The recent fuel hike and subsequent measures taken by the Malaysian Government (e.g. urging Govt. staff in northern Malaysia to cycle to work) has met with more disapproval than support in recent days. We have the Federation of Malaysian Consumers Associations (FOMCA) president saying that the hike was “simply too much”, the Kuala Lumpur Lorry Operators Association secretary-general claiming that “…even the present diesel subsidy was not enough…” and even the president of the Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers chiming in with “…the recent hike in fuel price may have a significant negative impact on the manufacturing industry if there is a potential increase in electricity charges.”

But that’s not all. Malaysiakini is host to much more “disturbing” talk on the fuel hike. Try the “durian story” analogy which argues that there’s no reason to decrease fuel subsidies when Petronas - a highly profitable fuel company - is government-owned (or more accurately, citizen-owned). Try this reader’s call for more transparency and accountability by Petronas (or rather, the Government). If you want even more arguments against the fuel hike, look at the responses of MDP (arguing that the Govt.’s aim of using the extra funds for public transportation and etc. would turn up empty, yet again) and DAP (arguing that the move is “highly irresponsible and uncaring”).

Luckily, we do have positive statements from Malaysians. There are those that applaud the Government’s move, arguing that subsidies benefited the rich more than the poor in the first place (but still pushing for greater accountability of Petronas’ gains). Personally, I feel that Malaysian demand for petrol has been far too high in the first place - a clear symptom of the circumvention of basic economic principles. Subsidies have undeniably served their purpose, but oversubsidies have possibly cost Malaysian companies their international competitiveness.

It’s therefore a brave move to remove these competitive hindrances, now that they are less needed. Better to wean Malaysian firms from “petrol overdependence” now rather than later as no longer can we expect kindness in today’s harsh global economy. Of course, we do also have to hope that the financial gains from the fuel hike are used appropriately.

You would think that the revamping of Malaysian Airlines (MAS) would entail truly drastic measures, in line at least with the modern economic forces at play against conventional airlines. But the excerpts from the recent Q&A session chaired by MAS managing director Idris Jala proved otherwise.

We’re actually considering staff salary raises of 3% to 3.5% (when MAS returns to profitability), at a time when MAS’ recovery isn’t even assured. A morale booster maybe, but a temporary one. I like to think that a profitable MAS would be the only way anyone can recover any sort of confidence with one of our national assets.

Now, RM2 billion probably isn’t that much of an injection for the Government. After all, we only built KLCC with RM1.8 billion in 1998. But it would have been nice to see something other than this response, “I prefer not to dwell on the past but to focus on, from here on, how we can make the airline profitable…” when asked about the alleged mismanagement and abuse of privileges in MAS. It’s probably a correct response, but only because profitabiliy would be an impossible aim otherwise.

In any case, we have, at the very least, a turnaround plan for MAS in place. That’s an important first step. Hopefully, we’ll see MAS returning to the black, the same way Proton did after losses in the first and second quarters of the fiscal year of 2005.

Malaysia.Is-There has begun implementing aside-style (a.k.a. remaindered links) posts in order to ensure that relevant news that do not receive the “full post” treatment will at least be reported. This was done as there were just too much interesting news to blog about, and far too little time.

Note: The very first aside-style post is right below this one. All asides still have permalinks and can be commented on.

You can take it both ways. But whether it is this post on Malaysian Airlines (MAS) that is old news, or MAS - the airline - itself, the facts remain: MAS is on a downhill path. A net loss of RM367.7 million in the second quarter (Q2) of 2005 is not the problem. It merely underscores the pervasive problems MAS is suffering from.

But patriotism tends to blur the facts. Some have pointed to AirAsia as part of MAS’ woes, claiming that the low cost carrier does “…affect the business of the scheduled airlines unless the scheduled carrier is a fully international airline like Singapore Airlines.” Well, it would be difficult to deny that low cost carriers pose a significant challenge to large, bulky and lumbering airlines like MAS, but the real reasons for that must be made clear. AirAsia is just more cost and price-competitive. MAS just lacks proper management. Period.

Of course, we are given reason to hope. On Feb. 9, it was announced that Malaysia Airlines’ “comprehensive business turnaround plan” will be out to fry on Feb 27. Apparently, we’ll be looking at “…several elements to ensure the airline’s cashflow survival, profit turnaround and human resource development.”

Now, let’s hope that the word “turnaround” wasn’t being used lightly (or worse still, sarcastically). After all, there’s still another five days to the miracle announcement that will salvage our dreams for a self-sustaining national carrier. That’s more than enough time for hope to build up - enough hope to destroy whatever confidence that we have left for the future of one of our most favoured national assets.

Controversial or not, it seems more Malaysians are leaping at the opportunity to exercise their freedom (or rather, luxury) of choice in deciding their future child’s gender. And the nice thing about the whole process is that most methods seem remarkably safe and simple minimal surgery, minimal drugs, and most of all, minimal invasive biotechnological methods.

For the simpler (and less effective) approaches, all you need to do is to attend consultation with recognised fertility centres, and implement a few relatively simple instructions - from eating “…more alkaline-based food such as seafood…” to having “…intercourse during ovulation using a certain method.” But once we go to the extremely controversial (and expensive), yet effective (~99% accurate), pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) method or even the less controversial Micro-Sort and Intra-Uterus Insemination (IUI) techniques, then things start looking a bit cloudier as embryos and the like come into the picture.

In any case, certain religious groups are already complaining - Christians in particular. But I suppose this isn’t a surprise given that, on a worldwide scope, this “playing God” debate is nothing new. However, as long as the more controversial methods (e.g. PGD, IUI) do not become predominant in Malaysia, I doubt there’s really much to argue about.

I’ve been posting very slowly in recent days due to a few commitments elsewhere.

Yes, I understand that there is really no excuse for this, especially since I’m well aware that it is one of the no-nos of blogging. This is made worse by the fact that this is a really new blog.
So… all this means is that I’ll be revving up my posting rate very, very soon. Give me a few days.