Tan Kay Hock
The question that comes to mind is that while Kay Hock is quite a despicable, shallow, pain in the butt, why pick on him and side with businessmen whose patrons have looted tens of billions from Malaysia in their day? Both parties are equally bad for the country.
By Bahuddin Ayub
Dear Sir,
There were several errors, omissions and what appeared to be misrepresentations in your article about Tan Kay Hock and the double tracking project from Gemas-JB. (Re: How playing golf with the Prime Minister can earn you billions)
Firstly, your article failed to disclose that the key people behind CREC are business people closely linked to Daim Zainuddin.
Your article goes on to give a whole list of subsidiaries of CREC as though endorsing CREC. It fails to state that CREC was responsible for losing the original double track project by quoting a price almost double the GOM’s budget.
Secondly, the article seems to imply that the Chinese are averse to paying commissions because of their anti-corruption laws and the death penalty. This is naive to the extreme.
The Chinese are happy to pay any commission as long as they can remain competitive and secure the project. Hence their great success in Africa where they are happy to keep replacing corrupt Western businesses and keep various despots in clover.
China Harbour (CHEC) is a rogue company and is the subject of a major lawsuit over the Second Crossing to Penang. In the suit which was publicised in the Singapore Straits Times and The Edge, they are alleged to have worked in cahoots with Vincent Lim and businessman Latif Abdullah and Hashim Osman linked to Kamal Badawi and stole the proposals made by their sister company China Road & Bridge and their local partners and presented it to Badawi as their own.
But even a rogue company such as CHEC will destroy whatever reputation they have left by divulging details of any discussions with their promoter Tan Kay Hock who was most certainly introduced to them by the devious Vincent Lim.
The question that comes to mind is that while Kay Hock is quite a despicable, shallow, pain in the butt, why pick on him and side with businessmen whose patrons have looted tens of billions from Malaysia in their day? Both parties are equally bad for the country.
I believe RPK has been deliberately fed this info and misled quite possibly by associates of Daim who is also the man behind Desmond Lim. (Cindy is the sister of Robert Tan, a long time Daim nominee and partner). Their objective is simple, kill the relationship between Najib and Kay Hock who is Desmond’s principal competitor for the ears of Najib.
This is quite easy with Rosmah as she is pissed off with Kay Hock possibly over some women issue but not so easy with Najib who is close to Kay Hock. They need to disgrace Kay Hock in order to consolidate their hold on Najib. Once Kay Hock is out of the way, there will be rejoicing in the Daim/Desmaon camp and it will also pave the way for other low lifes such as Easwaran, Jho Low and others.
The KTM direct nego with Zhuzhou on the EMUs was Desmond/Cindy/Daim’s first victory. Look out for more orders on Zhuzhou, CITIC and CREC.
Heaven help us if Daim makes a comeback. Be afraid, be very afraid.
We all want a clean progressive Malaysia with a just society. To do so we must tell the whole truth even if in the short term it is not expedient for us.
Another interesting topic Malaysia Today should explore is the attempt by Gamuda/MMC to monopolise and control the proposed Metro lines in Kuala Lumpur which are sorely needed in one form or another.
When the North-South Highway (RM6Billion) was implemented, it created an unprecedented boom in the construction industry. Out of its implementation, many Malaysian companies earned their stripes and were able to go international. These included Gamuda, IJM, Ho Hup, Road Builders, Mudajaya, Minco, SSP, HSS and others.
With the double tracking project (RM12Billion) by Gamuda and the towering Syed Mokhtar, no such boom emerged. Only one company emerged with credentials – Gamuda. (We can discount MMC as any company under the purview of SM is going to be abysmally run.)
The key difference is UEM under Halim gave out contracts at fair prices. Consulting firms were allowed to develop and with the combination of experienced personnel and track record, Malaysian firms were able to go international.
With the double tracking, Gamuda-MMC squeezed everyone’s margins to the rock bottom. There was only one winner. And the biggest loser – Malaysia.
