Letter from Low Thia Khiang, Chairman, Hougang Town Council
I refer to the press report on Town Council Management Report (TCMR) and Upgrading Programs on June 17, 2010.
SMS Grace Fu said the Lift Upgrading Program would add to the responsibilities and operational costs of town councils. However, we are talking about estate maintenance here. In the context of the TCMR, operation cost is not measured. In fact, newly installed lifts are less likely to break down and will have lesser maintenance issues. In any case, I am not aware of any town council that would embark on an upgrading exercise in its estate, such as building a swimming pool, under the IUP or MUP to significantly increase its responsibilities and potential maintenance issues.
I have been talking about Interim Upgrading program (IUP), Main Upgrading program (MUP) and CIPC funding for projects on this issue in relation to estate maintenance thus far. To clarify the issue, SMS Grace Fu should let the public know how much each town council has benefitted from the above upgrading programs cumulatively since the inception of these programs up to 2009.
I have asked in Parliament, and again in my press release of June 14, for the information on the amount of funding each PAP Town Council received from the various upgrading programs to be made public. I am disappointed that the Ministry of National Development (MND) has kept silent on this.
Based on MND’s written reply to my question in Parliament, the budget for the IUP was $4,000 per flat and the followings are the distribution of the IUP precincts by Town Councils (TCs).
However, the above funding is only part of the story. There are also other types of upgrading programs like MUP and IUP Plus, as well as CIPC funding for projects carried out by PAP TCs.
What I know is that the PAP government has spent huge sum of monies over the years to upgrade HDB flats in PAP constituencies, which in turn has benefitted the PAP TCs immensely. They could have saved substantial sum of expenditure in cyclical works and routine maintenance as a result. The savings would have contributed to the operating surplus and higher sinking fund over the years. These savings, when invested, would have further generated investment income for the TCs.
The public should know how much additional funding is given to PAP TCs directly or indirectly via the upgrading programs. Singaporeans can then judge for themselves whether this could affect the outcome of the town management and financial position of the town council.
The same press report stated that “only few arrears are written off”. However, I noted that in FY 2007/08, Jalan Besar, Tampines, Holland-Bukit Panjang and Hong Kah town councils wrote off $240,090, $172,468, $103,560 and $106,307 respectively. What is the cumulative figure of the SCCC arrears written off by each PAP TC over the years?
—————————————-
Read also Mr Low’s earlier rebuttal: Disclose additional funding received by PAP TCs: Low tells MND.
And: Good counterpunches by Workers’ Party chief by Yawning Bread.
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
MM,SM and PM to the rescue…If Fu and MND can’t answer low…they will need a heavy weight to shut low out in parliament.
I am disappointed that the Ministry of National Development (MND) has kept silent on this.
==> that is because Mr Low, you are asking for the National Secret. it is of utmost importance that the People not know how their funds are diverted into different wards, because if they knew, they would realise that the funds are SO EQUALLY distributed, it takes a genius with a supercomputer to calculate it so evenly. Only the men in white can do such a feat, because they are Transparent, Honest, Fair, and cannot possibly do what Mr Mah suggested, which was to favour PAP constituencies over opposition ones, despite his relentless preaching.
However, I noted that in FY 2007/08, Jalan Besar, Tampines, Holland-Bukit Panjang and Hong Kah town councils wrote off $240,090, $172,468, $103,560 and $106,307 respectively. What is the cumulative figure of the SCCC arrears written off by each PAP TC over the years?
==> mr low must be a liar! the woman in white Grace Fu already told us that the town councils that she quoted, which MUST be representative of The Truth, have small write-offs, therefore, it is IMPOSSIBLE that there can be six-digit write-offs, totally impossible! since Grace Fu must be the honest, non-misleading future ministeress of National Disappointment, it cannot be possible that such large write offs exist, otherwise this truthful minister would have mentioned it Willingly and Without Prompting.
therefore i can only conclude that Mr Low may have made up these figures, since Opposition is supposed to be less competent than people wearing white.
I don’t think so they will ever review out the full details that may lead to more and more questions that they would not be able to answer to the singaporeans later on. What about the last huge loss of millions that they had secretly been using to gamble away on those toxic investemnts, up till now still no one dares to speak out???
Notice how MND and Grace Fu have ducked on the question of actual funding figures. All the answer we get are rhetoric.
Either Grace Fu do not know the figures or she is covering the truth to be told.
If she does not know the figure, she should not be paid so highly a monthly salary as she does not know her job.
If she is covering the truth to be told, she should not be a MP or minister at all, since she is not truthful to the electorate!
The reason Singapore has so many problems recently is because the PM,unlike his father,is surrounded by ever-ready-to-please flankies.
These chaps,they don’t paint the true pictures to the PM as they just merely want to curry favour with spiced up flavours.And,that’s the real danger.
Sad,not many HONEST and sincere guys serving the country these days.
In the current global environment,we need even more urgently people who are frank and sincere and full of integrity to help the PM run this one-resource country.
We really should consider an OBAMA-styled cabinet so that only those public-spirited rather than se;f-serving citizens become leaders.
From http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/good-counterpunches-by-workers-party-chief/#more-924
“I took a look at the accounts of the Ang Mo Kio- Yio Chu Kang Town Council, run by the PAP under Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong himself (he is one of the six members of parliament for Ang Mo Kio).
For the year ended 31 March 2009 (the latest accounts available on their website), this town council was owed S$981,360 in “conservancy and service receivables” by its constituents (Balance Sheet, line 10)…
This town council’s annual report showed “only” S$981,360 in uncollected debts because it had earlier written off S$1,601,380 ($1,357,093 + $244,287).”
Erh… I think they will say it takes at least 60 years to figure those arrears that have been written off….
That’s PAP for you…
Minister Fu rebuts LTK in her very honest way:
>> She said he was ‘overly simplifying the situation’
She didn’t say he was wrong. Maybe she can’t. What she CAN say, is that LTK overly simplifys. Not that LTK was wrong. LTK can still be right, in an Overly Simplified Way.
It also means that, if LTK only just Simplified it, not Overly Simplify it, LTK can still be right, in a Simple way. Not that LTK is wrong. He is still Simply Right.
>> She stressed that all TCs .. are treated the same when it comes to estate upgrading.
Now it is Fu’s turn to Over Simplify. To make it less simplified, the full sentence may read, “She stressed that all TCs .. are treated the same when it comes to estate upgrading. However, when will the turn Finally come for opposition wards, I have to leave it to my Minister Mah, who has different ideas.”
But that would be too wordy and Unsimplified, as are many things in government in the eyes of the ruling party.
The rest of the newspaper article goes on quoting Minister Fu saying the same thing – her method is to not say LTK is wrong, because she can’t, but to say LTK is doing something (e.g. oversimplifying), which, when you read fast, sounds like LTK is wrong, but it isn’t, yet it sounds like it.
This is again, very clever use of english. Watch and learn, opposition people. It took many public relations people many hours to formulate her clever english reply.
someone should ask the HDB to explain the millions of dollars wasted over the past 20-30 years of MUP due to its “every flat pays the same” policy.
it the most wasteful policy that can be imagined. good working condition doors/windows/grills/bathroom/toilet tiles etc were hacked/demolished/thrown away because there was no incentive to continue using these items. whether you replace or not, you still pay the same.
also,have you noticed that after MUP you a given a bill which states the flat owner’s share in a lumpsum, if you ask for an itemised bill, HDB will ignore you and refuse to provide.
so all that talk about transparency is all crap, so don’t expect HDB to provide any figures/data that show the truth.
I think the more disGraceFul tries to evade the questions posed by LTK, the more we are going to learn about how funds are (mis)managed by government agencies, and many more underlying truths which we otherwise would not get to hear and learn.
-
LTK made some very good connection in linking the ‘indirect’ funds, disguised under programs like IUP, IUP Plus, MUP and CIPC, where funding is given to the PAP estates resulting in TCs not having to fork out a cent for works carried out under these programs. This in turn means that the S&CC collected from residents would go straight into their sinking fund and remain there. It can only accumulate and grow. No wonder they run into the $Billions of dollar$ when put together.
-
Without such funding for Opposition held wards, every repair and upgrading bills will have to be fully paid for by residents in these wards. Their funds will never grow.
-
We can now see more clearly the uphill battles our Opposition MPs face when serving citizens governed under the PAP. A government should not make such a distinction and must accord every citizen what it due to them in fairness, regardless whether their constituency is run by them or the Opposition.
-
Seems like the PAP brand has grown too big for the good of Singaporeans. The government of Singapore serve the PAP first before the citizens.
-
We need change. We need this government to do exactly what they have been empowered by the citizens to do – which is to care for them – regardless whose side they are on. We need to be collectively regarded as one, and not by the political choices we make.
-
We are one. We are Singaporean. We are being served by the PAP. We are the boss. It is time for us to play the role we possess.
-
If I choose kaya over peanut butter for my bread, the PAP cannot say it won’t give me bread just because I had preferred kaya while the others are having peanut butter. If it is its job to provide the bread, then the bread must be placed on my table like the rest.
What a load of distraction!
* If 10% of S&CC are in arrears, the opposition TCs are sympathetic.
* If 20% of S&CC are in arrears, the opposition TCs are compassionate.
* When 60% of S&CC are in arrears, Hougang and Potong Pasir must be somewhere in poor continent! Or are they?
Obviously, the residents are testing the 2 opposition MPs. It is not difficult to guess the level of discontent in the 2 opposition wards is high.
if low thia kiang, and his few merry men, and chiam also, can manage these towns with so little resources,
i’m very afraid to imagine, what will happen
when they get the rest of the money
my god.
pinnacles@potongpasir and @hougang coming up.
similarly, if you gave mah bow tan another 100 million, he can put 3 swimming pools in pinnacle@duxton and say he’s done an Even Better Job.
i never understood what was he congratulating himself about with this pinnacle, do you?
low
i never understood what was he congratulating himself about with this pinnacle, do you?
…………………
simply because pinnacle is the ONLEE hdb flat where you must pay $5 to go rooftop look look see see…so no lunch included
)) simply because pinnacle is the ONLEE hdb flat where you must pay $5 to go rooftop look look see see…so no lunch included
is that an “Achievement”?
you can build another one, let’s say, in front of West Coast The Vision blocking its view, and have a $5 roof terrace, and spend another few hundred million on it, and add a swimming pool.
does it mean you can give yourself a BIGGER pat on the back, because it is more shiok than Pinnacle@duxton (cos duxton has no swimming pool) ?
If oppositions speak, it is called political motive,if the ministers or MIW speak, it is called what ??
If our elected MPs cannot get access to data, I really suspect that no one can, and our “leaders” must have ruled our country blindly ==> exactly the reason why we are in such a mess!
Why the hell do we still need the Parliament then???
We are more dictatorship than democracy.
low
and add a swimming pool.
does it mean you can give yourself a BIGGER pat on the back, because it is more shiok than Pinnacle@duxton (cos duxton has no swimming pool) ?
…………..
wei wei sensitives issues hor..orchard road jus flooded..please don’t mentioned WATER…
today when it rained this moanin..many orchard road shopowners shivered…
this remind me of something i wanna says but kept on forgettin to print..when tsunami striked in our neighbourin countries..we send in rescue workers..when orchard road flooded none of our asean members even send in their maids with pails and mops..heck even hoching gracefOOLLEE donates $400 million$ to help the tsunami victims to tide over..perhaps its time for hoching to redonate another $400 million$ to OUR little shopkeepers to help them to rebuild their little shops as well?
is the pinnacle saying that from now on, all future HDB flats will look like that -
with keycard access, gantry cashcard carparks, restricted access roof terraces at mid-point and rooftop, condo-like facade, minimum 50-storey height for good view
or was that a one-off lucky draw that had Nothing Whatsoever to do with public housing?
by the way, the RAIN feels good this morning, and the rest of the public housing denizens are wondering when their turn at the lucky draw will come.
they accuse the opposition of not coming up with these plans, so they can’t touch the money.
Opposition shall one day come up with the PUP (Pinnacle Upgrading Plan).
to build a Pinnacle@_insertfavouriteestatenamehere_
you need
$279million for 1848 units of Pinnacle@Duxton
that’s just under $151,000 a unit
you will end up with all those features
you can win an additional award if you spend $152,000 a unit. this raises the overall construction cost by $1,848,000.
with this extra $1.85mil, you can build a swimming pool, and make it restricted access, which Pinnacle@Duxton doesn’t even have.
that way, you will win The Swimming Pool Award.
you can also try to put the swimming pool on the 50th storey, but the contractors may want to charge extra.
Any constituency can take part in this Pinnacle Upgrading Plan. You can also tap on government subsidy money to do it, just as Pinnacle@Duxton tapped on the money. Everyone’s Equal, almost.
Ooh la la:
Hougang TC* has been receiving annual grants from the government totalling $23,655,500 since its inception in 1990.
Opposition ward residents are not that worse off afterall.
* Can’t find any F.S. on Potong Pasir TC.
http://www.housingloansg.com/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=193&Itemid=34
see the link. that’s where you’re wrong. your PUP doesn’t need to be so expensive.
1420 units of pinnacle cost $51.5k a piece = $73.1 million in proceeds.
317 4-room flats sold at minimum of $0.457mil = $144 million in proceeds.
111 5-room flats sold at minimum of $0.545mil = $60.5 million in proceeds.
total cost = $73.1 + $144 + $60.5 = $279 million
what?19 June 2010
Hougang TC* has been receiving annual grants from the government totalling $23,655,500 since its inception in 1990.
Opposition ward residents are not that worse off afterall.
hougang is one out of 84 MPs, probably about 59500 out of 5,000,000 population, therefore $23.65 million means it gets $397 per capita since 1990, that means it is
$19.85 per year per person in Hougang
or $1.65 per month per person in Hougang
ok lah, they received less than one economy rice a month (1 meat 1 veg)
It is strange that for years we got the impression that if we voted for the opposition and they won, our TCs wouldn’t be getting grants.
It is stranger that the opposition have been keeping silent that they, in fact, do receive various types of grants – S&C grants, cyclical work grants and govt. subvention for GST grants.
The grants amount to more than $1 million each year.
i think cipc only goes to PAP wards?
what? 19 June 2010 Ooh la la:
Hougang TC* has been receiving annual grants from the government totalling $23,655,500 since its inception in 1990.
Opposition ward residents are not that worse off afterall.
* Can’t find any F.S. on Potong Pasir TC.
…………………………………
woah! what do you xpect the opposition team to do? pay ALL the expenses from their MP allowances? hav you ever tried to lived in potong pasir? you don’t..here you come mubblin how good the poton pasir/houghang peasants are havin an EQUAL deals with the normal pap wards…don’t talk..don’t booast..even your envoirment officer tear down poton pasir manmade meet the people partition walls from the void deck simply because under hdb rulins..its an illegal contructions…in a pap ward..you can built any partitions/containers just to house pre-ERECTIONs proporganda posters
for MONTHs ahead…RENTAL FREE…
hmmm, the problem with words like ‘opposition parties’ & ‘ruling parties’ is, that itself subconsciencely alters our perception of the 2 camps.
its very easy for the ruling to label oppsoition parties in neg(-) ways that in turn shapes thoughts that judges either 1 biasedly. hense, leads people to entrench their perceptions deeper & deeper.
knowing that only part of the stats were revealed, i would have expected a more robust rebuttal from PAP ministers. i would expect the black, the white & not even a tiny hint of a shade of grey area.
kudos, to Mr Low TK for having the guts to stand up & stand firm. SM Goh as a scouts would be (quietly) proud that Mr Low is a livng, breathing & walking scout sans the uniform.
i wonder Orchard Rd need how much $$ to maintain, keke…
:D
It seems MBT is a problematic minister who has been running his ministires on bias mode using our tax monies.
LTK provides the connections and facts. The gov cannot give any good answer to the people of Singapore, so they spin around.
Unfortunately, they provide all the wrong answers.
Be transparent with our money, why only to the ruling party wards.
PAP TCs have too much fund, I saw some wards building new walkways and then hack it after a month.
Why? Too much fund from residents and then spend the money to account for the S&C increase.Who are all these contractors who bid for the project.
It is good Mr Low is not letting up. Do not let them always have the last words..and said let’s move on…
It is amusing that Low Thia Khiang thinks the public is interested in knowing how much funds had been given to PAP town councils. What the residents are interested is whether their estates are in better conditions and well managed. Does he seriously think Singaporeans bother about the PAP wards received far more funding than opposition wards? The answer is : NO!
Be govt contractor best 1.. earn most money.. and do fark up job
Many MPs are busy with running their directorships in their commercial listed companies (many of those still bleed red ink). So it is very difficult to understand how all these multitasking jobs in running TCs could get an A?