MARC lowers rating on Perwaja Steel's RM400m debt notes, outlook negative
Greece struggles on reform, lenders may face rising bill
F&N 1Q earnings fall on absence of Coca-Cola contribution, higher material costs
India court ruling to trigger telecoms industry shakeout
Ex-UBS trader refused bail as bank probe deepens
Maxbiz to submit application against Bursa’s proposed delisting plan
| Abdullah urged to see through Penang bridge talks |
| Written by Sharon Tan | |||
| Thursday, 12 March 2009 21:17 | |||
|
Liew Chin Tong (Bukit Bendera-DAP) said today that any increase of cost would put undue burden on the people in Penang who would end up paying toll for generations to come. He said Abdullah should end corporate welfare for the government-linked company. He also wondered about UEM's suggestion to spend RM20 million for "ceremony functions" and RM63.51 million for "HQ overhead ad support". The Economic Planning Unit (EPU) had ordered Zaidun-Leeng Sdn Bhd, a consultancy company, to review the bridge's construction cost last year and a report entitled Proposed Penang Second Bridge Crossing Independent Review: Costing Review was published. The report stated that RM4.3 billion was needed to build the second link, whereby RM2.2 billion would be allocated to China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC) and another RM2.1 billion would be apportioned to UEM which will acquire land and build the super structure. In November 2008, Jambatan Kedua Sdn Bhd chief executive officer Tan Sri Zaini Omar was reported as saying that the discussion with UEM on the building cost would be completed within a week. Subsequently, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng (Bagan-DAP) was told during a question-and-answer session in parliament early this month that the discussion would be completed sometime this month. Liew, who spoke in the parliament lobby, said while he welcomed the open tender system for the toll management, he was concerned that UEM would end up having a higher contract price. "The report commissioned by EPU, which was ready last July, was based on material costs which were at a record high and had regarded the RM4.3 billion quoted as fair price. "If that is fair price then UEM must accept the RM2.1 billion as the cost and should not be allowed to suggest a higher price," said Liew.
|
|||