Mah Bow Tan admits he was caught “off guard” by rising prices of resale flats

Written by Our Correspondent

In an interview with TODAY, National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan admitted that he was “caught off guard” by how the HDB resale market headed north in a recession year.

“Nobody, no matter how prescient, no matter how clever, would have been able to predict that this was what was going to happen,” he said.

The prices of resale HDB flats hit a record high in June this year and is still going up, fueled partially by the relentless influx of foreigners into Singapore.

PRs are allowed to buy resale flats and some of them had “spoiled” the market by over-paying for them.

One Indonesian PR forked out $653,000 for a 4-room resale flat in Queenstown when he could have easily afforded a private condominium.

Despite growing complaints from Singaporeans that they are being priced out of the public housing market, Mr Mah believes the current system is far superior to one that keeps housing cheap through a non-market-based system.

“Because it gives greater benefits to the home-owner. It gives them a stake in Singapore … it also allows them to profit from the growth that Singapore enjoys because as we grow, the flat value goes up,” he said.

Singaporeans can only unlock the value of their asset unless they give up their citizenship for good and migrate elsewhere.

Otherwise they will have to fork out a higher sum of money to buy another new flat even if they sell theirs for a hefty profit.

Mr Mah insists that prices are still “affordable” as “evidenced by how 80 per cent of Singaporeans who buy new flats can pay for their mortgages using only 21 per cent or less of their income.”

However the figures does not take into consideration the bank interest rates and inflation.

Furthermore, by depleting their CPFs for over-priced HDB flats, Singaporeans may end up having little or no savings for their retirement.

With the two IRs opening next year, pundits are predicting that property prices, public housing included, will continue to increase next year.

Grassroots leader hanged himself after quarrel with committee members

Written by Our Correspondent

A grassroots leader of Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, BBM Mr Loh Meng Hai, Louis hanged himself after a quarrel with fellow committee members of Bukit Timah Beauty World Merchant Association.

During its AGM held on Monday, Mr Loh, who was the Chairman of the association, was accused of “mismanaging” the association’s finances.

Both sides broke into an intense quarrel which lasted till midnight. Mr Loh did not sleep after he returned home. His body was found hanging lifelessly in the storeroom in the morning.

Mr Loh is the treasurer of Bukit Timah CCMC. A wreath from Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon, Minister of State, Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports and MP for Holland-Bukit Timah GRC was noticed at his wake.

Mr Loh has been an active grassroots leader for the last 40 years. He was awarded PBM in 2002 and BBM in 2007.

News source: Lianhe Wanbao

2009 nudges Singapore further on repression

OPINION

2009 is a forgettable year for Singapore as the ruling party introduces more laws and tricks to curtail the political and civil rights of Singapore citizens and to further entrench itself in power for perpetuity.

In other countries like China, North Korea, Iran and Myanmar, repression takes the form of assassinations, imprisonment and forced labor. In Singapore, it is institutionalized in the system to give it a veneer of legitimacy and respectability such that most Singaporeans are ignorant of its implications.

The Public Order Act (POA) was rushed through in Parliament and implemented just in time before the APEC Summit in November this year ostensibly to prevent “social unrest” at the international meeting.

Under the law, a solo protest anywhere in Singapore (except Hong Lim Park) is illegal and the police has overriding powers to ask the protester(s) to “move on” from the scene.

Freedom of speech and assembly is guaranteed under Article 14 of the Singapore Constitution and it can only be suspended during times when National Security is being threatened.

It is the innate right of Singaporeans to partake in the political life of their nation which includes expressing their displeasure publicly against the ruling party.

The law was introduced not so much for the sake of “public order and security”, but to deter opposition members and activists from making use of such “mini-protests” to attract international attention to the PAP’s repressive rule.

All forms of public dissent are strongly frown upon by the PAP because it will shatter the myth that it is a popular government elected by the people.

Rocked by a series of mini-bond protests at Hong Lim Park last year, the police has now fitted CCTVs at Hong Lim Park to discourage Singaporeans from participating in the events held there though the Kreta Ayer Police Station is just a stone-throw away.

In May this year, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced a series of “reforms” to further strengthen the PAP’s position ahead of the next general elections.

Pressurized by rising demands from the ground for more opposition representation in Parliament, PM Lee had increased the number of non-PAP seats to 18 with 9 NCMPs and 9 NMPs.

The state media is quick to heap praise on him for “liberalizing” the political landscape, but don’t be deceived – it is merely a gimmick to appease Singaporeans and to perpetuate the PAP’s political hegemony.

Other than to provide new PAP MPs with free training in debating, the token “opposition” representation will not challenge the PAP’s stranglehold on Parliament as it still retains its two-thirds majority.

The MPs can debate till the cows come home and the PAP will just pass the bills and laws are it sees fit. In short, it is no more than a “Wayang” – full of sound and fury, but nothing of substance.

Short of helping the opposition, it may work against them in the next general election as voters may be less inclined to vote for an opposition candidate knowing that he/she can still enter parliament as a “best loser” – a NCMP.

For all their worth, NCMPs and NMPs will never pose a serious threat to the PAP as they are deprived access to crucial grassroots resources privy only to an elected MP which will help them build up the opposition to mount a credible challenge to the PAP in the long run.

What Singapore truly needs is a genuinely competitive political system and level playing field for all political parties so that the best party to lead the nation can emerge and assume power in a legal and peaceful manner and not a one-party system where one single political party calls the shots and tweak the system to ensure that it wins election after election.

Without the prospect of ever losing power, no government of the day will bother to sit down and listen attentively to the concerns of the people. Singaporeans can have the best debaters screwing the asses of the PAP ministers in parliament to create some entertainment for them, but at the end of day, what will it achieve with the PAP still firmly in control of every institutions of the state?

For example, you can have the 18 non-PAP MPs protesting against another impending hike in the ministers’ pay, but when the time comes for the vote, who will be having the last laugh?

On the other hand, if the PAP is denied its two thirds majority in parliament like Malaysia’s Barisan Nasional, then it will have little choice but to obey the wishes of the people.

We have a glaring example right at our very doorsteps: When the Barisan Nasional dominated Malaysia before the 2008 elections, it did not care a hoot about the ethnic minorities. Now that it lost its two thirds majority in parliament, it is now singing a different tune altogether out of fear of being booted out of office in the next general election.

We can have 18, 28 and even 38 NCMPs and NMPs in Parliament, but so long our political system remains closed, uncompetitive and repressive as of now, the PAP can expect to win elections after elections for the next five decades.

If PM Lee is sincere in liberalizing Singapore’s political landscape, there is really no need for him to increase the number of non-PAP seats in Parliament. All he needs to do is to level the playing field to ensure that a credible alternative party can emerge from the populace to challenge it.

It is an irony that while Singaporeans are always urged by PAP leaders to stay competitive, they themselves are so afraid of competition.

Whether a two-party system is suitable for Singapore is for Singaporeans to decide and not the PAP. This country belongs to every Singaporean and not the PAP alone.

The PAP is nothing more than a political party which must be elected by the people to run the country. If it is not performing up to the expectations of the people, then it should be prepared to be voted out of office.

Right now, the PAP still thinks it is the only party with the divine right to govern the nation on behalf of the Singaporeans regardless of what they think. This is not a democracy but a tyranny in disguise.

Ultimately, the future of a nation must be determined by the people themselves and not by a single political party. Until Singaporeans reclaim their rights to toss out unwanted and unpopular governments as and when they wish, the degree of political repression in Singapore will be no different from rogue states elsewhere.

Malaysian police seek British help to find RPK

Bernama, 31 December 2009

Police believe Malaysia Today portal editor Raja Petra Kamarudin is still in London and have asked the authorities in the British capital to trace him, inspector-general of police Musa Hassan said.

“Based on intelligence, police believe Raja Petra is still hiding in London and I have asked the authorities there to trace him,” he told Bernama.

He said Raja Petra was wanted back in the country to prove his innocence.

“If Raja Petra feels he is not in the wrong, he should come forward and clear his name. Why should he hide? He should return here,” he said.

Raja Petra went missing after two warrants of arrest were issued for him for failing to attend a court hearing on April 23 and May 23 for publishing seditious words and defaming Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, wife of the prime minister in Malaysia Today.

On the possible extradition of Raja Petra, Musa said the application would take time.

“In fact, there is no need for (an extradition) order. He has to surrender,” he said. – Bernama

800,000 households to get $106 million dollars worth of “rebates”

Written by Our Correspondent

In yet another sign that the next general election will be held sometime next year, the Ministry of Finance announced that “800 ,000 Housing Board households will receive $106 million worth of U-Save rebates.”

The first payout, amounting to $60 million of utility rebates, will be made in January, while the the second payout will come in July. 

Th U-Save rebates are used to offset utility charges directly and are part of the GST Offset Package announced in Budget 2007 to help Singaporeans, especially low and middle-income households, cope with the GST increase.

Electricity tariffs for households are going up by 5.4 per cent or 1.18 cents per kWh for the first quarter of next year due to “higher fuel oil prices”.

Just before the 2006 general election, the ruling party unveiled a “progress package”, disbursing a couple of hundreds of dollars to each Singaporean.

After it won the election, GST was raised to 7 per cent ostensibly to “help the poor” in the words of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Since then, the income gap between the poor and rich has widened considerably. The cost of living has increased while the median wages of Singaporeans remain stagnant at $2,600.

It is not known how the increase in GST has gone towards helping the poor. The issue was never raised again by the Prime Minister or any other leader.

Singaporeans should not be too happy at the latest cash handout by the ruling party. Before they even know it, the amount disbursed to them will be “recouped” via higher GST, ERP, fines and whatever in double quick time.

Halimah Yacob on the issue of “underemployment” among PMETs in Singapore

Written by Our Correspondent

Many Singapore workers who were retrenched during the global financial crisis last year are still unable to find a job which commensurate with their skills and qualifications.

Known as “under-employment”, it is becoming a major issue which NTUC will tackle in the coming year. Under-employment is said to be more common among older Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians (PMETs) who are the hardest hit during the economic downturn.

Halimah Yacob, Deputy Secretary-General, NTUC, said:

“He may be very qualified, very skilled, but the jobs that he wants to do and is willing to do is not available. He ends up doing a job that does not make full capacity, productive use of his capabilities. It also involves the case where jobs are not paying them the kind of salary or earning that they feel is commensurate with their qualifications and skills.”

[Source: Channel News Asia, 31 December 2009]

Middle-aged degree-holders are hardest hit with some of them becoming taxi drivers when they lost their jobs during the economic downturn.

Madam Halimah said that this is unavoidable as with slow economic growth, job opportunities are limited.

Though the sluggish growth of the entire economy is a reason for under-employment, a key contributory factor is the relentless influx of cheap foreign workers into Singapore.

In the past, only highly qualified expats or blue collar workers are permitted to work in Singapore. In the past few years, foreign PMETs have flooded the Singapore labor market leading to intense competition with locals for jobs which can otherwise be taken up by them.

For example, IT engineers, assistant engineers and technicians are PMET positions which are now opened to foreigners leading to the stagnation of wages for Singapore workers.

Instead of encouraging companies to think of ways to increase their productivity and reduce their perennial reliance on cheap foreign labor, NTUC Secretary-General Lim Swee Say exhorted Singapore workers to be “cheaper, faster and better.”

With the cost of living going up, especially that of public housing, transport and utility bills, many ordinary Singaporeans are feeling the squee.

There are no independent trade unions in Singapore to fight for the rights and interests of Singapore workers.

The largest umbrella trade union NTUC is a pseudo-government organization which is always headed by a PAP minister. Mr Lim Swee Say is a minister in the Prime Minister’s Office while Madam Halimah Yacob is a PAP MP.

Neither is there any opposition in parliament to check on the ruling party’s pro-foreigner policy either. Singapore PMETs have no choice but to put up with the current situation.

Even taxi-drivers are now facing stiff competition from cheaper workers from China and Vietnam.

 

EDITORS’ NOTE:

Madam Halimah Yacob has written a reply to our article here

The year in review: 10 top news of 2009 in Singapore

The Temasek Review Team

With year 2009 drawing to a close, let us recall the top ten news of the year.  Counting down, we take you through the most significant news of the year as seen by The Temasek Review:

#10. Torching of Seng Han Thong:

Yio Chu Kang MP Seng Han Thong got off to a bad start to the year when he was set on fire by a resident during a community event. The culprit, Ong Kah Chua was said to be “mentally deranged”. He was never charged in court for any crime and is currently incarcerated at IMH indefinitely at the President’s “pleasure”. Seng’s plight did not draw much sympathy from netizens who gloated over his misfortune prompting a deputy police superintendent to warn that “action” might be taken against those who spread “baseless and malicious rumors” in cyberspace.

  

#9. “Suicide” of David Widjaja:

21 old Indonesian NTU student David Widjaja allegedly stabbed his professor Chan Kup Luk before leaping down to a grisly death. The mainstream media attributed his death to over-indulgence in computer games. His family claimed that he was not depressed and he had no reason to kill himself. Witnesses at the scene said they saw David running out of Prof Chan’s room shouting “Help, somebody is trying to kill me!”. A coroner’s court was convened three months later at the family’s insistence, but the verdict of his unfortunate death remained unchanged: “suicide”.

 

#8. Mysterious death of SAF Medical Officer Dr Alan Ooi:

Dr Alan Ooi went missing for eight months before his body was found in Australia. Just before his death, he sent a farewell email to his family and close friends. All sorts of wild speculations about the cause of his death were circulated in the mainstream media including depression, gambling woes, relationship problems and addiction to computer games. Chinese tabloid Shin Min Daily published an extract of his farewell email which highlighted a failed relationship. An anonymous reader sent us his entire email which we dutifully published on our site the very next day – Dr Ooi had been extremely unhappy about his work in the SAF. He had wanted to break his bond, but was not allowed to do so. The family had written to MINDEF to seek an answer which it obliged with a vague reply in the Straits Times. Like many other cases, we will never know the real cause of Dr Ooi’s death.

 

#7. Ping Pong saga Part 2 – Lee Bee Wah versus Liu Guodong:

Eight months after pissing off an entire nation with her unwarranted outburst at the Beijing Olympics, PAP MP Lee Bee Wah showed Singaporeans again why she could not be trusted with her mouth. In an interview with the Straits Times on why the contract of former coach of the Singapore Table-Tennis team, Liu Guodong, was not renewed, Lee was quoted saying that he had some “problems” in his character and professionalism. A fuming Liu flew all the way from China to Singapore to seek clarification from Lee. Lee did not meet him in person, but sent two STTA officials over who tried to con Liu to sign a document in English which he could not read to absolve Lee Bee Wah from all legal liabilities. Liu did not sign and returned to China. The case is still not closed yet. Lee subsequently act blur and refrained from commenting further on the matter, but Liu said he had not ruled out taking legal action against Lee.

 

#6. Singapore’s population hitting the 5 million mark:

Due to the nation’s declining birth rates, the ruling party has resorted to “mass-importing” foreigners from elsewhere to keep the population growing. Foreigners now make up 36 per cent of Singapore’s population, up from 14 per cent in 1990. The target is supposedly 6.5 million, but many Singaporeans are already up in arms over the ruling party’s ill-conceived immigration policy which forced Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to make a rare concession during his National Day Rally speech in which he promised Singaporeans that he would “slow” the inflow of foreigners. Three months later, his father MM Lee Kuan Yew exhorted Singaporeans again to “bear” with the tide of immigrants which has now grown to become a flood and a nightmare for many ordinary Singaporeans.

 

#5. Record high prices of HDB flats which remain “affordable”:

Prices of HDB flats continue to climb in spite of the sluggish economy with that of resale flats hitting a record high in June this year, contributed partly by rising demand from the relentless influx of foreigners as well as limited numbers of new flats built in the preceding three years. Despite widespread frustration and resentment on the ground at the sky-rocketing prices, HDB continues to insist that public housing remain “affordable” to Singaporeans. National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan chided home buyers for being “choosy” while his deputy Grace Fu said that rising prices of flats help to “create wealth” for Singaporeans.

 

#4. Departure of Chip Goodyear and re-appointment of Ho Ching as Temasek CEO:

The former CEO of mining giant BHP Bilton made the headlines earlier this year when he was appointed to take over Ho Ching as CEO of Temasek Holdings. The manpower changeover was supposed to take place half a year later, but it didn’t. The Temasek Board dropped a bombshell two weeks before the stipulated date for its CEO-designate to assume his position officially: Chip had left Temasek due to “strategic differences” and Ho Ching was re-appointed as CEO (after losing billions of dollars in overseas investments). Finance Minister Tharman was grilled in parliament by his own PAP colleagues on the real reasons behind Chip’s departure. He refused to reveal more,  saying that it is not in the “strategic interest” of Singapore to do so.

 

#3. Temasek and GIC “burning a hole” in the nation’s reserves:

The “buy high, sell low” syndrome continues to plague both sovereign wealth funds. Temasek Holdings bought shares in Barclays bank at a high in 2008 last year and sold them at a low in January this year, making an estimated loss of USD$850 million dollars. In contrast, Abu Dhabi made a profit of USD$2 billion dollars by selling them a few months later. Still, the loss pales in comparison to its USD$4.6 billion loss when it offloaded its stake in Bank of America again at a low price. While Temasek Holdings was pretty transparent in its investments losses, very little is known about GIC’s losses. According to a report in September by Wall Street Journal, GIC suffered a loss of around SGD$59 billion dollars in the fiscal year ended March. The news was never reported by the Singapore media.

 

#2. Zhang Yuanyuan proclaimed her loyalty to China:

Chinese citizen and Singapore PR Zhang Yuanyuan became a “celebrity” overnight when she flashed her blue Singapore IC on China’s CCTV7 and proclaimed her loyalty to China. Zhang had returned to Beijing to take part in its National Day parade. While netizens bombarded her for her callous behavior, PAP ministers came out in strong support of her. Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong said Zhang could not be faulted as she is “only” a Singapore PR, not citizen. It was later revealed that Zhang came to Singapore in 2003 armed with a diploma from an unknown institution in China to study English. She later found work as a Chinese language teacher in a private school and got her Singapore PR within two months of application. She would have become a Singapore citizen had she chose to remain in Singapore.

 

#1. AWARE saga: The show of youth power

When a group of Christian ladies seized control of feminist NGO AWARE during its AGM in March, nobody would expect it to turn into a protracted saga which went on to become the number one hot-selling news in Singapore and captured the attention of the entire nation. The AWARE Old Guards accused the newcomers of launching a “constitutional coup” to take over the organization and called for an EGM to “reclaim” it. Egged on by the state media, Singapore’s Generation Y responded and came out in full force to support the Old Guards. More than 2,000 people turned up at Suntec Convention Center for the EGM on 2 May which lasted a marathon 7 hours from 2pm to 9pm with President Josie Lau bowing out in disgrace eventually. A few memorable quotes were uttered at the EGM such as Thio Su Mien’s “You have no respect for your senior” and Sally Ang’s “Shut up and sit down!” The ruling party must have watched the show with trepidation from the sidelines. Singapore youth have shown that they are capable of organizing themselves and making their votes count.

 

The Temasek Review team will take to wish all our readers a Happy New Year. See you in 2010 as we prepare to take another great leap forward into the unknown.

PAP spin doctor: 2009 a year of political “liberalization” in Singapore

Written by Our Correspondent

The incorrigible spin doctor of the PAP – Chua Mui Hoong has come up with another audacious spin to pull a wool over the unsuspecting eyes of Singaporeans to send off her political masters on a high before the year ends.

A former intelligence officer with the Singapore Internal Security Department together with her elder sister Chua Lee Hoong, both are now “senior writers” of the Straits Times.

In a lengthly article published today, Chua Mui Hoong tried to convince Singaporeans why 2009 has nudged Singapore further on “liberalization”.

She highlighted the key “changes” to the electoral system introduced by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong: “raising the minimum number of opposition Members of Parliament from three to nine through the Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) scheme; increasing the minimum number of single-seat wards from eight to 12; lowering the average size of Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs); and introducing a no-campaigning ‘cool-off’ day on the eve of polling day.”

“Also noteworthy this year was the decision to include estates in opposition wards Hougang and Potong Pasir in the multi-billion dollar lift upgrading scheme, to fit older HDB blocks with lifts that stop at every floor,” she added.

Ms Chua praised PM Lee for introducing “small tweaks” that shift the political landscape towards more “openness and diversity” and to encourage “participatory politics” by rewarding even failed opposition candidates with easier access to Parliament.

Singaporeans should not be too happy yet. These “tweaks” are nothing more than a ploy to appease the rising demand from the ground for more opposition in Parliament and only serve to further entrench the PAP in power.

As Ms Chua acknowledged herself, they “are tactical, political moves that aim to satisfy voters’ desire for more checks and balances, without really risking the People’s Action Party’s (PAP’s) grip on power.”

No political party will ever bother to listen to the people if is grip on power is never threatened. Having additional token number of non-PAP MPs in this case does nothing to “liberalize” the political landscape as the PAP is still assured of its two-third majority in Parliament to ramp unpopular policies down the throats of Singaporeans.

Furthermore, the changes may backfire on the opposition as voters will not be less inclined to vote for them since they can now enter parliament as a “best loser”.

If PM Lee is serious about shifting Singapore’s landscape towards greater “openness and diversity”, it should scape the unfair rules and laws which tilt the playing field towards the PAP: appoint an independent Elections Commission, limit the number of GRCs to less than half of the total number of seats, announce the electoral boundaries and polling date at least half a year in advance, increase the duration of the campaign period, decouple SPH and Mediacorp from the PAP and refrain from using frivolous defamation lawsuits to cripple its opponents.

Far from being “liberalizing”, 2009 is a “regressive” year for Singapore which sees the political and civil rights of Singaporeans taking a huge step back with the introduction of the Public Order Act to outlaw even a solo protest, the introduction of the “cooling-off” day to give the PAP an unfair advantage on the eve of polling day and the failure of the PAP to account to Singaporeans the losses suffered by Temasek and GIC.

Singaporeans must stop depending on the PAP to “liberalize” the political landscape. It’s time to we give them a hand by booting them out of office come GE 2010.

Uniquely Singapore

By Dingle Ting

“Uniquely Singapore” is the catch phrase often used to describe Singapore. It holds true in many ways.
 
Here are some “uniquely Singapore” moments.
 
Singaporean children go to school and recite the national pledge daily. They place their fists over their hearts and resolve to “build a democratic society” every single day.
 
Yet for the past 40 years where Singaporean children have been solemnly declaring to “build a democratic society” their country continues as a non-functioning democracy or hybrid regime as named by the Economist. The Singapore government, despite solemnly taking the same pledge every National Day, says that functioning democracy like those in countries such as the UK, North America, Europe, Oceania is dangerous and continues to denies its citizens such democracy. Singapore’s national pledge has hardly any significance in the real world.
 
This reminds me of the many African countries, like Congo, that call themselves “Democratic Republics”. Or the North Korean state that calls itself “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea”. Despite what they openly call themselves, in reality, they are really not a democracy at all.
 
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, what a joke. At least the Chinese are honest, they openly say they are communists and are ruled by one party.
 
In democratic countries, citizens talk openly about politics. Friends gather at cafes to talk about politics. They discuss policies made by the government. People actively canvass for support towards their causes. If they have the free time, they can stand at a street handing out flyers to promote their cause. They join political parties and express their views peacefully.
 
Political parties are a fundamental part of every democratic society. In functioning democracies, people are encouraged to explore political views, to join political parties and to speak up against injustice. For only then, will society progress. Only with such a thinking populace in place, can economic wealth, freedom and justice last through generations.
 
In Singapore, people who join political parties other than the ruling one are often stigmatized. This is rather common. You join the SDP or DAP or whatever political parties you have in Singapore and realize some of your friends no longer answer your phone calls. Some of your neighbors no longer speak to you and pretend not to know you when you say “hi”. Your parents are extremely worried about you joining a political party and ask you “Have you got nothing better to do? Why look for trouble?”
 
In the past 3 elections in Singapore, walkovers have always hovered around 50% of the total contested seats. This means that around 50% of the seats are uncontested as no one even dares or bothers to compete for them. The people in those areas do not even have to vote as the ruling party has already won these seats, even before election day. Therefore, it wouldn’t be very wrong to say that the ruling party has more or less won the election even before the election itself.
 
These would be unfathomable for someone in the UK or any democratic country. Politics is a much encouraged and righteous affair in all free countries of the world. Yet in the HDB flats of Singapore, it is quite frequently associated with “trouble”.
 
In the UK or any other free country, citizens jump at the chance to speak up. Even the youths are always involved in politics. The youths of the UK are now campaigning for the government to lower the voting age to 16. There is a “youth parliament” where youths make believe they are MPs. They form parties and debate policies. The “House of Commons” (UK parliament) has even allowed these youth to use the real parliament for their mock debates.
 
A closer look at Singapore would easily shed some light as to why quite a few Singaporeans are afraid to take part in politics.
 
In Singapore, permits are required to speak in public and have an assembly of more than 5 people. Libel laws in Singapore are also interpreted in a manner unlike those in other functioning democracies.
 
Opposition party members like Dr Chee Soon Juan and his associates who hold peaceful protests are jailed and fined. When they stand on the streets to hand out flyers to promote their cause, they are prosecuted and fined too. When they express their views verbally, they are sued for libel for a single “wrong” sentence made. They are then fined hundreds of thousands of dollars and bankrupted if they fail to pay up. As bankrupts, they cannot run for parliament or leave the country at will.
 
How are opposition parties ever going to have a meaningful campaign if they cannot even go out in public to canvass for support? How can a functioning democracy ever take place in such an environment?
 
The UN declaration of human rights states that everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. Obviously that is not the case in unique Singapore.
 
For all his misfortunes, you can actually say that Dr Chee is relatively lucky. Unlike past politicians such as Chia Thye Poh, Lim Hock Siew, Said Zahari, or many others, he was not jailed for over a decade, without trial. The Singapore government claims these men were communists that is why they were jailed for a decade, or in Chia’s case, two decades without trial.
 
Ironically, Singapore is now very friendly with China, the biggest communist country in the world. Singapore are one of the only three countries who receive 15 days visa free travel to China. The streets of Singapore are filled with plenty of immigrants from China, many of them, who having lived in a Communist country their whole life, have communist views too. Some of them may even be from the CCP.
 
Due to the environment they live in, many Singaporeans are afraid to take part in politics and opposition party members find it rather impossible to conduct a meaningful campaign. After all, how do you have a meaningful campaign when everyone is afraid to join your party, when you cannot gather in public to spread your views? When unusual libel laws are in place where one wrong sentence can bankrupt you?
 
Singaporean men are forced to serve two years of conscription along with 20 years of reservist duties. They are told that their sacrifice will allow them to live as free men.
 
Yet every night that they go back home, many of them live in fear. They shudder at the thought of joining a political party and expressing their political views in their own country. What irony.
 
The teenage vandal is lashed at till permanent scars are left on his buttocks and then thrown in jail for 6 months for his youthful mistake of spray painting graffiti on a wall.
 
While dictators such as “Thein Sein” who subverted the will of democracy has a flower named after him by Singapore (Dendrobium Thein Sein). He then enjoys five stars treatment courtesy of the Singapore government.
 
I guess the lesson learnt is this – You teenage chav. Instead of spray painting walls, renounce your Singapore citizenship, take up a Myanmese one, join their army, become a general, be part of a group of people who carry out torture and even murder, then come back to Singapore. They will name a flower in honor of you and you can dine in fine wine.
 
Everyday in Singapore, people who overstay their work visas by 3 months are sentenced to lashing of their buttocks where permanent scars are left behind. Drug traffickers are sentenced to hang. Cheats are sentenced to unbelievably long years behind bars. Justice, Singapore style.
 
In the UK or most other functioning democracies, the British judge and public would shake their heads at such manifestly excessive sentences. The punishments do not fit the crime at all. In Singapore, these are ruled as appropriate every single day. Just compare the punishments in Singapore against those in the US, UK or even Serbia or Poland and you will see how ridiculous they are.
 
Similarly, the Singapore gaols says they are “humane” and “rehabilitative”. Yet every day, it carries out hanging of drug mules, lashes teenage vandals and foreigners who overstay their work visas. 
 
In Britain, the prisoner places his shoes under his bed before watching TV to pass his time.
 
In Singapore, the prisoner sleeps on hard concrete so he cannot place his slippers underneath. There is also no TV for him to watch daily. Many of them just stare at the walls for the 23 hours daily till the paint peels. Quite a number of them develop mental illnesses due to the overly harsh regime.
 
Reasonably speaking, such treatments are inhumane mentally and physically.
 
But in Singapore, it is humane because they say so. It is also alright to hand out unbelievably harsh sentences, to fine and jail people for peaceful assembly, to bankrupt politicians for making one wrong sentence, because the they, the higher ups in Singapore, say so. It is also acceptable to name flowers in honor of human right abusers such as “Thein Sein”. Never mind what the international norms or standards are.
 
When you point out the fact that Singapore ranks as a “hybrid regime” in the Democracy Index, ranks 144th in the world for press freedom, ranks 43 out of 45 in the privacy index, is the country with the highest number of executions per capita, the government will come out with all kinds of excuses to pull the wool over your eyes, ranging from we are Asians to these foreigners are jealous and are out to sabotage us.
 
Think about it, why in the world would the UK or US or any other functioning democracy be jealous of Singapore? The average guy in the UK or US wouldn’t even want to live in Singapore for extended periods of time unless there are compelling reasons to do so. Singapore is merely a tiny island half a world away, it would be absurd to say Singapore is a threat to the biggest economies of the world. The UK spends millions of dollars in sending aid to Africa every year alone. These countries are merely doing their part in speaking up for democracy, human rights and justice.
 
Thank god Obama was not born a Singaporean. If so, he could have spent long periods behind bars for his youthful heavy drug use. If the amount of drugs on him was large enough, he might even be hanged for drug trafficking. The same goes for Jacqui Smith and David Cameron of the UK. They could all be ex convicts, unable to find a job, sweeping the floors of Ang Mo Kio, had they been Singaporeans.
 
Unbelievable. 
 
But hey, they don’t call it “Uniquely Singapore” for nothing, do they?
 
Ding Ting. British citizen in London.

25 PAP MPs may retire in next GE to make way for new candidates

Written by Our Correspondent

According to political analysts, as many as 25 MPs may be asked to step down in the next general election to make way for new candidates.

Eugene Tan, a law professor from Singapore Management University said the percentage of MPs who retired in past elections is about 25 per cent and he believed the figure may even be as high as 30 per cent in the next election.

However, vocal backbencher MPs are likely to be retained in his opinion as “the ruling party wants to let Singaporeans know that some PAP MPs are able to perform better than opposition MPs in scrutinizing and criticizing its policies.”

PAP MPs currently hold 82 out of 84 seats in the Singapore parliament. The other two non-PAP MPs are Mr Chiam See Tong from Potong Pasir and Mr Low Thia Kiang from Hougang.

Singapore has been ruled continuously for 50 years since 1959 by the ruling PAP whose leaders have advocated a “one-party” government as one which is “ideal” for Singapore.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that Singapore has too few talents to form a two-party system like the United States. Law Minister Shanmugam told an American audience lately that Singapore’s “unique” system has worked for it over the years and is a key factor in its economic success.

Due to increasing pressure from the ground to liberalize the political landscape, PM Lee was pressurized to announce a series of “reforms” to increase the number of non-PAP seats in parliament to 18.

They will be filled by 9 “best losers” in the elections as NCMPs. The other 9 seats are reserved for NMPs who do not represent any constituency.

Though there appears to be an increase in the number of “opposition” MPs in parliament, they are still short of the number needed to deny the PAP its traditional two-thirds majority which enables it to pass bills and legislation freely and easily without any proper debate or consultation wtih the people.

As the NCMPs and NMPs do not have a grassroots support base of their own, they are unable to build a credible alternative party to provide genuine political competition to the PAP.

Despite constantly exhorting Singaporeans to compete with foreigners, the PAP is unwilling to reform the entire system to allow other parties to compete with them on a level playing field.

With the next election likely to be called sometime next year, the PAP will begin to retire some of its MPs, but some remain “irreplaceable”.

It is not known if its geriatrician leader MM Lee Kuan Yew will still contest in the next general election. He will be 87 years old next year.

By his own admission, Lee told a Japanese audience lately that he is “not doing much work except doing forecasting”, yet he appears in the news more frequently than his son the Prime Minister.

Which PAP MP do you wish to see step down in the next GE? Post your thoughts here and share with our readers!

Next Page »