TR EMERITUS

More and more people are getting frustrated and calling for the resignations of LKY and LHL. The ruling party is fighting hard (more wayangs), giving all kinds of excuses to their bad decisions and policies. I like to give my take on why LKY stays on till today. His first overstay His original intention of power transfer was 1988, why? Remember the elected president – he was shot at by the oppositions. To save face he denied his intention. In 1990, he took a swipe at GCT before hand over (more of a block head). LKY never thought highly of him. Remember LKY said his first choice was Tony Tan? Well, GCT thought that he was good enough – promising 5Cs, more good years and Swiss standard. You know the result... In 1984, GCT mentored LHL at the very start; he even boasted to the AFP that LHL was his first choice.  He never wanted to admit that he was just a ‘seat warmer’. LKY stayed on to keep an eye on GCT and to ensure that GCT would not overstay. N.B. Toh CC was against LHL inclusion into politics. But the good Dr Toh was ousted from the cabinet in 1981 (clearly a political move). In 2004, the economic crisis took a toll on GCT, he finally passed the seat to LHL. His second overstay The baton was now in LHL's hand. Without hesitation, LHL announced Saturdays off for all civil servants. His desire to outshine the 2 ex-PMs proved to be a no-brainer. Till this day, he had been struggling with his oversize hat. The 2006 general election was LHL's first GE as PM. PAP being a "kiasu" party, wanted to ensure its winning. In those days, social media just started. Also, Singaporeans were generally apathetic to politics because life was still good then. LKY and GCT knew that their 2 GRCs would be a walkover as, at the time, opposition still had no confidence of competing head-on with especially 2 former PMs who used to get 70-80% of votes. Their participation would easily give LHL 12 "free" seats (6 for each GRC). And so, LKY and GCT continued to contest in 2006. LKY could have opted out of joining the cabinet but likely, GCT wanted to also have a chance to become a "senior minister". So GCT stayed on and if GCT stayed on, LKY would continue to stay on for the reason given above. Then came 2011 general election. GCT and LKY contested again, thinking that it would be a nice walkover. But by 2011, Singaporeans were getting angry with the PAP government. PAP essentially screwed themselves with their open door immigration policy. Like what NMP Eugene Tan said, this is the "mother of all issues" in Singapore now. Driven by anger, more people join opposition parties. For the first time, all seats were contested in Singapore, including LKY's Tanjong Pagar GRC and GCT's Marine Parade GRC. It was a pity that the opposition team for Tanjong Pagar GRC was disqualified due to technical reason. But in Marine Parade GRC, GCT for the first time, got less than 60%. It was a shock to everyone in PAP. LKY and GCT had no choice but to resign from the cabinet after the 2011 election. Why? It was to protect his son as PAP got the worst % votes. They needed to ensure the future survival of PAP. If LKY stayed on in cabinet, more Singaporeans would get angry. As for GCT, he knew that his days were over when he got less than 60% despite himself being popular with Singaporean voters before. Here is an extract from ST (18 Nov 1985): Then, PM LKY's interview with Asahi Shimbun: Q: Mr Prime Minister, we think that you are still going to be in your position.  But when do you think you will retire? A: As soon as there is somebody who competent to take the job, I should not be here.  It’s better for Singapore.  If I hang on indefinitely, it will become more complicated. GCT – competent?  LKY stayed on. LHL – competent?  LKY also stayed on. So, who is making things more complicated for everyone? Singapore history is currently in the making - very dramatic!   Edmund * Submitted by TRE reader      Read More →

Little India riot 《欲隐其祸，何患无辞》 意思是说，隐藏根尾，隐遁祸端源头，给予的解释，根本就是驴唇不对马嘴。尽管报告写到“天花乱坠，振振有词”，说的话像子弹，笔墨像机关枪，乱枪扫射，不对症下药，也只是浪费时间，浪费子弹。试问，本末倒置之论，何以服众，又如何带领新加坡人民共创未来呢？ 《镇暴车队因堵车延误40分钟抵达现场是借口》 据坊间说法：慢走10分钟，快跑5分钟可抵达暴动现场，是否有点匪夷所思，如此近距离，既堵车几十分钟，这是否也说明了，外来人口暴涨，导致本国塞车情况日益严重，如果政府持继“独断独行”的态度，不正视人口暴涨的问题，只会理下更大隐患。 暴动事件，暴徒皆是外来者，不可抹黑的事实，警方也承认芽笼治安日益恶化”，也有诸多事故证明，是外藉坏分子入侵，导致芽笼治安每况愈下。而今政府依然对“外来者暴涨”课题，是避而不谈，难道说，真要等到“血染街头”，政府才会正视研讨？ 《沟通方面而论》 政府所谓的外来人才，绝多数不晓得英语，大多数民众应该也会认同 (at least for me who can't speak solid angmo can still speak good singlish)。换个方式来说，鸡鸭可以沟通吗？是鸡学鸭语，还是鸭学鸡言？试问，警察如何与不晓英语的外来者沟通？两者无法沟通，则产生矛盾，进而演变成暴动事件。不解决彼此沟通问题，警察未来，又如何维持社会秩序？ 解决警察和外来者，沟通问题，可说是易说难行，一则是举国警察学外语，二则聘请外来者当警察，如果说是后者，警局里则会出现，一只鸡，一只鸭，顿时，警队自身沟通也瘫痪，警察又如何维持社会秩序？ 你们可有听说过，欧美等各国，暴动后禁酒？答案肯定是没有。如果正如政府所说的，只是几只小花猫喝酒闹事，那为什么暴动后，政府严阵以待，实施禁酒，封路，尽一切可能，减少外来者汇聚小印度，加上大批警员驻守等等，这些点点滴滴，会否说明了，外来者的数量，已经严重超越警戒线？ 总结，关键都指向人口数量暴涨，也有大量事故证明，政府的量宽人口政策才是祸首。目前，如果我们要杜绝眼前的乱局，只有两条途径可选： 第一条是现任政府紧急刹车，悬崖勒马，关上“量宽人口”这水龙头 第二条则是《2016》选出新政府，关上“量宽人口”这大闸门 读者们你们认为还有第三条选择吗？   青春小馒头   Editor's note: Perhaps some kind souls in TRE can help translate the whole text. Will help to translate the concluding paragraph - In summary, the key reason (of Little India riot) points to the huge population increase (in Singapore). There are also a lot of incidents and stories proving that government's liberal population policy is the culprit. Currently, if we want to put an end to the present chaos, there are only 2 alternatives: The first is the current government needs to apply the emergency brake, shut the "liberal population policy" tap The second is to elect a new government in 2016, shut the "liberal population policy" gate Readers do you think there is a third choice?  Read More →

(Jakarta, 4 Jul). Antigraft official Bambang Widjojanto has accused Singapore of facilitating money fraud in Indonesia by issuing S$10,000 notes, which have limited domestic use. “Do Singaporeans carry S$10,000 notes in their pockets when they go shopping? For whom do you think the Singaporean government made the note?” Bambang, a deputy chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), asked on Thursday at a discussion in Jakarta. Bambang said that if the Singaporean government did indeed issue the S$10,000 notes for the purpose of Indonesian distribution, it would be “very insulting.” The theory has also been advanced by Agus Santoso, the deputy chairman of the Financial Transaction Report and Analysis Center (PPATK). “In my opinion, they have facilitated Indonesian money fraud because the big notes are only distributed in Indonesia,” Agus said. The actual distribution of the S$10,000 notes, which come out to Rp 96 million each, can be attributed to oversight on behalf of Bank Indonesia’s supervision of money changers. Agus said thanks to policies regarding money exchange, people could freely enter and exit Indonesia in possession of S$10,000 notes. .... The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has announced that it will no longer issue the S$10,000 note as of Oct. 1. The deputy managing director of the MAS, Ong Chong Tee, attributed the move to a better electronic payment security system, which has reduced cash transactions involving large notes. .... Countries like Singapore and Malaysia have essentially become safe havens for graft suspects, Agus recently said, because they are often able to get away with laundering their money there. He cited the case of an unnamed former bank executive — one of dozens who received government bailouts and fled the country following the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis. The fugitive bank executive took up residence in Singapore, where he remained beyond the reach of Indonesian law enforcers, due to the lack of an extradition treaty between the two countries. “In that case,” Agus said, “the fugitive has even become a Singaporean citizen.” [Read more:  The Jakarta Globe]  Read More →