We have successfully conducted our Singapore Budget 2019 Forum today.

We thank all who have attended and also great appreciation to those who have helped to make this possible.

The following is our official statement on PAP government's Budget this year:

Budget 2019: Political Gimmicks without Bold Vision

Expansionary Budget with Money locked up in CPF and Medisave?

1. Finance Minister Heng Swee Kiat has declared that his Budget 2019 for Singapore government is an “Expansionary” budget and he cited the projected budget deficit of $3.5 Billion after taking into account of the net effect NIRC and Special Transfers of $3.6 Billion as supporting fact. However when we put the details of the Budget at closer examination, we have come to the conclusion that this Budget is NOT the usual “Expansionary” budget but just full of political gimmicks without bold vision.

2. A government Budget is an important tool of fiscal policy that is used to manage the economy. An Expansionary Budget would result in fiscal stimulations of the Nation’s economy in anticipation or direct mitigation of any potential economic slowdown or recession. But in Minister Heng’s Budget 2019, there is no mention of any job creation initiative nor bold vision for Singapore’s Future Economic development direction.
3. Most of the “additional spending” announced for the populistic Merdeka package ($6.1B), Long Term Care ($5.1B) and other the various injections of money into healthcare, workfare, schemes for SMEs ($4.6B) and education (Total of $15.3B of Special Transfers) are either just money transfers credited into CPF or Medisave accounts or deferred expenditure across a few years which do not have an immediate direct impact on overall spending in the economy.

4. It basically means that these money are effectively an “expected surplus” (over the announced $3.5B deficit) ultimately stashed away into the reserves via such Special Transfers arrangement.

5. Thus we do not really see this year’s Budget as “Expansionary” but rather a pack of Budgeting Acrobatic Gimmicks which channeled money back into the reserves masqueraded as “Goodies” for Singaporeans without real positive impact on the Economy.

Cost of Living

6. In a normal free market economy, inflation is normally caused by an excess demand on goods and services. This will drive up the cost of living for everyone.

7. However, in Singapore, inflation is mostly caused by the PAP government and its Government Linked Companies. The rise in water tax, electricity tariffs, public transport fares, healthcare cost, the rapid increase in rentals by GLC REITS, petrol and diesel prices etc. are the direct results of PAP governance.

8. How could the derisory $300 GST voucher cover the inflation caused by all these increases?

9. The BEST gift to ALL Singaporeans is NO GST instead of GST vouchers!


Cost of Healthcare

10. Any increase in healthcare subsidies for Merdeka generation could easily be offset by another round of increase fees in polyclinics and public hospitals.

11. We have witnessed how fees at public polyclinics and hospitals increased right after the last Pioneer Generation Package was announced in 2015.

12. At many instances, the fees at these public “restructured” healthcare entities are even higher than private clinics or hospitals before subsidies were taken into account.

13. There is a need to rethink whether the current model of “Restructured Hospitals” really serve Singaporeans’ interests at all.



Adverse Impact on SME

14. There are a couple of new but insignificant programs initiated in this year’s budget to help SME and workers to cope with changing dynamics of the economics.

15. However, out of the $4.6B slated to help both SMEs and workers over next three years, only $100million was put into funds for helping SMEs to upscale.

16. Although we agree to the overall strategy of reducing dependency of Foreign Workers in the long run, but we do not think it is a good move at all to apply such one-size-fit-all policy of reducing the Dependency Ratio Ceiling to cut across the board for the whole Service Sector.

17. Local SMEs are always grossly disadvantaged by the foreign workers policy whereby larger foreign companies enjoy concessions through government special incentives or technical advantage in sourcing their foreign labor via internal transfers from foreign bases.


Where are the Good Jobs?

18. Within the Service Sector, there are many sub-sectors which have very different labor situations. Singaporeans generally shy from certain industry or service sectors like hospitality, Food and Beverage sectors while there is a great underemployment for Singapore PMETs who cannot find jobs in other service sectors like banking, finance or IT etc.

19. A more calibrated approach should be implemented to focus more on reclaiming PMET jobs for Singaporeans in service sector instead.


Tax Cut for Taxi Companies while Higher Tax on Taxi Drivers?

20. The increase of diesel tax will affect SMEs greatly with an increase in business cost despite of the cut in road tax for diesel vehicles.

21. We are particular concerned on the impact on taxi drivers. While the PAP government gave a generous reduction in Special Tax on Diesel Taxi by $850, but this may only benefit taxi companies while taxi drivers suffer higher diesel price due to the double of diesel tax.


The Real Vision and Plan to Cut Pollution

22. A great percentage of commercial vehicles used in Singapore runs on diesel engines. The increase of Diesel Tax will not have significant effect on lowering the consumption of diesel for these commercial vehicles because the demand is totally inelastic.

23. Raising Diesel Tax now without providing a viable alternative to businesses will only result in a drastic rise in business cost. This may affect our leading position as logistic hub in Southeast Asia.

24. PAP government lacks the bold vision to explore clean alternatives for commercial vehicles running on diesel.

25. The key problem with diesel engines lies with the toxic cancer-causing nitrogen oxide emission. Thus we should phase out diesel vehicles from our roads totally instead of just raising diesel tax.

26. In fact, our long term plan should aim to reduce air pollution on the roads by phasing out both petrol and diesel vehicles totally by replacing them with electric vehicles.

27. Instead of harming our SMEs and economy by raising diesel tax now, we should be putting more investment and focus efforts to implement a comprehensive plan to promote electric vehicles by building relevant infrastructures and battery waste management system.

28. Singapore is lagging behind countries like China and Norway when it comes to implementation of a systematic plan of replacing diesel and petrol vehicles by electric vehicles to cut down harmful air pollution. This is due to the lack of bold vision and political will of PAP leadership.


CPF Inadequacy

29. About 75% of retirees are getting less than $500 from CPF payout. This is totally inadequate which resulted in many retirees living in absolute poverty.

30. It is an irony that Singaporeans had paid 37% of their monthly salary into CPF but yet they could not retire comfortably with a good payout from CPF.

31. It basically means that the CPF system along with the HDB and Medisave policies had failed to secure a decent retirement for most Singaporeans.

32. This will have to be looked into and only with Bold Vision could a government come up with bold plans to revamp the whole structure.


Long Term Care for Ageing Population

33. We will be facing the Silver Tsunami very soon when the baby boomers from 1950s to 1970s start to reach retirement age.

34. Putting billions into funds as future subsidies is a passive act which lack forward looking planning vision.

35. We would rather spend these billions now to build up both infrastructure and human resource capacity for long term care to prepare for the inevitable Silver Tsunami in the coming decade.


Pre-School Childcare and Education vs Fertility

36. The cost of Pre-school education is extremely high even after subsidies.

37. This is one important factor among the many issues that cause low fertility rate in Singapore.

38. Instead of putting more money in Edusave, it is time to focus to solve this pertaining issue of Pre-school education.

39. A cheap or even free Pre-school education system for all will also level up for children from poor families which will improve future potential social mobility.


Our Concerns:

HDB

40. There is no mention on any plan for PAP to resolve the huge problems which they have created in the past via Asset Enhancement Scheme.

41. No funds is allocated for any initiative on solving the time bomb of a huge stock of ageing HDB flats in the coming decades.

42. On the contrary, the Ministry of National Development has the biggest cut in its budget by 19.3%!


Financing Huge Infrastructure Spending via Borrowing

43. It is mentioned that part of the huge infrastructure spending like Changi Terminal 5 will be partially financed by borrowings.

44. It is also mentioned that Government will provide guarantee to these loans.

45. Is there a necessity for Government to finance such infrastructure spending when we have a huge National Reserve well above $500B?

46. Financing such infrastructure through borrowing would mean such spending on extremely expensive mega projects will escape rigorous scrutiny by parliament while the government has taken up huge potential liability as a guarantor.

47. The lack of accountability to parliament when the government takes up such huge liability will result in unchecked ex-Budget spending which could go wrong.


Conclusion: A Budget that Lacks Bold Vision

48. We are utterly disappointed by this year’s Budget which basically mimics the 2015 Election Budget without Bold Visions and lacks New Ideas.

49. This Budget contains a pack of gimmicks that attempt to make Singaporeans feel good and make believe that they had gained something substantial from it. However, most of these goodies are deferred goodies.

50. Unfortunately, these political gimmicks are done at the expense of the need of REAL immediate expenditures on various areas which we have listed out here.

51. Singaporeans deserve a better deal than what the current Budget could offer.
52. The reduction of GST relief and duty free alcohol concession for travelers is the best key feature to sum up this Budget 2019 – Small Mindedness without Bold Vision.

Goh Meng Seng
Secretary General
For CEC People’s Power Party Singapore

People's Power Party New Year Message 2019

People's Power Party New Year Message 2019

2018 is a terribly challenging year for Singapore’s Democratic development. Although 2018 is coming to an end but we believe the Democratic situation will further worsen in 2019.

The Online Citizen and The Independent have been targeted by the PAP Administration and its proxy, NTUC, which has claimed to have “symbiotic relationship” with PAP. On the other hand, while we would support the Prime Minister to sue States Time Review (STR) and its editor for the criminal defamatory report which it has put up, we have reservations over the use of the Administrative power to geo-block the site altogether. This has created a precedent for PAP to geo-block any site which is critical of it. We also have great reservation over the Prime Minister’s decision to sue someone who has been misled by the report and had mistakenly shared it. The Prime Minister should take legal actions against STR and its editor instead.

We believe that the various acts are aimed to send chilling fear to Singapore dissidents and opposition supporters to curb their sharing of legitimate criticisms and anti-PAP commentaries. PAP’s intention to pass the “Fake News” law in 2019 is also an attempt to curb freedom of speech and expression. Any narrative that is contrary to PAP’s version could well be classified as “Fake News” and this law will give PAP the power to charge anyone who dare to put up such narratives!

On the other hand, we are also extremely concerned of the competency of the 4G leaders of PAP in dealing with important and sensitive diplomatic issues with our neighbouring countries. The recent unnecessary over-reaction to the sea boundary dispute as well as the dispute over airspace control has exposed the pure diplomatic incompetency and potentially dangerous political posturing of PAP’s 4G leaders. While Singaporeans understand the need to close rank and stand united when we face external threats but we will always want to stand on the higher moral grounds. There is absolutely no necessity to fan frenzy Nationalistic feelings when such fire may get out of control and translate into mindless agitations on the ground which in turn result in irreparable damage on bilateral relationship.

It is well known to the world that Singapore has the strongest arm forces in this region and there is absolutely no necessity to flex our muscle in demonstration of protest towards any surrounding country over any issues. Diplomacy has always been the pillar of our success as a small Nation in establishing a network of strength and support in both mutually beneficial economic and political development with other countries in the world. The 4G leaders of PAP must be reminded that our military might is established to prevent war and provide stability instead of starting any war or for bullying others into submission.

Looking forward into 2019, we hope that PAP will garner the wisdom and help from people with more experience in diplomacy to deal with bilateral disputes with Malaysia.

We do not expect PAP to change its strategic attempt to curb Freedom of Expression on the New media but we believe that only a good beating of PAP in the coming General Elections in 2019 or 2020 will send a strong message to PAP that it doesn’t pay to do more harm to the Nation’s Democratic development. PAP’s broken promise of “Light Touch” on internet chatters has turned into “Deadly Touch”.

We also foresee a dark economic cloud over the horizon for 2019 but under PAP’s rule, cost of living and business cost have increased tremendously over the past few years. They have just increased public transport fares despite of lower fuel price and the millions of indirect subsidies given to public transport companies! Singapore has remained as the most expensive city in the world for a few years now. This is the result when Singaporeans gave PAP too much of a mandate in GE 2015.

We believe that a combination of High Cost and Economic Downturn will hit Singaporeans very hard if PAP doesn’t change its High Cost policies soon.

Singapore is going to face a very challenging time ahead in 2019. We hope that Singaporeans will stand united and keep PAP in checks in order to get it on to the right path of Democratic and Economic development for Singapore.

Wishing Every Singaporean a Happy New Year 2019

Goh Meng Seng
Secretary General
People’s Power Party

Rebuttal to PM Lee's comment on HDB Leasehold is the same as Private Property

Rebuttal to PM Lee's comment on HDB Leasehold is the same as Private Property

Our PM Lee has made the following comment during a book launch:

"I find this argument frankly amazing. Many private properties are held on 99-year leases too, and yet nobody argues that they are merely being rented," said Mr Lee. "HDB lessees have all the rights over their flats that owners of such leasehold private properties have. You can live in it, you can transact it, you can bequeath it to you children. In fact HDB owners enjoy extra privileges because HDB flats get upgraded from time to time, with generous government funding."


1) Manay Private Properties are held on 99 year leases but they do have FULL rights to their properties and LAND. Eg. they could FENCE up their properties, decide on their own landscaping, rent out their properties without much restrictions, decide on their own when and how much they could sell their properties and do Enbloc redevelopment.

2) Private Properties owners also own their land for that leasehold period with strata tittles accorded.

3) However, HDB lessees DO NOT own their land with strata titles. Could PM Lee provide the proof that HDB lessees own their land with strata titles?

4) HDB lessees DO NOT have FULL rights to their HDB flats. They only have LIMITED rights, restricted by all the HDB rules, regulations and law.

5) HDB lessees cannot decide anything about the land their HDB land sits on. They cannot fence their blocks up or employ security guards.

6) Even when it comes to Enbloc, only HDB could decide when it could be done and only HDB could buy back all the HDB flats for Enbloc.

7) HDB Lessees cannot even sell their flats FREELY to anyone, unlike Private Properties.

8) Ironically, since HDB is the LAND LORD which owns the all the land that HDB flats sit on, why should HDB lessees be asked to pay part of the upgrading fees? It is the responsible of the LAND OWNER to maintain the infrastructure built on the land, is it not? How could PM Lee turn around and said that HDB lessees are enjoying some "privilege" of "heavily subsidized" upgrading when it was the other way round, HDB lessees made to subsidize the upgrading work which is supposed to be the Land Owner's aka HDB's obligations?

9) Fundamentally, there are GREAT differences between the 99 Year leasehold between a Private Properties vs HDB flats.

Goh Meng Seng

Statement On The Disruptions to the Singapore Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) System 16 Nov 2017

Statement On The Disruptions to the Singapore Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) System

Our national transportation had been beleaguered with issues since 2011, which in the early days had mostly been only delays and unexpectedly longer travel duration. However, issues encountered recently by the SMRT were more varied, unusual and were of much greater concern.

Such concerns were overwhelming to the extent that the 30th anniversary of the inception of the MRT system in Singapore was not even mentioned as such.

It is appreciated that the Minister for Transport, Mr Khaw Boon Wan had recently cited overpopulation as being the root cause of these issues. The acceptance though is long overdue and patently insufficient. Mere acknowledgement of the possible effects of the overpopulation which could have led to the transportation system woes, should not simply end with just that.

A much more detailed and thorough study would be in order given the duration the problems pertaining the MRT system had been lingering. The study would enable the identification of the actual state of the system, especially the North-South and the East-West lines which were first opened and had been operating for 30 years.

The various avenues which could possibly have had caused the deterioration of the system should be subjected to detailed study by competent authorities with the appropriate expertise. Such expertise, if needed should be procured from other train operators with experience in handling systems of similar complexity. Failure to carry out the study could cause speculations to continue as a consequence of the specific causes on the disruptions not been clearly identified.

Not carrying out the necessary steps could also result in the gradual worsening of the system, as we had seen in the recent episodes of train service disruptions. These could cause a further waste of time and resources, and worse, linger on as a possible hazard.

As such, our Party is seeking the matter be studied by a commission tasked to inquire further into the causes of the train disruptions, in view of all the possible difficulties and the hazards faced by people.

Sivakumaran Chellappa
Vice Chairman & Head of Policy Research
People’s Power Party (PPP), Singapore
For CEC

People’s Power Party (PPP) Statement on Singapore Presidential Elections 2017

Date: 12 Sep 2017

For Immediate Release:

People’s Power Party (PPP) Statement on Singapore Presidential Elections 2017

The Elections Department announced on 11th of September 2017 that Madam Halimah Yacob is set to be the 8th President of the Republic Singapore, having been the only potential candidate to have been issued both the Malay Community Certificate and the Certificate of Eligibility.

This means that the other two presidential hopefuls, Mr Mohamed Salleh Marican and Mr Farid Khan were not successful in their application to stand although both gentlemen had also been issued the Malay Community Certificate each. Both had failed to satisfy the ridiculously stringent criteria imposed upon private sector applicants.

The People’s Power Party (PPP), first of all, would like to express gratitude to both gentlemen who had bravely stepped forward to provide an opportunity for Singapore citizens to choose their next Elected President reserved for the Malay community. Mr Salleh and Mr Farid had subjected themselves to be scrutinised by the public with regard to their “Malayness” since they are of Indian and Pakistani by descent respectively. Madam Halimah, though technically an Indian by descent, have had her “Malayness” certified four times over in general elections previously.

PPP views this latest development of PE2107 as opportunity denied to both private sector candidates since the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC) has discretionary powers. We also note the administrative manipulation of what could have been a participatory democracy.

First and foremost, the virtue of Reserved Presidential Elections had been eclipsed by the notion that the Malays are not capable of winning in an open contest. The Malays of Singapore are actually sick of such tokenism. To add salt to injury, the “Malayness” of Presidential hopefuls are being questioned by the general public and subjected to a special committee to certify that they are Malays.

Mr Salleh and Mr Farid should be lauded as successful self-made men who are truly non-partisan and independent. That cannot be said of Madam Halimah, who, despite of her claim to not be serving any political party after stepping down as Speaker of Parliament just about a month ago, would always be seen to be beholden to her supposedly erstwhile political masters. This indebtedness would forever be etched in the memory of Singapore for generations to come should she submit her nomination forms this Wednesday, 23rd of September 2017.

When victory is declared on a battle not fought, there is no glory nor dignity.

While we could grudgingly accept that this may be a Reserved Presidential Elections for the Malay but we definitely could not agree with the blatant political ploy to turn it into Reserved President for PAP’s Halimah!

While Dr Tony Tan was not the President of 64.8% of Singaporeans who voted against him in PE2011, at the very least he fought a battle and won by 0.35% margin against his closest contender, Dr Tan Cheng Bock.

PPP is disappointed without reservation that the office of the Elected Presidency is once again tweaked in forms and eventually, it denies robust electoral challenge that is the essence of our Democratic guarantee. In our view, Mr Salleh and Mr Farid who are prominent individuals of the Malay community with the exceptional capabilities to perform the role of the Elected President with full competency. The denial of their candidacy is really regrettable.

PPP shares the sentiments of Singapore Malays who feel insulted that they been taken for a ride. The community sees themselves, yet again, as a scapegoat for the political agenda of the Powers That Be. They are the ones paying the ultimate political price. They rightly feel used, betrayed, played out and stupefied now that they bear witness to political gains built upon Malay dignity.

Last but not least, PPP further reiterates that we should not allow electoral rules to be manipulated in such divisive way and the Constitution should not be changed so frequently by the ruling party just to suit their own political agenda. An Independent Commission appointed by the Elected President should look into every attempt of amendment made to the Constitution and the Elected President should also be vested with Veto power to such amendment with the advice of the Commission.

Most importantly, we hope that Singaporeans should realize that giving PAP 70% mandate with overwhelming power via the dominance of parliamentary seats will not work in the interests of our Nation. We should deny PAP Two Third Majority in the next General Elections so that they could not just bulldoze any amendment to our Constitution at their fancy. This will ensure a truly fair electoral process and this will enhance the independent role of the Elected Presidency above and beyond partisan politicking.

Syafarin Sarif
Chairman
People’s Power Party (PPP), Singapore For CEC

Protest against Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Visit to Singapore

For Immediate Release

Protest against Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Visit to Singapore

The People’s Power Party expresses our dismay and disappointment on the account that the Republic of Singapore is hosting a state level visit with Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. On grounds dear to us, we elect to stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people who have until now, been deprived of a rightful independent statehood, and the very fact that Israel’s current hostile policy has put the much awaited Two-States solution into a stalemate. It is without doubt that under the watch of its current Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, the State of Israel continues to brutalise its position as the unforgiving occupying power over Palestinian territories. Palestinian lands and private properties continues to be confiscated and forcefully vacated to make way for illegal settlements, violating international law and stands in contradiction against various UN charters and resolutions. The latest, being UN Resolution 2334, has been met with obvious defiance from PM Benjamin Netanyahu who once again demonstrated his will not to abide by the Security Council’s mandate. This is indeed a call for concern.

Under Benjamin Netanyahu's watch, Israel continues to choke West Bank and Gaza from getting open access to commerce and trade, freedom to travel, adequate humanitarian aids and necessities and within that wider overview, been a resultant force that has stagnated the economic growth and opportunities of the occupied Palestinian population. The state of this occupation, conducted by aggressive military force that reeks of brutality are indeed acts that are deplorable which has been condemned at international level. Without any withdrawal in sight in view of its occupation policy, any indication from Singapore to host such high level meeting serves to endorse Israel’s disparaging acts.

The Israeli government continues to affirm its illegal stance, calling Jerusalem, a city of shared sanctification by the three Abrahamic faith, as its eternal capital. This violates another UN resolution who has long viewed that such pronunciation are to be rejected outright .

The Palestinian struggle and resistance have taken various shapes and actions. While we do not endorse nor condone acts of deliberate terrorism that hawks on human lives to achieve political aims, the response put forth by Israeli's military has been grossly outweighing in scale. It reeks of vengeance and often undertaking punitive and collective punishments to families of suspected resistant fighters which destroy their homes and places of residence indiscriminately. In effect, Israel seeks to achieve its existence through means that spells acute and deliberate terrorising.

Without doubt, Benjamin Netanyahu, in his capacity as the country’s Prime Minister, has overseen the continuation of such operations. Benjamin Netanyahu’s defiance in response to the latest Resolution 2334’s passing was all too obvious that he is repulsively defiant. His intention to downgrade ties with countries which have been historically friendly with Israel, but had voted for the very resolution, shows the very obvious how far he would go to disregard peace as the ultimate solution to the Palestinian issue. The reactions subsequent to the passing of the resolution from him and his government so far ought to be condemned and reprimanded. Hence, it is ethically wrong for our government to demonstrate a higher level of friendship with a country that perversely downplays, lest disrespect, mandated UN resolutions.

We should not host Benjamin Netanyahu, given the continuing human rights violation and breach of International Law as well as his defiance of UN resolution under his Premiership. We run risk of destroying our warm relationship with our neighbours and contradicting our international standing as a small open country which has championed the Rule of Law, upholding the International Law and an active advocate of the legitimacy of United Nations resolutions. His visit could create an air of distrust and scepticism towards the Singapore’s consistency in our diplomatic commitment in promoting Rule of International Law.

Singapore also prides itself as the bastion of religious and cultural diversity, with its people enjoying a high level of communal integration. Our values in accepting differences among its religious communities have allowed us to prosper as a nation in peace, within ourselves and with our neighbours. Benjamin Netanyahu and his government’s apparatus and apartheid rule at present, do not share the same value which we hold dearly. Granting him a state visit could well undermine the very values we have been accustomed to in achieving peaceful coexistence.

PM Lee Hsien Loong should seriously review its relationship with Israel. We hold the innate view that Singapore should continue its neutrality, befitting to humanistic principles, towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without the need to break existing bilateral ties with the State of Israel. On that note, we applaud our government’s effort and diplomatic engagement in finding ways to seek a peaceful resolution to the ongoing Palestinian occupation. We acknowledge our relationship with Israel spanned from the time our armed forces was in its foundation stage. However, we should not turn a blind eye to Israel’s unacceptable conduct and stance with regards to its Palestinian Occupation. These are namely:

1) Disregard of United Nations Resolutions which call upon Israel to carry out the agreed Two-States peaceful resolution to the Palestinian Occupation.

2) Facilitating and initiating ILLEGAL settlement on Palestine land.

3) Supporting and legalising Land-Grab policy in Palestine which grossly and blatantly in breach of International Law with respect to Occupation.

4) Effecting apartheid rule on Palestinian land.

5) Carrying out systemic human rights abuses, terrorising and condone the atrocities carried out by its armed forces in the Occupied land.

All these issues need to be put forth in concessionary stages before Singapore alleviates its bilateral relationship with Israel. The vehemently continuous terrorising nature of Israel towards its occupying residents in Palestine runs contrary to our strong resolve in wanting to eradicate terrorism. Hence it is crucial at this stage that we rescind any invitation that we may have extended to Israel's Prime Minister.

We should instead persuade Israel to honor its earlier agreement to peaceful establishment of the Two-States resolution. We should continue to persuade Israel to end military hostilities and withdraw immediately all the illegal settlements that continues to be constructed in occupied Palestinian territories. It is all too important that Benjamin Netanyahu’s government shows full intention and commitment in abiding with past resolutions to entrench trust in the international community by fostering and pursuing peaceful end of occupation hostilities. Until Benjamin Netanyahu shows his intention to conduct this wilfully, any engagement that we conduct at this level would only deliver an impression that we are in tacit approval of Israel’s condemning actions towards the illegally occupied Palestinian territories.

Goh Meng Seng
Secretary General
People’s Power Party Singapore
For CEC

People’s Power Party (PPP) Response Committee on the Future Economy Report

For Immediate Release:

People’s Power Party (PPP) Response Committee on the Future Economy Report

We refer to the Committee on the Future Economy report. 

There is nothing exceptionally new from the report apart from recognizing International Trade and Relations as an important integral component of our Economic Success.

International Trade Treaties

People’s Power Party would like to reiterate our stance that whatever Trade Agreement or Treaties signed by the PAP must put Singaporean workers’ interests as the uncompromising first priority.

Singapore’s ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) has been very focused on securing trade agreements for its economic sustainability in an increasingly globalised world. 

Nonetheless, trade deals had more often came along with some trade-offs. One nagging opportunity cost has been the unemployment of locals.

In recent years and decade, we have seen PAP government having negotiated and signed Free Trade Agreements without much public consultation, debate or engagement. These FTAs include CECA signed with India which had basically opened up the flood gate for Indian PMETs to get jobs and stay in Singapore without much control. This has inevitably displaced quite a number of Singapore workers. In return, CECA mainly benefited large corporations like Temasek Holdings and GLCs to invest in India without substantial job creation for Singaporeans. 

We have also seen PAP government negotiated the now-failed TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) in secrecy without any public consultation. Only big MNCs were involved in the negotiation without the involvement and participation of our Labour Union or any other political parties or civil society groups. 

The failure of the TPP may mean a loss of opportunity for Singapore’s businesses.

However, we are more concerned about the need for transparency of any negotiation or signing of such trade pact . 

The failure of TPP coupled with the shocking “Brexit” of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, presented starkly to Singaporeans sudden moves against agendas that they have been herded towards.

Coming out of these shocking episodes is the clamour for transparency. The peoples of those nations wanted their voices to be heard and they have done so. The citizens of the US and UK have signaled that they want to be involved in decision-making that involves their lives and affects their nations. They want to know the details and not just be told. 

It would only be wise for the Singapore government to be open for a constructive dialogue that discusses the costs and benefits of all trade pacts including the TPP. 

PPP would like to suggest a public forum in which Singaporeans would be able to discuss any future negotiation of Free Trade Agreement with the Singapore government directly. This is especially important when FTA in present context is no longer just about demolishing trade barriers but involve more other aspects such as free mobility of labour, legal aspects of commerce and trade etc.

International Relations

We have seen how PAP’s missteps in handling international relationship had caused much upheaval, tension and unnecessary pressure to Singapore businesses in China. 

PPP would like to remind PAP that it no longer enjoys the protection of political goodwill and respect that Mr Lee Kuan Yew had garnered and it should tread carefully in the world politics, especially when it comes to the politics of big countries with huge economic clout. 

Singapore has survived and prosper throughout the decades with the help of great diplomacy in building bridges, making friends and creating political stability in our immediate region of existence. We have survived the uncertainty due to Confrontation, Vietnam war, Korean war, Cambodia war and the uncertainties due to the cross strait ties between China and Taiwan. We have managed to turn past enemies and threats into friends. We should not create unnecessary tensions in our region which is critical to our survival and prosperity. 

Apart from Globalization and Free Trade, Diplomacy of Peace is one of the most important survival strategy for an open economy like Singapore. It is worrying to witness how the current PAP government handle International Relationship and Diplomacy which will eventually affect our economic well being as a whole. 

We can only hope that the current mindsets of those involved in PAP government’s dangerous diplomatic stunts could be replaced with more humility and wisdom. 

Soft Power of Cultural Essence and Organic Industrial Growth

While we are not against the PAP government spending money on upgrading the skills of Singapore workers, but we observe throughout the decade, such programs had minimum value add to Singaporeans when our workers are not protected adequately from the displacement due to the influx of foreign PMETs. 

We also observe that PAP government has finally given up spotting “successful industry” to bet on after experiencing mediocre results from past bet on Bio-Tech industry. PAP government had led us in chasing rainbows one after another in the past decades but in the end, many Singaporeans of past generations eventually found that their skills are fast becoming obsolete when PAP tried to focus on other industries. 

We have serious doubt of such economic strategy. We would like to stress that most productive and useful innovations are derived from organic industries instead of learning something totally new and trying to compete with other countries which are already experts in this field. 

Singapore should identify its own Organic Growth Industries: those industries which we have comparative and competitive advantages. Innovations should be developed from these Organic Growth Industries to increase productivity. Else, we would be chasing Rainbows again like a headless chicken in the fast changing world of technology.

While technology is important in today’s economy, we should not lose sight of the Soft Power of Cultural Essence. We observe that there is a lack of utilization of Cultural strength in our local businesses and industries. 

There is a lack of in-depth exploration of the huge economic potential of our rich cultural heritage. Although we have a few good local brands that go regional and international, but compared to other countries we are still lacking behind. It shows that we have not put in enough efforts to help local companies in making use of our Cultural strength to enhance our international brand status.

Our cultural heritage could also provide us an advantage in enhancing our role in economic connectivity with our regional neighbours. But the apparent lack of general knowledge of our neighbouring countries has become a hindrance in making us an effective hub for the region. 

Increasing Business Cost vs Productivity Growth and Wage

DPM Tharman had put up a grand strategy to increase yearly productivity growth by 3% back in 2011. It seems that it has become an empty promise again. 

There are a few reasons why our Productivity Growth has been extremely low in recent decades. The high cost of doing business in Singapore has forced businesses to look for cheaper labour from foreign sources. This high business cost is basically due to the high rental which was basically controlled by GLCs and government agencies. Apart from that, indirect taxes such as COE on commercial vehicles has also taken a toll on businesses, especially business start-ups. 

Instead, PAP had addressed these issues by opening up the floodgate for cheap foreign labour which inevitably affect local wages and even displacement of local workers creating underemployment. Such move will inevitably reduce productivity growth as well as wages. 

The only way to ensure that Singapore continues to grow with high productivity growth is to prevent a Rent-Seeking Economy to develop. Rental and indirect taxes should be controlled so that more resources could be put into developing local human resources as well as business development.

Unfortunately, the CFE report did not touch on these important issues at all. 

Business Connectivity and Market Intelligence

There is generally a weak support of Market Intelligence and Research provided to local SMEs to help them in reaching out to the various matured as well as emerging markets in the region and the world. 

While the GLCs enjoy the support from the various government statutory boards in providing the necessary help in getting connected to the world and obtaining market intelligence of target markets, SMEs lack a comprehensive approach in obtaining such information and network.

If networking and connectivity are crucial for our local economic success, we would expect the PAP government to put more resources into building up resource centre and network of trade offices that focus on providing relevant information to local SMEs. 

Conclusion

We hope that this CFE report is not just another old wine in new bottle effort by the PAP government.

Sivakumaran s/o D Y Chellappa

Vice Chairman c/o Head of Policy Research

For CEC of People’s Power Party

PPP Press Statement: Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

People’s Power Party is shocked to read all the various reports that have come in with regards to the 26 defective trains out of 35 trains which SMRT and LTA have purchased from the consortium comprised of Japanese company Kawasaki Heavy Industries Rolling Stock Company and CSR Sifang Locomotive & Rolling Stock Company Ltd.

We demand answers for the following concerns which involved public safety and interest from LTA and SMRT:

1)      According to the report by Hong Kong Factwire, SMRT has suspected that the massive breakdown in December 2011 was caused by these new trains delivered from China. That was the reason why progressive payment from SMRT was slowed down and the subcontractors suffered cashflow problem. It was also said that SMRT has reduced the frequency of the schedule of these new trains from China after that incident in December 2011. We demand a response from SMRT on the validity of this report and if so, why it was not raised in the committee of inquiry which was held to find out the root cause of the breakdown then?

2)      LTA has admitted that structural cracks have been found in these new trains since 2013. We demand an explanation from LTA and SMRT why would they continue to order more trains from the consortium in 2014 and subsequently in 2015, amounting to a total of over 100 trains, after they have found an unusually high defective rate of 74% out of the first batch of 35?

3)      According to records of court proceeding launched in China with regards to the labour dispute between CSR Sifang and its former employee in 2013, the former employee has stated in the affidavit that CSR Sifang has deliberately fabricated test data results and reports in 2010. Was SMRT and LTA aware of such accusations? Did SMRT and LTA send their own engineers or independent Quality Control personnel to perform or audit the various tests? Did SMRT and LTA carry out any due diligence on quality checks before these trains were shipped to Singapore?

4)      It was also reported that these trains offered by the Kawasaki – Sifang consortium was not of the lowest bid. The lowest bid was offered by a Korean company. The pertinent question is why would SMRT and LTA chose to buy from the Kawasaki Sifang consortium which was more expensive but provided sub-standard quality products? Did SMRT and LTA do any due diligence on their quality test statistics before deciding to buy from this consortium? 

5)      74% defective rate is totally unacceptable by any standards. Did SMRT and LTA punish the supplier and consortium by any means? Was there any performance bond submitted by the Consortium in the first place?

6)      In view of the fact that there are several doubts and accusation of fabrication of vital quality test results with higher bidding price coupled with poor quality products, PPP urge the Corruption Practice Investigation Bureau to start a thorough investigation into the procurement process as this involved hundreds of million dollars of public money. 

7)      Concurrently, an independent Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry consisting of opposition MPs and external independent experts should be convened to investigate the SMRT and LTA should be stopped from procuring any trains from this Consortium before the findings of the COI has completed. Ministry of Transport and LTA have opined that the cracks found are not “safety critical”. However, we find their assertion lacks credibility and we should no longer believe in PAP government’s “ownself check ownself” model of governance. The COI should determine whether there is any negligence or dereliction of duties by the various parties in the procurement process and whether public safety has been compromised by these defective trains. 

8)      Last but not least, as a public listed company, SMRT should be censured for trying to hide such vital information of the defective trains from the general public. Transparency and accountability are two key important factors in upholding public confidence in a company like SMRT which is providing vital public transportation service. It is totally unacceptable for institutions like Singapore General Hospital or SMRT which provides critical vital public services to continue to operate in such an opaque and irresponsible manner. We demand accountability from the respective leadership for such mismanagement of public services.

Goh Meng Seng

Secretary General

For CEC

PPP Press Statement: Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

People’s Power Party is shocked to read all the various reports that have come in with regards to the 26 defective trains out of 35 trains which SMRT and LTA have purchased from the consortium comprised of Japanese company Kawasaki Heavy Industries Rolling Stock Company and CSR Sifang Locomotive & Rolling Stock Company Ltd.

We demand answers for the following concerns which involved public safety and interest from LTA and SMRT:

1)      According to the report by Hong Kong Factwire, SMRT has suspected that the massive breakdown in December 2011 was caused by these new trains delivered from China. That was the reason why progressive payment from SMRT was slowed down and the subcontractors suffered cashflow problem. It was also said that SMRT has reduce the frequency of the schedule of these new trains from China after that incident in December 2011. We demand a response from SMRT on the validity of this report and if so, why it was not raised in the committee of inquiry which was held to find out the root cause of the breakdown then?

2)      LTA has admitted that structural cracks have been found in these new trains since 2013. We demand an explanation from LTA and SMRT why would they continue to order more trains from the consortium in 2014 and subsequently in 2015, amounting to a total of over 100 trains, after they have found an unusually high defective rate of 74% out of the first batch of 35?

3)      According to records of court proceeding launched in China with regards to the labour dispute between CSR Sifang in 2013, the former employee has stated in the affidavit that CSR Sifang has deliberately fabricated test data results and reports in 2010. Was SMRT and LTA aware of such accusations? Did SMRT and LTA send their own engineers or independent Quality Control personnel to perform or audit the various tests? Did SMRT and LTA carry out any due diligence on quality checks before these trains were shipped to Singapore?

4)      It was also reported that these trains offered by the Kawasaki – Sifang consortium was not of the lowest bid. The lowest bid was offered by a Korean company. The pertinent question is why would SMRT and LTA chose to buy from the Kawasaki Sifang consortium which was more expensive but provided sub-standard quality products? Did SMRT and LTA do any due diligence on their quality test statistics before deciding to buy from this consortium? 

5)      74% defective rate is totally unacceptable by any standards. Did SMRT and LTA punish the supplier and consortium by any means? Was there any performance bond submitted by the Consortium in the first place?

6)      In view of the fact that there are several doubts and accusation of fabrication of vital quality test results with higher bidding price coupled with poor quality products, PPP urge the Corruption Practice Investigation Bureau to start a thorough investigation into the procurement process as this involved hundreds of million dollars of public money. 

7)      Concurrently, an independent Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry consisting of opposition MPs and external independent experts should be convened to investigate the SMRT and LTA should be stopped from procuring any trains from this Consortium before the findings of the COI has completed. Ministry of Transport and LTA have opined that the cracks found are not “safety critical”. However, we find their assertion lacks credibility and we should no longer believe in PAP government’s “ownself check ownself” model of governance. The COI should determine whether there is any negligence or dereliction of duties by the various parties in the procurement process and whether public safety has been compromised by these defective trains. 

8)      Last but not least, as a public listed company, SMRT should be censured for trying to hide such vital information of the defective trains from the general public. Transparency and accountability are two key important factors in upholding public confidence in a company like SMRT which is providing vital public transportation service. It is totally unacceptable for institutions like Singapore General Hospital or SMRT which provides critical vital public services to continue to operate in such an opaque and irresponsible manner. We demand accountability from the respective leadership for such mismanagement of public services.

Goh Meng Seng

Secretary General

For CEC

PPP Press Statement: Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

Defective Trains from China – More than what meets the eyes.

People’s Power Party is shocked to read all the various reports that have come in with regards to the 26 defective trains out of 35 trains which SMRT and LTA have purchased from the consortium comprised of Japanese company Kawasaki Heavy Industries Rolling Stock Company and CSR Sifang Locomotive & Rolling Stock Company Ltd.

We demand answers for the following concerns which involved public safety and interest from LTA and SMRT:

1)      According to the report by Hong Kong Factwire, SMRT has suspected that the massive breakdown in December 2011 was caused by these new trains delivered from China. That was the reason why progressive payment from SMRT was slowed down and the subcontractors suffered cashflow problem. It was also said that SMRT has reduce the frequency of the schedule of these new trains from China after that incident in December 2011. We demand a response from SMRT on the validity of this report and if so, why it was not raised in the committee of inquiry which was held to find out the root cause of the breakdown then?

2)      LTA has admitted that structural cracks have been found in these new trains since 2013. We demand an explanation from LTA and SMRT why would they continue to order more trains from the consortium in 2014 and subsequently in 2015, amounting to a total of over 100 trains, after they have found an unusually high defective rate of 74% out of the first batch of 35?

3)      According to records of court proceeding launched in China with regards to the labour dispute between CSR Sifang in 2013, the former employee has stated in the affidavit that CSR Sifang has deliberately fabricated test data results and reports in 2010. Was SMRT and LTA aware of such accusations? Did SMRT and LTA send their own engineers or independent Quality Control personnel to perform or audit the various tests? Did SMRT and LTA carry out any due diligence on quality checks before these trains were shipped to Singapore?

4)      It was also reported that these trains offered by the Kawasaki – Sifang consortium was not of the lowest bid. The lowest bid was offered by a Korean company. The pertinent question is why would SMRT and LTA chose to buy from the Kawasaki Sifang consortium which was more expensive but provided sub-standard quality products? Did SMRT and LTA do any due diligence on their quality test statistics before deciding to buy from this consortium? 

5)      74% defective rate is totally unacceptable by any standards. Did SMRT and LTA punish the supplier and consortium by any means? Was there any performance bond submitted by the Consortium in the first place?

6)      In view of the fact that there are several doubts and accusation of fabrication of vital quality test results with higher bidding price coupled with poor quality products, PPP urge the Corruption Practice Investigation Bureau to start a thorough investigation into the procurement process as this involved hundreds of million dollars of public money. 

7)      Concurrently, an independent Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry consisting of opposition MPs and external independent experts should be convened to investigate the SMRT and LTA should be stopped from procuring any trains from this Consortium before the findings of the COI has completed. Ministry of Transport and LTA have opined that the cracks found are not “safety critical”. However, we find their assertion lacks credibility and we should no longer believe in PAP government’s “ownself check ownself” model of governance. The COI should determine whether there is any negligence or dereliction of duties by the various parties in the procurement process and whether public safety has been compromised by these defective trains. 

8)      Last but not least, as a public listed company, SMRT should be censured for trying to hide such vital information of the defective trains from the general public. Transparency and accountability are two key important factors in upholding public confidence in a company like SMRT which is providing vital public transportation service. It is totally unacceptable for institutions like Singapore General Hospital or SMRT which provides critical vital public services to continue to operate in such an opaque and irresponsible manner. We demand accountability from the respective leadership for such mismanagement of public services.

Goh Meng Seng

Secretary General

For CEC

BUDGET SPEECH 2016 – Institutionalizing Unemployment Insurance

For Immediate Release:

BUDGET SPEECH 2016 – Institutionalizing Unemployment Insurance

The Finance Minister has put up this year’s budget on the footing and premise that Singapore Economy will slow down but not going into a recession. We have a different view on such presumptuous premise which only based on GDP projection figures instead of other more pertaining situation on the ground. Due to the nature of the industrial structure of our economy (i.e. the highly fluctuating Biomedical industry), GDP figures are no longer a good indicator of the well being of Singaporeans.

We would regard the indicators of consumption and the number of retrenchment for the coming year as the more important factors to gauge the well-being of our citizens. Considering the backdrop of the unusual number of retrenchments in the recent months, we would describe the situation as ‘bad’ and we expect the Minister to acknowledge the economic pain prevalent among the populace. The number of retrenchment is expected to hit record high (since 2008) for this year coupled with an expected corresponding drop in consumption. Thus, we believe that the Minister’s assessment of the economic outlook for Singapore is a gross underestimate of the real situation affecting the Middle-lower class Singaporeans.

The ‘trickle-down effect’ has proven to be an ineffective and inefficient policy, in view of the relentlessly globalized environment. One cannot be assured where the resources retained by the corporates would trickle down and where it would simply leave the people tricked into merely expecting the trickle down to happen

What is plainly needed now is the appropriate policies to alleviate the treacherous economic conditions for Singaporeans who have lost their jobs. It is time for the government to endorse that welfare is not a bad word and to come down like a ton of bricks upon anyone who even remotely suggest that.

An institutionalized unemployment insurance system can act as a bumper to cushion off any rapid economic downturn by making sure that local consumption will not drop drastically in such event. This system could be financed by the great amount of foreign workers’ levies which the government has been collecting all these years. It is only logical for the government to utilize levies imposed on foreign workers to help mitigate the potential loss of local citizens’ jobs due to the impact of the dependency on cheap foreign labour.

The current situation is dire and needs appropriately structured unemployment benefits. We should move away from the sporadic adhoc handouts which are more targeted at political patronage rather than a sensible, focused and institutionalized economic system of helping those who are retrenched to tie over the difficult period. In return, mitigate the otherwise dwindling purchasing power and thus consumption which will inevitably further aggravate the economy situation.

To be fair, those in the above 65 category had some of their concerns addressed. However we do not face financial problems only after we reach 65. It should also be noted those in the 55 to 65 category do not receive any form of targeted help despite their CPF withdrawal expectations having had vapourised over the last couple of years. Furthermore, this group of Singaporeans normally faces underemployment due to the influx of cheap foreign workers. We believe that it is the government’s responsibility to take care of this group of not-so-senior citizens as well.

The measures announced were glaringly spartan, with the general reason for the austerity being that it could still be a premature stage of the lean economy yet runs its course. The media would often enthusiastically tout this as a measure to ‘keep the powder dry’ for tougher times ahead and they did not waver this time. We do not believe it is good to wait till the SMEs are half dead before the government step in to stabilize the situation.

In that regard too, the phasing off the PIC would leave smaller firms and SMEs in a lurch while wanting to forge ahead during this challenging times. Although the PAP government has introduced a new scheme “Industrial Transformation Program”, but we see it as old wine in a new bottle. Throughout the decades, PAP government has talked about innovations, creativity, increasing productivity etc with many schemes being introduced and withdrawn; we do not see how this latest good sounding scheme could be any different from the previous ones if the bureaucracy and mindsets of GLCs, Ministries and statutory boards do not change at all. We foresee that this scheme will be no different from its many predecessors which were ineffective but costly.

We would remind the PAP government of its promise (made in2010) of growing Singaporean workers’ REAL wages by increasing productivity of SMEs by 3% per year. So far, it has missed this target for the past 5 years. We believe that the PAP government will have to relook into its methodology of helping SMEs and examine why many past schemes did not produce satisfactory results.



Goh Meng Seng

Secretary General for CEC