Please support The Anti-Mandatory Death Penalty Photo Project by simply taking a photo of yourself that says you do not support the Mandatory Death Penalty, and sending it to us! It can be as simple or as creative as you want, as long as it expresses the sentiment “I do not support the Mandatory Death Penalty”.
_________________________________________
By Leong Sze Hian & Andrew Loh
Jurong (JTC) and Aljunied Town Councils’ (ATC) Service and Conservancy Charges (S & CC) will increase for all flat types on 1 April.
As Singapore is just coming out of its worse recession, with the economy contracting by two per cent last year and also contracting by 2.8 per cent on a quarter-on-quarter seasonally adjusted basis in the last quarter of last year, unemployment still high at an average of 87,000 for 2009, wages falling by 3.2 per cent in real terms in 2009, and wage cuts that may not have been restored, I would like to suggest that we be cautious in starting to raise fees so soon.
For example, it was also announced recently that Polytechnic and Institute of Technical Education (ITE) fees will also go up from 1 April.
According to Jurong Town Council’s annual report for 2008/2009, it had a surplus for the year of $1.5 million, and an accumulated surplus of $3.2 million.
This is after transferring $11.7 million to the sinking fund, giving a total reserve of $79.3 million.
For Aljunied Town Council, the surplus for the year was $2.8 million and total town council funds were $59.5 million.
So, why is there a pressing need to increase S & CC so soon?
Even if we have to increase S & CC, those in 1 and 2-room HDB flats should be spared, as their median monthly household income from work declined by a whopping 13.9 per cent in 2009, according to the Department of Statistics’ Household Income Trends 2009 report.
Also, why is it that S & CC in the opposition wards Potong Pasir and Hougang are now lower than Jurong and Aljunied, for all flat types, except for 2-room flats in Hougang which at $28.50 is 50 cents more than Jurong and Aljunied?
According to media reports, Government grants in 2005 per household were $560 for Aljunied, compared to $114 and $111 for Potong Pasir and Hougang respectively.
For 2009, Government grants for Aljunied, Jurong, Potong Pasir and Hougang, were $9.1, $9.1, $0.75 and $0.94 million respectively.
So, even after adjusting for the smaller number of households in Potong Pasir and Hougang, it would appear that Government grants may still be substantially higher per household for Aljunied and Hougang.
If this is the case, why is it that S & CC in Aljunied and Jurong are higher, despite higher Government grants?
The fact that the last reported statistic that three to nine per cent of households were in arrears of more than three months on their S & CC, may indicate that many Singaporeans may still be in financial difficulties.
I hope that other town councils and service providers will not also increase their fees so soon too.
Readers will remember that in 2008, the Straits Times reported:
… the $2 billion in the sinking funds its [the PAP’s] 14 town councils manage is in good hands, said Mr Khaw Boon Wan, the party’s first organising secretary.
It would thus seem that in a year which saw the worst financial crisis in decades, Singapore seeing record inflation and our town councils being affected by the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the town councils have been able to effectively double its sinking funds.
The question one would ask is: How did this happen? Were returns from investments so good? Or are town councils collecting unnecessary excess of service and conservancy charges?
How did the sinking funds grow from $1 billion to $2 billion within the space of one year in such an adverse economic climate?
Perhaps before PAP town councils are allowed to increase S&C charges, these questions should be answered first.
___________________________________________________
@My Views Mar 21, 2010 4:29
>>Going by the logic of these Leong Sze Hian and Andrew Loh, the Singapore Government should stop imposing taxes since the country has such a huge reserve? What a joke!
I don’t think anybody is asking the govt to stop collecting taxes.. Without the increase in SC&C, the TC would still be collecting the current SC&C, nobody is asking the TC to stop collecting SC&C just because we have a huge reserve..
What’s the purpose of growing the reserve when it’s gonna be gambled away by the self-proclaimed “TALENTED ELITES”, who actually loses our $ instead of making profits.. Don’t tell me that profit and losses are expected in any investments, simply because we are not talking about ordinary people investing our $ here.. REMEMBER, pap always say they are “TALENTED”, so while everybody can lose $, they SIMPLY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO..
In economics, we learn about economies of scale. Bigger = more resources = more cost savings etc….
But then how come our big TCs are charging more than our smaller opp TCs?? Shouldn’t they be charging their residents lesser? What happened to the economies of scale?
Private businesses and condominiums also set aside some profit for their sinking funds. So, the concept of “sinking funds” is long established. It’s not a ploy thought out by Singapore.
Sinking funds serve other legitimate purposes. If you use it for operating expenses, then that other purposes will suffer badly. Why not everyone study why the private businesses and condominiums and even opposition TCs need to set aside sinking funds? Instead of being ever-eager to dig your hands into whatever funds there is lying around.
lobo76
Mar 22, 2010 16:11
Is there any reason to have reserves, if you are never going to use it?
———————————————————————————–
Without a strong reserve, how does the Government finance the Job Credit Scheme which saved so many jobs and companies?
damagedDNAs
Mar 22, 2010 16:27
by the way..did you all know that singapoor defences department bought and paid for 1 squadron of f16s fighter planes for the thais defences forces in return for usin the thais airspace as trainnin ground
____________________________________________________________
This is what I called trying to cook up a storm to mislead people.
The F16s were old fighter-planes belonged to Singapore and given away to the Thai Airforce, in return for using its airspace .
damagedDNAs;
How TRUE is this little scoop of yours? If it IS, aren’t you putting your neck on our Government’s Chopping Block??
@ CJ
http://tinyurl.com/ye32xrc
//My Views
How do you know they are old F16 fighters?
So you admitted that F16s were given to the Thais?
Wow, the Thais like F16s so much to receive old ones.
Very nice of us either way…
We now where <My views> work.
@ cat
My Views is correct on this matter.
the Thais like the F16s very much. especially after ST upgraded them to “Falcon One” standard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Singapore_Air_Force
“Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcon — 4× F-16As and 4× F-16Bs delivered in 1988 under the Peace Carvin I program, one F-16A was lost following a mid-air collision with another F-16A over South China Sea in 1990. All surviving airframe were retired in 2002 and was subsequently upgraded locally to “Falcon One” standard by ST Aerospace before being transferred to Royal Thai Air Force in 2004.[33]“
//(-_-)
Now I know where our defence dollars went.
How come every year we spent 10% of our GDP on defence?
@ cat
imo, 10% is good. as long as we have a credible armed force, it is not worth it to invade us unless it’s a World War scenario. or if we piss another country off enough.
my gripe with the Singapore Armed Forces is the NSF are paid like slaves while doing most of the work in the SAF, as well as old and lousy equipment, slow in replacement, not a lot of spares, no body armour, no NVGs for all soldiers, no secondary weapon, no sights/scopes for all soldiers, etc etc.
therefore, im in favour of increasing the military spending. but i also feel that the increased funding should not increase taxes of Singaporeans; there are government linked organisations that lost a lot of money even though they are all supposed to be geniuses.
//(-_-)
credibility has something to do with the army expenditure.
SAF budget does not determine credibility.
giving out gifts like that to the Thai army is like paying for them to protect us.
With that kind of spending pattern, I now know why we need 10% of the GDP for defence.
Some saving could have been done in that area to spend it on area such as the police force so that we have a better home team that doesn’t let terrorist escapes.
Also on healthcare and education.
10% of the GDP on defence to protect against a dated threat.
It might be more efficient to send in a group of terrorist to destroy S’pore than to send an army if I was an enemy of S’pore…
Low pay for NSF ? That is not the only issue.
The long duration for reservist training is another major issue.
the long list goes on and on.
When it is said the incomes have dropped , why is hikes still implemented here and there?
Is this an indication of Progress?
@ cat
the budget directly affects the quantity and quality of equipment that the SAF can buy, affecting the credibility. for example, compare the armies where soldiers have NFEs, body armour, ability to call airstrikes frequently and easily (US Armed Forces), against one that doesnt (SAF).
perhaps credibility is not a very good word. effectiveness then.
i do not think that the threat of a conventional war with another country is “dated”, and yes, terrorism can be used. but terrorism alone, no matter how many are killed, is just an annoyance to the government. for example, people died in 911, Bali, Madrid, etc due to terrorism. so? nothing changed.
@Ataman Wai Ling Kam
i think it is because they need more money to fund their investment / gambling habits.
to my understanding, since Town Councils have a free rein to spend/invest money as they see fit, they could lose a lot of money when a company they invested in go bankrupt, and could also lose a lot of money on paper. since losses are not made until the shares are sold, this will freeze the money already invested.
therefore, a lot of money must be taken in order to invest in other companies, or to manipulate the prices of the companies it invested in to take out the money that is frozen at a profit.
progress? wahahahahahahahahahaha… sorry. im not laughing at you, im just laughing at the idea.
//(-_-)
//i do not think that the threat of a conventional war with another country is “dated”, and yes, terrorism can be used. but terrorism alone, no matter how many are killed, is just an annoyance to the government. for example, people died in 911, Bali, Madrid, etc due to terrorism. so? nothing changed.
tell that to SAF.
tell that to the Brits who gave up most of the land it owns in Ireland against the Ireland terrorist.
//(-_-)
// terrorism alone, no matter how many are killed, is just an annoyance to the government.
Tell that to BUSH.
Tell that to Obama.
Tell that to the Israel.
@fpc
actually, that proves my point.
the US and Israel have always been subjected to terrorism for their hostile foreign policies.
and decades later, the same policies are still in place. terrorism is just an annoyance where innocent people die.
//(-_-)
Tell that to the Brits who had to hand over a large part of Ireland due to the success of the Irish terrorist in the 60s.
As if the peace treaty in the early 90s was a result of the war between Israel and the Muslims and not because of the success of the terrorists acts of the Muslims…
//(-_-)
I forgot to add: annoyance is an understatement.
heh. i may be wrong, there was popular support for breaking away from UK.
i do not recall Singapore taking over somebody else. if u r saying that Singaporeans will support foreign terrorists and their agenda(s), then u win already lor.
if terrorism were effective on Israel, then it will not continue its expansion in the Gaza Strip and West Bank by building additional settlements. and Operation Cast Lead would not have happened because it would have stopped its Zionist activities.
@ fpc
hmmm… understatement huh.
how about a big dil… stick shoved up the rear end? u wont die, but u’ll feel pain and be quite uncomfortable.
//(-_-)
terrorist is successfully enough to get a much bigger military to sign a peace treaty with a smaller (much smaller) terrorist organisation. Israel military might is world renown.
Subsequent developments/complications do not change the fact that the bigger military wants peace.
//heh. i may be wrong, there was popular support for breaking away from UK.
Of course there was popular support for breaking away from the UK from the English side, after the numerous successful attempts by the Irish terrorists to create chaos.
If there wasn’t support from the Irish side, how did the terrorists finance themselves and find ways to wiggle through the English administration.
//how about a big dil… stick shoved up the rear end? u wont die, but u’ll feel pain and be quite uncomfortable.
How do you know it will be uncomfortable?
How do you know I will feel pain?
I actually quite like it.
@fpc
terrorist is successfully enough to get a much bigger military to sign a peace treaty with a smaller (much smaller) terrorist organisation. Israel military might is world renown.
it is naive to think that the Israel signed it just because of terrorism. to mitigate the threat of terrorism, did Israel not build the infamous wall?
no. Israel signed it because the US twisted Israel’s arm all the way to the negotiation table.
so, we agree that there was popular support. so, in Singapore context, it would be like Singaporeans supporting foreign terrorists. not possible.
//(-_-)
Naive really? I don’t know why a stronger military (supposedly better equipped and trained) occupying a superior ground wants to concede to the requests of the defeated muslims.
US supported the Muslims in the 90s? Really? wow. That’s new.
and they had the Europeans thinking that US supported Israel because of the massive Jew influence in the US (economy and politics)…
//so, we agree that there was popular support. so, in Singapore context, it would be like Singaporeans supporting foreign terrorists. not possible.
I don’t even know what you are talking about here.
No agreement from me since it is like one mass of incomprehensible words on this one.
//(-_-)
Naive really?
I don’t know why a stronger military (supposedly better equipped and trained) occupying a superior ground wants to concede to the requests of the Muslims they defeated earlier.
//(-_-)
US supported the Muslims in the 90s? Really? wow. That’s new.
and they had the Europeans thinking that US supported Israel because of the pervasive Jewish influence in the US (economy and politics)…
//(-_-)
//so, we agree that there was popular support. so, in Singapore context, it would be like
//Singaporeans supporting foreign terr0rists. not possible.
I don’t even know what you are talking about here.
No agreement since it is incomprehensible.
Why would Singaporeans support Foreign invaders masked as terrorists? Just like why would English people support Irish Terrorists that bombed and killed English people and politics in the name of Irish liberation?
To A&E,
Hello DamagedDNAs,
Those numbers are staggering. What is the time frame?
Cheers.
>> Year 2009 alone.
Source: http://review.temasek.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/pdf/temasek-review-2009-colour.pdf (page 30)
For year ended 31 Mar
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Expenses: Selling & Distribution
$ (3,559)
$ (3,939)
$ (4,086)
$ (4,278)
$ (5,197)
$ (5,042)
Administrative
$ (5,772)
$ (7,003)
$ (8,040)
$ (8,104)
$ (8,619)
$ (8,068)
Finance
$ –
$ (2,120)
$ (2,415)
$ (2,611)
$ (3,207)
$ (2,727)
Other operating expenses
$ (3,633)
$ (4,648)
$ (4,758)
$ (5,053)
$ (8,681)
$ (15,333)
$ (12,964)
$ (17,710)
$ (19,299)
$ (20,046)
$ (25,704)
$ (31,170)
The only thing I am not sure is whether this expenses is for Temasek employee alone (only 380 staff – page 9) – which is a staggering amount, 8b for 380 people? and the funny thing is that the expense goes further up when the company lost money…
Oh, sorry, the comment cannot use table format…. re-post the table
For year ended 31 Mar 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Expenses:
Selling & Distribution $(3,559) $(3,939) $(4,086) $(4,278) $(5,197) $(5,042)
Administrative $(5,772) $(7,003) $(8,040) $(8,104) $(8,619) $(8,068)
Finance $- $(2,120) $(2,415) $(2,611) $(3,207) $(2,727)
Other operating
expenses $(3,633) $(4,648) $(4,758) $(5,053) $(8,681) $(15,333)
Sub-total $(12,964) $(17,710) $(19,299) $(20,046) $(25,704) $(31,170)
@ fpc
regarding Israel, it is simple. US pressure. US provides a lot of aid to Israel and so has some say in the issues, if it denies aid to Israel.
if the US does not support peace in the region, then it would’ve just let Israel do its thing without stepping in and creating a “road map to peace”. Israel has proven time and again that it is good at protecting itself, even in the face of overwhelming odds.
and yes, the Jewish lobby in Washington is quite strong. but that does not prevent the US president from making peace in the region for his own political gain.
the Israelis have been fighting since independence, it is not possible that they concede just because of terrorist attacks. i reiterate my stand. the peace treaties were signed because of US and international pressure, and has not made real peace in the Palestine.
regarding the support of Singaporeans…
Ireland broke off because of the popular support against the British. therefore, in Singapore’s context, would mean that there is popular support for a foreign country’s terrorist operations in Singapore. because there is no such support for terrorists, if there are terrorist strikes here, it will not affect the government policies.
i reiterate. terrorist operations are nothing more than a mere annoyance to the government.
<!– –>
//(-_-)
//regarding Israel, it is simple. US pressure. US provides a lot of aid to Israel and so has some say in the issues, if it denies aid to Israel.
yeah right the jews whose influence on US politics and Economy has a lot of interest in making that happen?
//Ireland broke off because of the popular support against the British
Yeah right, the brits supported irish terrorist to make their own life difficult.
@fpc
US presidents have always tried to resolve the Israel – Palestinian conflict. fact. if u do not see that, then too bad.
i think u misinterpreted my statement about Ireland. i meant, popular support by the Irish.
//(-_-)
//US presidents have always tried to resolve the Israel – Palestinian conflict. fact. if u do not see that, //then too bad.
the US presidents will always say they want peace. (except Bush). Yeah right, They have a lot of interests to work for a group of terrorists and not to Israel’s advantage?! who controls the wealth and politics in the US.
//popular support by the Irish.
If only popular support is sufficient… then the Tibet issue would be resolve so easily with the Chinese (and its Army agreeing) conceding freedom to Tibet…
@ fpc
like i said, if u choose not to see that the US pressure was the thing that made Israel negotiate, then too bad. maybe, in addition to the more moderate people in both the PLO and Israel.
terrorist attacks achieve nothing. Hezbollah, Hamas et al tried shooting rockets into Israel. do u know wat happened to them? no peace treaty will stop Israel from expanding. no terrorist can make Israel go to the negotiating table.
no one. other than the US from which Israel gets a lot of aid from. if the Israelis were scared into signing the peace treaties, then it would avoid pissing the PLO and Hamas off at the cost of not expanding the settlements.
Same funny business over at HDB. Their losses go up as prices go up.
Are these Govt owned or Govt linked buinesses subject to audit? Anyway even if they are, what difference does it make? Just like corruption is also subjected to the police and judges in Spore.
This election is not about voting for your ideology anymore, it is about fighting for your RIGHTS to YOUR money. With big number of oppos in place to keep the ruling party in check (whichever party), the latter cannot scoop as much as they want from the coffers.
abc Mar 24, 2010 22:58,
Hint: one purpose of sinking funds is to set aside money for asset renewal as the assets age and depreciate over time.
//abc
what’s your point?
//(-_-)
//like i said, if u choose not to see that the US pressure was the thing that made Israel negotiate,
//then too bad. maybe, in addition to the more moderate people in both the PLO and Israel.
It is not a choice. It is evident your argument does not make sense.
Jews in the US trying to <screw> jews in the Israel and terrorism to the Jews in Israel is nothing like a fart – this is what you are suggesting and it is a joke.
////(-_-)
// if the Israelis were scared into signing the peace treaties, then it would avoid pissing the PLO and //Hamas off at the cost of not expanding the settlements.
What you write here does not make any sense.
Must Israelis sign the peace treaty out of fear? Of what? of the US or the PLO?
Can they sign the treaty out of fatigue?
Fighting small numbers but effective and mobile enemies in your territory that are violent is tiring.
That’s just it.
fpc Mar 26, 2010 2:08,
My point is simple.
The sinking funds are there for some purpose. It’s not a dispensable spare fund that you can draw down whenever you please without discipline.
Example, you calculate and set aside a fixed sum every month for your year-end travel plans. If you draw from these because you absolutely crave for some extra short weekend trips once in a while, you can say goodbye to your year-end plans.
@fpc
the only ones that are fatigued are the Hamas. they need to operate secretly, fire rockets and run. the IDF only needs to send 1 or 2 F16s to erase a lot of them, plus a lot of their friends, from this world.
“fatigued”? no. sick of fighting, maybe. plus, US pressure. another possible reason might be because Yitzhak Rabin had liberal leanings.
if u think the US does not dare to pressure Israel, u only need to Google for examples.
oh, btw, i feel that the Ireland issue is misrepresented and misunderstood.
Northern Ireland always had the option to secede from the UK. i view it as a political power struggle between those that want to stay in the UK, and those that want to reunite. the British were requested to go in after the Northern Ireland’s security services can not handle it. the IRA laid down its arms after a power sharing deal, and the last time i checked, Northern Ireland is still part of the UK. so the IRA and terrorists achieved nothing.
Are you guys barking up the wrong tree?
How much is the S&CC going to increase? 50 cents? $2? or $3? In all honesty, how many residents do care about paying an extra 50 cents or $3 per month?
It is naive to think this extra $3 cost will have an impact on residents’ voting pattern!
This explained why the opposition parties could not beat the PAP. Because they don’t even understand the majority of voters’ needs and concerns!
@ My Views
read the article again. it’s calling for transparency and good questions.
in a country that sucks the people’s money away from them, i think they are valid.
@My Views, income decline while all the fees increase. You must be daft to believe that there isn’t any impact on low income. No wonder more and more people are shouting vote PAP out.
FaceTheFact
Mar 26, 2010 3:54
————————————————————————————–
How could you have income increase if your employer does not have profit increase?
@My Views,
How could the employer have profit when the cost keep increase?
//(-_-)
yeah right, Ireland is not an independant country and the irish terrorist achieve nothing.
//My Views
yeah right, it is very encouraging to the workers if the profits of employers increase year on year but the worker’s pay stay stagnant.