K.A.K.AWe are not writers but the current situation has prompted us to discuss and analyze facts that are surrounding MALAYSIA. We have known how BERJAYA has secured many contracts and the connections that they have. We were not really bothered at all until recently when it involved a security printing plant of Malaysian currency notes.
First, a bit history about this security printing plant which dates back to 1999. That was the time when BANK NEGARA MALAYSIA (BNM) had given its permission to a company known as
FOCUS EQUITY SDN BHD to conduct a feasibility study on printing of our own money, i.e. the currency notes.
Later, the outcome has resulted that the printing plant is viable and timely to be constructed. As such, in 2006, a loan worth of RM600 million was approved by a GOVERNMENT-BACKED BANK to the aforementioned company which will be backed up by a 30-year concession agreement between the government-backed bank, the government and
Focus Equity sdn bhd.
But the way this printing plant is going to materialise from the very beginning is questionable. Thus, we are going to discuss the facts and hope to get responses accordingly.
1. WHY BERJAYA?The shareholding structure of
FOCUS EQUITY comprises of corporate shareholders and one significant shareholder is BERJAYA LAND BHD. However, BERJAYA GROUP is under PN17 COMPANY and therefore, under that classification, the said holding company and its subsidiaries’ accounts are placed under BNM’s supervision. Any proceeds into any of the accounts are subject to BNM’s sole discretion and are going to be used for outstanding payments owed by BERJAYA.
Knowing the fact that all Berjaya companies are under BNM’s monitoring, why did the government-backed bank approve the loan? Having Berjaya Land Bhd as the shareholder will invite queries to the said government bank’s manner in approving loan applications. Does the said bank have to succumb to someone in superior or obey blindly instructions from the top?
Furthermore, the government bank’s exposure on Berjaya (before the abovementioned loan was approved) already stood at RM100 million. Thus, the approval of RM600 million would certainly exceeds the bank’s SINGLE CUSTOMER LIMIT for Berjaya Group as a whole and concurrently, breaching the BAFIA Act 1989. As such, why did the government-backed bank’s TOP MANAGEMENT indulge this issue?
Apart from the above, the land where the printing plant will be located will be constructed on a Berjaya’s land at BKT TAGAR, SELANGOR. Indirectly, this implies that Berjaya’s controlling power on this high security project of national interest is uncontrollable and unlimited.
In addition, rumours saying that BERJAYA is going to move its racecourse near to the printing plant. Is the MB of Selangor and the government going to allow such thing to happen?
2. WHY NO GOVERNMENT SHAREHOLDINGS?Initially,
FOCUS EQUITY was wholly-owned by ISTIMEWA RESTU SDN BHD, which is a non-bumi company. Then, the structure has changed whereby the shareholdings are inclusive of BERJAYA LAND BHD, EVOLUSI SIERRA SDN BHD, MENARA SETARA SDN BHD and AP WIRELESS SDN BHD.
Looking at the structure, there is no government shareholding. Why did the government, in particular the MOF, not want to be involved in the so-called NATIONAL HIGH SECURITY STRATEGIC PROJECT? It is a need and the responsibility for government representatives to be involved in the project so as to monitor and learn the security features in setting up a printing plant.
Isn’t it an obvious responsibility for BNM as well to study every aspects of setting up the plant from the earliest stage as to avoid any hanky panky along the way. This is even more crucial since the setting up of the plant involves a CONCESSION AGREEMENT that lasts up to 30 YEARS. BNM is the official OFFTAKER for the printing money. Therefore, the regulator should be part of the shareholdings as well. Furthermore, we can look at the Royal Mint’s structure whereby the company has been privatised but BNM still has a controlling interest in it. So, why is this different now?
As a matter of fact, KEMENTERIAN KESELAMATAN DALAM NEGERI should also send a team of its people into the company. The printing plant of currency notes are indeed and sensibly a very big and sensitive issue. It will affect the country’s financial wellbeing in the future. Therefore, the issue of security is highly applicable here. Why is the said ministry entrusting these shareholders with an unknown background and unfavourable condition (referring to Berjaya) to run the company?
In brief, the project is about printing of currency notes and abuse plus misdeeds could easily happened especially when there is no direct supervision by the government. Our money might be syphoned out of the country and our currency might be reduced to BLACK MONEY. Don’t we realise that Malaysia is infamous for its pirated goods, especially cds and vcds, and we certainly don’t want that our currency to suffer this same fate. Worse still, we have just been recently shocked by the allegation of counterfeit money in the recent Ijok by-election.
Is the government waiting for everything to be finalised and the concession agreement signed being reconsidering whether to be a partner in this venture? Obviously, at that moment, the purchase price would be at a premium and, again, if this happened, our government will have to fork out unnecessary sums of money just like in the case of PANTAI HOLDINGS. If the government could intervene in the early stage, this scenario will not have to be repeated and it is still not too late for the government to do so.
All the printing plants all over the world are owned by the government (correct us if we are wrong), and how rationale is the government in allowing a wholly private-owned company to print our own currencies in our own land where the major issue of security is a great concern? Why don’t we look at singapore (as the current administration is prone in satisfying this so-called “close” neighbour of ours); why that country does not want to build their own printing plant if the plant is really viable? Don’t we know that Singapore is always ahead of us in every aspect even now can freely intimidate and belittle our current administration?
3. WHO ARE THE BUMI SHAREHOLDERS/DIRECTORS?The current 22% BUMI SHARES belongs to Evolusi Sierra Sdn Bhd, Menara Setara Sdn Bhd and AP Wireless Sdn Bhd.
Who are these companies and the people behind them? Have they involved in the security business before or are they just proxies to some powerful people who are the real masters to the bumis?
In actual fact, the 30% QUOTA FOR BUMI has not been complied with. So, is it the end of the NEP policy which is slowly being taken away and lately, the same thing happened in the SJER/IDR project too (again, here it shows the “close” relationship between our administration and that dynasty ruled country).
4. WHAT IS THE RESULT OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY?We don’t think that the highly sensitive and top security nature of this project has made known to the public or even to the decision makers. The findings should be disclosed so as to ascertain that this project is in accordance to the recommendations made by the said study and thus informed decisions can be rightfully made. Are the government-backed banks aware of this study and its details? Do they have access to the said study?
5. GERMAN PRINTING PLANT ALREADY EXISTED IN MALAYSIAFocus Equity proclaimed that they are the only printing plant in MALAYSIA and, even worse, the sole supplier in SOUTH EAST ASIA (correct us if we are wrong). This was highlighted in the latest newspaper article published in the Star dated 18.4.07.
However, this GERMAN COMPANY has long established its presence in MALAYSIA except that the company is not producing Malaysian currencies. They only cater for the foreign market.
We are sure that the company is monitoring closely the development of
Focus Equity, as to why
Focus Equity could easily produce the Malaysian currencies without going the same procedures as the German company did (correct us if we are wrong). Are there any double standards or self-interest practised here? Is there any kickbacks involved here?
6. CONCESSION AGREEMENTIs it true that the GOVERNMENT is no longer a party to any concession agreements?
BNM is the PAYMASTER and in any conventional loans there would be an agreement signed by the paymaster/purchaser and the supplier/seller. However, will BNM continue to sign the agreement and look thoroughly into the terms and conditions of the said agreement? BNM is the responsible party that gave its approval to the project and they should also be the signing party as well.
Most importantly, before signing the agreement, did the ATTORNEY GENERAL’s office and all the relevant parties scrutinise the agreement properly?
7. SECURITY IS UNJUSTIFIEDHow come the government-backed bank can agree to a gearing ratio of 90:10? To our understanding, the only solid form of security for this printing project is the printing plant land which is worth less than RM100 million against the total loan of RM600 million. Whereabouts can we find any commercial bank which would agree to this kind of credit proposal? Even worse, there are no guarantees given by any of the shareholders or directors of
Focus Equity.
Having laid down all the discussion points , we really hope that there will be some intellectual and good feedback from all the readers. Looking at the timeframe when this loan was given out, one hardly notices that it actually coincides with the cabinet OR rather Pak Lah’s decision to scrap the scenic bridge which worth the same amount too, i.e. RM600 million. And finally, we really hope that the rumours on the early resignation of the government-backed bank’s Group Managing Director has nothing to do with this fiasco as the
Focus Equity’s account has just turned into NPL this year (correct us if we are wrong) and yes, what a coincidence that the cover page of BNM’s audited report 2006 depicted the printing money technique known as intaglio!
So amputation it is! I really feel for the parents who were given the run around by the officials. Although I am not privy to the information provided by the specialists and hospital administration, I just wonder how much false hope has been planted that the arm could be saved. Even in the very first photo (unclear as it was) the demarcation was clearly evident. The arm was not salvageable. Maybe it was a PR stunt to show that they were trying the best - but the time lost was irreplaceable. And they were still giving the infection background story - please own up!
