About the $2 company, they meant this news…...interesting….PAP
members are involved. Imagine what Singaporeans and the world will
get to know about other undisclose and undercover secrets should
the opposition party or parties become the ruling government of
Singapore.
Town council spat puts spotlight on PAP
By Jeanette Tan | Yahoo! Newsroom – Sat, Dec 22, 2012
Questions are being raised over how computer and financial
systems of an opposition-run town council were placed under the
control of a little-known firm linked to the ruling party.
In a post in his blog Yawning Bread on Friday, Alex Au said the
issue “has the potential to be a big story, causing enormous damage
to the People’s Action Party (PAP)”.
Controversy first erupted earlier this month when the Ministry
of National Development (MND) released its latest town council
management report, singling out the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council
(AHTC) with a “red” rating for its handling of service and
conservancy charge (S&CC) arrears.
The council was not rated for its corporate governance due to
its lateness in submitting its auditor’s management letter
“material to the banding of the corporate governance indicator”,
the ministry said.
WP’s response
Responding to the report, AHTC chair
Sylvia Lim, who is also chairman of the Workers’ Party, noted the
fact that the town council’s audit took longer than expected
because of its need to develop a new computer and financial system
from scratch.
In a statement released on 14 December, the same day the town
council management review was published, she explained that as her
party was taking over the town council in the wake of the their
success at last year’s election, it was informed that its existing
computer and financial systems would be terminated from 1 August
2011, “due to material changes to the membership of the Town
Council”.
She pointed out also that the systems, having been developed
collectively by the 14 PAP town councils over
a period of more than 15 months, were in January last year sold to
a company called M/s Action Information Management Pte Ltd
(AIM).
The town councils then leased the systems back from AIM, paying the company fees every month for the usage of
the computer systems — and a report from online socio-political
site TR Emeritus said these payments would have to come from the
S&CC paid by residents.
When the sale and lease-back occurred, AIM
was empowered by its prevailing service agreement to terminate the
systems contract with any of the town councils within a single
month’s notice in the event of a “material change” to its
composition, which is what happened with AHTC.
Given the circumstances, Lim said in comparison to the “more
than 15 months” that the 14 town councils spent collectively
developing a finance and computer system, the AHTC was left with a two-month timeframe to develop its
own equivalent systems.
Describing it as a “near-impossible task”, Lim said her town
council had to prioritise the development of its financial system
into phases, resulting in a delay for its audit.
Firm’s directors
Details about AIM and its make-up then
came to the fore. Lim noted in her statement that the company was
in fact a dormant one. TR Emeritus reported that AIM had been operating out of an office which allegedly
shares its address with more than 1,000 other businesses, apart
from the actual company that operates from that address — one
KCS Corporate Services Pte Ltd.
Further, a second report from the alternative news website noted
its discovery that AIM consisted of just
three people, all of whom were former PAP
Members of Parliament — its chairman, S Chandra Das, and directors
Lau Ping Sum and Chew Heng Ching.
The company had a total paid-up capital of just $2, with $1 held
in shares by Chandra Das, and the other $1 owned by Lau, according
to the report showing the firm’s business filing with the
Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority.
“As (Lim) pointed out, the questions have to be: Why did the
PAP Town Councils relinquish ownership of the
computer and financial system, and how much did they sell it to
AIM for?” asked Au. “It was probably
developed with taxpayer money by the 14 town councils, with much
input and support from taxpayer-paid town council staff, unless —
and it is hard to believe — the PAP paid for
the development of the system.”
Terms used in contract
Another issue that was raised involved the nature of the
contract signed when the town councils collectively sold the
computer systems to AIM, allowing the firm to
terminate the contract with just a month’s notice “should there be
a material change to the composition of the town council”.
Chandra Das later responded a few days later in a letter saying
that if the AHTC had sought a longer
extension of the contract (beyond 9 September 2011), AIM would have agreed to it, but pointed out that the
town council had not sought a further extension.
In reply, Lim said the first extension was obtained through a
party who “fought for” it on their behalf.
“We were certainly not given to understand that there could be
any extension after this,” she said. The second extension was given
to the previous town council’s managing agent, which needed time to
audit some of its processes, Lim added.
“As (Lim) asked: ‘How is it in the public interest to have such
a thing (the contract terms)?’” wrote Au.
“What price was it sold to AIM for? How
was that price arrived at? Was there competitive tendering?” he
asked in succession.
Au added further the questions of how acting for partisan
advantage is in the best interest of the residents of the
constituency, as well as whether or not the priority should be to
ensure that the systems in the town councils continue
accordingly.
He also argued that if the Corrupt Practices Investigation
Bureau and Attorney-General’s Chambers are independent
institutions, “we should expect them to mount an investigation
immediately”.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/town-council-spat-puts…
