Current Affairs
President guards Reserves: Really?
Leong Sze Hian/
I agree with Presidential candidate Dr Tony Tan’s remarks (“PE: President’s custodial responsibilities are important: Tony Tan”, Channel NewsAsia, Aug 19) that the custodial responsibilities of the president are an extremely important part of Singapore’s economic governance, especially over the use of the country’s financial reserves.
Used more than 27 times, but nobody knows?
In this regard, President Nathan revealed recently that the past reserves have been used more than 27 times since 2002, for projects like land reclamation and the Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme (Sers).
Govt use past, not current Reserves?
The reason given for approving the use of the past reserves was that although prior to 1999, such projects were funded out of current reserves, even though the government of the day would usually not benefit from them, such infrastructure projects often span across terms of government, which may disincentivise the government of the day to undertake them using current reserves, even though they benefited Singapore in the long term.
This revelation on the use of ‘past reserves’ just before the coming presidential elections, underscores what candidate Dr Tony Tan has been emphasising all along as arguably the focal point of his campaign – that the President holds the ‘key’ to the past reserves and therefore needs the experience, knowledge and expertise to make the right decisions in the future.
The above reason given may be somewhat of a contradiction, as the President should guard against a government of the day, from wanting to use past reserves instead of current reserves, due to being “disincentivised” from doing what’s populist with short-term gains rather than long-term projects which are good for the country.
President didn’t guard Reserves?
After all, wasn’t it precisely to prevent a government from using the past reserves other than when absolutely necessary, that the office of the presidency was created in the first place?
MOF clarification opens up more questions?
Since the Ministry of Finance (MOF) has clarified that “The Net Investment Returns Contribution (NRIC) of about $7 billion is drawn from returns on assets in excess of the liabilities and not gross assets” (“MOF puts up more information on S’pore reserves”, Yahoo News, Aug 12), why was the past reserves allowed to be used when the average annual NRIC was $7 billion?
Surely the more than 27 times that the past reserves have been used since 2000, cant’t possibly be more than $7 billion a year?
-
Singapore1 week ago
Rahayu Mahzam intends to take legal action over alleged defamatory online post by academic
-
Comments2 days ago
8World News anchor Zhang Haijie faces criticism for labelling Lee Hsien Yang as ‘unfilial son’
-
Court Cases1 week ago
Rahayu Mahzam’s role in reviewing redacted messages during Raeesah Khan investigation revealed in Pritam Singh’s trial
-
Editorial2 weeks ago
Lim Boon Heng’s misleading claims & omission in July ST interview on Income-Allianz deal
-
International1 week ago
Sinwar was not hiding in tunnels, contrary to Israeli PM Netanyahu’s claims
-
Politics1 day ago
Singapore govt accuses Lee Hsien Yang of creating ‘false urgency’ over 38 Oxley Road demolition
-
Opinion7 days ago
Did Edwin Tong fail to safeguard S$2 billion in surplus during NTUC Income’s corporatisation?
-
Opinion5 days ago
I Defy: Why I am not complying with my POFMA Correction Direction