PM Lee sends lawyer's letter to editors of TR Emeritus
-
3Boys:
I do try and keep abreast on financial matters, but I don't claim to know enough to be a judge of HC's performance. Perhaps you have something more firsthand and substantive than the stuff that floats around in cyberspace forums? Any sorta proper benchmark you can offer up that proves HC had underperformed her role? Am happy to be convinced.[/quote]someone in the market quote to me some facts on the $b lost selling some investments but with the cash redeployed it has made more gain now when compared with hypothetically not selling the investment.
I guess.. giving her a chance is ok.. but..............?limlim:
[quote=\"3Boys\"]
Yes, insider, I understand what you mean. But in this case, its not so much about HC being self-sacrificial, but about whether there is a potential loss of a talented individual (whatever what one may think of her ability). I think from the exchange between PM, Dhana (to the extent that it can be believed) seem to have dealt with the perception issue to some degree.
Already \"tried and tested\" and still in use..?
of course one can argue that had they not first made those investment, they could have more cash to make even more gain subsequently.....well, hindsight is always perfect .... but then they will also kena why cash are not gainfully deployed ......if only they / we know the market timing perfectly ..... -
3Boys:
How many more statements about HC does PM need to make? You yourself don't seem very convinced do you? If there were no threat of a lawsuit, how tempted may you be to definitively make exactly the same accusation that has now gotten TRE into hot soup?limlim:
[quote=\"3Boys\"]I thought we were talking about transparency a few threads ago? Now its okay for people to make wild allegations and the people being maligned should just shut up?
They can clarify or address the issue to the public..
Not necessarily armed with a threat to sue to the individual..
If it were me, I'd sue straight off the bat. Why should I waste additional time and energy on malicious comments posted by malicious people, defending myself? Only makes me look guilty, and encourages other malicious people to take a shot themselves, and it'll never end. Then all I do is responding and clarifying instead of doing my day job.[/quote]ok ok.. like I say.. it's juz a casual comment.. what you say is valid too.. -
HVR:
First, wat r u trying to say in ur second point?Way2GO:
[quote=\"HVR\"]
If I may add, PM has not asked for damages in this case. If I may further add, the damages awarded to all govt leaders for all previous suits were all donated to charities.
On ur first point, dat's true.
Its a shot across d bows.
Ditto with d honourable Minister.
d fear dat u cld be sued off ur pants
is enuff to shut up many.
That they sued not to enrich themselves but to clear their names. You shouldn't be fearful if you can back up what you said. Unless you are saying something you know you can't substantiate with facts.[/quote]You know the judge is appointed by who in Singapore?
I'll suggest that for our judiciary arm to be independent, it should be appointed differently in future. Presently, the chief justice is appointed by the President but from candidates recommended by the prime minister.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_system_of_Singapore -
WeiHan:
Ho Ho Ho!
You know the judge is appointed by who in Singapore?
I'll suggest that for our judiciary arm to be independent, it should be appointed differently in future. Presently, the chief justice is appointed by the President but from candidates recommended by the prime minister.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_system_of_Singapore -
Do you know once high court judges are appointed, they cannot be removed till at least 65 yrs old? This is what we called ‘life tenure’, to ensure that they can do their job impartially. They have to make decision and since they are also human, I guess they cannot satisfy everyone. Even though their decisions are open for scrutiny as they have to account and explain how they derived at the decision in the judgment. If the current way of appointing judges is not sound, you are welcome to feedback and give suggestion to relevant body.
-
ST Engineering only has a market cap of $10 billions.
Temasek Holding has a market cap of 200 billions.
HC was "promoted" straight away from a position as a CEO in STE to the CEO of TH. Think about it. STE and TH are a very different companies, not only in nature of business but in term of market cap of an entirely different league. People who can manage a 10 billion company, don’t necessarily mean thathe/she can manage a 200 billions company. Not to even say that STE is a technology company while TH is an investment firm.
I think to appoint people to such position as CEO of TH, the appointing body owe Singapore justifications of his/her qualifications. Every investment fund in the world has a transparent track record including warren Buffett’s Bekshire Hathaway. So why can’t we get a list of achievements in investment and management of all potential appointees? -
WeiHan:
Even US Supreme Court judges are nominated by the sitting President, who unashamedly uses them to prosecute political agenda. What system would you propose that is superior to the present one and immune to all political manipulation?
You know the judge is appointed by who in Singapore?
I'll suggest that for our judiciary arm to be independent, it should be appointed differently in future. Presently, the chief justice is appointed by the President but from candidates recommended by the prime minister.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_system_of_Singapore -
If I read the lawyer’s letter correctly, they were saying that TRE’s "cronysim" allegation was untrue because
1. Mdm Ho was appointed head of Temasek because of Dhanabalan’s recommendation (and not because of her husband’s recommendation),
2. her husband and (then PM) GCT had turned it down initially and had subsequently appointed Mdm Ho only upon Dhanabalan’s insistence,
3. Mdm Ho’s appointment was approved by the (then) President.
Therefore Mdm Ho’s appointment was "on merit" and through proper process…
So does it mean that it was based on merit because the ex-Cabinet Ministers appointed to chair Temasek’s board of director, Dhanabalan, thought so? -
What kind of merit are they talking about ?
-
3Boys:
The key point is separation of powers and an independent executive/legislature and judiciary.Nothing is perfect but we will try as much as possible to separate the legislature and judiciary power as much as we can. The american governmental system is unique such that they have independent power assigned to the legislative, executive and judiciary branch. Even the president does not have an absolute power in the executive branch of the government. But this not the case in Singapore. I will say the american system isn't perfect but they have better check of power and no branches or individual will have total power control.
Even US Supreme Court judges are nominated by the sitting President, who unashamedly uses them to prosecute political agenda. What system would you propose that is superior to the present one and immune to all political manipulation?WeiHan:
You know the judge is appointed by who in Singapore?
I'll suggest that for our judiciary arm to be independent, it should be appointed differently in future. Presently, the chief justice is appointed by the President but from candidates recommended by the prime minister.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_system_of_Singapore
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login