It is highlighted that Malaysia is paying less than Somalia, Thailand and Singapore for fuel. This is true, of course, but we also need to understand that these countries are net importers while Malaysia is a net exporter. A proper comparison will be between Malaysia and say Brunei or Qatar and Saudi Arabia? Can we have those figures?

If we compare fuel prices, it should be compared to in local currency as we need to take into consideration the living costs or the countries' income per capita to gauge the true cost in percentage of the people.

It said that owing to a relatively ‘cheap’ fuel price, Malaysia is consuming more than other countries namely Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, China and India. In my opinion, the reasons for the higher per capita consumption is due to the following reasons:

a. Poor public transportation even in urban areas as compared to Singapore and China. It is well-known that if you need to work in the KL area, you need to have a car or a motorcycle.

b. The percentage of people owning a vehicle in Malaysia is much higher than in Thailand, Indonesia, China and India. This will make the per capita consumption seem lower as it was averaged out to those who do not own any vehicle. For fairer comparison, urban to urban per capita consumption is desired.

The government's plan does not address the fuel subsidy to private companies/ institutions/corporations (RM18 billion as stated). I think for any subsidy cuts to work, it must start with the big corporations, not the rakyat. Why help the corporations but not the rakyat?

In must be remembered that Malaysia has one of the highest taxes when it comes to vehicle purchase. With the plan to rationalise the fuel subsidy, should we not also expect a rationalisation of the vehicle tax in the country just like our neighbour?

For example, a Honda Jazz costs about RM110,000 in Malaysia while the same cars costs only 560,000 Thai bahts. This means Malaysia's consumer is paying double for the same car against our neighbour!

What about the subsidy to the few privileged few in the re-con car industry? I'm talking about the APs. Why does the government have to subsidise these elitists by only giving APs to them (to reduce competition)? Should we not think about opening them up to competition so that the car prices can be reduced as well?

 

And while I agree that our cooking oil may be the cheapest in the region in ringgit terms, I do not agree that it is the cheapest by per capita income (the honour goes to Brunei). It is also noteworthy that Malaysia and Indonesia are the largest palm oil producers in the world; Net exporters to that effect.

 

On principle (for fuel, gas, electricity, toll):

1. Show us the initiative to reduce subsidy for the private and government institutions first.

2. Show us the plan to improve the public transportation system. The subsidy cuts should only take effect when the government shows its commitment towards improving public transportation. Show us the KPIs - what, who, when, where and how.

3. About toll, all toll concession agreement to be made public so that the rakyat is convinced that there is nothing to hide by the government. Anyway, there is nothing about national security in the agreements, is there?

4. About electricity - TNB had been announcing a high profit for many years. Why is there a need to still increase the tariffs?

 

And most importantly, I do not see the government's plan to plug the leakages in its administration inefficiencies and leakages in its contract awards to the few elitists. I think these ‘subsidies’ are much, much more higher than any fuel or food subsidy that the government is looking at cutting. But these are never mentioned in the plan. So the question is ‘why?’

 

Further, there is no mention of how the subsidy savings will be channeled. Which mechanism will ensure that it is channeled to the right people? Without such a independent setup, it remains to be seen whether the subsidy savings will remain with the rakyat or be channeled to an elite few.