Singaporean First Alliance

Over the years, we have heard about how the big influx of foreign workers or talents has created great impact on Singaporeans' life. We have also heard about how some Singaporeans cry out foul about those who protested or made comments about these foreign migrants as "Xenophobic" or simply "Extremists".

Some would even accuse anyone who raise the flag of Singaporean First as Xenophobic without really understanding what it means, neither will they reason it out in proper context.

We have seen how companies under the control of foreigners have started to build "racial enclave" within their own working environment. It is no surprise that we observe some banks or business entities being filled by employees with the same country origin. It has become so absurd that we start to see job advertisement put up in public space to have race or country origins or "Singapore PR", worse, to boast about their present working environment is dominated by their "own people" from the same country! And this actually happens right in our country!

When such things happened and reported on the social media, those usual suspects who cry foul about Singaporean First as "Xenophobic" have suddenly suffered strange disease of muteness. They have simply lost their voice and we have not heard from them calling these advertisement as "Xenophobic" or "Singaphobic"?  It is totally illogical for Singaporeans to be discriminated right in their own country! No citizens in the world, will become second class citizens and get discriminated by FOREIGNERS in their own countries. I guess these "human rights activists" who cry "Xenophobic" too often, should get their perspective right in the first place and stop taking that self righteous stance. There is nothing more righteous than good reasoning, fairness and justice.

In order to understand the whole problem of globalization, we must first understand the basics of ultra-capitalism. In the traditional teaching of "Free Market Principles", ultra-capitalism dictates that it would be BEST for the capitalist to have totally free mobility of labour and free mobility of capital funds so that they could maximize their profits wherever opportunities arise.

It would be easy to understand this ultra-capitalism concept by looking at the simple economic equation of production:

GDP = Labour Input + Capital Input+ Land + Technology + other factors of production (eg. raw materials)

It is not difficult to see that if we want GDP to grow indefinitely, we could just keep increasing labour and capital. This is exactly what PAP government is trying to do. They are trying to grow GDP at all cost by increasing labour, thus population and capital via luring MNCs.

The problem is, Singapore is just a little red dot with limited land space. We couldn't possibly increase the labour, thus population size indefinitely without resulting in more crowded living space for all Singaporeans. We should also be very mindful that we should not just increase GDP for the sake of GDP growth itself. The ultimate aim should be providing Singaporeans better jobs, better wages, better living standards and quality of life but definitely not higher inflation. But are we getting these in spite of higher GDP growth? What we are experiencing is that 80% of Singaporeans suffered from the cost of such ultra-capitalist method of growth, in terms of higher inflation and depressed wages, while only top 10 to 20% of Singaporeans benefited from such development. This is obviously represented by the ever increasing income disparity in Singapore.

I have renamed my FB Name to Goh Meng Seng SingaporeanFirst to indicate a new phase of my life in response to the various ridiculous happenings going on in Singapore under PAP rule, which allows us to be robbed of our dignity as a citizen, as well as subjecting ourselves to major discrimination by a huge foreign population allowed in by PAP. It will be a new era of Singaporean First Alliance for me from now on.

I have created a FB group Singaporean First Alliance and the following is my declaration of purpose:

As a small country, it is inevitable for Singapore and our citizens to feel the full impact of Globalization. It is inevitable for us to bring in more foreign workers, be it talents or otherwise, to supplement our workforce which will face contraction due to aging population caused by low fertility rate.

However, we must always remember that for whatever policies the ruling party of the day make, it must be solely for the benefits of our citizens. Thus, Singaporeans' interests must be the FIRST PRIORITY of ALL policies made by the government.

1) We are against the over-liberal FT policy which has compromised not only the wages of Singaporeans but also job opportunities for Singaporeans.

2) Foreign Labour from Third World developing countries can afford lower pay because of their lower cost and standards of living in their home countries but Singaporeans have to bear FULL impart of the higher cost of living for them and their families in Singapore. Cheap labour substitution by companies should be prevented by legislative and administration means by the Government.

3) We are just a tiny little island and any big influx of foreigners will definitely push up our land and property prices which will in turn inflate our rents and eventually prices for all goods and services. We are against mindless population targets set by the ruling party PAP which will eventually cause high inflation and push up our cost of living in Singapore.

4) We are against of the aggressive population target set by PAP because this will cause great strains on all public services starting from public transport, public housing to public healthcare.

5) We are against of the 6.9m population target because most of the foreign immigrants we are taking in are from Third World countries which have the very third world mentality and attitudes which are very different from ours. This will inevitably cause cultural frictions which may be a potential source of social tensions or even unrest if it is not managed properly.

6) There may be people who would accuse us of "Xenophobic" or even "Extremist" but we are not. We are just Nationalistic amidst the waves of Globalization and massive influx of foreign migrants, to defend the dignity, jobs and rights of our citizens, brothers and sisters of all races.

7) On the contrary, we view PAP's liberal FT policy as extremism and ultra-capitalist that only takes care of the interests of big MNCs, GLCs and business interests but disregard the welfare, well being and interests of our citizens. Such policy has only helped to suppress wages of citizens and compromise citizens' job security and well being, aggravating income distribution in spite of high GDP growth. Such strategy of Growth at ALL COST coupled with a weak labour law and union have made most Singaporeans suffer the high cost of growth while a minority of people, including foreign MNCs, GLCs and business owners, to enjoy the fruits of growth.

8) In fact, we are far from being Xenophobic as we are concerned and against the unethical modern slavery that has been practiced by some industry and businesses on low or unskilled workers from the Third World country. We are against of such modern slavery in Singapore which not only bring shame to our country but compromise wages of our Singaporeans in these fields as well.

9) We demand FAIR WAGE for ALL, including foreign workers with priority given to Singaporeans First. We understand that if we do not enforce FAIR WAGE for Foreign workers, our local Singaporean workers will be displaced by CHEAPER foreign labour.

10) As our national race strategy is to prevent the formation of "Racial Enclaves" in housing and such, we have observed that "Racial-National Enclaves" of foreign labour have formed in various sectors and industries. This has gone unchecked when the foreign migrants have started a quiet but deliberate effort to employ their own race or national origins for job openings when they have gained control of the hiring power within their organizations or companies. This is in effect an unhealthy development of Economic and Job colonialization by these foreign workers. This must be stopped. Any company in Singapore that do not employ at least 50% of Singaporeans will have little reasons to stay in Singapore as their presence will not benefit Singaporeans at all.

11) Last but not least, we may welcome these foreigners to work along us or even become Singapore citizens eventually one day, but we must maintain that these foreigner should realize that they are guests while we are the hosts. They should respect and obey not only our laws but also our cultural practices and way of life. Foreigner should integrate into our core, learn the ways of our multiculturalism harmony and tolerance instead of trying to impose their own values and way of life upon us. 

The self righteous Human Rights activists as well as PAP people will definitely try to throw labels like Xenophobic on such movement but I have only one simple defence, do they kick out their own family members so to let their friends stay in their house?

Singapore is the only land Singaporeans have to call home. It is only right for us to demand our government to take care of our own citizens and defend our rights and dignity against being treated and discriminated as second or third class residents on this land. These self righteous Human Rights activists should stop their own delusion but open their eyes to the real happenings around them, start to acknowledge truthfully the absurdity happening in Singapore that compromise our citizens' rights and interests.

If all fail, call me Xenophobic if you want; it is only right for me to fight for FAIR treatment and against mindless ultra-capitalist liberal FT policy.  If you can't see the abuse and trespasses of our citizens' rights and interests, so be it. I am just simply Nationalistic.

Goh Meng Seng

Electoral System Under Scrutiny

Recently five empty ballot boxes used for 2012 Presidential Elections were found idling in a school compound. The newly promoted Minister Chan has replied in parliament to brush it off as a non-issue as these were not "controlled items" anymore. That is utterly nonsense.

Maybe the Minister has not gone through any elections since he was "uncontested" during GE 2011 and he didn't know how the whole electoral process is carried out. But I am surprised no one, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE in parliament has challenged him on such nonsensical claim by pointing out the obvious contradictions to what the actual electoral process is about.

Let me run through the process in counting centers to illustrate this point:

1) After the polling is closed, all ballot boxes will be transported to the relevant counting centers. No polling agents nor counting agents are allowed to escort the boxes. This has been raised by Tan Jee Say. This should be improved and agents should be allowed to escort the ballot boxes.

2) When the ballot boxes reached the counting centers, they are separated into different precinct level for counting. A typical counting center will have six precincts, meaning, six separated tables for counting with different supervisors and counting agents.

3) The number of total ballots for each precincts was not announced before counting. This should be improved because the Election Department should have such data since it has been computerized. This is the make sure that the number of votes cast should equal to the number of votes counted.

4) After counting, they will submit the vote counts for the main supervisor to tally. There after, they will announce the vote tally.

5) If there is no objections, the Election officials will put every single thing, including counting documents and ballots BACK into the SAME BALLOT BOXES and sealed them up. This is done because it would be easy for future checking if there is any electoral dispute on the results. These boxes will then be sent to be stored at High Court Vault.

6) There is no other carriers used in the whole process. Thus, logically there SHOULD NOT BE EXTRA BALLOT BOXES lying around if this stringent process is followed thoroughly.

Thus, unless Minister Chan can show us that the whole counting process has been changed, there is absolutely no reason to believe that these boxes are discarded instead of "extras".

P.S. Add-on:
I am not saying anybody is lying because the electoral process has been changed over time. eg. Last time we used to have metal boxes with locks instead of paper boxes.

But any changes made to the whole process must not compromise the integrity or the perception of the integrity of the electoral process.

The reason to preserve ALL critical material used in the electoral process because if there is any dispute after the elections, investigation will have to be made and even boxes could be evidence or clue to what actually happened.

Thus, if there are more than one box in a precinct, all boxes must be preserved and kept until it is sure that no contest or dispute on the results warrant any recount or investigation, then these boxes will be sent to incinerators together.

This concept is about keeping the evidence of the first scene in any criminal investigation.

What the Minister has said is totally illogical because it would mean that critical evidence like the boxes would be "declassified" and throw away even before there is certainty that no investigation or dispute raised. That is absurd.


It is only logical to consider these boxes as controlled items even after vote count because it could create unnecessary doubts on the electoral process if there are boxes lying around that would give rise to suspicion of frauds. 

The Electoral Process must not only be done properly but it must also be SEEN to be done properly. Thus, all processes must be taken with great care. The addition suggestions I have made here must be considered seriously:

A) Election or Polling agents from both sides must be allowed to escort the transportation of ballot boxes.

B) Before the counting starts, counting agents and observers must be told about the ballot cast in the respective precincts. Total vote cast for all precincts must be declared as well. This could be done with the help of modern technology. This is to make sure that the possibilities of frauds will be minimized. 

This is a serious matter as it has great impact on the perception of the whole electoral process and the legitimacy of the people being elected in every elections. This is especially important when the last Presidential Elections was so closely fought and the vote difference between the elected candidate (Tony Tan) and the first runner up (Tan Cheng Bock) was just a few thousand votes.

An independent Parliamentary Inquiry Committee consisting of both ruling and opposition party MPs  should be set up and called to investigate about the matter instead of relying solely on statement made by the PMO which was the department in charge of the Election Department. A separation of power should be constructed to exercise true checks and balances of such important matter that concern the integrity of our electoral system.

Goh Meng Seng

P.S. Some said that the counted ballots should be contained in new boxes instead of old. I disagree. This is because if there is a any dispute later on, investigation will be made and all details of the electoral process will be scrutinized. Old boxes contain such details and it should be preserved.

Half Way Bell Check on SG Political Parties - WP Part II

It is always difficult for me to write an assessment or critique of Workers Party not only because it has apparently the largest "Internet Troopers" on New Media who would readily curse and swear at people who criticize WP but on top of that, I was once a member of its CEC.It will be a kind of internal struggle within me but since I have set to be truthful to myself and to the words I write, what have to be done, will be done accordingly. It is for the greater good of learning for our constant evolving and emerging democracy in Singapore.

It was exciting for anyone who have worked decades for a better development of democracy in Singapore to know that opposition party WP has finally "made it" to break through the stranglehold of the GRC system which was deemed as the "impenetrable fortress" of PAP heavily guarded by its ministers. I was no exception to such excitement. However, barely six to eight months right after such historical breakthrough, reality started to set in for WP.

WP fought GE2011 with a rather "sexy" slogan "Towards First World Parliament" which actually lacks philosophical and ideological depth but it works and they won. At first look, it doesn't really  matter as long as they could win seats. However, things to fall apart when parliamentary sitting starts.

What is WP's Policy Ideological Stance?

First of all, it seems WP has flip flopped on its stance on Million dollar Ministerial Salary. It tries to use some technical terms like MX-9 without a full understanding that their approach will end up similar to PAP. It is a kind of embarrassment for WP trying to show that it has "alternative" and different from PAP but ended up like a side-kick of PAP instead. I really wonder whether WP has done a thorough internal policy exploration and debate or not before it went on to parliament to present its stance.This is especially important when its new maverick MPs try to "show off" their "intelligence" by embarking on a path that result in the upheaval of present policy stance, due diligence must be made.

The most horrified thing to happen in parliament is WP's stance on 6.9 million population direction. It just gave a "discount" to PAP's 6.9 million to 5.9 million. It is another glaring attempt of WP trying to show it is different from PAP by having some pseudo "alternative" without really understanding the real issues around them. Plucking figures from the air isn't going to show much credibility on WP's policy front. Their proposal is in effect, a 15% increase from the present population figures and I wonder if they really think Singapore could cope with a further 15% increase in population or not.

Apart from all these, the most unbearable thing to see is WP going into parliament to raise municipal issues of cats, dogs and bird droppings. Have they run out of idea or policy matters to talk about in parliament?

All these could be excused, said WP apologists, because WP MPs are new to parliamentary culture and policy debates. But I would remind them that WP SG LTK has over 20 years of parliamentary experience and Sylvia Lim is not new as well. They should have provided the needed guidance to their "green colleagues".

It is also important to note that WP lacks real team building and shared core political values. Well, we can't expect much from opposition parties at this stage because most of the time, even for TEAM A of the opposition party, it is only assembled at the very last minute. Most important of all, for some odd reasons, you don't really see the WP MPs giving active support to each other in parliamentary debates. Communication and intense policy discussions among key members is a very important way to get political stance clear and everybody stick to it instead of flip flopping during public forums and parliamentary debates.

The most embarrassing contradiction and glaring fumble that exposed WP's apparent lack of Democratic ideology is the Vote Buying Saga in one of its HDB upgrading voting exercise carried out in its Aljunied Town. Lucky Draw for voting yes. Isn't this similar to PAP's strategy of vote PAP for HDB upgrading kind of pork barrel politics? Apparently WP only pays lip service to Democracy and attack PAP for vote buying just to gain votes. But when it comes to its own little management of a town, it would even go a step further by using privileged information of voters' preference (because it is not a secret ballot) to carry out its vote buying exercise!

Integrity, Transparency, Accountability and Competency

The unfortunate YSL adultery saga is the first major blow to WP. But apparently, the impact is very limited as the two by elections in Hougang and Punggol East have demonstrated that voters are unfazed  by such scandal. But up till now, due to WP's abrupt dismissal of YSL after keeping totally mum about the rumors, most Singaporeans will not know the truth at all. The truth may mean little to most people but the way WP handles this issue gives a glimpse on the opaque way WP deals with matters. It is unfortunate for an opposition party like WP who fights on the Democracy principles of Transparency and Accountability would end up tripping itself all over them. The only face-saving act was to sack YSL in double quick time when more evidence surfaced on the media to show that YSL has erred in his personal life.

Plagiarism is not acceptable in any field but apparently WP doesn't see it as a problem, even if it means suffering embarrassment when Pritam was exposed right in parliament. Apart from all these, there is also a small little drama of Secret Squirrel Saga happening right in the middle of Hougang By-elections which directly questioned WP Png Eng Huat's integrity when it shows documented WP internal CEC minutes that Png was listed as one of the potential NCMP candidate as contrary to what he has claimed. 

But these aren't the greatest evil yet. Town Council management and WP's managing agent FMSS seems to its biggest problem so far.

Town Council management used to be WP's Comparative Advantage against all other opposition parties but apparently it is loosing its plot over this field. First of all, the initial appointment of FMSS as its MA raise eyebrows. We have attacked PAP for giving out contracts and goodies to cronies but in the end, we find WP doing the same in its own backyard. So it seems that being FIrst World is to learn from PAP's First World bad practices in dealing with public contracts. But at the very least, when the Brompton bike saga blew up, PAP took actions against its errant civil servants.

WP's TC management was put in doubt for various issues:

1) For some reasons, the Independent Auditors didn't want to sign or comment on AHTC's account. This is rather unusual and we don't know why up till now. WP didn't offer any explanation at all and such opaque management style is really worrying.

2) WP blames some of its TC management problems to PAP's AIM. Although PAP's AIM saga involved politically motivated transactions, but apparently, from published documented emails, WP is supposed to have a smooth hand over since 2011. This was reiterated by WP's Sylvia Lim that there was a smooth transition. So it is quite puzzling to hear WP back tracking and blame on PAP for its own incompetency.

3) The most intriguing and disappointing happening is the Hawker Ceiling Saga. Here again, after it is apparent that there must be something wrong with FMSS management of the TC, inconvenient truths are just swept under the carpet. Accusations made against FMSS key manager insisting of additional payment was brushed aside while unsolicited quotation to the hawkers by its subcontractor was explained as "private deal"! It is really mind boggling  and when you thought LTK is going to do some serious investigation on this issue, a sudden twist happens and everything is quickly swept off and WP just pretends nothing happens. It is a typical incident that exposed doubtful integrity, non-transparent and total lack of accountability on WP's part.

4) Dubious sacking of TWO pregnant women by FMSS within a year has put serious doubts on WP's political standing. Some have argued that FMSS is not WP but we must always remember that FMSS only serves WP's AHTC and WP is the boss that employed this management agent. If the MA it employs has bad management practices that contradicts the party's political philosophy or ideology like eradicating discrimination of women, single women, pregnant women etc, then it has the political moral authority to correct FMSS. But so far, nothing heard from WP on such standing.

Despite of all these failings hitting hard at the basic fundamental core values of WP's Integrity, Transparency, Accountability and Competency, I guess most die-hard opposition supporters and WP people would still pledge their support for WP. This is a big silver lining for WP. However, there might be a small group of well educated middle ground voters who will have their confidence shaken by all these happenings. But I guess this group will be quite insignificant, taking the two by-elections into account.

Political Ground Movement & Engagement

WP remains as the only opposition party which has the most consistent political ground engagement on the front. It is a strong tradition that keeps the party moving, consolidate and provide ground activities for their activists. At the same same, it also provides an important revenue source to pay rent for the party HQ.

WP also has the advantage of controlling the TC in which provides a platform for it to organize various activities for residents, like Durian Tours etc. On top of that, they have consistent door knocking and block parties.

These are tested and proven to be effective political work that will help to fortified their gains as well as opening up new frontiers.

Intra-party Dynamics

On the surface, Mr. Low TK seems to hold a tight ship. However there are signs that all are not well.

First of all, it is the matter of ethnic balance. The departure of Sajeev and Fazli, both candidates of WP in GE2011, has shed some light of the perceived "Chinese" image of WP. Some may argue that these are just exceptional cases but that is not all. WP tried to woo "minority members" by holding some talks specially for Malays but the attendance by non-party members was pathetic. It has tried to appease the Malay community and its members by promoting some of them to cadre members. It has also "elected" more Malays and Indians into its Youth Wing CEC. But the fact still remains, its recent "helicopter co-option" of three "elite" members into its CEC has further tilted the racial balance within its top leadership.

The situation may aggravate if these members have seldom participated in any Hammer sales or door knocking. It is quite unusual for WP do a "helicopter co-option" of CEC members more than 1 year after its OPC. I remember back in the early days, they tried to co-opt a Malay lecturer but failed because the reason given was, WP should respect the will and votes of the cadres... well even when it is a good potential Malay candidate. Of course, the Malay lecturer left the party thereafter.

Apart from that, it is fascinating to observe LTK being "over-ruled" subtly in the Hawker Ceiling Saga. He has openly declared that he want to find out who asks FMSS contractor ATL to send the quotation to the hawkers. But subsequently, he retracted his stance by saying there will be no more investigation done. Although LTK has stepped down as Vice Chairman of the TC but he is still the SG of WP and member of the Board of TC. When there are issues arising from the TC which will put bad publicity and doubts on the party, he will need to step in to clear it up. Thus, it really makes me wonder whether he is still in control of the party at all when he has to do a U-turn like this publicly.

Many view the co-option of the three CEC members as "good development" but I would see it as a signal that there is intense tension within the CEC so much so that LTK has to use co-option as a means to tilt the balance to ensure stability within. But such co-option will create more quiet discontent among cadres and party activists especially so when it is perceived as "elitist" without considering the party's culture of "merits" based on participation of ground work like Hammer Sales and Door Knocking. It will disillusion them that WP is becoming too similar to PAP's management. It is not a good sign at all.

There has been long standing rumors about factional friction and even "fight" within WP but I would say that it would be foolish for anyone to rock the boat when all of them are sitting on its tip.

How is WP Performance so far?

Very disappointing. This is not just my assessment but some WP ardent supporters and even members who have put it plainly to me.

Chen Shao Mao has been "over-sold". He is the only one with "International Perspective" but he lacks depth in understanding issues in Singapore. This is why he could only go on lofty ideas but hardly any beef or insights on specific local issues. He may have well prepared speech delivered in parliament but as a lawyer, his debating skills is really agonizing. Although I don't like LKY at all but I have to agree with his observation of CSM, he is disappointing and cannot debate properly. It is a necessary but insufficient strength to recite a prepared speech properly in parliament. You need to be able to debate about it as well.

Then we have the maverick smart alec type, Pritam Singh. There is nothing wrong if you want to use somebody's else articulated points and this has been done quite frequently in parliament. But the only decent thing to do is to credit the source or raise it as "I have read this point from a blog....etc". But if you try to make it sound as your articulated point, then you lose your plot and integrity as well. Not to mention how he went on to conduct the "Vote Buying exercise" in his ward for HDB upgrading poll which is really a brutal and cruel way of diminishing the very democratic values his party is supposedly fighting for. Of course, his fumble over publicly saying that WP will be ready to be PAP's coalition partner in a post-GE2011 forum is really premature. The worst part is his role in the Ceiling Saga which he responded with that kind of smart alec attitude.

LTK is right that at present, WP is not ready to be the government yet. You may not need "elites", top lawyers or top scholars to form government but at the very least, you need people with REAL International Perspective and REAL Understanding of policy issues with indisputable integrity first before you can move forward to become ruling party. Apparently WP is very weak in this aspect. Sylvia Lim may be proficient in Legal issues while YJJ has good points in education policy, but that are about all they have. It would be very dangerous for WP to become ruling party with more of the likes of Lian and Huat. Nothing personal and nothing to do with "paper qualifications" but running ministries will need people with better ideas in policy matters. Learning from other countries is not a sin, but not knowing the issues and where to find solutions, will be devastating.

Conclusions

WP will definitely continue to win popular votes and more seats in the coming elections. Their ground political activities and engagement is superb and will allow them to gain more seats. However, that is purely not enough for a political party to win seats but unable to deliver in parliamentary debates or proper running of TC. It is just not enough to become a "social club" kind of political party where the party focus more on social gatherings and activities rather than serious policy discussions and deliberations.

Although it claims that it is not ready to be government, but it has to start somewhere, to groom itself to be a real alternative to PAP. It has to get its acts together, be it administrative running of its TC, policy debates in parliament, strengthening of their core values or just plain common sense.

Even if WP is really like what Pritam said, wanting to be a coalition partner of PAP, it will have to make sure that it has the people with necessary learning and exposures to become ministers.

What WP needs to do at the moment are:

1) Strengthen its internal political education process. It is just not enough to fill up members' time with Hammer Sales, Door Knocking and various social gatherings (temper dinners, Christmas party and such). A political party like WP will have to start political education to keep its members and activists deeply rooted in policy stance, political ideology and beliefs.

2) It must start to set its standards of good governance starting from TC management. It is totally unacceptable to allow its MA to create unnecessary political embarrassment and incidents that contradicts the party's political standing. WP must be the one which lead and guide the MA in management principles and not the other way round. It has to act as the boss of FMSS instead of allowing it to pull its nose around. Keep it under control.

3) It has to change its cultural mindset and change the perception of Malay and Indian communities if it wants to stay relevant to National political platform. Sense of Fairness and Justice is human inborn nature and you couldn't fool people all the time.

4) Integrity, Transparency, Accountability and Competency are easy slogans to shout about but definitely a heavy burden to practice. As an opposition, WP cannot lose the "Moral High Ground" by using the argument "PAP also like that" to justify its shortcomings. Worse still, learning those "legalized" but marred with all sorts of "conflict of interests" methods to run its daily business will definitely not give us any confidence at all. It has to set it straight and enforce a mechanism to get things right. Shying away from potential scandals and embarrassment by sweeping inconvenient truths under the carpet isn't going to help them grow. We are not asking WP to be filled with saints but basic integrity is a necessary ingredient to survive in Singapore politics. Just admit there is wrong if things really went wrong and promised to correct the situation. Supporters will understand and forgive people who are ready to learn the better ways but will not tolerate the lack of integrity. It is how you manage scandals and crisis that matters, not merely why they happen matters.

5) WP will have to keep its unity intact. Any signs of infighting or power struggles will definitely reduce voters' confidence tremendously. The lesson of SDP's internal struggle way back in 1990s is an important lesson for WP. While unity is important, WP cannot be run like a machine under dictatorial rule. It must learn to respect diversity of views and ideas, allowing its members, including future potential candidates to learn how to deal with public space and messaging. Curbing members' meaningful participation in internet forums, blogs and new media to express themselves of their various political and policy views will do more harm in their grooming. Instead, WP should ban or discouraged its members from involving "Internet Brigade" which aims to flame, troll or suppress critiques from commenting on its shortcomings. A political party that truly believe in Democracy and Freedom of Speech would encourage RESPONSIBLE SPEECH, discussions and discourses instead of encouraging or set up Internet Brigades to flame, troll, disrupt and suppress other people's freedom of speech.

The next step of democratic development for Singapore is to deprive PAP ABSOLUTE POWER in parliament, to cut its seats to less than two third of parliamentary seats. Thus, last but not least I hope that WP could work with all other opposition parties to achieve this aim instead of embarking on its predatory path of "I walk my own path" kind of mentality and start to prey on smaller parties by going all out for multi-corners fights to wipe them out.

WP has to realize that it has many shortcomings and it alone, may not achieve "greatness" in any sense. It will still need cooperation with other opposition parties to push on meaningful political, democratic development for Singapore.


Goh Meng Seng

Half Way Bell Check on SG Political Parties - PAP Part I

This is approximately the MID Term point of the present parliamentary term if you believe the next General Election will be held in 2015.

Before I start to write this article, there are three interesting Political News and happening in Singapore:

1) One of the most promising political star in SDP, Dr Vincent Wijeysingha has call it a quit over LGBT issues.

2) PAP has announced its latest promotion of ministers. Chan Chun Sing has been promoted while Tan Chuan Jin has unexpectedly missed out of this promotion exercise.

3) WP has announced the new co-option of three members into its CEC. One of them was a candidate in GE 2011 while the other two are relatively new "elites". One of them is a lawyer while the other is an Associate Professor lecturing in NUS.

4) For NSP, after half a year of neglect of their website (yes, no updates, not even on CEC information), they have started to act. However, some curious things I have observed. The Secretary General Hazel is missing in action for all NSP recent activities, so is her husband Tony Tan. Even for important press statement, it was issued by Nicole Seah, the second aassistant secretary, not Hazel. On the other hand, Apparently, the newly co-opted CEC member cum Head of Media Team is missing from the CEC list as well.

These are the four main political parties (sorry for the exclusion of the others, including SPP, DPP and others) that I am going to examine at this Half Way Point.

Post-LKY ERA


The context of present situations is Post-LKY ERA. What will happen or how things will develop with the final phase of POST-LKY ERA in the making? It is clear by the day that the days that Singapore will live without the physical presence of LKY will come soon. Transitions into such era or even into change of ruling power have been discussed openly and intensely recently. The fundamental questions are:

1) Will PAP break with the passing of LKY?
2) Will PAP lose power after LKY pass on?
3) How will the political landscape change with the passing of LKY?

LKY has stepped down right after GE2011 along with Goh Chok Tong. There are common whispers that he did it in order to use his last influence to clear out the main internal challenge posed by the "GCT Camp" to his son's rule. This is just like old kungfu show that the old master uses his last political breathe to save his disciple from the great opponent, killing both the master and the opponent altogether.

The recent promotion exercise is also seen as a bid to look for someone "acceptable" by the Lee camp to take over as Prime Minister once the present PM Lee steps down. Apparently, Chan Chun Sing and Heng Swee Kiat are the front runners while some people think that Lawrence Wong may be the third contender.

Many people say that Heng Swee Kiat is "intelligent" guy and he should be the PM. But I beg to differ. LKY wasn't the smartest (as compared to Dr Goh Keng Swee) among his peers back in the 1960s, neither was he the most charismatic (as compared to Lim Ching Song) but he became the PM. Leadership cannot be built upon intelligence alone. Dr Goh Keng Swee might be the smartest guy among his peers but he lacked the charisma, especially public speaking skills, to be Prime Minister. Intelligence alone is only a necessary but insufficient condition for Prime Minister-ship. As for Chan Chun Sing, I cannot imagine us, Singapore, to have a Kee Chiu General to be our Prime Minister.

In fact, I think Tan Chuan Jin, who has been left out of promotion this time round, has the few critical criteria to become the next Prime Minister. He is a "thinking" minister who can make amends to his positions from time to time to suit changes in various situations. Although it is unfortunate that he has to face a couple of crisis in these couple of years which he may not have handled exceptionally well, but from my observations, he can make necessary reflections and adjustments quite responsively instead of sticking to stagnant stance like former MND Mah BT who kept insisting on his HDB pricing strategy and policy even though many people have shown him that his HDB policy is really screwed.

But nevertheless, whoever tries to become the next Prime Minister under PAP will definitely find himself in the worst position in history. PAP is after all, a "sunset party" and what it has relied heavily upon, the total monopoly of power and assurance of winning elections on every seats have diminished. It will find itself more and more difficult to recruit talented people to join them because they can no longer fulfill their promise easily as there will no longer be a "sure win" elections even under GRC system.

In view of that, it would naturally be a regression down hill development for PAP into mediocrity as it can only attract second or even third rate candidates in subsequent GE. 

PAP: Epoch Change? 

Apart from such development, on numerous occasions, PAP leaders have reiterated that they have changed and will make efforts to revamp their various policies. Most important of all, they are saying they will listen, starting with "National Conversation".

The government controlled (yes, it is a direct physical control via Press Act, giving government management ownership and huge voting rights) SPH and Main Stream Media (MSM) have hailed PM Lee's recent policy announcements made in his National Day Rally as "Epoch" changes made but is that really so?

Well, to continue to work towards 6.9 million population is anything but Epoch change. Having just a tiny tweak to their multi-million dollar ministerial salaries to yet, multi-million dollar ministerial salaries isn't really big change at all.


All these are more like Public Relations exercise rather than any serious game changer kind of policy shifts. Look, calling their tweaks in healthcare policy as "Universal Healthcare Insurance" scheme is just a bad attempt to hoodwink Singaporeans. Giving more HDB grants doesn't change the fact that their pricing mechanism is the key primary problem of spiral prices that have made asset inflation out of tune with normal inflation and salary increments for the middle-lower class. 


The bare truth is, Singaporeans continue to face the fundamental problems caused by PAP's reckless population planning which causes runaway asset inflation, runaway healthcare cost coupled with inadequate hospital beds, break down in public transport system especially for MRT and not to mention the constant flooding due to over-urbanization and Marina Barrage which was created to cope with higher water demand.

Most importantly, apart from the horrendous 6.9m population policy, their tweaks at Housing policy, healthcare and transport policies aren't exactly anything revolutionary at all.

This is especially true for HDB housing policy. Minister Khaw BW has tried his very best to deliver his promise of delivering 13,000 flats or so for this year but what he did not realize that housing problem is a long term stablizing problem. First and foremost, we need a total revamp of the wrong concept of taking HDB flats as an "investment". HDB is a home, not an investment. Secondly, we must make sure that HDB price inflation should not be higher than income increment trend. This will need a total revamp of the pricing mechanism. Third most important point is that HDB land pricing should not be used as a forever input into our Reserves. There is absolutely no reasons to pursue an indefinite growth in Reserves.

Has PAP turned the tide?

How successful is PAP in turning adverse public opinion against it? Some people opined that although PAP didn't really make great changes in these key areas but it has managed to convince and woo middle ground skeptics. I am not so sure that the middle ground could be so easily woo over.

This is especially so when PAP's crisis management skills are rather bad. This is especially so when the HAZE broke out, they couldn't even get their logistics right to deliver the masks on time as promised. Not to say about the weather warning mechanism is totally out of date and serve no purpose in safeguarding citizens' lives. Not for the HAZE warning system, neither for heavy rain and flood warning system.


If PAP cannot get both immediate crisis management, governance and future forward looking policy direction right, I am afraid that it has started to roll down the slippery slope of mediocrity. Pure lack of competency and Vision for the future will be PAP's undoing for the next GE. PAP used to provide basic fundamental competency at daily management and administration of the various systems in Singapore. At least, train doesn't break down that often, flooding doesn't occur that often as well, neither do we have constant crunch on hospital beds as well as public buses and train. I am afraid that all these basic competency has been replaced by complacency.

PAP has never been good at crisis management. I remember during the crisis of Silk Air 185 crash incident back in 1997, the then Transport Minister Mah BT was so stressed up that he actually blew his top on reporters. Now that we have all sorts of small and big crisis from time to time, ministers just acted in a reactive manner. They are just treating problems in isolation instead of taking a more holistic approach. In Chinese, we call that "脚痛医脚，头痛医头“, literally mean when the leg pain, just treat the leg, headache, just treat the head. It seems that their ability of "Helicopter View" has crashed landed.

I suspect PAP has got its priorities all wrong right from the top. Growth at all cost is still the master guiding principle. The push for 6.9m population plan is one glaring example of such "strategic thinking".

To make matter worse for PAP, its GOLDEN MANTRA "Whiter than White" has been put in serious doubt by various incidents. Integrity and Morality are something MORE than legality. What seems to be "legal" may not mean it is done with Morality and Integrity intact. 

Apart from the many big and small scandals on TOP civil servants taking bribes, the AIM saga makes PAP looks even worse, putting doubts aimed directly at its core value of "Whiter than White". Well, some may even put Michael Palmer saga as part of this deterioration and erosion of Core Value of PAP but we should not forget what happens to WP's YSL saga as well.

The most important implication of these scandals is directed at the Core Management Principle of PAP : High Pay = Eliminate Corruptions. Well, some may view that as "legalized corruptions" but it doesn't matter now. It would also mean that alternative system or methods should be explored to upkeep a clean system.

It simply means that we can no longer depend on an authoritarian system which pays its political appointees and civil servants high pay to ensure clean governance. The CORE Values of Democracy, Separation of POWERS should be established to enhance checks and balances on the various organs of governance to enhance clean management.

Apart from that, the concept of "conflict of interests" should be instilled and boundaries of good practices should be established. Due to the authoritarian nature of PAP's rule, the concept of "conflict of interests" has never been institutionalized as part of our Rule of Law, if any. With the empowerment of Internet Era, I think increasing demands on transparency, accountability and good governance will naturally raise expectation on what constitutes "Rule of Law" and "good management practices". But it seems that both PAP and WP failed to realize or understand such a shift on popular expectations.

On the other hand, PAP seems to be confused by its own promise of "light touch" approach to public opinions expressed on the internet by throwing spanners, threats of law suits, criminal persecution etc etc on bloggers, cartoonists and activists at large. It would be seen in a very bad contrasting light whereby PAP is lax towards its own morality and integrity while exercising draconian precision attacks on little errors made by citizens. In Chinese, this amount to "宽己严人", i.e. strict towards others while lax towards its own kind.

Conclusion

If PAP is determined to regain some ground it has lost, it should seriously reflect upon itself on all these grounds:

1) Readjustment to their Philosophy and Ideology of Governance, thus really revamp their various policies towards the new philosophical or ideological directions.

2) Improve their competency at governance, including crisis management.

3) There is a serious need to rethink on the issues of Integrity, Morality, Transparency, Accountability and Good Practices. It would mean to institutionalize Separation of Powers and strengthen the Rule of Law by putting more emphasis on issues of Conflict of Interests.

4) Whether PAP likes it or not, the internet or the New Media has become the important Fourth Institution of emerging Democracy in Singapore and it will replace PAP's controlled MSM totally if PAP still have any fantasy about using MSM as its propaganda tool or mouth piece. If PAP chose to revert to its old dictatorial ways of dealing with dissenting voices, it would end up losing more seats and power even more rapidly than it could imagine. It will have to relearn Public Relationship and Media management instead of relying on obedient, compliant media, editors and reporters to save them from public embarrassment. 

Last but not least, I give PAP an E as a ruling party which failed to evolve and adapt to the new reality on the ground as well as the internet.

Goh Meng Seng

  

Singapore Thrid World Weather Warning System

I have written about this topic before but I guess I need to write about it again because I hate to see our children and young students being put through unnecessary danger by the incompetency of PAP's governance.

I am now spending most of my time in Hong Kong and apparently Hong Kong has a more "HUMANE" weather warning system that is targeted to serve its residents, not merely for its commercial interests only.

Most Singaporeans are ignorant of what modern weather forecast and warning system can do for them. Most don't even know how it works to serve them, prevent losses and even save lives. Some even protest that we cannot expect the government to "predict weather". This is understandable because they are ignorant of what modern weather monitoring system can do and Singapore government has not made available critical weather information free to all but except via commercialized payment for such information.

Who can blame Singaporeans for such ignorance when even our former PAP minister George Yeo didn't know how to react when he was facing his first Typhoon Number 8 warning in Hong Kong? It is not true that Hong Kong have more frequent adverse weather than Singapore apart from the seasonal typhoons. Sometimes, I feel that Singapore has more worse thunder storms than Hong Kong but Hong Kong has a proper colour coded weather warning system even though it has less incident of thunder storms than Singapore.

In Hong Kong, different colour coded warning means different actions required for different sectors. Most of the time, thunder storm warning applies more to certain sectors like swimming pools, construction sites and most importantly, to kindergartens and schools operations. If it is Red storm warning, kindergartens will be closed and kids are not expected to go to school. If it is Black storm warning, most schools will be closed. It would also possibly means that flooding will occur.

Now, can you imagine kids and young teenagers to go to school under the situation shown below? It is actually pretty dangerous for youngsters to be caught in such situation. 

Before some ignorant people start to accuse me for nitpicking PAP government, let me put it straight, with the huge amount of money we have spent in setting up our weather monitoring system catered to our airport which is one of the most busiest airport in the world, we are definitely adequately equipped to provide such weather warning system for public service. If Hong Kong can do it, I don't think we are any inferior to them.

Hong Kong could even predict typhoon path one week in advanced and put up necessary weather warnings in advanced but we do not require that in Singapore. What we need is just a few hours advanced warning to Singaporeans and schools to make the necessary preparations.

We in fact have such advanced warning system in place but it is a paid service. For those in the army, you would know that you can call in for weather advanced forecast. They use Cat system. Even when there is no storm, you could well get a Cat 5 for presence of thunder.

Thus, the most important question is, why is PAP government reluctant to provide such advanced coded weather warning to the public? Don't they care about our young children at all? Since huge public money has been spent on various advanced weather monitoring equipment, including weather satellites and such, we should demand the PAP government to provide such FREE PUBLIC SERVICE that serves to prevent unnecessary injuries and worse, loss of lives and property.

Why would we risk the lives of our students to get to school but in the end, finding their schools or lecture halls being flooded like the ones in NUS? Or like those students ended up like this at their school?

I would urge the PAP government stop being crowded with such a Third World mentally and start to take the welfare of our citizens seriously. After spending millions in weather monitoring system, we deserve better public service from the weather system, not just some ambiguous announcement and warning which means nothing at all. We need to set up a proper categorized and colour coded weather warning system to protect our citizens, particularly our students from being exposed unnecessarily to the dangers of adverse weather.

It may affect some of our economic activities and lower our economic growth a little, but the safety of our citizens' lives is more than growth digits. 

Goh Meng Seng

祭元老战士黄亚水前辈

今天从昔日战友得知工人党元老级人物黄亚水先生仙逝了。

 讲起黄亚水先生，我想许多人都对他认识不多，甚至是我，对他的认识也不能说是全面的。但是不可否认的，做为工人党一个重要“社阵”派系的领导人物，他对工人党或甚至新加坡反对党和民主发展的贡献是不可被抹杀的。

也许有许多人对这一些老一辈默默无闻，默默耕耘的政治人物、民主战士都觉得他们没有什么可以谈得上贡献的，但事实上，如果没有这一批“无名勇士”，我们就不可能有工人党今天的传承了。

说亚水前辈为勇士，一点也不为过。在1980、1990甚至是这世纪初的年代，没有多少人有根本的勇气站出来战斗行动党粗暴的一党专政。虽然像亚水一样的勇士，英文水准不高，但是如果没有他们勇敢的坚持和鼎力支持，惹耶勒南和刘程强先生就无法凭工人党这老平台不懈的奋斗。前人种树，后人纳凉，今天的工人党新秀也不会有机会凭借他们累积的政治资本走进国会大堂了。

亚水虽然不是“精英”，英文不好，但是他却是每年后港中秋节猜灯谜的主将，灯谜都是由他一手准备的。 他也曾是工人党的组织秘书，在中委里经常都扮演重要的制衡角色。

每个政党都会有不同的派系，这是大小组织难免的。亚水是80年代由李绍祖带领社阵合并入工人党后，加入工人党的。李绍祖往生后，亚水就成为这工人党里社阵派系的领导人。他在工人党生死存亡，党争关键的时刻，起着举足轻重的影响力，鼎力支持刘程强成为工人党的秘书长。没有他那关键的支持，工人党很可能会面对灭顶之祸。

但是政党政治是残酷的。在面对世代交接，工人党面对自我更新的时代，长江后浪推前浪是必然的结果。这也形成了新人与旧人矛盾的激增。我和亚水就在这历史背景下，成为对立面了。虽然我们都非圣人，都被人性的三毒贪、嗔、痴所蛊惑，但是无可否认的，亚水对反对党政治的坚持，是有目共睹的。

就在工人党从谷底飞跃起来的时候，亚水在自我更新的潮流中，黯然的被逼退下来。这是政治现实的残酷。我相信亚水前辈必会有一丝的遗憾，不能继续他的政治梦想。但我也相信他也必然欣慰他为新加坡反对党和民主政治护航的历史任务也成就了新加坡政治民主前进发展的里程碑。他的坚持和护航，促使工人党最终突破了集选区的围城，攻陷了阿育尼集选区。我相信亚水在天之灵，也会感到安慰了。

我只是亚水前辈生命中的一位过客，而且是他生命中“敌对”的过客。但纵然如此，我们还是站在历史上的同一边，都对民主政治有抱负和理想。在我离开工人党后不久，虽然亚水不再是工人党中委，但我还是礼貌的拜访他与他辞别。与他见面，离不开对政治的畅谈，对时事的评论。那时我就觉得，其实我们俩就有个共同点，政治细胞就一直流窜在我们的血液里。

安息吧，亚水前辈！也许没有多少人记得你的贡献，但是我们都知道你在这一生中也完成了一个辉煌的历史任务。

泣

吴明盛

NDR 2013 : What's wrong with PAP?

I have read some comments on Facebook and there were quite a number of applause for the POLICY TWEAKS from PM Lee. Yes, it is just POLICY TWEAKS, nothing revolutionary. It is worrying that all these tweaks seem to have hoodwinked some middle ground voters to only see the impact on their compartmentalized interests instead of the overall larger picture.

There are many things I think need to be addressed but since I am no longer Secretary General of an opposition party which will need to address broadly on the various issues, I will choose to focus on two most important issues.

HDB Higher Grant is Good? 

The debate on how to reduce HDB prices have started since I have raised this issue way back in 2010. There are two main methodologies:

1) Reduce the listing prices of New HDB flats directly according to Cost-plus formula.
2) Increase HDB grants

These two methods may or may no result in the same pricing in New HDB flats. But even if they did, they will have very different implications on the whole Government budgetary situation even though the impact on those Singaporeans buying their First HDB flats is the same.

The reason is that whatever HDB pays for land used to build these new flats, will be paid to SLA and all these money will go straight into the Reserves. This is one of the reasons why PAP can keep boasting about having exceptional ability to accumulate reserves. But wait, once these money goes into Reserves, it means that it will no longer be accountable to public scrutiny as the management of reserves is totally opaque and unaccountable to anyone! (President, you say? Look at what President Ong TC got from PAP when he asked for details!) It would practically mean that if more HDB grants are given to first time buyer without direct price control on the HDB prices, all these government grants will go straight to the reserves which will be managed in a very opaque way and not accountable to parliament nor public scrutiny.

Such transfers of government funds from its current account would have severe implications on the overall budgeting. It would mean that there will be relatively smaller funds for Education, Healthcare, Transport etc as compared to no grants given at all.

This is not to say these are real "subsidies" because the PAP government still make money from the land sales which is very much higher than their purchase price through the Land Acquisition Act. 

To make comparison, let's say there is no grants given but the HDB price is already set at the Cost-plus pricing. Singaporeans will enjoy very low HDB pricing and at the same time, the government do not transfer funds into the reserves directly but could use it for Healthcare subsidies.

This is the reason why I have been advocating Cost-Plus pricing mechanism, a totally revolutionary change in the system rather than the populist (because it makes Singaporeans think that Government is giving them money or subsidies) High Grant methodology advocated by Workers Party (Gerald Giam has made the point in TOC Face Off Forum) and now adopted by PAP.

Some people raise two concerns. One is on the impact on resale market and second, how to price the land that the Government own.

For the first issue of resale market, it is absolutely untrue that a change in the pricing mechanism of NEW HDB prices via Cost-Plus pricing would crash the resale market. Put it simply, the higher grant method would have crashed the resale market if what they say is true! But this is totally untrue.

HDB resale market is totally a segregated market because the needs of the people who are buying in resale market is totally different from first time buyers in New HDB flats. A substantial percentage of buyers in resale market are PRs who cannot buy New HDB flats. Most Singaporeans who buy resale flats are mainly upgraders or downgraders who will already have a flat or property as a leverage. If the BTO pricing for upgraders or downgraders is maintained at market prices, there will be no incentive for them to shift. Some are first time buyers but they are willing to pay a premium for choosing on where they stay. Thus, it seems that the HDB resale prices are more likely to be affected by Private Property Prices, as these are direct competitive substitutes, rather than NEW HDB prices!

As for how to price the land SLA acquired, we could learn from the Germans who are good at curbing unnecessary excessive speculations in property prices. Property prices are allowed to have a 1.5% increase in value per annum , anything above that, they will be subjected to very heavy taxes. Government land can be priced according to such formula, fixed at 1% or 2% increment per year.

Heathcare: PAP's Universal Healthcare Insurance?

The next important issue is of course Healthcare. Many people start to claim that PAP has finally embraced "Universal Healthcare Insurance System" simply because it has announced to cover elderly over 90 years old. That is really a misunderstanding of what Universal Healthcare Insurance entails.

Universal Healthcare insurance will need to cater to both Bigger SCOPE and DEPTH. What PAP is trying to do is just to increase slightly on SCOPE and a little bit on DEPTH. Furthermore, as some people have already mentioned in many blogs and articles, the payout from Medishield is pathetic as compared to the amount of premiums it received. The coverage of Medishield is pathetic. Medishield is in effect, "making money" and this coincide with the fact that healthcare spending by PAP government as compared to other developed countries in terms of percentage to GDP is also inadequate.

I have actually put up the idea of Universal Healthcare Insurance in NSP GE2011 Master Manifesto but unfortunately, it was not raised as the key policy view. The concept is simple.

1) Healthcare of Citizens should be the responsibility of Citizens, Employers and Government. (GEC). Insurance premiums should be shared by these three entities in different percentages. Non-working family members should also be covered with different percentages set for GEC in premium payment.

2) Universal Healthcare Insurance should have wider coverage, allowing citizens to cover every outpatient treatment in private clinic with a list of fixed payout for various drugs, consultancy and operations. Any excess will have to be born by patients. This means that for most Singaporeans or Foreign workers covered under this scheme, they will pay minimum amount for most treatments if they go to government hospitals or clinics. But if they chose to visit private hospitals, there will be a limit of insurance coverage and they will have to pay extra for their choice of expensive medical care.

3) Foreigners working in Singapore should also pay a higher premium into ths Universal Healtcare Insurance. The rational of this is to pool risk of working foreign population in Singapore to cross subsidize an aging Singapore citizens. For Foreign workers, the government will not pay for their premiums. The Premiums should be shared by the employers and foreign employees.

4) Most of the time, there should be surplus in the pooled fund. If there is any shortfall, the government should top it up.

These are the basic structure of my Universal Healthcare Insurance scheme. It has wider Scope and Coverage.

Conclusion

If PAP didn't transfer more funds into Reserves via HDB grants, most probably it would have more funds in current account to provide more spending on healthcare.

The fundamental question we should ask ourselves, how much reserves is enough? Should we have indefinite increases in our reserves and compromised on the well being of our citizens in Healthcare?

If the policy directions are done properly, there should not be additional increase in Medishield premiums or Medisave at all. That is what is wrong with PAP. They are totally obsessed with increase in reserves, stingy on spending for the well being of citizens and thus, never ending pay and pay.

Goh Meng Seng

Bad Editorial Practices by TRE

This is another response to TRE and I hope it will be the last.

First of all, I thank TRE for putting up my article. However, I think TRE is intellectually dishonest in two instances:

1) TRE has yet again, divert the REAL issue from my original title "Political Offensive Against Pan-Opposition Movement" to this present title "Goh Meng Seng: I'm not Anti-WP. It is apparently another attempt of Trolling and I am really very disappointed with TRE. We have been attacking SPH reporters about certain reports but the truth is, it was always the editors who change the titles of these reports deliberately to slant focus and even edit their reporting in a skewed manner. This is bad editorial practice and I regret that TRE has learned from SPH editors as well.

2) TRE claimed that it has just merely put up my posting from the forum for all to see but the truth is, they were taken out of context and worst, only two out of quite a few postings are posted to portray a slanted perspective with the Trolling intent. Someone has already pointed out this point in his comment on the said article. Half truth is no truth. Here again, a usual bad reporting practice learned from SPH as well. I do not think it is anything FAIR by reporting selectively and asked readers to form their own opinion from these slanted presentation.

As for the many disparaging comments posted on here on TRE, it is regrettable that most are made without even reading carefully what has been written and it is also apparent that they have been largely misled by the slanted title TRE has chosen to replace mine.

It is also disheartening to see some die hard opposition supporters/WP people to use such a language against those who they disagree with, even going to the extend of cursing me to die early. I am not perturbed by such cursing but I guess these people are abusing their Freedom of Speech and Expression in which Pan-opposition movement has fought very hard for it.

To put it bluntly, even hardcore PAP IB doesn't use such curse openly against opposition members. If you want Freedom of Speech, you must first learn to respect other people's right to express themselves freely even though you may disagree with it.

Last but not least, for those who cannot comprehend exactly what is going on, nope, I have no interests in meddling nor interfering in Sylvia Lim's love life. It is none of my business, really. I could only wish her good luck and happiness. I was just commenting on the way Sylvia Lim handled the press on this matter which puts herself in a very dangerously vulnerable position politically. Whether you take this as "advice" or not, I am really not bothered but it puts WP and the whole Pan-opposition movement at risk again.

It is also a good lesson to be learned by younger opposition members. Don't ever feel compelled to reply to reporters about your love life if it is just a normal relationship (i.e. not a scandalous adultery or such). They should protect you as a public figure if they truly love you.

Goh Meng Seng

Political Offensive Against Pan-Opposition Movement

This is my letter to TRE in response to one of their post.

Dear Editors,

I write to you in response to the article you have put up on Sylvia Lim & Quah Kim Song saga. It has inaccurately portrayed me “criticising” or “attacking” WP or Sylvia Lim. For the record, these photos of QKS with his ex-girl friend were not put up by me at all. I only make comment on the observations on how Sylvia Lim has been entrapped by such personal attachment and public life in which she was slowly led or misled into a politically vulnerable and dangerous situation.

Die hard opposition supporters like you in TR Emeritus (TRE) may not take it as an important issue over the photo revelation but we should always bear in mind that Singapore political battles are fought over the middle ground, not over die hard opposition or PAP supporters.

PAP has been on the “defensive” right after GE 2011 in which the Prime Minister himself has lowered himself and apologized during last GE. Apparently PAP has come to different conclusion now and it has adjusted its political posturing and position, moving off from defensive to offensive mode.

This can be seen from the Ceiling Gate Saga and the open criticism on prominent opposition member, Ravi Philemon over the Haze-N95 Mask saga. Such offensive has been extended by some sectors (ISD, PAP people, SPH or otherwise) to cover all other opposition members and bloggers like Vincent Wijeysingha, Alex Au etc.

I regret that amidst of the recent launch of new political offensive initiative by the invisible hand against Pan-opposition movement, TRE has chosen to divert attention and focus from the key message I have put up on the forum.

The key concern is the observation of the latest political offensive and the call for prudence on Sylvia’s part in dealing with her own private relationship else she may find herself victimized by those who have planned all these deliberate, well planned offensive against all people who are anti-PAP or anti-establishment (including SPH etc) regardless of whether they are bloggers or prominent opposition members.

We have seen deliberate attacks on individuals and website like yours by pro-PAP netters as well as the main stream media (MSM).

As much as WP Low Thia Khang has wished to “walk his own path” from other opposition parties, WP and its MPs will always be seen as part of the “Pan-Opposition” movement. People with the agenda to prolong PAP’s monopoly of power in Singapore will not stop or be merciful in finding all means to attack WP, even if it means to use underhand tactics as such, leveraging on its members’ private lives to undermine the whole Pan-opposition movement.

Many people may portray me as “Anti-WP” which is totally inaccurate at all. I am first and foremost, part of this Pan-opposition movement. But I also think that the only SUSTAINABLE way of keeping effective opposition presence in parliament is to keep opposition MPs in parliament up on their toes and not to be complacent. Especially so when the question of integrity, democratic values and principles are at stake, opposition movement must always be seen Whiter than the White PAP and keep ourselves on the Moral High Ground.

Anyone, especially the die hard supporters, who may always point to “Oh PAP also do that” are doing a great disservice to the whole opposition movement. If opposition parties or MPs are so much the same as PAP in some undesirable traits, then it begs the question on WHY would the MIDDLE GROUND voters want to vote for Opposition Parties instead of PAP since both are as black as they are? Furthermore, if opposition MPs cannot clear any doubts or questions on their integrity and such, it will compromise their position in parliament as an effective check and balance in parliament because they have lost the Moral High Ground.

As we can see and will see more in future, PAP will use diversion tactic whenever WP MPs want to question them on various issues….eg. they will shoot WP at Ceiling Gate, FMSS Gate when WP want to question PAP on AIM saga…etc. Such situation is detrimental to the Pan-opposition movement.

In fact, PAP is now trying to portray itself as “clean” and “white” again with the recent actions taken against errant civil servants, its own ex-MP and even its own MP cum Speaker of Parliament in Palmer-Gate. It is trying every means to create the impression or perception that it has the Moral High Ground of impartiality to enforce necessary punishment to its own kind. This is done concurrently with the effort to “expose” WP’s weakness or even create doubts on its overall integrity. Yes, die hard supporters may just brush this off as political smearing and such but we must again remind ourselves the the battle is fought over winning the minds and hearts of the middle ground.

If Pan-Opposition movement cannot show that it is impartial and fair in commenting and making reasonable remarks on the shortcomings of ourselves, we may risk losing credibility in the minds of the middle ground.

I shall use a quote from a prominent Malaysian businessman to end this article:

失败是成功之母，成功也是失败之母。

“Failure is the mother of Success, Success is also the mother of Failure”

I hope that the Pan-opposition movement in Singapore can develop healthily and shall maintain its Moral Compass in maneuvering through the rough seas of political struggle.

Goh Meng Seng