On Oil Prices

The market sets high oil prices to tell us what to do
By Martin Wolf
Published: May 13 2008 19:09 Last updated: May 13 2008 19:09
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/219fcbde-2108-11dd-a0e6-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1


Oil at $200 a barrel: that was the warning from Goldman Sachs, published last week. The real price is already at an all-time high (see chart). At $200 it would be twice as high as it was in any previous spike. Even so, it would be a mistake to focus in shock only on the short-term jump in prices. The bigger issues are longer term.

Here are three facts about oil: it is a finite resource; it drives the global transport system; and if emerging economies consumed oil as Europeans do, world consumption would jump by 150 per cent. What is happening today is an early warning of this stark reality. It is tempting to blame the prices on speculators and big bad oil companies. The reality is different.

Demand for oil grows steadily, as the vehicle fleets of the world expand. Today, the US has 250m vehicles and China just 37m. It takes no imagination to see where the Chinese fleet is headed. Other emerging countries will follow China’s example.

Meanwhile, spare capacity in members of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries is currently at exceptionally low levels, while non-Opec production has equally consistently disappointed expectations. (See charts.)

It looks increasingly hard to expand supply by the annual amount of about 1.4m barrels a day needed to meet demand. This means an extra Saudi Arabia every seven years. According to the International Energy Agency, almost two-thirds of additional capacity needed over the next eight years is required to replace declining output from existing fields. This makes the task even harder than it seems. As the latest World Economic Outlook from the International Monetary Fund adds, the fact that peak production is reached sooner, because of today’s efficient technologies, also means that subsequent declines are steeper.

This is not to argue that speculation has played no role in recent rises in prices. But it is hard to believe it has been a really big one. True, the dollar price has risen sharply, but that is partly the result of the decline in the dollar’s relative value (see chart). As I have argued before, if speculation were raising prices above the warranted level, one would expect to see inventories piling up rapidly, as supply exceeds the rate at which oil is burned. Yet there is no evidence of such a spike in inventories, as Goldman Sachs and the IMF point out.

Similarly, it is not even true that the investment needed to boost the constrained production capacity has been lagging. The WEO shows that nominal investment by national and international oil companies more than doubled between 2000 and 2006. But real investment hardly increased, because of a global scarcity of rigs and associated skilled labour services. Against this background, it seems far more likely that such speculation as there is has been stabilising, rather than destabilising: in other words, it is moving prices in the right direction, in order to reduce demand.

Will the high prices succeed in doing this? Certainly. Demand has to match supply for a simple reason: we cannot burn oil that does not exist.

The price spikes of the 1970s were followed by big absolute falls in demand and output (see chart). This was partly because of the recessions and partly because of rising efficiency. Both forces should work again this time, but to a much smaller extent. The slowdown in the US economy is indeed likely to be significant. Slowdowns will also occur in western Europe and Japan and even in the emerging world. But the latter will still grow rapidly. Overall, the world economy – and so world oil demand – is likely to continue to grow reasonably briskly. Similarly, the improved efficiency of use of petroleum, as people switch to more efficient vehicles, notably in north America (where the room for doing so is so large), will be offset by the rising tide of demand for motorised transport in the world’s fast-growing emerging countries.

On balance, it is quite unlikely that aggregate demand for oil will collapse, as it did after the two previous price spikes, just as it is unlikely that massive net new oil supplies will come on stream in the near future. This does not mean that prices will remain as high as they are today for the indefinite future: such stability is improbable. But it means we should expect a sustained period of relatively high prices even if “peak oil” theorists are proved wrong. If proved right, this would be true in spades.

So what should be the response to these simple realities? Here are some obvious “do nots” and “dos”.

First, do not blame conspiracies by speculators, oil companies or even Opec. These are the messengers. The message is one of fundamental shifts in demand and supply. If speculators push prices up in response, they are helping the adjustment. Even if Opec keeps output back, it is preserving a valuable resource for the future.

Second, do not blame the emerging countries for their growing demand. Citizens of rich countries must adjust to the higher prices of resources that the rise of the emerging countries entails. The only alternative is to attempt to destroy those hopes. That would be a blunder and a crime.
Third, understand that prices at these levels are now playing a big macroeconomic role. At $100 a barrel the annual value of world oil output would be close to $3,000bn. That is 5 per cent of world gross product. The only previous years in which it was higher than that were 1979 to 1982.

Fourth, adjust to high prices, which will play a big part in encouraging more efficient use of this finite resource and ameliorating climate change. The current shock offers a golden opportunity to set a floor on prices, by imposing taxes on oil, fossil fuels or carbon emissions.
Fifth, do try to reach global agreement on a pact on trade in oil based on the fundamental principle that producers will be allowed to sell their oil to the highest bidder. In other words, the global oil market needs to remain integrated. Nobody should use military muscle to secure a privileged position within it.

Finally, do become serious about investing in basic research into alternative technologies. Energy self-sufficiency is an implausible goal. Investing for a post-oil future is not.

We are no longer living in an age of abundant resources. It is possible that huge shifts in supply and demand will reverse this situation, as happened in the 1980s and 1990s. We can certainly hope for that happy outcome. But hope is not a policy.

The great event of our era is the spread of industrialisation to billions of people. The high prices of resources are the market’s response to this transforming event. The market is saying that we must use more wisely resources that have now become more valuable. The market is right.





All eyes on oil barometer as 'destruction point' looms
By Sarah O'Connor
Published: May 29 2008 03:00 Last updated: May 29 2008 03:00
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/84d464f0-2d18-11dd-88c6-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1


Oil fell by as much as $5 a barrel this week before rallying slightly, with the prices of gold, copper, wheat and rice also dipping. A pause for breath, many commodity market players say, after last week's heady highs. But others are posing the question: could oil at $135 a barrel have been the commodity boom's last hurrah?

Calling a peak to a market is a difficult task, and one most commodities analysts are loath to do with any precision. The task is particularly hard for commodities, an umbrella that covers base metals, precious metals, energy and food, all moving to their own dynamic.

But the oil price is often seen as a barometer for the entire commodities complex, and it is oil that everyone is watching. The shock that ripped through economies last week as crude prices punched through $130 a barrel gave players reason to question whether prices could rise much higher.

French fishermen and British lorry drivers set up blockades in protest at fuel costs, American Airlines grounded scores of older aircraft, and - most significantly - countries across south-east Asia said they would cut their fuel subsidies because they couldn't afford to keep them.
Francisco Blanch at Merrill Lynch says these are signs that a "demand destruction point" is looming - where oil becomes so expensive that demand for it falls away. The market has already hit that point in Europe and the United States, but demand is still growing in emerging market economies where subsidies insulate consumers from the pain of high prices.

Nauman Barakat at Macquarie agrees with Mr Blanch that things might be changing. "The word on everyone's lips is demand destruction which is very apparent in the US and may become a feature in the red-hot economies of Asia as those countries reduce fuel subsidies," he says.
But many analysts think the price needs to overshoot to about $150 a barrel before key developing countries such as China and India re-think their subsidies. China is unlikely to want to rock the boat before the Olympics, for example.

Oil's mini-tumble has been driven by a feeling that demand is dropping, says Eugen Weinberg at Commerzbank. Unlike many of his peers, he thinks the oil market is in the midst of a speculative bubble.

A drop in fundamental demand could be just what is needed to spook investors and spark a dash for the exit. "Because the price has been driven up by speculative money since it was at $90 a barrel, the fall will be dramatic," he says.

Others reject the claim speculators have pumped up the price, arguing that because supply is tight, even softening demand will not knock prices much below $100 a barrel.

If oil does tumble, that does not necessarily mean other commodities will fall with it. It might feel that way, though, to investors in commodity indexes, such as the Reuters/Jefferies CRB spot index, which is heavily weighted towards oil.

"This isn't the peak of the commodity market as a whole," Mr Weinberg says, "but the peak in oil prices is very near."

Additional reporting by Javier Blas

Growth and Distribution

Rich gain most from Brazil's emergence

By Gillian Lacey-Solymar Business correspondent, BBC Newsnight, Sao Paulo
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7371984.stm

Whilst the US teeters on the edge of recession and the UK battles with its own economic problems, it's easy to forget that some areas of the world are booming. Welcome to Brazil.
The boom is silencing critics who - ever since the term Bric was coined by the investment bank Goldman Sachs to explain the key emerging economies of the world - have been questioning Brazil's inclusion.

"Unequivocally, yes," insists investment banker Jean Marc Etlin, vice-chairman of Banco Itau BBA. "Brazil is a Bric" - alongside the other three; Russia, India and China. "It's a junior Bric, but going up the ranks. "It certainly fits the bill with healthy growth, a high population and plentiful natural resources."

Brazil's growth rate remain relatively low compared with other Bric's though. Its gross domestic product, or GDP, is rising at 5.4% per year, compared with 8.9% in India and 11.5% in China.
This is why sceptics used to believe that Brazil's inclusion is absurd, though many have changed their minds. "I'm no longer a sceptic," says Zeina Latif, head of economics for ABN AMRO in Brazil, citing the recent strength of Brazil's exchange rate and its macro-economic conditions.

Resource rich

When it comes to resources, Brazil has plenty. Agriculture has been growing at 13% a year, largely thanks to China's huge appetite for soya and beef products. Land the size of England is being given over to the sugar cane, which is used to produce Brazil's enormous ethanol supply. And the country is the world's largest exporter of orange juice. Brazil's recently discovered oil reserves are set to turn the country into a net exporter.

Massive growth

The boom in commodities and credit has played a part in fuelling the rise of Bovespa, the Brazilian stock market. "The market capitalisation is $1.4 trillion (£700bn)," says Joao Batista Fraga at the stock exchange. "In the last 10 years it has increased nine fold." But it is the structural changes in the economy that are creating the most excitement.

In the days of hyper-inflation, everyone spent their money the moment it was paid and no one was willing to lend. All property had to be bought with cash. Now that stability has returned to the economy, the sector that is causing so many problems in the US and UK - consumer credit and mortgages - is beginning to create real opportunities in Brazil. In shops, credit is just emerging, albeit at horrendous rates: 70% is not an unusual figure, and mortgages are also becoming available. Little surprise, then, that property prices are booming, both in the domestic and commercial sectors. In Sao Paulo, for example, office rents have tripled in three years.

Tough life

The growing wealth can be sensed in the elegant shops.
In downtown Sao Paulo there is no shortage of money to spend and the beautiful people are not coy about spending it. Some 60,000 new dollar-millionaires emerged in 2007 and it is said that many of the luxury brands have their highest global sales per square metre in Sao Paulo.


Despite the boom, Brazil's economic rise is not entirely smooth. Red tapes drives businessmen to despair, there are 75 taxes companies may be called upon to pay, and income inequality is rife.
Around the corner from many parts of the affluent city there are the favelas - effectively slums, though the word itself refers to a tenacious plant that grows on hills and is virtually impossible to eradicate. In reality, the favelas are indeed usually on steep land that no one else want, where people live in tiny corrugated iron shacks. If it weren't for the stifling heat you would think you were in Dickens's London. Life is nasty, brutish and short. Tiago has lived in the favela all his life. He is doing a course across the river, on the rich side. In economic terms, it may as well be the other side of the world. "Newspapers say life is better for Brazilians but that's not accurate," he says. "In Sao Paulo there's a huge contrast between rich and poor. "There are always luxury apartments being built next to the favela, so the world thinks it's getting better. But here in the favela it's not improving."

Winners and losers

Brazil's cumbersome tax system does not help.
Including indirect taxes, the poor end up paying proportionately far more in Brazil's topsy turvey system. People who earn up to three times the minimum wage pay 48% tax. Wealthier people who earn 30 times the minimum wage pay 24%.

As yet, the money has not trickled down sufficiently to the lowest in society, but the wealth is certainly being created. Many within the authorities are keen to have Brazilians participate more broadly in the success of the economy. For example, at the stock exchange they welcome 16,000 young visitors a year to explain to them how to buy stocks and shares to become a part of this brave new world. The students seem receptive, even entranced by the drama of a buy-sell re-enactment on the stock exchange floor. Brazil clearly has a long way to go before income equality reaches acceptable levels. But with its commodities, its fledgling property boom and its taming of past inflationary fears, it is well along the path to becoming a developed economy.

Gillian Lacey-Solymar's report from Brazil can be seen on BBC Newsnight at 2130 GMT.

Lagi Tentang Perpaduan Melayu

Sunday, June 08, 2008

Perpaduan Melayu milik UMNO?

http://sangkelembai2006.blogspot.com/

Kalau ada yang lupa, perlu di peringkatkan bahawa pernah dikatakan oleh George Bernard Shaw bahawa seorang tolol itu lebih berbahaya daripada seorang yang jahat, dan apa yang sangat membimbangkan kita sekarang ini ialah terlalu ramai orang yang tolol merayau-rayau di koridor kuasa di dunia ini.

Perpaduan Melayu kini berada pada tahap paling rendah, kata Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, hari ini. Katanya ia berlaku kerana orang Melayu kini yang tergolong dalam pelbagai organisasi mempunyai pandangan dan hala tuju yang berbeza-beza.

"Mereka tidak ada hala tuju yang sama arah sepertimana dahulu dan itu menyebabkan banyak organisasi di luar lingkungan kita mula melontar beberapa pandangan yang dulunya relevan tetapi kini tidak relevan lagi umpamanya soal ketuanan Melayu," katanya.

Adakah betul persoalan bahawa perpaduan Melayu sudah tidak ada lagi lenyap dan tidak sebagai dahulu. Apakah sebenarnya perpaduan dari segi Perspektif Menteri yang mempunyai Phd dalam bidang komunikasi itu?

Apakah definisi perpaduan pada Menteri itu? Adakah bila orang Melayu sudah tidak lagi menyokong UMNO dengan sendiri memberi erti bahawa tidak ada perpaduan di kalangan orang Melayu. Agaknya dari segi kaca mata Dr Zahid Hamidi itu kayu pengukur bagi melihat perpaduan Melayu.

Tetapi tidak pula beliau bertanya kepada dirinya sendiri kenapa perpaduan Melayu berada di tahap paling rendah sekarang ini jika dakwaan itu boleh diterima akal?

Kalau dia hendak menjawab pun, dia dan UMNO akan merasa malu sendiri kerana dengan dakwaan itu, akan membenarkan hakikat bahawa UMNO telah gagal walau pun sudah berusia 62 tahun dan Merdeka sudah mencapai tahap 50 tahun dalam usaha membentuk orang Melayu berpadu dalam satu akidah perjuangan yang bernama Ketuanan Melayu.

Maka akan menyusul satu soalan kedua kelak ia itu kenapa gagal?. Jawapan UMNO selama ini tidak pernah memikirkan soal Melayu secara berterusan atau kontinuiti, segala dibuat secara ad hoc dan secara kebetulan bukan sebagai perancangan strategik.

Dasar Ekonomi Baru dirangka kerana setelah 12 tahun Merdeka belum ada perancangan ekonomi yang komprehensif untuk orang Melayu, baru terfikir hendak dibuat sesuatu untuk orang Melayu, baru disedari bahawa sekolah-sekolah kelas penguasa seperti MCKK-Malay Collage Kuala Kangsar tidak banyak membantu bertambah baik nilai orang Melayu dan barulah nak buat Universiti Kebangsaan dan beberapa sekolah menengah yang berprestij untuk rakyat yang datang dari golongan tidak berada dan masyarakat luar bandar.

Sekarang dalam soal pendidikan ada kejayaan dalam mobiliti orang Melayu khasnya produk Institut Teknologi Mara yang sekarang bertaraf Universiti. Alhamdulillahlah Melayu tidak lagi boleh dianggap tolol tetapi masalahnya ialah kerana UMNO secara berterusan sekian lama tanpa menyedari melakukan proses lobotomi kepada orang Melayu atau membodohkan Melayu.

Beberapa pemimpin UMNO menggunakan ungkapan kepentingan Melayu dan ketuanan Melayu bukan berusaha untuk meningkat kemajuan jati diri Melayu dan jika ada usaha pun kemajuan jati diri itu dimulakan kepada dirinya dahulu secara tidak halal dengan rasuah dan tidak amanah, sebelum bangsanya. Maka terjadilah apa yang berlaku sekarang, cerdik pandai Melayu secara senyap membuat protes tidak mahu menerima UMNO sebagai wadah perjuangan mereka lagi.
Mereka melihat bahawa Perpaduan Melayu walau pun dalam komuniti yang kecil seperti berlaku di Kelantan, telah menunjukkan ada kekuatan yang diperjuangkan selaras dengan Ketuanan Melayu. Orang Melayu Kelantan menolak UMNO tetapi menerima dengan senang hati PAS sebagai wadah perpaduan dan ketuanan Melayu.

Oleh itu jika UMNO mengatakan bahawa ketuanan Melayu sudah terhapus, dia melakukan kesilapan yang tidak berfakta. Ketuanan Melayu masih wujud dan terus mara ke hadapan tetapi bukan memakai kapal layar yang pernah karam di tahun 1969 atau kapal UMNO yang terselit di atas lambang dacingnya yang tidak dipakai orang.

Keputusan PRU ke12 jelas menunjukkan bahawa UMNO sudah seperti kapal Titanic yang gah hebatnya tetapi boleh karam hanya sekadar terlanggar “ice berg”. Maka Titanic UMNO sudah pasti akan tenggelam secara perlahan dan dalam keadaan ini sekali orang Melayu berfikir setelah 3 bulan berlalu, pemimpin UMNO khasnya yang menjadi Menteri sama seperti penumpang Titanic hanya sibuk untuk menyelamatkan harta benda mereka tanpa mempedulikan yang penumpang lain.

Menteri-menteri UMNO sekarang hanya berfikir seperti kata Ahli Parlimen Kota Belud untuk mencari harta yang tiga keturunan tak habis makan. Bukan bermaksud untuk menghina pemberian darjah atau pingat tetapi jika kita lihat bahawa Abdullah Hj Ahmad dengan Kerajaan Tiga Beranaknya tanpa ada perasaan malu memberikan anugerah kepada dua bekas Menterinya yang sudah diketahui mempunyai rekod dalam BPR-Badan Pencegah Rasuah. Kerana kedua orang ini penyokong kuatnya maka tidak dia dilakukan seperti apa yang diterima oleh Kasitah Gadam.

Kesimpulannya Perpaduan Melayu dan Ketuanan Melayu akan terus kekal di Malaysia. Pembuktian yang jelas apa yang berlaku di Perak, di mana jika dikira walau majoriti kerajaan campuran itu kelebihan kepada orang bukan Melayu tetapi mereka akur dan menerima konsep ketuanan Melayu itu bila mana di sebuah kerajaan Melayu beraja hendaklah orang Melayu/Islam menjadi Menteri Besarnya.

Akhirnya jawapan kepada ketuanan Melayu bukan kepada mana-mana parti Politik tetapi kepada Institusi Kerajaan Melayu Beraja sama ada di peringkat Persekutuan atau negeri. Selagi orang bukan Melayu mempunyai kepercayaan kepada sistem atau institusi dan orang Melayu sendiri tidak membuang adat dan budayanya dan mendukung Institusi Beraja selagi itu ada ketuanan Melayu walau apa parti politik yang memerintah.

Begitu juga Perpaduan Melayu yang jelas bukan milik UMNO atau UMNO menjadi kayu pengukurnya, sebaliknya Perpaduan Melayu ialah bersatu untuk menolak mana-mana Parti-parti Politik yang merugikan orang-orang Melayu seperti yang berlaku di Selangor, Perak dan Kedah dan sudah berlaku beberapa kali di Kelantan, di mana dengan berkat Perpaduan Melayu mereka menolak UMNO yang difikirkan sudah sesuai di tenggelam macam kapal Titanic dan amat tepat dijadikan tukun tiruan untuk ikan-ikan bermain dan berkumpul.


Sang Kelembai: Sebenarnya ahli-ahli Majlis Tertinggi UMNO tidak ada keperluan untuk bertukar fikiran dan pandangan dalam soal Perpaduan dan Ketuanan Melayu. Kerana isu itu ialah isu politik sahaja yang terpenting sikap ahli-ahli MT-empty mesti berubah jangan sampai ada ahli-ahli MT dan para Menteri termasuk yang penagih arak tegar, mulai sekarang menghentikan sikap yang terlalu banyak berbohong dan akhirnya pemimpin UMNO termasuk Abdullah Hj Ahmad menjadi percaya dengan pembohongan yang dibuat sendiri.

Unity among Malays at lowest level?

Unity among Malays at lowest level, says Zahid
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/6/8/nation/21491983&sec=nation



KUALA LUMPUR: Unity among Malays is at its lowest level as there is no concerted participation towards their development, said Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Lamenting that many “organisations” no longer placed emphasis on issues relevant to the Malays, Ahmad said there was no clear-cut single direction adopted by the Malays.
In the same light, he added that the political prowess of Malays was slowly eroding.
“For example, the notion of Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) is no longer relevant to many. The rights of Malays as guaranteed under the Constitution should be defended.
“However, let me make it clear here that when we speak of Ketuanan Melayu, in no way am I implying that other races should be sidelined or rejected. We have to defend our rights, and that’s all I’m saying,” said Ahmad Zahid during a press conference yesterday.

The minister was clarifying a statement made in his speech earlier, when officiating the Persatuan Seni Silat Cekak Convocation Ceremony held in conjunction with the association’s 42nd and 43rd anniversary celebrations at the International Islamic University of Malaysia (IIUM) in Gombak near here.

In his speech, Ahmad Zahid had said, “The rights of Malays in this country should not be questioned by others. If this is so, we too can question their rights.” He clarified that his statement in no way rejected other races or religion, reiterating that Malays should stand up to defend their rights. “But when the issue is raised, many regard it as if we (Malays) are trying to confiscate the rights of other races. This is not so,” said Ahmad Zahid.

Asked why he had digressed from his original speech text to raise this issue at the event, he replied, “Takan kamu semua tak tahu” (You all know why), refusing to elaborate further.
On his recent visit to Saudi Arabia, Ahmad Zahid said that his purpose there was to discuss several issues relating to the pilgrimage charges for Malaysians performing the Haj in Mecca.
The de facto Islamic Affairs Minister, said he was there to attend an annual international meeting with the Haj Minister of Saudi Arabia together with other ministers of similar capacities.
Among the issues highlighted included accommodation and amenities for Malaysian pilgrims.
“Lembaga Tabung Haji (LTH) is looking at renting hotels, hostels, houses and other accommodation with closer proximity to ease the burden of travelling for pilgrims. “However, there has been a 300% increase in accommodation costs and we are in talks with the Saudi government to maintain previous prices,” he said.

He added that the Saudi government also hoped Malaysia could send more general medical practitioners with the pilgrims. Currently, six doctors accompany pilgrims on their journey. Ahmad Zahid said they would comply with this request.

Asked on the quota of Malaysian pilgrims performing the Haj, he said that was no increase (0.1% or 27,000 pilgrims per year). He added that the Saudi government also lauded Malaysia’s Haj Passport (which is issued by LTH) as it included strict security measures.

Sejahtera, Aman dan Makmur?

Adakah ini yang dinamakan Sejahtera, Aman dan Makmur?


Petrol naik 78 sen, diesel RM1, elektrik jika lebih RM43
Oleh ZULKIFLI JALIL
http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2008&dt=0605&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Muka_Hadapan&pg=mh_01.htm

PUTRAJAYA 4 Jun – Harga petrol di negara ini dinaikkan sebanyak 78 sen seliter kepada RM2.70 seliter berkuat kuasa esok.

Ini merupakan kenaikan 40 peratus daripada harga RM1.92 seliter sekarang. Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi berkata, harga diesel turut dinaikkan sebanyak RM1 kepada RM2.58 seliter daripada RM1.58. Ketika mengumumkan pakej penstrukturan semula subsidi bahan api di sini hari ini, beliau berkata, prinsip penentuan harga petrol dan diesel di Malaysia sekarang akan berlandaskan kepada harga bahan api itu di pasaran dunia. Langkah itu yang turut menyaksikan kenaikan harga gas untuk sektor elektrik dan industri, menurut Abdullah, adalah selaras dengan usaha kerajaan untuk membawa harga bahan api di Malaysia ke arah harga pasaran sebenar.

Tarif elektrik, kata beliau, turut dinaikkan “bertujuan meningkatkan kecekapan pasaran dan menggalakkan rakyat Malaysia untuk menjimatkan sumber tenaga” tetapi kadarnya berbeza mengikut kegunaan dan sektor. Perdana Menteri percaya dengan penguatkuasaan harga baru petrol, diesel, gas dan tarif elektrik itu, sektor komersial dan industri akan lebih bermotivasi untuk meningkatkan kecekapan operasinya.

Berdasarkan harga minyak mentah pada kadar AS$125 setong, kerajaan menganggarkan sejumlah RM13.7 bilion penjimatan dapat diperoleh daripada penstrukturan subsidi petrol, diesel dan gas serta pendapatan daripada levi yang dikenakan terhadap Penjana Tenaga Bebas (IPP) dan Pengeluar Minyak Kelapa Sawit (POP).

Abdullah menjelaskan, subsidi bahan api distruktur semula bagi memastikan bantuan dapat diagihkan dengan lebih adil dan memberi lebih manfaat kepada mereka yang memerlukan, terutama golongan berpendapatan rendah dan sederhana.

Subsidi bahan api tetap diberikan kepada rakyat di bawah penstrukturan baru itu, kata Perdana Menteri.“Kerajaan akan memberi diskaun atau pengurangan kepada pengguna sebanyak 30 sen bagi setiap liter minyak yang dijual. “Kalau harga pasaran petrol, misalnya seperti hari ini, pada RM3 seliter, kita akan tentukan harga minyak dengan memberi diskaun atau pengurangan 30 sen. “Maknanya yang perlu dibayar oleh pengguna ialah RM2.70 seliter walaupun harga sebenar ialah RM3,” kata Abdullah.

Diskaun itu, kata beliau, akan diberi secara tetap. Walaupun harga minyak diselaraskan sebulan sekali, kerajaan akan memastikan diskaun 30 sen itu terus diberi, ujarnya. Utusan Malaysia difahamkan, mengikut cadangan asal harga petrol sepatutnya RM3 seliter, tetapi mesyuarat Kabinet hari ini meminta kerajaan memberi diskaun 30 sen untuk setiap liter petrol yang dijual di negara ini.

Semasa sidang akhbar, Perdana Menteri ditanya kemungkinan kenaikan harga petrol dan diesel yang diumumkan itu menyebabkan kerajaan pimpinannya kurang popular di kalangan rakyat.
Abdullah menjawab: “Ini bukan soal untuk popular, ini adalah langkah serius untuk keperluan rakyat. Kita tidak boleh puaskan hati semua pihak tetapi memastikan ‘situasi menang-menang’ untuk semua.''

Menjawab soalan daripada seorang wartawan Indonesia yang mengatakan di negaranya kenaikan harga minyak telah mencetuskan demonstrasi dan bantahan terhadap kerajaan, Perdana Menteri berkata: “Insya-Allah, saya harap rakyat Malaysia tidak berdemonstrasi sebab apa yang kerajaan putuskan ini adalah yang sebaik-baiknya bagi menangani keadaan yang susah hari ini. “Lagi pun harga baru petrol dan diesel yang diumumkan hari ini masih lagi yang terendah di rantau ini.'' Abdullah memberitahu, Kabinet yang membincangkan soal kenaikan harga minyak dalam mesyuarat selama empat jam hari ini meneliti satu per satu kesan yang akan timbul daripada keputusan itu.

Sidang akhbar Perdana Menteri hari ini turut disertai anggota-anggota Jawatankuasa Kabinet Menangani Inflasi termasuk Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak; Menteri Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin; Menteri Kewangan Kedua, Tan Sri Nor Mohamad Yakcop; Menteri Perdagangan Dalam Negeri dan Hal Ehwal Pengguna, Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad dan Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Amirsyam A. Aziz.
Turut hadir ialah Presiden Petronas, Tan Sri Hassan Merican; Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif Tenaga Nasional Berhad, Datuk Seri Che Khalib Mohd. Noh dan Ketua Pengarah Unit Perancang Ekonomi (EPU), Datuk Dr. Sulaiman Mahbob.

On the poverty line

On the poverty line
May 22nd 2008
From The Economist print edition
http://www.economist.com/finance/economicsfocus/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11409401&CFID=8125392&CFTOKEN=97089615

Has “a dollar a day” had its day?


IN DECEMBER 2007 the World Bank unveiled the results of the biggest exercise in window shopping in history. Scouts in 146 countries scoured stalls, supermarkets and mail-order catalogues, recording the price of more than 1,000 items, from 500-gram packets of durum spaghetti to low-heeled ladies' shoes.

This vast enterprise enabled the bank to compare the purchasing power of many countries in 2005. It uncovered some statistical surprises. Prices in China, for example, were much higher than earlier estimates had indicated, which meant the Chinese income in 2005 of 18.4 trillion yuan ($2.2 trillion at then-market exchange rates) could buy less than previously thought. At a stroke, the Chinese economy shrank, in real terms, by 40%.

Since then, many scholars have wondered what this economic demotion means for the bank's global poverty counts. It famously draws the poverty line at “a dollar a day”, or more precisely $1.08 at 1993 purchasing-power parity (PPP). In other words, a person is poor if they consume less than an American spending $1.08 per day in 1993. By this yardstick 969m people suffered from absolute poverty in 2004, a drop of over 270m since 1990. The world owed this progress largely to China, where poverty fell by almost 250m from 1990 to 2004.

But if the Chinese economy was 40% smaller than previously thought, surely its poverty count must be correspondingly higher. Surjit Bhalla, of Oxus Investments, speculated that China's toll would increase by more than 300m. He mischievously accused the bank's number-crunchers of conspiring to lift the poverty count so as to keep their employer in business beyond its natural life.

Give a quarter, take a quarter

The dollar-a-day definition of global destitution made its debut in the bank's 1990 World Development Report. It was largely the discovery of Martin Ravallion, a researcher at the bank, and two co-authors, who noticed that the national poverty lines of half-a-dozen developing countries clustered around that amount. In two working papers* published this week, Mr Ravallion and two colleagues, Shaohua Chen and Prem Sangraula, revisit the dollar-a-day line in light of the bank's new estimates of purchasing power. They also provide a new count of China's poor.

Thanks to American inflation, $1.08 in 1993 was worth about $1.45 in 2005 money. In principle, the researchers could count the number of people living on less than this amount, converted into local money using the bank's new PPP rates. But $1.45 a day strikes the authors as a bit high. Rather than update their poverty line, they propose to abandon it. It is time, they say, to return to first principles, repeating the exercise Mr Ravallion performed almost two decades ago, using the better, more abundant data available now.

They gather 75 national poverty lines, ranging from Senegal's severe $0.63 a day to Uruguay's more generous measure of just over $9. From this collection, they pick the 15 lowest (Nepal, Tajikistan and 13 sub-Saharan countries) and split the difference between them. The result is a new international poverty line of $1.25 a day.

Why those 15? The answer is philosophical, as well as practical. In setting their poverty lines, most developing countries aim to count people who are poor in an absolute sense. The line is supposed to mark the minimum a person needs to feed, clothe and shelter himself. In Zambia, say, a poor person is defined as someone who cannot afford to buy at least two to three plates of nshima (a kind of porridge), a sweet potato, a few spoonfuls of oil, a handful of groundnuts and a couple of teaspoons of sugar each day, plus a banana and a chicken twice a week.

But even in quite poor countries, a different concept of poverty also seems to creep in, the authors argue. It begins to matter whether a person is poor relative to his countrymen; whether he can appear in public without shame, as Adam Smith put it.

This notion of relative deprivation seems to carry weight in countries once they grow past a consumption of $1.95 per person a day. Beyond this threshold, a country that is $1 richer will tend to have a poverty line that is $0.33 higher (see chart). The authors thus base their absolute poverty line on the 15 countries in their sample below this threshold.

How many people in the world are poor by this new definition? The authors are not yet ready to say. But they have taken another look at China. By their new standard, they find that 204m Chinese people were poor in 2005, about 130m more than previously thought.

That is the bad news. The brighter news is that China's progress against poverty is no less impressive than previously advertised. By Mr Ravallion's and Ms Chen's new standard, the number of poor in China fell by almost 407m from 1990 to 2004, compared with the previous estimate of almost 250m.

China's economic co-ordinates may be different than thought, but its trajectory is much the same. And therein lies a lesson. Give or take a dime or two, it matters little where a poverty line is drawn. Like a line in the sand, an absolute poverty standard shows whether the economic tide is moving in or out. It does not matter too much where on the beach it is drawn.

For practical purposes, policymakers will always care more about their own national poverty lines than the bank's global standard. The dollar-a-day line is more of a campaigning tool than a guide to policy. And as a slogan, $1.25 just doesn't have the same ring to it. A better option might be to reset the poverty line at $1 in 2005 PPP, which would line up reasonably well with at least ten countries in the authors' sample. In adding a quarter to the dollar-a-day poverty line, the researchers may cut its popular appeal by half.

Harga petrol, diesel diapung

Harga petrol, diesel diapung
Oleh Nazura Ngah dan Siti Shahila Ahmad

http://www.bharian.com.my/Current_News/BH/Wednesday/BeritaUtama/20080603234010/Article/index_html

Kos bahan api ikut pasaran global selepas mekanisme baru skim subsidi diperkenal OgosKUALA LUMPUR: Harga petrol dan diesel di negara ini dijangka diapungkan mengikut harga pasaran global selepas mekanisme baru skim subsidi bahan api dilaksanakan kerajaan Ogos ini. Pada masa ini, harga bahan api itu dikawal kerajaan dengan memberi subsidi yang besar, tetapi Menteri Perdagangan Dalam Negeri dan Hal Ehwal Pengguna, Datuk Shahrir Samad semalam berkata, kawalan harga minyak akan ditarik balik apabila mekanisme baru skim subsidi dilaksanakan dalam tempoh dua bulan lagi.

Menerusi cara itu, katanya, harga bahan api di Malaysia akan mencerminkan harga pasaran global. "Ia bergantung kepada harga pasaran global," katanya kepada pemberita selepas merasmikan Sidang Kemuncak Pembinaan Malaysia 2008 di Pusat Dagangan Dunia Putra (PWTC) di sini. Ketika ini, harga petrol di negara ini selepas subsidi hanya RM1.92 seliter dan diesel RM1.58, jauh lebih rendah berbanding RM5.20 (petrol) dan RM4.33 (diesel) di Singapura yang mengapungkan harga bahan api itu.

Bagaimanapun, Shahrir berkata, kerajaan sedang menimbang untuk melaksanakan dua mekanisme pemberian subsidi iaitu menerusi penetapan kuota dan pendapatan tunai bagi mengurangkan beban rakyat. "Kerajaan tidak boleh hanya menaikkan harga petrol dan diesel tanpa memberi suatu bentuk subsidi kepada rakyat, terutama golongan yang berhak menerimanya. "Oleh itu, kerajaan sedang menimbang pelaksanaan dua mekanisme pemberian subsidi, iaitu sama ada menerusi penetapan kuota melalui penggunaan MyKad atau pendapatan tunai," katanya tanpa menjelaskan secara terperinci mekanisme itu. Kelmarin, Shahrir berkata, penstrukturan mekanisme baru skim subsidi bahan api itu sudah dikemukakan kepada Kementerian Kewangan dan akan diputuskan Jawatankuasa Kabinet Menangani Inflasi.

Jawatankuasa itu mengadakan mesyuaratnya semalam bagi memuktamadkan pelbagai cadangan untuk pertimbangan akhir Kabinet, hari ini. Ditanya sama ada Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi akan mengumumkan kenaikan harga petrol dan diesel serta mekanisme baru skim subsidi selepas mempengerusikan mesyuarat Kabinet hari ini, Shahrir berkata: "Kita tidak boleh membuat keputusan lagi... esok (hari ini) perlu dilihat sebagai sebahagian daripada langkah penyusunan atau penstrukturan semula skim subsidi. "Kita sedang meneliti langkah bagaimana untuk menaikkan harga petrol dan diesel di pam dan pada masa yang sama kita boleh membanteras penyeludupan, penyalahgunaan dan ketirisan subsidi. "Kita perlu menunggu esok (hari ini). Pada asasnya adalah untuk meningkatkan harga petrol dan diesel di pam tetapi pada masa yang sama juga mahukan supaya subsidi sampai kepada rakyat," katanya. Shahrir berkata, subsidi ke atas bahan komoditi itu dijangka meningkat daripada RM55 bilion kepada RM65 bilion tahun ini jika mengambil kira purata harga minyak mentah pada paras AS$136 setong. Katanya, kerajaan juga kehilangan hasil pendapatan daripada peruntukan subsidi untuk bekalan minyak dan gas kepada Pengeluar Tenaga Bebas (IPP), sektor tenaga, sektor bukan tenaga dan sektor lain, khususnya di Semenanjung. "Dengan jangkaan harga minyak di pasaran dunia terus meningkat, kerajaan perlu menyediakan tambahan peruntukan untuk subsidi bahan api berkenaan." katanya.