PKFZ “mother of all scandals” – 2nd set of 3 questions for OTK: agree to RCI to nab all culprits?

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced on Friday that he had directed Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat to “provide answers on every question raised by any party” involving the PricewaterhouseCooper audit report on the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ).

I am still waiting for Ong’s full response to my first three questions on Malaysia’s “Mother of All Scandals” – the RM12.5 billion PKFZ Rip-Off.

Ong should end his linguistic games and boldly admit that he had failed the public pledge he made in his first month as Transport Minister to “tell all” about the PKFZ scandal, that he would not condone or protect wrongdoers responsible for the PKFZ “Mother of All Scandals” , even though they were former top leaders, whether MC A or Barisan Nasional.

The following are the media reports of Ong’s first promise as Transport Minister in April 2008 to “Tell All” about the PKFZ Rip-off –

• “Ong to tell all on the PKFZ – ‘I wish to reveal to the people the true situation’” (Star 8.4.08)


• “Won’t consider whether former leaders would be investigated – Ong Tee Keat:

Revealing the truth is about the issue and not personalities” (Sin Chew 9.4.08)
The Sun reported:

Asked when the report will be ready, he said it will be out soon once a thorough report is completed. “We will not just give a statement to explain everything.”

These statement by Ong in early April 2008 was reinforced by the New Straits Times report (8.4.08) which made it clear that the Transport Ministry was completing its own inquiry into the PKFZ Rip-Off, as this New Straits Times report said that:

• the Transport Ministry will announce its findings on the PKFZ “soon”;

• the Transport Ministry’s investigation “is currently ongoing” ;

• “the probe would reveal how the development cost has risen to RM4.6 billion,
how to revive the free zone and also to identify those responsible for cost overruns”.

But suddenly, the Transport Ministry’s own investigations into the PKFZ Rip-0ff disappeared from the radar of the Transport Ministry, government and the public, as in its place, Ong announced a high-profiled inquiry by PricewaterhouseCoopers.
But what happened to Transport Ministry’s inquiry into the PKFZ which Ong said “would be out soon” long before the appointment of PwC to conduct an audit report on the PKFZ?

Was the Transport Ministry investigation aborted, and if not, what happened to its report and finding?

How many separate inquiries had been conducted by the Transport Ministry since the conception of the PKFZ concept and where are their reports?

Was there anything new in the PwC audit report which Ong had not known from the Transport Ministry’s files and records as well as from the Transport Ministry’s inquiry into PKFZ?

If so, then let Ong list out the matters and revelations in the PwC report which he had not known before from the Transport Ministry records and inquiry, and had learnt for the first time from the PwC audit report!

If there is nothing in the PwC audit report which Ong had not known earlier from Transport Ministry records, files and inquiries, then the PwC inquiry and report are a waste of public funds although it appeared to have played the role of allowing Ong to stall public accountability on the PKFZ Rip-Off!

Ong is alternating at different times between being all-powerful and all-impotent as Transport Minister in his relationship with the Port Klang Authority (PKA) Chairman.

He was all-powerful when he directed the chairman of PKA, Datuk Lee Hwa Beng, to submit a copy of the PwC report to MACC and Public Accounts Committee, but suddenly became all-impotent in claiming that he had no role to play in determining and limiting the terms of reference of the PwC audit study to a “position review”, excluding detection of “any wrongdoing” including the conduct or misconduct of previous Transport Ministers, Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik and Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy in the PKFZ scandal.

Ong should decide whether he is “all-powerful” or “all-impotent” vis-à-vis the PKA Chairman as he could not pick and choose to be “all-powerful” in certain issues but “all-impotent” in other areas with regard to PKA and the PKFZ!

As the PwC audit report is so unsatisfactory and unacceptable because of its restricted scope and limited terms of reference, will Ong agree to the establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry to conduct a thorough, indepth and wide-ranging investigation to bring to book all present and past characters who had played a role in the creation of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ monster scandal?

This is the first question of my second set of three questions to Ong on the PKFZ Rip-off for him to answer, as assigned to him by the Prime Minister.

Question No. 2 – What follow-up actions is Ong taking from the PwC audit report on the PKFZ scandal apart from directing the PKA Chairman to submit a copy each to MACC and the Parliamentary Accounts Committee?

In fact, Malaysians are entitled to know what actions Ong had taken to “clean house” in the PKA and PKFZ based on Transport Ministry’s own information and inquiries, or nothing whatsoever had been done by Ong as Transport Minister in the past 14 months despite both entities, PKA and PKFZSB, being run down to insolvency status and would have been declared bankrupt if not bailed out by public funds.

Otherwise the PKFZ scandal would not have been described as a “can of worms” or even a “swamp of crocodiles” snowballing from a RM1.8 billion scandal in 2002 under Datuk Seri Dr. Ling Liong Sik as Transport Minister, more than doubling to RM4.6 billion under Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy as Transport Minister and now mushrooming into the astronomical figure of a RM12.5 billion scandal under Ong’s watch as Transport Minister?

Question No. 3 – This query is from the SMS of a member of the public, which reads:

“For the PKFZ project, government now only audit land and admin problems. They should also audit buildings that already completed and awarding of contract. I think a lot of rakyat money already wasted during award of contract to sub-contractors. In order to arrive at the true estimates of the construction costs, a Building Inspection and (Investigation) Audit has to be carried out to assess objectively any discrepancies and to quantify the non-compliance of Contract, Drawings and Specifications to that of currently completed works. This exercise would include the overall audit of Architectural items, M & E installations, infrastructure and amenities/facilities built. The materials, quantity and costs can be compared against contract specifications and most importantly to confirm the quality and acceptability of construction work to acceptable standards undertaken so that the government can anticipate and factor the immediate and long term Maintenance, Repair and Replacement costs. Who knows if the quality and workmanship meet standards or are there more hidden problems that require more rakyat money for remedy?”

I take the Prime Minister at his word, that Ong has been instructed to answer all and every question from any person with regard to the PKFZ scandal. Ong must not disappoint the Prime Minister.

Before I conclude, I welcome Malaysians to send to me questions they have about the PKFZ scandal, for onward transmission to Ong for him to answer and take action.

(Media Conference Statement by in Bukit Mertajam on Sunday, 31st March 2009)

  1. #1 by k1980 on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 8:05 am

    As with the Lingam case, all the crooks named in the report will be quietly pardoned and free to enjoy all their billions. After all, they are BN party members. An entirely different scenario with heavy punishments will occur only if the perpetrators are opposition party members

  2. #2 by Godfather on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 8:22 am

    Ong Ta Kut should be “brave” enough to order a transparent investigation into who exactly received the funds from (a) the land sale and (b) the turnkey contract between PKA and Kuala Dimensi. It is very easy to trace payments – don’t waste time on the thousands of RM of cash payments to ikan bilis, just investigate the electronic trail of money that ran into millions and billions. The obscene profits must have been distributed via wire transfers and even if KDSB or Wijaya have destroyed their records, the banks would not have done so.

    Investigate who are the subcontractors to KDSB and show us a list of the owners of those subcontractors. This is because the PwC report kept repeating that PKA did not receive “value for money”, a clear term for having been defrauded.

    Najib and Ong Ta Kut should also explain why despite the years of police reports and ICA reports on this deal by Ronnie Liu and Nadeswaran of the Sun, nothing was done by either the police or the ICA, and only now did the MACC start their investigations.

  3. #3 by Godfather on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 8:34 am


    Convening a RCI will simply go the way of the Lingamgate RCI. It’ll be a case of “I can’t remember” by all those named in the report.

    All we should ask if for an international company like Knoll to be given the mandate to trace the flow of payments from the companies involved. The findings of this investigator should be made public to let people know who were the ultimate beneficiaries of this scam.

    Ong Ta Kut should also make a declaration that other documents involved in this deal – for example, between the Ministry of Finance and the rating agency, the EPU and KDSB, the Selangor Land Office and KDSB – be declassified and made public.

    We know that UMNO was involved – the Treasurer was chairman of Tiong’s company, and a Youth exco member was chairman of KDSB. We know that MCA was involved through Ling and Chan. Ling’s nominee ran PKA throughout the period before she resigned and disappeared from public view. We all know that Tiong was the conduit through which subcontracts and cash were given out as goodies.

  4. #4 by monsterball on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 8:47 am

    Coward Ong tells all….he is finished.
    One knew all on the BMF scandal…finished in HongKong..decades ago…murderer never caught.
    LKS said this is 5 times worst that BMF scandal.
    Najib had to play the role of truthful man….ordering Ong to reveal all. It is all play acting.
    It’s a fool’s dream to expect it.

  5. #5 by Black Arrow on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 9:19 am

    Ong Ta Kut won’t reveal anything. He is just backtrackking and pussy-footing around, playing lots of mind games.

  6. #6 by tanglk on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 9:21 am


    Any experience accountants call tell u that PwC’s report is not an AUDIT report.

    It is just a REVIEW report based on the scope given by PKA Board.

    As per para 1.2 of the report:
    “Under the LoE, our scope of work is limited to the following areas:
    • Review of authority to enter into agreements pertaining to the Project, including acceptance of
    any variation and cost escalation covering the years 2002 to 2007;
    • Review of financial implications of agreements;
    • Review of current status of the Project;
    • Review of PKA’s ability to pay Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) and/or the Ministry of Finance
    (MOF); and
    • Review of financial position of PKFZSB.”

    In summary, what PwC did is that they read all information provided by PKA/PKFZSB and summarise it into a report and give some of their opinion based on the facts.

    I don’t know which stupid guy suggest this kind of scope as most accountants know review will not give you the level of comfort that you want (from public point of you). I also don’t know why PKA’s Board agreed with this kind of scope.

    This kind of job can easily cost at RM1m tax payer monies (may be more depend on the time they spend).

  7. #7 by ALLAN THAM on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 10:38 am

    The reason of using PWC is simple. Remember that LHB is a trained accountant himself, it is natural that he recommended to use a professional firm to review all documents and put in a nice summary and have some comments and suggestion this and that and let the people have feel happy sort of thing. And never forgot to pay PWC’s fee up front

  8. #8 by House Victim on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 11:57 am

    Thanks Tanglk for focus on the “Unaudited” nature of the “Report”. So, it is only used to “fool” the public.

    Similar to a Developer is presenting so called “audited Statement” when all Charges of a Condo were paid in and out from the Developer account. But, the so called audited account was under another organization’s name who have no legal status even to own an Account with the bank.The tricks was there for more than 20-25years!

    Tracing the mess of SJ – the Subang Ria Park, Wangsa Baiduri, LHB was Councilor, State Assemblyman involving in those Housing projects approval. The manipulation of those Public land, public areas into projects and common areas in the project to developers, etc.. cannot be realized without his contribution. He had been complained heavily and therefore, how can he be qualified to involve in this investigation. How can district resident representatives be nominated and appointed by MPSJ. Then, with the so called “opinion” from these representative that MPSJ was or may be also is used as “public opinion” for approving projects. Even many of them had basically violated the rules and regulations.

    The “unofficial” guaranteed letter is already sufficient to start the roll of legal action against CKC and the digging of others. The way RCI worked on the Lingkam case had already lost the confidence of Malaysians towards any investigation by RCI. The Report from Auditor General should be basis to start with as they had the power and set of regulations to do so.

    Has it been done so? However, if even the report from Auditor General AG had been ignored and AG had not used his power to summon the explanation of those involved. There will not be any mechanism in Malaysia to get the job done. DEAD END!!

  9. #9 by House Victim on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 12:05 pm

    The shareholders or holders of those bonds have the legal status to start a suit to challenge the “unauthorized” letter, etc.. But, where can a fair court be found? A fair Judge can easily be transferred and DRAGGED!!


  10. #10 by limkamput on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 12:38 pm

    To me, the mother of corruption, abuse of power and mismanagement in PKFZ is the government’s guarantee of bonds issued by the promoters. If the bonds were not guaranteed, no money would have been raised and no siphoning and mismanagement would have happened. If the promoters of PKFZ were to raise money on their own, the financiers and bankers would have exercised due diligence and the abuse would not be so great. As it is, it is the usual moral hazard issue when the promoters and bond holders are not really bearing the risks of this project. Ultimately it is the government who has to service and pay off the bond holders.

    One solution (and this may sound ridiculous) – the government defaults the bonds. Let the bond holders sue the government and for once let our bias courts do the rightful thing to reject the bond holders’ demand. I guess this is the best way to teach the bond holders a lesson. (But the problem is most of bondholders are also government institutions).

    As far as I know, the letter of comfort was of no use to bond holders. The main culprit was the letter of guarantee issued by the Treasury.

    I don’t know why it is so difficult – study this and study that, PwC and MACC. Just follow the damn money – from where the money comes from, and to where the money goes. I am sure the land in PKFZ does not contain gold and the buildings are not made of silver. At this point, I have all the bad words in my finger tips. I am trying hard to restrain.

  11. #11 by -ec- on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 12:40 pm

    when immigration record can be easily deleted, i wonder what else on this land that cannot be deleted by…ya’know who.

  12. #12 by ALLAN THAM on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 1:13 pm

    PKFZ is the worst corruption and it is not going to stop that and as it was reported the interest is keep eating our tax payers pockets. That was the most scary thing when you think on it. Unlike BMF scandal the amount is fixed at 2.5 b but not this PKFZ. cAN YOU SEE THAT. I fully understand with the how limkamput feel now. His feeling is the same for all who care. THis bunch MCA idiots should send to firing yield just like CHINA will do on the corrupts.

  13. #13 by frankyapp on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 1:27 pm

    Why ask Ong Tee Keat ? We all know he’s umno’s aide de camp. We should ask the prime minister who is umno’s head. From experience,MCA,MIC or GERAKAN,whatever scandal crops out under their respective watch ,they have to consult with PM Umno before they could open your mouths.Don’t you think it’s wasting pretty lots of time by asking these dumb mouths ?

  14. #14 by ALLAN THAM on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 1:38 pm

    I can predict PKFZ losses will not stop here any time. It will costs the tax payers more as time go. Why? Can you imagine BN admit its mistake by abandon and scarped the project? BN will never do that even it is financially wise to do as the political costs was to high for them. They will not border about financial costs but political costs is more important to them. Do believe, you have read what DPM has commented. PKFZ should go on.
    Other may say we pro opposition know how to curse and swear on the project. But if any one of you know how corrupt BN cronies was know what we react such strongly. Now, when ever a project start with all the wrong footing it is almost gone case? They have mess it from day one intentionally or unintentionally, what you may think, they have mess from the start.
    Let be honest, the only solution is to get sufficient tenants. What step have PKA taken since day one, other than breaking the rules and procedures all these while. The way they disregard the advise of Jafri recommendation to work on phases and the way they bulldozer their way through. The way they award the project with no proper detail planning, all these point to the evil intention of milking the cow until its bleed!
    PKFZ is the saddest and term it mother of all scandal is a mere understatement. PKFZ is cancerous and it is growing by the days and before its dead it make the tax payers suffered the most damages that one could imagine.
    The master will not let it go just like that before it bring the house down. It has to be a change of government before there is a true solution on this.
    Knowing that the interest costs is running by days make you bleed!

  15. #15 by johnnypok on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 1:39 pm

    The culture of robbing is deep-rooted. It is like a giant tree and very difficult to cut down. The only way to destroy it is to tie a strong cable around the base and increase the pressure to strangle it. All the durians will drop, including the unripe ones!

  16. #16 by a2a on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 1:55 pm

    We(malaysian) want to break free
    We(malaysian) want to break free
    We(malaysian) want to break free from your(BN) lies
    You’re so self satisfied I don’t need you
    We’ve got to break free
    God knows God knows we(malaysian) want to break free

    We(malaysian) fallen in love with justice, anti-corruption and democracy
    We(malaysian) fallen in love for the first time
    And this time we(malaysian) know it’s for real
    We(malaysian) fallen in love yeah
    God knows God knows We’ve fallen in love with justice anti-corruption and democracy


    We(malaysian) want to break free
    We(malaysian) want to break free
    We(malaysian) want to break free from your(BN) lies
    You’re so self satisfied I don’t need you
    We’ve got to break free
    God knows God knows we(malaysian) want to break free

  17. #17 by a2a on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 1:57 pm

    We(malaysian) want to break free
    We(malaysian) want to break free
    We(malaysian) want to break free from your(BN) lies
    You’re so self satisfied We don’t need you
    We’ve got to break free
    God knows God knows we(malaysian) want to break free

    We(malaysian) fallen in love with justice, anti-corruption and democracy
    We(malaysian) fallen in love for the first time
    And this time we(malaysian) know it’s for real
    We(malaysian) fallen in love yeah
    God knows God knows We’ve fallen in love with justice anti-corruption and democracy


    We(malaysian) want to break free
    We(malaysian) want to break free
    We(malaysian) want to break free from your(BN) lies
    You’re so self satisfied We don’t need you
    We’ve got to break free
    God knows God knows we(malaysian) want to break free

    We(malaysian) fallen in love with justice, anti-corruption and democracy

  18. #18 by ktteokt on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 2:32 pm

    The report is full of SHIT and that is the reason it has been held back by BN even though OTK promised to release it “NEXT WEEK”! Which next week is he referring to? As long as he can still breathe, there is always a NEXT WEEK!!!!!!!

  19. #19 by clear conscience mirror on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 4:00 pm

    Dear Uncle LKS

    I was an ex-auditor from Ernst & Young and I am very upset how could such a fiasco of this size can ever, ever happen.

    I had read through the entire PWC “report” which Ong Tee Keat says would bare all those details.

    There seem to be a clear mistaken identity over the terms, “report” and “review”. By the terms of the scope sheet, PWC actually was only asked to review within those guided terms and not otherwise. PWC would not want to expand beyond what its duties are; lest they be classified as “busybody”, “unprofessional”, “stepping out of line”, “unethical” and whatnot you name it. It has thus, much needed, for PWC to maintain its integrity and professionalism in the course of this task. Of course, PWC would definitely not want itself to be sued for any unforeseen circumstances and coming from point of view involving their scope of work, namely ONLY a “review”, it is expected of them being very careful in their report. They cannot go beyond any investigation nor report it as an investigation. So, their report has to be qualified in their foreword that the report cannot be used for this purpose or that purpose. It appears to tell the recipients (including members of the public) that there is this something which they could not reveal; something not in the scope of engagement.

    Let me give some insights to the implications which MACC, PKA, the Government, The Transport Minister and most importantly the public by large must take note of.

    Firstly, as the scandal involves a non-matching income and expenditure event, how could PKA be able to meet its financial obligations with the interest spiraling against the low incomes it currently derives. It has been said by many experts that PKA should increase its incomes via new clienteles (renting out more of those units) but let us not forget about the fact that defects affecting units have more potential liabilities which quantum is not identified as yet and which cannot be relied upon on KDSB for rectification due to the fact that the defect liability warranty period had expired. I anticipate it will take PKA a Herculean task to resolve all these problems to turn around this fiasco; otherwise there goes another debacle involving public funds which Malaysians dearly must preserve in the light of the ongoing economic plight.

    Let me dissect into the many intriguing events that took place; whether with the knowledge of the PKA board or not. There seems to be too much authority given to the General Manager (GM), Assistant General Manager (AGM) and Manager (General Services). Many of us would have some mind-bogging requirement to rationalize as most of the actions taken within the PKA management that were either blatantly exceeded or ignored. This is in reference and against which the followings (being in place) for a multi-billion Ringgit project to be carried out:-
    a) Ministry Of Transport recommended KDSB be awarded contracts wherein there is no mention of any open tender exercise,
    b) it was reported that all agreements were not submitted to the PKA board for approval,
    c) the GM and a steering committee runs the project without specific authority nor subjected to the supervision of the PKA board (although the PKA board is updated periodically),
    d) the steering committee was setup without PKA board resolution,
    e) the GM has only RM50,000 specific authority limit,
    f) common seal being used without the PKA board approval,
    g) non-compliance with the Cabinet terms
    h) acceptance of variation orders ADW & NADW beyond stipulated authority in place,
    i) reliance on solely one solicitor and one quantity surveyor resulting in acceptance without KDSB completing the infrastructural works, acceptance of variation orders per (h) above,
    j) despite knowing its inability to meet the Cabinet’s self-financing condition in May 2004, PKA still went ahead into signing other significant development agreements,
    k) PKA and the Ministry Of Transport went against the Ministry Of Finance terms of land acquisition, its land acquisition financing or land lease option per the MOF letter dated 12/6/01; resulting in PKA needing a “bailout” in 2012,
    l) PKA and the Ministry Of Transport did not develop PKFTZ in accordance to the JAFZ/TSG Masterplan which is over 8 years but instead opted for its development to be fully developed within 2 years; thus jamming up its cashflow now experienced by PKA,
    m) no control over the RM51 million- RM309 million of interest charged to PKA as there seemed to be ambiguity over its calculation (not surprising for this to happen since all agreements were not approved by the PKA board and only one non-independent solicitor being used),
    n) rationalization of buying the land at RM25/sq ft which is higher than anticipated should have raised concerns by the PKA board,
    o) PKA did not require KDSB to submit plans and drawings, did not require DA3 to specify details of building and infrastructural specifications, scope of KDSB’s work and price specification,
    p) PKA’s acceptance of KDSB’s architects’ certificate of payment,
    q) PKA’s acceptance of higher interest on two occassions,
    r) KDSB’s continued rectification of defects although contractually it is not obligated to do so.

    Looking at all the above (a) to (r), there cannot be so much flaws that can slip the PKA board notice. It cannot be the GM and his team of steering committee having overlooked such glaring flaws. It cannot be, as solicitor, not noticing such discrepancies that were allowed to happen. Likewise, it cannot be the quantity surveyor cannot ascertain work completed or not before payment is made. It has to do with many implications many of us ordinary Malaysian can feel frustrated over such public misuse of funds.

    Uncle LKS, push for a RCI in parliament in the next sitting. The BN government will be tainted if it does not act accordingly. Pursue it vigorously with Ong Tee Keat as Najib had mandated him to reply publicly. For this, may you forward this to Ong Tee Keat in order for him to lodge a MACC report himself and to accede to a RCI. Forward this to the King and all sultans in the form of a memorandum; highlighting to Their Majesties how much the rakyat is going to suffer in the years to come.

    Gather your IT men to start off a website to collate all questions from the public and document each and every detail of the various dirty actions taken in this course of non-compliance to or exceeding authority which can be subjected to the existing laws. Press on for the AG to take action for such public debacle.

    The rakyat is looking toward all clear conscience MPs to save Malaysians and Malaysia. We have suffered too much under 51 years of misguided rule and misappropriation of public funds.

  20. #20 by Godfather on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 4:13 pm

    Ong Ta Kut wrote in his blog that a consulting firm like PwC would be expected to have limitations in what they can do, thereby implying that his hands were tied when the choice of PwC was made. He also implied that PwC had no investigative capability, and had no mandate to pursue relationships between parties unconnected with PKA. This allows parties like Wijaya, the Fishermen’s cooperative and even the Ministry of Finance off the hook !

    Like I said at the top of this thread – use someone like Knoll to track the flow of money, and report on who got what, when and why. If KDSB, Wijaya and the Fishermen’s cooperative cannot be forced to cooperate and open their books, then the first RM 4.6 billion would not be traceable.

  21. #21 by clear conscience mirror on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 4:23 pm

    In summary, all Malaysians should ask the followings:-

    a) who authorized the signing of agreements, if not the PKA Board?,
    b) who actually signed the agreements and acceptance of variations?,
    c) who are those in the chain of command in the organization of PKA?,
    d) were those in command aware of these flaws or were they in any way involved in one way or another in assisting, allowing it to happen or unaware of it?,
    e) who are the cheque signatories who signed the cheques?,
    f) were there verifications on a segregation of duties being carried out or were these transactions managed within a small circle of personnel in PKA and who were they?.

    In any organization, there must be system control and especially important functions must involve check and balance. Segregation of duties would minimize subversion of system control. Questions like, ” Can payments be made without proper verification and authorization?”, “Can this happen without blah, blah, blah?”, etc.
    If such control questions are put in place, there will be less chances of circumventing the controls.

    I was also surprised by the fact that PKA had entered into a RM4.632 billion soft loan from the Govt on 30 June 2007 when it realized its first scheduled payment failed and I am certainly more taken aback that the Govt approved it when the Govt knew PKA did not comply with the Cabinet’s directive. It is a bailout as far as the public is concern. Why should the Govt then approve the soft loan? Don’t you think so, Malaysians? Do you think you have been taken for a ride or given “sodomie” to swallow?

    Think for yourself how much your cucu & cicit would suffer. You decide what you need to do.

  22. #22 by clear conscience mirror on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 5:20 pm

    Dear Uncle LKS

    I had also visited Ong Tee Keat’s blog wherein he blogged as follows in response to your sets of questions wherein he also hit back at your criticism of the terms of reference for the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), which was said to be restrictive.
    Ong Tee Keat’s blog says:-

    “I have no role to play in working out the exact terms of reference as it was mutually agreed upon by Port Klang Authority (PKA) and PwC.

    “However, it must be noted that accounting firms such as PwC has no investigative powers and neither can the PKA board give it authority to check on matters outside the board’s own scope of authority,” Tee Keat said, pointing out PwC was not the competent body to do an audit on legal implications.

    He added the opposition should know that professional firms have limitations and restrictions and “they cannot be expected to play the role of prosecutor, judge, and jury”.

    He slammed what he called “the opposition’s obvious lack of understanding of the financials involved”.

    I wonder whether Ong Tee Keat knows what he is talking. PWC would have received an appointment letter from PKA stating the terms of its appointment and they will just follow it, that’s it so simple. It is PKA that decided what terms of reference PWC shall do and report accordingly in accordance to those terms.

    However, it must be noted that Ong Tee Keat, if he so gallantly said would reveal all, should direct PKA’s Lee Hwa Beng to ensure all aspects of unraveling to be undertaken by PWC. In short, do an investigative audit term sheet and PWC shall be all the most happier to do so.

    Furthermore, how can Tee Keat say in pointing out PwC was not the competent body to do an audit on legal implications? How can he also chide you by saying you should know that professional firms have limitations and restrictions and “PWC cannot be expected to play the role of prosecutor, judge, and jury”?

    Ong Tee Keat should not presume that PWC is not competent to do so. It is a integrity run-down of PWC which PWC can actually sue him. PWC is all as “Jack of all trades” in investigation audit; including one encompassing an audit on legal implications. PWC, please note, with this Ong Tee Keat comment, your integrity has been doubted, tainted and perhaps defamed and it may mean you can take action for defamation against Ong Tee Keat.

    If al all Ong Tee Keat wants to bare his fangs, he should bite hard and release his venom in this fiasco. Don’t just hiss around, show others that you are present with venom to harm (authority to do so) but failed to bite hard (act decisively). Authorise Lee Hwa Beng to do the revise the term sheet and release the details of the investigations of the Transport Ministry audit to show how much it bites.

    Otherwise, all talk the talk is not going to bring back the support for MCA/BN

  23. #23 by clear conscience mirror on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 5:32 pm

    Dear LKS

    Again, I would like to dissect a little more detail into the micro-level of ONg Tee Keat’s below statement:-

    “……neither can the PKA board give it authority to check on matters outside the board’s own scope of authority.”

    The question here I would like to pose to Ong Tee Keat is, “If PKA does not have the authority to authorize PWC to check on matters outside the board’s own scope of authority”, then who has? There must be a chain of command that the PKA board reports to. It must then be that higher up chain be responsible to dictate the PKA board to do so. Look at the setup of PKA and it would reveal that chain of command. is it the Minister Of Transport or the Ministry Of Transport? Lee Hwa Beng must stand out to clarify this aspect of authority reporting. It cannot be Lee Hwa Beng being a qualified accountant himself not knowing who he should be reporting. Then why is he being directed by Ong Tee Keat (as Transport Minister) to lodge a report at MACC if Ong Tee Keat is not the higher up command of the PKA board?

    Many more questions still went unanswered. Why must the PWC report be vetted by the Cabinet first? Is there any cover up in tandem with the soft loan approved by the Cabinet?

    Your answer is as good as mine.

  24. #24 by Ramesh Laxman on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 5:53 pm

    I think that we are dancing around the issue. I worked in a country where those in position of political and public leadership had to declare their wealth including those of their spouse, children, brothers and sisters to the Head of Government or Head of department before they assumed office. This list is reviewed and if it is found that the person has wealth added to the list for which he does not have acceptable explanation he has to resign. And that extra wealth is transferred the state. Please do not send your investigators to find out how it is done. Because it this operation is done in a very subtel manner and on a person to person basis.

    We have heard that in a number of countries in Asia leaders have taken their own life for one reason or other. Now, just ponder why they do this.The laws of today cannot handle this kind of wrong doings. However, the head of depatrment has the powers to take action in accordance with Bab D of the General Orders.

    I hope for the sake of our children and our grandchilden one person will have the will to take this matter seriously. There must be an end game and that end game must lead us to a country that has good governance which is akin to parents telling their children to get good grades.As parents we must show the way to our children on the methods employed to to get good grades and harp on them until it becomes second nature.

    We still have time because we are still relatively prosperous. If one need a better time and excuse to embark on this mission now is the time. This global economic and financial crisis provides that platform for our leaders to make a change once and for all.

  25. #25 by UzMiNoOnist on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 7:08 pm

    Discuss all you want NOW. Soon you will be charged for sedition for commenting on this issue.

    My main question is “How come only small fries are named”. Is it reasonable for me to suspect that in such a huge corruption there are bigger sharks involved.

    PWC is loosing its creditably for working hand in hand with BN/UMNO to fool the Public.

    Now, MACC, where are your raiding officers. Is MACC = Mana Ada Curi Curi?

  26. #26 by lee wee tak_ on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 7:31 pm

    don’t rely too much on PwC report. Remember last time the audit frim’s report on the can of words on Proton came out in the Edge?

    what happened next? no action, no head rolled, and Malaysians forgot about it and continue financing the bloated leech by buying them Proton cars still, albeit at lower numbers

  27. #27 by blablowbla on Sunday, 31 May 2009 - 10:46 pm

    scandals by scandals,never ending scandals,that’s what our politicians are good at!

    now you know why tiong was raising penny issues in the parliament,what he concerns more are actually his business kingdom,right?

    every month striking lotery worth rm1million,can drag untill 1041th year,i think this is a very far far far sighted planning,but i am not sure whether the earth stlll around at that time,see,missiles are flying over south korean n japan’s heads at the moment,nobody knows what is going to happen,further more,disasters,mother natures,viruses,global warming,aliens n monsters are attacking earth,the sun dont shine,the earth dont turn,the moon taken away by sun…………

    may god bless tiong that his generations can live thousand years!

  28. #28 by TomThumb on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 3:38 am

    clear conscience mirror,

    with a name like this you need to grow up real fast!

  29. #29 by TomThumb on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 3:45 am

    how about lim kam fart??

  30. #30 by TomThumb on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 4:34 am

    mother of this mother of that have we heard it before. say something original.

  31. #31 by Godfather on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 7:09 am

    There is nothing original about Barang Naik in their capacity to lie, cheat and steal and then get the police and judiciary to protect their misdeeds. Ferdinand Marcos did it before, Estrada did it before, and now Mugabe has been doing it for over 20 years. Marcos went under, so did Estrada, and now Mugabe is on life support. Barang Naik will not survive beyond 2013.

  32. #32 by Godfather on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 7:10 am

    Now we have the mother of all idiots – TomThumb.

  33. #33 by Godfather on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 7:45 am


    Has anyone proposed the filing of an injunction to stop PKA from making any further payments to KDSB ? I believe that we as taxpayers have the right to take action to prevent the government soft loan from being disbursed as there are grounds to believe that the contract between PKA and KDSB was fraudulent and therefore void.

    If Ong Ta Kut really has the interest of the rakyat at heart, he should direct PKA to halt all payments to KDSB.

  34. #34 by yhsiew on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 7:54 am


    Where are the big fish?

  35. #35 by Joshua on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 8:30 am

    BMF was in a deal connected with Sabah and Berjaya’s Government that collapsed in 1985.

    so look back on 2013 or 2009 when 9 =dog for Sabah, would UMNO/Be eNd’s Govt in Sabah collapse this year?

    Going back this is the sad story of 9 & 13.

    9 and 13 in Sabah.
    This may have happened in the past since 1963 for Sabah. Will it happen in the future?
    I am talking of the USNO’s controlled Government for the period 1963-1976 which is 13=4 years.
    First General Elections in 1967 on 8th April, reconfirmed the Government of USNO under Tun Mustapha, and that Government collapsed in 1976 and 67-76 is 9 years while 67 and 76 add up to 13=4 in both years.
    The Berjaya Goverment collapsed in 1985 after 9 years and 85 adds up 13=4.
    The PBS Government collapsed in 1994 after 9 years and 94 adds up to 13=4.
    Was there really an elected victory for BN led by UMNO in 2004? I had yet to lodge a Police report.
    Would this Government last as long as it wishes? If you are looking for 13, it could be in 2013, and it is not 9 years but 19 years since 1994. But 2007-1994 is 13 years like the first USNO Government. M is the 13th alphabet.
    We may be intrigued by numbers but other factors are also involved.

    The end is here as confirmation of LOST Malaysia not 1Malaysia is failed judiciary
    and the rotten system of profligacy of RM30 trillions
    in some 27 Police Reports as ignored:- as lost Police in its direction.
    There are too many dramas with evil intention for 52/46 years within M’sian rotten system resulting in profligacy of at least RM30 trillions and no good for every one as the scourge of RAHMAN is tailing off.

    STOP the rot or M’sia go into oblivion.

  36. #36 by Bigjoe on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 8:57 am

    The worst thing about this suppose ‘accounting’ of the project is that there is no accounting of whether there is any likelihood the project can be saved at all. There is no full financial and operational disclosure. The excuse is that my limiting the full disclosure, they have a better chance of coming up with a rescue plan.

    The problem is the excuse is only valid IF there is even a likelihood of a possible plan. Given the original plan was suppose to be RM1.8 billion and it already has cost RM7.5 billion, the likelihood of a plan without someone billions is zero. Anyone with basic financial skills will tell you that just a fact of life.

    So the only issue is, if someone is suppose to lose money? Who owns the loans of PKFZ? Who is going to take the bath for this thing to stay alive OR is it better to just let it die which is what the opposition is proposing.

    I for the life of me, can’t see real proper lenders take up the loans with PKFZ with the guarantee of transport ministry when they are not allowed to do so. Its just basic due dilligence for basic loan officers and credit committees. So its likely the loans are taken up by crony banks (which most in Malaysia are) or the local funds namely EPF and state-linked funds, agencies and companies.

    There is no chance this thing can be saved without taking a blood bath and so the issue is whose blood should spill or more accurately why don’t I see blood of the cronies and those that hide it for them yet?

  37. #37 by limkamput on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 9:09 am

    HI no brainer tomtoe, may be what i said earlier have your masters worried.

    Fully agree with godfather: Now we have the mother of all idiots – TomThumb.

  38. #38 by helpless on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 9:11 am

    I guess all Malaysian except those who are with the guilty mind on the scandal would like to see the people hard earned money be paid back.

    Until today, based on the past result of most of the court cases that Malaysia jusridiction is yet to be improved with more public acceptable case reference.

    When going through the current law is ineffective in getting the scandal reverted by returning the money to the people, the people’s collective force might able to make the change. Nationwide signature collection through all source of channel might able to show that Malaysia in general are serious about it.

    Imagine wht can Billion of Ringgit do for the Malaysian.

    A credit is given to Ong for calling it for a report of the scandal. However, the effort will go right down the drain if he do not go further to reactify it by getting back people money and punish those who responsible.
    On the other hand, Ong shall be wise enough will be a great man in Malaysia history and get all the respect if he can do it for the Malaysia.

    Although we are yet to see if the authority given to him by the PM is realistic or just an hyprocrite.

  39. #39 by helpless on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 9:14 am

    On the other hand, Ong shall be wise enough TO DO IT AND HE will be a great man in Malaysia history and get all the respect if he can do it for the Malaysia.

    Although we are yet to see if the authority given to him by the PM is realistic or just an hyprocrite

  40. #40 by taiking on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 9:45 am

    Everything also got limit one maa. See the reference to pcw also limited in scope. If not limited ah sure until cow come home and go out and come home and go and come home and go out again and come home again also cannot finish. You understand or not?

    So hoh, its the same. Najib asked tee kiat to answer all questions. Only answer mah. Najib never ask him to follow-up this and follow-up that. Waaah if this must do that must also do sure eat strength. See beh chiak lark ah li lang chai bo! (die father eat strength ah your all know or not! really diefatesayakon one).

    You all got notice or not. Recently hoh like najib got no mention 1malaysia anymore. What he forgot 1malaysia oredi ah? So fast one meh? Maybe he confuse. So many things happening. He also confuse how to 1malaysia.

    Of course maa. 1malaysia. Where got 2malaysia one. Or 3malaysia. I sure surprise if got such thing. What. Then I travel overseas. I tell people I come from malaysia and travelling to malaysia for visit for tour ah? Cannot what. If more than 1malaysia sure like that confuse one. Then hoh people sure ask. You come from which malaysia? Like that how to answer? Tell them the boleh one ah? huh? Not the some other malaysia. The boleh one. Neh the bolehmalaysia.

    Mother Gobi had a chanced meeting with Mother Klang. Its a completely unexpected meet. A truly rare occassion indeed. Maybe fate brought them together for somewhere in their seperate being they share a wierdly uncommon link. A link that has to be nothing less than uncommon and wierd for a link that bridges thousands of miles cannot be common or normal. A link which though uncommon and wierd is actually quite simple in its making – the loss of something treasured: For Mother Gobi her treasured child, and for Mother Klang, the treasured wealth of the people that was entrusted to her care. The lost of a young life that was at the same time carrying another younger life and the lost of a future for scores of people are driving tears from all four eyes of the two grieving mothers.

    But loss is never an absolute event. There is no such thing in this cruel world for by the normal rule of the game the loss of one is always the gain of another. In this game the final sum will always be zero. The tears and griefs of one would be the smiles and jubilation of another. But unknown to creator of the grief that now besiege the two weeping mothers, their respective loss is unique – is different from all the other loses. Their losses cannot be turned into smiles by the rules of that zero sum game. Its a different game altogether. And he who chooses to play this game is if it was a zero sum game is clearly mistaken. And the outcome we will soon see in a not too distant future.

  41. #41 by Godfather on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 10:56 am


    We have to remind Ong Ta Kut that he promised to tell all regarding the PKFZ scandal or issue (or whatever he chose to describe it). Instead of telling us about the scandal, he submits a report that tells us about PKA, and the chronology of events. We don’t want to know about PKA’s financial position or financial projections. We don’t need the chronology of events.

    We want to know who ultimately got the money for the land deal between PKA and the fishermen’s cooperative. If the money is still sitting in the coop account (which makes UMNO more stupid than I can ever imagine), then freeze the money because the land deal was in contravention of government directives and against the AG’s recommendation.

    We also want to know who are KDSB’s subcontractors. We want to know where and how the money flowed from the bondholders to KDSB to their subcontractors and shareholders.

    We want to know why the MOT issued the letters of support and why the MOF issued the letter of “clarification” to the bondholders thereby fortifying the position that the letters of support were really financial guarantees. If you read the transcript of the interview with the KDSB chairman, an UMNO Youth exco member, the PKFZ was never a project of national interest, so who approved the letters of support ? If Ling issued the letters unilaterally, then why did Nor Mohamed sign the letter of “clarification” as MOF II ? If Ling and Nor Mohamed acted in concert without cabinet approval (which I doubt as I know the conservatism of the latter), then why should be cabinet approve the soft loan of RM4.6 billion ?

    If these people had overstepped their levels of authority, then the whole transaction would be ultra vires, and there is no need to compensate KDSB. Why should anyone be afraid of legal action against PKA by KDSB ?

    I’d like to think that this whole scandal is the work of a few rogue people who overstepped their bounds, but with the cabinet hell-bent on “saving” the project, it can only mean that the whole BN is in cahoots with the primary perpetrators.

  42. #42 by TomThumb on Monday, 1 June 2009 - 11:07 am


    suck my thumb!

You must be logged in to post a comment.