A big hello to everyone!
I am back after my hiatus during which a lot had happened.
Well, the biggest thing that happened during my absence would probably be the budget right? So let’s talk about it.
This is going to be a long post, so you might want to make yourself a cup of coffee or take a piss first.
Here are the main topics discussed:
Build up to Budget 2009
Details of Budget 2009
Reactions to the Extraordinary Budget
The budget debate
– Cutting GST to stimulate demands
– Cutting ERP and other levies
– Comments on the Jobs Credit scheme
– On using our past reserves
– Other senseless remarks / suggestions
First, let’s look at the build up to the budget.
Build up to Budget 2009
The build up to Budget 2009 was quite dramatic, machiam movie like that.
Less than one month before the budget, we were told our growth forecast have been cut again to -2 to 1 percent.
Full report here
Next we were told we are in “sharp recession” and that there’s nothing we could do to get out of it.
Full report here
Said our Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang
‘There is very little we can do to try and mitigate the impact of such a major decline in external demand’
‘The economic downturn has spread to all sectors of our economy.’
Then, days before the budget, we were told it is estimated that 300,000 jobs would be lost in 2009 and 2010.
Full report here
And that our “growth” forecast had been cut yet again, I don’t know why they even call it growth anymore.
Full report gone, less dramatic report here
The entire kampung is starving, we may have to kill our sacred cow so that we can have something to eat…
Full report here
In the midst of all the doom and gloom, came a new hope.
Full report here
Have no fear, the extraordinary budget is here!
Enter the Resilience Package
Back to top
Termed the “Resilience Package”, it was announced by our dear “No sign of recession” minister of finance on 22 January 2009.
The name sounded quite fierce – Resilience, like name of navy ship like that.
Indeed, the Resilience Package totalled $20.5 billion, that’s $20,500,000,000 for you numerically challenged folks out that. More money than any of us would see in our life time… combined.
Full report here
So what is so extraordinary about the Resilience Package?
According to our finance minister
‘The package aims to help save jobs to the maximum extent possible in the recession, and to help viable companies stay afloat’
‘The resilience package will not get us out of recession.’
‘But it will help avert an even sharper downturn, and more lasting damage to the economy.’
In other words it is a fierce budget, but not fierce enough to fight the recession, despite the record breaking amount of money committed.
So what are some of the details of this package?
According to reports, the Package has five components:
- Mechanisms to help Singaporeans stay employed so they can continue to support their families.The budget introduced the Jobs Credit scheme which will cost you and I $5.1 billion, the bulk ($4.5bil) of which will go into the Job Credit scheme.
Full report here
Basically, our tax dollars will be used to pay 12% of the first $2,500 of monthly wages of each employee on the CPF payroll for one year, payable quarterly beginning from March 2009.
Garmen also announced plans to increase the workfare income supplement (WIS) scheme to help people who are… well…. basically underpaid for the ridiculous cost of living here.
Full report here
Compared to the jobs credit scheme, this initiative will cost us a measly $150 million.
The Skills Programme for Upgrading and Resilience (there’s that word again!) aka SPUR will also be enhanced.
Finally, garmen will do their part and recruit people into the public sector expanding the civil service by 18,000 jobs over the next two years.
For example, education will be hiring 3,000 teachers.
Full report here
MOH will spend $500mil to recruit and train more medical staff
Full report here
- Stimulating Bank Lending
$5.8 billion of will be set aside to “stimulate bank lending” through enhancing existing schemes and a new Special Risk-Sharing Initiative (SRI). The SRI comprises two components:
Full report here
Enhancing Business Cash-flow and Competitiveness
This is done mainly through giving businesses ‘creative’ tax concessions costing us tax payers a total of $2.6 billion.
There will be a 40% property tax rebate for industrial and commercial properties in 2009.
Full report here
How does this help smaller sized businesses which don’t own their storefront you ask? That’s a good question.
Our finance minister explained.
‘Landlords should also consider further adjustments of rentals and more flexible leasing arrangements and payment terms, in light of the severe downturn in demand faced by their tenants.’
Shortly after Mr Tharman’s announcement, the Housing Board (HDB), National Environment Agency (NEA) and the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) announced details of their rental rebates.
HDB said it will be giving a 15 per cent rental rebate to all their commercial and industrial tenants, as well as industrial land lessees for one year from January to to December.
National Environment Agency (NEA) said rebates will given to stallholders operating in markets and food centres but preferred to provide details in terms of absolute dollars and cents rather than a percentage.
Singapore Land Authority (SLA) will also grant a 15 per cent rebate on the monthly rental to eligible tenants and temporary occupation licensees of State commercial and industrial properties.
While it appears that 15% is the norm, I can’t help but wonder why garmen agencies are reluctant to declare that they are passing 100% of their property tax rebates to their tenants. Since I do not know what percentage of their property prices are their rents, it is difficult to determine if 40% property tax is equivalent to 15% rental rebate, but I would think not. And if the tax rebate isn’t passed on to tenants, then isn’t it profiteering on the part of the property owners?
Also on the cards is a property tax deferral for land approved for development for up to two years
Full report here
This probably only benefit the big property developers, in a way, it is a signal that they can take their time to develop the property on the land which they have bought, take your time, next 2 years we don’t collect tax from you. Then these companies can continue to send their workers back to India and drag their feet when paying their suppliers.
A 30% road tax rebate for goods vehicles, buses and taxis for one year was also announced along with tax waiver of special diesel tax for unhired taxis.
Full report here
While the rebate for commercial vehicles made sense, the waiver of tax for unhired taxis only served to help the big players again, and again it appeared to be counter-intuitive because to me, it sends the signal that it is all right to hold on to your unhired cabs… we don’t tax you.
Corporate Income Tax Rate (CIT) will be reduced to 17% with effect from Year of Assessment 2010
Full report here
Garmen will also increase funding in “innovation”, a whopping $900mil will be pumped into various funds.
Full report here
Other measures which are included but are beyond the comprehension of my non-elite brain are:
-Carry-back relief enhancements for losses incurred for Years of Assessment 2009 and 2010
-Tax exemption of all foreign-sourced income earned on or before 21 January 2009, if remitted within a year.
-Accelerated capital allowance for plant and machinery acquired in this year and the next;
-Accelerated write-down of renovation and refurbishment expenses incurred for Years of Assessment 2010 and 2011;
Although I haven’t the faintest idea what they are, I am sure they must be good, because they are thought up by our elites.
Although experts in the field of taxation seemed disappointed.
Full report here
They are saying something about this year’s tax rebate scheme being ‘exactly the same’ as last year’s.
- Supporting Families
Garmen will spend $2.6 billion to provide additional support to Singaporean households.
$580mil will be spent doubling the GST rebate, which some folks don’t get a single cent.
Full report here
Garmen will also give a 20% personal income tax rebate for tax residents capped at $2,000 for Year of Assessment 2009. This amounts to $457mil reduction in tax collected.
Full report here
Home owners will get a one-off 40% property tax rebate in 2009, which amounts to $75mil (frankly, peanuts)
For a help that is as far-reaching as this, it is disappointing that the actual dollar amount of the help rendered is so low.
Here’s a pretty good summary of the measures taken to help families and individuals.
Source here
Keen eyed readers would have noticed the budget set aside for financial aids for needy student amounts to $20mil and an earlier report on the educational budget stated that the budget had increased by 5.5% to $8.7b, and the increase would be used to help needy students as well as train 3,000 new teachers.
Let’s do our sums… 100% + 5.5% is equivalent to $8.7 b
That means that 5.5% would be around 450,000,000 ($450m), that’s the increase, of which $20m is used to help students, the rest… for 3,000 new teachers. That works out to $140,000 for 1 teacher. So expensive ah?! Or did I make a mistake somewhere? Comments welcomed.
- Building a Home for the Future
Under this component, $4.4 billion will be spent in four areas:
$1.3 billion worth of infrastructure projects to be brought forward to 2009.
$1 billion funding for sustainable development programmes over five years.
Development of suburban nodes, road and rail networks, drainage and sewerage networks, and public housing estate rejuvenation; and
Upgrade of education and health infrastructure.
Can’t comment much on this because not much details are available.
You can see a pretty good summary (in pdf) of the extraordinary Resilience Package here
Of the $20.5 billion to be pumped in, $4.9 billion will come from our past reserves.
Full report here
It is doing so even though it has built up sufficient savings during its current term, which began in 2006, in order to have ‘full flexibility’ to respond to the current economic crisis, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said in his Budget Statement yesterday.
According to our finance minister:
‘Tapping on past reserves now gives us the resources that we need to deal decisively with the current economic crisis and also ensures that we have all the resources we need to respond to the considerable uncertainties that lie ahead,’
Got that? Me neither.
If the past reserves are so sacred, when touch it unless it is absolutely necessary?
Cannot wait until really need to use then draw from it meh? I suppose that’s why you and I are not the finance minister.
Reactions to the extraordinary budget
Back to top
Shortly after the announcement of the Resilience Package, comments from our elites were published.
Our PM called it a ‘decisive budget’
Full report here
But when asked if there would be off-Budget measures to boost the economy. PM Lee appeared quite tentative and said it was too early to tell.
‘We take it one step at a time,’ he said. ‘We’ve taken some time to put together this Budget. We had a few months since September when the American financial system started going visibly and seriously out of kilter, and we spent the last few months assessing the situation, deciding what best will fit our circumstances, what the economy needs most.’
Other experts seemed more sure than him, expecting a plan ‘B’ to be announced eventually.
Full report here
PM also took the opportunity to assured the needy that they would be taken care of.
Full report here
This seemed kinda strange given that details of the budget had already been announced. What was even stranger was his remark below:
‘We will do lo-hei, we will have good luck…because we will make a strong effort to help ourselves,’ he said, referring to the tossing of raw fish salad for good luck and success.
If only helping people cope was as simple as the act of tossing some raw fish and vegetables.
MM Lee summed up the budget as one that would help to save jobs and urged business, banks and retail landlords to ‘do the right thing’. This made it the second time in the space of less than 6 months that banks were told that. I am sure you still remember the first time.
Full report here
The president of the Real Estate Developers Association of Singapore (Redas) were quick to pick up on the example of ‘doing the right thing’ set by HDB, NEA and SLA and came forth and asked business owners to “be reasonable” in their expectation for rental rebates.
Full report here
Our dear labour chief also announced his expectation of business doing the right thing to help retain employees, stating the circumstances under which he felt it would be acceptable for firms to retrench staff.
Full report here
It seemed he still believed businesses actually give a hoot about what he thinks when making such decisions.
SM Goh went to great lengths to explain that our sacred cow has not been slaughtered.
Full report here
‘We must continue to exercise great discipline and not dip into our reserves at the first sign of trouble,’
Which sort of begged the question why was our reserves used now…. given that we have enough funds for the fierce Resilience Budget even without drawing on the past reserves.
Yes yes I know, so that we can be flexible right? But isn’t our budget already a decisive one? Still need so much flexibility? I suppose only the elites know why.
During the same time, in an unsurprisingly timely and considered fashion, our main stream media published a report stating that not only is our cow still alive, it is getting fatten up as we speak.
Full report here
So we have absolutely nothing to worry about.
However, with that much of our nation’s money involved, naturally, concerned folks like you and I would have some questions in our minds, questions like: Where is the money coming from? Where would it be used? Is it is best way to spend it? How effective would it help folks like us in a time like this?
That’s what the budget debate is for. Essentially, the budget debate is where parliament sit down, then the PAP elites will bring their *cough* rehearsed *cough* questions forward and ask the finance minister, often, these questions would turned out to be what were on our minds for some strange reason.
Some of the elites will also make some *cough* rehearsed *cough* suggestions, which coincidentally, also happen to be on our “aiyah, garmen should… (fill in your own suggestion here)” list, and the finance minister will respond to it.
The more exciting questions posed during the budget debate would often come from the non-PAP people, it is exciting mainly because they don’t cough so much.
Of course, during such long sessions of dialogue, there are bound to be some rather senseless suggestions and remarks, perhaps from elites which were too bored or half asleep.
We will explore all of them in the next section.
The budget debate promised to be an exciting event, in fact, 50 elites were scheduled to speak on the budget during the debate.
Full report here
The budget debate
Back to top
The budget debate kicked off on 3 Feb 2009.
I will organize this summary by topic.
Cut GST to stimulate demand
Back to top
Not surprisingly, one question that was on the minds of almost all the non-elites in the nation was fielded.
Full report here
MP Inderjit Singh… asked for a temporary GST cut to 5 per cent. This, he argued, appears to be ‘the most effective way to stimulate local demand’.
Mr Singh… cited a Straits Times article by economics professor Basant Kapur, who calculated that the 2007 GST hike to 7 per cent raised the Consumer Price Index by 1.5 per cent – resulting in a $6.6 billion capital spending loss.
Compared to this, the additional GST credits of $580 million announced in the Budget ‘appear small’, said Mr Singh.
‘The GST increase has produced a negative effect on spending and if a cut can produce even a modest stimulus to consumption, it should be considered,’ he argued…
Singh’s call was echoed by Michael Palmer, MP for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC. The key difference was that Palmer could actually remember a time where there were not GST, Singh on the other hand probably believe GST existed long before the dinosaurs.
Full report here
The call to fire up demand didn’t just involved cutting / scrapping GST.
Full report here
Another way to get people spending is for the Government to distribute what Mr Ang Mong Seng (Hong Kah GRC) calls ‘consumption coupons’. He suggested giving everyone about $300 worth of coupons to be spent in six months.
‘Apart from tobacco and alcohol, people can use them in department stores, neighbourhood shops, hawker centres and restaurants. I think this will help our retail shops’ business,’ he said. This should be equivalent to a six-month sales campaign at all retail outlets, driving tourism and benefiting industries from transport to hospitality, he added.
Meanwhile, Mr Singh called on the Government – as a client – to diversify its demand. For instance, its recently announced infrastructure projects worth close to $11 billion benefit mainly the construction industry.
I observed two things here.
One, Ang’s suggestion of issuing consumption coupons was actually quite a good call. Compared to the GST credits and what not, the coupons will get spent, it will stimulate demand and most likely, would encourage what I would call a top-up spending. No self respecting Singaporean would want to spend a $300 coupon on a $295 purchase, so most likely, what you would see would be top-up spending, meaning people would spend $300 coupon plus cash on a higher value purchase, hence pumping even more money into the industry.
Second, a rather worrying observation, is that our MPs lack basic economy and money sense. Ang suggested that the coupons should not be spent on alcohol and tobacco, while Singh asked the garmen to diversify its spending and not just limit it to construction.
Understand this, any amount of money you pump into the economy gets re-spent and re-spent and re-spent, it would transcend sectors and goods. If the garmen spend $11mil on construction, this $11mil would be used by the construction company to pay their suppliers, staff and workers.
The supplier than use it to pay their own supplier, their own staff and their own workers, their staff may then spend the cash (along with the coupons) to buy household items from their neighbourhood provision shop, the provision shop owner then use this money, and the coupon (if it is still valid) to pay his son’s tuition teacher, who will then use the money to…. you get the idea.
Sure, along the way, part of it will get sent out of the country, but there’s no way of stopping it. The key here is to stimulate spending, the more spending we have, the faster the economy will recover and it doesn’t really matter where and on what the money is spent. Our MP don’t seemed to get it.
Anyway, not surprisingly, this was one of those cough cough question… which was easily handled by our minster of finance.
Full report here
Mr Tharman… gave three reasons why a lower GST would not ‘have the desired impact on demand and on the economy’.
First, cutting the GST “will not help business costs to any significant degree”, he said. The GST does not impact business margins as companies claim back any GST they pay for their purchases from the Government.
In fact, changing this rate would result in additional costs for businesses, who would have to adjust their systems for a new GST rate on their goods and services, and then shift them back when the GST is restored.
Second, a GST cut “will not lead to any significant increase in spending”. The United Kingdom recently cut its Value-Added tax by 2.5 per cent, but this has not spurred consumption, he said.
Lastly, the GST is “a valuable source of revenue” that allows the Government to pay for additional social support measures in this crisis.
The revenues collected from GST go towards programmes for the lower income like the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme, Mr Tharman said.
I think you can basically just ignore points 1 and 2 and take it that the last point is why GST reduction won’t be carried out.
Robinson’s sorted of proved that…
Full report here
Cut ERP and other garmen related levies
Back to top
Indejit must have drawn the short straw because he got to be the hero during the budget debate.
His next proposal was for garmen to cut ERP and
Full report here
Mr Singh suggested cuts in Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) and other fees and charges, as well as foreign maid levies, for a start.
‘I feel that cost as an issue has been underestimated as a problem by the Government,’ he said.
‘I hope to see cost issues dealt with with more urgency in any off-Budget measures that the Minister may be planning. And I hope that that happens soon,’ he added, referring to Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.
Mr Singh… cited 18 cost increases announced last year.
‘Each of them may have had a minimal impact, but taken together, would have been very significant for businesses,’ he said.
Goodness, had there been 18 cost increases? That’s terrible! I wonder what is going to be done about them?
Jobs Credit Scheme
Back to top
There was also what the papers labeled ‘a lively debate’ on the effectiveness of the jobs credit scheme.
Full report here
Opposition MP Low Thia Khiang…questioned if this system would save jobs in companies where sales could not sustain overhead costs.
‘Between waiting three months for $900 cash rebate from the Government versus saving $7,500 immediately by retrenching a worker, which choice does the Government think a struggling employer will make?’
He then suggested the scheme will simply benefit profitable companies that have no intention of retrenching workers.
Using supermarket operators Sheng Siong and NTUC Fairprice as examples, he asked:
‘Are we using our reserves to increase the profits of profitable companies in this downturn?’
A very fair and well-analyzed position in my opinion.
However, other MPs were quick to shoot him down…
Ms Jessica Tan (East Coast GRC) asked if he was aware that the scheme was targeted at making Singaporeans more attractive to employers.
Mr Yeo Guat Kwang (Aljunied GRC) asked if Mr Low was aware that the savings from the scheme will spur Sheng Siong to open more outlets, each one creating 80 more jobs.
(which was kinda stupid I must say… open new outlet so easy one ah?)
Mr Low maintained a tone of scepticism until Mr Heng Chee How (Jalan Besar GRC) asked him pointedly if he thought the subsidy would not reduce the risk of retrenchment.
Now… to be fair, I believe Low’s question was never whether it would help reduce the risk of retrenchment, rather, could the $4.6bil be better used.
But Low, who must be concussed by then… simply said
‘I don’t think it works.’
Which was kinda disappointing… if only he had the awareness of what was being asked and gave his response along the line of what I have below…
No one can say for sure if a scheme or an action would reduce the risk of retrenchment. If we are simply talking about reducing the risk with no commitment to the level of effectiveness, we might as well just adopt housewife Elizabeth Tan’s method?
That would surely demonstrate how silly Yeo’s question was.
Low’s lack of composure only gave other PAP members the opportunity to boast how solid the JC scheme was.
There was no voice louder than our labor chief who openly embraced the scheme not once but twice in a space of a few days.
Full report here
Full report here
During which he also revealed that he is not blind to the fact that our CPF employer’s contribution have declined over the years…
‘Many Singaporean workers are concerned (that) even if they keep their job, will they be able to keep their CPF? Employers’ contribution to CPF has declined over the years…to 14.5 per cent now. Many workers’ take-home pay has already been affected. There’s no overtime, shorter work week and so on. So any significant cut in CPF this time round will hurt even more.’
But he never say, as labour chief, what he is going to do about it.
He also somehow, managed to narrow the choices to how Singaporeans could be helped to keep their jobs down to 2 things – Job Credit or further cut to employer’s CPF contribution.
PM Lee also came forth and defended the JC scheme.
Full report here
He too, subtly implied that it was either that or CPF cut. Well, not much of a choice right?
Mr Lee said that by giving the grant, the Government is in effect paying for part of workers’ CPF contributions, on behalf of employers. It works out to an average 9-point cut in the CPF contribution of an employer, who now pays a maximum of 14.5 per cent.
What it means, he said, is that the company pays less of the worker’s salary while the worker gets the same amount of money. This reduces costs and makes the Singaporean worker more competitive, he added.
‘This way, companies will be able to keep more of their workers instead of retrenching them. Without the Jobs Credit, companies might have to cut CPF or wages to save jobs.’
Speaking of CPF cuts, this previous post should be of interest to most. But this is old news… Ok, back to the budget debate…
West Coast GRC MP Ho Geok Choo gave Low Thia Khiang a lesson in diplomacy when she spoke about the jobs credit scheme.
When you want to criticize the brain child of our garmen, don’t say it will not work, say ‘it has limits’… like that say then nicer mah, people won’t all gang up and shoot you.
Full report here
On using past reserves
Back to top
Another hot topic was why the past reserves were used, why our president who was supposed to hold the second key to this reserve had so readily okay’ed the request to use it, and naturally, how much reserve do we have..
The general feeling by our PAP elites is that it is ok to use our past reserves, in spite of all the hoo-haa generated.
But just this once ok!
Full report here
Two main questions emerged from this.
The first, from the non-PAP “trouble markers”.
Opposition MP Low Thia Khiang said: “Past reserves are supposed to be protected by a two-key system. The government holds one key, while the President holds the second key. But the speed at which the two-key system can unlock the reserves is too fast for comfort.
“I want to know when was the request for the S$4.9 billion made? How long did it take the President to give the in-principle approval? Does the President or the Council of Presidential Advisors know for certain what the government intends to do with its substantial current reserves before allowing it to draw down on past reserves. Can a pre-emptive spending rationale be a compelling reason for the President to unlock the reserves?”
Nominated MP Siew Kum Hong said: “There has been precious little information about the deliberations of the President or of the Council of Presidential Advisers in giving in-principle approval to use the reserves. The government should ask the President and the Council to publish detailed reasons for their decisions. This is the first time we are using the reserves. It is therefore a golden opportunity to set the principles for doing so.”
This call for more details and insight into the decision by the second key holder was a very valid one, after all, if like what Low said in this report.
Full report here
‘When the Government key says unlock, the other key unlocks automatically. And I wonder whether the second key has always been there on the safe,’ he said.
Then why the heck are we paying some guy excess of $3mil annually to do a job that a 3-year old could do?
The second question that emerged was a cough cough question, which was basically… so after spending this $4.9bil, we still have enough or not?
Lim Wee Kiak, MP for Sembawang GRC, said: “Our reserves and investments must have also taken a hit and decreased just like all asset classes in the global market. How much of our reserves is left after the spending on these two programmes? Can the Finance Minister assure the House that our goose that lays golden eggs year after year will continue to do so after this withdrawal and after this financial shock?”
Tampines GRC MP Irene Ng asked: “Can I ask the finance minister for an estimate of how long would it take for the government to reinstate this projected S$4.9 billion drawdown from the reserves? Or are we quite comfortable at the rate that the reserves have been accumulating over the years, providing more than enough for any life-and-death contingency?”
Let’s look at the first question, how did the president arrived at his decision.
In his response… minister of finance outlined the steps leading up to obtaining the second key to turn.
Full report here
Explaining the process step-by-step, he said that Cabinet approved the proposal to draw on the reserves to fund the Jobs Credit scheme and the Special Risk-Sharing Initiative to free up bank lending one week before the Budget.
But even before the Cabinet approved the move, PM Lee discussed the matter informally with the President to ’sound him out and to give him more time to think over the matter’.
After the Cabinet decision, detailed briefings were given to the President and his Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) by the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Ministry of Manpower, the Ministry of Finance and the Monetary Authority of Singapore.
‘We addressed the President and CPA’s questions and clarifications on all relevant matters,’ said Mr Tharman.
‘We also briefed the President and the CPA on the possible scenarios that might require our accumulated savings or past reserves in the next few years and the contingency measures that might be necessary,’ he added.
‘These included justifying the draw on past reserves before exhausting current savings.’
Once the Government had finalised the costs for the two schemes, it sent a formal request to the President.
‘The President and CPA were able to form their views in advance of this final submission because they had been thoroughly briefed,’ said Mr Tharman.
The President’s formal approval will be sought once Parliament passes the Supply Bill, he added.
What minister of finance had done was to give details of the process… but not how the decision by the president was arrived.
It was rather disappointing that Low and Siew didn’t press for more information. But several days later, perhaps sensing that the lesser mortals like you and I are not quite satisfied, our president came forth and explained why he said yes.
Full report here
Below are the reported statement by our president.
‘I recognised the importance of giving confidence to go ahead with the measures proposed in the Budget for the particular reference to past reserves bearing in mind (that) if the situation prolongs or worsens, negative consequences would have kicked in, making any measures too late to be of any effect,’ he told the Singapore media at the Istana.
‘The urgency was quite evident, and I think 11 days was reasonable. If it had to be, it could have been shorter.’
‘Whether you take 11 days or one month, the process will be the same,’ he noted. ‘If we had the luxury of time, we’d have taken much longer. But the circumstances were such, people’s confidence had to be restored.’
Once again… nothing was mentioned about what was deliberated, what were some of the questions he or the Council of Presidential Advisers (CPA) had asked.
So now, the people know the process, who asked who, who spoke to who, what report was sent, why it was so urgent, but yet we have absolutely no idea why the second key was used, contrary to the title of the above newspaper article.
This was really quite disturbing, especially so when minister of finance ended the budget debate saying that the garmen may use more of the reserves…
Full report here
THE Government, which is tapping its past reserves for the first time to fight Singapore’s worst recession, cannot rule out a further drawdown in the event of another exceptional situation, said Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam on Thursday.
‘In that scenario, the onus will once again be on the Government to justify its case to the President and the Council of Presidential Advisors to seek Parliament’s approval… and to explain to the public its reasons for doing so,’ he said when rounding up the debate on the Budget statement in Parliament.
Now the second question on how much reserves do we have, how long it would take to recover what was spent this time round was a more delicate one… this was perhaps the fuel that boosted the fire which the paper was trying to keep wrapped up.
Once again.. we saw impeccable timing in events that unfolded over the next few days.
First came the ’shocking’ news that Ho Ching would be stepping down as CEO of Temasek Holding.
Full report here
Full report here
Next came the announcement that both Temasek Holdings and GIC’s portfolios have fallen. Temasek’s by 31%, GIC’s by an undisclosed figure.
Full report here
And finally… we were told once again that those were long term investments and our reserves will not be depleted by those losses.
[Some times, I really wonder how the ST team comes up with their headlines... will not be depleted doesn't mean unaffected ok!]
Full report here
Anyway… so do we have enough for the future? Well… beats me.
Other senseless remarks / suggestions
Back to top
During the budget debate, some senseless remarks also came up.
But if you look past these seemingly idiotic remarks, you would probably realized that they served the purpose of distracting people from the real issues at hand.
Who knows, perhaps the MPs had to draw straws beforehand to decide who would have to look stupid in front of the entire nation, all for the greater purpose of distracting the masses.
First came the cockenathan story our beloved labor chief decided to share with us. On the mouse who barked.
Full report here
It is not very interesting, so I’ll leave it to you to read it yourself.
Next was a real stunner from the chap who perhaps was the most unlucky to have drawn the shortest straw of all…
It came from Nominated MP Loo Choon Yong, if you do not know who he is before this, it’s quite all right, heck, it’s even ok if you can’t remember his name after reading this post, but I’ll bet you would remember him as the MP who suggested that we revert back to 5.5 day work week because we’re not using our Saturdays for sex.
Full report here
Wah piang, I didn’t know since the implementation of the 5-day work week, Saturdays are now reserved for sex… must have missed the government brochure.
Anyway, that’s my first installment on the budget, which by the time this writeup is posted, is already long gone. This delay has its benefits though… in my next installment, I will be compiling some articles on the effectiveness of the help rendered thus far. Stay tuned.
Posted by gohks 
Posted by gohks 
Posted by gohks 
