Sunday, October 23, 2016

Why the federal budget has lost its meaning

No control or oversight over expenditure, lack of financial discipline through the use of supplementary budgets, and unchecked growth of off-budget agencies with massive borrowing.
By T.K. Chua
When I read “Why I didn’t watch the Budget speech” as written by Kensi from Sarawak, I found my feelings were the same. For the first time in a quarter century I did not sit through the whole Budget speech. I walked off after the first hour or so.
The Budget has long lost its aura. It is just an annual pomp for fund managers to get excited and for the government to announce some goodies. Whether or not the goodies are carried out as planned is as good as anyone’s guess.
Why do I say our federal budget is meaningless?
First, the annual budget has never capped the amount of borrowing that the federal government could incur each year. If the federal government may borrow without restraint, who bothers whether our projected revenues and expenses are adhered to? If revenues fall short, the government could borrow more to fill the gap. If expenses burst the budget, again the government could borrow more.
Where are the restraints and control that the annual budget is supposed to provide?
In fact, the annual supplementary budgets are clear indications that the budget has failed to keep government financial indiscipline in check. The government will borrow and spend as it wishes, regardless of the revenue performance or actual expenditure incurred.
Second, the annual budget is just a mechanism to dish out allocations, but never to accomplish its intended outcomes. We mistakenly look at the allocation earmarked for each programme as if it is a fait accompli.
But this is far from true. For example, just look at the allocation for subsidies which the government has always bragged about. It is time for the government to list out how much of the allocation has reached the intended target groups and how much of it was siphoned off by corrupt officials, businessmen and those who could indulge in arbitrage.
Seriously, if budget spending has been constantly effective over the years, I believe there would be no more poor people in this country.
Third, the annual federal budget is no longer the true representation of government financial commitment and responsibility. Off-budget agencies and activities have now overwhelmed traditional government ministries and departments.
Parliamentary oversight of government taxation and expenditure through the annual budget is at best only half correct.
When non-financial public enterprises and GLCs set up ventures, incur debt and impose contingent liabilities on the government, did they get the approval of Parliament to begin with? When government decides on privatisation projects, including guaranteeing revenues and profits of privatised entities, did it seek the approval of Parliament?
I thought the Federal Constitution, (through Part VII – Financial Provisions), is very clear on financial oversights by Parliament – no taxation shall be levied or expenditures incurred unless with expressed authority of federal law. How then did the government spend and borrow so massively through off-budget agencies such as GLCs and Non-financial public enterprises?
It is simple; the annual budget can’t instil discipline if there is no oversight. The annual budget can’t function as an instrument of control if borrowing and off-budget activities are allowed to roam free, unrestrained and unchecked.
T.K. Chua is an FMT reader.

Rakyat can ikat perut, university graduates can become shoe shine boys

Prime Moron has been saying the dumbest things again. It is about that electronic engineer girl selling nasi lemak to survive.

  • Sunday October 23, 2016
  • Siti Nasi Lemak was mentioned by Najib in Budget  2017
  • Najib said Siti an example of graduate who took a big leap, with her education background in electronic engineering, to be a young entrepreneur.
  • Siti started two months after she completinjg her studies
  • there was not much planning that went into Nasi Lemak 
  • Prior to this, I had never even made nasi lemak

My comments :  Ya Allah Ya Rahman why is this moron so stupid?

You mean you sent a top student to Electronic Engineering school so that she can graduate with a degree in electronic engineering and then sell nasi lemak on the road side? 

I say mangkuk, then what is the purpose of the New Economic Policy? 

Then why bother to send them to university?

It costs hundreds of millions of Ringgit to build a university.  It costs about RM50,000 to train an engineer.  Why does it cost so much? Because this is higher education, tertiary education, technology based education that will create high tech products and high income jobs in the economy.

You do not need any investment at all to create a nasi lemak seller. 

Why not just stop them from going to school? Or send the girls to school until Darjah 6 (Std 6).  You dont need a degree in engineering to sell nasi lemak.  

Belajar sampai Darjah Enam cukup lah.  After that send them into the streets to sell nasi lemak. Apa susah sangat. She can become an "entrepreneur" at 12 years old. 

In other countries they call them 'street vendors'.  Not entrepreneurs.  

Above and below : Thousands of "entrepreneurs" in Jakarta. 
With moron's leadership, soon Malaysia will also become like them. Hooray.

Siti herself says :
  • there was not much planning that went into Nasi Lemak
  • Prior to this, I had never even made nasi lemak

You dont need any education to sell nasi lemak. Or prior experience.   What is the purpose of studying electronic engineering if you want to become a nasi lemak seller?

And if all the university graduates become nasi lemak sellers, then what happens to the makcik nasi lemak with a Std 6 education or Tingkatan 3 education who sells nasi lemak now?  

All the university educated nasi lemak "entrepreneurs" will put the makcik nasi lemak out of business. What will the makcik nasi lemak do then?

What about the hundreds of thousands of SPM leavers? What will they do to become 'entrepreneurs'? Cuci jamban ke?

That other stupid nut Nazri says a cheaper Ringgit is better for tourism. Maybe the medical graduates can become shoe shine "entrepreneurs" at the airports (since there is NO MORE slots for Housemen at gomen hospitals). 

When it falls to RM5.00 to the US Dollar, unemployed doctors can earn "gaji besar" becoming shoe shine boys at the KLIA.  How about that? Nazro will agree with that.

If the stupid gomen fails to create enough employment for doctors, why not doctors become shoe shine "entrepreneurs".     (Nasi lemak shall be reserved exclusively for electronic engineers ok).

 Shoeshine "entrepreneurs" - top graduates of top universities?

Pesta konvo - future nasi lemak sellers, shoe shine boys

Prime Moron 1 or PMO1 says it  is an "ikat perut" Budget.  The alternative media has gone to town with this 'ikat perut" thingy.

First here are some graphics and images:

Above Someone sent me this cartoon drawing.  The menteri character is eating like a pig. The people character gets to chew on bones. Dalam kartun ini watak menteri makan macam babi. Marhaen pula makan tulang.

Below here is another picture. This is a real picture. Not a cartoon. What do you think folks? Do you see human beings in this picture? Or do you see khinz*r?


Rizal, stealing from public purse is more dangerous

Image result for rizal mansor

YOURSAY | ‘The aide to the PM's wife is talking louder than the PM's aide.’
Hang Babeuf: Threatening the life of a person is one thing. It is a crime. No two ways about it. Making an ironic, dismissive or even a sarcastic comment about someone or something may be discourteous, challenging, but it is not a crime.
To say "Adios" [Be entrusted to God, terserah kepada Tuhan] to Haron Din is not discourteous in the least. To misunderstand that comment and "go after" the man who said it is discourteous. And foolish. (But it's grist to the mill of those who want to trade in, and compete over, "being offended".)
To say you don't like your leaders, who happen to be Malays, is not to scandalise and cast abuse upon all Malays or Malay culture. I don't particularly care for PM’s wife Rosmah Mansor. But when I say so, it entails no disrespect for women generally.
When I deplore PM Najib Razak's behaviour and attitude, it is Najib and his ways that offend me, not Malay culture and society.
Time for Rosmah and her staff to wake up, get real, learn to be modern citizens. It will be good for them.
Gerard Lourdesamy: Why does Rosmah need an aide, and who is paying his salary? The last I checked with the Constitution and the Ministerial Functions Act 1969, the prime minister's wife is not a member of the cabinet or the public services.
How can the antics of a few Bersih supporters be attributed to the organiser? Does that mean the death threats against Bersih chairperson Maria Chin and the actions of the red shirts can be attributed to Umno?
I agreed that freedom of expression and the right to dissent has its limitations, but Rosmah is not the right person to define such limitations.
What is "racial" about Bersih? Bersih 1 to 3 was dominated by Malays and Bersih 4 had more Chinese. So what? Do public protests in Malaysia have to be defined by race and religion?
What Rosmah needs to remember is that she is not a national leader. Politicians are servants of the people and not their masters. The sooner Rosmah learns some humility, the better for her.
Jaycee: Rosmah’s aide Rizal Mansor, what about the people who steal from the taxpayers and spend the money lavishly on themselves? Isn't that more dangerous?
And how to have unity where the government practices race-based policies and racism? And what about the rigged election where a party with a minority of popular votes refuses to concede defeat?
Drngsc: I am very impressed. The aide to the PM's wife, who should be quiet, is talking more and louder than the PM's aide.
Please know that the wife of PM is not an elected position and neither she nor her aide have any business to make any public comments about public life and policy.
It is important to note that Bersih is not race-based and it is not Bersih's tradition to mock public figures.
Bersih is for free and fair elections and the whole of Malaysia is very, very angry that PM has allegedly stolen US$783 million of our money and put it into his personal bank account.
Of course, in Bersih 4, some young people were so angry that they made their anger public. The police have investigated this and taken action. That is the law and the proper way.
Vent: This is defending the indefensible by comparing oranges to apples. And just look who's talking? An "aide" to a prime minister's wife! This is unheard of in nations considered democratic.
So, who pays his salary? Najib with his unearned millions in his bank account or Rosmah with her life-long savings?
RKR: Rizal should be the second last person to talk about double standard. The last is Najib. How can you pretend to save the Malays and Malaysia when your bosses are allegedly stealing billions from the people?
Hagai: "Uncharacteristically, she (Maria) seems oblivious that the actions of Bersih supporters have caused deep anger and revulsion among a large segment of Malaysians who resent using race-based processions and traditions to mock the leaders of another race."
What rubbish is Rizal talking about?
Worldly Wise: Umno is the repository of ethnic discrimination. They look at everything from the ethnicity point of view. For them, it does not matter if the whole country goes down.
Malaysia is a third world country and not in the first world because of Umno. Instead of improving the Malays, they keep the Malays dumb.
In primary schools, secondary schools and universities, Malays do not perform well. It is all because of Umno's failure to improve the Malays.
Anonymous 706151436780066: Rizal has not understood the criminal significance of spending money you never earned or having money in your possession you can't account for.
He may need to learn the social significance of telling the truth lest he be forced to explain his actions in the afterlife in a divine court.
Anonymous 759201436321741: Notice something? Top echelon Umno politicians now keep their distance and avoid making public statements, especially to Malaysiakini, in the defence of MO1.
Perhaps they already saw the writing on the wall and try to avoid being a political casualty in GE14.
Anonymous_1419577444: Rosmah is just the wife of the prime minister. She does not have any official role in the government of Malaysia.
Nothing in the Malaysian constitution and laws says she is accorded the title ‘First Lady of Malaysia’ (Flom).

Therefore, who the heck is Rizal to speak like he is some government official with authority? He is just a butler in Najib's household. - Mkini

Utusan urges Putrajaya to 'blacklist' Bersih's sponsors

Image result for Utusan urges Putrajaya to 'blacklist' Bersih sponsors

Utusan Malaysia has urged Putrajaya to blacklist businesses which funds electoral reforms pressure group Bersih's ongoing roadshow.
In an article by Awang Selamat today, the daily said that it was wrong for businesses to back a group that is tyring to depose a democratically elected government.
"Another issue which needs attention is the business dealings or award of contracts to companies and entrepreneurs who sponsor the series of Bersih gatherings.
"This issue has been repeatedly raised to Awang's. These pro-Bersih companies should rightfully be blacklisted," read the article written by the Umno-owned daily's senior editors under the same pseudonym.
The article also claimed that state governments that are not administered by BN often had the same policy of "blacklisting" companies which are seen as the "enemy".
"What is happening now is (Putrajaya) is empowering the guilty parties.
"These businesses are making a profit which are used to fund Bersih which wants to overthrow a government outside the democratic process," read the article.

In view of this, the authors urged Putrajaya to take preemptive action against the "Bersih 5 threat".
Bersih is currently organising a series of roadshows to drum up support for the Bersih 5 rally scheduled for Nov 19 in Kuala Lumpur.
The Bersih 5 rally is calling for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to step down over the 1MDB scandal and for reforms to the electoral system.- Mkini

MP: If ‘sub judice’, M'sia courts can also similarly convict MO1

Image result for Parliament speaker pandikar

Dewan Rakyat speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia's argument that discussion of the 1MDB scandal in Parliament would affect the court case in the US could also apply to local investigators, said an MP.
Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng said if Pandikar's claim were true, then investigations abroad could also affect case here made against the scandal-hit Finance Ministry sovereign fund.
"Let me remind Pandikar that 1MDB is the prime subject of investigations into money-laundering and fraud in at least six countries, including Switzerland, Singapore and the US.
"If his theory of sub judice is correct, we can then rely on what public statements have been made by investigators in the six countries as proof to convict […] the one popularly known as 'Malaysian Official 1' in our Malaysian courts," said Lim in a statement today.
Lim said based on the speaker's "wisdom" Bank Negara could use the explanations in the Singapore Central Bank's documents to initiate proceedings against local banks linked to 1MDB or its subsidiaries to transfer large sums into Prime Minister Najib Razak's personal accounts.
Last Thursday Pandikar barred questions on the growing 1MDB scandal saying it would be sub judice, as the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) could cite the Hansard in its US forfeiture hearings.
Former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram said Pandikar's argument was legally incorrect.
Former Court of Appeal judge Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus concurred, telling Malaysiakini the question of sub judice does not arise at all.
He said this is because the case is being heard in the US, not Malaysia.
Not America's 51st state
Lim reminded Pandikar Singapore this month ordered Falcon Bank to close its local branch and pay a S$4.3 million fine.
"Two bank officers were charged in Singapore over various crimes linked to the 1MDB scandal.
"Earlier this month the Swiss attorney-general also alleged 1MDB and its subsidiaries were involved in a ponzi-like scheme," said Lim.
He quipped Pandikar should be reminded Malaysia isn't the US' 51st state."Therefore to debate the DOJ civil suit involving 1MDB in Parliament is not sub judice at all," he said.

In July the US DOJ launched what it described as one of the largest single action ever brought under the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative, involving approximately US$1 billion worth of assets allegedly taken from 1MDB.
"The Malaysian people were defrauded on an enormous scale (in) a scheme in which tentacles reached around the world," deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Andrew McCabe had said.
However, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak had said that the DOJ action does not involve him.
While the court filings do not mention the prime minister directly, it does cite an unnamed 'Malaysian Official 1' 36 times. -Mkini

Saturday, October 22, 2016


This news has not been reported by Utusan Meloya, Berita Harian, NST or Star. It means the gomen has given instructions to hush things up.
Only the Chinese Press has been playing this up. Messages were flying around that the EPF was borrowing RM12 billion.
The EPF has now clarified that they are not borrowing RM12 Billion. They are only borrowing RM1.2 Billion.  (Such a small amount). Here is EPF’s explanation why they are borrowing, which itself is strange. 

The news had earlier been reported in the Chinese media.

Lets analyse a little.
EPF says they want to borrow RM1.28 billion to protect against forex risks.
This does not make sense. To protect against forex risks you can buy some currency hedging. You can “lock in” a certain exchange rate  for the currency of your requirement. But you cannot lock in the exchange rate forever. They usually run for a few months. 
Some bank must provide this ‘lock in rate’ and they will charge an arm and a leg.  And there are major risks. This was how our Bank Negara lost all those billions of Ringgits. Still have not learnt any lessons?
If the EPF wants to refinance its assets in the UK, then they should be borrowing in UK Pounds. Not Ringgits. If you borrow Ringgits to refinance Pound Sterling it does not make good sense. This is what happened in the 90s economic crisis. Local corporates borrowed in US Dollar when their earnings were in Ringgit. A bad example : TNB.
Unless the EPF is borrowing in Pounds from DBS and Stanchart Banks.
So the cat is out of the bag – refinance means the EPF borrowed to acquire those assets. 
Borrowed in Ringgit or in Pounds? 
Oops.  Tapi kenapa nak rahsia sangat? Duit orang lah. 


The philosophy guiding how a government relates with the people is something that not many Malaysians talk about. But if we go back to the early days of this country, ideology used to matter.
In a speech delivered at IDEAS Annual Dinner on 20 February 2016, Tun Musa Hitam, Malaysia’s former Deputy Prime Minister who started his political career under Tunku Abdul Rahman, said, “In those early days of our history, politics was more ideological than material. There were indeed, yes, indeed, two camps in Umno: the Tunku camp and the Razak camp.
“The Tunku camp was clearly and unapologetically right wing, pro-west and pro-business. The Razak camp was allegedly socialist-communist inclined, a brand enough to scare and scuttle people away all the way in those days when communist terrorists were the biggest threat to our independence.”
This was a telling statement, because Musa was suggesting that the liberal administration of the Tunku was eventually replaced by a socialist-communist inclined administration of Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, Malaysia’s second Prime Minister.
If we analyse history carefully, indeed we could see how Razak was leaning in a leftist direction. Among the most significant foreign relations built by Razak was with communist China, when he visited the country in May 1974. Razak was also the one who introduced huge government intervention into Malaysia’s socioeconomic system when he introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1971.
Government domination of the economy is an important feature of a leftist ideology, and this naturally led to the government imposed ethnic-based affirmative action, and all its related policies, that plague our country until today.
Razak’s ideology was almost completely opposite to the market economy envisioned by the Tunku when he said that Malaysia is a country that believes “in the system of free enterprise”.
We must acknowledge that government intervention has existed since the time of the Tunku. Several times the Tunku too used government powers to stifle dissent. But government interventionism grew much bigger and was formalised under Razak’s administration.
TUNKU CAMP VS RAZAK CAMP: Behind the smiles, did Razak plot Tunku’s ouster
It was Razak’s desire effort to create an ill-defined “social justice” that gave birth to the New Economic Policy (NEP). As a result of their wrong definition of social justice, the NEP was implemented is such a way that nudged us to live our lives along communal lines until today.
Even worse, today we can’t even discuss this supposed temporary policy in rational way anymore. Today we live in a country where if you speak honestly on difficult and sensitive issues, you risk being accused of disloyalty to the country, or worse, being seditious.
Thus we see today how everyone, from activists to the media, thinking twice before commenting on the so-called sensitive topics. That is the legacy that was left to us by Razak’s imposition of big government on Malaysia. That is what we get when we fail to understand the real philosophy, and the potential dangers of the philosophy, behind a particular policy.
It will take a lot more time to change this situation. But it is important for those of us who dream of a more liberal future for the country to persist. We cannot allow the country to continue on the trajectory of big government paved by, as Musa Hitam puts it, Razak’s “socialist-communist inclined” thinking.
Instead of a big government philosophy, I propose that we should return to the philosophy of a liberal, small and limited government as originally envisioned by the Tunku for this country.
The liberal belief stems from a commitment to the principle of liberty, which is commonly described as the right to live our lives in any way we want to so long as we do not do any harm to others.
It is important to stress the second part of the description: “as long as we do no harm to others”.
A liberal way of life a highly responsible one. We take it as our responsibility to do no harm to others and we acknowledge that we will have to account for any harm that we do. Yes we want to live our lives how we wish. But we also undertake not to harm others.
Tunku Abdul Rahman puts it nicely when he said that “Life in this world is short. Let us make use of our lives in the pursuit of happiness and not trouble.”
In fact, the Tunku even put in the Proclamation of Independence that one of the roles of government is “ever seeking the welfare and happiness of its people”. It is not the role of government to stop us from enjoying our happiness in the way we want. Instead the role of government is to help and to allow us to seek our own happiness in our own ways.
As I said above, it will take time before we can truly enjoy the fruits of the Tunku’s vision for liberty for this country. The liberal journey of this country was disrupted in 1970 and that disruption continues until today. We need to realign the country back to the right trajectory.
And the realignment process needs to start with us appreciating the importance of having a philosophy based on freedom and liberty to guide all our policies.
(Wan Saiful Wan Jan is the chief executive of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs, IDEAS)