Income of a participant of SALCRA land development programme

I am here making special reference to the challenge that Tan Sri Jabu made in the Borneo Post on 8 December asking us to prove 10 percent of what SALCRA had achieved or else he insisted we cannot be genuine in our effort to assist the Dayak. He declared that it was his extraordinary patience and ingenuity that has brought great success to SALCRA since its establishment 32 years ago, to which we strongly disagreed. To us, as far as landowners are concern, it is a bane.

In view of that challenge I am now publishing herein below the extract from an actual income of a participant of SALCRA land development programme for the years 2000-2005. The land, which is the subject matter of this extract, was first planted in 1989. However, there was no figure available for the years 1989-1999.

Please readers, compare the size of land and the dividend distributed generated from land that SALCRA had planted with oil palm.

Facts would speak for itself. Based on what the facts speak, there is nothing near or close to 10 per cent returns for the size of land that SALCRA is using. If one were to plant chillies, for example, on that 5.6 acres of land, the return would be a thousand times bigger than the dividend that SALCA had distributed to the participant of Lot 926.

From the above case study, can any of us tell whether the participant herein below would ever be rich solely relying on that income? The answer is obviously in the negative. This is just one example, which is the reflection of many more participants.

Are we just talking rubbish and know how to talk only, as the honourable Second Deputy Chief Minister had alleged? The corroborative evidence we have irresistibly points out that we are not making bare allegations but consistent with the true state of affairs.

It is so sad that the honourable minister does not have the humility to admit that he has all along misled the entire nation into believing that SALCRA participants have been making tons of money from the venture. But instead he has arrogantly condemned everybody else is wrong but him and him alone.

I like to believe that SALCRA has been making money but the dividend distributed to the landowners are nothing but peanuts. Where does the money go then? People are therefore compelled to make many curious and even wild guesses.

By the way, on my way to visit a lecturer friend at UNIMAS this evening, I passed by the half-completed multi-storey SALCRA building complex. By its look and the artist's impression of the complex, the cost of constructing the complex must be in the millions of ringgit. The question is, from where the fund to build the complex had come from? If it has come from the land of the participants, are the participants in the know? Have they no say in the way income generated from their land would be used?

What conclusion or inference can we draw? In my humble opinion, I submit that there is so much that is hidden that participants and members of the public should know. I further submit that SALCRA has achieved nothing. If any or at all, SALCRA has only succeeded in providing Sarawakians with certain permanent employment.

It is pitiful that hopes for a better living have been taken for a ride.

------------------------------------------------------

BONUS/DIVIDEND DISTRIBUTION FOR A 5.6 ACRES OF OIL PALM DEVELOP BY SALCRA AT LOT 926 ROBAN SOUTH PHASE 3, SARATOK FROM YEAR 2000 TO 2005

Area: (2.27 ha or 5.6acres)


Bonus/Dividend Received from Year 2000 to Year 2005


Year Dividend Received (RM) Yearly Dividend (RM)

2000 224.07 224.07
2001 000.00 000.00
2002 000.00 000.00
2003 182.84
2003 270.77 453.61
2004 477.96
2004 484.65 962.61
2005 757.08 757.08

Total 2397.37

Average Income Per Year 399.56

Average Output /Acre/Year 71.35

Average Output /Acre/Month 5.95


***
Taking MPOB price at RM350/Ton
RM5.95/RM350x1000kg = 17kg/month or 567gm/day
If 1 acre is planted with 40 palms, then 1 palm produces only 425 gram/ month

***Bonus and dividend are being used interchangeably and both refer to the same thing.