Tharman proves that ng eng hen was lying in parliament in 2007

[makapaaa]

[h=1]THARMAN PROVES THAT NG ENG HEN WAS LYING IN PARLIAMENT IN 2007[/h]
<!-- /.block --> <style>.node-article .field-name-ad-box-in-article {float: left;margin: 15px 15px 10px 0;}.node-article .field-tags{clear: both;}</style> Post date:
4 Aug 2014 - 4:30pm





<ins id="aswift_1_expand" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: inline-table; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><ins id="aswift_1_anchor" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: currentColor; width: 336px; height: 280px; display: block; visibility: visible; position: relative; background-color: transparent; border-image: none;"><iframe name="aswift_1" width="336" height="280" id="aswift_1" frameBorder="0" marginWidth="0" marginHeight="0" scrolling="no" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowfullscreen="true" style="left: 0px; top: 0px; position: absolute;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe></ins></ins>


Speaking in Parliament about the way GIC invests money, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, who is also a director in GIC, explained that the money used by GIC comes from a pool of government funds.

He explained that it is not only Special Singapore Government Securities (SGSS) or CPF money that is used, it is also a large amount of other, unencumbered assets.
Because CPF is the retirement savings of Singaporeans that the government must pay back to CPF members when they reach the draw down age, it is actually a liability or a debt that the government owes Singaporeans.

Using this 'borrowed' money for investments is a risky businesses.

However, Tharman clarified that GIC doesn't just rely on these borrowed funds. Instead, GIC also invests hundreds of billions of dollars worth of other assets that are not borrowed such as proceeds from land sales, government surpluses and more.

DPM Tharman also explained that GIC does its investments without regard for the Government's liabilities. In other words, GIC doesn't care that some of its funds are borrowed.

He highlighted that GIC does take risks with its investments but these are calculated risks with an aim for good long-term returns.

He said that as with all investments, there will be fluctuations in the value of reserves and this is part of standard investment risk. He added that the only way to avoid these fluctuations is to invest in low-return, low-risk investments but this would mean that the returns may not even meet inflation.

Tharman also pointed out that so far, GIC has managed to get good long term returns but he also said that investment markets are uncertain and volatile and short-term returns can be low or even negative at times.

He gave an example of the Global Financial Crisis which brought GIC's 5-year returns to only 0.5% for March 2013. But by 2014 when the GFC year was no longer in the 5 year return calculation, returns rebounded strongly.
Tharman also said that the President also looks after investments and will raise the flag if he feels that GIC has made poor investments. So far, this flag has not been raised, Tharman explained.

What is more curious about this explanation is that it is clear now that GIC does in fact use CPF funds as part of their pool of money for investment.

This was only just recently admitted by the government. Prior to that, the government continued to insist that CPF was not used by GIC.

In fact, in Parliament in 2007, Dr Ng Eng Hen responded to a question by Low Thia Khiang on whether CPF was used by GIC.

Dr Ng firmly replied 'No'.

(See: Back In 2007, It Was Claimed In Parliament That GIC Does Not Invest CPF Funds)
Earlier in 2001, Lee Kuan Yew also claimed that CPF was not used by GIC at all. He even said that the two were completely separate and "unlikely to cross paths in the future". (See: LKY : GIC Does Not Use CPF Funds)

With all this talk now about how GIC invests and the admission that CPF is in fact used as part of GIC's funds it would seem that both Lee Kuan Yew and Ng Eng Hen were lying.

 

[makapaaa]

[h=2]So Much for Transparency[/h]

August 5th, 2014 |

Author: Contributions

This confirms they don’t have a single honest bone in their
body. First they tell us that GIC’s annualised 20-year REAL rate of return is
4.1 percent. Then, probably realising that the number is none too impressive,
group chief investment officer Lim Chow Kiat added that their portfolio also
generated a 12.4 percent annualised NOMINAL rate of return for the past 5 years.
It’s bad enough the chow-kuan Lim chose to compare apples with oranges,
the sad fact is that the whole bushel of rotten fruit is just performing to
script.

It was only recently that the Republic’s sovereign wealth fund manager, with
well over S$125 billion under its control, reluctantly admitted that its funds
are sourced from current account surpluses, government surpluses AND CPF
inflows. What they are still not willing to reveal is exactly how much CPF
monies have been stashed in the hush-hush pool. While on the subject of
secretive money, do note that those surpluses are the result of the present
government being thrifty (planners’ view) or plain mean (people’s view). Money
which should have been allocated for social needs, be it healthcare, public
transport or affordable housing for the masses.

Does it help if they add Suppiah Dhanabalan to the board? When he was in
charge of DBS, and officers were jumping ship because they were the lowest paid,
Dhanabalan gave the lame excuse that DBS was the training school for Singapore’s
future bankers. The stampede continued unabated, and he had to quietly revise
the pay scale to match. And when he killed off POSB, he claimed that the effect
of disgruntled customers moving off to other banks was minimal. The reality was
that the migration of funds was huge, and he had to quietly bring the POSB name
back. To date he is still keeping mum about Ross Worthington’s documented
account of being slapped in the cabinet meeting room, continuing to “subscribe
to the tenet of all secrets staying within the PAP family” (chapter on “The
Civil Service and Core Executive Dynamics”, page 150,151). The tragedy here is
that Dhanabalan
is a bible carrying church goer, and he will be carrying secrets to his grave,
all for the sake of a seat on the board.



Tattler


* The writer blogs at [url]http://singaporedesk.blogspot.com[/URL]

 

[virus]

Shiny head also lying. Long term investment like banks which were acquired during financial crisis were dumped and registered massive. Something jim rogers forewarn as a stupid move.

 

[winnipegjets]

Please spread the word to sinkees that the PAP government has robbed them big time to the tune of $850k.

$1.3 million is the amount they could have in their CPF if it was invested in a safe security like the S&P etf. Instead, the government kept the money for itself to generate huge returns, paying sinkees only 2 percent thus generating $450k after 30 years.

By the way, 5 percent for a long term investment is mediocre return!