I refer to SQ Solitaire's letter SIA, Pak Lah and a new business idea in response to my letter . I was rather surprised that SQ missed the whole point of the letter. The central theme was not SIA nor Lee Kuan Yew. The theme of the letter was the utter and complete lack of transparency and associated accountability of the BN government machinery.

It transcends just about every facet of the 'governance infrastructure' that is used to manage the various arms of the government of the country. Remember, in almost every instance of governance whether it is a project, enterprise or managing a country - the optimisation of scarce resources (people, time and money) is a testament to the efficiency and effectiveness of the management.

This means that with any responsible government, everything from public projects to personal lifestyles of the administrators (especially those funded by the public) comes under scrutiny of the 'rakyat' since they are underwriting the costs, ultimately. The quality of governance (good, bad or irresponsible) is assessed at many different levels but with a set of common criteria set expectations, deliverables, accountability and full transparency.

As a consequence of this 'lack of accountability' criterion, BN ministers insulate themselves from the harsh realities of the 'rakyat' and continue, unabated, in their insatiable pursuit of questionable enterprises that are funded with public monies.

I introduced SIA as a 'logical, local equivalent' of a better run airline. In any case, SQ's personal experience with SIA's in-flight service is not validated by the objective criteria by which all the major carriers are judged and recognised, including MAS. Hence, SQ's comment 'the wrong perception (SIA) ... enjoys in the marketplace...' is based on subjective criteria, the 'I think', 'my experience has been and therefore it is' kind versus the data that supports the conclusion.

The fact that SIA can win the awards on a recurring basis on the same objective survey that MAS participates in is testament to their superior service in and out of the cabin.

The idea of starting a business jet service in Malaysia is not an 'SQ brainwave'. In 2001, some good Malaysian friends of mine who operate and - in one case, a part-owner of an air charter enterprise in Europe - decided to broach the subject of an executive jet service like the one SQ talked about. Being former pilots in Malaysia (a motley crew with airline, charter and helicopter operation experiences) and hence familiar with 'the situation', my close friends spent countless hours exploring the feasibility of such an operation in Malaysia.

Numerous scenarios, from short-term executive jet leases to flying schools and 'feeder service' to the major (turbo-prop) type operations were examined. Operating bases in Penang, Ipoh and later, Senai, were also examined with numerous business plans and associated cost-benefit computations revisited time and again.

Once the type of operation was determined, stalled discussions with one aircraft manufacturer re-commenced. One stumbling block after another was navigated and activity really intensified during 2005 when I thought that they would finally wring out an agreement with the parties and authorities involved.

Unfortunately, with over US$100 million dollars as start-up capital at stake, it also attracted the usual BN crony-worms to the banquet. A demand for US$2 million 'up-front charges' had to be paid up before the deal could proceed to the next stage never mind the final outcome (although assurances were made that the deal would indeed go through). On top of that, a 10 percent annual 'kick-back' of the profits were to be paid to the said parties.

Mind you, all of these payments were to be made to parties that would not contribute a penny to the venture and who also had no interest in advancing Malaysian aviation to the next level. It was, in my friends' words, quite an experience to do negotiations with these riff-raff ('Semua okay-lah' types) after dealing strictly with knowledgeable business professionals in Europe.

Anyway, the net result (after four years of trying), was complete exasperation and - in late 2005 - complete withdrawal from the enterprise. To SQ's 'political patronage' comment, I suppose my friends did not have the right connections - at least not to the tune of US$2 million plus 10 percent. In addition, suggestions made by these 'political patrons' hinted that 'this kind of venture is being earmarked for a certain (no names were given) individual'.

As for SQ's dismissive comparison to Singapore (or any other model), his attitude is very much in line with the arrogant BN stalwarts. Nothing irks them more than comparison to our southern neighbour, even if the latter outperforms our government on almost every single objective dimension of governance.