WP Misses Court Deadline to Appoint Accountant

The Workers' Party (WP) of Singapore is once again up to their old tricks. Since failing in their appeal in the High Court, the WP was given until yesterday (5 February 2016) to appoint one of the Big 4 accounting firm as their independent auditor.

When the deadline came, instead of appointing an auditor, the WP has filed a motion to request for an extension of time. To be honest, this was not unexpected as the WP desperately tries to prevent Singaporeans from knowing the truth about the Town Council financial accounts. By all estimates, money has mostly likely been misappropriated.

We seriously hope the Court will act to find the WP in contempt of their orders. This game of delay has gone on for long enough and Singaporeans have been patient. But enough is enough and we want to know the truth.

AHTC Court Case - Pritam Singh

Apparently serving his in-camp training (ICT), WP's Pritam Singh showed up in Court in his No. 4 uniform. To many NSmen, this is clearly a cheap trick as it takes mere minutes to change out of uniform. Sources also tell us that Pritam had been similarly excused from ICT before to attend court cases and in each of those instances he had changed.

Pritam's appearance in Court in his No. 4 can therefore be seen as a cheap attempt to play the patriot card. This same tactic was used most famously by Oliver North during the Iran-Contra Scandal.

Unfortunately for Pritam, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon did not fall for the trick and issued Pritam an ultimatum. AHTC now has until Friday to appoint an independent accountant. Failing which, the Court will appoint. CJ Menon also concluded that AHTC and or its lawyer Peter Low was less than truthful in their earlier affidavits and, essentially implied, that AHTC was playing a delay game.

The end of AHTC, and the Workers Party, has begun. Once an independent auditor is appointed, the truth about the missing funds will be revealed. We wouldn't be surprised if The Workers Party now suddenly comes clean and pleads for voters forgiveness. In fact, the WP only managed to do 1 of the 2 transfers of sinking funds ordered by the Court. So money is definitely missing.

While some may consider this a loss for democracy in Singapore, we believe that it is more dangerous for Singapore to have opposition members without the correct values.

AHPETC High Court Appeal - Pritam Incompetent or Dishonest?

I have been closely following the court case as, like many of my friends, we had high hopes for the WP to be the alternative to the PAP. Sadly, the WP imploded with its mismanagement of its Town Council and, in my opinion, this contributed significantly to their dismal performance at GE2015. Whether it was incompetence or financial impropriety, AHPETC is the albatross hanging around the heads of Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim and Pritam Singh.

From the newspapers reports, I learnt that  Ajunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) nominated an essentially one-man operation called Business Assurance to be the accountant to solve their many problems.  HDB asked some questions presumably because it has concerns about the company’s capabilities. The TC declined to reply and referred the issue to the Court. Last week, the Court directed the TC to provide more information on Business Assurance.

I am really surprised that AHTC chose this company because if they had bothered to ask around in the industry, they would have discovered some interesting facts about this one-man operation owned and managed by Alex Chai Chon Fatt. Being an accountant, I am aware that it is fairly common knowledge among many of us in the industry that Alex Chai has failed his Practice Monitoring Programme (PMP) and that he is restricted from conducting audits of companies for a period of 1 year. In fact, this is the second time that Alex Chai has failed his PMP.

For those that are unsure about what the PMP is, the PMP is the regulatory instrument to promote audit quality. Audit quality is the cornerstone of market confidence in the reliability of the financial information upon which the market makes capital allocation decisions. The PMP provides quality assurance to the market through ascertaining whether public accountants have complied with the prescribed auditing standards, methods, procedures and other requirements. This assurance gives users of financial reports increased confidence in audit opinions.

Did Pritam Singh know all this when he selected and nominated the firm? If he did, he was pulling a fast one to mislead HDB and the Court. If not, he has been sloppy because there is every reason why he or his GM should have conducted due diligence checks to ensure that the company is in good standing before selecting and nominating them. They would have found out if they had asked Business Assurance directly because I don’t think Alex would lie about failing the PMP and is under restriction as these are unavoidable facts.

I eagerly await the unfolding drama in Court this week. MND and HDB will definitely be aware that Alex Chai is no longer qualified to conduct the audit. In fact, a quick Google check will tell you that since 14 Nov 2014, Alex Chai had joined Transcorp Holdings as its financial controller. So what is the WP and Pritam Singh up to?  If you ask me, it is likely that Pritam  will now waste the Court’s time by giving some excuse to avoid answering the question directly as to whether they knew or whether they didn’t bother to conduct basic due diligence checks on  Business Assurance and Alex Chai’s professional standing before selecting and nominating it.

BTW while I cannot confirm this, I also heard talk in the industry that AHTC’s latest auditor was Audit Alliance and its senior partner, Lee Tai Wai had also failed his PMP. 

AHPETC - WP Misleads Public with Creative Headlines

The Worker’s Party continues to mislead the public with their creative headlines.

LIES

In an amazing announcement, Pritam Singh, Chairman of Aljunied Town Council (AHTC) announced that the "AHTC welcomes the Court’s rejection of the submission of the Attorney-General’s Chambers (representing MND & HDB) that AHTC’s conduct of its defence during the course of the hearings at the High Court and at the Court of Appeal was egregious and somehow improper.”

In their subsequent statement published on their own website, the WP claims that “at the hearing on 7 January 2016, AHTC, the Ministry of National Development (MND) and the Housing & Development Board (HDB) have been ordered to bear their own legal costs.” The WP also claimed that they welcomed the “the Court’s rejection of the submission of the Attorney-General’s Chambers (representing MND & HDB) that AHTC’s conduct of its defence during the course of the hearings at the High Court and at the Court of Appeal was egregious and somehow improper.”

REALITY

Firstly, the Court usually requires litigating parties to bear their own costs. So by arguing that the WP had won as the HDB and MND had to bear their own cost, is the same as saying that HDB and MND had also won as WP had been ordered to bear their own legal costs. It makes no sense.

Secondly, MND and HDB never asked for carte blanche to look into AHPETC’s financial affairs. In fact, AHTC had tried and failed to get the court to prevent the appointed independent accountant from looking into FMSS and FMSI. The High Court had in fact extended the authority of the independent accountant to look beyond FMSS and FMSI if it is necessary to recover money lost.

TRUTH

What we can say is that the WP is skilled in the art of manipulation. They realise that people seldom read beyond the headlines and as long as they push out misleading headlines, they will win war of public perception. In order not to be deceived, and to see the WP for what they really are, we urge Singaporeans to take a second look at what they are saying, and then to verify the facts.

AHPETC - Punggol East Accounts

The WP's AHPETC has, as we expected, has been unable to hand over an audited (and unqualified) account of the Punggol East Town Council. The following is the statement by PAP's MP Charles Chong to his residents.

--------

Dear Punggol East residents,

The team from Pasir Ris-Punggol Town Council has taken over the functions of the Town Council for Punggol East Constituency with effect from 1 December 2015, which is in line with MND’s guideline for the handover to be completed.

We have received the first set of documents from AHTC and are examining them. We are awaiting a second set of documents from AHTC which would be the audited financial statements on the PE accounts. We will only be in a position to comment further on the handover after all documents are submitted and examined.

Even though the audited accounts are not ready, we have taken over the official management of estate matters in Punggol East. While this may cause us some difficulties, it  does not serve the residents' interests to prolong the handover period and we would like to get down to work as soon as possible.

The Town Council office at Blk 156A Rivervale Cresent is undergoing minor renovation works and will be in operation from 22 Dec onwards. From now till 21 Dec, residents can go to any of the PRPTC offices at these locations below. The Town Council website address is http://www.prpg-tc.org.sg/index.php

For Town Council related issues you can also reach me at my email : Charles_Chong@prpg-grc.sg

Sengkang Office
Blk 266 Compassvale Bow #01-06
Singapore 540266
Tel: 6489 0520
Fax: 6385 0930
Email: sengkang@prpg-tc.org.sg

Punggol Office
Blk 603 Punggol Road #01-01
Singapore 820603
Tel: 6590 9500
Fax: 6659 8263
Email: punggol@prpg-tc.org.sg

Pasir Ris Office:
Blk 577 Pasir Ris
St 53 #01-88
Singapore 510577
Tel: 6585 4938
Fax: 6585 4937
Email: pasirris@prpg-tc.org.sg

AHPETC Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of the Government

In the latest chapter of the long-running Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol-East Town Council (AHPETC) saga, the Court of Appeals on Friday (27 November 2015) made the following findings:

1.  AHPETC did not disclose related party transactions in its financial statement.  It could not produce any evidence to show that the Town Councillors had considered the full extent of the related party interests.

2.   There were lapses in the procurement of services from FMSS.

3.   Key officers of AHPETC were acting in clear conflict of interest when they approved payment to FMSS - a company in which they themselves were Directors and Shareholders.

4.    AHPETC had not taken any steps to recover amounts due as a result of wrong payments made.

5.   AHPETC did not have a system to monitor its S&CC charges accurately.  As a result, there was no assurance that it was able to monitor and manage arrears properly.  It did not have a proper system to ensure that documents were properly accounted for and safeguarded.

6.   AHPETC had various lapses in internal controls.

7.   AHPETC continues to be in non-compliance by failing to pay into sinking fund.  There is no basis at all for AHPETC to fail to make the transfers.  AHPETC should do so within 3 months, if necessary by increasing FMCC charges or by liquidating its investments.

8.    The Court also held that they ought to appoint Independent Accountants (IAs) to assist in identifying the outstanding non-compliance by AHPETC.  These Accountants will also look at whether payments were made wrongfully and should be recovered.

In a surprising move, Chairman of the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) Pritam Singh said AHTC "fully accepts and respects" the Court of Appeal’s judgment, and will comply with "all the orders made by the court". He said AHTC will also work with MND to facilitate the prompt transfer of the outstanding grants to AHTC. Pritam added, "The Town Council acknowledges its role as a guardian of public funds. We assure the Ministry of National Development (MND) that government grants or grants-in-aid are used solely for the upkeep of the town and in the interests of all residents."

Hopefully, with the IAs appointed and a proper forensic audit performed, we can finally get to the truth of the matter.

Post GE2015 The AHPETC Saga Continues

Post Singapore General Election 2015, the issue at AHPETC continues. Zaobao yesterday published a forum letter in which the writer complained about poor estate management by the Worker's Party led Town Council.

Apparently, all is not well in Aljunied ...

ZB carried a letter (“Unsatisfactory management by WP town council”) by Hougang resident Chen Fuming, who said that the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council’s management of the estate was not up to standard. He cited several examples: a fallen tree was covered up with clutter turning it into a potential mosquitoe-breeding ground; choked drainage pipes on the ground floors of HDB flats were realigned instead of being cleared; rubbish chutes in HDB flats were not properly cleaned; and only three HDB blocks had been repainted under a maintenance and repainting project launched in October 2013. Chen also highlighted a particular multi-storey carpark which he claimed was poorly maintained, and said that residents should be refunded a year’s worth of S&CC if it was proven so.