Hundreds/thousands of transactions annually but GIC has preferred to keep information which belongs in the public domain private.
Any government which conceals such information from the people does it to prevent embarrassment. Fact: Over more than 3 decades, GIC’s realized and unrealized losses amount to tens of billions of tax/CPF dollars.
After the disclosure of epic blunders like the UBS investment, GIC has not disclosed sufficient ‘winners’ to convince CPF members that its ‘6% long term return’ is not plucked out of thin air.
Many investments – especially those prior to the financial crisis – have been wiped out and Singaporeans will never know. Massive losses have been concealed with the blessings of elected MPs who have pretended to be dumb.
Look at the ridiculously-small number of transactions disclosed by GIC before the financial crisis. A $200-plus billion fund made only 6 transactions in 2006? (Edited images from GIC website.)
Only 8 in 2007?
And the same number in 2008?
And guess what? In 2009, GIC disclosed only one transaction, ie its Citigroup stake was reduced to below 5%.
Even an idiot is able to sense that something is very wrong somewhere. Are elected MPs idiots, or worse? 😦 😦
If Parliament continues to sleep, the hole that GIC has dug CPF members into will only get deeper.
Isn’t the number of transactions disclosed by GIC unbelievable for a fund manager with more than $200 billion in assets?
GIC had invested billions of our CPF/government reserves near market highs from 2006 to 2008. Similar to UBS, a number of these investments are deeply submerged or have gone pock kai. GIC has the figures.
At or near market bottoms, GIC would have also cut massive losses and it has again concealed these transactions to prevent embarrassment.
It is logical for Singaporeans to suspect the PAP government has been increasing the CPF Minimum Sum and delaying the withdrawal age to enable GIC to recoup very large investment losses.
Recently, GIC has been making billion-dollar bets and is no longer interested in diversifying risks. Like the $14 billion UBS speculation, these billion-dollar bets have no plan B. Not trying to recoup losses?
If there are no massive CPF investment losses, why does GIC fear transparency?