Wednesday, January 30, 2019

NSW AG Speakman SC invites prosecution of Muslim apostates in Australia by Muslim governments,NGOs from anywhere in the world.

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Troy Grant MP
NSW AG Speakerman's religious exclusions an
election issue ;his Dept Of Justice Secretary
 Cappie-Wood must not interfere in the coming
 election to defend or promote Speakerman

In yet another breathtaking demonstration of his legal skills the Attorney General NSW Mark Speakman SC has declared that the has the power to prosecute in NSW, anyone, anywhere in Australia and the world, against whom a complaint is made pursuant to the quite wide provisions of the Anti-Discrimination Act NSW (see below article from The Australian, 31 January 2019).

Australia has, until now, provided a safe haven for opponents of many of Asia's Islamic statutory bodies and state-linked NGOs.

A case in point are the members of the secret ex-Muslim network in Australia, whose words reported by the ABC would be perceived to be offensive to Muslims in even moderate Malaysia. Many like them who have sought refuge in Australia so that they might express their beliefs ((or lack of belief) without fear of state prosecution and persecution are now vulnerable to complaints made against them by agents and others sponsored by the respective states in NSW pursuant to the provisions of the NSW Discrimination Act.Indeed, there is nothing to prevent the states concerned from making the complaints themselves. Race and religion are almost synonymous in for example Malaysia,so as to make the exclusion of discrimination on religious grounds in NSW meaningless.


State anti-discrimination law ‘applies to all Aussies’
The  Australian
JANUARY 31, 2019
NSW Attorney-General Mark Speakman says the state’s anti-discrimination laws apply to people outside NSW, prompting a warning Australians could find themselves dragged before legal bodies in multiple states because of comments they make online.
Mr Speakman has intervened in a long-running dispute ­between Queensland-based former army officer Bernard Gaynor and NSW gay rights activist Garry Burns.
Mr Gaynor, now a conser­vative Christian blogger, has been hit with about 36 complaints from Mr Burns, filed with the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board, over comments on his blog and Facebook page. Mr Gaynor says he has so far spent about $250,000 on legal fees defending the complaints of alleged homosexual vilification or victimisation.
The father of eight has asked the NSW ­Supreme Court to prevent the Anti-Discrimination Board, the NSW Civil and ­Administrative Tribunal and the NSW Local Court from dealing with any ­existing or future complaints against him. He argues the bodies have no jurisdiction to deal with the complaints because he is a Queensland resident.
However, the Attorney-General has argued, in submissions filed with the NSW Supreme Court, that the state’s anti-­discrimination laws are not confined to NSW residents.
“There is nothing in the text or context of the Anti-Discrimination Act which suggests that persons who are not residents of NSW are immune from having a ‘complaint’ made against them under that act,” the submissions say.
Mr Gaynor said if Mr Speakman’s arguments were ­accepted, any Australian who commented on issues such as same-sex marriage or the Safe Schools program could be dragged before each state and territory’s legal system. “They could have done nothing wrong in their own state but face costly litigation in others,” he said.
“If NSW succeeds, there will be a significant chilling effect on free speech and every Australian will need to be careful that their speech is not just lawful where they live, but in places where they don’t and cannot cast a vote.”
Institute of Public Affairs research fellow Morgan Begg said: “What the NSW Attorney-­General is saying here is incredibly dangerous. We would see an ­explosion in litigation.”

Saturday, January 26, 2019

Will KPMG International be "EnRoned"? : Fallout from Malaysia's 1 MDB scandal may cost KPMG USD 10 billion,maybe more?

by Ganesh Sahathevan 

By DennisM - Own work, CC0, 

Malaysia 's Securities Commission has finally, it seems, decided to investigate KPMG with regards the 1MDB theft:

The international  partnership should not consider itself this writer pointed out in an article posted on 29 March 2015(see below).


Is KPMG International being "EnRoned"? : Fallout from Malaysia's 1 MDB scandal may cost KPMG USD 10 billion 

A new verb, "Enron-ed" was coined by John M. Cunningham, the former Arthur Andersen Director in the Seattle Office, to describe the demise of Arthur Andersen.

KPMG International ,the Swiss Cooperative under which KPMG partnerships worldwide come together to offer audit and other services under the direction of a Global Executive Leadership Team,  has found itself entangled in Malaysia's 1 MDB sovereign wealth fund scandal.

It appears that in managing the crisis it now faces, KPMG may be managing its 1 MDB documents in a manner similar to  Arthur Andersen and its  documents related to the  Enron assignment which led to the effective demise of that firm which was once considered the gold standard in auditing.

The Sarawak Report website that has in recent weeks published 1 MDB emails that reveal gross financial impropriety,  recently published email correspondence between 1 MDB and its former auditor, the KPMG partnership in Malaysia,where KPMG has been shown to provide directions  on how 1 MDB's books should be 
re- presented in order to receive an unqualified audit opinion. 

1 MDB is now unable to repay its loans worth USD 10 billion and counting, and it is likely that the company will be liquidated, with its debts assumed by the Malaysian Government which has effectively guaranteed 1 MDB's borrowing.

KPMG International has been queried about its potential liability for the possible if not probable  civil and criminal claims arising from the 1 MDB scandal, and its general counsel Tom Whetered has insisted that the Cooperative offers no client services and has nothing to do with 1 MDB.

However that is a denial based on form for everything in substance says otherwise. To begin with, KPMG International counts as its revenue fees from the Malaysian partnership,and that will include fees from the 1 MDB assignment. In fact its  recently retired chairman , Michael Andrews,  identified Malaysia as a target market for growth when he took on that role.

Then the Singapore managing partner Sai Choy Tham, who is also a member of KPMG International's Global Executive Team , is also Regional Head of Audit, South East Asia.  Mr Tham has been queried about his communication with the KL office with regards the 1 MDB emails revealed by Sarawak Report,and has been asked specifically if communications in the past weeks has included directions about the management of 1 MDB documents. He has refused to confirm or deny that he has issued  directions in that regard, in his capacity as Regional Head Of Audit and member of the KPMG Global Executive Team.
The queries put to Mr Tham were also put to KPMG International chairman John Veihmeyer, who has also chosen to remain silent.

Meanwhile ,KPMG's  partners in Malaysia have , in response to the Sarawak Report expose, insisted that all they have done they have done in accordance with international accounting standards.
Each of the Big 4 has its own auditing procedures that are considered proprietary, and in insisting that the 1 MDB audit was executed in accordance with international standards the partners in Malaysia are really saying that they have acted in accordance with KPMG International's established norms and procedures.
Put in another way, the Malaysian partners are insisting that they have acted  as directed by KPMG International, even as KPMG International seeks to distance itself from them.

Monday, January 21, 2019

India & PM Modi paid for Dato Seri Dr Anwar to come to India and lecture them on IT,AI ,the Digital Economy.........

by Ganesh Sahathevan

I will not say more, for fear of detracting from the great man's words.Having said that, readers are asked to consider who is paying for what, and when delivery is expected. 


Monday, January 7, 2019

Happy Russian Orthodox Christmas

Patriarch Kirill of Russia
5 hrs
"Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to men of good will"


Saturday, January 5, 2019

Vitol's "all Christmases at once" deal with Petronas makes one wonder if Petronas has become a charitable organisation

by Ganesh Sahathevan

The Star reported on 29 November 2018 quoting Bernama:

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 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.

Reuters reported the same but included this additional bit of information:

Royal Dutch Shell decided in October (2018) to construct the export terminal. It was the first major investment decision in a new North American LNG export project for two years and was expected to launch a new wave of such projects in the region.

Petronas, the Malaysian oil and gas company that bought a 25 percent stake in the project in May, will supply Vitol with 0.8 million tonnes per year (mtpa) of LNG starting from 2024 for 15 years, Vitol said in a statement.

Vitol joins Asian utilities Tokyo Gas, Toho Gas and Korea Gas Corp (Kogas) as buyers, committing to offtake around 2.4 mtpa collectively.

Such long-term agreements normally underpin project finance and are critical before a final investment decision is taken.

But because Shell and partners Petronas, PetroChina, Mitsubishi and Kogas are such large players in the LNG market, they can absorb the output into their global portfolios without needing to find significant other buyers.
erm contract
Under previously announced deals, Toho Gas will buy 0.3 mtpa, Tokyo Gas 0.6 mtpa and Kogas 0.7 mtpa from LNG Canada.

In other words, Petronas has agreed to put-up the massive capital investment that
will enable  Vitol, a trader, to secure its supplies of LNG under a long term contract. In contrast, the other investors in the project have invested to secure long term supplies for their long-term customers, to whom the cost of the investment will be passed on. 

Which makes one wonder, is Petronas a charity,and is its management in competition with Santa Claus?



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.

Petronas, Vitol Asia inks LNG supply deal


Thursday, 29 Nov 20188:05 PM MYT