Episode shows how dominant party can ‘eat up’ opponents, says Sylvia Lim
Workers' Party Chairman Sylvia Lim. Photo: Wee Teck Hian
SINGAPORE — The saga involving the Workers’ Party (WP)-run Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) is an example of how “a dominant ruling party ... can use government departments to make political attacks on their political opponents”, said WP chairman Sylvia Lim yesterday.
“It’s a huge government machinery that we have right now. Over the years ... the PAP (People’s Action Party) has become very strong and, if anything, I think this town council episode shows how the huge machinery can try to eat you up,” said Ms Lim, who is also AHPETC’s immediate past chairman.
Speaking at a WP press conference to formally introduce some of its new candidates for the coming General Election, Ms Lim was responding to a reporter’s question on whether she thinks the AHPETC issue could become a lightning rod during the hustings.
She added that the ruling party has “proxies” to highlight issues and try to “confuse and distract the public”.
“I think the voters will need to pay attention to this and ask yourself whether it is in your interest or in your children’s interest as well to feed this huge machinery and let the PAP become stronger. If you are not careful, they will eat you up as well,” said Ms Lim.
The protracted episode involving AHPETC’s financial management lapses came to a head on Saturday when the Ministry of National Development (MND) issued a statement alleging that AHPETC’s former managing agent, FM Solutions and Services (FMSS), has been “grossly profiteering” from its work for the town council — which was its only client — making net after-tax profit of as much as S$2 million in financial year 2013/2014, after paying its directors/shareholders more than S$1.1 million in fees and salaries.
Responding on the same day, Ms Lim said she was appalled at the ministry’s “series of careless accusations” aimed at discrediting her party politically. Among other things, she said that “payment in accordance with contracts cannot be overpayment”, and arrangements between FMSS and its employees are “entirely commercial and not within the control of AHPETC”.
Yesterday, National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan said he was surprised at Ms Lim’s reply, and described FMSS contract with AHPETC as “very rich”.
Responding to Mr Khaw’s comments, Ms Lim said she was unsure which contract Mr Khaw was referring to. Nevertheless, she noted that the contracts that the MND referred to in its statement were awarded after an open tender.
She also pointed out that AHPETC’s books were open for the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO) during its audit.
The AGO audit report, which was made public in February, uncovered accounting lapses. But Ms Lim pointed out: “There has been no finding by the AGO or anyone that we did not exercise due diligence in our assessment of the contract price.”
On whether the remuneration for FMSS directors/shareholders is stipulated as part of the contracts, Ms Lim said: “What the company does (within itself), how much they pay their own officers and all that, that is an internal matter for them.” She added: “What we assess is based on the services rendered, what is a fair pricing for that service.”
Mr Png Eng Huat, who is the sitting Member of Parliament for Hougang, chairs AHPETC’s audit committee. He stressed that the town council cannot determine the profit margin of the managing agent as it is an open tender. “You can’t determine and you can’t dictate,” said Mr Png.
Referring to the MND’s contracts for building flats, for example, he said: “Do you go and check ... how much (the contractors) pay the directors, how much profit they make because it affects (the) prices of our flats? Do you do that? It doesn’t make sense.”
