Categories
ASEAN Politics & government

[766] Of crooked bridge cancelled

While I’m relieved that the Malaysian government has stopped the bridge talks with Singapore and directly crossed out the possibility of Malaysia acceding to unacceptable Singaporean demands, I’m extremely disappointed with the Malaysian government’s decision to cancel the bridge altogether . I found it out through TV3. Bernama has more:

KUALA LUMPUR, April 12 (Bernama) — The government has decided to stop the construction of the bridge to replace the Johor Causeway that links Malaysia and Singapore, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced Wednesday.

He said the government had also decided to stop all negotiations pertaining to the bridge. Construction of the bridge, also known as the “scenic bridge” began early this year, to replace half of the Johor Causeway on the Malaysian side.

Though the reason for quitting the negotiation has been given, reason for the bridge cancelation is still a mystery. Hence, tomorrow’s local papers will be of extraordinary interest. The Malaysian government must clear out the air.

Before tomorrow comes, I’d like to say, historical heritage is not a proper reason and I will not accept such incoherent reasoning.

As stated earlier, I’m for a bridge, straight or otherwise. And no, if there’s still anybody that thinks the bridge would be a cul-de-sac, it is not. At the same time, I’m against bowing to Singaporean impossible demands. You could say, I’m being hawkish on this matter.

p/s – ReCom.org is down (again!) but it should be back up in less than a day.

pp/s – as if one disappointment is not enough, Malaysia lost 1 – 0 to Japan in Hockey World Cup Qualifier in Changzhou, China. This makes it hard for Malaysia to qualify for the World Cup.

ppp/s – the Prime Minister answers the mystery:

PUTRAJAYA, April 12 (Bernama) — Malaysia decided to stop the construction of the “scenic bridge” meant to replace the Malaysian half of the Johor Causeway because of its legal implications and complications, said Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi Wednesday.

The Prime Minister said the Cabinet deliberated on the project at its weekly meeting today and felt that there would still be legal implications and complications to resolve afterward should Malaysia proceed with the project.

“Problems will arise when we have to cut the causeway, the water pipes and railway track and connected them to the new bridge. The problems will continue,” he told Bernama when asked to explain why Malaysia did not just build the bridge in its own territory without negotiating with Singapore.

So, does this mean we could only have a bridge in 2060 when the water contract ends?

Categories
Environment

[765] Of polluters may face death penalty

On TV a few hours ago was a report on Akta Industri Perkhidmatan Air (Water Services Industry Bill) and it is set for approval soon . The report on TV3 highlighted that a water polluter that causes death on purpose may face death penalty. I haven’t had the chance to take a look at the bill since I can’t find it on the net. The most relevant result is an article at Bernama. The Bernama’s report dated yesterday:

KUALA LUMPUR, April 10 (Bernama) — Those who pollute the drainage or the water supply system may face death penalty when the Water Services Industry Bill 2006 is approved and enforced.

The bill tabled by the Communication, Water and Energy Minister Datuk Seri Dr Lim Keng Yaik for the first reading in Dewan Rakyat here also listed the acts considered as polluting drinking water and its penalties.

Dr Lim who also tabled the Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara Bill (SPAN) 2006 to create a commission to oversee and regulate the water supply and sewerage services in Peninsula said the second reading of both the bills would be done during the current sitting.

Under the Water Services Industry Bill, anyone found guilty with the intention of causing the death face a death penalty or jail up to 20 years and rotan.

If the death is caused by radioactive and toxic pollutants discarded in the water, those found guilty can be jailed not more than 10 years or fined not more than RM500,000 or whipping or all three.

I’m all for stricter environmental code but death penalty doesn’t quite sound right. This is even more so since the death penalty is applicable only when the polluter pollutes with the “intention of causing” death. It sounds as if it belongs to some other act that deals with treason or sabotage.

Let’s think about it. When a typical person or an entity pollutes, do they intent to cause death?

I doubt it. Typically, it’s about externality; the polluters don’t bare the cost of pollution and pass the cost of pollution to society instead. I have never heard a profit-seeking entity pollutes with the intention of killing somebody else. Even there’s death, these people don’t intent to kill. They intent to cut cost instead. It’s cheaper to pollute. For this reason, I feel this clause is meaningless. It gives so much leeway to polluters that it doesn’t really matter if the clause is included in the bill. It is ineffective.

The punishment clause should be rewritten. The phrase with the intention of causing death should be removed and while the death penalty dropped. Instead, it would be better if the bill states that anybody – with or without intention of polluting – found guilty of polluting our water supplies will face prison time or heavy monetary penalty.

For a person that commits murder on purpose – by whatsoever mean – we don’t need a new bill to deal with that, do we? Much less do we expect to deal with that in a water bill, in my humble opinion.

Categories
Economics Sports

[764] Of between globalization and public policy

I’m bored but I just want to share an article published by the New York Times. It’s Globalizing Good Government:

Globalization’s critics argue that a more open world economy sets off a race to the bottom by encouraging countries to jettison protections for consumers, workers and the environment. In reality, the opposite is true.

In the accompanying illustration, it looks like Malaysia by far is the second most globalized country within Southeast Asia. First is that island down south.

p/s – some people love to talk about how China is pushing Malaysia aside in every aspect, adversely affecting us. Especially protectionists. Actually no. In NST’s Business Times today, Malaysia is benefiting from China economic boom:

MALAYSIA ranks second globally on being positively impacted by the fast growing economy of China, according to an independent survey.

The 2006 Grant Thornton International Business Owners Survey (IBOS) found that Malaysian medium and large enterprises (MLEs) are benefiting from the Chinese economic boom.

That along with more than USD 2 billion Malaysian trade surplus with China prove that these pessimists are wrong.

pp/s – this season’s bastard kampioen is P$V. Mathematically confirmed. Ajax on the other hand lingers at fifth and if things don’t improve soon, Ajax might miss the chance to be in the next Champions League season . Ajax needs at least fourth placing to qualify for the new weird Champions League playoff. For the why, see Wikipedia.

However, that won’t prevent me from celebrating Ajax’s 1 – 0 win over AZ! Hat off to Boukhari and Stekelenburg.

Categories
Economics

[763] Of honey, ah sugar sugar

There are reports of sugar shortage in four Malaysian states. While that happens, the authority, which is the Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs in this case, is blaming smugglers and hoarders.

PUTRAJAYA: Low sugar cane supply in the international market has contributed to the shortage of sugar in the country, said Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister Datuk Shafie Apdal.

This is in addition to the on-going smuggling of the controlled item to neighbouring countries, he added.

On the contrary, smuggling and hoarding is not the root cause. Instead, these are mere symptoms of inefficient market. The root is inflexible price; controlled price regime.

In Malaysia, items of mundane but delicious daily want and need like chickens, salt and sugar are controlled. They’re controlled because people in the higher echelon of the Malaysian society want to protect the consumers, in particular the common people. Noble indeed but misguided.

Price is an important signal. In a free market, price fluctuates with supply and demand, constantly seeking the perfect equilibrium. If it is not allowed to seek that equilibrium, something is bound to happen. That something could be anything — smuggling activities is one of them. Currently in Malaysia, there is a price ceiling imposed on the sugar market and that price ceiling is preventing the prices from achieving its stable state.

If prices increase worldwide and Malaysia has a price ceiling on sugar, thus making Malaysian prices lower than world’s prices, a simple arbitrage demands a reasonable trader to sell sugar to the world instead of Malaysia. This is the reason why smuggling is happening; it is not because some people are naturally born criminals but rather, simple economics demands it.

Like I have said earlier, this price ceiling is there to protect the consumers, or so those in the government thought. In reality, we can clearly see how such unneeded protection is depriving consumers of sugar. This brings in a question – do we prefer higher priced sugar or no sugar at all?

I’m forcing a false dilemma on you, true. Nevertheless, distributive inefficiency is as real as it can get.

Categories
Economics Sports

[762] Of podcast on Lampe Berger

w00t! Podcast. Well, technically, Zencast because I used my Zen Micro. For clarity, refer to [761] Of the reason why this Lampe Berger fad is a pyramid scheme, posted yesterday.

You will need Quicktime to listen to it. However, if you’re more anti-Apple than me, you can download the mp3 file here and play it on your favorite media player instead.

p/s – almost forgot. Justice served. Inter 0 – 1 Villareal. Aggregate 2-2, with the away goal belongs to Villareal.