I forgot all about the financial consumer advocacy association that Tan Kin Lian had set until one of his fan club's leading cheerleader raised this as an achievement. I was intrigued and to be fair to the chap, decided to look into it. I think also must have uncovered why he did not wait for the petition of 100,000 signatures to be done. And quietly buried the petition issue and still refuses to discuss it.
What a day, calling here and there to check and verify the facts ( or is smears in some language).
Tan Kin Lian announced the launch of the financial consumer advocacy group with much fanfare Straits Times on 26th Aug 2009. That is nearly 2 years ago as an independent, not for profit consumer advocacy association.
So how did the Association perform. I am sure we all can agree that the association progress and achievement would be a good barometer as we are looking at financial prudence, interest of the consumer in terms of investment and savings and fighting to protect their interest. Sounds familiar? So let's see what we can find out.
Guess what? The financial consumer advocacy association has become a training centre on investment and financial products no different to many that have sprung up over the years. It is performing poorly and the committee members are total unknowns.
More interestingly it is a one man show and it legal office and operating location is the same as Tan Kin Lian's private company. In fact it shares some common resources.
For a public interest association, advocating protecting consumer interest, there is no transparency in terms of membership numbers, attrition rate, no disclosure of AGM outcome, no disclosure of year end financials and the facts are so bare that any member of public will be wondering why all the secrecy.
After checking around, found out that they are struggling in terms of membership numbers and in terms of advocacy, the output is close to nil. One chap told me that it about 1,000 and most people don't renew after seeing it for themselves.
All this so far is not illegal. But one wonders besides the lack of transparency, is there a conflict interest. Is the membership and training programmes a ready catchment pool for associated business for associates and his company. Note the captive Market comment that I made about NTUC Income.
Go to the website of SIAS which found life after the CLOB disaster and founded by David Gerald. It's has a membership of 60,000. Note who are in it's committee and it's advisory board. Also note that information is readily available on their website. I always wondered why set up another organisation and advocacy group to cover the same area.
I am sure many of you all are aware that during the mini bond crisis, the establishment refused to acknowledge or reply to him as well a financial institutions. For someone who claims to have been approached by the establishment to run for Parliament, sounds a bit out of place. David Gerald was a total nobody and he ended up meeting ministers and regulators. He is also noted for forcing audit firms to come out with a more rigorous audit regime for financial investments.
Go figure.
No comments:
Post a Comment