TR EMERITUS

The purpose of my contextual analysis was to present PM Goh in his own words. It was not to say whether the PM Goh administration was right or wrong. From 1990 to 2004, PM Goh publicly made it clear his aims and views. However people continued to see PM Goh as a transitional leader while blaming PM Lee for the problems they faced. The inability to understand the PM Goh administration had an effect on the PAP’s critics. They started to have a contradictory mindset. They became very angry after being aware of certain policies but did not want to think further after an initial emotional outburst. They kept hoping the problems were only around for a short while and future speedy recovery would solve them. Others speculated on the possible presence of hidden secret documents which allegedly showed how PM Lee plotted to make life difficult for existing locals.    The critics needed to realize their problems started from 1997 onwards, not from 2004 or since the General Election of 2006. Unless they reviewed their position, their dream of beneficial socio-economic and political change would come to nothing. Part 1 of 5. Year 2000. “First, whether we like it or not, every Singaporean is now competing against the rest of the world. Not just bankers and airline employees, but also nurses, retailers, and factory operators.  This is the reality of globalisation.” Interpretation: This clearly showed the PAP’s priorities. It was concerned about how Singapore could compete as a whole. The individual did not matter that much. “Third, as companies restructure or merge to improve their operations, we will see retrenchments.  Job vacancies are up, yet 7,800 workers were retrenched in the first half of this year.” Interpretation: After 2000, some jobless persons complained to the pro-PAP mainstream media they felt bewildered on remaining jobless despite a comprehensive job search. They were hoping the PAP would solve the unemployment problem. However to the PAP, employment supply-demand mismatch was just a fact of life. “Fourth, the income gap between the top and bottom will widen.  With both China and India opening up, the global supply of unskilled workers has increased. This will depress the wages of unskilled workers everywhere. On the other hand, around the world, demand for skilled people, especially top talent, exceeds supply.  Furthermore, such people are mobile, and can go wherever they are in greatest demand.  So incomes of those with skills and high ability will rise to global standards.” Interpretation: Since the PAP had predicted an increasing income gap, it could live with the higher Gini coefficient.  Its position on high salaries was that these people were much more talented than the others. Low income workers should not grumble about others earning more “The fiercer competition will drive us to excel. Our people, especially our young, are well educated in technology and IT.  Most Singaporeans will have the skills and training to do the jobs that are being created.  Most of us are on the right side of the knowledge and digital divide, and more can be if we make the effort.” Interpretation: According to the PAP, our well-educated young should welcome more competition as this would make them better persons. People who were unable to cope were those who did not make the effort “The key to Singapore’s continued growth is talent. …Singapore’s own talent pool is too small for all the thing’s we want to do. …We need to top it up with global talent. We must therefore also welcome foreign talent, and absorb them into our economy and society to strengthen the Singapore team.” Interpretation: Temasek Review’s favourite National Service-exempted Continental Indian-born Foreign Talent Mr Sinha Shekhar became a Singapore Citizen in 1994 at the age of 25. This was only 3 years after the 1991 General Election when the PAP’s slogan was “more good years”. As of 2000, Mr Sinha Shekhar had been a citizen for 6 years. To the PAP, Mr Sinha Shekhar and similar persons were welcomed into Singapore to create more good years.  “Immigration will help us to grow our population.  But if we continue to have too few babies, over time, the proportion of Singaporeans in our population will fall. The texture and character of our society will change.” Interpretation: PAP critics generally agreed that massive immigration had further discouraged local reproduction of babies. They also felt procreative measures were insufficient. The PAP refused to slow immigration down but did not want to see a different society.  As a result, the PAP kept exhorting locals to integrate with foreigners and even mobilized grassroots organizations to promote this. End of Part 1 Part 2 of 5. Year 2001. “Our basic safety nets are in place. We have ensured that every citizen can afford essential medical care, everyone has a roof over his head, and every child's education is looked after. If you face difficulties because of the economic slowdown, your MPs, Citizens' Consultative Committees and Community Development Councils will try to help you.” Interpretation: The important words were “try to help you”. The PAP did not guarantee anything. Basic medical care certainly did not include the rising costs of treating the old. For those who were upset with rising public housing flat prices, this could be solved if more family members lived together in the same unit. Essential education usually meant primary and secondary education up to age 16. After that, it was up to the grown-up child to figure out how to compete with foreigners.        “Meanwhile, I urge Singaporeans to prepare themselves for this difficult period, for example, by going for retraining and skills upgrading. This will improve your chances of finding a new job should you lose your present one, or getting a better job when the economy picks up.” Interpretation: This had given jobseekers the impression that the PAP had a very well-organized and effective job-matching and retraining programme. The PAP simply claimed more training might increase the chances of re-employment and nothing else.  As of 2010, many older workers above the age of 40 insisted the PAP had taken very good care of the people until they actually went through the PAP-directed job-search process. “Singaporeans who are having difficulty finding employment should take on jobs which they normally would not even consider. There are several hundred thousand foreign workers here on work permits. They are here because employers cannot find enough Singaporeans to fill these jobs. Those of us who are retrenched should consider these jobs. This will not only give us some income now, but will also impress our future employers that we are a practical and realistic people, not fussy workers who prefer to remain unemployed for long periods.” Interpretation: Reducing expectations did not necessarily increase the chances of re-employment. Some senior managers questioned the jobseeker even more. It was only from about 2009 onwards that these hirers began to show more empathy. The only reasons for this were that they had seen more of their peers being kicked out of office long before retirement age and that their grown up children became permanent professional jobseekers. “Workers need to learn new skills for the New Economy. Businesses should take a hard look at their operations and strategies, in anticipation of changes in their operating environment.” Interpretation: The idea of workers and businesses coming together sounded very nice. However, businesses had constantly complained of not being able to find suitable persons for all kinds of positions. A point to note was many of these businesses were actually Government-linked organizations who were being encouraged by the PAP to act global. As a result, whenever they were work-related problems, organizations were always inclined to solve them by replacing locals with foreigners. “The banking liberalisation has pushed the local banks to consider merging. I know that this is causing some anxiety.” Interpretation: At the time of the liberalization, there was no significant public education on the various consumer banking products. These reorganized banks started to market more insurance policies, unit trusts, structured deposits to customers who only knew about savings deposits and fixed deposits. The banks only started one (Money and Sense) after bad publicity emerged from customers who lost money from these products. Another major consumer loss occurred during the Lehman brothers structured product collapse in 2008.   End of Part 2 Part 3 of 5. Year 2002 “But because we had no foreign debts and our banks were well managed, we have recovered faster. We made 10% growth in the year 2000.” Interpretation: It was around 2000 that it became obvious that growth rates had little impact on income levels on the lower end. We must remake Singapore so that in the long-term, we can continue to: achieve growth of 4 to 6% annually; create jobs for the people; raise the income of Singaporeans; and keep the cost of living stable. Interpretation: Since growth rates from 2002 onwards had largely been far more than the 4-6%, the PAP was able to argue it had the right talent for the right positions. Since immigration continued to increase significantly at a time when growth rates remained high, the PAP wanted to bring in more immigrants. With reference to job creation for the people, underemployment was not mentioned. Therefore a former local senior manager who ended up as a low-wage part-time worker could also be considered gainfully employed. Under PAP rule, large numbers of foreigners became citizens and permanent residents. As a result they were quickly reclassified as local people. With such a measuring method, job losses from locals to foreigners were not shown When the higher-end people earned more, this would also mean overall income of Singaporeans would rise. Determining cost of living could also be subjective.  While people had been highlighting living costs since the General Election of 1991, the PAP countered this was due to rising expectations. Theoretically, living costs could be reduced significantly if people maintained an austere lifestyle. “There are many other jobs which older Singaporeans can also do. Factories find it difficult to recruit Singaporeans for such jobs, and need to rely on foreign workers. Employers report that local workers are reluctant to travel a little further, and to work shifts. Singaporeans should be more flexible and adaptable. It is better to be gainfully employed, than to remain unemployed for long periods in the hope of finding the perfect job, which may never come.” Interpretation: A repeat of the National Day message in 2001. As job problems mounted, more existing locals were considering emigration. 10 days after blaming job seekers for being choosy in this National Day message, PM Goh labelled aspiring emigrants as “quitters” at the National Day rally speech on 18 August 2002. On the travelling issue, employers preferred employees to stay near the workplace. This was in case of a need to stay back to complete tasks after the official working hours. In fact this need had become the norm. “Our present income levels and standard of living are already high” Interpretation: This was a polite way of telling people that certain population segments had the good life for too long. Therefore they should reduce expectations and earned lower income. High standard of living actually meant high cost of living. Therefore to the lower income, high standard of living had no real meaning. “And we must encourage an innovative and entrepreneurial spirit, so that more Singaporeans will start businesses and create opportunities for ourselves, even as we attract more MNCs to invest here.” Interpretation: The call for more local entrepreneurship had existed since the 1990s. At the same time, some local entrepreneurs saw the role of government-linked companies (GLCs) in all economic sectors having an unfair political advantage and an obstacle. Some jobseekers expected GLCs to hire more existing locals as they thought GLCs existed for national strategic reasons. However, since PM Goh took office in 1990, there was no “hire Singaporean first” policy in GLCs. With more MNCs hiring more foreigners, existing locals felt they were left out of any created opportunities. End of Part 3 Part 4 of 5. Year 2003 “We have suffered successive blows in the last six years. First, the Asian financial crisis. Then, the recession in 2001 and the Jemaah Islamiyah terror plot. And this year, SARS.” Interpretation: Anything bad was blamed on external factors. The PAP was never to blame. In 1999, not long after the Asian financial crisis of 1997, PAP legislator Dr Tan Cheng Bock suggested in Parliament that the government should think Singaporeans first. His suggestion was openly and strongly rejected by PM Goh. At this time the pro-PAP mainstream media mentioned a rise in religious piety. While it acknowledged socio-economic pressures had caused more people to seek religion for solace, the effects of government policies were not mentioned. Seeking religious guidance because of pressure instead of individual interest was a potential problem. This was because followers were less likely to question their leaders. Furthermore, Singapore did not have a culture of questioning religious doctrine. Religion was considered to be sensitive and beyond the normal discussion scope. Once any action was justified based on a religious interpretation, it was very difficult to rebut this argument. Leaders with a hidden political agenda could accumulate enormous financial and political power. “..we are up against strong competition from lower-cost countries. For the first time in its history, PSA had to lay off staff to bring down costs and prevent more shipping lines from crossing over to its rivals. It had to cut wages too. We also face the same challenge as developed economies like the US, which are seeing the migration of white-collar jobs to India, the Philippines and Thailand.” Interpretation: The PAP’s assertion was that due to cost competition, lower end workers only had 2 choices. Either they accept even lower pay or not being paid due to job emigration. The PAP also seemed to have found a solution to deal with the migration of white-collar jobs to India, the Philippines and Thailand. This was the bringing in of large numbers of people from these countries to take up white-collar jobs here. As a result, the PAP was able to maintain that foreigners were here to save jobs as these jobs were not moved out.  White-collar employees also had 2 choices. Either jobs moved out of Singapore or jobs remained but taken up by foreigners. “Singapore is secure, efficient and corruption-free. Singaporeans are well-educated, hardworking, and willing to learn new skills. We are also resourceful in overcoming problems.” Interpretation: Singapore had achieved much over the years. However, if Singapore was always so good, then naturally it should be able to attract the right talents to create beneficial growth for everyone. Since Singaporeans had so many virtues, then the foreign talent policy should be calibrated to a limited top-up. Instead for the past 20 years from 1990 to 2010, the PAP’s main priority was the achievement and retention of a critical mass in quantity terms. To meet this objective, government organizations and their allies had to bring in as many foreigners of various types in the shortest possible time “We will have jobs to go with growth, not jobless growth. We will not just cope; we will soar again.” Interpretation: There were jobs with growth. Large numbers of foreigners of various backgrounds took up the various jobs. Initially, locals were replaced by foreigners. Subsequently, foreigners who had left were replaced by more foreigners who had arrived later. Employers became so used to hiring foreigners that hiring and promoting locals became the unthinkable. Singapore did soar with economic growth largely exceeding the 4-6% growth over the period of 2000-2010. Individual benefit depended whether there was income growth. As of 2003, many people still assumed high growth rate would be good for them. Questioning the “growth first” strategy only came much later. End of Part 4 Part 5 of 5. Year 2004 As PM Goh stepped down in 2004, therefore this message also included a longer overview of the main events from 1990 to 2004. “The first seven years produced bountiful harvests.  We distributed the fruits, and helped lower-income Singaporeans.” Interpretation: The situation was reasonably tolerable between 1990 and 1997. Therefore, when problems came after 1997, people remained faithful to the PAP. They had confidence in the PAP’s earlier track record. From 1990 to 1997, the PAP was largely cautiously optimistic. After 1997, the PAP kept talking about recovery at the end of the year or the beginning of the following year. While people on the ground began to feel things had worsened, the PAP insisted things were improving. “The next seven became lean years.  First, Southeast Asia was struck by the Asian Financial crisis.  Then followed September 11, terrorism, SARS and economic recession.” Interpretation: As in the case of 2003 message, everything bad was attributed to external factors and people generally accepted this explanation. PM Goh remained popular at the time of the handover. “Singaporeans are not naturally drawn to politics… I was asked to stand for elections in 1976 by the late Mr Hon Sui Sen, who was then Finance Minister. .. By the time Mr Hon’s invitation came, I was the managing director of Neptune Orient Lines, leading a comfortable life away from public glare.” Interpretation: PM Goh represented the Singapore Dream of 4 Goods. This was to be a good student, scored the good grades, got a good job with a good salary. Born in 1941 to a lower-end household, his advancement started when he was educated at Raffles Institution. He later obtained a Bachelor of Arts degree from the Singapore University in 1964. His big break came when he joined the elite Public Administrative Service in the same year. The subsequent years were more good years for him. After becoming Prime Minister in 1990, he truly felt more vibrancy and value could be created by bringing in what he thought to be foreign talent. This massive immigration influx over the past 14 years from 1990 to 2004 destroyed the Singapore Dream for many young Singaporeans. “Hsien Loong has asked me to stay on in the Cabinet. I have agreed to do so.” Interpretation and Conclusion: The point of Cabinet retention was simple. PM Lee Hsien Loong emphasized continuity from PM Goh. The 2nd half of PM Goh’s administration from 1997 to 2004 was influential in shaping the characteristics of Singapore. The foreign talent policy was an important pillar of the PM Goh administration from 1990 to 2004. During this period, the PAP consistently resisted repeated calls to reduce the immigration flow. Even after stepping down, former PM Goh continued to use his cabinet position of Senior Minister to promote this policy. End of Part 5     Grey Hippo  Read More →

Beleaguered PAP National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan, who has come under fire for his failure to control sky-rocketing prices of HDB flats, now shiftsthe blame to Singaporeans again for the strong demand in public housing. The prices of HDB flats have ballooned in recent years due to a limited supply of flats in the face of growing demand caused partly by the relentless influx of foreigners into Singapore. Though the PAP regime announced its ambitious plan to increase Singapore’s population to 6.5 million people via immigration way back in 2005, the number of flats built between 2006 – 2008 is the lowest over the years. Only 3,183 flats were built in 2008 when Singapore accepted 20,000 new citizens and 90,000 PRs who were allowed to purchase resale flats in the open market by the PAP regime. [Source: HDB Financial Report 2008/2009] As there are insufficient new flats being built to meet the demands of both Singaporeans and the new citizens, many have to purchase flats in the resale market, thereby jacking up prices in the process. Below is a graph illustrating how the rise in the prices of resale flats coincides with the rise in the number of foreigners in Singapore between the years 2000 and 2008, courtesy of Kojakbt, the moderator of 3in1kopitiam: While Mr Mah has admitted he had been “caught off-guard” by the astronomical prices of HDB flats, he is adamant that they are affordable to Singaporeans and chided home-buyers for being “fussy” and having “unrealistic” expectations. Speaking in Parliament yesterday, Mr Mah accused of some Singaporeans buying HDB flats in anticipation of possible price increases in the future though they are not in need of housing and blamed them for contributing to the strong demand today without substantiating his claims. "I advise buyers to be financially prudent and remember that HDB flats are meant for their long-term occupation," he was quoted as saying in the Straits Times. Mr Mah should reveal the number of Singaporeans who own more than one HDB flat especially those who live in private properties and rent out their HDB flats for income, like YPAP leader and new citizen from India Sinha Shekhar before plucking nothing out of thin air and blame Singaporeans for their housing woes. Had Mr Mah built the 16,000 flats way back in 2006 - 2008 instead of next year, we will not be stuck in the current predicament.     Debunking official myths of HDB flats series: 1 Myth 1: Singaporeans are “owners” of their HDB flats 2. Myth 2: HDB flats are “affordable” to most Singaporeans 3. Myth 3: Rising prices of HDB flats “generate” wealth for Singaporeans   Related articles: >> Mah: 16,000 BTO flats next year >> Median COVs hit a record high >> $300,000 for four-room BTO flats in Punggol >> Mah Bow Tan: HDB flats are still affordable to first time flat buyers >> Why Mah Bow Tan’s policy of high HDB flats is wrong >> Letter to Mah Bow Tan on HDB policies >> Singaporean want govt to allay anxiety over HDB leasehold >> Mah Bow Tan embarrassed by Reform Party’s Hazel Poa >> Mah Bow Tan: “Unrealistic” expectations to blame for unhappiness about flats >> Taiwanese PR paid record $ 650,000 for 4-room resale flat >> Grace Fu: PRs are helpful to HDB flat owners selling their flats >> HDB launches “traveling exhibition” to trumpet its achievements in the heartlands >> PAP to upgrade 12,000 HDB households ahead of next election >> Mah Bow Tan: We do not want flat prices to go down >> Prices of resale flats to rise further as PR quota reached >> Taiwanese PR offers $50k COV for resale flat >> Mah Bow Tan: PRs have minimal impact on resale flat prices >> No empirical evidence to suggest that public housing is affordable in Singapore >> When will Singapore’s property bubble burst? >> Why HDB is unable to reveal break down costs of new flats now >> HDB to consider introducing rules to curb property speculation >> HDB blames Singaporeans for not selecting flats when given the chance >> Singaporeans worried about retirement after depleting CPF to pay for over-priced HDB flats >> Mah Bow Tan acknowledged that rising HDB flat prices has sparked “fresh concerns” >> PM Lee: Govt does not have control over prices of resale flats” >> COVs of resale flats shooting through the roof >> HDB resale price index hit record high in 2009 >> Singaporean wants PRs to live in rented flats instead of buying resale flats >> Singaporeans wants PRs to be banned from selling HDB flats at a profit >> Shanmugam: Singaporeans likely culprits for driving up HDB flat prices >> Mah Bow Tan: HDB flats remain affordable >> Means testing for PRs to buy resale flats >> Immigration and public housing: should the govt or people plan ahead? >> Grace Fu: hard to predict demand for housing >> Indonesian PR bought 4-room flat at $653,000 >> Mah Bow Tan asks home buyers to be realistic >> PAP MP blames young couples who cannot get a flat for not planning ahead >> Home affordability: HDB versus the public >> Demand vs supply: so many applicants, so few flats >> Number of applicants exceed number of flats >> HDB to increase supply of flats >> Mah: don’t compare with prices in the past >> ERA: 40 per cent of HDB flat buyers are PRs     Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.  Read More →

Since the eruption of the "DOG" food scandal, more and more Singapore volunteers have been stepping forward with horrid tales of the inhumane treatment they are being subjected to volunteering for the inaugural Youth Olympic Games (YOG). Many are students in secondary schools, ITEs, polytechnics and junior colleges and were coerced to volunteer for the YOG by their schools. One JC even threatened students with six hours of Corrective Work Order if they do not volunteer. [Get instant updates and discussions about the YOG on our Facebook page here] According to the feedback we receive, the students often had to work for long hours without proper meals or rest and some have to take cabs home after 1am as no transport is provided. One JC student told us that he was forced to serve as an usher at Jalan Besar stadium for one entire week from 4pm to 11pm daily and still has to attend school at 8am the next day. "I am dead tired every day I return home and fall to sleep immediately. Where got time to study. I am worried for my term tests in two weeks' time," he wrote in exasperation. Another polytechnic student volunteering at the Youth Olympic Village work from 1.30-10.30pm daily and apparently she is only entitled to one pathetic packed meal. "In addition, the volunteers were not even given chairs to take a rest because apparently one member of the organising committee commented that some other individuals were lazy and took all the chairs away. Imagine standing straight for 10 hours?" she exclaimed. These accounts were corroborated by a letter from an irate parent Lim Yoke Peng which was published in the Straits Times Forum on 14 August 22010: "I was appalled by the meals served to volunteers of the Youth Olympic Games ('Caterer acts after criticism of YOG food'; yesterday). My son, who is a junior college student, was enlisted as a volunteer. He had to train for weeks from 11am to 11pm and sacrificed weekends. So it is irresponsible of the organisers to neglect basic requirements like a proper meal or transport. After training, volunteers must find their way home. How would one expect to encourage pride in service?" Our students are already stressed up by the heavy school load. The PAP regime and MOE should not impose additional burden on them by forcing them to volunteer for the YOG which has nothing to do with their studies anyway. EDITORS’ NOTE: Has your life been turned upside down by the YOG? Please share your views with us. We assure you that your identity will be kept strictly CONFIDENTIAL. We will be your UNCENSORED VOICE. We will publish your letter in FULL with ZERO editing, moderating or censoring. You do not have to suffer in silence! You have the RIGHT to speak up as a citizen of this country. Remember: you are a CITIZEN of Singapore, not a SLAVE of the PAP regime. Our mailbox has been swarmed by letters from YOG volunteers for the last few days. Unless you specifically want us to publish your REAL NAME, we will use a pseudonym instead. Please understand that due to manpower constraints, we may not be able to publish your letters immediately and we will have to stagger them a few hours apart to ensure that they get maximum exposure. Please keep your feedback coming! Singapore for SINGAPOREANS! Your interests always come FIRST. Related articles: >> PM Lee caught napping at YOG opening ceremony? >> Disaster at YOG opening ceremony >> 8 reasons why I am disappointed with YOG opening ceremony >> Netizens lampooned YOG opening ceremony >> No news of YOG opening ceremony in rest of the world >> MOE teacher: How students can stay out of YOG >> YOG Webcast server crashed >> SFI promises to improve “DOG” food for volunteers >> Primary school students stand in the rain to welcome YOG torch >> Plight of Singapore volunteers at Youth Olympic Village >> JC students forced to attend YOG events >> Dr Vivian: Singaporeans are proud of YOG >> PM Lee: YOG has struck a “chord” with our people >> Dr Vivian: YOG venues will not become “white elephants” >> Online pressure forced SFI to provide better food for YOG volunteers >> Civil Service Club offering free YOG tickets >> Journey of YOG flame costs Singaporeans $7 million dollars >> Corny YOG propaganda in Straits Times >> Tharman: YOG enthusiasm is real >> Polytechnic student: I don’t care about YOG >> JC students being “volunteered” for YOG >> YOG: What the HELL is that? >> PAP provides YOG athletes and officials three daily buffets >> YOG students being given “dog food” >> Singapore students forced to volunteer for YOG >> Poor ticket sales forced closure of YOG gallery section >> PM Lee calls on Singaporeans to support YOG >> Young Singaporeans hurl vulgarities at YOG >> Dr Vivian wants Singaporeans to celebrate YOG >> NTU students complain about YOG >> Dr Vivian: Sports is not about “petty politics” >> More than 300 Singaporeans joined “I hate YOG” Facebook >> CNA poll: 90 percent of Singaporeans “not interested” in YOG >> Slovak YOG Ambassador slams YOG venues of “school standard” only >> Two Facebook groups calling for boycott of YOG >> Free condoms for YOG officials and athletes >> Singapore helping to repair Jamaica’s stadium in return for YOG marketing >> Former stripper to choreograph opening ceremony of YOG >> Desperate PAP wants Singaporeans to get “passionate” about YOG >> PAP to Singaporeans: Give way to YOG vehicles or get fined $130 >> PM Lee wants Singaporeans to do their part for YOG >> Only six teams in YOG soccer tournament 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 →