Thursday, January 17, 2008

Tony Pua, what say you on PKR's increased fuel subsidy?

Malaysiakini tells us that PKR claimed the Gov't can afford fuel subsidies.

What triggered this claim by Tian Chua had been government ministers averring the opposition would bankrupt the country by reducing fuel prices should the latter come into power.

PKR information chief Tian Chua insisted that the government is capable of maintaining or even reducing fuel prices despite soaring global crude oil prices. He said Petronas would be making oodles of lollies because of the current record high crude oil prices. He wants the profits to be used as fuel subsidies.

I am personally not in favour of subsidy of any sorts, except for education.

For a start. a two or more tiered pricing system always lend itself to corrupt practice where illegal siphoning of subsidized fuel across the tiered system (basically pilfering) would invariably occur. The corruption would invariably involved government officials even right up to the very top.

Then, why should we subsidize the 1st World Singaporeans who come across the causeway on weekends? No doubt this is just a petty point but it annoys me mucho.

No, I prefer to see the fuel profits invested for our future, like developing a world class education system all the way right up to tertiary level, water and other essential services, environment, research facilities, technology, infrastructure, etc.

While I wouldn’t go to the extent of echoing the government ministers’ accusation (a bit rich when they are the ones ripping off the country) I am disappointed that dear Tian Chua is adopting crowd-pleasing policies rather than providing responsible leadership.

But readers, what say you? Do you support Tian Chua’s policy on fuel subsidy, even to the extent of reducing the current prices? I wonder what would Tony Pua say of Tian's proposal?


  1. Good rhetoric, we should forward this to Tony Phua and tap his brilliant mind, plus it would help his cause if we do increase our subsidy for education, an area of his personal interest.

  2. As long as Malaysia is still a net exporting country for crude oil, then the subsidy is sustainable.

  3. I'm not in favour of ANY subsidies - even education. The write-up in MT detailing the rip-off of the tax-payers' money by the local Us, either through dubious 'lecturers &/or facilities upgrading', is a NORM knowing throughout the academic (another monkey?) circuit!

    Any form of subsidy mechanism will eventually be abused! One must give these 'idiots' credit for devoting much needed public funds!

    Here are my take;

    A question - dollar for dollar M'sian fuel prices are actually very high, even more so for a nett oil export country with claimed of heavy oil subsidy- why?

    AND why every time the politicians mentioned about inter-countries expenses comparison exchange rates come into play?

    It’s OK to employed exchange rates when inter-countries TRADES are involved. But for intra-countries expenses comparison? A fair comparison cannot be achieved unless one is also taking INCOME averaging within the inter-countries into consideration!

    Example – just compare the average income of the trademan’s income in said Australia & M’sia! Or the average income of a clerk in HK & M’sia!

    For M'sia one simple check is the huge public fund wastes/leakages through mismanagement by the current govt.

    Fuel prices in M'sia can stay reasonably affordable IF the excess wastes/leakages are channeled into upgrading the national facilities/efficiencies - like national transportation policies for a start.

    Removing the current fuel subsidies can bring the current fuel prices upward due to initial market responses - panic, choas & readjustments. BUT eventually the fuel prices will settle at level determined by market forces.

    We'll not see the petrol prices going up as around RM3.50 per litre -as claimed by some 'learned' quarter when the situations claimed her national level.

    Most of the M’sian JOE public are not born yesterday, so to speak.

    Perhaps the Opposition has somethings to fine –tune the fuel prices – DO just open up the can, OK?

  4. Perhaps it is better if the return from MAS (a small portion of it) is returned to the Tax payers by means of lower taxes. In that way, only Malaysians will benefit from it. Singaporean or others will not benefit. Money is circulating within the country. But subsidies just for Oil will not be useful. It will be abused. Long lines of people will begin forming at the station and ration cards will have to be given out. So no fuel subsidies directly..indirectly however it can be subsidised (as with many things) by lowering the tax rate for all citizens (foreign workers who pay taxes here will not get the tax break).

    Well that's just my suggestion.

  5. oops, I meant return from Petronas (or other profit making GLCs)

  6. The original thinking behind the original decision to have subsidized fuel across-the-board was a good and intelligent decision. One which benefited the people and country. An egalitarian policy.

    Instead, now we have a policy that is only benefitting and encouraging crooks within, to rush and scramble for these subsidies.

    It does not require much intelligence to see that our corrupt politicians especially those within UMNO - forever shameless - took the opportunity of expressd public sentiments for enhanced egalitarianism vis-a-vis MM's neo conservatism for 22 years, to push through abolishment of the across-the-board subsidy on the questionable argument that the policy does not benefit the poor. That argument is based on jealousy and envy and does not, should not, and cannot stand. I am surprised that intelligent people could fall for that false and irrational argument.

    There are other ways to equalise society. This is not one of them. The multi-tier subsidy policy is nothing more than wool over the eyes of the people; As though UMNO are really do-gooders concerned with the poor when in fact, it is just a perfidious exercise to create opportunities to plunder the wealth of the country for their own benefit; The crooks within UMNO that is.

    Where is the NEAC? If they are still around, please argue for the original policy to be re-instated and let it benefit all who needs it - irregardless. Beyond benefitting many, it is also a necessary stimulus and incentive to create an expanding economic pie.

    Keep the original goal in mind and the original rationale for the across-the-board subsidy policy. It is a good policy. Much like a National Health Scheme or a Education for All policy.

    As for those who advocated change to the policy, kindly kick them out - those bastards whose advocacy is tinged with selfish ulterior motives. Such policies should never have been made on the basis of the loud and demanding crooked politicians.

    As it is, once again, one can only shake the head and say "Shameless!", "Apalling!". Is this how we make public policy?

    An additional reason perhaps, why I am reluctant to give my vote to BN unless they are responsive enough to shove back into the faces of the crooks within, these wrong policies.

    Reduce the across-the-board subsidy by all means since the price of oil has risen to such an extent. But do NOT alter it to benefit a few. Otherwise, what am I to think of UMNO and BN?

    Time perhaps, for a course in Egalitiarianism Policy Making 101?