'PKR Parti ANAK-BERANAK'

PKR sekali lagi memperlihatkan parti itu cenderung kepada parti anak-beranak apabila tempat Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim digantikan dengan isterinya, Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail pada pilihan raya kecil (PRK) Dun Kajang, 23 Mac ini.

Ketua Umno Bahagian Besut, Nawi Mohamad berkata, jika dahulu Anwar menggantikan tempat Wan Azizah di Parlimen Permatang Pauh, kali ini Wan Azizah pula menggantikan tempat Anwar berikutan ketua pembangkang itu hilang kelayakan bertanding selepas dijatuhkan hukuman penjara lima tahun oleh mahkamah rayuan.

Katanya, keadaan itu turut menunjukkan Anwar mempunyai agenda peribadi berbanding perjuangan kepada rakyat sehinggakan tidak memberi peluang kepada pemimpin lain dalam PKR untuk bertanding di kerusi tersebut.

“Itu adalah hak PKR, tetapi macam tiada calon lain sehinggakan beri kepada isteri sendiri. Mungkin juga dia ada agenda lain kerana sebelum ini dikhabarkan beliau mahu jadi Menteri Besar Selangor.

sumber:sinar

Boikot Barangan Cina Dap ORI

Melayu Pulau Pinang perlu tahu realiti DAP. Sapa terer baca sampai habis

1.DAP naikkan sewa gerai.

Majlis Perbandaran Seberang Perai (MPSP) telah menaikkan sewa gerai makanan dibawah kendalian MPSP. Kenaikan antara 20%-100% ini berkuatkuasa September lalu. Dianggarkan lebih kurang 5,500 peniaga yang menerima kesan akibat daripada kenaikan sewa ini yang melibatkan kenaikan antara RM30-RM120. Berdasarkan rekod MPSP, hasil kutipan sewa gerai oleh MPSP pada tahun 2013 adalah sebanyak RM3.5 juta tetapi perbelanjaan untuk pengubahsuaian dan penyelenggaraan telah mencecah RM4.4 juta.
Untuk rekod, sewa gerai dibawah kendalian MPSP tidak pernah dinaikkan sejak 1992 dan maka alasan ini telah digunakan oleh kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang untuk menaikkan sewa sekaligus meletakkan beban tanggungan sepenuhnya kepada para peniaga gerai ini. Ini juga bermakna bahawa kerajaan Barisan Nasional dibawah Gerakan hakikatnya lebih kompeten dalam mengurus dan menyelengara gerai-gerai ini selama 16 tahun tanpa apa-apa beban kenaikan sewa sebaliknya dalam masa hanya 6 tahun, kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat (PR) dibawah pemerintahan regim DAP menaikkan sewa gerai sehingga 100%.
Awal tahun 2014, apabila Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur mencadangkan untuk menaikkan cukai pintu di kawasan Kuala Lumpur, seluruh kepimpinan PR telah membantah dan protes atas dasar bahawa kenaikan ini akan membebankan penduduk malah melancarkan petisyen membantah kenaikan cukai pintu ini. Soalnya, mana pergi pejuang-pejuang rakyat ini apabila kerajaan DAP menindas para peniaga gerai di kawasan Seberang Perai yang bukan sahaja membebankan tetapi juga langsung tidak mempedulikan nasib golongan peniaga ini?

2. Ekonomi Negeri Penang dalam bahaya.

Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang telah menghabiskan RM832.42 juta untuk perbelanjaan pada tahun lepas berbanding RM540.08 juta bagi tempoh yang sama pada tahun 2012. Hakikatnya, perbelanjaan tahunan kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang ini bukan sahaja bertambah sebanyak 54% dalam masa setahun tetapi pertambahan ini adalah tiga kali ganda sejak dari tahun 2008.
Pertambahan perbelanjaan kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang ini adalah tidak seimbang secara ekonomiknya. Realitinya, pendapatan hasil cukai kerajaan negeri di bawah Lim Guan Eng ini hanya bertambah sedikit sejak tahun 2008 iaitu sebanyak RM110 juta dan kerajaan negeri sendiri mengakui bahawa hanya mengharapkan hasil pendapatan cukai sebanyak RM130 juta sahaja untuk tahun 2015 dengan hasilnya dijangka diperolehi melalui bayaran premium tanah untuk pembangunan sebanyak RM69.18 juta di Bayan Mutiara dan Batu Kawan.

3. Tanah Penang dijual oleh DAP untuk bendung defisit perbelanjaan kerajaan Negeri.

Tahun 2013 menyaksikan pertukaran hak milik tanah melibatkan Beijing Urban Construction Group Co. Ltd (BUCG) untuk melaksanakan projek pembinaan terowong dasar laut sepanjang 20.8 km dengan anggaran kos sebanyak RM 129 juta/km dengan kos keseluruhannya yang menelan sebanyak RM6.3 bilion serta hak konsesi kutipan tol selama 30 tahun turut diberikan kepada pemaju. Dalam keadaan kerajaan negeri menghadapi perbelanjaan defisit saban tahun, apakah wajar untuk melaksanakan satu projek mega sedangkan pada masa yang sama isu-isu rakyat diketepikan?
Tahun ini sahaja tiga tanah milik kerajaan di Batu Kawan telah dijual kepada Aspen Vision (49% dimiliki oleh Ivory Properties) dengan harga sebanyak RM484 juta (dipetik daripada kenyataan Lim Guan Eng bertarikh 12 Januari 2014), Paramount Group sebanyak RM67 juta (Laporan The Star bertarikh 26 Mac 2014) dan penjualan paling kontrovesi adalah melibatkan Eco World Sdn Bhd dengan harga sebanyak RM1.02 bilion (Laporan The Star bertarikh 15 September 2014). Rafizi Ramli telah mengkaitkan syarikat ini dengan bekas Menteri Besar Selangor, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim sehinggakan beliau dipecat daripada Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) dan hingga kini tuduhan berkenaan gagal dibuktikan oleh PKR.
Soalnya, apakah yang akan terjadi kepada negeri Pulau Pinang andaikata kesemua tanah-tanah milik kerajaan negeri dijual kepada kapitalis tanpa mengambil kira kepentingan rakyat Pulau Pinang.
Dalam satu kenyataan yang dibuat oleh Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang itu sendiri bertajuk ‘BN Sold More Land than Pakatan Rakyat’ bertarikh 28 Jun 2014, beliau mengakui bahawa kerajaan PR telah menjual sebanyak 106.1 hektar tanah dengan hasil sebanyak RM1.1102 bilion. Namun jika dilihat kepada rizab negeri Pulau Pinang, hanya pertumbuhan yang sedikit dicatatkan iaitu sebanyak 3.85% iaitu daripada RM1.025 bilion kepada RM1.192 bilion. Margin kenaikan rizab negeri dengan keuntungan penjualan tanah adalah tidak boleh diterima akal pemikiran waras. Kemana perginya duit hasil penjualan tanah ini?

4.DAP tidak akan bina rumah mampu milik

Kegagalan kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang membina rumah kos rendah sepanjang pentadbiran DAP ini adalah satu kegagalan yang harus diakui dan bukannya beban tersebut dilemparkan kepada kerajaan persekutuan. Ini jelas kelihatan apabila soalan Ketua Pembangkang Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN) Pulau Pinang Datuk Jahara Hamid yang telah meminta kerajaan negeri untuk memperincikan jumlah rumah kos rendah yang dibina sepanjang pakatan rakyat mentadbir negeri ini.
Dan soalan ini disambut oleh Exco kerajaan negeri Jagdeep Singh Deo bahawa kerajaan persekutuan sama sekali gagal membekalkan rumah kos rendah dan rumah mampu milik kepada rakyat serta mendakwa negeri di bawah pimpinan DAP itu sering dianaktirikan adalah satu sandiwara semata-mata untuk menutup lubang kegagalan kerajaan negeri.
Malah Lim Guan Eng juga telah memberikan amaran kepada kerajaan Persekutuan dengan tidak membenarkan untuk membina rumah mampu milik untuk orang Melayu di tanah seluas 94 hektar di Pulau Pinang. Soalnya, kenapa kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang bersikap diktator terhadap niat murni kerajaan persekutuan dalam usaha membantu rakyat memiliki rumah mampu ini. Daripada menjual tanah kerajaan semberono, adalah adil kiranya tanah-tanah tersebut diperuntukkan untuk pembinaan rumah kos rendah dan mampu milik kepada rakyat Melayu Pulau Pinang.
sumber : Ketua Pengakap

Constitutional monarch shouldn't meddle in politics

 YOURSAY ‘That will be perceived as challenging the people's right to decide.’
 
Khalid resigns as Selangor MB, no snap polls

Kim Quek: It is the fundamental principle of constitutional monarchy that the power to rule is vested in the people, not in the monarch.                           
 
 Inherent in that power is the right of the political party, which is chosen by the electorate to rule, to determine its leader to head the government.
 
 A constitutional monarch should never meddle in politics, for that would be perceived as challenging the people's right to decide, thus breaching the fundamental compact between the monarch and the people, as defined in the country's constitution.
 
 In the case of Selangor, the constitution states that the sultan shall appoint a member from the state legislative assembly "who in his judgement is likely to command the confidence of the majority of members of the state assembly".
 
 And since the ruling coalition Pakatan Rakyat, which enjoys a majority of 43 against 13 in the state assembly, has nominated Wan Azizah, whose majority support is unquestioned, the sultan should simply appoint her as such.
 
 Asking for multiple nominees for the sultan to pick and choose is clearly out of the realm of the constitution, and may be perceived as an attempt to interfere in the political decision-making process of the ruling party.
 
 Pakatan should not concede to such a request to avoid opening the floodgate of palace interference into politics - a situation that may plunge the country into endless constitutional crises.
 
Pemerhati: In a parliamentary democracy, which Malaysia claims to be, the menteri besar should be the choice of the people. Since a majority of the elected representatives want Azizah to be the MB, then she should become the MB.
 
 Under the constitution, the sultan has no choice but to appoint Wan Azizah as the MB, unless he can give strong reasons that are stipulated in the constitution for rejecting her.

 The sultan has no right to choose the MB and he would be acting unconstitutionally if he insists on choosing an MB from a list of names.
 
 If in the past there was such a practice, then it was wrong and a mistake and that mistake should not be repeated.
 
Aries46: Whatever arguments put forward in the debate of constitutional monarchy or absolute monarchy or whatever, the sultan seems to hold the trump card.
 
 Going by the state constitution, Wan Azizah is the people's choice and has the majority support in the state assembly. I presume this has been conveyed to the sultan in her repeated request for an audience.
 
 If in spite of this, Tuanku still requests for more than two names, it only goes to signify that His Royal Highness (HRH) has, rightly or wrongly, taken it upon himself to have the final say.
 
 Pakatan needs to consider carefully its precarious position, what more with a wishy-washy ally like PAS that is liable to turn the tables at any moment. No doubt to PKR, it is a matter of principle and pride, but at what cost?
 
 However, in all fairness, HRH must grant Wan Azizah's request for an audience, at least for the rakyat to understand what exactly is in the Tuanku's mind on this crucial issue.
 
Adam Ningau: If the sultan is allowed to pick, then why waste time to submit names? Just ask Tuanku who he wants among the state representatives.
 
 Indeed, the floodgates have been opened. Our sultans, one after another, want to have more say in the appointment of public office holders. Their roles are no longer symbolic. This will result in a more complicated political landscape in future.
 
Pakatan-Ku: Lots of commentators here do not understand the word "discretion". The sultan has the right to ask for more than two names. Someone wrote why after 2008 GE12, the sultan accepted only one nomination.
 
 The answer is simple. The sultan was at that time had confidence in Khalid as MB. This time he has already shown that he has no confidence in only one name and wants to have a choice. Pakatan has to put its act together and clean up the mess it has created.
 
BeeC: Tuanku has also asked for more than two candidates in 2008 and 2013. However, Pakatan has just named one candidate (Khalid Ibrahim) and had no problem to have the candidate accepted by Tuanku.
 
 So, it's only a convention for Tuanku to ask for more than one candidate. Conventionally, it's not a 'must' request.
          
Wg321: I hope Malaysiakini would ask the opinion of former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad on this matter. This is because BN faced the same problems with other sultans before.
 
 Is it constitutional for the sultan to ask for two names or more? Who chooses the MB? Is it the rakyat or the sultan ultimately? Can the sultan overrule the rakyat's choice of candidate?
 
 It would be very interesting to hear what Mahathir has to say.
 
Kang Kong King: By convention, it has to be more than two names? When Khalid Ibrahim was proposed, were two names given?
 
 When Mohamad Khir Toyo was proposed, were two names given? When Muhammad Muhammad Taib was proposed, were two names given? I don't remember hearing this before.

Maplesyrup: When the current PM was appointed, I wonder, besides Najib Abdul Razak's name, what other names were presented to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong? Is this a precedent?
 
 Malaysians want democracy and we have to overcome gerrymandering, unfair practices, abuse of federal funds, etc. Now we have to add one more item to the list.
 
 I just remembered the last time the palace rejected a candidate. It was in Perak, during Pakatan's rule. Is it coincidence that the path to rule for Pakatan is different from BN?
 
CQ Muar: At the end of the day, political parties elected by the rakyat no longer have any more say.
 
 Whatever hopes and aspirations voters might have from representing parties would just fizzle out - as the ruler wields the absolute power to overide, decide and appoint based on HRH's preference. Probably, in this case, based on 'convention'. Call this democracy?
 
Single Malt: The sultan is perhaps reluctant to consider Wan Azizah because he doesn't want his MB to have her spouse in jail. It may be embarrassing for him.
 
 From this, it is crystal clear that Anwar Ibrahim is going to be put behind bars following the Federal Court review in October.
 
Rick Teo: This is all a ‘sandiwara’ (an act). I can tell you clearly what the whole intent is. The intent is to appoint a member from PAS to be the next MB.
 
 It's all been decided by the secret meeting between PAS and palace. That's why PAS doesn't want to commit to Wan Azizah.
 
 And when PAS takes over, Selangor will be handed back to BN within one term because they will start to introduce all the Taliban laws. Just you watch.
 
Inquirer: Be very careful. You may retain Selangor without PAS, but Pakatan without PAS federally may give BN their two-thirds majority in Parliament.
                                              
 That may well be the end game, especially if a few of its MPs can be put away by other means. Be very careful.