Tan Kin Lian & the FISCA Mystery

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. 

Contact Tan Kin Lian privately?

He is running for public. I am not marrying his daughter or placing an investment with him. We Singaporeans should learn to debate in public. The Straits Times practices censorship in favour of the ruling party. Hardware zone is owned by SPH. Blogs owners control comments. There is only one forum that I know is pretty much free when it comes to Singapore Political discourse.

If he finds that anything that I said is false, he can always rebut it for everyone to see. Singaporeans who care enough have to ask themselves if all these makes sense. Do you use money from a workers cooperative to build a swimming pool. Do you use a workers cooperative funds and give away thousands of dollars to pay for RC noticeboards. I am sure you know RCs do when MPs come. The same RC and all grassroot organisation do not work with opposition MPs since JBJ broke PAP monopoly.

I have used the term "less capable" in a nice way to describe a range of Singaporeans some of who are naive, some are desperate because they feel short changed, and others just have no idea what happened in the past.

If someone uses workers" cooperative funds to build swimming pool or fund political activities in the west, they will be lynched. Only in Singapore, it is called jumping to conclusion. What do you think he is going to tell me in private? That he was actually working undercover for Worker Party and infiltrated the PAP to help the common man. If he refutes all this, then you can draw your conclusion. For all you know that he might come up with an explanation that the swimming pool contractor had lost a contract to a foreign talent and to save his kids and give them a good education, I ask him to build a pool.

Look who are the people who he is working with for EP. Anyone that you think is considered respectable or influential? He is well known in Singapore and he has never changed. Note where Sylvia, LTK, Chiam stand when it comes to him.

What have we learnt so far about Tan Kin Lian's Character?

1) Downplaying the role of his PAP past:
You can't hold the position of cadre, branch secretary, and CCC chairman in the 1980s unless you are a committed and dyed in the wool follower. These are no ordinary posts. When he was cadres, the number of cadres were few hundred. This was the inner circle of the PAP albeit not the all power CEC. This was the period when PAP hold on the country was its peak before Anson By Election disaster. It was also a period that number of people were under detention, there was no feedback unit and it was the PAP way or the highway.

2) 30 years in NTUC Income:
It obvious that most are not aware or forgot that NTUC Income began as a worker's cooperative. It was protected by the Govt and has had a natural captive market. In simple terms, it did not have to compete in the open market. Tan Kin Lian earned his wealth on the backs of ordinary workers and that includes taxi drivers. Unlike other candidates who had their own income and worked in the market place like 97% of Singaporeans, this man until his retirement enjoyed the benefits of a PAP protected company. It is common knowledge that many people find it revolting working for the PAP or its creation the NTUC. It is also common knowledge that potential PAP MPs are given jobs in NTUC when they are basically not marketable. Look at the type of MPs who are working in PAP. Irene Ho, Yeo Guat Kwang, Ong Ah Heng, and now including rejected candidates from Aljunied. Imagine during his tenure he managed to build a swimming pool in his office building while leading a workers cooperative.

3) Patronising the less able:
a) The office of EP is sterile and has little impact on the Govt of the day. The moment that he said that he will influence the investment decisions of the Govt, I knew we were dealing with a dishonest individual. The president has not powers, no means and no avenue on the investment decision of the Govt. The Chief Justice despite his role cannot influence the decision of the investing arm of the state. The President is also in the same. Why did Tan Kin Lian make this claim. It is playing to the gallery of the less able.

b) The office of EP is essentially a conventional ceremonial state with the added powers of holding the 2nd key. The moment he holds assent to a bill, attempts to go against the clemency advice of AG and the cabinet, we are going straight into a constitutional crisis. Is he capable of it. Yes but I suspect that it will be in his 5th year and one year before the expiry of term.

c) Giving up much of the salary of the President. This is another cheap and populist move, knowing full well the high salary is a major political timebomb for the PAP. What many are not aware is that the President's Purse is such that all his and that of his family needs are met from accommodation, food, clothing(yes clothings as well, suits, dressed), Golf are all taken care of. No money is needed. There is also an expense account for entertainment. He can invite and treat all his friends at the Istana on State expenses.

d) Intentionally confusing the role of an MP that represents his constituents and protect their needs to that of a President who is supposed to be a role model, a guardian of state assets and emblem of state institutions. The EP role does not sync with all his claim. His rhetoric suggest that the role he should have gone is that of an MP.

4) Target audience: So who are the less able that he has been misleading.They are not politically well versed, driven to desperation because this govt has failed them on issues of housing, CPF minimum sum etc and who are clutching as straws for relief. Tan Kin Lian knows full well that all these cannot be addressed. The Office of President does not allow the President to influence policies and the executive function of the state. If Tan Kin Lian honestly believes that he can act for the people in these areas, he should categorically state what he wants to do and how he is going to circumvent the limited role of the President to achieve these things.

5) His Conduct: Until his retirement, he enjoyed the benefits of a PAP member. He did not whisper an iota of discontent to anyone about this govt. When he retired in 2007, suddenly he painted himself as a dissident and expressed the desire to contest the Presidency in 2008. The climate began to turn against the PAP quite considerably since late 1990s. In 2006, the youth selected to have a dialogue with the old man, gave the despot a black eye on national TV and actually asked to step down from cabinet. Seems to me that having milked the PAP, he now in on a different bandwagon and blowing with the wind.

6) His contribution to society: I have asked this repeatedly and except for the mini-bonds which he does credit for, this guy has never done anything in the social or charity space. He actually donated money from the workers cooperative to put up RC notice boards for the benefit of the PAP.

Scroobal - Response to Tan Kin Lian

In my very first comment I revealed a series of facts which have never been refuted and also accompanied that we comments based on these facts. To his claims of "smears " I penned this;

Couple of observations in regard to his response to allegations of smear.

1) He needs to understand that there is distinct difference between smear and adverse comments or comments that are not flattering.

2) The following are facts;
- he was a branch secretary of Marine Parade which is the highest ranking party post after the MP in a constituency
- He was chairman of Marine CCC which is a political appointment and the most important committee in a constituency
- He was also the chairman of the Marine Parade Community Centre Management committee
- He was a cadre member of the PAP for 30 years
- He headed NTUC Income for 30 years
- NTUC is a political body and a sister organisation of PAP
- NTUC Income has a captive market share courtesy of the PAP and the Govt

The PAP does not give such posts to any Tom, Dick and Harry. While he was holding these posts, Chia Thye Poh was still a guest of the PAP.

3) Many people including PAP MPs have made comments that went against the Govt and PAP. They include Tan Cheng Bock, Wan Soon Bee , Tan Soo Khoon, Lily Kong etc. I can't recall Tan Kin Lian ever making an adverse comment that had similar impact or came close to that. Can anyone recall he ever doing prior to his retirement? All we can recall is that having enjoyed the fruits of PAP for over 30 years and after retirement, he is now claiming to be a freedom fighter. That's like asking a convicted pedophile who has reformed to run a kindergarten.

4) Thousands of people have written to the Press on many things and the majority are adverse comments. I can't recall a single letter of his and probably it was not earth shattering. By the way writing letters to the press does not earn anyone any credit or certainly the office of President. There has to be a clear pattern of thought and opinion and a distinct reputation is earned.

5) No one has accused him of not serving NTUC income policy holders. I am beginning to worry about his poor comprehension of English which is crucial if he is going to give assent to bills that will eventually become law. The claims are that NTUC Income has a captive market and he enjoyed the benefits of being a PAP member.

6) His claim that he was invited to be an MP twice but was declined can best be addressed by naming those who requested him to do so. It similar to me making the false claim that 2 cabinet ministers asking me to be MP. It is a hollow claim and notice how easily one can make the claim. Its common knowledge that Tan Kin Lian was asked to move on. I am sure if he was well regarded he will have no qualms naming the person or persons who asked him to be an MP. After all he is running for the highest public office and Singaporeans are keen to make an informed judgment. Those who approached him if they really value him would have no problem acting as referees.

7) The claim that he did not take up the offer of MP is that he was occupied by work. Tan Cheng Bock was running a medical practice. Davinder Singh, MD of Drew and Napier, all the cabinet ministers are not full time MP. What about Chiam, LTK and MAO. 99% of parlimentarians around the world have a day job. By the way NTUC Income is serving a captive market and it does not operate outside Singapore. Even at the time, there was no town councils to occupy the MP.

8) He was asked for his past history of being associated with social work and or charities. All he could claim was mini-bond. Quite a worry for someone who claims that he wants to help Singapore. People who bought mini-bonds are actually those who have savings and those who had surplus income. Not exactly a charitable act in my opinion.

As far as I can tell this guy has been moving around opposition parties and exploiting the gullibles ones for air time and exposure. Just go to Youtube and watch his rally speeches. No substance but general motherhood statements about fairness, Justice, equality etc. You be the judge.

Most importantly from his reply you can see that he likes obfuscating to make claims that he was unfairly smeared.

- Nobody ever claimed that he was branch secretary for 30 years. The claim was that he was enjoying the benefits of running NTUC Income for 30 years. He was also a PAP cadre member for 30 years.
- Nobody ever claimed that he was silent of issues. The claim was while enjoying the fruits of his time with PAP/NTUC for over 30 years he kept silent.
- Nobody ever claimed that he was ripping his policyholders. The claim was that he was given a captive market and enjoying it


Either he has poor comprehension of English or he is developing the art of obfuscation but quite poor it.

Tan Kin Lian's 2nd reply

This is Tan Kin Lian 2nd reply to comments made on the Robin Hood thread. On this occasion he replied directly instead of thru Goh Meng Seng. Again he has classified it as smear. I will pen my comments to this in subsequent posts

This is my reply to the author, scroobal.

Several people have asked the question why I decided to contest the Presidential Election and not the General Election, and I have given an honest answer. As you have observed (and so have many other people), I have done so reluctantly, but for the reason that I have stated - to give the voters a wider choice. I assure you that the journey has been very difficult for me personally.

It is all right if you prefer another candidate, but there is no need for you to give a negative interpretation to my statements and engage in a smear on my character. I suggest that you contact me at kinlian@gmail.com and get the facts or my perspective, before you jump to your conclusions and make your judgement. In any case, if you do have to make a judgement on other people, you should exercise fairness and impartiality.

I also ask you to check with people you know, who may be PAP cadres - but not MPs. They will tell you how much real influence they have in the policy making of the party. In my case, my influence is close to none, in spite of being a cadre for almost 30 years.

Tan Kin Lian - Robin Hood Complex

This is his latest media release. Sounds like a confused man. Look at each individual comment. Bear in mind these are his comments with nothing changed. And he wants to be head of state. Illusion of grandeur?

- I did not want to contest the general election as I did not like to spend time to run a town council, if I were elected. ( he thinks he might be elected as an MP)

- I was also not yet ready to join any of the political parties – until their leaders agreed to merge and build their membership base. ( once all the opposition parties merge, he will join and do what?)

- Initially, I did not want to contest the presidential election either. I changed my mind after receiving requests from many people to stand and offer them a chance to vote. (who are these people and how many are pushing this reluctant man)

- They said that I was one of the few non-PAP people that might be able to get the certificate of eligibility (god's gift to Singapore)

- After Dr. Tan Cheng Bock expressed interest, I decided also to join in. My reasoning was that it would be difficult for the “powers” to disqualify both candidates but it would be easier for them to find the reason to disqualify a single candidate. ( he things that Tan Cheng Bock might be disqualified if he was only candidate from anti Govt camp.)

- I would be quite happy to lose the election. (gracious in defeat)

- Some people may prefer some other candidates and not me, but that is all right. ( wow, humble)

- There is really no need for them to insult me or smears my character or reputation ( highly respected individual ?)

- I hope that right minded people will stop these bad behavior. (wrong minded people please carry on)

Friday, June 24, 2011
Contesting the Presidential Election

Some people commented in some blogs that it would have been better for me to participate in the general election, rather than the presidential election. I like to explain my decision.

I did not want to contest the general election as I did not like to spend time to run a town council, if I were elected. I was also not yet ready to join any of the political parties – until their leaders agreed to merge and build their membership base.

Initially, I did not want to contest the presidential election either. I changed my mind after receiving requests from many people to stand and offer them a chance to vote. (They said that I was one of the few non-PAP people that might be able to get the certificate of eligibility).

After Dr. Tan Cheng Bock expressed interest, I decided also to join in. My reasoning was that it would be difficult for the “powers” to disqualify both candidates but it would be easier for them to find the reason to disqualify a single candidate.

I acknowledge that I do not have the same “class” or “charisma” as Dr. Tony Tan. If that is what the people of Singapore wants, I would be quite happy to lose the election.

I can only offer to the people the chance to vote for a candidate who is willing to listen to the people and reflect their aspirations, have an independent approach to the decisions that have to be made by the President’s office (and not be confrontational to the Government) and able to use my knowledge to safeguard their CPF money and the national reserves.

Some people may prefer some other candidates and not me, but that is all right. There is really no need for them to insult me or smears my character or reputation. (I refer to defamatory remarks and smears posted against me in some blogs or websites or being circulated by e-mail. I hope that right minded people will stop these bad behavior.)

Tan Kin Lian

Tan Kin Lian - An Opportunist? Let see the Facts

This guy from day one was with the PAP. He was appointed as the CEO of NTUC INcome the captive Insurance organisation for all NTUC and Govt associated organisation in 1977. He stepped down from NTUC Income in 2007, 30 years. This was the period where NTUC Income started muscling in and got unprecedented access to army camps and work places that others Insurers did not have. So who provided the access. The govt gave this guy a career and a lifestyle on a silver platter.


Tan was also one of the first cadre members of the PAP and was also the long reigning Branch Secretary of Marine Parade PAP. Those who are not familiar, the position is the highest political ranking for the PAP in a constituency. The only higher is the MP. It was also this reason why all new MP automatically become a PAP cadre member in order to control the Branch secretary. Get this he was elected in 1977 when Chia Thye Poh, Dr Lim Hock Siew and a whole host of people were rotting in prison.


Tan is no ordinary PAP member. He was part of the main machinary. He was already a branch secretary when PAP abuses were growing unabated.

In course of 30 over years, while drawing easy income in view of its captive market, this guy never uttered a single word, never even farted in a wayward way. Even more interesting is that his circle of friends were all establishment figures. An believe me it is common knowledge.

It is also common knowledge when he became disgruntled when it was made known to him that he would not become an MP. He was told this more 15 years ago yet carried on dutifully.

Here is the part where I think we are dealing with a dishonest individual. His campaign on the mini-bonds. His colleagues and those who knew him were surprised as he happily enjoyed the fruit of a regime and did not cast a doubt in accepting them.

Larry Havercamp, a Wharton MBA, and economist and with SMU revealed how NTUC and others in Singapore abused their position in creating many of the instruments including the way they treated unclaimed monies.

Imagine, he retires and suddenly we are looking at Mother Theresa. The fact that he has managed to bring NSP, SDP and WP together and used their names to declare his candidacy shows what an opportunist and manipulator that this guy is. WP which has been cautious unlike SDP and NSP, finally fell into his trap by asking one of the WP senior chaps to collect the nomination forms. Imagine a retiree is too busy to collect nomination forms.

In comparison, Tan Cheng Bock from his first day in office, was screwed by GKS and old man and continued to be screwed during his tenure in office.

Tell me what did he exactly do that Tan Kin Lian before his retirement and after he could no longer milk the establishment office that one thinks as anything close to dissension or even a sensible suggestion to improve the lot of Singaporeans.

Even when he was meeting political activists, he could not help himself and even tried selling torchlights etc.