Wong sing Nang webpage

Encik Wong Sing Nang: Thank you, Tuan Speaker. I rise to take part in the debate of the Land Code (Amendment) Bill, 1997. My speech would only concentrate on two parts, Clause 19 of the Bill and Clause 6 of the Bill. I will first deal with Clause 19 of the Amendment Bill which proposes to add immediately after Part 9 of the Land Code a new Part namely Part 10 to the Land Code. This is in line with the view to consolidate and integrate the laws relating to sub-division of land to be governed by the Land Code. Hence it is proposed to repeal the Land (Control of Subdivision) Ordinance (Cap.82) and to consolidate the laws relating to sub-division and development of land with the Land Code so that sub-division and development of land becomes part of the Land Code.

Under this part, a body, a State Planning Authority (SPA) is established to approve all sub-division and development of land with provisions for the Authority to delegate some of its statutory functions to the Director of Lands and Surveys or to any public officer.

The functions of the State Planning Authority is stated in the Bill are among others, to plan, control and regulate the development and use of all land and buildings and to consider and approve, subject to such terms and conditions as it may deem fit to impose plans for sub-division, development of land, and to formulate policies and guidelines for and to give directions to local authorities with regard to the use and development of land within their respective jurisdictions.

           This part of   the   Bill also spells out the procedure for application for sub-division and development of land. In Peninsular Malaysia, there is an act called Town and Country Planning Act 1976 that is Act 172. It provides the policy administration and setting up of the State Planning Committee and Local Panning Authority and the functions of the Local Planning Authorities. Every local council shall be the local planning authority for its own district and its functions are to regulate, control and plan the development of all lands and buildings within the area and also to undertake, to assist and to encourage the collection, maintenance and publications of statistics, bulletin and monogramme and other publications relating to town and country planning.

          Although our Local Government structure is different from that of the Peninsular Malaysia perhaps, we might consider also to have our Local Authority be our own Local Planning Authority instead of having a Centralised State Planning Authority. The Local Authority will play a more effective role in this aspect if it is given the power to plan its own town and country. Such devolution of power reflects the participation of the local population in decision making process. Also a Local Authority understands its own area better than a State Planning Authority and in a better position to keep under review the principle physical economic, environmental and social characteristics of the area in so far as they maybe expected to affect that area in terms of distribution of population of that area whether resident or not. Under the Building Ordinance 1994 Section 5(1) it provides that the competent planning authority in certain areas may take possession of land within the regular line of street. This competent authority referred to in Section   2   of   the   Building   Ordinance 1994    includes the   Director of Lands and   Surveys and any person on whom the powers are conferred on by the Director of Lands and Surveys under the Land Control Sub-division Ordinance.

SMART PLAN

           Tuan Speaker, I would like to know why did   the competent authority approve buildings to be constructed right in the middle of a road as had happened in Sibu particularly at Foochow Lane and also at the front portion of Hua Kiew Road. For one incident at the entrance of Terap Lane from Brooke Drive only half of the road was being constructed due to the existence of a big residential house there. Is this proper town planning? How can such a plan be approved by the planning authority? These are the questions that we have to ask. In Section 4 of the Building Ordinance 1994 it provides that the competent planning authority may prescribe a line on each side of a public street between which no portion of any building may abut thereto after such line has been prescribed and drawn. The Planning Authority must not compromise in town and city planning and give approval to plans due to pressure from some quarters. We must plan smartly to have smart towns and cities in the future. We must have competent planners. Clause 19 of the Bill does not specify when the Superintendent should forward the documents referred to above together with his comments to the Planning Authority through the Director.
          A time frame should be prescribed for example within     six months after submission of the plans to the Superintendent to forward them to the Director of Lands   & Surveys. Also there   is no specific time   frame   after receiving the application from the Director of Lands and Surveys for the Director to forward them to the State Planning Authority for it to approve or reject the application.

            I   propose that, within six months the State Planning Authority should either approve, reject or require a new plan to be prepared and submitted for approval. This will bring certainty to the applicants and also give fairness to their applications.

CAR PARKING SPACE

I also wish to touch on matters which are crucial to the car parking space which is also under the purview of the State Planning Authority. At present, the number of car parking spaces to be provided would be determined by having regard to the usage of the land or buildings intended to be built thereon or alternatively the State Planning Authority may accept such sum of money as may be fixed by the rules made under Section 248 for each car parking space in lieu of making provisions for such space required by the Authority.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, the government should change the car parking space policy. If the building plans do not provide sufficient car parking space then the Planning Authority should insist on constructing additional car park stories or creating additional car parking spaces. The Planning Authority should not accept payment in lieu of making provision for each car parking space required. The shortage of car parking spaces will accelerate with town population growth. In future car parking will become so difficult that it will certainly cause traffic congestion and jam in town. Mr. Speaker, Sir, that is part of my observation on the State Planning Authority which could be established under Clause 19 of the Amendment Bill.

CONCEPT NCR BARU

In the second part I would like to make some observations on the Bill introduced which intended to allow and give power to the Government to acquire Native Customary Land for agriculture development particularly the oil palm plantations. Clause 6 of the Bill which is the new Section 18(ii) provides ?The Superintendent may amalgamate all lands within a development area referred to in Sub-Section I over which native may acquire ownership or over such land at any adjoining state land into one parcel of land for the purpose of issuing a single document of title to the body corporate approved by the Minister?. The new Section 18(iii) states that on the expiry of a lease issued to the body corporate under Sub-Section 1 ?Any native whose land has been included in such a lease may apply to the Superintendent for the issue to him of a grant over his land or any part thereof and the Superintendent may, subject to the direction of the Director issue such grant to the native upon such terms and conditions as he may deem fit to impose?.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Government recently introduces the new concept of NCR land development formulated on the premises that huge area of such land be turned into plantation with a new form of life to facilitate a joint-venture operation with the private sector for the purpose of a large plantation development.

The idea behind this move is to turn the NCR land into an economic asset by the creation of NCR land bank with an optimum return from such investment on sustainable basis of more than 5,000 hectares per NCR land bank.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, when I attended The New Concept of the NCR Land Development Seminar on the 30th August, 1997 at Damai Lagoon Kuching, we were made to understand that this joint venture model of development, will have the following equity shares and structure. The partners, the private investors --- 60%, managing agent on behalf of NCR owners---30%, and the managing agent---10%. And to protect the landowners we were also made to understand that there were three sets of legal documents which should be executed by the State Government, NCR owners, trustees and the investors. These legal documents are the Deeds, Trust Deeds and the Joint-Venture Agreement which will determine the duties, commitments and responsibilities of each party involved in the project including that of the State Government.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, the land title should be registered under the name of the Joint-Venture Company, (JVC) for a period of 60 years after which the NCR owners should would have the option to decide. My observation, is specifically on this Clause 18, the new Section 18. My first observation, is that the legal documents namely the Deeds, Trust Deeds and the Joint-Venture Agreement must be in statutory form since they are going to be standard legal documents applicable to all joint-venture developments. This will avoid all misunderstandings and when necessary if there be any abuse, to seek for legal remedy.

My second observation, is that if there are landowners who refuse to participate in the joint venture development, they should have their rights protected in the statutory form and the authority concerned may not issue any individual land title to those landowners who object to these developments. He or she must have some form of document to prove or substantiate that he or she objects to the plantation development and is at liberty to develop his or her own land.

Perhaps a statutory form should be designed for him or her to sign and acknowledge the fact that his or her land be left within the land bank for his or her own use or cultivation.

My third observation, is that, we should have a statutory registration book to keep all the particulars of this joint-venture developments and all transactions relating to this developments be entered into such registration book and be kept by the Resident of that particular division and access to the registration book be allowed to interested persons upon payment of a prescribed fee to be fixed by the Authority concerned. This will uphold the principle of transparency and accountability and thereby prevent creating any unnecessary misunderstanding between parties concerned.

My fourth observation is that the NCR landowners must form a Board of Trustees to safeguard their interests. The members of the Board of Trustees who are elected by the landowners themselves should hold office for a period of five years and be gazetted. This would be the best system for them to run the joint-venture for themselves as they are entitled to be seated in the board of the joint venture company. This will also reflect the spirit and trust of the landowners.
My fifth observation is that the NCR landowners should be issued with some form of certificate or at least some form of document to certify their respective shares in a joint-venture company. This will assist and facilitate the administration of their lands in future. Such documents or certificates will also assist the landowners to pass their interests in their lands to their future generations. This is so because the lease is for a period of 60 years, which is a fairly long

time and if the present owners passed away the future generations may not have any document to prove that they are the descendants of the present owners. Therefore, for the smooth administration of the scheme, some form of document or certificate ought to be issued to the landowners to enable them to pass their interests in the land or to their future generations.

My sixth observation is that the issue document of title issued to the joint-venture company should be for a period of 60 years whether or not the Government intends to provide a saving Clause to the effect that the parties to the agreement may request for a review of the agreement to decide whether the joint-venture is on sound footing with a ten years interval after signing the agreement.

Mr. Speaker, Sir, the new Section 18(a) (iii) if I may now read, ?On the expiry of a lease issued to the body corporate under the Sub-Section 1 any native whose land has been included in such a lease may apply to the Superintendent for the lease to be issued to him in the form of a grant over his land or any part thereof?. The word ?may? ought to be substituted by the word ?shall? because the identity of the landowners would already have been identified when the joint-venture agreement are signed or to be signed, so who are the natives entitled after the expiry of the 60 years lease would already have been clear.

Lastly, Mr. Speaker, Sir, with regards to the re-entry by officials in case of breach or default, this is provided under Clause 12, a new Section 23 of the Land Code. As you all know there are a lot of landowners who are in breach of land title conditions and that is why I believe the Government is introducing the Land Control

Prescribed Trading (Activities) Bill to be debated in this Dewan tomorrow. I agree with the procedures laid out in this section because opportunity would be given to the landowners who have breached the land title conditions or are in default of the conditions stated in the land title to apply and be given an opportunity to be heard. I believe this is in line with the National Land Code used in Peninsular Malaysia. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I support this Clause 12 of the Bill but I make a big reservation on Clause 6 of the Bill, that is the new Section 18(a) of the Land Code (Amendment) Bill. If I may, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would suggest that this House should refer this Bill to the Select Committee as had been done in the Parliament when the Dangerous Drug Bill was referred to a Select Committee, where it heard all the views from the various sectors before eventually passing the Act in Parliament. So, I wonder whether we can also refer this Bill to the Select Committee to hear the views from the landowners and their comments on the various observations made by the Honourable Members of this House to a date, probably, in the next sitting of the Dewan.

And with that Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise. Thank you