How ridiculous it is 23/5/22

I wonder how the GPS government led by Premier AbangJohari is going to protect the rights of Sarawak without going to court to repeal the Continental Shelf Act 1966; the Petroleum Development Act 1974 and Territorial Sea Act 2012 to restore the eroded rights by just claiming them on their own. It is absurd to say that he would wait for the federal government to take action to sue the Sarawak government. It is idiotic to wait for the plunderers to sue the one being plundered for their wrongdoings. Alamak! What a curse! What a pity! What a shame!

选择性的援助房屋26/2/22

B40与M40难申请房贷 “可负担房屋”沦为空谈

（诗巫25日讯）砂拉越肯雅兰全民党中央财政赵燕芳说，联邦政府应先指示中央银行解决房屋贷款困难的问题，才来谈30万令吉以下的“可负担房屋”（RMM），不然，再好的政策也只是沦为空谈而已，无法实际的帮助B40与M40群体。

 

“从以前的一马房屋（Prima）、SPNB房屋到今天的可负担房屋计划（RMM）等计划，政府制定关于帮助无壳蜗牛一族的政策，看似洋洋洒洒，然而，低收入群体所面对的最主要困境，却是难以取得银行贷款。即使申请获得批准，借贷的条件也很苛刻。”

 

据她了解，一般银行并不喜欢借贷予低收入者，这种风气存在已久，并在今天演变成金融界一种变相的“歧视”文化，导致许多年轻人在购屋或创业时，往往贷款无门。

 

一路来，政府所推出的可负担房屋，并未使广大的B40与M40群体受益，只有那些可申请政府贷款的公务员，符合购买的条件。至于其它领域的低收入人士，几乎都被银行拒于门外。

 

“政府口口声声说要帮助低收入者购买房屋，借此实现居者有其屋目标，然而，国家银行却未放宽借贷的条件，这是多么讽刺的事。或许所谓的帮助对象，只是针对公务员而已，以达致他们的政治议程。”

 

布城的高官乐此不疲的推出可负担房屋的政策，证明了国内无蜗族的比例仍非常高，难道他们对低收入群体无法取得银行贷款的事情，真的一无所知吗？又或者避讳某些政治因素，选择视而不见？

 

“许多无壳蜗牛一族向我们投诉，政府一次又次的给了他们希望，却又一次又一次的撕裂了他们的梦想，因为他们根本无法从银行中取得贷款。这种情况已经对年轻人造成严重负面的冲击，影响他们奋斗的信心。”

 

看新闻说说看25/3/22

15/3/22

砂拉越人的立场一定要掌握好。说好了马来西亚三国联邦是平等伙伴关系。今天砂华人领袖对premier这词是总理还是总督为什么还在犹豫不决呢?既然，咱们讲好马来西亚联邦三邦是平等伙伴关系也符合MA63宪法精神，premier就是总理，名正言顺。华裔的领袖们啊，请勇敢的为砂拉越立场踏出这一步吧!

千万不要再自我贬低，砂拉越堂堂正正的一个邦国过去被自家的政客弄得4不像，今天正是时刻扳回邦国的地位，机会就在砂拉越领袖的手中。记得MA63的合法性是值得咱们去挑战的。一旦上了国际法庭，对马来亚来说是凶多吉少。敢敢的坚持砂拉越人的立场才是王道。马来西亚联邦如果无法遵循MA63宪法精神，那么咱们砂拉越准备退出独立去吧。

砂拉越独立应该是咱们终极目标。只要我们可以凝聚砂拉越人迈向砂拉越

独立目标前进，砂拉越独立是迟早的事。59年砂拉越在所谓的马来西亚联邦体系内是被狠狠殖民的。马来西亚根本就是马来亚的化名。马来亚本意就是要拼吞砂拉越和沙巴。所以不间断的掠夺，剥削，打压，抢劫和霸凌咱们砂拉越和沙巴。

今天，很搞笑的复邦。更搞笑的是砂拉越领袖在总理或总督上这么困难决定呢!暂时，跟马来亚玩玩吧。砂拉越人要有志气在砂国会里去完成砂拉越独立程序，这应该是势在必行的事。这是按照联合国宪章1514赋予咱们砂拉越人自决权。

16/3/22

交地权换取修缮残校? 赖耀松要政盟交代。对啊，咱们全砂拉越人都要砂政盟解释一下怎么一回事。修宪恢复砂拉越为邦的地位，马来亚又来霸凌砂拉越，砂盟怎么都没吭一声呢？

我认为砂盟政府应该发挥砂拉越身为邦国立场。砂拉越政盟应该扮演好一个好政府的角色和发挥政府的功能之一，就是维护自家的权益。

MA63 is a fraud22/3/22

They should not insist on amending the federal constitution by reinstating the lost status of Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners of Malaya in the federation.

“The Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) is a fraud in itself because it says nothing about Sabah and Sarawak being equal to the Federation of Malaya”, he said in a written statement.

Another fraud in the so-called agreement was that at the point that it was signed on July 9, 1963 Sarawak was not a sovereign nation.

In fact, the signing of MA63 violated established international law because Sabah and Sarawak at that time were still colonies of Britain.

“Under international law, only sovereign nations have the legal standing to sign treaties with one another. Thus, the signing of MA63 was also in contravention of Article 7 of the United Nations Decolonisation Declaration of 1960 (UNDD),” he said.

Legal experts also believe that MA63 should be treated as an invalid treaty after Singapore exited from Malaysia.

“The MPs and state governments of Sabah and Sarawak would betray the trust of their people if they insist on or participate in the amendment to the federal constitution,” he said.

“The remedy that Sabah and Sarawak should immediately take now, instead of seeking to amend the federal constitution, is to inform or make representation to the United Nations giving their views that the formation of Malaysia should be considered null and void.

“At the same time, Sabah and Sarawak should under the supervision of the United Nations take steps to proceed with decolonisation process under Article 1514 of the United Nations Resolutions before deciding the fate of Sabah and Sarawak further.”

For decolonisation process many legal minds believe that Britain still has a political obligation to see the decolonisation of Sabah and Sarawak be properly done in accordance with international law. With United Nations Resolutions 1514 and 1541, Sabah and Sarawak were said to be gifts from Britain to the Federation of Malaya on September 16, 1963, to enlarge the territories of the federation.

On that day, Datuk Ong Yoke Lin, the Permanent Secretary to the United Nations from the Federation of Malaya notified that upon the acquisition of Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak, the Federation of Malaya took a new name called the Federation of Malaysia.

Therefore, to many legal experts, Malaysia is Malaya and Malaya is Malaysia, he said.

砂拉越政府的责任23/3/22

砂拉越政府到底责任在哪儿？怎么允许砂拉越短缺5037位教师呢？该是时候要回砂拉越的教育自主权了吧！砂盟政府该发挥邦国的权益吧！砂总理的权力到底有多少份量呢？他怎么能坐视不理砂拉越短缺这么多教师。很多砂拉越人想当教师连门都没有。怎么一回事？

今天，如果砂拉越掌握教育自主权，这种情形绝对不会发生，而且可以制造很多就业机会呢。这一切，能怪谁呢？我们的人民代表们到底在做什么？

Shortage of teachers in Sarawak23/3/22

Shortage of 5037 teachers in Sarawak

On behalf of Sarawakians, I would like to complain about the shortage of 5037 teachers in Sarawak. I am sad to see the happening when many Sarawakians who want to be teachers are deprived of the chance. Isn't it time for GPS government to ask for the return of the education autonomy for good?

The GPS government definitely has the responsibility to address the shortage by training our own teachers. Isn't time to keep the taxes collected from different sources from Sarawak for our own use?

Thank you for your understanding and attention.

Yours faithfully，

Belinda Ling Moi Hung.

The Labuan people decide

Labuan people have right to decide – Hajiji

POSTED ON MARCH 24, 2022, THURSDAY AT 8:52 

KOTA KINABALU (March 24): The people of Labuan have the right to decide whether they want to be part of Sabah again or stay as a Federal Territory.

Chief Minister Datuk Seri Panglima Hajiji Haji Noor said this in reply to elected assemblyman Datuk Seri Panglima Yong Teck Lee who asked the Sabah government to ask the Federal government to return Labuan to Sabah.

“This matter involves the people of that island because they have the right to decide the position of the territory,” he said in the Finance Ministry’s winding-up speech at the State Assembly 

Moi Hung Ling:

What kind of logic is it for the need of Labuan people' right to decide whether to have Labuan returned or "stay as the federal territory when the Malayan government took away Labuan without any consent and approval of the Labuan people?