Repost from Temasek Review 26 April 2011 http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/04/26/is-that-mm-lee-speaking/
--------------------------
Finally MM Lee has spoken .He has spoken on 3 points. However, are all his points relevant and correct? It is for the readers to decide:
1) That we should not rock the foundation
This is a wrong perception and assumption. Voting for alternative parties is not rocking the foundation. In fact we are just changing the builders, while maintaining the foundations. Kudos to the old guards. They have laid a good foundation. However, most of the old guards have passed on. The younger team is definitely not as good compared to the old guys(Is there another Goh Keng Swee? How about Hon Sui Sen?or Lim Kim San?) Having a lousier younger team, it is only natural for Singaporeans to seek alternative builders. Therefore, no one is rocking the foundation. In fact, it is precisely with such firm foundation that we notice that the current builders are given us shoddy work at high prices. As such, is it still worthwhile to engage the same builders for another 5-6yrs? It is a simple choice, better and more compassionate builders are around. They will also cost Singapore less. As such, to continue the nation building on the foundation, it is only timely for Singaporeans to vote in alternative parties.Parties that will work towards a Singaporean Singapore.
2) Our selection criteria has the proven track records
With regards to this, reference is made to the article: http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/04/12/do-not-be-hoodwink-by-upcoming-coments-from-mr-lee/
It has predicted that he will mentioned that PAP has the best proven track records for their candidates, out of 5 which are minster potential. It is also predicted that he will speak up.He did. Well, here is the rebuttal:
There will be no reference to the poorly-demeanour candidate TPL and the loose- morale candidate FMH(nothing to do with both gender and age). Once again, he mentioned that the selection process has been proven in history of Singapore to be robust. This may sound like a good possible defense. There is , however, some plausible flaws. The selection process has not been flawless, there are cases of one term and corrupted MPs like the late Teh Ching Wan (Minster. Likewise, there are cases where Minster potential end up as MOS(eg the late MOS Balaji)If history or track record is anything to go by, then the history of the 2 candidates(TPL and FMH) is to be much desired. This argument cuts both ways.
3) CPF and Housing Assets
These are topics, which has been rebuttal many times over the internet. However, an accelerated appreciating housing assets where most citizen have only 1 flat is useless. Where will they stay after selling the flat. If the appreciating asset is just slightly above inflation, most Singaporeans would accept it, but the prices are now beyond the reach of many. CPF, while it has it uses, seemed to be getting further and further away fom withdrawal. The age group is being raised each time. Likewise the basic limit is increasing and the withdrawal amount is limited. The only attractive term for CPF is to be able to will it to someone, As time goes, would it just be a paper value? Were is be a piece of paper that says it is transferred from one generation to the other, but the amount can never be withdrawn fully. Is this a future of CPF?
It is true that Singaporeans have to vote wisely in the heat of the elections. PAP is also guilty of playing up this GE(look at the accusations from MBT, LHL and even GCT who says that he will be gentleman and comment on his GRConly.) If not, our children and randchildren will suffer, starting from the next 5-6 years. As such, it is time to allow alternative parties to represent us in parliament.
Vote for a Singaporean’s Singapore.
Reject PAP’s Singapore.
Anson Be
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
DPM Wong: ‘Look at what I have done the last 27 years’
Repost from Temasek Review 26 April 2011 http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/04/26/dpm-wong-look-at-what-i-have-done-the-last-27-years/
---------------------------
DEPUTY Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng on Sunday urged voters to decide if the escape of Mas Selamat Kastari was a ‘fatal’ enough security lapse that it will affect whether they will elect him.
Mr Wong, who is leading the People’s Action Party team in the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, believes that residents in his constituency will ultimately consider his track record and the work he has done there for the last 27 years.
Mr Wong said this after a market visit to Toa Payoh East, with his other team-mates, who included Education Minister Ng Eng Hen on Sunday morning. He was asked by the media whether the escape of Singapore’s most wanted fugitive – who was recaptured in Malaysia a year later – would cost him votes.
The former Home Affairs Minister said: ‘I told Parliament the day of his escape that a mistake was made, there was a lapse in the security and I apologised for that and I said that we will do everything to find him.
‘Eventually it took us a while to locate him after he ran away and we gave the Malaysians information where he was hiding. Now, having done all that, I think people did understand that yes indeed, we have done what we could.
‘Of course, the first mistake cannot be obliterated. It was there, I owned up to it, as the minister, I took responsibility for it. That’s the right thing to do.
‘And I think people will look at that and see on the whole, based on what I have done here for the last 27 years, is that one lapse by a department fatal to their decision on electing me or not. I think that, they will have to consider.’
Citing the transformation of the Bishan-Toa Payoh area over the last two decades, he said residents in the GRC were generally happy and appreciated the improvements in the area, and no resident had raised the Mas Selamat issue with him.
The Singapore People’s Party (SPP), which is facing off the PAP team in Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, has cited the Mas Selamat incident as an example of the need for greater public accountability, a key issue of the SPP’s manifesto.
Source: Straits Times
---------------------------
DEPUTY Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng on Sunday urged voters to decide if the escape of Mas Selamat Kastari was a ‘fatal’ enough security lapse that it will affect whether they will elect him.
Mr Wong, who is leading the People’s Action Party team in the Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, believes that residents in his constituency will ultimately consider his track record and the work he has done there for the last 27 years.
Mr Wong said this after a market visit to Toa Payoh East, with his other team-mates, who included Education Minister Ng Eng Hen on Sunday morning. He was asked by the media whether the escape of Singapore’s most wanted fugitive – who was recaptured in Malaysia a year later – would cost him votes.
The former Home Affairs Minister said: ‘I told Parliament the day of his escape that a mistake was made, there was a lapse in the security and I apologised for that and I said that we will do everything to find him.
‘Eventually it took us a while to locate him after he ran away and we gave the Malaysians information where he was hiding. Now, having done all that, I think people did understand that yes indeed, we have done what we could.
‘Of course, the first mistake cannot be obliterated. It was there, I owned up to it, as the minister, I took responsibility for it. That’s the right thing to do.
‘And I think people will look at that and see on the whole, based on what I have done here for the last 27 years, is that one lapse by a department fatal to their decision on electing me or not. I think that, they will have to consider.’
Citing the transformation of the Bishan-Toa Payoh area over the last two decades, he said residents in the GRC were generally happy and appreciated the improvements in the area, and no resident had raised the Mas Selamat issue with him.
The Singapore People’s Party (SPP), which is facing off the PAP team in Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, has cited the Mas Selamat incident as an example of the need for greater public accountability, a key issue of the SPP’s manifesto.
Source: Straits Times
The inconvenient truth about WP’s campaign slogan
Repost from Temasek Review 26 April 2011 (http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/04/26/the-inconvenie%e2%80%8bnt-truth-about-wps-campaign-slogan/)
--------------------------------
Dear Straits Times,
I refer to the 23 Apr 2011 letter by Ms Indranee Rajah.
Ms Rajah claims that the Workers’ Party is twisting in every possible way to explain away its campaign theme of a First World parliament. That is not true. Along the way, the Workers’ Party has elaborated more in response to public queries and has clarified its campaign theme.
Ms Rajah claims that the Workers’ Party finds it inconvenient to identify countries as models for a First World parliament because of what is happening in most of the First World. Does Ms Rajah have proof to say so or is she saying it because she feels like it? As a lawyer, she should know better not to insinuate without proof. The Workers’ Party has already explained that it wants to evolve its own model that works for Singapore. Ms Rajah can refuse to accept the Workers’ Party’s reasons but she has no right to declare the reasons false unless she can prove it.
In any case, if we refer to the World Bank’s indicator for government effectiveness, what is happening in most of the First World isn’t as bad as Ms Rajah makes it out to be. Countries like Denmark, Finland, Sweden, New Zealand, Lichtenstein and Hong Kong have done as well as before if not better. Countries like Switzerland, Canada, Luxembourg and Australia have only dipped slightly. Countries like Norway and the Netherlands continue to do well despite larger dips. Therefore, Ms Rajah’s claim that parliaments of First World countries aren’t exemplary because of what is happening to their countries now isn’t quite valid.
Also, what is happening now is just a snapshot of what has happened over many decades. The Global Financial Crisis is touted as a once-a-lifetime event. Do we judge First World countries on the basis of this single event only? If this had been 1997 and we are in the midst of the Asian Financial Crisis, would Ms Rajah be able to say the same?
Ms Rajah claims that there is nothing unique about scrutinising government policies since we already have non-constituency MPs doing it. Ms Rajah is ignoring the right of the opposition MP to block government policies.
Ms Rajah now claims that blocking government policies is about gaining power. Must Ms Rajah and the PAP always see things through their own power hungry eyes? The most innocent thing can become tainted when seen through tainted eyes.
Ms Rajah should realise that even if the vision of a First World parliament is inspired by those found in First World countries, it doesn’t automatically follow that those countries must be the ones to model after. Ms Rajah cannot preclude the Workers’ Party from adapting existing examples into a model that suits Singapore.
The inconvenient truth is simply that of Ms Rajah’s convenient but illegal insinuations.
Thank you
Ng Kok Lim
--------------------------------
Dear Straits Times,
I refer to the 23 Apr 2011 letter by Ms Indranee Rajah.
Ms Rajah claims that the Workers’ Party is twisting in every possible way to explain away its campaign theme of a First World parliament. That is not true. Along the way, the Workers’ Party has elaborated more in response to public queries and has clarified its campaign theme.
Ms Rajah claims that the Workers’ Party finds it inconvenient to identify countries as models for a First World parliament because of what is happening in most of the First World. Does Ms Rajah have proof to say so or is she saying it because she feels like it? As a lawyer, she should know better not to insinuate without proof. The Workers’ Party has already explained that it wants to evolve its own model that works for Singapore. Ms Rajah can refuse to accept the Workers’ Party’s reasons but she has no right to declare the reasons false unless she can prove it.
In any case, if we refer to the World Bank’s indicator for government effectiveness, what is happening in most of the First World isn’t as bad as Ms Rajah makes it out to be. Countries like Denmark, Finland, Sweden, New Zealand, Lichtenstein and Hong Kong have done as well as before if not better. Countries like Switzerland, Canada, Luxembourg and Australia have only dipped slightly. Countries like Norway and the Netherlands continue to do well despite larger dips. Therefore, Ms Rajah’s claim that parliaments of First World countries aren’t exemplary because of what is happening to their countries now isn’t quite valid.
Also, what is happening now is just a snapshot of what has happened over many decades. The Global Financial Crisis is touted as a once-a-lifetime event. Do we judge First World countries on the basis of this single event only? If this had been 1997 and we are in the midst of the Asian Financial Crisis, would Ms Rajah be able to say the same?
Ms Rajah claims that there is nothing unique about scrutinising government policies since we already have non-constituency MPs doing it. Ms Rajah is ignoring the right of the opposition MP to block government policies.
Ms Rajah now claims that blocking government policies is about gaining power. Must Ms Rajah and the PAP always see things through their own power hungry eyes? The most innocent thing can become tainted when seen through tainted eyes.
Ms Rajah should realise that even if the vision of a First World parliament is inspired by those found in First World countries, it doesn’t automatically follow that those countries must be the ones to model after. Ms Rajah cannot preclude the Workers’ Party from adapting existing examples into a model that suits Singapore.
The inconvenient truth is simply that of Ms Rajah’s convenient but illegal insinuations.
Thank you
Ng Kok Lim
President Nathan: We must appreciate foreigners and welcome them
Repost from Temasek Review (http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/04/26/president-nathan-we-must-appreciate-foreigners-and-welcome-them/)
---------------------
Paving the way for another 900,000 ‘Foreign Talents’, President S R Nathan has called on Singaporeans to appreciate and welcome foreigners into Singapore.
Speaking at an Indian community event, the President was quoted by the local media as saying: “New arrivals and foreign workers may cause discomfort because of our unfamiliarity with their diverse accents and habits, but we must not forget how they have made our lives better.”
“We must appreciate the contributions of these foreigners and new citizens, and welcome them into our midst, as our ancestors were welcomed in days gone by.” he added.
Barely 3 days ago, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has hinted that Singapore needs another 900,000 to “do the construction and other heavy work, jobs Singaporeans are not willing to do.”
Although Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had on a seperate occasion promised to ’slow down’ on the intake of foreigners, he backtrack later on to reiterate that foreigners help create jobs for Singaporeans.
According to a Wall Street Journal editorial in January 2010, the rapid inflow of foreigners has depressed the wages of ordinary Singaporeans, increased the cost of living, especially that of public housing and led to an overall decrease in the standard of living in Singapore.
Foreigners now make up 40 percent of Singapore’s population, up from 14 percent in 1990. Of the remaining 60 percent who are citizens, an increasing number are born overseas.
The next general election may be the last window of opportunity for native Singaporeans to reclaim ownership of their own country. The PAP’s present immigration policies are likely to continue if it forms the government again and Singaporeans will soon be relegated to being minorities in their own country of birth.
---------------------
Paving the way for another 900,000 ‘Foreign Talents’, President S R Nathan has called on Singaporeans to appreciate and welcome foreigners into Singapore.
Speaking at an Indian community event, the President was quoted by the local media as saying: “New arrivals and foreign workers may cause discomfort because of our unfamiliarity with their diverse accents and habits, but we must not forget how they have made our lives better.”
“We must appreciate the contributions of these foreigners and new citizens, and welcome them into our midst, as our ancestors were welcomed in days gone by.” he added.
Barely 3 days ago, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew has hinted that Singapore needs another 900,000 to “do the construction and other heavy work, jobs Singaporeans are not willing to do.”
Although Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had on a seperate occasion promised to ’slow down’ on the intake of foreigners, he backtrack later on to reiterate that foreigners help create jobs for Singaporeans.
According to a Wall Street Journal editorial in January 2010, the rapid inflow of foreigners has depressed the wages of ordinary Singaporeans, increased the cost of living, especially that of public housing and led to an overall decrease in the standard of living in Singapore.
Foreigners now make up 40 percent of Singapore’s population, up from 14 percent in 1990. Of the remaining 60 percent who are citizens, an increasing number are born overseas.
The next general election may be the last window of opportunity for native Singaporeans to reclaim ownership of their own country. The PAP’s present immigration policies are likely to continue if it forms the government again and Singaporeans will soon be relegated to being minorities in their own country of birth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)