View Full Version : Politics: Talam Debt Acquisition
22nd November 2009, 01:44 PM
Anwar dispels party storm over Talam debt acquisition
Friday, 20 November 2009 Super Admin
(The Edge) - Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today played the peacemaker in a tiff between party leaders over the Selangor state government’s plan to acquire debts owed by property developer Talam Corporation Bhd to subsidiaries of several state agencies.
Anwar told reporters that PKR was satisfied with Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim's "initial explanation" on the transaction's core issues.
"In the interest of transparency and accountability, Khalid assured us that the transaction would remain open to public scrunity," Anwar told a press conference in parliament today.
In the same breath, the opposition leader also defended PKR secretary-general Datuk Salehuddin Hashim who reportedly questioned, in a "strongly-worded" email to PKR representatives, why Khalid had kept the party in the dark over the matter.
"At the outset, we respect and defend the right of any party leader to raise and question policy matters of any state government, including states governed by Pakatan Rakyat," Anwar said. malaysia-today. (http://malaysia-today.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28618:anwar-dispels-party-storm-over-talam-debt-acquisition-&catid=19:newscommentaries&Itemid=100131)
Selangor wants Talam to pay up RM391m in 3 months (http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/component/content/article/153298.html)
A closer look at Talam Corp Bhd (http://anilnetto.com/accountability/a-closer-look-at-talam-corp-bhd/)
Talam Corp Info. (http://talam.com.my/profile/corporate.htm)
KEuro’s move to pare Talam stake puzzling. (http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/component/content/article/148217.html)
22nd November 2009, 09:02 PM
TALAM & Selangor Government – Cleaning up previous government mess
22/11/2009 by drrafick
1. Past week or so, the Selangor government deals with its GLC hits the limelight. If it was not highlighted by PKR secretary-general Datuk Salehuddin Hashim in a strongly-worded” email to PKR representatives, the matter became a media interest as well as being used by BN Selangor to attack Khalid. The fact would show that this is a state matter and not a party matter. The state matter should have been addressed at the State Assembly.
2. For those who are not clear of the matter, I did some research on my own by talking to people in the right places and analyzing some materials in the public domain. The current situation arises because the State GLC has been used as a vehicle previously for the purposed of business. In most cases, the previous administration of the State gave away large tract of land to Talam Corp in exchange for some development projects. One such example is the University Selangor project. In most instances, Talam did not deliver its part of the bargain completely. Most of these deals are above board and the politicians that controls the GLC makes it happen in a magical way. It goes without saying that Chah Ah Chye and the past Selangor government have a hand in glove relationship.
3. The impact of the debt has led to the GLC not able to declare profits. Since it did not declare profits, it cannot pay divided to the State. In past, it is not important for the State to make money but it is important that key political figures and party continue to benefit from it. The total debt has ballooned to RM391 million and the GLC is not able to recover the money. They are stuck between politics, making profit and inability to collect debts.
4. The action of the State Government of centralizing the debt to the State 100% owned agency (MB Incorporated) would relieve the various GLC to recover its debt. It gives the companies the much needed liquidity to return to profitability. At the same time, the State Government can use the laws at their disposal to acquire the various assets belongs to Talam if Talam failed to settle the debt in the required time. To me, this is a smart move. It gives the State Government a chance to recover its debt in the fastest way and takes Chan Ah Chye (of Talam Corp) to task.
5. The problem with PKR secretary-general Datuk Salehuddin Hashim (DSH) is that he is not able to differentiate the differences between party matters and state matters. DSH questions on why there is no briefing to the State PKR top brass? In my opinion, there isn’t a need in the first place to consult or brief the PKR, the political party. This is a state matter and it should be addressed at the Exco and State Assembly level. All State Representative in the State must be given a briefing in the State Assembly for them to understand the deal. It is not a party matter. It sounds funny but the way DSH acted points that he has hidden agenda.
6. I am studying the development of this matter and on how the state plans to acquire properties and manage the various banks where the property is being charged. I have a specific interest here as I hope to get the state to assist in the same modus operandi in solving the abandoned housing projects in the State. The State can start with the Ukay Bistari project where I and several friends are reviving the projects. Even in Ukay Bistari project, Khir Toyo played a role which actually led to the abandonment of the project several years ago. drrafick (http://rights2write.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/talam-selangor-government-%E2%80%93-cleaning-up-previous-government-mess/)
24th November 2009, 12:18 PM
Talam debt: Audit needed on state agencies
A thorough independent audit is needed on the Selangor state agencies that are owed RM391 million by Talam Corp Bhd to find out how the debt arose and who is responsible for allowing it to linger. What wonders it would reveal!
The stage agencies concerned are subsidiaries of Selangor Development Corporation (PKNS), Kumpulan Darul Ehsan Bhd (KDEB), Permodalan Negeri Selangor Bhd (PNSB) and Yayasan Pendidikan Selangor.
State agencies usually come under the purview of top Selangor government leaders, and if these debts go back a decade as has been reported, then those responsible in the previous administrations have to be held accountable. anilnetto (http://anilnetto.com/accountability/talam-debt-thorough-audit-needed-on-state-agencies/)
5th March 2010, 12:58 PM
Selangor MB silences critics with RM50 million debt recovery
By Neville Spykerman
SHAH ALAM, March 5 — Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim proved his naysayers wrong by successfully collecting more than RM50 million in cash and assets from developer Talam Corp Bhd after acquiring its debts from state firms.
The Selangor mentri besar came under fire last November for getting the state to buy up RM392 million in debts which Talam owed to three state companies, all accumulated during Datuk Seri Dr Khir Toyo’s administration.
“We have so far collected more than RM50 million and we hope to collect the rest within the year,” Khalid told The Malaysian Insider last night.
His action was initially criticised by the Barisan Nasional (BN) opposition and also by former PKR secretary-general Datuk Salehuddin Hashim, who has since left the party. TheMalaysiaInsider.... (http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/55298-selangor-mb-silences-critics-with-rm50-million-debt-recovery)
10th July 2012, 06:24 PM
Talam for Dummies
11:40AM Jul 7, 2012
COMMENT “Confusing” probably describes most of our initial attempts to get to the bottom of what the deal was between Talam Corporation and Selangor.
With a little diligence, clear thinking and attention to detail however, most mysteries can be unravelled and articulated efficiently.
This article attempts to explain in easy to understand terms the background and context of this issue, how Selangor recovered the debt owed to it by Talam, and how this debt recovery differs from the bailouts we have seen at the federal level.
In the beginning
The story begins in the late eighties and early nineties, with an engineer and project manager who worked in Selangor state subsidiary PKNS - one Chan Ah Chye.
This man later goes on to form Talam Corporation, and before long - possibly due to close connections with the ruling elite in Selangor, then headed by BN menteri besar Muhammad Muhammad Taib - becomes a major player in the Selangor property and development scene.
http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/272/73c209722519ef5c638351f3dd0bd9ef.gif.pagespeed.ce. hp9uDTkD7W.gifOver time, an extremely large amount of state land is alienated to Talam, who basically gets it for free. A strong imagination is not required to speculate in whose pockets any resulting profit eventually ends up.
Talam’s modus operandi seems to be to pledge this land to the bank in exchange for huge loans, which they then use to finance their development and profit making projects. In essence, since they got the land free, they have successfully achieved money for nothing (it is uncertain as to whether “chicks for free” were involved).
The ‘wise’ businessmen of that era believed in the dictum of never using your own money when you can use someone else’s. This heavy lending continued to characterise Talam’s business approach, and their loans consistently kept getting bigger and bigger.
Of course, no student of recent economic trends is unfamiliar with the concept of a bursting bubble.
The financial collapse of the late nineties brings Talam’s debt-ridden house of cards crashing down. An overgearing of loans and inability to service them halts various half-completed projects, rendering them idle, half-built ruins.
Ihttp://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/305/250x248xd79b99c1f4f3903a1bf952c5a8bc9d06.JPG.pages peed.ic.uVUn6KZiDJ.jpgncredibly however, this does not prevent Talam and their political patrons from altering their basic modus operandi.
In 2001, under BN menteri besar Khir Toyo (right), three parcels of land are alienated by Selangor to Talam via their subsidiary Maxisegar Sdn Bhd, who undertakes to construct Unisel’s campus at an estimated cost of RM750 million.
It will probably come as no surprise that Talam failed to complete this project. By September 2006, the company had been classified as an affected company under Practice Note 17 (PN 17), indicating dire financial straits.
New sheriff in town
In 2008, when Khalid Ibrahim assumes the menteri besar’s post, he inherits a situation in which Talam owes the state and its subsidiaries (among other creditors), a great deal of money.
Urban legend has it that when Talam was called in to explain why they have never endeavoured to pay their debts, the sheepish reply given was, “No one ever asked us to.”
http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/495/280x189x1b7062f541749ad922d722e93241a000.jpg.pages peed.ic._ErEKjAgwQ.jpgThankfully for the citizens of Selangor, there was a new sheriff in town.
Corporate finance is not only an area of expertise for Khalid (left) - it is a passion. With great gusto, he set out to solve this problem, and recover that which was owed by Talam to the people of Selangor.
The problem was undoubtedly challenging, but after some work and careful strategising, a plan was set into motion.
The end goal was simple: to leverage the assets still held by Talam to repay the debt Talam owed to the Selangor and its state subsidiaries.
The technical nitty-gritty
Making this happen was a technically complicated process that required considerable financial acumen.
The summary is this: firstly, the debts that were owed by Talam to Selangor state subsidiaries were properly booked and accounted for - something that, very suspiciously, had not been done before. Once these debts were acknowledged by all parties, the debts were consolidated and transferred to one state subsidiary - Menteri Besar Incorporated (MBI), which was then responsible for collecting the debts from Talam in the form of land and cash.
The rest of this section explains how this was done. It is a boring and complex explanation, but I list it here for the record and for those interested.
Talam owed RM392 million in debt to three Selangor state subsidiaries: KHSB, PIYSB, and PNSB. After acknowledging and booking these debts, the next step was to have another state subsidiary, Selangor Industrial Corporation (SIC), purchase these debts from the other three companies.
A loan from CIMB Bank of RM 392 million was given to SIC to complete this purchase. In November 2009, the state exco and legislative assembly both approve a grant of RM392 million to MBI, who then use the funds to purchase the original consolidated debt from SIC. SIC then uses those funds to pay off their CIMB loan.
The end result is as simple as the transaction itself is complex - without any major or excessive transactional expenses, Talam now owes the same amount of money to just one state subsidiary, instead of the original three.
Restructuring and successful collection
It is important to note that at no point are funds transferred from taxpayer monies to Talam. Funds have instead only been transferred from one pocket of the state to another.
http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/349/262x173x306fbab3ae5049c0c6116957449bfd28.jpg.pages peed.ic.BPOyWSJRFz.jpgThis differs wildly from federal bailouts of corporations like Indah Water Konsortium, MAS, or the Putra/Star LRT, where taxpayer money was injected directly into companies that had probably lost untold amounts via mismanagement, corruption and plundering.
The transfers in the Talam debt restructuring allowed for a structure in which there is a clear acknowledgement and accounting for the RM392 million owed by Talam, and a single company for them to pay it to.
The story does not end there.
Another extremely important milestone in this tale is that MBI has in fact already succeeded in recovering all RM392 million in debt owed by Talam.
For those who would like to keep score, this recovery came in two forms.
RM340.88 million was recovered via acquisition of land and assets: 1,322 acres of land in Bukit Beruntung worth RM150.28 million, 2,264 acres of land in Bestari Jaya worth RM105.3 million, 400 acres of land in Ulu Yam and 60% equity in Ulu Yam Golf & Country Resort worth RM22.2 million, 134 acres of land in Danau Putra worth RM52.1 million and five office units in Menara Pandan worth RM11.1 million.
The remaining RM51.12 million was collected in cash: RM12 million from sales of land in Puncak Jalil, RM5 million in cash assignments from EON, RM7.68 million in payments by Unisel for earthworks, RM9.04 million from the sale of 25.94 acres of land in Bukit Beruntung, and RM17.4 million from sales of 218 acres of land in Bestari Jaya.
Go ahead, count it - it's all there.
Facts trump hype - again
How can we summarise this? For more than a decade under BN, one corporation owed the state hundreds of millions of ringgits.
Within a year or two of taking over, Khalid managed to collect on these debts, instantly increasing the amount of money available to spend on welfare programmes throughout Selangor.
Yes, it’s a scandal that Talam was allowed to get the free lunch it did under BN, and it’s a scandal it took this long for to create the change in government that succeeded in cleaning up the mess.
Ihttp://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/495/258x174x49efab94ed10a6a00819ccdddd961a2b.jpg.pages peed.ic.-IDQiMmsiS.jpgt would be insulting to suggest that this article is titled specifically in the hopes that Chua Tee Yong (left) would take the time to carefully peruse the facts within. Nevertheless, perhaps he may find the exercise beneficial in his longer term efforts to maintain what little credibility he has left.
Said credibility is shrinking at about the same rate at which he is reducing the amount of money claimed to be ‘misused’ by Selangor - from RM1 billion, to RM260 million, to RM42 million. Before long, he may have to measure in sen instead.
Perhaps Chua fancies himself a Rafizi Ramli. What he fails to understand however, is that Rafizi’s exposes are not just all about ‘glamorous’ press conferences and big numbers. Behind every expose is a ton of hard work and solid research.
Behind Chua appears only to be blind ambition that extends far beyond ability, and a shameful mainstream media that think that hype can overturn facts.
NATHANIEL TAN believes this world is full of people, he was born to love them all. He blogs at www.jelas.info (http://www.jelas.info/) and tweets @NatAsasi (http://twitter.com/natasasi). He is also a consultant for the Selangor state government.
11th July 2012, 07:59 PM
KES TALAM ADALAH SATU PROSES KUTIPAN HUTANG
Kes Talam merupakan satu proses bagaimana Kerajaan Selangor mengutip hutang sebanyak RM392 juta daripada syarikat Talam Corporation. Malangnya, kejayaan cuba untuk diremehkan dengan mempersoalkan kewibawaannya. Sesetengah pihak telah memberi persepsi seolah usaha ini telah dilakukan dengan tidak professional dan telah merugikan rakyat Selangor.
Saya ingin tegaskan bahawa pengutipan hutang ini adalah hasil usaha Menteri Besar Incorporated (MBI) yang Ahli Lembaga Pengarahnya adalah terdiri daripada pegawai kerajaan dan golongan professional termasuk Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri, Pegawai Kewangan Negeri dan saya sendiri selaku Pengerusi.
Proses pengutipan hutang ini melibatkan dua peringkat dimana peringkat pertama adalah “debt recognition” atau pengesahan hutang.
Peringkat pertama telahpun selesai dimana Dewan Selangor telah mengiktirafkan hutang tersebut dan MBI telah diberi tugas untuk mengutip hutang tersebut.
Dalam menjalankan tugas mengutip hutang, MBI telah membuat beberapa perjanjian untuk memastikan hutang diselesaikan dengan beberapa cara termasuk pembayaran tunai dan penyerahan harta kepada MBI.
Sebagai sebuah badan professional, MBI telah membuat beberapa usaha bagi memastikan kepentingan kerajaan negeri sentiasa diutamakan. Antara usaha
yang dilakukan adalah memastikan Talam menandatangani perjanjian dokumen jaminan nilai aset ( Underwriting assets document) yang diserahkan. Semua asset yang diserahkan oleh Talam hendaklah tidak kurang dari RM392 juta.
Ini bermakna walau apa pun aset yang diserahkan, rakyat negeri Selangor tidak akan mengalami kerugian kerana jaminan nilai aset melalui perjanjian tersebut.
Peringkat kedua pula adalah pelaksanaan perjanjian yang melibatkan proses yang agak rumit dan sukar difahami oleh mereka yang kurang arif. Kerajaan Negeri percaya pegawai yang terlibat telah melaksanakan tugas dengan baik kerana akhirnya kesemua hutang tersebut dapat dikutip semula. Pada masa yang sama, mereka ini telah memastikan setiap transaksi mempunyai dokumen lengkap dengan minit-minit yang direkodkan. Tiada ruang untuk mana-mana pihak mengambil komisyen atau imbuhan daripadanya.
Memandangkan masih ada lagi orang yang mahu memberi tohmahan kepada pegawai kerajaan ini maka MBI telah membuat keputusan untuk menjemput firma audit dan akauntan bertaraf antarabangsa untuk meneliti dan mengkaji proses pelaksanaan kutipan hutang sepenuhnya. Firma ini juga akan menyediakan satu laporan dan analisa secara professional. Usaha ini akan dikelolakan oleh bekas Akauntan Negara, Y Bhg Dato Mohd Salleh Mahmud.
Saya ingin tegaskan, usaha mengutip hutang bukanlah retorik politik. Bukan juga untuk meraih publisiti. Ianya adalah amanah dan tanggung jawab dalam menguruskan sumber kewangan negeri yang akhirnya sumber tersebut harus dipulangkan semula kepada rakyat.
TAN SRI ABDUL KHALID BIN IBRAHIM
DATO MENTERI BESAR SELANGOR
6th September 2012, 10:06 AM
KPMG auditors find S'gor-Talam deal above board (http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/208025)
2:42PM Sep 5, 2012
Independent auditors have found that the Selangor government had made “a sound commercial decision” in its debt recovery exercise involving Talam Corporation Bhd.
http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/504/210x278xd7ef149b3849d1f367fd4cfeab70d41f.jpg.pages peed.ic.cVB6lwvmql.jpg“It was purely a debt settlement arrangement. (Audit firm) KPMG is of the view that Selangor made a sound commercial decision under the circumstances... at that point in time,” states KPMG’s report as read out by Selangor Menteri Besar Abdul Khalid Ibrahim (left).
KPMG also found that, based on state records, the assets obtained from Talam “are sufficient for Menteri Besar Incorporated (MBI)... to recover Talam debts, with no debt waiver by MBI”.
Also present at the press conference today was Chan Siew Mei, executive director of KPMG’s advisory unit.
Chan said the review was conducted over a period of a month and that the scope was “strictly to check on transactions and supporting documents”.
“It was not to see if allegations (against the state) were true or not,” she said.
Asked if she had found instances where the value of land assets involved were lower than the debt it was to offset, she said: “The short answer is Yes.”
“But the details are answered in the (state prepared and KPMG-vetted) frequently asked questions (FAQ),” she said.
However, Abdul Khalid said that at no time was the state “shortchanged” as provisions were put in place to ensure that Talam would make up the difference if the land did not match the value of the debt.
‘FAQ to help MCA friends’
In the four-page FAQ, the question on overpriced assets was answered by saying that the audit found that the valuations “supported the gross consideration which was agreed upon by MBI”.
http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/496/330x500xcaec8d0e1985c063074bb0158ea10454.gif.pages peed.ic.BU3PmWneuF.png“Hence the records showed no situations of assets being overpriced,” it reads.
According to the MB, the FAQ was put together to assist the media and public, “and your MCA friends” to understand the issue better.
He added that the report will be made public and tabled, alongside a White Paper on the matter at the November sitting of the state assembly.
“(KPMG’s) conclusion demonstrates that the debt recovery was legal, ethical, done in good faith and has in no way compromised the interest of the state, its subsidiaries or the people of Selangor,” he said.
He said that if MCA, which has asserted that the Selangor government was involved in a RM1 billion fiasco, still needs assistance to understand, they can consult any of the state’s four appointed spokespersons.
They are Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua, Selayang MP William Leong, Kuala Selangor MP Dzulkefly Ahmad and the MB’s political secretary Faekah Husin.
“If they don’t like Pua’s face, they can get a nice explanation from Dzulkefly or a female one by Faekah, or from a friendly lawyer by the name of William Leong,” he quipped.
He added that the state will proceed with legal action if MCA continues to assert that it was involved in a scandal.
Comparison with Enron
In immediate response, MCA deputy minister Chua Tee Yong, who has been at the forefront of the attacks, said the audit result could be due to limited access to documents.
http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/x/www.malaysiakini.com/mk-cdn.mkini.net/511/330x220xb32045a3f8e84714851147cf63bea29f.jpg.pages peed.ic.EDy_6NlG1A.jpgHe also referred to the Enron Corporation scandal involving an American energy company where auditors failed to uncover billions of debts and failed projects hidden by executives through accounting loopholes.
"(An) audit report depends on the scope of the work. Enron and a lot of (other) cases show that (an) audit and its results are limited to the documents available," he said in a tweet.
The details of the report should only be discussed further when it is made available to the public, he said.
"The White Paper is still long outstanding," he added.
FAQ on Talam debt recovery exercise (http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/208051)
6th September 2012, 10:44 AM
FAQ on Talam debt recovery exercise (http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/208051)
4:45PM Sep 5, 2012
These are the frequently asked questions on the Talam debt recovery exercise prepared by the press secretariat of the Selangor Menteri Besar's Office.
Question: 1. Did the Selangor Government bail Talam Corporation out for RM1 billion?
Answer: This is not a bailout. The state government had merely recovered debts owed to it by Talam Corporation (Talam). We are unable to comment on how the RM1 billion is derived as the amount is neither in the records of the state nor in the agreements with Talam.
2. If it was not a bailout, what was the exercise conducted by the Selangor government with regard to the Talam debts?
The state government had carried out a debt settlement exercise. A debt settlement can be in the form of cash and/or assets. In this instance, assets were used as the mode for settlement. The exercise that was carried out was to recover assets from Talam through a settlement agreement for the debt owed.
3. What is the difference between a bailout and debt settlement/recovery?
Bailout constitutes acts of giving financial assistance to a failing business to save it from collapse. The provision of "financial assistance" is defined in Bursa Malaysia's requirement as:
a) Lending or advancing any money; or
b) Guaranteeing, indemnifying or providing collateral for a debt.
In this case, the State did not provide any of the above to Talam and hence this is not a bailout. Debt recovery is, literally, claiming debts from your debtor of what is rightfully yours.
In this case, the arrangement between Talam and the state government is a debt recovery situation where a group settlement agreement (GSA) was signed. The agreement allowed the state to "take" Talam's assets so that these assets can be sold for the state to recover its money.
4. When and how did Talam incur the debt?
The Talam debts - which amount to RM392 million - initially arose from dealings with state subsidiaries as below:
Joint Venture Agreements between Permodalan Negeri Selangor Bhd (PNSB) of RM28.3 million and Kumpulan Hartanah Sdn Bhd (KHSB) of RM115.1 million; and
A privatisation agreement for the construction of Universiti Industri Selangor (Unisel) campus between the state government and Talam in 2001 for RM248.7 million.
5. Did Selangor government recover all the debts owed by Talam?
Yes. All RM392 million has been recovered in the form of assets settlement.
6. How did the State government recover the debts?
The outstanding debt of RM392 million from Talam to the state was recognised by both parties through a group settlement agreement (GSA) between Talam and Menteri Besar Incorporated (MBI) dated March 12, 2010, and a supplemental agreement dated April 9, 2010.
These debts were to be settled through transfer of lands/properties from Talam to MBI. A total of 14 assets were transferred, consisting as below:
Nine plots of land and two properties amounting to RM671 million (with RM275 million in encumbrances);
Cash repayment by Talam of RM5 million;
Debt transfer of RM7.7 million; an
Equity transfer of RM4.2 million
7. Did the debt recovery exercise compromise the state government's interest at any time?
No, the exercise did not compromise the state government's interest as the exercise did not involve any cash. It was merely a debt settlement arrangement where Talam also undertakes that the state government will recover its RM392 million in full.
8. Was there any attempt by the state government to recover the debts from Talam before 2009?
Yes. The state government had entered into various settlement agreements in 2005, 2007 and 2008 to recover the debts from Talam. However, those settlements did not work out.
The debt recovery was successful after Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim crafted the present exercise, which involves a global settlement agreement.
9. Did the exercise benefit the state government?
Yes, the state benefitted from the exercise. Firstly, the GSA had put the state government in an advantageous position where MBI received payment.
Secondly, to the secured lenders when previously it was pooled together with other unsecured creditors of Talam. It then proceeded to recover all debts from Talam, in full, with no debt waiver by MBI.
10. Was there any irregularity during the transfer of the 14 assets stated above?
No. Irregularities were found during an audit of the transfer of the said assets. The assets were transferred by virtue of the Settlement and Supplementary agreements and the subsequent Sale & Purchase Agreements with the final buyers.
Monies will flow to the relevant banks (to settle the encumbrances) and the balance to MBI. This process is being monitored closely by MBI to ensure all the amount due is recovered in full.
11. There were accusations that some assets were overpriced, thus causing losses to the state. What has the audit revealed?
The audit revealed that various valuation reports have already been performed by the state - both by external valuers and the government Valuation Department - for internal purposes. Subsequently, these valuations were referred to for this settlement exercise.
Overall, these valuations supported the gross consideration, which was agreed upon by the MBI. Hence, the records showed no situation of assets being overpriced.
12. What happened to these assets after they were transferred to the state government/MBI?
These assets were sold to various parties. To date, 10 out of 12 settlement assets have been sold.
13. Were the assets eventually purchased by state government subsidiaries? If yes, which companies were involved? Did any of them suffer losses from any of the purchases?
Not all the settlement assets were purchased by the state subsidiaries. Two plots of land were actually purchased by third parties.
The subsidiaries that purchased the assets are:
Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor (PKNS) - RM16.9 million gross consideration;
PNSB - RM438.5 million gross consideration; and
KHSB - RM44.7 million gross consideration.
(Gross consideration refers to consideration before deduction of bank encumbrances).
No losses are anticipated from these purchases. Development plans have already been made for the lands purchased. With these plans, the subsidiaries are expected to make developers' profit in the future.
14. Could it have been better for the state government to sell the lands to third parties instead of state subsidiaries?
Since the prices of the lands are already locked in at the gross consideration prices as agreed in the settlement agreement, it does not matter who purchases the land. The state government/ MBI will not make any gain or suffer any loss from the sale of assets.
Since the state and its subsidiaries wish to develop the land themselves, these lands were sold to the said companies.
15. Was the entire process a good commercial decision made by the State Government? If yes, why?
Yes, it was a good commercial decision by the state government as the exercise had led MBI to recover the Talam Debts in full, with no debt waiver.
This FAQ was part of the press release issued by Menteri Besar Office.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.