Minister of Transport either misled or lied to Parliament about AirAsia’s debts!
Soalan Nombor 43: PR-1212-L13830
5 thoughts on “Questions Time, 30 June 2008”
I rather suspect that the officer in MOT misled or lied to the Minister. In any event, why there was no payment of the debts since 2002. I do agree with YB Wee’s notes with regards why Minister of Finance had to be involved in a debt between 2 GLCs and AirAisa, a private company.
I am sure that there are many private companies owed monies to GLCs and the Minister of Finance was never called in to solve. Why must AirAsia be given special treatments.
The Minister of Finance must not be involved in such private debts of AirAsia unless Minister of Finance has an interest in it.
Minister of Finance, hands off if you have no interest in AirAsia. Otherwise announce your interests.
What level playing field when Minister lied in Parliament. This is typical BN Minister when replying in Parliament. YB Wee should press on to challenge the Minister on his lies to Parliament.
Level playing field: my foot! Tony Fernandes has been on the “rampage” in the MOT when Chan Kong Choy was the Minister of Transport. If AirAsia really wanted a level playing field then pay up all the debts to MAHB and MAS.
Since AirAsia has stated that it owes MAHB about RM68 million and not the RM130 million as announced by Datuk Ong Tee Keat, the Minister of Transport, then just pay up the RM68 million first. Tony Fernadnes talked so much about AirAsia making massive profits and at the same time it is not paying its debts to MAHB since 2002.
YB Wee, you have our support. No other MP talks about AirAsia ewxcept you. Please carry on probing and I am sure we will soon see more things at he end of the day.
MAHB cannot be deem as a normal company and operate base on a normal commercial entity because it is a national carrier. As a result of some jolly merry-going, MAS’s pricing seems higher compared to other airlines and Malaysians are paying for it.
“Pemberian kredit oleh Malaysia Airports Holding (MAHB) kepada AirAsia adalah tertakluk kepada polisi kredit syarikat yang diluluskan oleh Lembaga Pengarahnya. Berdasarkan polisi kredit syarikat, tiada had ditetapkan untuk sebarang kemudahan kredit yang diberikan kepada syarikat-syarikat penerbangan
– then there is no policy when there is no limit
– any sort of comercial lending should based on collaterals, repayment periods/terms, credit limit
– where in the business world that people would lend money on such generous terms to a competitior?
– Even if Air Asia got the route, they, as a listed commercial entity, should find their own way of raising funds. By getting the funding from MAHB, one wonders if ultimately the tax payers have to ot the bill or not.
“Bagi mendapatkan semula hutang-hutang tersebut daripada AirAsia, MAS dan MAHB sedangan mengadakan perbincangan dengan AirAsia dan Kementerian Kewangan.”
– it seems that there has been no repayment period/terms agreed before the loan is disbursed.
If MAHB management are professional enough, this would not happen. Unless the management is grossly negligent which can’t justify thei high pay, or they have been “arm-twisted” not unlike the ex-TNB honco by the previous adminsitration in connection with IPP agreements. Old models, new players.
Now AirAsia talks about level playing field. When Chan Kong Choy was the MOT, “level playing field” was never in their vocabulary.
The CEO of MAHB should be sacked immediately because he allowed AirAsia to chalk up its debt to RM113 million since 2002 according to MOT.
With the Sleep Head up there, MAHB can carry on not pursuing the RM113 million debt. Another form of subsidy.
I rather suspect that the officer in MOT misled or lied to the Minister. In any event, why there was no payment of the debts since 2002. I do agree with YB Wee’s notes with regards why Minister of Finance had to be involved in a debt between 2 GLCs and AirAisa, a private company.
I am sure that there are many private companies owed monies to GLCs and the Minister of Finance was never called in to solve. Why must AirAsia be given special treatments.
The Minister of Finance must not be involved in such private debts of AirAsia unless Minister of Finance has an interest in it.
Minister of Finance, hands off if you have no interest in AirAsia. Otherwise announce your interests.
What level playing field when Minister lied in Parliament. This is typical BN Minister when replying in Parliament. YB Wee should press on to challenge the Minister on his lies to Parliament.
Level playing field: my foot! Tony Fernandes has been on the “rampage” in the MOT when Chan Kong Choy was the Minister of Transport. If AirAsia really wanted a level playing field then pay up all the debts to MAHB and MAS.
Since AirAsia has stated that it owes MAHB about RM68 million and not the RM130 million as announced by Datuk Ong Tee Keat, the Minister of Transport, then just pay up the RM68 million first. Tony Fernadnes talked so much about AirAsia making massive profits and at the same time it is not paying its debts to MAHB since 2002.
YB Wee, you have our support. No other MP talks about AirAsia ewxcept you. Please carry on probing and I am sure we will soon see more things at he end of the day.
MAHB cannot be deem as a normal company and operate base on a normal commercial entity because it is a national carrier. As a result of some jolly merry-going, MAS’s pricing seems higher compared to other airlines and Malaysians are paying for it.
“Pemberian kredit oleh Malaysia Airports Holding (MAHB) kepada AirAsia adalah tertakluk kepada polisi kredit syarikat yang diluluskan oleh Lembaga Pengarahnya. Berdasarkan polisi kredit syarikat, tiada had ditetapkan untuk sebarang kemudahan kredit yang diberikan kepada syarikat-syarikat penerbangan
– then there is no policy when there is no limit
– any sort of comercial lending should based on collaterals, repayment periods/terms, credit limit
– where in the business world that people would lend money on such generous terms to a competitior?
– Even if Air Asia got the route, they, as a listed commercial entity, should find their own way of raising funds. By getting the funding from MAHB, one wonders if ultimately the tax payers have to ot the bill or not.
“Bagi mendapatkan semula hutang-hutang tersebut daripada AirAsia, MAS dan MAHB sedangan mengadakan perbincangan dengan AirAsia dan Kementerian Kewangan.”
– it seems that there has been no repayment period/terms agreed before the loan is disbursed.
If MAHB management are professional enough, this would not happen. Unless the management is grossly negligent which can’t justify thei high pay, or they have been “arm-twisted” not unlike the ex-TNB honco by the previous adminsitration in connection with IPP agreements. Old models, new players.
Now AirAsia talks about level playing field. When Chan Kong Choy was the MOT, “level playing field” was never in their vocabulary.
The CEO of MAHB should be sacked immediately because he allowed AirAsia to chalk up its debt to RM113 million since 2002 according to MOT.
With the Sleep Head up there, MAHB can carry on not pursuing the RM113 million debt. Another form of subsidy.