ToToTan [Sticker]陈多多@雅 8:43 AM事实再次证明卖砂火箭张管家完全没为砂朥越立场争取权益！当砂朥越政府宣布要在2019年1月1号开始征收石油与天然气“原料出口”销售税时，张管家第一时间为马来亚国油公司背书，张管家深怕马来亚联邦政府和国油公司少赚了那5%的销售税！这是出卖砂权益的造告行为！

当听到砂政府宣布正在向马来亚国油公司收取价值39亿令吉作为砂朥越国家发展基金的“额外收入”后，马来亚经济部长阿兹敏被吓到了！阿兹敏随后立即飞到古晋试图和阿邦左谈判降低征税（例如0％）

如砂朥越政府不同意，他打算威胁撤回早前2019预算案拨给砂朥越的40亿！庆幸的是砂朥越政府并没有被他的威胁有所动摇！据说阿邦左的回应是“如果你撤回分配给砂朥越的40亿预算，那么我们就将提高收取15％的税收（大约120亿令吉)”！

不止阿滋敏亲自出手，他还和张管家里应外合软硬兼施的逼砂政府收回向国油公司征5%销售税！张管家利用他卖砂火箭最拿手的误导抹黑企图混淆视听，把砂政府要新征收的石油天然气“原料出口”销售税硬辩成是向人民开刀征税，这是不正确的！张管家再次企图欺骗误导砂朥越人民，他只为马来亚和国油公司设想，从不为砂朥越前途发展而奋斗！

阿邦左已经清楚说明这新征的5%销售税是《原油、化学肥料、天然气、液化天然气等原产品。而不是消费者商品》。这些原产品都必须出口砂朥越，因此这项新税是抽在石油和天然气公司上，特别是马来亚国油公司，而不是一般老百姓！

阿兹敏很清楚，所以开始为马来亚国油担心。然而假砂朥越人卖砂火箭张管家还继续混肴砂朥越人民，乱称这个石油产品销售税是抽在人民身上！所以说这如果不是现代卖砂贼，那还是什么？如果说70年代“耶谷”第一次出卖了砂朥越权益，那么卖砂火箭张管家就是现代2018年的第二波出卖砂权益的历史罪人！

马来亚国油在2019年将一次性发放300亿股息给联邦政府，国家石油公司在预算案提呈之後，马上发表文告表示，此举不会影响国油的基本面和现金流。那么阿兹敏为什么还担心国油不能负担砂的5%销售税（39亿令吉）？

可以给马来亚联邦300亿的股息作为商品及服务税退款而不会损害其经营，为什么向沙朥越支付5％的税3亿-5亿就会损害国油的利益？难道给马来亚就可以，给砂朥越就不可以？要知道这石油天然气是属于砂朥越的，而不是属于你们马来亚的！

所以如果马来亚国油公司觉得有负担，那么国油可以推出砂朥越采油行列，没人逼国油petronas 一定要在砂开采对吧！所以马来亚国油Petronas是可以选择退出的！

5%的销售税我还嫌抽少了，为了砂朥越，抽10%的石油天然气原料出口销售税也不为过！

如果马来亚觉得我们砂朥越是麻烦制造者，那么就请把我们砂朥越踢出马来西亚联邦！If Malaya feels that Sarawak is a trouble maker, So please take us Sarawak out of Malaysian Federation.

卖砂火箭张管家已经不是砂朥越人，他处处只为马来亚设想，从来不为砂朥越争取应有的权益，这就是卖砂造告！

＃509有种投票叫卖砂

https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2018/11/05/petronas-can-absorb-negative-cashflows-of-rm40b-for-2-years-says-sp/
My comments:
当砂罗越人从醒觉开始到警觉再到爱砂国，这股力量那一种武器可以阻止呢？  迈向砂罗越独立国是[势在必行]。到时，马来亚政府还敢如此嚣张吗？ 想象一下，没有一直以来1974开始砂罗越和沙巴这些石油天然气后还有1976其他违宪的税收后，马来亚的日子，怎么过呢？ 掠夺剥削压制霸凌砂沙两国后，还要向我们凶，还要耍威风呢？
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Ｂｌｏｇ，Ｔｗｅｅｔ ａｎｄ ｆａｃｅit 9/11/2018 砂罗越人的砂罗越

Ｂｌｏｇ，Ｔｗｅｅｔ　ａｎｄ　ｆａｃｅit　2/11/2018　

　　　　　　　　　　砂罗越人的砂罗越

        我相信2021砂罗越选举，第三势力会至少赢得50席位或更多。 现在，我希望各党各派系会同心协力共同合作以达到这目标。[有志者事竟成]或where there is a will, there is a way.   我跟我先生打赌。大概三年后，砂罗越会独立。他说不会这么快。至少也要7年。嗯。。嗯，反正，我们没有下赌钱。互相没有压力。

     砂罗越是100%属于砂罗越人的。 捍卫砂罗越是砂人的责任。[国家兴亡，匹夫有责]；[砂国兴亡，个个砂人有责]。对，我们要准备踢马来亚政党。 这些马来亚政党是会真正分裂砂国（1841成立的哦。James Brooke 是我们建国之父。）我们不能靠现有的政府。他们真的不行。 我们要靠的是人民的力量。 来表现砂罗越[獾]的精神，为了砂罗越的完整和独立，绝不退缩。

        砂罗越人要从新认识我们的国家砂罗越。在联合国的国家纪录中，她绝不是马来亚的领土，有别于台湾，香港。。。  我们只是被托管因为当年，我们砂人没有自治的能力。早在30年前，我们开始有自治能力是，可是我们的权益几乎都被马来亚政府[鲸吞]了。 马来亚的政府，正如已故李光耀先生所言马来亚政客们不是要按照MA63 [合作]发展， 他们是以马来西亚名义要[鲸吞]他区。他们当年马来亚第一任首相Tunku Abdul Rahman就抱着这种野心参组，接着Najib 的阿爸Tun Razak，就使用各种下流低级手段, 513后就邪恶的发出警急法令（emergency law）特意利用这法令把砂沙拼吞。接着就来个1974年石油发展法令，我砂沙两国的石油资源[鲸吞]了。 1976年又来另一个走违反[国际法令]把砂沙两国贬低成州，[顺理成章]任由中央掠夺，剥削，盗取，压制和霸凌欺压。

       醒觉后的砂罗越人，对马来西亚=马来亚代表[掠夺，剥削，盗取，压制和霸凌欺压]。殖民砂沙两国。是的，很多砂罗越人对马来西亚这联邦国名开始有那种莫名其妙的反感和[邪恶的联想]。我希望马来亚国旗有那1天在我们砂沙两国消失的无形无踪。 所有马来政党统统被踢出我们的砂沙两国。 不让砂沙两国人被收买，为了个人的权益，来出卖自己的国家。从1963年参组马来西亚，我们砂沙两国人，多少政客成为[卖国贼]。历史有一天会有交待的。是谁？ 当年，人民无知的很不行。现在人民普遍都醒觉了。所以509后砂的DAP的人马都被95%的华人骂到[臭烂]。 509之前，张健仁是张健仁；509后张健仁是脏贱人。

        509后，大家都看得清清楚楚DAP一帮人马[卖国贼]那副贱相。我真的，真的，真的，，，，感到不能言喻的[恶心]。我相信很多人跟我一样或我跟很多人一样对ＤＡＰ人马感到不能言喻的[恶心]。这一切都归功于马来亚那些邪魔们的［邪恶策划］的因果。　要解除这些罪恶重复着，避免我们砂人做傻事，出卖砂国换取无限利益，我们真的要切割这种［联邦和州］的关系。我们砂人就要坚决［脱马独立］。有个流传名言［脱马无罪，独立有理］砂罗越独立的大业是［势在必行］，没有回头路。５５年被马来亚政府很［狗］任由中央掠夺，剥削，盗取，压制和霸凌欺压，够了吧。

Blog and Tweet 30/10/2018 9: 5: 3 Vs 3: 5: 9

Blog and Tweet 30/10/2018    9: 5: 3 Vs 3: 5: 9
不是采取多数决 为什么要这么样安排马来亚9个（加主席）；沙巴5个；砂3个？ 不然这么安排了砂8个砂政府自己选人；沙巴8个；马来亚3个。怎么样? 时代不一样了。独裁 随时都要面对人民的审判。虽然砂罗越卖国者还是保持不变。但是，这时代做卖国贼，好像也不容易哦。天天都要面对人民的诅咒。张健仁是否有调查95%支持希盟的，现在还有10%支持吗？

Associations support DM's stand on rights over O&G resources

        MIRI: The Bu­mi­put­era com­mu­nity here are in full sup­port of Chief Min­is­ter Datuk Pat­inggi Abang Jo­hari Tun Openg’s state­ment that Sarawak will not com­pro­mise on reg­u­la­tory rights over its oil and gas re­sources.

Miri Malay As­so­ci­a­tion( PMM) pres­i­dent Radzali Ali­sion, in par­tic­u­lar, said PMM fully en­dorsed the state gov­ern­ment’s firm stand on Sarawak’ rights to its min­eral re­sources as stip­u­lated in its Oil Min­ing Or­di­nance (OMO) 1958 and its rights un­der Malaysia Agree­ment 1963 (MA63).
      How­ever, he said PMM would like the state to get all its O& G in­dus­try play­ers to im­me­di­ately ad­here to all reg­u­la­tions un­der the OMO with­out any grace pe­riod, es­pe­cially in the case of Petronas.

“   PMM sup­ports the Chief Min­is­ter on the rights over Sarawak’s oil and gas re­sources,” Radzali told The Bor­neo Post on Sun­day.
       Radzali also said PMM sug­gested that the Sarawak gov­ern­ment seek de­tails of how pay­ments/roy­al­ties are cal­cu­lated by Petronas all these years and to im­me­di­ately, be­fore the end of this year, claim back all ar­rears due to the state and its peo­ple.
        He said Petronas must also give guar­an­tee of em­ploy­ment of lo­cals, which should form part of the terms of is­su­ing li­cences un­der the OMO or other rel­e­vant or­di­nances.

        PMM sup­ports the Chief Min­is­ter on the rights over Sarawak’s oil and gas re­sources. Radzali Ali­sion, Miri Malay As­so­ci­a­tion(PMM) pres­i­dent.

        On the MA63 is­sue, PMM would like Gabun­gan Parti Sarawak (GPS) and all Sarawak mem­bers of Par­lia­ment to pro­pose ap­pro­pri­ate amend­ments to any rel­e­vant fed­eral laws in the com­ing par­lia­men­tary ses­sion with­out wait­ing for the fed­eral gov­ern­ment to ini­ti­ate such changes, he added.
        Shar­ing the same view, Per­sat­uan Ke­dayan Miri ( PKM) chair­man Mohd Ab­dul­lah is con­fi­dent that Abang Jo­hari is look­ing at the is­sue from a big­ger per­spec­tive.
He said what­ever de­ci­sion made should be of Sarawak’s in­ter­ests and rights and no other par­ties can just step in and do what­ever they want to the state’s re­sources.

    “The peo­ple of Sarawak have waited so long for our rights to O& G and MA63 and to wait any longer will be very frus­trat­ing and un­for­give­able,” he said fur­ther.

   “Our CM has made his re­search and find­ing on our rights be­fore we joined Malaysia as we (Sarawak and Sabah) are equal part­ners with Malaya and stay firm on the de­ci­sion.”
       Per­sat­uan Jat­tie Meriek ( PJM) com­mit­tee mem­ber Sarkawi Hamzah said the as­so­ci­a­tion sup­ported the chief min­is­ter’s stand.

The Borneo Post

My Comments:

     I hope that more and more organisations like the ones above will stand up to give their point of view on Sarawak's rights.

theborneopost.com

SUPP wants equal footing for federal govt, Sarawak and Sabah in MA63 Committee

Michael Tiang

        KUCHING: The Pakatan Harapan (PH) government must initiate an Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) for the Federation of Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak to meet and honour the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).
The PH government, by heading and dominating the MA63 Special Cabinet Committee, will defeat the original spirit and intent of the three regions coming together to form Malaysia in 1963, said Sarawak United People’s Party (SUPP) Youth chief Michael Tiang.
     “In order to sincerely and effectively review the enforcement of MA63 after 55 years of the formation of Malaysia, for a start, the PH government must initiate an IGC for Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak to meet and honour MA63,” he said yesterday.
Tiang, who is a political secretary to the chief minister, noted that the MA63 Special Cabinet Committee has only two state representatives each from Sabah and Sarawak.
        The two representatives are the Chief Minister and State Attorney General (AG), he said.
     “The rest are mostly federal cabinet members and federal officers. I’m afraid by setting up the committee in such composition, it is definitely not intended to set a convincing platform for inter-governmental in nature, not to mention to review equal partnership of both Sabah and Sarawak in the federation,” he said.
Works Minister Baru Bian from Sarawak and International Trade and Industry Darell Leiking from Sabah are among the federal cabinet ministers in the special committee.
        As such, Tiang said he supported Chief Minister Datuk Patinggi Abang Johari Tun Openg’s earlier suggestion that the special committee should follow in the footsteps of the IGC 1962 structure.
       The SUPP man said the committee should comprise the three governments (federal government, Sarawak government and Sabah government) headed by the British, which serves as a neutral party to the federation.
    “It should not be a steering committee under the federal cabinet headed by the prime minister. The first footing is already not made on the right path.
    “To review MA63 enforcement in Malaysia, the three governments should be given chances to meet on an equal footing too,” asserted Tiang.
Back in 1962, he said there were five representatives from the British, eight from Malaya, 10 from Sarawak and eight from Sabah.
   “Each brought their own AG, state secretary, financial secretary, chief minister and other relevant members of the state assembly,” he added.
Last Wednesday, de-facto Law Minister Datuk Liew Vui Keong announced the formation of the MA63 Special Cabinet Committee to review and propose measures to rectify the status of Sabah and Sarawak.
      He said the committee, headed by the prime minister, comprised eight federal ministers and other members including Abang Johari and Sabah Chief Minister  Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal.
      The eight ministers are Liew, Baru, Darell, Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng, Economic Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Azmin Ali, Communications and Multimedia Minister Gobind Singh Deo, Foreign Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah and Transport Minister Anthony Loke.
       According to Liew, the committee will meet in a month’s time, after which it will hold a meeting once a month for the next six months.
       He said everything including oil royalty and other developments will be discussed, adding: “We would like to go to the core of  the matter, mainly the implementation of the Malaysia Agreement.”

theborneopost.com

Grounds to sue UK Government and Federal Government

By Voon Lee Shan

Voon Lee Shan

        The Cobbold Commission Report was misleading and should not be used to draft the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) for the formation of the Federation of Malaysia.
        This is because the inquiry conducted by the Commission interviewed only about 4,000 out of the 700,000 people in Sarawak to assess whether they wanted Sarawak to be included in the formation of Malaysia.
        It revealed that only 1/3 agreed to the formation of Malaysia, 1/3 disagreed and the other 1/3 doubtful. The 4,000 people interviewed (less than 1 per cent of the population) could not represent the voice of the whole people of Sarawak at that time.
         Therefore, MA63 should be declared null and void because it was based on a misleading report of the Cobbold Commission to the British government at that time.
        The effect of any null and void agreement could not be used to form a binding contract be it an agreement like MA63.
        Worse still, MA63 is an International Treaty which should be perfectly drafted and should not be based on misleading findings or information. My humble view is that Malaysia should not be formed based on a void MA63.
        Now, the federal government wants to rectify the wrongs caused by the Cobbold Commission and is trying to convince the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak that MA63 is a valid Agreement.
        The formation of Malaysia had not benefitted the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak and, being sovereign nations before Malaysia, both Sabah and Sarawak were then reduced in status to states only.
        The sovereignty of these nations had been affected.  The federal government wants to overcome the unhappiness of the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak by first amending Article 1(2) Federal Constitution by putting back the status of Sabah and Sarawak from states to their rightful status as nations of their own within the Federation.
        The federal government argued that the erosion of rights of the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak as entrenched in MA63 could not be rectified unless the Constitution is amended.
       My humble opinion is: What have we to rectify when the legality of the formation of Malaysia is questionable?
       Even if MA63 had been legally passed or constructed, the several fundamental breaches of MA63 by the federal government had made Malaysia no more a sensible political union between Sabah and Sarawak with the Federation of Malaya.
Now, we are waiting in suspense how and when all flaws caused by MA63 could be rectified.  The governments of Sabah and Sarawak should not be trapped by the call by the federal government through the Law Minister, YB Liew Vui Keong, a Sabahan, to go to the negotiation table to review and to rectify the loss or erosion of rights caused by the federal government as entrenched in MA63.
         To put all things right that went wrong which began nearly 60 years ago may take 60 years or longer to undo. Our pride that Sabah and Sarawak are sovereign nations had been affected.
        Since there is an admission of the erosion of the rights of the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak by the federal government, this perhaps could be a good ground to sue the federal government for loss caused till now.
       My humble opinion is also that since MA63 should be flawed the UK government should be responsible for the loss incurred by the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak.
       The Sarawak government is urged to sue UK and federal government for loss incurred by the peoples of Sarawak.  Such a legal process is possible because if Hindraf could do it or file such suits in UK, there is no reason the Sarawak Government could not do it.
The writer is a lawyer and former Batu Lintang state assemblyman.

theborneopost.com

Soo asks why Sarawak PH silent on revenue sharing

Lina Soo

KUCHING: Sarawak Reform Party (STAR) president Lina Soo is puzzled as to why Sarawak Pakatan Harapan (PH) seemed to be muzzled and failed to address Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng’s statement in Parliament that revenue sharing with Sarawak will only be upon improvement of the Malaysia economy.
        Soo also questions Lim’s ambiguity and political doublespeak in saying that the federal government requires more time, or Sarawak has to wait until next year and also to wait until the country’s financial position permits, before sharing revenue with Sarawak.
    “What excuse is he using, to hoodwink Sarawakians to cover up their tracks to continue to plunder Sarawak’s resources, specifically oil and gas, and taxes contributed by Sarawak?” she said in a statement issued here.
       Soo also named Pakatan MPs from Sarawak – Chong Chieng Jen, Baru Bian and Dr Kelvin Yii – for failing to live up to their promise of increased royalty to 20 per cent and the return of 50 per cent of Sarawak’s taxes to Sarawak.
     “Are their pledges just empty words before general election? Why are they lost for words now?
     “It is the duty of the federal government to ensure that Sarawak has money for development after collecting Sarawak’s oil revenue and taxes.   Furthermore Pakatan had promised that there will be more money as there will be no more corruption. Why is it not happening?” she asserted.
        Soo also alleged that the previous Barisan Nasional (BN) regime took oil-producing states’ wealth and taxes, and made sure that no state could survive without federal aid.
     “And now the Pakatan regime is simply continuing the exploitation of Sarawak’s wealth and making Sarawak a beggar state.  This is not by accident but by design,” she added.
        Soo reminded the Pakatan government that there is no condition in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) that revenue sharing is subject to the economic and fiscal condition of Malaysia.
        She said this was another unilateral or one-sided imposition of terms and conditions by the federal government which repudiates the MA63, and compounds the multiple breaches of the international treaty upon which the Federation of Malaysia exists.
       “If the federal government refuses to return its revenue, then Soo questions what is the meaning of Sarawak remaining in the federation when it defeats its very purpose, in a situation where the federal government sabotages Sarawak’s economy and continues its flagrant breaches of the Malaysia Agreement.
     “Sarawak is at the crossroads, and the Sarawak people must be wise to stand up to more bullying and exploitation, regardless of whichever regime is in power,” she said.
      According to news reports, Lim had said in the Parliament on Wednesday that although a formula on revenue sharing with Sabah and Sarawak will be inked next year, this will only be implemented when government’s finances permit it.
      Revenue sharing with Sabah, and Sarawak as well as higher oil royalties are among the promises made by the Pakatan Harapan government in its election manifesto.
       Datuk Seri Nancy Shukri (GPS-Batang Sadong) then asked Lim to give a proper deadline on the implementation.
      Telling her to be patient, Lim said before Pakatan came to power, there was no plan to share revenue with Sabah and Sarawak.
   “This is wrong.   I was involved in the committee discussions. Please retract the statement,” countered Nancy, the former minister in the Prime Minister’s Department.

My comments:
The Sarawak government headed by Abang Johari should take the stronger stand to stop the taxes collected in Sarawak to go into the federal coffer.  The Sarawak government should cut short the grace period from the end of 2019 to the end of 2018 for Petronas to apply for the licences to do businesses in Sarawak.  Abang Johari should be strong and has no fear when Sarawakians 95% are behind him.