Disciplining rules
NST-Prop 29/10/2005 By Andrew Wong

I’m a strong advocate for freedom of speech, free market forces and meritocracy. Protection, regulation and order, I believe, are only essential to properly raise up an infant, and even then, only to guide him or her to grow strong, straight, healthy and with focus on doing God’s will.

For many of us, whatever rules, curfews or regulations our parents laid down when were young were gradually removed when we managed to win their trust, exhibit our maturity and demonstrate our ability to confront life on our own two feet.

The same should be the case for our country’s industries. The call for Proton to battle it out on its own should not be seen as putting it out in the wilderness, but as a sign it is matured enough to compete with other manufacturers on a level playing field. After all, born in 1985 and now 20 years old, don’t you think it’s too old to still be spoon-fed and continue living under its parent’s safety net?

Ditto the property sector, where private sector developers first set foot into around the early 80s. After nearly a quarter of a century of growth, free market forces should be the main basis for its players’ survival or failure.

Yet, it can’t happen. The sector still requires the rotan every now and then to keep its players in check … no thanks to an undisciplined group that, according to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, currently number 695.

Labelled “rogue developers” by the media and the National House Buyers’ Association, they account for 15.5 per cent of the developer barrel totalling 4,500. However, I suspect the ratio could be even higher since rogue builders of industrial, commercial and leisure units are not in the Housing Ministry’s radar. Remember, serviced apartments and shop-units fall under the commercial category.

Some time ago, I had asked Housing Minister Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting whether there were plans to widen his ministry’s role and perhaps rename it the Property Ministry so its enforcement and legislation could be responsible for more than just built residential units. He laughed off the question, commenting that he has “a lot of work to do as it is”.

Although there is no official data on the number of buyers of industrial, commercial and leisure units that have been hoodwinked in one way or another, a look at our development landscape comprising abandoned industrial parks, shop-office projects, retail malls, resort ventures and bungalow plots seem to show that the number isn’t small. As it stands, there is over RM7 billion worth of abandoned projects littering the country.

So quite understandably, although around 25-years old, the property sector still can’t exist with minimal supervision much less total independence.

There are two ideal solutions to the whole scenario: Either strengthen Ong’s ministry with the resources and commitment to enforce the laws of the land as well as to vet through the credentials of all developers before allowing them to display their plans in the public domain; or introduce the build-then-sell concept.

In the meantime, to empower buyers to be vigilant, the Government had, since Wednesday, revealed the identities of the 695 rogue developers on its website (www.kpkt.gov.my).

Broken into five categories ranging from minor offences that can be settled via payment of fines, to major crimes such as developing without licences, this is the list the HBA had been asking the Government to disclose in the last week’s issue (Oct 22, 2005).

It might not be able to end the hardships suffered by buyers, but at least it is a step in the right direction as it enables them to enter into deals with their eyes wider open.

For the story on the Government’s list of errant developers, bounce your eyeballs to the right to find out more.