-
In light of the large amounts of claims made to the former CCC Chairman, will there be a full audit of all payments made by the CCC to the said CCC Chairman?
-
What was the exact nature of the “claims” made? Why was there a need to incur such large “claims” in relation to voluntary work on behalf of the CCC?
-
What was the total amount of “claims” made by the CCC to the CCC Chairman, and what were these “claims” for?
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...or-since-2014/
AGO: Grassroots organization unfairly awards contracts to a foreign contractor since 2014
Published on 2018-07-18 by Correspondent
The People Association (PA) and one of its Grassroots Organizations (GRO) have been questioned by the Auditor-General Office (AGO) in its report released yesterday (17 Jul) over 2 tenders whose contract value totaled $500,000 for the Mid-Autumn Festival 2016 and Chinese New Year 2017 events.
AGO found that the GRO responsible for calling the 2 tenders had used the same foreign contractor for the manufacturing of the street light-up decorative items. In fact, the same foreign contractor had been awarded contracts for the annual Mid-Autumn Festival and CNY events since 2014.
AGO observed that the GRO was bias and had not evaluated the proposals from the other tenderers on the same basis. “Besides the issue of fairness, there was also no assurance that the contract was awarded to the tenderer which could provide the best value,” AGO noted.
Furthermore, the foreign contractor who was awarded the contract was from overseas and it required the GRO to bear additional obligations which included accommodation cost for its workers during their stay in Singapore, transportation charges for materials and provision of a site for assembling lanterns.
“These additional costs, on top of the tender price, were not considered by the GRO in its tender evaluation for price comparison. There was also no mention of these additional obligations in the tender evaluation report and tender recommendation report for the tender approving authority to make an informed decision,” AGO said.
The other question, of course, is whether these workers who came from overseas to assemble the lanterns for the events had the right permits to work here, even if they were supposed to be working temporarily for the projects.
GRO accepts tender proposal from sole foreign tenderer after tender closed
In the case of CNY 2017 event, the same foreign contractor was the sole bidder and had also stated in its proposal additional items which the GRO had to bear under the contract. Again, the additional costs were not mentioned in the tender evaluation report and tender recommendation report.
For the CNY 2017 tender, AGO noted that the GRO had accepted the tender proposal of this sole foreign tenderer after the tender was closed.
“The GRO had also allowed the tenderer to submit two revised tender proposals mainly to revise the quantity and lighting effects on the lanterns and consequently, the bid price after the tender had closed,” AGO said.
“Accepting late submission of tender proposal and allowing the tenderer to amend its tender proposals and bid price after the tender had closed went against the principles of open and fair competition, and transparency. Such lapses could lead to allegations of unfair practice.”
To further complicate matters, AGO observed that the contracts signed with the foreign tenderer were not based on the laws of Singapore but those of the tenderer’s country. So, any unresolved disputes would be filed for litigation in the courts of the tenderer’s country, even though the work is done in Singapore and for Singapore.
“Such provisions in the contracts might not safeguard the interest of PA and its GRO,” AGO said.
AGO did not mention the name of the GRO nor the name of the foreign contractor.
PA explained that the contracts were prepared by the foreign tenderer and the GRO did not seek the advice of PA’s legal department before signing the contracts. Moving forward, the GRO would prepare the contract, PA said.
PA also informed AGO that the procurement lapses were largely attributed to the procuring team having inadequate understanding of Government procurement guidelines and operating under time constraints. PA said it would take measures to improve staff understanding and compliance with Government procurement requirements as well as ensure proper contract management documentation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kuasimi
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/gove...ty-bonding-lim
Higher budget estimates for People’s Association is to help community bonding: Lim Swee Say
The 2015 budget estimates allocated to The People’s Association (PA) reflect a higher level of commitment by the government towards promoting social cohesion and racial harmony, Lim Swee Say, Singapore’s Minister for Culture, Community and Youth, said on Monday.
In a written reply to queries over the 51.3 per cent jump in the PA’s expenditure estimates to more than S$1 billion for FY2015, Mr Lim said the PA “promotes community bonding in Singapore”.
Of the S$339.6 million or 51.3 per cent increase in the estimated Financial Year (FY) 2015 expenditure of the PA, S$239.3 million (70.5 per cent) is for the development of facilities for residents’ use.
These include the building of the Tampines Town Hub, construction of nine new community centres (CCs) and two Water-Venture outlets as well as the upgrading of 28 existing CCs under its 15-year upgrading cycle.
Mr Lim added that the increase of S$100.3 million, or 29.5 per cent, in operating expenditure will go into implementing the Pioneer Generation Ambassador programme.
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...view_id=138425
13 of 18 grassroots organizations checked by AGO found to have recurring problems in award of contracts
Published on 2018-07-17 by Correspondent
The Auditor General Office (AGO) released its auditing report for the FY2017/18 on government ministries and statutory boards today (17 Jul).
One of the statutory boards audited was People’s Association (PA), which the late Lee Kuan Yew once made a comment about its close relationship with the PAP.
At a public forum, Mr Lee once commented on what some PRC officials had observed when they were visiting Singapore. He said, “They (PRCs) discover that the People’s Action Party (PAP) has only a small office in Bedok. But everywhere they go, they see the PAP – in the RCs (residents’ committees), CCCs (citizens’ consultative committees), and the CCs (community clubs).”
All these grassroots organizations (GROs), of course, fall under the purview of PA.
In any case, in its report, AGO censured PA for not obtaining proper approvals for award of contracts and variation.
It said that it has test checked 189 purchases amounting to $6.03 million made by PA’s 18 GROs during this audit. Out of the 18 GROs, 13 (or 72%) were found not to have obtained proper approvals for award of contracts and variation for some 25 purchases totalling $619,900.
Some of the lapses highlighted by AGO were as follows:
a. 19 purchases (totalling $497,400) made by 10 GROs without approval, with only verbal approvals, or with approvals obtained only after goods and services had been delivered.
b. 6 purchases (totalling $122,500) made by five GROs with approvals for award of contracts and variation obtained from the wrong parties. The approving parties were either not authorised or had lower approval limits.
“Not obtaining approvals from the appropriate authorities before awarding the contracts would undermine the role of the approving authorities and the award of contracts would not be subject to the scrutiny of the relevant authorities,” AGO said.
“Delays in seeking approval indicate laxity in controls over the award of contracts. Retrospective approvals weaken the controls put in place to ensure that contracts are properly considered by the approving authorities before they are awarded.”
“Recurring lapse” on the part of PA
AGO also noted that failure to obtain proper approvals for award of contracts is a “recurring lapse”. A similar observation was raised in the Report of the Auditor-General for the financial year 2014/15, three years ago.
PA explained that some of the lapses pointed out by AGO resulted from “unexpected requirements” that arose at short notice. Nevertheless, PA acknowledged that proper approvals should have been sought for award of the contracts and that it would review its financial procedures and strengthen the approval processes to cater for contingency scenarios and ensure that proper approvals from the appropriate authorities were sought.
PA also said it would step up training on procurement for the GROs.
Just the tip of the iceberg?
According to PA’s website, it has some 1,800 GROs reporting to PA.
The Auditor-General notes in the report, “As audits are conducted on a test check basis, they do not reveal all irregularities and weaknesses.”
This means not all 1800 GROs are checked.
In the annual audit for 2014/15, AGO found lapses in the management of tenancy contracts in 35 community club/centre management committees (CCMCs) and common procurement irregularities among the GROs.
In total, the AGO test-checked 115 GROs and many were found to have financial lapses.
Many of which are staffed by members of PAP, and it remains a question as to how many of those amongst the unchecked 1,667 GROs would have problems with their award of contracts to vendors and contractors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
kuasimi
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...s-association/
High time to audit the books of the People’s Association
By Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss
The People’s Association (“PA”) is an organ heavily funded by taxpayers’ money.
For FY 2012 and FY 2013, it received S$399 million and S$540 million in Government grants respectively. [1]
Earlier this year, the Government increased by 51.3 percent the estimated expenditure of the PA, and allocated the PA over S$1 billion from the public coffers to fund its activities for FY 2015. [2]
On Wednesday (15 July 2015), the Auditor-General’s Office (“AGO”) published its Report for the Financial Year 2014/15 which revealed troubling lapses in PA governance, suggesting that taxpayers’ money granted to PA is not being wisely and accountably spent.
The AGO revealed that 35 Community Club/Centre Management Committees (“CCMCs”) had awarded S$17.78 million worth of tenancy contracts without proper approval.
More surprisingly, it was revealed that Admiralty CCC’s Chairman had approved claims to himself amounting to S$114,767 via seven payments. Conflicts of interest were also discovered in the approving of two contracts totalling $32,000.
By any standards, S$114,767 is a significant amount of claims to request reimbursement for.
This is especially so in the context of a volunteer organization like a CCC.
MPs for Sembawang GRC Mr Khaw Boon Wan and Mr Vikram Nair were quick to highlight that there was “no evidence of dishonesty”.
That is beside the point, and in any case a very low threshold to cross.
The specific questions Minister Khaw and Mr Nair should answer, in relation to Admiralty CCC, are:
A much more significant point of concern is this: the AGO audits are conducted on a test check basis, they do not reveal all irregularities and weaknesses (see page 2 of the AGO Report [3]). In other words, the full extent of the lapses in PA finances and processes highlighted by the AGO Report remains to be ascertained.
Huge amounts of public funds are granted to PA every year. This year, the PA was allocated an unprecedented amount for its expenditure. The worrying lapses revealed by the AGO call for decisive action – the immediate appointment of independent auditors to conduct a full and thorough account of all public funds disbursed by PA. The public has to be assured that the lapses are not endemic. The PA has to be held accountable for how it has deployed our money.
The PA was historically created to help the ruling PAP control the grassroots. [4] It is an organ of the ruling party. The PA’s Chairman is the Prime Minister. It is not politically neutral. Only PAP MPs can be appointed as PA Grassroots Advisers, opposition MPs cannot.
It is also high time to ask if the PA, a politically compromised, heavy user of public funds, should even continue to exist at all. A taxpayer-funded mass movement arm set up to benefit the ruling party has no place in a fair, just and democratic Singapore.
[1] The People’s Association 2013/2014 Annual report
[2]
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/gove...ty-bonding-lim
[3]
http://www.ago.gov.sg/docs/default-s...52ec114080.pdf
[4]
http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infoped...83012.html#Fn5
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...ion-last-year/
NTUC Fairprice: From preventing profiteering to making $380 million last year
Published on 2018-07-16 by Correspondent
According to information from NTUC Fairprice website, it was setup in 1973 (then called NTUC Welcome) to “help stabilize the cost of living and prevent profiteering”. At the time, the global oil crisis triggered rising food prices, raising the cost of living in Singapore.
Former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew once praised NTUC Fairprice:
NTUC Welcome was born during the oil crisis when there was high inflation. In the 1970s, rising oil prices were threatening the basic right of ordinary Singaporeans to decent standards of living. The Co-operative fought resolutely against profiteering to ensure that ordinary Singaporeans would have access to low-cost daily necessities.
Despite razor-thin profits and the struggle to gain suppliers’ trust, it overcame all odds to enable families to enjoy certainty for their basic needs in our early days of nation building.
Today, it said that its mission is to continue to “moderate the cost of living in Singapore”:
However, its profits are no longer “razor-thin”. According to its annual report published online, NTUC FairPrice Group made $380 million last year.
NTUC CEO: Eating in is a lot cheaper than eating out
And speaking of moderating the rising cost of living in Singapore, Seah Kian Peng, CEO of NTUC Fairprice as well as MP of Marine Parade GRC, gave a “useful tip” to Parliament last week (10 Jul), telling everyone that “eating in is a lot cheaper than eating out”.
He said, “I think all of us know that eating in is a lot cheaper than eating out wherever you may go. So things like that may be simple tips but I think it’s useful tips which I think could be incorporated within the eight tips that you (Minister Chan) have.”
Seah has been with NTUC FairPrice since January 2001.
Minister Chan Chun Sing said at the end of his reply to Mr Seah: “We thank NTUC’s enterprises for continuing to show leadership in the pricing of its many products and services beyond groceries, today including, healthcare, eldercare and also childcare.”
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...view_id=138410
Bloomberg: Singapore’s economic lead over Malaysia is Shrinking
Published on 2018-07-18 by Kwok Fangjie
In an article on Tuesday (17 Jul), Bloomberg noted that the economic gap between Singapore and its Northern neighbour is set to shrink over the next year.
The author noted that after trailing for a third consecutive year, Malaysia “is inching closer to regaining its lead over Singapore’s economy”.
Malaysia’s GDP in 2017 was $314.5 billion, which is approximately $9.4 billion less than Singapore’s $323.9 billion”
However, Malaysia’s faster economic growth will mean that the gap is closing.
Based on median estimates of economists surveyed by Bloomberg, Malaysia’s economy will expand by about 5.5% in 2018 as compared to 3.1% for Singapore. In other words, the deficit will shrink to just over $2 billion next year.
Businesses in Malaysia are more confident with the Pakatan Harapan coalition government
A news report from Malaysia’s New Straits Times (21 May) said that the appointment of Billionaire Robert Kuok as part of the Council of Elders (CoE) will enhance confidence in the stock market and local government.
Malaysian Industrial Development Finance research head Redza Rahman felt that Kuok’s experience is dealing with the Chinese and Hong Kong governments would be extremely useful to ensure that Malaysia’s relationship with its biggest trading partner continued to be on cordial basis.
Agreeing, Maybank’s Head of Research Wong Chew Hann added that the CoE “comprises very experienced and well-respected names in the investment community.” Amongst others, committee members include former Finance Minister Tun Daim Zainuddin and former Central Bank governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz.
More recently (28 Jun), China’s Xin Hua news reported that Malaysian businesses were more optimistic about the new Pakatan Harapan government. Surveying close to 3,500 SMEs and corporates, the survey said that business outlook in the near term remains upbeat with expected improvements in both turnover and profitability.
What do you think?
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...-organization/
AGO found groceries meant for distribution to needy residents went missing in grassroots organization
Published on 2018-07-17 by Correspondent
The Auditor-General Office (AGO) released its auditing report on government ministries and statutory boards for the Financial Year 2017/18 today (17 Jul).
In its report, AGO pointed out that groceries purchased for needy residents by some grassroots organizations (GROs) were not in accordance with the stipulated contracts and that some of the groceries even went missing.
People’s Association (PA) is the statutory board responsible for all the GROs in Singapore. Some 1,800 GROs report to PA.
Groceries Purchased Not in Accordance with Contracts and Unaccounted For
AGO said it test checked groceries purchased (totaling $169,000) for distribution to needy residents at 2 GROs and found that the type of groceries purchased and prices paid by one GRO were not in accordance with those stated in the contracts with a vendor. As for the other GRO, AGO found that some of the groceries purchased could not be accounted for. In other words, the groceries had gone missing.
AGO test-checked the purchase of 66 types of groceries at the first GRO and found that it had paid prices higher than the contract rates for 9 of them. Another 25 types of groceries purchased were not provided for in the contracts. It did not name the GRC nor the vendor involved.
At the second GRO, AGO found that 12 types of groceries purchased (totaling $2,800) were not in the packing lists for distribution to the residents for 3 of the 5 months test-checked. The GRO also did not maintain records to track the groceries purchased and distributed. Hence, there was no assurance that all groceries purchased were distributed to the needy residents and properly accounted for.
AGO did not say if any Police reports were lodged for the missing groceries. It also did not name the GRO.
PA informed AGO that it would ensure that proper procurement procedures are observed. It would also strengthen its procedures on the stock-taking, packing and distribution of groceries.
Close relationship between PA and PAP
The relationship between PA and the ruling People’s Action Party is a close one. In fact, many of the Citizens Consultative Committee (CCC) chairmen are also PAP branch chairmen.
One such CCC chairman who wears both CCC and PAP hats is Mr Victor Lye Thiam Fatt. He is the CCC chairman of Bedok Reservoir-Punggol CCC and also PAP branch chairman. He was part of the PAP team which tried to wrest Aljunied GRC from the WP in the last GE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OngKeKiang
Yes he will fuck Sillypore again .
You saying that the entire highest paid in the world present Singapore leadership cannot handle a 93 years old frail Mahathir?
http://theindependent.sg/netizen-all...or-membership/
Netizen alleges that PAP MPs drive luxury cars and play golf at Yishun country club without paying for membership
By Jewel Stolarchuk - July 19, 20184776
Facebook user Liew has alleged that he frequently sees a group of ruling party parliamentarians playing golf at the Orchid Country Club in Yishun, even though he believes these politicians are not members of the club.
Liew further shared a video of several luxury cars, such as a McLaren and a Bentley that cost millions, parked at the club’s carpark and alleged that the vehicles are driven by People’s Action Party (PAP) MPs. Liew alleged that the white Bentley captured in the video belongs to a Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC MP and claimed:
“Every Wednesday morning a bunch of PAP MP will play golf at Orchid country club. I am a paying member there and I am very sure they are not member. I am wondering is this perks make known to the public? Is it in line with what they so call clean wages.
“I have taken a Video in the car park. They are all driving luxury car like Mclaren, Bentley that cost more than 1 m. Singapore now has no more civil servant, but only civil boss, that’s why they are driving bigger cars and living in bigger houses than us. We voted them to control us, sound very stupid hoh. The white Bentley SKK 418 R is own by Bishan MP”
https://www.facebook.com/donald.liew...6528811779686/
Liew’s video has garnered over 12.000 views and more than 300 shares since he published it on his Facebook wall earlier today.
Meanwhile, another netizen alleged that ruling party politicians frequently asked him for free upgrades to first class, when he was apparently working with Singapore Airlines.
The netizen, Facebook user David Lam Kiap Tan, further claimed that when he began working with teleservices operator M1, PAP MPs would seek “free exchanges for new phones”:
While several netizens responding to Liew’s claims have responded by urging others to vote these MPs out at the next General Election, several others have expressed doubts at the veracity of Liew’s allegations and have opined that this may just be “fake news”.
One such netizen, Facebook user Terence Tan, pointed out that even if the MPs are not members of the country club, they may have been signed in by their friends who are members:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
NotMyPresident
Why is it PA again ??? Didn’t last time PA also kenna red card from AGO ???
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...-lim-swee-say/
Grassroots leaders’ good intentions the root cause of financial lapses: Lim Swee Say
Published on 2015-08-18 by Andrew Loh
Auditor General’s Report
Grassroots leaders involved in financial irregularities were only trying to help, said the deputy chairman of the People’s Association (PA), Lim Swee Say, in Parliament on Monday.
“We can fault (grassroots volunteers) for their non-compliance of financial procedures, but please do not doubt them in their passion and commitment in always doing their best for the community,” Mr Lim said.
He was responding to questions from Workers’ Party (WP) Member of Parliament (MP), Png Eng Huat, and Non-constituency MP, Lina Chiam, on the findings by the Auditor General in its report which was released in July.
The AGO had found numerous incidents of non-compliance with financial rules among the ministries and statutory boards it audited.
Among the most notable were those involving Nparks, which had awarded contracts valued at more than S$20 million without calling for open tenders; and the PA, where the AGO had conducted test-checks on about 115 grassroots organisations (GROs) under the PA umbrella.
OC, July 2015
Out of the GROs test-checked by the AGO, 30 per cent were found to have financial or accounting irregularities.
Nonetheless, Mr Lim said, “I can say with confidence there is no irregularity at the system level.”
Instead, he said the root cause of these lapses were the “good intentions” of the grassroots leaders.
Mr Lim explained this by raising various examples of how grassroots leaders were “actually doing their best to serve the interests of the residents and meet the urgent needs of the community.”
Mr Lim, who is also the Minister of Manpower, related how grassroots leaders had gone “all around Singapore” to look for face masks when the haze hit the island in 2013.
This was after a community hospital had appealed to the GROs for air purifiers for patients who were being housed in the hospital’s non-airconditioned wards.
When they found a “small store which had limited stock”, the grassroots leaders decided to purchase the masks without first calling for three tenders, which is what is required by the rules.
“Madam Speaker, is this a case of non-compliance of financial procedures and rules? The answer is yes,” Mr Lim said. “Is this a case of grassroots leaders and volunteers compromising the interests of the community? The answer is certainly no.”
As for the chairman of the Admiralty Citizens’ Consultative Committee (CCC) who was found to have been involved in the award of a contract worth $32,000 to a company in which he was also a senior management executive, and also for writing and approving reimbursements cheques to himself worth $114,000, Mr Lim said, without identifying the chairman, Mr Tonic Oh:
“Although there was no evidence of dishonesty, the CCC chairman has taken personal responsibility for these lapses and resigned from his position.”
Mr Lim disclosed that the improprieties involving Mr Oh included money for a funeral wake which a needy family required immediately.
“There was no supporting documents for the claim but the amount given was witnessed by a few volunteers,” the Straits Times reported Mr Lim as having told the House.
Two other claims had receipts to justify the reimbursement, but out of another four claims by Mr Oh, only one had supporting documents.
Also, 13 tenancy contracts amounting to $3.67 million were awarded by the GROs without competition.
Despite their “good intentions”, Mr Lim said, this went against financial rules, which required them to obtain approvals, which the GROs involved did not.
Turning to the AGO report itself, Mr Lim said the last time the PA received an “adverse opinion” rating from its auditors was in 2012.
Previously, the PA’s own auditors had given it “adverse opinion” for at least 10 years prior to 2012, before the GROs’ accounts were included in the PA’s financial statements.
Since consolidation of the accounts of all the 1,800 GROs under the PA in 2013, the PA’s financial statements have received “clean opinions” in FY 2013 and FY2014, Mr Lim said.
He said, however, that the PA “cannot completely eradicate human error when it comes to financial governance.”
Mr Lim added that since the AGO report, the PA has set up a “Grassroots Finance Review Committee” to review its financial and procurement rules for grassroots organisations.
Mr Lim noted that the committee – made up of three grassroots leaders from the PA – “consists of members with standing and expertise.”
However, Mrs Chiam, who filed an Adjournment Motion on the AGO report, said an independent committee should be appointed to look into the matter instead.
She said “the litany of financial lapses committed by the [PA]” has raised many issues, among them were:
First, that it has been more than a decade since PA’s Grassroots Organisations (“GROs”) have been audited. This was because the PA has not produced the financial statements of the GROs for audit, and has only done so in the financial year 2013/2014.
She calls for these financial statements to be disclosed, and for them to be audited.
Second, the pervasiveness of such poor financial practices across the 1,800 GROs since the AGO had only test-checked a mere 6.5% of the GROs.
Third, that an independent review committee should be established instead of the Grassroots Finance Review Committee, chaired by three grassroots leaders, that was set up in the aftermath of the AGO report.
The chairman of the PA, Lee Hsien Loong, did not speak on the issue in Parliament on Monday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mushr00mhead
Pay them 7-figure salary to jo-bo-lan not enough to make you speechless?
All their time charged to you as taxpayers money. You pay for NTUC, Grassroots, Civil Service, GLCs but they use it to control you, Singapore and Singaporeans.
Does not make sense right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JoesephToh
I also would like to know how come the PAP government charge Singaporeans such a high price of water when only the Malaysians are paying 3 sen only ? Someone only say because of high cost production need to increase price . Really??? Than can you please explain to us what is the high cost to your voters ?
https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...-at-least-672/
Vivian says M’sia benefitted from buying treated water at 21% of cost but why SG consumers charged at least 672%?
Published on 2018-07-09 by Correspondent
In Parliament today (9 Jul), Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan said he expects Malaysia to fully honour the terms of the 1962 Water Agreement, including the price of water, signed between Singapore and Malaysia.
“The 1962 Water Agreement was guaranteed by both Singapore and Malaysia in the 1965 Separation Agreement, which in turn was registered with the United Nations,” he said.
Tying the 1962 Water Agreement to the 1965 Separation Agreement signed between both countries, Minister Balakrishnan added, “Any breach of the 1962 Water Agreement would call into question the Separation Agreement, which is the basis for Singapore’s very existence as an independent sovereign state.”
Water has been in the spotlight in recent weeks after Dr Mahathir said in an interview with Bloomberg last month that the 1962 water supply deal with Singapore was “too costly” for Malaysia and that he wanted to talk to Singapore about it.
“We will sit down and talk with them, like civilized people,” Dr Mahathir told Bloomberg.
The water agreement allows Singapore to draw up to 250 million gallons of raw water from Johor daily at three sen (1.01 Singapore cents) per 1,000 gallons.
Vivian: Malaysia benefited from water pricing arrangement
In Parliament, Minister Balakrishnan noted that Singapore has already stated its position on the water issue comprehensively.
“The core issue is ’not how much we pay, but how any price revision is decided upon’,” he said. “Neither Malaysia nor Singapore can unilaterally change the terms of this agreement between our two countries.”
He also added that Malaysia has previously acknowledged that they themselves have benefited from the pricing arrangement under the deal.
Johor currently buys treated water from Singapore at 50 sen per 1,000 gallons, as provided for under the 1962 Water Agreement. This is a fraction of the cost to Singapore of treating the water, he further noted.
“Hence, in 2002, then-PM Dr Mahathir said that Malaysia did not ask for a review when it was due as Malaysia knew that any revision would also affect the price of treated water sold by Singapore to Malaysia.”
According to a MFA media release on its website, it costs Singapore RM2.40 to treat every 1,000 gallons of water. By selling the treated water to Malaysia at 50 sen or 21% of cost, Singapore is providing a subsidy of RM1.90 per 1,000 gallons to Malaysia. Everyday, Singapore is providing a water subsidy of RM70,000 to Malaysia, it said.
Singaporean households charged at least 672% more for treated water from PUB
Meanwhile, Singapore’s water prices were raised earlier this month (1 Jul). The new water tariff which Singapore households now have to pay is:
S$1.21 per cubic meter, for consumption below 40 cubic meter per month
S$1.42 per cubic meter, for consumption exceeding 40 cubic meter per month
This does not include the Water Conservation Tax or the Waterborne Fee. If both are included, the total water price would be:
S$2.74 per cubic meter, for consumption below 40 cubic meter per month
S$3.69 per cubic meter, for consumption exceeding 40 cubic meter per month
Since MFA said that it costs Singapore RM2.40 or S$0.81 to treat every 1,000 gallons (4.55 cubic meter) of water, that means it costs Singapore S$0.178 to treat every cubic meter of water. Including the cost of buying water from Malaysia at 3 sen per 1000 gallons or S$0.0022 per cubic meter, the total cost to Singapore for 1 cubic meter of treated water would be $0.178+$0.0022 or S$0.18.
To summarize, PUB buys water from Malaysia at S$0.0022 per cubic meter and spends another S$0.178 per cubic meter to treat it, giving a total cost of S$0.18 per cubic meter. It then in turn, sells to Singaporean households at S$1.21 per cubic meter (using the above $1.21 rate and excluding Water Conservation Tax and the Waterborne Fee). This translate to at least 672% more Singaporean households have to pay for the treated water from PUB. And if we use the S$2.74 rate which is inclusive of taxes, Singaporean households end up paying 1,522% more.
So, can PUB give Singaporeans a breakdown how consumers are being charged 672% more after buying water at 3 sen from Malaysia and treating it at RM2.40 per 1,000 gallons?
Furthermore, can PUB also explain the S$1.1 billion profits it gained in the last 7 years, as noted by financial blogger Leong Sze Hian?
Editor’s note - It would help a lot to explain to the citizens on the cost to treat water via the Newater or desalination process. However, PUB chooses to lump everything together and justify the increase of water by simply referring to the investments made by the government on water treatment. Based on past figures, it seems that the government will eventually be profiting from the sale of utilities even though the upfront investment is high
.
