Alor Gajah: World Biotechnology Hub?

I read with extreme interest, an article in the New Straits Times which proclaimed that Alor Gajah (in Melaka, by the way), will soon become the "next biotechnology hub of the world". Undertaking this "massive project costing RM1.36 billion" at the 113ha site is "California-based Actis Biologics Inc, a bio-pharmaceutical company which has set up a Malaysian-registered company Actis Biologics Malaysia Sdn Bhd."

Now, don't get me wrong, I welcome such investments into Malaysia, and certainly if indeed Malaysia can become a global biotechnology hub, it will be excellent news for the country. However, having experienced plenty of disastrous mega-projects in Malaysia with supposed foreign investment or participation, you will forgive me if I am a little apprehensive (understatement?) when it comes to such mega-announcements. I can't help but to suspect if there's anything fishy going on.

I'll just name a few examples here. Datuk Keramat Holdings Berhad was supposed to deliver the first phase of a US$60 million studio and entertainment complex is planned on a 480-hectare piece of land in Cyberjaya. It was to form an integral part of MSC's most prestigious project: the creation of a $790-million high-tech film studio and a Disneyesque theme park complex called the Entertainment Village. Unfortunately, the grand launch during the 2001 International Advisory Panel, complete with Jacky Chan in a shimmering white outfit, proved to be the only highlight of that initiative. Instead of sharing the blame, Multimedia Development Corporation laid the blame squarely on the developer after millions of ringgit was burnt.

And, what about another of Dr Mahathir Mohammad's favourite projects - InventQjaya?
A Dr Sadeg of Reveo Inc (USA), a Libyan-American, told CNN's TalkAsia host Lorraine Hahn in a programme aired in November 2002 that former premier Mahathir Mohamad had invited him to invest in Malaysia's Multimedia Super Corridor after a meeting in New York. The project is funded by a government loan of RM437 million, of which RM228 million has been paid out. Now, with practically nothing to show besides the ownership of several commercially useless patents, the Malaysian government is charging Reveo of money laundering and absconding with the loan. Disaster? You tell me.

Of course, lets not forget the latest mega-project scandal the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ), a RM1.3 billion project which ballooned to RM4.6 billion, which in turn now requires government bailout with a soft loan which will probably never see the light of day.

So, back to our very own "RM1.36 billion bio-technology hub". Who is this Actis Biologics Inc, and are they sufficiently competent to manage such mega projects? With the project suffer the same fate as InventQjaya and require the same bailout like PKFZ?

I've done some very simple preliminary checks, something that you and me can all do with Google. Here are some initial and not necessarily conclusive findings, which nevertheless, raises some interesting questions for the authorities to follow up on:

1. Based on a free summary report by Dun & Bradstreet, a premier provider of international and US business credit information and credit reports, Actis Biologics is an unlisted company which started in 2004. It has annual sales of US$530,000 and 7 employees.
   
   Um.. a 3 year old company with 7 employees and revenue of about half a million US Dollars, taking on a RM1.3 billion "world biotechnology hub" project?
   
   
2. Now, if the above data is sufficiently intriguing, there's a more detailed business information report available for US$110.00, which may contain further juicy information. The report studies key performance information, including sales figures, net worth, financial condition, legal suits etc. I'm sure the relevant Malaysian government authorities in-charge of the project will find the US$110 money well spent. There are of course, other reports on the company which can be purchased.
   
   
3. It will of course be useful to see other projects which Actis have undertaken, and in particular, one in India which was launched at the end of 2005. Despite many press statements then sounding overwhelmingly similar to the NST article, no further news is available as to the progress of the project in Mumbai. As reported in the Economic Times, India, Actis planned a US$3 million investment in a R&D lab in India. Also, check out the report in Hindu Business Line or the one at Rediff.com:
   

   US-based biopharmaceutical company Actis Biologics Inc is setting up its wholly owned subsidiary in India in a move to make the country a hub for its clinical research and developmental activities.
   
   Having recently licensed the angiozyme technology, jointly developed by Sirna Therapeutics and Chiron, Actis expects this technology platform to power drug development in different segments. This technology helps block blood supply to cancer cells and the same method can be used for fat cells too, he said.
   

4. Which brings me to this "angiozyme" technology. A 1-pager introduction on the enzyme is available here. Actis bought the rights to Angiozyme from the owners, Sirna and Chiron for worldwide distribution i.e., Actis isn't the inventor of the product. As reported here in the November 2005 edition of the Business World, India:
   

   Actis does not do any drug discovery. Instead, it licences promising drugs that have cleared early stages of human trials from either universities or biopharmaceutical firms in the US after a due diligence by its own scientific team. What Actis wants are partners in India that would be interested in helping it take these products through clinical trials in exchange for marketing rights in emerging markets and global manufacturing rights.
   
   Actis expects that the capital will be put up by the Indian partner while Actis brings the clinical and manufacturing expertise needed for a completely new biotech product.

The question then is, and I assume the situation is relatively similar for Alor Gajah, if Actis is not bringing in the much needed capital, then who is forking out the RM1.3 billion investment? The Malaysian Government? You and me?

Let me reiterate, I have every wish that the project announced by Actis will be wildly successful, for then it'll prove to the world that Malaysia is a worthwhile country to invest in. However, our past experiences, particularly with incompetent and guillible government officials, it certainly necessitate that stringent due diligence be conducted to ensure that we don't dig another hole for ourselves.

One for You, Two for Me

Barisan Nasional governments tend to set the best examples. On the surface, they'll tell you that the government and its leaders will share the burden of the people, "ringan sama dijinjing, berat sama dipikul" or "有难同当，有福同享", but in practice, it's often "one for you, two for me".

And that cannot be more obvious that what is happening with the Terengganu state government, the state with the second highest poverty rate in Peninsula Malaysia, when the state executive councillors purchased their brand new spanking Mercedes Benz to "cut cost", as blogged here earlier.

And in a remarkable show that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has lost total control over its administration, his directive that these new vehicles shall be used only for VIPs in Terengganu was immediately and totally disregarded with utter contempt by the Terengganu state cabinet. The brand new cars already found their way on the road with their proud new owners.

While the official reason for the switch from Proton Perdanas to Mercedes-Benz was due to "cost cutting measures", it is interesting to note that last minute calculations were made to justify the RM3.4 million expenditure which showed inflated repair figures for their old Perdanas. It took the former Menteri Besar to threaten a legal suit for the current administration to admit that the repair bill was only half of what was proclaimed! Hence was the decision to purchase new Mercedes-Benz made on errorneous figures or was there even a study before the decision was made?

And the state government has the cheek to blame the media for sensationalising the issue!

But the cherry on the pie must be the following announcement, in their attempt to control the damage they have imposed on the reputation of the national car manufacturer, that taxi drivers in Terengganu will receive incentives for switching over to the national car(!)

Criticised for not supporting the national car, the state government has announced special packages for taxi drivers to buy new Proton cars to replace ageing Nissans and Toyotas. The package in the form of monetary aid is for legitimate taxi drivers and those refurbishing their Proton taxis... Under the package, each taxi driver would be given RM10,000 to buy a new Proton Saga or Wira to be used as taxis.

My goodness! If that is not the clearest indication that such inferior products are only suitable for taxis in the state and obviously not good enough for the state government leaders, then I don't know what is. Much good that will do to the reputation of their beloved Proton.

These newly installed state government leaders are clearly intoxicated with the policy of "one for the people, two for us" that has symbolised Barisan Nasional administration over the decades.

Cost-Cutting Mercedes

The Government tells us to tighten our belts. Prices are up and inflation is at record levels. The Cabinet even made a show of "sacrifice" by cutting 10% of their entertainment allowance. However, it's certainly clear that this philosophy isn't fully subscribed by the Barisan Nasional government.

The Member of Parliament for MUAR, noted in his speech in Parliament supporting the Government's motion to reduce subsidy and increase fuel prices that will share the burden with the rakyat - "ringan sama dijinjing, berat sama dipikul". Lets reflect this against the little drama in Terengganu over Perdanas and Mercedes for state executive councillors.

The state government has defended the purchase of 14 Mercedes E200 Kompressor cars at RM3.43mil for the use of its state executive councillors and senior officials.

The Menteri Besar of Terengganu, Datuk Ahmad Said had the cheek to suggest that the measure to purchase Mercedes cars was a "cost-cutting measure". Does he take Malaysians for idiots?

What is perhaps more enlightening is our UMNO's leaders honesty with regards to the quality of Proton vehicles.

“We are not saying that the national car is not good but in reality we are coughing up more money for maintaining the Proton Perdanas, particularly the gear boxes,” he said.

In essence, what this new MB is saying is that anybody who purchases a Proton Perdana is an idiot as well, because, money will actually be better spent buying a Mercedes which cost double a Perdana. (Great advertisement for Proton, I'm sure)

Despite the Deputy Prime Minister, otherwise also known as Mr "Tighten Your Belt" among other things, insistence that only Proton Perdanas are acceptable, it misses the point of why 4-year old executive cars must all be replaced wholesale.

Is this part of a "new Menteri Besar, new cars" philosophy, regardless of how much the people are suffering?

Without wanting to sound like we are blowing our own trumpets, the move by the Barisan Nasional state government in Terengganu stands in stark contrast to the new government in Penang, where vehicles ordered by the previous administration worth more than RM600,000 were cancelled. And that's barely a-fifh of what Terengganu is spending.

Is this a direct implication of a Malaysian government being flushed with windfall cash, in this case from record petrol revenues?

Besar periuk, besar keraknya.

Or to the right honourable member from Muar, I think the more appropriate description of the Barisan Nasional government's policy should be "ringan kerajaan jinjing, berat rakyat yang pikul".

No to a Police State in Blogosphere

Nathaniel Tan, a 26 year old dedicated blogger, a Harvard University alumnus and an aide to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been arrested under the Section 8 of the Official Secrets Act (OSA) over allegations that he had documents linked to Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Johari Baharom’s alleged involvement in corruption.

To demonstrate our solidarity with Nathaniel who has been dealt with great injustice, to show our steadfast refusal to let the Government curb the democratisation impact of blogs and the Internet, and to voice our displeasure at the OSA, we are organising a forum with invited speakers from across the civil society with details as follows:

Venue: KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall
Date: 19th July 2007 (Thursday)
Time: 7.30 pm
Admission is Free; Bring Friends

The panel of Distinguished Speakers include:

• Nathaniel Tan, Blogger & Aide to PKR Advisor*
• Jeff Ooi, Protem Vice-President, All Blogs Malaysia
• Harris Ibrahim, Lawyer & Founder of The People's Parliament
• Nurul Izzah Anwar, Special Assistant to PKR Advisor
• Lim Guan Eng, Secretary-General of DAP
• Tony Pua, Economic Advisor to DAP Secretary-General

Chairperson: Soon Li Tsin, Journalist & Blogger

* We will be inviting Nathaniel to speak to us and relay his experiences at the Forum should he be released from remand on Tuesday, 17th July or before. We'll also be trying to leave as much time to the floor as possible, so as to enable greater interaction at the forum.

And for those who would like to find out a little more about the young man who wants to do so much for his country, check out the write up at Jeff's blog.

A quick note on the OSA:

The OSA in its current form allows for a government to administer this country covertly and in defiance of the accountability and transparency that is crucial to democratic process. As human rights lawyer, Malik Imtiaz says, "this impacts on all our lives in more ways that we can begin to understand as the government is given a means to thwart legitimate public interest by the forced suppression of material and relevant information."

See you there!! ;)

Candlelight Vigil for Nathaniel

More activities are being planned for Nathaniel as I write. Leaders of both DAP and PKR have unreservedly condemned Nathaniel's arrest.

Meanwhile, there's a candlelight vigil for Nathaniel tonight (Sunday 15th July) at 8.00pm outside the Dang Wangi Police Station (Jalan Stadium, near Merdeka Stadium). Let's show that we are not cowed by irresponsible, vindictive, unethical (I can go on...) police and government actions. See you guys there!

Free Nathaniel

The blogosphere is abuzz with Nathaniel's arrest. I really don't think I'll add to the opinions already raised, except to say that Nat is such a nice guy that doesn't deserve this treatment. The police abuse of the laws of the land is abhorrent and deplorable.

Clueless Politicians

Other than the many twists and turns in the Altantuya Murder Mystery, the other subject which has been hitting the headlines in the past week or so, has been the controversy over the issue of credit check services provided by CTOS Sdn Bhd. Much has been reported in the press, and most of it was negative.

Even today, the Prime Minister as well as the Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi chipped in unintelligently by claiming that "when CTOS made conclusions based on incomplete and outdated information the people concerned would be victimised. I dare make the claim here that Pak Lah has never ever seen the system himself, or he would have realised immmediately that the system does not blacklist individuals or companies.

Before I proceed, let me clarify that:

• I've had a glimpse the CTOS service
• I have no idea if my name will produce a result in CTOS
• I have no shares in CTOS
• I have no personal dealings with CTOS or its management

My beef on this issue is simply that economically illiterate Ministers are placing the efficiency and credibility of Malaysia's financial institutions at risk.

These statements were made following various allegations made by the Deputy Minister in Prime Minister's Department, Datuk M. Kayveas against the company. (The CEO of CTOS has issued an open letter published in Malaysiakini to the esteemed Minister, and intends to file a defamation suit against the latter.)

Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak asked that CTOS "should not create problems or prevent borrowers from getting loans from financial institutions". Most shockingly, Deputy Finance Minister, Datuk Dr Awang Adek Hussien has called on Banks "to stop using the services provided by CTOS".

Credit Information Enables Efficient and Sound Banking System

What CTOS provides is a service which is in demand by financial institutions to evaluate the credit-worthiness of their borrowers. Such information enables lending to be processed efficiently and at a lower risks for banks. No financial institution in the country will be willing to provide loans if such information is lacking or unavailable.

What CTOS does is to collate information which are publicly available and gazetted instantly to subscribers will then make their own assessments with regards to the credit-worthiness of the borrowers. As a result our financial and banking system has become more efficient as loans can be processed in greater confidence within a faster processing period. Banks offering loan approvals within 24-hours cannot do it today without such information.

On the other hand, without the CTOS service, Banks will still have to assess the credit-worthiness of the potential borrowers by reviewing bankruptcy gazettes, public notices in newspapers, company registration information in Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM), a tedious and time-consuming process. Such a process is inefficient, unwieldy and prone to errors.

Hence, when the Deputy Finance Minister called on Banks to stop using the CTOS service, he is in effect asking our Banks to increase take on unnecessary risk, which will only result in higher non-performing loans (NPLs). Datuk Dr Awang Adek Hussien is also effectively asking them to be less efficient and as a result, less competitive compared to foreign financial institutions.

The General Public Are Winners with a service like CTOS

While parties with a poor credit history are clearly unhappy with the availability of services such as CTOS, it must be made known that the overwhelming majority of Malaysians benefit tremendously from such a system.

A negative search (i.e., no result) in CTOS for example, will often mean that a person's track record is clean. A search on 94% of all Malaysians will result in a negative search. Hence because of the availability of a credit information service like CTOS, these 94% of Malaysians will have their loans or business requirements processed at a faster, more efficient and effective manner. In fact, for many, it may mean higher facilities as well as lower interest rates.

Hence, what our Ministers are unfortunately trying to do is to in effect, to protect Malaysians with potentially weaker credit history while sacrificing the interest of the majority of Malaysians with excellent credit standing.

The Key is Accurate Information

Action should only be taken against CTOS should the information found within the system contain errors, which will then unfairly jeopardise the interest of the victim. CTOS should hence make all necessary effort to ensure that the data within the system is accurate.

In the event whereby CTOS faces difficulty in maintaining an updated record, all efforts must be made to obtain these relevant information. The Government should at the same time ensure that information such as bankrupts who have been discharged, are made available publicly on a timely basis.

Stop Making Unfounded Allegations

The Ministers should therefore stop making unfounded and uneducated allegations against companies such as CTOS, for they are critical in ensuring that our business and financial system and operates in a substantially more efficient and effective manner. They should instead seek direct clarification with CTOS to better understand their services and what necessary improvements should be made.

The Edge financial weekly has asked in its column "Frankly Speaking" this week, "Why shoot the messenger"?

...aren't the critics barking up the wrong tree? They are merely shooting the messenger. The culprits are actually the financial institutions that depend on credit bureaus for information on the credit-worthiness of their clients.

...ultimately, the decision to lend or not to lend to an individual lies with the banks and other financial institutions. There is no obligation on thepart of the banks to make a decision based on what has been provided by credit bureaus.

Even Transparency International has issued a statement with regards to "grave threats to transparency".

By seeking to suppress information, the authorities are “clearly violating freedom of access to information for legitimate business purposes and to be informed on public policy issues,” said TI-M president Ramon V Navaratnam in a statement today.

This freedom is not only essential for the public to make responsible and informed decisions based on fair access to information, but also for an open and transparent democracy to function meaningfully, he explained.

Officials and legislators should also cease their attacks on CTOS and instead raise “concerns about the way credit and financial information is collated and disseminated” with the management, he said.

“The fact that some legislators’ names are listed as defaulters surely does not justify any call to ban the service. We have to be increasingly concerned with public and national interest rather than the protection of individuals,” he added.

It is disappointing that in the midst of attempting to build world-class banks in an increasingly globalised and competitive environment, our clueless Ministers are seeking to eliminate one of the most critical components - "information", from being accessed by our financial institutions.

Instead of taking such a retrogressive step, they should encourage greater competition in this field so as the system will become even more efficient and reliable, benefiting not only our banking industry, but also all Malaysians.

Liar Liar

On Wednesday, I sat in a press conference with my party boss, Lim Guan Eng as well as YB Tan Kok Wai protesting the instructions given to the various TV stations for banning all footage of opposition leaders.

The next day, NTV7 denied the claims, as reported in Malaysiakini here.

"I can tell you, there is no such directive," a top network source told malaysiakini when contacted.

"Also, our prime time news period is also too short (30 minutes) and it’s impossible to air everything," explained the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

"Then again, all media reporters have their guidelines on what to write and what not to write, so it’s the same for our news desk. In the final analysis, it depends on what the politicians are saying," he added.

Well, the journos at Malaysiakini must be applauded for doing their job. They came up with concrete proof today that instructions were issued by Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) under the Ministry of Energy, Water & Communications.

Click image for a larger view

“The government has noted that several private TV and radio stations have been airing speeches by opposition party leaders,” wrote MCMC chairman Dr Halim Shafie in the June 7 letter.

“Your station is requested not to broadcast such speeches in future.”

The one-page letter added that the directive should be implemented immediately.

Hence, very simply, all these denials about discrimination are just lies, as we had known all along. Except now, its in black and white.

SMART

Courtesy of The Star. More pictures at the Star Photo Gallery

Beautiful view, ain't it?

Unfortunately, it isn't a river we are looking at, but instead Jalan Sultan Ismail. The question then is, what happened to Stormwater Management and Road Tunnel (SMART) which cost us some RM1.9 billion?

Or is it not so SMART now?

Public Works Debacles (PWD)

Just got back from tonight's forum (after dinner), and really need sleep ;). But thought I'd post an announcement that I'll be speaking at Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (again!) at a forum organised by Oriental Daily.

Topic: PWD - Public Works Debacles
Venue: KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall
Date: 31st May 2007
Time: 7.30pm

There are 3 speakers for the evening, including myself. The other 2 speakers are Ir Yong Yew Wei, and another lady from MCA.

Last weekend when I was on Astro, YB Wee Ka Siong concurred with our opinion that plenty has to change, including the Minister himself, in order to prevent our future infrastructure projects from collapsing on us. Well, later this evening, we'll investigate further on the underlying causes behind the leaking in Parliament and the new mega-court complex, cellings collapsing and electricity failing, as well as cracks in brand new buildings and highways.

The medium of communication will be in Mandarin. ;) See you there!

Quality of Ministerial Replies

I asked a very specific question, which was scheduled to be answered in the Parliament today at No. 26 (i.e., won't get answered orally but will get written response). I asked the Home Affairs Minister:

...bagaimanakah nilai maklumat dan kedudukan projek mega "Sistem Imigresen 'Single Platform' (SIM). Adakah projek sensitif keselamatan dalam negeri ini diberi kepada sebuah syarikat yang kurang berpengalaman dalam bidan sistem imigresen, yang dimiliki oleh warganegara asing pada masa kontrak ditetapkan?

The reply by the Minister is as follows:

Untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat, Sistem Imigresen Malaysia berasaskan 'Single Platform' (SIM) dibangunkan oleh Syarikat Multimedia Glory System Sdn Bhd adalah syarikat dimiliki warganegara dan mempunyai status syarikat MSC.

Adalah tidak benar syarikat ini tidak berpengalaman dalam pembangunan sistem kerana pada masa ini beberapa modul sistem telahpun siap dibangunkan dan sudahpun beroperasi seperti sistem kawalan pintu masuk di lokasi-lokasi pintu keluar/masuk imigresen seluruh negara, sistem keselamatan, sistem pas sempadan di semua pintu masuk Imigresen Imigresen sempadan Malaysia - Thai dan sistem kawalan depot Imigresen. Malah SIM telahpun menyalurkan maklumat statistik pelancongan kepada TDC secara 'online real-time' pada masa ini.

I'll make a few comments and you can judge for yourself, if the Minister has avoided my questions altogether. Of course, to ask the above questions, I'll have my little birds (more little birds welcome).

1. The Minister completely ignored my question on the value of the project awarded. What I do understand is that the project is valued at 9 figures.
   
   
2. The Minister evaded my question as to whether the sensitive project was awarded to a company belonging to foreigners at the time of award.
   
   
3. The Minister did not state if the company had the necessary experience to carry out such a sizeable and specialised project at the time of award.
   
   
4. And besides stating certain modules which were apparently implemented, the Minister did not state if there were significant delays to the project, and when it was meant to be completed, and of course, what the Government is doing about it.

From what I can see, the clear lack of transparency and honesty with the answers certainly give rise to greater cause that something isn't particularly right with the project, and more investigation is needed. It is one thing when the Minister is clueless about a particular topic, but another altogether when he is clearly evasive.

No Local Government Elections?

Holding local government elections was one of the key rallying points by nearly all of the opposition candidates during the last general elections, myself included, or more specifically, myself in particular.

And to reiterate, I will do my utmost to apply all necessary pressure on both the state governments led by DAP, PKR or PAS to hold local government elections, as well as of course, pressing the Barisan Nasional federal government to allow local council elections.

Quite a few questions have been raised by MPs in parliament as to whether the Federal Government intends to hold local government elections, one of which came from Liew Chin-Tong, MP for Bukit Bendera on 7th May:

Menteri Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan [diminta] Menteri Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan menayatakan hala tuju dan jangka masa pelaksanaan pilihanraya Kerajaan Tempatan bagi membuka sebuah babak baru dalam demokrasi di Malaysia.

The answer was short but not so sweet:

Untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat, Kerajaan tidak bercadang untuk mengadakan pilihanraya Kerajaan Tempatan.

Well, it clearly demonstrates that the new Minister of Housing & Local Government, Datuk Seri Ong Ka Chuan, who took over from his brother, Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting, has no intention in respecting the wishes of the voters who clearly want local government elections to promote efficiency, transparency and good governance.

The Penang state government led by DAP has publicly pledged that they are committed towards local government elections to be held by or before the next general elections. There is an action team looking specifically into this issue, particularly on legal and administrative aspects of conducting local government elections in the state.

At the same time, we are awaiting the relevant policy announcements by the respective state governments in Perak and Selangor on its commitment to, and the time-frame for executing local government elections.

Let's push for concrete steps to be made towards local government elections, and let the Federal Government challenge the state government in the state of law, against the wishes of the population, should they so wish to do so.

Mahkota Cheras - Selangor Government Must Act

The state of Mahkota Cheras controversy has deteriorated into a farce when the Federal Reserve Units (FRU), equipped with water cannons and all, were deployed by the Grand Saga Highway concessionaire to construct a barricade across a road which has been proven by the Hulu Langat Land Office in a letter dated April 22, 2008 as belonging to the state.

While it is comforting to note that the Menteri Besar, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim has acknowledged, as per the Star report yesterday that “the residents had the right to use the access road without having to pay toll”, it is disappointing that he had not taken a stronger stand on the issue, and in fact had not dealt with it much earlier when the FRU was first deployed, or even before that.

This has resulted in the situation clearly getting out of control, with a fracas between the residents and the FRU units in the wee hours of the morning 2 days ago (see video here), and a Member of Parliament lying in the hospital at this point of time, having been assaulted by the police.

It is critical that the new state government demonstrate political will and determination to stand for what is right and just, without fear or favour, instead of wavering in uncertainty or adopting a “we will look into it” or “we will have to discuss further” culture which is reminiscent of the previous Barisan Nasional government. It is of great concern that Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim had qualified his statement on the “right of use” by saying that the state government must also take into consideration that the toll is the source of revenue for the company.

With the state ownership of the land no longer in dispute, the local government, in this case the Kajang Municipal Council (MPKj), must take all necessary actions to prevent illegal structures from being constructed on state land.

If an enforcement officer does not hesitate to compound a car parked temporarily but illegally on a state road, why should MPKj decline to take action, via compounds and summons, against the parties who are erecting a permanent structure in the middle of the road? In fact, any party who persist in constructing illegal barriers, in the face of compounds issued, must be charged in the court of law.

As the old adage that we members of the opposition is so fond of using, “justice must not only be done, but seen to be done”. The rakyat will be understandably discontented if the government enforces the law against the man on the street, while allows room for negotiation and delay when commercial interests are involved.

It is hence critical that the Menteri Besar of Selangor demonstrate much greater urgency in the matter, without letting the situation deteriorate further than it already has via inertia. If the first night's deployment of the FRU against residents who wanted the law upheld has not injected such urgency, then we certainly hope that the second night's deployment would have.

The new state government is being given certain leeway to perform by the people of Selangor. However, it will quickly lose its goodwill if the people's interest are not given priority.

Raja Petra Bailed

OK, I must confess I did a little boo boo this morning ;-)

After 15 minutes of circling around, I finally found the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court where the Malaysia Today writer was scheduled to be freed on bail this morning.

I arrived early before 9 and was informed that Raja Petra will only arrive at 9.45 am. Happily, I wandered off with Wan Hamidi, who is rumoured (heh!) to have quit New Straits Times to join my boss in Penang in the coming months, for a cup of teh tarik.

Mana tahu, as I was happily strolling back to the sessions court at 9.40, I saw a group of supporters outside the court from a little distance, and Raja Petra was already being driven off!

Sigh, and I sheepishly joined the crowd, including the media who was present who all looked at me "knowingly" that I missed the "show". And now I need to go back and report to my boss that I umm..., "failed" to represent the Chief Minister of Penang to show his (and my own of course) moral support for the ordeal he is going through.

Readers may be reminded that Sdr Lim Guan Eng was also jailed for 2 years on sedition charges, which resulted in his disqualification as a Member of Parliament (and losing all benefits, including his pension and gratuity), plus the non-renewal of his accounting practice license from the Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA). But this things some how have a way of coming around. ;-)

With regards to the sedition charge by the Government, which I've yet to "formally" register my position on my blog - my position is clear, and so is the Party's, that without going into the merits of Raja Petra's allegedly seditious article, the Government's use of the sedition act is a clear cut abuse of an oppressive law.

If the Deputy Prime Minister or his wife so find that the articles published were misleading or factually inaccurate, they should take the necessary civil suit route to resolve the matter, and not clearly using and abusing the state machinery.

DAP leader in Parliament, Sdr Lim Kit Siang made it the number 1 item on his agenda, "The Empire Strikes Back" in his first speech in the 12th parliament. See also the video of his speech here.

Jetsetting PM & DPM II

Heh, thanks to the sharp memory of the moderators of Berita Malaysia, I was reminded that the Barisan Nasional (BN) secretary-general then, had himself advised "component parties of the coalition against using government facilities, including public buildingsand canopies, for the March 8 general election campaign."

[Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad] said they would have to apply to lease the facilities if they wanted to use them. The BN should be cautious so as to avert problems which might crop up later following the use of government facilities during the campaign, he told reporters after attending an election briefing pertaining to the Kangar parliamentary constituency near here.

Now, the BN Secretary advises one thing, and the BN Chief and Deputy Chief completely defied the "advise". I do wonder if BN has applied to "lease" the jet facilities, and if so, how much is BN paying for these services. After all, their use of the services cost the Government a whopping RM792,000!

Jetsetting PM & DPM

Here's an interesting question posted by Abdul Hadi Awang (MARANG) last Wednesday, and the reply from the Prime Minister's office, in case you missed it in your local papers.

Berapakah jumlah perbelanjaan yang ditanggung oleh Kerajaan sepanjang tempoh kempen Pilihan Raya Umum ke 12 dari 24 Februari sehingga 7 Mac 2008 hasil dari penggunaan jet eksekutif Kerajaan bagi kegunaan YAB Perdana Menteri dan YAB Timbalan Perdana Menteri.

And the answer?

Bagi tempoh 24 Februari sehingga 7 Mac 2008, jumlah perbelanjaan untuk penggunaan jet eksekutif adalah sebanyak RM792,325.20.

Lulu blogged it here.

Quick factoid: Candidates for parliamentary seats are permitted to spend not more than RM200,000 under the Elections Act, or be subject to disqualification.

And check out my boss getting "caught" here (or here as reported in The Star) in contrast.

Sheer Arrogance

Arrogance amongst some UMNO and BN personalities continues despite having become opposition members in certain states. Sometimes it just defies belief.

Former deputy menteri besar (my apologies, should read chief minister) of Penang who was also in-charge of land matters, Datuk Abdul Rashid Abdullah had the gall to challenge the new government to come up with proof of impropriety with regards to land alienation exercises during the previous administration. He even lambasted...

...the new state government for not knowing how to run its administration and suggested that Lim “take lessons on land administration before making allegations about land discrepancies”.

Well, it looks like he may just get his wish with the impending disclosure of land with abnormal premium discounts given to certain quarters and state land alienated to big companies.

Steps are also taken to discover how some of the Penang Municipal councils are able to deplete their cash reserves at an unbelievable rates - such as Seberang Perai Municipal Council which saw their reserves dwindle from RM227m to RM25.6m within 7 years.

Incredulity

(Poster courtesy of Kickdefella)

Pak Lah, you have betrayed the trust of the people. I had plenty of faith in you when you first took over the prime ministership of this country. As I've blogged before, I had hope. Even when I lost faith in your leadership, I had thought that you were a pious and sincere person who lacked the necessary skills as a leader.

I'm sad to say that I was dead wrong. Clearly, many will tell me now that I'm such a terrible judge of character. Not only is our current prime minister a sleeping, absent, incompetent prime minister, his personal integrity and his sincerity in creating a better Malaysia is clearly in doubt.

When the Parliament, the symbol of people's democracy, where its members are themselves elected by the people, becomes a 'forbidden palace' to the people who want their grouses heard, it is the ultimate mockery of "democracy".

You would have read it here in Malaysiakini, where all roads to Parliament are blocked, preventing the people from handing their petition to the people who claim to represent them. Worse, Pak Lah ordered the leaders of BERSIH, the very people asking for clean and fair elections, arrested for attempting to hand the petition to the Parliament.

Pak Lah, you have declared in your BN mouthpiece, The Star, that you have ordered the arrests because "public safety above all". Pak Lah, do you bloody think that we are 3 year old kids? Are you trying to tell us that the rakyat, armed only with a few sheets of paper, approaching the Parliament on the edge of the city, is threatening the safety of Malaysians?


Pak Lah, please stop telling lies to our fellow Malaysians. You lied to the world when you declared that your cabinet comprised of 50% non-Malays.

Pak Lah, you promised us a less corrupt nation when you took over. Instead, we are more corrupt than ever, dropping a spot in international rankings for each year of your reign to 43rd this year.

Pak Lah, you also promised no more mega-bailouts, yet this year, you approved the biggest bailout ever in the history of Malaysia, attempting to rescue the unrescuable Port Klang Free Zone project with RM6.7 billion. And yet, the culprits for the fiasco has not been brought to book.

Pak Lah, you promised and boasted of greater press freedom, but interference in the mainstream media has never been more apparent! Malaysia crashed to its lowest ever press freedom ranking at 124th!

Pak Lah, most of all, you told us you wanted to hear the truth, no matter how much it hurts, but instead, you had your Minister of Misinformation, Datuk Zainuddin Maidin, tell the press editors that he'll only listen to Barisan Nasional component parties and not the media or the public. What's worse, there was never a denial that the instruction came from you!

Pak Lah, you said you were a Prime Minister for all Malaysians, but you declared Malaysia an Islamic state and concurred with your deputy, Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak that Malaysia was "never, never a secular state", a clear-cut defiance of the Federal Constitution, and discriminating against Malaysians' fundamental right to freedom of religion.

Pak Lah, you have clearly lost control of your administration. You have only demonstrated your utter incompetence, your lies and hypocrisy. Now, not only have I lost faith in your leadership, I have also lost faith in your integrity and piety.

Pak Lah, you are rubbish and you are a absolute disgrace to the nation.

EPF Track Record

Both the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi, who is also the Finance Minister as well as the Employee Provident Fund (EPF) CEO, Datuk Azlan Zainol have argued that they will employ banking professionals to run RHB Bank which EPF has acquired, subject to approvals.

In addition to issues relating to higher risks which have been raised earlier, EPF's decision in this case raises a few additional questions.

• Firstly, why does the EPF Board believe that they are the best judge of banking professionals to operate and manage the Bank? Wouldn't an existing banking institution, with the necessary expertise be a better judge to do so?
  
  Hence wouldn't the interest of EPF and its contributors be better served if another banking institution which has the necessary expertise and experience, has taken over the stake from Utama Banking Group (UBG)?
  
  
• Secondly, it is worth noting that the EPF Board has no proven track record to speak of, in recruiting the best candidates to operate its own subsidiaries. In fact, in its 63% owned subsidiary, Malaysia Building Society Berhad (MBSB) which is a financial institution in itself, has performed terribly in recent years.
  
  One of the key reasons for EPF’s poor investment returns are due to EPF’s involvement in questionable projects and bad loans given out by MBSB. MBSB is notorious for giving huge loans to politically-connected companies such as to the failed Perwaja Steel Bhd. In Melaka alone, such bad loans by MBSB amount to more than RM 150 million.
  
  Non-performing loans by MBSB reached a high of RM 4.45 billion in 2002 and is at RM 4.33 billion in 2003. MBSB achieved the dubious distinction of having the highest non-performing loan ratio of 62% amongst all banks in the country, against the banking average of 7.4% in 2002. MBSB lost almost RM 1 billion in profits from 1998-2002, reducing its shareholder funds of RM 1.1 billion to only RM 70 million.
  
  If EPF is unable to find the “right” banking professionals to manage an existing subsidiary which suffered such heavy losses, why does the Prime Minister and the EPF board believe that it can do any better for a much larger financial institution in RHB Bank?
  

EPF should stick to its charter to prudently manage the retirement funds of Malaysian workers utilising low risk strategies such as a diversified portfolio in equities to generate safe and reasonable returns. EPF has no business attempting to be a “business owner” which leads to re-aligned objectives and incentives as well as significantly higher risks.

EPF Sacrificed Returns for Control?

In a press conference by Employee Provident Fund (EPF) CEO, Datuk Azlan Zainol on Friday, he was reported to have given several reasons for the acquisition of Rashid Hussain Berhad.

He said that EPF wanted to “increase exposure to a sector that has good long term prospects”. He also expects a 6% - 7% return on capital over one to two years. Beyond that, the returns could be as high as 8% to 10%. In addition, he cited that the decision was made to “protect EPF investment” rather than “let it go”.

Are these good or credible reason to take on significantly higher risks posed by the acquisition of a commercial bank?

• Firstly, as a prudent investment fund, the manner in which one should “increase exposure” to the banking sector is to make an evaluation of the various banks and invest in them according to their performance as well as the strength of their existing management. EPF should not be acquiring an entire bank, which is widely recognised as not among the leading performers, and then appoint new managers for the bank (because EPF itself has no expertise).
  
  In addition, Datuk Azlan has stated that EPF intends to dispose its current interest in other, possibly better performing banking groups. Clearly the acquisition of RHB Bank has placed EPF in the awkward position of being a owner of a bank which conflicts with its charter as an objective fund manager seeking to invest in the best performing companies.
  
  He added specifically that EPF will be disposing its equity holdings in other banks to avoid conflict of interests. This means that the decision to invest or divest is no longer a function of likely investment returns. Hence, has EPF sacrificed returns in exchange for the control of a bank?
  
  A good and prudent fund manager does not increase its exposure to a sector by betting all its eggs in one basket, in this case, RHB. The RM10 billion new investment represents more than 20% of its RM49.6 billion equity allocation based on its 2005 Annual Report. Such disproportionate amount of investment in a single stock clearly represents poor portfolio allocation and diversification.
  
  
• Secondly, it is curious how Datuk Azlan came up with his 6%-7% over one to two years, and as high as 10% thereafter. With no concrete plans presented as well as so much uncertainty over the future management and other new potential shareholders, did he pluck his estimates from thin air? Datuk Azlan also failed to mention that such aggressive returns also mean substantially higher risks for EPF which may very well result in equally substantial losses.
  
  Datuk Azlan claimed that he could not remember that EPF's prior investment in RHB Bank which averages around RM10 per share, is worth only about RM4.60 today. And at its low, was worth only RM0.50, a 95% paper loss just two years ago. At the same time, despite predicting the higher returns, he refused to give an assurance that the life savings of the people will be protected, claiming that there is “no guarantee in business”. Will Datuk Azlan be prepared to resign as the CEO of EPF if the RHB investment does not generate the “expected returns”?
  
  
• Thirdly, it is a very poor investment strategy to simply acquire the entire bank to protect its existing 31.7% stake. Such a strategy could easily backfire on EPF and its contributors. Any attempts to average down the cost of EPF's stake in the bank without an independent look at where RM10 billion will be able to generate better and less risky returns will just be a case of throwing good money after bad.

What is most baffling is EPF's argument that after the acquisition exercise, it will then seek to reduce it stake in the Bank by selling some 35% stake to 2-3 strategic investors. If these investors are crucial to improving the performance of the bank, why aren't EPF teaming up with them in advance to bid for the Bank? If EPF claims it can place out the shares of the Bank at higher prices to interested parties hence making a quick profit, why didn't these parties participate in the competitive bid for the bank? And if EPF hasn't identified the new strategic investors, isn't the Board of EPF putting the cart before the horse, placing great risks to the retirement funds of Malaysian workers?

Clearly the above questions demonstrate that the entire acquisition by EPF Board was a “buy first, think later and hope for the best” exercise. EPF should stick to its charter to prudently manage the retirement funds of Malaysian workers utilising low risk strategies such as a diversified portfolio in equities to generate safe and reasonable returns. EPF has no business attempting to be a “business owner” which leads to re-aligned objectives and incentives as well as significantly higher risks.