The anger and frustration in her voice was evident, as a Twentytwo13 reader spoke about the sale of parrotfish at a hypermarket in Jalan Klang Lama, Kuala Lumpur, during her visit there not too long ago.
Carmen, as she identified herself, is an avid diver, who often embarks on coral reef conservation work off the coast of Terengganu.
“Parrotfish are so important to the ecosystem, okay. I don’t understand why people can’t eat other fishes, and not this species. If you don’t eat parrotfish, you won’t die lah,” said Carmen.
“I know there’s no regulation against the sale of this (type of fish). But use common sense, lah. The fishermen, the traders, and the consumers … they should all be educated about our marine life.”

Parrotfish (Scaridae) are easily recognised by their parrot-like beak of fused teeth, a bluntly rounded head, large scales, and brilliant colours. They are important reef eroders, and more important in the production of sand than any other group of animals in tropical seas. It has been estimated that a large parrotfish may produce as much as a ton of sand a year.
Twentytwo13 reached out to the Department of Fisheries on June 1, regarding the matter. We spoke to a representative, who shared that their hands were tied as the law did not prohibit the sale of parrotfish. He said the department had embarked on educational programmes but was quick to add that the fish is popular especially among the locals in Sabah.
He requested an email so that the department can respond officially. An email was sent on the same day. Till today, there’s not been a reply.
The ghosting continues – this time with the Human Resources Development Corporation (HRDC).
Twentytwo13 reached out to HRDC last week and sent the corporation – an agency under the Human Resources Ministry – an email on June 28, regarding the implementation of the RM300 fee per trainee for the processing of micro-credential training grant.
This was after this news website received numerous complaints from business owners and trainers, who wanted justification for the processing fee.
“The maximum a trainer can charge per day, per employee, is RM700. How did they (HRDC) compute charging 43 per cent (RM300) of that to employers, when trainers are the ones delivering content?”
The Small, and Medium Enterprises Association, in a June 22 statement, described the new fee as “counterproductive” and limits small, and medium enterprises from upskilling and reskilling their employees during a time of severe labour shortages.
Despite the criticism, there has not been any acknowledgement regarding the questions sent. Not even a “noted”. Nothing. Silence is certainly not golden.
It must be noted that some ministries, and even government agencies have been extremely proactive in answering every single query posed. In fact, their ministers, deputy ministers, secretary-generals or directors-general would pick up the phones to reply, or email their answers promptly, regardless of the situation.
However, there is this growing tendency of ignoring requests from the press – not to mention a member of the public.
It seems that these agencies would only be concerned when an issue is blasted on social media. Only then, would they scramble to provide answers and issue statements.
Newsrooms operate by documenting the statements of the relevant parties and leave it to the readers, viewers, or listeners, to make up their own minds. Ghosting only results in pretty much one-sided reports.
Perhaps there had been numerous efforts in the past to educate fishermen against catching, and traders against selling parrotfish, but these had fallen on deaf ears.
Perhaps there is a solid justification for the HRDC’s RM300 fee per trainee.
On the other hand, perhaps these agencies do not have the answers, and will only think of one if, and when, their agency goes “viral”.
Your guess is as good as mine.