13.07.2015 Views

PRIVATIZATION Privatization in Malaysia, Regulation, rent-seeking and policy failure

PRIVATIZATION Privatization in Malaysia, Regulation, rent-seeking and policy failure

PRIVATIZATION Privatization in Malaysia, Regulation, rent-seeking and policy failure

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Malaysia</strong>’s national sewerage system 99RM84 million per annum 29 for the f<strong>in</strong>ancial years 1999–2001. On 23 June2000, the MoF completed its purchase of IWK for RM192.54 million cash.Based on his 32 per cent stake <strong>in</strong> IWK, Ishak would have received RM61.6million (i.e. a loss of RM80.9 million).Ex post <strong>failure</strong>Tariff revisionsThe downward tariff revisions <strong>and</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>ued non-payment of seweragecharges underl<strong>in</strong>es the government’s ex post political <strong>failure</strong> to enforcepayment. There were three tariff reviews (November 1996, April–June 1998<strong>and</strong> September 1999), followed by revisions (January 1997, July 1998 <strong>and</strong>October 1999) <strong>and</strong> discounts (1997, 1998, 1999). The concession period wassubsequently extended three times, follow<strong>in</strong>g each tariff revision (1995–2022,with provisions for tariff revisions every three years after the first five yearsto adjust for <strong>in</strong>flation; 1996–2024; <strong>and</strong> 1998–2034) (<strong>Malaysia</strong>n Bus<strong>in</strong>ess,16 June 1995) (Table 4.08).In August 1995, follow<strong>in</strong>g widespread opposition, the government offereddiscounts of 40, 30 <strong>and</strong> 20 per cent respectively for the first, second <strong>and</strong> thirdyears for all non-household customers. The government was to compensateIWK with RM300 million for losses result<strong>in</strong>g from these discounts. However,when bill<strong>in</strong>g was extended to the state of Perak <strong>in</strong> October 1995, accumulationof arrears (for charges for the period commenc<strong>in</strong>g from the orig<strong>in</strong>altakeover date) led to more public dissatisfaction. In May 1996, the government<strong>in</strong>itiated a tariff review exercise follow<strong>in</strong>g further public compla<strong>in</strong>tsabout rates, <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong> October 1996, ordered IWK to stop bill<strong>in</strong>g or collect<strong>in</strong>gpayment pend<strong>in</strong>g a review. The review exercise addressed issues related tobill<strong>in</strong>g, charges <strong>and</strong> services, as well as f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g the development <strong>and</strong> managementof a modern <strong>and</strong> efficient sewerage system (Sewerage ServicesDepartment, <strong>Malaysia</strong> 1998).On 20 November 1996, the Prime M<strong>in</strong>ister announced that IWK was towrite off RM180 million <strong>in</strong> unpaid sewerage charges <strong>and</strong>, <strong>in</strong> return, wouldbe provided with an additional RM450 million soft loan. The governmentalso announced new sewerage rates effective from 1 January 1997 based onthe pr<strong>in</strong>ciples of affordability <strong>and</strong> equitability, with bus<strong>in</strong>esses, <strong>in</strong>dustry <strong>and</strong>government offices pay<strong>in</strong>g more to subsidize lower-<strong>in</strong>come home owners.The first revision of rates not only reduced monthly charges, but alsochanged the basis of evaluation. Household customers (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g governmentquarters) were charged fixed monthly rates from RM2 to RM8(depend<strong>in</strong>g on type of premise), <strong>and</strong> were exempted from water usagecharges. Commercial customers were levied a basic charge based on theannual value of the property 30 plus RM0.65 per cubic metre of water usageexceed<strong>in</strong>g 100 cubic metres a month. Industrial customers were charged a flatrate based on the number of employees (Table 4.09).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!