I refer to the article Upgrade infrastructure to revive Ipoh, DAP urges .

LNG supply

To suggest that Ipoh’s fortunes will be revived by Petronas supplying liquefied natural gas to the city’s industrial sector is rather over-simplifying the problem. Cheap power is not the only factor although it is an important factor.

Logistics is an area which handicaps Ipoh vis-a-vis Penang and KL. Expanding the airport is only part of the answer. What Ipoh (Perak) really needs is a port and for this we have the best natural harbour in Peninsula Malaysia – Lumut.

It will be a huge project but ultimately it will pay dividends as it will make it more attractive to set up in Perak. There are other factors like cheap land, a pool of educated and trainable manpower, minimum red tape etc.

Expanding the airport is pointless if there is not enough traffic. Already airlines operating small aircrafts connecting Ipoh to Singapore and Medan are finding it unprofitable, what about bigger aircrafts?

Public transport

Yes, the public transport system in Ipoh sucks. The companies operating buses in Ipoh run old rust buckets which not only pollute the place but are a danger to road users.

While the Pakatan Rakyat government’s proposal to introduce 300 air-conditioned buses is commendable, their plan for a transport hub which did not have public feedback before it was drawn up will disadvantage most users rather than benefit them.

The perception was that a deal was stitched up with certain favoured business interests and then the plan put to the public as a fait accompli. That went against the CAT (competency, accountability and transparency) principle touted by DAP.

Free WiFi etc

This is a good idea but I can’t see how by just providing free WiFi, Ipoh-ites will turn into intellectuals. Maybe more libraries or a better library service is a better way. Free WiFi will no doubt help the business sector and that is good.

‘Implementation of environmentally friendly renewal energy sourcing’ – what does this mean? It’s not use just bandying vague statements without substantiating them. How do Nga Kor Ming and his taskforce propose to do that?

As to the proposal to use five languages for road signs, I can see where they are coming from; but Arabic? Since when did we have Arabs in Ipoh or Arabs visiting Ipoh in numbers to justify this? This is just a ridiculous suggestion to please who?

Malays are not Arabs and most of them do not speak or read Arabic (save reciting the Quran). It’s such a transparently political ploy that it is laughable.

Local government elections

The task force has saved the best for last: local government elections – in line with the principle of ‘no taxation without representation’. If this were the case then Ipoh-ites should not have had to pay taxes during the time of the Pakatan government, but they did.

This last and ‘most important’ proposal is just bull. . . t! When in power, Pakatan introduced a system whereby some local councilors were from the public (with no party affiliations) but still at least three quarters were party hacks.

While this is an improvement on the BN’s system of loading local councils entirely with party hacks, it is not the same as having local elections. Also in nominating members of the public I note that Pakatan had assiduously avoided nominating members of certain NGOs which have contributed to monitoring local government actions.

In short, the Pakatan government was more interested in getting councilors who were docile and would not challenge the government. While in power, the Pakatan government did nothing to bring on local government elections.

Instead, it cites the Local Government Act as the obstacle for doing this. So why is it now saying that it will bring back local government elections? You mean they have found a way around the Local Government Act?

The report lacks details – how will the proposals be funded and how will they be implemented? Until we see the details, this is just another of those ‘pulling wool over the public’s eyes’ - a PR exercise that political parties carry out.

I don’t think political parties should take the public for fools.