[NKF] Ex-NKF patron Mrs Goh Chok Tong regrets remarks about TT Durai's pay: SM Goh

[tomato75]

Ex-NKF patron Mrs Goh Chok Tong regrets remarks about TT Durai's pay: SM Goh
By Wong Siew Ying, Channel NewsAsia

Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong said his wife, who is the former patron of NKF, regretted saying that the charity's ex-CEO Mr TT Durai's annual pay package of some S$600,000 was "peanuts".

Mr Goh spoke to the media about the issue at a school celebration on Saturday.

Mrs Goh's remark on Mr Durai's annual salary on Tuesday raised many eyebrows and upset many more.

Senior Minister Goh said his wife now regretted making that comment.

He added: "When she told me what she said at home, I told her immediately, you're in trouble. There'll be negative reaction and sure enough the next day, Singaporeans reacted generally quite critically to her remarks and it's understandable because NKF is a charity and Singaporeans contribute to the NKF and they don't earn much."

Mr Goh added that he shared the public's sentiments and showed Mrs Goh several emails and letters he had received about her remarks.

Mr Goh said: "To educate her I showed her the letters and emails and now I think she understands better what she said was not quite in order but she explains why she said it. She told me that she was thinking of the organisation, she said that if you look at the organisation, the right person must be paid the right wage, but of course she put it across that way, the rest is history."

Senior Minister Goh said Mrs Goh's resignation as NKF's patron was a separate matter.

She has decided to step down as she felt the new NKF board might want to start afresh by appointing another patron or even go without one.

On the NKF, Mr Goh said he's pleased with the way Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan handled the matter, and agreed that the appointment of Gerard Ee as the interim CEO is a right one.

Going forward, he hopes the new board will review NKF's management practices and suggest areas for improvement. - CNA /ch

[Gizmore]

told you GCT will slap his forehead and shout "wat the...." when he saw what his wife commented....

[banana]

if she is sincere abt her regret den say it herself.

[Iris]

The woman also very dumb. If really sincere, then must appologize for her remark herself wat.. Still have to rely on her hubby to appologize for her?!

I think what happened is that she can't bring herself to say that her remark was wrong and her hubby can't do anything about it so end up, he appologize for her, hopefull to end all the backlash from her remarks..

[tomato75]

While I am disappointed for her comment, but I think it will be best for Mr Goh to step up and talk about it instead of her doing it herself. The impact will be different.

Many respect Mr Goh and when he talked about it, more are willing to listen to him. If Mrs Goh do it herself it be much more difficult and may just get backslash again, no?

[AKA Lance]

She told me that she was thinking of the organisation, she said that if you look at the organisation, the right person must be paid the right wage, but of course she put it across that way, the rest is history."


I am quite curious why she didn't think about the patients first rather then the CEO's pay. She is afterall the former Patron to NKF. Either ways, she damaged her own reputation and credibitlity after she made that comment.

[Cornball]

Mrs Goh is a lawyer

[tomato75]

Mrs Goh is a lawyer

Lawyer is one thing lah, even we have economist that insist he is always right also mah. At least, her hubby quite steady and mentioned about it and not just sweep it under the carpet. Our economist may want all of us to apologise to him instead hor. :lol:

[Cornball]

i mentioned that cos i thought her words would be more measured...

[AKA Lance]

While I am disappointed for her comment, but I think it will be best for Mr Goh to step up and talk about it instead of her doing it herself. The impact will be different.

Many respect Mr Goh and when he talked about it, more are willing to listen to him. If Mrs Goh do it herself it be much more difficult and may just get backslash again, no?
I think Singaporeans will be more understanding if she came forth and explain. People will doubt her sincerity and regret even more now that GCT has to speak up on her behalf.

[tomato75]

I think Singaporeans will be more understanding if she came forth and explain. People will doubt her sincerity and regret even more now that GCT has to speak up on her behalf.

:)

I am quite ok with Mr Goh doing the job but I respect your views too.
One thing I see is that her role is only a Patron, a faithful Patron and is different from Durai and gang which turns the entire NKF like a money spinning for personal benefits. :)

[soojin]

I think she made that statement while she was still rather emotional over the events that transpired that day in the courtroom...therefore it wasn't as measured as one would expect from a lawyer.

[Gizmore]

I think she made that statement while she was still rather emotional over the events that transpired that day in the courtroom...therefore it wasn't as measured as one would expect from a lawyer.
given her status, I don't expect her to make comments because she is emotionally affected.

and yes, i agree with paddy that GCT's word would have more impact. but nevertheless, i still think it lacks sincerity on mrs goh part

[apollo]

merely another person to step up to pacify the general public not to pursue abt elite's top bracket income.

haiz....

mebbe mr goh could add his personal remarks abt the 12 month bonus whether in his personal opinion, tat he condone such an act.

ok ok.... he'll not do it.

[tomato75]

given her status, I don't expect her to make comments because she is emotionally affected.

and yes, i agree with paddy that GCT's word would have more impact. but nevertheless, i still think it lacks sincerity on mrs goh part

here's a joke.. probably she cant appear publicly herself.
Kenna bitch slapped after making the comment, so face still like pig head, no? hahaha

[AKA Lance]

merely another person to step up to pacify the general public not to pursue abt elite's top bracket income.

.
Of course! They pay taxes you know! And we don't need to guess where the tax money goes to!:)

[apollo]

the difference is what r they benchmarking the pay against.... pple got to think carefully.

NKF is not a bank, even if it is, that is pretty bad gearing ratio on expenditure spending. it's lop so badly i'm sure donald trump would hv fired the entire board without blinking.

[panadoll]

But the way she say that the right person shld be paid the right amt... but this is a charity organization... where the money comes from the public.... so i totally disagree with the reason she gave..

[Gizmore]

But the way she say that the right person shld be paid the right amt... but this is a charity organization... where the money comes from the public.... so i totally disagree with the reason she gave..
600k salary, i still can take it.

10-12 mth bonus ? and at SARS period ? economic downturn period ?

everybody is getting cut except him ?

[phillipchai]

600k salary, i still can take it.

10-12 mth bonus ? and at SARS period ? economic downturn period ?

everybody is getting cut except him ?
BLudder, cool it lar, the guy already step down liow, some more paying for the legal expenses from own pocket, and that they are starting the investigation on NKF right now.....

[Gizmore]

BLudder, cool it lar, the guy already step down liow, some more paying for the legal expenses from own pocket, and that they are starting the investigation on NKF right now.....
sorry sorry, was just reiterating why mrs goh should not side him...

[panadoll]

600k salary, i still can take it.

10-12 mth bonus ? and at SARS period ? economic downturn period ?

everybody is getting cut except him ?
Ya... the monthly salary of 25k is still acceptable since he is the CEO... but having the 12 months bonus is far too ridiculous.

[dk99]

sometimes, regret is too late.....
her name has already gone down the drain..... even if she comes out and say sorry, people will still remember the remarks she made.......

it's too late.... singaporeans are already hurt by her remarks. doubt there is anything tat can repair her image......

[weimeng]

SM Goh's regret statement should close the chapter lah....Let's move on and keep both eyes open for NKF's revamp....

What's said cannot be unsaid. Wonder if she'll be another patron again.

Oh No! I'm wondering again!!!

[apollo]

Khong Guan is a good place... I like their camel roasted nuts.

I wonder if WanWan also got some kinda peanuts as well....

[rijac]

alamak... still talking about this issue ah?

[juliana78]

hmm.... i sure dun wan her to be patron leh... dunno whether still got charity org wan her to be patron or not

i still prefer hand or farmer brand peanut. nicer & crunchier!

[dk99]

SM Goh's regret statement should close the chapter lah....Let's move on and keep both eyes open for NKF's revamp....

What's said cannot be unsaid. Wonder if she'll be another patron again.

Oh No! I'm wondering again!!!forgive but not forget.....

[spark]

Mrs Goh is a lawyer

Lawyer is one thing lah - :lol:
Agreed with 75tomatoes that lawyer doesn't have one hoot to do with it. Sometimes lawyers do have to use strong words in defence of one party, and thus being engrossed, can get carried away.

It's more to do with being a privileged aristocrat. When you are part of a ruling class, in a position of exalt, where the public is supposed to look up to you, you live life in the service of the public. Along with the privilege bestowed, this class has to lead by example, an act which calls for great resilience at times. Not being able to restrain one's emotions, making remarks off the cuff (especially one that many would perceive as deriding their status), and then not coming out immediately to address one's mistake - is something that would divide rather than bond.

Some folks are by nature softhearted and would share a friend's hurt deeply. In that kind of mood, words can come out all wrong, when actually the intentions is pure. It's good to see that she is human, and not cold-blooded alien. To err is human, let's be divine and forgive.

[minee]

Glad that GCT bothered to come out and clear things up.

Think as much as damage control goes, he's done all he could. ;)

Had the feeling that they would just diam diam about it liao.

[JeromeZ]

the difference is what r they benchmarking the pay against.... pple got to think carefully.

NKF is not a bank, even if it is, that is pretty bad gearing ratio on expenditure spending. it's lop so badly i'm sure donald trump would hv fired the entire board without blinking.
opps, the problem is, if u get donald trump in to fix the gearing ratio, it'll probably cost 5-10x dulai's pay check leh. worth it or not leh? well, u pay peanuts, u get monkey mah hor? lotsa monkey biz hor?

[Silverelf]

Well, I would not have out it past SM Goh to come out and claim a 'regret' for his wife.

1) It is in his best interest
2) Heard some stuff about the two of them

All in all, I think it's best he came out and made this statement. At least now he can be better separated from the peanuts

[gckh]

Glad that GCT bothered to come out and clear things up.

Think as much as damage control goes, he's done all he could. ;)

Had the feeling that they would just diam diam about it liao.
I share the same feeling. having said that, i also kinda feel that in this instance he is his wife's "mouth-piece" so to speak in verbalising the apology, if u can call it that. GCT, being the ever diplomatic & well liked SM & ex-PM, can probably articulate it much better & more sincerely than his lawyer wife - she's probably quite gabra as to how to apologise properly & not make things worse. so wat better way that to apologise thru' her hubby whom everyone respects.

[weimeng]

Glad that GCT bothered to come out and clear things up.

Think as much as damage control goes, he's done all he could. ;)

Had the feeling that they would just diam diam about it liao.

Hehe, same feelings here, esp. the diam diam part. :lol:

[AKA Lance]

I am trying to understand this article. It doesn't say that she apologized for her remarks. It just says that she regrets her remarks?

[olo]

I am trying to understand this article. It doesn't say that she apologized for her remarks. It just says that she regrets her remarks?
She regrets lor, see no up on fellow Singaporeans, thinking they are naive and sua koo.

[apollo]

let's not spit hair lah.... her hubby apologized for her.

so if CSJ's spouse apologize to him, will he let CSJ off his hook? too bad JBJ's spouse gone to sell duck egg, so one 1 vouch for him.

[dk99]

I am trying to understand this article. It doesn't say that she apologized for her remarks. It just says that she regrets her remarks?nobody said she apologized ah..... she just regret only. no apologized.

even if she did, also useless lah.... her image is already gone.... everytime i see her on news, i'll always remember the peanuts issue.... :lol:

[gckh]

nobody said she apologized ah..... she just regret only. no apologized.

even if she did, also useless lah.... her image is already gone.... everytime i see her on news, i'll always remember the peanuts issue.... :lol:
i think we can take Goh's remark that she regretted to mean subtly that she apologises (at least that's wat I'd like to think, seeing that she is Goh's wife).

being an ex-PM & now SM's wife for so many years already, one would think that she would hv picked up at least some diplomacy skills from her hubby & know wat to say & not wat to say depending on the situation. but as we all can see, she hasnt learnt much - Goh had to educate her by showing the e-mails, letters etc regarding the ppl's disgust at her remarks. probably high IQ & v low EQ.....

and also an immense love for peanuts!!:lol:

[Mashimaro]

She's a lawyer, so what. Like I said, to show that she is sincere, she shd come out personally to apologise, not asking hr husband to say on behalf of her. Too irresponsible of her.

[RiverDance]

maybe we can start a new peanut brand

we just oem from hand or farmer brand and put our own packaging

with her face there lor

i tell u we sure sell a lot one

[Silverelf]

maybe we can start a new peanut brand

we just oem from hand or farmer brand and put our own packaging

with her face there lor

i tell u we sure sell a lot one

Agree. sure got good sales

[Cornball]

haha.. imagine her face on the packaging.. pengz man

[Cornball]

maybe the tagline will be..

"Good as Goh around the World"

[Silverelf]

haha.. imagine her face on the packaging.. pengz man
dun play here, quick go buy people's O2 Mini

[gckh]

haha.. imagine her face on the packaging.. pengz man
u wanna buy ah??? eat corn flakes not enough meh??:lol:

[Cornball]

u wanna buy ah??? eat corn flakes not enough meh??:lol:
no la.. i dun eat peanuts one...:nono:

[Cornball]

dun play here, quick go buy people's O2 Mini
:knock:
elfy

:knock:
elfy

:knock:
elfy

[juliana78]

dun even need marketing leh... jus sell anywhere sure got people buy one

[Silverelf]

dun waste time cornball. Time's awasting. GO buy the 2 O2 minis

[Silverelf]

no la.. i dun eat peanuts one...:nono:
Of course you don't. YOu corn, corn flakes and twisties what

[gckh]

no la.. i dun eat peanuts one...:nono:
ya, even if u do, also cant afford like everyone else...... 600K for peanuts!! only elite who hv gold taps can afford to buy & eat!!

[gckh]

dun even need marketing leh... jus sell anywhere sure got people buy one
not many Sporeans can afford 600K for a bag of peanuts leh!!! maybe only the rich ones ie those with gold taps can.......normal ppl like us, forget it lah!!

[Cornball]

Of course you don't. YOu corn, corn flakes and twisties what
hmm.. corn flakes.. idea hor... i was thinking of some things to put in my office pantry...:think:

[juliana78]

s'pore got a lot of rich people mah.... u wan them to buy, sure dun need marketing. cos they wan to be seen wif the product. so prove their high class status

[Cornball]

ya, even if u do, also cant afford like everyone else...... 600K for peanuts!! only elite who hv gold taps can afford to buy & eat!!
so heng for me la, since i dun eat peanuts...

[Silverelf]

hmm.. corn flakes.. idea hor... i was thinking of some things to put in my office pantry...:think:
Corn flakes good.
Cornball and Cowism make a good pair

[largedarkones]

www.oriental-food.biz

[blue_quartz]

(TalkingCock.com!)

[AKA Lance]

Goh had to educate her by showing the e-mails, letters etc regarding the ppl's disgust at her remarks
That is the saddest part of it all.

[apollo]

simi... i once heard neber teach old dogs new tricks.

woof can we teach her? woof? anyone can woof me?

[swish]

[Cornball]

posted liao leh, swish.. jus 2 posts up

[jeffyen]

<i>I WRITE in my personal capacity.

I have been a long-time admirer of the National Kidney Foundation.

The NKF has been outstanding in supporting kidney and other patients. It and its supporters have been tireless not just in raising funds. They have played a key role in providing life-saving dialysis services for kidney patients and more. They also counsel, and sometimes cajole or even berate, patients and their families to take responsibility for themselves and make an effort to live.

Patients and their families, including their children, are encouraged to work together to contribute to their own support, and not give up. This helps them retain their self-respect and live their lives confidently as full members of society. I cheer the NKF for this enlightened philosophy.

Taking on a dialysis patient is almost like adopting a chronically and critically ill child. You take responsibility not just to give money on the spur of the moment in a flash of sympathy, or to organise dialysis sessions for the week in a spurt of enthusiasm.

You know that it is a serious lifelong commitment of support. You know that any interruption of that support means fear, a loss of hope, and a death sentence of sorts. Many long-time Giro donors understand this.

The NKF has wisely built up strong reserves over the years. It is a sensible and responsible approach.

The NKF's fears are understandable. No one likes to have the dreadful responsibility of deciding which patients should live when money dries up in an economic downturn.

What if 10 per cent or 20 per cent of their patients or their patients' breadwinners lose their jobs in an extended downturn? Surely, you hope to continue dialysis for them even if they cannot co-pay their part?

I would like to recommend that the NKF considers building and managing its reserves as an endowment. It also needs a sufficient buffer to weather a deep recession. Perhaps this was what it had been trying to do. Perhaps the prolonged years of difficulties during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s and the earlier brink of the 1985 recession had spurred the frenetic pace of fund-raising in recent years. But this funding model needs to be properly modelled, analysed and communicated.

To the NKF I would like to say, when you complete your review and put together your plans, do share them. I am sure Singaporeans and many others share a chord of sympathy for your cause.

On the issue of CEO pay, I believe that even charities ought to be managed professionally. How else can we extend high-quality and impactful services, including specialist educational and therapy support, to those in need? After all, we do not expect CEOs of publicly funded hospitals to be poorly paid, do we?

Indeed, the NKF is more like a community hospital with multiple centres for high-quality lifelong critical care. It operates and manages dialysis centres to provide vital life-saving services at the highest safety levels. It does this with a heart, looking after the emotional and psychological well-being of its patients too. Taken as a whole, the NKF has certainly done very well for its patients.

True, there will be volunteers, much admired and respected, with independent means who can help charities without having to take a single cent in salary. There are also others, much loved and lauded, who for religious reasons or perhaps in memory of a parent, child or friend, would give selfless service to others. Society owes them all a debt of gratitude, and applauds their spirit of charity.

But we should not then believe that all those involved in charitable causes should in turn be charitable cases themselves. Skilled specialists and experienced managers would soon turn to other careers and job opportunities if they could not earn a living commensurate with their skills and ability. And we would all be the poorer for it, as services drop in quality or wither away.

Sometimes, in a life-threatening illness, all the money in the world will not be able to bring a loved one back. Mr T.T. Durai has helped make a difference in the NKF where medical science has offered a lifeline, though at a cost of tireless fund-raising for life-time dialysis support.

I would not begrudge Mr Durai proper and well-earned compensation and bonus. He probably earned less than what he would have earned if he had continued in his profession as a lawyer.

Yes, some of the things that Mr Durai has allegedly done rather raise a questioning eyebrow or two. Some may have crossed the line of proper conduct in respect of conflicts of interest as well. If so, they should be corrected.

It is also important to put in place a set of practical governance guidelines to minimise conflicts of interest, especially for an institution of public trust.

While the leadership of a CEO is critical to shape and drive any organisation, it is equally important that the board balances its support and guidance for its CEO with its fiduciary duty. It has to serve as an impartial guardian of stakeholder interest in a public institution.

As a civilised society, we should not lightly condemn anyone in the court of public opinion without the benefit of due process and the right to a fair hearing. Even murderers have that right. If there has been corruption or misuse of funds, then let the relevant authorities investigate and take the case through due process for a fair and proper judgment.

There may have been errors of judgment. Most of us can accept and forgive this. On the other hand, we should resolutely guard against those with serious faults of character, and not put them into positions of trust. But let us be fair and keep open minds, and give the benefit of doubt until the full facts are known.

These deliberations and decisions have important long-term considerations and impact. They should be taken calmly and steadily, away from the acid of hate and anger of betrayal.

Understandably, many feel betrayed. They feel they have been deceived into making donations of hard-earned money. However, this is no excuse for vandalising the NKF facilities, or heaping abuse on NKF staff. Two wrongs will not make a right.

Let us not forget there are real patients who continue to need dialysis support. I would urge the staff of NKF to continue to support them well, and not let this wave of fury shake them from their mission and professionalism to serve their patients well.

I am sure it will be a tremendous comfort to both the patients and their caregivers if the rest of us can keep calm and give them our moral support.

Finally, whatever the transgressions or shortcomings, I want to put on record my deep gratitude for Mr Durai and the NKF and their supporters, including numerous donors, media artists and volunteers, as well as board members and patron. Together, they have been tireless in their efforts and contributions all these years to make a difference in the lives of many kidney patients in need.

I do hope that every one of us, including Mr Durai and the NKF, will emerge the stronger, wiser and better from this serious and unfortunate setback.

I am also grateful to all the volunteers and professionals working in the various other voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). They too have given tireless and dedicated service of time, effort, money, love and emotions, to the young and old, to those sickly and in need, in their respective worthy causes.

Whatever their faults and foibles, the volunteers, staff and professionals in our VWOs have collectively given hope to many among us, and made this island a better place. In turn, I hope Singaporeans and my fellow men will join me too in supporting them, and show them our generosity and warmth of the human spirit.

Many drops an ocean make, and many hands will lighten the load. On my part, I will continue to donate to the NKF and other favourite charities.

Ho Ching (Ms)</i>



Does anyone know if this is something similar to what Mrs Goh has said? :)

[apollo]

so how much did Mrs Lee donated? i hope she wins the Fiat Panda.

[jonathan Low]

Although content prob much the same, she puts it in a far more diplomatic way than Mrs Goh ...The latter has much to learn from her. Ya, like someone said earlier, - potential patron candidate liao.


Got a question : if at the end of the day, they find a 'suitable' CEO and give him the same pay (w perform bonus tagged to donations brought in), but disclose this to the public, how many of u out there will continue/resume your donations to NKF?

[apollo]

cfm - i still wun donate to them.

they got enuff to last 30 years, i hope they halved tat amt and passed them to other needy organisation, whether tat goes to better beds, facilities, tie them over 6 months, whatever, tat would b a good deed done.

but i still think the best candidate would be a religious leader instead. or ask president nathan lor... he is people's president right? i think he wun ask for much lah.

[gckh]

cfm - i still wun donate to them.

they got enuff to last 30 years, i hope they halved tat amt and passed them to other needy organisation, whether tat goes to better beds, facilities, tie them over 6 months, whatever, tat would b a good deed done.

but i still think the best candidate would be a religious leader instead. or ask president nathan lor... he is people's president right? i think he wun ask for much lah.
i agee with u lah.... best candidate would be a religious leader - at least he/she would be guided by religious principles & wont be greedy (I hope). get someone from the corporate world, they may be "talents" but they will go by business principles, demand v high pay with perks etc.

of course again, there r exceptions like gerard ee who isnt being paid at all for being the interim chairman & CEO but these r few & far between.

[olo]

i agee with u lah.... best candidate would be a religious leader - at least he/she would be guided by religious principles & wont be greedy (I hope). get someone from the corporate world, they may be "talents" but they will go by business principles, demand v high pay with perks etc.

of course again, there r exceptions like gerard ee who isnt being paid at all for being the interim chairman & CEO but these r few & far between.
He cannot be paid lah. He officially retired liaoz. :lol:

[gckh]

He cannot be paid lah. He officially retired liaoz. :lol:
harlow, this is an official position lah.... so even if he's retired, that doesnt mean he cant ask for salary wat!!!

[olo]

harlow, this is an official position lah.... so even if he's retired, that doesnt mean he cant ask for salary wat!!!Cannot lah. If he ask for salary, not nice to his repute lor. Since got money for retirement liaoz.......work for interest lor.

[gckh]

Cannot lah. If he ask for salary, not nice to his repute lor. Since got money for retirement liaoz.......work for interest lor.
ya la... more as a sort of "NS" for rich & charitable retirees...

[Gizmore]

i agee with u lah.... best candidate would be a religious leader - at least he/she would be guided by religious principles & wont be greedy (I hope). get someone from the corporate world, they may be "talents" but they will go by business principles, demand v high pay with perks etc.

of course again, there r exceptions like gerard ee who isnt being paid at all for being the interim chairman & CEO but these r few & far between.
i raise 2 hand and agree and also.

[quaint]

cfm - i still wun donate to them.

they got enuff to last 30 years, i hope they halved tat amt and passed them to other needy organisation, whether tat goes to better beds, facilities, tie them over 6 months, whatever, tat would b a good deed done.

but i still think the best candidate would be a religious leader instead. or ask president nathan lor... he is people's president right? i think he wun ask for much lah.

i totally agree
i dun think there is a need for me to donate to nkf liao..
got enough money to sustain for so many years..might as well donate to other organisations.

[wayang]

I WRITE in my personal capacity.

I have been a long-time admirer of the National Kidney Foundation.

The NKF has been outstanding in supporting kidney and other patients. It and its supporters have been tireless not just in raising funds. They have played a key role in providing life-saving dialysis services for kidney patients and more. They also counsel, and sometimes cajole or even berate, patients and their families to take responsibility for themselves and make an effort to live.

Patients and their families, including their children, are encouraged to work together to contribute to their own support, and not give up. This helps them retain their self-respect and live their lives confidently as full members of society. I cheer the NKF for this enlightened philosophy.

Taking on a dialysis patient is almost like adopting a chronically and critically ill child. You take responsibility not just to give money on the spur of the moment in a flash of sympathy, or to organise dialysis sessions for the week in a spurt of enthusiasm.

You know that it is a serious lifelong commitment of support. You know that any interruption of that support means fear, a loss of hope, and a death sentence of sorts. Many long-time Giro donors understand this.

The NKF has wisely built up strong reserves over the years. It is a sensible and responsible approach.

The NKF's fears are understandable. No one likes to have the dreadful responsibility of deciding which patients should live when money dries up in an economic downturn.

What if 10 per cent or 20 per cent of their patients or their patients' breadwinners lose their jobs in an extended downturn? Surely, you hope to continue dialysis for them even if they cannot co-pay their part?

I would like to recommend that the NKF considers building and managing its reserves as an endowment. It also needs a sufficient buffer to weather a deep recession. Perhaps this was what it had been trying to do. Perhaps the prolonged years of difficulties during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s and the earlier brink of the 1985 recession had spurred the frenetic pace of fund-raising in recent years. But this funding model needs to be properly modelled, analysed and communicated.

To the NKF I would like to say, when you complete your review and put together your plans, do share them. I am sure Singaporeans and many others share a chord of sympathy for your cause.

On the issue of CEO pay, I believe that even charities ought to be managed professionally. How else can we extend high-quality and impactful services, including specialist educational and therapy support, to those in need? After all, we do not expect CEOs of publicly funded hospitals to be poorly paid, do we?

Indeed, the NKF is more like a community hospital with multiple centres for high-quality lifelong critical care. It operates and manages dialysis centres to provide vital life-saving services at the highest safety levels. It does this with a heart, looking after the emotional and psychological well-being of its patients too. Taken as a whole, the NKF has certainly done very well for its patients.

True, there will be volunteers, much admired and respected, with independent means who can help charities without having to take a single cent in salary. There are also others, much loved and lauded, who for religious reasons or perhaps in memory of a parent, child or friend, would give selfless service to others. Society owes them all a debt of gratitude, and applauds their spirit of charity.

But we should not then believe that all those involved in charitable causes should in turn be charitable cases themselves. Skilled specialists and experienced managers would soon turn to other careers and job opportunities if they could not earn a living commensurate with their skills and ability. And we would all be the poorer for it, as services drop in quality or wither away.

Sometimes, in a life-threatening illness, all the money in the world will not be able to bring a loved one back. Mr T.T. Durai has helped make a difference in the NKF where medical science has offered a lifeline, though at a cost of tireless fund-raising for life-time dialysis support.

I would not begrudge Mr Durai proper and well-earned compensation and bonus. He probably earned less than what he would have earned if he had continued in his profession as a lawyer.

Yes, some of the things that Mr Durai has allegedly done rather raise a questioning eyebrow or two. Some may have crossed the line of proper conduct in respect of conflicts of interest as well. If so, they should be corrected.

It is also important to put in place a set of practical governance guidelines to minimise conflicts of interest, especially for an institution of public trust.

While the leadership of a CEO is critical to shape and drive any organisation, it is equally important that the board balances its support and guidance for its CEO with its fiduciary duty. It has to serve as an impartial guardian of stakeholder interest in a public institution.

As a civilised society, we should not lightly condemn anyone in the court of public opinion without the benefit of due process and the right to a fair hearing. Even murderers have that right. If there has been corruption or misuse of funds, then let the relevant authorities investigate and take the case through due process for a fair and proper judgment.

There may have been errors of judgment. Most of us can accept and forgive this. On the other hand, we should resolutely guard against those with serious faults of character, and not put them into positions of trust. But let us be fair and keep open minds, and give the benefit of doubt until the full facts are known.

These deliberations and decisions have important long-term considerations and impact. They should be taken calmly and steadily, away from the acid of hate and anger of betrayal.

Understandably, many feel betrayed. They feel they have been deceived into making donations of hard-earned money. However, this is no excuse for vandalising the NKF facilities, or heaping abuse on NKF staff. Two wrongs will not make a right.

Let us not forget there are real patients who continue to need dialysis support. I would urge the staff of NKF to continue to support them well, and not let this wave of fury shake them from their mission and professionalism to serve their patients well.

I am sure it will be a tremendous comfort to both the patients and their caregivers if the rest of us can keep calm and give them our moral support.

Finally, whatever the transgressions or shortcomings, I want to put on record my deep gratitude for Mr Durai and the NKF and their supporters, including numerous donors, media artists and volunteers, as well as board members and patron. Together, they have been tireless in their efforts and contributions all these years to make a difference in the lives of many kidney patients in need.

I do hope that every one of us, including Mr Durai and the NKF, will emerge the stronger, wiser and better from this serious and unfortunate setback.

I am also grateful to all the volunteers and professionals working in the various other voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). They too have given tireless and dedicated service of time, effort, money, love and emotions, to the young and old, to those sickly and in need, in their respective worthy causes.

Whatever their faults and foibles, the volunteers, staff and professionals in our VWOs have collectively given hope to many among us, and made this island a better place. In turn, I hope Singaporeans and my fellow men will join me too in supporting them, and show them our generosity and warmth of the human spirit.

Many drops an ocean make, and many hands will lighten the load. On my part, I will continue to donate to the NKF and other favourite charities.

Ho Ching (Ms)




I will say this woman is very long winded. And secondly she is NOT QUALIFIED to say anything on the NKF matter until she herself practises TRANSPARENCY with Temasek.

[apollo]

wayang: i think she just did a ala Lau Lee by saying abt it. she now 1 notch up for the patron seat. lolz. doubt anyone really wanna challenge her for the post liaoz.

[RequiemDK]

Although I see that she does make several good points, her attempts at justifying Durai's bonus automatically flatlines the quality of her letter. His salary may be a tad high, but it's the fact that he got such a huge bonus, from public donations no less, during a time of economic doldrums that riles people up and I don't think she sees that.

[largedarkones]

i agee with u lah.... best candidate would be a religious leader - at least he/she would be guided by religious principles & wont be greedy (I hope). get someone from the corporate world, they may be "talents" but they will go by business principles, demand v high pay with perks etc.

of course again, there r exceptions like gerard ee who isnt being paid at all for being the interim chairman & CEO but these r few & far between.

Yeah, hand over to Father Joachim Kang!

[Silverelf]

i agee with u lah.... best candidate would be a religious leader - at least he/she would be guided by religious principles & wont be greedy (I hope). get someone from the corporate world, they may be "talents" but they will go by business principles, demand v high pay with perks etc.

of course again, there r exceptions like gerard ee who isnt being paid at all for being the interim chairman & CEO but these r few & far between.
I do not agree that a religious leader is suitable.
Let's keep NKF neutral.

[Iris]

I do not agree that a religious leader is suitable.
Let's keep NKF neutral.
Me neither.

Humans are fallible, no matter how religious they are. I think its better to keep NKF neutral and have proper checks in place to prevent the same episode from happening again..

[jonathan Low]

cfm - i still wun donate to them.

they got enuff to last 30 years, i hope they halved tat amt and passed them to other needy organisation, whether tat goes to better beds, facilities, tie them over 6 months, whatever, tat would b a good deed done.


:) I don't see myself donating to NKF too (or any other VWO), if they employ another CEO with almost the same pay and benefits, even if they use the "minister's pay" argument again. I can't see myself giving a big chunk of my hard-earned donation dollar to fill the pockets of a CEO running a charity organisation. It will only further dilute the meaning of the words charity and philantropy, which i do not want to see disappear from the social service scene here in Singapore.

[yojanjan]

Although content prob much the same, she puts it in a far more diplomatic way than Mrs Goh ...The latter has much to learn from her. Ya, like someone said earlier, - potential patron candidate liao.


Got a question : if at the end of the day, they find a 'suitable' CEO and give him the same pay (w perform bonus tagged to donations brought in), but disclose this to the public, how many of u out there will continue/resume your donations to NKF?
cannot compare like dat lah, one is a quip after 2 long emotional days (and probably feeling a little defensive too) just outside the court and the other is a well thought out open letter crafted and honed in the privacy of one's office.

[jonathan Low]

cannot compare like dat lah, one is a quip after 2 long emotional days (and probably feeling a little defensive too) just outside the court and the other is a well thought out open letter crafted and honed in the privacy of one's office.

What i was trying to put across was tt she should not have said anything then, go home consult her hubby and then in the privacy of her home / office write a diplomatic letter like HC. Better, she shouldn't even have turn up in court too- Jacky Cheung didn't come down, did he?

[yojanjan]

What i was trying to put across was tt she should not have said anything then, go home consult her hubby and then in the privacy of her home / office write a diplomatic letter like HC.... [/B]

if you have read my other posts, i totally agree that a "no comments (at this time)" would have surficed, and that it was a totally inept remark (even if she did mean it with the best of intentions). But still... HC has the benefit of hindsight at the expense of Mrs G lor.


.... Better, she shouldn't even have turn up in court too- Jacky Cheung didn't come down, did he?

:rotfl:

[gckh]

<CENTER>ST News On The Go
«Prev (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/stp_mobile/story/0,5588,329382,00.html?) | Headlines (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/stp_mobile/index/0,5587,,00.html?) | Next (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/stp_mobile/story/0,5588,329346,00.html?)»

</CENTER>« ST Forum »
NKF can do without a high-powered CEO
IT HAS been shown that if NKF sticks to its original mission of helping kidney patients, only $30 million is needed each year for its 2,000 patients, of which $8 million is used for subsidising patients requiring help.

The governance of NKF, as with any large voluntary body, requires the presence of a good board of dedicated people from different groupings, a good chairman and a good CEO.

Does the CEO of the NKF really need to be an expert in fund-raising as well as having the other qualities that any good CEO has to have? If NKF exists only for this purpose then perhaps yes - but this is not the case.

I would like to suggest that if the model of the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) is followed there would be no need for such an extraordinary, high-powered CEO.

The NCSS was formed in 1992 and before that was its predecessor, the Singapore Council of Social Service (under the leadership of the late Dr Ee Peng Liang). It now looks after over 200 voluntary welfare organisations and more than 146 programmes, and funds about 350,000 beneficiaries.

It started the Community Chest more than 20 years ago as its fund-raising arm which raises what is needed for the following year after careful scrutiny of the projected budgets submitted by the voluntary welfare organisations registered with the Community Chest for that particular year. NCSS thus has a built-in regulatory mechanism. It is totally transparent. It is also a role model for expenditure in fund-raising, spending less than 10 per cent of what is raised and even this is paid by an external agency, Singapore Pools.

Thus every dollar donated by the public is spent fully on the people who need the funding. From a small beginning, it now successfully raises the over $40 million that is needed each year.

It is overwhelmingly volunteer-driven. Its first chairman was Dr Ee, followed by Dr Richard Eu and, presently, Ms Jennie Chua. They accomplished this admirable task with no pay, no bonuses and no perks. They are truly volunteers in fund-raising. They are supported by a committee of like-minded and dedicated volunteers and some paid staff of NCSS to help carry out the fund-raisers.

Why can't the revamped NKF follow this successful pattern of the NCSS? Fund-raising can be volunteer-driven with some professional support.

It has worked for the NCSS and, what is more, it will bring in more participation from the community by not only giving money, but also time. This will spread the message of philanthropy.



Dr Robert Loh Choo Kiat





Dr Loh is former president of the National Council of Social Service

--------------------------------------------------------------------
very good points made. just shows that u dont need to get some "talent" who will demand a high salary & perks for running a charity.

[apollo]

The hard hitting message "It is totally transparent"

[phillipchai]

The letter was more like a slap in the face to those pro-NKF camp in the sense that Charity, while its nice to have to be able to raise lots of money, but the money is a mean to an end.

And the end is to help those less priviledged.

So, what if you raise a million whereby only 500k goes to those needing it?
acceptable, to some maybe.

But what if you raise 2 million, whereby 500k goes to those needing it and that another 500k is a "reserve" and that another 1 million is what you need to keep this machine runnig???

Remember, all these money drops not from the sky, neither are they a proceed from your goods and services....but from the good will of the general public.

Would it not be that the good-will of the general public squandered???

would not the public cry out in anger and demand for blood(or a kidney) to those that squandered them, especially if it is in a bad time????

Think about it.

[AKA Lance]

The hard hitting message "It is totally transparent"

Ahhh.."Transparency"

Almost a myth here.

[gckh]

<CENTER>ST News On The Go
«Prev (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/stp_mobile/story/0,5588,329591,00.html?) | Headlines (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/stp_mobile/index/0,5587,,00.html?) | Next (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/stp_mobile/story/0,5588,329606,00.html?)»

</CENTER>« ST Forum »
Have qualified retirees run welfare bodies
I REFER to the NKF controversy and especially that over the pay package of its former CEO.

I agree that you need to pay the right price for the right candidate. However, when you consider the type of organisation in question - in this case, a charitable organisation with its income derived from donations - the consideration should be different.

When Dr Richard Hu retired as chairman of Shell, he was invited to join the Government on a much-reduced salary package than what he was drawing at Shell.

He accepted because, firstly, he did not expect to get what he was getting at Shell, and, secondly, he wanted to contribute to society.

Similarly, voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) could find retirees who are qualified and who do not expect to get what they received before their retirement to take over the helm. Many VWOs have executive directors or CEOs who are retirees and who do excellent work.

Also, I did not expect a CEO working for a charity to keep insisting that he should take what he was entitled to, knowing that the money he was spending was not earned income but donations by millions.

Chong Thye Hin

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think this is a good idea. wat do u guys think?

[apollo]

tat seems to hint Jialat Ee for the job leh.

how abt pathetic toilet cleaner like me... i think i qualify also mah. dialysis machine r like toilet cleaning process also right?

i accumulated years of experience lah. i think i deserve it. esp when u consider i got infinity with taps, the golden type.

[gckh]

<CENTER>ST News On The Go
| Headlines (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/stp_mobile/index/0,5587,,00.html?) | Next (http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/stp_mobile/story/0,5588,329591,00.html?)»

</CENTER>« ST Forum »
Has our moral compass gone out of kilter?
THE recent National Kidney Foundation (NKF) saga has raised a few red flags.

Has something gone wrong with the moral compass of our society? We witnessed a number of corporate scandals recently, with the leaders inflating or falsifying company financial data, or even being involved in insider trading.

Now we are seeing a similar situation at a charitable organisation.

The classic justification is that good has been done, and the good sort of outweighs the bad. This is situational ethics at play, where the most articulate and clever persuasion wins the day.

The fact is that such considerations should come as mitigating factors after one's wrongdoings have been dealt with, not as a first defence.

By any standard, corporate or charitable, the recent disclosures were very serious violations of public trust.

Until such issues have been investigated thoroughly and dealt with, one should express full support and appreciation for the good work that the staff and volunteers of NKF had done, but reserve comments on the work of the NKF leadership.

Just because there is a gleaming building with a couple of thousand people helped means little, when thousands more could have been helped if things had been done correctly.

The NKF saga also showed up a wide gap between the haves and have-nots. Quite a number of people voiced their support for the incredible pay package of former CEO T. T. Durai, and these people typically are those who are perceived to be already enjoying a high standard of living.

But one look at the petition website calling for the CEO to go shows a completely different picture, with people expressing anger, shock and sadness about his pay and travel perks that most would never see in a lifetime.

The issue is not just about transparency. The fact is that if a charitable organisation were to announce that it is paying so-called top dollar for top talent, with MNC CEO-like perks, it would not take a rocket scientist to tell us that it will not be able to raise much money. The massive cancellation of Giro contributions should put paid to any counter-argument.

It seems odd that there are people who do not see the impact of such great income disparity. To borrow the words of SPH counsel Davinder Singh, that donor living in a two-room HDB flat with a wife and two kids, and earning $1,000 a month, would have to work four years to get the same remuneration that Mr Durai got in one month. And the irony is that Mr Durai's pay came in part from this man.

Regardless of what the privileged may say, the fact is that people are furious, angry in a manner not seen for a very long time. The solution is not simply to ask people to keep quiet and be understanding, but to acknowledge that anger, recognise that something has gone terribly wrong, get to the bottom of things, and right the wrongs quickly.

I was in the audience when the Prime Minister spoke about the elite in Singapore. PM Lee Hsien Loong spoke about how it is inevitable that all societies have elites, and that the deliberate suppression of the elite would have negative consequences, leading to social retardation.

He stressed that the solution is not to enforce equity, but to promote voluntary empathy from the elite, resulting in a win-win scenario with a form of invisible social contract.

The NKF saga seems to indicate that we are very far from that ideal. As the PM observed, the elite need to realise that their status and power come from the masses. May they never forget that.

There also seems to be a serious breakdown in communication between our decision-makers and the man in the street. Despite all the official feedback mechanisms, set up with great fanfare and at great cost, the communication of the people's outrage came via a website set up by a 20-year-old national serviceman.

Within a mere two days, more than 40,000 signatures had been registered, causing the website to crash. Within hours, SMS messages, e-mail and digital movies poking fun at the saga with 'peanut' jokes spread like wildfire across the digital landscape in Singapore.

This showed that there were huge pent-up emotions. The saga served as a lightning rod, focusing attention on one particular website where, without fear of recrimination, true feelings were expressed in often-very-colourful language (decision-makers ought to go through the comments on the website to learn a thing or two).

In an age where everyone can now be a broadcaster with blogs and transmitting devices aplenty, this could signal the onset of an era where information chaos will reign.

I am not suggesting that we adopt a free-for-all. But we must not ever believe that just because someone keeps quiet, he has nothing to say. By maintaining a veneer of compliance, we may very well be masking serious misgivings that are threatening to break out into the open when the right time, or the right tools, arrive.

Yong Teck Meng

--------------------------------------------------------------------
This just about sums it up regarding wat most of us feel about the salary etc of someone heading a charity!!!!

[shawntim]

i tot it was well written.

[yojanjan]

IIRC, there are about 300,000 giro donors, and about 15,000 cancellation (including about 100 who cancelled and reinstated) as of 19-7-05, that works out to just 5% cancellation. I'm not advocating that pp cancel or continue whatever their reason, but I had expected more to cancel than that...

[largedarkones]

its sad to see that the elite view $600K as peanuts while there are still people living close to poverty line in SG. The great income divide will result in social unrests in future if not addressed now.

[apollo]

t is sader that when they view it as peanuts yet shy away from donating peanuts to charity.

lolz.

[wayang]

In 2003 staff cost is 27mil, 7 mil for patients.
National Kelong Foundation.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stor.../158919/1/.html (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/158919/1/.html)

[apollo]

you can say tat again...
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/79534/1/.html

[gckh]

In 2003 staff cost is 27mil, 7 mil for patients.
National Kelong Foundation.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stor.../158919/1/.html (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/158919/1/.html)
No wonder all of Durai's staff loyally support him - he probably gave them 12 mths bonus & perks etc for meeting fund-raising targets which, to me at least, is ripping off the folks who had to take paycuts etc.:mad:

[Silverelf]

And I seem to remember that they were stating in one of their shows during the bad econoomical years, that they were worried that they could not reach their donation targets.........

Now I know why. Not enough money to pay for bonus otherwise.

[BlueWater]

see this image

http://www.ministryofpets.com/forum/uploads/post-28-1121480514.jpg

[apollo]

looks like the charity cancer has spread.

President's Star Charity: All proceeds go to beneficiaries
Production costs shared by MediaCorp and Singapore Pools

I refer to the article, "The tyrant who will be missed" by Ms Denyse Tessensohn (July 18) where she asked if corporations are the donors to the President's Star Charity.
.
We would like to clarify that all proceeds raised through the President's Star Charity show go directly to the beneficiaries.
.
The bulk of the cost of production of this show is borne by MediaCorp as its contribution to a worthy cause.
.
The balance of the cost is paid for by Singapore Pools (the Challenge Sponsor).
.
In this way, all donations received are channelled to the beneficiaries.
.
The President's Star Charity is only one event out of the series of "Challenge" events each year.
.
Like the President's Star Charity show, Singapore Pools helps to underwrite the administrative costs of these events.
.
The President's Star Charity offers viewers and well-wishers an opportunity to call and donate. The amount so raised varies, as revealed during the show.
.
The occasion of the TV Star Charity is also used to acknowledge the contributions from several corporations and philanthropic bodies, as well as individuals who make substantial contributions towards the President's Challenge.
.
While the donations from individuals for the President's Star Charity and other President's Challenge events may, in total, be less than corporations, what is important is the wide public contribution and participation that makes the President's Challenge a broad-based and community-based effort.
.
In fact, even in the case of those classified under corporate contributions, the organisations concerned also mobilise their staff and volunteers to donate as well as organise events where the public can also contribute to the President's Challenge.
.
Examples include SBS Transit's Heartbus, Lianhe Zaobao's ZPop Concert, and SingHealth's marathon relay that ropes in the healthcare sector.
.
Ultimately, the list of beneficiaries for the President's Challenge is scrutinised by a committee comprising representatives from the National Council of Social Service, relevant government agencies involved with voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs), and the President's Office.
.
Many of these beneficiaries are small VWOs that do not have the resources nor the reach to undertake extensive fund-raising activities on their own.
.
Each year, the amount raised through President's Challenge goes entirely to 40 to 50 beneficiaries and to the Community Chest, where many more charities benefit.
.
We hope all Singaporeans will continue to support the various charitable causes including the President's Challenge.
.
What they do to help the needy in our midst through their active participation and involvement will go a long way in nurturing a compassionate and sharing society.
.
Letter from: Ms Bellerina Yeo
.
President's Challenge 2005 Secretariat

in other news, topgun at sata has also stepped down.

[Silverelf]

Looks like an audit for all VWO/Charities is due.

Suddenly here step down, there step down. :suspicious:

[apollo]

Student volunteers abused, flag day sales fall by 30% after NKF saga

SINGAPORE : Student volunteers raising funds for voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) have been facing a backlash of the NKF saga for the past two weekends.

One was even shoved in the face by a member of the public, while others had their honesty questioned.

And upset VWOs are appealing to the public not to tar them with the same brush.

On most Saturday afternoons, you would find hundreds of students from various schools outside MRT stations and along busy streets selling flags.

In the past, the public has always given generously, but how has it changed following the NKF incident? Lets find out.

"Excuse me, would you like to donate to charity?" People shunned me, ignored me and even snapped at me.

Out of every 10 people approached, only one stopped to drop in a coin.

And those who did, had many questions.

"For what causes? I need to know what I am donating for."

"What percentage goes to the people?"

Some students were even on the receiving end of public anger over the National Kidney Foundation episode.

Christopher Clarence, Student Volunteer, said: "One of them even stuck out his hand to my friend's face and just walked on by, shunning him. People just told us that they do not believe in charities."

Lai Yi Ying, Student Volunteer, said: "Last time, before the NKF scandal, people are more eager to give the money. Now, they will brush you off, walk by like you do not exist, very discouraged and demoralised."

Goh Hui Leng, Community Involvement Programme Coordinator of Ang Mo Kio Secondary School, said: "My students went out for flag-raising last week and the responses from the public was really disappointing.

"We know that the public is angry but please do not take it out on our students. We believe in inculcating values and we believe in charities.

"We will continue to send our students out for fundraising. Please support them and do not vent your anger and frustrations on them."

The Special Olympic Group, which had its flag day last Saturday, said fundraising was an upsetting affair.

Koh Ai Hua, Administrator of Special Olympics Singapore, said: "Some of the students were told to go back to school. Don't do it. Why are you doing it? What for?

"For this flag day, the amount raised is about 30 percent less compared to the previous two years we had. This year we only raised $65,000."

Operating out of a void deck with a three-member staff, flag day contributions cover half of the Special Olympic Group's operating costs.

Programmes to be run later this year may now be cancelled due to limited funds.

The Singapore Action Group of Elders has similar concerns.

Phua Kok Tee, CEO of Singapore Action Group of Elders, said: "Over the past two weeks, the number of volunteers coming forward to help SAGE raise funds has significantly dropped. We feel that this is a result of the recent NKF saga.

"The amount of money we need to sustain our services will fall short, probably by 20 to 30 per cent.

"It is understandable, the public's mood and the environment. What I sincerely hope is that the spirit of charity and compassion will return sooner rather than later.

Regular volunteers like Joel Gwee said morale was low, leading some to even stop volunteering.

Joel said: "When we do fundraising, people stare at us as though we committed a crime. My friends who are volunteers are starting to lose faith in charity organisations.

"We are volunteers, we do not get paid a single cent. We feel like we are raising for the wrong cause sometimes because the organisations, VWOs, do not show transparency to us at the moment, so we do not know where the funds are channelled to.

"It is disheartening as well, for all you know, our hard work might be going into somebody else's pockets."

How long would it be before public confidence in charities can be restored?

Larger charities with surplus funds in their bank accounts may be able to continue operations for months, even years.

But smaller charities, with no surplus funds, may have to scale down projects or even dismiss their staff. - CNA/de

imo, pple should conduct themselves in public n not shove hand into some1's face lidat. whoever did tat is beri disgraceful.

[RequiemDK]

Worse, it's not the students' fault, yet they are being scrutinized under the same light. I don't think it's fair to treat students like that, because it's not easy to sell flags in the first place. Just hope the public can be more discerning in how they treat other volunteers. NKF is at one end of the spectrum, but there are other volunteer organizations that really depend on volunteers for their staff and barely get by with minimal expenses.

I'm beginning to disagree with Mr Khaw's assessment that there is room in Singapore for VWOs managed like NKF. If the existence of something like NKF means that other VWOs have to suffer for the lack of donations to them, and now the attitude shown to them due to their questionable practices, then I think it's in the public's interest to scrap such an inefficient model. $27mil going to staff while $7mil to patients in 2003 is a travesty. Say all you want about patients' self-esteem and all that bullcrap. I think it's just a cover up for their siphoning of funds into their own pockets when the proportion of funds going to help patients is that damn low. :/

Sure, it can be self-regulated in the sense that people can simply not donate to NKF. But who suffers? So what if the CEO's salary goes down from $600k to $300k? It's the patients and the staff at the lower tiers who will suffer in the end when they start dismissing staff and rejecting more patients or cutting subsidies, all very typical corporate measures. :/

[apollo]

ya... i was beri upset n distraughted when Quiky came home to tell me abt it. Not that the hand bruised his face or what, but I think whoever did tat neber wash after gg to the toilet. damn too much.

[olo]

All these happens because Singaporeans dun dare to speak out and fight it out. Always go through the mild avenue of forums, newspapers etc......in the end........the public has very bad perception. Even if the "transparency" is really there, if its just the TV news, newspaper and forums along will not be enough to justify and prove it. Very bad for our future. We are too mild. No gatherings peaceful protest, just like in HK or Taiwan. That will engnage the public to participate and therefore change the perception that NKF is not the only VWO. :lol:

Using the current practise, i doubt few years down the raod, the stigma and donating to "nowhere" is always there and strong.

When the public wants transparency, its means fast response, fast investigations. Not like now, seems that somebody is trying to hide something. Very bad.

[apollo]

hmm... so olo is the one that pangsai forgot to wash his hands n shove them into the face or is tat delay who elbowed Quiky in the face?

[Iris]

hmm... so olo is the one that pangsai forgot to wash his hands n shove them into the face or is tat delay who elbowed Quiky in the face?
Wah Apollo, you beri good leh! One sentence suan 3 persons! :lol:

:hail: Apollo

[Beaver21]

Wah Apollo, you beri good leh! One sentence suan 3 persons! :lol:

:hail: ApolloOther people one stone kill two birds... our apollo one sentence suan three persons!
And that's just only 30% of his real power!

[Mach 5]

Other people one stone kill two birds... our apollo one sentence suan three persons!
And that's just only 30% of his real power!
i think this one 5% nia.....

[Silverelf]

I never had the habit of donating to flag days indiscriminately.

I only donate to some of my personal supported charities, cos they are the ones who get very little funding and donations, so I save up my donations for them.

[cowism]

I never donate to flag day.. Find them v irritating..

[Silverelf]

I never donate to flag day.. Find them v irritating..
I ever did flag day once. hated it

[cowism]

I ever did flag day once. hated it\

I wonder who likes it.. There is no meaning to it and it's like begging for money. Rather do something more practical!! Life aint all about MONEY

[dk99]

I've done a couple of flag days during my sec sch days.... feel okie about it....

and i always try to donate when i saw a flag day tin. maybe 20 to 50 cent.....

[Iris]

I ever did flag day once. hated it


I never donate to flag day.. Find them v irritating..

Heh! You 2 are the reasons why each hated flag day!

[RequiemDK]

\

I wonder who likes it.. There is no meaning to it and it's like begging for money. Rather do something more practical!! Life aint all about MONEY Have a heart... Our students don't have much of a choice, and if the public takes it out on them, then what kind of a message are we sending to them? This sort of thing, you should voice it out to the administration instead, i.e. the principal, MOE, but I can tell you right off the bat that besides flag day, students do have other CIP activities. It's just that all the public sees is flag day. Who can see the students that volunteer their time on weekends at the old folks' home? Why snub the students who're doing flagging because they're still eager and innocent? All it ends up achieving is reinforcing the idea that our society is very much a graceless one, and demoralizing them. True, money isn't everything, but without money, you can't achieve much either. They're doing their part, and believe me, flagging isn't easy, especially when 90% of the people simply avoid you as if you had the black plague.

Remember that not everyone believes or sees the same thing. You may not think that there's much meaning to flagging or that the money actually goes to a worthy cause, but some students do believe in it and make a sincere effort. Can we not dampen their spirit of charity?

Edit: Would just like to add... Let's show them some courtesy. Smile at them, acknowledge them, and if you feel you don't want to donate, simply say no thank you and decline, and move on. But even 10 cents helps to make someone else's day, so why not? I've just received a letter from a member of the public condemning the courtesy of some students from my school, but personally, I feel that as much as teachers can do to educate students on courtesy, if they go out and see everyone behaving like jackasses, all their effort is for nought. :|

[Iris]

Truth is the casualty when defamation cases cost so much to fight (http://www.todayonline.com/articles/63174.asp)

DEFAMATION law is a funny thing. I recall a former boss telling a client that the last thing he wanted was to be at the wrong end of a defamation lawsuit, simply because defamation law is so skewed in favour of the plaintiff.

Generally, a plaintiff in a lawsuit must prove that the defendant was liable for the alleged misdeed, and that he does not have a defence. But defamation is different. It is one of the very few areas of law (in fact, the only one that comes to mind readily), where the defendant has the burden of proving his innocence.

The plaintiff only has to show that the defendant said or wrote something about the plaintiff that would tend to make people think less of the plaintiff. That is all he needs to do.

To win, the defendant must prove that what he said was true, or that it was a fair comment on a matter of public interest, or that the circumstances of the statement made it qualified — for instance, it was said in Parliament or on the witness stand. That can be a real uphill task for the defendant.

It all seems very technical, this issue of who has the burden of proof. But take it from me: I have handled some defamation cases and I would very much rather be representing the plaintiff than the defendant.

The recent lawsuit by the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) says it all.

Before the NKF sued Singapore Press Holdings (SPH), it had its way with individuals who said they had seen its then-CEO, Mr T T Durai, flying first class on NKF funds. It sued them, and won damages, apologies, legal costs, the works. It won on every count, every time.

It took a corporate behemoth such as mainboard-listed SPH, with a market capitalisation of about $7 billion, to stand up to the NKF and wring the truth out of it. The contrast is stark.

Perhaps if Mr Archie Ong or Mr Piragasum Singavelu had been able to afford the services of a Senior Counsel such as Mr Davinder Singh, the truth about the NKF would have come out much earlier, or perhaps the problem would have been nipped in the bud.

And let's think about the broader implications.

What if SPH had, when threatened with litigation by the NKF, made a business decision to simply retract the original Straits Times report last year, to avoid the costs, inconvenience and distractions of a lawsuit? What if it was not SPH, but a small magazine of limited means, that had broken the story?

What if the contractor, the mysterious "Mr Tan", had simply blogged about installing a gold-plated tap in Mr Durai's office?

What if the story hadn't been about the controversies surrounding the NKF, but about corporate fraud at a listed company? What if a wannabe-whistleblower at China Aviation Oil, ACCS or Citiraya had gone to the press?

Yes, the Commercial Affairs Department would certainly have investigated the allegations, but its investigations normally take quite some time to complete.

Meanwhile, our court system fully deserves its reputation as being one of the fastest and most efficient in the world. A whistleblower of limited means might have been forced to settle a lawsuit and pay damages long before any charges were brought against any wrongdoers.

Defamation law has a role in a civilised society. A person whose reputation has been damaged should have the right to compensation for that damage and to prevent it from recurring. I think no reasonable person would argue with that.

But there does need to be a fair balance in the law, so that everyone — not just those with the means to engage the best lawyers to defend them — can exercise their right to free speech.

That right becomes a mere illusion if it is, in practice, out of reach for the common man and the preserve of well-heeled individuals and powerful corporations.

One possibility is to follow the example of the United States, where a plaintiff who is a public figure has to prove that the defendant had made his comments maliciously. This principle was adopted to uphold the US constitutional right to free speech.

But this argument was rejected by the Singapore courts in a case in the early 1990s, even though the Singapore Constitution provides for a similar right.

To be fair, the New South Wales Law Reform Commission had, in 1993, also considered this approach, but doubted its suitability given certain differences in the US and Australian legal systems (which is similar to that of Singapore).

The Commission came up with some other suggestions, such as making the plaintiff prove the falsity of the allegations in question. However, New South Wales does not appear to have adopted any of those suggestions..
But it is clear that a system that compels defendants to admit fault when they are innocent, simply because they have no resources to effectively fight the allegations against them, cannot be just.

So, maybe it is time to learn from the NKF's past practices, and reconsider how defamation law operates, to prevent lawsuits from being used as a weapon to suppress truths that should come out.

Because, as the NKF case has shown, we all lose if they do not come out.

[eagle]

This is a very well written point on defamation. I had the opportunity of watching a friend being on the receiving end of the defamation suit. He lost because of a technical point and also because he did not have as good a counsel nor the deep pockets to fight.

After this, I realised that one could be sued so easily and that we actually do not really understand what is defamatory / libeous and what is not. In fact, a thread should be started to so that everyone can learn and understand what is this all about - from a technical legal view point.

Anyone willing to start such a thread. I believe it would benefit many. I know I would.




Truth is the casualty when defamation cases cost so much to fight (http://www.todayonline.com/articles/63174.asp)

DEFAMATION law is a funny thing. I recall a former boss telling a client that the last thing he wanted was to be at the wrong end of a defamation lawsuit, simply because defamation law is so skewed in favour of the plaintiff.

Generally, a plaintiff in a lawsuit must prove that the defendant was liable for the alleged misdeed, and that he does not have a defence. But defamation is different. It is one of the very few areas of law (in fact, the only one that comes to mind readily), where the defendant has the burden of proving his innocence.

The plaintiff only has to show that the defendant said or wrote something about the plaintiff that would tend to make people think less of the plaintiff. That is all he needs to do.

To win, the defendant must prove that what he said was true, or that it was a fair comment on a matter of public interest, or that the circumstances of the statement made it qualified — for instance, it was said in Parliament or on the witness stand. That can be a real uphill task for the defendant.

It all seems very technical, this issue of who has the burden of proof. But take it from me: I have handled some defamation cases and I would very much rather be representing the plaintiff than the defendant.

The recent lawsuit by the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) says it all.

Before the NKF sued Singapore Press Holdings (SPH), it had its way with individuals who said they had seen its then-CEO, Mr T T Durai, flying first class on NKF funds. It sued them, and won damages, apologies, legal costs, the works. It won on every count, every time.

It took a corporate behemoth such as mainboard-listed SPH, with a market capitalisation of about $7 billion, to stand up to the NKF and wring the truth out of it. The contrast is stark.

Perhaps if Mr Archie Ong or Mr Piragasum Singavelu had been able to afford the services of a Senior Counsel such as Mr Davinder Singh, the truth about the NKF would have come out much earlier, or perhaps the problem would have been nipped in the bud.

And let's think about the broader implications.

What if SPH had, when threatened with litigation by the NKF, made a business decision to simply retract the original Straits Times report last year, to avoid the costs, inconvenience and distractions of a lawsuit? What if it was not SPH, but a small magazine of limited means, that had broken the story?

What if the contractor, the mysterious "Mr Tan", had simply blogged about installing a gold-plated tap in Mr Durai's office?

What if the story hadn't been about the controversies surrounding the NKF, but about corporate fraud at a listed company? What if a wannabe-whistleblower at China Aviation Oil, ACCS or Citiraya had gone to the press?

Yes, the Commercial Affairs Department would certainly have investigated the allegations, but its investigations normally take quite some time to complete.

Meanwhile, our court system fully deserves its reputation as being one of the fastest and most efficient in the world. A whistleblower of limited means might have been forced to settle a lawsuit and pay damages long before any charges were brought against any wrongdoers.

Defamation law has a role in a civilised society. A person whose reputation has been damaged should have the right to compensation for that damage and to prevent it from recurring. I think no reasonable person would argue with that.

But there does need to be a fair balance in the law, so that everyone — not just those with the means to engage the best lawyers to defend them — can exercise their right to free speech.

That right becomes a mere illusion if it is, in practice, out of reach for the common man and the preserve of well-heeled individuals and powerful corporations.

One possibility is to follow the example of the United States, where a plaintiff who is a public figure has to prove that the defendant had made his comments maliciously. This principle was adopted to uphold the US constitutional right to free speech.

But this argument was rejected by the Singapore courts in a case in the early 1990s, even though the Singapore Constitution provides for a similar right.

To be fair, the New South Wales Law Reform Commission had, in 1993, also considered this approach, but doubted its suitability given certain differences in the US and Australian legal systems (which is similar to that of Singapore).

The Commission came up with some other suggestions, such as making the plaintiff prove the falsity of the allegations in question. However, New South Wales does not appear to have adopted any of those suggestions..
But it is clear that a system that compels defendants to admit fault when they are innocent, simply because they have no resources to effectively fight the allegations against them, cannot be just.

So, maybe it is time to learn from the NKF's past practices, and reconsider how defamation law operates, to prevent lawsuits from being used as a weapon to suppress truths that should come out.

Because, as the NKF case has shown, we all lose if they do not come out.

[Silverelf]

Heh! You 2 are the reasons why each hated flag day!
Hahaha!! Maybe!

Well, I disliked flag day cos, I am not sure that it does inculcate the proper values anyway. And in my case it was miserable through and through. Granted that most of the experience was not due to the flag day, but I just disliked it ever since

I did Flag Day once when I was in NPCC, that day I was having a very bad stomachache, so I was already feeling very miserable. I was very near my home and wanted to go home for a while to use the toilet and the other flag raisers disallowed me to do so. So there I was miserable, almost convinced that I was gonna die.. waiting for donations (you woulda thought with such a sick face I would have gotten sympathy donations).

Finally, it was time to go back and turn in our donation tins. Everyone queued up (including me, the sick chicken) everyone got a t-shirt on turning in the tins, so I figured everyone would get one, therefore when they didn;t give me one, I said:"You forgot to give me a t-shirt"

The stark reply was:"That's only for people with full tins"

Kaoz. That was bloody humiliating loh! Anyway, how would they know if the contents in my tin were not worth more then the others? Maybe mine all $50 notes leh?? $50 notes very light compared to $0.50 you know... Somemore I sick chicken, nobody care, go sell flag. No welfare at all. Crap it all lah. Think about it still angry.

[romeosg]

Hahaha!! Maybe!

Well, I disliked flag day cos, I am not sure that it does inculcate the proper values anyway. And in my case it was miserable through and through. Granted that most of the experience was not due to the flag day, but I just disliked it ever since

I did Flag Day once when I was in NPCC, that day I was having a very bad stomachache, so I was already feeling very miserable. I was very near my home and wanted to go home for a while to use the toilet and the other flag raisers disallowed me to do so. So there I was miserable, almost convinced that I was gonna die.. waiting for donations (you woulda thought with such a sick face I would have gotten sympathy donations).

Finally, it was time to go back and turn in our donation tins. Everyone queued up (including me, the sick chicken) everyone got a t-shirt on turning in the tins, so I figured everyone would get one, therefore when they didn;t give me one, I said:"You forgot to give me a t-shirt"

The stark reply was:"That's only for people with full tins"

Kaoz. That was bloody humiliating loh! Anyway, how would they know if the contents in my tin were not worth more then the others? Maybe mine all $50 notes leh?? $50 notes very light compared to $0.50 you know... Somemore I sick chicken, nobody care, go sell flag. No welfare at all. Crap it all lah. Think about it still angry.
Wahhh... Elf got a very bad experience... :think: :think:

[Silverelf]

Wahhh... Elf got a very bad experience... :think: :think:
Yeah, Flag Days = exploitation of Child Labour. Eerrr... ok lah, that was a bit overboard hahahah

[romeosg]

Yeah, Flag Days = exploitation of Child Labour. Eerrr... ok lah, that was a bit overboard hahahah
Shouldn't it be voluntary? :think:

[ka]

The new temporary CEO has said something that I find hard to understand.

He justifies the hoarding of reserves for the hypothetical day in which NKF will need the money for a new and expensive dialysis machine/treatment (that doesn't yet exist.)

Wouldn't it be better to release that money to patients now (or to other charities who also need money), and then IF the day arises that a new expensive machine becomes available, make a plea for donations then?

[weimeng]

what if the donations do not come, then what....

[ka]

what if the donations do not come, then what....

Then you're screwed. But then again, if people, out of the generosity of their hearts and empathy for the needs of the unfortunate, were willing to give $300,000,000, why wouldn't they give if there arose a need in future?

[romeosg]

I thought I read the newspaper the other day... chinese newspaper lah... b4 the resignation that this group said they'll double their donations if Durai stepped down? :think: :think: