TR EMERITUS

Someone asked for my view on this issue - Should Singapore use a party-list proportional representation instead of the current first-past-the-post voting that use constituency like SMS and GRC to give the opposition many seats if their party got 5% of votes in the elections? This article explains the "party list proportional system". I think that it is better to have a mixed system, where a member is elected to represent the constitutuency under the "first past the post system" and additional members are elected on the "party list proportional system". This article explains the "mixed system". My preference is for a "one party system" where election of leaders is carried out democratically by the members of the party (which could represent 5% to 10% of the population. This system ensures that the leaders are elected by people who are willing to spend time to understand the system and to know the people that they are voting for. Most countries consider that "democracy" requires all citizens to have the right to vote. In practice, a large majority of the population do not pay attention to the political system. They are easily swayed by messages made during the election campaign. The political parties and candidates with the most funds are able to reach out better to the votes. The winners are usually the people with the most election funds. This is a real weakness of a system where every citizen has a vote. It explains why most democracies are not able to deal with the challenges faced by the ordinary people. There is another weakness in a system based on competition among political parties. These parties spend more energy fighting each other than to find solutions to improve the living standards of the people. A "democratic system" allows for the governing party to be thrown out of office if it does not perform. In most countries, the governing party does not perform and have to be replaced at a future general election. Tan Kin Lian      Read More →

Zakir Hossain Hello everyone, I would like to respond to the statement issued by the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) regarding their refusal to renew my work permit, which resulted in my repatriation to Bangladesh after 19 years of work in Singapore. Thousands of migrant workers in Singapore work hard in construction, shipyard, manufacturer, landscape industry daily to build the city, maintain the roads and clean the streets. We travel to Singapore to earn money to support dependents back in our home countries. Over time, many of us also develop an attachment to Singapore. We befriend Singaporeans, and we care about Singapore and want the country to do well. But it is difficult for migrant workers to have a voice in Singapore. We are aware that our work permits can be cancelled at any time by our employers or the authorities, and that scares many workers into silence. With loans to pay and family members to support, most of us cannot afford to lose the jobs that we have in Singapore and be sent home. Migrant workers faced discrimination and difficult conditions even before the pandemic, but Covid-19 made things worse for us. Tens of thousands of us were locked down in dormitories that were crowded, hot, and stuffy. We had to live in fear as the virus spread. We often did not have much information about what was happening, which made us worry even more. Cooped up in our dormitories, we could only agonise about our situation, made worse by the knowledge that our loved ones at home were also worrying and crying for us. Conditions can vary from dormitory to dormitory. Some workers were in more difficult situations than others. The workers at Westlite Jalan Tukang were given food of poor quality, with insects found among the rice and vegetables. Living conditions were poor, and those who had tested positive for Covid were not immediately isolated. It made them worry about passing the virus on to their roommates, as much as their roommates were scared of catching Covid from them. When I heard of the conditions that these worker brothers faced in their dormitory, I could immediately relate. It was easy to put myself in their shoes. I myself caught Covid more than once during the pandemic, while I was stuck in my dormitory. We were confined in stuffy rooms, with up to 12 people in a room, and 15 of such rooms using one bathroom. Ambulance sirens filled the dormitory every day and we were losing hope one by one. I knew, firsthand, how it feels to find your roommates testing positive, and wondering when you might be next, and how bad it might be when you get sick. I saw my roommates being shocked and scared after I told them I was feverish and might have Covid despite preventive measures. There was no space in the room to hide from the virus; two of my roommates started crying and another two started praying. I have survived despair, so I know it well. Most of us could not give feedback to our dormitory operators or employers about the situation. Some were not paid their salaries despite it being promised to them. In August 2020, Reuters reported “a spate of suicides and attempted suicides involving migrants in Singapore” due to mental health issues from a lack of support from friends and family. I myself was transferred to the hospital, Expo and army camp, and then back to the hospital again, when I was down with Covid. In October 2021, a Facebook user took a video of the community care facility in Ang Mo Kio and its poor conditions were rectified. Contrastingly, as migrant workers, we have no avenue to talk about the dormitory conditions or the Covid situation. Only dormitory residents with lived experience can speak of the trauma we went through I could understand why the workers in Westlite Jalan Tukang felt helpless, angry, and anxious. That was why I was dismayed to see the response to these desperate workers. I was horrified to see that riot police and armoured vehicles had been deployed to the dormitory. (As CNA reported at the time, there was a “heavy security presence”, with armoured police vehicles at the scene.) It made me feel like, instead of engaging with the workers’ fears and concerns as human beings, the reaction of the authorities was to see my fellow workers first and foremost as security threats to be managed. I am a migrant worker and a poet. I use my poetry to convey the experience of migrant workers to the rest of Singapore. I use my writing to bridge the gap between workers and Singaporeans who might not know much about what we face, so far from our families and our homes. I wanted to use my voice to highlight the concerns, hopes, dreams, and fears that migrant workers in Singapore have. Upset by what happened at Westlite Jalan Tukang, I responded as I often do: with words and poetry. The point of my Facebook post was to point out that, if migrant workers were really treated as “brothers”, we would not be treated so differently from others in Singapore. If we were really seen as part of the Singapore family, the response to the pain and suffering of migrant workers would not be riot police in scary, intimidating vehicles. I had only hoped that the Minister would have more compassion for workers. I wanted to highlight the plight of the workers in Westlite Jalan Tukang and use my voice to help their situation. It was also not to “incite” or “inflame” the emotions of workers in Westlite Jalan Tukang and elsewhere. This can be seen from how the poem was addressed to the Minister, and not to the workers. Additionally, I signed off as “workers of Westlite Tukang”, because I had heard first-hand accounts from the workers there and have lived experience as a worker dormitory resident as well. It saddens me that MOM saw my efforts to speak up about migrant workers’ issues, and to take part in community initiatives, literary art festivals and workshops, as “activism” that they had to tolerate the previous times they renewed my work permit “despite” my involvement in such activities. I have never wished bad things for Singapore. I have always wanted to contribute to the community, and sincerely thought that what I did brought people together and made society richer. It is disappointing that what I saw as giving back to a country and society I have grown to care deeply about, was seen by MOM as me overstaying my welcome. I am worried that MOM’s statement sends a message to migrant workers still in Singapore that speaking out about workers’ issues is “activism” that will be punished. I am concerned that this will make workers even more afraid to speak up, and to participate in public life in Singapore. I fear that this will hurt the relationships between workers and Singaporeans that so many of us have worked so hard to build over the years. I am grateful to Singapore for letting me contribute to your country and infrastructure for the past two decades. I hope that workers will have accessible channels for feedback. I hope issues will be resolved without any repercussions when workers speak up. I hope workers can continue to participate in public life in Singapore freely. We see Singapore as our home away from home and we are part of the Singapore community. I want to encourage my brothers to continue working for the good of Singapore, as I did.   Sincerely, Zakir Hossain      Read More →

From 1975 when the Misuse of Drugs Act was amended to replace the sentence of long term imprisonment, caning and hefty fines with DEATH, the Singapore government has failed to achieve its goal of zero drug case? Doesn't this 47 year period prove to the government that the death penalty has not worked as a deterrence? How many more years and how many more deaths by hanging does the government need to prove that they cannot achieve their target? Can the government wise up? Stop all executions and abolish the death penalty. Executions do not stop drug trafficking.   Teo Soh Lung      Read More →