Sunday, August 07, 2022

I wasn’t minister when RM6bil LCS contract was given, says Zahid




I wasn’t minister when RM6bil LCS contract was given, says Zahid


Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said the contract awarded to Boustead Naval Shipyard was done in accordance with the appropriate guidelines.


PETALING JAYA: Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has absolved himself of blame over the troubled RM6 billion littoral combat ship (LCS) project, saying he was not defence minister at the time the contract was awarded.

Zahid said he should not be blamed for the problems plaguing the project as the contract was awarded in 2014, a year after his term as minister ended.


“I held the position of defence minister from April 2009 to May 2013,” Umno Online quoted him as saying.

Hishammuddin Hussein succeeded Zahid as defence minister and held the post when the LCS project was awarded.

On Thursday, Public Accounts Committee (PAC) chairman Wong Kah Woh said the defence ministry and Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd (BNS) had ignored the navy’s views on the LCS project.

He said the initial Sigma design chosen by the navy was approved by the defence ministry, only for it to be changed to the Gowind design on July 11, 2011, after BNS had recommended it to the then minister three days earlier.

Wong said not a single ship had been completed although Putrajaya had spent RM6 billion on the project, which was given to BNS via direct negotiations.

He added that the navy should have received five of the ships by August this year.


Zahid, who is Umno president, was among the top officials summoned by the PAC as he was the defence minister in 2011.

Commenting further, Zahid said the contract awarded to BNS was done in accordance with the appropriate guidelines.

“Clearly it has nothing to do with me, in fact the armed forces pension fund (LTAT) is the largest shareholder in BNS.

“Whichever party is responsible for causing the construction delay must provide an explanation to the PAC,” he said, adding that he was ready to cooperate with the committee if summoned again.

1 comment:

  1. Since the MACC is involved, it would be interesting to see how the MACC would investigate the case.

    Mind you, the time line is very easily established and the official documents like invoices and payments should be available to confirm such timeline.

    Importantly, the 10 letters of protest by the navy chief (to protect himself) will provide clarity even further.

    ReplyDelete