PAP has again engaged in propaganda to mask the true state of our CPF. Success is success but failure can also be turned into ‘success’ by our self-checking government. 😉
And so we continue to hear more positive news from MSM in “More CPF investors beat guaranteed risk-free returns in fiscal 2016. BT Perhaps DPM Tharman is right after all to claim that Singaporeans are not fools.
CPF Board (CPFB) has managed to achieve a “better result” by tweaking “the way it measures the performance of investments”. (Tweaking data has always been one of PAP’s favourite tools)
CPFB claims that this is “more aligned with the industry practice of fund managers”.
Why then was CPFB’s practice not aligned with industry practice for decades? Were Singaporeans misled?
According to CPFB:
At 58%, CPFB would of course have been forced to address this issue. Perhaps 38% was acceptable? What about earlier years, say in 2009 or 2010 post GFC?
Only CPFB has the statistics and it will of course use a methodology to achieve any desired outcome.
CPFB: “But given the resource constraints for industry players to re-compute the data using the new methodology for past years, the CPF Board could only go as far back as fiscal 2015”.
Perhaps we are expected to believe industry players are still using manual calculation?
CPFB: “It has excluded CPFIS account holders with no investments, and factored in unrealised gains or losses for investments held during the reporting period from Oct 1 to Sept 30″.
Would this have happened if we are in a bear market?
Perhaps we should consult (not my) President Halimah:
When global stock markets enter a bear market – as they will – expect CPFB to come up with a lagi new methodology to reflect whatever it wants. 😉
CPFB has never attempted to resolve the issue of retirement funding shortfall but constantly trying to paint a positive image of itself to mask its failure. 😦