Malaysiakini : Mohd Sidek said the then PM Najib Abdul Razak thought that his salary was a bit too low for the responsibilities.
“So (it was done) from the goodness of his heart - I thought that was the reason (for my appointment).
“This was just a vehicle to compensate for that low salary, not because I was KSN,” Mohd Sidek said while being cross-examined.
But what back-breaking job did he have to do for the big bucks?
He
had earlier told the court that since his appointment, he was never
involved in any meetings or discussions on the company’s issues and had
never been invited to attend 1MDB’s annual meetings.
One newspaper headlined the reportage on the front page with the heading “Money for nothing”.
Damning indictment
In
his book, “Capturing Hope: The Struggle Continues for a New Malaysia”,
former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamed said former treasury
secretary-general Irwan Serigar Abdullah had drawn a huge income through
the chairmanship of several government companies.
“In total, he
was being paid as much as RM200,000 a month – that’s RM2.4 million a
year and far above normal government pay,” he wrote.
This is the
Malaysian malaise. Not only are top civil servants getting supplementary
incomes from GLCs and statutory bodies, but also members of Parliament.
In
2012, the then chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Azmi
Khalid, made a damning indictment on government officials appointed to
the boards of companies.
Addressing shortcomings in the National
Feedlot Corporation (NFCorp), the PAC outlined a number of weaknesses in
the standard operating procedures applied by the Finance Ministry and
the Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry Ministry, whose representatives
sit on the NFCorp board to “protect” the government’s interests.
In
the aftermath, I wrote: “I don’t mean to look down on any profession,
but when you appoint someone who is more apt at driving a forklift or a
teacher whose competency is in the area of teaching geography than
knowing about ports and operations involving millions of ringgit,
naturally, one can expect disaster. In many cases, such posts are linked
to political association and patronage – not competency or ability.
“Dissecting
and deciphering Azmi’s frank yet courteous remarks was not a difficult
task. It is not the first time that government-appointed directors were
“sleeping on the job” and it won’t be the last until and unless the
government insists on being open and accountable to the people.”
But
did anyone bother? After the Sheraton Move, in an unverified audio
recording – purportedly from the Bersatu supreme council meeting on Feb
23, 2020 – a man whose voice resembled that of Bersatu president
Muhyiddin Yassin was heard saying that Umno MPs could be enticed to join
Bersatu if they are offered ministerships or GLC posts.
“If they
know a new government is being formed, with UMNO in, ‘Why don’t you
(Umno MPs) join in now, rather than you join later’?
“I think if
we did that, a majority would leave Umno (with just) 10-20 (MPs), with
just Najib (Abdul Razak) and his people (left behind) … especially if
there are positions. If not a minister, then chairperson of a GLC,” the
man in the recording said.
Is it fair for taxpayers?
The
result is that many sitting MPs are reaping the rewards by drawing
hefty allowances from GLCs. There is also a staff in the Prime
Minister’s Office drawing a five-figure salary as the deputy chairperson
of a statutory board.
Elsewhere, government officials, as Azmi
pointed out, sit on all statutory bodies representing their respective
ministry’s interests. This is nothing unusual because when it comes to
policies and government directives, they are there to explain and
assist.
As sitting board members, they sit during office time. Is
it fair for the taxpayer to pay him extra when attending these meetings?
What extra expertise do they bring to the table?
The problem
appears to be that there is no fixed rate of allowances. Each GLC or
statutory body pays different rates, and some even throw in an
additional incentive – a tailored tuxedo. Some board members are
occasionally sent on overseas junkets, especially when crucial decisions
are scheduled to be made.
Has the time come for the Treasury to
regulate or fix a ceiling on allowances instead of allowing board
members to dictate what they should receive?
Author’s note:
Serving as a member of the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel
of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, all members, including
this writer, were paid an allowance of RM300 each month for our time and
expertise.
