Tuan Speaker,
I rise to debate on the Motion in appreciation to the speech delivered by his Excellency Tuan Yang Terutama (TYT) in this august House on the 5th day of May 2014.
Tuan Speaker, may I first congratulate our new CM who became the chosen one despite many more senior BN leaders waiting for decades for the job? But judging from the past days’ developments in this House, I guess he did show his administration is different from the previous one and one that is at least more receptive to the voice of the opposition and reason.
Tuan Speaker, when this House moved unanimously to demand an increase of the Oil Royalty to 20% from the federal government, history has been created in that:
- We have finally come to a point to resolve the oil royalty issue which has been one of the stumbling blocks to the development of Sarawak’
- The House has never seen such display of unity for the interest of the Sarawak and our people although there is still room for the BN’s bench to improve so that they will be able to look at the bigger picture instead of the petty issues.
Sarawakians all are delighted that the elected Wakil Rakyat of the people have come united on this important issue of protecting our rights in the most valuable natural resources of ours. They see a glance of hope that we will have enough funds to elevate the living standards of the people and bring the necessary developments that have all these while being illusionary to them, most important of all they see Hope for Sarawak.
Now, there are a few more urgent and important issues that the CM must address to fully make his mark in the history of this beloved land of ours. The GST, Hudud issue, good governance and efficient public services are all waiting for the new CM to address.
- GST
Tuan Speaker, we all know that GST is a regressive tax and the poor and lower middle incomes groups are made to suffer with a regressive taxation system, put it bluntly, it is like robbing the poor to help the rich!
Tuan Speaker, my observation of the BN bench last year during the Budget session is that most of them stood to support the GST but I really wonder how many actually really listen to the voters that put them in this Dewan!
How many of them who openly support the implementation of the GST know how it will make Sarawakians suffer as they are finding it difficult to make ends meet already and the extra 6% consumption tax is like putting the last straw to break their back.
Tuan Speaker, a survey was carried out by the Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research between April 12 and 21, 2014 and the results show the majority of those surveyed rejected GST; 55% Malay opposing it, 70% Chinese and 74% Indians opposing it.
How can the GST be good for the people? According to a news report, 6% GST will bring some RM 22 billion to the country’s coffer? Where on earth will that RM 22 billion come from if not form the pockets of the Malaysians and Sarawakians?
Tuan Speaker, our PM has recently lobbied for the support of the generl public and use the analogy of “antibiotic to cure the sick”. Tuan Speaker, if I may use his logic then Malaysia under the BN is very sick and thus need this special GST brand of antibiotic to cure.
But then again, the medical doctors normally do not prescribe anti-biotic unless it is essentially necessary as too much dosage is “bad” for the health of the patients.
More importantly is the problem of prescibing the wrong drug and wrong doasge as they can be fatal to the patients. In the case of using GST as an anti-biotic to heal our nation's financial health, it is the wrong presciption for the wrong illness. The PM should start healing the nation's financial health from the leakages as often reported by the auditor reports and rationise the government's spending.
The government says it has yet to finalize the final list of goods exempted for GST and it shows that the government is not sure and ready.
Tuan Speaker, I have spoken out against the implementation of the GST in the last Budget sitting in November 2014 as follow which I am going to repeat:
While the poor are made to “feed” the government with the GST, the government operating expenditures more than double between 2003 (RM 14 billion)and 2008 (26 billion) and further increased to RM 36.6 billion in 2014. When the government don’t have enough money to spend, they “remember” the rakyat and they bring in the GST. Instead of prudent spending, the government spends like no tomorrow and ask the rakyat to tighten their belts.
Let me give an example to enlighten this House, under the present system, those earning below RM3000 per month do not have to pay tax. Under the GST, these groups will be affected as they basically pay GST on all their consumption apart from some exempted items. If these groups consume RM 2000 per month, they will have to pay GST of RM120 per month and RM1440 per year. Overall, 2/3 of their incomes are taxed.
On another hand, those making RM30, 000 per month, their consumption may be RM10, 000 while they invest the rest of their incomes and strictly speaking only 1/3 of their incomes are taxed under the GST.
You might ask “how many Malaysian household will be adversely affected by the implementation of the GST?
According to the ministry of finance, 80% of the Malaysian household or 5.2 million household earn less than RM 3,000 per month and that’s how serious it is and why we must oppose the implementation of GST in the first place. The figure was released when the government announced that those are the families been given BR1M.
They are already struggling to make ends meet. They do not pay taxes because they are below the tax-paying threshold. It is ironic that when on one hand the government feel that these folks need assistance and thus give them the BR1M but on the other hand these folks become the losers when the GST is implemented as explained earlier.
Tuan Speaker, Sarawak is one of the poorest states in Malaysia with one of the highest number of poverty and hard core poverty in the country. We have contributed immensely to the federal government with our oil and gas and our infra structures are some 20-30 years behind our counterparts in West Malaysia. We need to stand firm to protect our people and the best way the state government can do is to exercise our rights as enshrine in the federal constitution, we owe it to our people to give back their rights and not give-in to the federal government.
Tuan Speaker, under the Malaysian arrangement to the formation of Malaysia, Sarawak is entitled to safeguards the interests of the people and the rights are been enshrined in our federal constitution. One of such right is to retain control of our own finance, development and tariff and have the right to work up our own taxation.
Article 95B(3) of the Federal Constitution states: “The Legislature of the State of Sabah or Sarawak may also make laws for imposing sales tax, and any sales tax imposed by State law in the State of Sabah and Sarawak shall be deemed to be among the matters enumerated in the State List and not in the Federal List;
but (a) There shall not in the charging or administration of a State sales tax be discrimination between the goods of the same description according to the place in which they originate; and (b) The charge for any federal sales tax shall be met out of sums collected from a person liable for that tax before the charge for a State sales tax.
With this, Sarawak should exercise our rights in rejecting the implementation of the GST in April 2015. If he CM can make his stand by announcing that Sarawak will not allow GST to burden its people then that would be his legacy and Sarawkians will thank him forever. Time is running out as the GST will be implemented in April 2015 and once it is implemented then it will be too late.
Tuan Speaker, like the Oil Royalty issue, this is another issue which this House should unite once again and speak with One (1) Voice, the voice for Sarawakians.
- Conflict of Interest
Tuan speaker, we all speak about fairness, equality for good governance. Good governance is what any administration aspire to be and in order to bring about good governance we need to have transparency, accountability and accountability and the executive branch must avoid conflict of interest in discharging their duties.
What then is the definition of “conflict of Interest”? We can defined a Conflict of interest as a situation in which a person has a private or personal interest sufficient to appear to influence the objective exercise of his or her official duties as, say, a public official.”
The conflict in a conflict of interest exists whether or not a particular individual is actually influenced by the personal interest.
A very simple case is in the case of the appointment of the deputy Chairman of the SMC. Datuk Sri Wong Soon Koh, in in capacity as the senior minister of the Local Government, appoints his son, Datuk Wong Kee Yew, as the deputy Chair of the Sibu Municipal Council in January this year.
This has created a public uproar in Sarawak but in particularly Sibu. Of course the senior minister denies that he was the one making the decision and pointed out that the DCM, YB Alfred Jabu, made the decision on behalf of the state cabinet.
Tuan Speaker, lets us not fool ourselves and thought we can fool the world as well, the Minister in charge of the said Local Government is the one who really made the decision and once that decision is made the Cabinet will only ratify that decision, the DCM approval on behalf of the cabinet is mere formality.
That is why I have said and the majority of the general public concur that the senior minister has breach his duty by making a decision that is perceived and seen to be a conflict of interest and in doing so has tarnished the reputation of the state government.
If that is allowed and not condemned by this House, then there will never be accountability for this administration and the others will follow by giving their families members and cronies Land and Contract and what not.
Please don’t tell this House that is the true standard of Sarawak under the BN, we have to show good examples to our youth and we have to be accountable to our people, and only then our new CM can set a good example for his administration.
Jalan Lau King Howe. On another note, the senior minister for the Ministry of Local government and Social Development shuns the issue of changing of the name of Jalan Hospital to Jalan Lau King Howe against of the wishes of the majority of the community in Sibu and the United Chinese Association of Sibu has openly lobby for the change of name.
Tuan Speaker, the late Mr. Lau King Howe is a patriot and a Philanthropist whose donation made it possible then (1936) to build the only hospital in the region serving the need of the people in the central regions of Sarawak.
I am sure many Ahli-ahli yang berhomat in this House know about Hospital Lau King Howe and some may even been medically treatment at that hospital before.
Tuan Speaker, it is only fitting that such a request be granted to someone who has been so selfless to contribute to the society, even the Rajah administration then recognise and name the hospital after Mr. Lau.
The Local authority has no reason or excuse not to give in to the request for the change of name in memorial of the late Mr. Lau King Howe as it would encourage more people to do charity works and create a more caring society. Doesn’t that the ministry of Local Government and Social Development want and strike for?
- Malaysian agreement
Tuan Speaker, safeguarding the prevailing unity and racial harmony is of course very important but the assistant minister (Islamic affairs) in the CM department seems not to agree with this as he said “Sarawak will comply with any decision or stand made by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak on the motion of the private bill for hudud.”
This is totally against the fundamental liberty on freedom of religion as per our federal constitution as well as writing off the Malaysian Agreement. Under the Malaysian Agreement, while there was no objection to Islam being the national religion of Malaysia there should be no State religion in North Borneo, and the provisions relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malaya should not apply to North Borneo.
It is important for this House to make a stand on this issue or else our younger generations would forget that such an agreement existed and thought we join the Malaya federation whereas the fact of the matter is we form Malaysia together with Sabah and Singapore and there exists a Malaysian Agreement to protect Sarawak and Sabah and the points listed included the 18 points agreement for Sarawak. The first point was on Religion which stated “While there was no objection to Islam being the national religion of Malaysia there should be no State religion in North Borneo, and the provision relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malay should not apply to North Borneo.”
Thus the assistant minister should clarify his statement and position on his statement on “Sarawak will comply with any decision or stand of the PM on the motion of the private Bill for Hudud”?
The Chief Minister has to make a stand on this as well or else it would be read that his assistant minister (Islamic Affairs) is making the stand on behalf of the State government.
Other issues:
1) Internet speed
The internet speed provided by TM and other Telcos have been bombarded by the netizens as turtle-speed and these internet providers have been slow to respond to the needs of the people, businesses, banking institution, legal firms and brokerage houses and even police station have often experience the frustration of low speed and loss of connectivity.
How could Sarawak attract investment of the high-tech sector with such a terrible internet connection and how can we train our youths to be internet savvy?
Our honourable minister of housing has also raised this particular issue and I fully agreed with him that Sarawak needs better internet infrastructure in order for our youth and our businesses to be competitive.
While the nation’s ranking in the world internet speed is 112, which is quite shameful already, but that would not be the actual scenario for Sarawak where most of the cable are still copper and not the fibre optic cable as in the Klang valley.
Sarawak government needs to act and not just talk about the problem
as our youths have been complaining for ages about the slow internet speed. TM must be warned that if it can’t buckle up then we should allow other network providers to come into Sarawak.
2) LPKP- during the Nov. 2013 sitting which highlighted the issues of LPKP being slack in carrying out their duties such as their board often fail to meet once a month and thus causing unnecessary delay for those who wish to apply for commercial licences as well as having a negative effect on the economy of the state.
We would have thought LPKP would look into their workflow and improve their efficiency after that, but I received information that LPKP did not polish up their act at all. This year up to May, they have had only 2 board meeting and their failure to meet have resulted in more backload being built up and created much delay to those who apply for the commercial licenses.
Tuan Speaker, if a government department fail to carry out its responsibility to serve the general public then what should the government do about it? Should the government turn a blind eye, a deaf ear and a muted mouth on the department heads?
In this case, the LKPK should meet at least once a month to sort out all the commercial licences’ applications. Unless the department can prove that it did meet once a month every month then the chair of the Board and the secretary must be held answerable and explain why and what happened as to make them unable to meet once a month as per the guideline of the ministry.
议长先生，首先让我恭贺我们新上任的首长，尽管有许多更高级的国阵领袖为这份工作在等待了几十年。可是，从过去几天的州立法会议的进展中，我猜想他没有展现与前任不同的管理作风，其中一点就是至少更容易接受来自在野党的声音。
议长先生，当议会一致通过要求联邦政府增加石油开采税至20%，这已经创造了历史：
1） 我们终于达致这个共识，以解决这一直被认定为是砂州发展绊脚石的石油开采税问题。
2） 州议会不曾看到大家如此团结来捍卫砂州人民的切身利益。我们的人民期望国阵有更大的改善空间，以便他们可以看到大的愿景，而不是小问题。
砂州人民希望看到他们选出来的代议士能够团结一致来处理重要的问题，来保护我们珍贵的自然资源的拥有权。他们看到了希望，我们将有足够的资金来提升人民的生活水平，以及给予他们梦想中的基本建设。最重要的是，他们看到了砂劳越的一线曙光。
现在，有一些紧急和重要的课题需要首长解决，以充分的在这热爱的土地上留下历史的烙印。那就是消费税，回教刑事法，良好的施政及公共服务都在等待新任首长来解决。
1） 消费税
议长先生，众所周知，消费税是一种累退税，穷人和中介层的人民将成为累退税收制度的受害者。说穿了，这根本就是一项劫贫济富的税收制度。
议长先生，依据我的观察，在去年商讨预算案的会议中大部分的国阵议员都站在支持消费税的立场。我真的不知道有多少代议士真正将他们送进入议会的人民声音听进去。
在他们当中有多少人公开支持实行消费税，他们是否知道这项税务将使到砂州人民受苦。因为他们已经非常艰苦的在维持生计，这额外的6%税务将会把他们逼上绝路。
议长先生，一项由默迪卡中心在2014年4月12及21日所进行的民意调查。调查结果显示，大部分消费者反对实行消费税；55%马来人反对，70%华人和74%印度人反对。
消费税如何会是一项对人民好的税务？依据新闻报导，6%的消费税将会为国家财库带来22亿的收入。这22亿的钱将从哪里来，如果不是从马来西亚和砂州人民的口袋？
议长先生，我们首相最近正游说广大人民的支持和使用“抗生素治疗病痛”来做比喻。议长先生，如果可以利用我的逻辑，在国阵治理下的马来西亚已经病入膏肓，所以需要以消费税做为抗生素品牌来治疗。可是医生通常都不使用抗生素，除非病患真正需要抗生素来医治。因为太多的剂量是“坏的”，将影响患者的健康。更重要的是，患者通常都有选择疗程和主治医生的决定。倘若，错误的使用抗生素都可能是致命的绝症。
政府表示，尚未敲定免征消费税货物的最终名单，并表明政府没有把握和准备。
议长先生，在去年2014财政预算案时，我曾公开反对实行消费税。以下我再说一遍：
正当这些贫穷的人民透过消费税在“喂养”政府之际，政府的营运开支是2003年（140亿）和2008年（260亿）之间的双倍，在2014年增加至366亿。当政府没有足够的钱花费时，他们就“记得”人民，并且实行消费税。政府的胡乱挥霍，反而要求人民缩紧腰带过日子。
让我举个例子，在目前的系统下，每月收入3千令吉以下的人士不需缴税。在消费税的系统下这些群体都会受到影响，因为他们的基本消费都必须缴付消费税，除了一些免税的项目。如果一个家庭每月开销为2000令吉，那么他们必须缴付120令吉的消费税，一年将缴付1440令吉。整体来说，他们2/3的收入将被用于缴付税收。
除此之外，那些月入3万令吉人士的消费或许是1万，其余的用于投资而投资赚到钱却不必还消费税，严格来说他们只有1/3的收入被征收消费税。
你们可能会问“有多少的人们将会受到冲击？”
照政府的资料高达80% 的大马家庭或5百20万的家庭的月收入少过马币3，000 ，那是多么严重，所以为什么我们不赞同消费税的施行。当政府派发一马援助金的时候，这些数据被公布。
他们已经非常努力在维持生计。他们没有缴税是因为他们的收入低于纳税的门槛。让人觉得讽刺的是，当政府认为他们贫穷需要派发援助金来援助的当儿，另一边厢又实行消费税，就如我之前所说的最终人民依旧是输家。
议长先生，砂州是马来西亚最贫穷的州属之一，拥有最多贫困和赤贫的州属。我们贡献非常多的石油和天然气给联邦政府，可是我们的基本建设却落后西马半岛20-30年。我们必须站稳立场来保护我们的人民，政府所能进行的最好方式就是行使联邦宪法所给予的权利。我们应该为我们人民争取回他们应有的权利，而不是将权利给予联邦政府。
议长先生，在参组马来西亚时，联邦宪法阐明砂州有权利维护砂州人民的切身利益。其中一项就是财务自由管理权，发展和税务制度，我们有绝对的权利来制定自己的税务制度。
联邦宪法第95B（3）条规定，沙巴和砂劳越的立法机构可以制定征收消费税的法令，一切由砂沙两州所通过的税收法令将被列入州务列表当中，而不是联邦列表。
但是，(a) 不得征收或实行消费税，必须区别种类和出产地。及(b) 在缴付州级消费税收之前，一切联邦政府的消费税收必须加上之前的个人税务。
有了这些，砂拉越应该使用行使权来拒绝即将在2015年4月实行的消费税。如果首长可以表明砂州拒绝实行消费税的立场，那将是砂州的传奇，砂州子民将永远感激首长英明的举措。面临实行消费税的时间不多，消费税将在2015年4月实行，一旦实施将为时已晚。
议长先生，好比石油开采税的课题，这是另外一个议会成员必须团结的一个课题。我们必须发出同样的声音，那就是砂州人民的声音。
2）利益冲突
议长先生，我们一直在谈论关于公正，平等和良好施政。良好施政的管理机制必须要有透明度和问责制来履行职责以避免产生任何的利益冲突。
那么“利益冲突”的定义是什么？我们可以将利用冲突的情况定义为，即一个人有客观的私人或私人利益足以影响他行使公务，也就是说一个公职人员执行公务。
在利益冲突矛盾的存在与否，不是属于个体，真正是取决于个人的利益影响。
一个非常简单的例子，那就是诗巫市议会委任署理主席的情况。身为地方政府部长的拿督斯里黄顺舸高级部长在今年一月委任其儿子拿督黄其耀担任诗巫市议会署理主席一职。
这项委任在砂州诗巫掀起人民强烈的舆论。当然高级部长否认这项委任是他个人的决定，并表示是副首席部长阿弗贾布取得内阁成员的决定。
议长先生，我们不要再自欺欺人，以为我们可以欺骗全世界。掌管地方政府的地方政府部长有绝对的权利发出委任，一旦做出决定，内阁只是负责批准该项决定而已。副首长通过内阁表决，那只是沦为一种形式而已。
这就是为什么我说，大多数的市民一致认为这项通过高级部长所做出的委任被认为是涉及利益冲突的决定。并且违反了自己的职责，因此玷污了州政府的声誉。
如果这是被允许的，以及没有在议会殿堂里受到谴责，那么永远不会有人会为本身的管理失当负责。因此将会有更多的人跟随这样的方式将土地和工程给予自己的家庭成员。
不要告诉议会这就是砂州国阵的标准。我们必须为年轻的一辈树立良好的榜样，也只有我们新的首长可以在他的治理上树立好的榜样。
刘钦侯路。在另一方面，地方政府及社会发展部高级部长回避将医院路更改至刘钦侯路的课题。更改路名的举动违反了广大诗巫人民的意愿，诗巫华团联合会曾公开游说当局更改路名。
议长先生，已故刘钦侯先生是一位爱国者兼慈善家，因他的捐赠使到这区域唯一一间医院可以建成(1936)，服务整个砂州中区的人民。
我相信在座的许多议员都知道刘钦侯医院，一些议员可能之前有在这家医院看诊过。
议长先生，这只是纪念为社会做出无私奉献的人士。就连英殖民时代也是将医院的名字命名为刘钦侯医院。
地方政府没有理由或借口不将该路命名为刘钦侯路来纪念刘钦侯先生。因为这将鼓励更多的人做慈善工作，创造一个更加有爱心的社会。不知地方政府与社会发展部是否愿意顺服民意？
3）马来西亚契约
议长先生，维护当前的团结和种族和谐固然是非常重要，但是首长署助理部长（回教事务）似乎不同意这样的论点，他说：“砂拉越将遵守任何决定或站在首相拿督斯里纳吉所提出的回教刑事法，私人法案”。
这完全违反了联邦宪法给予的基本宗教信仰自由的权利，就好比在马来西亚契约里所记载的。在马来西亚契约的协议下，只要对于伊斯兰教是官方宗教没有异议的情况下，那在北婆罗洲就没有强制限定的宗教。对于之前伊斯兰教在马来亚宪法所规定的不应用于北婆罗洲。
对于这项课题，议会的立场是至关重要的。否则年轻的一辈将会忘记有这样的协议存在，并认为我们是加入马来亚联邦。而事实是沙巴，砂劳越和新加坡与马来亚共组马来西亚，而当中存在一个非常重要的协议来保护沙巴和砂劳越，包括砂州的18点协议。第一点是对宗教的规定，不反对伊斯兰教是马来西亚的国教，在北婆罗洲没有限定国教，对于之前伊斯兰教在马来亚宪法所规定的不应用于北婆罗洲。
因此，助理部长必须澄清他所说的“砂拉越将遵守任何决定或站在首相拿督斯里纳吉所提出的回教刑事法，私人法案”的言论和立场。
首长必须表明立场，否则他的助理部长（回教事务）所发表的将代表州政府的立场。
其他课题：
1） 上网速度
马电讯和其他电讯公司所提供的网速被网友轰炸为龟速。然而互联网服务供应商迟迟没有针对这样的状况给个人用户，企业，金融机构，律师事务所和经济公司给予改善。甚至是警察局也经常体验到低网速或失去网络连接的困境。
砂州如何能够吸引高科技前来投资，如果我们的网际网路如此糟糕？以及如何能够培养我们的年轻人成为网络精英？
我们尊贵的房屋部长也提出了这项课题，我完全同意他的看法，砂州需要更完善的网络基本设备，让我们的年轻人和企业保持良好的竞争力。
我国在世界互联网速度排名在第112位，这是相当羞耻了。但是那可能不是砂州的实际情况，砂州大多数的电缆依旧是使用铜电缆，而不是向巴生谷的光纤电缆。
砂州政府应该采取行动，而不是谈论而已。
如我们的年轻人每天抱怨缓慢的互联网速度。马电讯必须得到警告，如果无法跟得上时代的步伐，我们应该允许其他网络供应商进入砂州提供服务。
2） 商用车辆注册局
在2013年11月的州立法会议中已经强调商用车辆注册局以怠慢的工作态度来履行他们的职责。如他们的董事会往往不能每月召开一次会议，从而对那些要申请商用执照的业者造成不必要的延误，并且对州内的经济带来负面的影响。
我原以为商用车辆注册局会去了解一下他们的工作流程和改善他们的服务效率，但是我收到的讯息显示商用车辆注册局根本没有改善他们的行为。截止今年5月，他们只有2次的会议，这样的情况制造了更多障碍，为欲申请商用执照者制造了更多的延误。
议长先生，如果政府部门无法履行服务大众的职责，那么政府应该怎么做？政府是否应该视而不见，充耳不闻和对各部门主管漠不吭声？
在这种情况下，商用车辆注册局每月至少开一次的会议，以便所有的执照申请可以得到处理。除非该部门可以证明每个月至少可以开一次会议，不然的话该局的主席和秘书必须做出交代和解释有什么事情导致他们无法遵循部门的指示，每月至少开一次的会议。
