- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
[h=2]PM Lee should heed his own advice[/h]
June 2nd, 2014 |
Author: Contributions
Barely a week after Lee Hsien Loong spoke of integrity and
the importance of admitting ones mistakes, the Auditor General released his
annual report and gave the PM the perfect opportunity to practice what he
preached. The report for 2012/13 cites more than two dozen incidents relating to
contracts worth almost S$300M where the PMO’s National Research Foundation
appear to be in violation of The Building and Construction Industry Security of
Payment Act. While the PM himself is not directly implicated, the failure of a
department under his oversight to abide by its legal and contractual obligations
clearly raises significant questions. Will the PM or his office stand up for
their integrity and admit to these mistakes – as the PM has urged his political
opponents to do over much smaller matters – or will silence be maintained?
To quote the Auditor General’s report directly, under the heading “Prime
Minister’s Office”:
62. The Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap. 30B,
2006 Revised Edition) stipulated the time frame for making payment and
requirements for payment response to a payment claim. The Act was passed to
address cash flow problems faced by the construction industry by upholding the
rights of parties to seek progress payments for work done and goods
supplied.
63. For the contract for building works construction and another contract for
foundation works (total contract value of $295.72 million), AGO found 32
instances of late payment to contractors (totalling $254.04 million). In six
instances (totalling $26.09 million), the delays ranged from 33 to 174 days.
64. For the three consultancy services contracts (total contract value of
$27.25 million), AGO observed that NRF did not provide payment responses to the
consultants’ payment claims (totalling $24.56 million).
Report of the Auditor-General for
the Financial Year 2012/13
Some observers may find it shocking that the Auditor General claims to have
observed unlawful behaviour on the part of the government, but in fact this
year’s revelation follows even more serious breaches detected by the AG last
year. As was first reported by Kenneth
Jeyaretnam, the Ministry of Finance last year broke the law – in fact the
constitution – in issuing a “promissory note” to the World Bank without
presidential approval. In the same year, the Ministry for National Development
was also found to have breached the constitution by engaging in unlawful
accounting methods on a land reclamation project.
In any normal democratic country, unlawful or unconstitutional behaviour on
the part of the government would be a significant scandal, in Singapore however
these mistakes go completely unreported by a mainstream media that apparently
deems the cleanliness of a hawker centre to be much more significant. A
mainstream media also that uncritically toes the government line on what
constitutes “integrity“,
but will surely not call the PM out if he maintains silence in failing to admit
to the many unlawful mistakes that have been committed by entities responsible
to him.
The key question arising from the AG’s findings is whether the current
government are fit for purpose in terms of upholding the public interest. Can a
government that despite being extremely well paid, repeatedly breaches the law,
the constitution and their own contractual obligations be entrusted with the
wealth and well being of the nation? The PM should take his own advice. Speak
the truth. Things have clearly gone wrong, and even though it is inconvenient,
the PM should admit to the unlawful mistakes made by the current government. A
failure to do so will only leave the PM open to accusations of hypocrisy since
these are exactly the steps the PM urged his political opponents to take over
actually much more trivial mistakes made in the cleaning of a hawker centre.
The PM should respond. His integrity is at stake.
Andy Xian Wong
*The author blogs at http://andyxianwong.wordpress.com
** The author of this article contacted the Prime Minister’s Office who
were offered the chance to comment on the concerns raised by the Auditor
General’s report. No response was received.
the importance of admitting ones mistakes, the Auditor General released his
annual report and gave the PM the perfect opportunity to practice what he
preached. The report for 2012/13 cites more than two dozen incidents relating to
contracts worth almost S$300M where the PMO’s National Research Foundation
appear to be in violation of The Building and Construction Industry Security of
Payment Act. While the PM himself is not directly implicated, the failure of a
department under his oversight to abide by its legal and contractual obligations
clearly raises significant questions. Will the PM or his office stand up for
their integrity and admit to these mistakes – as the PM has urged his political
opponents to do over much smaller matters – or will silence be maintained?
To quote the Auditor General’s report directly, under the heading “Prime
Minister’s Office”:
62. The Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act (Cap. 30B,
2006 Revised Edition) stipulated the time frame for making payment and
requirements for payment response to a payment claim. The Act was passed to
address cash flow problems faced by the construction industry by upholding the
rights of parties to seek progress payments for work done and goods
supplied.
63. For the contract for building works construction and another contract for
foundation works (total contract value of $295.72 million), AGO found 32
instances of late payment to contractors (totalling $254.04 million). In six
instances (totalling $26.09 million), the delays ranged from 33 to 174 days.
64. For the three consultancy services contracts (total contract value of
$27.25 million), AGO observed that NRF did not provide payment responses to the
consultants’ payment claims (totalling $24.56 million).
Report of the Auditor-General for
the Financial Year 2012/13
observed unlawful behaviour on the part of the government, but in fact this
year’s revelation follows even more serious breaches detected by the AG last
year. As was first reported by Kenneth
Jeyaretnam, the Ministry of Finance last year broke the law – in fact the
constitution – in issuing a “promissory note” to the World Bank without
presidential approval. In the same year, the Ministry for National Development
was also found to have breached the constitution by engaging in unlawful
accounting methods on a land reclamation project.
In any normal democratic country, unlawful or unconstitutional behaviour on
the part of the government would be a significant scandal, in Singapore however
these mistakes go completely unreported by a mainstream media that apparently
deems the cleanliness of a hawker centre to be much more significant. A
mainstream media also that uncritically toes the government line on what
constitutes “integrity“,
but will surely not call the PM out if he maintains silence in failing to admit
to the many unlawful mistakes that have been committed by entities responsible
to him.
The key question arising from the AG’s findings is whether the current
government are fit for purpose in terms of upholding the public interest. Can a
government that despite being extremely well paid, repeatedly breaches the law,
the constitution and their own contractual obligations be entrusted with the
wealth and well being of the nation? The PM should take his own advice. Speak
the truth. Things have clearly gone wrong, and even though it is inconvenient,
the PM should admit to the unlawful mistakes made by the current government. A
failure to do so will only leave the PM open to accusations of hypocrisy since
these are exactly the steps the PM urged his political opponents to take over
actually much more trivial mistakes made in the cleaning of a hawker centre.
The PM should respond. His integrity is at stake.
Andy Xian Wong
*The author blogs at http://andyxianwong.wordpress.com
** The author of this article contacted the Prime Minister’s Office who
were offered the chance to comment on the concerns raised by the Auditor
General’s report. No response was received.
