Malaysia's nuclear power rationale: You've just lost 3, so I'm gonna build 2 of my own!

Being simply critical of decision made by governments and governing bodies because said decisions don’t sit side by with my own views, is not normally my style. However, to wake up to the BBC on one tab of my browser, showing pictures of the horrendous fallout of the Tsunami, and it’s implications on the nuclear plants and consequentially and most importantly the people of the region; and on the other tab of a Malaysian independent news portal, headlining the Malaysian government’s bad-tasting, badly-timed, badly constructed, badly- delivered, barely thought-through release of it’s nuclear energy ambitions, left me very little choice but to just RANT!

Let me be frank and clear, by clarifying my own personal stance on nuclear power.
I am on arguing for or against the building of nuclear plants.

I have minimal, though enough knowledge to understand the principals of how nuclear fission generates heat and drives engines. I also know a few arguments both for and against the sustainability of nuclear energy as a whole. However, I fully acknowledge that I am not in a position of any knowledge or authority to opine authoritatively over the validity of the plans.

What I do have a HUGE problem with, is everything else about the announcement. Here’s my break down if it:

Bad timing and Bad Taste:

A fellow Asian country has just suffered the worst natural disaster, which is culminating as we speak into the worlds worst ever multiple nuclear accident. Forget the fact that Malaysia doesn’t sit on a faultline, and rarely feel earthquakes etc etc. It’s simply BAD TASTE.
To metaphorise: you wouldn’t announce to the world that you’re buying a bigger and better industrial meat mincer, after your neighbour from a few doors down has just had his right arm chewed up by his older modelled meat mincer. And not only that, is it a little ‘insensitive’ to announce to the entire street that you’d learn from the poor man’s mistake by making sure there’s a system in place to ensure that nothing untoward will happen to you as a result of your new purchase, when your poor neighbour is still in intensive care?

Badly constructed and communicated

My initial choice of adjectives for the ones who crafted this message from the Malaysian government was going to be ‘seasoned and high level political operators’, and then set upon the easy task of pointing out how they’re selling themselves short. After all, we are talking about the deputy PM and the minister for green energy. Then, upon further thought and contemplation, they’re definitely veterans, and been around for a long time doing what they do. But so have the likes of Gadaffi and Mubarak….

Firstly, I remember reading somewhere that the validity of Nuclear energy for Malaysia will be based on a consensus of the People over the course a a few years. When I read about it, I thought,’ Great! The government’s got the sense to do this the sensible way. Sell the idea to the people and give them the opportunity to buy-in or rule-out!’. I see no where that the afore-mentioned consensus back in 2008-2009, commissioned to TNB’s nuclear energy exploratory arm back then, being referred to, nor do I see or hear of any attempts of a consensus being built. Certainly haven’t heard of a referendum being called or a national debate being had on nuclear power. I’ve had the fortune/misfortune of working in frontline politics both in Malaysia and the UK. Anyone with the slightest experience in politics can tell a mile away, when a message isn’t supported by figures, it’s either because there NO figures or the figures are bad! The fact that there’s been no quotation of any figures suggesting a consensus, or any form of public support, could only mean one or more of the following:

1) There is NO public consensus (as in the results of relevant surveys/studies shows that the public doesn’t want nuclear power)
2) It was a badly run consensus building campaign, and the people were neither given the opportunity to consider the options, nor were they consented. *(the fault of the person running the the exploratory arm of TNB)
3) The decision was a top-down one. The PM is using his position of power to create employment and development figures with a globally controversial energy programme, which his predecessor, from his side of the political divide, announced would be decided on a consensus building basis.

*I will be exploring this further down the line in this posting

Any one of the above factors simply but loudly suggest that the decision and its ramifications have not been fully and properly considered. Worst still, the decision could’ve been made contrary to the expressed views of the public, at the public’s own expense. Down that chain of thought, the PM is essentially, embezzling the public’s taxes to build his portfolio of acheivements in jobs creation and joining the league of nuclear energy nations, possibly against the wishes of those paying for it! (Honestly… I’m not spinning….at all)

All in all, the message was badly constructed and could’ve been done with a great deal more political tact. If a political nobody can see such a fundamental flaw in the message, imagine the real political operators out there! And the message was crafted by the Deputy Prime Ministers staffers!?!?

I put it to you all that the Political operators at the very top of Politics in Malaysia, base on the way the message in question was crafted, are ABSOLUTE AMATEURS at best, and not fit for the wages they are paid at worst!

‘the Malaysia Nuclear Power Corporation had opened a tender to international consultants to conduct a study on the location, suitability and safety of the location, type of technology and public acceptance of the proposal.’ Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Datuk Peter Chin

According to this, the government has decided on building 2 nuclear plants, when it doesn’t know where, how and its suitability. Most importantly it’ just admitted that it is yet to even seek acceptance of public proposal! My point proven!

… and I digress.

Away from politics and back to the Bad decision and why.

The motive behind the decision

It’s an age old adage in Malaysia, that ‘every project announced by government, is another minister’s friend, family, or party member taken care of, financially for a few generations. I am not making accusations here of cronyism, but merely asking the questions that has come to the fore in my inquisitive mind. Neither am I questioning the correctness of certain appointments made by TNB, and the prime minister past and and present. But I’d like to present some facts for you to make up your own mind.
When the first noises about nuclear energy being explored as an alternative to what was the status quo, in light of fluctuating energy and fuel prices, The head of Nuclear Energy taskforce and it’s Nuclear Energy Unit for TNB was Dr Mohd Zamzam Jaafar. Through out 2008-2009, Dr ZamZam on many occasions announced TNB’s approach to nuclear energy as an alternative, is to seek public consensus of its validity and credibility. In Feb 2001, th PM announced the appointment of Dr Mohd Zamzam Jaafar as the chief executive officer of the newly formed Malaysia Nuclear Power Corporation as aforementioned to do what he was supposed to have been doing, when he was working for TNB.

Now, I’m sure we will all know the answer to my following questions. But I will make my point by asking those very questions.

• Who owns TNB?
• Doesn’t the aforementioned lacking of public consensus on nuclear energy as an alternative, the public’s lack of knowledge on the subject and furthermore, the non-existent of their engagement over the decision making process to spend Billions of Ringgit on building 2 nuclear plants, suggest that Dr ZamZam didn’t do a very good job?
• Moreover, doesn’t that mean the owner(s) of TNB has made a massive screw-up?
• And if Dr ZamZam didn’t do a very good job, then why has he been appointed CEO for the body overseeing the exploratory process, which he failed to deliver in his previous role?

Now I have a couple more questions which may not be public knowledge, but It would be VERY VERY inappropriate for me to ask. Just the way I would now ask you not to picture in your mind, ‘A big Black Cat’ and you would, simply not have that picture on your mind….. Questions like

• Is Dr ZamZam related to anyone in the cabinet?
• What is Dr ZamZam’s political affiliation?
• Does Dr ZamZam hold any stakes in construction companies which maybe now investing in expertise and infrastructure in building nuclear power plants?
To sum up the ramblings up to this point, I guess it’s down to the following few points.

The politicians who claims to be running the country, are simply amateurs who have gotten to where they are by luck, chance and cronyistic means. And in reality, can’t even craft a simple message and deliver it with the necessary requirements of a semi mature democratic power with a fairly intelligent citizenship/electorate.

The decision making process in government, and the way in which those processes are carried out, the engagement of the public/electorate in hish sensitivity issues concerning public health and welfare, and very longterm implications, like building nuclear energy plants, are at best un-transparent; and at worst a total farce, which is contrary to how a modern democratic country should be, where decisions ought to be made through consensus and not top down from politicians whose legitimacy is far from absolute.

The announcement by the government to build the 2 nuclear power plants shows the inadequacies of the current regime, in this current turbulent times, and most importantly, it's unsuitability to remain walking in the corridors of power. When a government can show such lack of international propriety by the insensitive timing of the announcement; and furthermore inwardly, show such disregard for its electorate, one wonders the validity of the motive behind the decisions. And from that its far too easy to question every motive of every decision made by the same government.

A time for change perhaps?