Ong apologises to Idris Jala, wants Pemandu’s clarification

Pemandu should not be involved in the business of giving government consulting services, presumably for profit, to other governments and entities overseas.

KUALA LUMPUR: The takeover of BFR Institute – Big, Fast, Results  by Pemandu Corporation raises a whole set of new questions, says Serdang MP Ong Kian Ming.

Firstly, he said in a statement, why should Pemandu be involved in the business of giving government consulting services, presumably for profit, to other governments and entities overseas, as it has been doing?

Secondly, why should the tax payer bear the net cost of RM3.9 million for hosting the three day Global Transformation Programme in 2015 given that budgetary cuts were being implemented left and right on other government agencies, including public universities?

Thirdly, the statement by Pemandu that the balance of the RM10 million allocated to the Global Transformation Programme 2015 was sitting in the accounts of Pemandu and not BFR Institute should not be seen as an assurance.

Since Pemandu Corporation was incorporated on October 26, 2009, it has submitted four annual accounts to the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) viz. for Financial Year 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2014. For each of these annual accounts, the revenue and the profit / loss was recorded as zero.

Ong wants to know whether this means that Pemandu Corporation did not receive any grants from the Federal Government for its operating costs.

He has other questions as well.

Does this also mean that Pemandu Corporation did not spend a single sen of operating expenses, especially for the many labs it held, payments to consultants, and rental for their many open days?

Is there another entity which Pemandu uses to park its expenses and grants?

Ong also apologised to Idris Jala if he had caused anyone to think that the latter benefited financially from his then 51% share of BFR Institute which was held in trust, and which has now been diluted down to 51 shares as per the latest CCM records.

At the same time, the MP said he would like Pemandu or Idris Jala to clarify whether the remaining 51 votes the latter holds in BFR Institute was still being held in trust or whether the latest CCM records are not up to date and that he no longer holds any shares in BFR Institute. “This is related to Pemandu’s statement which says that it currently owns 100% of BFR-I directly,” said Ong. “As long as Idris Jala still holds on to a single share in BFR Institute, whether directly or in trust, it’s not accurate to say that Pemandu Corporation currently owns 100% of BFR Institute directly.”

Ong said he hoped Pemandu could answer these questions in as speedy a fashion as when they clarified the facts pertaining to the share ownership of BFR Institute.

He was referring to Pemandu’s statement dated May 19, 2016 in response to his press conference at Parliament House on the same day.

Apparently, his statement referring to Idris Jala’s 51% ownership of BFR Institute Sdn Bhd, was based on a company search he did on February 25 of this year. The transfer of Idris Jala’s 51% stake to Pemandu Corporation was not reflected in the CCM accounts as at February 25.

According to the company search Ong did on May 22, Idris Jala now holds 51 out of 400,000 shares of BFR Institute Sdn Bhd with the remainder being held by Pemandu Corporation.

According to Pemandu’s statement, Idris Jala held his shares of BFR Institute Sdn Bhd in trust as Pemandu Corporation was not allowed to have a greater than 49% stake in another company.