Rilek1Corner

Tag: opposition

  • Activist Han Hui Hui Calls For S$10,000 Donation To Pay For Legal Fees

    Activist Han Hui Hui Calls For S$10,000 Donation To Pay For Legal Fees

    On 5 June 2015, an email was received by Han Hui Hui informing her that she has to pay $6,000 to the Attorney General’s Chambers as her application OS67 has been withdrawn while she was overseas on 27 May 2015.

    OS67 is an Originating Summons seeking declarations that Singaporeans should be given the rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech at Hong Lim Park to demand for transparency and accountability.

    On 6 June 2015, $500 was paid to seek legal advice as OS67 is important to the #ReturnOurCPF case for both the illegal demonstration and public nuisance charges.

    On 7 June 2015, summons, affidavit and other legal documents were prepared.

    On 8 June 2015, a further $256.90 was being paid to the Supreme Court as filing fees.

    On 9 June 2015, the court has granted Han Hui Hui the right to represent herself in court as Mr M Ravi was suspended and there is no other legal counsel available.

    We are looking for 10,000 Singaporeans who care to give $1 each so as to continue this fight.

    This amount is for the court, filing and legal fees to continue the cases of Singaporeans being charged for the CPF Protest at Speakers’ Corner on 27 Sep.

    Send your $1 via Internet Banking, ATM or cheque to POSB savings account no. 279-12328-0.
    (This account belongs to Han Hui Hui and has the sole purpose of organising events as well as fighting lawsuits against us)

    Please help to share this meaningful activity with your friends.

    Source: www.allsingaporestuff.com

  • The Workers’ Party: A Response To Lawrence Wong

    The Workers’ Party: A Response To Lawrence Wong

    RESPONSE TO MINISTER LAWRENCE WONG’S OPINION PIECE

    AHPETC finds Minister Lawrence Wong’s accusations in The Straits Times of 5 June 2015 surprising and puzzling.  We would like to make the following clarifications to correct the misconceptions.

    1. What the High Court recently had to decide were, mainly, legal questions i.e. whether the court had power to entertain the Ministry of National Development’s request for the court to appoint and authorise independent accountants (1) to co-sign cheques for the disbursement of the FY 14/15 and FY 15/16 $14m Town Council grants which the MND had withheld; and (2) to look into AHPETC’s past transactions.  The High Court accepted the arguments of AHPETC’s lawyers that there were no legal bases whatsoever for the MND’s request, and accordingly, threw out the government’s entire case.
    1. There was no trial and the High Court did not itself embark on a dedicated fact-finding exercise.  However, in the course of delivering the judgment, the High Court expressed views on AHPETC’s lapses but the views were based, principally, on the findings of the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO) Report.
    1. A special two-day sitting of Parliament was convened to debate the AGO Report.  All Workers’ Party Members of Parliament (MPs) who are responsible for overseeing the management of the Town Council, including Secretary-General Mr Low Thia Khiang, participated in the debate to explain and clarify matters raised.
    1. Ms Sylvia Lim denies that she lied to Parliament.  Parliament has avenues such as the Committee of Privileges to ensure that MPs’ conduct meets the standards expected.
    2. Just because AHPETC did not physically transfer monies into Sinking Funds from its Operating Funds does not mean that monies are missing.  Up to Financial Year 13/14, AHPETC has done the necessary transfers.
    1. Currently, MND is withholding $14 million in grants to AHPETC.  If MND continues to withhold the grants from AHPETC that every Town Council should receive, AHPETC will not be able to fulfill its obligations to make the necessary Sinking Fund transfers.
    1. AHPETC does not understand the basis for Minister Lawrence Wong to accuse AHPETC or the Workers’ Party of “dishonesty” or “irresponsible” behaviour.
    1. All Town Councils are required to be audited, and the audit reports are presented to Parliament for public scrutiny.
    1. Whether AHPETC’s contractors are delivering services or not, and the standard of their work, is a matter that residents can assess for themselves.
    1. When Town Councils engage contractors, they are required to comply with rules on the calling of public tenders.  If any Town Council staff has committed any illegal act or corrupt practice, he / she will have to face the full consequences of the law.

    Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council spokesman
    05 June 2015

     

    Source: www.ahpetc.sg

  • Tan Kin Lian: Tan Cheng Bock Will Contest Under Workers’ Party

    Tan Kin Lian: Tan Cheng Bock Will Contest Under Workers’ Party

    After visiting an exhibition at Marina Bay Sands, I took a taxi back to my office. I had a nice chat with the taxi driver who drove a Comfort taxi for more than 20 years. We discussed how good were the old days, when Singapore was under Mr. LKY. The HDB flats were affordable, and the cost of living was also low.

    Things got progressively worse under the next two prime ministers. HDB flats are now too expensive. Many young men cannot afford to get married due to the high cost of housing.

    Then he gave a bombshell. He said that the PAP would lose at least four GRCs at the next general election – Marine Parade, East Coast, Bedok and Aljunied. (Maybe GCT will not contest in Marine Parade at the next GE?) The Workers Party are working hard in Pasir Ris also.

    Where are they going to get the candidates. His taxi driver friends had privileged information that Dr TCB and 40 ex PAP leaders will contest under the Workers Party banner. Wow!

    He made the statements in a most convincing manner. He believed in the reliability of his source. His friends had attended meetings where these matters were discussed.

    During the second World World, when Norway was occupied by the Nazis, there were regular rumors that the Allies had landed to liberate Norway. After a while, most people knew that the rumors were not true, but it was nice to hear them anyway.

    This was how I felt about the statements made by the Comfort taxi driver. They are probably not true, but it was nice to hear about them anyway. But, maybe … with Mr. LKY having passed away from the scene, the ex PAP leaders may be coming forward?

     

    Tan Kin Lian

    Source: http://tankinlian.blogspot.sg

  • Roy Ngerng: PAP Makes Singaporeans Pay High Taxes And Earn From It

    Roy Ngerng: PAP Makes Singaporeans Pay High Taxes And Earn From It

    The PAP government in Singapore keeps masquerading to Singaporeans that tax is low in Singapore.

    Indeed, the personal income tax that Singaporeans pay on a per capita basis is low – it is one of the lowest among the highest-income countries.

    However, what the PAP does not tell you is that Singaporeans pay much higher indirect taxes and high social contribution rates.

    In fact, Singaporeans pay more than 4 times higher indirect tax than personal income tax. Where other high-income countries pay about the same amount of indirect tax as personal income tax, Singaporeans actually pay more than 4 times more.

    Not only that, Singaporeans also pay more than 3 times higher social security into the Central Provident Fund (CPF) than personal income tax. Again, where other high-income countries pay much lesser into social security or on average, about the same as personal income tax, Singaporeans are made to pay more than 3 times more.

    In total, Singaporeans thus actually have to pay nearly 8 times more into indirect tax and social security than personal income tax. This is when other high-income countries only pay an average of about twice as much or at most four times as much than personal income tax.

    So, you see, it is not true that Singaporeans pay low taxes. The income tax rate is low but what Singaporeans have to pay into indirect tax and social security is nearly 8 times more, which is a lot.

    The PAP keeps saying that personal income tax is low and thus Singaporeans should be grateful. But this is how the PAP is trying to trick you. Personal income tax is low but it is not for you. Only a very small and select group of people benefit from the low personal income tax – the rich.

    Indeed, Singapore’s top personal income tax rate is the lowest among the developed countries – 20%.

    But do you know even the highest income earners in Singapore do not have to pay the top rate of 20%? In fact, for someone who earns US$300,000 a year in Singapore, he or she only need to pay 14.1% – which is much lower than what a similar income earner in the other developed countries have to pay, and is also the lowest among the developed countries.

    Not only that, when compared to the top tax rate of 20%, a US$300,000 earner in Singapore only needs to pay 70.5% of the top tax rate. This is the lowest proportion among the highest-income countries, where a similar income earner would have to pay an income tax of about 90% of the top tax rate. In other words, high-income earners get to get away with it, more than the other developed countries.

    In comparison, for the majority of Singaporeans, we have to pay 37% of our wages into CPF. As compared to the rich who only have to pay 14.1% of their salaries into tax, the majority of Singaporeans are sacrificing more than twice as much into CPF.

    There is the rhetoric that the CPF is not tax but as I will show you soon, the CPF is a tax and the majority of low- and middle-income Singaporeans are paying more than the high-income earners, the PAP among them, into tax.

    So, you see, personal income tax rate is low, sure. But it is not for you. It is only for the very rich. Not only is personal income tax low for them, it is the lowest among the developed countries.

    ‪#‎SayNotoPAP‬

     

    Source: Roy Ngerng

  • Amos Yee: Singapore Government Sucks But Opposition Also Manipulative

    Amos Yee: Singapore Government Sucks But Opposition Also Manipulative

    My mother, upon reading what Vincent had done to me, was absolutely horrified and disturbed, contacted Terry Xu of TheOnlineCitizen, to confirm that the moments I had mentioned concerning her in lieu of the Vincent story, was true, and to perhaps express it to the general public.

    However, as of now, Terry has yet to reply to my mother, even though he had been prompt in replying to her before, and voluntarily offering to write an article, explaining and showing the true nature of my mother’s police report.

    And Roy Ngerng who initially condemned me for my actions towards making molest allegations to Vincent. Now chooses to remain absolutely silent about the affair, after I had revealed the emotional abuse Vincent had inflicted on me.

    I asked him if he could assist in helping me confirm that the altercation he witnessed between Vincent and I, when we went to Public Enemy was true. But he refused to do so, still claiming that it’s to protect Vincent from any further harm.

    So Roy Ngerng thinks that hiding the truth, is advantageous for Vincent. Ahh… I see now why they are very good friends.

    But I think really, the true reason why Terry and Roy have refrained from talking about all of this, is simply because people just don’t like to admit that they have changed their opinions once further evidence have surfaced, because that might indicate that when they made their initial hasty judgement, they were wrong.

    And this is the reason, why PAP is able to rule the country for so long.

    The government in Singapore really fucking sucks, but then again, the opposition are manipulative too.

     

    Source: Amos Yee