If Statutory Boards are allowed to
keep so much of Public Funds in their individual holdings, how much
bigger is our Reserves that remains unaccounted to Singaporeans -
either to the Elected President or to the Singapore Parliament
?
What is the net growth made to the Reserves Holdings, or losses
made from which lessons could be drawn for the future ?
Can the Finance Ministry pronouncement of budget deficits be
believed, when Parliamentary Committees formed by Members of the
Ruling Party has been able to discern opportunities to balance the
budget ?
32 stat
boards holding on to $33b surpluses
Parliamentary committee calls for review to see if the
boards' surpluses are excessive and should be returned to
Govt
By Audrey Tan
WHILE Singapore's Budget is predicted to fall short by $2.2
billion, 32 cash-rich statutory boards could more than fill the
gap: They are sitting on accumulated surpluses of at least $33.48
billion.
If that cash hoard was returned to the Government, it would more
than comfortably fund this year's projected deficit about 15 times
over.
These figures were released on Tuesday by the Estimates Committee,
which urged the Government to review the boards' surpluses to see
if they were excessive.
If they were, then government ministries should see if there was
any reason for their statutory boards to hold on to the money, the
eight-member committee suggested in its report to the House on
Monday.
It noted that some statutory boards have 'relatively high'
surpluses even as the Government continues to run a Budget deficit
for a third consecutive year.
If the panel's suggestions are adopted, the surpluses are likely to
be whittled down, said economists at Standard Chartered Bank
yesterday.
Amid news that the boards have been quietly accumulating $33
billion, it also turns out that some have already spread their cash
around.
The Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore and the Inland Revenue
Authority of Singapore have returned $2.5 billion and $165 million
respectively since 2000, the Finance Ministry said in a reply to
the committee's report.
It said this in agreeing with the panel's suggestion that where
surpluses appeared excessive, the money should be returned to the
Government.
But don't expect all the $33 billion to be siphoned off for other
government needs.
The ministry noted that many of the bigger boards are self-funded
and use their accumulated surpluses to finance their operations and
development projects.
For example, the Monetary Authority of Singapore needs its reserves
to perform its role, while most of JTC Corporation's surpluses are
re-invested in land for redevelopment purposes.
On the issue of trimming surpluses, Standard Chartered economist
Joseph Tan said yesterday that the Government could cut the annual
budgets of these statutory boards, thereby reducing its own overall
operating expenditure.
'This will help the Government constrain any deficit formation when
it cuts the overall corporate and personal income tax rates to 20
per cent for the Year of Assessment 2005,' he said.
Instead of subjecting themselves to scrutiny by the Finance
Ministry, the statutory boards could cut their fees and charges to
voluntarily reduce their surpluses, he added. This would reduce the
overall cost of doing business in Singapore.
In its report, the committee had asked if the Government had
adequate policies, guidelines and review processes to ensure that
excessive surpluses were not left to keep compounding, or wasted on
extravagant projects.
TOO MUCH CASH ?
Statutory board Accumulated Surplus (FY
2002)
Monetary Authority of Singapore $13.6 billion
Jurong Town Corporation $9.1 billion
Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore $2.5 billion
Central Provident Fund $1.6 billion
Urban Redevelopment Authority $1.3 billion
Public Utilities Board $1.2 billion
Singapore Labour Foundation $662.9 million
Singapore Totalisator Board $589.8 million
Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore $573.9 million
Land Transport Authority $426.7 million
Source: ESTIMATES COMMITTEE
Straits Times - Thursday Edition 22 January 2003
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,231299,00.html?