Kg Hock Aun resettlement delayed again

The participants of Rancangan Perkampungan Tersusun (RPT) Kg Hock Aun are disappointed over the Perak CM’s Adviser’s announcement over the development of Kg Hock Aun.

The manner in which the matter was handled does not resolve but burdens the parties involved.

Kg Hock Aun is situated off Jln Kuala Kangsar in Ipoh and the village sits on a prime developmental land.

The 15 to 20 families staying there have houses with electricity meters but the residents share water supply from a temple situated at the site.

The issue of resettlement has been brought up numerous times by the protesters and Pakatan Rakyat (PKR), but to date it remains unattended to.

Before the Pakatan state government was able to carry out the project as promised by the BN led state government, the Pakatan state government was overthrown after 9 months in power.

There have been numerous protests and the latest was as per  the date on the video.

The people there resided on the government owned land from as early as in the early1970s. Most of them are Malaysian Indians and during the last elections the Ipoh City Council had offered each family, the land to be acquired for RM14,000 (MBI earlier said RM14,800) plus a premium of  RM1,500 to redevelop the said land.

The people consist of poor Indians and they cannot afford even this and had requested the City Council to be more sympathetic towards them.

Previously, the residents had suggested a contractor who had dealings with state government projects in the past, especially in respect of Kampung Tersusun who was willing to rebuild the homes at a lower cost of about RM9,000.

Negotiations between the City Council and the residents have been going on since the last general elections.

City Council chose to keep silent about it until now. However, the City Council personnel with Chief Minister’s Indian Affairs Adviser Datuk Veerasingam made a similar offer to redevelop the same land without acknowledging that prior negotiations had taken place.

The latest official function of giving out “Letter of Offer” again was held recently at the State Secretariat Building.

The offer is similar to the offer made at the previous general elections but with a higher premium of RM3,000 instead of RM1,5000 as in the past.

The DAP got involved to assist the residents to get a fair deal. A protest with the aid of DAP was carried out.

The current demonstration however was carried out by the residents themselves without the aid of DAP or any other political party. However, CM’s Indian Affairs Adviser was present.

The protesters’ concerns are:

(1)   Why the offer made and accepted at the time of the last general elections was not executed instead of making a fresh offer over the same land with a higher premium.

(2)   Why did the City Council award the contract to one individual in the first place without consulting/negotiating with the residents who are going to be paying the contractor?

(3)    Some names of the residents were excluded. When questioned, the City Council claimed that they are not entitled be part of the project although, they have birth certificates to prove that they were born there. These residents came to know that they had been excluded when the second round of “letter of offer” were given to the residents. A report to MACC was made, but had nothing transpired since.

The protestors further claim that the City Council appointed contractor is said to be an MIC member, who claims to reside there, but the Head of the committee claims that the contractor is not from there.

The Head claims that the person appointed by the City Council has no experience of building houses as he is said to be a small road builder. The protesters want an open tender before the contractor is appointed. The residents want the lowest cost possible as they are poor people.

The protestors claim know of a contractor who had carried out government projects in Kampung Tersusun before and who had put in his tender bid which was lower than the cost put up by the City Council’s appointed contractor.

The residents had questioned the City Council as to why the contractor with the lowest bid was not awarded the project but instead the contractor was accused of being “black listed” by the City Council. It was alleged that the contractor is blacklisted.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE