Oil and gas stocks were fired up in KLSE after Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad's Budget 2004 disclosure that the government could allow another consortium to undertake the "development" of "marginal oil and gas fields so as to gain the confidence of other countries" (New Straits Times, Sept 16).

Other countries however have no reason to be otherwise diffident about Petronas' performance or capability.

It is awash with cash in money market funds and overseas investments, has a balance sheet that is an envy of any multinational, contributes to some 30 percent of total government expenditure and can point to a BAA1 rating by Moody's Investors Service for its foreign currency debt that is one notch higher than Moody's rating for Malaysia itself.

So why the need for another consortium to gain confidence of other countries?

How much does it cost a consortium to develop oil and gas fields? I don't know the figures but am sure they ought to be real big numbers for prospecting, drilling and the whole infrastructure works.

It makes no sense if the consortium is substantially foreign-owned and has money, because oil and gas reserves are the heritage of Malaysians under the Petronas Charter.

If it were a local controlled consortium, who are the ones behind it and do they have the requisite development funds?

If they do not have sufficient funds, is Petronas supposed to fund or partially fund it?

Why should Petronas venture into that which assists another when based on track record and finances it could do everything alone for its and the nation's benefit?

There is also a problem of definition regarding what is "marginal" oil and gas reserves.

Presently, marginal may be potentially lucrative in the future, which if allocated to the other consortium would benefit the interests behind it, instead of Petronas, which represents the nation.

As Malaysians concerned for our children's collective material welfare in the future, we are entitled to ask questions, albeit general ones so that clarification may be given to assuage our anxiety for the future.

And the first fundamental policy question is: What is the compelling reason for state-owned Petronas, the custodian of the financial future of Malaysians, to be deprived of its monopoly in the future wealth represented by oil and gas reserves (no matter how marginal) of the nation? How can having another consortium boost other countries confidence in us?