Temasek Holdings in Various Companies

Discuss about life in Singapore. Ask about cost of living, housing, travel, etiquette & lifestyle. Share experience & advice with Singaporeans & expat staying in Singapore.
Post Reply
User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16516
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:43 pm
Location: K. Puki Manis

Temasek Holdings in Various Companies

Post by JR8 » Thu, 21 Feb 2013 6:07 pm

Strong Eagle here. I've split out this discussion from the telephone bill thread since therat posted some interesting information about Temasek holdings.

^ Agreed, it is outrageous; a product of a lack of competition.

Who owns Starhub, the SGn gubment perchance?[/quote]

User avatar
taxico
Director
Director
Posts: 3232
Joined: Sat, 10 May 2008 6:05 pm
Location: Existential dilemma!

Post by taxico » Thu, 21 Feb 2013 8:54 pm

JR8 wrote:^ Agreed, it is outrageous; a product of a lack of competition.

Who owns Starhub, the SGn gubment perchance?
you got it!

therat
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 2:23 pm

Post by therat » Thu, 21 Feb 2013 10:20 pm

JR8 wrote:^ Agreed, it is outrageous; a product of a lack of competition.

Who owns Starhub, the SGn gubment perchance?
All 3 telcon, Singapore government has a share
All 2 public transport operator, singapore government has a share on it.

As long as it is a earning business, Singapore government has a share on it.

User avatar
Wd40
Director
Director
Posts: 4245
Joined: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 10:53 am
Location: SIndiapore

Post by Wd40 » Thu, 21 Feb 2013 10:31 pm

therat wrote:
JR8 wrote:^ Agreed, it is outrageous; a product of a lack of competition.

Who owns Starhub, the SGn gubment perchance?
All 3 telcon, Singapore government has a share
All 2 public transport operator, singapore government has a share on it.

As long as it is a earning business, Singapore government has a share on it.
Let me guess, All 3 major banks, Singapore gahmen has a share :)

therat
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 2:23 pm

Post by therat » Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:33 pm

These are direct investment. Those invest by the invested company is not inside the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temasek_Ho ... nvestments

Major investments of Temasek Holdings as of March 31, 2012[1]

Finance & Banking

Bank of China Limited (2%)
China Construction Bank Corporation (8%)
DBS Group Holdings (30%)
Standard Chartered PLC (18%)
ICICI Bank (2%)

Telecom & Media

MediaCorp Pte Ltd (100%)
Singapore Telecommunications (54%)
Shin Corporation (42%)
Singapore Technologies Telemedia (100%)
Bharti Airtel (5% as of 2010)
STATS ChipPAC Ltd (84%)

Transportation and Industrials

Singapore Airlines (56%)
Keppel Corporation (21%)
Neptune Orient Lines (66%)
PSA International (100%)
SembCorp Industries (49%)
ST Engineering (51%)
SMRT Corporation (54%)
Singapore Power (100%)


Life Sciences, Consumer and Real Estate

CapitaLand (40%)
Mapletree Investments (100%)
Olam International (16%)
Celltrion, Inc. (10%)
Li & Fung Limited (3%)
M+S Pte Ltd (40%)
Pulau Indah Ventures (50%)
SATS Ltd (43%)
Wildlife Reserves Singapore Pte Ltd (88%)


Energy & Resources

The Mosaic Company (5%)
Chesapeake Energy Corporation
Clean Energy Fuels Corp (0.49%)
FTS International (40%)
Inmet Mining Corporation (11%)
MEG Energy Corp (6%)
China Power

User avatar
Strong Eagle
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11650
Joined: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 12:13 am
Location: Off The Red Dot
Contact:

Post by Strong Eagle » Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:46 pm

Wow! A 100 percent of the bird cage liner. Little wonder its on such a short tether.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 39562
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 1:26 pm
Answers: 10
Location: Retired on the Little Red Dot

Post by sundaymorningstaple » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 6:56 am

Strong Eagle wrote:Wow! A 100 percent of the bird cage liner. Little wonder its on such a short tether.
Actually, from that list, it would appear that they hold absolutely 0% of the bird cage liner. You are looking at Media Corp which are the Television stations. the bird cage line is Singapore Press Holdings which I don't see on the list at all, surprisingly enough.
SOME PEOPLE TRY TO TURN BACK THEIR ODOMETERS. NOT ME. I WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW WHY I LOOK THIS WAY. I'VE TRAVELED A LONG WAY, AND SOME OF THE ROADS WEREN'T PAVED. ~ Will Rogers

therat
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 2:23 pm

Post by therat » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 9:14 am

Singapore Press Holdings chairman is also held by former PAP minister.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_Press_Holdings

There are close ties between the directors of SPH and the Singapore Government. S. R. Nathan, Director of the Security and Intelligence Division and later President of Singapore served as SPH's Executive Chairman from 1982 to 1988 and the first President (1994–2002) of SPH was Tjong Yik Min, former chief of the Internal Security Department. The immediate former Chairman of SPH, Tony Tan was Deputy Prime Minister of Singapore from 1994 to 2005 and President of Singapore from 2011–present.

Dr Lee Boon Yang, currently a director, will become the next chairman of Singapore Press Holdings if he is re-elected in the December 2011 AGM

--------
For those wondering who is Dr Lee Boon Yang.
He is is a former Singaporean politician. A member of the governing People's Action Party (PAP), he served in the Cabinet from July 1991 to April 2009 in various portfolios, including Minister for Defence, Minister for Manpower, and Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts. He was also a Member of Parliament (MP) for Jalan Besar GRC from 1984 to 2011.

User avatar
nakatago
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 8348
Joined: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 11:23 pm
Location: Sister Margaret’s School for Wayward Children

Post by nakatago » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 10:21 am

Having the government investing in companies is not bad per se but they're more after profits instead of welfare of the citizens--the citizens are not treated as shareholders. :(
"A quokka is what would happen if there was an anime about kangaroos."

therat
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 2:23 pm

Post by therat » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 10:41 am

http://www.thereadinggroup.sg/Articles/ ... rclass.pdf

During 2002 Singapore National Day Rally Speech, PM of Singapore Goh Chok Tong already said "We had treated welfare as a dirty word."

User avatar
nakatago
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 8348
Joined: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 11:23 pm
Location: Sister Margaret’s School for Wayward Children

Post by nakatago » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 11:30 am

therat wrote:http://www.thereadinggroup.sg/Articles/ ... rclass.pdf

During 2002 Singapore National Day Rally Speech, PM of Singapore Goh Chok Tong already said "We had treated welfare as a dirty word."
Avoiding any extremes here but what would he call then any help that people who have fallen through the cracks need then?

:roll:

also, TL;DR
"A quokka is what would happen if there was an anime about kangaroos."

therat
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 2:23 pm

Post by therat » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 12:43 pm

Government minister replied in 2007, when the Minister for Community Development and Sports had an exchange with fellow MP Dr Lily Neo, on whether the government could give more money to the poor so that they could afford three meals a day.

Vivian Balakrishna, Minister of Community Development, Youth and Sports said: 'How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?'


In 2007, the Public Assistance rate for a single person was $260.

Do you think $260 is enough for a person for one month expense?
One month is $260 which work out $8.666 per day for a month of 30 days.

[edit to add the follow text]
I recall, after this debate, the public assistance increase by S$30 to $290.

While they give themselves huge salary increase.
I think that was the starting.

And b'coz of the above message, it become a famous quote for Vivian. People only remember him as "How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant" minister
Last edited by therat on Fri, 22 Feb 2013 12:54 pm, edited 3 times in total.

therat
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 2:23 pm

Post by therat » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 12:46 pm

In April 2007, SALARIES of civil servants and ministers are going up this month, with ministers at the starting grade getting the biggest pay rise of 33 per cent.
The size of the increments will depend on how far behind salaries are compared to their private sector benchmarks and on individual performance, Mr Teo Chee Hean, the minister in charge of the civil service, told Parliament yesterday.


Pay will be more closely tied to performance. Thus, the variable portion in ministers' pay will go up from the current one-third to almost half.

The pay packet of ministers at the entry grade of MR4 is now $1.2 million, or 55 per cent of the private sector benchmarks to which it is pegged.

It goes up to $1.6 million this year, which takes it to 73 per cent of the benchmark. A second round of increases is planned for next year to bring it to 88 per cent of the benchmark.

More senior ministers will get smaller increases, sliding from 33 per cent to 14 per cent at the higher grades.

With the change, the Prime Minister's annual salary will go up from $2.5 million to $3.1 million.

This will place him at No. 102 in the ranking of top income earners among Singaporeans, permanent residents and Malaysians working here, up from 164 currently.

But it will still be lower than in 2000, when his salary ranked 63rd.

The total salary revisions for the civil service will increase the Government's wage bill by $214 million or 4.7 per cent. The wage bill for political appointment holders goes up by $10.5 million or 23 per cent to $56 million.

The bulk of the civil service wage increases will go to teachers, police and other uniformed officers, management executives and others who make up the 64,000-strong civil service.

In setting forth the changes for Parliament to consider and debate, Mr Teo said the policy of competitive wages had enabled the Government to induct and retain able men and women.

As a result, Singapore could maintain its 'competitive advantage' of a clean, effective and efficient public service.

It was what Harvard Business School professor Richard Vietor described in a new book as 'the best example of government that works', he said.

Mr Teo added: 'We don't want pay to be the reason for people to join us. But we also don't want pay to be the reason for them not to join us, or to leave after joining us.'

The salary revisions will not be in quantum alone.

Mr Teo also announced a major restructuring of pay for ministers and top civil servants at grade MR4 and above, which will increase the variable portion of their annual package from 34 per cent now to 47 per cent.

With the change, a fifth of ministers' annual salaries will depend on a GDP bonus of between zero months, if the economy grows by 2 per cent or less, and eight months, if it expands by 10 per cent or more.

Another quarter of their salaries will be linked to performance. The Prime Minister will decide how much performance bonus each minister receives.

A fixed car allowance of 2.5 months will be scrapped.

The annual allowance of Members of Parliament, last revised seven years ago, will also go up by 23 per cent to $216,300.

Among civil servants, officers in the Home Affairs Uniformed Services, graduates in the management executive scheme and Foreign Service officers are set to receive the biggest pay increases.

Yesterday, 11 MPs joined in the debate.

Most supported the principle of competitive salaries but several questioned the benchmarking formula and the timing of the increase.

Two MPs suggested having an independent panel decide the benchmarks, with West Coast GRC MP Ho Geok Choo arguing that the present process could be construed as 'self-serving'.

The temperature in the House rose a few degrees when Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, who last spoke in the House in 2005, rose to challenge Workers' Party MP Low Thia Khiang.

Mr Low said that Finland, Denmark and Switzerland ranked higher than Singapore in certain studies on clean government and the standard of living, yet their leaders earned much less than those here.

Mr Lee replied: 'Their governments never produced the kind of transformation that we have. To make the transformation from what we were in 1959 or 1965, to what we are requires an extraordinary government with extraordinary government officers to support it.'

The debate continues today.

{edit to add this table}
The annual salary structure
With immediate effect, (in Singapore dollars):
President – $3,187,100 (up 24.9%),
Prime Minister – $3,091,200 (up 25.5%),
Senior Minister – $3,043,300 (up 13.5%),
Minister Mentor – $3,043,300 (up 13.5%),
Deputy Prime Minister – $2,452,500 (up 18.8%),
Minister and Senior Perm Sec – $1,593,500 (up 32.5% increase) (MR4 Grade),
Entry Superscale Grade – $384,000 (up 3.3%) [SR9 Grade],
Member of Parliament – $216,300 (up 23.2%).

User avatar
nakatago
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 8348
Joined: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 11:23 pm
Location: Sister Margaret’s School for Wayward Children

Post by nakatago » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 12:57 pm

"During my day, we had to walk 20 miles to school! In the snow! And it was uphill! Both ways!"

Because 2012 is very much like 1965.
"A quokka is what would happen if there was an anime about kangaroos."

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16516
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:43 pm
Location: K. Puki Manis

Post by JR8 » Fri, 22 Feb 2013 7:09 pm

I hadn't realised there was an opposition MP in the SGn parliament.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Staying, Living in Singapore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests