PKFZ: Spectre yet to be exorcised

Ong Tee Keat
June 11, 2012

The issue will never be resolved if the findings of independent panels were perceived to have been buried in the confidential dossiers on the investigators and prosecutors’ desks.
*****_________________________________________________________________________*****
May 28 has always been a red-letter day to me. This year, as we ushered in the uncelebrated third anniversary of the release of Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) audit report commissioned by the independent auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), the multi-billion-ringgit financial debacle remains a relatively sensitive riddle within the corridors of power.

Amid the legal proceeding brought against two former transport ministers, the discerning public, perturbed by the magnitude of the debacle, is certainly yearning for more big names to be brought to the fore of justice.

I raised this (PKFZ) question in Parliament last year but it was, however, rejected on grounds of sub judice. Though disappointed, I could still grudgingly live with it in view of the fact that the probe by both the police and Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) still appears to remain open-ended.

As the immediate past-transport minister who triggered the PwC review of the PKFZ issue and later commissioned a more thorough probe into the 20 points of doubts raised by PwC, the much- laboured findings would certainly remain indelible in my memory.

Though my ministerial tenure was unceremoniously terminated, I am still hopeful to see that the confidential report compiled by the panel would ultimately do the taxpayers’ monies justice by bringing the culprits to book.

Any contemplated bid to obscure the self-revealing findings for fear of creating further damage to the ruling party is deemed inexpedient as any perceived cover-up would only alienate the people further.

The onus is now on such authorities as the police, MACC and Attorney-General’s Chambers as the findings had been handed to them to facilitate investigation as early as August 2009.

How long would they take to conclude their probe is beyond the realm of public knowledge. But it is within my right to seek clarification on the current status of the findings collectively compiled by the panel members who are helming the various professional bodies.

It would be unkind to accuse anybody revisiting the issue of thirsting for the blood of those culprits implicated in the debacle. But any inaction to punish the perpetrators of the alleged fraudulent claims in the mammoth project would readily be misconstrued as a form of tacit connivance of misdeeds designed to challenge the check-and-balance mechanisms within the establishment.

To the discerning taxpayers, the ultimate punishment of the perpetrators under the laws of the land is not going to mark the end of the episode so long as no serious recovery of public funds that had been fraudulently siphoned off is made.

Likewise, the taxpayers cannot simply turn a blind eye to the challenging future of the mega-transhipment hub in the face of its present difficulties in turning it around.

On June 10, 2009, hardly two weeks after the release of the PwC report, three independent panels were immediately established by me as the then minister to explore the possibilities of turning around the project, in addition to recommending structural revamp of statutory bodies to facilitate good corporate governance, especially within all port authorities and deep-diving into the 20 anomalies raised by PwC.

The turnaround task was swiftly taken over by the high-powered Cabinet committee headed by the Chief Secretary of the Cabinet.

No progress at all

But todate, no sign of a turnaround has ever been sighted. The repeated appeals to the Ministry of Finance (MOF) to reschedule the high-profile RM4.6 billion loan with a downward revision of interest rate from 4% to 2% went unheeded.

The perceived elusiveness on the part of the Ministry of Transport (MOT) in answering a pertinent question of mine on March 15, 2012 in Parliament had somewhat further clouded the less optimistic scenario.

My question focused on the present arrears of the PKA (Port Klang Authorities) loan for the project and how would MOT endeavour to ensure PKA can afford to repay the outstanding loan based on the present schedule and interest rate, given that the present revenue generated by the PKFZ project could hardly defray the hefty debts.

As expected, my question that was numbered 71st ( the last question of the day in the order paper) was destined to be out of reach from the 90-minute time frame set for the parliamentary oral questions.

This had further led to the total denial of any opportunities for me to raise supplementary question on the subject matter.

Much to my dismay, the written answer I received did not address my question. The minister replied that so far PKA had used up a whopping RM2.6 billion from the government loans to service the debts.

This might raise many eyebrows but it was not in the question at all. On PKA’s ability to service the debts, the reply appeared even more inexplicable, if not incoherent, when it was said that one of PKA’s options is to apply to MOF for rescheduling the loan as well as revising its terms and conditions.

All in all, the minister was coy about answering the key questions I raised. I was merely told something that I myself had been pursuing while I was the minister, that is, seeking rescheduling of the loans.

This simply implies that there has been no progress at all in the probe after I exited from the Cabinet two years ago.

Those in the corridors of powers may have good reasons to frown upon me whenever I bring up the issue.

Nonetheless, to me and many others who have no personal vested interests in the project, the spectre of PKFZ could never be exorcised as long as the findings of the independent panels were perceived to have been buried in the confidential dossiers on the investigators and prosecutors’ desks.

The writer is the immediate past transport minister and MCA president. He is also the Pandan MP.

ORIGINAL LINK : PKFZ: Spectre yet to be exorcised

PKFZ suit: 26 ex-PKA board members dragged in

Malaysiakini
Kuek Ser Kuang Keng
May 14, 11 1:43pm

Port Klang Authority (PKA) may have decided not to sue its former board members over the huge losses of the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) project, but former general manager OC Phang intends to drag the board into her legal suit.

Phang's solicitors have filed third party notices against 26 board members during her tenure, including former PKA chairpersons Ting Chew Peh, Yap Pian Hon and Chor Chee Heung, demanding they be brought into PKA's lawsuit against her.

Currently, Yap is Selangor BN publicity chief and Chor is the housing and local government minister.

azlanIn 2009, after initiating investigation into the PKFZ scandal, PKA had sued Phang for breach of duties during her tenure from 1997 to 2008.

While the case was still being heard at Shah Alam High Court, Phang filed the third party notices at the same court on May 5.

"The notices were filed against the board members for their contribution, in respect of the claim made against her by PKA for damages for alleged breach of duties, in relation to actions and decisions made as member of PKA," her counsel K Lavinia told Malaysiakini yesterday when contacted.

Phang was also a board member during her tenure as general manager.

"She claimed that these 26 individuals are also liable for contribution towards the claim, and costs claimed by PKA, as they were members at the material time between 1997 and 2008," Lavinia added.

In other words, should Phang lose the suit she wants all board members to equally share the costs that the court grants PKA .

'12 days to reply'

Lavinia said notices to 11 of the 26 board members have already been served, and they have to reply within 12 days.

PKA received fire for its present board's decision not to act against its former officials over PKFZ's losses.

The decision was made in a meeting on Mac 22 when the PKA board voted 5-2 against taking legal action on the previous board members despite its legal advisor's suggestion the contrary.

Besides a civil suit by PKA, Phang is also being charged with criminal breach of trust and for making false claims over the PKFZ scandal.

Following this, two former transport ministers - Ling Liong Sik and Chan Kong Choy - were charged for cheating over the project.

The PKFZ controversy arose after it was revealed that the development cost of the massive 400-hectare integrated cargo distribution hub spiralled from RM1.9 billion to RM4.6 billion.

A CALL TO REJECT THE POLITICS OF THREATS AND RACE

May 4 2011
PRESS STATEMENT BY:-
TAN SRI DATUK ROBERT PHANG MIOW SIN
Justice of Peace
Chairman – Social Care Foundation

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A CALL TO REJECT THE POLITICS OF THREATS AND RACE

The Chinese community is an integral part of Malaysian society and the exercise of their intellectual rights should not be subjected to any political threats or intimidation. History has shown that the Chinese are pragmatic and open-minded and seek only fair implementation of policies by the Government of the day. The views I express below are the culmination of Chinese thoughts based on the above principles.

1.    During the past MCA presidential campaign, I took out an advertorial at my own cost to denounce Dr Chua Soi Lek as a bad apple compared to Ong Tee Keat. Some members of the public misunderstood my action to mean that I am an MCA member and was taking sides in that party presidetntial elections.

2.    Let me be clear. I am not and have never been an MCA member nor a member of any political party. I took out that advertorial because the issue at stake was very clear to me, as clear as night and day. Chua Soi Lek was a “soiled“ person, having  admitted that he was the actor in the pronographic vcd that was widely circulated. A philandering husband and a person with such decadent moral values would be problematic if he takes on a public office. Being President of MCA would mean he is the leader of the Chinese community, the Chinese face in the Government when he meets government leaders from other countries.

3.    By Chua Soi Lek’s own admission of  his inherent weaknesses, he could not possibly be the best person in the Chinese community to talk about Chinese interest in this country. It would be a sad day for Malaysian Chinese if that was the case, as if we have scraped the barrel and could only come up with someone like him. After all, this is the same rationale used by UMNO to denounce Anwar Ibrahim as a great risk to the Malays if he ever ascend the Premiership. Thus, MCA must be seen consistent wiith the principles espoused by its more dominant partner in BN.

4.    At that time, the option was for the MCA to be led by Ong Tee Keat whom the majority of the Rakyat had likened to be a good apple. The reasons are obvious. Ong Tee Keat did not have the inherent weaknesses of Chua Soi Lek. He was also fearless in raising the PKFZ issue that had resulted in several personalities being prosecuted. That proved costly to Ong when the invisible powers caused him to lose the MCA Presidency and his Minister’s post.

5.    Today, Chua Soi Lek as MCA President had issued a statement that the party will give up all government posts if the Chinese community did not support its candidates in the next general election. In an act of total naiveness, the MCA presidential council says they  back him. If they made that declaration out of of their own free will, then truly they have been deceived. I say so because they must been mislead by Chua Soi Lek’s cunning move.

6.    Presently, Chua has no government post because under present climate he is too much of a liabilty. Thus, Chua loses nothing by making that declaration. If he succeeds in his scheme, he would only be perpetuating his presidency because the other MCA leaders would also have to give up their Ministerial posts. Thus, Chua would have removed the advantage they have over him as a party leader without a government post. Thus,Chua plays the wild card game. He is throwing the gauntlet to UMNO, to BN and to the Chinese community to accede to his demands in a round about way. He is resorting to the politics of threats.

7.    By doing that he is making the MCA behave like a Chinese pressure group instead of the government’s coalition partner.  He is making the MCA behave no differently than PERKASA, the ultra Malay rights group.  It must be remembered that PERKASA is not a government component party.  MCA cannot behave that radical especialy after having condemned PERKASA so vehemently.  Therein lies the hypocrisy and deceitfulness of Chua Soi Lek.  Even Tun Dr. Mahathir felt that way, thus he is defended PERKASA’s struggles.

8.    As a BN coalition partner, I would expect MCA President Chua to behave more responsibly. By making his personal agenda to be MCAs‘ official stand, he will only harden our Malay bothers to support Perkasa and Utusan’s  proposed “1Melayu, 1Bumi” movement to curb Chinese political power in the country. This philosophy of race-based politics should be rejected outright by all Malaysians. Dr. Chua’s statement paled in comparison to then CM of Penang, Lim Guan Eng – who dealt with this issue in a more statesmalike manner when he said that  Elections are about democracy, not about race. It is about choosing the best candidate who can best serve and represent voters, not about race. It is about whose policies promote justice, freedom and truth, not about race.“

9.    Chua’s declaration is setting a very dangerous precedent that will divide the country further if the Chinese are not represented in the government. His declaration was made for a very selfish motive because Chua realises that Prime Minister Najib would not have a man of his background in the Cabinet. He is a liability not only to the Government but also to the Chinese community at the next GE13. My fears of the gambit that Chua would take for his political survival have now proven true. 

10.    Needless to say, by his statement, Chua Soi Lek will only be remembered as someone who is looking after his own interest instead of the interest of all Malaysians.  For that irresponsible stand, he should be consigned to obscurity.

11.    To that end, I humbly appeal to our PM YAB Dato‘ Sri Haji Mohd. Najib to try comprehend more of the Chinese inner feelings, that the Chinese community do not like to be threatened.  If the Chinese community in Semenanjung choose to remain silent, that would mean they will send the same message in a loud and clear manner as reflected by the Sarawak Chinese in the recent Sarawak state elections. Despite the strong and intimidating threats by the regime of CM Taib Mahmud and the BN, the Chinese community outrightly rejected them.This is a clear and undisputed fact.  I pray our PM not to ignore this glaring fact.  I implore the PM to avoid being dragged into this pitfall by the President of MCA, Dr. Chua Soi Lek.

12.    Thus, I call on all Chinese especially the MCA current leaders and members to remove the blinkers and wake up, not to succumb to Chua’s politics of threat and race.  They must reject that call to abandon government post because, in truth, that is a call to reject participation in a 1Malaysian Government.

“HUMBLENESS IS GOOD VIRTUE, ARROGANCE SHALL FALL, THE MEEK WILL RULE THE WORLD”.
.....................................................................
Tan Sri Datuk Robert Phang Miow Sin
Justice of Peace

Guess who's going to bail out PKA?

Malaysiakini
Jan 14, 11 9:51am

'The Humpty Dumpty of PKFZ has been knocked off its perch. Now all the Soi Leks and Najibs cannot put in back together again.'

PKFZ may face 'bankruptcy' over soft loan

SusahKes: Port Klang Authority (PKA) chairperson Lee Hwa Beng, may we - the taxpayers of Malaysia - ask you a down to earth, honest to goodness, question?

After all this revelation, and all the white elephants and bailouts that you and I have witnessed from the Mahathir years to now, do you and MCA, still want Umno to govern this nation?

At which point do you, MCA chief Chua Soi Lek and Co, develop some modicum of conscience and guilt, that Umno has played everyone out in this country (other than their own kind)?

Titan: Come on rakyat, we need to make the government and PM Najib Razak more accountable, not less. Former transport minister Ong Tee Keat (OTK) had strenuously attempted to do that, but he was hung out to dry.

The Humpty Dumpty of PKFZ (Port Klang Free Zone) has been knocked off its perch by the OTK's insistence of an independent inquiry into the sordid affairs of PKFZ. Now all the Soi Leks and Najibs cannot put in back together again.

Anonymous_4196: What? And yet Najib wants to build a 100-storey tower in order to attract investors? Didn't BN sang the same song when pitching the idea of PKFZ in 2001?

Lover Boy: Any reasonable Malaysian knows that PKFZ will be bankrupt due to the magnitude of its debt. What Lee Hwa Beng is saying is nothing new.

What I want to know is when will the government go after the real culprits, charging some small fries like former PKA general manager OC Phang and former MCA chief Ling Liong Sik will not pacify Malaysians. This leakage is not small - it is so big that nothing man-made can cover this hole.

MACC, please go after the bigger fish. Use PricewaterhouseCooper audit report as a guide.

ForJustice: Okay, so now who's going to bail them out? The government again? If yes, this means we taxpayers are paying for it. I think all those involved from the government ministers approving this project down to the company's officers must be held accountable, and pay for it.

Tailek: No report will come out from the super task force, not even long after chief secretary to the government Mohd Sidek Hassan has retired. I would not be surprised that no one in government is even looking into this matter anymore.

That is Malaysia Boleh for you. Every form of financial corruption and sex scandal is permissible and excusable so long as you are in the right camp, and that camp is the BN camp. This apathy is so sickening it makes you want to weep for Malaysia.

Longjaafar: Is this the kind of 'good management' of the country's economy that we hear so much about? Maybe they need to hire another set of CONsultants to look into this.

Ghkok: Every sen being used to bailout PKFZ is one sen less for improving transportation, policing, education, programmes for the poor and needy, etc. Every additional sen used for bailout brings us closer and closer to the 2019 bankruptcy date as stated by Pemandu chief Idris Jala.

Clearwater: Numerous BN politicians involved in this fraudulent white elephant have still not been charged in court. That is the most galling part of the PKFZ scandal. No accountability, no responsibility, no transparency, no morality. That about sums it up. On this fiasco alone, BN deserves to lose power in the next general election.

Michael Angelo: I read that in China, corrupt officials responsible for fiasco of such magnitude will have to pay for the bullet used to execute them after they are found guilty. And their body parts and organs donated to needy transplants.

Considering the wastage of RM12 billion of public money, perhaps this form of penalty can be considered.

Enviroman: The federal government must not bail out PKFZ. Let it go bankrupt. Federal funds are our funds, our taxpayers' money. Don't let our funds be put to questionable use. Malaysians must protest to pressure them into not bailing out PKFZ. Who will start the ball rolling?

Original posting from http://www.malaysiakini.com

PKFZ may face 'bankruptcy' over soft loan

Malaysiakini
Kuek Ser Kuang Keng
Jan 13, 11 1:30pm

Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) will not be able to finance its RM4.6 billion soft loan from the Finance Ministry, which it must begin servicing from this year.

It is likely that without federal government intervention, the controversy-ridden mega project operated by the Port Klang Authority (PKA) will become bankrupt, albeit technically, next year.

"Even if PKFZ is fully tenanted, we will not be able to start paying up on our loan instalment to the Finance Ministry from this year, according to the Pricewaterhouse Coopers (PWC) report," PKA chairperson Lee Hwa Beng said in an interview yesterday.

After three years of operation, the free-trade zone is still underutilised. The occupancy rate for light industrial units is close to 50 percent, while only about 25 percent of the land is occupied.

The occupancy rate for office blocks is about five percent. Others facilities, such as a hotel and an exhibition hall that is larger than the Mines International Exhibition Convention Centre, are still not operational.

Waiting for a lifeline from MOF

The PWC audit report commissioned by former Transport Minister Ong Tee Keat in 2009 to probe the PKFZ scandal, said the project outlay has ballooned from RM1.96 billion when it was conceived in 2001 to a staggering RM12 billion.

PKA was unable to fund its obligations to PKFZ turnkey contractor Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) from its own resources when the first scheduled payment was due in 2007.

Following this, the Treasury disbursed a RM4.632 billion 20-year soft loan, which critics see as a bailout of a failed government project.

The cash flow projections by PKA indicates that it would be unable to service its loan instalments between 2012 and 2041, thereby attracting additional interest of another RM5 billion.

This will bring the total project outlay to a whopping RM12.453 billion by year 2051, according to the audit report.

However, Lee, whose term will end on March 31, is confident that the federal government will not allow PKFZ to go bankrupt.

"We pay the Finance Ministry, not a third party, and we are part of the federal government. So the port will not become insolvent... definitely business will carry on and the terminal operators can continue to do their business," Lee said.

The PWC audit report states that PKA could, however, avoid or reduce the extra RM5 billion interest cost on two conditions: by restructuring the Treasury's soft loan, and by making the project viable.

'Totally uninformed' on task force findings

A 'super' task force, set up by cabinet in October 2009, was supposed to study the project and offer solutions to the current dire situation.

However, Lee claimed to be "totally uninformed" about the findings of the task force since it was set up.

"I don't know if the task force has come out with a report," he said, adding that any solution must be implemented through PKA because it was the statutory body governing PKFZ.

The high-powered task force, headed by chief secretary to the government Mohd Sidek Hassan, was established by the cabinet after the PKFZ investigation report, commissioned by Ong, was submitted to the cabinet.

It was to determine if there was misconduct or criminal element on the part of individuals or entities involved in the project and recommend actions to be taken against them if there were, recommend measures to improve governance as well as PKFZ's management, prepare a restructuring plan and formulate business models for PKA and PKFZ.

It was given six months, to come out with a report, which meant the due date was April 2010.

But no announcement on the report has come forth from the government so far.

Original Posting : http://www.malaysiakini.com

Ong brings PKFZ to Parliament

Submitted by webmaster on Fri, 2010-10-22 21:52
By OTK Info Unit

KUALA LUMPUR (Oct 22, 2010): Pandan MP Dato’ Seri Ong Tee Keat is continuing his relentless strive to fully expose the multi-billion-ringgit Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) financial scandal in Parliament.

Ong has submitted 10 oral questions for the current parliament session, leading with queries directed at Transport Minister Datuk Kong Cho Ha.
Of the 10 orals questions submitted, four are related to the PKFZ sham.
The following are details of the questions submitted:

PERTANYAAN-PERTANYAAN UNTUK JAWAB LISAN OLEH AHLI PARLIMEN PANDAN YB DATO SRI ONG TEE KEAT

(1) YB Dato’ Sri  ONG TEE KEAT minta Menteri Pengangkutan menyatakan:

(a) kenapa dana sukuk  yang wujudkan oleh Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd bagi membiayai projek PKFZ melalui empat (4) buah SPV itu dibenarkan agar mengenakan kadar faedah yang setinggi 7.5% setahun, berbanding dengan kadar 5% setahun yang telah dipersetujui pada peringkat awal.

(b) Apakah sukuk itu pernah diberi jaminan oleh Kerajaan? Jika ya, mengapa? Jika tidak, kenapa Lembaga Pelabuhan Kelang diarahkan oleh Menteri untuk menjelaskan bayaran faedahnya tahun ini walaupun projek PKFZ itu didapati terdapat banyak kekurangan dan kecacatan dalam pembinaannya?

(2) YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Menteri Pertanian menyatakan sebabnya setakat kini hasil padi dari sesuatu kawasan, umpamanya Chui Chak dan Sekinchan, masih tidak boleh dipasarkan di luar sempadan negeri yang berkenaan. Tidakkah amalan itu mengehadkan pemasaran hasil padi kaum petani yang berkenaan, dan justeru menjejaskan rezeki mereka?

(3) YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Menteri Pelancongan menyatakan bilangan lawatan beliau ke seberang laut sejak menyandang jawatan ini. Berapakah jumlah perbelanjaan yang terbabit dan apa pula keberkesanan lawatan-lawatan yang dimaksudkan, baik dari segi kualitatifnya mahupun kuantitatifnya.

(4) YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Menteri Dalam Negeri menyatakan satakat ini samada penyiasatan polis terhadap kes PKFZ telah tamat. Jika sudah, bila ia tamat dan apa tindakan susulannya. Jika belum, mengapa ia mengambil masa yang begitu panjang, walaupun banyak hasil perjumpaan yang terkandung dalam laporan panel siasatan bebas yang ditubuhkan oleh Kementerian Pengangkutan pada 10.6.2010 boleh memudahkan penyiasatan polis?

(5) YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Menteri Pertanian menyatakan

(a) Mengapa Kementerian tidak melaksanakan keputusan Jemaah Menteri agar membenarkan kaum nelayan dalam kategori zon B menggajikan pekerja asing yang sah sebagai pembantu mereka mulai 01.06.2010.

(b) Setakat ini berapa orang nelayan telah disabitkan kesalahan menggaji pekerja asing selepas 01.06.2010?

(6) YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Perdana Menteri menyatakan samada terdapat unsur-unsur tertentu yang menghalang pendakwaan individu-individu yang terbabit dalam kes PKFZ. Jika ada, sila jelaskan ragam dan puncanya. Jika tiada, apakah ia bermaksud tiada individu lain yang dijangka akan diheret ke muka pengadilan selepas Tun Ling Liong Sik.

(7) YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Perdana Menteri menyatakan samada Pasukan Petugas yang diketuai oleh Ketua Setiausaha Negara untuk mengkaji kes PKFZ telah mengemukakan sebarang laporan ‘ turnaround plan’ kepada Jemaah Menteri. Jika ya, bila dan apa cadangannya. Jika belum, mengapa?

(8) YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Perdana Menteri menyatakan setakat ini berapa kes penyiasatan rasuah yang membabitkan orang politik telah dijalankan oleh SPRM dan berapa pula telah diheret ke mahkamah. Dari kes-kes yang didakwa itu, berapakah jumlah wang rasuah yang terbabit?

(9) YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Menteri Luar menyatakan bilangan kes penahanan bot nelayan kita oleh pihak berkuasa Indonesia di luar dan dalam perairan kita sejak tahun 2008. Setakat manakah ianya menjejaskan perhubungan dua hala di antara Indonesia dengan negara kita?

YB Dato Sri ONG TEE KEAT minta Menteri Pengajian Tinggi menyatakan  mengapa universiti-universiti tertentu yang tersenarai dalam golongan 200 universiti terulung dalam Times Higher Education Survey masih belum diikhtiraf  kelayakan akademiknya oleh Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam. Setakat ini berapa universiti  sedemikian dan kursus yang ditawarkan yang masih tidak diberi pengikhtirafan?

Apakah perancangan Kementerian untuk menangani keadaan seperti ini?

Original posting : http://ongteekeat.net

Astro新闻多看点：PKFZ

Astro新闻多看点：PKFZ
Astro xīn wén duō kān diăn:PKFZ

Astro Host:周慧敏
Astro Host:zhōu huì mĭn

此采访录制于2010年8月7日
cĭ căi făng lù zhì yú 2010 nián 8 yuè 7 rì

嘉宾由拿督斯里翁诗杰和隆雪华堂执行长陈亚才，
jiā bīn yóu ná dū sī lĭ wēng shī jié hé lōng xuĕ huá táng zhí xíng zhăng chén yà cái,

一同­出席！采访内容关系到PKFZ舞弊案，
yī tóng-chū xí! căi făng nèi róng guān xì dào PKFZ wŭ bì àn

人民对敦林被提控上庭，
rén mín duì dūn lín bèi dī kòng shàng tíng

是否对国家司法重拾信心­？
shì fŏu duì guó jiā sī fă chóng shí xìn xīn­？

除了敦林，是否还有其他人涉及舞弊案呢？
chú le dūn lín,shì fŏu hái yŏu qí tā rén shè jí wŭ bì àn ne?

国阵政府是否对肃贪有了决心？
guó zhèn zhèng fŭ shì fŏu duì sù tān yŏu le jué xīn?

抑或那只是一­场戏，最后却会不了了之呢？
yì huò nà zhĭ shì yī cháng xì zuì hòu què huì bù liăo le zhī ne

普罗大众当然对此事各有所持！
pŭ luó dà zhòng dāng rán duì cĭ shì gè yŏu suŏ chí!

那对于拿督斯里翁诗杰和陈亚­才又会怎么说呢？
nà duì yú ná dū sī lĭ wēng shī jié hé chén yà cái yòu huì zĕn me shuō ne?

我们不妨听听两位的意见！敬请观赏！
wŏ men bù fáng tīng tīng liăng wèi de yì! jiàn qĭng guān shăng!

 PART 1

Part 2

Part 3

NTV7与翁诗杰面对面破解巴生自贸区疑团

NTV7与翁诗杰面对面破解巴生自贸区疑团
NTV7 yú wēng shī jié miàn duì miàn pò jiĕ Bā shēng zì mào Oū yí tuán

NTV7 Host: 李晓蕙
NTV7 Host: lĭ xiăo huì

此采访录制于2010年7月20日。
cĭ căi făng lù zhì yú 2010 nián 7 yuè 20 rì

前阵子，当大家在狐疑巴生港口舞弊案，究竟涉及了谁的时候，
qián zhèn zi,dāng dà jiā zài hú yí Bā shēng găng kŏu wŭ bì àn,jiū jìng shè jí le shéi de shí hou

但当在最重要阶段，突然被新任交通部长，勒令撤销彻查，
dàn dāng  zài zuì zhòng yào jiē duàn, tū rán bèi xīn rèn jiāo tōng bù cháng, lè lìng chè xiāo chè chá

为了要让人民知道更多的真相，
wèi le yāo ràng rén mín zhī dao gèng duō de zhēn xiàng,

今天，我们终于邀请到了揭发舞弊案的首要人物，
jīn tiān wŏ men zhōng yú yāo qĭng dào le jiē fā wŭ bì àn de shŏu yào rén wù

拿督斯里翁诗杰，来为我们破解和讲述PKFZ的来龙去脉。
ná dū sī lĭ wēng shī jié, lái wéi wŏ men pò jiĕ hé jiăng shù PKFZ de lái lóng qù mài

专辑内容当中，包括有：
zhuān jí nèi róng dāng zhōng, bāo kuò yŏu:

- 为何舍工地征用法令，而选择高价收购地皮？
- wèi hé shè gōng dì zhēng yòng fă lìng, ér xuăn zé gāo jià shōu gòu dì pí?

- 为何自贸区计划不公开招标？
- wèi hé zì mào Oū jì huà bù gōng kāi zhāo biāo?

- 成本125亿？！是真是假？
- chéng bĕn 125 yì?! shì zhēn shì jiă?

还有许多精彩的内容，有待君亲自聆听！
hái yŏu xŭ duō jīng căi de nèi róng, yŏu dài jūn qīn zì líng tīng!

 Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Crusader Ong did it all for justice

Exclusive Interview with Free Malaysia Today, Part 2
By Teoh El Sen
 

KUALA LUMPUR: Ong Tee Keat is no stranger to controversy. In fact, he is well-known for his crusade against corruption in the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) "mother of all scandals".

In this second part of a recent interview with FMT, Ong answers several questions related to the many scandals and controversies he has been, in one way or another, involved in.

Ong said more big names are still unaccounted for in the PKFZ scandal, in which five people have been charged, but up Dr Ling Liong Sik came as a surprise to him.

PKFZ, the commercial and industrial project, was initially conceived as a RM1.82 billion venture constructed over 1,000 acres but the costs ballooned to RM12.5 billion. After the project's financial records were audited, allegations of corruption, conflict of interest and breach of trust surfaced.

On the controversial Automated Enforcement System (AES), the nationwide speed cameras system set to be implemented, Ong said he had dealt with the matter when he was transport minister.

The AES has come under fire for allegedly awarding the project to "crony companies", but Ong questioned why the disgruntled companies had not complained sooner but had cried foul to him later on.

He said though he did not know the details prior to his ministerial position, the marks the companies had received (in live demonstation of the AES in 2007) were clear answers, and he stood by his decision to follow the test results from the tender process on the companies that scored the highest.

In the interview, Ong also condemned the sacking of two senior executives and a deejay in Chinese-language 98.8 FM radio station, but declined to say if he thought MCA (which owns the station) and its president Dr Chua Soi Lek were behind it, as was widely speculated. He chose instead to say that the facts of the case speak for themselves.

Excerpts of the interview are as below:

FMT: On the Port Klang Free Zone scandal, are you satisfied with the recent developments wheres culprits are being brought to book, especially the charging of Dr Ling Liong Sik?

Ong Tee Keat: Charging anybody came much to my surprise, especially in terms of timing and the wording of the charges itself.

Based on the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) audit report released on May 28, last year, I set up three independent panels to probe into the areas of concern raised by PWC. One was to zero in on all the doubts raised in the PWC report, the second was to institutionalise good governance within the statutory bodies, especially under ministry of transport; and lastly to turn around the PKFZ project.

The reports were submitted to me by two of the panels on Aug 10 last year. I handed them over to the government, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and commercial crime police. I presume (the reports) had been very useful to the authorities.

FMT: They say there are more people involved in the PKFZ yet to be charged, some say even politicians from Umno?

OTK: When we first conducted the PWC audit and later (set up) the independent panels, one salient point I told the panels was that no political interference should ever be allowed, not even from the minister's department or even my office. We made sure the reports remained uncensored, not even a word -- and we did it.

To answer your questions if other individuals were involved or implicated... certainly (there were people named) in the reports submitted to me that I subsequently handed over to the government. (Those people) cut across partisan or racial lines, because we don't look at that. Whoever is being named would never be given any due consideration on their social status or party affiliation.

FMT: So there are more names not yet charged?

OTK: Yes, a few other names were mentioned in the audit report...

FMT: But Ling Liong Sik's name was never in the audit report, right?

OTK: The report was more focused on the development work whereas the land deal took place quite some years ago. When I first started the investigation, I started from scratch. I couldn't get any documents or information really. And a lot of things were not within the scope of my knowledge. In Ling's case, it was related to a land deal and my investigation was focused on the development of PKFZ.

FMT: What do you mean when you say you were surprised by the timing of the charge?

OTK: It's because it took place after such a long time, after the submission of my panel reports. It's already been one year plus. All of a sudden Ling was charged. That certainly caught everybody by surprise.

FMT:  Do you regret bringing up the PKFZ issue?

OTK:  Never. But perhaps I should have chosen a different timing. But honestly at that point of time, I was duty-bound to clear it up.

FMT:  How has the case against Tiong (where Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd chief executive officer Tiong King Sing claimed that he gave Ong RM10 million last year for the party's activities) affected your credibility?

OTK:  I must say I don't know if the belated clearance (from MACC) helps or not. But if you say there is no effect whatsoever from those allegations, it's not true. Suffice to say, I have gone through such an ordeal especially at the height of the MCA crisis; this issue was time and again used as ammunition by detractors.

FMT:  Moving on to the 98.8 FM radio station and the recent incident where DJ Jamaluddin Ibrahim was asked to go on leave and CEO Wong Lai Ngo and senior programme manager Tan Chia Yong suspended(all three have since been sacked). Is it politically motivated?

OTK :  I know the development of the entire episode, which I noted with great concern. The only thing I want to say is what I experienced and what I know.  When I was the president of MCA, there had been numerous cases of complaints against certain DJs and certain programmes of 98.8 and I was urged to interfere. Some programmes were deemed detrimental to the image of certain leaders. But I chose not to interfere because I did not believe in such a move. I refrained from doing it because that would set a bad precedent of political interference.

FMT:  But you wouldn't say if this is being done now?

OTK:  Yes, I noted it with great concern. I was watching what was going on. But I want to make no specific comments.

FMT:  But do you think there is something more than meets the eye here, not just a normal turnover?

OTK:  To my understanding, a show-cause letter means that whoever is accused of doing something would have an opportunity to defend his case. A show-cause letter is not tantamount to sacking. I am saying this in general, and not referring to Jamal's case per se.

FMT:   Do you think Jamal was treated unfairly then?

OTK:   Let the facts speak for themselves, whether the case is being handled justly or not. The public perception and judgment speak volumes.

FMT:   Could we move on to the controversy concerning the purchase of China CSR Zhuzhou Electric Locomotive Co Ltd train coaches? You have replied this in a blog post. Are there any further developments on this?

OTK:   No. I've said what I had to say... and that was prompted by the mere fact that certain individuals did not seem to have done sufficient homework. Raising doubts is one thing, but in raising doubts you must substantiate with convincing facts and figures, and you must understand the subject matter well. This applies to anybody... the whistleblower could be partisan or non-partisan, but you must get it right. If at all you want to pursue a case, in the name of justice... you want to make sure justice prevails. If you can't get it right, you are misguided and went in the wrong direction. Then at the end of the day, even if it was a genuine scandal, people might go off tangent. If at all it is a real case, the perpetrators, if any, could very well go scot-free because you didn't do it right.

Just like in the case of PKFZ for instance; no doubt, the first whistleblower -- the opposition politicians -- they made a hue and cry. But the problem is when I first took over the portfolio, I had no choice but to read over what I could find and resurrect the issue. Honestly, I couldn't make any inroads at all, because apparently they cried foul just by suspecting something was amiss, but crying foul alone, you may end up with nothing. I experienced that.

FMT:  Another issue that was raised was the Automated Enforcement System (AES), the speed camera system. There are allegations that there are inconsistencies in the tender process. Another complaint was from a local company that said it was sidelined eventhough its AES was homegrown technology and scored high marks in the tender process (live demonstration of the AES). What was your role in this?

OTK:  On the AES, a live demonstration was conducted in 2007 before I came in (as transport minister). The demo or test enabled all the bidders to demonstrate their competitive edge. I was told and shown evidence that each and every bidder had its own performance assessed, and the marks they secured in the test.

What happened was that the sore losers then cried foul later on, even to me. In the first place, why didn't they cry foul at that material time? They couldn't asnwer me why they didnt raise their objections then. The live demo itself was attended by a independant panel of judges, including from the judiciary, and representatives from the Anti-Corruption Agency (now MACC).

At that material time, it was not under me but under my predecessor (Chan Kong Choy). When I took over, I based everything on the findings of the live demo; of course I had to proceed. I strictly followed the outcome of the demo, which was supervised and overseen by the panel of judges, that's all. I made no fresh recommendations.

FMT:  So you agreed to award the two companies?

OTK:  Because that's the only thing we could fall back on. We cannot simply overrule certain things without solid reasons.

FMT:  You are saying that when you were the transport minister, those companies complained to you but you couldn't find anything wrong?

OTK:  So far I think there were two companies which complained. The problem was: why did you score low marks? If at all you thought the modus operandi was unfair, you could have raised objections then.

FMT:  Making allegations against others is different from putting up your defence to justify your cause. The simple question was, "Why didn't you raise this then?"

OTK:  But hypothetically, if they were right about the possibility of favouritism, is it possible for a review of the tender process?

I did grant such a latitude by revisiting the live demo, especially the results of the live demo. But the conclusion was that the marks scored by the complainants could in no way prompt a decision to overrule what has been decided.

The search for the truth starts. PKFZ

Citizen Nades - By R. Nadeswaran ( Every Monday & Wednesday ) The SUN

IN mid-2003, the first signs of impending problems at the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) were published in this newspaper. It was a passing comment in the No Punches Pulled column which appeared in the now-discontinued Sun Weekender.  I had briefly touched on the price of the land which was bought from the local co-operative at RM3 per sq ft and sold to the Lembaga Pelabuhan Klang (LPK) or the Port Klang Authority (PKA) at RM25 per sq ft.

No one responded to my subsequent scathing columns which demanded answers. The silence from the Transport Ministry and the PKA was deafening. Despite regular reminders, nothing was forthcoming except an anonymous letter which landed on our desk a few months later. It started:

LPK was always financially strong. In fact, it was the best managed statutory board in the country in the 1980s and 1990s. During the final phase of privatisation in 1995 it had RM450 million in reserves in a government approved bank. It was debt free in spite of building the first phase of West Port. Interestingly. LPK also paid RM50 million as taxes to the government. Today, we understand that LPK as a regulator with less than 100 staff will not be able to finance its budget from internal resources. What happened to all the funds? Who is responsible for the total financial mismanagement? All fingers point to three possible parties as custodians of the Port Authority’s funds…

This precipitated what was to become a series of exposes on the biggest financial scandal in this country, dwarfing the Bumiputra Malaysia Finance (BMF) scandal which rocked the country in the 80s. A series of explosive articles and columns continued exposing the weaknesses, abuse and misuse of power. We were careful not to point fingers at anyone as we are merely journalists pointing out the faults. We could not and will never be the judge, jury and executioner. We left it to the authorities to act, but it was not until a new minister who took over the transport portfolio when the wheels of justice began turning. Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat called in independent auditors and the rest, as they say, is history.

Today is not the culmination of the scandal that has dogged three former transport ministers, three past chairmen of the PKA and dozens of civil servants and individuals who served on the board. The trial of former PKA general manager Datin Paduka Phang Oik Choo will give a glimpse on how the PKA ended up insolvent and had to go with a begging bowl to seek a bailout. Let’s not prejudge the issue. The concept of innocent until proven guilty must prevail.

Phang is accused of three counts of criminal breach of trust (CBT) involving RM254.85 million from three RHB accounts between Oct 1, 2004 and May 9, 2006 and if convicted, faces a maximum 20 years’ jail and a fine on each charge.

The trial of Malaysia’s biggest financial fiasco where the development costs of the 1,000-acre integrated cargo distribution hub and industrial park escalated from RM2 billion to RM4.6 billion will be watched closely. Others charged in the PKFZ scandal are former Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) project director Law Jenn Dong, 51, KDSB CEO Stephen Abok, 51, and architect Bernard Tan Seng Swee, 48, from BTA Architect. KDSB is the turnkey developer for the PKFZ project while BTA Architect was the project’s consultant.

Going back to the ominous warnings of the financial disaster which stood before us and the failure to act by the authorities will be an exercise in futility. Delving into the past is of little use. Lest we are accused of contempt of court, we will refrain from commenting on the case proper or making judgments.

The prosecution will have to make out its case with documentary evidence and through witnesses. And for the next few days or so, the testimony of the witnesses and the conduct of counsel for both the prosecution and defence will come under public scrutiny. This case cannot and should not be decided by a court of public opinion, but a competent court of law. We may have our views, opinions and knowledge, but what will ultimately clinch the case are facts and nothing else.

The prosecution of key players marks a watershed in the history of our country. Although a few low-level officers have been charged and convicted with mismanagement and misuse of funds in the past, this is the first time a senior official has been charged with sums exceeding RM250 million. As they say, let the trial start and we, the lesser mortals, will watch with our eyes wide open.

R. Nadeswaran, who broke the PKFZ scandal may not be able to sit through the entire court proceedings, but will surely make applications for trial notes at a later stage. Comments: citizen-nades@thesundaily.com

PKA will pay, says minister

by Terence Fernandez and Giam Say Khoon

Lee Hwa Beng

Kong Cho Ha

KUALA LUMPUR (July 27, 2010): Transport Minister Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha today used his ministerial power to override yesterday's decision by the Port Klang Authority (PKA) to refuse to make the final payment of RM222.58 million to a special purpose vehicle (SPV) set up by Port Klang Free Zone turnkey contractor Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) to raise funds from the market. The SPV, Free Zone Capital Bhd (FZCB), is one of four set up by KDSB to raise funds from bonds for the controversial PKFZ project.
When met after the MCA presidential council today, Kong said: "We will pay according to what has been decided much earlier; according to the schedule that was set a long time ago.
"I will talk to them (PKA)."
A news report in a financial daily today said the PKA board had decided not to make the final payment to FZCB as the board did not want to be in a position where PKA wins a law suit against KDSB but cannot recover the money.
Effectively, PKA has shifted the decision on its bond obligation to Kong under Section 3(4) of the Port Authorities Act 1963, which gives the power to the minister to override the board's decision.
theSun has learnt that the PKA decision could have basis in the revelation that KDSB had given undertakings that it will cover any shortfall in repayments towards the bonds should the PKA fail to do so.
PKA had been under pressure to make the bond payments from various quarters as failure to do so would result in adverse effects on the local bond market.
However, these guarantees by KDSB reveal that any shortfall in the bond repayment makes it KDSB’s problem and not the Malaysian taxpayers.
It is understood that these undertakings emboldened the PKA board to withhold its final payment to FZCB, due on July 31.
The PKA is currently suing KDSB for RM1.4 billion for breach of contract.
PKA chairman Datuk Lee Hwa Beng said the letters from KDSB to three SPVs – FZCB, Valid Ventures Bhd and Transshipment Megahub Bhd -- were tabled at yesterday's Board meeting.
However, he declined to say if the guarantees by KDSB were the basis of the Board's decision to withhold payment to FZCB.
"I cannot reveal the deliberations of the meeting, but we have advised the Transport Minister of our decision," Lee said, declining to say more.
The letters which were sighted by theSun earlier this month revealed the creation of escrow accounts with OSK Securities Bhd. They are deemed as the "missing link" in investigations into the RM12.5 billion mega-scandal. Former Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat said even auditors PriceWaterhouseCoopers had not come across these letters.
"These undertakings will prevent taxpayers money from being further abused," said Ong when met recently.
He added that he had been calling for payments to KDSB to be frozen until the outcome of the PKFZ probe.
The letters read: "We hereby confirm that we undertake to cover the shortfall in the event of any shortfall in the amount payable by Port Klang Authority in the year .... vis-a-vis the bond repayment amount after taking into account balances in the Escrow Account."
The FZCB letter dated Sept 12, 2006 was signed by KDSB director Idris Mat Jani with RM6.5 million in the escrow account. It also stated that KDSB will provide a corporate guarantee for the New Additional Development Works (NADW) equivalent to 5% in value of the NADW.
The Valid Ventures letter dated Feb 28, 2006 also signed by Idris stated that KDSB is required to gradually build up a sum of RM47.6 million in the Escrow Account.
The guarantee for Transshipment Megahub in a letter signed by KDSB director Omar Abdul Latip on Sept 13, 2004 stated that the Escrow Account will have not less than RM36 million.
According to reports, Valid Ventures is owed RM1.3 billion due next year while Transshipment Megahub is owed RM1.4 billion due in 2012.
Another RM150 million is owed to another SPV, Special Port Vehicle Bhd. -- theSun

www.thesundaily.com 

Public interest should have been considered, says Ong

Saturday July 31, 2010

PETALING JAYA: Public interest should have been considered in the decision to make Port Klang Authority (PKA) pay Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd’s (KDSB) special purpose vehicle Free Zone Capital Bhd, a former minister said.
Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat said his hopes turned to despair when he found out that his successor Transport Minister Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha might exercise his ministerial prerogative to make out the payment.
“While I recognise that this is a privilege of the minister, the exercise of this right must be tempered with sound reasoning and, more importantly, considered with the people’s interest at heart,” he said in his blog http://www.ongteekeat.net yesterday.
On Wednesday, a statement from the Transport Ministry said the Government had decided that PKA should make payments to special purpose vehicles as set out in its payment schedule.
The statement added that all relevant factors were taken into consideration when making the decision to pay, including the Govern­ment’s commitment to bondholders and the obligations of PKA under the agreements signed.
The special purpose vehicles – Transship­ment Megahub Bhd, Valid Ventures Bhd, Special Port Vehicle Bhd and Free Zone Capital Bhd – were involved in turnkey developer KDSB’s effort to raise funds from the bond market to finance the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ).
In his blog, Ong said justifying payment by giving the reason “pay according to what has been decided much earlier, according to the schedule that was set a long time ago” was a foolhardy move.
He added that any decision on payment must also consider several other factors, including:
> The existence of new facts – the “missing link” in the PriceWaterhouse Coopers Advisory Services report, of letters revealing that KDSB had given undertakings or guarantees that it would cover any shortfall in repayments towards the bonds should PKA fail to do so.
> The above supported the contention that the “letters of support” provided by Ong’s predecessors at the Transport Ministry were not guarantees, and effectively released the pressure on the Government to pay the bonds.
Ong said there was at least RM1.4bil in disputed claims for all principal agreements between KDSB and PKA, of which more than RM2bil was payable as scheduled until 2017.
“Sweeping the dirt under the carpet will not make the problem go away. I hope the current minister and PKA have enough gumption to carry out the pledge to continue with the PKFZ probe,” he wrote in his blog.
PKA, which directly oversees PKFZ, has sued KDSB for RM1.4bil over cost overruns.
The project cost, initially estimated at RM2.5bil, had ballooned to RM4.6bil.

thestar.com.my

Pua: Charge Kong if PKA fails to reclaim RM1.4b

By Boo Su-Lyn

August 03, 2010

 

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 3 — DAP national publicity secretary Tony Pua called for transport minister Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha to be charged for his directive to Port Klang Authority (PKA) to repay bondholders. Pua said that Kong’s instruction for PKA to honour its final bond obligation of RM372 million, which was paid by July 30 despite the board’s ongoing suit against turnkey contractor Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB), could cause losses of RM1.4 billion to Putrajaya if PKA is unable to reclaim it from the latter.

“If the transport minister has failed to brief the Cabinet of the pertinent points with regards to the bond and the on-going litigation against KDSB by PKA, and should PKA be unable to reclaim the RM1.4 billion fraudulently claimed by KDSB, then Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha must be similarly charged in court like the former Transport Minister, Tun Ling Liong Sik, for allegedly defrauding the Cabinet and possibly even conspiring to cause massive losses to the government of Malaysia,” said Pua in a statement today.

The latest twist in the PKFZ scandal saw MCA ex-president Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik being charged in court on July 29 for allegedly deceiving the Cabinet about the land acquisition for the PKFZ project in Klang.
Dr Ling is the fifth and the highest-ranking person to be charged in relation to the PKFZ scandal.
The PKFZ project was initially estimated to cost less than RM2 billion but is expected cost as much as RM12.5 billion due to interest costs from deferred payments if the trans-shipment hub fails to perform.
Pua, also the Petaling Jaya Utara MP, lambasted Kong for “single-handedly” making the decision to repay RM222.58 million to Freezone Capital Bhd (FZCB) despite the PKA board of directors cautioning against the move pending litigation outcomes as KDSB might not refund the amount even if PKA were to win their case in court.

“Has the prime minister and the Cabinet been misled as well by Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha into believing that the government has no choice but to make the payment, despite the various letters of undertaking given by KDSB to its bondholders where in the eventuality where there is shortfall of payment from the government, KDSB will make up for such a shortfall?” asked Pua.

Pua also hit out at Kong for refusing to consider various suggestions to hold the payments due in escrow that will be issued to rightful parties only after the court case against KDSB has been concluded.
“Such recklessness can only be interpreted as an attempt to bail out KDSB from its predicament when its bondholders exercises the undertaking which has been issued by KDSB, where KDSB will be forced to make the hundreds of millions in outstanding bond repayments,” said Pua.

Putrajaya’s decree to PKA has come under fire from Pakatan Rakyat (PR), who claim that the Najib Administration is “bailing out” culprits behind the PKFZ scandal.

Former transport minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat, who had called for a freeze last month on all repayments to KDSB bondholders, also questioned Putrajaya’s decision to force PKA to pay KDSB bondholders, expressing scepticism of the government’s argument that failure to pay bondholders would lead to adverse effects on the local bond market.

Kong had said that the Ministry would stick to the original schedule set before, which stipulates that the board had an obligation to fulfil a final payment of RM372 million, a second part of the RM723 million repayment due to bondholders this year.

Of the total, PKA paid RM222.58 million to Freezone Capital Bhd (FZCB) and the remaining RM150 million to the special port vehicle (SPV).
KDSB is now facing a suit of RM1.4 billion by the PKA for, among other things, allegations that it had made bloated claims for work done on the project.

“Who will then be responsible for this loss of RM1.4 billion litigation?” asked Pua. ”Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha must not evade accountability, and must immediately declare his willingness to take full responsibility for his actions in decreeing the payments to KDSB bondholders,” he added.
The board had last month disbursed some RM350 million to Transshipment Megahub Bhd (TMB) and Valid Ventures Bhd (VVB).

It is due to make more payments to three other SPVs besides FZCB up until 2017.

www.themalaysianinsider.com

Dr M will testify in Dr Ling’s case if called

By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani Malaysian Insider

August 03, 2010

 

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 3 – Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said today that he will testify in Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik’s Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) cheating trial if the court subpoenas him. He said that whoever is called by the court is required to testify. Yesterday Dr Mahathir stressed that Dr Ling is innocent until proven guilty.
“It is required to testify in court, a person must do it. He cannot say that I don’t want. Everyone that has to testify in court has to do so,” he told reporters at Petronas headquarters here.
Dr Ling, 66, is charged with cheating the government by misleading the Cabinet helmed by Dr Mahathir (pic) on the land acquisition for the PKFZ project in Klang.
Dr Mahathir also refused to comment if the Cabinet was misled by the former transport minister.
“I don’t know if he misled me or not because I do not know if he is guilty or not. At this moment, he is only being charged. Whether he is guilty or not, it is for the court to determine,” he said.
The PKFZ project was mooted during his term as transport minister and the cost of the project, initially estimated at less than RM2 billion, more than doubled to RM4.6 billion by 2007.
The total bill for the project is expected to swell to as much as RM12.5 billion due to interest costs from deferred payments, if the trans-shipment hub fails to perform.
He faces up to seven years in jail and a fine under the Penal Code.
The friendship between the two doctors dates back to the 1980s when Dr Ling helped hold the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) together as the MCA president while Dr Mahathir struggled to unite the splintered Umno. Both retired from Cabinet the same year – Dr Ling in May 2003, and Dr Mahathir five months later.
Last year, The Malaysian Insider reported that Dr Ling had told the Public Accounts Committee’s (PAC) probing the scandal-ridden PKFZ that it was Dr Mahathir who oversaw the project’s land valuation.
In the verbatim of the PAC meeting procedures, the former MCA president pointed out that the costing and valuation of the land was determined by the Valuation and Property Services Department (JPPH) which was chaired by Dr Mahathir, who was the then finance minister.
“Our job in Ministry of Transport is to only state the fact that we want the land. Costings, valuations and all that, it is not the function of the Ministry of Transport. We do not have a Valuation Department.
“Costings and valuations is a question for the Treasury to deal with. They have the Valuation Department and everything is there, not in Ministry of Transport. I think [it was] Tun Dr Mahathir who chaired it, and he was the finance minister also. He saw it very clearly. That was the fact of the case,” Ling said in the verbatim report.
However, Dr Mahathir said that a prime minister is only responsible over matters that he has knowledge.
“As a prime minister, he is always responsible but there are limits to the responsibility and if he doesn’t know something then you can’t say that he is responsible. There are a lot of things which happened in this country which the prime minister do not know, so if you know something, please tell,” he said.

Dr M will testify in Dr Ling’s case if called
 

PKFZ and Ling LS Shocker by Margaret Justice

Margaret Justice 
1. MCA in shock over Dr Ling’s PKFZ charge By Clara ChooiJuly 29, 2010KUALA LUMPUR, July 29 – Today’s prosecution of Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik over his role in the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal, has sent shockwaves through the MCA, leaving party leaders stuttering in response.

2. MCA’s usually calm and collected president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek himself appeared shaken by the news and admitted that it was unexpected.

3. “MCA leaders are shocked by this,” he told reporters who surrounded him for a response after he opened the Perak MCA Youth convention at the state liaison body’s headquarters in Ipoh.

4. He added, however, that he was confident that Dr Ling, 66, who had served as the party’s president from 1986 to 2003, would be given a fair trial.

5. When contacted later in the evening, MCA secretary-general and Transport Minister Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha fell silent for several moments when informed of the news.

6. When asked if he was surprised, Kong said: “Of course I am. Why do you only call me when there is bad news?”

7. He added that he was “concerned” about Dr Ling’s prosecution, especially since the latter was a prominent figure in the MCA.

8. Dr Ling was slapped with charges under Section 418 and alternatively, under Section 417 of the Penal Code, for an offence concerning land valuation.

9. Section 418 concerns “cheating with knowledge that wrongful loss may be thereby caused to a person whose interest the offender is bound to protect” and Section 417 concerns the punishment for cheating.

10. If convicted under Section 418, Dr Ling faces a maximum jail term of seven years, or a fine, or both, and if convicted under Section 417, he faces a lesser sentence of five years jail, or fine or both.

11. He claimed trial to the charges and the case has been fixed for mention on September 3.

12. Dr Ling, believed to be the first Tun in the country to face such prosecution, is the most influential personality to date to be brought to book over the controversial PKFZ scandal.

13. When contacted, many MCA leaders chose to keep mum over the issue, pleading for more time to study the charges before issuing any comment.

14. MCA vice-president Datuk Donald Lim told The Malaysian Insider that the matter should only be addressed by the president.

15. “I would rather not comment. I just heard about it too,” he said.

16. A fellow vice-president Gan Ping Sieu also declined comment but chose instead to seek information from The Malaysian Insider over the details of the charges against Dr Ling.

17. “What did they involve? What were the specific charges,” he asked, before saying that he would need more time before speaking on it.

18. Another vice-president Datuk Chor Chee Heung told The Malaysian Insider that careless comments on such a shocking piece of news should not be made.

19. “I barely just heard about it myself. I do not know the details, so it would be unfair to make any comment for now. It is a big issue,” he pointed out.

20. Other MCA leaders could not be reached via the telephone.

21. On micro-blogging site Twitter, MCA Youth chief Datuk Wee Ka Siong, who is usually active, was uncharacteristically quiet. His last post was at about 4pm, on an unrelated matter.

23. MCA presidential council member Chua Tee Yong tweeted that the PKFZ case needed transparency if the government wanted to revive the people’s trust in them.

24. “Give a chance 2 clear d air instd of guessg and hypthosg,” he said in his tweet.

25. The PKFZ project, Malaysia’s biggest port investment, was initially kickstarted in the early 2000 with a budget of RM1.8 billion.

26. The amount ballooned, however, allegedly due to mismanagement and corruption, and is estimated to likely cost a whopping RM12.5 billion now, including interest charges.


Margaret Justice

PKFZ: Foolhardy To Ignore New 'Missing Links' and People's Interests

Submitted by webmaster on Fri, 2010-07-30 07:43

I laud the decision of the Board of Port Klang Authority to hold back its final payment (see here:http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/highlights/170666-pka-wont-pay.html) of RM222.584 million to Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd. (KDSB)’s special-purpose vehicle (SPV), Free Zone Capital (Bhd). The payment is stipulated under the New Additional Development Work (NADW) agreement signed between KDSB and the Port Klang Authority (PKA). A total of RM522.584 million is due under NADW, of which RM300 had already been paid in 2008 and 2009.

The final payment under NADW due on 31st July 2010 mentioned above should be withheld to avoid crossing the threshold of what KDSB is legally entitled to. I have mentioned in my earlier blog (see here:http://www.ongteekeat.net/pkfz/pkfz-making-the-right-but-tough-decisions) that it goes against sound reasoning to make full and final payment when there is clear dispute amounting to at least RM83 million for fraudulent claims, such as the supply of 33kv to Precinct 2 and Precinct 8, which has yet to commence from Notice of Payment No.1 until the last Notice of Payment No. 24.

The PKA Board has avoided the risk of a ‘hollow victory’, when monies paid cannot be physically recovered subsequently when the courts rule in its favour.

The Board of PKA has yesterday, demonstrated its integrity by making the correct but difficult decision, in putting the interest of the Government and taxpayers first, as against political interference. The move to ensure that 1/3 of Board members being comprised of independent directors not aligned to any political master, which was initiated during my tenure as Minister of Transport, has begun to bear fruit.

My hopes turn to despair when I read here (http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=49932) that the current Transport Minister may exercise his ministerial prerogative to override PKA’s decision. Whilst I recognise that this is a privilege of the Minister, the exercise of this right must be tempered with sound reasoning and more importantly, considered with the people’s interest at hand.

The justification behind the decision to “pay according to what has been decided much earlier, according to the schedule that was set a long time ago” is a sweeping one and indeed foolhardy. It must be read in the light of the following:

a)      The existence of new facts – the ‘missing link’ in the PriceWaterhourseCoopers Advisory Services (PwCAS) report, of letters revealing that KDSB had given undertakings or guarantees that it will cover any shortfall in repayments towards the bonds should PKA fail to do so.

b)      The above supports the contention that the “Letters of Support” provided by my predecessors at the Ministry of Transport are not guarantees, and effectively releases the pressure from the Government to pay the bonds. In other words, the Government is under no direct legal obligation to pay the bondholders. This is supported by Parliamentary Hansard that recorded a Deputy Minister of Finance stating the same. The letters also do not comply with Section 14 of the Financial Procedures Act 1957 to be effective Government guarantees.

c)      The fear of negative repercussions to our sovereign rating is unfounded. The reported  default of RM240 million bond by Malaysian International Tuna Port Sdn. Bhd. (MITP), a similar case on hand did not create much of a ripple in the market, as was last year’s one-week default in payment with regards PKFZ.

d)      The bondholders are not privy to the principal agreements signed between PKA and KDSB. The SPVs’ right to payment are merely secured under the assignment, which is subject to what is lawfully due to KDSB under the principal agreements. It makes absolute sense to withhold payments to the SPVs pending determination of what is lawfully due to KDSB by the courts.

I hope that the current Minister and PKA have enough gumption to carry out the pledge to continue with the PKFZ probe (http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/6/8/nation/6417615&sec=nation).

There is at least RM1.4 billion in disputed claims for all principal agreements between KDSB and PKA, including the Land Agreement (LA), Development Agreements (DA) and Additional Development Agreements (ADW), of which more than RM2 billion is payable under as scheduled until 2017. Sweeping the issue dirt the carpet this year will not make the problem go away.

TAKEN FFOM www.ongteekeat.net