atans1

Posts Tagged ‘TOC’

AGO’s report: “Ownself can check ownself”

In Uncategorized on 28/07/2016 at 6:40 am

That’s what Terry’s Online Channel, TRE, other anti-PAP sites and their hard-core fans seem to telling other S’poreans: “Ownself can check ownself”,

This clearly is not something they really want to do.

After all, they have the motto, “The PAP is always wrong”. So they gleefully highlight the contents of the Auditor-General’s report into the many cock-ups that the PAP administration make. All good knocking fun, while hurting the PAP. as they see it.

But they promote the PAP’s self-serving idea, “Ownself can check ownself”all the same.

No-one can deny that the AGO’s report really does show that the MIW and their public service minions have feet of clay. They are not the super heroes they pretend to be.

But don’t Terry’s Online Channel, TRE, other anti-PAP sites and their hard-core fans realise that by praising the AGO’s report in order to validate their world view that “The PAP is always wrong”, they are in fact telling the 60-70% of S’poreans that consistently support the PAP that, “Ownself can check ownself”?

“Ownself can check ownself” is a unique selling point of the PAP. And Terry’s Online Channel, TRE, other anti-PAP site and their hard-core fans are double confirming that it works? With enemies like these, who needs friends?

I mean don’t Terry’s Online Channel, TRE etc realise the AGO is just another part of the PAP administration, juz like the much derided presidency, and the police they so love to hate?

In that light, isn;t the AGO showing “Ownself can check ownself” by criticising the other parts of the administration? Really one should rxpect better of Terry’s Online Channel etc than fall into the trap of promoting “Ownself can check ownself”.

And have they forgotten that they were rubbishing the AGO’s report on the then AHPETC town council, pointing on its “flaws”. (Btw, KPMG, has found even more problems, saying that another 18 months will be needed to fix the WP TC’s accounting system. But that’s material for another post.).

And now they are saying that the AGO’s report on the PAP administration is a good piece of work? Because the report whacks the PAP isit? Something doesn’t sound right does it? Shouldn’t they use the same logic to this report as they did to the report on the town council?

Yes I’m mocking and rubbishing Terry’s Online Channel, TRE, other anti-PAP sites and their hard-core fans for behaving like the constructive, nation-building legal media who also highlight and praise the AGO’s report. At least they get paid for their efforts.

But I’m constructive in my motive. How can they hope to convince the swing voter to swing away from the PAP with such flawed logic or assumptions? Or such inconsistency?

And a more subtle point I’m trying to make is that in a de-facto one-party state, it’s a mistake to unthinkingly use ang moh logic (based on the assumptions of living in a liberal democracy) to analyse any situation. They should “Seek truth from facts”, not from ang moh assumptions and logic.

As to the real worth of the AGO’s report, someone put this comment** on FB with which I concur:

Well its a good reminder that bureaucratic organisations will have some degree of inefficiencies, no matter how many brilliant people you hire inside, are sometimes antagonistic to the rules applied to them due to constraints of operations, and that sometimes they get overcharged or cannot solve certain otherwise easily resolvable corporate issues because well…some people are sometimes out of touch with the industries they dabble in.

… and of course proof that Singapore’s public sectors are not an exception to the existing theories in bureaucracy. Love this AGO report because its such great research evidence lol.

Nothing more, nothing less. Certainly not to prove that “The PAP is always wrong” or “AGO report blows gaping hole in PAP’s rhetoric of competent and efficient government”. At best, it shows that the bureaucracy here is like any other bureaucracy: flawed.

But course Terry’s Online Channel, TRE, other anti-PAP sites and their hard-core fans would not agree. The PAP is really lucky in having them as enemies.

——————–

*Andrew Loh of TOC (then The Online Citizen, not Terry’s Online Channel) was a real fan of the WP TC’s accounting practices. Nothing was wrong said TOC. Much good did it do TOC. The WP MPs never donated a cent to TO. It was a SDP member who made a big donation.

**This comment also gives the lie to the SDP’s charge that “AGO report blows gaping hole in PAP’s rhetoric of competent and efficient government”.

Rebranding of TOC and the Indian

In Uncategorized on 27/07/2016 at 6:10 am

TOC is the name by which The Online Citizen is more commonly known. There are rumours that “The Online Citizen” name is to be dropped, in favour of “Terry’s Online Channel”. This change is to reflect Terry Xu’s alleged role at TOC. TOC is alleged to be a one-man show.

I can confirm that TOC will not stand for “Terry’s Online Channel” even though Terry doesn’t even have a dog helping him at TOC. It’s really a one-activist show. It’ll soon see its 10th anniversary (if it not already has) and I, for one, hope that it’ll stagger on. Hopefully, it can reinvent itself.

Meanwhile at the Indian TISG, P Ravi, the newly appointed editor has said because the Indian has given up trying to  be a socio-political website, among the many other things it wanted to be.

— “We made certain deliberate choices and rebranded by changing our tagline from ‘Responsible, Intelligent, Robust’ to ‘News That You (our readers) Need;. That set the direction for us in the last 6-months.”

— “TISG is a news agency, not an institution which is entrusted to uphold democratic ideals.”

—  “TISG is positioned to be a tabloid/magazine and not a socio-political website.”

 

 

 

 

On the contrary, TOC Terry had a great week

In Media on 06/03/2016 at 4:42 pm

The Middle Ground couldn’t resist aniping at TOC aka Terry Xu

THE Online Citizen (TOC) has had a bad week, having had to endure a salvo of fire coming from different sides. First, Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam chastised the site for propagating “falsehoods” with regard to the death of 14-year-old Benjamin Lim. Second, The Straits Times ran a story highlighting that the site was now a one-man-show. The third and latest blow dealt to the site comes in the form of a Media Development Authority (MDA) order for The Opinion Collaborative Ltd (TOC Ltd), to return its revenues to a foreign advertiser.

My friend replied:

I tot Terry Xu (aka TOC) had a great week. Get great publicity thanks to minister (eyeballs that TMG, Indi and mothership would kill for), show S’poreans that one man get make a difference* (get minister upset), and best of all fix the “bad” side of TOC. All hail Terry. Btw, I edited his first pieces for TOC. After each rewrite, I mean rewrite, I’d say to Ravi, “Pls ask him to juz take photos.” It was clear from his sentence structures he was thinking in Chinese, then translating into English. He’s come a long way.

Terry posted this recently on what makes him run (Btw, he left out what he told me last year: his feeling that there are injustices that have to made tight or at least publicised.):

I was talking to one of my friends this afternoon and the point about “journalism standards” came out.

My point is this. I don’t call myself as a journalist. It would be an insult to the term if I am titled as one. I am trained as a electronic technician at school and worked as an engineer so I would introduce myself as either of that as my core profession and engineering to me remains as my passion in life. I call myself as a reporter or whatever, solely for the sake of convenience in doing my work.

So whenever anyone from the journalistic community talks about journalism standards** to me, I don’t feel insulted nor disheartened. I just learn whatever I can from the comments and feedback to improve the stuff that I do.

The reason why I am doing what I am doing now is because the people who are trained in their job are not doing their god-given duties/profession properly with pride and integrity. If Singapore had real journalists who covered stories truthfully to the best of their ability, there would be no place for a person like me, someone who is terrible in English and ill-trained in “journalistic practices” doing what is essentially a one-man show.

So Singapore reporters or journalists or whatever, think about the reason why you took up the course and subsequently the job. Is your monthly salary the reason why you decided to work as a reporter or because you had a greater calling in this profession.

Singapore can never change for the better without the media professionals doing their job right.

Additional note – Some have talked about the difficulties that reporters have when facing their editors who are put in place for their pro-government stance. While not dismissing their attempts to push the boundaries, I still note that reporters (of course, grudgingly due the editors) is responsible for the poor literacy of this country. Because, ultimately, the half truths are written and signed in the name of the reporters.

On another point of securing the job as a reporter, a simple point for such reporters to consider, while it is unfair, but wouldn’t they be just perpetuating the whole system that brought about this unfair situation by conforming to the system; giving an impression to the public that nothing is being hidden from their eyes and everything is dandy. That because one needs to be paid, then submit articles so as to support a media outlet to allows the editor to bully the reporters into submission? To me as a layman, it seems just illogical especially when they know exactly who and what is creating this non-conducive environment for their work.

I made a small donation to TOC. I hope readers do too https://www.patreon.com/tocsg?ty=h.

Btw, my dogs are thinking about my suggestion that I stop donating to the RSPCA and to donate instead to TOC. I told them there’s a minister looking out for dogs and cats etc, but there’s no minister to help people like the Lims.

—-

*Those who applied to be NMPs, wanting to make a difference, should take up blogging. Has any NMP in recent memory got a minister so annoyed? I rest my case.

**A tua kee media figure criticised Terry recently in an article in Yahoo. Funny he didn’t tell us that he is a shareholder of the Indian and has some management role there. But this guy has form in not disclosing interests http://www.stockbank.com.sg/news/2412 and http://exchersonesusaurea.blogspot.sg/2011/06/pn-balji-formerly-of-st-paid-spin.html

Anyway what can one expect from someone who bites the hand that fed him well?

 

In defence of TOC

In Uncategorized on 02/03/2016 at 1:04 pm

No I’m not defending TOC against the accusations of the Minister for Pets because a Facebook comment says it all:

By hitting out at TOC, Shanmugan completely avoids discussing issues such as the management of police investigations involving minors.
TOC asked many pertinent questions. Asking questions is not same as spreading falsehood.
BTW it is a FACT, not falsehood, that the ministers and police did not respond till now.*

No, I refer to this https://www.facebook.com/notes/karen-chua/tocs-downfall-and-the-unfortunate-case-of-benjamin-lim/1694464534128520?__mref=message_bubble which laments that TOC has fallen from the standards set by people like  Siow Kum Hong and P Ravi and is now in the gutter alongside ASS and TRE.

Speaking as someone who was involved with TOC in those glory days (juz ask Ravi or KH), I think the lady is talking rubbish. TOC is evolving. Under Terry Xu it’s trying to move beyond BS commentary.

Once upon a time, commentary criticising the PAP administration was cutting edge stuff..

Now when there are publications like The Middle Ground*, mothership*** and the Indian doing criticising the pAP administration it’s time to move on from this stuff. It’s no longer edgy to criticise the PAP administration.

TOC may succeed or it may fail but it’s trying to be on the cutting edge in its 10th yr of operation. It got lost when it became Hammer–on -Line. The WP took the publicity and its MPs kept their wallets and purses closed. One of the co-founders never became a WP candidate in GE 2015,

TOC may get lost again, but it’s trying ti remain relevant and edgy.

As for her praise of the Indian Independent, what can I say? If any website needs adult supervision it’s this website. It’s run, I’m told,  by two interns, both with links to the NTU School of Journalism, and their inexperience shows.

— Earlier this yr it carried a glowing story about WP’s Leon the Lion Man. Trouble was theIndian didn’t tell readers that he was a shareholder. A good, reputable publication should have highlighted the fact, to avoid accusations of biasness. 

— And it took a long time for it to correct a mistake (weeks in fact) after it was pointed out to the Indi that it linked to the wrong article.

Coming back to TOC, the fact that the Indian, and mothership are gleefully repeating the remarks of the Minister For Pets show how much they hate and want to dethrone TOC. Power to it. As for TMG, I respect its coverage of its remarks of the Minister For Pets.

TOC must be doing shumething right, attracting the wrath of Shanmugan and his new media pets allies.

Update at 4.30am on 3 March: A great comment by a co-founder (not the wannabe Sith Lord) of TMG on the realese of TMG of a very long document released by the Minister for Pets to Parly on TOC’s falsehoods: “Look, a boy has just died but we really want everyone to know that TOC misreported us.”

At this rate, I’ll have to stop making snide remarks about She who wanted to be a Sith Lord. Keep up the good work TMG.

———

*My Facebook avatar replied: Last para: Sub judice lah. The British have moved on from the sub judice conventions that they passed down to us.

I’ll be doing a piece explaining what he meant.

**Establishment figures set it up: two Paper Imperial Stormtroopers , one of which tot she could be ST editor. This is a Sith Lord post.

***Rumoured to have been funded to the tune of $1m by Philip Yeo (Remember him?) after lobbying by one George Yeo (Heard of him?). The way it has been buying eyeballs indicates that it has serious money to burn.

Why liddat? TOC keeps on dissing Harry

In Uncategorized on 27/12/2015 at 10:03 am

I think the u/m is the only piece of Killer Cheng that I’ve come across that I agree with.

I was about to bitch to Terry Xu that he really had a problem with LKY (Hate him isit?) what with him using recently released docs to cast aspration on Harry’s tears, yet again. Fortunately Calvin Cheng saved me the trouble (see below). The only thing I’d add is that maybe Harry cried because he realised that he could only boss around the people of S’pore, not the people of M’sia.  Btw,I have heard from a very reliable source that in his Raffles College days he was always making fun of the Malays from the Malay states. He considered them, it’s alleged, poor-cousin, country bumpkins.

As to the significance of the Albatross papers, here’s a non-partisan objective view. https://www.facebook.com/1DevadasKrishnadas/posts/482884078539647

Part of which reads

We should not see history from our current lenses but locate its meaning in the context of the time, place and personalities. [This applies esp to TOC’s favourite historian PJ Thum.]

The papers from the Albatross file … do not change the narrative that Singapore and Malaya, which had endeavoured to stay one as they had been under the Empire and to an extent long before, were being thrust into separate directions for political, historical and economic reasons.

These powerful explanatory ingredients were being cooked in the work of the hot wok of a Cold War and strive for self-determination, with the meal further seasoned with the stinging sauces of both the Communist insurgency and Indonesian Confrontation.

We do better to remember that our leaders, as indeed those on the Malaysian side, were men coping with the complexity and challenges of their time in the best way they could with a view to doing the least harm.

The road behind them was torn up by war, insurgency and economic recession and the wider road ahead for former colonies still unmade let alone chartered.

They did their best and as they say, the rest is history.

They should be measured by the future they birthed that is the present we enjoy.

It implictly too disagrees with TOC’s attempts to diss Harry.

As to “Kill the bahies Cheng” other point about S’pore in 1965, I’ve made the same point to Terry and the cybernuts of TRELand. I’ve also made the point that we didn’t go backwards like Rangoon. (But that it was because we had LKY, Dr Goh, and not ex-SAF generals running S’pore: post)

—————–

I do not know why The Online Citizen and its editors seem so intent on revising history and putting Mr. Lee Kuan Yew down.
During LKY’s funeral, they and others kept insisting that Singapore was already rich in 1965 and thus LKY couldn’t have brought Singapore from Third World to First. They posted pictures of high-rise buildings from the Collyer Quay area as proof.
That’s just silly. Yes the colonial heart of Singapore was relatively developed, but it was an enclave for the British. Much of Singapore was still swampland, and parts still were up till the late 70’s.
Now because the ‘Albatross’ files showed that extensive negotiations took place during Separation, TOC seems to be claiming that as a result, we couldn’t have been ejected.
Again, this is naive. Even in a divorce, when one party is unwilling, that party tries to negotiate for the best deal before the divorce. We were asked to leave – but our leaders had to negotiate for the best terms possible, including the Water Agreements that still provide us water cheaply till this day 50 years on.
Finally, they seem to claim that just because others said LKY seemed pleased at the Separation, and that there is some evidence that he may actually have supported some reasons for Separation, his tears on TV must have been fake.
Human beings are complex people. During times of grief, there can be relief. And even during times of relief, there can be worry and regret. After years of fighting with the Ultras, I am sure LKY must also have been relieved at finally separating. But being a Malayan at heart, he must also have been upset. Any human being who has gone through separation must know that it’s always a mixed-bag of emotions.
I have always maintained that Singapore needs good opposition and critics to progress. What’s keeping us from progressing is the quality of the critical voices at the moment.

Lest we forget

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/03/lee-kuan-yews-singapore

And he was right about the importance of being bi-lingual

Good for out brains: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-35170392

TOC does a gd deed/ Who was GG trying to fix?

In Uncategorized on 09/12/2015 at 11:40 am

When I first saw this https://www.facebook.com/TheIndependentSG/videos/647927852015527/?theater, my FB avatar went WTF! on Facebook. A beefy, young man with three children, on welfare, KPKBing and then trying to fix a welfare officer. And he and his wife could afford video recording eqpt to boot? Makes one agree with one Harry about those who sponge off tax-payers.

Well TOC explained that things were not as they seemed. Example: guy was really seriously ill despite being tua chiak  http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/12/man-receiving-msfs-assistance-did-not-intend-to-cause-trouble-with-video/?utm_content=buffere33a2&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

It was a video that should not have gone on-line. It seems that one Gilbert Goh (yup one of the usual suspects) who put in on-line with the consent of the welfare couple. They told tOC they regretted filming and making the video public. Not surprising given the nasty comments they attracted from me and nany others. Juz wondering who GG was trying to fix? Social activists and ordinary S’poreans who want the PAP administration to spend more on welfare.

But here’s a further twist to the plot. A social activist and wannabe politican (whom I respect) ctiticised TOC for interviewing the couple with questions along the lines of “Why have three kids if you also need welfare”. He called “insensitive” to Ravi’s plight.

My FB avater defended TOC’s piece

 I for one wanted to know why if so poor have two kids and want a third. His explanation that he had two when he had a job, and that the third was conceived before he became unable to work means that if I see comments about “why poor but still want kids”, I’ll be able to kick ass.

— I’ve not spoken to our mutual friend in TOC but I think that TOC (rightly perceived in my view) that the video was an own goal. That many S’poreans (self included) had questions about the guy himself rather than his plight. It also undermined the growing view that more should be spent on welfare. The video is the kind of stuff that a troll (again including self) would use to counter Dr Chee. And while from yr perspective of the importance of human dignity it was insensitive, the interview showed me (al least) that the guy and wife were not irresponsible bums and scroungers. They had problems, thru no fault of their own, and needed a helping hand. They would be in the words of the Victorians and the majority of PAP voters “the deserving poor”..

I understand that my avatar was right about TOC’s motive.

Three cheers for TOC for giving us the details to show us that the couple are otdinary S’poreans who need a helping hand.  And a “Dislike” to Gilbert Goh and my activist friend. He didn’t see the big picture issue that TOC saw.

Btw, I’ll blog on a group of S’poreans who really think the PAP administration owes them a living. In fact, they feel more entitled than our ministers. No wonder the PAP gets a 70% majority.

Haze, 9/11 & TOC

In Indonesia, Political governance on 28/09/2015 at 5:18 am

PM got really lucky on 9/11? Or did the 9th Immortal* use his newly acquired powers to fix the weather?

DSC_0080

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DSC_0029

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Imagine if 9/11 was as hazy as last Friday (Schools had to be closed and in the morning, the Pollutants Standards Index,PSI, hit 341- the highest level this year.). PM would most probably not have got the 10 point swing that had the anti-PAP cyberwarriors like Constance Singham choking on their venom from their fangs https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/09/16/social-activist-feminist-in-denial/. A five point swing would have been more likely, something which I tot probable based on my analysis that East Coast and Marine Parade would not fall, but Aljunied would repent

In the run up to 9/11, if the weather had been like that in the last week TOC (WP’s Hammer Online) would be pushing the line that the haze is almost all the fault of the PAP administration: like it did on Friday

The Singapore government has a duty to address the annual issue and to stop pushing the blame to “uneducated” villagers and companies that are almost never prosecuted in any way. The residents of Singapore deserves a better answer than being urged to bear with it and told that things are beyond our control.”

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/09/is-spore-helpless-about-the-haze-not-really/

I’ll go into what the Hammer Online TOC wants the govt to do one of these days. But until then bear in mind that anti-PAP cyberwarriors accused the govt of using salt to induce rain juz before F1. When the govt denied this, TOC said the govt was being less than open because the M’sians and Indons might have used salt to induce rain (Wow everything blame PAP isit?). Btw, TOC and the anti-PAP cyberwarriors didn’t use the the word “salt”. They used the term “sodium chloride”. To make the seeding sound more “sinister”?

It’s stories like this that “double confirm” the PAP administration’s assertion that TOC is indeed “political” and worthy of being hantamed, left, right and in the balls. When it was “gazetted” yrs ago, I tot the action unfair: now I’m not so sure.(Disclosure: I helped out at TOC when Ravi was chief editor,)

TOC doesn’t respect the decision of 70% of voters to support the PAP? It like, Dr Chee, wants the 30% to rule over the 70% isit?

“At home, anger at the current political situation is palpable [Huh? OK on TRE] and some have resorted to action [TRE cybernuts are shoutong obscenities and cursing their fellow S’poreans? Nothing unusual there.] . If the PAP is content to label this group of citizens as the ‘noisy minority’, … For these people, the prospect of being unable to bring about political change through the ballot box* only makes the PAP’s claim of legitimate power sound dangerously vacuous.”

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/09/23/will-the-real-sdp-dr-chee-pls-stand-up/

(He forgot that over the years this 30% of voters have been able to get the support of swing voters in Hougang, Aljunied and Punggol East. Juz because the SDP can’t win, doesn’t mean that others can’t. Go ask the WP. Yes, it’s an uneven field, but winning is not impossible. Takes time, patience and maturity: virtues that Dr Chee may not have.

Yes the minority has rights, but so does the 70%. Democracy is not about majoritism, but neither is it about dictatorship by the minority.

Here’s an extract (emphasis mine) from a BBC article that Doc Chee and TOC should bear in mind when demanding that the views of the 30% must prevail (because the 30% agrees with their “right” views?)

Clem Attlee’s Labour government had a massive Commons majority and an undoubted mandate, but had only 16 peers in the Lords. Theoretically, their Lordships could have frustrated Attlee at every turn, throwing out or wrecking every bill in their programme, but that would have risked retaliation in the form of outright abolition – so, instead, a deal was struck.

Peers would not oppose measures promised – “foreshadowed” – in the government’s manifesto, and therefore assumed to have the endorsement of the electorate, at second or third Reading. In other words, the government would get the legislation it had promised to voters, and therefore would not have to get bogged down in an Asquith-style struggle with the Lords – Addison was a veteran of the Asquithian Liberal Party, and would doubtless have preferred not to repeat its epic battles with peers.

Cranborne spelled the new doctrine out in the debate on the King’s Speech in July 1945:

“Whatever our personal views, we should frankly recognise that these proposals were put before the country at the recent general election and the people of this country, with full knowledge of these proposals, returned the Labour Party to power. The government may, therefore, I think, fairly claim that they have a mandate to introduce these proposals. I believe it would be constitutionally wrong, when the country has so recently expressed its view, for this House to oppose proposals which have been definitely put before the electorate.”

He reserved “full liberty of action” on legislation not included in an election manifesto.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34340715

———————————

*Funny that no-one has accused LKY of using his unearthly powers to transform Oppo votes into PAP votes. But Uncle Redbean comes close.

The final result was just too incredible and unbelievable. This must be the biggest mystery of this GE. It was like a strange event in the Bermuda Triangle that defied all logic and reasons. How could a SDP team that was technically superior or at worst equal to the PAP team lost so badly?

Call it a miraculous win for the PAP team. The other mystery must be the near loss of the WP team in Aljunied GRC. The voters could not switch camp just like that, and without a big crisis. The AHPETC was no crisis but a red herring. The voters of Aljunied were not so daft not to see it to affect their voting decision.

Yes, the truth is stranger than fiction.

http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.sg/2015/09/the-sdp-team-that-could-not-have-lost.html

I’m sure that he, like Goh Meng Seng, believes that UFOs are aliens visiting.

 

 

 

 

Auntie, good accounting is a national issue/ TOC bans avatar again

In Accounting, Financial competency, Political governance on 18/08/2015 at 4:43 am

People are interested in national issues, not just town council matters, Sylvia Lim says (TOC). Well the need for a town council to have an accounting system that is fit for purpose is also a national issue. OK I exaggerate. It’s an issue at least in areas where the WP is contesting, is a fairer statement.

Auntie Lim*, Gilbert Goh**, TOC (As SPH and MediaCorp are to the PAP, so TOC** is to the WP) and TRE are trying to equate the lapses at PA and other government entities and departments identified by the Auditor-General with that of the the lapses at AHPETC identified by the Auditor-General.

The big difference is that the while the Auditor-General  says nasty things about the way the govt bodies like the PA does things, he doesn’t say that they don’t have an accounting system that is not fit for purpose. He is able to pick out lapses in the PA and other govt bodies because they have proper accounting systems. The accounting systems allow the lapses to be noticed.

But he says that the AHPETC accounting system sucks so badly that no proper records are kept.

The Auditor-General pointed out, inter alia, that AHPTEC did not “a system to monitor arrears of conservancy and service charges accurately and hence there is no assurance that arrears are properly managed”.and “No proper system to ensure … proper accounts and records were kept as required by the Town Councils Act.” (Related post https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/02/10/conflicts-of-interest-what-conflicts/

Because proper records are not kept, no-one knows if there are irregularities.  There may be none but there may be some or many: who knows? And what if there are major irregularities?

The way things are going, only a PAP win in Aljunied will ensure that the truth comes out on whether anything is wrong. WP is dragging its feet on setting the system right. It is moving to the Bishan/ Toa Payoh model of directly managing the cleaning etc, which will allow it to say it has “moved on” without resolving the issue of irregular accounts.

Someone posted this analysis on Facebook

Having read the full report, the responses by APHTEC and AGO and PWC’s responses I would say the following.

1. That management and supervision for the first two years were sorely lacking , to the extent that corporate governance is needed , FMSS and FMSI was allowed both management powers, payment powers without supervision.

2. Whether current WP members accept it or not. There is a difference between Management Companies appointing their own people to the TC as GM’s when the management companies are owned by the GOV or GLCs and hence there is no direct pecuniary interests and when in the case of FMSS everything is owned and attributed to Miss How and her Husband and there is a direct pecuniary interests.

3. I could accept the need to appoint FMSS. I cannot accept the need to appoint FMIS whereby the shareholders were both the deputy GMS for lift EMS services. To the extent that there are only a few TC management companies and they refused to help , can the same be said of lift management companies ?

4. To an extent the problem can be laid at the head of the Sec Gen and Low. The people under his leadership trusted low and low I believe trusted miss how.

5. The trust was built over her management of the TC in Hougang for many years and it just seems that when faced with the problem of integrating seven town councils which in itself will be the largest town council in SINGAPORE, she lacked both the management and accounting expertise necessary to integrate all the bits and pieces.

6. FMSS at the end of the day seems to have bitten of more than they could handle, likewise FMSS was not adequately supervised by all the MPs and the leadership within the party for whatever reason.

He could have added, but didn’t, that the WP TC Chair and Vice are lawyers, albeit one was from SMU law school. And there is another MP that is a lawyer, a former partner is a top US law firm. Btw, one, M Ravi called these lawyers three,”cow dung” in another context.

One wonders why they didn’t draw up better conflict of interest mgt rules for the TC’s consideration. And if they did, why were these not implemented? Because Low trusted the Ms How?

Let’s be very clear, the PAP administration didn’t bully or fix the WP on this issue of bad record keeping. This was self-inflicted.The managing agent bears a lot of responsibility for the state of affairs. It didn’t keep proper records of who it was paying, and for what purpose. The AHPETC failed in its duty to monitor what the managing agent was doing.

The inability of the AHPETC to keep proper records is now personal.

I now live in Marine Parade GRC (Joo Chiat kanna rezoned). I’ve voted for the WP since I was able to vote (bicyle thieves, an ex-Woodbridge patient) because I believe that a one-party state is bad for S’pore; but do I want to live in a GRC managed by the WP, a party that couldn’t keep proper records, and is in denial over this fact? And which throws smoke on the issue. It can’t bluff me because I was a Hon Treasurer of a club https://atans1.wordpress.com/2014/11/23/ahpetc-sadly-pap-ib-gets-it-right/.

And I’m not alone: the neighbours (they are accountants, lawyers etc), and the really real Marine Parade residents I talk to, are wondering if the bad record keeping will continue. We know WP can keep the area clean and tidy, but can it keep proper financial records? https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/08/16/pap-wp-dont-do-accouting/

 

—–

*Ms Sylvia Lim says the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC), has been singled out for “exemplary treatment” by the government.
She also called on the govt to “act with similar vigour, by withholding grants and commencing legal proceedings”, against gov’t depts and stat boards which have been found with financial irregularities in the Auditor-General’s Report.
Ms Lim made the call in her court affidavit on the hearing on the MND’s application on Monday.

(TOC)

**A statement seeking support from the public has been posted online as a petition calling for the government to investigate fully the recent slew of financial and accounting irregularities unearthed in the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO) Report.

“We… hope our government will investigate thoroughly the AGO audit lapses and come up with a official statement to address the concerns of the people,” the statement, posted on change.org, said.

“The lapses are both glaring and shocking as Singaporeans have all along place their trust in a government that has enjoyed above-board corruption-free governance for a very long time,” the statement by Gilbert Goh said.

(TOC again)

***TOC has again banned my Facebook avatar from commenting on TOC’s Facebook posts. It’s TOC’s right. But so like the PAP. But then WP is nothing more than PAP Lite and TOC is its poodle. And let’s see if a TOC founder stands as a WP candidate this GE.

Cover-up in action?

In Uncategorized on 18/06/2015 at 4:44 am

(Update on 19th June 6.30 am

The Singapore SEA Games Organising Committee (SINGSOC) has apologised for the confusion that led to many spectators being locked out of the 28th SEA Games closing ceremony at the National Stadium …

While SINGSOC acknowledged it could have done better in managing the situation, it rejected suggestions that tickets to the closing ceremony were oversold ,,,”we would like to confirm that there were still sufficient seats in the stadium for all those who came for the event/”

While it is unclear exactly how many spectators, most of whom had purchased tickets — which cost up to S$40 each — were locked out of the closing ceremony, it is believed to be in the hundreds.

They were prevented from entering the stadium as many of those already inside had waited around the inner concourse area after they failed to locate their seats due to the stadium lights having gone dark for the ceremony.

But safety concerns meant the gates had to be closed to prevent the congestion from worsening if more were allowed in …

Today

What do you think?

Let’s see if the refunds are to hundreds or thousands of people)

===================

TOC and the constructive nation-building media yesterday reported that ticket-holders were turned away from the closing ceremony of SEA Games.

The local media played down the incident. Example CNA said:

Scores of ticket holders shut out of SEA Games closing ceremony

Several people told Channel NewsAsia they had SEA Games closing ceremony tickets, but were turned away because they were told the National Stadium was “full”.

TOC screamed:

Chaos at Sports Hub: Thousands with tickets left stranded outside for Closing Ceremony

CNA also reported this which shows that SINGSOC downplayed the incident:

In a statement posted on the SEA Games 2015 Facebook page, the Singapore SEA Games Organising Committee (SINGSOC) said entry points needed to be adjusted on Tuesday evening as a “significant proportion of the spectators were at the gates just before the start of the ceremony”.

It added that this was so spectators could be seated as quickly as possible. “Consequently, some gates had to be closed for safety reasons.” 

“The organising committee apologises for the inconvenience caused and disappointment of those affected. We will offer a full refund to anyone who had purchased a ticket and was unable to be seated. In addition, you will receive the supporters’ medallion,” SINGSOC said.

If this follow-up report by TOC is even half-right, there seems to be a cover-up at work:

TOC has reason to believe that the crowding at the SEA Games closing ceremony was caused by SINGSOC over-issuing tickets, for fear of not having a max-out crowd, like what happened at the opening ceremony. Queries have been sent to SINGSOC.

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2015/06/story-behind-stadium-gate-jams-singsoc-over-catered-on-seats/

Cynical over-selling without concern for safety?

All this brings me to the importance of social media and new media outlets like TOC

During the Parliament debate on Tuesday (10 Mar), Mr Khaw also took the opportunity in his speech to hit out at social media.

He said, “In 2011, many Singaporeans were swayed by the social media commentaries, and worried that the Singapore Dream would not be available to future generations. We have proved through action that the worry was unnecessary.”

“After four years of hard work, we have cleared the backlog and placed our home-ownership policy on even firmer foundation. Every generation will be able to afford their own HDB homes. This is our promise,” he added.

But perhaps it is social media and its cousin new media which is keeping the government on their toes and prodding Mr Khaw and his team to do better for Singaporeans?

We need protection from the Harassment Protection Act?

In Internet on 18/05/2015 at 4:14 am

I don’t know what were the PAP administration’s intentions when it passed the Protection From Harassment Act. But based on the reports of the constructive, nation-building media of the comments made by comments and commentaries by Judases journalists , I got the impression that the Act was meant to protect the ordinary S’porean who could not afford to sue for defamation. It was an “affordable” remedy for us mere mortals. not multi-millionaire ministers or govt agencies etc.

It was a shield.

The PAP administration’s public statements certainly did not suggest that it was meant to be added to the tool-kit of sledge hammers and power drills that the state, rich people and others could use to “suppress” criticism; something the usual human rights kay pohs said it would be used for.

Well the ang moh tua kee kays have been proven right. It is a sword, not a shield.

Mindef successfully applies under Protection From Harassment Act against Dr Ting, TOC

That it happened to TOC, the promoter and champion of irresponsible, bullying hooligans like Roy Ngerng, his side-kick New Citizen Han Hui Hui, and Amos Yee, Mummy’s Pet, is no consolation; though it might seem poetic justice of sorts.

And it could have been worse. A charge for making comments about the late Harry Lee that were likely to cause distress to people who saw the comments was dropped by the prosecution in Amos Yee’s case. The charge was earlier stood down. The charge was based on the above act. If anyone can defend himself, it’s certainly Harry.

TRE: cyber-sleuth extraordinaire

In Humour, Internet on 18/12/2014 at 5:58 am

TRE should be commended for telling us that Victor Lye who is really work hard for PAP in Aljunied

is the Chief Executive of Shenton Insurance Pte Ltd [Link].

He must be a very lucky CEO to be given 1.5 years leave by his company, so as to enable him to “focus on his grassroots work”.

According to information from ACRA, Shenton Insurance is owned by Parkway Holdings. In other words, it is a subsidiary of Parkway Holdings:

If Mr Lye were to be an opposition member, would he have been given 1.5 years leave to do “grassroots work” by Shenton Insurance too?

What do you think?

http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/12/17/paps-victor-lye-given-15-years-leave-to-do-grassroots-work/

And telling us that

While Minister of State for National Development Desmond Lee is busy trying to “fix” opposition town council AHPETC, his own Jurong Town Council appears to be clueless in stopping rats running wild in his GRC.

A Facebook user uploaded videos and photos on his page yesterday (16 Dec) of what appeared to be rats scurrying around a grass patch:

Video: https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10202327035292102

http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/12/17/while-desmond-fixes-ahpetc-rats-run-wild-in-his-grc/

Gd investigative work using Google. If only TOC would do this too rather than behaving like the WP’s version of the PAP’s ST. But then TRE’s public face is an IT scholar, and elite school-boy that does credit to Catholic High (unlike a certain blur drum major)..

Julius Caesar was wrong about these anti-PAP activists

In CPF, Humour, Political governance, Public Administration on 24/07/2014 at 4:19 am


When I saw the above photo in TOC, I couldn’t help think that  Juius Caesar was wrong when he said,
Let me have men about me that are fat;
Sleek-headed men, and such as sleep o’ nights.
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
(Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar scene ii)
Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam, Dr James Gomez, Dr Paul Tambyah and Mr Goh Meng Seng don’t have a lean and hungry look.
And they certainly think too much. As to dangerous what do you think?
Only the presenter and a blogger (the two tiny ones in the centre) fit the description of “dangerous”.
GMS used to pretty trim, now his belly is as big as Garbra Gomez’s and KenJ’s. They not doing the rounds like NSP’s P Ravi? He lost a lot of weight by climbing stairs distributing NSP materials to HDB residents, getting a great workout in return. And all the WP MPs and NCMPs are trim. They do the rounds of their areas.
Mr Kenneth Jeyaretnam, Dr James Gomez, Dr Paul Tambyah and Mr Goh Meng Seng  were taking part in “TOC Policy Exchange on CPF – rethinking the system”. Do watch it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmViCNPF_vc
And donate to TOC:
TOC’s Policy Exchange discussion on the CPF. We thank the various members on the panel who have contributed to the discussion. MOM and CPFB were invited to join us, but have declined.

Regrettably, we had to scale down to size of the event due to lack of funding. If you would like TOC to continue holding such discussions, please do help us with funding. To note, our forums are open to sponsorship.

Finally, do remember that Dr Paul Tambyah is an active SDP member and a professor at NUS. Gone are the days when people liked him accepted invitations to join the PAP without thinking. Or when dabbling in Oppo politics was a no-no for NUS academics. They could be investigated and sacked.

S’pore is changing despite the PAP’s hegemony.

TOC: Nine “Main Stories”, only one original

In Uncategorized on 02/09/2012 at 11:17 am

I was planning to write a totful, analytical piece abt the changes at TOC since the GE of 2011. There had been major changes twice since then in the way TOC was run.

But the front page of TOC (at the time of writing compels) me to put up this short note.

There are nine Main Stories, of which only one is an original piece. Of the rest, two three are media releases (no, I’m not bitching abt them because they give useful info) but the remaining six five Main Stories are from other blogs. And the original article is not a gd piece of writing. It’s a rant.

And the reprints (two from the same person) are OK reads, nothing v.v good. Today’s Main Story, written by one KennethJ, is not even that recent. It was written shumetime back.

While today’s front page, is extreme, I’ve noticed that ever since Ravi the do-gooder stepped down*, there has been a growing use of “reprints”. In June, I sent an email to a member of the Core Team asking jokingly if KennethJ was paying for ad space or had taken over TOC**. On 2 June and 3 June this year, out of the nine Main Stories TOC carried, he had three articles (I’m not sure if they were reprints from his blog) and one praising him to the skies.***

Is TOC becoming an aggregator? Is it becoming an aggregator out of choice or because of a dearth of original material ?Remember it’s so easy nowadays to start a blog, and aggregators like SGDaily and S’pore Surf draw attention to new bloggers by helping promote pieces they think should be of interest.

And why is the editorial team not writing more themselves? Ravi and before him, Andrew Loh, used to write many of the original articles that appeared in TOC.

———————–

*I helped him edit and the new team asked me twice to help edit but never used my edits (their right) and I never ever got another piece to edit from them (fair enough, not wasting the time of both sides if they don’t like my edits)

**Remember he tried to takeover SDP only to fail and look silly, dumb and petulant in the process. Chiam (his mentor) came out looking silly but recovered quickly his credibility. KennethJ never did.

***And between 7 July- 10th July, there were two articles by him (again not sure if they were reprints) and one abt him out of the nine Main Stories.

.

—–