Saripati cadangan ialah satu forum [1] dalam rangka "civic nationalism" [2] yang bertujuan menentukan "political legitimacy" [3] tindak tanduk Pentadbiran kini sehubungan Wilayah Pembangunan Iskandar.
Pengantar Isu
Perbuatan menjual bumi dan hak bangsa semata-mata demi kepentingan ekonomi segelintir Melayu, dengan perbuatan itu dipromosikan sebagai bertujuan membawa kebaikan besar kepada bilangan yang ramai adalah kisah lazim dalam sejarah bangsa Melayu.
Sepatutnya, setelah kerap terserempak dengan kesan perbuatan menjual kepentingan kaum yang dibuat di atas nama “pembangunan” bangsa Melayu kini sudah pun mempunyai satu falsafah tersendiri tentang pembangunan. Setidak-tidaknya falsafah bangsa Melayu tentang pembangunan itu ialah:
Pembangunan mampu milik.
Atau pun paling tidaknya bangsa Melayu menjadikan prasyarat supaya soalan berikut ditanya tentang segala apa agenda yang bertemakan “pembangunan:”
Pembanguan untuk siapa?
Papan tanda di hadapan sebuah kilang di Jalan Yuannan dalam Daerah Lihuan,
Tetapi setelah berulang kali menggadai kedaualatan bangsa, bermula dengan Pulau Pinang, Province Wellesley (daerah Kepala Batas dan kawasan yang berdekatan) dan Pulau Singapura, dengan klimaksnya orang Melayu menjual murah hak “jus soli” – masih lagi wujud satu keengganan di kalangan bangsa Melayu untuk belajar dari kesilapan. Kini didapati segelintir Melayu melalui pelbagai helah samar dan silap mata perhubungan awam telah
Kali ini perbuatan ini dinamakan Wilayah Pembangunan Iskandar (WPI). [4], [5].
Sila [klik] untuk lawati laman yang membawa perincian cadangan.
Sehubungan, saya mengalukan sebarang cadangan (tajuk atau nama pembentang) dari tuan/puan dan mengajak tuan/puan turut serta dalam forum (percuma) ini, baik sebagai pemerhati mahupun pembentang.
1 comment:
Sedutan dari posting saya http://anotherbrickinwall.blogspot.com/2007/06/musa-bombed-ku-li-unscathed.html berikut:
"Musa Bombed, Ku Li Unscathed
Musa and Tengku Razaleigh came, saw but one conquered, while the other conked!
In a standing room of mostly post 1969 born, Tengku Razaleigh, or affectionately called, Ku Li, took the crowd on a historical “ranjau sepanjang jalan” trip onto the path of modern Malay and Malaysia towards economic and social development. Whilst, Tun Musa’s attempted to provide a briefing on Iskandar Development Region (IDR) to a group of Kuala Lumpur-based Johorean proved to be disastrous.
Musa and IDR
Musa was said to be very nervous, prior to the briefing session organised by the Persatuan Anak Melayu Johor (PAMJ), meant particularly for Johorean based within the Klang Valley last night. Although he managed to regurgitate his same line of arguments, Musa didn’t quite grasp the issues posed to him and didn’t survive the last few shelling from the floor.
Musa explained that he is not the Chairman of the IRDA and not involved in its policy formulation and implementation but merely a member of the IRDA International Advisory, together with Tan Sri Robert Kuok, Tan Sri Kishu, Tan Sri Shamsuddin and banker Andrew Sheng.
There was a brief presentation of the IDR conceptual plan by Encik Ismail, believed to be UEM’s Vice President for Planning, but much of the briefing session was done by IRDA’s top officio, Dr Iskandar. The presentation was basically the same information already provided to the mainstream press, their official website, and Internet blogs – a massive Metropolis development.
The pertinent issues raised by the audience were the Singapore factor, edging out of Malays in urbanisation, and benefit for the local Johorean.
Musa gave an unconvincing answer to the Singapore issue by relating Goh Keng Swee’s perceived embrasive response to Johor’s intention to build a Port in his early days and his perceived new concept of regional state. He tried to downplay the Malaysia-Singapore Ministerial level committee on IDR.
Much of the shelling he received was on the Johorean Malay interest and it did not help his cause with the sketchy answer given by Dr Iskandar on the opportunities available, if not lack of any definitive proposal. Ismail also mentioned that manufacturing will not be the main thrust of economic development at IDR but services.
This brought about a strong response from the floor that gave a history of the conception of IDR and called IDR a promotion of an incomplete plan and merely a concept play of only property development with no content and clear direction, unlike Labuan, MSC, and Langkawi. There is much truth for Musa and his team was constantly saying they are in the midst of studying and drawing up plans for many aspects of IDR, and short of bragging the credentials of the team members rather than deliverables.
The IDR plan criticised for doing the contrary to the planning approach of Tun Abdul Razak to seek for prior response and constant feedback from the people, as raised by Musa at the Seminar Legasi Tun Abdul Razak. He claimed IDR was shoved down the Johorean throat and no briefing and effort to seek the people's acceptance. While Musa and his team tried to deny, other voices rose to confirm the claim.
Musa tried to explain his position on removing the Malay affirmative action policy within the IDR by raising four common issues raised by foreign investors – security, quality of life, incentives, and affirmative action. He tried to push the point of quality instead of fascination with figures and a 1960s economic concept he coined as “copycat economy”. He may have forgotten that Malaysians have a strong tradition, from the days of Tun Abdul Razak till Tun Dr Mahathir, for a Malaysian-made comprehensive solution.
This brought about a series of response that reminded him that the economic uplifting of Malays has not been effective and such a development would result in pressure by Malays to sell their lands. The Q&A had to end but one last audience slipped in to just short of calling Musa a traitor but put his position as a Nationalist in question.
After Musa left, the many of the accompanying association officio were in disbelieved at Musa for putting his head on the guillotine for Abdullah Badawi. ..."
Post a Comment