Jump to content

Mahathir revives Singapore water dispute, says water deal too costly


Vratenza
 Share

Recommended Posts

Contracts and terms are renegotiated all the time. Especially when one was made decades ago.

 

The sad thing is people here fail to understand that and that is why we fail when we venture overseas and b i t c h that we were played out. Just a sad fact of life here.

 

The keyword is "renegotiate", which means you lose something to gain something after re-negotiation. Singapore has no problem for that and is willing to accept the price increase for the water supply extension after 2061. But what Mahathir want is huge increase in price alone for nothing in return. 

 

For Singapore, agreeing to price increase for nothing in return is not any form of re-negotiation, it is a surrender.

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

The keyword is "renegotiate", which means you lose something to gain something after re-negotiation. Singapore has no problem for that and is willing to accept the price increase for the water supply extension after 2061. But what Mahathir want is huge increase in price alone for nothing in return.

 

For Singapore, agreeing to price increase for nothing in return is not any form of re-negotiation, it is a surrender.

Thank you for proving my point.
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny to see internet experts pound out the specifics (not you).

 

A nominal 3% inflation adjustment over the decades would see the price increase by over 4 times over the last 4 decades. We probably won't know the reason behind the deal but the price is nothing short of ridiculous. And I'm commenting on a neutral perspective

Nolar, I definitely not an expert, just sharing my views, noone will renegotiate a deal if they don't get something out of it unless it is done at gunpoint.

 

I also think 3cts is too low given the water tariff i am paying but Msia had the opportunity to raise prices twice but they forgo those rights, we really don't know what was given in return, so perhaps i should keep my mouth shut.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are reasons why they have lawyers and economists working out the deal and contract BEFORE it was signed.

 

Just because the Malaysian side did not do their due diligence in factoring in future economical growth and currency exchange means we are obliged to go back to the table to "renegotiate"?

 

TDM is still expecting us to be Adik to the Abang..... In the first place, isn't the Abang suppose to give in to the Adik in our Asian cultural roots?

 

 

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In this case , MFA is out of sync and irrelevant to Singaporeans..

My take is water being the most important issue must make our stand very clearly..

Furthermore, this water contract was part of the terms and cond. for Sgp being pushed out of the Federation..

Case by case basis, Other things can re-nego but for this matter, it’s a no go..

post-52390-0-89342000-1530063339_thumb.jpeg

  • Praise 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hypersonic

In this case , MFA is out of sync and irrelevant to Singaporeans..

My take is water being the most important issue must make our stand very clearly..

Furthermore, this water contract was part of the terms and cond. for Sgp being pushed out of the Federation..

Case by case basis, Other things can re-nego but for this matter, itâs a no go..

Yes, I aslo feel this part is crucial. It's part of the separation deal. If any part of the separation can be changed if one side not happy for economical reasons, than Singapore as a separate country jialat liao, our existence as a separate country can be renegotiated if the neighbor is not happy.
  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Turbocharged

There are reasons why they have lawyers and economists working out the deal and contract BEFORE it was signed.

 

Just because the Malaysian side did not do their due diligence in factoring in future economical growth and currency exchange means we are obliged to go back to the table to "renegotiate"?

 

TDM is still expecting us to be Adik to the Abang..... In the first place, isn't the Abang suppose to give in to the Adik in our Asian cultural roots?

 

No we're not obliged to play ball. Just have to accept the fact that the other party can choose to renege and walk away.

 

Just like I'm not obliged to let you burgle my **** you **** burglar haha

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

ah Dik....play ball......****.......you know this is going to attract the unmentionable like @Radx right? :D

 

Looooooong time no see !

:D

 

No we're not obliged to play ball. Just have to accept the fact that the other party can choose to renege and walk away.

 

Just like I'm not obliged to let you burgle my **** you **** burglar haha

 

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are reasons why they have lawyers and economists working out the deal and contract BEFORE it was signed.

 

Just because the Malaysian side did not do their due diligence in factoring in future economical growth and currency exchange means we are obliged to go back to the table to "renegotiate"?

 

TDM is still expecting us to be Adik to the Abang..... In the first place, isn't the Abang suppose to give in to the Adik in our Asian cultural roots?

now adik richer than abang........of course adik must help the abang when he is in trouble. If abang didnt want to sell their raw water back in the 60s our growth would have been on a slower pace if not stunted. Just go for a win-win solution because the amount we are paying currently is really down there........agreements can be ratified and never cast in stone. Give some and take some because we are actually taking their natural resource for a nominal fee. Nothing is for free and we should just be fair. We can be fair to NK and US last month but why can we be fair to our nearest neighbour?
Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

after this

 

they would claim that the independence in 1965 is void and singapore is a province of malaysia and we should burn the passport and flag

 

then replace with

 

 

 

post-131345-0-29786800-1530066113_thumb.jpg

 

 

 

saya akan belajar malayu

Edited by Staff69
  • Praise 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

No we're not obliged to play ball. Just have to accept the fact that the other party can choose to renege and walk away.

 

Just like I'm not obliged to let you burgle my **** you **** burglar haha

Where is your usual Avatar? The chiobu one.
Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

like someone mentioned earlier, the water agreement is part of the deal to kick us out of the federation:

 

https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/ISA1965

 

Article VIII

 

Mutual government guarantees of water agreements

14.  The Government of Singapore shall guarantee that the Public Utilities Board of Singapore shall on and after Singapore Day abide by the terms and conditions of the Water Agreements dated 1st September, 1961, and 29th September, 1962, entered into between the City Council of Singapore and the Government of the State of Johore.
    The Government of Malaysia shall guarantee that the Government of the State of Johore will on and after Singapore Day also abide by the terms and conditions of the said two Water Agreements.

 

 

 

now adik richer than abang........of course adik must help the abang when he is in trouble. If abang didnt want to sell their raw water back in the 60s our growth would have been on a slower pace if not stunted. Just go for a win-win solution because the amount we are paying currently is really down there........agreements can be ratified and never cast in stone. Give some and take some because we are actually taking their natural resource for a nominal fee. Nothing is for free and we should just be fair. We can be fair to NK and US last month but why can we be fair to our nearest neighbour?

 

Just to add, when we were unceremoniously kick out of the Federation, nobody talks about fairness then, especially when everyone in the Federation expect Singapore to falter and trip on it's own.

 

Edited by Vratenza
  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

like someone mentioned earlier, the water agreement is part of the deal to kick us out of the federation:

 

https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/ISA1965

 

Article VIII

why should they provide us the basic necessity if they planned to kick us out? If i am that leader i wouldnt even sign an agreement selling raw water.........tio bor? Why give a lifeline? Politics is never straight......crocodile tears aplenty.
Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

If you read the statutes carefully, the water agreements were made a few years pre-independence. but during the separation, it was ratified so that both sides in mutal agreement to uphold the terms and conditions.

 

why should they provide us the basic necessity if they planned to kick us out? If i am that leader i wouldnt even sign an agreement selling raw water.........tio bor? Why give a lifeline? Politics is never straight......crocodile tears aplenty.

 

Edited by Vratenza
Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

http://www.askmelah.com/madam-kwa-geok-choo-1920-2010/

 

 

 

read in the memoir that it was lky wife that ensure water deal is iron clad to ensure everyone of all races get a steady water supply after they kick us out thinking we would claw back begging them

 

 

but little did they knew

 

 

we had the last laugh

 

 

 

 

and it was lky persistence to make sure we dont need their water after the agreement ends

 

 

 

lets all stand in 1 direction

 

 

after all

 

 

we might have different political views

and race or religion

 

 

but we are Singaporeans after all

Edited by Staff69
  • Praise 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

After the 1962 water agreement, there was no other new agreements to sell/buy water beyond 2061. 

 

The 1990 agreement was a supplementary to the 1962 agreement after a re-negotiation. In the agreement, SG compensated Malaysia RM320million for the land to build the linggiu dam, an additional RM18,000 per ha and an annual RM30 for every 1000 sq feet of land. 

 

Singapore paid for all the costs of the reservoirs in Johor, the dams, pipelines, plant, equipment, etc., and Singapore paid all costs of operating and maintaining the infrastructure, which would be handed over to Malaysia at a later date when the agreement expires. The whole project cost Singapore $310 million when completed in 1993. 

 

In the agreement, SG is allowed to draw up to 250 million gallons of untreated water a day at 3 sens per 1000 gallons. In addition, SG can also draw beyond the 250 million gallons of untreated water a day, but this addition water would be treated in johor.  "The price of this additional supply would be calculated based on a fixed formula: the weighted average of Johor's water tariffs plus 50 percent of the surplus from the sale of this water by PUB to its consumers after deducting Johor's price and PUB's cost of distribution, or 115 percent of the weighted average of Johor's water tariffs, whichever was higher."

 

So are we really buying water at 3 sens per 1000 gallons? 

 

All the long, SG has been open to re-negotiation of the water agreement, we are always prepared to pay a higher price for water, provided the water agreement function as a stand alone agreement from other issues. Malaysia on the other hand has always wanted to re-negotiate the water agreement as a package including the supply of natural gas, use of air space, KTM and the development of the lands after the relocation of the KTM. 

 

Are we really not willing to pay a higher price for untreated water?  I think the whole world knows that we are willing to do anything to get  water, and if money can buy water, there is no reason we are not willing to pay for it. Or are there other factors we need consider in order to safe guard ourselves from predators?

 

Had SG and MY not came to an agreement on the KTM issue in 2010, would it be  price Lao Ma is talking about?  Lets not forget that the KTM issue was always connected to any water issue in the longest time ever, an issue even LKY could not settle when he was alive.  [laugh]  [laugh]  [laugh]

Edited by Tianmo
  • Praise 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

why should they provide us the basic necessity if they planned to kick us out? If i am that leader i wouldnt even sign an agreement selling raw water.........tio bor? Why give a lifeline? Politics is never straight......crocodile tears aplenty.

 

 

Because if  SG did not  agree to go peacefully, LKY may have become the  PM of Malaysia instead, and UMNO may not have rule 60 yrs. [laugh]  [laugh]  [laugh]

Edited by Tianmo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Because if  SG did not  agree to go peacefully, LKY may have become the  PM of Malaysia instead, and UMNO may not have rule 60 yrs. [laugh]  [laugh]  [laugh]

 

No way - serious racial riots would likely have been the result.

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...