Most Read
Most Commented
mk-logo
From Our Readers

LETTER | I read with interest the letter A tale of two taman - Taman Tugu and Taman Rimba Kiara. It tells the tale based on what information is available to the writer. While much is said, unfortunately not all is told, presumably not due to any malice but more due to insufficient information.

The Taman Tugu project was in a state of uncertainty when the Pakatan Harapan government came to power. It had a RM650 million initial price tag and much of it was to come from the Public-Private Partnership Unit (Ukas) and Khazanah. Ukas pulled out and it was left to Khazanah and the Ministry of Federal Territories to decide what to do. After some discussion, it was decided to scale down the project to around RM110 million with Khazanah bearing most of the cost and the Federal Territories Ministry contributing around RM20 million (or RM19,768,464 to be precise) through DBKL.

In May this year, the ministry presented a cabinet paper to pass the ownership and responsibility of overseeing Taman Tugu to a foundation formed specially to look after Taman Tugu called Amanah Warisan Negara or Awan for short. This foundation will seek contributions and sponsors, local and international, to upkeep Taman Tugu.

The cabinet paper was passed and the Federal Territories Ministry is proud of its role in securing and protecting this 66-acre tropical rainforest in the city.

The case of Taman Rimba Kiara is very different. When Harapan came to power, 12 acres of this 25-acre taman had been sold to Yayasan Wilayah Persekutuan (YWP) and had been rezoned for mixed development. That occurred in 2013. Since then, a joint-venture was set up by YWP with a developer and a Development Order (DO) was issued. It is claimed that an expenditure of about RM150 million had been incurred and cancellation of the DO would mean DBKL would have to refund the expenditure and buy back the land to re-gazette it as park land. On top of that, another RM25 to RM30 million would be required to build homes for the longhouse residents.

Even if there is a party which agrees to build the houses for them, the proposal to build the houses on the four-acre longhouse footprint may face opposition from the longhouse residents. They will have to be moved out until the houses are ready and they do not want this. But, of course, opposition from the poor and defenceless is not a problem and can be easily handled. Who cares what they want, right? After all, they are not members of any residents' association worth mentioning.

The reason why new houses were not to be built on the longhouse footprint was due to a desire to respect the wishes of the longhouse residents. Their wishes have been ignored for the past 37 years. Let us listen to their appeals this one time.

The longhouse residents have requested they be allowed to stay there while their new houses are built. They do not want to be uprooted, separated from their temple and left vulnerable for the length of time the project is undertaken.

What if the project is delayed or worse, abandoned? What if the rental of their temporary homes are not paid? Who will look after their temple while they are away? Such concerns had been expressed during the negotiations which were held in 2015. So it was agreed they will not be moved out and will stay there. The poor and the old have many concerns and fears.

Besides Taman Rimba Kiara, Taman Tun Dr Ismail residents also have around 400 acres of park land at the nearby Taman Persekutuan Bukit Kiara. The Federal Territories Ministry has already tabled a paper to the cabinet to gazette 274.3 acres of this park and will gazette the balance when the current lease expires.

Drawing parallels between Taman Tugu and Taman Rimba Kiara cannot be any further from the truth. One was earmarked for conservation while the other for development. Both were handled in the best way possible given the circumstances.


The writer is press secretary to the minister of federal territories.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.

ADS