TwoSen

I REFER to the letter on the polystyrene ban by Universiti Sains Malaysia (”Others should follow suit” - NST, Jan 14) by Dionysius S.K. Sharma. I would like to take the opportunity to clarify some of the issues Dionysius raised.

USM has taken what is seen to be an environmental-friendly step, especially in the eyes of the public and activists.

The consumption of polystyrene foam products has been steadily increasing in Malaysia, with more than 20 foam boxes being used every second each day during the lunch hour.

Polystyrene is a versatile plastic and a little known fact about polystyrene foam is that it is 100 per cent recyclable. The manufacturing facility, in the company I work for, recycles several tonnes each day to be made back into polystyrene resin.

Furthermore, polystyrene foam has been certified to be food-grade material, and is, therefore, free of carcinogenic compounds. If it did contain these compounds, it would never have been approved to contain hot food for human consumption.

If we are talking about taking initiative, a lot comes down to individual over corporate responsibility.

I cannot recall the number of times I have seen drivers and their passengers throw rubbish indiscriminately out of their windows. Also, aluminium cans are seen to be environmental-friendly, although they, too, can presumably sit on a landfill and not decompose for “1,000 years”, but they do not bear the same stigma as foam containers.

We export huge amounts of foam products to countries such as Australia and New Zealand and anyone who has been to these countries cannot deny the widespread use of foam lunch boxes.

But how do these countries deal with the problem of waste? It comes down to mentality. People must learn to dispose of rubbish sensibly, as even biodegradable plastics can cause a substantial amount of land pollution, resulting from improper disposal.

As society evolves, manufacturing evolves with it. My company is sourcing for renewable, biodegradable materials for our plastic containers for a more eco-friendly future.

I have great admiration for organisations like the Worldwide Fund for Nature. I hope they will make an effort to work with companies like mine to strive for a better future.

DOUGLAS TAN, Kuala Lumpur

Source: NST – January 17, 2008

I WRITE to voice my displeasure at budget airline Firefly, which recently introduced a Subang-Johor Baru air service with much fanfare, only to terminate it quietly on Jan 13.

I have a JB-Subang booking for travel in the immediate post-Chinese New Year period and got to know of this route cancellation by chance, since there was no email, SMS or phone advice from this airline.

A call centre inquiry confirmed the route cancellation, the reason offered was “major route reorganisation”.

Under this airline’s conditions of carriage in Clause 9, it is stated: “At any time after a booking has been made, we may change our schedules and/or cancel, terminate, divert, postpone, reschedule or delay any flight where we reasonably consider to be justified by circumstances beyond our control or for reasons of safety or commercial reasons.

“In the event of such flight cancellation, we shall at our option, either:

“Carry you at the earliest opportunity on another of our scheduled services.

“If you elect for a refund, we shall refund you.”

It would thus appear that since the route is no more in service, the only recourse would be a refund. A full-service airline would have booked an alternative flight with another airline.

This raises the question of an unfair advantage to Firefly at the consumers’ expense.

It also brings to question the oft-used strategy employed by a low-cost carrier in terminating non-profitable flights with neither care nor consideration for passenger convenience.

Is there no regulatory body to monitor such practices? Does the airline realise the amount of inconvenience it can cause to travellers by such route termination according to its whims and fancies?

W.S.W., Kuala Lumpur

Source: NST – January 17, 2008

CHARITY begins at home. That was my first thought when I read that the government will not allow subsidised sugar and flour to be sold to foreigners (”No more cheap sugar, flour for Thais and Singaporeans” - NST, Jan 16).

Our controlled food items are meant for locals.

Since these products are more expensive in neighbouring countries, their citizens are making a beeline to our country to buy such goods, thus creating an artificial shortage.

With this ban, one hopes that locals will not face a shortage of cooking commodities any more. The authorities need to be diligent in stopping smugglers from siphoning off our food to neighbouring countries.

HAMDAN IBRAHIM, Kuala Lumpur

Source: NST – January 17, 2008

FOR the last few days, residents of Bandar Utama, Petaling Jaya, especially in BU2, BU3 and BU4, have been bombarded with loud singing caused by performances held at the main entrance of the new wing of 1 Utama.

The performances start at 8pm and continue until 10.30pm on weekdays and from 10.30am to 10.30pm on weekends, with singers blaring Malay, Mandarin and English songs. Sometimes, they scream their heads off.

Residents are unable to spend their evenings or weekends peacefully as the noise level is too high and irritating.

I would have no quarrels if the performances were held inside the complex.

But to hold it out in the open, just outside the main entrance, and allowing the performers to scream on top of their voices with the amplifier at full blast is really a nuisance and not entertainment.

Should residents be subjected to such noise pollution? Why should residents get a raw deal just because some people want to make more money?

L.S.H., Petaling Jaya

Source: NST – January 17, 2008

MUCH has been said about the state of Malaysia Airlines. In spite of the often promising statements it makes, the sad reality is that it lags so much in efficiency behind many other airlines.

Nevertheless, my family has always tried to fly with our national carrier before considering other airlines. Until now, that is.

Recently, we booked a flight to Melbourne departing Kuala Lumpur on Feb 9. The booking was confirmed and we were issued a statement stating we have until Jan 17 to pay up.

However, when we went to the travel agent on Jan 10 to pay, we were told the due date had been brought forward by 10 days to Jan 7 without our knowledge and, therefore, our bookings had been cancelled automatically. No attempt was made to contact us.

The travel agent made a call to MAS to complain about this. The response from MAS was simple: it is the computer “system”.

Instead of being our first choice, MAS is now the airline of last resort for my family. It saddens me that as a Malaysian, I have to give priority to Singapore Airlines, Thai Airways and Emirates over our national carrier.

When a confirmation of booking slip is not worth the paper it is printed on, and does not ensure that you will get your tickets, you have to finally give up.

LEE LAI LIN, Sungai Petani

Source: NST – January 17, 2008

FOUR foreigners and a local, believed to be part-time smugglers, were arrested at the illegal jetty in Pengkalan Kubur trying to smuggle out essential items, including 77kg of cooking oil (”4 Thais held over smuggling of sugar, cooking oil” — NST, Jan 11).

A foreigner, involved in transporting ketum leaves on previous occasions, was arrested in Bukit Kayu Hitam trying to smuggle in 90kg of packed ketum concealed in a secret compartment of his lorry.

And in the Kubang Pasu district, Narcotics Department officers arrested a man who had 600 packets of ketum powder, 280 packets of ketum juice and 200kg of ketum leaves in his bedroom.

Admittedly, it is difficult to curb this old trade of smuggling, a highly profitable undertaking. Cooking oil sold at RM2.50 locally can fetch a price of RM4.50 to RM4.80 in a neighbouring country. Similarly, a person who sells ketum products can earn as much as RM1,000 per day.

The law is in place but smuggling remains rampant. The lenient punishment meted out on smugglers is not a deterrent, and they will continue to take the risks.

W.M. RAMLI, Ulu Klang

Source: NST – January 17, 2008

I TAKE this opportunity to congratulate the Malacca Narcotics Department for its tireless effort to rid Malacca of the drug menace.

I heard about the biggest drug bust ever recorded in the state’s history. Kudos to the department.

VIJAY SHANMUGAM, Taiping

Source: NST – January 17, 2008

We refer to the complaints of “Voluntary Social Worker” concerning Wan Zainun Wan Mohamad (letters, Jan 11).

At no time had Wan Zainun been chased out of the hostel in Petaling Jaya. It is true that the Malaysian Association of the Blind (MAB) was in need of the land on which the hostel was standing for development and therefore, the blind tenants were given quit notice. Alternative housing arrangements had been made for the tenants to obtain PKNS flats in Shah Alam. They did not leave the hostel until after they had received the keys to their new flats.

Subsequently, Wan Zainun decided not to stay in her own flat in Shah Alam, but preferred to stay with her blind friend, Liong Tat Kiong, in his house in Petaling Jaya. Both of them (former tenants of the hostel) had been provided assistance to purchase the PKNS flats for which they each paid RM25,000 from their own funds.

Some years later, Wan Zainun had approached MAB to help her apply to the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) to buy a low-cost flat. She was accompanied to the DBKL office by one of our officers. The DBKL authorities informed her that it was not their policy to sell the flats but to rent them out. She was offered a flat for rental but she declined.

Later on, Wan Zainun approached MAB for help with adaptive equipment to help her in her work as a part-time masseuse. We helped her to purchase a special handphone at the cost of RM1,500. She was needed a Deaf- Blind Pacmate costing RM24,000. Much effort has been put in to source for sponsors and the Rotary Club has promised to consider the matter.

Efforts are also being made to find a cheaper model which could meet her needs.

On Wan Zainun’s difficulties in obtaining her incentive allowance from the Welfare Department, firstly a letter had been written to the Selangor Welfare Department.

A letter was written to the Selangor Welfare Department in Shah Alam by our Job Replacement Officer on Sept 24, 2007. This was followed by a letter to the Petaling Welfare Office in Subang Jaya by the MAB Welfare Unit on Sept 27.

Before and after writing these letters, repeated phone calls had been made to the respective Welfare Departments to follow up on her case.

However, as Wan Zainun is quite self-reliant because she has some sight and she wanted to act independently, we felt it best not to patronise her and, therefore agreed to her request for her to take the letter by herself to the Petaling Welfare Officer.

When we did not hear from the Petaling Welfare Department, we made contact with the relevant officer and she told us that Wan Zainun would be getting her allowance soon.

After some delay, we got in touch again with the Welfare Officer and that was when we learned of the miscommunication between the KL and Petaling Welfare Departments and the mix-up regarding Wan Zainun’s address.

We continued to maintain contact with the relevant Welfare Officer so that the matter would be settled soon. However, the complaints concerning Wan Zainun have since appeared in the papers.

On Jan 8, our officers accompanied Wan Zainun to the Petaling Office. There the officer with whom we had been in contact informed us that the matter concerning Wan Zainun’s address had been resolved and that she would be receiving her back-dated allowances of RM1,200 from July to December 2007 plus the allowance of RM300 for this month.

Her future allowances will be credited into her bank account.

If “Voluntary Social Worker” had clarified with MAB regarding the facts of the case, it would have helped to avoid much of the misunderstanding.

George Thomas
Executive Director
Malaysian Association for the Blind

Source: The Sun – January 16, 2008

I HAVE been reading reports over the past few days on the fact that the crime rate in Malaysia has gone up by 13.4 per cent. Anyone on the street would have been able to attest to this fact.

A few days ago, my handbag was snatched in front of a hotel and office block in Jalan Sultan Ismail, Kuala Lumpur, by a motorcyclist about 2pm.

What is alarming is that since then, the majority of people I spoke to have told me that the same thing had happened over the past two years to their wives, husbands, daughters, sons or friends in Kuala Lumpur or major cities in the country.

When I went to make a police report, they were helpful although it was clear that such incidents were normal occurrences and nothing was done to catch the thieves or to prevent such incidents.

My trip to the Road Transport Department for a new licence also confirmed this: I was told that I had to pay a fine of RM20 (despite a police report) and this was normal, too.

It is interesting to note that despite the Jalan Sultan Ismail area being busy and frequently used by tourists, no police personnel are patrolling the area.

This is a departure from the practice in other major cities such as Singapore, Hong Kong and Bangkok where you frequently see police personnel patrolling busy areas.

In fact, many Malaysians and friends from overseas have said that it felt much safer in other countries than in Malaysia.

Where are our police? Having a pondok will not stop criminals as they only need to avoid the area where the pondok is.

Having closed-circuit television cameras will not necessarily prevent such incidents as CCTVs only help to view what had happened.

By that time, criminals would have committed the crime and sped off.

In my case, I was not harmed. If the thief had injured me, no CCTV could have prevented that.

Apart from having more policemen patrolling hotspots and busy areas, it is also important that such criminals are given stiff sentences.

Why, because even if the criminals claim that an incident is their first offence and plead for leniency, it should be remembered that their crime would have emotionally scarred their victims.

Such criminals who are willing to harm their victims should receive harsh penalties.

Effective measures should be implemented before this becomes another matter which dies down after a few weeks of debate.

J.C., Ampang, Selangor

Source: NST – January 16, 2008

AS you drive to my housing estate in Shah Alam, you can see banners hanging all over the way claiming that it is the best developed.

I believed it, bought a home and moved into the housing area more than a year ago. However, reality has set in.

One thing that you realise when you move in is the poor quality of workmanship. Hairline cracks all over the building, poor plumbing and poor water-proofing are among the common grouses of the residents here.

One puzzling answer from the developer for the hairline cracks is “it’s common in the construction industry”.

The longer you stay here, the more hairline cracks you start to see.

This developer promised us an 18+18-month warranty for its homes. But whenever you complain about the poor finishing, they’ll pass the buck to its contractors.

These contractors, in turn, perform shoddy repairs and most times the defects recur.

The developer also prom-ised us that security services would be provided for free for two years.

When you walk into its sales office, you would be amazed to see the number of Gurkha security guards. You’d be under the impression that they’re the ones who are going to secure your housing estate.

However, in the housing estate, it is another sad story.

Some of the security guards look more like thugs. Sometimes, they don’t even wear uniforms. You wonder if these are the people who are going to take care of your house.

There was a case of drunken security guards fighting among themselves.

To make things worse, foreign workers from construction sites walk in and out of the area.

The guards do not control foreigners from coming into the housing area or playgrounds.

I urge those who want to buy a house from this developer to study these issues carefully before buying homes from them.

V.M., Shah Alam

Source: NST – January 16, 2008