NKF trial over,but what about Govt's role as permit-granter?

• blueheeler

  9 Feb 07, 08:37

  Most of the people linked directly to the NKF saga have thrown in the towel. For their wrongdoing, I assume they'll have to pay compensate NKF.
  
  But thinking back, NKF is an organisation that surely must have operated under some kind of govt's charity-permit. As the permit-granter, surely the govt has the responsibility of 'oversight' to make sure NKF operates above board.
  
  Fact: NKF abused its authority for so long and to the amount of millions of dollars. Fact: the govt, throughout the wrongdoing period of the NKF, was its permit-granter. Fact: When the NKF scandal 1st made the news, prominent people in govt, and those married to prominent people in govt, 'defended' NKF's conduct to be 'above board'.
  
  Yes, we should go after the NKF board members for their wrongdoing. But what should be done to those in govt who had the duty of 'oversight', but failed to 'oversee' that NKF was properly run?
  
  This is not a situation where I suggest that the entire Ministry of Health is to take the blame for one single unclean satay stall in Bedok. The NKF was a high-profile charity with million-dollar fund-raising TV shows, with a patron married to an ex-PM, with previous public debates about 1st-class travel for staff...etc. Surely the internal affairs of such a prominent NKF should be of interest to the govt, who should sensibly be 'auditing' it from day-one.
  
  I'll give a poor anology: I have a dog, which is licensed in my name. One day, the dog runs away and bites someone. The dog is caught, and killed for the saftey of the public. I, as the dog's licensed owner, was not present during the biting, but I would be in trouble nevertheless for not locking it up securely.
  
  So, shouldn't the overall 'master' of NKF be put under scrutiny as well?
• ditzy

  9 Feb 07, 08:42

  You can't fight city hall.
• charlize

  9 Feb 07, 08:45

  Originally posted by blueheeler:

  Most of the people linked directly to the NKF saga have thrown in the towel. For their wrongdoing, I assume they'll have to pay compensate NKF.
  
  But thinking back, NKF is an organisation that surely must have operated under some kind of govt's charity-permit. As the permit-granter, surely the govt has the responsibility of 'oversight' to make sure NKF operates above board.
  
  Fact: NKF abused its authority for so long and to the amount of millions of dollars. Fact: the govt, throughout the wrongdoing period of the NKF, was its permit-granter. Fact: When the NKF scandal 1st made the news, prominent people in govt, and those married to prominent people in govt, 'defended' NKF's conduct to be 'above board'.
  
  Yes, we should go after the NKF board members for their wrongdoing. But what should be done to those in govt who had the duty of 'oversight', but failed to 'oversee' that NKF was properly run?
  
  I'll give a poor anology: I have a dog, which is licensed in my name. One day, the dog runs away and bites someone. The dog is caught, and killed for the saftey of the public. I, as the dog's licensed owner, was not present during the biting, but I would be in trouble nevertheless for not locking it up securely.
  
  So, shouldn't the overall 'master' of NKF be put under scrutiny as well?

  It depends on who is the dog's owner lah.
  
  Really.
  
  
• SevenEleven

  9 Feb 07, 08:46

  this is only the civil case. the show must go on
  
• ArdusKane

  9 Feb 07, 08:50

  Originally posted by ditzy:

  You can't fight city hall.