May 24, 2018

Hyflux’s fall from grace: What went wrong

5 comments

 

 

Hyflux Innovation Centre at Bendemeer.

 

SINGAPORE — The woes of water-treatment company Hyflux, once a market darling and much-vaunted trailblazer in Singapore's entrepreneurial space, have been festering for some time, market watchers and corporate governance experts said on Wednesday (May 23).

 

However, the company and its board failed to pay enough attention to its finances as it put the pedal to the metal in expanding its footprint, the observers told TODAY.

 

On Tuesday, Hyflux announced it was seeking court protection to reorganise its business and deal with its liabilities. It also suspended trading of its shares and related securities.

 

The aim was to allow the company to focus on ongoing talks with strategic investors, optimise operations, nail down areas for growth and complete projects to generate steady cash flow, said the company, which recently posted its first-ever yearly loss since its public listing in 2001.

 

Associate Professor Lawrence Loh, from the National University of Singapore (NUS) Business School, called the reorganisation "long overdue", as the signs were clear for some time: Hyflux's stock has tumbled to about S$0.20 a share, one-tenth of the price in its heyday. "But it's better late than never," said Assoc Prof Loh.

 

Synonymous with the company, its founder and group chief executive Olivia Lum, who is also executive chairman, has over the years built a steady record and propelled the firm to global prominence, with operations and projects spanning the Asia-Pacific, Middle East, Africa and the Americas.

 

Hyflux founder Olivia Lum speaking at the opening ceremony of Singapore’s second and largest desalination plant, Tuaspring Desalination Plant. TODAY file photo

 

Despite her stellar record, observers have raised questions over whether corporate governance and risk management practices had been adequate.

 

Assoc Prof Loh, who is director of the NUS Business School's Centre for Governance, Institutions and Organisations, pointed out that Hyflux's risk management committee met only once in the 2017 financial year.

 

By contrast, its audit committee met four times, and its investment, nominating and remuneration committees each gathered twice in the same financial year, checks by TODAY showed.

 

Assoc Prof Loh said the company needs to beef up its risk management, as it has to make large and risky investments at times.

 

NUS corporate governance expert Mak Yuen Teen said it was "not enough" for a risk management committee to convene just once a year. "I would ask whether they were actually effective, because what can you do once a year?" he said.

 

The nature of Hyflux's business, its heavy debt pile and rapid growth meant that risk management was key for the company, added Assoc Prof Mak. "Most committees, I expect them to meet at least three or four times in a year to be meaningful," he said.

 

Then there is also the issue of whether Hyflux's board of directors had asked the right questions and challenged corporate decisions in the face of a dominant figure like Ms Lum, who has "strong ideas and a strong mind", said Assoc Prof Mak.

 

He noted that in companies helmed by founders, there was the chance that the founders would either fail to listen to the views of their directors or do not have the "right kind of directors" serving on their boards, because they want to push their ideas through.

 

Hyflux's eight-member board includes two former employees. Non-executive independent director Christopher Murugasu was Hyflux's senior vice-president for corporate services and Mr Gary Kee, a non-executive non-independent director, was its executive director overseeing areas such as corporate finance and information technology.

 

Assoc Prof Loh said that in general, it was not good practice to have ex-employees serve on boards, because boards are meant to "represent the shareholder, and monitor the management and employees". "It doesn't square with the fundamental purpose of a board," he said.

 

Agreeing, Assoc Prof Mak said former employees are also unlikely to question Ms Lum's decisions. "If they are former employees, would they feel that they are in a position to challenge management?" he asked.

TODAY has reached out to Ms Lum and some of the company's independent directors for comment. When contacted, law professor and independent board director Simon Tay declined comment.

 

More at https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/hyfluxs-fall-grace-what-went-wrong

May 24, 2018

10 prominent Singaporeans who graduated from Hwa Chong Junior College

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/10-prominent-singaporeans-who-graduated-from-hwa-chong-junior-college

7. Olivia Lum, 53

 

Ms Lum is the executive chairman and Group CEO of Hyflux Ltd, a company that she built from scratch back in 1989.

A former Nominated Member of Parliament, she is a plucky individual, having overcome a financially disadvantaged childhood to become the acclaimed entrepreneur that she is today.

 

May 26, 2018

So many established Sinkie companies haemorrhaging badly of late........what the hell is going on???

May 26, 2018

About time to say RIP Hyflux?

 

 

New Posts
  • SPF STATEMENT ON AWARE’S FACEBOOK POST CRITICISING SPF’S CRIME PREVENTION POSTER We refer to comments made by AWARE on Police crime prevention posters, warning against outrage of modesty. These posters are displayed on the public transport network. These posters are part of crime prevention visuals that the Police have produced in collaboration with the National Crime Prevention Council and Singapore Polytechnic’s Media, Arts & Design School. Other crimes such as shop theft and dishonest misappropriation of property are also featured in these visuals. These visuals target potential perpetrators, and specifically highlight the punishments for committing the criminal acts, in order to send a strong deterrent message. AWARE has criticised the posters, on the basis that they focus on the punishment, and do not refer to the harm suffered by the victim. AWARE does not seem to have understood the purpose of the posters. The posters are designed to warn would-be offenders, who are unable to exercise self discipline or control themselves, regardless of their knowledge of the harm that their act will cause to the victim. The visuals were designed to influence their behaviour, by telling them what punishment they will face. AWARE’s suggestion, on the other hand, is unlikely to have the intended deterrent effect on such offenders. The Police fully acknowledge that outrage of modesty victims suffer from trauma and other consequences. Indeed, and for this reason, the objective of these visuals is to prevent such harmful actions in the first place, by driving home the point that outrage of modesty is an egregious offence with serious penalties. Hence, our crime prevention messages are carefully curated, based on our understanding of the profile of offenders. It is unfortunate that AWARE has chosen to make these public judgements against the Police without any attempt to contact us to understand our perspective, despite having worked with us in the past to enhance support to victims of sexual offences. https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10159102575364408&id=56706929407
  • Facebook user Gerard Ong has joined the chorus of criticism against the DPM with a critique that has garnered over 400 reactions and more than 300 shares on social media. A lengthy Facebook post criticising Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat over his dismal performance in Parliament last week is trending online. DPM Heng, who is expected to succeed Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and become Singapore’s fourth head of government after the next election, is widely considered the head of the ruling People’s Action Party’s (PAP) fourth-generation (4G) slate of leaders. Last week, he introduced a motion in Parliament to get Workers’ Party (WP) politicians Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim to recuse themselves from the financial matters of their Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC). Instead of scoring a win for his party, Mr Heng fumbled. Multiple parties who were present in the House and those who watched the proceedings online noted that Mr Heng struggled to defend his motion when confronted with the WP’s position that they will be appealing the High Court decision in the apex court. A visibly flustered Mr Heng eventually called for an abrupt time-out in the middle of the proceedings. His hour-long speech introducing his motion was also called “rambling” and his closing remarks were considered “garbled” by those who were in the gallery. Prime Ministe Lee Hsien Loong was also seen looking exasperated as he coached Mr Heng on what to say. Facebook user Gerard Ong has joined the chorus of criticism against the DPM with a critique that has garnered over 400 reactions and more than 300 shares on social media. In a post published last Thursday (7 Nov), Mr Ong noted that this is not the first time Mr Heng has faced a roadblock during a parliamentary clash with WP chairman Sylvia Lim: “In March 2018, it was the trial balloon saga where Heng Swee Keat (HSK) asked Sylvia Lim to apologise and withdraw her allegation on the timing of the GST hike. Now he is asking her and Low Thia Khiang to recuse themselves from the town council’s financial matters. “Being a legal practitioner, Sylvia knew the motion was not legally binding and refused to do so. Besides if she did, it would clearly indicate to some degree that they were dishonest and untruthful in safeguarding public funds that were entrusted to them. “In both incidents HSK went head-on into two roadblocks when it was totally unnecessary for him to do so. Under parliamentary rules he did not breach any rules. But HSK should have known that Sylvia was not going to budge as she knew where she stood by the rules of the house as well. “What HSK must understand is when one apologises it really means one has done wrong. If Sylvia feels that she has done no wrong and has not profited from it why should she make statements or carry out actions to indicate her wrong doing? “In this case the courts have decided but the ruling will only be absolute when the appeal is heard and the final ruling given. This is called due process of law which in essence prohibits the government from taking any action against its citizens or agents of the government until a final verdict is delivered by the apex court.” Asserting that Mr Heng has shown once again that “he is still an amateur at the game,” Mr Ong wondered why he chose this course of action and speculated about whether Mr Heng was trying to prove himself to his party members. Pointing out that neither the current PM or the immediate past PM were very good examples of strong leaders, the netizen asserted that one who is high-handed is not necessarily a good leader: “HSK has again shown his hand that he is still an amateur at the game. I fail to understand why he adopted this latest course of action. I wonder who was his audience? Was it the Prime Minister, the cabinet and fellow PAP MPs? Was he trying to show them that as heir to the PAP throne, he is indeed a worthy successor to LHL? “What he should realise is LHL and GCT are not very good examples of strong and decisive PMs. The only reason GCT survived was because LKY was Senior Minister and Minister Mentor from 1990 to 2011, he provided the backbone to these two PMs. “Well we know why LHL became PM and how he has performed. But at least LHL has pretty decent oratorical skills and is articulate. “HSK must now realise that being high-handed does not mean you are a good leader. Look at what people are saying on the internet of his recent spat with Sylvia. A good leader knows when to open up and when to take decisive action.” Opining that Mr Heng, who also serves as Finance Minister, may be good with numbers but may not be a good leader for the people, Mr Ong added: “Good leaders always take calculated risks and aim to win. Poor leaders always stumble because they have not thought through their intended decisions and its ramifications. HSK is in essence a numbers man but not a good leader of people. “Richard Hu who was Finance Minister from 1985 to 2001 was a classic example of a behind the scenes numbers man. Although he was eloquent, he was not a leader in the true sense of the word. “Goh Keng Swee was a brilliant economist and blue-skies man but was inept as a public speaker. They were in reality good planners and visionary political leaders. Men like them knew they were never good PM material.” Calling Mr Heng an “uninspiring leader who is unable to galvanise his followers,” Mr Ong said that the DPM’s “lack of presence” and poor communication skills worry him given the geo-political situation in the region: “HSK from his recent showings is an uninspiring leader who is unable to galvanise his followers. He lacks presence and his communicative skills are below par. This worries me as the world has become a dangerous place. “The geopolitical situation in the Asia Pacific has become less stable. The rise of China and its military prowess is a cause of worry as China knows that whatever we may say or do, we are still in the American camp. “The wheels are still churning up north as well. If you have watched recent political developments you will see alliances being struck between old enemies. As yet we still do not know who will succeed Mahathir. “In Indonesia, Joko Widodo has appointed his political rival, Prabowo Subianto as his Defence Minister as well as others who were against the President in the hustings. These developments could affect the immediate political relationship over areas such as airspace management, defence arrangements, border controls and the like. “At a time like this we need a decisive leader who is smart at navigating and taking on the challenges which will surely come our way. A leader who is also compassionate and one who puts his country, his people and party (in that order) before himself. “In this day and age of electronic media broadcasts and TV, a leader must have excellent communicative skills. This is definitely a veto quality in my books. “Why Singapore did well from 1965 onwards was because we had LKY and a very able cabinet in our formative years. When LKY spoke, you can’t help but listen. Not only was he bright but he was street- smart and competent as well. His cabinet comprised able and selfless men who were up to the job. “They knew how the game was played. In the past there was no internet and social media in existence, so we all pulled the oars together. But those days are gone. Singaporeans are better educated, and more vocal. We are better informed and more exposed to the world at large. “Many of us have become “critical lovers” of Singapore. Our political leaders must remember that when we criticise our leaders it does not mean we are disloyal to our country or ungrateful for what the PAP has done for Singapore.” Pointing out that the times have changed and the people want more of a say in how the country is run, Mr Ong said that it may be good for Singapore in the long-term to elect an capable opposition in Parliament so that the ruling party will also rely on capable and decisive leaders: “But times have changed, the world has changed and our leaders must go with the change. Being high-handed in governance is passé We all want to have a better say in how our country is run. “In the next election, if members of the opposition are voted in, they will also be held accountable for their words and deeds. Perhaps it may be good for us in the long run to have a capable opposition in parliament as it will make for a better PAP with capable and decisive leaders who will understand that a one-party state is a thing of the past!” http://theindependent.sg/hsk-is-an-uninspiring-leader-who-is-still-an-amateur-at-the-game-criticism-against-dpm-heng-trends-online/

2019 © All Rights Reserved | PROLIFIC SKINS

No part of this website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied, modified or adapted, without the prior written consent of the site administrator, unless otherwise indicated for stand-alone materials.

Commercial use and distribution of the contents of the website is not allowed without express and prior written consent of the site administrator. All other logos, products, services and company names mentioned in the PROLIFIC SKINS website are trademarks of their respective owners and subject to their own copyright laws, foreign or domestic.

For clarifications on any other sharing-related concerns, please use the contact form provided on this site.