# MND’s 14 May 2015 response to media queries on AHPETC’s media release

- **Source:** Ministry of National Development
- **Published:** 2015-05-14T14:30:00.000Z
- **Author:** Ministry of National Development
- **Original:** https://www.mnd.gov.sg/newsroom/press-releases/view/mnd-s-14-may-2015-response-to-media-queries-on-ahpetc-s-media-release
- **Topics:** Investment & Capital Markets

## Featured rationale

Independent accounting safeguards could enable grant disbursement while protecting public funds, potentially stabilising financing for estate operations and mandatory sinking-fund contributions.

## AI summary

MND withheld AHPETC grants after audit disclaimers increased from four to 13, while offering half the grant subject to legal compliance.

## Original article

In response to AHPETC’s latest media release, the following is MND’s reply to media queries: 

1. All Town Councils (TCs) are entitled to S&CC Operating Grants, but they must be able to safeguard these grants, which are public funds, and channel them to the purpose for which they are given. 

2. MND has given AHPETC much latitude, as far as grants were concerned. In fact, in the first year when their own auditors qualified their accounts and had 4 disclaimers, MND still gave AHPETC the grant, because the TC assured MND that they would rectify their shortcomings. 

3. However, the following year’s audit showed that not only did AHPETC not rectify, the situation had gotten worse; the TC’s accounts continued to be qualified and the number of disclaimers increased from 4 to 13. AGO had to be called in to do a special audit of the TC’s accounts, the first time in the history of TCs. Under the circumstances, it would be unconscionable for MND to continue to give AHPETC the grants, which are public moneys, without proper safeguards. 

4. Notwithstanding this, MND, in response to Ms Sylvia Lim’s appeal, offered to disburse half of the grant, even while the AGO audit was on-going, on the condition that the TC complies with the law. However, Ms Lim never responded to this offer. Her latest statement still doesn’t explain clearly why AHPETC did not disclose to the Court as late as 27 March 2015 that it needed these grants. Indeed, it had insisted it did not. 

5. In the latest press release, Ms Sylvia Lim gives the impression that AHPETC is not making transfers to the Sinking Fund and contravening the law, because MND has withheld the grants. The fact is AHPETC also did not make mandatory transfers to the Sinking Fund in FY11/12 and FY12/13, while receiving grants from MND. 

6. This latest press release by AHPETC is another example of why MND had to go to Court to seek appointment of Independent Accountants. This is the only way to depoliticise the issue: AHPETC deals directly with the Courts, and not engage in endless argy-bargy with MND.

## Chinese translation

> Translation model: grok_cli

### 国家发展部2015年5月14日就阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会媒体声明回应媒体询问

针对阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会（AHPETC）最新媒体声明，国家发展部（MND）对媒体询问的回复如下：

1. 所有市镇理事会（TCs）都有权获得服务与杂费（S&CC）运营补助金，但必须能够妥善保管这些属于公共资金的补助金，并将其用于指定用途。

2. 就补助金而言，国家发展部已给予阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会很大的空间。事实上，在其自身审计师对其账目出具保留意见并附有4项无法表示意见（disclaimers）的第一年，国家发展部仍向阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会发放了补助金，因为该市镇理事会向国家发展部保证将纠正其不足。

3. 然而，翌年的审计显示，阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会不仅未予纠正，情况反而恶化；该市镇理事会的账目继续被出具保留意见，无法表示意见的数量从4项增至13项。审计总长公署（AGO）不得不被请来对该市镇理事会账目进行特别审计，这在市镇理事会历史上尚属首次。在此情况下，国家发展部若在缺乏适当保障措施的前提下继续向阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会发放属于公共资金的补助金，将是不可接受的。

4. 尽管如此，国家发展部在回应林瑞莲女士的诉求后，提出即使在审计总长公署审计进行期间，仍可发放一半补助金，条件是该市镇理事会遵守法律。然而，林女士从未回应此项提议。她最新的声明仍未清楚解释，为何阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会迟至2015年3月27日仍未向法院披露其需要这些补助金。事实上，它曾坚称并不需要。

5. 在最新新闻稿中，林瑞莲女士给人的印象是：阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会未向储备金（Sinking Fund）转账并违反法律，是因为国家发展部扣留了补助金。事实是，阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会在2011/12及2012/13财政年度从国家发展部获得补助金的同时，也未按规定向储备金作出强制性转账。

6. 阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会这份最新新闻稿，再次说明了为何国家发展部必须向法院申请任命独立会计师。这是去政治化处理此事的唯一途径：由阿裕尼—后港市镇理事会直接与法院交涉，而不是与国家发展部进行无休止的争辩。