你爸爸或公公的地要被政府收回了吗？

The Motion was defeated by brute majority of BN:
MOTION by Wong Ho Leng, ADUN for Bukit Assek, Sibu:
That safeguards and better tenure be provided to landowners in that all leases/land titles in Sarawak be automatically and unconditionally extended or renewed for 99 years prior to their expiry, that the acquisition process be deemed automatically cancelled in the event that the land be not acquired within 2 years of the proposed acquisition, and that reasonable compensation according to market price be expeditiously paid to land owners on acquisition.
Tuan Speaker,
The Motion standing in my name has 3 parts. I will move them in turn.
(1) Extension/Renewal of Term of Title
Land ownership is a fundamental right enshrined in the Federal Constitution. Land is the people’s root.
Statistics
About 20 years ago, when the State election was held in April 15-16, 1987 in conjunction with the Ming Court incident, no political party bothered to talk about renewal or extension of term of land titles. This was simply because people thought that the land leases would expire 20 years down the road. The impact was not so immediate, so to speak. No one was worried then.
But now, 20 years later, landowners are concerned of their leases expiring.
20 years is not a long time. It flies like a flashy twinkle of an eye. In terms of a person’s life, it is scary to ask how many 20 years one has.
Therefore I implore upon you all to do something before counting how many 20 years are left in us. Politicians come and go, but the term of the land leases are shortening, year by year. The concerns of the landowners are growing, day by day.
Almost all of us in this august House are landowners. To that extent I declare my interest. Our parents, siblings, next of kins, relatives, friends and enemies are also landowners. Do we care for them? When we are able to, please leave a legacy that we are doing something concrete for the future generations.
Let us go to statistics. They do not lie.
Most land tiles in Sarawak are for a term of 60 years.
As of December 2005, 171,157 land titles with term 60 years or less had been issued in Sarawak. This represents 43% of all land titles issued in Sarawak. Compared this with neighbouring Sabah and Peninsular Malaysia, very few titles are issued for 60 years.
By the end of 2010, 6,584 land titles will expire;
By the end of 2015, another 30,111 land titles will expire;
By the end of 2020, a further 21,091 land titles will expire;
By the end of 2025, another 86,648 land titles will expire.
This means that by the end of 2025, less than 20 years from now, 144,434 land titles will expire out of 171,157 issued. This represents a whopping 84.4% of the 60-years titles.
Landowners are from Chinese, Malays, Melanaus, Dayaks communities. It would be totally inhuman not to understand the worries of the landowners.
No Automatic Renewal
In the Dewan Undangan Negeri sitting in July this year, the Minister had said that there would be no automatic extension, but that the people must apply for extension and pay a premium.
In May 20 2006, SUPP suffered a heavy loss. They put part of the blame on the land issue. Yet, they took no concrete action. It was more than 6 months after their electoral defeat that it decided to set up a task force to collect information on land. It was reported in the news on 19th November 2006 that the task force will submit a memorandum to the Chief Minister.
There is no need to submit a memorandum to the Chief Minister. As elected representatives, you can say your piece to the Chief Minister right in this uppermost sanctum of the legislative chamber.
Tell the Chief Minister the plight, worries and concern of the people.
Tell the Chief Minister what do the people want. I want to hear you say it too.
I am conveying these worries to the Chief Minister now. This is not my first time doing so. We all can do it.
A caring Chief Minister will have to listen. That is the very essence of the existence of this House. But we should not blame the Chief Minister alone. If all our elected wakil rakyat had transcribed the people’s worries and concern to the Chief Minister, I do not believe that he won’t listen.
Premium
Apart from having to pay RM200.00 per acre to extend the term of the agricultural land, landowners do not have any idea how much they will have to pay to obtain extension to their terms for commercial, industrial and residential land.
I have no doubt that the Government had wanted the people to pay hefty premium to renew or extend their land title term. On 20th January, 2005 during a meet the community leaders session in Sibu the premium rates were announced in the presence of the SUPP leaders in Sibu. The rates as announced, to be based on land value, were as follows:
Purpose Town Land Suburban Land Country Land Commercial 61% 45% 25%Industrial 61% 45% 25%Office 55% 45% 25%Recreation 53% 42% 25%Residential 50% 40% 25%Agricultural 230 per acre 230 per acre 200 per acre
We should not blame the people for becoming worried about their properties. They spent so much money buying them. Yet, over time, they have to pay the hefty premium, failing which they will lose everything, including the house on the land.
Energies for People But Not for Self
Some of the component parties of the Barisan Nasional could spend time and energies on internal strife. But is solving the people’s immediate concern, plight and worries over their land their immediate concern?
About 20 years ago, we had the Ming Court. Not too long ago, we had witnessed the infamous struggles in SNAP and PBDS that led to their de-registration. Then we have this political rift in PRS. As if political dramas are part of the day, we have this massive and messy political bickering in the SUPP. The Deputy Chief Minister II said yesterday that political collision is bad enough. It cannot be wrong.
As a part of the Government, your job should be to look into solving the problems of the people. Please do not be involved in political collision courses and political bickering. The Chief Minister in his Budget speech yesterday said that political bickerings and arguments do not benefit anybody.
It was during these political bickerings in the SUPP youths that talks of signature campaign to hold the Special Delegate Conference surfaced. Meaningful signature campaigns are good and must be encouraged. They bring concrete message to the relevant parties.
That was why DAP started a signature campaign throughout Sarawak last month. We are seeking more safeguards and security to land ownership. Thousands of letters of appeal to amend the Land Code had been sent by post to the Chief Minister’s office. We have brought many of these letters here, all properly signed by the members of the public. The letters show that the people want their concern over land solved.
While on the ground, we see the frenzy desire to see a change to the Land Code to give landowners more safeguard and security to their land.
I urge the Government not to play ostrich to people’s demand.
The SUPP could hold many meetings to discuss the MBKS mayor issue, the issue over who was to be groomed to be the Deputy Chief Minister etc. Much time and energy were spent by both camps to demand the Deputy Chief Minister to retire or to let Minister of Finance II to take the seat as Chairman of Forward Team etc. Why similar time and energies and aggression could not be spent to discuss the plight of the people, including their concern over land ownership or to demand the cabinet led by the Chief Minister to amend the Land Code?
The message I intend to convey is there. There are urgent problems faced by the people. Tackle these problems. As a part of the Government, that is your job. Do not waste time in political bickerings and arguments.
Instead of demanding to change the law to provide for better safeguard and security to land ownership, the SUPP leadership in Sibu could hold emergency meetings to discuss disciplinary actions against one of their Assistant Ministers for intending to form Dudong branch. On 29th October 2006 the Borneo Post flashed a headline “Shock over Dudong Branch”. It was reported that all the Chairmen of 16 units of SUPP Sibu branch, together with their members, turned up in full force to show their solidarity. Solidarity! For what? To deliberate on what sort of disciplinary action to be taken against Dr Soon Choon Teck! Since the formation of SUPP in 1959 has there been a solidarity meeting by all units in SUPP Sibu branch to deliberate on the plight of the people and to discuss the land issue?
Legacy of Change for Better
I must record that DAP fully agrees with the Chief Minister that there is something we share in common, that is, our desire to see Sarawak move ahead.
But many times I heard that it was the Chief Minister who had been slow to allow the present laws to be amended so that lease terms are automatically extended before they expire.
Rather than blaming one person, I believe that it is the Government that is to blame. I understand that any decision of the cabinet is made collectively.
No one can hold on power for life. After 22 years as the Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir Mohamad had to hand over the helm to his successor.
Our Chief Minister had been in power for a longer time. You will have to hand over your chair to somebody else one day.
Before you leave the office, the Chief Minister should consider leaving a legacy which can be the subject of praise by the future generations. You should leave no chance that you were the bad boy for change. Let me elaborate.
The 2004 Parliamentary election was fought on the “New Prime Minister factor”. Campaign materials especially in Chinese depicted the new Prime Minister as modern Justice Pau that would leave no stone unturned to weed out corruption. Implicit in this campaign theme is the message that the former administration under Tun Mahathir Mohamad was corrupt and unclean, thereby needing Justice Pau. The Barisan Nasional made history by reaping an unprecedented win as a result.
When the Corruption Index was released, it shows that our country’s ranking had fallen 5 places from 39 last year to 44 this year. Who was blamed? In Parliament, de facto law minister Nazri Abdul Aziz said that this dismal performance is attributable to the previous administration.
Therefore, do not leave room for the future administration to possibly call you a bad guy. When debating something concerning land, I had heard one or two members of the Barisan Nasional blaming our former TYT and not the present administration. This is not fair because though in the same Party they did not dare to make suggestion to improve when the former TYT was the Chief Minister.
I believe that safeguards and better tenure must be provided to landowners. I believe that it is only right that all leaseholds in Sarawak be automatically and unconditionally renewed or extended for 99 years prior to their expiry.
The mechanism for automatic renewal or extension can be done by the stroke of a pen, to amend the Land Code.
My humble suggestion to the Chief Minister is this. Do something now. Amend the Land Code to provide better safeguard for the landowners. They will appreciate you. Leave a legacy that you care and love the Sarawak people. If you have already cared, there is no harm if you can care even more.
(2) Acquisition Process
The second part of my motion relates to acquisition process. I believe that it is necessary that the acquisition process be deemed automatically cancelled in the event that the land is not acquired within 2 years of the proposed acquisition.
10 years ago in this august House I suggested that in order to cater for proper planning, perhaps the acquisition process should only lapse after 3 years. Now, 10 years on, I must confess that I must assume that computerisation and the advent of ICT should help expedite all acquisition processes while at the same time cutting down bureaucratic red tapes. In order that we may not be seen to lag behind other developed states, we should cut down this process to 2 years, so that acquisition process must be deemed to be automatically cancelled in the event that the land is not acquired within 2 years of the proposed acquisition.
I heard some honourable members speak on this issue before in this august House. That is not enough. Where is the policy in black and white? The Land Code should be amended to ensure that this is possible.
Let us remind ourselves of history. Politicians should better believe that historical records are there to oversee us. Let me read from an election manifesto of PERMAS-PBDS distributed in the April 1987 election. It says in paragraph 7:
(a) Compensation for land acquired for Government purposes must be based on market price at the time of payment of compensation and NOT when notice to acquire under s.47 of the Land Code is issued.
(b) The powers granted under s.47 will not be abused. We will not, for example, place an entire town under s.47, as the Abdul Taib Regime did in Lawas.
(c) Notice of intention to acquire land under s.47 of the Land Code shall automatically lapse after 3 years if the land has not been acquired by Government within that period.
(d) Steps will be taken to ensure that repeated notices under s.47 of the Land Code, contrary to (c) above, will not be permitted.
(e) We will amend the Land Code to give effect to these proposals and to remedy weaknesses exploited by the present regime.
The group that issued this election manifesto had been called political pirates. But that was history. Elected leaders of this group had re-joined the Barisan Nasional and merged with them. What has been done? The Land Code had not been amended.
Do something now. DAP stands together with the Government to do it. Landowners must get more protection.
(3) Compensation
The 3rd part of my motion concerns compensation. I believe that laws must be made so that reasonable compensation according to market price must be expeditiously paid to landowners on acquisition. Otherwise, release the land to freedom.
I do not believe that any one of us has any qualms about compensation for land acquisition to be based on current market price.
The problem is, we have cases where the Government has determined that certain land be acquired, but despite the waiting, compensation is not forthcoming. I have a recent example. On 17th January, 2003, the Minister of Planning and Resource Management made a decision to acquire 29 parcels of land in Sibu for the establishment of Lau King Howe Polyclinic (Replacement) and Medical Laboratory cum Store, Sibu. Section 48 Gazette notification was made vide No.989 of 20th March, 2003.
By letter dated 27th October, 2004 the Superintendent of Lands and Surveys, Sibu Division, gave notice that “the State intends to take possession of the land” under the provisions of section 48 of the Land Code.
All these were prime land located at Jalan Tun Abang Haji Openg, less than a stone’s throw away from Sibu town center. The Land and Survey Department offered to compensate the landowners RM12,000.00 per point. Yet, the independent valuation says that the land was worth RM18,000.00 per point. This is another instant where it is clear that compensation has not been based on market price, at least from the valuers’ and landowners’ perspective.
Not much went further than this. Then on 24th February, 2006, the Land and Survey Department in Sibu wrote to inform the following:
“For your information, this office is now awaiting for the requisite fund from Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia to proceed with the acquisition. ... Todate, ... Jabatan Kesihatan Negeri Sarawak has not made final decision to acquire the site or otherwise”.
All these while, the landowners were kept at limbo and waiting. They could not sell, charge or do anything else with their land, even if they need them for business, medical treatment or for children’s education. Since the date of the gazette notice, the compensation money has not come.
This process is not fair to landowners. Because the land had been designated for acquisition, the transferability is compromised, and even more so, the sale price will be reduced or jeopardised. The forced sale price won’t be high.
I believe that it is important and it is only fair that once acquisition is notified, compensation must be paid out expeditiously. Otherwise, release the land to freedom.
(4) MOTION FOR ALL
I appreciate to be given this opportunity to move this Motion. This motion is moved for all. It can be for members of this House. It can be for heads of departments and officers sitting in this chambers. It can be for those seated in the public gallery. This motion is for all landowners of Sarawak. It is for all anak-anak Sarawak, who are honest in believing that extension of land title is for their good and that of their children and their children.
Even for those who hate me, this motion is also for them.
It was reported in the Borneo Post on 16th November, 2006 that Minister of Tourism and Finance II said during the 55th anniversary of the Petty Traders and Meradong and Sibu Division at Sibu Civic Centre that DAP “mentioned a lot of problems, but they ask others to solve them”.
How sad, this irresponsible statement made by this Minister.
DAP raised problems because they are the people’s problems. DAP raised problems because the Government had not looked after or solve these, the people’s problems. DAP raised problems because it is the duty of the Government to solve these problems. Please understand that it is the Government’s duty to solve the people’s problem. It is not the role of the Opposition. Please go and read the books on politics and democracy. Even the Government under Communist China knows that it is the Government’s job to solve the people’s problem, what more a Government elected by the people, for the people, of the people?
The People’s problems are solved by the heart, with a heart, a heart with conscience. I pray that you all have both the heart and the conscience.
I am now bringing the land problem to this august House. I feel duty bound to. I am asking that this problem be solved by all of us. As legislators, we can do it, and most importantly, we have to do it.
We all had witnessed the making of history in May 2006. Do not ignore history. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
(5) CONSCIENCE OVER WHIP
Our state either moves forward or backward. We move forward if as legislators we have hearts and conscience for the people. We either evolve or regress, adapt or stagnate. We regress if we are mere robots.
In order to move forward, we must hear the just demands of the people. We must be positive, democratic, mature and judicious.
Do not feel that this is an Opposition Motion so it has to be defeated. All of us stand equally before the law. Vote according to your conscience. Be YBs with conscience for the betterment of the lives of the people.
Do not reduce this house into an impotent debating club or a rubber stamp of the executive. That will make a democratic election meaningless, making this august house a lame duck. This lame duck overlay would be immensely bureaucratic, immensely destabilising, immensely infamous.
Do not jettison this democratic institution as a lame duckling. All that we say in this august house are recorded for posterity.
Be a part of this legacy to protect the landowners. Engineer a sustainable change by all our efforts. Learn from the election of May 20 and change course. The time is now.
I beg to therefore move.