This Teo , still sound very :IRON TEETH!!! Sound very’ deny” to say they have made mistake…..

ya,ya ya ~ Just like Pinky style,,,,Let’s MOVE ON,,,,No need to ask Why this & That
and Throw the Little pad….

It really sound like a broken record. Nobody will give a damn to what he has to say in future.

He also said :
“As our investments and circumstances differ, the town councils will reach out to their residents directly to address their queries and receive feedback through various channels such as newsletters, websites and dialogues. We will continue to explore ways to keep residents informed of our finances.”

Is he for real ? The respectively TCs are all stonewalling. Only 3 replies to 22 email queries as highlighted in a previous TOC post.

Can someone from Holland-Bukit Panjang TC please send a query directly to him to ask for details of the TC’s investment ?

He seems to be blabbling the same tune over and over again. What about answers like how they are going to recover the money or what would happen to the money in accounting term? write-off?

Firstly, the transfer to sinking fund is set at too high a level, 35pc of the fees that we pay. In private estates, this is set lower and the question should be asked why this is so for public estates. Secondly, how much of the growth of the sinking fund in the past few years is due to transfer and how much due to return on investments. Could clearcut statistics be provided, please.

Teo ah Teo…. just answer the question can?

So how does the town council plans to recover the $???????

What is this? NO ANSWER AT ALL!!!!! just another PAP delaying tactics, what’s new?

I think we should all be fair here. There are two main issues here and we should not confuse the two issues and anyhow whack THP.

1) Is there a need for such a large sinking fund? In other words, can S&C charges be lower?

2) Having accumulated such large sum, should the TCs invest them for better returns?

Personally, I think there is a case for 1) – that is, why build up such a big fund; why not reduce the S&C charges?

As for 2), having accumulated the fund, I think generally the TCs did okay as long as they stick scrupulously to their respective Investment Policies and guidelines. Their portfolios are diversified. Some asset classes suffered losses, but overall, the diversification is still prudent.

YA same as the first letter and also same issue of not providing enough details into the investment and profit/loss statement.

Unless Dr Teo is more transparent the public will be disillusioned with how the govt has confronted such financial fiasco.

The problem here is in good times, these papees wants credit and start rewarding and showering themselves even with projected $$$millions in salaries, now when comes strings of screwed ups, no one . . . I SAID NO ONE EVEN THOSE WHO ARE DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE either refused to admit or answer to their mistakes, and THIS IS NO SMALL MATTER, ITS $$$MILLIONS LOST BELONGING TO THE CITIZENS OF SINGAPORE!!!!!! NOT EVEN TO MENTION THOSE $$$BILLIONS ALREADY GONE, all these are taxpayers $$$$$!
and . . . . . NO-ONE-IS-RESPONSIBLE!!!

Aya, the more he try to avoid answering, there’ll even more questions ahead cos ppl r getting more confused.

To: T on December 5th, 2008 9.55

I’ll help you with some answers.

1) Is there a need for such a large sinking fund? In other words, can S&C charges be lower?

Kaffein> Sure… after I’ve increased the S&C to recuperate the losses first. Now that my sinking fund has shrunk, it think we should increase to 40%.

2) Having accumulated such large sum, should the TCs invest them for better returns?

Kaffein> Hey this question is not particularly smart since asking the same question to CPF and GIC yields nothing.

Kaffein> Anyway, the returns were never for the residents, mind you. It’s for the future of SG Inc and especially for rainy days. Have your wife and daughters become maids yet? No? Then it’s still a rainy day.

Personally, I think there is a case for 1) – that is, why build up such a big fund; why not reduce the S&C charges?

Kaffein> Again, the answers you will get is similar to the same question posed to GIC and Temasek.

As for 2), having accumulated the fund, I think generally the TCs did okay as long as they stick scrupulously to their respective Investment Policies and guidelines. Their portfolios are diversified. Some asset classes suffered losses, but overall, the diversification is still prudent.

Kaffein> TCs did not do OK. I don’t know how you can accept them as OK. Look at it this way:

- The money is never theirs to begin with. Why does it smell similar to NKF?
- All returns and profits should be re-channeled back to the constituency in terms of lowering S&C, helping in upgrades, maintenance, etc.
- S&C has been increasing over the years. Yeah in good times, people don’t mind the increase. But now?
- When the Lehman Brothers fiasco came up, NONE of the TCs reported anything. Until people started to ask questions. This is NOT ok and does not sit well with me.
- All their Annual Reports, AGMs, etc spoke nothing of their diversified investments.
- And they did it ‘with their eyes wide open’ as quoted by someone.
- And some senior guy up there challenged the people to check oppositions’ TC funds. Yeah…. scrutinise the funds as he brayed for blood. Now.. how come so mum?

I wished we had been more proactive and think out of the box instead of swallowing the whole hook, bait and sinker…. and fisherman.

Kaffein

kaffein- one word

perfect.

12) Kaffein on December 5th, 2008 10.53 am

In the first place, TCs using the public funds for investments without the public’s knowlege is already illegal. Try doing this in a public listed company and see where you can land yourself into . . . . .JAIL!

teo,
how much is the total loss?

teo,
how much is in ‘toxic’ products?

teo,
can i find out this from your financial statements and annual report?

teo teo teo….key issue addressed?

well … wat to do when you have one and only party in the last 40 years. they can simply do wat they want and get away with clean records

Mr Brown, we need a sequel!

Whose monies?
Who custodian?

Does ‘Whose’ know where monies ?

They are trying very hard to push this TC investment debacle aside. There must be a lot of hidden skeletons in the closets. You can also see that the MSM is also trying to move the general population away from this sticky issue. His reply is in the midst of many other news reports and they are also trying to slide the issue to one small corner.

Who is going to hold anyone accountable when those who ought to, are not held accountable.

It is clear that the strategy the PAP Town Councils are adopting is to avoid specific replies to letters from the public on their failed investments while writing to the press to describe the overall financial health of the PAP Town Council investments.

In this way, PAP Town Councils can avoid giving actual specifics on their investment. The difference between raising questions at Parliament and raising questions by emailing the PAP Town Councils is that the PAP Town Councils must address the specific questions posed at Parliament.

We must bring our questions to NMPs and NCMPs so that PAP Town Councils cannot avoid answering them.

Peoples’ Representatives please speak up for the people and demand clarity.

aiyoyo

after go to website & read the TC reply/comments

still as blur as before, maybe now a bit more blurer..

aiyoyo it seems that the PEOPLE answer questions so ’rounded’

while non PEOPLE had to answer questions directly & clearly, if not….

aiyoyo

http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Story/STIStory_310511.html

I think next election he will be out. Case closed because he no more in Parliament. No one to answer the issue. Standard way of doing

I have a suggestion.

Since TOC is celebrating its 2nd birthday tomorrow at HLP, why don’t we have a ‘What We Most Want To Ask The Government’ segment during the celebration there?

Each of you can write down your questions on large pieces of vanguard sheets, bring them on down to HLP and display them all over the park for all to see. Good idea?

TOC must also make sure that its video crew go around the park to video them all and post it here in its TOCtv channel for all to see. Youtube would be good too and make sure everyone else in bloggoland gets a footage of it.

Teo Ho Pin did NOT address the issues and concerns raised over the investments of tonw councils. is Mr Ho suggesting that one can a get a meaningful picture of what town councils have invested just by reading their disclosure of “investment returns”???

I wonder if that is how Mr Ho invests his own money?

Refer to
“….The PAP town councils exercise prudence when making investment decisions. We take a long-term view on investment of town council funds. Our investment decisions are guided by approved financial advisers and banks. We also adhere to investment guidelines set by the Ministry of National Development.
The current financial crisis has had an unprecedented impact on financial markets around the world. If not for this financial crisis, some institutions and investments that have failed or are now deemed high risk, would have been considered very safe by most. However, as a result of our prudent and diversified investments, our sinking fund has grown and earned positive returns. …….”

More FLAW logic are exposed:
“We take a long-term view on investment of town council funds. Our investment decisions are guided by approved financial advisers and banks. ”
SO TC went in with ‘eyes open’ as guided by approved financial advisers and banks, they could not complain and they are liaible to the ‘LOSS OF SINKING FUND’ seems conclusive.
compare it to
The 10.700 victima of Lehman-linked product.
They too took a long-term view on investment – 5 to 5 1/2 lock-in period.
But Their investment decisions were misguided by approved financial advisers and banks yet they were lectured ” walked in with eyes open”.
The victims will fight and continue to fight for justice.

“The current financial crisis has had an unprecedented impact on financial markets around the world. If not for this financial crisis, some institutions and investments that have failed or are now deemed high risk, would have been considered very safe by most. ”
If not for this financial crisis, some institutions and investments that have failed or are now deemed high risk, would have been considered very safe by most. Mmmmm…uncle, we are talking about investment in Credit-linked Notes. What did DBS wealth managment say during the meeting with DBS HN5 noteholers? CLN is rated at high risk 8-9 in a risk measurement yardstick of 1-10. The inherent risk of this financial instrument’s high risk rating is consistent from the outset.
The investment in LB Minibonds, DBS HN5, ML Jubilee 3 and MS Pinnacle 6, 9 & 10 placed the institutional investor (ie. TC lah) in two casino: First-to-Default credit default risk references 5 to 8 Reference Entities and risk attached to Sythethic CDO with 100 to 150 reference portfolio embeded CDS as underlying assets. Finally a third major risk in the Issuers as Counterparties and Swap Guarantors. LB Mininbonds fiasco came when the Swap counterparty went bankrupt and default in payment to noteholders. DBS HN5 & ML Jubilee 3 has LB as a FTD RE defaulted. MS PS 9 & 10 were again different in that the credit event was triggered off because of the default in the underlying assets.
UNCLE…enough to tell U that rain or shin the inherent risk is just enormous.
Need to redefine “exercise prudence when making investment decisions.”

Annual return 5% vs Capital outlay 100% and lock-in period 5 1/2 years.

1st yr – 5% vs 100%
2nd yr – 10% vs 100%
3rd yr – 15% vs 100%
4th yr – 20% vs 100%
5th yr – 25% vs 100%
5 1/2 th yr – 27.5% vs 100%
Of course, after 5 1/2 yr he got back your 100%, if NO CREDIT EVENT.

Liken it to betting soccer match – Arsenal vs Hull City
Odds 1 to 20 in the 1st year
Odds 1 to 10 in the 2nd year
Odds 3 to 20 in the 3rd year
Odds 1 to 5 in the 4th year
Odds 1 to 4 in the 5th year
found the similarity in the two? If Hull can stay in EPL in 5 years logical lah!
After 5 year, try something else.

I will rather bet soccer match and the fact that Hull indeed beat Arsenal 2-1 in Arsenal’s home ground in their 1st year in EPL.
So I will never agreed that ‘I walk in with eyes open’ if I were properly advised…

just wondering besides this “loss”, what other investments they have not in the limelight, last time heard that they one of the major share holder of company called Creativ…, now not sure still got or not. Anyone knows?

This guy’s skin must be thicker than an elephant. His TCs have lost so much money and he can still say they have been prudent. What a joke.

I am so glad that TOC has been tracking the replies by Dr Teo.
I suppose we will be provided some figures.
It will be difficult for many of us who are no accountant to be able to fully understand them.
Has TOC any capable ones to take on the task and simplify them for us.
Or are there any pro bono ones?

I noticed something different about they way he writes his letter this time round..
He did not mention asking residents to email town council..
Obviously,someone should write in to Forum and ask him that a lot of people emailed town councils to ask for answers,just like what they had answered the last time..but this time,not only did they not answer..but they try to shift the focus somewhere else..!

This PAPees TCs must now come out clean with their books, so do not try to pang layang again, push here push there, the citizens and the public have the rights to know where you used their monies for, this is our $$$ and not yours, so don’t try to divert or turn away not answering to us, come out clean now! All these years, you cheats on us, torture us, keep increasing the fees and even throw many of the citizens into jail, now its our turn, you can run but you cannot hide cos the truth is out.

No point sqeezing him further as he has already said whatever he needs to say. The bad investment is a bad investment whether open eye big big or not. Its an honest mistake as no one purposely loose money. So lets move on.

Cannot blame these useless ministers because these irrelevant answer are just the complacency culture of PAP. The rampant culture of evading the question with irrelevant answer.

Mr Brown enlightened us with his newest podcast and I’m sure u see the question-evading pattern in all the clowns’ answer.

“http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2008/12/01/the-mrbrown-show-town-council-investment-bank-of-singapore/”

We should give our representative a break right?
Afterall , the people chose him to represent them right? I mean I assume he was voted in and elected officially by the people?
Correct me if I am wrong. I am really lost touch with singapore after all these years enjoying life in australia and new zealand and sometimes indonesia and the outlying islands.

world class answer! any person who is being paid $2500 a month can give this kind of answer.. haha uniquely Singapore

all is well, there is nothing wrong, no money is lost, it’s not our mistake, let’s move on and more importantly, BE THANKFUL OK!!

If we were to observe the rule of corporate governance I don’t see why the Chairman and the TC committee should not be holding a town house meeting and have an open dialogue with the residents. The ST Forum page, TC newsletters and websites
are just impersonal and rather cold. The TC is accountable to the residents and is a servant to the public.

Anyone know the difference between REPORTERS and journalists?

There is a great disconnect here, where lots of right questions are being asked on the internet.

I wonder why the reporters and MP’s cant seem to ask the right questions ???

I am wondering why the opposition party are not asking questions with regards to this…

“…to address their queries and receive feedback through various channels such as newsletters, websites and dialogues….”

So, is not TOC such a feedback channel thru websites? So why didnt our THP address the issues here? Such gobbledygook!

TOL, you’re doing a great job! Just be careful- you might be shut down, for campaigning against the govt! You know,back in the ’60s and ’70s, the PAP ran a newspaper called What Others Say. Of cos, it was a propaganda weapon for LKY to battle with the UMNO Malays in govt. It quoted Utusan Melayu, Berita Harian etc. and used the excuse to attack them. So will PAP consider TOC to be an anti-govt campaign and shut it down like Singapore Herald?

Why not TOC organise another protest at the next Speakers Corner?

aiyoyo

will there be a third letter to explain to ST huh???

aiyoyo

I pity this Dr Teo, as he is one doctor who could not save his own sorry ass. I have no doubt that his political career already hatakaki. A scape goat for the MIW

42) wh173rav3n on December 6th, 2008 6.16 am
They can shut down anything they like which is their usual tactic, when losing time, they can do the dirtiest things to get them back on track, this is politics, this is singapore, and the everyone knows them too well now, globally too!

Of TOC should explore ways to keep residents informed of all your finances. But please tell us in short, how much has been lost so far.
TOC should be clear about their direct responsibility to the residents, and not to gamble away people’s blood and sweat money!

Singaporean_67 (#47),

I believe you meant TC instead of TOC.

What happened to this article posted yesterday?

MP instructs TC Manager After Meeting Minister “We will not disclose any further details on TC investments”

It’s not in the list in the Main Stories archives…

Again the key issue has not been addressed:
The concerned is ‘Investing Sinking fund’. From day 1 we know that Sinking fund cann’t be lost we have to accept that it has to be in a very safe investment so that the capital will be kept intact despite the low return. As is definited, Sinking fund is not meant for risky investment. Low yield means low risk.

Next is that the sinking fund is invested in ‘ Cedit-linked ‘ structured product. It’s exposure to credit risk means the entire capital will be wiped out. Not only risk to no return but also the loss of the entire capital. For all the loss etiher in LB Minibonds, DBS HN5, ML Jubilee 3 & MS Pinnacle 9 & 10, the 5 to 8 First-to-Default entities mean the loss of capital is magnified 5 to 8 times let alone the 100 to 150 corporate names referenced in the Synthetic CDO portfolio.

If die die must buy structured deposit/structucted product( Note that SD & SP are again different as laid down in MAS 2004 guidelines), why chose ‘Credit-linked Notes’ which both the capital & return are in such a high risk? Threre are many others to pick that are likely to have the capital intact if held to maturity such as Equity-linked & Commodity linked…; and Currency-linked which will not lose substantial capital.

Why ‘Credit-linked’ Notes and it simply could not equate the word’ Prudence’?