CPF members need to be aware of historical facts about how we have been screwed by PAP. Only then will members understand the necessity to right a system corrupted by greed.
CPF has always been a cheap source of funds which has enabled PAP to fund infrastructure construction – especially HDB flats – and overseas investment by GIC.
Addicted to cheap CPF funds, PAP became reliant on this to generate government revenue. In an attempt to prevent public knowledge of this fact, LKY had even resorted to lying about GIC not having used CPF for investment in 2001 and 2006.
LKY was GIC chairman for 3 decades so let’s not call a spade by any other name. LKY had lied. (Image source)
Besides LKY, Minister Ng Eng Hen had also tried to pull a fast one in Parliament in 2007 by anyhow claiming that CPF was not a cheap source of funds for GIC.
Whether investment funds are cheap or not is relative to the yields of similar instruments. For example, if CPF OA rate was lower than even 5-year Singapore government bond yield or 1-year commercial bank deposit rate, CPF funds were bloody cheap.
With cheap funds, GIC could anyhow tikam tikam and pocket the difference between, say, CPF OA rate and its rate of return. Investment in bonds provide a clear example of how GIC really made money in the past.
According to GIC, its portfolio consisted of 40% bonds “until the end of the 1990s“.
Since inception in 1981 to 1986, US 10-year bond yields had ranged between 10% and almost 16%!
(Our highest 6.5% CPF rate is mistakenly believed to be high as many Singaporeans are unaware that developed countries were paying double-digit yields on their bonds during the 1980s.)
From GIC’s bond investment, CPF members should be able to see clearly how we have been shortchanged.
The huge difference in bond yields and CPF rates continued until 2000. GIC only needed to pay CPF members very low CPF OA rates and kept high returns from bond investment. After taking into account exchange rate losses, GIC could make money with one eye closed.
Even if GIC had made poor returns, senior executives would still be handsomely rewarded with multi-million dollar bonuses because the cost of funds was extremely low, ie CPF rates were depressed by PAP.
Today, the $124 billion in CPF OA remains a very cheap source of funds for GIC. This is because it is impossible for GIC to raise $124 billion from investors at 2.5%.
In 2007, Ng Eng Hen said: “If it was cheap, we would have a line of suitors waiting for the money. There are none.”
Which goondu really really believed Ng, keechiu.
CPF members should be wary of propaganda and not be afraid to think or question PAP ministers when they start to talk cock. After all, CPF monies do not belong to PAP but members.
likedatosocanmeh 
And a source of corruption. After all Keppel used our money to enrich others via bribes.
If Temask didn’t have access to CPF they would’ve been far more careful.
Personally CPF need tp be totally independent where individuals companies and unions should choose the managers and investments. Bettervyet liberalize Singapore wealth management expertise so singaporeans can grew 5heir own wealth.