The following is an email query sent to Dr Ong Seh Hong, MP for Marine Parade GRC, regarding the$60,000 loan he took from Ren Ci Hospital. The email was sent on Friday, 17 April 2009. TOC is awaiting his reply.
Dear Dr Ong,
I am writing this email query on behalf of The Online Citizen (www.theonlinecitizen.com).
We are aware of the letter you wrote to Channelnewsasia providing some background to your $60,000 loan from Ren Ci Hospital. We would like to ask you several follow-up questions relating to the loan.
Given the charitable nature of the organization and concerns members of the public might have regarding the appropriateness of this transaction, we hope you will use this as an opportunity to clarify.
The questions are:
1) Was the loan declared and publicly disclosed in Ren Ci’s accounts?
2) Why did you choose to take the loan from Ren Ci instead of the banks?
3) Did you pay interest on the loan, and if so, was the interest rate comparable to then-prevailing market rates?
4) What was the timeline for repayment of the loan and did you comply with it?
5) When did you complete repayment of the loan?
6) Did you declare this loan to the People’s Action Party selection committee?
I look forward to your speedy reply. As these questions are of interest to my readers and the public at large, this set of queries will be published on The Online Citizen at the same time it is sent to you. We hope to receive a response from you by the end of this working day. Your response will be published as a separate article.
Regards,
Choo Zheng Xi
Editor-in-Chief
The Online Citizen
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
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.