Tee Yong wants to debate Selangor MB over Talam
UPDATED @ 02:50:14 PM 15-08-2012
Chua (centre) evaded Pua’s open invitation to debate the same matter. — File picKUALA LUMPUR, Aug 15 ― MCA’s Datuk Chua Tee Yong today challenged Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim to a public debate of the Talam Corporation debt issue and put the matter to rest.
Chua issued the challenge today while also alleging the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) Selangor government’s handling of the property developer’s debt payment was rife with financial improprieties.
“I want to debate with the mentri besar on this deal,” Chua told reporters today at the MCA headquarters here.
There, Chua also acknowledged an open invitation to debate the issue with DAP national publicity chief Tony Pua, but brushed this off by saying he did not “want to debate DAP members with third hand information”.
“Is DAP more clear on the transaction deal (than the Selangor MB?” he asked.
Chua, who had accused the Selangor government of over-paying RM42 million for a 916ha plot of land as part of a debt settlement with Talam, also said Khalid “is lying and misleading the public” for previously saying all debts were hidden and there was no state subsidiary attempt to recover debts from Talam.
Describing the debt transfer for the state-owned firm as “the mother of all lies committed by the PR Selangor government”, Chua today enclosed to reporters the settlement agreement document dated July 14, 2009, signed by Khalid for the recovery of the company’s debts to state agencies.
“A new committee known as Talam Task Force Committee is to be formed to negotiate and to implement a new global settlement for the recovery of all outstanding debt from Talam,” Chua told reporters today at MCA headquarters here.
“Based on the document, all settlement agreements signed earlier between state government agencies with Talam shall be terminated and cease to have any effect and new terms of settlement shall be negotiated to recover all amount outstanding for Talam,” he added.
Chua said that since all previous settlements were terminated, all the assets accepted by the Selangor government were based on their decision and “has nothing to do with the previous (BN) state government”.
“I highlighted that the BN government made (the) effort to collect debts via 8 March 2007 supplemental settlement agreement. It was clearly stipulated in that agreement that the previous state government is not involved to clear the land (of) encumbrances,” he said.
"However, PR Selangor government has terminated all the settlement agreement and under the new settlement agreement in 2010, PR Selangor government has to settle an additional amount of RM296 million," he added.
"This document clearly shows that PR Selangor government must be responsible for all of its own action for the debt settlement."
Last month, Chua had alleged that the Selangor administration had bought over Talam Corp’s RM676 million assets to clear the firm’s outstanding debts of RM392 million to three state subsidiaries.
He had further claimed that the RM392 million in the supplementary budget approved by the state assembly in November 2010 to Mentri Besar Incorporated (MBI) was used by the state government for the alleged bailout.
Talam Corp, now known as Trinity Corporation Berhad, had owed Universiti Selangor (Unisel) and Permodalan Nasional Selangor Berhad (PNSB) RM277 million as well as SAP Holdings — a subsidiary of listed company Kumpulan Hartanah Selangor Berhad (KHSB) — RM115 million, equalling a total debt of RM392 million.
In response, Pua pointed out that the debt had been incurred during BN's rule of the state and had been considered a “hidden debt” as it was never recorded in the books of the three state-linked subsidiaries.
But after Election 2008, he said the debts were “uncovered” by the newly-elected PR state government, which later immediately commenced action to recover the monies.
Pua explained that the state government, through the state assembly, had in November 2010 legislated MBI to handle the collection of the RM392 million that the troubled property developer firm owed to the state’s subsidiaries.
