TR EMERITUS

Dear Temasek Review I refer to the letter to mypaper (mypaper.sg) by Mrs Anna Lee dated 31 May 2010. Mrs Lee had recounted an experience with a Filipino national with Singapore PR. After earning a considerable amount of money, this Filipino withdrew his Central Provident Fund savings, gave up his PR status and left Singapore. Mrs Lee was particularly unhappy because she knew that this Filipino had made use of the pro-immigration policies of the ruling PAP and its allies (PAP Group) to his own advantage. The PAP Group had granted permanent residency to large number of immigrants so as to encourage them to take up Singapore citizenship. However this Filipino was only interested in making money before relocating. Mrs Lee claimed she worked in Human Resources and said foreign nationals were not necessarily cheaper to hire. I thanked her for highlighting this as since 1997, much of the debate has been centred on cheap foreigners versus expensive locals. I wish more former Human Resource Directors and retired organizational Vice Presidents can give their opinions on this issue. Mrs Lee asked if the relevant authorities had taken steps to prevent the liberal granting of permanent residencies. The reality was that since the 1990s, the PAP Group had very interested in bringing in massive numbers of immigrants. Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong kept talking about the need to attract critical quantity of talent when he was Prime Minister from 1990 to 2004. This critical mass approach meant that the PAP Group had to bring in foreigners far beyond population replacement levels and long term needs. This was because the PAP Group was aware that people would come and go. For example, if the PAP Group decided it wanted to naturalize 50 foreigners, it might have to bring in 100. The Filipino mentioned in this case was not much of a problem to the PAP Group as his departure had already been taken into account during policy formulation. Mrs Lee had asked if employers had exhausted all recruitment options in Singapore before hiring foreigners. She could this question to her colleagues or superiors in the organization she was working. When the pro-immigrant policy was promoted in the 1990s, it was not just a matter of not being able to find suitable employees among the locals. Those in charge had other thoughts. The prevailing mood at that time was based on the concern that younger locals who grew up from the 1970s to the 1990s had the good life for too long. More foreigners meant more competition which was said to be good for everyone. When some youngsters began to complain about career opportunities in Singapore they were told to venture abroad including less developed countries. Therefore, locals’ efforts on remarketing or repackaging about themselves would be neutralized by the inflow of immigrants. Some had no intention of staying or contributing to Singapore society in the long term. The PAP Group would be reluctant to stop the flow of these extra immigrants as this could reduce the critical mass which the PAP Group could choose for naturalization.    On a positive note, locals could also learn from this Filipino in critical thinking. He experienced the pace of life and the cost of living in Singapore. He knew the way to success was to relocate a cheaper place once a critical amount of money had been earned. He understood had he stayed on and faced financial difficulties in the future, the PAP Group might not come to his rescue.   Yours truly (Mr) Chua Yuankai The writer is a long-term underemployed and marginalized local-born Singapore citizen who once aimed to become successful in Singapore. Currently he is thinking how to survive.   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 →

作者:冀居·谢 那个涂鸦的瑞士人看来逃不过美国仔迈克菲的惩罚——鞭刑。连他们的大使馆都嗅到一点讯息，说在本地得守本地的法。可是今天(09/06/2010)的早报社论总算有点LP—— SMRT为何出现严重保安疏漏？，没错涂鸦车厢折射的不是破坏公物的问题，而是保安的疏漏。 世界上所有防恐的措施都是集中在公共交通上，因为对于恐怖分子来讲，这是用最低成本能达到最大效果的方法。如日本的奥姆真理教就在地铁站释放毒气，欧洲的好几起恐怖活动都和地铁、铁路离不开关系。好莱坞也拍过好几部这类的影片，印象中好像铁汉布鲁氏威利好像演过一部，最后地铁车厢从地底撞到路面来。还有最近几年的《V怪客》，他就是找到一个废弃的地铁站，然后把一列地铁停放在那里，装入满车的炸药。乘着跨年狂欢的时刻，伦敦市中心会关闭好几个地铁站，这样他就不会伤到无辜的乘客。然后他算准十二点钟跨年烟花燃放，背景是柴可夫斯基的《1812序曲》，把车开入西敏寺站，炸毁大笨钟、西敏寺国会大厦，虽然是电脑CG，仍然很十分震撼。 社论说：“事实上，自从恐怖威胁出现后，公共交通安全也立即跃居防恐安全前线。当局在2004年就成立了公共交通安全委员会，其成员包括交通部、陆路交通管理局、内政部、内部安全局、警察部队、联合反恐中心、民防部队等相关部门的代表。因此，民众最想知道的是，列车涂鸦事件的症结在哪里？谁应该负起咎责？”——现在所有的道歉几乎都推給SMRT的总裁，至于咱们的内政部长黄根成和国土安全部长贾古玛，真的是死猪不怕开水烫吗？ 来源：大马论坛  Read More →

The two opposition MPs in Parliament Low Thia Kiang and Chiam See Tong have poured scorn on the recently released Town Council Management Report which gave their town councils the lowest scores as compared to those run by the PAP. The report was prepared by the National Development Ministry headed by a PAP minister Mah Bow Tan who floated the idea in the aftermath of disastrous investment losses suffered by PAP Town Councils two years ago. Town councils were graded 1 to 5, with 1 being the best grade. When contacted by the media, Mr Low said he was sceptical about the entire exercise and defended his town council's performance: "Opposition town councils start from a disadvantaged position, as they are at the bottom of the queue for estate upgrading. Considering this, for the Hougang Town Council to be given a ranking of four for maintenance, as against a three and below given to a PAP town council with all the various upgrading given them by the HDB, it is an accomplishment," he was quoted as saying in the Straits Times. As the purse-strings are controlled by the PAP, opposition wards are denied critical maintenance and upgrading funds even though their residents pay income taxes like the rest of Singapore. The PAP has practised such "pork-barrel" politics over the year to maintain its grip on power. Former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong once threatened to reduce the opposition wards into "slums" should their residents continue to vote against the PAP. Besides Hougang, Potong Pasir also performed badly in the report. However, its MP Chiam See Tong dismissed it as a "ploy to discredit his town council." The timing of the report's release is timed impeccably a few months before the next election to portray the opposition wards as poorly run and to sway public opinion in favor of the PAP. For pragmatic Singaporeans whose life-savings are tied up with their flats, estate maintenance and upgrading are perhaps the only reason for them to vote for the increasingly unpopular PAP.   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 →