Breaking: Old Fart to Sue WSJA AGAIN?!

makapaaa · Aug 27, 2009

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=452><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top width=452 colSpan=2>Published August 27, 2009

</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top width=452 colSpan=2>Government rebuts WSJ Asia's editorial on Temasek

By LEE U-WEN
<TABLE class=storyLinks border=0 cellSpacing=4 cellPadding=1 width=136 align=right><TBODY><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right>

</TD><TD>Email this article</TD></TR><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right>

</TD><TD>Print article </TD></TR><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right>

</TD><TD>Feedback</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
(SINGAPORE) The Finance Ministry has rejected a number of 'unfounded claims' made by The Wall Street Journal Asia (WSJA) in a recent editorial on Temasek Holdings that called into question the organisation's transparency.

In that editorial last Thursday, WSJA writer Mary Kissel said that the Singapore government 'will only disclose what it deems acceptable' with regard to how the investment company performs.
Ms Kissel went on to say that given that Temasek lost over $40 billion between March 2008 and March this year, 'there is an argument for more outside scrutiny from Parliament'.
On Aug 18, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam was asked in Parliament about transparency over Temasek's investments, as well as the reasons behind the sudden U-turn when Charles 'Chip' Goodyear resigned as its CEO-designate.
In a letter to Ms Kissel on Tuesday, Mr Tharman's press secretary, Chin Sau Ho, said that the government takes a 'principled approach' in what it discloses on Temasek, and not just what it deems acceptable.
'It discloses all relevant information that Singaporeans need to judge Temasek's performance as a long-term investor, favourable or otherwise. But it does not believe that either government or Parliament should become engaged in Temasek's investment strategies or internal governance.'
<SCRIPT language=javascript>  </SCRIPT><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=4 width=300 align=right><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top align=middle>

<IFRAME height=250 marginHeight=0 src="http://ads.asia1.com.sg/html.ng/site=tbto&sec=btointhenews&cat1=bnews&cat2=btointhenewsart&size=300X250" frameBorder=0 width=300 marginWidth=0 scrolling=no bordercolor="#000000"><script language='JavaScript1.1' src='http://ads.asia1.com.sg/js.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&site=tbto&sec=btointhenews&cat1=bnews&cat2=btointhenewsart&size=300X250'></script><noscript>

</noscript></IFRAME>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Doing so, he explained, would 'politicise' Temasek's operations, and prevent the company from managing its portfolio professionally and sustaining good, long-term performance.
Mr Chin went on to say that Temasek discloses 'well beyond' what it is required to by law - it publishes its total shareholder returns each year over various time horizons, as well as the portfolio value for each year since its inception in 1974. 'Temasek's accounts are audited by reputable international auditors.'
On Ms Kissel's statement that Temasek had sustained losses since March last year, Mr Chin noted how she had left out other facts raised in Parliament - that Temasek's annualised returns of 15 per cent from 2003 until November 2008 had exceeded relevant market indices and many comparable investment entities worldwide.
Mr Chin also clarified the statement that claimed that the government did not favour a non-Singaporean as CEO of Temasek.
'As the Finance Minister told Parliament, while it is ideal to have a Singaporean, this is not always possible as the field of candidates with experience in running international operations is narrow.'
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

makapaaa · Aug 27, 2009

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=452><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top width=452 colSpan=2>Published August 27, 2009

</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top width=452 colSpan=2>Government rebuts WSJ Asia's editorial on Temasek

By LEE U-WEN
<TABLE class=storyLinks border=0 cellSpacing=4 cellPadding=1 width=136 align=right><TBODY><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right>

</TD><TD>Email this article</TD></TR><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right>

</TD><TD>Print article </TD></TR><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right>

</TD><TD>Feedback</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
(SINGAPORE) The Finance Ministry has rejected a number of 'unfounded claims' made by The Wall Street Journal Asia (WSJA) in a recent editorial on Temasek Holdings that called into question the organisation's transparency.

In that editorial last Thursday, WSJA writer Mary Kissel said that the Singapore government 'will only disclose what it deems acceptable' with regard to how the investment company performs.
Ms Kissel went on to say that given that Temasek lost over $40 billion between March 2008 and March this year, 'there is an argument for more outside scrutiny from Parliament'.
On Aug 18, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam was asked in Parliament about transparency over Temasek's investments, as well as the reasons behind the sudden U-turn when Charles 'Chip' Goodyear resigned as its CEO-designate.
In a letter to Ms Kissel on Tuesday, Mr Tharman's press secretary, Chin Sau Ho, said that the government takes a 'principled approach' in what it discloses on Temasek, and not just what it deems acceptable.
'It discloses all relevant information that Singaporeans need to judge Temasek's performance as a long-term investor, favourable or otherwise. But it does not believe that either government or Parliament should become engaged in Temasek's investment strategies or internal governance.'
<SCRIPT language=javascript>  </SCRIPT>
=> What's so irrelevant of Sporns wanting to know why Goodyear was forced out? Temasick belongs to 1 Familee or Sporns?

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=4 width=300 align=right><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top align=middle>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Doing so, he explained, would 'politicise' Temasek's operations, and prevent the company from managing its portfolio professionally and sustaining good, long-term performance.
Mr Chin went on to say that Temasek discloses 'well beyond' what it is required to by law - it publishes its total shareholder returns each year over various time horizons, as well as the portfolio value for each year since its inception in 1974. 'Temasek's accounts are audited by reputable international auditors.'
On Ms Kissel's statement that Temasek had sustained losses since March last year, Mr Chin noted how she had left out other facts raised in Parliament - that Temasek's annualised returns of 15 per cent from 2003 until November 2008 had exceeded relevant market indices and many comparable investment entities worldwide.
=> Compare with 1950s thingy again? Sounds like Ho Jinx and company weren't paid their salaries from 2003! If not, why insist on fudging the figure behind long time frame? Fact remains that Ho Jinx and Daddy-in-Law lost $270B in 8 months while Sporns were told $ no enuff to help them.

Mr Chin also clarified the statement that claimed that the government did not favour a non-Singaporean as CEO of Temasek.
'As the Finance Minister told Parliament, while it is ideal to have a Singaporean, this is not always possible as the field of candidates with experience in running international operations is narrow.'

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>=> Indeed, none is competent within the Familee to do anything apart from using its kangaroo court to persecute critics. Yet these CCB corrupt traitors are not prepared to allow Sporns outside of the Familee to run the show. What utter rubbish is this!

Breaking: Old Fart to Sue WSJA AGAIN?!

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)

makapaaa

Alfrescian (Inf)

Similar threads