The Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) has submitted to the Housing and Development Board (HDB) on 18 August, its fifth monthly progress report issued by its auditor KPMG to AHTC. (click here for the full report)

This report was issued in accordance with the Court of Appeal judgment in Attorney General vs. AHPETC (Civil Appeal No. 114 of 2015)(“the Judgment”).

AHTC is managed by Workers’ Party (WP)

AHTC wrote that since the July 2016 monthly report, KPMG has completed its checks of all payments made by AHTC through the use of “dummy” vendor codes amounting to $271,598.20.

AHTC said that it accepts the control shortcomings in the use of these codes and will be reviewing its processes to ensure their proper use in future.

AHTC notes KPMG’s findings that no duplicate or fictitious payments have been found with respect to its checks on AHTC’s use of dummy vendor codes, and that all payments were supported by documentation.

Extract from page 6 of report, para A.3.2:

In our July 2016 Report, we noted that AHTC’s use of the “dummy” vendor code made it “easier for duplicate payments or fictitious payments to be made without being detected.” We subsequently reviewed all of the 207 payments recorded using the “dummy” one-time supplier code totalling SGD271,598.20 for duplicate or fictitious payments and found none. The payments were supported by documentation relating to purchase and receipt of the goods and/or services.

KPMG noted that AHTC has made the sinking fund payment for Q1 FY2016/17 within the time period required of all Town Councils under the Town Councils Act.

summary of FR
KPMG’s finding in the July Report

WP attacked in July for report on “dummy” supplier code

Earlier in KPMG’s July 2016 Report, it noted that one of AHTC’s procurement policies allows the use of a “dummy” supplier code (“Supplier (One Time)”), for refunds of tender deposits and for other purposes. The value of transactions using this dummy supplier code since its creation in 2015, totalling SGD271,598.20, of which SGD33,170.00 relates to refunds of tender deposits.

After the report was released, individuals such as the Minister of Law and Home Affairs, K Shanmugan lambasted the Workers’ Party on the matter.

He wrote on his Facebook, “The rot is at the top. This should come as no surprise. The High Court and the Court of Appeal have already criticised Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Pritam Singh for suppressing the truth (designed to mislead) both in Parliament and in Court. To them, the truth is a tradable commodity. I will say more about this in another post.”

The minister also wrote that AHTC’s lapses were found by their auditors to be not isolated, but rather “pervasive” and “systemic”.

The minister used harsh words by saying, “KPMG said that AHTC used highly irregular shortcuts to process millions of dollars in payments to related parties, and “suppliers”. It used “dummy” vendor codes for payments, without specifying who the suppliers were. These practices could have concealed duplicate or fraudulent payments. Obviously, WP’s leadership thought they could play Aljunied residents – and Singaporeans — for dummies.”

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

Influx leads to safety issues

I find it increasingly hard to feel safe as a woman in…

电影情节真实上演? 12轿车连环追尾

泛岛高速公路发生连环追尾事件,疑涉及12辆轿车,暂未接获任何伤亡事件。 脸书群组All Singapore Stuff在昨日(8日)将近下午4时,上载了一段长约28秒,涉及多辆轿车追尾事件的视频,引起网民热议。 帖文中还写道,“马路上的连环车祸。小心驾驶。” 视频中只见“相连”的12辆轿车停在右边车道,有些轿车严重受损,连引擎盖都扭曲,但有些则似乎只有轻微碰撞。 其中,还能见到有部分司机和车上乘客下车,查看车子的受损程度。 有关视频上载后至今已经有超过12万7000人观看,还获得615个评论。 网友们纷纷表示,以往在电影中才能看到的情节,没想到会在我国上演。 大部分网民都是首辆轿车忽然停车,导致后来的车子没有及时刹车而酿祸,然而事实还要等待有关当局调查后才证实。 有者则觉得这些驾驶者和车主们要“破财”了,“有钱人”、“后面赔前面的,一直这样下去”、“全部都是贵车,最后的最倒霉”、“完蛋了,最后要陪完”。 网民们也发出类似提醒和谴责的评论,指责这些驾驶者都忘记了要和前面车子保持安全距离的条规,最后只能自食其果了。

人民协会:已有67巴仙家庭领取口罩

随着疫情的蔓延,口罩成为我国市面需求吃紧的商品,政府日前为了让民众能够获得口罩,因此派发520万个口罩给137万户家庭,即每户获得4个口罩。根据统计,已有约67巴仙的家庭领取口罩。 人民协会发布数据,表示已有67巴仙的家庭已领取政府所派发的口罩。 早前,人民协会考虑到有些家庭可能无法在2月9日前领取口罩,因此将领取口罩的期限延长至29日。 需要口罩但未领取的国人,最迟应在明天(29日)到住家附近的民众联络所领取口罩。 至于剩余口罩,人协将归还到国家库存,以确保我国的医疗机构和有需要人士有足够的口罩供应。