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

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

2016 Chinese New Year Message

Normally at this time of the year, I would be happily preparing my Chinese New Year greetings for all my friends and supporters, but today, my heart is heavy and saddened.

Benjamin Lim committed suicide because of the inappropriate use of police force and this has made my party colleagues and I extremely depressed. I could not imagine how the Lim family could possibly feel anything good about this festive season with such overwhelming sorrows of their lost son. On behalf of my family and my party, I would like to offer our heartfelt condolences to the Lim family.

As a father of a teenage girl, it is my greatest joy to watch my girl grow up. However, if one day, my daughter was to be brutally abused and ill-treated by this ridiculous police state until she has mental breakdown, I would also be totally devastated. Thus, I empathize with the Lim family of the loss of their son. This system of overwhelming police power which was allowed to exercise the most primitive deformed kind of police procedure, based on the first premise of guilty before proven innocence, extended its power to use whatever force including mental humiliation to extract confession, is in fact our common karma.

Benjamin Lim’s death is not solely an insolated incident. His death is in fact an amplification of the absurdity of this system of excessive police power. Every year, there are numerous people who have suffered under this excessive police power. Thus, in the midst of sorrows, we should resolve to fight for our ideal system based on our belief in the balance of powers through the Separation of Five Powers.

On this eve of Chinese New Year, I am also shocked by the devastating impact of the earthquake in Tainan. I hope that our Taiwanese friends could overcome the pain and sufferings with their determination and willpower. I will pray for our Taiwanese friends, praying for the speedy rescue of the trapped and injured. most importantly I will pray for the minimum casualties for this unfortunate natural disaster.

Last but not least, on this Chinese New Year Eve, I sincerely wish every friends and supporters, good health and safe travel in the coming year. Thank you for all your support over the years and I hope we will have a better life in the coming one.

Goh Meng Seng

Response to PAP's change of political rules

Response to PAP's change of political rules

The Prime Minister has announced a few changes to our political system, basically centered around NCMP scheme, down sizing GRC, increasing number of SMCs and rules regarding the Elected Presidency.

People's Power Party is founded on the principles of political reform based on Separation (and Independence) of Five Powers, namely Legislative, Executive, Judiciary, Selection/appointment and Impeachment Powers.

The Elected Presidency

One important advocacy of our founding beliefs is to entrench and enhance the Elected Presidency so much so that, certain powers or government institutions should fall under the charge of the Presidential Office. We are advocating the institutions of Impeachment powers, Selection/appointment powers to come under the purview of the Elected Presidency. Namely, the Elected President should take charge of the following institutions and functions:

1) CPIB
2) Election Department
3) Public Service Commission (PSC)
4) Appointment of judges
5) Ombudsman Commission
6) Equal Opportunity Commission
7) Appointment of key office holders in Temasek Holdings and GIC

On top of that, the President should have the veto powers to block any legislation which he deems detrimental to the nation’s interests. Such veto can only be overturned by subsequent two-third approval of parliamentary votes.

Thus, the reform for the Elected Presidency could be more extensive than what the Prime Minister has proposed.

Although we welcome the proposal of putting the racial balance into consideration for the Elected Presidency, but we object to the proposed increase of power given to the Presidential Advisory Council. The appointment of the members of this Council should not be decided by the ruling party or Cabinet. It should be the sole prerogative of the Elected President to appoint his own Council. Furthermore, the Elected President is elected and empowered by Singaporeans and he should have the full power to make decisions in the interests of the Nation He should be the one who will answer to the Singaporeans who voted him, not the Advisory Council. Thus, the Advisory Council cannot overshadow the powers of the Elected Presidency.

GRC, NCMP and Proportional Representation.

We welcome the announcement of downsizing the GRC. We feel that the correct size for the GRC system should be 3 to 4 seats per GRC.

However, we do not see the necessity of having any SMC nor NCMP if our proposal of Proportional Representation is implemented.

No matter how PAP tries to package it, NCMP has little legitimacy under the current setting. They will always be considered as second class members of parliament or just simply "backdoor MPs".

The advantages of Proportional Representation system coupled with the full GRC system will truly give Singapore's Parliament Plural Voices while prevent the loss of Ministerial caliber members of any political party which would become the ruling party or part of a ruling coalition.

Proportional Representation system guarantees intense contest and competition of ideas and ideals whereby multi-corner fights would not be frown upon or "avoided". It will enhance political competition and consensus building based on plural voice and representation in parliament.

The current system has tremendous flaws. Beside discouraging healthy competition and contests, it also post a danger of instability. If the ruling party lost a GRC, it may risk losing one or two of its good Ministers altogether. This will not provide the kind of political stability and continuity which we need.

The Proportional Representation system also mitigates the problem of the Tyranny of Majority Rule. It would allow individuals or groups with specific focus to contest and chance of getting into parliament to contribute to the plurality of debates. Example, if a group of Nature lovers or Green activists were to be elected into parliament, they will provide a diversity in the debates in various development plans, providing the Green Views instead of subjecting our Nation and future generations to the ills of a monolithic discourse pushed by the ruling party.

Thus, we urge the ruling party to reconsider their plans to change the political landscape to take a serious long term view on the Nation's political stability by adopting a more comprehensive and bold stance of political reform, which is beyond party politics, to ensure that our Nation adopts the best democratic system based on the fundamentals of Separation of 5 Powers.

Goh Meng Seng
Secretary General
People's Power Party

Politics of Negotiation

I shall now make a public clarification on the "half truth" which was deliberately leaked to smear NSP and destroy opposition unity.

In any negotiation,everybody will put up reasoning and persuasions to justify their positions or claims. Examples, hypothetical comparisons and illustrations will be used to make a point.

During the discussion of the Marine Parade GRC, an illustration of the undesirability of 3 corner fight was made using the example of Aljunied GRC, to make a point that 3 corner is totally unhelpful. Unfortunately this was quoted out of context and deliberately leaked to the media to make a big hoo-haa over it.

Subsequently, a secret ballot was called to show which side has a more convincing argument over Marine Parade. This voting has nothing to do with "small parties against WP" mentally but rather, was made in good spirit to register the perception of those in attendance on the matter, since it was the major deadlock of the meeting. This secret voting was non-binding but for the WP representatives to convey the opinion expressed by those who were present to their leaders.

It is with deep regret that such misinformation was exploited to make opposition as whole look very bad.

The truth is, we have made tremendously progress in good spirit with almost all opposition parties participating actively in making the necessary compromises so that our aim of eliminating multi-corner fights could be achieved. When you first see the mind-blogging charts of competing claims, don't panic or assumed that there is a massive disagreement. That is not true at all.

Every party needs to take a breather from the first meeting to discuss with their own CEC members to decide how to proceed from the negotiation. Each party knows exactly what transpired and how other parties think or what were their preferences and desires. It would take some time for everyone to digest and rethink on their own positions. Some might even call up each other for bilateral talks. This will help everyone to resolve the conflicting claims in the second meeting.

True enough, the second meeting was pretty smooth as compared to the first one, using only 1 hour to resolve all differences (save and except for WP who did not turn up) in contrast to the 3 hours used in the first meeting.

I have attended two such previous "Unity Meetings" (yes, TWO and you may wonder which two! ;) ) and I understand how it works. Thus, I was pretty confident that things could work out well. Unfortunately, the Main Stream Media has preyed on the first meeting to present "Opposition fighting each other", which we have denied repeatedly! The meetings were cordial, sometimes fun (yes, we did crack jokes from time to time) and most importantly encouraging with all of us clapping whenever any party relented on their claims to make ways for others!

I am very glad that it is within my expectation that most conflicting claims have been resolved (saved and except for WP because they did not send any representatives for second meeting) and all are well!

My sincere and heart felt thanks to ALL participants/leaders of opposition parties to make this possible. Special thanks to SDP for making the critical compromise which allows us to resolve many entangling conflicts in double quick time. Thanks to SingFirst which has shown great Wisdom in accepting good reasoning so much so that it would agree to give way in good faith.

Last but not least, special thanks to NSP which has made PPP's contest in CCK a clear shot without 3 corner fight.

I hope that with this clarifications, we can put all the bad press behind us and work together to fight against one common opponent, PAP.

Goh Meng Seng

People's Power Party SG's Message

Secretary General's Message

I had a dream when I first joined opposition politics way back in 2001, a Democratic Dream. No matter where I venture politically, this Dream has never left me. Democracy is a very large word indeed and many have different views on what Democracy really is. Checks and balances are important aspects in a Democracy but most as it seems, only stop at the parliamentary level.

Many of the problems with the policies we face right now are partly, or wholly, due to the lack of necessary Democratic system in the governance of our country. From the deliberate inflation of HDB prices, the signing of Free Trade Agreement which affect Singaporeans to the unchecked opening of floodgate to excessive foreign labour, all these done with absolutely no systematic and analytical checks nor consultation.

I believe Real Democracy is built upon a good system of governance which institutionalizes the necessary Separation of Powers within the establishment. It is not just only about having more opposition MPs in parliament but devising a system that would prevent the over concentration of powers into the hands of a few ruling elites.

There is no doubt we have at this point, a system where power play is highly concentrated amongst the PAP ruling elites. It might have worked during LKY’s era but at this time and age since his departure, nobody can be certain that such high concentration of powers will not lead to corruption or the abuses of power in the management of our country’s affairs. We have already seen in the recent AGO report on the government that there had been numerous lapses which were mostly attributed to the mishandling in not averting conflict of interests within the system.

Singapore has gone through more than 5 decades of one-party rule and our development path is a totally skewed one. PAP’s obsession in maintaining its one party rule together with its mindless pursuit of Economic Growth at all cost, has resulted in a total blockage of Democratic development and cultivation. We have also neglected our country’s Social and Cultural Development for far too long, despite its diverse population possessing richness in heritage.

With a new Post-LKY era dawning on us, Singaporeans should no longer take good governance for granted. We should rethink on what kind of system of governance we want for Singapore in order for us to prosper and sustain a quality government that could be inherited over generations. We need to make this happen for our future generations to come. We should demand a better and balanced development for our country, in all the Four Pillars of our Nation; Politics, Economics, Social and Cultural development. We should reject the continuation of the present system of high concentration of powers in governance.

The High Concentration of Powers and Imbalance of Nation building are as important as the bread and butter issues like healthcare, housing, over population, unchecked influx of foreign labour that cheapens our mid tier work force, Free Trade Agreement, high cost of living, public transport, CPF, etc. The People’s Power Party is formed to address the two issues of the High Concentration of Powers and Imbalance of Nation Development. We will provide a Vision for Singapore on how we should strive and prosper in this Post-LKY Era.

Goh Meng Seng

A Public Apology to Tampines Voters

We had our first public walkabout this morning at Chua Chu Kang Lot One. I have made the official declaration that People's Power Party will contest in CCK GRC.

On top of that, I have made a PUBLIC APOLOGY to Tampines Voters:

My team and I have promised to return Tampines to contest right after GE2011.

Throughout the past few years, there were Tampines voters who have been asking about me and my team to go back and contest Tampines GRC. They have expressed their wish and expectation of us to continue our fight in Tampines.

However, we also know that NSP has been working very hard on the ground in Tampines. For each elections contest, a lot of time, efforts and money will be spent. It would not be right for us to get into this ground without any good reason. Furthermore, we also think that NSP's A team has very good candidates whom we think deserve to be sent into parliament.

Taking the example of Macpherson SMC. Some have speculated that I will be contesting in this SMC. I will never do that because I know the President of NSP, Sebastian Teo, had spent a lot of efforts on ground work there prior to GE2011 before it was redrawn into Marine Parade. He had done more than 3 rounds of door knocking there until it was considered a "danger zone" so much so that PAP government decided to redrawn it into Marine Parade.

In fact I decided to persuade and support Nicole Seah and her team to contest in Marine Parade in GE2011 because my confidence of getting a good result was based on the massive ground work Sebastian Teo had done in Macpherson. To be fair, the extraordinary result which Nicole Seah's team achieved in Marine Parade was partly due to the hard work Sebastian Teo has put in Macpherson.

It will be totally inappropriate for me to wrestle my way into contest in Macpherson. Similarly for Tampines GRC.

Thus, it is with deep regret that I and my team have to make this difficult decision to withdraw from the contest in Tampines GRC in the coming GE.

We hope that Voters in Tampines could forgive us for breaking our promise to return to Tampines this GE. We also hope that our supporters in Tampines will continue to support NSP's effort in the coming GE because we believe that we should send in good and deserving candidates into parliament.

Goh Meng Seng

People's Power Party Vision

Secretary General's Message

I had a dream when I first joined opposition politics way back in 2001, a Democratic Dream. No matter where I venture politically, this Dream has never left me. Democracy is a very large word indeed and many have different views on what Democracy really is. Checks and balances are important aspects in a Democracy but most as it seems, only stop at the parliamentary level.

Many of the problems with the policies we face right now are partly, or wholly, due to the lack of necessary Democratic system in the governance of our country. From the deliberate inflation of HDB prices, the signing of Free Trade Agreement which affect Singaporeans to the unchecked opening of floodgate to excessive foreign labour, all these done with absolutely no systematic and analytical checks nor consultation.

I believe Real Democracy is built upon a good system of governance which institutionalizes the necessary Separation of Powers within the establishment. It is not just only about having more opposition MPs in parliament but devising a system that would prevent the over concentration of powers into the hands of a few ruling elites.

There is no doubt we have at this point, a system where power play is highly concentrated amongst the PAP ruling elites. It might have worked during LKY’s era but at this time and age since his departure, nobody can be certain that such high concentration of powers will not lead to corruption or the abuses of power in the management of our country’s affairs. We have already seen in the recent AGO report on the government that there had been numerous lapses which were mostly attributed to the mishandling in not averting conflict of interests within the system.

Singapore has gone through more than 5 decades of one-party rule and our development path is a totally skewed one. PAP’s obsession in maintaining its one party rule together with its mindless pursuit of Economic Growth at all cost, has resulted in a total blockage of Democratic development and cultivation. We have also neglected our country’s Social and Cultural Development for far too long, despite its diverse population possessing richness in heritage.

With a new Post-LKY era dawning on us, Singaporeans should no longer take good governance for granted. We should rethink on what kind of system of governance we want for Singapore in order for us to prosper and sustain a quality government that could be inherited over generations. We need to make this happen for our future generations to come. We should demand a better and balanced development for our country, in all the Four Pillars of our Nation; Politics, Economics, Social and Cultural development. We should reject the continuation of the present system of high concentration of powers in governance.

The High Concentration of Powers and Imbalance of Nation building are as important as the bread and butter issues like healthcare, housing, over population, unchecked influx of foreign labour that cheapens our mid tier work force, Free Trade Agreement , high cost of living, public transport, CPF, etc. The People’s Power Party is formed to address the two issues of the High Concentration of Powers and Imbalance of Nation Development. We will provide a Vision for Singapore on how we should strive and prosper in this Post-LKY Era.

Goh Meng Seng

Singapore is BIGGER than LKY & LHL

I refer to the forum letter entitled “Govt critics riding on Amos’ case for their own cause” published on 8 July 2015 (Today).

The author insinuated that my participation in the protest held in Hong Kong on 5 July 2015 was an attempt to “incite participants of other nationalities” to protest against a “local issue”. And the author opined that I am not “patriotic” because I did nothing to stop the protestors from burning the “effigies” of Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong.

My response is as follows:

1) I believe the author, Mr. David Tan, has never participated in any protest before. It is an extremely common practice for protesters (overseas) to burn effigies of their targeted politicians or individuals. In the said protest, I would say that the printed images of Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong are not even considered as “proper” effigies to begin with.

2) A staff from Singapore Consulate was present at the protest site and he didn’t step in to interfere with the burning of the “effigies”. Is he considered as “unpatriotic” by David Tan’s definition?

3) I do not consider the two individuals, Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong as “representation” of Singapore. i.e. they are NOT Singapore and Singapore does not equate to them. I believe Singapore is definitely BIGGER than them.

4) There are reasons why the protesters have demonstrated such disgust of the two persons, so much so that they proceeded to burn their images. You may or may not agree with them, but this is their way of expression in Hong Kong.

5) As I have repeatedly said, I do not respect dictators and definitely have even lower opinion of Lee Hsien Loong after his administration has chosen to use such inhumane and cruel means against a 16 year old boy.

6) I would have raised my objection to the organizers if they were planning to burn the Singapore flag. They didn’t burn the Singapore flag but only two individuals’ images whom I have very little respect to start with. And I do not think they are in any way, represent Singapore’s sovereignty.

7) Thus I do not see why I should interfere in their protest activity at all.

8) Besides, it is a really bad move if anyone from the Singapore Consulate has interfered in their burning of the images. It will only escalate the matter and create a bigger unnecessary bad press for Singapore.

9) In fact, Singapore Consulate’s refusal to receive the letter of protest from the protesters has aggravated the situation back then, resulted the protesters to take further actions of pasting protest signs on the lift lobby. This is totally unnecessary as the protest could have ended earlier and peacefully.

10) Human right is an universal issue. There isn’t a need for anyone like me to “incite” protest by foreigners against such human rights infringement. The reason why Singapore name is being dragged into the mud is basically due to the total mismanagement of PAP government under Lee Hsien Loong in handling Amos Yee case. Anyone with good conscience should feel angry about this and should question why PAP government has damaged Singapore name internationally.

11) When our country is being invaded, we will stand up and fight our enemies. When our government has brought shame to our Nation, we should speak up against it. Only then, it is true patriotism. We should not misplace our patriotism to support any government which has done wrong and brought international shame to our Nation.

12) Last but not least, I am quite puzzled why the author is expressing more concern of the burning of effigies which didn’t cause any harm to the dead nor the living (maybe only a slight dent to ego) but chose to ignore the unjust, cruel and inhumane harm which the PAP government has inflicted on a 16 year old boy.

13) I would opine that this is a total disproportionate and unbalance focus on the inconsequential issue while trying to sidetrack from the more important issue of political persecution of a 16 year old boy.

Goh Meng Seng

Answers to my Detractors At Anyhowhatum Blog

Credit: Photo by SPH during GE2011

The following are the answers I have given to the critical questions posted to me by one of the my detractors, blogger at anyhowhantam.blogspot.sg

I hope these answers which I have given could address most of the common doubts and questions most people have in mind about me and People's Power Party.

1. Mr Goh you've made quite a few remarks about some aspects of the Worker's Party's style or methods. And to be blunt, some have quite a sting in them. You were of course a former member and stood on their ticket, and people assume that you left in a huff or with acrimony. Did you leave the WP on a good note or were you forced out? (Here it depends how you answer, but i'll assume it's not on very bad terms)

If you feel that some of the remarks are stinging, then you should ask yourself whether it is really relevant with good reasoning or not. If it is just some irrational ranting, then it should not be stinging, right? 

What do you expect from a politician? Do you expect him to be loyal only to their own party affiliations or to the people and Nation? Especially when there are public interests involved, do you just expect politicians just close both eyes because it involves his own party affiliations or do you expect him to stand firm and defend public interests? These are the fundamental questions we should ask ourselves and we have been unhappy about PAP MPs all this while because we feel that they are more concerned about their own party’s interests rather than ours, the voters. Similarly, when it comes to pertinent questions of competency or even integrity, should we do the same as PAP people and keep absolute silence over such issues which may implicate opposition party like WP?

I have explained in quite a number of posts on my blog, I chose to leave WP because of the mistake I have made on the internet which was conceived as damaging to WP’s image. However, this incident has also highlighted the differences I have with WP leadership over internet engagement policy. I chose to leave on my own, without pressure from anyone, because I do not want to create any disruption on WP’s progress just because of this issue.

The exit is cordial, no hard feelings.

2. If that's the case, why then do you express displeasure at the way they do things? Of course I'm not suggesting that every time you speak it's anti-WP, but people tend to remember this more. (again you batted this away - like a baseball player)

As explained in my answer to your first question, it is about Public Interests. You should observe that every comment made is all about public interests; i.e. whether public funds are used appropriately, management of TC is done appropriately, integrity of those people in public office etc.

This is why I have written into my party, People’s Power Party, the important Core Values which we believe in:, namely, Public Service, Integrity, Honesty etc etc. If you view it as “anti-WP”, then I cannot help it. As far as I am concerned, it is “Pro-People” and “Pro-Public Interests”. I could of course, like many other opposition activists, chose to keep quiet over this just in fear of losing votes from hardcore opposition supporters, but I guess that is unhealthy and opportunistic. It would mean that when something wrong happens to my own party’s management of public entities, if we ever win any seats, I will also try to do a hush hush cover up or just protect the party at all cost, instead of being transparent and accountable for whatever mistakes we have made. Do you want me to become like this?

Integrity is something easy to talk about but not so easy practice. It means that even if nobody is watching, you will not steal. Regardless of what situations, you should always be upright in your Speech, Thought and Actions. It means that regardless of who makes the mistakes, even if it is King, Queen, Emperor, own family members or own people with the same political affiliations, you should always speak up without fear or favour, bravely on what’s wrong, what’s right and what should be done or avoided.

I come into opposition politics not merely because I am “Anti-PAP” but rather, I take it as public service and for public service to work towards the welfare of the people and Nation, instead of merely taking side, irrationally and irresponsibly, with any people. My answer may disappoint a lot of hardcore opposition supporters but this is what I am, who I am. If you really do not agree with me or believe in my principles on this basic fundamental position, then you have the right not to vote for me.


3. The point is Mr Goh, no 1 faults you for speaking your mind, but the thing to remember and I'm sure you'll be the 1st to admit, the PAP are very kiasu (or even kiasi). Every small mistake the opposition make, they on it like a flash. They control every aspect of the media, and these things are made into a huge issue. The media not only reports it, they dissect it, examine it, analyse it and even offer opinions on it - unfavourable of course. So the perception is that you bear a grudge against the WP, and by doing so, you're just helping the PAP out. How would you respond to these assumptions/perceptions?

It is actually very simple to deal with such thing. If there is a problem or a mistake is made, just admit it, apologize and promise not to make the same mistake again. There is really no need to take overly defensive position. Just like YSL saga, up till now, we do not know exactly what happened. How can like that?

When it comes to management of public entity, whether we like it or not, accountability and transparency are of utmost important. When there is a question of “integrity”, then it must be addressed thoroughly. But look at how WP treated the whole issue of integrity when LTK has first promised to investigate on why the contractor has not done according to contract but went on to request additional payment from hawkers for scaffolding but later on, retracted this promise and said no investigation is needed. Do we opposition has any moral high ground left when we want to demand transparency and accountability from PAP?

PAP may be politicking to the dot by exploiting WP’s weaknesses but that is beside the point. If WP was able to handle the issue in an appropriate manner, with full transparency and accountability, I do not think PAP could win anything from such politicking.

We opposition people have been harping on PAP’s mistakes as well and New Media is no where inferior than PAP’s controlled MSM. But if you have observed very carefully, PAP has evolved from previous aloofness in treating or ignoring these attacks from New Media as “mere ranting”, to a position of taking serious actions against those “mistakes” exploded on New Media. In fact, they have taken quick reactions to some of the flaws or mistakes exposed on New Media.

My point is this, ths is fair game. Democracy is built upon the premise that Human Beings cannot be trusted with power (any form of power, be it small or big) because over time, Power corrupts, Absolute Power corrupts absolutely. Thus the system of Democracy is based on separation of Powers so that effective checks and balances could be installed. As for politicians involved, we should learn to understand that we should not put 100% trust on anyone of them, including me. Only through active citizenry whereby mistakes and scandals are exposed and people responsible for these are brought to shame, then we can be sure that power, in any form, is not being abused by those in public office.

As far as I am concerned, regardless of black cat, white cat or blue cat, whoever steals, is bad cat. Whichever catches the rat, is good cat. Whichever sleep on its job, is lazy cat. My loyalty only goes to the people and Nation, so to make sure that good cats are maintained in public service. If any cat has turned lazy or bad, then kick them out, no matter who they are, which party they come from.


4. Of course when you briefly quit politics, it's quite alright to speak out about what ails the opposition parties, I notice you've also not been endearing to your former party (which you led) - NSP. But now that you've formed a new party, will you hold back your fire? Unless of course you end up in a 3 horse race, where you have to show the voters there, the difference between you and whichever opposition party contests there, and also against the PAP obviously.

For people who are already in public office, we have to use higher standards to keep them on their toes. For others, we compete on strength, characters and ideas or ideals we can offer. Some people feel that as opposition party leader or member, we shall not speak ill of other opposition party for two reasons:

1) Opposition Unity
2) Self serving

But look at this from another way. Is there any concrete “Opposition Unity” in the first place? WP has declared openly that they will walk their own path. So could there be “Opposition Unity” without WP’s involvement?

Attacking PAP is not considered “self serving” but attacking on other opposition party is considered as self serving? If there is a three corner or multi-corner fights, then you are suggesting that it is alright for me to say bad things against the other opposition parties because we are in direct contest. However, if there is no direct contest, I should not say anything bad about other opposition party’s mistakes made? It is more self serving and opportunistic to choose to say bad things about those who contest against you while keeping quiet when they do not!

Let’s say PAP lost power and WP became the ruling party. So now what? Do we continue to whack PAP but defend WP’s mistakes due to inexperience all the while?

My point is simple, if your actions are dictated by your self interests as well as the elusive “opposition unity”, then you will most probably misplaced Public Interests to be inconsequential. And this is the whole point of engaging in politics, be it opposition or PAP or otherwise. You should have your heart placed at the right place:- Public Service and thus, to safeguard Public Interests.


5. Which brings me to the next question - As you know there's a core opposition vote everywhere - even 'The Slipper Man (remember him?) managed to retain his deposit in a 1 v 1 fight. But since there's only like 27 actual contests (no thanks to the GRCs), maybe the next election we might see 30 contests, finding an empty constituency is going to be hard. The fear is that 3 or 4 horse races dilute the core opposition votes, and also the crucial swing or neutral votes needed to cross the line. Your party being the newest could face a voter backlash, have you considered that?

As long as the total number of candidates from opposition does not overflow, there should not be multi-corner fights. But if there are parties which try to increase their number of candidates, then multi-corner fights are unavoidable. The fundamental problem lies with the total number of candidates, not total number of opposition parties.

If there is really going to be multi-corner fights, then it is about time for voters, especially hardcore opposition supporters, to learn to vote with a discerning mind. It will no longer about PAP vs Opposition. It is not about that superficial “branding”. If opposition supporters just vote according to superficial “branding” instead of scrutinizing the strength and weaknesses of each individual candidate put up for contest, then they are encouraging big brand party to field their candidates irresponsibly! If all opposition supporters learn to vote responsibly, with the aim to choose the GOOD people whom they could trust to bring value and contributions towards the Democratic cause, then there should not be any “dilution” of votes. Unfortunately this would mean other opposition candidates will have to lose their election deposits, so be it. In the long run, it will help to shape the political landscape; political parties should not anyhow put up candidates to contest in multi-corner fights as there is a price to pay.

As for our party PPP, it may be new but it is run by people with years of experiences and most importantly, people with their minds and hearts put in the right place for Singapore with a set of strong Core Values and Political Beliefs. My personal motive in getting back into partisan politics again is to make sure that people who have the competency, capability and most importantly, the right attitudes, core values and political beliefs to get into Public Service as opposition MPs. In short, a gatekeeper to ensure good people are fielded while keeping out those dubious ones. The rest is up to voters like you. If we lost badly, so be it. We will respect voters’ choice but the lost is not merely ours alone. But we believe opposition supporters would be wise enough to vote for the interests of the Nation, not merely for “party loyalty”. The era of “putting a donkey up and you will get my vote” should be over. We should evolve into a more discerning and sophisticated lot in order to advance for a more matured Democracy.

In short, I will do my best for the public interests of Singapore and I hope opposition voters will do the same, vote for the public interests of Singapore too.


6. Of course we all hope there could be opposition unity, but if push comes to shove, are you prepared to take the plunge and have a 3 way contest?

It is a premature hypothetical question. As far as I could, I will try to avoid 3 corner contests. But if I can’t, then I will have to assess the candidates sent by the other opposition party, whether they are really better choice than ours, objectively speaking. If they are truly people of caliber and we believe they have something to contribute to parliamentary debates, we will avoid. If not, we will stand firmly on our ground. For those parties who refuse to reveal their candidates, then it could only mean that they do not take such electoral contest seriously at all. We will ignore them and continue with our contest.


7. And what about losing your deposits, surely you'll have to consider that too? The amount here is outrageous, don't you agree?

It is too premature to assume we will lose our deposits. But if we do lose our deposits, so be it. As I have said, we will respect the choice of voters. No regrets.


8. Ok you've explained why you've come back into politics, speaking to TOC and TRE (video interview correct?) The thing I'd like to know, is why did you leave the NSP in the 1st place? I mean it's very normal for a leader to step down or face a challenge after losing a general election, but that doesn't mean he should actually quit the party. Take Ian Duncan-Smith, William Hague or Edward Heath in the UK. Conservative leaders, lost the election but remained in party as MPs. Even Tengku Razaleigh in Malaysia, he's still an MP despite losing the leadership challenge. Shouldn't you just have stepped down as leader but remained in the party? And you could still come back as a candidate under their banner for the next GE.

If you have a strong guiding principle of Public Service, then you will understand why I left and why I decided to come back now.

I joined opposition politics via WP in 2001 with two things in mind. I have told my wife to give me 15 years and I will try to achieve two fundamental goals:

1) Help opposition to Breach the First GRC fortress
2) Deprive PAP of two third majority

But this should never be at the expense of public interests; I am intolerable of issues of integrity and incompetency.

After GE2011, Hazel wanted to take over the SG post of NSP. I do not think it is a good idea for her to take over because of her lack of experience in running a political party. Running a political party is very different from running a business entity. It needs special skill sets. Besides, she was pretty new to NSP. I could have stopped her if I had contested for the SG post as well but it may create tensions even before the group of people who have just joined NSP could have the chance to integrate with the other party members.

In considering the situation back then, I was extremely happy that opposition, through WP, has finally breached PAP’s GRC fortress in Aljunied GRC. The first milestone I have set for my 15 years of participation has come to fruition. My assessment back then was that I have confidence in WP to maintain the momentum garnered from this initial success and thus, the second milestone of depriving PAP the two third majority would most probably happened in the coming GE. By the next GE, my 15 years “contract” would have expired!

Thus, after much consideration and in view of the achievement of the first milestone plus giving NSP a chance of preventing premature crack or break right after GE, I decided to take a step back and go into partisan sabbatical.

By taking a step back, I see my role as political observer and I should become non-partisan in order to put up my views as independent. It would be wonderful to be non-partisan political observer forever until I die but situation doesn’t allow me to have that luxury.


9. 1 other possibility for your new party to avoid 3 way contests is to of course join forces in a coalition with other parties like the SDA does. You could team up with say SingFirst, the DPP, even the SDA itself and all contest under 1 umbrella. Will you consider this option?

SDA platform is no longer effective without Chiam’s SPP. To create another platform of alliance will take time and it will not be possible for this round of GE. I am open to the idea for opposition parties to contest along COMMON POLICY PLATFORM instead. We find great similarities in some of the policies offered by different people or opposition parties. There are of course differences but we can put aside the differences in policy perspectives and concentrate on the common ground to put up a credible front against PAP’s current policies. I believe this is more important than forming an “Alliance of Convenience”. Naturally for parties who are wiling to collaborate on the common policy platform would not go into clash with each other.


10. If you don't mind, I would like to ask 2 questions which I slammed you for in my articles. The 1st was your leadership of the NSP in the last elections. Do you agree that you made some tactical mistakes -especially in Tampines? I have a few friends there, and they're pretty sore that you left it too late to attack Mah Bow Tan and the sky-rocketing HDB prices. You could have pulled an upset there if you focussed on it by sending an A team, or come very close, maybe even getting a NCMP seat. Do you agree you made a mistake, and will you do things differently this time and go for the jugular?

You are observing from a distance and thus, I do not blame you for your inaccurate assertions.

My attacks on MBT and HDB prices, started at least 9 months way ahead of GE. If you look at what I have written on my blog, you will realize that this is a step up deliberation on HDB issues. Timing was just right actually, to build up on public opinion just before polling day. Although it is really not easy initially to convince 85% of HDB flats owners that their flats should be cheaper, but I should say that the whole campaign on HDB has turned up well.

Even up till today, the strong consensus on HDB flat pricing is still emerging very strongly on all fronts. PAP MBT didn’t dare to hold a debate on HDB issues even I have challenged him three times over MSM!

As for the A team or not, I have already explained in my blog posts. I have offered Tony and Hazel to contest in Tampines, but they have declined. I have offered Nicole Seah to contest in Tampines, she has declined as well. I respect their decisions and I do not force people to do what they decided not to do.

It is on hindsight that people think Tampines is an “easy target”. Way before 2009, nobody hated MBT. Nobody talked about HDB issues. And MBT, as the Minister for MND, has naturally FORTIFIED Tampines with all sorts of upgrading projects. For those who live in Tampines would have noticed that right before GE2011, at every corner you turned in Tampines, you could see upgrading projects in process!

I would also remind you that for Tampines, since ever it became a GRC, opposition party contested there has never crossed 41%. PAP has gotten more than 73% in 2001 and 68% in 2006 respectively! I think it is unfair to expect my team to create a 19% vote swing from 31.5% in 2006 to win Tampines in GE2011! The average National vote swing was only 6%. And considering the fact that this result is a swing of 11.3% after a 10 year period of being under SDA which was a restrain on the development of NSP party’s branding back then, I feel that it is already a remarkable fight.

I should say that it should be clear to everybody that this Minister-Specific strategy which I have applied in GE2011 has shown results. PAP has never wanted to debate or fight on any specific policy issues during any elections. They would AVOID all policy debates or discussion AT ALL COST. They know that they would be cornered into a defensive mode if elections are fought along policy views. They will create distractions or simply ignore strong opposition challenges on any specific policy. I do not think I have made any tactical or strategic mistake here with regards to Tampines campaign, else, you and your friends won’t be feeling strongly that MBT and his team should be kicked out. And the fact is, even when MBT’s team won, MBT has been forced to relinquish his post as Minister for MND! I would say that we might not have won the whole battle, but at the very least, we have won half of the battle of getting rid of MBT as Minister!

For the coming GE, there are new issues and new strategy has been planned. It is not appropriate for me to reveal any details now as it is too premature to do so.


11. The other question is related too - your advice to Tan Kin Lian to run for the Presidency. His 5% not only lost him the deposit, but made Tony Tan President. Do you regret now advising him to run?

I do not think those (about 100K) who voted for Tan Kin Lian would have voted for Tan Chen Bock. Those who have voted for Tan Kin Lian are mostly die hard anti-PAP people who have lost their money during the mini-bond saga. Tan Chen Bock, as a PAP member back then, did nothing to help them or voice out for them. They would have either voted Tan Jee Say or simply spoilt their votes. Thus, it is rather presumptuous to assume that Kin Lian’s participation in the Presidential Elections has cost Tan Chen Bock his presidency.

On the other hand, I supported Kin Lian because he has shown that he is willing to step up to fight against injustice and unfairness during the Mini-Bond saga. Non of the other candidates have done so. In fact, some of the Mini-bond victims have gotten back some of their money because of Kin Lian’s efforts. Besides, Kin Lian was the first one to show any interests in Presidential Elections after the Mini-bond saga. He is never opportunistic in his approach and genuine in his intent to uphold social justice. I do not know much of other candidates but I know Kin Lian well in upholding the values he has put up. I believe in having a President who has strong beliefs and Core Values of honesty, integrity and fairness. If you ask me whether I will do it again to support Kin Lian as President, I will definitely do it again if Kin Lian ever wished to contest. I know Kin Lian isn’t political savvy in his projection of image but that’s also what I respect him for, being truthful to himself without much pretence on what he speaks. Elections, as I have said before, should be putting the RIGHT people, GOOD people into important position of power.


12. Of course such things made you quite unpopular with certain segments within the opposition camp. And you know lah Singaporeans, always have 'conspiracy theories' - some even say you're a PAP mole planted and encouraged to run to dilute the opposition! So are you a mole or Trojan Horse?

I do what I believe in as good for Singapore’s political aka democratic development. I do not take opportunistic view of “winning at all cost”; e.g. putting a donkey just for the sake of winning. I believe strongly in integrity, honesty, fairness and public service. I believe in helping or pushing people with GOOD characters, right attitude and hearts in the right place to serve the people into position of power. At times, I even hope that certain people should not have contested, not because of the lack of paper qualifications or any other reasons, but because I know of their character flaws or they have integrity problem. But in politics, I have to make compromises. For these strange bed fellows, I will not help them in any ways to win because I know that if they win, Singapore will be in great trouble.

At the end of the day, other people can say anything they want but my stance is pretty clear. Moles will not try to help to build opposition parties up, not only one party, but TWO opposition parties, from small ships into credible battleships in such a short span of time. Moles will not push for rebranding exercise of opposition parties, not one but TWO, with all sorts of suggestions and strategies to rebuild public confidence in opposition camp. Moles will not hit hard at the HARD SORE policy issues like HDB, which was the GREATEST POLITICAL CAPITAL of PAP which it has accumulated over 40 years! Well, I don’t think any moles would spend prolonged period of time and effort, in writing policy issues and hitting at the core of PAP’s incompetency.

I can only say, these people who really make up such conspiracy theories, should have their heads checked.


13. Ok I'll try to end it here with just a few more questions. Opposition politics is a lonely and hard road to travel, with so many pitfalls, not only does the PAP try to squeeze you and make the field very uneven, you end up having detractors (including myself) condemning you for your efforts. Do you regret it? Does your wife and family ever tell you, 'Ah Seng, sua lah, enough lah, just quit and be a private citizen?' Do you ever feel like giving up because of the hardships and lack of thanks?

I have no regrets, really. If people like you and PAP IBs ignore me, then it is clear that I am irrelevant. I do not blame you for writing bad things about me because I know you are not insider who will have privileged information to help you understand the greater whole picture. Politics isn’t simple, but it isn’t that complicated at all. Just keep your heart in the right place, do whatever you need to do with your conscience clear, then whatever other detractors say, are totally irrelevant. You cannot please everyone all the time. While I have detractors like you, but I also have strong supporters and following as well. You are my mirror to show me how people look at me. If I have free time like this, I will try to correct your wrong perception. If not, I will just leave it aside. Or I simply learn from you on how I could do better (though this is very rare). I draw strength from lots of people who have given me strong support and encouragement. People who can see exactly what I am trying to do and where I am coming from will have stronger believe in me, my strength and my team.

Every “revolutionary effort”, has always started from a small group of people, with a small group of supporters. In time to come, consistency will prove my point and consistency can only be achieved by having strong guiding beliefs, principles and a set of Core Values.

Well, for my immediate family, of course my wife and child would love to have their husband and father to spend more time with them. But they also know the importance of my political work and I am blessed to have their full support on all fronts. I am greatly indebted to them for their love and support. Most importantly, they are proud of what I have done and what I am doing as well. This is something that money cannot buy.

I have written a few articles in my blog about stories of my childhood. You should go and read it. I am not someone who will give up easily when the job isn’t done. In fact, I love challenges and fighting for social justice. And you must be mistaken. You may think that there are a lot of people who will hate me in Singapore but I am beginning to feel that you are the minority whenever I meet strangers on the streets who will wave at me, smile at me, shake my hand and even thank me and encourage me for the work I have done. It is not “thankless” to me. I felt touched by each of these encounters and this is the main reason for me to carry on fighting.




14. Assuming that you fail again - I'm not trying to put you down, but new party, 1st time of asking is quite an uphill task - just being realistic, supposing you fail again, will you keep plugging away like JBJ and Chiam have up to old age, or is there a time frame where you will hang up your boots?

When Chiam left SDP in 1997 and contested in a newly formed SPP, he won. This was because he was no stranger and he was an MP. I cannot say I am as popular as Chiam but I am confident in myself and my team. Not many people in opposition have all the relevant experiences and skills in running a party, lest running a whole election campaign proper. I am one of the very few who have hands on experiences in planning for campaign logistics as well as media management. Besides, I have a team, though small but with relevant skill sets and experiences, to help me out.

When I gave a briefing on PPP to all the founders and supporters, I have stated categorically that PPP will become the ruling party or part of ruling coalition one day. It may not happen during my lifetime but it will outlive all our founders and achieve that aim. This is because we have started it right, with the right Core Values, Political Ideologies, Philosophies and objectives all embedded in our Constitution.


15. Ok last question - national issues aside - opposition parties tend to overlook municipal issues, which are very important to voters. They want to be assured that a team can take over from the PAP and run the Town Council and their estate well. How confident are you in fulfilling this role, and do you have a team in place that can run the estate seamlessly?

Running a Town Council WAS NEVER AN ISSUE! SDP has run THREE Town Council back in early 1990s. WP has run its Hougang Twon Council for two decades! Why is it an issue now? You will really have to THINK REAL HARD, why do we have issues now when we don’t in the past?

Running Town Council is REALLY a NON ISSUE if you understand Separation of Powers to implement proper checks and balances. On top of that, you must also understand Conflict of interest and how to avoid it.

MPs’ MAIN CORE Job, is Parliamentary Debates, less of estate management. How many PAP MPs really know how to run an Estate? You just employ people with professional experiences and qualifications to do it while you are to ensure the system of management is in proper order with proper checks and balances through separation of powers. On top of that, prevent conflict of interests.

I think most of you have been misled by PAP to put all focus on TC management. This is what PAP wants you to focus on for the next GE, instead of those teething policy issues!

As for the pertinent question about whether I have a team of people who can manage the TC, yes, of course! You just need professional people with estate management experiences to run the TC, not some rocket scientist lah!

Goh Meng Seng

In Memory of Opposition Sage-Fighter - Goh Seng Soon

"The coffin is for the dead, not for old man". This is Seng Soon's pet-phrase. Today, his death has ironically confirmed his pet-phrase: he has to leave this world before he could drink that champagne which he has prepared for years.

Most probably to all those who are not in the field of opposition politics, or even to most of those who are in it, Goh Seng Soon is a stranger to them. However his contributions to Singapore's Democratic political development should not be ignored. He was one of the only 5 heavy weight members in Workers Party who were conferred as "Honorable Member" of the party. He was one of the very few political figures in Workers Party who has the most political acumen, wisdom and idealism. He was also one of the very few senior veterans in Workers Party who has claimed the Badge of ISD.

I have once said Mr. Low Thia Khiang is my initial political teacher, but I have never mentioned, Mr. Goh Seng Soon was however, my advanced political tutor and soul-mate. Along the lonely path of political struggle, I am really fortunate to meet such a good teacher and soul-mate.

To understand Goh Seng Soon's political course, we will have to start from Singapore's political exile and refugee, Tan Wah Piow's saga. Seng Soon was born in a poor family but he was a bright student who seek to take up part time diploma courses in pursue of a better paper qualification. In that era of active student movement, he has the opportunity to get to know Tan Wah Piow and other prominent student leaders of that time.

When former union leader and PAP's MP Phey Yew Kok framed, falsely incriminated and accused Tan Wah Piow of "rioting", Seng Soon became the key witness for Tan Wah Piow. When the said "riot" was happening, Seng Soon was just having coffee with Tan Wah Piow near the venue of the rioting. In the name of Justice, Seng Soon has chosen to fight against the unreasonable and rascal almighty bully all the way without any reservation. No matter how intimidating the opponents were in court, he fought them fearlessly. The crossing swords in court has created a rare excitement in Singapore's judiciary history, so much so that it has become the daily headlines of the then Chinese newspaper Nanyang Sang Pao for that duration. Seng Soon has repeatedly outmaneuvered the Deputy Public Prosecutor that he ended up flipping his tie over his shoulder in frustration!.

Seng Soon admired Tan Wah Piow's talents and he admitted that he has learned a lot from Wah Piow in debating skills and leadership. In view of Wah Piow's talents, Seng Soon believed that Lee Kuan Yew would definitely find every means to get rid of him if possible. This was basically the reason why all of them believed that Tan Wah Piow has to run road, else he would definitely be dead.

When the verdict of injustice came to put Tan Wah Piow into jail for 1 year, Seng Soon stood right outside the courtroom's door and told the reporters, "I guess I will not be going home today". Indeed, he was mentally prepared to be arrested by LKY's ISD. True enough, the ISD agents were waiting for him right outside the court building! He was detained by ISD without trial for more than 4 months. When they gave him the "cold shower" in the detention centre, he retaliated by throwing hot coffee at them and even wanted to beat them up. When they tried to force confession out of him of being Communist, he told them he belonged to the LARGEST PARTY in the world, the Rice Bowl Party. His unyielding and dauntless attitude has left a great impression till today, only that he has left us now. However, being kept in captive by these bullies would inevitably mean that he would be tortured by them. Such humiliation has been unforgettable and unforgivable to Seng Soon. This was basically the fundamental reason for the deep-seated hatred Seng Soon had against the LKY-PAP regime. He has even named his dog "HARRY", the Christian name of Lee Kuan Yew, to vent his anger. Lee Kuan Yew has thus become his "sly fox".

Initially, Lee regime wanted to send Tan Wah Piow to army training immediately after his release from prison. However, after a strong protest from the student unions, Lee regime finally relented and agreed to allow Tan Wah Piow to go back home to visit his family members for a day. Lee regime has sent ISD agents to follow Tan Wah Piow everywhere he went on that day but luckily, with the help of Seng Soon and his friends, Tan Wah Piow managed to do a disappearance act and escaped from the agents' surveillance. After hiding for months, he managed to leave Singapore safely. Seng Soon became the unsung strategist of his escape.

Seng Soon lost his opportunity of higher education due to his involvement in the student movement and activism. Ｉbelieve that if he were to have the opportunity to further his studies, his achievements would be very much greater than it is now. Although he lacked the opportunity of acquiring a proper higher education but he was able to become Consultant, in his own merits, for a wooden plank factory in Indonesia as well as high class restaurant etc. in Singapore over his lifetime.

Politically, his contributions at the back scene cannot be ignored. Even though in his whole life, he has only participated in one General Elections in 1988, but in that battle, PAP has activated almost all its heavy weights to support its candidate in Chua Chu Kang SMC! These heavy weights included Mr and Mrs Lee Kuan Yew, former DPM and President Ong Teng Cheong, current President Tony Tan etc. Despite of such great showing from these PAP heavy weights, he was still able to garner 40.7% in that 1988 GE. The reason why Lee Kuan Yew was so concerned and nervous about Goh Seng Soon's participation in the elections was because if he ever got elected into parliament, they would be facing an opponent more formidable and "troublesome" than JB Jeyaratnam himself!

Even after Seng Soon stood down from frontline politics, he was still very influential within the party. He has helped out with Mr. Low Thia Khiang's grassroot activities during the foundation years and had contributed his time, effort and money on various occasions and activities. He was pivotal and critical in the progress of getting Low Thia Khiang to replace JBJ as Secretary General and undoubtedly, was credited as the most important man behind WP's move towards a totally new era from then on. He has also acted as the treasurer of the party, one of the more important position in the party CEC. He was also the Election Agent of Dr Poh Lee Guan during the 2001 General Elections.

During this elections in 2001, the authorities had created a lot of issues for the Workers Party but Seng Soon was ever ready to engage in the battle of wits and courage with them. In facing the various deliberate unreasonable difficulties created by the police, Seng Soon was always able to collect all evidences and fight if off with the police officers with full confidence. Whenever the police wanted to make things difficult for him, he would put up with a cunning smile and walk off as if nothing happens. This has confused the police until they didn't know what to do with him. In the end, the top police officers in the Ang Mo Kio Police Station were said to be so afraid of him and would avoid him at all cost. It was such an unforgettable terrible experience with Seng Soon that they have given him a nickname, "The Devil from Workers Party"!

In the past, for almost every Sunday, Seng Soon would pay out of his own pocket to prepare appreciation luncheon for those Workers Party members who had gone for Hammer Sales all around Singapore in the morning. After lunch, they would sit down together and count the intake for the Hammer sales on that day. This also provided the opportunity for members to chit chat and enhanced comradeship among themselves. Once the URA called him up and claimed that he has contravened the rules of private residency by carrying out "political activities" in his private flat and they wanted an explanation from him! As usual, Seng Soon was so calm and steady, did not even show any bit of anger when he visited URA. He just left them a simple statement, "If you think I am in the wrong, please sue me in court!", gave them that cunning smile and then just left URA with the staffs stunned. URA was shocked and didn't know what to do with him! Actually, it was only Seng Soon's style to always be prepared for such incidents. He has long collected newspaper cuttings as evidence that PAP leaders had told the press that they had once had a very important meeting at one of the senior leader's house to make a very important decision. If URA was to sue him for breaching the law, then this senior leader must have broken the law as well! Luckily URA didn't take any action against Seng Soon else the veteran senior leaders of PAP would face great embarrassment if they were to be taken to court as well!

Seng Soon was never a power crazy politician. When Workers Party was able to find enough young people to take over important roles in the CEC, he took the initiative to ask to step down from CEC when the election of new CEC was due. However, this doesn't mean that he didn't care for WP' development anymore. On the contrary, up to the very last days of his life, he was still worried about the development of Workers Party.

Among all opposition members, Goh Seng Soon could be considered as a rare species. He has an extra-ordinary huge network in Singapore and he was definitely one of the smartest strategist among the veterans. He could analyse and determine the truth of political reality with his Theory of Relativity and logic. Nothing was too complex to be solved by him. Regrettably, he has left before he could accomplish what he has set out to do.

Although I have learned quite a lot of things with regards to politics and diplomacy from Seng Soon, but I didn't dare to consider myself as his "disciple" because I have not gone through that proper formality. He has a totally different view of this student who was considered by many people as "traitor of Workers Party". In the face of overwhelming WP members' hostility towards me, he was still willing to regard me as one of his soul mates and best friends. I am very touched by the trust he has in me. For some ultra-sensitive information which he would refrain from sharing with his WP comrades, he has shared with me unreservedly. Our mutual trust was built on the fact that we have come to acknowledge that we were both on the same path, we have the common goals and common idealism. He has shown understanding that my criticisms of WP were all made based on the premise of enhancing a better progress and development for Democracy. His only complain to me was that my actions or criticisms of WP has put him in a very difficult spot among his WP comrades. However, he still hoped that I could return to WP. He has encouraged me and even wanted to try every means to put me back into WP. But I have subtly and tactfully put such suggestions into cold storage. Deep down my heart, I was very grateful for his good intentions but I didn't dare to tell him, without me, Workers Party will not die, but if I returned to Workers Party, I will definitely perished!

How many soul mates can one meet in a lifetime? It is even rarer still for a political soul mate. In this lonely political path of mine, Seng Soon was the only political soul mate whom I could have perfect genuine meeting of minds and souls, spoke freely about anything and everything, mutual respect, looked out for each other...etc. He used to joke frequently that he has achieved the status of "Political Sage Fighter", one who have both the wisdom and valor while I was just a "Political Fox"! This was because he was always circumspect and farsighted, could always foretell with divine accuracy in political matters. What he set to do, he would always accomplish it. However, the unexpected had happened and he has lost quite badly in his last battle of his life, in full regret. Now, I am left even more lonely in this path of politics.

The passing of Goh Seng Soon is definitely a great loss to opposition politics. To the Workers Party at this critical juncture of democratic development, such loss is definitely a huge blow to it. As for me, it is emotionally totally unbearable.

For now, I only hope that my teacher, Seng Soon, will have a smooth journey to heaven. You have such little regrets in life, no big deal and you shouldn't be bothered at all. I hope that my little eulogy here could well put your extraordinary life on record of Singapore political history by summing up your contributions to our political development in this life. I sincerely hope that we shall meet again to continue our friendship in next life. Please Rest In Peace.


In Mourning,


Goh Meng Seng

悼一代政枭 -- 吴成顺

“棺材是装死人的，不是装老人的” 这是成顺经常挂在口边的口头禅。今天，这也印证了他这句话，他始终不能喝他那已准备已久的香槟，而先走一步了。

对于许多政治圈外的人，甚至是政圈内的人，也不一定认识吴成顺这个人。他对新加坡的民主政治的贡献，却是不可忽视的。在工人党里，他不只是党内五位被封为永久名誉党员之一的重量级党员，他也是工人党内党员之中极少数最有政治智慧和理念的政治人物。他也是工人党内极少有ISD“勋章”的资深党员。

我曾经说过刘程强先生是我的政治启蒙老师，但我没说的是，吴成顺先生却是我的政治导师与知己 。在这孤独的政治道路上能有个良师益友，是非常难得的。

讲起吴成顺的政治历程，就必须从陈华彪事件讲起。成顺出生贫寒，但天资聪慧的他也努力的尝试半工半读的考取好文凭。就在那七十年代的学生社运大时代中，机缘巧合的认识了陈华彪和其他学生领袖。

在陈华彪被彭由国诬赖骚动时，成顺是陈华彪最主要的证人。事发时，成顺就跟陈华彪在事发地点附近喝咖啡。为了正义，成顺与无理，无赖的强权对抗到底。在法庭上，就算是敌对方摆出强势的阵营，也无所恐惧。法庭上的唇枪舌战，更成为新加坡历史上罕见的精彩。那时的南洋商报更是重点报导。那时的主控官更是被成顺辩得哑口无言，气得当场飙起领带赌气！成顺对陈华彪是赞叹不已的，他也坦诚他从华彪身上学了不少东西。对华彪的机智和才华，成顺认为李光耀必定会顾忌而除之后患。这也是为什么那时他们都认为陈华彪如果不跑路，必死无疑。

当陈华彪被冤枉判罪入狱一年，成顺便在法庭门外对记者说，“我恐怕今天回不了家了”。他已经做好被李光耀政权的内安局ISD抓进牢里！就如他所料，内安居人员真的就在法庭建筑物外恭候他多时了！他被内安局ISD在没有审讯下，关了四个多月。当狱中的人员对他施与冰水浴时，他就把热咖啡丢向他们，甚至要出手还击。当他们向他逼供，说他是“共产党员”，他就说他是天下第一大党的成员，“饭碗党”。他那不屈不挠的精神，至今依旧，只叹人不在。但是毕竟是被强权无理的扣留住，狱中被他们折磨，这耻辱是他毕生难忘的。就因为这样，他和李光耀政权结下了深仇大恨。他甚至把他所养的狗叫作李光耀的洋名“HARRY”来泄愤。李光耀就成了他口中的“老狐狸”。

原本李氏政权想在陈华彪出狱后就马上把他押到军营里去受军训。在当时的学生会强烈抗议下，也只好给他出狱后一天的时间回家探望家人。当时李氏政权出动了内安部ISD人员到处跟踪陈华彪，幸好有成顺这班朋友帮他出了“金蝉脱壳” 之计，才能逃脱爪牙的跟踪，辗转逃离了新加坡。成顺因此成了幕后的无名军师。

成顺因学生运动而失去了读书升学的机会。我相信如果他能有读书的机会，他的成就必定不小。虽然缺乏这样的机会，但他还是靠着自己的本事，在印尼的木板场当过顾问，在高级餐厅也当过顾问等等。

政治上，他背后的贡献也不可忽视。虽然他只当过一次工人党的候选人，但是那次一战竟然使人民行动党出动了几乎所有重量级人物到蔡厝港单选区去为他们的候选人站台！这些重量级人物包括李光耀夫妇，王鼎昌，现任总统陈庆炎博士等等。然而他依旧能在那次1988年的选举中拿到40.7%的得票率。李光耀对吴成顺的参选如此“大阵营”和紧张对待是因为他们知道如果让成顺胜选入国会，他们所要面对的将是比惹耶更棘手的对手了！

成顺退居幕后后，还是起着举足轻重的影响力。他帮助刘程强先生巩固了后港区的基层运作，在不同场合和活动中也出钱出力。在工人党决定让刘程强接棒惹耶秘书长之位的过程中，也扮演了决定性的角色，是使工人党走出新局面的最大功臣。他在工人党党中央当过重要的财政职位，也在2001年大选中，成为傅日源博士的竞选代理人。在这次竞选中，状况连连，成顺更是与警察们斗智斗胆！在面对警察的种种刁难时，成顺往往都是胸有成竹，各种证据都是收集齐备，准备与警方对着干！每一次警方要刁难时，他都以他那若无其事的阴笑面对，使得警察不知如何是好！据说当时宏茂桥警署的高官们都对他敬而远之，毕生难忘！他们都给成顺取了一个外号，“工人党的魔鬼”！

以往成顺还会自费在几乎每个星期天准备好午餐，以好慰劳在早上到全岛各处去卖党报活动的工人党党员。饭后，大家就一起算好那一天卖报所得，也以此为党员联谊，聊天。有一次， 市重建局竟然找他麻烦，说他违反了私人住宅条例，在他的私人房子里“进行政治活动”而要他到市重建局解释！成顺也就如他一惯的作风，不慌不忙，也不动气的到市重建局，只抛下了冷冷的一句，“如果你们觉得我错了，请到法庭去告我吧！”，然后依旧给了他那见之丧胆的阴笑，走了。市重建局竟然被他吓得不知所措！其实以成顺的性格，他肯定是有备而来的。他早已经收集了报章的报导，行动党的大老们曾经自己自爆说，他们是在其中一位元老家里开完政治会议，而做出了某个重要政治决定的。所以如果成顺在他家里慰劳党员算是政治活动，那么在行动党党员家里开政治会议，做出政治决定，也必定是违法了！幸好市重建局那时没有对成顺采取任何行动，要不然行动党的元老级人物可要糗大了！

成顺在工人党有足够新血做世代替换时，就主动的要求从中委选举中退下来。但这不表示他不再在乎工人党的发展。直到他去世之前，他还是为工人党的发展担忧。

在众多的反对党人当中，吴成顺可说是稀有品种。他的人面广，人际关系网络特别大，而且是工人党中最有谋略的老党员之一。他能以相对论和逻辑法，轻易的识破政治真相，对错综复杂的事情都能轻易的解开谜团。但是唯一遗憾的是，他大志未了，便先行一步了。

虽然我从成顺身上学了许多政治和处世待人上的道理，但是我也只能自称为学生而非“徒弟”，因为我没有真正拜过师。他对我这人人喊杀喊打的“工人党叛徒”的“学生”却有独到的看法。面对着众多工人党员对我的敌意，他还是依旧以知己相交，对我的信任，更是令我感动。有些机密的情报，连工人党的同志他都忌讳分享，而他却跟我分享了。我们彼此的信任，就建立于我们都认清了彼此是同路人，我们都有共同的目标，共同的理念。他也谅解我在针对工人党时，是对事不对人，而是在促进民主发展的大前提下所做的批评。他唯一埋怨的是，我这么一搞，使到他周围的同志都对我不满，让他难做人。然而他在生前还是希望我，鼓励我回到工人党去，甚至要帮我，把我弄回去工人党。但是我还是婉转的冷对待了。在我心里，我只能对他的好意感激不尽。但我没跟他说的是，工人党没有我，不会死，我回工人党，我必死无疑！

人生知己几何？政治上的知己更是少之又少！成顺是我孤独政治旅程中，唯一能肝胆相照，畅所欲言，互相尊重，互相照应的知己。他常笑言，他已经是政枭了，我只是政狐罢了！这是因为他经常老谋深算，料事如神，要做的事，总能做到。遗憾的是，人算总不如天算，他还是在他人生的最后一役中，栽了跟斗，遗志未了，惋惜不已哀。而我这政治道路会是更加孤独了。

吴成顺的逝世必定是反对党政治的一大损失。对工人党来说，在这民主政治建设的关键时刻来说，更是重大的损失。而对我来说，更是情何以堪啊！

此时此刻，也只希望成顺老师，一路走好。你这一生中，也只有那么少许的遗憾，没什么大不了的。我这小小悼文，也只能把你一生的精彩，略作记录，为历史做个交代，也为您政治生涯做个总结，以祭您在天之灵。我由衷的希望我们来世再见，再续我们的师徒缘。安息吧。

哀
吴明盛

后记：
有些人对于我用“枭”这字来形容吴成顺是不敬和不恰当的。我倒是不以为然。

第一，成顺本人选择用政枭形容自己，我也了解为何，也尊重他的意愿。
第二，成顺自喻为枭，自有他的理由。你以为你要成为枭，就能成吗？

没有两把刷子的人，是不能成枭的，也许只能成狗熊还差不多！

真正认识成顺的人，都会知道他以枭自居，以枭为傲。我都说了，成顺虽然饱读中国历史，但是他是截然不同的华校生，看事物是坦荡荡的，绝不迂腐于儒学封建论述，更不会理会别人迂腐的思维。

第三，枭雄，对成顺来说，就是对他最恰当和最贴切的形容。他的确可以变得满身杀气来对付敌方。对他来说，对付像李光耀这样的枭雄，就必须自个先成为枭雄！

这就是成顺的傲气所在，对于只是纠缠于文字意义的书生来说，这是他们无法了解的。

第四，所以俗话说得好，秀才造反，十年不成！只有枭级人物，才有那个能耐可以造反成功的。

第五，以下是权威字典对“枭”的定义，其一为智勇杰出的人物

第五，世俗的人往往被误导，以为儒家的那一套才是正统，叛离造反在儒学里是离经叛道的，所以对曹操这类枭雄定了贬义之型。儒学只被君王用于架奴人性，制约叛变造反之心，所以才出了君君臣臣父父子子之说。秀才为何造反不成，就是因为受这种思想困锁住了。