By Choo Zheng Xi and Khairulanwar
THE drama didn’t let up while votes were being tallied by external auditors Deloitte and Touche.
From 4.30 pm till the final count at 7.30pm, member after member continued to castigate the new committee on a range of issues from their understanding of feminism to the amount of money they had spent so far a month into their term.
One burning issue members demanded an answer to was how much of Aware’s funds has been spent in the last month. The Aware constitution requires the Executive Committee to seek the consent of members before approving expenditures above $20,000.
One member pointedly asked Honorary Treasurer Maureen Ong if her committee had used more than $20,000 in organising the EGM, and noted asked if her committee had acted beyond the powers granted to them in the Aware constitution. Picking up the question of financing, members from the floor started demanding an estimate for how much had been spent so far.
Ms Ong announced that an estimated $80,000 had been spent on lawyers, auditors, and venue bookings. This brought the audience to its feet in anger.
Calling the spending “extravagant”, Aware member Loretta Chen said it was the “turning point” as it indicated that the team headed by Ms Josie Lau “may not be the best to lead AWARE”, despite being “well-meaning women”. Running a group such as AWARE required a set of values that was different from their “corporate ethics.”
Mark Ho, the legal adviser to the Old Guard, questioned whether Josie Lau’s exco tried to “reach out” and “call for help” in organizing the EGM, to save on fees for event organizers, legal help and the various miscellanies.
Social worker Suzanne Jarzabkowska commented that in “an NGO culture, money is the last thing we reach for” – preferring to “work by consensus” and leveraging on the “network” of civil society. By resorting to a “chequebook culture”, it underlined that Ms Lau’s team “does not understand how NGO works.”
Ms Bridget Lew, the director of HOME, derided the expenditure as “shameful” for an NGO whose ethics are usually to “work hard (and) struggle hard.”
It is unclear at this point of time how Aware will defray the costs for the expenditure, or whether Ms Lau’s team will bear any of the costs.
——
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
*shake head* money down the drain.
Amazing. 80K. At least this is a lesson well paid for in the sense that now we know the extent to which democracy and civil society might be threatened if we do not have a good system in place in the first place to prevent such things from happening. Still, it’s so much money which could have been spent better.
I am not too eager to pursue the matter of money, especially the amount spent on booking the venue. With such a large crowd, I’m not sure if it will be possible to book a place for a reasonable fee that can:
1) accommodate at least 2000 people
2) on such short notice.
Sure, the money for engaging the lawyers and all were too costly and perhaps unnecessary (isn’t Thio Su Mien a lawyer herself?), but I think the supporters of the Old Guard should not be too, for a lack of a better word, aggressive when seeking for accountability of the money spent on the venue.
I know it is overspending according to the rules, but think about it: if the new exco hadn’t overspent, would this EGM have been possible?
they refused help from the old guards to help in the logistics, and they were so inexperienced, they probably didn’t do their research, on how to get a large venue at a cheaper price.
3) Jackson Tan on May 3rd, 2009 10.37 am
You live by the sword, you die by the sword.
Josie, Maureen and the others kept talking about the constitution, from how they were legally elected at the AGM to the fact that they need not resign although the no confidence was passed. The constitution was very clear about the spending restriction. They breached it. They are liable.
Even logically speaking, they can’t say that they had no choice. For example, if dear old Maureen had booked a football field or a school hall, she could have defended any criticism that the venue was not good by saying that she had no finances. And its not just the EGM cost, it’s also many costs such as changing the locks to an electronic card system (very expensive) -alamak! Just buy a new padlock, lah! And surveillance systems. You know, even without the EGM costs, they were probably already over the limit. That is such poor governance – they don’t even know their spending limits.
Also, the old Guard had tried to contact them several times (this is a fact) to coordinate the logistics. Now if dear old Maureen had been smart, she would have said to them “Look, we need a bigger and better venue – it will cost so much” and the old Guard could have objected then. And if they did not, the old Guard would have looked bad if they had brought it up during the EGM.
Finally one of the most valid points brought up was that AWARE is an NGO and not a profit seeking company. Ask for help. Use your networks – eg ask Suntec City – this is a public service, give us a discount. Difficult yes, but must try. If you want to run an NGO, you need to know how to “beg” and canvas for help. That is why its not easy to run something like AWARE. Josie and cohort they had no clue on this – it didn’t even cross their mind – they couldn’t answer this when asked. So this shows so clearly that they have no clue on how to run an NGO. In running an NGO, you need goodwill in abundance and from day one, when Josie and cohort seized power, the goodwill had dried up. So even if we shove all the ridiculous arguments on religion and homosexual sex aside, the fact remains that Josie and her cohorts were woefully inexperienced and incapable of running an NGO and did not have any goodwill out there. That alone, should justify their removal.
Maureen, in the previous conference, professed to be smart financial guru to be more fitted to her job as honourable treasurer. Unfortunately, she did not display well on running the financail affairs of AWAREand deliberately violated the spending rules laid out in the constitution. This matter should not go to rest just like that, all these self proclaimed smart asses should bear full responsibility for what they did to the cash coffer and not running away like nothing was wrong. Proper investigation should be carried out, the veteran should consult with their lawyer to see what proper charges is suitable for the robbers.
the right thing to do is for the just replaced exco members to pay for expenses over 20k.
No money no EOGM – simple. With EOGM the old guards got into power with membership of 3000 and only spent $90,000. So let us be grateful and not vindictive..there is a lot to be done. The right thing to do is be realistic and forgive.
i have been switching reading threads from various sites and realized that postings from josie & gang supporters would suddenly turned meek on the subject of accounting for money.
most will say let it go and move on, some even said without spending that money, the old guards would not even win.
i figured no matter how strong their voices were on other subjects, the money part there is truly no debate, josie & gang has ‘crossed the line ‘ of their constitutional rights.
i believe we should actively advocate on this issue, make them accountable for their irresponsible extravagant chequebook ways.
agree w 8)
excess of 20k shld be footed by thio for masterminding the whole damn waste
Misappropriation of AWARE’s fund to the tune of $90,000 in a month. Josie has broken all of Singapore’s vice records. In the NKF saga,and Ren Ci saga, it all occurred over a period of many years. Josie and her pussycats are indeed very efficient. All for the wrong reasons. Maybe it’s appropriate as she is after all a VICE president in DBS.
SOCIETIES ACT
(CHAPTER 311)
Penalty for misuse of money or property of a registered society.
19. —(1) Where on complaint made by a member of a registered society or by the Registrar it is shown to the satisfaction of a District Court or a Magistrate’s Court that any officer or member of that society has in his possession or control any property of the society otherwise than in accordance with the rules of the society, or has unlawfully withheld any money of the society or wilfully applied such money to purposes other than those expressed or directed in the rules of the society and authorised by this Act, the Court shall, if it considers the justice of the case so requires, order the officer or member to deliver all such property to the trustees of the society or such other persons as the Court may appoint and to pay to them the money so unlawfully withheld or improperly applied.
(2) A complaint made under subsection (1) other than a complaint made by Registrar shall not be entertained unless the Court is satisfied that the complainant is, on the date of the complaint, a member of the registered society in respect of whose property the complaint is so made.
(3) Any person bound by an order made under subsection (1) who fails to comply with the terms thereof and the directions given therein within a time to be specified in the order shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000.
(4) An order made under subsection (1) shall not affect or prevent a prosecution of, or civil proceedings against, any such officer or member.
Punishment of fraud, false declaration and misappropriation.
20. Any person who with intent to mislead or defraud any other person gives to the other person a copy of any rules, regulations or other documents, other than the rules of a registered society, on the pretence that they are the existing rules of the society or that there are no other rules of the society or gives to the other person a copy of any rules on the pretence that those rules are the rules of a registered society when the society is not registered, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both.
source: http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/
MAINTENANCE OF RELIGIOUS HARMONY ACT
(CHAPTER 167A)
RESTRAINING ORDERS
Restraining orders against officials or members of religious group or institution
8. —(1) The Minister may make a restraining order against any priest, monk, pastor, imam, elder, office-bearer or any other person who is in a position of authority in any religious group or institution or any member thereof for the purposes specified in subsection (2) where the Minister is satisfied that that person has committed or is attempting to commit any of the following acts:
(a) causing feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different religious groups;
(b) carrying out activities to promote a political cause, or a cause of any political party while, or under the guise of, propagating or practising any religious belief;
(c) carrying out subversive activities under the guise of propagating or practising any religious belief; or
(d) exciting disaffection against the President or the Government while, or under the guise of, propagating or practising any religious belief.
Penalty for breach of restraining order
16. —(1) Any person who contravenes any provision of an order made under this Part shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or to both and, in the case of a second or subsequent offence, to a fine not exceeding $20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years or to both.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of any written law to the contrary, a District Court shall have the jurisdiction to impose the maximum penalty prescribed for an offence under this Act.
source: http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/
What did Josie’s AWARE stand for. Here goes…. Aggressive Women All Resigned Eventually
” Life can be so randomly beautiful, as long as you’re open to it.”
8 ) socrates:
With the $20k limit written in the constitution, would it not have made sense to not hide the fact at first? It would only be the right thing to not insist that “the costs are still being computed, etc.” earlier and not reluctantly giving an estimate only when pressed to by the umpteen person from the floor. This was after the vote was cast by the floor! Were they planning on hiding it? How far would the vote swing in favour of the old guard if this has been revealed earlier?
Constance Singam has said that she had sent emails to Josie and co. as she could get help for the possible costs, and that going to the Singapore Mediation Centre would be a way to help defray the costs, but they refused the help. Women and men have stepped up after Constance to say that if Josie and co. had asked the old guard for help, the influence and reach of AWARE would have mitigated a lot of costs. An event planner said she would have willingly stepped up to offer her free service if she had been asked to. Josie and co.’s retort that she should have offered initially does not hold. They are the organisers of the EGM, they should have asked around for help and not the other way round. How would members know what’s needed or not?
How could us, members of AWARE (regardless of our membership period), be “grateful”, “realistic and forgive”?? AWARE falls under the arm of the Charity branch and this ‘misuse of funds’ should be raised for their investigation.
Disgusting amount of money spent here.
Oh, and a man came up to say that the $40 from each new members would be ~$120,000 so after the $90,000 spent, there will be a profit of $3,000 still!
How could a NGO be treated like a corporation??
forget about singapore news, this website is turning into aware propaganda tool
From the start, I suspect the new Exco had an agenda to destroy the old Aware and possibly finish it off by depleting its finances if any other means failed.
It was obvious from their series of vindictive actions that the new Exco had no intention to continue the good work that Aware had been doing. If they have been sincere, they would have consulted the old Guard extensively to provide the necessary continuity in their current programmes. If they have been so obsessed in destroying what the old Aware stands for, they should now be prepared to face the consequences of the arrogant behavior.
Otherwise they would have literally got away scot-free for murder, literally.
Wonder if Josie Lau(Sai) spends DBS budget dollars as freely as she did AWARE’s.
The clown who suggested some $3K profit out of the 1 month saga, should ask if that is his own money, will he do that. Furthermore the money could have been put to very good use to help people. I ask again, if the money comes from his own pocket will he spent it the same way. The mind got problem.
Actually, the remaining amount should be S$30,000…
Anyway, that clown is really – a clown – this money from the members are meant to help people in need…
Of course he doesn’t care cos his church is probably very rich and spending is not an issue for them…
Back to JL and her team – they have failed in their fiduciary duty (as guardian of the funds) and must be taken to task for that…
I work in PR and i can tell you – they shouldn’t have spent so much money on something like this. Their events company should have bargained down more, or choose a better location. Expo offered them Changi Exhibition Hall which is far cheaper. And yes, they could have gotten a field like the Workers Party did.
We are not saying that they were not faced by difficult circumstances, but the fact remained that they did not want to accept the help from the Old Guard. Just look at their volunteers against We are Aware group, the latter was well organised and gave us all free food, drinks and even flowers. The New Guard volunteers didn’t even usher people correctly.
Even my clients from MNCs do not just throw 90k for such a small event. It just shows a total disregard for the organisation’s money. I want to see their individual claims and receipts as well. Wonder what is on it
Make them pay it back. It is their choice to choose this path. Let them get to know what it is like to be hounded by one after another letter of demand.
to 11) Peiyu. The man was not ANY man, he is the husband of dear Ms Josie Lau. Of course twisted logic is expected.
let us move on and see what AWARE can do to promote better lives for women badly affected by the financial crisis….Thought one member already mentioned that the net cash position is even better than before the start of the event?
its time some adults learn to take responsibility for their own actions. no wonder Josie wasn’t to upset stepping down, they depleted large amounts of Aware’s funds!!
Aware should come up with a system to blacklist individuals who have shown how much a threat they are to an NGO!!
Wiht additional $120k in the coffer what is $90k ? Was it spent on rubbish ? If fact it was the Singam faction who was responsible for the cost. If she didn’t cause all the problems Josie and comm need not have to spend on any thing but of course the coffer wouldn’t have swelled to $120K. This is the trade off.
Singam forced the spending. They should be made responsible .
Josie & fiends could be spending “just a few” months sitting on the Exco position thinking about how to help women. fantastic leadership on display!!
dunno to to cry or laugh then… +.+
According to The Sunday Times report at pg.12, accountant Lim Wee Lim of the Church of Our Saviour which JL & Co. attend, he said “If you take away $90,000 expenses from $120,000 (referring to the windfall in membership fees collected) that you got, you still have $30,000 more than before.” Let the final audit of Aware expenditures be made public to see whether the accountant is credible in his calculation. Perhaps he has assumed that the entourage of legal advisers, auditors, security officers, policemen, support staff, etc, volunteered their services gratis to JL & Co. to help Aware generate a net profit of $30,000 in EGM. If it is credible, it is now the JL & Co.’s turn to call for another EGM to oust Dana Lam & Co. to make another $30,000 or more for Aware.
Watchman, you really have no experience or idea what a charity organisation is about. Why don’t you join one to have a better idea how money should be spent? What exactly did Mrs Constance Singam do? Could you be more exact?
As for the money, it’s not a profit/loss thing. The thing about charities is that every single cent should be spent on their beneficiaries as much as possible. If you don’t understand that I suggest you start getting some field experience before you use such obviously extravagant terms like ‘trade off’.
/// 13) Men In Back on May 3rd, 2009 1.25 pm
What did Josie’s AWARE stand for. Here goes…. Aggressive Women All Resigned Eventually ///
MIB – more like … Arrogant Women Are Rejected Emphatically …
are the old women picking cans, clearing tables being helped???
(34)
r stray dogs fed? r the homeless given homes? r the dom gg to batam every weekend caught? aiyo. pls leh. aware is so small, how to look after everyone? since u care so much u go do something la
to the Watchman: Of course. If Ms Singam is responsible, then i suppose you should be responsible too since you are one of those who cause this split to swell instead of promoting reconciliation. Would you please leave your contact behind so that we can send a bill of… i don’t know, how does $20000 sound like to you?
This whole episode is the fault of Josie and her cronies. Since they CHOSE to oppose the Old Guard by turning up at the AGM and voted a new Exco, it is their fault! If they hadn’t even appeared, nothing would have happened right?
See? I followed your line of thought but at least mine made sense. Please refrain from writing unless you have something more to contribute than fantasies.
JL & Co should be made to account & justify for all expenditure under their watch, not just the amounts exceeding S$20K.
Eg #1 – expenditure S$21K, JL & Co should not just be responsible for the excess S$1K, they must be responsible for the full S$21K.
Eg #2 – expenditure S$10K, although did not exceed the S$20K limit, JL & Co should account & justify this expenditure. Otherwise, they must be responsible for the full S$10K.
Everyone have to be mindful of spending monies that don’t belong to their pockets.
number 17..madam PeiYu…your calculator is out of batteries is it? after deduction..left 3K? lol
Spending over $90K in just over a month is incredible. 90K is a lot of money and I wonder whether those responsible can account for the money spent. Someone must be accountable and answerable for the money spent. I guess the money belongs to AWARE and should have been spent wisely.
I agree with ost #37 that everyone must be mindful of spending monies that are not theirs.
To Retired poor man….
Not to worry…josie’s husband has already accounted for the $90K spent, he said that the membership fees of $120k from AWARE could cover up for the money which his wife have spent. How “nice” of them to take the hard-earned money of the members’ money to cover up for the extravagance which josie indulged in right?So “resourceful” and “thoughtful” of him to say such things in EGM, what more could josie ask for in a husband like Alan Chin ?
Guess what?If it was the call from old guard, they would have asked for sponsorships because they are more than resourceful and capable to do so, unlike josie and gang, who spent some $90K on some stupid stuffs to secure their chances of winning.
Bite them hard.
Do NOT let Josie & Gang go so easily without them paying every cent unjustifiedly spent. They were approached by other members to help and to co-ordinate and assist. in logistics and venue but JL & Gang did not co-operate. Legal and venue costs could have been FREE.
Amongst others, who would be paying for the cost of the Raffles Town Club where they held their ‘press release’ ?? They could have saved money easily by using Aware’s own premises !!. Using Aware’s hard earned/saved (precious) money to show off their fragile image??
Accountability time, ladies.
Why spend so much money in such a short time? You think it is your own money or what? Spend like nobody’s business. This is a non-profit organization you know? Why did you not ask for volunteers??? Why Suntec city? You better pay all the money back! You think money so easy to earn? These women are really living in their own high-class world. How to expect them to lead a NGO???
Mr Lim Wee Lim, it is not about whether there is 30k left from the 120k new memberships brought in. You are missing the point here. You mean if they attracted another 120k worth of memberships, they can go out and spend 90k on new uniforms for AWARE? What are you talking about? There must be reasonable spending, especially for a non-profit organization. Money must be accounted for and used wisely. So you agree that TT Durai deserved the gold tap in this office since he attracted so much donations? What nonsense you talking? I know your pastor asked you to support your church members but please contribute with logic can? Talking nonsense lah you.
i wonder if there were any studies between a rich person who oversees a large amount of money that does not belong to him/her, & a cavalier attitude towards the monies.
I was in the queue with an AWARE volunteer who mans their helpline. she was saying how they needed to buy new headsets and euipment for training counsellors (to listen and record novices during the training process) but had not done so as they were mindful of expenses and she complained bitterly about the cost of the new security system and cctv installation as a WANTON WASTE OF SCARCE RESOURCES. She probably had a heart attack when that dishonest, mendacious Maureen finally, AFTER TWO HOURS of badgering gave the estimate of $90 000.
In an NGO culture, we dont claim for so many expenses. We offer our skills for free- there were two male pro-bono and a whole team of women lawyers working probono for old guard for example, so R&T were REDUNDANT. We work round the clock during projects without whining : “I slept at 4 am” as the Josie gang did at one point during the meeting. We cajol and blackmail friends and family into ‘volunteering’ when manpower is needed instead of hiring staff. We chase after donors instead of issuing checks left,right and centre. Josie and gang were a complete insult to the cause and good riddance!
Also to show you the calibre of the audience- we were not fishwives who had wandered in by mistake- if the old guard had say, lost all their lawyers, if they had turned around and asked for help – and those women certainly know how to charmingly and with humility ask for that kind for help- there would be at least a dozen lawyers in that room who would have responded. I knew two of them, and they knew other colleagues were also in the pro-old guard audience.
There were 4 christian type josie supporters sitting next to me. When the Exco flashed their individual CV’s on the projectors, I made a point of exclaiming aloud each time : Not one hour of volunteer work in AWARE or for any women’s organisation. I was a bit in the face but I did not let up the litany. These women had to know the truth about their ‘heroines’.
mirax, way to go.
people without experience nor knowledge should just, in Watchman’s words, stop being so kaypoh! dunno how to run NGO still wan to take over and anyhow spend.
now the the rightful guard has been restored, please guard (pun intended ^.^) Aware entrances & loopholes more diligently, not forgetting the money!!
How come an accountant from Church of Our Savior (COOS) is allowed to see AWARE’s account books? Does his authority to see the account books come from COOS or AWARE? This is suspicious.. And COOS still claims they didn’t instigate the coup…
29) The Watchman on May 3rd, 2009 4.24 pm
“it was the Singam faction who was responsible for the cost…
Singam forced the spending. They should be made responsible”
talk about twisted logic… it hurts my poor brain, seriously.