Economic Philosophies at War

Source:http://en.liewchintong.com/?p=920

January 21st, 2011

Economic Philosophies at War

“The philosophical basis of PR’s policies is that by genuinely addressing the economic concerns of the bottom 60% of the population, the rest of the nation will be better off in a “rising tide” that lifts all boats.”

Race is a factor in political contestations in Malaysia probably ever since the birth of electoral politics in the country. But while ethnicity may still matter, debates over economic philosophies and policies will likely play a major part in deciding the outcomes of the next general election.

Two unique features distinguish the next election from the previous ones.

First, for the first time, the opposition can claim to have some experiences in government as a coalition and beyond the fringe states. Before the collapse of the Perak state government, Pakatan Rakyat (PR) coalition partners govern five states with about 60% of the country’s population.

Surviving one blow after another from a seemingly “hostile” federal government, inheriting a less than satisfactory civil service, and constrained by the lack of resources and authorities, the PR states are still alive and kicking, to say the least.

Second, while the 1990 and 1999 elections saw some forms of opposition coalition, PR is entering the next election not as an ad hoc arrangement like its predecessors.

Collaborations of PR parties exist not only at national level but had extended to state and local levels for nearly three years now.

This co-operation has survived a sustained pressure on issues that could have broken up the coalition — the Malay unity talk promoted by Umno, various religious issues aimed at eroding PAS support and not to mention the numerous attacks on Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and PKR and constant flaying of Lim Guan Eng and DAP by vernacular newspaper controlled by Umno.

Indeed, not only that PR did not disintegrate as its opponent wishes, the opposition coalition has released major policy documents in the forms of Common Policy Framework in December 2009 and PR’s Agenda in December 2010. Not in Malaysia’s electoral history that manifestos of sort are released years ahead of expiry date of parliamentary terms.

The hotly debated “100-day programme” is but a small portion of the actual documents.

The real challenge posed by the nascent opposition coalition to Umno/Barisan Nasional, one of the world’s oldest elected ruling party that is still in office, lies in their contrasting perceptions of
economic realities facing the people and the ensuring prescriptions to remedy them.

It’s the economic philosophies at war.

The government’s Economic Transformation Programme is a resemblance of Mahathirnomics. It is all about first world infrastructure without serious attempt to remedy the third world mentality.

The assumption is that capital investment alone is sufficient to solve Malaysia’s economic malaise and bring the economy to the next level.

Students of economics would know that growth comes from various factors of production which include capital investment, technological upgrade (or some would call innovation), labour (or human capital).

A holistic view is needed. PR understands the economic realities which elude the government’s latest programme: that many still have low income despite working hard due to an archaic policy belief that wages must be kept low to keep jobs and many are self-employed in the informal sectors (think about the hawkers, petty traders and taxi drivers) with very little financial security because formal jobs do not pay enough.

Many are also heavily indebted with monthly instalments such as cars, houses and consumer products like television, refrigerators and furniture.

According to the New Economic Model documents, the bottom 40% of Malaysian households are living with a monthly average income of RM1,500 (and three-quarters of them are bumiputera) while 60% of the households (of four persons averagely) live with a less than RM3,000 income, which is near subsistence if one lives in the cities.

It is worth noting that an estimated 68% of Malaysia’s population lives in urban settings (cities and towns with population more than 10,000) in 2010, a huge increase from 33% in 1970.

A World Bank report on Malaysia in November 2010 has the following findings:
• Income inequality in Malaysia is among the highest in Asia and resembles that of Latin America’s — the bottom 40% of the population earn 14.3% of the total income while the top 20% earn nearly 50% of the total income;
• Wages are low — 66% of all formal workers in the manufacturing and construction sectors earn less than RM900 per month;
• A huge informal sector — 35% of household heads are classified as self-employed informal workers.

It has also been reported that household debts are mounting and has reached 77% of GDP.

While many among the young urban poor and lower income groups are not registered as voters and the electoral system is disproportionally skewed in favour of those in the rural sectors, it is suffice to conclude that the economically struggling households are electorally potent.

The philosophical basis of PR’s policies is that by genuinely addressing the economic concerns of the bottom 60% of the population, the rest of the nation will be better off in a “rising tide” that lifts all boats.

We need a new way of looking at the economy. Distribution and growth are not mutually exclusive and actually works hand-in-hand.

As a start, PR proposes to improve the disposable income of Malaysians through better provisions of public goods such as the “buy-back” of tolled roads with an aim of eventually removing tolls, re-channelling of subsidies from independent power producers to other more needy causes and cheaper broadband access.

A better public transport system, an affordable and decent healthcare, and a new look at housing policies, deserves further attention notably to cater for those in the low and mid- dle income groups.

When ordinary folks do not have to pay for basic services like tolled roads, they will have more cash in hand to improve their standards of living and to pay for the education and skill upgrade of themselves and their children.

Wage structure is another area in which a new paradigm is needed to save Malaysia from the vicious cycle of low wage, low skill and low productivity. PR is committed to implement a minimum wage system.

A more holistic view of the economy is where PR begins its quest for better alternative policies for Malaysia. These policies will surely be an important part of the political debate in anticipation of the next general election.

—
This article was published in TheEdge Financial Daily, 18 Jan 2011

It is food that counts ...

Source: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/from-around-the-blogs/37507-enough-about-croninomic-projects-it-is-food-that-counts

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

By Lee Wee Tak

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 dandirealisasikan oleh rombongan back-bencher BN yang telah mengunjungi Taiwan untuk mempelajariteknologi dan teknik pertanian tahun lalu supaya terdapat pulangan berpatutan daripada perbelanjaan wangrakyat 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 rendangservings 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 Berhadtook 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.

Read more at: http://wangsamajuformalaysia.blogspot.com/2011/01/enough-about-croninomic-projects-it-is.html

Poverty eradication - is it a game of numbers?

Source: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/1/17/nation/7813566&sec=nation

Perak’s big question –poor or not poor?

By ROSHIDI ABU SAMAH
roshidi@thestar.com.my

SITIAWAN: The Implementa­tion and Coordination Unit (ICU) of the Prime Minister’s Department has concluded that Perak has achieved “zero hardcore poor” status but the state government, ironically, believes otherwise.

Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir said there were still poor and hardcore poor families in Perak whose data was not included in e-Kasih database (a national database system to implement and monitor anti-poverty programmes).

As such, he said the state was not satisfied with the conclusion by ICU which was made in November last year.

“I hope the Women, Family and Community Development Minis­try, which is handling the e-Kasih database, will look again at the statistics of poor and hardcore poor families in Perak.

“The current figures do not reflect the actual number of poor and hardcore poor families in the state,” he said after handing over mock house keys to 37 poor families from Lumut and Beruas yesterday.

Dr Zambry said the state government had also discovered that some families who were registered in the e-Kasih database were not entitled to receive aid.

“We have previously made a request to the ministry for the data to be checked and updated from time to time,” he said.

Earlier in his speech, Dr Zambry criticised former Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin for giving misleading information during a ceramah about a land matter in Kampung Masjid, Pangkor.

He said Nizar should stop making false allegations about the matter which had already been explained at a state assembly meeting last month.

Dr Zambry had told the assembly that the state had decided to buy a piece of land in Kampung Masjid, which was once occupied by 100 hardcore poor families including his mother, to prevent the families from being displaced.

Pelan pembangunan mana yang lebih benar - Debat wajar diadakan...

Debat Najib/Anwar wajar diteruskan - Pelan pembangunan mana yang lebih benar

Sumber:

http://aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com/2011/01/debat-najib-dan-anwar-wajar-diteruskan.html

Perbezaan pandangan politik harus dinyatakan didalam pilihanraya sahaja. Masing-masing parti boleh menunjukan semua perbezaan itu untuk memberi kita rakyat yang biasa ini untuk memilih parti mana yang boleh mengisi kehendak dan kemahuan kita. Masing-masing mempunyai keinginan dan aspirasi yang berbeza. Itulah satu ‘attribute’ sebagai manusia. Manusia adalah secantik-cantik kejadian dan manusia itu dijadikan Tuhan untuk mengenali dan menghormati diantara puak-puak dan kaum serta cara hidup mereka.

Didalam politik yang menjadi isu besar dalam masyarakat Malaysia pada hari ini perbezaan diantara yang memerintah dan yang menjadi alternatif sangat jelas. Isu yang terakhir ialah perbezaan diantara pelan transformasi yang diperagakan oleh BN dengan pelan transormasi alternatif yang diunjurkan oleh PR.

Dalam ‘convention’ PR yang diadakan baru-baru ini, PR telah mengunjurkan pelan transformasi alternatif yang hanya memerlukan dana sebanyak RM19.2 billion. Angka ini jauh lebih rendah dari unjuran yang diunjurkan oleh BN. Najib memberikan reaksi yang negatif terhadap unjuran PR itu dan meminta rakyat jangan terpedaya dengan pelan PR itu. Najib terus memberi amaran yang jika PR memerintah dan pelan itu dilaksanakan negara akan menjadi bangkrap.

Anwar terus meminta Najib untuk tampil kehadapan dan mengadakan debat terbuka dihadapan rakyat untuk menunjukan kebenaran dan kelebihan masing-masing. Ramai dikalangan orang ramai memandang alasan Najib yang negara akan bangkrap jika dilaksanakan program dan pelan yang diunjurkan oleh PR itu akan membuatkan negara ini bangkrap sebagai tidak berasas.

Mereka bertanya kepada Najib bagaimana pihak yang membelanjakan RM19.2 billion itu boleh mengbankrapkan negara berbanding dengan pihak yang membelanjakan RM51 billion? Bagi masyarakat yang ‘simple’ Najib memberikan reaksi tanpa meneliti apa yang hendak dikatakan beliau di khalayak ramai.

Anwar begitu ‘persistent’ dengan cabarannya untuk berdebat dengan Najib secara terbuka dan saya merasakan rakyat suka untuk melihat debat ini diadakan untuk melihat dengan mendengar perbezaan diantara kedua belah pihak ini.

Disebaliknya Najib menolak sebarang debat dan beliau berkata beliau tidak peduli dengan persepsi rakyat terhadap beliau dengan penolakkan itu. Hanya Nazri Aziz dan Khairy disebelah BN yang meminta Anwar untuk berdebat dengan mereka dahulu sebelum berdebat dengan Najib.

Kedua-dua belah pihak elok jika diadakan perdebatan kerana rakyat sedang didalam pencarian kearah mana kita nak arahkan negara kita ini. Rakyat mahu tahu yang mana satu yang boleh memperagakan kebolehan masing-masing. Rakyat hendak tahu apa benarkah setiap projek pembangunan itu betul-betul dalam harga yang sebenarnya.

Apabila Najib memperlekehkan pelan yang dianjurkan oleh PR mereka telah mengatakan yang pelan mereka dibantu oleh pakar-pakar ekonomi dan mampu mewujudkan pembangunan yang secara relatifnya lebih murah dan tidak payah membebankan negara dengan membelanjakan wang rakyat yang banyak. Ini semua rakyat hendak tahu dan PR pun mahu menunjukan yang apa tuduhan terhadap ketirisan dialam perbelanjaan wang rakyat oleh BN itu ada benar.

Bagi BN pula kita harus sedia mempertahankan apa yang kita lakukan. Maka Najib sepatutnya menerima cabaran itu. Berdebat secara terbuka bukannya perkara baru didalam sistem demokrasi. DiAmerika dan di UK perdebatan seperti ini adalah perkara biasa dan rakyat akhirnya akan membuat keputusan. Kita jangan lari dari sistem yang biasa dilakukan dalam negara yang ingin menyuburkan demokrasi.

Jika kita benar-benar betul dan jujur maka sepatutnya kita menerima cabaran Anwar itu untuk membuktikan kejujuran kita dalam mentadbir negara selama ini. Inilah kesempatan yang patut diambil dengan suka hati kerana kita telah mengatakan yang segala urusan untuk meneruskan pelan pembangunan itu adalah telus dan transperen.

Rakyat ingin tahu yang tuduhan BN selama ini yang negara akan bangkrap jika PR memerintah. Betul kah tuduhan itu? Maka debat terbuka merupakan jawapan yang terbaik. Kalau tidak berani jangan main tuduh-tudah sahaja. Buktikan tuduhan itu dengan debat terbuka ini. Ini adalah isu besar bukannya kecil. Dalam perdebatan inilah Najib boleh menggariskan dalil-dalil yang pelan transformasi yang dianjurkan oleh PR itu akan mengbankrapkan negara.

Umumkan sehari cuti umum untuk rakyat mendengar perdebatan ini. Jika cuti umum boleh diberikan kepada rakyat kerana Malaysia memenangi Piala Suzuki masakan perdebatan yang penting untuk menentukan masa depan rakyat ini tidak boleh diberikan cuti umum.

Tetapi samada perdebatan ini berlaku atau pun tidak, rakyat akan tetap membuat keputusan. Marilah kita harapkan yang terbaik bagi masa depan anak-anak dan cucu-cucu kita.

OPPOSITION REFORM PLAN WILL UNDERMINE M'SIA'S GOOD CREDIT RATING?

Source:http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/bnm/20110112/tbs-mahani-pakatan-ceeeaba.html

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 12 (Bernama) -- A renowned economist says Pakatan Rakyat''s 100-day reform plan is highly questionable as it focuses on excessive spending without definitive avenues for generating revenue, a move that undeniably will raise the country''s sovereign risk and undermine Malaysia''s current good credit rating in international markets.

Datuk Dr Mahani Zainal Abidin, the chief executive of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS), said the proposed reforms do not take into account Malaysia''s financial ability to fund the high-spending reforms which includes raising subsidies as well as providing handouts.

"Prolonging subsidies or redistributing the wealth of the country without taking into account the country’s economic growth will not be viable," she told Bernama in an interview here today.

As a consequence, foreign investors might exit the country, she said.

Pointing to Pakatan Rakyat’s reform plan announced at its national convention in Penang last December, she said it would be popular to introduce the suggested reforms but would be detrimental to the economy and nation.

Dr Mahani also said the economy would regress if the reforms were initiated and the government would lose the ability to subsidise and help the poor if the economy doesn’t grow.

"The reforms are basically not for economic goals but more for distribution, and no emphasis has been highlighted on how they want to grow the economy."

"This is definitely not favorable to the business community and the private sector," she said.

More than anything else, she said the flawed plan''s emphasis was not on growing the economy, but just re-distributing the wealth, from which certain quarters would be badly affected as the economic pie was not expanding," she said.

Likening the populist reform plans to welfare dished out in some European countries, she stressed that these countries compensated welfare payments with a high level of taxes to finance amenities and public service provided to their citizens.

In Malaysia, "you can’t have a welfare state economy with low taxes, and if they still push on with it, the country would have to issue a substantial amount of bonds to support its actions," she said.

If the bonds were raised to increase public sector salaries or maintain subsidies without generating growth or increasing income flow, investors would raise doubts as to how the country was going to repay its sovereign debts.

In the process, "Malaysia''s credit ratings would falter while the sovereign risk of the country would be very high, and investors will not buy the bonds as the funds to be raised will be viewed as an unproductive usage of money," said Dr Mahani.

On claims by the Opposition that they would need only about RM19 billion to pull off the reform plan, she said if the subsidies were reduced like the RM19 billion in gas subsidies given to independent power producers, it would spark off a chain reaction in hikes in electricity tariffs.

"Where is the money going to come from when prices of electricity needs to be maintained," she said.

If subsidised electricity given to factories in order to reduce cost of production was reduced, producers will have no choice but to pass on the higher costs to consumers.

As such, Malaysia will not be viewed as a competitive country for manufacturing products if the cost of production is on the high side, she said.

Even worse, investors would definitely be affected, as under the Pakatan plan, it looks like many entities providing public utilities would be re-nationalized.

"Their future will be very uncertain and exiting the country may be the only viable choice for them," said Dr Mahani.

“Upholding the rule of law and respecting agreements signed are very important in doing business, and to me, this is a contradiction to Pakatan’s plan as in their course of implementing reforms, they can just declare contracts signed before as null and void,” she said.

Dr Mahani also said that a more holistic approach should be taken as the rakyat’s welfare should be taken care of, but the way to do it was not to continue subsidies and raise nominal incomes, but expand and rejuvenate the economy, increase revenue and maintain Malaysia as a competitive country when compared with its peers.

"We must be realistic as the world is not perfect and there may be some constraints, if we do not live within our means."

"I think we have to take into account the implications to the country as a whole before anything is being undertaken,” she said. -- BERNAMA

PAKATAN Hanya Perlukan RM19 Bilion Untuk Rakyat

Source: http://anwaribrahimblog.com/2011/01/11/pakatan-hanya-perlukan-rm19-bilion-untuk-rakyat/

Kenyataan Perdana Menteri kononnya Janji 100 Hari Pakatan Rayat tidak dapat dilaksanakan atas alasan negara tidak berkemampuan membuktikan lagi UMNO/BN berselindung di sebalik penguasaan media untuk memadamkan fakta. Maka memandangkan isu ini mendesak dan menyentuh kepentingan rakyat dan negara, kami syorkan diadakan satu debat terbuka.

Tuduhan beliau bahawa Janji 100 Hari Pakatan Rakyat akan menjadikan negara muflis adalah dangkal kerana hakikatnya, UMNO/BN yang berhutang setiap tahun sehingga hutang negara menggunung. Laporan Ketua Audit Negara yang dikeluarkan pada 25 Oktober 2010 memberi amaran bahawa nisbah hutang negara kepada KDNK telah melepasi paras 50% buat kali pertama dalam sejarah negara.

Hutang kerajaan Malaysia bagi tahun 2009 meningkat kepada RM362.39 billion atau 53.7% dari KDNK. Malapetaka ekonomi ini berlaku di bawah pentadbiran Perdana Menteri sekarang sebagai Menteri Kewangan. Dalam tahun 2010, kerajaan melancarkan 19 program menjual bon yang membabitkan hutang tambahan bernilai RM58.1 bilion.

Tabiat berhutang UMNO/BN akan diperhebatkan tahun ini. Pada 14 Disember 2010, Bank Negara Malaysia mengumumkan kerajaan akan menjual 29 bon tambahan dalam tahun 2011. Menurut anggaran Institut Penyelidikan RHB, penjualan 29 bon ini akan membabitkan hutang baru kerajaan persekutuan berjumlah RM83 bilion.

Makanya, alasan Perdana Menteri untuk menolak Janji 100 Hari Pakatan Rakyat perlu dikaji dengan berlatar belakangkan perkara-perkara ini. Malaysia sememangnya sedang menuju ke gerbang kemuflisan jika UMNO/BN terus berhutang sewenangnya seperti sekarang – tetapi ia bukanlah disebabkan oleh Janji 100 Hari Pakatan Rakyat. Malaysia akan muflis akibat ketagihan UMNO/BN kepada pembaziran dan rasuah yang berleluasa, demi mempertahankan sistem kroni kapitalisme yang didokong UMNO/BN.

Contoh-contoh pembaziran UMNO/BN sudah diketahui rakyat. Perdana Menteri terlampau taksub dengan bangunan 100 tingkat yang menelan belanja RM5 bilion, sedangkan isu perumahan mampu milik meruntun golongan berpendapatan rendah dan orang muda. Kerajaan UMNO/BN akan mengugut bahawa negara akan muflis setiap kali Pakatan Rakyat memperjuangkan imbuhan tambahan para guru, tetapi ia tidak rasa bersalah apabila meluluskan kontrak RM77 juta kepada APCO. Senarainya terlalu panjang untuk dihuraikan disini.

Oleh itu, tindakan pertama Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat adalah melancarkan perang habis-habisan menentang rasuah di setiap peringkat, bermula dengan pemimpin-pemimpin kanan politik. Ini akan menyelamatkan RM28 bilion yang tiris dari Perbendaharaan setiap tahun akibat rasuah, seperti yang dianggarkan oleh Ketua Audit Negara.

Selepas itu, Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat akan menstrukturkan semula sistem subsidi untuk memansuhkan subsidi korporat yang hanya mengkayakan beberapa kerat kroni. Jumlah RM19 bilion subsidi korporat yang ditanggung oleh PETRONAS untuk membayar IPP milik kroni akan dipulangkan kepada Perbendaharaan. Kita juga akan menyemak semula sistem konsesi toll untuk memansuhkan bayaran pampasan RM4 bilion setiap tahun yang kini ditanggung kerajaan.

Dua tindakan yang mudah ini akan memulangkan RM51 bilion kepada rakyat – lebih dari cukup untuk melaksanakan Janji 100 Hari Pakatan Rakyat yang jumlahnya hanyalah satu pertiga dari jumlah yang diselamatkan:

1.Imbuhan khas perguruan berjumlah RM500 sebulan menelan belanja RM3.2 bilion setahun.

2.Jaminan Pakatan Rakyat bahawa subsidi minyak akan dikekalkan untuk golongan berpendapatan rendah akan melibatkan penstrukturan semula sistem subsidi, supaya hanya golongan yang berkelayakan menikmati subsidi minyak. Kos subsidi di bawah sistem sebegini dianggarkan berjumlah RM4 bilion setiap tahun.

3.Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat akan meneruskan subsidi gas memasak, berjumlah RM4 bilion setiap tahun.

4.Penstrukturan semula sistem tol di bawah PLUS dianggarkan menelan belanja RM23 bilion, berdasarkan harga pasaran yang ditawarkan oleh Khazanah dan KWSP. Kos tambahan yang perlu ditanggung kerajaan untuk mengambil alih operasi dari pemegang saham minoriti dianggarkan berjumlah RM8 bilion.

Justeru, jumlah dana yang diperlukan untuk melaksanakan Janji 100 Pakatan Rakyat hanyalah RM19.2 bilion; yakni sama dengan subsidi korporat yang diberikan kepada IPP milik kroni setiap tahun. Jumlah ini adalah terlampau sedikit berbanding RM51 bilion yang hilang setiap tahun akibat ketirisan dan rasuah demi memastikan kroni gembira dan bersenang-lenang.

Janji-janji lain seperti skim air percuma dan skim wi-fi percuma telah pun dilaksanakan di negeri-negeri Pakatan Rakyat. Kami telah membuktikan ia mampu dilaksanakan.

Oleh yang demikian, Perdana Menteri tidak boleh berdolak dalih lagi kenapa UMNO/BN tidak mahu melaksanakan Janji 100 Hari Pakatan Rakyat apabila rakyat tahu bahawa ia mampu dilaksanakan. Tabiat berhutang UMNO/BN yang membebankan generasi akan datang adalah sangat tidak bertanggungjawab, apatah lagi apabila wang yang dipinjam tidak dibelanjakan untuk rakyat.

DATO’ SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM
KETUA PEMBANGKANG
11 JANUARI 2011
===========

PAKATAN ONLY NEEDS RM19 BILLION TO IMPLEMENT 100-DAY REFORM PROGRAMS

Prime Minister’s repudiation of Pakatan’s 100-day reform programs on financial ground will further highlight UMNO/BN’s reluctance to spend the national wealth for the people.

It is a bit presumptious for the Prime Minister to claim that Pakatan’s 100-day reform program will bankrupt the country, since it is UMNO/BN-led government that had borrowed excessively each year. The Auditor General’s Report released on 25 October 2010 cautioned Putrajaya that the national debt to GDP ratio has breached the 50% mark for the first time in our history.

Malaysia government’s debt for 2009 rose to RM362.39 billion or 53.7% of GDP. The level of national debt in fact worsens under the stewardship of the current Prime Minister. The government undertook 19 bond programmes with a combined value of RM58.1 billion in 2010.

On 14th December 2010 Bank Negara Malaysia announced that the government will launch 29 additional bond programmes in 2011. RHB Research Institute estimates that this will involve a combined value of RM83 billion of new debts to be undertaken by the Federal Government.

Therefore, the Prime Minister’s criticism in rejecting Pakatan’s 100-day reform program should be viewed in this perspective. Malaysia is en route to bankruptcy at the rate that it is raising debts to fund UMNO/BN’s addiction to wasteful spending and corruption that is endemic in the crony capitalism structure that it props.

The public is generally privy to such examples of excesses are well known to the people. Instead of providing homes to the poor and young people, the Prime Minister is more obsessed with his 100-storey tower costing RM5 billion. The UMNO leadership will scream bankruptcy each time Pakatan fights for better pay for the teachers, yet it has no qualms to pay RM77 million for a one year contract to APCO. The list is endless.

Thus, the first action of a Pakatan Federal government is to announce an all out war against corruption at all levels in the government, starting with the political leadership. This will save an amount of RM28 billion for the national treasury as estimated by the Auditor General, believed to have been lost each year due to corruption and leakages.

Next, a Pakatan Federal Government will restructure the national subsidy system to abolish corporate subsidies that had bled the people and enriched only a few cronies. The RM19 billion of subsidy to IPP borne by PETRONAS each year will be reverted to the national treasury. Similarly, we will undertake an overhaul of the toll concession system to return the RM4 billion’s worth of compensation paid to concessionaires back to the national treasury.

These two quick actions will yield an additional RM51 billion financial muscle for a Pakatan Federal Government to implement our 100-day reform programs, whose cost is only a third of the amount:

1. The new RM500 a month teaching allowance for teachers and educational officers will cost RM3.2 billion annually

2. Our guarantee that fuel subsidies will be maintained for lower income group will involve a restructuring of the subsidy system, so that only the lower income group enjoys fuel subsidy. The cost estimate for maintaining fuel subsidy under a restructured subsidy system is RM4 billion annually

3. Pakatan Federal Government will continue to subsidise LPG, at an estimated cost of RM4 billion annually

4. The restructuring of the toll system under PLUS is expected to cost RM23 billion, based on the current offer made by Khazanah and EPF. The additional cost to acquire minority shareholders is approximately RM8 billion.

The additional cost required to fund Pakatan’s 100-day programs is only RM19.2 billion, an amount equivalent to the existing corporate subsidies fed to IPPs each year. This is a pittance compared to the RM51 billion stolen from our national economy to keep the cronies afloat and fat.

The other people-centric programs such as free water and free wi-fi schemes have been implemented in Pakatan states. This has been proven to be viable and sustainable.

The onus is for the Prime Minister to come up with a complete explanation of his reluctance to implement these programs, when rakyat knows that we can afford it. It is utterly irresponsible to continue piling debts for future generations to bear but refuses to utilise the money for the welfare of the people.

DATO’ SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM
LEADER OF OPPOSITION
11 JANUARY 2011