from someone somewhere on Facebook ... (not me)
=============== QUOTE ===============
I have emotional and business interest in both Singapore and Malaysia.
And I would like to use my social media platform to clarify some facts
because some of my Malaysian relatives/friends think that Singapore is
taking advantage of Malaysia by buying 3 sen for Johor raw water (which
some Malaysia politician always like to use this as whipping tool to
stir up anti-Singapore sentiment) signed in 1961 and 1962 for 99 years.
It is a win-win deal and the two countries citizens should know why so
that we can stay united and work together.
For those who don't care, great, continue to give gratitude and drink
your clean water.
And here's why.
1. Singapore pays 3 sen for raw water which otherwise would have gone
from the river to the sea. Why only 3 sen? It is because Singapore bears
the full cost of treating this water, as well as building, operating and
maintaining the dam, pumps and pipelines including billion dollar in
building them initially. Johor bears nothing and all these assets belong
to Malaysia 100% after the agreement expires.
2. Singapore then sell the treated water to Malaysia at 50 sen. The real
cost of treating the water is RM2.40 per 1,000 gallons based on 2003
figure (this cost should goes up according to inflation). So Singapore
is in fact absorbing RM1.90 per 1,000 gallons in cost. And Malaysia buys
37 million gallons a day (mgd) of treated water.
3. The Malaysian government buys 37 mgd of water from Singapore when
under the Water Agreements, Singapore needed only to provide Johor with
17 mgd of treated water. So why is Malaysia buying more than double
their entitlement? The answer is simple: Malaysia government is making
easy money from this cosy arrangement. Having bought Singapore-treated
water at 50 sen per 1,000 gallons, the Malaysian government then sells
it to Johor citizens at RM3.95 per 1,000 gallons.
4. Under the Water Agreements, Malaysia should have asked for a price
revision in 1986 and 1987. But Malaysia chose not to do so. Then in
August 2000. Malaysia suddenly decided it wanted to raise the price of
current water. Even though Malaysia had lost its right to review.
Singapore was prepared to consider Malaysia's proposal as part of a
package of bilateral issues which included future water supply for
Singapore after 2061. Malaysia stood to gain a lot from the considerable
concessions Singapore was prepared to make.
5. The heart of the water issue is not how much Singapore pays for
water, but how Malaysia wants to revise the price of water. Singapore
government cannot let Malaysia government change the terms and
conditions of the 1961 and 1962 Water Agreements whenever they are
unhappy. Malaysia government cannot break their solemn word on a whim.
If Malaysia government can increase the price of water as and when they
liked, what is the value of other agreements countries have signed with
them? Where will it all end? Even China honour the 99 year lease
agreement of Hong Kong with the British (although it was called the
"Unfair Treaty" signed in 1898 after the Opium War with great
humiliation to the whole Chinese in China).
6. However, when Malaysia government could not get its way on a price
revision during the negotiations, it started accusing Singapore or
Singaporeans of being "unreasonable", "insincere", "legalistic".
"selfish". "profiteering" etc making no reference to the full picture of
buying the treated water cheap (with no capex investment) and resale it
at a much higher price. The Malaysian media spread so many untruths
about the water talks that the Singapore Government had no choice but to
release all the documents and correspondence between the leaders of the
two countries.
7. In addition, Singapore government is also working very hard to be
100% self reliance on water by 2060. We have crossed more than 70% mark.
Singaporeans and Malaysians should exercise independent thinking. We are
brothers and sisters by culture and heritage!
=============== UNQUOTE ===============
any comments?
--
The Inquirer
The most unbiased and independent participant on Usenet. I whack both
sides of any debate with my questions. If there is a 3rd, 4th, ... etc
side, I will also whack!