`


THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!


 

10 APRIL 2024

Monday, July 16, 2012

Avoid these water audit firms, MP tells Selangor gov't



DAP's Klang MP Charles Santiago today called on the state government not to use the services of water audit firms Halcoo, Suez and Wessex Water to verify reports by Syabas.

This, Santiago explained, was because these audit firms have existing work with the federal government and using them could raise a "conflict of interest".

mtuc syabas pc 091007 charles santiago"They should use an independent body, such as the International Water Association," the MP told Malaysiakinitoday.

Santiago (right) also argued that even the reports from Syabas were "suspect" and urged the team that is to monitor the water concessionaire to gather data required by itself and not to depend solely on the daily reports from Syabas.

"What we need is a full forensic audit."

Santiago was referring to the oversight body that Selangor is setting up to monitor Syabas operations before the state government moves to take over the concessionaire's operations.

Selangor has said it has lost confidence in the capability of Syabas to deliver its contractual obligations as the water supplier in the state.

The oversight body comprises state secretary Mohamed Khusrin Munawi, state water regulator Nordin Sulaiman and the three water audit firms that are supposed to vet and verify Syabas' daily reports.
Santiago also wants Syabas to explain water disruptions taking place in the state in the last few weeks, around Seri Kembangan, Klang and Hulu Langat.

He urged the concessionaire to disclose whether this was because of infrastructure problems or whether it was part of the water rationing it has announced last week.

“If it is water rationing, it is illegal as they have yet to obtain approval from the National Water Services Commission (Span) as per the Water Services Industry Act 2006.”

Whatever the cause of the disruptions, Santiago said, Syabas was obligated, under Section 54 (123) of the Act, to replace the water loss to consumers via other means such as water tankers and tanks, something he argued the company failed to do in the affected areas.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.