及马来西亚协议交回给联邦政府。这些权利例如；教育权利，不公平的5%石油与天然气开采税，平等伙伴地位。在过去52年，这些权益全部被砂州国阵放弃，然而这些对砂州所造成的伤害是无法弥补的。

我们的首长已经在口头上宣布许多堂皇的承诺，可是这些所谓利民的政策是否可以兑现？人民在等待首长可以保证实现；承认独中统考文凭，20%石油与天然气开采税及联邦政府可以立即下放权利。如果首长无法兑现承诺，那么他的信誉将会受到质疑，即使是对他充满信任的人民。

诗巫被边缘化

从2011年开始，我已经提出许多关于诗巫的发展和发展不足的课题。在过去的10年，诗巫没有任何新的道路或道路衔接，诗巫的发展基本上出现停顿的状况。我曾在10月时提呈一份关于诗巫外围道路衔接的计划书给首长办公室，并且呼吁我们的首长将计划纳入2016年砂州财政预算案。那7000万的交通规划计划可以舒缓拥挤的交通，以及可以解决人口频密的住宅区和商业中心的道路连接问题，并且可以成为诗巫的一个重要为建造更多的廉价屋做准备。

议长先生，首长所提呈的2016年财政预算案，发展开销为59亿7000万 ，26亿5000万用于乡区发展。如果我们将那笔拨款平均分为60个乡村选区，每个选区平均会分得4千400万的发展金。

那为何不能够给予诗巫5个选区暨；柏拉旺，武吉阿拾，都东，南甲和巴旺阿山所要求的7000万拨款（少过1.2%的发展开销）来提升诗巫的道路连接及解决日趋严重的道路拥挤？诗巫外围道路将惠及所有5个诗巫选区的人民，不只是我的选区柏拉旺而已。

议长先生，我没有反对政府将大笔的款项拨给乡区进行发展，但是必须记住诗巫2千500万的人民不应该被排除在发展主流之外。现时诗巫人民也迫切需要得到公平的发展拨款。

议长先生，全面将诗巫排除在发展主流之外，砂国阵政府是在鄙视诗巫人民，不然的话我们找不到更好的理由来解释为何首长拒绝行动党为了诗巫人民切身利益所拟定的外围交通规划计划书。

诗巫已经被国阵政府边缘化了几十年，诗巫已经被美里超越成为砂州第2大城市，现在民都鲁也超越诗巫成为第3大城市。诗巫人民期望首长的治理作风有别于前任首长，并且呼吁首长将诗巫外围道路计划纳入2016年砂州财政预算案。

航空

议长先生，我自2011年的时候就已经提出机票昂贵的课题，并且同样的课题也在我的州立法议会提问中被提及。然而，政府却对我的提出的问题视而不见，以方便将调整机票价格的责任推卸给航空公司。

诗巫机场不只是服务诗巫人民而已，而是整个砂州中区的人民。那是国内10大繁忙机场之一，在2014年共有1,440,935名乘客使用，以及每天有3948位乘客使用诗巫机场。

议长先生，我刚接获投诉许多来自西马半岛求学的学生投诉，他们因为机票价格昂贵迫使所以无法在农历新年回家过年。我将学生们的讯息连同航空公司网站所得到的机票价格分享在我的面子书专页后得到非常大的回响，许多砂州人民投诉诗巫区的机票价格是全马最贵的。那篇帖文得到超过1000个的分享，这显示出机票的课题是砂州中区人民心中的痛。

在我面子书分享该课题后的2天，媒体也相序的报导相关的新闻。星洲日报头版的标题写着“机票好贵，回家过年大出血”。

议长先生，试想想，单程机票从吉隆坡飞往诗巫要价1049令吉。依据新闻报导，从吉隆坡飞往诗巫的机票价格比吉隆坡飞往古晋，吉隆坡飞往美里贵好几倍。

另外一家本地华文报章，诗华日报同样报导相关新闻；标题为春节机票贵得惊人。农历新年是华人家庭团圆的日子，那是其中一个华族非常注重的事项。许多家长他们的儿女们在西马半岛或国外工作，农历新年可能是他们与孩子们一年见面一次的日子。

议长先生，来回机票需要2千多令吉是无法令人接受，学生和家长也无法负担得起如此昂贵的机票费。在这经济不景的时刻，这将加重许多家庭的经济负担。

问题是，议长先生，砂州政府是否能够为砂中区人民做点事？我相信所有要砂州境内营运的航空公司都必须先得到州政府的批准，无论是马航，亚航或飞翼。

州政府不能给予航空业者使用无理的理由在农历新年，达雅丰收节和开斋节生意量最高峰的时刻胡乱制定机票价格。在特定的时段机票价格正常暴涨，这已经被视为航空业者的商业游戏。大部分的旅客都非常清楚航空业者剥削搭客的行为，可是在没有选择的情况下只能接受被砍菜头安排。

我们可以看到执法单位如何使用反暴力法令来对付牟取暴利的商家，违法的商家可以被罚款高达数千万令吉，可是航空业为何可以视无忌弹的牟取暴利？

当然，州政府可以做一些事情，砂中区的人民要求州政府立即采取措施和行动以成立保护消费者利益的机制。

我要向州政府发出一道问题，“如果连如此简单的芝麻小事都无法解决，那么还有什么事情可以做？

石油与天然气开采税

议长先生，从州立法议会一致通过全权委任首长与联邦政府协商增加石油与天然气开采税至20%的决定已经过了一年半的时间。我们看到首长多次的向砂州人民重覆表示不会放弃向联邦政府争取给予砂州公平的石油与天然气的税务分配。可是，协商必须要设定一个期限，不然的话联邦会觉得砂州政府在捍卫砂州利益时表现的非常懦弱。

到现阶段为止，对于议会一致通过的石油与天然气开采税的议决案，首长与联邦的谈判已经取得什么样的进展？这一届的砂州立法议会已经接近尾声，我们的首长在这重要的课题上似乎没有什么可以向州议会报告。

如果首长无法胜任这项任务，砂州人民对于首长继续引领砂州前进可以存有多少的信心？倘若，首长不能迫使联邦政府回到谈判桌，那么首长应该重新考虑与联邦国阵的合作关系。

首长指出，砂州石油和天然气的开采税收入减少一半，主要的原因是因为原油和天然气的价格暴跌。助理部长在回答议员提问的问题关于砂州石油与天然气的储存量将在多久之后会耗尽时表示“石油是25年，天然气是37年”。

议长先生，我们石油与天然气的储存即将耗尽，因此当务之急首长必须在毫不拖延的情况下成就又砂州立法议会所一致通过的增加石油与天然气开采税至20%的议决案。

消费税，马币贬值和一马发展公司

砂州行动党已经公开呼吁首长带领砂州国阵脱离联邦国阵。因为我们知道巫统从来没有视土保党为平等伙伴，砂州已经失去原有平等伙伴的地位。

尊贵的巴类区议员兼州高级部长丹斯里占玛欣已经提呈动议要求重新检讨马来西亚协议及联邦宪法附件第9条来点出砂州所面对的困境。

议长先生，我们不能假装一切都很好，当我们砂州同胞面对经济最艰巨的时刻，这都怪联邦国阵政府无能的治国所致。联邦政府强硬实行消费税是为了拯救国库漏洞，马币贬值是因为一马发展公司26亿丑闻所致。这些通通都直接的影响砂州人民的日常生活。

虽然砂州人民已经接受首长开明的立场，对于一些课题如宗教和种族，使用英语，半承认独中统考文凭及拨款给独中华小，可是人民对首长与联邦国阵继续保持合作关系的决定感到极度的失望。

首长已经失去留名青史的机会来带领砂州迈向改变之路。首长继续支持首相所领导的政府，这也使他失去扮演造王者的角色与联邦政府谈判已夺回马来西亚协议中所赋予砂州的权益，联邦给予砂州更多数额的拨款及20%的石油与天然气开采税。

首长曾指责反对党试图将他与首相纳吉牵连在一起，并且强调他与一马发展公司毫无关联。但是，首长必须明白，他无法与首相纳吉撇清关系，除非首长撤回他对首相纳吉的支持。

即将来临的州选将考验首长的政治的正确方向，人民将透过选票来告诉他人民对他的期许有什么是他没有做到的。例如带领砂州国阵脱离联邦国阵。

毫无疑问，在来届砂州选举，人民将会把投票的定义鉴定为投票给首长就是投票给首相纳吉！

由首长所提呈的2016年砂州财政预算案无法达到预期的效果，预算案没有聚焦在人民当前所面对的问题。财政部长更专注在偏向发展及乡区。

首长没有提及许多人民当下所面对的课题；例如实行消费税，一马发展公司，马币贬值，物价和服务价格上涨，以及试图讨好乡区选民而忽略了城市地区的需求。一个可以准确的表达这预算案的标题就是“为国阵量身定做的大选预算案”。

但最关键的是，由首长所提呈的预算案是赤字预算案而非盈余预算案！

议长先生，由哥打圣淘沙州议员所指出的，首长声称“2016年财政预算案为盈余预算案”（2016年财政预算案首长讲词第31页）

然而，看2016年估计发展草案，我们看到砂州的总收入为55亿4千74882.31令吉，发展开销为80亿407935.88令吉，（分别为营运开支20亿7200万令吉和发展开支59亿6700万令吉）显示出2016年财政预算案赤字为24亿9千300万令吉。

我已经读过整个财政预算案，所加起来的盈余与首长提呈的财政预算案不相符。

我们不知道首长所提出的盈利从那里来所以希望他在预算案在议会进行投票表决前可以解释清楚。

2016 Sarawak Budget Speech

Tuan Speaker, thank you for giving me the chance to deliberate on the Sarawak budget 2016 tabled by the Chief Minister on the 7^th December 2015.

Tuan Speaker, the chief minister in his budget speech said that the 2016 allocation under the national budget to Sarawak is insufficient. I couldn’t agree more on this.

Tuan Speaker, the BN leaders, including those from the PBB, SUPP and the UPP all applauded the 2016 national budget presented by the PM when they were asked by the press. The DPM even said that it’s a Sarawak election budget, so there ought to be lots of goodies for Sarawak. But how come the CM is singing another tune in this Dewan?

Tuan Speaker, I am surprised by the CM as if the CM truly feels that the 2016 allocation for Sarawak is not sufficient, then why didn’t he said so when the 2016 budget was tabled by the PM and urged the PM to adjust the budget or else he will direct the Sarawak BN MPs to vote against the budget?

And if the CM is not happy about the national budget’s allocation for Sarawak, then why weren’t the federal ministers from Sarawak told to bring the matter to the attention of the PM? How many Sarawak federal ministers are there in the federal cabinet?

Were they sleeping?

Now that the Parliament has voted for the 2016 budget presented by the PM, what is the use of CM saying “tidak cukup”? Is it because he is putting up a show for Sarawakians now that the state election is just round the corner? The rational Sarawakians would see through the smoke screen and would make state BN pays for failing Sarawakians.

To put the record straight, while all the Sarawak DAP MPs, and actually all the DAP MPs in the House voted against the 2016 national budget, all the Sarawak BN MPs voted for the 2016 budget. The question Sarawakians need to ask is “who is selling off Sarawak interests?” The answer is pretty clear, Tuan Speaker, it is the state BN.

Tuan Speaker, Sarawakians believe that as long as BN remains in Putrajaya the development disparity between Sarawak and peninsular Malaysia will never be able to be bridged as BN is the perpetrator for the poor state of the affair of Sarawak. 

We need the state government to pay more than lips services if we want Sarawak to catch up with the peninsular, words like “tidak cukup” or “we also want Sarawak to have the same facilities as enjoyed by our brothers and sisters in peninsular Malaysia” by the CM are not enough although they sound nice and brave to some.

Sarawak must stand up to the federal BN government and not give in to them. We are where we are not only because of the federal BN’s unfair treatments but because the BN state government has allowed that to happen over the last 5 decades.

Sarawak BN state government even surrendered our special rights enshrined in the federal constitution and the M”sia Agreement to the federal government. Rights such as education, the unfair 5% oil and gas royalties, the equal partnership status and what not. All these were given up by the Sarawak BN government over the past 52 years and the damages caused are beyond repair.

Our CM has been saying all the right things but can he deliver? The feel good factors will slowly give way to reality as the people expect the CM to deliver his pledge on UEC’s recognition, 20% oil and gas royalties and devolution of power by the federal government NOW. If the CM fails to live up to his words, then his credibility will be questioned and doubted by the people who put so much faith in him.

Sibu marginalized

Tuan Speaker, since 2011, I have raised many issues about the developments of Sibu or rather the lack of them. Over the past 10 years, there is no new road or link being built/constructed in Sibu and Sibu’s development has basically come to a standstill. I have submitted a Sibu Outer Links’ proposal to the CM’s office in October 2015 and urged our CM to have it adopted into the 2016 budget. The 70 million proposal will ease the heavy traffic jam and solve the problem of the lack of connectivity among the densely populated residential and commercial areas in Sibu as well as pave the way to develop a low cost housing hub in Sibu.

Tuan Speaker, the 2016 budget tabled by the CM has a development expenditure of RM 5.97 billion and RM2.65 is allocated for the rural development. If we take that and divide by 60 rural constituencies, each constituency will get an average of RM 44 million of development funds.

So why can’t the 5 state constituencies in Sibu, i.e, Pelawan, Bukit Assek, Dudong, Nangka and Bawang Assan request for RM 70 million (which is less than 1.2% of the development budget) allocation to improve the links in Sibu and ease the worsening traffic jam in Sibu? The Sibu Outer Links will benefit the people of all the 5 state constituencies and not sorely for my constituency of Pelawan.

Tuan Speaker, I have no objection for the government to provide higher allocation for the rural areas but bear in mind that the 250,000 people of Sibu should not be excluded from the development that we deserve. Sibu people also need a fair share of development funds and we need it now.

Tuan Speaker, to totally cut Sibu out of the state development, the BN state government is in contempt of the people of Sibu as we don’t see any reason for the CM to refuse a proposal which is good for Sibu even if that proposal was initiated by the DAP.

Sibu has been marginalized for decades by the BN government and we have been overtaken by Miri as the second largest town in Sarawak and Bintulu has now overtaken us as no. 3. The people of Sibu have hope that this CM will be different from his predecessor and I urge the CM to include the Sibu Oute Links in the 2016 Sarawak budget.

Air transportation

Tuan Speaker, I have raised the issue of exceptionally costly airfares to and from Sibu since 2011 and had raised the same issue in my questions as well. However, the government has turned a blind eye to my plea to regulate the airfares and conveniently push the blame to the airline companies.

Sibu airport serves not only the people of Sibu but all the peoples in the central region of Sarawak. It’s the 10^th busiest airport in the country with a passenger traffic of 1,440,935 in 2014 and that’s 3948 per day.

Tuan Speaker, recently I have received many messages from Sarawak students studying in peninsular Malaysia about the costly airfares for them to return for the CNY. I posted one of the messageI received together with the price of air ticket taken from the website of one of the airline companies on my Facebook Timeline and that sparkled a heated reactions from many Sarawakians who complained that the Sibu’s sector air ticket is the most expensive in Malaysia. The post has been share more than 1000 times which shows how dear that subject matter is to the heart of the people in the central region of Sarawak.

The issue was also picked up by the media 2 days after my posting on Facebook and the Headline on one Chinese daily Sin Chew Zit Poh says “Too expensive, returning home for CNY is blood vomiting”.

Tuan Speaker, imagine a one way ticket from KL-Sibu at a staggering RM 1,049! The said article reported that the airfare from KL-Sibu is several times more expensive than KL-KCH and KL-Miri.

Another local Chinese daily, See Hua, also reported on the cut-throat price of air ticket during CNY. CNY is the time for family reunion and it’s the single most important matter for the Chinese. For many parents whose sons or daughters who work in peninsular Malaysia or overseas, the CNY could be the time of the year when they will see each other again.

Tuan Speaker, a return ticket of RM 2,000 plus is simply unacceptable and unaffordable for the students and the parents of these students. During this trying economic time, this will definitely burden many families.

The question, Tuan Speaker, is “can’t the state government do something for the people in central region of Sarawak?” I am sure any airline company needs the approval of the Sarawak government to operate in Sarawak, be it MAS, AirAsia or MASwings.

The state government can’t give a lame excuse that the pricing is fixed by the industry bearing in mind that the airfare during CNY, Gawai and Hari Raya are normally skyrocketing, the players of the aviation industry are seen to exploit the travelers knowing very well that most have no choice but to take the bite.

We have seen how anti-profiteering act has been used to charge the traders who over-charged the consumers and were fined tens of thousands of ringgit but how come the aviation industry can go scotch free?

Surely the state government can do something and the people from central region of Sarawak demand that the state government take immediate measures and action to set up a mechanism for the protection of consumers.

My question to the state government is “if you can’t handle a small matter like this, what else can you do?”

Oil and Gas Royalties

Tuan Speaker, it has been a year and a half since this House resolved to give full mandate to the CM to negotiate with Putrajaya to increase the royalties of oil and gas to 20%. We have seen the CM repeatedly told the people of Sarawak that he will not give up fighting for the fair share of our oil and gas. However, there must be a dateline to the negotiation process or else it shows that the Sarawak state government is too weak to protect the interests of Sarawak.

What has the CM achieved so far on the oil and gas royalties resolution passed by this House? The current session of DUN Sarawak is near its end and yet our CM has almost nothing to report on this all important issue.

If the CM can’t deliver this, how much faith would the people of Sarawak has on him to lead Sarawak forward? If the CM can’t force Putrajaya to the negotiation table then the CM might have to reconsider the political union with federal BN.

CM has pointed out that our state revenue from the Compensation in lieu of Oil and Gas rights has been halved due to the slump in cruel oil and gas price. The assistant minster reply to a member’s question on how long our oil and gas reserve would last has this to say “25 years for oil and 37 years for gas”. Tuan Speaker, our reserve of oil and gas would run out soon and thus it’s imperative that the CM delivers on the resolution passed by this House without delay.

GST, fallen value of Ringgit and 1MDB

DAP has openly urged the CM to pull Sarawak BN out of the federal BN because we know that UMNO has never treated PBB as its equal and Sarawak has lost its position as the equal partner.

The honorable member for Baleh, Senior Minster Tan Sri James Masing has tabled the motion for the review of M’sia Agreement and the Ninth Schedule of the federal constitution speaks volume of the predicament of Sarawak.

Tuan Speaker, we can’t pretend that everything is well when our fellow Sarawakians are facing the toughest economic struggle because of the mismanagement of the federal BN government. The implementation of the GST to save the country’s state coffer and the falling value of the Ringgit because of the scandalous 1MDB and the RM 2.6 billion scandal have all adversely affected the lives of Sarawakians.

While Sarawakians have been receptive of the CM’s open and progressive stand on some of the issues such as religion and race, the use of English, the half-recognition of UEC and funding for the Chinese Independent schools, they are totally disappointed by the CM’s continue political alliance with federal BN.

The CM has lost his chance to leave a legacy to bring about real change to Sarawak and even to the whole of Malaysia for continuing to support the leadership of the PM. The CM failed to utilize his Kingmaker role to bargain for the return of all the Sarawak’s rights as per the Malaysia Agreement and a bigger slice of the federal budget allocation and the 20% oil and gas royalties.

The CM has accused the opposition of trying to associate him with Najib and says he has nothing to do with 1MDB but the CM should know that he can’t distance himself from Najib and 1MDB unless he withdraws his support for Najib.

The coming state election will test the CM’s political correctness for not doing what the Sarawakians expected him to do, i.e. to pull Sarawak BN out of the national BN.

Make no mistake, the people would definitely equate a Vote to CM is a Vote to Najib in the coming state election!

The budget 2016 tabled by the CM falls short of expectation, instead of concentrating on the problems being faced by the people of Sarawak, Finance Minister is more particular about taking credit of its Development Biased and Rural Biased nature of the budget.

The CM failed to address many of the issues such as the impact of GST, 1MDB and the falling value of Ringgit and the spiraling cost of goods and services and ignore the needs of the urban areas while trying to impress the voters of the rural areas. One can’t be wrong to label it as an “election budget of the BN and for the BN”.

But most crucially, the Sarawak budget tabled by the CM is “wrong”!

Tuan Speaker, as pointed out by honorable member for Kota Sentosa, the CM said “the 2016 Budget continues to propose an estimated budget surplus” (page 31 of the Ucapan Belanjawan Bagi Tahun 2016 by the CM).

However, looking at the command paper 13 of 2015, the draft Development Estimates, 2016, we see the Revenue of RM 5,547,488,231 versus the Expenditure of RM 8,040,793,588 (Operating expenses at RM 2,072 billion and Development Expenditure of RM 5,067.7 billion) which shows a deficit of RM 2.493 billion for 2016 budget.

I have read through the whole budget and it just doesn’t add up to be a surplus budget as pointed out by the CM. I think this is very serious as we can’t debate on a budget that is “wrong” as we would not know how to get the revenue to fund the projects outlined by the CM.

I believe that this House should give the CM a chance to revise his budget so that he would not be in contempt of the House for giving wrong information to the House in the budget 2016.

I am incline to believe that the CM wishes to produce revised estimates and put the record straight before this House continues to deliberate on the budget, let along put it to a vote.

Tuan Speaker, I regret that I can’t support a bill based on wrong estimates and look forward to seeing that the CM to represent his revised estimates.

诗巫行动党提呈的7000万诗巫外围交通连接计划

行动党对首席部长阿迪南昨天在州议会宣布的2016年砂州财政预算案没有将增建诗巫外围道路的计划纳入预算案中感到遗憾。首席部长在2016年财政预算案提呈了59亿7千万的发展开销，而却不能容纳行动党题呈的7000万诗巫外围交通连接计划？

行动党对于首长阿迪南的财政预算案感到失望，从预算案中可以解读出首长已经放弃发展诗巫的意愿。因为连诗巫人民最迫切的交通需求都得不到他的关注，更不必谈论其它有利于诗巫人民的发展计划。这样的举动是否也意味著首长在来临的州选举不再需要诗巫人民的选票

为了使诗巫交通更顺畅及解决诗巫发展陷入瓶颈的困境，行动党提出4项增建和扩建道路的计划给州政府。行动党於今年10月12日提交这项耗资7000万令吉的道路系统规划建议书给州政府，期盼州政府可以体恤诗巫人民当前所面对的交通阻塞的困扰。

首长所提呈的2016年州财政预算案基本上是一个赢取乡民区选民的财政预算案，在预算案当中行政开销- 20亿7千万 (26%)，发展开销- 59亿7000万 (74%)及26亿5000万给予乡区发展。行动党从来没有反对政府提升乡区的发展。但是在发展乡区之余也应该依据需求来发展城市选区。

诗巫就是一个典型的例子，诗巫在13年来都不曾开辟新的道路，在交通工具不断的增加目前的道路已经无法负荷交通流量的需求。诗巫人口占砂州人口的10%，行动党的道路计划只有7000万令吉，为何州政府连这区区的7000万都无法提供给诗巫人民？这样的治理心态如何能够带动诗巫的发展？这根本就是漠视诗巫人民的感受和利益。

诗巫已经从砂州第二大城市变成第四大，落在古晋，美里及民都鲁之后；当年提出诗巫在2005升格为市的目标已经没有下文。如今诗巫陷入如此不堪的局面，身为诗巫一份子的黄顺舸高级部长难辞其咎。黄顺舸当了20年的部长，而且还是掌管地方政府部的部长，非但无法协助诗巫升格为市，反而连最基本的道路建设也无法为诗巫人民争取。

行动党也要求黄顺舸向诗巫人民解释是否支持行动党为诗巫人民提议的7000万道路计划，还是他在州内阁里反对这项有利于诗巫人民的计划？因为由始至终，黄部长都一直提出破坏性的言论来诋毁行动党为诗巫人民所提呈的7000万道路计划；例如揶揄行动党没有在限期里提呈计划书的“限期论”。

行动党对于诗巫道路计划也曾挑战黄部长提出更好的计划来惠及诗巫人民，而不是一直破坏行动党为诗巫人民所提呈的计划来阻碍诗巫的发展。倘若，黄部长有更好的计划，行动党将全力支持，反之黄部长若是真心为诗巫人民谋取利益，那么他应该义无反顾的支持行动党7000万的道路计划而不是搞破坏，毕竟最终人民的利益是最重要的。

行动党也希望首长阿迪南可以以人民的需要性来进行发展计划，而不是依据个人的喜好选择性的来拟定发展开支。2016年砂州财政预算案显示出首席部长并非是一位全民的首长，因为他并没有秉持一视同仁的发展态度来分配州政府财政资源。首长为了讨好乡区选民，却牺牲城市选民的利益，最终的目的就是要巩固本身的政权而已。

国会通过砂选区划分 黄培根：预料中事

(诗华日报诗巫4日讯)国会通过砂选区重新划分，砂行动党副主席黄培根表示不惊讶。

他说，这也显示三权已失去独立操作，行政拟出的法案，在国阵占着人数多的优势，一定会通过。

他称，无论是多么牵强或是对国家多么不利的法案，都会被通过，从来没有看到国阵的议员会投反对票。

他说，我们没有英国国会那种让议员独立投票的高素质国会，英国国会就英国对否攻打IS让议员们独立投票。

他说，国、州议员是人民选出来的，必须要根据选民的意愿投票，因此，国会议员不要把国会沦成为胶印议会。

违反一人一票原则

他说，该党不反对检讨选区的划分，但是，却反对违反一人一票相同等值的民主原则。

他举例说，即使同样是市区选区，如砂督及隔邻的明岭区,选民人数的差距就超过一半，砂督区只有万多名选民，而明岭则有三万名选区，而差距更大的是，人数最多的柏拉旺，有3万1388名选民，选民最少的只有6000多数，差距是五倍。

他形容，这违反了基本的民主法则，对城市的华人选区非常不公平，同时，也对民主构成伤害。

他将这归咎于国阵华基政党，允许国阵为所欲为的划分选区。

国阵以牵强的要为乡区选民提供更好的服务来划分选区，但是，黄培根表示，议员的职责是要辩论法案及财政预算案等，况且，乡区已有屋长、社区领袖等作为人民与政府的桥梁。

新选区为2新党而设

他称，新划分的11个选区，绝大部份是从国阵强区划分出来，黄培根表示，他在去年于州议会辩论时就已指出，选区划分是为了容纳联民党与自强党。

他说，国阵重新划分选区，是为了巩固其势力。

对于妇女、福利及家庭发展部长拿督巴都卡陈赛明指这是首长的用心良苦，要照顾乡区的人民。黄培根形容，这是非常可笑的，若是如此，国阵应检讨他们的议员为何没有好好的履行他们的职责。

他称，国会通过砂州选区划分，也是纳吉乐见的，纳吉希望国阵在砂州选举中取得大胜，来巩固他的势力。

行动党推动在国会里通过对纳吉不信任票及否决财政预算案，虽然因人数不足而未能成行，他称，行动党要选民在州选时，给在野党更大的支持，赢取更多的议席，巫统内就有更大的声音，要求纳吉下台。

他说，砂州选举是国选的指标，砂州被形容为国阵的定存，若国阵失去更多的议席，则是砂州人民对纳吉的不信任，要纳吉下台，因此，来届州选是非常重要的。

黄培根：统考问题勿再拖延 首长须实际解决

（诗华日报诗巫5日讯）柏拉旺区州议员黄培根说，眼看本届州议会的期限即将届满，因此星期一（7日)召开的州议会是很重要的一项会议。

经过5年的任期后，他看到的真相是许多与民生有贴切的课题如消费税的执行，百货涨价，马币贬值等，包括新任首长阿迪南在内，也无法将问题给予解决，只能集中财力及物力予乡区的选民，希望能争取民心，继续支持政府。

今日在行动党诗巫总部举行的新闻发布会上发言时，他如斯表示。

他表示，在任期间，国阵政府口口声声说只有国阵可以带给砂州发展，问题是，在每次的州议会开会时，国阵的州议员站起来提出的课题往往是乡区基建不足的问题有关，如没电没水，也没有诊疗所。

他问，既然国阵这样好？为什么国阵代议士提出的问题却与此相反，那是指乡区没有发展，否则为何水电都没有，这是十分讽刺的事。

他只怕州议会殿堂已成了胶印政府。

他说，作为诗巫人民的代议士，希望诗巫7000万的外围大道兴建工程可以在2016年的财政预算案中获得拨款。

他要首长拿出诚意，实际解决砂州面对的各项问题如统考文凭等，如果不解决的话，人民再给阿迪南五年的时间，也只会苦了人民本身，砂州也不会有改变。

DUN Question December 2015

1)   To ask the Chief Minister (written reply)

     On oil and gas royalties

a)      What is the progress of our demand for an increase of royalties to 20%?

b)     Is there any dateline been set for the negotiation process? If yes, when? If not, why?

c)     Has the PM or the federal government given any indication as to whether they will accede to the demand for 20% royalties as resolved by DUN Sarawak?

d)     Why isn’t this pertinent issue been even mentioned by the PM in his 2016 national budget? Is that to be read as the PM has no intention to even consider our demand?

e)     If the negotiation failed, what action will the state government take to resolve this issue?

2)   To ask the Chief Minister (written reply)

     On the recognition of UEC

a)    Kindly state the details including the terms and conditions on the recognition of the UEC by the state government.

b)    Is the UEC equivalent to the STPM or the SPM?

c)    The ministry of Higher Education stated that the federal government will not recognize UEC, isn’t that as good as telling us that the federal government doesn't support the Sarawak state government no matter how much they depend on Sarawak's support?

d)      What measures are to be taken to honour the pledge you made to the Chinese community that the state government will recognize the UEC including the acceptance of UEC as the entry requirement for UNIMAS?

3)   To ask the Minister for Local Government and Community      development (written reply)

     On Urban Transformation Center (UTC) in Sibu

a)     What is the total cost of UTC’s project in Sibu? Please list out in detail.

b)     What is the name of the contractor for the said UTC project? Is it a Sarawakian company? Was the contract given based on open public tender?

c)     The said UTC occupies the top three (3) floors of the Sibu Central Market’s car park and has taken out 306 of the existing car parking lots, what measures are taken to restore the number of public car parks in Sibu town area?

4)   To ask the Minister for Tourism (oral reply)

     On air fares in Sarawak

a)      Do you know how expensive is air travel in Sarawak?

b)       What action if any will the government take to alleviate the suffering of Sarawakians where air travel may be the only option?

      (32 words)

5)  To ask the Minister for Public Utilities (written reply)

    On public transportation

a)     Please list the number of vehicles including lorries, buses, passenger vehicles and motorcycles in Sibu for the year of 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 respectively?

b)      Please list the number of bus companies and the number of buses they operate for public transportation in Sibu?

c)     Do you have any plan to elevate the service of the public transportation in Sibu? If yes, how. If no, why?

d)      Will the state government consider the plan suggested by the DAP to uplift and reform the public transportation system in Kuching, Miri, Sibu and Bintulu?

6)   To ask the Chief Minister (oral reply)

     On Sarawak participation in the oil and gas Industry

YAB has emphasized time and again that we want to participate in the oil and gas  industry, what is the current level of our participation on the overall oil and gas industry?

      

7)   To ask the Minister for Industrial Development (written reply)

     On Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)

a)        How much FDI has Sarawak attracted for the past 4 years (2011-2014), please break down the details by each division of the state.

b)         How many jobs have been created for Sarawakians through the FDI for the year 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 respectively for each division of Sarawak?

8)   To ask the Chief Minister (written reply)

     On GST

a)              How much GST has been collected from Sarawak since 1st April 2015?

b)              How much GST will be collected from Sarawak in 2016?

c)              How has GST affected the lives of Sarawakians and what have we to  gain from the GST? 

9)   To ask the Chief Minister (oral reply)

     On 1MDB

    

Please clarify your statement “1MDB has nothing to do with Sarawak. I don’t even know what is 1MDB until 6 months ago. Now, the opposition is trying to associate me with Najib.”

     

10)   To ask the Chief Minister (written reply)

      On the separation of powers          

a)        Do we practice the principle of separation of powers among the three branches of the government?

b)       Is our Executive and the Legislative independent of each other or has the Legislative been marginalized to the extent that it has become the rubber stamp of the Executive?

c)        Does the state government practice the rule of law and formulate policies with due consideration with the decision of the Judiciary in the matter of the NCR land disputes?