A+ | A- | Reset
Home arrow The Blogs arrow Guest Columnists arrow Fuel on Malaysia's political fire

Fuel on Malaysia's political fire PDF Print
Posted by admin   
Wednesday, 11 June 2008 08:09

Image 

By Anil Netto

PENANG - Malaysians are reeling from a 41% rise in petrol prices and a 63% hike in diesel as Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi's administration scrambles to ward off public discontent over his unpopular policy decision to remove fuel price subsidies.

Electricity tariffs were also raised by 11% for household use and 26% for commercial and industrial use. The oil price hikes, announced last week, are unprecedented for this oil-exporting nation accustomed to low prices at the pump. The inflationary policy has so far prompted scattered protests in cities across the country and with a bigger demonstration scheduled for July 12, which organizers hope will draw a crowd of over 100,000.

Most Malaysians are resigned to the fact that the days of cheap oil are over. But a sudden 41% increase, rather than a gradual repealing of subsidies, has left many fuming at a time they already face inflationary pressures for other commodities, including food.

The policy announcement was poorly timed for Abdullah, whose ruling coalition is still shell-shocked by the results of the March general election in which it lost close to half the popular vote, along with control of five states. Even opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, who normally strongly advocates a market-driven economy with a humane face, has described the sudden fuel price hikes as "unconscionable". He has already predicted the policy will hasten the widely anticipated downfall of Abdullah's administration.

Abdullah is expected to face a leadership challenge within his United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party, which helms the ruling coalition, in party elections in December. His administration's grip on power - the coalition has a 140-82 majority of parliamentary seats - appears tenuous amid persistent rumors of factional defections to the opposition's ranks.

Those rumors focus strongly on the pivotal, oil-producing state of Sabah, situated in north Borneo. Like other oil-producing states in the federation, Sabah, which has large pockets of poverty in its less-developed interior, receives only 5% in royalties from the huge amounts of oil extracted from its shores.

Neutral observers are wondering why Abdullah did not take a more gradual approach to weaning the country off fuel price subsidies. Many Malaysians appear to have grudgingly accepted the reasons for the removal of the subsidy, which the government argues promotes excessive fuel consumption and distorts the market.

But they are at the same time severely critical about the lack of transparency in the accounts of the state-owned oil corporation, Petronas, which only reveals its accounts to the prime minister. Petronas does not divulge a detailed profit and loss account to the public, but rather only makes available its annual report, which discloses only basic "financial highlights" and summary figures such as revenue and profit before tax.

Malaysians were told before the March general election that the country would become a net importer of oil by 2011. Petronas' chief executive has since said that with higher global oil prices, the growth in local demand for oil would likely slow and prolong the period which Malaysia is a net exporter. "If the rate is reduced from 6% [demand growth annually] to 4%, it will be extended by three to four years to 2014 or 2015," he recently said.

Immediately after the price hike announcement, state-influenced newspapers produced figures showing that Malaysia's oil prices are still among the cheapest in the region. However, one widely circulated e-mail shows a comparison chart of domestic oil prices in a list of oil-producing nations which indicates that Malaysia is among those with the highest prices.

Opaque gains
According to the company, Petronas made a pre-tax profit of 42.3 billion ringgit (US$12.9 billion) in the six months to September 2007, on schedule to outpace the 76.3 billion ringgit turned in for the entire fiscal year ended on March 31, 2007. Most recent company statistics boast a return on total assets of 25.9%; the figures for the year ended March 31, 2008, are expected to be released later this month.

While the government and analysts say subsidies distort the market, Malaysians are rankled by the subsidies extended to the hugely lucrative Independent Power Producers, many owned by companies linked to the country's politically connected and wealthiest big business families. For the electricity sector, Petronas has said it is raising its fuel price from 6.40 ringgit per mmBtu (million British thermal units) to 14.31 ringgit per mmBtu.

Still, that upward adjusted rate is way lower than the prevailing market rate for natural gas futures for July delivery trading on the NYMEX, which currently hover at between US$12-13 (over 40 ringgit). That's a subsidy of close to 30 ringgit per mmBtu and extended into the future will cost Petronas more than 160 billion ringgit in gas subsidies for all users until 2022

Since 1997, Petronas has handed out a staggering 30 billion ringgit in natural gas subsidies to IPPs, many through power purchase agreements government critics say are lopsided in favor of the power producers. These agreements, signed during prime minister Mahathir Mohamad's tenure, still have about seven years to run at terms skewed in favor of the IPPs.

The remaining contractual period is expected to be highly profitable for the IPPs since their capital investments by now are nearly fully amortized. The government says it will reduce natural gas subsidies for the electricity sector progressively, rising slowly until local rates reach market prices in 2022.

The government says it will save 13.7 billion ringgit as a result of the lower fuel subsidies. Of this, 7.5 billion ringgit will be used to subsidize the price of petrol, diesel and gas, including cash rebates for those with cars below 2,000 cubic centimeter engines. Most of the remainder will be spent on improving food security (4 billion ringgit) and cooking oil subsidies (1.5 billion ringgit).

It also announced a 30% windfall profits tax on the IPPs for profits exceeding a return of 9% of assets. But banking analysts cited in The Edge business weekly say the smaller IPPs are unlikely to pay much in extra taxes as their books show for various accounting reasons a return of barely above 9% on net assets. An industry source quoted in the weekly suggested that the IPPs may soon ask the government for an extension to their concession period in exchange for incurring the newly imposed windfall taxes.

Responding to the public outcry, the government also announced a raft of measures aimed at cutting government expenditure by 2 billion ringgit annually. These include cutting the entertainment allowances of cabinet ministers by 10%, limiting their paid annual vacations to Association of Southeast Asian Nations destinations and holding government seminars and workshops on government premises instead of private hotels.

Ordinary Malaysians, too, are expected to cut back on unnecessary spending, which will further dampen public and private spending and business sentiment. At issue will be whether the savings from lower subsidies will be used for the public good, including improving public transport and mitigating the impact of inflation on the poor, or whether it will be squandered away on new crony-based projects that in the end bring little benefit to the country.

Abdullah's credibility and longevity hangs precariously in the balance.

- Asia Times

Comments (8)Add Comment
...
written by cahaya, June 11, 2008 08:52:29
For those who are interested,
Summary of Petronas Group Results for the last three years is available at:
www.petronas.com.my/internet/c...FY2007.pdf

Like many others, I had *****ed and searched the Petronas website, but their financial reports are hidden from public view. Wonder why! Are they afraid the rakyat will see and ask questions about the huge profits?
Finally discovered the summary accounts using search engine tools.
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 5
...
written by cahaya, June 11, 2008 09:16:49
Anil Netto,
Thank you for your excellent analysis of recent developments!

Abdullah's credibility and longevity hangs precariously in the balance.

You probably meant the longevity of the BN government, which is known for its culture of deceit and incompetence.
The rakyat are looking forward to a new government: one that has Competency, Accountability and Transparency!
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 5
...
written by hairu 32, June 11, 2008 09:55:17
I have written an article about the profitability of Petronas and some other related matter. pls refer to my Blog. address is http://voiceofreasoning.********.com/
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0
...
written by ksmaniam, June 11, 2008 09:59:15
I have a proposal for everyone which i would like everyone including the government, ngo.s the ministers, umno and bn together with the think tanks, Dsai and of course our mentor RPK and the people who read MT.

WHAT PREPARED ARE WE ALL IF THE PETROL DIMINISHES TODAY.
WHAT IS EVERYBODY GOING TO DO ABOUT IT.

WHAT HAS THE GOVERMENT DONE TO PREPARE FOR THIS EVENTUALITY.
OTHER THAN TO TAX THE RAKYAAT, HAS ANYTHING BEEN DONE AND HOW SERIOUSLY HAS THE UNDERTAKING BEEN DONE.
THINK ABOUT THIS BEFORE SPENDING ALL THE MONEY OBTAINED FROM THE SALE OF PETROLEUM.
yes, my two cents worth.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 2
...
written by ksmaniam, June 11, 2008 10:01:17
sorry....in haste i used the wrong word.

it should be

"How" prepared are we if the petroleum from our country diminishes....
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0
...
written by mgeo, June 11, 2008 20:24:21
a. The writer failed to clarify that the "favourable terms" given by Maha Thief include Tenaga having to buy at higher-than-market rates.
b. 30 billion in subsidies already given, and the govt. is proud it will be able to save 13.7. Under the secret agreement, how much will still be given?
c. The whole public war between Maha Thief and his successor could be a show.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0
...
written by izkandar, June 13, 2008 04:17:49
The statement made by Anil that Petronas subsidises IPPs is incorrect. For your information, electricity tariff comprises of the following component as follows:

(a)Component to cover cost of fuel and in this case it is the gas for the power sector.

(b) Component to cover cost of the planting up of the assets (power plants) which runs into billion of ringgit forked out by IPPs including TNB

(c) Component to cover the maintenance of the plant during the operating period.

Note that the fuel component is considered a pass through component whereby IPP derives no benefits regardless of the fuel price.

This fuel component of the tariff and the eventual subsidy from Petronas is passed through to TNB who then passes it down to the end user via tariff adjustment.

If the fuel price reduces, the end users should benefit from it and if the fuel price increases, the end user end up paying a higher tariff.

This explains why effective 1 July when gas price will be increased by the government, the end users end up paying a higher electricity tariff.

Therefore, in essence , Petronas (and the Government ) subsidise the power sector (not TNB or IPPs ) to ensure low electricity tariff. To reiterate, the IPPs derive no commercial benefit from the gas pricing as set by Petronas and the Government.
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0
...
written by izkandar, June 13, 2008 04:18:34
Allow me again to explain this gas subsidy issue to IPPs in another angle.

It is a basic fact that large electricity power / energy cannot be stored. So every time the switch is turn on, the supply needs to match demand instantaneously. To construct and commission a power plant will require an average of 30 months. Forward planning, therefore, is required but sometimes (or often than not) there will be mismatch between supply and demand due to various reasons. This would then result in excess or shortage of capacity.

The cost (economic implication) of shortage of power to the country obviously far outweighs the scenario where there is excess power. Can you imagine the inconvenience if there’s brown outs and worst black outs. (Remember the early 90s?) To built the same plant now will cost double for each megawatt.

IPPs are ‘contract manufacturers” as subcontractors to TNB. The contract is to make available the generating capacity to TNB. IPPs need to recover capital cost and fixed cost (staff and minor maintenance) from TNB. This is called capacity payment which is like installment over say 25 years period.

For each unit generated, an IPP need input fuel (gas) at a cost of RM 6.40/ mmBtu, equivalent to output price of 5 sen/unit of electrical energy. If the fuel cost at market is say at Rm24/mmBTU, the electricity price will obviously be, say 20 sen/unit. So if the fuel cost goes up the electricity energy cost will also go higher correspondingly, thus the pass through (of cost to TNB and finally consumer )concept (as mentioned above).

Additionally, the more hours that generators run the more major maintenance will be needed to replace parts, again payable by installment by each unit generated.

On the other hand, fuel and major maintenance costs constitute the energy payment.

Therefore , to that say IPPs gain from the gas subsidy is completely false.

report abuse
disagree 0
agree 0

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
 
< Prev   Next >
 
Some Images Hosted With
Thank You ImageShack!
 BLOGGERS AGAINST ISA

Powered and Optimized for:
Malaysia Today by MT-TEAM