Following our questions about Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin’s costly trip to Dubai for five days, his office has issued a statement of response in an attempt to clarify details of the trip.
We thank the Deputy Prime Minister for the response, as transparency and openness are very much welcomed in the bid to ensure accountability of public funds. However, a few questions remain unanswered.
What is the cost?
Firstly, the public has the right to know how much was the total cost borne by the Government, not only by the Ministry of Education and DPM’s Office, but also agencies such as TalentCorp, Education Malaysia, Tourism Malaysia and others for this trip, including for travel by “special aircraft,” lodging at the five-star Shangri-La Dubai and other costs incurred.
According to the latest documents revealed by the whistle-blower (see attachment), “all expenditure by the Deputy Prime Minister and his wife (including incidentals), as well as officers/staff of the Minister’s Office in the Ministry of Education” are to be paid for by the Ministry of Education, while the expenditure of other officers would be paid by the DPM’s office.
What do we gain?
Secondly, what is the return for Malaysia in terms of education development and trade? In terms of education, what is the purpose of establishing bilateral relations when most gulf countries performed even worse than Malaysia in the recent PISA (Programme for International Students Assessments) 2013 report?
While Malaysia ranked a lowly 52nd out of 65 countries, Middle-Eastern countries such as Jordan and Qatar ranked 61st and 63rd, while UAE managed to edge Malaysia out by ranking 48th. Should we not be establishing education ties with high-performing states such as Shanghai, Hong Kong, Finland or Canada instead?
Why 17 people?
Perhaps even more importantly, the DPM’s office did not explain why a 17-man delegation was required to attend this five-day trip. The delegation list was previously leaked last week and has not been refuted by the DPM’s office.
Not only is it extravagant to send 17 people, it is even more shocking to note than out of the 17, seven of them are security personnel (six bodyguards and one aide-de-camp), while the rest are made up of personal aides such as four special officers, two political secretaries, a press secretary and a private secretary.
If one of the main purposes of going to Dubai was to develop education ties and also attend an education exhibition, why are there no officials from the Ministry of Education?
Who are the private sponsors?
Lastly, the statement from the DPM’s office also mentioned that some of the events in Dubai, such as dinners and golf games, were sponsored by private companies. Two Malaysian construction companies were specifically mentioned, namely Ahmad Zaki Resources Bhd and Eversendai Corporation.
We therefore ask, which other private companies are sponsoring and what are their interests in Malaysia?
For the sake of accountability and transparency in the use of public funds as well as in the public interest, we hope these questions will be answered.