Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Be prepared for a new heaven and a new earth without seas


Be prepared for a new heaven and  a new earth without seas
I refer to Daily Express’s special report “When love to eat seafood far exceeds care” 18 March, 2018 and would like to add some views that are surprisingly omitted.  My views would be added as I go alone.
Before I go further, I would like to list out the highlights in that special report namely Mud crab- the favourite local seafood; High value aquaculture fish species; seventy-five per cent of wild fish stocks   are gone, going!; the greatest threat – overfishing; astonishing industrial fishing technology rule the oceans; huge trawling ships combing big areas of seas; when two-thirds of oceans is free of laws; and UN’s zero overfishing target by 2020 hasn’t happened.
Those items could be the topics discussed at the International Conference on Marine Science & Aquaculture held recently in Kota Kinabalu.
I am wondering so many missing very important disturbing issues which had been regularly raised in mass media namely environmental degradation in coastal areas, plastic trash/wastes in seas, pollution of human wastes, unsightly settlements in coastal land without waste disposal infrastructure, fish bombing and poisoning; illegal fishing intrusion etc.
The various issues or topics raised in the International Conference maybe deemed to be the big picture of our fish resources globally but can we take note of the Biblical truth as we are told in Revelation  21:1 (last book in Bible) as “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.”
Can we reflect on the first Biblical book as in Genesis 1 (first book in Bible) where all God’s creation was good and then created human being. In Genesis 1:26 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”
God in Genesis 2:19 said “19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.” So man was to take care of all creations of God.
Have  we failed God’s intention when most things in the wild had been depleted by mismanagement, wilful neglect and omission of care?
Is it too late with such depletion of seafood resources when we have been in criminal neglect for too long in many development although the conference speakers blamed the causes as listed in the special report?
The main source of fish stocks is the mangrove swamp frontier which has been dwindling over the recent decades with much decadence as observed even around our coastline in Sabah. Fishes are hatched and bred in mangrove swamp until they proceed to the sea for growth in the zone of coral reefs which are similarly depleted and bleached by rising temperature or what we call climate change.  Deforestation and pollution of the seashores do affect the quality of the mangrove swamp and the coral frontier for the extended breeding ground where the sea and ground water meet with the right PH of the water.  That is the main reason that the observation of seventy-five per cent of wild fish stocks   are gone, going!
If only we know what the favourite mud crabs consume in their environment likely very polluted, then we may avoid them sending the right message.
Aquaculture may sound very good as a solution to maintain fish/seafood supplies but it cannot be the natural substitute for wild fishes which taste much better. Aquaculture in confined breeding and growth habitat cannot be sustained in term of quality and quantity.  Some of those fishes could be fed with “waste” and chemicals resulting in contaminated food.  Nothing is best with the open sea unpolluted.
Do we have good chance to regulate over fishing using new tech and increasing sizes of trawlers?  Even Indonesia was bombing such trawlers found in the sea limit. Can science find a quick solution to curb fishing by trawlers?  The rainforests were depleted by the excessive use of the chain saws in the 1970s and now we have the fish trawlers to do similar expedited depletion of the precious fishes of all sizes.  Maybe we regulate the hours of operation of trawlers in the open sea like we operate office daily with a meter which can send a signal to the monitoring centre.
So the UN fails us again when we are told “UN’s zero overfishing target by 2020 hasn’t happened.”
We do not how the prices of seafood in the market places are fixed without any regulation.  The scenario of supply and demand maybe faulty as prices seem to be rising and some items have very excessive price tags.  When the price tags are very high, the profiteers would go for those items to expedite depletion until it is extinct.  There appears to be no limit to that.  The harvesters do not incur any costs of ‘cultivation’ for the fishes in the sea except spend some effort to bring in those abundant harvest without concern of its level of fishes in the seas. So how do we understand the selling price of such fishes in the market place getting more expensive by the weeks more so especially in bad weather condition?
Do we know how much we lost when deforestation had its toll in the late 1990s especially all the natural herbal value for our health and biodiversity in the forests?  The double whammies is seen when the alien monocrop oil palm replaces the natural rainforests when other valuable crops / fruit plants could also be grown side by side to sort of maintaining some diversity.  
Now do we also know how much treasure in the oceans are to be lost?  Our diet for health can be missing when known Omega 3 in fish naturally breed in the wild could be irreplaceable. 
Our wild life in the wilderness also dwindling.

Even around our homes in the open spaces, much biodiversity is lost to the very efficient hand carried grass cutting knives regularly.
 
Lets us spend some time in meditation on the Biblical verse “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.”
What would happen if that would come to pass possibly soon? Maybe we would have fishes in mega lakes ?
Maybe with 25% fish stock, this scenario is getting nearer and animals would emerge in abundant in new wilderness of land.  
Some of us maybe always talking of “sustainability” for some comfort to justify “rampaging” or ravaging without limit the earth which is definitely very much defaced and irreparable unless God does another massive miracle for His creation- new heaven and new earth.  Would most of us still be around?
Joshua Y C Kong 22/3/2018

Wednesday, March 14, 2018

Settle the financial terms of MA63 promptly



Settle the financial terms of MA63 promptly
According to Keesing’s Contemporary Archives Nov 2-9 1963 page 19716, Kuala Lumpur and London Talks on Malaysia – Agreement on Establishment of Federation by Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak, Sabah, it was recorded that “The financial questions previously in dispute between Singapore and Malaya were settled in the following manner: (1) 60 percent of the Federal revenues collected in Singapore would be paid to the Singapore Government and 40% percent to the Federal Government; (2) to assist development in the Borneo territories, Singapore would make available to the Federal Government a 15 year loan of 100,000,000 Malayan dollars, free of interest for the first five years and a 15 –year loan of 50,000,000 Malayan dollars at current market rates to the Federation (i.e. 150,000,000 Malayan dollars in all, or about  £17,500,000 ).”
I am wondering if such financial pledge was properly implemented since 1963 especially Singapore had “left” Malaysia in August 1965.  Also for Sabah case, it was 40% of Federal revenue for Sabah and Singapore was 60%.  Why such discrepancy?
The other pressing question is “ has Malaya fulfilled its pledge to Sabah since 1963?”.   Was it one of the reasons that Singapore “left” Malaysia over such pledges in August, 1965?
So now we have been arguing over the terms and conditions of Malaysia Agreement 63 (MA63) for some years recently.  It is no longer any doubt over that MA 63 had been breached in all sectors for Sabah and Sarawak.
It is very fresh in our mind that minister Nancy Shukri in 2015 pledged to resolve all the breaches but why are we still talking about MA63 heading to no where and no implementation even after 50 years ? Obviously, there has been no good governance since 1963 nationally.  The writing is on the wall.
It maybe some excitement over the latest threat by the Foreign Minister Datuk Anifah Aman to resign from his position and UMNO and his words are “Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman said he will leave Umno immediately if the Prime Minister fails to fulfil his promise to restore Sabah's rights as specified in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) that had been inadvertently taken away or eroded under successive Prime Ministers. "I will not even wait for a day to stay in Umno and I will resign from my ministerial post if the Prime Minister breaks his promise.” (DE 4/3/2018).

Despite several verbal promises to restore the rights of MA63 for Sabah and Sarawak by the PM, nothing appears any obvious reality.
What is really holding up such promises? Would any political party coming to power in Putrajaya resolve such promises promptly and adequately in financial terms ?
The rights of MA63 come with attachment of very substantial financial implications in all sectors. Isn’t it a great dilemma that such breaches to be restored would need massive financial settlement? How could Malaysia in its fiscal scenario come up with such massive financial deals which can accumulated to Trillions of Ringgit for Sabah and Sarawak?
Flimsy excuses had been in recent years that nothing is owed to Sabah and Sarawak for decades.
Would such financial records for various components be kept for the purposes of MA63 for decades?
There is always the easy way out for some leaders to stipulate that Federal Government had incurred much expenditure in various sectors for decades but such expenditures are irrelevant as there are incurred for collection of revenue.
Even for the Malaysia Plans 1 to 11, Sabah and Sarawak had been very much short changed into many billions of ringgit based on 13 states instead of 3 portions.  My book “Sabah Wealth – Images of woods power” (2005) does provide such short changed quantity till 2000 but not conclusive.
Another item also in much dispute is the oil and gas resources and the share due to the Borneon States where only 5% was the case.  Even 5% payment of royalties were not supported by details of the working for such payment according to ex State Secretary of Sabah. 5% payment of oil royalties is also dubious if Petroleum Development Act 1974 is challenged as illegal, null and void.
Various Federal taxes had been collected and remitted direct to the Federal coffer for portions of revenue derived from the Borneon states especially from Sabah. 
Even for GST collections in Sabah including those accounted for direct to KL, has Sabah received 40% of such revenue since 2015?
Certain rights of MA63 cannot be quantified. Such rights as freedom of religions and education/English language cannot be given a quantum in terms of financial value.
But certain items like in the MA63 such as 40% of Federal revenue in Sabah, Malaysia development plans (short changes) and autonomy would mean a  lot of financial needs to be implemented for some decades. Such amounts can be very substantial in the range of up to Trillions of Ringgit. Without adequate financial provision, autonomy would be difficult to be implemented.
Whether the Federal Government can afford to pay up past dues depend on its fiscal capabilities or the political will to do so is now sort of exposed by the recent statement by the Finance Ministry as “Malaysia will lose RM416.6bil in revenue if the Goods and Services Tax (GST), tolls, National Higher Education Fund Corp (PTPTN) loans and excise duty were abolished, said Ministry of Finance (MoF) Secretary-General, Tan Sri Dr Mohd Irwan Serigar Abdullah.” 
Such figures given do show us that annual fiscal budgets of around RM300 billions is very far from the real federal revenue.  It would appear that the amount short declared would be up to RM500 b annually.  Even the recent revenue of Petronas is to be queried.
So such long overdue substantial funds to come to Sabah and Sarawak should be held in a State sovereign fund to be maintained and managed transparently by a capable and trustworthy independent body for the purpose of good investment for the much neglected current generation and future generation to keep Malaysia intact.
I look forward to a quick settlement of the long overdue funds of MA63.  It is no longer in any period of negotiation and discussions which has been endless in recent years since 1969/1976.
Joshua Y C Kong 15/3/2018