Kong Choy should answer in the PAC the five questions I asked him in Parliament in November 2007 on the PKFZ scandal but which he had been evading for two years


An online MCA website, malaysianmirror.com, has reported on the willingness of former Transport Minister Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy to appear before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal.

Like his predecessor Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik, Chan should give clear-cut assurance that he will not emulate their former boss, former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir in succumbing to a sudden attack of selective amnesia when appearing before the PAC in the way Mahathir succumbed to selective amnesia when appearing before the Lingam Videotape Royal Commission of Inquiry in January 2008, where he had to say “I cannot remember” or its equivalent 14 times during his 90-minute testimony.

In his appearance before the PAC, Kong Choy should answer the five questions I posed to him in Parliament in November 2007, but which he had been evading for two years, viz:

  1. Was it true that when the Port Klang Authority and the Transport Ministry insisted on buying the 1,000 acres of Pulau Indah land for PKFZ at RM25 PSF on a “willing buyer, willing seller” basis, in the face of strong objection by the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the Treasury which had recommended that the land be acquired at RM10 PSF, the Cabinet had given its approval subject to two conditions:
    1. categorical assurance by the Transport Minister that the PKFZ proposal was feasible and self-financing and would not require any public funding; and
    2. that every RM100 million variation in the development costs of PKFZ would require prior Cabinet approval.
  2. In the event, the first condition was breached when the PKFZ project ballooned from RM1.1 billion to RM4.6 billion requiring government intervention and bailout while the second condition was breached with the original PKFZ development costs of RM400 million ballooning to RM2.8 billion without any prior Cabinet approval ever been sought for every RM100 million increase in development costs.
  3. The Transport Minister had unlawfully issued four Letters of Support to Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd (KDSB), the PKFZ turnkey contractor – to raise RM4 billion bonds, which were regarded as government guarantees by the market. The Transport Minister had no such powers to issue financial guarantees committing the government, as it could only be issued by the Finance Minister and only after Cabinet approval. The first Letter of Support was issued by the former Transport Minister, Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik on May 28, 2003, which was Liong Sik’s last day as Transport Minister while the other three were issued by Kong Choy.
  4. Whether it wasn’t true that in recognition that the four unlawful “Letters of Support” of the Transport Minister had nonetheless given implicit government guarantee to the market that the Cabinet had in mid-year to give retrospective approval for the unlawful and unauthorized four Letters of Support by the Transport Ministers in the past four years creating RM4.6 billion liability for the government in the bailout of PKFZ.
  5. Why no action had been taken against the Transport Minister, Liong Sik and Kong Choy, as well as the government officials responsible for the unlawful issue of the four “Letters of Support”. Kong Choy had said that he did not know that he had no power as Transport Minister to issue such Letters of Support. Was this acceptable explanation for getting the government embroiled in the RM4.6 billion PKFZ scandal?

After each question, I specifically asked Chan to give a “yes or not” answer – to deny if the facts I had mentioned were untrue, and to explain and justify what he and the government had done if what I had said was undisputed and true.

In his reply in Parliament, Chan completely ignored the five questions on the core issues of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, as well as other questions which I had posed, including:

  • How Chan could claim that he did not know that as Transport Minister he did not have the powers to issue Letters of Support which were tantamount to government guarantees in the issue of RM4 billion bonds by Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd, as only the Finance Minister had such powers and also after getting prior approval by the Cabinet. How can Chan claim ignorance of this important financial principle when Chan had been Deputy Finance Minister for close to four years from Dec. 1999 to June 2003? Did Chan completely waste his close to four years as Deputy Finance Minister and learnt nothing?
  • Why Chan did not seek the advice of the Legal Adviser of the Ministry of Transport on whether he had the authority and powers to sign the Letters of Support but relied instead on advisers from outside the Ministry?
  • Why for more than three years from May 2003 to December 2006, the Finance Ministry was in the dark and completely unaware that four unauthorized Letters of Support involving RM4 billion bonds had been issued by the Transport Minister as it was only in December 2006 that the Treasury was informed by the lead arranger for the bonds that such Letters of Support had been issued by the Transport Minister and that they constituted government guarantees for the bond issues? Doesn’t this shocking evidence of a shambolic government, with the right hand not know what the left hand is doing?

I look forward to Chan answering these questions after evading them for two years when he appear before the PAC on the PKFZ scandal.

It is reported today that Port Klang Authority (PKA) has been overruled by the Finance Ministry and had been directed to resume payment of RM660 million to PKFZ turnkey developer, Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd (KDSB) companies, for the PKFZ land and development.

Last Tuesday, PKA Chairman, Datuk Lee Hwa Beng had announced deferment until outcome of review by the task force commissioned to take another look at PKFZ by 10th August 2009.

I had received this information on Saturday, which was why it was my No. 106 question to Transport Minister Ong Tee Keat last Saturday.

Despite Ong’s silence, Lee’s admission of the payment of RM330 million yesterday and another RM300 million by end of the month is confirmation of the truth of the veracity of the questions I have been posing to Ong in the past 36 days. What has Ong got to say for his losing out to KDSB’s Datuk Tiong King Sing in this “test of will” between the two?

Although I had announced a three-day break of my daily “three questions a day” to Ong on the PKFZ scandal, Ong’s “cultural assassins” have continued their attacks on me.

The latest statement by Ong’s “cultural assassin” accused me of trying to deflect attention from the Penang issue of Kampong Buah Pala and Kedah Pakatan Rakyat crisis, which is so ridiculous to any Malaysian following daily news – as I started my daily “three questions a day” on PKFZ to Ong on 30th May 2009, many weeks before the two controversies in Penang and Kedah.

However, with these baseless attacks by Ong’s “cultural assassins”, I am inclined to continue my daily questioning of Ong on the PKFZ scandal. I will announce my next move on Friday.

  1. #1 by cintanegara on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 2:39 pm

    What say you?

    The Star, dated July, 6th

    GEORGE TOWN: Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s reason for moving into a rented, luxury bungalow because his official residence is infested with termites and fire ants is a “flimsy excuse”, says Gerakan.

    Its state Youth vice-chairman H’ng Khoon Leng said Lim was not being transparent on the location of his new residence, tenancy agreement, deposit or the bungalow’s renovation costs.

  2. #2 by cintanegara on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 3:02 pm

    LKS can see a louse as far away as China but is not aware of an elephant on his nose…..

  3. #3 by Yee Siew Wah on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 3:09 pm

    This KC and his previous boss who use to speak like he has gallons of oil in his stomach or throat r now enjoying the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$..in style la.
    Who cares!!!!
    This is Bolehland

  4. #4 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 3:32 pm

    OK , so from what is said above, former Transport Minister Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy appears to have:

    1. exceeded his powers as transport minister or knowledge of procedures; and

    2. not complied Cabinet’s two conditions ie Transport Minister’s assurance that the PKFZ proposal was feasible and self-financing and would not require any public funding and getting cabinet’s approval for every RM100 million variation in the development costs of PKFZ,

    when he issued 3 of the 4 “Letters of Support” to the market accepted as guarantees.

    In such a case, instead of questioning Chan Kong Choy, wouldn’t it be more appropriate for YB to direct the interrogation at the Cabinet itself why, in spite of 1 & 2 above, the government/cabinet
    :-
    (a) vis-à-vis the market still ratified and made legal the unlawful letters of support issued without Ministry of Finance’s approval;

    (b) take no action, so far, against former transport ministers for issuing the 4 letters of support outside their powers;

    (c) as reported today have the Finance Minsitry still direct “Port Klang Authority (PKA) “to resume payment of RM660 million to PKFZ turnkey developer, Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd (KDSB) companies, for the PKFZ land and development;”

    (d) still support the PKFZ project by pouring more public money like salt into sea into PKFZ project, and not allow it to die natural death etc.

    More specifically, wouldn’t it be correct to say that the proper party to whom questions like (for examples) :

    · what to do with transport ministers who claimed that they “did not know that as Transport Minister he did not have the powers to issue Letters of Support” or

    · “Why no action had been taken against the Transport Minister, Liong Sik and Kong Choy, as well as the government officials responsible for the unlawful issue of the four “Letters of Support”

    · “why for more than three years from May 2003 to December 2006, the Finance Ministry was in the dark and completely unaware that four unauthorized Letters of Support involving RM4 billion bonds had been issued by the Transport Minister”

    should more appropriately at this juncture be directed is the cabinet/government rather than the “ignorant” ex-transport ministers purportedly acting outside their powers?

  5. #5 by rabbit on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 5:14 pm

    hello cinta negara… change your nick to benci rakyat ok! LGE only rented a bunglalow, what about your Datuk khir TOYO bought??? hahaha i hope your eyes not over cross lor, the headline is this Tooyo 1st, you didt miss it right! some peoplle rent some people buy! who is richer leh? i guess your cinta is one of the donnation to him. lol oh…. LKS perhaps he dunno how is GAJAH look like, but you cant even see own cock when stand str8. hahahaha

  6. #6 by chengho on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 5:37 pm

    Rabbit ,

    then there is no diff between K Toyo and LGE , at least Toyo Did not talk about CAT….

  7. #7 by intan on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 5:50 pm

    Is it true that CKC is enjoying himself in the casinos in Macao, Melbourne and Las Vegas? In the case of the cultural assassins, who pays their salaries? OKT’s party HQ?

  8. #8 by rabbit on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 6:42 pm

    no no no chengho, toyo didt talk about cat, but he ack like cat, an catman! the word for RENT n BUY is a lot of diffrent lor. try to read the star online! MB so rich lor… i think is another NEVER Land in malaysia. hahaha
    CKC never go to lis bo one lah, cos he is not a vip yet, try to chk the list of VIRGO CR list at port klang lah. you might see him on board hahahaha

  9. #9 by YK Leong on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 7:09 pm

    “I will take a three-day break from the 36-day “three questions a day” session and 108 questions to decide whether to continue with the daily questioning on the PKFZ scandal, and if so, in what new form”.

    Brother Lim Kit Siang, I CAN’T STOP THE MUSIC. Perhaps, I will gamble my luck with the MCA secretary-general, Wong Foon Meng for answers over the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal. STAR (5 July 2009) headlined: “MCA to address public complaints effectively”.

    My complaint #3 for 7 July 2009 to the MCA Public Services and Complaints Bureau is can Ong Ta Kut re-confirm whether 300 copies of the PKFZ report together with its appendices had been printed and delivered to Parliament? The full reports are kept in COLD STORAGE. Ta Kut blamed the powerless and helpless Parliamentary Secretary for not distributing the reports to the MPs. Does Ta Kut agree with me that the Parliamentary Secretary is at the receiving end because of his blame game? Was it correct to say that specific written instruction must be issued to her before she could act? SHE IS A LADY.

  10. #10 by monsterball on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 10:00 pm

    Rabbit..it is useless to talk to idiots like chengho and cintanegara on buy and sell…rent or own it….talking business sense…to them.
    Eng Guan gave the reasons why he needed to move out and rent a house….and look at cintanegara comment…totally illogical….and what is he trying to say about LKS on China? Do you understand it?
    Is he accusing LKS… a racialist?
    Chengho …is lost in the woods…need to be done up…told to bend down…bottom up.. by few woodpackers.
    He is always in the itchy mood….looking for attentions.

  11. #11 by monsterball on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 10:23 pm

    Rabbit…Toyo..is the CAT on the hot tin roof…crawling silently…looking for lubangs…to steal and run away..to store n his RM24 million mansion…which have rooms for cintanegara and chengho as his guests.
    Small size…big size…fat and thin two legged chickens are always ready to be roasted by them….to keep these two idiots fully satisfied.
    Sometimes…UMNO wolf gang will do them up….proper…inside up…upside down..bottoms up…hypnotizing them….to be their slaves forever.
    These two are like drug addicts…consumed by UMNO ..to do their job for MCA…indirectly serving UMNO as their task masters.
    They are here to protect MCA and insult LKS.
    They do not debate not discuss…like oppositions.
    Cintanegara loves to show off his idiotic comments.
    Chengho is the itchy one….simply love foreplays..to do him up proper and good.

  12. #12 by the reds on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 10:27 pm

    Chan Kong Choy is a smart guy, retired at the suitable time to evade from being questioned. MCA guys work in this way! Look at the current MCA President, OTK even absconded to Paris! Really shame on them!

  13. #13 by YK Leong on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 - 10:55 pm

    reds, not retirement.

    Tong Choy was not picked to contest the 308 general election because of the PKFZ scandal. Before he was rejected by the sleeping beauty, a few constituencies were mentioned, such as, Bentong, etc. (sorry, I can’t recall the names).

  14. #14 by rabbit on Wednesday, 8 July 2009 - 1:20 am

    o i c monster ball, thanks for the great info ya ya. now only i know this 2 tedpole. hahaha well dont worried about that black cat. one day he will cought in the battery, do you use eveready batt? hahaha all malaysian will see this cat lah. another zakaria in klang lah.. hahaha i think i need to send my remote control helicopter attach mini cam fly over toyo place lah. needd to see got wishing wheel inside or not, maybe roller coster also got, also can see this 2 tedpole in his swimming pool or not. hahahaha hmmm i wonder, got GAJAH inside or not? Bro LKS n others DAP’s must pay the visit, IPG will take care of parking avoid jamm. hmmm MACC will sell the ticket at gate side. is true, we never see gajah in the istana b4, should go lah. hahahaha… cinta negara,… if you still can’t find your tool,i think u need a enlargment program from internet, 2 or 3 weeks you see the result. bill to toyo lah. very cheap only, chengho.. wait for LKS at toyo place, show him what is gajah ok, maybe you can ride or command the gajah draw 1 daps group poster on the spot. good idea u know, earn some side pocket money. hahaha

  15. #15 by Godfather on Wednesday, 8 July 2009 - 12:28 pm

    Kit:

    The fact is that the Treasury has now put pressure on PKA to make payments to KDSB which was originally withheld. It is clear that this cannot be a sole MCA scam because the Treasury did write a letter to the rating agency (which then copied this to the bondholders) that the letters of support issued by the MOT were valid and constitute the full faith of the government. You have to ask Nor Mohamed Yakcop why he did that and on whose instructions.

    Satu lagi projek Barisan Nasional.

  16. #16 by cintanegara on Wednesday, 8 July 2009 - 5:19 pm

    t’s not surprising then Monsterball doesn’t understand a simple Chinese proverb…

You must be logged in to post a comment.