Penang Watch

Kg Buah Pala is like a bubble which has been waiting to burst: the first smell of trouble started way back in 2004 and 2005 when the ex-CM Koh Tsu Koon's Exco approved the 50% discount sales of the land at RM10.00/sq ft;Then the residents belived that the seemingly all-mighty MIC could help them. So they stuck to supporting BN then. By 2008 they found to their horror that the new condo projects `Oasis' has started distributing their flashy leaflets around and they had been given notice to pack up and leave. Panicked they switched to Pakatan, specifically the DAP, for support. Under the sweet talk by DAP politicians they threw their entire support behind the party in 2008 mar 8th general elections. Pakatan swept Penang, including the state constituency containing Kg Buah Pala. The residents must think then that there is now a light at the end of the tunnel. But without they ever know it the State Government endorsed the transfer of the land title of Kg Buah Pala to the developer, within a month the new state government took over power-much faster than the previous government had taken to do the same!

Now the truth are out: political talk are cheap-the residents' housing rights are pawned. While the public may think that this is just a 1-off misfortune for a small group of Penang residents-there are reasons for the public to think again over their misplaced complacency! While the actual figure is unknown as yet there are significant section of Penang OL land status. So what happen when the State Government think that they want to take back these lands for redevelopment? 

This is an electorally combustible issue-as proven in last Sarawak state election-which helped DAP capture 6 of the state seats in Sarawak. But his issue could prove to work against the party if it is not handled well here. Kg Buah Pala is a test case for such TOL lands-which also include a World Heritage are ie the Clans Jetties at Weld Quay. 

When the new state government came to power last year it promised to transfer all residential TOL land to permament status. Obviously this policy did not take into consideration cases like the kg Buah Pala. Then: which other lands would be excluded? 

At the base of it is the issue: should the real residents of a land enjoy the land which collectively belong to them -or they should be forced to accept what their collective property agent  ie the state government, decide is the higher bidder for the land? In countries like Papua New Guinea an alternative view hold that the land belong to the people who occupy it-not the self-appointed collective property agent! 

Ong BK