Skip to main content

国产变党产?行动党市镇管理的变戏法


 
the only bidder was the PAP-owned Aim#1
Aim 是一间行动党拥有的公司。这不是把市镇会的公共财产转化为行动党的私人财产了吗?哦,原来行动党还有私人公司,即使只有一间投标公司,行动党难道不会避嫌吗?
到底,行动党还有多少私人公司?

经过几天的剧本操作后,行动党市镇会和Aim终于把剧情的一部分公告天下,根据官方媒体的报道#1,我们可以整理出以下的时间点:

时间0 无事故 无开发费 无开发时间
不知从何时开始14个行动党市镇会开发电脑软件,也不知道开发费是多少,当然,也不知道开发的软件公司是谁?

时间1 招标书
转手电脑软件的招标在2010630日在海峡时报上了广告。有5间公司拿了表格,但是,只有Aim交上招标书:Aim出价14万元,同时每个行动党市镇会每月要支付785元给Aim。首次合同的期限到20111031日。

时间2 转手费
20111月,14个行动党市镇会将电脑软件以14万元转手给Aim

时间3 使用费
每个行动党市镇会每月要支付785元给Aim。首次合同的期限到20111031日。
(这个解释吻合了阿裕尼-后港市镇会和Aim延期合同的纷争,而Aim的回答也不过是表面功夫而已#1

时间4 国产变党产
现在,根据张和傧解释,Aim是行动党的公司。这就是说14间行动党市镇会开发的电脑软件,以14万元转手给Aim,而Aim即是行动党拥有的公司。

电脑会计软件从原本的公共财产,为何会转手给Aim后,就变成了私人财产,而拥有者竟然是人民行动党。行动党要拥有这个软件的目的是什么?

市镇会开发软件,投资花钱,然后,转手给Aim,然后现在行动党市镇会告诉人民,Aim是行动党的公司。到底在新加坡的宪法下,政党是否可以拥有公司,做生意?我们不是说为了防止外人干政,不可以接受外国外人的援助吗?那么,行动党自己做生意就可以吗?Aim只是一个小公司,两块钱公司,就可以有能力付14万元买软件,如果是10块钱的行动党公司,不是可以买几百万,几千万的生意了吗?再发展下去,几个亿的生意都可以做了。

政联公司做生意,人民已经不高兴,更何况行动党的公司?

新加坡人对政联公司,淡马锡,政府投资公司的大做生意,发自己人的财,已经很不满意了。现在,行动党的公司也出来做生意。你觉得如何?

淡马锡和政联公司买下政府的财产,如,POSB,机场,海港,地铁经营权等等,人们对这些财产的估价,都有所怀疑,最初的投资成本折合成卖价,是否有折扣?低估卖价,让利给政联公司和淡马锡,一直是有些估价专家怀疑的地方。当然,Aim是否从中得到好处,不知道软件开发费是多少,开发公司是谁,这个答案一时还不清楚。

让人费解的是,为何行动党市镇会需要转手软件给Aim,这个每月700多元的收费也不多,为何需要这么做。人家淡马锡,政联公司一出手,就是几百万几千万,Aim根本就是小儿科。

不论是小儿科还是大儿科,行动党的公司Aim做了这笔软件生意,已经成为事实。在法律面前,司法面前人人平等下,这里面有着太多的为什么要回答。

这不是折扣不折扣的问题?也没有像颜添宝计算总理薪金给折扣这么简单。他说总理大方给我们每个人折扣,总理的220万薪金,如果用300多万新加坡公民来计算,就是每个人都不到1元。我们还赚到。真的吗?是新加坡人赚到还是总理赚到?

(newnation.sg)

同样的道理,在Aim事件中,是行动党的Aim赚到,还是14个行动党市镇会?14万元除14,每个行动党市镇会拿回1万元,再除组屋人口,每个公民,可以分到多少?以阿裕尼集选区的10多万选民来计算,1万元给10多万人除,每个公民可以得到多少。颜添宝可以不可以用DBS的超级电脑帮我们算一算。

颜添宝天真,14个行动党市镇会天真,还是行动党的Aim天真?Aim董事没有收董事费和其他利益是天真还是不天真的解释#1

现在的重点是时间0的问题,我们要从原点看起。但是,行动党是否会告诉人们事情是如何从无变成有,从混沌变成生成,再从有和生成,最后变成行动党的财产。或许,了解淡马锡,政联公司的变戏法后,我们可以自我解释,自我解读。

说到底,就是10万个为什么?

这里面真的有太多的为什么?为什么交代事情,是交代一部分一部分而不是一个完整的故事。难怪总理一直为榜鹅东单选区的补选放心不下。因为有颜添宝和Aim这样的数学头脑,他怎么会放心举行补选呢?

#1

http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/contract-follows-regulations-say-pap-town-councils

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By i...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...