EPU and ASLI over 30% equity

13Friday

JK? Digest no 16 of October, 06 <261 of 2006> Definite already 30% of equity in Bumiputra hands

Dispute of EPU and ASLI and what next?  IRB should know better.

Asli? 45% figure yet to proven wrong (letter in Malaysiakini)
Ronnie Liu of DAP     http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/58050
Oct 11, 06 4:45pm
Tan Sri Muhyiddin have spoken twice on the matter within the last one week. It shows the subject is of great interest and importance to you. My earlier statements have asked you to disclose the methodology used by the Economic Planning Unit to determine the percentage of equity held by different ethnic Malaysians and foreigners instead of discrediting the facts and figures presented by Asli.


I have this to say in my book - Sabah Wealth - image of woods power)


EPU Implementation Director could not explain why almost the same amount of RM30 billion still for MP 6 & 7 for reduction of 11% (down from 21%-10%) only when they incurred RM33 billions for MP2, 3, 4,5 (60%-21% decline in poverty). (Details in my book - Sabah Wealth - image of woods power)


Table C shows the allocation over 3 decades since 1970 and if you have a closer look in 4 Malaysia Plans 1971-1990, the total amount allocated for poverty eradication was RM33 billion while the amount was RM30 billion for ten years 1991-2000. Lets reflect that it was claimed that poverty eradication was very productive as the incidences of rural poverty dropped from 60 % in 1970 to 21.1% in 1990, and other similar declining trends as per table A, For such a drastic performance RM33 billion were expended, why then for the period 1991-2000, do we still need so much funds of about RM30 billion when we had much lesser poverty to eradicate? I had asked these questions at the seminar, but no satisfactory answers were given. I hope the relevant authorities tell us why such a scenario had arisen. By a bit of imagination, it would appear the poor always with us, had been utilised by some for hidden agenda. Or were such massive fund just wasted?


They call themselves Doctors of what?

TABLE C ----Total Development and Poverty Eradication Allocation, (RM million)

Plan Period
Total Development Allocation
Poverty Eradication Allocation
1971-1990
1991-2000

MP2 (1971-1975)
7,415
2,350
2,350
   
MP3 (1976-1980)
21,202
6,373.4
6,373.4
   
MP4 (1981-1985)
46,320
11,238.5
11,238.5
   
MP5 (1986-1990)
35,300
12,970.7
12,970.7
   
MP6 (1991-1995)
54,705
13,900.8
   13,900.8

MP7 (1996-2000)
67,500
16,084.8
   16,084.8

Total (1971-2000)
232,442
62,918.2
32,932.6
29,985.6


Source: Chamhuri Siwar; Kajian Keberkesanan Pendekatan2 Pembasmian Kemiskinan di Malaysia, Paper Presented at Muzakarah Penggubalan Model Pembasmian Kemiskinan Menurut Perspektif Islam, 14-15 April 2000, Kuala Lumpur.

TABLE A---- -Incidence of Poverty & Hard core poor, selected years. (extracted from source of EPU)

Year
1,970
1,985
1,990
2,000 (target)

Incidence of Poverty (percentage)
52.4
20.7
16.5
5.5

Incidence of urban poverty (percentage)
22.3
8.5
7.1
1.9

Incidence of rural poverty
60
27.3
21.1
10

Incidence of hard core poverty
--
6.9
3
0.5




Joshua Kong (proponent of MIGS)

Author of New Wealth Order, EPIC of Sabah, FIRE, Sabah Wealth - image of woods power,

EPIC of Sabah - 2nd Edition, Paper to Parliament Select Committee on Unity and National Service.

EPIC of Sabah - 3rd Ed., WATER, A tussle in biodiversity of two liquids - palm oil and water,

Sabah and Sarawak in Malaysia in 1963, Paper Paper to Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity (2006).

http://www.e-borneo.com/col/jkong/

13Friday

JK's Digest no 17 of October, 06 <262 of 2006> A right thing to do by Dr Lim Teck Ghee


Stop those 'screaming' of the socalled leaders.

Are we going the way of 'mob' rule?


Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS) Professor Dr Lim did the right thing by resigning as Director.

By the way, have they seen the details of the equity holdings of those 1,000 + listed companies.  If not see that again.

I think this is the only country that need to do such an exercise into futility when there are so much unknown in the shareholdings of all companies. Isn't this an ugly manifestation of the apartheid phenomenon as undeclared. While it is to be appreciated for the NEP since 1970 with a target of 30% equity in the hands of the bumiputra (sons or princes of the soil), it is always a changing scenario from year to year.

At least Dr Lim had done a detailed report. Although I have not seen it, at least there is some thing as transparent as that. Is there any detailed report on how the Government or EPU's version of 18.9%? Lets there be an arbitration.of the truth of both methodology used. Maybe forums or roadshows be done nationwide to show us of the reality of these reports to resolve the issue once and for all.

There are quite a few unknown factors in the shareholdings of all companies - listed and unlisted.

Such unknown factors are as follows:-
1) Elements of proxies (how significant proportions are these people as proxies?)
2) The proportion of nominee accounts in listed and unlisted companies. How do we know who are the real owners of these nominee accounts?
3) How do we treat those major Government Linked Companies - both listed and unlisted?
4) The market capitalisation of the 1,000+ listed companies are very significant when the capital market is concerned. This is the bulk of all capital in the hands of the people local and foreign.
5) The quantum of those equity in the hands of bumiputra that had been disposed off since 1970.
6) When we consider all those 600,000 + limited companies in the registrar of Companies, is it appropriate to add up all those nominal issued (not paid up) shares? I think most of the private limited companies are there for some purposes like tax planning and restructure of personal assets. Considering that quite a number of these companies are near dormant or even dormant, those shareholding of nominal share of RM1 can be negative in most cases. Pure fixed or landed assets holding companies should be discarded in this exercise as many other people also hold such assets but in their personal capacity.

7) Be it 18.9% or 45% in the hands of bumiputra, do we really know what percentage of the equity is in the hands of the Chinese, Indians, and other local groups? What proportion of such equity is in the hand of foreigners or foreign companies. Do we have such percentages for the harmony of multiracial nation?

Would there be a possibility for all the data be available especially those held in Bank Negara Malaysia and the Inland Revenue Board (IRB)? Would the IRB go after those people who have accumulated so much wealth/capital via the share market? What about the impact on the wealth due to the 1997's Asian financial crisis?

I believe the 30% has been achieved in 1990.

Joshua Kong (proponent of MIGS)
Author of New Wealth Order, EPIC of Sabah, FIRE, Sabah Wealth - image of woods power,
EPIC of Sabah - 2nd Edition, Paper to Parliament Select Committee on Unity and National Service.
EPIC of Sabah - 3rd Ed., WATER, A tussle in biodiversity of two liquids - palm oil and water,
Sabah and Sarawak in Malaysia in 1963, Paper Paper to Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity (2006).
http://www.e-borneo.com/col/jkong/

13Friday

JK's Digest no 18 of October, 06 [263 of 2006] 50 years of Never ending policy (NEP)


No doubt about 30% of equity in the hands of bumiputra .

Bumiputera equity controversy:
Asli man quits in protest
12 Oct 2006
Shamini Darshni
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_Ne ... /Article/index_html

Economist Dr Lim Teck Ghee stands by findings and says he cannot accept backdown by Asli president, Mirzan Mahathir, who has defended his stand.
KUALA LUMPUR: The fallout over Asli's controversial report on Bumiputera equity ownership continued yesterday when its stalwart economist resigned in protest.
"for example, if Khazanah Nasional Bhd was to declare dividends, it would go to the government, which would then go to a consolidated fund for all Malaysians. This makes it impossible to segregate the fund for each ethnic group," Mirzan said.


>>>> my comment is as follows:-

Lets give some thought on this.  Why does the Government go into business or industries?  Who would own such shares although such shares are initially held by the Government?
I believe there is an understanding that such shares would be transferred to the bumiputra in the days ahead as it was done in the case of MAS - the national airline.  So such shares would be deemed to be under the bumiputra sector.

On the other hands would such shares be allocated to non bumiputra such these companies be handed over to private hands?

Another argument can be that - what is the proportion of GLC shares in the model of 45%?   Would that be 15%? If so, then the 30% target is already attained.

Also there are cases of Sabah companies where the names are not Muslims but bumiputra due to the qualified natives, such shares are classified/reclassifed by the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) as non bumiputra.  Such shareholding would be classified  in the annual returns as bumiputra by the said companies concerned.  I also believe the CCM would only take Muslim sounding names including those with BIN as Malays and bumiputra.  Those with Chinese names and without BIN can be considered non bumiputra although they are natives of Borneo with Anak Negeri Certificates.  I had been asked this kind of question when I submitted Annual Returns at the CCM before.

So EPU's figures can be inaccurate/understated as it is likely that only Malay/Muslim is considered bumiputra.


Joshua Kong (proponent of MIGS)
Author of New Wealth Order, EPIC of Sabah, FIRE, Sabah Wealth - image of woods power,
EPIC of Sabah - 2nd Edition, Paper to Parliament Select Committee on Unity and National Service.
EPIC of Sabah - 3rd Ed., WATER, A tussle in biodiversity of two liquids - palm oil and water,
Sabah and Sarawak in Malaysia in 1963, Paper Paper to Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity (2006).
http://www.e-borneo.com/col/jkong/

[ Last edited by  13Friday at 12-10-2006 10:56 PM ]

13Friday

JK's Digest no 19 of October, 06 [264 of 2006]  Sabah is really insignificant in Malaysian wealth
What should we do next to save Sabah?.


I had downloaded the 40 pages of the Corporate Equity Distribution by Centre for Public Policy Studies.

But page 7 was blank and Sabah's listed Companies that are controlled by Government Linked Entities were not considered by CPPS when Sarawak portion was included.  

It is indeed worrying for Sabah that little investments are maintained for the well being of Sabah.  Even those investments initiated by the greedy State Government in the Saham  Amanah Sabah worth RM500m are reduced to a pittance within a few years.   Yet these same leaders are still in power and dreaming of improving the status of Sabah.   Another public listed GLC lost RM400m in a single year and yet people are dumb.  So it is for the totally new Government to reverse the fortune of Sabah.  To kickstart that we need to fight for the RM120 billion in my program known as Mega ICC Group Sabah (MIGS).  Otherwise most Sabahans already in slavery of sort are not worth anything and even worst than slaves in a rotten system under the present Government.  No apology from me for that strong statement.

But why did the Chairman of ASLI, Datuk Mirzan apologise for that good paper "CED" by CPPS?

His reason for not reading a small 40 pages report is not a good one.  For that I don't think he should destroy that CED paper when a paper is based on research facts.  Should he not now apologise to the nation for his failure and resign from ASLI.  Should not it be that Dr Lim Teck Ghee be now be promoted to be in that vacancy instead.

Why should we need to do that?  It is the Prime Minister's desire for his people to tell him the truth and work with him.  In this instance, Dr Lim has been doing just that and his paper stands the test of truth.  Is the apology of Datuk Mirzan justified in the desire of the Prime Minister, and if not then it is Datuk Mirzan to know what to do next.

I also hope that the children of the Tun Dr Mahathir in business can confirm the rumour that is going around that they had lost billions of Ringgit in the 1997's Asian Financial Flu.  It is up to Datuk Mirzan to confirm that now.  If that is the case, the nation can ill afford such people holding a job as Chairman of ASLI.

Joshua Kong (proponent of MIGS)
Author of New Wealth Order, EPIC of Sabah, FIRE, Sabah Wealth - image of woods power,
EPIC of Sabah - 2nd Edition, Paper to Parliament Select Committee on Unity and National Service.
EPIC of Sabah - 3rd Ed., WATER, A tussle in biodiversity of two liquids - palm oil and water,
Sabah and Sarawak in Malaysia in 1963, Paper Paper to Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity (2006).
http://www.e-borneo.com/col/jkong/

13Friday

http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/58327

Bumi equity figure: Missing the whole thing

Dr Collin Abraham
Oct 17, 06 3:41pm

Without stretching the argument, one also needs to seek an explanation as to why, while there is an affirmative action policy (NEP) to help the Malays, the vast majority of those afflicted by social ills such as drug abuse, HIV/Aids (almost 80%) and even the highest incidence of incest should be among this community.

13Friday

JK? Digest no 34 of October, 06 [279 of 2006] NEP and its new terms.

Started after the riots in 1969, sad.


The Alliance, have won in 1969 only 51 percent ??? of Parliament seats hence the root cause of the start of New Economic Policy (NEP) (American Congress Report 2006). That is how we consider Sabah and Sarawak seats.   That was 12 years of Independence in 1957.  Alliance did have very low percentage of overall votes.

NEP started as a sort of social contract basically in Peninsula Malaysia for a period of twenty years but the adverse impact had been felt in Borneon States of Malaysia.

Recently the debate on NEP surfaced following the figures of equity held by Malays and Non Malays by Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (ASLI) after more than 30 years.

While the present Government wants NEP to be extended, there are enough good reasons for NEP to be discarded for the good of the nation.

One of the glaring disparities between the Peninsula Malaysia and East Malaysia is as reported in the American Congress was from 1995 to 2005, total road length increased from 61,380 kilometers to 77,673 kilometers. Most roads (67.7 percent) are in Peninsular Malaysia. In term of land size, East Malaysia is much bigger with Sarawak (47,500 sq miles) Sabah (29,388 sq miles) and Peninsula Malaya (50,700 sq miles),. The 2000 Population of 2.million, 2 million and 18 million respectively.

Have you read the US Congress Report (latest 2006) ?  Is it true in its facts?

Could these disparities be due to NEP and concentrated in Peninsula Malaya only? Whatever that maybe NEP can be acronyms to indicate "No Exception Please, Never Ending Policy, New Emergent Policy, Now Expired Privileges, No Extra Pledges, New Elite Programme, Negative Expected Promises, Nihil Economic Productivity, Numb Every Person"

Who say Malaysia has succeeded, must be fooling themselves as the system sucks.


Joshua Kong (proponent of MIGS)


Author of New Wealth Order, EPIC of Sabah, FIRE, Sabah Wealth - image of woods power,

EPIC of Sabah - 2nd Edition, Paper to Parliament Select Committee on Unity and National Service.

EPIC of Sabah - 3rd Ed., WATER, A tussle in biodiversity of two liquids - palm oil and water,

Sabah and Sarawak in Malaysia in 1963, Paper Paper to Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity (2006).

http://www.e-borneo.com/col/jkong/