Privatization of Domestic Flight Routes???

Imagine if tomorrow the Govt says that it needs to create 5 new highways in Malaysia to meet the increasing demand for quality roads and connectivity from the public.

So the Govt. calls in 2 local construction companies and asks them to construct these highways by a certain date . The Govt knows where this 5 new highways will be located and which cities it will connect. But it says that it is entirely up to these two companies to work together to decide the relevant details like which company will construct which highway, how many lanes each highway will have, how much toll to charge the public, how long to charge etc. All the Govts needs from them is 5 new highways.

See the similarity between the above example and the issue of MAS/Air Asia domestic routes?

What we don't realise is that this is another form of PRIVATISATION; the Govt is actually privatising the domestic flight services!

But unlike in past privatisations, this time there is no tender at all (whether open or negotiated). More worryingly, the Govt has left it entirely to a private company to DECIDE the details like flight frequency, what aircrafts to use, how much to charge etc!

I guess it may take sometime even for the opposition members to realise that this is in effect a PRIVATISATION!

If you notice, sometimes we tend to avoid using words or phrases that may result to our audience unnecessarily reacting negatively to our views / proposals.

For example, after Barings Bank in Singapore was brought down by Nick Leeson, the word "derivatives" is a taboo. So if you were a treasury officer then and had to market derivatives to your corporate clients, you simply didn't call it"derivatives". Call it other names such as structured products etc. Why? Because the word "derivatives" would unnecessarily trigger a negative reaction from your clients leading to them not buying your product.

Similarly, the word "bail-out" is a taboo. "Privatisation" is also a taboo. These words will immediately trigger the public's reaction to a chain of events in the past, possibly leading them to react negatively.

But we should try to be smarter. Just look deeper. What matters more is actually the "description", not the phrasing.