Anwar and Shabery shake hands at the end of the debate. So what do you think? Who was the more convincing? Respond to the poll on the sidebar.
2151: Why don’t you give your ideas without talk of changing government, Dato Seri?
Anwar: If they accept our suggestion, we will support them. In Feb 2006, after an earlier price hike, there was 4.8 per cent inflation. Now, after the price hike, inflation has soared to nearly 8 per cent in a month. Venezuela and Iran may have low oil price and high inflation, but we now have high oil price and high inflation! Look at the countries around us – how we have lost out to them in competitiveness. I still believe Malaysia, with its resources, has the potential if it cleans up its act.
Shabery: Mahathir has been blamed for the IPPs, but Anwar was once singing the praises of Mahathir. He should have resigned back then. Why is he only talking about a 50-sen reduction now when the oil price was RM1.92 before the election and he promised to reduce it then? We will only burden the country with high subsidies and could end up in debt to international “money lenders”.
Petronas alone (not the group) gives 91 per cent of its profit to the government. What else is there to give? Petronas is strong because of the government of Umno and BN. We do not burden Petronas but allow it to reinvest. About this talk of abuse of power – we are not alone in raising prices; it’s a global problem.
Anwar: Among oil producers, our price is high. If we want our economy to be strong, if we continue in this direction, our economy will be severely undermined. That’s why I am committed to explaining to the people. I will not respond to Shabery’s personal attacks. I don’t have space on RTM after this. I give you my assurance that i will contest in a by-election in the shortest time.
Shabery: Anwar hasn’t changed much. Those who built Petronas – Razak, Mahathir, Abdullah – Anwar has opposed them. If we continue to ask more money from Petronas to subsidise the country, we could end up poorer and Petronas could end up being taken over. Our GDP growth is 6 per cent, much better than many others. The debate now shows how open the government has become.
2140: In a few years we might not have enough oil. What do we do then? Should we continue the subsidy, or are you going to have a sharp price rise then?
Anwar: Who gave the figure of oil depletion in a few years? That assumes there are no further oil discoveries. Some 30 years ago, our reserves were supposed to last until 2005. Petronas then went abroad to explore. I defend Petronas but I criticise the BN.
The mismanagement of the government, the leakages… It’s true, the IPPs were during my time, but look at the record. Ani Arope was opposed to the EPU and the Prime Minister’s Dept over the IPPs. That’s why he quit.
The IPPs have made billions but those on the losing side are Petronas and TNB. We could plug the leakages and cronyism and save a total of RM3 billion. Who’s idea is this of a sharp oil price rise? This is a IMF-World Bank prescription! It is slanderous to say that I bowed to IMF wishes back in 1997-98.
Petronas said there was a special dividend for the government of RM6 billion this year. Can’t we take RM1 billion of this to reduce the oil price? It is not an issue of Pakatan Rakyat. It is for the people. We are staring at economic recession and unemployment.
2132: Why do you focus on the price of oil and not talk about income tax or reducing inflation?
Shabery: We are not a major oil producer. We are just a minor producer. We are just a small net exporter. Only 26 per cent of Petronas profit is from domestic sources. Petronas has to use its profits to find oil abroad. We now have a world renown oil corporation. Don’t make Petronas too poor.
Anwar: Shabery, who compared Malaysia to Venezuela and Iran? We should look at Malaysia as an oil exporter. The sharp rise has caused economic deterioration. Why did the government break its pre-election promise not to raise oil prices? Who is saying anything about taking Petronas money? My argument is to look at the IPPs and wipe out corruption. Why don’t we manage our treasury better to ease the suffering of the people?
Shabery: This is a populist argument. We can accept it if our oil is isolated from the world or if our oil is the only one that is expensive in the world. The IPPs existed when Anwar was in government, and he defended their contracts back then. Anwar used the methods that the IMF favoured to try and resolve the 1997-98 crisis. It is easy to talk when you are outside. Even with their difficulties now, believe me, the people have enough to eat. Show me a country which gives cheap oil without high inflation.
2128: When you were Finance Minister you sent up a Tabung Warisan. What was the aim?
Anwar: The idea was to keep part of our earnings for the future, but that was not maintained. The sharp price now has led to spiralling inflation. It will have adverse effects. But each rise of US$1 in the price of oil actually results in RM360 million income for us. Right now, the sharp rise in inflation will lead to a deterioration in the economy.
2125: In 2006, when there was a price hike, the government said it would improve public transport. Now they are saying that they are going to use the substantial savings for the benefit of the people. Can we believe that?
Shabery: All the countries that have cheap oil – look at Venezuela and Iran, look at their high inflation rates. We can now overcome our food price crisis. Our rice is cheaper than Thailand. We don’t have to demonstrate on the road or hold indecent concerts.
2120: Your premise of a 50 sen reduction is because Malaysia is an oil producer. But your points about IPP had nothing to do with oil. Are you going to distribute what has been collected through the hard work of others so that you get a good name?
Anwar: IPPs are also involved with oil and gas. Petronas has made a huge profit; its profit ranks it among the top 10 oil companies. We will definitely ask Petronas to reinvest. But Petronas is the right of the people. Are we just going to look after the tycoons and the cronies or the people? The 50 sen reduction is just the first step. The extreme price hike has won no support. The only ones supporting it are the BN MPs..
2111: Would the government have to subsidise foreign oil companies in retail sales if there is a price subsidy as Petronas alone does not control the retail market?
Shabery: If subsidies are given out, it would benefit the rich and foreigners as well. Why don’t we give the money straight to the people who need it? Finland and Norway etc do not have subsidies and have shown good economic performance.
Anwar: If you want to compare with Norway, it has 10 times the per capita income of Malaysia. The petrol price is hurting the poor and marginalised groups and aggravating their suffering. It is our responsibility. Such a sharp rise is burdening the people. If Umno and the ruling coalition don’t realise this, then their future is bleak. What about infrastructure spending – isn’t that a form of subsidy for companies? But we call that “incentives”. On the other hand, aid for the people is called “subsidies”, which are given a negative connotation.
2107: Shabery responds that the government would have to incur a subsidy of RM50 billion if it maintained the price at RM1.92 and that would affect development. He said that global factors also influence the oil price. He recalled the first global crisis in 1973-74, which worsened inflation including in Malaysia. Petronas was formed back then, which wasn’t easy. The people supported Razak’s move. Anwar protested against Razak back then. And Anwar was now doing this again.
2102: Anwar kicks off with his opening statement. He insists that with proper economic management and eradication of corruption, an immediate cut in petrol price of 50 sen is possible. He speaks of the suffering felt by many, particularly the Malays and bumis in Sabah. He points out that TNB has to pay for 40 per cent excess capacity and how Petronas has made an excellent profit of RM100 billion – which could enable the government to raise RM3 billion for distribution to the people through a price reduction.
2100: The one-hour live debate gets underway at Balai Budaya. The moderator warns against raising irrelevant issues. Both speakers receive decent applause.
Share your comments on the debate over TV9, Astro Awani and Bernama TV from 9.00pm. This live write up is specially for those of you who don’t have access to these three stations and those abroad who would like to follow the debate. Please note this is not a verbatim transcript; it just covers the main points raised or emphasised and paraphrases much of what was said.
thanks, with your effort, I can enjoy the debate as if I am sitting in front of TV.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Which mean, Shabery is willing to take Anwar’s idea, in order to protect his/BN’s ruling position? They might have to pay big amount of ‘royalty’ for Anwar’s idea, huh?
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
2125: In 2006, when there was a price hike, the government said it would improve public transport. Now they are saying that they are going to use the substantial savings for the benefit of the people. Can we believe that?
Shabery: All the countries that have cheap oil – Look at Venezuela and Iran, look at their high inflation rates. We can now overcome our food price crisis. Our rice is cheaper than Thailand. We don’t have to demonstrate on the road or hold indecent concerts.
I thought this answer from the Minister of Information is a clear reflection of his inadequate sense of hearing and understanding.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The question of who wins who lose does not arise.
However, now we know exactly what Anwar will do if he takes over the gomen. As for Ahmad Sabery,being a Minister he cannot do much but got to defend the gomen whatever it takes. What upset me,is the personal attack embark by Sabery in the course of his arguement.
cheers.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It was so clear that Anwar was speaking like a PM, with substance, precise and professional. Shabery was no match at all, nothing new in his arguments and looked like someone very desparate grasping for straws as he could not rebut Anwar’s argument and had to resort to personal attacks.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Anwar! stop debating with kids. Orang tanya Utara dia jawab Selatan. Anyway it was pleasure to hear our future PM speak and indeed a relief to have identified that we actually have clowns in the August House.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My opinion is that Shaberry touches more on ‘historical’ happenings and to some extent made personal attacks on anwar which may be perceived as his inability to provide relavant answers to some of the questions.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Shabery completely avoided the transportation improvement topic. The IPP issue is also beaten around. You go to Port DIckson you can see another new IPP (Jimah Power) is being built. We only need 15 % excess power. We are already producing 40% extra and the government is allowing another new IPP to produce.
As net producer isn’t petronas earning more with the new petrol price. Or is it we are buying expensive have another long term sealed contract to sell cheap?
Toll charges also come under the same non reversable contact!
Why don’t Shabery compare with Thailand. Net impoter. Fuel price is high. What about food and essential items? Even the papaya on the road costs more then in Thailand. No Road Tax and toll.
May be government can set up another cabinet committee to sit on this issue.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Looks like there will be a cabinet reshuffle tomorrow as Shabery Chik lost the debate… hehehhe
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To me Shabery just got himself buried by Anwar…
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I managed to listen to the debate live online. I’m actually delighted that the debate which didn’t involve any racial comments. I’m happy with the outcome of the debate. I think we need to acknowledge that Shabery has the guts to debate with Anwar unlike other UMNO leader. So, I want to thank Shabery.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Shabery eventhough he is MP of Kemaman (Where PETRONAS have a big interest there (anyway, Kerteh is one of the kampung at Kemaman)), he spoke cluelessly about the oil&gas industry and PETRONAS data tabled by him were inaccurate at all.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Bravo Anuar,
Cool as ice – when personal attack.
Shabery – small boy still learning how to talk.
Shabery gang – The Tan Sri – shaky question like he have no confident – product of rusty mind.
Anwar gang – as confident as Anwar.
Winner – ANWAR IBRAHIM.
RAJRAMAN – piss of about Anwar because few times talking about bumiputra.So indian and chinese will dream like me as MALAYSIAN PUTRA IN MY DREAM.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hitting below the belt. That’s what Shabery did.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Agree. However you look at it we have to give credit to Shabery. At least he has the guts. Not hiding behind controlled media (and young handsome boy?) to make attacks. Shabery may have made a fool of himself (and UMNO) but he enabled history tonight.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This debate shows the government didn’t think carefully when reducing the oil subsidy. Didn’t he know that Malaysia has one of the highest oil retail price in the market compared to all oil producing nation. With the oil price up, inflation has risen. What is next, a possible raise in bank interest rate due to perceive inflation? What will happen to all the poor people suffering. The rich politician doesn’t understand the situation on the ground at all. I hope the government will do something about it, else all Malaysian will suffer.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Shaberry is not in the main stream, the A or N group, but with the R group. Maybe, he is prepare to be buried.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Shabery delving into the past to make cheap personal attacks on Anwar is unbecoming. He even goes back to 1974 Baling demo – how low can you go? Just keep to the issue, s…!
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thanks for the update. Unfortunately, I did not have the plug in for live ISP streaming.
Looks like Shabery doesn’t understand what are the ground rules of a debate except to attack Anwar on a personal basis. Being an information minister, i can safely conclude that the information coming from the BN will thus be shallow and childish.
Perhaps, Shabery should spend more time in Indonesia just by watching the 10 free to air national TV and the quality of the live debates, everyday covering a whole range of topics from politics to religion and most importantly, what matters most to the rakyat.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Basically Anwar is saying that if we don’t have enough cloth to make a shirt, we can cut some from the curtain, some from the bed sheet, etc, and we can get a shirt. That’s fighting spirit. Shabery is just throwing his hands up and saying there is nothing we can do, everyone is facing the same problem, talking is easy, blah, blah, blah! If Malaysia is to survive in this competitive global environment we need fighters like Anwar!
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Shabery should resign tomorrow. He’s not fit to be an information minister. Kalah teruklah. What a shame to Malaysia to have such historian minister. Stop talking about the past etc. People’s are suffering now because of the ignorance minister like you.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I watched the debate on TV and I have to say that Shabery is of no matched to Anwar. Anwar clearly won the debate hands down.
Why? Because while Anwar answered all questions precisely, factually, to the point and without staying away from the original questions, Shabery was beating about the bush, running in circles, talking stories, attacked Anwar personally, and running out of topic on most occasions.
It was obvious that while Anwar came to proved a point, Shabery came to shame, discredit and humiliate Anwar with below the belt attacked on Anwar personal character. Everything, but to answer the questions.
But then again, maybe he didn’t know how to answer them.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think Shabery did very well holding his own against Anwar although he did resort to personal attacks on several occasions referring to Anwar’s past as a firebrand youth leader as well as his time in the govt. But who can blame him when you’re up against a legendary orator!
Generally the debate went well and I wish it could have carried on longer. The only “blemish” was the idiotic panel member of Shabery who tried to show what a smarta** he was by asking a couple of stupid questions. (esp the 2nd one)
Hopefully we will see more of such debates in the near future.
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
cantek la anil,
thank you for the posting. i’m at work in manchester uk
tak boleh nak view the streaming telecast. nasib baik jumpa your reportage.
http://ceritarassa.blogspot.com/
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well, I’m eager to see what is tomorrow’s news about this.
“Shabery Resigns”?
As expected from Anwar, he was quick on his tongue and mind.
As expected from Shabery aka UMNO, he resorted to personal and below the waist attacks.
Anyway, the debate was way too short…haiz(backside and seat also haven warm yet)
Complain about this comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0