K Shanmugam
Singapore
“Bank accounts are frozen when there is reason to suspect that the bank accounts are involved in illicit activities, including money laundering activities.”
“The Singapore Police Force does not track the requested data. Distinguishing artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content typically requires more detailed forensic examination which may not be necessary in every investigation and may also not be conclusive as to whether AI-generative tools were used.”
“The Building and Construction Authority’s Code on Accessibility provides baseline requirements for accessible and inclusive buildings. It stipulates a minimum width of 1.5 metres or 1.8 metres for primary accessible routes, depending on the building type.”
“The Road Traffic (Motor Vehicles, Driving Licence) Rules under the Road Traffic Act set out the scope of the medical assessment required for motorists aged 65 and above who wish to retain their driving licences.”
“When a Police report has been made, the Police will investigate to determine if a criminal offence has been committed. If there is reasonable suspicion that a case is scam-related, the Police can direct online service providers to restrict Singapore users' access to the relevant online activity under the Online Criminal Harms Act.”
“Through intelligence sharing and coordinated enforcement actions, the cross-border operation disrupted a transnational drug trafficking syndicate and downstream drug trafficking activities, with the UK arresting seven persons so far and further investigations underway.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,552 lines we hold for K Shanmugam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 73 of 92.
“Law firms will also benefit from the exposure to complex cross-border disputes and eminent international judges with vast experience. International mediation is another area that will provide opportunities for our lawyers. The SIMC offers world-class international commercial mediation services. It has a panel of over 65 world-class mediators from 14 jurisdictions. Since its launch last November, the SIMC has already received its first international mediation referral. The SIMC and SIAC have introduced an innovative Arb-Med-Arb Protocol. This will allow settlements reached at mediation to be recorded as consent awards that are internationally enforceable. The SIMI will also help make mediation a viable and attractive option to resolve disputes. It will set standards and provide greater understanding of mediation. With international commercial arbitration, litigation and mediation services now collectively in place, Singapore can offer the full suite of dispute resolution services to commercial users that are best suited to address their business needs. This will provide local lawyers and law firms with more work, as we have experienced for international arbitration. Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah will describe some of the other schemes that are available for local lawyers and law firms. She will also take the remaining cuts.”
“This will help those who depend on maintenance payments to raise their children after their divorce. We aim to complete this work in 2016. Next, let me turn to the regionalisation of Singapore law practices. The Ministry is taking active steps to help Singapore law practices grow further. We want them to tap into regional opportunities. We are the leading dispute resolution hub in the region. There are three components in our strategy: (a) international arbitration; (b) international litigation; and (c) mediation. We have enjoyed success in the field of international arbitration. We are now Asia's leading arbitral centre and one of the world's leading arbitral centres. We aim to replicate that success for Court-based litigation and international mediation. We have, in that context, recently set up the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC), the Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC) and the Singapore International Mediation Institute (SIMI). Mr Vikram Nair asked for updates on the SICC, SIMC and SIMI and how they will benefit local lawyers. The SICC offers foreign parties with access to a neutral court forum in the region. It will be an alternative to the usual customary fora. It introduces innovations designed to make it Page: 107 more attractive for international parties. For example, it has special procedures for efficient resolution of cases governed by foreign law and a distinguished and diverse panel of international judges who will work with our Singapore judges. Since the SICC was launched on 5 January this year, 11 eminent international jurists have been appointed as International Judges. The SICC will increase opportunities for our lawyers and local firms.”
“The process should resolve the key issues, which are the division of assets and the custody and access to children. It should not reopen the wounds of the marriage and allow the Court process to become an arena for emotional conflict. Ms Ellen Lee asked about the impact of these reforms on the legal profession as a whole. Family lawyers will be an important link between their clients and the Court. The Family Justice Committee has an on-going dialogue with the Family Bar through the Law Society on Page: 106 these changes. That will continue. Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah has also disseminated newsletters to family lawyers, describing the reforms to all of them and how the family justice system has been revamped. We have also organised, either directly or with partners, numerous courses, talks and training sessions for family lawyers. These have touched on the new judge-led approach and case management, the appointment of Child Representatives and family mediation. In addition, a framework has been established to train and certify family lawyers as Family Mediators. Feedback from the Family Bar has been positive. The Family Justice Courts will explore additional training areas, as appropriate. Family lawyers are encouraged to attend these courses to equip them with the necessary skills to manage cases in the new family justice system. Looking forward, the Ministry will continue to review family law-related legislation with an impact on people and family life. These include the Guardianship of Infants Act, the Intestate Succession Act, the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act and the Legitimacy Act. We will also look into strengthening the enforcement of maintenance orders.”
“The Centre will provide basic legal advice and refer them to CLAS where appropriate. We have worked closely with the Courts, Law Society and the Criminal Bar to prepare for the launch of CLAS. The official launch will take place later this month on 23 March. The scheme's success would not be possible without the help of volunteer lawyers and law firms. There has been strong support shown for the scheme from the Bar. Thirteen law firms have pledged to take on CLAS cases on an annual basis. This is in addition – and I emphasise – an addition to the many lawyers who have already committed to doing CLAS work and who have been the backbone of CLAS. The big firms have also come forward. They have assigned lawyers to work for CLAS full-time or given time off to work for CLAS. 4.15 pm There is strong participation from the legal profession and strong Government support. More accused persons without means will have access to justice and they will receive the help and the guidance and assurance they need as they face the criminal justice system. Let me now turn to the family justice system. Another major area of reform has been in the family justice field. Families should be saved as far as possible. But, often, the marriage has irretrievably broken down. The parties end up in the Court system and the Court process should not worsen the anguish for the family. For these reasons, the family justice system was revamped and the Family Justice Courts were set up. They will help families through this area of the law by providing: (a) simplified and streamlined processes and practices; (b) enhanced case management; and (c) the judge-led approach. The aim is to: (a) reduce costs; (b) simplify the process; (c) focus on the essentials; and (d) protect the children.”
“Thank you, Mdm Chairman. We will continue to improve our justice system. We will try and ensure access to justice to as many people as possible, refine our justice system to help protect families and enable law firms to modernise and grow. I will cover three main areas in my speech. First, what we are doing to help litigants; second, how we are improving the Family Justice system; and, third, what we are doing to help Singapore law firms expand regionally. Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah will cover the other areas. First, on helping litigants. Mr Hri Kumar requested an update on criminal legal aid. The Government will now play a bigger role in criminal legal aid. It will provide funding to CLAS administered by the Law Society. That is a significant shift in the Government's philosophy. The enhanced CLAS scheme will serve up to 6,000 accused persons per year. These are people who we assess are unable to afford their own lawyers. It should not affect the work of the small law firms. We will continue to monitor the figures and assess accordingly. The enhanced CLAS scheme will adopt a revised means test to allow more deserving persons to qualify for assistance. It will provide more services, apart from full representation, and people can receive basic legal advice or assistance in writing letters of representation or mitigation pleas. Increasing the awareness of CLAS is also important. The Law Society will produce a pamphlet of rights that will raise awareness of CLAS. It will be distributed to police centres, Page: 105 police posts and Community Clubs throughout Singapore. In addition, there are people without lawyers who are charged in Court. They can be referred to the Community Justice Centre at the State Courts.”
“Senior Minister of State Masagos will now speak on our engagement with emerging markets in the Middle East, Latin America and Africa, as well as on our technical assistance and consular services for Singaporeans abroad.”
“Singapore participates actively in the negotiations as we want to see a balanced global agreement with universal participation, where all countries, big and small, contribute to climate action in line Page: 89 with their national circumstances. In addition, we continue to grow our diplomatic space through participation at other fora like the G20, and even in non-traditional areas, as we have heard several times in the past, like the Arctic Council. While we are not officially a member of the G20, which groups the largest economies of the world, we have been invited to participate in the G20 Summits, including the one to be held in Antalya, Turkey, in November 2015. Mr David Ong asked what Singapore's role was in the Arctic Council and how Singapore's interests are expressed and protected. We became an observer to the Arctic Council in May 2013. This has allowed us to closely monitor developments in the Arctic that may impact us. This has also opened up new opportunities for us to deepen our engagement with Arctic states. As a low-lying island, we are concerned about the melting ice sheets and changes in sea levels. Our participation at the Council will inform us in the development of climate change adaptation strategies. The melting of Arctic ice has enabled longer navigational seasons along the Northern Sea Route during the summer months, enabling ships to reduce travel times between Europe and Asia, compared to the traditional route through the Suez Canal. This translates to cost savings and faster voyages for shipping companies. Nevertheless, there remain many challenges, such as the presence of sea ice and icebergs, limited mapping of the Arctic Ocean and harsh weather conditions to operate in the Arctic.”
“The CSP will consist of a substantive 10-year work programme to strengthen collaboration across the key pillars of Economics and Trade; Foreign Affairs, Defence and Security; and People-to-People exchanges. In addition to nurturing good bilateral relations with our partners, Singapore also actively engages them through the various multilateral fora. This year not only marks Singapore's 50th year of Independence, but also the 50th anniversary of our membership in the United Nations (UN). The UN itself is celebrating the 70th anniversary of its establishment. Through the UN, we continue to play an active role as a responsible and constructive member of the international community. Negotiations are ongoing at the UN for the Post-2015 Development Agenda to be adopted this year. To show our continued support, we are looking for ways to share our experience and contribute to the Development Agenda, including through a new initiative for technical cooperation. We have consistently been active at the UN as convenors of the Forum of Small States and the Global Governance Group. As the co-chair of the Group of Friends for Sustainable Cities, we will share at the UN our experiences in developing sustainable and liveable cities. This year, we are organising the World Cities Summit Mayors Forum in June which will be held in New York City. We have also raised awareness of major urban challenges, such as water and sanitation issues, through events like World Toilet Day. In addition, the 21st Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris in December also needs to adopt a new global agreement on climate change.”
“Notably, our leaders visited Poland, Hungary and the Slovak Republic in 2013 to develop linkages and to raise awareness of the economic opportunities of using Singapore as a gateway to Asia. We are looking forward to welcoming Hungarian President János Áder when he visits in April 2015. We remain concerned about the situation in Ukraine. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko visited Singapore in December last year and briefed our leaders on developments there. We have taken a strong stand against Russia's military intervention in Ukraine because we believe that all countries, big and small, must abide by international Page: 88 law. This is especially vital to small countries like Singapore. We hope that a lasting resolution can be reached to restore peace to the region. With Russia, the annual High-Level Russia-Singapore Inter-Governmental Commission has been a useful platform for Singapore to highlight our positions on issues directly to Russian leaders and engage the different regions in Russia. On Australia, Minister Shanmugam mentioned briefly our relations. Let me add that this is the 50th anniversary of Singapore-Australia diplomatic relations, and also in response to Mr Liang Eng Hwa's request for an update. This is the 50th anniversary of Singapore-Australia diplomatic relations. They are amongst one of the first countries to recognise our Independence in 1965 and a key partner with whom we enjoy a close and multifaceted relationship founded on strategic convergence. There is bi-partisan support in Australia for good relations with Singapore. Both countries are taking this relationship to the next level by launching a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) this year, which will further broaden and deepen existing cooperation.”
“We are celebrating the 50th anniversary of relations with key European partners this year, namely, France, Denmark, Italy, Germany, the UK and the Netherlands. To mark the occasion as well as to celebrate SG50, we are organising commemorative events in Europe, while the European missions and communities in Singapore have also initiated various activities. Over the decades, we have developed broad-based and substantive relations with Europe. We continue to explore ways to deepen ties through the exchange of high-level visits and regular interactions across many sectors. Recent visits include President Tan's State Visit to the UK in October 2014 and Prime Minister Lee's visit to Germany and Spain in February this year. President Tan is also scheduled to make a State Visit to France in May. On the economic front, the EU is Singapore's third largest trading partner and the largest contributor of Foreign Direct Investments into Singapore. To further strengthen our economic linkages with Europe, we are working on the ratification of the EU-Singapore FTA (EUSFTA) and the EU-Singapore Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (ESPCA). At the same time, we are also growing our strong links in vocational training. For example, Germany, together with Switzerland, is a key partner and learning model of the SkillsFuture initiative to develop pathways for applied and continuing education and training in Singapore. Singapore engages Central and Eastern European countries bilaterally, but also within the framework of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). On the sidelines of the last ASEM Summit in Milan last October, Prime Minister Lee met several leaders from the region to discuss, among other things, economic opportunities in each other's regions.”
“We have also maintained good relations with the Republic of Korea and will commemorate our 40th year of bilateral relations with a State Visit to the Republic of Korea by President Tan later this year. Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked for an update on Singapore-India relations and how this may, in turn, have an impact on business, employment and skills training opportunities for Singaporeans. Our relations with India are long-standing and warm. We are working with Prime Minister Modi's government towards elevating our relationship to a strategic partnership which will further deepen political and economic relations. 4.15 pm As part of the commemorative events celebrating the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Singapore and India, President Tan made a State Visit in February this year, and President Mukherjee will reciprocate with a State Visit to Singapore later this year. Prime Minister Modi is also scheduled to make a visit to Singapore. Singapore and India are cooperating at both the central and state government level in India, in areas where we can add value, such as urban solutions and skills development. Our Page: 87 companies are working with the Andhra Pradesh state government on the master planning of the new capital city, as Member Dr Intan has brought up. This project will position Singapore businesses to take advantage of downstream opportunities. We are also sharing our experience in vocational training with the Rajasthan government. Through such capacity building projects, we will, in turn, promote the Singapore brand name in India and beyond. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef asked about our diplomatic relations with various European Union (EU) countries, as well as Singapore's collaboration with new and emerging markets, such as Eastern Europe.”
“President Tan, Prime Minister Lee, Emeritus Senior Minister Goh, as well as Deputy Prime Ministers Teo Chee Hean and Tharman Shanmugaratnam visited China in 2014. Singapore also hosted visits by Chinese State Councillor Yang Jiechi, Guangdong Party Secretary Hu Chunhua and Zhejiang Party Secretary Xia Baolong, among others. This year marks the 25th anniversary of the establishment of Singapore-China diplomatic relations and there will be an exchange of State Visits to commemorate the occasion. The Singapore Day will be held in Shanghai in April this year, reflecting the size of the Singapore diaspora in China. Singapore's cooperation with China has evolved to keep up with the times. Following our experience with the Suzhou Industrial Park and the Tianjin Eco-City Project, we are now looking at working together on a third government-to-government project in China's Western Region. We are also exploring new areas of cooperation in finance, social governance, food safety, sustainable development and environmental protection. Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked for an update on Singapore's relations with Japan and the Republic of Korea. Singapore and Japan share a close and multifaceted relationship and we cooperate closely on many issues of common interest. Singapore-Japan relations are further strengthened by frequent meetings between Prime Minister Lee and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. In fact, they have met six times in the last two years. In 2014, Prime Minister Lee spoke at the Nikkei Conference in Tokyo while Prime Minister Abe delivered the keynote address at the Shangri-La Dialogue.”
“On the United States and China, Mr Ong Teng Koon had asked about the state of Singapore's relations with the US and China, including how we can further grow these relationships. Both the US and China remain key partners for Singapore and for many of our neighbours. They have important roles to play in ensuring continued stability and growth in the region. Singapore's political, economic and security ties with the US remain strong and substantive. Prime Minister Lee and Minister Shanmugam made separate visits to Washington in June and May last year and met President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry respectively. Our relationship with the US is underpinned by strong institutional frameworks and processes that have been established over the last decades. These include the Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA) that frames our defence partnership and cooperation, and the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (USSFTA) which continues to be the cornerstone of our economic relationship. In fact, the US is our top foreign investor. More recently, MFA and the US State Department conducted our Third Strategic Partnership Dialogue in Washington in February this year. We will also be renewing our Third Country Training Programme to deliver more impactful joint technical assistance to the ASEAN region in 2015. China – China's growth and prosperity bring benefits to the region. It is the top trading partner of many ASEAN countries, including Singapore, as we have heard from Minister Shanmugam earlier. Our relations with China continue to be excellent, with regular high- Page: 86 level exchanges and robust economic and people-to-people cooperation.”
“As an organisation, we will continue to try and prioritise, allocate our resources effectively, and our officers will try to protect and advance Singapore's interests on the global stage. Minister Grace Fu and Senior Minister of State Masagos will answer the other questions. The Second Minister for Foreign Affairs (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Thank you, Madam. Ms Irene Ng had asked about Singapore's relationship with ASEAN countries. Minister Shanmugam has covered Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei and Thailand. I will now cover the other ASEAN neighbours. Our relations with them are strong as we continue to deepen our relationships and support them in their development and integration into the ASEAN Community. Page: 85 Myanmar is in the midst of significant political and economic reforms. Singapore continues to invest in Myanmar's development as we strengthen our links with the government and people for the benefit of both countries. For example, we have been working towards the establishment of the Singapore-Myanmar Vocational Training Institute in Yangon later this year which will contribute to Myanmar's efforts in developing skilled labour. With Vietnam, we continue to implement our Strategic Partnership on the basis of mutual respect, trust and ensuring a balance of benefits. We celebrated 40 years of diplomatic relations with Laos in 2014 and will be celebrating the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations with Thailand and Cambodia this year. Singapore also stands ready to assist our neighbours during difficult times. President Tony Tan visited the Philippines last year and made a special visit to Tacloban, an area devastated by Typhoon Haiyan. He also handed over Singapore's contributions to the Philippines' relief and reconstruction efforts.”
“ISIS is really the latest manifestation of the forces that inspire religious radicalisation, extremism. We face risks in the form of terrorism arising from returned fighters as well as sympathisers of ISIS. All countries in the region have a strong interest to work together to address this. We have taken a clear, unambiguous position. We have condemned the actions of ISIS. We are doing our part to support the international coalition against ISIS. In Asia, countries have also taken a firm stance against the actions of ISIS. They are taking steps to address the threat of extremism. They have done this both domestically and through international cooperation. In this context, Singapore will be organising an East Asia Summit Symposium on Religious Rehabilitation and Social Reintegration in April this year. This is to share best practices among member countries on tackling extremism. It is in the interest of all countries in the region to work together and deal with this threat. Madam, there are fundamentals, strategic imperatives that have shaped our foreign policy. These fundamentals and strategic imperatives will continue shape our foreign policy in the years ahead. We have to find ways of staying relevant. We must continue to nurture and build on existing partnerships networks, deepen regional integration. To achieve this, maintaining a premier foreign service is crucial. In terms of resources, MFA's staff is our greatest asset. Given the increasingly complex external environment, there will always be competing demands for the time and attention of our officers. They will continue to give their best even in times of resource constraints. However, inevitably, one has to recognise that there is a limit to what can be achieved when there are severe constraints.”
“It is a situation where, if you do not keep your eye on the ball and you come back to it two years later, the picture looks very different. And the countries and their alignments look very different. We will do our best to achieve a balance. But we keep making the point, which sometimes sounds boring, but we are a small country. We try to keep relations on an even keel, and we take over as coordinator of ASEAN-China dialogue relations at a very interesting time, later this year. Madam, we have limited influence over major power relations. But over the years, we have created a small, niche role for ourselves. We have done this through our active promotion and participation on regional platforms. These platforms involve the major powers. We try to be an honest broker in dealing with these issues in our relations with the major powers. We work closely with like-minded countries to encourage the constructive engagement of the big powers in our region. In the context of the strategic balance in the Asia Pacific, I also want to mention Australia. We enjoy strategic convergence with Australia on key issues. We are working towards a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP). The CSP will be launched later this year by Prime Minister Lee and Prime Minister Abbott. While we enjoy excellent relations with our partners, there are global challenges. These can complicate not only relations between nations, but also affect our own people. I can, Page: 84 therefore, understand Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef and Ms Ellen Lee's queries. They asked about the threats posed by the expanding ISIS network and its impact on the region. The expanding ISIS network is a serious threat to global security. We are not immune.”
“It is much broader than that. China is either the number one or number two trading partner for almost every country in ASEAN. China is the largest investor in most countries in ASEAN and, if not the largest, then the second largest. If you look at how the regional architecture is developing, what China has done, in terms of its relationship in the last few years, look at mainland Southeast Asia. It is being criss-crossed with the infrastructure, often financed by Chinese capital and built by Chinese Page: 83 companies, which integrates mainland Southeast Asia effectively with southern China. The mainland Southeast Asian countries welcome that. It increases their economic vibrancy and the whole region is becoming integrated economically. Beyond that, China's relationship with each of the ASEAN countries is being upgraded to a very high level. Some of it is based on economic diplomacy; some of it, for example, as in our case, is based on long relationships and mutual understanding. In addition, China is also the engine or motor that drives some of the very important regional initiatives, for example, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank that is being set up which will finance a large number of projects in the region. On the sea, of course, there are the developments that Mr Gerald Giam has mentioned. There are other developments as well. The changes are happening very quickly, and the response to these changes depends really on the countries involved. Some of the countries, if you take Cambodia, Laos, they have no claims in the South China Sea. They see the benefits of these changes; all of us see the benefits in these changes. As we take a view, it is important that we understand what the changes are.”
“At this stage, that remains a hypothetical question, because China has confirmed at its highest levels – Prime Minister Li Keqiang himself and through various other official platforms – that China guarantees freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. The question is also hypothetical for another reason because we cannot presuppose, one way or another, whether China is entitled to build on these islands and reefs, because that is a circular question. It depends on whether China owns those islands and to what extent it has an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and to what extent it has territorial sea and whether these are islands which are capable of generating either territorial sea or EEZ. Those are questions on which we take no position. They are to be sorted out among the different claimant states and subject to international law. 4.00 pm Given that all those scenarios are hypothetical and given that China's assurances on freedom of navigation have been given at the highest levels, our task is to focus on the Code of Conduct to make sure how parties interact with each other, when they engage each other in the high seas. If, for some reason, there are issues of freedom of navigation, what is currently available are platforms for ASEAN and Singapore to engage China at the highest levels. ASEAN provides a platform – I earlier talked about ASEAN +1 and ASEAN + 3 – and a variety of other platforms have been set up where these issues can be discussed with China and taken up at the Leaders' level, at the Foreign Ministers' level, at the senior officials' level. Those are the very purpose of the platforms to discuss these issues. At the same time, it is important to remember that the ASEAN-China partnership is a broad-based one. It is not restricted to the South China Sea.”
“Meanwhile, the risks of conflict remain in the Korean Peninsula, as well as the South and East China Seas. The Code of Conduct in the South China Sea has been ASEAN's consistent goal. Over the past year, there have been a number of developments. These developments have lent urgency to the need for a COC to be concluded between ASEAN and China. China has indicated its willingness to work towards a COC. It most recently repeated its commitment at the 17th ASEAN-China Summit. Singapore will work closely with ASEAN member states and China to expedite negotiations on the COC. Meanwhile, we continue to urge all parties to refrain from actions that could escalate tensions in the South China Sea. Mr Gerald Giam expressed specific concern about China's, as he put it, extensive building on reefs, islands and the militarisation of those reefs and islands. He asked about the threat to freedom of navigation and pointed out that that is a serious risk for us. I thank him for these comments because if freedom of navigation is impacted, for us, it is an economically existential issue. It is as simple as that, because we have two major arteries: north-east, north-west. North-west through the Straits of Malacca; north-east through the Page: 82 South China Sea. Our external trade is three to four times that of our gross domestic product (GDP), and free flow is, therefore, vital to our very existence as a sovereign state. His question is what will we do if China threatens freedom of navigation – what will we do as Singapore, and what will we do as ASEAN.”
“Both sides reaffirmed the excellent state of bilateral relationships. Both are committed to exploring new areas of cooperation. We are focused, in particular, on expanding links between our younger leaders and youths on both sides. We have also broadened and deepened our relationships with the rest of our Southeast Asian neighbours. Page: 81 With Thailand, we continue to enjoy excellent relations. The current government has promised stability. Thailand is ASEAN's second largest economy. It is important for us that Thailand succeeds. This is in Singapore's and ASEAN's interests. We wish Thailand well. Prime Minister Prayut is expected to visit Singapore for a Leaders' Retreat this month. We look forward to working with Thailand. We want to strengthen Singapore-Thailand relations and promote ASEAN's interests. Let me now turn to the broader region – US, China and Japan. Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Ms Ellen Lee, Mr Ong Teng Koon and Mr Gerald Giam asked about the situation in the broader Asia Pacific region, including relations among the US, China, Japan, as well as the situation in the South China Sea. There have been positive developments in the relationships in the countries in the Northeast Asia region. Tension between Japan and China has subsided somewhat after the meeting between Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and President Xi Jinping last November. The situation between the two countries, however, remains fragile. Good, cordial relations between the major powers are important, because that will help foster regional economic development and prosperity. We welcome Japan's desire to play a more proactive role in the region to contribute to regional peace and stability. This should be broad-based and not just focused on security.”
“Under the ASCC blueprint, we will explore concrete initiatives to strengthen people-to-people linkages and promote understanding of ASEAN. And, of course, we will work closely with our ASEAN colleagues and Dialogue Partners. Mr Alex Yam has sought an update on Singapore-Malaysia ties. He has also asked about our relations with Indonesia under the new administration. Madam, our relations with both our immediate neighbours are stable and good. Relations with Malaysia have made steady progress over the years. Our Prime Minister and Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak have had many good meetings. They have made good progress on many fronts. The Next Leaders Retreat will be in Singapore on 5 May. Malaysia and Singapore are working together on key projects, including the iconic projects in Iskandar Malaysia, the High Speed Rail and the Rapid Transit System. We also help each other in times of need. The upcoming Retreat will be another step in keeping up the positive momentum. With Indonesia, we also developed a positive relationship. We look forward to President Joko Widodo's introductory visit to Singapore. The Prime Minister met the President at his inauguration last October and he had a private breakfast in Singapore last November. We look forward to maintaining a strong relationship with the new administration. And of course, we are always looking into ways to expand mutual cooperation. We are Indonesia's largest foreign investor. There is potential for us to do much more together. We will also explore strengthening collaboration in areas such as defence, environment and people-to-people links. We will continue to maintain our special relationship with Brunei. His Majesty, the Sultan of Brunei, visited Singapore last year.”
“Singapore has actively participated in and supported the activities that focus on youths, for example, the ASEAN Youth Competition on Arts and Human Rights held in 2014 which aimed to raise awareness of the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration amongst the youths in ASEAN. We have given all of these activities publicity, both on the MFA website and I have put it on my Facebook page. For those Members who are interested in what foreign affairs does, they can follow me on Facebook. As regards FIFA and 2030, ASEAN has directed the Youth Ministers to go and study the possibility of hosting the World Cup in 2030. It is a complex undertaking. It is still being studied because, not least, you need to coordinate the 10 countries and see how the events can be held across 10 countries. So, that is being studied. We will continue, together with the other ASEAN countries, to look at how we can bring across this concept to ASEAN, to the individual on the street and the young people. And at the Foreign Ministry level, our Ambassadors-at-Large have been supportive of youth initiatives in order to raise awareness of ASEAN. For example, the Singapore Polytechnic Annual Youth Model ASEAN Conference. Prof Tan Tai Yong spoke about the need for exchanges within ASEAN. I agree with him that there is a need for these exchanges to go beyond the political and institutional level. There is a need for closer engagement to extend also to the people-to-people level. Page: 80 In December, we will host the Eighth ASEAN Para Games for the first time. We will welcome over 1,000 athletes with disabilities. The Games will serve as a platform to enhance inclusiveness and promote ASEAN solidarity.”
“We need to continue to promote a greater understanding of ASEAN to our people, especially the young, on how ASEAN can be more meaningful to them. Over the years, ASEAN has cooperated to improve the quality of life of its people. We adopted the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) blueprint. That blueprint aims to build a people-centred and socially responsible ASEAN Community. Ms Sylvia Lim had a number of questions on that. Page: 79 At the ASEAN level, the ASCC addresses the following broad areas for cooperation: human development, social welfare and protection, social justice and rights, ensuring environmental sustainability, building the ASEAN identity and narrowing the development gap. There are about 339 action lines in the ASCC blueprint. They are being implemented through various activities undertaken by the ASCC sectoral bodies. The ASEAN Secretariat tracks implementation of the ASCC blueprint. Unlike the AEC with tangible targets, the 339 action lines in the ASCC blueprint seek to achieve aspirational and qualitative objectives. For example, the promotion of a sense of community among ASEAN citizen; there are specific items identified as action items, but the ultimate objective is aspirational. Specific to what we do, in the context of young people and the youths of ASEAN, there have been a number of activities that have been undertaken: ASEAN+3 Youth Caucus, ASEAN Professional Youth Volunteer Corps, ASEAN Youth Humanitarian Seminar. Given the various levels of economic development, different ASEAN member states would naturally have different development implementation priorities. For example, some ASEAN member states focus on education and healthcare, whilst others focus on security.”
“All those people working in MNCs in Singapore, their jobs are dependent on the MNCs being able to export out of Singapore. Singapore itself is not enough of a market. So, the greater the market, the more the benefits for a highly-educated, highly-skilled population that exists in Singapore. And we enjoy a unique position within ASEAN. We are a centre for capital. We have a safe, stable and secure environment that is conducive for business. There is rule of law. Singapore can become the New York of ASEAN. Our choice is to be plugged into the AEC and benefit from it, or erect walls and prevent our companies and our people from reaping the benefits of integration. Are we better off with only our small domestic market or do we want to be part of the seventh largest economy in the world? As a centre of the seventh largest economy of the world! ASEAN has signed eight Mutual Recognition Agreements. These agreements facilitate the movement of skilled labour in the following professions: accountancy, architecture, dentistry, engineering, medicine, nursing, quantity -surveying and tourism. But those who seek jobs must meet domestic regulations and standards set by the national professional bodies. The risk for us is not that the AEC will come into full force; actually, it is the reverse, that there will be various hurdles set up by the different countries or their national bodies that prevent our people from fully benefiting from this integration. Integration has got to benefit everyone. Madam, the integration and community-building efforts cannot stop on 31 December 2015. We are looking beyond 2015. We are working with our neighbours to develop the Post-2015 Vision for the ASEAN Community. That is expected to be ready at the end of the year under Malaysia's chairmanship.”
“There have been questions raised about the AEC possibly leading to job loss, whether our SMEs will be at disadvantage, whether foreigners will be privileged over Singaporeans. There is some misperception here. Let us think about this. Singapore grew at an average of 3.6% over the last two years. Thirty percent of Singaporeans go to university every year. About 46% go to polytechnics and a substantial number of the rest go on to some form of tertiary education. Almost 100% of the cohort, we try and make them highly skilled with good education. We want to grow those skills even further. Our graduate population as a percentage – polytechnic population, the population with skills from the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) as a percentage – are all increasing. But Singapore itself is a very small market. We need access to a larger market. We have to be well-connected to the region to prosper and create jobs for our people. Look at ASEAN. It grew at about 5.3% annually in the recent past, outstripping Singapore's growth; some of the countries within ASEAN grow even faster. Taken together, the countries of ASEAN form the seventh largest economy in the world. An integrated ASEAN will benefit every ASEAN member country, including Singapore. Every ASEAN country will benefit in its own way through the AEC. For us, the AEC provides our people and companies with greater opportunities across ASEAN. You look at it in terms of the individual, professionals, people with skills, people with qualifications from across different sectors – ITE, polytechnic, university – will have a broader market. If you look at Page: 78 our companies, likewise, they will have a broader market. 3.45 pm Let us put it another way, look at MNCs.”
“Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about our role in ensuring a regional architecture that is conducive for peace, stability and growth. Specifically, Ms Irene Ng made a number of comments, as a sharp observer of international relations, a very nuanced observer. She asked about the state of ASEAN which is a very big question, ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and ASEAN's future plans after 2015. I will try and answer them as well as I can. Prof Tan Tai Yong asked about progress in ASEAN. As Members will be aware, strengthening the regional architecture, with ASEAN at its core, has been a cornerstone of our foreign policy. We work closely with other ASEAN member states to preserve ASEAN Centrality. We try and keep the regional architecture Page: 77 open and inclusive. A strong and united ASEAN provides a framework to maintain peace and stability. ASEAN creates a neutral platform for key stakeholders and major powers, in and outside the region, to engage in dialogue and to maintain peace and cooperate in various sectors. We also work closely with our ASEAN neighbours to build and maintain a cohesive, prosperous region. Again, not an end in itself, but as a means to creating a better livelihood for all our people. As part of the regional integration efforts, the ASEAN Community will be established by December 2015. A key focus is the AEC. Ms Irene Ng asked about the benefits of the AEC to Singapore. The AEC will integrate and transform ASEAN into a single regional market. It will mean a freer flow of goods, services, investments, skilled labour and capital within ASEAN. There remain, however, issues to be sorted out. It is by no means something that is a clear and easy strait.”
“" Over the last 50 years, we have developed strong and sustainable partnerships at the bilateral, regional and international levels, created international space – economic, political and strategic – that we need to advance and defend our interests. I agree with Mr Sitoh's observations on the uses of soft power to enhance our relevance in international relations. We have been doing so. He specifically suggested that we set up a secretariat to monitor this. I can assure him that in my Ministry, this is one of the key priorities from the Minister downwards. Our relevance and soft power come from our success. No one will pay us attention if we are a failed state. So, we have to ensure that we are relevant internationally and we must remain exceptional. But we neither seek nor claim to be a model for others. But because of our success, people come to study our governance model and economic policies. We must also remember the support from our friends around the world who helped us to where we are today. We learn from others. For that, we should, where we can, give back to the international community what we can. The Singapore Cooperation Programme (SCP) is the primary platform through which we share our development experience. And over 80,000 public service officers from around the world have come to Singapore to study our programmes. Our relevance in international relations is only, of course, a means to an end; it is not an end in itself. We need to be relevant so that others will engage and cooperate with us. That will allow us to work with others to advance our national interests and shape and strengthen the regional architecture. That is particularly crucial in ASEAN. We need a stable, peaceful and prosperous region for economic growth.”
“Madam, I thank the hon Members for their comments. I thank Mr Sitoh Yih Pin for his statement on our international strategy. He highlighted two key tenets of our foreign policy: one, the realities that small states must contend with; and, two, the importance of maintaining Singapore's relevance in the world. At SG50, it is useful to restate the realities that have shaped our foreign policy: one, our small size – the lack of a hinterland and natural resources; two, our multiracial, multi-lingual society; and three, the evolving geo-political situation, featuring competition between major powers. In this context, three imperatives have driven our foreign policy engagement since 1965. One, the need to protect our independence and territorial integrity; two, the need to maintain our relevance in the international system; and three, the need to assert our right to chart our own destiny as a sovereign nation. It is useful to recall what our founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew said in 1966, and I quote, "A foreign policy for Singapore must be one as to encourage, first, the major powers in the world to find it – if not in their interests to help us – at least in their interests for us not to go worse"; and he added, "We must always offer to the rest of the world a continuing interest in the type of society we project". That remains valid today. At the 2009 S Rajaratnam Lecture, Mr Lee again said, and I quote, "Friendship, in international relations, is not a function of goodwill or personal affection. We must make ourselves relevant so that other countries have an interest in our continued survival and Page: 76 prosperity as a sovereign and independent nation. Singapore cannot take its relevance for granted.”
“Mdm Speaker, I said that I would come back to clarify if necessary on Annex 3. Ms Lim asked me yesterday whether the table, which I circulated showing AHPETC paying FMSS significantly more per unit, is correct. I have verified the rates in the table that I gave, in Annex 3, are correct. These are the rates in the management agency contracts that the Town Councils have signed with their respective Page: 25 Managing Agents. AHPETC is the only Town Council where the Managing Agent charges differential rates for residential and commercial units. Some Town Councils, in the past, charged differential rates, but all the Managing Agents have since done away with those and applied a fixed rate for both. Ms Lim may have been mistaken and confused the Managing Agent rates with the service and conservancy charges (S&CCs) paid by commercial units which may differ from the S&CCs paid by residential units. So, the calculation that I have put out is correct and, on a weighted average basis, AHPETC pays $1.6 million more, compared with other Town Councils. Thank you.”
“There is nothing on the record and, if you look at my speech, there is nothing on the record that ACRA's statement was discussed at the Town Council meeting; it is not recorded in any minutes. But if you say that all the Town Councillors knew all the facts and yet proceeded on this basis, then, no doubt, you will explain to us why you chose to record some facts but not others; you chose to record that they were employees and directors but not owners. You will also then explain in due course at the right forum why you thought fit to approve this process, with full knowledge of facts.”
“You may be misled because the previous Aljunied Town Council had differential rates but, today, those are the rates – if you look at the year that we have put. Now, if there is any change to be made to the table, I will check overnight and I will let you know tomorrow. This is what I have been told; it is accurate, but since I have not checked it myself, I will have it checked tonight. As regards the other points, you asked about FRS. I think you are referring to the wrong FRS. What you are referring to is the FRS which came into force as of July last year. If you go back to the FRS before July last year, you will see that it is as I have stated it. Second, you throw at us that you have some audit firm which gave you the all-clear, would it not be good for you to produce that report and let me ask you these questions. The firm was tasked to review the MA tender and had a narrower scope compared with Pricewaterhouse. The review by that firm focused primarily on compliance with tender procedure. Were they asked to consider the substantive considerations behind the award of Page: 105 the contract? Did they actually sign off on the process that is outlined in Annex 4 and say: "We agree. This is a wonderful process and you can go ahead with this – where the same person issues the invoice, certifies it and also signs the cheque?" Did they approve that? Did they approve the process? So, let us be clear what they approved and rather than debating here – I think, why not you make a substantive statement? I will be surprised if you can produce any professional who is honest, who will say the processes that have been outlined in this House are supportable. You referred to the ACRA statement.”
“I see a very interesting definition of transparency: we will answer residents, we would not answer in Parliament. [Interruption] Well, I am not sure what you are saying because I have asked all these questions and you stand up there and you say, "If you are my resident, I will answer you." I assume that since I am not your resident, you will not answer me in Parliament here. But let us not debate it. If you have answers to the questions I have asked, please revert to us tomorrow when you speak, rather than to say you will answer to your residents when you knock on their doors without RC members. Second, you say you support the Motion. You know, there is a phrase, "To walk the talk." Talk is cheap. I have asked a series of detailed questions, with facts and figures and data and what was disclosed and what was not disclosed and why it was not disclosed and why was your Town Council's Managing Agent paid so much. I think if you want to go beyond and you want to be honest with the people of Singapore, I suggest you take your time and you answer those questions, rather than to provide grand pronouncements about rejecting my statements and that you are all for transparency. I accept that you are for transparency. So, in the spirit of transparency, answer the questions. Now, in response to Ms Sylvia Lim's points, again, there is a general statement of rejecting everything I said. I think the question is really that I have not made broad statements. I have referred my statements by reference to facts and figures. So, you would do well to go back to those facts and figures and answer them. As regards Annex 6, the Managing Agents' rates, I am assured that the rates are correct, as set out in the table.”
“I can give you an answer straightaway. You should look at Annex 6 and you will see in the first page that the Managing Agent's rates, once they are done on a weighted average basis, these figures are accurate, I am told by MND.”
“This is in addition to the gross breach of fiduciary duties in relation to FMSS and FMSI. Page: 101 You made a conscious decision to appoint your close supporters – Loh, Ms How and Yeo – to run the Town Council. You allowed the set-up which allowed monies to be paid to them, unlawfully. What does this say of your integrity? In conclusion, I say this to the AHPETC Town Councillors. Each of you appears to have seriously breached your fiduciary duties. On behalf of the residents of Aljunied GRC, more than 150,000 of them, hardworking, honest people, we have to ask the Workers' Party to come clean and explain yourselves to the public. Your residents deserve some real, honest answers.”
“They did not manage the Sinking Fund; their data is unreliable; they have submitted reports with significant discrepancies; and it looks like they are not even able to monitor the overall state of what your residents pay you in S&CC fees; they do not perform bank reconciliation required by the TCFR; they do not properly control receipts and handling of cheques; accounting systems and procedures were inadequate; they do not check on amounts collected, paid out and receivables; their own auditors, Foo Kon Tan, heavily and seriously qualified the accounts for FY2011/2012 and FY2012/2013; and for FY2013/2014, no audited accounts have been submitted. It is well overdue. Ms Lim can go on about all of this being rubbish, but you cannot run away from the facts. Why are the accounts not here yet? Just give an answer. If you were a listed company, by now, your shareholders would have sued you. Because you collect public funds every month, you have a duty to account to your residents. Basically, the Town Council is in shambles. It is quite amazing to hear you stand up and say, "Everything is okay." Your own auditors have qualified the accounts for two years running; seriously qualified. And you also admit you may not be able to submit your accounts for this year. And how can you say everything is okay? Only the audited accounts can show that. The fact that you cannot produce accounts shows that there is something seriously wrong. While you stood up to the public to say that you have a team of dedicated professionals who can run the Town Council, "Don't worry!", you say, and you cannot even produce the accounts. It is not just a matter of there having been a few lapses on some issues. So many things are so disastrously wrong. There has been a complete dereliction of duties.”
“Is that right? I am sure we will have your answer to all the questions that we have raised. And I am sure that is the most parliamentary language you can find. In the course of several months, many questions have been raised about the way the Town Council's finances have been managed. You refused to answer the questions. Instead, you kept repeating that answers will be given when the AGO report was issued. Now, the report has been issued. Will we get honest, direct answers to these questions? And, finally, Mr Low – Loh and Ms How were your friends. They got the contracts because they were your friends. What is your role and responsibility, Mr Low? You allowed all of these to happen. As the Secretary General of the Workers' Party, what is your Page: 100 responsibility? Let us look at the question of what should be done now. Any honest Town Councillor will admit that all this is unacceptable and will want to set right what has gone wrong, which means, coming clean on the facts, re-looking at all the contracts and payments and recovering all the excesses, the over-payments and the payments made in breach of fiduciary duties, which means taking legal action where necessary. Will the Town Councillors do that? Mdm Speaker, the AGO report makes for sad reading.”
“And the Town Council also failed to give documents and information to your own auditors and to PwC. The inevitable question is: why did you do all of this? On 13 May 2013, Ms Lim, you made a speech in this Parliament. You said you are committed to being accountable to others for Town Council management and you strongly defended FMSS, Loh and Ms How. That was the very month, May 2013, that you stopped submitting arrears data to MND. Your Town Council had submitted it every month until then. You also said that you had a "team of dedicated professionals" to run the Town Council. And you said, "How did we get to this point? We have a team of dedicated professionals with Town Council experience, because for the past 20 years, you Hougang voters have supported us. Because of you, Singaporeans can now see they have a choice. They can see that it is not only the PAP that can run Town Councils". And you said, "MPs in Singapore manage Town Councils in HDB estates. Under the Town Councils Act, elected MPs are to manage and improve the common property in the town, which includes roofs, lifts and other common facilities. A large part of a Town Council's income comes from the residents, by way of S&CC or service & conservancy charges; Town Councils also receive Government grants, which are funded by taxpayers. Being custodians of public monies, MPs should use Town Council funds to advance the residents' interests and not for partisan advantage." You knew you were custodians of public monies. That is why FMSS and FMSI were allowed to freely transfer public funds to themselves?”
“It will be a gross breach of those fiduciary duties to have allowed Loh, Ms How and Yeo to act as they did and rubber stamp what they did. You will be aware that such conduct is unlawful. If a Town Councillor acts in breach of his fiduciary duties, then legal action can be brought up. The Town Councillor would have acted unlawfully. Mr Chen, now that all these details are out – what are you going to do? How are you going to explain to your residents? Let us turn to Mr Pritam Singh. You are a lawyer. You make fierce speeches about transparency. In May 2011, you said, "My friends, the Workers' Party has one important rule that we abide by strictly – we will not play politics with the residents of Aljunied GRC by making empty promises to them. If there is one thread that runs through the Workers' Party manifesto, it is the thread of transparency and accountability" – you thundered. You have been anything but transparent and accountable. There is a thread all right, but it weaves and leaves a tangled web. Would you tell us what your position is on each of these questions I have asked? Now, let us turn to Ms Sylvia Lim. You are the Chairperson, lawyer. You obviously must have known from the beginning that Loh, Ms How and Yeo owned FMSS and FMSI. And you approved the system that was set up. And you rubber stamped their actions by countersigning the cheques. You do not seem to have ensured that all relevant facts were made known to all the Town Councillors. No discussion on how the serious financial conflicts were going to be handled. No discussions on how residents' monies will be protected. Page: 99 Nothing. You must have known that such conduct would be in serious breach of your legal, fiduciary duties. That it will be unlawful to do so. Yet, you allowed this.”
“As I have said, where did the money go in the end? It will be interesting to find out. Let me now turn to the fourth issue: the responsibility of each of the Town Councillors for what has happened. Given this sorry state of affairs, it is now time for each Town Councillor to come clean before this Parliament and before the people of Singapore. Page: 98 Let me start with Mr Chen. Mr Chen has said that they will "take a rational and responsible approach" to Town Council management "with the interests of the residents ‘high' on their minds." Mr Chen should tell us: did you know that Loh, Ms How and Yeo owned FMSS and FMSI? If you did, when did you know? Why was there no discussion at the Town Council of their ownership of these companies? And why is there no record in the minutes of any such discussions? Did you know that Loh, Ms How and Yeo were going to be allowed to supervise themselves and pay themselves as set out in Annex 6? Did you know of the process? Did you know that the amounts involved ran into millions of dollars? Over $6 million in just one year – FY2012/2013? Did you know that FMSS was being paid very high MA fees, much higher than anyone else? If you did not know the full facts, Mr Chen, then that is a partial excuse. Because I think if you had known all the facts, you could not have agreed to this structure – no one could reasonably have agreed to it. This cannot be approved, in law, by anyone acting honestly and with full knowledge of the facts. So, the question is: what did you know and when did you know? I am reminded by Deputy Prime Minister Teo that you are the Chairman of the Finance and Investment Committee. Mr Chen, as a lawyer, you will know that every Town Councillor owes fiduciary duties and you know what fiduciary duties mean.”
“So, the rest of us here and the rest of Singapore will not know what they made. The basic point is that while the Town Council lost money, FMSS and FMSI made money. The Town Council can find out the answers. Will it do so? Mr Low said to this House that the Town Council had no choice but to appoint FMSS. He played the victim. No one else wanted to tender to be the Managing Agent for the Town Council because it is an Opposition ward. Lucky to have had Ms How to the rescue, he says, because she had some experience from Hougang. When the Workers' Party Members of Parliament took over the Town Council on 8 May 2011, there was an existing MA contract with CPG. This was due to expire only on 31 July 2013, two more years to go. And the contract was such that it could not be terminated by CPG. It could only be terminated by the Workers' Party. The Town Councils Act provides for continuity. There was no need to start from scratch. Ms Sylvia Lim says that CPG asked to be let go. Maybe so. But it was up to the Workers' Party whether they wanted to let CPG go. But you had already decided who you wanted. So, let us not pretend here. FMSS was set up on 15 May 2011, seven days after the General Election (GE). And you decided to replace CPG with FMSS. Ms Lim had said that discussions on termination started in the end of May. That was after you set up FMSS. Taking over was pre-meditated, to hand over the Managing Agent to the parties that you wanted to. So, stop playing the victim card. You said having Ms How was lucky for the Workers' Party, but I think one can conclude from the AGO report that it has not been so lucky for the residents, seeing how they had been short-changed. But of course, Ms How and FMSS have been very lucky. They made more than other Managing Agents.”
“Auditors say your accounts are in a mess, the accounts are unreliable. In fact, you say yourself that you cannot produce the accounts. Auditors say that you have no clear idea of what has happened to the cash. And you come and you say no money is lost. One can only wonder at such a statement. The law takes an extremely strict view on related-party transactions when conflicts of interests are involved. The lawyers in this House will know that. When contracts have been entered into with related parties in breach of fiduciary duties – and let there be no doubt that there is a breach of fiduciary duties here by everyone – the law presumes loss. It will require the related party to justify every payment by showing what work was done and assessing the true value of the work. The contracts are all voidable. Given all of this, how can Ms Lim or anyone honestly say no money has been lost? And the money was not lost through accident. The structure was approved by at least some of the Town Councillors. For your party supporters to form a company and do all of this, this is not a question of negligence or inexperience. You do not need many years of experience to Page: 97 know that you should not let your friends do what they like with public funds. We will only get a full picture of what monies were lost if there was a forensic audit of the Town Council from May 2011 to January 2015. But you know what? It will be quite easy for the Town Council to find out how much money exactly FMSS and FMSI made. All you have to do is to ask them to produce their accounts and bank balances. How much were Ms How, Loh and Yeo paid? How much money did FMSS and FMSI make? Since FMSS is a private exempt company, its accounts are not public. And FMSI is a sole proprietorship.”
“But that is before you even look at issues like blatant double charging or over-charging. Page: 96 Just one illustration of that. Four Town Councillors who were asked to look at the FMSS' fee proposal to provide essential services. Some of the elected Members of Parliament must have been on the Committee. They briefed the other Town Councillors on the fee. They told the Town Councillors that the fee would be about the same as what was the previously charged fee. The previously charged fee was about $49,000 per month. But the four Town Councillors misled the others. FMSS actually charged $67,000 per month and it was not picked up. They happily paid. This is an oversight? Can it be an oversight? Is it not because of the way FMSS was allowed to operate? Over-payment by more than $120,000 – just from one transaction. And what was the work done? Who knows? This particular case was exposed quite by chance. If not exposed, the money would not have been repaid. And when it came out, the Town Council says, "Oh, sorry. We made a mistake." How did the mistake arise? How many other such mistakes which benefited FMSS? AGO was not asked to do a forensic audit. So, they did not check all the items. They only checked on the general processes. And even that, only for one year from 2012 to 2013. So, you cannot say, based on AGO audit, that no money was lost. And AGO had made that clear that you cannot say that. When you set up a system that is so flawed, of course, there are going to be serious issues. Let us put this in layman's terms. You have a business, with cash, valuables belonging to other people. You do not know what exactly you have. You put a friend in charge. They take what they want of the cash. You overpay them several million dollars. You do not check.”
“Notwithstanding numerous requests and reminders, AHPETC did not provide a number of the requested documents." Right through, active, persistent non-disclosure. Obviously deliberate. And the consequence of all of this? Of the millions that were paid to FMSS, who knows how much was justifiable? That brings me to the third of the four major issues that I have highlighted – monies lost by the Town Council. Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Low have been quick to say that, despite all the problems, no Town Council monies have been lost. Really? Can she or anyone else honestly say that no monies have been lost? When the Town Councillors act in breach of their fiduciary duties and paid Loh and Ms How millions of dollars, that is not a loss to the Town Council? Over-payment to a related party is not a loss? That is a really strange statement from Ms Lim. The house is burning and she is standing in front of it and says, "You know, there has been no loss." Is it possible that she does not recognise loss even when it is staring before her face? Let us try and put a number on the monies that have been paid to FMSS in breach of fiduciary duties. Firstly, the MA fees of $22 million. As we saw earlier, the over-charging could be about $6.4 million, perhaps more. That is the over-payment by the Town Council to FMSS for MA fees. Is that not a loss? Add in other amounts which were paid to FMSS without any adequate check or control; $6.6 million in one year. Four years – what would the figure be? You get a lot of money paid by the Town Council to FMSS. So, just on these figures, perhaps over four years, $20 million? You add the $6.4 million, of course, there will be some overlap – because part of the $20 million would be part of the MA fees.”
“Three, the Town Council's own auditors, Foo Kon Tan, queried them on transactions with FMSS. The Town Council failed to answer them. As a result, Foo Kon Tan qualified their audit report and said "the Town Council had not made available to us details of the project management service fees paid to a related party. Accordingly, we are unable to determine the completeness of the related-party disclosures". These are your own auditors. The Town Council refused to give information to its own auditors and you keep talking about transparency. And the Town Council failed to disclose the details of its contracts with FMSS in its FY2012/2013 accounts. And so, the report went on to say, "AHPETC did not disclose fully the related-party transactions in its financial statements." This was in breach of the Singapore Financial Reporting Standards (FRS). Again, Mr Chen, the rules are all there. You just need to comply with them. The FRS requires disclosure of related-party transactions in financial statements. The pattern of non-disclosure is obvious. Page: 95 And the Town Council also refused to give details to PwC, which was requested as part of the AGO audit, and I quote from the AGO report, "we noted that AHPETC has entered into a number of RPTs whereby substantial sums were paid to related parties in FY2012/2013. The Town Council ("TC"), despite repeated requests, did not provide us with all the critical documents relating to these transactions." I quote again, "Since the commencement of our review in April 2014, we have made various requests for documents from AHPETC as part of our review of selected transactions. In our view, these documents (such as documents which record the proper disclosure and consideration of RPTs) ought to exist as a matter of record.”
“Now, let me deal with the second major problem on transparency, the discussion on conflicts, or rather, the absence of discussion on conflicts. Surprisingly, there seems to have been no record of any discussion whatsoever by the Town Council on the process that you see outlined in Annex 4 where they pay themselves, that almost every aspect of the payment process would be controlled by FMSS. Nothing disclosed, nothing discussed. Again, some Town Councillors must have known about the process and they must have approved it. Could Ms Sylvia Lim, as Chairperson, not have known? Why did she not discuss Page: 94 it with all the other Town Councillors? There is no record that she did so. In response to queries by PwC as part of the AGO audit, what response did the Town Council give? Just guess. Instead of answering the questions, they said, "This is not within your remit to ask." That is an evasion; it is not an answer. The auditor asks you serious questions and your response is, "You are not entitled to ask me these questions." Why does the Town Council not give proper answers instead of playing hide and seek? What are you hiding? This is not negligence. It is an active decision to suppress. It raises the issue of integrity. The issue of integrity is raised right through. This pattern of non-disclosure and murkiness has been a constant and troubling feature. One, as we saw, the Town Council minutes suggest that the Town Councillors were not given the full details on FMSS. Or if they were given the details, then someone decided that only the less important parts should be recorded. Two, there seems to have been no discussion at Town Council meetings of the actual process. There is no record that this took place, how FMSS would be supervised and how the risks will be mitigated.”
“The minutes show that between August and September 2011, the Town Councillors were given limited disclosure. They were only told that Loh and Ms How were directors and employees of FMSS. Very odd. It was felt necessary to tell the rest of the Town Councillors that Ms How and Loh were directors and employees of FMSS, but not reveal the more important fact that they were not just employees and directors but also the owners of FMSS. PwC asked the Town Council why was there no record of Loh, Ms How and Yeo's ownership being disclosed and discussed at the Town Council meeting. The Town Council says, "Oh, everyone knew the ownership structure of FMSS." Really? Every Town Councillor knew? Then, why did the Town Council make the curious decision to only record that they were directors and employees and not record their ownership of FMSS and FMSI? What was there to hide about the ownership? Why record only some of the less important facts and omit the most important fact? And there is no reference whatsoever in the minutes to FMSI, that it was owned by Loh. FMSI got contracts worth $29,400 per month for five years – October 2007 to June 2012. And Loh's ownership was not mentioned or recorded? Obviously, some of the Town Councillors would have known that Loh and Ms How owned FMSS. Could Ms Sylvia Lim not have known? She was the Chairman of the Town Council. So, did she tell the other Town Councillors? What exactly did she tell? Were the ownership details recorded or revealed? Beyond this limited disclosure, there is nothing else in the Town Council minutes. And over the years, there was no further disclosure of the interests. Nothing. Despite the many contracts and millions that were given to FMSS and FMSI.”
“The rhetoric from the Workers' Party is always about helping the poor man. The reality is that the Workers' Party took money from the man-in-the-street to give to their friends in FMSS. Mr Low and Ms Lim keep saying there has been no loss. Maybe there was no one taking money through the backdoor in the dark of the night. There was no need because the money was taken from the front door in broad daylight. Through all this overcharging – $6.4 million over four years on this calculation, overcharging on managing agent's fees. Another $6.6 million taken out in just one year through an unlawful process. There might be an overlap between the two sums because part of the $6.6 million would be for MA fees. And there must have been much more. I will now deal with the second major problem arising from the facts, which is lack of transparency and lack of disclosure. Ask yourself: should the full facts have been disclosed to all the Town Councillors? Should the process have been discussed? Should the risks have been considered? Should the safeguards have been thought about? The answers to these questions might appear obvious. The behaviour of a party which claims to champion transparency and accountability was shocking. First, the facts do not seem to have been fully disclosed to all the Town Councillors. Second, there seems to have been no proper discussion of the conflicts at all. Let me deal with the non-disclosure first. If Members look again at Annex 4 that was handed out earlier, the fact that Loh, Ms How and Yeo owned FMSS – that is obviously Page: 93 important. You would expect it to be disclosed and discussed at the Town Council meeting. But strangely, there are no minutes of Town Council meetings where any such disclosure is recorded. Instead it gets very curious.”
“A comparison of the Managing Agent rates in Singapore for 2014-2015 will be shown in this table. It is quite an important table. Members will be shocked by it and, therefore, I will wait for it to be distributed before I continue. If Members look at this, you can see from this annex that FMSS charges the Town Council $14.92 for each commercial unit, compared with between $4.80 and $6.65 for all other Town Councils. Is this inexperience? Is this oversight? Is this a case of playing the victim, coming here and saying we are all victims of a political conspiracy? This is what you decided Page: 92 to pay. Small businesses in Aljunied were charged much more to pay FMSS. Likewise, FMSS charged the Town Council $7.43 for every residential unit. Others charge between $4.80 and $6.65. And from July 2014, FMSS increased its rates even more. The rates are now $15.82 and $7.88. The commercial unit rates and Managing Agent's fees are now more than double what everyone else has charged. If you take the weighted average of MA fees paid by other Town Councils, it is $5.72 per unit for both residential and commercial units. The difference, therefore, on an annual basis, between what the Town Council paid FMSS and what others pay their Managing Agents is about $1.6 million every year. That is not the profit. That is just the difference. Obviously, everybody else makes a profit, too. So, this $1.6 million is on top of the profit that FMSS was making. You can compare the rates any way you like. Weighted average; you can compare it with Tampines, which is comparable; you can compare it with Chua Choa Kang, which has got a similar number of units. Whatever way you slice it, Aljunied pays far more to FMSS. What justifies this?”
“The Town Council decided to pay significantly higher Managing Agent fees to FMSS, compared with all other Town Councils. The total MA fees paid by the Town Council to FMSS were nearly $22 million for over four years. Mdm Speaker, may I ask for the next annex to be handed out, please?”
“This arrangement was designed deliberately. It was not accidental. It is with a husband-and-wife team who are hard-core supporters of the Workers' Party and close to some of the Page: 91 Workers' Party Town Councillors. They must have been highly trusted; they were the assenter and proposer for the Workers' Party in the General Elections of 2006. The conflict of interest is apparent, real and serious. No Town Councillor who knew of this structure could have approved this structure lawfully. It is not capable of being approved in law. It is unlawful. And it would have been a serious breach of fiduciary duties for any Town Councillor to have approved this process. During the AGO audit, the Town Council responded on this related-party transaction. It said, "Well, most of the payments were pre-agreed by contract". That is what Ms Lim told this House today as well. And the cheques were countersigned by the Chairman or Vice Chairman. With respect, these are non-answers. The payments may have been pre-agreed by contract but were the services being provided, let alone provided properly? Payments are being made for services. Who was checking on the services for which the millions were being paid? And the cheques being countersigned, what does that mean? What were the checks done for each payment? It is all quite unacceptable and unlawful. When pointed out, instead of accepting that this is unlawful and unacceptable, there is now an attempt to confuse and evade. So, serious questions remain unanswered on payments. I have said I will highlight two ways in which payments were made to FMSS, amongst several. Let me deal with the second way in which the Town Council was run for the benefit of FMSS. That was by inflating the Managing Agent fees paid to FMSS.”