Residents wading through floodwaters in Kampung Melayu Subang. - Photo: Bernama
SUBANG: A 46-year-old man had to carry his elderly parents on his back to safety after floodwaters rose rapidly during flash floods in Kampung Melayu Subang here Monday (Nov 2).
Zulkarnain Hashim said he faced tense moments when the water surged quickly, forcing him to carry his 90-year-old mother and 89-year-old father to higher ground.
He said there was a heavy downpour from 2pm to 4pm, before water levels rose abruptly to waist level by about 5pm.
"It was complete chaos when the water rose so quickly. I had to carry both my mother and father to get them to safety.
"This is not the first time. The flood problem has persisted since 1995, and this year alone our area has been flooded three times," he told Bernama during a survey of the affected area Monday.
Zulkarnain also claimed the neighbourhood flood warning siren failed to sound during the incident, raising questions about the effectiveness of the early warning system.
In the same incident, a young mother faced an anxious ordeal evacuating her two children, including a four-month-old baby boy, as floodwaters began entering their home.
Nur Atilia Elina Rosli, 24, said her husband, Ahmad Nawi Yaman, 27, was away at work when the water began rising at about 3.20pm, just as their baby woke from a nap.
She acted swiftly to move the baby and their three-year-old child out of the house.
"It was chaotic because I have a baby. When we left, the water was already knee-deep. I had to wade through the water carrying my children to reach a house on higher ground.
"This is the worst flood we have experienced so far. The water reached chest level," she said when met at the temporary relief centre (PPS) at Dewan Siantan, Kampung Melayu Subang.
Earlier, three victims, including a disabled elderly man and an infant, were evacuated to the relief centre following the afternoon deluge.
Selangor Fire and Rescue Department (JBPM) assistant director of operations Ashrul Riezal Asbar said the department received an emergency call at 5.18 pm, and a fire engine from the Bukit Jelutong Fire and Rescue Station arrived at the scene at 5.33 pm.
He said the flash flood affected about 92 houses across four roads, namely Lorong Merbau (30 houses), Jalan Cengal (seven), Jalan Resak (five), and Jalan Jati (50). - Bernama
THE four states that make up SG4 – Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu and Perlis – have long been among Malaysia’s less developed economies.
Together, they are home to approximately 5.7 million people and cover more than 38,000 sq km, yet contribute less than 10% of national gross domestic product (GDP), despite accounting for roughly one-fifth of the country’s population.
At the Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre on Oct 26, the coalition’s leaders gathered for the SG4 Business and Economic Forum 2026 under the theme “Four States. One Economic Vision”, seeking to demonstrate that this narrative can be reversed.
The headline message, delivered through a speech read on behalf of adviser Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, was one of untapped potential.
SG4 was described as a “sleeping giant” with the land, resources and strategic geography to become a productive economic region if its four states pooled their strengths rather than competed with one another.
The forum’s discussions, however, revealed a grouping still grappling with the fundamental tension between its economic ambitions and political origins.
One of the clearest messages was that SG4 must resist relying on raw commodity extraction, particularly in relation to rare earth elements (REE).
(Image: Harian Metro)
Dr Mahathir’s prepared remarks cautioned against simply “retrieving and selling” REE, arguing that greater returns would come from downstream processing and value-added activities.
This is a welcome departure from the resource-dependent model that has left some resource-rich but economically underdeveloped regions struggling to translate natural wealth into broad-based prosperity.
The forum also presented a cluster-based approach to regional integration. Rather than treating the four states as separate investment destinations, SG4 Group Sdn Bhd – the jointly owned company in which each state holds a 25% stake – aims to present them as a coordinated investment platform.
Its economic agenda covers infrastructure and logistics, trade and investment, agriculture and food security, education and human capital, and new resources and future income generation.
Each state brings different strengths and ambitions: Kedah’s manufacturing and semiconductor ecosystem, Kelantan’s agricultural potential, Terengganu’s oil and gas resources, and Perlis’s cross-border trade opportunities with southern Thailand.
Dr Mahathir’s speech also ventured into cultural commentary, warning that “shortcuts, quick profits, corruption” and a departure from Islamic principles of honesty had hindered Malay progress.
He noted that SG4’s predominantly Malay Muslim population placed particular importance on the responsibility to demonstrate ethical leadership.
More significantly, the political cohesion of SG4 faces questions. Recent changes in Perlis’s political leadership have raised concerns about whether the grouping can maintain a consistent four-state commitment.
While Perlis remains part of the SG4 platform, political changes within a member state could complicate the continuity of regional economic planning.
An economic bloc whose political alignment may shift with electoral outcomes presents challenges for investors seeking regulatory certainty and long-term policy commitments.
The forum’s organisers emphasised that SG4 would work alongside federal agencies such as the Malaysian Investment Development Authority (MIDA) and the Northern Corridor Implementation Authority (NCIA), rather than compete with them.
Nevertheless, a grouping formed by opposition-led state governments seeking greater economic autonomy may still face political sensitivities in its dealings with Putrajaya.
The forum’s commitment to people-centred development, including quality employment, local entrepreneurship and inclusive growth, is commendable.
Consolidating smallholders under professional management to support large-scale commercial agriculture is a sensible structural proposal. Recognising that SG4’s greatest asset is its people, rather than its minerals, is also economically sound.
(Image: FMT)
But the gap between ambition and implementation remains considerable. The forum offered no detailed human capital roadmap, specific skills-training commitments aligned with the semiconductor and downstream mineral industries it hopes to attract, or clear timelines for regulatory improvements that could make the states more attractive to investors.
Dr Mahathir’s absence due to health reasons, with his son Tan Sri Mokhzani Mahathir delivering his prepared speech, also highlighted the project’s association with a prominent political figure rather than a fully institutionalised leadership structure.
The SG4 Business and Economic Forum 2026 succeeded in presenting a coherent regional economic narrative and bringing all four state leaders together to articulate their ambitions in the language of investment and industrial development.
Its emphasis on value-added REE processing, coordinated industrial development and cross-border trade is strategically sound.
What remains unproven is whether SG4 can transcend its political origins. Investors need confidence that its economic institutions can withstand electoral changes, that its commitment to good governance extends beyond rhetoric, and that its relationship with the federal government will be defined by cooperation rather than political rivalry.
The sleeping giant has stirred. Whether it rises will depend not on the vision presented at a forum, but on the institutions, policies and decisions that follow.
The author, Prof Datuk Dr Ahmad Ibrahim is affiliated with the Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies at UCSI University and is an Adjunct Professor at the Ungku Aziz Centre for Development Studies, Universiti Malaya.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT
LICENSED tourism transport operators are bound by licensing conditions and operate openly in a competitive market. Unlicensed and illegal operators, meanwhile, pose varying degrees of regulatory and safety risks.
Unethical practices can occur among both groups, including operators who hold valid licences but fail to meet their duty of care.
Licensed operators possess the necessary licences, vehicle permits and appropriate insurance. They are required to comply with regulations, observe safety protocols and maintain business transparency. Their operations also contribute to the formal economy.
These safeguards may be absent among unlicensed operators working in the shadow economy. Alarmingly, members of the public continue to use their services, either lured by seemingly attractive offers or out of convenience when making last-minute decisions.
First-time visitors who book their own flights and accommodation, then arrange transport from the airport to their hotels, can be easy targets.
An offer of RM300 for a trip may appear inexpensive to travellers accustomed to dealing with currencies whose denominations run into the hundreds or thousands.
Exchange rates can be confusing, particularly when visitors compare figures without first converting them into a common currency.
As at Nov 2, RM1 was worth approximately 8.28 Thai baht, 15.69 Philippine pesos, 23.37 Indian rupees, 38.79 Japanese yen, 327.76 South Korean won, 4,464 Indonesian rupiah or 6,329 Vietnamese dong.
A seemingly small numerical difference should not be mistaken for a bargain. Visitors should always confirm the fare in ringgit before accepting a service.
Unlicensed vehicles are commonly used by operators who carry fare-paying passengers without the required permits. However, licensed operators may also use such vehicles knowingly when they run short of their own permitted fleet, or unknowingly when they fail to conduct proper due diligence on subcontractors.
The private vehicles involved may include passenger vans, multi-purpose vehicles and saloon cars. They are used for airport transfers, sightseeing tours and overland trips, including journeys to Genting Highlands.
Drivers who fear being caught by enforcement officers may rush between destinations, potentially compromising passenger safety.
There is also an important insurance concern. Private motor insurance is not automatically suitable for carrying fare-paying passengers.
A vehicle used for commercial passenger transport needs the appropriate cover, including protection for passenger liability where required. If an accident occurs, passengers may face difficulties obtaining compensation if the vehicle is operating outside the terms of its insurance policy.
This is one reason licensed transport services, with the required permits and insurance arrangements, matter.
Unlicensed and illegal operations are not the only concern. Unethical conduct can also arise among licensed operators that neglect their duty of care.
Ethical and responsible operators engage competent and fit drivers, maintain their vehicles properly, ensure drivers receive adequate rest, and insist on safe driving practices. Drivers should not use their phones while driving or exceed speed limits.
Unlicensed tourism vehicles can be found at international and domestic airports, as well as hotels and popular sightseeing and shopping destinations. Without consistent enforcement, these operators may continue to work openly, much like buses that flout speed limits on our highways.
Kudos to the Road Transport Department (JPJ) for conducting enforcement operations at Penang International Airport.
From Jan 1 to Oct 24 this year, JPJ Penang inspected 1,056 vehicles suspected of carrying passengers without valid permits. Enforcement action was taken against 496 vehicles, with 519 notices issued.
These figures point to the scale of the problem, although they should not be taken as a nationwide estimate.
The number of passengers using unlicensed transport services nationwide is difficult to establish without comprehensive data. Nevertheless, the risks extend beyond individual journeys. Passengers may face unsafe vehicles, inadequately insured operators, unexpected charges and limited avenues for redress.
Licensed operators contribute positively to Malaysia’s tourism industry and help uphold the country’s reputation.
In contrast, illegal and unethical practices undermine public confidence when visitors complain of being overcharged, misled or left without fair compensation after an incident.
Effective enforcement, public awareness and greater accountability across the industry are essential.
Visitors should check that their transport provider is properly licensed and that the vehicle has the required permit. A cheap ride is no bargain if it puts passengers at risk.
YS Chan is a tourism, transport and training consultant.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT
DEMOCRACY is supposed to give every citizen an equal voice in choosing who governs the country. But what happens when one Member of Parliament represents 200,000 voters while another represents only 50,000?
Both cast a single vote in Parliament, yet the citizens they represent do not enjoy anything close to equal electoral representation.
This raises an uncomfortable question: Is Malaysia drawing its electoral boundaries to ensure fair representation, or are political considerations influencing who gets represented and how effectively?
Two concepts lie at the heart of this problem: malapportionment and gerrymandering.
Malapportionment occurs when constituencies have substantially unequal numbers of voters but elect the same number of representatives. Gerrymandering involves manipulating electoral boundaries to give a political party or group an electoral advantage.
They are distinct problems, but both can undermine public confidence in democratic institutions.
Malaysia’s Federal Constitution, particularly the Thirteenth Schedule, sets out principles for constituency delimitation.
It provides that constituencies within a state should have approximately equal numbers of electors, while allowing some weightage for rural areas because of geographical difficulties and the challenges of reaching voters.
There is a legitimate reason for this flexibility. Representing a vast rural constituency in Sabah or Sarawak is not the same as representing a densely populated urban constituency.
Nevertheless, geographical considerations must not become an unrestricted justification for disproportionate representation.
Electoral reform advocates have highlighted the scale of the disparity. BERSIH, for example, previously cited Bangi as having 311,469 voters, compared with 178,185 voters across three neighbouring Selangor constituencies: Sungai Besar, Sabak Bernam and Tanjung Karang.
Such differences raise fundamental questions about the relative weight of an individual vote. The principle should be simple: one person, one vote, with reasonably equal value.
The answer, however, is not to eliminate rural representation or impose identical constituency sizes regardless of geography. It is to establish transparent, measurable and independently administered rules.
An independent boundary commission is essential
The first reform should be to strengthen the independence of electoral boundary delimitation.
Malaysia should consider establishing a professionally constituted, independent Boundary Delimitation Commission, comprising retired judges, constitutional experts, demographers, statisticians, geographers and representatives familiar with rural and indigenous communities.
Its members should serve fixed terms, with safeguards against political interference. Its recommendations should be based on published evidence and objective criteria, not party negotiations or previous election results.
Malaysia should also introduce a measurable benchmark for constituency size differences.
A normal target of no more than 10% deviation from the average electorate within a state could be considered, with clearly defined exceptions for geographical and accessibility difficulties.
This is a proposed policy benchmark, not an existing constitutional requirement. Any substantial deviation should require a written explanation supported by evidence and made available for public scrutiny.
Rural representation must be protected, but so must the democratic rights of urban voters. Neither should be disadvantaged through arbitrary arrangements.
Transparency must replace suspicion
Every redelineation exercise should publish existing and proposed electoral maps, electorate figures, demographic information and the methodology used. Citizens should be able to compare proposed boundaries through an accessible online platform.
Public hearings should be held in affected constituencies, allowing individuals, civil society organisations, political parties and local communities to submit objections.
The commission should also publish its responses and explain why objections have been accepted or rejected.
Consultation should not become a procedural formality in which decisions have effectively been made before the public is heard.
Article 114(2) of the Federal Constitution emphasises the importance of securing an Election Commission (EC) that enjoys public confidence.
That confidence must be built through a transparent appointment process, clear professional qualifications, parliamentary scrutiny, disclosure of potential conflicts of interest and security of tenure.
The objective is not to make the EC answerable to political parties, but to ensure that it is answerable to the Constitution and the people.
Parliamentary oversight should also be strengthened through a committee that includes government and opposition representation. The judiciary should remain available to review whether constitutional requirements and proper procedures have been followed.
Independence must never mean the absence of accountability.
Institutional integrity is bigger than electoral boundaries
(Image: CNA)
Ultimately, this debate is about more than constituency maps. It concerns the credibility of institutions.
A political party that criticises electoral arrangements while in opposition may discover their convenience when it enters government. This is precisely why reforms must be institutional rather than partisan.
Malaysia should begin by publishing electoral disparities, establishing independent boundary oversight, introducing measurable deviation limits and providing meaningful public participation. These reforms should be pursued through a clear timetable and applied regardless of which coalition governs the country.
Democracy is not simply about allowing citizens to vote every five years. It is about ensuring that the conditions under which they vote are fair and that the institutions administering elections are trusted.
Malaysia does not need a perfect electoral system. It needs one in which even the losing party can accept the result because the rules were fair, the process was transparent and the referee was independent.
A government should win because it has secured the confidence of voters, not because electoral arrangements have made it easier to secure parliamentary seats.
Perhaps the ultimate test of political maturity is whether those currently in power are willing to introduce electoral reforms that they themselves may have to live under when they become the opposition.
That is where genuine democratic reform begins.
KT Maran is a Focus Malaysia reader.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT
