NKF-that can of worms has already been opened!
-
I just heard that Durai's passport kena impounded. Seems like there's something really fishy going on after all.
-
Several top mgt bank account also being investigated.Originally posted by iveco:I just heard that Durai's passport kena impounded. Seems like there's something really fishy going on after all. 
-
When will they start investigating the people at GIC and Temasek Holdings? Sure there will be even more fishy stuff there
-
they won't one lah....obvious...the wayang show must be convincing....convincing can liao, cannot go to deep one....Originally posted by oxford mushroom:When will they start investigating the people at GIC and Temasek Holdings? Sure there will be even more fishy stuff there -
If Temasek & GIC belongs to Singapore reserve, than maybe the Elected President can call for an investigation.
-
Well, TT Durai at least dedicated his life to NKF by improving services in all Dialysis Centres. Who gave the SPH the right to publish his earnings on the paper and condemn him to the grave. SPH should have publicised the PAP income and let people know their gross annual income. Why people are not saying anything about their income and their lavish lifestyle? You people are also tax payers. Your salary is deducted to pay your tax. Yet you condemn this person who build NKF. Without NKF, would your fellow old folks benefit from the dialysis centres? Hospitals are expensive and have poor service records. NKF gave hope to citizens who suffered from kidney failures and benefitted from the dialysis centres.
-
his income figures are provided by himself. the money came from the public. he wasted public money on golden tape and his personnal car. he is not the founder of NKF so he didnt build it. he is only successful in conning money from public. the subsidy for patients are so low.Originally posted by bila_prem:Well, TT Durai at least dedicated his life to NKF by improving services in all Dialysis Centres. Who gave the SPH the right to publish his earnings on the paper and condemn him to the grave. SPH should have publicised the PAP income and let people know their gross annual income. Why people are not saying anything about their income and their lavish lifestyle? You people are also tax payers. Your salary is deducted to pay your tax. Yet you condemn this person who build NKF. Without NKF, would your fellow old folks benefit from the dialysis centres? Hospitals are expensive and have poor service records. NKF gave hope to citizens who suffered from kidney failures and benefitted from the dialysis centres.
wake up your farking idea. -
To put it this way fellow comrade, the government also conned public's money on foolish projects, eg. esplanade. TT Durai is no different from the government.
-
foolish projects like the esplanade? the esplanade was built to promote the arts in singapore. TT Durai pocketed the public's money and used it to buy his expensive toilet fitting. he also claimed that the reserves were running out soon, which is not true.Originally posted by bila_prem:To put it this way fellow comrade, the government also conned public's money on foolish projects, eg. esplanade. TT Durai is no different from the government.
the government is by the people, for the people. TT Durai is acting in his own interests. -
Minister Vivian Balakrishnan has just announced that government policy as a result of NKF case will be to let charity organizations self-regulate with one of the Charity CEO quickly suggesting following of civil servants' reward structure.
Here is my reply to a forum post at CNA posted on 25.9.2005:
It is not in government political interest to open up the NKF hole bigger by asking charity organziaton to correct high spending on CEO wages giving them 8-12 months bonuses or all the perks like Mercedes and golden taps.
For better closure, the direction will be to carry on as Singapore incorporated following civil service structure paying world-class salaries (not to attract higher calibre) but existing incumbents as rewards in the same way as civil servants are being rewarded and pushed up in terms of wages and bonuses.
If the whole system is meritocracy, and not protective or meant for rewards of existing elites, there will not be all the contrived multi-level promotional posts to which outsiders cannot even apply. There will not be all the 8-12 months bonuses paid out from surpluses which are not created out of elites own success factors but people's donations or contributions.
Our ministers must think out of the box and not from the same box all the time as we have seen in the running of the country. One policy about presumptuous talents and leaderships of a few and whole wage system is pushed to skyhigh not because of openness but rewards of incumbents and no one can change it. -
If minister Dr. Vivian Balakrishnan really believes that charity organizations can self-regulate themselves, he must be quite sure indeed that there is such a model of good corporate governance (for self-regulated management).
If there is none, can he really talk about self-regulations?
Was Singapore supposed to practise self-regulations in many areas as recommended before his time? What were the chances or success in human beings self-regulating themselves? Many public and private companies' CEOs are being charged in court for many corporate offences and CBTs. Can he tell them not to cheat or put up with promotional or bonus schemes for themselves?
If there is no substance or substantial commitments to certain policies it is better not to announce them.
Read more about good corporate governance at:
http://www.managefranchise.blogspot.com
http://www.ospforohsopolite.blogspot.com
http://www.easymanager.blogspot.com
Regards to Singapore Incorporated state of self-regulations. -
Sept 20, 2005
No cancer fund? That's a backward step for NKF
I am an ardent donor of the National Kidney Foundation (although I am not a big contributor) and am very proud of the status it has achieved over the years.
I can say I supported its programmes and objective to save and help the unfortunate.
When I first received a letter from then CEO T.T. Durai asking me to support him in setting up a new fund for less fortunate children, I did not hesitate and contributed what I could to the fund.
I was proud that the institution was embarking on a life-saving programme from kidney patients to disabled children. I strongly believe that it is the way to go for an institution that has a successful programme for kidney patients to extend its experience and know-how to help others.
It is just like a corporation expanding its area of expertise to other products but in this case it is a non-profit organisation.
Last year, it stated its intention to help cancer patients. I supported this new fund without hesitation. Since then, I had been contributing whatever I could to the funds.
The recent news to separate them into two different funds upsets me. Whatever that happened in the NKF saga about transparency are being looked into and rectified by its new board and CEO.
Should not the new team just move forward in the direction set by the previous team and not move backward?
Donors need to be educated. Tell them about the objectives of NKF and the direction it is moving in. There is no need to change its direction just because some donors are not happy.
I'd rather have donors who support the vision and direction of the institution than please those who cannot appreciate the goodwill. Going back to become just an institution for kidney patients is a step backward. Why have so many charities when many of them have problems raising funds and helping their beneficiaries?
The NKF Children Medical Fund and NKF Cancer Fund will now have to employ their own administration, management and fundraising staff.
Will this not eat into the charity dollars? Does Singapore have that many qualified volunteers to sit on the boards? Is it not better to belong to a single body which can effectively raise funds by using the same staff and administrative manpower?
Will it not be cost effective to have the existing staff to multi-task?
How will the cancer patients feel now? I remember the smiles on the faces of cancer patients when they were first told of NKF's intention to help them.
How disappointed they will be now? They will feel that they have been abandoned. How about the disabled children? I just can't bear to see the disappointment on their faces.
I believe the decision of the new team will also not go down well with the kidney patients who had been supportive of the NKF's decision then.
We do charity work for humanity's sake. Because of this, we strive to better ourselves by helping the unfortunate, go forward whenever we can and help all those who are in need.
The NKF, as an institution, had moved forward in its mission to help the unfortunate. Let's move forward despite the obstacles we face. I believe the staff of NKF and its donors will not stumble but carry on the mission.
I plead with the new NKF board and CEO to reconsider and move forward with the vision of helping the less fortunate individuals.
I wish all at NKF good health and will continue to do my part in contributing to its funds.
William Tan -
TO William Tan
why ANTkf send up cancer fund when there is cancer society ? they shd just close the fund, fire all the staff and pass the $$ to cancer society. -
Latest News:
Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training –
Teaching Performance Rankings August 2005
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=155913 -
What has it got to do with NKF or TT Durai?Originally posted by morning_sun:Latest News:
Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training –
Teaching Performance Rankings August 2005
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=155913 -
Get a different entrepreneur with private sector background with exposure to value-adding services, the same job will be better performed and costs can be further reduced.
In the first place, there is something basically not right in going for glory in running a charity organization like incurring high costs on CEOs and putting up a grand building. Because of these two high-cost factors alone, no matter how NKF tries to do it will be held back by high costs.
Per patient costs now as compared with similar treatment in Malaysia seems too high. It will be necessary to lease out the expensive premises and operate from inexpensive ones to use the rentals wisely and get funds flowing again for NKF and really lower the per patient treatment costs which should be the primary objective of NKF. -
I read it somewhere in the newspaper that it is b'cos the health minister gave durai suggestion.Originally posted by crazy monkey:TO William Tan
why ANTkf send up cancer fund when there is cancer society ? they shd just close the fund, fire all the staff and pass the $$ to cancer society. -
Posted by "robertteh"
Get a different entrepreneur with private sector background with exposure to value-adding services, the same job will be better performed and costs can be further reduced.
In the first place, there is something basically not right in going for glory in running a charity organization like incurring high costs on CEOs and putting up a grand building. Because of these two high-cost factors alone, no matter how NKF tries to do it will be held back by high costs.
Per patient costs now as compared with similar treatment in Malaysia seems too high. It will be necessary to lease out the expensive premises and operate from inexpensive ones to use the rentals wisely and get funds flowing again for NKF and really lower the per patient treatment costs which should be the primary objective of NKF.
REPLY BY ROBERTTEH:
REPLY BY: "Pitomnik"The guys running NKF were from the private sector... the foundation did accumulate reserves, and that's something most other charities can't claim to have done. If you're comparing just how long charities would last (i.e., financial stability), then NKF would win outright. But the issue here is how to strike a balance between helping more people, and having enough reserves to stay stable for the long term so that the patients it helps will never need to worry about the day the foundation will go broke.
I agree cost containmet is important. That is why I am all for pegging charity sector pay to civil service pay, maybe slightly less. But if there are excellent talents that can help bring charities to a higher level of excellence, but cost more, I'd say pay them. It's difficult enough to find talent to want to work in the Not-for-profit sector, let alone keep them. Unless you guys want te NPO sector to be saddled with the reputation of one that hires only the left-overs after the public and private sectors have gotten their share of talents...
I think NKF's cost isn't due to its premises... from what I understand, they're in housing estates, renting from the Town Councils and HDB. Can't beat that... unless someone donates a new dialysis centre, or waives rental. Comparing with M'sia is a hopeless cause... we all know over the causeway, healthcare IS always cheaper. Just that, for dialysis patients, they can't keep crossing over every other day for treatment, and really, what is the alternative other than to have dialysis operations in Singapore?
The NKF saga, and the state of the charity sector at large, is not a simple issue to resolve. With greying population, and increased health care costs, building a civic society will take time. And all of us will have to contribute positively to the process of building a Not-for-profit sector that is effective, efficient, responsible, accountable, and genuinely proud to proclaim that it has served the nation.
"If cost of treatment is so high and reserve is so big, neither the patients nor the public will be happy.
The way forward is not to keep justifying the past and comparing with the worse case scenario to stay in the denial mode. Real entrepreneurs do not keep giving such if-and-but and not so easy excuses.
It is time to do some think-out-the-box solutions. Even if these solutions at first sight might encourter some practical problems, it will be worth it to try as our patient paying component is really too high compared with reserve.
May be Durai has listened to this kind of excuses and pro-high cost and pro-high reserve policies so he had good reason too not to try harder.
If new CEO is appointed, public will want some new solutions not to be constrained by old policies that were overturned by the SPH open-court expose." -
Out of 305,000 Giro donors, only 40,000 cancelled. So what's the remaining donors doing? Waiting for what? Just like Raffles Town Club members - out of 19,000 members - only 2,000 cancelled their membership. Why? -
We have 305,000 - 40,000 = 265,00 Ah Qs. Ah Qs will accept anything.Originally posted by dannychua:
Out of 305,000 Giro donors, only 40,000 cancelled. So what's the remaining donors doing? Waiting for what? Just like Raffles Town Club members - out of 19,000 members - only 2,000 cancelled their membership. Why? -
since NKF, another 3 charities are suspected of financial irregularities.
-
The latest being Darul Ihsan orphanage.Originally posted by dragg:since NKF, another 3 charities are suspected of financial irregularities. -
Another new charity show on its way-The Cancer Charity Show 2005,Sunday Oct.,23, Ch 8,7pm. Are they re-igniting the camp fire or is it an encore to the NKF Charity Show?
-
If I am not wrong this one is different. This is a new charity set up not long ago. This one is headed by a cancer specialist Dr Ang Peng Tiam who is a practising oncologist. You can find him at Mt Elizabeth Hosp and acts as a consultant to the govt hospitals. He was also one of the founder of Cord Blood bank in Spore. This one is worth donating to.Originally posted by Heartlander:Another new charity show on its way-The Cancer Charity Show 2005,Sunday Oct.,23, Ch 8,7pm. Are they re-igniting the camp fire or is it an encore to the NKF Charity Show? -
I agree with what you say that people must draw a line between supporting government or people who are unfortunate. Singapore is comprised of people or Singaporeans not the government. When they support charities they are unfortunate people because of supporting Singapore the people not necessarily the government.