Khaw Boon Wan defends PAP Town Councils, still has not learnt from NKF

Avantas · #1 19-12-2008, 05:03 AM

In a 90 minute interview published in The Straits Times Insight today, Minister of Health Mr Khaw Boon Wan came out strongly in defence of the PAP Town Councils.

Mr Khaw reassured Singaporeans that the Town Councils’ funds are well managed and conservancy charges will not be raised as a result of the investment losses, reiterating a point which has been repeated ad nauseum by other PAP leaders.

He also pleaded with Singaporeans to be more understanding towards the Town Councils’ investment policies and the delay in the Town Councils announcing the losses to the public.

The state media’s prominent coverage of the Town Council fiasco in recent weeks is an indication of the extent of the backlash from the public that the PAP leadership found it ncessary to calm frayed nerves lest the discontent and anger translate into loss of votes in the next general election.

The PAP still doesn’t get it. Singaporeans are peeved and disappointed with the gross lack of transparency and accountability displayed by the Town Councils in the handling of the saga.

Read rest of article here:

http://wayangparty.com/2008/12/19/kh...s-nkf-blunder/

Porfirio Rubirosa · #2 19-12-2008, 05:13 AM

Was it stated in ST that the interview was 90mins?

ah_phah · #3 19-12-2008, 05:17 AM

in society, dog can't bite its owner, worker can't lecture his boss, maid can't tell the owner how she prefer things to be done... etc. in the same way, MIW idiots can't disagree with the top dog of the food chain.

only chicken can f*ck the paying customer literally

theblackhole · #4 19-12-2008, 05:24 AM

don't worry our town councils' sinking funds and all funds in singapore are safe and sound.so sleep soundlly.don't worry.go out and spend and spend. it's christmas!!!

0939 · #5 19-12-2008, 05:28 AM

Does HDB owners benefit from Town Council's investments?
What if the investments reap tons of money? Who should benefit?
What if the investments lose tons of money? Who should be blame, then again
should conservancy be raised to cover some one arse.

oli9 · #6 19-12-2008, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avantas

In a 90 minute interview published in The Straits Times Insight today, Minister of Health Mr Khaw Boon Wan came out strongly in defence of the PAP Town Councils.

Mr Khaw reassured Singaporeans that the Town Councils’ funds are well managed and conservancy charges will not be raised as a result of the investment losses, reiterating a point which has been repeated ad nauseum by other PAP leaders.

He also pleaded with Singaporeans to be more understanding towards the Town Councils’ investment policies and the delay in the Town Councils announcing the losses to the public.

The state media’s prominent coverage of the Town Council fiasco in recent weeks is an indication of the extent of the backlash from the public that the PAP leadership found it ncessary to calm frayed nerves lest the discontent and anger translate into loss of votes in the next general election.

The PAP still doesn’t get it. Singaporeans are peeved and disappointed with the gross lack of transparency and accountability displayed by the Town Councils in the handling of the saga.

Read rest of article here:

http://wayangparty.com/2008/12/19/kh...s-nkf-blunder/

Dont understand why Ah Khaw is defending his compatriot mangy dog, Dr Teo. Is the Town Council running under Ah Khaw's purview meh? The reasons why the public isnt happy with these sons of mangy dogs is because none of the hard questions have been answered.
Who is accountable for the losses is one of them.

DerekLeung · #7 19-12-2008, 06:32 AM

- Who takes town council funds to go on holiday .

HakkaThaileen · #8 19-12-2008, 07:08 AM

Why was Khaw Boon Wan chosen for the task..? I'm sure there are many other more appropriate choices besides Ah Khaw..

Porfirio Rubirosa · #9 19-12-2008, 07:19 AM

Ah Khaw is defending PAP not Ah Teo in particular. Look at the capacity in which he conducts this whitewash ooops I mean interview, it is as the first organising sec of PAP. Bloody ST might as well change its name to Petir

Quote:

Originally Posted by oli9

Dont understand why Ah Khaw is defending his compatriot mangy dog, Dr Teo. Is the Town Council running under Ah Khaw's purview meh? The reasons why the public isnt happy with these sons of mangy dogs is because none of the hard questions have been answered.
Who is accountable for the losses is one of them.

DOM the Clown · #10 19-12-2008, 08:38 AM

Rwanda Khaw to Press: Don't worry! I personally guarantee that the Town Councils spend 90 cents of every dollar paid for conservancy charges to the upkeeping of your estate.........

a porlumpar doggie aid interrupted..............

porlumpar doggie aid whispered to Rwanda: Psst psst psst psst......psst.... psst.....psst.........psst ............psst...........pssSSSTTT!!!

Rwanda Khaw to Press again: erm.........Where were we.....Right! As I was saying, I personally guarantee that the Town Councils spend 10 Cents of every dollar paid for conservancy charges for the upkeeping of your estate......

.........Rwanda Khaw.......this is for you:

The_Latest_H · #11 19-12-2008, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avantas

In a 90 minute interview published in The Straits Times Insight today, Minister of Health Mr Khaw Boon Wan came out strongly in defence of the PAP Town Councils.

Mr Khaw reassured Singaporeans that the Town Councils’ funds are well managed and conservancy charges will not be raised as a result of the investment losses, reiterating a point which has been repeated ad nauseum by other PAP leaders.

He also pleaded with Singaporeans to be more understanding towards the Town Councils’ investment policies and the delay in the Town Councils announcing the losses to the public.

The state media’s prominent coverage of the Town Council fiasco in recent weeks is an indication of the extent of the backlash from the public that the PAP leadership found it ncessary to calm frayed nerves lest the discontent and anger translate into loss of votes in the next general election.

The PAP still doesn’t get it. Singaporeans are peeved and disappointed with the gross lack of transparency and accountability displayed by the Town Councils in the handling of the saga.

Read rest of article here:

http://wayangparty.com/2008/12/19/kh...s-nkf-blunder/

How about apologising instead and admitting that there was a flaw in the decision to use taxpayers money in investing in banks and other financial institutions that were on the verge of bankruptcy?

Coming out strongly in defence only means that you're stubborn and ignorant. Dr. Khaw should know that people aren't happy at the way Town Councils have abused their power, and destroyed the trust between HDB residents and the Town Council.

It simply points out that corruption and the lack of accountability has made Town Council members practically unfit for office. But instead of taking responsibility, they say they have been right and people have to 'understand'.

Its utter nonsense.

makapaaa · #12 19-12-2008, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oli9

Dont understand why Ah Khaw is defending his compatriot mangy dog, Dr Teo. Is the Town Council running under Ah Khaw's purview meh?

This is called COLLECTIVE LEADERSHIP! In which all are responsible, so that nobody needs to be responsible! If one kena hum tum, ALL will hum tum back! Efficient leh? *zzzz*

Porfirio Rubirosa · #13 19-12-2008, 09:19 AM

Khaw appears to be saying that there was no mistake, negligence, incompetence or otherwsie on the part of the TCs and perhaps even its financial advisers viz the failed Lehman investments. He appears to be effectively placing all the blame on what I would call 'beyond reasonable foreseablility' "unprecedented" "who would have thought Lehman would have collapsed", "all other funds have lost money under unusual circumstances" factors. However what Khaw has not done is to properly and adequately justify his reasoning.

These critical questions still remain:

Did the TCs invest in Lehman with their 'eyes open' [from the interview Khaw's appears to be saying yes]? If no, then Khaw is talking shit in the first place.

If so, were they under the impression that the Lehman products were high risk or low risk?

If high risk, then was it a justifiable investment in the first place considering the low return of 5%?

If low risk, what was the basis of their belief? Did they reasonably understand the Lehman products they were investing in? Are the Lehman products on balance reasonably considered to be low risk products? Was there any mis-selling and/or misrepresentation?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Latest_H

How about apologising instead and admitting that there was a flaw in the decision to use taxpayers money in investing in banks and other financial institutions that were on the verge of bankruptcy?

Coming out strongly in defence only means that you're stubborn and ignorant. Dr. Khaw should know that people aren't happy at the way Town Councils have abused their power, and destroyed the trust between HDB residents and the Town Council.

It simply points out that corruption and the lack of accountability has made Town Council members practically unfit for office. But instead of taking responsibility, they say they have been right and people have to 'understand'.

Its utter nonsense.

The_Latest_H · #14 19-12-2008, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Porfirio Rubirosa

Khaw appears to be saying that there was no mistake, negligence, incompetence or otherwsie on the part of the TCs and perhaps even its financial advisers viz the failed Lehman investments. He appears to be effectively placing all the blame on what I would call 'beyond reasonable foreseablility' "unprecedented" "who would have thought Lehman would have collapsed", "all other funds have lost money under unusual circumstances" factors. However what Khaw has not done is to properly and adequately justify his reasoning.

These critical questions still remain:

Did the TCs invest in Lehman with their 'eyes open' [from the interview Khaw's appears to be saying yes]? If no, then Khaw is talking shit in the first place.

If so, were they under the impression that the Lehman products were high risk or low risk?

If high risk, then was it a justifiable investment in the first place considering the low return of 5%?

If low risk, what was the basis of their belief? Did they reasonably understand the Lehman products they were investing in? Are the Lehman products on balance reasonably considered to be low risk products? Was there any mis-selling and/or misrepresentation?

They would be crapping badly in their pants if they were asked in public of those three questions..

I wil also bet they didn't even read the black-and-white conditions on the contract before signing it. Now with their bums burnt, they are still insisting they were right.

Its the most politically stupid decision to deny in any case. If only LKY realises his mistake of not allowing his ministers to admit any sort of mistake.