Tunku Speech on 16 September 1963

Malaysia Day — Tunku Abdul Rahman

September 16, 2010

SEPT 16, 1963 — The great day we have long awaited has come at last – the birth of Malaysia. In a warm spirit or joy and hope, 10 million people of many races in all the States of Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak and Sabah now join hands in freedom and unity.
We do so because we know that we have come together through our own free will and desire in the true spirit of brotherhood and love of freedom.
We have made our decision after much care and thought, finally arriving at mutual consent by debate and discussion, inquiries and elections held over two-and-a-half years.
We can feel proud indeed of the way we have created Malaysia through friendly argument and compromise. The spirit of co-operation and concord is living proof of the desire we share for a common destiny.
What better basis for Malaysia can there be, what finer augury for the future?
The road to nationhood has not been an easy journey. Surprises and disappointments, tension and crisis, have marred the way.
The peoples of Malaysia, however, have endured all trials and tribulations with confidence and patience, calmness and forbearance, with faith in our final goal — Malaysia.
In the first eighteen months of political and constitutional discussions, beginning from May 1961, things went ahead favourably, because the ideal of Malaysia caught the imagination of all the peoples concerned.
We can all recall the remarkable enthusiasm and interest aroused then in the evolution of Malaysia.
Step by step the concept came to life. The activities of the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee, the merger talks between the Federation of Malaya and Singapore, the broad agreement reached in London to establish Malaysia, the appointment of the Cobbold Commission and its exhaustive inquiries in the Borneo Territories, and the subsequent establishment of the Inter-Governmental Committee — all these steps were taken in internal harmony and in full public view.
Suddenly towards the end of 1962 the situation changed. Communist China committed unjustifiable aggression against India. I stood up for democracy and condemned China’s attack.
One immediate reaction was that Communists throughout South-east Asia retaliated by an indirect assault upon me by opposing my idea of Malaysia, and they set about creating every possible difficulty to baulk Malaysia.
Other external complications occurred – the Philippines’ claim to North Borneo, the sudden and abortive revolt in Brunei, and the startling adoption by Indonesia of a policy of confrontation against Malaya.
All these events projected an international crisis in South-east Asia this year, the climax coming in June. The successful meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Malaya, Indonesia and the Philippines, followed by my own conference with President Soekarno in Tokyo eased tension considerably and brought new hopes for harmony and peace.
Prospects for a Summit Conference were good, confrontation from Indonesia subsided, so we went ahead with arrangements for the final talks in London on Malaysia.
The Malaysia Agreement was duly signed in early July. Unexpectedly Indonesia reacted most strongly, renewing its policy of confrontation with the result that the Summit conference of leaders of Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines at the end of July began in an atmosphere of doubt.
The Summit conference ended in an agreement by the three countries to form an Association of States of Malay origin to be known as Maphilindo.
It was agreed that in order that the partners in Maphilindo could welcome Malaysia the United Nations Secretary-General should be asked to ascertain anew the wishes of the peoples of Sarawak and Sabah. That request has not been implemented.
Now finally the peoples of Malaysia are celebrating the establishment of Malaysia. This is the time to think earnestly and hopefully on the future of Malaysia as the whole country resounds with joy.
So I pray that God may bless the nation of Malaysia with eternal peace and happiness for our people.
The Federation of Malaya now passes into history. Let us always remember that the Malayan Nation was formed after many difficulties during a long period of national Emergency, yet its multi-racial society emerged, endured and survived as a successful and progressive nation, a true democracy and an example to the world of harmony and tolerance.
As it was with Malaya, so it can be with Malaysia. With trust in Almighty God, unity of purpose and faith in ourselves, we can make Malaysia a land of prosperity and peace.
In doing so let every Malaysian in all the States of Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak and Sabah ensure that our Malaysia is truly worthy of the aims and hopes we have shared, the trials and stress, we have endured, in working together to achieve our common destiny.
“MERDEKA! MALAYSIA!”
* Speech by Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman on the occasion of Malaysia Day on September 16, 1963 to commemorate Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore forming Malaysia.

Najib Praised PDRM

Najib lauds speedy Sosilawati murder probe

September 16, 2010

Suspects in the murders of Sosilawati and three others are led towards the Bukit Jalil police station. — file pic

SANDAKAN, Sept 16 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak today congratulated the police force for its efficiency in solving quickly the murder of cosmetics queen Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya. He said the police should be given the time and space to handle the case so that all those involved in the crime could be brought to justice.
“This success (of the police) is very encouraging. I congratulate the police force for having acted fast.
“I hope they will gather all the evidence so that the court will have no doubt in imposing a sentence commensurate with the seriousness of the crime committed,” he told reporters when asked to comment on a statement by Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar that the murder of Sosilawati and three men had been solved.
Sosilawati, 47; her driver Kamaruddin Shamsudin, 44; lawyer Ahmad Kamil Abdul Karim, 32; and CIMB Bank officer Noorhisham Mohammad, 38, went missing on August 30 after they had gone to Banting, Selangor, over a land deal.
Police found out that the four had been killed, their bodies burnt and the ashes thrown into rivers near Ladang Gadong in Tanjung Sepat near Banting, and have detained eight suspects, among them two lawyers.
Earlier, Najib attended the Sabah level “Juara Rakyat” (People’s Champion) programme and an Aidilfitri open house, here.
At the event, also attended by Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman and leaders of Barisan Nasional (BN) component parties, the prime minister launched the “1 Malaysia Milk Programme” to provide free milk to primary school children.
Najib said the free milk programme, which was expected to be implemented next month, would initially be for pupils in standards one to six and would be extended in stages to higher levels.
He said the initial cost of the programme was RM4 million, and the allocation would be increased from time to time.
Najib said the Sabah government had given the undertaking that it would be able to supply the milk necessary for the programme. — Bernama

Comment on LKY

COMMENT Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, 87 tomorrow, is predictable on Malaysia - which coincidentally emerged on Sept 16 - in his interview on Sept 1 with the New York Times/International Herald Tribune (NYT/IHT).

Malaysia is the main item in his 'regrets' category as he looks back on his long life.

He's still "teary-eyed" - although his crocodile tears, as referred to by Tunku Abdul Rahman - should have dried up a long time ago as he sees a nation, which he "fought so hard to bring together", unraveling before his very eyes across the causeway.

This is a common observation among many non-Malays, if not Malays, in the country and Singapore: "Malaysia is really a beautiful country. God made it that way. But just look at what's happening to it?"

Lee (left) will probably have several more years of "anguish" - if that's the right word - over Malaysia, his faculties still intact, if the Gods that he denies permit him continued good health.

After that anything goes. It will really be tragic if Lee has to spend his last days like his wife, bed-ridden and unable to speak since a stroke two years back. This must be doing Lee in as well, although he puts up a brave front.

The major difference between Singapore and Malaysia, under the ruling elite, remains the same today as it was in 1965 when the city state was booted out of the new federation after two years.

There's no denying the fact that the ruling elite are squatting on all Malaysians under the guise of standing up for Malay and bumiputera rights. It was Lee himself who thundered just before the expulsion of Singapore from Malaysia: "If they (the Malay elite in Kuala Lumpur) think that they can squat on us and get away with it, they are sadly mistaken."

Fifty-odd years later, squatting is also the main complaint of Hindraf Makkal Sakthi - the ad hoc apolitical movement which initially began as a reaction against the conversion of Everest hero M Moorthy (right) ostensibly to Islam - which marshaled nearly 100,000 people to take to the streets in late 2007 to send shivers down the spine of the ruling elite.

Lee clearly did not describe Malaysia as a failed state, as Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin claims, or even close to it. Khairy's over-reaction is probably a case of "siapa makan cili, dia yang rasa pedasnya" (whoever eats chilli, will feel its burn).

What Lee is saying is that Malaysia has not done well, obviously compared with Singapore, and could have done better. He's also saying that Singapore could have done even better had Malaysia done better, whether the city state is within or outside the country.

Why Malaysia has not done as well as it should have is not exactly the best kept secret in the world.

There's a ruling elite in Malaysia, the same elite that Lee thundered at in 1965, that has managed to hoodwink a large portion of the rural vote bank to back its long stay in power in cahoots with the non-Malay elite. Between them, they have done in the rest of the nation.

The story behind the story

It would be pointless belabouring the various issues which Lee has raised in pointing out the dilemma that Malaysia faces today. He has mentioned the Indians, Chinese, the Chinese language, Tamil, English, Bahasa Malaysia, the education system, and the effort to turn Malaysia into a solely Malay-run country with only Malays occupying all key posts, among others.

We need to get behind Lee's rhetoric, true as it is. He was mindful of Singapore's commercial interests in not telling the story behind the story.

For starters, the entire structure of the ruling BN leaves a lot to be desired. The BN concept circumscribes the democratic process by tacitly endorsing elite "power-sharing" and denying the grassroots meaningful participation in elections, and by extension, nation-building. In reality, the non-Malays in BN are elected by Malay votes, having long been discredited by their own communities.

Umno, the ruling party, has a hidden self-serving agenda behind euphemisms like power-sharing, the BN spirit, and consensus-and-compromise.

They have hijacked Article 153 of the federal constitution from the King and indulged in gross deviations and distortions of the New Economic Policy (1970-1990) to serve a handful in the ruling elite and their fat cats in tow.

Behind the BN facade, the ruling elite has been making hay the last 50-odd years while the sun shone, stealing the people's sweat from the public treasury through government projects that they award themselves through nominees.

This has seen government procurements and projects costing the taxpayer twice, three times and even up to ten times what it should actually cost. The fact that the national debt burden has been estimated to be as high as 70 percent of the gross domestic product should therefore come as no surprise.

To camouflage the entire scam, every issue in Malaysia is twisted and turned into a racial issue to scare the Malays into circling the wagons and gathering under one political platform i.e. Umno. So, the party hopes to remain in power in perpetuity under this colonial-style divide-and-rule tactics even if it means that the rest of the country has to go to the dogs.

Umno toning down on its racist rhetoric since 2008 has seen the entry of Perkasa, led by Pasir Mas MP Ibrahim Ali (left) and endorsed by former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad, to take up the slack.

If Mahathir feels that the Malays still need defending after 53 years of independence, the question that arises is whether he has been tending to their needs during his long innings in power or his own.

Malaysia, Lee would probably agree, needs to get away from the BN and the sooner the better. Of course, Lee himself is exactly in no position to preach here as his People's Action Party (PAP) has also been in power since independence.

The PAP's long stay in power aside, Lee would no doubt point to the fact that unlike BN, it is not race-based and cannot be accused of squatting on the Singaporeans in the manner that Umno has done in Malaysia.

Among the poorest states

Also perhaps preying on Lee's conscience is the fact that Sabah and Sarawak are among the poorest states in Malaysia today, as virtual colonies of Malaya, despite vast land reserves and oil and gas resources.

Sabah only agreed to Malaysia after the late Donald Stephens was persuaded by Lee. Malaya needed Sabah and Sarawak to balance the bigger number of Chinese with the entry of Singapore into the federation.

True, Lee had no way of knowing that his island was going to be kicked out soon from the federation.

Had Sabah stayed out of the federation, Sarawak would have stayed out too like Brunei at the 11th hour and there would have been no Malaysia. Singapore would have in fact done well by itself, just as it has done since 1965.

There was no need for Lee to push for merger with Malaya but he did. His fear of a communist takeover of the island was much greater than other considerations including the welfare of the people in Sabah and Sarawak.

But Lee wanted the breathing spell that Malaysia gave him, albeit for two years, to enable him to consolidate the PAP's iron grip on the city state.

JOE FERNANDEZ is Malaysiakini's Sabah pointman who feels compelled to put pen to paper when something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He readily admits that there's a demon in him at times, urging him on.

Dr M and LKY

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Mahathir's rebuttal to Kuan Yew on race relations

Kuan Yew and Mahathir - long-time adversaries

Malaysia Chronicle

Not to be left out of the action, former premier Mahathir Mohamad has given his side of what he believes led to Singapore leaving Malaysia in 1965 - racism by Lee Kuan Yew's PAP party. Malaysia Chronicle appends below the relevant portions of the interview given by the Singapore Minister Mentor, where he says he regrets "having been turfed out of Malaysia". Scroll down for Dr M's rebuttal.


September 1, 2010 interview with the New York Times
(Click here to read full interview: Lee Kuan Yew: Don't judge a man until you've closed his coffin ...)

Q: “Let me ask a question about the outside world a little bit. Singapore is a great success story even though people criticize this and that. When you look back, you can be proud of what you’ve done and I assume you are. Are there things that you regret, things that you wished you could achieve that you couldn’t?”

Mr Lee: “Well, first I regret having been turfed out of Malaysia. I think if the Tunku had kept us together, what we did in Singapore, had Malaysia accepted a multiracial base for their society, much of what we’ve achieved in Singapore would be achieved in Malaysia. But not as much because it’s a much broader base. We would have improved inter-racial relations and an improved holistic situation. Now we have a very polarized Malaysia, Malays, Chinese and Indians in separate schools, living separate lives and not really getting on with one another. You read them. That’s bad for us as close neighbours.”

Q: “So at that time, you found yourself with Singapore and you have transformed it. And my question would be how do you assess your own satisfaction with what you’ve achieved? What didn’t work?”

Mr Lee: “Well, the greatest satisfaction I had was my colleagues and I, were of that generation who were turfed out of Malaysia suffered two years under a racial policy decided that we will go the other way. We will not as a majority squeeze the minority because once we’re by ourselves, the Chinese become the majority. We made quite sure whatever your race, language or religion, you are an equal citizen and we’ll drum that into the people and I think our Chinese understand and today we have an integrated society. Our Malays are English-educated, they’re no longer like the Malays in Malaysia and you can see there are some still wearing headscarves but very modern looking.”

Q: “That doesn’t sound like a regret to me.”

Mr Lee: “No, no, but the regret is there’s such a narrow base to build this enormous edifice, so I’ve got to tell the next generation, please do not take for granted what’s been built. If you forget that this is a small island which we are built upon and reach a 100 storeys high tower block and may go up to 150 if you are wise. But if you believe that it’s permanent, it will come tumbling down and you will never get a second chance.”

Q: “I wonder if that is a concern of yours about the next generation. I saw your discussion with a group of young people before the last election and they were saying what they want is a lot of these values from the West, an open political marketplace and even playing field in all of these things and you said well, if that’s the way you feel, I’m very sad.”

Mr Lee: “Because you play it that way, if you have dissension, if you chose the easy way to Muslim votes and switch to racial politics, this society is finished. The easiest way to get majority vote is vote for me, we’re Chinese, they’re Indians, they’re Malays. Our society will be ripped apart. If you do not have a cohesive society, you cannot make progress.”

Q: “But is that a concern that the younger generation doesn’t realize as much as it should?”

Mr Lee: “I believe they have come to believe that this is a natural state of affairs, and they can take liberties with it. They think you can put it on auto-pilot. I know that is never so. We have crafted a set of very intricate rules, no housing blocks shall have more than a percentage of so many Chinese, so many percent Malays, Indians. All are thoroughly mixed. Willy-nilly, your neighbours are Indians, Malays, you go to the same shopping malls, you go to the same schools, the same playing fields, you go up and down the same lifts. We cannot allow segregation.”

Q: “So leadership is a constant battle?”

Mr Lee: “In a multiracial situation like this, it is. Malaysia took the different line; Malaysians saw it as a Malay country, all others are lodgers, “orang tumpangan”, and they the Bumiputras, sons of the soil, run the show. So the Sultans, the Chief Justice and judges, generals, police commissioner, the whole hierarchy is Malay. All the big contracts for Malays. Malay is the language of the schools although it does not get them into modern knowledge. So the Chinese build and find their own independent schools to teach Chinese, the Tamils create their own Tamil schools, which do not get them jobs. It’s a most unhappy situation.”

Mahathir Mohamad

Lee Kuan Yew, the Minister Mentor of Singapore, is three years my senior. That means he and I practically grew up in the same period of time. That also means that I have been able to watch the progress of Lee, and in fact to interact with him on various occasions.

His assertion in his interview with the New York Times that “Race relations (would be) better if Singapore (had) not (been) “turfed out” (of Malaysia) is worth studying. Is it true or is it fantasy?

Before Singapore joined the Peninsular, Sabah and Sarawak to form Malaysia, there was less racial politics in the Federation of Malaysia. In 1955 the Malays who made up 80 per cent of the citizens gave a large number of their constituencies to the few Chinese and Indian citizens and ensured they won with strong Malay support. As a result the Alliance won 51 of the 52 seats contested.

The Tunku then rewarded this willingness of the Chinese and Indian citizens to support the coalition concept by giving them one million unconditional citizenship. This reduced Malay majority to 60 per cent.

In the 1959 elections the Alliance of Umno, MCA and MIC won easily though Kelantan was lost. PAS with only Malays as members was rejected. Racialism even when implied failed.

In 1963 Singapore became a part of Malaysia. Despite having promised that the PAP will not participate in Peninsular, Sabah and Sarawak politics, Kuan Yew reneged and the PAP tried to displace the MCA in the Alliance by appealing to Chinese sentiments in the Peninsular. Of course the slogan was “Malaysian Malaysia” which implied that the Chinese were not having equal rights with the Malays. If this appeal to Chinese sentiments against the Malays was not racial, I do not know what is racial.

But the Peninsular Chinese favoured working with the Malays in Umno. They totally rejected PAP in 1964.

Following the Malaysian Malaysia campaign a few Umno leaders tried to rouse Singapore Malay sentiments. There were demonstrations in Singapore where before there were none. Kuan Yew accused Jaafar Albar for instigating the Singapore Malays. Although I never went to Singapore, nor met the Malays there, I was labelled a Malay ultra by Kuan Yew himself.

By 1965 racism had taken hold and the Tunku was forced to end Singapore’s membership of Malaysia. But the seed of Chinese racialism had been sown, so that even after the PAP left, the “Malaysian Malaysia” war cry was picked up by the DAP, an offspring of the PAP.

With the background of Singapore’s activities in Malaysia in the short three years of its membership, can we really believe that if it had not been “turfed out” race relations would be better in Malaysia?

But proof of what would have happened was shown by the politics leading up to the 1969 elections. The MCA began to criticise the Sino/Malay co-operation especially on so-called special rights and demanded for a Chinese university. Umno then began to clamour for a greater share of the economy of the country. The Umno/MCA conflict resultedin the Alliance faring very badly in the 1969 elections.

DAP and Gerakan, a new party largely made up of MCA dissidents, made gains. The Alliance was shocked and rattled.

Then the Gerakan and DAP held their victory parade near the Malay settlement of Kampung Baru, hurling racist insults at the Malays. The result was the May 13 race riots.

Till today the racist slogan “Malaysian Malaysia” is the war cry of the DAP. Racism in Malaysia is clearly the result of Singapore’s membership of the country for just three years. Can we really believe that if Singapore had not been “turfed out” Malaysia would have no racial problem.

While Kuan Yew talks about his belief that all ethnic communities should free themselves from the shackles of racial segregation in order to promote fairness and equality among the races, he also said that “once we are by ourselves (out of Malaysia) the Chinese become the majority”.

Singapore’s population is made up of 75 per cent Chinese and they own 95 per cent of the economy. It is therefore not a truly multi-racial country but a Chinese country with minority racial groups who are additionally much poorer.

In Singapore dissent is not allowed. People who contest against the PAP would be hauled up in court for libel and if they win elections would not be allowed to take their places in Parliament. Whereas in Malaysia opposition parties invariably win seats in Parliament and even set up state governments (today four out of the 13 states are ruled by the opposition parties); the PAP in Singapore has to appoint PAP members to represent the opposition.

Whether the PAP admits it or not, the party has always been led and dominated by ethnic Chinese and have won elections principally because of Chinese votes. The others are not even icing on the cake.

If Singapore is a part of Malaysia the PAP can certainly reproduce the Singapore kind of non-racial politics because together with the Malaysian Chinese, the PAP will ethnically dominate and control Malaysian politics. No dissent would be allowed and certainly no one would dare say anything about who really runs the country.

Amnesia is permissible but trying to claim that it is because Singapore had been “turfed out” for the present racist politics in Malaysia is simply not supported by facts of history.

Lee Kuan Yew and I saw the same things and know the reasons why.

Playing Golf with PM

4 September 2010

tags: corruption, Najib Razak, Penang bridge

by uppercaise

This is a mirror posting of RPK’s article How playing golf with the Prime Minister can earn you billions published on 5 Sept 2010. It is reposted here as the full Malaysia Today site remains unavailable and links may not work. The full article continues after the turn.

Sunday, September 5, 2010
How playing golf with the Prime Minister can earn you billions

Tan Kay Hock is the low-profile controlling shareholder of Johan Holdings Berhad, a public-listed investment holding company. He is also the golf buddy of Najib Tun Razak and this relationship has made him hundreds of millions. Kay Hock recently caused ripples in China when he asked the Chinese for RM500 million and told them that RM200 million is for Najib’s family.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
For about ten years and over three Prime Ministers, the current Prime Minister included, the contract for the double-tracking electric train from Gemas to Johor Bahru has been ding-donging. Despite what was agreed between the leaders of China and the three Prime Ministers, which was later confirmed by the issuance of a Letter of Intent to China Railways Engineering Corporation (CREC), the government is again backtracking.
Najib now wants to award the contract to China Harbour Engineering Co. Ltd. (CHEC) instead, the company that is building the Second Penang Bridge — which shot up from RM1 billion to RM4.5 billion and now to RM22 billion (read more on the matter below).
The man behind this is Tan Kay Hock, Najib’s golf buddy. He is brokering the deal on behalf of CHEC.
The Chinese say that Tan Kay Hock is demanding RM500 million from CHEC and he told them that RM200 million is for Najib’s family. And this is making the Chinese very unhappy because, in China, both the givers as well the receivers of bribes will be sentenced to death with a bullet in the head plus the cost of the bullet is charged to the family of the deceased.
When the Chinese government offered the Malaysian government a loan to construct the Gemas to JB railway they indicated that CREC should be the contractor. CREC is one of the biggest specialist contractors for electric trains while CHEC has not constructed even one kilometer of electric railway (more details below).
A Letter of Intent had already been awarded to CREC. Now the government wants to cancel this Letter of Intent and issue a new Letter of Intent to CHEC. But for the new Letter of Intent to be issued to CHEC they must fork out RM500 million, which Kay Hock claims RM200 million will be paid to the Prime Minister of Malaysia’s family.
This is not only a violation of the terms of the loan from China but CREC is the company with the experience in constructing electric railways, not CHEC, the company already involved in the construction of the Second Penang Bridge. Added to the withdrawal or cancellation of the Letter of Intent to CREC and a new one issued to CHEC, with a RM500 million ‘price tag’ attached, it puts the Chinese government in a dicey spot when the risk would be a bullet in the head for those who approve the payment.
The Chinese are wondering whether it is worth the risk to pay Kay Hock the RM500 million he is demanding. If the Letter of Intent to CREC can be withdrawn after issuing it, what guarantee is there that the new Letter of Intent to CHEC will also not be withdrawn after they pay the RM500 million?
The Chinese are very aware that Vincent Tan also received a Letter of Approval for his gaming licence, signed by the Deputy Minister of Finance. However, after he paid RM170 million ‘under the table’, Najib denied in Parliament that Vincent Tan had been given a gaming licence and subsequently the Letter of Approval was withdrawn.
KTM is being used as Najib’s new cash cow. The EMU coach was a deal involving Rosmah Mansor (Najib’s wife), Mumtaz Jaafar (Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s ‘godmother’) and Cindy (Desmond Lim’s wife). Desmond, in fact, handled the deal where KTM coughed out RM1.4 Billion for coaches that cannot function. According to KTM, the coaches are not even worth RM300 million.
The saga gets more interesting with Najib and Rosmah holidaying in Monaco as guests of Jho Low — who told everyone that the yacht belongs to the Prince of Qatar. It was later revealed that Jho Low rented the yacht for Euro 90,000 per day to allow Najib and Rosmah to rub shoulders with Hollywood Starlets.
That brings us to a very crucial question. Where did Jho Low get that kind of money? Well, you see, afterMalaysia Today exposed Deepak Jaikishan — Rosmah’s carpetman cum bagman cum toyboy — she was forced to dump him. So now Jho Low is Rosmah’s new Mister Fixit and Collector of Commissions.
Let us see how the CHEC-Tan Kay Hock saga is played out. Now that the Chinese government knows that we know about the RM500 million deal would they dare still proceed with it? And does Tun Dr Mahathir Mahathir know that Najib has hijacked his pet electric train project?
***************************************

Mr Tan is said to be a golf buddy of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak
He is the low-profile controlling shareholder of Johan Holdings, a public-listed investment holding company, and said to be a golf buddy of Najib Tun Razak.
The Financial Times had reported that Tan Sri Tan, 61, was the owner of the 607ha Guiana Island, which is now at the centre of a fraud case brought by the United States authorities against Texan billionaire businessman Allen Stanford. — The Straits Times (Singapore)
Read: The crooked faces of Najib Altantuya’s Cronies and their Related Companies (http://ckcounterpunch.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/the-faces-of-najib-altantuya-cronies-and-their-related-companies/)
***************************************
CREC is the third largest civil construction enterprise in the world, and the Asian and Chinese largest railway, road and tunnel construction contractor. It has a leading position in China’s construction market, and participates in many large-scale infrastructure projects overseas (especially in countries in the Southeast Asia and Africa). Fortune magazine in the United States reported that CREC ranked 342 in the 500 world’s largest enterprises in 2007.
CREC consists of 31 member enterprises including:
- 16 super-large construction enterprises
* China National Overseas Engineering Corporation
* China Railway Resources Co., Ltd.
* China Railway First Group Corporation
* China Railway Erju Group Corporation (China Railway Second Group Corporation)
* Third Engineering Group Co. Ltd
* China Tiesiju Civil Engineering Group Co. Ltd (China Fourth Group Civil Engineering Group Co. Ltd)
* China Railway Wuju Group Corporation (China Railway Fifth Group Corporation)
* China Railway Sixth Group Co. Ltd
* China Railway Seventh Group Co. Ltd
* China Railway Eighth Civil Engineering Group Corporation
* China Railway No. 9 Group Co. Ltd(http://ckcounterpunch.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/the-faces-of-najib-altantuya-cronies-and-their-related-companies/)
* China Railway No. 10 Group Corporation
* China Zhongtie Major Bridge Engineering Group Co. Ltd (China Railway Major Bridge Engineering Group Co. Ltd)
* China Railway Tunnel Group
* China Railway Electrification Bureau Co. Ltd
* China Railway Construction Engineering Group
- 3 large or super large surveying and designing enterprises
* Second Survey and Design Institute of China Railway
* China Railway Engineering Consultants Group
* China Major Bridge Survey and Design Institute
- 3 large R&D enterprises
* Northwest Research Institute
* Southwest Research Institute of CREC
* Engineering Machinery Research and Design Institute
- 5 large manufacturing enterprises
* China Railway Shanhaiguan Bridge Group Co. Ltd
* China Railway Turnout Bridge Inc.
* China Railway Bus. Co. Ltd.
* Wuhan Engineering Machinery Works of CREC
* Hengping Trust and Investment Co. Ltd.
******************************************
The Second Penang Bridge
The Second Penang Bridge is a new bridge under construction in Penang, Malaysia. It will connect Batu Kawan on the mainland Seberang Perai and Batu Maung on Penang Island. It will be the second bridge to link the island to the mainland after Penang Bridge.
READ MORE HERE: http://www.penang-traveltips.com/second-penang-bridge.htm
The total length of the RM4.5 billion bridge is 24 km and will become the longest bridge in Malaysia and Southeast Asia. China Harbour Engineering Co Ltd (CHEC) expected to start work on the second Penang bridge in November 2007 for completion in 2011, but it had to be postponed for completion in May 2012, as the construction started late in November 2008, due to Umno-owned United Engineers Malaysia Berhad’s demand for a higher contract price. (Read more below).
***********************************************
Penang bridge: ‘UEM making outrageous demands’
UEM Builders Bhd has been making “outrageous” demands for financial assistance for the construction of the second Penang bridge, a state assemblyman charged today.
And the federal government is bowing to this government-linked company, said Sim Tze Tzin, Pantai Jerejak PKR state assemblyman.
He said the matter came to light after a “whistle-blower” produced a confidential letter from UEM to the Economic Planning Unit (EPU) soon after Pakatan Rakyat took over Penang two years ago.
Sim, who showed the letter to reporters in Parliament, said the letter, dated Aug 8, 2007, was signed by UEM chief executive officer Ahmad Pardas Senin and was addressed to EPU’s director-general Dr Sulaiman Mahmod.
Sim said the contents of the letter revealed, among other things, that UEM has asked for financial assistance to the tune of RM22 billion to build the bridge although the actual cost of the project is only RM4 billion.
“This is a very outrageous demand and the federal government has complied with it. We are afraid that the federal government would blindly agree to all other kinds of assistance requested by UEM,” he said.
“The letter is genuine. So far, any request from UEM has been complied with by the federal government,” he added.
In the letter, UEM has also asked for a concession period of 45 years, including seeking government soft loan and grant.
Something ‘amiss’
According to Sim, UEM has also requested that the toll rate be fixed at RM9.40 for the second Penang bridge. It also wants the toll price for the first bridge, currently at RM7, be increased to RM9.40, with the maximum tagged at RM11.50. This price structure will go on till 2051.
The toll collection is expected to amount to RM7 billion.
But Sim said the concession for the first bridge expires in 2018 and “so why did the letter state that it (toll price) will go on until 2051?”
He said UEM had also asked the government to scrap the 20% discount for the Touch ‘n’ Go cards.
“Lately, the government had announced it would abolish this discount, which goes to show that what the letter had stated is true. But due to public pressure, the government backed down and said the discount would only be for Penangites.
“Last week, the prime minister has said the toll price for the second bridge will be at RM9.40. Now, we are worried if the government had given in to UEM’s demand,” said Sim.
He added that there is something amiss in the second Penang bridge project, as the federal government is providing a huge amount of financial assistance to UEM. — Free Malaysia Today, 22 June 2010

---

© 2010 Raja Petra Kamarudin