Tharman refuses to answer questions on Goodyear’s exit
August 19th, 2009 | 
Author: From our Correspondent
For the first time, Finance Minister Tharman found himself under a barrage of questions from his own PAP colleagues.
MPs took turns to grill the Finance Minister on the abrupt departure of Temasek CEO-designate Chip Goodyear and its succession plans for the future.
The issue has come under intense public scrutiny. Singaporeans are discomfited by ex-CEO Ho Ching taking over the organization again.
Despite 25 minutes of questioning, Mr Tharman refused to bulge. His reason: disclosing the “strategic” differences behind Goodyear’s departure will serve no “strategic” purposes.
‘It is not sufficient that there be curiosity and interest (for information to be disclosed),’ he said, after Mr Low Thia Khiang, opposition MP for Hougang, asked if it was right for Temasek to keep Singaporeans in the dark.
Mr Tharman pointed out that Temasek already makes more public disclosures on its investment performance and strategy than comparable organisations. What really mattered was its performance over the long-term, he stressed.
When Temasek lost billions of dollars last year, Mr Tharman also defended it on the grounds of “long-term” performance. However, he did not specific a time-frame for it.
To Mr Seah Kian Peng’s suggestion to impose a time line for a successor to be chosen, Mr Tharman replied that none would be imposed on the process which means that Ho Ching will probably be in charge for a “long time” to come.
Founded in 1974 to manage Singapore’s reserves, Temasek Holdings has grown to become one of the largest sovereign wealth funds in the world.
Initially a conservative, domestic-based investor, Temasek under the leadership of Ho Ching was transformed into an “Asian investment company”. Her ill-timed, if not reckless forays into the financial market has been blamed for much of Temasek’s losses.
The sale of Bank of America and Barclays shares at their record low price in March this year cost Temasek billions of dollars. Though it was apparent by then that the decision to do so was unwise, nobody dares to take the Temasek board to task including the Finance Minister, who is supposedly in charge of Temasek.
With the Finance Ministry “washing their hands” off Temasek, it appears that it is now truly an “independent” commercial entity though it is funded entirely by taxpayers’ monies.
Posted in Headlines
23 Responses to “Tharman refuses to answer questions on Goodyear’s exit”
Loading ...
Alex Tan Allan Ooi AWARE Chee Soon Juan Chiam See Tong Claire Lee David Widjaja DBS Dr Allan Ooi Dr Silviu Ionescu Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Foyce Le Xuan highnote5 Hong Lim Park Jack Lin Xinli Jack Neo Jack Neo affair Jack Neo scandal Josie Lau Josie Lau Meng Lee Lee Kuan Yew Lehman brothers Lighthouse Evangelism MAS minibonds Miss Singapore World NTU stabbing PAP Pastor Rony Tan Ris Low Romanian diplomat in hit-and-run Rony Tan S-League silviu ionescu Singapore Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games Tan Kin Lian Thio Su Mien Tiger Woods affair Tong Kok Wai Top 8 Vivian Balakrishnan Wendy Chong Y O G Youth Olympic Games
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
Mr Tharman said: “People do want to know. There’s curiosity. It is a matter of public interest. But that is not sufficient reason to disclose information. I understand the interest, but it serves no strategic purpose.”
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/449540/1/.html
I would NOT agree with Mr. Tharman. It is not public interest as of curiosity to know BUT PUBLIC INTERESTS (with an additional “s” alphabet to add to the word interest) TO KNOW AS WE ARE THE ULTIMATE STAKEHOLDERS.
MPs should have been persistent in their questioning. Where are all the vibrant voices of the recently and carefully selected 9 MPs?
So much for the quality of parliamentary debate.
i would like to point out to tharma that we singaporeans are not merely curious. if he is a lawyer then he should not use such a frivolous word.do you think we are always looking for juicy news to talk or write about. We are concern. please tharma, we are stakeholders in singapore’s economic health. is this enough for you to tell us a little bit more.
Given the well-known American management practise of dismissing an entire team that was responsible for making bad decisions, very likely Chip goodyear was told to leave because he wanted to slaughter a few sacred cows i.e. he wanted to hold several elite scholars accountable for TH’s bad investment and dismiss them. And of course, should he appoint a new team made up of capable, highly-experienced people instead of scholars and they deliver a sterling performance, it would prove that organizations don’t need scholars from elite families to excel, and that just won’t do for those who have vested interests in this.
On an unrelated note, was HC given a golden handshake when she left? If so, was she made to return it when she was reappointed TH’s CEO?
Why IS Chairman Danabalam SO SO SO VERY QUIET on THIS ISSUE??? And MOF Tharman IS NOW Telling US THEIR ‘STOLLY’ THIS LATE??? AS how long has Mr. Goodyear leaving TH BEEN KNOWN??? Takes Time To “HATCH” a covering up ’stolly’ OR WHAT ELSE IS IT ALL ABOUT THEN???
PLEASE go to “A people united united by apathy and ruled by fear” blog in WP/TR for … my entry about an hour earlier about TH & GIC AND this government’s talk-talk-talk cock shop!!! It’s titled “Summarise for recall and benefit of OUR RIGHT TO KNOW … WHY …” And quoting “Singh” at the end about Singaporeans being clueless!!!
[...] Singapore Minister to People: We don’t give a damn to what you think! – The Temasek Review: Tharman refuses to answer questions on Goodyear’s exit – Who Moved My Singapore Cheese: Salah Year’s National Day Rally – The Void Deck: The Rally, [...]
….Mr Tharman said: “People do want to know. There’s curiosity. It is a matter of public interest. But that is not sufficient reason to disclose information. I understand the interest, but it serves no strategic purpose.”….
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/449540/1/.html
I would NOT agree with that statement. It is NOT public interests to know as relevant to inquisitive curiosity BUT A PUBLIC INTERESTS ( with the addition of the alphabet “s” after the word “interest” ) matched by a corresponding PUBLIC DUTY of the Government to disclose as we SINGAPOREANS are the ultimate beneficiary interests and stakeholders in those asset under management by TH on behalf of all citizenry.
Anyone disagree?
scarly even tharman also don’t know the answer…hahaha….
its not he dont want to answer. Its that he cant.
Or at least, if he does, he confirm tio hantam by senile old man. Then he will no longer have his lovely income.
Find me one CEO in any organisation in this world (China, Myanmar, North Korea, etc no count) who has lost billions, screwed up in succession plan, AND still get to keep the job with the approval of the ENTIRE BOARD, I will shut up and agree that Ho Chin should remain the boss.
A smart doggie will always abide by its master’s aspiration to gain his favoritism.
You make; you break.
That’s business.
Temasek’s in the black.
Singaporeans who gawk and do nothing still get bonuses annually whilst the world looks on with envy.
Count our blessings.
Everyone knows there was NO Temasek to begin with without MM & Ho Ching.
The global financial meltdown has eroded some funds.
We are grateful nonetheless.
Thank you PAP, our patriots.
P/S Developed & developing countries today are in bad shape. I shd know cos I’m just back from Argentina. S’poreans are lucky under the same government for the last 44 years. Many elsewhere have squandered and vanished, leavng the countries in deep sxxt.
Curious? Thama must be out of his freaking mind. he thinks we are 3 year kids out to satisfy our curiosity?!
WHERE IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY? AND WHY IS THE MOF ANSWERING THESE QUESTIONS WHEN IT SHOULD BE THE BOARD OF TEMASEK ANSWERING THEM!
same old tactic.
when questioned, defend the stance by belittling the queries of the public as insignificant and unworthy of further investigations.
just make the public look stupid.
haiz
Admin,
If my memory serves me right, I think I saw an article somewhere on the net which says our Finance Minister Tharman compared the “right” of silence of disclsoure on matter of “strategic difference” or the “exit of Goodyear” to similar right of silence among listed public company.
IS THIS CORRECT? Anyone seeing that comment anywhere is it the Singapore Enquirer? Can’t find it now on the internet.
PLEASE PROVIDE THAT LINK, ANYONE???
I think this is a ridiculous comparison as Tharman as a lawyer would agree with me that it is non-comparable at all.
Thanks in advance.
Give him a break, he’s just a dog. You people dare not take it up with the master, so hit on his dog.
Nevertheless, its a damn highly paid dog.
Hi Simon,
It appears that you do not know that the funds accumulated by Temasek all these years DO NOT come from the pockets of MM Lee or Ho Ching, but from the people of Singapore.
Temasek is in the black – that depends on how you look at it. Assuming it has a kitty of $200 million dollars. It will still be in the black after losing $199 million dollars.
There are many corrupted nations in the world, not just Argentina. Why not compare Singapore to Gabon, Zambia, Nigeria or Zimbabwe? That will really make the PAP look like God.
No party is perfect in this world. Governments can come and go, but the system must ensure that the people holds the real power to select their leaders.
The Temasek fiasco has amply shown us the true colors of a one-party system: one with little accountability or transparency.
It is telling that when it suits them, that a “sovereign-wealth fund” may hide under the minimal requirements for disclosures of a privately-held company; but when required, declares itself a national investment arm.
Every company has responsibilities to its stakeholders. Why is company different?
If Goodyear behind the billion dollars loss, I think he would be thrown into a deep dark pit
The ministers keep saying that it’s the “long-term” performance that matters.
But Singaporeans should understand that short-term performance is VERY IMPORTANT too. If the short-term loss is huge enough, it CAN bankrupt the whole organisation.
As the Noble Prize winning economist, John Maynard Keynes, once said:
“The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent”.
The short term irrational behaviour of the market can be brutal if an investor is not careful.
Better to let Singaporeans manage our own $$$.
We have very dynamic people like Stephen Lee, Koh Boon Hwee, Ho Kwong Ping, etc. I’m sure there are many more with proven track record.
Pay them well. Charity doesn’t bring out the best. Ask the prists, monks, pastors, etc.
They will feel the pinch & pain just like myself handling my own savings.
In short, greater accountablity – kiasuism lah.
Not everyone is cut out to be a hot shot investor – no matter what paper credentials or outstanding track record. There is only one Warren Buffet, one George Soros and one Peter Lynch. Must hunt for the “right” one – local or foreign – it is IMMATERIAL BECAUSE ONLY RESULTS COUNTS.
Personally been aware of finance professor ( can’t mention name of course) in a local university was a walking bankrupt ( only the final proceeding to sue for debt did not commence) having bought a load of solid blue chip ON MARGIN ACCOUNT right at the top end of the bull market cycle.
It is amazing that in the REAL investment world, the ones which one thinks will succeed brilliant ACTUALLY FAILS ABMOMINALLY.
Stock markets have a mind of their own and often “logic” has a mind of walking in the opposite contrary direction. THAT KILLS FOR CERTAINTY.
That is why I strongly suspect that those who had been badly bruised will turn out to be very good investors if they survive and recover. “Virgins” will just await to be raped in the incomprehensible casino of no rules.
QUOTE …
Ah Tan on Wed, 19th Aug 2009 3:06 pm
A smart doggie will always abide by its master’s aspiration to gain his favoritism.
UNQUOTE
The thing is that IN THIS CASE – It IS THE “BESIDE MANNERS” that MATTERS MORE!!!
Some are paid to work.
Some are paid to shut up.
Imagine what someone will lose if he actually work instead of shutting up like he was paid to? This is no laughing matter, SGD 3,000,000 in salary for doing nothing is at stake.