Can someone kindly explain the above mentioned situation because it is quite perplexing?

We aim to achieve a developed status through Vision 2020 but at the same time the nation was recently informed that we could go bankrupt by 2019, so how are we going to achieve Vision 2020?

Apparently, the government is of the view that cutting down on subsidies appears to be the only practical approach to bankruptcy.

However, I am of the view that it takes far more than that because cutting down on subsidies and then wasting the money on mega-projects which we can do without is just another form of recycling further debt.

For example, if we can order naval patrol boats that can be locally made at a cheaper cost, and which are just as good and maybe even better, why order them from abroad?

So cutting subsidies and then wasting the money does not achieve any real object or prevent us from becoming bankrupt.

There is a need to also prioritise the importance of our development. For example, it does not make economic sense to have KLIA and KLCC miles apart without a train service between the two.

Apparently our national pride prevents us learning a lot from our neighbour Singapore. Instead, we prefer overseas consultants.

Finally, when the government does allocate the necessary fund for a project, it gets filtered through many hands ending up in sub-standard work.

On the political front, we seem to have a string of senators introduced into the cabinet for popularity ratings, instead of achieving efficiency and quality work.

All this excess baggage will not ultimately win an election as proven in the past because people want results, not a popularity poll.