TR EMERITUS

  Introduction    According to the latest statistical report on  March  2010, our unemployment rate has fallen from the previous quarter of 3.3% to 3.2%.   Employment also rose from  2.990 million to 3.024 million-  an increase of 34, 000 jobs in the first quarter, the third quarterly increase after  two quarters of decrease in the first half of 2009 (see Table 1: source mom.gov.sg)   More importantly, of the 34,000-job increase, a sizeable 31,2000 came from the service sector – most probably due to the strong hiring from our two integrated resorts.  Manfacturing added another 3,400 jobs to the overall job increase.     Traditionally, these two sectors employ alot of foreign workers due to  the  lower cost factor and that many Singaporeans tend to shy away from such labour-intensive menial  work. It is unsure how many Singaporeans have been employed in these two major job-increase sectors as there is no available data  coming from the government.   Table 1: Employment                                                                                                     (In Thousands)   Employment Change Employment Level as at Mar 2010P 1Q 09 2Q 09 3Q 09 4Q 09 1Q 10P Total* -6.2 -7.7 14.0 37.5 34.0 3,024.0 Manufacturing -22.1 -15.9 -6.4 0.7 3.4 545.9 Construction 8.3 4.7 7.4 4.6 -0.8 384.2 Services 7.5 3.8 12.7 31.5 31.2 2,072.8 P: Preliminary estimates *: Total includes agriculture, fishing, quarrying, utilities and sewerage & waste management Data may not add up due to rounding    A total of 1,500 workers were also retrenched and 500 contracts terminated during this period resulting in a total number of 2, 100 workers made redundant (see Table 2).  This was comparable to the 2,220 workers made redundant in the previous quarter and was only 16% of the record 12,760 workers affected in the first quarter of 2009.     Table 2: Redundancy    Last updated: 30 April 2010       1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Annual 14,620 11,620 25,840 19,090 16,400 10,190 10,290 12,600 7,680 13,920 20,160 n.a. 1st Qtr 3,400 6,050 3,250 4,860 4,410 2,960 2,170 3,650 1,960 2,270 10,900 1,600p  2nd Qtr 3,350 1,860 5,630 4,090 5,140 2,060 2,120 3,260 1,920 1,800 5,170 n.a. 3rd Qtr 3,400 1,760 8,370 4,190 4,060 1,970 2,810 2,470 1,830 2,350 2,110 n.a. 4th Qtr 4,480 1,970 8,590 5,950 2,780 3,210 3,200 3,220 1,970 7,500 1,980 n.a. Source: Labour Market Survey   Employment Change Employment Level as at Mar 2010P 1Q 09 2Q 09 3Q 09 4Q 09 1Q 10P Total* -6.2 -7.7 14.0 37.5 34.0 3,024.0 Manufacturing -22.1 -15.9 -6.4 0.7 3.4 545.9 Construction 8.3 4.7 7.4 4.6 -0.8 384.2 Services 7.5 3.8 12.7 31.5 31.2 2,072   1Q 09 2Q 09 3Q 09 4Q 09 1Q 10P Redundancy 12,760 5,980 2,470 2,220 2,100 Retrenchment 10,900 5,170 2,110 1,980 1,600 Early Release of Contract Workers   Employment Change Employment Level as at Mar 2010P 1Q 09 2Q 09 3Q 09 4Q 09 1Q 10P Total* -6.2 -7.7 14.0 37.5 34.0 3,024.0 Manufacturing -22.1 -15.9 -6.4 0.7 3.4 545.9 Construction 8.3 4.7 7.4 4.6 -0.8 384.2 Services 7.5 3.8 12.7 31.5 31.2 2,072 Redundancy 12,760 5,980 2,470 2,220 2,100 Retrenchment 10,900 5,170 2,110 1,980 1,600 Early Release of Contract Workers 1,860 810 350 250 500 Redundancy 12,760 5,980 2,470 2,220 2,100 Retrenchment 10,900 5,170 2,110 1,980 1,600 Early Release of Contract Workers 1,860 810 350 250 500      1Q 09 2Q 09 3Q 09 4Q 09 1Q 10P Redundancy 12,760 5,980 2,470 2,220 2,100 Retrenchment 10,900 5,170 2,110 1,980 1,600 Early Release of Contract Workers 1,860 810 350 250 500   Unemployed Middle-Aged PMETs    Contrary to the uplifting economic recovery, I have been receiving alot of emails lately from PMETs seeking  career advice from our organisation.   Many of them belonged to the vulnerable age group of 40s – 50s.  Many are  also breadwinners  with young dependents and a home mortgage to boot.   It seems that even the recent economic boost of a double-digit growth could not arrest the escalating unemployment trend of our middle-aged PMETs. Many of these PMETs come armed with impressive degrees and a few accompanied by  MBAs.  Their resumes  glowed  with decades of working experience in senior positions but  sadly they remained jobless for many months some even for more than a year.   It is  amazing  to see that no employer is willing to take them on board even though they have slash their asking price by more than half of their former last-drawn salary.     One PMET previously working in the construction industry   as a business consultant told me he managed to find work in a non-profit organisation after pulling some strings. His pay was a mere 25% of his last drawn salary and he is on a contractual basis.   “What can I do Gilbert?” he lamented. “I am already 59 years old.”   Under employment is also a major issue here as experienced middle-aged PMETs watered down their resume in the hope of  getting a lower position on offer. They also know that senior managers conducting the job interview will feel threatened if they employ someone with better qualifications and work experience than them.   Sensing that their own country is not appreciative of their skills and knowledge, many  PMETs have decided to work and live abroad when the opportunity arises. We all know too well by now that recently more than 5,000 Singaporeans have apply to migrate to New Zealand in the quest for a better future. I have not seen so many Singaporeans trying their best to flee the country until now.   The recent total demise of our semi-conductor manufacturing industry is also to be blamed for putting  many engineers off work as companies  resettled in cheaper neighbouring countries.    Many engineers have to retool and switch over to a brand new career. Those who could not transit smoothly  due to personal reasons take up commission jobs in the  property and insurance careers. A few have no choice but to take up cab driving just to survive. Many have also downgrade their portfolio and expectations in the hope to continue working in our job-scarce economy.   What is exactly wrong with our modern economy right now and why are  our middle-aged  PMETs  continue to face re-employment setbacks when they are so well educated  and loaded with solid working experience?   1, Lack of legislation    There is a lack of adequate legislation protecting our middle-aged jobless workers from being re-hired.   In Singapore, many people know that their re-employment opportunities will be severely restricted if they are retrenched  in their  forties. After fifty, it is almost impossible to be re-hired and one should either switch to become a consultant or simply plan for early retirement.   Employers  have all along prefer younger workers for various corporate reasons and executives above the age of 40 years old face increasing pressure at re-employment. It is painful to see many middle-aged executives lowering their expectations drastically in the hope of trying to get back to the workforce.     It is as if hiring an older worker is a hindrance and disadvantage.   Discriminatory hiring has being going on  for many years here but, unfortunately so far,  there is a lack of legislation to prevent such exploitation.  Companies continue to hire discriminately base on age, gender and even race at the expense of our local workers. Companies continue to advertise using discriminatory terms such as Mandarin-speaking only,  below 50 years old need apply, female working environment among others.    The Minstry of Manpower (MOM) has yet to show its legislative teeth by clamping down on  discriminatory advertisement prevalent in the newspaper and online media. There is also little that the worker can do if he is not hired based on  grounds  of discrimination. He simply shakes his head and move on to another  hopefully fairer employer.   In other advanced developed countries, you can actually file a complaint   to the relevant governing body if you can find evidence of discriminatory hiring. There are also proper guidelines on recruitment  advertising  so that you are hired based strictly on two merits: your work experience and educational qualifications.  You can  leave out your age, race, gender, and photograph from your resume.   Some recruiters  have also told me that  senior  executives are apprehensive of employing well-educated experienced PMETs who may be rather unteachable and can  even later take over their jobs at the work place when they have learn the ropes.     I find that such fears are unfounded and reflect badly on the insecurities of our senior corporate staff. If a senior manager has such fear, he should not even be in his current position as he lacks confidence in his own work perfomance.   Singapore has struggled with the decade-long problem of re-employing  middle-aged workers and unless legislation is enforced stringently, my fear is that the pool of  unemployed PMETs  will grow unabated resulting in severe adverse social implication.  We all know too well that when the breadwinner goes out of work, the family faces financial stress and marriages may even break up as a result.   2. The foreign worker  factor   Many people have also speculated that the chief barrier to re-employment for our middle-aged PMETs comes from  the  sizeable foreign legion of workers.   One in three workers in Singapore now is a foreigner and for a small economy like ours, this is a big concern as there may  not be enough jobs to go around.   More crucially, the foreigner worker who comes here alone can take on any job with a much reduced salary compared to the local worker saddled with family obligations and mortgage repayment.   Previously, we use to have two kinds of foreign workers in our country.   One is the unskilled blue-collared foreigner who will do all the work that most Singaporeans shy away from. They are our construction workers who toil away under the sun laying bricks to build our skyscrapers and gleaming shopping centres.   They also slog away at our many manufacturing plants laboriously poring over PCB boards for around $800 a month. They are accepted and even welcomed by our local population l  as they do not pose  any competition to the majority of our  local workforce. Without them, we will not be able to stay in our gleaming HDB flats and shop in comfort at the many mega shopping malls dotting our  country.  Their contributions are significant to say the least.   The other kind is the white-collared  professionals who come in as expatriates and they are here to make up for the critical skills shortage faced by our local talents. They  have attractive pay packages and are brought in rotationally by their corporations. Their contributions are well received as most multi national companies will not be able to operate  here without their presence and talents. This group is also welcomed and their contributions are enormous and crucial to our economy.   Now,  we have the third foreign group: the in-between foreign talent. They are here to take over the positions of our mid-range executives and managers and is seen as an unwelcomed competition for jobs.    They  can take over any  positions in the office ranging from the front desk receptionist to the back end junior officer.    In fact, local workers feel  that the S-Pass work permit holder will be the one to fear the most. They are the ones that can replace anyone in the office.  Thousands of local workers were retrenched during the past  few years and employers seek to reduce cost by hiring cheaper foreigner workers.   Employers will understandably continue to exploit the foreigner S-Pass work permit quota when they are face with a vacant position in the work place.  In any business set up, acquiring profits will be the supreme  corporate mission and there is no mercy here. To The employer, a worker is here to produce a piece of work and there is no loyalty or patriotism.   Right now, any employer can hire foreign workers if they are willing to pay a minimum salary of $1, 800 excluding the monthly worker levy up to a certain quota base on industry type. This is often cheaper than hiring a local worker who  can cost anything from $2,000 – $2,500 for an executive position excluding CPF contribution.     To the tertiary-educated graduate with a few years of work experience and a family to support,  anything less than $2500 will be a financial struggle even if his spouse is working.   For the employers, at  the affordable cost  of $1, 800 a month, he can select  graduates  from many different countries and some come armed with many years of work experience.  The foreign worker is not only well educated, younger but also able to work very hard as he sees this as an excellent opportunity for him to resettle in a first-world environment.     Back home in his third world environment, he is often paid a fraction of the salary that he can earn here.  It is almost too good an opportunity to miss even if he earns a initial salary considered  low  here compared to our local terms. He can start work straight away and later look around for another better  job.   For   the employer,  if he  has exhausted all his S-Pass holder quota,  for $2,500-a-month salary he can alternatively employ a foreign professional using the Employment Pass (EP) category.    Furthermore, he has no quota  here and can employ as many foreigners as he wants – without any restriction.   It is  common knowledge by now that foreigners setting up shop here tend to prefer hiring their own kind as they can work together and speak the same kind of lingo. Thus, it is not common for foreign-run companies based here to hire  a majority of foreign  workers  in their offices with  local workers forming the minority.  Such foreign business setup does not benefit our local workforce here at all.   I feel that the S-Pass work permit category needs  a serious  tweaking  to better  protect the welfare of our local workers.  Companies should be encouraged to hire Singaporeans first before they resort to staff positions with foreigners. This is done in many developed countries so that local workers  are protected.   There is also nothing that the local executive can do to prevent his employer from terminating his service and replacing him with a cheaper  foreign worker.    Our unions here are also weakened by the tripartite movement initiated by the government to better protect the well being of our businesses.  Even if the dismissed executive brings his case to the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) to seek recourse, he is often brushed aside or told to seek legal advice. The frustrated executive, wronged at work, often felt helpless  that he has no where to turn to seek justice.   3. Obselete Skills of Our Matured PMETs   Many of our middle-aged PMETs were displaced for the first time in their life last year during the major financial crisis. Some even could not send out a proper resume when they began their job search after been retrenched as they were gainfully employed all this while.   Many appeared lost and tried unsuccessfully to return to their old trade.   For those retrenched from the semi-conductor industry,  going back to the same trade is almost impossible as it is a sunset industry and many factories have pulled out of Singapore and re-settled in cheaper locations such as Vietnam, China and Thailand. They face a bleak future as their skills are already obsolete for  the new economy and age is also against them. It will take alot of psychological re-adjustment for this group of professionals to retrain and return back to the work force. We all know too well that the older you are the harder it is to adjust and change.   This vulnerable group  not only has to lower their expectations drastically but also to take on an entirely different skill set to return to the workforce.   Of course, there are middle-aged PMETs who successfully switched careers and have happily settled down in their new job.  They managed to clear the huge salary  gap blockage and accepted the big pay cut that came with the career switch.   I remembered that I have to take a  $3000 pay cut to convert myself from a successful insurance agent to being a social worker.  There is alot of adjustment and  the family also went  through a period of tension as there is less disposable income to spend.   For those retrenched PMETs who decided to switch to doing something that they are interested in all along, the chances for a successful career shift are very much enhanced. Many I know have switched to doing social work or teaching in their mid-age as they find the work both meaningful and rewarding.  Such emotionally taxing jobs also favour the older workers  as they are emotionally stable and dependable.   Nevertheless, many middle-aged PMETS  still have real difficulty switching career easily. That is probably why some retrenched executives can go  jobless for up to a  year with some lasting even longer.   It will be ideal if PMETs try to cultivate multiple sets of skills when they are still working so that in the event of a retrenchment, he can easily switch to another line.    I know many PMETs take up licensing for taxi driving as a back up so that they have something viable to fall back on at least for the interim period until they find something concrete.   4.  Lack of unemployment welfare   A lack of unemployment welfare policy has placed  the middle-aged PMET into a desperate mode when he goes out of work.   There is no proper safety net here and this is one reason why jobless PMETs turn to any job that they can grab  even if its something that they dislike.    For those who are not so fortunate, the waiting period can be devastating and depressive. Many jobless PMETs have entertain thoughts of suicide when the journey seems long and dark with no visible light at the end of the tunnel.   I have seen many professionals who are at a loss on what to do next when they are retrenched. After six months of fruitless job searching, many can turn psychotic and some even need medical attention. Many also give up searching for a job after endless rounds of interviews and rejection.   Prolonged joblessness does snaps at one’s self confidence and esteem rendering the person ineffective and negative.  He urgently needs a job so that he can regain back his self esteem but job hunting also requires alot of confidence and optimism and it soon becomes a vicious cycle.   Unemployed middle-aged PMETs, especially those who are  the main breadwinner with  young dependents, face tremendous pressure at home when their savings dwindle over a long period of joblessness. He needs to continue paying bills when there is no income coming in. Over time, he will turn to borrowing from friends and relatives when his savings turn to almost zero. He also could not job search properly as he is haunted by his desperate financial situation.   Unlike other developed countries that provide unemployment benefit for a season, the Singapore government does not believe in dishing out the dole for the jobless.  They are left to fend for themselves with some ending up in tragic consequences.   The government  believes that our workers will go lazy and dependent on such welfare handout and have only restrict welfare for the very poor. They forget that these  developed countries who provide unemployment benefit has  also  produce workers with very high productivity. They have in no way allow the unemployment benefit system influences their strong work ethics.   However, some may argue that we have government aid agencies in the form of Community Development t Council  providing interim financial assistance to the poor and jobless.   The  five Community Development Councils (CDC)  here only provide interim financial assistance to those jobless  people  living in HDB 4-room flats and below and they must have little savings in their bank account.   The application criterion is also very harsh and you need to provide your savings  record, CPF account, details of  your  family income among others for the officer to confirm that you are not out to fleece the system.    You also have to sign a clearance form allowing the CDC to check your financial record follow by  a final home visit to ascertain that your house is not too lavishly renovated with expensive electrical appliances.   The  financial assistance  is normally given for not more than three months and the amount can be anything between $200 – $500 depending on  need. Re-application is allowed  but approval is done  on a case by case basis.   Such stringent application processing has actually frighten many genuine aid seekers from coming forward and for face-conscious Singaporeans,  many will shy away from approaching the CDC for any financial assistance even though they are in dire straits. Naturally, the PMETs are excluded due to the strict application criterion here unless he stays in a HDB 4-room flat and below and has little savings in his bank account. His working spouse must also not earn above a certain salary scale in order for him to qualify for the hand out.   During the previous recession in 2001, there is suggestion of a unemployment insurance  plan whereby the worker will buy insurance to provide him a sum of money when he goes  jobless.   The idea was however shot down and the usual reason was given – our workers will turn lazy and too dependent on such handout.   Our government aid agencies, supposed to assist the matured  jobless PMETs, are also clueless as to what to do with them besides providing them with motivational workshops and some training courses.   Career consultants are also not trained sufficiently  to do career coaching and may be more suited to help the lower end workers to find jobs.   Many PMETs were frustrated when they seek assistance at CDCs and WDA as  they were given the merry-go-round.  They were also made to take courses that do not really benefit them much.   PMETs naturally are more demanding of the counsellors  because of their qualifications and long corporate work experience.  More can be done perhaps to ensure that better-trained career counsellors are available to help this vulerable group of jobless professionals.   Conclusion   As our economy evolves and most of the jobs created come from the service sector, more can be done perhaps in the work restructuring area   to attract our local workers to such jobs.    Salaries can then be improved as employers expect more productivity from our local workers.   With more local workers available for employment in the service sector, hopefully we will lessen our dependence on foreign workers.   Proper legislation also needs  to be in place so that our matured workers are protected and can make a decent living in our own country. The S-Pass work permit quota needs to be further adjusted  so that employers do not have an easy excuse not to hire our local workers.   If not, we will continue to see a growing segment of our population feeling  sidelined and agitated. This can only mean adverse social implications for the whole country.    Written by: Gilbert Goh  Read More →

Dear PM Lee,   I refer to your interview by Charlie Rose as reported by Straits Times on 16 Apr 2010.   You said our entire system is founded on meritocracy where you get the job because you are the best man and not because of connections. But according to a Straits Times report on 20 Oct 2009, your father said that China's princelings like Li Peng's son and daughter may never be recognised if they weren't well connected because China is such a big place. Considering that the chance of you becoming the prime minister out of about 2.5 million Singaporean adults is a mere 0.00004%, we don't need to be as big as China to appreciate your father's belief that meritocracy aside, you need the right connections to stand out amongst so many Singaporeans. So if you share your father's beliefs, you shouldn't rule out the importance of connections and you or at least your father has no moral basis to sue IHT for allegedly saying something that your father essentially believes in.   You said you lose credibility and moral authority if people do not think you are the best man for the job. On what basis do you assert that? Just as you require IHT to prove their assertions, so too must you prove your assertions failing which you have no right to assert them. You have no right to say that you lose credibility when people do not think you're the best person unless you can prove it. You have no right to say that it is a fundamental issue of fitness to govern unless you can prove it. You said it is a basic Confucian precept that you are allowed to make the right decisions only if you have the moral right. But Confucian moral right comes from being virtuous, not being the best.   You said being put in the same list as Kim Jong II is as good as an attack on the moral fibre of your trust with the people. But the list included so many Asian nations, are you saying it is an attack on all those nations as well? Yet none of the leaders in those nations are even half as bothered as yourself. Why are you so especially sensitive? You give the impression that you are very insecure as though your very authority can be easily undermined by people saying you are not the best. What if we conducted a survey and found that 33% of Singaporeans find that you are not the best, would that undermine your moral right to govern? If we concede that there may be 33% who think that you are not the best, then why is it such a big deal that one journalist thinks so too? If your worry is that the other 66% may lose confidence in you when they come across the article saying you are not the best, then wouldn't that make their confidence in you shaky and weak to begin with?   You said the same journalist and newspaper has done it again. But what the journalist has done this time is to merely state facts and the facts speak for themselves. Unless the facts are erroneous, which they are not, you have no basis to make an issue out of it.   You said the IHT can bring their lawyers to prove what they say is true. That shows your basic ignorance of the basic law concept of presumption of innocence. As Mr Shanmugam would always emphasize, it is never up to the accused to prove that he is innocent. The onus is always on the plaintiff to prove the accused's guilt instead. As such, the onus is on you the plaintiff to prove what the IHT said is false. The onus is not on IHT to prove what they said is true. If you don't even understand this basic law concept, how can you even say you are the best?   You said your father made a state where there was none. But the state of Singapore was already in the making for 140 years before your father took over. The system that could run without him was not made by him but was bequeathed to him by the British.     Thank you     Ng Kok Lim  Read More →

作者:德仁 都说吴博士是‘due to personal reasons'而辞去职务并退出政坛，但是什麽‘个人原因’却是秘而不宣。 吴老到了73岁又新婚，他说是被人‘电到’(‘He has been shocked! ’应该是human shocked吧!) 吴老的唯一儿子是和前妻Alice 所生。吴老当时闹了绯闻已经是60好几，已是爷爷级的人。新人是在教育部当了他的小秘的现任太太。当时大房把家事告到老李面前，无可奈何吴老只好‘不爱江山爱美人’。办了离婚手续之后，他把离休后所得的退休金，房产全部归于大房（估计有整百万吧，现在也许不只这个数目）。一人空手和新人再筑新巢。所以，到今为止，他们家里人都‘顾左右而言他’，为出一本写真集都要大费周章，口沫不少。(见下文注脚) 【续评者一:费言】 传闻说：老李和老吴，为了一个女人翻脸。。。。看来果然不假！ 老李和老吴，关系和地位功能，就如中共建国初期的老毛和老周。 有人认为，老李只不过是在借题发挥，要把功高盖主的老吴早早冷藏，别老是挡在他前面。怎么讲，都是同志加兄弟，实在是兔死狗烹，冷酷无情。 PAP党史里的深层黑雾谜团，比中共的还要让外人费疑猜，在新加坡，估计没有人有兴趣，或者敢去追问。 如果老吴在26年前成就如日中天的时候，不莫名其妙地“被”退出政坛，搞到自己需要被下放去中国另谋出路，（美其名曰：特区顾问）如果让聪明的老吴再干多10年，20年或到今天26年，新加坡的江山也许不姓李，而是姓吴。 新加坡的今天，应该也不一定是这个样，应该还会开放许多，至少那条337A的同性恋古董法，会早被老吴一手废掉。 老李对情色之事有天生的厌恶洁癖，另一个闹绯闻给他无情干掉的PAP同志是，我们尊敬而英俊潇洒，多才多艺的前南大校长，李昭铭博士。 这几天，我们国营电视台的宣传架势，简直和北朝鲜死了金日成有得比。 把一条已经冷藏了26年的咸鱼，突然间再掏出来炒热然后呼呼上桌，足见我党之苦心和慌心也！！！ 40岁以下的新加坡人，估计没几个知道吴XX是谁！26年来，提都没提过的一个怪物或伟人，突然戴满光环从天而降，就连我们这种当年在老吴部下当兵的老公民，都要大吃一惊。 这年代，谁还有兴趣去看哪种共产党洗脑式的歌功颂德？这样出面歌颂丰功伟绩手法，你肯定效果是正面的？而不是让人对这样的处心积虑、机关算尽，巧诈利用的实际无情愈感厌恶？ 被冷藏寒宫26载，临终之际，还能为我党打免费广告？老吴在地下有知，不知是哭还是笑？吴夫人如果知道什么是广告知识产权，估计向PAP索讨个500万竞选广告费，一点也不算贵。 如此出面厚此薄彼的葬礼，不知道会不会让前王公鼎昌总统和老吴在地下，为争风吃醋而打起来呢？ 【续评者二:冬冬】 前总统王鼎昌其夫人贵为岛国第一夫人身故后没有囯葬，王前总统也没有，为何吴博士家人谢辞，但政府却又硬要给予囯葬呢？除了为竞选加分外，咖啡店传言是。。某人可能也不久矣，为吴博士举囯葬不过是为后来人的风光殓葬铺路。真耶假耶大家就轼目以待吧！ 来源：大马论坛 注脚: 《光华日报》:妻反对出传记 http://www.kwongwah.com.my 吴庆瑞的媳妇陈淑珊花了8年撰写《吴庆瑞传记》，相信是第一本也是至今唯一一本讲述他生平事迹的传记。 《Goh Keng Swee—A Portrait》3年前出版，除了讲述吴庆瑞童年和少年时的成长过程，还包括他从政的经过、对我国的贡献以及他丰富的人生经历。 不过，吴庆瑞的妻子潘瑞良得知出版消息后，提出反对，还向报界发表声明，表示吴博士不知有人要为他出书，也没人征求过他的意见，因此出版此书未经他许可，已违背他的意愿。 对此，陈淑珊回应：“我曾就为他写传记这事征询他的意见，他报以一贯的狂笑，说哪会有人要看。我答应他，确保访问简短，他似乎认可了。我曾一度表示也许应该改由他写自传，我可以当他的抄写员，他感叹道‘已经很晚了，我太老了‘。”  Read More →