PKR wants minister to explain Bernas' channelling RM700m funds to Tradewinds

PETALING JAYA: Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) has urged Agriculture and Agro-based Industries Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob to explain why Padiberas Nasional Bhd (Bernas) channelled over RM700 million of its profits to its parent company, which is owned by tycoon Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary.
"The Agriculture Minister must immediately answer if he is aware of the channeling of huge advances from Bernas to Syed Mokhtar's group of companies," its Alor Star member of parliament Gooi Hsiao Leung said in a statement yesterday.
"It is totally unacceptable for Bernas, which enjoys hundreds of millions of ringgit of government subsidy each year, import duty tax exemptions and hold the monopoly rights to import rice, to channel its profit derived from government protection to Syed Mokhtar's group of companies," he added.
Recently, RAM Ratings revealed that after the delisting of Bernas in April 2014, the group had channelled large amount of advances to its parent company, namely Tradewinds (M) Bhd and other related parties.
RAM had downgraded the rating of the rice firm's RM750 million Islamic Commercial Papers/Medium-Term Notes Programme (ICP/MTN) (2010/2017) to A3/negative/P2 from AA3/negative/P1.
"The question on everyone's mind now is whether the plan to raid Bernas of its cash was conceived right from the beginning when plans to de-list Bernas were announced to facilitate Syed Mohktar's takeover of Bernas," Gooi said.
Previously Ismail Sabri said Bernas de-listing was only temporary, noting it is until the group's restructuring process is completed.
However, Gooi said to date, no timeline has been given on Bernas's restructuring exercise or updates on its re-listing plan.
As at end-Dec 2014, the group's gearing and net gearing ratios stood at a respective 1.41 and 1.19 times which was considerably higher than RAM's projections of around 0.7 times and 0.5 times.
RAM said Bernas' funds from operations debt cover had thinned to 0.09 times which was again significantly below RAM's expectation of 0.26 times.