Wednesday, December 12, 2018

Tabung Haji bleeding billions in cash -Evidence from TH's audited cash flow statements has been available since at least 2016

by Ganesh Sahathevan






by Ganesh Sahathevan 

This report and others like it confirm what was reported by this writer (who was then promptly condemned as an ignorant infidel) on 5 February 2016 :
PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang (pic) has urged Lembaga Tabung Haji (TH) depositors not to withdraw their savings hastily from the financial institution concerned. 
He said, although a mistake was made by the previous administration of TH, it was not appropriate if there were some depositors who wanted to do so because the role of the institution was also to take care of the welfare of those going for the haj and and not solely focused on the economic sector.
"Not apt (to withdraw savings from TH) because what is important is to repair TH. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. If there is a mistake (in the TH administration), we correct it,'' he said in the ‘Bicara Minda' programme organised by Sinar Harian here Wednesday (Dec 12).


Now read on:






First Published  On Sahathevan Blog On 5 February 2016

by Ganesh Sahathevan

The following figures (in  Ringgit million ) have been extracted from Tabung Haji's audited financial statements for the relevant years.  The  figures are from the cash flow statement, not the profit and loss,for the cash flow statement gives a better picture of how much cash a business has gained or lost. In that way it is  more a  objective assessment of a business' performance,for profit and loss numbers are easily manipulated.
These numbers show how much cash TH has mostly lost from its ordinary business operations.
The "Group" column is a consolidated figure ,summing up cashflow from operations of all the companies TH controls.The "Tabung Haji" column shows what Tabung Haji earns on its own, without counting the companies it controls.
We usually look at the Group figure to provide a better overall view of the business,and in this case one can see that in the past 4 years, the Tabung Haji Group had a positive cash flow from operations in only 2013.In all other years it has lost billions in cash.


Net cash used in operating activities
Group
Tabung Haji
2011
-1 767 361
-1 150 025
2012
-1 354 224

-1 863 515
2013
205,63
-1 335 595
2014
-2 268 827
-1 108 847


However, in the case of Tabung Haji the Group figure is not so useful for there is no guarantee that TH can draw on the cashflow of Group companies to meet its financial obligations ie its obligations to depositors who can at anytime demand their money.
As shown in the table above, TH has been losing billions in  cash over the past four years.
While its overall cash position might be positive, this is due to borrowing, sale of investments, property and the like. That can never be the basis for a any business, particularly one that has immediate demands on cash from depositors.
In any case, a large significant deficit of cash from operations will ultimately impair any business' ability to raise funds,and will push it into disposing  assets at fire sale prices.
END 




Friday, December 7, 2018

Singapore's mobile Giraffe radar system a potential intrusion into Malaysian airspace

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Giraffe extends its reach (ES14E1)



The current debate about the intrusion of Singapore's aircraft navigational systems into Malaysia ignores the complications that can arise from Singapore''s use of its Ericsson Giraffe 100 radar station.

Being mobile platforms there is the potential that these units may cause something called "ghost noise" that can interfere with Malaysian civilian and military radar systems when deployed in areas close to the Causeway and border.

"Ghost noise" occurs due to interference with radar signals from ground based radar transmitters.

For example ghost noise,, which corrupts radar images, has been observed in radar images of the area around St John's Island, south of Singapore, where there has been a radar installation since at least 1997.

The latest version of the Giraffe system has a range of 75 km.It is more likely than not to interfere with Malaysian radar systems when deployed.
END

Saab’s Giraffe 1X Radar Offers a Man-Portable 75km Detection Range

Saab’s Giraffe 1X ground-based radar is the ultimate gap filler, providing airspace commanders with the capabilities needed to maintain continuous and accurate air situational awareness.
With a surveillance-on-the-move capability, the awareness stretches even further. Forces will stay safer even when on the move and a situational awareness can be achieved at all times without any deployment time or any person having to be exposed to outside threats during deployment.
For mobile forces out in the battlefield, air situational awareness is critical. The threat can consist of rockets, mortar, unmanned aerial systems, missiles or asymmetric attacks from terrorist groups. Saab’s lightweight, compact Giraffe 1X can be handled by one single operator.
“Our new radar solutions, including Giraffe 1X, use digital technology with flexible software. Software-based solutions are instantly upgradeable and require fewer components, which means the radars can be built smaller and lighter”, says Daniel Forsberg, marketing director India within Saab’s market area Asia Pacific.
Providing reliable protection for the forces and assets is even more important in high-risk situations. This requires a flexible and agile radar which can be located close to the combat area. Saab’s Giraffe 1X is lightweight and designed for easy integration on any type of platform. This means that the complete radar can be transported for example on a pickup truck or a helicopter, or it can be towed on a trailer. Its flexibility and compactness mean Giraffe 1X can be easily relocated even by means of manpower only. For example from a vehicle to the rooftop of a building, making it ideally suited to the rapidly changing needs of mobile forces.
Giraffe 1X can be operated both remotely and locally, and it can either be installed on a building or mast or integrated into a suitable vehicle. Giraffe 1X is a 3D Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, featuring the latest in radar technology, including Gallium Nitride (GaN) circuits.
Giraffe 1X forms part of Saab's Mobile Short-Range Air Defence (MSHORAD) solution – comprising the Giraffe 1X, C2 and RBS 70 NG Remote Weapon System (RWS) it enables moving units to identify and counter air threats quickly and effectively.
The MSHORAD solution is designed to complement existing defence by filling the gaps in long-range radar coverage created by terrain obstacles. It acts as a protective shield, scanning the battlefield to find and identify a threat, then coordinating the necessary action to remove the target. As an entire package, MSHORAD provides a solution that increases survivability and supports domain sovereignty in conflict zones.
Saab offers a full range of high-performance radar systems for a multitude of applications and mission types within the naval domain and for weapon locating, air surveillance, and ground-based air defence.
Giraffe 1X is on display at Saab’s stand at Defexpo in Chennai, India 11-14 April 2018. Please visit us in Hall 3, Stand 2.1A.
For further information, please contact:Saab Press Centre, 
+46 (0)734 180 018
presscentre@saabgroup.com
Saab serves the global market with world-leading products, services and solutions within military defence and civil security. Saab has operations and employees on all continents around the world. Through innovative, collaborative and pragmatic thinking, Saab develops, adopts and improves new technology to meet customers’ changing needs.




Friday, November 30, 2018

Petronas & Vitol: Why, How Much, And Petronas Must Make Contracts Public



by Ganesh Sahathevan


Petronas recently announced that it entered into a 15 year LNG  sale contract with Vitol, one of 

The deal seems odd for Petronas as a national oil company (NOC) has rights ,access and financing that the likes of Vital and even the majors can only dream of. The LNG will come from Petronas' long delayed Canadian Kitimat project, where Petronas' JV partners have rights to product in exchange for their investment. 

Petronas has a 25% stake, and it is hard to understand why Petronas needs the likes of Vital to sell the LNG.Quite apart from direct contact with NOCs around the world, Petronas has trading hubs in ,among others, Singapore and the UK.

In the spirit of New Malaysia, Petronas needs to explain why this deal with Vitol is necessary.
END

















Petronas, Vitol Asia inks LNG supply deal

OIL & GAS


Thursday, 29 Nov 20188:05 PM MYT





KUALA LUMPUR: Petronas, through its subsidiary, Petronas LNG Ltd (PLL), signed a binding heads of agreement on Oct 1, 2018, with Singapore-based Vitol Asia Pte Ltd for a long-term liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply deal.

The supply to Vitol Asia would commence in 2024 for up to 800,000 tonnes per annum with a period of up to 15 years on both delivered ex-ship and free-on-board basis.


“The primary supply to Vitol will come from LNG Canada and other PLL's global LNG supply portfolio. LNG Canada is a major LNG project located in Kitimat, British Columbia, Canada, where Petronas is one of the joint venture participants with an equity holding of 25%,” it said in a statement today.

Canada is Petronas' second largest resource holder after Malaysia, with vast unconventional oil and gas resources in North Montney.


Meanwhile, Petronas LNG Marketing and Trading Vice-President Ahmad Adly Alias said Petronas was able to provide flexible solutions within a changing and evolving LNG market due to its strong global supply portfolio.

“Petronas is pleased to sign this long-term LNG supply deal with Vitol and hopes that it will continue to enhance the long history of business collaboration with the Vitol group,” he said.

Vitol LNG Head Pablo Galante Escobar said Petronas supplied the company's first LNG cargo in 2005 and the company has now extended its LNG relationship until at least 2038.

“We are also committed to the long-term development of the LNG market and its evolution to become a more flexible and tradeable commodity.

"This supply deal with Petronas will further strengthen our ability to offer reliable and flexible LNG solutions to customers, worldwide,” he added. - Bernama


Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2018/11/29/petronas-vitol-asia-inks-lng-supply-deal/#55wsK8Bbd22d4VEm.99

Wednesday, November 21, 2018

Reposting :Deloitte admits it missed billions in fraudulent 1MDB transactions-Will Deloitte International go the way of Arthur Andersen

by Ganesh Sahathevan


Image result for deloitte

The Star reported:
Member of Parliament for Kepong Lim Lip Eng has asked the Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA) on the status of its investigation of Deloitte Malaysia over its handling of the audit of 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).
Speaking to reporters in Parliament where he had earlier posed a question to the Ministry of Finance on the role of Deloitte in the 1MDB scandal, Lim said that top executives of Deloitte had defended its work when they testified to the Public Accounts Committee in 2015."We all know now that these defences were false. We call upon MIA to take action," said Lim. 
Mr Lim makes his demand in a very different 
context from that which existed in 2016 when the story below was published. Deloitte in Malaysia as well as the international partnership can no longer be assured that it will have the Malaysian Government on its side.\\

END







JUL
28

DOJ info would have impacted 1 MDB audit, Deloitte says-Deloitte admits it missed billions in fraudulent transactions-Msian partnership might take international firm the way of Arthur Andersen 

Looks  like Deloitte will join KPMG:

DOJ info would have impacted audit, Deloitte says

     37 comments     Published Today 11:57 am     Updated Today 12:57 pm

    Deloitte Malaysia said its audit of 1MDB in 2013 and 2014 would have been impacted if it had known at that time the information contained in the United States Department of Justice's (DOJ) lawsuits to seize 1MDB-linked assets.
    As such, 1MDB's 2013 and 2014 financial statements, which the auditing firm signed off on March 28, 2014 and Nov 5, 2014, "should no longer be relied upon", it said in a statement.
    "The complaint (filed by DOJ) contains information, which, if known at the time of the 2013 and 2014 audits of 1MDB, would have impacted the financial statements and affected the audit reports and, accordingly, those audit reports issued by Deloitte Malaysia dated March 28, 2014 and Nov 5, 2014 respectively in connection with the 2013 and 2014 financial statements of 1MDB should no longer be relied upon," Deloitte said in a statement.
    This comes after 1MDB announced that Deloitte is quitting as 1MDB's auditor, making it the third audit firm to part ways with 1MDB since its inception in 2009.
    Deloitte notified 1MDB of its intention to quit in February, the state investment said in a statement yesterday.
    Deloitte remains 1MDB auditor until a replacement is appointed, 1MDB said.
    1MDB's accounts from 2010 to 2012 were audited by KPMG, but the firm's services were terminated in December 2013.
    According to the Public Accounts Committee report on 1MDB, KPMG was fired after it refused to sign off on the accounts without details of investments worth US$2.32 billion.
    KPMG signed off on the accounts after Abu Dhabi's International Petroleum Investment Compny guaranteed an investment, the PAC report said.
    The Wall Street Journal reported another audit firm Ernst & Young was fired in 2010 for raising similar questions.
    The DOJ is seeking to seize more than US$1 billion of assets it said were purchased using funds siphoned from 1MDB.
    The 1MDB board yesterday said it is confident of no wrongdoing.
    However, it is taking precautionary measures by discounting its 2013 and 2014 financial statements until the DOJ lawsuits have been dealt with in court.

    Friday, November 16, 2018

    Malaysian Bar Council "menu" candidate Roger Chan continues to stonewall queries about his promotion of an Australian "Practical Masters", despite obvious problems

    by Ganesh Sahathevan


    The current secretary of the Malaysian Bar Council ,Mr Roger Chan, has put himself up for election as part of a "menu",reminiscent of  that ill-fated 1990s "Team Wawasan":


    Meanwhile  he and the current  Bar Council Executive have maintained a stony silence with regards their promotion of an "applied masters" offered via Sydney's College Of Law. Being offered out of Sydney  local approvals from Malaysia's Ministry of Education may not be required,but that sounds like too clever a scheme.

    The Australian  College Of Law “ Practical LLM” is based on the Practical Legal Training course . It survives to this day due to government support.
    Lawyers in Sydney refer sarcastically to the College Of Law as the "College Of Knowledge".

    Students at the College tend to be careful about what they say for fear of being denied admission to practice ,as this writer discovered,but that is a story for another day.

    Nevertheless, in 2006 some did speak to local industry paper  Lawyers Weekly.This is what they had to say:

    In a report on practical legal training (PLT) this week, Lawyers Weekly reveals that some students feel that a $6,000 fee could be lessened and considerable time saved if PLT was actually more practical, with more hands-on hours. One student, who wanted to remain anonymous, said his PLT course offered him little that he could not have picked up in a law firm.
    Now working part-time in a firm, our source said he is being exposed to many things he did not encounter during his PLT. “You can only learn so much in the theoretical sense. On my first day of work I had to write an affidavit for a man who’d punched his wife out. It was totally different to be doing this on real cases. If I hadn’t done college, I don’t think it would have been that much different. Maybe I would have had to ask the partners a couple more questions, or looked at a few more websites. But I don’t think that’s enough to warrant a $6,000 fee,” he said.
    “I drafted forms and affidavits in college. But I didn’t get a real idea about what it was about until I worked, and got this job. Maybe that says I wasn’t sufficiently involved in the learning process. But I still maintain that you have to be in the law to learn from it,” he said.
    It would be more useful to have internships within law firms, so that students can really understand what it is like to work in private practice, our source claimed. “I think three internships would be much more effective. Many people I study with agree with me. Most of my peers online think [the course] is a real hassle. 
    “You can’t teach practical application in an educational institution. Universities should have a system where you can do many internships… When it is taught by professionals, rather than on the job, you are losing an essential part of the learning process,” he argued.
    “My solicitor friends say that some things are quite important to do in college, such as trust accounting. But, on the whole, it isn’t the kind of diploma that is giving you a great deal of hands on knowledge. Ninety per cent of what I have learnt so far I learnt through work experience,” he pointed out.
    Stephanie Booker, another PLT student, questioned whether ‘practical legal training’ is an accurate term. “[My course] certainly taught me where to look for things that I may need — rules, areas of law... As for helping me to apply these rules, there is a huge difference between the reality of my workplace and the comfort of my PLT course. For example, I find that the way I draft letters for [my course] is not acceptable in my workplace, and vice versa.”

    END 


    Reference 


    FACULTY

    Programme Director: James Jung

    Further faculty to be appointed






    Saturday, August 18, 2018

    YA Daryl Goon , the Malaysian Applied Law LLM ,and YAA Richard Malanjum

    by Ganesh Sahathevan





    MASTER OF LAWS (APPLIED LAW) IN MALAYSIAN LEGAL PRACTICE





    This writer has spent much time this week, and the last praying that the newly appointed Yang Ariff Daryl Goon might condescend to explain why he has has endorsed something called the Master of Laws (Applied Law) in Malaysian Legal Practice.

    Goon has been asked to explain given the fact that this LLM (and indeed no others) have been approved by the Legal Profession Qualifying Board..

    The Malaysian Bar Council seems to have played some part in promoting the course (see below) but its President and Secretary have refused numerous requests for information about what

    approvals if any the Malaysian Bar Council had obtained to promote the course in Malaysia.


    The course website , hosted by the private college in Australia that manages the course (with a faculty of one person) shows prominently the Bar Council's logo. YA Daryl Goon is listed among its advisers.


    The private college also claims that it produced in 1985-86 the first group of "elite" law graduates from MARA who were admitted to practice in Malaysia. This does come as a bit of surprise to this writer and others like him who know and know of Malaysian lawyers who graduated from MARA in the 1970s. In the latter category (for I do not know him personally) is the current Chief Justice , YAA Tan Sri Richard Malanjum, who graduated in 1973.
    One hopes that the newly minted YA will at least have an explanation for his YAA.


    END






    The questions (see below) remain despite this promotion by the Bar Council Malaysia:

    e

    Circular No 147/2017
    Dated 11 July 2017n
    To Members of the Malaysian Bar
    Providing Assistance to The College of Law, Australia | Development of Localised Master
    of Laws Programme
    The Bar Council Malaysia has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with The College of
    Law, Australia and New Zealand in order to create further legal education and training platforms
    for the benefit of Members of the Bar.
    In this regard, The College of Law is interested to localise the content of its existing Australian
    Master of Laws (“LLM”) in Applied Law programme for Malaysia, and is interested in working
    with Members of the Bar who have relevant legal research and writing, and practical legal
    experience. This is to be carried out on a project basis, and the Members will be remunerated.
    The first six subjects in this new LLM programme are near completion and will be offered in
    September 2017 as part of a new LLM (Applied Law) with a major in Malaysian Legal Practice.
    The next 11 LLM subjects that The College of Law is interested in localising are listed below:
    (1)
    Advocacy;
    (2)
    Alternative Dispute Resolution Practice;
    (3)
    Arbitration.
    (4)
    Banking and Finance;
    (5)
    Family Law Practice;
    (6)
    Intellectual Property Practice;
    (7)
    Islamic Banking and Finance;
    (8)
    Mediation;
    (9)
    Mergers and Acquisitions Practice;
    (10) Negotiation; and
    (11) Wills, Estates and Trusts.
    If you are interested in pursuing this opportunity, please send your expression of interest together
    with your detailed resume and any queries, directly to:
    Peter Tritt
    Director | Asia-Pacific
    The College of Law Australia and New Zealand
    Level 23, Nu Tower 2
    Jalan Tun Sambanthan,
    50470 Kuala Lumpur
    Email: ptritt@collaw.edu.au
    Mobile: +6013 305 7660
    Thank you.
    Roger Chan Weng Keng
    Secretary
    Malaysian Bar

    Australia has a history of undermining Mahathir ,so why does his opinion on the embassy move matter?

    by Ganesh Sahathevan


    Scott  Morrison pushed back at 93-year-old Mahathir Mohamed leader whom he met the day before in Singapore and described ...





    Scott Morrison pushed back at 93-year-old Mahathir Mohamed leader whom he met the day before in Singapore and described as "the elder of ASEAN". "I will not have our policy dictated by those outside the country," he said.Wallace Woon

    Treasurer Josh Frydenberg scolding Mahathir seem to be  the fighting words of a proud Jew and Australian,  but unfortunately  history proves otherwise.
    First , many who know Mahathir ,and that would include senior figures in  Australia (Bob Carr does not count,but ask Bob Hawke), would  not consider Mahathir anti-semetic despite his public statements.

    They would understand that his reference to hook-nosed
    Jews  is in the same vein as his description of his own Malay Muslim coreligionist  as being  " unproductive, corrupt and dishonest”.


    However there  are ongoing attempts in Australia to undermine Mahathir in every way. The latest attempt, which appears to be linked to an umbrella effort to insulate Australian personalities from Malaysia's 1MDB scandal,  has involved  the NSW Department Of the Attorney General And Justice asserting as credible  claims on the "Thirdforce" website that Mahathir paid this writer US 1 Million ,which was then used to fabricate stories about ex-PM Najib which were ultimately put to air by ABC 4 Corners.

    This comes after the fact that Australia's ex-PM Turnbull went out of his way to honour ex-PM Najib despite the US DOJ's actions in seizing assets that were  acquired by Najib's relatives and associates with money stolen from the 1MDB sovereign wealth fund, even as Mahathir led an ultimately successful campaign to remove Najib , given that theft.

    Mahathir had on many occasions just prior to the Turnbull-Najib public display of affection  called on Australia to join with the US, Switzerland and Singapore to help recover money stolen from 1MDB, but to no avail.


    Having ignored him for so long , the  Australian pretense that   Mahathir's opinion matters is laughable, Moving the Australian embassy to Jerusalem matters to Malaysia and  Mahathir  as much as  Australia's same sex marriage laws.PM Scott Morrison and Treasurer Frydenberg know this.

    The real question here is why the government they lead is now looking for excuses not to make the move. That has to do with Australian opposition to Israel in favour of  Palestine ,which can be found even among Australian Jews. Readers should not be surprised that there would be among  Australia's Jewish population opposition to moving the Australian embassy to Jerusalem. For an example of that muddle headed thinking, consider their treatment of Raphi Israeli.

    END




    Raphael Israeli: Muslim apologist, thy name is coward

    AS an Israeli, one becomes used to the bias of the world's media and the frustrations of being misrepresented in the face of hysteria. But as a visiting academic to the land of the fair go, I didn't expect to find the same thing here.
    At the end of last week, the Australian Jewish News interviewed me about my research into Muslim communities in Europe. Having spent much of my life studying and writing about this subject, I was asked by a reporter about my views and how relevant they were to Australia. He pressed me as to whether the violence that Europe was experiencing with its Muslim population could happen here.
    I said it could happen anywhere, including Australia, that Muslim immigration occurred unchecked.

    READ NEXT

    The response in the media has been less than friendly. Sydney radio broadcaster Mike Carlton and The Sydney Morning Herald implied that I was a racist, and I have been denounced by some leaders of the Jewish community.
    I came to Australia to speak about Islam and the Middle East and to share the fruits of my books and research. But I've been dragged into an argument on a sensational issue that was not part of my schedule here. The many audiences who were to attend my lectures throughout the land were deprived of hearing them, except that private organisations, Jewish and non-Jewish, picked up the sponsorship of those lectures and I will end up giving more lectures than previously planned.
    I am vastly rewarded by the multitude of supporting voices and the outpouring of calls and emails, from Jews and non-Jews, in Australia and abroad, and by the pressing queues of learners who've signed up for my classes. (There have also been a few hostile callers, some of whom identified themselves as Muslims or Muslim converts who typically use abusive language instead of a civilised voice of reason.)
    I have been researching Islam in Europe and have come to some disturbing findings about the new third Islamic invasion of Europe: specifically, the Muslim neighbourhoods that breed violence and trouble and the home-grown European Muslims who have sworn to change Europe to their tune, to Islamise it and to use violence, if necessary, to that end.
    So much so that erstwhile proponents of immigration such as France, The Netherlands and Britain have had to revise their laws, introduce new restrictions and shelve the marvellous utopia of multiculturalism as simply unfeasible and counterproductive.
    There is nothing racist about adopting those policies, much less about describing them in a scholarly fashion. Moreover, it's fair, honest and educative to infer from those data to other parts of the Western world, such as Australia, which face the same issues.
    I do not wish to play the victim and I appreciate that Australia is noted for robust debate. But when a scholar who has no axe to grind honestly describes and analyses what policy-makers in Europe have done, and draws a straightforward conclusion about Australia, to be abused and branded as a racist is extraordinary.
    Shouts and abuse are not a policy, nor do they encourage public debate. If someone wishes to dismiss data by providing alternative sets of facts and arguments, that is a debate, but by shooting the messenger instead of addressing the issue, no public cause is served. It is a fact that since 2000, Jewish facilities were attacked by Muslims in Europe and Australia, but never the other way around. To state that is racism?
    Some, of course, prefer to hide behind hollow slogans of "inter-communal harmony", "inter-faith co-operation" and "multiculturalism" instead of exposing Muslim violence and inflammatory rhetoric and act, together with Muslim moderates, to uproot these phenomena.
    Aware of the European parallel, I am neither surprised by the Muslim leaders' attempts to shut off any debate in Australia and intimidate anyone who raises his voice against such actions, nor by the Australian press complicity in that process. Only yesterday I received threats from a Chechen Islamic website. So much for civilised debate.
    But I am stunned by the behaviour of some Jewish leaders, who didn't seek to find out what I had said but instead relied on a report in the Australian Jewish News that misrepresented the context (not distorted or falsified) of what I said. Instead of supporting free debate in this country, these Jewish leaders have elected to shamefully disown it in statements that were geared to placate Muslims.
    People who lack courage and stamina to stand up for principles, who whisper in my ear that they agree with me but then act in public to protect their positions and the illusions they are trying to cultivate in this society, do not act in a Jewish, Australian or even civilised fashion.
    Raphael Israeli, a professor of Islamic, Middle East and Chinese history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has been brought to Australia by the Shalom Institute of the University of NSW.