Not about to miss out on one of the most talked about and high profile weddings of the year, International Women's Association of Penang (IWA) will hold a charity street party at the Straits Quay on 29th April to celebrate the Royal Wedding of Price William and Catherine Middleton. Prince William is second in line to the British throne after Prince Charles, and the couple have been been together, on and off, since 2001.
The wedding which will be held in Westminster Abbey will be screened live on six giant plasma screens via the internet according to Frances Wilks, one of the organizers involved in the event.
Invitations to the wedding service are issued in the name of Her Majesty The Queen and includes 1,900 guests. Out of which, 650 guests have been invited to the lunchtime reception at Buckingham Palace given by the Queen and approximately 300 guests invited to dinner, also at Buckingham Palace, by the Prince of Wales.
The Herald Sun reported that a signal-blocking technology will be installed at the Westminster Abbey to effectively ban Twitter, calls and untimely ringtones. The technology will be turned on early Friday morning British time, and will remain for the whole duration of the ceremony. The move was suggested by the royal family and approved by the security.
The Royal Wedding Street Party at the Straits Quay will cost RM65 for adults and RM40 for children below 13 years old. Those below 5 years old get to go free of charge.
Tickets are available from committee members, IWA office and the Kaffa Kafe in Straits Quay. Ticket prices are inclusive of either two beers or two glasses of wine, together with fish and chips, bangers and mash, coronation chicken with apple crumble and bread and butter pudding. Water and squashes are free flow.
The Pearly King and a "Royal Couple" will make a special appearance.
Prizes are sponsored by Amee Phillips, OE Design, Danai Spa and the G-Hotel too among many others for quizzes on Cockney Rhyming Slang and the Mysterious Images game.
Children will have a chance to be crowned best dressed prince and princess for the evening besides looking forward to drawing and painting competitions.
This event aim to raise funds for 4Paws, a sanctuary founded by Barbara to house abandoned street dogs. Currently she takes care of over 80 dogs and this fund will provide for the dogs' expenses such as food and medical bills.
The IWA is an organization set up to initially support women who accompany their expatriate husbands, but now includes single mothers, women who own businesses here and also women who are on the Malaysia, My Second Home programme. IWA currently has a membership of about 320 members in Penang and is committed to doing charitable work.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Magistrate rules in favour of Bayswater JMB
Magistrate court judge Tengku Sharizan bin Tuan Lah ruled in favour of Bayswater Resort Condominium in an application filed by Lisa Nadia Tan Thuan Li to set aside a warrant of seizure and sale due to a default in maintenance payment amounting to slightly more than RM14,000.
“The court does not want to interfere with the management’s decision,” he declared this morning, claiming that the applicant was indebted to the management.
However another application to release all items belonging to her father, Tan Cheng Lim was approved.
“I will try to apply from the magistrate that no enforcement takes place until the disposal of the appeal,” said lawyer S. Raveentharan who is also the state assemblyman for Batu Uban.
Suraya, from Amareson & Meera, the lawyer representing Bayswater however declined S.Raveentharan’s proposal to meet at the magistrate’s chambers. She requested S.Raveentharan to put in a formal application instead.
Lisa Nadia (right) is a single parent who lives with her father and two children.
She had tried to pay the Bayswater Joint Management Body since last year after receiving the warrant of seizure and sale of the condominium. The management accepted two out of the 17 post-dated cheques. The rest were declined on grounds that a legal case was pending.
“If they had accepted the cheques, about half the payment would have been cleared by now,” explained the elder Tan.
Earlier this year, ten police personnels went to Lisa’s apartment unit to take inventory of her household items. The issue regarding the alarming number of policemen entering her house remains unclear although police authorities have denied it in writing.
S. Raveentharan submitted the proof with photographs of ten policemen in the house taken on the same day but it was nevertheless not taken into consideration for the judgment.
In a final discussion with the law firm representing Bayswater, S.Raveentharan managed to secure an agreement for Lisa to clear her debt in three separate payments.
“The court does not want to interfere with the management’s decision,” he declared this morning, claiming that the applicant was indebted to the management.
However another application to release all items belonging to her father, Tan Cheng Lim was approved.
“I will try to apply from the magistrate that no enforcement takes place until the disposal of the appeal,” said lawyer S. Raveentharan who is also the state assemblyman for Batu Uban.
Suraya, from Amareson & Meera, the lawyer representing Bayswater however declined S.Raveentharan’s proposal to meet at the magistrate’s chambers. She requested S.Raveentharan to put in a formal application instead.
Lisa Nadia (right) is a single parent who lives with her father and two children.
She had tried to pay the Bayswater Joint Management Body since last year after receiving the warrant of seizure and sale of the condominium. The management accepted two out of the 17 post-dated cheques. The rest were declined on grounds that a legal case was pending.
“If they had accepted the cheques, about half the payment would have been cleared by now,” explained the elder Tan.
Earlier this year, ten police personnels went to Lisa’s apartment unit to take inventory of her household items. The issue regarding the alarming number of policemen entering her house remains unclear although police authorities have denied it in writing.
S. Raveentharan submitted the proof with photographs of ten policemen in the house taken on the same day but it was nevertheless not taken into consideration for the judgment.
In a final discussion with the law firm representing Bayswater, S.Raveentharan managed to secure an agreement for Lisa to clear her debt in three separate payments.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Kenyataan Media oleh Chow Kon Yeow terhadap Isu Tapak Penjaja Sunway Tunas
Kenyataan Media Mengenai Aduan Terhadap “Corrupt Practices Of MPPP Officers & Former Councillor” oleh Dedah Korupsi (Pro Bono Publico)
Berkenaan dengan email daripada “Dedah Korupsi” oleh Pro Bono Publico bertarikh 6 April 2011 berkenaan dengan “Corrupt Practices Of MPPP Officers & Former Councillor”, siasatan telah dijalankan oleh MPPP.
Tanah yang dimaksudkan oleh pengadu ialah Lot 13180, Mukim 12, Persiaran Mahsuri 1, Taman Sunway Tunas. Tanah ini diserahkan oleh pemaju Tetuan Sunway Tunas Sdn. Bhd. dengan perjanjian namaan RM1.00 kepada Majlis sebagai tapak penjaja. Tanah ini telah didaftarkan di bawah pemilikan MPPP pada 26 September 2002.
Tanah ini diserahkan kepada MPPP sebagai tapak penjaja dalam keadaan tapak kosong yang berlantaikan konkrit dan disediakan juga tempat basuhan. Tapak penjaja ini di bawah pengurusan Bahagian Pelesenan sebagai jabatan yang bertanggungjawab atas pengurusan pasar dan kompleks penjaja.
MPPP telah menerima satu permohonan daripada Tetuan Sunway Sdn. Bhd. pada 21 Mac 2011 untuk membeli semula tanah ini tetapi MPPP telah menolak disebabkan tanah ini adalah untuk tapak penjaja. Pada ketika ini, tiada sebarang struktur yang dibina di atas tapak tersebut dan MPPP sekarang dalam proses untuk memagar tapak tersebut. MPPP belum ada sebarang perancangan untuk membina gerai-gerai penjaja.
MPPP tidak mengetahui tentang penglibatan bekas Ahli Majlis yang dimaksudkan dalam email tersebut. MPPP juga menafikan tuduhan pegawai Jabatan Penilaian dan Pengurusan Harta yang ”corrupt” kerana MPPP telah menolak permohonan ini.
Chow Kon Yeow
19-4-2011
Berkenaan dengan email daripada “Dedah Korupsi” oleh Pro Bono Publico bertarikh 6 April 2011 berkenaan dengan “Corrupt Practices Of MPPP Officers & Former Councillor”, siasatan telah dijalankan oleh MPPP.
Tanah yang dimaksudkan oleh pengadu ialah Lot 13180, Mukim 12, Persiaran Mahsuri 1, Taman Sunway Tunas. Tanah ini diserahkan oleh pemaju Tetuan Sunway Tunas Sdn. Bhd. dengan perjanjian namaan RM1.00 kepada Majlis sebagai tapak penjaja. Tanah ini telah didaftarkan di bawah pemilikan MPPP pada 26 September 2002.
Tanah ini diserahkan kepada MPPP sebagai tapak penjaja dalam keadaan tapak kosong yang berlantaikan konkrit dan disediakan juga tempat basuhan. Tapak penjaja ini di bawah pengurusan Bahagian Pelesenan sebagai jabatan yang bertanggungjawab atas pengurusan pasar dan kompleks penjaja.
MPPP telah menerima satu permohonan daripada Tetuan Sunway Sdn. Bhd. pada 21 Mac 2011 untuk membeli semula tanah ini tetapi MPPP telah menolak disebabkan tanah ini adalah untuk tapak penjaja. Pada ketika ini, tiada sebarang struktur yang dibina di atas tapak tersebut dan MPPP sekarang dalam proses untuk memagar tapak tersebut. MPPP belum ada sebarang perancangan untuk membina gerai-gerai penjaja.
MPPP tidak mengetahui tentang penglibatan bekas Ahli Majlis yang dimaksudkan dalam email tersebut. MPPP juga menafikan tuduhan pegawai Jabatan Penilaian dan Pengurusan Harta yang ”corrupt” kerana MPPP telah menolak permohonan ini.
Chow Kon Yeow
19-4-2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
Media Statement by Chow Kon Yeow on Swiftet Farming
Media Statement by Chow Kon Yeow, Penang State Executive Councillor for Local Government and Traffic Management at the conclusion of the Local Government Consultative Forum on Monday, 11 April 2011 at the Kompleks Masyarakat Penyayang, Penang.
1. Swiftlet farm operators and MCA leaders have raised three issues at a demonstration staged at Komtar walk, on Friday 8 April 2011.
2. Issue No.1 –Accused the Penang State Government for trying to kill off this lucrative industry by removing swiftlet premises from the World Heritage Site of Geoege Town!
3. Issue No.2 –“Heritage” in whatever forms are still “dead things”, only people have lives!
4. Issue No.3 –Mulu National Park and George Town are both heritage sites, why swiftlet activity are allowed in Mulu and not George Town!
5. The Penang State Government is not trying to kill off swiftlet farming. We want swiftlet farm investors to continue this lucrative business at appropriate zones approved for such activities.
6. Swiftlet farm investors would see their investments secured and sustainable over a long term if it is carried out at approved zones.
7. Swiftlet farm investors should not risk their investment by putting up swiftlet farms in unapproved zones as they would have to face enforcement action for failing to get the required planning and building approval from the local councils.
8. Swiftlet farm investors should revise their investment strategy in line with the Federal Government’s decision to stop swiftlet farming in the World Heritage Sites of Melaka and George Town and also the adoption of the National Guideline for Swiftlet Farming.
9. By lobbying intensively against the decision to stop swiftlet farming in George Town World Heritage Site, swiftlet farm investors are expecting the wider interests of the State and people to be sacrificed so that their narrow interests can be protected.
10. By asserting that “heritage in whatever forms are still lifeless dead things”, exposed their lack of understanding and appreciation of George Town World Heritage Site.
11. They are just equating heritage with artefacts, monuments or even antique pieces meant for decoration purposes at home.
12. George Town World Heritage Site is not about lifeless artefacts, monuments or antique pieces. George Town was inscribed as World Heritage Site because of the outstanding universal values of a living heritage. “Melaka and George Town are living testimony to the multi-cultural heritage and tradition of Asia, where the greatest religions, and cultures met. The coexistence of distinct faiths - both tangible and intangible - in particular the different religious buildings, is a testament to the religious pluralism of Asia.”
13. Swiftlet farm investors should realize that if George Town is taken over by birdhouse, this city would be turned not only into a bird city but a ghost city, which threaten not only the World Heritage Site status but also George Town as the capital city of the State of Penang. In short the future of George Town is at stake!
14. Who would allowed the future of George Town to be compromised?
15. The other assertion is made because of sheer ignorance. Mulu National Park is a natural heritage while George Town is a living heritage. Swiftlet belongs to the natural realm. Just because swiftlet activities are found in Mulu National Park, a natural heritage site, does not mean it should be allowed in the living heritage site of George Town.
檳州地方政府及交通委員會主席曹觀友于11-4-2011地方政府論壇上的總結
1. 養燕業者及馬華領袖于上週五（8-4-2011），在光大大道展開的示威行動中提及3項要點。
2. 第一：檳州政府企圖將喬治市的養燕業者趕盡殺絕！
3. 第二：古蹟怎樣講都是死物，人類才是有生命的！
4. 第三：姆魯國家公園和喬治市同樣是世界遺產，為何姆魯允許引燕活動而喬治市卻不能！
5. 檳州政府並非要將燕業者趕盡殺絕，而是要養燕業者在允許養燕活動的地區，繼續他們這利潤豐厚的行業。
6. 養燕業者在適當及被允許的地區進行養燕活動，將可以看到這項投資的長遠保障及穩定。
7. 養燕業者不應冒險在禁止養燕的地區進行養燕活動，因為業者在不獲得地方政府批准規劃及建築圖測的情況下，將會受到執法行動的對付。
8. 養燕業者應更改他們的投資策略，遵循中央政府禁止在馬六甲及喬治市世界文化古蹟遺產區內養燕的決定，以及采納全國養燕指南。
9. 養燕業者強烈反對喬治市禁止養燕的決定，只為了希望保住他們的私益，而犧牲州政府及廣大群眾的利益。
10. “古蹟怎樣講都是死物”的言論，顯示他們不了解及不珍惜喬治市世界文化遺產。
11. 他們只是一昧的將古蹟，與古物、甚至作為家居裝飾的古懂劃上等號。
12. 喬治市並不是古物或古懂的死物，其文化古蹟遺產地位是來自喬治市，無形及有形的獨特傳統多元文化色彩，尤其是宗教和文化並存的特色，不同的宗教建築，更突顯出這是一個多元宗教的地區。
13. 養燕業者應了解，一旦喬治市被燕屋取代，整座城市將不只是變成燕城，而是鬼城。這不但威脅世界文化遺產地位，同時也威脅喬治市作為檳州主要城市的地位。簡單來說，這影響喬治市的未來利益！
14. 誰會為了喬治市的未來而輕易妥協？
15. 至于另一個言論，則暴露了他們的無知。姆魯國家公園是自然生態遺產，而喬治市則是文化古蹟遺產。燕子是屬于自然生態的。姆魯國家公園有引燕活動，正因那是自然生態遺產；這不代表喬治市作為文化古蹟遺產，就應該允許養燕活動。
1. Swiftlet farm operators and MCA leaders have raised three issues at a demonstration staged at Komtar walk, on Friday 8 April 2011.
2. Issue No.1 –Accused the Penang State Government for trying to kill off this lucrative industry by removing swiftlet premises from the World Heritage Site of Geoege Town!
3. Issue No.2 –“Heritage” in whatever forms are still “dead things”, only people have lives!
4. Issue No.3 –Mulu National Park and George Town are both heritage sites, why swiftlet activity are allowed in Mulu and not George Town!
5. The Penang State Government is not trying to kill off swiftlet farming. We want swiftlet farm investors to continue this lucrative business at appropriate zones approved for such activities.
6. Swiftlet farm investors would see their investments secured and sustainable over a long term if it is carried out at approved zones.
7. Swiftlet farm investors should not risk their investment by putting up swiftlet farms in unapproved zones as they would have to face enforcement action for failing to get the required planning and building approval from the local councils.
8. Swiftlet farm investors should revise their investment strategy in line with the Federal Government’s decision to stop swiftlet farming in the World Heritage Sites of Melaka and George Town and also the adoption of the National Guideline for Swiftlet Farming.
9. By lobbying intensively against the decision to stop swiftlet farming in George Town World Heritage Site, swiftlet farm investors are expecting the wider interests of the State and people to be sacrificed so that their narrow interests can be protected.
10. By asserting that “heritage in whatever forms are still lifeless dead things”, exposed their lack of understanding and appreciation of George Town World Heritage Site.
11. They are just equating heritage with artefacts, monuments or even antique pieces meant for decoration purposes at home.
12. George Town World Heritage Site is not about lifeless artefacts, monuments or antique pieces. George Town was inscribed as World Heritage Site because of the outstanding universal values of a living heritage. “Melaka and George Town are living testimony to the multi-cultural heritage and tradition of Asia, where the greatest religions, and cultures met. The coexistence of distinct faiths - both tangible and intangible - in particular the different religious buildings, is a testament to the religious pluralism of Asia.”
13. Swiftlet farm investors should realize that if George Town is taken over by birdhouse, this city would be turned not only into a bird city but a ghost city, which threaten not only the World Heritage Site status but also George Town as the capital city of the State of Penang. In short the future of George Town is at stake!
14. Who would allowed the future of George Town to be compromised?
15. The other assertion is made because of sheer ignorance. Mulu National Park is a natural heritage while George Town is a living heritage. Swiftlet belongs to the natural realm. Just because swiftlet activities are found in Mulu National Park, a natural heritage site, does not mean it should be allowed in the living heritage site of George Town.
檳州地方政府及交通委員會主席曹觀友于11-4-2011地方政府論壇上的總結
1. 養燕業者及馬華領袖于上週五（8-4-2011），在光大大道展開的示威行動中提及3項要點。
2. 第一：檳州政府企圖將喬治市的養燕業者趕盡殺絕！
3. 第二：古蹟怎樣講都是死物，人類才是有生命的！
4. 第三：姆魯國家公園和喬治市同樣是世界遺產，為何姆魯允許引燕活動而喬治市卻不能！
5. 檳州政府並非要將燕業者趕盡殺絕，而是要養燕業者在允許養燕活動的地區，繼續他們這利潤豐厚的行業。
6. 養燕業者在適當及被允許的地區進行養燕活動，將可以看到這項投資的長遠保障及穩定。
7. 養燕業者不應冒險在禁止養燕的地區進行養燕活動，因為業者在不獲得地方政府批准規劃及建築圖測的情況下，將會受到執法行動的對付。
8. 養燕業者應更改他們的投資策略，遵循中央政府禁止在馬六甲及喬治市世界文化古蹟遺產區內養燕的決定，以及采納全國養燕指南。
9. 養燕業者強烈反對喬治市禁止養燕的決定，只為了希望保住他們的私益，而犧牲州政府及廣大群眾的利益。
10. “古蹟怎樣講都是死物”的言論，顯示他們不了解及不珍惜喬治市世界文化遺產。
11. 他們只是一昧的將古蹟，與古物、甚至作為家居裝飾的古懂劃上等號。
12. 喬治市並不是古物或古懂的死物，其文化古蹟遺產地位是來自喬治市，無形及有形的獨特傳統多元文化色彩，尤其是宗教和文化並存的特色，不同的宗教建築，更突顯出這是一個多元宗教的地區。
13. 養燕業者應了解，一旦喬治市被燕屋取代，整座城市將不只是變成燕城，而是鬼城。這不但威脅世界文化遺產地位，同時也威脅喬治市作為檳州主要城市的地位。簡單來說，這影響喬治市的未來利益！
14. 誰會為了喬治市的未來而輕易妥協？
15. 至于另一個言論，則暴露了他們的無知。姆魯國家公園是自然生態遺產，而喬治市則是文化古蹟遺產。燕子是屬于自然生態的。姆魯國家公園有引燕活動，正因那是自然生態遺產；這不代表喬治市作為文化古蹟遺產，就應該允許養燕活動。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)