PA's "Stellar" Reply to Sear Hock Rong Affair

[scroobal]

http://utopia8787.blogspot.com/2010/01/pas-reply-on-eunos-grassroots-enquiry.html

Monday, January 25, 2010
PA's reply on Eunos Grassroots Enquiry
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:23 PM, PA wrote:

Dear Alex,

We refer to your email dated 1 January 2010.

We have checked the transactions between Mr Sear Hock Rong's company, R2E
Concepts, and the Eunos Grassroots Organisations. We observed no
impropriety in the transactions.

Thank you for your query.

Ms Adlina Jaffar | Head | Corporate Communications Division | (Embedded
image moved to file: pic20259.gif)
People’s Association | 9 King George’s Avenue Singapore 208581 | DID: 6340
5430 | FAX: 6348 5977 | www.pa.gov.sg

Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this message. If
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
My reply to PA:

Hi People's Association

I thank you for your reply, but your answers do not prove there is no
impropriety in the transactions.

Questions regarding R2E and Eunos Grassroots Organization:

1) May I ask to access the transaction files of R2E and Eunos Grassroots pertaining to the following clients:
Eunos Citizens' Consultative Committee Eunos Zone '1' Residents' Committee
Eunos Zone '3' Residents' Committee
Eunos Zone '5' Residents' Committee
PAP Community Foundation Eunos

2) Cost of each Tender

3) Name of suppliers who quoted for teach Tender

4) What are the exact services provided by R2E for each transaction?

5) Identity of each member of the Constituency Tender Committee.

Questions regarding the People's Association:

1) How many People's Association Grassroots Leaders are PAP members?

2) What exact benefits do Grassroots Leaders have from joining the Grassroot Schemes?

I'm sorry to inform you that Singaporeans will feel insulted reading this patronizing email.

Please treat Singaporeans with respect.

Alex Tan Zhixiang
S87xxxxxx
9xxxxxxx
Jalan xxxxxx Blk xx #xx-xxxSingapore xxxxxx

This message is forwarded to all 2785 members of the Facebook Group "VOTE FOR CHANGE, VOTE THE PAP OUT" and Mr Teo Ser Luck(YPAP Chairman), Zaqy Mohammad(YPAP Vice Chairman), Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed(MP for Aljunied GRC (Eunos))

 

[Getloud]

'Please treat Singaporeans with respect.'

I like to see that statement more often.

 

[scroobal]

I wonder is old man is prepared to put his money where his mouth is and come clean on using taxpayers fund for PAP agenda via PA. If this prick is indeed clean, honest and possesses a modicum of integrity, he will give instructions to botak to give the answers to all of Alex's questions.
1) None of the questions fall within the meaning of State Secrets
2) PA is a statutory board funded by taxpayers and is obliged to provide answers that are of public importance
3) PA is not operating in the commercial sector and therefore cannot rely on exuses such as commercial in confidence.
4) Tan Boon Huat is an Admin Service staff who is protected by the Public Service Commission and has to act in a manner that serves the country and not one particular party.

I cannot think of a single reason why PA should hold back on any of these answers.

Singaporeans of all hues and persuasions should not erroneously conclude that these fall outside the self serving definition of GCT's doctrine of OB markers.

Kudos to Alex Tan and SPP for raising these questions. We need Singaporeans like Alex who is not afraid to seek answers.

 

[Brightkid]

........
I cannot think of a single reason why PA should hold back on any of these answers.

......

If someone or a company goes...'uh'......'ha?'......'hmmm'........or silence/avoiding answering questions......etc.......that means the answer is positive and in agreement with them questions/accusation.

Not I say wan. Someone during a parliment sitting couple years back said so during a cross-fire with LTK.

 

[Papsmearer]

I wonder why the CPIB is so quiet on this matter. If the PA has nothing to hide, they should welcome an outside investigation via a chartered accountant, or something like this. CPIB always has no balls to investigate PAP elites in favour.

 

[annexa]

PAP foundation is not under PA la.

 

[Internet Brigade]

I wonder is old man is prepared to put his money where his mouth is and come clean on using taxpayers fund for PAP agenda via PA. If this prick is indeed clean, honest and possesses a modicum of integrity, he will give instructions to botak to give the answers to all of Alex's questions.
1) None of the questions fall within the meaning of State Secrets
2) PA is a statutory board funded by taxpayers and is obliged to provide answers that are of public importance
3) PA is not operating in the commercial sector and therefore cannot rely on exuses such as commercial in confidence.
4) Tan Boon Huat is an Admin Service staff who is protected by the Public Service Commission and has to act in a manner that serves the country and not one particular party.

I cannot think of a single reason why PA should hold back on any of these answers.

Singaporeans of all hues and persuasions should not erroneously conclude that these fall outside the self serving definition of GCT's doctrine of OB markers.

Kudos to Alex Tan and SPP for raising these questions. We need Singaporeans like Alex who is not afraid to seek answers.

Why should the PA bow to the demands of a cyber terrorist rabble rouser?

State secrets have not been quoted so why did you pluck it out of the air? Because you want us to think there is something to hide when there is nothing.

 

[streetsmart73]

I wonder why the CPIB is so quiet on this matter. If the PA has nothing to hide, they should welcome an outside investigation via a chartered accountant, or something like this. CPIB always has no balls to investigate PAP elites in favour.

hi there

1. bro, when pigs have wings mah!
2. this is sinkieland transparency 101

 

[Internet Brigade]

hi there

1. bro, when pigs have wings mah!
2. this is sinkieland transparency 101

And since when has CPIB announced they will be investigating anything? Shall i also inform you each time i wish to take a piss?

 

[oli9]

http://utopia8787.blogspot.com/2010/01/pas-reply-on-eunos-grassroots-enquiry.html

Monday, January 25, 2010
PA's reply on Eunos Grassroots Enquiry
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:23 PM, PA wrote:

Dear Alex,

We refer to your email dated 1 January 2010.

We have checked the transactions between Mr Sear Hock Rong's company, R2E
Concepts, and the Eunos Grassroots Organisations. We observed no
impropriety in the transactions.

Thank you for your query.

Ms Adlina Jaffar | Head | Corporate Communications Division | (Embedded
image moved to file: pic20259.gif)
People’s Association | 9 King George’s Avenue Singapore 208581 | DID: 6340
5430 | FAX: 6348 5977 | www.pa.gov.sg

Not surprise with this kind of reply. look at the name again.
Ms ADLINA JAFFAR. I think a Malay footballer can string more passes than
she can string a few intelligent response.

 

[kingrant]

A Comission of Inquiry is better.

 

[makapaaa]

'Please treat Singaporeans with respect.'

I like to see that statement more often.

Respect has to be earned. And as long as there are 66% GOONDUs out in force on Polling Day, be glad that the PAPee Traitors donch pee and shit on Sporns after that.

 

[halsey02]

Why should the PA bow to the demands of a cyber terrorist rabble rouser?

State secrets have not been quoted so why did you pluck it out of the air? Because you want us to think there is something to hide when there is nothing.

The taxpayer's wether a internet rebel rouser or so called cyber terrorists, demands an accoutabiility.

The accused must open his books to show that he is whiter than white...where there is smoke, there is fire...

All of us who opposes, critizes, stand up for our rights are 'rebel rouser's, cyer terrorists'...there is an equivalent in old China Tang Dynasty..

Then, the MIW's are now terrorists too, by embracing the communist conrades, they once termed them as rebel rouser..or have the tag being switched??

 

[Internet Brigade]

The taxpayer's wether a internet rebel rouser or so called cyber terrorists, demands an accoutabiility.

The accused must open his books to show that he is whiter than white...where there is smoke, there is fire...

All of us who opposes, critizes, stand up for our rights are 'rebel rouser's, cyer terrorists'...there is an equivalent in old China Tang Dynasty..

Then, the MIW's are now terrorists too, by embracing the communist conrades, they once termed them as rebel rouser..or have the tag being switched??

There are limits to accountability and transparency. Not to forget there are corporate responsibilities to uphold.

Public disclosures of internal practices and semi-private tenders are not within the right of the tax payer.

 

[halsey02]

There are limits to accountability and transparency. Not to forget there are corporate responsibilities to uphold.

Public disclosures of internal practices and semi-private tenders are not within the right of the tax payer.

True!, but when there is an outcry for accountability...espcially when public interest is involved..it must be shown...

I believe that there are declarartion in place too, when joining any organization the person's interests & relations in joining that organization, especially one like the RC..

Are you saying that, we do not know what is goverance, audits & checks??..

is this the same as 'it is not our interest to know, about GIC..Temasek...thhis is also in the same vein??

as in private tenders..etc..

if one does not 'smoke the hive'...the bees will not get defensive..if one tells the truth...there is no need to shout to the mountain.."there is nothing to hide"...

 

[Highfalutin]

[COLOR="_______"]Different Strokes for Different Folks. It's Good To Be King!:p[/COLOR]



OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL DONATIONS LAW


1. The Political Donations Act (Cap. 236) and its Regulations came into operation on 15 February 2001.


2. Political Donations Act (Cap. 236)

a. The Act seeks to prevent foreigners from interfering in Singapore's domestic politics through funding of candidates and political associations.
b. It prohibits political associations and candidates from accepting donations except from permissible donors, and restricts the receipt of anonymous donations to less than S$5,000 in total per reporting period.
c. It also requires the three following groups of people:

• Political associations, which comprise all political parties registered under the Societies Act, and any organisation whose objects or activities relate wholly or mainly to politics in Singapore and is gazetted as a political association under the Act
• Any person who is or desires to be a candidate of any election and his election agents
• Donors who have made multiple small donations with an aggregate value of S$10,000 or more to a political association in a calendar year
to file donation reports periodically with the Registrar of Political Donations.




3. Political Donations Regulations
a. The Regulations spell out the procedures for filing of donation reports by the three affected groups of people mentioned above and surrendering of anonymous donations.
b. It set out the procedures for the application, issue and collection of the political donation certificate, which any individual seeking election to Parliament or the office of President must produce to the Returning Officer on Nomination Day in order to be validly nominated as a candidate.
c. It also requires receipts to be issued by recipients of cash donations.


4. The Registry of Political Donations administers the Act and its Regulations. It is located within Elections Department at the following address:

11 Prinsep Link
Singapore 187949
Tel: 1800-2221808 1800-2221808
Fax: 6332 3428

 

[scroobal]

You really took his word hook, line and sinker. PA is not a private company or a public listed company. Its a government body and do not share the privacy privileges of a company or someone's personal financial details.

PA is a public institution. Any query of this nature anywhere in the 1st world or even in a democratic country has to be explained and details released. Many people do not deal with public institutions because they can't have the privacy that companies and private entities have. Furthermore it is not providing commercial services but public sector related services so there is not commercial in confidence basis not to disclose.

There is a reasonable basis for the query.
1) This guy has been tagged as a failure in the civil service and his probation extended. He quit.
2) Within 6 months he got a string of contracts with no track record whatsoever.

True!, but when there is an outcry for accountability...espcially when public interest is involved..it must be shown...

 

[scroobal]

You really took his word hook, line and sinker. PA is not a private company or a public listed company. Its a government body and do not share the privacy privileges of a company or someone's personal financial details.

PA is a public institution. Any query of this nature anywhere in the 1st world or even in a democratic country has to be explained and details released. Many people do not deal with public institutions because they can't have the privacy that companies and private entities have. Furthermore it is not providing commercial services but public sector related services so there is not commercial in confidence basis not to disclose.

There is a reasonable basis for the query.
1) This guy has been tagged as a failure in the civil service and his probation extended. He quit.
2) Within 6 months he got a string of contracts with no track record whatsoever.

ps. when someone bolds or increases his font size, it has no relation to the veracity of that comment.

 

[Internet Brigade]

True!, but when there is an outcry for accountability...espcially when public interest is involved..it must be shown...

I believe that there are declarartion in place too, when joining any organization the person's interests & relations in joining that organization, especially one like the RC..

Are you saying that, we do not know what is goverance, audits & checks??..

is this the same as 'it is not our interest to know, about GIC..Temasek...thhis is also in the same vein??

as in private tenders..etc..

if one does not 'smoke the hive'...the bees will not get defensive..if one tells the truth...there is no need to shout to the mountain.."there is nothing to hide"...

I think "public outcry" is a term too often abused. Especially by the likes of Temasek Review that claims to know that the whole cyber nation is up in arms everytime a speech is made.

Information on GIC & Temasek is withheld for competitive reasons (which ultimately is in the interest of the larger society).

Surrendering public accounts to one man who claims to represent the larger public would be irresponsible. Imagine I wrote to POSB and said i want to have the transactions statements of all members of RCs and CCCs and civil servants. And they complied because i am a tax payer and some forummers agree that i should have access..... chaos....

 

[Internet Brigade]

You really took his word hook, line and sinker. PA is not a private company or a public listed company. Its a government body and do not share the privacy privileges of a company or someone's personal financial details.

PA is a public institution. Any query of this nature anywhere in the 1st world or even in a democratic country has to be explained and details released. Many people do not deal with public institutions because they can't have the privacy that companies and private entities have. Furthermore it is not providing commercial services but public sector related services so there is not commercial in confidence basis not to disclose.

There is a reasonable basis for the query.
1) This guy has been tagged as a failure in the civil service and his probation extended. He quit.
2) Within 6 months he got a string of contracts with no track record whatsoever.

Scroobal,

Engaging in your misdirection again.

PA is a public institution but it engages private institutions for services. As do all the ministries. When there are irregularities, they will be spotted and those responsible are dealt with by the Public Accounts Committee and the AG.

It is not in the PA's obligations to answer queries pertaining to private transactions.