More than 10 years of financial omissions by People’s Association in its reports
The People’s Association (PA) has had the ratings of “adverse opinion” given to its annual audits by its auditors for the years 2008 to 2011, reported website TRE Emeritus.

Adverse opinion – A professional opinion made by an auditor indicating that a company’s financial statements are misrepresented, misstated, and do not accurately reflect its financial performance and health. Adverse opinions are usually given after an auditor’s report, which can be internal or independent of the company

However, The Online Citizen has viewed the annual reports of the People’s Association (PA), from the years of 2001 to 2010.

In all these years, the PA’s auditors made some observations and noted that the financial statements of related organizations of the PA had omitted providing financial statements to the auditors.

As such, the financial statements of the PA did not include the statements of its related organizations, such as community clubs and community centres.

Lee Hsien Loong
Chairman of People’s Association, Mr Lee Hsien Loong

For financial years 2010-2012, the PA only presented “financial highlights” in their reports.

“In other words, the financial reports became just financial summaries,” said TRE Emeritus.

The PA is a statutory board under the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY).

The chairman of the PA is Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

We present here extracts of remarks and observations by the auditors engaged by the PA of the financial ratings from the financial year (FY) 2001 to 2010:

FY01/02

  • Auditor KPMG noted the omission of the financial statements of the community centres and community clubs.

FY02/03

  • Auditor KPMG noted the omission of the financial statements of the community centres and community clubs.

FY03/04

  • Auditor KPMG noted the omission of the financial statements of the community centres and community clubs.

FY04/05

  • Singapore Financial Reporting Standards (FRS) were introduced by MOF and PA, as a stat board, have to comply.
  • Auditor changed to Price Waterhouse Cooper (PWC)
  • Auditor PWC noted the omission of the financial statements of the community centres and community clubs, which are required by FRS Standard 27.

FY05/06

  • Auditor PWC noted the omission of the financial statements of the community centres and community clubs, which are required by FRS Standard 27 (revised 2004)
  • This time, PWC used stronger language but stopped short of an adverse opinion:

    “[Because] of the significance of the matters referred to in the paragraphs above, and their potential impact to the financial statements, the accompanying financial statements do not present fairly, in accordance with the provision of the People’s Association Act, Chapter 227 (“the Act”) and Singapore Financial Reporting Standards, the state of affairs of the Association as at 31 March 2006 …”

  • First time the term GRO is used in the annual report, p.49 provides a full breakdown of all the organisations that make up the GROs.

FY06/07

  • Auditor PWC took another step forward and issued an adverse opinion on the omission of GROs’ financial statements.

FY07/08

  • Auditor PWC issued an adverse opinion on the omission of GROs’ financial statements.

FY 08/09

  • Auditor PWC issued an adverse opinion on the omission of GROs’ financial statements.

FY 09/10

  • Auditor changed to KPMG
  • Auditor KPMG issued an adverse opinion on the omission of GRO’s financial statements

No more published detailed financial statements in FY 2010/11 and onwards till date, instead a consolidated financial statement is presented in its annual report. However, its revealed by one of the local news agency that in 2010/2011, the PA was also given an “adverse opinion” rating.
This is not an accusation of any wrongdoing by PA. In fact, the auditors make it clear, in every FY’s report, that there was no suspicion of any wrongdoing.
The key questions are:

  1. From corporate governance/accounting principle standpoint, is it a good practice to omit the financial statements of GROs since FY01/02?
  2. PA in its media release, promises to set things right in FY13 (report due March 2014). FRS was introduced in FY04.  PA made a parliamentary reply in 2008 that there was nothing wrong with the GROs’ accounts. Why did PA say it will comply in its next financial report?

And this after all these years?

If not for the news report, no one would have known that PA’s 2010/11 was an adverse opinion as well.

PA should once again put out its financial statement in the open for public scrutiny instead of presenting consolidated financial statements without transparency.
____________________
Evidence to substantiate the above points attached.

PA_auditorreports

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

【选举】民主党倡议援助失业者方案 应对后冠病时代危机

新加坡民主党指出,在该党的“重新启动RESTART”援助和重新雇佣计划下,被裁员的员工将获得临时援助金,让他们创业,扭转我国的经济结构,强化国家企业家文化。 民主党秘书长徐顺全在脸书帖文,指出该党所推出的“重启”计划,能够协助被裁退的国人,让他们能够透过该援助金重新振作,甚至创业。 他表示,该党非常关注我国的就业机会和失业率课题,并对目前的政策感到失望。 他指出,透过“重启”计划,被裁国人能够持续18个月获得原薪金的一半援助金,即即首半年提供原先工资的75巴仙,第二半年提供一半的工资,以及最后的半年提供原工资的四分一。 “若被裁员工能够找到另外九名面对同样命运的国人,他们可以透过提交可行的商业计划书,一次性领出所有援助金,作为合作企业的资本。” 该计划也会就合作企业的类型制定广泛的指南,并设立独立机构进行监督,以防遭滥用,更可以引用法定指南,让董事会和管理层承担责任。 他指出,此做法已经在意大利率先被提出,被称为马可拉法(Marcora Law),帮助被裁退的人们重新振作,并鼓励国人创业。类似的合作企业为会员所拥有和管理,将有助于新加坡市场的经济包容性和多元化。 徐顺全指出,我国在“裙带资本主义”指数中,排位偏高,是不健康且不可持续的现象。因此他希望自冠状病毒19疫情后的复苏时期,我国能够摆脱政府主导的国内经济,真正调整我国的经济结构,让私营部门取到关键作用,加强国家的企业家文化。

马国行动管制令延长至下月12日

马来西亚首相慕尤丁宣布,马国原本至下周二(28日)结束的行动管制令,将延长两周至5月12日。 这也是马国第三度延长上述管制措施。不过,在针对特定人群仍稍微放行,包括允许早前需留在大专学府的大专生回家,以及那些在管制令期间,被困他乡无法回乡的人士,获允许一次性的出行。

TOC’s exclusive interview with Tan Kin Lian

Excerpt of TOC’s exclusive interview with Mr Tan Kin Lian: — TOC:…