Showing posts with label Defence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Defence. Show all posts
Friday, October 19, 2012
Mindef - Incorrigible Culprit in Auditor General's Report
The Minister of Defence must be answerable for the incorrigible and repeated breaches discovered by the Auditor-General on an annual basis
It no longer comes as a surprise that the Ministry of Defence is one of the biggest culprits found by the annual Auditor General Report for bad governance in its procurement and projects resulting in billions, if not billions of ringgit of losses to the Malaysian Government.
For consecutive years, the Auditor-General has discovered inexcusable practices of incompetency, mismanagement and possibly collusion or corruption with unscrupulous suppliers and contractors. They have included maggots and expired food served to our army,
In the report for 2010 for example, the Auditor-General found that the maintenance contracts for the aged AGSVs did not have the necessary expertise to repair the vehicles and late penalties were not meted out to these contractors when they failed to repair the vehicles within the necessary time frame.
The Auditor-General had also criticised the “improper payments” of allowance to the Territorial Reserve Army personnel who according to the records, did not attend the relevant training. He had even recommended that the relevant officers be punished via “surcharge” as permitted under Section 18(b) of the Akta Tatacara Kewangan 1957.
Similarly in 2009, one of the biggest scandal exposed was the construction of a new RM256 million Skudai 7th Brigade Army Camp which was awarded in 1997 but has only achieved 18.3% completion. This was despite the fact that the contractor, Kausar Corporation has collected their construction fees in full via a land swap deal where the company was already given the ownership of a 153 hectares piece of land.
Kausar was able to pledge this piece of land to a bank for the amount of RM465 million showing that the land which could be worth as much as RM800 million, which is well above the cost of construction of the camp. Despite the above, to date no action to date has been taken against the developer, including terminating the contract, charging late penalties or reclaiming the land which has been awarded to them.
In the latest Auditor-General Report, the Ministry of Defence has among the transgressions cited, awarded 12 contracts to build living quarters for married military personnel has not only incurred a cost overrun of 84%. Instead of costing RM1.74 billion, the Ministry paid RM3.21 billion, despite the delivery of shoddy units. The most glaring aspect of the above lapse, is the fact that only 1 of the 12 contracts was awarded via open tender.
All these offenses are on top of the multi-billion ringgit scandals which have been exposed to date, including the “commissions” paid for the acquisition of Scorpene submarines amounting to more than RM600 million, the increase in the cost of acquiring 6 naval patrol vessels from RM6 billion to RM9 billion or the purchase of 257 armoured personnel vehicles for RM7.55 billion from DRB-Hicom when the latter procured these units, less certain accessories and system software from a Turkish defence company for only RM1.7 billion.
The was also the questionable deal involving the acquisition of 12 “customised” Eurocopters for RM2.3 billion or RM192 million each, when Brazil was able to procure the same helicopter, presumably “uncustomised”, for only RM82 million each. Even the Johor Sultan has chipped in with the criticism that the Ministry of Defence has acquired four Rapid Intervention Vehicles (RIV) for RM2.76mil or RM690,000 each by the Ministry of Defence despite the fact that the Sultan was able to procure a better vehicle for only RM150,000.
Despite the above, the Defence Minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi was only concerned that “the opposition's action aimed at gaining public support for their own political interest could undermine the image of Malaysia's defence among the international community,” as reported in the media on 14 October.
The Minister has expressed regret over the opposition using the issue for “political expediency as the general election is approaching, without considering the implications.”
The Minister of Defence must not attempt to sweep all the multi-billion ringgit scandals under his watch under the carpet by citing the fear that it will “undermine the image of Malaysia’s defence” or question “the capability of our armed forces”.
In fact, what we have harped on continuously over these scandals are specifically to raise the capability of our armed forces to ensure that they are better trained and equipped to secure our borders. Had the above procurements be conducted with billions of ringgit of savings via open and transparent processes, without wastages, mismanagement and astronomical profits for the suppliers, the same billions of ringgit could have been utilised to acquire even more defence equipment for the army, navy and air force.
Given the flagrant breaches in the Ministry of Defence, we repeat our call to the Ministry of Defence to set up a Parliamentary Oversight Committee into Defence Procurement to ensure that our defence personnel will not be shortchanged and to ensure that every sen of our tax-payers’ monies are properly spent. We call upon the Minister to keep his promise to “consider” the above proposal at our meeting held in January this year.
Thursday, September 13, 2012
More Defence Scandals
The reprimand by the Sultan of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim Ismail on the acquisition of Rapid Intervention Vehicles (RIVs) at exhorbitant prices highlights the malaise in the Ministry of Defence procurement exercises
On Saturday 8 September 2012, the Sultan of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim Ismail asked that “nobody should take advantage of the situation for personal gains when acquiring equipment for the Special Forces,” adding that recently four Rapid Intervention Vehicles (RIV) were purchased for RM2.76mil or RM690,000 each by the Ministry of Defence.
Sultan Ibrahim then displayed one of the RIV vehicles and another personal vehicle that he purchased for RM150,000.
“Which of these will be your choice? I do not understand why government purchases involve exorbitant charges that do not make sense,” Sultan Ibrahim, who is also a Colonel in the Special Forces, was reported to have said.
The above acquisition follows a series of controversial procurement of defence vehicles by the Ministry of Defence that have raised major question marks over whether the tax payers are getting value for their money.
In 2008 the Ministry of Defence has acquired 12 Eurocopter Cougar EC725 for RM2.3 billion or RM193 million each despite the same model helicopter being acquired for only RM82.8 million each by the Brazillian government. The Ministry had attempted to justify their higher purchase price to the Parliamentary Accounts Committee on the basis that there were “customisations” on the vehicle to meet the needs of the local air force.
Last year, the Ministry also awarded a RM6 billion contract to Boustead Naval Shipyard to build 6 offshore patrol vessels and a RM7.55 billion contract to purchase 257 units of 8x8 Armoured Personnel Carriers (APCs) from DRB Hicom Bhd.
The RM6 billion contract was subsequently inflated to a RM9 billion contract and the Minister of Defence, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi had justified the both the acquisition and the increase in price on the fact that Malaysians are acquiring the state of the art “littoral combatant ships” (LCS).
It was subsequently exposed that the Ministry of Defence had merely “renamed” the German-made “Gowind Class” naval vessels into “LCS”, which is the name for the more technologically advanced ships built for the United States. We can only interpret that the "renaming" of the ships is done to mislead the public into believing that we were indeed acquiring the best-in-class ships with the RM9 billion contract.
Similarly, it was exposed that while we are buying 257 APCs from DRB-Hicom for RM7.55 billion, DRB-Hicom is acquiring the 257 APCs from Turkish defence contractor for RM1.7 billion. While DRB-Hicom will still need to install certain optional equipment, such as the turret guns and software systems onto the APCs, it is beyond reasonable believe that such additional “customisations” will cause the bill to be inflated from RM1.7 billion to RM7.55 billion; or from only an average of RM6.6 million to RM29.4 million for each vehicle.
When the above controversies were exposed, I was accused by the Minister of Defence as a foreign spy seeking to expose national defence secrets and criticised as being ill-informed with regards to defence technology.
However, when the critique comes from the Sultan of Johor, the Minister has no choice but to concede an investigation into the glaring financial irregularity. Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi had responded yesterday that “the Defence Ministry takes note of the comment positively. [He] will look into the difference in prices between the RIV awarded by Sultan Ibrahim priced at RM150,000 compared with the RM690,000 sold by the supplier.”
We call upon all of the above deals to be investigated and scrutinised not the Ministry of Defence itself, but by an independent Parliamentary Oversight Committee. Malaysians have no faith that the Ministry will be able to conduct an investigation that is fair and above board.
In the light of procurement transparency promoted by the Government Transformation Programme, it is critical that the Ministry of Defence supports the set up of the Oversight Committee to prove that all is above board. After all, if all the above transactions are of value for money to the Government, then surely there is nothing to hide from this independent panel.
On Saturday 8 September 2012, the Sultan of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim Ismail asked that “nobody should take advantage of the situation for personal gains when acquiring equipment for the Special Forces,” adding that recently four Rapid Intervention Vehicles (RIV) were purchased for RM2.76mil or RM690,000 each by the Ministry of Defence.
Sultan Ibrahim then displayed one of the RIV vehicles and another personal vehicle that he purchased for RM150,000.
“Which of these will be your choice? I do not understand why government purchases involve exorbitant charges that do not make sense,” Sultan Ibrahim, who is also a Colonel in the Special Forces, was reported to have said.
The above acquisition follows a series of controversial procurement of defence vehicles by the Ministry of Defence that have raised major question marks over whether the tax payers are getting value for their money.
In 2008 the Ministry of Defence has acquired 12 Eurocopter Cougar EC725 for RM2.3 billion or RM193 million each despite the same model helicopter being acquired for only RM82.8 million each by the Brazillian government. The Ministry had attempted to justify their higher purchase price to the Parliamentary Accounts Committee on the basis that there were “customisations” on the vehicle to meet the needs of the local air force.
Last year, the Ministry also awarded a RM6 billion contract to Boustead Naval Shipyard to build 6 offshore patrol vessels and a RM7.55 billion contract to purchase 257 units of 8x8 Armoured Personnel Carriers (APCs) from DRB Hicom Bhd.
The RM6 billion contract was subsequently inflated to a RM9 billion contract and the Minister of Defence, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi had justified the both the acquisition and the increase in price on the fact that Malaysians are acquiring the state of the art “littoral combatant ships” (LCS).
It was subsequently exposed that the Ministry of Defence had merely “renamed” the German-made “Gowind Class” naval vessels into “LCS”, which is the name for the more technologically advanced ships built for the United States. We can only interpret that the "renaming" of the ships is done to mislead the public into believing that we were indeed acquiring the best-in-class ships with the RM9 billion contract.
Similarly, it was exposed that while we are buying 257 APCs from DRB-Hicom for RM7.55 billion, DRB-Hicom is acquiring the 257 APCs from Turkish defence contractor for RM1.7 billion. While DRB-Hicom will still need to install certain optional equipment, such as the turret guns and software systems onto the APCs, it is beyond reasonable believe that such additional “customisations” will cause the bill to be inflated from RM1.7 billion to RM7.55 billion; or from only an average of RM6.6 million to RM29.4 million for each vehicle.
When the above controversies were exposed, I was accused by the Minister of Defence as a foreign spy seeking to expose national defence secrets and criticised as being ill-informed with regards to defence technology.
However, when the critique comes from the Sultan of Johor, the Minister has no choice but to concede an investigation into the glaring financial irregularity. Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi had responded yesterday that “the Defence Ministry takes note of the comment positively. [He] will look into the difference in prices between the RIV awarded by Sultan Ibrahim priced at RM150,000 compared with the RM690,000 sold by the supplier.”
We call upon all of the above deals to be investigated and scrutinised not the Ministry of Defence itself, but by an independent Parliamentary Oversight Committee. Malaysians have no faith that the Ministry will be able to conduct an investigation that is fair and above board.
In the light of procurement transparency promoted by the Government Transformation Programme, it is critical that the Ministry of Defence supports the set up of the Oversight Committee to prove that all is above board. After all, if all the above transactions are of value for money to the Government, then surely there is nothing to hide from this independent panel.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
So It's 6 Littoral Combat Ships, Or Not?
However after our clarification meeting between Pakatan Rakyat Members of Parliament - Saifuddin Nasution, Dzulkefli Ahmad and myself with the Minister of Defence, Dato' Seri Zahid Hamidi and his officials, we have confirmed that we are not acquiring Littoral Combat Ships.
The Government has been justifying the cost of acquisition of the 6 ships by comparing against the United States LCS programme which cost between RM1.5 billion to RM2.5 billion per ship to claim that we are buying on the cheap at only RM1.5 billion per ship.
The LCS is a specific ship built by the United States (US) Navy and no other countries. The US current has only 2 LCS in service with orders for additional ships still under construction.
According to Naval-Technology.com, the LCS is "a fast, highly manoeuverable, networked surface combat ship, which is a specialised variant of the family of US future surface combat ships... Both [ships] achieve sprint speeds of over 40knots and long-range transit distances of over 3,500 miles."
The Wikipedia entry notes that the LCS are able to "add the capabilities of a small assault transport with a flight deck and hangar large enough to base two SH-60 Seahawk helicopters, the capability to recover and launch small boats from a stern ramp, and enough cargo volume and payload to deliver a small assault force with armoured fighting vehicles to a roll-on/roll-off port facility."
The reputable Defense Industry Daily also confirmed the LCS are "115 – 127 meters in length and 2,800 – 3,100 tons of displacement" and are differentiated from typical frigates by "their shallow water design and employment."
However, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed during our dialogue that the top speed for our SGPVs is only 28 knots and not 40-45 knots of the standard LCS. In addition, our ships will be shorter at 105 meters and does not have the long-range transit reach of 3,500 miles. Earlier announcements by Mindef have also confirmed that the ships will have a 2,500 tons of displacement, carry only an Eurocopter 725 each and does not have the capability to launch and recover small boats.
In fact the announcement by Mindef contractor Boustead Naval Shipyards on Bursa Malaysia last month and our meeting confirmed that we will be acquiring "Gowind Class Corvettes" from scandal-tainted French shipbuilder DCNS. It will certainly be a stretch of any military experts' imagination to equate our purchase of these SPGV Corvettes to the state of the art LCS.
We would like to once again thank Mindef for holding the dialogue with us 2 days ago for this information could not have been confirmed otherwise.
We would now like to call upon Mindef to "call a spade a spade" and stop the attempt to disguise our acquisition with fancy names to justify their substantial cost. The Gowind-class corvettes are not ships to be belittled and are powerful in their own ways which may serve the needs oe Malaysian Navy, but they are not by means the equivalent of LCS as trumpeted by the Minister and Government.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
6 Second Generation Patrol Vessels: RM6 billion or RM9 billion?
The Pakatan Rakyat Member of Parliaments – Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, Saifuddin Nasution and myself would like to thank the Ministry of Defence for making arrangements to provide clarifications to us over the recent procurement controversies yesterday.
One of the key issues which required urgent clarification was the disparity between the originally stated RM6 billion to acquire 6 SGPVs, first highlighted in February 2011 which was subsequently increased to RM9 billion in December 2011.
Below is a chronology of events and statements made:
At the meeting yesterday, the Secretary-General of Defence Ministry, Dato’ Seri Ismail Ahmad “clarified” the apparent increase in the cost:
Malaysians can now make their own judgement as to whether the explanation given by the Defence Ministry is acceptable or even credible.
I had asked during the meeting that if the actual purchase price or original budget was to be RM9 billion, then why did the Defence Minister announce on 5th February 2011 that it was RM6 billion to acquire 6 ships?
I further added, if it was indeed RM9 billion and not RM6 billion all this while, why was it that it took more than 9 months for the “correct” RM9 billion figure to be exposed via the Boustead announcement?
No further clarification was given by the Defence Ministry or the Minister besides insisting that it was all along a RM9 billion acquisition.
The above controversy provides one of the clearest instances why it is imperative for the Parliamentary Oversight Committee on Defence Expenditure, modelled after the United States House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations which looks after defence policies as well as the US Defense Budget Appropriation Committees which review and approve detailed defence expenditure.
The setting up of such a committee with access to all the necessary and relevant documents will ensure that no one will be left with any doubt over whether it was RM9 billion all along or whether there was a massive increase in price from RM6 billion.
One of the key issues which required urgent clarification was the disparity between the originally stated RM6 billion to acquire 6 SGPVs, first highlighted in February 2011 which was subsequently increased to RM9 billion in December 2011.
Below is a chronology of events and statements made:
- On February 5th 2011, Bernama reported that “the government has agreed to allocate RM6 bil to build six second generation patrol vessels for the Royal Malaysian Navy, Defence Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said Saturday” in an article entitled “RM6 bil approved for 6 patrol vessels”. It was mentioned that Boustead Naval Shipyard will be awarded the contract to build the ships.
- On 12 February 2011, the New Straits Times also reported that the Royal Malaysian Navy Chief, Admiral Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Jaafar said that “the RM6 billion package deal for six second-generation offshore patrol vessels is considered reasonable… the cost included weapon-system installation, radar technology and other sophisticated equipment to enhance the armed forces' firepower.”
- On 8th March 2011 in Parliament, Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi had further clarified that “pada masa ini pihak kerajaan masih belum memuktamadkan harga. Sejumlah RM6 bilion telah diperuntukkan sebagai siling dalam Rancangan Malaysia Kesepuluh dan sebahagian akan melimpah ke Rancangan Malaysia Kesebelas dan mungkin hingga ke Rancangan Malaysia Kedua Belas.” (pg 6). He repeated the same on 21 March 2011 in Parliament (pg 52).
- On 16th December 2011, Boustead Holdings Bhd has announced on Bursa Malaysia that its subsidiary Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd has received the “letter of award to undertake the construction of the ships” from Ministry of Defence Malaysia “to design, construct, equip, install, commission, integrate, test and trials, and deliver six LCS” for the new ceiling price of RM 9.0 billion.
At the meeting yesterday, the Secretary-General of Defence Ministry, Dato’ Seri Ismail Ahmad “clarified” the apparent increase in the cost:
- Firstly, Dato’ Seri Ismail claimed that the announcement made by Boustead Holdings Bhd refers to a “letter of intent” and the agreement has not been finalised. However this contradicts the statement made by Boustead to the stock exchange which clearly stated that it is a “letter of award”.
- Secondly, Dato’ Seri Ismail claimed that the Defence Minister’s reply in parliament was perhaps wrongly interpreted. What the Minister apparently meant was that RM6 billion was just for the 10th Malaysia plan and did not include the RM3 billion budgeted in the 11th Malaysia Plan. Therefore the price was RM9 billion for the 6 ships all along, and never RM6 billion.
Malaysians can now make their own judgement as to whether the explanation given by the Defence Ministry is acceptable or even credible.
I had asked during the meeting that if the actual purchase price or original budget was to be RM9 billion, then why did the Defence Minister announce on 5th February 2011 that it was RM6 billion to acquire 6 ships?
I further added, if it was indeed RM9 billion and not RM6 billion all this while, why was it that it took more than 9 months for the “correct” RM9 billion figure to be exposed via the Boustead announcement?
No further clarification was given by the Defence Ministry or the Minister besides insisting that it was all along a RM9 billion acquisition.
The above controversy provides one of the clearest instances why it is imperative for the Parliamentary Oversight Committee on Defence Expenditure, modelled after the United States House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations which looks after defence policies as well as the US Defense Budget Appropriation Committees which review and approve detailed defence expenditure.
The setting up of such a committee with access to all the necessary and relevant documents will ensure that no one will be left with any doubt over whether it was RM9 billion all along or whether there was a massive increase in price from RM6 billion.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Pakatan Rakyat MPs to meet Zahid
Pakatan Rakyat Member of Parliaments, Saifuddin Nasution, Dr Dzulkefli Ahmad and myself will meet with Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi tomorrow 19th January 20112 (Thursday) at 3 pm at the Ministry of Defence after receiving his invitation to discuss the recent controversies with regards to defence procurement.
Among the issues which we will raise with the Minister is the contract signed by the Ministry of Defence with Boustead Naval Shipyards “to design, construct, equip, install, commission, integrate, test and trials, and deliver six Littoral Combatant Ships (Frigate Class)” for the amount of RM9 billion last month.
The RM9 billion contract was signed despite the Minister of Defence having told the Parliament twice in March last year that the ceiling price set for the acquisition of these ships was set at RM6 billion. This represents a huge increase of RM3 billion or 50% of the original budget.
Malaysians are even more concerned when Boustead announced that the ships will be built by scandal-ridden French warships manufacturer, DCNS. While the ship-building history and capabilities of DCNS are not in doubt – DCNS has been found guilty of bribing government officials in Taiwan and has been fined by the Courts €630 million (approximately RM2.5 billion).
The Taiwanese government has continued its litigation against DCNS by filing another NT$ 3.0 billion (RM310 million) in additional compensation from DCNS, above and beyond the sum above, for prohibited commissions and kickbacks at the International Court of Arbitration.
Malaysians are of course well aware of the €115 million (~RM500 million) paid to Perimekar Sdn Bhd for “coordination and support services” in the Malaysia’s purchase of 2 Scorpene submarines from DCNS which cost €1.34 billion (~RM6.5 billion). Perimekar was owned by the Prime Minister and the then Defence Minister Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s close associate, Abdul Razak Baginda. It was also a newly set up company with no prior experience in providing defence support and coordination services.
The Ministry of Defence must also provide clarity over the RM7.55 billion purchase of 257 armoured personnel carriers at RM29.4 million each. It has been publicised widely that Deftech Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of DRB-Hicom Bhd owned by Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al Bukhary which was awarded the contract, has purchased the “base system” from Turkish defence company, FNSS Defence Systems for approximately US$559 million (~RM1.7 billion).
The Minister must provide transparency over the above procurement, especially since it was conducted without any open tender. The Government must provide details of equipment and services which makes the difference between the acquisition cost of RM7.55 billion relative to the “base system” of only RM1.7 billion.
Most importantly, given the size, specialisation and sensitivity of defence procurement, we would like to repeat our call for the Malaysian government to set up the Parliamentary Oversight Committee on Defence Procurement modelled after the United States House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations which looks after defence policies as well as the US Defense Budget Appropriation Committees which review and approve detailed defence expenditure.
The set up of the Parliamentary Oversight Committee on Defence Procurement will lead to greater accountability and transparency to ensure that the rakyat’s wealth will not be frittered away, especially in the light of the warning by Datuk Idris Jala that Malaysia might be bankrupt by 2019 if Government expenditure is not curtailed.
Among the issues which we will raise with the Minister is the contract signed by the Ministry of Defence with Boustead Naval Shipyards “to design, construct, equip, install, commission, integrate, test and trials, and deliver six Littoral Combatant Ships (Frigate Class)” for the amount of RM9 billion last month.
The RM9 billion contract was signed despite the Minister of Defence having told the Parliament twice in March last year that the ceiling price set for the acquisition of these ships was set at RM6 billion. This represents a huge increase of RM3 billion or 50% of the original budget.
Malaysians are even more concerned when Boustead announced that the ships will be built by scandal-ridden French warships manufacturer, DCNS. While the ship-building history and capabilities of DCNS are not in doubt – DCNS has been found guilty of bribing government officials in Taiwan and has been fined by the Courts €630 million (approximately RM2.5 billion).
The Taiwanese government has continued its litigation against DCNS by filing another NT$ 3.0 billion (RM310 million) in additional compensation from DCNS, above and beyond the sum above, for prohibited commissions and kickbacks at the International Court of Arbitration.
Malaysians are of course well aware of the €115 million (~RM500 million) paid to Perimekar Sdn Bhd for “coordination and support services” in the Malaysia’s purchase of 2 Scorpene submarines from DCNS which cost €1.34 billion (~RM6.5 billion). Perimekar was owned by the Prime Minister and the then Defence Minister Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s close associate, Abdul Razak Baginda. It was also a newly set up company with no prior experience in providing defence support and coordination services.
The Ministry of Defence must also provide clarity over the RM7.55 billion purchase of 257 armoured personnel carriers at RM29.4 million each. It has been publicised widely that Deftech Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of DRB-Hicom Bhd owned by Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al Bukhary which was awarded the contract, has purchased the “base system” from Turkish defence company, FNSS Defence Systems for approximately US$559 million (~RM1.7 billion).
The Minister must provide transparency over the above procurement, especially since it was conducted without any open tender. The Government must provide details of equipment and services which makes the difference between the acquisition cost of RM7.55 billion relative to the “base system” of only RM1.7 billion.
Most importantly, given the size, specialisation and sensitivity of defence procurement, we would like to repeat our call for the Malaysian government to set up the Parliamentary Oversight Committee on Defence Procurement modelled after the United States House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations which looks after defence policies as well as the US Defense Budget Appropriation Committees which review and approve detailed defence expenditure.
The set up of the Parliamentary Oversight Committee on Defence Procurement will lead to greater accountability and transparency to ensure that the rakyat’s wealth will not be frittered away, especially in the light of the warning by Datuk Idris Jala that Malaysia might be bankrupt by 2019 if Government expenditure is not curtailed.
Wednesday, January 04, 2012
Zahid Must Stop The Desperate Lies
Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi must stop the scurrilous allegations that I am a “tool” for a foreign country in repeated attempts to deflect his Ministry’s lack of transparency and accountability
Chinese newspapers carried the story that Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi has accused me of being a “tool to a former professor who has become a professor in a foreign country” on 2nd January 2012. He has added that “the foreign country is the puppet-master of a particular party in Malaysia”. He has even claimed that he has documentary proof to validate what he has said.
I have obtained the full transcript of the comments made by the Defence Minister on 1st January, and the relevant accusation is as follows:
All these scurrilous accusations arose as a result of the continued pressure placed on the Defence Ministry to be transparent with its military equipment purchases, especially in the light of a poor assessment by Transparency International (TI). The TI scored Malaysia at only 4.5 points out of a maximum of 12, or only 37.5%, well below the failure mark. This was the score given in the inaugural “Transparency of Defence Budgets Report” launched on 19 November 2011.
Director of the International Defence and Security Program for TI in United Kingdom, Mark Pyman, who launched the report in Subang Jaya said “Malaysia ranked far below other countries (for this), where the budget lacked details and no audits were undertaken of the secret programmes.”
Malaysia is ranked alongside Afghanistan, Rwanda, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the report, well below other countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The results of the research indicate that approximately 14 per cent of the countries under review in this study scored high and these are primarily developed countries with strong democratic systems in place.
Treason as accused by the Defence Minister is a crime of the highest order in Malaysia and is punishable by death. The accusation by Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi is as serious as it is outrageous, and such contemptuous behaviour is completely unbecoming of a Minister.
Given the severity of the allegations that I am compromising the nation’s security, I challenge Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi to come up with the so-called “documentary proof” that I am a “tool” of a professor in a foreign university and charge me accordingly. However, if the Minister fails to furnish the proof, then he should immediately withdraw the remarks and make a public apology for making such unfounded statements.
It appears that Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi does not realise that he is being fed with fictitious stories from his chief intelligence officer, Papagomo – who had recently enjoyed the unrivalled privilege of sailing in the country’s first submarine. Papagomo is also the source of the scurrilous allegations against Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s son recently who was wrong victimised as having sexually assaulted a female student in his school.
It is extremely worrying that the country’s Defence Minister is relying the country’s intelligence from a blogger who is an obsessive liar without any morals and ethics. In fact all Malaysians should be terribly concerned that our Defence Minister who wields great powers, can be so gullibly compromised by a writer of unbelievable and outlandish fiction.
Chinese newspapers carried the story that Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi has accused me of being a “tool to a former professor who has become a professor in a foreign country” on 2nd January 2012. He has added that “the foreign country is the puppet-master of a particular party in Malaysia”. He has even claimed that he has documentary proof to validate what he has said.
I have obtained the full transcript of the comments made by the Defence Minister on 1st January, and the relevant accusation is as follows:
“Saya fikir Tony Pua ni adalah seorang yang menjadi alat saja seorang bekas professor yang telah menjadi professor di university di luar negara, dan negara itu memang menjadi dalang kepada sebuah parti di negara ini. Saya fikir asal politik di Malaysia biar dibentuk oleh ahli-ahli politik Malaysia. Jangan pernah menjadi dalang daripada mana-mana negara . Saya tidak menuduh tapi saya ada dokumen-dokumen dan bukti-bukti untuk mengesahkan apa yang saya katakana ini.”The is the second time the Defence Minister had implied that I am a foreign agent. In March 2011, Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi was reported in Utusan Malaysia to have said:
“Dia [Tony Pua] dulu ditangkap di Singapura, dibawa ke mahkamah, tetapi sebab hubungan dia mungkin baik dengan pejabat tertentu di sana, beliau dilepaskan (dan) tidak dapat jadi ahli Parlimen (di sana)”As I’ve responded last year, I’ve never even been fined for jay-walking in Singapore, what more being arrested and charged in the court of law in the island city.
All these scurrilous accusations arose as a result of the continued pressure placed on the Defence Ministry to be transparent with its military equipment purchases, especially in the light of a poor assessment by Transparency International (TI). The TI scored Malaysia at only 4.5 points out of a maximum of 12, or only 37.5%, well below the failure mark. This was the score given in the inaugural “Transparency of Defence Budgets Report” launched on 19 November 2011.
Director of the International Defence and Security Program for TI in United Kingdom, Mark Pyman, who launched the report in Subang Jaya said “Malaysia ranked far below other countries (for this), where the budget lacked details and no audits were undertaken of the secret programmes.”
Malaysia is ranked alongside Afghanistan, Rwanda, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the report, well below other countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The results of the research indicate that approximately 14 per cent of the countries under review in this study scored high and these are primarily developed countries with strong democratic systems in place.
Treason as accused by the Defence Minister is a crime of the highest order in Malaysia and is punishable by death. The accusation by Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi is as serious as it is outrageous, and such contemptuous behaviour is completely unbecoming of a Minister.
Given the severity of the allegations that I am compromising the nation’s security, I challenge Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi to come up with the so-called “documentary proof” that I am a “tool” of a professor in a foreign university and charge me accordingly. However, if the Minister fails to furnish the proof, then he should immediately withdraw the remarks and make a public apology for making such unfounded statements.
It appears that Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi does not realise that he is being fed with fictitious stories from his chief intelligence officer, Papagomo – who had recently enjoyed the unrivalled privilege of sailing in the country’s first submarine. Papagomo is also the source of the scurrilous allegations against Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s son recently who was wrong victimised as having sexually assaulted a female student in his school.
It is extremely worrying that the country’s Defence Minister is relying the country’s intelligence from a blogger who is an obsessive liar without any morals and ethics. In fact all Malaysians should be terribly concerned that our Defence Minister who wields great powers, can be so gullibly compromised by a writer of unbelievable and outlandish fiction.
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Zahid Unfit To Be Minister (II)
Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi displays the worst traits of a minister who is arrogant, ignorant and shockingly forgetful.
I read with great surprise that Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi has once again reiterated his “invite” to me to meet him with regards to the cost increase over the acquisition of 6 naval patrol vessels from RM6 billion to RM9 billion. I feel extremely honoured because this is the third invite in 4 days!
His first invite made via the press was on 29th December, followed by another on 31st, and another yesterday, on the 1st January of the new year – all of which were published in Bernama. He need not have made so many invites, he had me at “hello”. I had immediately after reading his first invite, publicly responded that Pakatan Rakyat MPs, Nurul Izzah Anwar, Dr Dzulkefli Ahmad and myself are more than happy to take up his offer of clarifications on 30th December.
Unfortunately, despite his eagerness to meet me, our Defence Minister appears to be very poorly informed and does not read the news. So, I repeat again here, that we accept the invite from the Minister to offer clarifications and look forward to his honourable office to make the necessary arrangements for our visit.
What was however more shocking was his claim that I’ve never dared to face him over the controversial acquisitions even in parliament, and insinuated that I was a coward for raising the issue only during political ceramahs.
He said “when I answered his question in Parliament, [Tony Pua] was not present to hear my reply, but continued to harp on the matter in political ceramah. He is brave only before the opposition crowd but chicken out when asked for a face-to-face meeting.”
The above is utter and complete nonsense as I was present in Parliament and even debated heatedly and extensively with him when he was replying in Parliament on these issues twice in March 2011!
When he was responding to the question from Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng on the 8th March 2011, I was there and chastised the Minister for un-ministerial behaviour for asking my colleague to “go back to kindergarten”. (Hansard pg 5 – 9 http://www.parlimen.gov.my/files/hindex/pdf/DR-08032011.pdf)
In a more extensive subsequent debate on 21 March, when the Minister was directly reply to my questions raised in parliament, he had even threatened to sue me for defamation. I had stood my ground and debated extensively with the Minister over the procurement of 6 naval patrol vessels and 257 armoured personnel vehicles. (Hansard pg 34 - 54 http://www.parlimen.gov.my/
files/hindex/pdf/DR-21032011.pdf)
Hence Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi’s allegations that I was not present in Parliament exposed just how forgetful and absent-minded he is. Even worse, it shows that our Defence Minister does not check his facts before making statements.
Given his absent-mindedness, I would further like to remind the Minister that he had twice in Parliament in March last year confirmed that the price for the 6 patrol vessels have not been finalised and a budget ceiling of RM6 billion has been set.
On 8th March 2011 in Parliament, Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi had said “pada masa ini pihak kerajaan masih belum memuktamadkan harga. Sejumlah RM6 bilion telah diperuntukkan sebagai siling dalam
Rancangan Malaysia Kesepuluh dan sebahagian akan melimpah ke Rancangan Malaysia Kesebelas dan mungkin hingga ke Rancangan Malaysia Kedua Belas.” (pg 6). He repeated the same on 21 March 2011 in Parliament (pg 52).
However, the Defence Minister now has the cheek to say in his latest statement to Bernama that “the cost of procuring assets for the national defence inventory will not exceed the ceiling set by the government”, when it has increased by 50% from RM6 billion to RM9 billion in less than a year!
All of the above points to the fact that we have a clueless defence minister who is arrogant, forgetful, ill-informed and ignorant. The manner in which budgets are so easily exceeded will only increasing the likelihood of realising Dato Idris Jala’s greatest fear, that Malaysia may be bankrupt by 2019.
I read with great surprise that Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi has once again reiterated his “invite” to me to meet him with regards to the cost increase over the acquisition of 6 naval patrol vessels from RM6 billion to RM9 billion. I feel extremely honoured because this is the third invite in 4 days!
His first invite made via the press was on 29th December, followed by another on 31st, and another yesterday, on the 1st January of the new year – all of which were published in Bernama. He need not have made so many invites, he had me at “hello”. I had immediately after reading his first invite, publicly responded that Pakatan Rakyat MPs, Nurul Izzah Anwar, Dr Dzulkefli Ahmad and myself are more than happy to take up his offer of clarifications on 30th December.
Unfortunately, despite his eagerness to meet me, our Defence Minister appears to be very poorly informed and does not read the news. So, I repeat again here, that we accept the invite from the Minister to offer clarifications and look forward to his honourable office to make the necessary arrangements for our visit.
What was however more shocking was his claim that I’ve never dared to face him over the controversial acquisitions even in parliament, and insinuated that I was a coward for raising the issue only during political ceramahs.
He said “when I answered his question in Parliament, [Tony Pua] was not present to hear my reply, but continued to harp on the matter in political ceramah. He is brave only before the opposition crowd but chicken out when asked for a face-to-face meeting.”
The above is utter and complete nonsense as I was present in Parliament and even debated heatedly and extensively with him when he was replying in Parliament on these issues twice in March 2011!
When he was responding to the question from Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng on the 8th March 2011, I was there and chastised the Minister for un-ministerial behaviour for asking my colleague to “go back to kindergarten”. (Hansard pg 5 – 9 http://www.parlimen.gov.my/files/hindex/pdf/DR-08032011.pdf)
In a more extensive subsequent debate on 21 March, when the Minister was directly reply to my questions raised in parliament, he had even threatened to sue me for defamation. I had stood my ground and debated extensively with the Minister over the procurement of 6 naval patrol vessels and 257 armoured personnel vehicles. (Hansard pg 34 - 54 http://www.parlimen.gov.my/
files/hindex/pdf/DR-21032011.pdf)
Hence Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi’s allegations that I was not present in Parliament exposed just how forgetful and absent-minded he is. Even worse, it shows that our Defence Minister does not check his facts before making statements.
Given his absent-mindedness, I would further like to remind the Minister that he had twice in Parliament in March last year confirmed that the price for the 6 patrol vessels have not been finalised and a budget ceiling of RM6 billion has been set.
On 8th March 2011 in Parliament, Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi had said “pada masa ini pihak kerajaan masih belum memuktamadkan harga. Sejumlah RM6 bilion telah diperuntukkan sebagai siling dalam
Rancangan Malaysia Kesepuluh dan sebahagian akan melimpah ke Rancangan Malaysia Kesebelas dan mungkin hingga ke Rancangan Malaysia Kedua Belas.” (pg 6). He repeated the same on 21 March 2011 in Parliament (pg 52).
However, the Defence Minister now has the cheek to say in his latest statement to Bernama that “the cost of procuring assets for the national defence inventory will not exceed the ceiling set by the government”, when it has increased by 50% from RM6 billion to RM9 billion in less than a year!
All of the above points to the fact that we have a clueless defence minister who is arrogant, forgetful, ill-informed and ignorant. The manner in which budgets are so easily exceeded will only increasing the likelihood of realising Dato Idris Jala’s greatest fear, that Malaysia may be bankrupt by 2019.
Saturday, December 31, 2011
We Will Meet Zahid
The Defence Minister, Dato’ Seri Zahid Hamidi has said yesterday that he was willing to meet up with me to explain and clarify the purchase of the six second generation patrol vessels or “littoral combatant ships (frigate class)” (LCS). The issue surfaced again since the price tag for the war ships has increased from RM6 billion announced on 5 February this year, but has since increased 50% to RM9 billion this month.
Boustead Holdings Bhd has announced on Bursa Malaysia that its subsidiary Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd has received the “letter of award to undertake the construction of the ships” from Ministry of Defence Malaysia “to design, construct, equip, install, commission, integrate, test and trials, and deliver six LCS” for the new ceiling price of RM 9.0 billion
We have asked for the Defence Minister to explain the drastic increase, especially since even the initial RM6 billion price tag had already attracted controversy and required Dato’ Seri Zahid to provide an explanation in parliament.
In defending the RM6 billion deal in parliament, the Minister had claimed that these patrol vessels were no ordinary ships but were advanced warships known as "littoral combatant ships" (LCS).
Datuk Seri Zahid had in March claimed that the LCS is "bigger and faster" and "it is also equipped with three-dimensional warfare equipment like cannons, missiles and torpedoes” which are able to take on jets, ships and submarines respectively.
He argued that "with the rapid development of technology, the RMN would need an LCS with state-of-the-art equipment like the sonar system for submarine detection and anti-submarine torpedoes, which would help in the operation of the two RMN submarines to safeguard the sovereignty of national maritime areas."
Since the RM6 billion price tag has already come with all the above “advanced” technologies to fight jets, ships and submarines, what else has the Ministry of Defence ordered to justify the additional allocation of RM3 billion? The price-tag of RM1.5 billion will certainly make our patrol vessels among the most expensive in the world.
Instead of providing in open explanation, Dato’ Seri Zahid had mocked me yesterday asking “Where does he get his figures? From Kua Kia Soong, the former DAP MP?” If he has bothered reading my statements, I’ve stated clearly that the figures came from the announcements made by Boustead as well as “authoritative” answers made by himself in the Parliament. The Minister will perhaps do well to stop relying on Papagomo as his chief intelligence advisor, who has to date provided the former with only half-truths and fictitious data.
Pakatan Rakyat MPs, including Nurul Izzah Anwar and Dr Dzulkefli Ahmad are more than willing to take up the offer from the Minister to seek his clarification. However, he should not only provide clarifications for the above purchase involving RM9 billion but also the other mega-acquisition of 257 armoured personnel vehicles (APVs) costing RM7.55 billion this year. In his parliamentary reply to me on the APVs, he had claimed “no knowledge” over the details of the cost.
The Minister must also answer, given his assurance that his Ministry is “open to transparency”, why the Government is unwilling to set up a Parliament Oversight Committee to review and monitor defence expenditure. If the Ministry is not even willing to subject himself to oversight by the Parliament, the country’s highest legislative body, then Dato Seri Zahid Hamidi has no right to talk about “transparency”.
Boustead Holdings Bhd has announced on Bursa Malaysia that its subsidiary Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd has received the “letter of award to undertake the construction of the ships” from Ministry of Defence Malaysia “to design, construct, equip, install, commission, integrate, test and trials, and deliver six LCS” for the new ceiling price of RM 9.0 billion
We have asked for the Defence Minister to explain the drastic increase, especially since even the initial RM6 billion price tag had already attracted controversy and required Dato’ Seri Zahid to provide an explanation in parliament.
In defending the RM6 billion deal in parliament, the Minister had claimed that these patrol vessels were no ordinary ships but were advanced warships known as "littoral combatant ships" (LCS).
Datuk Seri Zahid had in March claimed that the LCS is "bigger and faster" and "it is also equipped with three-dimensional warfare equipment like cannons, missiles and torpedoes” which are able to take on jets, ships and submarines respectively.
He argued that "with the rapid development of technology, the RMN would need an LCS with state-of-the-art equipment like the sonar system for submarine detection and anti-submarine torpedoes, which would help in the operation of the two RMN submarines to safeguard the sovereignty of national maritime areas."
Since the RM6 billion price tag has already come with all the above “advanced” technologies to fight jets, ships and submarines, what else has the Ministry of Defence ordered to justify the additional allocation of RM3 billion? The price-tag of RM1.5 billion will certainly make our patrol vessels among the most expensive in the world.
Instead of providing in open explanation, Dato’ Seri Zahid had mocked me yesterday asking “Where does he get his figures? From Kua Kia Soong, the former DAP MP?” If he has bothered reading my statements, I’ve stated clearly that the figures came from the announcements made by Boustead as well as “authoritative” answers made by himself in the Parliament. The Minister will perhaps do well to stop relying on Papagomo as his chief intelligence advisor, who has to date provided the former with only half-truths and fictitious data.
Pakatan Rakyat MPs, including Nurul Izzah Anwar and Dr Dzulkefli Ahmad are more than willing to take up the offer from the Minister to seek his clarification. However, he should not only provide clarifications for the above purchase involving RM9 billion but also the other mega-acquisition of 257 armoured personnel vehicles (APVs) costing RM7.55 billion this year. In his parliamentary reply to me on the APVs, he had claimed “no knowledge” over the details of the cost.
The Minister must also answer, given his assurance that his Ministry is “open to transparency”, why the Government is unwilling to set up a Parliament Oversight Committee to review and monitor defence expenditure. If the Ministry is not even willing to subject himself to oversight by the Parliament, the country’s highest legislative body, then Dato Seri Zahid Hamidi has no right to talk about “transparency”.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Purchase of 6 Naval Vessels up from RM6 billion to RM9 billion
On February 5th this year, Defence Minister Dato' Seri Zahid Hamidi announced that the Government has approved RM6 billion for the Royal Malaysian Navy to acquire 6 second generation patrol vessels to be built by Boustead Naval Shipyards.
In defending the RM6 billion deal in parliament, the Minister had claimed that these patrol vessels were no ordinary ships but were advanced warships known as "littoral combatant ships" (LCS).
Datuk Seri Zahid had in March claimed that the LCS is "bigger and faster" and "it is also equipped with three-dimensional warfare equipment like cannons, missiles and torpedoes” which are able to take on jets, ships and submarines respectively.
He argued that "with the rapid development of technology, the RMN would need an LCS with state-of-the-art equipment like the sonar system for submarine detection and anti-submarine torpedoes, which would help in the operation of the two RMN submarines to safeguard the sovereignty of national maritime areas."
The LCS is indeed a technologically advanced patrol vessel currently only acquired and deployed by the United States (US) in the world. The US owns 2 of these ships - USS Independence and USS Freedom while Malaysia is seeking to acquire 6 of these LCS.
While the price of the ships was not "final" in February, it has come as a shock when Boustead announced on Bursa Malaysia that the contract which was just signed last week is now valued at RM9 billion or 50% higher that what was approved earlier this year by the Government.
The Minister must explain why has the price for each ship increased by RM500 million or RM3 billion in total for the 6 ships suddenly, well above the original approved budget. For example, has the specification for the ships been "improved" further since Dato' Seri Zahid's reply in Parliament - which was then already the most technologically advanced patrol vessel - which justified the whopping increase in price?
Boustead Naval Shipyard, previously known as PSC Naval Dockyards which delivered the previous 6 naval patrol vessels at RM6.75 billion or 26.2% above the original contract price of RM5.35 billion. The ships were also delivered only after a 2 year delay and hundreds of defects.
In the 2006 Auditor-General Report, the Ministry of Defence was faulted for the dubious award of contract to an obviously unqualified contractor, the failure of technical and financial management, hefty illegitimate contract price increases, undocumented and overpayment, unjustifiable waiver of penalties, and a complete failure of ministry oversight. The Defence Ministry was then headed by Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
Such a track record does not give Malaysians any amount of confidence that history will not repeat itself. With such a rapid increase in budget by RM3 billion before even the start of construction of these ships, can the current Defence Minister assure Malaysians that these ships will not suffer the same disgraceful fate as the earlier ships?
As Defence expenditure in Malaysia remains highly opaque, with Malaysia ranked "medium to low" in transparency by Transparency International, we continue to call for a Parliamentary Oversight Committee to review and approve defence expenditure as practiced in all developed countries. The expenditure involved billions of ringgit in acquisitions annually, hence the sheer lack of transparency leads only to poor accountability, and more often than not, massive leakages and over-spending. These leakages must be plugged to ensure that the country doesn't become bankrupt by 2019 as speculated by Minister in Prime Minister's Department, Datuk Idris Jala.
In defending the RM6 billion deal in parliament, the Minister had claimed that these patrol vessels were no ordinary ships but were advanced warships known as "littoral combatant ships" (LCS).
Datuk Seri Zahid had in March claimed that the LCS is "bigger and faster" and "it is also equipped with three-dimensional warfare equipment like cannons, missiles and torpedoes” which are able to take on jets, ships and submarines respectively.
He argued that "with the rapid development of technology, the RMN would need an LCS with state-of-the-art equipment like the sonar system for submarine detection and anti-submarine torpedoes, which would help in the operation of the two RMN submarines to safeguard the sovereignty of national maritime areas."
The LCS is indeed a technologically advanced patrol vessel currently only acquired and deployed by the United States (US) in the world. The US owns 2 of these ships - USS Independence and USS Freedom while Malaysia is seeking to acquire 6 of these LCS.
While the price of the ships was not "final" in February, it has come as a shock when Boustead announced on Bursa Malaysia that the contract which was just signed last week is now valued at RM9 billion or 50% higher that what was approved earlier this year by the Government.
The Minister must explain why has the price for each ship increased by RM500 million or RM3 billion in total for the 6 ships suddenly, well above the original approved budget. For example, has the specification for the ships been "improved" further since Dato' Seri Zahid's reply in Parliament - which was then already the most technologically advanced patrol vessel - which justified the whopping increase in price?
Boustead Naval Shipyard, previously known as PSC Naval Dockyards which delivered the previous 6 naval patrol vessels at RM6.75 billion or 26.2% above the original contract price of RM5.35 billion. The ships were also delivered only after a 2 year delay and hundreds of defects.
In the 2006 Auditor-General Report, the Ministry of Defence was faulted for the dubious award of contract to an obviously unqualified contractor, the failure of technical and financial management, hefty illegitimate contract price increases, undocumented and overpayment, unjustifiable waiver of penalties, and a complete failure of ministry oversight. The Defence Ministry was then headed by Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
Such a track record does not give Malaysians any amount of confidence that history will not repeat itself. With such a rapid increase in budget by RM3 billion before even the start of construction of these ships, can the current Defence Minister assure Malaysians that these ships will not suffer the same disgraceful fate as the earlier ships?
As Defence expenditure in Malaysia remains highly opaque, with Malaysia ranked "medium to low" in transparency by Transparency International, we continue to call for a Parliamentary Oversight Committee to review and approve defence expenditure as practiced in all developed countries. The expenditure involved billions of ringgit in acquisitions annually, hence the sheer lack of transparency leads only to poor accountability, and more often than not, massive leakages and over-spending. These leakages must be plugged to ensure that the country doesn't become bankrupt by 2019 as speculated by Minister in Prime Minister's Department, Datuk Idris Jala.
Monday, December 12, 2011
Zahid Hamidi and Papagomo: What's the Link?
The presence of blogger Papagomo on board KD Tun Razak Scorpene submarine proved that Defence Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi is an incorrigible liar, for he had promised Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng that Papagomo will not be on board the submarine.
Zahid had even told reporters that no bloggers were on board claiming that "If we allowed any blogger to go, others would ask, too".
However Papagomo's blogpost with pictures has proven beyond doubt that Zahid is not only untrustworthy, Papagomo is the numero uno Umno blogger, hatchetman and special advisor to the Defence Minister, or the latter would not have been allowed on board the high security submarine.
The Defence Minister hasn't only lied to Lim Guan Eng about Papagomo's presence, he had earlier promise the Penang Chief Minister that he would accompany the latter for the ride, but reneged on the promise last minute.
Zahid had also earlier this year made unbelievable and scurrilous allegations againts me when he alleged that I was previously arrested and charged in Singapore which disqualified me from becoming a Member of Parliament in the city state. He had further claimed that it was due to my connections with the Singapore authorities that I was released and returned to Malaysia to become an elected representative here.
Such fantastic stories can only originate from an Umno blogger extraordinaire, who had also started the despicable and fictitious allegations that Lim Guan Eng's son was forced to transfer school due to sexual assault and Lim Guan Eng had paid money to cover up the case. It was later proven beyond doubt that Papagomo and his cohorts had made up the allegations when the alleged victim was a foreigner never to have stepped onto the shores of Penang.
The fact that Papagomo possesses such exclusive privilege with the Defence Minister who is also the most senior Umno Vice-President confirms his position as the latter's inner-circle confidante.
Papagomo 's privilege is a clear cut case of abuse of power and the Defence Minister must answer to all Malaysians for his lies and his intimate association with one of the most despicable of Umno bloggers.
Zahid has singled me out for criticism for not having gone on the submarine sojourn. I was overseas for the past week and was unable to make the trip to Langkawi. However, as pointed out by Lim Guan Eng, going on the dive will only prove the dedication and professionalism of the Malaysian Navy, which was never in doubt. It will give people like Papagomo the bragging rights but does not at all answer our questions over the seemingly exhorbitant billions of ringgit paid, as well as the hundreds of millions of "commissions" made to interested parties.
Zahid had even told reporters that no bloggers were on board claiming that "If we allowed any blogger to go, others would ask, too".
However Papagomo's blogpost with pictures has proven beyond doubt that Zahid is not only untrustworthy, Papagomo is the numero uno Umno blogger, hatchetman and special advisor to the Defence Minister, or the latter would not have been allowed on board the high security submarine.
The Defence Minister hasn't only lied to Lim Guan Eng about Papagomo's presence, he had earlier promise the Penang Chief Minister that he would accompany the latter for the ride, but reneged on the promise last minute.
Zahid had also earlier this year made unbelievable and scurrilous allegations againts me when he alleged that I was previously arrested and charged in Singapore which disqualified me from becoming a Member of Parliament in the city state. He had further claimed that it was due to my connections with the Singapore authorities that I was released and returned to Malaysia to become an elected representative here.
Such fantastic stories can only originate from an Umno blogger extraordinaire, who had also started the despicable and fictitious allegations that Lim Guan Eng's son was forced to transfer school due to sexual assault and Lim Guan Eng had paid money to cover up the case. It was later proven beyond doubt that Papagomo and his cohorts had made up the allegations when the alleged victim was a foreigner never to have stepped onto the shores of Penang.
The fact that Papagomo possesses such exclusive privilege with the Defence Minister who is also the most senior Umno Vice-President confirms his position as the latter's inner-circle confidante.
Papagomo 's privilege is a clear cut case of abuse of power and the Defence Minister must answer to all Malaysians for his lies and his intimate association with one of the most despicable of Umno bloggers.
Zahid has singled me out for criticism for not having gone on the submarine sojourn. I was overseas for the past week and was unable to make the trip to Langkawi. However, as pointed out by Lim Guan Eng, going on the dive will only prove the dedication and professionalism of the Malaysian Navy, which was never in doubt. It will give people like Papagomo the bragging rights but does not at all answer our questions over the seemingly exhorbitant billions of ringgit paid, as well as the hundreds of millions of "commissions" made to interested parties.
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
Call for Parliamentary Select Committee on Defence
The Defence Minister, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi yesterday dismissed the need for a bi-partisan parliamentary oversight committee over defence expenditure, claiming that he “is confident in the ability and transparency of the evaluation committee of the three branches of the Malaysian Armed Forces (ATM)”.
Such contemptuous arrogance towards parliamentary oversight over defence expenditure which amounts to tens of billions of ringgit annually has proven Transparency International (TI) right by scoring Malaysia at only 4.5 points out of a maximum of 12, or only 37.5%, well below the failure mark. This was the score given in the inaugural “Transparency of Defence Budgets Report” launched on 19 November 2011.
Director of the International Defence and Security Program for TI in United Kingdom, Mark Pyman, who launched the report in Subang Jaya said “Malaysia ranked far below other countries (for this), where the budget lacked details and no audits were undertaken of the secret programmes.”
Malaysia is ranked alongside Afghanistan, Rwanda, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the report, well below other countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The results of the research indicate that approximately 14 per cent of the countries under review in this study scored high and these are primarily developed countries with strong democratic systems in place.
The Minister’s disdain towards transparency and accountability is best epitomised in his reply to the question which I had posed in the recently concluded parliamentary sitting. I had asked for the Minister to explain the gap between the RM7.55 billion paid for 257 armoured personnel carriers to Deftech Sdn Bhd, and what latter will be paying to FNSS Defences Systems, a Turkish defence manufacturer – RM1.7 billion for the same items. Deftech is a subsidiary of DRB-Hicom Bhd based in Pekan, a company controlled by Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Syed Bokhari.
The Minister had acknowledged the above transactions, but had the gall to claim “no knowledge” of the details of the Deftech-FNSS transactions and hence was not able to explain what makes the difference in the 2 contracts. The Minister was also not forthcoming in explaining other sizeable transactions such as the RM6 billion purchase of 6 Second Generation Patrol Vessels as well as the RM2.3 billion acquisition of 12 Eurocopter EC725 helicopters.
The answer most often given by the Minister and defence officials to justify the much higher pricing had been that the military equipment were “customised to our specific needs”. Mark Pyman had stated that it is in the best interests of the government that customisation is kept at a bare minimum as it disproportionately drives costs up. He said that “it doubles the base price before you can say good morning. It’s not value for money, difficult and dangerous”.
However the best justification for a Parliamentary Oversight committee is the annual litany of scandals and transgressions reported in the Auditor-General Report on the Defence Ministry.
We call upon the Government to honour the Prime Minister’s Government Transformation Plan (GTP) which pledged for transparency and accountability by setting up the Parliament Select Committee on Defence, modelled after the United States House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations which looks after defence policies as well as the US Defense Budget Appropriation Committees which review and approve detailed defence expenditure.
Otherwise, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi’s contemptuous attitude towards transparency and accountability marks the lack of honesty and sincerity by the Prime Minister to honour his GTP pledges.
Such contemptuous arrogance towards parliamentary oversight over defence expenditure which amounts to tens of billions of ringgit annually has proven Transparency International (TI) right by scoring Malaysia at only 4.5 points out of a maximum of 12, or only 37.5%, well below the failure mark. This was the score given in the inaugural “Transparency of Defence Budgets Report” launched on 19 November 2011.
Director of the International Defence and Security Program for TI in United Kingdom, Mark Pyman, who launched the report in Subang Jaya said “Malaysia ranked far below other countries (for this), where the budget lacked details and no audits were undertaken of the secret programmes.”
Malaysia is ranked alongside Afghanistan, Rwanda, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the report, well below other countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. The results of the research indicate that approximately 14 per cent of the countries under review in this study scored high and these are primarily developed countries with strong democratic systems in place.
The Minister’s disdain towards transparency and accountability is best epitomised in his reply to the question which I had posed in the recently concluded parliamentary sitting. I had asked for the Minister to explain the gap between the RM7.55 billion paid for 257 armoured personnel carriers to Deftech Sdn Bhd, and what latter will be paying to FNSS Defences Systems, a Turkish defence manufacturer – RM1.7 billion for the same items. Deftech is a subsidiary of DRB-Hicom Bhd based in Pekan, a company controlled by Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Syed Bokhari.
The Minister had acknowledged the above transactions, but had the gall to claim “no knowledge” of the details of the Deftech-FNSS transactions and hence was not able to explain what makes the difference in the 2 contracts. The Minister was also not forthcoming in explaining other sizeable transactions such as the RM6 billion purchase of 6 Second Generation Patrol Vessels as well as the RM2.3 billion acquisition of 12 Eurocopter EC725 helicopters.
The answer most often given by the Minister and defence officials to justify the much higher pricing had been that the military equipment were “customised to our specific needs”. Mark Pyman had stated that it is in the best interests of the government that customisation is kept at a bare minimum as it disproportionately drives costs up. He said that “it doubles the base price before you can say good morning. It’s not value for money, difficult and dangerous”.
However the best justification for a Parliamentary Oversight committee is the annual litany of scandals and transgressions reported in the Auditor-General Report on the Defence Ministry.
We call upon the Government to honour the Prime Minister’s Government Transformation Plan (GTP) which pledged for transparency and accountability by setting up the Parliament Select Committee on Defence, modelled after the United States House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations which looks after defence policies as well as the US Defense Budget Appropriation Committees which review and approve detailed defence expenditure.
Otherwise, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi’s contemptuous attitude towards transparency and accountability marks the lack of honesty and sincerity by the Prime Minister to honour his GTP pledges.
Tuesday, November 01, 2011
Defence Ministry Yet to Resolve Last Year's Scandals
Site visit with Johor Bahru DAP Members to
Skudai 7th Brigade Army Camp
Skudai 7th Brigade Army Camp
The Minister of Defence should not be mischievous in asking the Federal Opposition to stop objecting to defence procurement but instead answer for the complete lack of action against irregularities raised by the Auditor-General in its annual reports
Bernama has reported that the Defence Minister, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi has stated that the Royal Malaysian Air Force will buy new aviation ground support vehicles (AGSV) next year as the existing fleet was becoming too costly to maintain. He said that “The majority of AGSV are old and need to be replaced. The Auditor-General’s Report clearly shows the critical need for the new assets.”
He urged further for the federal opposition not to question his ministry’s need to spend on new assets during times of peace, saying the Auditor-General’s report should “open their eyes” to reality.
Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi should not be so mischievous as to blame the federal opposition for objecting to defence procurement such as to purchase new equipment to replace items which are no longer usable or safe to use.
We have never protested against the Ministry of Defence from purchasing new equipment or vehicles. What we have protested strongly is the complete lack of transparency in the manner where these items are purchased, which appear to cost substantially higher that the necessary spend.
Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi for example, in his reply to my question in parliament, has refused to clarify what makes the difference between the RM7.55 billion procurement of 257 armoured personnel carriers from Deftech Sdn Bhd and the price which the latter paid to acquire these vehicles from FNSS Defence Systems, a Turkish defense manufacturer for RM1.7 billion. The Minister had claimed ignorance over the RM5.9 billion difference, despite the fact that he witness the signing of the agreement between the 2 companies in Turkey earlier this year.
What is more important is the fact that while Datuk Seri Zahid was quick to state his intent to acquire new AGSVs, he has failed to explain or take action against all various discrepancies and potential abuse cited in the Auditor-General’s report. In the report for 2010 for example, the Auditor-General found that the maintenance contracts for the aged AGSVs did not have the necessary expertise to repair the vehicles and late penalties were not meted out to these contractors when they failed to repair the vehicles within the necessary time frame.
The Auditor-General had also criticised the “improper payments” of allowance to the Territorial Reserve Army personnel who according to the records, did not attend the relevant training. He had even recommended that the relevant officers be punished via “surcharge” as permitted under Section 18(b) of the Akta Tatacara Kewangan 1957.
While the Ministry of Defence may need time to “sort out” the problems highlighted by the Auditor-General in the current report, the Minister has no such excuse for not having dealt with the problems raised in the 2009 report. One of the scandals arising from the previous year’s report is the construction of a new RM256 million Skudai 7th Brigade Army Camp which was awarded in 1997 but has only achieved 18.3% completion.
I’ve personally visited the site (see photos) yesterday and found the construction site to be still in deplorable conditions, with massive soil erosion causing major mud floods in neighbouring residential areas and abandoned “ruins and relics” peppering the site. And yet, despite the massive delay, and recommendations by the Auditor-General to do so, the contract with the developer Kausar Corporation Sdn Bhd has yet to be terminated.
The Grand Canyon of Malaysia (1)
The Grand Canyon of Malaysia (2)
The Ancient Ruins of Skudai (1)
The Ancient Ruins of Skudai (2)
The Ancient Ruins of Skudai (3)
What is worse is the fact that Kausar Corporation has collected their construction fees in full via a land swap deal where the company was already given the ownership of a 153 hectares piece of land. Kausar was able to pledge this piece of land to a bank for the amount of RM465 million showing that the land which could be worth as much as RM800 million is well above the cost of construction of the camp.
It is the Army and the tax payers who have to suffer as the Ministry of Defence has already (over)paid for the construction works in full, and yet after more than 15 years, the Army is still awaiting its “new” camp to be completed. Despite the above, no action to date has been taken against the developer, including terminating the contract, charging late penalties or reclaiming the land which has been awarded to them.
The Minister of Defence, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi must answer for all of these major scandals instead of just putting his priority gleefully to procure new vehicles, and blaming the federal opposition for taking him to task.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
MinDef must explain the RM6 billion difference
Pua demands MinDef explain extra RM6b for APCs
By Yow Hong Chieh October 24, 2011
KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 24 — The Defence Ministry must explain why it paid RM7.6 billion for armoured personnel carriers (APC) procured by DRB-Hicom Bhd for only US$559 million (RM1.7 billion), Tony Pua said today.
Defence Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi told Parliament last Tuesday his ministry did not have any information about the deal between DRB-Hicom unit Defence Technologies Sdn Bhd (Deftech) and Turkish firm FMC-Nurol Defense System (FNSS) for 257 units of Pars 8x8 APCs.
But Pua said today it was unacceptable for Zahid to say he knew nothing about the deal as the minister had witnessed its signing in February, according to the Turkish press.
“How can he claim to know nothing about the difference in price when he was there (in Turkey) witnessing the signing between the two parties?”
“And the difference in price is so big, surely a responsible government must ask... what are the differences that make up the gap?” the DAP publicity chief told reporters in the Parliament lobby here.
Pua stressed that any government that wanted to rein in its expenditure must be able to account for the RM6 billion difference in pricing.
He added that Zahid should give a proper response in Parliament and not just brush off the question while “acting stupid”.
“I don’t know whether he’s pretending to be stupid or really the ministry doesn’t know anything,” Pua said.
Deftech chief executive Abdul Harith Abdullah said last year the cost of the FNSS contract includes manufacturing and other costs associated with the production of a new combat vehicle.
The Malaysian-developed APC is built from the Pars APC produced by FNSS of Turkey, in co-operation with US company, General Purpose Vehicle.
Deftech is to build 12 variants from the base vehicle, including personnel carriers, anti-tank weapon carriers, command and control as well as anti-aircraft weapon vehicles.
By Yow Hong Chieh October 24, 2011
KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 24 — The Defence Ministry must explain why it paid RM7.6 billion for armoured personnel carriers (APC) procured by DRB-Hicom Bhd for only US$559 million (RM1.7 billion), Tony Pua said today.
Defence Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi told Parliament last Tuesday his ministry did not have any information about the deal between DRB-Hicom unit Defence Technologies Sdn Bhd (Deftech) and Turkish firm FMC-Nurol Defense System (FNSS) for 257 units of Pars 8x8 APCs.
But Pua said today it was unacceptable for Zahid to say he knew nothing about the deal as the minister had witnessed its signing in February, according to the Turkish press.
“How can he claim to know nothing about the difference in price when he was there (in Turkey) witnessing the signing between the two parties?”
“And the difference in price is so big, surely a responsible government must ask... what are the differences that make up the gap?” the DAP publicity chief told reporters in the Parliament lobby here.
Pua stressed that any government that wanted to rein in its expenditure must be able to account for the RM6 billion difference in pricing.
He added that Zahid should give a proper response in Parliament and not just brush off the question while “acting stupid”.
“I don’t know whether he’s pretending to be stupid or really the ministry doesn’t know anything,” Pua said.
Deftech chief executive Abdul Harith Abdullah said last year the cost of the FNSS contract includes manufacturing and other costs associated with the production of a new combat vehicle.
The Malaysian-developed APC is built from the Pars APC produced by FNSS of Turkey, in co-operation with US company, General Purpose Vehicle.
Deftech is to build 12 variants from the base vehicle, including personnel carriers, anti-tank weapon carriers, command and control as well as anti-aircraft weapon vehicles.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)