come to think of it. How many PAP ministers and their extended family shorted the Singapore Dollar by converting it to buy overseas property. Yacoob probably has priperty in Peuto Rico as it is a Tax haven. Many many billions over the years?
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Chitchat Not in Singapore’s interest to reveal size of reserves: DPM Heng
- Thread starter bobby
- Start date
The sing dollar in its natural state is already high destabilized. In addition to all the foreign workers changing billions of sing dollars every month into Ruppes, Yuan, dongs, etc. U also have thousands of high net worth individuals from countries like China and Indonesia, dictators like Najib, Mugabe, and thai and myanmar drug lords, etc hiding tens of billions of $ in S'pore. All these foreign currencies need to be converted to sing dollars. Not to mention foreigners buying properties in singapore. so every month, you have billions of $ selling sing $ and the opposite, buying Sing $.
This fucker is only Second class honour in econs. Better to go with Jeyaratnam with double first in econs.
Let me tell you the secret fear of Heng and the PAP. It is the price of gold and silver. His balls will shrink if everyone bids up gold. If every stinkie and ang mos here decides to buy gold and silver, that is the end of Stinkapore. China will launch an attack and occupy Istana.
It is also a joke to say that to be a President jaga the reserves...you must be a CEO of a company with at least $500m turnover pa so that this President can understand and can deal with big enormous figures.
Yet they allow a m&d President who was the Speaker of the Parliament with law qualifications staying in a HDB flat to jaga our unknown reserves.
Yet they allow a m&d President who was the Speaker of the Parliament with law qualifications staying in a HDB flat to jaga our unknown reserves.
Last edited:
Erhmmm....Second Class Lower.
If that the case. 1 rich billionaire converting to sing dollar to buy sing property is more than the remittance of thousands of foreign workers etc. So actually sing dollar should be increasing even more
China already has its hands full with the South China Sea and domestic problems, but it will attack and occupy Sinkieland? Unless its forces are already on the island, probably masquerading as civilians.
Granted its a state secret.
But why can it not be presented, in private briefings, to our elected representatives who can then question the issues in Parliament without having to reveal any numbers?
But why can it not be presented, in private briefings, to our elected representatives who can then question the issues in Parliament without having to reveal any numbers?
The inner circle decides everything. Not all elected politicians have a say in the matter.
This is a totalitarian shithole, not a civilized country. It is a distilled version of the CCP regime of China, while pretending to inherit the Brit's Parliamentary system.
This is the most inane, illogical, stupid post I have seen in a while. Come, I clap for you.
How can the apuneh President look after the reserves if she does not know how much is in there? I would say this is a strong case for negligence and not performing her legal role and not exercising fiduciary duty to all sinkies.
Heng the nerdy jack-in-office decides nothing. His Familee masters say no to revealing size of reserves, so he obeys their will.
he is only here to look pitiful and trustworthy to con the citizens because cheebye Loong looks like an untrustworthy asshole
Jamus Lim tells MP Saktiandi Supaat who wants to keep reserves secret: All exchange rate policy is monetary policy
by Correspondent
27/02/2021
in Parliament
Reading Time: 5min read
164
On Wed (24 Feb), NCMP Hazel Poa from the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) asked in Parliament for more transparency on Singapore’s financial reserves. Ms Poa argued that MPs were being asked to vote on a Budget that would require a draw on the reserves, without being informed of its actual size.
“While I do not yet know the answer to that question, I do know that Members of Parliament are being asked to vote on a Budget that would require a draw down on our reserves without knowing its size. Without knowing our nation’s financial position, it would be difficult to make sound and prudent decisions, and certainly not informed ones,” she said.
“So again, I ask that more transparency with regards to the National Reserves be made, if not only that Singaporeans better understand the rationale for difficult decisions like the need to raise the GST to 9% in the future.”
Ms Poa also asked if President Halimah Yacob is aware of the exact size of the reserves when she made decisions on its draw down.
Yesterday (25 Feb), People’s Action Party (PAP) MP Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC) spoke out against revealing the full extent of Singapore’s national financial reserves.
“Publicising data from our reserves is akin to revealing the size of our ammunition, to hedge funds and speculators out there with large pools of funds to play with,” he said, echoing what the Finance Ministry has been saying all along.
Saktiandi was formerly working at the Economic Policy Department of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) before joining Maybank. He is currently the foreign exchange research head at Maybank.
He explained that Singapore uses the exchange rate as its instrument of monetary policy – unlike most other countries which use interest rates. He said that this rendered Singapore vulnerable to currency speculation and attacks.
“As a financial centre, there’s also the risk of capital flows if our currency is attacked for speculative reasons. I don’t think we want to add in the element of this risk into the equation for our Singaporean job seekers,” Saktiandi said.
He added that the potential risks and downsides outweigh the benefits of transparency. “Transparency is practised where it is safe and sensible to do so, and it isn’t true that our reserves are completely undisclosed.”
“For example, Temasek and MAS’ (Monetary Authority of Singapore) fund sizes are made public, only GIC’s is not.”
MP Jamus Lim countered MP Saktiandi
Workers’ Party MP Jamus Lim then rose to say he disagreed with Saktiandi’s point that revealing the reserves would be destabilising. “It could also encourage stabilising speculation,” said Prof Lim, who is a economics associate professor and a council member of the Economic Society of Singapore (ESS).
Prof Lim actually worked outside of Singapore at the World Bank for seven years, from 2007 to 2014, serving in its Development Prospects Group and specializing in long-term macroeconomic projections. He was also an economist at the Institute for Southeast Asian Studies and the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. As such, Prof Lim is less susceptible to any group thinking that might linger among PAP politicians and Singapore bureaucrats.
Prof Lim continued, “If we were off our fundamentally determined exchange rates, we could encourage market participants to actually engage in speculative activity that would get us back on to our fundamental exchange rate.”
“(And) while it is convenient to argue that we have a distinct system in terms of exchange rate policy, by purchasing power parity, all exchange rate policy is in fact monetary policy. So even though it is the case that we target explicitly the exchange rate, it will have implications for inflation.”
Saktiandi then tried to defend himself by essentially repeating his earlier assertion, “The impact of the currency attacks can never be stabilising. It has ramifications on the economy, it has ramifications on jobs.”
He talked about the Asian financial crisis, saying its impact on some countries in the region was significant to the point that their currencies depreciated, with cascading effects on the economy.
“That’s from my own lived experience in 1998, 1999,” Saktiandi said. “The theoretical element that you shared… does not make sense. Unless you’re talking about misalignments in the long run, that eventually correct themselves in time.”
Prof Lim then replied, “I should point out that I am in fact old enough to have also lived through the Asian financial crisis, and I’m aware of the conditions surrounding it. So this is not just in theory, it was also my lived experience.”
MP Saktiandi goes round and round on difference between Norway and Singapore
Stating that he does not think that the monetary policy between Norway and Singapore, Mr Lim asked if Mr Saktiandi could clarify why he thinks that there is a difference between the two.
Mr Saktiandi replied:
by Correspondent
27/02/2021
in Parliament
Reading Time: 5min read
164
On Wed (24 Feb), NCMP Hazel Poa from the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) asked in Parliament for more transparency on Singapore’s financial reserves. Ms Poa argued that MPs were being asked to vote on a Budget that would require a draw on the reserves, without being informed of its actual size.
“While I do not yet know the answer to that question, I do know that Members of Parliament are being asked to vote on a Budget that would require a draw down on our reserves without knowing its size. Without knowing our nation’s financial position, it would be difficult to make sound and prudent decisions, and certainly not informed ones,” she said.
“So again, I ask that more transparency with regards to the National Reserves be made, if not only that Singaporeans better understand the rationale for difficult decisions like the need to raise the GST to 9% in the future.”
Ms Poa also asked if President Halimah Yacob is aware of the exact size of the reserves when she made decisions on its draw down.
Yesterday (25 Feb), People’s Action Party (PAP) MP Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC) spoke out against revealing the full extent of Singapore’s national financial reserves.
“Publicising data from our reserves is akin to revealing the size of our ammunition, to hedge funds and speculators out there with large pools of funds to play with,” he said, echoing what the Finance Ministry has been saying all along.
Saktiandi was formerly working at the Economic Policy Department of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) before joining Maybank. He is currently the foreign exchange research head at Maybank.
He explained that Singapore uses the exchange rate as its instrument of monetary policy – unlike most other countries which use interest rates. He said that this rendered Singapore vulnerable to currency speculation and attacks.
“As a financial centre, there’s also the risk of capital flows if our currency is attacked for speculative reasons. I don’t think we want to add in the element of this risk into the equation for our Singaporean job seekers,” Saktiandi said.
He added that the potential risks and downsides outweigh the benefits of transparency. “Transparency is practised where it is safe and sensible to do so, and it isn’t true that our reserves are completely undisclosed.”
“For example, Temasek and MAS’ (Monetary Authority of Singapore) fund sizes are made public, only GIC’s is not.”
MP Jamus Lim countered MP Saktiandi
Workers’ Party MP Jamus Lim then rose to say he disagreed with Saktiandi’s point that revealing the reserves would be destabilising. “It could also encourage stabilising speculation,” said Prof Lim, who is a economics associate professor and a council member of the Economic Society of Singapore (ESS).
Prof Lim actually worked outside of Singapore at the World Bank for seven years, from 2007 to 2014, serving in its Development Prospects Group and specializing in long-term macroeconomic projections. He was also an economist at the Institute for Southeast Asian Studies and the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. As such, Prof Lim is less susceptible to any group thinking that might linger among PAP politicians and Singapore bureaucrats.
Prof Lim continued, “If we were off our fundamentally determined exchange rates, we could encourage market participants to actually engage in speculative activity that would get us back on to our fundamental exchange rate.”
“(And) while it is convenient to argue that we have a distinct system in terms of exchange rate policy, by purchasing power parity, all exchange rate policy is in fact monetary policy. So even though it is the case that we target explicitly the exchange rate, it will have implications for inflation.”
Saktiandi then tried to defend himself by essentially repeating his earlier assertion, “The impact of the currency attacks can never be stabilising. It has ramifications on the economy, it has ramifications on jobs.”
He talked about the Asian financial crisis, saying its impact on some countries in the region was significant to the point that their currencies depreciated, with cascading effects on the economy.
“That’s from my own lived experience in 1998, 1999,” Saktiandi said. “The theoretical element that you shared… does not make sense. Unless you’re talking about misalignments in the long run, that eventually correct themselves in time.”
Prof Lim then replied, “I should point out that I am in fact old enough to have also lived through the Asian financial crisis, and I’m aware of the conditions surrounding it. So this is not just in theory, it was also my lived experience.”
MP Saktiandi goes round and round on difference between Norway and Singapore
Stating that he does not think that the monetary policy between Norway and Singapore, Mr Lim asked if Mr Saktiandi could clarify why he thinks that there is a difference between the two.
Mr Saktiandi replied:
The deputy Speaker stopped the exchange at that point, as to whether Mr Saktiandi answered Mr Lim’s question with his response, that is for anyone to judge.
Independent Budget office a “wasteful duplication” of functions: DPM Heng
Workers' Party calling for independent Budget office to do their job for them, he says
Photo: FB screengrab/Heng Swee Keat, Pritam Singh
Share
https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php...a-wasteful-duplication-of-functions-dpm-heng/
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?te...tion-of-functions-dpm-heng/&via=Independentsg
https://www.linkedin.com/shareArtic...“wasteful+duplication”+of+functions:+DPM+Heng
https://telegram.me/share/url?url=h...“wasteful+duplication”+of+functions:+DPM+Heng
https://reddit.com/submit?url=https...“wasteful+duplication”+of+functions:+DPM+Heng
AUTHOR
Hana O
DATE
March 1, 2021
- Advertisement -
Singapore – Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat said that an independent Budget office would be a “wasteful duplication of functions” as there are independent audits by the Auditor General’s Office and parliamentary scrutiny of the Government’s spending.
On Friday (Feb 26), during his Budget wrap speech, Mr Heng responded to Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh’s proposal for an independent Budget office to examine the Government’s Budget and assure “public accountability and transparency in light of the massive drawdown of reserves” in fighting the Covid-19 pandemic.
Mr Heng noted that information on the results of last year’s Budget measures had been published. He was referring to the “Interim Assessment of the Impact of Key Covid-19 Budget Measures” released by the Ministry of Finance earlier this month.
“I am glad Mr Singh agrees with the need to be prudent and accountable in our spending. And in fact, it would be very helpful if each time Mr Singh or his colleagues ask the Government to spend more, to give us their estimates of how much it will cost and how they will fund it,” Mr Heng was quoted as saying by channelnewsasia.com.
- Advertisement -
“But instead, the Workers’ Party (WP) has called on the Government to spend S$20 million to set up an independent parliamentary Budget office to do this job for them, even as they call for more scrutiny on Government expenditure.”
For a second consecutive year, Singapore will draw on past reserves to cushion the pandemic’s impact, drawing another S$1.7 billion this year. This will raise the total amount withdrawn to S$53.7 billion for FY2020 and FY2021.
Mr Heng noted that the estimated S$52 billion allocated last year would not be fully utilised. The Government expects to use S$42.7 billion of the S$52 billion for FY2020, resulting in a S$9.3 billion balance, the report added.
Mr Singh asked Mr Heng where the S$20 million to set up an independent Budget office came from. Mr Heng replied that was the figure given by Member of Parliament Jamus Lim, who later clarified that the amount was for the Finance Ministry’s upcoming committee of supply debate.
Mr Singh then pointed out that the Finance Ministry’s committee of supply debate had not yet begun and, therefore, Associate Professor Lim’s figure should not be part of the current discussion.
Mr Singh asked how the S$24 billion allocated for businesses and workers’ transformation over the next three years would be utilised.
He also asked about the outcomes of the Capability Transformation Programme and if the subsidies to private hire bus drivers would be extended as they have been affected by the decline in tourists.
However, before Mr Heng gave his reply, Leader of the
House and Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Indranee Rajah asked Mr Singh to clarify the purpose of the Budget office and confirm if it was the same as the independent fiscal council that Assoc Prof Lim referred to.
In his first answer, Mr Singh confirmed the two proposals were not the same. He added that the House should wait for Assoc Prof Lim’s proposal.
When Ms Rajah asked once more if the Budget office and fiscal council are the same, Mr Singh said it would be “the same thing.”
Mr Heng then noted he was “totally confused” because these two entities were “very different.”
“Your arguments are totally convoluted. One does not lead to the other,” said Mr Heng, referring to Mr Singh’s earlier mention of an incident when he was part of the parliamentary estimates committee a few years ago.
“A senior civil servant said, ‘I cannot be smarter than my boss’,” said Mr Singh earlier. “Who’s her boss? Her boss is the Minister of Finance.”
“So a parliament Budget office or officer is there to provide independent analysis to confirm the nature of the Budget, to confirm that programmes are delivering their outcomes that are desired,” Mr Singh argued.
Mr Heng also asked if Mr Singh and WP members had read the interim report on Budget measures.
“There is a reason why I put up the interim report even though the full effects have not been done, because I am conscious that we have used a big part of last year’s Budget … we have used the past reserves, and that I have a responsibility to account for those outcomes,” he said.
Mr Heng added no one questioned the outcome of the measures. “So what is the purpose of setting up an office when the information that is publicly available is there for you to ask,” he said.
In response, Mr Singh said that the proposal for a Budget office was a question about organs of state and separated from the issue of outcomes.
He explained that the Budget office would offer an independent perspective and help Parliament in approving the Budget. “Those who are approving the Budget ought to have, I think, access to an independent analysis.”
Not wanting to “prolong the debate,” Mr Heng informed Mr Singh that they could further discuss the issue at the Finance Ministry’s committee of supply debate, with specific issues being discussed at the relevant ministries’ committee of supply debates./TISG
Read related: Denise Phua tells Pritam Singh not to politicise the work of the CDCs
Workers' Party calling for independent Budget office to do their job for them, he says
Photo: FB screengrab/Heng Swee Keat, Pritam SinghShare
https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php...a-wasteful-duplication-of-functions-dpm-heng/
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?te...tion-of-functions-dpm-heng/&via=Independentsg
https://www.linkedin.com/shareArtic...“wasteful+duplication”+of+functions:+DPM+Heng
https://telegram.me/share/url?url=h...“wasteful+duplication”+of+functions:+DPM+Heng
https://reddit.com/submit?url=https...“wasteful+duplication”+of+functions:+DPM+Heng
AUTHOR
Hana O
DATE
March 1, 2021
- Advertisement -
Singapore – Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat said that an independent Budget office would be a “wasteful duplication of functions” as there are independent audits by the Auditor General’s Office and parliamentary scrutiny of the Government’s spending.
On Friday (Feb 26), during his Budget wrap speech, Mr Heng responded to Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh’s proposal for an independent Budget office to examine the Government’s Budget and assure “public accountability and transparency in light of the massive drawdown of reserves” in fighting the Covid-19 pandemic.
Mr Heng noted that information on the results of last year’s Budget measures had been published. He was referring to the “Interim Assessment of the Impact of Key Covid-19 Budget Measures” released by the Ministry of Finance earlier this month.
“I am glad Mr Singh agrees with the need to be prudent and accountable in our spending. And in fact, it would be very helpful if each time Mr Singh or his colleagues ask the Government to spend more, to give us their estimates of how much it will cost and how they will fund it,” Mr Heng was quoted as saying by channelnewsasia.com.
- Advertisement -
“But instead, the Workers’ Party (WP) has called on the Government to spend S$20 million to set up an independent parliamentary Budget office to do this job for them, even as they call for more scrutiny on Government expenditure.”
For a second consecutive year, Singapore will draw on past reserves to cushion the pandemic’s impact, drawing another S$1.7 billion this year. This will raise the total amount withdrawn to S$53.7 billion for FY2020 and FY2021.
Mr Heng noted that the estimated S$52 billion allocated last year would not be fully utilised. The Government expects to use S$42.7 billion of the S$52 billion for FY2020, resulting in a S$9.3 billion balance, the report added.
Mr Singh asked Mr Heng where the S$20 million to set up an independent Budget office came from. Mr Heng replied that was the figure given by Member of Parliament Jamus Lim, who later clarified that the amount was for the Finance Ministry’s upcoming committee of supply debate.
Mr Singh then pointed out that the Finance Ministry’s committee of supply debate had not yet begun and, therefore, Associate Professor Lim’s figure should not be part of the current discussion.
Mr Singh asked how the S$24 billion allocated for businesses and workers’ transformation over the next three years would be utilised.
He also asked about the outcomes of the Capability Transformation Programme and if the subsidies to private hire bus drivers would be extended as they have been affected by the decline in tourists.
However, before Mr Heng gave his reply, Leader of the
House and Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Indranee Rajah asked Mr Singh to clarify the purpose of the Budget office and confirm if it was the same as the independent fiscal council that Assoc Prof Lim referred to.
In his first answer, Mr Singh confirmed the two proposals were not the same. He added that the House should wait for Assoc Prof Lim’s proposal.
When Ms Rajah asked once more if the Budget office and fiscal council are the same, Mr Singh said it would be “the same thing.”
Mr Heng then noted he was “totally confused” because these two entities were “very different.”
“Your arguments are totally convoluted. One does not lead to the other,” said Mr Heng, referring to Mr Singh’s earlier mention of an incident when he was part of the parliamentary estimates committee a few years ago.
“A senior civil servant said, ‘I cannot be smarter than my boss’,” said Mr Singh earlier. “Who’s her boss? Her boss is the Minister of Finance.”
“So a parliament Budget office or officer is there to provide independent analysis to confirm the nature of the Budget, to confirm that programmes are delivering their outcomes that are desired,” Mr Singh argued.
Mr Heng also asked if Mr Singh and WP members had read the interim report on Budget measures.
“There is a reason why I put up the interim report even though the full effects have not been done, because I am conscious that we have used a big part of last year’s Budget … we have used the past reserves, and that I have a responsibility to account for those outcomes,” he said.
Mr Heng added no one questioned the outcome of the measures. “So what is the purpose of setting up an office when the information that is publicly available is there for you to ask,” he said.
In response, Mr Singh said that the proposal for a Budget office was a question about organs of state and separated from the issue of outcomes.
He explained that the Budget office would offer an independent perspective and help Parliament in approving the Budget. “Those who are approving the Budget ought to have, I think, access to an independent analysis.”
Not wanting to “prolong the debate,” Mr Heng informed Mr Singh that they could further discuss the issue at the Finance Ministry’s committee of supply debate, with specific issues being discussed at the relevant ministries’ committee of supply debates./TISG
Read related: Denise Phua tells Pritam Singh not to politicise the work of the CDCs
the way he said it, macam the reserves already running low. too malu to reveal.
Its all an illusion, there is no reserves.
Similar threads
