Source TheStar
KUALA LUMPUR: The Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) has been banned effective yesterday, said Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar.
In a statement yesterday, Syed Hamid said the decision to declare Hindraf illegal was made as a result of investigations by the Registrar of Societies (ROS).
“The ministry found the organisation’s activities contravened the Societies Act 1966 and if left unchecked, the organisation could pose a threat to public order, peace, security and morality in Malaysia,” he said, adding that even the sovereignty of the country and prevailing racial harmony would be jeopardised.
He made the declaration based on powers vested under Section 5(1) of the Societies Act.
Syed Hamid said Hindraf had the criteria of an organisation as it had filed an application to register with the ROS on Oct 16 last year.
Despite not getting approval, he said Hindraf had been organising illegal assemblies and inciting hatred among Malays and Indians.
“Hindraf also tried to get the support of foreign countries to pressure the Government to bow to its demands,” he said, adding that all these had affected the country’s image.
Ipoh Barat MP M. Kulasegaran said the decision was ridiculous and uncalled for, adding that he would move an emergency motion asking for an open debate in Parliament today.
“This is against the interest and aspirations of the Indian community that is seeking a more tolerant and fair Government,” he said, adding that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had agreed to hold a dialogue with Hindraf leaders but “nothing was done”.
Hindraf national coordinator, R.S. Thanenthiran said the ban was unfair as they had not committed any crime or broken any laws, adding that Syed Hamid could have done this in retaliation to the police reports Hindraf supporters lodged against him.
Thanenthiran said Hindraf chairman P. Waythamoorthy, who is in self-exile in Britain, had instructed coordinators to wait for a day before making further statements.
Coalition of Indian NGOs secretary-general Gunaraj George said that by banning Hindraf, Syed Hamid had rendered the Indian community voiceless, but said it would not dampen the spirit of its supporters.
“I know that their struggle will go on especially to free all those detained under the ISA.”
Governemnt bans Hindraf for contravening Societies Act
Source TheStar
KUALA LUMPUR: The Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) has been banned effective yesterday, said Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar.
In a statement yesterday, Syed Hamid said the decision to declare Hindraf illegal was made as a result of investigations by the Registrar of Societies (ROS).
“The ministry found the organisation’s activities contravened the Societies Act 1966 and if left unchecked, the organisation could pose a threat to public order, peace, security and morality in Malaysia,” he said, adding that even the sovereignty of the country and prevailing racial harmony would be jeopardised.
He made the declaration based on powers vested under Section 5(1) of the Societies Act.
Syed Hamid said Hindraf had the criteria of an organisation as it had filed an application to register with the ROS on Oct 16 last year.
Despite not getting approval, he said Hindraf had been organising illegal assemblies and inciting hatred among Malays and Indians.
“Hindraf also tried to get the support of foreign countries to pressure the Government to bow to its demands,” he said, adding that all these had affected the country’s image.
Ipoh Barat MP M. Kulasegaran said the decision was ridiculous and uncalled for, adding that he would move an emergency motion asking for an open debate in Parliament today.
“This is against the interest and aspirations of the Indian community that is seeking a more tolerant and fair Government,” he said, adding that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had agreed to hold a dialogue with Hindraf leaders but “nothing was done”.
Hindraf national coordinator, R.S. Thanenthiran said the ban was unfair as they had not committed any crime or broken any laws, adding that Syed Hamid could have done this in retaliation to the police reports Hindraf supporters lodged against him.
Thanenthiran said Hindraf chairman P. Waythamoorthy, who is in self-exile in Britain, had instructed coordinators to wait for a day before making further statements.
Coalition of Indian NGOs secretary-general Gunaraj George said that by banning Hindraf, Syed Hamid had rendered the Indian community voiceless, but said it would not dampen the spirit of its supporters.
“I know that their struggle will go on especially to free all those detained under the ISA.”
KUALA LUMPUR: The Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) has been banned effective yesterday, said Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar.
In a statement yesterday, Syed Hamid said the decision to declare Hindraf illegal was made as a result of investigations by the Registrar of Societies (ROS).
“The ministry found the organisation’s activities contravened the Societies Act 1966 and if left unchecked, the organisation could pose a threat to public order, peace, security and morality in Malaysia,” he said, adding that even the sovereignty of the country and prevailing racial harmony would be jeopardised.
He made the declaration based on powers vested under Section 5(1) of the Societies Act.
Syed Hamid said Hindraf had the criteria of an organisation as it had filed an application to register with the ROS on Oct 16 last year.
Despite not getting approval, he said Hindraf had been organising illegal assemblies and inciting hatred among Malays and Indians.
“Hindraf also tried to get the support of foreign countries to pressure the Government to bow to its demands,” he said, adding that all these had affected the country’s image.
Ipoh Barat MP M. Kulasegaran said the decision was ridiculous and uncalled for, adding that he would move an emergency motion asking for an open debate in Parliament today.
“This is against the interest and aspirations of the Indian community that is seeking a more tolerant and fair Government,” he said, adding that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had agreed to hold a dialogue with Hindraf leaders but “nothing was done”.
Hindraf national coordinator, R.S. Thanenthiran said the ban was unfair as they had not committed any crime or broken any laws, adding that Syed Hamid could have done this in retaliation to the police reports Hindraf supporters lodged against him.
Thanenthiran said Hindraf chairman P. Waythamoorthy, who is in self-exile in Britain, had instructed coordinators to wait for a day before making further statements.
Coalition of Indian NGOs secretary-general Gunaraj George said that by banning Hindraf, Syed Hamid had rendered the Indian community voiceless, but said it would not dampen the spirit of its supporters.
“I know that their struggle will go on especially to free all those detained under the ISA.”
Government to relook and shelve some projects
Source TheStar
KUALA LUMPUR: The Government will review and shelve some projects including those in the economic corridors in view of the global economic slowdown, said Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
The Prime Minister said the Government would decide which projects should go ahead and which could be put on hold.
“We have made the decision to review the projects once again. We need to postpone some projects which have yet to start construction,” he said at Akademi Kenegaraan’s closing ceremony for the Spirit of Merdeka 2008.
Abdullah said the action was appropriate because these were big projects and involved huge sums of money.
“The review involves all projects including those in the economic corridors. We will implement those we can afford and hold back those which can be postponed,” he said.
He said, however, the country was still drawing in foreign investments, adding that Malaysia’s approach was “targeted investment” from areas with excess funds.
“We have provided good investment opportunities for this country,” he said.
To a question on Malaysia not being able to achieve the same GDP as the previous year due to the global economic slowdown, Abdullah said Malaysia’s economy was resilient and the ringgit stable and it had strong foreign reserves.
He said Malaysia could maintain its exports at a high level and it was enjoying a favourable trade balance and even though the political scenario in the country was active, the nation remained peaceful.
Abdullah said Malaysia has already determined its approach in the present challenging economic times and had strategies to minimise the impact.
“We used to be dependent on the American market but we have now diversified and found markets for our goods in others places like the Asean countries, China and countries other than the United States,” he said.
He also pointed out that Malaysia had a high level of savings and this could help the situation.
“Malaysians can invest inside the country and domestic consumption can drive the economy,” he said, adding that the country’s fundamentals remained strong.
On another matter involving the purported controversial helicopter purchase, Abdullah said he had not received the details of the Eurocopter deal.
“I am calling the Mindef (Defence Ministry) secretary-general about this. I don’t want to cause any confusion,” said Abdullah, who is also Defence Minister.
Earlier this month, Mentari Services Sdn Bhd chairman Capt (Rtd) Zahar Hashim alleged that the tender made during Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s tenure as Defence Minister to replace the aging Nuri helicopters had been too costly.
Capt Zahar claimed the Government could have saved almost RM1.5bil if it had bought the Kazan-M172 helicopters from Kelowna Flightcraft Ltd, the firm he represents, instead of buying Cougar EC-725s from the German-French firm, Eurocopter.
He said the Kazan-M172 met all the specifications required by the armed forces and cost RM898mil while the Cougar units cost the Government RM2.317bil.
KUALA LUMPUR: The Government will review and shelve some projects including those in the economic corridors in view of the global economic slowdown, said Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
The Prime Minister said the Government would decide which projects should go ahead and which could be put on hold.
“We have made the decision to review the projects once again. We need to postpone some projects which have yet to start construction,” he said at Akademi Kenegaraan’s closing ceremony for the Spirit of Merdeka 2008.
Abdullah said the action was appropriate because these were big projects and involved huge sums of money.
“The review involves all projects including those in the economic corridors. We will implement those we can afford and hold back those which can be postponed,” he said.
He said, however, the country was still drawing in foreign investments, adding that Malaysia’s approach was “targeted investment” from areas with excess funds.
“We have provided good investment opportunities for this country,” he said.
To a question on Malaysia not being able to achieve the same GDP as the previous year due to the global economic slowdown, Abdullah said Malaysia’s economy was resilient and the ringgit stable and it had strong foreign reserves.
He said Malaysia could maintain its exports at a high level and it was enjoying a favourable trade balance and even though the political scenario in the country was active, the nation remained peaceful.
Abdullah said Malaysia has already determined its approach in the present challenging economic times and had strategies to minimise the impact.
“We used to be dependent on the American market but we have now diversified and found markets for our goods in others places like the Asean countries, China and countries other than the United States,” he said.
He also pointed out that Malaysia had a high level of savings and this could help the situation.
“Malaysians can invest inside the country and domestic consumption can drive the economy,” he said, adding that the country’s fundamentals remained strong.
On another matter involving the purported controversial helicopter purchase, Abdullah said he had not received the details of the Eurocopter deal.
“I am calling the Mindef (Defence Ministry) secretary-general about this. I don’t want to cause any confusion,” said Abdullah, who is also Defence Minister.
Earlier this month, Mentari Services Sdn Bhd chairman Capt (Rtd) Zahar Hashim alleged that the tender made during Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s tenure as Defence Minister to replace the aging Nuri helicopters had been too costly.
Capt Zahar claimed the Government could have saved almost RM1.5bil if it had bought the Kazan-M172 helicopters from Kelowna Flightcraft Ltd, the firm he represents, instead of buying Cougar EC-725s from the German-French firm, Eurocopter.
He said the Kazan-M172 met all the specifications required by the armed forces and cost RM898mil while the Cougar units cost the Government RM2.317bil.
Bernanke says U.S. economy faces big threat
Source Reuters
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday that turmoil in credit markets poses a "significant threat" to the U.S. economy, suggesting more interest-rate cuts could be coming to help stave off a deep downturn.
Bernanke said it will take some time to restore normal credit flows and pledged the U.S. central bank would continue to act aggressively to fight the crisis. Importantly, he said inflation risks were ebbing, which suggests Fed officials see latitude to lower borrowing costs further.
"By restricting flows of credit to households, businesses, and state and local governments, the turmoil in financial markets and the funding pressures on financial firms pose a significant threat to economic growth," Bernanke told the Economic Club of New York.
"We will continue to use all the tools at our disposal to improve market functioning and liquidity," he said, adding that policy-makers' aggressive and quick response crucially distinguished this episode from the crisis of the 1930s.
U.S. stocks, already down sharply on Wednesday on news of an unexpectedly big drop in September retail sales and weak factory data, sold off even more after the Fed chairman's dour assessment and finished the day with their largest percentage losses since the 1987 crash.
St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President James Bullard said the sharp 1.2 percent drop in retail sales increased the risk of recession. "The third quarter, I think, will be flat to slightly negative," he told reporters in Little Rock, Arkansas. "That is going to push up the probability that it will later be named a recession.
RATE CUT SEEN
The data contributed to expectations that Fed officials will follow up an emergency interest rate cut made last week with another reduction at their next meeting on October 28-29.
Last week, in concert with central banks around the globe, the Fed cut benchmark rates by a half point to 1.5 percent. It said an intensification of the financial crisis had raised risks to growth, while curbing the risk of inflation.
In the latest bid to restore financial market stability, the U.S. government on Tuesday announced a dramatic plan to recapitalize banks, beginning with a $125 billion equity investment in nine major financial institutions.
But even with the government scrambling to restore credit, Bernanke cautioned it will take time for the economy to heal.
"Stabilization of the financial markets is a critical first step, but even if they stabilize as we hope they will, broader economic recovery will not happen right away," he said.
Analysts said Bernanke's words suggested the Fed chief saw the deteriorating outlook as calling for another rate cut.
"Bernanke's comments ... reinforce the sense that the Fed will lower interest rates when it meets again," said Tony Crescenzi, chief bond market strategist at Miller, Tabak & Co in New York.
FEW BRIGHT SPOTS
A Fed report prepared for the central bank's next meeting added to the gloomy news about the economy.
The Beige Book said economic activity had weakened across the country in recent weeks as businesses revisited capital investment plans, consumers curtailed spending and labor markets softened. The Fed described business contacts as "pessimistic."
In his speech, Bernanke said the housing sector remained the economy's weakest spot, but he also cited "marked slowdowns" in consumer spending, business investment and the labor market.
He added that credit markets would take time to unfreeze and said export sales, until recently a bright spot, were likely to slow as well.
While inflation had been high recently, Bernanke said expectations of future inflation had held steady or eased, import prices were moderating and commodity prices had fallen.
Those factors, along with the softness in the economy, "should lead to rates of inflation more consistent with price stability," he said. "I think the evidence is now in that the inflation problems are moderating and look to be returning to price stability at a reasonable pace."
Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren was more direct.
"One of the characteristics of a recession is in each of these recessions the inflation rate has come down quite dramatically," he told a real estate group in Boston.
"We're in a period when the economy is likely to grow quite slowly. The events of the last couple of weeks certainly aren't going to help.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday that turmoil in credit markets poses a "significant threat" to the U.S. economy, suggesting more interest-rate cuts could be coming to help stave off a deep downturn.
Bernanke said it will take some time to restore normal credit flows and pledged the U.S. central bank would continue to act aggressively to fight the crisis. Importantly, he said inflation risks were ebbing, which suggests Fed officials see latitude to lower borrowing costs further.
"By restricting flows of credit to households, businesses, and state and local governments, the turmoil in financial markets and the funding pressures on financial firms pose a significant threat to economic growth," Bernanke told the Economic Club of New York.
"We will continue to use all the tools at our disposal to improve market functioning and liquidity," he said, adding that policy-makers' aggressive and quick response crucially distinguished this episode from the crisis of the 1930s.
U.S. stocks, already down sharply on Wednesday on news of an unexpectedly big drop in September retail sales and weak factory data, sold off even more after the Fed chairman's dour assessment and finished the day with their largest percentage losses since the 1987 crash.
St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President James Bullard said the sharp 1.2 percent drop in retail sales increased the risk of recession. "The third quarter, I think, will be flat to slightly negative," he told reporters in Little Rock, Arkansas. "That is going to push up the probability that it will later be named a recession.
RATE CUT SEEN
The data contributed to expectations that Fed officials will follow up an emergency interest rate cut made last week with another reduction at their next meeting on October 28-29.
Last week, in concert with central banks around the globe, the Fed cut benchmark rates by a half point to 1.5 percent. It said an intensification of the financial crisis had raised risks to growth, while curbing the risk of inflation.
In the latest bid to restore financial market stability, the U.S. government on Tuesday announced a dramatic plan to recapitalize banks, beginning with a $125 billion equity investment in nine major financial institutions.
But even with the government scrambling to restore credit, Bernanke cautioned it will take time for the economy to heal.
"Stabilization of the financial markets is a critical first step, but even if they stabilize as we hope they will, broader economic recovery will not happen right away," he said.
Analysts said Bernanke's words suggested the Fed chief saw the deteriorating outlook as calling for another rate cut.
"Bernanke's comments ... reinforce the sense that the Fed will lower interest rates when it meets again," said Tony Crescenzi, chief bond market strategist at Miller, Tabak & Co in New York.
FEW BRIGHT SPOTS
A Fed report prepared for the central bank's next meeting added to the gloomy news about the economy.
The Beige Book said economic activity had weakened across the country in recent weeks as businesses revisited capital investment plans, consumers curtailed spending and labor markets softened. The Fed described business contacts as "pessimistic."
In his speech, Bernanke said the housing sector remained the economy's weakest spot, but he also cited "marked slowdowns" in consumer spending, business investment and the labor market.
He added that credit markets would take time to unfreeze and said export sales, until recently a bright spot, were likely to slow as well.
While inflation had been high recently, Bernanke said expectations of future inflation had held steady or eased, import prices were moderating and commodity prices had fallen.
Those factors, along with the softness in the economy, "should lead to rates of inflation more consistent with price stability," he said. "I think the evidence is now in that the inflation problems are moderating and look to be returning to price stability at a reasonable pace."
Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren was more direct.
"One of the characteristics of a recession is in each of these recessions the inflation rate has come down quite dramatically," he told a real estate group in Boston.
"We're in a period when the economy is likely to grow quite slowly. The events of the last couple of weeks certainly aren't going to help.
Dow loses 733 after data feeds recession worry
Source Reuters
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street had its worst day since the 1987 stock market crash on Wednesday, as bleak economic data fed worries that all the efforts to unlock credit markets may not stave off a severe recession.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke added to those concerns when he said the economy faced a "significant threat" from paralyzed credit markets.
Dismal monthly U.S. retail sales set the tone for the session, dropping the most in more than three years, while a measure of New York state manufacturing hit its lowest level since the index started in 2001.
The Nasdaq has now wiped out all of its gains from Monday's 11 percent rally, while the benchmark S&P 500 is up only about 1 percent from Friday's close.
Wednesday's data intensified recession fears, as did the Federal Reserve's Beige Book report, which showed economic activity weakened across the United States in September as businesses revised capital investments and consumers curtailed spending.
Shares of companies considered economic bellwethers, such as industrial conglomerate Caterpillar Inc, fell sharply. Caterpillar's shares slid over 11 percent.
Fears of recession knocked commodities lower, with Exxon Mobil tumbling 14 percent as the price of oil fell.
"Retail sales spooked investors this morning and has increased the near-term risk of a broad-based recession," said Tom Sowanick, chief investment officer at Clearbrook Financial LLC in Princeton, New Jersey.
The Dow and the benchmark S&P 500 suffered their worst one-day percentage drops since 1987.
The Dow Jones industrial average slid 733.08 points, or 7.87 percent, to 8,577.91, while the Standard & Poor's 500 Index tumbled 90.17 points, or 9.03 percent, to 907.84.
The Nasdaq Composite Index sank 150.68 points, or 8.47 percent, to 1,628.33.
The broad Dow Jones Wilshire 5000 closed down 905 points, or 8.99 percent, at 9,160.43, representing a paper loss for the day of approximately $1.1 trillion.
LATE SLIDE FOR eBAY
The negative news continued after the closing bell, with online auctioneer eBay Inc warning that its full-year revenues would fall below its previous forecast. Shares of eBay dropped about 4 percent after the closing bell.
During the regular session, shares of retailers skidded, with Wal-Mart falling 8.1 percent to $50.05 and Home Depot dropping 5.9 percent to $19.83. Analysts said the weak retail sales data underscored the severity of the squeeze on consumers faced with sliding home values, a tumbling stock market and tight credit.
Caterpillar's shares fell 11.4 percent to $42.06.
In the energy sector, Exxon Mobil fell 14 percent to $62.35, while Chevron lost 12.5 percent to $59.98. U.S. crude futures slid to a new 13-month low below $75 a barrel as fears of demand falling in a recession and slumping equities further pressured the oil markets. U.S. crude for November delivery fell $4.09 to settle at $74.54 a barrel.
Other commodity-related companies were also slammed as materials tumbled. Miner Freeport McMoran slid 19 percent to $33.17.
FOR BANKS, NO QUICK FIX
Financial shares fell after Meredith Whitney, an influential bank analyst at Oppenheimer & Co, said government's plan to stabilize key U.S. banks by injecting $250 billion is not a "panacea solution." The S&P's financial sub-index dropped 9.1 percent.
Shares of State Street Corp, one of the world's biggest institutional asset managers, plummeted 17.4 percent to $46.83. The company reported rising unrealized losses in its commercial paper program and investment portfolio, sparking concerns among investors.
Strong results from Coca-Cola, the world's largest soft-drink maker, helped it buck the trend after it posted quarterly profit that beat Wall Street's expectations. Coke's stock shot up 1.1 percent to $44.21 -- the only one of the 30 Dow industrials that finished higher.
Trading was low on the New York Stock Exchange, with about 1.68 billion shares changing hands, below last year's estimated daily average of roughly 1.9 billion, while on Nasdaq, about 2.54 billion shares traded, above last year's daily average of 2.17 billion.
Declining stocks outnumbered advancing ones by 9 to 1 on the NYSE and by 8 to 1 on the Nasdaq.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Wall Street had its worst day since the 1987 stock market crash on Wednesday, as bleak economic data fed worries that all the efforts to unlock credit markets may not stave off a severe recession.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke added to those concerns when he said the economy faced a "significant threat" from paralyzed credit markets.
Dismal monthly U.S. retail sales set the tone for the session, dropping the most in more than three years, while a measure of New York state manufacturing hit its lowest level since the index started in 2001.
The Nasdaq has now wiped out all of its gains from Monday's 11 percent rally, while the benchmark S&P 500 is up only about 1 percent from Friday's close.
Wednesday's data intensified recession fears, as did the Federal Reserve's Beige Book report, which showed economic activity weakened across the United States in September as businesses revised capital investments and consumers curtailed spending.
Shares of companies considered economic bellwethers, such as industrial conglomerate Caterpillar Inc, fell sharply. Caterpillar's shares slid over 11 percent.
Fears of recession knocked commodities lower, with Exxon Mobil tumbling 14 percent as the price of oil fell.
"Retail sales spooked investors this morning and has increased the near-term risk of a broad-based recession," said Tom Sowanick, chief investment officer at Clearbrook Financial LLC in Princeton, New Jersey.
The Dow and the benchmark S&P 500 suffered their worst one-day percentage drops since 1987.
The Dow Jones industrial average slid 733.08 points, or 7.87 percent, to 8,577.91, while the Standard & Poor's 500 Index tumbled 90.17 points, or 9.03 percent, to 907.84.
The Nasdaq Composite Index sank 150.68 points, or 8.47 percent, to 1,628.33.
The broad Dow Jones Wilshire 5000 closed down 905 points, or 8.99 percent, at 9,160.43, representing a paper loss for the day of approximately $1.1 trillion.
LATE SLIDE FOR eBAY
The negative news continued after the closing bell, with online auctioneer eBay Inc warning that its full-year revenues would fall below its previous forecast. Shares of eBay dropped about 4 percent after the closing bell.
During the regular session, shares of retailers skidded, with Wal-Mart falling 8.1 percent to $50.05 and Home Depot dropping 5.9 percent to $19.83. Analysts said the weak retail sales data underscored the severity of the squeeze on consumers faced with sliding home values, a tumbling stock market and tight credit.
Caterpillar's shares fell 11.4 percent to $42.06.
In the energy sector, Exxon Mobil fell 14 percent to $62.35, while Chevron lost 12.5 percent to $59.98. U.S. crude futures slid to a new 13-month low below $75 a barrel as fears of demand falling in a recession and slumping equities further pressured the oil markets. U.S. crude for November delivery fell $4.09 to settle at $74.54 a barrel.
Other commodity-related companies were also slammed as materials tumbled. Miner Freeport McMoran slid 19 percent to $33.17.
FOR BANKS, NO QUICK FIX
Financial shares fell after Meredith Whitney, an influential bank analyst at Oppenheimer & Co, said government's plan to stabilize key U.S. banks by injecting $250 billion is not a "panacea solution." The S&P's financial sub-index dropped 9.1 percent.
Shares of State Street Corp, one of the world's biggest institutional asset managers, plummeted 17.4 percent to $46.83. The company reported rising unrealized losses in its commercial paper program and investment portfolio, sparking concerns among investors.
Strong results from Coca-Cola, the world's largest soft-drink maker, helped it buck the trend after it posted quarterly profit that beat Wall Street's expectations. Coke's stock shot up 1.1 percent to $44.21 -- the only one of the 30 Dow industrials that finished higher.
Trading was low on the New York Stock Exchange, with about 1.68 billion shares changing hands, below last year's estimated daily average of roughly 1.9 billion, while on Nasdaq, about 2.54 billion shares traded, above last year's daily average of 2.17 billion.
Declining stocks outnumbered advancing ones by 9 to 1 on the NYSE and by 8 to 1 on the Nasdaq.
Fasten your seatbelts
Source TheAge
Over time, the volatility of the stock market exceeds the capacity of traders to absorb losses. In other words, very few people actually make money trading the stock market through entire cycles.
In the wake of the biggest one-day rout since the 1987 crash, this reality will brutalise any punter intrepid or foolish enough to have waded back in for a spot of bargain hunting during the few days.
Over the long-term, shares perform better than the other asset classes, bonds and property, but short and medium-term trading is a big boys' game. And so it is that the bear market now appears to be entering its "capitulation" phase where people simply chuck their hands in the air and walk away. Institutional volumes drop away too.
To those who have lambasted this reporter for being excessively bearish this year - and apparently talking the market down (which entirely exaggerates our significance in the universe) - it may be useful to know that we cut our teeth in this journalism caper in the bear market of 1990. It was not until every last punter was a bear and believed the market would not recover for years ... that it finally did.
This left a stark impression of the herd mentality, and of the notion of capitulation. In the aftermath of an abortive expansion into the US market Westpac had been decimated by the deepest losses in Australian corporate history, the stock was on its knees in the $2 range amid speculation the bank would go under, market sentiment was unbearably morose, and somebody began building a stake in Westpac.
The mystery buyer was finally outed as Kerry Packer. He picked up a 10% holding and launched a tilt for a couple of seats on the board with henchman Al Dunlap. They failed. Packer sold out way too early - but still made $100 million.
It should be kept in mind that the share market began recovering when Australia fell into the recession of the early 1990s. Since that time the market has been broadly in upswing. The dotcom bubble was just that, a bubble, and the subsequent bull-market by far the biggest in history.
This time around, sadly, the level of consumer debt is far greater.
Meanwhile, the bad news came thumping in last night on both sides of the pond. We won't reiterate here. Fed chairman Ben Bernanke was sufficiently concerned that he foreshadowed the need for greater market supervision by government in managing asset price bubbles.
Bernanke is a champion at shutting the gate after the horse has bolted, though a good deal of the blame for this mess can be directed at the abject failure of his predecessor Alan Greenspan to supervise interest rates for the long-term.
And in a prelude to further state intervention Bernanke noted that the US faced a "very serious too-big-to-fail problem". "There are too many firms that are in some sense systemically critical".
The big fear is bonds. Will the US bond market crack? Throughout this crisis there has been a pattern. When the Dow has been strong, bonds have weakened. When the Dow has been weak, bonds prices have ticked up in the "flight to quality".
The US bond market is the biggest market in the world and the 30-year treasury bond has hovered near its all-time highs - or all time low yields, as bond yields are inverse to price.
Bonds have been in a bull-market since the early 1980s when the yield peaked at 15%.
If the US bond is destined for the mother of all sell-offs - to use a tired old term - the world is in for the mother of all "dislocations" - to use a euphemism.
In the last seven trading days the 30-year bond has been sold down from 122.50 to 114.50, off a low of 113.80.
The Fed can control short-term rates but the fate of the big bond may be out of its hands, especially since China owns more than $1 trillion of them and the Arabs probably more.
If the rate spikes up so do the costs of long-term borrowing for the US Government. This, at a time when the deficit is spiralling towards $US1 trillion this year (some commentators are tipping $US2 trillion) and government debt - and this is before the ocean of household debt - is 70% of GDP and rising.
As GDP is contracting and fiscal policy expanding, the outlook is not pretty. Who will buy the bonds? The oil producers will. China and the rest of the world may not. The US Government will pull out all stops to protect the primacy of its bellwether asset, the long bond, and defend its dollar at all costs.
Over time, the volatility of the stock market exceeds the capacity of traders to absorb losses. In other words, very few people actually make money trading the stock market through entire cycles.
In the wake of the biggest one-day rout since the 1987 crash, this reality will brutalise any punter intrepid or foolish enough to have waded back in for a spot of bargain hunting during the few days.
Over the long-term, shares perform better than the other asset classes, bonds and property, but short and medium-term trading is a big boys' game. And so it is that the bear market now appears to be entering its "capitulation" phase where people simply chuck their hands in the air and walk away. Institutional volumes drop away too.
To those who have lambasted this reporter for being excessively bearish this year - and apparently talking the market down (which entirely exaggerates our significance in the universe) - it may be useful to know that we cut our teeth in this journalism caper in the bear market of 1990. It was not until every last punter was a bear and believed the market would not recover for years ... that it finally did.
This left a stark impression of the herd mentality, and of the notion of capitulation. In the aftermath of an abortive expansion into the US market Westpac had been decimated by the deepest losses in Australian corporate history, the stock was on its knees in the $2 range amid speculation the bank would go under, market sentiment was unbearably morose, and somebody began building a stake in Westpac.
The mystery buyer was finally outed as Kerry Packer. He picked up a 10% holding and launched a tilt for a couple of seats on the board with henchman Al Dunlap. They failed. Packer sold out way too early - but still made $100 million.
It should be kept in mind that the share market began recovering when Australia fell into the recession of the early 1990s. Since that time the market has been broadly in upswing. The dotcom bubble was just that, a bubble, and the subsequent bull-market by far the biggest in history.
This time around, sadly, the level of consumer debt is far greater.
Meanwhile, the bad news came thumping in last night on both sides of the pond. We won't reiterate here. Fed chairman Ben Bernanke was sufficiently concerned that he foreshadowed the need for greater market supervision by government in managing asset price bubbles.
Bernanke is a champion at shutting the gate after the horse has bolted, though a good deal of the blame for this mess can be directed at the abject failure of his predecessor Alan Greenspan to supervise interest rates for the long-term.
And in a prelude to further state intervention Bernanke noted that the US faced a "very serious too-big-to-fail problem". "There are too many firms that are in some sense systemically critical".
The big fear is bonds. Will the US bond market crack? Throughout this crisis there has been a pattern. When the Dow has been strong, bonds have weakened. When the Dow has been weak, bonds prices have ticked up in the "flight to quality".
The US bond market is the biggest market in the world and the 30-year treasury bond has hovered near its all-time highs - or all time low yields, as bond yields are inverse to price.
Bonds have been in a bull-market since the early 1980s when the yield peaked at 15%.
If the US bond is destined for the mother of all sell-offs - to use a tired old term - the world is in for the mother of all "dislocations" - to use a euphemism.
In the last seven trading days the 30-year bond has been sold down from 122.50 to 114.50, off a low of 113.80.
The Fed can control short-term rates but the fate of the big bond may be out of its hands, especially since China owns more than $1 trillion of them and the Arabs probably more.
If the rate spikes up so do the costs of long-term borrowing for the US Government. This, at a time when the deficit is spiralling towards $US1 trillion this year (some commentators are tipping $US2 trillion) and government debt - and this is before the ocean of household debt - is 70% of GDP and rising.
As GDP is contracting and fiscal policy expanding, the outlook is not pretty. Who will buy the bonds? The oil producers will. China and the rest of the world may not. The US Government will pull out all stops to protect the primacy of its bellwether asset, the long bond, and defend its dollar at all costs.
PAS leaders condemn Cheras Umno’s decision to create fund against libel suit
Source TheStar
KOTA BARU: Three senior PAS leaders have condemned the Cheras Umno division for setting up a fund to help the Utusan Malaysia newspaper defend itself against multi-million libel suits, saying their intention had racial undertones.
PAS vice-president Datuk Husam Musa said it was unbecoming for politicians to be defending newspapers that by virtue of ethics, was an independent organisation, a watchdog acting on behalf of society.
He wondered why Cheras Umno was going after Seputeh MP Teresa Kok who was at the centre of allegations that she petitioned a mosque in Puchong to reduce the volume for azan (a call for prayers) as everyone named in the allegations, from Kok to the mosque committee, had denied this.
Yet Cheras Umno was pushing the issue without realising the sensitivities of race and religion, said Husam.
“This is unhealthy for a country with a strong multi-ethnic and multi-religious composition, it can lead to unsavoury tensions,” he said.
Husam was speaking at the Kota Baru PAS “Hari Raya Aidil Fitri” gathering at the state Chinese Chamber of Commerce where the guest of honour was Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng.
Kota Baru MP Datuk Wan Abdul Rahim Wan Abdullah who hosted the event said most inhabitants in the country particularly the Malays were descendents of migrants either from parts of the Malay archipelago or from the Yunan province in China with some later coming from India.
PAS spiritual adviser Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat urged Umno to come out with a fund to salvage Malays from following the secularism form of Islam that they imposed after learning from the British.
He said it was dangerous to use racism in an age where people are fighting for justice and equality around the world.
Lim who launched his book here about experiences of prison life to the early formative days of a DAP-dominated Penang Government, urged MCA and Gerakan to leave the Umno-dominated Barisan Nasional.
KOTA BARU: Three senior PAS leaders have condemned the Cheras Umno division for setting up a fund to help the Utusan Malaysia newspaper defend itself against multi-million libel suits, saying their intention had racial undertones.
PAS vice-president Datuk Husam Musa said it was unbecoming for politicians to be defending newspapers that by virtue of ethics, was an independent organisation, a watchdog acting on behalf of society.
He wondered why Cheras Umno was going after Seputeh MP Teresa Kok who was at the centre of allegations that she petitioned a mosque in Puchong to reduce the volume for azan (a call for prayers) as everyone named in the allegations, from Kok to the mosque committee, had denied this.
Yet Cheras Umno was pushing the issue without realising the sensitivities of race and religion, said Husam.
“This is unhealthy for a country with a strong multi-ethnic and multi-religious composition, it can lead to unsavoury tensions,” he said.
Husam was speaking at the Kota Baru PAS “Hari Raya Aidil Fitri” gathering at the state Chinese Chamber of Commerce where the guest of honour was Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng.
Kota Baru MP Datuk Wan Abdul Rahim Wan Abdullah who hosted the event said most inhabitants in the country particularly the Malays were descendents of migrants either from parts of the Malay archipelago or from the Yunan province in China with some later coming from India.
PAS spiritual adviser Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat urged Umno to come out with a fund to salvage Malays from following the secularism form of Islam that they imposed after learning from the British.
He said it was dangerous to use racism in an age where people are fighting for justice and equality around the world.
Lim who launched his book here about experiences of prison life to the early formative days of a DAP-dominated Penang Government, urged MCA and Gerakan to leave the Umno-dominated Barisan Nasional.
Cops probe commotion at PM’s Raya open house
Source TheStar
PETALING JAYA: Police have recorded statements from three Hindraf organisers regarding a commotion at the Prime Minister and Cabinet members’ Hari Raya open house at the Putra World Trade Centre recently.
The three are S. Jayathas, 41, K. Shanti, in her 30s, and K. Selvam, 43. They were accompanied by their lawyers Latheefa Koya and N. Surendran.
Shanti is the wife of Hindraf chairman P. Waythamoorthy who is in self-exile in London.
The three arrived at the Dang Wangi district police headquarters at 3pm yesterday where they gave their statements for an hour.
Surendran said the three were asked about 28 questions under Section 27 of the Police Act and Section 447 of the Penal Code.
“However, we chose to remain silent for each of the questions because we felt that the questions had nothing to do with the case we were being investigated under,” said Jayathas.
Surendran said the questioning was a form of intimidation and harassment against his clients who had gathered peacefully at the Prime Minister’s Hari Raya open house.
“It is absurd because for the first time in Malaysia someone is called in for questioning for attending a Hari Raya open house. We believe this is politically motivated and a clear case of police abuse of power,” he said.
He added that police did not mention whether there was a need for the three to present themselves again at the police headquarters for further questioning.
Kuala Lumpur deputy police chief Senior Asst Comm (I) Datuk Abdul Samah Mat confirmed that police were investigating the case.
A group of 160 Hindraf and “Free Raja Petra Kamarudin” supporters were said to have allegedly caused a commotion at the Prime Minister’s open house before presenting him with a teddy bear and a Raya greeting card containing signatures requesting the release of detained Hindraf leaders.
PETALING JAYA: Police have recorded statements from three Hindraf organisers regarding a commotion at the Prime Minister and Cabinet members’ Hari Raya open house at the Putra World Trade Centre recently.
The three are S. Jayathas, 41, K. Shanti, in her 30s, and K. Selvam, 43. They were accompanied by their lawyers Latheefa Koya and N. Surendran.
Shanti is the wife of Hindraf chairman P. Waythamoorthy who is in self-exile in London.
The three arrived at the Dang Wangi district police headquarters at 3pm yesterday where they gave their statements for an hour.
Surendran said the three were asked about 28 questions under Section 27 of the Police Act and Section 447 of the Penal Code.
“However, we chose to remain silent for each of the questions because we felt that the questions had nothing to do with the case we were being investigated under,” said Jayathas.
Surendran said the questioning was a form of intimidation and harassment against his clients who had gathered peacefully at the Prime Minister’s Hari Raya open house.
“It is absurd because for the first time in Malaysia someone is called in for questioning for attending a Hari Raya open house. We believe this is politically motivated and a clear case of police abuse of power,” he said.
He added that police did not mention whether there was a need for the three to present themselves again at the police headquarters for further questioning.
Kuala Lumpur deputy police chief Senior Asst Comm (I) Datuk Abdul Samah Mat confirmed that police were investigating the case.
A group of 160 Hindraf and “Free Raja Petra Kamarudin” supporters were said to have allegedly caused a commotion at the Prime Minister’s open house before presenting him with a teddy bear and a Raya greeting card containing signatures requesting the release of detained Hindraf leaders.
Should Malaysia guarantee bank deposits?
Source TheStar
AS governments around the world are rushing to guarantee deposits with their financial institutions in the wake of a spreading financial crisis, the question is if Malaysia should follow suit — and when.
If Malaysia decides to do so, it won’t be the first time. During the Asian financial crisis of 1997/98, there was a significant shift of money from local to foreign banks, which were perceived to be safer than the local banks.
To stop the situation from worsening and to ensure that local banks had sufficient deposits to provide enough liquidity for their banking activities, the Government gave an assurance that deposits with local banks were safe. Savers were assuaged and the shift dwindled.
Now we are in an ironically happy situation — relatively speaking that is — where many people perceive local banks, because of their lack of exposure to the US subprime mortgage crisis, to be stronger than some of the foreign ones.
It may be just too early for the Government to think of giving another such assurance to depositors right now since the banks here are little exposed to the credit and lending crisis overseas and their critical ratios all still look good.
But there is no harm in giving some deep thought to the issue, especially since it is central to the health of a financial system. If depositors lose confidence in the financial institutions and withdraw their money, liquidity will simply dry up and lead to a total collapse of the system.
Right now, there is a deposit insurance scheme in operation. This is sponsored and supported by the Government under Perbadanan Insurans Deposit Malaysia or PDIM, the deposits insurance body. Under the scheme, each account holder per bank is insured up to RM60,000 in the event of bank failure. This covers the over 90% of depositors who have RM60,000 or less in deposits per bank.
But the amount of deposits covered is a whole lot less than that because the large depositors in the system are government bodies, corporations, partnerships and businesses, each of whose accounts can run into the millions.
Many of them will maintain just a couple of accounts and it would be too much trouble and too little benefit to spread it over 36 banks and gain an insurance coverage of just RM2.16mil (36 times 60,000) under the current deposit insurance scheme.
Under the PDIM scheme, RM191.5bil of deposits were insured as at Dec 31, 2007. But the total deposits as at the same date with commercial banks in Malaysia amounted to RM821bil. That means less than a quarter of total deposits are insured.
While the scheme is good for ensuring that the bulk of depositors is protected in the event of bank failure, it does not insure the bulk of deposits in the system. Thus, the deposit insurance scheme that Malaysia has is one that protects small savers but is of little help when it comes to problems that can affect the entire financial system — more than that is required to stop a systemic failure.
So far, contagion has not resulted in severe disease yet. The financial system is sound. But if the economy slips into recession, and output of goods and services contracts as worldwide demand falls, things can get sour here. And if there is a severe fall in property prices, it will worsen things.
And then there are peculiar problems in guaranteeing bank deposits — there could be a surfeit of deposits from overseas coming in here to take advantage of a government guarantee.
Conversely, if neighbouring Singapore decides to guarantee deposits, there could be an outflow of funds from here to there if we do not follow suit.
Yes, it may still be a bit premature to talk about guaranteeing all deposits in the banking system. But it is clear we must continue to watch the situation very closely and, if it is time to give that assurance, we simply must.
AS governments around the world are rushing to guarantee deposits with their financial institutions in the wake of a spreading financial crisis, the question is if Malaysia should follow suit — and when.
If Malaysia decides to do so, it won’t be the first time. During the Asian financial crisis of 1997/98, there was a significant shift of money from local to foreign banks, which were perceived to be safer than the local banks.
To stop the situation from worsening and to ensure that local banks had sufficient deposits to provide enough liquidity for their banking activities, the Government gave an assurance that deposits with local banks were safe. Savers were assuaged and the shift dwindled.
Now we are in an ironically happy situation — relatively speaking that is — where many people perceive local banks, because of their lack of exposure to the US subprime mortgage crisis, to be stronger than some of the foreign ones.
It may be just too early for the Government to think of giving another such assurance to depositors right now since the banks here are little exposed to the credit and lending crisis overseas and their critical ratios all still look good.
But there is no harm in giving some deep thought to the issue, especially since it is central to the health of a financial system. If depositors lose confidence in the financial institutions and withdraw their money, liquidity will simply dry up and lead to a total collapse of the system.
Right now, there is a deposit insurance scheme in operation. This is sponsored and supported by the Government under Perbadanan Insurans Deposit Malaysia or PDIM, the deposits insurance body. Under the scheme, each account holder per bank is insured up to RM60,000 in the event of bank failure. This covers the over 90% of depositors who have RM60,000 or less in deposits per bank.
But the amount of deposits covered is a whole lot less than that because the large depositors in the system are government bodies, corporations, partnerships and businesses, each of whose accounts can run into the millions.
Many of them will maintain just a couple of accounts and it would be too much trouble and too little benefit to spread it over 36 banks and gain an insurance coverage of just RM2.16mil (36 times 60,000) under the current deposit insurance scheme.
Under the PDIM scheme, RM191.5bil of deposits were insured as at Dec 31, 2007. But the total deposits as at the same date with commercial banks in Malaysia amounted to RM821bil. That means less than a quarter of total deposits are insured.
While the scheme is good for ensuring that the bulk of depositors is protected in the event of bank failure, it does not insure the bulk of deposits in the system. Thus, the deposit insurance scheme that Malaysia has is one that protects small savers but is of little help when it comes to problems that can affect the entire financial system — more than that is required to stop a systemic failure.
So far, contagion has not resulted in severe disease yet. The financial system is sound. But if the economy slips into recession, and output of goods and services contracts as worldwide demand falls, things can get sour here. And if there is a severe fall in property prices, it will worsen things.
And then there are peculiar problems in guaranteeing bank deposits — there could be a surfeit of deposits from overseas coming in here to take advantage of a government guarantee.
Conversely, if neighbouring Singapore decides to guarantee deposits, there could be an outflow of funds from here to there if we do not follow suit.
Yes, it may still be a bit premature to talk about guaranteeing all deposits in the banking system. But it is clear we must continue to watch the situation very closely and, if it is time to give that assurance, we simply must.
PAS persoal perkembangan projek Koridor Pantai Timur
Source Harakah
KUALA LUMPUR, 14 Okt (Hrkh) - Dato' Kamaruddin Jaafar (PAS-Tumpat) melahirkan kebimbangan kerana setelah dua tahun Koridor Pantai Timur (Ecer) dilancarkan, sehingga kini peruntukan RM30 juta yang diumumkan hanya untuk kajian semata-mata.
Jelas Kamaruddin, perkara ini amat mengecewakan terutama bagi rakyat di negeri Kelantan, Terengganu dan Pahang.
"Projek Jambatan Sultan Yahya ke II yang lebih 13 bulan dilancarkan dan untuk pelaksanaan projek selama 30 bulan, tidak sampai 10 peratus dilaksanakan. Perkara ini menunjukkan kegagalan yang jelas di pihak kerajaan," katanya.
Beliau berkata demikian sewaktu mengemukakan soalan tambahan dalam sesi soal jawab di Dewan Rakyat hari ini.
Dalam pada itu Kamaruddin turut mengemukakan persoalan, apakah Petronas sebagai peneraju utama projek berkaitan tidak bercadang untuk mewujudkan 'supply base' di Bachok, Pasir Puteh atau Tumpat untuk menyelenggarakan pencarian, penggalian serta penemuan minyak dan gas yang banyak terdapat di persisir lautan Kelantan dan Terengganu.
Menjawab soalan tersebut, Menteri Di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Senator Tan Sri Amirsham A.Aziz berkata Ecer masih baru dilancarkan dan baru dilaksanakan pertengahan tahun ini.
Jelasnya, kerajaan masih dalam peringkat perundingan bagi mendapatkan pelabur di peringkat sektor pembuatan termasuk industri berkaitan minyak.
Sementara itu, dalam isu yang sama, Dato' Abdul Ghafur Salleh (BN- Kalabakan) menyelar kerajaan kerana pelaksanaan koridor di Sabah yang dilancarkan dua tahun dahulu sampai sekarang tidak menampakkan sebarang hasil.
"Sudah dua tahun koridor di Sabah dilancarkan oleh Perdana Menteri tetapi sampai sekarang tidak nampak 'satu butir pasir' pun saya tidak nampak. Kenapa perkara ini dilalaikan. Mungkinkah kerana ini hanya 'manisan' kepada rakyat Sabah sewaktu pilihan raya sahaja?" katanya yang menarik perhatian ahli dewan yang lain.
Abdul Ghaffur juga mempersoalkan apakah janji peruntukan RM5 bilion yang diperuntukan untuk pelaksanaan koridor tersebut telah diberi, akan diberi, belum diberi atau tidak diberi.
Beliau juga melahirkan kekecewaan kerana berlaku ketidakadilan dalam pelaksanaan koridor di Semenanjun dan Sabah.
"Petronas merupakan peneraju utama koridor di Semenanjung. Bagaimanapun peneraju di Sabah adalah syarikat-syarikat kerajaan negeri yang tidak mempunyai wang.
"Rakyat Sabah tidak mahu 'manisan' semata-mata. Jika betul-betul ada peruntukan tersebut, boleh bagi kepada kami. Saya juga lihat dalam bajet tiada dinyatakan mengenai perkara ini. Kita minta penjelasan daripada Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri megnenai perkara ini," katanya.
Bagaimanapun Amirsham yang bangkit menjawab soalan tersebut menyatakan soalan tersebut tidak mempunyai perkaitan dengan soalan asal yang dikemukakan.
Abdul Ghaffur yang tidak berpuas hati dengan jawapan yang diberikan Amirsham sekali lagi bangkit menyatakan adalah tidak adil bagi beliau kerana sebagai menteri, jawapan bagi perkara tersebut seharusnya dapat diberikan.
"Dato' Speaker, ini tidak adil. Seharusnya semua jawapan berkaitan dengan koridor ini sudah ada dalam kepala Menteri Jabatan Perdana Menteri. Kalau begini tidak layak duduk di Jabatan Perdana Menteri," katanya yang disahut suara-suara ahli dewan.
Timbalan Yang DiPertua, Dato' Ronald Kiandee menyatakan isu yang dinyatakan itu harus dibawa dalam perbahasan bajet.
KUALA LUMPUR, 14 Okt (Hrkh) - Dato' Kamaruddin Jaafar (PAS-Tumpat) melahirkan kebimbangan kerana setelah dua tahun Koridor Pantai Timur (Ecer) dilancarkan, sehingga kini peruntukan RM30 juta yang diumumkan hanya untuk kajian semata-mata.
Jelas Kamaruddin, perkara ini amat mengecewakan terutama bagi rakyat di negeri Kelantan, Terengganu dan Pahang.
"Projek Jambatan Sultan Yahya ke II yang lebih 13 bulan dilancarkan dan untuk pelaksanaan projek selama 30 bulan, tidak sampai 10 peratus dilaksanakan. Perkara ini menunjukkan kegagalan yang jelas di pihak kerajaan," katanya.
Beliau berkata demikian sewaktu mengemukakan soalan tambahan dalam sesi soal jawab di Dewan Rakyat hari ini.
Dalam pada itu Kamaruddin turut mengemukakan persoalan, apakah Petronas sebagai peneraju utama projek berkaitan tidak bercadang untuk mewujudkan 'supply base' di Bachok, Pasir Puteh atau Tumpat untuk menyelenggarakan pencarian, penggalian serta penemuan minyak dan gas yang banyak terdapat di persisir lautan Kelantan dan Terengganu.
Menjawab soalan tersebut, Menteri Di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Senator Tan Sri Amirsham A.Aziz berkata Ecer masih baru dilancarkan dan baru dilaksanakan pertengahan tahun ini.
Jelasnya, kerajaan masih dalam peringkat perundingan bagi mendapatkan pelabur di peringkat sektor pembuatan termasuk industri berkaitan minyak.
Sementara itu, dalam isu yang sama, Dato' Abdul Ghafur Salleh (BN- Kalabakan) menyelar kerajaan kerana pelaksanaan koridor di Sabah yang dilancarkan dua tahun dahulu sampai sekarang tidak menampakkan sebarang hasil.
"Sudah dua tahun koridor di Sabah dilancarkan oleh Perdana Menteri tetapi sampai sekarang tidak nampak 'satu butir pasir' pun saya tidak nampak. Kenapa perkara ini dilalaikan. Mungkinkah kerana ini hanya 'manisan' kepada rakyat Sabah sewaktu pilihan raya sahaja?" katanya yang menarik perhatian ahli dewan yang lain.
Abdul Ghaffur juga mempersoalkan apakah janji peruntukan RM5 bilion yang diperuntukan untuk pelaksanaan koridor tersebut telah diberi, akan diberi, belum diberi atau tidak diberi.
Beliau juga melahirkan kekecewaan kerana berlaku ketidakadilan dalam pelaksanaan koridor di Semenanjun dan Sabah.
"Petronas merupakan peneraju utama koridor di Semenanjung. Bagaimanapun peneraju di Sabah adalah syarikat-syarikat kerajaan negeri yang tidak mempunyai wang.
"Rakyat Sabah tidak mahu 'manisan' semata-mata. Jika betul-betul ada peruntukan tersebut, boleh bagi kepada kami. Saya juga lihat dalam bajet tiada dinyatakan mengenai perkara ini. Kita minta penjelasan daripada Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri megnenai perkara ini," katanya.
Bagaimanapun Amirsham yang bangkit menjawab soalan tersebut menyatakan soalan tersebut tidak mempunyai perkaitan dengan soalan asal yang dikemukakan.
Abdul Ghaffur yang tidak berpuas hati dengan jawapan yang diberikan Amirsham sekali lagi bangkit menyatakan adalah tidak adil bagi beliau kerana sebagai menteri, jawapan bagi perkara tersebut seharusnya dapat diberikan.
"Dato' Speaker, ini tidak adil. Seharusnya semua jawapan berkaitan dengan koridor ini sudah ada dalam kepala Menteri Jabatan Perdana Menteri. Kalau begini tidak layak duduk di Jabatan Perdana Menteri," katanya yang disahut suara-suara ahli dewan.
Timbalan Yang DiPertua, Dato' Ronald Kiandee menyatakan isu yang dinyatakan itu harus dibawa dalam perbahasan bajet.
MTUC bimbang ekonomi global jejas negara
Source Harakah
BUTTERWORTH, 14 Okt (Hrkh) - Kongres Kesatuan Sekerja Malaysia (MTUC) mempertikaikan kenyataan Kerajaan Malaysia yang masih menggangap ekonomi negara masih kukuh sedangkan semua tahu ekonomi global sedang mengalami kejatuhan.
Demikian kata Presiden MTUC, Syed Shahir Syed Mohd semasa sidang akhbar di Pejabat Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Lektrik (E.I.W.U) Taman Inderawaseh, Perai pagi tadi.
Menurut beliau, bila ekonomi global jatuh pastinya Malaysia tidak terlepas daripada merasai bahang kegawatan dan kenyataan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi sendiri tidak releven.
"Kerajaan Malaysia sewajarnya bertindak segera mencari jalan bagaimana untuk menyelamatkan kegawatan yang semakin memuncak sekarang bukan mengeluarkan kenyataan yang tidak releven," ujarnya yang hadir bersama Pegerusi MTUC Pulau Pinang, Abdul Razak Abdul Hamid.
Di negara luar seperti Amerika Syarikat dan Britian, kerajaan negara itu terpaksa mengeluarkan peruntukan menyelamatkan institusi kewangan daripada bangkrap.
Sebagai sebuah negara kecil bagaimana Malaysia boleh bertahan walhal banyak eskpot negara ini bergantung pada dua negara besar itu, katanya.
MTUC katanya, begitu khuatir dalam masa terdekat banyak industri di negara ini akan ditutup sekali gus pembuangan pekerja berlaku tanpa membayar sebarang pampasan sepertimana yang berlaku pada kilang Nikko Electronic Berhad awal tahun ini.
Jesteru katanya, untuk menangani masalah tersebut, Kerajaan Malaysia harus mewujudkan tabungan untuk digunakan apabila syarikat tidak mampu membayar pampasan dan kerajaan juga disaran mengkaji semula polisi kewangan kerajaan sendiri supaya pekerja tidak terus ditindas.
BUTTERWORTH, 14 Okt (Hrkh) - Kongres Kesatuan Sekerja Malaysia (MTUC) mempertikaikan kenyataan Kerajaan Malaysia yang masih menggangap ekonomi negara masih kukuh sedangkan semua tahu ekonomi global sedang mengalami kejatuhan.
Demikian kata Presiden MTUC, Syed Shahir Syed Mohd semasa sidang akhbar di Pejabat Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Lektrik (E.I.W.U) Taman Inderawaseh, Perai pagi tadi.
Menurut beliau, bila ekonomi global jatuh pastinya Malaysia tidak terlepas daripada merasai bahang kegawatan dan kenyataan Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi sendiri tidak releven.
"Kerajaan Malaysia sewajarnya bertindak segera mencari jalan bagaimana untuk menyelamatkan kegawatan yang semakin memuncak sekarang bukan mengeluarkan kenyataan yang tidak releven," ujarnya yang hadir bersama Pegerusi MTUC Pulau Pinang, Abdul Razak Abdul Hamid.
Di negara luar seperti Amerika Syarikat dan Britian, kerajaan negara itu terpaksa mengeluarkan peruntukan menyelamatkan institusi kewangan daripada bangkrap.
Sebagai sebuah negara kecil bagaimana Malaysia boleh bertahan walhal banyak eskpot negara ini bergantung pada dua negara besar itu, katanya.
MTUC katanya, begitu khuatir dalam masa terdekat banyak industri di negara ini akan ditutup sekali gus pembuangan pekerja berlaku tanpa membayar sebarang pampasan sepertimana yang berlaku pada kilang Nikko Electronic Berhad awal tahun ini.
Jesteru katanya, untuk menangani masalah tersebut, Kerajaan Malaysia harus mewujudkan tabungan untuk digunakan apabila syarikat tidak mampu membayar pampasan dan kerajaan juga disaran mengkaji semula polisi kewangan kerajaan sendiri supaya pekerja tidak terus ditindas.
The Wrong Plan for Australia
Source Wall Street Journal
By STEPHEN KIRCHNER
Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has just unveiled a fiscal stimulus plan worth 10.4 billion Australian dollars ($7.4 billion). At around 1% of GDP, it's bold. Will it work? Probably not as intended.
The plan consists of a set of handouts for politically appealing groups, such as old-age pensioners and families with children. There's also a big boost to infrastructure spending. It's a dramatic change for a government that as recently as May was hewing to the tightest fiscal policy since 1970-71, with a budget surplus of 2.1% of GDP. That budget was designed to put downward pressure on inflation. Taken together with the Reserve Bank of Australia's one-percentage-point easing at the beginning of the month, the new stimulus package points to a major reassessment of economic risks on the part of Australian policymakers. Growth has replaced inflation as the top concern.
Mr. Rudd's plan might look like a solution in search of a problem. Economic growth is set to slow, but Australia's real economy has yet to show significant stress from the global financial crisis. Financial institutions remain sound, and confidence has been boosted by the weekend's coordinated move by Australia and New Zealand to insure deposits. Monetary policy has already responded aggressively and a sharp fall in the Australian dollar exchange rate relative to the U.S. dollar is performing its traditional function of insulating Australia from external economic shocks.
There's certainly room for stimulus measures. But there are risks to stimulus, too. Timing fiscal stimulus measures so they take effect when they are most needed is difficult. Get the timing wrong and these measures could end-up being pro- rather than counter-cyclical.
A case in point is the government's proposal to accelerate its infrastructure spending agenda. Even with an accelerated timetable, work on these projects will not commence until well into 2009, with much of the spending not seen until even later, when Australia may already be through the feared economic downturn. Infrastructure spending decisions made in a crisis atmosphere might not be evaluated to the highest standards. Australia could be saddled with some wasteful rather than productivity-enhancing infrastructure projects.
Other aspects of Mr. Rudd's plan are at odds with what government should be doing in the current environment. The plan provides $1.5 billion in grants to first-time home buyers. It would double the grant amount to buyers of existing homes, while tripling the grant to buyers of newly built homes. The latter measure will be useful in addressing the chronic housing shortage that has driven housing affordability in Australia to record lows and seen rising rents makes a significant contribution to inflation.
The grant to buyers of existing homes, however, will serve only to bid up the prices of existing properties, the opposite of what is needed to improve housing affordability. This will benefit existing home owners rather than new home buyers, and has little value as a stimulus measure because it merely transfers wealth from buyers to current owners rather than encouraging new housing supply.
In other respects, the plan moves away from, not toward, broader structural reforms important to the long-term health of the economy. Consider the lump-sum payment to old-age and other pensioners, scheduled for December. Single pensioners will receive a one-time payment of A$1,400, while couples will receive A$2,100. The government calls this a "down payment on long-term pension reform," but it leaves the long-term future of pension reform an open issue. The focus for future reform needs to be on reducing dependence on the government pension. This means making the pension less rather than more attractive, so as to encourage people to save for their retirement.
Similarly, the government will make a one-off A$1,000 payment for each child in eligible families. While this may have some value as a short-term economic stimulus measure, it does not address some of the long-term issues clouding the family payments system, including the disincentives to labor-force participation.
The biggest problem with the stimulus plan, however, is something that's not in it -- tax relief. That too has been left to a future review by the Treasury Secretary, Ken Henry. There had been speculation the government might introduce a one-off tax rebate. Since the government says it is making "down payments" on future reform, a tax rebate would have provided a welcome signal of the government's commitment to this vital policy area. A tax rebate would diffuse more broadly than one-off welfare payments and reward labor-force participation rather than welfare dependence.
Short-term stimulus measures need not conflict with the imperatives of long-term structural reform. The government should have used the global financial crisis to gain increased traction for a long-term structural reform agenda that will provide lasting economic security, and not just a short-term boost to spending. The biggest flaw of Mr. Rudd's plan is all the opportunities it missed.
By STEPHEN KIRCHNER
Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has just unveiled a fiscal stimulus plan worth 10.4 billion Australian dollars ($7.4 billion). At around 1% of GDP, it's bold. Will it work? Probably not as intended.
The plan consists of a set of handouts for politically appealing groups, such as old-age pensioners and families with children. There's also a big boost to infrastructure spending. It's a dramatic change for a government that as recently as May was hewing to the tightest fiscal policy since 1970-71, with a budget surplus of 2.1% of GDP. That budget was designed to put downward pressure on inflation. Taken together with the Reserve Bank of Australia's one-percentage-point easing at the beginning of the month, the new stimulus package points to a major reassessment of economic risks on the part of Australian policymakers. Growth has replaced inflation as the top concern.
Mr. Rudd's plan might look like a solution in search of a problem. Economic growth is set to slow, but Australia's real economy has yet to show significant stress from the global financial crisis. Financial institutions remain sound, and confidence has been boosted by the weekend's coordinated move by Australia and New Zealand to insure deposits. Monetary policy has already responded aggressively and a sharp fall in the Australian dollar exchange rate relative to the U.S. dollar is performing its traditional function of insulating Australia from external economic shocks.
There's certainly room for stimulus measures. But there are risks to stimulus, too. Timing fiscal stimulus measures so they take effect when they are most needed is difficult. Get the timing wrong and these measures could end-up being pro- rather than counter-cyclical.
A case in point is the government's proposal to accelerate its infrastructure spending agenda. Even with an accelerated timetable, work on these projects will not commence until well into 2009, with much of the spending not seen until even later, when Australia may already be through the feared economic downturn. Infrastructure spending decisions made in a crisis atmosphere might not be evaluated to the highest standards. Australia could be saddled with some wasteful rather than productivity-enhancing infrastructure projects.
Other aspects of Mr. Rudd's plan are at odds with what government should be doing in the current environment. The plan provides $1.5 billion in grants to first-time home buyers. It would double the grant amount to buyers of existing homes, while tripling the grant to buyers of newly built homes. The latter measure will be useful in addressing the chronic housing shortage that has driven housing affordability in Australia to record lows and seen rising rents makes a significant contribution to inflation.
The grant to buyers of existing homes, however, will serve only to bid up the prices of existing properties, the opposite of what is needed to improve housing affordability. This will benefit existing home owners rather than new home buyers, and has little value as a stimulus measure because it merely transfers wealth from buyers to current owners rather than encouraging new housing supply.
In other respects, the plan moves away from, not toward, broader structural reforms important to the long-term health of the economy. Consider the lump-sum payment to old-age and other pensioners, scheduled for December. Single pensioners will receive a one-time payment of A$1,400, while couples will receive A$2,100. The government calls this a "down payment on long-term pension reform," but it leaves the long-term future of pension reform an open issue. The focus for future reform needs to be on reducing dependence on the government pension. This means making the pension less rather than more attractive, so as to encourage people to save for their retirement.
Similarly, the government will make a one-off A$1,000 payment for each child in eligible families. While this may have some value as a short-term economic stimulus measure, it does not address some of the long-term issues clouding the family payments system, including the disincentives to labor-force participation.
The biggest problem with the stimulus plan, however, is something that's not in it -- tax relief. That too has been left to a future review by the Treasury Secretary, Ken Henry. There had been speculation the government might introduce a one-off tax rebate. Since the government says it is making "down payments" on future reform, a tax rebate would have provided a welcome signal of the government's commitment to this vital policy area. A tax rebate would diffuse more broadly than one-off welfare payments and reward labor-force participation rather than welfare dependence.
Short-term stimulus measures need not conflict with the imperatives of long-term structural reform. The government should have used the global financial crisis to gain increased traction for a long-term structural reform agenda that will provide lasting economic security, and not just a short-term boost to spending. The biggest flaw of Mr. Rudd's plan is all the opportunities it missed.
UAE pumps $19 bln more emergency funds into banks
Source Reuters
DUBAI (Reuters) - The United Arab Emirates more than doubled its emergency bank funding plan to 120 billion dirhams ($32.67 billion) on Tuesday as Gulf Arab states stepped up moves to combat the global financial crisis.
But the Gulf Arab state left bankers guessing about how it would employ the 70 billion dirhams ($19 billion) of new cash -- the biggest Gulf cash intervention to date -- after the UAE central bank opened a 50 billion dirham emergency lending facility last month.
The UAE prime minister ordered the transfer of funds to the finance ministry to pump into the banking sector to protect against global volatility, state news agency WAM said, without giving details of the mechanism.
The latest moves comes after an unprecedented week of emergency policy initiatives in the Gulf and around the world to revive a financial sector paralysed by fear and threatening to push the global economy into a deep recession.
The UAE government promised earlier this week to protect all national banks from credit risks, to provide sufficient liquidity for interbank lending and to guarantee bank deposits.
In a bid to bolster shares after weeks of declines, it also relaxed share buyback rules on the country's bourses.
Interbank lending rates in the UAE fell for the second day running on Tuesday after the extra funds were announced. Interbank rates in Saudi Arabia, which has also sought to reassure investors that there is sufficient liquidity in the system, edged up after falling on Monday.
"The series of measures the authorities have taken including pumping liquidity, facilitating company share buyback procedures, guaranteeing deposits...has the ability to reinforce confidence in the financial markets," Abdullah al-Turaifi, head of the Securities and Commodities Authority said.
MECHANISM UNCLEAR
Bankers said they expected the new government funds to be deposited with banks to alleviate the tensions that had pushed up interbank lending rates.
"It will probably be in the form of deposits. There are examples of this around the world," said the treasurer at a major UAE bank under the condition of anonymity.
"There is more tension in Dubai than in Abu Dhabi but everybody is affected," he said. "The good news is that they are providing financial assistance, it is earmarked and available for the sector."
The UAE central bank declined to comment and a spokesman for the finance ministry was not immediately available.
If the government places new funds as deposits with banks, it will ease funding tensions and help relax borrowing conditions that threaten to choke off a five-year economic boom in the Gulf Arab region, said a second UAE bank treasurer, who declined to be named.
But if the funds are merely meant to augment the existing 50-billion-dirham borrowing window, it is unlikely to have any impact, he said.
"If there is actual cash coming into the market, we'll see the interbank market settling down," he said.
"If it doesn't come in ... in that case, actual lending and borrowing in the interbank market will not improve."
The ruler of Dubai and UAE Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum ordered the central bank and the finance ministry to devise a system by which to pump the new liquidity into the financial sector, WAM said. It gave no more details.
DUBAI (Reuters) - The United Arab Emirates more than doubled its emergency bank funding plan to 120 billion dirhams ($32.67 billion) on Tuesday as Gulf Arab states stepped up moves to combat the global financial crisis.
But the Gulf Arab state left bankers guessing about how it would employ the 70 billion dirhams ($19 billion) of new cash -- the biggest Gulf cash intervention to date -- after the UAE central bank opened a 50 billion dirham emergency lending facility last month.
The UAE prime minister ordered the transfer of funds to the finance ministry to pump into the banking sector to protect against global volatility, state news agency WAM said, without giving details of the mechanism.
The latest moves comes after an unprecedented week of emergency policy initiatives in the Gulf and around the world to revive a financial sector paralysed by fear and threatening to push the global economy into a deep recession.
The UAE government promised earlier this week to protect all national banks from credit risks, to provide sufficient liquidity for interbank lending and to guarantee bank deposits.
In a bid to bolster shares after weeks of declines, it also relaxed share buyback rules on the country's bourses.
Interbank lending rates in the UAE fell for the second day running on Tuesday after the extra funds were announced. Interbank rates in Saudi Arabia, which has also sought to reassure investors that there is sufficient liquidity in the system, edged up after falling on Monday.
"The series of measures the authorities have taken including pumping liquidity, facilitating company share buyback procedures, guaranteeing deposits...has the ability to reinforce confidence in the financial markets," Abdullah al-Turaifi, head of the Securities and Commodities Authority said.
MECHANISM UNCLEAR
Bankers said they expected the new government funds to be deposited with banks to alleviate the tensions that had pushed up interbank lending rates.
"It will probably be in the form of deposits. There are examples of this around the world," said the treasurer at a major UAE bank under the condition of anonymity.
"There is more tension in Dubai than in Abu Dhabi but everybody is affected," he said. "The good news is that they are providing financial assistance, it is earmarked and available for the sector."
The UAE central bank declined to comment and a spokesman for the finance ministry was not immediately available.
If the government places new funds as deposits with banks, it will ease funding tensions and help relax borrowing conditions that threaten to choke off a five-year economic boom in the Gulf Arab region, said a second UAE bank treasurer, who declined to be named.
But if the funds are merely meant to augment the existing 50-billion-dirham borrowing window, it is unlikely to have any impact, he said.
"If there is actual cash coming into the market, we'll see the interbank market settling down," he said.
"If it doesn't come in ... in that case, actual lending and borrowing in the interbank market will not improve."
The ruler of Dubai and UAE Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum ordered the central bank and the finance ministry to devise a system by which to pump the new liquidity into the financial sector, WAM said. It gave no more details.
BNM: Malaysian financial system can weather global financial storm
Source TheStar
KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian financial system can weather the global financial turmoil and remains resilient, says Bank Negara.
The central bank said on Tuesday that it has a fully developed supervisory and surveillance system. It was also continuously monitors all financial institutions under its purview and will take appropriate action to safeguard the soundness of the financial system.
“The (central) Bank stands ready to provide liquidity, whenever necessary, to financial institutions under its purview. The Bank is also closely engaging with the other monetary authorities in the region to monitor and respond with co-ordinated measures in managing the current challenging environment,” it said.
Commenting on the resilience of the local financial institutions, it said this was due to several years of reforms, institutional development and capacity building, continuous efforts to enhance corporate governance and risk management standards and practices.
Bank Negara said the level of non-performing loans had also improved to 2.5%. It said the standardised approach of the Basel II capital adequacy framework was implemented effective January 2008.
“There is also ample liquidity in Malaysia’s financial system to facilitate the orderly functioning of economic and financing activities,” it said.
As at end-August 2008, net interbank placements with Bank Negara by the banking system totalled RM198.5bil.
“The banking and insurance industries are therefore operating with adequate capital and liquidity buffers that have been accumulated over several years.
Malaysia’s financial institutions also have negligible exposure to both sub-prime related securities and to the affected financial institutions of other countries, with more than 90% of total assets of the banks and insurance companies in ringgit denominated assets.
Bank Negara also said all foreign financial institutions in Malaysia were locally incorporated and had a high level of capital that is committed to support their domestic operations.
As at end-August 2008, the risk-weighted capital ratio for these foreign financial institutions was at 12.6%.
KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian financial system can weather the global financial turmoil and remains resilient, says Bank Negara.
The central bank said on Tuesday that it has a fully developed supervisory and surveillance system. It was also continuously monitors all financial institutions under its purview and will take appropriate action to safeguard the soundness of the financial system.
“The (central) Bank stands ready to provide liquidity, whenever necessary, to financial institutions under its purview. The Bank is also closely engaging with the other monetary authorities in the region to monitor and respond with co-ordinated measures in managing the current challenging environment,” it said.
Commenting on the resilience of the local financial institutions, it said this was due to several years of reforms, institutional development and capacity building, continuous efforts to enhance corporate governance and risk management standards and practices.
Bank Negara said the level of non-performing loans had also improved to 2.5%. It said the standardised approach of the Basel II capital adequacy framework was implemented effective January 2008.
“There is also ample liquidity in Malaysia’s financial system to facilitate the orderly functioning of economic and financing activities,” it said.
As at end-August 2008, net interbank placements with Bank Negara by the banking system totalled RM198.5bil.
“The banking and insurance industries are therefore operating with adequate capital and liquidity buffers that have been accumulated over several years.
Malaysia’s financial institutions also have negligible exposure to both sub-prime related securities and to the affected financial institutions of other countries, with more than 90% of total assets of the banks and insurance companies in ringgit denominated assets.
Bank Negara also said all foreign financial institutions in Malaysia were locally incorporated and had a high level of capital that is committed to support their domestic operations.
As at end-August 2008, the risk-weighted capital ratio for these foreign financial institutions was at 12.6%.
The RM 2.4 billion Telecom HSBB (High Speed Broadband) subsidy
Source MP KitSiang
Why is Telekom subsidised with RM2.4 billion of tax payer’s money for the HSBB project when an alternative proposal do not require subsidy? Why wasn’t there an open tender to choose the best proposal?
Why does the govt think Telekom is the best company to role out HSSB in spite of the fact that Telekom failed to achieve the national objective of high internet penetration after more than 10 years?
Simple economics will tell that a competitive environment will produce the results the country wants.
Besides failure to deliver the numbers (high internet and broadband penetration) and despite the fact that Telekom is a laughing stock because TMnet is well known for bad quality of service, the govt persist to award the next generation broadband project to Telekom.
HSBT (High Speed Broadband Technology Sdn Bhd) has offered to build a similar network without subsidy. Even if the govt deem HSBT inexperienced to carry out such a large project, wouldn’t the fact that their not requiring a subsidy tell them a subsidy may not be required?
Why then does the govt. need to provide public funds especially in this financially troubled time? The money will be better spent on the rakyat.
Since public money is involved, why wasn’t there an open tender? The govt should justify the rationale and provide details.
To make it worse, Telekom’s HSSB network is only a partially open network when it is known globally that such an infrastructure should be open and accessible to other broadband providers such as in S’pore. Furthermore, the govt did not have specific terms for the sharing of the HSSB network with other service providers.
Telekom has said screening will be done to allow competition that adds value to the industry, country and consumer. The term ’screening’ is bad enough while the part on adding value is open to interpretation.
A similar initiative, “Equal access plan for fixed line phone” introduced a decade ago supposedly to encourage competition in the ISP industry failed miserably. It played to Telekom’s hand to stunt the rise of serious competitors.
It is amazing that the govt continued to allow Telekom to use vague words when Telekom has shown this bad faith previously. Doesn’t the govt learn?
In spite of openly talking about increasing internet penetration and quality, the failure of Telekom to deliver still encourages the govt to dish out the same and to support Telekom further. There is no real competition for broadband in the country.
Can anyone say that Telekom’s 95% share of the market shows M’sia has liberalised the broadband service provider industry effectively?
What the country needs to propel itself forward in the information age is true liberalisation and not simply pay lip service to it. The HSSB project awarded to Telekom will only strengthen their already dominant position.
Will the govt force Telekom to adopt open access where any service provider can use the HSSB network to reach their customers when it is constructed? This is the way to create competition to provide the best service at reasonable prices, vital in order to develop the content and IT industry here.
A few questions to conclude:
• Isn’t the RM2.4 billion subsidy unfair, Telekom is already too dominant?
• Why allow Telekom to defer third party full access to the HSSB network for 7 years when Telekom is already the dominant player? It will be their right if they funded it 100% themselves but with public funds, there should be no delay at all.
• Will the govt listen to all stakeholders – the public, IT industry and broadband industry as to the best way forward for the HSSB project through a study because it is now a public project with public funds involved?
• Why is the govt protecting the revenue of one entity Telekom when true liberalisation will develop the industry, potentially returning revenue many times more for the country?
• Will the govt put in a proviso in the agreement with Telekom HSSB project to ensure open access to all service providers at reasonable price that includes annual audit by a third party? Failing this, will the govt ensure since there is interest, for at least one more HSSB provider within a year? Competition must be created.
Why is Telekom subsidised with RM2.4 billion of tax payer’s money for the HSBB project when an alternative proposal do not require subsidy? Why wasn’t there an open tender to choose the best proposal?
Why does the govt think Telekom is the best company to role out HSSB in spite of the fact that Telekom failed to achieve the national objective of high internet penetration after more than 10 years?
Simple economics will tell that a competitive environment will produce the results the country wants.
Besides failure to deliver the numbers (high internet and broadband penetration) and despite the fact that Telekom is a laughing stock because TMnet is well known for bad quality of service, the govt persist to award the next generation broadband project to Telekom.
HSBT (High Speed Broadband Technology Sdn Bhd) has offered to build a similar network without subsidy. Even if the govt deem HSBT inexperienced to carry out such a large project, wouldn’t the fact that their not requiring a subsidy tell them a subsidy may not be required?
Why then does the govt. need to provide public funds especially in this financially troubled time? The money will be better spent on the rakyat.
Since public money is involved, why wasn’t there an open tender? The govt should justify the rationale and provide details.
To make it worse, Telekom’s HSSB network is only a partially open network when it is known globally that such an infrastructure should be open and accessible to other broadband providers such as in S’pore. Furthermore, the govt did not have specific terms for the sharing of the HSSB network with other service providers.
Telekom has said screening will be done to allow competition that adds value to the industry, country and consumer. The term ’screening’ is bad enough while the part on adding value is open to interpretation.
A similar initiative, “Equal access plan for fixed line phone” introduced a decade ago supposedly to encourage competition in the ISP industry failed miserably. It played to Telekom’s hand to stunt the rise of serious competitors.
It is amazing that the govt continued to allow Telekom to use vague words when Telekom has shown this bad faith previously. Doesn’t the govt learn?
In spite of openly talking about increasing internet penetration and quality, the failure of Telekom to deliver still encourages the govt to dish out the same and to support Telekom further. There is no real competition for broadband in the country.
Can anyone say that Telekom’s 95% share of the market shows M’sia has liberalised the broadband service provider industry effectively?
What the country needs to propel itself forward in the information age is true liberalisation and not simply pay lip service to it. The HSSB project awarded to Telekom will only strengthen their already dominant position.
Will the govt force Telekom to adopt open access where any service provider can use the HSSB network to reach their customers when it is constructed? This is the way to create competition to provide the best service at reasonable prices, vital in order to develop the content and IT industry here.
A few questions to conclude:
• Isn’t the RM2.4 billion subsidy unfair, Telekom is already too dominant?
• Why allow Telekom to defer third party full access to the HSSB network for 7 years when Telekom is already the dominant player? It will be their right if they funded it 100% themselves but with public funds, there should be no delay at all.
• Will the govt listen to all stakeholders – the public, IT industry and broadband industry as to the best way forward for the HSSB project through a study because it is now a public project with public funds involved?
• Why is the govt protecting the revenue of one entity Telekom when true liberalisation will develop the industry, potentially returning revenue many times more for the country?
• Will the govt put in a proviso in the agreement with Telekom HSSB project to ensure open access to all service providers at reasonable price that includes annual audit by a third party? Failing this, will the govt ensure since there is interest, for at least one more HSSB provider within a year? Competition must be created.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
