My three questions (No.31 to No. 33 on the 11th day in the current series) to Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat on the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal today are:
-
Who was the MCA President most responsible for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal – Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik or Datuk Seri Chong Kong Choy, who were Ong’s predecessors as Transport Minister?
Furthermore, among the MCA Port Klang Authority (PKA) Chairmen from the start of the ill-fated PKFZ project, who was the one who must bear the greatest blame – Tan Sri Ting Chew Peh, Datuk Yap Pian Hon or Datuk Seri Chor Chee Heung or were all three blameless?
-
PKA Chairman Datuk Lee Hwa Beng said in the press today that he had a good team in both the boards of PKA and PKFZ to monitor the developments in the PKFZ issue.
He said: “We have representatives from the Ministry of Transport, Treasury, Economic Planning Unit (EPU), Malaysian Industrial Development Authority and also the Selangor government in both the boards (to monitor and study developments in the PKFZ and the problems affecting it).”
If the board members of PKA and PKFZ had always been such “good team”, then could how PKA’s accumulated healthy reserves of about RM500 million a decade ago could be so run down completely to the extent that the PKA is today technically insolvent as a result of the ballooning of the PKFZ from RM1.1 billion under Liong Sik in 2002 to RM4.6 billion under Kong Choy and now RM7.453 billion under Ong, and heading towards a grand total of RM12.453 billion rip-off?
- The Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) held two meetings in 2007, Sept. 6 and Sept. 25, on PKFZ and made various observations and recommendations. Can Ong list a full report of the actions that had been taken by the Transport Ministry, PKA and the Port Klang Free Zone Sdn. Bhd (PKFZSB) arising from the PAC report, or was the PAC investigations, observations and recommendations just a big waste of time and public funds as there was just no follow-up actions?
#1 by k1980 on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 11:57 am
Who was the MCA President most responsible for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal – Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik or Datuk Seri Chong Kong Choy?
Just check their family fortunes and bank accounts and you will get the answer.
#2 by frankyapp on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 1:00 pm
Both are equally responsible and irrespective of who’s pocket is fullest.It’s weird how on earth that people who involved and benefited fron the 12.5 billion scandal can get away and still be given the national’s highest tittle.
#3 by grace on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 1:24 pm
Ling Liong Sik is responsible!
Chan too should not be let off the hook!
MCA, Conngrats!!! Your preseidents had done very, very well!!!
#4 by YK Leong on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 1:30 pm
Here are the answers to your questions 31 to 33:-
1. Apa nama, apa nama, apa nama …………..
2. The money just disappears like what David Copperfield does even though we have an accountant by profession and knows the business. It is just taxpayers’ money lah.
3. I can’t recall and remember. Kepala pusing.
#5 by House Victim on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 1:34 pm
Since the Selangor Government is mentioned as being a Representative to the Boards of PKA & PKFZ, any comment or saying from the Selangor Government?
#6 by albert308 on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 1:46 pm
The former transport who sign a letter of guarantee for bond loan on government side caused disaster for the nation. That is the worst MCA minister in history.
Now, the new PKA looks over outspoken. We must be reminded of his track record as former Subang Jaya assemblyman; PIRATE OF LAND. Potentially the worst PKA Chairman in years to come as the saga has not ended.
#7 by monsterball on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 2:35 pm
Do not forget….behind those two…..Mahathiir kept both eyes closed.
#8 by ekompute on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 2:58 pm
“… kept both eyes closed”
I think the correct phrase is that he “gave them his blessings”. How many people were pulled up by the government for corruption during Mahathir’s 22 years rule? Anyone have the figures? Either there was hardly any corruption during his rule or ….
#9 by ekompute on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 3:01 pm
“Who was the MCA President most responsible for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal – Liong Sik or Kong Choy?”
Hint: Does Kong Choy has a son who could afford to buy two public companies in one go?
#10 by waterfrontcoolie on Tuesday, 9 June 2009 - 11:30 pm
I think Monsterball hit it on the head! Both Ling and Chan served under the most celebrated PM of Malaysia but he didn’t ‘know a thing’! maybe Chan’s son is still too young to do so!!
Anyway, the procedures at insitutions like PKA have been in practice since the Statutory enactment, for this to happen someone much higher than PKA had to ‘short circuit it’! Of course based on the timing in the report, both Ling & Chan ta’bolih ta’terlibat; and the Chairman would be Ting with Yap as the ‘reluctant’ bridesmaid! Of course Chor happens to sit astride the fence when the second guarantee was undertaken.
#11 by boh-liao on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 - 12:11 am
Y would the BN politicians care?
Just like Muhyiddin Yassin, LOL an Umno heavyweight,
who did not know that students need not pass
the English paper to get a Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia certificate
What does he really know?
#12 by House Victim on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 - 1:50 pm
albert308 Says:
Yesterday at 13: 46.19
“We must be reminded of his track record as former Subang Jaya assemblyman; PIRATE OF LAND.”
Correct, correct!!
1. How can HE approved and turned the Club house of Wangsa Baiduri Condo project into the Hotel – Holiday Villa when he was Councilor for MPPJ?
2. How can he continued to approved subsequent building as Condo when the club facilities there was knowingly (to him) that was gone?
3. How can he approved the Landscaped Garden as part of the common area when the land does not belong to the Developer?
4. How can he declared the Landscaped Garden in the Condo being a Public Park in 2006?
5. How can he continued to approve the Wangsa Baiduri with “recreation land to be allocated for the Town house” since 1990 until the last part of land in Wangsa Baiduri was gone?
6. How can he manipulated the Approval of the project for the last 20 more years allowing more than 1700 units to be built when the quota was only 1429?
7. How can he re-approve an abandoned 17-story 288 units building (framework built up to 17 story in 1996) to be re-approved to 30 story 0f 385 units in 2003? (Subang Meridian to Subang Boulevard)
8. How can he called up an “Objection Hearing” for Subang Ria Park when he knows pretty well that it is a Town Park having been handed over to MPPJ in 198?? (when he was Councilor for MPPJ and then Assemblyman for MPSJ)?
9. How can he approved carpark with part of Land from that Subang Ria Park when it should be public land?
10. How can he not providing even the Town Park for Subang Jaya (Subang Ria Park) for the last 25 more years when he was Councilor in MPPJ and Assemblyman for MPSJ (until last GE)?
11. How can he keep silent or defending for the land title of Subang Ria Park wrongly issued to SIME UEP and even providing chance for them to a Public objection with representatives appointed by MPSJ?
12. How can he keep silent and ignoring the fact that Wangsa Baiduri was built on part of the Water Retention Pond for Subang Jaya?
13. What kind of re-activating program he had done to those abandoned project in USJ – such Newgate 21…? I believe PWC was the liquidator or Auditor for “riving” the project!!
And, then the new coming Assemblyperson has no way to handle his mess???http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showthread.php?t=23559
14. How can those Greenland under State or Municipal Structural Plan in SJ be approved for commercial and residential projects in SJ? And, some of the reserved green land for those SS were turned into Buildings?
15. How can he allowed Highway to go into the Municipal without a fair voting within those district concerned and allowing cross-districts voting?
………………………………………………………………..etc, etc..
DOES ALL THESE QUALIFIED HIM TO BE CHAIRMAN OF PKA? AND ASSEMBLYMAN AND PUBLIC SERVANTS?
On the Housing matter, OKT cannot be skipped as “sinner” for the Housing Industry that had done much more damages than the PKFZ projects with so many abandoned projects with Housing Developer Act and Strata Title Act renewed many many times but with more conflicts and abuses!!
What credits can MCA claimed to have being a Political party for Malaysia?
#13 by ekin on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 - 7:16 pm
LLS SUDAH LARI! Laught Out Loud!
#14 by Taxidriver on Thursday, 11 June 2009 - 1:20 am
Mahathir likes to give his views and comments on almost every matter. Why is he so quiet on this one??????
#15 by ekin on Thursday, 11 June 2009 - 2:34 am
SAMA SAMA ADA TAHI MA HA HA HA