Marxism
mailing list archive

Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]

Date:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Thread:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Index:  [ Author  | Date  | Thread  ]

[Marxism] DAP (Malaysia) demands more subsidies and profit sharing from largest oil company



On the 28th of February, the price of petrol in Malaysia increased by 30 sen/litre (an 18% increase). More info here:

http://www.aliran.com/ms/2006/0228.html
http://www.jeffooi.com/2006/03/fuel_price_grassroot_journalis.php
http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/48156
http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/48146

The following is from a mailing list for the Democratic Action Party of Malaysia, a socialist-democratic party; regarding the profits of Petronas, Malaysia's most profitable oil company.

On Mar 10, 2006, at 3:44 PM, DAP MALAYSIA wrote:

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---
This is the list for the Democratic Action Party of Malaysia. To subscribe,
send "subscribe" in email body to <bungaraya-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx gw.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---

Press Statement By DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng In Melaka On
10.3.2006.

If A Non-Oil Exporter Like Singapore Can Give S$2.6 Billion Cash (RM 6
Billion) To All Singaporeans, Especially The Poor, Why Can’t The
Malaysian Government Do So When Petronas Has Earned Nearly RM 500 Billion
Since Its Inception In 1971?
==========================

If a non-oil exporter like Singapore can give S$2.6 billion (RM 6 billion)
cash to all Singaporeans, especially the poor, why can’t the Malaysian
government do so when Petronas has earned nearly RM 500 billion since its
inception in 1971?

DAP will take up the offer by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad
Badawi in his special briefing to 4,000 BN leaders in the Kuala Lumpur
City Convention Centre on Sunday that the opposition can see him on the
30 cents fuel hike. Datuk Seri Abdullah had said, "The Opposition can
come and see us to learn why it was necessary to impose the 30 sen
increase. We have nothing to hide. We have to be transparent."

DAP hopes that the Prime Minister will show that he has nothing to hide
and is transparent by meeting the DAP delegation who wants to impress on
him the anger of the people at the explanations of the fuel hike. Instead
the government is seen as uncaring and unsympathetic of the sufferings and
extra financial burden placed on lower income groups wage earners and the
poor.

The fact that BN has go on a mammoth drive to mobilize its 4.5 million
members to explain the rationale for the fuel hike highlights how
unjustified the increase is and the complete rejection of the
government’s plea for the people to adapt and change its lifestyle as
hypocritical and double-standards. There are 5 examples of such
irresponsible behavior despite its assurances that it is responsible in
managing our country’s finances, implement prudent spending and good
governance.

One, is the failure to deal with corrupt officers who have profited from
the diesel subsidy at public expense. Fishermen received a diesel subsidy
by being charged at RM 1 per liter of diesel. Such diesel subsidy for
fishermen rose sharply from 326 million liters in 2002 to 1.2 billion
liters in 2005. However the amount of fish caught actually declined from
1.29 million metric tones in 2002 to 1.2 million metric tones in 2005.

Clearly someone is becoming extremely rich in selling this subsidized
diesel illegally to non-fishermen. It is unlikely that fishermen are the
real culprits as they would be unable to be approved so much diesel
unless they can prove it with the amount of fish caught. The most likely
suspects are officials from the relevant Ministry who approved the supply
of diesel to go up by nearly 900 million liters from 326 million liters to
1.2 million liters. At an average difference of 30 cents from the market
price, the country has lost nearly RM 300 million to those connected to
the Ministry who abuse the diesel subsidy.

Why is no action taken against enforcement personnel who allow the amount
of diesel supplied to go up nearly 3 times yet the amount of fish caught
to decline? Clearly the government is confusing policy with
implementation resulting in the Malaysian public being punished with
higher fuel prices for the failure in enforcement.

Two, the government has asked the people to change its lifestyle yet
refuses to practice what it preaches. The government must show leadership
by example by instructing all its Ministers and senior government servants
to take public transport and reduce expenses to live moderately and cut
cots. Any failure to do so would only reinforce perceptions that the
burden of the fuel hike would not be shared equally by all but would be
borne by the poor and wage earners.

Third is that Malaysians should count themselves lucky as we enjoy paying
one of the lowest price amongst South East Asian countries, except
Brunei. There is a fallacy in this argument in that we do not want to
compare fuel prices with oil exporters like Brunei but only oil importers
like Singapore, Thailand and Indonesia who are forced to pay higher fuel
prices. One can not compare an apple with oranges. If Malaysia was to
compare our fuel prices with other oil exporters, our fuel prices are
amongst the highest.

Fourth, if our oil is expected to be exhausted by 2010, there is greater
urgency to let fuel price find its real market level of RM 2.46 per liter
so that we are prepared for the day when we have to import our oil needs
at US$65-70 per barrel. Removal of subsidies prevents market distortion
in the actual prices of our products, improve efficiency, cut down losses
due smuggling of our cheaper fuel overseas as well as forces the economy
to be more competitive and Malaysian workers more productive.

However such removal of subsidies carries a large social cost to the poor.
To alleviate the high cost of living faced by the people, especially wage
earners and lower income groups, Petronas huge profits of RM 35.5 billion
should be shared with Malaysians. Petronas profits of at least RM 35.5
billion for the 2004-2005 financial year would allow every Malaysian to
take home at least RM 1,500 per annum. Instead of giving to every
Malaysian, such profits should be given only to the needy ones.

If Singapore, which is not an oil exporter can give S$ 2.6 billion in
direct cash to Singaporean poor workers and lower middle-class in its
2006 Budget announced on 17 February 2006, why can’t Malaysians benefit
from our oil revenue. The time has come for 25 million Malaysians to
benefit directly from this oil revenue. We have been denied our rightful
share for the last 31 years and it is only fair that Malaysians can
benefit in the final four years left in oil revenues before we become an
oil importer by 2010.

Fifth, would the people really benefit from the improvement in
transportation system or development projects from the RM 4.4 billion
savings in fuel subsidies as a result of the 30 cents fuel hike. When the
fuel price was increased from RM 1.37 to RM 1.92 per liter for petrol and
RM0.78 to RM1.58 per liter for diesel since May 2004, billions of ringgit
were saved in fuel subsidies. However the people did not see any benefit
from development projects or improvement in public transport.

Malaysians would want to see some direct benefits from our oil resources
instead of it being squandered and siphoned off by cronyism and
corruption. DAP considers it unacceptable and even shameful that an oil
importer like Singapore can distribute cash to its poor but not an oil
exporter like Malaysia. These are the 5 issues that the Prime Minister
must address and failed to adequately explain to the public.

-LIM GUAN ENG

http://www.dapmalaysia.org/

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism



Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]