TR EMERITUS

By P.R. VENKAT and COSTAS PARIS SINGAPORE -- Temasek Holdings Pte. Ltd. announced revisions to its charter in an effort to distance its mission from the interests of Singapore Inc. The revised charter defines Singapore's Temasek as an investment company, managed on commercial principles to create and deliver sustainable long-term value for its stakeholders. It dropped a reference from its previous charter, published in 2002, that said Temasek was a company that manages the government's investments in companies for the long-term benefit of Singapore. Temasek is wholly owned by Singapore's Ministry of Finance, and considers its portfolio companies to be "stakeholders." Despite the government being its sole shareholder, Temasek doesn't consider itself to be a sovereign-wealth fund. Temasek officials insist its goals are primarily financial rather than to support Singapore government policy, although Singaporean companies make up a substantial portion of its portfolio. The changes to its charter could help support its case for being a more independent organization from the Singapore government. Earlier this year, Temasek hired former BHP Billiton Chief Executive Charles Goodyear to succeed current Chief Executive Ho Ching, the wife of Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. That plan to bring in the U.S.-born executive was nixed in July when Temasek said the parties wouldn't proceed with the transition, citing "strategic differences." Mr. Goodyear hasn't commented on the parting and Temasek also hasn't provided details on those differences. At a news conference, Temasek Chairman S. Dhanabalan said Temasek could sell its stakes in major Singapore firm if they can't provide acceptable levels of growth, although he added that there is no immediate need for such a move. Temasek has major stakes in blue-chip stocks listed on the Singapore Exchange, such as Singapore Telecommunications Ltd., Singapore Airlines Ltd. and DBS Group Holdings Ltd. "We are open to divesting [stakes in Singapore companies], but our main focus is to build business internationally," he said. Source: Wall Street Journal   EDITORS' NOTE: Temasek Review is a paid subscriber of The Asian Wall Street Journal  Read More →

From our Correspondent State-owned sovereign wealth fund Temasek Holdings, which lost billions of dollars in failed overseas investments lately, has released an updated Charter that "reaffirms its role as a commercial investment company to create and deliver sustainable long-term returns for its stakeholders." Speaking at the launch on Tuesday, Temasek's chairman S Dhanabalan said it was an opportune time to update the Charter which was first published in 2002 though that there is not much change in the Charter's ideals and principles. Before the Charter is even proclaimed, Temasek should ask itself the following questions: 1. The source of its funds. 2. Who its stakeholders are. 3. How is it going to assess its own performance. It is both technically and morally wrong for Temasek to protray itself as a "commercial investment company" because it is not a private or public-listed company at all. Since it is owned by the Ministry of Finance under the government of Singapore, Temasek Holdings is government-owned entity belonging to every citizen of Singapore. Set up in 1974 originally to manage Singapore's budget surpluses, it is not known the amount of money Temasek has received from the Finance Ministry over the years. Being a sovereign-wealth fund, Temasek has to be accountable to its stakeholders, which is the people of Singapore. In a public-listed company, all its accounts are released and sent to its shareholders. Its Board of Directors can be thrown out anytime during an AGM or EGM by shareholders who are unhappy with their performance. The Temasek Board still remains in place despite losing billions of dollars of taxpayers' monies and though Mr Tharman acknowledges that the abrupt departure of CEO-designate Chip Goodyear is a matter of "public interest", he refuses to reveal the exact reasons as it doesn't serve any "strategic purpose". Public-listed companies are judged by its performance, returns and dividends to investors. What benefit has Temasek given to Singaporeans after so many years of "growth"? Either way, the present Charter of Temasek makes little sense at all. If it is indeed a commercial investment company, then it should adhere to the standard practice of public-listed companies based on the size of its fund. If it is a government-owned entity, then it should be held accountable for its decisions  and there must be full transparency in its transactions. Based on Temasek's bizzare behavior so far, it appears more like a personal family fund than a sovereign wealth or commercial investment fund.   EDITORS' NOTE: As part of our continuing efforts to transform this site from a blog to an internet newspaper, the news articles will be undergoing a fast turnover on a daily basis, so please visit our site daily to keep yourselves updated on the latest developments.  Read More →

By Phong Teck on Singapore Enquirer I refer to the comments made by Mr. Harry Ng on his letter dated 25 August 2009. (read letter here) Unfortunately coming from someone who is neither a citizen nor a person who understand the sacrifices male citizens made for this country, I would suggest his opinion is just doing lip service to what MM Lee and our dear Government has been advertising, Singapore Permanent Residents (PRs) is the way to the future of Singapore, at the expense of Singapore Citizen interest. I would like to point out the factual error in his letter dated 25 August 2009. Firstly, Mr. Eduard Tay’s Letter pointed out “…a neighbourhood school” he is seeking for his child, not a top school but a school near his residence. Twisting the facts of Mr. Eduard Tay’s letter to give credibility in your arguement seems very superficial. Secondly, what sort of benefit can a 6 year old foreigner brings to another 6 year old citizen here in a primary one class??? Intellectual or Cultural exchange?? Isn’t it easier to Google all this online or you must be using a different search engine?? My child studies in a multi-national kindergarten, well I do not see any benefit he gained from his classmates except the occasional swearing words he picks up from his Korean and American classmates?? Thirdly, give healthy competition to remind the children to constantly upgrading themselves. Getting into a neighborhood school is already tough for Mr. Eduard Tay, let alone talking about giving competition in the school. It is already a tough environment for a primary school kid nowadays and your way to improve their situation is to pile on them with further competition with these PRs. I would suggest you should jog down to the nearest school around your place and observe their studying environment before making such comments. Fourthly, if a poor Singaporean Citizen complains about its rich counterpart, its only natural. It happens everywhere in the world, from United States to Japan. However, it is rare for citizens to complain about the equal opportunity handed out in a silver palette to foreigners who don’t contribute to the building of their nation because almost all developed nation recognized the importance of their citizen’s contribution, except ours. Do we see this type of incident happening in United States or Japan?? What happened to Mr. Jerry Yang in United States can only happen in United States and not anywhere else in the world, not Taiwan. It is totally absurd to make such comparison with the situation in Singapore. Does Mr. Jerry Yang need to serve the mandatory two and the half years National Service like all male citizens in Singapore. For all I know he may have gone to the United States to escape his country’s mandatory National Service. Lastly, nearly all of the PRs here are economic migrants who want only the best for themselves and their families. Once they have earned enough, they will return back to where they came from. Only Singapore citizens, who have for generations staying and supporting this nation, will be there when the country is in need. Sadly, our government has forgotten what sacrifices our fathers and forefathers made for this country, instead choosing PRs as the next loyal savior of this country. I can only say fools like you and our government will believe that out of the 100% of these economic migrants, 99% will take up citizenship and save our nation in times of need. Source: Singapore Enquirer  Read More →