Rilek1Corner

Tag: The Workers’ Party

  • 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

  • MND Appeal To Be Heard On 3 August

    MND Appeal To Be Heard On 3 August

    An appeal by the Ministry of National Development (MND) against a High Court decision not to appoint independent accountants to the Workers’ Party (WP)-run town council is expected to be heard on August 3.

    The ministry had originally asked for an expedited appeal process with the appeal hearing to be held in the week of July 6, but Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon said the appeal court’s July calendar was full.

    Another consideration was that the lawyer for WP’s Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC), Mr Peter Low, will be unavailable for the next three weeks.

    Presiding over an half-hour open-court session on Thursday to decide whether to grant the ministry’s request for its appeal to be fast-tracked, the Chief Justice said the August 3 date would depend on the availability of the other two Judges of Appeal who will hear the appeal as well.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • K Shanmugam: AHPETC’s “Egregious Conduct” Must Be Punished

    K Shanmugam: AHPETC’s “Egregious Conduct” Must Be Punished

    A day after a High Court raised the red flag on the goings-on in Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC), Law Minister K Shanmugam followed up with hard-hitting words for the Workers’ Party, which runs the town council.

    The scathing comments Justice Quentin Loh directed at AHPETC confirms his remarks previously that AHPETC’s town councillors had acted in an “unlawful” manner, said Mr Shanmugam, who is also Foreign Minister. He also zeroed in on the fact that the judge had highlighted AHPETC chairman Sylvia Lim’s misleading statements to Parliament about the financial transfers the town council was required to make.

    “I said in February, in Parliament, that the WP MPs’ conduct on AHPETC was unlawful. I said that several times. I choose my words carefully. This judgment confirms what I have said,” said Mr Shanmugam, who was giving his views on the court’s decision at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs today (May 28). “The judge was scathing about the town councilors and their conduct. He said that the chairman of the WP misled Parliament. It is very serious to lie in Parliament.”
    Today was not the first time Mr Shanmugam has, shorn of parliamentary privilege, described the WP town councillors’ conduct as unlawful. Parliamentary privilege refers to the legal immunity from any action in the courts for words spoken in the course of parliamentary proceedings. The aim is to allow Members to speak freely and frankly without fear of legal consequences.

    In an 80-page judgment released on yesterday, Justice Loh had said that AHPETC’s actions were “at the height of financial irresponsibility”, quoted Mr Shanmugam.

    The judgment underscores the fact that action should be taken over the “egregious conduct” of the AHPETC, he added, highlighting that the judge had said the conduct was “possibly criminal” and that the town council could be sued by residents and the Housing and Development Board.

    Mr Shanmugam said: “If this were to happen to a People’s Action Party town council, what do you think Singaporeans would be asking? If this were to happen to a public company, what do you think the shareholders would be saying? Is conduct like this responsible? Is the Government responsible if it just keeps quiet in the face of a judgment from the Supreme Court that says all these things?”

    The judge also noted that “it is clear there are grave and serious questions” in AHPETC, relating to its books and the validity and property of payments made to related parties.

    Calling for WP’s Secretary-General Low Thia Kiang and other AHPETC town councillors to take action, Mr Shanmugam said: “(They) have to explain what are they going to do to set right the situation? … What are they going to do to answer the ‘grave and serious questions’ that the court says has been raised? This is pretty serious.”

    Mr Shanmugam said MND will consult the Attorney-General’s Chambers on its next steps, but said the Government has a responsibility to pursue further action.

    Reiterating that the judgment concurs with the government’s position that AHPETC’s conduct “was bad … and actionable”, Mr Shanmugam said the judge was of the view that the Town Councils Act empower the HDB and residents, not MND, to seek legal action.

    “That is something the Attorney-General will advise us on, as to whether it is the correct interpretation, and what they should do about it,” he said.

    AHPETC could not be reached for comment today.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • Residents Forced To Clean Common Areas, Query AHPETC Collection Of S&CC Charges

    Residents Forced To Clean Common Areas, Query AHPETC Collection Of S&CC Charges

    SINGAPORE — For more than seven months, the residents and the developer of a Design, Build and Sell Scheme (DBSS) project at Upper Serangoon Road had to clean and maintain the common areas themselves, because of an impasse involving the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) and the Housing and Development Board (HDB) over maintenance documents.

    Following discussions, the standstill at Parkland Residences was recently resolved and from next month, the town council will fulfil its duty to manage common property in public housing estates as stipulated under the Town Council Act.

    However, as far as the residents and the developer are concerned, the matter is not fully resolved: Residents, several of whom had moved in as early as October last year, said that during that period, some of them continued to pay service and conservancy charges (S&CC), even though others had stopped paying as a matter of principle. Meanwhile, the developer, Kwan Hwee Investment, said it hopes to seek reimbursement for the expenses it had incurred for taking care of the common areas between November and this month.

    The situation came to light after TODAY reader Julia Ng wrote to the newspaper last week about the problems she and her neighbours face at Parkland Residences.

    Among other things, Ms Ng wrote about how residents were billed for the S&CC upon collecting their keys but “there were no subsequent reminders, and many of us have not been making payment”.

    She added: “It did not seem required, since there was no maintenance as evidenced by the dirty corridors and surroundings, especially in the earlier months when many residents took it upon themselves to clean the corridors.”

    Ms Ng said the residents understood that the development had not been handed over to the town council and that the S&CC “were collected on behalf of the HDB, which the latter denied”.

    Replying to Ms Ng’s letter, HDB director (land administration) Koo-Lee Sook Chin clarified that the S&CC collected by AHPETC “are not collected on behalf of HDB”. She revealed that AHPETC had “refused to perform its duty until the developer handed over a list of documents and items specified by (the town council)”.

    “HDB has clarified that these documents and items were not required for AHPETC to carry out its day-to-day cleaning and maintenance,” Mrs Koo-Lee said.

    She added that as AHPETC had “refused to maintain the common areas”, the HDB asked the developer to clean the estate in the interim, “to ensure that the hygiene of residents’ living environment would not be compromised”. The developer has been cleaning the estate since Nov 12 last year, Mrs Koo-Lee said.

    “Pending AHPETC’s execution of its duties to maintain the estate, HDB will work with the developer to ensure that the estate is maintained in the interim, for the benefit of all residents,” she said.

    Speaking to TODAY, Mr Philip Tan, Kwan Hwee Investment’s project manager for Parkland Residences, confirmed that the AHPETC wanted HDB’s endorsement for maintenance documents — such as drawings of water supply and gas pipes and lift maintenance schedule — but the HDB disagreed.

    Mr Tan said these documents are needed to assist a town council in taking over the maintenance of services. He added that the developer had deployed cleaners on a daily basis. “We hope to seek some form of reimbursements for the cleaning work that we have done since November,” he said.

    Responding to TODAY’s queries, an AHPETC spokesman said the town council “agrees that there is room to improve the handover procedures between the developer, the HDB and the town council with regard to DBSS developments”. He added that the town council was “exercising its due diligence in the handover”. Nevertheless, the town council has since reviewed its internal process, he said.

    The spokesman did not reply to questions on the S&CC, including which period was the AHPETC collecting the S&CC and what it intends to do with the S&CC collected. Residents at Parkland Residences said the situation has improved, but they recalled their frustrations in the initial months.

    “There was a rat infestation at my block,” said resident Joyce Wong, 27. “The bins at the lift lobbies just started piling up because no one was clearing them. When residents complained, the developers took away the bins, but then we didn’t have anywhere to discard our rubbish at.”

    Another resident, a homemaker who only wanted to be known as Mrs Chan, said: “We asked the HDB whether we should pay (S&CC), but they said they hadn’t handed over to the town council yet and were not collecting. When we approached the town council, they said they were collecting on behalf of HDB, but the HDB said they didn’t know anything.”

    Human resource manager Sim Bee Lay, 39, said she has not paid the S&CC since she moved into her flat.

    “We only received one letter and there were no reminders following that,” she added.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • High Court Turns Down MND Request For Independent Accountants At WP-Run AHPETC

    High Court Turns Down MND Request For Independent Accountants At WP-Run AHPETC

    The High Court will not appoint independent accountants to oversee government grants to the Workers’ Party (WP)-run town council.

    Justice Quentin Loh said that the Ministry of National Development (MND) has not established legal bases for its court application to appoint the accountants.

    Despite the “grave and serious questions” raised over the state of accounts at Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC), the judge wrote that “when the Town Councils are set up, the whole idea is to rest the responsibility of the management of the funds as well as the estate with the Town Council.”

    The Court therefore will not appoint independent accountants to oversee payments made by AHPETC.

    MND had wanted independent accountants to sign off on AHPETC payments over $20,000 before it released several million in government grants to the town council.

    But in his grounds of decision, released on Wednesday, Justice Loh said that it is a “travesty for AHPETC to have ignored their duties and obligations imposed on them by the Town Councils Act and Town Council Financial Rules.”

    “They owe a duty and a heavy responsibility to their constituents to run AHPETC properly and it is incumbent on them to put their house and finances in order.”

    “If AHPETC was a managing corporation … I have no doubt that AHPETC or its officers will be exposed to to the possibility of civil liability or, in an extreme scenario, criminal liability,” he added.

    Justice Loh said that his decision should not stop the Housing Board or AHPETC residents from bringing legal action against AHPETC for the lapses.

    In a two-day court hearing earlier this month, the MND said that questions remain over the cash flow position and accounting practices of AHPETC, which recently missed two sinking fund payments.

    AHPETC said that it did not make those payments as it needed the funds to keep daily operations going.

    MND has withheld two years of grants to AHPETC – a total of about $15 million – as it said it has no guarantee that those funds would be used properly.

    On March 20, MND applied to the court to appoint independent accountants to AHPETC to safeguard government grants.

    Earlier this year, serious accounting and governance lapses were discovered at AHPETC by the Auditor-General’s Office.

    Commenting in the judgment on Wednesday night, AHPETC chairman Sylvia Lim, who is also WP chairman and an MP of Aljunied GRC, said: “We respect the court’s decision and will be studying the judgment in detail.

    “In the meantime, we remain focused on filing our audited accounts for FY 13/14 and FY 14/15, and on continuing to improve our financial processes.”

    Separately, the ministry noted in a statement that the Court agreed with its concerns about AHPETC.

    A spokesman, citing the judgment, said: “The Court said there were ‘grave and serious questions’ that have been raised regarding the state of AHPETC’s accounts and the validity and propriety of payments previously made by AHPETC to related parties (amounting to $25.9 million), and that ‘there have also been numerous breaches of the provisions’ of the Town Councils Act and Town Councils Financial Rules. The Court added that the TC’s conduct was the height of financial irresponsibility.”

    She added: “The judge also stated that if AHPETC was a managing corporation subject to the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act, he would have no doubt that AHPETC or its officers will be exposed to the “possibility of civil liability… or, in an extreme scenario, criminal liability”.

    “The Court added that it was a travesty for AHPETC to have ignored their duties and obligations. And that the TC was to be blamed for not accepting MND’s offer to release the grant.

    “The Court said that HDB and residents could have brought the action, but not MND itself. The Court has also noted that MND can require the TC to appoint Independent Accountants (as a condition for release of grants), without having to get a court order.”

    The spokesman added that MND will carefully study the judgment, and consider what its next steps should be.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com