This blog is about the political struggle I am engaging in Singapore. The title "Singapore Alternatives" is chosen because my only political dream is to build a true alternative in Singapore. Alternative to PAP government, of course. As the Alternative, the political party must be able to have the visions and policy insights to lead Singapore. I will write on various policy views and personal beliefs that I think is crucial in building up the Alternative. All constructive comments are welcome.
I have wanted to write about this issue earlier but couldn't get the appropriate "evidence" in time. But it seems that the PAP has taken a step faster than me this time round.
When PAP decided to build these two Casino Resorts (yes, I refuse to fool my readers on the true nature of these resorts by calling them "Integrated Resorts"), they have declared openly that these Casino Reports' primary targets are foreigners/tourists.
However, it seems that Casino operators do not agree with the government at all. This brochure from Resort World is distributed ALL ROUND ISLAND. It provides shuttle bus schedules which covers North South East West and Central.
If we take a good look inside this brochure, we will find a total of 19 pick up points all over Singapore being served by this FREE SHUTTLE BUS service. There are two full pages of DETAILED schedule:
Some may think that there is nothing wrong for Resort World to provide free shuttle service for Singaporeans who want to visit the Universal Studio. But wait, take a closer look at the time scheduled. On normal weekdays, the last bus leaving from most "terminal" bus stop is at 10pm while returning shuttle bus service also ends at about 10pm. However, during week days, the Universal Studio closes at 7pm!
During weekends or public holidays, the timing is even more absurd: last shuttle bus ends at 12am in some places while others ends after 2am! So who do these FREE SHUTTLE BUSES serve? Apparently, only the Casino operates 24 hours!
The above are all documented evidences I have gathered. Marina Sands also provides Free Shuttle Service but I do not have the details. But Sands has the advantage of situated right next to the MRT station.
It is obvious that the Free Shuttle Bus service is aimed at local Casino patrons. Resort World seems to take the fastest step to "rectify" the situation by declaring that all Free Shuttle Bus service to the heartlands will stop with immediate effect. Is this a sign of self confession even before MCYS completes its "investigation"?
Well, does the fault lies only on the Casino operator?
It is unimaginable that the authority didn't know about all these scheduled free shuttle bus services at all. First of all, license needs to be issued to these buses to ferry the public. To run such scheduled service round island at different intervals, it will need at least 10 buses for these 5 zones. Did LTA know about such service?
The Free Shuttle Bus service has been running for quite a few months. (I first heard about it in May.) Brochures have been distributed island wide. There is even signboard tied on lamp posts at the respective pick up point! Photo from Channel News Asia Website
How could such an extensive operations escape the ears and eyes of this government? It actually takes months to react to it?
I am not too sure how the new law created specially for governing Casino operators say about those operators who breach rules on marketing the Casino to local patrons. But I think it is important for the PAP to keep up to its words that these two Casino Resorts are marketing aggressively to local population.
This Free Shuttle Bus service is just the tip of the iceberg. I was told that personalized letters to individuals have been sent to market the Casino. I was even told that credit card holders or some VIPs were given special privileges for visiting the Casino. Are they allowed to do all these local marketing?
Casino gambling is a vice, no matter what. While we ban advertising for things like cigarettes, why should such vice be allowed to be marketed to the people? Besides, PAP has reiterated that such Casino Resorts are meant for Foreigners and Tourists but it seems that this is not the case at all!
I am a staunch Anti-Casino person. I have delivered a speech back in 5 March 2005 to reason why Casino is bad for Singapore. The PAP has claimed that the successful casino in the world has 80% foreign patrons with only 20% local gamblers. But in Singapore, we have seen that the gamblers in casino here consists of 60% of local gamblers! But yet, they are still marketing the casino to local population!
Apparently, the Casinos have broken their promise of focusing on foreign gamblers. They are not keeping to their own term of success, attracting 80% of foreigners but instead, concentrating on marketing to local population!
The other area of problem is the huge amount of credits that the casino operators could grant to its patrons. We just realize that one Singapore businessman has lost $26milloin to the Casino. This is mainly because the Casino is all willing to grant credit to this man, almost unlimited credit.
I was told that as long as you could put up a $50k deposits, you could possibly get credit terms from the Casino!
My question is this, do Casino operators have any finance license to grant such big loans to its patrons? Are the present laws adequate to cope with such extensive loans or credits given by the Casinos? If Casino is allowed to grant such huge amount of loans/credits to its patrons, then it is apparent that it will become a big money lender as well! Shouldn't it be made to abide to existing finance law?
1. Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong has finally conceded what the National Solidarity Party (NSP) has been saying all along: that the government’s liberal immigration policy was poorly thought out, and has had an adverse impact on housing plans. In his comments reported by The Straits Times on 7 September 2010, SM Goh offers the implausible excuse that the government was “caught by surprise”.
2. Given that the government sets quotas on the number of foreign workers to be let in to the country every year, it is ridiculous for the government to claim that it was caught flat footed by a sudden surge in immigrants.
3. Mr Mah has said as early back as 2007 that Singapore is planning for a 6.5 million person population within the next 20 years. Apparently, as a Cabinet Minister, Minister Mah is well aware of the direction that this government is heading to. It is thus inexcusable for HDB, under Minister Mah’s charge, not to respond accordingly to the intended population plan. Minister Mah will have to be made accountable for such mismanagement of the housing planning by HDB.
4. SM Goh and the NSP are in complete agreement over one point: the National Development Ministry, helmed by Mr Mah Bow Tan, is the Ministry that should bear the responsibility for the housing bubble that resulted from this surge in immigrants.
5. On the other hand, NSP is doubtful of PAP’s policy of increasing the population size to 6.5million. The falling total fertility rate (TFR) of native Singaporeans means that the government’s race towards the 6.5 million figure will be spearheaded by a further influx of foreigners. Despite the government’s packaging of the 6.5 million figure as a “planning parameter”, Singaporeans will be justified in demanding reassurance given that previous planning parameters have been exceeded, as SM Goh concedes.
6. Singaporeans across almost every demographic have borne the brunt of this poorly thought out policy: low wage workers have seen their incomes decline as foreign workers depress wages, while at the other end young middle income couples have seen public housing continue to rise beyond their means. Every Singaporean taking public transport has seen the reality of a public transport infrastructure bursting at its seams.
7. In light of all of the above, the NSP calls on the government to urgently revise the 6.5 million person population target downwards, and commission an inter-Ministry study with the purpose of accounting to Singaporeans regarding how housing, transport, and social infrastructure can continue to be assured.
8. The NSP also reiterates our stand that new HDB flats should be sold at cost price to citizens. HDB should also consider selling new flats to PR at market price so to ease the demand due to unusual increase in PR population.
Goh Meng Seng Secretary-General, National Solidarity Party On behalf of the National Solidarity Party 8 September 2010
It has flooded again today, NSP empathize with Singaporeans who have been suffering from these floods which seemingly has become a norm nowadays.
Following our recent call for the government to commission a Committee of Inquiry to look into the recently frequent flash floods, the National Solidarity Party (NSP) has researched into possible short-term solutions to alleviate the problem of flooding temporarily for those who are affected. NSP recommends a combination of three affordable and practical measures that the government can implement quickly as a short-term solution to minimise the threats from future flash floods.
The three short-term measures are: flood alarm system, “Floodgate” and submersible pump.
An effective Integrated Flood Alarm System (IFAS) consisting of Short Message Service (SMS), localized siren and broadcast warnings should be put in place. The government should open up a website for those residents and workers in flood-prone zones who would want to be warned of flash floods via SMS to register themselves there. Whenever a flash flood occurs, the nearest neighborhood police post should deploy personnel to sound off a unique siren around the affected area. Lastly, radio and television broadcast warnings should also be given to drivers and motorists.
We have researched for a relatively cheap, portable and viable “Floodgate” which may help residents and businesses to prevent flooding damaging their properties whenever the need arises. The British Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies, responsible for flood response has made recommendation of the product featured by British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). This product had effectively prevented flooding in business and residential premises where it was deployed. Huw Irranca-Davies, had promised to inject government funding to supply it to Britain’s flood-prone areas. Costing as little as S$700 each, Floodgates may be easily installed into, and removed from, standard doors. We also hope that the PAP government could provide funding for residents and businesses to acquire such cheaper alternative to help alleviate the pain caused by these floods. More details on the product could be found at http://www.floodgate.ltd.uk
Lastly, submersible pumps may be distributed to residents and businesses in flood-prone zones. They can be used to pump flooding water out of their premises if all things fail. The Civil Defense or another defense unit should also be equipped, and deployed, with heavy-duty submersible pumps that are able to channel flooding water into a nearby unblocked drain, river, or reservoir, or the sea.
NSP empathizes with residents and businesses of their pain in coping with these flooding which seems to become a norm after PUB has turned 90% of Singapore into water catchment area. The damages of the few past flooding have surpassed ten million dollars and we believe it will continue to go up.
While NSP believes that the government still needs to commission a Committee of Inquiry to look into long-term solutions, it believes that the above-recommended short-term measures can and should be implemented immediately with government funding in order to safeguard the interests and safety of the residents and businesses in our flood-prone zones.
Goh Meng Seng Secretary General National Solidarity Party
Like many Singaporeans, NSP is shocked to learn that the PAP is only giving due recognition to present NSmen while ignoring those past NSmen who have contributed to the safety and stability of this country.
It is easy for the ruling party to say that it is not just about the money. However, the exclusion of those NSmen in Mindef Reserve from such rewarding system has hurt their feelings more than the mere $9000 in question.
When the Prime Minister mentioned about this hand out of $9000 to NSmen, many Singaporeans are happy and glad that the PAP has not forgotten of the sacrifices and contributions that Singaporeans have made towards this country. Even though some of us may not get the full amount eventually, but at least it is a token of appreciation by the government that matters.
However, we do not expect the PAP to miss out a whole two or three generations of older male Singaporeans who have completed their full cycle of National Service. This leaves a bitter taste in them and it seems to indicate that once they have passed their “useful” time to the Nation, the PAP will just abandon them aside. Such move betrays the cold, clinical pragmatism of PAP rule. It also makes us wonder whether PAP will abandon all of us when we become old and incapable to contribute to the country in time to come!
Leave no man behind. This is what NSP believes in as what the Officer Cadet Course would teach all leaders of SAF. This is also the mantra of PAP but it just doesn’t really practise what it preaches.
Goh Meng Seng Secretary General National Solidarity Party
We are glad to hear the Prime Minister addressing the various key problems that we have been raising for the past one year in his National Day Rally speech.
However, at closer examination, we have the following key points to make:
$60 billion for MRT infrastructure over 10 years
1. Where would the government get the funding of $60B from?
2. Will the PAP government increase the GST to 10% or raise other taxes to get additional funding? Will the public transport fares increase to finance this expenditure?
3. Will the PAP government keep to the promised time frame of 10 years? The PAP government has delayed various important infrastructure projects, like the building of hospitals as well as the Downtown line, which have resulted in the increased cost of construction. Will the PAP government promise to keep to the budget of $60B instead of allowing it to balloon out of control, just like what happened to the YOG budget?
Measures to keep Housing Affordable
1. We are very confused by the various contradictory signals that the PAP ministers have sent within these few months:
a. Late last year, Minister Mah Bow Tan claimed that housing was still affordable, and that the influx of immigrants was not a main factor causing the rise in resale prices. But now the Prime Minister has acknowledged that the influx of new immigrants has contributed to the rise in resale prices.
b. When Minister Mah put up the first few measures in March 2010 to curb rising resale prices, some Singaporeans questioned the inadequacy of such measures. Minister Mah defended his ministry’s decision and said no other measures would be necessary. But just 5 months down the road, Minister Mah has introduced more drastic measures to curb property prices.
c. In March 2010, Minister Mah claimed that the supply of flats was more than sufficient to meet any surge in demand. However it seems that his ministry must now go into overdrive to ramp up the supply of BTO flats.
d. In March 2010, Minister Mah raised the minimum occupation period for resale flat owners who take bank loans from 1 year to 3 years. Barely a few months later, the ministry is now further pushing it up to 5 years. It seems that HDB is unable to provide any policy stability at all.
e. On 26 June 2010, MM Lee said there probably isn’t any property bubble. But now, Minister Mah admits that a property bubble is in the making.
2. In December 2009, after admitting to being “caught off guard”, Minister Mah reassured us of the ministry’s ability to keep this problem of “unexpected” rise in property prices in check. Yet the contradictions as noted above clearly signal that his ministry continues to lose sight of the severity of the problem.
3. The latest drastic measures have caused unwarranted shocks to the whole system. Those who have based their purchases of HDB flats or private properties on the past policies will face great financial losses. The frequent policy changes will erode investor’s confidence in the government’s competency in dealing with such problems.
4. As long as there isn’t any fundamental change in the pricing mechanism of new HDB flats and the increasing demand of new migrants (Permanent Residents) is not effectively met by other means, we do not see how prices for both new and resale HDB flats can become affordable. NSP reiterates our stand that new HDB flats should be sold at cost price to citizens. HDB should also consider selling new flats to PR at market price so to ease the demand due to unusual increase in PR population.
Immigration Policy
1. We do not think that the Prime Minister understands the real problems caused by the huge influx of foreign labour on the ground.
2. PM Lee has raised the example of coffeeshop owners unable to find Singaporeans who are willing to work until 12a.m. and thus they need to employ foreign workers. But the truth is, to ask workers to work 14 hours or more in a day is an act of exploitation. The labour law should be applied equally on both local and foreign workers. We cannot allow employers to exploit foreign workers just because Singapore workers are unwilling to be exploited.
3. We also notice that there are firms putting up recruitment advertisement which discriminate against either Singapore citizens or races. The liberal FT policy that the PAP government has adopted is partly to be blamed for this discrimination of local Singapore citizens by businesses. This practice has to be stopped and NSP urges the government to set up Commission of Equal Opportunity and setting laws to outlaw discriminatory employment practices.
4. PM Lee has ignored the severity of the depression of wages of both middle and lower income earners due to the influx of foreign labour. There is no mention of any concrete plans to deal with this problem.
5. PM Lee may think that foreign labour will help to create jobs for Singaporeans but the reverse is also true. Many Singaporeans’ jobs have been displaced by foreign labour. The problem is so severe that engineers and managers are now becoming taxi drivers. We have invested lots of money in the education of our citizens but such displacement of jobs of foreign labour has effectively made our investment wasted. Here again, there is no mention of any concrete plans to deal with this problem by PM Lee.
6. Raising workers’ levy alone will not help much in preventing engineers and professionals being displaced by foreign labour. Raising workers’ levy will not prevent exploitation of foreign workers nor save jobs for citizens.
7. Last but not least, this liberal immigration policy has caused a serious problem of income disparity within our society. Wages of both middle and lower income earners have been depressed while some have basically lost their jobs and face underemployment or even unemployment. The widening of income gap and the diminishing of middle class are great concerns to social stability but the Prime Minister has not addressed it either.
Conclusion
Although we feel that the Prime Minister has put up a very good pre-election National Day Rally speech but we still find that the solutions that his government has provided are generally inadequate.
We must bear in mind that all the problems and issues addressed by the Prime Minister are mostly the result of oversight by the various ministries under the charge of the respective ministers. All these problems are not new and have been raised by many people including NSP over the year. These problems could be long anticipated as it is the direct result of PAP government’s deliberate policy of opening the floodgates for foreign workers and migrants to come to Singapore. These “caught off guard” ministers should be responsible and made accountable for their deficiencies.
We also note that the Prime Minister did not resorted to giving out goodies or red packets to citizens as a populist tactic to win support. We would be impressed if PAP decides to abandon its past undesirable election tactic and choose to contest the elections based on its policy views, ideas and plans instead. We would be even more impressed if PAP could put up the boundary report way before the impending general elections. It will open up a new era of healthy political competition and engagement for Singapore.
Goh Meng Seng Secretary General National Solidarity Party
Some reporter ask me what I would like to hear from PM Lee's speech and whether those key problems of Housing, Public Transport, Healthcare, floods...etc. Of course, whether PM will give out goodies.
My take is this, the problems of Housing, Public Transport, Healthcare and floods are not simple issues that could be resolved within a short period of time. The fact is, mistakes and oversights have been made by various ministries with regard to the explosive growth in population due to PAP's own FT policy. Whatever he says will not take effect immediately and solve the problems in a short period of time. Thus, most probably he will avoid them.
PAP is just too used to giving out goodies prior to GE since GCT time. Such "populist vote buying exercise" has been entrenched. I would be pleasantly surprised if LHL decided to go into GE without giving out goodies. That would mean Singapore politics will take a turn for a better change in which political contests are based on contest on ideas and strength, instead of pork barrel and vote buying politics. But I guess even if the LHL wanted that way, his party colleagues would not agree. They are just too used to such pork barrel and vote buying politics that they will pressure their leadership to continue doing it. Else, they will feel insecurity and not confident of holding their grounds.
I would want the PM to address the vanishing middle class which result in the worsening of income disparity. When PAP MPs took the signs of engineers turning into taxi driver as a consolation, this is where the problem will explode. Retail stores targeting the middle class have suffered and withdrawn in size. This is a BAD SIGN. We will end up with two extreme polar income earners which will create social tension in the mid and long term. This situation is worsen by the influx of foreign labor which displace the middle class workers or depressing their wages.
These are important issues that could not ignore. But it seems that PAP's economic discourse has always avoid this important issue altogether.
Any students of economics who study Capitalist by Karl Marx would know that such income disparity will eventually result in class struggle and instability. I just hope that our Nation would face this severe problem of income disparity with an open mind and try to resolve it before it is too late.
PAP government is spending $387,000,000 for YOG which Singaporeans have shown very little interest. They even need to FORCED students to volunteer in the event while giving them TERRIBLE FOOD!
On the other hand, there are many problems which the PAP is very reluctant to spend money to solve. The recent flooding needs to be solved but at an UNKNOWN cost which the PM said would be TOO HIGH.
ON top of that, PAP government has refused to provide to many less privileged Singaporeans. They have refused 50% of applicants for public assistance.
This $387million was spent to host 5000 athletes and officials for YOG. This means on average, S$77400 was spent for each of the 5000 guests. This could have lasted 5000 citizens who are on public assistance of $360 for almost 18years!
It is time for us to re-examine the priorities of the PAP government. Why would they be willing to spend hundreds of millions on an event which very few Singaporeans are interested in while become a miser unwilling to spend in improving or helping the lives of Singaporeans at large?
I used to write special posting for each National Day on my blog every year (well almost). Most of the time, the theme is about National Identity.
For personal "ranting" during National Day is quite straight forward. But writing a National Day message for my political party is totally another cup of tea altogether.
I have been helping my party to do the recording of our National Day Message in three languages since last year. This year, I have to do it for myself as well as my friend, Syafarin who is delivering the Malay version.
Although this message is written for my party, National Solidarity Party, but it fully reflects my sentimental at this moment on what this Nation needs to change. The truth is, I have decided to join opposition politics 9 years ago basically because of my belief that I have to change the whole political system of Singapore, for the sake of my future generations.
So here it is:
English
It has been a frustrating year for many Singaporeans.
Although our GDP has grown significantly for the past quarters but the decline in the retail sector speaks volume of the kind of growth we are getting.
Our purchasing power is either stagnant or unable to catch up with the inflation caused by various factors. Any GDP growth that doesn’t benefit Singaporeans in terms of higher purchasing power and quality of life is meaningless. It is at best just another justification for the ministers to increase their own pay.
On the other hand, we have to ask ourselves while our Nation achieves almost 20% growth in GDP for the last quarter but have our income achieve even half of that growth?
Besides, the cost of having such high GDP growth is tremendous. We are just increasing more and more foreign labour to achieve growth. This may result in suppressed wages for Singaporeans and at the same time, a more crowded place for everyone else.
According to our study and research, the PAP government has consciously embarked on a very aggressive foreign workers policy to help boost the economy since 2006. However, many ministers, including the Ministers for Transport, Health and National Development are basically “Caught off Guard” by such explosive population growth.
Our public transport system could no longer cope with the excessive increase of population over such short period of time. The growth in train and bus services is lagging far behind the growth of population over the years. This results in over crowded MRT trains and buses during peak hours.
On top of that, the fares have increased for many of us since July, for as much as 7% or more!
Our HDB flat prices are shooting off the roof. HDB failed to build enough flats to cope with the population growth. The need of paying a 30 years mortgage for a simple HDB flat is definitely not a sign of affordability.
Hospital care is the most important matter of life and death. However hospital beds are in great shortage as the building of the new hospital is delayed for nearly a decade. It seems that the Ministry of Health does not plan ahead. The problem could be so acute that sometimes patients have to be left lying along the corridors of the wards!
But yet, our Prime Minister has just declared that we need another 100 thousand more foreign workers! Are we supposed to endure a further deterioration of these problems?
The recent floods that we have are creating doubts on the competency of the highly paid PAP government. We do not want to hear excuses from “once in 50 years”, “it is impossible to be flood free” to “it is an act of God”. When we are paying the world’s highest pay to the ministers, we expect such fundamental problems to be solved.
To suffer 3 or 4 floods within a couple of months is totally unacceptable to a small island that prides itself as a modern world-class city state.
All these happenings come under the charge of the world’s most expensive ministers in Singapore. We need accountability but there is none. We need proper checks and balances but there is little.
Singapore needs to progress both economically as well as politically in a balanced way. We should not just aim for some huge GDP growth at all cost. We should also build a political system whereby accountability is effectively in place.
It is time for us, my fellow Singaporeans, to reflect upon all these happenings during this National Day. We have to ask ourselves what kinds of living environment and quality of life we want for our children. High GDP growth no longer guarantees better quality of life but in contrary, lower our overall standard of living.
We also have to ask ourselves whether we want our children to inherit a political system that is based on total dominance of power by a single ruling party, which will use every means to fix its opponents and those who hold alternative views. Do we want our children to inherit a government which only demands the highest pay in the world but shy away from accountability and responsibility?
We need a change to this system and we need courage to change it.
Tahun ini merupakan tahun yang menghampakan ramai rakyat Singapura. Meskipun GDP kita telah meningkat dengan banyaknya dalam beberapa bulan kebelakangan ini, sektor runcit yang menjunamlah yang memberi kita gambaran yang sebenar tentang pertumbuhan ekonomi kita.
Kuasa membeli kita sama ada telah mendatar atau tidak dapat menampung kadar inflasi . Sebarang pertumbuhan GDP yang tidak memberi faedah kepada rakyat Singapura dari segi kuasa membeli dan mutu kehidupan yang lebih tinggi tidak bermakna sama sekali.
Keadaan begini hanya memberi peluang kepada para menteri kita menaikkan lagi gaji mereka sendiri. Sebaliknya pula, kita mesti tanya pada diri kita – negeri kita telah mencapai hampir 20% pertumbuhan GDP bagi tiga bulan terakhir ini tetapi adakah pendapatan kita akan mencapai separuh daripada kadar pertumbuhan tersebut?
Kita harus berbelanja lebih untuk menampung pertumbuhan GDP yang begitu tinggi. Kita terpaksa menambah lebih banyak lagi tenaga asing untuk mencapai pertumbuhan tersebut. Ini bermakna pendapatan bagi rakyat Singapura akan dicantas dan pada masa yang sama, negeri kita akan menjadi lebih sesak dengan orang asing.
Menurut kajian kami, pemerintah PAP memang dengan sengajanya memulakan pengambilan tenaga kerja warga asing ini secara melampau sejak 2006 semata-matanya untuk merancakkan ekonomi. Bagaimanapun, kebanyakan menteri kita, termasuk Menteri-menteri Pengangkutan, Kesihatan dan Pembangunan Negara, telah disentakkan dengan pertumbuhan penduduk yang mendadak.
Sistem pengangkutan awam kita tidak dapat lagi menampung ledakan penduduk yang keterlaluan dalam masa yang begitu singkat. Perkhidmatan MRT dan bas-bas begitu lembab dibandingkan dengan pertumbuhan penduduk yang semakin banyak kebelakangan ini. Ini membuat keadaan begitu sesak dalam MRT dan bas-bas pada waktu puncak. Untuk memburukkan keadaan lagi, Kebanyakkan di antara kita terpaksa membayar tambang yang lebih sejak bulan Julai ini, adanya sehingga mencecah lebih 7%.
Harga flat-flat HDB kita sudah membumbung tinggi. HDB gagal membina flat-flat yang cukup bagi menampung pertumbuhan penduduk yang begitu pesat. Sekarang kita perlu membayar duit rumah selama 30 tahun untuk sebuah flat HDB yang biasa – ini menandakan rumah bukan lagi sesuatu yang kita mampu.
Penjagaan kesihatan di hospital merupakan perkara terpenting antara hidup dan mati. Bagaimanapun, katil-katil di hospital sudah banyak berkurangan disebakan pembinaan sebuah hospital baharu tergendala selama hampir sedekad. Ini membuktikan betapa Kementerian Kesihatan tidak memandang jauh semasa membuat rancangan untuk memastikan pertambahan katil-katil hospital seiring dengan pertumbuhan penduduk yang melampau. Masalah ini menjadi begitu runcing apabila ada pesakit-pesakit yang terpaksa berbaring di tempat lalu lalang di wad-wad hospital.
Nanum begitu, baru-baru ini Perdana Menteri kita mengumumkan bahawa kita memerlukan lagi 100 ribu pekerja asing! Adakah kita harus bertahan lagi dengan keadaan yang sememangnya telah begitu buruk?
Banjir yang menimpa kita baru-baru ini membuat kita tertanya-tanya tentang kebolehan pemerintah PAP yang bergaji lumayan. Kita tidak mahu lagi dengar alasan-alasan seperti “hanya sekali dalam 50 tahun”, “mustahil kita tidak dilanda banjir”, dan “ini kuasa Tuhan”. Kita harapkan perkara-perkara asas sebegini dapat ditangani memandangkan kita membayar menteri-menteri kita gaji yang paling lumayan di muka bumi ni. Tetapi kita terpaksa mengharungi 3 atau 4 banjir dalam masa dua bulan dan ini amat tidak munasabah bagi sebuah pulau kecil yang mendabik dada sebagai sebuah bandar moden bertaraf dunia.
Semua ini berlaku di bawah jagaan menteri-menteri termahal dunia di Singapura. Kita perlu ada pertanggungjawaban tetapi tiada langsung, Kita perlu ada mekanisme keseimbangan tetapi terlalu sedikit.
Singapura perlu maju dalam kedua-dua bidang ekonomi dan politik dengan cara yang seimbang. Kita tidak harus mensasarkan pertumbuhan GDP yang besar sehinggakan mutu kehidupan kita sengsara. Kita harus ada sistem politik di mana terdapat pertanggungjawaban.
Saudara-saudara dan saudari-saudari setanah air, masanya telah tiba untuk kita memikirkan tentang perkara-perkara ini sempena Hari Kebangsaan kita. Kita perlu tanya pada diri kita – suasana kehidupan yang bagaimanakah yang kita mahukan untuk Singapura. Pertumbuhan GDP yang tinggi tidak lagi menjamin mutu hidup yang lebih baik tetapi sebaliknya, merendahkan taraf kehidupan secara keseluruhan.
Kita juga perlu tanya pada diri kita sama ada kita mahu anak-anak kita mewarisi sistem politik berteraskan kekuasaan mutlak di bawah pemerintahan satu parti, yang akan menggunakan apa cara sekalipun untuk ‘kerjakan” lawan mereka dan sesiapa sahaja yang mempunyai pandangan yang berbeza.
Kita perlu menukar sistem sebegini dan kita perlu berani menukarnya.
Selamat menyambut Hari Kebangsaan. Dirgahayu Singapura.
MM Lee has claimed that no amount of Engineering could prevent floods.The Japanese has proven MM Lee WRONG.
The Japanese has started to build the G-Can, termed as "Underground Temple" to rid Tokyo of floods. This massive project which cost about S$4Billion was started in 1992 and completed in 2006. You can view more photos and read the introduction of G-Can here.
It has almost rid Tokyo of flooding due to typhoons and heavy rains. It is also believed that it could act as a massive underground bomb shelter.
You could read about the background information of this G-Can Underground Temple here.
Instead of letting GIC and Temasek Holdings losing billions of dollars in financial crisis, it will only cost us less than 10% of the total losses suffered by GIC and Temasek Holdings to engineer our way out of flooding. Tokyo is many times bigger than Singapore and I guess we should use less than the total amount of money needed for such project.
The following is a video in Japanese which show what will happen if such flood control measures like G-Can is not in place:
The video is part of a Japan government report warning that as many as 3,500 people could die in the event of such flooding. Water would also quickly flow into Tokyo’s subway network, putting as many as 97 stations out of commission.
In the past two weeks, when my party, National Solidarity Party, went on our usual political outreach on Sundays to promote our publication North Star, we were warned for illegal hawking and our Vice President Christopher Neo was eventually summoned for this offence of "illegal hawking". I shall not deal with the details of the case here but it is pretty bizarre that political activists who make sacrifice of their time and effort to be involved in public service of politics were charged for "illegal hawking".
It is pretty insulting actually. Most probably someone in National Environment Agency doesn't really know what exactly an illegal hawker is. I will illustrate what it means to be an illegal hawker here.
I am born in a poor family of 10. My parents have to feed and send 8 children to school. I am proud to say that my parents have given all they have to provide these 8 children the best education that each could achieve and that include sending 1 to polytechnic, 2 to local universities and 1 overseas.
They could only do that by becoming illegal hawkers. There is nothing shameful to admit that I was also an illegal hawker since I was 5 years old, helping my parents to mend our temporary "stall" or going around the flats to sell their lasi lemak, ottah kwei and bee hoon. I am the youngest and thus I have to help out in the morning before I go to school. I spent most of my holidays hawking these food "illegally". If there is anything PAP or ISD want to dig, this is the ONLY DIRT they could find about me, a young illegal hawker at the age of 5 till 11.
My parents have to wake up 3am in the morning to prepare all the food for sales to the morning working crowd.They have made a name for themselves in the neighbourhood for selling the delicious nasi lemak and dumplings. Pre-orders for dumplings during the festive season were in the tens and hundreds. Well, I did receive orders from my fellow Primary School classmates quite frequently as well. They still remember my parents' nasi lemak and will mention it each and every time without fail when we have our occasional reunions!
Beside helping out the sales, which trained me to be very quick in mental Maths calculation (yeah, that's why I scored full marks for my Maths in Primary school!), I have to help out with the carry of bags of chili and endure the strong smell of belachan when they prepare the chili for the nasi lemak. All 10 of us have to squeeze in a small two-room rental flat with only 1 bedroom.
Life was tough but enjoyable though. I enjoyed every minute of it, especially going up that 20 storey high flats to shout out "Ottah, Ottah kwei, Nasi Lemak!" Even the avoidance of the "dee gu" (law enforce officers from NEA) was just like hide and seek or playing catching for me.
My parents have tried to apply for hawker license many times but failed. They were not granted the license or any hawker stall at the market. But for survival sake, they have no choice but to become illegal hawkers to bring 8 children up and provide them with all the education they could get. If they haven't done that, there might be another 8 delinquent youngsters on the streets and eventually add on to the social problems of Singapore!
It was all pure hard work and determination of earning enough money to raise 8 children with proper education that make them carry on with that label "illegal hawkers". To me, I am proud of my parents for their dedication to us, their children. "Illegal hawkers"? Who cares! When the system fails to provide the adequate means for the family to survive, then we will have to find our own ways to survive.
Nobody wants to break the law unnecessarily. I do not view my parents as "law breakers" but rather survivors of the system on the fringe. They did not choose to cheat, rob or become criminals but just "illegal hawkers" to earn a living for all of us. When the survival of the family is at stake, you will have to find ways to fight the lesser evil of the law.
I write this to illustrate one very important point. As far as possible, we will be law abiding citizens. But when the circumstance is such that our survival is being threaten, the only way would be playing on the fringe of the law. The situation NSP and all other opposition parties are facing due to the inappropriate enforcement of "illegal hawking" law on us is pretty similar to my story.
The survival of NSP is being threaten now due to this "illegal hawking" summon. The only difference is that WE ARE NOT HAWKERS but VOLUNTEERS in Political Public Service. The law is inappropriately applied to us and it would mean that politically, NSP will face closure if its political activity of promoting its messages and publications are being curtailed.
Just today, I have met an old gentleman who accused us of appearing just before elections. I explained to him that we have been selling our North Star all around Singapore for years! PAP has always sneered at opposition parties by saying we only work when elections come. That is totally untrue and PAP knows it. Be it walkabout on the ground or various press releases on policies and current issues, NSP has been pretty active doing all these.
It is now NEA trying to curtail our political activism on the ground by issuing such silly summon of "illegal hawking". Choosing between becoming a totally law abiding of silly law which make us politically inactive and being an effective political party actively engaging the ground but risks being summoned as "illegal hawkers" by NEA, I would choose the later. I am not here to make NSP just a flower vase of PAP's farce pseudo Democracy. I am here to make NSP an effective party that would actively challenge and put proper checks and balances on PAP's dominance of power.
This is not only about the survival of NSP or any other opposition parties alone. It is about the sustainability of the healthy political development for Singapore. If there is a small price to be paid as being insulted as "illegal hawkers" by the unreasonable PAP's rule, so be it.
We will continue to carry out our usual weekly political outreach on Sundays from this Sunday onwards.
On top of that, if you are unable to see us on the ground but very curious about what kind of publication the authority doesn't want us to sell on the ground, you could purchase a copy from our NSP website at the following address:
The following is the news in Reuters on DBS paying compensation to Minibond victims in Hong Kong:
DBS Hong Kong to pay $84 mln in Lehman settlement
PRESS DIGEST - Hong Kong - July 14
DBS Group Holdings Limited 4:05pm GMT+0800 HONG KONG | Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:13am EDT July 14 (Reuters) - DBS Hong Kong, a unit of Singapore's DBS Group Holdings (DBSM.SI), will pay out a combined HK$651 million ($84 million) to some buyers of Lehman Brothers constellation notes, the territory's financial regulator said on Wednesday.
Customers classified by the bank as having a low to medium risk profile would receive their money returned plus interest that would have been payable had it been placed in a fixed-term deposit, Hong Kong's Securities and Futures Commission said in a statement.
Investors in Singapore, Hong Kong and Indonesia who bought the product had lost their money after the U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers went under in 2008.
The constellation notes are credit-linked notes related to the collapsed U.S. bank. (Reporting by Kelvin Soh; Editing by Chris Lewis)
I have played a very small role in this Minibond Saga, both in Singapore and Hong Kong. But I am very glad that the Hong Kong Victims have finally get at least 60% to 70% compensation from the banks and financial institutions.
This is especially an important lesson for Singaporeans to understand how TRUE DEMOCRACY could work to their advantages in times of such crisis. The Hong Kongers have put great pressures on its government to make good of a settlement for the Minibond saga. This could only be possible with the help and pressure exerted by the Pan-Democratic Legislative Councilors (equivalent to our MPs in parliament) through the various hearings conducted by the Legco.
In Singapore, the government would prefer to protect the interests of the banks and financial institutions in such an ultra-capitalist manner basically because the government itself holds substantial shares in most of the local financial banks and institutions. It would be difficult for the government to be a good referee (i.e. regulator) as well as the main players (shareholders of these institutions). Naturally, the interests of investors would be compromised in the process.
This situation is further worsen by the fact that there is a lack of true checks and balances in parliament. In HK's case, the Legco enforce an equivalent of "Commission of Inquiry" to get civil servants from the Finance ministry as well as chiefs of those banking institutions to be questioned thoroughly. Such pressure has finally paid off by a reasonable settlement being made by getting the institutions to compensate up to 60% to 70% to their investors.
In great contrast, Singapore Minibond victims are left to their own peril. Whatever little effort the MAS puts up, the settlement is a sham which favors heavily to the financial institutions, with compensations as little as 10% only. The only consolation is that Great Eastern has willingly put up 100% compensation to its investors.
But we cannot trust and depend on the magnanimous acts of these institutions. We must have a system which could balance the interests of the masses vs the capitalists. We should not have a government that will face conflict of interests in this case, to act responsibly and fairly.
It is an important lesson of the Democracy for all of us. You will not realize the importance of Democracy unless you need it.
The following is an article by "Blowing in the Wind" on the comparison of New and Old bus fares:
Old and new bus fares compared It's not only long-distance commuters who have to pay more under the new fares in Singapore. So do many others if you compare the old fares with the new. Here's how the so-called "distance-based" new bus fares compare with the old fares, which were based on how many "stages" one travelled. I am comparing only the adult fares payable by EZ-Link cards on air-conditioned buses.
Up to 3.2 km now 71 cents, earlier 69 cents (up to 4 stages)
3.3 km to 4.2 km now 81 cents
4.3 km to 5.2 km now 91 cents, earlier 3.6 km to 5.6 km 91 cents (4.5 –7 stages)
5.3 km to 6.2 km now $1.01
6.3 km to 7.2 km now $1.09, earlier 5.6 km to 8 km $1.11 (7-10 stages)
7.3 km to 8.2 km, now $1.15
8.3 km to 9.2 km now $1.21, earlier 8.4 km to 10.4 km $1.21 (10.5 – 13 stages)
9.3 km to 10.2 km now $1.25
10.3 km to 11.2 km now $1.29
11.3 km to 12.2 km now $1.33
12.3 km to 13.2 km, now $1.37
13.3 km to 14.2 km now $1.41, earlier 10.8 km to 14.4 km $1.31 (13.5 – 18 stages)
14.3 km to 15.2 km now $1.45
15.3 km to 16.2 km now $1.49
16.3 km to 17.2 km now $1.53
17.3 km to 18.2 km now $1.57, earlier 14.8 km to 18.4 km $1.41 (18.5 – 23 stages)
18.3 km to 19.2 km now $1.61
19.2 km to 20.2 km now $1.64
20.3 km to 21.2 km now $1.67
21.3 km to 22.2 km now $1.70
22.3 km to 23.2 km now $1.73, earlier 18.8 km to 23.2 km $1.50 (23.5 – 29 stages) 23.3 km to 24.2 km now $1.75
24.3 km to 25.2 km now $$1.77
25.3 km to 26.2 km now $1.79
26.3 km to 27.2 km now $1.80 , earlier 23.6 km to 28 km $1.60 (29.5 – 35 stages)
27.3 km to 28.2 km $1.81
28.3 km to 29.2 km now $1.82, earlier 28.4 km and more $1.65 (35.5 stages or more. That was the maximum fare)
You can see the fares between 29.3 km and 39 km in the chart below.
39.3 km to 40.2 km now $1.93
Over 40.3 km $1.94 (now the maximum fare)
Both the old and new fares were taken from the SBS website when I blogged about them (When is a fare hike a fare cut?) in April when the new fares were announced. The old fares used to be based on "stages". But I could convert them to kilometres since each "stage" covered a distance of 800 metres.
The new fares can be seen in a chart on the SBS website, which seems to have taken down the old fares. Here's the complete new fare chart which I also published in my earlier post.
I asked in my earlier post if the Public Transport Council could please explain how two in three commuters won't have to pay more despite the fare hike.
For that's what it said it found in a survey.
But now the Straits Times reports more than 80 per cent of the 600 respondents in a Hardwarezone.com poll said they have to pay more since the new fares came into effect on July 3.
An insightful sum up of recent draconian acts of the PAP government in recent month by Mr. Joshua Chiang
First there was the barring of former ISD detainee and 'Marxist conspirator' Vincent Cheng from speaking at a public forum organised by the NUS History Society at the National Library.
Then there was the forum held at Fort Canning Park two weeks ago where another ex-detainee, Teo Soh Lung launched her book "Beyond The Blue Gate" about the events surrounding Operation Spectrum and her days as a detainee in Whitley Detention Centre. That, surprisingly went ahead without incident. Despite the fact that there wasn't any official outcry over the book, only one major bookstore, Kinokuniya now sells it. (Though you can purchase it from other sources here -
a) Contact Rizal via cellphone: 91460944 or email: isrizal@function8.org b) Online purchase through Ethos Books Online c) Select Books (Tanglin Shopping Centre) d) At Pagesetters Services Pte Ltd, 65 Ubi Crescent, #06-04 Hola Centre, Singapore 408559
There are no other major bookstores in Singapore whom I know will carry titles critical of the Government, for eg. books by Chee Soon Juan. (But you will find Men In White, The Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew displayed proudly at all other major bookstores)
But one book apparently got the authorities worried enough to ban its sales in Singapore, even going to the extent of asking Kinokuniya to remove it from its shelves. The book in question is Once a Jolly Hangman. It paints an extremely unflattering picture of the process in which Singapore carries out its Mandatory Death Penalty, except that, based on what the author unearthed, the process appears rather abituary. (see here - http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/07/new-book-puts-death-penalty-on-trial/)
You will also be surprised that the opposition party newsletter you pay a dollar for, for the past donkey years, is actually not allowed to be sold as the political parties do not have an NEA license to 'Hawk'.
Now this is worrying because not only is selling the newspapers the major source of income for most oppositional parties, it is the best way in which they can disseminate their views. We know of course that dropping political pamphlets into letterboxes is wrong (http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/04/that-anti-pap-flier/). Last I heard the chap who distributed the anti-PAP flier has been arrested. Getting around the lack of a hawking license to sell the party papers is not as easy as it seems because you will find all sorts of laws and legislation that are so loosely written that they can easily be used to stop you from selling anything.
Which leads us to the question of why did NEA act only now, considering that opposition parties had been selling their stuff on the streets for years. I've even bought a copy of The Hatchet Man from JBJ once.
Well I wouldn't presume to read the authorities' minds but you would be interested to know that most opposition parties nowadays regularly sold out their newsletters. Which means every time a party goes out to the housing estates and hawker centres, 3,000 copies of publications containing alternate views gets circulated around. It also means that there are many people sick and tired of reading the Straits Times.
All in all, it is a rather oppressive month, and not because of the weather. I remember a National Day speech by PM Lee in 2006. He said, "We have to debate. If we didn't have a debate, I think we will come to the wrong conclusion." Right now my impression of 'debate' is really the joke I keep using - "Debate is de thing that you catch de fish with".
------
On a very separate note, my brother's maid returned to Burma for good. (Sorry i can't bring myself to call it "Myanmar" - it is the name the regime, and those who recognize the regime uses) Just the day before she left, I asked if she could get me an autographed poster of Aung San Suu Kyi. It amused her to no end.
We hereby categorically make the following open statements with regards to NEA’s action against us in our recent outreach on 4 July 2010 at Blk 137 Tamines St 11:
1) We strongly believe that it is totally inappropriate to use the Environment Public Health Act to charge us for “Illegal Hawking” when we are merely promoting our party publication North Star News. There is no issue of public hygiene with regards to selling a publication. There is no applicable licence, as confirmed by NEA officer, for political parties carrying out such activity. How could we be charged for not applying a licence under the ACT when there isn’t a relevant one to start with?
2) We are a legally registered political party carrying out our legitimate political outreach just like any other political parties or grassroot organizations like the Resident Committees (RC). We sell publications just like all other political parties, including PAP (in some branches) and RC which periodically send members to sell National Flags, dinner tickets, fun fare tickets etc. We are all volunteers who are providing Public Service in terms of grassroot or political activism. WE ARE NOT HAWKERS, least illegal ones, who depend on such activities to earn our individuals’ livelihood.
3) It is a total blatant INSULT to us, including all other social-political activists (from RP, WP, PAP, RC etc), who have sacrificed their free time and effort when NEA considered all of us as ILLEGAL HAWKERS.
4) We are a lawful and law abiding organization but we will not ignore UNFAIR and UNREASONABLE rules and regulations. We will fight to change these rules and regulations for the betterment of Singapore.
5) We will defend our Dignity as political activists in Public Service with whatever little resources we could garner.
6) However, we also hope that we could first meet up with the relevant people in NEA with the authority and power to make decisions on such serious matters to resolve this issue ONCE AND FOR ALL for the benefits of ALL social political activists who are actively engaged in their respective organizations.
7) With due respect to NEA as the law enforcer, we will voluntarily take a temporary break for the coming Sunday (11 July 2010) and we hope that NEA would reciprocate by meeting up with us to resolve this serious matter amicably.
New Distance Fare System is Fare Hikes in Disguise
We are greatly disappointed by the new fare system that the PTC intended to implement on 3rd July 2010. Our recent research on SMRT as well as LTA Public Transport websites shows that almost all the MRT fares that we have checked from different lines have increased quite substantially.
Please refer to the following table for our findings:
We are not able to do a complete table on the various fare comparisons for all possible rides but from our sample findings, it shows that fare increase resulted from the new Distance Fare system ranges from 3.75% to more than 7%.
The PTC has not made such straight forward indications when they try to convince Singaporeans that most of them will enjoy lower fares for their daily travels on public transport. The PTC should stop misleading Singaporeans with its assertion that most Singaporeans would benefit from this new fare system. PTC should be more truthful upfront by publishing the whole matrix of comparisons between fares for MRT rides between all possible combinations.
Any fare increase more than 2% in such simple straight forward MRT rides is totally unacceptable as wage increase for many of the lower wage earners who utilize public transport most do not have much increment on their wages.
Many Singaporeans rely on MRT for their travelling needs and there is little alternative to MRT rides without wasting great amount of time in interchanging between buses and being trapped in traffic jams. Such enormous outrageous hike in fares is totally unacceptable for a monopoly like SMRT.
On the other hand, it is impractical to expect bus commuters to waste time changing buses during peak hours just to “enjoy” any lower fares. Such “lower fares” may only be lower in comparison with the new long haul trunk services.
We believe that even with such “lower fares”, it will still be higher than the old fares for long haul rides. PTC should present to Singaporeans the comparison between NEW and OLD fare structures for some main trunk services.
We strongly condemn PTC for its attempt to implement such a fare system which is in fact an outrageous hike in fare in disguise.
SMRT chief executive officer and president Saw Phaik Hwa in Sunday ST report "SMRT: Tighter security will not mean higher fare" has claimed that while trains may be crowded, they are not at 'crush load' and 'people can board the train - it is whether they choose to'. She used the example of Hong Kong MTR trains' ability to take in 2000 people during peak hours as compared to singapore's MRT train of 1400 people during peak hours to support her view.
Ms Saw is either misleading or ignorant. HK MTR trains have EIGHT cabins. Singapore's trains have only six cabins! How could she use it as a comparison to Singapore's train system is really beyond my comprehension!
On average, each HK MTR train cabin could take in about 250 people. If we use 250 people as an indicator, Singapore's train would only able to take in about 1500 during peak. This is not very far from the present situation.
This calculations is perfectly relevant and reflect accurately to what we are experiencing on the ground. i.e. the trains are just too packed!
I would advise Ms Saw, as the chief of SMRT, should walk out of her Ivory Tower and dependency on some blind statistics and experience herself first hand the situation on the ground. Apparently she is taking statistics from other places VERY BLINDLY without even understanding the differences involved to make up her IMAGINARY conclusions that Singapore's trains are not at "crush load"!
Goh Meng Seng
P.S. Added information for maximum capacity for a train cabin in HK:
Seats: 46 Standing: 268 Total maximum capacity is 314.
According our SMRT Chief Ms Saw, Crush Load is 2000 per train with six cabin. Means, each cabin will have 333 passengers! How could that be?
We were at Bendemeer market selling our North Star this morning. Someone called up the NEA to come down and check on us. While I keep asking the two nice officers to carry out their duties to summon us and I would admit to selling our papers, they did not take action. NEA under Dr Yaacob should spend more time to check the longkang for debris instead of disturbing opposition parties...
This problem about "illegal hawking" for opposition parties when they go for their ground work and sell their newspaper/newsletter must be solved once and for all.
SDP has tried to apply "hawking license" to sell their papers Democrats before but application was rejected. Most likely nobody in NEA dares to grant that kind of license to opposition parties.
So I would urge NEA to DO THE RIGHT THING, carry out their duties and summon all of us. We will not pay for the summon. We prefer to go to court and go to jail and let the whole world see how PAP government is set to deter opposition parties to carry out their political work on the ground.
Fine all opposition party members, including Mr. Low TK for "illegal hawking". Let's settle this issue once and for all. But in spite of my constant persuasion to the officers to summon us, they have refused and walk away. I actually feel very sorry for them. Someone has sabo them and burn their weekend. Calling their office and sending them down for nothing!
I will let NEA knows where we are going to conduct our "illegal hawking" next Sunday in advance and hope that they carry out their duties properly.
I have been in self-imposed retreat for quite a while now. I intended to stay off my blog and the media just for a little longer but it seems that this unbearable reoccurring of floods around the island has forced me to cut short my peaceful retreat. I have issued the following Press Statement on behalf of NSP:
Setup A Committee of Inquiry to look into improving drainage & weather warning system
NSP shares the frustration and disappointment of many Singaporeans whose lives have been severely disrupted by the reoccurring floods in recent days.
The Ministry of Environment and Water Resources under Minister Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim has reportedly spent billions in improvement works on the various canals on this island. However it seems that the situation seems to have little, marginal improvement over the years.
In 2009, when flood hit Bukit Timah, Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim has claimed that it is a once in 50 year happening. We know that this is pure exaggeration as flash floods were happening quite often in that area in the 1970s and 1980s. But since 1990s, millions, if not billions have been spent on improvement works on the Bukit Timah Canal and we would expect floods of such magnitude should be a thing of the past.
On 16 June 2010, Orchard Road was flooded, causing millions of dollars of damage to private properties and businesses. The ministry under Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim has given the excuse of debris blockade.
Today, floods appear again, not only in Orchard Road and Bukit Timah, but in various places around Singapore. What could be the excuse then?
Back in 1999, an article in New Paper has once boasted that Orchard will never flood because of the Stamford Canal. It was said that it will take a COMBINATION of hide tide and 100mm of rainfall within an hour to flood Orchard. But since the Marina Barrage has been built, high tide should not be the main issue here anymore. Could the Marina Barrage be the main issue then?
The first incidence of flooding in Bukit Timah could be excused as Act of God. The second flood in Orchard Road could be excused on the blame of debris. How about the third one? Isn’t it too much of an excuse for such floods to keep reoccurring? Could it be too much of a coincidence that such floods occur after the Marina Barrage has been built?
We hope that the government would form an Independent Committee of Inquiry on this matter. This committee should consist of people who have the expertise to review the whole drainage system in Singapore. Singaporeans should deserve better accountability from the highly paid minister and civil servants instead of resigning to praying to heaven for not flooding Singapore.
On top of that, we would also like to urge the authority and the Committee of Inquiry to look into the possibility of implementing a colour coded weather warning system. This is necessary to reduce the risks of people being exposed to adverse weathers like heavy rains and floods. A Red code rain weather warning would mean that young kids will not have to attend kindergarten while a Black code rain weather warning would mean that all classes in schools should stop. This should reduce the risk of young children being endangered by adverse weather.
Singaporeans want the government to ACT NOW to resolve and improve the drainage as well as weather forecast systems. We hope that the PAP government would respond promptly to this call.
Dr Goh Keng Swee: A S'pore giant by admin , May 14, 2010, 1000hrs
By Loh Chee Kong cheekong@corporateobserver.com.sg
SINGAPORE (May 14, 2010) - The man behind Singapore's stellar economic growth- masterminding its economic and industrial policies, among his endless list of contributions, as the republic came into its own following independence - died today at the age of 91 after a long battle with illness.
Dr Goh Keng Swee (1918 - 2010) Born in Malacca, Dr Goh Keng Swee - dubbed as the "economics wizard" and an alumni of the London School of Economics - was Singapore's former Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) who also helmed the finance, defence and education ministries in his 25-year political career.
One of the founding fathers of Singapore and widely seen as its economic architect, Dr Goh retired from politics in 1984 and had shied away from the public eye. From the country's early days, Dr Goh saw the economic imperative of the Singapore society - a central tenet of governance until today.
Dr Goh's trenchant thinking on Singapore's economy continues to influence present-day policymakers.
He once noted: "For us in Singapore, the road to greater wealth is through thrift, enterprise and hard work. The road to stability lies in prudence and foresight in prosperity, and patience and fortitude in adversity. In the swinging age of the new economies, all this sounds old fashioned and Victorian. No doubt it is, but I think it is unrealistic to expect that doctrines worked out for developed economies, when foreign trade forms a relatively small part of the GNP, would apply in their entirety to the exceptional situation that is ours."
He was responsible for setting up many of Singapore's key government agencies, including the Economic Development Board and the Defence Science Organisation, and oversaw the creation of the Singapore Armed Forces and the Jurong Industrial Estate. His legacy also includes policies such as compulsory conscription for male Singaporeans above 18 years old; the Gifted Education Programme; and streaming and religious education in schools.
The 1979 "Goh Report" greatly influenced the development of Singapore's education system - Dr Goh's idea of streaming, in particular, was conceptualized to provide different curriculum and rate of teaching to children of different abilities but the implementation on the ground, especially in the later years, had strayed from the vision.
When Dr Goh was appointed chairman of the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the Board of Commissioner of Currency in 1980, he took measures to promote Singapore as an international financial centre - making amendments to three major financial regulations: the Banking Act, the MAS Act and the Finance Companies Act. During the 1985 recession, he acted to stop the downward slide of the Singapore dollar.
Another former DPM, Dr Tony Tan, paid tribute to Dr Goh in an issued statement. Dr Tan is the executive director of Government Investment Corporation of Singapore (GIC) - which was set up with Dr Goh's "pivotal" inputs and based on his "resolute belief in the need to protect and grow the hard-earned wealth of Singaporeans continues to influence the GIC community", said Dr Tan.
Dr Tan added: "Today, the idea of the Sovereign Wealth Fund seems natural, but Dr Goh's focus on reserve management was rare among countries in his time. Dr Goh's farsightedness and fortitude laid the foundation for the development of GIC as stewards of Singapore's foreign reserves."
Apart from having a keen mind for numbers, Dr Goh also appreciated the value of music and leisure - he set up the Singapore Symphony Orchestra and the Jurong Bird Park. Inspired by a free-flight aviary he visited in Rio de Janeiro during a World Bank Meeting, Dr Goh wanted to build the bird park in Jurong - he saw the place as more than an industrial zone - as an outlet for Singapore families to escape from the urban life.
Dr Goh's prudence in maximising Singapore's limited resources was reflected in his personal life in which his legendary parsimony is well-documented.
His wife had previously recounted to this writer how Dr Goh would bring soap flakes and wash his own clothes on official visits overseas. Once, when Dr Goh was hospitalised, he even chided his wife for being a "wastrel" when she took a piece of tissue paper from the box. Dr Goh, his wife said, would carefully tear a piece of tissue paper into half - keeping the other half in his pocket for later use.
A BELIEVER
A rabid saver himself, Dr Goh was behind the setting up of POSB Bank - which had waived the minimum sum required by other banks - to help lower income Singaporeans build up their savings.
For all his penchant for hard-nosed economics, Dr Goh could never reconcile the idea of paying high salaries for public officers, including ministers. When it was announced that the British forces would withdraw from the Suez Canal in the late 1960s, Dr Goh knew it would impact the thousands of workers working in the British military bases in Singapore. He called the Accountant General into his room and told him, "We have to cut civil service pay, go and work it out, starting with me."
When he was offered the post of deputy chairman of MAS following his retirement from politics, Dr Goh was offered the same pay that he was drawing as DPM. He asked to be paid half the amount.
A firm believer in meritocracy, one of Dr Goh's greatest fears for Singapore is that it could become an "old boys' club".
He once said: "In advanced societies, it is not so much open nepotism which is to be feared but the insidious 'old boy' type whereby no legalities (sic) are committed but in which the pinnacles of power, influence and wealth are the reserve of those born into the right families."
Dr Goh added: "A system may arise in which the dominant minority... arrogate to itself not only the openings to the seats of power, but also the avenues by which individuals can fit themselves out for such positions of power. The dominant minority is thus able to point out those outside of the charmed circle just do not have the necessary qualifications to be admitted to the elite group."
Following his retirement, Dr Goh would find it hard to read the newspapers or watch the news on television - knowing that he no longer had an influence on the nation's affairs.
While some may see it a pity that Dr Goh had voluntarily cut short his political career and retreated from the public eye prematurely - so much so that many younger Singaporeans have not heard of him - his wife reiterated that Dr Goh never sought "money, power or glory or even to be honoured".
In a booklet she published in 2008 in tribute of her husband, after she had set up the Goh Keng Swee Foundation, Mrs Goh wrote that Dr Goh "made all the contributions... for the nation and for Singaporeans".
She added: "The fact that today's political leaders can go round the world to sell the Singapore success story is in itself satisfaction for him. Dr Goh himself mentioned that God has given him a reward for what he has done for Singapore. His pastor, Reverend Macolm Tan has said that his reward is in heaven."
I received news about the passing of Dr. Goh Keng Swee this morning while in Hong Kong. I am very much saddened by this news.
Later in the evening, a ST reporter requested a response from me, on behalf of my party. This is what I said to him:
Our nation has lost a great man who has contributed tremendously to our nation building. Although we do not agree totally to some of his past policies but his spirit of socialism and public service are the source of inspiration to many of us. In mourning his death and the lost of our national icon, we would like to remind PAP of their humble democratic socialist root which was fully manifested by the late Dr. Goh Keng Swee. The PAP should reflect upon their great deviation from the socialist foundation which was upheld by Dr. Goh Keng Swee. Last but not least, our deepest condolences to the family of Dr. Goh Keng Swee.
A special Tribute to Dr Goh Keng Swee for raising Singapore up from a poor country to one with strong economic foundation.
I have not met Dr. Goh Keng Swee personally. My first impression of him came from my late father. Although my father was a skeptic of PAP rule, he had shown much respect to Dr. Goh Keng Swee, acknowledging him as the few, if not the only one, who was sincere and always had the interests of the people at heart.
I got to know Dr. Goh Keng Swee better after I became a student of Economics in NUS. I went through pages and pages of those White Papers that he wrote during his tour of duty in many ministerial portfolios. A true blue Socialist at heart and a Visionary in his era. In 1960s when many countries were caught up with protectionism due to the rise of nationalism in the post-colonialism era, he pushed for Free Trade Port and invited foreign investments onto our shores.
From the description of many others who have worked with him, he was someone who would always be very careful of spending every cent of taxpayers' money. He was also someone who would think of ways to lower cost for the benefits of Singaporeans at large.
Although I did not agree with some of his policies, especially streaming and elitist grooming (Gifted) program in education but I have a lot of admiration and respect for Dr. Goh Keng Swee. He has left a legacy which is hard to be matched by anyone in modern history. He has set a high standard for people who are in Public Service, be it civil servants, ministers, politicians or otherwise.
I am inspired by his socialist idealism and pragmatism which are embedded in many of his policies. It is rather sad to see how the contemporary PAP has forsaken much of the solid ideological foundation upon which our nation was created. It was only after the fading away of Dr. Goh Keng Swee from local politics that we started to hear people cynically relating PAP to Pay And Pay. From HDB, COE, Healthcare to Education, we have lost every bit of socialism in them. Cost recovery and even profit making have become the main policy direction for almost all ministries.
While Singaporeans mourn the death of a great man in this Nation, I hope that everyone of us, including PAP members, should reflect upon the stray path that we have been put on since the stepping down of Dr. Goh Keng Swee.
It is very unfortunate that I won't be back in time to pay my last respect to Dr. Goh. May he Rest In Peace.
Goh Meng Seng
Afternote: I will be able to pay my last respect to Dr. Goh after all on 20 May.
We refer to the interview of Minister Mah Bow Tan entitled “Mah Bow Tan on the frontline talking about HDB prices, COV and Elections” published in Lianhe Zaobao on 8th May 2010. On behalf of National Solidarity Party, I would like to make the following response:
We wish to remind Minister Mah Bow Tan that the success of HDB House Ownership scheme is built upon the sacrifices of our forefathers. Without the Land Acquisition Act which empowers and allows the ruling party to acquire almost 80% of land from our forefathers, Singapore would not be able to develop so rapidly and HDB would not be able to execute the House Ownership smoothly.
This is one of the most important land reforms since independence. We could only examine the role of HDB and the pricing mechanism for new HDB flats properly under this context. In its first 20 years, HDB has fulfilled its role under this land reform plan, i.e. utilize the acquired land to build HDB flats and sell them at cheap prices or even under cost to the people, in doing so, redistribute land to the people. This is the fundamental role of HDB. Most people who had their land forcefully acquired did not protest because they knew that they were making sacrifices for the people and the Nation. This is the social contract between the people and the ruling party. The HDB flats has only a 99-year lease and it provides stability to the whole system. It ensures future generations of Singaporeans will have a roof over their heads throughout their life span. This is the basic concept of land reform, distribution and public housing policy.
But now Minister Mah says, “The government cannot sell the new HDB flats at cost because this would mean that flat owners will not be able to sell it at market prices in future.” We do not understand on what basis does Minister Mah make such an assertion. Prior to 1990s, our father’s generation bought their HDB flats at cost or even under cost and now they can still sell their flats in the resale market at market prices. Isn’t this PAP’s policy? The government selling new HDB flats to Singaporeans at cost price has absolutely nothing to do with whether Singaporeans could sell off their flats in the open resale market or not.
Minister Mah also says, “The House Ownership Scheme is most beneficial to Singapore because it could ultimately allow house owners to sell their flats for a profit and use it for retirement. Selling flats at cost price would not achieve such aim.”
First of all, a HOME is not an “investment”. People only use properties as investment when they do not use it as a HOME. It is only when people have their second house then they could consider it as a “tool” for investment!
Secondly, if Singaporeans do not need to suffer from high HDB prices and use their CPF to pay for a 30-year mortgage, they will not need to “sell flats for retirement”! Minister Mah is simply putting the cart before the horse.
Thirdly, we can hardly imagine any first world country or world-class government asking their people to “sell house for retirement”!
Fourthly, can Minister Mah guarantee that each and every generation of Singaporeans can sell their flats at good prices when they retire? Can such scheme work in a rapidly aging society? From the economic perspective, it is totally unsound. In a rapidly aging society, there will be more elderly people than youngsters for the next 20 to 30 years, meaning more sellers of HDB flats than buyers! How can prices be good in such a market situation?
The root of the problem lies with the fact that prices of new HDB flats have outstripped income growth for the past 30 years. Our last generation paid only a 10 or 15-year mortgage for their HDB flats but now, our present and future generations will have to pay a 30-year mortgage for their new HDB flats! If they are married at 30 years old, they can only finish paying up their mortgage by 60 years old. By then, there will be little money left in their CPF. This is why they need to “sell flats for retirement”!
We call upon Minister Mah and PAP to take their responsibilities as embedded in the social contract of land reform seriously and fulfill them, instead of trying to shrug it off by using all sorts of flawed reasoning and excuses. We do not expect the ruling party to meddle with the resale market but we hope that HDB could resume its original role by publishing the cost of all new HDB flats and selling them at cost price to first time Singaporean buyers.
Goh Meng Seng Secretary General National Solidarity Party
Photo from Channel News Asia Website
Posts
