Comparing the NKF and AP Scandals

Recent events in Malaysia and Singapore show starkly how the different authorities handle problems that have become public.

In Singapore, there was a major furore when it was revealed that the CEO of the largest charity body, the National Kidney Foundation , earned $600,000 income plus bonus. Even the patron of the charity resigned after she mentioned that the salary was “peanuts” for the CEO.

The government action was swift and definite. All the Board members of the NKF resigned and a new board was formed; with KPMG appointed to review the operations for possible conflict of interest and other criminal breaches.

The AP scandal in Malaysia was equally sensational. During a public spat over the AP distribution and the survival of Proton, the national car project, there were accusations that AP holders were under declaring the landed prices of imported cars so that the Treasury lost on import duties and the low selling prices were jeopardizing Proton.

There was great reluctance to release the recipients of the AP handouts as it “was not government policy” to do so. It is not surprising that minister was so reluctant to make the details public as it is now known that a handful of individuals have been receiving the bulk of APs during the past 5 years and some of them were actually ex-ministry officials.

It was also disingenuous for a senior officer to claim that he and not the minister was solely responsible for the AP decisions. The minister further claimed that anyone would apply for APs and these were granted based on performance and having more than one import licence was acceptable.

All this has been secretly done for the past 25 odd years; presumably under the blanket of the NEP policies of distributing wealth among the poor. The revelations show that the Treasury may have lost millions in less import duties and sales tax.

Perhaps the relevant questions that Malaysians should demand an answer are:

Were the policies for approving APs published so that those who qualified could apply?

Did ex-ministry officers take advantage of inside information to get the AP licence?

Was there collusion between the Customs department and AP holders to understate prices?

How does the practice of granting Aps to so few help to further the aims of the NEP to reduce poverty among Malaysians, irrespective of race?

If we compare the actions taken for a private organisation that has lost the trust of the public in Singapore and the business as usual of the government in Malaysia, we sadly realise that Malaysia solely lacks good governance and accountability.

Someone wrote that in a democracy, we get the government we deserve. So fellow Malaysians I guess we are partly to blame for the mess we are in.

Not to forget the sword-brandishing leaders who claim that they still need the crutches of the NEP; never mind that some like the AP kings have received
diamond encrusted solid gold tongkats and some have been coming for the handouts for more than 25 years