Kuching: Wilfred Yap’s statement on the FWTA issue perfectly illustrates what is wrong with SUPP’s approach to governance.
The issue on FWTA was never about Sarawak’s rights under MA63. Most Sarawakians support Sarawak exercising its constitutional powers. The real issue is how GPS chooses to exercise those powers.
For years, GPS has told Sarawakians that we must fight to reclaim our rights. Yet whenever those rights are obtained, we see the same old approach of creating monopolies and forcing businesses and employers to bear the additional costs.
Wilfred Yap himself acknowledges the concerns raised by businesses over the increased costs under the FWTA system. However, instead of questioning the monopoly structure at the heart of the issue, he merely proposes minor refinements while continuing to support the existing monopoly model.
This is typical of SUPP. They claim to champion businesses, but when a monopolistic arrangement is imposed on employers, they rush to defend the system rather than stand up for the people who have to pay for it.
Till now, there is no proper and acceptable answer as to why the FWTA system must be channelled through a private company when the Sarawak Government already has established ICT entities such as SAINS with the expertise and capability to undertake such functions.
What is even more troubling is that the private company charges substantial fees while the Sarawak Government itself does not receive a single cent from these collections. Based on the approximately 100,000 foreign workers currently in Sarawak, even if the fees were reduced to half of the present rate, the company could still potentially generate close to RM100 million annually.
This is the monopoly that Wilfred Yap and SUPP are defending.
The issue is no longer whether the fees should be slightly lower or whether some rebates should be given. The real question is why a private company should be placed in a monopolistic position to collect such enormous sums from Sarawakian employers in the first place.
Sarawak’s autonomy should be used to benefit the people and strengthen our economy, not to create monopolies that enrich a select few at the expense of employers, businesses, and ultimately consumers.
If Wilfred Yap truly wants to be a check and balance, he should be asking why this monopoly was created in the first place, who benefits from it, and why businesses are being forced to bear these additional costs. Instead, he has chosen to defend the very system that businesses across Sarawak are questioning.
Michael Kong Feng Nian
Special Assistant to YB Chong Chieng Jen
24 June 2026
