Media statement 
by Ronnie Liu, Shadow MPPJ Chairperson and DAP National Publicity Secretary 
on Wednesday, 2002-06-05 
in Petaling Jaya

Local councils-the worst service provider 

In a survey conducted in 2000 by an independent body on the quality of services provided by various public and private agencies, local councils as a whole was judged the worst service provider in the country, ranking last at the bottom. 

The MPPJ is of course, no exception. There is not much of improvement after the last survey, judging from the quality of life we are getting in Petaling Jaya, and the numerous complaints we received from the residents over the last two years. The MPPJ closed U-turns and roads without consulting the local residents, causing hardship and inconvenience to all road-users. And they are so reluctant to reopen those U-turns despite protest and objection from the majority of the effected residents. What has happened in Taman Megah is a typical example. The council always takes too long to fill up potholes, resurface bad roads, replace damaged drainage, repair basketball courts or take action against illegal entertainment and gaming outlets.

The recent controversy and confusion over the P J Local Draft Plan 1 is unnecessary and avoidable if the council had followed the principles of Local Agenda 21dutifully and professionally. How can the council draw up such a massive structural plan without consulting the residents? Why should they fix a forbidden price of RM150 per set for the draft plan? Why can't they give out a few copies free to the various newspapers and electronic media so that they can help to publicise the plan to the residents? We are now living in an IT world. What MPPJ should have done is to upload the entire plan onto the existing MPPJ website to encourage all effected residents to read and study the plan.

It is the right of the residents to demand the traffic feasibility study which was used to draw up the plan, as well as the minutes of the council meetings concerning the draft plan. But the Shadow MPPJ wish to forewarn the residents that they would not be able to get any details from the minutes of the so-called full board meetings as announced by councillor CK Lim today. That is simply because all discussions will be held in committee meetings, and the full board meeting is only served to approve the decisions reached in those committee meetings (and usually without giving details or without further discussion). 

That is the main reason why the Shadow MPPJ has stopped attending such full board meeting after sitting through a few frustrated and fruitless meetings in 2000. CK Lim should not have made such misleading statement. What he should do is to convince his peers to provide the minutes of proceedings of all the relevant committee meetings to the PJ residents if he is really sincere and honest about the matter. After all, it is the right of the ratepayers to obtain such minutes as these minutes are classified as official documents. And there is no reason for the council to classify these minutes as confidential documents under the Official Secrets Act.

The DAP PJ and Shadow MPPJ reiterate that MPPJ should withdraw the PJ Local Draft Plan 1 which is replete with glaring flaws and weaknesses in toto, and call on the Menteri Besar of Selangor Datuk Mohammed Khir bin Toyo to personally look into the matters raised by the P J residents over the controversial master plan.

The MPPJ councillors have failed miserably over the local draft plan controversy. Instead of helping the residents to find solution to their woes and problems, they were doing just the opposite. The poor performance of the appointed councillors has only served to strengthen our belief that the only way out is to restore election for all local councils in the country.

As pointed out correctly by one renowned columnist today, "the ratepayers (residents) have no way of removing the councillors because they are appointed and not elected. We can judge their performance but can't pass judgement on them. They can make mistakes and get away with them. Their two-year terms are fixed and their peers in political parties decide on their position - not the people".