Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Chor Chee Heung launched Malaysian Institute of Accountant’s new standards boards on June 9.
Datuk Chor had once been chairman of scandal-hit Port Klang Authority (PKA). But, he said, “Other than visiting the PKFZ and receiving reports pertaining to the development of the PKFZ … at every board meeting … I was never involved in any other activities on the PKFZ.” (Edge June 10).
A strangely hands-off approach given that the Auditor-General himself had raised warning points as early as May 2004 and as the cost ballooned 6-fold from under RM2bn to RM13bn and counting … And this man is now Deputy Finance Minister.
Directors are supposed to exercise diligence and oversight, even more so in the case of government bodies like PKA which ultimately belong to the taxpayers. Yet, Datuk Chor seems to think merely receiving reports is sufficient fulfilment of his director duties.
Somewhat ironic then that he officiated at the launch of the Audit and Assurance Standards Board and Ethics Standards Board of the Malaysian Institute of Accountants at no less than the headquarters of the Securities Commission.
“Honesty, integrity, transparency and accountability are the key words in good corporate governance,” said Chor according to the Sun on June 10.
Those words ring hollow in the wake of PKFZ.
Besides fulfillment, or the lack of, of his director duties, Datuk Chor was also in a conflict of interest situation. Reporting accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers noted Datuk Chor was also deputy chairman of Wijaya Global Sdn Bhd, which was linked to a key beneficiary of contracts signed with PKA when he was PKA chairman.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
PKFZ scandal – will we actually see accountability?
A “Special Task Force” and two committees have been formed to “take immediate action” on Port Klang Free Zone, so said a Wednesday, 10 June press release by Port Klang Authority (PKA) chairman Dato’ Lee Hwa Beng:
1) The Task Force, comprising lawyers, accountants, quantity surveyors and building cost consultants has to make “in depth analysis and studies within their given scope of expertise and provide PKA the appropriate recommendations, within 2 months, for follow-up actions to be taken by the government”;
2) A Committee of Corporate Governance led by Datuk Paul Low, President of Transparency International Malaysia “shall oversee all future (emphasis mine) governance issues to ensure that lapses that have been identified .. do not recur in future”;
3) At PKFZ level, an Executive Committee has been formed “to plan and monitor the business development of the trade zone”.
More committees, more fees! Yes, we do need to chart the most effective part forward. But just as importantly, we need accountability for the past. Jail terms for wrong-doers. Not just more committees, studies, recommendations, planning and monitoring.
Otherwise, Malaysia is doomed. Because wrongdoers have nothing to fear. It’s OK if you swindle the rakyat of RM13bn. RM13bn that could have been used to build 500,000 low-cost houses; RM13bn that could have sent 43,000 deserving students to further their studies overseas, RM13bn that could be used to give RM1,300 cash to each adult Malaysian. You just suffer a few days, or perhaps weeks, of adverse publicity. After that you can go about enjoying your luxurious life, your overseas holidays, flashy cars ….. when you really should be in jail.
Citizen Nades of the Sun on Wednesday published a good long, list of people who should shed light on the issue. Here’s my summary. Accountability must start from the top down. The top in this case starts from the Ministers of Transport. No guilt is presumed, but some explanations are in order, for a start:
1) Former Ministers of Transport Tun Ling Liong Sik and Tan Sri Chan Kong Choy have to explain how the cost ballooned over 6x from RM1.957bn to RM13bn today despite constant reassurances the project was viable;
2) In addition Transport Minister Chan signed not one, but THREE letters that “can be construed as guarantees”. Such letters can be issued only by the Ministry of Finance. How could he have signed THREE such letters? Was he misadvised? Or did he sign knowing the implications? Either way, the Minister and/or senior civil servants have to answer;
3) The men who held the position of PKA chairman (at different times) through this mess: Senior MCA politicians Datuk Dr Ting Chew Peh, Datuk Yap Pian Hon and Datuk Chor Chee Heng, who is now Deputy Finance Minister.
The chairman is head of the board of directors which governs PKA. The board of is supposed to scrutinize management and guide policies. Yet, the Pricewaterhouse report confirms “a general lack of Board oversight and governance over the Project”.
For example, PKA gave KDSB development contracts on the basis of unfinalised building plans, and as early as May 2004, the Auditor General said PKA did not have sufficient financial resources.
Where was the Board and the Chairman when all these transpired?;
4) Datin Paduka O.C. Phang, former general manager of PKA.
1) The Task Force, comprising lawyers, accountants, quantity surveyors and building cost consultants has to make “in depth analysis and studies within their given scope of expertise and provide PKA the appropriate recommendations, within 2 months, for follow-up actions to be taken by the government”;
2) A Committee of Corporate Governance led by Datuk Paul Low, President of Transparency International Malaysia “shall oversee all future (emphasis mine) governance issues to ensure that lapses that have been identified .. do not recur in future”;
3) At PKFZ level, an Executive Committee has been formed “to plan and monitor the business development of the trade zone”.
More committees, more fees! Yes, we do need to chart the most effective part forward. But just as importantly, we need accountability for the past. Jail terms for wrong-doers. Not just more committees, studies, recommendations, planning and monitoring.
Otherwise, Malaysia is doomed. Because wrongdoers have nothing to fear. It’s OK if you swindle the rakyat of RM13bn. RM13bn that could have been used to build 500,000 low-cost houses; RM13bn that could have sent 43,000 deserving students to further their studies overseas, RM13bn that could be used to give RM1,300 cash to each adult Malaysian. You just suffer a few days, or perhaps weeks, of adverse publicity. After that you can go about enjoying your luxurious life, your overseas holidays, flashy cars ….. when you really should be in jail.
Citizen Nades of the Sun on Wednesday published a good long, list of people who should shed light on the issue. Here’s my summary. Accountability must start from the top down. The top in this case starts from the Ministers of Transport. No guilt is presumed, but some explanations are in order, for a start:
1) Former Ministers of Transport Tun Ling Liong Sik and Tan Sri Chan Kong Choy have to explain how the cost ballooned over 6x from RM1.957bn to RM13bn today despite constant reassurances the project was viable;
2) In addition Transport Minister Chan signed not one, but THREE letters that “can be construed as guarantees”. Such letters can be issued only by the Ministry of Finance. How could he have signed THREE such letters? Was he misadvised? Or did he sign knowing the implications? Either way, the Minister and/or senior civil servants have to answer;
3) The men who held the position of PKA chairman (at different times) through this mess: Senior MCA politicians Datuk Dr Ting Chew Peh, Datuk Yap Pian Hon and Datuk Chor Chee Heng, who is now Deputy Finance Minister.
The chairman is head of the board of directors which governs PKA. The board of is supposed to scrutinize management and guide policies. Yet, the Pricewaterhouse report confirms “a general lack of Board oversight and governance over the Project”.
For example, PKA gave KDSB development contracts on the basis of unfinalised building plans, and as early as May 2004, the Auditor General said PKA did not have sufficient financial resources.
Where was the Board and the Chairman when all these transpired?;
4) Datin Paduka O.C. Phang, former general manager of PKA.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
When civic-conscious citizens turn criminal
My community is turning “gated”. It started with simple security patrols many years ago, expanded to closures of certain roads with crude barricades earlier this year, and now, proper boom-gates and guard-posts are being constructed. All thanks to dedicated community leaders and supportive residents.
I watch with mixed feelings. On one hand, I certainly feel much safer with the enhanced security scheme, which I have supported from Day 1 of its humble beginnings. On the other hand, I am conscious that we are erecting barriers on public roads, which is a crime.
True, the residents’ association is closing roads with only the bests interests of the community in mind. And the authorities have adopted a hands-off attitude.
But where do we draw the line? Today we barricade a public road with the best of intentions. What next tomorrow? Who decides which intentions are noble enough for the law to be broken? Remember the political party which took over a playground to build a “service centre”? It claimed “good intentions”.
There are two big-picture issues here. One is the failure of the Barisan Nasional government to protect our communities. Crime used to be something that happened to someone else. Now, I personally know people who have been robbed, burgled and mugged. I am sure I am not atypical of the average city-dweller. Our police force needs to be far more effective.
The second issue is rising lawlessness. Laws are necessary for society to function. Laws must be enforced and people must be convinced that justice is even-handed for society to work. At this point, normally law-abiding citizens are now teaching their children that some laws can be ignored if our “intentions are good”. This fear of crime has forced civic-conscious Malaysians to turn criminals themselves, blockading public roads to protect the safety of themselves and their families. What next?
I watch with mixed feelings. On one hand, I certainly feel much safer with the enhanced security scheme, which I have supported from Day 1 of its humble beginnings. On the other hand, I am conscious that we are erecting barriers on public roads, which is a crime.
True, the residents’ association is closing roads with only the bests interests of the community in mind. And the authorities have adopted a hands-off attitude.
But where do we draw the line? Today we barricade a public road with the best of intentions. What next tomorrow? Who decides which intentions are noble enough for the law to be broken? Remember the political party which took over a playground to build a “service centre”? It claimed “good intentions”.
There are two big-picture issues here. One is the failure of the Barisan Nasional government to protect our communities. Crime used to be something that happened to someone else. Now, I personally know people who have been robbed, burgled and mugged. I am sure I am not atypical of the average city-dweller. Our police force needs to be far more effective.
The second issue is rising lawlessness. Laws are necessary for society to function. Laws must be enforced and people must be convinced that justice is even-handed for society to work. At this point, normally law-abiding citizens are now teaching their children that some laws can be ignored if our “intentions are good”. This fear of crime has forced civic-conscious Malaysians to turn criminals themselves, blockading public roads to protect the safety of themselves and their families. What next?
Friday, June 5, 2009
PKFZ scandal – how the cost rose from RM1.9bn to RM7.5bn, and counting
My Maxis is still Max-sick. 8 days after the problems began, one whole week after my first report, Max-sick engineers are “still working on it”. What a clueless bunch. On the other hand, thanks DiGi! Your broadband service has been fast and reliable.
Back to the main subject of this posting, Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ). Last week, I summarized the story and gave a big picture view of how the cost grew and grew. This week, we shall delve into how those costs actually got added in, and who the beneficiaries were.
Let’s start with just the cost for land purchase and development works. These were originally estimated at RM1.957bn in 2001. As at 31 Dec 2008, that had ballooned by RM1.565bn or 80% to RM3.522bn.
How did that additional RM1.565bn cost happen? First, purchasing the land cost RM646m more than it should have. Port Klang Authority (PKA) paid private company Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) RM1,088m for the land via a negotiated direct purchase. It could have compulsorily acquired it, as originally directed by the Ministry of Finance, for RM442m.
That leaves another RM919m to explain (RM1,565m–RM646m=RM919m). That’s mainly due to additional development works and accelerating construction so that the project was completed in just 2 years instead of phasing it in in such a way that it could be self-financing as approved by the Cabinet. PKA was in such a hurry that it signed development agreements based on estimated amounts and without detailed building plans. Effectively, PKA told KDSB, we have money to spend, just build whatever you want and we’ll take it!
So, land and construction costs alone became RM3.522bn. On top of that, because PKA committed to paying KDSB more than it could afford from current cash flows, it agreed to deferred payment terms and had to resort to soft loans from the government. The interest cost of all those deferred payments and soft loans now totals RM3.931bn. Add that to the construction cost and you get the RM7,453bn total as of now.
The deferred payment terms to KDSB are another issue. PKA has to pay 7.5% pa interest to KDSB. Being a statutory body, PKA could have itself raised government-guaranteed debt at 4% pa and paid KDSB cash, saving 3.5% pa of interest payments. On the RM3.522bn development cost, 3.5% is equivalent to RM123m per year of additional payments. The beneficiary? KDSB!
So, who’s behind KDSB? KDSB is wholly-owned by Wijaya Baru Holdings Sdn Bhd (WBHSB). The major shareholder of WBHSB with a 70% stake is Datuk Seri Tiong King Sing, Barisan Nasional MP for Bintulu. Tiong, by the way, is also the chairman of the Barisan Nasional Backbenchers’ Club – the club for BN MPs. I don’t know who owns the other 30% in WBHSB.
KDSB did not keep all the profits itself. Its main contractor was Wijaya Baru Sdn Bhd (WBSB). WBSB is 45%-owned by Wijaya Baru Global Berhad, which in turn is 32%-owned by Tiong. I don’t have the details of the other shareholders. Wijaya Baru Global’s chairman is Datuk Seri Abdul Azim Zabidi, former UMNO treasurer. Azim is also a board member of KDSB. Wijaya Baru Global’s deputy CEO is UMNO Kapar deputy division chief Datuk Faisal Abdullah.
So there you have it. The cost over-runs and some of the beneficiaries. The police and MACC have been awfully quiet about any investigations so far. Perhaps they are too busy watching Men in Black.
Back to the main subject of this posting, Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ). Last week, I summarized the story and gave a big picture view of how the cost grew and grew. This week, we shall delve into how those costs actually got added in, and who the beneficiaries were.
Let’s start with just the cost for land purchase and development works. These were originally estimated at RM1.957bn in 2001. As at 31 Dec 2008, that had ballooned by RM1.565bn or 80% to RM3.522bn.
How did that additional RM1.565bn cost happen? First, purchasing the land cost RM646m more than it should have. Port Klang Authority (PKA) paid private company Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) RM1,088m for the land via a negotiated direct purchase. It could have compulsorily acquired it, as originally directed by the Ministry of Finance, for RM442m.
That leaves another RM919m to explain (RM1,565m–RM646m=RM919m). That’s mainly due to additional development works and accelerating construction so that the project was completed in just 2 years instead of phasing it in in such a way that it could be self-financing as approved by the Cabinet. PKA was in such a hurry that it signed development agreements based on estimated amounts and without detailed building plans. Effectively, PKA told KDSB, we have money to spend, just build whatever you want and we’ll take it!
So, land and construction costs alone became RM3.522bn. On top of that, because PKA committed to paying KDSB more than it could afford from current cash flows, it agreed to deferred payment terms and had to resort to soft loans from the government. The interest cost of all those deferred payments and soft loans now totals RM3.931bn. Add that to the construction cost and you get the RM7,453bn total as of now.
The deferred payment terms to KDSB are another issue. PKA has to pay 7.5% pa interest to KDSB. Being a statutory body, PKA could have itself raised government-guaranteed debt at 4% pa and paid KDSB cash, saving 3.5% pa of interest payments. On the RM3.522bn development cost, 3.5% is equivalent to RM123m per year of additional payments. The beneficiary? KDSB!
So, who’s behind KDSB? KDSB is wholly-owned by Wijaya Baru Holdings Sdn Bhd (WBHSB). The major shareholder of WBHSB with a 70% stake is Datuk Seri Tiong King Sing, Barisan Nasional MP for Bintulu. Tiong, by the way, is also the chairman of the Barisan Nasional Backbenchers’ Club – the club for BN MPs. I don’t know who owns the other 30% in WBHSB.
KDSB did not keep all the profits itself. Its main contractor was Wijaya Baru Sdn Bhd (WBSB). WBSB is 45%-owned by Wijaya Baru Global Berhad, which in turn is 32%-owned by Tiong. I don’t have the details of the other shareholders. Wijaya Baru Global’s chairman is Datuk Seri Abdul Azim Zabidi, former UMNO treasurer. Azim is also a board member of KDSB. Wijaya Baru Global’s deputy CEO is UMNO Kapar deputy division chief Datuk Faisal Abdullah.
So there you have it. The cost over-runs and some of the beneficiaries. The police and MACC have been awfully quiet about any investigations so far. Perhaps they are too busy watching Men in Black.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Maxis is guilty of fraud
Yup, my Max-sick broadband is on the blink again. The problems started Friday, but I was still able to get a steady, albeit slow connection via EDGE technology. On Saturday, the line kept dropping. By Monday evening, Max-sick was dead. Cue countless calls to Max-sick's “customer service” and a home visit by an unskilled vendor who insisted it was a modem problem when I was 1000% sure it wasn't. True enough, he changed the modem and still there's no service.
Finally, yesterday (Tuesday) evening, someone called and said Max-sick had “escalated my problem up to the engineering team”. What? I had complained on Saturday!!! It takes them THREE days to “escalate” the problem? Whatever happened to service integrity? Internet connection is a necessity nowadays. I rely on it to work and earn income. No internet = pissed off customers and lost opportunities. Yet when I asked Max-sick if they are at least going to waive my monthly fee, they said “they have to close the file first”, whatever that means.
Maxis is guilty of fraud. It is charging for a service (broadband) which it is not delivering. It's like a travel agent selling you a 5-star holiday package including accommodation at the Shangri-la, but dumping you into Rumah Tumpangan Ah Fatt instead. Actually it's worse than that. Maxis is not delivering ANY service at all. So, Maxis charges us for 5-star hotels but leaves us sleeping in the streets. In the meantime, it has the gall to continue aggressively selling Broadband packages. I know because I was accosted yesterday evening by yet another Maxis vendor! Needless to say, I gave him a piece of my mind, telling him he was selling a non-existent service.
But we consumers are powerless. There is no choice. Streamyx is equally bad, and I doubt that Celcom Broadband can outperform its sister company. In a situation like this, it is the regulator that has to protect the consumer against rapacious large companies.
So, where is our regulator? Incompetent like much of the Barisan Nasional government. Sigh. Next elections are so far away. In the meantime, we are stuck with a government that the majority of peninsular Malaysians did not vote for. Please, fellow citizens in Sabah and Sarawak – next elections help us kick out this useless administration.
And in case you're wondering, I had to drive out, incurring petrol and parking expense and spending unnecessary time, to find a place with wi-fi so I could upload this.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Cost of PKFZ scandal – RM500 for every single Malaysian, and counting
I spent the morning at the Port Klang Authority with the DAP team, scrutinising the appendices to the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) report that was made public yesterday. The experience was slightly better than when we checked out the toll concession agreements earlier this year. Nicely-printed main reports are available. The appendices though, are available for review for only 2 weeks, and restrictions apply – they cannot be photocopied or photographed. But we can take notes on our computers, which is a relief for people like me with scrawly hand-writing.
It is a mound of dirt, so I'm sure there'll be plenty of coverage by Kit Siang, Tony, et al. I'll just help with the background for starters:
The players are:
1) Port Klang Authority (PKA), a statutory body under the Ministry of Transport.
2) PKA decided to set up Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ), an integrated 1,000 acre zone offering facilities for international cargo distribution.
3) To design, construct and finance PKFZ, private company Kumpulan Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) was appointed as the turnkey developer.
There are all sorts of conflict of interest and performance issues surrounding KDSB and its appointment which I shall leave to others to highlight. Moving on the the billions of ringgit that were lost and stand to be lost:
1) The cost originally estimated in 2001 was RM1.957bn for land and development works.
2) This had escalated to RM4.947bn as at 31 Dec 2008. (The cost for land and development works alone had jumped to RM3.522bn. In addition, because PKFZ had to borrow to fund the development, there was RM1.425bn of interest costs).
3) The Ministry of Finance (MoF) extended a soft loan of RM4.632bn to PKA to help fund PKFZ.
4) Even though the MoF loan is soft (on friendly terms), some interest still has to be paid. This works out to RM2.506bn, taking the total project cost to RM7.453bn.
So, as of 31 Dec 2008, the tax-payer was already down by over RM7bn! It gets worse:
1) Based on its own assumptions, Port Klang Authority will be in cumulative cash flow deficit for the next 42 years, until 2041. Put another way, PKA starts making money only in 2042.
2) PKA's assumptions, needless to say, appear overly-optimistic (email me if you want details).
3) The Reporting Accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) say PKA will not be able to repay the Ministry of Finance the soft loans as scheduled, based on PKA's own (optimistic) assumptions. These loans will have to be restructured, leading to an additional RM5bn of interest costs.
4) So, ultimately, the total project will cost RM12.453bn. That’s RM500 for each and every one of us.
5) Bear in mind, the RM12.453bn estimate is based on PKA's optimistic assumptions.
6) If we make more realistic assumptions, the total cost will be much higher. I'm guess-timating RM20bn+!
So, where do we go from here? Speaking from a logical angle, the RM7.453bn total cost so far is gone and burnt. We must look forward. And looking forward, we're talking about a further loss of at least RM8.5bn, based on PKA's own optimistic assumptions. This is based on RM5bn just for project-financing (point 4 above) and, in addition, PKFZ is expected to burn another RM3.5bn of cash to finance its operating cash flow over 2008-2041.
Can the government walk away? Should the government walk away and save at least RM8.5bn? By the way, that RM8.5bn will go a long way to privatising PLUS!
It is a mound of dirt, so I'm sure there'll be plenty of coverage by Kit Siang, Tony, et al. I'll just help with the background for starters:
The players are:
1) Port Klang Authority (PKA), a statutory body under the Ministry of Transport.
2) PKA decided to set up Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ), an integrated 1,000 acre zone offering facilities for international cargo distribution.
3) To design, construct and finance PKFZ, private company Kumpulan Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) was appointed as the turnkey developer.
There are all sorts of conflict of interest and performance issues surrounding KDSB and its appointment which I shall leave to others to highlight. Moving on the the billions of ringgit that were lost and stand to be lost:
1) The cost originally estimated in 2001 was RM1.957bn for land and development works.
2) This had escalated to RM4.947bn as at 31 Dec 2008. (The cost for land and development works alone had jumped to RM3.522bn. In addition, because PKFZ had to borrow to fund the development, there was RM1.425bn of interest costs).
3) The Ministry of Finance (MoF) extended a soft loan of RM4.632bn to PKA to help fund PKFZ.
4) Even though the MoF loan is soft (on friendly terms), some interest still has to be paid. This works out to RM2.506bn, taking the total project cost to RM7.453bn.
So, as of 31 Dec 2008, the tax-payer was already down by over RM7bn! It gets worse:
1) Based on its own assumptions, Port Klang Authority will be in cumulative cash flow deficit for the next 42 years, until 2041. Put another way, PKA starts making money only in 2042.
2) PKA's assumptions, needless to say, appear overly-optimistic (email me if you want details).
3) The Reporting Accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) say PKA will not be able to repay the Ministry of Finance the soft loans as scheduled, based on PKA's own (optimistic) assumptions. These loans will have to be restructured, leading to an additional RM5bn of interest costs.
4) So, ultimately, the total project will cost RM12.453bn. That’s RM500 for each and every one of us.
5) Bear in mind, the RM12.453bn estimate is based on PKA's optimistic assumptions.
6) If we make more realistic assumptions, the total cost will be much higher. I'm guess-timating RM20bn+!
So, where do we go from here? Speaking from a logical angle, the RM7.453bn total cost so far is gone and burnt. We must look forward. And looking forward, we're talking about a further loss of at least RM8.5bn, based on PKA's own optimistic assumptions. This is based on RM5bn just for project-financing (point 4 above) and, in addition, PKFZ is expected to burn another RM3.5bn of cash to finance its operating cash flow over 2008-2041.
Can the government walk away? Should the government walk away and save at least RM8.5bn? By the way, that RM8.5bn will go a long way to privatising PLUS!
How TIA can make a lasting impact
Here’s my prediction: By 2012, three years after the launch of the Terengganu Investment Authority (TIA), the average Terengganu citizen will be pretty much unaffected by the billions of ringgit spent. Ultimately, when the projects are completed, when the land-flippers and contractors have collected their millions and hundreds of thousands or ringgit, the rakyat will be left with only poorly-constructed, under-utilised buildings which start falling apart very quickly.
TIA is perpetuating the myth that all it takes to develop a nation is infrastructure. Just build fancy new buildings and we’ll achieve developed status! It’s not that simple. It has already been proven in Malaysia – building first-world infrastructure WILL NOT take us to first-world status. Developed status is also about the soft issues – education, culture, civil society ….
Putrajaya, KLIA and the KLCC Twin Towers are the best case studies. These were supposed to be icons of a developed Malaysia. Now, after barely ten years, Putrajaya is already crumbling and KLIA is beset with the same taxi touts and illegal parking problems that plagued Subang. The KLCC Twin Towers area, in an ironic way, has turned out to symbolize Malaysia. Within KLCC itself, swanky stores cater to rich tourists and the professional Malaysians engendered by the NEP, but just 50 metres outside, rogue taxi drivers over-charge with impunity and across the road along Jalan Ampang, poor itinerant traders set up shop in the evenings, cooking on make-shift stoves.
But perhaps I am wrong, and TIA will not just be a mega-project play. Let’s say TIA does attract serious oil and gas specialists to set up shop in Terengganu, spending billions on capital investment. How many Terengganu folk are actually qualified to work in those specialized, highly-technical fields? Households in Terengganu are the second-poorest in Malaysia. It will look a lot like the British days, when foreigners held the senior positions and locals had to be content with the low-level jobs.
TIA would make a much more meaningful and lasting impact on Terengganu if it starts from the ground up. Let’s start with education. Use the money to fund the best teachers and offer good facilities. Build the proficiency of Terengganu children in English, Math and Science. Educate the next generation of Terengganu. Only then, seek the high-value, highly-specialised industries, when Terengganu people themselves can take full advantage of the employment opportunities
More to come. I’m off now to Port Klang to view the report on the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) debacle with your hard-working DAP MPs. This time, I hope I’m not again forced to go back to pen-and-paper.
TIA is perpetuating the myth that all it takes to develop a nation is infrastructure. Just build fancy new buildings and we’ll achieve developed status! It’s not that simple. It has already been proven in Malaysia – building first-world infrastructure WILL NOT take us to first-world status. Developed status is also about the soft issues – education, culture, civil society ….
Putrajaya, KLIA and the KLCC Twin Towers are the best case studies. These were supposed to be icons of a developed Malaysia. Now, after barely ten years, Putrajaya is already crumbling and KLIA is beset with the same taxi touts and illegal parking problems that plagued Subang. The KLCC Twin Towers area, in an ironic way, has turned out to symbolize Malaysia. Within KLCC itself, swanky stores cater to rich tourists and the professional Malaysians engendered by the NEP, but just 50 metres outside, rogue taxi drivers over-charge with impunity and across the road along Jalan Ampang, poor itinerant traders set up shop in the evenings, cooking on make-shift stoves.
But perhaps I am wrong, and TIA will not just be a mega-project play. Let’s say TIA does attract serious oil and gas specialists to set up shop in Terengganu, spending billions on capital investment. How many Terengganu folk are actually qualified to work in those specialized, highly-technical fields? Households in Terengganu are the second-poorest in Malaysia. It will look a lot like the British days, when foreigners held the senior positions and locals had to be content with the low-level jobs.
TIA would make a much more meaningful and lasting impact on Terengganu if it starts from the ground up. Let’s start with education. Use the money to fund the best teachers and offer good facilities. Build the proficiency of Terengganu children in English, Math and Science. Educate the next generation of Terengganu. Only then, seek the high-value, highly-specialised industries, when Terengganu people themselves can take full advantage of the employment opportunities
More to come. I’m off now to Port Klang to view the report on the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) debacle with your hard-working DAP MPs. This time, I hope I’m not again forced to go back to pen-and-paper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
