退出廣肇聯合總會

本會會員曾於13/05/2001本會會員大會上，提出要求董事部解釋有關“3＋1嬰兒基金計劃”。當時會長李振光曾作出說明，如下:

“何世琩先生被推選為總會會長時，在就職典禮的交流會上談及“嬰兒基金計劃”。按照常規，非正式會議上所提及的事項是無紀錄在案的，但之後何世琩先生就向報界宣佈這項計劃，大部分的理事和屬會都是通過報章方知道有關基金的成立”

在隨後的廣肇聯合總會常務理事會上，本會表示基本上支持“3+1嬰兒基金計劃”的概念，贊成總會長提出華人多生育論宗旨，但必須加以詳細研究及討論有關基金的細節和運作，同時要求先成立籌委小組處理。過後，本會發現這項計劃不夠透明化時，雖被推選為信託人之一，但也推辭之。本會卻因此而被批評及遭受外界的遣責。

當時麻坡廣肇會館、巴株吧轄廣肇會館、關丹廣肇會館、馬六甲廣肇會館及順德會館已成“3+1嬰兒基金計劃”的信托人，但卻未開會討論過有關基金的事項。但本會卻竟然收到廣肇聯合總會的公函，要求各屬會修改章程以配合“3+1嬰兒基金計劃”的運作。另外，當時“3+1嬰兒基金計劃”所籌獲的款項是存入順德會館的戶口，而不是廣肇聯合總會的戶口。

本會雖多次致函廣肇聯合總會，提出有關“3+1嬰兒基金計劃”的運作和信託契約內容的疑問及修改，但廣肇聯合總會皆沒在常務理事會上提出討論和回答。

(有關信函可參閱附件) & (“3+1嬰兒基金計劃”契約可參閱附件)

以下乃當時本會對“3+1嬰兒基金計劃”的運作和信託契約內容所提出之部份疑問及修改:
a. 所籌獲款項並不存入廣肇聯合總會銀行戶口。

b. 在基金會尚未註冊成功的情況下，竟要求各屬會修改章程，以配合此項基金的運作。基金小組尚屬成立之初，既具如此大的權力作上述要求，這種做法已超越小組的權限，況且並沒在常務理事會上與各屬會討論或通過此項議案。

c. 向廣大華社所籌得的基金，只限發給廣肇會員而已，這樣對華社有欠公平，似乎已與歪離此基金會的宗旨。

d. 任何信託人不需是總會的“會館會員”的代表，並且享有絕對的權力處理基金會的一切運作，如變賣物產、修改基金會章程、投資等，皆不需獲得會員大會或特別會員大會通過，甚至不需負上任何責任。可見得基金小組的職權實在大的驚人，已與母會(廣肇聯合總會)完全脫節。

e. 於2001年，“3+1嬰兒基金計劃”契約內容尚存許多爭議性問題未解決，甚至未經過廣肇聯合總會大會通過的情況下，就冒然開始執行基金會，對外宣佈“生效日期是31/08/2000”。

16/05/2004，會長陳一賢在會員大會上宣佈本會決定退出“馬來西亞廣肇聯合總會”。會長指出:董事部收到某一些有居心人士發示匿名信破壞、中傷，這些都是因爲外力介入，因此經過董事會詳細討論後，作了一個令人痛心的議決，即退出廣肇聯合總會。
原由：

• 本會曾多次致函廣肇聯合總會，提出有關“3+1嬰兒基金”運作和契約內容的疑問及修改，但總會皆不給予答覆。
• 廣肇聯合總會主要領導人唆使本會會員及職員，公然與本會董事部對抗，已干預本會內政。
• 本會已提供會館資料予廣肇聯合總會，以編入“廣肇聯總紀念特刊”，但本會資料卻沒被刊登在有關特刊内，足以見得總會並不尊重本會。

Reasons Why Selangor & Federal Territory Kwong Siew Association 雪隆廣肇會館Parted Company With The Federation Of Kwong Siew Of Malaysia 馬來西亞廣肇聯合總會

At the Annual General Meeting on May 13 2001, members requested the Board of Management to clarify the matter of “3+1 Foundation Fund Scheme For New Born Babies”.

Mr. Lee Chun Kong (李振光) President of the Board who presided the meeting explained:

“When Mr. Ho Sai Cheong (何世琩) was elected as the President of “Federation Of Kwong Siew Of Malaysia”, he raised the 3+1 foundation fund scheme when he delivered his inaugural speech and the matter was discussed. However according to meeting procedure any discussion on any matter not mentioned in the agenda for the meeting could not be discussed or minuted.
After the meeting had ended, Mr. Ho called a press conference to announce the formation of the 3+1 foundation fund scheme. Later many members of our board of management including some affiliated members in the Federation came to know of this “3+1 Foundation fund scheme” only through newspaper reports.”

Subsequently at a management board meeting of the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia, our association made clear that we were in full agreement to the concept of the 3+1 Foundation Fund. We also agreed with the President of the Federation of Kwong Siew who was promoting the idea of increasing the child birth rate of the Chinese community.
However there was a need to study the proposal in greater detail and more discussions to come up with a good mechanism to implement the fund. We further suggested that a committee be appointed to begin the process. We found out later that the operation of 3+1 foundation fund scheme lacked transparency and fairness. We were surprised that we were nominated as one of the trustees of the foundation fund. We rejected the appointment and found ourselves criticized and ridiculed by some parties.

At the same time Kwong Siew Associations of Muar, Batu Pahat, Kuantan and Malacca, together with the Soon Tuck association (順德會館) accepted nomination as trustees of the foundation fund scheme even in the absence of a formal meeting to formally establish the foundation fund scheme. In spite of all these our association received a letter from the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia requiring all affiliated Kwong Siew associations to amend their respective constitution to participate in the 3+1 foundation fund scheme. It was also stated that the monies raised for the foundation was to be deposited in the account of the Soon Tuck Association (順德會館) being trustee in the account of the Federation of Kwong Siew Of Malaysia.

Our association had written letters to the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia on numerous occasions seeking clarification on the operational procedures of the foundation fund scheme, its responsibilities and limits of authority of the trustees plus suggestions offered. There were no replies. Moreover there had been no discussion or debate on the matter during subsequent board of management meetings. (Please see attached correspondence from our association as well as the proposed foundation fund scheme - to encourage higher birth rate of children).

The questions raised by our association in connection with the operations of the foundation fund scheme, its responsibilities and authority of the foundation trustees included the following:-

(a) Why was the money raised for the fund scheme could not be directly deposited in the account of the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia.

(b) While the foundation fund scheme had not been registered with the authorities, the trustees at this initial stage did not have the authority to write to the affiliated Kwong Siew associations asking for amendment in their respective constitution to accommodate participation in this fund scheme. Despite repeated calls, the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia did not raise the issue at subsequent board meetings. There were no discussions by the other affiliated Kwong Siew associations to pass resolutions pertaining to the matter.

(c) While the fund was to be solicited from the Chinese communities at large, the benefit was only limited to members of the Kwong Siew associations. This lacked fairness to start with and appeared to have departed from the founding principles.

(d) The appointed or nominated foundation trustees need not necessarily be representatives of the affiliated clan associations and these trustees have the absolute authority to deal with all matters related to the foundation scheme such as selling of properties of the Foundation, amend the rules of the Foundation, investing the funds of the Foundation etc. All these decisions need not have to be approved or accepted at general members’ meetings or emergency members’ general meeting. And top of all these, no trustee was to be held personally responsible for any consequence arising from any decisions.
The extent of the authority of the foundation trustees is way in excess of normal practice and good governance. And it is totally not in accord of the good intentions of Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia.

(e) In 2001, eventhough the operational procedures and implemention rules of the Foundation Fund scheme had never been discussed and approved by the Board of Management of the Federation of Kwong Siew Of Malaysia, some officials of the federation went ahead with the launching and announcement of the fund to the public on Aug 31, 2000.

On May 16, 2004 our President Mr. Chan Chow Yin (陳一賢), officially announced that our association had parted company with the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia. The departure had been discussed and approved by the board of management of our association. The association had specifically listed the following reasons for the departure.

• Our association had written to the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia on a number of occasions in which we raised our concern over the operating procedures of the Foundation Fund scheme along with our suggestions to be incorporated for better transparency and operational controls. But we had never received any reply from the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia.
• A senior management board member of the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia had instigated some of our association members and even our office staff to oppose our association’s position on the matter taken by our board of management. This constituted an unwarranted interference in our internal affairs.
• Upon a request by the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia, the board of management had submitted lots of information about our association to be included in a special anniversary publication of the Federation of Kwong Siew of Malaysia. However the information was never used in the publication. The board of management deemed this as a sign of disrespect to our association.