Workers' Party GE 2015 Rally Promises ....

WP GE 2015 Rally Promises: True or not? Or talk cock again ...

Been a property developer for 20 years and I also don’t think I dare to say such things.

The problem with the property market is first, it is volatile and second, because there are too many direct and blunt interventions by Government. If Low Thia Khiang can read the property cycle so accurately – he is either throwing smoke or the real Property Guru. Based on his airy explanation, I can only conclude that it is the former.

I think the only way HDB flats can be "stable" in price over the years and over property cycles is to return to a system of sell-back to HDB based on fixed valuation with discount for age of flat and remaining lease. This used to be the case. But that would mean 800,000 HDB owners today would lose the asset value that their flats fetch on the open market and which is a key part of their retirement nest-egg calculations. People who will suffer are the middle-aged to elderly people who own existing flat.

Price stabilisation over the last few years came about not from a single magic bullet like de-linking BTO pricing from resale. Stupid and irresponsible to oversimplify this. Stabilisation came about through a slew of cooling measures including shifts in HDB pricing. These measures had to be introduced incrementally to avoid overkill and avoid crashing the market which would only hurt all homeowners or more than 90% of all Singaporean households. Depressed flat prices will badly affect existing flat owners.

More important than just pricing is affordability. Whatever the price, people need to be able to afford it based on their ability to pay. This depends on their income and on the amount of grants they can obtain from HDB.

Low Thia Khiang should not prescribe medicine when he is not a doctor. He should at least do his homework before shooting off his mouth with bullshit dressed as political sound-bites.

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.

Open Letter by a Concerned Resident to Ms Sylvia Lim

Open Letter by a Concerned Resident to Ms Sylvia Lim

 

Dear Ms Lim,

 

First of all, thank you for stepping up and speaking-up for average Singaporeans like myself.

 

As a resident of Aljunied, I have been following the AHPETC saga closely as it afterall concerns me and my family. My husband and I, despite what the Government says, believe that you are an honest person and do not know of the huge profits that FMSS has made off the TC. This is a case of you trusting the wrong people who in the end succumbed to greed. Coffee-shop talk is that they are all Mr Low’s trusted friends and if this is the case, I can understand the difficult situation you must have been in all these years as a Chairman of the TC without control over the officers of FMSS.

 

While I do agree that there may be some political motivation on behalf of MND, I also believe in the adage that there is no smoke without fire. So since they have now highlighted certain gaps or lapses in AHPETC which is difficult to deny, I hope that you will now pay more attention to the details and sort out the problem. I believe as the opposition, you would be given some leeway by the public as experience takes time to acquire.

 

To be honest, from a resident's perspective, I really don't bother how much the MA earns as long as I do not pay more than what is fair and I get good service. My only concern is whether the issues raised by MND will affect the house I live in and to a greater extent the resale value of my house.

 

As a Singaporean, I believe we all want the same thing - a country that is democratic and based on justice and equality. At the coming GE, my family and I will continue to give you and the WP our support because we believe you need a chance to grow and gain experience. But you must be upfront with us all and acknowledge when something is wrong and then give us your word that you will sort things out. We will respect and trust you for it.

 

A Resident and Supporter

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.

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

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.

Singapore General Election 2015: Freak Election Results

This is a cool video we came across from a Citizen Sane. It is aptly titled "A Sanity Check".

Starring ... PM Lee Hsien Loong, Minister Chan Chun Sing, Minister Tan Chuan-Jin, Minister Heng Swee Keat, Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Pritam Singh, Mr Tan Jee Say and Everyday Singaporeans.

Singapore GE 2015: We predict WP to contest more GRCs for self-survival

Singapore General Election 2015.  When it comes to GE 2015, besides the date of the election, the next question on Singaporean's mind is whether the Worker's Party will be content to remain in Aljunied GRC, or make a bold move to contest another one or even two GRCs.

 

The WP's historic win of the Aljunied GRC in 2011 has certainly swelled its ranks with supporters and in turn a pool of potential candidates. Unfortunately, the Worker's Party is run much like a fiefdom by Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim and even the mighty international corporate lawyer Chen Show Mao has been stifled to the extent that he is non-existent.

 

According to our analysis, the Worker's Party will definitely seek to contest outside Aljunied GRC. In fact, we believe that Low Thia Khiang will be selling a grand vision of denying the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) the two-third majority in Parliament. Unfortunately, this grand vision is not driven in the interest of democracy, but self-survival.

 

While the AHPETC debacle is still pending in the Court, one thing is certain, AHPETC is near bankruptcy and the only way they can avoid it is to win another GRC and co-mingle the funds. This, in our analysis, was the same reason that Low Thia Khiang ventured outside Hougang to contest the Aljunied GRC in 2011. Back then, Low Thia Khiang was lucky. The much talked about freak election result occurred. The PAP would have comfortably retained Aljunied GRC if not for the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew's now infamous statement that residents of Aljunied would live to repent their decision if they voted in the WP.

 

With AHPETC raising questions about government grants being misappropriated, over-payment of contractors and dubious dealings with their managing agent, it makes us wonder whether residents of Aljunied (and Singaporeans as a whole) still believe that the Worker's Party has the moral character and values to "co-drive" Singapore's Parliament. While Singaporeans want an alternative voice in Parliament, it is also important to have the correct alternative voice. Singapore needs an opposition that is honest and of good personal characters. We cannot afford to have an opposition that champions transparency and accountability, but refuses to be open and accountable themselves.

 

In short, we believe that the Singapore General Election 2015 will see the Worker's Party contesting a few GRCs with Low Thia Khiang himself leading the charge. Whether the Worker's Party will be able to win more GRCs, or even keep Aljunied, will depend on whether Singaporeans can see past the rhetoric and vote not only for an opposition, but vote for an opposition that is honest, proven and of good moral character to co-drive Singapore.

AHPETC Saga - Low Thia Khiang's Silence is worrying

Sylvia Lim Should Step-Down ….  

As a political observer, I cannot help but wonder what went wrong with AHPETC. A successful AHPETC would have been a big boost to the credibility of opposition parties in Singapore.

The Worker’s Party (WP) cannot be so daft as not to know that their every action would be under intense scrutiny. So why would otherwise intelligent people like Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim and Chen Show Mao create a system that is essentially illegal. Surely, they would know that it would only be a matter of time before the truth is unveiled.

I dare say that the WP won the Aljunied GRC primarily because of Low Thia Khiang. Having successfully held on to the Single Member Constituency of Hougang since 1991, and having personal built the de facto opposition party to the dominant People’s Action Party, residents of Aljunied felt they could trust Mr Low. So when Low Thia Khiang introduced his “A Team” and urged residents to make them co-drivers, residents of Aljunied voted WP believing that Mr Low and his team would deliver.

Sadly, that trust has been misplaced.

Since Sylvia Lim assumed the role of Chairman of AHPETC, things have not been as promised by Low Thia Khiang. AHPETC is in a mess. Not only financially, but also legally. Specifically …

a. statement of accounts are not only overdue, but submitted with qualifiers by AHPETC’s own auditors making the contents suspect for accuracy

b. despite promises to get AHPETC in order, nothing significant has been done 

c. there have been overpayment for services and management fees with the General Manager of AHPETC earning 3 times the salary of GMs of other Town Councils 

d. lucrative contracts have been awarded to the GM’s own company

e. government S&CC grants (in the millions) have not been properly accounted for 

f. legal requirements to transfer S&CC collected to the sinking fund has not been done

g. transfer of sinking fund to Florence Regency took place late and after threats of legal actions

h. summons to attend Court to refund residents’ S&CC fees collected

i. …. and the list goes on

Given Low Thia Khiang’s track record of managing Hougang as an MP without incident, one can safely assume that AHPETC’s financial and legal troubles is caused by Sylvia Lim – the Chairman of AHPETC. In my mind, Sylvia Lim has proven herself to be incompetent and she should step-down for the sake of all opposition parties. In fact, I would even call on Low Thia Khiang to do the right thing and push for Sylvia Lim to step-down. Residents of Aljunied voted for Sylvia Lim on the basis of Low Thia Khiang’s endorsement. It is therefore the right thing for Low Thia Khiang to take responsibility for his mistake. 

WP’s manifesto says that they are for rational, responsible and respectable politics. Let’s see if WP takes responsibility for the debacle that AHPETC has become. How the WP deals with AHPETC will demonstrate how respectable the WP and its leaders are.

MND vs AHPETC: The facts of the case

MND details exchange it had with Sylvia Lim over financial status of AHPETC.

The National Development Ministry says even though it had offered to disburse half of the FY2014/15 Service and Conservancy Charge Operating Grant to Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council, the town council chairman Sylvia Lim did not take up the offer.

......

SINGAPORE: Earlier in April, the Ministry of National Development (MND) stated in court that the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) is "technically insolvent". This charge was not challenged by the town council (TC).

The court hearing was to decide if independent accountants should be appointed to safeguard government grants. When asked if the town council had become insolvent because the ministry had withheld funding, the ministry released the exchange it had with Workers' Party chairman Sylvia Lim, over the financial status of AHPETC.

MND said in response to media queries that even before the Auditor-General's Office (AGO) audit was completed it had offered, in response to Ms Lim's appeal, to disburse half of the FY2014/15 Service and Conservancy Charge (S&CC) Operating Grant to AHPETC. However, AHPETC "failed to take up the offer", MND said.

"In 2014, Ms Sylvia Lim had appealed to MND twice to disburse the S&CC Operating Grant, even though the AGO audit was ongoing, stating that the TC would not be able to pay its contractors and make Sinking Fund transfers otherwise. Yet, when MND, in response to her appeal, offered to disburse half of the grant to the TC, she did not take up the offer," an MND spokesperson said.

"MND has now applied to the Court to appoint Independent Accountants to enable the grant to be securely disbursed to AHPETC. But again, despite repeated questions from the judge, AHPETC told the Court it does not need the grants," the spokesperson added.

The ministry said the sequence of events is as follows:

• On April 28, 2014, MND wrote to Ms Sylvia Lim: “MND is considering to withhold the FY14/15 S&CC Operating Grant until the conclusion of the audit by the Auditor-General. Right now, we do not have reasonable assurance of proper financial management and keeping of accounts by AHPETC. Before we do so, we want to know whether AHPETC has any views or concerns as regards the proposed withholding of the above S&CC Operating Grant. If there are, you must let us have AHPETC’s views or concerns in writing for our consideration no later than 10 working days after you have received this letter (i.e. by May 14, 2014).” Ms Sylvia Lim did not reply to MND by May 14, 2014.

• More than a month later, on June 16, 2014, Ms Sylvia Lim wrote to MND, stating: “the continued withholding of the grant to AHPETC is likely to critically and adversely affect the TC’s cash flow position, resulting in a disruption of essential services to the town because the TC would not be able to pay its contractors…We call on the Ministry to disburse without further delay the Operating Grant it has withheld from AHPETC.”

• On June 20, 2014, MND replied to Ms Sylvia Lim that it was prepared to “reconsider the withholding of grant, to take into account the impact, if any, this may have on the TC’s provision of essential services to the town.” Following this, MND and AHPETC had a series of exchanges to clarify AHPETC’s cash flow position.

• On Oct 7, 2014, MND informed Ms Sylvia Lim that MND was “deeply concerned about the TC’s financial situation based on the information you provided and we would like to work with you to see how we can help the TC sustain its operations and avoid disruption of essential services to residents. We are prepared to consider, as an exceptional measure, releasing half the operating grant to AHPETC while the AGO audit is still on-going”. This would be subject to conditions such as Ms Lim ensuring that the TC makes all the necessary transfers to the Sinking Fund for the entire Financial Year as required under the Town Councils Act and the Town Councils Financial Rules, and Ms Lim confirming and declaring that the statements on AHPETC’s financial accounts she earlier provided to MND was true. MND did not receive any reply from Ms Sylvia Lim.

• On Nov 5, 2014, Mr Low Thia Khiang told the media that the TC had no cash flow problem.

• A week later, on Nov 12, 2014, Ms Sylvia Lim informed MND: “I would like to inform you that the figures given in my letters of July 30, 2014 and Aug 13, 2014, while correct based on information at the time, will need updating. We are assessing the situation and will reply substantively to your letter of Oct 7, 2014 should we wish to take the option of the half-grant while awaiting the conclusion of the AGO audit.” Ms Sylvia Lim had not gotten back to MND since then.

• On Feb 12, 2015, Ms Sylvia Lim told Parliament: “The Town Council accepts that it should have transferred the full amounts due to the sinking funds each quarter and should have paid sinking fund expenses directly from the sinking fund accounts. We have taken steps and made good the transfers… We have also done the transfers for FY2013 and have been making transfers for FY2014.”

• On Mar 27, 2015, during the Pre-Trial Conference, Ms Sylvia Lim repeatedly assured the Judge that AHPETC did not urgently need fresh grants from MND, as AHPETC had sufficient funds for at least the next 3 months. Ms Lim’s lawyer also told the Judge, after checking with Ms Sylvia Lim: “I have spoken to my client … they have not pursued the MND to release … the grants … because they don’t need the funds. They are okay … they can manage.”

• Yet, on May 4 and 5, it was revealed in Ms Sylvia Lim’s sworn affidavit, signed Apr 17, and in front of the Judge, that AHPETC had not made two out of the four mandatory quarterly transfers to the Sinking Fund for FY14/15, and even the two transfers it did make (for 1Q/2QFY14) were late. AHPETC also admitted that the TC would need the S&CC grants in order to operate in accordance with the law, and to make its Sinking Fund contributions. This was contrary to what Ms Sylvia Lim had told Parliament during the February 2015 Parliamentary debate on the AGO report, and what she and AHPETC’s lawyer told the Judge on Mar 27.

AHPETC Court Case - An Open Letter to Ms Sylvia Lim

An Open Letter to Ms Sylvia Lim

Dear Ms Sylvia Lim,

I am not your resident. I live in East Coast. But I hope you will not ignore me.

In Parliament Law and Foreign Affairs Minister K Shanmugam outlined some questions for the town councilors of AHPETC including:

1. Why did they not comply with normal accounting standards, resulting in millions of dollars in related party transactions?

2. Did they know that the managing agent FMSS was owned by a husband and wife team who were Workers’ Party supporters? Why was FMSS paid $1.6 million more per year compared to other town councils?

3. How much profit did FMSS make? How much were the husband and wife paid?

All these are valid questions. Instead of answering them, MP Pritam Singh stood up in Parliament and said he answered only to residents. If the Law Minister was a resident, said Mr Singh, he would answer him.

This is ridiculous. It has been many weeks since the Parliamentary sitting.

I pay S and C fees and I want some answers too. These are questions that ought to be publicly debated, not just whispered in shadows and coffee shops.

Mr Shanmugam is the Law Minister, and he says what the town councillors did was “unlawful”, taking money from the man in the street and giving it to their friends through town council operations.

He says: “Maybe there was no one taking money through the backdoor in the dark of the night - because the money was going out in broad daylight through the front door.”

Maybe, maybe not, but maybe is not good enough for me. I want to know for sure. It’s time all of us, residents or not, got some answers.

After all, if you are coming to my ward in the next GE, I want to know that my sinking funds are safe.

Joshua Lim

AHPETC: What Sylvia Lim does not want Singaporeans to know ...

In the on-going saga over the likely misappropriation of government S&CC grants by AHPETC, one common refrain we hear from Ms Sylvia Lim and the Worker's Party is that the AGO Special Audit gave them a clean bill of health. The WP is telling their residents that if there is reasonable suspicion of any offence being committed, the CPIB/CAD would have been called in to investigate. So if CPIB and CAD have not stepped-in, this proves that AHPETC has done nothing wrong.

What Ms Sylvia Lim, the Worker's Party and AHPETC have not told their residents is that the AGO Special Audit did not NOT find any criminal wrong-doing as this was beyond the scope of the audit. What the AGO Special Audit did find was that the financial reports submitted by AHPETC are not reliable and not accurate. MND has now asked for the appointment of an Independent Auditor, who will be tasked to do a forensic audit, and the CPIB/CAD will be called in once an offence is found. This is precisely why AHPETC does not want the Courts to appoint an Independent Auditor

Workers' Party of Singapore Above the Law?

During the recent budget debate, the Workers’ Party was quick to exercise their parliamentary rights to question the government on their proposed and past spending. It is ironic that just last month, in the same house, the Workers’ Party of Singapore had blatantly refused to answer questions put forth by the People’s Action Party on how Workers’ Party run Ajunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) had spent taxpayers money.

In justifying his question on needing to know how money was being spent on the new SAF Volunteer Corps (SAFVC), Low Thia Khiang argued on the concept of the need for equity in treatment. Perhaps Low Thia Khiang can reflect on his own question and ask himself why the issue of equity in treatment applies to the PAP (answering his question) and to the issue of how Volunteers are treated, but not the more fundamental issue like the need for WP to answer to Parliament?

Is this how a first world parliament operates?

The Workers’ Party is obviously out of control in their belief that they are above the law. The AHPETC issue clearly reveals the true character and values of Low Thia Khiang, Slyvia Lim and Pritam Singh. It is time Singaporeans showed the Workers’ Party that they are not above the law.

More Singaporeans Are Turning Away from the Workers Party

WP IS ONLY GOOD IN RHETORIC, NOTHING ELSE!

This note was originally a post on my timeline on 14 February 2015 in response to this blog post on Petulantchild.

I reproduced the post into this note (with some refinements) to preserve my thoughts for posterity.

I identify with the above blog post totally! I didn't start out being a PAP supporter either!

The writer of the above blog may not be a PAP supporter now but I see the "eureka" moment down the road.

Most may find it hard to believe, I used to be a SDP supporter!

Back when I first started studying law back in the late 1980s, I was a diehard supporter of the SDP that Mr Chiam See Tong led as its founding Secretary-General. Exposed to the western models of democracy in the study of Constitution Law, I wanted the PAP to be checked too! Mr Chiam's approach in Parliament of focusing on issues rather than rhetorics and personal attacks appealed to me. By contrast, the approach of the then WP Secretary-General made me adverse to the WP.

I cheered for SDP in the elections in the early 1990s and was elated when SDP won 2 more seats (Bukit Gombak by Ling How Dong and Nee Soon Central by Cheo Chai Chen) in addition to Potong Pasir where Mr Chiam had always stood, using the by-election strategy. I was so proud of Mr Chiam when the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew called him the de facto leader of the opposition in Parliament.

By the time I became a lawyer in 1998, I had given up on the SDP. In just a few years from winning 3 SMCs, Mr Chiam was kicked out of SDP by his protégé, Chee Soon Juan. The petty politics within the opposition camp also became quite obvious, these folks weren't interested in the big picture. They were interested in themselves. The SDP with CSJ embraced the rhetorics and personal attacks that made me adverse to WP. I became a fence sitter, I became neither for the opposition or the PAP.

After becoming a lawyer, I started taking part in committee work in the Law Society. I figured I should play a part in improving the environment I work in. By 2003, I stood in an election for Law Society's Council and won.

As I got involved in "governance" of the Legal Profession in Council, I realised that it was not an easy job at all. You may have the best of intentions but nobody sees it. The good that you do is nullified by detractors as a matter of course and any lapses are amplified. Those who support you, do so in silence because they have more important things to do, like practise law and building a clientele. Detractors usually have an axe to grind because of self-interest and because they fail to see the larger picture of the needs of and the threats to the profession. Gradually, I came to appreciate the difficulties of running a country. I was only involved in the running a profession of 4,000, the PAP Government was running a country with a population of more than 4 million. By extrapolation, I could imagine their stresses being 1000 times more than mine as a Council member. I started to see things from the PAP's angle and saw the difficulties of running this little "red dot", the difficulties of avoiding the threats and maximising the opportunities.

I had warmed up to the PAP. So when I was asked by  Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon (whom I met through volunteering with my primary school alumni association) to help her in Bukit Timah in the 2006 General Elections as a volunteer, I obliged. There was a walkover on Nomination Day. The opposition was still using Mr Chiam's by-election strategy. By now, there were 2 opposition MP, Mr Chiam who's still in Potong Pasir on his new party's ticket and Low Thia Khiang, WP's new Teochew Sec-Gen, who had taken Hougang by storm. SDP under Chee was nowhere to be found in Parliament.

After helping Mrs Yee-Foo very brief campaign in 2006, I was asked to stay back to help in Bukit Timah. I volunteered with the Grassroots and Mrs Yu-Foo's MPS. Then one day a green form with a lighting logo was pushed to me, I signed it without much hesitation. I had by then realised that there was so much being done on the ground and people were being genuinely helped.

I became a Young PAP member and later became the YP Chair in Bukit Timah. Being in YP exposed me to PAP Ministers and MPs and gave me opportunities to understand why they do what they do. I realised that they are just ordinary people who try to do things extraordinarily. They know they are not perfect but try to do the best they can for the country. I had the opportunity to give feedback and criticise them and I got to understand things from their angle. I came to understand the constraints of our country and the trade offs that are needed. I see them listening although they may not agree with what they hear.  I see them tweak and change what's no longer working and fiercely defending what works. I realise that like Council work, this was hard work and a thankless job.

I saw the PAP make the error of not giving credence to the Internet, allowing alternative sites to spread toxic rumours and responding to these only through the mainstream media. The PAP thought that as long as it ran the country well, the citizenry will vote for them. Big mistake.

Meanwhile, even after becoming a PAP member, I still held the firm belief that check and balance is necessary. By 2011, WP seems very promising as LTK started bring in the likes of Chen Show Mao but I was alarmed that the opposition had ditched Mr Chiam's by-election strategy. Mr Chiam, who was by then in poor health, was himself claiming that those in the opposition camp could be ready to be government. People were clamouring about the need for change. I was skeptical. Really? Change to what? All that Singapore enjoys today are the results of PAP policies. By no means perfect, the PAP government tries its best. PAP has a track record. Whilst I can accept that check and balances are needed, a WP (definitely not CSJ's brand of SDP) government is not something Singapore is ready for. LTK by his own admission was not ready. Ditching the by-election strategy was unsafe. This drove me to defend the PAP even more because someone else being government then was unthinkable.

The 2011 election was a watershed election. The WP won a GRC in addition to Hougang with the war cry of a "First World Parliament". But Potong Pasir was lost by not Mr Chiam but Mrs Chiam. Mrs Chiam came into Parliament as a NCMP, so did WP's Gerald Giam and Yee Jenn Jong. WP's Eric Tan left WP over this.

WP's Yaw Shin Leong MIAed over allegations of extra-marital affairs. By-election was held for Hougang, WP's Png Eng Huat got into Parliament.

PAP's Speaker, Michael Palmer resigns for the same failings as Yaw. By-election was held for Punggol East and WP's Lee Li Lian got into Parliament. 

WP now have 9 MPs in Parliament, 7 elected and 2 NCMPs. They now hold 2 SMCs and 1 GRC.

Did the check and balance, with the largest number of opposition MPs in Parliament in all of history, do some good? Yes. The PAP government was definitely put on its toes. So was the civil service. Whilst there was some changes for the better, there is also a risk of policies turning populist. Civil servants were also getting unprecedented complaints and unreasonable demands that take their attention off their normal functions.

Did the WP measure up to their "First World Parliament" war cry? They majored in rhetoric and minored on policies. They voted against PAP motion on revision of ministerial salaries and raised an alternative suggestion that came back to the same result. Much precious Parliamentary time was spent checking on the WP's running of its town council but the WP was evasive, played the victim card and gave lame excuses.

Are we ready for a WP government? Are we ready for a non-PAP government?

Michael S Chia

*Article first appeared on https://www.facebook.com/notes/michael-s-chia/seeing-the-light-and-makin...