The BN Government Must Conduct A Royal Commission Of Inquiry Into Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamed Allegations RM3.4 Billion Losses In Cash Reserves Suffered By National Carmaker Proton Caused By “Bad Management”.

Yesterday, the New Straits Times reported former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as saying that Proton Holding Bhd’s cash reserves had fallen from a high of RM4 billion to a staggering low of RM600 million to help cut company losses.

According to Dr Mahathir, our national carmaker Proton had accumulated RM4 billion during Tengku Tan Sri Mahaleel Ariff’s tenure as CEO, but its cash reserves had dropped to a dangerously low RM600 million during his successor Datuk Mohammed Azlan Hashim’s stewardship.

Dr Mahathir also added that the losses sustained are partly due to the sale of MV Augusta to a little-known company called Gevi SpA in 2006 for only 1 Euro, even though Proton had paid more than RM300 million for a 57% stake.

Subsequently,after the sale of MV Augusta by Proton, BMW paid 93 million Euros or RM446 million at the time for one third of MV Augusta. Following that, Harley Davidson bought the rest of MV Augusta for USD 109 million or RM360 million at the time. In other words, a company that was sold by Proton for 1 Euro or RM4.8 at the time was then resold to BMW and Harley Davidson for a total of RM800 million!

As Dr Mahathir rightly points out, Proton’s downfall is caused by nothing less than “bad management”.

Therefore, DAP calls for a Royal Commission of inquiry into the mismanagement of Proton and the billions of ringgit in losses suffered over the years, especially the RM3.4 billion losses in cash reserves. This is a very serious matter considering that Proton is our national carmaker.

The inquiry should determine whether the Government should cut losses by cashing out immediately and winding up Proton, or risk losing more money as in the MV Augusta deal. This is an important decision that must be studied by the inquiry as the Malaysian public does not want Proton to end up as a sacred cash cow that continues to chew cash.

The inquiry should also look into whether Khazanah Nasional, the Malaysian government’s investment arm, received a good price over the recent deal in which it divested its 42.7% stake in Proton to DRB-Hicom Bhd. Khazanah sold their stake for RM1.3 billion or RM5.50 per share, which is half of Proton’s book value of RM9.81 per share and a write-down compared to the RM8 per share that they had originally paid. Once again, it appears to be another example of a Government deal gone sour at the taxpayer’s expense.

One of the key persons involved in building up Proton’s cash position to RM4 billion is Tengku Tan Sri Mahaleel Ariff’s. As such, we propose that Tengku Tan Sri Mahaleel Ariff’s should be a member of the inquiry panel as he will understand the issues best.

The inquiry must then suggest the appropriate action to be taken against those responsible for the staggering losses incurred and the recommended steps to prevent such future losses, especially when it involves public funds.

–BM Translation –

Kenyataan Akhbar Setiausaha Agung DAP dan Ahli Parlimen Bagan Lim Guan Eng di Kuala Lumpur pada 8.2.2012

Kerajaan BN Mesti Menubuhkan Suruhanjaya Siasatan DiRaja Untuk Menyiasat Dakwaan Tun Dr Mahathir Terhadap Kerugian RM3.4 Bilion Yang Dialami Proton Disebabkan Oleh Pengurusan Yang Lemah.

Semalam akhbar New Straits Times melaporkan mantan Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad telah berkata bahawa Proton Holdings telah kehilangan sejumlah besar simpanan tunainya dari nilai RM4 Bilion ke jumlah yang begitu rendah sebanyak RM600 juta untuk menampung kerugian syarikat.

Menurut Dr Mahathir, pembuat kereta nasional, Proton telah mengumpul RM4 Bilion sepanjang tempoh khidmat Tengku Tan Sri Mahaleel Ariff sebagai CEO, tetapi jumlah tersebut telah menyusut ke paras RM600 juta sewaktu perkhidmatan penggantinya Datuk Mohammed Azlan Hashim.

Dr Mahathir juga menambah bahawa kerugian yang dialami juga disebabkan oleh penjualan MV Augusta kepada sebuah syarikat yang tidak dikenali bernama Gevi SpA pada tahun 2006 dengan harga 1 Euro, sungguhpun Proton telah membelanjakan lebih RM300juta untuk pegangan sebanyak 57%. Berikutan penjualan MV Augusta oleh Proton, BMW telah membayar 93 juta Euro atau RM446 juta pada waktu yang sama untuk pegangan satu pertiga dari MV Augusta. Harley Davidson pula membeli baki pegangan MV Augusta untuk USD109 juta atau RM 360 juta pada waktu itu. Dalam kata lain, syarikat yang dijual oleh Proton pada harga 1 Euro atau RM4.80, telah dijual semula kepada BMW dan Harley Davidson pada harga berjumlah RM800 juta.

Seperti yang dikatakan oleh Dr Mahathir, kejatuhan Proton adalah disebabkan pengurusan yang lemah.

Oleh yang demikian DAP menyeru supaya satu Suruhanjaya Siasatan DiRaja dibentuk untuk menyiasat salah-urus Proton dan kerugian berbilion ringgit yang dialami sepanjang waktu ini, terutamanya kerugian berjumlah RM3.4 bilion dalam bentuk simpanan tunai. Ini adalah satu perkara serius, memandangkan Proton adalah pembuat kereta nasional.

Siasatan haruslah menentukan sama ada kerajaan boleh mengurangkan kerugian dengan menggulung syarikat Proton secepat mungkin, atau mengambil risiko kerugian yang lebih besar seperti yang terjadi dalam perjanjian MV Augusta. Ini adalah satu keputusan yang sangat penting yang mesti dikaji dalam siasatan tersebut kerana rakyat Malaysia pastinya tidak mahu Proton terus kerugian.

Siasatan juga mesti melihat sama ada Khazanah Nasional, badan pelaburan kerajaan Malaysia, mendapat harga yang baik apabila ia menjual pegangan 42.7% dalam Proton kepada DRB-Hicom Bhd. Khazanah telah menjual pegangannya pada harga RM1.3 bilion atau RM5.50 satu saham, iaitu separuh daripada nilai ‘book value’ Proton iaitu RM9.81 satu saham dan juga nilai asal yang dibayarnya iairu RM8 satu saham. Sekali lagi, ini adalah satu contoh pengendalian buruk kerajaan yang mengakibatkan kerugian kepada pembayar cukai.

Salah seorang individu yang bertanggungjawab membina simpanan tunai Proton sehingga berjumlah RM4 Bilion ialah Tengku Tan Sri Mahaleel Ariff. Oleh yang demikian, kami mencadangkan supaya Tengku Tan Sri Mahaleel Ariff menjadi salah seorang ahli panel siasatan memandangkan beliau lebih memahami isu tersebut.

Siasatan itu akhirnya mestilah mencadangkan langkah-langkah yang perlu diambil terhadap mereka yang bertanggungjawab untuk kerugian yang begitu besar, dan langkah-langkah untuk membendung kerugian pada masa akan datang, terutamanya apabila membabitkan dana awam.

LIM GUAN ENG

–Mandarin Translation–
民主行动党秘书长兼峇眼区国会议员林冠英于2012年2月8日在吉隆坡发表声明：

国阵政府一定要成立皇家调查委员会，针对敦马哈迪医生所指，由于“管理不善”，国家汽车制造商普腾损失了34亿令吉的储备现金。

昨天，《新海峡时报》报道了首相敦马哈迪医生的谈话，他说，普腾控股有限公司的现金储备已经从40亿令吉，减少至6亿令吉，以协助公司减少损失。

根据马哈迪医生指出，普腾自东姑丹斯里马哈里担任总执行长开始，已经累积了40亿令吉，但是他的现金储备在拿督莫哈末阿兹兰接手后，已经跌至6亿令吉。

马哈迪医生也说，上述亏损部分原因是由于普腾于2006年将MV Augusta 以1欧元脱售给Gevi SpA，虽然当时普腾为57%的股权支付了超过3亿令吉。结果，在普腾出售了MV Augusta 后，宝马以9300万欧元或4亿4600万令吉购买了三分之一的MV Augusta 股权。随后，哈里大卫逊以1亿900万美元或3亿6000万令吉购买了MV Augusta 其余的股权。换句话说，普腾以1欧元或4令吉80仙脱售的公司，之后再以8亿令吉转卖给宝马及哈里大卫逊！

正如马哈迪指出的，普腾的没落是由于“管理不善”所导致的。

有鉴于此，行动党促请皇委会介入调查普腾的管理不当问题，以及过去几十年损失的几十亿令吉，特别是34亿令吉的现金储备。由于普腾是我国国家汽车制造商，这是非常严重的事情。

皇委会应该要决定政府是否要马上将普腾兑现、结束经营，还是继续让普腾像在MV Augusta的交易出继续亏损。这是重要的决定，必须由皇委会来做决定，因为马来西亚人民不要普腾变成别人的摇钱树，继续亏钱。

皇委会应该要研究，马来西亚的投资臂膀国库控股是否在最近脱售普腾42.7%的股权给DRB Hicm有限公司的交易中，得到好的脱售价。国库控股以每股5令吉50仙或总数13亿令吉出售股权，这是普腾账面价值（每股9令吉81仙）的一半，比起他们原本以每股8令吉购买普腾股权时，也是贬值的交易。

很明显地，这又是另一宗政府牺牲纳税人金钱的交易。

东姑丹斯里马哈里是其中一个将普腾现金储备增加至40亿令吉的关键人物。因此，我们建议他应该受委为皇委会的成员之一，因为他最清楚当中的问题。

这个皇委会也应该建议要采取什么行动，对付那些导致巨额亏损的人士，以及如何预防这种事情再次发生，尤其这涉及公众款项。

林冠英

DAP is curious why the Federal government had still not make any announcement on such an important highway concession which violates the basic principles of public accountability and transparency. Before the government signs this agreement with Europlus, the Prime Minister must ensure that the following 7 questions why Europlus was given such a good deal are fully answered.

1. Was there an open tender, and if no why not. If yes, who were the other parties and why were their bids rejected?
2. Why was Europlus chosen when they have no proven track record in build-operate-transfer(BOT) of highway concession and its principal owners have a troubled history of problematic housing development projects?
3. How can the government grant such a long concession period of 60 years, which is the longest in Malaysian history, second only to Malaysia’s 100 year agreement to supply water to Singapore in the 1960s?
4. What was the rationale of granting a soft loan of RM2.24 billion from 2013 at 4% interest and also offer an interest subsidy of 3% from commercial loans for 22 years? Both interest subsidies which may cost the Federal government RM4 billion assuming a principal loan of RM6 billion.
5. Why should the government pay RM980 million for land acquisition cost if this is a privatised project?
6. Why is the cost for the 316 km highway at RM7.07 billion or RM22.3 million per km more than double the cost of building a similar highway in India at RM10 million per km?
7. If this newest toll concession is the alternative to the already congested North South Highway, why stop at Taiping? Why is the Europlus concession not extended to Penang which is even more heavily congested? This is unfair not just to Penangites but also Kedahans.

For the Prime Minister’s Department to grant a 60 year concession period means, that generations of Malaysian will be compelled to pay toll, from me to my great grand-children. This is unacceptable and giving such a long concession only benefits the few, allowing the toll operators to earn mega profits of Pharaonic proportions at the expense of 28 million ordinary Malaysians.

Malaysians can no longer tolerate another North-South Expressway(NSE) scandal, where the toll operator is given a 50 year concession period until 2038 even though they have reaped profits many times over their investment outlay. The NSE costs RM6 billion to build and as at 31.12.2010, the toll operator has already received RM24.3 billion, landing a cool RM18.3 billion in profits.

Why should the NSE operator be allowed to continue to collect till 2038 and hike up toll rates when they have earned such massive and Pharonic-like profits of RM18.3 billion, 3 times the construction cost? Enough is enough! That is why PR is pressing for the abolition of tolls on the NSE in view of the pharonic like profits earned by the toll operator.

Is the RM7.07 billion Europlus highway concession deal another scandal in the making? Malaysians do not want another NSE scandal. The Prime Minister must fully answer the 7 questions to ensure that public benefit is assured and public interest is protected in this Europlus RM7.07 billion 60-year concession deal.

Lim Guan Eng

—-BM Translation —-

Kenyataan Akhbar oleh Setiausaha Agung DAP dan Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang Lim Guan Eng di Kuala Lumpur pada 29.1.2012

Perdana Menteri Harus Menjelaskan Sama Ada Konsesi 60 Tahun Berjumlah RM7.07 Bilion Yang Dianugerahkan Kepada Europlus Untuk Pembinaan Lebuhraya Banting-Taiping Sepanjang 316km Yang Melibatkan Pinjaman Mudah RM2.24 Bilion, Subsidi Faedah 3% Untuk 22 Tahun Dan Geran Sebanyak RM980 Juta Untuk Pengambilan Tanah Adalah Selaras Dengan Kepentingan Awam.

Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak harus menjelaskan sama ada konsesi 60 tahun berjumlah RM7.07 bilion yang dianugerahkan kepada Kumpulan Europlus Bhd (Europlus) untuk pembinaan lebuhraya Banting-Taiping sepanjang 316km yang melibatkan pinjaman mudah RM2.24 bilion, subsidi faedah 3% untuk 22 tahun dan geran sebanyak RM980 juta untuk pengambilan tanah adalah selaras dengan kepentingan awam.

Europlus mengumumkan telah menerima surat kelulusan untuk membina lebuhraya 316km daripada Unit Kerjasama Awam Swasta Jabatan Perdana Menteri.

DAP berasa curiga kenapa Kerajaan Persekutuan belum lagi membuat pengumuman mengenai konsesi lebuhraya yang jelas melanggar prinsip asas ketelusan dan kebertanggungjawab awam. Sebelum Kerajaan menandatangani perjanjian dengan Europlus, Perdana Menteri hendaklah memastikan bahawa 7 soalan berikut dijawab:

1. Adakah tender terbuka dijalankan untuk perjanjian ini, dan jika tidak, kenapa? Jika ya, siapa lagi yang menyertai dan kenapa mereka tidak dipilih?
2. Kenapa Europlus dipilih, sedangkan mereka tidak mempunyai rekod prestasi yang terbukti dalam bina-kendali-pindah (BOT) sektor lebuhraya, dan pemilik utamanya mempunyai sejarah permasalahan dalam projek perumahan?
3. Bagaimanakah Kerajaan boleh memberi tempoh konsesi selama 60 tahun, iaitu yang terpanjang dalam sejarah Malaysia dan kedua hanya kepada perjanjian pembekalan air selama 100 tahun kepada Singapura yang telah dimeterai pada tahun 1960an?
4. Apakah rasional untuk penganugerahan pinjaman mudah sebanyak RM2.24 bilion dari tahun 2013 pada kadar faedah 4% serta subsidi faedah 3% untuk pinjaman komersial selama 22 tahun? Kedua-dua subsidi ini berjumlah RM4 bilion jika prinsipal pinjaman adalah RM6 bilion.
5. Kenapa perlu Kerajaan membayar RM980 untuk pengambilan tanah sedangkan ini projek swasta?
6. Kenapa kos lebuhraya 316km ini yang berjumlah RM7.07 bilion atau RM22.3 juta setiap km adalah dua kali ganda kos pembinaan lebuhraya yang sama di India dengan kos RM10 juta setiap km?
7. Jika konsesi tol terbaru ini adalah alternatif kepada Lebuhraya Utara-Selatan yang sesak, kenapa berhenti di Taiping? Kenapa konsesi Europlus tidak dilanjutkan kepada Pulau Pinang yang mengalami kesesakan yang lebih teruk? Ini tidak adil untuk rakyat Pulau Pinang dan juga Kedah.

Konsesi 60 tahun yang dianugerahkan oleh Jabatan Perdana Menteri ini bermakna bahawa beberapa generasi rakyat Malaysia akan terpaksa membayar tol dari generasi saya hingga ke cucu-cicit saya. Ini langsung tidak boleh diterima kerana tempoh konsesi yang begitu lama ini hanya menguntungkan segelintir kroni syarikat pengendali tol yang akan mengaut keuntungan maha-Firaun manakala yang ruginya 28 juta rakyat Malaysia.

Rakyat Malaysia tidak boleh menerima lagi satu skandal umpama Lebuhraya Utara-Selatan (NSE), di mana pengendali tol diberi tempoh konsesi 50 tahun sehingga 2038 walaupun mereka sudah mengaut keuntungan berkali-kali ganda lebih daripada pelaburan asal. Kos pembinaan NSE adalah RM6 bilion dan setakat 31.12.2010, pengendali tol sudah pun menerima RM24.3 bilion, iaitu keuntungan sebanyak RM18.3 bilion.

Kenapa pengendali NSE dibenarkan mengutip tol sehingga 2038 serta menaikkan kadar tol apabila mereka sudah mengaut keuntungan yang maha-Firaun, iaitu RM18.3 bilion ataupun 3 kali ganda kos pembinaan? Cukup-cukuplah! Kerana itulah PR menekankan pemansuhan tol NSE.

Adakah konsesi lebuhraya RM7.07 kepada Europlus ini permulaan lagi satu skandal? Rakyat Malaysia tidak mahu pengulangan skandal NSE. Perdana Menteri haruslah menjawab 7 soalan di atas untuk memastikan kepentingan awam dijaga dan dipelihara dalam perjanjian RM7.07 bilion dan konsesi 60 tahun Europlus ini.

— Mandarin Translation —

民主行动党秘书长兼槟州首席部长林冠英于2012年1月29日在吉隆坡发表声明：

首相必须解释颁给优乐家集团（Europlus）价值70亿7000万令吉长达60年合约，兴建从万津到太平316公里的高速公路，对公众有什么好处？以及22亿4000万令吉的软贷款、22年的3%利息补贴及9亿8000万令吉的征地拨款，是否符合公众利益？

首相拿督斯里纳吉必须解释，颁予优乐家价值70亿7000万令吉长达60年合约，兴建从万津到太平316公里的高速公路，对公众有什么好处？以及22亿4000万令吉的软贷款、22年的3%利息补贴及9亿8000万令吉的征地拨款，是否符合公众利益？优乐家集团宣布它接获首相署公私合作单位的批准信，得以兴建一条316公里的高速公路。

民主行动党感到好奇，为什么联邦政府还没有宣布如此重要的高速公路特许经营合约？这违反了公众透明度及公信力的原则。在政府与优乐家集团签署这项合约之前，首相必须回答下列七道问题，解释为何优乐家集团获得这么好的待遇？

1. 是否进行公开招标，如果没有，为什么？如果有，其它参与招标者是谁？为什么他们被拒绝？
2. 优乐家集团在兴建-运作-转移（BOT）高速公路特许经营权方面完全没有经验，而且其主要所有人在之前的房屋发展计划留下许多问题，为什么它还会被选中？
3. 政府如何可以颁布长达60年的特许经营权？这是马来西亚史上最长的经营权合约，仅次于1960年签署的100年供水新加坡合约。
4. 有什么理由他们可以自2013年起获得22亿4000万令吉、利息4%的软贷款，而且还获得商业贷款3%利息补贴长达22年？如果贷款本金为60亿令吉，这联邦政府需花费的两项利息补贴为40亿令吉。
5. 既然这是私营化工程，为何政府要支付9亿8000万令吉的征地费用？
6. 为何316公里长的高速公路承建费为70亿7000万令吉，或每公里2230万令吉？比印度同等高速公路的承建费还高出一倍，在印度，高速公路兴建成本每公里约1000万令吉。
7. 如果这项特许经营权是拥挤的南北大道的替代道路，为什么只建到太平？为什么优乐家集团特许经营没有延长到交通更拥挤的槟城？这不只对槟城人不公平，也对吉打人不公平。

首相署颁布这项长达60年的特许经营合约，意味着马来西亚几代人都将被迫缴付过路费，从我一直到我的曾孙。这实在令人难以接受，如此的特许经营权只让少数人受惠，让收费站经营者赚取庞大的利益，却牺牲2800万马来西亚人的利益。

马来西亚人再也无法忍受另一个南北大道丑闻，这条大道的经营者获得50年的合约（到2038年），虽然他们已经赚取了比投资额高出许多倍的利润，他们还是可以继续收取过路费。南北大道花费60亿令吉兴建，截至2010年12月31日，他们已经收取243亿令吉的过路费，利润为183亿令吉。

为什么南北大道特许经营公司可以继续收费、调高过路费直到2038年？他们已经赚取了183亿令吉、这是承建费的3倍！够了！收费站已经赚到了庞大的利润，这就是为何民联要废除南北大道收费站的原因。

这项价值70亿7000万令吉的优乐家集团大道特许经营权是不是另一宗丑闻？马来西亚人不要另一宗南北大道丑闻。首相必须回答上述七道问题，确保在这项60年合约、70亿7000万令吉的特许经营合约中，公众利益受到保障。

林冠英

Present policies which are corrupt, opaque with no open tenders and benefits only certain cronies would only bring Malaysia backwards. A good comparison is South Korea. In 1970, Malaysia’s Gross National Income(GNI) per capita was USD 380 as compared to South Korea USD 260. But 40 years later in 2010, Malaysia’s GNI per capita was at USD 7,760 while South Korea had exceeded us by almost 3 times at USD19,890 (World Bank)

Malaysia’s failure to compete is compounded by the horde of Malaysians leaving. Even the BN government concedes that 2 million Malaysians have left the country since Merdeka in 1957. Countless Malaysians have PR in foreign countries including present Ministers and former Ministers. No one blames the 2 million Malaysians for leaving when the present policies stresses more on politics of division and hate than results-oriented performance drive our best and brightest away.

A recent example is the unfair, harsh and humiliating treatment of temporary Chinese primary school teachers by reducing their benefits arbitrarily without any consultation. How much will it cost the Federal government to continue maintaining existing benefits or even increasing them to temporary teachers? I doubt that such costs will exceed the RM250 million National Feedlot Corporation scandal where money meant for rearing cows is used instead to purchase luxury condos.

Why allow the few cronies to earn extraordinary profits at the expense of 28 million Malaysians. For instance, it took RM 6 billion to build the North-South Highway. But the toll operators have collected RM 24.3 billion as at 31.12.2010 and yet can continue to collect toll till end 2038 and increase toll every year! As the toll operators have already made RM18.3 billion in profits, there is no reason why toll can not be abolished.

Even more talented Malaysians will leave if BN continues to blame the Chinese and minorities for the federal government’s failed policies or use the Chinese threat to frighten the Malays. How can the Chinese be a threat to Malays when critical economic sectors such as banking, insurance, ports, highway toll concessions and infrastructure, transport, automotive industry, IPPs, sugar, rice, flour, plantation products, oil and gas are dominated by Malays?

We must grow up believing in our abilities, trusting each other and have faith that Malays and non-Malays can be world champions. Malays and non-Malay kids must grow up respecting each other as Malaysians and hating only corruption. 2000-9 is the lost decade of corruption where RM1,077 billion of “black money” was illicitly and secretly taken out of Malaysian.

Enough is enough! Let us implement policies that will stop corruption, wipe out poverty, attract back Malaysian talents so that Malaysia can be a high-income nation enjoyed by everyone regardless of race, religion or gender.

Instead of focusing on cronies, let us implement people-centric policies that are clean, fair, competitive and improves our standard of living.

LIM GUAN ENG

槟州首席部长兼行动党秘书长林冠英于2012年1月27日在霹雳班台行动党晚宴致词稿：

唯有廉政、公平、具竞争力及改善人民生活、吸引人才回国的经济政策，才能让马来西亚转型成为人人共享繁荣的高收入国。

是时候让我们推行廉政、公平、具竞争力及改善人民生活的经济政策，吸引人才回国，才能让马来西亚转型成为人人共享繁荣的高收入国。让我们在水龙年踏出第一步，于来届大选让“万象更新”，好让全民可以在2020年享受国家繁荣。

没有公开招标、只让特定朋党受益，现在的腐败、不透明、没实施公开招标的政策，只会让马来西亚越来越落后。最好的比较例子就是韩国。1970年，马来西亚人均收入为380美元，韩国是260美元。2010年既40年后，马来西亚的人均收入为7760美元，而韩国已经超越我们三倍，达1万9890美元（世界银行报告）。

马来西亚无法竞争，也导致大批马来西亚离开这个国家。就连国阵政府也承认，自1957年独立以来，已有200万马来西亚人离开。无数的国人在外国拥有永久居留权，包括我们的现任及前任部长。我们不怪这200万移民的马来西亚人，因为是现有那种导致分裂及制造仇恨的政策，把我们最好、最聪明的国民逼走。

最新的例子就是，政府独断地减少华小临教的福利，让他们遭受不公平、冷酷及侮辱的对待。联邦政府若维持临教的福利甚至增加他们的福利，会花他们多少钱？我怀疑这笔费用是否超过国家养牛中心丑闻2亿5000万令吉？这笔原本应该用来养牛的钱，被滥用来购买豪华公寓。

为什么我们要牺牲全体2800万国民的利益，让几个朋党赚取额外好处？例如：南北大道承建费为60亿令吉。但是收费站在2010年12月31日已经收取了243亿令吉。它们不但可以继续收费到2038年，而且还可以年年调高过路费！既然收费站已经赚了183亿令吉，为什么不能废除收费站？

如果国阵继续怪罪华人及少数民族，不正视本身失败的政策，或者用华人来威胁马来人，更多马来西亚人才将会移民。当许多重要的经济领域如银行、保险、港口、汽车、独立发电厂、白糖、白米、面粉、种植业、石油及天然气都已经被马来人主导，华人如何威胁马来人？

我们要相信自己的能力、互相信任、要有信心，无论是马来人或非马来人都可以成为世界冠军。马来人或非马来人的孩子都必须在相互尊重、视彼此为马来西亚人的情况下成长，他们只能仇视贪污。2000年至2009年间，我们因贪污而导致1兆7700万令吉黑钱外流。

够了，让我们实施能够除贪、扶贫、吸引人才回国的政策，打造马来西亚可以成为一个各族、各宗教或男女老少都能分享繁荣的国家。

与其集中精神在朋党身上，不如让我们通过推行廉政、公平、具竞争力、提升人民生活水平的政策来迎接龙年，祝各界新年快乐！

Malaysia will become a fully indebted nation before the end of the decade at the current rate of massive borrowing and irresponsible spending by the BN Government.

The Federal government debt to GDP (Gross Domestic Product) ratio has increased yearly from 53.1% in 2010, 53.8% in 2011 and 54.8% in 2012. This is extremely alarming and nearly touching the national debt ceiling of 55%.

According to Malaysian Institute of Economic Research (MIER) fellow Mohd Ariff Abdul Kareem, if the Federal Government continues to borrow at the current rate, our debt to GDP ratio will be 100% of GDP by 2019!

In absolute terms, Federal Government debt rose by 71% in 4 years to RM456 billion at end 2011 from RM266 billion at end 2007. At the same rate of expansion, our national debt will be RM780 billion by 2016, and RM1.3 trillion by 2020.

Mohd Ariff also noted that what is more worrying is that our rate of borrowing is far outpacing our economic growth, so much so that he was quoted as saying, “If nothing is done to reverse the current trends in government expenditures and revenues, extrapolation suggests that Malaysia’s national debt will explode to 100 per cent of GDP by 2019.”

This is extremely dangerous, and even more disastrous when coupled with statistics from Bank Negara’s Annual Report 2010, which revealed that Malaysia’s household debt at the end of 2010 was RM 581 billion or 76% of GDP, thus giving us the dubious honour of having the second-highest level of household debt in Asia, after South Korea. In addition, the Malaysian household debt service ratio stood at 47.8 per cent in 2010, meaning that nearly half of the average family’s income goes to repaying debts.

Not only are Malaysians debt-laden, cost of goods are also skyrocketing while income and salaries have stagnated. While infant milk powder has risen by nearly 50% in recent times, other basic commodities have also gone up by leaps and bounds, such as:
1. Sugar: RM1.45/kg (Jan 2010) to RM2.30 (May 2011) – 58% in 18 months.
2. Eggs: B grade RM9/30eggs (sept 2010) RM10/30eggs (now).
3. Electricity tariff: average increase of 7.12% in June 2011.
4. The tarik and kopi susu: increase RM0.10 to RM0.20 (9.1% to 18.2%.
5. Gardenia bread: 5%-14% hike (2011).
6. Service tax increase 1%: additional RM720 million in taxes to Federal Government.
7. Onions: price up 17% (Dec 2010).
8. Milo: up 5% 1st half 2011; 4% 2nd half 2011.
9. Nescafe: price went up further 6% in 2nd half 2011, when price is already >RM20 per 300gm
10. Favorite food items like roti canai, char koay teow and nasi kandar have become smaller even portions at the same price.

In contrast, Pakatan Rakyat-managed states have successfully managed their finances and not overburdened the people with debts. In fact, Penang managed to reduce state debt from RM630 million at 8 March 2008 to only RM30 million as at end of October 2011. This represents a debt reduction of 95% or RM600 million, which is the highest debt reduction of any state in Malaysia’s history!

Clearly, Malaysians who wish to have a better life for themselves and their future generations must make a choice between a government that is spendthrift and that borrows irresponsibly without being able to make the pie grow bigger, or a government that is prudent and transparent that will put the concerns of the rakyat first.

Confirmation By Malaysian Institute of Economic Research (MIER) That Malaysia Will Go Bankrupt By 2019 With Debt To GDP Ratio Of 100% Demonstrates The Importance Of Change Of Government At The Next General Elections For PR To Save Malaysia From Bankruptcy.

LIM GUAN ENG

—– BM Translation—-
Kenyataan Akhbar Setiausaha Agung DAP dan Ahli Parlimen Bagan Lim Guan Eng Di Kuala Lumpur Pada 11.1.2012

Pengesahan Institut Penyelidikan Ekonomi Malaysia (MIER) Bahawa Malaysia Akan Bankrap Menjelang 2019 Dengan Nisbah Hutang Kepada KDNK 100% Menunjukkan Keperluan Untuk Menukar Kerajaan Dalam Pilihan Raya Umum Akan Datang Supaya PR Boleh Menyelamatkan Malaysia Daripada Kemuflisan

Malaysia akan menjadi negara penghutang sebelum akhir dekad ini jika Kerajaan BN meneruskan cara-cara perbelanjaan dan peminjaman yang tidak bertanggungjawab.

Nisbah hutang Kerajaan Persekutuan kepada KDNK (Keluaran Dalam Negara Kasar) telah meningkat setiap tahun dari 53.1% pada tahun 2010, 53.8% pada tahun 2011 hingga 54.8% pada tahun 2012. Kadar hutang ini amat membimbangkan kerana sudah hampir mencecah siling hutang negara iaitu 55%.

Mengikut felo Institut Penyelidikan Ekonomi Malaysia (MIER) Mohd Ariff Abdul Kareem, sekiranya Kerajaan Persekutuan terus meminjam seperti sekarang, nisbah hutang kepada KNDK negara akan mencapai 100% ataupun menyamai KDNK menjelang tahun 2019!

Secara mutlak, hutang Kerajaan Persekutuan telah meningkat sebanyak 71% dalam tempoh 4 tahun kepada RM456 bilion pada akhir 2011 daripada RM266 bilion pada akhir 2007. Jika kadar peningkatan yang sama diteruskan, hutang negara akan meningkat kepada RM780 bilion pada tahun 2016 dan RM1,300 bilion pada tahun 2020.

Yang lebih menrunsingkan, Mohd Ariff juga menyatakan bahawa kadar pinjaman negara adalah jauh lebih tinggi daripada kadar pertumbuhan ekonomi. Beliau dipetik berkata: “Jika tindakan tidak diambil untuk menyongsangkan trend dalam perbelanjaan dan pendapatan kerajaan, ekstrapolasi menunjukkan bahawa hutang negara Malaysia akan menjadi 100% KDNK menjelang 2019.”

Ini amat berbahaya, dan lebih teruk lagi jika ditambah dengan data Laporan Tahunan Bank Negara 2010 yang mendedahkan bahawa hutang isi rumah Malaysia pada akhir 2010 berada di tahap RM581 bilion atau pun 76 peratus daripada KDNK, lantas “menobatkan” Malaysia sebagai negara dengan hutang isi rumah yang tertinggi di Asia selepas Korea Selatan. Tambahan pula, nisbah bayaran hutang isi rumah Malaysia berada di tahap 47.8 peratus pada tahun 2010, atau dalam erti kata lain, setengah daripada pendapatan isi rumah digunakan untuk pembayaran hutang.

Rakyat Malaysia bukan sahaja dibebani hutang piutang, tetapi kos barang-barang harian juga sedang melambung sementara pendapatan dan gaji tidak meningkat. Susu bayi pun telah naik harga sebanyak 50% baru-baru ini. Antara kos barangan harian yang meningkat adalah:

1. Gula: RM1.45/kg (Jan 2010) kepada RM2.30 (Mei 2011) – 58% dalam 18 bulan.
2. Telur: Greg B RM9/30biji (Sep 2010) kepada RM10/30biji (sekarang).
3. Tarif Elektrik: kenaikan purata 7.12% pada bulan Jun 2011.
4. Teh Tarik dan Kopi Susu: Kenaikan RM0.10 hingga RM0.20 (9.1% hingga 18.2%).
5. Roti Gardenia: Kenaikan 5-14% (2011).
6. Cukai Perkhidmatan: Kenaikan 1% (cukai tambahan RM720 juta untuk Kerajaan Persekutuan).
7. Bawang: Kenaikan 17% (Dis 2010).
8. Milo: Kenaikan 5% pada suku pertama 2011, 4% pada setengah tahun kedua 2011.
9. Nescafe: Kenaikan 6% pada setengah tahun kedua 2011, di mana harga sudah >RM20/300gm.
10. Semua makanan kegemaran ramai seperti roti canai, char koay teow dan nasi kandar makin kecil bahagiannya walaupun harga tetap sama.

Sebaliknya, negeri-negeri Pakatan Rakyat telah berjaya mengurus kewangan supaya rakyat tidak dibebani hutang. Di Pulau Pinang, hutang kerajaan negeri telah dikurangkan daripada RM630 juta pada 8 Mac 2008 kepada RM30 juta pada akhir Oktober 2011. Ini merupakan pengurangan sebanyak 95% ataupun RM600 juta, iaitu pengurangan yang paling besar dalam sejarah mana-mana negeri di Malaysia!

Adalah jelas bahawa rakyat Malaysia yang menginginkan kehidupan yang lebih baik hari ini dan untuk generasi masa depan hendaklah membuat pilihan di antara sebuah kerajaan yang boros dan meminjam secara tidak bertanggungjawab di samping gagal menjana perkembangan ekonomi, dengan sebuah kerajaan yang berhemat dan telus serta mengutamakan kepentingan rakyat.

Pengesahan Institut Penyelidikan Ekonomi Malaysia (MIER) bahawa Malaysia akan bankrap menjelang 2019 dengan nisbah hutang kepada KDNK 100% menunjukkan keperluan untuk menukar kerajaan dalam Pilihan Raya Umum akan datang supaya PR boleh menyelamatkan negara daripada kemuflisan.

LIM GUAN ENG

—- Mandarin Translation —

民主行动党秘书长兼巴眼区国会议员林冠英于2012年1月11日在吉隆坡发表声明：

马来西亚经济研究所（MIER）确认，在债务占国民生产总值比率的100%时，马来西亚将在2019年破产，这显示下届大选改朝换代的重要性，让民联来拯救濒临破产的马来西亚！
________________________________________________________________

由于国阵不负责任地大肆借贷、挥霍无度，马来西亚将在接下来的10年内，逐步成为负债累累的国家。

联邦政府债务占国民生产总值的比率已经从2010年的53.1%，增加至2011年的53.8%， 2012年的54.8%。这是一个严重的警钟，接近了国家债务顶限的55%。

根据马来西亚经济研究所研究员莫哈末阿里夫透露，如果联邦政府继续目前的借贷率，我国的债务占国民生产总值比率将在2020年达致100%！

确切而言，联邦政府的债务在短短四年内，从2007年的2660亿令吉增加71%至2011年的4560亿令吉。依据同样的扩展率，我国的国债将在2016年达致7800亿令吉，在2019年达致1.3兆令吉。

莫哈末阿里夫也指出，最让人担心的是我们的借贷率高出我国的经济增长率，他说：“如果政府对于目前的开销与税收问题，继续坐视不理，预料马来西亚的国债到了2019年将是国民生产总值的100%。”

这是非常危险的，更糟的是，2010年世界银行年度报告指出，马来西亚的家庭债务在2010年达5810亿令吉（国民生产总值的76%），成为全亚洲家庭债务第二高的国家，仅次于韩国。2010年，马来西亚家庭收入支出比率为47.8%，意味着很多家庭近乎一半的收入是用来偿还债务的。

马来西亚人不只欠债累累，我国的物价也在节节上升，但是收入和薪水并没有增加。婴儿的奶粉最近也上涨近50%，其它的商品也大幅度涨价：
1. 白糖 – 每公斤1.45令吉 (2010年1月) 涨至 2.30令吉 (2011年5月) – 18个月内上涨了58%
2. 鸡蛋: B级 每30粒 9令吉 ( 2010年9月) 涨至现在每30粒10令吉
3. 电费 – 在2011年6月平均涨了7.12%
4. 奶茶和咖啡：涨价10仙至20仙 (9.1% 至18.2%)。
5. Gardenia面包 –涨了 5%-14% (2011年)
6. 服务税涨1% – 联邦政府额外征收7亿2000万令吉税收
7. 洋葱- 上涨17% (2010年12月)
8. 美禄价格 -2011年上半年上涨 5% ;2011年下半年上涨 4%
9. Nescafe 价格在2011年下半年上涨了6%，价格已经是每300克20令吉。
10. 大家喜爱的印度煎饼、炒果条、黄姜饭的虽然没起价，可是份量却越来越小。

相反地，民联各州属理财有道，不让人民承担太多债务。事实上，槟城的债务从2008年3月8日的6亿3000万令吉减少至2011年10月的3000万令吉，减少了95%。成为马来西来史上债务减少最多的州属。

很显然地，那些想要让自己及下一代拥有更好的未来的马来西亚人必须选择，你们要的是一个乱花钱、乱借钱的政府，还是一个谨慎理财、透明化、以人民利益为依归的政府。

马来西亚经济研究所（MIER）确认，在债务占国民生产总值比率的100%时，马来西亚将在2019年破产，这显示下届大选改朝换代的重要性，让民联来拯救濒临破产的马来西亚！

林冠英

Around the world, it is increasingly difficult to find countries that set the retirement age at less than 60. Most European countries have 65 as the retirement age, while in others like the United States and Germany it is set at 67. Even our neighbouring countries like Thailand have already set it at 60.

There is now a global trend to extend the retirement age, the result of higher life expectancy brought about by the advances into health sciences and the increasing availability of medicine, better nutrition and generally a better lifestyle. This is also evident in Malaysia where the average life expectancy has increased to 75, from 61 in 1970.

Due to the increase in life expectancy, people around the age of 55 to 60 are in fact in the prime of their working life, and their experience should be optimally utilised rather than wasted. Someone in their prime should be allowed to further contribute rather than be left to pasture.

Lastly, a higher retirement age will also allow Malaysians to earn and save more, especially in the current economic climate of uncertainty. According to the EPF, 73% of contributors have less than RM 50,000 saved while only 17% have over RM100,000 at the point of their retirement.

How are people expected to survive the next 20 years with only RM50,000 worth of savings? With the increase in retirement age, people will be able to save more since they will be working longer at a higher income bracket.

More worryingly, Bank Negara’s Annual Report 2010 revealed that Malaysia’s household debt at end of 2010 was RM 581 billion or 76 per cent of GDP. Malaysia has the second-highest level of household debt in Asia, after South Korea.

The Malaysian household debt service ratio was 47.8 per cent in 2010 or almost half of a household’s income goes to repaying debts. A debt service ratio of more than 33% would be considered unhealthy. As a rule banks would not lend money to those whose total servicing of interest exceed one third of their income. Clearly Malaysians are becoming an indebted nation with the Malaysian government leading the way by giving the people money from borrowed loans.

The Federal government debt to GDP(Gross Domestic Product) ratio has increased yearly from 53.1% in 2010, 53.8% in 2011 and 54.8% in 2012. Federal government debt rose by 71% in the 4 years from RM456 billion at end 2011 from RM266 billion in end 2007.

This is one essential difference between BN and PR state governments. PR does not give money to the people from borrowed money, which ultimately has still to be paid by the people. PR state governments give money from budget surpluses where the people or their children are not required to repay back in future.

With such a high household debt amongst Malaysians and with no help expected from the highly indebted Federal government of BN that can not even help themselves, the people needs to work longer to support themselves and their families. Who would want to continue working if they can afford to retire? For this reason, DAP urges the extension of the retirement age in the private sector similar to that done in the public sector.

LIM GUAN ENG

—– BM Translation —–

Kenyataan Akhbar Setiausaha Agung DAP dan Ahli Parlimen Bagan Lim Guan Eng Di Kuala Lumpur Pada 23.12.2011

Dengan Nisbah Bayaran Hutang Isi Rumah 47.8 Peratus Pada 2010, Rakyat Malaysia Tiada Pilihan Lain Selain Bekerja Lebih Lama Dan BN Patut Melanjutkan Umur Persaraan Pekerja Sektor Swasta Selaras Dengan Sektor Awam.

DAP mencadangkan sokongan dwipartisan untuk lanjutan umur persaraan pekerja sektor swasta selaras dengan sektor awam, iaitu kepada 58 tahun atau pun 60 tahun seperti yang dicadangkan. Masa sudah tiba bagi Kerajaan BN untuk melaksanakan lanjutan umur persaraan untuk sektor swasta sebelum pilihan raya umum yang akan datang.
Di seluruh dunia, makin sukar untuk menemui negara yang menetapkan umur persaraan di bawah 60 tahun.

Kebanyakan negara Europah menetapkan 65 sebagai umur persaraan, manakala negara-negara seperti Amerika Syarikat dan Jerman menetapkannya sebagai 67 tahun. Negara jiran kita seperti Thailand pun sudah menetapkan 60 sebagai umur persaraan.

Dunia sejagat sedang melihat lanjutan umur persaraan disebabkan jangka hayat yang kian meningkat ekoran daripada kemajuan dalam sains kesihatan, ketersediaan perubatan, pemakanan yang lebih berkhasiat dan gaya hidup yang lebih sihat secara am. Ini juga jelas dilihat di Malaysia di mana jangka hayat secara purata telah meningkat kepada 75, berbanding dengan 61 pada tahun 1970.

Disebabkan peningkatan jangka hayat ini, orang yang berumur sekitar 55 hingga 60 tahun sebenarnya berada dalam zaman paling produktif, dan pengalaman mereka haruslah digunakan secara optimum dan tidak dibazir. Mereka harus diberi peluang untuk menyumbang dan bukan dibiar begitu sahaja.

Umur persaraan yang lebih tinggi juga akan membenarkan rakyat Malaysia mengumpul lebih pendapatan, terutama sekali dalam iklim ekonomi yang tidak menentu ini. Mengikut KWSP, 73 peratus daripada pencarumnya mempunyai simpanan kurang daripada RM50,000 sewaktu bersara manakala hanya 17 peratus mempunyai simpanan melebihi RM100,000.

Bagaimanakah seseorang itu diharapkan untuk menyara kehidupan selama 20 tahun dengan simpanan sebanyak RM50,000? Dengan lanjutan umur persaraan, orang akan diberi peluang untuk mengumpul lebih banyak kerana dapat bekerja lebih lama dalam lingkungan gaji yang lebih tinggi.

Yang lebih membimbangkan, Laporan Tahunan Bank Negara 2010 telah mendedahkan bahawa jumlah hutang isi rumah setakat akhir tahun 2010 berada di tahap RM581 bilion atau pun 76 peratus daripada KDNK. Ini bermakna Malaysia mempunyai tahap hutang isi rumah yang kedua paling tinggi di Asia selepas Korea Selatan.

Nisbah bayaran hutang isi rumah Malaysia berada di tahap 47.8 peratus pada tahun 2010, atau dalam erti kata lain, setengah daripada pendapatan isi rumah digunakan untuk pembayaran hutang. Nisbah bayaran hutang lebih daripada 33 peratus dianggap kurang baik. Biasanya, institusi kewangan tidak akan memberi pinjaman jika jumlah bayaran faedah melebihi satu pertiga pendapatan. Amat jelas bahawa negara Malaysia sedang menjadi negara yang berhutang, apatah lagi dengan Kerajaan Persekutuan yang memimpin dengan pemberian wang pinjaman kepada rakyat.

Nisbah hutang Kerajaan Persekutuan kepada KDNK kian meningkat dari tahun ke tahun, dari 53.1 peratus pada 2010, 53.8 peratus pada 2011 kepada 54.8 peratus pada 2012. Jumlah hutang Kerajaan Persekutuan pula telah melonjak 71 peratus dalam 4 tahun kepada RM456 bilion pada akhir 2011 daripada RM266 bilion pada akhir 2007.

Inilah satu perbezaan yang ketara di antara kerajaan-kerajaan BN dan PR. PR tidak memberi wang pinjaman kepada rakyat kerana hutang piutang itu kelak akan dibayar oleh rakyat juga. Kerajaan Negeri PR memberi wang yang diperolehi daripada belanjawan lebihan, di mana rakyat atau anak-anak mereka tidak akan dibebani hutang.

Dengan hutang isi rumah yang sangat tinggi di Malaysia, dan tanpa apa-apa pertolongan daripada Kerajaan Persekutuan BN yang sendiri berhutang piutang, rakyat terpaksa bekerja lebih lama untuk menampung diri dan keluarga mereka. Siapa yang mahu bekerja jika boleh bersara?

Untuk sebab ini, DAP menggesa supaya umur persaraan dalam sektor swasta dilanjutkan selaras dengan lanjutan yang dibuat untuk sektor awam.

Lim Guan Eng

—— Mandarin Translation —-

民主行动党秘书长兼巴眼区国会议员林冠英于2011年12月23日在吉隆坡发表声明：

从2010年马来西亚每一名国民的家庭债务占了债务比率47.8%，我国人民别无选择，必须工作更多年，国阵应该将私人界职员的退休年龄延长至与公共服务界一样。

民主行动党建议不分党派，支持将私人界职员的退休年龄延长至公共服务界一样，从58岁延长到60岁。是时候了，国阵应该在来届大选前，延长私人界的退休年龄。

纵观全世界，已经很难找到把退休年龄设定在60岁以前的国家。大多数欧洲国家的退休年龄是65岁，而其它的如美国和德国则为67岁。就连泰国的退体年龄也是60岁。

随着医学的进步，人均寿命因更好的医疗、营养和生活方式而延长，全球都趋向延长退休年龄。在马来西亚，人均寿命从1970年的61岁增加到75岁。

随着人均寿命的延长，55岁至60岁之前的人其实正处于工作黄金期，他们的经验应该被利用而不是浪费。在这个黄金年龄的人应该继续贡献，而不是被离开职场。

最后，延长退休年龄也将让马来西亚人民赚更多钱及存更多钱，特别是在这种不确定的经济气候底下。根据公积金局的记录，73%的公积金局会员存款到了退休时少于5万令吉，只有17%会员存款会多过10万令吉。

在存款只有5万令吉的情况下，要一个退体人士如何度过接下来的20年？随着退休年龄的延长，人们能在工作多几年的情况下获得更高的薪水而拥有更多的储蓄。

更令人担忧的是，世界银行2010年度报告揭露马来西亚的家庭债务到了2010年为581亿令吉或国民生产总值的76%。马来西亚的家庭债务是亚洲第二高，仅次于韩国。

马来西亚的家庭债务比例在2010年占了47.8% 或几乎占了每个家庭收入的一半。一般上若家庭债务比例超过33%，将会被视为不健康状态。银行的常规是不会贷款给那些债务超过收入三分之一的家庭。很明显地，马来西亚人民将和马来西亚政府一样成为负债累累的国民，因为后者竟然用借钱来派钱给人民。

联邦政府的债务与国民生产总值的比率（GDP）逐年增加，从2010年53.1%，增加至2011年53.8% 及2012年54.8%。联邦政府的债务从2007年的2660亿令吉，四年内增加71%，在2011年达到4560亿令吉。

这就是国阵和民联政府的主要差别。民联不会把借来的钱派给人民，因为如此一来，人民最终还是要负债。民联派的钱是财政预算的盈余，人民与他们的孩子不用在未来背负债务。

马来西亚人的家庭债务居高不下的情况下，加上国阵联邦政府已经债台高筑、自身难保，我们无法奢望他们的协助，人民别无选择，必须工作更多年来养家。但是，如果有能力退体，又有谁想继续工作？因此，行动党促请当局将私人界职员的退休年龄延长至与公共服务界一样。

林冠英

I wish to challenge Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop to a public debate on whether the extension of the concession period for Penang Bridge by 17 years and BKE by 11 years, in exchange for a freeze on on toll hike for 5 years on 5 highways including the NSE, benefits Penangites and Malaysians.

Tan Sri Nor attacked me in the New Straits Times today for practicing double-standards in opposing the revised deals that will defer toll fare hike for 5 years until 2016. I fail to see how this revision deal benefited the people and how I can be practicing double-standards when I am taking the principled stand in opposing toll operators benefiting hugely at the people’s expense.

TOLL COMPENSATION WAIVER ~ REVISED CONCESSION TERMS

This revision deal above is NOT a win-win situation for both the government and the toll operator as well as the rakyat but clearly a win all solution for the toll operators. Penangites are unfairly penalised for the toll fare hike freeze for 5 years for Penang Bridge, NSE, BKE, Linkedua and Elite. Penangites have to pay an extra 17 years for Penang Bridge till 31.12.2038 instead of 31.12.2021 and for BKE an extra 11 years till 31.12.2038 instead of 27.6.2026, just to allow the 5 toll operators to defer the toll hike by 5 years. There is no extension for NSE or Linkedua.

What is most unconscionable and unfair to the rakyat is that the toll operators are reaping obscenely high profits where they have more than recouped their original investments of construction cost. In a written parliamentary reply of revenue obtained by toll operators until 31.12.2010, the toll operator for NSE spent RM 5,945 million to construct the NSE but has received RM 24,266 million in toll receipts and government compensation.

In other words the NSE toll operator has recorded a surplus of RM 18,321 million as at 31.12.2010 over his investment outlay. Is there any need for the NSE toll operator to collect any more tolls from the public much less increase toll fares? By right and in the rakyat’s interest, toll collection in the NSE should be stopped immediately in view that the revenue returns are 3 times more than the original investment.

The situation is similar for Penang Bridge which has collected RM 1,859 million but spent RM 944 million on construction cost, enjoying a surplus of RM 924 million. For BKE, toll collection amounts to RM 340 million on construction cost of RM 256 million, recording a surplus of RM 84 million. Instead of paying until 31 December 2038, Penangites should not be paying any toll at all in the Penang Bridge and the BKE.

And yet Tan Sri Nor claims that this revision deal benefits the rakyat by freezing toll hike, when the toll hike remains but slyly disguised where its impact is not felt now, but the pain lengthened for another 17 years for Penang Bridge and 11 years fro the BKE.

If Tan Sri Nor is so confident that this revision deal benefits the people, then he should not fear to debate with me so that the people can see how this revision deal benefits them instead of the toll operators.

—– BM Translation—-

Kenyataan Akhbar Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang Lim Guan Eng di Kuala Lumpur pada 28.11.2011

Cabar Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop Untuk Berdebat Secara Terbuka Berhubung Dengan Isu Sama Ada Lanjutan Konsesi Jambatan Pulau Pinang Selama 17 Tahun Dan Lebuhraya Butterworth-Kulim (BKE) Selama 11 Tahun Sebagai Balasan Pembekuan Kenaikan Kadar Tol Selama 5 Tahun Membawa Manfaat Kepada Rakyat Pulau Pinang Mahupun Malaysia.

Saya ingin mencabar Menteri dalam Jabatan Perdana Menteri Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop untuk berdebat secara terbuka berhubung dengan isu sama ada lanjutan konsesi jambatan Pulau Pinang selama 17 tahun dan BKE selama 11 tahun sebagai balasan untuk pembekuan kenaikan kadar tol selama 5 tahun di 5 lebuhraya termasuk lebuhraya utara-selatan (NSE) akan membawa manfaat kepada rakyat Pulau Pinang mahupun Malaysia.

New Straits Times hari ini telah melaporkan bahawa Tan Sri Nor telah mengecam saya kerana mengamalkan “double-standards” dalam bantahan saya terhadap semakan semula perjanjian tol. Saya tidak dapat melihat bagaimana semakan semula yang menangguhkan kenaikan tol selama 5 tahun sehingga 2016 ini dapat membawa manfaat kepada rakyat. Tambahan pula, saya tidak faham bagaimana saya boleh dikatakan sebagai mengamalkan “double-standards” apabila saya mengambil pendirian yang berprinsip untuk membantah syarikat-syarikat pengendali tol yang selama ini meraut keuntungan yang besar daripada rakyat.

PENGECUALIAN PAMPASAN TOL ~ SEMAKAN SEMULA TERMA KONSESI

Semakan semula terma konsesi seperti di atas BUKANLAH satu keadaan “menang-menang” bagi Kerajaan, pengendali tol dan juga rakyat tetapi satu kemenangan yang besar bagi syarikat-syarikat pengendali tol sahaja.

Rakyat Pulau Pinang akan menerima hukuman yang tidak adil sebagai balasan untuk pembekuan kenaikan kadar tol selama 5 tahun bagi Jambatan Pulau Pinang, NSE, BKE, Linkedua dan Elite. Rakyat Pulau Pinang sekarang dihukum dengan lanjutan tol selama 17 tahun untuk Jambatan Pulau Pinang, iaitu sampai 31.12.2038 dan bukan tarikh luput asal 31.12.2021. Bagi BKE pula, tempoh tol ditambah 11 tahun kepada 31.12.2038 daripada tarikh luput asal 27.6.2026. Ini telah dilakukan supaya kadar tol untuk 5 lebuhraya di atas akan dibeku selama 5 tahun. Tambahan pula, tidak ada lanjutan tempoh tol bagi NSE atau Linkedua.

Yang paling tidak adil dan tidak berhati nurani, adalah hakikat bahawa syarikat-syarikat pengendali tol sudah pun meraut keuntungan yang besar di mana kos pelaburan asal pun sudah selesai dikutip.

Jawapan bertulis Parlimen mengenai hasil yang telah dikutip syarikat-syarikat pengendali tol sehingga 31.12.2010 telah menunjukkan bahawa syarikat pengendali tol NSE telah membelanjakan RM5,945 juta untuk pembinaan lebuhraya tersebut, manakala telah menerima sebanyak RM24,266 juta daripada kutipan tol dan pampasan kerajaan dalam jangka masa yang dinyatakan. Dalam erti kata lain, syarikat pengendali tol NSE telah mencatat lebihan sebanyak RM18,321 juta setakat 31.12.2010 daripada pelaburan asal.

Adakah perlu lagi untuk syarikat tersebut untuk mengutip lagi banyak tol daripada rakyat apatah lagi untuk menaikkan kadar tol? Sepatutnya, dan jika diambil kira kepentingan rakyat, kutipan tol bagi NSE patut dihentikan serta merta sedangkan hasil kutipannya sudah pun 3 kali ganda pelaburan asal.

Keadaannya serupa untuk Jambatan Pulau Pinang yang telah mengutip sebanyak RM1,859 juta dengan kos pembinaan RM944 juta. Lebihan yang dicatat sebanyak RM924 juta. Bagi BKE, tol yang dikutip berjumlah RM340 juta manakala kos pembinaannya RM256 juta, iaitu lebihan sebanyak RM84 juta. Rakyat Pulau Pinang bukan sahaja tidak sepatutnya terus dibebani tol sehingga 31 Disember 2038, malah tol bagi Jambatan Pulau Pinang dan BKE harus dihentikan serta merta.

Namun demikian, Tan Sri Nor mendakwa bahawa semakan semula perjanjian tol ini membawa manfaat kepada rakyat melalui pembekuan kenaikan kadar tol, sedangkan kenaikan kadar tol ini sebenarnyamenyamar disebalik lanjutan tempoh tol. Kesannya mungkin tidak dirasai sekarang, tetapi kesakitannya akan berlanjutan selama 17 tahun bagi Jambatan Pulau Pinang dan 11 tahun bagi BKE.

Jika Tan Sri Nor betul-betul yakin bahawa semakan semula perjanjian ini membawa manfaat kepada rakyat, beliau patut berdebat dengan saya supaya rakyat dapat memahami bagaimana semakan semula perjanjian ini akan membawa manfaat kepada mereka dan bukan kepada syarikat-syarikat pengendali tol.

—- Mandarin Translation —-

槟州首席部长林冠英于2011年11月28日在吉隆坡发表的声明：

挑战丹斯里诺莫哈末就槟城大桥及北海居林大道的特许合约，分别展延17年及11年以换取未来5年不涨过路费是否真正惠及槟城人及马来西亚人民，来一场公开辩论。

我谨在此挑战丹斯里诺莫哈末就槟城大桥及北海居林大道的特许合约，分别展延17年及11年以换取5条大道，包括南北大道在未来5年不涨过路费是否真正惠及槟城人及马来西亚人民，来一场公开辩论。

丹斯里诺莫哈末在今天的《新海峡时报》对我展开攻击，声称我在修定后的大道合约上，也即是将收费调涨推迟5年至2016年一事持有双重标准。我实在看不出到底这项新的修定合约如何惠及人民，我的立场是反对大道经营者以牺牲人民利益的方式大幅度牟利，这怎么会变成“双重标准”呢？

豁免收费大道赔偿 ~ 修定后的特许条款：

上述的修定合约，对政府、大道经营者及人民而言，都不是三赢的情况，反之，这很明显地只是对大道经营者最有利的解决方案。槟城人在5条大道，也即是槟城大桥、南北大道、北海居林大道、马新第二通道及中环公路的“冻结调整过路费5年”的协议下，被不公平地处罚。为了让5条大道经营者展延调涨过路费5年，槟城人被逼多还17年的槟城大桥过桥费，直至2038年12月31日，而不是原本的只需还槟城大桥过桥费至2021年12月31日。同样的情况也出现在北海居林大道，原本的特许经营权只到2026年6月27日，可是如今槟城人却必需多背起11年的大道包袱至2038年12月31日。反之，南北大道及马新第二通道的特许经营权却没有展延。

更不合情理及对人民不公平的是，这些大道经营者已经收取了大幅度的高利润，他们早已成功收回他们的原有建筑费投资。我在一次的国会书面回答中得悉，截至2010年12月31日为止，南北大道公司只花了 59亿4千500万令吉投资作建筑大道之用，却已收取了 242亿6千600万令吉的过路费及政府赔偿金。

换言之，截至2010年12月31日，相比他们的投资支出，南北大道经营者已经创下了183亿2千100万吉的盈余。南北大道公司还有必要向人民收取过路费，甚至是要调涨过路费吗？就事论事或站在人民的利益来看，南北大道应该立刻停止收费，因为他们已经收取超过原有投资3倍的盈利了。

类似的情况也发生在槟城大桥。槟城大桥公司只花了 9亿4千400万令投资在建筑费上，可是却已牟取了18亿5千900万令吉的过桥费，享受着9亿2千400万令吉的盈余。至于北海居林大道，总收费额已创下 3亿4千万令吉，而建筑成本只是 2亿5千600万令吉，记录了8千400万令吉的盈余。与其需要缴交过路费至2038年12月31日，槟城人民其实是根本不再需要缴交任何的过路费，不管是槟城大桥过桥费或北海居林大道过路费。

然而，丹斯里诺莫哈末在声称这项修定合约因为冻结调涨而惠及人民的当儿，事实上却是变相的起价，因为有关的起价依然存在，只是我们现在不会受到影响，而是分别将痛苦延长了17年（槟城大桥）及11年（北海居林大道）。

如果丹斯里诺莫哈末信心满满，认为这项修定后的特许合约是惠及人民的，那他应该勇于接受挑战，跟我来一场公开辩论，以让人民清楚的知道这项修定后的特许合约，到底是惠及人民还是惠及大道经营者。

林冠英

Whilst giving out cash aid to the poor and Malaysians are welcome, questions are raised as to where the Federal government is going to find the money, when even Petronas is expected to contribute only RM28 billion next year or RM2 billion in dividends less as compared to 2011. The numbers just do not add up when the Federal government still expects revenues to increase from RM183 billion this year to RM186 billion next year despite the lower dividend payments from Petronas.

Unlike PR state government that funds cash aid to the poor from a surplus budget, BN’s 2012 Election budget relies on deficit spending to buy votes. Many economists have warned that the 2012 Budget risks committing the country to the path of unsustainable spending at a time when the global economic outlook appears to be a recession.

Dr Marie-Aimee Tourres, a senior research fellow at the faculty of economics and administration at the University of Malaya, said that the budget’s “goodie strategy” was not linked to any productivity commitment. Clearly this Election Budget is designed to please voters. At the same time, DAP does not find any measures to combat corruption or plug leakages so that resources can be released for public benefit.

For this reason, the Federal government’s target of reducing the budget deficit from RM45.5 billion this year to RM43 billion in 2012 or 5.4% to 4.7% of GDP is unlikely to be reached. Revenue collection is overly optimistic and may result in higher federal government debt to fund the deficit spending.

The Federal government debt to GDP(Gross Domestic Product) ratio has increased yearly from 53.1% in 2010, 53.8% in 2011 and 54.8% in 2012. Federal government debt rose by 12% in 2011 to RM456 billion from RM407 billion in 2010. To ensure debt sustainability, the Federal government has imposed a 55% ratio to GDP rule. This 54.8% ratio to GDP by 2012 hovers dangerously close to the 55% Federal government debt to GDP rule.

More worryingly, Bank Negara’s Annual Report 2010 revealed that Malaysia’s household debt at end of 2010 was RM 581 billion or 76 per cent of GDP. Malaysia has the second-highest level of household debt in Asia, after South Korea.

The Malaysian household debt service ratio was 47.8 per cent in 2010 or almost half of a household’s income goes to repaying debts. A debt service ratio of more than 33% would be considered unhealthy. As a rule banks would not lend money to those whose total servicing of interest exceed one third of their income. Clearly Malaysians are becoming an indebted nation with the Malaysian government leading the way by giving the people money from borrowed loans.

This is one essential difference between BN and PR state governments. PR does not give money to the people from borrowed money, which ultimately has still to be paid by the people. PR state governments give money from budget surpluses where the people or their children are not required to repay back in future.

———-BM Translation——
Kenyataan Akhbar oleh Setiausaha Agung DAP dan Ahli Parlimen Bagan, Lim Guan Eng pada 12.10.2011 di Pulau Pinang.

Tidak seperti kerajaan-kerajaan negeri Pakatan Rakyat yang memberikan dana bantuan kepada golongan miskin melalui lebihan bajet, bajet pilihan raya BN untuk 2012 bergantung kepada defisit perbelanjaan dan pinjaman kewangan yang akhirnya perlu dibayar oleh rakyat.

Walaupun bantuan wang tunai kepada golongan miskin dan rakyat Malaysia dialu- alukan, timbulnya persoalan di manakah Kerajaan Persekutuan akan mencari wang apabila Petronas dijangka hanya akan menyumbang dividen sebanyak RM28 bilion pada tahun ini ataupun RM2 bilion kurang berbanding tahun 2011. Jelas bahawa unjuran Kerajaan Persekutuan bahawa pendapatan akan meningkat daripada RM183 bilion tahun ini kepada RM186 bilion tahun depan adalah tidak munasabah memandangkan dividen daripada Petronas dijangka berkurang.

Tidak seperti Kerajaan Negeri Pakatan Rakyat yang memberikan bantuan tunai kepada golongan miskin daripada lebihan bajet, bajet pilihan raya BN 2012 pula hanya bergantung kepada perbelanjaan defisit untuk meraih undi. Ramai pakar ekonomi telah memberi amaran bahawa risiko bajet 2012 membawa negara kepada perbelanjaan yang tidak mampan kerana dibelanjakan ketika ekonomi dunia mengalami kemelesetan.

Dr Marie-Aimee Tourres, seorang felo penyelidik kanan di fakulti ekonomi dan pentadbiran Universiti Malaya, berkata bahawa bajet ‘buah tangan’ ini tidak dikaitkan dengan mana-mana komitmen produktiviti. Jelas Bajet Pilihanraya ini direka untuk meraih pengundi. Pada masa yang sama, DAP tidak dapat nampak sebarang usaha untuk memerangi rasuah atau ketirisan dalam pengurusan sumber negara.

Atas sebab itulah, sasaran Kerajaan Persekutan untuk mengurangkan defisit bajet dari RM45.5 bilion tahun ini kepada RM43 bilion menjelang tahun 2012 atau 5.4 peratus kepada 4.7 peratus daripada KDNK mungkin tidak dapat dicapai. Pungutan hasil adalah terlalu optimistik dan boleh menyebabkan peningkatan hutang Kerajaan Persekutuan untuk membiayai perbelanjaan defisit ini.

Ratio hutang Kerajaan Persekutan kepada KDNK (Keluaran Dalam Negara Kasar) telah meningkat setiap tahun daripada 53.1 peratus pada tahun 2010, 53.8 peratus pada tahun 2011 dan 54.8 peratus pada tahun 2012. Hutang Kerajaan Persekutuan pula telah meningkat sebanyak 12 peratus pada tahun 2011 kepada RM456 bilion daripada RM407 bilion pada tahun 2010. Bagi memastikan kemampanan hutang, Kerajaan Persekutuan telah menetapkan nisbah 55 peratus kepada KDNK. Justeru, nisbah 54.8 peratus kepada KDNK menjelang tahun 2012 ini sangat berbahaya kerana sudah menghampiri 55 peratus peratus kepada KDNK.

Lebih membimbangkan, Laporan Tahunan Bank Negara 2010 mendedahkan bahawa hutang isi rumah Malaysia pada akhir tahun 2010 adalah sebanyak RM581 bilion atau 76 peratus daripada GDP. Malaysia mempunyai tahap hutang isi rumah yang kedua tertinggi selepas Korea Selatan.

Nisbah bayaran hutang isi rumah rakyat Malaysia adalah 47.8 peratus pada tahun 2010, yang bermakna bahawa hampir separuh daripada pendapatan isi rumah digunakan untuk bayaran hutang. Secara umum, nisbah bayaran hutang yang melebihi 33 peratus dianggap tidak sihat. Bank juga mempunyai syarat tidak akan memberi pinjaman jika lebih daripada satu pertiga daripada pendapatan mereka digunakan untuk bayaran hutang. Jelas rakyat Malaysia telah membentuk negara yang banyak berhutang, terutamanya apabila Kerajaan Malaysia memberikan wang yang diperolehi daripada pinjaman.

Ini adalah satu perbezaan antara BN dan Kerajaan Negeri Pakatan Rakyat. Pakatan Rakyat tidak akan memberikan wang kepada rakyat daripada wang yang dipinjam di mana pada akhirnya, rakyat masih perlu membayar wang tersebut. Kerajaan Negeri Pakatan Rakyat memberi wang daripada lebihan bajet di mana rakyat atau anak-anak mereka tidak perlu membayar balik wang pada masa akan datang.

———Mandarin Translation ———-
民主行动党秘书长兼巴眼区国会议员林冠英于2011年10月12日发表声明：

民联政府在拥有预算盈余的情况下发放援助金给穷人，而国阵却是借钱来派钱，打肿脸皮充胖子，在开销赤字、欠债的情况下，派钱给人民，最终还是要由人民来还债。

我们欢迎政府发放现金援助给贫穷人士和马来西亚人，问题是，联邦政府去哪里找钱？就连国油也预算明年只能掏出280亿令吉或20亿令吉的股息，比2011年更少。尽管国油股息降低，联邦政府却预算政府税收将从今年的1830亿令吉增加至明年1860亿令吉，这让人无法理解。

民联政府在拥有预算盈余的情况下发放援助金给穷人，而国阵却是借钱来派钱，打肿脸皮充胖子，在2012年预算赤字的情况下，派钱买票。很多经济学家已经发出警告，在全球经济看来没有好转之际，2012年预算可说是冒着国家开销无法持续的风险。

马大经济与行政学院资深研究员玛丽亚艾美说，预算案的“糖果策略”与生产力没有联系。很明显地，这是为了讨好选民的大选预算案。同时，行动党也找不到联邦政府决心肃贪或防止疏漏的借施，让资源基于公众利益而发放。

因此，联邦政府看起无法达致削减赤字的目标，他们本来算计把今年的财政赤字455亿令吉减少至2012年430亿令吉，或是国民生产总值的5.4%减少4.7%。联邦政府对税收的估计过于乐观，可能导致联邦政府为了弥补开销赤字，而欠下更多债。

联邦政府债务对国内生产总值的比例逐年增加，2010年为53.1%、2011年为53.8%及2012年为54.8% 。联邦政府的债务也从2010年的4070亿令吉增加12%至2011年4560亿令吉。为了维持债务可承担能力，联邦政府规定债务比例不能超过国民生产总值的55%。2012年的债务对国内生产总值的比例却是54.8%，徘徊在联邦政府所订下的债务限制边缘。

更令人担忧的是，国家银行2010年度报告揭露，截至2010年底，马来西亚的家庭债务高达5810亿令吉，或占国民生产总值的76%，成为亚洲国家债务第二高的国家，仅次于韩国。

2010年马来西亚家庭偿债比例为47.8%，或者说近乎一半的家庭收入是用来还债的。偿债比例若超过33%都是不健康的现象。按章行事的银行往往不会把钱借给那些债务占收入超过三分之一的贷款者。很明显地，随着政府带头借钱来派给人民，马来西亚人已经成为负债累累的国民。

这便是国阵与民联州政府的根本差别。民联政府不是借钱来派钱，因为这样最终还是要叫人民来还债。民联政府是从财政预算盈余中，拨款发放给人民，人民及他们的子子孙孙无需在未来还债。

林冠英

Lim Guan Eng is the Chief Minister of the Malaysian state of Penang and the Secretary General of Malaysia’s Democratic Action Party, the DAP.

Mr Lim has brought resounding progress to Penang under his system of governance based on the principles of ‘Competency, Accountability and Transparency’.

On Monday, the Chief Minister delivered a speech on human rights and transparency at a function sponsored by the Centre for Malaysian Studies at Monash University’s Asia Institute here in Melbourne.

Presenter: Cameron Wilson
Speaker: Lim Guan Eng, Chief Minister of Penang and Secretary General of Malaysia’s Democratic Action Party

LIM: We were quite pleased when he made the announcement but when he said subsequently that it’ll be scrapped next year likely after the next elections, we were wondering whether he’s just a cosmetic exercise and merely to present or portray his human rights credentials. So I think whether this is a genuine repeal of the act I think remains to be seen, there’s a big question mark.

WILSON: Do you think you’ll get more detail before the election?

LIM: We hope so but if he’s sincere about repealing the act he should have done it at the coming parliamentary sitting this year. There’s no reason to wait for it next year. How difficult is it to repeal an act? It’s only a one-page statute, and I do not think there will be any opposition in parliament.

WILSON: How much of this decision or the announcement to repeal the act, how much do you think is related to some of the protests and the social push that we’ve seen in Malaysia this year?

LIM: Definitely it’s linked because the Bersih rally, the quest for free, fair and clean elections was badly mishandled by the government resulting in two-thousand arrests of ordinary and law-abiding citizens, and Malaysia received widespread condemnation of the harsh crackdown. And I think they lost tremendous support, the Prime Minister’s approval rating slipped from a high of 73 per cent to 59 per cent. So this is an attempt by him to shore-up support to try to regain the initiative that he’s also a human rights advocate. But we are wondering whether he’s merely pouring old wine in new bottles.

WILSON: Does that change in support for the Prime Minister or drop as you say in support for the Prime Minister, does it naturally translate to an increased support for Bersih?

LIM: Definitely, and also I think it also eats into his efforts to try to win back more states in the next elections. So this is as I said an attempt, a cosmetic exercise which will only be proven if he continues to repeal it next year, but if he does it this year. And also the other question of this Cameron is that he has said that whilst the ISA is going to be repealed, it’ll be replaced by two other preventive laws, and we are wondering if the preventive laws that he’s going to replace the ISA is the same. And it’s not one, it’s two preventive laws, and are we getting now two ISA’s instead of one.

WILSON: And at this stage the detail of those two new laws is still relatively scant?

LIM: No details whatsoever. So it may end up to be just an empty, a meaningless announcement.

WILSON: Can we add, I’d like to hear your personal experience with the Internal Security Act. Now you were arrested under this act in the past, it was quite some time ago, but can you just outline for us the circumstances of that arrest?

LIM: Well I was detained for being a threat to national security, at the time I was only 26 years old, newly elected to parliament, and it is actually a preventive law which detains you without trial. So it is a subjective exercise or discretionary exercise by the minister in charge. They do not have to justify why they arrested you, and it is arbitrary and completely, well described as high-handed abuse of democratic norms, an act to stifle dissent. If I am considered a security threat when I was only 26 years old, I’d like to believe I’m a greater security threat now. Why am I not detained now?

WILSON: But did you know at the time that you were being antagonistic and you perhaps would be subject to this sort of treatment?

LIM: No I expected to be detained at some point of my career, not when I was just elected to parliament. How can you be a threat to national security when you are just 26 and I do not think I was that influential that if I’m not detained the whole country will go up in flames. That is far-fetched.

WILSON: And you were detained for over a year, just explain the circumstances?

LIM: 18 months, well for the first 60 days you are put under solitary confinement, the conditions of detention were what you saw in the movies; interrogation continuously for 48 hours, they put you in an enclosed room without any windows, only a ventilation shute or a vent and you’re just cut off completely from society. So you only face four walls and you have no human contact whatsoever except with your interrogators. And I think that boredom and that solitary confinement can really drive you up the wall.

WILSON: So you had no idea of what sort of support you might have had outside of your confinement and how much people knew about your situation?

LIM: For the first 60 days, none. But after my detention was extended for two years, then I had contact with the outside world, but not for the first 60 days.

WILSON: How did that experience shape your political career?

LIM: Well when you’re detained under ISA there are only two possible results; one is either you break down and you give in, what … described to your family you are turned over, or you become more determined to try to reform. And I think that I ended up angry and more determined as I said to make sure that what happened to me if possible doesn’t happen to other Malaysians.

WILSON: My guest on Connect Asia’s Profile segment today is Lim Guan Eng — the chief minister of the Malaysian island state of Penang, and Secretary General of Malaysia’s Democratic Action Party. Did you feel at all that your family’s role, the fact that you’re from a politically active family and relatively well educated and the like, did that change the treatment you received?

LIM: No I think that probably they treated me a little bit more harshly than my other comrades, probably because I was a little bit, I was a young man then, I was angry at the fact that I was detained, and some of the questions that they asked and the reasons they tried to justify for my detention were just ridiculous. So they considered me to be uncooperative and that’s why as I said perhaps they treated me a little bit more harshly.

WILSON: And how is that use of detention and the ISA, how has that changed in your view the use of that to influence political opposition over the years since you were detained, what is it, it’s 25 years ago now?

LIM: 1987, that’ll be nearly 25 years, right.

WILSON: So has it changed, have you seen a different treatment of political opponents in that time?

LIM: Yes, I think the treatment now is a little bit more, well I wonder whether the use of the word humane is appropriate, but I think they treat them a little bit gentler than during our time, because they’re used to getting away with it, and when you highlighted your abusers they had to do some modifications. But again these are superficial modifications. The core of the issue is that the ISA is evil, detention without trial is wrong. Nothing, no explanation can turn what is black into white. And it must be scrapped unconditionally.

WILSON: So that’s what you’d be looking for from the Prime Minister, Najib Razak, is it, a commitment to repeal it unconditionally?

LIM: That’s right.

WILSON: How optimistic are you that you will actually see that?

LIM: Well the fact that he’s forced to yield, previously his position is that there will be no repeal of the ISA and he’s refused to compromise on questions of security. Now this sudden announcement I think is a result of concerted pressure from all segments of society, even from supporters within the ruling coalition. I think he has come to realise that he cannot withstand the demands of civil society, and even if Malaysia is to be a civilised nation such oppressive, repressive and suppressive laws have to go.

WILSON: Do you believe that the Australian High Court decision to reject Australia’s planned deal to send asylum seekers to Malaysia for processing and the attention that that has brought on Malaysia as a country, its human rights practices here in Australia, do you feel that’s had any influence?

LIM: Well I would say it may have prompted the Prime Minister to speed up the calls and the demands that the ISA be scrapped. Definitely it’s embarrassing for Malaysia to be described by certain political leaders in Australia, and I think more importantly by the Australian High Court that we do not measure up to international human rights norms. And I do not think that this is something that we can hold our heads up high, and definitely I’m sure it would have prompted the Prime Minister to speed up the consideration to repeal the act.

WILSON: Is that not overstating the influence of Australia’s court decision and the debate here in Australia that this decision could see a repeal enacted that’s been on the cards for years with nothing happening?

LIM: I just say it could have prompted the decision be speeded up. As I said Malaysia doesn’t want to be measured negatively compared to Nauru. I would think that wouldn’t be complimentary by any standards. So definitely it would be embarrassing for any Malaysian leader, well not only just in Australia but also other countries that our human rights record doesn’t measure up internationally, and I think by repealing or by making this announcement he has received tremendous credit, and I’m sure Malaysia has received favourable press internationally.

WILSON: So in hindsight was entering into negotiations with Australia for an asylum seeker deal, was that perhaps an error in judgement, did it just bring about greater scrutiny on Malaysia?

LIM: Maybe in retrospect yes, but I think initially they were looking at the economic benefits of this deal. And when Malaysia’s human rights record was scrutinised, in the end it just doesn’t measure up.

WILSON: Can we just finish up talking a little bit on a separate note, talking about economics in Malaysia at the moment, Penang where you’re from, one of the most developed and economically important states of Malaysia. What’s driving its boom at the moment?

LIM: I think a couple of factors; number one I think many companies are looking for alternatives and Penang is able to offer that because we have finally got our act together. Principally since we took over in 2008 we have implemented governance based on competency, accountability and transparency. We have taken a strong stance against corruption, promoting integrity and I would like to say that basically we have nearly zero corruption in Penang. We were praised by Transparency International for implementing open tenders and fighting corruption.

WILSON: So has that been a success the implementation of the open tenders?

LIM: Yes we have saved public money resulting in budget surpluses every year, and we’ve got record budget surpluses, so this has resulted in record levels of investment, record budget surpluses, a labour shortage and also nearly zero debt.

WILSON: Is it something that you could see being applied to the rest of Malaysia?

LIM: Definitely, actually when you talk about open tenders Cameron it is an international norm, but in Malaysia it is considered as what I would describe as even heresy, heresy because Malaysia has never practised open tenders, it is always done through negotiated tenders and basically something for the cronies, something on the gravy train. So we feel that we have proven that a clean government practising transparency, practising open tenders can out-perform a government that looks after cronies and is not transparent.

WILSON: So given all we’ve discussed in the last 15 minutes here, the change in politics, some of the change in the economics that you’ve just discussed there, how significant is this moment in Malaysia’s history for real reform, to really see changes in the future of the way the country is run?

LIM: Well we’re at a crossroads, whether we can see change and I think change is now the most powerful word in the world. You can’t stop change, you either have to change or you will be changed, and it is up to Malaysians to seize the initiative to reclaim democracy and reclaim their government. Government should be for the people, not for the cronies, and if Malaysians are able to have the courage to change I’m sure we can be high-income economy and we can join the ranks of civilised democratic nations.

====== Mandarin Translation ========================================================

以下是槟州首席部长林冠英于2011年9月20日接受澳洲广播电台（英文台）接受访问时的访问文本：

http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/connectasia/stories/201109/s3321815.htm

亚洲简况：人权与槟城首席部长林冠英

2011年9月20日

林冠英是马来西亚槟州首席部长及民主行动党秘书长。

林冠英在其秉持“能干、公信及透明”的施政原则，为槟城的发展带来了显著的进步。

星期一，他在莫纳斯大学亚洲研究院的马来西亚研究中心所赞助的活动上，发表了关于人权与透明度的主题演讲。

Presenter: Cameron Wilson
Speaker: Lim Guan Eng, Chief Minister of Penang and Secretary General of Malaysia’s Democratic Action Party

林冠英： 当他（首相纳结）宣布（废除内安法令）时，我们都感到很欣慰，但是当他说明年才废除，而是可能是在大选之后，我们怀疑这是不是粉饰的动作，也为他的人权记录加分。那么究竟会不会真的废除上述法令，我还是很怀疑。

威尔森: 你认为你会不会在大选前获得更多资料？

林冠英: 我们也希望，如果他是真心要废除这个法令，他应该在今年的国会废除。不用等到明年。废除法令有多难？那只是一张法令，我不认为国会里会有人反对。

威尔森: 你认为废除内安法令的决定或宣布，与今年我们看到马来西亚的示威及社会压力有什么联系？

林冠英: 肯定有关系，因为净选盟大集会这个要求自由、公平及干净选举的集会，被政府严重处理不当，导致2000个普通市民被逮捕，马来西亚也因强行镇压集会而遭到各界的谴责。我想他们也因此失去支持率，首相的支持率从73%下跌到59%。这是他希望通过废除内安法令为自己树立人权支持者的形象、重新赢取支持率的做法。但是，我们怀疑，他是不是旧酒装新瓶、换汤不换药。

威尔森: 对首相支持率的改变，或者是你所说的对首相的支持下跌，是不是可以自然地被解释成越来越多人支持净选盟？

林冠英：肯定是，我也认为他希望在来届大选赢得更多州属。所以，他的这项尝试是不是只是一种政治把戏，就要看他是不是在今年废除。另一个问题是，他说内安法令将被两外两个预防性法令取代，我们怀疑这两条替代法令是不是和内安法令一样。到时，我们不只有一条内安法令，而是有两条。

威尔森: 在这个阶段，另外两条新法令的内容还不足够?

林冠英：我们什么细节都不知道。所以它可能只是一个空洞、毫无意义的宣布。

威尔森: 你可不可以谈话你与内安法令的亲身经验。你曾在这项法令下被捕，虽然已经是很久以前的事，但是你可不可以大概讲述一下你被捕的情况？

林冠英：我曾经被指威胁国家安全而被逮捕，当年我才26岁，也是刚刚中选的国会议员。那其实是一条防范性法令，可以无审讯扣留一个人。只需要负责部长的主观或任意的判断。他们不需要说明逮捕你的理由，这是独断的、高压的对付异议分子的反民主手段。如果在我26岁那一年我被指控为威胁国家安全，我相信我现在是“更大的”威胁。为什么他们不扣留我？

威尔森: 那个时候你知不知道你被视为敌对分子，而你当时可能会遭对付？

林冠英: 我预料在我的事业里我可能会遭逮捕，但是，我中选为国会议员时我没有想过。当你才26岁，你怎么可能会威胁国家安全？我不认为我有那样的影响力，如果不捉我，整个国家会陷入混乱。这太牵强了。

威尔森: 你被扣留了超过一年，能不能说说当时的情形？

林冠英：18个月，首60天你独自被监禁， 扣留室的情形就像电影里那样；48小时连续不断地盘问，他们把你关在一个没有窗口的密室，只有一个抽风孔，你完全与世隔绝。你只面对四面墙，除了盘问你的人，无法接触其他人。我想，当时的苦闷及单独监禁，真的可以把你逼疯。

威尔森: 所以你完全不知道当时外面有多少人支持你？有多少人知道你的情况？

林冠英：首60天完全不知道。但是在我的扣留被延长两年时，我才开始与外界接触。

威尔森: 这样的经验如何造就了你的政治事业？

林冠英：当你在内安法令下被扣留时，只有两个可能性：完全崩溃、投降，不然就是更加坚定地继续改革。当时我非常愤怒也更加确定，不能让发生在我身上的事，发生在其它马来西亚人身上。

威尔森: 你是否觉得自己的家庭里的角色，比如：来自具政治背景的家庭，受过良好教育等，会不会因此而受到不同的对待？

林冠英: 我认为，我反而因此遭受比我的同志更恶劣一点的对待，可能是当时我还年轻，我为自己遭扣留感到非常愤怒，他们问我的一些问题、以及他们企图制造扣留我的理由，都让我觉得很荒唐。所以，他们认为我不合作，因此我说他们对我可能恶劣一点。

威尔森: 这段在内安法令下被扣留的经验，从你被扣留那一年，直今25年了？当局有没有改变他们影响政治反对派的方式？

林冠英：1987年，直今25年了。

威尔森: 你有没有发现对待政治对手的方式已经不同往日？

林冠英: 是的，我想现在他们对待反对派人士的方式，比我们那个年代“人道”一点，当我们不断地突出侵虐者时，他们就必须调整。但是，这些都是表面上的调整。内安法令的核心问题就是：无审讯扣留是不对的。任何人都不能把黑的讲成白的。它必须无条件被废除。

威尔森: 因此，你要知道首相纳吉是不是有诚意要无条件废除这条法令？

林冠英: 是的。

威尔森：如你所见，你对此乐观吗？

林冠英：事实上是他感受到了压力，之前他的立场是不会废除内安法令，而且拒绝在安全问题上妥协。如今，这项突如其来的宣布，我认为是受到来自各社会层面的压力，包括了执政党本身的支持者。我认为他难以抵挡住来自公民社会的要求，马来西亚若要成为一个文明的国家，那这项压迫、镇压、抑制人民的法令就得消失。

威尔森: 你相信澳洲高庭反对来自澳洲的难民到大马处理，多少影响到大马本国的人权进程吗？

林冠英：我可以说这加速了首相废除内安法令的呼声。无可否认，一些澳洲政治领袖对马来西亚的形容实在大马难堪，但最重要的是澳洲高庭指出我们还不符合国际人权标准。我不认为这项裁决能让我们继续昂首正视，这将迫使首相加速考虑废除该法令。

威尔森: 澳洲高庭的裁决是否有此高的影响力，因为澳洲方面正辩论这项决定可否见到多年来只厅楼梯响的废除动议？

林冠英：我刚说了，这可以迫使加速这项决定。马来西亚不想被别人拿来与非洲的瑙鲁做负面的比较，我想任谁都不会觉得这是一项值得庆贺的标准。所以这可让任何大马领袖都决得难堪，因为我们的人权记录不只在澳洲受非议，在其他国家也不符合国际标准，因此透过宣布废除法令，他将获得极好的声誉，而我也肯定大马也争取到了国际媒体的报导。

威尔森: 所以在澳洲难民交换计划进入协调的尾声之际，这项裁决或许是错的呢，这是否导致对马来西亚进行更严格的审查？

林冠英： 若回顾的话也许是，但我想他们最初对这项交易只是经济利益的考量 ，但随着大马人权纪录被审查，最终只会发现不符合标准。

威尔森: 在结束之前，我们可以谈谈别的吗？就谈现今的大马经济，你来自的槟城，大马其中一个高度发展及经济重镇。是什么导致槟城现在高速增长？

林冠英： 我认为有几个因素，其一是很多企业正在寻求替代方案，而槟城正可以提供它们的要求，因为我们与这些企业最终一起付诸行动。自从我们在2008年执政以来一直秉持着能干、公信、透明的施政方针。我们坚决反贪的立场、提倡廉政，我可以说槟城已经接近零贪污。我们因为实施公开招标及打击贪污，还受到国际透明组织的赞扬。

威尔森: 因此公开招标已经获得了成功？

林冠英： 是的，我们为公众省下了许多钱，因为每年都有财政盈余，而且还创下纪录。这些都体现在了投资创下纪录、财政盈余创下纪录、员工短缺及几近零的债务。

威尔森: 对你看来，这可以在大马其他地方实行吗？

林冠英：当然可以，说实在的，卡梅隆当你提到公开招标，这可是国际的标准规范啊，可在大马公开招标好像被看成异端般，因为大马不曾实施公开招标，而是给予朋党及经过谈判的招标 ，是一个黄金外快列车。所以，我们已经证明实施透明政策、实施公开招标的政府会比只照顾朋党及不透明的政府，表现好很多。

威尔森: 看回我们这15分钟的讨论，目前政治的改变以及经济上的一些改变，对马来西亚历史上的真正改革、对这个国家的未来是否有显著的影响？

林冠英:我们处于十字路口，我们能不能看到改变，“改变”已经是世界上最具影响力的字眼。你无法停止改变，你必须改变，否则你就被被改变，马来西亚人民必须选择，要主动积极回到民主正轨，纠正我们的政府。政府应该是为人民服务，而不是为朋党服务，如果马来西亚有勇气改变，我肯定我们可以成为高收入经济体，我们也可以成为文明民主国家的一分子。

1. When the China-Asean Free Trade Area (CAFTA) came into effect on the 1st of January, 2010, it was already evident to many of us that this will be Asia’s decade. Somewhere along this decade, China’s economy, measured in Purchasing Price Parity (PPP) terms, will overtake the US economy to become the largest economy in the world. With worries of managing government debt continuing to plague the European Union as well as the United States, Asia will have to take the lead in driving economic growth for the rest of the world.

2. The China-AFTA pact (CAFTA) is the result of a visionary proposal by former Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji at the ASEAN-China Summit in November 2000. Even then, it was already clear to Premier Zhu and the leaders of the respective ASEAN countries that the rapidly expanding trade between China and ASEAN would grow by even greater leaps and bounds with the institutionalization of a Free Trade Area (FTA).

3. From 1991 to 2000, ASEAN-China trade grew at an average annual rate of 20.4%, much faster than either the growth in China’s global trade (15%) or in ASEAN’s global trade (11%). This rate accelerated to 30% in 2002, a clear sign of the dynamic economic activity that was taking place between China and ASEAN.

4. In 2001, the year which China joined the WTO, China-ASEAN trade (exclusive of HK) was US$41.6 billion.[1] This increased to US$223billion in 2008, an average annual increase of 30%.[2] As a result, China became ASEAN’s third largest trading partner while ASEAN became China’s fourth largest trading partner.

5. Malaysia’s importance in the trading relationship with China within the ASEAN context is highlighted by the fact that we are the second largest trading partner, after Singapore, comprising approximately one fifth of the total China-ASEAN trade. As of 2010, China became Malaysia’s largest trading partner, overtaking Singapore, Japan and the United States.

6. Penang sits at the hub of this trading relationship given that half of Malaysia’s exports to and imports from China are in the electrical and electronics (E&E) sector of the economy. Intermediate as well as assembled E&E products from and to Penang from China form an important part of the global supply chain for major multinationals that operates in both places.

7. How then can Penang take full advantage of CAFTA in this new decade? We recognize that the nature and structure of CAFTA has opened up economic opportunities in four areas, namely: (i) opportunities to increase trade in physical goods (ii) opportunities to increase economic activity in the service sector (iii) opportunities to increase the two way flow of direct investment and (iv) opportunities for cooperation in other economic areas.

(i) Opportunities to increase trade in Physical Goods

8. Currently, Malaysia benefits from a strong manufacturing export sector and within this sector, E&E products comprised 34% of total exports in the first half of 2011. But the current composition of E&E export products including consumer electronics, electronic components and electrical items, are mostly in stable or even sunset industries, therefore limiting their growth potential. In fact, the latest figures show that exports from this category of products decreased by 6.5% in the first half of 2011.

9. With the removal of import and non-tariff barriers for trade in goods and with the changing demands of the marketplace, there are many opportunities to Penang-China expand trade in growth industries such as medical devices to cater for the expanding health care industry and solar panels and light-emitting diodes (LEDs) to cater for the expanding renewable and sustainable energy industry.

10. Penang has successfully utilized its advantage as an E&E manufacturing hub to expand its share of exports in these growth industries. Many of the local and MNC manufacturing LEDs such as Philips Lumileds, SILQ and Osram have successfully moved up the value chain by producing better quality and more energy efficient products.

11. More recently, companies such as St. Jude Medical, B Braun, Accellent, Symmetry Medical and Ambu have expanded or started their operations manufacturing medical devices in Penang.

12. Last but not least, Bosch Solar Energy’s RM2.2b investment in a crystalline photovoltaic (PV) manufacturing plant in Penang in June of this year (2011) heralds the potential for more solar energy related products and its components to be exported to and imported from China.

13. In addition to manufactured exports, there are also opportunities to increase Penang-China trade through the export of halal products to the sizeable Muslim minority population which can be found in large numbers in some of the provinces in China.

14. Estimates of the Muslim population in China range from a low of 20 million[3] to a high of more than 100 million.[4] The Muslim population in China are mostly concentrated in the Northwest Areas like Xinjiang, Gansu, Ningxia, Qinghai, Guizhou and Hebei as well as in the province of Yunnan in the Southwest and Henan in the Center. Even the low end of this estimation would provide a number of people almost equivalent to the population of Malaysia as a market for Malaysia’s halal food.

15. Malaysia’s Halal Certification standards are well known and reputable not just in the process of preparing the halal products but also throughout the supply chain in the entire production, packing and transportation process.

16. Penang is already a gateway to the halal market to countries in the Middle East and also has the physical infrastructure such as the International Halal Sea Port and Halal warehouses and cold chain facilities that are extremely important to the process of marketing and exporting these products overseas.

17. Penang is also establishing itself as a serious halal research hub with joint research coming from Malaysian public universities such as USM, UPM and IIUM as well as two universities from Southern Thailand, namely, Prince of Songkhla University and Chulalongkorn University.

18. This area of halal food exports was often highlighted by business delegations from Henan, Shandong and a few other areas in China with a significant % of Muslim residents.

19. Penang companies who are already exporting unique Penang halal products should make full use of CAFTA by seeking out these new markets for their products.

(ii) Opportunities to increase activity in the Service Sector

20. While trade in physical goods will likely make up the majority of Penang-China trade, the areas with the highest growth potential are likely to be in the service sector. I will highlight two specific areas in the service sector which are prime candidates for growth. The first is in the related area of business process outsourcing (BPO) and shared services outsourcing (SSO). The second is in the area of tourism.

21. Penang is an ideal hub for BPO (Business Process Outsourcing) and SSO (Shared Services Outsourcing) because of its strategic location in the heart of Asia Pacific region and time zone which means that companies in Penang are able to conduct business round the clock in Asia, Europe and Americas.

22. In addition, the linguistic ability possessed by Penang’s multiracial and multilingual population means that it can serve numerous groups in Asia as well as the United States, United Kingdom and Australia.

23. As economic connections between Penang and China continue to grow, these transactions will have to be supported. Many MNCs which have operations in Penang have also set up BPO and SSO arms in order to support their customers in and outside Penang. International companies such as IBM (IT), Ideal Capital (BPO), MoBif (BPO), JABIL Shared Service Centre, Dell (BPO), Seagate (SSO), National Instruments (BPO) and PMC Sierra (BPO) are but a few examples of international companies which have BPO and SSO operations in Penang.

24. The volume of business originating from China has and will continue to grow significantly as their sales to and from China increase. It is in the interest of these companies to increase the scale of their BPO and SSO operations in Penang, especially in order to exploit growing economic relationships between Malaysia and China and also ASEAN and China.

25. The other area of the service sector which will benefit significantly from CAFTA is the tourism sector. Already, tourist arrivals from China to Malaysia in 2010 stood at more than 1.1 million and is growing at an annual rate of 10%. Penang, with its unique combination of history, architecture, natural beauty, food and culture, is a natural destination for Chinese tourists. This unique tourism experience, acknowledged by UNECSO in the form of a World Heritage Site (together with Melaka), can be enjoyed by more Chinese tourists with the help of strategic government and business partnerships and initiatives.

26. For example, more needs to be done to exploit the Penang-Xiamen sister city relationship, established since 1993. The historical connection between the Hokkien population in Penang and their relatives and ancestors in this part of Southern China needs to be better explored or highlighted. While the Penang state government has already taken many initiatives to strengthen Penang-Xiamen ties – for example, in the publication of the ‘Penang-Xiamen Premier Business Route magazine’ and organizing for Penang businessmen, companies and business chambers to participate in the 15th China International Fair for Investment and Trade in Xiamen in September 2011, these strategic initiatives need to be broadened to include a larger number of actors, especially from the private sector.

27. Additional tourism offerings such as short and long term cruise holidays departing from Penang to nearby Langkawi, Thailand and Indonesia needs to be developed in order to present more options to attract Chinese tourists to visit Penang.

28. The growing attractiveness of Penang as a destination for medical tourism can also be taken advantage of by Chinese tourists especially as the demand for more sophisticated health care treatment grows along with growing Chinese incomes.

29. It is also hoped that the comprehensive collaborative framework established between MAS and Air Asia will see more direct flights to China from Penang in recognition of the growing economic linkages between the state and China.

(iii) Opportunities to increase two-way flow in FDI

30. Currently, FDI flows from China to ASEAN and to Malaysia are still relatively small.

31. An increasing number of Chinese companies are also realizing the potential payback from investing in Penang, evidenced by decision of four Chinese companies in four different sectors to set up operations in the state during the first fourth months of 2011.

32. Nissi High Tech Service is a power management company, Arvest Global is in the oil and gas industry, Shenzhen Alex Connector Co Ltd is a player in the E&E sector and Internatioal Marketing Organizing Service (IMOS) is involved in the service sector of the economy.

33. While Penang cannot compete with China on the basis of labor cost, where Penang has a comparative advantage is in the area of human capital, better physical infrastructure, the change in focus from manufacturing to research and design and a more conducive environment for the protection of intellectual property.

34. Chinese giants in the E&E sector including companies like Huawei, which already has a presence in Technology Park Malaysia (TPM) and MDec, should also seriously consider investing in R&D facilities in Penang to exploit the knowledge environment.

35. At the same time, an increasing number of Penang companies have also expanded their activities to China including AT Systematization Berhad (Suzhou, Industrial Automation Products), JEFI AquaTech Resources Sdn Bhd (Fujian, Frozen Shrimp/Food Processing) and Qdos Flexcircuit (Xiamen, manufacturer of Flexible Printed Circuits (FPC))

36. In addition to private investment flows from Chinese companies in private opportunities, the Penang state government also welcomes the participation of Chinese companies and the Chinese government in important infrastructure projects in the state. The construction of Penang’s Second Bridge, expected to be the longest in South-East Asia, is a joint venture between UEM Builders Bhd and China Harbor Engineering Co and is partially funded by a US$800 million loan by the Chinese government to the project.

37. The Butterworth-Penang Tunnel Project and other highway traffic elevation project which spans nearly 30km with a projected cost of RM 8 billion offers not only opportunities for Chinese investors but also a fiscal boost to pump-prime the economy should there be any global slowdown.

38. As of January 2010, CAFTA encompassed 1.9 billion people, had a combined GDP of US$6.6 trillion and total trade amounted to US$4.3 trillion. Under the CAFTA, more than 9,000 products imported from China to Malaysia are duty-free while China will reduce tariffs on more than 7,000 products from ASEAN. Besides manufactured goods, the agreement also covers services and investment. Hence, there are opportunities for many MNCs to increase local content of their products to be above 40% to take advantage of the ACFTA so that products can be shipped from Penang, Malaysia into China. We also hope that some of the US$10 billion Chinese-Asean Fund (CAF) can be invested in some of these projects in Penang and in the NCER.

39. Let everyone including MNCs and SMEs consider Penang as a reliable location that protects your investment and yet serve as a gateway to China through the CAFTA. In other words, we offer not just our natural competitive and comparative advantages in logistics,the high-tech, high-value and knowledge based industries but also in language. resort tourist destination and a cultural intermediary between East and West.

40. Penang can be the key gateway in Malaysia for China & ASEAN as Penang has several competitive advantages.

(a) Top in investments in Malaysia attracting 36% of Malaysia FDI despite having only 6% of Malaysia’s population.

(b) The best financially-managed state in Malaysia according to Auditor-General’s Report.

(c) The only government in Malaysia to be praised by Transparency International for having a clean government that fights corruption and practice open tender.

(d) Contributes 65% of Malaysia health tourism receipts.

(e) Pioneering green state with a ban on free distribution of plastic bags to hypermarkets.

(f) Safe city with the largest drop in crime index.

A city that is cleaner, greener and safer can offer security and certainty for your profits and investments.

A cleaner, greener and safer Penang is the ideal gateway for China to ASEAN.

[1] http://www.asean.org/17310.htm

[2] http://www.eai.nus.edu.sg/BB519.pdf

[3] http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090711070052AAtZ1ia

[4] http://www.islamicpopulation.com/asia/China/Muslim%20in%20China.htm

UMNO should show proof to back up its wild allegations or else stop its vicious lies that The Economist was paid off to write a favourable article about how the new PR state government has incresed Penang’s economic development and investments. UMNO had spread such lies of a payoff in relation to the 13th August issue of The Economist, under the title of Malaysia’s Penang state, “Getting back its mojo!”(After a slump, an early engine of globalisation is thriving again).

On August 16, 2011 UMNO MP for Kota Belud Abdul Rahman Dahlan twitted,
“As usual. Must must read! RT @satD: @cmlimguaneng @limkitsiang how much u paid Economist 4 D Mojo Advertorial?”

Clearly UMNO is unhappy at the praise heaped on the new PR state government for its success in fighting corruption and running a clean government as well as stressing on performance, productivity and proficiency through its acclaimed open tender system. This has caused a revival of Penang into a thriving engine of globalisation that aims to be not just a sweat-shop of the manufacturing sector but also a smart-shop for the services industry like medical tourism, high-tech and knowledge based.

PR adoption of a successful model of governance centered on a clean government and competency has allowed Penang to attract the highest investments in its history with RM12.24 billion in 2010. The concluding remarks by the Economist has caused much concern amongst BN supporters, “Little wonder, then, that Penang has become a political weathervane as much as a lesson in economic development.”(see article)

Instead of trying to compete with Penang PR on ideas, BN is trying to sabotage our efforts with vicious lies. I wish to remind BN that PR does not engage in such dishonest practices like some Federal government leaders in buying off journalists for favourable reviews. And not everyone can be bought, certainly not the Economist. As the most reputable economic magazine in the world, BN’s allegations of PR buying off The Economist reputation has no credibility whatsoever.

The UMNO Kota Belud MP should show proof or retract his allegation and apologise for trying to undermine and diminish the hard work of 1.6 million Penangites, who in the last 3 years have successfully turned around the graceful decline of Penang over the previous 18 years.

Press Statement By Penang Chief Minister And DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng In Kuala Lumpur On18.8.2011

Read the article at The Economist : Getting back its mojo– After a slump, an early engine of globalisation is thriving again