Saturday, January 20, 2018

STRATA Property insights - Serious on strata

Important issues and frequently asked questions

STRATA-type property is and has been all the rage. It is also expected to be "the living model" if not already.

Whether in cosmopolitan cities or suburban fringes, and as space becomes "in want" and prices hike, we feature our final article on strata-related property highlighting pertinent questions frequently asked to which Chris Tan (CT) gives input on.

Q: What should one look out for in the S&P before deciding on buying a particular strata-titled residential property?

CT: Buying a strata title property is not just buying a property but buying into a community living regulated by law. As a buyer, you are not only responsible for your very own unit but also the common property within the development too.

There is an ongoing obligation to pay the monthly service charges and sinking fund until the day you sell the same to another owner.

Besides the S&P Agreement, you are normally expected to sign the Deed of Mutual Covenants too, that regulates the relationship of the many owners within the same development with house rules vis-a-vis the prescribed by-laws under the Strata Management Act. In addition to the compliance with these rules, you are also expected to participate in the management of the common property at the Annual General Meeting as well as the Extraordinary General Meeting.

In the completion of the S&P Agreement, do ensure that the seller has no more outstanding charges and sinking funds owing the management and that the deposits paid are to be adjusted accordingly.

Q: Can you please explain further on 'share units' of strata-titled property? How does this affect a residential strata-titled property owner or what is the relation between the owner and the share units?

CT: Share unit has always been there in strata living as it will be stated in the strata title upon its issuance. It is now capturing the limelight, given that it is now the basis to be contributed into the maintenance charges and not the usual rate psf of the size of your main parcel.

There are different 'weightages' for the main parcel, the accessory parcel and the type of usage to make up the various elements of the share unit.

Suffice to say that two units of apartments of the exact same size might have different share unit allocation, if one has more accessory parcels than the other, or one is of commercial usage while the other is residential.

Q: What are some current and common issues faced by owners of strata-titled residential property and how would these be best settled?

CT: Issue 1: Contribution to service charges and sinking funds from the owners have always been done on the total size (in sf.) of the main parcel. Under the new regime since June 2015, it should now be based on per share unit instead.

Share unit is a concept that takes into account the size and the usage (of different allocated weight) of both the main parcel as well as the accessory parcel. It's stated clearly in the strata title when it is issued. It is also the basis of voting by poll if so requested in any General Meeting. Share unit is therefore now the basis of both contribution and control as opposed to just control in the past.

In theory, it should be a fair method for all. The issues are:

(i) Some strata owners find themselves paying more than before while some strata owners now pay less; and

(ii) The Share unit allocation under the previous legal regime was a result of consultation and discretion and not as transparently guided under the new law. It is a difficult process and to adjust again, particularly when the strata titles have been issued, will be tedious.

Issue No. 2: In Phased Development there is now a requirement to file the Schedule of Parcels (SOP) stating clearly the total share units to be offered under the entire development before one can proceed to sell. It therefore includes the later phases of a development that will only be developed in the future.

The issue is that this SOP can only be adjusted if we can get 100% of the owners to agree or it is a direction from the authority.

There will be no flexibility accorded to the developer who might want to change the SOP for the feasibility or sustainability of the development, taking into account the new circumstances of the future, in the best interest of the entire development.

Another related issue would be on the contribution of the allocated share units by the developer for yet to be developed phase in the maintenance of the common property already built and delivered.

Q: Any other 'surprises' or areas of concern that many strata-titled residential property owners are unaware of until after purchase of such residents?

CT: Don't be surprised if the property does not come with an allotted car park, although it is a norm to expect a car park to come with the unit. It is not always the case.

Q: Like many busy owners of a strata-titled property who do not have the time to sit in at resident's meetings with the management body – many have simply 'gone with the flow' of things as 'questions/disputes' require time for discussion.

What would you recommend for busy individuals who have 'no time' to attend such meetings but can only look at the annual/bi-annual strata/building management statements/financial reports? What should one keep an eye out for in these financial statements?

Why is it important to attend these meetings; what would owners be losing out on by not attending and being an 'active owner'?

CT: It is a regulated community living and participation is expected of every owner.

Although many have chosen to be passive, you need to participate or run the risk of letting major decisions lay in the hands of the active few.

You should keep an eye to ensure that the charges collected are well spent, that collection should always be monitored and the performance of the appointed property manager.

Also, understand your rights and obligations as a strata owner is important, and ensure that you and your neighbors are equally aware of the same too.

Q: As a tenant, and not the owner of the 'parcel' – are they bound to all the By-laws?

CT: The by-laws, additional by-laws and amendment of such additional by-laws made by the Management Body shall not only bind the owners but also the tenants, chargess, lessees and occupiers.

Q: Any other important issues that you would like to highlight to readers of theSun?

CT: Moving forward, strata living will be the preferred way of community living. Take a keen interest to learn and understand this living model in order to get the most out of it.

There are many more frequently asked questions, especially on management bodies, by-laws and leakage and defects. Answers to these can be found in Chris Tan's Owner's Manual & Guidebook.

Follow our property column next Friday for more insights on the market in the local scene.

Source: Thesundaily

Related articles

Related posts:

High-rise living in below par, need professionalism in managing the property

Invest in the future

By-laws governing strata property management in ...

Aug 11, 2015 ... There are (or will soon be) more people living in high-rise strata ... New beginning in ... Managing strata properties in Malaysia Sep 11, 2012

A strata property living nightmare: leakage

Aug 23, 2015 ... IF you live in a high rise building and have an inter-floor leakage issue, you ... occurs during the defects liability period, and which the housing developers ... By -laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 1

Service charges under strata title property in Malaysia

Aug 27, 2015 ... By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 2. General ... Cheers for high-rise house buyers GEORGE TOWN: The state ...

Malaysian Strata Management Act 2013 will be enforced ...

May 28, 2015 ... There are (or will soon be) more people living in high-rise strata ... New beginning in ... Managing strata properties in Malaysia Sep 11, 2012

Regulate property management! Forum on Strata ...

Dec 22, 2012 ... There are (or will soon be) more people living in high-rise strata properties than in landed properties, given the rapid urbanisation and rising ...

Managing strata properties in Malaysia

Sep 11, 2012 ... ... engineers, architects, shopping and high-rise complex managers, management corporations ... Though building owners (JMBs and MCs) and Real Estate Investment Trusts ... Building Management Association of Malaysia.

Poor services from JMBs, Unlicensed Property ...

Jun 15, 2011 ... "It's similar to the drive that was extended to unlicensed real estate agents ... working at the high-rise apartment block where Liew See Lanlives.

Malaysian property sector still attracting overseas investors

Aug 19, 2015 ... “We are pleased to make our first direct real estate investment in ... it had set a record of sorts for pricing its high-rise serviced residential units of ...

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

PTMP: Losses making fashion company in Penang Undersea Tunnel Project

Filepic: PenangPropertyTalk

Did the Penang Govt do a "bait and switch" on the Penang people?

That was the question posed by MCA deputy president Datuk Seri Dr Wee Ka Siong after it was revealed that a local fashion company has been identified as the shareholder of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) for the RM6.3bil Penang undersea tunnel project.

He questioned how the DAP-led Penang state government can claim that it is normal for a loss-making local fashion company to be suddenly involved in building a complicated multi-billion undersea tunnel as its first project as part of normal buisiness diversification process.

Shareholdings disclosure of the company on Bursa Malaysia. Pic: mca.org.my

Shareholdings disclosure of the company on Bursa Malaysia. Pic: mca.org.myShareholdings disclosure of the company on Bursa Malaysia. Pic: mca.org.my

"Taking aside the fact that the fashion company has reported losses in each of the past 3 financial quarters and their last financial statement submitted to Bursa Malaysia on 29 Nov 2017 showed that the company had cash balances of RM1,7 million and short-term loans of RM16.5 million, I believe the Penang Government is completely missing the point.

"The main point is that the Penang Govt had reassured and promised to the people of Penang in March 2013 when the project was awarded that the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) company had strong financial backing of RM4.6 billion and had deep experience in construction," Wee highlighted, in a statement posted on MCA's website.

He points out that five years later there was nothing to show except for the millions spent on uncompleted feasibility studies.

“Did the DAP government lie to the public and made a bait and switch?" he asked.

Meanwhile, political analyst Datuk Eric See-Toh has revealed that the project never awarded on open tender.

"This is an interesting development as the project was never awarded based on Open Tender as DAP frequently claims.

"It was done via a Request for Proposal (RFP) exercise where a company was then selected for further negotiations before agreement signing," he noted in a recent Facebook posting.

"The Penang Government should release the minutes of why the winner was selected and why others were rejected," he urged the DAP-led Penang government to give a proper explanation over how this could have happened.

This is important, he stressed as the result has clearly led to "such lop-sided terms that is in favour of the contractor and at the expense of the people of Penang" which is the reason for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigation now. "Allowing many to participate in an open RFP is not the most important question but how and on what basis the final party was selected and the negotiations after that," he added.

"Taking aside the fact that the fashion company has reported losses in each of the past 3 financial quarters and their last financial statement submitted to Bursa Malaysia on 29 Nov 2017 showed that the company had cash balances of RM1,7 million and short-term loans of RM16.5 million, I believe the Penang Government is completely missing the point.

"The main point is that the Penang Govt had reassured and promised to the people of Penang in March 2013 when the project was awarded that the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) company had strong financial backing of RM4.6 billion and had deep experience in construction," Wee highlighted, in a statement posted on MCA's website.

He points out that five years later there was nothing to show except for the millions spent on uncompleted feasibility studies.

“Did the DAP government lie to the public and made a bait and switch?" he asked.

Meanwhile, political analyst Datuk Eric See-Toh has revealed that the project never awarded on open tender.

"This is an interesting development as the project was never awarded based on Open Tender as DAP frequently claims.

"It was done via a Request for Proposal (RFP) exercise where a company was then selected for further negotiations before agreement signing," he noted in a recent Facebook posting.

"The Penang Government should release the minutes of why the winner was selected and why others were rejected," he urged the DAP-led Penang government to give a proper explanation over how this could have happened.

This is important, he stressed as the result has clearly led to "such lop-sided terms that is in favour of the contractor and at the expense of the people of Penang" which is the reason for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigation now.

"Allowing many to participate in an open RFP is not the most important question but how and on what basis the final party was selected and the negotiations after that," he added.

"According to a MACC source, the investigation was zeroing in on the tender process and appointment of the company to carry out the feasibility study for the (Penang Tunnel) project." said a report today.

This is an interesting development as the project was never awarded based on Open Tender as DAP frequently claims.

It was done via a Request for Proposal (RFP) exercise where a company was then selected for further negotiations before agreement signing.

The Penang Government should release the minutes of why the winner was selected and why others were rejected as well as the minutes of the attendees and what was discussed during the negotiations with the winner prior to the final agreement that led to such lop-sided terms that is in favour of the contractor and at the expense of the people of Penang.

Allowing many to participate in an open RFP is not the most important question but how and on what basis the final party was selected and the negotiations after that.

Eric See-To.
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/…/undersea-tunnel-probe-m…/
Here's an explanation between RFP and Request for Tender/Quote and other methods:
http://thoughtbubble.com.au/…/whats-the-difference-between…/

LikeShow more reactions

CommentShare

Mak

Source: Malaysian Digest: http://www.malaysiandigest.com/

Related Links:

Politicians on MACC radar over tunnel payoffs - Nation

“There were politicians who received a few hundred thousand ringgit and those who took millions.
“Investigators are digging in on the extent of the misconduct and where the payments took place.

“It is believed that this is also related to the two land swaps done as payment for the feasibility study,” said a source, who declined to elaborate.

Feasibility study cost just doesn't add up, says Wee - Nation

Undersea project: Fashion apparel just an investor not contractor, says Lim

More arrests likely in undersea tunnel probe - Nation

Related posts:

Penang undersea tunnel project scrutinized by the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC)

In troubled waters: An artist’s impression showing where the tunnel project will start on the island. Land swap under...

Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) - Tunnel project rocked, Directors arrested in graft probe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6B9o1baUaP8 https://youtu.be/VL98vA4I2gE Stalled ambition: A view of the Gurney Drive s...

Sunday, January 14, 2018

Goodbye, Silicon Valley

Greener pastures: Wang at his company’s headquarters in Shanghai. The successful Silicon Valley alumni was lured back to China by the promise of a brighter future.

Chinese-born talents are abandoning California for riches back home with the rise of China's new titans.

A FEW years ago, Wang Yi was living the American dream. He had graduated from Princeton, landed a job at Google and bought a spacious condo in Silicon Valley.

But one day in 2011, he sat his wife down at the kitchen table and told her he wanted to move back to China. He was bored working as a product manager for the search giant and felt the pull of starting his own company in their homeland.

It wasn’t easy persuading her to abandon balmy California for smog-choked Shanghai.

“We’d just discovered she was pregnant,” said Wang, now 37, recalling hours spent pacing their apartment. “It was a very uneasy few weeks before we made our decision, but in the end she came around.”

His bet paid off: his popular English teaching app Liulishuo or LingoChamp raised US$100mil (RM397mil) in July, putting him in the growing ranks of successful Silicon Valley alumni lured back to China by the promise of a brighter future. His decision is emblematic of an unprecedented trend with disquieting implications for Valley stalwarts from Facebook Inc to Alphabet Inc’s Google.

US-trained Chinese-born talent is becoming a key force in driving Chinese companies’ global expansion and the country’s efforts to dominate next-generation technologies like artificial intelligence and machine learning. Where college graduates once coveted a prestigious overseas job and foreign citizenship, many today gravitate towards career opportunities at home, where venture capital is now plentiful and the government dangles financial incentives for cutting-edge research.

“More and more talent is moving over because China is really getting momentum in the innovation area,” said Ken Qi, a headhunter for Spencer Stuart and leader of its technology practice.

“This is only the beginning.” Chinese have worked or studied abroad and then returned home long enough that there’s a term for them – “sea turtles”. But while a job at a US tech giant once conferred near-unparalleled status, homegrown companies – from giants like Tencent Holdings Ltd to up-and-comers like news giant Toutiao – are now often just as prestigious. Baidu Inc – a search giant little-known outside of China – convinced ex-Microsoft standout Qi Lu to helm its efforts in AI, making him one of the highest-profile returnees of recent years.

Alibaba Group Holding Ltd’s coming-out party was a catalyst. The e-commerce giant pulled off the world’s largest initial public offering in 2014 – a record that stands – to drive home the scale and inventiveness of the country’s corporations.

Alibaba and Tencent now count among the 10 most valuable companies in the world, in the ranks of Amazon.com Inc and Facebook.

Chinese venture capital rivals the United States: three of the world’s five most valuable startups are based in Beijing, not California.

Tech has supplanted finance as the biggest draw for overseas Chinese returnees, accounting for 15.5% of all who go home, according to a 2017 survey of 1,821 people conducted by think-tank Centre for China & Globalisation and jobs site Zhaopin.com. That’s up 10% from their last poll, in 2015.

Not all choose to abandon the Valley. Of the more than 850,000 AI engineers across America, 7.9% are Chinese, according to a 2017 report from LinkedIn.

That naturally includes plenty of ethnic Chinese without strong ties to the mainland or any interest in working there. However, there are more AI engineers of Chinese descent in the United States than there are in China, even though they make up less than 1.6% of the American population.

Yet the search for returnees has spurred a thriving cottage industry.

In WeChat and Facebook cliques, headhunters and engineers from the diaspora exchange banter and animated gifs. Qi watches for certain markers: if you’ve scored permanent residency, are childless or the kids are prepping for college, expect a knock on your digital door.

Jay Wu has poached over 100 engineers for Chinese companies over the past three years. The co-founder of Global Career Path ran online communities for students before turning it into a career. The San Francisco resident now trawls more than a dozen WeChat groups for leads.

“WeChat is a good channel to keep tabs on what’s going on in the circle and also broadcast our offline events,” he said.

Ditching Cupertino or Mountain View for Beijing can be a tough sell when China’s undergoing its harshest Internet crackdown in history. But its tech giants hold three drawcards: faster growth in salaries, opportunity and a sense of home.

China’s Internet space is enjoying bubbly times, with compensation sometimes exceeding American peers’. One startup was said to have hired an AI engineer for cash and shares worth as much as US$30mil (RM119mil) over four years.

For engineers reluctant to relinquish American comforts, Chinese companies are going to them. Alibaba, Tencent, Uber-slayer Didi Chuxing and Baidu are among those who have built or are expanding labs in Silicon Valley.

Career opportunities, however, are regarded as more abundant back home. While Chinese engi-

neers are well represented in the Valley, the perception is that comparatively fewer advance to the top rungs, a phenomenon labelled the “Bamboo Ceiling”.

“More and more Chinese engineers who have worked in Silicon Valley for an extended period of time end up finding it’s much more lucrative for them career-wise to join a fast-rising Chinese company,”

says Hans Tung, a managing partner at venture firm GGV who’s organised events to poach talent.

“At Google, at LinkedIn, at Uber, at AirBnB, they all have Chinese engineers who are trying to figure out ‘should I stay, or should I go back’.”

More interesting than prospects for some may be the sheer volume of intimate data available and leeway to experiment in China.

Tencent’s WeChat, built by a small team in months, has become a poster-child for in-house creative licence.

Modern computing is driven by crunching enormous amounts of data, and generations of state surveillance has conditioned the public to be less concerned about sharing information than Westerners.

Local startup SenseTime for instance has teamed with dozens of police departments to track everything from visages to races, helping the country develop one of the world’s most sophisticated surveillance machines.

China’s 751 million Internet users have thus become a massive petri dish.

Big money and bigger data can be irresistible to those itching to turn theory into reality.

Xu Wanhong left Carnegie Mellon University’s computer science PhD programme in 2010 to work on Facebook’s news feed.

A chance meeting with a visiting team from Chinese startup UCAR Technology led to online friendships and in 2015, an offer to jump ship. Today he works at Kuaishou, a video service said to be valued at more than US$3bil (RM12bil), and commutes from 20km outside Beijing. It’s a far cry from the breakfast bar and lush spaces of Facebook’s Menlo Park headquarters.

“I didn’t go to the US for a big house. I went for the interesting problems,” he said.

Then there are those for whom it’s about human connection: no amount of tech can erase the fact that Shanghai and San Francisco are separated by an 11-hour flight and an even wider cultural chasm.

Chongqing native Yang Shuishi grew up deifying the West, adopting the name Seth and landing a dream job as a software engineer on Microsoft’s Redmond campus.

But suburban America didn’t suit a single man whose hometown has about 40 times Seattle’s population.

While he climbed the ranks during subsequent stints at Google and Facebook, life in America remained a lonely experience and he landed back in China.

“You’re just working as a cog in the huge machine and you never get to see the big picture.

“My friends back in China were thinking about the economy and vast social trends,” he said.

“Even if I get killed by the air and live shorter for 10 years, it’ll still be better.” - Bloomberg

Related Link:

Next Crisis Will Start in Silicon Valley - Bloomberg

Chinese workers abandon Silicon Valley for riches back home ...

Only the brave teach

Show of solidarity: Fellow teachers and unionists gathering at the Seremban magistrate court last month in support of Cikgu Azizan (centre in white).

ONE tight slap – I still vividly remember that hard, stinging smack across my cheek as my teacher flew into a fit of rage after I did something naughty as a primary school pupil at St Xavier’s Institution in Penang.

I can’t recall which teacher hit me, but there must have been more than one. They pinched my stomach and even my nipples. Many of my classmates can attest to that, even 40 years on.

There was also the occasional caning, which I felt was an act of gross injustice and, perhaps, even one of perversion on the part of our disciplinary teacher. To me, back then, he was an unfair individual, and my opinion still stands. To this day, I have no idea why I was caned and not given the chance to defend myself.

But, bless his soul, because he has passed on. Most students from back then would have forgiven him by now, for he probably knew not what he was doing.

However, one thing is certain – as far as I know, none of us returned home and complained about this disciplinary action to our parents.

Comedian Harith Iskandar always reminds his audience that if one complained to their parents, they can expect to get another tight slap that “would burn your face and send an electrifying chilling effect to all parts of your body,” and consequently, leave a lifetime’s reminder.

So, the smartest thing to do, as most older Malaysians can testify, was to keep quiet. Of course, we also warned our classmates, some of whom were our neighbors, to swear to keep things under wraps and not tell their parents about the drama at school.

The caning and slaps, by disciplinary standards, were the “final” punishments. We surely remember the use of rulers, feather dusters, belts, black board dusters and in my case, even a shoe that flew in my direction.

And I wasn’t even in the naughty boys’ category. I didn’t get into fights or was caught loitering with the bad hats after school.

As one writer, Adrian Lee Yuen Beng, wrote in Aliran: “The teachers were our ad hoc parents who taught with joy and passion, and like their predecessors, never demanded any recognition. They customarily stood at the back of the class, silently rejoicing as the students celebrated their exam success.

“We received an education steeped in tradition as mission schoolteachers took teaching seriously; it was not a mere job, but a vocation, nay, a calling.

“Our teachers were proud of their lessons and believed in their form of education. They shaped us into intellectuals, sportspersons, politicians, educators, religionists, physicians and other important societal figures.”

Fast forward to today – and it’s the total reverse. The guilty party – the student – runs home to complain to his parents.

Now, the father and mother fly into a rage and decide to confront the teacher at school the following day. What unnecessary drama!

Adding insult to injury, the parents then seek the help of a politician, who has likely been deprived of the media’s glare for a while. Then, all three confront the teacher.

Lodging a police report is, of course, the next thing they do, and to embarrass the teacher and school further, they call for a press conference.

This is modern Malaysia. Perhaps, today’s family is smaller. There are only one or two children in a family, and they are, invariably, pampered.

During my time, there were at least four or five siblings and even so, we were still regarded a small family. Dad was always too busy earning a living, trying to put food on the table, so, he was thankful that the teacher played surrogate father, at least during school hours. The lesser-educated father would have been equally respectful of teachers. After all, it’s accepted that teachers mould the character, calibre and prospects of their students.

However, the modern-day father thinks he’s smarter and earns more than the teacher, his condescending and confrontational attitude not boding well for the situation.

He probably thinks the teacher has a dead-end job or is too busy distributing business cards to pupils for after-school tuition.

But, for an old-school type like me, I find it difficult to accept news of teachers being hauled to court for purportedly hurting their students.

Honestly, don’t the police and prosecutors have better things to do than to charge these teachers who were merely trying to discipline the children – responsibilities which may have been neglected by their caregivers?

In December, a teacher facing the charge of hurting his student, was given a discharge not amounting to acquittal by the magistrate’s court.

Magistrate Mohd Zaki Abdul Rahim delivered judgement after the prosecution told the court that they wished to withdraw the case.

Azizan Manap, also known as Cikgu Azizan, claimed trial to the charge of slapping an 11-year-old male student on the left cheek in April for indiscipline, the misdemeanour including sniffing glue, bullying and playing truant.

He was charged under Section 323 of the Penal Code for voluntarily causing hurt and was left facing a jail term of up to a year, a fine of RM,2000, or both, upon conviction.

Leading up to his discharge, several hundred people, including fellow teachers, gathered at the court in a show of solidarity for Cikgu Azizan.

By all means, go ahead and Google it: there are numerous reports of teachers threatened or roughed up in schools, and surprisingly, we seldom hear of offensive parents charged in court for criminal intimidation or causing bodily harm.

We have now been made to understand that the old ways don’t work anymore. The children need counselling and their hair needs to be stroked to motivate them. Have these methods worked better? That remains to be conclusively proven.

One thing’s for sure, though, the tight slap was unbeatable in my time in instilling discipline. Now, when I enter a lift, the millennials are too busy looking at their handphones, so don’t expect them to address you as “sir” or even greet you.

You’d be lucky if they called you “bro” and gave you an enthusiastic high-five, instead.

Would the proverbial one tight slap work today in curing disciplinary ills? Hardly likely.

By Wong Chun Wai

Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now the group's managing director/chief executive officer and formerly the group chief editor.

On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.

Saturday, January 13, 2018

Moving forward with affordable housing

One way to solve housing shortage problem is to build more houses.

"If we take a look at countries with commendable housing policies such as Singapore and Hong Kong, we notice that the government plays a very important role in building and ensuring a sufficient supply of housing for their people."

THE issue of affordable housing has been a hot potato for many countries, especially for a nation with a growing population and urbanisation like ours.

In my previous article, I mentioned that there was a growing shortage of affordable housing in our country according to Bank Negara governor Tan Sri Muhammad Ibrahim. The shortage is expected to reach one million units by 2020.

According to Bank of England governor Mark Carney, one of the most effective ways to address the issue is to build more houses. There are good examples in countries like United Kingdom, Australia and Singapore, which have 2.4, 2.6 and 3.35 persons per household respectively.

In comparison, the average persons per household in our country is 4.06 person, a ratio which Australia had already achieved in 1933! To improve the current ratio, we need to put more effort into building houses to bring prices down.

If we take a look at countries with commendable housing policies such as Singapore and Hong Kong, we notice that the government plays a very important role in building and ensuring a sufficient supply of housing for their people.

For example in Singapore, their Housing and Development Board (HDB) has built over one million flats and houses since 1960, to house 90% of Singaporeans in their properties. In Hong Kong, the government provides affordable housing for lower-income residents, with nearly half of the population residing in some form of public housing nowadays. The rents and prices of public housing are subsidised by the government and are significantly lower than for private housing.

To be on par with Australia (2.6 persons per household), our country needs a total of 8.6 million homes to house our urban population of 22.4 million people. In other words, we need an additional 3.3 million houses on top of our existing 5.3 million residential houses.

However, with our current total national housing production of about 80,000 units a year, it will take us more than 40 years to build 3.3 million houses! With household formation growing at a faster rate than housing production, we will still be faced with a housing shortage 40 years from now.

Therefore, even if the private sector dedicated all its current output to build affordable housing, it will still be a long journey ahead to produce sufficient houses for the nation. It is of course impossible for the private sector to do so as it will be running at a loss due to rising costs of land and construction.

In view of the above, the government has to shoulder the responsibility of building more houses for the rakyat due to the availability of resources owned by the government. Land, for example, is the most crucial element in housing development. As a lot of land resources are owned by government, they must offer these lands to relevant agencies or authorities to develop affordable housing.

I recall when I was one of the founding directors of the Selangor State Development Corp in 1970s, its main objectives was to build public housing for the rakyat.

However, today the corporation has also ventured into high end developments in order to subsidise its affordable housing initiatives. This will somehow distract them from focusing on the affordable housing sector.

Although government has rolled out various initiatives in encouraging affordable houses, it is also important for the authorities to constantly review the original objectives of the relevant housing agencies, such as the various State Economic Development Corporations, Syarikat Perumahan Negara Bhd, and 1 Malaysia People’s Housing Scheme, to ensure they have ample resources especially land and funding to continue their mission in building affordable housing.

A successful housing policy and easy access to affordable housing have a huge impact on the rakyat. It is hoped that our government escalates its effort in building affordable housing, which will enhance the happiness and well-being of the people, and the advancement of our nation.

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

By Alan Tong

‘Pakatan taking a step backwards’

PETALING JAYA: Pakatan Harapan’s choice of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as its candidate for prime minister is a step backwards for the Opposition grouping, said Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia Senior Fellow Sholto Byrnes.

In an opinion piece yesterday in The National, a newspaper published in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, Byrnes wrote that Pakatan’s choice of Dr Mahathir showed it did not have confidence in its own leaders.

He said it also reflected badly on Opposition supporters who were strongly against the Government, which Dr Mahathir led for 22 years.

“The notion that this represents change, let alone fresh blood, is laughable and reflects very poorly on the Opposition’s confidence not only in its younger cadres, but also in those who have always opposed the Barisan Nasional governing coalition,” said Byrnes.

He said many Opposition supporters and leaders were imprisoned by Dr Mahathir, who is currently Pakatan Harapan chairman, for no good reason other than that their vehement opposition inconvenienced him.

“They are entitled to feel bitter at having to kowtow to their former jailer,” he added.

Byrnes noted that Dr Mahathir, who is now 92, would become the world’s oldest leader if elected in the event that Pakatan Harapan wrests power from Barisan.

This, he said, would open Malaysia to international ridicule.

“Any who doubt that should imagine the incredulous laughter if either George H.W. Bush, aged 93, or Valery Giscard d’Estaing, a sprightly 91, were to seek to return to the presidencies of the United States and France respectively,” he said.

Commenting on Dr Mahathir’s Dec 30 apology for his past mistakes when he was prime minister, Byrnes pointed out that the former leader said sorry for nothing specific.

Dr Mahathir later suggested that it was Malay custom to apologise for possible past mistakes.

“Whatever charges might be laid against him over possible wrongdoing during the course of his premiership – and Opposition activists have in the past called for him to be put on trial for them – he is essentially unrepentant,” Byrnes wrote.

He said Dr Mahathir would never have switched to the Opposition if Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak had been prepared to act as Dr Mahathir’s tame supplicant and do everything his former boss wanted.

“For ever since he stood down from the premiership, Dr Mahathir has not been able to let go,” he said.

Recognising that it was Chinese faces who had the track record and visibility in the Opposition after Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s jailing, Byrnes said Pakatan was trying to hide them behind a facade of Malay politicians to win the crucial votes of the majority Malays.

“There are decent people in the Opposition, whom I have come to know personally. But this new top ticket drives a coach and horses through the Opposition’s old principles and thus through whatever moral authority it had,” he said.

Choosing a nonagenerian former PM to head Malaysia's opposition is a regressive move

- REUTERS/Lai Seng Sin/File Photo

THE announcement last weekend that Malaysia's opposition coalition, Pakatan Harapan (PH), had chosen Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as its candidate for prime minister made international headlines for two reasons. Firstly, Dr Mahathir has been the country's head of government before, for a record-breaking 22 years from 1981 to 2003, during which (and afterwards) his governing style was described as "authoritarian". With trademark sarcasm, the good doctor now one-ups that by conceding that in office he was nothing less than a "dictator". He is not renowned as an advocate for reformist democracy, which is what PH claims to stand for.

Secondly, he is now 92, which would make him the world's oldest leader if elected. Opposition columnists have ludicrously compared Malaysia, much praised by the World Bank, the IMF and other international bodies for its current government's reforms, prudent economic stewardship and excellent growth, with Zimbabwe. In fact, it is the latter's former president Robert Mugabe, a 93-year-old gerontocrat deposed ignominiously last year, who was so close to Dr Mahathir that the BBC's John Simpson once paid him the backhanded compliment of calling him "a kind of successful, Asian Robert Mugabe."

Malaysia's opposition is now effectively helmed by two leaders from 20 years ago: Dr Mahathir and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, the deputy he sacked in 1998 and humiliated after the latter was charged and then jailed for sodomy and corruption. Anwar is currently in prison on a second sodomy charge. His wife, Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, is nominally PH's candidate for deputy prime minister but should the opposition win, its plan is for Anwar to be given a royal pardon, enter parliament via a by-election and then take over from his former nemesis as prime minister.

The notion that this represents change, let alone fresh blood, is laughable and reflects very poorly on the opposition's confidence not only in its younger cadres (and by younger, that means 50 and 60-year-olds) but also in those who have always opposed the Barisan Nasional (BN) governing coalition, which has never lost power since independence.

Theirs has not been an easy road. Many were imprisoned by Dr Mahathir for no good reason other than that their vehement opposition inconvenienced him. They are entitled to feel bitter at having to kowtow to their former jailer. And while Dr Mahathir might still be very sharp – his tongue has lost none of its spikiness – they cannot be oblivious to the fact that proposing a man who could be 93 by the time he became prime minister again opens the country to international ridicule. (Any who doubt that should imagine the incredulous laughter if either George HW Bush, currently aged 93, or Valery Giscard d'Estaing, a sprightly 91, were to seek to return to the presidencies of the US and France, respectively.)

So why has Malaysia's opposition proposed him as their leader? Ah, but Dr Mahathir has changed his tune, some will say and has even recently apologised. Firstly, he said sorry for nothing specific and secondly, he then suggested it was Malay custom to apologise for possible past mistakes. However, whatever charges might be laid against him over possible wrongdoing during the course of his premiership – and opposition activists have in the past called for him to be put on trial for them – he is essentially unrepentant.

The late Karpal Singh, the formidable Indian national chairman of the mainly Chinese Democratic Action Party (DAP), would never have stood for it. His daughter and others with a long record in the opposition cannot stomach Dr Mahathir at the top and have said so vocally, as have some significant members of Anwar's People's Justice Party (PKR).

No wonder, for this is no alliance of principle. It is one of convenience. And if the current prime minister, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, had been prepared to act as Dr Mahathir's tame supplicant and do everything his former boss wanted, this would never have happened. For ever since he stood down from the premiership, Dr Mahathir has not been able to let go. First he undermined his handpicked successor, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, and then Najib – not for any malfeasance on their parts but for the crimes of not taking his "advice" as orders and for not indulging his dynastic ambitions.

Paradoxically, Dr Mahathir's appearance at the head of the opposition pact is actually a testament to how strong a position Najib has built over the last two and a half years. Recognising that it was Chinese faces who had the track record and the visibility in the opposition after Anwar's jailing, PH is now trying to hide them behind a facade of Malay politicians to win the crucial votes of the majority Malays.

But their new alliance is incoherent, with politicians having entirely contradictory records on matters of civil liberties and free speech, for instance – and, worse, deceitful ones, claiming that the goods and services tax that the current government has introduced could be removed, with no real plans for how they would replace the vital revenue.

There are decent people in the opposition, whom I have come to know personally. But this new top ticket drives a coach-and-horses through the opposition's old principles and thus through whatever moral authority they had.

Malaysia has a good government that has won accolades for its determined fight against violent extremism and its successful economic transformation programme. It deserves a better opposition. And there's a certain 92-year-old who deserves the gratitude of his people for services past – but also a retirement he has put off for far too long.

Source: by Sholto Byrnes, The Star

> Sholto Byrnes is a senior fellow at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia

PKR gives up 14 seats to Pribumi for GE14

PETALING JAYA: PKR has given up 14 constituencies it contested in the last general election to Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Pribumi) for the upcoming 14th General Election (GE14).

Pakatan Harapan’s approved distribution of parliamentary seats for GE14 shows PKR giving up seats in Selangor, Negri Sembilan, Johor, Perak, Kelantan and Pahang to Pribumi.

Notably, it has surrendered the Pekan seat – currently held by Umno president and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak – to Pribumi.

Notably, PKR has given up its Lumut parliamentary seat, currently held by Mohamad Imran Abd Hamid, to Amanah.

Since the departure of PAS from the now-defunct Pakatan Rakyat coalition, many of that party’s previously-contested seats were distributed evenly among Pribumi and Amanah, a PAS breakaway party.

Interestingly, Pribumi is the Pakatan Harapan party contesting seven seats in Kelantan, against five by Amanah and two by PKR.

Pribumi will have a strong presence in the Umno stronghold of Johor, fielding candidates in 10 seats.

Four of those seats (Sri Gading, Pengerang, Pontian and Muar) were previously contested by PKR, while Tanjung Piai was previously contested by DAP.

Johor’s Ayer Hitam seat, which was previously under DAP’s quota, will be contested by Amanah.

Pribumi is set to contest eight seats in Perak, after PKR gave up four seats there – Tambun, Bagan Serai, Tapah and Pasir Salak.

PKR is also slated to contest the Sungei Siput seat now held by PSM’s Dr Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj. Dr Jeyakumar won the seat under the PKR banner in the last election.

Apart from Johor, Pribumi also has strong representation in Perak (eight seats), Kelantan (seven), Pahang (six) and Kedah (six).

It is believed that Pribumi is thought to have a better chance against Umno in those seats, compared to Amanah.

Some instances of give and take were seen in the planned parliamentary seat distribution.

Amanah in turn has given up the prized Titiwangsa seat to Pribumi, leaving it with no potential representation in Kuala Lumpur.

Related Link:

Dr Mahathir has hijacked Pakatan, says Liow

righways

Rightways - Sowing the seeds of Success: Think Global, Act Local; Change & Grow Rich; Sow as You Reap & Soar High! Richard Tan MBA(UK), BCA(NZ), AMA(USA),MMIM

Thursday, January 11, 2018

Penang undersea tunnel project scrutinized by the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC)

In troubled waters: An artist’s impression showing where the tunnel project will start on the island.

Land swap under MACC scrutiny

PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian-Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) probe into the controversial Penang undersea tunnel is focused on land swaps that were made for the feasibility and detailed design study which has yet to be completed.

Sources said investigators are scouring documents involving two plots of land – Lot 702 and Lot 713 in Bandar Tanjung Pinang – with a size of 1.48ha and 2.31ha respectively.

The value of Lot 702 is around RM135mil while Lot 713 is around RM160mil.

It is learnt that both parcels of land have since been mortgaged to banks to obtain financing. The state government has also authorised planning permission on both parcels of lands.

“The state government paid the consultant for the feasibility studies by means of two land swaps. The cost for the feasibility study is around RM305mil.

“It has become an issue on why the study cost was inflated so much when it should have been an estimated RM60mil,” sources said, adding that determining the inflation and the reason behind it were among the challenges faced by the investigating team.

The sources also said that the graft-busters have their sights targeted on “somebody” who has been enjoying kickbacks and entertainment from the deal.

The feasibility and detailed design study is for the 7.2km undersea tunnel connecting Gurney Drive on the island to Bagan Ajam in Seberang Perai.

It is part of the RM6.3bil mega project comprising a 10.53km North Coastal Paired Road (NCPR) from Tanjung Bungah to Teluk Bahang, the 5.7km Air Itam–Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Expressway bypass and the 4.075km Gurney Drive–Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Expressway bypass.

Yesterday, the investigating team also questioned four officers from several state government agencies on the land swaps.

Sources added that the anti-graft agency also raided a property agency office in Penang and carted various documents away. It is learnt the chief executive officer of the company was not around during the raid.

MACC deputy chief commissioner Datuk Seri Azam Baki said his investigating team has yet to call in any witnesses for the case as they are still conducting a thorough study on the seized documents.

He added that the officers would still be obtaining more documents from the companies involved and also from the state government.

Two bosses of construction firms held for six days as MACC investigates project

Datuks’ remanded in tunnel probe

https://youtu.be/k3oDrOpBe78

Taken away: Officers escorting one of the men out of the courthouse in Putrajaya.

MACC digs deeper

A swap involving two parcels of land worth close to RM300mil is in the spotlight as the MACC intensifies investigations into claims of corruption in Penang’s undersea tunnel project and several accompanying highway projects. Two ‘Datuks’ have been remanded and several key officials in companies and agencies involved in the project have been questioned. But Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng says the project will go on.

GEORGE TOWN: Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng says the undersea tunnel project, now the subject of a corruption investigation, will proceed unless there is a court order to stop it.

He said he was baffled by yet another investigation into the project as the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) had been conducting an investigation into the RM6.3bil mega project comprising the tunnel and three other highways since 2016.

“What are they investigating now? Is it because of the looming general election?

“The project was awarded via an open tender overseen by international accounting firm KPMG.

“Still, I have instructed everyone involved to give their full cooperation to the MACC in its investigation as we have nothing to hide,” said Lim at a press conference at Komtar yesterday.

On Tuesday, graft-busters arrested two “Datuks” involved in the controversial Penang undersea tunnel project to help in investigations into claims of corruption.

The duo, who were picked up in Putrajaya and Penang, have since been remanded for six days to facilitate the probe.

The anti-graft agency raided the offices of four state government agencies – the Penang Public Works Department, Penang State Secretary, Penang Office of Lands and Mines and Penang Valuation and Property Services Department – and three property development and construction companies – Ewein Zenith Sdn Bhd, 555 Capital Sdn Bhd and Consortium Zenith Construction Sdn Bhd’s Penang office.

MACC officers also questioned several officers in charge of the respective agencies and companies. Sources familiar with the investigation said the probe into the undersea tunnel project was also zooming in on land swaps.

Ewein Zenith is a joint-venture vehicle of Ewein Land Sdn Bhd and Consortium Zenith BUCG Sdn Bhd.

The latter is a Malaysia-China joint venture that was awarded the RM6.3bil mega project to build the 7.2km undersea tunnel connecting Gurney Drive on the island to Bagan Ajam in Seberang Prai, a 10.53km North Coastal Paired Road (NCPR) from Tanjung Bungah to Teluk Bahang, the 5.7km Air Itam–Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Expressway bypass and the 4.075km Gurney Drive–Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Expressway bypass.

Consortium Zenith BUCG changed its name to Consortium Zenith Construction Sdn Bhd on Jan 18 last year after the withdrawal of Beijing Urban Construction Group (BUCG).

In a related development, Vertice Bhd (formerly known as Voir Holdings Bhd) said the current investigation by the MACC will not impact the progress of the undersea tunnel project.

It said the project was an integral component of the Penang Transport Master Plan and that the role of Consortium Zenith Construction as the main contractor would remain.

Consortium Zenith Construction is a 13.2% associate company of Vertice. PUTRAJAYA: Two high-ranking bosses of development and construction companies have been remanded for six days as graft investigators continue their probe of the Penang undersea tunnel project. The two “Datuks” were held here and in Penang before being brought to court.

A 59-year-old businessman was brought to a magistrate’s court here at 9.40am yesterday and remanded for six days until Monday to help with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) investigation.

Magistrate Fatina Amyra Abdul Jalil allowed MACC prosecutors’ remand application although the Datuk’s lawyer Hamidi Mohd Noh objected, arguing that there was no need for his client to be held.

“I told the court that my client has been cooperative with the MACC.

“I would also like to point out that my client is innocent and his remand is only to assist the investigation,” he told reporters after the proceedings.

The MACC had initially asked for the Datuk to be held for seven days but the magistrate only allowed six days.

He was arrested at the MACC headquarters at around 8.45pm on Tuesday after being called for his statement to be recorded.

In George Town, another Datuk was brought to court for a remand application at 11.40am.

He was handcuffed and wearing MACC’s orange lock-up T-shirt with black pants when he arrived at the courthouse escorted by MACC officers.

The 49-year-old appeared calm and smiled to reporters but did not say anything before he was led inside.

Deputy registrar Muhammad Azam Md Eusoff granted a six-day remand order and the businessman was escorted out of the courthouse about 30 minutes later.

The case is being investigated under Section 16(a)(B) of the MACC Act 2009 for bribery.

It is also believed that one of the Datuks remanded yesterday tested positive for drugs.

On Tuesday, MACC personnel raided the offices of four state government agencies – the Penang Public Works Department, Penang State Secretary, Penang Office of Lands and Mines and Penang Valuation and Property Services Department – and three property development and construction companies believed to be related to the case.

The project involves a plan to bore a 6.5km tunnel below the seabed to connect north Butterworth and the island.

The tunnel is to connect Bagan Ajam, a mature suburb of about 5km from the Butterworth ferry terminal, to the end of Gurney Drive near the Pangkor Road junction on the island.

Connected to the project are three paired roads to be built on the island as a traffic dispersal system to cope with the traffic that the tunnel would bring to Gurney Drive, which is already densely developed.

The three paired roads are from Teluk Bahang to Tanjung Bungah, from Pangkor Road to the Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Expressway – part of this stretch will be underground – and from Air Itam to the expressway near the Penang bridge.

To finance the construction, projected to cost RM6.3bil, the state government is giving payment in kind of 44.5ha of state land to the contractor, Consortium Zenith Construction.

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng told the state assembly in 2014 that the land was valued at RM1,300 per sq ft and the project, ending with the tunnel, is scheduled for completion in 2025.

It was reported last March that RM135mil worth of land had been given to the contractor as payment to fund the feasibility studies and detailed studies.

A public-listed company announced in January 2016 that it had secured an agreement to buy 20.2ha of the land from the contractor over 10 years at RM1,300 per sq ft.

It is believed that the MACC is looking into why the state government allowed the contractor to presell state land despite delays in the project construction.

MACC to make more arrests - Penang undersea tunnel project

More arrests are likely in the investigations into claims of corruption in Penang’s RM6.3bil project involving an undersea tunnel and three highways after MACC officers raided 12 more places and took statements from a dozen witnesses. They are looking into an agreement on payments to the concessionaires but Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng says there was no wrongdoing and that not a single sen has been paid for the undersea tunnel project.

PETALING JAYA: Investigators looking into the allegation of corruption in the Penang undersea tunnel project are said to be thoroughly looking through the papers related to the contract for the feasibility study for the undersea tunnel.

“The agreement looks suspicious and the feasibility study for the mega project does not exceed RM305mil as announced by the state government,” sources said.

“The state government might have made a payment which is way different than the real value of the study,” they said.

On Thursday, The Star reported that the graft-busters were zooming in on the land swaps of two plots of land in Bandar Tanjung Pinang.

The sources also say that the reclaimed land for the land swaps were of high value for development. It is believed that the state JKR has set the value for the study and that allegations of misappropriation were raised when the value that was paid far exceeded the initial value.

To finance the construction of the tunnel and three paired roads on the island, projected to cost RM6.3bil, the state government is giving payment in kind of 44.5ha of state land to the contractor, Consortium Zenith Construction.

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng had told the state assembly in 2014 that the land was valued at RM1,300 per sq ft and the project, ending with the tunnel, is scheduled for completion in 2025.

It was reported last March that RM135mil worth of land had been given to the contractor as payment to fund the feasibility studies and detailed studies. However, the study has not been completed although the land has been handed over.

A public- listed company announced in January 2016 that it had secured an agreement to buy 20.2ha of the land from the contractor over 10 years at RM1,300 per sq ft.

It is believed that the MACC is looking into why the state government allowed the contractor to presell state land despite delays in the project construction and the study.

Source: The Star Malaysia reports by MAZWIN NIK ANIS and INTAN AMALINA MOHD ALI

Related stories:

Feasibility study and designs cost RM305mil

Wee: Why is a fashion firm an SPV shareholder?

MACC probe shifts to bidding process - Nation | The Star Online

MACC looking at how RM305mil was paid - Nation | The Star Online

MACC focussing on Penang tunnel project studies, sources say ...

Lim: Not a single sen paid for Penang undersea tunnel project ...

No money paid for project, says Lim - Nation

12 spots raided in tunnel probe

Undersea tunnel land swap deal fishy, says MACC

Guan Eng: Project will go on unless there’s a court order to stop

Vertice, Ewein shares down following Penang arrests - Business News

Ewein MD remanded by MACC - theSundaily