Singapore Recalcitrant

A Stand-up Comedian

2012-01-15T23:12:00.000-08:00

A stand-up comedian performs by standing before an audience and telling jokes putting his audience in stitches. Whether the comical performance of Acting Minister Chan Chun Sing (aka Kee Chiu in social media) of Ministry of Community Development, Youth & Sports at his ministerial community visit to Jurong Spring Ward in Jurong GRC resembles that of a stand-up comedian is not difficult to imagine. Let's examine what he said about ministers' pay at this gathering. Pay is not an issue for the team in government when asked whether the expected pay cut in ministerial pay would make ministers less motivated. He does not think they come here for the money but to provide a better life for the next generation. One of the reasons he stepped forward was because he knew he was joining a team that was not here for the money. The key is to find the right balance and money should not be the one factor to attract them which also should not be the bugbear to deter them.

Well said but perhaps with tongue-in-cheek. Acting Minister Chan Chun Sing was in fact trying to say that PAP ministers, including himself, are selfless politicians dedicated to the service of the people not because of the money and certainly without any thought of ennriching themselves. If they become multi-millionaires in the process, this is a just reward that Singapore taxpayers owe them for their so-called dedicated selfless service to the people. They are such talented and indispensable species that they consider their salaries must be commensurate with the top earners in the private sector. Their profession of selfless service to the people must be taken with a large pinch of salt. So Acting Minister Chan Chun Sing could be expected to speak with tongue-in-cheek to defend an untenable position. Perhaps the recent Straits Times crystal ball gazing that he could be the future prime minister could have caused a little swollen-headed on his part for him to rant about PAP ministers' selfless service.

An article on 22 July 2011 on this website titled "Are the 3rd generation PAP leaders really not self-serving?" (still available on this website) extolled the first generation PAP leaders like Dr Goh Keng Swee and S. Rajaratnam who really served the people without thought of money drawing modest salaries. Lee Kuan Yew led by example as the then prime minister but he later degenerated into a mercenary politician. In fact he was instrumental together with the then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong for the introducation of the present astronomical pay for the ministers in 1994. The point is if the first generation PAP ministers could be so noble and selfless in serving the people without enriching themselves with taxpayers' money, why is it so difficult for the third generation of PAP ministers to follow the selfless example?

True, PM Lee Hsian Loong has shown some compunction and tried to mitigate the people's wrath by appointing a Ministerial Salary Review Committee to look into ministers' salaries and recommend suitable cuts. People say this is just a wayang because the Committee's recommendations for cuts are not deep enough to satisfy the people and can best described as cosmetic. The recommended annual salary for the prime minister is still set very high at $2.2 million which is five times the annual salary of US$400,000 of the American President Barack Obama. The recommended annual salary for a junior minister is set at $1.1 million which is more than two times the annual pay of the American President. Presumably, the comical Acting Minister Chan Chun Sing will be getting this amount and it will take a lot to convince the people that he is not in it for the money. Anyway, ministerial salaries will once again certainly be a hot button topic in the 2016 General Election.

Serving the People or Self-serving?

2012-01-06T03:07:00.000-08:00

PAP leaders are the first to assert vehemently that they are in politics to serve the people. But are they really or is it because of the astronomical salaries they pay themselves out of taxpayers' money? They can holler till the cows come home but few, if any, of the politically-conscious Singaporeans will swallow that they are in it for altruistic reasons.But then they can come round to say that majority of Singaporeans have returned them to government at every election. That seems to be a conundrum as in the last General Election (GE) in May last year 60.1 per cent of the electorate who cast their votes voted for the PAP. This was despite the massive disillusionment about the PAP in the run-up to the last election. The erratic mood of the electorate had even stumped the predictability of the psychologists. But the next GE in 2016 may see a greater watershed performance by the opposition parties, especially the Workers' Party (WP) .

When the Ministerial Salary Review Committee under Mr Gerard Ee was formed after the GE, the initial response of discerning Singaporeans was one of scepticism that it could really recommend drastic cuts of ministerial salaries considering the composition of the Committee. "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak" which saying aptly sums up what the Review Committee could do or was willing to do. With due respect to them, if they recommend too drastic a cut of the ministerial salaries they probably fear that they will incur the wraths, if not displeasures, of the PAP wallahs. It will be less onerous facing the wraths and displeasures of the ordinary Singaporeans.

Can Mr Gerard Ee and his committee honestly say that the recommended annual salary of $2.2m for the Prime Minister, which is five times the annual pay of US$400,000 of Mr Barack Obama, the American President, is a fair charge to the Singapore taxpayers? Or the recommended $1.1m for the junior minister, which is more than two times the annual salary of the American President? The accusation that the ministerial salary revision is merely a perfunctory cosmetic exercise of the Ministerial Salary Review Committee is never too far-fetched. To all intents and purposes this is now a fait accompli and since the recommendations have been accepted by the Prime Minister and his government, there is virtually nothing that the disgruntled Singaporeans can do now to reverse the process except to wait patiently for the next election in 2016 to show their dissatisfaction. The ministerial salaries will once again be a festering topic in the next GE.

Singaporeans are not unfamiliar with the highfalutin figure of Ms Grace Fu, Senior Minister of state in the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts and the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources. Apart from being highfalutin, she appears to be also narcissistic. She was reported to have audaciously said that when she entered politics in 2006, pay was not a key factor for her. The more considerations for her were the loss of privacy and personal time, public scrutiny and career disruption. She further said:"I had some ground to believe that my family would not suffer a drastic change in the standard of living even though I experienced a drop in my income. So it is with this recent pay cut. If the balance is tilted further in the future, it will make it harder for any one considering political office."

It was not surprising that her adverse comments swiftly went viral and there were around 1000 critical comments from netizens. She tried to salvage the situation by claiming that she had been misunderstood. There is a Chinese saying: When a word is spoken even a four-horse carriage finds it difficult to chase.(一言既出，驷马难追).

Ms Grace Fu has not proven herself to be exceptionally outstanding in her work. If anything , she comes across to the public as a run-of-the-mill type and not any talent to be crowed about. She should consider herself extremely fortunate to be appointed a senior minister of state and should not behave like a spoilt child just because of a minor pay cut. Considering the humongous salary she enjoys, if she has any compunction she should be serving the people and not be self-serving. A very good example for her to emulate is the inimitable selfless Workers' Party MP Mr Chen Show Mao who gave up a lucrative profession to serve the people of Singapore as an MP. He is what I would call a true patriot. Mr Chen Show Mao is not only an exemplar for Ms Grace Fu to follow but for the whole PAP leadership as well.

Finally, Ms Grace Fu could gracefully choose to go back to her former profession if she thinks that it would satisfy her ego.

The SMRT Debacle

2011-12-16T03:38:00.000-08:00

The name SMRT has become synonymous with chaos and confusion as evidenced by its worst breakdown in its 24-year operating history in train stations across Singapore last night. Thousands of commuters riding home during the evening rush hour were plunged into total darkness as trains on the North-South Line suddenly lost power and ground to a halt. The chaos and confusion that followed were so unprecedentedly atrocious that it was incredible that they could happen only under the inept management of SMRT CEO Saw Phaik Hwa. No words could describe the dire sufferings of the commuters in the stifling heat of windowless carriages where the air-conditioning had also failed. It was indeed a nightmarish and traumatic experience for the commuters.

Happening so soon after the Circle Line debacle, does it not occur to the fertile mind of the Transport Minister, or the PAP Government for that matter, that something is radically wrong with the management of the SMRT helmed by its CEO Saw Phaik Hwa. She was nowhere to be seen and it was up to the Transport Minister to make an appeasing statement from Cambodia where he is attending the 17th Asean Transport Minister Meeting. Under Saw Phaik Hwa's watch, not only were Singaporeans provided with comical spectacles of vandalism of SMRT carriages in their depots on two occasions. In addition there had been frequent disruptions of train services to the utter inconvenience of commuters culminating in the debacle last night. She was quite flippant in her attitude towards all these happenings and the question uppermost in Singaporeans' mind is whether she has not outlived her tenure in her million-dollar job.

The SMRT provides an essential service to the commuting public in moving large number of people from place to place in an efficient manner. The frequency in the number of breakdowns in services does not convey confidence in the commuting public nor does it reflect well on the efficiency or the lack of it in the management. One or two breakdowns should have forewarned the management of possible flaws in the system and that efforts should have been made to detect these defects and rectify them. Complacency seems to be the order of the day and nothing seems to have changed the frequency of disruptions. Let's see if the Transport Minister will be able whip up some urgency to act in the complacent management, especially its sluggish CEO to make a really credible improvement to the SMRT system.

The press conference given by CEO Saw Phaik Hwa today can best be described as an exercise in futility. No amount of press conference will be able to compensate the commuters for their nightmarish and traumatic experience in the latest SMRT debacle.

The Momentous Impact of Aljunied

2011-11-29T01:04:00.000-08:00

Judging from the soul-searching that pervaded the PAP convention at the University Cultural Centre on Sunday 27 November, PM Lee Hsien Loong and his Cabinet colleagues are stilll smarting from the humiliating defeat of the top PAP team in Aljunied GRC in the last General Election in May. They lost two heavyweight ministers, a senior minister of state and a prospective political office holder in the Aljunied fiasco. PM Lee has now vowed at the convention that the party is set on retaking Aljunied in the GE in 2016. All very brave words but would history and, more importantly, the enlightened voters of Aljunied allow PM Lee and the party to indulge in this fantasy of retaking Aljunied? The wheel of history only moves forward and PM Lee and his circle of self-acclaimed ministers may find to their dismay not only that they could not recapture Aljunied but may lose a few more GRCs to Workers' Party and the other opposition parties if they are able to muster credible candidates against the PAP. People on the ground are already talking about it.

More startling to the complaisant PAP leaders is the belief in certain quarters, among them some quite prominent, that in the present struggle for political supremacy, the Workers' Party (WP) is portrayed as having similar prowess that PAP had in the turbulent period before it came into power in 1959. The PAP had the solid support of the pro-communist unions under the powerful leadership of Lim Chin Siong. The PAP now has the unions completely under its control through its jocular minister Lim Swee Say. So politically the WP is deprived of this important source of trade union support. But if WP is on the political ascendancy reminiscent of the PAP 1959 political might, there is every possibility the trade union rank and file may shift their allegiance to the WP, maybe not openly, in defiance of the PAP-dominated NTUC leadership.

From his demeanour in the PAP convention, PM Lee Hsien Loong and his Cabinet comrades show no compunction in wanting to snuff out the opposition completely from Parliament. Of course, PM Lee can explain that the opposition can still be represented in Parliament in the capacity of NCMPs. Is this not a travesty as NCMPs are not elected MPs? They do not represent any constituency and have no voting rights in certain aspects in Parliament. It shows the arrogance of the PAP leaders in wanting to assert their political dominance in Parliament to the exclusion of the opposition, especially the WP. This is perhaps what they want Singaporeans to believe that they are practising democracy, which is contrary to their oft professed intention. Is this not a mockery of democracy?

Anyway, a great number of electors are disillusioned with the PAP leaders. Even with the five years before the next election for the PAP leaders to rectify their shortcomings and win over the disenchanted voters, they may not find the going smooth for the simple reason that history is no longer on their side.

Usurping the role of the Host (喧宾夺主）

2011-11-20T17:50:00.000-08:00

The Chinese saying :xuan bin duo zhu (喧宾夺主）is more scathing in its Chinese form than its English rendering "usurping the role of the host". And in the Chinese society there could be example of social occasions which ended up with one party accusing the other party or person with this saying. It has an unpleasant connotation which could have a lingering effect on the receiving party or person for quite a while.

The Straits Times and the Media Corp could have, whether unwittingly or not, played the role of portraying our eminent PM Lee Hsien Loong as a usurper of the role of the Indonesian host President Susilo Banbang Yudhoyuno. The Straits Times and Media Corp had been giving prominent daily reports of the speeches of PM Lee at the ASEAN/East Asia Summit in Bali, Indonesia to the diminution of other world leaders, especially President Yudhoyuno. You opened the Straits Times every morning and you could see nothing but PM Lee Hsien Loong said this or he said that and very little of what other world leaders said at the Summit. One could not help getting the impression that PM Lee was the host of the Summit and that he was actually running the show. The Indonesian Ambassador here could not have failed to notice this phenomenon as it was so glaring. President Yudhoyuno could hardly be amused but being a magnanimous person he could not be expected to show any displeasure. But Indonesians have a long memory.

We now come back to the role of the Straits Times. The public perception that it is the propaganda organ of the PAP Government is never too far-fetched. And the chairman of the Singapore Press Holdings who exercises tight control of the Straits Times and other vernacular newspapers is described as the spin doctor. So to counter the pro-government propaganda that the Straits Times disseminates, there is a proliferation of the social media which provide an alternative source of news to the public. Because what they print is not complimentary to the Government, there is now an intention on the part of the Government to curb the influence of the social media by legislation, although still at a preliminary stage. The Internet played no small part in the PAP's loss of the Aljunied GRC and reduction of the total percentage of the votes garnered in the General Election in May this year.

There is really nothing wrong in PM Lee Hsien Loong's ambition to portray himself as an outstanding politician among ASEAN and world leaders at the ASEAN/EastAsia Summit or in any international forum. But it shows political sagacity that this is done without any tendency of one-upmanship.

A Comical Gaffe by Minister Khaw Boon Wan

2011-11-05T02:19:00.000-07:00

The small Himalayan country called Bhutan came into prominence recently when its king married a commoner in a colourful ceremony and brought happiness to his subjects winning the universal acclaim of being the most happy nation on earth. This seems to strike a chord with Singaporeans who wish the Bhutanese well for their happiness which is to many people an elusive element in the Singapore society. However, along came a jocular figure in the person of Minister Khaw Boon Wan who pooh-poohed the universal perception that Bhutan could be the last Shangri-la on earth.`He also denigrated Bhutan that it could not be the happy country made out to be as its people are almost eking out a living from its not very fertile soil. Mr Khaw could not have been more pretentious by his depreciating remarks on Bhutan just from one brief visit to the country. Of course, he could not be faulted for trying to be more critical than the former MM Lee Kuan Yew in disparaging others.

Be that as it may, it could come as a mild shock to Mr Khaw to discover that there is a highly-cultured Bhutanese who goes by the name of PaSsu who could give him a lesson in logical argument in English. Does it surprise Mr Khaw that an ordinary Bhutanese could operate a blog on which he has posted that "this is in reply to National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan of Singapore on his comments made on our country". For a Bhutanese he surprises readers with his fairly high standard of satirical replies to each of Mr Khaw's disparagements of his country.

Saying that he was not surprised when Mr Khaw said that "Bhutan is not the last Shangri-la on Earth" because a friend of his from Singapore found Bhutan only "full of mountains and valleys". The Bhutanese asked sarcastically:"When you visited Bhutan, what did you expect? Those flying mountains you saw in Avatar? or every Bhutanese merrily dancing in designer clothes? Well, you must have at least expected fancier cars and taller buildings but we only have taller mountains (not flying ones) and thicker forest (truly natural)". To Mr Khaw's uncomplimentary remarks that most of the time he only saw unhappy people toiling in the field, worried about the next harvest and whether there would be buyers for their products, the quick-witted Bhutanese quoted a proverb he had heard in school:"Two men looked through the prison window, one saw the mud and the other saw the horizon".

The humorous Bhutanese said that he was surprised that Mr Khaw spent most of his time in Bhutan looking in the fields and was amazed at his ability to figure out whether the people are happy or unhappy just by looking at them. He answered point-blank that if Mr Khaw had gone closer to see the people in the fields, he would have heard them singing and enjoying the social lives which Mr Khaw would not understand. He would have seen a woman with a basket on her back holding arms with several children coming with steaming food and everybody will sit down to eat their lunch, laughing, joking and feeding babies. The people do not worry about the next harvest or whether there would be buyers for their products. In fact, they do not do much commercial farming but do the farming to keep with tradition. When the sun sets, the people leave for their homes where they have a large family waiting for a family get-together.

Well, Mr Khaw, Singapore may be a thriving modern city but what percentage of the people are really happy like the Bhutanese. The people who can be said to be extremely happy are ministers like your kind self who are drawing whopping salaries from the taxpayers' money. So before you venture again to dispense your uncomplimentary remarks about other countries, you will save yourself a lot of public disapprobation if you think twice before you open your big mouth. Or maybe ministers are so thick-skinned that one more criticism does not add further to their dented reputation.

The Bhutanese blog post is titled:"Bhutanese replies to Khaw Boon Wan's 'Shangri-la' comments". It is meant to be an open letter to Mr Khaw Boon Wan if he has not already read it.

The Display of One-upmanship in Parliament

2011-10-24T06:21:00.000-07:00

Does the "new normal" in politics include the beginning of a display of more affability on the part of PAP ministers and MPs towards the opposition (especially Workers' Party (WP) MPs in Parliament? This does not seem to be incongruous with the aim of the realistic PM Lee Hsien Loong but whether this noble intention has gone down well with his colleagues and MPs is intriguing. If the proceedings of the start of the 12th Parliament are any indication, it shows that there are still a few stragglers among the MPs and at least one minister without portfolio.

Mr Lim Swee Say was described in the Straits Times as the ruling party's most high profile Mandarin-speaking minister. He featured in a heated debate with the WP secretary-general Mr Low Thia Khiang in Parliament. By Lim's disdainful demeanour and aggressive attitude in presenting his arguments, PM Lee's idea of a more tranquil and courteous atmosphere in the 12th Parliament is devoid of meaning. TV footage of his antics in Parliament showed him to be more comical than rational with his clownish demeanour.

The object of his caustic crticisms, Mr Low Thia Khiang, emerged as an indignant cogent opponent who was able to outmanoeuvre the PAP high priest in almost all his arguments. In response to Lim Swee Say's clarification on his "cheaper, better, faster" catchphrase, Low's quick retort was: "On his clarification about cheap, faster and better workers, I would say that perhaps we will start to see better, faster and perhaps cheaper (ones) after the ministerial salary review is completed".

In the longest debate with Mr Low, the Minister in the PMO Lim Swee Say said he was at a loss for words that Mr Low felt ministers served out of self interest. Responding, Mr Low said he was referring to Singaporeans' perception, nicely hitting the nail on the head. In this connection, an article was published on 22-7-11 on this website titled: "Are the 3rd generation PAP leaders not really self-serving?" which attempted to show why there was a perception among Singaporeans that PAP ministers (including the PM) were a self-serving lot. The relevant post is still available and Mr Lim Swee Say is strongly urged to read it to keep abreast of Singaporeans' perception.

There is an acting minister who is given the nickname "Kie Chiu"(meaning raise your hand) . He has the ridiculous habit of asking his puzzled audience to raise their hands to show approbation of what he has said. Then another minister who had become notorious for disappearing from heavy flood scenes in Orchard Road leaving helpless business victims in the lurch. Another minister incurred public displeasure at showing an indifferent attitude to food-poisoning volunteers who helped in the Youth Olympic Games. These are supposed to be the cream of our selfless ministers.

Returning to WP MP Mr Chen Show Mao's maiden speech in Parliament, a large number of Chinese-speaking Singaporeans who were viewing the TV programme on Parliamentary debates were not only disappointed, but were angry at Media Corp for censoring Chen's speech. They could only see Chen saying the words:"Patriotism is not the preserve of the ruling party" and the rest was cut off. The citizens were eagerly waiting to watch the immaculte performance of Chen as a excellent Mandarin orator and ended up with hearing only one sentence of his speech. It was an anti-climax to them to say the least. Is this kind of discrimnation going to endear them to the PAP?

A former woman journalist of the Lianhe Zaobao has written an article in the current affairs column of the Chinese journal on 21-10-11 that it was a grave error for Media Corp to refrain from reporting the epoch-making maiden speech of Mr Chen Show Mao in its TV programme and urges that Parliamentary debates be reported in full in future. She said that Singaporeans were disappointed that they were deprived of the opportunity of watching Chen's wisdom and intelligence in action.

A Dispassionate View of Chen Show Mao's Analogy

2011-10-21T21:58:00.000-07:00

The Workers' Party MP Mr Chen Show Mao has so far shown by his words and actions that he is a man of very careful disposition. He is not known to have said or done anything which could be considered to be uncomplimentary to the PAP leaders or Government. In fact, he could only be the antithesis of the highfalutin former MM Lee Kuan Yew. So before he brought up the analogy of Emperor Tang Tai Zong of the Tang Dynasty China in his maiden speech in Parliament, he would have considered all the pros and cons that this delicate theme could engender. The overwhelming response to his speech, especially the analogy of Emperor Tai Zong, proved him to be a consummate politician.

Two of the three PAP MPs who debated Chen's Tang analogy were rational in their comments. One even commented that Chen should have been given more applause. One woman MP Ms Ellen Lee (Sembawang GRC) voiced a dissenting view of Chen's analogy. She argued that it was inappropriate to compare the PAP to Emperor Tang Tai Zong as he was an autocratic ruler in a feudal era. It is quite possible that there may be some conservatives among Singaporeans holding this view.

Let us examine dispassionately the appropriateness of Chen's analogy. Emperor Tang Tai Zong was one of the most, if not the most, enlightened ruler in Chinese history. He had shown no characteristic of an autocrat and under his sagacious rule, the Chinese people experienced a period of peace and prosperity. He treated his people like his own children and showed concern for any of their distress and sufferings. During his benevolent rule, he nurtured and developed a host of literary, artistic, musical, dance and theatrical talents which were a legacy to modern China. That he was able to achieve all these remarkable achievements was due in no small measure to the constant fearless and far-sighted advice of his famous loyal courtier Wei Zheng. And so the period of Emperor Tang Tai Zong's enlightened rule was given the historical title of Zhenguan golden era (贞观之治）。

Chen Show Mao could not have equated the PAP Government to a feudal ruler but the analogy was meant as a timely encouragement to the PAP leaders to emulate the enlightened adminstration of Emperor Tang Tai Zong which he could not have done this without mentioning the emperor. The fact that the emperor was a feudal ruler, though a benevolent one, could only be taken in a co-incidental sense as the emphasis is on his enlightened administration and not on his status as a feudal ruler.

When Chen made the analogy, he would have expected that there will be some Singaporeans who may hold different views. That is only to be expected in a democratic society and it is hoped that the above exposition would be able to persuade them from any misconception. Mr Chen Show Mao has proved himself to be a sincere and able politician and his analogy of Emperor Tan Tai Zong has been made with all sincerity and not without humility.

Tribute to a Passionate Patriot with Lofty Principles

2011-10-19T02:03:00.000-07:00

By now the name Chen Show Mao is no longer strange to Singaporeans. In particular, they should remember him as the charismatic member of the Workers' Party (WP) quintet who toppled the formidable PAP team which included the heavyweight Foreign Minister George Yeo in the Aljunied GRC in the General Election in May this year. He was quite modest in his pivotal role in bringing about the historic WP victory.

He brings along with him formidable credentials which even the ordinarily disdainful PAP leaders could only admire and respect. How could they be otherwise when Chen's credentials put him in a position superior to most, if not all, of the PAP leaders, including possibly the immodest PM Lee Hsien Loong himself. With his talent and international legal experience Chen is going to pioneer a political path for Singaporeans which will give the PAP leaders a run for their money trying to emulate or counter.

Chen showed his political dexterity when he made his maiden speech in Parliament yesterday (18-10-11). He showed himself no less effectively bi-lingual than the best of any such politicians that the PAP can muster. He spoke fluently in Mandarin and not only displayed political maturity but magnanimity as well when he deftly sketched out the relationship between the WP and the ruling PAP as he saw it by bringing back to present reality the royal court of Tang Dynasty China.

There was in Emperor Tang Taizong's reign in the Tang Dynasty a famous courtier Wei Zheng who was renowned for speaking the truth to the throne and was unafraid of offending the emperor. As a result of courtier Wei's fearless and far-sighted criticisms, the emperor introduced the Zhenguan golden era (贞观之治） that would become a model for China's future rulers. Mr Chen appealed earnestly: "In this 12th Parliament, I hope a wise ruling party can be Tang Taizong while we the WP can be Wei Zheng. Together we can create a prosperous era, one that is not dictated by a single ruler surrounded by 'yes' men". (The quotation of Mr Chen's speech is taken from the Straits Times)

Mr Chen's speech was described as mastery and commanded the attention of the almost-full House, including PM Lee Hsien Loong. That the House has rarely experienced such a dignified utterrance of a rising political star of Mr Chen's calibre is never in doubt. As a further proof of the respect he commands, Minister of State for Education and Defence Mr Lawrence Wong was careful in his speech to avoid the pitfall of irrational criticism of Mr Chen's speech. As if by intuition he also touched on the same theme of the relationship between the Government and the people. It was the PAP smart Alec Dr Teo Ho Pin who made some dissenting noise that he"did not know the difference (Mr Chen) has made" in defining the differences. (Mr Chen was making the point that political differences are not akin to divisions that will lend to time-wasting politicking and gridlock).

In conclusion there is a Chinese saying which fits exactly the character of Mr Chen Show Mao: Acquainted with things ancient and modern; Well versed in philosophy. (博古通今；精通哲理）. There is a prediction that in Mr Chen Show Mao the highfalutin former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew will meet his waterloo.

A Comedy in Conspicuity

2011-10-03T06:09:00.000-07:00

Perhaps the article Defining 'the Government' in the Straits Times of 3.10.11 written by the political reporter Janice Heng was seen as a comedy in conspicuity mainly to amuse rather than to convey any serious meaning. She may find that she shows naivety in expecting the discerning public to believe that the Straits Times and the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) controlling it are not the propaganda organ of the PAP Government. If she is a newbie and shows dreadful ignorance of the true camouflaged character of the Straits Times and the SPH, she may be forgiven. But is she?

It was a well-known fact that when Dr Tony Tan was chairman of the SPH, he was described by the public as the Government's spin doctor. It meant that he was the PAP Government's propaganda chief and the mainstream media (MSM) could only churn out pro-Government propaganda in their journals to the detriment of opposition politics. It was only during the hustings for the General Election this year and after that that some reasonable journalistic coverage has been given to the opposition parties. The Forum page in the StraitsTimes is meant for letters from the public written in praise of the Government. Writers of letters critical of the Government are usually turned down ostensibly because of lack of Forum space.

Ms Janice Heng shows remarkable naviety in saying that those who think The Straits Times is inextricably linked to the Government should try spending some time here as a political reporter. Does not this show that ST political reporters are blinkered and cannot see the wood for the trees?

The post of chairman of SPH has always been held by former ministers starting with the late former minister Lim Kim San. After the late Mr Lim Kim San, the baton was passed on to Dr Tony Tan, another former minister and deputy prime minister. Now the chairman SPH post is passed on to Dr Lee Boon Yang, another former minister. This is to ensure that the pro-PAP Government propaganda by the SPH-controlled MSM is perpetuated. So is not Ms Janice Heng myopic in her assertion that the Straits Times is not inextricably linked to the Government?

Do not all these revelations about PAP Government's tight control of the press through the SPH make Ms Janice Heng out to be either a naive and ignorant political reporter or a politically-motivated one to be writing such a frivolous article which could easily mislead dispassionate readers? Reporters Without Borders, an international non-governmental organisation that advocates freedom of the press, gave a very low ranking (137) on freedom of press in Singapore. Ms Janice Heng may not be aware of this low press freedom ranking and may be something for her to mull over if she contemplates to write about press freedom in Singapore.

A Geriatric in Pomposity

2011-09-22T17:44:00.000-07:00

In the normal course of logic, when a person grows old he or she becomes more circumspect in speech and behaviour. But then sometimes there is an exception to this logic when you find a geriatric behaving pompously and bombastically and expecting his preachings to be accorded a regal reception. There are many Chinese sayings to portray such highfalutin individuals but suffice it to quote just one or two: All are too mean for his notice (目空一切) and Conceited and egoistic (自高自大).

In fact having made one gaffe after another in his comments on world as well as local affairs which were embarrassing, to say the least, to his prime minister son as well as to the Government, one would have thought that the former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew would simmer down and retire gracefully to a quiet affluent life to the relief of sceptical Singaporeans. But unfortunately this was not to be the case and his latest gaffe was to humiliate a PhD student of the Nanyang Technological University at a forum. Miss Joan Sim, who probably adored the former MM for what she thought was an inimitable eminent politician and statesman, naively asked him an innocent question about social cohesiveness. Instead of answering the question, the former MM baffled his audience by hubristically urging the PhD student, who is single, to stop wasting her time on her doctorate and find a boyfriend instead. That the surprised audience was shocked by his crass remarks could well be imagined, but the normally sedate Miss Sim could well have been knocked over with a feather from shock. Will Miss Sim still harbour any illusion of the former MM as a humane fatherly figure after this deplorable incident?

The President of the Association for Action and Research (AWARE) Ms Nicole Tan showed admirable courage in attacking the former MM Lee Kuan Yew's comments claiming that it "perpetuates sexist stereotype" and "belittling single women". She also slammed the PAP Government for not "walking the talk". For her adverse remarks against the former MM and the PAP Government, it would not be a surprise if the plucky Ms Nicole Tan finds her presidency being challenged. The netizens are equally critical of the former MM.

It should be well known by now that the highfalutin former MM takes a delight in bullying university students, especially NTU students, (Miss Sim's case is an example) and yet NTUSU and other student organisations seem to enjoy the antics of this blustering octogenarian. This is a fascinating phenomenon and one cannot help associating it with masochism. Does the former MM have a high opinion of university graduates whom he described as "educated but not bright"?

The question that is uppermost on everyone's mind is why does not PM Lee Hsien Loong do something to curb his father's impetuousity. The answer may be found in the saying that a leopard cannot change its spots. Then there is the question of filial piety towards the father which may inhibit any altruistic desire to act.

Did the former Minister Mentor really say it?

2011-09-06T07:16:00.000-07:00

Whatever his strong point, the former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew is not known to be a person who is judicious with his words. There is a Chinese saying aptly fitting him: His mouth never chooses kind words (口不择言). He thinks he is more sagacious than the famous Chinese sage Confucius. But the narcissistic Lee Kuan Yew's booboos in his utterances have become his trademark.

It is hard to believe that the US embassy cable, leaked by whistle-blower website WikiLeaks, reporting the former Minister Mentor characterising Islam as a "venomous religion" during a 2008 meeting with visiting US senator Hilary Clinton is not authentic. The US diplomat reporting it was obviously present at the meeting and it was a first-hand report of the proceedings. Unless we believe that the US diplomat was an irresponsible officer who had an ulterior motive in misreporting the offending words used by the former Minister Mentor, there could be no dispute as to the accuracy of the report. Anyway, senator Hilary Clinton would have noticed it if she thought it was misreported.

Could the fact that it was not recorded in the Foreign Affairs Ministry notes of the meeting be conclusive proof that the offending words were not used by the former Minister Mentor? There could be many plausible explanations for the omission of the offending words from the record. Could it be the prescient discretion of a conscientious officer who could forsee a political furore over this offending term in the future? So we have now to decide the probability between the US embassy version of the meeting where the offending words "venomous religion" were used and the former Minister Mentor's version in which he vehemently denied ever using such offensive words.

To refresh the memory of Singaporeans, perhaps it should be remembered that our former Minister Mentor is not immune to making booboos from time to time. His famous "flash in the pan" in describing the black American candidate Mr Barack Obama when he contended the American presidential election in 2008 was Lee's biggest gaffe. Lee Kuan Yew was rooting for the white American candidate Mr John McCain and considered the election of a black American President to be apocalyptic. He had to eat his words and humbled himself when he met President Barack Obama in2009. President Obama showed that he was a figure of magnanimity.

Another of his booboos occurred in 2009 in which he made deleterious comments in the National Geographic magazine portraying Singaporeans as less hard-driving and hard-striving so that it became necessary for the Singapore Government to bring in Chinese immigrants as a counter-measure. Needless to say Singaporeans were infuriated by his disparaging comments which showed up his political insensitivity.

His next gaffe was his disparaging comments on the Singapore Malays/Muslims in his much-hyped book "Lee Kuan Yew : Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going". He commented that other communities have easier integration than Muslims because they tend to be "distinct and separate". This caused an uproar in the Malay/Muslim community with the Association of Malay Professionals (AMP) making a scathing attack on the Minister Mentor. There was concern that this Malay anger had affected Malay support of the PAP in the Aljunied GRC which was won by the Workers' Party in the May 2011 General Election.

Finally, should the former Minister Mentor find himself having nothing better to do than delivering his so-called pearls of wisdom to gullible audiences, there is a pretty comical suggestion that he could busy himself by becoming a stand-up comedian to entertain the kids. They will be extremely delighted and will regard him as their idol.

Singaporeans want an enhancement of powers for the future President.

2011-08-31T01:50:00.000-07:00

The president, as provided for in the Constitution, has veto power in respect of the protection of national reserves, appointments of key personnel in the civil service, ISA detentions, CPIB investigations and the maintenance of religious harmony. Beyond these responsibilities he has to act in accordance with the advice of the prime minister and his Cabinet. For instance, the Law Minister asserted that the president cannot speak publicly without the advice of the PM and his Cabinet. This has raised a minor storm from the three presidential candidates other than Dr Tony Tan. Mr Shanmugam has since softened on his hard stand.

In the recent presidential hustings, apart from Dr Tony Tan who was considered a pro-PAP candidate quite comfortable with the constraints imposed by the Constitution on the president, the other three candidates were all very vocal against this circumscription. They were definitely voicing the strong dissensions of the majority of the voting electorate against these undemocratic restraints on the president's powers. They wanted the president to be able to initiate action on social issues, especially those on the poor people's livelihood. It is significant that one candidate wanted the president to have discretionary power to decide on the clemency of condemned prisoners. The case of Yong Vui Kong, who has gone through all the processes of appeals in the High Court and to the president for clemency over his death sentence for heroine possession, has generated considerable sympathy among Singaporeans for sparing his life. The outgoing president has no discretion but to act on the advice of the Cabinet. The new president will not be able to act any differently.

The three presidential candidates, other than Dr Tony Tan, had created such a furore with their animated stand against constitutional constraints on the president's powers that it could be ignored at the PAP Government's own peril now that the hustings are over. The events have clearly shown that Singaporeans are strongly desirous for a change to enhance the powers of the future president. The new president Dr Tony Tan will still be circumscribed by the Constitution but as he has said he will not feel uncomfortable with it. This is because of his close liaison with PAP leaders. He professes to be an independent president but how independent he can be will be interesting to watch.

Coming back to the enhancement of presidential powers, even the MSM Lianhe Zaobao, in its editorial on 30-8-11, is able to see this trend coming and advises the PAP Government that it cannot put off for long the desire of Singaporeans for an enhancement of the president's powers. The writing is already on the wall. The PAP Government can choose either to ride roughshod over the people's desire or to show a more democratic facade by preparing to accommodate the people's wish to see the future president's powers enhanced. Even the new president Dr Tony Tan is able to see this inevitable trend coming.

A Cliffhanger Presidential Election

2011-08-28T04:34:00.000-07:00

Despite the voluminous criticisms against him in the social media, the former deputy prime minister Dr Tony Tan still managed to scrape through with the slimmest of margin in the presidential election to become the seventh president of Singapore. Dr Tony Tan won by a minuscule margin of 0.34% or 7269 votes. With the massive support from trade unions and other establishment bodies and the tacit endorsement of the PAP Government, Dr Tony Tan's narrow victory can be said to be a irony of fate against a more worthy opponent Dr Tan Cheng Bock. There is a Chinese saying befitting Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Although defeated but still honourable (虽败犹荣). He had put in massive efforts in his campaign and not only his supporters but many Singaporeans will be extremely disappointed that he has been deprived of victory by the slimmest margin imaginable. Fate has been unkind to him for he would have made an excellent president with his independence of character.

Willy-nilly we are now saddled, through the intricacies of fate, with a new elected president whose independence of the PAP Government is never reassuring, given his PAP background. Will he turn out to be another S R Nathan whose tenure has been anything but illustrious. Of course Dr Tony Tan is the PAP tacitly-endorsed candidate and nothing pleases PM Lee Hsien Loong and his Cabinet colleagues more than his election as president as this removes a source of anxiety of a possible turbulent relationship with the presidency if any of the other three candidates was elected.

In his campaign Dr Tony Tan portrayed himself as a candidate with financial expertise and vast experiences in the corporate world and is the best person with a steady hand to handle the national reserves. He was careful to steer clear of problematic political and social issues that the three other candidates promised they would take up with the PAP Government, if elected. Dr Tan Cheng Bock's proposal to move the PMO and Cabinet Office out of the Istana particulary irked him. So could he be expected to initiate any issue with the PAP Government that will bring benefit to Singaporeans? His pet answer is that the president's power is circumsribed by the Constitution and that the centre of power is the PAP Government. So it will be interesting to watch how Dr Tony Tan will perform as the elected president of Singapore for the next six years.

It is surpising that Mr Tan Jee Say secured only 25.04% of the votes which could mean that a good percentage of the anti-establishment votes had gone to Dr Tan Cheng Bock. He would have made a good independent president considering his bold character.

Mr Tan Kin Lian managed to secure only 4.91% of the votes which could mean that he had neither pro-PAP nor anti-establishment voters' support. Right from the beginning he had shown concern that he could lose his deposit but the fact that he still entered the fray was something quite incomprehensible. But does he realise that he was in fact playing the role of a spoiler? His 4.91% of the votes could have gone to Dr Tan Cheng Bock which would have made all the difference for him to win the election. This is a guilt that Mr Tan Kin Lian will have to live down.

Finally, the message to the PAP Government is clear. Dr Tony Tan only secured 35.19% of the votes which means that 25% of the 60% of the pro-PAP votes in the last General Election has deserted him. With only one third of the electorate voting for him, it shows clearly that Singapore voters do not want a pro-PAP president. How the PAP leaders are going to reconcile this is something which they have to live with. Quite evidently, Dr Tony Tan just does not have the moral authority to represent all Singaporeans as their president.

Is the People's Association a Political Tool of the PAP?

2011-08-23T04:37:00.000-07:00

The People's Association (PA), as constituted, was glamourised as a politically-neutral organisation designed to mould Singaporeans into a patriotic citizenry. Its administration was paid out of taxpayers money so it owes its allegiance to Singapore taxpayers and by extension to Singapore voters. The CEO of the PA and his staff should be expected and duty-bound to be impartial when they have to deal with the opposition parties. They have been showing political bias towards the PAP but as long as they do not persecute or harass the opposition parties, the people tend to view it as a natural inclination of a slavish mind. After all, the PAP leaders are their political masters and the prime minister is the chairman of the PA.

The latest bouts of high-handed antics of the PA against the Workers' Party (WP) MP Chen Show Mao and the WP itself are something which any right-thinking Singaporean will feel revulsed. They are going beyond the realm of propriety and decency to please their political masters and no decent Singaporean would believe them if they disavow that their deplorable actions are not politically-motivated and an abuse of power.

Let's examine the facts. WP MP Chen Show Mao was invited in his capacity as MP by residents of his Paya Lebar Ward in Aljunied GRC to a Seventh Month dinner celebration . The Citizens' Consultative Committee (CCC) (which comes under the PA) in his Paya Lebar Ward told the organisers that they could not invite the WP MP to the dinner if it was held at premises under the CCC charge. As a result the invitation was withdrawn. The irony is that the defeated PAP candidate Madam Cynthia Phua can attend such dinners under the guise of PA's appointed grassroots adviser. We leave it to the people to judge if this kind of interpretation is not cockeyed and politically-motivated.

To make sure that the WP is politically ashyxiated, the PA in collusion with the Housing Development Board (HDB) transferred the management of 26 open spaces - mainly fields and hard courts often used for community events - from the WP Aljunied Town Council to the PA without giving WP any notice. This move would give PAP candidates a ground advantage and permanent presence in Aljunied GRC in advance preparation for the next elections.

As if all these are happening without his knowledge, if not at his instructions, PM Lee Hsien Loong is adopting the untenable attitude of "seeing no evil and hearing no evil". Neither the PM nor the relevant minister has the civility of saying anything in explanation or clarification, much less justification. They may bank on the possibility of Singaporeans not remembering this whole episode over time. But it still begs the question whether the PA is a political tool of the PAP.

Who is likely to capture the Presidency?

2011-08-21T04:52:00.000-07:00

Who is likely to capture the Presidency? Will it be the former deputy prime minister Dr Tony Tan or former PAP MP Dr Tan Cheng Bock or the former NTUC Income chief Mr Tan Kin Lian or investment adviser Mr Tan Jee Say?

With all the excitement that has been whipped up so far in the election campaign and still with a few more days before polling day it may be a bit premature to give a definitive assessment of the chances of the four candidates. But initial assessment may show that Dr Tony Tan may be in an unassailable position. He has been pledged with support from trade unions, clan associations and Chinese, Malay and Indian Chambers of Commerce. But it does not necessarily mean that the rank and file of these unions and associations will heed their leaders in their choice. They may have their own personal preferences.

Not least of all, PAP leaders like PM Lee Hsien Loogn and ESM Goh Chok Tong have given Dr Tony Tan tacit endorsement which may bring him most of the 60% Pro-PAP votes. But Dr Tony Tan's stand on the Marxist conspiracy detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) and the graduate mothers scheme is going to go against him because of his untenable position.` He is just unable to extricate himself from his intricate position.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock has solid support of voters in Ayer Rajah Constituency but outside of it is an unknown factor. So far he has shown that he is a formidable opponent of Dr Tony Tan and has presented himself as a credible candidate for the Presidency. His idea of requiring the PMO and Cabinet Office to be moved out of the Istana complex if he is elected president has gone down well with the electors. This will cause quite a flutter to the prime minister and put him in a fix whether to move out of the Istana complex or not. Dr Tan Cheng Bock also has the support of leaders of some opposition parties in their personal capacity which means that his chances of getting some anti-establishment votes are quite good. His chances of being elected will depend on the percentage of pro-PAP votes he can hive off from Dr Tony Tan. His non-establishment votes are not likely to be significant.

Mr Tan Jee Say's candidature has been a source of consternation to the PAP leaders. In his campaign he has never ceased to remind voters that his mission as president, if elected, is to provide checks and balances on the PAP Government. But he has been careful to qualify that by saying that he will not be openly adversarial to the Government. He can be considered as the only candidate out of the four who is independent of the PAP Government. There is no reason not to expect him to get solid support from the 40% anti-establishment votes which may be just enough for him to secure the presidency. Imagine former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and ESM Goh Chok Tong having to stand up before Mr Tan Jee Say when approached by the latter if he is elected president, a former personal private secretary of DPM Goh Chok Tong in the civil service. It will be difficult for LKY and GCY to live down this appartent humiliation.

Mr Tan Kin Lian strikes one as an enigmatic candidate. He is a former PAP cadre but the PAP does not appear to be particulary impressed with his service to the party. He claims to be independent of the PAP but with his past PAP connection can he really expect Singaporeans to believe him? He is in a comical position where he can neither attract pro-PAP votes nor anti-establishment votes. He may believe otherwise. He can be so insensitive that he can go electioneering at a solemn memorial ceremony for the late political detainee Mr. Tan Jing Quee. He should consider himself lucky that he was not ejected from the gathering. He promises to be the voice of the people if elected. He is also concerned whether he will be able to secure 12.5 per cent of the votes so that he will not lose his deposit.

The hustings are getting more exciting each day and there will be more campaigning by the four candidates in the next four days. We will know on 27 August after polling has ended who is the lucky candidate to be the new elected president. Whoever he is should deserve the unanimous approbation of all Singaporeans. If Dr Tony Tan is elected, then the question of unanimous approbation is in doubt because he is the least of the four candidates that netizens want to see elected.

The Prospects of the Presidential Election.

2011-08-12T06:14:00.000-07:00

It could be said that the Presidential Elections Committee's (PEC) decision to give certificates of eligibility to four of the presidential hopefuls has come as a bit of surprise in terms of the timing and its liberal interpretation of the eligibility criteria. The four successful presidential hopefuls for the presidential election are former deputy prime minister Dr Tony Tan, doctor and former MP Dr Tan Cheng Bock, former NTUC Income CEO Mr. Tan Kin Lian and investment adviser Mr. Tan Jee Say. There were doubts that Mr. Tan Jee Say could not have met the eligibility criteria but that he has finally been able to qualify shows the liberality and progressive thinking of the PEC, which is a credit to its chairman and members.

If all four potential candidates seek nomination on 17 August, then Singaporeans will be presented with a rare spectacle of a four-cornered contest. Dr Tony Tan seems to lead with a substantial political advantage with the main stream media, especially the Straits Times, going on an overdrive in extolling has so-called merits as a potential president. He is in every respect a PAP Government-endorsed candidate, maybe one may like to describe it as tacitly but an endorsement nevertheless. He has also portrayed himself as eminently qualified, because of his so-called unique financial expertise and extensive administrative experience as a minister, to be elected as president by the Singapore electorate. He has been praised by PM Lee Hsien Loong as the most suitable candidate for president. So has also the Emeritus SM Goh Chok Tong heaped praise on Dr Tony Tan. Law Minister K. Shanmugam mentioned recently at an Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) forum that the president can influence the PM if he is wise, knowledgeable, trusted and respected by the PM which prompted president hopeful Dr Tan Cheng Bock to interprete that only a Government-endorsed presidential candidate can wield influence with the PM. So how Dr Tony Tan is viewed by the Government as the next elected president is never in doubt.

Dr Tony Tan is also supported by the Tan Clan Federation and a number of trade unions, if not the NTUC itself. He is likely to be supported by pro-PAP voters who comprised 60.1 % of the voting electorate in the last General Election. But what percentage of support he gets will depend on whether Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Mr. Tan Kin Lian, both former PAP members, also receive support from the same pool of pro-PAP voters. It will be assumed that the 39.9 % of the anti-establishment votes will go to Mr. Tan Jee Say, a former Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) member who is contesting as an independent candidate. In the unlikely event that some of the anti-establishment votes would go to Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Mr. Tan Kin Lian, the number is unlikely to be significant to affect the prospect of Mr. Tan Jee Say.

The probable scenario is likely to be that no single candidate is going to win 50% or more of the votes to make him an outright winner. The deciding contest may be between Dr Tony Tan and Mr. Tan Jee Say. If the dilution of Dr Tony Tan's pro-PAP votes is not significantly large, he may have a better prospect of winning. But it is unlikely to be a shoo-in. Mr. Tan Jee Say's prospect of winning is equally strong if he gets the solid support of the anti-establishment votes.

We will know at the end of polling on 27 August if Singaporeans get a PAP-endorsed or an independent elected president.

A Bombastic Scare Tactic

2011-07-27T01:58:00.000-07:00

This is not the first time that the former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has used his bombastic scare tactic to deter Singaporeans from moving towards a two-party system which he warned as being fraught with dangers. He is a past master in sophistry which he uses consummately in this instance to try to demonstrate that Singapore is exquisitely governed by a PAP one-party system and that Singaporeans will only rock the boat at their own peril by "electing weak and ineffective governments".

He tried to gloss over Western criticisms of the systems of government in Singapore and China and misleadingly asserted that they sprung out of "preconceived ideas" the West has about multi-party democracy. It is interesting to note here that he seems to equate the system of government in Singapore with that of China. China is a one-party Communist system of government where there is hardly any democracy or suffrages as known to the democratic world. Singapore is a democracy with election by citizens of a government every five years. What kind of grotesque mind has this man Lee Kuan Yew in trying to mislead Singaporeans that the systems of government in Singapore and China are identical? He also tried to portray a similarity between the PAP and the CCP claiming both have comparable cultural backgounds and work on the basis of pragmatism. Can the non-Chinese Singaporeans be amused by such tendentious comparisons?

By his arguments which he purports to speak on behalf of the PAP Government, the PAP seeks to perpetuate a one-party hegemony and draws on the Chinese experience as a guide. Therefore, any talk of a two-party system by the opposition is anathema to the PAP. And so begun a pernicious campaign of scare tactics by the former MM Lee Kuan Yew to castigate this system and to deter Singaporeans from ever entertaining any idea of this PAP-abhorred two-party system.

As shown by the General Election in May, the writing is on the wall that Singapore electors are disillusioned with the PAP one-party hegemony and have shown their disgust with the PAP by voting in a Workers' Party (WP) team in the renowned Aljunied GRC. However one looks at it, it is not unreasonable to assume that, with the wheel of history moving forward, a two-party system is not something that is intangible whether in the near or distant future.

This reality has sent a blue funk to the PAP leaders, especially LKY, that the hitherto somnolent Singapore electors have awakened from their slumber. They have very discerning eyes - the Chinese call it "snow-clear" (雪亮) (meaning very clear) - and they will be able to see through the machinations of the PAP leaders, delivering them a more telling blow in the next GE. It may not lead to an alternative government, unless there is a significant surge of talented candidates in the opposition, but may see a significant increase of successful opposition candidates sufficient to form a two-party system. Will the former MM Lee Kuan Yew have sleepless nights over this electoral evolution? It would mean that from now on he will intensify his heinous campaign of scare tactics to make sure that this nightmarish eventuality will not materialise.

The wheel of history is progressive and not regressive.

Are The 3rd Generation PAP Leaders Not Really Self-serving?

2011-07-22T01:54:00.000-07:00

We often hear of smooth-talking politicians professing vehemently that they are dedicated to serving the people but in the end most of them are more motivated by enriching themselves. There is no dearth of such self-serving politicians, especially in the third world.

Singapore is proud of its first generation PAP leaders who were sincere politicians dedicated to serving the people, especially the poor, without any unwholesome thoughts of enriching themselves in the process. They were quite contented with the modest stipends they got for their ministerial pay. And there was an almost complete absence of any corrupt tendency among the ministers in spite of their modest pay. They were elected by the people for the people in the true sense of the words. And there was no lack of their political zeal in transforming a backward Singapore society to a more developed one where poverty of the lowest rung was reduced to a considerably manageable degree. We think that their names can go down in Singapore's history as remarkable selfless nation builders.

The second generation PAP leaders inherited the legacy of the first generation in remarkable condition and for the first few years the tradition of serving the people was carried on. Then in the middle of 1990s the Prime Minister hit on a brainwave that in serving the people they must not overlook the opportunity of enriching themselves from the country's wealth. So without any tinge of compunction, an astronomical scale of salaries of two or more millions a year each was introduced to reward the so-called impoverished ministers. All these merrily came out of the taxpayers' money, Can the taxpayers demur?

Now this introduction of astronomical ministerial salaries gave an entirely different perception to the lofty ideal of serving the people. The people were now served by ministers motivated by a whopping salary and the distinction between greed and service was hardly palpable. So we now had a provider of service to the people without a soul and was merely a mercenary. This caused a lot of unhappiness to the people who had voiced their vitriolic criticisms on the ministerial salaries but they were unable to sway the intransigence of the PM. The people's wrath, however, continued to fester.

Then came the third generation PAP leaders who continue to carry on blithely the astronomical ministerial salary tradition and their so-called service to the people which we must now view askance. As long as their motivation is their whopping salaries, the distinction between greed and service to the people is at best indistinguishable. As one citizen puts it, a blind PAP leadership is trying to lead a sighted people. As the Chinese saying goes: the people's eyes are snow-clear (雪亮）(which means very clear) and they can easily see through the disingenuity of the PAP leaders. They are just biding their time until the opposition can come up with a viable alternative governmental slate of candidates. Or they can show their disapprobation by delivering a more telling anti-PAP result in the next general election.

PM Lee Hsien Loong had a premonition and had very wisely ordered a review of the ministerial salaries. We will wait and see whether the outcome is drastic enough to meet the people's expectation. The most absurd is the President's salary which should have been included in the review. He draws $4.2 million a year holding babies, attending Istana open houses and receiving foreign dignitaries. When asked by a wag what he has been doing all these years as a President, he was at a loss for words for a reply and sheepishly asked his enquirer to read his memoirs (as yet unpublished). His is just a ceremonial role and it is suggested that $500,000 a year is more than adequate for his office.

A Refreshing Candidate in the Presidential Election

2011-07-15T19:35:00.000-07:00

We have been presented so far with three prospective candidates who have past connections with the PAP. One was a deputy prime minister, deputy chairman of GIC and chairman of the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH). Another was a PAP MP and the third a PAP branch office-bearer. So the electors were actually presented with a Hobson's choice. Now we have a fourth prospective candidate in the person of Mr. Tan Jee Say who has no past connection with the PAP and is a refreshing entrant in the presidential fray.

Mr. Tan Jee Say was a Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) candidate in the General Election in May but failed to capture the Holland-Bukit Timah GRC in which he contested with his party comrades. He is said to have resigned from the SDP to contest the presidential election as an independent candidate. He has creditable credentials and there is every reason that he will succeed in getting qualified as a candidate.

Mr. Tan Jee Say stands out as a candidate truly independent of the PAP Government. In this way he stands a very good chance of garnering the anti-establishment votes. The other three candidates - Dr. Tony Tan, Dr. Tan Cheng Bock and Mr. Tan Kin Lian- will have to contend with one another for the pro-PAP votes. This is likely to be the scenario because the current electoral mood is still to shun the white (白色忌讳）(the white meaning the PAP) and may target candidates with past PAP connections.

The election of Mr. Tan Jee Say as president is likely to cause consternation to the PAP Government. Mr. Tan knows that as president he has very little executive powers except custodial responsibility on national reserves and he has to work within the constraints of the Constitution. For the first time in Singapore's history, PAP leaders will have the discomfiting experience of dealing with a president with opposition background. And there will no longer be a yes-man at their beck and call. Six years is a long time and there will be no guarantee that during this lengthy tenure of the president there will be complete harmony between the president and the PAP Government. So if Mr. Tan Jee Say could be disqualified as a candidate it will save the PAP Government untold discomforts, if not displeasures, in having to deal with a self-assertive and independent president. With the PAP any bizarre scenario is not an impossibility.

If Mr. Tan Jee Say is indeed elected president, it will be a celebratory occasion for true Singaporeans. It will show the political awakening of the people who dare to display displeasures to the so-called PAP democratic rule. In fact this is a continuing phenomenon from the General Election in May which witnessed the PAP's first defeat in the reputable Aljunied GRC and reduction of its total votes to 60.1%. There is no reason not to expect this electoral mood to continue in the presidential election.

How Can The Proposed Fare Hike Be Justified?

2011-07-14T19:23:00.000-07:00

It has become a regular routine for the SBS Transit and SMRT to apply for increase of bus and rail fares every two or three years ostensibly to cover increased operating costs. It therefore does not come as a surprise for these two public transport operators (PTO) to apply for the maximum increase of 2.8 per-cent for bus and rail fares due, according to SMRT, to rising fuel prices and manpower costs. The sharp reaction from the commuting public to the proposed fare hike is something to be expected. They cannot understand the whim and fancy of the PTOs in proposing fare hike at this juncture when cost of living is on the rise thus increasing their burden of livelihood, especially the lower-income group. And ironically you have a comical Transport Minister saying blithely that it is not unreasonable for the operators to earn fair returns from the sizeable capital investments required to sustain their operations and to invest in future public transport needs.

In answer to the Minister's point, he may be aware that for the year 2010 SMRT made a profit of $162 million and SBS Transit made a profit of $72 million. Would he not agree these were fair returns since public transportation is a public good and should not be profit-oriented? If it is operated strictly for profits at the commuting public's expense, then the Government should sincerely consider the Workers' Party's (WP) proposal for a National Transport Corporation to oversee and run major transport services. Such a transport body would not be driven by profit but would operate on a cost-recovery basis. Just because the proposal comes from an opposition Party, in this case the Workers' Party, it should not be viewed as an anathema. The way the Transport Minister dismissed it off-hand by saying the proposal "might seem like a very attractive idea but it has serious downsides in reality" is not very helpful in wanting to solve a complex public transport problem. His thesis on the "serious downsides" appears to be his own version of the negative effects of the nationalisation of the public transport. Whether the Minister's arguments will be accepted by the commuting public is a moot point. He should therefore seriously reconsider his hasty conclusion of the WP's nationalisation proposal for its feasibility and eventual adoption in the public interests.

Be that as it may, the immediate problem facing the commuting public is the PTOs' fare hike proposal. The Public Transport Council (PTC), helmed by Mr. Gerard Ee, says it will review the current fare adjustment formula which is valid until next year and will bear in mind the interests of commuters and long-term viability of the PTOs. It is hoped that the PTC should consider, for a start, whether under the current adverse cost-of-living circumstances there is a need for any fare hike since the PTOs have earned fair returns in 2010 and will be expected to do the same this year. The proposed maximum increase of 2.8 per-cent for bus and rail fares will be an onerous burden on the commuting public, especially the lower-income group when they are already shouldering adverse cost-of-living burden. There is a Chinese saying: Lift up high your esteemed hand (to help) (高抬贵手）. All eyes are now on the PTC on which is placed the public hope that it will come up with a solution equitable to the commuting public.

How Independent Is Dr. Tony Tan?

2011-07-04T02:58:00.000-07:00

Dr. Tony Tan is well known as the PAP spin doctor. He was Chairman of the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) and was in fact the propaganda chief of the PAP Government. In addition he was the Deputy Chairman of the Government of Singapore Investment Corp (GIC). Not to mention he was at one time chairman of the PAP. So when he announced on 23 June that he was stepping forward in the presidential election as an "independent" candidate, it was greeted with great incredulity bordering on the comedy or ludicrousness.

Dr. Tony Tan is not apolitical and could not be unaware of the political ground situation where the electorial mood is said to be inimical to the PAP. He is a smart Aleck and knows that as a PAP-endorsed candidate he will be disadvantaged by the considerable anti-establishment votes. So he hits on the idea of presenting himself as an "independent" candidate and hopes by this masquerade he can get the support of the anti-establishment voters. To give substance to his declaration as an "independent" candidate, he divests himself of his positions of deputy chairman of GIC and chairman of the SPH hoping in this way to convince the electorate of his "independence".

Dr. Tony Tan can succeed only if he thinks that Singaporeans are so naive as not to be able to see through his scheme. The voters are not going to believe that divesting himself of his PAP positions is going to make him any more independent than a PAP wallah. Emeritus SM Goh Chok Tong has openly stated that Dr. Tony Tan is eminently suitable for president. PM Lee Hsien Loong has asserted that Dr. Tony Tan will be a unifying figure for all citizens and will bring honour and credit to Singapore. So to all intents and purposes, these PAP leaders have endorsed Dr. Tony Tan as a PAP candidate, however tacitly, but nevertheless an endorsement. So where is the independence?

So willy-nilly Dr. Tony Tan will go into the presidential election not as an independent but a PAP-tacitly-endorsed candidate. He will have to contend with two so-called independent candidates in the persons of Dr. Tan Cheng Bock and Mr. Tan Kin Lian. Of the two contenders Dr. Tan Cheng Bock has shown to be an independent-minded person with better credentials. The electorial mood now is to shun the white (白色忌讳）(the white meaning the PAP) and Dr. Tan Cheng Bock should be able to garner the anti-establishment votes. But he may not have a smooth passage because of the candidature of Mr. Tan Kin Lian who may inadvertently act as a "spoiler". The pro-PAP votes, as expected, will go to Dr. Tony Tan and any votes for Mr. Tan Kin Lian can only come at the expense of Dr. Tan Cheng Bock's anti-establishment votes with disastrous effect on the latter's election success. The civilised thing for Mr. Tan Kin Lian to do, in the higher interest of the political unity of the people, is to withdraw from the contest so that it becomes a straight fight between Dr. Tony Tan and Dr. Tan Cheng Bock. Mr. Tan Kin Lian will win the gratitude of the people of Singapore in this way.

The "People's" President

2011-07-03T03:34:00.000-07:00

The so-called publicly-acclaimed President S.R Nathan finally announced on 1 July that he would step down when his second term runs out on August 31. Even when Dr Tony Tan announced his intention to contest the presidential election as an"independent" on 23 June, the comical President S.R Nathan was still keeping his intention close to his chest, mysteriously promising to reveal his intention in two weeks. It was obvious even to the most gullible that President S.R Nathan was bluffing to subject the public to his sense of suspense as to his re-election intention when any such intention would be put paid with the entry of Dr Tony Tan into the presidential contest. Although Dr Tony Tan's independent status is questionable, his standing in the PAP easily eclipsed that of President S.R Nathan and therefore any intention of the latter to contest against the former is out of the question. That no one, not even members of the opposition, had the heart to call S.R Nathan's bluff shows a measure of tolerance that public has for his antics.

In his statement, President S.R Nathan acknowledged both the Singaporeans who had criticised him and those who had shown him "affection and kindness". It is intriguing that a former senior minister of state and some PAP MPs called Mr. S.R Nathan a People's President in spite of the fact that he had acknowledged that Singaporeans had criticised him. It is interesting that only PAP members called him that and those intoxicated PAP members should access the internet to have a measure of the netizens' criticisms of Mr. S.R Nathan as an unpopular president. In addition the curses of the president from taxi drivers should send shivers down the spine of Mr. S.R Nathan. Taxi drivers are by nature loquacious and they do not need much encouragement to open up about the iniquities of the PAP leaders. In view of such an adverse reaction, would it not be a travesty of the noble title to call Mr. S.R Nathan a People's President? So far, only PAP members have called him that or have sung him praises.

In the history of Singapore's presidency, only two past presidents had been acknowledged by Singaporeans as People's Presidents. One was the late President Wee Kim Wee who was really adored by Singaporeans. The other was the late President Ong Teng Cheong, who was especially adored by the Chinese-educated. President Wee Kim Wee's relationship with the PAP Government was a smooth one with no hiccup. But President Ong Teng Cheong's serious tiff with the PAP Government over his request to examine the national reserves resulted in unhappy ending. The Government's vindictiveness extended to the withholding of a state funeral for the late President Ong Teng Cheong when he passed away.

President S.R Nathan has accumulated enormous wealth from the taxpayers' money. If he still has any compunction about his prodigious wealth, he should seriously consider about donating a meaningful amount to some deserving causes. The Chinese believe that this will be rewarded by heaven, especially in the afterlife.

The Sophistry of Law Minister K. Shanmugam

2011-06-19T02:35:00.000-07:00

The general feeling is that there is a lack of moral integrity in the Law Minister K. Shanmugam in his tendentious way of expounding the quest of the late President Ong Teng Cheong for an account or details of the Singapore reserves. Minister Shanmugam showed a fertile imagination in asserting that President Ong was not " stonewalled" and was in fact provided with "a complete listing of State buildings and lands" by the Government. He further asserted that President Ong wanted all of them valued at (then) current values which could have taken 56 man-years.

Quite fantastic! This was the first time that Singaporeans had ever heard that President Ong had asked for a listing of State buildings and lands. All along it was made clear in the public's mind that President Ong had asked for an account or details of the Singapore reserves which had caaused great consternation to the PAP leaders. For some esoteric reason, the PAP leaders considered it prudent not to share this information on Singapore reserves with President Ong lest it could lead to some unforseen consequences. So the PAP wallahs hatched a grotesque excuse to President Ong that it would take 30 years of work to provide the information the President had sought for.

President Ong was not so naive as not to realise that this was an underhand trick of the Government to prevent him access to the information he asked for. And as to be expected, this was the beginning of his turbulent relationship with the PAP Government, which is never known to be magnanimous. This state of affairs continued until the retirement of President Ong. The PAP leaders continued their vindictiveness even after his death by not according him a State Funeral, when other lesser dignitaries were accorded this honour when they died.

The disrespectful impertinence towards President Ong by the PAP leaders over Singapore reserves has continued to fester among Singaporeans who from time to time showed outrage on this disrespect. President Ong was regarded as a People's President and was adored by Singaporeans, especially the Chinese-educated. There is a prospect that this will continue to haunt the Government and so Mr. K. Shanmugam, as Law Minister, took upon himself to try to put the ghost to rest. With due respect to him, he lacks the finesse and moral integrity to put up a convincing explanation. He started on the wrong footing by asserting that there was no "stonewalling" of President Ong which no decent Singaporean would believe. Then out of the blue with a sleight-of-hand he introduced a so-called "complete listing of State buildings and lands" provided by the Government. Mr. Shanmugam did not mention if President Ong was satisfied with the Government's presentation, which would have obfuscated him, let alone satisfied. The puzzling question is why should President Ong want a listing of State buildings and lands when it was clear in everyone's mind what he asked for was about Singapore's reserves.

If Minister K. Shanmugam expects his sophistry to dispel the suspicion of Government's disrespectful treatment of President Ong, he will have to try harder and with more sincerity.

A Referendum on the Ministerial Pay

2011-05-24T23:32:00.000-07:00

There is a general trend of opinion that the Special Committee appointed by PM Lee Hsien Loong to review ministerial salaries may not meet the people's desire for a meaningful cut of the whopping ministers' pay. The composition of the Committee does not exude the kind of confidence that it will really go to the root of the problem and recommend drastic cuts. At best itwill show that it has gone through the motion of examining in detail the basis and level of ministerial salaries and come up with a cosmetic recommendation falling far short of the people's expectations. It takes great courage to recommend drastic cuts to ministerial salaries and there is the lingering doubt that the appointed committee does not possess that kind of pluck and determination.

There is some kind of consensus among certain people that an ideal way of determining the degree of ministerial salaries cut is by a referendem. This is such a heated topic and of such intense interest to the public that it is of fundamental importance for the people to be involved in the final determination of the degree of cuts in ministerial salaries. We could offer the Government three sets of proposal for the referendum for the electorate to decide. One is for a 50% cut; the second is a two-third cut and the third is a 80% cut. Even if any one of these three proposals is decided by the electorate, the ministers will still be quite comfortably off with the reduced salaries when compared with ministers' salaries in other Asian or Western countries. Service to the people must involve some sacrifices on the part of the ministers. The people will be happy and this will endear the PAP Govenment to the people.

There are rumours circulating around that another matter which is causing considerable worry and anxiety to PM Lee Hsien Loong and his Cabinet colleagues is the forthcoming election of the President. The PAP leadership is said to be frantically looking for a suitable candidate who could win the election considering the current unpredictable mood of the electorate. It is very important at this juncture for a pro-PAP candidate to be elected as President if only because of the need to keep the country's reserves from being inspected by an inquisitive President. Another reason is that with a pro-opposition or neutral President relationship between the President and the PAP Government may not be that congenial, especially in the case of a strong-willed President. The mood of the electorate is still not entirely in the Government's favour and any less eminent candidate they put up will likely end up in woe. The person likely to win the presidency for them is none other than the former Foreign Minister George Yeo because of his still eminent standing among the electorate. Otherwise the mood of the electorate is that they want to see a non-PAP candidate elected as President for a change. They thnik it will be good for Singapore to have a President who really represents the people without the PAP baggage.

It will be interesting to watch who will emerge as the person with the audacity to offer himself as a candidate to compete against a formidable PAP nominee. Since this is a national election, this iconic personality will likely get the opposition support and the support of all those borderline cases who voted for the PAP in the last General Election.

The Might of the People's Power

2011-05-22T00:18:00.000-07:00

Never has the might of the people's power manifested itself so strongly in Singapore as in the last General Election. This was acutely felt by PM Lee Hsien Loong and his Cabinet colleagues when the People's Action Party (PAP) was overwhelmingly defeated in Aljunied GRC resulting in the loss of two heavyweight ministers and a prospective Speaker of Parliament. The PAP also saw its share of valid votes drop to 60.1 per cent compared to 66.6 per cent in 2006, the lowest since independence. There has been a considerable amount of soul-searching in the party and PM Lee has since shown that he is going to give more priority and importance to the people's financial and social woes. He may be gung ho in his revivifying effort but whether some of his more tardy ministers are up to the mark is another matter. There is a Chinese saying: He who gains the people's heart gains the country; he who loses the people's heart loses the country (得民心者得天下；失民心者失天下）. In a microcosm, the Workers' Party fits into the former.

It is because of the widespread criticisms of the astronomical ministerial pay that PM Lee now feels the heat and compunction to do something to assuage the people's anger. He has now decided to form a special committee to be headed by Mr. Gerard Ee, National Kidney Foundation Chairman, to review the basis and level of Ministers' salaries. It is preposterous when the prime minister's salary is six times that of the President of the United States of America. Even a minister's salary exceeds that of the USA President several times.

A discomfited and comical SM Goh Cok Tong had described the issue of ministerial salaries as the "opposition's flogging horse" and said that the "majority" of the population were not concerned about it. He was either day-dreaming or was misled by his feedback people. In fact he was the blurry-eyed Prime Minister who introduced these infamous ministerial salaries in the mid-1990s, so how could he be be aware of the people's wrath now? Even if he were aware, it would reflect badly on his reputation to admit to this animosity of the people. In fact at that time, the famous author Catherine Lim sent a long letter to the Straits Times highly critical of the astronomical salaries but the then PM Goh Chok Tong, true to his hubristic character, dismissed Catherine Lim's letter offhand, chastised and warned her that if she wanted to engage the Government politically she would have to join a political party to do it. What impertinence! Any citizen has the right to criticise the Government in his own capacity. In fact by his high-handed action, PM Goh was trying to intimidate Catherine Lim not to criticise the Government on this issue.

The fact that PM Lee Hsien Loong has now decided to form a special committee to review the ministerial salaries flies in the face of Emeritus SM Goh Chok Tong's complacent assessment of the ground feelings on this issue. The ball is now in the court of the Review Committee to see if it has the courage to recommend a drastic pruning of the absurd ministerial salaries to a level commensurate with their duties and responsibilties to the satisfaction of the people (rakyat).

The PAP's Waterloo in Aljunied

2011-05-07T19:07:00.000-07:00

What has disquieted the PAP leaders, especially PM Lee Hsien Loong, about the possible loss of the much-vaunted Aljunied GRC has finally come to pass. With this defeat, Foreign Minister George Yeo, Minister Lim Hwee Hua and Senior Minister of State Zainul Abidin Rasheed have now lost their official positions. When the Workers' Party (WP) put its best team of Secretary-general Low Thia Khiang, Chairman Sylvia Lim and star candidate Chen Show Mao on Nomination Day to contest in Aljunied GRC, the party was going for broke in its effort to capture the GRC. The Chinese describe it as: To smash the cooking vessels and sink the boats (破釜沉舟）. It means that WP has to succeed because there is no retreat. This now proves to be a correct strategy first adopted with success by the ancient Chinese feudal prince Xiang Yu (项羽）.

Although not entirely unexpected, the Aljunied defeat came as a shock to PM Lee and his Cabinet colleagues. One of the biggest contributory factors to this political setback was the gratutious warning by the hubristic Minister Mentor to Aljunied voters that they live and repent if they voted the WP. Another factor could be the soured Malay ground which was angered by the disparaging remarks on Malay integration by MM Lee. Of course the important factor is the eager desire of Singapore voters to see more opposition MPs in Parliament as a check to the PAP.

This is acknowleged by PM Lee at his press conference following the announcement of the election results. He could not hide his disappointment at the Aljunied defeat and indicated that he would arrange for alternative assignments for the defeated ministers. George Yeo has been an outstanding Foreign Minister and his experiences should stand him in good stead for any diplomatic or non-diplomatic assignment. It will be a great loss to the country if his talent is overlooked.

There was complete unity among the opposition parties and the fact that this did not translate to the capturing of more GRCs and SMCs when the voters' mood was in their favour is an incomprehensible question. What makes it more puzzling is that there was no dearth of high quality candidates put up by the opposition parties who could match the quality of PAP candidates. However, the PAP managed only to win the Joo Chiat SMC and the Potong Pasir SMC by the skin of their teeth. The results were so close that the outcome could have gone the way of the opposition. The share of valid votes garnered by the PAP dropped by 6.5 percentage point to 60.1 per cent compared to 66.6 per cent in 2006.

Although the creation of the GRCs is seen by the opposition as a PAP scheme to shackle their electoral ambitions and facilitate the backdoor entry into Parliament of untested new candidates, the WP's win in Aljunied GRC shows that it can demolish this PAP invincibility if there is steely determination. WP has now to show that it can manage and administer Aljunied GRC as well as, if not better than, the PAP. The PAP has vowed that it will retake Aljinied GRC in five years, so this will be a challenge to the WP to excel. Above all, WP MPs will be watched very closely by the Singapore public for their performance in Parliament, now that they have eight MPs. Mr. Chen Show Mao will be the centre of public attention. This will be a good beginning for WP and Singaporeans can look forward to seeing more excitement in Parliamentary proceedings. And the PAP will have some soul-searching to do.

The Timing of PM Lee's Apology

2011-05-03T22:05:00.000-07:00

The Prime Minister has finally said "sorry" for the many mistakes of his government such as tardiness in addressing shortfalls in housing and transport including the escape of detained terrorist Mas Selamat Kastari and flooding of Orchard Road. PM Lee kept a discreet posture then. It would have been remarkable if this apology had been expressed by PM Lee long before the present hustings but the fact that he has chosen this moment to say it loses much of its significance, despite what the Straits Times spin doctor says.

However, it shows great humility on the part of PM Lee but then is this not a last minute effort to win back votes when opposition pressure is gaining ground in their campaign focussing on the same mistakes for which PM Lee has apologised? This only goes to prove that more opposition voices in Parliament are an imperative to provide a check and balance from time to time to the PAP government's shortcomings, The voters' eager desire for change is never so loud and clear and it sends a shudder to the pompous PAP leadership. A lot of scrambling is going on to try to contain the situation but PM Lee's apology may be viewed as a little too late to stem the opposition tide. There are still two more days of electioneering for PM Lee to win over the voters.

PM Lee's comment on his eminent father MM Lee is both instructive and revealing. It shows MM Lee to be an anachronism in the government and yet he is tolerated. He draws a $3m plus annual salary and all he does is "forecasting" in his own words. Is this a fair charge on the taxpayers' fund? Most of the time he creates a booboo whenever he open his big mouth. Foreign Minister George Yeo found to his consternation the damage of the uncalled for warning of "ruminate and repent" to Aljunied voters by MM Lee. The Minister Mentor is filthy rich and why does he still want to draw on the taxpayers' fund? In fact, he could gain public approbation by donating his sinecure salary to a charity or charities and offer his services to the government on a voluntary basis. Is he that popular when there are calls, especially by the netizens, for him to retire?

The campaign for Aljunied GRC is gathering momentum and the PAP team helmed by George Yeo is directing their fire-power at the character of the Workers' Party (WP) team. WP Secretary-general Low Thia Khiang is portrayed as a politically ambitious man whose ambition does not stop at just capturing the Aljunied GRC. Psychologically, the WP may be slightly in a advantageous position but then the state of play can still be fluid. PM Lee sounded a note of optimism when he said PAP could win Aljunied and will muster PAP top guns to lend support to George Yeo in his campaign to try to clinch a PAP victory. MM Lee's stern warning words "ruminate and repent" may be a dampening factor.

A Disoriented Senior Minister

2011-05-03T09:16:00.000-07:00

SM Goh Chok Tong had the dubious distinction of introducing the astronomical salaries for ministers when he was the prime minister. There was a big hue and cry over this unprincipled draw on the taxpayers' money. But true to his uncompromising character the obnoxious proposal was pushed through by PM Goh and this is now a permanent feature of the ministerial pay. This is a peeved subject which has never failed to incense the public from time to time whenever there was an occasion to highlight it as in a general election. As expected, this had no compunctious effect on the Prime Minister and his ministers blithely continue to wallow in their wealth at the taxpayers' expense.

Describing the issue of ministerial salaries as the opposition's " favcurite flogging horse", the comical SM Goh said that the "majority" of the population were not concerned about it. Does he really seriously believe in his own conjecture? It does not mean that when they remain silent the people are not concerned about it. Has SM Goh ever heard of the saying: Dare to be angry but dare not speak out (敢怒而不敢言). Because of the government high-handed manner in dismissing any dissent to the ministerial salaries, the people are resigned not to expect any concession from the government on the issue. So even if they are angry about it, they prefer to remain silent until such time when their pent-up anger bursts out.

SM Goh can say that this subject had been debated in Parliament but does he honestly believe that with the PAP dominance any useful outcome will come out of these parliamentary debates? The two opposition MPs and one NCMP were easily overwhelmed by the sheer force of the PAP MPs. Any arguments the three opposition MPs were able to put through were like voices in the wilderness. This incidentally could be one of the issues that acts as a catalyst for the electors to want to see more opposition MPs being voted into Parliament to provide more opposition voices as a check and balance to the PAP government. So on the surface SM Goh may find the "majority" of the population were not concerned about the issue but may discover to his chagrin that this could be just an illusion.

On his shabby treatment of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) scholar candidate Tan Jee Say, SM Goh could have shown more civility. There was no justification for him and MM Lee to denigrate Tan on his civil service credentials especially when it was proved that the attacks were all misconceived. SM Goh was the one who emphasised on a clean and fair campaign at the outset of the hustings but then he could not resist a smear campaign against Tan. There is a Chinese saying: One can row a boat in the stomach of a prime minister (宰相肚内可撑船）. It really means one should be magnanimous and SM Goh can take a lesson from it.

The Vexatious Minister Mentor

2011-05-01T00:04:00.000-07:00

He could be quite affable if he is not agitated. The Minister Mentor appears to be unnerved by the prospect of a Worker' Party (WP) victory in Aljunied GRC in the General Election (GE) and is hopping around uttering not appeals but strictures warning Aljunied Voters of dire consequences should they vote for the WP which he promised they will repent. What do you think will be the reaction of the Aljunied voters, especially those who have made up their mind which party to vote, to this intimidation of the Minister Mentor?

It is quite reasonable for them to dismiss it as a ranting of a PAP leader who has temporarily lost his self-control when faced with an adverse political situation. It may even have the opposite effect in galvanizing the indignant voters into voting for the WPs including those who are on the borderline. There is definitely a wind of change blowing in this GE and Singapore voters would like to see more opposition MPs in Parliament to provide a check and balance to the dominant PAP. A glaring example of the wanton habit of the PAP leaders bulldozing legislations was the hasty manner in which the proposal of astronomical, some call it obscene, salaries for the PAP ministers was passed.

There are five more days, minus the one-day cooling period, for the PAP to try to reverse any unfavourable voting trend of the electorate, but then the opposition parties will be equally determined to win over the sympathy of the voters. If you go by the attendances at election rallies, the opposition, especially the WP, rallies show more enthusiastic support. But then some past election rallies had shown that this might not be a reliable indicator of voters' support. In any case, better crowd attendances have undeniably an encouraging boost to the morale.

Aljunied GRC is the most hotly contested GRC in this GE and is closely watched both inside and outside the country. This is a water-shed event because two heavyweight ministers and a prospective Parliament Speaker face the danger of fading out of the political hierarchy if the WP wins the election. And the WP has put up its best team ever and is determined to wrest control of the Aljunied GRC. The PAP team is not taking things lying down and is equally determined to put up a good fight. But psychologically the PAP team is on the defensive and PAP leaders, especially MM Lee, are pessimistic of PAP chances. This prompted the Minister Mentor to warn Aljunied voters that they have five years to live and repent. Christians are appalled at the choice of the word repent by MM Lee. In christianity the word repent is used when a sin has been committed. Is MM Lee trying to imply that voting for the WP team in Aljunied is a sin? Is this not sacrilege? This is something for the Minister Mentor to unravel and this is not the first time he has created a booboo. Good luck to him.

The Hidden Agenda of the Straits Times Editorial

2011-04-29T04:25:00.000-07:00

Can the Straits Times (ST) honestly say that it stands neutral in the present hustings? Everyone knows that it is under the tight control and direction of the Singapore Press Holdings helmed by a former PAP deputy prime minister who is in reality the government spin doctor and the ST can best be described as a propaganda broadsheet of the PAP. Anyone with any article critical of the government or its leaders aspiring to find printing of it in the ST will invariably come up against a wall of courteous denial, as the famous author Catherine Lim experienced recently when she sent a satirical letter about the comical Minister Mentor to the ST for airing in its Forum.

Let's examine the implication of the ST editorial :GE 2011. What do voters really want? What does it try to imply by saying that the voter cannot vote for the opposition with the assurance that PAP will be returned to power in any case? It is a given that, with the present political state, the PAP will be returned to power but perhaps with a reduced majority. Is not the ST calling on the voters not to vote the opposition? It shows the ST is treading on questionable ground as a national newspaper supposedly dedicated to an objective presentation of news to the public. A blind man can easily discern that this is hardly objective by no stretch of imagination,

Next the editor cannot resist the temptation of touching on the hotly contested Aljunied GRC which is being closely watched by not only the public and voters but also the PAP leaders as well as the opposition. To expect the editor to present an objective and impartial view of the electoral fray in Aljunied GRC may be somewhat unrealistic. He insinuated that a Workers' Party (WP) victory will not be cost-free. The so-called exquisite quality of the PAP team is given great play, especially the team leader Foreign Minister George Yeo. He is being put in the same distinguished category of the late Foreign Minister S. Rajaratnam. The editor asked if Singapore would have been better off if Mr. S. Rajaratnam, Singapore's first Foreign Minister, had been defeated in the 1963 GE as he almost was. The answer is given as an obvious no.

The editor further asked if voters want a strong opposition badly enough to boot out of office so many able people. Can they vote against Rajaratnam, he asked? Even a blind man can see where the ST editor's tendentious arguments are leading to. Firstly it is invidious to compare George Yeo with the late S. Rajaratnam and secondly it is sacrilege to invoke the late Foreign Minister's name in such circumstances. Comparison of merits between George Yeo and the late S. Rajaratnam is at best subjective.

ST is never a neutral newspaper and its tendentious deprecation of the Workers' Party is a natural progression of its heinous design. The electoral battle in Aljunied GRC has begun and it is best for newspapers not to take sides, leaving it to the contesting parties to convince the voters respectively and win their votes.

A General View of the Opposition Prowess

2011-04-27T08:08:00.000-07:00

The most refreshing piece of news that comes out of the Nomination excercise today is the show of unity by the opposition parties to avoid three-cornered contests and to have straight fights with the PAP in all 14 GRCs and 11 SMCs. The only set-back is in the Punggol East SMC where there is a three-cornered contest involving the PAP, the Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) and the Workers' Party (WP). It's an unfortunate situation and WP could have been more gracious in withdrawing as a three-cornered contest is bound to benefit the PAP candidate.

Be that as it may, the show of opposition unity augurs well for the opposition parties in the 2011 General Election. For the first time voters can have a clear choice to vote for a PAP candidate or an opposition candidate. It is not far-fetched to say that opposition parties have built up considerable support in the present campaign and it will not be too presumptuous to say that voters may be persuaded to feel that it is opportune to elect a number of opposition candidates into Parliament to provide a check and balance to the PAP which they think has been in dominnance far too long. The PAP will still be returned to power and voters may feel that the PAP leaders' call to voters to vote for their future and their children's future is meaningless and superfluous.

The most significant contest that has emerged in this Nomination exercise today is the battle of supremacy between a PAP team A helmed by Foreign Minister George Yeo and a high-powered WP team headed by its secretary-general Low Thia Khiang in the Aljunied GRC. Included in the WP team are star candidate Chen Show Mao and WP Chairman Sylvia Lim whilst the PAP team comprises also a woman minister and a Malay senior minister of state.

The Aljunied electoral battle will be closely watched by the PAP leaders as well as the opposition fraternity as either way the result of this contest is going to have a profound effect on both parties, but more on the opposition. If the WP team emerges victorious, not only will it give a big boost to the opposition standing but will lift their morale. The PAP on the other hand will suffer ignominy with the loss of two ministers and a senior minister of state. It will also show that the PAP is not invincible. That is why Low Thia Khiang had kept this team combination close to his chest until Nomination Day. The fact that he has put the creme de la creme from his party to contest the Aljunied GRC shows that he is going for broke. There is an appropriate Chinese saying: To smash the cooking vessels and sink the boats (破釜沉舟）. It means the WP must succeed because the retreat route is smashed. It will be the epoch-making journey of the WP and God willing they will succeed. The wheel of history only moves forward. In the last general election, the WP lost narrowly to the PAP mainly because the Malay votes were not in their favour. The Malay ground culd be different this time and the WP should apare no effort in working hard on it.

The PAP teams which may not have a safe or easy passage could be in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, Tampines GRC, Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC and Moulmein-Kallang GRC. The SMCs in danger of falling into opposition hands may be Joo Chiat SMC and Mountbatten SMC. The PAP team in Marine Parade GRC may see its percentage of votes decreased because of the presence of the beleaguered woman candidate Tin Pei Ling. She is no match to her counterpart Nicole Seah of the National Solidarity Party (NSP). It will be a laughing stock if she causes the defeat of the PAP team in a freak election.

One thing which is incomprehensible to the common man is why the PAP leaders insist on a clean sweep of the elections without any humane consideration of political space for the opposition when the Party itself is so dominant without any fear of being toppled. One believes that this only happens in a fascist country in other parts of the world. In a real democracy, opposition voices are a feature of its parliamentary system and in fact are encouraged. As a matter of fact, the PAP is in an unassailable position and can afford to be liberal and accommodating in its dealings with the opposition.

The Desperate Appeal of the Minister Mentor

2011-04-26T02:15:00.000-07:00

The amount of excitement that has been aroused on the opposition parties is something even the normally arrogantly sanguine MM Lee Kuan Yew could not fail to miss. It must have frightened the wits out of him to see that the wind of change has finally come to sweep the PAP from its pedestal. Maybe the PAP may not be swept from power, short of a freak election, but certainly an admission of a number of opposition MPs into Parliament is not a remote possibility. They will have the responsibility of providing a meaningful and effective check to the PAP's impetuosity in Parliament.

So our highfalutin MM Lee has suddenly waken up to this potential threat to the PAP monopolistic tranquillity in Parliament and decided to use his passe influence as a founding father of independent Singapore in a last desperate attempt to win back the pro-opposition votes for the PAP. So he goes into the ritual of how the first generation PAP leaders had gone through great political sacrifices and hardships to bring Singapore to its present prosperous state and appeals to voters not to rock the foundations, reminding them of what's at stake.

It cannot be argued that the first generation PAP leaders were selfless politicians who were in it not for the money. They were really there to serve the plebeians and to improve their livelihood politically and economically. The same may be said of the second generation PAP leaders initially until the mercenary PM Goh Chok Tong introduced overnight astronomical salaries in the region of millions a year for his already well-paid ministers and himself. The third generation PAP leaders inherited his preposterous financial legacy. The second and third generations leaders could hardly be described as selfless and not in it for the money. By the time they retire, all these affluent ministers are multi-millionaires enjoying humongous pensions.

MM Lee said that at the May 7 General Election, the PAP is fielding candidates " of proven character, of high calibre and with a track of performance that shows they will not fail in taking on repsonsi8bilities". Can the same be really be said of the 24 new PAP candidates. They are untested individuals and are likely to enter Parliament on the coat-tails of anchor ministers in the GRCs. So how are they of proven character and of high calibre? In fact some of the opposition candidates are no less eminent than the PAP candidates and can match them in every sphere. One of them Chen Show Mao even surpasses them in proven character and high calibre and his candidature has become a bee in the PAP's bonnet.

MM Lee concluded by calling on voters to vote for men and women of proven character and track records of high performance. Make the right choice to secure the future of your children and grandchildren. This is a desperate call to the voters to vote for PAP candidates by MM Lee who is himself an insult to the intelligence of the voters by standing for election in spite of his advanced age and blundering behaviour. That his Tanjong Pagar GRC is going to have a walkover is a travesty.

The writing is on the wall. The judicious Singapore voters will decide on May 7 whether there should be more opposition MPs in Parliament. This is history in progress and no PAP force can reverse it.

The Electoral Threat of the Workers' Party (WP)

2011-04-21T00:27:00.000-07:00

From the recent criticisms of PAP ministers on the Workers' Party (WP) manifesto and its other voters enticement policies, it is obvious that PAP leaders regard the WP as the biggest threat to their dominance in the General Election. So far WP seems to be the best organised opposition party with the biggest slate of candidates including some star performers. The fact that PAP leaders have focused their character attacks on the WP star candidate Chen Show Mao shows that Chen's prominence has rattled the confidence of the PAP. No doubt that he is only one individual but is so special that he can exude a winning streak to his fellow candidates in the GRC. He is more than a match for any of the candidates in the PAP camp.

The WP will not only be able to capture the GRC in which Chen stands but in a number of SMCs and possibly another GRC. The PAP leaders are not amused by this WP onslaught and are leaving no stone unturned to put up their best teams against the WP. That the WP will be resourceful enough to find a chink in the PAP's armour cannot be doubted.

National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan is obviously feeling the heat of the WP's proposal to lower the prices of new Housing Board (HDB) flats. He described it as not in the interest of Singaporeans and even dangerous. He gave three reasons: One it would impact the value of existing flats; two the WP was showing that it was against the Government's asset enhancement policy; three the WP's proposal amounts to an illegal raid on Singapore's reserves.

Let's examine the three reasons of Minister Mah to see if they are flawed. A high percentage of flats were bought on the resale market and naturally incurred higher costs. Quite a lot of these resale flats were for renting out. So if the WP proposal would impact the value of existing flats, the owners mostly affected are those who purchased their resale flats for commercial benefits. Lowering of the prices of new HDB flats would benefit especially first time buyers, particularly those getting married and they form a large proportion of the population. How then can this be interpreted as against the Government's asset enhancement policy?

As for the third reason that the WP proposal amounts to an illegal raid on Singapore's reserves, is not Minister Mah going into the realm of make-belief? The ordinary Singaporean will not be able to understand his tortuous argument and much less believe in it. So it is best left to the intelligence of the ordinary Singaporeans to form the opinion whether Minister Mah is flawed in his arguments.

On the election front, it is both encouraging and a credit to opposition unity that so far GRCs are unlikely to see any three-cornered contest. Kudos should go to the Reform Party for its exemplary conduct in withdrawing from all three-cornered contests. This augurs well for the opposition and it will be a consummate feat if this can be implemented in the SMCs.

The Fallacy of the GRCs

2011-04-18T04:29:00.000-07:00

GRCs were introduced ostensibly for the so-called important reason to ensure Parliament will have a minimum number of minority MPs. According to PM Lee Hsien Loong: We are a multiracial, multi-religious society. If we don't have GRCs, our multiracial, multi-religious Parliament will be under threat. All very gallant and idealistic sentiments.

Let us examine whether this specious argument is sustainable. Because of the unwieldy nature of the GRCs, they did not seem initially to attract the interests of the opposition parties. This was probably due to a lack of suitable personnel and financial resources. So the PAP were able to maintain a dominance of the GRCs by reason of their superior personnel and financial resources. In order to give a semblance of accommodating minority representation, a very small percentage of Malay, Indian and other ethnic candidates were included in the GRCs. This is only an eyewash as this minority representation is used as a cover for the backdoor entrance of untested candidates into Parliament on the coattails of anchor ministers. Because of their dominance, the PAP candidates in a GRC are usually returned by a walkover in an election.

There is only one minority candidate in a GRC consisting of four to six persons and the rest are untested backdoor entrants. A recent glaring example is the beleaguered Tin Pei Ling who to all intents and purposes will enter Parliament in this manner. There has been public pressure for her to stand in an SMC in the upcoming general election but this seems to have fallen on deaf ears. So when one considers the percentage of minority representation with the percentage of untested backdoor entrants in the GRCs, it does give a lie to the PM's assertion that GRCs are set up to preserve minority representation in Parliament which is important in our multiracial, multi-religious society. The most logical choice of action is for the PAP to abolish the GRCs in order to have a level playing field for the opposition parties.

Going on another subject, it seems quizzical for PM Lee Hsien Loong to remind all party members, whether old ones or new ones, that they are here to serve Singaporeans. Never forget we're servants of the people, not their masters. Never lord it over the people we're looking after and serving. Well said and timely only if it is not ironical. Can one imagine the arrogant and bumptious MM Lee, the father of PM Lee, lowering himself as a servant of the people? It hardly befits his narcissistic character.

Another minister who hardly fits the bill of a servant of the people is Dr Yaacob Ibrahim. As Enviroment Minister his high-handed handling of the Orchard Road floods can by no stretch of imagination qualify him as such. Last but not least is our smart Aleck MCYS Minister Vivian Balakrishnan whose callous treatment of volunteers who were afflicted by food poisoning during the Youth Olympic Games can hardly be called a servant of the people.

It is good that PM Lee has come out with this call for party members to be humble towards the people but the timing is questionable. Be that as it may, the fact that he has made the call is commendable.

A Down-to-Earth Counsel to the Opposition

2011-04-14T08:56:00.000-07:00

The euphoria engendered in the opposition parties of their respective prowess leading to the mad scramble to carve out the SMCs and GRCs they consider their preserves to contest in the upcoming General Election is intriguing. This is an unhealthy trend and can only be described as madness. This gross disunity of the opposition is something that will be viewed by the PAP leaders with infinite glee as it would make their election effort a shoo-in. They will certainly want to see the opposition parties continue their fight over the rights of their respective constituencies up to Nomination Day when the die will be cast and they find themselves in a zugzwang.

There is a Chinese saying:"Unity is Strength" (团结就是力量). During the Sino-Japanese war the Chinese were able to resist the more superior Japanese army because the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communists were able to unite against the Japanese and eventually defeated them. It is hardly called unity if opposition parties are engaged in three-cornered or four-cornered contests in SMCs and GRCs. It is already an uphill task for the opposition in a one to one contest with the PAP, so what chances of success have the opposition in a three-cornered or four-cornered contest?

It would be a pity for the opposition parties to fritter away their golden opportunity because over the last one or two years they have been able to win over considerable support, not only of the young voters but older electors as well. They have even been able to disaffect a considerable number of erstwhile PAP supporters who are disillusioned by the PAP government's inequitable policies. There is also the new media which is staunchly behind the opposition parties.

Some of the opposition candidates are of such a high calibre that they are more than a match to their PAP opponents and are well placed to capture a considerable number of SMCs and some GRCs in the General Election. This favourable situation has not escaped the sharp attention of PM Lee Hsien Loong and his Cabinet colleagues and in fact has rattled them. It will be noticed that their election campaign has been particularly high-powered and intense, especially in their colossal efforts in discrediting the opposition's offensive.

It is not too late and is in fact timely for opposition parties to pull up their socks and transcend their selfish interests to put up a marvellous show of unity by agreeing to only one party to contest in a SMC or GRC against the PAP. Which is the most suitable party in terms of candidates' qualities may be quite subjective but some sacrifices may have to be made so that the pro-opposition electorate should not be let down. When there is a will there is a way. The writing is on the wall that the opposition parties will triumph in the upcoming General Election.

The so-called independent candidate who wants to contest in the Joo Chiat SMC may prove intransigent. Anyway, his intention and background are not very illustrious. It will be a surprise if he does not lose his deposit. So the opposition candidate chosen to contest this SMC can easily take him in his stride.

Good luck and God willing.

The Unique Minister Mentor

2011-04-07T07:24:00.000-07:00

Can there be a more squirmy occasion than when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong extolled his old man as a unique and one and only Minister Mentor before a gullible University student audience at the National University of Singapore Cultural Centre on the night of 5 April? PM Lee listed his eminent father's contributions as in terms of his stature, in terms of his network, in terms of his weight which people give to what he says and concluded by saying that he is a very precious resource. It is quite natural, being MM Lee's anointed son to follow his father's footstep to become prime minister, to extol his father's so-called virtue.

PM Lee took special precaution to avoid mentioning the considerable number of booboos committed by his eminent father. He had also taken the trouble to avoid mentioning the constant vitriolic criticisms that MM Lee received at the hands of the new media, in particular the criticism that MM Lee is drawing $3m plus of the taxpayers' money annually for doing nothing but "forecasting" in his own words. There were also frequent calls in the internet that he should retire and not waste the taxpayers' money. These disclosures would give a lie to PM Lee's sentimental statement that his father is a unique Minister Mentor.

In fact MM Lee is an incorrigible highfalutin character who often opened his big mouth to make booboos to the chagrin and embarrassment of his prime minister son, only the latter will find it unfilial to show it. Before the American presidential election in 2008, MM Lee appeared to be disdainful about the prospects of the black American candidate Mr. Barack Obama becoming an American President. He described Mr. Barack Obama as a "flash in the pan". He was rooting for the white candidate Mr. John McCain and considered the election of a black American President to be apocalyptic. President Obama is a magnanimous person and when MM Lee unabashedly entreated a meeting with the President in October 2009, he was overwhelmed when President Obama described him as "one of the legendary figures of Asia". That made him look rather foolish after calling Mr. Barack Obama a "Flash in the pan".

Another booboo of the Minister Mentor occurred in 2009. He made deleterious comments in the National Geographic magazine in which he protrayed Sigaporeans as less hard-driving and hard-striving so that it became necessary for the Singapore government to bring in Chinese immigrants as a counter-measure. This caused a furore in Singapore.

His latest gaffe is his disparaging comments on the Singapore Malays/Muslims in his much-hyped but doubtful repute book:Lee Kuan Yew: Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going. He commented that other communities have easier integration than Muslims because they tend to be "distinct and separate". This caused an uproar in the Malay/Muslim community with the Association of Malay Professionals (AMP) coming out in a scathing attack on the Minister Mentor. It was up to the Prime Minister to issue a statement dissociating the government from MM Lee's disparaging comments. It had taken MM Lee more than a month to come out reluctantly with a statement to say "I stand corrected" but no apology. Whether the Malay ground was convinced of the sincerity of MM Lee's belated statement was a moot point.

PM Lee is right in saying that his eminent father is a unique Minister Mentor but unique in making booboos. In this respect he has no equal and it will be an insult to the intelligence of the electorate if he is nominated to stand in the General Election.

The Beleaguered Tin Pei Ling

2011-04-03T02:18:00.000-07:00

Why is this PAP cinderella Tin Pei Ling, and not other new prospective PAP candidates, being singled out for profuse criticisms by netizens is not entirely without logic. Her young age may be one factor indicating that she has just been weaned from suckling and lacks any political or worst still any humanitarian experience. But above all, it is her opulent lifestyle and rather highfalutin character that irk the netizens. It must have cost a bomb for her to celebrate her birthday at an upscale restaurant in Japan which could have been just one of her regular expensive feasts. Not only netizens but ordinary voters will wonder how a young hubristic woman with such expensive taste and politically inexperienced could pretend to know the hardships of ordinary people and much less to serve them.

She is married to the private secretary to the Prime Minister and this the netizens consider, rightly or wrongly, to be an important factor in Tim Pei Ling being chosen as a new candidate in the coming General Election. With such an uproar over her candidature, it will be a surprise if she could win if she were to contest in an SMC. So the latest PAP stunt is to put her as a candidate in Marine Parade GRC under the stewardship of SM Goh Chok Tong to ensure her election as an MP. But SM Goh is likely to have taken account that Tin Pei Ling is unlikely to be a vote-getting team member in his GRC. If anything, she will only bring down the percentage of votes that SM Goh's team is likely to get in the election.

That the PAP wallahs have come out in open support of Tin Pei Ling in face of widespread criticisms by netizens is something to be expected. They cannot be seen to chicken out at this stage as they have their reputation to consider. Tin is probably selected after an extensive process of selection and they could not afford to be seen to be abandoning her just because of netizens' criticisms. That would show them up to be fragile in succumbing to pressure. They go one step further in criticising the new media for making uncalled for attacks on Tin. The MSM Lianhi Zaobao devoted its editorial on 2-4-11 under the title:"Say no to smearing black politics" (向抹黑政治说不) joining in the Government's criticisms of netizens' attack on Tin. In spite of all the government's support of Tin, there is an approp0riate Chinese saying: "Empty cave comes the wind, its coming is natural" (空穴来风，其来有自）。Ir really means there is no smoke without fire.

Tin Pei Ling makes history in that this is the first time a new PAP receives such widespread adverse reception even before the hustings begin. It is left to be seen if she can transcend her bruised image if she is elected and show her detractors that she is made of sterner stuff than what they make her out to be. Not only the netizens but the whole of Singapore will be watching Tin Pei Ling's performance with highly critical eyes.

The Comic Utterrance of a Senior Minister

2011-03-13T01:24:00.000-08:00

SM Goh Chok Tong had asked, quite comically, how many had followed the tragic events in Japan with the tsunami ... and then put into context our floods in Singapore against that kind of disaster. He said:"I am not saying we shouldn't do anything about the flood. But the amount of noise you made with just sporadic flood compared to the Japanese. I saw them on TV. Very stoic looking. You don't see them crying. This has happened, just get on, that's the kind of spirit you want to have and you call it nation building."

Bravo SM Goh, coming from a minister drawing millions of dollars of obscene pay, about five times the modest pay of a Japanese minister. The Japanese are stoic looking in such a gigantic disaster because they have decent ministers who do not pay themselves outrageously from taxpayers' money, and yet are efficient in solving the people's problems. The way the Japanese ministers, led by their prime minister, in bringing succour to the devastated population in this tsunami disaster against colossal logistical odds can engender the kind of stoic look extolled by SM Goh.

Any why cannot the fastidious Singaporeans exibit that kind of spirit? Take the Enviroment Minister, Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, for example. He draws a salary four to five times that of a Japanese minister and during the Orchard Road deluge, he made himself scarce leaving the flustered shop-keepers and traders to fend for themselves fighting the flood resulting in thousands, if not millions, of dollars in loss or damage to property. Dr Yaacob was also the prophet to say that such flood occurred once in fifty years. So how can Singaporeans be stoic looking like the Japanese when our ministers' dedication is seen to be so inferior to the Japanese, in spite of our ministers' astronomical pay. So it is necessary for Singaporeans to make appropriate noises from time to time to jolt our ministers out of their apparent lethargy or complacency.

The ministers' astronomical pay should be a sore point with Singaporeans and opposition parties should exploit it in their election campaigns. To add to the insult, the ministers are paying themselves eight months' bonus. Singaporeans should be made aware of the preposterous situation where the PAP government pay their ministers outrageous increases or bonuses whenever they feel that they could justify such largesse to themselves. However hard they try to justify their astronomical pay, not all Singaporeans are convinced of their fallacious arguments. So opposition parties must not fall into the trap that this is a fait accompli and not worthy of highlighting in their hustings.

Talking of opposition unity, the proposed slate of candidates of the National Solidarity Party (NSP) for the Moulmein-Kallang GRC could be said to be of excellent material capable of capturing this GRC, nothwithstanding whatever calibre of the candidates that the PAP will put up. Workers' Party (WP) which is also keenly eyeing this GRC, should, in the bigger interest of opposition unity, give way in a gentlemenly manner to the NSP to contest this GRC. If NSP captures this GRC, it will reflect sublimely to the camaraderie spirit of the WP which will win it the respect of the electorate.

Is MM Lee's Induced Correction Sincere?

2011-03-08T03:22:00.000-08:00

It seems an eternity for the hubristic MM Kee Kuan Yew to come out with a long-awaited and probably much-induced statement to say that "he stands corrected" vis-a-vis his disparaging remarks about the Malay-Muslims, but without an apology. It begs the question whether he is sincere in his pretentious utterance or that he is not convinced that he had erred in his disparaging remarks. There can be no question that he has shown humility as it is not in the character of this arrogant man to show humility. Madam Halimah Yacob can be excused for showing effusive response to MM Lee's utterance because she belongs to the PAP hierarchy and could not afford to dissent, much less to disparage. The chairman of the Association of Muslim Professionals (AMP) merely welcomed the news with the qualification that this retraction was necessary since the community had prior to this not heard from MM even after the clarification made by PM.

There is however no reaction from the Malay ground. Either the MSM has considered it prudent not to highlight any unfavourable reaction from the Malay ground or the Malay ground reserves making any reaction prominent for the time being. There are good reasons for it to remain silent. There is an appropriate Chinese saying for this reaction: Dare to be angry but dare not speak out. (敢怒而不敢言）. They may be biding their time till election day.

What do Singaporeans think of the sincerity 0f MM Lee in his statement:"I stand corrected"? Any rational person will wonder why it has taken this demigod so long to show his remorse on a matter of racial denigration of the Maly-Muslims of his own making. The Prime Minister (MM Lee's son) spelt out the Government's views on the matter on January 30. More than a month has elapsed since and MM Lee could not have suffered a mental thrombosis in the meantime not to realise that it is essential in order to show sincerity he has to be prompt in his remorsefulness. Any delay, not to mention such inordinate delay in his case, will render his sincerity a suspect. Therefore, what Singaporeans think of the sincerity of MM Lee on this matter can no longer be a mystery but whether they want to be vocal about it is another matter.

As explained earlier, the Malay ground on MM Lee's sincerity is latent but the AMP's reaction could give an indication of the Malay ground feelings. The opposition parties can bear this in mind in their hustings in the coming General Election. Workers' Party cannot easily forget that it was the Malay vote that tilted the balance against it in the Aljunied GRC in the last general election thus depriving it of a signal victory. So opposition parties ignore the Malay vote at their peril and the Malay ground may be just right for them to win over provided they work diligently and sincerely to convince them. So far opposition parties have not shown complete unity in their distribution of constituencies to be contested and they could be defeated even before they could make the first step if they do not consolidate their position.

The Oppressive Goods and Services Tax (GST)

2011-03-02T17:20:00.000-08:00

The well-heeled may take the 7% GST in their stride, but it is certainly a burden to the low-income group. It is so all-embracing there is hardly any service, government or otherwise, that one is exempt from paying GST. The Finance Minister claimed in his tendentious Parliamentary speech that the low-income group paying GST comprised the bottom 60 per cent of households which contribute just 16 per cent of Singapore's GST revenue. Be that as it may, the fact remains that they are burdened with the oppressive GST.

The Minister asserted that what the low-income group will receive from the Government budget pay-outs will more than offset what they pay in GST. How long can this largesse last and this low-income group will go back to square one once government's hand-out is exhausted. Can you imagine that if you go to a restaurant where there is no service charge or where the service charge is 5 per cent, you will find that you are faced with an absurd bill for GST which is more than the service charge?

The opposition MP Mr. Low Thia Khiang has hit the nail on the head when he asserted in Parliament that the Government uses the GST as a panacea to everything. However strenously the Finance Minister tried to dismiss it offhand, there is no denying that Mr. Low's assertion is viewed with credibility by a significant section of the electorate. And his proposal of a two per cent cut in the GST cannot be an election gimmick and is without doubt very popular with the population, citizens or non-citizens, rich and poor, and even PAP members and supporters. So how can a credible Government not pay heed to a popular wish of the population and continue obstinately to expect their approbation as a matter of course. Worst still, there are talks in town that to aggravate the people's burden, the PAP Government is going to raise the GST to 10 per cent after the general election.

Although the GST is not a major issue, it is significant enough for the opposition parties to highlight it in their hustings. The poorer section of the electorate will certainly be enamoured of the not illogical opposition arguments against the GST. Even the middle class and the rich will readily lend their ears to the opposition stand on this absorbing subject. The Government's stand on this issue has been expounded ad nauseam and there is unlikely to be any new line of argument in their defence.

Our country is Singapore and what other countries do with their GSTs are irrelevant because their polities are different and any comparison is untenable. The PAP Government is kiasu in thinking that acceptance of Mr.Low Thia Khiang's proposal of 2 per cent cut in the GST is conceding a political advantage to the opposition. The PAP will still be returned to power, perhaps with a reduced percentage, in the coming general election and the opposition parties will be able to capture one or two GRCs if they show unity. This is Singapore's political reality and no amount of political play will be able to change this chessboard.

An Election Budget

2011-02-18T06:03:00.000-08:00

What has been touted as a bountiful budget is, strictly speaking, actually an election budget. Barring anything unforseen, this year will be an election year. What has prevented the PM from naming a date so far, according to observers, is the uncertainty of the ground situation where there is an undercurrent of dissatisfaction among a considerable section of the underclass. The election budget is therefore very timely as an attempt to assuage the unfavourable situation and to win over this disgruntled class. What one sees on TV are only the apparently happy faces of the population specially focussed by TV personnel for the benefit of the gullible audience. Can one imagine the counter effect any showing of unhappy faces on TV can have on the populace?

As the name implies, the election budget is aimed at vote-procuring (I would not use the obnoxious word vote-buying) in the general election by using the people's money. This gives the PAP wallahs a distinct advantage over the opposition in the general election because the opposition can never, in terms of financial resources, match the PAP in procuring votes in this manner. Besides the election budget, the PAP has introduced or will introduce other measures like HDB Estate upgrading and gerrymandering to ensure a clean sweep of the poll.

In view of such a great electoral disadvantage, can the opposition surmount such an obstacle in competing in the coming general election.? In spite of the PAP's apparent impregnable position vis-a-vis the general election, there is, however, considerable electoral support for the opposition partly as a result of their frequent walkabouts in the constituencies meeting the people and partly because of the animosity of some of the people towards the PAP. Therefore all is not lost provided there is unity among the opposition parties. Although the PAP seems to be a colossal force, with ingenuity a united opposition will be able to find a chink in its armour and capitalise on it.

It is not a given that the whole electorate has been bought over by the PAP's election budget. As has been said there is considerable sympathy among the electorate for the opposition and it can appeal to their good sense and fair play for their votes in the coming general election. With unity there is no reason why a united opposition will not be able to capture one or two GRCs which will really be splendid in bringing down the arrogance of the PAP leaders, especially that of the hubristic MM Lee Kuan Yew. After the recent booboo of MM Lee in disparaging the Malay/Muslim community, the opposition can perhaps count on considerable support from the Malay voters, despite the luke-warm effort of PM Lee Hsien Loong to resolve the Malay anger. As long as MM Lee does not show any humility in apologising for his aspersion, the Malays are not known to have short memories. Many of the public have predicted that the percentage of votes that the PAP will get in the coming general election will be reduced.

Finally, the Finance Minister can congratulate himself for a vote-winning election budget.

MM LEE INCURRING THE WRATH OF AMP

2011-01-28T23:30:00.000-08:00

Once again the hubristic MM Lee Kuan Yew has incurred the wrath of the public, this time the Association of Malay Professionals (AMP). And it is on no less weighty a subject than his disparaging comments on the Singapore Malays in his much- hyped but of doubtful repute book Hard Truths To Keep Singapore Going. He commented that other communities have easier integration than the Muslims because they tend to be "distinct and separate".

The AMP is the latest Malay elite body to not mince words in its scathing attack on the so- called benign Minister Mentor which is published in The Online Citizen and Temasek Review websites. Surprisingly, the Straits Times published some relevant excerpts of the article today. Yesterday ST carried the statement of the Muslim Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) on the subject which is in a pathetic conciliatory tone, in stark contrast to the vitriolic criticism of the AMP.

Some government and opposition leaders in Malaysia and Indonesia were highly critical of MM Lee's disparaging remarks of the Singapore Malays. But what should set the pace for Malay unhappiness over MM Lee's adverse remarks is the inimical stand of the AMP with its caustic criticism. As the name suggests AMP is a body of Malay elites, the Malay professionals. Needless to say, they are the cream of the Malay community and their views and opinions on matters affecting the Malays are naturally viewed by the community as sublime. Therefore, the PAP government must regard the AMP with the respect that is accorded to an organisation of such high professional repute.

The AMP has all along been very accommodating politically with the PAP government and has never been known to be highly critical of the government until now on the subject of Malays being "distinct and separate", remarks blithely imposed on the Malays by a cavalier MM Lee. This is going to put the Malay minister and his equally docile fellow-MPs in a dilemma. These gallant Malay minister and MPs have never uttered a single dissenting word against MM Lee's remarks and they will find themselves totally untenable in defending their position.They are all well- heeled, maybe not as well-off as their Chinese counterparts, but to come out in support of the AMP attack will be suicidal. Because of the AMPs standing in the Malay community, it may be similarly suicidal for the Malay minister and MPs to castigate them.

This is one time MM Lee has opened his big mouth and made a big booboo. How he is going to resolve it is going to tax his deviousness and to see if he is really sincere in his humility, a rare trait if ever he has it.

There is an appropriate Chinese saying: He who ties the bell round the tiger's neck is the one to untie it (解铃还是系铃人）。

Farewell to a Matriarch

2010-10-05T01:24:00.000-07:00

MM Lee Kuan Yew's wife, Madam Kwa Geok Choo, had been bedridden for the past two years in a vegetative state and her passing last Saturday came as no surprise. Perhaps God is benevolent in releasing her from her suffering. It must be a very painful experience to MM Lee who is known to be a very loving and caring husband. But then parting is an inevitable life journey. We extend our deepest condolences to MM Lee and his family and to PM Lee Hsien Loong for the loss of his beloved mother.

As a respect of Mrs Lee's sublime character, her humility and her flawless reputation as a dutiful wife and mother, the tributes for her that keep pouring in from local and foreign dignitaries reflect her popularity and dignity. But on such a solemn bereavement of an august figure, there is always the danger of some newspapers going overboard in their adulatory expressions of extolment of the late Mrs Lee which could probably cause her to turn in her grave.

Some newspapers described her as the First Lady. The title is reserved for the wife of a President and Mrs Lee is the wife of a former Prime Minister. The Lianhe Wanbao described her as the "Mother of a Country"(母仪天下). In Chinese the title c ould only be used by an Empress of ancient China. Is the Lianhe Wanbao trying to say that Mrs. Lee is an Empress and by extension MM Lee an Emperor? The competency of the newspaper writer is questionable and for a newspaper of its reputation, making such a crass mistake is unacceptable. The Lianhe Zaobao is on the other hand more rational is describing Mrs Lee as the "Eternalised Mother Model" (母仪足式，懿范长存）。

The Chinese press described Mrs Lee, who was always dressed in cheongsam with short hairdo, as an epitome of Chinese femininism. But the only flaw is that she is a peranakan and was almost non-literate in Chinese. The consensus is that the late First Lady Mrs Ong Teng Cheong more fitted the bill. Mrs Ong's Chinese educational background and her upbringing in a poor Chinese family made her a more unanimous choice as a Cheongsam First Lady. Her cheongsams were usually decorated with orchid motifs and replicas of her cheongsams were sold in renowned boutiques. However this should not detract from Mrs Lee's intrinsic display of the Chineseness in her and the enthusiasm of the Chinese press in portraying her distinct Chineseness should not be faulted.

The late President Ong Teng Cheong was in every respect a People's President but unfortunately his forthrightness in insisting to look into Singapore's reserves brought him into dissension with the PAP Government of the day. By right the late President Ong deserved and should have been given a state funeral upon his death when even lesser dignitaries were given such honours. Even today PAP leaders may still be fuming over the late President Ong's so-called brazenness. Does it show the magnanimity of the PAP leaders? The late President Ong was at one time a PAP leader himself.

A critique of MM Lee Kuan Yew's interview

2010-09-18T05:35:00.000-07:00

There is a Chinese saying:When a person is about to die, his/her words are kind (人之将死，其言也善）。

What does one make of the MM Lee Kuan Yew's interview with The New York Times' Seth Mydans coming just before his 87th birthday? Was it the ramble of a man on whom the above Chinese saying is a prophetic indicator? There was an absence of his usual pompous and bombastic style as he narrated his life experiences and philosophy to his astute interviewer.

As expected the public reactions are mixed. There are some who are nostalgic of the so-called progress and prosperity Lee Kuan Yew was supposed to have brought to Singapore. These are the ones who see only the angel in him and are prepared to overlook his iniquities. The number could be quite considerable but not the netizens.

Then there are those who hold contrary views, some very vitriolic. There was an acrimonious critic who sent a very caustic open letter via his email from overseas which is believed to be widely distributed and pulled no punches in his ferocious assailment of Lee Kuan Yew arising out of his New York Times interview. Quite co-incidentally, he also predicted that Lee Kuan Yew was nearing his death judging by the interview he gave. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was not spared the critic's venom who described his appointment as Prime Minister as a design by his father to perpetuate a dynasty. He predicted that PM Lee would find himself rudderless once his father, who acts as his eminence grise, was gone.

What is MM Lee's motive in telling the public about his so-called attentive care of his wife when she is already in a vegetative state? Is he trying to gain public sympathy for his so-called spousal plight? Madam Kwa Geok Choo, to all intents and purposes, is no longer in a position to respond to any human stimulation in any form and his so-called affectionate consolatory whispers to her every night stretch the imagination. MM Lee probably wants people to remember him as a deeply affectionate husband and gentleman. Does he realise that there are people who wonder why he is prolonging the sufferings of a wife in her present vegetative state with no hope of resuscitation? Would not that be more cruel than to allow her soul to be released? Somehow it does not seem compos mentis for MM Lee to leave his wife in her vegetative state and go jetting around to places, like Paris for example, ostensibly to conduct business of the State, including mesmerising gullible world audienses with his pearls of wisdom.

There was a momentary display of compunction when MM Lee admitted that he was not saying that everything he did was right but then he qualified it by saying that everything he did was for an honourable purpose without elaborating. The word honourable here is very subjective. He dismissed criticisms by Western reporters as rubbish and added that they were not the ones who may write the obituaries offering the final verdict on his actions. He concluded by quoting a Chinese proverb:Do not judge a man until his coffin is closed (盖棺定论).

It is appropriate here to reproduce a quote by a Lee Kuan Yew aficionado: Will his name be etched in the hallowed halls of pantheons or a fallen sufferer of hubristic iconoclasm.

Is this an impetuous or knee-jerk reaction?

2010-09-11T05:33:00.000-07:00

Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) had already decided to stop its shuttle bus services to the heartland areas at 11 pm on Sunday 12-9-10 and the directive from the Casino Regulatory Authority (CRA) for both the RWS and Marina Bay Sands (MBS) to stop their services abruptly in the early Friday afternoon is mind-boggling. The decision appeared to have been made impetuously by the CRA as it gives the public the impression of fluster at the top (including the MCYS Minister) over what adverse effect this problem could have on the PAP's election prospects if left doing nothing about it. There was apparently no thinking through on what consequences such abrupt stoppage of the shuttle services could have on the heartlanders, the bus operators and the fate of the hundreds of staff (including drivers) who will become jobless. Almost all the buses were newly bought with banking loans and the owners are now in a fix as to what to do with their buses and how they are going to service their loans.

Long before RWS was opened, the company had already planned to include shuttle bus services to the IR. This was with a view to encouraging car owners to use the shuttle services to the IR, thus not contributing to traffic congestion. The other objective is to provide free transport services to heartlander families to visit the IR as a form of requittal to society. There are amenities like the Universal Studios theme park, numerous shops and food outlets in RWS for the enjoyment of the families. They make it a family outing taking advantage of the convenience of the shuttle bus services. Now a so-called benevolent government has with a stroke of the pen deprived these deserving families of the enjoyment of the attractive amenities in RWS. Does the PAP government believe that such impetuous action will endear it to these families?

Is it logical to contend that prospective gamblers would take advantage of the free shuttle bus services to visit the casinos which would save them only a few dollars when a hefty $100 entry fee does not present any deterrence? They would still be visiting the casinos even without the free shuttle bus services. So just because of some misplaced notion on the part of the relevant authorities, heartlanders are deprived of the means of bringing their families on enjoyable outings to RWS.

Perhaps it may occur to our enterprising functionaries that depriving would-be gamblers of the free means of trnasport would not deter them from visiting casinos. There are already measures in place such as education to rehabilitate Singaporean gamblers to get them to eschew their gambling habits. Maybe the answer is to re-inforce these measures with more innovative ideas and not to look for fall guys to justify some bizarre action. Anyway, inveterate gamblers are a lost cause.

Rambling Thought

2010-09-06T05:34:00.000-07:00

From time to time we get to see retired prime ministers making pompous pronouncements to justify the sinecures they presently occupy. So it should not come as a surprise when Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong made what he called his momentous pronouncement that "we're victims of our own success". He said Singaporeans were constantly belly-aching about carpark. housing, crowded public transport and so on. He urged Singaporeans (probably with tongue-in-cheek) to put their woes in perspective and think of the poor.

Indeed, are we the victims of our own success? We ask SM Goh to so some soul-searching and say candidly if we are not instead the victims of so-called PAP success. Any right-thinking Singaporean will know that our housing, unemployment and public transport woes are the result of mismanagement of its immigration policy by the PAP government. The unrestrained influx of immigrants from China and India is accepted as the cause of the rising prices of HDB housing, the overcrowding in the MRT and buses and the deprivation of jobs to Singaporeans. There are still extensive caustic criticisms of the Prime Minister's National Day Rally speech although he tried very hard to appease Singaporeans on the government's indiscriminate immigration policy. So what logic is SM Goh using in trying to attribute these woes as "victim of our success"? Singaporeans are not as naive or daft as he tries to make them out to be.

Recently SM Goh coined a new 5 C's namely career, comfort, children, considerateness and charity and urged Singaporeans to adopt them in place of the original 5 C's which included condominium, cars and credit-cards. There have been comments that SM Goh was not far-sighted enough and had overlooked an equally important but detractive 5-Cs namely conceit, covetousness, cunning, cowardice and contemptibility which he should consider urging Singaporeans to avoid.

There is reason for these commentators to coin this 5 C's for avoidance. It would not be wrong to say that Singaporeans were sometimes referred to as "Ugly Singaporeans" by foreigners abroad, and probably here.This could not have nothing to do with the obnoxious behaviour of some pompous Singaporeans who were pushy and brazen when overseas. They were more confined to the elite or well-heeled class who would unabashedly flaunt either their expertise or their opulence to an unreceptive audience. Of course we have not descended to the level of the "Ugly Americans" but this should not be taken as a source of pride considering the connotation of the disparaging term. Does not SM Goh consider this novel 5 C's proposed by the commentators as something worthy of adoption by Singaporeans? If nothing else, it will have the effect in the long run of retrieving the reputation of Singaporeans.

Is the MCYS Minister showing his fangs?

2010-08-26T08:14:00.000-07:00

The Straits Times, the government propaganda mouthpiece, as expected, has been giving glowing news coverage to the Youth Olympic Games(YOG). But true to its colour, it chose to withhold incidents of inferior food supply to the thousands of volunteers and consequent food poisoning among some of them from its reporting. The netizen world is full of caustic criticisms of these incidents and has accused the MCYS Minister of "callous" treatment of the volunteers. There were even pictures showing what the netizens called "dog food" consisting of a small piece of unpalatable looking bland meat with six small pieces of long bean with some rice. These criticisms could not have escaped the delayed attention of the MCYS Minister who, no doubt apart from rectifying the inferior food, showed a hypocritical performance by heaping praises on the hapless volunteers in an attempt to make amends for his "callous" treatment.

The netizen world is full of reports of poor spectator attendances and of school children being coerced to attend the games to make up for the poor spectator crowd. 80,000 tickets have been allotted to schools, but apparently these were not gratis and students were made to fork out money for the tickets. Very cunningly, the Straits Times chose not to highlight these glaring imperfections in its reporting, no doubt done with an ulterior motive.

Just imagine with the plethora of caustic criticisms by netizens, with none pulling their punches, on the YOG is added the vitriolic comment by a fiery netizen in the person of Abdul Malik Mohammed Ghazali who posted on a Facebook group on August l8 that it was time to "burn Vivian Balakrishnan and the PAP". It appeared to be more violent than other netizen postings on the subject but there is no reason to believe that it was not said by Abdul Malik in a metaphorical sense.

There is no doubt that Minister Vivian Balakrishnan took umbrage to this personal attack on him and as a result the police swooped on Abdul Malik, arresting him for "incitement of
violence". As soon as news of Abdul Malik's arrest got out, the netizen world responded with extensive vitriolic criticisms against the arrest and blamed Dr Balakrishnan for the police action. The MCYS Minister has not spoken and if it is true that he is responsible for the police action, then it would be wise for him to remedy the situation, unless he disregards netizen criticisms and considers netizens not part of the polity. After all the offence is, to all intents and purposes, technical and why picked on Abdul Malik to put him through the rigmarole of a court prosecution when other similar-minded inimical netizens abound. Or could it not be the MCYS Minister's unwholesome intention of making an example of Abdul Malik, hoping thereby to put a stop to the belligerent action of the netizens?

The Mind-boggling National Day Award

2010-08-09T03:22:00.000-07:00

It will not be an exaggeration to say that Singaporeans woke up today to the mind-boggling news of the National Day award of the Distinguished Service Order to the Chairman, PUB Mr. Tan Gee Paw ostensibly for solving Singapore's perennial flood problems. Singaporeans cannot be faulted for not believing that the DSO could be awarded to Mr. Tan at this time for flood taming when the recent deluge disasters in Orchard Road and elsewhere are still fresh in their mind. Can there be a more dense and insensitive Cabinet led by an equally sensitive Prime Minister to bestow this DSO award at this time when Singaporeans are still strongly outraged by the inept handling of the recent floods by the Singapore leaders, in particular the PUB.

There may be merit in awarding the DSO to Mr. Tan but what Singaporeans cannot understand is why at this inauspicious moment? There is in fact no hurry in making the award after Mr. Tan has been able to tackle the flood situation successfully. Mr. Tan will feel more honoured if the award is made at the right time instead of which he is attracting more strictures than honour by this award now. The amount of snide remarks one hears in the public will testify to this. It makes Singapore a laughing-stock.

There was a renowned Chinese Xia Yu (夏禹）in BC 2000 China who became world-renowned for taming the flooding problem of the Yellow River, which was the perennial bane of China. No proper description could be found to portray the immense destructions it had caused to the country. Xia Yu tackled the problem for thirteen years without even entering his house to see his family when he passed by three times. (夏禹治水，三过家门而不入). Such was his single-mindedness and dedication in carrying out his task. For his success in his monumental task in solving the Yellow River flood problem he was subsequently elevated to be the first emperor of the Xia Dynasty. In the Singapore context perhaps Mr. Tan Gee Paw may find himself elevated (or elected) to the post of President by a gullible cabinet if he is successful in taming the flood problem in Singapore.

Singaporeans who have been following political events in Japan will pooh-pooh the highfalutin MM Lee Kuan Yew's ranting that no engineer of international standing will be able to solve the flooding problem of Singapore which he haughtily dismissed as an Act of God. He now puts the blame on God, a very God-loving man. Is the omniscient MM Lee aware of the recent internet posting which highlighted the magnificient engineering feat of the Japanese engineers in defeating the flooding problem in Tokyo? They call it the G-can system. Perhaps the bombastic MM Lee may for once be humble enough to sit at the feet of the Japanese engineers to seek their expertise in tackling the flooding problem in Singapore. When the late David Marshall could humble himself by sitting at the feet of the late Indian PM Jawaharlal Nehru to seek political wisdom, surely there can be no lack of humility on the part of M Lee to do the same before the Japanese for a sublime noble cause.

A Redeeming Feature of the PAP Government

2010-07-06T06:58:00.000-07:00

As outraged netizens it is quite natural to vent our wraths on the arrogant PAP government from time to time for the innumerable injustices by it. It is equally natural for the government to promote an international benevolent feature in order to divert some of the local broadsides. It is for its political capital that it is doing this but this should not detract from the immense succours that disaster victims received, especially in the case of colossal natural disasters such as a tsunami.

The Meulaboh tsunami disaster in December 2004 presented the PAP government with a golden opportunity to show to the world its readiness and benevolent prowess in rising to the humanitarian occasion promptly. Meulaboh was a sleepy Acehnese town in Indonesia and the tsunami destructions were so widespread and devastating that they were beyond belief. The number of lives lost was inestimable.

Team Singapore was the first to descend on the devastated town, before other foreign governments and non-governmental organisations (NGO), and began the agonising task of rescuing the survivors and resettling them. After that came the laborious and lengthy task of rebuilding and rehabilitation. That Team Singapore has persevered relentlessly since the start of the disaster in Decembver 2004 till now in its noble task of rebuilding and rehabilitation showed its sterling quality and determination which in turn reflected on the international acclaims to the PAP government. The tsuname disaster in Aceh with its subsequent rebuilding and rehabitation can indeed be said to be a showcase of the PAP government's humanitarianism. The colossal devastation of the tsunami disaster had shocked a normally placid world and the PAP government's heroic role in rescue, rebuilding and rehabilitation could not but elicited a show of respectful gratitude from an amazed world.

Here is the irony of it. It is all very well for the PAP government to promote an international humane image. When it comes to the local scene, it shows it is not so benign in its ruthlessness in dealing with the opposition parties and those who are not so sparing in their vitriolic criticisms of the government. Maybe it is in its mental make-up that it finds it antipathic to show the same kind of justice and fairness universally as in its international image projection.

Prime Minister's and ministers' silence on major public occurrences and happenings is not going to endear the government to the public, not to mention losing public confidence. The recent SMRT Changi depot security lapse and the Orchard Road deluge are only two cases in point. Then there is the question of a fair general election but the general expectation is that there will be gerrymandering when electoral boundaries are drawn up, obviously not to the advantage of opposition parties contesting the election. Of course, it will be a godsend if the PAP government can show a little more fairness and justice but is this not analogous to wishing for the pie in the sky?

Are Singaporeans Paying For Monkeys?

2010-07-04T07:19:00.000-07:00

The question that is being asked frequently in the internet is:Are Singaporeans paying for monkeys? By right monkeys deserve to be paid peanuts but how come we are paying millions.

The recent occurrences have not given the public the confidence of a government that holds high the concerns of the public. The golden silence of the Minister for Transport and Minister for Home Affairs on the debacle of the security lapse of the SMRT at its Changi depot is a typical example. They were either lofty in their attitude or remiss in their responsibility of the implication of the enormity of the SMRT security lapse. It was ludricuous that this could have escaped the attention of the two ministers.

Next is the comical performance of the Minister for Environment in connection with the recent flood in Orchard Road. Whether the public view it as shirking responsibility but his elusive presence was not to be found in the Orchard Road flood area when it was imperative for the flood victims, especially the serious ones, to be given sympathetic succour. He was like an invisible man who appeared after the storm to utter such crass statement that such flood occurred only once in fifty years. Such flippancy can hardly give confidence to the public, especially those in the flood-prone areas, that we have a minister who could tackle the flood situation.

Then there is the equally crass statement of the Prime Minister that it is impossible in Singapore to expect the place to be completely free of floods. This is the kind of talk that aims to pre-empt any public wrath to descend on the government should there be any unmanagable devastating flood befalling Singapore in future. In other words, the government is seeking an easy way out. The PUB should have by now identified the flood-prone areas and discovered the cause. In fact their officers are condifent of overcoming, if not minimising, the problem. So what is all this talk by the Prime Minister of not expecting a flood-free Singapore, if not to divert the attention of the public.

The trend of ministers, including the Prime Minister, of showing indifference towards occurences and happenings that the public view as affecting their security and welfare is disquieting, to say the least. There are very considerable criticisms by netizens on the ministers' haughty attitude. It automatically brings up the question that the astronomical salaries that the Prime Minister and his ministers get are really what they deserve and a fair charge on the taxpayers' fund. So the netizens coined the phrase:Are Singaporeans paying for monkeys?

MM Lee Kuan Yew the "Forecaster"

2010-06-23T07:10:00.000-07:00

It would not be far off the mark to say that the narcissistic MM Lee Kuan Yew would consider it an honour if he were invited to officiate the opening of the Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort. But he had to settle for a second best by touring the MBS a day before its grand opening, which to some people may be seen as a form of unofficial opening ceremony before its actual officiation which will no doubt tickle his ego.

But a leopard can never change its spots. True to his swaggering character he cannot help opening his big mouth, in conformity to his calling as a "forecaster", to predict that the newly opened MBS will take up to seven years to reach full capacity. With his official status MM Lee could not have been accompanied on his tour of MBS by any lesser personality than the MBS Chairman Mr. Sheldon Adelson.

One cannot expect Mr. Adelson to be amused by MM Lee's unflattering forecast, evidently not based on any tangible evidence but on his whim and fancy. How is Mr. Adelson going to face his shareholders if he allows such a deleterious remark, not one made by an ordinary mortal, to pass with impunity. Mr. Adelson is a shrewd Caucasian, one who must have had considerable experience in his career in dealing with high-ranking politicians of all political hues and colours and would certainly not be overawed by their prominence. He blithely told a disconcerted MM Lee that he believed that MBS would achieve full capacity in the year 2011. MM Lee was clearly seen to be taken aback by the Chairman's candid retort and could be seen to have no answer to his statement. Mr. Adelson is therefore seen to have reasserted his position thus giving assurance to his shareholders that he is no pushover.

Whether MM Lee will take this as a lesson to curb his egregious habit of "forecasting" for the wrong reason at the wrong time will be something which Singaporeans will be relieved to know.
He is paid more than $3 million a year from taxpayers' money to do what he himself has described as "forecasting". His position is a sinecure and he has so much time on his hand that he jets around the world, not infrequently, on taxpayers' funds to overwhelm his gullible audiences with his irresitable charms, making booboos in the process.

The latest example is in his eulogy to the late Dr. Goh Keng Swee whom he described as the minister who acted on his own "to have a clean break from Malaysia". Of course, such a serious controversial divergence from known facts could not have been allowed to pass without accountability. Dr. Goh is no longer around to clarify and the controversy has unfairly impinged on his character. Whatever is the motive of MM Lee to bring this up after Dr. Goh's death only time will tell. But in view of the disquiet generated by this controversy among the public, MM Lee is now trying strenouosly to carry out damage control in order to salvage the situation. His feeble attempt at vindication in the Straits Times of 22 June is a typical example.

The Sophistry of Minister K. Shanmugam

2010-06-20T09:33:00.000-07:00

It is obvious that the government is trying strenously to manage damage control as a result of the fallout from the serious security lapse at the SMRT Changi depot. Whilst the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Home Affairs had remained reticent, for reasons best known to themselves, on the security breach, it has now fallen on the shoulder of a discomfited Second Minister for Home Affairs K. Shanmugam to make a belated sophistry on the goverment's dissociation of responsibility on security of private sector installations giving SMRT and its depots as an example and citing prohibitive costs as the main reason.

It is incredulous that the Minister could come up with such a simplistic view on a matter of considerable gravity as security. It is fortunate that the security breach at the SMRT Changi depot was a graffiti caper by two innocuous foreign pranksters. So the SMRT honchos are held responsible for the security lapse although the government cannot escape embarrassment and loss of face. Up to this stage the dissociation of responsibility stand of the government appears to sound reasonable.

But has it occurred to Mr. Shanmugam that, instead of two foreign pranksters, the security breach at the SMRT Changi depot could have been carried out by Jemaah Islamiah (JI) terrorists? Does he think that these JI terrorists would be there to spray-paint graffiti on the train? The consequence of such a scenario would be immensely devastating especially if the carriage is packed with commuters. Will Mr. Shanmugam consider such a security situation to be the responsibility of theSMRT honchos for them to manage?

So Mr. Shanmugam will have to show more ingenuity and circumspection in explaining to the business community or private sector, that whilst it is their primary responsibility to look after the security of their installations, the circumstances in which the government will assume full responsibility of any breach of security, for instance in case of terrorist-inspired incidents.

The SMRT Changi depot security breach was a good example where the Minister for Transport or the Minister for Home Affairs could have come out in the first instance with an assurance to the commuting public that security at the SMRT was being reinforced for their safety. Instead it was left to the SMRT chief executive Saw Phaik Hwa to express deep regret for the "serious lapse", quite flippantly because some people said that she was merely aping DPM Wong Kan Seng. It is appropriate to ask here if an assurance from a government minister would have a greater impact on the commuting public.

A Comic Opera

2010-06-11T07:44:00.000-07:00

It's uncanny that it was a Swiss national Oliver Fricker who showed how easy it was to breach the so-called unbreachable security of the SMRT's Changi depot to spray graffiti on an MRT train in the middle of the night. What made it all the more comical was that the train was allowed to ply its services for two days without anyone's being the wiser although SMRT now claimed that its staff thought it was an advertisement. Is the claim not a bit far-fetched?

Fricker may not have realised it at that time but his impetuous artistic painting, though may have appeared to him to be an innocuous caper, is certain to have caused great consternation to the powers that be. They may have been probably woken to the harsh reality that their elaborately laid out security of protected places could be breached by some foreign prankster out to make fun of the hubristic PAP government.

By his caper Fricker has knowingly or unknowingly caused the government to lose face and public confidence. Does he seriously think that the PAP government will show magnanimity and let him off lightly? Fricker may not have realised that his folly could have brought him serious consequences or he might have had second thought about going through with his prank. Then there is an alleged accomplice and the government is not going to let him off either. What part the alleged accomplice had played in this prank may only be known when he is arrested and brought back to Singapore. He is believed to have fled to Hongkong.

DPM Wong Kan Seng cannot be amused at the ease with which Fricker had breached the security at the SMRT's Changi depot. It is fortunate that it was just a prank for DPM Wong will be singing a different tune if it had been done by a Jemaah Islamiah (JI) terrorist group. Because what the JI terrorists would have done would not be just spraying amusing graffiti on the train. The scenario could be quite devastating.

We wonder if the SMRT's chief exective Saw Phaik Hwa really realised the gravity of the SMRT security gaffe. It is quite flippant for the CEO to just say she deeply regretted the "serious lapse" (here some people said that she tried to ape DPM Wong Kan Seng) and tended to shift responsibility to SMRT staff.

Another glaring fact is the complete silence of the Minister for Transport on this SMRT security lapse. It does not seem to concern him and he does not consider it important for him to reassure the commuting public that security of the SMRT is being reinforced for their safe travel.

Neither have we heard anything reassuring from DPM Wong Kan Seng who is the Home Affairs Minister. Are we to assume that the government is complacent about the present SMRT security lapse until a real terrorist incident explodes in its face?

The Secession Conundrum

2010-05-30T18:50:00.000-07:00

True to his disingenuous character, the Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew always has something up his sleeve which he would foist on the unsuspecting public, ostensibly to score a point. The latest is his baffling disclosure on Singapore's separation from Malaysia which he made in his eulogy to the late Dr Goh Keng Swee at his state funeral. It was anybody's guess whether the distinguished audience at the funeral was taken aback by his enigmatic disclosure that it was the late Dr Goh who decided on his own, after discussions with Tun Abdul Razak, the Malaysian DPM and Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman, the Minister of the Interior to have a clean break. In other words it was Dr Goh alone who made the decision to secede from Malaysia and later told PM Lee Kuan Yew about it. The Chinese have a proverb: Behead first and report to the throne later (先斩后奏).

From events at that time and what MM Lee Kuan Yew said in his memoirs it was the Malaysian PM Tunku Abdul Rahman who decided to expel Singapore from Malaysia, choosing to "sever all ties with a State Government that showed no measure of loyalty to its Central Government". Lee Kuan Yew was adamant and tried to work out a compromise but without success. He was later convinced by Goh Keng Swee that the secession was inevitable.

Lee Kuan Yew's Malaysian Malaysia adventure against the Central Government exacerbated by race riots in Singapore caused immense alarm to the Malaysian leadership, in particular Tunku Abdul Rahman. He came to the inevitable conclusion that he could not resolve the crisis and decided that separation was the best solution.

Singaporeans have been taken for a ride once too often by the highfalutin MM Lee Kuan Yew and it is about time he shows some civility and responsibility in enlightening the public as to his motive, whether good or evil, in portraying Dr Goh as the protagonist of the secession, especially when DR Goh is no longer around to question its truthfulness. It shows Dr Goh to be a man of gross impetuousity, making a decision on his own on a grave matter affecting the destiny of millions of Singaporeans. Is this a fair reflection on a statesman on whom the innumerable tributes show him to be a man of sound principle and not one to have acted on his own on such a grave matter as secession?

Well, the ball is now in MM Lee Kuan Yew's court. There is another appropriate Chinese proverb: He who ties the bell round the tiger's neck is the one to untie it (解铃还是系铃人).

A Premonition of Opposition Disintegration?

2010-05-08T08:25:00.000-07:00

Even Heaven looks kindly upon the opposition and paves the way for it to progress to its present pre-eminence and hopefully up to and including the general election. The ground is definitely favourable in favour of it and it has all the electoral support from the new media, especially the netizens who have continually called on voters, especially young voters, not to vote for PAP. Of course, any support from the government-controlled mainstream media is out of the question.

In fact, it has all the characteristics of the victors in the Red Cliff battle in the Chinese historical saga, the Three Kingdom. On the eve of the battle, the fabulous prescient Military Adviser Zhu Ge Liang made his famous prediction: All things made ready but only lacks the East Wind (万事具备，只欠东风. As he patiently waited, the East Wind arrived and sent his armada into victory in Red Cliff. The Chinese history is quoted as an analogy to show that the opposition is having all things made ready but only lacks the East Wind in the form of unity to secure victory like the Red Cliff victors.

The talks between Reform Party (RP) led by Mr. Kenneth Jeyaretnam and the Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) led by Mr. Chiam See Tong to form an alliance to contest the general election started on a promising note. It had all the makings of a remarkable beginning of a significant process leading to the indispensible unity of the opposition in facing the PAP in the general election. The talks were going so well that it came as something of a shock to hear the news that the proposed RP-SDA alliance had come to grief over the SDA's declination of acceptance of the 11 conditions of the RP after having earlier agreed to them. Kenneth Jeyaretnam was right to feel mystified and SDA Chiam See Tong did not improve matters by remaining tight-lipped.

Mr. Chiam See Tong seems to hold the key to this whole opposition unity conundrum.
A veteran politician like him should have no illusion about the paramount need of opposition unity in securing victory over the PAP in the general election. This should transcend all personal or party interests in the overall interests of opposition unity. The RP-SDA alliance fiasco will be viewed with exultation by the PAP leaders as it would mean that without unity the opposition will be less of a threat to their dominiance in the general election notwithstanding any favourable ground condition and new media support to the opposition. Of course, if the opposition parties were to contest against one another in a single ward or GRC, this will virtually amount to a walk-over for the PAP.

The general election is likely to be still some time away and the oppoosition, especially Mr. Chiam See Tong, should transcend their parochial interests to forge a solid unity and not let down their electoral supporters. If the opposition parties fritter away the present golden opportunity, they may not find a similar opportunity for a long time to come.

Is Straits Times a government mouthpiece?

2010-05-02T00:07:00.000-07:00

Speaking during a dialogue session organised for forum writers to the Straits Times, ST Editor Han Fook Kwang admitted that the paper suffered from a perception that it is a " government mouthpiece". But he got the cheek to say with tongue-in-cheek: "But the test is if our readers believe in the paper and continue to buy it". It is pathetic that Mr. Han, who is just a cog in the massive government propaganda organisation is trying to ape his political masters in continuing to hoodwink the people as to the insidious political role of the Straits Times. What Mr. Han says about the Straits Times is not important because he is impotent himself and is not in a position where he can in any way influence the policy of the Straits Times.

What is of more concern to the discerning Singaporeans is whether there is freedom of the press in Singapore. Reporters without Borders ranked Singapore media 133th in terms of press freedom among 175 countries last year. Can there be press freedom when the mainstream media is tightly controlled by a forbidding organisation like the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH)? It is not some kind of benevolent organisation but an omnipotent body formed by the government to oversee the mainstream media, especially the Straits Times, in its dissemination of government propaganda. At the head of SPH is none other than a former deputy prime minister who is also the spin doctor.

Under the circumstances, it will be naive to think that press freedom exists in Singapore. What the mainstream media,especially the Straits Times, dishes out to the public is what the government wants the public to read. Views, opinions or articles inimical to the government, especially from opposition parties, will find it extremely hard to get publicity, esecially in the Straits Times. Even letters unflattering to the government sent to the Forum suffered the same fate.

We will see the true colour of the mainstream media, especially the Straits Times, during the hustings for the General Election. Under the tight control of SPH, the PAP will have monopoly of the mainstream media, probably to the exclusion of the opposition parties. The opposition parties will most likely have to rely on the new media to support their election campaign. The Straits Times, being a government mouthpiece, is not likely to lend a hand to the opposition campaign. It will be just wishful thinking.

Although Singapore's population has increased, Straits Times circulation has shown a decline. It claims an inflated readership of 1.4 million. This shows that there are Singaporeans who cease to read the Straits Times because they are disgusted with its pro-government propaganda. These are the people who turn to the internet for their supply of local and foreign news and they could form a fairly substantial number. There are also some who read the Straits Times for its sports, social and financial news, skipping its propaganda.

One will have to be cynical to believe that there is press freedom in Singapore. This, at best, depends on the charitable whim of the powers that be.

Can there be a level playing field?

2010-04-29T07:40:00.000-07:00

Was it any wonder that the PAP government was able to bulldoze through Parliament amendments to the Parliamentary Election Act (PEA) to increase NCMP from six to nine and a cooling-off day on eve of Polling Day? It was a foregone conclusion with the PAP's massive majority in Parliament. What chances the minuscule number of two opposition MPs and one NCMP had against the relentless aggressive onslaught of PAP ministers and MPs in trying to stem the PAP's might in bulldozing through the amendments?

Opposition NCMP Sylvia Lim was remarkable in her element in putting up a scintillating performance with two eloquent speeches, one on the NCMP amendment and the other on the cooling-off day that had PAP ministers in a discomfiture trying to match. Those who have not read her speeches are encouraged to do so in order to share in the oratory of her arguments against the two amendments to the PEA. The arguments were cogent and could have moved any sceptical audience in an assembly but unfortunately fell on deaf ears of PAP ministers.

Is the increment of 3 NCMP seats up to 9 seats a boon to the opposition as propagated by the government? A NCMP seat is awarded to the defeated opposition candidate with the highest number of votes in the constituency he or she contested. The government is in fact telling the voters that even if a PAP candidate is elected, the defeated opposition candidate can still enter Parliament as a NCMP. Thus guillible voters are hoodwinked into believing that it is safe to vote for the PAP candidate as the defeated opposition candidate is not deprived of a seat in Parliament. But the simple voter may not be able to have the cognition of the handicap faced by a NCMP. He or she has no costituents to represent and therefore has no status in his or her constituency. The NCMP cannot vote on certain important issues in Parliament besides other disabilities. In other words the NCMP is like a puppet apart from being allowed to make speeches in Parliament. Therefore, increasing the NCMP seats is just a charade of the PAP government to maintain or strengthen its massive majority in Parliament.

A cooling-off day on eve of Polling Day is another shenanigan of the PAP government to ensure its dominance on Polling Day. A total ban on electioneering on cooling-off day puts the opposition parties at a disadvantage as they are not able to make any last-minute appeal to voters in order to counter government propaganda against them. Nowhere in the democratic world is there such a precedent and for the PAP spin doctor to come up with this nefarious idea is the apex of perfidy. There is no guarantee that the crafty PAP will not take advantage of this cooling-off day to slip in anti-opposition propagnda in disguised form while opposition electioneering stands frozen.

These two schemes are introduced in addition to vote-catching measures that have been put in by PAP leaders. The upgrading of aging HDB flats inPAP constituencies as welll as in some opposition wards is just one example. The PAP leaders are doing all these as they are concerned about reports of favourable ground situation in favour of the opposition in a general election. They will try with everything in their power to prevent the opposition from making inroads into their political dominance. So can the opposition expect a level playing field?

The Subtlety of Gutter Politics

2010-04-21T07:06:00.000-07:00

Politics in many countries in the world where elections are held every four or five years to determine which political party should form the government of the day has one thing in common. The incumbent government will try everthing in its power to ensure its return to power in the election. So in the period before the election, the government can be seen to be offering sweeteners to potential electors in order to win their votes.

For instance in Singapore, reasonably-priced HDB flats are being built to deflect the ruffled feelings of potential flat-buying citizens who were intimdated by the frenzy of the overheated HDB flat market in terms of prices and availability. Another inducement is the upgrading of aging HDB flats both in the PAP constituencies and opposition wards. Currently, there is talk of the restoration of the employers' cut of the CPF to the workers. To complete the destruction of the opposition hope of ever coming close to capturing any PAP seats, whether single ward or GRC, will be the inevitable gerrymandering of electorial boundaries which will indicate how soon the General Election will take place. For the PAP it will be a case of head I win and tail you lose.

In spite of all these vote-catching preparations, it cannot be said that the PAP is not worried about the ground situation which is favourable to the opposition and is likely to improve with the approach of the General Election. The internet is full of exhortations to Singapore electors, especially the young voters, not to vote the PAP. The mainstream media is not overly friendly to the oppositiion but it can be assured of robust support from the new media, especially the redoubtable netizens.

Discomfited PAP leaders are scrambling to salvage the situation and to try to find a plan to break the spirit and solidarity of the opposition. Is it a co-incidence that a former president of the Reform Party chose this moment to pick up a quarrel with the secretary-general of the party Kenneth Jeyaretnam to present a sombre picture of disunity within the party? This is exactly what the PAP leaders hope to see happen to the opposition. Is this an act of providence to strengthen the hand of the PAP? Reform Party is the best bet to capture the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC in combination with the Singapore Democratic Alliance. Is there going to be a domino effect on the opposition whether by providence or otherwise thereby snuffing out opposition chances in the General Election?

Whether by providence or not, the opposition, especially Kenneth Jeyaretnam, should tighten up their security to ensure that no mercenary is infiltrated into their parties to cause disunity. It is still not too late to do that now. There is a Chinese saying: To repair the pen after the sheep have escaped is not too late. (wang yang bu lao, wei wei wan yi)

Publish Post

The god has spoken

2010-04-20T07:11:00.000-07:00

The god has spoken. No one can be mistaken that this refers to the godlike figure in the person of the pompous Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew. He was in his element when he delivered his bombastic discourse at the first Singapore Indian New Year Celebrations at Serangoon Road last Saturday on the highly distressing subject of immigration. He chose an Indian environment to address this subject because he could be assured of a docile and captive audience who could expect nothing short of his obsequious compliments to the Indian community. He was talking glibly about the better-endowed, educationally and financially, Indian immigrants whom the Singapore government was trying to attract. They do not present any major demographic or economic problem to the government. The Indian work permit workers are the ones giving some social and sanitary problems wherever they congregate.

The ones giving Singaporeans perennial social and political problems are the Chinese immigrants. Singapore has seen an overwhelming influx of Chinese immigrants since time immemorial and their presence is so ubiquitous that they can be found in such unlikely places as Indian restaurants working as waitors and waitresses. Singapore commuters find scant comfort in their public transport travels, be it in buses or MRT, where Chinese immigrants could cause crowding to an intolerable degree, sometimes worsened with hordes of Indian work permit workers.

The speed with which Chinese immigrants were able to obtain Permanent Resident (PR) status and citizenship had to be witnessed to be believed. The irony is that many of the new citizens and PRs were not really enamoured of Singapore. They regard China as more dynamic and grandiose in size, politics and economy and as their motherland where they belong. They were merely birds of passage whose aim of getting Singapore citizenship or PR status was to get employment and more importantly to purchase HDB flats which they could sell at a profit when they returned to their motherland for good. Have the Singapore leaders, especially MM Lee, awakened to the fact of pseudo-patriotism displayed by these Chinese immigrants? Were they not partly the cause of the phenomenal price increase of our HDB resale flats? Singapore prospective purchasers of HDB resale flats are the ones who bear the brunt of the deceitful behaviour of these Chinese immigrants. Even other Singapore non- flat purchasers join in the chorus of protest.

Then there is the question of employment. We have 30,000 PMETs (Professionals, Managers, Engineers and Technicians) who have been unemployed for quite a long time and we now have Chinese and Indian immigrants competing with the PMETs for limited employment opportunites. Is it not incumbent upon the Singapore government to give priority to our PMETs in finding them employment before the Chinese and Indian immigrants? Perhaps some of the Indian immigrants may have special IT qualifications and may be treated separately. Apart from the PMETs there is a large number of unemployed Singapore citizens needing government attention.

There is a well-known saying: Charity begins in the home.

A Plausible Revelation

2010-04-18T09:03:00.000-07:00

She did not marry me and became Temasek Holdings' Chief Executive Officer. I married her because she had the talent of a CEO. This was the dramatic revelation of PM Lee Hsien Loong in referring to his wife, Ms Ho Ching, in an interview with Mr. Phil Ponce, host of the Chicago Tonight on WTTW Channel 11 last Thursday. Apparently, this was said to pre-empt Mr. Ponce from popping the question of nepotism in the Singapore government.

At first glance, the startling revelation seems in order. But upon closer examination, it could hardly stand up to scrutiny. Like the Chinese saying: It simply breaks without being attacked (不攻自破）。 First of all, when did PM Lee first discover that Ms Ho Ching possessed CEO talent? Had she ever served under him before she married PM Lee so that her display of outstanding talent akin to that of a CEO in the course of her duty could not have been missed by the eagle-eyed PM Lee? If not, unless he had clairvoyant power and could have seen things where other people could not, it may seem a bit far-fetched for PM Lee to make that kind of claim.

If the claim of Ms Ho Ching being CEO-talented before her marriage to PM Lee is lacking in proof, then the question of nepotism in connection with her Temasek CEO's appointment as a corollary cannot simply be wished away. Singaporeans will be wondering whether, with her disastrous stewardship of Temasek Holdings involving colossal losses, Ms Ho Ching really has the talent for the post. The lack of accountability for these losses has not given confidence to Singaporeans, especially the taxpayers, that Temasek Holdings is in capable hands. The question uppermost in their mind, despite government's vehement denial, is whether Ms Ho Ching would have been appointed Temasek's CEO if she had not married PM Lee. This is still a moot point with Singaporeans.

The question of nepotism is not confined to Singaporeans. Singapore ministers going on official overseas assignments were often asked this question, maybe in a diplomatic way. Even the PM in American this time if he had not had the foresight to bring it up first. So in the world of politics, you can plead being above board in nepotism and corruption but you cannot completely eradicate cynicism shown by some of the sceptical citizens. And this can have a multiplying effect in certain circumstances.

Well, the die is cast. We will wait and see how the PAP will fare in the General Election which can be called as early as this year. They are likely to face a formidable realigned opposition with the avowed aim of denting the invincibility of the PAP.

Is the Opposition capable of epoch-making?

2010-04-06T06:15:00.000-07:00

Is the opposition capable of epoch-making? The answer has to be a definite yes. The ground for the opposition is favourable and improving and the prognosis for making inroads into PAP domain can be said to be sanguine. Provided the opposition is united and avoid feuding one another in the hustings. There is already quite a steady flow of talented candidates with excellent tertiary qualifications into some of the more credible opposition parties and they are going to give the much-vaunted PAP election contestants a run for their money. The opposition should continue to woo more of the high-calibre candidates to join their parties in the time available before general election is called.

The to be applauded combination of the Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) and the Reform Party (RP) in firing the first salvo in their quest in breaking the pernicious PAP stranglehold on Singapore with a combined walkabout in Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC last Sunday is an encouraging beginning of what is to follow. That Mr. Chiam See Tong who heads the SDA and Mr. Kenneth Jeyaratnam, chief of RP, had chosen Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC to test the ground is significant. This GRC is the political stronghold of DPM Wong Kan Seng which he has helmed and has been uncontested since it was formed in 1997. Another GRC which the opposition is going to zero in on is the Tampines GRC which is helmed by the Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan. MM Lee Kuan Yew has tried to frighten Tampines voters that they would see their HDB flats go down in value if they did not vote PAP in Tampines GRC.

That the SPH-controlled mainstream media, especially the Straits Times, has given luke-warm publicity to the SDA-RP walkabout is not something unexpected. The opposition will be naive to expect adequate ardent coverage of their election campaigns during the hustings by the mainstream media. Their political masters, the PAP, will have the first call on them. All is not lost, maybe just a bit deficient, for the opposition parties as they will be strongly supported by the new media.

Where the new media stand vis-a-vis the PAP government and its leaders is not a mystery. They have been consistent in their vitriolic criticisms on the PAP government and its leaders for their unpopular and undemocratic policies. The netizens are mostly young voters and they have called on other voters, especially young voters, not to vote for PAP in the general election. It will be foolhardy for the PAP leadership to ignore this wave of anti-PAP sentiments by the netizens and their possible impact on the outcome of the general election. PM Lee Hsien Loong has tried to pooh-pooh these online criticisms as "astroturfing".

Well, PM Lee and his cabinet colleagues may feel confident PAP will be returned to power at the next General Election, but the capture of at least two GRCs and some single seats by the combined oppostions is a distinct possibility. PM Lee is welcome to continue to live in his fool's paradise.

Is the Straits Times above Astroturfing?

2010-04-02T06:58:00.000-07:00

This is what is called astroturfing by the mainstream media, especially the Straits Times. The Straits Times in its editorial today was nauseatingly sycophantic in calling on the government to "turf out of consideration astroturfed views when determining policies".

But does the Straits Times genuinely believe that its propagandist organ is above astroturfing? The editorial described astroturfing as a manufactured product masquerading as the real thing: fake mail, phone call or digital campaigns orchestrated to appear like spontaneous "grassroots" responses. Is not the Straits Times answering to this description in its pro-government propaganda to the exclusion of constructive opposition and concerned critics' voices?

The Straits Times seems to be aping the Prime Minister in disparaging online criticisms of the government as fakes orchestrated to appear like spontaneous grassroots responses. Is not the echoing of his master's voice cringingly a form a astroturfing? Right-thinking Singaporeans have seen through the obsequiousness of the Straits Times. There are regular readers of the Straits Times who are digusted with its spineless character and give up reading the trash in the paper going instead to the internet for their local and international news.

It is precisely because of the dearth of genuine news about the political and financial mismanagements of the government which the mainstream media are covering up that there is a healthy growth of the new media to counter this journalistic abberation of the mainstream media. For example it was the new media which provided the news of the recent heavy financial loss of over US $1 billion by the Government Investment Corporation (GIC). True to their obsequious character, there was not a word in the mainstream media about this GIC financial disaster to the public. Although the public were apprised by the new media, there was very little they could do with no accountability by the "democratic" government. Would the Straits Times describe the dramatic disclosure by the new media of the financial loss of GIC as astroturfing?

Hovering over the mainstream media like a sword of Damocles is a body called the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH). It is hardly a benevolent organ but a tightly-organised body that supervises closely any piece of pro-government propaganda that goes out from the mainstream media. Woe betides any exuberant journalist who does not toe the line. The next thing he knows is that he will find his rice-bowl dancing (a Chinese slang for dismissal). To ensure absolute obedience to its draconian policy, the government has installed a former deputy prime minister, who is also the government spin doctor, at the head of SPH. So how can one expect anything but astroturfing from the mainstream media, especially the bombastic Straits Times.

The Prime Minister's Conundrum

2010-03-28T07:00:00.000-07:00

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is reported to have voiced his disdain as to the authenticity of the new media, among other things, at a dialogue with about 100 so-called active contributors to the government feedback arm Reaching Everyone for Active Citizen (REACH) yesterday. He calls it "astroturfing". As the name suggests REACH could not be anything but a docile body and the 100 active contributors could best be described as a captive audience. It could have made a difference if it had included other discerning Singaporeans.

The Prime Minister has pompously cited the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) saga last year to prove his erroneous contention of online complicity to lure government's involvement to back one side against the other in the leadership tussle. The AWARE saga was a humdrum association domestic quarrel hardly of any national significance and if the government could be duped by so-called online deception into taking sides, then it could go to show the quality of government leadership or the lack of it.

Perhaps it could have occurred to the lucid mind of the Prime Minister the impetus that led to the evolution of the new media in Singapore. Every right-thinking Singaporean is aware that the sycophantic main stream media, epecially the egregious Straits Times, will only disseminate government propaganda and not any dissenting thesis inimical or unflattering to the government. There is the omnipotent Singapore Press Holdings, at the head of which is a government spin doctor, which monitors closely every piece of propaganda that the main stream media dish out to the public. The current news report of the Prime Minister's salvo on the new media is a typical example.

Can you blame the pent-up netizens for opening up an alternative media channel to disseminate the truth about the iniquities of the PAP government? The Prime Minister will be living in a fool's paradise if he thinks that their online crticisms of the government and its ministers are colluded fakes and are not given serious attention by discerning Singaporeans. The Barisan National in Malaysia is a good example for pooh-poohing their netizens and suffered a severe setback in their last general election when they were hit by a tsunami evidently masterminded by the online citizens. This could not have failed to wake up the PAP leadership to the possibility of a similar tsunami hitting the PAP in the next General Election in Singapore. The PAP leadership was seen to be scrambling to clutch at a straw by sending their seasoned war-horse, the narcissistic Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, to Malaysia under the guise of a fraternal visit to suss out the cause of the Barisan National election debacle as a lesson for the PAP.

The Prime Minister is an astute politician and he ignores the pernicious influence (pernicious to the PAP) of the online citizens at his peril.

The Misguided Heroism of Minister George Yeo

2010-03-16T07:04:00.000-07:00

The dramatic exposure of the sexual exploits of the renowned Singapore film producer and director has no parallel in recent Singapore's history. What is perplexing to Singaporeans, especially feminine Singaporeans, is the bombastic manner in which the normally sensible Foreign Minister George Yeo called on Singaporeans to rally behind and support Jack Neo and his family in their so-called hour of distress, arising out of the infidelity and sexual exploits of the amorous Jack Neo.

What people cannot understanding is whether this a a just cause for the Foreign Minister to come out in his official capacity to lend his name to rally support from Singaporeans. True, Jack Neo was in a state of panic and Minister George Yeo was the person he could think of as his saviour when he confided in the minister his amorous predicament before it became public. It looks like Minister George Yeo was suddenly confronted with a grave situation involving his personal friend Jack Neo that he probably did not think through the possible repercussion when he merrily made his controversial public statement rallying support for Jack Neo.

At best, this is a personal matter and Minister George Yeo should have treated this on a personal basis and quietly given Jack Neo his moral support. It cannot be denied that Jack Neo is a public figure but he is caught in a scandalous amorous affair. Would it be proper for a government minister to come out in open support of any other celebrity caught in a similar amorous situation? It does not make the action any proper even if the perpetrator is a personal friend. In Jack Neo's case, is Minister George Yeo not sending a wrong signal to the public? It will be an irony if his robust rallying call turns out to be counter-productive considering the extensive adverse reaction on the internet.

The internet is full of caustic criticisms of the improper action of Minister George Yeo in calling for support of Jack Neo. There was in particular a woman blogger who was especially acrimonious in her lengthy posting. This was not the first faux pas in recent months by the embattled Minister George Yeo. He was caught wrong-footed in the Romanian charge-d'affaires hit-and-run accident investigations when he merely said enigmatically that this was very bad when asked to comment.

His booboo notwithstanding, Mr. George Yeo is otherwise considered a more creditable PAP minister whose discourses in and out of Parliament are of an intellectual standard reminiscent of the brilliant oratory of the late Mr. S. Rajaratnam. He has a bright future if only he can avoid making silly mistakes in his public utterances and postures. Of course this will depend on how long the decadent PAP dynasty can last.

The Somnolent Deputy Prime Minister

2010-03-07T06:10:00.000-08:00

Can you imagine anything more clownish than a deputy prime minister snoozing away during a speech by his fellow- DPM Wong Kan Seng in Parliament? DPM Teo Chee Hean was caught by camera. We have just witnessed a clownish spectacle of the minister and secretary- general of the NTUC who said in Parliament that he was deaf to the criticisms of an opposition MP and we are now presented with the comical spectacle of a deputy prime minister snoozing while Parliament was in session. If Mr. Wong Kan Seng's discourse can induce somnolence in Mr. Teo Chee Hean, he can certainly apply for a patent for insomnia cure.

DPM Teo Chee Hean has been given wide publicity as the man of the moment appointed by the Prime Minister to improve national productivity. With his somnolent performance in Parliament, do Singaporeans really believe that he has the right credentials for the important task. When he can snooze off during a Parliamentary session, what is there to give the public the confidence that he will stay alert in his productivity job. As he is also the Defence Minister, is he setting a good example to his soldiers? If any soldier is caught sleeping on his job, how is he going to discipline the soldier? There will definitely be double standards in punishment meted out to the offending soldier.

It may be argued that there may be extenuating circumstances in DPM Teo's case, as some ministers and government MPs found sleeping during Parliamentary sessions is sometimes a common sight, but a deputy prime minister is not a ordinary mortal. He is next in line to the prime minister and acts for the latter in his absence. Can you imagine the prime minister being caught snoozing in Parliament? There will be mayhem which will lead to further deterioration of confidence in the government.

Maybe in the eyes of the government DPM Teo Chee Hean is a minister of sterling character. With his fat obscene pay of $3 million a year he is expected to give a sterling performance rather than be caught sleeping on the job. He is in charge of our Army, Navy and Air Force and these forces look up to him for sterling leadership. Good leaders learn from their mistakes and improve on them. Let us hope that DPM will learn from his experience.

We may not see the end of such comic operas. It may be appropriate to conclude with a famous saying of the Chinese philosopher Confucius: I do not wish to see it any more. (wu bu yu guan zhi yi)

The Consummate Joker

2010-03-04T06:03:00.000-08:00

Can you believe your ears when the honourable Mr. Lim Swee Say, minister and secretary-general of the NTUC, said that he was like the little frog in the unheard of fable "kingdom of frogs" that he was deaf to all the criticisms of MP Mr. Low Thia Kiang on his so-called doctrine of ameiloration of lower wage workers. Mr. Lim could have been piqued and embarrassed by the incisive demolition of his painfully-created but not flawless doctrine by an ingenious Mr. Low in Parliament. Credit must be given to Mr. Lim for his ingenuity in thinking up such an unseemly parable to defend his wounded pride.

Is not Mr. Lim acting like a little emperor? Is that the proper attitude for a minister and NTUC secretary-general drawing a fat obscene pay of over $2 million a year out of taxpayers' money to adopt in reply to crticisms. Is he not a law unto himself with the kind of brazen attitude he adopts?

If Mr. Lim represents the overbearing attitude of ministers, that is the reason we should vote in more opposition candidates. The PAP leadership is aware of such a possibility and it is now trying to sweeten the ground to make sure that it does not lose too many GRC's at the next General Election. This is where the opposition parties should close ranks to capture at least one or two GRC's. The opposition can do it if they can avoid disunity and put up some credible candidates. The ground is ripe for them to make inroads especially with young voters who are disillusioned with the PAP government. The PAP leadership is especially worried about the loyalty of the young voters and will be making strenuous efforts to win them over. Probably the die is cast and whatever strenuous efforts the PAP leadership makes may have little effect.

The tsunami that hit the Barisan National in the last general election in Malaysia is a wake-up call to the PAP leadership. But it may not be a similarly hefty tsunami that will hit the PAP in the next General Election. So they are scrambling madly to try to assuage any disastrous side-effect that the Malaysian tsunami may bring. As a result the people are given the spectacle of the much-hyped Economic Strategy Committee's report and the recent so-called bountiful budget whichthe PAP leadership hopes will revive its flagging election prospects.

The opposition should not be seen to be idle. This is a chance not to be missed to bring the PAP down from its pedestal and its arrogance. They should attract more credible candadites, especially scholars like the ones the Reform Party attracted, to represent them in a united stand in the next General Election. Already considerable netizens have called on voters, especially young voters, not to vote for PAP which is a good sign for the opposition.

Everyday Rob People

2010-02-26T06:22:00.000-08:00

It's amazing that it takes a witty taxi-driver to interpret the ERP as Everyday Rob People. How this amusing taxi-driver's witticism strikes a chord with motorists depends on whether they are affluent who regard ERP charges as peanuts or they belong to the less afflluent who feel the pinch of the ERP charges. Of course, the government ministers are a class of their own as they either travel in official cars or do not give any thought to ERP charges as they are affluent enough with their obscene salaries to regard such charges as peanuts.

In June, 2008 there was a bright spark of a minister who was also the general secretary of the NTUC. He regaled an audience in a two-hour dialogue with what he thought was his ingenious driving experience of getting car beeps four to five times a day from the ERP gantries which he passed through on his way to and from work and thought nothing of it. What the audience did not realise was that he was a minister drawing a fat obscene pay and the car beeps charges probably did not come out of his pocket. The audience's laughter probably gave him a false sense of security that the audience, or for that matter the public, did not think that he was a joker.

Is the ERP system a boon or a bane? The Transport Minister, who represents the government, swears to it that it smoothens the flow of traffic where gantries have been set up. But does it? You still find traffic snarls in places like Braddell and Thomson Road gantry in front of Media Corp during peak hours. Then there is the so-called double whammy. For example, if one leaves Selegie Road and enters Orchard Road there is a 50-cent charge. But when the same person returns to Selegie Road from Bras Basah Road he incurs a $1.50 charge.

Whether the system is a boon or a bane is a moot point depending on whether it is from the government's point of view or from the motorists' point of view. Of course, It enhances the government's coffers, hence the ERP is called by some people "Everyday Rob People". It is quite widespread and not just the taxi-driver's interpretation. As to the Transport Minister's assertion that it smoothens traffic, he should listen to the uncomplimentary remarks of irate motorists.

Well, no system is perfect. So there is obviously a need for the beleaguered Transport Minister and his ebullient Land Transport Authority (LTA) to straighten out the unevenness of the ERP system. It is likely that the LTA staff have exhausted their ideas and there is nothing humiliating to invite innovative ideas from the public, with monetary incentives if necessary.

The insensitive indiscretion of Senior Paster Rony Tan

2010-02-09T06:04:00.000-08:00

There is in fact no tenable defence for the inordinate indiscretion of Senior Pastor Rony Tan of the Lighthouse Evangelism church for his denigration of Buddhism and Taoism in his "miracle service". The pastor is in fact a charming and rational personality normally and exudes charisma in conducting his miracle and Sunday services at the Lighthouse Evangelism church. Attendees at the church were invariably mesmerised by his sermons which were delivered with his inimitable splendor. His genial disposition endears him to his parishioners. He has given so much of his life to the salvation of the seriously-ill who flocked to his miracle services for miracle cures. And this is a phenomenon which has to be witnessed to be believed. Even doctors who had been invited to attend such services were amazed at the "miracles".

Many people were stunned when they witnessed the incredible performance of Senior Pastor Rony Tan on online video clips when he ridiculed Buddhism in his disparaging comments about the religion. There was no doubt that these were insensitive comments which horrified and outraged the Buddhists. There was extensive public clamour for drastic action to be taken against Pastor Tan including detention under the ISA. The outburst of outrages was something to be expected considering the sensitivity of the issue. But it was up to the government security organisation, in this case the Internal Security Department (ISD), to assess the situation and take a rational view as to the type of action to be taken. In their professional assessment, they considered it adequate just be calling up Pastor Tan for a dressing down for his insensitive comments about Buddhism and a stern advice not to run down other religions in his preaching and proselytising.

Pastor Rony Tan should thank his God to be let off so lightly. He has posted an apology on the church's website, promising to respect other faiths and "not ridicule them in any way, shape and fashion". But some diehard Buddhists have maintained that posting an apology on the church's website is a lukewarm effort with its limited readership. It transpires now that TV Singapore has given quite comprehensive news reporting in all four languages of Pastor Rony Tan's apology and this should satisfy any lingering doubts as to the pastor's sincerity. Even DPM Wong Kan Seng has expressed his satisfaction with the final development.

Both the Singapore Buddhist Federation and the Singapore Taoist Federation have shown magnanimity in their response to this issue. This unfortunate polemic should now be considered closed.

The wheel of history will move forward

2010-01-26T06:06:00.000-08:00

Ever heard of the wheel of history moving backwards? That should worrythe PAP leadership as to the political direction Singapore is heading. The younger electorate will be the deciding factor in the next general election and the election after that. An increasingly number of them have manifestly shown that, while not entirely disillusioned with the PAP, they want to see a transformation in the government structure to reflect a more equitable society. And not unnaturally, they see a credible opposition as a vehicle for this transformation. Of course, for this to have any degree of realisation, there must be tangible inflow of able and high calibre potential candidates to the opposition parties, especially those who are scholars or talented degree holders. This is what is happening now in Singapore and the young voters are certainly to be elated at this trend of political development which will hopefully lead to the realisation of their cherished dream of a change of government.

That the PAP leaders have been monitoring this worrying trend for some time is not in doubt. They could not show openly that they are worried, but not yet to the point of panic, over this political development. So the prime minister has to put on an artificial front to comment sarcastically the dramatic event of a husband-and-wife team who are government scholarship holders who graduated with first-class honours degrees from Cambrige University joining the opposition Reform Party but admitted it is a significant development. When asked about reports of well-qualified Singaporeans joining the opposition, he simply glossed over the issue but wished them well. What else can he say?

The tsunami that hit the Barisan National in the last general election in Malaysia is a lesson that the beleaguered PAP leaders take to heart. The ostensibly fraternal visit by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew to Malaysia last year was not just a friendly visit but with special assignment to assess the real reason for the Barisan National election debacle so that the PAP can readjust its unpopular policies to prevent s similar tsunami hitting the PAP in the next general election. They have so many unpopular measures to adjust one of which is the long-overdue reduction of the obscene salaries of the prime minister and his affluent ministers. If the prime minister is still ignorant how unpopular their obscene pay is, ask any man in the street. The other is their policy allowing the indisciminate influx of Chinese immigrants who are so problematic that they are regarded as the bane of our social ills.

Anyway, if the PAP is not voted out of power at the next general election because the opposition is not yet able to field sufficient number of credible candidates, PAP will be fortunate if it gets away with just a decimation of its position. But its luck may not hold in the general election after that. Singaporeans can be patient.

A Moral Turpitude of Singapore's Great Helmsman

2010-01-25T06:07:00.000-08:00

It is certain that MM Lee Kuan Yew does not find it flattering to be compared with China's Great HelmsmanMao Zedong in greatness. It will be a boost to his ego.

A little injustice, maybe not daily, is in the repertoire of the Minister Mentor and does not cause him any compunction. What is a small injustice to a public officer when the then- prime minister showed no qualms about the prolonged detention of Dr. Lim Hock Siew (19 years) and Chia Thye Poh (32 years). This is as good as any time to revisit the injustices that this public officer suffered at the hand of the Minister Mentor who is now facing an unprecedented crunch to his popularity and career.There is a sonorous call by a discerning public for him to step down as Minister Mentor as he is no longer considered a deserving or appropriate imposition on the taxpayers' fund with his astronomical salary of more than $3 million a year doing nothing but "forecasting".

The American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is an omnipresent intelligence organisation with its tentacles reaching almost every nook and corner of the earth, not even sparing China. Wayback in 1961 when Singapore was in the turbulent era in the South East Asian region facing ferocious communist agitation, CIA was very desirous to recruit a Special Branch (SB) officer to act as an undercover agent to supply it with with security information on communist threats to Singapore and the region including information of the inner workings of the government.

The identity of the SB officer the CIA intended to recruit cannot be disclosed at this stage because of some arcane twisted working of the then-prime minister's mind, he had refused to identify the officer publicly, apparently for fear that this officer would steal the thunder from him. But it may be to his dismay that this is already public knowledge. Only MM Lee thinks that it is not.

The Special Branch officer was approached by his boyhood buddy to work as an undercover agent for the CIA in 1961. The SB officer sat on it for three days without reporting it to his superior because he was unhappy with the PAP government's oppressive policy against civil servants who were generally English-educated who had not supported the PAP when it was in the opposition. Amongst the PAP's persecutions was the docking of civil servants' pay. I told my superior Mr. Richard Corridon this when I finally reported the CIA approach to him. This was where the injustice arose. The then- prime minister Lee Kuan Yew twisted the officer's reason grotesquely to convey a doubt on the officer's loyalty and integrity. This is what MM Lee said in his memoirs: "The officer found the CIA's offer so attractive that he sat on it for three days before reporting to Richard Corridon". Mr. Corridon unfortunately is no longer in this world and therefore cannot testify to Lee Kuan Yew's dishonesty.It was a glaring insult tothe officer's integrity and it did not seem to bother MM Lee's conscience.

This was not the first time MM Lee had disparaged this officer. The other occasion was when he told an untruth about this officer at the Select Committee Hearing of the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill on 9 October 1986 that this officer had been asked to quit as Director CPIB in connection with the investigations of four detectives by the CPIB following an official complaint by the then-solicitor-general Mr. Francis Seow. The officer was accused of helping out his friend Mr. Francis Seow and had the four detectives sacked. The accusation was a figment of MM Lee's imagination. The officer was able to proof that he had been appointed Director ISD following his stint in CPIB. These were two glaring examples of the recklessless of MM Lee Kuan Yew who had little regard for the truth. Much less was there any apology from a callous MM Lee.

The CIA saga has been mentioned in MM Lee's memoirs. Two CIA polygraph experts brought in specially from Saigon to put the officer through a lie-detector test had been detained. So was a third CIA officer. An undercover first secretary of the American Consulate was declared a persona non grata. A polygraph had been recovered and this is now displayed in the ISD Heritage Centre. The CIA fiasco had sent a shock wave right up to the White House in Washington. The US President then was Mr. John Kennedy. The SB officer was awarded a Meritorous Service Medal and given an accelerated promotion. But the SB officer was not publicly identified though no one after reading this article will have any doubt as to his identity.

The SB officer's embargoed reminiscences contain more vivid accounts of the SB operations in the CIA saga. Well, whether the then-prime minister Lee Kuan Yew had used this incident as a leverage in his dealings with the Americans is left to the imagination of the public whether he would have let such a golden opportunity to slip by.

Is MM Lee Kuan Yew adding value to Singapore?

2010-01-24T06:07:00.000-08:00

Education Minister Ng Eng Hen can hardly be classified as a PAP heavyweight and so his political views on MM Lee Kuan Yew should be taken with a certain amount of circumspection. He is probably overawed by the intimidating reputation of MM Lee. Which lightweight minister is not? MM Lee is after all the father of the prime minister Lee Hsien Loong and is probably the power behind the throne.

So when Dr. Ng Eng Hen was popped the question as to why MM Lee was not stepping down by Mr. Dennis Tan, a workplace safety and health trainer and member of the National University of Singapore Society (NUSS) at a dialogue following Dr. Ng's speech to members of the NUSS and NUS alumni and staff on Friday night (22-1-10), to his credit he appeared not flustered and was able to give a dipolmatic answer. Dr. Ng replied: "The question is, does MM add value to Singapore? I'm not talking about in history, I'm talking about now. That's the question that should be asked, not whether he should retire or not. Singaporeans must decide. MM spots pitfalls, he tells you what to avoid. He pushed for F1, for the IRs. So you decide. At the end of the day, it's the vote. If his constituents at Tanjong Pagar feel he's not adding value, they are free to vote."

Very diplomatic except that this is the stock answer any minister, or for the matter the prime minister himelf, will give any inquisitive or well-meaning individuals who have the well-being of the political future of Singapore at heart. The PAP leadership has anticipated that the stepping down of MM Lee will be a hot topic, especially among the young electorate who wonder why this old scrooge is still drawing a whopping salary of over $3 million a year doing nothing but "forecasting". So all the ministers are primed to give the stock reply, maybe varying in style in giving it in some cases so as not to give the impression of regimentation.

There are very widespread dissensions among the public, PAP supporters notwithstanding, that MM Lee should be removed from his Minister Mentor's post. If the PAP leadership is still ignorant about this, it shows that their feedback unit is malfunctioning or their ground is feeding them only information that the leadership wants to hear. Whether MM Lee is adding value to Singapore is a moot point but he himself confesses that he does nothing but "forecasting". Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong may find himself in an untenable position if he acts alone to remove MM Lee. who is after all his father. But it will be different if the ministers show some backbone and initiate action which would absolve the prime minister from the onerous responsibility of having to do the task himself and incur the infamy of being unfilial.

Does the PAP leadership sincerely believe that leaving the constituents at Tanjong Pagar to decide is the right course to resolve this matter. There are so many imponderables, one of which, very crucial, is whether the opposition is able to put up a team of credible candidates to face M M Lee's slate of candidates. Another is MM Lee is in a GRC and it will be impracticable to expect electors to vote against MM Lee without affecting his fellow-candidates. He still has his admirers among the electors, who are either blind to or condone his kinks. The million-dollar question is: Is the PAP leadership heeding the call of the public and sincere in wanting to resolve the problem of the removal of MM Lee ? The ball is in the PAP court.

Is this a premonition of the PAP waning stars?

2010-01-20T06:05:00.000-08:00

The news this morning in the Straits Times of a husband- and- wife team who have joined the opposition Reform Party should come as a welcoming and exhilarating tidings to the young Singapore electorate who will determine the fate of the highfalutin PAP. What made it so significant is that both husband and wife were government scholarship holders who graduated with first-class honours degrees from the world- renowned Cambridge University in England. The reason why they have not gravitated towards the PAP could be the same cogent reason for a hopefully high number of similarly intellectually endowed young men and women to join the opposition. And it will be a good omen for Singapore.

That the PAP hegemonists, especially the narcissistic Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, will be losing much sleep over this historical political development may not be an exaggeration. From their recent political posturing, it is obvious that they are fearing the day when their precarious position will succumb to a relentless onslaught by young invinvible Singaporeans who are bent in sweeping away the vestiges of an increasingly unpopular PAP regime. And the PAP wallahs are not standing idle and are strenously preparing the political ground to prevent such a disastrous phenomenon from happening. So one sees them relaxing some draconian rules and restrictions and offering sops to the electorate, especially the younger ones, in order to retain their loyalty. They are leaving no stones unturned in trying to woo young professionals to join their rank.

The tsunami that hit the Barisan National in Malaysia in the last general election could not have been lost on the PAP leaders. In fact, they were so distraught by it that they sheepishly sent their old war horse Minister Mentor Lee, ostensibly on a fraternal visit, to Malaysia to try to assess the real reason for the phenomenal transformation of the political allegiance of the Malaysian electorate, especially the young politically-conscious Malays. What the astute Minister Mentor saw could not have not convinced him that a similar tsunami could take place in Singapore, if not in the next general election, then in the one after that.

Minister Mentor is not unknown to have run down the opposition as inept and in no way qualified to form an alternative government. He is clearly too conceited in his blustering views. How can he say that the opposition could not govern efficiently if, in the first place, it has not been given an opportunity to administer a government? The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Is Minister Mentor Lee not too presumptuous? Let Ms Hazel Poa and her husband Tony Tan Lay Thiam be the trail-blazers in leading an unrelenting influx of similary qualified young professionals to opposition parties to give the arrogant PAP a run for its money in the next general election. If history is allowed to manifest itself, PAP's mandate should have concluded its course and the Singapore people should be blessed with a rejuvenated but untried government formed by the opposition to begin an era of beneficial government to the people. The first heroic act of the new government will be expected to be the reduction of the obscene salaries the prime minister and his affluent ministers are now paying themselves unabashedly.

The True Colour of a Disingenuous Romanian Government

2010-01-06T08:16:00.000-08:00

Events of the hit-and-run accident involving the Romanian charge-d'affaires Dr. Silviu Ionescu have now taken a dramatic turn with the latest Romanian Government's intractable stand on the whole affair. My earlier hopeful concept in my posting of 5-1-10 of a sagacious Romanian Government taking a humanitarian stand in this affair is now shown to be misplaced.

In a stunning twist, the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has now declared that Dr. Ionescu has been recalled to Romania and will not return to Singapore. This honourable gentleman disappeared suddenly three days after the hit-and-run accident and turned up in Romania. It has all the drama of a science fiction that it suddenly occurred to the Romanian MFA to declare Dr. Ionescu's recall to Romania, more than two weeks after his return to his home country. In fact, he had stated that that he would be returning to Singapore later this month. That this is clearly a ploy of the Romanian government not to allow Dr. Ionescu to assist in the police investigations which would in all likelihood turn out to be detrimental to him. The Romanian MFA is talking tongue-in-cheek if it professes to ensure that justice is done in this case. Even the condolences the Romanian Embassy gives to Ms. Yenny Young, wife of the deceased victim Tong Kok Wai, call for scrutiny considering that the condolences were not accompanied with an offer of compensation.

Like a comic opera, the Romanian MFA now says that it is conducting its own investigations into the hit-and-run accident and will forward results of its investigations to the country's Public Prosecutor. It is incredible how a reputable country can indulge in such childish pranks. How does it propose to investigate when the accident occurred in Singapore and all the relevant witnesses are here. Is the Romanian government trying to hoodwink the world it can genuinely investigate the accident which in all honesty it can only do by remote method.

The Singapore police have an unenviable reputation of being competent in their criminal investigations. They have carried out comprehensive investigations into this hit-and-run accident and have almost completed them except for the questioning of Dr. Ionescu which is crucial to the whole case. Dr. Ionescu has to account for his implication in the whole case and this now seems impossible with the latest intractable stand of the Romanian MFA in not allowing Dr. Ionescu to return to Singapore. And any lifting of the immunity of Dr. Ionescu will be out of the question.

Whther the Romanian Government by its intractable attitude is showing an ugly aspect of its feature may be too early to say. There is a remote possibility that it may relent, but how remote is that possibility is a million-dollar question.

The Disoriented Romanian Diplomat

2010-01-05T06:13:00.000-08:00

Diplomats are people with plenty of time on their hand and, if they do not have their families with them, are likely to explore the exotic sphere of amorous liaison. Our fun-loving Romanian diplomat Dr. Silviu Ionescu could not have been above this mould.

There is a Chinese saying: When one's stomach is full and warm one's thought is on sexual desire (bao nuan si yin yu). Dr. Ionescu is no angel and that he was with an Asian female companion in the early hours of December 15 could not have raised any eyebrow. He had earlier been to a karaoke lounge in Peace Centre and could have tippled whether to what extent is now difficult to ascertain. So willy-nilly he has to be given the benefit of the doubt that he was not inebriated.

After dropping his female companion off he apparently was heading home when he ploughed into first two pedestrians and later another one. He was driving a black Audi A6 with a diplomatic licence plate. That he claimed that he was not the driver at the time is a moot point and taxes the imagination when there is overwhelming evidence of public-spirited witnesses. There is the evidence of the taxi-driver whose cab he hailed at Sungei Kadut to take him back to River Valley Road. The fact that he disappeared suddenly three days after the hit-and-run accident and returned to Romania ostensibly for medical treatment does not add to his credibility. He promised that he would return to Singapore later this month to assist in the police investigation but it is prudent to wait and see.

Of the three victims of the hit-and-run accident, one had since succumbed to his injuries on Christmas day. The other two are luckier but are still under medical care. Whether the victims, especially the deceased's family, will get any compensation is a big question mark. The Romanian government cannot escape its moral responsibility here.

As long as Dr. Ionescu is outside the jurisdiction of Singapore, police investigations of the hit-and-run accident are likely to be handicapped. The facts are glaring and it is incumbent upon the Romanian government to direct Dr. Ionescu to return to Singapore to assist in the police investigations in the interest of justice and fair-play. The Romanian government will endear itself to Singaporeans, if not to the world, if it lifts the immunity of Dr. Ionescu to allow him to be prosecuted and face the penalty if there is concrete evidence to implicate him in the hit-and-run accident, in which a life has been lost.

Immunity is meant to protect diplomats from malicious persecutions by foreign governments and should not be abused. Where there is a clear case of fundamental injustice committed by a diplomat, the government of the diplomat concerned is judged whether its leaders show distinctive statemanship in their diplomacy of seeing to it that justice is done. So far, Romania is of high repute in the eyes of the world and it would not be worth its while to allow this little unfortunate incident to mar its reputation.

Another Booboo of the Minister Mentor

2009-12-26T09:14:00.000-08:00

Due to his highfalutin character, the eminent Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew can never refrain from making booboo in his bombastic utterances, usually made at the wrong time for the wrong reason. His latest gaffe is his deleterious comments in the National Geographic magazine in which he portrayed Singaporeans as less hard-driving and hard-striving so that it became necessary for the Singapore government to bring in Chinese immigrants as a counter-measure.

His gratuitous comments happen to grate on the raw nerves of Singapore netizens, besides innumerable other citizen, who, one and all, do not mince their words in their condemnation of the ungracious MM Lee. The essence of their anger centres around the fact that for MM Lee, who draws a whopping salary of over three million dollars a year, jets around the world at taxpayers' expense and does nothing but in his own words "forecasting", to portray Singaporeans in such despicable terms is stretching their patience to the limit.

This is not the first time that MM Lee has made a gaffe nor will it be the last to the government's embarassment. The problem is that he has too much time on his hand and, apart from "forecasting", he does not know what to do with his leisure. So he thinks hard to find a topic that he thinks will amuse his international audience and at the same time please his Singapore electorate. But experience has shown that he is not the consummate entertainer who does not falter in his clowning.

The indiscriminate influx of Chinese immigrants is a sore point not only among the discerning Chinese Singaporeans but more so among the Malay and Indian Singaporeans. There is an overtone of racisim involved in this connection as Malays and Indians are naturally alarmed by this overwhelming influx of yellow intruders. They do not appear to enhance the quality of life here except to make up for the deficiency of the Chinese demography and to provide cheap labour. They are so ubiquitous that there is hardly any service job that is not monopolised by a Chinese national.

Is this policy of encouraging the indiscrimiate influx of Chinese immigrants a rational one to rectify the demographic deficiency? Are we getting the right type of Chinese immigrants who can enhance the elitist quality of the population? There appears to be a need for the re-examination of the government's immigration policy to ensure a more equitable influx of quality immigrants, not only of Chinese nationals but of other nationalities as well.

That the Straits Times did not carry MM Lee's callous remarks is not surprising.

The Sobering View of an Ex-ISD Officer

2009-12-10T06:13:00.000-08:00

Those who are sobering readers of the political book Men In White cannot help but form an impression that the tome is a glorification of the narcissistic Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew. It is small wonder that some people and portals describe it as a propaganda book. It depicts Lee Kuan Yew to be a one-man crusader in his fight against the might of his so-called pro-communist foes. The authors fail to highlight Lee Kuan Yew's more ignominous persona.

On the other hand the book Fajar Generation by an aggrieved group of former detainees connected with the old Malaya University Socialist Club is an antithesis and contains an incisive indictment of what they imply as the iniquities of a treacherous and inhuman Lee Kuan Yew. The authors, especially Dr. Poh Soo Kai and Tan Jing Quee. had apparently visited the British Archives in the United Kingdom and quoted extensively relevant extracts from the Archives to expose the so-called treachery and perfidy of Lee Kuan Yew in complicity with the British to push through the Malaysia plan. The book Fajar Generation is published in West Malaysia and surprisingly is available in some book stores in Singapore.

To debunk the subtle assertion in Men in White that Lee Kuan Yew had been able through his own industry to build up a mass base for his political ambition by simply agreeing to serve as legal adviser to pro-communist trade unions and other communist front organisations (CUF), it is obvious the authors are over-simplifying the issue. It was a well-known fact that Lim Chin Siong, the former general secretary of the powerful Singapore Factory & Shop Workers Union was the undisputed leader of the communist united front and controlled the mass base. Lee Kuan Yew could not have been unaware of this fact and knew that he had to depend on Lim Chin Siong and his mass base to advance his political ambition.

To give an example of the massive influence of Lim Chin Siong over his CUF members, the CUF used to hold anti-colonial mass meetings at the old Happy World Stadium which were invariably packed to capacity. It was an unforgettable experience to behold that Lim Chin Siong was given a standing ovation when he entered the stadium. Lee Kuan Yew would usually be tagging along holding his briefcase and this phenomenon could not have escaped the sharp attention of Lee Kuan Yew. He had no doubt kept this at the back of his mind for reference in his dealing with Lim Chin Siong in future. Lee was of the conviction that as long as Lim was a free man, Lim would be a great obstacle to his ambitious plan of capturing political power. So along came an unsuspecting benefector in the person of Chief Minister Lim Yew Hock who did Lee a great favour by detaining Lim Chin Siong and his fellow activists thus allowing the ambitious Lee Kuan Yew to inherit Lim Chin Siong's mass base to advance his political ambition. The word gratitude is not to be found in Lee's lexicon. In fact, it would have been a great joke if Lim's detention had caused him any grief.

Flash in the Pan

2009-11-13T06:05:00.000-08:00

Flash in the pan. It is common knowledge who was the smart-alec Singapore political leader who said these infamous words in describing Mr. Barack Obama before he was elected American President. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew appeared to be disdainful about the prospects of a black American candidate becoming an American President and true to his highfalutin character he irresistably opened his big mouth to make his disparaging portrayal of Mr. Barack Obama. Any possible repercussion arising out of his cavalier utterance could not have been further from his mind. He was apparently rooting for the white candidate Mr. John McCain and was no different from the white American supremacists who considered the election of a black American President to be apocalyptic.

As a result, the victory of Mr. Barack Obama in the American presidential election could not but bring mortification to MM Lee. That President Obama was subsequently awarded the Nobel Peace Prize within a year of taking office added to MM Lee's consternation. This was not the first time he opened his big mouth which brought embarrassment to the point of disaster. But all is not lost because MM Lee has a thick-skinned quality and can change like a chameleon. He calculated that he had to come to terms with the untenable problem sooner or later. The opportunity presented itself when he went to America to receive an award presented by the US-Asean Business Council end of October. He managed to wrangle a meeting with President Barack Obama the day after the award dinner.

That President Obama was magnanimous enough to condescend to see MM Lee warts and all could not have escaped his narrow outlook of black people. He was naturally astounded and overwhelmed when President Obama described him as "one of the legendary figures of Asia". President Obama was very liberal with his accolade to people who had been disparaging in their behaviour towards him. And MM Lee may be forgiven if he had been mesmerised by the thought that President Obama had been incredibly forgiving. This must have been so exhilarating to him that he forgot himself and made his gaffe by calling on President Obama to engage in Asia in order to counter-balance the emerging economic and military might of China. This immediately evoked a colossal uproar from the Chinese people, especially their netizens, which looked like it was going to be prolonged. But Chinese leaders very judiciously mitigated the situation, not necessarily out of any consideration for MM Lee but more likely for the overall political interests.

Can the leopard change its spots? Can MM Lee be counted on to curb his tendency of making political gaffes in future? We may see a subsidence of indiscretions on his part for a time but there is no guarantee that there will not be a recrudescence of his gaffes. This is a problem which deserves a final solution by the PAP leadership. After all, he is drawing a whopping salary for doing a nominal job.

The Booboo of Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew

2009-11-04T06:04:00.000-08:00

Never in the recent history of China has there been such national wrath evoked against a foreign political leader such as the current campaign against our eminent Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew for his sinophobic call to the American President Barack Obama to engage in Asia in order to counter-balance the overwhelming emergence of China's economic and military powers. This was one time the highfalutin MM Lee opened his big mouth and invited disaster, which in a way will have repercussion on Singapore.

The Chinese are a people who will not easily forget a favour or a treachery. It looks like this anti-MM Lee movement in China, especially among its netizens, is not going away for a long time. The Singapore Chinese are described as having abandoned their ancestry (shu dian wang zong) and Singapore is depicted as opportunistic. The way the campaign is carried out in China is reminiscent of the early days in Singapore when a French-educated Chinese journalist branded as "er mao zi (literally a two-haired brat - a totally derogatory reference to a westernised Chinese devoid of Chinese culture) a certain political leader. This is the theme the Chinese netizens are plugging which is an uncanny co-incidence as the audacious Chinese journalist has long departed from this world.

MM Lee is not unknown to be constantly ingratiating himself with Chinese leaders and made frequent visits to China in order to pay his obeisance. But now the Chinese felt that they have been stabbed in the back by none other than a sinophile who has all along professed undying affection for the Chinese people. At the same time this chameleonic leader hightailed all the way to America to hobnob with its president and give his earth-shattering advice to the latter to contain China. Were the Chinese wrong in describing Singapore as opportunistic?

We will now come back to some sense of reality. Do Singapore taxpayers really believe that the annual remuneration of three million dollars MM Lee receives is a fair charge on them? To all intents and purposes the office of Minister Mentor appears to be a sinecure. What he does is to jet around to spout his whimsical ideas upon gullible audiences around the world, that not surprisingly included such discerning world leaders like President Barack Obama. And occasionally he made a booboo out of it. We think he has a more than prodigious nest egg to see him through a luxurious lifestyle until the coffin is closed and we have the verdict.

A lesson in humility at the feet of the Chinese Premier

2009-10-17T22:28:00.000-07:00

There are people who are born with humility and there are people who acquire humility as they progress in life and become matured. Humility comes as a second nature to the modest Prime Minister of China Wen Jiabao . His latest display of humility was centered around a small mistake concerning rocks. Many people would not have noticed it, but Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao felt the need to publicly apologise for it .
His public apology was given prominent publicity in our local Chinese paper Lianhe Zao Bao on 14th October 2009. The Straits Times picked it up and published it on 17th October. Premier Wen was on a visit to a middle school to celebrate Teacher's Day and mixed up his rock types in his talk with the students in an informal meeting. He immediately apologised in a letter to Xinhua News Agency the next day and the news disseminated by Xinhua captured the hearts and respect of the Chinese people. Premier Wen is affectionately known as the People's Prime Minister in China.
This is where our eminent Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew can take a leaf out of Premier Wen's book on humility. Singapore has no comparison with China in size, population and world renown. When the late David Marshall, when he was Singapore's Chief Minister, could sit at the feet of his political idol, the late Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, to imbibe political wisdom from him, there is no reason why MM Lee could not benefit by sitting at the feet of Chinese Premier Wen to learn humility from him. MM Lee will certainly endear himself to sceptical Sinagaporeans by becoming a more modest and caring person.
So far it is known humiliy is not his forte. He has never been known to apologisae for his mistakes. Two glaring examples in the past can be cited to show such a character flaw in him. The first occasion was when he made a scurrilous attack on my reputation at the Select Committee Hearings on the Legal Profession Act (Amendment Bill) on 9th October 1988. He knew it was an unfounded vicious attack but made no attempt at correction or apology. He could have been sued for libel but for obvious reasons it would have been an exercise in futility with heavy financial loss to me, especially when he was then the Prime Minister.
The second occasion was on 30th September 1998 when a lengthy poignant letter by Ms Tan Siok Choo, daughter of the late Tun Tan Siew Sin, former Malaysian Finance Minister, was published by the Straits Times in which she refuted, by remarkable patient reasoning, the disparaging remarks made by MM Lee against her late father in his memoirs. In particular she was able to rebut cogently the allegation that her late father had harboured covetous ambitions of becoming Malaysia's Deputy Prime Minister.
The most decent thing, in the mind of right thinking Singaporeans, was for MM Lee to make a sincere apology for the damage and anguish he had cost Ms Tan by his disparaging remarks about her late father. But then his courage deserted him and he resorted to getting his press secretary to give a reply, a rather feeble one, which was neither here nor there and contained no apology.
MM Lee has quoted the Chinese proverb "When the coffin is closed you will have the verdict."
Future historians will find his lack of humility a factor which they cannot ignore and MM Lee may find his quotation prophetic.

All's Well That Ends Well

2009-10-16T08:50:00.000-07:00

My blog posting "An Unconscionable Injustice" has generated considerable interest, very much more than I had expected, on the injustice done to my reputation in the political book "Men in White". The matter has now been amicably settled with the authors publishing a note of correction and apology in the Straits Times on 16-10-09 which I find it difficult not to accept gracefully as a vindication of my reputation. I must specially mention Mr. Richard Lim, one of the authors, as the person who worked earnestly and assiduously to find a solution to the problem that would be fair to me. I think I owe him a sense of gratitude for his altruistic spirit.

The manager of the blog "Temasek Review" has displayed exceptional camaraderie spirit in his dramatic presentation in support of my cause of seeking justice to vindicate my reputation. That he was doing all this out of an altruistic desire of righteousness was very much in evident. His blog has a very wide readership, both local and foreign, and the favourable comments which came from his readers were overwhelming. They could not have been without any impact on the people higher up.

I must offer my apologies for not being able to thank each and every one of the readers of his and my blogs who contributed striking comments and thank them sincerely for their exemplary show of support, which I will always remember.

I have indicated to Mr. Richard Lim that I will treat this matter as closed and so it will be.

Last but not least, I must not forget to express my gratitude to my former colleague and buddy Teoh Kah Chay for drawing my attention to the libellous references about me in the book "Men in White"; otherwise I would still be none the wiser for it.

An Unconscionable Injustice

2009-10-09T07:29:00.000-07:00

Occasionally, there can happen to an unsuspecting person an underbelly attack on his reputation from not entirely unexpected quarter.

Quite frankly, I am baffled by the motive of the ebullient authors of the overhyped political book "Men in White" in giving me unflattering mention in it. Whilst it is purported to give an objective history of the PAP struggle I wonder what have I got to do with the intra-party struggle. Anyway, in page 441 of the book the ambitious authors made the following unverified disparaging statement about me under the sub heading "Another Foreign Hand" : "But in 1971, after a police raid on his (Francis Seow's) woman friend's apartment, he used his influence and friendship with the then director of the Corrupt Practices Investigations Bureau, Yoong Siew Wah, to have the four officers who had conducted the raid sacked. The attorney-general Tan Boon Teik intervened to reinstate the four officers. Seow was allowed to resign rather than have his actions investigated because of his track record in the Legal Service. Yoong was also asked to quit."

On 28-9-09 I wrote to the Chief Executive Officer of the Singapore Press Holdings drawing his attention to this disparaging statement about me and requesting that a correction be made in his newspaper. I explained that the CPIB was duty-bound to investigate all formal complaints. Mr. Francis Seow made a formal complaint and CPIB carried out investigations of the four detectives. The investigation papers were sent to the Deputy Commissioner of Police who made the decision to dismiss the detectives. There was a prima facie case against the detectives. There was no question that I was asked to quit. I was appointed Director of Internal Security Department following my CPIB stint.

My letter was passed to Mr. Richard Lim, one of the three authors of the book. Mr. Lim replied on 1 October that the material for the disparaging statement was taken from a speech made by the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew at the Select Committee Hearing of the Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill which was published in the Straits Times on 10 October 1986 of which a copy was attached.

It did not come as a surprise to me as the then PM Lee Kuan Yew was like a god to some people and the accuracy of his denigration of a person's reputation was invariably taken at its face value. That he made the disparaging statement about me in the heat of the moment without regard to its accuracy in his heated exchange with a cool-headed eloquent Francis Seow at the Select Committee Hearing could not be ruled out. He is not unknown to have behaved erratically with venom in his speech when highly agitated. He was obviously so infuriated by Mr. Francis Seow's biting taunts that it escaped his normally lucid mind that I was not boarded out but appointed Director ISD after my CPIB stint. It was subsequently pointed out to him but humility is not his forte and he has not been known as one to apologise for his mistakes. Mr. Richard Lim, one of the authors, has assured me that he would add a line after the sentence that I was also asked to quit to indicate that I was actually appointed Director ISD after my CPIB stint in his next and future editions of the book in order to be fair to me.

It was reported that the then attorney-general Mr. Tan Boon Teik intervened to have the four detectives reinstated. Very gallant of him. He must have read the CPIB file on the investigations and could not have missed that the dismissal of the four detectives was made by the Deputy Commissioner of Police. How the then PM Lee Kuan Yew was given the impression that I had the four detectives unlawfully dismissed is something I would like to get to the bottom of.

Mr. Francis Seow was the solicitor-general at the time when I was director CPIB. He had overall supervision of CPIB investigation files sent to his department for final direction. That I should have had a cordial relation with Mr. Francis Seow was natural in human relationship development. For the then PM Lee Kuan Yew or for that matter the attorney-general Mr. Tan Booin Teik to give a sinister connotation to such a relationship seemed to raise doubt as to the soundness of the detractors' mind. Why should the affinity between Mr. Francis Seow and me be seen as something unwholesome?

The most decent thing for the Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew to do now is to undo the harm he has caused me and to restore my reputation. But will he?

Hanky-panky in Hourly-rate Hotels

2009-09-15T23:09:00.000-07:00

The question and answer session in Parliament day before yesterday (14-9-09) on the need to pre-empt so-called illegal activities in hourly-rate hotels provided much amusement in that Senior Minister of State S. Iswaran seemed to be baffled himself in describing as "illegal activities" the government was trying to prevent in these hotels.

It is common knowledge that these hourly-rate hotels are popular and convenient tryst venues for foreign maids and their foreign paramours as well as for local illicit lovers. These hotels serve their purpose from economical point of view in addition to minimising their chances of being discovered. This aspect of the hotel business is quite brisk and brings in not an insubstantial amount of revenue to the hotels.

So where are these foreign and local lovebirds going to for their trysts if this avenue is denied them? Where there is a will there is always a way. Is this hanky-panky of such a magnitude that you need a sledge-hammer to curb it? This is a problem that is common in all the big cities of the world and they seem to be able to take it in their stride. Is Singapore trying to portray itself as a city of saints? Even saints go for an occasional amorous pursuit. There are also examples of Catholic paedophilic priests. Perhaps the Senior Minister of State may care to clarify what "illegal activities" exactly he has in mind.

Are there other nefarious activities that the Senior Minister of State thinks need curbing in these hourly-rate hotels and for the installtion of cctv to identify the perpetrators. Since when did these so-called illegal activities become a problem attributable to the hourly-rate system?

Singaporeans are a pragmatic people and to them hanky-panky is at worst a moral issue hardly deemed illegal. So they are curious to know what "illegal activities" are carried out in these hourly-rate hotels which cannot be carried out more safely elsewhere. Just like in the Temasek saga concerning the sudden departure of its CEO-designate, the government can elect to remain uncommunicative in the present case which would, not surprisingly, show its apathy to public opinion. The attitude is it is for your own good to know only what the government wants you to know. As the late American President Abraham Lincoln once said: You can bluff some of the people some of the time. The Chinese say that the eyes of the people are "ice-clear" and can see through any deviousness. There is also the Chinese saying: You do what is required of you.

A Manifestation of Realism

2009-09-03T07:00:00.000-07:00

Will there come a time in the future when a credible oppostion takes over power in Singapore? The honourable Minister Mentor has always pooh-pooh this possibility. During a dialogue session at the fifth anniversary dinner of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy last night, he was jolted back to reality by the renowned author Ms Catherine Lim (whom he feigned not to recognise at first) who posed him the question: "In the event of a serious threat of a freak election, would you do the unthinkable, that is, send in the army?" His answer, as given in the Chinese press, was (perhaps not with tongue-in-cheek)" if we lost the electors' mandate, we will respect the election result and hand over the political power."

The almighty MM Lee was on this occasion more down-to-earth and was now more worried rather than sceptical that a credible opposition could come in maybe not in the next general election, but after. He gave a few scenarios including one where they were not able to find a team which can equal an opposition team or if they become corrupt, inefficient and cannot deliver.

What is it that has caused this fundamental mental transformation in the normally dogmatic Minister Mentor? The world is in a perpetual change and Singapore is part of this world. (The Book of Change: i jing). The epoch-making political events in our neighbouring country cannot be without influence on our young voters and this phenomenon cannot escape the astute mind of MM Lee and PAP leaders. The recent so-called fraternal visit by MM Lee to Malaysia could not have been strictly for social intercourse as such. Not so much the worry of the Malay Supremacy posture of UMNO activists spilling into Singapore but of more concern to MM Lee and his PAP colleagues are the robust opposition politics which could have a catalytic effect on the young voters of Singapore.

Is MM Lee of the certainty of mind that Singapore's young voters are satisfied with the status quo? His diffident exposition of the Singapore political landscape of the future at the anniversay dinner dialogue does not convey the confidence. He could have been having this gnawing feeling of political uneasiness for some time and is not something he suddenly becomes awakened to. So it is a irrevocable fact that the young voters, even more mature ones, are looking for more dynamism in an equalitarian policy that reaches out to all strata of our society. They are not totally disillusioned with the present PAP leadership, not by any stretch of imagination, but it is human nature just to want to see some political change. The wheel of history moves relentlessly on. This is the reason a daunting MM Lee cast a pall of sombreness on the destiny of the PAP. The change may not happen in the lifetime of the more senior citizens but, as sure as the sun rises in the east, it is going to happen in the near or distant future.

The Debilitating Side-effect of the Speak Mandarin Campaign

2009-08-31T00:36:00.000-07:00

It may be showing irreverence to portray the honourable Minister Mentor in the category of a chameleon. His metamorphosis from a Sinophobe to a Sinophile is remarkable by any standards. Perhaps the saying that there is no permanent friend or enemy in politics is apposite in his case.

China, post- Mao Tse-tung, was an emerging as an economic juggernaut under the dynamic leadership of Deng Xiaoping and the whole world was gravitating to jump on the bandwagen. MM Lee, who was then Singapore's Prime Minister, was astute enough not to miss the boat and overnight became a Sinophile. He had unabashedly extolled the virtues of the People's Republic of China and its dynamic charismatic leaders, especially Deng Xiaoping.

MM Lee (or PM Lee) was so besotted by the charisma and charms of the celebrated Communist Chinese leaders that it could have possibly germinated the idea of a Speak Mandarin Campaign in his mind. And so was born the Speak Mandarin Campaign, probably much to the delight of Communist China. It was supposed to appeal to Chinese Singaporeans, especially those who were not bi-lingual. With MM Lee's exhortations, it took Singapore by storm and Chinese Singaporeans, even some enthusiastic non-Chinese, were blithely, and maybe proudly, rattling off in Mandarin. This is a feather in MM Lee's cap and is so far-reaching that Mandarin is spoken in all Government offices dealing with the public and in hospitals. But how this campaign with its chauvinistic overtone is viewed by non-Chinese Singaporeans is a moot point.

Perhaps this saying is appropriate here: Can you have the cake and eat it? While the Speak Mandarin Campaign is a success, the standard of English has suffered as a result. It has reached a stage where MM Lee exhorts Singaporeans, especially the youths, to speak grammatically correct or proper English. The Singapore youths speak atrocious English but are otherwise Singlish-savvy. This trend is worrying and, if allowed to continue, will have an adverse effect on the international reputation of Singapore as a country with a very high standard of English. So MM Lee has now come up with a Speak English Campaign. But the Minister Mentor will face an uphill task as the youths are too deeply entrenched in their Singlish habits to pay any heed to MM Lee's appeal. Could this aspect of the language problem have been neglected all these years because of too much emphasis on the Speak Mandarin Campaign. There is a appropriate Chinese saying:"It is not too late to repair the pen after the sheep have escaped", which is meant to indicate that it is not too late to remedy the situation whatever it takes.

Proficiency in Mandarin may stand a person in good stead in his business dealings in China and maybe Taiwan. But English is the language that is pivotal in business and social intercourse with the world, especially the West and USA. Can one imagine any of our future leaders speaking Singlish here and overseas but MM Lee would probably not be around to see it.

No racial inequality in Utopian Singapore?

2009-08-29T21:25:00.000-07:00

One of the easiest ways to make his hackles rise is to heckle the benign Minister Mentor about racial inequality in Singapore. He is either myopic or a dreamer who believes in a utopian Singapore where racial inequality exists only in one's imagination. Sooner or later he is going to be roused forcefully from his idealistic dreams by the stark realities of the problem.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong narrated in his National Day Rally on 16 August a classic example of a near Sino-Malay incident which was timely prevented from happening through the alertness and quick action of community centre officers. A Malay family had successfully obtained an HDB void deck for a wedding and was appalled to find it occupied by a Chinese family for a funeral rite. As it turned out, the Malay family showed exemplary communal spirit and understanding by agreeing to move the wedding to another site, thus preventing an ugly racial incident. Knowing the Chinese idiosyncracy where funeral rites are concerned, the Chinese family could not have given way. On the other hand the Malay family could have insisted on racial equality and held their ground.

Perhaps MM Lee would have been more enlightened about his utopian dream by the following snippet by a Chinese reporter of the Lianhe Zaobao published on 29 August. Apparently, this woman reporter specialised in collecting conversational titbits in her rounds of community centres. Here is an interesting account of her scoop: "As a majority race we Chinese do not always comprehend how our speeches and behaviours or national policy will influence our other racial compatriots. Because of this we should diligently listen. For example, my recent attendance at a dialogue has allowed me to hear for the first time that in actual fact our Malay compatriots when renting HDB void decks for wedding are rquired to state clearly in the signed form their agreement to withdraw if there are people (meaning Chinese) wanting the place for funeral rites". Can the enlightened Minister Mentor really believe that this is racial equality? If this is true, there is an urgent necessity for the government to rectify this racial inequality before it deteriorates into an untenable situation.

Another area of racial inequality perceived is the apparent unrestricted influx of foreign workers from China, especially in the service sector. Can one imagine Indian clients being served by Chinese waiters in Indian restaurants? This is because Indian restaurateurs find it impossible to overcome official red tapes when they apply for service workers from India. Apparently no such red tapes exist for the entry of service workers from China. So, as an expediency, some Indian rstaurateurs resort to the engagement of Chinese service workers to fill their waiter vacancies. Conversely, can one imagine Chinese clients being served by Indian waiters in a Chinese restaurant? Is this not ridiculous? So are the Indian restaurateurs receiving fair treatment and is this MM Lee's definition of racial equality? It is not surprising that rumblings of racism can sometimes be heard.

So the great Minister Mentor should exercise more circumspection before he ventures to declaim that there is no racial inequality in Singapore.

How Sophistic Can Temasek Be?

2009-08-28T23:49:00.000-07:00

"You can bluff some of the people some of the time". This famous saying was made by the late renowned American President Abraham Lincoln in the 19th century and it is still axiomatic in the 21st century Singapore.

Temasek, or rather Ms Ho Ching, hid behind a sophistic phrase "unresolved strategic differences" to make the bombshell announcement of the sudden departure of the CEO-designate Mr. Charles Goodyear. Since the enigmatic announcement there have been massive clamours from the disillusioned public for Temasek or Ms Ho Ching to enlighten them on the real reason for Mr. Goodyear's departure. Ms Ho Ching cannot be so naive as to expect the discerning public to be so easily taken in by such sophistry.

Temasek spent two years since 2007 wooing Mr. Charles Goodyear who was interviewed by board members individually and as a group. Are we asked to believe that the board members, individually and as a group, showed such ineptitude that they could not detect any prospective "strategic differences" or any similar flaw in the prospective CEO? This is what the public would like to be enlightened on. Indeed, there is a plethora of requests for such enlightenment from netizens which Temasek could not have been so ignorant as to be unaware of. Maybe their most expedient attitude is to ignore such clamours in the hope that they will blow over in course of time.

Are these really "unresoved strategic differences" as such between Ms Ho Ching and Mr. Charles Goodyear? When did Ms Ho Ching discover these differences to be so fundamental that they cannot be resolved? Or could it not boil down to the fact that it gradually became dawn on Ms Ho Ching that Mr. Goodyear was not a malleable character much to her chagrin. In short, Mr. Goodyear was found to be a maverick. Worst still, he appeared to all intents and purposes to be going to throw a spanner in the works when he assumes complete control of Temasek. No doubt this discovery had appalled Ms Ho Ching and the Temasek Board and, amidst the frantic scrambling for a face-saving solution, a drastic action had to be taken which necessitated the giving of a golden hand-shake to a disconcerted Mr. Goodyear. This was where politics came into play. To preserve a semblance of goodwill on both sides, the parting was euphemistically described as mutual and the phrase "unresolved strategic differences" was coined to give the comic opera a veneer of respectability. The truth of the matter will eventually appear on the grapevine but may take some time.

In the meantime Ms Ho Ching will continue to reign as Temasek queen which public talks have predicted as her ambition. The disenchanted public will be watching with bated breath to see if there will be any further disastrous financial losses under her diffident stewardship, her recent so-called honour as the world's fifth most powerful woman notwithstanding.

Were they highfalutin ideas?

2009-08-20T00:26:00.000-07:00

The poor Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Viswa Sadavisan did not really expect the massive fury of none other than the benign Minister Mentor (MM) to land on him. For him it was no doubt a signal honour to be appointed an NMP and, brimming with the ebullience of a people's crusader, he made what he thought a maiden speech in Parliament befitting his altruistic aspiration. Let's examine what he said that brought the wrath of MM upon him.

There was nothing wrong, indeed it was patriotic of Mr. Sadavisan, to quote the National Pledge to remind the government to adhere to its principles in its management of the affairs of the State based on racial equality enshrined in the National Pledge. It was a fair proposition and there was nothing highfalutin about it except in the person's imagination.

MM Lee may have been moving on a higher political plane in recent times jetting to the West and China to exude his charismatic charms on his guillible audiences so much so that he is detached from the political reality of a section of the people, especially the non-chinese. If he is not like the ostrich burying its head in the sand he should not miss the rumblings, faintly perceptible because of a climate of fear, of racial inequality among a section of the non-Chinese. In fact it took an intrepid patriot like Mr. Sadavisan to draw attention to such a phenomenon, knowing that it would not be viewed with any kindness. One can live in a fool's paradise and, one fine day, finds the ugly reality explode in his face.

As an elder statesman MM Lee thinks that it is in incumbent upon him to entertain the rakyat from time to time, whenever he feels the occasion for it, with his so-called inspirational speeches. He delights in giving such evangelical speeches as it gives him the satisfaction of assuming himself to be a messiah. So it is in his innate character that he would use such bombastic words as "bring the house back to earth" in his highfalutin speech in Parliament. It would not come as a surprise if House Members, who have been so used to his snide remarks, have taken this in good spirit.

Of course his memoires could only be a glorification of his exploits and do not reflect a verdict of his so-called statesmanship. He has used the Chinese proverb:"When the coffin is closed, you will have the verdict" to explain that he would leave it to future historians to judge him. To judge him now may be a bit premature and unflattering.

SMRT

2009-08-12T07:42:00.000-07:00

Could it not be more appropriately called the Singapore Mass Rapid Travesty? SMRT is supposed to move big numbers of commuters who travel in the train efficiently, but seems to lack courtesy in some of its front-line staff dealing with commuters. Quite glaring was the overwhelming manhandling manner of its operating staff in its recent campaign against eating and drinking offenders in trains and stations. To use an analogy, it was not unlike using a sledge-hammer to whack a fly. It was obvious that the offending commuters were quite intimidated by such peremptory approach. The whole operation could have been done with more finesse which would have left a better taste in the mouth of the public.

The discourteous behaviour of the SMRT front-line staff has remained unchanged since a heart-rending incident involving an elderly female Malay commuter three years ago. Her name was Madam Dalmah, 63, who had severe diabetes with frequent giddiness and prone to fainting spells. Her doctor had advised her to always have some sweets with her to be taken when she experienced such fainting spell. This was because her blood sugar level was low.

She had one such fainting spell as she was commuting in the train on this occasion. Fortunately, she was accompanied by her son Mr. Azli Talip, 35, who promptly popped a lozenge into his mother's mouth. She recovered from her fainting but the whole incident was watched by two SMRT officers. Instead of showing compassion for the old woman's plight, they really showed their fangs. One of them rudely questioned the son whether he knew it was an offence to eat on the train. He refused to accept the son's explanation of his mother's medical condition.This smart alec asserted that an offence was an offence and warned Madam Dalmah not to be caught eating on the train again. Of course the son was livid but he quite wisely avoided creating a scene.

The callous attitude of the SMRT officer, which should take the cake for callousness, has given such a harrowing experience to Madam Dalmah that she now shuns travelling on the SMRT. The train service must not only be concerned with only the mass movement of commuters efficiently for which it was established but it owes a duty to the commuting public to see that its staff, especially its front-line staff, do not forget courtesy to the public along the way, especially compassion to those who are indisposed like Madam Dalmah. The recent campaign against eating and drinking offenders does not give the impression that SMRT has changed for the better in its fron-line staff's attitude since the discreditable incident three years ago.

Sermon on the Mount

2009-07-29T09:03:00.000-07:00

There is a Chinese saying that if you do not open your big mouth, nobody will say you are dumb. Ms Ho Ching has finally opened her big mouth ostensibly on the Temasek debacle, but not quite. She started off with a red herring, quite rightly because of the public wrath, to divert Singaporeans from the real issue by offering so-called co-investors a stake in Temasek Holdings. Just like the slick operator she is, she either deliberately or absent-mindedly left out the details. And what are Singaporeans to make of this seemingly castle in the air?

This was an excellent opportunity for Ms Ho Ching to transcend her egregious persona and to show, even for a fleeting moment, the persona of an upfront Temasek CEO to explain the reason behind the abrupt departure of the CEO-designate Mr. Charles Goodyear instead of hiding behind the terse stereotyped "unresolved strategic differences". Instead of redeeming herself from disastrous track record of recent colossal losses of Temasek's assets, she glossed over the real issue to digress with the entertainment of bombastic salesmanship.

Can Ms Ho Ching blame Singaporeans for speculation when she is uncommunicative on the reason behind the sudden departure of Mr. Charles Goodyear? The public has a right to know and Ms Ho Ching has a moral responsibility to disclose. How long is she going to keep this charade under wrap is what the public wants to know. Like a closely-sealed hen egg which can hatch into a chick (a Chinese saying), whatever secret will eventually appear on the grapevine.

Whether this whole episode is a masquerade to allow Ms Ho Ching to perpetuate in her pet appointment as Temasek CEO is a moot point. One has only to listen to coffee shop talks to follow this trend of opinions. Be that as it may, Ms Ho Ching has now to shed her past inept persona and show more astuteness in making financial investments of Temasek. Her track record in this respect could hardly stand up to scrutiny.

Temasek may not be a government entity but is nevertheless a government-owned company.So any substantial financial losses in injudicious investments involve taxpayers' money and must be answerable to the public. But so far this has not been the norm and Temasek seems to be a law unto itself.

The Temasek Conundrum

2009-07-22T07:02:00.000-07:00

There is a Chinese saying: Human sympathy is as thin as the paper; world affairs are like playing chess where each game is new. The sudden departure of Mr. Charles Goodyear as CEO-designate may sound like a bombshell but is not actually unexpected. The antics of Temasek Holdings have ceased to intrigue right-thinking Singaporeans.

But Singaporeans will certainly be more interested to know more than just the terse reason of "unresolved strategic differences" given for the dramatic flip-flop. But we must accept that it is not uncommon for government-linked companies to hide behind stereotyped statements for any administrative or financial lapses.

There was considerable fanfare when it was announced by Temasek Holdings early this year the appointment of Mr. Charles Goodyear as the CEO-designate to take over fully from Ms Ho Ching on lst October. It has found this gem of a prospective CEO after continual search and approached him as early as 2007. It seems that Temasek had spent more than a year wooing Mr. Goodyear, who was interviewed by board members individually and as a group. If Temasek had gone through such elaborate and meticulous efforts to recruit this eminent personality, there was no reason to believe that it could not have foreseen any flaw in its recruitment plan which now has to be aborted. Having interviewed the candidate so thoroughly, it is quite unbelievable that is could not have detected any sign of intransigency in his character, which appears to be the root of the present fiasco.

Now there is the question of compensation as a farewell gift to the gracious Mr. Goodyear for his noble acquiescence to leave, thus saving Temasek from an intractable situation if he chooses to remain in his career. The compensation can run into millions of dollars but then this will be only a drop in the ocean in Temasek's coffers. It is known to have lost billions of dollars in the sales of its stakes in Bank of America and the British Barclays Bank without any compunction. The Chinese press reported that Mr. Goodyear decided to leave on his own accord in which case the question of compensation is a moot point.

Singaporeans were quite elated on learning the news early this year that Ms Ho Ching was relinquishing her CEO post in Temasek to make way for Mr. Goodyear. Now will the news that she is going to helm Temasek indefinitely following the leadership transition fiasco have a welcoming or dampening effect on Singaporeans is going to be a million-dollar question. This will depend on whether she is astute enough not to merrily squander away Temasek's assets. Her track record in this respect has been disastrously unimpressive, losing billions of dollars of public money with impunity.

ASEAN's Pipe-dream

2009-07-04T10:07:00.000-07:00

Asean seems to be moving with its head in the clouds where Myanmar is concerned. Asean leaders are either naive to an unbelievable degree or they are so blinkered that they cannot see the wood for the trees. Myanmar military junta leader General Than Shwe has shown himself time and again to be an untrustworthy despot whose heinous oppressions of his country's democratic fighters, especially the iconic Ms Aung San Suu Kyi, are world renowned. And yet it defies human sanity for Asean founding members to invite, perhaps in their mind, a benign Myanmar to join their august organisation.

Whilst the whole democratic world was outraged and making vitriolic attacks on the despotic military junta of Myanmar for the trial of Ms Aung San Suu Kyi on a trumped-up charge, we were entertained to an incredible spectacle of a Singapore Senior Minister stating openly to the despotic General Than Shwe that it was Myanmar's domestic affair. The Senior Minister could have been in a state of euphoria when he said it probably because of the overwhelming receptions accorded him on his visit to a so-called utopia state. What signal his impetuous utterance had given to the democratic world is not hard to guess.

The latest antics of the despotic General Than Shwe in rejecting outright the request of the United Nations Secretary-General Mr. Ban Ki Moon to interview detained Aung San Suu Kyi should be a wake-up call to Asean. If the Singapore Senior Minister thinks that his ingratiating talk to the despotic General Than Shwe had softened his heinousness, the Singapore Minister had better think again. This is a typical example of a leopard never changing its spots.

So a world personage of no lesser prominence than a UN Secretary-General has now received a first-hand rebuff from what Asean considers to be its most promising star. Does not this egregious act of the Asean darling Than Shwe fly in the face of Asean leaders? Mr. Ban Ki Moon is chief of the United Nations and what kind of world reactions can Asean expect on his outrageous treatment by the leader of its over-cherished member.

Myanmar will be like an albatross round the neck of Asean if the latter is still under the illusion that it can democratise Myanmar with a well-intentioned but unworkable policy of constructive engagement. This can have a deleterious effect on the impeccable reputation of Asean in the long run, a reputation it has painfully built over the years.

Perhaps Asean leaders may take note of this Chinese idiom: Rein in your horse on the brink of the cliff.

Stark Awakening from a Nostalgic Dream

2009-06-22T07:05:00.005-07:00

The fanfare accorded to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew in his nostalgic journey to Malaysia was nothing short of the etiquette normally accorded to royalty and head of state or government, except in MM Lee's case there was no inspection of ceremonial guards. Whether it went to his head with an intoxicating effect is intriguing but the quizzical description by an adversarial Dr Mahathir Mohamad of a visit of "a little emperor of the little middle kingdom" is certainly not lost on the public.

The exceptional receptions MM Lee received must have intoxicated him to the extent that he could have believed himself to be some kind of messiah delivering his gospels to his believers. In such circumstances he could have been so msemerised by his own irresistable charms that he could be forgiven if he could not see the taboo or sensitive area to be avoided. And so, whether absent-mindedly or otherwise, he pursued relentlessly ad nauseam the sentitive question of the supply of sand to Singapore as a quid pro quo for Singapore's participation in the building of a third bridge to East Johor. MM Lee is an extremely experienced politician and he could not have been so abstruse as not to understand that the question of sand supply is considered as a sovereignty matter by the Malaysians and is taboo. The corollary is that now you have the UMNO Youth chief and a whole host of indignant UMNO leaders up in arms against the supply of sand to Singapore.

MM Lee's Malaysian visit has received not inconsiderable favourable press publicity both in Malaysia and in Singapore. What should have been a feather in his cap has now been marred by his avoidable indiscretion in making irrational utterances. In his hubristic way, MM Lee may think this is a matter he can take in his stride. But it could not have escaped his intelligence to know that this is going to have a serious implication for his son PM Lee Hsien Loong in his relationship with his Malaysian counterpart Datuk Seri Najib Razak. They have established an excellent relationship during PM Najib Razak's recent introductory visit to Singapore and now this faux pas by an ebullient MM Lee is going to put them in a dilemma. Especially for PM Najib Razak. How is he going to smoothen the wrath of his indignant UMNO leaders and followers?

There is a appropriate Chinese saying: Deficient in success but excess in failure.

A Journey of Nostalgia

2009-06-10T07:16:00.000-07:00

He had just returned from self-adulating trips to China and Britain and was flush with smugness and narcissism. It is quite natural the Minister Mentor is now thinking of exuding his irresistable charms on admiring luminaries across the causeway. It is not unlike in the Chinese parable a village boy made good who returns in brocade garb to his village to flaunt his glory before his village elders. But MM Lee Kuan Yew is decked out in a Chinese national garb probably to emphasize his Chineseness in a sea of Malay supremacy.

He is no doubt flattered by the very distinguished reception accorded to him by the gracious Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak and Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, whom he greeted as an "old friend from Johor". Their discussions are merely formal and are a regurgitation of issues gone over between the Malaysian PM and the Singapore PM during the former's introductory visit to Singapore recently.

There are two possible scenarios for the Minister Mentor's visit. The planned revision of Parliamentary consituencies ostensibly to accord more political space to the opposition expounded recently ny PM Lee Hsien Loong could not have not occupied MM Lee's astute mind. His proposed visits to the Pakatan Rakyat-governed states of Penang and Kelantan could not be for the simple objective of social intercourse. They would enable him to have a closer look at what makes the Pakatan Rakyat ticks and whether there is any danger of this remarkable phenomenon taking hold in Singapore in the near or distant future. A tete-a-tete with the dynamic Pakatan Rakyat chief Anwar Ibrahim, if this is on the cards, may provide the inquisitive MM Lee with the invaluable information he seeks.

Another scenario, which borders on the sceptical, is the exploration of a possible merger with the Chinese-dominated Penang. This is not too far-fetched as an idea but is politically untenable. So this is in all probability a non-starter, but is not without interest in Singapore and Penang. Both were former British Straits Settlements.

MM Lee Kuan Yew is probably giving a miss to a possible meeting with his long-time adversary Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad during this visit. Dr. Mahathir may be an unpredictable personality, but is not likely to hold any animosity towards MM Lee now. He may even have a few pleasantries with MM Lee if they meet. There is no permanent friend or foe in politics.

A Political Buffoonery

2009-06-09T09:41:00.000-07:00

Except for the bizarre phenomenon of Asean luminaries fallen over one another in ingratiating themselves to Myanmar, the pariah nation would have been isolated by the international community, especially the west, like a leper. And so would it not be like a comic opera for the sagacious Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong to make a fraternal visit to this despotic state at a time when the whole democratic world is appalled by its ruthless suppression of its citizenry, including the iconic Aung San Suu Kyi? Quite true, this visit is ostensibly at the invitation of Myanmar's Prime Minister, but the Senior Minister cannot be worth his salt if he is not ingenious enough to find a credible excuse to postpone the trip to a more propitious time. Of course he did not and would have considered it not to be in accord with his stature not to have accepted the invitation, to the dismay of Asean's western allies.

Myanmar rulers, on the other hand, are astute enough to capitalise on SM Goh's visit to enhance their discreditable reputation in the hope that the pariah nation could become more acceptable in the democratic world. So they hide their fangs and turn on their artificial charms on a gullible prominent guest including a diplomatic offensive in the form of a meeting with the egregious General Than Swee, chairman of the so-called State Peace and Development Council.

SM Goh is just human and to say that he is overwhelmed by his host's attention is not an overstatement. How else could one explain his gaffe in stating openly in TV news report that the trial of Aung San Suu Kyi is a domestic affair? When the whole democratic world is furiously attacking the despotic Myanmar regime for the persecution of Aung San Suu Kyi, it is entertained by a comic utterance that this is a domestic affair of the Myanmar government by a no lesser personality than an eminent Senior Minister of the Singapore government. Would it not be sending a wrong signal to the democratic world? Indirectly, would SM Goh not be echoing the warning of Myanmar's Deputy Minister of Defence at the recent Shangri-La Dialogue to the international community to keep their hands off the internal affairs of Myanmar?

Myanmar's military junta will be having the last laugh.

Another parting gift from the gracious Ms Ho Ching

2009-06-06T07:05:00.000-07:00

Singaporeans have hardly recovered from the shocking Temasek's colossal loss from its sale of Bank of America shares and are now presented with another no less shocking loss of between 500 million pounds sterling (S$1.2 billion) and 600 million pounds sterling in the sale of its stake in British banking giant Barclays. And a so-called Temasek's spokesman had the cheek to say that they "don't comment on unsourced reports." Such arrogance of Temasek's staff is a sad reflection of the superciliousness of its top management in dealing with the public and the chief executive officer is not without fault. It is amazing that such colonial-minded attitude still exists in Temasek.

Straits Times has performed a chivalrous service to the Singapore public by exposing this gross financial mismanagement by Temasek. By all indications, if not for the Straits Times exposure, Temasek will in all probability be keeping this colossal financial loss under wrap, hoping in this way to escape the wrath of the public. So much for the integrity and transparency of Temasek's honcho. Now that this financial mess is public knowledge, will the public let this pass without any uproar or will it take the Temasek's management to task for this gross financial mismanagement?

There were all kinds of speculations by financial analysts and fund managers on Temasek's sale of its Barclays stake at a colossal loss but not an iota of explanation from the so-called upfront Tamesak about its financial fiasco in Barclays. It has the impudence to suggest that news reports on this sensitive subject do not reflect Temasek's policy and that the public should independently ascertain the veracity of these reports before contemplating any action. Is this all the expanation that Temasek could give and is this its manifestation of transparency? A loss is a loss by whatever name and is a fact in this case arising out of Temasek's injudicious and ill-advised investment.

One thing is certain is that the ebullient Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam will, like a knight-errant, come to the rescue of the hubristic Temasek's management with his usual sophistry glossing over the flagrant financial loss and exaggerating the overall profits of Temasek. This is expected of him as a dutiful minister.

In this connection, Singapore can take a leaf out of the book of Japanese culture. The Japanese have such an excellent civil culture, which Singapore leaders try to emulate in certain aspects, that, in such a situation as the Temasek financial fiasco, the chairman or president of the corporation will publicly apologise to the public to seek their forgiveness. In serious cases, the honchos may even perform "hara kiri" (suicide by cutting open the abdomen) to atone for their mistakes. Can one imagine Ms Ho Ching apologising to the public or performing the hara kiri?

From the secretive way Temasek goes about its business, it would not be surprising if the latest financial fiasco may not be the final parting gift of the gracious Ms Ho Ching considering that October 1, the handover date, is still some time away.

Another parting gift from the gracious Ms Ho Ching

2009-06-04T18:15:00.000-07:00

This posting has been overtaken by subsequent events and
it is considered prudent to have it deleted. It is an uncomplimentary
commentary on the sale of Temasek's stake in Barclays.

My apologies.

The Apoplexy of ASEAN

2009-06-01T07:01:00.000-07:00

Since its formation in 1967 with five founding members, Asean has grown to its present formidable strength of ten countries. It had a modest beginning with the fledgling organisation striving very hard to gain the recognition and confidence of the international community, in particular the United States of America and the European countries and of course lately the titanic China. It is now enjoying an unprecedented renown in world diplomatic relations comparable to any similar western alliances like the European Union.

Whilst it was at the zenith of its development, Asean seemed to have lost its sense of direction by inviting the despotic Myanmar regime to join its rank, to the dismay of its western allies. Of course Myanmar was not alone in being invited to join Asean as there were four other South East Asian countries invited as well. It was unclear who was the smart Aleck whose brilliant thinking initiated this bizarre idea of including Myanmar in the organisation. It goes without saying that he was able to convince his gullible colleagues with his cockeyed argument of a policy of constructive engagement with Myanmar.

Assuming that a policy of constructive engagement was a noble cause in the beginning, subsequent truculent and undemocratic behaviour of the Myanmar military junta should have disabused any would-be diehard dreamers in Asean of the futility of such a policy. Asean is full of sound and fury but has little to show, apart from bombastic talks and vauntings, to bring Myanmar to its senses. In fact, what Asean should now take as a last straw in his patience is the outrageous outpouring of Myanmar's Deputy Minister of Defence at the august Shangri-La Dialogue warning the international community, including the eminent Asean members, to keep their hands off the so-called internal affairs of Myanmar including the trumped-up trial of Aung San Suu Kyi. Quite appalling, but not unexpected, not a single member of the Asean luminaries had the audacity of even uttering a squeak to chastise the egregious Myanmar general who had
flagrantly abused his position as a guest. It was left to the US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and British Minister for International Defence and Security Ann Taylor to press for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi and other political detainees.

Well, quo vadis Asean? The whole world is anxiously waiting for some deterrent action against the despotic Myanmar regime including its expulsion from Asean. Can Asean shake off its spineless image? While it is scrambling to restore its confidence, the Myanmar military junta will be cocking a snook at its Asean colleagues and the world.

The whimsical wisdom of MCYS Minister

2009-05-30T07:13:00.000-07:00

The STTA saga has taken an incredibly unremarkable twist in Parliamant yesterday. That the STTA president's conduct was considered important enough for the Minister of Community Development, Youth and Sports to bring up in Parliament showed the government's awareness of the immense public interest in this saga. What really came as a dampener was the Minister's incredible disclosure that neither the MCYS nor the National Sports Council was going to be involved or to intervene in solving the injustice. In other words, they are going to be just bystanders occupying the ringside seats to watch the slugfest between the STTA and ex-coach Liu Guodong. How heroic coming from a Minister and to add to his not unedifying utterance he quoted the analogy of a line call in a tennis match to exemplify the dispute which can only appear relevant to the gullible. Perhaps he has never heard of the well-known Chinese saying: To each his own virtue and wisdom.

The Minister cannot blame the public for any misunderstanding of the Minister's incomprehensible non-involvement stand as an endorsement of the questionable conduct of the STTA president Lee Bee Wah. She will certainly take heart from the Minister's encouraging words which will, not unexpectedly, embolden her to be more truculent in her dealing with ex-coach Liu. Is it in the interest of the government to encourage an impasse in the dispute and any subsequent tussle in a court of law. The wise Minister has no doubt been sufficiently briefed as to the possible implications to the government in a court battle. Quite apart from the possibility of not having a good reflection on the government, there is the question of who is going to foot the legal bill. Will it go down well with the public if taxpayers' money is used?

There is widespread call from the public for the removal of Ms Lee Bee Wah from the STTA presidency. In fact, according to the STraits Times, she was handed an online demand with 4,500 signatures for her resignation on Sunday 24-5-09. The government has often been vaunting that it heeds the voice of the people and this is a significant occasion for it to live up to its vaunt. One quite disturbing element that may influence any decision to remove Ms Lee Bee Wah is that according to market speculation she is considered a favourite of PM Lee Hsien Loong in his Ang Mo Kio GRC. Could this be the reason why the Minister is afraid to remove her? There is a appropriate Chinese saying: He who ties the bell is the person who can untie it.

It is amazing how the Minister can justify his astronomical pay by burying his head in the sand and hoping that the knotty problem will unravel itself. Is there a need to needle the Minister out of his inertia in order for him to show more spunk? Quite apart from Singapore public support, could the Minister be blissfully unaware that ex-coachLiu is getting strong support from his countrymen in China and that Singapore is getting a bad press there over ex-coach Liu's shabby treatment?

The Mas Selamat Kastari Conundrum

2009-05-27T08:30:00.000-07:00

If there is any piece of sensational news that could knock a Singaporean over with a feather, the incredible news that Mas Selamat Kastari is being detained in Malaysia for two years by the Malaysian authorities takes the cake.

Not only were the ordinary Singaporeans could not believe their ears, but the Singapore leaders and security agency seemed to have been kept in the dark until the very last minute. This is one coup by the Malaysians that the Singapore leaders and Singaporeans will be grateful for for a long time and is a reflection of the excellent relations we have with the Malaysians.

Of course Mas Selamat is a minor pawn and Singapore must look at the broader picture of international relationship. Home Affairs Ministry, not surprisingly, is faced with a near intractable situation and has no alternative but to issue a statement of appeasement to keep up with the hilarity. The Malaysians could have decided to detain Mas Selamat for two years in Malaysia long before the Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak paid his introductory visit to his Singapore counterpart earlier this month. Of course he was not talking with his tongue in his cheek when he touched on the repatriation of Mas Selamaat to Singapore because he is the Prime Minister of Malaysia who is expected to be above any suspicion of perfidy. But one cannot help seeing a picture of smugness in him when he made the startling announcement at the press conference today of Mas Selamat's two-year detention in Malaysia. It was to all intents and purposes a coup de grace by him.

Quo vadis Singapore? The Internal Security Department (ISD) will be hard-pressed trying to get the details of Mas Selamat's flight of freedom from the Whitley Road Detention Centre (WRTC), at least not for another two years and maybe longer. The only possible alternative is to get the benevolent service of the Malaysian Special Branch to condescend to get the details from Mas Selamat which may not be an ideal arrangement. Maybe the Malaysian SB may condescend to allow ISD officers to question Mas Selamat in Malaysia. How Mas Selamat managed to do a Houdini escape from WRDC is a subject that will engross an agog Singapore public. ISD has an obligation to fulfill this duty.

Will Mas Selamat be cocking s snook at Singapore? One has to get it from the horse's mouth. The Malaysians will be sniggering. Why Malaysia is doing the favour to Singapore of detaining Mas Selamat in Malaysia is for posterity to discover, unless one can get it from the Malaysians.