On 17 October, 2005, I received a SMS from YB Teresa Kok that Works Minister, YB Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu has requested her to convey a notice for meeting with the residents’ representatives to be held on 19 October at 4pm. Subsequently, I received calls and fax from the authorities informing the meeting with the Minister. The conditions were that the representatives are limited to three and no media should be invited.
Our action committee had an emergency meeting and nominated three representatives as follows:
-
Lau Kien Foh – Overall representative
-
Au Lai Koong – Represent Zon N
-
Sallehudin – Represent Zon L
We also agreed on the strategy and action steps. We decided to take the opportunity to show all the documentation evidence and convince the Minister on our positions.
On 19 October 2005, our team arrived at the ministry half an hour before the meeting and soon joined by YB Teresa. We were invited into the meeting room around 4pm. In the meeting room, there were about 20 senior officers from the authorities. We took the opportunity to introduce ourselves and also get to know them. About 10 mins later, the Minister walked into the meeting room and shook hands with us.
The Minister started the meeting by introducing his team. They were Deputy Works Minister, Parliament Secretary, Ketua Setiausaha, Timb. KSU, Directors and Asst. Directors of various departments including the new Director General of Lembaga Lembuhraya Malaysia (LLM). The Minister also explained that he had informed the cabinet about meeting with us and also his intention to convey the government’s plan to us. He also informed that he understands an independent study by Ikram has started and he agrees to abide by the results of the study. He further said that should the independent study shows that the cracks reported were due to the highway project, the government will undertake to compensate the houses affected. The compensation can be in cash or reimbursement of costs incurred by the residents to repair the cracks.
The Minister further said the cabinet has agreed that the construction of highway should not cause disturbance to the residents along Jalan 2/149. He then instructed the Director General of LLM to ensure that this order is being carried out and also asked us to work directly with him. He continued by informing us that he has instructed the project team to consider raising the height of the elevated highway so that it is “further” from the residential houses. According to him, with the additional heights of the highway, the noise will not impact the houses along the highway as the noise travels up and sideways. He also said that the project team will build a 2 meter strengthen concrete parapet wall and further 1.5 meter sound proof barrier. The road surface will also be layered with high tech materials that will reduce the noise from vehicles. He then asked the resident representative to comment.
I took the opportunity to respond. I started by conveying the residents’ gratitude to the Minister for this opportunity to meet and discuss with him. I also thanked all the senior officers for attending the meeting, but expressed regret that other related government authorities such as Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) was not invited in the meeting. I elaborated on the efforts taken by the residents in highlighting their issues and also stated the following facts:
1. We never object the development of highway but instead we support developments that will benefit the people
2 . Based on the facts and evidence gathered, we are of the view that the authorities had made a blunder. They had failed to acquire or stop the development of houses on land supposedly targeted for the highway development
3 . The residents are the victims of these blunders committed by the authorities. It is unfair to shift the consequences of these blunders committed by the authorities to the residents
4 . The residents object to the stretch of the highway (about 1.25km) being built 2.3m away from their houses. Their objections are based on the following:
-
The 2.3m setback is not according to the guideline set by LLM in highway development
-
The 2.3m setback is not “approved” by local authority (DBKL) although it was claimed in LLM’s letter earlier
-
The 2.3m setback as quoted by DBKL is being used for houses to houses, and never intended for houses to highway
-
The mitigation measures proposed are not acceptable to the residents as all mitigation measures do have its limitations
-
The process of approving the highway project is full of ambiguity as there are evidences of serious breached of guidelines, for example significant facts were not reported in the EIA reports.
-
The close proximity of the highway construction has caused serious cracks to the houses
5. The residents also voiced dissatisfaction on the communication process of the highway development. They were kept in the dark (although many efforts have been taken to seek clarification and confirmation from the authorities even as early as 1997) as to the highway project. There were no consultations, briefing or even meeting the residents to inform of the project, prior to its commencement.
6. The residents also believed that the higher authorities such as the Minister or even the Cabinet were not given the correct information. This is demonstrated by the facts that the Minister was not aware of the status of construction work at site, the breached of working hours by the contractor and also the seriousness of cracks reported.
7. The irresponsible attitude of the contractor also irritated the residents especially in handling the cracks issues. The residents took the proactive stand in reporting the cracks to the contractor with the hope that they will work together to monitor and agree on rectification steps. Unfortunately, it turned out that the contractor used the information to “accuse” the residents that the cracks were caused by their “own-doing”.
I ended with an appeal to the Minister and his senior officers to help us as we are the victims of these circumstances. I also expressed our readiness to work with the Government in arriving at an amicable solution and I urged all of them to be fair to the residents, and try to put themselves in the shoes of the residents – I asked them that “would they put their family in similar situation as we are about to face, i.e. subject your family to live 2.3m away from an elevated highway?”. I also challenged the officers to proof us wrong as we are ready to walk through our documentation evidence.
The Minister responded by instructing the DG of LLM to issue a stop-work order immediately pending the completion of the investigation by Ikram. He then read through some documents to explain the sequence of events. He pointed out that the social and environmental issues raised by the residents were highlighted by the government way back in 1998, and the government was ready to acquire land as advised by the consultant to avoid issues faced today. He further explained that due to the financial crisis, the government had to shelve the project and did not proceed with the land acquisition. He, however, said that the local authority and the developer were well aware of the land targeted for highway development, and they should not proceed with the housing development. He is of the view that his ministry should not be blamed for failure to acquire the land for highway development. He is not sure who is the culprit but believes that the local authority and developer should also share the blames. He thinks it is not fair that his ministry is being seen as the “bad guy” and the rest are seen as “good guys”. He admitted that the residents are the victims in these circumstances.
The Minister then asked us what alternatives that we have in mind. I replied that there are options to realign the highway such as via KL-Seremban highway or Besraya highway. My reply was rejected by the Minister and his senior officers, claiming that it is “too late” to realign and they have acquired the necessary lands for the current alignment. I then said that the next option is to do the right thing to correct the mistake and if it involves acquiring the houses, then so be it. I also offered assistance and took up the challenge to discuss with the residents on the rationales of such acquisition action. I also expressed our view that the residents will respond rationally and an amicable solution can be achieved. The Minister replied that this will set precedence that will eventually subject the government to costly land acquisition when highway development is planned. He also voiced concern that this may invite investigation by Anti-Corruption Agency as they may suspect some wrong doings. We replied that we are ready to work on the details with the government and also agree to the principle that no-one should “take advantage” or “benefited” out of this arrangement. We are confident that a detailed arrangement can be achieved to address his concerns.
The Minister then thanked us for the suggestions and said that he has to leave for other appointments. He agreed to meet and continue discussion with us in future. The KSU and the minister’s secretary then took down our contact details and said that they will contact us again.
The meeting adjourned at about 5:10pm.
By: Lau Kien Foh.
23 October 2005 |
