Well done!

Borrowing from loanshark is illegal now, what about borrowing from charitable organisation ? TOC has done a good job, opposition MP is slow in reaction.

I would really like to see the reply :P

My question:
- What was the interest rate for the GIC staff housing loan and the bank loan Dr Ong toook?

I guess:
- The bank housing loan had a higher interest rate compared to the GIC staff housing loan.
- The bank approved only $500K loan based on its assessment and Dr Ong need to get $60K from Ren Ci to bridge the gap.

how many times of income does a bank loan allow you to draw? wondering because if he became COO of ren ci, his salary would be pretty high, not sure why the banks wouldn’t want to lend him up to 56k.

But that’s besides the point…borrowing from a charity is quite fishy, especially if the CEO had a fishy way of not declaring loans on official records.

Err… it’s confidential… I don’t know…?

Looks like Dr Ong is the new CEO taking over Ming Yi, so we donors also have doubt whether Dr Ong can come clean, since he is now managing Ren Ci, I think better not donate to be on safe side

5) good question on April 17th, 2009 11.53 am
But that’s besides the point…borrowing from a charity is quite fishy, especially if the CEO had a fishy way of not declaring loans on official records.

If I am not wrong, all these charities are registered as company. If he were switching company, that would have been a common staff loan.

It is common for the company to offer staff housing loan as a way to tie down staff as the case of his $560K from the GIC. It is also common for the new company to offer alternative loan or other means to help new hire to settle the loan with previous employer.

Like it or not, charities need to observe some of the reasonable norm in the business world. Of course, it should not include allowing and paying for the luxury spending of its staff.

The fact that Ming Yi gave a supplementary credit card to the assistant and he used it for all those expensive purchases is more disturbing.

Now my question is….

As a director, did you know if there were….. clear policies on employee loans….before you took one….

Then once the loan was given to you.. …you sure would have first hand knowldge about loan policies…..

Then why was this gap not plugged….

because of your incompetent work….Venerable Ming Yi is in court…..See what has happened now…….Now Ming Yi is saying ‘Got no clear policy on loans ‘

You are in a difficukt situation…..an another question…..why did you say yesterday that the trail was on going and you did not want to comment and today you spill the beans……

Got lawyers advise..is it……

A more relevant question is why the PAP did not come clean about this MP’s accepting a loan from the corrupted monk BEFORE the trial started. Why did PAP wait till it was revealed in the courts where it caused alarm that even an MP was helping himself to the cookie jar where it was meant for charity.

Does the law state that BEFORE trial there cannot be a disclosure? Doubt it. Cos if PAP wants to play the honesty game then the right thing to do was to disclose this MP’s loans BEFORE trial.

I am uncomfortable. We had to wait till there’s a trial to discover an MP has taken a loan from a charitable organisation. It doesn’t matter to be whether thisloan was taken recently or long ago.
I thought at 1 stage, a concern was raised regarding some policy makers having acquired properties at possibly better values, and a call was made that the PM needed to be kept in the know…
To be sure policy makers are clean, all financial transactions between MPs/ PM/ SMs and non profit/ charitable organisations should be declared, and this is the least that should be done.
The other question is which auditor checked on this organisation year on year, and how long did it take for the problem to be discovered ?

In the first pllace he is just a clinical advisor, therefore is not a full-time staff should not be eligible for staff loan even if staff loan is policy of any company. Beside this is a charitable organisation, all fund collected from donors are intended to subsidise the medical care of the poor and elderlys, so it should not be doled out as loan to staff. This is a breach of trust given by donors to Ren Ci.Only interest earned or dividend earned from investing the donors’ fund should be allowed for staff loan purposes. Dr Ong has degraded the noble status of members of parliament by borrowing money from a poor man’s coffer. This is the result of promoting high office of the state through material benefits, the principle of getting people to high office should end now or else our country is going to loose our souls.

Zheng Xi, great job !
I bet his reply won’t come fast, need PAP vetting first.

hope that he will really reply.

if i have not done anything wrong i will surely reply.

but maybe the court case is still going on.

so he also better keep quiet.

this is what the usual reply.

so we will not get any reply.

what to do?

If you’re a worker, it’s “dare not to tell us and we’ll burn your ass off WHEN we find out” but if you’re one of The Chosen Ones, then it’s simply “don’t ask, don’t tell”…

As usual – just another day in Uniquely Singapore….

Such staff loans even without interest are not uncommon. Furthermore, he took it when he wasn’t an MP and he paid in full already.

More importantly, they seem to have pass a bill that has a Move On law right? So now it is legally ok for them to say “let’s move on”.

What I really want to know is why Dr Ong threw the two candy wrappers in the Parliament house…

Hi Choo Zheng Xi,

when you do all these are not afraid be mark by high people or follow or monitor by agents?

actually i think you are doing the right thing but still………

or i watch too much james bond movies.

i doubt very much it is a loan. it could well be something, ‘ang poa’ or ‘jump ship token’? who knows?

of cos now he said its loan. in the first place he should jolly well known of his elist positon. i would expect old man to kick his ass soon…

i think very smart talented people will surely mostly chose to work for the current king.

to go against the current king really will be a great sacrafice.

but maybe next time in heaven or hell will suffer much lesser.

This man is drawing 2 salaries: MP “allowance” of $13,000+ per month and salary from his main day job.

Was it yet another “Honest Mistake”??

The Obamas have made public their tax returns in detail

I wonder if our leaders will silence all this chatter by doing the same. It would go a great way towards ending all the speculation and rumors and will do wonders for Singapore’s transparency and accountability…

See http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/04/15/the-obama-tax-returns-by-the-numbers-and-with-his-own-tax-increase/

it was honest mistake …..

How on earth would he know that the salary will come to such indecent figures…some 8 years later…..

Honestly, was a honest mistake lah… let’s move on please …. tsk tsk….

Wah in deep s#it !!!!! No way out !!!!!! And it’s going to get worse…..

What if he choose not to reply?

I am not rich and jobless.
Still, I never borrow money except rare occasions like $2 to pay and pay for food.
but this is just me. but i pay and pay back immediately next day.

going on credit is not wise unless absolutely necessary.

This article is a good effort by TOC and I am sure is much appreciated by the mere mortals who may also feel like wanting to him some questions but being mere mortals, we are not used to such thingys. We are sporeanos.

Die lah like that, MP money no enough what more to say we small fish sure die one.

Why can’t he just borrow legitimately from a bank or any financial institutiion? he is afterall a doctor and should have no problem at all getting a loan from such avenues.

Why borrow from a charity organisation that gets its income from people’s donation ? And why Ren Ci risk this loan ? What if Dr Ong was unable to repay the loan ? Donors have to bear the “write-off” ? Doesn’t make sense at all.

I bet mr. puppet Goh will surely surface sometime soon to say “Oh, it’s his personal affairs and we will leave the matter to the investigative authority. Let’s move on …..” and all that usual sh*t.

Great work TOC
Will at least put a stop to one predator in white

If not for the trial, people would not have known there was such a loan.

26) OMG on April 17th, 2009 5.54 pm Why can’t he just borrow legitimately from a bank or any financial institutiion? he is afterall a doctor and should have no problem at all getting a loan from such avenues.

Why borrow from a charity organisation that gets its income from people’s donation ? And why Ren Ci risk this loan ? What if Dr Ong was unable to repay the loan ? Donors have to bear the “write-off” ? Doesn’t make sense at all.

I tell you why OMG

These types of loan very flexible and free and easy no questions ask no repayment plan…. no interest type… you bent my back , i’ll bent yours !

is it true he just joined or for not long began his borro?
not very nice right? I mean if it was me.
but can also lah. if legal and authorized to borro.
if its a legalised borro, what is the issue?
but as asked in the article, what are the payment terms? standard payment terms? got interest? surely should have? surely sama sama interest as mere mortos?

If I were a doctor……. I think i happy shiok shiok live good life liao.

i knew he will not reply he will just keep quiet.

nothing wrong if the contract or terms say so. it is black and white no choice.

but for a charity it will be wrong to take money to loan anyone.

no matter it is a staff, mp, minister or president.

and it will be worse if a person that can qualify to be mp feel it is ok to take a loan from charity.

charity money is from public.

charity is not a business.

but maybe he is a kind monk.

he just wants to help people.

but just use wrong method and get caught.

feel pity for him also.

and maybe the guy is not very sure about the rules and mix up business rules and charity rules together.

means as long as i borrow and return then everything ok.

and rules for charity are also more lax last time.

bad luck. too bad.

Is Ren Ci contravening and breaking a lot of law and rules
First is the misappropation of Publicly Donated Funds
Thus U WOULD DEEM It CBT and MISUSE
Second does it not fall under the MONEY LENDERS ACT
where the person who loan and the person who borrow
knowingly it is Publicly Donate Funds would make him a accesory or
accomplice in the CBT
Seems lot of cover up is going on

i get pissed off every time i see that fake monk in his yellow uniform, whether on the papers or on TV. Can’t wait to see him in the jail uniform.

The old man is right if you don’t pay the top talent in our government they may think of other way to get the money and be corrupted. So in conclusion, MP should be paid million S$ allowance to prevent them from being corrupt.

i think there is a member of the royal family,

who is also leader of one of the richest belief,

earn tons of money.

there is only a report,

but nobody complained.

maybe he is really god.

Imagine if it was Chee Soon Juan instead of Ong Seh Hong.

All PAP hell would break loose.

I believe he has explained that it is part of the condition of his employment with
RenC to pay for part of his housing loan. He has since then repaid the loan.
Sounds ok and above board to me. No dishonesty here!

aiyoyo

not sure the elites got talk about this issue in the palemen???

think very high chance, if the culprit not the elite group,

will be grill until chao da (burnt)!!!

still basic question – Y man on the street so hard get loan, and end up loan from

the sharks? is this one of the reason, not sure…

another sad story

aiyoyo

I also want to find out more about the incident.

What is the combined wealth of PM, MM and SM ?
At least more than $200M, right ?
It is not too late to pool their combined wealth and start a scheme to provide loans to PAP MPs. The other ministers with their muliti M $ pay can participate if the demand is there, extending to those at the grass-roots level as well.
Of course such loans should be interest free and payable over the long term, 20 to 30 years seems very reasonable.
This is a lot better for the PAP’s image, rather than borrowing from a monk,
even if there is intention to repay the loan. lol

$500,000 from the bank.Why not $560,000? Hardly any difference. The $60,000 smells more than the dirtiest public toilet. The PAP’s lackeys would be running around like chickens without their heads buying up all the rose scent they can find. Bunch of hypocrites.

Dr Ong is a smart person. But smart person can also do stupid things at times. I guess he is very calculative and tries to milk to his extreme advantage. Borrowing $560,000 from Ren Ci is out of the question. $60,000 seems to be palatable. So why not?

It is common practice for banks to entice staffs from competing org to join them via sign-on fees (bonus). They usually do not have to repay this bonus if it didnt become controversial.

The terms loan, bonus, sign-on fee are often casually intermixed.

One could for example be paid a sign-on fee at first, but later return it as a loan made good when he changes his mind.

The repayment schedule, timeline and perhaps deal size hold clues to the true nature of the deal.

Look, people.

Ren Ci is a charity, not a bank or a financial institution. It asks and begs for money from the public and reaps millions each time.

The money is suppose to help the poor, the needy, the old.

The money is NOT TO HELP PEOPLE PAY OFF THEIR STAFF HOUSING LOANS!

When I donate my money, I want it to go to those who need it who cannot fend for themselves! Dr Ong Seh Hong should know, indeed he knows, that Ren Ci is a charity and its work is to help the needy!

IT IS NOT A PLACE FOR HIM TO GO AND GET CHEAP LOANS! DAMNIT!

Ren Ci should not be giving $60,000 to a person who can afford to get $500,000 from the bank!

This is utterly shameful! I am disgusted.

Can or not can?
Why not can if cannot?
citizens based on justice and equality so as to achieve . dioboh?
can i ask for 59000 borrow?
can borrow me or not?
how ? please provide the procedure.
Let all loan to pay and pay our other loans. can or not? not can? can can?

how long would it take to reply the above questions which are quite direct and clear. i wonder.

Our dear Dr Ong may be up there and with GCT today.
This is a very small peanut world.
To-morrow will be different.
If he choses to ignore netizens now, he is making the biggest mistake in his political career.

“Ren Ci should not be giving $60,000 to a person who can afford to get $500,000 from the bank!”

Everyone knows that it pay to “bribe” the gahmen into holding position in organization through unwarranted “incentive and benefit” because it is very effective to use government relationship to perpetuate their money-making business. After all, with the gahmen and MP in the organization, who will dare to investigate the organization other than their own circus ? They think that having government protection by having gahmen in the organzaiton will protect them forever.

#50 daniel,

it has been going like that all this while. it is a business sense. getting them to involved is like paying for the tickets for imunity.

pap even asks for outright support as donations in the form of table dinners to be sponser in thousand of dollars during national day celebration. it is not a surprise to the community here.

Post #50/ 51.

PAP MPs must all be very careful now. The smarter ones who openly exploit the system are not MPs,take for eg the selfish NKF guy which gave rise to Mrs GCT peanut story. They work outside but exploit the establishment and even draw in VIP or VIP’s wife into their schemes.
Dr Ong’s case is 50:50 – needs details like is it interest free ? are there other benefits alongside it and not reported yet ? , etc, These are his own demands and his employer had agreed to the terms. He will have to face the consequences of moral judgement.
Eventually he may get away with all but his character and fitness to continue as an MP will be the subject of not only citizens’ concern but the PAP as well.

Yes, as ordinary citizen, we want to know the details …

42) PaP golden loan on April 18th, 2009 9.41 am What is the combined wealth of PM, MM and SM ?
At least more than $200M, right ?

From the looks of how sour the Temasek and GIC performed last year. I guess you can say their conbined wealth is really in deep water or underwater and maybe realized the some of the losses already.

LKY already said “Life is Unfair! Some People are more Equal than Others”
That why double Standard!

Obama will not be president in Singapore cause he take drugs.

Steve Jobs can’t be so successful cause he drop out from university.
Only Graduate got Good Gene!

In this time and Age! Who will believe LKY!!!

Jolly this is public donated fund raised towards charitiable cause.

For a medical doctor helming such an organisation, clearly these monies are holy scared not to be touch. He should never enter into such “unprofessional” relationship with the Rev. Is his character one which is loosely and easily influenced where he does not think carefully on his feet? Or is he plainly guillible?

This raised an issue of PAP screening of their choice. We were led to belief in them. But this time, it shows a crack in integrity.. At time when you hear some of these new young MP speaks, your heart will weep.

The cover-up of 8x bonus for Dr Teo HP Town Council staff. This unhealthy money relationship with a charity by Dr Ong Say Hong, some rumours of M having relationships other than their spouse; these showed cracks are appearing in the once fadicious PAP.

OR have they decided to lower their standards?

bWill his integrity be an issue of investigation by Medical Council, is his profesional conduct a focus for further investigate.

I wouldn’t say good job to TOC or Mr Choo Zheng Xi for that matter.

I think the email was just plain rude and over demanding- Dr Ong has every right not to reply. Who are you, seriously? Who do you think you are? Demanding that someone replies by the end of a working day? Absurd. Not to mention that Dr Ong is busy enough with this case, it’s already ridiculous to expect anyone at all to reply to an email within such a short span of time.

In response to gg’s comment (32th), “i knew he will not reply he will just keep quiet”; I only have to say not everyone is as free as you.

The attitude and content of this email is ludicrous and plain stupid- I’d rather Dr Ong not reply to this email, there’s no need to lower his status just to satisfy the curiosity of some unreasonable Singaporeans.

Before you say you’re disgusted, may I just say some of the replies here make me utterly embarrassed to be a Singaporean as well.

57) Ethan on April 18th, 2009 10.49 pm
Dear Ethan
Dr Ong has been waiting for 8 years for this news to explode. He jolly knows that paper cannot be used to wrap fire. One day the truth will emerge. There are only 6 questions. Someone as intelligent as Dr Ong will not find it difficult to answer and reply. Let him prove his innocence. Let him be accountable for his actions. The more he delays, the less credible he becomes. What is he afraid of to respond?

My only question is whether Dr Ong had to pay any interest on the loan, and if not, then surely this benefit should be regarded as additional taxable income for which he should voluntarily report it to the Govt Income Tax Dept? Failure to disclose such income is an offence under the Income Tax Act.

Is Straits Times a true journalism ?
They fail to discover that Dr Ong is a MP ?!?

======================
Director among Ren Ci staff who took loans
Sat, Apr 18, 2009
The Straits Times
http://news.asiaone.com/News/the%2BStraits%2BTimes/Story/A1Story20090418-136008.html

AMONG the staff members who received loans from Ren Ci Hospital was Dr Ong Seh Hong, now its chief operating officer and clinical director.

The former head of the hospital’s human resources department, Ms Joyce Teng, said that he was given a $60,000 loan in 2000. She reckons that it was probably the biggest loan given out during that time she was employed at Ren Ci, from 1997 to 2001.

Dr Ong’s name surfaced on Thursday, the sixth day of the trial against Ren Ci ex-chief Ming Yi, when the subject turned to whether the hospital had a policy on granting staff loans.

[i]Before you say you’re disgusted, may I just say some of the replies here make me utterly embarrassed to be a Singaporean as well.[/i]

how about we pasted dr ong foto in renyi/parliament houses
with the words

owed $ pay $$$ ?

seriously also, who is dr ong before CNA’s news?
Now he is known as someone who borrowed S60,000 from a monk and a charitable hospital to get a job at the said hospital.

#50 Daniel on April 18th, 2009 1.10 pm comment reminded me of an old man who was appointed advisor to Citibank. Recall the news reports about our SWF poor investment judgement of buying preference shares of the bank.

MP Ong has not the calibre of an MP and should go. Goh CT should take responsibility as having recruited him and resign as SM.

My goodness, if Goh CT really resigns, then the savings of just his basic salary alone of $3.2m, excluding performance bonus and pensions, would be more than enough to pay for eighty medical doctors each earning $40000 p.a. to prop up our hospital services.

The media’s failure to identify Dr Ong as a PAP MP is very glaring. When Tan Lead Shake’s wife case came for mention the “Opposition Politician’s Wife” headline was also glaring. Get the message?

In any case Dr Ong is the MP in the ward I live in. Should’nt he spend more time looking after his ward. I swear I have never seen him visiting the flats because no matter how he performs the GRC system does not make him personally accountable. Some say he often went “jalan-jalan” at the Geylang Serai temporary market – yes just “jalan-jalan” to say hello to the many rats there. Even the job of keeping the place clean and healthy he cannot do properly. Too bad somebody else must take the blame. The Mama Rojak happens to be a very convenient scapegoat.

Good job TOC for keeping up the pressurs here.

Singapore needs to know here just like the town council investment which have now die natural death.

Dr Ong needs to answer here.

With due respect, what IF he ignore your question, email or calls?

maybe he forgot.

I actually am very curious to hear him take the opportunity offered to clarify.
I like to hear how a doctor reply. Must be very bombastic.

Wah, former CEO of Ren Ci got 9 lives with 9 Credit Cards………modern day monk, living in a Money Trap World with good taste for 5 Star Hotels etc…..all in the name of Charity??? can’t believe!…To me Charity begins at home!

…#69 (what a strange number..lol) and a helpful room mate as well!

I don’t think I will ever donate to Ren Ci again. It is a shame, that with this episode, the good name of Ren Ci has gone down the drain.

4) What was the timeline for repayment of the loan and did you comply with it?
A: Anytime convenient to me.

5) When did you complete repayment of the loan?
A: When Ren Ci’s CEO was arrested and charged.

6) Did you declare this loan to the People’s Action Party selection committee?
A: Yes, I told one of the famiLEE’s members and he replied that it was “hear no evil, see no evil”.

I agree with sarek.

The loan to Ong is not an issue itself. Companies do that all the time and its not illegal at all.

Whats of concern should be whether the “loan” was indeed a loan as intended, not some bri**, kickba**, etc etc etc

Was there any paperwork like IOU? Was the loan declared in RC’s statement of affairs? It it was, then we should cut Ong some slack and move on.

“The Obamas have made public their tax returns in detail”

I wont be surprised if the famiLEE doesn’t pay taxes at all since its afterall, still “their money”. Oaying taxes to them means from one hand to the other, thats all.

“Interesting conflictlitus on April 18th, 2009 12.21 pm how long would it take to reply the above questions which are quite direct and clear. i wonder.”

Very long lar, you lon understand issit?

See hor, must make appointment with lawyer, then must call PM secretary make appointment to see PM, then PM must see SM, then hor must again appointment to see MM, all take time lar.

Understand lar, without the head of the famiLEE say “OK”, who dare to make reply hor, dio bo? Even PM also must wait for MM to give clear instructions and directions mah, you tink he dare to act on his own meh?

PM useless but he no stupid lar, PM position also handed on a plate to him one, on the condition that when the head of the famiLEE say sit, he die die guai guai must sit. You know?

So hor, lon wait for le reply lar, go play with AWARE 1st, then maybe hor, after the election hor, the MP Ong win seat hor, if you no forget then he reply lor. If Ong bo join election or lose, then this issue all under the carpet liao and the gahment will use the “Move On” law, order you to move on lor.

After reading so much comments regarding this issue and trying hard to be as rational as possible (just to ensure not being labeled as purely anti-establishment bashing), still my conclusion is that there are a few questions I find mind boggling and hoping that people with a clearer and impartial mindset could help in providing answers.

1) Are NGOs in Singapore allowed to use public donated money as loan to working staff?

2) If point 1 is legal, shouldn’t this policy be declared to public? Again, the primary reason for this transparency is that public donors expect donations are used for charitable causes. Yes? No? Strictly speaking “Staff Loan” to me does not fall into this category. This will not be an issue if it is a non-NGO.

3) If it is perfectly okay to treat it as staff loan and that it is within the legal frame work of Singapore laws, why wasn’t this came to light much earlier before this Ren Ci incident? I mean this amount would have appeared in their P&L, why wasn’t this issue raised by auditors who audited their accounts? (I mean the legality of its nature).

I mean, there must be legal laws to safe guard this “possible abuse of publicly donated funds”. Yes? No? Are these people involved traversing with our judicial system? This incidence gives a real bad name for charitable organizations in Singapore who are truly “NGOs”. The implications are far greater than these people involved thought of, the public confidence must be badly shaken as we no longer know whether public donations are really for good causes and that in turn will affect those who relied on these charitable funds for support.

In my humble opinion, I have always viewed NGOs are run by a handful of “reasonably paid” employed administrative staff and the rest of them are mainly volunteers wanting to contribute their valuable time for a good cause. This episode has deep implication and is far from being clean, clear policies or guidelines on how NGOs are operated in Singapore and there are caused for concerns by the public. I sincerely hope the authorities will look into this matter and investigate it with a serious mindset and provide a satisfactory response to clear the doubts of the concerned public. Please don’t allow this to tarnish the good old name of Singapore government clean cut policies. This cannot happen here. We are examples for our neighbors and countries like China, Vietnam and elsewhere are trying to embrace our corruption free policies into their countries. Please do not ruin this stellar record that was built with the blood and sweat of hard working law abiding Singaporeans.

Retiree

“If he choses to ignore netizens now, he is making the biggest mistake in his political career.”

Lon worry lar, famiLEE will protect him one, the election come, he maybe inside and contesting a GRC of 8 or maybe 10 men lor, headed by MM, worry simi?

Underwater ar, why you so stupid?

“From the looks of how sour the Temasek and GIC performed last year. I guess you can say their conbined wealth is really in deep water or underwater and maybe realized the some of the losses already.”

You think they invest with their own money ar? They take loan from GIC lar, if make money they pay back lor, if lose, they write it into GIC’s portfolio and GIC suffer lar, not them.

So simple also must I teach you meh?

Ethan

I would normally agree with you on the NO need to reply in this matter. It is only fair and just if such emails would go unnoticed IF it was any ordinary person.

BUT and a HUGE BUT Ong is NOT an ordinary person. He is an ELECTED MP (elected by the people, ie: US). And due to this position, he is OBLIGATED and MUST REPLY because HE IS ACCOUNTABLE TO US!

Don’t want to reply also can, resign lor. Dont be an MP, then we won’t be bothered if he had taken any loan from Bin Laden.

..#69

coincidental the No. 9 got some religious or magical meaning as to why a monk wants 9 Credit crads …..puzzling to read in today’s ST about his roomate 2 sharing a room?………………..hope no hanky panky too!

Mama Rojak……….. rocks! all hawkers in Geylang got more “C” now
Ren Ci – slowly the cat is out of the bag…….
Mat Selamat ……..may be forgotten now!
Recession & Retrenchments – In focus now.
where is Dorai now???

Why there seems to be some PAP involved in rich charities? Is it because these charities needs the legitimacy of the PAP MPs or ministers to champion their causes?

First NKF, then Ren Ci, then Youth Challenge (maybe no direct PAP people, but nonetheless fishy).

What about some very very rich churches whose pastors and staff are paid 20k, 30k or more per month? Are there MPs involved or Ministers involved as members or otherwise?

I got a doubt regarding conflict of interest.
Hope somoene can clarify for me.

1. An ‘independent auditor’ :
a. ‘Independent’ : a company is the paymaster to an accounting firm to act as the independent auditor. I like to know, being in the business of auditing and being the service provider to the paymaster, is there conflict of interest? I hope to get clarified on this.

b. ‘auditor’ : ditto.

The sad thing about the establishment is that however hard they try to be truly clean and respectable, along will come some of their own selfish clowns like the NKF guy, etc.. and now the good doctor who will move the PAP back 2 steps for the 3 steps forward taken.
The case is quiet from his end ; perhaps the good doctor doing good work in Marine Parade is too busy attending to other more important matters.

Little does he or his GRC colleagues know that he is starting to harm and damage the reputation of his bosses.

My question to the PAP MP is quite simple:
The $560,000 housing loan from former employer GIC is obviously secured against his property. Unless he has a credit issue, any bank should be able to provide a full re-mortgage at a competitive rate. Recall property prices were still high at the time of transaction. Why split his liability into two parts? The $60,000 from Ren Ci or Ming Yi has to be something other than a straight forward staff loan. Quite possibly he decided to “retire” his obligation after signing on with the MIW, knowing his finances will be up for scrutiny. Or worse…. his political bosses asked him to “take care of it.”

The new 5 C:

Comsumerism
Commercialism
Comrades
Connections
Conspiracy

Please. This MP is a PAP MP so he is must be very honest and good.

I wish to add that: don’t you guys get it? This POA law will keep MM Lee in power so that is good for Singapore. If you don’t believe me, watch a documentary called:

Success Stories: Lee Kuan Yew

It is a very nice show! My teacher show it in national education lesson. After that, me and my classmates, we all respect MM Lee more. He fight bad guys like communists in the past and even has many operations to stop bad guys! Operation Cold Store and Operation Spectrum. Bet you dunno what I am talking. Nowadays he still has not give up to catch bad guys. Like a USA citizen blogger, people wearing kangeroo shirts. They all bad for