[h=2]
Why Ho Ching Won’t Respond to Me[/h]
March 29th, 2013 |
Author:
Contributions
Dr Christopher Balding
I am frequently asked why Temasek or the Singaporean government refuses to respond to what I have written about the obvious discrepancies in their financial accounts. The answer is simple: they cannot respond. Let me explain some of the reasons.
First,
Temasek and the government of Singapore know there are enormous discrepancies in the public financial accounts and the claimed returns of Temasek. Let’s assume for one minute that I am wrong in everything I have said about Temasek and Singapore (I am not but let us assume for a minute that I am). Singapore and Temasek could easily refute my claims with simple data they should have in front of them. I am aware they claim factors like national security in refusing to release financial data but even with this in mind, they could prove me wrong easily without releasing total reserve information or other sensitive data. The fundamental problem facing Temasek and Singapore is that I am right in my fundamental analysis and they cannot prove me wrong.
Second,
Temasek and the government of Singapore cannot respond because if they provide any evidence or data it will only expose other flaws in their carefully constructed edifice. As a small boy I remember my mother telling me that
if you lie, you then have to lie even more to cover up your original lie, and that the truth eventually catches up with you anyway. If Temasek and Singapore do respond in sufficient detail to try and refute what I have written, they will only create additional problems by revealing other discrepancies. For instance, even if Temasek returns are actually 17% (which they are not), this only creates a larger discrepancy given the many years of operational government surpluses which should yield a much larger total number of financial assets. In other words, providing
any information will only further reveal the enormous inconsistencies of Temasek and Singaporean financial data.
Third,
the government of Singapore cannot intimidate, control, or sue me. I am not Singaporean. I do not live in Singapore. I have no family in Singapore. The government of Singapore historically has jailed, sued, or bankrupted people who challenge authority or present inconvenient facts about their rulers or policies. The government of Singapore cannot control me and they definitely cannot intimidate me. Let me make something perfectly clear: I am not going away.
Fourth, Temasek and Singapore know that responding to my allegations will only invite additional scrutiny from much more powerful and well known institutions and persons. By not responding, they are hoping this eventually goes away. They only invite additional questions by responding to what I have shown with Singaporean data.
I would welcome the opportunity to come to Singapore and either be provided access to financial data to prove myself wrong or engage in a public debate with a public sector official, though I know this will never happen. I only began writing what I wrote after reviewing it in great detail and taking my findings to a great many people asking them for other explanations or what I might be missing. Making such strong accusations about a financial institution and a state’s public finances required a very high burden of proof. However, given the enormous discrepancies in data published by Temasek and the Singaporean government, no other conclusion could be reached.
I will even state that if I am ever proven wrong with hard data, which is incredibly unlikely, I will write a public apology to all institutions and persons that I have referenced in my writings. Wonder if Temasek and Singapore, Inc. are willing to make a similar guarantee and then provide the data to prove me wrong?
.
Christopher Balding
* The writer is a professor of business and economics at Peking University HSBC Business School. An expert in sovereign wealth funds, he has published in such leading journals as the Review of International Economics, the Journal of Public Economic Theory, and the International Finance Review on such diverse topics as CDS pricing, the WTO, and the economics of adoption and abortion. His work as been cited by a variety of media outlets including the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times. Prof Balding received his Phd from the University of California, Irvine and worked in private equity prior to entering academia. He blogs at http://www.facebook.com/baldingsworld.
March 29th, 2013 |
Author: Contributions 
