The naivety of the PAP government

[Eisenhut]

So easy to cheat the CPF Board.
Surely this is not the only case.

Man, 71, gets jail for cheating CPF Board into giving him income support for over 10 years​

Tan Kah Poh was sentenced to 18 weeks' jail for two counts of cheating CPF Board. ST PHOTO: KELVIN CHNG

Jan 28, 2022

SINGAPORE - For over a decade, the elderly man duped the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board into thinking that he and his wife were employees of a company earning $1,000 a month so they would get payouts and CPF contributions.
This led CPF Board to disburse more than $86,000 to Tan Kah Poh, 71, his wife, Toh Poh Choo, 70, and the defunct company he was the sole director of.
On Friday (Jan 28), Tan was sentenced to 18 weeks' jail for two counts of cheating CPF Board. Two other similar charges were taken into account for his sentencing.
The court heard that Toh and his wife had no formal employment and gave Mandarin tuition occasionally.
In 2008, Tan wanted Toh to be eligible for government grants for Singaporean employees and began submitting to CPF Board the Ordinary Wages portions of payment advices from International Times, falsely indicating that Toh was an employee receiving a monthly salary of $1,000.
International Times used to publish newspapers, magazines and books but has been dormant since 2000, said Deputy Public Prosecutor Ng Jean Ting.
The Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) was introduced by the Ministry of Manpower in 2007 to support Singaporean employees whose earnings are in the bottom 20 per cent of the population. It is administered by the CPF Board.

Under the WIS, Singaporean employees will receive CPF top-ups for their retirement savings and a cash supplement if they have an income of less than $2,000, are Singaporean, and are more than 35 years old on Dec 31 of the work year, among other requirements.
Between September 2008 and October 2009, Toh received payouts from CPF Board totalling $2,101.
Tan was notified about these payouts through letters sent by CPF Board to their home.


In 2010, Tan began submitting his own name and listed his monthly salary as $1,000 too.
He made CPF contributions to his account through International Times as employer CPF contributions, even though he knew that he was not a salaried employee.
This went on till 2019 and CPF disbursed a total of $35,259 in cash to the couple. A total of $32,596 was disbursed in CPF contributions.
Between 2011 and 2019, CPF Board paid out $18,150 to International Times under the Special Employment Credit scheme which was meant to support employers and raise the employability of Singaporeans above 50 years of age.


CPF Board also paid out $300 to the company under the Temporary Employment Credit scheme which was introduced in 2014 to help with the rise in business costs to employers.
DPP Ng told the court that Tan made full restitution of all the payouts received by him, Toh and International Times.
She urged the court to sentence Tan to 18 to 22 weeks imprisonment, noting that deterrence is the dominant sentencing consideration for cases involving Government fraud.
"The need for deterrence is to safeguard national resources," she said.
The Straits Times has contacted MOM for comment.
Tan will begin serving his sentence on Feb 16.

71 yr old also must jail??? Singkee cheat pap is cardinal sin, FT cheat pap sweep under carpet

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Trying to address one woke issue but end up pushing the problems to the Sinkies who have to buy their own plastic bags, and this does not curb the use of plastic bags.

Forum: Demand will not be affected by plastic bag charge​

Jan 31, 2022

The demand for plastic bags is significant in Singapore, where the majority of residents live in high-rise buildings and use plastic bags for waste disposal.
The proposed charge for disposable bags will not reduce the actual demand for them, but will just make people pay for the bags instead (Disposable bags may cost you 5 to 10 cents from 2023, Jan 28).
For supermarkets, there is little incentive to look into better solutions when shoppers are the ones who will bear the cost of it all.
Also, since this is like a green tax, instead of being collected by supermarkets, the proceeds should go to the Government for the greater good.
I hope the National Environment Agency can reconsider the proposed charge and seek other solutions to save the environment.

Too Kah Sam

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

More than 9 years' jail for man who cheated Iras into disbursing over $11.8m in productivity grants​

Lim Chit Foo and two accomplices set up more than 200 shell companies to make false claims. ST PHOTO: KUA CHEE SIONG

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Court Correspondent

Mar 7, 2022

SINGAPORE - A man and his two accomplices created more than 200 shell companies to obtain productivity grants, unlawfully obtaining over $11.8 million from the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (Iras).
On Monday (March 7), Lim Chit Foo, now 38, was sentenced to nine years and four months' jail. The Singaporean had pleaded guilty to 20 cheating charges in January.
The court heard that he had two accomplices - Wang Jiao, 39, and Li Dan, 38.
Some time before April 2015, Lim hatched a plan to make false claims under the Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) scheme, which granted cash payouts and bonuses to eligible companies to spur productivity.
From 2015 to 2016, the trio set up more than 200 shell companies and paid people to be nominee directors.
False claims were submitted under the PIC scheme for fictitious expenses incurred by the shell companies in the form of software and Web-based system purchases.
In one instance, Wang and Li got to know Chua Phoi Yong and told him that they needed a Singaporean who was not bankrupt to set up companies for them.

Li proposed to set up the companies in Chua's name and promised Chua that if the firms were profitable, he would get a cut of the profits.
Chua allegedly agreed and gave the fraudsters his Singpass ID and password to set up the businesses.
Between Oct 28, 2015, and May 25, 2016, Chua was appointed director of G & G Prestige.


On Li's instructions allegedly, he opened a bank account for the company and pre-signed blank cheques so that Li could withdraw money from the account at any time.
According to court documents, Wang and Li then submitted fraudulent PIC claims to Iras under the name of G & G.
Iras disbursed nearly $45,000 to the company's bank account on Jan 22, 2016.
The court heard that the trio repeated this mode of operation with more than 200 shell companies, and received around $11,793,000 from Iras.
Court documents state that in September 2016, a man working with the trio submitted documents to Iras which the agency suspected were forged.

Investigations found that there were more than 400 PIC applications submitted by the shell companies between 2015 and 2016.
In an earlier proceeding, Deputy Public Prosecutor Eric Hu told the court that only around $455,000 in funds have been recovered to date.
He added that Iras would have disbursed a further $8,487,000 to the swindlers had their PIC applications for these claims been successful.
Lim was represented by lawyer Bachoo Mohan Singh who told the court that his client is "deeply remorseful and wants nothing more than to put the matter behind him".
Mr Singh added: "He would like to inform this honourable court that he will not repeat such a mistake in the future and intends to engage in any rehabilitative techniques for the purpose of improving his moral worthiness."
For each count of abetment by conspiracy to commit cheating, an offender can be jailed for up to 10 years and fined.
The cases involving Wang and Li are still pending.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Motor vehicle importer fined $5.6 million for evading Customs duty and GST on 464 vehicles​

Lin Junjiang, the sole proprietor of J21 Imports, under-declared the value of the vehicles in 2016. ST PHOTO: CHONG JUN LIANG

Kok Yufeng
Transport Correspondent

Mar 9, 2022

SINGAPORE - A Singaporean motor vehicle importer was fined about $5.63 million on Wednesday (March 9) for evading Customs duty and goods and services tax (GST) on 464 vehicles he had imported into Singapore.
He had done this in 2016 by under-declaring their value.
As he did not pay the fine, Lin Junjiang, 39, was instead jailed for three years and four months in default.
He also has to serve an additional four weeks in prison for underpaying the additional registration fee (ARF) of some of these vehicles.
In a statement on Thursday, Singapore Customs said Lin, the sole proprietor of J21 Imports, pleaded guilty to an offence under the Customs Act and another offence under the Road Traffic Act for giving incorrect information related to vehicle tax.
A second Customs-related charge was taken into consideration during sentencing.
Singapore Customs said it started investigating J21 Imports after it noticed that the company did not declare the value of optional features for the 464 vehicles in order for the agency to assess the duty and GST payable on them.

The vehicles were imported into Singapore over a five-month period between June and November 2016.
Investigations revealed that two invoices would be prepared for each imported vehicle transaction.
The first invoice would state the partial value of the vehicle, while the other invoice would indicate the vehicle's balance value and falsely describe it as a "liaison fee".
J21 Imports had only declared the partial value in the first invoice but failed to declare the "liaison fee", despite knowing that this amount had to be declared, Singapore Customs said.
The intentional omission of the "liaison fee" from these declarations resulted in a shortfall of about $704,000 in Customs duties and about $295,000 in GST payments.
Singapore Customs said the under-declaration of the values of 67 of the 464 vehicles also led to an ARF shortfall of about $567,000, which was to be paid to the Land Transport Authority.

It added that members of the public with information on smuggling activities or evasion of duty or GST can call the Singapore Customs hotline on 1800-233-0000 or e-mail it at [email protected]
Anyone convicted of the fraudulent evasion of Customs duty or excise duty can be fined up to 20 times the amount of duty and GST evaded.
For giving incorrect information related to vehicle tax, those convicted can be fined up to $10,000 or be jailed for up to six months.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Jail for man linked to scammer who had cheated Iras into disbursing over $11.8m in grants​

Maurice Tan Wei Qiang was sentenced to 10 months' jail on March 11, 2022. ST PHOTO: KELVIN CHNG

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Court Correspondent

Mar 11, 2022

SINGAPORE - A man was sentenced on Friday (March 11) to 10 months' jail over his role in a ruse linked to scammer Lim Chit Foo, who had duped the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (Iras) into disbursing more than $11.8million in productivity grants.
The court heard that Maurice Tan Wei Qiang, now 39, had acted on Lim's instructions and played an active part in facilitating the retention of criminal benefits.
Tan was also a director of shell companies that were used to unlawfully submit Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) claims to Iras. They included Creliable and Kezro.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Eric Hu said that as a result of Tan's "knowing disregard of of his directorial duties", fraudulent PIC claims were made to cheat Iras of more than $250,000.
He was ordered on Friday to serve a jail term after he pleaded guilty to three charges under the Companies Act.
As part of his sentence, he is also disqualified from acting as a director or taking part in the management of a company for five years.
Both Tan and Lim are Singaporeans.

On Monday, Lim, now 38, was sentenced to nine years and four months' jail. He had pleaded guilty s in January to 20 cheating charge.
The court heard that the PIC scheme, administered by Iras, was a government subsidy open to all Singapore-registered companies that have active business operations here and employ at least three local employees.
Under the initiative, which expired in 2018, companies could convert qualifying expenditure which they had incurred, such as purchases of IT and automation equipment, into cash payouts.

The DPP said that Tan first met Lim through a mutual friend some time around 2008 to 2010. Tan then started working for him.
Some time before April 2015, Lim hatched a plan to make false claims under the PIC scheme.
He also proposed to Tan that the latter's name be used for purposes that include incorporating new companies.
The prosecutor added: "Lim also told the accused that as part of the packaging of the companies, Lim would be doing PIC claim submissions for the companies. Lim told the accused that he intended to claim for a higher qualifying expenditure than what was actually incurred.
"As the accused would be the registered director of these companies, Lim promised the accused between $3,000 and $6,000 as commission for approved PIC claims made in the companies' names."
As Tan was already working for Lim at the time, he agreed to be registered as the director of various companies. Tan also knew that the firms had no business or operations at all.
The companies were later used to cheat Iras.
DPP Hu told the court: "(Tan) was not involved in the submission of PIC claims in the names of the companies and was not aware of the details of the claims."
Tan was, however, aware that the claims were not genuine, the court heard.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Two men fined more than $33,000 in total for cheating LTA in trailer weighing ruse​

Loh Yeok Lum (left) and Chua Cheng Kang used a modified trailer on 21 occasions to dupe the LTA. ST PHOTOS: KELVIN CHNG

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Court Correspondent

MAR 22, 2022

SINGAPORE - Two drivers in an engineering company worked together to cheat the Land Transport Authority (LTA) in a ruse involving metal beams being welded onto a trailer to make it heavier so it could pass inspection.
The modified trailer was then used for multiple inspections.
In a statement on Tuesday (March 22), the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) said that all newly manufactured trailers must pass the registration inspection before they are allowed on the roads.
On 21 occasions between October 2010 and April 2012, the Singaporean men duped the LTA into believing that the company's trailers were compliant with the approved technical drawings when they were not.
At the time of the offences, the men were working for Sin Trans Engineering, which manufactures and repairs trailers.
Loh Yeok Lum, 67, was fined $17,500 on Tuesday after he pleaded guilty to seven counts of cheating. Seventeen other charges were considered during sentencing.
The other offender, Chua Cheng Kang, 65, admitted to seven cheating charges and was fined $15,750.He had 14 other charges taken into consideration during sentencing.

In its statement, the CPIB said that as drivers employed by Sin Trans, the pair's duties included sending newly manufactured trailers to JIC Inspection Services for registration inspection.
JIC, a subsidiary of testing laboratories company Vicom, is one of LTA's authorised inspection centres with weighing facilities.
The CPIB said the inspection includes weighing the trailer to ensure its unladen weight is within acceptable margins of what is specified in the approved technical drawings.

Investigations by the CPIB revealed that in 2010, Sin Trans' trailers failed their registration inspections as they were found to be lighter than what was stated in the approved technical drawings.
The bureau added: "In order to pass the inspection, Loh purchased two metal beams - one weighing one tonne and another at 300kg - and arranged to weld the metal beams onto the trailer to increase its weight to the required range.
"With this method, the said trailer managed to pass the inspection. Loh would often pass off the same trailer, which he had welded the beams to, for multiple other Sin Trans trailers' inspection."

To successfully perpetuate this deception, Loh would also alter the chassis number of the modified trailer.
Loh then explained this method to Chua, who drove the modified trailer for inspection and witnessed the weighing.
After using this method for about six months, Loh started to weigh part of a prime mover together with the underweight trailers in order to pass the inspection. Loh also shared this method with Chua.
CPIB investigations revealed that Loh had also engaged in a conspiracy with two JIC inspection officers to cheat the LTA into issuing registration approval codes for Sin Trans trailers on three occasions in February 2014.
For each count of cheating, an offender can be jailed for up to three years and fined.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

"Together, we can build a kinder and more tolerant and considerate Singapore."

Totally naive for the PAP government to wait for all Sinkies, PRs, and foreign talent to be kind and tolerant.

Forum: Advisory panel seeks public views for recommendations report on noisy neighbours​

Jul 14, 2022

I refer to the recent letters and Straits Times commentary on neighbourhood noise (Dealing with noisy neighbours from hell, July 3).
Since the Community Advisory Panel (CAP) on Neighbourhood Noise was convened, many people have come forward to share their experiences with neighbourhood noise. In many cases, noise disputes were resolved amicably when people approached their neighbours to discuss the issue.
Some others, however, may not have been as fortunate. We empathise with the various situations that residents face in dealing with neighbours whose activities generate noise so disruptive that they are unable to work or rest properly in their own homes.
Unfortunately, noise is subjective. People have different tolerance levels for noise and varying definitions of what constitutes unacceptable noise. It is thus challenging for government agencies to respond with enforcement.
We have observed from our public engagements that noise thresholds tend to be highly contextualised depending on specific factors - for example, frequency, duration, state of mind, or the relationship between the parties involved.
The CAP was therefore convened to help define unacceptable noisy behaviours and recommend community norms. This is the first step in establishing common reference points to guide residents' behaviour, and to empower residents in resolving their disputes among themselves.
In the event that the issues cannot be resolved among residents, the relevant agencies can use these norms as a reference for downstream interventions, such as mediation at the Community Mediation Centre, or in assessing claims with the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal.

The panel is also considering what more can be done, and will be making further recommendations in our report.
To propose a set of community norms that is truly representative of societal consensus, it is vital for us to consult widely. We need to understand the needs of the various segments of our society, how residents define unacceptable noise, and the actions they are willing to adopt in addressing noise concerns on the ground.
We hope that the public can support the work of the panel.
I encourage those who have not contributed their views to do so by responding to the the online survey (go.gov.sg/neighbourhoodnoisesurvey) or signing up for our focus group discussions (go.gov.sg/neighbourhoodnoisefgd).
Together, we can build a kinder and more tolerant and considerate Singapore.

William Wan (Dr)
Chairperson of Community Advisory Panel on Neighbourhood Noise

 

[borom]

will be so tolerant if the noisy chap is Halimah's neighbour in Yishun?

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Civil servants blindly disbursed money without thinking and checking.

SkillsFuture scam: Over 14 years' jail for chief money launderer and recruiter​

Osmond Chia

Jul 15, 2022

SINGAPORE - A key player in what is believed to be the largest case of fraud against a government institution was jailed for 14 years and four months on Friday (July 15).
Sim Soon Lee, 46, pleaded guilty to a slew of charges that include engaging in a criminal conspiracy to defraud statutory board SkillsFuture Singapore of close to $40 million and abetting money launderers to hide the sum.
Sim joined months after the syndicate was formed but "took it to a new dimension" as its chief money launderer and main recruiter who brought in company directors to front more than 8,300 bogus claims, said the prosecution.
Some $21 million of the money scammed is still lost.
According to court documents, the case involved Sim, who was a self-employed consultant then, and four others: Ng Cheng Kwee, 45; Lee Lai Leng, 43; David Lim Wee Hong, 43; and Andy Quek Sze Leng, 41.
Ng, Lee and Quek were earlier dealt with and handed lengthy jail terms of up to 17 years and nine months.
The syndicate used nine shell companies to submit 268 fraudulent claims worth $714,112 to SkillsFuture between April and August 2017.

The firms posed as training providers and applicants and lodged fake claims to exploit the course fee subsidies via SkillsFuture's online portal.
Enticed by the offer of commission, Sim joined around May, tasked to recruit nominee directors for the shell companies.
This was to obscure the syndicate members' individual identities and evade detection from the authorities, said Deputy Public Prosecutors Jordon Li, Tan Zhi Hao and Ivan Chua.

Sim recruited his friends - Quek, Ang Cheng Guan and Tan Wee Kee - and rewarded them in return for their Singpass details and to be registered nominee directors of the companies. Ang and Tan have been dealt with in court.
The group doubled down on the claims and submitted 8,381 fraudulent course fee grant applications to SkillsFuture by October 2017.
In the application, they lied that 25,141 employees from their companies had attended training courses conducted by three training providers that they listed.
By October, $39,944,296 had been disbursed by SkillsFuture.

Sim then oversaw a sophisticated money laundering operation to hide some $28 million of the money by accompanying the nominee directors to encash the cheques from the grants. He did so to ensure the directors did not embezzle the money.
The money was dissipated to numerous bank accounts.
In doing so, Sim received around $1 million in total commission and has not made any restitution.
He left Singapore for China in October 2017 and was deported back in July 2018, when he was arrested.
Of the money stolen, the authorities recovered some $18.6 million.
Seeking up to 15 years and eight months' jail for Sim, the DPPs said Sim was one of the key instigators of the crime ring, whose operations became more complex and severe after he joined.
They added that Sim helped to make nearly $80 million worth of bogus claims and was personally involved in laundering more than half the scammed money as the "chief money mule" in the scheme.
The group stole from public funds and caused immense financial losses and reputational harm to SkillsFuture, the DPPs added.
In sentencing, Deputy Principal District Judge Luke Tan said: "This was a case involving a syndicate, which in the words of the prosecution, orchestrated the largest case of fraud involving a government institution."
Sim's jail term was back dated to July 14, 2018.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

SkillsFuture scam: Key member of syndicate admits to being director of fake training companies​

The scam has been described as the largest case of fraud perpetrated against a public institution in Singapore. PHOTO: ST FILE

Jean Iau


JUL 14, 2021

SINGAPORE - One of the key members of a SkillsFuture scam involving nearly $40 million admitted to his role in the syndicate on Wednesday (July 14).
Andy Quek Sze Leng, 41, played the role of the "dua beh gong" or "dummy director" of several of the shell companies that were used to dupe SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) into disbursing money for training courses which never took place.
Quek, a former Grab and Uber driver, pleaded guilty over video-link on Wednesday to 21 charges which include cheating, laundering the criminal proceeds and transferring funds gained from criminal conduct.
A total of 49 similar charges will be taken into consideration for his sentencing, scheduled for Aug 18.
The scam has been described as the largest case of fraud perpetrated against a public institution in Singapore.
Under the SSG scheme, a Singapore business entity that sends its employees for skills training courses with registered training providers can apply to SSG for a subsidy, if certain conditions are met.
This means a portion of the total course fee payable by the business entity to the training provider will come from the Government. Depending on the claim method used, subsidies are paid to either the training provider or the applicant business.

Ng Cheng Kwee, 44; Lee Lai Leng, 42; Sim Soon Lee, 44; David Lim Wee Hong, 42; and Quek, are said to be important operatives in the syndicate which used nine shell companies to commit the offences. The cases involving the other key members are pending.
These entities submitted a total of 8,386 fraudulent course fee grant applications and a corresponding 8,391 claims to SSG between May and October 2017.
The court heard that Quek joined the syndicate in July that year after Sim offered to pay him, if he registered himself as a director of three of the companies that purportedly offered training.

"(Quek) knew that the training providers were cheating... because he was asked by Sim to be a 'dua beh gong of the companies', meaning he was to 'take the blame' if anything were to go wrong," said Deputy Public Prosecutors Ivan Chua and Tan Zhi Hao.
Sim informed Quek that there was no training conducted by the three training providers, but Quek agreed to the deal because he wanted to make money.
Between August and October 2017, Quek agreed to assist Sim in laundering the criminal proceeds. Sim asked him to sign cheques issued by the three training providers and withdraw about $19 million in cash from the accounts which held the disbursements from SSG.
He received more than $1 million in commission from Sim and has not made any restitution.

Quek fled the country on Oct 20, 2017. He went to China with Sim.
Quek was extradited from Hong Kong in August 2018 after he failed to renew his Singapore passport there. Quek had tried to get help from Sim but was unable to contact him.
Of the close to $40 million disbursed by SSG, the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) recovered about $18.6 million. Other members of the syndicate made restitution of $21,000, and about $21.3 million remains unaccounted for.
Another member of the syndicate, Lee Chi Wai was sentenced to five years and eight months' jail in November 2018. Quek's brother, Roger Quek Si Guang, was jailed for 3½ years in February 2019 for his involvement.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Forum: Investigate how lapses were able to happen in SkillsFuture scam​

July 19, 2022

That a five-member syndicate could so easily outsmart SkillsFuture Singapore and fraudulently secure nearly $40 million is mind-boggling (SkillsFuture scam: Key player jailed for 14 years, 4 months, July 16).
While it is heartening to know that the culprits have been caught and now have to serve lengthy jail terms for their crimes, it must be noted that only some $18.6 million has been recovered.
The use of shell companies to pose as training providers and applicants and lodge fake claims that went undetected seems to indicate a failure of SkillsFuture's authentication process.
The root causes must be identified and eliminated. Relying on taking legal action against those who steal public funds is unsatisfactory since stolen funds often cannot be fully recovered.
In addition, officials should be held accountable for any failure to discharge their duties or negligence to safeguard public funds. They have a fiduciary duty of care to the public.
I urge the Auditor-General's Office to conduct an independent and comprehensive investigation to uncover the circumstances leading to such fraudulent acts and to flag other possible fraud cases.

Ang Ah Lay

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Three govt agencies make police reports over irregular bids flagged in AGO report​

The MHA, SLA and NEA have lodged police reports over irregular quotations by companies that submitted bids for contracts. PHOTO: SCREENGRAB FROM GOOGLE MAPS

Clement Yong

July 20, 2022

SINGAPORE - Three government agencies have lodged police reports over irregular quotations by companies that submitted bids for contracts, some of which had passed checks and were awarded using public funds.
In its annual report released on Wednesday (July 20), the Auditor General's Office (AGO) raised doubts about the authenticity of some of the bids received by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) and the National Environment Agency (NEA) in the financial year that ended in March.
It had recommended that the agencies investigate the matter.
For instance, the AGO had suspicions about two direct contracts awarded to a contractor by SLA where there were "tell-tale signs that cast doubt on the authenticity of quotations", without elaborating in its report on how much the contracts cost.
It also found another case where a contractor submitted bids that contained similar irregularities. The SLA made police reports in both instances.
For the NEA, AGO's checks found possible irregularities in 61 of 364 approved grants between September 2018 and September 2021, awarded under an NEA scheme related to raising the efficiency of the environmental services industry through the adoption of technology.
Under the scheme, NEA would co-fund a percentage of costs for companies to buy a new digital solution or equipment.

A total of $340,000 was given to the 61 irregular applications, out of a total of $5.62 million awarded in grants during the three-year period.
The problematic bids for MHA contracts came from star rate items, which were services and items that were not listed in the contracts.
One of the issues that AGO flagged was that MHA had not adequately assessed bids for their cost, but a further examination of the bids themselves showed that a "substantial number of star rate items" were improper in the first place.
AGO said 531 of 752 star rate items totalling $3.14 million, or about 34 per cent of the total value of such items checked, were problematic, although it did not elaborate on whether contracts were awarded to these.
"As a result, there was inadequate assurance that value for money had been obtained for the star rate items," the report said.

All three agencies have since told the AGO that they will better equip their officers with skills to detect tell-tale signs of questionable applications and work on making their processes more rigorous.
An MHA spokesman said the ministry takes a serious view of the possible irregularities in quotations, and lodged police reports immediately after the AGO surfaced the issue. Based on investigations so far, MHA staff are not involved in the irregularities, she added.
Last year, AGO also found possible irregularities in the records of three government ministries and two statutory boards, which subsequently led to police reports.
These were the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth, Ministry of Education, MHA, the Housing Board and People's Association.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Auditor-General finds SkillsFuture Singapore overpaid $4.22m, has yet to collect $43m in levies​

SkillsFuture Singapore overpaid an estimated $4.22 million due to lapses in the management of its grants, said the Auditor-General's Office. PHOTO: LIANHE ZAOBAO

Hariz Baharudin
Assistant News Editor

July 20, 2022

SINGAPORE - The government agency in charge of lifelong learning here had overpaid an estimated $4.22 million due to lapses in the management of its grants, said the Auditor-General's Office (AGO).
In its annual audit of government accounts, the AGO also flagged that SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) was lax in enforcing the collection of Skills Development Levy (SDL) funds from 2015 to 2020, resulting in an estimated $43 million owed to the agency as at April this year.
The AGO detailed these and other findings in a report released on Wednesday (July 20) on government accounts for the 2021/2022 financial year.
It issued an unmodified audit opinion on the government's financial statements, as well as those of three statutory boards, four government-owned companies and two other accounts. This means it was satisfied with the financial statements audited, and that the statements met requirements and were prepared in accordance with accounting standards.
The AGO also carried out selective audits of four statutory boards and three government funds whose books were audited by external parties.
In the case of SSG, the AGO pinpointed several reasons for the lapses in grant management, including inadequate monitoring to ensure grants were given out to those eligible and insufficient checks by service providers on claims filed by training providers.
Grants were also disbursed to individuals and companies that were not allowed funding due to reasons like suspected fraud.

The AGO also said it "observed laxity" in enforcement by SkillsFuture in collecting skills development levies - a compulsory levy that all employers have to pay for all employees here to support workforce upgrading programmes.
"AGO is of the view that SSG was tardy in its enforcement actions and did not put in adequate effort to conduct audits of employers which potentially owed significant amounts of SDL," it added.
AGO also said it had audited the whole-of-government period contract and framework agreement on creative services for communications campaigns that was administered by the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI), after it received complaints.

Under the agreement, public sector agencies can procure creative services from a panel of vendors, and at prices evaluated by MCI.
The AGO noted that MCI did not get approval from the appropriate authority for variation in this contract – the agreement had been approved at a value of $174 million for three years from October 2018.
The contract was subsequently extended by six months, but the total procurement made under the agreement as at Dec 31, 2021 was $322.74 million, nearly twice the initial approved value.

In response, MCI said part of the increase was due to the surge in communications campaigns such as for the Merdeka Generation Package and Covid-19 related communications on vaccination, jobs and safe management measures, which could not have been accounted for in 2018.
AGO also said that when MCI called a tender to appoint the vendors, it did not clearly state the unit of measurement for certain items that tenderers were supposed to quote for.
This led to different vendors using different units of measurement when public agencies procured their services – for instance, some vendors used “per man-hour” to measure manpower services instead of “per person” as MCI had intended.
During the tender evaluation, "MCI did not ascertain whether the tenderers had quoted on a like-for-like basis for items where quotes submitted by tenderers varied significantly", said AGO.
It flagged how the highest rates submitted by tenderers were 43 times to 92 times the lowest rates for some items. For instance, one tenderer submitted a bid of $900 for an item while another put in a bid of $82,800, or 92 times more, for the same item.
AGO added that the ministry did not monitor the spread of the $322.47 million worth of contracts awarded to the 39 vendors on the panel.
The top vendor was awarded 38 per cent of the total value, or $124.06 million, and the next two highest vendors getting 7 per cent ($22.90 million) and 6 per cent ($20.04 million) respectively.
For the top six public sector agencies by procurement value which tapped on the MCI framework, AGO noted that the same top vendor in the panel accounted for 14 per cent to 95 per cent of the awards made by these agencies.
The AGO stressed the importance of having a good spread of contracts to encourage vendors to bid for future tenders, and in turn ensure public agencies can continue to enjoy competitive prices in the long run.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Visiting professor at NUS Business School called out in China as fraud with fake credentials​

The 58-year-old academic's background came under scrutiny after her ties with Huawei were denounced by the company.
Belmont Lay
July 23, 2022

An academic from China, who is a visiting professor at the National University of Singapore Business School, has been called out as a fraud in her home country.


News of her allegedly faking her academic credentials to land jobs at prestigious institutions of higher learning were reported by the South China Morning Post.
A check with the NUS website revealed that Professor Chen Chunhua, 58, is no longer listed and her profile appeared to have been removed.

In response to Mothership‘s queries, an NUS Business School spokesperson said: “We hold our faculty to the highest standards and are conducting a review of the adjunct faculty member’s credentials. The faculty member will not be teaching any modules pending our review.”

Why public fact-checked her​

Chen, who is from Peking University, a leading university in China, allegedly has a degree from a fake university in Europe and pretended to be a “military adviser” for tech firm Huawei.
Members of the public in China fact-checked her declared qualifications after Huawei issued a public statement denying Chen's claims of her ties to the company and its founder Ren Zhengfei.
This announcement kickstarted the intense public scrutiny a few weeks ago.

Huawei says it’s all fake​

“Huawei does not know her, and it is impossible for her to know Huawei,” the tech company said on July 6.
The company said it noticed “over 10,000 online articles”, with some referring to her as a “Huawei military adviser”, and even featuring Chen’s comments on the company.
It was even written that she met Ren.
Huawei called these articles “false information”.

Odd anecdote​

The oddest anecdote stemmed from Chen supposedly recalling an alleged meeting she had with Ren.
This anecdote appeared in one popular article written by Chen published in early 2017.
She even went as far as to claim that Ren, the Huawei founder, acted as her driver after he insisted on picking her up personally.
Chen responded with her own statement after the Huawei statement was released.
She claimed that most of the articles that mentioned her and Huawei were not written by her.
She also claimed that the company was just a case study for her work.

What public found​

The online sleuths who dug into Chen's background found that her doctoral degree was issued by an unlicensed university two decades ago.
The academic supposedly obtained a doctorate of business administration (DBA) from the European University of Ireland in 2001.
But the organisation has no website and is not one of 25 legitimate Irish universities the Chinese education ministry acknowledges.
The Irish Times reported in 2011 that the “university” operated without official approval from a Dublin address and had no office, according to SCMP.
In 2005, Chen went on to do postdoctoral research at Nanjing University, according to her own bio details.
She was even included in Fortune’s China’s 25 Most Influential Businesswomen Leaders list for four consecutive years from 2015 to 2018.
Besides her stint at NUS, Chen is also dean of Beijing International MBA (BiMBA) Business School at Peking University, as well as a professor and doctoral supervisor at the School of Business Administration of the South China University of Technology.
The issue of academic fraud has frustrated people in China, as there is intense pressure to enter top schools, while examinations can be life-altering experiences.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

20 weeks' jail for ex-research fellow who cheated NUS of over $39,000​

Thomas Teh Kok Hiong, 42, who is no longer with NUS, was on Monday (July 25) sentenced to 20 weeks' jail. ST PHOTO: KELVIN CHNG

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Court Correspondent

Jul 25, 2022

SINGAPORE - A research fellow at National University of Singapore (NUS) cheated the school of more than $39,000 and used it to buy items such as a radio and equipment for his car.
Thomas Teh Kok Hiong, 42, who is no longer with NUS, was on Monday (July 25) sentenced to 20 weeks' jail.
Teh, who used to be from NUS' Department of Biomedical Engineering, pleaded guilty last month to five cheating charges and two counts of forgery.
Eighteen other charges were considered during sentencing.
He has since made full restitution.
In earlier proceedings, the court heard that Teh submitted 22 claims to NUS to fraudulently receive some $39,500 between 2010 and 2018.
Investigations revealed that he gave false and inflated claims, as well as those for expenses he did not incur, such as purchases made by his family.

Such claims are made to NUS through an electronic system, which requires staff to enter details of their expense and supporting documents like invoices or receipts.
The entries are run past administrative staff before the money is disbursed.
Deputy Public Prosecutor V. Jesudevan told the court that the staff members did not conduct any physical checks to verify if the goods had been delivered and trusted that the claims were genuine.

He added: "To avoid detection and create legitimacy to these false claims, (Teh) altered receipts and invoices."
It turned out that the expenses that he claimed for consumables for projects were either made up or were for his personal purchases.
Among other things, in 2017, he paid $300 to install solar film on his car.

Similarly, he forged a document to make a $4,815 claim - 16 times higher - for "UV protective film for lab hood and cabinets".
In 2018, Teh submitted a false claim of $2,820 for a motor and other equipment.
This was untrue because he bought a label printer and a radio for his own use, which cost around $1,000.
He then forged a document to support his expense claim to cheat NUS into disbursing him $2,820.
In an unrelated case, former NUS professor Tan Kok Kiong, 54, was charged in January last year with multiple counts of forgery and cheating.
The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) said in an earlier statement that he allegedly submitted fraudulent claims totalling more than $100,000 to NUS between 2012 and 2019.
CPIB added: "He is alleged to have generated fictitious invoices for the purported purchase of products and services and submitted claims that were either inflated or for expenses that were unrelated to his research grant.
"By doing so, he is alleged to have cheated NUS' approving officers into disbursing those sums of money to him."
The cases involving Tan, who used to be from NUS' Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, are still pending.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

SkillsFuture Singapore has contacted all parties to recover S$4.22 million in grant overpayments: MOE​

People wearing protective face masks waiting to cross the road at Church Street on Sep 6, 2021. (Photo: CNA/Gaya Chandramohan)

Tang See Kit​

@SeeKitCNA
01 Aug 2022

SINGAPORE: SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) has contacted all affected training providers, companies and individuals to recover the millions in overpayments made due to lapses in the management of its grants, said Minister of State for Education Gan Siow Huang on Monday (Aug 1).
These parties “will be given time to check their own records and return any confirmed overpayment”, she told Parliament.
An annual report by the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO), released last month, found that SSG had overpaid an estimated S$4.22 million to grant applicants and training providers.
This was caused by inaccurate or erroneous declarations by grant applicants and training providers that were not picked up by the agency’s internal checks, said Ms Gan in a reply to questions from Members of Parliament.
A majority of these errors occurred prior to November 2020 when SSG’s previous IT system for grant administration had used a declaration-based approach, she added.
Other errors also occurred during the manual processing of grants, including human errors made by the service provider contracted by SSG to perform grant administration functions.
Ms Gan said that to reduce reliance on declarations and manual processing, the agency had since November 2020 put in place a new IT system that uses administrative data in government databases to determine and verify eligibility of the grant applicants.
SSG is also streamlining its business rules to rely less on declared information and manual verification.
“Where these cannot be avoided, SSG will tighten its audits on payments disbursed and on the work of its service provider,” Ms Gan added.
Asked by MP Sylvia Lim (WP-Aljunied) if the ministry is considering any action against the service provider for its errors, Ms Gan replied: “There are contractual terms and KPIs that the service provider (is) liable for, and SSG will be looking through this.”
But she added that the root cause identified was the massive volume of manual processing, which makes it difficult for all verifications to be done fully. “Hence, there need to be more upstream changes in the policies and business rules,” she added.
Ms Lim also asked how much has been defrauded or overpaid since the inception of the SkillsFuture initiative, as well as how much has been overpaid thus far.
To that, Ms Gan said it has not been ascertained if the latest S$4.22 million in overpayments should be categorised as fraud given the “lengthy” verification process with the parties involved.
But fraud cases have been detected since the SSG was formed, she noted, citing a case in 2017 where a syndicate was found to have committed fraud amounting to S$40 million.
On the recovery of overpayments, Ms Gan said the agency will “need some time” to verify and follow up with affected companies and individuals.
SSG, the agency in charge of lifelong learning, was also found by the AGO to be lax in enforcing the collection of Skills Development Levy (SDL) funds from 2015 to 2020, resulting in an estimated S$43 million owed to the agency as of April this year.
The SDL is a compulsory levy that companies have to pay each month for all their employees working in Singapore.
The levy payable for each employee is 0.25 per cent of the monthly total wages. The agency derives estimates of SDL payable by firms based on existing government data, such as the Central Provident Fund (CPF).
“SSG’s estimates may differ from actual SDL amounts paid by employers due to factors such as fluctuations in total wages paid to foreign workers every month,” said Ms Gan.
“In some cases, the variance may be due to employers using more updated employee data, instead of being an actual underpayment of SDL.”
SSG has adopted a “risk-based approach” to follow up on estimated variances, she added.
“The overall variance between the estimated SDL payable and the actual payments has fallen from 18 per cent of overall SDL collected in 2008, to the current 3 to 4 per cent, with the majority of companies compliant in paying their levy today.”
Ms Gan attributed this to IT system improvements and SSG’s reminder letters and calls, but the agency acknowledges that more needs to be done to actively reconcile remaining gaps and help all employers pay the correct levy.
SSG will give affected employers time to validate the amount owed, she said, adding that the agency has started engaging affected employers and will contact all by the end of this financial year.
Ms Gan also said timely payment reminders will be sent, while more efficient processes will be developed to resolve differences in the company’s and SSG’s estimates of SDL payable.
For the few recalcitrant employers who do not pay the outstanding levies despite reminders, SSG will take “decisive punitive actions”. Individuals will also be taken to task should any negligence be found.
In addition, SSG will be working more closely with the Government Technology Agency (GovTech) on a new IT system that can make more accurate SDL estimates and track employers in these payments.
Authorities are hoping to roll out the system by the middle of next year, said Ms Gan in response to a supplementary question from MP Yip Hon Weng (PAP-Yio Chu Kang).
The agency takes the AGO’s findings “seriously” and will “do even more” to review and enhance its policies, processes and systems to prevent lapses, she added.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

$2.3b cost of terminating Sports Hub PPP represented 'fair deal' for Govt: Edwin Tong​

Sport Singapore will start operating the Singapore Sports Hub from Dec 9. PHOTO: ST FILE

Sazali Abdul Aziz
Correspondent

Aug 1, 2022

SINGAPORE - The Government's decision to take over the management and ownership of the Singapore Sports Hub came after "detailed financial, legal and operational due diligence" was carried out, Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong told Parliament on Monday (Aug 1).
The Government came to the conclusion that the move would serve the interests of Singapore and Singaporeans better, he said.
National agency Sport Singapore (SportSG) had announced on June 10 that it would terminate the partnership with Sports Hub Pte Ltd (SHPL), the private consortium that has been running the $1.33 billion facility since it opened in 2014, and start operating the 35ha facility from Dec 9.
This brings to an end the public-private partnership (PPP) and its profit-driven model, which ultimately proved restrictive to the role the Government wanted the Sports Hub to fulfil.
Responding to questions from various MPs, Mr Tong explained in a ministerial statement that the Government has been "closely evaluating the performance of the Sports Hub" over the last 12 to 18 months and assessing whether to continue with the PPP.
The arrangement saw SportSG paying SHPL an annual fee of about $193.7 million from 2014 to 2035 to finance and operate the facility.
He also gave a detailed breakdown of the costs of the move and explained how it was comparable to the $2.32 billion that SportSG would have paid had it continued with the PPP arrangement till 2035.

He said the takeover decision represented a "fair deal" for the Government on which to take back the assets.
"None of these components are penalties to the Government for the termination... These are simply costs we would have had to incur or would have incurred going forward," Mr Tong reiterated.
With the termination, the Government would have to pay two main "buckets" of cost, he added.


The first is the amount to be paid to SHPL for the termination, worth about $1.5 billion, and the second is the costs that will be spent post-handover, estimated at about $800 million.
From the first bucket, the largest component, which accounts for $1.2 billion, he said, is the capital expenditure that the Government would have had to bear if it had adopted the traditional procurement approach from the start.
The remaining components, worth about $300 million, are primarily the fair open market value of the Sports Hub, which is commercially negotiated, and other costs, expenses and deductions.
The second bucket, said Mr Tong, comprises the costs of running and operating the facility, post-handover.
He noted that the current operating assumptions and costs incurred by SHPL, which includes maintenance and programming costs, and the day-to-day costs of operating the venue, amount to approximately $68 million a year, or a sum of $800 million until 2035.
"Taking the two buckets of costs to be paid for the termination - the sum to be paid to SHPL, which largely reflects the upfront capital expenditure and future operating costs - this would be a fair deal that the Government is making to take back the assets," said Mr Tong.

He also further explained in Parliament that there was "a confluence of several reasons", and not just any single one which led to the Government's decision.
The first is that, despite the world-class infrastructure of the venue, the "quality and volume" of the SHPL's calendar of events and programming for the facility, which includes the 55,000-seater National Stadium, fell short of expectations.
"We wanted to see SHPL invest in the creation of their own new event intellectual properties and building on existing event properties, but these did not come to fruition," said Mr Tong.
"Apart from the Super Rugby event from 2016-2019, SHPL has not secured any recurring or marquee sport events at the Sports Hub on a multi-year basis. The Sports Hub is a world-class sporting facility, and of course international marquee events are important."
He added that there "ought to have been more community participation and activation" around the Sports Hub, in the form of grassroots, schools, or junior national athletes programmes having more access to the venue through key events at National School Games, or Family Days and carnivals centred around sporting objectives.
There was a need for greater emphasis on community programming and "driving social outcomes, even if such programmes did not always resonate with commercial returns", he said.

The SHPL's profit-driven focus meant that SportSG "encountered resistance" when it planned to bring the ActiveSG basketball academy programme to the OCBC Arena "as such activities were not revenue-generating", while costs of hosting school sport events, such as combined sports days and National School Games, were high and prohibitive to organisers.
While he noted that moving to have more community participation at the Sports Hub will likely mean higher expenditures and increases in daily operating and maintenance costs, Mr Tong said they would be cushioned by the fact that full revenue generated from the Sports Hub would now accrue to the Government.
Among the various supplementary questions that were later posed for about half an hour, Leader of the Opposition and Workers' Party chief Pritam Singh asked about how much the SHPL has had to pay to the Government for non-performance or unmet standards since 2014.
Mr Tong replied: "Subject to checking this and... based on memory, I believe the figure is around the order of $44 million for defects rectification, non-availability payments and so on."
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio GRC) also asked if the National Day Parade would return regularly to the National Stadium - it has been staged there only once, in 2016, since the Sports Hub opened - to which Mr Tong said the Government "would certainly be open to it", but has to be "circumspect" about the matter given the lead-up and preparation time required for the parade to take place.

While Mr Tong reiterated why it made sense for the Government to utilise the PPP model at the inception of the project in 2003, he highlighted how the local sporting and entertainment ecosystem in Singapore has grown and matured since.
He cited the growth of internal capabilities within SportSG as well as those of local and locally based companies, the rise in demand for world-class events, as reasons which made the Republic "now much better placed" to move forward from the arrangement.
"Overall, the limitations of the current arrangement, the changing environment, and our growing capabilities and ambition were factors we considered when deciding on terminating the relationship," he said.
"I would add that this was not a decision taken lightly, but we felt that... with the confluence of all these factors coming together, the time was now right."

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

What went wrong with the Sports Hub experiment​

Grace Ho
Opinion Editor

The takeover of the Sports Hub is expected to cost the Government some $2.3 billion. PHOTO: ST FILE

Aug 2, 2022

SINGAPORE - It has been two months since the Government announced that it would take over the ownership and management of the Sports Hub instead of carrying on with the existing public-private partnership (PPP) arrangement. On Monday (Aug 1), Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong shed more light on the matter.
He touched upon the limitations of the current arrangement, the changing environment, and Singapore's growing capabilities and ambition as factors the Government considered when it decided to terminate the relationship.
The decision was not driven by financial reasons or to save money: the takeover is expected to cost some $2.3 billion, comparable to the additional $2.32 billion the Government would have paid had it continued with the partnership.
Also, while it was problematic that the private consortium could not secure any recurring or marquee sports events on a multi-year basis - apart from the Super Rugby event from 2016 to 2019 - the larger issue is that the Sports Hub is an iconic, national sporting asset.
Because of this, there must be a strong sense of affinity and connection between it and Singaporeans, said Mr Tong. There ought to be more community participation and activation around it, including greater access for the grassroots, schools or junior national athlete programmes.
The fact that there were no upfront costs for the Government under the PPP arrangement proved useful during the global financial crisis in 2008, as fiscal resources could be channelled to other economic and social needs. SportsHub Pte Ltd (SHPL) also bore the costs of any delays or defects.
But I would suggest that the financial crisis did not have any major impact on the deal. Singapore generally has the fiscal space to undertake such projects on its own, unlike some developed economies with large public deficits.

I do think, however, that the prospect of Singapore being the pioneer of the largest sports stadium infrastructure deal in Asia at the time - coupled with the risk mitigation, economic efficiency and design and construction arguments Mr Tong reiterated on Monday - made the case then for PPP compelling.
Mr Tong gave a frank and clear-eyed explanation: when Singapore started exploring this project in 2003, neither the Government nor the local sporting and lifestyle or entertainment industries had sufficiently matured or developed depth of experience in bringing in marquee sports and entertainment events from all over the world.
Notwithstanding the commercial "skin in the game", things did not work out as intended, especially at the operational stage. Profit-loss considerations sat awkwardly with social objectives. Multiple stakeholders and sub-contractors - each with different goals - pulled the project in different directions.
Examples cited on Monday showed just how untenable the situation had become. Plans to hold ActiveSG academy programmes such as the Basketball Academy at the OCBC Arena met with resistance, as such community sports programmes were not revenue-generating.
Schools were expected to bear the costs of laying the turf for games such as football and rugby. Community events organisers that catered their own food and drinks had to pay high levies because of an exclusive catering sub-contractor arrangement.
No amount of tinkering with key performance indicators on the edges would have helped. If I were the Government, I, too, would want to make a clean break.
MORE ON THIS TOPIC
$2.3b cost of ending Sports Hub public-private tie-up represented 'fair deal' for Govt: Edwin Tong
Govt to set up holding company to manage Kallang Alive precinct, Sports Hub
Workers' Party MP Gerald Giam (Aljunied GRC) questioned how SportSG would be able to bring in more marquee events, given that SHPL with all its expertise was unable to.
Mr Tong replied that local players had built up expertise over the years. This was not just about SportSG, but about the maturity and development of the entire ecosystem in Singapore.
He also refuted the pre-supposition that SHPL did not bring marquee events into Singapore because it was unable to. Rather, the risk and loss-bearing cost structure of the project had disincentivised it from doing so. "So there were a number of structural problems with the current arrangement which made it harder - not impossible, but harder for SHPL to have done so."
In what seems to have become a habit, Non-Constituency MP Leong Mun Wai prefaced his questions with a lengthy exposition, and managed to squeeze in a reference to the Sports Hub being "given" to a private consortium.
But the fact is the Government never "gave" the Sports Hub to anyone. The structure of the PPP provides for a unilateral right on the part of the Government, but not SHPL, to terminate the project and take over ownership and management at any time before the expiry of the project, with no penalty for such an early termination.

Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh asked if the Government had charged SHPL for non-performance. Mr Tong replied that, pending further checks, the number would be in the order of $44 million for issues such as non-availability payments and rectification of defects.
A few lessons can be drawn from the Sports Hub venture. We now know that the profit-driven model of the consortium, which worked well in the infrastructure phase of the project, was not sufficiently aligned with the current more sporting- and socially-driven phase of the project.
But proper project structuring should factor in all phases from the outset. In this regard, the Sports Hub is a learning point and will, as Mr Tong said, "feature in the thinking" when the Government embarks on future projects with third parties.


Second, even as the Sports Hub outcomes shift away from predominantly commercial ones towards realising sporting and social objectives, there will likely be increases in operating and maintenance costs. These should be monitored and the public monies accounted for.
Third, the Sports Hub case should give public agencies pause when considering whether to adopt the PPP model. A more straightforward model could be for the Government to fully finance the construction of such facilities, contract them to a managing agent upon completion, or run them on its own.
Even under the traditional procurement model, not to mention PPPs, there are many areas where agencies may not have had repetitive experience in managing certain types of projects, or built up the necessary risk-management capabilities.
It is important to frame the problem statement and ask: is there genuine potential for private expertise and innovation? Is it truly necessary to bring in private players to help solve a public problem - especially in today's economic climate where the private sector may have even less appetite to absorb the risks associated with uncertain future revenue streams?
In the end, the Sports Hub is more than just a PPP or state-run piece of world-class infrastructure. As Mr Tong observed, the next chapter for Sports Hub is about sports being part of the life of every Singaporean, shaping a nation of resilient individuals, and strengthening people's sense of unity. Now that is something worth looking forward to.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Trio charged with cheating LTA, several offences linked to speed limiters on buses​

(From left) Teoh Sio Meng, Sundram Retnam and Tee Wei Chye were working at different transport related firms when they allegedly cheated LTA. ST PHOTOS: KELVIN CHNG

Shaffiq Alkhatib
Court Correspondent

DEC 12, 2022

SINGAPORE - Three men who were hauled to court on Monday face charges of cheating. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) was among the parties they allegedly cheated.
Among other things, the trio, who were from different transport-related companies, allegedly conspired to commit cheating offences involving speed limiters – devices fitted to vehicles to prevent them from going over a pre-set maximum speed.
At the time of the alleged offences, Teoh Sio Meng, 50, was a director at T & L Transit, which provides chartered bus services, while Sundram Retnam, 50, was the sole proprietor of SV Bus Transportation Services.
The third man, Tee Wei Chye, 44, was a mechanic at vehicle inspection company Leng Chong Engineering at the time.
On Monday, all three were charged with offences, including multiple counts of cheating.
On two occasions between June 2017 and January 2018, they allegedly conspired to dupe an inspector from vehicle inspection company Vicom into believing that a working speed limiter had been installed on a bus.
As a result, the trio are said to have induced the inspector to hand the bus a passing grade for the police speed limiter test.

Teoh is also accused of cheating the LTA on eight occasions between July 2015 and January 2018, while Sundram is said to have done so on one occasion around the same period.
In a statement on Monday, the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) said: “(The pair) were alleged to have deceived the LTA into believing that there were working speed limiters installed on various buses when there were none, thereby intentionally inducing the LTA to allow licence and road tax to be renewed for those buses.”
On two occasions in June 2017, Teoh allegedly instigated Muhammad Sukri Sulaimi to deceive the LTA into believing that there were working speed limiters installed on two buses when there were none.

CPIB did not disclose details about Mr Sukri.
Tee is accused of adjusting the speed limiter in a bus, on or before June 2017, allowing the speed of the vehicle to exceed 60kmh.
On or around April 17, 2018, he also allegedly deceived the LTA into believing there was a cab partition installed in a minibus for the purpose of complying with the law when he intended to remove it after inspection.
Tee is also said to have deceived the LTA into believing that another bus did not emit smoke density of more than 40 Hartridge Smoke Units, which would comply with the law.
The CPIB said he had allegedly intended to adjust the air-to-fuel ratio in the fuel pump of the bus after the inspection.

Tee’s alleged deceptions intentionally induced the LTA to allow the licences and road taxes to be renewed for both buses.
Each of the accused was offered bail of $5,000 on Monday, and their cases have been adjourned to Jan 5, 2023.
For each count of cheating, an offender can be jailed for up to three years and fined.

 

[LITTLEREDDOT]

Forum: Do more to deter touts who take advantage of accident victims to jack up costs​

Dec 24, 2022

I am a lawyer who handles road accident claims. Road touting has become a serious and, unfortunately, profitable business.
These touts swoop in right after an accident. They know which roads are the busiest and where accidents are more likely to occur.
Their offer of help comes with a few enticements. First, they will make things convenient and settle everything. Second, they have workshops and surveyors, sometimes unqualified ones, who are prepared to jack up repair costs for a bigger cut. And third, the car owners can get a complete makeover of their cars even for minor dents. At times, willing car owners are paid for playing along.
Indeed, where there’s honey, the bees will come. However, the cost to justice is paid by the accident victims, the insurance companies and car owners who pay car insurance premiums.
When such bogus claims rise, insurance payouts increase. Over time, premiums also rise. It’s a shared financial woe because of the acts of a few rogue freeloaders.
Most accident victims are also being exploited. These touts strike when victims are most vulnerable, right after a collision. They hijack from them what is most crucial: the victim’s autonomy. In turn, they offer them “peace of mind” in the guise of a rescuer, when what they are after is a lucrative payout.
I am sure that some are jailed for making these fraudulent claims. But a strong message of deterrence has not been sent, since cases appear to still be rampant.

I have clients who shared with me that they were led from the accident site to the workshops, then to a police post to lodge a report, and then made to sign documents without knowing their full content.
I feel that more has to be done in this area. And I hope this raises awareness for those who may be the next victims of such touts.

Michael Han Hean Juan