Skip to main content

Vote Oppositions - To See The Books You Want To See


If we really seriously want to see the books of CPF, GIC, Temasek Holdings etc. , then the last resort is to vote for the oppositions. The PAP will not show you the details, instead if you make a wrong calculation, you will end up receiving a letter of demand.

So, what can we do? The only way is to change the government. Only after changing the government, the PAP will have to hand over the books and the accounts to the new government. However, with 40% support, it is still a distance away for the Big change. Those who are seriously wanting to know the accounts and the books must work harder and ask more citizens to support the oppositions and vote out the PAP.

Voters, not politicians or the Courts, make the laws through parliament.  Laws must reflect the majority as politicians are only temporary elected to lead the country. The PAP cabinet can be removed if citizens vote them out.
    
Voters make and decide the laws?
(picture taken from Today, 24 May 2014)


So, the coming election slogan will be:

To see the CPF books, vote out the PAP.
or in short PAP out CPF in

In fact, not only we will see the CPF books, we will also see the HDB books whether there are subsidies or not, and also the medicare book, population book and many others.
  
Opening and closing balances

If the Aljunied Town Council is still under the management of the PAP, we will not know the problem of the opening and closing balances there. We certainly will not know the AIM problem. Below is the first item of the independent auditor's disclaimers in the Annual Report of the town council :

Opening balances? #1

There is no clear certainty on the opening balances. The auditor said “ we were unable to obtain sufficient, appropriate audit evidence............ we were also unable to determine if the opening balances .........”.

What are opening balances? These are balances ‘carried forward’ from the previous closing balance. So, the closing balances from the previous accounting period ‘brought down’ to become the opening balances of  the the current accounting period. In double entry system, these previous closing balances should be equal to current opening balances.

If these two balances are ‘unable to obtain sufficient, audit evidence and unable to determine’, the auditors will have to state it in the auditors' report as shown above.

But why do the closing and opening balances differ from each other? The auditors don't know and as outsiders, we also don't know. The only certainty is these two supposedly equal balances are now not equal. If the management of town council never changes hand, we will not know about this certainty.

Information gap

In a media release on 14 February 2014, The Workers' Party explained the situation as follows:

[We do understand the auditors’ plight, as there were information gaps that existed at the handover after the General Election 2011 which to date are still not filled.  At FY 2011, the auditors had tried to request information from former auditors, unsuccessfully.  Repeated attempts by the Town Council (TC) to obtain information from the former Managing Agent (MA) and government authorities, such as asking MND / the Housing and Development Board regarding $1.12 million which the PAP-run Aljunied TC had recorded as receivables from the Citizens Consultative Committees (CCCs) for Town Improvement Projects, did not yield answers.  Attempts in FY 2012 to get the information were also unsuccessful.  Unless those agencies with the required information furnish them to the TC, it is likely that information gaps will remain and the accounts will continue to be qualified every year.  In this regard, we note that MND could well be the best party to assist the TC to resolve some of the key information gaps. ] #2

There is an information gap resulting to the opening balances problem.

Town council management is a small business as compared to CPF, GIC and Temasek. Will we expect more information gap when there is a change of government?


Three possible scenarios for CPF Books

Hence, at least 3 scenarios may happen if we vote out the PAP.

1. The PAP is right.
There is no information gap. The closing balances of the old government equal to the opening balances of the new government. The books are clean and all accounts are properly maintained and there is no disclaimers from independent auditors.

2. The PAP is wrong.
There is information gap like the auditors' disclaimer in the Aljunied Town Council. In this case, an estimated opening balances have to open so that the accounting and (qualified with disclaimer) auditing work can carry out.

The new government may need to issue bonds or get loans from IMF, World Bank or Asian Development Bank if our cash balances are not sufficient to carry out the daily operations.  For the Aljunied Town Council case, there are money in the bank, so the daily operation is per normal and the town management needs not need to raise extra fund to support its operation.  Otherwise, Aljunied residents will have to pay more fees even though they have made no faults at all.  

The certainty is we know there is an information gap. There is a ‘certain’ difference between opening and closing balances.  

3. A delay of 52 man-years
This is the worst scenario and will create the biggest uncertainty in Singapore. We cannot rule out this possibility. When the late President Ong Teng Cheong asked to see the books, the answer from the PAP was:

[that the Accountant-General had informed him it would take 52 man-years to provide him with a list of the Government's physical assets;] #3

The account books need 52 man-year to calculate and new opening balances will then show up. What happen to CPF members, reserve, foreign exchange, etc in the mean time? This will create the biggest uncertainty in Singapore and will bring political crisis to the new government and Singaporeans. This potential political crisis is so different from the so-called political warning from government scholars and academics.

However, if we want to see the truth, the books of accounts, we have to vote out the PAP to see the real picture.  There is a price to pay for knowing the truth.

#1

#2
http://www.ahpetc.sg/media-release-14-feb-2014/

#3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_President_of_Singapore#Differences_between_Government_and_first_directly_elected_President

Comments

  1. $$$ GENUINE LOAN WITH LOW INTEREST RATE APPLY $$$
    Do you need finance to start up your own business or expand your business, Do you need funds to pay off your debt? We give out loan to interested individuals and company's who are seeking loan with good faith. Are you seriously in need of an urgent loan contact us.Email: (urgentfastloan@gmail.com)

    ReplyDelete
  2. How I Got My Loan From A Genuine And Reliable Loan Company

    My name is Mrs.Anna Daniel. I live in Ukraine and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave me happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of $220,000,00 and was scammed by those fraudulent lenders and a friend introduce me to Mr.James Eric, and he lend me the loan without any stress,you can contact him at (urgentfastloan@gmail.com)

    LOAN APPLICATION FORM:

    Full Name:................
    Loan Amount Needed:.
    Purpose of loan:.......
    Loan Duration:..
    Gender:.............
    Marital status:....
    Location:..........
    Home Address:..
    City:............
    Country:......
    Phone:..........
    Mobile / Cell:....
    Occupation:......
    Monthly Income:....
    Website You Heard About Us?......
    Email Him at: (urgentfastloan@gmail.com)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear Sir/Madam
    I am a veteran with common wealth of nations humanitarian delivery agency a subsidiary of UN..
    Mrs. Sarah Hayes 68 died of covid19. Before her death she left in the sum of (€17,000,000.00) with a Security & Finance Firm in Europe for safe keeping there is an incrustation she revealed that the funds should not be left unclaimed. You are to stand as the beneficiary to late Sarah Hayes.
    Respond to me your interest at lampealfredm46@gmail.com,and contact details for all other formalities which is genuine and trustworthy person.
    Hoping to have a good deal with you on mutual trust.
    Sincerely

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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 ...

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...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...