MCA and MCA Minister Wee Ka Siong are political serial liars that will skip unashamedly to the next lie when their “solid proof” goes “poof” to undermine and sabotage the under sea tunnel and 3 main road project intended to alleviate traffic congestion in Penang. We have seen how Wee and MCA leaders skip from lies after lies beginning with the lie that the contractor was paid for the under sea tunnel even though not a single cent or single square inch of land was paid.
Without showing solid proof to back his previous lie, Wee than skipped to the insinuation how can a fashion company Vertice, as an investor, have the capability to build the under sea tunnel. It is actually China Railway Construction Corporation(
Wee even doubted that the Zenith consortium had the minimal paid-up capital requirement of RM381 million, when this is the pre-requisite before any consortium can be considered in an open competitive tender. The Penang state Secretary heads the Penang Tender Committee and he would not have granted the tender to Zenith unless all conditions such as the minimal capital requirement is fulfilled. Wee have refused to explain and account for their lies, and has instead chosen to run away and go to the next lie when his “solid proof goes poof”!.
MCA President Liow Tiong Lai may have even abused his powers as Minister of Transport to talk to CRCC and suddenly coming out with a press statement on behalf of CRCC, confirming that CRCC is the main contractor and not the shareholder. Why is Liow using his “public position to settle private scores” and forgetting his position as Minister, becoming CRCC’s spokesman instead? Instead, Liow’s confirmation has only vindicated the state government as truthful about CRCC’s status as a main contractor. Only Wee insists that the state government stated that CRCC was a shareholder of the special purpose vehicle (SPV).Unlike Wee, I do not run and hide but answer Wee’s lies up front.
Yesterday Wee showed Buletin Mutiara, a Penang state government-owned publication for its edition of 16 to 31 March 2013, to prove that I had said that CRCC was a shareholder as follows,
“The state government had awarded the tender to Consortium Zenith BUCG, a special purpose vehicle company set up by a joint venture between local company Construction Zenith, China Railway Construction Corporation Ltd (CRCC) along with Beijing Urban Construction Group, Sri Tinggi Sdn Bhd and Juteras Sdn Bhd.”
I did not state in March 2013 that CRCC is the main shareholder. At that time, the lawyers had not finalised the agreement between the 3 parties comprising the state government, Zenith as the successful tenderer and CRCC as the main contractor. The conclusive legal position was only finalised when the agreement was signed by the three parties, on 6 October 2013 and stamped on 29 October 2013. Comparing what I said in March 2013 to Clause 8.5 of the agreement stamped on 29.10.2013 indicate the following:-
Clause 8.5, Representations and warranties
“Zenith Construction Sdn. Bhd. has secured a joint venture with CRCC Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. (presently known as CRCC Malaysia Berhad) (1022568-D), a company wholly-owned by China Railway Construction Corporation Ltd., for the purposes of the Construction Works and the implementation of the Project, and that the joint venture between the companies shall continue throughout the tenure of the Project;”
What I had said in March 2013, before the agreement was signed in October 20123, was in reference to the joint-venture between the parties. What type of “joint-venture” is clarified legally and conclusively by the contractual agreement that was signed and stamped on October 2013. In that contractual agreement, it is clear that CRCC is the main contractor. Whatever said before October 2013 is not as important or as relevant compared to the contractual agreement signed on October 2013.
This raises the question why does Wee raises this question 5 years later if he knew there was a contradiction in 2013. Clearly there was none. There would be a need to explain the contradiction if I had said this after October 2013, after the contractual agreement was signed, that CRCC was a shareholder and not the main contractor.
Finally, disputing on the words contractor and shareholder does not equate to corruption. Can Wee explain where the corruption is in the entire tunnel and 3 main roads project? Or can Wee show proof that there are kickbacks amounting to millions of ringgit paid to the Penang state government leaders as alleged. Wee must explain where is the corruption to dispel the negative impression of a dual selective investigation by MACC and a political witch hunt by BN, misusing their control of the BN media to smear the reputation of Penang state government leaders.
Whether BN succeeds or not to cause this the 3 roads and under sea tunnel to fail and not to be built, will depend on whether Zenith or CRCC can sustain the pressure exerted from the MACC investigations and the daily widespread negative coverage in the BN media. The question is if MCA or BN succeeds in sabotaging the project, what is their alternative plan to alleviate traffic congestion in Penang?
LIM GUAN ENG