The authority should have acted earlier

Dear Mr Tan

I refer to this comment on your blog at 1.57 pm on 26 April. It is quite obvious from it that the authority (not sure which ministry as you did not mention it but definitely a Minister or Ministry is involved since you mentioned it). 

Now that your "allegation" is proven to be true, I wonder whether you will pursue the matter with the person and/ or the Minister or Ministry. As Chiam See Tong mentioned before, our leaders must take responsibility. They have been taking credit and rewards for doing many things right and deservedly so. But when things go wrong they have to learn to and must take the responsibility. That is why they are the government. That is the role of the government. 

I was quite disappointed to see our DPM / Minister of Finance issuing warning in Parliament two weeks after the company was raided. It seems like it is an act to "wash their hands" over the matter. Although each individual has to be held accountable for their own actions the authority is there to help maintain and ensure law and order. The authority has the power and resources to do what ordinary citizens are unable or unwilling to do. In this case, the authority must have been aware of the operation of the operator. Otherwise it would not be placed on the alert list. 

But having put them on the alert list, it their job done? Or is it just so that again they can "wash their hands" if things turn nasty. They can simply point to the list and say "see, we warned you, it is on the list"? This does seem unprofessional and lack of courage to do the right thing. To pre-empt disaster and tragedy. Which is the hallmark of a government; one which Singapore is well known for but I am unsure now.

POSTING IN TKL BLOG ON April 26, 2012 1:57 PM 

"One of the underlings was angry at my posting. She told me rudely to make a Police report, rather than to post this vague allegation in my blog.

I wanted her, and her minister, to know that I had made a report to the Commercial Affairs Department on another alleged fraud. This report was made in conjunction with another person, who had painfully investigated the alleged fraud for quite some time, and had compiled a dossier of documents that provide evidence of the offence.

The CAD officer decided, after over two months, that there was insufficient evidence for them to investigate the matter.

We learned later, that the CAD officer did not even call up the alleged offender to ask him to give an explanation to the issues that were raised.

If a carefully prepared report with documentary evidence could be ignored in this manner, there is little chance for my "suspicion" to be given any consideration.

In case the underling and her minister does not know, the ordinary citizens do not have the authority, power or resources to carry out any investigation or enquiry.

I wish to post this comment here, so that the underling can report this state of affairs to her minister.

I did not post the comments from the underling, as she has a habit of attacking me in my blog and Facebook. She was quite rude in challenging my views and did so just for the sake of rebuttal. I suspect that she is under orders to monitor my blog. "