TR EMERITUS

Written by Our Correspondent With no opposition to challenge him, Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan spent much of his time in Parliament yesterday heaping generous praises on the existing health policies. He claimed that Singapore's "3M health financing model" was "admired' and studied by others for its ability to provide "good coverage in a cost-effective manner" and these policies came about because of "good" decisions by some people such as Mr Lee Kuan Yew who came up with Medisave and refined by Mr Goh Chok Tong. However Mr Khaw was quick to stress that there is only "so much" the government can do and the individual and family have to take responsibility to care on their own. He related a story of a patient who cared for her disabled husband whom he praised for being a "good" person. "For such people who shouldered their familial responsibilities as caregivers, MOH would go all out to support their caregiving role in the form of good policies, appropriate subsidies and additional home-based support," he was quoted as saying in the Straits Times. Though the Singapore government continues to indulge in self-prase of its much "vaunted" public healthcare system, there are rising concerns on the ground at the escalating costs. There is a common saying among Singaporeans that "one can afford to die in Singapore, but not afford to fall ill." While Singaporeans have to shoulder the responsibility ultimately for caring for their own families, the onus is on the government to come up with a flexible and sensible health policy for all Singaporeans. The access to basic primary healthcare is an innate right of all Singaporeans. Mr Khaw should spend more time to think of ways to lower healthcare costs instead of indulging in self-praise.  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent PBM Jack Neo was dropped by Mitsubishi Electric Asia from its advertisements on the StarMex air-conditioners a few days after his affair with a 22 year old model Wendy Chong was leaked to the public. The Straits Times released a statement from Mitsubishi Electric today in its Life section: "The company is in the midst of withdrawing all advertising materials using Jack Neo in them. We will not be renewing our engagement agreements with J Team Productions." It was not revealed if the sex scandal was the cause for the termination. PBM Jack Neo has been endorsing the air-conditioners for the last two years which had appeared on television and taxis. Arguably the most successful movie director Singapore has produced to date, PBM Jack Neo is also a prominent grassroots leader and personal friend of Foreign Minister George Yeo who jumped immediately to his defence asking Singaporeans to rally around him when the scandal first erupted. He was made to look like a fool when it was subsequently revealed that PBM Jack Neo was involved with at least ten other women besides Wendy Chong, including Foyce Le Xuan whom he tried many times to bed. Two other local companies Bee Cheng Hiang and Goh Joo Hin, which had product placements in Neo's earlier films such as I Not Stupid and Love Matters, declined to speak to the media.  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent After losing a few billion dollars of national reserves, PAP Minister Lim Hwee Hua got the cheek to say it is "not realistic" to avoid losses on every investment made by the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation or GIC. Mrs Lim is responding to PAP MP Madam Ho Geok Choo's request in Parliament for an update on GIC's investments. GIC has suffered disastrous losses in its UBS and Stuyvesant Town investment amounting to more than $10 billion dollars which made international headlines in recent weeks. The state media has been quick to downplay the significance of the losses. What was not mentioned is the cavalier manner in which the investment decisions appeared to be made. For example, it was revealed by Bloomberg that GIC took only 3 days to make the decision to invest in UBS: “Marcel Ospel, then chairman of Zurich-based UBS, called GIC Chief Investment Officer Ng Kok Song, according to comments they made at the time. Talks began on Dec. 6, 2007, and by the evening of Dec. 9, GIC had committed to make its biggest single purchase at the time,” Bloomberg reported. [Source: Bloomberg, 1 March 2010] Mrs Lim claimed that both GIC and Temasek Holdings have so far delivered 'creditable' returns on their portfolios over the "long term" without substantiating her statements. Nobody expects GIC never to make any losses, but Singaporeans do expect a minimal degree of accountability and transparency in the management of Singapore's reserves which are accumulated over years of budget surpluses. It is not realistic to lose billions of dollars and still allow the same people to sit on the boards of GIC and Temasek Holdings. Neither is it realistic to expect people with no prior experience in the finance industry to head the two funds. And it is definitely not realistic for Mrs Lim to pluck figures out of thin air without opening the account books for auditing. Are we getting the best people to run GIC and Temasek Holdings? Definitely not, according to U.S investment guru Jim Rogers who questioned the intelligence of GIC fund managers after they made the hasty decision to invest in UBS: “I know these people, and they have never given me the impression that they’re smarter than anyone else. They have gigantic amounts of money, but they’ve made a bad judgment in these cases.” Mrs Lim should stop hiding behind the lame excuse of "long term returns" to defend GIC's dismal performance. If every single investment is assessed on the basis of "long term returns", then every Tom, Dick and Harry can be a fund manager including our own Harry Lee who said in the aftermath of the "blood-letting": “When we invest, we are investing for 10, 15, 20 years. You may look as if you are making a big loss today, but you have not borrowed money to invest. You will ride the storm, the company recovers, your shares go up.” [Source: CNA, 6 Feb 2009] We are sitting on actual and paper losses of billions of dollars. Imagine if a fraction of it is re-invested in Singaporeans within a ten year period instead of waiting for the shares to go up. It is not realistic for the PAP to play around with the hard-earned savings of Singaporeans like that. The reserves belong to every citizen of Singapore - our grandparents, parents and children and not to them. In private investment firms, CEOs and entire boards of directors can be sacked based on one wrong investment decision, but in Singapore, the same old people remain secured in their positions, is this realistic? If it is not realistic for GIC to avoid such gigantic losses in the future, then perhaps its Chairman should consider stepping down in a favor of a more qualified and experienced fund manager.   Related articles: 1. GIC incurs more than$7 billion loss in its UBS investment 2. Straits Times downplay GIC losses 3. GIC may have lost more than $13 billion dollars in its UBS investment on paper 4. GIC’s UBS investment: A chronicle of a disaster in the making 5. GIC’s $14 billion investment in UBS in jeopardy after it faces collapse 6. Dr Tony Tan: GIC in good shape  Read More →