I just came back from the PRC after a week there and missed all the earlier actions in the press and the parliamentary debates on the AGO Report on AHPETC.
Just as well as there were 'strong words and unsubstantiated claims of losses' been made by various INTERESTED parties - related or otherwise as in PAP ministers and MPs as well as WP MPs.
This is my take on the situation:
1. AGO is an impartial organization that ensure that ALL governmental organizations function prudently financially and otherwise.
It has annually reported a fair bit of 'mistakes, misuses and even abuses' of public fund by public organizations. Some were punished. Some were corrected. It is a necessary quality assurance process, and if frauds were detected that will be bonuses.
AGO has highlighted the issues that need attention CLEARLY. WP and... those responsible for AHPETC acknowledged the validity of the issues. None mentioned frauds. All agreed to implement the suggested remedial actions.
So, it is perplexing that 'strong words' were use to describe the situation by the Ministers and MPs of PAP in the government.
Yet, none ask for a formal charge of wrong-doing.
The voters need to be reminded that MOST, if not ALL, previous AGO Reports related to PAP-government run entities. Only those where frauds were proven were dealt with through law enforcement.
Others were dealt with administratively.
AGO is a National Agency run by the government FOR the PEOPLE of Singapore. It is not affiliated to any political party. This MUST be so always!
2. A National concern raised or 'highlighted' is: perceived or real resistance to do business with an opposition party, WP in this instance, by ESTABLISHED managing agents DESPITE supposedly HIGHER FEES being paid by AHPETC due to lack of COMPETITIVE Bids!
Voters have to be concerned about this NATIONAL issue TOO.
The PAP ministers and MPs, including the PTC, have been saying that 'if you want HIGHER services, you must be prepared to pay more' is proven to be contradictory HERE. The TRUTH is, the claims that SOME OF US had been saying that: "COMPETITION drives prices and qualities of products/services and solutions!"
We need to be unambiguous about this! How can we have competitive bids for opposition-run TCs as it may well be the case when more voters decide to vote the opposition to balance the absolute power of the ruling party.
Of course, this will depend on how the eligible voters MEASURE WP's AHPETC overall performance besides those highlighted by the AGO Report.
3. 'allegation of losses' and 'taking public money to give to friends' are fairly serious ones. Coming from 2 full cabinet ministers make it very CREDIBLE unless the PEOPLE do not have much faith in the 2 full ministers.
If there are evidence to support these strong words, perhaps the GOVERNMENT should get the CPIB to investigate deeper and further.
The findings BE open to PEOPLE and leave NO STONES unturned.
4. WP needs to clarify:
a. what are the issues that SIMPLY cannot be resolved by the auditors regarding the 'hand-over balances'?;
b. was 'an one-time clean up' considered as this is the normal process when Opening Balances SIMPLY cannot be resolved as NO ONE want to know about it and NO ONE know how to deal with it? i.e. may be an one-time write off of S$Xm? Could MND had helped as once mentioned by Ms Sylvia of WP?;
5. PAP needs to consider:
a. is it fair tor voters to compare this 'saga' with 'blown the budget YOG'? the TCs with 'mini bonds'? etc. If the answer is: 'Yes'. The advantage is to the WP. Yes?;
b. will PAP work with a Managing Agent who asked to be terminated DESPITE having a year or 2 of services left?;
c. are there too many overlaps of LAYERS of agencies taking care of TC affairs? e.g. the recently set-up Municipal Services Office to take care of issues in the grey area between NEA/National Park and LTA? The Mayors system with TCs? The privatised ex-HDB services into many of the existing TC's managing agents?
Singaporeans have witnessed 'The First World Parliament' where different political parties members DEBATED about regional issue that THREW UP some NATIONAL ISSUES. e.g. nationally is there an invisible barrier to 'deter ordinary business people from doing business with WP or other opposition parties'? e.g. do we have too many redundancies in the 'management of TCs affairs'? e.g. do we have a National Government dominated by the ruling party picking on oppositions and magnifying any mistakes made?
NOW, the First World Citizenry are WATCHING over ALL the politicians in the First World Parliament to make sure that they treat each other FAIRLY and not 'play play' with each other.
Just as well as there were 'strong words and unsubstantiated claims of losses' been made by various INTERESTED parties - related or otherwise as in PAP ministers and MPs as well as WP MPs.
This is my take on the situation:
1. AGO is an impartial organization that ensure that ALL governmental organizations function prudently financially and otherwise.
It has annually reported a fair bit of 'mistakes, misuses and even abuses' of public fund by public organizations. Some were punished. Some were corrected. It is a necessary quality assurance process, and if frauds were detected that will be bonuses.
AGO has highlighted the issues that need attention CLEARLY. WP and... those responsible for AHPETC acknowledged the validity of the issues. None mentioned frauds. All agreed to implement the suggested remedial actions.
So, it is perplexing that 'strong words' were use to describe the situation by the Ministers and MPs of PAP in the government.
Yet, none ask for a formal charge of wrong-doing.
The voters need to be reminded that MOST, if not ALL, previous AGO Reports related to PAP-government run entities. Only those where frauds were proven were dealt with through law enforcement.
Others were dealt with administratively.
AGO is a National Agency run by the government FOR the PEOPLE of Singapore. It is not affiliated to any political party. This MUST be so always!
2. A National concern raised or 'highlighted' is: perceived or real resistance to do business with an opposition party, WP in this instance, by ESTABLISHED managing agents DESPITE supposedly HIGHER FEES being paid by AHPETC due to lack of COMPETITIVE Bids!
Voters have to be concerned about this NATIONAL issue TOO.
The PAP ministers and MPs, including the PTC, have been saying that 'if you want HIGHER services, you must be prepared to pay more' is proven to be contradictory HERE. The TRUTH is, the claims that SOME OF US had been saying that: "COMPETITION drives prices and qualities of products/services and solutions!"
We need to be unambiguous about this! How can we have competitive bids for opposition-run TCs as it may well be the case when more voters decide to vote the opposition to balance the absolute power of the ruling party.
Of course, this will depend on how the eligible voters MEASURE WP's AHPETC overall performance besides those highlighted by the AGO Report.
3. 'allegation of losses' and 'taking public money to give to friends' are fairly serious ones. Coming from 2 full cabinet ministers make it very CREDIBLE unless the PEOPLE do not have much faith in the 2 full ministers.
If there are evidence to support these strong words, perhaps the GOVERNMENT should get the CPIB to investigate deeper and further.
The findings BE open to PEOPLE and leave NO STONES unturned.
4. WP needs to clarify:
a. what are the issues that SIMPLY cannot be resolved by the auditors regarding the 'hand-over balances'?;
b. was 'an one-time clean up' considered as this is the normal process when Opening Balances SIMPLY cannot be resolved as NO ONE want to know about it and NO ONE know how to deal with it? i.e. may be an one-time write off of S$Xm? Could MND had helped as once mentioned by Ms Sylvia of WP?;
5. PAP needs to consider:
a. is it fair tor voters to compare this 'saga' with 'blown the budget YOG'? the TCs with 'mini bonds'? etc. If the answer is: 'Yes'. The advantage is to the WP. Yes?;
b. will PAP work with a Managing Agent who asked to be terminated DESPITE having a year or 2 of services left?;
c. are there too many overlaps of LAYERS of agencies taking care of TC affairs? e.g. the recently set-up Municipal Services Office to take care of issues in the grey area between NEA/National Park and LTA? The Mayors system with TCs? The privatised ex-HDB services into many of the existing TC's managing agents?
Singaporeans have witnessed 'The First World Parliament' where different political parties members DEBATED about regional issue that THREW UP some NATIONAL ISSUES. e.g. nationally is there an invisible barrier to 'deter ordinary business people from doing business with WP or other opposition parties'? e.g. do we have too many redundancies in the 'management of TCs affairs'? e.g. do we have a National Government dominated by the ruling party picking on oppositions and magnifying any mistakes made?
NOW, the First World Citizenry are WATCHING over ALL the politicians in the First World Parliament to make sure that they treat each other FAIRLY and not 'play play' with each other.
No comments:
Post a Comment