We envision a united Singapore, based on the principles of inclusiveness and non-discrimination. All citizens, regardless of race, religion, language, gender, place of origin, or socioeconomic status, are treated equally and with respect, and given equal opportunities in all areas of work.
We envision a compassionate Singapore, committed to reducing income inequality and readily rendering a helping hand to fellow countrymen or women who encounter calamities, disabilities, or illnesses requiring costly or prolonged treatment.
We envision a progressive Singapore which values diverse opinions and ideas, built on the foundations of accountability, transparency, and independence of the three branches of government - the Parliament, the Civil Service, and the Courts.
Lets say alliance say "oh, social mission....have have.... no worry." And after 1 year, it says, due to business reasons, abort it. What is the law to do about that if it has 51% majority?
Making a hasty change of the law suggest there is colluding with a private enterprise to prevent suffering heavy financial losses from breaking the deal this smell of unethical even criminal in nature.
A old highly politically powerful mature rebuttal over the INCOME deal where it is better for PAP to humble and be transparent to be held accountable to gain respect of the people.
Good valid decent line of questions that evidently show up the disastrous oversight of PAP and NTUC concerning the deal which beg the question is such incompetence and unprofessional behaviour and practices that may be committed in other similar transactions affecting national interest.
Why is PAP arguing and defended an action of the deal that is presumably against the interest of local policy holders not addressing solution to bad measure of business dealing that is against the national interest of Singapore.
My question: So what kind of deal will be 'heavy weight' enough to warrant the attention of MAS? Do they mean this Allianz-Income deal is too small or not that significant??
Mr Leong is definitely the Pro and the man for this matter in Parliament. Suddenly it is like his previous Banker figure impact came into full action! 💪
LMW pls get elected first. Fact is the points you are talking about are democracy at work, that is why brought up for discussion in parliament. Even if it takes time in parliament is fine. That's democracy at work, so cabinet and members can ask questions to seek clarifications.
Mr. leong, heart warming to see the awesome progress you have made in parliament in the last years! PSP has certainly proven your credibility as parliamentarians. Look forward to you all getting voted into parliament in the next election and speaking on singaporean’s behalf. 🙏🏻
i dont think they will abort the deal, they just halt it to cushion the public reaction....After winning the GE2025 election, they will continue with the deal
Mr. CHT has comprehensional issues. He putting words into Jamus and Mr. Leong mouth, saying waste of time and putting civil servants under the bus. CHT should withdraw this allegations
@@ssangyongA230 cant believe PAP candidates are responding and behaving in this manner. He is very fast to jump in to say withdraw allegation and its very defensive.
@@firefly4326 The white cannot win then play with words and if still cannot win, they will play PROFMA cards. If this carry on, real issue sure cannot come to fair discussion or solution. Just imagine if whole parliament is under white...🤔🤔🤔
Not just CHT, many issues pap fail to justify with proper accountibilty. Govt is still quietly stuffing our population with foreigners until there is no space to walk. One day crippled the entire mrt system and created chaos in Singapore then only they will wake up. This irresponsible govt only think for their own pocket without putting the well being of citizens as a top priority.
More than that, bringing in more citizen means less job opportunities(they took up our job) , more inflation(more rich pple buying goods bringing up the prices), more mrt breakdown(heavier load), more congested road(COE, ERP price increases), more road accident (people stressed working more jobs to cope w living expenses or working longer hours). More crime as those cant find job, need to survive resort to scamming, stealing and robberies.....
They are not threaten at all, they can redraw the electoral boundaries, they can pump in new citizens to those with more opposition to dilute them. They can make SMC becomes GRC(and bring scholars using heavy weight minister, knowing is difficult for opposition to compete in GRC).
After the merger, the capital reduction of $1.85B will be returned to shareholders over 3 years. As majority shareholder, Allianz will get 51% (or $.9435B) of this amount. So after 3 years the NET cost to Allianz to acquire 51% of NTUC Income will be only $1.257B (=$2.2B - $.9435B) Basically, Allianz got 43% of the cash to acquire NTUC Income from the latter. WTF. Why was this approved by the board of NTUC Enterprise and NTUC Income? Morgan Stanley was the financial adviser to NTUC Enterprise. How was it chosen ? How much was it paid? Morgan Stanley Asia Head Ronald Ong is NTUC Income Chairman because he is most knowledgeable about insunrace. He said he recused himself on this transaction. This meant nobody on the NTUC Income board knew enough to properly evaluate the sale to Allianz. Ronald Ong should be immediately removed as Income Chairman. The use of Morgan Stanley as financial adviser should also be investigated. This reminds me on the Keppel acquisition of Straits Steamship. In 1983 Keppel acquired Straits Steamship another listed company. Keppel was advised by Jardine Fleming, a Hong Kong based investment bank. Keppel paid a "premium" for the company. This is called "goodwill" in accounting and has to be amortized yearly as an expense in Keppel's income statement. This resulted in an (accounting, not cash) loss for Keppel. LKY was livid and said GLCs do not lose money. He told Jardine Fleming to leave Singapore within 24 hours. The Keppel Chairman was also promptly replaced. Did Morgan Stanley advised NTUC on the sale of 51% of Income to Allianz? How was it hired? What are the terms of reference of the assignment? How much was it paid by NTUC? What did it recommend? The written advise/recommendation of Morgan Stanley should be made public. Does it mention capital extraction? If LKY was still around most likely heads would promptly roll for this fiasco.
Yes, Alternative gov MPs should pursue for answers more insistently going forward. This will show the voters what is wrong with those posed the question
