~by: Leong Sze Hian~

I refer to the article “CNB miscalculated statistics since 2008, releases correct figures” (see HERE).

Following this revelation, the blogs have been abuzz as to whether other statistics may have problems too.

According to the annual reports of the Government Investment Corporation (GIC), it  was reporting its 20-year nominal returns in both US$ (5.7%) and S$ (4.4%), in its 2009 report (see HERE).  It also gave the real return in Singapore Dollars (S$), at 2.6 per cent, but not in United States of America Dollars (US$).

However GIC’s 2010 and 2011 reports only gave returns in US$. Which means that the report went from reflecting no real US$ returns in 2009, to only real US$ returns in 2010 and 2011, being 3.8 per cent and 3.9 per cent respectively (see HERE), and no longer in S$.  Why is this so?

What was the return in S$? Since the S$ has been appreciating against the US$, was the S$ return much lower? In this connection, one reason that has been cited for the declining returns was the appreciation of the S$ against the US$.

In its latest 2011 report, GIC has disclosed the 5 and 10-year nominal US$ returns (being 6.3 per cent and 7.4 per cent respectively), instead of just the 20-year returns in previous reports. However, the new 5 and 10-year returns are only given in nominal and not real terms? And again why are the returns not reflected in S$? Are the S$ returns much lower than the US$ ones?

Why is there so much inconsistency in GIC’s reporting? Is this another computer error like Central Narcotic Bureau’s?

Mr Chua Soo Kiat’s in his letter published in the Today newspaper ‘Disclosure is important’ (see HERE) asked why the GIC does not disclose the amount of funds it manages and its annual profit and loss, unlike the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and Temasek Holdings,  Instead of a straight forward answer to Mr Chua’s simple question as to how much it has lost on its UBS investment (in the light of the recent UBS rogue trader’s US$2.3 billion scandal), GIC has once again harped on its 20-year returns (see HERE).

Given the apparent “comedy of (computer) errors” in its inconsistent reporting described above, is the GIC’s consistent refusal to disclose more information when asked by Singaporeans and in Parliament, reasonable and acceptable?

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

三巴旺财神庙大火 出动62民防人员扑灭火势

三巴旺财神庙昨晚(18日)发生火患,民防部队在9时15分接到通报立即前往救援。 根据民防部队脸书贴文,民防人员赶到现场时,火势已吞噬一楼,并往二楼蔓延。当局出动了19辆消防车和动员62民防人员到场,约在凌晨把火扑灭,火势不至于蔓延至其他楼层。 根据一些网传视频,可见火势骇人。三巴旺财神庙在2006年落成庙内还有纯铜制成的巨型财神爷雕像。 当局也继续浇湿灾场,避免火势反扑,火患起因还在调查。 附近疗养院的住户也暂时疏散,其中一名年长者因呼吸困难被送院。暂无其他伤亡报告,疗养院住户也在当晚11时45分返回住处。

【冠状病毒19】4月25日新增618确诊

根据新加坡卫生部文告,截至本月25日中午12时,本地新增618例确诊,大部分为住客工宿舍工作准证持有者,只有七位是本地公民或永久居民。 本地累计确诊病例达为1万2693例。

Foreign DP holder with $1.5K salary says no company will pay more to hire Singaporeans for her job

TODAYOnline published an article on Sunday (14 Mar) highlighting that anxiety is…

Protest against public transport fare increase

By Tiffany Gwee Photography by Jeremy Chan A group of approximately 400…