Is Asas Serba's proposal really workable?

Good analysis--> Is Asas Serba's proposal really workable? I find your 'concerns' quite reasonable. Though Ibrahim Bidin is an experienced Toll Expert and entrepreneur, [I know him well from our Manila days], taking over the toll business from disparate parties with their own reasons for desiring their own toll business, consolidating various suppliers of equipment, technology may present more problems than solutions. it may also be seen that the Govt is 'trying to twist' the arms of the smaller players, and drive the smaller suppliers out of business? Reducing the toll by 20% is commendable, but more can be given.

However, the reply that was given to the concern that Asas Serba may not maintain the roads well is patronising. I quote... ".. There’s also concern that Asas Serba may not maintain the highways as well as the current operators. Asas Serba director Ibrahim Bidin said market forces would dictate that they would. “If we don’t, the number of highway users would drop and our toll collections will decline. Our bondholders would then come after us.....” To me, it would be a horrible time for Malaysian road users, if in the near future, Asas Serba really neglected to maintain the roads in the same condition as now, what will be the traffic situation on the roads if the road users avoid potholed tolled roads and use the free Federal Roads? Can you imagine the jams that we will be having? The whole country will be gridlocked!!! It would be better for the Govt {in the event it accepts Asas Serba's offer} to write into the takeover agreements some form of punitive punishment for Asas Serba in the event of non compliance of conditions, and not accept such a flippant reply.

Indonesians show of violence at Stadium, with offensive weapons!!!

This report of yours really give us the creeps [it is also the 'most viewed' news online] Indonesians show of violence at Stadium, with offensive weapons!!! Many letters have been published voicing concern that there are too many foreigners working in the country, and total dependence on such lowly paid unskilled labour can only have long term deleterious effects on our society. Looking at the pictures of the Police showing to the Press, the large number of weapons 'captured' from the foreigners show frighteningly that these harmful effects have arrived. And will continue to be a major dilemma for our Govt to deal with. If we do not find a solution to stemming the need for cheap foreign labour soon, it will not be long for us to see the day, when large groups of foreigners* from the South Eastern countries clash with each other for "territorial" control and gang rights. What will become of civil society then?

Malaysia's Path to Destruction..

I must commend the Star for another very good effort in exposing the seeming nonchalant attitudes taken by the Govt in protecting the assets of the country, in the feature >>PATH TO DESTRUCTION but I must say, even the Star seems to be knocking its head against a very hard rock. The perils that you rightfully warned the readers against, ie loss of catchment area, nasty run offs, destruction of forests, less drinking water etc.appear not the be the concerns of the authorities at all. Reading through the column slowly, I appreciate the details that you have managed to piece together to make a very worrying read. In particular, I must ask the authorities the following questions which I hope The Star would be able to get a response:

• It was mentioned that the new highway would cut through the Gombak, Ampang ahd Hulu Langat Forest Reserves.. My question is.. If these areas have already been designated as a Reserve, who has the legal as well as moral authority to destroy them? If Reserves are designated precisely with the reason to protect them for posterity, why are they being destroyed now? Are we enacting such legislation, JUST FOR FUN and for immoral politicians to make use of? Why do we have to sign petitions and beg the Prime Minister to intervene? Until we begin to treat violation of Forest reserves a a crime against the nation, we will not see the end of all such dastardly acts.
  
• It would be nice, if The Star could detail what the EIA study has concluded on the impact of the construction of the highway on the water catchment capacity of the area. It does not require any expert on environmental study to observe that the removing or trees and vegetation from the reserve will just reduce its capacity to act as a holding storage for rainwater. Trees and vegetation hold a tremendous amount of water during heavy rains, and slowly release it to the rivers and the reservoir. Lack of such vegetation will cause, as you have mentioned it, nasty run offs, besides, losing much valued potable water. My question here is, can the EIA study have ANY OTHER CONCLUSION, other than construction of the highway will be highly dangerous for the future of the water supply of our Selangor denizens.
• What about the trees that are cut? Who owns them and the revenue they bring in as Logs.??

You know Mr Editor, I have to take my hat off to your staff for soldiering on and doing such excellent investigative journalism, but it will look again to me, this will be another drop of water off a duck's back!

People First, Performance Now?.... Hah

Going Green

Reading the cover features, Going Green, Mindset change needed to reap the benefits of green technology and Reducing our carbon footprint make a lot of sense, but something seems to be troubling my mind. I was wondering how those businesses and corporations involved in destructive use of the Earth state in their mission statements the efforts or steps they take to reduce the effects of their businesses on the environment, that will comply with internationally acceptable standards of carbon footprint reduction or staving off the effects on global warming. Generally all companies and corporations exist to make money and to give profit to its shareholders, based on an ongoing concern and increasing profitability. Based on such a world wide business premise, for example:

• How would a Timber company reconcile the need for continuous and sustained profits with sustainable practices? We know in Malaysia, it is a foregone fact that annual concessions of virgin forests (sometimes from a part of the forest reserve) are applied for by companies, and often approved by various State governments, for the extraction of valuable hardwood. The companies, whose core business is timber extraction, need regular infusions of new forest lands so that its profits can be maintained. Replanted forests do not have the kind of wood that virgin forests produce, and anyway, replanted forests are unable to fulfill the voracious demand for hardwood only found in our forests in Borneo. I wonder if these companies can ever be classified as companies that will comply as "Green" companies, if one day we wake up suddenly to the fact that we do not have any forests left?
  
• Similarly companies in the Americas and elsewhere that destructively mine for copper, aluminum, diamond, etc. To be successful ongoing concerns providing sustained profit streams to its shareholders, these companies must necessarily destroy more land, and often have to evict natives from the spot as those poor denizens are sitting on literally pots and pots of gold. Again, my question. How will these companies ever meet with the criteria to be called "green"

Or, do we practise double standards? Allow "destructive" companies to carry on, because we don't what to do otherwise? If so, what is the point of talking about "going green" then? :-(

Malaysians, Good & Ugly..

Reading this report in The Star Hearing impaired girl's call for help heard loud and clear! surely warms the heart strings, makes you feel that all is right with the world, and in spite of being the world's worse litterers, Malaysians have hearts of Gold! However, even in good news such as this, there is something amiss, something that also shows up the heartlessness of some Malaysians, who, though they appear in the best position to help the poor little girl hear again, chose to be deaf to the heart rending appeals. If the public could so spontaneously respond to offer what assistance that they could afford, why has there no similar gesture from the doctors or the hospital involved in the imminent operations? Would it hurt a specialist's finances, or the hospital's eventual profitability, if they magnanimously offer some discount? Or have they steadfastly held on to that cost of RM110,000 knowing full well they can always milk the kindness of Malaysians to the hilt.

This episode has also reminded me of a recent letter by a Star reader who claimed that a certain hospital hugely overcharges a patient, once it knows that the hospitalization costs are to be covered by Medical Insurance.

Surely we expect our doctors to have hearts too? Are we expecting cows to jump over the moon?

It's time the Govt stand firm..................

I would like to thank you for publishing the letter, [The Star] Don't buy the excuse and [NST] Investments: make firms hire Malaysians
by the same writer, in which he has expressed some important issues such as :

• Firms opt to hire foreign workers in spite of Govt levies.. " Why? Because it is cheaper and easier to hire and retain trained foreign workers from under developed countries than to do the same for our people..."
• " Why should the government provide incentives to these companies only to see them employ foreigners?..."

The writer further maintained that the Govt should call the bluff of these multinational companies on pulling out their investment or not re-investing.

I think the letter has addressed the urgent need to re-look into our now defunct policy of attracting foreign FDI investments into the country mainly through the apparent availability of cheap LOCAL labour. in the 70s, when the policy was introduced, incentives like tax holidays and cheap infrastructure and utility costs were given so that huge investments can be channelled into the country to help develop it, and more important, these foreign investments provide a significant source of employment for our nascent labour force, which then boasted of low wages, and a general proficiency in the English language.

Since Malaysia has now lost out in this area, ie our local labour are no longer cheap and our mastery of the English language has also plummeted, does the Govt still want to attract such FDI, when they have to IMPORT foreign labour to keep wages down? Why should we continue to provide incentives like tax holidays, cheap infrastructure and cheap resources like electricity, diesel and water, when all we get in return besides some Capex expenditure, are the increasingly negative effects of a burgeoning foreign labour force.

We should ask ourselves, what is the way out of this mess, and what must we do to spur our country to achieve a "high income" status. How will the NEM address this?

Definitely not by pandering to the selfish motives of these multi nationals, who have only profit in their hearts.

No Returns for us
Don't pander to the selfish motives of the multi nationals

Arrange discounts for Seniors

MGD of Kuala Lumpur, in his timely letter to you Arrange discounts for Seniors has again highlighted the issue of the plight of retirees and senior citizens. He said, " THE rising cost of living is especially distressing to senior citizens who depend on their fast depleting life savings to survive..." He also suggested that "Nascom, the umbrella body for senior citizens’ organisations in this country may be in a position to bring some relief to members of these affiliated organisations".by negotiating with corporations to offer discounts to senior citizens in an effort to help them manage their meager budgets.

However, I think in the light of the Govt's pronouncements to make our nation a "high income" society, with higher levels of earnings driving the growth of our economy, I think asking NACSOM to beg for discounts is woefully inadequate. In our push for the country to attain the level of high income and consumption, it will sadly have to ignore the plights of the senior citizens who are already retired and by and large, except for the lucky few Govt officials, will not be earning incomes. Furthermore, the population of the aged is increasing fast, as we provide better health services and amenities. In short, driving the nation to attain high income and a developed status will only serve to isolate, alienate and push the senior citizens further below the 'poverty line'.

In light of this, providing amenities, discounts and other assistance to the elderly SHOULD BE PART OF GOVT POLICY, to be mandated through laws passed in Parliament. It should not be a matter of choice but it should be a subject of social conscience for the Govt and companies claiming to practice social and corporate responsibility to proactively provide more significant assistance to the seniors.

Helping them should be Govt policy