I dedicate this article to the Londoner’s and that Malay Professor a bright young 23 years old Abang Awam, whom together we had debated over this issue; and to that my first school teacher that I fond of Cikgu Salbiah the wife to that corrupted Datuk Jaafar Hamzah the former MP of Johor Bahru but, (whom had collected and recieved my original paperworks and the original CD, twisted me to getting for him hundreds of vessels from overseas, and tricked me to surrender the konowledge in the name of working for a joint-partnership..hmmm..) that we knew and hope they still kicking (even he had committed lies when I asked him for the return of the CD)…”aren’t you pity at me after using my ideas for your personal gain?..”.. and a “special thanks” for the coffee to Tan Sri Mahyudin Yassin who had given me a chance as a poor man to visit and present the working paper at his house in Kuala Lumpur, just before he hold the post in Ministry of Agriculture after the Affendi Nawawi’s.
Sadly, On behalf of my children who are sufferings due to losses of finance of their father, I record these questions that no need to be answered by those individuals. I will return to claim my trophy, professionally or through the jail and lock-ups..As you guys had always asked and blamed others not to knowing how to ask others – so now, I want to ask.
1. Why you promoted the 3F plans under Fisheries Budget while you don’t have the funds?
2. Why you asked people to spend on the agriculture business but you don’t commit?
3. Why you commit with others after you gain entry at international level through us?
4. Where is the cell phone that I bought for you and your daughter?
5. When are you going to pay back the thousands of dollars money that I spent at Mandarin Hotel dinner with your political friends?
6. Where is my original paper works and CD that I entrusted to you?
7. Where is the RM500 million that was announced in the budget?
8. Where is the fund that you supposed to give me after I spent my RM2.3 million to bring the vessels?
9. Where is the RM3.0 billion goes to after using my paperworks?
10. Why my paperworks were duplicated into 7 copies and traveled the world under different names?
11. Why my proposal were rejected and delayed but he the non-heritage non local’s were heard?
12. Why all documents of my vessels were kept and disappeared?
13. Why you opened the informations of your success even you don’t have the landings?
14. Why you participate in this business even though you don’t have the funds?by letting others to fish using your license?but not supportive to the local initiator?
15. Why you asked for RM60000 fee for the approved RM200000 loan?
16. Why you pulled back the loan even you aware we were constructing the project?
17. Why you asked for RM60 million even you aware that we are to build the port for you?
18. Why no one visited me when the first vessels from China arrive berthing at the first port of call?
19. Why you changed the department without the portfolio?and now disappeared?
20. Why you give up all your business status and disappeared now after that RM3.0 billion issue?
21. Why you revamp the bank and changed their name and status after the issue?
22. Why you terminate my banker friend?
23. Why my banker friend showed my paperwork was binded included in your paperwork?
24. Why you use my paperwork for your thesis in MBA program?
25. Why you use the people history to gain your reputations?
26. Why you open your wallet in front of me and full of cash even I can guess your salary is not that much?
27. Why you gain business and never pay the commission for 7 years even you know it started from me?
28. Why you give so much fund to the rich and they utilized at different field without your concern?
29. Why you expect us to show you our operations but you deny our participation with you?
30. Why the 5 vessels full load of tuna were returned back to its port of origin and reported to me?
31. Why you signed the purchase of my friends factory overseas for usd 2 dollars but you never paid?
32. Why that usd 2 dollars turned into multi million ringgit but the money never reach to my friend?
33. Why my friends vessels were burnt at the border?
34. Why my friends vessels captured by you but never released to them even they want to pay compound?
35. Why you allow the Malaysian waters controlled by others?
36. Where is the RM40 million survey budgets goes to?
37. Why you got the Datukship at the cost of other people you betrayed?
38. Why you promoted the project and ask for the gift but destroy our plight when we need assistance?
39. Why you do business which are supposed to be done by the fisherman?
40. Why you give me that man’s copy of IC to open account under his name?
41. Why you take my paperwork and demand for RM20 million for the approval of the loan?
42. Why you leave this heritage business to the non-heritage people?
43. Why you betray me?
44. Why you said and touched the issues of that my late father were non influential with no social status, and destroyed my work for 2 years after you requested us to expand the size of the projects up to USD450 million when we only asked for USD100000 at initial stage, after we spend money and time, after I sold all properties and loss RM2.3 million to fulfill your request, and you dare saying that in your public office, at the bank?
I am your father. I am different from your friends father. When I changed my direction and disappear, don’t be amused or worried. But remember, this is your father, YOUR father who have been cheated. Your father who had waited for 2 years to leave this place. I will go, and I will write.
My son, you are the eldest. This is the ATM’s card and the passport that you need. We have to separate here.
My son, take care of your younger siblings 6 and 3. You go to school, for your future.
My son you had witnessed we had slept on the newspaper covered floors in cold after I lost the house for our shelter.
My son, You were 9 and you remembered that together we drive our vessels into the port of Endau LKIM together, you remember, you the witness, you will tell this struggle of your father, you are the only one who knows that I don’t lie.
My son, I will come back to take you out from here.
Updates | This is Google’s cache of https://fast.bnm.gov.my/fastweb/public/PublicInfoServlet.do?chkBox=2008072300023&mode=DISPLAY&info=NEWS&screenId=PB010400. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 13 Aug 2008 11:54:40 GMT
Links | MITP
MARC has revised its rating outlook on Malaysian International <b style=”color:black;background-color:#ffff66″>Tuna</b> Port Sdn Bhd’s (MITP) Bai’ Bithaman Ajil Islamic Securities (BAIS) facility of up to RM240.0 million to developing from stable. Concurrently, MARC has affirmed its rating of A+ID on MITP’s BAIS. The outlook revision follows an estimated six-month delay in the completion of major construction works at the <b style=”color:black;background-color:#ffff66″>tuna</b> port following a stop-work order issued by the Department of Environment (DOE) which has yet to be lifted. This negative development has resulted in cost overruns in construction. Consequently, MARC believes that MITP will be heavily reliant on income and cash flow from MITP’s trading and processing operating subsidiaries to meet profit payments on the BAIS. Failure on the part of these subsidiaries to achieve projected income could adversely affect MITP’s debt servicing capacity. The amortization of the BAIS which starts only in 2012 will, nonetheless, afford MITP some flexibility and room to address its current construction challenges. Additionally, MITP’s close ties to the government, which remain unchanged since the initial rating, provides some assurance of financial assistance if and when required. Notwithstanding, if the stop work order persists and contractors are unable to proceed on target under the revised construction schedule, downward rating movement could result in the absence of other offsetting positive development on the project.
The affirmed A+ID rating continues to reflect strong perceived government support for the <b style=”color:black;background-color:#ffff66″>tuna</b> port privatisation project on the basis of a letter of support issued by the Ministry of Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry (MOA) to back the rated obligations and the 40% shareholding in MITP held by government agency, Lembaga Kemajuan Ikan <b style=”color:black;background-color:#a0ffff”>Malaysia</b> (Fisheries Development Authority of <b style=”color:black;background-color:#a0ffff”>Malaysia</b> or LKIM). LKIM possesses step-in rights that enable the former to assume the operations of the port in the event of a default under the concession by MITP. To a lesser extent, the rating also reflects the fair prospects for the <b style=”color:black;background-color:#ffff66″>tuna</b> fishing in the region.
The port is currently under its final phase of construction. LKIM had earlier granted an extension of time from the original scheduled completion date of 17 September 2008 to 31 May 2009. Construction had only commenced in June 2007 following delay in obtaining approval for the early commencement of the project from local authorities. However, following the stop-work order issued by the DOE, construction works have been suspended since September 2007, resulting in estimated cost overruns of RM5 million, which will be wholly borne by MITP. Any significant cost overruns are likely to necessitate additional funding from shareholders, Bindforce Sdn Bhd (Bindforce) and LKIM. As at end-May 2008, about 18.5% of construction had been completed, against the scheduled construction progress of 40%. MARC is satisfied that the contractor for the dredging works, See Song & Sons Sdn Bhd, the turnkey contract and security arrangements do not expose MITP to major additional risks. Full commercial operation remains scheduled by June 2010.
Once MITP is fully operational, it will be competing against more established fishery ports in the region for a share of discretionary vessel landings. As MITP will only be able to establish a predictable vessel landing profile with the passage of time, there is a risk that actual revenue and cash flow will be lower than projected under the base case financial model. Additionally, MITP’s highly geared financial structure provides limited downside protection for adverse conditions.
MARC also believes that the current European Union ban on processed seafood on <b style=”color:black;background-color:#a0ffff”>Malaysia</b> will pose additional challenges to MITP if it is not lifted before the <b style=”color:black;background-color:#ffff66″>tuna</b> port moves fully into commercial operation.
MITP was incorporated in 2004 as a 60:40 joint venture between Bindforce and LKIM to undertake the privatization of the <b style=”color:black;background-color:#ffff66″>tuna</b> port at Batu Maung, Pulau Pinang. The port is to be developed into a fully integrated fisheries port, using the proceeds of the BAIS to finance the third phase of construction works at the port.
MALAYSIAN INTERNATIONAL TUNA PORT SDN BHD
| Organisation Name: |
MALAYSIAN RATING CORPORATION |
| News Type: |
RATING ANNOUNCEMENT |
| Reference Site: |
None |
| Embargo Date: |
23/07/2008 |
| Embargo Time: |
03:00 PM |
| Expiry Date: |
13/08/2008 |
| Priority: |
Medium |
| Summary: |
MARC REVISES OUTLOOK ON ITS A+ID RATING OF MALAYSIAN INTERNATIONAL TUNA PORT SDN BHD’S BAI’ BITHAMAN AJIL ISLAMIC SECURITIES FACILITY TO DEVELOPING FROM STABLE; AFFIRMS RATING |
| Attachments: |
No attachment available. |
| Disclaimer: |
Members shall strictly adhere to the Rules of FAST 2005 at all times when using FAST. Bank Negara Malaysia shall not be liable in contract, tort or otherwise for any direct, indirect or consequential loss or damage sustained by any members or others due to inaccurarcy or error of data / information disseminated by members via FAST. |
Older | Report
17-05-2007: MARC assigns long term rating of A+ID to MITP’s proposed Islamic securities of up to RM240m
Email us your feedback at fd@bizedge.com
MARC statement on May 17
MARC has assigned a long-term debt rating of A+ID to Malaysian International Tuna Port Sdn Bhd’s (MITP)’s Bai’ Bithaman Ajil Islamic Securities (BAIS) facility of up to RM240 million.
The A+ID rating incorporates a strong reliance on government support for the highly visible tuna port privatisation project based on a Letter of Support issued by the Ministry of Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry (MOA) to back the rated obligations.
The Letter of Support essentially states that the Government of Malaysia (GOM) through a statutory body, Lembaga Kemajuan Ikan Malaysia (Fisheries Development Authority of Malaysia or LKIM), will ensure that MITP is in the position to meet its obligations under the BAIS facility.
LKIM has a 40% ownership interest in MITP, and possesses step-in rights that enable the former to assume the operations of the port in the event of a default under the concession by MITP.
MARC’s assessment of the strength of government support considers the importance of the project, the favourable prospects of the regional tuna fishing industry, the perceived intent of both MOA and LKIM, and finally, the financial stature of the supporter.
MITP’s close ties to the government are expected to remain unaltered in the medium-term.
The rating also reflects the following risks:
The construction programme is currently in its final and most significant phase, with a remaining construction period of two years. Although MITP has opted for a turnkey contract providing liquidated damages to minimise the risk of cost overruns, MARC is concerned that the unrated contractor has a limited and uncertain capacity to assume most of the project’s construction risk;
The project carries a slight risk that additional cash might be needed to fund changes in the scope of construction in the event of a necessary variation. If additional funds are required, both shareholders, Bindforce Sdn Bhd (Bindforce) and LKIM may have to procure the necessary cash;
MITP will be competing against more established regional fishery ports for a share of discretionary vessel landings. There are already four established tuna ports in the region, namely, Bali Port in Indonesia, Phuket Port in Thailand, and Trincomalee Port and Galle Port in Sri Lanka. Similar infrastructure developments in the region may yield added competition going forward. A highly competitive environment would limit MITP’s ability to raise port charges;
MITP will only be able to establish a predictable vessel landing profile with the passage of time. Vessel landings are influenced by a number of factors including the economics of tuna fishing, which of late, has been affected by fuel price; the sustainability of fishery resources; and the implementation of measures to prevent overfishing by national fisheries regulators and regional fisheries organisations such as limits on fishing capacity (vessel numbers), cuts in take of overfished tuna stocks and area/time closures;
This is MITP’s, and key project participant, Bindforce’s, initial operation of a project of this nature; There is considerable uncertainty as to whether assumed growth rates in key revenue and cash flow line items will be achieved given the short operating history of the port. Diesel trading, the largest revenue component in the base case financial projections, is susceptible to developments in diesel supply arrangements, and pricing (in respect of which there is an inherent regulatory element). Significantly lower revenue numbers would have an impact on the robustness of debt service coverages; and
MITP’s highly geared financial structure constrains the company’s ability to absorb any unexpected cash flow development.
MITP was incorporated in 2004 to undertake the privatisation of the tuna port at Batu Maung, Pulau Pinang. It is a joint venture company Bindforce (60% interest) and LKIM (40% interest). The port is to be developed into a fully integrated fisheries port specializing in tuna by the year 2008. MITP is using the proceeds of the BAIS to finance the third phase of construction works at the port.
X
Updates| Today
Philippines bans tuna fishing and tuna trade
Updated: 2008-09-03 11:30:11
THE PHILIPPINES – The Department of Agriculture (DA) has issued a Fishery Administrative Order (FAO) prohibiting the trade of small tuna effective this month in an aim to conserve its tuna stocks.
Raising fish production anchored on the principle of sustainable development has been pursued by the Arroyo government through, among others, the establishment of mariculture parks and fish sanctuaries.
In pursuit of the President’s SONA thrusts, the government has thus far put up 34 mariculture parks and 134 fish sanctuaries. One of these mariculture parks is the sprawling one in Tawi-Tawi in Sibutu East and in North Lagoon, Sitangkal in fulfillment of Mrs. Arroyo’s promise to the people of that province in her 2007 SONA.
DA Secretary Arthur Yap said the new directive, which will take effect this month (September), will make it unlawful for any person, association, cooperative, partnership or corporation to operate tuna purse seine nets with mesh sizes smaller than 3.5 inches or 8.89 centimeters at the bag or bunt portion in catching tuna.
“Small tuna” refer to young tuna that weigh less than 500 grams apiece, and include yellow fin tuna, big eye tuna, and skipjack tuna.
Under Fisheries Administrative Order 226, it will also be unlawful to trade small tuna caught beyond the by catch ceiling of 10%.
“Tuna is one of the top marine export products of the Philippines and the tuna-fishery resources have been exploited by purse-seine nets, which are observed to catch significant number of small tunas,” said Yap in FAO 226.
Yap issued FAO 226 upon the recommendation of DA Undersecretary Jesus Emmanuel Paras and Director Malcolm Sarmiento of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR).
In keeping with the President’s SONA commitments, the DA has also been carrying out other measures to conserve the country’s fish resources for the use of future generations.
These ecology-friendly initiatives include the ongoing fish tagging by the Philippines and seven more Asian countries of five commercially- important fish species like galunggong and hasa-hasa in the South China Sea and Andaman Seas, under a three-year collaborative research on the migration patterns of small pelagic fishes in these waters.
Sarmiento said the Philippines is undertaking this tagging project for mackerel and round scads species in partnership with Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia (Peninsula, Sabah and Sarawak), Vietnam and Myanmar.
This three-year research project is an offshoot of a regional study of the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Council (SEAFDEC)-entitled ‘Information Collection for Sustainable Pelagic Fisheries in the South China Sea’-to determine the relationship of small pelagic stocks in Southeast Asian countries, including their biology and population.” SEAFDEC, whose aquaculture department is based in Iloilo and is headed by Dr. Joebert Toledo, has been, according to Sarmiento, “an active partner in the development of the country’s fisheries resource towards sustainability. Together with 10 other SEAFDEC member-countries, the Philippines has been seriously promoting the adoption of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries in Southeast Asia.”
He said that SEAFDEC is an intergovernmental organization tasked to promote sustainable fisheries development in Southeast Asia with eleven member-countries, namely, the Philippines, Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Japan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.
The tagging of fish involves the insertion of special number-coded yellow tags at the base of the dorsal fins of individual fishes. The fishes are released back into the sea and their tags will hopefully be returned to the nearest fishery agency by the fishermen who catch them.
This project is designed to let researchers determine the migratory path of these species, which, in turn, will eventually lead to the development of a regional management plan for the sustainability of small pelagic fisheries in the region, he added.
In issuing the FAO, Yap noted that the harvest of small tuna has caused alarm and “grave concern± because it affects the replenishment of tuna stocks as significant numbers are caught before reaching maturity.
He said that the commercial fisheries sector in the Philippines is now showing the strains of reduced catch as purse-seine nets contribute to the harvest of small tuna.
Sarmiento noted that FAO 226 was issued in compliance with the conservation measures for juvenile tuna–particularly bigeye and yellow fin- adopted by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, of which the Philippines is a member-country.
Violators of the new fishing and trading rules will be fined P2,000 to P20,000, or face imprisonment of six months to two years, or both penalties, depending on the court’s discretion.
The DA will also cancel the licenses or permits of fishing companies found guilty of violating FAO 226 provisions.
Under FAO 226, operators will be given a grace period of three years from the effectivity of the order to change or replace their nets gradually.
“However, the compliance of the nets to the legal mesh size should start in the first year of the grace period where 10% of the total number of purse-seine catchers should phase out the illegal mesh size; on the second year it will be 20%, and on the third year will be 70%,” the order stated.
Tuna purse seine refers to a type of fishing gear that surrounds a school of tuna fish attracted by payao lights or from free school or drifting logs using a rectangular net with floats at the upper portion and purse rings at the lower section, where the purse rope or cable passes through to close the net bottom during fishing operations.
The net is either hauled manually or through a mechanical or hydraulic net hauler or power block.
Next Selected | Article
Posted: Thu, Oct 25 2007. 12:09 AM IST
‘Tuna fishing is a different ball game’
Marine consultant George L. Skoutarides says freshness decides the price of the catch; calls for improving Andamans, Vizag airports so it can be flown to markets
Ajayan
Kochi: The Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA), the government trade promotion body, has been focusing on promotion of the tuna fish industry for about two years now. From $15.68 million (Rs62 crore) in 2005-06, tuna exports almost doubled to $30 million last year.
The trade promotion body has recently appointed George L. Skoutarides of Australia as a consultant to tap this marine wealth, which needs special skill for fishing, handling and preservation. In an exclusive interview with Mint, Skoutarides talks about tuna fishing and the steps that need to be taken to ensure profitability. Edited excerpts:
How long have you been in fishing activities?
I have been into commercial fishing for more than 45 years now. I started off as a vessel owner and operator off the New South Wales (NSW) coast in Australia where I was chairman of the Bermagui Fishermen’s Cooperative Ltd, a small venture with 40-odd boats. In 1990 I first began helping other countries, starting off with developing tuna fishing in Fiji. I then moved over to Papua New Guinea and later to South Africa, Yemen, Japan and Indonesia. The objective has all along been improving the profitability of tuna fishing.
Tell us about your initiatives in India.
It is hardly a month since I have come to India as the consultant for developing tuna fishing. My role begins from the grass-roots level—that is from the fishermen to the markets such as Japan and the European Union countries. I have been visiting places such as Visakhapatnam, the Andamans and now Kochi and meeting fishermen and boat owners. I have also inspected some of the boats that have been converted for tuna fishing with cold storage system and found that they are of international quality, especially the ones at Visakhapatnam. Some of them, however, need fine-tuning, like the one I recently inspected in Kochi. I will soon start a training programme for fishermen.
How different is the fishing methodology in India?
Tuna fishing is a different ball game. It needs a lot of expertise to make tuna fishing profitable—right from catching to killing and preserving it. A minor fault in any of these could mean a waste of time, energy and money.
High potential: George L. Skoutarides plans to train Indian fishermen.
Tuna fishing is generally long-line fishing, where the boat goes deep into the sea and long lines, running for kilometres are left deep down. Once the tuna is caught, it has to be struck on the head at a particular point to numb it. Its fins are removed, the brain gutted out and a spike introduced through the spinal cord. There are problems with spiking, which damages the flesh around the backbone. The fluid from such damaged meat affects the quality of the flesh around it. The blood-drained tuna is then immediately chilled so that its freshness is not lost. For this, we need a cold chain on every boat. Once brought on shore, it has to be immediately ice-packed and transported to the markets.
Can we improve the quality of Indian tuna?
The tuna is graded, based on its colour, fat content and freshness. The killing methodology as well as the handling and the cold storage determine the quality of the fish and profitability of the business. Japan is the market for the high-quality fresh tuna and the price fetched for such a variety can be $15-18 a kg.
Why do you prefer the long line?
There is one method of using Persian net to catch tuna. Though it is very efficient and ensures a good catch, this method may take away a whole school of tuna and with it even the broodstock. In long-line fishing, where hooks are attached to the lines, only big fish are caught and it is the most sustainable method.
Finally, what promise does India hold for tuna?
The waters along the Andaman and Nicobar coast hold vast potential. In addition, the east coast and the southern tip of the Indian coast, especially the Nagercoil belt, where tuna fishing is now on, hold great promise. Studies have shown that the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) around the Andaman and Nicobar Islands is a major resource for a variety of tuna. Since freshness is what decides the price for tuna, the catch should be immediately airlifted to their markets.
Is there any problem area that India must look into?
We need to address the problems of logistics. The airport at Port Blair in the Andamans or the one at Visakhapatnam should be upgraded to have cargo flights so that the tuna can be immediately transported. Another major issue is that foreign vessels have been operating in Indian waters. These vessels carry the catch to Phuket in Malaysia, download it there and then airlift to Japan. Once India gets into tuna fishing in a big way, only vessels with Indian flags should operate. Once vessels are employed for tuna fishing, India can earn a place in global tuna trade.
Republic of Malaysia | Local Campaigns Resources 