As a non-Singaporean watching from overseas with mere curiosity, Sylvia's argument is probably the most sensical to date. Conflict of interest can be both perceived or actual. And in this case, while they can argue that actual conflict of interest was removed, they shouldn't say that perceived conflict of interest did not exist.
Sadly, this may not be just conflict of interests... ... Hahahahahahahahahahahaha... ... Hahahahahahahahahahahaha... ... Stupid oppos... Here is a copy of my humble no value view as a 个人民意： “@gonggong9078 Actually if CPIB is 'Proper', Vivian, especially Shanmugam's are not legal, or they don't have that 'privilege' to eat into the reserves. If you discount the land valuation or such, and even include your own renovation or 'refurnishing' but basically 'eat' into the rental, which is the ROI of the state asset so said belonging to state reserves by Edwin Tong... ... For asset valuation or reserves valuation say at 1000 at base, if ROI under such so said no preferential treatment (or arrangement), Shanmugam's case alone will be 'depreciating' the asset valuation by what those disadvantaging trees lah, those unacceptable renovation or refurnishing which whatever is just lowering or discounting or cutting down on rental or ROI of the asset, means from 1000 unit of money, if this is ok for one minister then this has to be assume the 'rule ok' for all ministers and of course, all related or similar utilization of the assets in reserves which means cutting ROI CRITICALLY, which BY RIGHT hence cut down the valuation of reserves by say 200 unit of money since the hit at property segment of the reserves by right... ... Which means, Shanmugam alone can be said to be 'eating' 200 units of money of the reserves, and IF this is logical true... ... which is only logical anyway in by right situation... ... ...Shanmugam is already a corruption case. Unless Sis Ho Ching's Temasek can tell me when buying up stakes of companies, the ROI from rental goes down, their property valuation assessment can remain. So I really question CPIB... ... this is OBVIOUS preferential treatment, and NO minister should have the privilege to be allowed to 'eat' into the state reserves or public money, so either CPIB is not 'fair', or not working, or CPIB has no one with any brains, or CPIB doesn't have anyone who read accountancy... ... So I personally don't know what it is, and yes I could be wrong... ... Hehehehehehehehe... ... There are other things CPIB's 'finding' actually affects, which Loong probably miss out as the cabinet busily trying to wash Shanmugam clean... ... There is one important issue behind if this is involving colonial time property... ... which I will leave it to the public to guess. By this case not only expose SLA's issues... plus making me raise eyebrows at CPIB... ... It also shows how stupid the oppos. This is likely NOT just a code of conduct issue. No trees or back discount or whatever you call it from 'refurnishing' should suppress or cut the rental or omit land valuation hence ROI of the asset for valuation in the Reserves. And we cannot have one valuation rule for public, and one specially for ministers or civil servants, since... ... no preferential treatment. But in this case... ... seriously no preferential treatment until such already threaten the entire valuation of State reserves? I don't know, you tell me. Hehehehehehehehe~ If they have the brains, by now there could be even a motion of distrust raised in parliament against PAP's fitness to govern. So legal or not... ... as a member of public, my 'low' professionalism in my lens can only yield a public opinion of mine that something is so not right, and here I briefly explained... ...”
The issue is that your last point would veer towards hearsay, and people would either assume there is or isn't based on little evidence but still give a degree of condemnation. Condemnation will exist - *even* *when* if any other MP did the same thing that they really made the attempt to remedy the issue, no matter how effectively that was done or not - and no matter if they made all the decisions humanly possibly for them to try to eliminate the potential for conflict of interest - by definition, potential will *always* exist. One can potentially die tomorrow, one can potentially live to old age. If any discussion chooses to prioritize potential all the time - nothing real will become relevant. People will vote based on real shaky considerations. Once facts leave and plausibility enters into a democracy, it will be evident, as it has been for many democracies, that politics will go downhill. Singapore and Singaporeans would expect higher standards and clearer - not wishy washy - ideas that are pragmatic; this is the source of the country's success thus far
>Sylvia's argument is probably the most sensical to date Where are you from? There's no such word as sensical in the dictionary. Perhaps you meant sensible?
A minister should always be held to a higher standard beyond the mere legality of issues. This is the definition of the so-called "whiter than white". But there is a lot of grey areas where the issue drags the minister into - which he shd have avoided att all costs even though he was within the skirtings of legal boundaries. Fact is even after recusing himself, minister had a working authority over SLA. The recusal was only on a specific aspect of a land issue while he still exercised authority over sla on all others. So the recusal is only formal, not actual. Therefore the perception of conflict will be there in a fair minded person even though actual or potential conflict does not seem to be there. A minister who not only should uphold the letter of the law but also the spirit of which. A fair minded person can see the perception may not be dispelled even though the illegality of the issue has been seemingly. dispelled.
Exactly.... When raesah khan's conduct was questioned. Pritam Singh was questioned exhaustively for his inability to do due diligence in dealing with it.... Good that Sylvia is questioning them👌
She explained the issue well. Why talk of legality when the Code of conduct is crystal clear and explicit? Just side tacking the core issue of conflict of interest
Many can read the issue in between the lines and form their perception.The opposition MP defined conflict of interest as stipulated in the Code of conduct loud and clear.Well done Sylvia.
PAP'S trolls (their hirelings) are the only ones who can't see her logic, and they'll continue to cut and paste their copied comments on the net. The strategy isn't as effective as most people seem to have found their voice and are speaking up.
But many will never till they die see thru nor discern. Many will say, "aiya, got food to eat, job to do, cans alreadys mah. Dong talk about politics , we are merely voters of a First world" 🤣🤣🤣🤏 Majority Rules is a concept, a human construct full of flaws. Majority need not mean all are smart or good people. Anyone can be a Majority voter. They can be good, bad or bigoted biased partisan self serving minions too. Nothing is barring these. That said, I am not saying what is the reality. I am saying in general what is possible.
@@cnaz8709 the IBs of today are too weak to be of any significance. I not talking about SG Gossip nor Weekly Ketchup. I really am not referring to them. We need to be clear.
Although I agree with what Sylvia said, I have to say in politics, people do tend to see what they like to see. Most of the time, both sides are right with one side emphasizing one the half empty portion of that glass of water while the other side emphasizing the other half.
She appealing to laymen's interpretation of 'conflict of interest".So to speak,how a person with little or no knowledge of the law would perceive this matter.But the man on the street now is being confounded by legal technicalities and terms beyond them.
I'm always disappointed with Sylvia being a lawyer, needing SM a non lawyer to define CoI to her. The key words of SM's reply was "fair minded persons"
Sylvia' speech is so clear and straight forward even my kids in their secondary schools can understand what is she saying. Mr Teo's explanations, I keep rewinding the clip, even play it 0.5x slower, I also catch no balls.
The Learned Minister drew a distinction between :- A. Potential conflict of interest B. Actual conflict of interest The Learned Minister said once there is no B, the perception of Conflict of Interest should cease to exist in a fair minded person. But once there is no B, does it follow that A cease to exist? No, A still exists. And to a fair minded person, given the letter and the spirit of the Ministerial Conduct, it is A that is cause of concern, not whether B resulted or not.
@@praba991ify Yes i agree. But just because no one profited from this transaction does not erase the *potential* conflict of interest. PM and SM have made it clear there was no conflict of interest (i.e. no one profited) But it is the potential conflict of interest that bothers me (i cannot speak for rhe majority).
By SM Teo logic, any politician can just claim he is removed from the chain of command, then no conflict of interest will be occurred. In lay man term, You got power you say what is what loh
Yes ! All along he and his party think singaporeans are plain stupid and that's why they can do whatever they want. Getting own people to check own people for wrongdoing instead of engaging an independent body
Totally agree with Sylvia Lim, whether or not there was a misconduct or how they managed to avoid conflict, as ministers they should never come into these grey zones it’s a big damage to the trust given for your party. Let it be Sylvia Lim, let them carry on and it’s maybe a good thing they thought this way so they continue and Singaporeans will lost faith with them.. Just like a supermarket holds a lucky draw but will have a disclaimer that it’s own staff are not allow to enter the draw.
Yes. Now their defence is that the lucky draw is not conducted by their own staff thus there is no conflict of interests and their staff can participate.
Totally agreed , with the ministers stepping up to rent B&W GCB in prime land and jolly well COI will come into play , why step on the dragnet knowing they are spiders & webs waiting for them to be trapped. Yes thy should have been advised by the 3rd party advisors - LTA, SLA, appointed agents by appointed estate agencies & estate agents , there are areas of COI too , hazardous COI, Potential COI & Perceived COI & Reality COI. Not last minute decide to make changes to alter COI. It’s does not work this way or both ways
@@ngteckhoh wonder why LHL and TCH came out to defend, condone, and rubberstamp the leases instead of taking remedial actions to win back the trust of the voters. jus compare how LHL handled this case to GCT on the nassim jade saga. LKY himself had to vomit the discount he received from the developer, even though it's perfectly normal for early birds to get discounts from developers.
Never enter into transactions where his " financial interests " might conceivably come into contact with his public duty. Guess Minister Teo Chin Hin totally miss out on this point which is disappointing.
Dear SM Teo, spare us the technicality of your personal interpretation which is laughable but we do not want to argue with a person that does not know the meaning of shame. SM is not trying to answer to the context of SIlva Lim. He is talking rubbish to confuse everyone. I am dumb but still I can understand what Silva Lim was trying to say.
Remember how Lee Hsien Yang, Lee Suet Fern have to “exiled” from Singapore over the last Will made by LKY, and how LHL, Teo Chee Hean and PAP threatened them with interpol and even Police Report over LKY wills? With now this Ridout road Saga just 6 months later from the issues, what can we compare our government? Is our government doing a good job in serving the people or has “democracy” turned into like US/EU style of democracy where people will come in and argue on nonsensical issues, or minuscule issues that don’t need the parliament to run it, shame on them.
If a Law Minister or SM cannot even understand a simple Para 3.2 of the code of conduct, how are we, the citizens, going to trust the LAW enforced by the LAW Minister? 厚颜无耻， 知法犯法，罪加一等！
There are many cracks in the parliament of today. It's really high time PAP lose a few more seats in the coming elections. Everytime they do things that disappoint the citizens punish them by losing more seats.
他们这几只群披上白羊皮的狼群，睁眼说瞎话，别看他们现在得意得很，以后他们的子孙就会遭殃的。 Their bad karma will naturally take its course. 现在就已经给我们看到，某家族过去为了巩固地位及名声，欺压百姓，结果殃及子孙，甚至做什么投资也失败，没颜面还不知羞。
LHL & TCH are simply trying to cover up their behinds and the mess left by Shan & Vivian. Shan is a senior lawyer and he should know in his heart of hearts that he has surely crossed the "conflict of interest" line. SLA is under his charge. He also appoints the chief of SLA. Does TCH, a non-legal person need to define to SL what conflict of interest means? SL is sharper and to the point here.
The key word from what i hear from the code of conduct is "CONCEIVABLY"-- so it does not matter whether there is actual occurrence or action taken. As a layman, I can understand, but the ministers cannot??? Mr Google explains: CONCEIVABLE = capable of being imagined or grasped mentally.
A different level of understanding.The learned are like that : their perception are the defining ones - the rest,they believe,think and conceive like children.
TEO is wrong because the minister code of conduct says cannot even be "where his financial interest might conceivably come into contact with his public conflict with his public duty" definition of conceivably = capable of being imagined or grasped mentally.
Lan Jiao lah ! Like that everything can also be perceived in the matter of differing context. If that is the case , the minister might as well sit down and do nothing because he does something , the code of conduct will haunt him . Stupid Opposition supporters
@@russiasucks7170 since when everything can be perceived that way? I don't think there was perceivable COI for Vivian but for shan there's definitely perceivable COI since SLA is under him
The issue here is, the citizens are not happy with rising costs across the board while salaries remained stagnant. While we are struggling and paying inflated costs for shrinking BTOs, ministers are building their own resort while our homes are being removed for new developments. Singaporeans are becoming unhappyl. With the amount of complaints we hear on a daily basis, the govt should realise that we are bursting our bubbles already.
If many are staying in the rental 3room flat, should we all feel bad stay in condo? There is nothing wrong whereas how one live, as long as they justify and are willing to go through it. That's life. Those people feel affected because others done well? they should find motivation and aspire to do better tomorrow, today. Can't be keep blaming ancestors... We should expect everyone to live differently per their choices, unless we practice communism here.
Please shut up. If it is always one needs to be motivated to work harder, there will not be poor people existing in all the different countries in the world. The policies and practices of the government do affect the ordinary people's livelihoods.
@@leanne2330 It is amazing that PAP supporters like yourself keep harping about people's jealousy. Is this really what it is? People jealous of Shanmugam and Vivian living in a big bungalow? You totally ignore the fact that there are many unanswered questions about the saga and about the Minister's Code of conduct. I strongly disagree that the review conducted by Teo Chee Hean is an independent one. Now listen to this... While our millionaires Ministers are living in bungalow, we have Goh Chok Tong telling everyone of us right in our face, their salary is not enough and need to be adjusted upward!!!!!! This is what I call shameless. Stop telling me they did a good job. Go have a bloody good look at the inflation rate in this country!
Did the British overlord colonizers ever really cared about the residents in Singapore? Never, Why? Most of the British sent to the colonies are awful outcaste members of the elite London social scene and in turn, they turn their spite on the natives treating them as the lower classes like in class rigid Victorian era. Unfortunately for Singaporeans, the PAP which has literally enjoyed unfettered power and unchecked wealth since independence for almost close to 60 years has assumed themselves to be the new overlord and their behaviour beginning some 20 off years ago shows it clearly, dismissing and simply ignoring the genuine concerns expressed by Singaporeans regarding their policies, notably the FT and CECA.
Ms Sylvia Lim already mentioned that the code of conduct prohibits even conceivable conflict of interest but SM Teo keep saying actual and potential …, isn’t it conceivable that an employee or employees decisions might in some ways be influenced because the transaction or transactions is or are by their bosses??
As I kept educating online people, Language is not Maths. Language is merely an Art. Maths : 1+1=2 and cannot be anything other than 2 regardless of race Language or religion. Language : 1+1 can be anything limited merely by your imagination. Roti Prata making is an Art. Many different flavors possible. Vanilla, Cheese, With or without Hum. If still not clear, let me know. Attend my Free Web master class . Free for the first 100 early birds😅
Hmmmm, WP should be quite familiar if they have not forgotten P Singh over Raeesah saga underlining conflict. Okok at least it perceived and conceived on so many front that Singh had ..... Interesting.
To opposition... ... isn't it better the more Chee Hean try to wiggle out, the better? Hahahahahaha... ... The entire PAP has taken the bait... ... and now in the net. Lucky for WP. You think Harry would have taken the bait? No... ... He would have taken this chance to ax Vivian and Shanmugam, and show the people how strong his leadership is, and PAP has zero tolerance to bad leadership or black horses... ... in the sea of white shirts. Very lucky for oppositions nowadays... ... Loong is not his father, and is surrounded by too many layers of parasites. PAP is doomed... ...
@@leanne2330 Most if not all Singaporeans know tt RK had concorted those unthinkable or damned lies n ultimately she did admitted, apologised n in the resigned from d Oppo on her own accord, so what is there to brag about.
It is not even about perceived conflict of interest. It is an actual conflict of interest by common sense, but no one dares to say it out loud because of fear of getting sued and shot down by PAP. The law might technically not be broken because of well PAP spent a Month covering their track, including creating a ridiculous story that involves Shan guessing the guidance price so accurately which is close to impossible in reality
SM's Teo's words are unconvincing. He comes across as playing with word. Sylvia Lim is right, we should not even allow for the perception of possible impropriety. This is a slippery slope...
Curious that DPM uses the word 'matter'. The fact is that Shanmugam had and still has powers over the SLA and persons involved in that matter. If SLA rejected his offer, life would be hard for those in SLA involved in that decision.
But SM Teo stated that the minister had 'removed' himself from the matter. So by 'removing' himself,those in SLA knows he has no power (in this matter only).That being the case, they can make decisions accordingly without fear of retaliation.😉
@@michaelz123x6 but Shanmugam was and is the law minister the whole time. how can the SLA officers make decisions accordingly without fear of retaliation?
SL's point is one of public perception as a result of this transaction but TCH kept talking about removing itself from the transaction or decision making.
Shanmugam was the law minister the whole time. i don't see how he could remove himself from the transaction or decision-making. why SM Teo bending over backward to defend the case?
Disclose ALL relevant facts including the rental received by the two ministers for their GCB. Then the public can make a well-informed decision if there is something wrong instead of "splitting hair" on conflict of interest.
The money spent to remove the trees and sprucing up the whole area to make it liveable are money from tax payer. Hence, there is a conflict of interest. if all cost are coughed up by the ministers then public will not be upset. Why must mati mati chose to live in state houses which are neglected and not for human habitat except for snakes and termites.
Long strory short - why were the leases in The names of the 2 respective wives Did not SLA DO A DUE DILIGENCE ON THE FINICAL STANDING ON THE 2 WIVES OF THE MINISTERS TO CONFRM THEY QUALIFIED TOWARDS THE RENTZLS WHICH SHUD HV BEEN A NORMAL POCEDURE/ NORM ? Edwin Tong claims the trees were taken down as adviced by an expert and /or ministry of Enviroment Without showing any such written doc evidence for same He was like firing " blank shots in the air "to convince the public In court and being a lawyer himself- he would not hve accepted such verbal assurances/ facts - whsteverbu say -say it with producing documents Edwin Tong
Deplorable evaded the clarifications asked, He is revealed the true persona. No humanity and proud. Do u remember 'your vote is vvvvery much needed' in 2020 .
SM Teo doesn't seem to get the issue raised by Lim. The perceptions are not actualities. Even when there is not an actuality or intention, there can still exist a perception.
I got not much knowledge on Laws or terms used related to legislation. But been worked in corporate for more than 25 years, for this case I can summarise as follows... The 2 ministers renting the black and white house is NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING... Hence when kenna pao dou, they are struggling to gather all evidences that can prove to the world that both of them are DOING THINGS RIGHT. As far as the code of conduct that Ms Slyvia Lim pointed out, the both ministers are not doing the right thing. The end. Full Stop.
Why does Minister Teo or Tong disparaged a questioner before or after his explanation? LIke, "you are a lawyer you should know" or "I've explained before" with a sniggering and a hypocrite smile.
But if the public was not aware beforehand that Mr. Shanmugam had taken steps to recuse himself, as the Government had not discuss it at all, that perception could not and would not have been dispelled. Thus, the perception by the fair-minded person, based on incomplete information at the time, would be that there was a conflict of interest.
To avoid any conflict , the check and balance must be independent, not ownself ! Put this to rest by doing such. Why so much dribbling when this could be so easily resolved!
When a ruling government their member who is mp & also a minister who had allegations on ride out rd a property which not sure what has happended that needed to be investigated it's a,conflict of interest and how can minister pay so low rental or rent it out when public wanna know is it private house or state owned ..so thank to opposition to bring it out
The REASON why Potential Conflict of Interest MATTERS in PUBLIC Office and to average Singaporeans was because the powers that be doesn’t have a Good track record of TRANSPARENCY and ACCOUNTABILITIES! It’s a One Party State essentially. So a minister from the SAME political party claiming that it wasn’t important simply because “No Actual Evidence of Conflict of Interest” was found is actually being VERY DISINGENUOUS.
No one stays at the top forever.. No matter how great… Look at history itself… All the twists and turns and honest answers in reality or otherwise as it is, will all be replayed in heaven on judgement day for all souls, which will then be presided ultimately by the all mighty powerful creator of all creation, souls and universe…..no one escapes or escapes from His judgement up there…
Clarification to Senior Minister Teo: Why did the ministers' wives sign the lease and not the ministers ? And how did the ministers' wives qualify to be the ones who could lease the property ?
It seems interestingly to note the only TCH can interpret, know, succumb to the directive what 'the code of conduct' means, others have to follow finale of what he prescribed under the explanation, He seems the only Messiah to know the 'tablet'.
You know that the way he pretends to smile shows he has a lot to hide and using this to disarm the audience. Otherwise often you see his 臭脸 in parliament. Known him since he was an low plp officer in the navy and people who worked close to him.
Conflict of interest doesn't apply only when you have power. It applies to anyone with professional responsibilities who may have vested interests (due to money, greed, family, etc). Even the cleaner can have a conflict of interest - working for another job to earn more money (vested interest) while he's a cleaner for X company (professional responsibility).
Sorry forgot to add. In this case, the cleaner has a conflict of interest at X company. Teo does not even know the simple definition and is misleading Sylvia and parliament - shouldn't he be put to trial?
One Should Immediately Recluse Herself Or Himself When She or He Was Tasked To Abjudicate In Subject Matters When Herself or Himself Has Absolute Conflict Of Interests As A Close Friend, As A Family Member, As A Colleague, As A Member Of The Same Party ETC Etc
Any normal people will know what is right and wrong than to take a learned person. Twisting n turning n playing with words. God knows. One can lie to many people, but not with God, especially when u r put in a position not to do as u pleased. One wanted to hold on to the power n received status n wealth, then show how honest n respectful that people can support n sing :well done.
T, as much as you said ~ a bad apple cannot be good. S is speaking of code of conduct and emphasises on SHOULD n NEVER and it is not what actions r needed to avert an actual conflict of interest under the code of conduct. If you as a Minister cannot understand this realistically, then maybe you have to step down as a Minister. Facts n Truths are clearly depicted n delineated in this matter. All twisting of words cannot distort those facts.
Accountants and Lawyers have a code of ethics and conduct and we are held to very high stds. In any investigation, even a Perceived conflict will not be tolerated. I recall as a junior EY audit assistant (not just audit partner) being told not to buy stocks of companies we hv audited (even a few days) and best, not buy stocks of any client of EY at all. Do u know EY audits the most SG public listed co too! 😢. What more these are ministers! 😮
SM to remove yourself one must have entered. S Lim point out should not have entered. SO conflict already started, when the law minister enter into transaction never mind recuse himself later. Don't come with your own interpretation. Please.
In the court of law, there is no conflict of interest by definition. Have been repeated multiple times. In on court of public opinion.....you are still trying to defend the situation. As stated in the code of conduct pointed out by Sylvia Lim, you can see the court of law answer to public opinion. I will ask the Ministers, knowing what they know now, will they do the same thing?
If clarification to the conflict of interests works, why do you need to write down the code of conduct? Every ministers can declare it before getting involved of such issue. Why bothers to create such a code lol?
What the fark, Teo Chee Hean's explanation of conflict of interest is exactly describing what Shanmugam's renting of Ridout Road bungalow was all about. TCH is describing what Silvia Lim is saying !
People have very short term memory…where was her code of conduct… embodies the highest standards expected of you Mss Silvia when you were dealing with Aljunied TC ????
The code of conduct is obfuscated by technicalities and legal jargons. From plain sight, these "actual and potential conflict of interests" which the law minister has "taken steps to avoid" is more like navigating the very same legal system that he is familiar with rather than upholding the code of conduct. From the public perspective, it is legally right but morally and ethically conflicted.
As a non-Singaporean watching from overseas with mere curiosity, Sylvia's argument is probably the most sensical to date. Conflict of interest can be both perceived or actual. And in this case, while they can argue that actual conflict of interest was removed, they shouldn't say that perceived conflict of interest did not exist.
Sadly, this may not be just conflict of interests... ... Hahahahahahahahahahahaha... ...
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha... ...
Stupid oppos...
Here is a copy of my humble no value view as a 个人民意：
“@gonggong9078 Actually if CPIB is 'Proper', Vivian, especially Shanmugam's are not legal, or they don't have that 'privilege' to eat into the reserves.
If you discount the land valuation or such, and even include your own renovation or 'refurnishing' but basically 'eat' into the rental, which is the ROI of the state asset so said belonging to state reserves by Edwin Tong... ...
For asset valuation or reserves valuation say at 1000 at base, if ROI under such so said no preferential treatment (or arrangement), Shanmugam's case alone will be 'depreciating' the asset valuation by what those disadvantaging trees lah, those unacceptable renovation or refurnishing which whatever is just lowering or discounting or cutting down on rental or ROI of the asset, means from 1000 unit of money, if this is ok for one minister then this has to be assume the 'rule ok' for all ministers and of course, all related or similar utilization of the assets in reserves which means cutting ROI CRITICALLY, which BY RIGHT hence cut down the valuation of reserves by say 200 unit of money since the hit at property segment of the reserves by right... ...
Which means, Shanmugam alone can be said to be 'eating' 200 units of money of the reserves, and IF this is logical true... ... which is only logical anyway in by right situation... ...
...Shanmugam is already a corruption case.
Unless Sis Ho Ching's Temasek can tell me when buying up stakes of companies, the ROI from rental goes down, their property valuation assessment can remain.
So I really question CPIB... ... this is OBVIOUS preferential treatment, and NO minister should have the privilege to be allowed to 'eat' into the state reserves or public money, so either CPIB is not 'fair', or not working, or CPIB has no one with any brains, or CPIB doesn't have anyone who read accountancy... ... So I personally don't know what it is, and yes I could be wrong... ... Hehehehehehehehe... ...
There are other things CPIB's 'finding' actually affects, which Loong probably miss out as the cabinet busily trying to wash Shanmugam clean... ...
There is one important issue behind if this is involving colonial time property... ... which I will leave it to the public to guess.
By this case not only expose SLA's issues... plus making me raise eyebrows at CPIB... ...
It also shows how stupid the oppos. This is likely NOT just a code of conduct issue. No trees or back discount or whatever you call it from 'refurnishing' should suppress or cut the rental or omit land valuation hence ROI of the asset for valuation in the Reserves.
And we cannot have one valuation rule for public, and one specially for ministers or civil servants, since... ... no preferential treatment. But in this case... ... seriously no preferential treatment until such already threaten the entire valuation of State reserves?
I don't know, you tell me. Hehehehehehehehe~
If they have the brains, by now there could be even a motion of distrust raised in parliament against PAP's fitness to govern.
So legal or not... ... as a member of public, my 'low' professionalism in my lens can only yield a public opinion of mine that something is so not right, and here I briefly explained... ...”
The issue is that your last point would veer towards hearsay, and people would either assume there is or isn't based on little evidence but still give a degree of condemnation. Condemnation will exist - *even* *when* if any other MP did the same thing that they really made the attempt to remedy the issue, no matter how effectively that was done or not - and no matter if they made all the decisions humanly possibly for them to try to eliminate the potential for conflict of interest - by definition, potential will *always* exist.
One can potentially die tomorrow, one can potentially live to old age. If any discussion chooses to prioritize potential all the time - nothing real will become relevant.
People will vote based on real shaky considerations.
Once facts leave and plausibility enters into a democracy, it will be evident, as it has been for many democracies, that politics will go downhill.
Singapore and Singaporeans would expect higher standards and clearer - not wishy washy - ideas that are pragmatic; this is the source of the country's success thus far
Applaud you for being a fair minded person SM mentioned in his last line 👍🏼🙏🏼
>Sylvia's argument is probably the most sensical to date
Where are you from? There's no such word as sensical in the dictionary. Perhaps you meant sensible?
A minister should always be held to a higher standard beyond the mere legality of issues. This is the definition of the so-called "whiter than white". But there is a lot of grey areas where the issue drags the minister into - which he shd have avoided att all costs even though he was within the skirtings of legal boundaries.
Fact is even after recusing himself, minister had a working authority over SLA. The recusal was only on a specific aspect of a land issue while he still exercised authority over sla on all others.
So the recusal is only formal, not actual. Therefore the perception of conflict will be there in a fair minded person even though actual or potential conflict does not seem to be there.
A minister who not only should uphold the letter of the law but also the spirit of which.
A fair minded person can see the perception may not be dispelled even though the illegality of the issue has been seemingly. dispelled.
*Great speech by Sylvia shes making great sense of direction about conflict of interest*
She always been well spoken or articulated in her comments
Exactly.... When raesah khan's conduct was questioned. Pritam Singh was questioned exhaustively for his inability to do due diligence in dealing with it.... Good that Sylvia is questioning them👌
She explained the issue well. Why talk of legality when the Code of conduct is crystal clear and explicit? Just side tacking the core issue of conflict of interest
Yes, her questioning outclassed PS whose hands seems to be tied. I dong mean he put his hands inside his pocket
@@leechengho2821 Fully agreed Sylvia and Pritam are razor sharp with their justifications thats what made them concrete with their opinions
Welll done Sylvia, some of us can see through their answers.
Many can read the issue in between the lines and form their perception.The opposition MP defined conflict of interest as stipulated in the Code of conduct loud and clear.Well done Sylvia.
PAP'S trolls (their hirelings) are the only ones who can't see her logic, and they'll continue to cut and paste their copied comments on the net. The strategy isn't as effective as most people seem to have found their voice and are speaking up.
But many will never till they die see thru nor discern. Many will say, "aiya, got food to eat, job to do, cans alreadys mah. Dong talk about politics , we are merely voters of a First world" 🤣🤣🤣🤏 Majority Rules is a concept, a human construct full of flaws. Majority need not mean all are smart or good people. Anyone can be a Majority voter. They can be good, bad or bigoted biased partisan self serving minions too. Nothing is barring these. That said, I am not saying what is the reality. I am saying in general what is possible.
@@cnaz8709 the IBs of today are too weak to be of any significance. I not talking about SG Gossip nor Weekly Ketchup. I really am not referring to them. We need to be clear.
@@ngteckhoh Agree, i stand corrected. I hope many more will see:)
I’ve always had respect for Sylvia. She’s right here and I’m disappointed if people fail to see her logic.
Maybe it’s the gist of the argument is the consequence of agreement to her explanation. 😢😢
Although I agree with what Sylvia said, I have to say in politics, people do tend to see what they like to see. Most of the time, both sides are right with one side emphasizing one the half empty portion of that glass of water while the other side emphasizing the other half.
She appealing to laymen's interpretation of 'conflict of interest".So to speak,how a person with little or no knowledge of the law would perceive this matter.But the man on the street now is being confounded by legal technicalities and terms beyond them.
Just too bad tt this ppl are literally blind.
I'm always disappointed with Sylvia being a lawyer, needing SM a non lawyer to define CoI to her. The key words of SM's reply was "fair minded persons"
well done, sylvia. u nailed it.
She certainly had done so by putting forward to them a very tough question n yet they can fooled us with their nonsensical logic
Sylvia' speech is so clear and straight forward even my kids in their secondary schools can understand what is she saying.
Mr Teo's explanations, I keep rewinding the clip, even play it 0.5x slower, I also catch no balls.
I have to translate your English to Hokkien before I can make sense of your last remarks !
👍👍👍
I can't understand either.
It is totally inconceivable to me that our multi million SM cannot understand Para 3.2 properly
The Learned Minister drew a distinction between :-
A. Potential conflict of interest
B. Actual conflict of interest
The Learned Minister said once there is no B, the perception of Conflict of Interest should cease to exist in a fair minded person.
But once there is no B, does it follow that A cease to exist?
No, A still exists.
And to a fair minded person, given the letter and the spirit of the Ministerial Conduct, it is A that is cause of concern, not whether B resulted or not.
C. No conflict of interest
@@praba991ify please elaborate
@@frazel22
No one profited from this transaction.
The property was vacant for years,meaning it was losing potential income
@@praba991ify Yes i agree. But just because no one profited from this transaction does not erase the *potential* conflict of interest.
PM and SM have made it clear there was no conflict of interest (i.e. no one profited)
But it is the potential conflict of interest that bothers me (i cannot speak for rhe majority).
Both A and B are very clear.
By SM Teo logic, any politician can just claim he is removed from the chain of command, then no conflict of interest will be occurred. In lay man term, You got power you say what is what loh
He thinks we are stupid?
Like “What do you think?” In 2012😊😊
Yes ! All along he and his party think singaporeans are plain stupid and that's why they can do whatever they want. Getting own people to check own people for wrongdoing instead of engaging an independent body
The only way is to vote PAP out. This is the way.
this is the way.
Force them to call for an election soon.
@@tangt4860 protests should arise!
Totally agree with Sylvia Lim, whether or not there was a misconduct or how they managed to avoid conflict, as ministers they should never come into these grey zones it’s a big damage to the trust given for your party. Let it be Sylvia Lim, let them carry on and it’s maybe a good thing they thought this way so they continue and Singaporeans will lost faith with them..
Just like a supermarket holds a lucky draw but will have a disclaimer that it’s own staff are not allow to enter the draw.
Senses
Yes. Now their defence is that the lucky draw is not conducted by their own staff thus there is no conflict of interests and their staff can participate.
Test them in the next elections
Totally agreed , with the ministers stepping up to rent B&W GCB in prime land and jolly well COI will come into play , why step on the dragnet knowing they are spiders & webs waiting for them to be trapped. Yes thy should have been advised by the 3rd party advisors - LTA, SLA, appointed agents by appointed estate agencies & estate agents , there are areas of COI too , hazardous COI, Potential COI & Perceived COI & Reality COI. Not last minute decide to make changes to alter COI. It’s does not work this way or both ways
Please remember to bring this matter up during the next election.
Yes. Plus the heinous VDS measures on the unjabbed who lost their jobs and livilihoods too🤨.
It'll be long forgotten. Protests should arise!
And LHY issues also.
LHY and LSF case also.
Well done Sylvia !!!! 💪💪💪💪💪💪💪
It is abundantly clear and explicit as stated in the Code of conduct. No need to twist and turn
@@ngteckhoh wonder why LHL and TCH came out to defend, condone, and rubberstamp the leases instead of taking remedial actions to win back the trust of the voters. jus compare how LHL handled this case to GCT on the nassim jade saga. LKY himself had to vomit the discount he received from the developer, even though it's perfectly normal for early birds to get discounts from developers.
Never enter into transactions where his " financial interests " might conceivably come into contact with his public duty. Guess Minister Teo Chin Hin totally miss out on this point which is disappointing.
it's called benign neglect, a.k.a. act blur.
Snakesham ran the rental through with chee Hean and he agreed to it so how could Teo be put in charge of the review?
@@tangt4860 ownself review ownself
Not miss but was instructed to miss it.
He selectively neglected it!
It's time for president, pm and all mps to declare assets and liabilities, and tax return
Dream on😢
Yup..if they truly practice transparency. They should walk the talk
They say trust is like a glass once broken no more trust
Long overdue. So many Asian democracies and undeveloped countries have already implemented it.
Dear SM Teo, spare us the technicality of your personal interpretation which is laughable but we do not want to argue with a person that does not know the meaning of shame. SM is not trying to answer to the context of SIlva Lim. He is talking rubbish to confuse everyone. I am dumb but still I can understand what Silva Lim was trying to say.
you are not dumb. they are, because they think they can fool us
Remember how Lee Hsien Yang, Lee Suet Fern have to “exiled” from Singapore over the last Will made by LKY, and how LHL, Teo Chee Hean and PAP threatened them with interpol and even Police Report over LKY wills?
With now this Ridout road Saga just 6 months later from the issues, what can we compare our government? Is our government doing a good job in serving the people or has “democracy” turned into like US/EU style of democracy where people will come in and argue on nonsensical issues, or minuscule issues that don’t need the parliament to run it, shame on them.
Fail to refute, proceed to redefine the definition of COI.
Congrats Teo for officially bringing PAP to a new low.
I keep hearing definition of conflict of interest many times in this whole drama
The way teo explain seems to be indirectly admit there is conflict of interests
Also, remember earlier this year how they handle Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Suet Fern in the mismanagement of Final LKY Will??
If a Law Minister or SM cannot even understand a simple Para 3.2 of the code of conduct, how are we, the citizens, going to trust the LAW enforced by the LAW Minister? 厚颜无耻， 知法犯法，罪加一等！
There are many cracks in the parliament of today. It's really high time PAP lose a few more seats in the coming elections. Everytime they do things that disappoint the citizens punish them by losing more seats.
If this were to happen in other parts of Asia, big riots ,without a doubt, in Singapore we're merely meek sheeps
@@Johnne009 You are the meek sheep🐑. Speak for yourself.
他们这几只群披上白羊皮的狼群，睁眼说瞎话，别看他们现在得意得很，以后他们的子孙就会遭殃的。 Their bad karma will naturally take its course. 现在就已经给我们看到，某家族过去为了巩固地位及名声，欺压百姓，结果殃及子孙，甚至做什么投资也失败，没颜面还不知羞。
Lol you are talking about yourself? Be absolutely thankful that you have Shanmugam as your Law Minister.
LHL & TCH are simply trying to cover up their behinds and the mess left by Shan & Vivian. Shan is a senior lawyer and he should know in his heart of hearts that he has surely crossed the "conflict of interest" line. SLA is under his charge. He also appoints the chief of SLA. Does TCH, a non-legal person need to define to SL what conflict of interest means? SL is sharper and to the point here.
Sad to see this minister abuse their position.
Not an isolated incident somemore.
The key word from what i hear from the code of conduct is "CONCEIVABLY"-- so it does not matter whether there is actual occurrence or action taken. As a layman, I can understand, but the ministers cannot??? Mr Google explains: CONCEIVABLE = capable of being imagined or grasped mentally.
A different level of understanding.The learned are like that : their perception are the defining ones - the rest,they believe,think and conceive like children.
Well said SL as for TCH I lost it as you are not making any senses..! He recused himself from the cookie jar but was caught with a cookie….
Twisting and turning wont help to change people's perception. Voters know best how to vote at next GE.
TEO is wrong because the minister code of conduct says cannot even be "where his financial interest might conceivably come into contact with his public conflict with his public duty"
definition of conceivably = capable of being imagined or grasped mentally.
Worker party supporters are stupid 😂. So all government officers cannot go ntuc fair price to get link point because also link mAh.
Lan Jiao lah ! Like that everything can also be perceived in the matter of differing context. If that is the case , the minister might as well sit down and do nothing because he does something , the code of conduct will haunt him .
Stupid Opposition supporters
@@russiasucks7170 since when everything can be perceived that way? I don't think there was perceivable COI for Vivian but for shan there's definitely perceivable COI since SLA is under him
@@metoothanks3973 u understand what I say anot ? If not go back and read again
@@russiasucks7170 spoken like a true keyboard warrior 😂
The issue here is, the citizens are not happy with rising costs across the board while salaries remained stagnant. While we are struggling and paying inflated costs for shrinking BTOs, ministers are building their own resort while our homes are being removed for new developments. Singaporeans are becoming unhappyl. With the amount of complaints we hear on a daily basis, the govt should realise that we are bursting our bubbles already.
If many are staying in the rental 3room flat, should we all feel bad stay in condo? There is nothing wrong whereas how one live, as long as they justify and are willing to go through it. That's life.
Those people feel affected because others done well? they should find motivation and aspire to do better tomorrow, today. Can't be keep blaming ancestors...
We should expect everyone to live differently per their choices, unless we practice communism here.
Please shut up. If it is always one needs to be motivated to work harder, there will not be poor people existing in all the different countries in the world. The policies and practices of the government do affect the ordinary people's livelihoods.
@@leanne2330it’s a zero sum. You think resources just magically materialise out of thin air?
@@leanne2330 It is amazing that PAP supporters like yourself keep harping about people's jealousy. Is this really what it is? People jealous of Shanmugam and Vivian living in a big bungalow? You totally ignore the fact that there are many unanswered questions about the saga and about the Minister's Code of conduct. I strongly disagree that the review conducted by Teo Chee Hean is an independent one. Now listen to this... While our millionaires Ministers are living in bungalow, we have Goh Chok Tong telling everyone of us right in our face, their salary is not enough and need to be adjusted upward!!!!!! This is what I call shameless. Stop telling me they did a good job. Go have a bloody good look at the inflation rate in this country!
Did the British overlord colonizers ever really cared about the residents in Singapore? Never, Why? Most of the British sent to the colonies are awful outcaste members of the elite London social scene and in turn, they turn their spite on the natives treating them as the lower classes like in class rigid Victorian era. Unfortunately for Singaporeans, the PAP which has literally enjoyed unfettered power and unchecked wealth since independence for almost close to 60 years has assumed themselves to be the new overlord and their behaviour beginning some 20 off years ago shows it clearly, dismissing and simply ignoring the genuine concerns expressed by Singaporeans regarding their policies, notably the FT and CECA.
Ms Sylvia Lim already mentioned that the code of conduct prohibits even conceivable conflict of interest but SM Teo keep saying actual and potential …, isn’t it conceivable that an employee or employees decisions might in some ways be influenced because the transaction or transactions is or are by their bosses??
As I kept educating online people, Language is not Maths. Language is merely an Art.
Maths : 1+1=2 and cannot be anything other than 2 regardless of race Language or religion.
Language : 1+1 can be anything limited merely by your imagination. Roti Prata making is an Art. Many different flavors possible. Vanilla, Cheese, With or without Hum.
If still not clear, let me know. Attend my Free Web master class . Free for the first 100 early birds😅
Hmmmm, WP should be quite familiar if they have not forgotten P Singh over Raeesah saga underlining conflict. Okok at least it perceived and conceived on so many front that Singh had ..... Interesting.
do you think PAP cares about the perspectives of what others may think?
when there is absolute power, there's absolute corruption
To opposition... ... isn't it better the more Chee Hean try to wiggle out, the better? Hahahahahaha... ...
The entire PAP has taken the bait... ... and now in the net.
Lucky for WP. You think Harry would have taken the bait?
No... ...
He would have taken this chance to ax Vivian and Shanmugam, and show the people how strong his leadership is, and PAP has zero tolerance to bad leadership or black horses... ... in the sea of white shirts.
Very lucky for oppositions nowadays... ... Loong is not his father, and is surrounded by too many layers of parasites.
PAP is doomed... ...
@@leanne2330
Most if not all Singaporeans know tt RK had concorted those unthinkable or damned lies n ultimately she did admitted, apologised n in the resigned from d Oppo on her own accord, so what is there to brag about.
Well said Sylvia
It’s rotting pap.
If you cannot convince them , confuse them. Its their strategy all along.
its true. i was thinking the same
I seriously doubt the two Indian millionaire ministers rented the places at Ridout Road without consulting each other.
一针见血。Just hearing their explanations and we know they couldn’t weasel their way out of this
It is not even about perceived conflict of interest. It is an actual conflict of interest by common sense, but no one dares to say it out loud because of fear of getting sued and shot down by PAP.
The law might technically not be broken because of well PAP spent a Month covering their track, including creating a ridiculous story that involves Shan guessing the guidance price so accurately which is close to impossible in reality
SM's Teo's words are unconvincing. He comes across as playing with word. Sylvia Lim is right, we should not even allow for the perception of possible impropriety. This is a slippery slope...
Curious that DPM uses the word 'matter'. The fact is that Shanmugam had and still has powers over the SLA and persons involved in that matter. If SLA rejected his offer, life would be hard for those in SLA involved in that decision.
Got sense
But SM Teo stated that the minister had 'removed' himself from the matter. So by 'removing' himself,those in SLA knows he has no power (in this matter only).That being the case, they can make decisions accordingly without fear of retaliation.😉
@@michaelz123x6 but Shanmugam was and is the law minister the whole time. how can the SLA officers make decisions accordingly without fear of retaliation?
All that Snakesham needs to do is to give that LHL look to Leong when an upright SLA official rejects his bid.
@@tangt4860 no need LHL look. TCH look can already.
Let the public decide and judge Vivian/Shanmugam and the PAP for that matter at the next GE! VTO!
SL's point is one of public perception as a result of this transaction but TCH kept talking about removing itself from the transaction or decision making.
Shanmugam was the law minister the whole time. i don't see how he could remove himself from the transaction or decision-making. why SM Teo bending over backward to defend the case?
SM Teo still doesn't understand the question. I'm really disappointed with the current government with all this scandal recently.
Disclose ALL relevant facts including the rental received by the two ministers for their GCB. Then the public can make a well-informed decision if there is something wrong instead of "splitting hair" on conflict of interest.
The money spent to remove the trees and sprucing up the whole area to make it liveable are money from tax payer. Hence, there is a conflict of interest. if all cost are coughed up by the ministers then public will not be upset. Why must mati mati chose to live in state houses which are neglected and not for human habitat except for snakes and termites.
Kudos to Silvia for raising Section 3.2, which clearly demonstrates a clear conflict of interests since Minister has powers over SLA
A blunder to task SM Teo, who did not read law, to head the review.
If they cannot convince you, they confuse you. Giddy
Confusing everyone does not make it right
Imagine if this happened with the opposition party minister...will it become a witch hunt or just a mere investigation?
I bet it will be a lengthy court case. If possible they will scrutise every single member to find fault.
There will be Public inquiry.
There will be committee of Previleges and committee of inquiry and also committee of actual conflict.
I assure you it will be COI to the entire opposition party with a minimum of 6 hours per pax.
And the person involved must tender it’s position.
Because of saving 2 trees, they’re going to lose the forest. The time is near. 😔
Long strory short - why were the leases in The names of the 2 respective wives
Did not SLA DO A DUE DILIGENCE ON THE FINICAL STANDING ON THE 2 WIVES OF THE MINISTERS TO CONFRM THEY QUALIFIED TOWARDS THE RENTZLS
WHICH SHUD HV BEEN A NORMAL POCEDURE/ NORM ?
Edwin Tong claims the trees were taken down as adviced by an expert and /or ministry of Enviroment
Without showing any such written doc evidence for same
He was like firing " blank shots in the air "to convince the public
In court and being a lawyer himself- he would not hve accepted such verbal assurances/ facts - whsteverbu say -say it with producing documents Edwin Tong
Deplorable evaded the clarifications asked, He is revealed the true persona. No humanity and proud. Do u remember 'your vote is vvvvery much needed' in 2020 .
SM Teo doesn't seem to get the issue raised by Lim. The perceptions are not actualities. Even when there is not an actuality or intention, there can still exist a perception.
3:56 ha even the people are not satisfied with your answer. Don’t try and goreng people.
Authorities are good at 'speaking in tongue' to protect their positions
Conflict of interest does not apply to .PAP. Others apply. 😊
Team Sylvia and just love to see the continuous battle between Sylvia and shanmugam 🥳🎉
I got not much knowledge on Laws or terms used related to legislation. But been worked in corporate for more than 25 years, for this case I can summarise as follows...
The 2 ministers renting the black and white house is NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING... Hence when kenna pao dou, they are struggling to gather all evidences that can prove to the world that both of them are DOING THINGS RIGHT.
As far as the code of conduct that Ms Slyvia Lim pointed out, the both ministers are not doing the right thing. The end. Full Stop.
Why does Minister Teo or Tong disparaged a questioner before or after his explanation? LIke, "you are a lawyer you should know" or "I've explained before" with a sniggering and a hypocrite smile.
But if the public was not aware beforehand that Mr. Shanmugam had taken steps to recuse himself, as the Government had not discuss it at all, that perception could not and would not have been dispelled. Thus, the perception by the fair-minded person, based on incomplete information at the time, would be that there was a conflict of interest.
To avoid any conflict , the check and balance must be independent, not ownself !
Put this to rest by doing such. Why so much dribbling when this could be so easily resolved!
Good job Sylvia's.
Sure the ministers have broken no laws. But this issue has raised more questions than answers
Absolutely. Let the people judge at next GE.
@@ngteckhoh can't wait.
When a ruling government their member who is mp & also a minister who had allegations on ride out rd a property which not sure what has happended that needed to be investigated it's a,conflict of interest and how can minister pay so low rental or rent it out when public wanna know is it private house or state owned ..so thank to opposition to bring it out
The REASON why Potential Conflict of Interest MATTERS in PUBLIC Office and to average Singaporeans was because the powers that be doesn’t have a Good track record of TRANSPARENCY and ACCOUNTABILITIES!
It’s a One Party State essentially. So a minister from the SAME political party claiming that it wasn’t important simply because “No Actual Evidence of Conflict of Interest” was found is actually being VERY DISINGENUOUS.
No one stays at the top forever..
No matter how great…
Look at history itself…
All the twists and turns and honest answers in reality or otherwise as it is, will all be replayed in heaven on judgement day for all souls, which will then be presided ultimately by the all mighty powerful creator of all creation, souls and universe…..no one escapes or escapes from His judgement up there…
Very sharp Point by Sylvia
I’m glad this happened and PAP behaved the way they did, as expected.
Clarification to Senior Minister Teo:
Why did the ministers' wives sign the lease and not the ministers ?
And how did the ministers' wives qualify to be the ones who could lease the property ?
who sign?....ah ngiao ah gao?...
How did Shamugam remove himself from the conflict of interest? SM didn’t explain.
Those in powers above just declare they recluse themselves, & those below with bonuses prospects n appraisals at stake will "LL" have to agree loh!
SM Teo is not answering the clause that Sylvia has mentioned.
Beating round the bush to defend.
He himself is clueless as a defence minister😅
Precisely.
Code of conduct applies only to opposition
@@ginachua4168
It seems interestingly to note the only TCH can interpret, know, succumb to the directive what 'the code of conduct' means, others have to follow finale of what he prescribed under the explanation, He seems the only Messiah to know the 'tablet'.
If LKY is around, you see whether he dare to interpret "the code of conduct" based on his definition?
@@Buttercookies0Right on!😁
SM Teo is protect Shan and Bala from his speech.
From the same soup as expected.
Obvious.
You know that the way he pretends to smile shows he has a lot to hide and using this to disarm the audience. Otherwise often you see his 臭脸 in parliament. Known him since he was an low plp officer in the navy and people who worked close to him.
It was made to be tht way by LH L
To close the matter as soon as possible
Becz there are wrongdoings
Conflict of interest doesn't apply only when you have power. It applies to anyone with professional responsibilities who may have vested interests (due to money, greed, family, etc). Even the cleaner can have a conflict of interest - working for another job to earn more money (vested interest) while he's a cleaner for X company (professional responsibility).
Sorry forgot to add. In this case, the cleaner has a conflict of interest at X company. Teo does not even know the simple definition and is misleading Sylvia and parliament - shouldn't he be put to trial?
So,everyone should run for office because many laws don't/can't/won't apply once they have a mandate.
Whatever they say, have their say and theres no other way for their say....
Suppress, denounce, twist in circles and no apology needed.😉
TCH seems to be beating around the bush trying to confuse everyone 😅
It is about optics. Sylvia is right in pointing out the circular argument by TCH and yet he does not get it.
He is senile
One Should Immediately Recluse Herself Or Himself When She or He Was Tasked To Abjudicate In Subject Matters When Herself or Himself Has Absolute Conflict Of Interests As A Close Friend, As A Family Member, As A Colleague, As A Member Of The Same Party ETC Etc
Any normal people will know what is right and wrong than to take a learned person. Twisting n turning n playing with words. God knows. One can lie to many people, but not with God, especially when u r put in a position not to do as u pleased. One wanted to hold on to the power n received status n wealth, then show how honest n respectful that people can support n sing :well done.
T, as much as you said ~ a bad apple cannot be good. S is speaking of code of conduct and emphasises on SHOULD n NEVER and it is not what actions r needed to avert an actual conflict of interest under the code of conduct. If you as a Minister cannot understand this realistically, then maybe you have to step down as a Minister. Facts n Truths are clearly depicted n delineated in this matter.
All twisting of words cannot distort those facts.
Dr Vivian looks very stress up if your conscience is clear there is nothing worried about
When he started to stutter 😅 knew this wouldn't end well
All this arguing would have been avoided if they just bought a landed property. Or gcb instead of renting from SLA..
Accountants and Lawyers have a code of ethics and conduct and we are held to very high stds. In any investigation, even a Perceived conflict will not be tolerated. I recall as a junior EY audit assistant (not just audit partner) being told not to buy stocks of companies we hv audited (even a few days) and best, not buy stocks of any client of EY at all. Do u know EY audits the most SG public listed co too! 😢. What more these are ministers! 😮
A far fetched reply
SM to remove yourself one must have entered. S Lim point out should not have entered. SO conflict already started, when the law minister enter into transaction never mind recuse himself later. Don't come with your own interpretation. Please.
Never enter, even conceivably.
Agreed with you, Sylvia.
Well said
How come.this has no Committee Of Enquiry with Chief Justice Judge
In the court of law, there is no conflict of interest by definition. Have been repeated multiple times. In on court of public opinion.....you are still trying to defend the situation. As stated in the code of conduct pointed out by Sylvia Lim, you can see the court of law answer to public opinion. I will ask the Ministers, knowing what they know now, will they do the same thing?
If clarification to the conflict of interests works, why do you need to write down the code of conduct? Every ministers can declare it before getting involved of such issue. Why bothers to create such a code lol?
I'm not sure if Teo CH understands what he's talking about.
中國有一句话，当一個人到不要臉的地步，就是天下無敵。
滚啦！法律没问题就是没问题了。反对派就是无中生有😂
官官相护，奈何！
可见人民行动党和共产党是同流合污。
官字两个口
加油👏Ms. Sylvia Lim. Unfortunately, the answer to the queries were given the runaround
Swinging words to avoid question. Sylvia cannot understand these sort of playing with words.
What the fark, Teo Chee Hean's explanation of conflict of interest is exactly describing what Shanmugam's renting of Ridout Road bungalow was all about. TCH is describing what Silvia Lim is saying !
People have very short term memory…where was her code of conduct… embodies the highest standards expected of you Mss Silvia when you were dealing with Aljunied TC ????
Double standard. This show we need more opposition getting in to parliament. To reduce they over power.
This Ridout case could be a case study for law students.
The code of conduct is obfuscated by technicalities and legal jargons. From plain sight, these "actual and potential conflict of interests" which the law minister has "taken steps to avoid" is more like navigating the very same legal system that he is familiar with rather than upholding the code of conduct. From the public perspective, it is legally right but morally and ethically conflicted.
We have learnt how questions are answered in the mighty world class SG parliament for the world to see
SM Teo is also a big conflict of interest in what he said. If subject to SG Citizens polls, the matter will be a public outcries.
Can really see TCH struggling to spin a BS story as reply Sylvia Lim he can't even string a proper sentence.