TR EMERITUS

1. I don’t want to buy a house with a Cash-Over-Value of $100,000 2. I don’t want to be accused of being fussy if I don’t want to live on the first floor or basement bomb shelter, or ulu ulu places like Kusu Island 3. I don’t want keep hearing that flats are “affordable” when I really cannot afford flats. 4. I don’t want to see foreigners flood our condos, HDB estates, MRT trains, buses, schools, EVERYWHERE 5. I don’t want to know about how ministers are getting lots of landed and prime property both local and overseas when I have trouble getting a 3-room flat. 6. I don’t want ministers who get multi-million dollar salaries when I do odd jobs and some months I don’t make more than $2,000. Ministers in other countries may take bribes and embezzle. My ministers are smarter, they get more money claiming more MILLIONS in salary LEGALLY. 7. I don’t want to pay ERP just because foreigners’ cars are clogging my roads. Especially, when ERP do not solve congestion problems!!! We still have terrible traffic jams! 8. I don’t want to do NS and reservist to protect my country against foreign invaders when: (A) I don’t have a house to protect (B) I cannot afford to start a family to protect (C) I have to protect foreigners and their property with my life when they run away during war. (D) Foreigner PRs do not have to serve (E) I get paid worse than a Bangala worker. To think that National Service needed people donation’s in 1967, after a year, it gathered S$ 3 million from Singaporeans when we were all so poor. 9. I do not want to see PRs and New citizens flashing their blue and pink ICs on their national days. 10. I do not want to see the shamelessness of importing foreign athletes and claims that Singapore won when a foreigner won. Oh yes, we pay these foreigners millions of dollars so that Singapore can claim that it won. WOW! 11. I do not want to hear jeering against the SG local soccer teams from foreigner spectators when we play against other countries IN OUR OWN COUNTRY! 12. I don’t want to pay 7% more for everything I buy in my whole life when the government gives my $200 in “compensation” handouts! 13. I want to see a local student being the top student. Not some China kid. Not hearing from ours kids that there is no point to work hard as some foreigner is going to squeeze them down inevitably. 14. When there is public curiosity, I expect my government (especially Law minister) to be transparent enough let us know about Temasek and HDB cost to build a flat, etc. 15. I want my country to be known as a COUNTRY. My country is NOT just a city like some idiot claims. 16. I don’t want LHL’s son to be the next succeeding prime minister. 17. I don’t like how China suckered us in the Suzhou park initiative and we still have to kiss their assess. 18. I cannot understand why local siblings cannot buy flats when foreigner PR siblings can buy flats. 19. Singles are not allowed to buy flats before 35? Are singles supposed to be forced into marriage just because of this? By the time singles reach 35, the flat prices will be higher by $100,000 to $300,000. These singles worked very hard to scrimp and save only to see savings ERODED away by inflation! 20. I do not want to read the paper when it is pro-PAP and there is major censorship and selective publishing and late publishing for what cannot be hidden. 21. I don’t want my life-savings to be belittled as the salt on the “peanuts”. 22. I don’t like it when my country’s reserves lost tens of billions of dollars and the PM’s wife can still head Temasek! 23. I want important national assets key to our security like power stations to BELONG to our country, not sold to foreigners. 24. I like to add hum to my mee siam by the way. 25. I want a president who actually DOES more. Not one which who I seek shakes hands, seldom speaks, does not even pardon and spare a 19-year-old kid his life. Not a president who kids confuse with Mas Selamat (Many kids who know Mas Selamat do not EVEN know Nathan) 26. I don’t want to have my next national day parade at the silly riverside place….AGAIN! How long does it take to make a stadium? We are a country but we don’t even have a national stadium?? How about loaning Malaysia’s Merdeka Stadium for Singapore’s National day? 27. I want job security. A contract for 1 or 2 years, Then look for work again. The cycle repeats. We have to worry for our jobs and livelihoods on a daily basis. When we are over 40 years old, who want us anymore? I might as well join the army as sign on. But wait, that is contract TOO! 28. I don’t want the next generation to suffer like me in university. I had to work part-time to support my uni fees in NUS, while foreign students get free uni education thanks to MOE PLUS $500 allowance every month. After that, NUS still has the cheek to call me up and ask me to donate to NUS. Why they need money? They lost hundreds of millions of endowment in the financial crisis. I can still remember working and saving for 3 months before I could afford a 2nd hand laptop. 29. I want to protest in the streets to voice my discontent without being put to jail by the ISA act or made bankrupt. For goodness sake, I don’t even dare to accept Singtel’s offer of giving me free 6 months internet if I switch from Starhub to Singtel, because I am scared that my IP address and my name will be blacklisted by the government. (considering Singtel’s afflictions with the govt) 30. I want an opposition party in power. Any opposition is welcome. As educated and smart as my current and soon-to-be-ex ministers may be, I want people who CARE and LISTEN. Even if it is a guy who had graduated from kindergarten would be welcomed if he cares. 31. Elites who have been born with a silver spoon, who never had trouble finding a job, who never had money difficulties, who never went hungry, who breezed through NS, do NOT deserve my respect nor should they be in the government. We need people who UNDERSTAND what it is like at the pits and bottom! Not some shortie who claims to understand hardship with a childhood living in 3-room flat but marries an angmoh and lives in a landed mansion. 32. I want a better electoral system! I don’t want WALK-OVERs again. Some of the seniors did not even get to vote ONCE in their whole lives. How is that democracy? 33. I want fairness. Is it a coincidence that certain estates under certain members of our government are especially well-cared for with upgrading etc incentives? Is this fair? Are residents of areas under the opposition similarly cared for? I quote a resident from Potong Pasir “the lifts here are so old and I can’t climb the flight of stairs to reach my place anymore.” I supposed the 60 year old aunty would be forced to vote for PAP to get new lifts. 34. I want a limit to the number of years the PM can hold office, so that as bad and as lousy as the PM is, we can at least have a chance to start afresh. 35. I want small quotas/ratios legislated for foreigners. 36. I want foreigners to be restricted to less than 20% of our population instead of 36%. 37. MBT actually said that foreigner PRs were under-represented in HDB flats. Pah! No more than 2 flats in a block should be sold to PRs! Otherwise, how can the many old uncles and aunties have pocket money for retirement by renting out flats? 38. I want their CPF contribution percent to be much higher and that their CPF to be forfeited if they leave SG. 39. I want higher income taxes and property taxes for foreigners. 40. I want NS for foreigners. 41. Foreigners who bought HDB flats cannot be allowed to rent their flat out EVER! 42. I want the SGD to be moderated downwards! A higher SGD may benefit those who can afford to holiday overseas, those who are rich enough to send kids to overseas for studies, or PRs and foreigners when they remit money home. BUT overly high SGD deters investments into Singapore. 43. I want curbs on inflation. To that effect, we need to install restrictions on property speculation, raise reserve ratios in banks, and have more stringent criteria before loans are issued. AND OF COURSE, GST lower back to 3% 44. When foreign talent enters my country. I want these people to be REALLY foreign talent. I don’t want my country’s pink IC and PR to be handed out like toilet paper. 45. I want more heavily subsidized birth-delivery, child-care, pediatric health and education care to boost local numbers. If S.Korea can do it, why not us? The practice of replacement diminishing local numbers with foreigner number MUST STOP. 46. Instead of always saying Singapore does not have enough talent, will the government spend more money and effort in education and grooming the young? Every time they say that there is not enough of certain type of people, the government will import these people in masses and hordes. 47. I expect government-affiliated institutions to not indulge themselves with luxuries when other citizens have bread-butter problems: When NTUC income unilaterally announced major cuts in its bonus for insurance-policy-holders, the MAS allowed this to happen. NTUC income claimed financial woes, but took HUNDREDS of agents to Australia for an exorbitant expense-paid holiday as they made the announcement earlier this year!!! Do they think about the widows and orphans when they dine fine with wine??? At first I could not believe NTUC Income to be capable of this, then I checked on the web and saw the NTUC CEO hugging 2 BIKINI girls and drinking champagne in Australia too. (1) http://ms-my.facebook.com/photo.php?…1001838&ref=mf (2) http://ms-my.facebook.com/photo.php?…1001838&ref=mf 48. I expect the MAS to protect citizens financially too: When thousands of investors lost their life savings in the mini-bond fiasco, where was the government?? Unlike the Hong Kong government which had exerted pressure on its local banks to compensate a minimum sum to its minibond holders, the Singapore authorities chose to stay out of the matter….. MM Lee Kuan Yew even chided Singapore investors for “walking in with their eyes open” and therefore did not deserve a compensation. 49. I have 1 more issue with the state Media Press. HOW can they publish photos of people suspected of crimes when they have not EVEN been convicted?? Imagine the tarnishing to the poor suspect’s reputation if he were innocent! It is not as if the guy can sue ST and get $400,000 in defamation compensation. 50. Anyone can give the 50th reason??????????????? Come on my fellow locals. If I can say so much, you can at least say something! Few thousand people viewing this article and so little comments???   A Bitter Singaporean  Read More →

The Prime Minister has announced the commencement of the The Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010 on 1st July 2010. The Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010 is an amendment to the Parliamentary Elections Act (Chapter 218 of the 2007 Revised Edition). Amendments in particular which may be of interest to would-be voters are highlighted below:   1. Penalty for offences Generally, the penalty (fines) imposed on most offences under the Elections Act have been increased from the original $100 - $500 to $1000 - $1500. Jail term (if applicable) have also been increased and most offences are now a seizable offence within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 68) - the police can arrest a person on the spot instead of issuing a summons.   2. Allowance for a “cooling off” day Section 34 (6)(d) and 34A (6)(d) of the principal Act have been amended to allow for up to 10 days for poll to be taken instead of the original 9 days - the additional 1 day being the "cooling off" day, ie: eve of poll.   3. Restoration of name to register of electors  The fees for such restoration have been increased from $5 to $50 under Section 43 (8)(a) and (9).   4. Increase in the number of non-constituency Members The number of non-constituency Members to be declared elected shall be the whole number (ignoring any less than 0) ascertained in accordance with the formula 9 – B, where B is the total number of Opposition Members elected to Parliament. It was 3 non-constituency Members prior to the amendment.   5. Badges, symbols, etc., prohibited on polling day and eve of polling day No badge, symbol, rosette, favour, set of colours, flag, advertisement, handbill, placard or poster or any replica of a voting paper shall be worn, used, carried or displayed by any person or on any motorcar, truck or other vehicle as political propaganda on polling day will now include eve of polling day (ie: cooling off day).   6. Repeal and re-enactment of section 78B Section 78B of the principal Act is repealed and the following section substituted therefor: “Election advertising ban” 78B.—(1) Except as otherwise provided by or under subsection (2), no person shall, at any time on polling day or the eve of polling day at an election in an electoral division — (a) knowingly publish, or knowingly cause or permit to be published, any election advertising in or among any electors in the electoral division; or (b) knowingly display, or knowingly cause or permit to be displayed, any election advertising on any vehicle, thing or structure within the electoral division or adjoining the electoral division. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply to — (a) the distribution of a book, or the promotion of the sale of a book, for not less than its commercial value, if the book was planned to be published regardless of whether there was to be an election; (b) the publication of any news relating to an election — (i) in a newspaper in any medium by a person permitted to do so under the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (Cap. 206); or (ii) in a radio or television broadcast by a person licensed to do so under the Broadcasting Act (Cap. 28); (c) the telephonic or electronic transmission by an individual to another individual of the first-mentioned individual’s own political views, on a non-commercial basis; (d) any election advertising that was lawfully published or displayed before the start of the eve of polling day at any election on what is commonly known as the Internet and that was not changed after its publication or display; (e) the continued lawful display or posting of posters or banners that have been displayed or posted before the start of the eve of polling day at any election; and (f) such activities or circumstances as may be prescribed by the Minister. (3) Any person who contravenes subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction by a District Court to a fine not exceeding $1,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both. (4) Every offence under this section shall be a seizable offence within the meaning of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 68).”.   7. Prohibition of canvassing on polling day and eve of polling day  Section 80 of the principal Act have been amended to prohibit canvassing on the eve of polling day ( cooling off day) and polling day.   8. New section 80A inserted to restrict election meetings  “Restrictions on election meetings” 80A.—(1) Without prejudice to sections 12 and 13 of the Public Order Act 2009 (Act 15 of 2009), and notwithstanding section 14 of that Act, all election meetings, wherever held, are prohibited — (a) in the case of a general election, on polling day and the eve of polling day at the general election; or (b) in the case of a by-election in any electoral division, on polling day and the eve of polling day at the by-election, and notwithstanding section 7 of that Act, no permit shall be granted under Part II of that Act for such an election meeting even if a notice under section 6 of that Act is given in respect of that election meeting. (2) Notwithstanding section 14 of the Public Order Act 2009, an election meeting shall not take place within any public place that is designated as an unrestricted area under that section during any of the following periods: (a) in the case of a general election, between the day of nomination appointed for the general election and the day before the eve of polling day at that general election (both days inclusive); or (b) in the case of a by-election in any electoral division, between the day of nomination appointed for the by-election and the day before the eve of polling day at that by-election (both days inclusive), unless the Commissioner of Police is notified under section 6 of that Act of the intention to hold the election meeting, and a permit is granted under section 7 of that Act in respect of that election meeting; and Part II of that Act shall apply to such an election meeting as if it does not take place within an unrestricted area. (3) Any reference in the Public Order Act 2009 to an assembly or a procession that is unlawful under Part II of that Act shall include a reference to an election meeting — (a) that is held in contravention of subsection (1) or (2); or (b) in the case of an election meeting that takes place in an unrestricted area within the meaning of section 14 of the Public Order Act 2009 — (i) that is held on a date or at a time which differs from the date or time specified in relation to the election meeting in the notice given under section 6 of that Act; or (ii) that is not in compliance with any requirement imposed by section 8(1) of that Act or any condition imposed under section 8(2) of that Act on organisers or persons taking part in that election meeting. (4) In this section, “election meeting” means a public assembly (within the meaning of the Public Order Act 2009) organised by or on behalf of a candidate nominated for election — (a) to promote or procure the electoral success at the election for one or more identifiable political parties, candidates or groups of candidates; or (b) to otherwise enhance the standing of any such political parties, candidates or groups of candidates with the electorate in connection with the election.”.   9. Persons prohibited from conducting election activity (Section 83 (1)(A)) Persons prohibited from conducting election activity have been expanded to include: “(1A) An individual who is not a citizen of Singapore shall not knowingly publish or display, or knowingly cause or permit to be published or displayed, any election advertising in or among any electors in an electoral division during the period beginning with the day the writ of election is issued for an election and ending with the start of the eve of polling day at the election.”; A full copy of the The Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 2010 can be downloaded from the Official Web Site. In addition, the Prime Minister has appointed Mr Yam Ah Mee to be the Returning Officer, with effect from 1st June 2010.     Andrew Tay Disclaimer: The writer is not legally trained and interpretation may contain unintentional error(s). Readers are encouraged to seek expert  legal advice whenever possible.  Read More →

At a dialogue session organised by the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) yesterday, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam claimed that one of the targets of the ESC is to increase the median wages of Singapore worker by one-third from $2,400 today to an inflation-adjusted $3,100 in year 2010. This represents an average real increase of 2.4% per annum over the next 10 years. This seems to represent a deviation from past PAP’s stance whereby the aim of economic policy has been all about pushing high GDP growth with little regard to its distributive effect. As far as economic development is concerned, Singaporeans need to ask themselves the following questions: 1) Whether and how much Singaporeans have benefited from the economic growth, and 2) What is the quality of this growth and whether it is sustainable? It is clear that the average Singaporean is not benefiting from the country’s economic growth due to the very unequal distribution of income. While Singapore has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world, at $53,143 in 2009, employees receive a disproportionately small share of the GDP. Profits take about 46% of GDP, which is extremely high in comparison with most developed and advanced developing economies. In addition, foreign-owned companies receive almost half of this unusually high profit share. This is exacerbated by the low linkages between the high growth economic sectors and the participation of Singaporean workers in these activities. The government targeted growth in the biomedical and chemicals sectors and in capital market back office processing, but these sectors are dominated by foreigners who also receive most of the benefits. To achieve high GDP growth, the PAP government allowed hordes of cheap foreign workers in to reduce business cost for labour-intensive activities. This kind of economic growth is easy low-hanging fruit, but it is of low quality and is unsustainable. Such growth is not underlined by productivity increases and is derived merely from factor input accumulation. The liberal foreign worker policy has disproportionally hurt Singaporean workers in the low-end jobs most. The wages of the bottom 20-30% Singaporean workers have been depressed and have not improved in real terms in recent years. Stuck in their low wages, they cannot provide their family a decent living, are made to rely on wage subsidies, and can never save enough for their retirement. The Progress Report of the Ministerial Committee on Low Wage Workers released in June 2009 claimed a nominal increase of 9.2% in the monthly wage of the 20th percentile employed resident from $1,200 in 2006 to $1,310 in 2008. But using the inflation rate of 9.5% experienced by the lowest 20% income group over the two year period, the low wage workers were in fact worse off in real income terms. In addition, the economic growth has been achieved at the expense of huge externalities from overpopulation. Such a huge inflow of people has shown up in surging housing costs, higher inflation, overcrowding in our public transport, and shortage of hospital beds in public hospitals. There was a serious lack of coordination between the National Population Secretariat under DPM Wong Kan Seng, the economic development ministries MOM and MTI, and the social development ministries like MOH, MND and MOT. The use of unskilled foreign workers also hinders technology adoption and lowers the productivity level of the country. One reason for the alarmingly dismal productivity growth numbers is the reluctance on the part of employers to adopt labour-saving technologies because of the continued availability of cheap foreign labour. Rather than investing in workers to increase their productivity, employers resort to the easy way out of hiring more cheap foreign workers. Another cause of the country’s low productivity growth is the constant structural changes taking place in the economy. For instance, our focus in manufacturing moved from traditional industries, to shipbuilding, to hard disk drive assembly, to semiconductor wafer fabrication, to chemicals, and recently to biomedical. This has hindered productivity growth through learning-by-doing - the capability of workers to improve their productivity by learning on the job and improving their work processes over time. As workers are displaced from their industry, productivity gains arising from knowledge deepening in their job or industry is often wasted. Each time the government jump starts a new industry, we start from ground zero again. The use and constant turnover of foreign workers also contributed to the above, as they often do not stay long in their jobs here and the knowledge gained on the job is lost when they leave Singapore. To conclude, we need to think hard about whom all this growth is for. Economic development in Singapore must benefit Singaporeans. It must bring about a better quality of life for the citizens. It pains many informed citizens to see that this expensive and self-praise PAP government has got the orientation of its economic policy so seriously wrong and lacked the foresight to chart out the country’s long term economic strategy. Rather than maximising economic welfare for Singaporeans, this government blindly pursued the misguided goal of chasing after high GDP growth. The pegging of the bonuses for ministers and top civil servants has contributed to this perverse incentive. Much more can and needs to be done to unwind the unforgivable damage that this PAP government has done to the lives of the many ordinary hardworking Singaporeans over the past decade.     Edmund Khor Reference: Manu Bhaskaran's article "Reassessing Singapore’s economic future" published in The Edge Singapore 25 July 2009  Read More →