Facebook Twitter Google Plus Vimeo Youtube Feed Feedburner

ROS LBoard 1

‘Rewcastle-Brown among sources in WSJ Saudi Aramco report’

 | March 20, 2017

Report claiming the Saudi company had pulled out of the Pengerang deal quotes Sarawak Report editor and others in the opposition, says Rahman Dahlan.

DEWAN RAKYAT

rahman

KUALA LUMPUR: Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Rahman Dahlan claims to know the identities of the sources quoted by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) in its report that Saudi Aramco had pulled out from the Pengerang oil refinery project.

He claimed one of the sources was Sarawak Report editor Clare Rewcastle-Brown.

“The other two or three are the opposition,” said Rahman.

At that, Abdul Azeez Rahim (Umno-Baling) stood up and asked: “Who are the three stooges?”

Ko Chung Sen (DAP-Kampar) had asked for the total cost of the Penggerang development in his original question.

WSJ had on Jan 26 quoted three sources who said Saudi Aramco had pulled out from the Pengerang project.

Rahman said Saudi Aramco played only a part in the Refinery and Petrochemical Integrated Development project, which in turn was only a small part of the Pengerang Integrated Petroleum Complex project, which cost US$27 billion (RM119.5 billion).

“The Aramco deal is (worth) US$7 billion in the Petronas Pengerang project,” he said.

Petronas and Saudi Aramco were still in discussions, which commenced two years ago, over the deal, he said.

He said it was taking a long time due to the cost involved.

“The prime minister has sent a delegation, in which I was involved, several times to finalise the matter with the Saudi government.”


Comments

Readers are required to have a valid Facebook account to comment on this story. We welcome your opinions to allow a healthy debate. We want our readers to be responsible while commenting and to consider how their views could be received by others. Please be polite and do not use swear words or crude or sexual language or defamatory words. FMT also holds the right to remove comments that violate the letter or spirit of the general commenting rules.

The views expressed in the contents are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of FMT.

Comments