Witchhunts and jealousies...

The new Pakatan state governments, especially Penang and Selangor, have often been accused of being obsessed with ‘witch hunt’ whenever they pointed out mismanagement by the previous governments.

I would like to use an analogy of moving into a house occupied by a previous occupant who left behind a mess of rubbish, or more seriously, a ransacked house. Before the new occupant can start living in the house, isn’t it necessary to clear the rubbish first and put things in their proper places?

In the case of financial records, to use a simple example of incomplete records, isn’t it necessary to find the opening balances to start off and then try and find the missing information from other sources to fit the puzzle? In the process, any dubious dealings are likely to be found and necessary to be highlighted.

I have just read The New Sunday Times, CBT (Cars. Bikes. Trucks not Criminal Breach of Trust)section, where Yamin Vong mentioned that independent auditors, Price Waterhouse, found 70 out of 97 AP holders were mere brokers and someone commented, ‘Not only they didn’t have showrooms or fixed assets, some of them didn’t even have the pretense of having documentation or bumiputera signatories.’

In the current Air Asia’s quest for LCCT in Labu, someone commented that some commentators are clearly opposing out of jealousy. If I were someone who missed out on being a crony, then I might be one of those guilty of it. But there are many people who are just interested in ensuring the right people are in charge and any major policies are transparent and accountable.

In the latest development, Tony Fernandes is using the reason of ensuring survival of the company and maintaining the employment of its staff. There is also the urgency in finding parking space for the new Airbus planes to be delivered soon. I don’t know about others, but I find this reflects poorly on its corporate planning. It is like having bought a Rolls Royce and realised the car porch is not big enough to park it.

If there is a requirement that only those with the necessary CEO experience in similar big companies are qualified to criticise, then most MPs do not have it, let alone ordinary laymen. But sometimes, someone else not directly involved may have a better perspective and can see certain aspects, which a biased person cannot. Just imagine, judges need to be criminals before they can judge criminals?