What Young Voters Need To Know About Tony Tan

[PTADER]

Like George Yeo, Tony Tan is no angel. The oldies know about their abusive, egregious history.

The young Nicole Seahs and young voters of Singapore who have not lived through the abuse, bullying and destruction of the PAP's political opponents and their families by PAP men like Tony Tan need to know a little about the history of men like Tony Tan before casting their votes. They should not, as what Nicole Seah has mistakenly done in an attempt to play "gentleman politician", endorse the very people who were guilty in abusing, persecuting and destroying innocent Singaporeans and their families.

The history of these toxic, noxious and abusive PAP tyrants and bullies who, with the help of a compliant judiciary and prostitute press, were unforgiving and merciless in their relentless destruction of innocent Singaporeans whose only crime was to contest against them, must not be allowed to be swept under the carpet of history and forgotten.

Tony Tan, despite his desperate attempt to now distance himself from his PAP political lords and masters, is one such toxic, noxious and abusive bastard.



TONY TAN ALSO SUING TANG FOR DEFAMING HIM IN REPORT.
25 January 1997
147th Prostitue Press

DEPUTY Prime Minister Tony Tan is also suing Mr Tang Liang Hong for defaming him in a police report he made on Jan 1.

This is the seventh defamation suit that has been filed against the defeated Workers' Party candidate by People's Action Party leaders and members.

Dr Tan, who is also Defence Minister, gave notice of his legal action in an advertisement published in The Straits Times yesterday.

Mr Tang, who is in London, has eight days to enter an appearance at the Registry of the High Court if he wants to defend himself.

If he does not, judgment may be made against him, warned Dr Tan's lawyers, Wong Partnership. Dr Tan is claiming damages and costs.

Copies of the Writ have been posted on the Supreme Court notice board and on the front door of Mr Tang's home in Hua Guan Avenue.

On Wednesday, Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Trade and Industry Minister-elect Lee Yock Suan also initiated defamation action against the 61-year-old lawyer over his police report.

The report was against 11 PAP leaders who had alleged that the WP man was an anti-Christian, anti-English-educated Chinese chauvinist, who could cause social and racial disharmony.

In his report, made at Kreta Ayer neighbourhood police post, Mr Tang said that their allegations and statements were groundless and were intended to harm his reputation and to defame him.

He also claimed that their actions and statements were likely to "incite religious extremists to hate me and cause harm to me and members of my family".

The PAP leaders had also challenged and provoked him repeatedly to make public statements which they said might cause social disorder in Singapore, he added.

The suits over Mr Tang's police report are separate from the three defamation actions by PM Goh, SM Lee, and six other PAP members for his comment that they had concocted lies against him.

He is also being sued by SM Lee and DPM Lee for his comments in the Hongkong-based magazine Yazhou Zhoukan about discounts on HPL apartments sold to the Lees last year.

 

[suicidalpap]

Good to bring up his past arrogance and evil ways. He is always in cahoots with the Lee family.

 

[PTADER]

THE SUITS AGAINST TANG
6 February 1997
147th Prostitute Press


More than a dozen lawsuits have been filed against defeated Workers' Party candidate Tang Liang Hong by leaders and members of the People's Action Party. WALTER FERNANDEZ of the Political Desk gives an overview.

Who's suing

Mr Tang faces some 13 defamation suits, brought against him by 11 PAP men.

They are:

Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong

Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew

Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong

Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan

Trade and Industry Minister Lee Yock Suan

Education Minister Teo Chee Hean

Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon

Dr Ow Chin Hock

Mr Chin Harn Tong

Dr Ker Sin Tze

Mr Seng Han Thong

The alleged defamations ... and the lawsuits

Criminals and liars On PAP politicians calling him an anti-Christian Chinese chauvinist: "I am going to lodge a police report against them for criminal offence. They are telling lies. They are defaming, assassinating my character. They concocted lies and go on television and spread the lies." - Interview, The Straits Times, Dec 31.

He was referring to PM Goh, SM Lee, R-Adm Teo, Mr Ch'ng, Dr Ow, Mr Chin, Dr Ker and Mr Seng.

Lawsuits: 3 PAP politicians say his comments were a grave and serious slander and libel, calculated to disparage their character and integrity.

Abusing the court process Mr Tang applied to the courts to have the first three lawsuits against him struck out as they were an abuse to court process. He said the lawsuit against him for calling the PAP leaders liars were being used as a political weapon to "bury him politically and financially". The courts dismissed the application.

Lawsuits: 3 PM Goh, SM Lee and six other PAP members are suing him for accusing them of abusing the court process.

Use of Internal Security Act In a telephone interview published on Jan 11, Mr Tang said he might be "locked up and not be given a chance to defend myself". When told that that Mr Goh had said that he would not be arrested under the ISA, Mr Tang laughed and said: "Is that so? I have not heard about it. Do you think I should believe him?" He added: "Many years ago, there was some problem at Nanyang University, Lee Kuan Yew told the students that there was nothing to fear. But some of them were arrested a few days later."

Lawsuits: 2 PM Goh and SM Lee have sued him for slander and libel over his remarks, which they say, questioned their integrity and gravely injured their character and reputation.

Police reports Apart from his comments at rallies and in the press, the WP man also filed two police reports on Jan 1, the eve of Polling Day. In the first, he asked for police protection. In the second, he lodged complaints against 11 PAP politicians for leading the public to believe that he was an anti-Christian Chinese chauvinist and anti-English-educated. Their actions and statements, he said, were also likely "to incite religious extremists to hate me and cause harm to me and members of my family".

Lawsuits: 3 The second police report led to him being sued for defamation by three of the PAP men named: BG Lee, Dr Tony Tan and Mr Lee Yock Suan.

HPL discounts On discounts received by SM Lee and DPM Lee for HPL condominiums: "This matter should be passed to the Commercial Affairs Department or Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau. Their reports will be more convincing to the public." - Interview, Yazhou Zhoukan, June 1996. The magazine apologised to the Lees. But Mr Tang refused to. At three election rallies on Dec 31, he told the crowds that he would raise the HPL issue if elected and that this was why the Lees wanted to keep him out of Parliament.

Lawsuits: 2 The Lees sued for defamation last September for his remarks in the magazine article. They filed a fresh suit in January for his rally remarks.

Action ...

See you later Mr Tang left Singapore for Johor just days after the Jan 2 General Election, saying he feared for his safety and was concerned that he would be arrested under the ISA.

From there he went to Kuala Lumpur, Hongkong and London, where he said he was preparing documents to refute the PAP charges and consulting his Queen's Counsel.

... and reaction

Mareva injuction PAP leaders and their lawyers, believing that Mr Tang did not plan to return home, asked the court to grant a worldwide injunction freezing his assets. Under the injunction, the Tangs have to set aside S$11.2 million for possible damages and legal costs if they sell their assets. His wife, Madam Teo Siew Har, is also subject to the injunction because the courts accepted that assets in her name could belong to him.
J.B. Jeyaretnam also sued ...

See this He is alleged to have shown a rally crowd copies of the police reports Mr Tang had made against the 11 PAP men. He told the crowd that Mr Tang, had "just placed before me two reports he has made to the police against, you know, Mr Goh Chok Tong and his team."

Lawsuits: 8 PAP leaders are suing him for drawing the public's attention to Mr Tang's allegations and in so doing, endosing Mr Tang's allegations that they were guilty of criminal defamation.

 

[PTADER]

PAP LEADERS WANT S$12.9M IN DAMAGES

8 May 1997
147th Prostitute Press

THE 11 People's Action Party leaders, who won 13 defamation lawsuits against Mr Tang Liang Hong, have asked the High Court to award them a total of S$12.9 million in exemplary and aggravated damages.

Prime Minister Mr Goh Chok Tong has sought a total of S$2.15 million in his three suits against the Workers' Party member.

This amount includes S$1 million for the suit in which Mr Tang called him a liar and made other defamatory remarks. It is the highest figure asked for in the 13 suits against the WP man.

Senior Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who sued Mr Tang five times, has asked for a total of S$3.35 million. Two of his suits are joint actions with Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong over Mr Tang's remarks on their purchases of Hotel Properties Limited (HPL) apartments.

DPM Lee, who has a total of three suits, is claiming S$2.1 million.

Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Dr Tony Tan and Trade and Industry Minister Lee Yock Suan are pressing for S$600,000 and $550,000 respectively for each of their suits.

Education and Second Defence Minister, Rear-Admiral (NS) Teo Chee Hean, and each of the five other plaintiffs filed two joint suits.

RAdm (NS) Teo is asking for S$900,000. Each of the other five PAP men - Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon, Dr Ow Chin Hock, Mr Chin Harn Tong, Dr Ker Sin Tze and Mr Seng Han Thong - are claiming S$650,000.

The list of damages sought was presented to the High Court yesterday by Mr Davinder Singh, the lawyer for SM Lee.

He and Mr Harry Elias, counsel for RAdm (NS) Teo, Mr Ch'ng, Dr Ow, Mr Chin, Dr Ker and Mr Seng, argued that the damages sought were justified since the case was unprecedented, given that Mr Tang had shown malice, aggravated and repeated the defamation, and abused the court process.

"We have also considered previous awards," Mr Singh said. "But only for the purpose of demonstrating that the gravity of the charges, the malice and the aggravation in these actions are in an entirely different orbit."

Even if the leaders were unable to recover the full amount from Mr Tang, the awarding of substantial damages by the court would vindicate them, he said.

"Singapore has been built on the integrity of the men who have appeared before Your Honour. These men went onto the stand ready to subject their integrity to a gruelling test.

"But the defendant shrank from the battle. The quality of the plaintiffs' evidence remains untarnished."

Mr Tang had called Mr Lee and the other PAP leaders liars when they labelled him an anti-Christian Chinese chauvinist during the campaigning for the General Election in January.

But he "fled with his tail between his legs" to "spirit his assets away" and avoid being questioned in court on his extremist views on Chinese education, language and culture, Mr Singh said.

""His conduct from Dec 28 till today is consistent only with an admission that he is a chauvinist, has lied, and is unable to mount any defence in fact, or in law, on the issues of liability and damages," he added.

He had no doubt, he said, that the defendant would continue to attack the plaintiffs and remain outside Singapore's jurisdiction.

Speaking later, Mr Elias argued that the sums awarded for defamation here in the past had been too lenient. He cited several cases in which English, Australian and Malaysian courts had awarded hefty damages for defamation.

British footballer Graeme Souness, for example, won 750,000 in 1995 against publisher MGN Ltd after one of its newspapers called him a "tight-fisted dirty rat".

Mr Elias argued that the case against Mr Tang was more serious as he had attacked some of Singapore's top leaders.

He told Justice Chao Hick Tin: "You have had in your court the Prime Minister, two Deputy Prime Ministers, a mayor and Members of Parliament. We have not seen anything like that for a long time, and hopefully it will be a long time before it happens again."

The hearing continues today with more closing submissions by the lawyers for the other PAP men.

 

[PTADER]

PM, 10 OTHER PAP MEMBERS SUING JEYA

1 February 1997
147th Prostitute Press

THE Prime Minister and 10 other PAP leaders and members are suing Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam for allegedly defaming them at a Workers' Party rally on the eve of Polling Day on Jan 1.

They are claiming that he used words to allege that they were guilty of criminal defamation and conspiracy and lacked honesty and integrity.

All the 11 plaintiffs are claiming aggravated damages from the leader of the Workers' Party who offered to apologise to them, but denied that the words he used were defamatory.

The plaintiffs are Mr Goh Chok Tong; Mr Lee Kuan Yew; Dr Tony Tan; BG (NS) Lee Hsien Loong; Rear-Admiral (NS) Teo Chee Hean; Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon; Dr Ow Chin Hock; Mr Seng Han Tong; Mr Lee Yock Suan; Mr Chin Harn Tong and Dr Ker Sin Tze.

According to the statement of claim of Rear-Admiral Teo and Mr Ch'ng, Mr Jeyaretnam had told the Jan 1 rally: "Finally, Mr Tang Liang Hong has just placed before me two reports he has made to the police against, you know, Mr Goh Chok Tong and his team."

They also noted that when Mr Jeyaretnam spoke those words, he held up the police reports or documents purporting to be police reports.

The manner in which he spoke was calculated to work up the emotions of the audience, it said, adding that the defendant could not have believed the truth of the allegations in one of the two police reports.

The publication of his words resulted in the press procuring copies of the two reports filed by Mr Tang on Jan 1. In one report, he alleged that a number of ministers and MPs had committed a criminal conspiracy to defame him.

The full text of both reports was published in the New Paper on Jan 2 and The Straits Times on Jan 3, the statement said, adding: "The defendant published the words knowing that they were untrue, alternatively reckless as to whether they were true or false."

Mr Tang, who was Mr Jeyaretnam's WP team-mate in Cheng San GRC, told The Straits Times in an interview earlier that he would sue the PAP leaders and members and lodge a police report against them for calling him an anti-Christian Chinese chauvinist.

He named Rear-Admiral Teo who said on Dec 26 that Mr Tang complained at a dinner in 1994 that there were too many Christians and English-educated permanent secretaries and people in the Cabinet.

Both Rear-Admiral Teo and Mr Ch'ng criticised his views on Chinese language and culture during the hustings. Their comments and Mr Tang's interview with The Straits Times were published in the local press.

The plaintiffs are relying on the inference that the people at the Jan 1 rally would have known of the matters set above.

They would also have known that Mr Jeyaretnam's reference to the two police reports was in relation to the allegations of criminal conduct against the plaintiffs.

The statement of claim by Rear-Admiral Teo and Mr Ch'ng said: "The words, in the context in which they were published, in their natural and ordinary meaning, meant and were understood to mean that the plaintiffs have committed and were guilty of committing criminal offences."

They also argued that the words, by way of innuendo, bore and were understood to bear the meanings that the plaintiffs had committed and were guilty of criminal defamation and criminal conspiracy.

The other innuendo was that they had a defect in character and lacked honesty and integrity, the statement said, adding that Mr Jeyaretnam knew his words would be published and was liable for their publication in The Straits Times and Business Times on Jan 2.

They were calculated to disparage the profession or office of the plaintiffs who were gravely injured in their character, integrity and reputation and were brought into public scandal, odium and contempt.

The plaintiffs also said that Mr Jeyaretnam had made the remark to enhance his chances of becoming a Member of Parliament for Cheng San GRC.

 

[evisionary]

Found an old article: The Rich fight among themselves to be even richer.
http://www.asiaone.com/News/The+Straits+Times/Story/A1Story20080211-48963.html

With the financial backing of Tony's family, other Presidential hopefools doesn't stand a chance.

 

[PTADER]

WORLDWIDE COURT INJUNCTION TAKEN OUT AGAINST TANG AND WIFE

147th Prostitute Press
28 January 1997


THE Prime Minister, the Senior Minister and nine other PAP members have obtained a worldwide injunction to prevent Mr Tang Liang Hong from disposing of his assets if he has to pay for damages and legal costs in their defamation suits against him.

Under the Mareva injunction, which Justice Lai Kew Chai approved yesterday, Mr Tang will have to set aside up to S$11.2 million for possible damages and legal costs if he decides to liquidate his assets.

The injunction applies to Mr Tang, the defeated Workers' Party election candidate, as well as his wife, Madam Teo Siew Har.

A one-page statement from the lawyers for Mr Goh Chok Tong and the other PAP members issued at 11.15 last night said:

"Justice Lai Kew Chai has given his approval today to an order of court dated Jan 27 for a worldwide Mareva injunction and ancillary action up to the value of S$11.2 million in the actions of Messrs Goh Chok Tong, Lee Kuan Yew, BG Lee Hsien Loong, Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam, Teo Chee Hean, Ch'ng Jit Koon, Ow Chin Hock, Chin Harn Tong, Ker Sin Tze, Seng Han Thong and Lee Yock Suan against Tang Liang Hong and Madam Teo Siew Har (Mrs Tang).

"Justice Lai also made the following orders:

* Madam Teo be joined as a joint defendant in the above actions.

* Madam Teo enter an appearance within eight days of the service of the amended writs of summons in the above action.

* Madam Teo be exempted from filing a defence in the above actions.

* Leave be granted for the plaintiff to serve a combined order.

"If Mr Tang and/or Madam Teo neglect to obey the order of the court, they will be liable to a process of execution, including committal proceeding for the purposes of compelling them to obey the same."

The statement comes soon after Mr Tang told reporters from London last Thursday that he was selling his properties in Singapore and Malaysia to fight the lawsuits filed against him by PAP ministers and members.

This includes his family bungalow in Hua Guan Avenue, in the prime residential Bukit Timah district.

Property agents estimate the 8,000 sq ft bungalow to be worth between $4.5 million and S$5 million, based on a conservative estimate of S$600 per sq ft. Mr Tang has said that he had entrusted the sale of his properties in both countries to his law firm.

He has declined to say how many houses he owns, but sources in the real estate sector have said that he owns a number of houses and several pieces of land in Malaysia.

 

[rusty]

He was the head of the brain washing machine...The Shit Times.
He gambled with our reserves and what's next when he becomes the president.

 

[myfoot123]

Being in the GIC all his donkey years, he doesn't believe in accountability and transparency. The reason for him wanting to contest for the president post is to follow through PAP prescribed path -so that no one knows PAP dirts and TT is a good well-kept PAP secret. On the other hand, TCB and TKL both have very independent mind of their own, they will not compromise with PAP if they smell something is amiss. To protect Singaporeans reserves and stopped Ho Jinx gambling spree, we need people like TCB or TKL. Tony Tan is not qualified to be people president because he has been in ivory tower for too long. If we said PAP is out of touch with the ground, TT is not in touch at all. Otherwise Straits Times will not be ranked 158th under international freedom of press.

60% daft Singaporeans. You still have time to repent if you regretted voting for PAP. This is your last chance to make things right again.

 

[PTADER]

IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT CANCELS PASSPORTS OF TANG'S WIFE
147th Prostitute Press
30 January 1997


THE wife of Mr Tang Liang Hong, Madam Teo Siew Har, has had her passports cancelled to stop her leaving before investigations into her husband's taxes are completed.

A Home Affairs Ministry statement yesterday said that all her passports had been cancelled since Monday by the Controller of Immigration, on the direction of Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng.

The one-page statement explained that on Monday, the Home Affairs Ministry had been informed by the Comptroller of Income Tax that the defeated Workers' Party candidate was under investigation.

The statement also gave two reasons why the Comptroller thought she should not be allowed to leave.

She had been "involved in the movement of some of Mr Tang's files from his office to their home" and could have been "involved in the administration of Mr Tang's tax matters", it said.

"After considering the above facts, the Minister directed the Controller of Immigration to cancel all the passports issued to Madam Teo under the Passport Regulations with effect from Jan 27."

Madam Teo's restricted passport was confiscated on Monday night at the Woodlands checkpoint as she tried to leave for Malaysia. She still has her international passport but cannot use it.

Why we seized files: Iras

In a separate statement issued yesterday in response to media queries, the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore explained why it raided Mr Tang's house and office in the early hours of Tuesday.

The one-page statement explained that such raids were undertaken when the tax authorities suspected that relevant documents might be destroyed or tampered with.

Most raids are done during office hours, but in his case, "it was observed that many large boxes were being moved from his office at about 9.30 pm on Monday".

Suspecting that these boxes could contain relevant documents, the tax authorities moved to seize all relevant documents from his home and office immediately.

The Iras investigation officers removed "a substantial number of boxes of files and documents".

The statement also said that the Iras had started monitoring Mr Tang from the "middle of 1996, well before the General Election".

It said all taxpayers who fail to give their accounts as required when they file their annual tax returns would have their cases identified for review in June of the tax year.

"In our review, we pay particular attention to those cases where the taxpayers have reported significant variations in their earnings. Some cases would then be selected for further monitoring," it said.

Iras also said that it was unable to say when the examination of Mr Tang's documents would be completed and added that in any case it "depended on how cooperative the taxpayer was".





WHAT POWER HAS MINISTER TO DO THIS?

147th Prostitutes
31 January 1997


THE Workers' Party has asked Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng to state the power he has to cancel and impound passports issued to Mr Tang Liang Hong's wife, Madam Teo Siew Har.

"This is a matter of great interest to our citizens who hold international and restricted passports," WP chief J.B. Jeyaretnam said in a statement yesterday.

The Controller of Immigration, he noted, had not answered her solicitors' letter asking for the power under which she was prevented from leaving for Malaysia on Monday night when her restricted passport was impounded.

"Will the Minister of Home Affairs say under what power the international passport was cancelled and the restricted passport was impounded?" he asked.

Madam Teo's passports were cancelled to stop her from leaving Singapore before investigations into her husband's taxes were completed. An MHA statement on Wednesday also said she had been "involved in the movement of some of Mr Tang's files from his office to their home" and could be "involved in the administration of Mr Tang's tax matters".

It added that her passports had been cancelled since Monday by the Controller of Immigration, on the direction of the Home Affairs Minister

 

[PTADER]

Tony Tan demands Singaporeans to stop being "hypocritical" and pay him and his ministers the millions they are demanding as salaries so that the families of men like him and his PAP comrades would not "suffer".


Govt open about the way it pays ministers : Tony Tan

147th Prostitute Press
4 December 1993

THE Government has never shied away from paying its ministers and other office-holders openly, unlike in other countries where secret payments or undisclosed perks are made, Dr Tony Tan said yesterday.

"This openness is very important because it forms the basis for the honest and corruption-free government for which Singapore is admired throughout the world and which forms the basis for our progress and prosperity," Dr Tan (Sembawang GRC) noted.

Singapore should, he added, continue with its system of revising regularly the salaries of civil servants and political office-holders so that it maintains its reputation as a nation free of corruption.

The former Minister for Education, who stepped down at the end of 1991 to return to banking, was one of several MPs who rose in support of the salary revisions.

Dr Tan, who is now chairman of OCBC Bank, called on Singaporeans to view the revised salaries in perspective.

The salaries were not exorbitant, but "in line, in fact, lower than, the salaries which are paid to senior executives in the private sector".

He added that Singaporeans should not begrudge civil servants and ministers their salary revision.

They should also not be hypocritical about paying these people adequately, as the revision was "our investment in the future of Singapore".

He added that after 13 years of working closely with the Cabinet, he could vouch that the ministers were honourable people.

"For anybody to question the motivation and intention of the Government in making this salary revision will be to my mind quite absurd."

He said high salaries should not be used as a means to attract people to public service, as a sense of public duty and mission was also needed.

But it helped for those who were serving in full-time office that they be paid adequate salaries, so that they could look after their families and need not worry that their families would suffer as a result of them going into office.

 

[PTADER]

Of course, it's a bit different when it comes to salaries of ordinary Singaporeans.

Ministers' salaries must go up, says Tony Tan.

Singaporeans' salaries must go down, says he.


DPM Tan urges workers to do their part in wage reforms
147th Prostitute Press (CNA Division)
11 July 2003

Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan has urged workers to do their part to bring down wage costs even as Singapore has a window of opportunity to attract more investments because of the recent SARS crisis.

Dr Tan's comments come just a day after economic data released by the government showed a dismal performance in the second quarter.

It was the launch of a photo exhibition on the SAF's peacekeeping mission in East Timor, where over 1,000 peacekeepers have served since 1999.

The media were keen to find out the Defence Minister's assessment of Singapore's economic outlook.

Despite the poor performance of the economy, mainly due to the impact of SARS, Dr Tan was optimistic going forward.

He said the crisis has made international investors acutely aware of the dangers of putting all their eggs in one basket, like in China.

"If something happens in that country, your production may be disrupted, so the issue of business continuity becomes very important. And I think following on from the SARS issue, investors will be very concious of the need to ensure they spread their investments," said Dr Tan.

Hence Singapore is likely to benefit.

But before that, Dr Tan feels wage reform is urgent.

"If we show that we are prepared to take a determined effort to hold down costs particularly in the area of wages, then it will show international investors that we are quite serious and Singaporeans are prepared to take difficult steps."

Especially to reward workers according to performance and not seniority.

He acknowledged that unemployment and retrenchment need to be tackled.

"A nation is not a company, you can't sack Singapore citizens, they are part of our society. Whether they are successful or unsuccessful, they are part of the Singapore family, and we have a duty to look after them," Dr Tan said.

It is hoped with more investments, new jobs can be created, but workers have to be nimble and retrain.

**************

Wage cost burden heavier than in US.
147th Prostitute Press
27 August 2003


Quoting a Perc global survey, Deputy PM Tony Tan tells why it is urgent that costs are brought down through CPF rate cuts

SINGAPORE'S workers have become more expensive than those in the United States and Australia, according to an international survey.

It shows Singapore is not just ahead of developing countries but also developed cities such as New York and Sydney.

This 'alarming' situation worries Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan, who brought it up yesterday to show why the Central Provident Fund (CPF) rates must be cut swiftly and substantially.

The survey issued by the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (Perc) firm on July 2 shows that on a scale of zero to 10, with zero being the lowest labour cost country, Singapore stood at 5.5, the fourth highest among 14 countries surveyed. This puts it ahead of the US (5.07) and Australia (4.8).

'To me, this is a profoundly important statistic. It's a simple one but it gets to the nub of the problem. We have priced our labour out of the market,' Dr Tan told reporters, elaborating on a speech he made later at a dinner to celebrate the 35th anniversary of Sembawang Shipyard and its employees' union, and National Day.

He made it plain he was not expecting workers here to match the cheap wages of China and India or those of neighbouring countries.

'But it is crucial that we do not price ourselves ahead of developed countries which are also our competitors in the global market,' he said.

He acknowledged that obtaining a correct reading of the economic situation was difficult.

However, a meeting in June with US businessmen in New York led him to realise there was something amiss here. The Americans were confident of a resurgence in their economy but back home, he found companies continued to retrench.

'There was something more than the Sars' impact or other transitory factors. It must be a structural factor.'

The Perc report crystallised the problem: high wage costs.

Its labour cost index is derived from a survey of expatriates working in Asia, asking them to rate the country's labour cost. The finding is checked for consistency against its data on other labour costs.

The Perc survey also looked at overall costs of doing business, prime rents and utility costs, and Singapore did relatively better.

As Dr Tan pointed out, measures are in place to ease other business rigidities: Corporate tax will be cut to 20 per cent by 2005, many government charges have been cut or removed, and land prices are kept affordable.

The need now is to remove the rigidity in wage structure - the CPF rates, said Dr Tan.

It makes companies less flexible because it is 'a tax on cash flow'. By lowering it, more money is immediately available to keep companies viable, thus saving jobs.

'We have no choice but to reduce our CPF rates substantially and quickly if we want to save jobs,' he said, echoing similar calls made on Sunday by Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong and Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Mr Goh had said the current 36 per cent could be lowered to possibly 30 per cent.

Yesterday, Dr Tan said: 'The more substantial the cut, the more likely you don't have to make another cut down the road.'

He assured Singaporeans of help: 'No Singaporean will lose his or her home or be denied medical care because of the cut in CPF. We will help Singaporeans to meet their mortgage payments.'

Poor families will also get aid for daily needs, he added.

Dr Tan's call for a CPF cut was supported last night by Mr M. Ramasamy, president of the Sembawang Shipyard Employees' Union.

He said: 'It's for our survival and we should have done it much earlier.'.

 

[Varuna]

Never knew much about this person Tony Tan except for his perculiar way of sporting a unique comb-back haristyle and the high waist pants which is always pulled almost to his chest level. Any further info about him to earn our votes.

 

[Rogue Trader]

26 August 2003 2104 hrs (SST) 1304 hrs (GMT)
Channel News Asia

Singapore's labour costs higher than US, Australia: DPM Tan

By S. Ramesh

It is more expensive to hire a worker in Singapore compared with the
United States and Australia.

That's the finding of a recent report by a risk consultancy, and this
says Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan, is a major concern.

Speaking at Sembawang Shipyard's National Day dinner on Tuesday, Dr
Tan reiterated the need for a lower CPF contribution rate to slow
down the rate of companies relocating elsewhere.

He said PERC's July report compared the average labour costs in a
number of Asia-Pacific countries, rating them from zero to 10.

As expected, China was a clear winner in the lowest labour cost
category, with a grade of 2.00.

Singapore was rated fourth highest with a grade of 5.50.

But what's alarming is Singapore's grade was higher than that of the
US with 5.07 and Australia with 4.90.

This means it is more expensive to hire a worker in Singapore,
compared to a similar worker in the US or Australia.

Dr Tan said: "This to me is a profoundly important statistic. Simple
one, but it really gets to the nub of the problem. We have priced our
labour out of the market. And when we do that, even when demand comes
back companies will not expand their operations here."

And Dr Tan said, a high rate of CPF contribution is a major rigidity
in the wage structure.

Also, from the point of view of companies, income tax is a tax on
profits which the company makes, but CPF contribution is a tax on the
company's cash flow.

With a lower CPF rate, companies will immediately have more money to
finance operations and be viable, thus saving jobs.

Dr Tan said Singapore had no choice but to reduce CPF contributions
substantially and quickly, if jobs are to be saved.

"If this proposed reduction in CPF contributions is to have a maximum
impact, it should be done as quickly as possible and the more
substantial you make the cut, it is more likely you won't have to
make another cut down the road," he said.

And he had this assurance for all Singaporeans.

"No Singaporean will lose his or her home or be denied medical care
simply because of the CPF cut...we will look after Singaporeans and
we should look after Singaporean workers because we have a
responsibility," he added.

 

[Windsor]

Tony Tan, well-known as a staunchest ally of the Lees and has a lot to answer for our predicament. I believe he was also instrumental in the Primary School and Secondary School Streaming exercises that encourages elitism. There were many of such policies now in place, thanks to Tony Tan and GCT. Singaporeans should well remember this when they vote in the EP. DO we want another Nathan or even one worse than Nathan?

 

[Rogue Trader]

DO we want another Nathan or even one worse than Nathan?

President Nathan says Tony Tan has the qualities to lead S'pore
Posted: 23 June 2011 1843 hrs

Photos 1 of 1

President S R Nathan

SINGAPORE : Singapore's President, S R Nathan, says Dr Tony Tan has the qualities to lead the country.

His comments followed Dr Tan's announcement on Thursday morning that he would contest the upcoming Presidential Election.

Mr Nathan called him a remarkable man and wished him well.

He was speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a book launch at the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS).

The book, titled "The Law and Practice of Singapore Income Tax", is the product of the tax community's first collaboration between the public and private sector.

The 39 authors and editors are from the accounting, auditing and legal fields, as well as IRAS.

The book is not an entry-level book, but instead is aimed at helping practitioners gain more insight into Singapore's taxation laws.

When Mr Nathan was asked whether he had decided to run again for the presidency, he said he would be giving an answer in two weeks' time.

He added: "You have to wait for that. Everybody's asking me that question. I'm having sleepless nights trying not to answer. So not before long, you'll get the answer."

- CNA/al

 

[Lucian Darth]

Thanks Bro trader, for the valuable history lesson. Phui! This fellow is totally in cohoots with them. He is not getting my vote.

 

[lianbeng]

lianbeng says, "tony tan used to be minister of state, defence, health, education, etc... hor! dun play play hor!"

 

[Rogue Trader]

Thanks Bro trader, for the valuable history lesson. Phui! This fellow is totally in cohoots with them. He is not getting my vote.

Don't thank me. I merely googled for "Tony Tan" and cut-n-pasted what was reported in the States times.

I've heard that Tony Tan is one of the most polite and humble human beings anyone can meet. But his past deeds as a MIW gives an "interesting" insight.

 

[Windsor]

Don't thank me. I merely googled for "Tony Tan" and cut-n-pasted what was reported in the States times.

I've heard that Tony Tan is one of the most polite and humble human beings anyone can meet. But his past deeds as a MIW gives an "interesting" insight.

Tony Tan, MIW's favourite son us now vying to be the next EP of Singapore. As one of MIW top policy-maker and originator of unprecedented changes to our CPF, school streaming exercises and many more, he is undoubtedly one of the most influential Minister in Singapore's history.

From LKY to GCT and now LHL, Tony Tan has been part of of the MIW innermost circle. He stands tall, surpassing even GCT in contributions, with the likes of Goh Keng Swee and Rajaratnam in the making of Singapore. So what is the difference between these 3 gentlemen you ask?

Unlike GKS and Raja, TT's contributions were more towards dismantling and tweaking systems that brought Singapore forward since Independence. The Singapore of today was partly due to TT's efforts and no thanks to him, our school beget Elitism, our CPF no longer offers a safety net for our retirement, our HDB becomes unaffordable and we have an influx of new citizens and FTs.

Singaporeans stood together to deny the MIW from a clean sweep during the 2011 GE. Our efforts to gain more opposition seats were foiled due to the gerrymandering and other obstacles put in place to ensure they will win. Who was the man in charge of SPH who were helping the MIW during GE? This time, for the election of the EP, Singaporeans should be more determine to deny the MIW to put in place someone who was instrumental in denying us our rights.

In conclusion, I had in the beginning decided to spoil my vote for the coming EP elections as we all know anyone that is the next EP will be helpless. I have changed my mind and will vote anyone who is not Tony Tan.