Show us the figures
By R. Nadeswaran, The Sun
The principle is that when one holds public office, nothing should be concealed. This has led to watchdogs, NGOs and even MPs from questioning wasteful expenditure. We have heard successive governments declaring “openness” and “will be transparent and accountable” but have we seen it being put into practice? What is preventing our ministers and civil servants from doing the same?
PHILIP Hammond was appointed secretary of state for transport after the Conservative-Liberal Democrats came into power after last year’s general election. As usual, the new man is expected to meet industry players including airport operators, motor vehicle makers and rail operators. He also had to travel to Amsterdam and the Hague for a discussion on sustainable travel for which he travelled on the train and submitted a claim for £141 (RM685). As the secretary, he and his spouse were invited for sports events for which the insurance giant Aviva provided the tickets. He went to the theatre too, courtesy of Upfront TV. He was also invited to lunch with two financial outfits – Merril Lynch and Charthouse Capital and of course, we all know who picked up the tab.
Sir Suma Chakrabati is the permanent secretary to the Justice Ministry. He had lunch with the leader of the Trade Union Congress but paid for his food which amounted to £27.50 (RM133.50). He also received a pen, a business card holder and a luggage tag from Roger Wilkins, secretary of the Australian Attorney-General’s Department. The ministry’s director-general of finance had dinner and drinks at London’s Dorchester Hotel hosted by PricewaterhouseCoopers.
During the last quarter of last year, David Hass the special adviser to the justice secretary was hosted for lunch by the BBC, The Times and the Law Society.
How does a Malaysian scribe have access to such details? In a system where accountability and transparency are revered, everything must be declared and put in the public domain for the taxpayers’ knowledge. These requirements not only cover politicians but the civil service as this allows the public to know where their hard-earned taxes went. Gifts and hospitality must only be accepted in exceptional circumstances and which are appropriate to the circumstances, for example offered in the course of a normal business meeting or by a delegation of an overseas government; are modest and appropriate, for example a token item such as a promotional pen or key-ring, or routine hospitality such as coffee and biscuits, or a light working lunch.
The principle is that when one holds public office, nothing should be concealed. This has led to watchdogs, NGOs and even MPs from questioning wasteful expenditure. We have heard successive governments declaring “openness” and “will be transparent and accountable” but have we seen it being put into practice? What is preventing our ministers and civil servants from doing the same?
We cannot provide the answers but it can be said that questions on expenditure always fell on deaf ears as far as our civil servants are concerned. Since the Brickendonbury project was conceived in 2006, we have been asking for information on the money that had been spent. The closest we got from the then director general of sports Datuk Dr Ramlan Aziz was a ball-park figure of RM800,000 which was paid to one of the architectural firms based in St Albans which was commissioned to prepare plans and submit documents to the local council.
How much was spent on first-class travel, the five-star hotels, the limousines and the hefty subsistence allowances still remains a secret although such information is not deemed to come under the Official Secrets Act. We can only guess that one of the reasons was that we, the taxpayers not only paid for the officials, but also cronies who were being rewarded for one favour or the other.
Two weeks ago, the world’s biggest tourism fair – the ITB was held in Berlin. The directors of Tourism Malaysia’s (TM) offices in Europe were ordered to attend it as there was to be a meeting with the minister. For the minister, a suite had been booked at the Ritz, a limousine was hired but she cancelled her trip at the last minute. So, how much did we spend on that aborted meeting although it can be said that there was a meeting chaired by the head of TM’s European Desk.
But how much did it cost the taxpayers when the system is that hotels and limousine companies do not offer refunds? Will our civil servants be like Hass and make public their expenditure or will they hide behind the veil of “sulit” and keep mum about it?
