anilnetto.com

Today, several Penang-based bloggers and websites simultaneously launched a “Penangites for Trams” campaign.

We hope more and more bloggers and webmasters - especially all those who care for Penang - will join in the campaign by placing these graphics on their blogs or websites. You may link the graphic to the URL for this post or choose to link to any other article or post extolling the benefits of trams.

This will help to raise awareness of the viability and economic benefits of trams. Of course, trams work best as part of an integrated public transport system, complementing an efficient and extensive network of buses.

Fittingly, the latest issue of business weekly The Edge carries a full-page article in support of the re-introduction of trams in Penang.

Join in the campaign and pass the word around.

So far, these are the other bloggers and websites that support the re-introduction of trams in Penang:

• Mustafa K Anuar
• Susan Loone
• Mucked in a Jam
• Penang Watch
• Kris Khaira
• Surind
• Anything Goes
• LAH-mour
• No Kacau and Don’t Kacau
• Stephen Doss
• Contemporary Malaysia
• Black and White (Justin Choo)
• The Kuala Lumpur Traveller
• Forest Explorers
• Apprize
• News for Malaysians

Come on, together we can bring the trams back to Penang!

In case you are wondering what advantages trams bring, here’s a list from the City of Edinburgh Council website.

Benefits of trams

The number of residents, visitors and businesses are expanding, especially in key areas such as the Waterfront and west Edinburgh.

While growth is good for our economy, it also means our roads will get busier and journeys longer without a new transport choice. Trams can carry large numbers of people quickly and efficiently.

Trams don’t take up a lot of road space but they do carry a lot of people. As Edinburgh continues to grow, trams will be the most efficient way for people to travel about our city.

• Trams show a city is a modern and well-connected place to do business which can lead to more investment, new jobs, regeneration and more prosperity for us all
• Trams are an attractive option for motorists, with car users likely to be attracted to tram travel. Research shows 20% of peak hour and 50% of weekend tram passengers in the UK previously travelled by car
• Trams enhance the urban environment and generate civic pride
• Trams will encourage shoppers to travel to the city centre which can lead to more investment by businesses and regeneration. Dublin saw a rise of between 20% - 50% in pedestrian footfall figures on Grafton Street, the city’s main shopping thoroughfare. Some retailers reported a 25% increase in trade
• Residential and commercial properties may see prices increase beside tram routes. In some cities with trams, house prices have risen by up to 15% and rental prices by up to 7%
• As trams run on electricity, there will be no emissions from the vehicles themselves
• Trams will be accessible to everyone, with benefits of low level boardings at every stop and other easy-to-use features which particularly help the disabled and less mobile
• Trams will be safe to use as, in addition to a driver, every tram will have a passenger attendant on board to check tickets, answer passenger queries and ensure no anti-social behaviour occurs
• Trams will offer concessionary fares

This morning, Suaram Penang coordinator Lau Shu Shi, who is also Penang coordinator for the Abolish ISA Movement (GMI), and Teh Chun Hong were released on police bail.

Shu Shi told me she is required to report to the police on 21 May to find out about a possible charge under Section 90 of the Police Act. Section 90 covers disorderly conduct in police stations and states that “any person who, in a police station behaves in a riotous, indecent, disorderly or insulting manner shall be guilty of an offence under this Act”.

She also has to report on 24 May pertaining to a possible charge under Section 27 of the Police Act. This section is about police powers to regulate assemblies, meetings and processions including the requirement for organisers to apply for a licence for an assembly.

She said she was brought to the court premises this morning but remained in the court lock-up cell without being actually produced in court. They were both later released on police bail. “So it was mala fide (bad faith),” she said. Suaram activists are arguing that there was no need to hold them overnight at the police station if they were not going to be produced in court the next day. They already had their statements recorded yesterday.

One activist at the scene told me the case was not registered for the morning. The press had turned up in full force with video camera crew but after waiting for a couple of hours, nothing happened.

Shu Shi and Chun Hong, a Suaram secretariat member who also works for Pesticide Action Network, are represented by lawyer Darshan Singh.

Both the Suaram activists had participated in an Anti-ISA gathering in Penang yesterday in support of ISA detainee and Hindraf adviser P Uthayakumar’s attempts to seek medical treatment in IJN.

The above videoclip shows how Chun Hong was detained and handcuffed yesterday soon after he had filmed the scene at the Patani Road police station.

Hmm, instead of curbing crime, they are arresting and charging peaceful activists and demonstrators.

Remember, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, when faced with an Umno-led demonstration soon after he took over the helm of the state government, had said he does not oppose peaceful demonstrations. In fact, the Chief Minister himself had recently participated at an Anti-ISA forum organised by some of the groups involved in yesterday’s demonstration.

So, if the state government doesn’t mind such demonstrations and in fact even supports the GMI campaign to abolish the ISA, whose interests were the police really serving by locking up Shu Shi, the Penang GMI coordinator, and her colleague last night?

The PGCC project has been the biggest land scam in Penang, Penang Chief Minister Guan Eng said today, adding there were a couple of other large scams still under investigation.

He was responding to a statement by Teng Hock Nan yesterday (see full statement below). The previous Penang state government had converted the Turf Club land from open recreational area to “new development” under the Penang Structure Plan gazetted in June 2007.

Critics claim the state lost between RM120 million and RM400 million in conversion fees as the conversion was done before the PGCC project was approved while the state forfeited RM1.5 billion in potential revaluation surplus, which it would have earned had it purchased the land from the Penang Turf Club itself instead of allowing the land to be sold to Abad Naluri. A priceless green lung has also been put in danger of being turned into a congrete jungle instead of into a People’s Park.

Teng said yesterday the Municipal Council had not made any decision on the PGCC nor had the previous state government decided whether and how much premiums or charges to levy on Abad Naluri, the PGCC developer. “Therefore, since no decision has been made as yet, it is up to the new state government and the MPPP to make whatever decision that they think suitable with respect to the site and any development proposal, including whatever charges to be imposed.”

In response, Guan Eng said: “I want to ask Koh Tsu Koon what are the consequences of (re)rezoning the land.” He said he knew the consequences but he wanted Koh to tell him. “Show me you are on top of your job. You have been chief minister for 18 years. You tell me what are the consequences should we want to rezone it,” he challenged Koh. Guan Eng said all this with a smile.

“Koh Tsu Koon is in big trouble,” observed one journalist who was present.

Some believe that rezoning the land back to recreational status could leave the state open to claims for compensation. So the state might not want to do anything with the land at the moment and just leave things as they are - but that could open the land to other forms of property development later, dashing hopes that it could be turned into a People’s Park.

As one activist observed, Teng’s statement yesterday just reinforced the fact that nothing has been approved, but failed to answer why the previous state government rezoned the land without waiting for an application from the developer.

Guan Eng posed more pointed questions to Koh and Teng. When the change was made from tanah lapang dan rekreasi to pembangunan baru, how does this benefit the public interest, he asked. “Why and how did you change this?”

As for the previous administration holding public hearings to obtain the views of the public, Guan Eng said he would let the NGOs reply to this. He said as far as he knew, civil society groups were largely unaware of these public hearings.

The Penang Chief Minister added Koh and Teng had misled the Prime Minister when they got him to officiate at the launch of the PGCC last October, when the project had not yet been approved. “Why did you allow the PM to embarrass himself in launching an illegal project?”

One activist remarked that he finds it hard to believe that Abdullah was not aware of the background and status of the project. The PM had said back then he wanted all approvals to be expedited.

Another activist commented:

And here is Teng’s statement in full:

Statement by Dato’ Dr Teng Hock Nan
Former Penang State Exco Member in charge of Local Government

THE PROPOSED PGCC PROJECT:
PREVIOUS STATE GOVERNMENT DID NOT APPROVE AS YET
PRESENT GOVERNMENT CAN DECIDE AND IMPOSE LEVIES

It must be emphasised that the application for planning permission by the developer of the proposed Penang Global City Centre (PGCC) project has not yet been approved by the Penang Island Municipal Council (MPPP) under the previous state government as of 8 March 2008.

The previous state government has also not made any decision as yet on whether and how much premiums or charges were to be levied on the developer relating to the proposed PGCC project.

The formulation of the structure plan, which made provisions on zoning of development for the whole state, followed the proper provisions and procedure for structure plan under the Town and Country Planning Act. Public exhibitions and hearings were held in 2006 - 2007 on the draft structure plan which was finalised and gazetted in June 2007.

In this respect, the structure plan did not specify the type (residential or commercial or “mixed”) and the scale (density, plot ratio, etc) of “new development” zoned on that site.

The MPPP can still decide whether to reject or approve any development proposal, including the type and the scale. It is also up to the State Planning Committee chaired by the Chief Minister to provide guidance.

Therefore, since no decision has been made as yet, it is up to the new state government and the MPPP to make whatever decision that they think suitable with respect to the site and any development proposal, including whatever charges to be imposed.

Sat, 10/5/2008