This is the seventh day of my “three questions a day” to the Transport Minister and MCA President, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat on the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) Rip-off.
Question No. 1 (No. 19 in series):
Last Saturday’s New Straits Times (30.5.09) carried the following report headlined: “Port Klang Free Zone Scandal: Najib tells Ong to provide the answers”:
KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has directed Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat to respond to queries involving the audit report on the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ).
He said Ong would provide the necessary information on the report by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) that was released on Thursday.
“I have asked Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat to provide answers on every question raised by any party on the audit report. You can refer to him.
“He will provide the explanation,” Najib said after chairing the Umno supreme council meeting here yesterday.
In his blog on the same day, Ong said:
The Prime Minister, YAB Dato’ Sri Najib Razak has entrusted me to answer queries pertaining to the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ). I am thankful to the Prime Minister for his confidence and his support, and this reflects the mutual understanding that we have established in the handling of this issue.
I had acted immediately on Najib’s open invitation, which has been confirmed by Ong, and posed three questions a day in the past six days on the PKFZ “mother of all scandals”.
Ong has not given a proper answer to anyone of the 18 questions.
Can Ong deny that he has been daily breaking the Prime Minister’s open directive “to provide answers on every question raised by any party”, despite his claim in his blog that by entrusting him to answer queries on PKFZ, Najib was demonstrating his confidence and support, as well as reflecting the “mutual understanding that we have established in the handling of this issue”?
Why is Ong betraying Najib’s confidence, support, understanding and trust in him by failing to live up to the Prime Minister’s open commitment that the Transport Minister will answer every question on the PKFZ scandal?
Is the MCA President letting down the Umno President and Barisan Nasional Chairman?
Question 2 (No. 20 in series): In his blog of 28th May, the day of the public release of the PricewaterhouseCooper audit report on PKFZ, Ong said he had directed the Port Klang Authority to act on four fronts, viz:
- To seek legal recourse for contractual shortcomings or irregularities.
- To seek professional advice on the restructuring of financial obligations of PKA.
- To improve and tighten governance issues at management and board levels of PKA.
- Finally, to further beef up the day to day management of PKFZ to strengthen operations and improve its financial returns.
He also directed the Chairman of PKA, Dato’ Lee Hwa Beng to submit a copy of the report to Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and two days ago, blogged that he had directed the PKA Chairman to “submit fourteen (14) copies of the report as well as the appendices to members of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), and it will do so as soon as possible”.
Does Ong agree that he is giving the impression that the PKA Chairman and Board are a bunch of useless lot who have to be micro-managed and micro-directed to seek legal redress, to seek professional advice, to tighten governance, to beef up day-to-day management and not only to submit copies of the report to the PAC, but also the number of copies!
If the PKA Chairman and Board are so useless and incompetent that they have to be so micro-managed, why don’t he sack the whole lot and take over as PKA Chairman himself?
Question No. 3 (or No. 21 in series): As Ong is still in China, this question is particularly pertinent: what would have been the fate of MCA and BN leaders responsible for creating the RM12.5 billion PKFZ Rip-Off if this had happened in China?
Or would Ong claim that not a single MCA leader, present or past, is culpable or blameworthy in any degree for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ Rip-off whether his two predecessors as Transport Minister, Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik and Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy, or the three previous PKA Chairmen Tan Sri Ting Chew Peh, Datuk Yap Pian Hon and Datuk Seri Chor Chee Heung?
Would Ong think such a claim by all these five MCA stalwarts would be acceptable in China? Or would anyone of them end up having to face the firing squad?