Paying PKFZ bondholders will further erode FDI, claims PKR treasurer

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal
July 29, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, July 29 — PKR demanded today that the Najib Administration review its decision ordering Port Klang Authority (PKA) to pay Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) bondholders until the on-going civil suits involving PKA and turnkey contractor Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) are settled.

PKR treasurer William Leong claimed that the government’s decision will send a wrong signal and would only drive away investors in the near future.

“I call on the government to review its decision and act in the interests of the people by withholding payment until the Court decides on the civil suits otherwise it sends a wrong signal that crime does pay in Malaysia. This decision will not instill confidence in the foreign or local investors but will only lead to further erosion of FDI. Confidence arises in the respect for the laws. In this case it is by withholding payments when there is no legal requirement to pay.

“The Najib Administration’s decision (is) far from showing that the Government is committed to the sanctity of contract and respect for laws, on the contrary sends a signal to the capital markets, investors and the public that in Malaysia crime does pay. It is decisions like this that has eroded FDI by 81 per cent and has reduced our country’s competitiveness behind Thailand, Vietnam and the Philippines,” said Leong in statement today.

The Selayang MP said that the government’s move showed that it was giving preference to the interests of “private bondholders and KDSB” instead of protecting taxpayer’s monies and maintaining accountability.

Leong pointed out that since the PKA board had lodged police reports and was currently embroiled in civil suits against KDSB for fraud, overpayment and breach of contract, there was no legal obligation whatsoever to complete the payments to the bondholders pending the outcome of the said civil suits.

“The government’s reason that this is because of the government’s commitment to bondholders is not acceptable. The statement serves instead to confirm that the whole truth behind the PKFZ scandal has not been revealed. The Najib Administration’s decision amounts to a volte-face or a complete turnaround from the position announced by the Badawi Administration. The previous Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat informed Parliament that the letters issued by the former Transport Minister were not guarantees.

“He stated in the Parliament and it was recorded in the Hansard that the letters were letters of support. It means that they were mere statements of intent that the Government will ensure PKFZ shall have sufficient funds to meet its contractual obligations. If this statement given in the Parliament is true then there is no legal requirement for PKFZ to pay KDSB when KDSB did not comply with and breached its contractual obligations,” said Leong.

Leong added that if the government insisted on paying the bondholders irrespective of whether or not KDSB had complied with its obligations under the contract with PKFZ, then the letters issued by the former Minister of Transport Dato’ Chan Kong Choy were not “mere letters of support as claimed but are indeed guarantees.”

“As such these letters of guarantees were issued in violation of Section 14 of the Financial Procedure Act 1957 and offences have been committed. In such circumstances, the failure to act according to the Public Accounts Committee’s recommendation to investigate and charge Dato’ Chan Kong Choy and all those involved (other than subordinates and lower echelon officers) for criminal breach of trust and other offences in this scandal sends a signal that there is a shocking lack of political will to enforce the laws and regulations by the authorities under the present administration.

“If, on the other hand, the Badawi Administration and Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat are correct then there is no legal obligation to pay. The present administration’s decision to pay cannot be not due any legal commitment. It is thus an extra-legal payment made for the benefit of these private interests. The Najib Administration in seeking to protect the interest of bondholders and KDSB has failed to protect the interests of Malaysians,” said the PKR man.

Pakatan Rakyat (PR) have attacked the Najib Administration ”bailing out” the culprits by ordering the Port Klang Authority (PKA) to pay its Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) bond obligation of RM222.58 million to Freezone Capital Bhd (FZCB).

The Barisan Nasional (BN) government had announced yesterday of the order for PKA to honour its final bond obligation despite the board’s ongoing suit against turnkey contractor Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB).

The Transport Ministry said yesterday that PKA would have to make payment to special-purpose vehicles as set out in the payment schedule.

Kong had said that the ministry would stick to the original schedule set before, which stipulates that the board had an obligation to fulfil a final payment of RM372 million, a second part of the RM723 million repayment due to bondholders this year.

Of the total, PKA is obliged to pay RM222.58 million to FZCB and the remaining RM150 million to Special Port Vehicle (SPVB) by July 31 this year.

It was reported that the PKA board had decided to hold back on its final payment to FZCB, one of the four special-purpose vehicles (SPVs) that was established by KDSB, the turnkey contractor for the troubled PKFZ project.

KDSB is now facing a suit of RM1.4 billion by the PKA for, among other things, allegations that it had made bloated claims for work done on the project.

The board had last month disbursed some RM350 million to Transshipment Megahub Bhd (TMB) and Valid Ventures Bhd (VVB).

It is due to make more payments to three other SPVs besides FZCB up until 2017.

Last month, former Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat had called for a freeze on all repayments pending the outcome of the PKA’s lawsuit against KDSB.

He claimed that further payments would jeopardise the existing legal action by PKA, noting that freezing them was a more favourable position than later having to recover monies already paid.

In an interview with The Malaysian Insider last night, Ong reiterated his stand, saying that the government should “consider the reasons” for not fulfilling the bond obligation.

The former transport minister said the government should ask PKA about its refusal to pay instead of forcing the payment by the deadline this Saturday.

“We must look at both sides of the story — the justifications, the rationale — given by PKA as to why they chose to defer payment,” Ong told The Malaysian Insider last night.

The former MCA president said one factor influencing PKA’s decision to hold back monies was the outstanding allegations of fraudulent claims made on projects, especially new additional development work, where no work had been carried out.

“Do you think that you’d still want to pay them? That explains why the panel that I formed to probe into the possible wrongdoings and the 20 points raised by PwC (PricewaterhouseCoopers) in the review report made such a recommendation to the PKA board [to defer payment],” Ong said.

Sources in PKA told The Malaysian Insider that the directors of PKA risk being held liable for hundreds of millions of ringgit after being asked to pay bondholders of the controversial PKFZ project, despite ongoing legal disputes over the amounts owed.

The sources said that the directors were advised that should PKA win their lawsuit against KDSB but fail to recover any money, the directors could be held responsible for money already paid out.

“The directors could be held liable for failing to discharge their fiduciary duty” said the sources.

“That is the crux of the issue.”

In Parliament on June 29, Deputy Transport Minister Datuk Abdul Rahim Bakri had said that the government would not stop the payments to bondholders for it had a “commitment” to them.

He had said this following a question by Ipoh Timor MP Lim Kit Siang who asked whether the government through PKA should not pay KDSB since PKA was in a legal dispute with KDSB, and instead set up a (escrow) third-party account to hold the money.

Pua later pointed out to Abdul Rahim that PKA’s commitment was not to KDSB’s bondholders, but KDSB itself as the main contractor for PKFZ.

He also predicted that the government would eventually have to bail out KDSB from its financial woes.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/paying-pkfz-bondholders-will-further-erode-fdi-claims-pkr-treasurer/

指下令付款予KDSB错放讯息 梁自坚：违法得利难以服人

作者／本刊记者 Jul 29, 2010 03:59:58 pm

【本刊记者撰述】人民公正党总财政兼士拉央区国会议员梁自坚针对国阵联邦政府推翻巴生港务局决定，指示港务局必须按照原订时程表付款表示遗憾，因为国阵政府决定牺牲人民的利益，把纳税人的钱约马币3亿7200万支付给Kuala Dimensi（KDSB）。

梁自坚表示，联邦政府作出这项决定是以遵守合约的法律责任和对债权人的承诺为理由。“这项决定带来了一个很清楚的讯息给我国的资本市场、投资者和人民，那就是在马来西亚违法还可以得到付款。”

他称，这也是为什么马来西亚外国直接投资已经削弱了81％以及马来西亚的竞争力已经落后于泰国、越南和菲律宾的原因。”

梁自坚也是著名的企业律师，他表示，巴生港务局董事部已经向警方报案并针对KDSB作出诉讼欺诈、多付款项和违约。如果承包商被起诉欺诈、多付款项和有缺陷的或不完整的工程，在这段审讯过程以及法庭尚未审判，港务局是没有法律责任需要支付给该承包商。

指翁否认发保证信件

梁自坚也说，政府对于债券人的承诺而指示港务局付款的理由是不能接受，因为前交通部长翁诗杰在国会下议院时说，前交通部长发出的信件是没有保证的，这些信件只是支持信件而已。

“这意味着，那些支持信件的用意是属于陈述的意图，那么政府将确保巴生港口自贸区是有足够的资金以符合其合约的声明。如果那些声明在国会下议发表时是正确的话，KDSB 不遵守和违反其合约义务时，那么就没有法律规定巴生港口自贸区需要支付KDSB款项。”

他表示，如果像联邦政府所说的，政府因法律承诺而支付给债券持有人无论KDSB有没有履行和巴生港务局所签下的合约义务，那么前交通部长陈广才发出的信件不是单纯的支持信，而是保证信件。

梁自坚最后表示，他呼吁政府检讨和撤回其决定直到法庭作出任何审判，因为这项决定将会导致外国直接投资的进一步侵蚀、投资者的信心下滑。

http://www.merdekareview.com/news/n/14348.html

TRUTH WILL HELP US CHANGE THE 10TH MALAYSIAN PLAN PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE

Honourable Dato Speaker,

Critical Economic Structural Reforms

I am grateful for the opportunity to participate in the parliamentary debate on the 10th Malaysian Plan. It is heartening to know that the Government finally acknowledges the country needs critical economic structural reforms. The Government proposes to make this transformation under the New Economic Model. Pakatan Rakyat had prior to the 12th General Elections warned that dire reforms are needed and had proposed the New Economic Agenda. BN and PR therefore share a common platform that reforms are needed. The difference lies in political will.

Courage and Conviction

Pakatan Rakyat’s struggle for reform is based on courage and conviction. Courage based on knowledge of the truth. Conviction based on the faith in the people’s desire for change.
1,500 delegates from Keadilan, DAPand PAS have given full endorsement for the New Economic Agenda at PR’s Convention on 19th December 2009. No UMNO or any BN division has given support to the NEM. In fact, not only UMNO members but even ministers have attended and supported anti-NEM forums. Perkasa, UMNO members and Bumiputra NGOs and movements such as “Bangkit Melayu” led by the previous Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir, have objected to the NEM. They claimed that the Malays are still poor and are economically disadvantaged. They fear that if the NEP’s affirmative policy is abolished the Malays will suffer. They have called for a “May 13 Rally” to remind the people of the riots when Malay rights are not respected. Due to these pressures, the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, officers in the Economic Planning Unit and government officials have disowned the National Economic Advisory Council (“NEAC”) and disclaimed the NEM as government policy. The Prime Minister, Dato Sri Najib Tun Razak declared at the Bumiputra Economic Congress on 31st May 2010 that he would not betray the NEP policies.

In the light of this development, the Government’s political will to make the changes is suspect. The Government needs to show that it has the political will and conviction to carry out the promised reforms. It is therefore imperative for the Government to carry out the following actions.

Firstly: Establishing a Truth and Reconciliation Tribunal on the May 13 Incident.

The Government must firstly acknowledge that the May 13 Incident was a political coup d’etat and not a racial problem. The cornerstone of the NEP has been the May 13 Incident. There must be a Truth and Reconciliation Tribunal to investigate whether “the May 13 Incident” was a ploy by Malay capitalists to depose Tunku Abdul Rahman as prime minister and not a racial riot.

Tunku referred to such a plot in the book “K. Das and the Tunku Tapes” :

“You know Harun was one of those-Harun, Mahathir, Ghazali Shafie-who were all working with Razak to oust me, to take over my place…”

Subki Latiff, a journalist wrote in 1977:

“The May 13 Incident did not occur spontaneously. It was planned quickly and purposely. The identity of the planners of the incident cannot be stated with accuracy. But whatever it was that happened, the May 13 Incident was a form of coup d’etat directed against Tunku Abdul Rahman. The Tunku’s power in fact ended from then onwards. Although he continued to be Prime Minister and President of UMNO, he was no more than a figurehead.”

(Dr Kua Kia Soong “May 13 Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969)

Recently, Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad, who was Tun Razak’s political secretary prior, during and after the May 13 Incident wrote an article about the incident. He said that the tragic and vicious incident need not have happened had Tun Razak’s message to Dato’ Harun Idris, the Menteri Besar of Selangor, reached him 30 minutes earlier or had Tan Sri David Tan Chee Khoon and Tun Lim Chong Eu spoken to Tun Razak 30 minutes earlier to relay their message that they would not cooperate with DAP to form the state government of Selangor nor work together in Perak and elsewhere. Tan Sri Abdullah said he was beside Tun Razak when he took the calls. He recalled clearly what Tun Razak told Dato Harun:

“…the good news is you will continue to run Selangor. Chee Khoon and Chong Eu have just spoken to me and they want the status preserved. So tell the people gathering at your house to disperse.”

Dato Harun thanked Tun Razak and asked him to convey his gratitude to the two statesmen. Between five and ten minutes after that, Dato Harun rang Tun Razak to say it was too late. As he was persuading them to disperse, news reached the crowd that clashes had begun in Chow Kit area and beyond.

The New Economic Policy was created in the aftermath of the May 13 Incident. Since then “the spectre of May 13” is raised whenever the supremacy of UMNO is threatened or civil rights issues are raised. From above accounts a Truth and Reconciliation Tribunal must be established to ascertain whether the tragic clashes were to oust the Tunku, or to enable Dato Harun Idris to be retained as Chief Minister or due to racial disharmony. This country has been caught in a quagmire of racial politics for 40 years. As the nation searches for a new direction, it is imperative that the Government acknowledges the facts behind the May 13 Incident. For this nation to move forward in the future, it must be anchored on a past grounded on solid truth and not a tissue of lies.

Secondly: It must be acknowledged not all Malays benefited from the NEP.

The Government must secondly acknowledge that the NEP benefited only a select few. The argument for maintaining the NEP is Malay poverty.

Based upon Government Statistics, after 40 years of the NEP, 62% of the Malays earn RM3,000.00 or less. They are farmers, rubber tappers, fishermen, factory workers and small traders. 34% of Malay households earn between RM3,000.00 and RM10,000.00. They are government servants, officers in government linked companies, contractors and traders. Only 2.8% of Malay households earn between RM10,000.00 and RM20,000.00. They are senior executives in GLCs, big contractors and professionals. Only 0.5% of the Malay households earn more than RM20,000.00. The claim that NEP benefited all Malays therefore cannot withstand scrutiny. Only the select few benefited while the majority remains in poverty or trapped in the lower income group.

The Prime Minister in his answer to my parliamentary question on 10 June 2010 said the Government acknowledged that Malays form 80% of the lowest 40% income group in the rural areas. Malays constitute 53% in the urban areas.

The Prime Minister explained that the reasons for this predicament are caused by the lack of capacity and ability to take advantage of economic opportunities, lack of capital resources, low level of education and skills, staying in rural areas and in the interior and being involved in low productivity activities.

It is only the select few who have taken advantage of the economic activities generated by the NEP. They also do not have capital resources but bank loans are arranged for them and they are bailed out when they face financial troubles. They have been given RM54 Billion worth of Bumiputra shares, privatized contracts, APs and licenses.

The Government must explain to the 80% lower income group of Malays and the Malay students why under the DEB, they have to repay the Government student loans, why they have to repay these loans with interests, are black listed when they default in repayments and are declared bankrupts when they fail. While on the other hand the select few are bailed out when they are in trouble such as the Government buying MAS shares from Tajudin Ramli at RM8.00 each when the market price was only RM3.62.

Tun Dr. Mahathir explained this in 1998 “The Way Forward” London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson) when he said:

“The NEP, it must be iterated, was not concerned in making all the bumiputras earned equally or share equally the wealth distributed amongst them. … the intention of the NEP was to create in the bumiputra community the same division of labour and rewards as was found in the non-bumiputra communities, particular, the Chinese. … the equitableness was not to be between individuals but between communities.”

The Honourable Member from Gua Musang in his speech on launching the second edition of the late James Puthucheary’s book “No Cowardly Past” on 22 March 2010 referred to this concept of creating a group of a few Bumiputra capitalists. He said that the NEP was intended as a unifying policy. There is no mention of race in the policy. It was subsequently reinvented as an inalienable platform for a Malay agenda. This group asserted the incongruous fiction of a Malay supremacy that requires affirmative action for a permanently dependant Malay. In its implementation, it became a project to enrich a selection of Malay capitalists. James Puthucheary warned back in 1959 that this was bound to fail:

“The presence of Chinese capitalists has not noticeably helped solve the poverty of Chinese households. Those who think that the economic position of the Malays can be improved by creating a few Malay capitalists, thus, making a few Malays well to do, will have to think again.”

Today, we asked those who oppose the structural reforms to think again. We are facing a crisis that threatens the political and economical foundation of our nation. We have come to the end of the road for the myth of the Malay Dilemma. It is important that the Government has the courage to acknowledge that the NEP did not provide for all the Malays but instead benefited only a select few. It is necessary to have a new policy such as Pakatan Rakyat’s New Economic Agenda for an affirmative action programme based on needs and not race. The Government must have the courage to acknowledge that a policy that is sustained through the rhetoric of ethnicity cannot succeed.

Conclusion:

The Government must show it has the political will to make the critical changes needed. The Government must have the courage to face the truth. It is only when the truth is known can the nation find the strength to change. We have reached the cross roads of our nation’s development. The Government must not allow emotional issues of race to shroud the NEP’s failure to the nation in general and the Malays in particular. A Truth and Reconciliation Tribunal will allow proper closure of the May 13 Incident. It has haunted the nation for 40 years. The nation has not healed because we continue to fear. It is a fear built into our political system. This fear is rooted in the ignorance of the truth. We must as a nation exorcise the ghost of the May 13 Incident. As long as the truth remains hidden, we will not mature as a people and as a nation.

Thank you.

William Leong Jee Keen
Member of Parliament for Selayang
21 June 2010

PERUBAHAN MELALUI KEBENARAN PEMBAHASAN RANCANGAN MALAYSIA KE-10

Dato Yang Di-Pertua,

Dengan izin saya mengucapkan terima kasih diberi peluang untuk mengambil bahagian dalam pembahasan Rancangan Malaysia Ke-10 ini.

Keperluan Kritikal: Perubahan Struktur Ekonomi

Saya sungguh tertarik membaca Rancangan Malaysia Ke-10 terutamanya cadangan bagi negara kita mencapai status ekonomi berpendapatan tinggi menjelang tahun 2020. Mukasurat 2 Buku Rancangan Malaysia Ke-10, menyatakan aspirasi tidak akan tercapai tanpa transformasi ekonomi yang menyeluruh. Jika transformasi tersebut tidak dilaksanakan, Malaysia bakal ketinggalan memandangkan negara membangun yang lain berkembang pantas dan kian merapatkan jurang kemajuan. Kerajaan bercadang melaksanakan perubahan struktur ekonomi melalui Program Transformasi Kerajaan dan Model Ekonomi Baru (”MEB”).

Kami di sebelah Dewan sini sebelum PRU 12 telah memaklumkan bahawa negara kita telah hilang daya saing. Negara perlu Reformasi. Pakatan Rakyat telah mencadangkan Agenda Ekonomi Baru. Tindakan Afirmatif hendak mengikut keperluan dan bukan kaum.

Pada masa ini, Kerajaan Barisan Nasional dibawah pempipinan Yang Berhormat Perdana Menteri bercadang membuat perubahan dengan program Transformasi dan Model Ekonomi Baru. Samadanya dipanggil Reformasi melalui Agenda Ekonomi Baru oleh Pakatan Rakyat atau Transformasi melalui Model Ekonomi Baru, kita kedua-dua belah di Dewan Mulia terdapat titik persamaan bahawa Malaysia perlu melakukan perubahan struktur yang kritikal. Perbezaan ialah dalam keazaman politik.

Pakatan Rakyat percaya perubahan dapat dicapai dengan adanya keberanian dan keyakinan. Keberanian berubah berasas dari kebenaran. Keyakinan berubah berasas dari kepercayaan dalam semangat rakyat untuk perubahan. Pada 19 Disember 2009, di Konvensyen Pakatan Rakyat Pertama, 1,500 ahli dari PAS, DAP dan Keadilan telah mengisytiharkan perjuangan Pakatan Rakyat untuk membuat perubahan besar-perubahan asas, dengan izinnya, “big change-fundamental change”. Kita, Pakatan Rakyat yakin melaksanakan perubahan kerana kami percaya “keberanian berasaskan kebenaran” dengan izinnya, “the courage of truth” disandarkan oleh “keyakinan dalam semangat rakyat untuk berubah” dengan izinnya, “Faith in the spirit of the people for change”. Kita pasti rakyat mahu perubahan dan kita akan berjuang untuk perubahan sampai berjaya.

Berbezaan antara BN dan PR ialah keazaman politik. Saya melihat Kerajaan tidak cukup keazaman politik untuk melaksanakan perubahan melalui MEB. MEB akan menjadi seolah-olahnya Dasar Ekonomi Baru (”DEB”) dibawah nama baru dan tidak ada perubahan sebenara akan dicapai. Kerajaan telah menunjukan bahawa kerajaan kekurangan keazaman politik. Kerajaan telah menunjukan Kerajaan tidak ada cukup keberanian untuk melakukan perubahan. Ini jelas dilihat bila Kerajaan dicabar oleh golongan tertentu.

Perkasa, ahli UMNO dan kumpulan yang menganggil ”Bangkit Melayu” membantah NEM dan perubahan. Mereka menyatakan bahawa ramai Melayu masih miskin dan terbelakang dari segi ekonomi. Kalau tindakan afirmatif dibawah DEB dihapuskan, mereka takut Melayu akan rugi. Mereka menyeru perhimpunan ”Peristiwa Mei 13” untuk mengingatkan rakyat Malaysia tentang rusuhan perkauman jika hak-hak orang Melayu tidak dihormati.

Dengan tekanan seperti ini, Yang Berhormat Menteri dalam Pejabat Perdana Menteri di Unit Perancang Ekonomi dan pegawai kerajaan menolak Majlis Penasihat Ekonomi Negara (”MPEN”) sebagai badan kerajaan dan menyangkal MEB sebagai usul kerajaan.Pada Mei 31, 2010, Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak, Perdana Menteri, juga telah membuat pengisytiharan di Kongress Ekonomi Bumiputra bahawa beliau tidak akan mengkhianati prinsip-prinsip DEB.

Kita di PR tidak akan teragu-ragu membuat perubahan. Ini adalah sebab 1,500 ahli dari DAP, PAS dan Keadilan didalam Konvensyen Pakatan Rakyat Pertama telah memberikan sokongan penuh untuk Agenda Ekonomi Baru. Rakyat telah memberikan sokongan penuh kepada PR untuk membuat perubahan yang diperlukan. Bila kita mebanding dengan BN, sehingga hari ini UMNO atau parti parti komponent tidak ada konvensyen oleh ahli ahli mereka memberikan sokongan penuh kepada MEB. Sebaliknya saya melihat bukan sahaja ahli UMNO tetapi juga Menteri hadir diforum-forum yang membantah MEB. Ini sudah menjadi jelas bahawa MEB tidak ada kesokongan penuh oleh semua menteri dalam jemaah menteri.

Jika Kerajaan bersungguh-sunguh ada niat untuk membuat perubahan, saya meminta Kerajaan mempamirkan keazaman dan keberaniannya untuk melakukan perubahan seperti yang dicadangkan dalam NEM dan melaksanakan perubahan struktur ekonomi dengan memberikan penjelasan dan pengakuan terhadap perkara berikut.

Perkara Pertama: Menubuhkan Tribunal Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi Peristiwa Mei 13

Kerapkali supremasi UMNO diancam atau isu kekurangan hak asasi manusia dibahas, momok ”Peristiwa Mei 13” dibangkitkan.Negara kita telah terperangkap dalam kancah politik perkauman selama 40 tahun. Negara kita telah sampai kepersimpangan yang kritikal. Rakyat kita perlu membuat keputusan samaada mengikut jalan lama dengan DEB dan politik perkauman atau mengambil jalan baru dengan melaksanakan perubahan. Untuk membolehkan rakyat dapat mencapai konsensus tentang halatuju, Kerajaan perlu menubuhkan satu Tribunal Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi Peristiwa Mei 13.

Tribunal ini perlu untuk membantu negara kita membina satu masa depan yang cerah daripada sejarah Peristiwa Mei 13 yang suram dan rumit. Negara kita perlu mebina masa depan dan harapan baru atas batu asas sejarah yang disandarkan oleh fakta benar yang berkukuh dan bukan atas rangkaian syak wasangka dan pembohongan.

Adakah Peristiwa Mei 13 merupakan satu komplot orang Melayu kelas kapitalis menggulingkan Tunku Abdul Rahman sebagai Perdana Menteri atau adakah peristiwa yang tragik ini belaku disebabkan oleh masalah perkauman.Tunku Abdul Rahman telah menyatakan dalam buku "K. Das and the Tunku Tapes" bahawa insiden adalah komplot untuk menggulingkan beliau. Beliau menyatakan berikut:

“You know Harun was one of those-Harun, Mahathir, Ghazali Shafie-who were all working with Razak to oust me, to take over my place…”

Pada tahun 1997, Subki Latiff, seorang wartawan menulis:

“The May 13 Incident did not occur spontaneously. It was planned quickly and purposely. The identity of the planners of the incident cannot be stated with accuracy. But whatever it was that happened, the May 13 Incident was a form of coup d’etat directed against Tunku Abdul Rahman. The Tunku’s power in fact ended from then onwards. Although he continued to be Prime Minister and President of UMNO, he was no more than a figurehead.”

(Dr Kua Kia Soong “May 13 Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969)

Baru-baru ini, Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad, bekas setiausaha politik Tun Razak, sebelum,semasa dan selepas Peristiwa Mei 13 telah menulis sebuah artikel tentangkejadian itu.Beliau menyatakan bahawa insiden tragik dan ganas itu tidak perlu terjadi sekiranyapesanan Tun Razak kepada Dato’ Harun Idris, Menteri Besar Selangor diterima 30 minit lebih awal atau jika Tan Sri David Tan Chee Khoon dan Tun Lim Chong Eu memaklumkan Tun Razak 30 minit lebih awal bahawa mereka tidak akan bekerjasama dengan DAP untuk membentuk kerajaan negeri Selangor atau bekerjasama di Perak dan di tempat lain. Tan Sri Abdullah mengatakan beliau berada di samping Tun Razak ketika beliau mengambil panggilan-panggilan tersebut. Beliau jelas mengingati tentang apa yang dikatakan oleh Tun Razak kepada Dato’ Harun:

“…the good news is you will continue to run Selangor. Chee Khoon and Chong Eu have just spoken to me and they want the status preserved. So tell the people gathering at your house to disperse.”

Dato’ Harun mengucapkan terima kasih kepada Tun Razak dan meminta beliau menyampaikan rasa terhutang budi dan amat berterima kasih kepada dua ahli politik terhormat. Lebih kurang lima hingga sepuluh minit selepas itu, Dato’ Harun menelefon Tun Razak untuk memaklumkan bahawa ia sudah terlambat. Pada masa beliau mengarahkan mereka untuk bersurai, berita telah diterima rusuhan telah bermula di kawasan Chow Kit dan berhampirannya.

Dasar Ekonomi Baru dibentukan selepas Peristiwa 13 Mei atas alasan resmi kaum Melayu merasa dibelakangkan oleh kaum Cina. Daripada petikan dan pengalaman peribadi yang disebut diatas, terdapat alasan yang mencukupi untuk sebuah Tribunal Kebenaran dan Rekonsialisi ditubuhkan demi memastikan apakah kejadian sebenar adalah untuk menguling Tunku, untuk Dato’ Harun Idris merebut jawatan sebagai Ketua Menteri atau kerana ketidakharmonian perkauman. Tribunal Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi sungguh penting untul memberikan satu ketamatan dengan izin “closure” kepada rakyat dan mengadakan pembaruan “a renewal” untuk Negara kita.

Perkara Kedua ialah Perakuan DEB hanya bermanfaat segelintir terpilih

Perkara yang kedua, Kerajaan perlu membuat untuk membuktikan Keazaman melaksanakan perubahan, ialah mengakui DEB tidak memberi manfaat kepada semua orang Melayu. DEB hanya memberi manfaat kepada golongan kecil yang terpilih.

Hujah yang selalu digunakan untuk mempertahankan DEB adalah dasar ini akan membasimikan kemiskinan orang Melayu. Akan tetapi perlaksanaan DEB terpesong. DEB telah disalahgunakan. DEB digunakan untuk memberi manfaat besar hanya kepada satu golongan terpilih. Selain daripada golongan kecil ini, orang Melayu biasa masih miskin atau berpendapatan rendah.

Selepas 40 tahun DEB dilaksanakan, kebanyakan Melayu masih adalah golongan pendatpatan terendah 40%. Berdasarkan Statistik Kerajaan (a) 62% dari orang Melayu memperolehi RM3,000.00 atau kurang. Mereka adalah petani penoreh getah, nelayan, pekerja kilang dan peniaga kecil; (b)34% keluarga Melayu memperolehi antara RM3,000.00 dan RM10,000.00. Mereka adalah pekerja kerajaan, pegawai di syarikat yang berkaitan dengan kerajaan, kontraktor dan peniaga; (c ) 2.8% keluarga Melayu memperolehi antara RM10,000.00 dan RM20,000.00. Mereka adalah eksekutif kanan di syarikat berkaitan kerajaan (GLC), kontraktor besar dan profesional; (d )Hanya 0.5% dari keluarga Melayu berpendapatan lebih daripada RM20,000.00.

Yang Berhornat Perdana Menteri pada 10 Jun 2010 (Khamis) dalam jawapan kepada pertanyaan parliament saya, telah menyatakan bahawa Kerajaan sedar 80% daripada golongan luar Bandar berpendapatan 40% terendah adalah terdiri daripada bumiputra. Dalam Bandar 53% adalah dari kaum Melayu.

Mengikut Yang Berhormat Perdana Menteri, banyak factor yang menyebabkan Bumiputera masih merupakan sebahagian besar daripada kalangan isi rumah 40% terendah. Ini antara lainnya disebabkan oleh kekurangan dari segi kapasiti dan keupayaan untuk merebut peluang ekonomi, tidak mempunyai sumber modal, mempunyai tahap pendidikan dan kemahiran yang rendah, tinggal di luar Bandar atau kawasan pendalaman dan terlibat dalam aktiviti yang berproduktiviti rendah.

Peluang ekonomi yang dijana oleh DEB direbut oleh golongan terpilih. Mereka juga tidak ada modal tetapi Bank Bumiputra, Bank Rakyat, UMBC dan lain lain Bank memberikan pinjaman kepada mereka. 54 Billion Ringgit saham yang diperuntukkan untuk Bumiputra telah diberi. Hanya 2 Billion masih dimiliki oleh Bumiputra. Siapa yang menerima saham ini. Bukan semua orang Melayu atau Bumiputra menerima saham ini. AP, lesen, kontrak penswastaan dan kontrak lumayan telah dibeikan kepada golongan terpilih.Kerajaan harus menjawab bagaimana saham Bumiputera yang diperuntukkan di bawah DEB telah diagihkan dan dibahagikan kepada siapa. Bukan semua orang Melayu/Bumiputra menerima saham tersebut.

Kerajaan harus memberikan alasan kepada golongan 80% Bumiputra berpendapatan terendah dan pemimjam-pemimjam PTPTN mengapa golongan terpilih ini diberikan bantuan kewangan dan diselamatkan bila ada masalah tetapi mereka hendak membayar faedah untuk pinjaman, disenaraikanhitam bila membayar dan menjadi muflis bila gagal. Mereka juga Bumiputra mengapa layanan berlainan. Mengapa mereka tidak dapat manfaat DEB seperti yang dinikmati oleh golongan terpilih ini.

Tun Dr Mahathir telah memberikan alasan pada tahun 1998 di dalam"The Way Forward" London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson) bahawa:

“The NEP, it must be iterated, was not concerned in making all the bumiputras earned equally or share equally the wealth distributed amongst them. … the intention of the NEP was to create in the bumiputra community the same division of labour and rewards as was found in the non-bumiputra communities, particular, the Chinese. … the equitableness was not to be between individuals but between communities.”

Yang Berhormat Gua Musang dalam ucapannya pelancaran edisi kedua buku mendiang James Puthucheary's "No Cowardly Past" pada 22 Januari2010 merujuk kepada konsep mencipta sebuah kumpulan kapitalis dari beberapa Bumiputra. Beliau menyatakan bahawa DEB telah dicipta dengan niat menyatupadukan masyarakat. DEB tidak ada syarat yang merujuk kepada mempentingkan mana-mana satu kaum yang spesifik. Ia telah direkasemula sebagai satu batu loncatan untuk agenda Melayu dan pada masa yang sama menegaskan ketuanan Melayu dan mengekalkan mitos orang Melayu yang berdependan kepada tindakkan afirmatif untuk selamalamanya. Dalam pelaksanaannya, ia telah menjadi sebuah projek untuk memperkaya segelintir kapitalis-kapitalis Melayu yang terpilih.

Hari ini, saya meminta mereka yang menentang perubahan struktural untuk berfikir semula. Kami berada dalam krisis mendasar dalam isu politik dan ekonomi. Kita telah sampai pada penghujung jalan dalam menggunakan cara lama untuk menguruskan hal. Kerajaan harus mempunyai keberanian untuk mengakui bahawa DEB bukan untuk semua orang Melayu dan telah menguntungkan hanya segelintir golongan. Kerajaan harus ada keberanian untuk mengakui bahawa suatu dasar tergantong kepada retorik perkauman tidak boleh

berjaya.

Kesimpulan:

Hanya dengan adanya pengakuan dan penjelasan dari Kerajaan bolehlah Negara Bermaju. Keraajaan hendak keberanian untuk mengaku bahawa DEB telah gagal memberi manfaat kepada negara pada umumnya dan kaum Melayu khusunya. Retorik emosional perkauman tidak sepatutnya digunakan untuk mengekalkan DEB yang teleh gagal.

Tujuan Tribunal Kebenaran dan Penyelarasan (Perdamaian) adalah penting untuk menggalakkan legitimasi kebangsaan dan perdamaian dengan mendedahkan kebenaran Insiden. Kita harus ada penutupan bagi Peristiwa Mei 13. Hal ini telah menghantui negara selama 40 tahun. Kita belum sembuh sepenuhnya kerana suasana ketakutan dimainkan oleh unsur-unsur tertentu. Rasa ketakutan ini telah dibina di dalam system politik kita sehingga menjadi sebahagian daripada jiwa rakyat. Ketakutan ini timbul sebab rakyat tidak ada pengetahuan tentang peristiwa yang sebenar. Kita harus mengusir hantu Peristiwa Mei 13 ini. Selagi kebenaran itu

tersembunyi dan perasaaan ketakutan dan syak wasangka meneruskan dan berlanjutan, kita tidak akan matang dan maju sebagai satu masyarakat dan sebagai satu negara.

Sekian terima kasih.

William Leong Jee Keen

Ahli Parliament Selayang

21 Jun 2010.