Andrew Loh

Temasek Holdings seems to be caught in a cycle of bad and inept decision making. In a country which brooks no failure, it is a wonder that despite the failings of the past few years, no one – at all – in the sovereign wealth fund has been held responsible.

In February 2009, Temasek reported a 31 per cent fall in its investment portfolio – and this was only for the period March to November 2008. Its original portfolio was S$185 billion. It now stands at S$127 billion. We still do not know how much in total it has lost from December 2008 to July 2009.

In a somewhat desperate effort to put a positive spin on things, the Minister for Finance said, as reported by the Business Times, that “Temasek Holdings’s portfolio grew $56 billion since March 2003 – as its $58 billion loss last year came after ‘a much greater gain’ of $114 billion in the five preceding years.”

And of course, that claim was published with a big bold headline which said, “Temasek’s 6-year report card shows $56b gain.”

A $58 billion loss can be turned, with just a few words from the Finance Minister, into a $56 billion gain – overnight.

Losses aside, the manner in which such losses are revealed are also highly suspect. For example, as Mr Leong Sze Hian pointed out earlier: Both the Merrill and BoA losses came to light only after securities filings in other countries or when international news agencies reported them – and were not voluntarily disclosed by Temasek or the government. Earlier in March, the Minister Mentor revealed GIC’s losses to Reuters and not to Parliament which debated the issue a few weeks earlier. (Source)

The latest twist is the resignation of Mr Charles Goodyear which again is shrouded in mystery. Despite the mainstream media’s spin on it, it is clear that Temasek has serious management problems – both in its renewal process and its investment acumen.

So, where do we go from here? Singaporeans seem powerless to hold Temasek, and for that matter, the GISC as well, to account. Our Members of Parliament too are either inept in questioning the government or are just as helpless. The mainstream media, being a state-controlled propaganda apparatus, cannot be counted on to provide any meaningful role in this.

Singaporeans must realize that it is dangerous for an organizations such as Temasek and the GISC to be in charge of half a trillion dollars of their money, make huge losses and remain secretive. It is dangerous because, in a time where financial scandals can bring down giants in the industry, and with no political accountability in the system, those who are responsible for such losses remain at the helm, and indeed seem to enjoy the support of those in government.

Perhaps the only hope which Singaporeans have in making a serious statement that they want more openness is at the ballot box.

But the question is: Are Singaporeans angry enough? Are they angry at all?

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

Leopards and spots

by: Siew Kum Hong/ It is as if the PAP is determined…

外泄艾滋病带原者资料案裁定罪成,或面临最高9年有期徒刑

日前涉嫌外泄我国艾滋病带原者资料,以此勒索新加坡政府一案,美国法院于周三(5日)裁定,三项罪名成立,将在9月被判。 据《海峡时报》引述费雷拉的律师表示,34岁的费雷拉( Mikhy Farrera-Brochez)在当地时间6月4日,经历一天半的审讯,美国肯塔基州最终作出判决,裁定嫌犯费雷拉罪成,需服刑18-24个月。 费雷拉于今年1月22日及2月18日向新加坡政府发送两封恐吓信件,试图勒索新加坡政府,要求释放其丈夫吕德祥医生。他扬言,若不依照指示,将公开艾滋名带原者的资料。 另一方面,费雷拉非法及蓄意持有含逾一万名艾滋名带原者资料的数据库,已违反联邦法律的罪名。 费雷拉的律师则辩称,他并非蓄意勒索政府,而是想借此让民众知道数据库已被外泄。尽管他承认今年数据库外泄一案,但却否认2016年数据库外泄一案并非他所为。 称欲要新加坡政府承认数据库不安全才会出此下策 “他想要新加坡政府承认数据库并不安全”律师表示。他续指,费雷拉在潜入数据库前已向新加坡与美国相关机关通报,但却被回绝。 费雷拉也在庭上指出,他之所以会发出上诉两封恐吓信件是因为他想要新加坡政府关闭带原者登记网站。 他反驳卫生部说法,“你并不需要以科学研究或健康为由要求他们注册在案,你可以匿名收集资料,不需要向艾滋病毒带原者索取名字来了解病患的性行为。” 卫生部日前在作供时称注册病人信息是为了要及时了解病毒的扩散以及为预防教育做准备。 检方与辩护律师各持己见…

Singapore and China to tighten bilateral relationship

Vice Foreign Minister of the People’s Republic of China Liu Zhenmin visited…

【冠状病毒19】无需再依据身份证尾号 环境局放宽湿巴刹人流管制

自本周末(9月12日)开始,将放宽的四家本地巴刹人数管制,人们无需再依据身份证号码的尾数进入巴刹。 有关的四家湿巴刹为芽笼士乃巴刹、义顺环路第104/105栋的忠邦城湿巴刹、马西岭巷第20/21栋组屋的湿巴刹,以及位于裕廊西52街第505栋的湿巴刹。 虽然无需再根据身份证号码尾数进入湿巴刹,但是民众还是必须使用SafeEntry访客登记系统,以及遵守一米的安全社交距离。 根据身份证尾数限定进入湿巴刹的措施,是于今年4月22日开始实施。而环境局指出,当限制措施于8月13日开始,在工作日开始放缓后,湿巴刹外的人群管理和排队情况一直维持在可控制范围内。 尤其是在马西岭和芽笼士乃的湿巴刹外,工作日几乎看不到有排队的情况出现。 据当局调查,四个湿巴刹在工作日的平均客流量有显着增加,增幅约18巴仙至48巴仙之间。“这为湿巴刹摊贩带来更多生意,同时也为到来的客户提供更大的灵活性。” 当局也察觉到,周末的人流和过去三周相比并没有很大变化,且很少客户从周末转改到工作日进行购物。 芽笼士乃湿巴刹的人流量最多,甚至有逾百人在湿巴刹外排队的情况出现,;而马西岭的人流也不少,排队人数可多达70人,。另外两个湿巴刹则没有出现排队的现象。 在高峰时段,排队进入芽笼士乃湿巴刹的客户需耗时约20分钟,在马西岭湿巴刹排队则需花费15分钟。然而,环境局认为这都是在可“控制的排队时间”内。