TWO TOWN COUNCILS, TWO DIFFERENT RESPONSES

Someone asked why the CPIB was called in so quickly at Ang Mo Kio Town Council while no CPIB action was seen at WP-run AHTC despite all the accusations. What's the difference?

NOT A GOVT ACTION BUT AN ACTION TAKEN BY AMK TOWN COUNCIL...

First, this probe is not an action taken by the government against the town council. This is an action taken by the the AMK Town Council against their general manager in response to a complaint.

ZERO TOLERANCE FOR CORRUPTION

PAP Town Councils hold themselves to a higher standard of zero tolerance for corruption.

Ang Mo Kio Town Council received a complaint against Victor Wong in September.

Chairman of AMK TC, Ang Hin Kee said that the nature of the complaint "relates to probable behaviour needing investigation done by CPIB". Thus the town council referred the case to CPIB.

IN CONTRAST

Despite the lapses flagged by AGO, and despite the findings of KPMG, and KPMG suggesting the possibility of criminal breach of trust, WP has REFUSED TO ACKNOWLEDGE that there are serious issues with their town council.

Instead WP has chosen to politicize the problems at their town council, to play victim and to insist that there was no wrongdoing.

ACCOUNTABILITY TO RESIDENTS UNDER THE TOWN COUNCIL ACT

AMK TC has held themselves accountable to their residents by referring the case to CPIB for possible wrongdoing.

AHTC on the other hand had gone the opposite way to fight tooth and nail in court to obstruct every investigation into their affairs dragging the investigations from months to years and still with no conclusion in sight.