Press Release:
The reason why we
regard it as a bailout:
1)
When acquiring/accepting assets the state
government is suppose to use the valuation by the Property and Services
Department (JPPH). However assets are acquired/accepted at gross inflated
prices according to private valuation instead of JPPH. An example is Bukit
Beruntung 2 which is valued by the JPPH at RM113 million but acquired/accepted
by the Pakatan Selangor State Government at RM345million.
Of the total assets
accepted/acquired amounting to RM676million by the PR Selangor State Government
there is apparent overvaluation of RM339 million to RM397 million.
2)
Assets accepted/acquired for the debt
settlement has limited commercial value. For example:
a.
Low occupancy and empty office lots in Menara
Pandan and Ukay Perdana;
b.
Danau Putra land that is ex-mining pond and
not subdivided
c.
Hillslope C3 and C4 land in Ulu Yam;
d.
Underwater ex mining pond land in Bestari
Jaya; and
e.
Puncak Jalil land that has returned to state
government by Talam since 2005.
3)
PR Selangor State Government settled a sum of
RM266 million to Talam financers/bankers. The amount is mainly raised through
sales of land to PNSB, where PNSB took a loan plus interest of RM316million. (The
Edge article dated 15th March 2010, indicates that for Talam to be
no longer designated as a PN 17 Company, the company had to satisfy in effect
outstanding defaulted debts that stood at RM227 million as at 30th
November 2009).
4)
The MB has indicated that Talam was facing
the possibility of liquidation. It should however be noted that after the
transaction with PR Selangor State Government, Talam was no longer designated
as a PN 17 Company.
5)
Most of the land in selangor is earmark for
development. However after 2 ½ years the land acquired from talam does not have
clear development plans.
6)
The state companies scenario is as follows;
a.
The state government owe KHSB RM115million
and no payment has been made to KHSB based on latest quarterly result.
b.
Unisel financial condition has worsened as
Unisel only receive RM10 for the talam debt collection exercise instead of
RM248million. RM36million discount is also given though Talam did not fulfil
the settlement agreement that expires in 2008.
c.
PNSB instead of collecting RM28milion has
received only RM10 and is now having a loan of RM230million with interest cost
of RM86million while talam saves RM24million yearly
7)
Why is it necessary for PR Selangor State
Government to accept/acquire assets more than required to the extent that it
now owes Talam money RM30million at the end of this exercise?
8)
In the previous settlement agreement before
308, Talam is required to settle all the land encumbrances. There was no terms
to accept land with encumbrances or to pay Talam financers/bankers.
As such the total cost in terms of the Talam
deal is as follows;
Assets accepted/acquired with
apparent overvaluation RM 676million
Total
interest cost borned by PNSB RM 86million
Discount
given talam RM 36million
________
Estimated
total cost RM
798million
---------------
Included
apparent overvaluation of RM397million
Until
today PR Selangor government has not been able to give a clear answer on the
issues raised.
The
white paper is still not tabled and the rakyat is waiting after 2 ½ years. Why
is the state exco and MB so silent on such a big transaction?
The
review by KPMG is only a Public Relations exercise as it did not address any
allegations including assets acquired at inflated price compared to JPPH
valuation. In fact it raises more questions.
There
is an abuse in government procedure as PR Selangor government has not been able
to clarify if JPPH valuation supports each of the assets acquired.
MACC
should look into this.
//END
BY Datuk Chua Tee
Yong
MCA
Young Professional Bureau Chairman
Deputy
Minister of Agriculture and Agro-based Industry
Member
of Parliament for Labis
