• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

PM MisAIMs Again: Another Conflict of Interest Emerges

Wildfire

Alfrescian
Loyal
On hearing that the Prime Minister had ordered a review by the Ministry for National Development (MND) of the business transactions
involving Action Information Management (AIM), a company owned by the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), Andrew, Editor-in-Chief
of Publichouse.sg, reaction was, “Isn’t the Minister for National Development Khaw Boon Wan also the chairman of the PAP, the entity
at the centre of this whole controversy?”

It is a sentiment shared by some others as well.

“As AIM is a company that was set up by members of the PAP, is it in the public interest to task a Ministry that is headed by the chairman
of the PAP to assess the integrity of its transactions?” asks activist Jolovan Wham in his Facebook note.

As the issue at the centre of the controversy involves the business transactions of the 14 PAP town councils with a PAP-owned company,
it is reasonable to expect to see some distance between the review committee and the chairman of the party whose business dealings
are the subject of the review. Otherwise, the apparent or perceived conflict of interests would or might cast doubts on the review itself.

Also, the business transactions took place a long time ago. They did not happen yesterday. The minister, being both the chairman of the
PAP and the minister whose ministry oversees town councils, should have recognised the apparent conflict of interests, and should in fact
have initiated a review or investigation earlier.

“After all, if there was anything untoward in the transaction, shouldn’t MND have spotted it in the first place? It’s like telling MND to go
through self-criticism
,” Bertha Henson wrote on her blog.

As such, the review team should consist of non-PAP, non-MND personnel. “[A] committee comprising independent and respected members
of society from the business community, civil society and the various political parties should be appointed to carry out the investigations,”
Wham suggested.

The controversy over the AIM-PAP issue is one of a conflict of interests. With MND heading the review of the business transactions, another
conflict of interest, perceived or otherwise, has apparently emerged.
 
Last edited:

myfoot123

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Another wayang review, someone is going to get rich out of it again. It was like Ah long getting another Ah Long gang to review whether their business meet its own community ethical standard.
 
Top