Tan Sri Dato' Seri Diraja Ramli bin Ngah Talib
Appointed from 22.11.2004 - Present
Read here Open Letter from Lawyer Malik Imtiaz
"... Regrettably, the trend of REJECTIONS of Opposition motions by the Speaker (of the Dewan Rakyat) is ALARMING.
The smooth, efficient and efficacious operation of the Dewan is a birthright of ALL Malaysians and a vital aspect of the governance of this country.
Any interference with this process is an injury to the nation and to Malaysians.
The continued rejection of motions vital to a clear understanding of the state of this nation is a process that can only lead us to ruination.
The Speaker appears to have overlooked the beneficiaries of his trusteeship.
He is the representative and spokesman of Parliament in its collective capacity and is the chief custodian of its powers and privileges (M P Jain).
He IS the steward of the Dewan Rakyat for ALL Malaysians.
Let there be open and fair debate in the Dewan Rakyat, Mr Speaker, Sir."
-Malik Imtiaz Shah
-Malik Imtiaz Shah
" Mr Speaker, Sir
We read and hear a lot about the Speaker of the Dewan Rakyat refusing to allow debate on motions moved by the Opposition.
The rejection of the urgent motion by the Opposition to debate the Port Klang Free Trade issue ( and here in Malaysiakini )was the latest casualty of a perhaps overly enthusiastic exercise of control by the Speaker.
This time the reason advanced (as reported by Malaysiakini) was that as the matter was being looked into by the Government, there was no need for a debate on the subject in the Dewan.
I believe that most, if not all, the motions moved by the Opposition in recent times have been on important matters, for the principle involved or otherwise.
From sexist slurs to questioning the use or abuse of national funds, the matters raised could not be seen to be other than relevant to the national interest.
I say this NOT because I support the Opposition but because of the significance of these issues, especially in a system like ours.
The lack of transparency and the continued expectation on the part of Government that Malaysians accept the validity of its actions simply for it being the Government makes it all that much more important that the truth emerges.
The Dewan Rakyat represents the essence of government of the Federation. It is not just a legislative chamber. It is from its members that Cabinet evolves. It is in the Dewan that the deliberation and discussion by elected representatives so essential to the balanced governance of this nation is intended to happen.
For this reason, parliamentarians are accorded immunity and privilege from criminal and civil sanction. Through frank and open debates, and the truth that emerges from these debates, it is intended that a certain measure of control be brought over Executive function, a control balanced by the vigilance of an independent judiciary.
It is through the Dewan that control over public finance is intended to be exercised.
Were it otherwise, there would be arbitrary exercises of power.
Regrettably, when viewed in this context, the trend of rejections of Opposition motions by the Speaker is alarming.
Bearing in mind that it is only the Opposition that appears to be interested in more than just propaganda and non-speak (how else can one characterize the performances of members of the Government) as is easily seen from the nature of the motions moved, the continued rejection by the Speaker is undermining the very institution he is charged with safeguarding.
The Speaker of the Dewan Rakyat enjoys great prestige, position and authority. He has extensive powers to regulate its proceedings under its rules of procedures with a view to maintaining orderly conduct of parliamentary proceedings and discipline and order. No debate is allowed on his rulings except on formal resolution.
In all of this, the Speaker is much more than merely a presiding officer of the Dewan. He is the representative and spokesman of Parliament in its collective capacity and is the chief custodian of its powers and privileges (M P Jain).
Respectfully, the Speaker appears to have overlooked the beneficiaries of his trusteeship. He is the steward of the Dewan Rakyat for all Malaysians.
The smooth, efficient and efficacious operation of the Dewan is a BIRTHRIGHT of ALL Malaysians and a vital aspect of the governance of this country.
Any interference with this process is an injury to the nation and to Malaysians. The continued rejection of motions vital to a clear understanding of the state of this nation is a process that can only lead us to ruination.
Let there be OPEN and FAIR debate in the Dewan Rakyat, Mr Speaker, Sir. "
Read here for more on Captain Yusof's "Ancient Mariner" blog and HERE and HERE
(Captain Yusof Ahmad is a former pilot superintendent of Klang Port Authority (PKA)/Lembaga Pelabuhan Kelang (LPK) and pioneer General Manager of West Port. He is now semi retired and currently freelancing as a Port & Marine Consultant. He owns the blog called "Ancient Mariner". )
"... That the Speaker would shoot down Lim Kit Siang’s bid to introduce an emergency motion to debate the PKFZ issue in parliament was a foregone conclusion.
(A) Lembaga Pelabuhan Klang (LPK) bought the land at RM25 psf when parcels of reclaimed land were going at between RM12 - RM15 psf depending on the size of the parcel.
- How did LPK arrive at the figure of RM25 psf?
- Who carried out the valuation of the property?
- Normally, the Government Valuers would have been called in to value this. Why were they not called?
- Is it true a Valuer linked to Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd. carried out this valuation?
- If we add RM3 psf for infrastructure, etc., the cost will be RM18 psf. This would have cost RM784 million minus encumbrances .
- LPK must have paid RM305 million extra!
- Why were all these facilities built without knowing the needs of the clients?
- The Board decided to develop the first 500 acres and gave the turnkey job to their friends, Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd. for RM400 million.
- Who was the expert to decide as to what is the type of facilities to be developed i.e. the size of warehouses, business complexes, etc.
- Was there a survey done from the potential clients as to the needs? If there is a report on this, can it be made available?
- Everyone in the construction and engineering consultancy business know that turnkey projects cost 30% above open tender prices. Did LPK pay RM100 million more than it should?
At the original cost of RM400 million for the development of the first phase and giving the benefit of escalation in price for the 2nd phase amounting to RM600 million, the total cost inclusive of professional fees should only be RM1 billion.
- What happened to the RM850 million?
- So what has happened to the RM2 billion?
- Takde orang lain yang sesuai lagi ke?