SMRT Comms Chief Margaret Teo just sabo her colleague arrested for drink driving

SMRT VP for corporate communications Margaret Teo has mastered the art of flipping prata super fast.

With regard to a SMRT senior executive arrested for drink driving, SMRT “asked for privacy for its staff member, who is reportedly SMRT Trains chief operations officer (rail) Alvin Kek”.

SMRT then turned around and disclosed a personal detail of Trains COO Alvin Kek which SMRT employees would probably have known: ““We request that the privacy of our staff, especially under the circumstances of his recent bereavement, be respected.”

Thanks to Margaret Teo, Alvin Kek will become the most popular SMRT employee this week.

Posted in SMRT/SBS TRANSIT | Leave a comment

Arrested SMRT Trains COO a super SAF scholar?

I refer to ST article “SMRT Trains chief operations officer Alvin Kek arrested for drink driving at Woodlands Checkpoint”.

ST: “Prior to his employment at SMRT, Mr Kek spent 14 years with the Singapore Armed Forces, where he was a colonel and a chief engineering officer.”

To become a colonel in 14 years, Alvin would have to be a former SAF scholar.   He wasn’t.

Alvin was not in his early 30s but was already 45 when he joined SMRT.  14 years with SAF = enlisted when he was 31 years old. Fake news?

Fact: Alvin enlisted in 1986 and left as colonel after 27 years with the SAF.

In previous articles, Alvin was also reported to have spent 14 years with the SAF. (link)


Posted in MAINSTREAM MEDIA, SMRT/SBS TRANSIT | Leave a comment

HDB should stop lying about lessees’ ownership status

HDB claims it sells new flats to buyers at subsidized prices.  But HDB is in fact referring to the lease and not the flat.1hdb1b

HDB should come clean and explain how buyers automatically become owners by signing an Agreement for Lease ?

Going by HDB’s logic, doesn’t that automatically make a vehicle lessee its owner?

Unless ownership rights are transferred to buyers, HDB is clearly lying about the ownership status of ‘flat’ buyers.

Posted in HOUSING | 1 Comment

HDB lessees ignorant of scam, continue to mistake themselves as owners

Credit should be given to PAP for its brainwashing technique: most HDB lessees continue to believe they own public property.

I recently commented on Tan Kin Lian’s FB and suggested that he should help to raise awareness on the bigger issue of true ownership of HDB flats.

However, the former presidential candidate was not even aware of the issue and tried to explain the difference between owning a leasehold vs freehold property.

I have referred Tan to a previous post, hoping he could be sufficiently enlightened to eventually highlight the HDB ownership scam.

From the table below, the issue of true ownership should be clear to even an idiot. 😉
Since we are clearly ‘lessees’ and not ‘owners’, why are we paying property tax?

Should we pay for the maintenance of common areas which are public property?

Isn’t it the government’s obligation to fund long-term maintenance?

Financial institutions cannot accept ‘our’ flats as collateral for mortgage loans because we do not own the flat: we only own the lease.

HDB ‘owners’ only sign a Lease Areement, not a Purchase and Sale Agreement.
Because HDB is the actual and only owner, the flat occupied by lessees has to be inspected prior to its ‘sale’.  This is similar to a landlord inspecting the rented out room at the end of the tenancy, prior to returning the deposit.

HDB lessees’ ‘sale’ of ‘their’ flats is nothing more than a lease transaction.

In a 2014 reply from HDB’s principal legal counsel, ‘owner’ is as defined in the H&D Act, not the conventional meaning of ‘owner’.

By defining ‘lessees’ as ‘owners’, Singapore’s home ownership rate is almost top in the world.  Without H&D Act’s weird definition of ‘owner’, our home ownership rate drops to the lowest in the world. (PAP’s miracle at the stroke of a pen)

HDB lessees who still believe they are owners should question and demand honest answers (likely won’t get) from their MPs.

Hold PAP accountable for the HDB scam or our children will likewise be fleeced.





Posted in HOUSING, POLITICS | Leave a comment

SMRT “Reserved CEO” selection process similar to PAP’s “Reserved Presidency”

2 days ago, SMRT announced that a new CEO had been found after a “global search”. (ST)

No details were given and this naturally raised suspicions that SMRT had lied.  This was because the new CEO will be another former paper general, coincidentally a former successor to CEO Desmond Kuek when both were paper generals.
1globalsearch1In response to a ST Forum letter slamming the decision to try its luck with another ex 3-star general, SMRT disclosed the following criteria for the new CEO: personal values, leadership qualities, relevant engineering knowledge, track record in operations and people management, and the ability to collaborate with multiple stakeholders.

But Neo does not possess “relevant engineering knowledge” nor “track record in operations” because he has never even worked in the industry.

To ensure Neo got selected, SMRT disclosed that “a key attribute considered in the final selection was the candidate’s understanding of the needs of Singapore’s commuters and public transport system.”

So, even if more qualified candidates, eg CEO of Hong Kong’s MTR or Taipei’s Metro had been headhunted, they would have been rejected by SMRT.

SMRT’s selection process is clearly similar to our Reserved Presidency where the PAP had set the criteria to suit its pre-selected candidate.

Engaging an executive search firm to conduct a comprehensive “global search” was to impress gullible Singaporeans that clueless Neo stood out when compared with more qualified foreign talents.


Posted in SMRT/SBS TRANSIT | 3 Comments