Was it Really Politically Motivated?
When RM2.3billion is to be used to purchase ‘the scandal tainted’ Eurocopter Cougar EC725 helicopters supposedly the best choice to replace the ageing Nuri, are we expected to be glad that such a huge sum of tax revenue is to be used for allegedly 40-year old aircraft redeveloped and refitted and given a new name?Click HERE to read more.
By Masterwordsmith
I blogged about this last year in WHAT NOW MY LOVE? BLIMEY! HELICOPTERS OF COURSE and Malaysiakini has a post HERE on that topic.
According to Free Malaysia Today:
* “Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak said today the choppers are the best choice to replace the ageing Nuri.”
* He said the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) had cleared the inquiry process on the proposed purchase of the Eurocopter Cougars. (Google eurocopters and you can find lots of sites debating this
* “There’s no doubt that the Defence Ministry and the Royal Malaysian Air Force want that particular aircraft and the government is satisfied,” Najib said.
* “The integrity of the whole process cannot be questioned. So it is now a question of affordability.”
* In defending the Eurocopter deal yesterday, Najib said: “We will have to work out the financing capability and affordability. It is a very high performance helicopter.
“It is the best performing helicopter of its class; so let’s not get involved in this (argument on the choice). Whatever happened in the past, it was all politically motivated.”
With due respect, I would like to pose the following questions:
1. In what ways are the choppers the “BEST CHOICE” to replace the ageing Nuri?
Could someone in the Ministry allay the fears of the public about the dollars and cents of this decision and also safety issues?
What about other options such as the Sikorsky S92 or the Bell 214ST. These options make more sense as they are cheaper both to buy and to maintain and have a good track record in terms of reliability.In fact, an older version of the 214ST was used in the Vietnam War.
Is our Malaysia government buying the BEST aircraft in terms of value for money? From whom are they making this purchase? Was there a feasibility study conducted to compare prices and functionality of these copters? Or is it merely wastage of public funds that can weaken our country economically and morally?
2. In the first place, why was there an issue with the proposed purchase that necessitated the PAC to conduct an issue? Such a development does not augur well for anyone’s credibility. Read this LINK and THIS SITE and a report at THE SUN (11th Nov 2008).
3. Can someone tell me how the government can be satisfied with the WANTS of a particular persons who WANT a particular aircraft?
According this site, a “want” is defined as having a strong desire for something. The word ” need ” is defined as lack of the means of subsistence. In every arena of life, the two concepts are opposing elements (Merriam-Webster Online).
As a citizen, I wonder why the WANTS of some people can cost 2.3billion RM when the NEEDS of many other citizens in terms of public goods and services are HAVE NOT BEEN MET for many decades? Just look at how many in East Malaysia and the east coast of the peninsular still do not have access to electricity, piped water etc? I need not elaborate any further.
Read more at: WAS IT REALLY POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?
