PKFZ Failures: Project Management & Contract Management

Public Accounts Committee (PAC) chairman Datuk Seri Azmi Khalid said there were weaknesses in the scandal-hit Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) project, especially in its marketing and project management, particularly contract management, and this had burdened the cost and led to many other issues.


"We found the weaknesses to be more inclined towards project management... contract management itself...," Azmi Khalid said, adding that if project was marketed and 90 per cent of the area was taken up, the issue would not have come up.

"But because of the marketing, it became a big issue and placed a burden on cost, and various issues came up, as we know today," Azmi said.

SOURCE: NST

*******************************

Datuk Seri,

You have rightly pointed out the fault. That is profound knowledge! But the government have been emphasizing on building competencies on Project Management for the last ten years. Why are the representatives still incompetent? Do you need more seminars? Call me, please!

**********************

Tee Keat trumpets PKFZ successes

Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat, who vowed to reveal all in the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) debacle, offered instead a testimonial of his own apparent success in revitalising the scandal-ridden project that helped force his predecessor out of office.

He told a press conference that the occupancy rate, employment, investment status and cargo movement have increased since he took over as Transport Minister.

The PKFZ project has been criticized because its development cost of less than RM2.5 billion had ballooned amid concerns about its ability to meet its debt obligations as well as that of the soft loan.

There were also questions about the possible kickbacks after it was disclosed that several individuals acquired the piece of land where the PKFZ now sits at RM3 per sq ft in 1999. The Port Klang Authority (PKA) later acquired the land at RM25 psf.

PKFZ ran into further problems when Jebel Ali Free Zone quit the management of the property.

Ong said PKFZ had recorded an increase of more than RM200 million in investments from March to November.

Occupancy rate for all facilities had also increased, with the leased office block recording the most significant increase from one per cent in March to 19% as of November.

For open land and light industrial unit facilities, the occupancy rate is now 18% and 17% cent respectively.

“The Jebel Ali took six years to have 40 per cent occupancy,” said Ong referring to the free zone in the United Arab Emirates.

Most importantly, said Ong, was the number of employees in the area which had increased from 972 to 1,659 within the last eight months.

“I still can remember when I first set foot in the area, people said this is a ghost town,” said Ong when elaborating on the success in increasing the number of employees in the PKFZ.

Source: The Malaysian Insider

Ong Tee Keat says he has done a great job of increasing the occupancy from 1% to 19% ... That is FANTASTIC! But ... 19% occupancy also means 81% unoccupied??? Let's say, you built 10 houses to be leased and only 2 houses is leased; won't it mean: you will be making a huge loss? Eight houses unoccupied and the developer says he has done a great job? Of course it has improved from 1% to 19% but the fact still remains that 81% remains unoccupied and 81% holding cost.

Anyway, let's celebrate too! Results are results ... if your son scored 1% in maths and science and has now scored 19%, though he still fails but he has improved tremendously, and if we allow this kid another 20 years at the same school and the same class, he may be able to further improve to 50% and pass his SRP exam at the age of 35. Still not too late.

***

Ong Tee Keat treading on danger PKF Zone

New Transport Minister Datuk Ong Tee Keat will reveal how the RM4.6bil soft loan to the Port Klang Free Zone was spent.

“I wish to inform the rakyat about the true situation – whether it was actually squandered, not squandered, and where it has gone to, as well as the breakdown of the budget,” he said.

“This is not to judge anyone. That’s not my motive."

“What’s important is that we are responsible for informing the public,” he said

The response from entrepreneurs towards the project was still poor and the management has to look into the root cause and come up with plans to attract entrepreneurs to move to PKFZ, he said.

“I choose to address the issue in such a manner not because I am pressured to do so but I want to do it proactively to uphold transparency,” he said.

The cost of the PKFZ project was said to have ballooned from RM1.845bil to RM4.632bil by the time the project was completed in four years.

Source: Ong to tell all on Port Klang Free Zone

Would Ong Tee Keat be allowed to disclose all the inside trading and corruptions? It will unravel the cans of worms. Ong might be sacked or asked to resign soon.

Give Licence; Take back Licence!

Energy, Water & Communication Minister Lim Keng Yaik said "The government will withdraw some licences given to firms to offer high-speed Internet services using WiMAX technology as the market is too crowded".

The licences, for 2.5 gigahertz (GHz) and 3.5 GHz spectrums, will be taken back over a five-year period.

"There are too many WiMAX players. When you have too many players, they will kill each other," Keng Yaik said.

"Majority of them, after two to three years of obtaining the assignment don't have more than 10 customers and some don't even have any customers," Dr Lim.

Too many? When you first approved all of them didn't you take into consideration that this would be the scenario? Some of them have no customer at all? Ali Baba-ism didn't work?

The government gave licences to four companies to operate the 2.3GHz airwave. They are Bizsurf (M) Sdn Bhd, MIB Comm Sdn Bhd, Asiaspace Dotcom Sdn Bhd and REDtone-CNX Broadband Sdn Bhd.

Eight companies have licences to use WiMAX-related equipment while four firms won the permit to use the 2.5GHz and 3.5GHz airwaves.

It is disappointing to note that some licence holder do not have a single customer. Even Time.com who was given the 3G licence had not operated and had now sold the 3G spectrum to DiGi, who was not granted the licence. So you can see that those who merit the licence are not given and DiGi had to pay some $600 million to acquire the 3G spectrum from Time.com. That's how money is made without lifting a hand to invest. All you need is political patronage and thereafter, sell the rights to someone who deserved by merit but was discriminated.

On another concern is the fact that if licence can be issued and taken back at will by the authority, how could investors be confident on investing here?

Let's take another issue... Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Aziz said "There will be no bumiputra recruitment quota for multinational corporations (MNCs)." Nazri said "this was because the country would lose its competitiveness if the Government should impose such a policy."

Now if we are to consider the statement from Keng Yaik, shouldn't investors and MNCs be fearful of the ability of the authority who may at a later date decides otherwise?

This is a similar dilemma Singaporeans are facing when considering to invest in Iskandar Development Region (SJER).

At the present moment, the State Government wanted investments in SJER and are luring the Singaporeans.

The Mentri Besar is offering olive branches to potential investors and were even prepared to forego the 30% Bumi equity. But Singaporean government had a bad experience when their investments by Temasek Holding in Pantai Hospital were questioned by none other than Khairy Jamaluddin at the UMNO General Assembly two years ago and ultimately caused Khazanah to acquire the stakes from Temasek who had to exit to mitigate the political risks. That's why till today, no Singaporean firms had yet to take up the opportunities in SJER even though there are so much exceptions promised by the State government.

The Arabs too had learned a lesson or two such as that of Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ). Jebel Ali Free Zone (Jafza), a Dubai-based Free Zone operator had to withdraw their management concession for PKFZ because of bureaucracy, interference by politicians and others with vested interests, deliberate incorrect minuting of meetings and even attempts at tax evasion by the Malaysian negotiators. The separation was acrimonious.

Noel Gulliver, Jafza's man, who was PKFZ general manager was forced out from his office and taken to the Immigration Department. Graham Lovett, Gulf Managing Partner of Clifford Chance in an e-mail to Chuck Heath, Jafza International senior vice-president (international operations) expressed his distrust of the Malaysian negotiators. Graham Lovett expressed his grave concern that "... Jafza did not and does not want to be a party to any tax problems with the Malaysian government ... Lovett expressed his concerns that "...they are not acting in good faith." In a letter to Transport Minister Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy, Heath said red tape had hampered the progress of the free trade zone as among others, Jafza had to deal with 27 government departments involved in the client approval process. Heath wrote: "There has been a total lack of government planning ... He added that there is a lack of transparency... "Unfortunately," Heath added, "without radical surgery in cutting out the above obstacles, we feel this project is doomed to failure.“ Jafza officials had also met the PM to express the anomalies and shortcomings in PKFZ.

The whole mess in PKFZ is testimony as to why foreign investors shy away from Malaysia. We add the case of Pantai Hospital and WiMAX, and many others, the list will be voluminous.

Bentong District Council Pok-Kai

8 vehicles belonging to Bentong District Council were sealed after the Local Authority defaulted in their payments amounting to RM213,732.42 to a contractor who was awarded a contract to install lightings at the council building which was completed on July 27, 2004.

The contractor, EST Enterprise Sdn Bhd was granted a judgment dated Jan 12 this year by the Sessions Court who had directed the local authority to pay up the judgment sum. Despite the judgment, the local authority had failed to settle the judgment sum. EST then obtained a writ of seizure and sealed the 8 vehicles including a skylift, tractor, van and 4-wheel drive vehicle.

Pity the local council. they had collected taxes, quit rents and can't pay the contractors. the government just did not have the ability to contained the leakages and pilferages of those billions. The funny thing is that our government is able to bail out PKFZ for RM4.6bil but unable to pay RM213,000. Maybe, local councils are allowed to go bankrupt but not Kuala Dimensi as it is owned by some high profile UMNO leaders.

Chan sudah Kong-Choyed

You bloggers, please give chance lah.

MAS flight delay, also blame him.

FAX-MASWing gadoh, also blame him.

Bus accident, also blame him.

Tak da bus untuk balik kampung, also blame him.

Bus driver mabuk, also blame him.

Jelapang toll-booth incident, also blame him.

Mana boleh tahan???????

PKFZ project also blame him.

SEkarang, dia pun sudah Kong-choyed.

Pak Lah sudah tak da transport minister....

Zam dengan Nazri sekarang kena tanggung jawab pula.

Good Idea, justify Corrupt Idea

PKFZ a good idea, says Ling

The plan to set up the Port Klang Free Zone to emulate Dubai’s Jebel Ali Free Zone was a good strategic idea, said former Transport Minister Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik.

“Up to my time, it was the idea put forward and accepted by the Cabinet. So we took the first step and bought the land before we lose it (to other development),” he said, adding that he only knew of developments in the PKFZ issue through the newspapers.

The Transport Ministry last week said the Port Klang Authority bought the land at RM25 per sq ft from Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd, which had bought the undeveloped property in 1999 for RM95mil or RM3 per sq ft.

Idea can be good but it is also an opportunity for the political corruptors to enrich themselves unjustifiably, bankrupting the state and bleeding the nation profusely.

Our politicians are not lack of ideas as this is the tool they used to make billions from nothing. Koperasi Nelayan got the land from the state for pennies, sold to a connector at $120mil who then conveyed it to PKA for $1b. Koperasi made 100x profit ($100mil), and connector made 10x profit ($900mil). Good biz deal!!!! Big deal. Good idea, Ling Liong Sik?

Is the Nation sinking?

Will Malaysia sink to a 5th World Nation?

What has become of the nation?

Former IGP Haniff said 90% of corruption in the police force and 40% of the officers living beyond their means. The current IGP said we are ok and everyone is clean.

Anti-Corruption Agency Director-General was investigated for corruption and the Attorney-General department declared him clean.

The Deputy Internal Security Minister was investigated for corruption and the A-G department also declared him clean.

Companies Commission's prosecutor Azmil Haron told magistrate Fadzilatul Isma Ahmad Refngah that he had been instructed to withdraw the charges against the two companies and its directors. All 37 charges against controversial Port Klang assemblyman Datuk Zakaria Md Deros and five of his business partners instituted by the Companies Commission (CC) have been withdrawn. The CC had taken Zakaria and the five to court by virtue of their position as directors of Harvest Court Industries Bhd and Titi Steel Sdn Bhd, which had contravened the Companies Act 1965. Zakaria Md Deros was also alleged to have stolen sand from a plot of land belonging to another company.

The Transport Ministry today explained that the bailout of the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) estimated RM4.6 billion was attributed to advice given by Jebel Ali Free Zone Authority (Jafza). "Initially, the project was to be completed in two phases on just 500 acres, with development cost estimated at RM400 million. However, following advice from Jafza, the Port Klang Authority (PKA) developed the free zone in a single phase utilising 1,000 acres (250ha), at a total cost of RM1.845 billion," the statement said. The statement confirmed that 250ha were bought from Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) at RM25 per sq ft although government valuers had estimated put it at about RM10 psf (which was an inflated price. It only cost KDSB $3/sq ft to acquire it).

Then we have the Chief Justice who denied that there were delays in giving written judgment by various High Court and appeal Court Judges. CJ do not consider such acts as misconduct and in fact recommended those judges for promotion. Now, the CJ is proposing that the Common Law system should be replaced by Syariah Law system. Ahmad Fairuz had said that there was no need to use English common law after 50 years of independence, suggesting another procedure as a substitute.

The Attorney-General department had cleared all the "special ones" and declared them clean. The PM had declared that his son and son-in-law is clean. The ACA chief is clean and his department had also declared all others clean. No one is corrupt; the nation is clean. All politicians in Barisan Nasional is clean.

But.... but... NameWee is in trouble because he sang a rap song. Raja Petra is in trouble because he is a blogger and someone wrote a comment in his blog. Blogger Nathaniel was arrested and remanded. Tian Chua has being questioned. Jeff Ooi and Rocky Bru had to face defamation suit.

The nations problem are now focused on bloggers. The whole parliament are more concerned with bloggers and gobloks. This is because the nation no more have problems of corruption and mismanagement. We had clean up the system of the words and replaced it with wealth management and kautim management. The roof of parliament house leaks and it takes $22mil to pay a consultant to carry out survey works on the defective roof and propose rectification. The repair works would probably be worth $2mil. The consultant appointed to compile a report on Putrajaya building maintenance problems was worth $20mil. So thats how projects are created and wealth distributed. I wonder how many of you Bumis had benefited from these few projects. Malaysia had more than 15mil Bumis; so how many percentum benefited? Probably Samy can reveal.

PKFZ Bailout? Legal Bullshit.

PKFZ: Govt's hand forced in bailout

The Sun reported that: [Quote]"The government has to bail out the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) because the Transport Ministry had given undertakings it was not authorised to do so.

The ministry issued "letters of support" which were used by the turnkey contractor - Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) - to raise bonds and get an AAA rating from the Malaysia Rating Corporation Bhd."[Unquote]

According to The Sun, [Quote]"The four letters were issued between 2003 and 2006 for the issuance of bonds for the RM4.6 billion cost of the project. Ministry sources argue that they merely "supported" the applications but bankers contacted by The Sun said that in effect, they were letters of guarantee which only the Treasury can issue.

This is because the letters from the ministry committed the government to ensure that at all times, the Port Klang Authority (PKA) will fulfil all its financial obligations to KDSB.

"So, the government was left with little choice but to salvage the situation," said an industry source.

"When you give such undertaking for that kind of money, common sense dictates that proper advice must be sought because such letters bind the government.[Unquote]

Remarks

Is it true that the government had no choice and that such letter of support was binding between the bankers and the government?

Answer: It depends. But unlikely.

Letters of Support or Letter of Comfort may have legal effect even though it is not a guarantee. The question in each case is to determine the legal effect of the terms of the letter.

The Kleinwort Case

Klientwort Benson Ltd v Malaysia Mining Corp Bhd [1989] 1 WLR 379

MMC Metal was a wholly owned subsidiary of the MMC Bhd and the letter of comfort was in relation to an acceptance credit and multi-currency cash loan facility to a limit of [sterling]5 million, later increased to [sterling]10m. The tin market collapsed in October of 1985 and MMC Metals collapsed with it. The plaintiff called upon the defendant to repay the outstanding loan, but the defendant refused on the basis that the letter did not impose any binding obligation on the defendant to support MMC Metal. The defendant noted that the circumstances had changed materially and that they had reviewed and changed their policy as a consequence.

The form of the contested paragraph in the English case was of the intermediate type. It read:

"It is our policy to ensure that the business of MMC Metals Limited is at all times in a position to meet its liabilities to you under the above arrangements."

The court at first instance held that the paragraph constituted a contractual promise and that the promise included an undertaking that the policy would not change during the lifetime of the loan agreement. The Court of Appeal could not agree with this conclusion, holding that the paragraph was merely a representation by the defendants about their existing policy and not a promise about future conduct.

The decision in Kleinwort Benson was the first in which a UK superior court considered the enforceability of a letter of comfort. The Court held that a letter of comfort expressed only a moral obligation unless the terms of the letter were decidedly promissory. The Court did not address the issue of why commercial men and women would devote so much time and money to expressing unenforceable obligations.

The Banque Brussels Case

In Banque Brussels Lambert S A v Australian National Industries Ltd, Rogers J considered the effect of a letter of comfort. The defendant argued that the letter did not create a binding contract, basing its argument on the decision of the English Court of Appeal in Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Malaysia Mining Corp Bhd.

The basic facts of the Banque Brussels case were similar. The defendant held 45% of the issued capital of the holding company that owned 100% of the borrower. The bank required the letter of comfort, in a form satisfactory to it, as a condition of the loan. The defendant had previously refused to give a guarantee. The disputed letter of comfort was the negotiated compromise.

The second disputed paragraph, the third paragraph of the letter, was in the following terms:[5]

"We take this opportunity to confirm that it is our practice to ensure that our affiliate [the borrower] will at all times be in a position to meet its financial obligations as they fall due. These financial obligations include repayment of all outstanding loans within thirty (30) days."

Rogers J noted that there were two closely related questions. Was there an intention to create legal obligations and, if so, were the terms of the letter of a sufficiently promissory nature to be held to be contractual?


Rogers J held that:

"There should be no room in the proper flow of commerce for some purgatory where statements made by businessmen, after hard bargaining and made to induce another business person to enter into a business transaction would, without any express statement to that effect, reside in a twilight zone of merely honourable engagement."

This is very close to the analysis of Hirst J at first instance in the Kleinwort case. The Court of Appeal, however, held that the Skyways principle could not apply unless the words were clearly promissory.

Promissory Estoppel

As already noted, the Court of Appeal in Kleinwort held that the words were not promissory. They reached their conclusion by "...subject[ing] the letters to minute textual analysis."

Rogers J acknowledged that the words used are important, but thought that:

"...it is inimical to the effective administration of justice in commercial disputes that a court should use a finely tuned linguistic fork."

With this approach, it is not surprising that Rogers J found both the disputed paragraphs to be promissory. The clear aim of the second paragraph was to devise "a carefully crafted trigger to allow for recovery" and Rogers J was prepared to find at least the second part of the paragraph to be promissory. He also thought the first part to be promissory even though it was slightly weaker than the (non-disputed) paragraph in the Kleinwort letter.

Concerning the third paragraph, Rogers J found that it was promissory by the simple expedient of rewording it. If the paragraph is read as:

"it is our practice to ensure that [the borrower] is at all times in a position to repay all loans made to it by your Bank"

then it is more obviously promissory.

The plaintiff also succeeded in claiming that the defendant was estopped from denying the truth of the statements in the letter of comfort and from asserting that the promises were not a binding legal obligation. Rogers J found that the evidence established that the defendants knew that the plaintiff regarded the obligations as binding. It was, in the circumstances, unconscionable for the defendant to fail to disabuse the plaintiff of the incorrect perception.

Summary

It would be possible to reconcile Kleinwort and Bank Brussels in the traditional manner by attributing the difference in outcome to differences in wording and pleadings. To do so would be to overlook the differences in approach used by the two courts. The Court of Appeal adopted a traditional analytical approach whereas Rogers J used a functional analysis.

So, is our Minister and the govt as a whole acted as assholes? Didn't we have the Attorney-General's Chamber and a platoon of super lawyers paid by the govt using taxpayers' monies?

Govt must bail PKFZ to save (Few) shareholders

Second Finance Minister Nor Mohamed Yakcop said the government had to bail out Port Klang Authority Free Trade Zone project even though it has to forged out $4.6b as it is in the long-term national interest.

"We put money to create confidence for the overall economy and we will do that," Nor Mohamed Yakcop was reported to have said.

According to Nor Mohamed Yakcop the government had to rescue this company in the interest of the minority shareholders and the public in general.

Dear Nor Mohamed Yakcop, who is the minority shareholders? Wasn't it the minority shareholder the person who inflated the value of the land from $3 per sq ft to $25 per sq ft and sold that land to Port Klang Authority? That minority shareholder had pocketed nearly $1b and PKA is bleeding.

Secondly, by rescuing the PKFZ, what public interest in general are you referring? What had the public benefited from the whole project? It was the few UMNO members who pocketed few hundred million each and you call this public interests?

Thirdly, it is clear fact that the government do not have the money. So where are you going to borrow the $4.6b? Wouldn't you think that this $4.6b would have been better spent in other projects?

Dear 2nd Hand Minister, do not hide the facts. There are plenty of information which is in the public information center and many of those from PKA had already revealed it to the public. You should get your cyber-troopers to comb the internet to download those articles and evidences. Oh, do not forget that the Arabs had also revealed quite an amount of information when they leave. Jafza general manager Noel Gulliver and senior vice-president (international operations) Chuck Heath had already revealed much to the public. Please ask the cyber-troopers to blank out the various articles so that public would know less. Otherwise, many would know you are erecting a smoke-screen and lying. BTW, Lying is against Islam, En Nor Mohamed.

PKFZ: Unraveling the Pandora Box

PM asks Chan to explain

Chuck Heath, the senior vice-president (international operations) from Jebel Ali Free Zone (Jafza) pointed out to our government that there was a "total lack of government planning. According to Chuck and Jafza experience, transparency was non-existent and the "Malaysian political and economic landscape has too many vested interests seeking involvement and control in Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) project".

Heath also alleged that since the signing of the management agreement, many issues arose, contrary to the spirit of the agreement and the contractual obligations of both parties. Prime Minister Pak Lah admitted that he had a meeting with Jafza officials but that it was held "a long time ago ...".

The original cost of the PKFZ project ballooned from RM2 billion to RM4.6 billion because of, overvalued land costs. What stands on the site are rows of unoccupied buildings, an incomplete four-star hotel and pothole-ridden roads. Documents obtained by theSun revealed that the fallout was because of red tape, political meddling, inaccurate minutes and attempted tax evasions.

Aiya... billion, billion investments, and billion-billion top-up and over-valuation. How can this happen? Are we telling the world that we had blind and deaf government? Or, are we having a government that supports parasitism?

Port Klang Modern Harbour City

Klang Modern Harbor City Project

Selangor wants to know why port project delayed

A proposed RM400mil project to turn Port Klang into a modern harbour city has not taken off and the government wants to know why.

“The project's proponent Asa Niaga submitted the harbour city development plan some time ago but work has not started yet. We will find out why. It was a project given to a bumiputra company to help bumiputra entrepreneurs,” said Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo after the state assembly sitting on the budget yesterday.

Asked if Asa Niaga faced financial difficulties in starting the project, Dr Khir said that if the company did not have money, the state would consider giving the project to another company. Dr Khir said he would also be looking into complaints that Asa Niaga, which operated a barter trade business in Port Klang, had supposedly violated conditions in its licence by “pinching” container business from others.

The harbour city is a massive project proposed in the 1990s. Asa Niaga planned to turn it into a first-class international passenger and boat terminal, comparable to the Fishermen’s Wharf in San Francisco, Clark’s Quay in Singapore and Port Douglas in Queensland, Australia. The proposal included four jetties, a yacht club, a fish and vegetable distribution centre, a wholesale market, two restaurants, duty-free shopping arcades, 15 chalet units and a 20-storey five-star hotel. Phase One was supposed to be completed in 2007, featuring domestic and international passenger terminals, a waterfront esplanade, a marina bay and two restaurants.

On March 21st 2005, The Star reported that the Selangor govt was in a quandary over whether to go ahead with a RM4bil project to turn Sepang district coastline into a beach resort to rival Gold Coast in Australia. The Sepang Gold Coast project is one of the biggest the state has ever planned to undertake and will transform the economic outlook of Sepang district and its surroundings. Under the proposal, the beachfront development can rival the Queensland Gold Coast or even Maimi Beach in Florida when completed. The project will see the development of the beaches from Bagan Lalang to Tanjung Sepat which is a joint venture between Permodalan Negri Selangor and Sepang Bay Sdn Bhd.

This project got into trouble when the local authority issue a stop work order as the piling works were carried out without following procedures.

So, what is happening to Selangor and it's mega development projects? The land has been alienated to these companies and there is no progress.

What interest me is that these development projects are such massive as so fantasies - competing with the reknown Gold Coast, Maimi Beach, Fishermen’s Wharf, Clark’s Quay and Port Douglas; and the developers are not reknown names like Syed Mokhtar, Francis Yeoh, Ananda Khrisnan, Diam Zainuddin, or business alliances or partnerships with names like Donald Trump, Hutchinson, etc.

We hear of Asa Niaga Sdn Bhd and Sepang Bay Sdn Bhd, both of which are not associated with mega PLCs such as Khazanah, Maxis, PNB, etc. How does a smallish company fund a massive billion dollar projects? Aren't we expected to see Ali-Babas?

UMNO Youth are suppose to have monitoring system and a economic secretariat to help, among other things, trace contract leaks and forge closer ties between government-linked companies (GLCs) and small- and medium-size industries. It was suppose to act as a “think tank” to the Government in the Malay economic agenda. Can't UMNO Youth take control of these two massive project so that the Malays can keep the profits in their own hand as enunciated by their Youth deputy president?

Cakap Tak Serupa Bikin.......