TR EMERITUS

YOG critic Mr Abdul Malik, who was turned into a celebrity overnight after his arrest by the Singapore police for "inciting violence and public disorder" has apologized to Dr Vivian Balakrishnan. Mr Malik had posted a comment on his Facebook taking Dr Vivian to task for the YOG mass food poisoning scandal on 15 August which caused 21 YOG volunteers to suffer from diarrhoea after taking food provided by the YOG caterer. Below is a snapshot of the original comment posted by Mr Malik who got him into trouble with the police: He was arrested at his workplace last by three plain-clothes police officers from Bedok Police Division whose Commander is DAC Teo Chun Ching and Head Investigator is DSP Goh Tat Boon. The controversial case made the international headlines, sparking a massive outcry among Singaporeans who were appalled at the inability of the police to differentiate between a metaphor and a genuine threat. In his email to Dr Vivian which was posted on his Facebook as well, Mr Malik apologized for causing discomfort to Dr Vivian and reiterate that he had never intended to threaten him: "If my words had caused you concerns for your personal safety, I wish to apologize for the discomfort I have caused you. In no way was this a threat or perceived threat meant to endanger your life. I have made that quite clear to the police, but I wish to state it to you formally as well to ensure I have made an effort to clarify matters with you. If nothing else, it is for the sake of ensuring I have a clear conscience." He ended his email by humbly requesting Dr Vivian to explain how the YOG budget was exceeded by more than three times: "At this point, I wish to formally address the issue of the YOG budget. I hope that you and your esteemed colleagues will be transparent in showing the account books for the scrutiny of every Singaporean. I trust that you wish to win the confidence of the population, and this is my suggestion to achieve that aim. The mood on the ground is that people are unhappy over the need for such a large increase in the YOG budget when the response was lukewarm at best." (Read the entire email here.) Dr Vivian claimed that he was not aware of Mr Malik's arrest till he read about it in the papers. According to Mr Malik, it was the Investigation Officer from Bedok Police Division who arrested him on his own accord. It is not known if he has received instructions from his Head Investigator DSP Goh Tat Boon or the Attorney-General Office to do so. Till today, the Singapore police still has not clarified the recent spates of arrests for comments posted on the internet to the public. Unlike in other democratic states, there is no Public Complaint Bureaus for police misconduct to check on the police in Singapore.   EDITORS’ NOTE The writer was arrested at his workplace on 24 August 2010 by three plain-clothes police officers from Bedok Police Division on the charge of “inciting violence and public disorder” under Section 267 Chapter 244 of the penal code. The Commander of Bedok Police Division is DAC Teo Chun Ching. Its Head Investigator is DSP Goh Tat Boon. His laptop was also seized. Mr Abdul Malik is an alumnus of Raffles Institution, the premier secondary school in Singapore which produced many national leaders including its first Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew.   Related articles: >> Dissenting is our right >> Abdul Malik: My thoughts on the YOG games >> Dr Vivian: I don’t care about arrest of YOG critic >> Arrest of YOG critic to squash dissent failed miserably >> Character assassination by Straits Times against YOG critic >> Netizens voice support for arrested YOG critic Abdul Malik >> Outcry among Singaporeans at arrest of YOG critic >> Singapore police put YOG on world map >> Did Dr Vivian lodge police report against YOG critic? >> YOG critic arrested by Singapore police >> Participant of “I hate YOG” Facebook arrested by police Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us  Read More →

The Reform Party was disappointed with the PM’s speech. This was an opportunity for the PM to address some of the pressing issues facing this country and his failure to do so has demonstrated once again that our government is out of touch with the people.  Here is the Party’s view on some of these issues and our proposed solutions. Economic performance The PM praised Singapore’s economic performance this year. However this has been built on the back of a vigorous US recovery, which is now fading fast. Singapore’s performance is just a leveraged version of what most of the other Asian economies have experienced. Given that imports subtracted 2.4% from US GDP growth in the last quarter it is clear that we are fast approaching the limits of what can be achieved by reliance on US demand. There are few signs that Asia has replaced the US as a source of final demand. So we can expect a dramatic slowdown in growth for the second half of this year and perhaps even a technical recession where growth is negative over two quarters. And let’s remember that while unemployment may have been contained, Singapore workers have suffered real wage cuts that are a long way from being restored. The wage guidelines for next year of a 3% pay rise would still be lower than expected inflation of 3-4%. In other words real wages will continue to fall. The Reform Party is of the view that our level of net saving is unnecessarily high and we would do more to stimulate domestic consumption by reducing taxes or increasing transfer payments to the less well-off. Foreign worker/Immigration policies Buried in the PM’s speech was the eye-opening detail that 400,000 Singaporeans (or about 20% of the domestic labor force) are receiving workfare of an average $1,000 each (most of which goes into CPF). This is the segment of the population which has suffered most from the PAP’s open-door foreign worker policy, yet there were no policy measures announced to help them. The PM relied on isolated anecdotes to downplay the level of anti- foreign worker sentiment that threatens to spill over into xenophobia. He provided no reassurances on immigration policy  and no evidence of how the PAP policies have benefited the ordinary Singaporean or older retrenched workers. The folksy stories of aunties do however concur with our experience that Singaporeans are not xenophobic by nature but have been pushed that way by PAP policy. The Reform Party supports the policy of allowing easy access to foreign workers with special skills, but we should ultimately be looking to provide Singaporeans with the skill sets to take their place over the longer term. We do not agree that this country needs foreign workers to compete directly with Singaporeans on all levels of the workforce. It is difficult to see how Microsoft’s need for skilled software engineers translates into the necessity of having foreign chambermaids or shop assistants. Nor indeed why any MNC (such as Microsoft) if it lacks skilled engineers should not reciprocate for the benefits of being based in Singapore, by running training courses to bring our local engineers up to the specification that they require. It is difficult to see why we should fight so hard to retain industries that employ 80-90% foreign workers as it just increases the competition for domestic inputs whose supply is inelastic, such as land. The Reform Party is pleased that the PM has responded to our call for the need to raise productivity. Unfortunately PAP policies such as the current excessively liberal foreign worker policy are antithetical to productivity growth  as they only serves  to keep cost of labour low. The government has yet to show any real commitment or clear cut long term strategy to increasing productivity. National Service The only concrete initiative was to reward NS men with a grant of $9,000. Few details were provided other than to say that it could be used to pay for further education (which the Reform Party would make free for NS men) and for housing (where sky-high prices are the result of deliberate government policy in restricting the supply of land and growing the population at an unsustainable rate). The Reform Party believes that $9,000 in a restricted account does not come close to reflecting the economic cost Singaporean NS men face with two years of lost earnings. Furthermore, the PM said that future education fees will have to rise, presumably to cover this additional expense. The Reform Party continues to propose, in this regard: Lower taxes for NS men Obligation on  foreign students on Singapore scholarships wishing to work here  to serve NS Cutting the NS period down to a year at maximum within 5 years A target for zero death in training Education On education, the Reform Party has repeatedly called for a reduction in the weighting given to PSLE in order to provide a more holistic education. We have also called for an abolishment of streaming at the early stages of education, between N levels and O levels as we want to offer opportunities for late bloomers who do poorly at PSLE to move up if they do well. The party is disappointed with the PM’s 30% target for enrollment and his excuses for not expanding further. Again the PAP demonstrate their inability to formulate any long term innovative strategy for increased enrollment in institution where learning is targeted at the skills required in the workforce. The Reform Party has also called for the need to increase the percentage of university enrolment up to advanced nation standards. The PM failed to touch on any measures that would ensure all of Singapore’s children receive an equal right to an education, including the physically challenged, those with learning difficulties, or other issues such as familial economic hardship. Conclusion It is interesting to see yet again how much Reform Party thinking is now reflected in Government policy but this begs the question of why we need a PAP government in the first place. In response, I reproduce below the Reform Party’s 19 policy pledges so the electorate can judge who has the welfare of ordinary Singaporeans at the heart of their policies. It is all very well to talk of the Singapore spirit but this is a government which continues to insist on running Singapore as a business and has downgraded Singapore from Sovereign Nation status to International city status. By Kenneth Jeyaretnam on votingrp.wordpress.com Read rest of article here.  Read More →

I read with amusment and contempt at the latest announcement of PM Lee’s decision to give $9000 to every male Singaporean who have completed his National Service liabilities as a distorted and twisted means of appeasing the local population in a feeble attempt to placate the locals and assuring them that Singaporeans’ interest are still “first” in the eyes of the PAP. Insincerity of the Monetary Compensation Perhaps the glaring and most obvious slap into the face of every male Singaporean is the fact that the $9000 monetary compensation for the 2.5 years that every male wastes in his National Service liability is that it comes in the form of CPF “money” and not cash. As much as the PAP would like us to think of our CPF money as our own money, the reality of the situation speaks otherwise. While there may be current seniors who were lucky enough to escape the recent spat of changes of ever more restrictive options of withdrawing CPF, a realistic analysis of the past behavior of PAP and their management of CPF will lead almost anyone under the age of 40 to conclude that he is probably unlikely to ever see his CPF retirement savings in his lifetime. With schemes like raising the Minimum Sum, raising the Retirement Age and most recently the reduced payout from CPF LIFE, as a mid-20s male citizen I am fairly confident that the only way that I will ever see my CPF money is when both my feet are in the coffin (an analogy that implies that the CPF money can only be withdrawn upon death or at a very old age). Thus, this token sum of $9000 CPF “money” that the PAP has offered is probably as useful as the “hell notes” that the Chinese burn as an offering to their ancestors. Quite simply, it is useless. Inadequacy of Monetary Offer Another slap into the face of every male Singaporean is the fact that TWO AND A HALF YEARS of the prime of our lives is only worth a pathetic $9000. In other words, the PAP has deemed that each male citizen is worth $3600/yr to $4500/yr (depending on whether you served 2.5 or 2.0 years of NS). In comparison, it makes every male citizen (in terms of monetary value) as valuable as the domestic maid you may have employed in your house. In fact, if one were to do a more accurate calculation and factor in the additional 10+ years of reservist liabilities, one will soon realize that (in terms of monetary value) maids have more value than male citizens in this country. Perhaps this was the point that PAP is trying to make – the lives of the male citizens in this country are less valuable than a maid, and probably approaching the value of a slave. How Much is a NSMan Really Worth? The following section attempts to calculate how much monetary compensation the PAP owes every male Singaporean. We shall use the most simple model to benchmark the lifetime earnings of a male Singaporean to that of a foreign “talent”. This models assumes the current age of 40 for the hypothetical person, 2 years of NS liability for the Singaporean, and 4 years of tertiary education for both the local and the foreigner, a starting salary of $30,000/yr, and an annual increment of 6.0%. With reference to the “Difference in Culumative Salary” column which denotes how much more a foreigner can earn in comparison to a local, the table below quite convincingly shows that a male citizen, age 40 as of this year should be entitled to claim around $150,000 based on the differential lifetime earning power when compared to a foreigner who has no such NS liability. In addition, to a first approximation, the table may be also used to derive the monetary entitlement for the compensation of National Service liability of any male from the age of 23 to 40 by looking up the respective value at the last column. When compared to the lowest value entitled for a 23 year old, which is $30,000, it does not take a genius to figure out that the $9000 monetary compensation from the PAP (even assuming it was paid out in cash) in a gross underestimate of how much the current government owes its male citizens.   Year Age Singaporean Foreign “Talent” Difference in Culmulative Salary Annual Salary Culmulative Salary Annual Salary Culmulative Salary 1989 19 National Service Liability Tertiary Education NA 1990 20 NA 1991 21 Tertiary Education NA 1992 22 NA 1993 23 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 1994 24 $31,800 $61,800 $61,800 1995 25 $30,000 $30,000 $33,708 $95,508 $65,508 1996 26 $31,800 $61,800 $35,730 $131,238 $69,438 1997 27 $33,708 $95,508 $37,874 $169,113 $73,605 1998 28 $35,730 $131,238 $40,147 $209,260 $78,021 1999 29 $37,874 $169,113 $42,556 $251,815 $82,702 2000 30 $40,147 $209,260 $45,109 $296,924 $87,664 2001 31 $42,556 $251,815 $47,815 $344,739 $92,924 2002 32 $45,109 $296,924 $50,684 $395,424 $98,500 2003 33 $47,815 $344,739 $53,725 $449,149 $104,410 2004 34 $50,684 $395,424 $56,949 $506,098 $110,674 2005 35 $53,725 $449,149 $60,366 $566,464 $117,315 2006 36 $56,949 $506,098 $63,988 $630,452 $124,354 2007 37 $60,366 $566,464 $67,827 $698,279 $131,815 2008 38 $63,988 $630,452 $71,897 $770,176 $139,724 2009 39 $67,827 $698,279 $76,211 $846,386 $148,107 2010 40 $71,897 $770,176 $80,783 $927,170 $156,994 Does the PAP really owe every NSMan up to $150,000? The numbers from the table above may be shocking, but mathematics does not lie. To a first approximation, the PAP owes every male citizen from age 23 to 40 a sum ranging from $30,000 to $150,000. However, perhaps the more disturbing fact is that the figure is an approximation and the real value is likely to be higher. In this short study, we have failed to consider factors such as the preferential employment of foreigners over the locals and the higher retrenchment, unemployment and underemployment rates of locals. Moreover, we have also failed to account for investment returns from one’s savings which generate a geometric return over time, and given that a foreigner has a 2 year headstart compared to a local, this difference will accumulate to a non-trivial sum by age 40. Thus, it is the author’s honest assessment that the assumption of both the local and foreigner having the same annual increment of 6.0% is most likely incorrect and not realistic. In reality, a local will experience a lower annual increment value (or perhaps even an annual “decrement” value due to retrenchment/underemployment) over his working lifetime. Nevertheless, the short study provided here does provide a decently accurate estimation of the lower limit figure of how much the PAP owes its male citizens.   Garrett Goh   * Garrett Goh is a recent graduate from the National University of Singapore. To a first approximation, he calculates that the PAP owes him $65,000 in compensation for the 2.5 years he wasted in National Slavery Service.  Read More →