Low Thia Khiang Lies! Hougang Town Council was not in the black

At one of the Workers' Party's recent rally, Png Eng Huat and Low Thia Khiang openly declared to their supporters that Hougang Town Council (HGTC) was in the black before they merged with Aljunied GRC. 

This is once again misleading as they took a snap-shot without declaring that they had debts to be paid. Additionally, HGTC's published financial reports show that they were in the red since 2008. In fact, their own auditors were concerned about the continued operations of HGTC.

Once again more half-truths by the Workers' Party to mislead Singaporeans. This simple animation by Citizen Sane explains the full story .... #sharethetruth #stopthe lies #stopwp

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.

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:

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

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

Singapore General Election 2015: Hougang-Gate

(1)    Png Eng Huat and Low Thia Khiang  declared that Hougang Town Council (HGTC) was always in the black. Not true.

Based on the TC’s own accounts, HGTC had operating deficits of $96,000 for 2008 and $102,000 for 2009 and $92,000 for 2010 (ending Mar 2011). Fact is they have been spending more than their income every year.

(2)    Png Eng Huat and Low Thia Khiang said that Hougang had a surplus when it merged with Aljunied. Half-true-deliberately misleading. 

(3)  Low Thia Khiang declared that there was no need for Hougang to merge with Aljunied. Not True.

Any book-keeper or accountant will tell you that the financial state of the TC is determined at the end of each year when the  income collected each month and expenses spent each month are totalled and squared. For instance, if you look at your own finances in a year, on the month you get  your bonus, you probably have a surplus. But when you add up the expenses against your income for the months in the rest of the year, your bankbook and bills will tell you whether you are spending more than you earn or not and whether you have savings (surplus) or debt.

What Low and Png did was to carefully select a month (May 2011) at the start of the financial year (which starts on 1 Apr 2011) to create a false picture of a surplus when in fact their finances reflected a pattern of deficit in Hougang which began in 2008. But by merging the Hougang accounts with Aljunied, they ensured that this will be buried from public view.

The TC’s own auditors, Kelvin Wong & Co,  on Mar 2011 stated that there is uncertainty over the adequacy of operating funds and that the HGTC’s so called surplus is just a snapshot and is not a good reflection of the TC’s finances because bonuses, property tax, GST expenses, etc were included in the financial report. In short, he is saying to Hougang TC that you are rich on payday, but actually you are in debt  because you have not settled all your bills and still spending more than you earn.

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.

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. 

The Story of FMSS: More than meets the eye

More to it than meets the eye: the story of FMSS

The numbers speak loudly enough for themselves – FMSS and its owners have clearly managed the TC to their own advantage and profiteered from it. In all, $3 million dollars in salaries, fees and profits last year– crazy margin - three dollars out of every S&CC ten dollar spent on the MA is sheer profit and benefits for the 4 owners. What adds insult to injury is that while they got paid big bucks, they didn’t even deliver a basic standard of administration and financial system to past muster under the TC’s own auditors. Four years this went on until the AGO audit exposed the mess the TC was in. Then Sylvia Lim finally had to step in and try to clean up the mess.

What is really difficult to comprehend is Sylvia Lim’s defensive reactions over FMSS. Each time, the TC screwed up – which means FMSS screwed it up - as highlighted by their own auditors, she will defend the FMSS with spurious and some plainly, false assertions.  When all else fails, she hide behind the argument that their relationship with FMSS is purely commercial and the contract was awarded via open tender bla bla bla. When AGO found a case of FMSS having misled the TC which wound up paying 40 % more than was rightly the amount, she trivialised it as a mathematical error and even took personal responsibility as Chairman of the TC for the “mistaken overcharging” by FMSS. Now when confronted this week with the glaringly obscene profits that the FMSS owners made off the TC, she dismissed it and declared there has been no overcharging by FMSS. 

The latest distraction she is trying to throw smoke with is that the Government shouldn’t look into all these things (even if it involved public monies) and that all this is an abuse of Government power. Are you kidding? As an elected MP, she has a legal duty to manage the TC conscientiously and safeguarding the residents interests and monies is at the heart of that.  No different from the Government, namely MND which oversees the TCs under the TC Act. This  duty of the office - of the elected MP of AHPETC and of the Minister for ND - requires that no stone be left unturned and that no one looks the other way to find out if residents have indeed been short-changed and overcharged by FMSS. The public has a right to know what the hell happened in the 4 years that the FMSS ran the TC, laughing to the bank but leaving behind such a huge rotten mess brewing under the façade of efficient enough cleaning services and other visible activities, which lull residents to believe that everything in the TC is hunky dory.

When you research and trace the facts, the picture that comes out tells you that there is more to FMSS than meets the eye. I have no doubt that FMSS was set-up at the initiative of the WP leaders. It was incorporated on 15 May 2011,  13 days after the GE; preparation for incorporation – collect/submit forms and getting lawyers to draw up incorporation documents - probably occurred at least a week before that. All this happened before CPG spoke to Sylvia expressing wish to terminate their service as the MA. In an interview reported in Straits Times (19 Aug 2011), Sylvia revealed that CPG asked to be released from their MA contract in “late May”

Ms How and her husband, Danny, long time supporters of the WP, were trusted aides who ran Hougang TC. They managed to put up almost $500,000 in a jiffy as paid up capital for the new company. And most telling, the company was set up as a “limited exempt private company” which means that its annual accounts need not even be submitted to ACRA . Completely out of public scrutiny.

There was obvious pre-meditation and strategy by the WP in the formation of FMSS. They had a hand in forming it, more than they have disclosed. To be fair, they had just won a GRC and were obviously nervous about trusting the CPG who had been running the TC under the PAP. They needed to rely on their own people. The FMSS was a WP trusted and WP aligned entity from the point of its creation. In my view, there is nothing wrong with what they did, even if they chose to keep it secret. No big deal, they did what they had to do. This is politics, man.

The story however starts to go bad after FMSS took over running the TC and ran it to the ground. Ms How, used to being her own boss under Low Thia Khiang in Hougang, ran AHPETC like the way she ran Hougang. Sylvia Lim had little control over her even when Ms How behaved in a rude and disrespectful manner to her - there was little she could do about it. But the truth it, Sylvia was quite happy not to have to deal with boring, mundane stuff like running a TC. She had her sights on higher things, they were on a roll, everyone in the WP was politically high. So no surprise, that in the same ST interview reported in Aug 2011, she assured that the party can run the TC and has set aside the first 6 months after the GE to focus on the TC and after that “ a few months down the road, we will start to think about the next general election and the new areas we would like to contest”

Four years passed – disclaimers piled up each year by their own auditor – FKP - as the TC under FMSS couldn’t even produce a clean set of accounts. I recall that the High Court Judge Quentin Low said that in another setting, this state of affairs would have led to civil if not criminal sanctions. What FMSS was guilty of was incompetence and greed. What Sylvia and her fellow WP MPs were guilty of was negligence arising from the arrogant belief that running a TC was no big deal. She had assured voters that the WP can easily run a GRC TC and were ready.  She thought she could have the challenge of running a GRC TC done in 6 months and then just focus on politics.

This under-estimation of the complexities of a GRC level TC management and over-estimation of the experience and expertise of FMSS is the root of why things went so wrong in AHPETC. This is why Sylvia assumed that the PAP’s AIM IT system contract would not be renewed and never bothered to ask; indeed like FMSS, the WP preferred to have their own system over which they had total control. Sylvia asked AIM for short extensions to get her own system going and this was acceded to; she even thanked AIM at the end of it all. But when things go wrong because of FMSS incompetence (even manual records got lost and couldn’t be traced), Sylvia blamed AIM. When their own auditors raised a list of growing disclaimers, Sylvia blamed “handover issues” implying that George Yeo fixed them up – this was a constant and tiresome refrain until debunked. The fact is the “handover” of documents and records was between the CPG and FMSS held under the supervision of the TC with Sylvia at the helm. Poor Georgie boy had nothing to do with it. I heard that when CPG left after a proper handing over records with FMSS signing for all documents received, Sylvia hosted a big makan to thank the CPG folks for staying back and handing over properly to ensure a seamless transfer. (Sylvia’s reflex to deflect and blame others seem deep seated.More recently she blamed deficits in the past to MND withholding their grants – the facts are completely the opposite! AHPETC TC was in deficit for those years when they had the full grants (FY 12/13, FY 13/14)  and they reported an operating surplus for FY 14/15, the year when the grant was withheld!)

When the AGO auditors went in to do a special audit of the TC , they were horrified to find that the TC’s archival and record system consisted of a room full of piled up boxes overflowing with documents.  No proper record keeping and many missing records, some conveniently so for FMSS as related third party transactions were found to be an issue by the AGO and even later by the TC’s own auditors. What was Sylvia and her MPs doing during all this time?  To be blunt, they had been sleeping on the job, underestimated the challenge of running a GRC TC and trusted the wrong people to do it but who screwed them. The only problem is because the monies are all residents’ monies, the ones who got royally screwed are the residents of AHPETC and many of them till today don’t even know it.

Sylvia makes a fine speech about the duties of MP looking after the TC. During the 2011 GE, she assured the voters that she and her team have the experience to run a GRC TC – no fear.  But the truth is she didn’t bother to spend any time looking after the TC. Hubris led her to presume that she could just oursource her duties to look after the TC to a trusted MA like FMSS and focus on cultivating her political ambitions. Indeed I recall seeing her on stage pleased as Punch when her fellow MP, Pritam Singh commended her to the rally audience as a political leader with Prime Minister material (aiyoh ).Some of you may recall it too. (Anyway the bloody PAP machinery makes sure you don’t forget it by running the footage ad nauseum on the social media.)

A word on the FMSS people. I know that there is no love loss between Sylvia and Ms How. Danny who died suddenly has been a victim of sorts too. By all accounts, he was a nice man and it is really quite nasty of Sylvia of constantly press him for recovery of monies and when he agreed, changed her mind to demand for even more. ( A FMSS staff told me that Danny was a good boss and FMSS a good and fair employer). As a lawyer Sylvia should have worked through proper legal channels but she wanted to do it confidentially for political damage control reasons and so she kept putting pressure  Danny personally to cough up more monies on the grounds of overpayment due to poor service. ( This is completely at odds with  Sylvia’s public assertion later that payment according to contract cannot be overpayment!) Sylvia of course didn’t dare to deal with Ms How as the fiery woman would probably have kicked her in the groin ( slapping is reserved only for use by WP candidates J).

I have always thought that Sylvia was a nice  damsel and Ms How was the bad egg; but I have revised my view since researching this story – Ms How is abrasive, hot tempered and cantankerous, a  rough diamond, but what you see is what you get. Sylvia is really a devious character (maybe politics have changed her) and she has shown herself to have no compunction to lie in your face. She is of course under great pressure too because she is left to shoulder this AHPETC-FMSS mess by herself and some of her fellow MPs have clearly distanced themselves from her on this issue.

Anyway back to the story: a  business is driven to make profits; it is not a charity. So I suppose one can argue that there is really nothing wrong for FMSS owners to pursue profits; they are not obliged to save for the TC. On the other hand, it is the elected MPs whose job and duty it is to oversee and manage the MA and ensure that they don’t profit at the expense of the residents. No checks, no balance. The WP MPs failed in their duty because the buck ends with them – final responsibility for managing the TC rests with them, the elected MPs. 

The Government wants to do a forensic audit of the 4 years of TC accounts when the TC was run by FMSS. Eventhough Sylvia has found instances of overcharging and was exposed trying to recover monies from FMSS privately, she resists any such forensic audit.

I am glad that Sylvia has finally took charge of TC affairs since Mar this year. But she must stop “protecting” FMSS in order to exercise political damage control to avoid the public knowing just how much their friends have screwed them and the residents, right under their noses for four years.

The PAP is not going to win back Aljunied this GE. You can bet on it. No need for Sylvia to be so kiasu and kiasi. Do the right thing even if the truth turns out to be inconvenient politically. Because in the long run, you will be politically stronger for it.

It is time for Sylvia to take ownership and not keep on sweeping this FMSS-TC episode under the carpet. Afterall she has taken the first steps already and have as reported in her latest audited accounts cleaned up the shit and improved the situation. She cannot pretend not to have an inkling of what a mess she is left with in the TC, she cannot pretend that the last 4 years under FMSS didn’t happen. Time to step up and do the right thing. Do a forensic audit and get it cleaned up once and for all.

“The bottom line is this: We are responsible to ensure that the town runs well. The managing agent is employed for their professional expertise, and they have to deliver ….We are quite well aware of the need to be careful with these monies which come from the residents and also from government grants. We will definitely want to protect these monies” (Sylvia Lim, ST 19 Aug 2011)

I believe Sylvia Lim meant these words when she said them then. Time for her to go back and live by them and stop ducking the problem.

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: Observations from a Former Town Council GM

Observations of a Former Town Council GM

Reading the news report today “AHPETC faced losses while agent’s profits jumped 300%” shocked me. Being a former General Manager (GM) of a Town Council myself, it is  quite unbelievable that the APHPETC is running into deficit and yet correspondingly, their Managing Agent, FMSS is making so much profits. In fact, anyone who has ever operated a business will know that it is impossible for services based business to earn an after-tax profit of 36%, let alone an after tax-profit of 36% after paying $1.14 million in director fees. Either the client is downright dumb and is willing to be milked, or the client is complicit. Even the Orh Luak man at the Old Airport Road market cannot earn so much.

The best that my TC ever earned in a year is 10%. But these were few and far between. A typical TC's profit margin is on average 5%. FMSS' profit margins without the benefit of scale is phenomenal by any standard. 

Like many of my friends in this industry, I had smelled a rat. Unfortunately the gang at AHPETC were tight-lipped and nothing ever slipped. Given the cash cow they were sitting-on, I now know why. Afterall, who would want to kill the goose that lay the golden egg? Now that everything is coming to light, I think it is time for me to share my thoughts ...

a. Monthly S&CC. It is impossible for a TC (or any business for that matter) not to know its monthly S&CC arrears. Anyone that can accept that it takes a complicated system to calculate this is obviously blinded to logic. AHPETC's decision to stop submitting their S&CC arrears is clearly a ruse. The form requested by MND is a simple matrix that any 1st year accounting student can fill. We should also not forget, that the Hougang TC and even AHPETC had been submitting it according to the table for several months before it suddenly became impossible for them to do it. My guess, AHPETC wanted to build the perception of Government bullying.

b. AGO Audit. When it became impossible for AHPETC to politically deny an AGO audit into their books, AHPETC switched tactics to one of hiding information. Thus when basic accounting information like starting bank balances were asked for, AHPETC blamed George Yeo. This misdirection was subsequently dismissed when AGO discovered evidence that AHPETC themselves had certified in a handing and taking over documents that all the information was provided. When this happened, AHPETC then began to blame the political environment and how no one wanted to work for AHPETC. In reality, nothing had changed. The same sub-contractors that did work for Ajunied under George Yeo, continued to do work for AHPETC. In fact, almost all of AHPETC's sub-contractors do work for both PAP-run Town Councils and AHPETC. Here, AHPETC continued to build on the perception of Government bullying but also started playing I am a victim of the circumstance card.

Despite what AHPETC or the WP tries to say, one thing is for certain. A mess existed and there is something definitely wrong at AHPETC. Given Sylvia Lim's assurances that FMSS had been providing excellent services to the residents of Aljunied, Hougang and Punggol East, I am surprised that the WP had not renewed FMSS' contract. Also, given the fantastic profits to be made, I am equally surprised that FMSS did not re-tender for the contract. Perhaps all is not well at AHPETC. All that is left for me to say is that now that the WP has decided to take over the role of running the TC themselves, it remains to be seen if Sylvia Lim will be able to sort out the mess.

My only hope is that the residents of Aljunied, Hougang and Punggol East are not made to suffer for Sylvia Lim's incompetency or whatever you want to call it.

AHPETC Financial Report - A Sinkhole in the making

AHPETC – A Sinkhole in the making?

To be honest, I was extremely, if not pleasantly, surprised that AHPETC had reported that their financial report for 2014/2015 had shown a small surplus. Thoughts of the Government fixing them came to my mind and I thought that the Workers’ Party had finally gotten their act today.

This changed this morning when I read The New Paper report that FMSS had served a letter of demand to AHPETC for the sum of $3.5 million. Straight away, any sympathy and remaining sense of faith I had in the Workers’ Party were gone.

I recalled when the issue of their account was raised in 2012, AHPETC blamed the improper hand-over by George Yeo.

Then when their lie was refuted, they then blamed the political nature of the Town Council system and claimed in Parliament that no one wanted to work for them. Once again, I was partially convinced that it was possible, but a close friend of mine working in the facilities management industry told me otherwise. In fact, he told me that many of the companies working for AHPETC were in fact serving the PAP-run Town Councils. Some reputable companies like Ban Chuan Trading & Engineering Pte Ltd, ATL Maintenance Pte Ltd, Campaign Complete Solutions Pte Ltd, Yong Aik Construction Pte Ltd, EM Services etc.

I am sure there are many more. So how can Low Thia Khiang claim in Parliament that no one wants to work for AHPETC?

Piecing information on AHPETC’s poor financial status as alluded to by the AGO and MND, now that it is confirmed that AHPETC owes FMSS $3.5 million, I cannot help but wonder how much more AHPETC owes….

God bless the residents of AHPE

SG Bumiputra

AHPETC Releases Town Council Financial Report for 2014/2015

After much delay and under threat by Singapore Court, the Workers' Party finally submits Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) financial report for FY2014/2015 on time.

I must say that on the surface, I am certainly very impressed and happy that AHPETC, since taking over the running of the TC from FMSS (their previous MA), is able to announce a surplus for their account.

It however makes me wonder if AHPETC had taken over earlier, would they not have avoided the deficit for the first 3 years. As a matter of curiosity, since the account seems to be in order, why did AHPETC not allow the Independent auditor (IA) to help them? My only guess would be to politicize the issue and make them appear as the underdog for Singapore General Election 2015.

But overall, I am just glad that both MND and the TC feel they are duty bound to ensure that public funds are dutifully utilized.

But then again, with the Workers' Party, one can never know ...

SG Bumiputra

Workers Party: Chen Show Mao

I was talking to a friend the other day and he said: “Wah, WP not bad this time! Remember Chen Show Mao? They managed to attract a few more star candidates to their party this time! Got professor and lawyers...not bad… just like the PAP!

So I thought to myself, if CSM is the prototype for WP’s superstar, who could be the next star candidate that flops CSM?

The suspects are Associate Professor Daniel Goh, litigation lawyer Terence Tan, and law firm partner Dennis Tan.

But remember WP’s previous star catch who flopped Chen Show Mao?

He’s also a top lawyer! Rhodes scholar somemore. If you don’t know what that is, it’s some bombastic ang moh scholarship, so he must be as good as all the President’s Scholars that the PAP have. But I haven’t heard him speak in a while…

So maybe these WP star candidates don’t actually have that much to do! If they get elected into Parliament, all they need to do is:

1.       Keep telling people “I am one of you” – Upload as many pics of yourself on the public transport as you can

2.       Come with a well-prepared speech, but leave the supplementary questions to your more eloquent colleagues (eh, but I thought he lawyer)

3.       Blink and talk slowly or hem and haw

4.       On difficult issues like the AHPETC saga: JUST STAY SILENT! (eh, but I thought he used to work for many financial companies? Wouldn’t he know how to explain the accounts?)

5.       Instead, spend time taking shaky and artistic-looking FB pictures – As blur as possible

 

WAH.

So everyone,

                      

 

Is AHPETC in Financial Trouble

Is AHPETC in financial trouble?

A simple matter of three points and one question ...

What is Sinking Fund?

The Sinking Fund is a long term savings fund required by law. The Fund is to pay for repair and replacement of major things like lifts and electrical re-wiring.

For instance, over the next 10 years, AHPETC needs to pay $54m from SF just to replace lifts in the older blocks. That leaves only $55m from its current SF to do many other essential works:

· Repairs and Repainting of over 700 blocks (which alone may be as much $100m if not more)

· Implementing LUP (this can be as much as $20m)

· Electrical Re-wiring

· Repair and Replacement of old sanitary pipes

· If there is not enough money in the SF, these critical things will not get done. Residents affected will suffer.  Their property value will drop.

· The TC meeting its SF requirements on time therefore is critical

How is Sinking Fund Collected

Each month every TC collects S&CC from residents. Every 3 months, the TC is required to deposit one third of the total S&CC collected into the SF.

In addition, the Government gives the TC an annual grant. One third of this must also be paid into the SF. The rest is up to the TC to use.

What is the Sinking Fund Situation in AHPETC

AHPETC has defaulted on their SF payments. Their present outstanding SF deficit is $9m. AHPETC will have to pay another $13.5m into their SF for the rest of this financial year (FY2015/16). AHPETC therefore needs a total of $22.5m ($9m + $13.5m) to meet their SF obligations this financial year. 

MND currently holds $14m grants due to AHPETC because their accounts have not been cleanly passed by their own auditors. At the Sylvia Lim’s request, MND is prepared to release the grants if the TC furnishes its latest financial status.  AHPETC has chosen not to give the info despite many reminders.

When MND releases these grants,  $4m must be deducted upfront for additional deposit into the SF. This leaves $10m for the TC to use.

This $10m is not enough to cover the AHPETC’s SF requirements for this financial year. The TC needs to find another $12.5m this financial year to do so from their operating account.

One Simple Question Sylvia Lim Needs to Answer to Residents

Under George Yeo’s team, the TC ran an annual operating surplus of $3.3m. Under the WP, this has turned into an annual operating deficit of $1.5m by early 2013.

Their latest financial situation is unknown because they cannot even produce a clean set of audited accounts for the last 3 years. Whatever it is, the negative and downward trend known so far must give residents cause for concern.

Residents should ask Sylvia Lim to state plainly and honestly: 

· How much surplus money they have in the TC operating account after paying off all bills and meeting SF obligations this financial year.

Residents have a right to know the truth. Is the AHPETC boat leaking and sinking slowly into eventual insolvency? 

AGO Finds Lapses in PA's Financial Management System

Yes, it is true! The independent Auditor-General Office (AGO) found lapses in People's Assocation's (PA) financial management of funds. This is the same AGO who after auditing AHPETC, found that "there can be no assurance that AHPETC’s accounts are accurate and reliable, or that public funds are properly spent, accounted for and managed."

 

As expected, opposition supporters were quick to jump on the bandwagon to draw similarities between the PA and AHPETC. While there are some similarities, what they fail to acknowledge is that there is a significant difference in how the lapses are being handled. Organizations of respectable sizes are bound to have lapses. It is impossible not to have them as the large numbers of people and transactions make it a mathematical certainty that it will happen. What is more important, and this alludes to the character and value of the organization and its management, is how the lapses are handled.

 

In the case of AHPETC, the Worker's Party continued to hide, lie and mislead the public. Instead of being open and transparent, they continue to keep crucial information and records from even their own appointed auditors. Even after their promise in Parliament to submit an unqualified audited statement by July 2015, this has not happened. WP MPs have continued to dodge the issue and those running AHPETC have stayed silent. Pritam Singh even went to extent to tell Singaporeans that they do not need to answer to Parliament. In the case of AHPETC, no investigation, no accountability, no responsibility, no transparency.

 

Compare this to how the People's Action party responded to the lapses. The PA took the lapses seriously, immediately convened an investigation, accepted responsibility for the lapses and the Chairman of the Citizen's Consultative Committee (CCC) resigned from his position even before wrong-doing (if any) was confirmed.

 

Thus while we are disappointed in what has happened to the PA (and the other Government agencies named in the AGO's audit report), we are confident that, where the Government is concerned, things will always be open and transparent.

 

I hope that through this incident, Singaporeans will be able to see through the smoke and mirrors of the Worker's Party and realise the true character and values of opposition leaders like Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim and gang. For the sake of Singapore, we must indeed vote wisely!

A Concerned Citizen: AHPETC, when will you tell the truth?

AHPETC, when will you tell the truth?

 

I used to think the PAP was 'fixing' AHPETC. AHPETC is run by the opposition Worker's Party. So I used to think that any trouble AHPETC ran into was probably played up by the PAP to make WP look bad.

 

Even when the Auditor General found problems in AHPETC's accounts, I closed one eye because they were newcomers on the block. Of course they would make a bit of mistakes before they get more experience, right? At least they were honest and served their residents with integrity.

 

But when I saw the recent court decision from the case between MND and AHPETC, I was stunned like a vegetable.

 

The judge said that the Chairperson of AHPETC, Sylvia Lim, had hidden the truth about AHPETC's money transfers from Parliament. She told Parliament that AHPETC had been transferring money to its sinking funds, when actually AHPETC had made the transfers late. AHPETC had even made one of the transfers the day before she was supposed to answer for AHPETC's actions in Parliament!

 

So Sylvia, please tell us, your ex-supporters, the truth: why did you mislead Parliament? It's one thing to make beginner's mistakes, but another thing to speak to Parliament without honesty and integrity. I can forgive small mistakes, but I cannot forgive people who hide the truth.

 

WP, I thought I supported you for your honesty and integrity. That's what we raised you up to Parliament for - to be our honest voice; to look after our interests. But if you can't even be honest in your own accounts to Parliament, I wonder what else you're not honest in.

 

A concerned citizen