i think Josie & fiends no forgetting Dr Thio & Derek Hong should qualify the most serious offence committed. code red!!

$20k+ was spent on the EGM, but they’d estimated spending $90k+ since taking office. Who wants to bet this estimate is a safe one, and the actual spending was much higher?

What was the rest of the $70k+ spent on? Even if the old guards would give these women a rest, I, as an AWARE member, will not.

Among many questions:

1) Why the need to install CCTVs in the AWARE office?
2) Why Raffles Town Club for a press conference for a few of them + Thio Su Mien? And was there a need to book such a big room? Raffles Town Club is not masak masak ok, is anyone even aware of the kind of opulence it represents? http://www.rafflestownclub.com.sg/
3) The spike in membership, and therefore contribution in membership fees, is NOT their credit. >1400 people joined to support the old guards, we would like our money to be spent on meaningful things, not for a few people to flush down the drain.

BTW, what a GAY party! Good entertainment. Now, shut up, sit down, go back to work!

You are missing the point. Whether organizing the event under $20k is possible or not, they had to get authorization before they spent it.

Even the Government needs to get the President’s permission to unlock the Reserves. Even if it is a formality, they have to go through with it because it is the law & they have to be accountable for it.

Are JL’s exco above the law?

And on the subject of the cost, if you are in charge of organizing conferences and think $90k for 3000 members is reasonable, you are terrible at your job.

At least 4 different event organizers I spoke to said it could have been done for much cheaper if the venue chosen was more care.

And about ‘graciously’ providing the figure, I would like to see you get your wallet stolen, the money spent and the thief telling you “yeah I spent $30 watching movie at GV gold class” and see how graciously you accept that answer.

Words like gracious, and mentor are what people call you, not titles you give yourself.

The old guards work in a way that reaches out to volunteers for help. There are lawyers who have been helping them for free even for the past years. Secondly, they would have gotten the venue for free. One of their supporters who organises events is able to secure a free venue to that nite’s turn out.

The old guards would not hire a top law firm – that is unnecessary expense.

The old guards would not install CCTV – another unnecessary expense.

The old guards would not use an expensive venue for an earlier Press Conference which the Josie’s team did.

The old guards offered their help to Josie at least 3 times regarding organising the EGM. Josie’s gang refused the help. If Josie would accept the old guards’ help, they would realise how to spend within $20,000!

So, Josie and her gang should be held responsible. They ought to pay for the excesses.

Switch the positions around – New Exco becomes old guard & old guard becomes New Exco.Would things happen the same way the money is managed.
Th results will be the same.

Its not easy for Josie Lau’s team to find a venue at a short timeline. I managed conferences. I know what its like have to book in advance for up to 200 attendees which could easily chalked up to S$100K.. Not to talk about 3000 members within 1 month. Who has the advantage on short timeline. Its the conference venue. S$90K is reasonable for 3000 members with large capacity.

Talk is cheap.

Money is always a sensitive & subjective issue. Its simply not appropriate to questions on money matters during EGM. It should be done later. What was done on the expense may be dealt later. All these questions on money were not clever and simply cornering questions. It may be enquired later on at a rightful platform on accountability rather. Such questions will ultimately be addressed anyway. Also AWARE is a society and there is a accountability system to a governing group & may be audited.

Its rightful for Josie Lau’s team not to address it at that point of time actually. But they have graciously provided the figure, to the long awaited devouring act of the old guards supporters. Very sad scene.

I am a member of AWARE. The money was spent without my authorisation or approval – much less that of the general meeting.

Article 18 of the Constitution states: The Executive Committee has power to authorise the expenditure of a sum not exceeding $20,000 per month from the society’s funds for the society’s purpose.

Article 9 of the Constitution States: The Management of the society is vested in a general meeting of the members presided over by the President.

It’s very clear that if they want to spend more than the $20,000 limit, they have to come to the general meeting of the members.

This they did not do. Even though they clearly knew that they were spending more than their limits – see the video evidence on youtube. Besides, they had other options like a field or school hall or even pasar malam style.

What do you call spending money you’re not supposed to spend?

Stealing.

No offence but suggest don’t be so quick to condemn Josie & Co. based on those parts you copied & pasted on the Societies Act & “Maintenance of Religous Harmony Act”, especially the latter since Josie & Co. never made their religion an official platform for election. All the while it’s the media & others who played up the religious card. There’s no evidence they intended to use AWARE to gain religious converts. They haven’t offended other religious groups (unless homosexuality is now a religion), promoted political causes & no evidence of subversion under the pretence of spreading their religious belief. Subversion in this context should be against the ruling govt, but even if stretched to mean against an established institution like AWARE, democratically & legally becoming the next elected authority is hardly the same thing as trying to destroy & weaken the existing authority through subversive actions.

As for the Societies Act, the onus is on the accuser to prove the defendant wilfully used the money for purposes contrary to the society’s rules. While I don’t know exactly what’s in the AWARE constitution, spending on an EOGM that was called on the members’ request seems a legitimate purpose, no matter how distasteful the total amount spent.

I’m just saying let’s not be so trigger-happy. Up to this point, even the Govt said this is an internal matter for AWARE to resolve, do you think the relevant Govt agencies have not already at least made a prelim assessment whether any laws broken? Sure, things may change, but until then no point for any sensible & rational person to indulge in speculation. I don’t think the way Josie & Co. have handled things is all right, but in the absence of hard evidence & while waiting for further developments & the new exco to decide the next steps, let’s all on both sides just cool off and focus our energies on more pressing matters in our own lives, the economy & our country.

JL and team certainly must be held responsible for this excess spending. Perhaps TSM being their mentor can help. WOULDN’T SHE? Perhaps WATCHMAN can chip in too..

cheers to Dana Lam, cheers to the return of old guard and thanks to all supporters of old guard to trash them.. we crush JL and team like a cockroach!

Someone out there who have access to AWARE’s constitution, please post the clause of the $20k limit Exco authorised to spent.

Please also see my post ” Societies Act” , “Maintenance of Religous Harmony Act”

3 strike, she’s out !

We must get back every single cent above the Constitutional Limit.

Anyway, Thio’s husband is not just rich but super wealthy guy in properties. And most of the exco are very successful figures in their own profession.

So we are not causing them hardship by making them pay for all the excess expenditure.

“Men in Back” is saying Josie & Co. have committed “Misappropriation of AWARE’s fund to the tune of $90,000 in a month” & compared them to the NKF & Ren Ci scandals. Misappropriation is dishonestly taking for one’s own use. Unless it is proven, it’s hardly fair to say Josie & Co had taken AWARE money into their own pockets, this is a very serious allegation. For sure they have to properly explain & account for money spent during their short term & for the new exco to decide on any actions taken, but in the interim let’s not speculate on unproven theories.

Yes, expenses could have been much lower if Josie & Co had asked around but objectively let’s consider:
- people have asked why the FM couldn’t offer a lawyer FOC from her firm. Seriously, would such a lawyer be trusted by majority of the members to give objective professional advice? Before EOGM, people were assuming the lawyer Josie & Co got would be biased due to a Christian connection, but from all accounts he seems to have given a sensible & neutral performance.

- Yes, Josie & Co should have been more open to offers of help from the old guard & others but can you really blame them after being on the receiving end of one month of attacks? Try shouting, hurling abuse & being just short of physically violent on someone continually for a month and suddenly turn around to be nice & offer to help. It would be human nature for the abused party to be wary & play safe to reject the help. On hindsight it was certainly not a wise move but you can’t really blame them for feeling overwhelmed by all the negativity & having a “barbarians at the gate” mentality.

Now they know the real “shock”….financial shock, that is.

Just a gentle reminder of our rules on posting comments. Please have a look at it here: http://theonlinecitizen.com/moderation/

Cool head, your comment is more than 1,500 words long and it is not allowed. Please try to keep your comments under 500 words.

Thanks.