HDB is a private commercial organisation, is a....

HDB is private, HDB is public, HDB is a commercial organisation, HDB is a govt organisation, HDB is to build flats for the people, HDB is to make as much profit for its shareholders.... What is HDB? What is the role of HDB? Oh it has been privatised, no longer a govt organisation or stats board. The govt has nothing to do with its policies. 'The Senior Minister of State for National Development, Ms Grace Fu, said yesterday that the HDB is "going to hasten the pace of the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) because we think this is a very good time....Ms Fu assured home buyers yesterday that HDB will "always price (the new flats) with the market price in mind.' This is quoted from the ST today. So is HDB govt or private? Also, this new pricing to the market must be a policy that every MP in Parliament also approved of. Was there any objection to such a policy or were there any question ask in Parliament? Objecting is a non existence word. Asking is the best that the people can expect from their representatives in Parliament.

Don't be stupid

'We have achieved progress with our bilingual education. It would be stupid for any Singapore agency or NTU to advocate the learning of dialects, which must be at the expense of English and Mandarin.' Chee Hong Tat, Principal Private Secretary to the MM. I cannot agree more with this statement. The romancing of ethnic, parochial and sectoral emotions and sentiments must not become a national preoccupation. Go on and cultivate, preserve and enjoy your personal romance with whatever holds dear to one's heart. But pushing such agenda is, yes, STUPID. It is stupid, it is stupid. Primordial instinct cannot be given too much of a free play and become a national agenda. The above quote is in the forum page of ST today. I am not sure if the stupid comment was Chee Hong Tat's comment or MM's comment. It is his letter, so it must be his. But the nuances and the familiarity of the stupid comment and its origin is well known. I thought only in cyberspace that such liberal use of the word stupid and expletives are common. I am glad that the main media is also feeling more free to express stronger feelings on issues. I am also glad that a PPS is also comfortable to use such terms in public statements.

Affordability Key to HDB flats

Ignatius Lourdesamy is working overtime to reply to the numerous questioning of HDB pricing of its flats. So far HDB has been explaining that the flats are all affordable as there is a range of flats to fit every pocket. The issue is why are the people not accepting this explanation and why are the people so unhappy with HDB? There seems to be a big gap of difference or perception between the two parties. In a way HDB is right. Just buy within your means. Just work out on 21% of your income and go for the flats that one can afford. The buyers must be wrong here. If they cannot afford a bigger flat, they must buy a smaller one. The other issue which many are still having a big doubt over their heads is with respect to the costing of the flats. First is the commercial interest and market pricing policy of HDB. This must have cheesed off a lot of the buyers. The second point is the costing. How did HDB work out their costs? The most important part of this puzzle is the land cost. I don't think anyone is going to agree with the way HDB cost their land. And that may be the reason why this is often spoken but no details will be given. Then there are the other costs which the people will be curious to know. HDB is a public housing organisation to build flats for the people. It is not a commercial or private enterprise no matter what it calls itself. It has a public responsibility to serve the interest of the people for the privilege position it is in. At the rate it is going, the animosity towards HDB will keep growing when its priorities do not match the perception and interest of the people it is supposed to be serving.

What I would call a badly managed and irresponsible stock market

Financial institutions across the world are licking their wounds and there were many red faces around. One exception is the stock markets. Despite the meltdown, no one is complaining, it seems, and the plight of the investors losing their fortunes were left untold. Many stock markets are victims of the financial tsunami. They cannot be sheltered from the onslaught. But many could have fared better while some actually dealt themselves in with many bad decisions. Some of the things I dread are as follows. 1. Reckless and rapid flooding of the market with IPOs. 2. Lack of control over dubious corporations. 3. Allowing the market to be manipulated or cornered by syndicates. 4. Allowing short selling in an imperfect market. 5. Hands off to irresponsible corporations making cash calls when liquidity is tight. 6. Allowing the erosion of values of stocks when some intervention is necessary. 7. Continue to multiply market instruments through more derivatives. 8. Deregulations when regulations is seriously wanting. These are some of my preliminary thoughts.

GIC lost 25% on paper

The media quoted LKY saying that GIC's portfolio fell 25% from its peak and was managing only $150b. For the 25% fall, I will strongly recommend that GIC take out a couple of billions to reward the staff for such a scintillating performance. It has greatly outperformed the market indices which fell about 40%. On the second point of $150b, I am very puzzled. Why was it reported in so many media reports that GIC was managing something like $550b? This is not a 10 or 20% error. It was inflated by almost 4 times what GIC has. Now, which is the real number? No one should question LKY as he is the GIC Chairman and it was like words from the horse's mouth. Some may wonder how come GIC is managing a portfolio that much smaller than Temasek. But fact is fact. Would the reputable and highly reliable media do some ground work to confirm the facts?