'Don't hide behind an over simplified explanation such as that the proper procedure was followed. If ‘proper procedure' can cause the country to lose RM570 million, then obviously something is not proper.'
No need for MACC to probe Scorpene deal: Zahid
Teh: RM570 million was approved by the cabinet to an unknown company called Perimekar for "coordination and support services". But Perimekar itself does not have any facilities and capabilities to provide such services.
This fact alone should be reason enough for MACC (Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission) to investigate not only the deal but also how the entire cabinet had conspired to get the deal approved.
Don't hide behind an over simplified explanation such as that the proper procedure was followed. If "proper procedure" can cause the country to lose RM570 million, then obviously something is not proper.
Lohyw: My heart bleeds every time I chance upon the aged having to eke out a living, be it working in the fields toiling under the sun, pushing a bicycle collecting recyclable cardboards boxes, or washing cars just to make ends meet.
Here we have a minister, or to be exact BN government, trying to justify spending billions on buying submarines for god knows whose benefit and allowing half a billion in ‘commissions'.
How on earth are these supposed to help Malaysians? Common sense will tell you that it was not for the rakyat, and for the life of me it will be the rakyat that will make BN pay dearly. I just can't wait for GE13 to be called.
Cala: Let us consider the quality of Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's answer. First, had the cabinet taken the necessary actions to ensure that high moral and ethical values were adhered to as demanded under Vision 2020 in this case (nine strategic challenges as conditions to enter First World)? Actually, the opposite is true.
Second, good governance practice is what UNESCAP requires of a good government so that corruption is minimised and the resulting benefits going back to the citizenry.
Third, look at the corruption index of Malaysia in 2009. It was no 56. Compare this ranking with Singapore (no 3), Australia (no 8), and Hong Kong (no 12). Are we happy?
Fourth, is directly negotiated contract allowed by the World Bank? Why was an open tender not called? In conclusion, is the answer from Zahid satisfactory? Do you trust the cabinet? Do you endorse direct negotiation tenders?
Multi Racial: Since when MACC takes instruction from the defence minister? According to Zahid, the Defence Ministry followed procedure and therefore no corruption. Is this guy stupid or what? Does he mean that if procedures were followed, there is no corruption. What if the procedures were wrong and ineffective in the first place?
Zahid said the previous cabinet was involved in the decision. In this case, it could mean we have an ineffective, negligence, irresponsible, corrupted cabinet members, or all of those. It could also be the cabinet was innocent and officers from the Defence Ministry falsifying records to mislead the cabinet.
Whatever it is, it was established by investigators that:
1) We bought the submarines at higher price
2) A newly registered company own by the PM's close aide was the biggest beneficiary
If Zahid love this country, wouldn't he want to catch those guilty too?
Ray Fire: Of course, Zahid will conclude there is nothing wrong with the Scorpene purchase as he is going to purchase of a set of armoured vehicles, which happens to be untested prototypes at a minimal cost of RM24 million each.
Even superior tanks are cheaper, but who the hell cares, the cabinet approved it, right? By the way, who are we going to war with? Why waste all the hard-earned tax money for things you only use in national day parades?
Vin Josef: Zahid contends that there is nothing to investigate about the Scorpene purchase since the matter was decided by the cabinet. One would have thought that considering the characters who are included in the cabinet, that in itself would be sufficient reason for the whole can of submarine worms to be opened.
Deepak, Rosmah 'sponsored' my London trip, quips Bala
Sabah Majju: MACC's U-turn probably came about when it realised that P Balasubramaniam may insist on volunteering information that could further spill the beans and incriminate its big boss.
By submitting written questions to Bala, its investigators are better able to do damage control and minimise international publicity, and yet be seen to be "investigating". The members of the investigating team must be sorely disappointed missing out on a London shopping trip.
The label ‘Malaysian Acting and Comedy Centre' aptly describes the work of the MACC.
Imraz Muhammed Ikhbal: If MACC was really interested to see to justice upheld and to see to it that efforts are not wasted as they claim it would be - then why can't it do both, i.e. attend the interview in London with Bala's lawyers present as well as get Bala to respond to their written questions?
It is not that one would negate the other. In fact, they may even corroborate with each other. So why the charade and flip-flop?
Masinad: As long as this matter is not thoroughly and fairly investigated to get to the bottom of the truth, it will remain a big humiliation for the country. The way the authorities concerned are working on it does give some credence to the allegations.
What we get at present are denials, counter-accusations and dragging of the feet. Is a case so serious - and which implicated the PM and his spouse - be handled in such a shabby and irresponsible manner?
Avoiding an open trial will only worsen the situation. The PM and those implicated are duty bound to answer the rakyat and cannot continue to play 'hide and seek'.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only Malaysiakini subscribers can post comments. Over the past six months, Malaysiakinians have posted 50,000 comments. Be part of the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
