Nobody needs to apologise or feel sorry for what they cursed about the issue here. Despite that DL in his personal opinion and based on the content of the DRAFT 1GP exposed was far too contradicting with what they resolved in the last workshop that it should not be the correct one, and thus to him it could be a hoax.  We can only suspect it is not the real one. But, where is the actual one? DL was only told the real one is still under drafting, but why at this time still not completed? Something to hide???? Are the people in charge real professionals as claimed???? The Cabinet meeting is about to start.  Why is the proposed draft not distributed to all concerned for final checking before formal submission to the Cabinet? The representatives from the Association involved in the drafting should come forward to clear the air with evidence. Even if they are being cursed and F**** wrongly at the end of the day, don't you all consider they deserved it? They should not keep the industry in suspense unless they are from the ASSOCIATION SENDIRIAN BERHAD. Therefore, until and unless it is proven with strong evidence that it is not the correct one, we should not take it lightly that it is not. What if in the end of the day that it is the real one after the Cabinet meeting? Who is going to be responsible for the damage caused?
Nobody should complain against or finger pointing against those concerned and directly affected of making noises here out of panic upon seeing the DRAFT 1GP. We should thank those who highlighted it here as, if it is a real one, we may still have time to look for a remedy. We must thank dunsun and cergau and others here taking great effort in the deliberating and exposing the issue that acted as a wake-up call or warning to all. So everybody would on their own initiative or through their connection to dig out the truth. There are simply far too many valid reasons for every one of us to be panic and start crying and cursing. To some, this could be the only source of income. This is also acting as a pressure and fore warning to people with insincere hidden agenda that they should not play a fool to highjack this National Public Interest issue. If they do that then they have caused a National Public Wrath on themselves and stirred up the HORNET NEST.
Until and unless someone could come forward to prove otherwise with evidence or until the official release of the 1GP from the Cabinet, in my humble opinion, this DRAFT 1GP should still stand. Meanwhile all of us should continue to do our best individually or collectively to ensure that the true 1GP should not be this DRAFT 1GP while we still have little time left. Don’t forget if we are not careful and if it turns out not in the industry favour, every one of us here with no exemption, has not only a little, but simply too much to lose forever.

Payback on total investment that I know of (the most successful ) is 8.5 years (at these low interest rate)
My very own 6 year old hse in the n region has 250+ nests.
By Dr. Tan's standards, it is a failure.
Failure or not, my oppurtunity cost in 'renting' out to these premises is almost zero. Zero tenants for 4 years before I started this venture.
The growth rate is tapering off coz the area will reach carrying capacity.
Do remember these birds are free flying!

So how does one justify the math?
At least I can say now is that I have tenants doing  barter trade with me. Mind you I started 6 years ago.
It would be foolish for me to compound the growt rate of these birds at more than 5% for the next 3 years on a quarterly basis.
Therafter I think it will just plateu off or decline as the bird population ages.

Of course there is still room if you are a frontiersman just like in the wild wild west .
If you overshoot it is still a long grind.
 

One cannot just hide behind the all encompassing "expiration of annual liscense".
Any investor foreign or local look for stable govt. on the assumption that their policies are consistent.
Investment in this industry is long term.
Payback on total investment that I know of (the most successful ) is 8.5 years (at these low interest rate)
My very own 6 year old hse in the n region has 250+ nests.
By Dr. Tan's standards, it is a failure.
Failure or not, my oppurtunity cost in 'renting' out to these premises is almost zero. Zero tenants for 4 years before I started this venture.
The growth rate is tapering off coz the area will reach carrying capacity.
Do remember these birds are free flying!

So how does one justify the math?
At least I can say now is that I have tenants doing  barter trade with me. Mind you I started 6 years ago.
It would be foolish for me to compound the growt rate of these birds at more than 5% for the next 3 years on a quarterly basis.
Therafter I think it will just plateu off or decline as the bird population ages.

Of course there is still room if you are a frontiersman just like in the wild wild west .
If you overshoot it is still a long grind.
 

Of course if your stars are all in alignment .........Congrats! you've struck gold.
But then gold rushes do come to an end !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ommorow meeting tentatively confirmed already. I let dunsunbuntut announce it tonight after he has gather more sifus.

just want to get to the bottom of things before the cabinet starts. i think im going into the parliament website now to check if any news yet
Latest finding.

Parliament website indicated Cabinet Meeting .
Some of the rang undang- undang i find interesting after i read its schedule actually gives right to immigration authority to intrude private premises.

Rang Undang-Undang
BAHAGIAN X
PENGUATKUASAAN
Kuasa pemeriksaan dan penyiasatan
82. Mana-mana pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan
hendaklah mempunyai semua kuasa yang perlu untuk menjalankan
suatu pemeriksaan dan untuk menyiasat pelakuan apa-apa kesalahan
di bawah Akta ini.
Akses ke tempat atau premis
83. (1) Mana-mana pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan
hendaklah bagi maksud Akta ini pada setiap masa mempunyai
akses sepenuhnya dan secara bebas ke mana-mana tempat atau
premis di mana seseorang menjalankan perniagaannya.
(2) Jika mana-mana pegawai kanan cukai barang dan
perkhidmatan menjalankan kuasanya di bawah subseksyen (1),
orang yang menjalankan perniagaannya atau mana-mana orang
lain yang berada di tempat atau premis pada masa kemasukan itu
hendaklah menyediakan kepadanya segala kemudahan dan bantuan
yang munasabah dan bantuan bagi dia menjalankan kewajipannya
di bawah seksyen ini.
(3) Jika mana-mana pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan
memasuki mana-mana tempat atau premis mengikut peruntukan
seksyen ini, dia boleh—
(a) menghendaki orang kena cukai atau mana-mana orang
lain untuk mengemukakan apa-apa barang, dokumen atau
benda yang berhubungan dengan perniagaan orang itu
dan, jika dia ialah orang kena cukai, apa-apa rekod yang
dikehendaki untuk disimpan di bawah seksyen 36;
(b) memeriksa apa-apa barang, dokumen atau benda;
© menyita dan menahan apa-apa barang, dokumen atau benda
jika pada pendapatnya ia boleh memberi keterangan
mengenai pelakuan apa-apa kesalahan di bawah Akta
ini;
(d) menghendaki orang itu untuk menjawab apa-apa soalan
yang berhubungan dengan apa-apa barang, dokumen atau
benda;
Cukai Barang dan Perkhidmatan 95
(e) menghendaki apa-apa bekas, sampul atau bekas muatan yang
lain di dalam tempat atau premis itu untuk dibuka;
(f) atas risiko dan perbelanjaan pemunya perniagaan itu,
membuka dan memeriksa apa-apa bungkusan, atau apaapa
barang atau bahan di dalam tempat atau premis itu;
atau
(g) mengambil sampel mana-mana barang atau bahan dan
membuat salinan atau cabutan apa-apa dokumen, jika
difikirkannya perlu.
(4) Jika mana-mana pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan
tidak dapat memperoleh akses sepenuhnya dan secara bebas ke
tempat atau premis di bawah subseksyen (1) atau ke mana-mana
bekas muatan yang berada di dalam tempat atau premis itu dia
boleh, pada bila-bila masa, memasuki tempat atau premis itu, dan
membuka tempat muatan itu dengan menggunakan kekerasan, jika
perlu.
(5) Mana-mana orang yang enggan untuk membenarkan
mana-mana pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan untuk
memasuki mana-mana tempat atau premis mengikut seksyen
ini melakukan suatu kesalahan dan boleh, apabila disabitkan,
dipenjarakan selama tempoh tidak melebihi tujuh tahun atau
didenda tidak melebihi satu ratus ribu ringgit atau
kedua-duanya.
Akses kepada maklumat yang direkodkan atau data
berkomputer
84. (1) Mana-mana pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan
yang menjalankan kuasanya di bawah seksyen 82, 83 dan 86
dan mana-mana pegawai cukai barang dan perkhidmatan yang
menjalankan kuasanya di bawah seksyen 87 hendaklah diberi akses
kepada apa-apa maklumat yang direkodkan atau data berkomputer,
sama ada disimpan dalam komputer atau selainnya.
(2) Dalam menjalankan kuasanya, pegawai kanan cukai barang
dan perkhidmatan atau pegawai cukai barang dan perkhidmatan,
mengikut mana-mana yang berkenaan—
(a) boleh memeriksa dan meneliti pengendalian apa-apa
komputer danapa-apa alat atau bahan yang berkaitan
yang dia mempunyai sebab yang munasabah untuk
mengesyaki digunakan atau telah digunakan berkaitan
dengan maklumat atau data itu; dan
96 Rang Undang-Undang
(b) boleh menghendaki—
(i) orang yang olehnya atau yang bagi pihaknya,
pegawai cukai dan perkhidmatan itu mempunyai
sebab yang munasabah untuk mengesyaki komputer
itu digunakan atau telah digunakan sedemikian;
atau
(ii) orang yang menjaga, atau selainnya terlibat dalam,
pengendalian komputer, alat atau bahan itu,
untuk memberinya apa-apa bantuan yang munasabah sebagaimana
yang dikehendakinya bagi maksud seksyen ini.
(3) Pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan atau
pegawai cukai barang dan perkhidmatan, mengikut mana-mana
yang berkenaan, boleh membuat salinan atau mengambil cabutan
maklumat yang direkodkan atau data berkomputer, jika difikirkannya
perlu.
(4) Bagi maksud subseksyen (1), “akses” termasuk diberi
kata laluan, kod penyulitan, kod penyahsulitan, perisian atau
perkakasan yang perlu dan apa-apa cara lain yang dikehendaki
bagi membolehkan pemahaman maklumat yang direkodkan atau
data berkomputer itu.
Majistret boleh mengeluarkan waran geledah
85. (1) Apabila ternyata pada mana-mana Majistret, berdasarkan
maklumat bertulis dengan bersumpah dan selepas apa-apa siasatan
yang difikirkannya perlu, bahawa terdapat sebab yang munasabah
untuk mempercayai bahawa di dalam mana-mana tempat, premis
atau pengangkut, terdapat apa-apa barang, dokumen atau benda yang
disembunyikan atau disimpan yang boleh memberikan keterangan
berhubung dengan pelakuan suatu kesalahan di bawah Akta ini,
Majistret itu boleh mengeluarkan suatu waran yang memberi
kuasa mana-mana pegawai cukai barang dan perkhidmatan yang
dinamakan dalamnya, pada bila-bila masa dan dengan atau tanpa
bantuan—
(a) untuk memasuki tempat, premis atau pengangkut itu untuk
menggeledah danapa-apa alat atau bahan yang berkaitan
yang dia mempunyai sebab yang munasabah untuk
mengesyaki digunakan atau telah digunakan berkaitan
dengan maklumat atau data itu; dan
96 Rang Undang-Undang
(b) boleh menghendaki—
(i) orang yang olehnya atau yang bagi pihaknya,
pegawai cukai dan perkhidmatan itu mempunyai
sebab yang munasabah untuk mengesyaki komputer
itu digunakan atau telah digunakan sedemikian;
atau
(ii) orang yang menjaga, atau selainnya terlibat dalam,
pengendalian komputer, alat atau bahan itu,
untuk memberinya apa-apa bantuan yang munasabah sebagaimana
yang dikehendakinya bagi maksud seksyen ini.
(3) Pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan atau
pegawai cukai barang dan perkhidmatan, mengikut mana-mana
yang berkenaan, boleh membuat salinan atau mengambil cabutan
maklumat yang direkodkan atau data berkomputer, jika difikirkannya
perlu.
(4) Bagi maksud subseksyen (1), “akses” termasuk diberi
kata laluan, kod penyulitan, kod penyahsulitan, perisian atau
perkakasan yang perlu dan apa-apa cara lain yang dikehendaki
bagi membolehkan pemahaman maklumat yang direkodkan atau
data berkomputer itu.
Majistret boleh mengeluarkan waran geledah
85. (1) Apabila ternyata pada mana-mana Majistret, berdasarkan
maklumat bertulis dengan bersumpah dan selepas apa-apa siasatan
yang difikirkannya perlu, bahawa terdapat sebab yang munasabah
untuk mempercayai bahawa di dalam mana-mana tempat, premis
atau pengangkut, terdapat apa-apa barang, dokumen atau benda yang
disembunyikan atau disimpan yang boleh memberikan keterangan
berhubung dengan pelakuan suatu kesalahan di bawah Akta ini,
Majistret itu boleh mengeluarkan suatu waran yang memberi
kuasa mana-mana pegawai cukai barang dan perkhidmatan yang
dinamakan dalamnya, pada bila-bila masa dan dengan atau tanpa
bantuan—
(a) untuk memasuki tempat, premis atau pengangkut itu untuk
menggeledah danapa-apa alat atau bahan yang berkaitan
yang dia mempunyai sebab yang munasabah untuk
mengesyaki digunakan atau telah digunakan berkaitan
dengan maklumat atau data itu; dan
96 Rang Undang-Undang
(b) boleh menghendaki—
(i) orang yang olehnya atau yang bagi pihaknya,
pegawai cukai dan perkhidmatan itu mempunyai
sebab yang munasabah untuk mengesyaki komputer
itu digunakan atau telah digunakan sedemikian;
atau
(ii) orang yang menjaga, atau selainnya terlibat dalam,
pengendalian komputer, alat atau bahan itu,
untuk memberinya apa-apa bantuan yang munasabah sebagaimana
yang dikehendakinya bagi maksud seksyen ini.
(3) Pegawai kanan cukai barang dan perkhidmatan atau
pegawai cukai barang dan perkhidmatan, mengikut mana-mana
yang berkenaan, boleh membuat salinan atau mengambil cabutan
maklumat yang direkodkan atau data berkomputer, jika difikirkannya
perlu.
(4) Bagi maksud subseksyen (1), “akses” termasuk diberi
kata laluan, kod penyulitan, kod penyahsulitan, perisian atau
perkakasan yang perlu dan apa-apa cara lain yang dikehendaki
bagi membolehkan pemahaman maklumat yang direkodkan atau
data berkomputer itu.
Majistret boleh mengeluarkan waran geledah
85. (1) Apabila ternyata pada mana-mana Majistret, berdasarkan
maklumat bertulis dengan bersumpah dan selepas apa-apa siasatan
yang difikirkannya perlu, bahawa terdapat sebab yang munasabah
untuk mempercayai bahawa di dalam mana-mana tempat, premis
atau pengangkut, terdapat apa-apa barang, dokumen atau benda yang
disembunyikan atau disimpan yang boleh memberikan keterangan
berhubung dengan pelakuan suatu kesalahan di bawah Akta ini,
Majistret itu boleh mengeluarkan suatu waran yang memberi
kuasa mana-mana pegawai cukai barang dan perkhidmatan yang
dinamakan dalamnya, pada bila-bila masa dan dengan atau tanpa
bantuan—
(a) untuk memasuki tempat, premis atau pengangkut itu untuk
menggeledah dan

(((((((Talk about open roof, dog kennel, windows type...
i personally know many farmers who use their 2nd storey shop (three storey strata titled shop) to convert into farm, they cannot open the roof liked we did in top floor. So, they resorted to use the window as the inlet hole.
and i also know many new shops that the developer sell it at strata title basis where 4 storey shops are sold per floor basis. and such those who bought the lower floor will need to use window type.
we cannot just said that well, our farms are all ok and those windows or dog kennel type will have to go.....tht is just the same liked what those ******* did where they take cares of themselves instead of all.
whether there are windows, dog kennel, open roof. as long as it meet the requirement in terms of db, they should be allow to continue operation.
i apologize if i offended anyone here.)))))))))))) Quote  CHANK
Just say that you can't please everyone with any GP and if the authorities try to please everyone, they will fail everytime and in the end, they will please no one and even offend everyone.

My uncle told me once; you cannot please everyone and if you do, you end up doing nothing, whatever you do, you can only please part of the people at one time and the most importance thing is that whatever you do,  you sincerely believe that it is the best in the interest of all.

To be fair to everyone, open window is a no no in town as I am a victim of the open window type. My house is behind a BH with the open window type and the music play for 24 hrs and my children can't sleep days and nights.

I can't find myself to report  to the authorities so I paid a contractor to seal my back windows facing the BH but then how many living behind opened window types are BH owners and willing to incure the cost of closing the window and the unhealthy windowless sleeping rooms. The main culprits of the industry is the sound disturbance and the open window is the worst kind.

and what after the GP. Opposition Politicians gain on Public complaints. We, the BHs owners are not Tai Sai, others do have rights and we are infringing into their right to a peaceful and healthy life.

A few of the compromised solutions @ Seremban workshop are

1. That open windows are not allowed
2. Residence area are not allowed
3. BHs may be neat and nice and need to repaint when  required.
4. No outside modifications are allow.
5. External tweeters must face the sky and not toward other buildings.
6. Regular maintenance and upkeeping of the BHs.
7. many many others requirements.

For open window type, as long as you play music, the sound will travel from the hole to the back building loud and clear esp. at night.......and there is no other way to solve then to prevent the usage of this method.

I remembered that during the mentioning of the open window type @ Seremban, a particular group asked me why didn't I object to it when it was mentioned and I replied why should I and not them; I am just one and they are group of 6 and they just sit down quietly and just listen for the whole section. I didn't mentioned that I am also against the opened window type 20 years ago and still am.

To be honest, for the BHs @ town to stay, there is no way for open window type as these type will bring future problem for the industry for not only sound pollution, smell and dust pollution will follow.

I am talking as a neutral guy who suffer from the BH and also gain from the industry. Above are my own feelings and others may feel differently and may wish to speak up. No intention of offending anyone but being a honest man, I just speak from my heart and what I believe that it is the best in the interest of the majorities of BHs @ towns.

Open window BHs owners may argue that we will comply but then how many and for how long and what after the GP. Opposition Politicians gain on Public complaints. We, the BHs owners are not Tai Sai, others do have rights and we are infringing into their right to a peaceful and healthy life.

A few of the compromised solutions @ Seremban workshop are

1. That open windows are not allowed
2. Residence area are not allowed
It is not residential area not allowed. It is 100% residential house in modern Taman or Garden not allowed. Whereas shop-houses of commercial title found in these area are permitted. Many people including Govt officials always get confused or make serious mistake in this interpretation. 

3. BHs may be neat and nice and need to repaint when required.
4. No outside modifications are allow.
5. External tweeters must face the sky and not toward other buildings.
6. Regular maintenance and upkeeping of the BHs.
7. many many others requirements.

I agree that OPEN WINDOW type in town constitutes almost 90 % of the complaints of noise pollution or nuisance received by the local govt. And I further agree that they together with any other type if found repeatedly committing noise pollution or nuisance, they should be penalised with summons with condition of either completely shut down their external sound permanently or alter their entrances and if still found committing nuisance after final warning that their operation as a bird’s house must be stop completely.
But I do not agree to put in law to one broad sweep indiscriminately to ban all window type. What about those in vicinity totally not causing noise pollution or nuisance? What about those built on agri-land and outskirts only causing nuisance to the monkeys? What about those operate in the abandoned projects or ghost towns where no resident lives?
There are already ample existing local by-laws with more than enough of teeth under the jurisdiction of the local govt that could be used to tackle these errant cases. Question here is whether the local govt enforcement is efficient, capable and effective to execute. If they are not competent to attend to complaints, who is to be blamed? Those not causing problem  OPEN WINDOW type owners to be scapegoats?
This is just like someone mentioned earlier 17,000 motor cyclists died on the road in Malaysia every year, the best solution shall be to ban all to ride on motor cycles. One Proton Saga was found sped through red light, all Proton Saga owners to be summoned?
To be fair to everyone, open window is a no no in town as I am a victim of the open window type. My house is behind a BH with the open window type and the music play for 24 hrs and my children can't sleep days and nights.
Because I am a BH owner myself, I complained it to the owner and it only went quite well for a week and then it happened again. I can't find myself to report to the authorities so I paid a contractor to seal my back windows facing the BH but then how many living behind opened window types are BH owners and willing to incure the cost of closing the window and the unhealthy windowless sleeping rooms. The main culprits of the industry is the sound disturbance and the open window is the worst kind.

Open window BHs owners may argue that we will comply but then how many and for how long and what after the GP. Opposition Politicians gain on Public complaints. We, the BHs owners are not Tai Sai, others do have rights and we are infringing into their right to a peaceful and healthy life.

  To be honest, for the BHs @ town to stay, there is no way for open window type as these type will bring future problem for the industry for not only sound pollution, smell and dust pollution will follow.

I am talking as a neutral guy who suffer from the BH and also gain from the industry. Above are my own feelings and others may feel differently and may wish to speak up. No intention of offending anyone but being a honest man, I just speak from my heart and what I believe that it is the best in the interest of the majorities of BHs @ towns.
In my personal humble opinion, I think your using of a NEUTRAL GUY should be replaced with VICTIM and that you cannot be considered neutral as you are a VICTIM. My sympathy is with you and also I share your feeling as I faced similar experiences.  Despite that I am also owner of BH, but I did caution a few BH owners for causing noise pollution in the neighbourhood and most gratefully accepted our highlighting with appreciation and corrected situations immediately and we became good friends. But a couple chose not to heed advice and continued with the blasting, not the non- BH owner residents but we, the BH owners jointly made serious complaints in writing to the Majlis and compelled the authority to take action against these two. End of the day, one rectified with no more noise pollution caused. The other was permanently shut off the operation as it was a rented premise. We are all BH owners and that we are most vulnerable if any one of us causes nuisance, every BH owner in the same vicinity would likely face indiscriminate finger pointing and may get into trouble not caused by us. Therefore it is our moral obligation to the neighbourhood to ensure to exert self control and regulating as not only we ourselves must not cause but also to ensure other BH owners not to cause nuisance. It is better for BH owners to warn and insist fellow errant owner to rectify situation than letting the local RESIDENT COMMITTEE to make noise which could be out of control and spill over to every innocent BH owner. This is one of the main reason why DL has repeatedly advised and encouraged localized BH association be formed in each and every town. It is not only to fend for owns rights from being abused by certain unscrupulous officials but also to do self control and regulating not only on its members but all BHs in the vicinity to minimize problems
High respect is given to WW that he chose not to exercise his legitimate rights to force the errant BH to stop the noise pollution but silently he swallowed it by footing for the cost to cover up the back window. WW is a really kind and considerate senior citizen for those who know him. But, a question raised here. Did the nuisance really stopped? What about your other immediate neighbours? Did they tolerate just like you?  And did what you did? 

EBN buyers are at door steps wanting to buy EBN but we are not going to harvest nest no matter what the price even the temptation is there as they are offering quite high a price. We will allow the chick to fledged, then we harvest cos we will be assured of min. 25% increment next time around. Seeing all those big white nests up there are really a temptation to pluck but a promise to the swiftlets is a promise that I will uphold and I never allow my birds to suffer nor mourn the losses of their offspring..... even if they take swifltets off the list of protected species.

Come May, we shall have plentiful at our dinning table........WW .......Wine and Women....Opp so sorry...just joking lah so don't feel offended my pretty ladies.

Happened to meet Pak Fatich Marzuki, one of the pioneer in Jawa not long ago. Bird population in Surabaya dropped by more than 50% over 20 yrs, something like 70% if memory correct compares to 20 yrs ago mainly due to industrialization. Deforestation as result of human population increase. But again, if you look at Jawa, the air pollution there is scary, their full moon is like one big orange in the sky indicating the amount of pollutants in the air.

That's why GP1 recommendation of relocating Bhs in industrial area also create another problem, if if the area is meant for heavy industry, birds will like it and increase population?

In the middle of forest the best but but security wise you dare to risk your life? Talk is cheap, come to think of it when they want to rob, $100, $1000 or $10,000 for them still money. Do they know or care how much you have? Even bright day light also rob. So better arm with gun if invest in tat kind of area but how many can get the permit?

Just hope whoever sitting up there smart enough to go the ground and understand rakyat plight. We have so much stranded assets, why don’t allow to make use of them to prosper the country and increase GDP? Tat’s 1Malaysia spirit in the first place!