Why Taiwan? Why now?
Kilo TangoPublished: Sep 11, 2008 9:07 AM | Updated: Sep 11, 2008 9:10 AM
I refer to the Malaysiakini report Trip not aimed to derail Sept 16 defections
Tiong King Sing's response does not appear sensible at all, even to a layman like me. I tried very hard to believe that the so-called study tour to Taiwan is not a waste of taxpayers' money and is not a desperate attempt by the ruling coalition to avoid mass defections by its own MPs.
Unfortunately, Tiong’s response has proven otherwise. I'm particularly skeptical that the so-called study tour to Taiwan by our MPs would provide a good experience to improve our agricultural industry.
MPs are lawmakers and representatives of constituents in the legislative branch. They're expected to spend great amount of time participating in debates in the August house. Otherwise, they have to attend to the local issues brought up by their constituents.
Besides their responsibilities as elected representatives, they have various commitments within their political parties, and for those who are not full-time politicians, there are also commitments as far as their practice and business ventures are concerned.
Also, many of the MPs who are in Taiwan are sitting on the board of directors of some government linked companies and hence, have strong commitments in the governance of such companies.
With so many hats, what makes Tiong believe that MPs are more qualified than relevant civil servants in participating in agricultural-related study tours? After all, can MPs be effectively transformed into agricultural experts in less than two weeks?
If the objective of this so-called study tour is to explore high-technology agricultural solutions and advanced equipment, is there a need to send 49 individuals all the way to Taiwan?
I am sure the civil servants under the government's payroll in the Agriculture Ministry are paid to do their job, and I'm sure one instruction from the minister’s office is all it takes if these 49 MPs would like to know more about the various high-technology agricultural solutions adopted all over the world.
Want to know more about advanced equipment? Simple – a request for a proposal from the ministry is sufficient and manufacturers will be lining-up in Wisma Tani to present their facts in detail. Tiong can even find out the technical specifications of every equipment, if he is interested.
Lastly, the choice of destination appears rather weird. Agriculture is not a significant industry in Taiwan, whereby cultivation activities in rice, sugar cane, tropical fruits and vegetables in Taiwan contributed only 2.69 percent of Taiwan's GDP of US$695.4 billion in 2007.
That works out to a marginal contribution of only US$18.7 billion. Malaysia, on the other hand, has a larger agricultural industry worth approximately US$30.8 billion, as the contribution of agricultural activities, mainly in palm oil, rubber, cocoa, pepper and tobacco, constitutes 8.6 percent of Malaysia's GDP.
The bottom line remains that taxpayers' money should not be wasted simply for the political survival of the ruling coalition.
Tiong King Sing's response does not appear sensible at all, even to a layman like me. I tried very hard to believe that the so-called study tour to Taiwan is not a waste of taxpayers' money and is not a desperate attempt by the ruling coalition to avoid mass defections by its own MPs.
Unfortunately, Tiong’s response has proven otherwise. I'm particularly skeptical that the so-called study tour to Taiwan by our MPs would provide a good experience to improve our agricultural industry.
MPs are lawmakers and representatives of constituents in the legislative branch. They're expected to spend great amount of time participating in debates in the August house. Otherwise, they have to attend to the local issues brought up by their constituents.
Besides their responsibilities as elected representatives, they have various commitments within their political parties, and for those who are not full-time politicians, there are also commitments as far as their practice and business ventures are concerned.
Also, many of the MPs who are in Taiwan are sitting on the board of directors of some government linked companies and hence, have strong commitments in the governance of such companies.
With so many hats, what makes Tiong believe that MPs are more qualified than relevant civil servants in participating in agricultural-related study tours? After all, can MPs be effectively transformed into agricultural experts in less than two weeks?
If the objective of this so-called study tour is to explore high-technology agricultural solutions and advanced equipment, is there a need to send 49 individuals all the way to Taiwan?
I am sure the civil servants under the government's payroll in the Agriculture Ministry are paid to do their job, and I'm sure one instruction from the minister’s office is all it takes if these 49 MPs would like to know more about the various high-technology agricultural solutions adopted all over the world.
Want to know more about advanced equipment? Simple – a request for a proposal from the ministry is sufficient and manufacturers will be lining-up in Wisma Tani to present their facts in detail. Tiong can even find out the technical specifications of every equipment, if he is interested.
Lastly, the choice of destination appears rather weird. Agriculture is not a significant industry in Taiwan, whereby cultivation activities in rice, sugar cane, tropical fruits and vegetables in Taiwan contributed only 2.69 percent of Taiwan's GDP of US$695.4 billion in 2007.
That works out to a marginal contribution of only US$18.7 billion. Malaysia, on the other hand, has a larger agricultural industry worth approximately US$30.8 billion, as the contribution of agricultural activities, mainly in palm oil, rubber, cocoa, pepper and tobacco, constitutes 8.6 percent of Malaysia's GDP.
The bottom line remains that taxpayers' money should not be wasted simply for the political survival of the ruling coalition.
View Comments0