Different or Indifference? ( Eng/ Bahasa)

Different or Indifference ?

Sarawak is indeed different  - not because the people are different but because the Government over the decades had failed to make a difference to bridge the socio-economic differences.

The question - is it due to genuine differences or political, socio-economic indifference ?

With a strong, stable and rich government, why are there still poverty, poor basic infrastructures and concerns over clean water, electricity supply and internet connectivity in this 21st century of science and technology  ?

https://www.theborneopost.com/2019/02/01/outwardly-rich-inwardly-poor/

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2020/07/13/sarawak-has-very-high-level-of-low-income-families-based-on-latest-poverty-criteria

https://dayakdaily.com/provide-clean-water-supply-electricity-internet-connectivity-to-rural-community-entulu/

https://www.newsarawaktribune.com.my/address-lack-of-internet-connectivity/

"Sarawakians had voted ‘wisely’ over the years to give the GPS/BN government and leaders the mandate to govern for the past 47 years"

47-57 years..... are way too long, notwithstanding what the 'experts' and political sychopants may say.

SARAWAKIANS must wake up and seriously consider choosing a new government to really feel and experience that...

1. There is always a better way of doing things.

2. No government or leaders are indispensable.

3. If better were possible, good is never enough.

4. Competition brings out the best in most things, including government and leadership.

5. We are RESPONSIBLE for the leaders and government we elect.

Mediocre leaders are a reflection of our very own CHOICES, if we keep electing and putting them in power.

6. A responsible government will ensure EQUITABLE development and ensure that it prospers and empowers its people through people-centric policies driven by a oneness in purpose for the common good and prosperity of all.

7. Leadership and government must be driven by the power of example over the example of power.

Until we get these into our hearts and minds, we will continue to move in circles, with 'business as usual'.

We need leaders driven by patriotism, not by greed.

For that to happen, we must recognise that ‘CHANGE’ is no longer a want, but a NEED.

A dire NEED.

Indeed, for Sarawak.

https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2021/01/08/we-want-to-replace-gps-in-sarawak-says-psbs-wong/

➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖

( BAHASA) 

Berbeza atau Tidak peduli?

Sarawak sememangnya mempunyai banyak perbezaan - Perbezaan ini bukanlah datang dari kepelbagaian masyarakat majmuk, tetapi kerana kepimpinan Kerajaan selama beberapa dekad telah gagal membuat perbezaan untuk merapatkan perbezaan sosio-ekonomi.

Persoalannya - adakah ini disebabkan oleh perbezaan sebenar atau ketidakpedulian sosio-ekonomi politik?

Dengan adanya Kerajaan yang kuat, stabil dan kaya, tetapi mengapa masih wujudnya jurang kemiskinan, infrastruktur asas yang buruk serta kebimbangan mengenai bekalan air bersih, elektrik dan sambungan internet pada abad ke-21, iaitu di zaman kecanggihan sains dan teknologi ini?

https://www.theborneopost.com/2019/02/01/outwardly-rich-inwardly-poor/

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2020/07/13/sarawak-has-very-high-level-of-low-income-families-based-on-latest-poverty-criteria

https://dayakdaily.com/provide-clean-water-supply-electricity-internet-connectivity-to-rural-community-entulu/

https://www.newsarawaktribune.com.my/address-lack-of-internet-connectivity/

Warga Sarawak telah memilih secara 'bijak' selama bertahun-tahun untuk memberi mandat kepada Kerajaan  dan pemimpin GPS / BN untuk memerintah selama 47 tahun terakhir.

47-57 tahun ..... terlalu lama, walau apa pun yang dikatakan oleh 'pakar' dan ahli syurga politik,

SARAWAKIANS mesti bangun dan mempertimbangkan dengan serius untuk memilih kerajaan baru yang benar-benar layak sehingga rakyat dapat merasai dan mengalami ...

1. Selalu ada cara yang lebih baik untuk melakukan sesuatu.

2. Tiada kerajaan atau pemimpin yang mustahak.

3. Sekiranya ada peluang yang mungkin lebih baik, kebaikan tidak akan pernah mencukupi.

4. Persaingan akan melahirkan banyak perkara yang baik, termasuk Kerajaan dan kepemimpinan.

5. Kita BERTANGGUNGJAWAB untuk memainkan peranan penting dalam usahasama memimpin terhadap Kerajaan yang telah kita pilih.

Bahkan jika, pemimpin yang biasa-biasa saja adalah gambaran PILIHAN kita sendiri, jika kita terus memilih dan meletakkan mereka berkuasa.

6. Kerajaan yang bertanggungjawab akan memastikan pembangunan yang SESUAI serta memastikan bahawa pembangunan tersebut haruslah maju dan memberi kekuatan kepada rakyatnya melalui dasar-dasar yang berpusatkan kepada rakyat yang didorong oleh kesatuan yang bertujuan untuk kebaikkan dan kesejahteraan bersama.

7. Pemimpin yang alang-alang atau 'semadi nadai' merupakan gambaran terhadap pilihan kita, kerana kitalah yang memilih dan memberikan mereka kuasa.

Sehingga kita dapat merasainya ke dalam hati dan fikiran kita, kita akan terus bergerak dalam lingkaran, dengan 'business as usual'

Kita memerlukan pemimpin yang didorong oleh patriotisme, bukan dengan penuh ketamakkan.

Untuk itu, kita mesti menyedari bahawa 'PERUBAHAN' bukan lagi kehendak, tetapi PERLU.

PERUBAHAN YANG MUSTAHAK.

Perubahan ini sememangnya untuk Sarawak.

https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2021/01/08/we-want-to-replace-gps-in-sarawak-says-psbs-wong/

 

Sarawak & Carbon Credit - Surely You Jest Bro Jo

 Sarawak & Carbon Credit - Surely You Jest Bro Jo

In a statement to the media on the 19th Oct 2020, reported by Borneo Post under the caption ‘ Sarawak Needs To Upgrade Law To Claim Carbon Credit, say CM’ CM Datuk Patinggi Abang Johari Tun Openg talked about updating state laws so that Sarawak can claim carbon credit and be recognised as a green state.

https://www.theborneopost.com/2020/10/19/sarawak-needs-law-to-claim-carbon-credit-says-abang-johari/

So what exactly is this carbon credit that Abang Johari is talking about and what is green state? Well, the key to understanding this starts with something called carbon footprints and carbon footprint corresponds to the whole amount of greenhouse gases (GHG) produced to, directly and indirectly, support a person’s lifestyle and activities.

Carbon footprints are usually measured in equivalent tons of CO2, during the period of a year, and they can be associated with an individual, an organization, a product or an event, among others.

Wide scale deforestation is a significant contributor to carbon footprints and the consequential global warming. 

Carbon credits and carbon tradings are mechanisms put in place by countries who are parties to the Kyoto Protocols and the Paris Agreement to control the emission of greenhouse gas and reduce global warming. Developing countries like Malaysia whose greenhouse emission is presently relatively high can use carbon credits earned from efforts to progressively reduce their rate of emission while promoting renewable energy. In other words, carbon emissions trading allows countries that have higher carbon emissions to purchase the right to release more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere from countries that have lower carbon emissions. It is a little like sin tax.

The thing to note here is that while Malaysia did ratify the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris agreement these two treaties are not binding on Malaysia because Malaysia is on the non-annexed list of developing countries. Incidentally, both the Kyoto Protocols and Paris Agreement are initiatives of the United Nation. Because Malaysia is not fully bound to the two agreements the question of Malaysia trading carbon credits does not arise. That Abang Johari mentioned that Sarawak does not have provisions in its law to treat carbon credit as a trading commodity is even more perplexing because carbon credit trading can occur only with the framework of the two treaties mentioned and the treaties are between nations that are fully and legally bound by the terms of the treaties. In short, these two treaties is the business of the federal government and the Sarawak government has no direct voice in the workings of these treaties in Malaysia.

https://magazine.scientificmalaysian.com/issue-13-2017/tackling-climate-change-malaysias-emission-reduction-target/

There is however the small possibility that Abang Johari has decided that he does not want to be controlled by the Malaya-driven federal government any more. And he wants Sarawak to have the necessary state laws to empower the Sarawak government to ‘fully ratify’ and be completely and legally bound to the two treaties, for the good of Sarawak. That of course will automatically mean that he is pushing forward the idea that Sarawak is a sovereign state (equal partner) within Malaysia and furthering the full and complete autonomy agenda under MA63. If this is the case, I am certain he has the unequivocal support of all Sarawakians, provided he carry the plan through. 

Sarawakians should now strongly urged Abang Johari to apply to the UN to allow Sarawak to be a party to the Kyoto Protocols and to the Paris Agreement and thereafter to ratify these two treaties. Once that is done Sarawak DUN must legislate a state law to ensure full compliance by all parties involved in the industry.

Sarawak’s stake in the oil palm industry was recently increased when the Sarawak government agreed to buy all of Tabung Haji’s plantations in Sarawak. The plantations were collectively valued at RM1.42 billion. That is the equivalent of 48% of the SST paid by Petronas to Sarawak. So it stands to reason that it must do all it possibly can to get in the good books of consumers in the EU countries and in the US.

https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/newsbreak-th-plantations-advanced-talks-sell-assets-sarawak

So, what has bio-gas from oil palm bio-waste got to do with carbon credits and green state status for Sarawak? Truth be told, I really don’t know. The main issue with the EU countries and the US over Malaysia’s oil palm is wide scale deforestation, cause of high carbon dioxide emission and global warming and, generating bio-gas from oil palm bio waste may be in line with the global trends of favoring renewable energy but it will not make the deforestation issue disappear.

There is the other issue about the viability of investments in plants for bio-gas in Sarawak. A study conducted not too long ago shows that one key issue among plantation companies is the high capital investment in the generating plants. Even if the mills are in close proximity to SEB’s grid, the Sarawak government will still not be able to compel any mill owners to build bio-gas generating plant as presently Sarawak does not have have ‘purpose built’ or dedicated ordinance that govern bio-gas industry in Sarawak.

Renewable energy is the future and CM Abang Johari looks determined and is fully prepared to bring Sarawak to make that quantum leap into the future. This is another area where Sarawakians must give their full support to Abang Johari. We there strongly urged him to lead the government, in the next sitting of the DUN, to legislate two crucial two ordinances namely the Renewable Energy Ordinance and Sustainable Energy Development Ordinance, patterned along the lines of the federal Renewable Energy Ordinance Act 2011 and the Sustainable Energy Development Act 2011. 

It would be quite safe to conclude that without these two initiatives, namely ratifying the two international treaties mentioned above and legislating laws that will give power to the government to implement the reforms to the industry, the oil palm industry will remain only as a channel to give huge tracts of land, very often NCR land of the dayaks, to the cronies of the government leaders.

Sarawakians will regard the initiatives mentioned above as one among your must do pre-PRN-12 Key Performance Indicators and will be closely monitored.

Over to you Abang Johari Sir.

SELF-PRAISE IS NO PRAISE

  SELF-PRAISE IS NO PRAISE

‘Sarawak has sound financial and resource management and this has helped the state to implement various development projects.

                 Chief Minister Datuk Patinggi Abang Johari Tun Openg pointed this out at a community                           dinner  held at the Kapit Civic Centre on Sunday evening (Oct 4th 2020)’

Those were the opening lines in a news report captioned  ‘State has sound financial, resource management’ and carried by the New Sarawak Tribune dated the 5th Oct 2020.

The claim is something all Sarawakians would be proud of it was a completely truthful statement. Unfortunately, truth sometimes can be stranger than fiction and in this case, it is a fiction worthy of a literally award. The only thing that Sarawakians will agree about in the matter of financial management is Sarawak finances is shrouded in secrecy.

In June 2018, shortly after the GE14 in which the Pakatan Harapan (PH) showed Barisan Nasional (BN) the exit door, Sarawak DCM Tan Sri James Masing was reported as having said the the Sarawak BN government should use up all the state’s reserve in the amount of RM31 billion for projects before the PRN12. That was the first and the last time Sarawakians ever heard of the financial strength of the Sarawak government because after that revelation from James Masing there was no farther mention from any of the government leaders including from the chief minister himself. Indeed, I am inclined to think that most of GPS ADUNs including assistant ministers do not know of the existence of the reserve.

Sufficiently piqued by this revelation Sarawakians are now asking where is the money kept. It would not be logical to assume that the entire RM31 billion is kept in low interest paying bank accounts as that would not exactly be sound financial management. So where is the money spread? Treasury Bills, Malaysian Government Securities, Stock & Shares? Real Estate Investments?, Bonds like the 1MDB Bonds? If a significant portion of the reserve is kept in forms other than cash, then what is the current market value now? Is the RM31 billion still there? 

Sarawakians are asking because what they know of from information in public domain does not dovetail with this ‘brief flash in the pan’ revelation from James Masing. There was for example the issuance of USD1.6 billion through Goldman Sachs in 2011 and 2012:  US investment bank Goldman Sachs appears to have turned a blind eye to glaring corruption risks and conflicts of interest in order to underwrite US$1.6 billion in bonds for the Sarawak State Government, Malaysia, said Global Witness today (1). https://www.globalwitness.org/en/archive/goldman-sachs-underwrites-us16-billion-under-radar-bonds-corrupt-sarawak-regime-and-wins/

The scandal ridden jiwa murni roads in central and northern regions of Sarawak is another example which speaks of the possibility of the reserve not existing at all. The jiwa murni roads were crucial network of roads that was intended to provide rural communities with road connectivity. We now know that the ‘contracted’ sum was RM800 million which was less than a billion ringgit. Why did the Sarawak government not use the reserve to construct these roads, so crucial to the well-being of the rural folks? Not to mention the 24 hours electricity and treated water supply to communities that are still deprived of these most basic of utilities. Good financial management would have dictated that financing for these projects would be through sources carrying the smallest interest or opportunity cost burden to the state government and raising funding through issuance of bonds is definitely not the best option.

The Development Bank Of Sarawak (DBOS), incorporated in May 2016 and commenced business in Jan 2018 is one page from the annals of the financial management of the Sarawak government which raised many questions among Sarawakians. The following is an excerpt from a news report carried by Borneo Post on the 13th Jan 2019 :

‘As of Oct 23 last year, DBOS holds a total deposit of RM3.448 billion with credit facilities approved and disbursed standing at RM350 million and RM244 million, respectively.

Assistant Minister of Corporate Affairs Abdullah Saidol said the depositors are government-linked companies (RM7.5 million), local authorities (RM17.6 million), statutory bodies (RM23.2 million), and the public sector (RM3.4 billion)’

https://www.theborneopost.com/2019/01/13/dbos-an-alternative-financing-route-for-sarawak/

At that time DBOS had in their books deposits totaling RM3.448 billion, all from the Sarawak government, directly or indirectly and a paid-up capital of RM1 billion.

https://www.dbos.gov.my/page-0-9-6-tid.html

On the 13th Jan 2020 DBOS homepage published a media statement in which they said ‘ Besides this, he (Sim Kheng Boon,CEO of DBOS) said DBOS had already approved loans amounting to a few billion ringgit. Aside from financing mega development projects, the bank also finances smaller infrastructure projects……“DBOS will offer banking facilities to eligible borrowers which have at least 51 per cent state equity with management control.’

The last sentence quoted here presented at least one area of concern which is that, among the eligible borrowers are those with 51% state equity with the balance of 49% being privately held. What it means here is that DBOS was set up to help finance (with state funds) private business people. Here we are talking about financing for the elites, the privilege few who are able to dip their hands into the 49% share in these very lucrative areas.

https://www.dbos.gov.my/modules/web/pages.php?mod=news&sub=news_view&menu_id=0&sub_id=19&nid=11&m=1&y=2020

An article published in the Home Page of Sarawak’s DAP reveals some names which should ring many alarm bells.

https://en.dapsarawak.org/petros-board-members-beneficiaries-of-petronas-contracts/

Next is Petroleum Sarawak Berhad (Petros), another wholly state-owned enterprise incorporated on the 6th March 2018. Petros presently has an issued and paid-up capital of RM20 million. 

In the words of CM Datuk Patinggi Abang Johari, it was set up by the state government to enable Sarawak to actively participate in the extraction of oil and gas in Sarawak. The thinly veiled objective was to increase the revenue stream from the oil and gas sector as the federal government was saying signs that it will not bow to Sarawak’s demand for an increase in oil loyalty.

What significant success has Petros achieved since incorporation? It was reported in Feb 2020 that Petros has assumed the role of gas transporter and aggregator in Sarawak effective this year following the sales and purchase of gas distribution business and assets in Miri and Bintulu.

Petroleum Sarawak Gas Sdn Bhd (Petros Gas), a subsidiary of Petros, is now the operator of Miri Gas Distribution System (MGDS) and Bintulu Gas Distribution System (BGDS). Both facilities were previously owned and operated by PETRONAS Gas Berhad (PGB), a subsidiary of Petronas.

https://www.newsarawaktribune.com.my/petros-takes-over-gas-distribution-business/

How much is the segment worth yearly to Sarawak or how much did Sarawak compensated Petronas for it was never revealed. What we do know is PDA74 is still very much relevant in the oil & gas industry and will remain as a major damper on CM Abang Johari’s ambitions for Petros and for the ROE and ROI of Petros. 

And there is the matter of the SST payout of RM2.95  billion by Petronas. Sarawakians were told on the 17th Sept 2020 that Petronas has paid to the Sarawak government the sum of RM2.95 billion in court-awarded SST on O&G products. Nine days later, Sarawakians were told that the Sarawak government has agreed to buy all of Tabung Haji oil palm estates in Sarawak. The consideration price was not mentioned but a 2019 valuation of the estates placed the fair value at RM1.42 billion. 

In the final reckoning it was a case of the federal government, through Petronas, putting money through Sarawak’s left pocket and taking it back through the right pocket via the Tabung Haji’s rescue plans. Whether or not there was some arm twisting there is unknown but Sarawak certainly was short changed.

https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/petronas-says-it-has-paid-sarawak-sst-2019

https://www.theborneopost.com/2020/09/26/swak-government-to-take-over-tabung-haji-oil-palm-plantations-in-the-state-says-cm/

And that, to my mind are unacceptable blunders in the managing of both the state’s financial and natural resources.