Showing posts with label GE 2015. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GE 2015. Show all posts

Wednesday, 9 September 2015

Singapore General Election 2015: Politics is dirty

SG General Elections just received the following copies of briefing notes by opposition supporters. These notes are to be used by opposition supporters during the cooling off day to do whisper campaigns against the People's Action Party (PA).

While it is not immediately who created the notes and who is behind this campaign, our guess it is either the Workers' Party (WP) or the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP). Why is this our guess? Simply because these two parties are schooled in the Taiwanese art of political campaigning and this has been their method of operations for years.

You be the judge. Do you want people like these as your leaders? The WP wants to form the next Government. If you vote more of them into Parliament, Singapore is doomed.

Vote wisely! 

WP whisper campaign ge2015

singapore ge2015 wp dirty tricks

Singapore GE2015: A Must Read Before Voting

There is an article circulating online as a must read before voting. As the writer has given, in my opinion, a bias perspective, here is my rebuttal ...
I am a Singaporean voter. I want our policies to be thoroughly examined by different political parties in the Parliament.
I know all the candidates have different strengths, weaknesses and abilities but that is exactly the whole idea. A policy paper can be better scrutinized by different people with different perspectives, angles and insights. Ultimately, Singapore and Singaporeans benefit from better policies. Good policies can withstand scrutiny, no matter who came up with them.
I am a Singaporean voter too. I want policies to be first the result of public engagement and consultation; second, to be examined by citizens as well as all relevant groups and parties. Policies affecting my life should not be vetted and examined only by political parties because frankly parties have their vested interests and MPs do not have a monopoly over common-sense and wisdom. Singaporeans are empowered enough today to think for themselves and speak up for themselves.

I am a Singaporean voter. I want our anti-corruption department to be completely detached from the power of any government, regardless of political party.

The department should be a checks-and-balances asset for the people of Singapore. The anti-corruption department should report directly to the people and conduct regular and random checks on every single branch of the state and government to ensure nobody plays under the table. Nobody.
I am a Singaporean voter and I agree. The CPIB must continue to be independent and do its job fearlessly and impartially as , to be fair to CPIB, it has done for 60 years. That is why Ministers and senior civil servants have been charged and punished when they commit offences. No other country has done this as well as Singapore and the credit goes to Lee Kuan Yew.

I am a Singaporean voter. I want our civil service, army, police and judiciary systems to be independent from any politically-motivated decisions from any incumbent government.

I am a Singaporean voter. Your ideas are flawed and you obviously need a lesson in political science and law. In a democratic system, there are 3 bodies - Parliament which makes laws, the Judiciary which interprets the laws and enforces it, and finally the Executive which govern. This is the principle of the separation of powers The judiciary must be independent. Parliament should preferably be plural and not dominated by one party.The civil service is part of the Executive which is led by elected officials ie PM and Cabinet.  The civil service must carry out faithfully the programmes of whichever elected party that forms the Government but it must do so impartially.  
I dislike the practice of parachuting newly-resigned civil servants, army or police officers or judges into the political sphere weeks or days before elections. This presents a serious conflict of interests because these newly-converted politicians still hold networks of influence within their old jobs and that may present dilemmas in crucial decision-making. Imagine if we go to war and our generals hesitate to act because they are considering military decisions based on answering to ex-colleagues-turned-ministers on which electoral constituency to defend or retreat from. Wouldn't that be a disaster if they lost battle initiative due to such considerations?
I am a Singaporean voter and I agree. However your example about war and generals is really stupid because Singapore is just too small to be defended in a war constituency by constituency.
I am a Singaporean voter. I understand all policies cost valuable taxpayers' monies.

I am a Singaporean voter too and I agree with you. However trade-offs are not just about monies but also about choices affecting how we live and the options we have for the future. No country can have their cake and eat it without them or their next generation starving in the end.

I am not a rabbit. I don't eat carrots dangling in front of me. I am not a dog. I refuse to be tamed or intimidated by fear-mongering tactics. I am not a crazy person either. I don't intend to bankrupt Singapore or Singaporeans over poorly-planned policies. I am, however, keeping an open mind to alternative suggestions to current policies. I don't mind these alternatives be thoroughly debated in Parliament because there is always a chance to find moderation and suitability in them until these policies can meet the needs and wants of Singaporeans.

I am glad you are not a rabbit or a dog or a crazy person but an open-minded person willing to entertain alternative views. I hope that is how you will take my elaboration over your ideas. No offence intended, hopefully no offence taken. 

I am a Singaporean voter. I want my government to work for me, not against me and certainly not for themselves. I want my politicians to earn their keep, not sleep through in Parliament and just nod their heads in agreement to pass policies into bills which are not clearly understood by the people.

Governments are servants to the people. If they lord over their own voters, they are not governments. They are called tyrants. I understand the need for attractive pay to entice the best talents and minds into a government. However, I want such salaries to be pegged to real performance in their terms of office. This is called meritocracy. Any member of parliament who naps in parliamentary sessions should receive a pay cut for that month. No excuses. Any member of parliament who has contributed no constructive suggestions to any policies in a year should receive a pay cut for that year. Any member of parliament who broke the laws of Singapore should receive a demerit ceremony in public and serve the necessary sentence in whichever way deem fit by the people of Singapore.

I am a Singaporean voter too and I agree with you except for the part about punishment to be determined by the people – that sounds too much like trial by lynch mob. Regardless of popular sentiment, the rule of law must apply – dispassionately and impartially.
I am a Singaporean voter. I want Singapore to survive longer than any political squabble or contest.

If any political party claims that Singapore will collapse or be in ruins if they are voted out of power, that means we have built the country in the wrong way. All political parties face the possibility of total dissolution but as a Singaporean, I want Singapore to possess a robust system where it can survive any change of power from any political party. This means the civil service, army, police and judiciary system must remain apolitical if they understand such a national need beyond political competition.

I am a Singaporean voter and I agree. Singapore should not collapse because one party is voted out of power. Whether Singapore will collapse because this happens prematurely is the question that is pertinent today because even the serious people in the opposition itself admit they cannot yet form an alternative government.  
I am a Singaporean voter. Vote not for Singapore's past. Vote not for Singapore's present. Vote for Singapore's future.
I am a Singaporean voter too and I also want to vote for a good Singapore future. But ignoring the past and present is  shallow thinking and reckless.  We must always remember the past that led us here without being trapped in the past; we must always look with honesty and with a hand to the heart, at the good we have in the present without being blind to its imperfections. Then we reflect and decide what we believe is the best choice to make for the future  when we cast our vote on 11 Sep.

Tuesday, 8 September 2015

Singapore GE2015: How to Vote

Today is the final day of campaigning. All the parties have spoken. Some made sense, some not so much. So how does the average Singaporean decide.

One analogy that is circulating online is to view the PAP as the dutiful wife who has been with you since day one. The PAP has been with you through thick and thin and has taken care of all your the family's needs. While no longer young and sexy, the PAP has proven herself to be loyal with your best interest at heart.

singapore general election 2015 how to vote

This contrasts with the opposition who, in the analogy, is seen as a PRC gold-digger. The opposition is sexy, young and there to pander to your wants. With nothing to lose, the opposition, can always tell you what you want to hear and make you feel good about yourself. Wanting to take over the place of the wife, the gold-digger will whisper things without concern for the consequences as it is easy to be responsible when you are responsible for nothing.

At the end of the day, the choice is simply between choosing someone who has been loyal and cares for you, or someone who is out for their own self-interest. 

For those that are not convinced, but say that that you need an affair so as to scare the wife to worker harder at home, do consider the consequences. If you miscalculate and the wife leaves, you will be stuck with a no good gold-digger.

There is however a third option .... spoil your vote!

singapore ge2015 how to vote

If at the end of the day, you believe that the PAP is still the best, but think that you need to voice your unhappiness by reducing their percentage of popular votes, signal via spoiling your vote. Spoiling your vote minimizes the risk of a freak election result where the PAP is voted out by accident over-night.

Singapore General Election 2015: Vision for Singapore

We have a vision for tomorrow, just believe, just believe

Over the last few days of campaigning, one question that I have heard from my friends repeatedly is –What will I get if I vote for PAP? More of the same?

WP says – vote for me, get minimum wage
SDP says – vote for me, get free healthcare
RP says – vote for me, get child and elderly support
HHH says – vote for me,  get your CPF back

What has PAP said?

“Please vote for me and my PAP team, so that we can keep improving Singaporeans’ lives and make our plans and dreams come true” – Lee Hsien Looong

Is that a collective “cheeeeey” I hear? PM – how to get votes liddat?

But here’s the thing – PAP is the only party that is expected to deliver on their promises. PM cannot just run off and promise to build a gigantic dome that keeps the entire Singapore air-conditioned (though side note – whoever can make that happen, gets my vote man).

So we should probably give the PAP some credit for being the only party fighting against the cries of “more, more, and more.” I mean, if our current leaders just want to stay in power for a couple more terms, collect their salaries (yes, I know, million-dollar salaries) and retire, all they got to do is spend the reserves and keep people happy. Free education? Sure, why not! Free healthcare? Sure, why not! Free transport? Sure, can even throw in a free bicycle or two.

Singapore has leapfrogged from mudflats to metropolis. We are now among the top global cities; there is no blueprint for us to follow.  But that doesn’t mean that we can remain at status quo. There are still challenges for us to overcome – changing demographics, widening inequality, and increasing regional competition. These will be hard to tackle and there’s no quick fix. If we don’t continue to push, the only place to go is down.

So relook what PAP is promising you.  Making lives better and providing more opportunities is not as easy as it sounds. And yes, Singapore will have to keep working and fighting to remain successful – no two ways about it.  But if the PAP presses on with policies such as improving pre-school education and SkillsFuture - policies which are decidedly unsexy – maybe that’s how they will make sure that dreams continue to come true in Singapore.


So as the song goes … We have a vision for tomorrow, just believe, just believe

Sunday, 6 September 2015

Singapore GE2015: What we are voting for ...


singapore ge2015 the choice
At a local coffeeshop, I heard a most interesting analogy. The uncle compared the relationship between the PAP and the Opposition Parties as that of the dutiful wife and the vixen. Here goes:

The PAP is akin to a middle aged wife of a self-made wealthy businessman. She toiled tirelessly, washing clothes, cooking, teaching the kids... Basically caring for household. 

Regardless of how well she runs the household, she would never have gotten the praises and adoration of her husband and children. When something goes wrong, it will usually be her fault... Too strict... Incompetent...u name it.

But why would she be naggish and strict? Because the wife is there to walk life's journey with the husband and she has a responsibility. She scolds because she is worried, she nags because her heart aches.

The opposition is like the vixen who is prancing and waiting to replace the wife. All she needs to do, is to dress up, speak nice sweet things and gain the liking of people. Nothing more. 

Once the vixen gains her position, she has his money to spend. She doesn't care if the kids or the family has a future! After all, she didn't walk the journey from the start with the family, the kids are not hers!

Why would this vixen be seemingly sweet and considerate? Because she has no responsibilities, and she doesn't and wouldn't appreciate how difficult and arduous the journey has been from rags to riches.

To pick on bones and speak badly of the wife, is easy, who can't? All that's needed is to speak against, act prominently and go against the flow of logic... 

Sad but real

SG Election 2015: HWZ Censors Pro-PAP Comments

HWZ censors anti-WP information ....

Earlier today, a netter on HWZ posted that Workers' Party’s Low Thia Khiang was lying and uploaded a picture of Punggol East SMC’s financial report. The report showed another statement with an additional $303k received, which did not result in a deficit.

The thread which was gaining traction and likely to portray Low Thia Khiang as a liar was deleted at about 1.30pmShown below is the real full Punggol-East statement of account. We cannot help but wonder if this is the end of Low Thia Khiang and the Workers' Party.

real punggol east financial report

Singapore GE2015: Misinformation on AHPETC’s Managing Agent Fees

Misinformation on AHPETC’s Managing Agent (MA) Fees

Articles have been circulating on HWZ, TOC and even Roy Ngerng’s page claiming that AHPETC’s managing agent’s (MA) fee are not high. The writers go to great lengths to show what appears to be empirical proof. While on the surface their calculation appears logical, it is fundamentally flawed.

TOC’s publication of the article is not unexpected as they are known to be the mouth piece of the Workers’ Party. And since the WP is literally on the ropes after it was made known that FMSS, their former MA, was suing AHPETC for $3.5m, they needed a distraction.

Number 1: First of all, Town Councils manage only HDB estates. Hence, using the number of electorate as the basis for deriving their average-per-constituent cost is flawed. If we were to actually compare apples to apples, the correct cost per user would show that AHPETC was still significantly higher than any of the other Town Councils.


AHPETC MA fees

Number 2: How can you delink management fees to determine cost. This is businessmen call salami slicing. To get an accurate cost analysis, the total cost to deliver the service must be factored in. So this is the actual cost to residents:


AHPETC managing agent fees

So nice try TOC! Once again, you have shown your creative genius in how you continually try to mislead Singaporeans.

Saturday, 5 September 2015

Singapore GE 2015: SPP-DPP An Uneasy Marriage of Inconvenience

An Uneasy Marriage of Inconvenience

A SPP-DPP alliance wants your vote in Bishan Toa Payoh. But a hyphen does not create a team.

singapore ge 2015 spp dpp coalition


DPP’a Benjamin Pwee had initially left the SPP amid disagreements over the appointment of Mrs Lina Chiam as Mr Chiam’s successor. This rift shows.

For instance, SPP and DPP members have been wearing their own party t-shirts while canvassing for votes in the GRC. Even though they are now running under the SPP banner, Mr Pwee and Mr Hamim are DPP t-shirts, even at the rally.

Furthermore, SPP and DPP personnel have been seen canvassing for votes separately. If the team cannot even work together to canvass for votes, how are they going to run a town council together?

Even the relatively larger Worker’s Party find it difficult to run a GRC town council well – what more a disparate team lacking in party cohesiveness an identity?

One hyphen does not make a team

The current team was a last minute artificial creation. A cobbled together SPP-DPP. But electoral rules do not allow for two different parties to contest as one team.

As a consequence, DPP members Benjamin Pwee and Hamim Aliyas had to resign from their party and re-join the SPP. They will resign from the SPP and re-join the DPP should they lose in the upcoming elections.

What does this say about political loyalties?

Mr Pwee and Mr Hamim could be purely opportunistic in their political membership. Votes at any cost – doesn’t matter my political affiliation. This means that they will shift and change with the political winds.

But even if they are truly committed to this current hyphenated creation, what can they really do? As part of the SPP’s recent rally at Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, opposition stalwart Mr Chiam See Tong appeared to deliver a short speech in support of the joint SPP-DPP team currently contesting the GRC.

The general thrust of the SPP’s message was that they are more in touch with the ground and less elitist than their PAP opponents. This is easy to say. But as I voter, I want to know – what can you do?

Team Mascot: Chiam See Tong

The team is limited by real issues of succession. Mrs Lina Chiam is a great wife but a poor leader. The SPP lacks competent and convincing leadership.

As a consequence, they continued to rely on an increasingly frail Mr Chiam. Mr Chiam is neither fit nor willing to run for an election – but the party continues to wheel him out at every possible opportunity.

Even on nomination day, Mrs Chiam needed the assistance of SPP’s Assistant Sec-Gen Loke Hoe Yeong, (Mr Chiam See Tong’s biographer), in reciting her speech. He probably wrote her speech as well. 

The visibly frail Mr Chiam was also made to stand at both nomination day and their recent rally. He is the only recognizable feature of the party.

Can voters trust a party that continues to make use of its founder as a mascot?  What will happen when Mr Chiam is no longer able to play even this diminishing role? Neither Mrs Chiam nor Mr Pwee are capable of exercising political leadership. Ironically, the SPP, in its manifesto, pushes for a “worry-free retirement” Mr Chiam See Tong appears denied of such a retirement, at least politically. 

Friday, 4 September 2015

Open Letter to Png Eng Huat (Hougang Town Council)

OPEN LETTER TO PNG ENG HUAT: DID HOUGANG TOWN COUNCIL HAVE A SURPLUS OR DEFICIT?

Dear Mr Png,

On 2 September, you gave a good rally speech on how Hougang town council had a surplus when it merged its account with Aljunied GRC on 26 May 2011.

But as a citizen and voter, I feel it’s my duty to speak up when I’m not sure if it’s the truth. I need to know I can vote people I trust, so I hope you can shed light on this.

I was told that Hougang town council may not be as good as you painted it to be – before 2011, Hougang town council was in deficit every year for 3 years:

FY2008/09 - deficit about $96k
FY2009/10 - deficit about $102k
FY2010/11 - deficit about $92k

You said in your speech that when Hougang TC merged its account with Aljunied on 26 May 2011, Hougang TC had a surplus. But I was also told that actually your auditors said that in the financial year ending 31 Mar 2011, your TC registered a net deficit of about $91k. I find it hard to believe, but is it true? This date is very close to the 26 May date, how come?

Apparently your auditor said they were not sure whether you had enough operating funds for daily operations, and your management had been exploring ways to improve the financial position of Hougang TC. What kinds of ways did your management explore?

There is talk that the surplus in Aljunied was used to cover the deficit in Hougang after the 2011 elections. Could that be the way your management improved the financial position of Hougang TC? I hope not…

Thanks Mr Png for taking time to clear up my doubts. It would also help if you could open your accounts and let the public see the Hougang TC audit reports from 2008 to 2011. 

Then we can know for sure.

Keep up the good work!

A Voter

open letter png eng huat hougang town council hgtc

Singapore Election 2015: Why I Continue to Support the PAP

An amazingly simple but powerful video by a PAP supporter on why she continues to support the PAP. She gets it right by saying that much has improved since 2011 and that only by working together with the Government can we continue to achieve as a nation.


Thursday, 3 September 2015

Pro-Opposition Supporter: Why I will not vote for Bernard Chen!

Although I am pro-opposition, I will not vote for WP’s disappointing candidate in Macpherson. NSP gets my Vote!

Many of my friends have said that they are envious of me—a resident in Macpherson SMC—because the number one opposition party The Workers’ Party is coming to contest in my area. I am spoilt for choices, they said, and don’t have to settle for “non-choices” such as The Reform Party, SingFirst or the Singapore Democratic Alliance.

But I beg to differ. I told them three reasons why I will not be voting for the Workers’ Party in this coming election.

First, WP is insincere in contesting in Macpherson SMC. I have done my due diligence to research what is the reason they are contesting in Macpherson SMC but I couldn’t find anything. It is clear to me that WP is only interested to come to Macpherson because it was part of Marine Parade GRC. And they are contesting in Marine Parade GRC only because Yee Jenn Jong’s beloved Joo Chiat SMC is absorbed into MP GRC. Otherwise, they wouldn’t even be here at all! If they were sincere, they would have been working the ground for Marine Parade GRC, including Macpherson, over the last few years. From what I can see, their sincerity extends to only Joo Chiat SMC.  

Second, Bernard Chen is an election greenhorn. I might have considered WP if they fielded a person who is at least familiar with Macpherson. But from what I have found, Bernard does not stay in Macpherson.  From his Facebook, he has been seen more in Hougang and Aljunied than in Macpherson. Since the WP believes so much in working the ground and engaging the residents, why send someone who doesn’t hasn’t been in the constituency regularly? My sense is that the WP is merely fielding him in Macpherson for his baptisan of fire into politics. If so, don’t expect me to vote for someone whom his own party don’t expect to win but here for the experience.

Third, I don’t trust Bernard Chen to run my town council. According to his blog, he has only worked for less than one year. To my surprise, he has even fewer working experience than me (I started working in September 2011) at 29 years old! Does someone who has so little years of working experience able to manage a town council when his more senior colleagues in the WP already has so much problems? Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim have said they were inexperienced in the financial matters as it was their first time and they would do better. Then why are they sending a greenhorn? Will he give the same excuses that he is unfamiliar in running the town council when he screws up? And the stakes are higher in Macpherson because there are so many elderly who live there. If the lifts don’t work and cannot be repaired in time, I shudder to imagine the consequence. In comparison, NSP’s Cheo Chai Chen was a former MP for Nee Soon Central SMC from 1991 to 1997. For what NSP is worth, at least they showed sincerity and seriousness by fielding a veteran who was an actual MP. Despite the troubles in NSP, I am keeping my options open and see what NSP’s Cheo Chai Chen will offer in the upcoming days and explain why he is a better candidate than PAP’s Tin Pei Ling.

WP might make a compelling choice in other places, but definitely not for me in Macpherson.

Wednesday, 2 September 2015

My response to Sylvia Lim's 2nd Open Letter to Residents of AHPE

In response to The New Paper’s article that FMSS had served a letter of demand on AHPETC for the sum of $3.5m, AHPETC issued the following Open Letter to the residents of AHPE. As with most of their communication, AHPETC has once again been selective with the truth and at times distorting the facts to suit their own lies.

sylvia lim open letter to residents of ahpe

SG Bumiputra sat down to study Sylvia Lim’s letter and the following are the distortions and untruths I discovered. 

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

SECOND OPEN LETTER TO RESIDENTS OF ALJUNIED-HOUGANG-PUNGGOL EAST TOWN

Dear Residents,

In my First Open Letter to you in June 2015, I explained three main points concerning various allegations made against Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC).  These were:

1. AHPETC does not and cannot reserve contracts for “friends” due to the public tender process;

2. The alleged “overpayment” by AHPETC to its former Managing Agent (MA), when compared to rates paid by PAP TCs in 2014, was an exaggeration, looking at the rates paid by PAP TCs in 2011, 2012 and 2013 according to data provided by the Ministry of National Development (MND);

[Distortion: FMSS’ MA rates were consistently higher than other TCs, in the four years that it was AHPETC’s MA (not just 2014) ). Now we also learnt that the margin of profit was 30% and the four FMSS owners made more than $3.2m a year.] 

3. The MA rates that AHPETC agreed to pay its MA in 2012 were arrived at taking into account the MA rate paid by the PAP management of Aljunied TC to its former MA.

If you missed the first open letter, you can read it online at http://www.ahpetc.sg/sylvia-lims-open-letter-to-residents/.

In this Second Open Letter, I would like to clarify and reassure all residents that AHPETC places your interests at the heart of its work and continues to make improvements to its financial management.

This letter will cover the issue of Conflicts of Interest and AHPETC’s financial position.

1. Conflict of Interest and Related Party Transactions

There have been allegations concerning related party transactions between AHPETC and its former MA, FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd (FMSS).

First, there is no longer any issue, as AHPETC is now directly managed and does not outsource its work to an MA.  The previous MA contract expired on 14 July 2015, and there were no bidders to take over the MA services after 14 July 2015.

Since 15 July 2015, AHPETC has been self-managed.  This means that AHPETC is now directly hiring staff to handle estate, finance, administration and other tasks, instead of outsourcing the work to an MA.

Under direct management, AHPETC’s contractors continue to deliver services under the existing contracts, now supervised by TC’s directly hired staff.

Second, there was never any conflict of interest whatsoever between the Workers’ Party (WP) or any of its Members of Parliament (MPs) and FMSS.  Neither WP nor any of its MPs or members has any interest in the business of FMSS.  None of the directors and shareholders of FMSS is a member of WP.

[Untruth: The late Mr Danny Loh and Ms How Weng Fan are long time WP supporters. They acted as assentor and proposer to the WP team of candidates led by Mr Yaw Shin Leong in Ang Mo Kio GRC in the 2006 General Election. Ms How has worked for Mr Low TK in Hougang since graduating from university. FMSS was formed on 15 May 2011, exactly 1 week after the results of the GE. CPG only informed Sylvia Lim of their wish not to continue as MA in late May.]

Third, there have been accusations that when the MA was working at AHPETC, the husband and wife team who owned FMSS could freely sign payments to themselves.  This is not true.  When WP took over in 2011, one of the first decisions made by the new Aljunied-Hougang Town Council was to require any cheques to the MA, no matter how small the amount, to require the counter-signature of AHPETC Chairman and Vice-Chairmen who have no interest in the MA’s business

[Untruth: While the payment amounts may have been pre-agreed by contract, the TC still has a duty to ensure that the services that the MA was contracted to provide were performed duly and properly. The question is, when the Chairman and Vice-Chairmen counter-signed these payments, did they take steps to counter-check that the contracted services - for which the millions were being paid - had been duly performed? The answer is clearly NO since their own auditors have observed poor governance over related third party transactions involving FMSS. And the AGO discovered specific instance of overpayment/overcharging by FMSS because it misrepresented the facts to the TC who approved the payment rates in ignorance.]

 2. Financial Position of AHPETC

Some people have accused AHPETC of bankruptcy and running huge deficits that are not sustainable, and also warned residents of other towns not to vote for WP so as not to subsidise AHPETC.  These allegations are misguided.

AHPETC filed its audited accounts for FY 14/15, on time, by 31 August 2015.  Though these accounts show AHPETC in annual deficit, this is because AHPETC has still NOT received its annual S&CC operating grant of $7.2 million from the government, which would normally have been paid to all Town Councils in April 2014.   Taking into account the $7.2 million in grant which AHPETC expects to receive, AHPETC’s annual income and expenditure statement would show an annual surplus of $1.7 million.

[Untruth: MND had to withhold the grants because the TC could not file a clean set of accounts for years. Its own auditors and the AGO itself raised numerous disclaimers and concerns. As these grants are public funds, MND has a duty to safeguard how they are used and managed. Nevertheless at the request of the TC for release of the grants to pay their outstanding SF deficits, MND agreed and asked for AHPETC latest cash flow position. The TC refused to give the information despite repeated reminders viz on 2 May, 15 Jun and 6 Aug 2015. Even the High Court Judge Quentin Loh remarked that the TC had itself to blame for not securing the grants.]

The past operating deficit was largely the outcome of higher tender price for various service contracts and start-up costs.

The current positive position came about through a combination of steps taken by AHPETC. These included lowering its utilities costs by using contestable energy, reducing its general and administrative expenditure, and increasing its revenue.

Throughout the difficult initial years, AHPETC management believed that it could improve the TC’s financial position, and the latest audit shows that it has.  We expect to further consolidate and improve AHPETC’s financial position going forward.

We have done our best to serve residents, and I would like to express appreciation to our staff for their contribution to the progress we have made and to our residents for their support and understanding.

SYLVIA LIM
CHAIRMAN
ALJUNIED-HOUGANG-PUNGGOL EAST TOWN COUNCIL


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

From this simple episode, it is obvious that Ms Sylvia Lim and the Workers’ Party are skills in the art of misinformation. Sandwiched between truths, the lies are hard to distinguish from the truth. 

Tuesday, 1 September 2015

AHPETC Financial Report FY2014/2015

AHPETC, now directly run by the Workers' Party, proudly announced that they have submitted the statutory required documents on time. If one did not know the full story, one would be surprised as to why there is great fanfare for an organization to do what it is required by law to do.

Accompanying that announcement, was also a statement that AHPETC had achieved a slight surplus for Financial Year 2014/2015. In and of itself, these 2 statements convey to the layman that all is fine in AHPETC. Unfortunately, what the two statements failed to do,  which they were deliberately designed to do, is to tell the truth about what went on and is still going on in AHPETC.

The following infographic tells you what AHPETC does not tell you .... or want you to know. #sharethetruth #ge2015 #sgelections

AHPETC financial report 2014 2015

Monday, 31 August 2015

Singapore GE 2015: Rebutting Tan Jee Say on ESM Goh as an Overstayer

Why ESM Goh Is Not An Overstayer?
Recently, Tan Jee Say told the media during the introduction of SingFirst candidates that ESM Goh Chok Tong is an overstayer in this election. It is not only wrong but unfair to the man who served as the second prime minister of Singapore.
ESM Goh Chok Tong has been in politics since 1976. For nearly 40 years, he has been serving in various key roles such as Senior Minister of State for Finance, Minister for Defence and Minster of Trade and Industry before becoming Prime Minister. He has a wealth of experience that few could match.
Indeed, the past 40 years was not smooth sailing as several challenges confronted Singapore. There were at least 3 economic recessions (1985, 1997 and 2001) and a major disease outbreak (2003 SARS crisis). It was Mr Goh Chok Tong and his cabinet colleagues who were closely involved in tackling those challenges that helped brought Singapore out of those dark moments.
His years of leadership in those years of crises make him an undisputed choice to assist PM Lee to mentor the next generation of leaders. It is indeed Singapore’s good fortune that he is still willing to stand for election again when he could already retire. His passion and dedication to Singapore is truly admirable.
Frankly, it is becoming more difficult for me to take Tan Jee Say seriously. Calling ESM Goh an overstayer is simply disrespectful. After all, Tan was ESM’s principal private secretary for five years. The only decent thing a former subordinate could do is to show some bit of respect for a former superior. Where is Tan Jee Say’s basic courtesy towards his former boss when he called him an “overstayer”?
More importantly, Tan Jee Say is an attention-seeker only interested in his personal political agenda. By calling ESM names, he is able to draw more media attention to himself and his fledging political party. His attention-seeking streak goes way beyond that episode. He tried to run for Member of Parliament in the 2011 general elections, gaining extra prominence because he was the former principal private secretary to ESM Goh and someone whose economic plans was endorsed by a senior civil servant in UK. When he was unsuccessful in his bid, he promptly resigned from the Singapore Democratic Party to run in the 2011 presidential elections. It was clear to me back then that there was not an iota of commitment in this man to either the SDP or the residents of Holland-Bukit Timah GRC. All he had in his mind was to have a platform to bring fame and glory to himself. After 2011, he has been making numerous appearances in Hong Lim Park criticising the Government but not offer any practical solutions except to keep spending more and more. He has now set up his own political party with policy proposals centered on spending money derived from unguaranteed expected returns from investing Singapore’s returns.
The onus is on voters in a democracy to exercise due diligence to examine what each and every political party is saying. I believe that the record speaks for itself. ESM’s lifetime of service to Singapore is evident to all Singaporeans. There is no need for us to take a political opportunist seriously.

Saturday, 29 August 2015

Singapore General Election 2015: Is This the First World Parliament You Want?


WP's concept of first world parliament


Title: Is This the First World Parliament You Want? 

The WP is out in full force, trying to convince Singaporeans why it would be a good idea to vote them into Parliament:

“Just by voting the few of us in during the 2011 GE, big changes have been introduced by the Government. If you vote more of us in (especially for all 28 seats), imagine how much change there will be!”

That sounds like a clever 2-for-1 deal – vote for the WP, and you get a more nervous PAP who will do more for you. Don’t worry too much about what we do – so long as we are there, the PAP will work harder.

But let’s think about this scenario: let’s say WP gets what they want and win 28 seats. Let’s say Lina Chiam reclaims Potong Pasir,  and one of the other opposition parties (we have 8 others, in case you didn’t know) wins one or more seats – maybe SDP’s Chee Soon Juan. Suddenly, everything changes – the PAP would have lost its 2/3 majority advantage.

Practically, all this would mean is that the PAP government would no longer be able to pass constitutional amendments easily, since WP has an interesting habit of abstaining from votes.

But that will not be the only change:

- Suddenly, our all-talk-no-action, we-are-just-happy-to-be-here WP MPs (remember, there will be 28 of them) will be constantly demanding more from the Men-In-White without actually suggesting any new ideas. If you don’t believe this, just go watch any of the Parliamentary sessions over the past 4 plus years. Yup, the WP MPs have been a huge disappointment.

- Instead of having more doers, and being able to draw from the wisdom of a larger pool of MPs, PM and his Cabinet will have to spend their time answering questions from WP MPs trying to score political points.

This is not just some wild conjecture – it is what some opposition members are calling for, and it is what WP is working towards. This is why they are selling their 2-for-1, PAP-does-while-WP-watches deal so hard.

I don’t know about you but I want my MP to DO things and not just be a checker. Because after all, I can check the Government. That is what the ballot box is for and frankly, there are many channels to provide feedback on policies to the Government.

What I want from my MP is someone who will come up with workable alternative suggestions that will improve my life. When we talk about opposition, that is what we are talking about. Not people who just wayang and the claim credit for things they did not do. So at the next general election, my choice will be dictated by a very simple logic: Who actually kept their promises? Who did things? Who is trying to claim the credit for others’ work? And most importantly, who do I trust? Remember, every vote counts, and we still have a choice to prevent the worst from becoming a reality. Cast your vote wisely.

Wednesday, 26 August 2015

Singapore General Election 2015: Gilbert Goh and Why I Will Never Vote for Him

Gilbert Goh has finally thrown his hat into the ring and will be contesting in the AMK GRC under the banner of the Reform Party. Nothing surprising as he has been a strong advocate of the down-trodden in Singapore. So why will I not vote for Gilbert? Simple.

Singapore ge2015 gilbert goh

#1: No Integrity. Gilbert likes to post pictures on Facebook of down trodden Singaporeans. He puts pictures of homeless people and accuses the Government of not helping. While it may be true that these few are homeless, what Gilbert fails to do is to tell the full story. As any social worker can tell you, solving the homeless problem often goes far beyond providing a physical home. It often goes into issues like family circumstances. In fact, many social workers will tell you that these homeless choose not to take-up the Government’s offer of shelter and help. It can be an issue of pride. Whatever it is, one cannot accuse the Government of not helping. So, the number one reason I will not vote for Gilbert Goh is because he tells half-truths for his personal agenda. Do we need an opposition like that in Parliament? I think not.

#2:  Irresponsible. As part of his activism, Gilbert Goh runs the website www.transitioning.org. Often, Gilbert will repost letters from PMETs claiming discrimination with examples that are blatantly false. Instead of making the effort to verify the information, or to edit these letters out, Gilbert will run these letters to stir anti-foreigner sentiments. I am not against activism, but I want responsible activism. Singapore is a multi-racial country and like it or not, we need to be extra careful when it comes to race and religion. We cannot have a Member of Parliament (MP) who irresponsibly uses race to stir the sentiments of Singaporeans. The number two reason I will not vote for Gilbert Goh is because he is irresponsible and he may destroy the racial harmony of Singapore.

#3: Poor Judgement. There is this saying that you are the average of the 5 people that you spend your time with. In the case of Gilbert, he chooses to spend his time with people like Roy Ngerng, Han Hui Hui, Amos Yee and Alex Tan. These people are out to destroy Singapore for no other reason than because they do not agree with the Government’s policies. If these are the friends that Gilbert chooses to associate with, I can only imagine what Gilbert will do if he wins a seat in Parliament. Thus while I cannot dictate who Gilbert Goh chooses as his friends, the number three reason I will not vote for Gilbert Goh is because I doubt that he can put the nation’s good before his personal agenda.

I therefore appeal to the residents of Ang Mo Kio GRC to vote wisely. Keep Gilbert Goh (and the likes of him) out of Parliament for the good of Singapore.

Sunday, 23 August 2015

Unseen Footage of Chee Soon Juan Heckling ESM Goh Chok Tong

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) has started to re-brand themselves with a slick PR campaign. The key question on many Singaporean's mind is whether Chee Soon Juan, a man so filled with hatred for the Government and who believes in disruptive politics, can make a responsible opposition Member of Parliament (MP).

To see the hatred and the style of democracy he advocates, SG Leaks as a telling video of the man in action. The video shows Chee Soon Juan heckling Mr Goh Chok Tong.

Click here for previously unseen video. You be the judge .... to us, he will never be a responsible opposition MP.

Wednesday, 19 August 2015

Singapore GE 2015: Is the WP Running Scared?

Is the WP Running Scared?

WP AHPETC Saga
 
Just 4 days after Workers' Party (WP) Low Thia Khiang confidently told the media that the WP would stick to its usual practice of introducing their candidates before Nomination Day without revealing where they will be standing, Sylvia Lim today (16 August 2015) announced that WP's elected members of Parliament would be defending their constitiencies.
 
What is significant about this change is that the WP had only days before said they would not change their practice, and that this annoucement came on the back of an announcement by AHPETC that they would be releasing their updated audited town council financial report on 31 August 2015. Political pundits see this change as an indication that the audited town council financial report would once again be qualified (meaning that its accuracy cannot be verified) and that this will raise questions and concerns from Aljunied residents. WP's decision to keep their "A-Team" in Aljunied is seen as a desperate attempt to strengthen their chances of retaining  Aljunied GRC.
 
Hougang MP Png Eng Huat's public comment that any discussion about AHPETC's financial position would only be meaningful once the report has been released , is  another clear indication that they are feeling the pressure from residents. One must not forget that 45% of Aljunied GRC voted for the PAP and WP's dubious track record of managing the Town Council will certainly lose them the swing votes. WP would most certainly have lost the votes of the residents of Florence Regency and the 2 DBSS projects where the WP had failed to perform their statutory duties to maintain the estates despite collecting S&CC fees.
 
There is a famous saying that you can bluff some of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, butyou cannot bluff all of the people all of the time. 
 
WP, your time has come and I predict that you will lose Aljunied GRC. 
 
SG Bumiputra