But we worry for her mental faculties when she argues that our life savings stowed away in the Central Provident Fund (CPF), is not our money.
"Is it our money? Our CPF savings are enhanced and forced CPF savings which are accumulated through our own deferred consumption, through co-payment by our employers and through top-ups from public funds. Is it really my private money? Do I have the right to spend it the way I would spend my own salary? I’m not entirely sure.”
This is not just a gaffe like the one committed by another lawyer who insisted that managing agent (MA) rates at Town Councils are identical for residential and commercial properties. One suspects she spoke not from her heart, or cranium capacity, but political motivations. The clue lies in her other affiliations: member of Our Singapore Conversation Committee (formerly National Conversation a.k.a. NatCon), member of the REACH Supervisory Panel (the Singapore Government’s "feedback" apparatus), member of the Council of the Law Society’s panel of approved Mediators and Investigative Tribunal members. The last being one who sees fit to deem a lawyer unfit to practise because of suspect medical condition.
Be kind with your visceral reaction to an obviously flawed interpretation of the original concept of the CPF. The people who reneged on the promise to release funds at age 55 are just as capable of resorting to all manner of wile to withhold our hard earned monies.
Posts
PAPism has representatives in every strata of Singapore society.
ReplyDeleteDo you think PAPism is all about taking away our money, rights and belongings for the benefit of the national reserves?
Is this a fair question?
According to LHL she communicated with him before making the speech in Parliament. So, no need to guess what she was up to. She probably has enough in her bank accounts not to have to worry about what's in her CPF if she can gain in other ways by carrying someone's balls.
ReplyDeleteHer law firm's website states that Ms Chia “assists clients in their applications to regulators for relevant licences or exemptions in the conduct of various regulated activities”.
DeleteGuess that briefing from LHL must have been a nudge nudge wink wink session.
That puts your 'Singapore Notes' in jeopardy doesn't it? It does not belong to you Tattler .That aside, it shows you how NMPs are vetted and selected. Another such example is Calvin Cheng. The wayang goes on in the meantime. A perfect storm should change all that.
ReplyDeleteThere must be much sympathies for her condition and I am writing with no spite all all.
ReplyDeleteBUT, SHE SEEMS TO ME INCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING THE CPF SCHEME. She is either too young or her mental capacity is like her limbs, UNDER FUNCTIONING.
patriot
Nothing against our handicapped members of the society. But many of us are shocked and in awe that this NMP has proven to be handicapped in her brain too! And she calls herself a lawyer?!! Geesh.
DeleteSo now if the Govt is topping up my children edusave account, they get to own my children and they are not mine anymore?!!! This is all so fuuuucked up and laughable.
"Patriot" , you are kind and yet your words are keen and sharp as can be ! I fully agree with you .
DeleteShe communicated with LHL first before making the speech. Wow, I wonder if all pap MPs informed him first of their speech contents (to get approval) before making speeches in parliament.
ReplyDeleteKNN, so this is the CPF vs Roy the People.
DeleteThis is OUR cpf vs Return MY cpf.
It sounds like they want to get away with legaltechnicality once again. It has now become urgent and critical that CPF and this PAP government better clarify once and for all , if they are denying the people that this is "our money" where we call the shots. Will WP please table this motion urgently.
Contributions by employer are not employees' money? Then who does it belong to?
ReplyDeleteAs far as the employer is concerned, "the employer's contribution" is part of the cost of hiring Singaporeans.
DeleteIt is part of employee's salary.
incidentally, about the gaffe made by the other lawyer in Parliament. The real gaffe he committed was in revealing that he did not know his facts - that MA rates for residential premises cannot be the same as those for commercial premises. He actually let out the truth when he responded immediately to Sylvia Lim's question and referred her to Annex 3 of his handouts. He blurted out that the figures in his charts were the weighted means of the rates for residential and commercial premises. That was the way that MND normally use and present the MA rates, i.e. by converting them to a single mean figure to represent both the residential and commercial rates. However, in his ignorance and confusion when further questioned by WP, he indicated he would check on the figures.
ReplyDeleteWhen he reverted back the next day in Parliament, he confirmed that the rates for the residential and commercial premises were actually the same for all PAP town councils, as shown in his chart. This clearly was a lie, and goes to show how low MND and PAP would stoop to score a point against the WP. This error has also committed the PAP town councils and their MAs to adopt a single rate for residential and commercial premises.
@ Anonymous @ 3/05/2015 9:08 AM
ReplyDeleteWho chooses the NMPs?
Are NMPs allowed to vote in parliament?
If yes ... then in theory THEY can select sufficient numbers of NMPs to out-vote any Opposition MPs.
She is not incapable of understanding; like all "nomal" SIngaporeans, she has been fed propaganda since she learnt to talk, read and write. During the cultural revolution, red guards believed it was correct that their parents and teachers be humiliated, struggled against, killed because they once worked for the KMT government. And besides, where one stands depends on where one sits, its the same for everyone. And I have not heard from the WP on what they would do with the CPF if they were, one day, to become the rulers. Its all the same, politicians cannot fight bureaucracy, our problems did not arise because of this or that party, its the monstrous civil service, which won;t be dismantled so easily. You think Lim Swee Say writes his own speech? Its the bureaucracy.
ReplyDeleteThe NMP appears to many that she is an idiot. But there is method in the apparent madness. The powers that be realise that there is traction in the 'return my CPF' movement started by Roy Ngerng. Roy showed how the government had turned your CPF monies into SSGS bonds so that legally the trust connection is broken legally. Your monies then become theirs and you are left holding on to the bonds, the interest rate of which is determined entirely at the discretion .In another context, Judge of Appeal Andrew Phang called such manoeuvres, legal red herrings. NMP Chia's "gaffe", endorsed by the PM, advances their attempts to put as much space between your CPF money and its ultimate destination as possible and cool the return my CPF money movement.
ReplyDeleteTo the nmp, silence is sometimes golden.
ReplyDeleteDid she also told lhl that cpf is also not the govt money.
ReplyDeleteGreat. You have $500,000 in your CPF account, the government top up with $500 during GE - what they called Progress Dividend. No, I did not say vote buying. I am not saying it is money politics. Nor did I say pork barrel politics.
ReplyDeleteClever - give you $500 from public fund, and the entire $500,500 belongs to them.
Now that a NMP tells us the employers' cpf contributions are not part of our hard earned monies, will it one day turn into workers' levies like foreign workers' levies belonging to the gahmen?
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid she is telling the truth. This government is not going to return your CPF money over its dead bodies. You can only hope that your CPF money is still there when the next government takes over.
ReplyDeleteTo follow her logic to the inevitable conclusion, because foreigners are added into the population, Singapore is no longer our country. Then what the fish are we defending?
ReplyDeleteThose dead fish found on Pasir Ris beach.
Deletehttp://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/mass-fish-deaths-raise/1689292.html
Saw quite a number of dead birds on the ground from Changi Coastal Road to Tampines.
DeleteSomehow, things are not right in Singapore.
Rats, cockcroaches, bugs and mosquitoes everywhere.
Worst of all according to some Sinkies, are Two Legged White Rats. The Menacing Species that beats all other pests around.
patriot
This is what NMPs are selected by the hypocrites to perform.
ReplyDeleteShe is just telling us the PAP's and LHL's position on the CPF that no Minister or MP can articulate without losing the coming GE if not causing an immediate riot.
So wake up and vote them out!
Saycheese
You cannot vote out a PAP-linked NMP.
DeleteNMP is nominated.
Nominated by who?
This is the reason why they have NMP.
ReplyDeleteSo they can elect and annoint some of their card members "civilians" and use them as mouthpiece for the ruling Party, where any utterances of such grossly stupid sentence were to come out of any MP, he/she will be losing the votes.
This is time to champion for the removal of the NMPs which many of us have any voted for in the first place. If the government wants alternative voices, they can go online and listen to people, or deal with the opposition party we elected. NMP is not constitutional, and in the case of Ms Chia Yong Yong, she clearly does not represent the electorate given her out-of-reality sentiments. In fact, it is utterly patronizing!
She should have had a word with Tan Chuan Jin before she sprout off "CPF is NOT your money" stance.
Bloody dirty running dog who can't even run. Yet she has such a big gap to bark mad yelps to provoke anger.
ReplyDeleteNo one will stop her from not withdrawing her CPF savings since she's not even sure she's entitled to it. CPF better put it down on record that she's forfeiting hers.
She probably checked with LHL to make sure no one withholds her CPF savings after her speech.
ReplyDeleteDamn cunning, isn't it ? They used the mouth of a NMP to tell us our CPF money is not our money ?
ReplyDeleteSo far none of the elected PAP MPs even dared to say it out loud that our CPF monies is not our money but here we have this NMP even warned us this is the hard truth.
WTF, so is this the cunning reason why PAP need to have NMPs in Parliament ?
Didn't Lim Siah Sway exclaim that he feels very happy everytime he looks at his CPF statement???
ReplyDeleteNow what exactly is this jubiliance for?
<“Every month, when I receive my CPF statement, I feel so rich and the best part is, I know the CPF money won’t run away.”
ReplyDelete- NTUC Secretary-General Mr. Lim Swee Say and Minister without Portfolio said this in 2008>
Why even bother about what she says. She is one of their brain-washed lackeys, installed by them as an NMP into Parliament to give a semblance of a neutral voice and the superfluity of a larger opposition. The NMP artifice in actual fact cunningly increases their own presence in Parliament. It's all pretence and wayang, because she will only parrot the lines of her master. The worst part is that they are using her disability to spread their propaganda. Wake up Chia Yong Yong, because they are only making use of you!
ReplyDeleteShe's a real job hopper - changing jobs every two years or so. With so many ex-employers, no wonder there are so many prior claims on her CPF money - all the ex-employers are entitled to their contributions - claw them back from her.
ReplyDeleteAiyoh...why say so much for....PAP Ministers money come where ahhh? From backside it is...whose backside...The Lees right...money again come from where...People of Singapore right...so wtf is the confusion huh...they brain addled by too much money or too much greed or the usual self serving themselves shiet...
ReplyDeleteNuts lah.