Govt to take 'hands off' approach on state funds: Tharman
-
Govt to take 'hands off' approach on state funds: Tharman
let's hope the new finance minister knows his responsibilities
'It is important for the government to retain its stance of not assessing Temasek and GIC on individual deals.' -- ST PHOTO: MUGILAN RAJASEGERAN
THE Government will take a 'hands off' approach on investments made by its sovereign wealth funds in banks including Citigroup Inc. amid the subprime meltdown, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said in Parliament on Monday.
The recent multi-billion-dollar investments in ailing global financial institutions were made purely from a commercial standpoint, he told the House.
The government plays no role in how the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) and investment firm Temasek Holdings decide their investment policies, said Mr Tharman.
'They make these decisions for commercial reasons based on their own calculations free of any influence from the government,' he told Parliament.
'It is not the government's role to comment on or second guess whether it was timely for GIC and Temasek to make these investments,' he said in response to an MP's question.
He said the government is 'scrupulous in avoiding comment' or influence not only publicly but internally on the individual decisions of Temasek and GIC.
'It does not judge the performance of GIC and Temasek by their individual deals,' Mr Tharman said.
GIC and Temasek are both sovereign wealth funds - a form of government-created investment vehicle which has emerged as a potent force on global financial markets.
With their newfound market muscle, such funds have led to concerns over a lack of transparency and national security in recipient countries.
The two funds made global headlines recently with their investments in global financial houses battered by a US housing slump.
GIC, the custodian of Singapore's massive foreign reserves of more than US$100 billion (S$143 billion), announced last week it would invest US$6.88 billion in US banking giant Citigroup.
That followed its December investment of almost US$10 billion into Swiss bank UBS, while Temasek Holdings committed to injecting US$4.4 billion into US brokerage firm Merrill Lynch.
'These are large investments; there will be downside risks and it's up to GIC and Temasek to assess these risks and decide if they are acceptable,' said Mr Tharman.
'It is important for the government to retain its stance of not assessing Temasek and GIC on individual deals.'
GIC, the government's fund manager, said in July 2006 it earned an average 9.5 per cent annually since its inception in 1981.
Temasek, the state-owned investment company, had a return on investment of more than 18 per cent by market value since its inception in 1974, the company said in its latest annual report.
Financial services rose to 38 per cent of Temasek's assets in the financial year ended March 2007 from 35 per cent a year earlier, the company said in the report released in August.
The company is the single-largest investor in banks such as Standard Chartered Plc and DBS Group Holdings Ltd. -- AFP.
-
...right...
-
Whether GIC or Temasek is exercising their right independently of the government to make their own organizational investment decisions over their portfolios or not is a secondary issue.
Of course the government can say that many of its GLCs too can also do the same making their own investments decisions without any interventions by the government.
The main issue here is : are such monies held by GIC or Temasek or GLCs public monies belonging to the public citizens?
If they are not, by all means go ahead and let them invest according to their own policies or wishes and it is true the government should not intervene in such matter.
On the other hand if the monies held by GIC or Temasek are public monies then the respective organizations holding these funds are only trustees and as trustees the general law should require them to invest such trust funds only according to certain criteria or principles.
The government has no legal or constitutional right to splash public funds on some citibank or UBS especially where our ministers also are rightly or wrongly their fiduciary advisors involving them in potential conflicts of interest. -
If I give my financial consultant $50,000 USD to do investments for me, I want to know what she does with it; what she bought, why she bought it, how much did she bough it for, what she sold, why did she sell it, how much did she sell it for and how much money I am making.
To me, she works for me and make recommendations. I make the decision so I do not blame her for my mistake. It would be stupid of me to just give her the money and not know what she does with if. It's absurd to even think that questioning her would be violating her professionalism.
But.. if the money is not mine, it's a never-ending stream of cash and I'm just making money from the transaction, that's a different story. I wouldn't give a damn if she looses two billion as long as I still make money regardless if it is a wise or stupid decision.
Oh I forgot to add... I would even second decision even if it is stupid simply because the she is my boss' wife. -
Dear Robert,
I find myself sometimes wishing Singapore would not get so involved overseas. Just sufficient to secure ourselves and not to the point where domestic issues go unresolved.
Sometimes I get the mental picture of a child getting a toy. At first he takes care of it and plays properly. Then he plays with it in imaginative ways. Then throws it around to test how strong it is. Then wanting to open it up to see what's inside. Then finally getting bored with the battered object and wants a replacement. -
The 40 plus years of this kind of government it only points to one fact - power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.Originally posted by phil30k:Dear Robert,
I find myself sometimes wishing Singapore would not get so involved overseas. Just sufficient to secure ourselves and not to the point where domestic issues go unresolved.
Sometimes I get the mental picture of a child getting a toy. At first he takes care of it and plays properly. Then he plays with it in imaginative ways. Then throws it around to test how strong it is. Then wanting to open it up to see what's inside. Then finally getting bored with the battered object and wants a replacement.
With the oppressive abuse of power against all oppositions there is no one left to check on any wrong doings now as all problems can be easily denied and facts twisted to suit the power. Black can be white and white black now. So power has taken a life of its own and has now become absolute.
With absolute power, it is easy to pretend to be caring and concerned but in actual fact the power will continue to govern to suit its own hidden agendas. Examples include the NKF problems people complained about for years yet there is no solution. Ministers do not need more monies to be retained as none of them are resigning to join private sector for higher pays and they privately know it is immoral and wrong to write their own pay cheques. Yet what do we see - another and another rounds of non-stops increases or taking of their own rewards. The same thing is happening to the investments of people's surpluses in the banks connected to them as they like. They know it is public trust monies and they should invest such monies only within the laws but they don't care and continue to talk with hypocrisy or looking the other way and not listening to complaints.
Because the power that be has tasted power and is fully prepared to deny all problems and challenge any one who criticise ' we have the mandate you are just a vocal minority". Power = all problems solved"
Practically, there is no point for people to try to reason or rationalize with despots.
The frequent excuse given to deny any problem is to quote worse-case scenarios saying how lucky we are as compared with others like Indonesians or Philippinos or Thais.
The second most common excuse is to claim with elections totally manipulated to perpetuate themselves "take us on if you can"
People are wasting their time attending forums, giving feedbacks and writing to newspapers.
Mr. Khaw is aware that the government is not subsidizing the medical servies because the total taxes collected are far in excess of expenditures yet he is not admitting this as an error or negligence in responsibility to serve the people.
But he will still insist on his means test to charge more fees so that the tax monies (only less than 4% of taxes as compared with a probable original allocation of 8%) will continue to be hoarded for surpluses to serve government other hidden agendas.
With a total tax revenue of more than S$6 billion per year there is no reason why government cannot provide basic medical class "C' services but Mr. Khaw does not care now because he too has now tasted power. -
The sin city is really in a sorry state.
If the investment loses money due to paper scholar who know nuts about finance, the peasants will be tax more to help the "poor".
The poodles will never be affected by any inflation or recession as their expenses can be charged on official account and they can also expect a fat pension when they retired.
It is like a vicious cycle.
Typical true life example of the animal farm.
Next time, the story will be become a true tale of city who rise, corrupts and perish. -
$33b GIC, Temasek ventures purely commercial: Tharman
You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time. -Abraham Lincoln
Purely commercial? Hands off? Dear citizens the director of Temasick is the wife of our dear prime minister. Any one still believe it's purely commercial and hands off? Is Tharman thinking Singaporeans were just borned yesterday? -
Cannot blame the finance minister, he is too busy coming up new idea to tax the people. After all, he is only paid a few millions.Originally posted by Lin Yu:let's hope the new finance minister knows his responsibilities -
Originally posted by (human):
there is actually a very sinister scheme behind all these purchase.... if you believe wat the hongkeys are spinning....
[b]$33b GIC, Temasek ventures purely commercial: Tharman
You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time. -Abraham Lincoln
Purely commercial? Hands off? Dear citizens the director of Temasick is the wife of our dear prime minister. Any one still believe it's purely commercial and hands off? Is Tharman thinking Singaporeans were just borned yesterday?
[/b]
to the hongkeys.. singapore's move is actually to consolidate its finance and banking strength through such purchases .... with the ultimate aim destroying hongkong.....
yes.... our leaders are very very sinister one.... soon... the next time their chief excutive of hongkong SAR come to singapore again... he can forget about the bak kut tae..... he can start by smelling our PM's ass.....
-
the financial muscle of the future will come from china. i think it will overtake the current powerhouse in 10-20 years time. china/ india will yield a lot more power and influence.
just like the brits who rules the world not too long ago, i suspect the american's time is up. it will be a matter of time when they will no longer have the resources nor influence to shape the world.
tt's why HK is not betting on US nor europe. -
i dont know if the global financial map will change that much in 10 to 20 years...Originally posted by weiqimun:the financial muscle of the future will come from china. i think it will overtake the current powerhouse in 10-20 years time. china/ india will yield a lot more power and influence.
just like the brits who rules the world not too long ago, i suspect the american's time is up. it will be a matter of time when they will no longer have the resources nor influence to shape the world.
tt's why HK is not betting on US nor europe.
nevertheless.... we got both india and chinese bank covered with massive holdings of shares in bank of china , China construction bank and ICICI bank of india... and DBS has landed in china, hongkong and taiwan. -
Originally posted by anonymouscoward:
What he said
[b]If I give my financial consultant $50,000 USD to do investments for me, I want to know what she does with it; what she bought, why she bought it, how much did she bough it for, what she sold, why did she sell it, how much did she sell it for and how much money I am making.
[b]
-
I don't think it's power that corrupts. I think it's the desire for power that corrupts. Just like it's not money that corrupts but the love of money that corrupts. Just like it's not faith that's the problem but blind faith. The list goes on.
-
The same ppl in the Goverment and Temasek....yet he say the govt take "hands off" approach
What he may mean is that the govt dun want to give explanation.....especially when it is a stupid decision
-
singapore aint the only country that invested in those banks... many countries like china, arab nations and scandinavian countries also invested in those banks...Originally posted by SnowFlag:The same ppl in the Goverment and Temasek....yet he say the govt take "hands off" approach
What he may mean is that the govt dun want to give explanation.....especially when it is a stupid decision
i must assume therefore... either your smarter then all those people... or you dun want to give explanation with regard to your stupid opinion. -
Hands off approach? I think they know their hands are stained with their foolish decisions of loosing peoples reserve in the investment by GIC and now trying to go for wash hands approach with 154th media to help them fool and spread their lies thinking all Singaporeans are all blinded like those 66%. Tharman if your hands are really dirty just admit it, no need to use propaganda machines to help you to help your masters to sweep the dirt under the carpet. It really seems pathetic.Originally posted by SnowFlag:The same ppl in the Goverment and Temasek....yet he say the govt take "hands off" approach
What he may mean is that the govt dun want to give explanation.....especially when it is a stupid decision -
So who is checking up on our state reserves?
The president? -
He busy making roti prata, where got time.Originally posted by charlize:So who is checking up on our state reserves?
The president?
So long as his salary goes thru every month, do you think he bothers about his responsibility to citizens.
If he talks too much later end up like Devan Nair or Ong Teng Cheong.
They going to say he wear sunglasses & wig, drive his mercedes out to nightclubs to cheong. -
... they should take to a "hands off" approach on the people's hard earned money as well...