Monday, January 7, 2013

Speaking Plainly

chao /chow, tʃaʊ/ a. [Hk. 臭] is Chinese for dirty, foul, smelly, stinking; detestable, disgusting, unwelcome.
Used in combination,
chao kuan /kooahn, kʊɑːn/ a. [Hk. 款 kuan] means not playing fair, stacking the odds in its own favour.

For instance, the full text of the Aljunied Hougang Town Council (AHTC) letter dated June 10, 2011 clearly indicates:
"We would like to inform you that Aljunied-Hougang Town Council is in the process of developing a Town Council Management System to support its operations effectively.
We would like to thank AIM for the assistance rendered to us in preparing the migration of database to the new system.
The new system is targeted to go live on 1 August 2011. While the new system goes live, we are planning to have the AIMS-TCMS (Financial Module) running concurrently till 31 August 2011, so as to ascertain the reliability of the new system.
As such, we would like to put up a request to continue to use the AIMS-TCMS till 31 August 2011, for your favourable consideration please."

The smoking bit in Action Information Management (AIM)'s ungracious response dated June 22, 2011, as supplied by AIM, is highlighted:
"We hereby give notice in accordance with Clause 9.3 of the Conditions of the above Contract that, owing to material changes to the membership of the Town Council, we will cease to allow Aljunied Town Council the use of the intellectual property and system functions relating to the developed application software currently used by the Town Council after a period of at least one month from the date of this notice.
The provision of the developed application software will therefore be terminated with effect from 1 August 2011."

It is clear as day AIM had no intention of acceding to AHTC's simple request for a one month period to ascertain the reliability of the new system. That's chao kuan in action.

In the rebuttal to Teo Ho Pin's long winded yarn of obfuscation and denials dated 2 Jan 2013 on the sale of the developed software formerly owned by the PAP-managed Town Councils to AIM in 2011, AHTC's Sylvia Lim's succinct summary speaks volumes:
First, that the PAP-managed Town Councils sold off the computer and financial systems developed with public monies to a vehicle of the PAP, just prior to the General Election;
Second, according to the most recent statement of Mr Chandra Das, AIM's Chairman, AIM "as a PAP company" wanted to "be helpful to the PAP Town Councils", and;
Third, that the PAP sees no issue with an arrangement allowing them to terminate the software agreements with any Town Council with one month's notice if there is a material change in the Town Council's membership. 

No need to call in Queen's Counsels to query the obvious; enough of taxpayers' time and money have been wasted on the pissing contest. To quote Ms Lim's Parthian shot: "We leave it to the public to make their own judgment." Touché.


  1. Well AIMs can do with 1 customer short unlike other money generating company that always looking to maintain or get more customers

  2. So who requested to terminate the town council management software at AHTC? Is Chandra Das a BALD-FACED LIAR, or Sylvia Lim, or as accessories, spin Dr Teo Ho Pin, or Grace Fu? Someone must be. You decide.

  3. Both sides had said much on this topic. Now let the people decide. My guess is PAP - 0, People - 1.

  4. I believe the PAP will stop treating this as an issue any longer.

    It has the haughty idea that it can ignore issues as and when it wishes.

    It is confident that its supporters are still fully behind it, and we are just a lunatic fringe.

    Even though the issue involves unfair procedures, dodgy companies, questionable funds, apparent 'siphoning' of public monies and an intent to hamstring the opposition.

    And in time those who are outraged will forget - along with the 200m case, Woffles Wu, Peter Khoo etc. How depressing...

  5. The WP letter to AIMs dated 10 Jun do make sense. Why ask for 1 month extension, if WP did not know that AIM will terminate the contract on 1 Aug???, unless it had been made known to WP (probably verbally) earlier.

    After receiving WP letter requesting for extension, AIM still issue a 1 Aug termination letter dated 22 Jun, because their lawyers advice so, only, in my opinion, means that they had AIM had informed WP that they will terminate the contact on 1 Aug, and need a black and white proof of intent.

    Still shows that AIM initiated the termination.

    1. That AIM terminated, or initiated the termination, is beyond doubt. The question is, did WP request to terminate the contract, as claimed by Chandra Das and co.? WP's letter asked to continue to allow them to use it until 31st Aug 2011, anticipating that AIM will stop the service. This is not a request to terminate - WP still needed the software.

      I think WP understand the mentality and modus operandi of the PAP, or how chow kuan they can be, as they had experienced it when they first won Hougang.

    2. Yes ! There must have been an earlier communication,verbal or otherwise, from AIM about the impending termination.

      Whatever it is, the facts are that the "sales" and subsequent re-leashing and getting NCS back into the picture sure smell "dirty".

      Am calling upon the PM, in his capacity as the PM and as Gen Sec of the PAP to investigate or at least initiate a Inquiry. No insinuation here.
      Just get on with the task.

    3. He had already taken action with regard the AIM Issue.
      He had served a letter to Blogger Alex Au over it.

      It is clear that the PM is working at the Matter. This means he is attending to it.


  6. Poor Singaporean1/07/2013 9:28 AM

    Thank you for your courage Singapore Notes for speaking the truth. Seems like we are led by a bunch of pinnochios.

    1. When you speak the truth with facts and figures, cecilia sue will just leave you alone! You won't fall into her $64K ice cream entrapment! Lol! Well done Tattler!

  7. In the 28 dec media release by Teo Ho Pin which was deleted from PaP website. He clearly stated that AIM helped in the transition period from late May to September. Notice that the termination was communicated in May, probably by phone, which leads WP to issue a formal letter in 11 June. You can still find this letter on Yahoo cache.

    1. Tried to cover his tracks, did he? Unfortunately for him the relevant section can still be accessed:

      "The PAP TCs awarded the tender to AIM which engaged NCS Pte Ltd to maintain and further develop the TCMS. A Novation Agreement was signed between AIM, NCS and the 14 TCs to make clear the ownership, licensing and maintenance arrangements for the software.

      After GE 2011, the software contract with AIM remained in place for the PAP TCs. However AIM decided to end the contract with the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC).

      AIM only owns the rights to the developed application software. All computer hardware, including the servers and receipting machines, belong to the respective Town COuncils, and these remained with Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) when the AIM's software contract ended."

      The link for the screen capture is available here.

    2. This guy is a liability to the PAP, will have to step down by the next GE. What a moronic highly educated "Talent", keep shooting his own feet.

    3. It is now clear that Teo Ho Pin initially tried to push the termination blame to AIM hoping that no one will discover that it belongs to PAP. In the process, he accidentally revealed that AIM initiated the termination. Now he try to cover his tracks by deleting the media release from the PAP website as well as Google cache. But he forgotten about Yahoo. Hahaha..

    4. "However AIM decided to end the contract with the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC)." Good detective work! Now who is not telling the truth? Another own goal.

      Grace Fu: "First, this is untrue, because it was WP that served notice to terminate AIM."

      AIM: Action Information Management (AIM) has reiterated its view that it was the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) which initiated the process to terminate the information system of the town council.

  8. I'm now watching Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung being fucked upside down with aggressive protestors. 130, 000 protesters want to bring him down for corruption. No need to go to Tampines courts to get cecilia sue lah.

    Hong Kong got no direct universal suffrage. They don't choose their MPs or Chief Executive directly yet they got so much more political rights and freedom than "daft" Sinkies! (at least 60%)

  9. Finally sunlight is shining through the fog. It is refreshing to see the blue sky again after decades of darkness. Well done, Tattler and other fearless bloggers!

  10. Frankly if you graciously serve notice to your Employer to terminate one's employment contract with them, does your Employer in turn do the ungracious thing to serve notice to terminate your contract in retaliation ?

    So is this kind of gracious worldclass standards that father & son has been conning us ? Anyway, worldclass, I am only referring to the obscene worldclass pay they demand for themselves, not the exact world class standards that they say their pay is worth paying for.

  11. Daddy, daddy!
    My white uniform has become soiled and dirty.
    Daddy, daddy!
    How ah?

    1. Daddy is already in disgrace. Better shut up lest they call me a sore loser again.

  12. Proof that the standard of English in Singapore has fallen. Or is it the ability to read and understand that has dropped?

  13. Alex have to apologise to the PM because he cannot prove that there is corruption involved. Without proof, CPIB will not investigate. With no investigation, how to prove that there is corruption?
    So now Ho Pin can say everything is legal and above board. Is this another of the inside polling station is not within 200m crap?

    1. Why do you need to make life so complicated ?

      CPIB is under the PM and which mean PM decide on whether CPIB can launch investigation. Are you still blur like sotong ?

    2. PM orders CPIB to investigate PAP? Keep dreaming...

  14. Strange even alternative blogs still think that AIM was set up to make life hard for WP. In actual fact, AIM has been around for 2 decades, serving as middlemen between government and public money. The biggest issue is not this war of words between parties; its that taxpayers have been and probably had all along been taken for a ride by this undeclared conflict of interest. When a publicly listed company fail to declare related party transactions, it is poor corporate governance, in some countries, its illegal. In Asia, esp Indonesia China Malaysia and India, its common place. In Singapore, this is alarming coming from the PAP.

    1. But just because AIM has been around for 2 decades, one cannot assume that it has been used as a conduit by the PAP for that long a period even though the PAP controlled Town Councils had prior dealings with it.

      Correction : One can assume but cannot openly voice out the suspicion or it can be considered defamation?

    2. "AIM was set up to make life hard for WP. In actual fact, AIM has been around for 2 decades, serving as middlemen between government and public money."

      Have you heard of this famous quote
      "It doesn't matter whether it's a white cat or a black, I think; a cat that catches mice is a good cat." by Deng Xia ping.

      So does it really matter at the end of day what is really the intended functionality of AIM as instrument of ruling party as long as it can be put into good use to serve the ruling party's interest ( for example, in term of financial benefit, asset transfer , proxy company and others) ?

      If it is a shell company indeed, it can serve mulch-purpose roles as the situation suits it, doesn't it ? Does it has to be one or the other but not both ?

      You should learn to question your assumption.

      What do you think ?

    3. We know that AIM was set up 2 decades ago. We have asked what it has been doing since, but an AIM shareholder has Declined to answer that question. As such, we cannot presume it has been a middleman between government and public money.

      We are also aware there is a possible undeclared conflict of interest in the TC software sale. But those involved in the sale have refused to declare this. So how?

    4. Wah, so many tongue twisters here, but somehow, still missing the point, where is that malaysian law grad to give you people a lesson leh?

  15. There is another chinese words called chao hei(smelly prawns) which could aptly described our leaders for having caught with their hands in the cookie jar!
    How many other $2 companies are there with ex MIW MPs as directors running operations with assets stripped from public sectors?

  16. When POSB was sold;
    Was there an open tender to determine a fair and competitive price?
    Did the Singapore President give his approval for the sale of POSB?

    Who benefited from the sale of POSB?
    What do you think?

  17. Everything legal.
    Nothing illegal
    Nothing criminal

    Unethical? maybe
    Unjust? maybe
    Unfair? maybe
    Not right? maybe

    Ironical that we are asked to live a "gentler, kinder society" and with Confucian attributes.
    To help fellow Singaporeans.

    Was MINDEF guided by 'right thing to do' to take care of Jason for life? guided by a sense of responsibility or following rules and procedures?