Let the Will and Kate show begin!

Admittedly, they are a winsome twosome who brought back excitement and glamour to the British royal family. But why the blazes are we so dazzled by the likes of them? 

TOMORROW, the most famous and glamorous royal pair in the world comes to town: Prince William and Princess Catherine a.k.a. the Duke and Duchess of Cam­bridge.

What a mouthful but, boy, don’t we just love the sound of it – so posh, so noble and yes, sooooo romantic.

It’s a tad ironic that many nations in the last couple of centuries dumped their monarchs in revulsion over their feudalistic, despotic ways, yet royalty’s power to excite the imagination has not dimmed.

For example, South Korea is stoutly republic but that hasn’t stopped its TV stations producing many popular K-dramas based on a fictional royal family set in modern times.

The ones I’ve seen usually have storylines of a long-lost princess or prince being discovered or the royal family battling conspiracies and winning the love and support of the Korean citizenry.

British royalty, however, has lasted – “as old as the hills”, as one wit described it on an online site – and is arguably “first among equals” where royal houses are concerned.

Despite its lineage, by the latter half of the 20th century, Queen Elizabeth II and her family had settled into stodgy respectability and were admired in a rather detached way.

After all, it was hard to go gaga over them when they were rather dull and not particularly good-looking or trendy. Princess Margaret was slightly scandalous but she seemed more desperate than daring.

Enter Diana and British royalty was turned on its head.

No one could and still can’t beat her combination of beauty, glamour, charity and blue blood.

I was in London the day she died on Aug 31, 1997. When I came back, I lamented her passing in a long column in the Sept 11, 1997, issue of Clove.

In it, I mentioned how I missed the opportunity to see her in person because she died a few weeks before she was due to attend an AIDS charity gala in Singapore.

If I had met Diana, I would be able to boast of a hattrick of sorts – seeing in the flesh three generations of British royalty. That’s because I had tea with Queen E when she came to KL for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in 1989 and I am attending the British-Malaysian Chamber of Commerce lunch on Friday where William will give a speech with Kate in tow.

Queen Elizabeth in person looked exactly like her photos and she spoke in a tinkly, girlish voice. And what did we talk about? The weather. The Malaysian weather, to be exact.

And she was funny. During her 1989 visit, she made a trip to Ipoh at the invitation of Sultan Azlan Shah. It had rained before her plane touched down.

As I recall, Queen E shared that when Sultan Azlan escorted her from the plane, he wanted to guide her down the red carpet that had been rolled out. But the rain had soaked the carpet and she said she didn’t want to walk on it, probably because she didn’t want to ruin her shoes.

She painted an amusing picture of two royal persons ever so courteously jostling each other on the red carpet without batting a protocol eyelid.

I have kept the invitation card embossed with her crest which states: The Master of the Household is commanded by Her Majesty to invite Ms June H.L. Wong to a Reception to be given by The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh at Carcosa Seri Negara on Tuesday, 17th October, 1989, at 5.00p.m.

I never found out who the Master of the Household was and why I was invited but I am eternally grateful for the experience.

But why should this piece of cardboard be precious enough for me to keep?

After all, as a Malaysian, I have royals aplenty of my own, all nine households. So why am I quite thrilled by Will and Kate’s visit? I am not the only one: all the 1,100 seats at the BMCC lunch were snapped up a month ago.

That’s a question a UK TV station wants to ask The Star editors – Why are Malaysians interested in British royals so removed from their life? – as part of its coverage of the visit. I am still mulling over my answers to that and other questions.

I can say it’s because we were a former colony and/or protectorate and being part of the Commonwealth, we never completely severed our ties with Old Blighty.

My 85-year-old dad can still sing God Save The King which he learnt as a schoolboy!

I can say it’s because many Malaysians speak English as a first language, earned their degrees in the UK and there is such a familiarity with Britain that London is sardonically described as a second home to rich Malaysians.

And yes, I must add that Malaysians are crazy English football fans.

I should point out we aren’t interested in all British royals though – just the queen, these two and Harry.

And that possibly because we were so enamoured of Diana that we are merely continuing that obsession through her sons and daughter-in-law who are – fortunately or unfortunately – young, good-looking and trendy, vital factors in today’s visual-fuelled world.

And who doesn’t love a real-life story of a commoner who wins the heart of a prince and becomes a nation’s future queen?

But I honestly believe that if Kate was plain, we wouldn’t be so interested. That’s why Sarah Ferguson and Sophie (Prince Edward’s wife lah!) never wowed us the way Diana did.

In time to come when William loses more hair, he may also lose his shine, the way his dad did. How Kate holds up and evolves in her role as princess remains to be seen and, therefore, her longevity on the popularity scale.

But for now, they are the It Royal Couple. Welcome to Malaysia, Your Highnesses.

> If you can offer other reasons why we are interested in British royals and what it is you like to read about the Duke and Duchess, let the writer know so that the better she can answer the UK TV station people. Ta and toodle pip!

So Aunty, So What? By JUNE H.L. WONG 

China defense ministry acts as Japan buys its Diaoyu Islands

(Reuters) - Japan brushed off stern warnings by China on Tuesday and bought a group of islands that both sides claim in a growing dispute that threatens to deepen strains between Asia's two biggest economies.

A territorial dispute between China and Japan has intensified with Beijing sending patrol ships near disputed East China Sea islands in a show of anger over Tokyo's purchase of the largely barren outcroppings from their private owners.

The arrival on Tuesday of the two patrol ships of the China Marine Surveillance off the islands was meant to assert China's claims, said the Chinese government's official news agency, Xinhua.

The marine agency is a paramilitary force whose ships are often lightly armed, and Xinhua said it had drawn up a plan to safeguard China's sovereignty of the islands.



BEIJING, Sept. 11 (Xinhua) -- The armed forces of China are completely opposed to the Japanese government's move to "purchase" the Diaoyu Island and two of its adjacent islands, Chinese Defense Ministry Spokesman Geng Yansheng said Tuesday.

Xinhua said two marine surveillance ships had reached the waters near the islands to "assert the country's sovereignty" (AFP/JIJI PRESS/File, Jiji Press)

Geng issued a statement on the Japanese government's implementation of so-called "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands.

Despite strong opposition from the Chinese side, the Japanese government blatantly announced on Sept. 10 to "purchase" the Diaoyu Island and its affiliated Nan Xiaodao and Bei Xiaodao. This act is a severe infringment of Chinese territorial sovereignty, Geng said.

Geng said the Diaoyu Island and its affiliated islands are China's inherent territory. China has sufficient historical and jurisprudential evidence surrounding this.

Geng said the Japanese government's action and the so-called "island purchase" was totally illegal and invalid.

In the statement, Geng said since the start of the year, the Japanese government has endorsed right wing forces to clamor for the "island purchase" and even move in to "purchasing the islands" by itself. He said this severely harmed the general situation of the development in China-Japan relations.

Geng said in recent years, Japan has expanded armament under various excuses, frequently incurred tension in regional situations and repeatedly stirred up troubles on the issue of the Diaoyu islands. Such moves are worthy of high vigilance by its Asian neighbors and the international community.

"The Chinese government and armed forces stand firm and are unshakeable in its determination and will safeguard sovereignty over the nation's territories," Geng said.

"We are watching closely the evolution of the situation and reserve the right to take reciprocal measures," Geng said.

Related:

Japanese gov't signs purchase contract on Diaoyu Islands: media

TOKYO, Sept. 11 (Xinhua) -- The Japanese government has exchanged the official contract on the purchase of Diaoyu Islands with Kurihara family whom the Japanese side called "the private owner", NHK reported Tuesday morning.

Japanese Cabinet on Tuesday morning decided to disburse reserve funds to purchase part of China's Diaoyu Islands, before signing a sales contract with whom the Japanese side called "the private owner" of the islands scheduled later Tuesday, it said.  Full story

Two Chinese patrol ships reach waters around Diaoyu Islands

BEIJING, Sept. 11 (Xinhua) -- Two ships of the China Marine Surveillance (CMS) have reached the waters around the Diaoyu Islands Tuesday morning to assert the country's sovereignty.

The CMS has drafted an action plan for safeguarding the sovereignty and would take actions pending the development of the situation, the CMS sources said.  Full story

Hu states China's stance on Japan ties, Diaoyu Islands

VLADIVOSTOK, Russia, Sept. 9 (Xinhua) -- Chinese President Hu Jintao met with Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda here on Sunday and made clear China's position on its relations with Japan and the Diaoyu Islands issue.

The two leaders met on the sidelines of the 20th informal economic leaders' meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum.  Full story

Top legislator reiterates China's stance on Diaoyu Islands

TEHRAN, Sept. 10 (Xinhua) -- China's top legislator Wu Bangguo said here Monday that Japan's decision to "buy" the Diaoyu Islands is illegal and invalid.

Wu, chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, briefed Iranian parliament speaker Ali Larijani on the latest development concerning the Diaoyu Islands.   Full story

"Absolutely no concession" on Diaoyu Islands, says Chinese premier

BEIJING, Sept. 10 (Xinhua) -- Premier Wen Jiabao said Monday the Diaoyu Islands are an inalienable part of China's territory and China will "absolutely make no concession" on issues concerning its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Despite repeated solemn representations of China, the Japanese government announced Monday it would "purchase" part of China's Diaoyu Islands from "private Japanese owners" and bring the islands under "state control."   Full story

Full text of Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China

BEIJING, Sept. 10 (Xinhua) -- Following is the full text of the Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China issued on Monday.

Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China

10 September 2012

Regardless of repeated strong representations of the Chinese side, the Japanese government announced on 10 September 2012 the "purchase" of the Diaoyu Island and its affiliated Nan Xiaodao and Bei Xiaodao and the implementation of the so-called nationalization" of the islands. This constitutes a gross violation of China's sovereignty over its own territory and is highly offensive to the 1.3 billion Chinese people. It seriously tramples on historical facts and international jurisprudence. The Chinese government and people express firm opposition to and strong protest against the Japanese move.  Full story

Related post:


Japan's buying Diaoyu Islands provokes China to strike back 

Managing strata properties in Malaysia

I LIKE to highlight the rather difficult and controversial issue of the management (and maintenance) of stratified properties, particularly flats, apartments and condominiums, in the context of the proposed Strata Management Act, 2012 which is expected to be tabled during the upcoming session of Parliament.

The Building Management Association of Malaysia (BMAM) is the only multi-stakeholder organisation (established in 2009) representing the collective interests of chambers of commerce, developers, engineers, architects, shopping and high-rise complex managers, management corporations (MCs), joint management bodies (JMBs) and managing agents.

However, BMAM was not nvited to participate in the workshops and discussions held by the National Land Council and the Housing and Local Government Ministry when the draft Bill was deliberated, although the implementation of the Act will have consequences that will directly affect BMAM stakeholder-member organisations.

According to the information available to us, the Bill states that only licenced valuers who have been admitted as Property Managers pursuant to Section 21(1)(a) of the Valuers, Appraisers and Estate Agents Act, 1981 (VAEA Act) to manage and maintain stratified (or subdivided) buildings as managing agents.

No such restrictions exist in the current laws that regulate building management, namely the Strata Titles Act, 1985 (ST Act) and the Building and Common Property (Maintenance and Management) Act, 2007 (BCPMM Act).

Building management is a multi-disciplinary occupation and cannot be exclusive to the valuers alone.

The JMBs and MCs want to have the independence and opportunity to appoint any fit and proper person, or appropriate entity, as managing agent on a “willing seller-willing buyer” basis on mutually agreed terms and conditions.

The Bill, by restricting building management and maintenance to valuers, would create a monopoly, and is inconsistent with the spirit of the Competition Act, 2010, which clearly discourages the creation of monopolies.

Though building owners (JMBs and MCs) and Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) have been exempted from this ruling, most JMBs and MCs, led by volunteers, do not have the time, skill, expertise or experience to manage and maintain their buildings, and neither can they afford to appoint a registered property manager as a managing agent.

JMBs and MCs would be required to pay a management fee in compliance with their Fee Schedule, excluding other operating costs such as staff salaries, electricity, water, cleaning, security, etc.

We will soon see the mushrooming of more urban stratified slums and ghettos, thereby defeating the objectives of the Government’s squatter resettlement programmes and public housing projects.

The fiduciary responsibilities of the MCs and JMBs have been clearly stated in the ST Act and the BCPMM Act on the management of the Building Maintenance Fund and the Sinking Fund.

The managing agent appointed by the JMB or MC to manage and maintain the subject properties is only required to perform these functions for and on behalf of the JMB or MC. A registered property manager is therefore not required.

The MCs and JMBs only need building and facilities management for their common properties.

Since common properties and facilities cannot be sold, and most residential building owners do not lease their common properties to third parties as they would need them for their own use.

Many non-valuer managing agents have several years of experience in building and facilities management.

They have also been admitted as members and registered building managers by BMAM upon satisfying the required admission criteria.

They are qualified and skilled in building management, operations and facilities maintenance, and have also subscribed to a professional building management liability insurance policy entered into between a local insurance company and BMAM.

Any attempt by the ST Act to split managing agents as valuers and non-valuers will be detrimental to the growth and development of the building management industry in Malaysia.

It will result in the loss of valuable management talent in the industry. It will also have serious social implications on the upward career mobility of qualified and experienced local building managers, many of whom are bumiputras.

The Commissioner of Buildings (COB) should be the sole regulatory body to
supervise and oversee the management and maintenance of stratified buildings in Malaysia.

The involvement of third parties, who have no ownership interests in the properties, will not only erode the COB’s authority but may also result in unnecessary layering, additional costs (with no proportionate increase in service quality), corruption, rent seeking and abuse of power.

PROF S. VENKATESWARAN
Secretary-general
Building Management Association of Malaysia