Revisiting 'Who is selling out Singapore?'
-
The original thread is here for references purposes: http://www.sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/311471 It has already expired so readers will not be able to post there. Comments may be posted on this thread instead. The reason why I am revisiting that particular thread is because of this: Singapore to sell off state electricity provider Nesa Subrahmaniyan and Dinakar Sethuraman Bloomberg Posted to the web on: 08 July 2008 SINGAPORE — Singapore’s government-owned investment company, Temasek, has put the city-state’s largest utility up for sale, further opening the electricity sector to competition after selling Tuas Power earlier this year. The sale of Senoko Power would be completed by the end of next year, Temasek said yesterday . Built at a cost of S$2,6bn ($1,9bn), Senoko’s 3300MW of capacity supplies 30% of the island state’s electricity needs last year. The company earned S$245m before interest, taxes and depreciation on revenue of S$2,49b n for the year to March 31 . The sale of Senoko Power comes at a time when mergers and acquisitions have slumped as the collapse of the US subprime mortgage market restricts banks from lending and curbs corporate purchases. Transactions in Asia’s power industry have totalled $12,9bn this year, less than a fifth of those last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. “Of course there’s the market downturn and rising fuel costs, but Temasek has got more traction going from the sale of Tuas,� said Simon Powell, head of power research at CLSA in Hong Kong. “The price matters, but there were parties, including banks, that were eager for Tuas and lost out, and Senoko offers a chance to get into a stable cash-flow business.� Sembcorp Industries, whose electricity unit accounts for about half of profit, would bid for Temasek’s two power generators after losing out to China Huaneng Group for Tuas Power, company president Tang Kin Fei said last month. In March, Beijing-based China Huaneng agreed to pay S$4,24bn for Tuas, the smallest of Temasek’s three power generators, which supply 90% of the island state’s electricity. Temasek, which manages more than $100bn in assets, last year revived a plan abandoned six years ago to sell the Singapore companies in order to tap rising demand for power assets. It has said it plans to sell its utilities, which also include Power Seraya , by early next year . Senoko Power and Power Seraya were transferred in 2001 to Temasek from Singapore Power, the main electricity supplier, after the government separated ownership of generators from transmission and distribution. Temasek had owned Tuas Power since 1995. The three generators are barred from holding each other’s shares, according to rules set by the government’s Energy Market Authority. The MSCI index of regional utilities declined 20% this year, compared with a 22% fall in the broader MSCI Asia Pacific index, excluding Japan. The Singapore government has been gradually introducing competition in parts of the economy, including banking, utilities and telecommunications. Deregulation of the electricity industry started in 1995 and in the gas market in 2000. After completing the second phase of liberalisation in 2006, 75% of total electricity demand was open to retail competition, and the total number of so-called contestable consumers rose to 10000, according to the Energy Market Authority.
-
July 19, 2008, Singapore
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The latest position is like this.
On 2.15 pm, Monday 21, 2008, at Subordinate Court No. 6, my lawyer Mr. Chia Ti Lik will apply to withdraw from further representing me in the July 4, 2008 disorderly behaviour case. I will represent myself. Mr. Chia is a good man and an excellent lawyer. Unfortunately his work load is too heavy at present to deal with this. This withdrawal application has my full approval. Thanks Mr. Chia.
Mr. Chia had earlier applied in Court 3 Subordinate Court on July 16, 2008 during the Pre Trial Conference for the disorderly matter for my passport to be released to me to attend to my matters in the US pending trial. This application was refused. I will be making a renewed application for this in Court 6, Subordinate Court on July 21, 2008. My application is supported by the US Embassy who have given a letter to the Court supporting my application.
I understand from the US Embassy that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will be in Singapore on July 24, 2008. I also understand that the US State Department at the highest levels is being briefed daily daily on my matter. I have asked the US Embassy to put my case to the Secretary of State while she is here.
I have received dates for the disorderly behaviour trial. They are in the Subordinate Court as follows. The dates includes many half dates and intervals between dates. This is because Mr. Chia had other matters to attend and therefore dates were unavailable. Since I will be conducting my own trial, I will ask for earlier uninterrupted dates to speed up the matter.
Dates as follows: All hearings in Court 6, Subordinate Court. July 24 full day, July 28, 9am to 1 pm, July 29 2.30 to 5 pm, July 30, 2.30 to 5 pm, July 31 9 am to 5 pm whole day, August 6, 9 am to 5 pm whole day.
High Court Blogging trial, Sept 8th to the 19th, High Court.
I will be disputing the disorderly charge and the charge that I insulted police officers. My stand will be that I was neither disorderly or insulted anyone on 4th July 2008, American Independence Day.
As for the the blogging trial that I insulted Judge Belinda Ang in my blog (the blogging case) , my stand will be that I insulted no one. I wrote a blog and I am entitled under my right to freedom of speech to say what I say during the 3 day trial of May 26 to May 28, 2008 in the High Court. The words that I used in the blog clearly meant in the English language that judge Belinda Ang had abused her authority, and it was not meant to be understood in any other sense. If in fact the selection of my words, although proper in the English language, was harsh I apologize to Judge Belinda Ang for it. However my stand will continue to be that in the English language, it was a proper use of the words to describe her actions.
As to her conduct of the case, I intend to stand by what I have said. She did not appear to be impartial at all, and Dr. Chee Soon Juan and his sister and the SDP was not given any real opportunity to put their case forward. That will continue to be my stand.
I cannot understand the Singapore Government in pursuing these matters against me. If indeed it is to punish me, it would be indeed a useless exercise. After all I am an American citizen. I will be returning to the the US after all, despite my punishment. And any amount of punishment cannot change the way I think. Any punishment meted out to me will not change my impression of the Singapore authoritarian government and Singapore's using the courts to silence Singaporeans yearning for democracy and freedom.
On the other hand, if it is an attempt to intimidate any other Singaporean from speaking up against injustices, it is clearly a failure. As you know, 19 Singaporean protesters have stood up against this government to voice their disaffection, during the Ta Boleh Tahan March 15, 2008 Parliment House protest, for which all of them have been charged in court. I was in Court 24 on July 18, 2008 in Court 24 for their pre trial conferences. Far from being intimidated, they have all been seen to be in very high spirits and look as if they are all ready to take on these unjust laws yet again. And what is more, all signs indicate that more and more young people are coming forward to stand up to repression and intimidation, their hearts emboldened and strengthened by this outrage against them.
All this is happening with the backdrop of the 72 page scathing report of the International Bar Association which clearly spells out the fact that the Singapore judiciary is an instrument of political repression against Singaporeans in order to perpetuate the Lee Kuan Yew Regime. The Guardian newspaper of London has only yesterday come up with an article stating the government of Singapore uses its so called economic success as an excuse to deny their people their human rights. Of course Lee Kuan Yew and the Mr. Teo, the Singapore High Commissioner to London have come up with the same old lame excuse that Singapore is unique, being Asian, small and multi racial, and therefore not suited to Western norms of human rights.
I will tell this to Mr. Lee and the High Commissioner. Human beings are human beings whether Asian, Australian or Eskimo. And being humans they are all entitled to human rights. And by the way human rights is universal. It is not particularly only for Europeans or Americans.
So stop trying to pull wool over our eyes. We are not babies.
Gopalan Nair
Singapore -
if one day the foreign owner decided to increase tariff to make money, who can stop them?
-
i would like to bang Condoleezza Rice