Showing posts with label supply chain in Malaysia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label supply chain in Malaysia. Show all posts

My EG - where did the My comes from?

MyEG is currently on the roll now. Its financial results are looking good. It looks to provide a positive image to the government's modernization initiative and enable IT savvy Malaysians to handle mundane transactions without needing to travel and queue.


According to Malaysia123.com

MyEG Services Berhad is a concessionaire for the Malaysian E-Government MSC Flagship Application. MyEG role as a Service Provider for the E-Services component essentially provides the electronic link between the Government and citizens/businesses



Through MyEG portal, MyEG offer the Malaysian public a single point of contact between the Government and the people it serves. MyEG portal enables Malaysians to dynamically interact with numerous agencies within the Federal, State and the Local Government machinery providing services ranging from information searches to licence applications.






Turnover and profits are on increasing trend for this listed company:






Effectively MyEG is

1) given a monopoly of handling e-government transactions; and

2) given access into private and confidential details of many Malaysians including credit card details, telephone numbers, addresses, traffic summons etc

Several matters pop into my mind.


If 1Malaysia -Performance-Now administration can outsource the "accounts receivable" function of JPJ, DBKL, Imigresen etc then how come we Malaysians are saddled with the most bloated civil service around?




Best Bloated Civil Service



With 1.3 million civil servants to a population of 26 million, Malaysia has one of the highest civil servants-to-population ratio in the world by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development standards.



In 2009, Malaysia’s civil servants-to-population ratio was highest in Asia Pacific. Her ratio was 4.68%, compared to Indonesia’s 1.79%, Korea’s 1.85% and Thailand’s 2.06% all of which have less than half our ratio.



In 2009, Singapore had a total of 60,000 civil servants, i.e., 1.5% of the total population. Hong Kong had 160,000 out of a population of 7 million (2.3%). Taiwan(population of 23 million) was served by only 528,000 (2.3%).

So the question is, are Malaysians paying double? Are we still paying for excessive number of civil servants while some of their jobs have been outsourced?

In addition, what kind of clause, terms and conditions did the Barisan Nasional administration bound the rakyat into? As tax payers' surely we have the rights to know. The audited accounts of MyEg merely included the statement:

We can't tell how we are being charged by MyEG, can we? Besides, were there open tenders called to ensure Malaysians got the best deal? Why MyEG was chosen? What are the safety procedures in place to ensure our private and confidential information submitted is not being abused?

Why can't the Performance Now administration come up with an inter-ministry/department team to handle this collection function across the administration without a profit element ?(MyEG as a plc needs to generate dividends to its shareholders and guess who is paying for the dividends, plus note 32 of the accounts shows that annually the plc pays about RM200K for rental and professional services to Embunaz Ventures Sdn. Bhd, a company owned by its Executive Chairperson, Dato’ Dr Norraesah Binti Haji Mohamad, "has a substantial financial interest" )

MyEG, to me, seems like another civil service that should be provided to tax payers at no additional cost - i.e. without profit, related party transactions and dividends. Sure theoretically, private enterprise are more efficient than public sector because of the profit motive but I have dealt with Hong Kong and Singapore immigration and income tax departments to know that with the right work attitude and culture, public service can be very very efficient and impressive.

While tax payers in private sector have to deal with risk of business downturn, pay-cuts, voluntary separation schemes, retrenchment, unfair/wrongful dismissals and other threats to our livelihood, majority of civil servants enjoy an iron rice bowl, pension (which offset the disadvantage of lower pay), immunity from disciplinary action (ask Siti Inshah and those BTN indoctrinators), pressure-less environment (unless you are in public schools), no performance yardstick (try calling an ambulance from public hospitals and see what happens) and whatever whatever.
Yeah sure, working in public sector has it disadvantages too but certainly not as stressful as those in risk-taking private sector.

If there is a really 1Malaysia thingy, then the civil servants should buck up, provide satisfactory services to Malaysians and benchmark against service level of Singapore and Hong Kong; the most efficient around the world.


Disclosure requirements that listed companies must follow, according to accounting standards, company law and Bursa listing requirements, are suppose to give more relevant information for investing public to understand the company they have or thinking of investing in.


According to the annual reports and accounts, the annual pay package of the executive directors is about RM312,000 per year. So with an "s", presumably there is more than 1 executive director hence the RM300K was supposed to be shared out.
Raja Munir Shah and Wong Thean Soon are designated as Executive Director and Managing Directors respectively in the annual reports so my mind boggles how 2 person can be deemed to control 56 million shares in the company that pays between them, probably around RM300K a year? Most intriguing.


The profile of Raja Munir Shah included the following:


In 1997, he was elected to head the Tanjong UMNO Youth Division and subsequently appointed as the State UMNO Youth Information Chief until his tenure ended in 2004. He was appointed as a City Councilor in 1997, 1998, 2003 and 2004. During his tenure as a Councilor in Penang Island Municipal Council (“MPPP”), he served as Chairman and Committee Member in various standing committees overseeing legislatives and policy matters within the jurisdiction of MPPP which covers the island of Penang.

I have to put my hands up in awe.

But the biggest shock is still to come....

http://sahamas.net/forum80/13150.html

Under the customs tax monitoring scheme, MyEG has a 40% stake in a special purpose vehicle (SPV) that will link up point-of-sales (POS) terminals of businesses that are subject to customs’ service taxes, such as restaurants and entertainment outlets.

The SPV will spend RM100 million on capex, but will receive a 20% share of the taxes that were previously found to be under-declared, with the lion’s share of 80% going to the government.

This will give MyEG a potentially large wildcard from FY June 2013 onwards. However, it is too preliminary to assess at this juncture, as much depends on how much tax was under-declared in the first place. The service will also be compatible with a GST regime that is likely to be implemented at a later stage, giving the company a potentially wider earnings base.

What kind of irresponsible government would

1) let a private sector to help them chase after tax evaders - do you see IRB employing debt collectors? If the custom authorities have an act to enforce, they should just enforce it without additional expebse!

2) let a plc to gobble up to 20% of public's money? these money could be used for welfare, education, healthcare, public utilities etc instead of dividends, private profits etc.

And this path to money printing encompass service, sales taxes and in future, after getting re-elected, GST. The magnitude of benefit coming to MyEG's way, at public's expense, is presently incalculable.


Enough about croninomic projects, it is food that counts

Cost of living in high income countries are high, understandably. However, before Malaysia achieve the high income status Najib administration aspires and advertises, we are nearer to high cost of living than high income. Lately the food prices are getting more and more unbearable, especially to those low income groups and those depending on social welfare assistance.

Part of the reason is the unprecedented high crude oil price. Other reason includes abnormal weather trend and raising demand for food, especially from China




High food prices has resulted riots in Algeria and abrupt and continuous increase in retail prices was the catalyst for the 1997 riot and mass murder in Indonesia.

Managing cost of living, and food price in particular, is critical for social order, much more than manufactured inter-racial differences.

However, a more sinister and largely unpublished reason for food price increase is food speculation. This article reveals something that made my stomach turned.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-how-goldman-gambled-on-starvation-2016088.html

For over a century, farmers in wealthy countries have been able to engage in a process where they protect themselves against risk. Farmer Giles can agree in January to sell his crop to a trader in August at a fixed price. If he has a great summer, he'll lose some cash, but if there's a lousy summer or the global price collapses, he'll do well from the deal. When this process was tightly regulated and only companies with a direct interest in the field could get involved, it worked.

Then, through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into "derivatives" that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in "food speculation" was born.

..........

So it has come to this. The world's wealthiest speculators set up a casino where the chips were the stomachs of hundreds of millions of innocent people. They gambled on increasing starvation, and won. Their Wasteland moment created a real wasteland. What does it say about our political and economic system that we can so casually inflict so much pain?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The world is a big place and Malaysia is also subject to the turbulence the speculators inflicted on the global population.

But, have our democratically elected leaders did all that is within their power to protect Malaysians from higher food prices?

In 2008, 50 of our members of parliament was taken to Taiwan for agriculture studies and yet the food price Malaysians have to grapple with seems to be a heavier than ever burden.

The answer to Teo Nie Ching's question on our behalf, in 2009, went unaccounted for:-

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.wretch.cc/blog/teonieching/21085796


13. Puan Teo Nie Ching [Serdang] minta Perdana Menteri menyatakan manfaat yang diperolehi dan direalisasikan oleh rombongan back-bencher BN yang telah mengunjungi Taiwan untuk mempelajari teknologi dan teknik pertanian tahun lalu supaya terdapat pulangan berpatutan daripada perbelanjaan wang rakyat yang mendadak itu.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Utusan Malaysia should stop focusing on what decent clothes she wears because YB Teo is much much more than that.

Securing food source for Malaysians do not require politicalising the livelihood of pig farmers and food source of non-muslims. If some quarters do feel strongly against pig farming and incapable of seeing this as a practical issue as it really is, spare a thought for our Hindu friends who have to put up with beef rendang servings in 5 star hotels, Big Mac dealing shopping malls, drive throughs and corner shops which are certainly more ubiquitous and obvious that some remote pig farms.

Making food prices reasonable does not require excessive level in supply chain. Padiberas Nasional Berhad took over the government's function in rice supply and subsidies management and all consumers have to pay extra to enable this company to be profitable and dividend paying to another concessionaire holder.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Talk about coming back with a vengeance. Is this privatisation necessary? Why Malaysians have to pay additional middleman profits? Can't the well remunerated Barisan Nasional Federal Government with more than 50 years track record operate rice system without this middleman at Malaysians' expense?"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please bear in mind that when our food suppliers and manufacturers calculate their cost of production and sales, they have to include profit guarantees or compensation accruing securely to the highway toll concessionaires who hence do not have great pressure to keep cost down.

Making food prices reasonable also does not require making a well connected person taking up a huge chunk of sugar subsidy

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to note 29 of its 2009 accounts, government grant /tax payers money of RM287 million was received by TW Group for rice and sugar.


Amazingly, this was disclosed in the accounts:

RM203.6 million or roughly 21% of the subsidized sugar was sold to......Bukhary Sdn Bhd

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is perhaps time for the government of Malaysia to serious look into the following strategic points:

1) ensuring Malaysian food supply can be substantially supplied by our own agriculture sector, thus insulating ourselves from the impact of world market; and

2) designing a complete and shortest possible supply route that ensure the food stuff reaches the population quickest possible (guaranteeing freshness) with minimal middle men intervention hence substantial portion of the profits can be channelled back to the farmers for their reinvestment and reward while keeping the price of food down. Reviving co-operatives anyone?

Steel and automobile industries are among those listed as "industry of national strategic importance" but I would rank food production above those 2 as more critical.

Let's look at how seriously our neighbours take their food supply:-

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) Singapore:

http://www.ava.gov.sg/NR/rdonlyres/9253E7B2-E57D-4992-982C-1304E73748D6/17884/MEDIARELEASEUPDATESONGOVERNMENTSEFFORTSTOENHANCEFO.pdf

UPDATES ON GOVERNMENT’S EFFORTS TO ENHANCE FOOD SUPPLY
RESILIENCE FOR SINGAPORE


1. The Ministry of National Development (MND) and the Ministry of Trade
and Industry (MTI) had formed an Inter-agency Committee (IAC) in 2008 to
look into the long term strategies to ensure that Singapore continues to enjoy a
resilient supply of safe food.
The IAC’s recommendations were announced for
implementation in July 2009

Food fund
3. The Food Fund was launched in Dec 2009 with the aim to strengthen our strategies of food diversification and local farming to ensure a resilient supply of food for Singapore.



7. AVA’s "matchmaking" efforts have also resulted in the successful establishment of an MOU between the Singapore Food Industries Pte Ltd and Indonesia’s fruit and vegetables association. Apart from this, AVA has been working with NTUC FairPrice in their ongoing efforts to expand their contract farming initiative. NTUC FairPrice recently established a new contract farm in Medan, Indonesia, to supply leafy vegetables to Singapore.


Food Substitutes
8. To help consumers mitigate the effects of potential supply disruptions and price increases, AVA has implemented public education programmes to create awareness on the availability of good product substitutes. Consumer uptake of frozen meat has increased since the launch of the frozen meat public education programme. A similar programme to raise awareness of liquid eggs and egg powder as viable alternatives to shell eggs was launched in Feb 10.


2) Brunei:

http://www.bt.com.bn/friday-special/2009/11/13/editorial-time-address-global-food-security

Brunei Darussalam has targeted a rise in its rice self-sufficiency target to 60 per cent by 2015 and also seeks to increase its self-sufficiency in other food requirements including fruits and vegetables and seafood like fish and prawns. Brunei is already self-sufficient in beef. The Brunei government owns a cattle farm in Australia that supplies most of the country's beef.

On Tuesday, His Royal Highness Prince Haji Al-Muhtadee Billah, the Crown Prince and Senior Minister in the Prime Minister's Office, emphasised on innovation taking a primary role in achieving and maintaining food security in the Asean region. Speaking at the opening of the 31st Asean Ministers on Agriculture and Forestry Meeting (Amaf), His Royal Highness said: "
I believe that innovation, based upon science and technology, will be a primary contributor to the maximisation of food production in a sustainable, more cost effective and environmentally responsible manner."

3) Indonesia

http://oryza.com/Asia-Pacific/Indonesia-Market/9617.html

Indonesia Attains Rice Self Sufficiency
By news desk on January 01,2009


Indonesian Vice President Jusuf Kalla has announced that the country would not be importing any rice in 2009 because its rice production target has been achieved.

The vice president also said that Indonesia had this year succeeded in achieving self-sufficiency in rice after a period of almost 50 years in which the country’s rice production continuously dropped

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, where do Malaysia go from here? Should more resource and attention be directed to making food supply secured and afforable, rather than raising more bonds for more cronimonics projects which turn up as white elephants, abandone projects or not so well maintained structures thereon?

Tradewinds (M) Berhad: your rice and sugar daddy

Previously, I wrote about Tradewind (M) Berhad borrowing RM1 billion to acquire shares of Padiberas Berhad at interest around 5.20-6.50%.


It is also interesting to note this:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/first/17961-working-out-a-new-role-for-bernas.html

Working out a new role for Bernas
Written by Cindy Yeap
Monday, 29 June 2009 00:00


Hong Kong-based Wang Tak Co Ltd, which has been actively mopping up Bernas shares on the open market since early 2006, continues to be a buyer. Wang Tak, which is linked to IGB Corp Bhd’s Tan family, held a 14.34% stake in Bernas in late 2006; it has since doubled its holdings to 30.14% as at June 16

Wang Tak’s* average investment cost — RM1.75 per Bernas share — while above the prevailing market price, is 0.88 times Bernas’ net asset per share of RM1.98 at end-March.
* no relationship with the author

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On page 52 of Tradewinds(M) Berhad's 2009 annual reports and accounts, it has this disclosure:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Material Contracts Involving Directors and Major Shareholders

(a) a Share Sale agreement dated 28 august 2009 between Tradewinds (M) Berhad (“TWS” or the “Company”) and Wang Tak Company Limited (“WT”) for the acquisition of 148,281,100 ordinary shares of RM1.00 each in padiberas Nasional Berhad (“Bernas”), representing 31.52% of the total issued and paid-up share capital of Bernas from WT for a total purchase consideration of RM308,424,688.00. The said acquisition was completed on 2 November 2009.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



hence TW paid an average RM2.08 per share and base on the average cost of investment reported above at RM1.75 per share, a cool profit of RM56.35 million has been shifted to good old Hong Kong while Malaysians will foot the loan repayment and interest. Another consequence of privatising something that the federal government should be overseeing.


TW is also a major player in Malaysia's sugar supply chain. According to its Managing Director, Bakry Hamzah in his operations reports included in the annual accounts and reports,
---------------------------------------------------------------------

" For the financial year ended 2009, the Sugar Division generated total revenue of RM976.2 million as against RM862.2 million posted in the previous year.......

....presently, Malaysia has only four sugar refineries, of which two are owned by TWS i.e. Central Sugars refinery Sdn Bhd (“CSr”) at Batu Tiga Shah alam, Selangor and Gula Padang Terap Sdn Bhd (“GPT”) at Kuala Nerang, Kedah."


------------------------------------------------------------------


According to note 29 of its 2009 accounts, government grant /tax payers money of RM287 million was received by TW Group for rice and sugar.





Amazingly, this was disclosed in the accounts:


RM203.6 million or roughly 21% of the subsidized sugar was sold to......Bukhary Sdn Bhd



And on what trade terms? According to the accounts, normal trade terms for TW is 7 to 90 days. At RM203million per annum, average daily sales is about RM550K to Bukhary Sdn Bhd and the balance of RM118 million owing by Bukhary Sdn Bhd amounts to 212 days of sales, about 7 months owing. For 2008, TW sold RM165 million worth of sugar to Bukhary Sdn Bhd and the receivables not collected from Bukhary Sdn Bhd of RM170 million even exceeded the whole year sale of sugar!




I wonder what does Bukhary Sdn Bhd do with so much sugar? Can they assist in the sugar shortage that we are facing in Malaysia?

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/6743421.html

Syed Bukhary has apparently benefited for a few years from his shareholdings in Padi Beras Berhad by way of dividend pay outs plus disposal of Budaya Generasi Sdn Bhd's substantial 145 million shares to TW.

Further examination of TW's operating expenses is interesting. In 2009, RM20 million was paid out to Albukhary International University.






This is a private university located in Kedah and provides scholarship to many studens from all over the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.aiu.edu.my/sponsorship.html

The Albukhary Foundation Scholarship
Albukhary International University (AIU) is fully funded by the Albukhary Foundation, Malaysia and all students attending AIU shall be sponsored through the Scholarship described herein.

The Albukhary Foundation intends to make available ten (10) scholarships for each country to assist disadvantaged youths, mainly Muslim youths, to graduate with a degree from the Albukhary International University.

Instituted in 2003, the Albukhary Foundation Scholarship has been offered to 382 students from almost 50 countries of whom many are currently studying at the International Islamic University Malaysia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Fine, if a very successful and rich man wants to be charitable with his earning but when a lot of the money comes from tax payers' subsidy and revenue from sales of staple diet of Malaysians i.e. sugar, rice and palm oil, there is an element of public interest we are talking about.


In the light of the annual brain drain and insufficient scholarship for all top scorers outcry plus the "Rakyat Diutamakan" rally call, the lucky foreign recepients includes Afghans, Albanians, Laotians, Yemenians, Ethopians, ...would we get any benefit out of this?



















Apa yang tidak dibetulkan oleh Rancangan Transfomasi Ekonomi Malaysia : saluran pengagihan beras kita.

Tulisan asal di sini.
Belanjawan 2011 yang berbau gubahan untuk tujuan pilihanraya umum telah disambut dengan teguran-teguran nan benas dan berpatutan kerana ia kembali kepada amalan memboroskan wang ke atas projek-projek besar dan mahal serta tertumpu di tempat yang sudah tepu dengan pembinaan bahkan memberi tekanan terhadap keseimbangan alam sekitar dan tidak mendatangkan manfaat yang meluas kepada rakyat jelata Malaysia..

Puan Latheefa daripada PKR telah menyeru pihak pentadbiran bahawa ia perlu menjaga keutuhan bekalan makanan negara pada Hari Makanan Sedunia.

Saya selalu bertanya-tanya mengapakah kuasa beli serta taraf kehidupan Malaysia selalunya lebih rendah berbanding dengan negara-negara maju. Memang amalan rasuah adalah salah satu sebabnya tetapi bagaimana pula dengan reka bentuk saluran agihan barangan kita? Patutkah pihak pentadbiran BN meneliti perkara ini dalam usahanya membuat transformasi ke atas ekonomi Malaysia?

Jika saluran agihan ini terlalu panjang, ia bermaksud terdapat lebih ramai orang tengah dan ini mengakibatkan para pengguna membayar harga yang lebih tinggi untuk mendapatkan barangann.

Kawan saya daripada Jepun memberitahu saya bahawa sushi di Jepun jauh lebih sedap daripada apa yang terdapat di Malaysia kerana kualiti beras yang rendah di Malaysia, dan daripada pengalaman saya sendiri, saya dapati mutu nasi di Hong Kong juga lebih tinggi.

Oleh kerana hampir semua rakyat Malaysia menjadikan nasi sebagai makanan utama mereka, saya mengambil keputusan membuat sedikit tinjauan dalam saluran agihan beras kita, dan usaha ini membawa saya ke Padiberas Nasional Berhad (“Bernas”)


Sumber: Laporan Tahunan dan Akaun Padiberas Nasional Berhad unutk tahun 2009


Syarikat ini berperanan besar dalam menjaminkan keutuhan sumber makanan rakyat Malaysia kerana ia bertanggungjawab dalam segala perkara yang berkenaan dengan beras kita termasuk subsidi, simpanan, pemasaran, perolehan, pengilangan dan sebagainya kecuali memasak nasi sahaja.

Menurut ucapan Pengerusinya dalam laporan tahunan 2009, Dato’ Wira Syed Abdul Jabbar Bin Syed Hassan menyatakan bahawa,

“Setelah melalui kemelut tersebut, saya dengan bangganya boleh menyatakan di sinib ahawa kami telah berjaya menjalankan tanggungjawab kami dengan baik sehinggakan
pada kemuncak krisis tersebut, BERNAS terpaksa melupakan objektif keuntungannya demi kepentingan negara; malahan BERNAS telah mencatatkan rekod kerugian pada tahun 2008. Selepas kemelut ini berjaya diatasi, apa yang pasti adalah – tanggungjawab kami telah dijalankan dengan baik.”



Hmmm…Dato Wira sendiri mengakui bahawa Bernas, sebuah syarikat di mana Menteri Kewangan memegang 1 Undi Khas yang berkuasa veto dan menguasai mutlak makanan utama rakyat Malaysia, mempunyai matlamat MENGAUT KEUNTUNGAN.

Oh ya, pengorbanan tahun 2008 telah dilaungkan tetapi selepas beberapa perenggan maka terdapat ulasan berikut,

"Saya juga amat berbangga untuk melaporkan bahawa keuntungan, perolehan dan jumlah jualan beras yang direkodkan dalam tahun 2009 adalah yang tertinggi semenjak penswastaan BERNAS."

Wah, nampaknya apa yang telah dikorbankan, balasan kencang dikenakan pada tahun seterusnya. Harus kita menanya, adakah penswastaan ini perlu dan patut diadakan? Mengapakah rakyat Malaysia perlu membiayai keuntungan orang tengah yang berlebihan? Bukankah para pentadbir BN yang berkuasa di peringkat persekutuan yang berpengalaman lebih daripda 50 tahun boleh menjalankan operasi pengagihan beras tanpa orang tengah ini yang kena dibiayai oleh semua rakyat Malaysia?

Bernas melaporan bahawa hasil jualan (juga boleh dikenali sebagai bayaran lebihan kepada orang tengah yang berlebihan) bertambah daripada RM2.2 billion dalam tahun 2005 kepada RM2.5 billion dan RM3.3 billion dalam tahun-tahun 2008 dan 2009 di mana keuntungan untuk tahun-tahun 2005 hingga 2009 adalah seperti berikut:

2005 + RM131juta

2006 + RM135 juta

2007 + RM107 juta

2008 - RM57 juta

2009 + RM180 juta


Bernas telah “mengaut balik” kerugiannya dalam tahun 2008 dengan serta merta. Keuntungan tersebut sebenarnya merupakan beban tambahan rakyat Malaysia, bahkan sejenis betuk cukai terbenam.

Jumlah RM3.3 billion tersebut jika dibahagikan kepada 27 juta rakyat Malaysia adalah RM120.74 seorang. Si ayah yang membiayai seisi keluarga 5 orang akan menanggung RM603 setahun, ataupun lebih kurang RM50 sebulan. Terima kasih atas sumbangan abang.

Angka tersebut nampaknya tidak keterlaluan (untuk setengah-setengah orang) tetapi tatkala anda membaca nota 31 dalam laporan tahunan 2009 Bernas bertajuk “Akaun Subsidi Harga Beras” yang menyatakan bahawa menurut Perjanjian Penswstaan 1996, kerajaan persekutuan akan membayar subsidi ke dalam akaun-akaun bank dan Bernas berperanan membahagikan dan membayar subsidi kepada pihak-pihak yang berkenaan.


Akaun yang diaudit itu menjelaskan bahawa akaun tersebut bukanlah harta ataupun tanggungan Bernas, maka ia dana yang tidak dinyatakan dalam kunci kira-kira Bernas.

Dalam tahun 2009, subsidi berjumlah RM600 juta telah dibayar daripada baki bawa ke hadapan RM75 juta serta peruntukan subsidi berjumlah RM599 juta.

Mengapakah rakyat Malaysia perlu membayar nasi mereka dua kali? Perlukah kita berbuat demikian? Apakah peranan Bernas yang di luar kemampuan Kementerian Kewangan?

Sebagai “syarikat yang diperbadankan” dan meskipun mempunyai kawalan mutlak ke atas suatu barang keperluan harian tanpa ancaman barang pengganti atau pun pesaing, Bernas terpaksa mendapatkan pinjaman bank dan rakyat Malaysia terpaksa membayar faedah yang berjumlah RM24 juta untuk tahun-tahun 2009 dan 2008.

Sebagai “syarikat yang diperbadankan”, Bernas juga terpaksa membayar dividen. Dividen sesaham untuk tahun 2005 adalah 8 sen sesaham; dan bertambah setiap tahun sehingga mencapai 20 sen sesaham untuk tahun 2009. Akaun 2009 menyatakan bahawa pembayaran dividen sebanyak RM84,672,000 telah dibuat untuk tahun kewangan 2009.


Bukankah lebih banyak manfaat dapat dihasilkan seandainya wang ini dibelanja ke atas usaha penyelidikan untuk mempertingkatkan mutu atau menambah kadar hasil beras, ataupun seperti NTUC yang mengembalikan wang kepada rakyat menerusi pelbagai bentuk layan istimewa?

Siapakah pemegang-pemegang saham utama yang memperolehi kebaikan daripada bayaran dividen ini? Menurut laporan tahunan 2008, Budaya Generasi (M) Sdn Bhd memegang 145 juta saham ataupun 30.79% pegangan sementara Serba Etikan Sdn Bhd memegang 29.8 juta saham ataupun 6.39%. Saya tidak tahu siapakah orang-orang yang saya kena belanja makan setiap kali saya makan nasi putih, nasi goring, nasi lemak, nasi dagang, nasi kandang, pulut dsb.


Lebih teruk lagi, menurut nota 23 dalam laporan tahunan 2009 Bernas, Tradewinds (M) Berhad telah membeli Bernas dalam suku tahun pertama tahun 2010 dan memegang 72.57% atau 341 juta saham di mana Tradewinds telah membuat pinjaman bank RM1 billion dengan kadar faedah 5.2% hingga 6.5% mengakibatkan satu lagi hutang yang kena ditanggung oleh semua rakyat Malaysia..


Maka durian runtuh untuk pemegang saham dulu, yang dibayar oleh semua rakyat Malaysia yang makan nasi


Aduhai, lebih peritlah untuk saya mengunyah nasi sekarang.

Supply chain of our rice; what the ETP missed out

The 2011 election budget has attracted the proper criticism as reverting to the past spending spree on expensive construction projects in already overcrowded and over taxed part of Malaysia without wide spread, tangible and real benefit to Malaysians.

PKR's Latheefa on World Food Day served a rightful notice telling the government the need to priortize food security.

I have always wondered aloud why purchase power parity and quality of living in Malaysia is inferior to developed nations. Sure, corruption plays a part but what about the structure of our supply chain? Should BN administration not look at this when they do that Economic TRANSFORMATION thingy?

If the supply chain is too long, there are more middle men and the end consumers have to pay more.

My Japanese friend told me that the sushi here is nowhere as good as the Japanese ones because of the inferior rice here; and from personal experience, I do find the rice in Hong Kong is of superior quality.

Since almost all Malaysians have rice as their staple diet, I decided to look into its supply chain, which takes me to Padiberas Nasional Berhad ("Bernas")

Source: Padiberas Nasional Berhad, Annual Accounts and Reports 2009.

It certainly has a big role to play in the food security of Malaysians whereby it is in charge of subsidies, stockpile, retailing, procurement, manufacturing and everything else relating to rice, bar cooking it.

According to its Chairman's speech in the 2009 annual accounts and reports, Dato’ Wira Syed Abdul Jabbar Bin Syed Hassan stated,

"At the outset, I must say that we have discharged our responsibilities well to the extent that at the height of the crisis, BERNAS practically had to forego its profit objective for national interest; in fact we posted a record loss in 2008. After the dust has settled, what is clear is this - we had done our job well."

hmmm....Dato Wira admitted that BERNAS, a company where Minister of Finance holds 1 Special Share with veto power and a monopoly of staple diet of Malaysians, are in for PROFIT.

Oh yes the sacrifice of 2008 was celebrated, but take a look at his next statement a few paragraphs later.

I am also pleased to report that profit, revenue and volume of rice sold recorded in 2009 were the highest since BERNAS’ privatisation.

Talk about coming back with a vengeance. Is this privatisation necessary? Why Malaysians have to pay additional middleman profits? Can't the well remunerated Barisan Nasional Federal Government with more than 50 years track record operate rice system without this middleman at Malaysians' expense?

Bernas' reported that revenue (read: amount paid to additional middleman) increased from RM2.2 bil in 2005 to RM2.5 bil and RM3.3 bil in 2008 and 2009 respectively; while the profits for 2005 till 2009 are as follows:

2005 + RM131mil

2006 + RM135 mil

2007 + RM107 mil

2008 - RM57 mil

2009 + RM180 mil

So Bernas "claw back" its "losses" of 2008 immediately. The profits above is actually additional cost to Malaysians, probably a hidden form of taxation.

The RM3.3 bil works out to be RM120.74 per person over total population of 27 million so if papa works to support a family of 5, that's RM603 per year for him. Additional RM50 on your food bill a month, please, thank you very much.

The amount looks bearable (for some) until you read note 31 to the accounts "Paddy Price Subsidy Account" which states that pursuant to the Corporatization Agreement of 1996, the government shall pay rice subsidies into banking institutions and Bernas is suppose to disburse the subsidies.

The audited accounts specifically mentioned that the above account is not part of Bernas assets and liabilities, hence an off balance sheet finance.

In 2009, RM600 million subsidies were disbursed from opening balance of RM75mil plus 2009 subsidy funding of RM599 million.

So why Malaysians are paying for their rice twice? Do we have to do that? What Bernas can do that the MOF can't do?

Being a "corporate body", despite having the status of a virtue monopoly of an essential good with no threat of substitute good or competitor, Bernas have to get a bank loan and Malaysians serviced bank interest amounting to RM24 million annually for 2009 and 2008.

And being a "corporate body" it has to pay dividends. Dividend per shares was 8 sen per share for 2005; increasing steadily to 20 sens per share for 2009. The 2009 accounts show dividend payout of RM84,672,000 was made for 2009 financials.

Would this money be better spent in channelling it to R & D to achieve better quality and rice yield, or like Singapore's NTUC, be given back as a rebate to Malaysians?

Who are the major shareholders who benefited from the payout? A review of its 2008 annual report shows that, Budaya Generasi (M) Sdn Bhd held 145 mil shares or 30.79%, Serba Etika Sdn Bhd held 29.8 million shares or 6.39%. I do not know these people who I have to belanja every time I eat white rice, fried rice, nasi lemak, nasi dagang, nasi kandang, pulut etc

To add salt on injury, according to note 23 of its 2009 annual accounts, Tradewinds (M) Berhad has acquired Bernas in 1st quarter of 2010, holding 72.57% or 341 million shares whereby Tradewinds raised a term loan of RM1 billion bearing interest at 5.2% to 6.5% hence another layer of debts for Malaysians to grapple with.

So immediate windfall to the previous shareholders, financed by all Malaysian rice eaters.

Sigh, the bowl of rice I have is getting harder to chew on from now on.






Sweating over the direction of Malaysia's water supply

I would like to thank a dear friend of mine who pointed out another nugget to me:

In the Auditor General's 2008 Report on the state government agencies' workings, the state government of Negeri Sembilan has surrendered federal government loan of RM1.2 billion (i.e. tax collected from you and me which was spent on building and developing the state’s water public facility) and transferred it to Pengurusan Aset Air Berhad.


This means for Negeri Sembilan folks, for the next 35 years, water tariff you pay goes to PAAB and also the state coffer, insftead of just the state only like before.






Further surfing non-porn related websites revealed the following findings:

The model of our water supply will be shifted all the way from government service to private sector.






Can anybody remember any public referendum or open tender with regards to this?



The trend is disturbing if you think of the proposed selling off of the toll concessions.

The state governments are selling off some huge chunk of assets to a MOF owned debt-incurring special vehicle (now a term that raises tension in the US after Enron). There will be immediate cashflow to the federal government while some newly created monopoly will increase government/public borrowings, run the operations and by the way, does anyone know how Indah Water Konsortium arrive at the tariff rates we paying for?



You can check out PAAB in their corporate website if you are free.


A cursory review of the Annual Reports and Accounts of PAAB for year ended 31 December (notice the "0"s in the comparative years i.e. no track record whatsoever) revealed the following:

PAAB paid RM2,774,091,000 to acquire “investment properties” in 2009 for control of water facilities in Melaka, Negeri Sembilan and Johor. That works out to be about..RM102.74 per Malaysian (total 27 million); that is only the beginning.



Now how did PAAB raise the money to pay for the “investment properties”? With no track records, borrow money, of course.

I wonder if another letter of support / guarantee ala PKFTZ is floating around somewhere.....

To quote from page 27 of the Annual Report and Accounts:

Pengurusan Aset Air Berhad (“PAAB”), a government-owned company under the Ministry of Finance (Inc.) together with CIMB Investment Bank as the Lead Arranger and Lead Manager (“CIMB”), had issued a program up to RM20bil Nominal Value Islamic Medium Term Notes Programme and Islamic Commercial Paper Programme which adopted the two Islamic concepts – Ijarah and Musyarakah on 26 October 2009.

The launch marks, the largest water related bond programme ever established in Malaysia, boosted the Sukuk in market segment reported by RAM.

..................

The establishment of PASB as a unit under PAAB is to undertake the latter’s acquisition of water assets and their accompanying liabilities in Peninsular Malaysia and Labuan. To date PAAB has acquired water assets from Melaka, Negeri Sembilan and Johor besides commencing negotiations with the other State Governments and their respective state water operators with the hope to arrive at an amicable sale and leaseback arrangement
.”

Alamak! What kind of legacy are we getting from the present administration? If the bi-partisan alternatives becomes a reality one day, Malaysians will still be tied to this legacy. By comparison what is going on in Selangor is very very different........free water

Also why am I not surprised with the presence of CIMB again?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.cimb.com/index.php?ch=subch_about_cimb_group&pg=pg_acg_our_leaders&ac=42&tpt=cimb_group


Dato' Sri Nazir Razak


Non-Independent Executive Director/Group Chief Executive

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The borrowings as at the financial year end stood at

(RM4,943,150,000+RM1,548,219,000+RM174,000,000) = RM6,665,369,000 or RM246.87 per Malaysian.

Just imagine what else the RM6 billion could have been channelled into, e.g. loans to SMIs or study loans or credit guarantee scheme for SMIs etc….




When you borrow money, you pay interest and now this mean the consumers have to bear more cost.

For financial year ended 31 December 2009, revenue (money collected from you and me) was RM97 million and 46% or RM45 million went to interest payment so for what justification Malaysians suddenly have to pay interest on our water tariff?

Ask any businessman if he feels like paying half of his sales to banks as interest payment.






On page 24 of the New Economic Model Direction issued by NEAC:

A key component of inclusiveness is the fostering of equal and fair economic opportunities. Affirmative action programmes and institutions will continue in the NEM but, in line with views of the main stakeholders, will be revamped to remove the rent seeking and market distorting features which have blemished the effectiveness of the programme.”


Well, PAAB is a monopoly recently created
and how did it be chosen to run such a vital, huge undertaking which concerns the security of all and sundry of this company?
Oh by the way, the Chairman of PAAB is YB DatoSeri DiRaja Tajol Rosli Ghazali, formerly the Chief Minister of the State of Perak


I do ponder and wonder about the following points:


1) If the federal government is getting huge payments from selling water concessions then how come there is the proposal for GST?
- had GST come to effect on water supply, the cost structure we face as consumer could be as follow

# cost of the "investment properties" we already paid for with taxes to build up
# interest cost PAAB have to pay on our behalf to buy the assets
# additional cost of running the new structure e.g. directors' pay, professional fees to bankers for raising the bond etc
# less: cost reduction compared to being a state-own agency, if any
# profit to pay dividends to shareholders (a form 6 economy student can tell you public goods should be non-profit oriented)
# profit to show as a viable company and for re-investing purposes
# payment of corporate tax previously not needed as state agency so a case of tax on tax?

Total # = Y, revenue required to collect from consumers who do not have a choice
then we pay GST on Y, kind of a big piece of kuih lapis, no? The idea of GST ain't dead yet, I believe.


(more than a year ago, I wrote

Modern business modules advocate shorter supply chain, which would guarantee freshness, lower prices and shorter delivery time. One thing that is not transparent to all and sundry is the supply chain in Malaysia. I hope the Domestic Trade Ministry can make public the supply chain of common goods and services. We can then see how many times the goods changed hands from producers, distributors, deals, retailers and eventually to you and me

Now at least something seems clearer to me now)

2) Was the revenue generated from this sale of vital national address mentioned in the Prime Minister's budget speech for 2009 or 2010 budget?
I don't think so.


3) With this cash injection from selling off water concessions, how come we are still having national budget deficits?


Arghh....I have some more debts to pay