Friday, May 29, 2009

POSSIBILITY OF MORE SCAMS EMERGING 行骗伎俩层出不穷

Regardless of whether there is an economic boom or economic recession, the possibility of people falling victim to scams is always there. More so during the economic slowdown, people will become more vulnerable to financial tricks and scams. But even when a person has a stable job or is living comfortably, they can still fall victim to scam and sometimes it is so convincingly done that you do not realise until it is too late.

The media constantly highlight the different type of scams that are used to trick victims into parting away with their hard earned money ranging from few hundred to millions. I was also targeted numerous times through email, phone calling and even letters.

Thankfully, I have managed to avoid the traps laid out but there was once where I nearly did give in and believe that by parting away with some money I will be able to gain manifolds in return. Luckily, I thought through the whole thing and realize that it was a scam.

As such, I hope to share and provide some of the type of scams that are common in Malaysia:

Deceptive lucky draws

There are two types of prize draw scam. With the first type, you receive a letter saying you have won a large prize. However, you are asked to send a fee to receive it. If you read the small print, it says you are only being entered into a prize draw.

The second type says that you have won a prize but have to order something from a catalogue to receive it. Again the small print makes clear that you are just being entered into a draw.

There are variations, sometimes it maybe through phone. I myself have encountered it and find it very well planned. Firstly someone would call you saying you have been chosen to be in a lucky draw. Few days later, you have ‘won’ and would be required to meet a lawyer to get release letter to obtain the prize. However, the lawyer happens to be outstation the prize will expire when the lawyer comes back. Hence to circumvent the rule, you would have to pay a fee and bank in direct into an account.

Scratch and win

This scam is so widely spread that it was banned to more victims. However lately, there seem to be reemergence of this scam again. Generally, the victim is being persuaded to try her luck and pick one of the envelopes that and upon scratching would win a prize. Then the victim would be guided to an office to collect the prize but would be required to pay a certain sum to settle government taxes and sign an agreement. Upon paying, the victim would realize that the victim has actually paid for the prizes.

Advance fee fraud

This is very common and anyone with an email account would have received it once. It maybe in the form of a letter, fax, e-mail or telephone, and usually concerns an amount of money that your correspondent needs to get out if their country. The victim is offered a large sum of money as a reward for helping with the transfer that is supposedly stuck. Some how the emails address seems weird; they might have gotten your name wrong and the letter is at times badly written.

Typically, the sender would claim to be a senior government official, a senior bank officer, an accountant with a state owned corporation, or perhaps a relative of a deposed or dead politician. It will also be marked “Strictly Confidential” or “Urgent”, and that the sender is writing to you at their own risk sincerely hope to share the returns.

Work at home/business opportunity scams

This scam tends to hit those seeking for part time jobs and is likely to be more popular because of rising unemployment. Typically theses scams are advertise in newspapers at times as an alternative income and usually stress the advantage of working from home ‘when it suits you’ or provide flexible work time.

In order to be eligible you need to spend money for registration, at times for training or to make photocopies, take out newspaper ads or buy software. If you buy craft kits and make items you may find the promoter will not pay out because your work does not come up their standards.

At times it be also similar to a pyramid selling scheme and the only money available is by getting other people to sign up. The distinction between a scam and Legitimate work-at-home promoters is that the latter would have start up costs and the work should not be so easy that it seems unbelievable no one has discover this gold mine. Before entering into any financial commitment check whether you can verify information with other workers, obtain as much data on the company and others.

The list above is not exhaustive but I hope this would provide some information on the type of scams used frequently in Malaysia. Nevertheless, I believe if we follow the below thought process it may help in identifying possible scams;

1. Is the competition too simple?
2. Does it seems too good to be true?
3. Are you are required to part with some money before you could claim your prize or reward?

If it is a yes to the above, please be very suspicious of the offer or the person giving the offer especially if it is not from a reputable firm. I hope and urge the public to be wary and to be extra cautious as there will be more scams due to the economic slowdown.

Lastly, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Walk away if in doubt and always think twice before you part with your money.

###

不管经济成长或衰退,都有人会掉入行骗者的陷阱而成为骗局的受害者。在经济放缓时刻,人们更容易陷入财务陷阱和骗局。即使是有稳定工作或生活舒适,都会有可能受骗,而且察觉时恐怕已经太迟。

媒体经常报道受骗者将血汗钱双手奉给行骗者的新闻,从数百令吉到数百万令吉都有。我也收过不少“幸运抽奖”骗局的电邮、电话或信件。

有一次,我也差一点相信一个只要付出一点就能获得高回酬的骗局,不过幸好我想通了,知道这只是骗局,才没有上当。

因此,我希望和大家分享我国常见的行骗伎俩:

蓄意欺骗的 “幸运抽奖”

常见的“幸运抽奖”有两种,第一种“抽奖”的形式是你收到一封通知你赢了大奖的信,条件是必须先给钱才可以拿到这份大奖。不过,信件下方的小字体却写明付钱只是获得抽奖的机会。

第二种“抽奖”骗局是,你收到一份信件通知你赢了奖,不过必须先订购货品才可以拿奖,同样的,信件下方的小字体说明:你只是获得抽奖机会。

行骗者有不同的招数,包括通过电话行骗。我本身就曾遇过,我还发现这些骗局还真是经过精心策划的!举个例子,有人打电话来说你中了奖,必须向律师索取信件才可以领奖,不过,那位律师目前人在外坡,奖品在律师回来之前已经失效,所以你必须先直接汇款到银行户口以领奖。

刮刮乐

刮刮乐已经传得很广,政府也已经禁止,不过最近有卷土重来的趋势。一般上,行骗者开始说服受害者碰碰运气,只要抽出一个信封,刮一刮卡就赢奖,然后就指示受害者去拿奖,不过拿奖之前必须先付政府税和签合约,最后受害者发现原来自己根本就是付款领“奖”。

通过先进科技的金钱骗局

这招很常见,我相信有电邮的人士都有收过,而且不论是信件、传真、电话都有类似骗局。举个例子,发电邮者说他们要离开本身的国家,希望获得你的协助,而他们会提供一笔钱作为回酬。不过,类似电邮地址一般上都很奇怪,要不然就是写错你的名字,文句也不通。

另外一个例子是,他们假冒高级政府官员、高级银行人员、政府机构会计师,甚至是被免职或逝世政治人物的亲戚,信件打着“高度机密”或“紧急”,发电邮者声称自行负责,只是希望和你分享回酬。

在家工作或商业机会的骗局

这种骗局主要对象是正在找兼职的人士,而且因为失业者增加而越来越盛行。一旦上他们是刊登报章广告,以额外收入和工作时间自由为诱饵。

如果要获得这份“工作”,你必须花钱注册、受训或买软件。如果你不是向他们买工具,你就会因为不符合他们的标准而不能获得工资。

这种骗局类似金字塔销售计划,也就是只有通过招收会员来赚钱。这种骗局和真正的在家工作的不同是后者需要先付成本,工作也不是那么容易,而且在还没有投入金钱之前,你可以和其他员工确定或者获得相关公司的资讯。

上述例子并不能涵盖所有行骗伎俩,我纯粹希望向大家提供一些常见骗局的形式供参考。我相信,如果我们根据下列的方式来判断,应该可以分辨骗局:

1. 形式是否太简单?
2. 一切太美好,令人难以置信?
3. 在领奖之前是否要先付一笔钱?

如果以上皆是,请大家一定要小心,这可能就是骗局,特别是如果有关公司没有信誉,欺骗的成数就更高。我希望公众小心警惕,尤其是经济放缓期间,骗局相信会更层出不穷。

天下没有白吃的午餐,如果有所怀疑就马上抽身,在付钱之前也必须要三思。

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Revamped taxi service to benefit drivers and public 调整德士收费,让司机和公众都受惠

Adapted from malaysianinsider.com
It was recently reported that taxi drivers may soon get their long awaited fare increase. It was not too long ago, in 2008, that the Commercial Vehicle Licensing Board (CVLB) issued a stern warning to taxi drivers that they risked losing their licences if they increased fares without approval. The proposed fare increase is expected to be a raise in the starting base meter fare from RM2 to RM4 and a rate review on the fare charged per km travelled.

The reason for the hike is due to increases in operation and maintenance cost of vehicles, and also that most taxi drivers are not earning enough. If we remember, in November 2008 there was even a proposal by the then Entrepreneur and Cooperative Development Minister to allow taxi drivers to sell packet drinks and phonecards to passengers as a side business to increase their earnings.
The proposal was not well received and I believed it did not take off. The fact the ministry suggested such a proposal shows that the government is probably trying to resolve the issue plaguing the taxi industry in terms of the ability of taxi drivers to earn a decent living. However the approach is not correct. We know that the part of the reason why the cost of operating a taxi is high is because taxi drivers are unable to obtain the permit themselves.

That could also be the reason why in January the first batch of cabbies, about 1,000, was given individual taxi permits. It is quite ludicrous that a taxi driver is unable to obtain an individual permit when he is the operator of the business. With company-owned permits, they have to work and pay off the companies first before they pay themselves. No wonder we always hear constant complaints of taxi drivers who do not use the meter and flaunt regulations. Tourists and the public do not have good things to say of our taxi drivers.

Since 1987, the CVLB has issued a total of 259,000 taxi permits, and individual permits represent a very small percentage of this figure.

A fare increase will help to alleviate the frustrations of taxi drivers, but if most of them are no individual permit holders, it is the permit holders who will benefit and not the taxi drivers. It is quite certain that with a fare review, the companies holding the permits will probably rent out the permits at a higher rate.

At the end the vicious cycle continues, the taxi drivers will continue to suffer and in return we passengers will bear the brunt and worst still we have to pay higher fares. I believe that if taxi drivers are able to earn a reasonable income monthly they will not resort to unscrupulous tactics to fleece passengers or tout at our international airport.

Talking about touts, it baffles me why this issue cannot be resolved. It is not as if it is difficult to carry out sting operations by posing as tourists to nab touts. But this will only address the symptom and not resolve the crux of the problem.

I believe the underlying issue is because taxi drivers ferrying passengers to the airport are unable to pick up passengers at the airport. They have to return empty. It is does not make economic sense.

It is time to do away with the monopoly on taxi services at the KLIA or any airport. I do not understand the need to have an exclusive taxi company to operate at an airport. I have yet to see any benefits of the current coupon system. In fact there are times at peak hours where you are required to take a premier taxi as a budget taxi is not available. To ease the situation and for more cost-effective travel, the government should allow taxis to pick up passengers freely without restriction. This could eliminate the tout problem and it would also help to increase the income of taxi drivers.

On the same matter, I have also heard grouses about different coupon fees charged by taxi companies. Apparently, the fare for a budget taxi from KLIA to the LCCT is higher than from the LCCT to KLIA even though distance is the same. The only reason I can think for this is that the taxi company feels that passengers from the LCCT passengers should get a cheaper rate since it is the LCCT.

The coupon system was implemented to counter profiteering by taxi drivers who refused to use meters but the effectiveness of this system is unclear. The rates should be transparent and clear like using the taxi meter. That way it would ensure that the coupon system is not abused.

Ultimately with better incomes, I believe taxi drivers would provide a better service to the benefit of everyone.
####
最近报道指出,政府将批准调涨德士车资,这是德士司机引颈长盼的好消息。商业车辆执照局曾在2008年严厉警告德士司机,如果擅自调涨车资,该局将吊销他们的执照。德士司机建议基本车资从原本的2令吉调高到4令吉,同时也重新检讨里程收费率。

德士司机是基于运作成本和汽车维修费提高,收入微薄而要求调高车资。去年11月,企业及合作社部长允许德士司机在车上售卖包装水和电话卡给乘客,以赚取外快的新闻,相信大家记忆犹新。

虽然这项建议没有获得广泛响应,不过我相信政府并没有因此而取消。这项建议显示政府正设法解决德士司机的生计问题,可是方法并不正确。要知道,德士运作成本高是司机无法获得本身的执照导致的。

这也是政府在今年1月发出约1千张个人执照给德士司机的原因。驾驶德士的司机无法获得个人执照的现象真是荒谬。以公司执照开德士的司机必须先把血汗钱交给公司,剩下的才是自己的。这也难怪我们经常会接到德士司机不使用里程表和不遵守条例的投诉,游客和公众对德士司机也没有好感。

1987年以来,商业车辆执照局从发出25万9千张德士执照,个人执照只占一小部分。

提高德士车资可以减轻司机的生活负担,不过,大部分司机没有个人执照,所以受惠的其实是执照持有者而并非德士司机。而且,重新调整收费率,持有执照的公司可能会以更高的费用出租执照。

如果继续恶性循环,德士司机同样会受苦,而乘客除了首当其冲,还得付出更高的费用。我相信,如果德士司机每月可以获得合理的薪金,就不会用伎俩欺诈乘客,或在国际机场招徕乘客。

谈到招徕乘客,我对当局一直无法解决德士在国际机场招徕乘客的问题感到迷惑。在取缔行动中假扮游客,揪出这些德士司机并不是难事,不过这只能暂时减少这个现象,不能真正解决问题。

我相信,目前的问题症结在于德士司机载送乘客到机场后,无法在机场接到新乘客,回程时必须驾着空荡荡的车,不符合经济效益所致。

我认为,现在是撤除特定德士公司垄断机场德士服务的时候。我不明白为何当局需要一家指定德士公司在机场提供服务。我也看不到目前的固本制度有什么好处。实际上,如果是繁忙时段,普通德士很难找到,你通常要使用豪华德士。为了缓解这个现象和减低路程费用,政府应该取消目前的限制,批准德士在机场自由载客,以解决德士在机场招徕乘客的问题,同时也可以增加德士司机的收入。

此外,我也听到一些人投诉德士公司有不同的固本收费。即使距离一样,从吉隆坡国际机场到廉价航空终站的的德士费,却比从廉价航空终站到吉隆坡国际机场的德士费低。我能想到的唯一原因,就是德士公司认为廉价航空终站的乘客应该享有廉宜价格。

虽然固本制度可以杜绝德士司机不用里程表的问题,不过其有效性仍有待观察。固本制度的收费率应该更透明化,就像使用里程表一样,当局也应该确保这项制度不会被滥用。

我相信,如果有更好的收入,德士司机会为公众提供更好的服务。

Monday, May 18, 2009

政府应透明化处理JPA奖学金 落实一个马来西亚概念

节录自我在拉美士卫塞节花车游行开幕礼的致词
首相拿督斯里纳吉一上任,就提出“一个马来西亚”概念。我觉得,我们不应该谈论一个马来西亚到底是一个口号,或者是新的还是旧概念,最重要的是,政府应该在拟定和执行政策时,全面落实这个概念,才不会成为空谈。

要落实一个马来西亚的概念,政府必须透明化、公平和有效地执行工作。举个例子,我们可以看到,几乎每一年,公共服务局公布海外学士课程奖学金后,都有考到很优秀成绩的学生,投诉他们无法得到奖学金。今年,一些在大马教育文凭考试中获得13个A以上的优秀生投诉他们不但得不到海外奖学金,反而还被派到大学预科班就读。

根据我的了解,2004年到2007年,获得公共服務局海外学士课程奖学金的学生共有6千零84人,其中土著有4千540人,非土著有1千544人。在人数方面,2004年获得奖学金的非土著有297人、2005年260人、2006年357人,2007年增加到630人。

如果我们分析,2004年获得这项奖学金的非土著学生占20%,2007年增加到35%,证明获得奖学金的非土著每年都逐步增加。

不过,虽然公共服务局提供的奖学金从2004年的1千484份增加到2007年的1千800份,可是,每年还是有很多优秀学生投诉他们拿不到奖学金。

根据去年的大马教育文凭考试成绩,共有3名学生获得16个1A、两人获得15个1A、6人获得14个1A、41人获得13个1A、229人获得12个1A,一共有281人获得12个1A或以上的成绩。

今年的公共服務局海外学士课程奖学金一共有1万5千零84人申请,公共服务局一共面试了8千363人。如果当局只是根据成绩来发放奖学金,而这些考到12个1A或以上成绩的学生都有申请和面试的话,那么应该可以拿到奖学金。

可是,在21世纪,成绩并不代表全部,学生的课外活动、常识、态度都很重要,因为有些学生成绩好,是因为他很会背书,可是对时事并不是很了解。所以,当局在处理奖学金申请时,也会根据申请者的课外活动、家庭背景、面试表现等来决定。

不过,如果政府不透明化处理程序,那么每年都会有人投诉分发奖学金的问题。

我们了解,土著因为固打制度而获得更多奖学金的机会,非土著则因为奖学金的配额限制,导致一些符合资格的优秀学生拿不到奖学金。

不过,因为优秀学生的人数每年都增加,因此,政府应该不分种族,确保符合条件的学生会拿到奖学金,以落实一个马来西亚的概念,不然,这些优秀学生可能会在获得其他国家提供的奖学金出国深造后,选择留在外国工作和发展,导致我国流失了许多人才。

如果我国要迈向高收入国家,政府应该寻求方法和采取必要的行动,解决奖学金的问题,以留住人才。

其实马来西亚有很多不同的奖学金,根据我的了解,目前有一个网站专门提供马来西亚各种奖学金的资料,有兴趣参考的话,可以浏览http://www.malaysia-scholarship.com/了解详情。

Sunday, May 17, 2009

JPS Carelines

from The Star 14 May 2009

The Drainage and Irrigation Department (JPS) has introduced a Careline to improve its delivery system and respond to complaints and enquiries swiftly.

By dialing the toll free 1-300-80-1010 for any matters related to the department and you can be assured of your issue being attended to immediately.

Drainage and Irrigation Department director-general Datuk Ahmad Husaini Sulaiman explained that the move was also a drive to improve its delivery system in keeping with the time.

“The careline helps the department in getting information and complaints in a more direct and faster manner.

“Rather than going through letters and emails, Careline is a definite thing: you call, you get an answer and you get an immediate reaction.

“If there’s no response, it will escalate from one level to another,” he said.

Ahmad Husaini said the system was designed to ensure that most, if not all, problems and complaints were resolved at the ground level by the department’s district engineers who were assisted by one or two junior engineers.

“If the district level has not responded to it, the matter will go to the state director and if there’s still no action at that level, the matter will be referred to me,” he said.

Call from complaints & Action

Complain sent to District Engineer: Within one hour of complaint lodged

District Engineer will meet up with complainant: Within two working days

The Careline telephonist will call all complainants to see whether they have met with the District Engineer: Within one working day

If not, an SMS will be sent to the State Director of JPS: One hour from receiving a response from complaint

State Director or the District Engineer to meet the complaint: Within two working days

The Careline telephonist will call all complainants to see whether they have met with the District Engineer after SMS have been sent to State Director: Within one working day

If not, an SMS will be sent to the Director General: One hour from receiving a response from complainant

State Director or the District Engineer will meet with the complaint: Within two working days.

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Penerima Projek Cari di Labis bertambah 拉美士区寻找计划受惠者大幅增加

Penerima "Projek Cari" di Labis telah menambah dari 44 orang kepada 108 orang dalam 2 minggu kebelakangan ini.

Akan tetapi masih ada 99 pemohon sedang menunggu kelulusan Jabatan Kebajikan Segamat. Saya akan mengikuti perkembangan pemohonan yang belum lulus.

Bagi penerima yang menghadapi masalah dan memerlukan bantuan, sila hubungi pusat perkhidmatan saya. Nama penerima seperti dilampirkan bawah:

拉美士区的“寻找计划”受惠者,在两个星期内从44人大幅度增加至108人。

去年9月至今年4月30日,在248宗申请中,福利局才批准了44人的申请,其余等待审批的申请共有148宗。

根据福利局在本星期三提供的资料,本选区的寻找计划受惠者已达108人,目前还有99人等待当局的审批,我会跟进这些申请的进展。

至于遇到问题的受惠者,请前往我的服务中心投诉。以下是受惠者名单:

NAMA PENERIMA PROJEK CARI DI LABIS

1 PANG SIEW ENG
2. LEONG SIEW CHAN
3. KONG CHOI WAN
4. HIN NYOK YUN
5. LEE YAN HUAI
6. PANG PEI YUAT
7. LEONG SHIN LEE
8. LAW HU BA
9. KHOO THIAM HUAT
10. R. SUBRAMONIE
11. SOH CHUI CHENG
12. LAI FOCK CHAI
13. TAY LAI HENG
14. LOW SAW LING
15. WONG KON KIONG
16. WONG AH KAW
17. SU POU YEN
18. EISVARI A/P VELAYUTHAM
19. LAW THAM PIT
20.WONG SANG FOOK
21. WONG CHONG
22. KOK YEW KEOW
23. CHONG SIN YOONG
24. H. KAMALADEVI
25. S. KAISHNAMAH
26. MOHD ZAIDUN MAHMUD
27. TAN BEE KING
28. LOW EH CHONG
29. S. MUNIAMMAH
30. G. ARAYEE
31. HAN KWEE LIN
32. NG GOON CHANG
33. EA KIA
34. C. MURUGAN
35. K. PATCHYMUTHU
36. RETNAM A/L BAJAREE
37. M.T. SHARMINI
38. YAP SU CHON
39. PANG WOO POO
40. LEW NGAN@LEW THEN HEE
41. CHEY AH KOW
42. CHONG FOK MUY
43. WONG YOON THYE
44. PEK KEE HOCK
45. A. ANANTHAN
46. M. KALIMMAH
47. S. HARYHARAN
48. V. PONNAMAH
49. SHE CHUAN
50. CHELAM A/P K.MUNISAMY
51. P. RATHAMAH
52. LIM AH KAU
53. V. MARIAPPAN
54. LAW YOK NGAN
55. KEOW MENG CHEE
56. YAU POH SUAN
57. LEE SWEE HUA
58. S. BAJIUM
59. S. KUTTAN
60. TONG SIEW CHOO
61. TEO CHOON SENG
62. SHEE SHEK YOW
63. S.N N.CHELLAPAN
64. A. BATHUMALAI
65. PANG LI CHUAN
66. GO FOOK TOON
67. CHONG LOI FAT
68. YOW SWEE BEK
69. SOH AH WENG
70. ZALILAH BTE ALAN
71. N. MUNIAMAH
72. LASTERI BTE DASLAM
73. WARAS BIN DASLAM
74. MOHAMAD BIN HASSAN
75. SURAINI BTE JAILANI
76. V. MUNUSAMY
77. SELLIAH A/L MUTHU
78. V. SELLAMAH
79. G.MUDIAPPAN
80. TEU AH SEE
81. TAN SIEW KIM
82. KIK NAM TING@KIK JIN TING
83. KOO YEE KOK@KOK GEE KOK
84. LIM KAH YUNG
85. KO AH BA@KHA AH BA
86. CHIA SIEW KENG
87. LEE YOKE KIM
88. M. TRIMUKAIAMAH
89. S. THERESIA
90. SU SOON ENG
91. VASAKEE A/P PONNAN
92. MARY A/P SOOSAI
93. LIM BOR KEAN
94. TEE KAU
95. LEE MOY YING
96. LEE HOON LONG
97. INDRA A/P RAJOO
98. YAP YONG YENG
99. SEAU YOK
100. WAI SUI SOONG
101. AYEN @ CHIA CHONG THAI
102. HOO WUAN YEE
103. TAN OW SWEE
104. WONG SAP
105. YAM KEE CHU
106. WONG JIN CHANG
107. JOON YANG NING
108. TEE PEH CHIN

APPROVED PERMIT, AN ENDING AT SIGHT? 汽车入口准证, 再见?

The handling, awarding and distribution of AP or Approved permit for vehicle by Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) have long been a contentious issue. In 2009, the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Car Dealers and Credit Companies Association has suggested for the government to open APs to all or give a quota of 30% to bumiputras with the rest open for auction. In response, the Deputy Minister of MITI, Datuk Mukhriz has announced that formulation of a new mechanishm for AP is one of the Ministry’s top priority.

Now what is an AP? AP is a license to enable one to bring in a completely built up vehicle. The AP does not waive one from paying taxes. The issue on AP was hotly debated and received very extensive media coverage in 2005. APs in the market previously are dubbed as the wonder paper as it enables one to generate risk free profit. The AP was issued initially to encourage and set a platform for Bumiputra players to participate in the automotive industry.

However, the AP instead evolved into a trading paper and the value hit nearly RM50,000 per AP. Before the debacle in 2005, there are two different type of AP namely franchise AP and open AP.

For Franchise AP holder, the AP is tied to a certain franchise or mix of vehicle. However, do not be mistaken that it is necessary for a franchise AP holder to have an extensive showroom and service centre. Most franchise AP holder merely acts as a middle man where it plays the importer role and in most cases not extensively involved in the retailing and after sales of the vehicle. Each AP for each vehicle is sold ranging from RM20,000 to RM50,0000 to the actual franchise distributor. The franchise distributor that has to invest huge capital to develop its network is unable to import the vehicle itself but dependent on the franchise AP holder. In addition, the franchise AP holder collects its money upfront regardless of whether the car is sold by the distributor to the end customer. Some franchise AP holder even requires that the franchise distributor appoints the AP holder company as the company for pre-delivery inspection and fitting of accessories resulting.

Meanwhile for open AP it is not tied to any particular mix of vehicle and it is usually for what the industry term as ‘recon car’. Open AP are usually for MPV, 4FWD and cars models that are not carried or serviced by the main distributors. As Open AP is not tied to any franchise mix or vehicle it is more ‘tradeable’ and easily ‘sold’ hence considered more lucrative to obtain.

Based on media report in 19 July 2005, a total of 67,158 AP whereby 49,632 AP relates to franchise AP and 17,526 relates to Open AP. The people dubbed as AP kings in the media reports in 2005 are Allahyarham Tan Sri Nasimuddin SM Amin, Datuk Syed Azman Syed Ibrahim, Datuk Mohd Haniff Abdul Aziz and Datuk Azzuddin Ahmad as they receive more than 28,000 AP of the total 67,158. Assuming the minimum value of each AP is RM20,000 the AP issued out in 2005 would be valued at RM1.3billion. This is just one year and apparently the AP system has been in place since 70’s and actively in place since 1997 onwards. The AP did not cost the government any cost except paper and administrative cost yet the holder potentially could have yield RM1.3billion in one year. Sadly it is the consumer and rakyat who bought any CBU units that have contributed to the AP holders’ coffers.

Subsequent to the 2005, MITI has subsequently issued franchise AP to franchise distributor directly after much effort by the franchise distributor. As such, most franchise AP holder is the franchise distributor but there is no certainty it is 100% as there is severe lack of disclosure and transparency of information on the allocation of AP. Hence, I believe that the call by The Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Car Dealers and Credit Companies Association to open all AP or to reserve 30% for bumiputra and to auction the rest relates mainly to Open AP.

In November 2008, during parliament session, the Deputy Minister of MITI has replied that the total AP given has been declining from 70,381 APs were issued in 2005, 60,460 in 2006, 50,304 in 2007 and 44,168 this year. The decrease in AP cannot be attributed to the fact that there are strict controls by MITI rather it can caused by numerous reasons. For example, the decrease can sometimes be due to the fact the distributor no longer import the vehicle in CBU but is assembled in Malaysia like Mercedes , hence no AP is required. The other contributing factor is that due to high oil price, the purchase of MPV, 4FWD and big cc cars have slowdown considerably in 2008. The amount of AP disclosed would provide more insight if the type of AP issued is also disclosed.

Assuming the percentage of franchise AP to open AP for 2005 (26%) is similar to 2008, thus for 2008 the open AP issued are 11,400 open AP. With a value of RM20,000 per open AP, thus the potential value of the AP issued is RM228mil yearly.

As such, I support and hope that the MITI would implement the idea mooted by the The Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Car Dealers and Credit Companies Association to encourage transparency in the allocation AP and to increase the revenue of the Government. Opening up the allocation of AP would also benefit the consumer as they will not be overburdened by the overpricing of AP held by selected few. It would also promote fair competition among car dealers as the AP is auctioned. This would also avoid cases, whereby car retailers that do not possess any AP are held ransom by the AP holders as they cannot meet their delivery and purchase stock without AP.

By introducing the auction concept, the complication relating to the selection process and control on the AP can be minimised. The 30% AP allocated to Bumiputera should not be tradeable and should be allocated to those that are genuine car dealers and distributor. I believe this would at least help the Government achieve the goal of creating a class of bumiputra entrepreneurs and uplifting the economic position of bumiputras. Currently based on the available information and judging from the media report in 2005, the AP system has not really achieved its objective as only a handful bumiputras that benefit from the AP.

As long as the AP issue is not resolve, it can remain a time bomb as the allocation is shrouded with secrecy. It would continue to create discontentment among non-bumiputra entrepreneur involved in the car industry as they are dependent on others to obtain license as most of them would not be able to obtain AP even though they have the financial and technical capabilities. Likewise, bumiputra entrepreneur would also have the same opinion if only selected few bumiputra or the politically connected remain to receive the AP. Meanwhile, if there is no revamp, the favoured would continue to amass great wealth at the expenses of the Malaysians.

Ultimately, scrapping the AP would be the best option to open up and liberalise the market, but further study would need to be carried out on the potential impact to assemblers and also the national car industry. While protectionism is unhealthy it is not detriment in every case for example in the US, the agriculture industry is heavily subsidised and the steel industry receives heavy protection.


由国际贸易及工业部处理和发出的外国汽车入口准证(AP)的课题争议已久。最近,雪隆汽车经销商及贷款公司协会建议政府全面开放所有AP,或保留30%给土著,其余公开拍卖;而新任贸工部副部长拿督慕克力则宣布,该部首要工作是实行新的AP制度。

那,什么是AP?AP是一张让拥有者从外国整装进口汽车的执照,有AP不等于可以免税。AP课题在2005年掀起讨论热潮,之前,AP被称为是“无风险的盈利”保证书。实际上,AP的原本的用意是鼓励土著业者参与汽车业。

不过,AP最后成了一种交易商品,一张AP要价近5万令吉。2005年之前有两种不同的AP,一种是连锁AP, 一种是开放AP。

对连锁AP拥有者来说,AP是汽车连锁店或汽车行使用的。不过,不要以为这些拥有者一定要有展示厅或服务中心。他们当中许多人只是扮演中介角色,即只是进口汽车,没有涉及售卖汽车或售后服务。他们以每辆汽车AP价格2万令吉至5万令吉的价格,卖给真正的汽车经销商。所以,那些投入大量资本设立联络网的汽车连锁经销商,不能自己入口汽车,反而要依赖AP持有者。而且,AP持有者是先收钱,不管经销商卖不卖得出车子。一些连锁AP持有者甚至要求连锁经销商委任他们的公司成为售前检查及安装配件的公司。

另一方面,开放AP并不限什么进口什么车款。这种AP通常是用来进口多用途汽车、四轮驱动车及主要经销商没有进口或服务的车款。由于开放AP不限进口车款,所以就更容易“卖出”和有利可图。

2005年7月19日的报道指出,在6万7千158张AP中,有4万9千632张是连锁AP,其余1万7千526张是开放AP。被媒体称为AP王的人士包括已故丹斯里纳西姆汀、拿督赛阿兹曼、拿督莫哈末哈聂夫和拿督阿祖丁,他们所拥有的AP超过2万8千张。假设每张AP至少2万令吉,单在2005年所有AP总值13亿令吉。这只是一年的保守估计,不要忘记,AP制度早在70年代就设立,1997年后更活跃。AP顶多只是花了政府的行政费和印刷费,不过AP拥有者每年却可能捞取了13亿令吉,更令人难过的是,购买整装进口车的人们都是AP拥有者的“顾客”。

2005年,在连锁经销商的极力争取下,贸工部直接发出连锁AP给连锁经销商。目前大多数连锁AP拥有者都是连锁经销商,不过因为程序不透明,所以会有例外。我相信,雪隆汽车经销商及贷款公司协会呼吁政府开放所有AP或保留30%给土著,以及公开拍卖开放AP的原因就在这里。

2008年11月,贸工部副部长在国会下议院回答议员提问时指出,该部发出的AP逐年减少,即2005年7万零381张、2006年6万零460张、2007年5万零304张及2008年4万4千168张。AP减少的原因有许多,不完全是因为贸工部严格控制。举个例子,AP减少可能是因为经销商改在本地装配汽车,而不是整装进口,所以不需要AP。其他原因可能是2008年油价调高,多用途汽车、四轮驱动车和大排气量的汽车销量放缓而致。如果政府详细说明AP类型,我们也可以看到更多详情。

假设2008年的开放AP和2005年连锁AP的数目相同,2008年的开放AP大概有1万1千400张,以一张开放AP有2万令吉计算,贸工部发出的开放AP价值2亿2千800万令吉。

有鉴于此,我希望贸工部落实雪隆汽车经销商及贷款公司协会的建议,让AP发放制度更透明,并增加政府的收入。开放AP可以避免小撮人控制价格,从中让消费人受惠,而且公开拍卖AP也可以让汽车经销商有公平竞争。这也可以避免没有任何AP的汽车零售商向AP拥有者买AP的情况出现。

通过拍卖AP, AP的遴选及控制程序的复杂性可以减到最低。30%保留给土著的AP应该分发给真正的汽车经销商,而不是用来交易。我相信这将达到政府提高土著经济地位的目标。根据报道,由于AP由小撮土著控制,因此达不到其原本目标。

因为AP的发放程序不透明,因此如果问题不解决,就是一个定时炸弹。拥有财力及技术能力的非土著汽车业者,如果必须依赖他人获得AP,他们的不满情绪会持续高涨。同样的,如果AP只是小撮人控制或政治化,土著也会有所不满。如果情况不改变,那小撮人将继续掠夺原本属于人民的财富。

要开放市场的话,取消AP制度是最好的方法,不过当局必须先探讨取消AP对装配商及国家汽车工业的影响。保护主义虽不健康,不过并不是对所有事物都有害,就好像美国农业获得许多津贴,钢铁工业也获得重度保护一样。

Thursday, May 14, 2009

黄能展任马华党鞭 拉美士9新县议员

转载自《中国报》13.5.09

(昔加末12日讯)昔加末拉美士新届县议员今午宣誓就职,当中有9人是新丁。

上述区域的今届县议员是于今午,在拉美士县议会会议厅举行宣誓就职仪式,21名巫统及马华县议员在县长柏汉面前进行宣誓。

在9名新人县议员中,5人来自巫统,3人来自马华及一人来自民政。

今届县议员党鞭由黄能展担任,该党原任的县议员包括陈逊溢、张毓声及邱秀慧,至于另外3名新丁则是邱瑞珍、林仕成及叶苏星,他们是取代已届满的陈宗、张秀娇与王春女。

另一方面,民政党在拉美士县议会占一席位,由黄来发接替不寻求连任的黄金标。

马华县议员委员出任各小组名单:
一站式事务组:黄能展
财政及庶务组:黄能展、张毓声、陈逊溢、邱秀慧
工程及发展组:黄能展、梁健豪、叶苏星、张毓声
卫生及执照组:邱秀慧、张毓声、黄能展
交通组:张毓声、叶苏星、林仕成
环境及旅游组:林仕成、梁健豪、邱瑞珍
产业税组:陈逊溢、邱瑞珍、梁健豪、叶苏星

Friday, May 8, 2009

政府应该放宽房地产条例

《当今大马》读者来函
蔡智勇 5月7日 傍晚6点33分

马华拉美士区国会议员蔡智勇建议,政府应该不论种族为所有首次购置房屋的国人提供折扣。

他说,政府应该放宽房地产条例,譬如购买50万令吉或以下房屋的首次购屋者,不论种族都可获得折扣。

他说,土著享有的房屋折扣固然能保留,但一项亲民的政策不应限制某个族群获利。上述建议既不会影响土著所享有的利益,也彰显政府公平和平等的施政。

蔡智勇今日针对森美兰州或考虑允许发展商将无法出售的土著单位,开放给非土著购买的措施发表文告说,为了让土著有能力居者有其屋,土著可享有5%至15% 购屋折扣,不过,由于提供折扣会削减发展商的盈利,因此,发展商可能会通过另外的方法来减低亏损,包括将成本转嫁购屋者,因而抬高屋价。

“非土著购买25万令吉的房屋没有任何折扣,不过购买1百万令吉房产的土著却可以获得至少5万令吉折扣,相等于25万令吉房产的20%。豪华房屋的土著折扣对非土著购屋者不公平,而且,非土著必须因此付出已被抬高的房屋价格。”

蔡智勇指出,发展商可以在发售房屋首6个月,或建筑工程达到50%后,向州政府申请公开发售土著保留单位,惟必须逐步发售。可是目前,一些已完工的单位,因为必须逐步发售而拖延了公开发售的进程。

“更糟的是,一些州政府向公开发售土著保留单位的发展商征收罚款,加重了发展商的成本,发展商可能会提高屋价来抵消成本的涨幅,因此出现部分公开发售的土著单位价格比较高。”

蔡智勇进一步指出,由于每州都有不同的固打限制,从30%至70%不等。根据人口比例来调整固打,发展商可能将固打设定和土著折扣的成本计算在内,结果售价已被抬高,特别是非土著的房屋单位。

“一些州属甚至设下条件,规定这些公开发售的单位只可以发售给土著。上述条件将导致房屋滞销,影响了产业成长潜能。”

另一方面,针对25万令吉以下的房屋可以不需获得外资委员会批准,并可豁免产业收益税的措施,蔡智勇建议政府应该根据各州情况,将外资置产的最低限额提高到至少100万令吉。

“如此一来,我们可以吸引到有素质的投资者,也避免国人与外资竞相置产,尤其是在巴生谷一带,25万令吉的最低限额确实太低。”

他也指出,州政府仍在外资买卖产业的程序上仍执行各自州属所定下的条例,引起投资者的混淆。

Monday, May 4, 2009

How about property liberalisation? 什么时候要开放购置房地产条例?

Adapted from malaysianinsider.com
MAY 4 – Recently, the Government announced a few major decisions that have been positive and I hope that there are more to come.

On the economic front, the decision to scrap the 30 per cent bumiputra equity requirement for the 27 services subs-sectors and also to allow a higher foreign equity participation for insurers and investment banks would augur well to attract more investment.

Even though some may argue that these are only ‘baby steps’, they are steps in the right direction to raise Malaysia competitiveness in the global business front.

We should not believe, however, that liberalising through removal of the equity component requirement would open the floodgates of investment. More still needs to be done to remove the bureaucracy of doing business, improving the efficiency of the civil service and etc.

In view of the gloomy economic climate, the Government should also consider liberalising or relaxing the property sector. Given its link to the other 160 industry sub-sectors, the property industry plays a pivotal role to breathe more life and activities in the local economy with its multiplier effect.

This is evident from the Government’s allocation of funds in the first stimulus package to build more low-cost houses through Syarikat Perumahan Negara Berhad.

With lower property sales, construction slowdown and deferment of new launches and huge inventory built up, some developers are facing difficulties and bracing for more hard times.

The few major areas relating to the national housing policy that may require some amendments or improvement are the applicability of the bumiputra discount, varying range of quota needed to be reserved and the mechanism for automatic release from bumiputra to non-bumiputra.

In parliament, I have raised the need to review and abolish the discount for the purchase of luxury properties by bumiputra.

Typically the bumiputra discount for property ranges from 5 to 15 per cent. The discount is intended to make property affordable to bumiputras. However, discounts provided for luxury property is not equitable to the rest of the buyers as it may result in non-bumiputra buyers having to purchase property at inflated price.

Example, for a RM1million condominium in Klang Valley, a 5 per cent discount would cost the developer RM50,000, equivalent to a low cost house. If there are 1,000 units being launched and 30 per cent are reserved for the bumiputra quota, thus the discounts on 300 units cost the developer RM15mil! The cost would be higher if it is a massive township development or if the discount is 15 per cent!

Providing discounts to some buyers would decrease the margin of the developer and hence developer would think of other ways to compensate for the margin loss or pass the cost to the other customers. This results in inflated purchase price.

On Nov 25, 2008, the Minister of the Housing and Local Government announced that they are in discussion on a proposal to scrap discounts for bumiputra who buy luxury property valued at RM500,000 and above. Hopefully the discussion is still in process and any amendments would be announced in due course.

Giving discounts to ensure that the people can have access to affordable housing is commendable and efforts to bridge the gap of property ownership between races promotes racial harmony but it should not be extended to luxury property. It creates feeling of unfairness and also potential conflict as a non-bumiputra buying a property worth RM250,000 is not entitled to any discount but a bumiputra buying a property worth RM1million is given a discount of at least RM50,000, which is 20 per cent value of the property costing RM250,000.

Furthermore, it is a fact that bumiputra lots usually fetch lower prices due to the restrictions on who it can be sold to, which makes the discount counter-productive. It does not allow the bumiputra to enjoy the maximum investment growth of a property when they buy a bumiputra lot.

The Ministry has also announced that they are discussing with the state governments to expedite the process of releasing unsold bumiputra quota units to the open market. Sometimes, bumiputra lots are not attractive as the buyer market is limited, resulting in unsold units.

Developers can apply to the state governments for permission to release unsold bumiputra quota units after six months or upon reaching 50 per cent construction stage, but the units are released gradually. The process can be so slow that the units might have completed but the release has not been obtained.

Worse still, some states even impose penalties for releasing unsold quota units, resulting in even higher cost to the developer. It would not be inconceivable that developers would have factored all these costs, again inflating the selling price of the property.

For example, it is possible that some of the developer lots sold after project completion are sometimes bumiputra reserve lot that have been released, and their price is usually higher to take into account the penalty paid and the holding cost.

Certain states impose a condition that the released units can subsequently be resold only to a bumiputra.

All these conditions can lead to unsold units and having too many empty houses in a project would diminish the growth value of the homeowners in the area.

There is also a range of quotas varying from state to state, from 30 per cent to 70 per cent in certain areas. While having a high quota may seem to be justifiable depending on the state demographics, it would invariably lead to the developer raising the base price to take into account both the impact of quota and discount that needs to be given, leading to inflated prices, especially for the non-bumiputra buyers.

There are also contradictions between the Federal Government’s initiatives to attract foreign investors and state rules.

The abolition of Foreign Investment committee approval for foreigners purchasing properties priced at more RM250,000 and the exemption of property gain tax would create foreigner interest in the local property market.

However, state governments still impose their own rules on foreign property sales and purchase, resulting in conflicting signals to investors.

Even though opening the property market to foreigners would enable to raise the profile and also spur the growth of the Malaysian property market, the minimum price for eligibility should be raised to at least RM1million, depending on state.

This is to ensure that we attract quality investors and avoid forcing Malaysians to compete with foreigners to buy a house for themselves as the amount of RM250,000 is too low for certain areas like the Klang Valley.

In summary, a bumiputra discount for property at a certain value should be maintained to ensure affordability of home ownership but a better policy is to not confine the discount to one race or religion.

We have already come so far since independence and I am sure anyone would agree that the Government should help the needy regardless of race or religion.

Consistent with this, discount should be given to every first home buyer limited to a certain value, maybe properties below RM500,000 depending on state, but not limited to race.

As bumiputras form the majority in Malaysia, they will still form the majority that would be entitled. That way the policy would be more equitable and fair, ensuring all Malaysians enjoy the benefits of development.

At the same time providing affordable property can help to fulfil one of the basic human needs and ensure that those starting out to work or middle income group are able to own homes.

The quota system and timeline to release the units should also be streamlined so that developers won’t have to price their properties higher just to offset the cost incurred for discounts, the quota system and potential holding costs.

Meanwhile, even though encouraging foreign buyers is essential to make the property market more vibrant, the needs of the citizen should not be neglected.
#####
最近,政府宣布了数项有利政策,我希望这些利惠政策会陆续有来。

从经济角度来看,放宽27个服务领域的30%土著股权条件,以及允许外资拥有更多保险及银行股权的措施,将吸引更多外资。

虽然有人说这些只是婴儿学步,不过,这是我国提高国际商业竞争力的正确途径。

我们应该知道,这些措施未必保证外资将涌进我国,反之,我国还需要致力减少繁文缛节、提高公共服务效率等,才有可能达到预期目标。

以目前低迷的经济状况来看,政府应该考虑放宽或开放房地产业领域。

房地产业和160个下游工业息息相关,这个领域的多重效应,可以让本地经济活跃起来。政府在第一套刺激经济配套中,通过国家房屋公司建造更多廉价屋,就是一个证明。

部分发展商正因为产业销售量低、建筑进展放缓、新产业计划延迟及产业滞销的问题而苦苦支撑。因此,当局应该修改国家房屋政策中数项主要条例,特别是土著折扣、土著固打和将土著固打自动公开让非土著购买的机制。

我曾在国会提出,当局有必要重新检讨和取消土著购买豪华房屋也同样享有折扣的条例。

一般上,土著购置房屋享有5%至10%折扣,这些折扣的用意是让土著有能力拥有本身的房屋。不过,豪华房屋的土著折扣对非土著购屋者不公平,而且,非土著必须因此付出已被抬高的房屋价格。

举个例子,在巴生谷地区售价1百万令吉的共管公寓,5%的折扣大概是5万令吉,等于一间廉价屋的价格。假设,发展商推出1千间房屋,30%保留给土著固打,那300间保留给土著的房屋折扣就高达1千500万令吉!如果是大规模的房屋发展计划,土著折扣还高达15%!

由于为部分购屋者提供折扣会削减发展商的盈利,因此,发展商可能会通过另外的方法来减低亏损,包括将成本转嫁购屋者,因而抬高屋价。

2008年11月25日,房屋及地方政府部长拿督斯里黄家泉宣布,该部将讨论是否要取消土著购买50万令吉以上豪宅时所享有的折扣。我希望该部继续进行这项讨论,并修正这项条例。

为人民提供购屋折扣,让居者有其屋的措施是值得鼓励的,这项措施也可以拉近屋主的种族比例,从中促进种族和谐,不过购置豪宅不应也享有折扣。这不但会让人觉得不公平,而且也可能引起异议。这道理显而易见,非土著购买25万令吉的房屋没有任何折扣,不过购买1百万令吉房产的土著却可以获得至少5万令吉折扣,等于25万令吉房产的20%。

再说,因为土著保留单位的转售对象有所限制,土著保留单位一般上只能低价转售,导致土著折扣达不到预期效果,即土著不能从土著保留单位的投资中,获得最大的投资回酬。

房屋及地方政府部也宣布,该部正与州政府讨论将售不出的土著单位公开发售的可能性。实际上,基于土著单位的对象有限,一些单位乏人问津。

目前,发展商可以在发售房屋6个月,或建筑工程达到50%后,向州政府申请公开发售土著保留单位,不过必须逐步发售。不过,一些单位已经完成,却因为必须逐步发售,拖延了公开发售的程序。

更糟糕的是,一些州政府甚至向公开发售土著保留单位的发展商征收罚款,加重了发展商的成本。如果发展商将这些成本计算在内,进而提高房屋售价,也不是什么令人惊奇的事情。

举个例子,一些发展商在产业计划完成后所售卖的单位可能是公开发售的土著单位,这些单位的价格通常会比较高,原因就是将罚款和其他费用都计算在内。

一些州属甚至设下条件,规定这些公开发售的单位只可以转售给土著。上述条件将导致房屋滞销,空置房屋太多,影响了有关产业的成长潜能。

此外,每州都有不同的固打,一些地区的固打从30%至70%不等。因为当局是根据人口比例来调整固打,发展商可能将设定固打的影响和土著折扣计算在内,结果售价已被抬高,特别是非土著的房屋单位。

另一方面,中央政府吸引外资的措施,可能和州政府的条例有所冲突。

譬如,外资购买25万令吉以下的房屋可以不需获得外资委员会批准,并可豁免产业收益税的措施,可提高外资对我国产业市场的兴趣。

不过,州政府仍在外资买卖产业的程序上仍执行各自州属所定下的条例,引起投资者的混淆。

虽然对外资开放产业市场可以刺激我国产业发展,不过,政府应该根据各州情况,将外资置产的最低限额提高到至少100万令吉。

如此一来,我们可以吸引到有素质的投资者之余,也避免国人与外资竞相置产,尤其是在巴生谷一带,25万令吉的最低限额确实太低。

简言之,土著享有的房屋折扣固然应该保留,不过最好的政策是不要限制某个族群或宗教获得折扣。

我们在独立后风雨同路多年,我相信,所有国人会同意政府应该不分种族或宗教地协助有需要的人士。

有鉴于此,政府应该为所有首次购置房屋的国人提供折扣,譬如购买50万令吉或以下房屋的首次购屋者,不论种族,都可获得折扣。

在这项措施下,基于土著是我国最大族群,因此土著仍是享有折扣的最大族群,如此一来政府会显得更公平和平等,并确保所有国人享受发展利益。

与此同时,提供可负担的产业可满足国人基本需求,确保工作一族或中等收入群都能居者有其屋。

固打限制和开放土著单位公开发售的程序必须精简,发展商才不会将折扣等费用计算在内而导致屋价抬高。

虽然鼓励外资置产对产业市场很重要,不过,当局也不应该忽略国人的需要。