Joseph Teo/


In the Straits Times on Thursday 12 May 2011, on page A4, “Cynthia Phua promises proper handover”, the following was reported:

“Aljunied Town Council is now managed by CPG Facilities Management, with whom the town council signed a three-year contract last year.  CPG managing director Jeffrey Chua is the town council’s general manager.  As the town council managing agent, CPG engages the services of other companies for services such as cleaning, maintenance and lift rescue.”

While CPG Corporation Pte Ltd is the corporatized and renamed Public Works Department, it is not apparent whether Mr Chua, as the Managing Director of CPG Facilities Management Pte Ltd holds shares or options in the firm CPG Facilities Management Pte Ltd (which appears to be a subsidiary of CPG Corporation Pte Ltd) or its parent.

Regardless, I find it difficult to understand how Mr Chua can carry out both his duties as the general manager of the town council, and the Managing Director of the town council’s managing agent.

Suppose Mr Chua, the Managing Director of CPG Facilities Management asked for a higher management fee, in order to deal with the rise in the foreign workers’ levy,  would Mr Chua the general manager of Aljunied Town Council grant that request?

If the town upkeep is poor, and HDB blocks are dirty, would Mr Chua the general manager of Aljunied Town Council replace himself as the managing agent?

It appears that there is a conflict of interest in Mr Chua’s roles.  If he receives a stipend or salary from both organizations, on whose behalf would he act?  If he only receives a salary from CPG Facilities Management, how can he then act in the interest of the residents of Aljunied GRC?

What I find extremely worrying, however, is that this matter only came to light because the Workers’ Party won Aljunied GRC, and there now needs to be a handover.  If the PAP had won, would this unhealthy arrangement have continued?  Are there any other such apparent conflicts of interest that we do not know about?

 

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

陈佩玲称四财案人均受惠逾两万元? 革新党肯尼斯吁援引假消息法要求更正

日前,在参与“坚毅向前”附加预算案辩论时,麦波申国会议员陈佩玲提到,政府四次拨款助国人和企业面对困难,粗略计算,政府针对疫情的平均个人援助大约为2万3千225新元。 此番言论立时引来网民非议,有者指出,百姓们实得在手上、看得到的现金或受惠数目,根本没有那么多,更质疑陈佩玲的数据哪里来? 陈佩玲较后则发文解释,自己是依据四个总值近930亿元的预算案,与人口相除,人均可受惠逾两万元,以此与其他国家国民的人均受惠程度作比较,也显示政府为应对此次疫情的决心。 不过,也是经济学家的革新党领袖肯尼斯(Kenneth Jeyaretnam),就质问应探讨930亿元的分配,公民直接收到的现金也只有600元的关怀与援助配套补贴。甚至为此要副总理兼财政部长王瑞杰,援引防假消息法,向陈佩玲发出更正通知! 再者,早前王瑞杰称为应对冠病不可预测情况,政府拨出额外130亿元作为应急基金。这可能包括在340亿元团结预算案的特别调拨款项(special transfers)。 此外,要衡量政府的直接援助,也可看总赤字743亿元中,减去约173亿元的留本基金(endowment fund)及信托基金(trust fund),以及130亿元的应急基金。

Number of sugar baby signups from Singaporean universities on the rise due to increasing university fees

In the wake of students struggling to cope with the rising costs…

仅上半年就超越前两年记录 骨痛热症病例破5000宗

今年骨痛热症病例似乎有所增加,目前已有四宗骨痛热症死亡病例,每个月有数百宗新病例。 据报导,今年2月份,两名分别居住在勿洛的74岁年长者,和居住在后港的77岁年长者被骨痛热症夺命。而在3月份宏茂桥一名71岁的男子也因此病逝。 另有一名住在后港的63岁年长者也于本月逝世。国家环境局(NEA)指出,所有的死亡病例都发生在病例集中区。 据环境局2019年骨痛热症检测数据显示,今年首季度(1月至3月)的病例共有2223宗,其中有25宗为骨痛溢血热症。这比上个季度,即去年的10月至12月增加了87.9巴仙的病例,上个季度共记录了1183宗病例。 更令人不安的是,今年截至6月17日,我国骨痛热症比例已经达到了5184宗,远远超过了2018年的病例总数,2018年共记录了3285宗病例,而在2017年共有2771宗。 单单只是今年的一周内,即6月9日至15日,环境局就接获467宗骨痛热症病例的报告,比上一周多出了67宗。事实上,环境局的报告显示,在过去三个月,每周记录的骨痛热症病例都增加了四倍。 病例集中区增加一倍 截止本月17日,环境局也检测到本月的骨痛热症病例集中区,共多达112个集中区,比上个月增加了一个倍。这显示了环境局在首个季度确定的214个病例集中区,已经在过去的三个月中增加了很多。情况似乎在第二季度会变得更糟糕。 截止今天(19日),根据环境局的数据显示,一共确定了119个活跃的病例集中区,其中有33个被列为“已爆发10宗病例的高风险区”。首五个区域为: 1.兀兰6道、兀兰环、Cres、兀兰 70和70通道 2.兀兰…

Josephine Teo heartened that businesses pledge support for fair hiring while job discrimination against Singaporeans continues

In a Facebook posting on Wednesday (20 Jan), Manpower Minister Josephine Teo…