Quantcast
Channel: The Real Singapore - Politics
Viewing all 937 articles
Browse latest View live

Dr Chee Soon Juan: A Middle Way for Singapore’s Economy

$
0
0

I refer to Mr Sanjay Perera’s letter, “We will always need clarity, integrity in leadership” (Dec 5).

Referring to my op-ed A New Vision for Singapore in the Wall Street Journal, he wrote that the economic growth model the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) advocates is contradictory because the party believes in growth at all costs while decrying Singapore’s present model.

He has misunderstood our stand. We do not believe in gross domestic product growth at all costs. In fact, we have stated in our alternative population policy, Building A People, that economic growth at all costs harms society.

While the market economy is important to encourage enterprise, the state must also intervene judiciously to ameliorate the extremes of wealth disparity, which we now witness here.

Between the extremes of collectivised farming where everyone is equally poor and the unregulated free market where the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few have wreaked economic havoc for the many, there is a middle way.

The SDP has advocated several policy initiatives that would take Singapore on this middle way. For example, we must encourage a risk-taking spirit among Singaporeans and a questioning — even dissenting — mind, which can only occur in a free, democratic society.

At the same time, we have laid out concrete proposals in our health-care, housing and soon-to-be-launched economic policies to narrow income inequality. These papers are published on our website http://yoursdp.org

These proposals include, but are not limited to:

• Abolishing the Minimum Sum Scheme and returning Singaporeans their Central Provident Fund (CPF) savings. This will afford retirees financial security.

• Removing land cost from public flats. This will make them affordable and will not deplete CPF savings for retirement.

• Doing away with the Goods and Services Tax for basic foodstuff, medical treatment and drugs as well as school supplies.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

Mr Perera also wrote: “Part of the contradiction that unhinges his piece is his claim about not letting market norms decide how society is run.”

In my piece, I made the distinction between a market economy and a market society. I shall not repeat it here, save to reiterate that the monetisation of social values, as is done with many of the People’s Action Party’s policies, is harmful to our society.

Mr Perera wondered whether we are “willing to advocate higher taxes, especially on the wealthy, as part of measures to ensure equity”.

There are ways to alleviate poverty and close the income gap here without having to raise taxes, such as re-prioritising our national budget and introducing the measures mentioned above, although raising taxes on the wealthiest 1 per cent should not be ruled out.

 

Dr Chee Soon Juan

*Letter first appeared on TODAY Voices, (9 Dec)

 

AHPETC: We Remain Steadfast to Serve the Residents of the Town

$
0
0

I refer to the article published in the Straits Times and Lian He Zao Bao on 10th December 2014 written by Mr Lawrence Wong, Minister for Culture Community and Youth. 

In his article, Minister Wong repeated the same tune of his party colleagues about Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) allegedly not releasing information on its financial matters.  He also raised doubts about some statements attributed to me as AHPETC Chairman on the arrears situation and reporting of arrears to the Ministry of National Development (MND). 

Let me clarify the matter. 

Minister Wong may have not known that the TC had explained to MND its challenge in submitting arrears data in MND’s format from mid-2013.  I had explained that while the IT system being used at AHPETC could churn out arrears reports, manual counting and sorting was required to get the information into the format required by the MND.  I had also informed MND that AHPETC had requested its software developers to enhance the system to churn out the reports in the required format, but this was work in progress.  MND had been informed that AHPETC’s Finance Team and its software developers had been involved in (two consecutive) audits, first by the TC’s own auditors (commencing mid 2013) and then by the Auditor-General (commencing March 2014), and that this had led to a deferment of reporting requests, including MND’s request for arrears data in its prescribed format.  I had concurrently offered to submit to MND the arrears data the TC had as it was, but this was rejected by MND.

Minister Wong asked the same questions as his colleagues about AHPETC having stopped submitting monthly arrears 10 months before the AGO audit began. He may have been under a mistaken impression due to mass media reports.

When the mass media interviewed me on 10 November 2014 on the MND’s Town Council Management Review (TCMR) results for Financial Year 2013, I was asked about the circumstances leading to AHPETC’s non-submission of two sets of documents – the TC’s audited financial statements for FY 13 as well as the arrears reports.  I had told the media that the audit for FY 13 could not reasonably commence while the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO) special audit was still in progress; as for the arrears reports, I told them that the finance team had been tied up with audits by our commercial auditors for FY 12 and then by the AGO. 

Unfortunately, my responses to the two matters were conflated in certain media reports. At no time did I say that focusing on the AGO audit was the sole cause of the delay in submission of the arrears data to MND.  In any case, MND should have known this from my earlier correspondence.

Due Diligence into Arrears Situation and Arrears Data

Minister Wong further wrote that “when pressed recently, Ms Lim said that she was looking into the matter and would release her findings in due time. That was the same answer she gave two years ago, when the arrears issues were first flagged”. 

It was unfortunate that Minister Wong has chosen to generalize the issue in a different context.  He referred to my statement in 2012 that AHPETC would be looking into the arrears situation and my recent statement that AHPETC would verify the arrears data.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

Minister Wong impliedly wondered whether anything had been done to recover arrears since 2012.  As residents will attest, AHPETC has been following up on households in arrears by issuing reminders for payment and engaging law firms to proceed with court actions where other steps have failed.  Residents in financial difficulties have also been placed on instalment plans.  As for the 2013 S&CC arrears figures recently highlighted by MND, we have made public several times that we are looking into the arrears data, and will respond to the query on the financial and arrears situation in due course.

Transparency and Accountability Accusation – A Non-Starter

Finally, I refer to Minister Wong’s “queasiness” about whether AHPETC and indeed the Workers’ Party (WP) is deliberately trying to avoid answering questions about the TC’s financial management and situation, and hence was not transparent and failed to account to the residents.

I thank the PAP ministers for repeatedly reminding Singaporeans of the issues that are close to our heart.

First, the public can expect that the PAP will be the first to hold WP to account.

Secondly, the PAP government has all the investigative arms within its disposal to hold WP to account on any matter under the sun.

Thirdly, AHPETC has been facilitating the special audit by the AGO, and like all Town Councils, AHPETC will have to have its annual accounts audited by firms approved by the MND.  We trust that the government will duly make public the AGO audit findings; the AHPETC’s annual audited accounts will also have to made public when audit is completed.  I believe that once the audited information is available, more productive discussions can be entered into. 

In the meantime, I urge Minister Wong not to confuse or alarm the public by speculating on whether the S&CC arrears situation has worsened or whether AHPETC is facing “bigger problems”.

SYLVIA LIM  
CHAIRMAN
ALJUNIED-HOUGANG-PUNGGOL EAST TOWN COUNCIL

10 DECEMBER 2014

 

Related:

Lawrence Wong Slams WP's Funds Management but Turns Blind Eye to CPF

 

SDP: We need you to build this vision with us

$
0
0

We want to build a thinking nation, one that shows compassion, one where the government listens to us, and where, even though things are not easy, we never give up trying to progress as a people.

We want to unfetter the minds of our fellow citizens, maximise opportunity for our younger people, and empower the poor among us.

We want to reclaim for our people the ability to question authority and to build a capacity for collective reasoning and debate.

This is the vision that the SDP has been working towards. We have a chance to achieve it at the next elections.

But we cannot do this alone. No one can. We need you, the people, to build this vision with us.

Next year we celebrate our 35th year of democratic service. During this time, we have been attacked relentlessly. There have been times when we had very little to go on. But we dug deep and where there was no path forward, we made one. We persevered because we believed in our people, in our nation.

Today, we humbly say that not only are we are still standing but, more importantly, we are growing and moving forward ever so determinedly. We have been consistent, we have been honest, and we have worked hard, very hard – all to make this Republic that we call home a better and prouder one for all our fellow citizens.

If you share our vision, if you believe in what we have done, if you believe in principled leadership then volunteer with us and join our campaign. Come to our GE2015 Campaign Kick-Off on 10 Jan 2015 at the Holiday Inn Atrium, Outram Road from 2-5pm.

Many Singaporeans expect elections to be called in the last quarter of 2015. That leaves us around nine months to make our case to voters to elect SDP candidates into Parliament.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

We have a mountain to climb. Our opponents have, to put it generously, an unfair advantage: They control the media; have, at their disposal, huge resources from the state; and bully and intimidate voters.

The task ahead, as you can see, is truly mammoth. If we delay our work or economise in our effort, we will wake up the day after polling to find that the PAP has retained all the seats. This will be disastrous for Singapore and her future, an outcome that none of us want to see.

So while we still can, while we still have time, let us roll up our sleeves and get to work. We are starting early so that when the whistle blows, we are prepared.

Go to our FB event page and make a commitment to come. We will run a brief workshop to equip you with the skills to help run the campaign.

Spread the word, don't just come by yourselves. Bring your family and friends, colleagues and classmates along. Organise groups on your FB. Talk to your neighbours. Let's get busy and turn this into a truly historic campaign.

 

Source: http://yoursdp.org

 

SingFirst Responds to PM Lee's PAP60 Speech: PM Lee is Flip Flopping

$
0
0

Channel News Asia sought SingFirst’s views regarding PM Lee’s speech at the PAP party conference on 7 Dec 2014. He spoke about how the next GE will be a deadly serious fight, that it was about choosing the next government and not merely giving more seats to the opposition.

CNA’s report on his speech here.

CNA: What is Sing First’s response to the speech?

SingFirst : The PM shows lack of confidence. He is flip-flopping. More than 20 years ago when town councils were introduced, PAP had said that election was about electing MPs to manage local housing estates, instilling fear in voters that their estates would be mismanaged by opposition MPs and would consequently drop in value. Now that opposition MPs have proven that they can manage housing estates, PAP is singing a different tune. By describing it as a national election now, PAP hopes to instill fear in voters that opposition cannot manage the country. We will prove the PAP wrong just as the opposition PAP themselves without experience in government proved the ruling party in 1959 wrong.

There is another revealing aspect. By downplaying the local dimension of a GE, the PM unwittingly shows his lack of confidence in his party local machinery which has been failing in recent years. He knows his local machinery will fail him again in the coming GE and it will not be a surprise if he is side-stepping them.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

PM also implies that the nation does not need checkers. He is wrong. Every organisation needs checkers; for example, the accounts of companies need to be checked by auditors. Without checkers, the PAP government will be prosecutor, judge and jury, all in one. Isn’t this scary? The PM is also wrong to say a checker will mean one doer or thinker less and hence a less effective government. The government does not need all MPs to be in government. it only needs a majority of MPs to form the government or 44 MPs in the current Parliament; not all MPs are members of the government with government posts. So even if all the 43 non-government MPs are opposition MPs, the government can still function effectively with all 43 opposition MPs as checkers.

The PM misled Singaporeans by saying opposition parties have no vision. If he goes to the website of opposition parties, he will notice they have a vision for the country. For example, SingFirst states its vision loud and clear on its website. Obviously PM does not know his competitors well. Has he forgotten what Sun Tze said, “Know yourself, know your enemy, a thousand battles, a thousand victories.” With LHL as leader, PAP will not win a thousand victories and it will not achieve its stated goal of winning back all lost seats. Isn’t it time for the PAP to change its Secretary General?

CNA: How would the party define the next GE?

SingFirst :  We see the next GE as a last chance for Singaporeans to assert ourselves, our interests and well being in the face of PAP’s relentless attempt to dilute the core of native Singaporeans by converting huge numbers of foreigners to citizenship. Yes the next GE is deadly serious for true blue Singaporeans.

CNA: How is the party gearing up for the next elections?

SingFirst: We are gearing up to contest as many constituencies as we can to provide an alternative to the PAP in cooperation with other opposition parties.

Source: SingFirst.Org

 

SDP: Political Parties Need a Strong Set of Values

$
0
0

A political party must not exist only to win power. It must also have a firm regard for the values that it hopes society will embody.

For the SDP, there is a set of core values which have shaped our party and guided us in word and deed. We present them here.

Equality

Equality forms the bedrock of a modern community. Equality does not mean making everyone the same, it means providing the equality of opportunity for everyone to excel and be the best that they can be. Without equal opportunity, especially in education, the chasm between the haves and the have nots will only grow wider and, worse, obliterate social mobility.

Compassion

Compassion is about taking care of the weak. It defines us as humans. Neglecting our weak, the elderly, and our poor is not just bad politics, it's also bad economics. That we are endowed with the ability to care for our weak, frail and less fortunate are virtues that we should celebrate, not shun. Compassion is what will keep greed from tearing our society asunder.

A government must have a strong sense of economic achievement tempered by an equally robust attitude of compassion. Only then can we ensure that prosperity reaches all.

Justice

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

The hallmark of a First World country is how the rule of law is upheld in society. Justice is how we, as a people, treat our fellow citizens.

Equality before the law is the mark of a just society. Discrimination against our fellow citizens whether it is in the social, economic and political sphere prevents justice from being served.

Democracy

Without democracy and political rights, the people cannot speak up on everyday issues that affect them – issues such as the retention of our CPF savings, escalating, HDB prices, high cost of living, etc. It is the lack political freedoms in Singapore that have given rise to many of the problems we face today because of the PAP's refusal to listen to the people.

Principled leadership

Politicians have acquired a bad reputation for cynically winning office at any price. This undermines confidence in the democratic process. Principled leadership is crucial to conduct government and retain public trust. In the long run political systems need principled leaders to enhance their societies.

These values underwrite the SDP's foundation, they inform us in our policy making. From healthcare to education, housing to population growth, the core values form the basis of our policies.

If they are also the values you want to see in Singapore's governance, come and join us at our GE2015 Campaign Kick-Off on 10 January 2015, Saturday, 2-5:30pm at the Holiday Inn Atrium, Changi 1 and 2, Level 2, Outram Road.

 

PAP Grassroots Leader masquerading as concerned citizen to question AHPETC

$
0
0

PAP Grassroots Leader masquerading as concerned citizen?

In a letter published in the freesheet Today, a reader by the name of S Shaikh Ismail called for residents to apply the standards of the corporate world and hold AHPETC accountable for its performance, as they "purchase and consume services (provided by the town council) on a monthly basis."

Drawing a parallel with the corporate world, he wrote:

"In the corporate world, a company is held accountable to its employees, directors and shareholders. There is a high degree of governance and this entails continuously measuring, tracking and assessing the performance of a firm against a set of clear and comprehensive metrics and performance indicators."

See: http://m.todayonline.com/voices/stakeholders-should-hold-town-councils-accountable

A check on the internet against the name of S Shaikh Ismail revealed that the writer is actually a key PAP grassroots leader in the Pasir Ris East PAP Branch.

According to his linkedin profile, Shaikh Ismail is in fact heavily involved in grassroots work and PAP initiatives:

"Shaikh is currently the Secretary of the Pasir Ris East Active Ageing Committee. He was also part of the 26-member committee which led the “Our SG Conversation” in 2013, looking into engaging Singaporeans to develop “as home with hope and heart”."

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/shaikh-ismail/4/86a/b4a?_mSplash=1

 

See also:

http://news.asiaone.com/print/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20100219-199622.html

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

His call for residents to apply corporate standards to town council accountability mirrors his current profession as a manager in the firm, Accenture, which provides consultancy services to companies to maximize shareholders' value.

Shaikh Ismail's letter is both ironical and baffling.

Under his Party's management, both GIC and Temasek have lost billions and yet, their Senior Management remain intact and shielded from criticisms.

Within the Party, ministers and ex-ministers (Vivian Balakrishnan, Wong Kan Seng, Yeo Cheow Tong, Mah Bow Tan) have performed poorly and yet escaped public sanction.

It also bears reminding that during GE 2011, his Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong himself had apologized for the mistakes made under his regime. In 2013, Lee again admitted that his regime lacked 20/20 vision.

Based on this poor track record, if we are to apply corporate standards of accountability, the PAP should have been sacked long ago. This is especially considering that we taxpayers are paying them each millions of dollars.

In reiteration, Shaikh Ismail would do well to remember the adage that when you point an accusatory finger at someone, your four fingers are pointing back at you.

 

 

The Alternative View

Source: https://www.facebook.com/358759327518739/photos/a.598097686918234.107374...

 

PAP Starting to Wobble on Minimum Sum, SDP will Keep up Pressure

$
0
0

PAP starting to wobble on Minimum Sum, SDP will keep up pressure

The Government has called for a review of the CPF Minimum Sum Scheme and says that it is willing to be more flexible on the matter including allowing a different Minimum Sum for different groups of people.  This is the clearest sign yet that the PAP is worried about the backlash that has developed to its move to withhold the people's hard-earned savings.  To be absolutely clear, however, such a measure will only confuse and complicate the CPF issue. In the end, the Government will still withhold the much-needed savings and leave retirees insufficient income to live on. 

The SDP stands firm and unambiguous on this matter as we have for the last 20 years: Abolish the Minimum Sum Scheme and return to retirees all their money.

The Government has broken its solemn promise to return Singaporeans their CPF savings. It is now trying to bargain with the people how much it can retain with this latest announcement to make the Minimum Sum more “flexible”.  The PAP says that the Minimum Sum Scheme is needed to prevent retirees from squandering their savings. Such an argument is dubious at best. There will always be the few who do not know how to spend their money wisely. The vast majority are, however, financially prudent, and they should not be penalised by having their retirement savings withheld. 

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

Such a policy is not only unfair and unintelligent but also immoral. Retirees need their retirement savings for various purposes like investing in a business, helping to pay for their children's education or simply to survive on in expensive Singapore.  Singaporeans have taken to the Internet to loudly and clearly indicate their rejection of the Minimum Sum Scheme and the PAP, with one eye on the next general elections, is beginning to wobble. Hence, its recent announcement to introduce “flexibility” into the scheme.

The SDP reiterates our stand on this issue: The Government must return the CPF money to the people in full after retirement.  We will keep up the pressure on the PAP to honour it's obligation and we will not stop until the Government heeds the people's voice. 

 

Notes:

The Minimum Sum was introduced in 1987. Upon reaching the age 55, a portion of one's savings in the Central Provident Fund will be transferred to the Minimum Sum Scheme. If the amount does not meet the required Minimum Sum, a portion of your new contributions, voluntary contributions, government top-ups and other refunds received after 55 will be used to top up the sum.

When it was first introduced, the Minimum Sum stood at $30,000. This was steadily increased to $155,000 in 2014 and will further rise to $161,000 in 2015. 

 
Singapore Democratic Party
 

SingFirst: Genes Can be Inherited but not Performance

$
0
0

After our Ang Mo Kio GRC walkabout

The PM’s performance was the focus of the media interview at the end of SingFirst’s walkabout in his Ang Mo Kio GRC yesterday. It is common knowledge and widely felt among Singaporeans that the economy has become less robust and society is more divided, stressed and unhappy.

He has failed to repeat his father’s achievements as PM.chip offLee Hsien Loong’s dismal record is unimaginable given that he has been “trained” as minister for 20 years before taking on the job as PM in 2004. Neither have the genes from his father been of much help. He might have inherited intelligent genes from his father but certainly not his performance. Unhappiness with their MP’s performance as PM was evident from our conversations with several groups of AMK residents in our walkabout. We met many residents who were severely affected by PAP’s policies that did not create a trickle down effect for the lower to middle class families, even in the PM’s GRC.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

Among them was a cleaner lady, Mdm Tham, resident of AMK, who described her struggle as a hawker centre helper. Mdm Tham earns a meagre salary of between $600 to $700 just to cover her monthly room rent. We will follow up with an article on Mdm Tham very soon as she represents the many elderly Singaporeans who need to perform the daily grind even at her age.

12

Mdm Tham earns $600 – $700 monthly as a part-time hawker centre helper

Prior to the walkabout, we briefed our members to familiarise them with the route. Some new members also shared their lives, their hopes, their dreams, how they have been affected by the recent policies and why they joined SingFirst.

singfirst members share

From left to right – Randy Ashmooni, Richard Foo, Roger Lim and Abel Soh

SingFirst Briefing

Tan Peng Ann briefed and shared the experience from the first walkabout in Tanjong Pagar for the second one in AMK

*See the rest of the photos at http://singfirst.org/2014/12/08/genes-can-be-inherited-but-not-performance/

 


SingFirst: Ghost of the Population White Paper Casts Long Shadow in Pasir Ris Punggol GRC

$
0
0

Several of the residents, in particular the young and middle age PMETs, expressed concern about the effects of the government’s liberal immigration policy. We disclosed to them that we had chosen to come to Pasir Ris – Punggol GRC in order to highlight this particular issue. Their MP and anchor minister in their GRC, Teo Chee Hean, is the minister in charge of the Population White Paper. In the PWP, the minister wants huge numbers of additional foreign PMETs and workers to come into Singapore, which will overcrowd our little island even more.

We empathise with their worries and told them the coming GE will give them the opportunity to put things right at the ballot box.

These are the photographs of our walkabout. Please comment and share your thoughts with us.

DSC_8692

3pm sharp on the field!

 

DSC_8737

Yong Guan and Peng Ann

DSC_8716

David Tan greets an elderly resident

DSC_8764

Randy, Jee Say and Chiraq (left to right)

 

*See the rest of the photos at: http://singfirst.org/2014/12/18/walkabout-3-ghost-of-the-population-whit...

Tags: 

High Commission of Singapore to Australia: Dr Poh Soo Kai’s commentary is 'Misleading'

$
0
0

<above pic: Former ISA detainee Dr Poh Soo Kai>

RESPONSE TO POH SOO KAI’S ALLEGATIONS

The PDF of this letter is available here.

Introduction

Dr Poh Soo Kai’s commentary (“Singapore’s ‘Battle for Merger’ revisited”) in New Mandala on 3 Dec 2014 is a misleading account of Operation Coldstore, Singapore’s merger with Malaya, the Barisan Sosialis Singapura (Barisan) and his own role in that period.

Dr Poh and other revisionists like Dr Thum Ping Tjin have alleged that Operation Coldstore was a political exercise meant to suppress what they claim to be legitimate, presumably peaceful, democratic opponents of the PAP government. A full reading of the declassified documents from the British National Archives shows clearly that Operation Coldstore was a security operation meant to counter the serious security threat posed by the outlawed Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) and their supporters in Singapore, working through the Barisan and associated communist united front (CUF) organisations. The revisionists conveniently omit mention of the incriminating information in these documents. For example, they quote selectively some of then UK Commissioner to Singapore Lord Selkirk’s remarks to claim that Operation Coldstore was an act of political suppression with no security basis. But a holistic reading of all the documents debunks their accounts. The documents reveal that both Selkirk and his deputy Philip Moore were concerned about the extent to which the CPM had penetrated the Barisan and had concluded that security action was imperative. Indeed, about two months before Operation Coldstore was carried out, they had begun to urge strenuously that action be taken.

The Barisan was not an ordinary left-wing political party, and its leaders were not “unwitting dupes” of the Communists. It was the prime CUF body in Singapore in the 1960s, influenced, directed and led by CPM cadres, as the British officials then, as well as CPM leaders themselves since, have acknowledged.

CPM in Singapore

In 1948, the CPM launched an armed struggle to establish communist rule in Malaya and Singapore. This was part of the wave of communist revolutionary wars then taking place in Asia. When terrorist attacks, sabotage and assassinations did not work, the CPM decided to pursue mass struggle. It re-activated the CUF by infiltrating and subverting open and legal organisations, including political parties, trade unions and student organisations.

This CUF instigated student and labour unrest in Singapore. Consequently, the Labour Front government of Chief Minister Lim Yew Hock – with the full concurrence of the colonial authorities – arrested over 300 CPM and CUF elements in 1956 and 1957 alone. Operation Coldstore in 1963 was a continuation of security operations that had been mounted since 1948 to contain the CPM.

The People’s Action Party (PAP) was elected to office in June 1959 on a platform that called for the merger of Singapore and Malaya. Both the non-communist faction of the PAP led by Lee Kuan Yew as well as the pro-communist faction led by Lim Chin Siong supported merger. In May 1961, then Malayan Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman proposed a “Greater Malaysia”, including Malaya, Singapore, and the British territories in Borneo. Mr Lee’s government welcomed the Tunku’s proposal. However, the pro-communists in the PAP came out in opposition to merger. They tried to capture the PAP and the Singapore Government in July 1961. They and the CPM believed that merger at that point would have frustrated their aim: to capture Singapore and use it as a base to subvert the Federation, in order to establish communist rule over the whole of Malaya. They also opposed merger because it would have put internal security in the hands of the anti-communist Malaysian central government in Kuala Lumpur, which would have had no hesitation to suppress pro-communists in Singapore as it had in Malaya.

When the communists and their supporters narrowly failed in their bid to capture the PAP, they were expelled from the party. They formed their own political party, the Barisan Sosialis. The following year, in Sep 1962, they lost the merger referendum. The Barisan then began discussing the question of armed struggle, and also pinned their hopes on Sukarno’s Indonesia opposing Malaysia.

The issue of armed struggle was discussed at length at a Barisan HQ meeting attended by about 40 cadres, including members of the Central Executive Committee as well as branch representatives, on 23 Sep 1962. Summing up the views expressed, Barisan Central Executive Committee member Chok Kok Thong urged his colleagues to “themselves determine the form their struggle should take: ‘basically armed struggle is the highest form of struggle’ but whether it should be adopted or not would depend on ‘the entire international situation’…”. Chok Kok Thong added:“…no one could say that the revolution was complete if it took the form of an armed struggle or incomplete if the peaceful and constitutional methods were used. …Experience elsewhere showed that there was no country in the world which had ‘attained a thorough success in revolution through constitutional processes’, and that throughout South East Asia, including Malaya, the ‘ruling classes would not lightly hand over political power to the leftists’”.[1]

The Barisan’s support for the armed Brunei revolt in Dec 1962, and their close association with the rebel leaders, showed that they were ready, when the opportunity arose, to use violent unconstitutional means to overthrow the government.

The Internal Security Council of Singapore (ISC), comprising representatives of the governments of the United Kingdom, Singapore and the Federation of Malaya, therefore approved Operation Coldstore in Feb 1963, as a pre-emptive move against the communists and their supporters.

That the security operation was targeted against the communists and their supporters – not mere democratic opponents of the PAP – has been affirmed by no less an authority than the CPM Secretary-General Chin Peng. He acknowledged in his memoirs that he had expected such a crackdown and had advised his cadres and followers to take the necessary precautions. He expressed regret that they did not do so, as Operation Coldstore, in his words, “shattered our underground network throughout the island. Those who escaped the police net went into hiding. Many fled to Indonesia”.[2] Clearly Operation Coldstore had not targeted innocent, non-communist “socialists”.

Barisan and CPM

The Barisan Sosialis was formed in July 1961 on the explicit instructions of Fong Chong Pik – aka the “Plen”, as Mr Lee Kuan Yew had named him in his Battle for Merger radio talks, “Plen” being short for the “Plenipotentiary” of the CPM who had first made contact with Mr Lee in 1957. Fong was the chief CPM representative and operative in Singapore. The Plen’s superior in the CPM was Eu Chooi Yip, who was based in Jakarta and in overall charge of the CPM’s operations in Singapore. Eu too confirmed in his memoirs that it was the Plen who instigated the formation of the Barisan.[3] As the Barisan was the main CUF organisation, it was led by the top CPM open front leader in Singapore, Lim Chin Siong. Lim became Secretary-General of the party while Dr Poh Soo Kai was its Assistant Secretary-General.

Chin Peng has confirmed that the Barisan was under the CPM’s influence. He cagily disagreed that the CPM “controlled” the Barisan, but admitted: “We certainly influenced them”.[4] He did not elaborate on how the CPM “influenced” the Barisan or who were the CPM’s proxies in its Central Executive Committee, but he confirmed that communists were among those who joined the party.[5]

At least seven of the Barisan’s 16 central committee members were known CPM or former Anti-British League (ABL) members. (The ABL was a CPM underground political organisation set up in 1948 and disbanded in 1957.) Two of the Barisan’s Central Executive Committee members, Chan Sun Wing and Wong Soon Fong, who were also Legislative Assemblymen, fled after the 1963 general election and surfaced at the CPM guerrilla camp at the Thai-Malaysian border. At least 15 former Barisan leaders and activists are known to have lived in the CPM’s ‘Peace Villages’ on the Thai-Malaysian border; many continue to do so.

The UK Deputy Commissioner in Singapore at that time, Philip Moore, made a perceptive observation that would apply to those who now feign ignorance or deny knowledge of communist control and influence over the Barisan and other CUF organisations. Reporting to London in Dec 1962, Moore noted: “knowing what we now do about the extent of Communist penetration within Barisan Sosialis, it will be more difficult to acquit many of the other leading members as unwitting dupes”.[6]

Moore was referring to two reports of meetings at Barisan HQ that he described as “of considerable importance not only for what they reveal of the future intentions of Barisan Sosialis, but they provide more conclusive evidence than we have had hitherto for the belief that Barisan Sosialis are Communist-controlled.”

“It has never been disputed,” he notes, “that the Communists in Singapore are following United Front tactics and that Barisan Sosialis is their principal instrument on the political front. …The report on the first of the two [Barisan] meetings shows that those engaging in the discussion were Communists examining quite frankly how best to achieve their ends. Furthermore, we can see that the Communist influence within Barisan Sosialis is not confined to the Central Executive Committee but extends to Branch Committee level…”.[7]

Moore’s superior, Lord Selkirk, concurred with this judgement. A week later, on 14 Dec 1962, after the Brunei rebellion, Lord Selkirk sent a dispatch stating: “I said I had recognised all along that a threat was presented by the communists in Singapore. I had not however previously been convinced that a large number of arrests were necessary to counter this threat. Recently, however, new evidence had been produced about the extent of the communist control of the Barisan Sosialis and also there had been indications that the communists might resort to violence if the opportunity occurred. Recent statements by the Barisan Sosialis and Party Rakyat supporting the revolt in Brunei confirmed this.”[8]

Two weeks later, Selkirk sent another dispatch stating: “it would be wise to make arrests of communists in Singapore as soon as possible.”[9]  

Merger

Independence through merger with the Federation had been the PAP’s platform ever since its founding in 1954. Merger was supported both by the non-communists and the communists in the PAP. So when the PAP won a strong endorsement in the 1959 General Election, winning 43 out of 51 seats, it pursued merger vigorously. Merger was not “foisted” on an unenthusiastic electorate.

But when the Tunku offered merger through Malaysia in May 1961, the communists made a startling about-turn. They determined to derail merger, even though they had all along insisted that Malaya and Singapore were one entity. Chin Peng later made it clear that the CPM wished to sabotage merger or delay its implementation at that stage. He disclosed that “[the] three of us [Chin Peng, Siao Chang and Eu Chooi Yip] came to the conclusion that it would be in the best interest of our Party [italics inserted for emphasis] if we plotted to sabotage [merger]. If we couldn’t derail it, at least we might substantially delay its implementation”.[10] The Barisan conformed to the CPM line and mounted a strong challenge to the PAP on merger.

On his part, the Plen frankly revealed that he had used the Chinese press to try to delay merger. He wrote: “A lot of the opinions expressed in the newspapers originated from me. These included slowing down the process of merger, and adopting the form of a confederation.”[11] He was also behind the agitation against educational reform in the Chinese middle schools, resulting in the examination boycott of Nov 1961. His aim was to arouse public dissatisfaction with the Government in the run-up to the merger referendum.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew, in his Battle for Merger radio broadcasts in 1961, exposed the communists’ objective and strategy. He explained that the communists and the Barisan opposed merger because they wanted to establish control over Singapore so they could subsequently subvert and take over Malaya. The radio talks won over public opinion in favour of merger on the terms proposed by the Government.

In the referendum in Sep 1962, the specific merger terms were put to the electorate. 71% of the voters opted for the PAP’s merger proposal while the Barisan, which called for blank votes to be cast in protest, got only 25%. There were trade-offs in the negotiations with Malaya for merger, as in any negotiation between states and territories. The terms and conditions settled upon were the best that the Singapore government could obtain under the circumstances. They allowed Singapore to retain control over areas that were key to Singaporeans such as education and labour.

Dr Poh now says that Singapore’s separation from Malaysia in 1965 proved that Barisan’s position on merger in 1961-62 was correct. This is yet another reversal of position. In 1965, following separation, the Barisan had condemned Singapore’s independence, characterising it as “phony”. It also withdrew from the Parliament of independent Singapore, declaring its preference to carry out “extra-parliamentary struggle”. The Barisan in effect reverted to the CPM’s original and real position: that Malaya and Singapore should be one entity (albeit under communist control) and that “extra-parliamentary struggle” was superior to constitutional politics. The reality is that the CPM and the Barisan had all along acted, in Chin Peng’s words, “in the best interests of our Party”. They never believed that Singapore should be independent of Malaysia and had opposed merger in 1963 merely for tactical reasons. And they never believed that they should restrict themselves to constitutional means to attain their political ends.

Lim Chin Siong

There is ample evidence in the British archives to show that Lim Chin Siong was a CPM member. Indeed, the British authorities were quite certain that Lim was a CPM member. One British document noted: “For tactical reasons, the Communist Party is in favour of legal activity through the extreme left-wing of the PAP led by Lim [Chin Siong], who is almost certainly a secret party member”.[12] In another, a dispatch in July 1962, Deputy UK Commissioner Philip Moore wrote: “we accept that Lim Chin Siong is a communist”.[13] In an earlier dispatch, in Oct 1961, Moore reported:

“Once Lim Chin Siong becomes convinced that the people of Singapore are going to support Merger, then I suspect he may well revert to the original long-term policy of the MCP [Malayan Communist Party] – a Socialist Government throughout Malaya. The opportunity of overthrowing Lee Kuan Yew and achieving a Communist-manipulated government in Singapore seemed, in July [1961], to be so golden that Lim Chin Siong could not resist it.”[14]

Lim Chin Siong himself publicly admitted that he was a member of the ABL, a CPM underground organisation whose members included many key communist leaders in Singapore then, namely Eu Chooi Yip, the Plen, PV Sarma (who together with Eu and others later operated the CPM broadcasting station in South China), Samad Ismail, John Eber and others. According to a book on the ABL published in 2013 by six former ABL/CPM members now residing in Hong Kong and Guangzhou, the ABL’s objectives included to safeguard the “core leadership of the party [CPM]”, build it up and expand its influence,[15]“learn revolutionary theory” and carry out “various clandestine activities”.[16] Before 1951, “it even carried out some extreme acts like confiscating identity cards and burning vehicles”.[17] ABL members also purchased medicine and supplies to support the CPM’s armed struggle.

One writer in the collection, CPM member Zhang Taiyong, described how Lim Chin Siong was transferred from underground activities in the ABL to open front activities. He revealed that Lim Chin Siong, after being expelled from the Chinese High School for his role in an examination boycott, “continued his studies at an English-stream school but later accepted the organisation’s decision and devoted himself to trade union movement and constitutional struggle”.[18]

Lim Chin Siong’s involvement in the CPM has also been confirmed by CPM leaders Siu Cheong and Ah Hoi. They cited Lim as an example of a CPM member who was deployed in open front activities in political parties: “Lim Chin Siong was chosen because he was considered a very important CPM member, who had excellent qualities as a Communist United Front (CUF) cadre, namely, dedication, trustworthiness and moreover, he had been involved in CPM activities since his schooldays.”[19]

The Plen himself admitted that Lim Chin Siong was “a person with whom I have had a special acquaintance” and that they had shared “a relationship as fellow workers”.[20] The two met several times – including, crucially, on 16 July 1961, a few days before the communists tried unsuccessfully to take over the PAP and the Government.

Documents written in Lim Chin Siong’s own hand which clearly show his links to the CPM were cited and published in Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s Battle for Merger in 1961.[21]

Lim Chin Siong was no mere leftist engaged in anti-colonial, constitutional activities. Lim and his fellow communist and pro-communist cadres in the Barisan, including Poh Soo Kai, played key roles to advance the CPM’s cause. They did so while concealing their communist hand from the Singapore public, whose support they needed for their covert long-term goals. Most senior united front leaders and operatives operated under instructions from communist “backseat drivers” like the Plen and Eu Chooi Yip.

Abundant Evidence of Communist Conspiracy

I have set out just some of the ample evidence of communist activity in Singapore that is available in the public domain. What is missing is an explanation from the revisionists as to why they have systematically ignored revelations by CPM leaders (including Chin Peng and the Plen) as well as the many British documents that demolish their claims.

As for Dr Poh Soo Kai, he has failed to explain his own role in this history. In Dec 1974, he helped CPM/CUF elements by providing medical aid to an injured CPM bomber, and then failed to report the matter to the authorities despite public appeals by the police for information. The bomber was part of a 3-man CPM team who were on the way to plant a homemade bomb at the home of a factory owner when the bomb exploded prematurely at Katong, injuring the bomber and killing his two accomplices. Dr Poh was also implicated in supplying medicine through an ex-detainee to the 6th Assault Unit of the Malayan National Liberation Army, the militant wing of the CPM, between 1974 and 1976. A mere “left wing” anti-colonialist, as Dr Poh describes himself now, would not have given material aid surreptitiously to the CPM’s violent armed struggle as late as 1976, years after both Singapore and Malaysia had become independent of Britain.

Dr Poh’s claim that Mr Lee’s account of events in the Battle for Merger radio talks and the government’s justification of Operation Coldstore “[have] been seriously questioned” by the public, is an exaggeration. There were no riots or clashes with the police after the security operation in Feb 1963, unlike what happened after the arrests and expulsions undertaken by the Lim Yew Hock government in 1956. Instead, seven months after Operation Coldstore, the Singapore electorate endorsed Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s leadership and returned the PAP to power with 37 out of 51 seats in the General Elections of Sep 1963. The Barisan, on the other hand, won just 13 seats. In subsequent elections in the 1970s and 1980s, the Barisan failed to win a single seat, eventually dissolving itself in 1988 and merging with another party. The electorate’s rejection of the Barisan and communism was thorough and total. Otherwise, Singapore would have laboured under the yoke of communism, and not have developed into a modern, non-communist nation.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

The crux of the battle between the pro-communists and the non-communists in the early 1960s was two contrasting visions for the future of Singapore, how we should govern ourselves, and how society should be structured.  Merger was the occasion, not the cause, of the struggle.  It was a struggle between people on both sides of the ideological divide who were prepared to die for their cause.  As Mr Lee said in his Battle for Merger talks, his opponents were men of courage and determination. Fortunately, so were Mr Lee and his non-communist colleagues. And fortunately for Singapore, the latter won.

We must not recast the struggle between the communists and the non-communists as just an ordinary political fight between factions, with one side out to suppress the other for mere political advantage. It was nothing of the sort. Rather, it was a ferocious struggle between people with strong convictions about how Singapore should be run.  Singaporeans who lived in those tumultuous times will not forget what was at stake. Attempts by Dr Poh and revisionists to recast the struggle and deny its roots in the communist strategy for domination including the use of violence, are misleading and disingenuous. Their disregard of the facts is disrespectful to the many Singaporeans who chose a non-communist path at great risk to themselves, and contributed to the success of modern Singapore.

 

BURHAN GAFOOR

High Commissioner

 

High Commission of the Republic of Singapore

17 Forster Crescent

Yarralumla, ACT 2600

Australia

 

[1]CO 1030/1160, Special Branch Source Report on BSS Meeting of 23 Sep 1962.

[2] Chin Peng, alias Chin Peng: My Side of History (Singapore: Media Masters, 2003), p. 439.

[3] Chen Jian 陈剑(Chin Chong Cham, Lang Jian Zhu Meng – Yu Zhu Ye Kou Shu Li Shi Dang An浪尖逐梦 – 余柱业口述历史档案 [Chasing Dreams on the Wave’s Crest] (Malaysia, Strategic Information and Research Development Centre, 2006), p. 209.

[4] Chin Peng, alias Chin Peng: My Side of History (Singapore: Media Masters, 2003), p. 438.

[5] C.C. Chin and Karl Hack (eds.), Dialogues with Chin Peng: New Light on the Malayan Communist Party (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 2004), p. 190.

[6] CO 1030/1160, P B C Moore to W I J Wallace, 7 Dec 1962.

[7] CO 1030/1160, P B C Moore to W I J Wallace, 7 Dec 1962.

[8]CO 1030/1160, Selkirk to Secretary of State for the Colonies, Tel. 582, 14 Dec 1962.

[9] CO 1030/1160, Selkirk to Secretary of State for the Colonies, Tel. 603, 28 Dec 1962.

[10] Chin Peng, alias Chin Peng: My Side of History (Singapore: Media Masters, 2003), p. 437.

[11] Fong Chong Pik, Fong Chong Pik: The Memoirs of a Malayan Communist Revolutionary (Petaling Jaya: SIRDC, 2008), p. 161.

[12] CO 1030/656, “The outlook in Singapore up to the end of 1960”, Note from Humphrys, 22 Sep 1959, Appendix p. 9.  

[13] CO 1030/1160, Moore to Wallace, Tel. 363, 18 Jul 1962.

[14]CO 1030/986, No. 959, PBC Moore to WIJ Wallace, 18 Oct 1961.

[15]Translation of Zhou Guang, “First Anti-British League group in Singapore Chinese High School” in Mainstays of the Anti-Colonial Movement: The Legendary Figures of the Singapore People’s Anti-British League, p. 31). (Hong Kong: Footprints Publishing Company, 2013)(hereinafter cited as Mainstays).

[16]Translation of Zhong Hua, “A Preliminary Study of the History of Singapore People’s Anti-British League”, p. 7, in Mainstays.

[17] Ibid.

[18]Zhang Taiyong, ‘Our cohort’s commander – Lu Yexun’, p. 61, in Mainstays.

[19]Aloysius Chin, The Communist Party of Malaya: The Inside Story (Kuala Lumpur: Vinpress, 1995), p. 67.

[20] Fong Chong Pik, Fong Chong Pik: The Memoirs of a Malayan Communist Revolutionary (Petaling Jaya: SIRDC, 2008), pp. 176-177.

[21] Lee Kuan Yew, The Battle for Merger (Singapore: Government Printing Office, 1961), p. 85.

 

Source: http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2014/12/18/reponse-to-poh-soo-k...

 

SDP: Help us build the future that you wish to see

$
0
0

Dear friends,

The next GE is not far away. The SDP is stepping up our campaign to meet the challenge. We are committed to building a free, just and compassionate Singapore where a democratic government listens to the people.

But we have a mountain to climb. The PAP has huge financial resources and the state machinery at its disposal. We are not deterred, however. We are confident that we can overcome Goliath - but only if each and every one of us do our part.

Singapore is at a cross roads. The PAP, with its continued authoritarian ways, is dragging Singapore in the wrong direction and making our country less and less liveable and the lives of Singaporeans more and more stressful.

On the other hand, the SDP has drawn up alternative policies and painted a new vision for our nation which will bring us renewed hope for our future – a democratic, dynamic and compassionate future.

We have been consistent, we have been honest, and we have worked hard to make this island that we call home a better and prouder one for all our fellow citizens.

We know you share this vision with us. We ask you to build it with us. Donate to our campaign. Don't wait until the elections are called, by then it'll be too late. Make your donation today.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

If each and every one of us do our part, we can run a highly effective campaign and ensure that SDP candidates get elected. When that happens, your worries as well as your hopes will come with us into Parliament.

So, please, contribute to the cause. Remember, this is our country and our future. They are worth fighting for. Thank you.

 

​Sincerely yours,

Chee Soon Juan

 

 

Source: YourSDP.org

NEA vs AHPETC: Workers' Party's Post-Sentence Statement

$
0
0

We respect the court’s decision and have paid the fine of $800. However, we are not satisfied with the outcome of the case.

We decided to contest the case in court, not because we wanted to create trouble for a government agency but because we believe it is a matter of public interest.  It concerns how a government agency should exercise its power conferred by law, and whether it acts in a fair and just manner.

As things stand today, the TC finds itself hampered in its management of the common property. Today is Xmas Eve, and Hougang Central Hub is empty because we are unable to organise activities to benefit residents and businesses in the area.  The TC has also lost a source of revenue to manage its operations.

We have noted that the State Court has declined to rule on whether NEA’s requirements are valid and reasonable. We will be consulting our lawyers to study the options to pursue these matters in the High Court.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

SYLVIA LIM  
CHAIRMAN
ALJUNIED-HOUGANG-PUNGGOL EAST TOWN COUNCIL

24 DECEMBER 2014

SDP: Our Students Need Less Homework and More Reading for Fun

$
0
0

study by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)showed that, in terms of students spending the most number of hours doing homework, Singapore ranks third. This is not an honour we should win.

The study surveyed 15-year-olds and found that those in Singapore spent an average of 9.4 hours on their homework a week. Students in Shanghai (13.8 hours) and Russia (9.7 hours) came in first and second respectively.

Students spend most of their time memorising facts and figures, and then practicing how to provide “model” answers to set questions in exams. How does this help to encourage their sense of inquisitiveness and independent enquiry – qualities vital for innovative thinking in the modern era?

Even the Chinese are lamenting their education system because it emphasises rote-learning and exam-taking at the expense of divergent-thinking and creativity.

University of Oregon Professor Yong Zhao, born and educated in China, wrote the bookWho’s Afraid of the Big Bad Dragon? Why China Has the Best (and Worst) Education System in the World in which he says,

As traditional routine jobs are offshored and automated, we need more and more globally competent, creative, innovative, entrepreneurial citizens—job creators instead of employment-minded job seekers. To cultivate new talents, we need an education that enhances individual strengths, follows children’s passions, and fosters their social-emotional development. We do not need an authoritarian education that aims to fix children’s deficits according to externally prescribed standards.

How do we break out of the mold of an exam-oriented system and foster creative learning? Answer: Give less homework, do away with the PSLE, stop ranking classes and schools, broaden the curriculum to include more humanities subjects, and encourage reading for fun.

(These ideas are discussed in detail in our alternative education policy Educating for Creativity and Equality: An Agenda for Transformation)

The more time our students spend remembering and regurgitating facts and formulae, the less time they spend on reading - a habit which has been neglected in Singapore but one which is key to the formation of life-long learning skills.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

Researchers Shaheen Majid and Venus Tan of the Nanyang Technological University found that a majority of Singapore students

were reading to improve their academic performance...Students often face pressure from their parents and teachers to improve their academic performance. The findings of this study suggest that probably even primary level students are not free from this pressure. Many children also expressed the wish to have more time for fun reading.

The educationists recommend that MOE consider reducing the workload of primary school children in order that they have sufficient time voluntary reading.

It is time that we look into reforming our education system. We need to allow our children to be children and, in the process, prepare them for the future.

In other words, we need leaders who can, and dare to, think out of the box.

 

SDP

Source: YourSDP.Org

 

Your Favourite Top 10 Stories on the SDP Website in 2014

$
0
0

There were several stories that we published that caught your attention in 2014. We countdown here the top 10 using an aggregate of the number of views, Facebook likes and shares. Some on the list may surprise you.

10. NDR response: PAP must return CPF money to the people 

Coming in at #10 is our response to PM Lee's National Day Rally speech where he reinforced the PAP's intent to continue the Minimum Sum Scheme. The SDP unequivocally called for the CPF savings to be returned. Not srprisingly, this article was one of the top draws of your attention.

9. The reason why Singaporeans are losing trust in the PAP

We reported PM Lee's attempt to dissuade Singaporeans from enrolling in universities and highlighted the disingenuity of the move by pointing out that the PAP continued to lure foreign undergraduate students to study here with generous financial assistance. This did not go down well with Singaporeans, of course, which was reflected in the article being one of the most read in 2014.

8. A New Vision for Singapore

Taking the #8 spot is Dr Chee Soon Juan's opinion piece A New Vision for Singaporepublished in The Wall Street Journal in November.

7. Perfect example of the Government not listening

The PAP's insistence on Singapore hosting the F1 grand prix despite the event causing much inconvenience to Singaporeans, losses to retailers and an increase in prostitution was a hot topic among Singaporeans.

6. What sort of an education system is this? 

Coming in at 5th spot is our post on the emphasis on exams in our education system. This was published on the day that the PSLE results for primary 6 students were announced. “What sort of education do we have that treats academic performance like a trophy sport: Glory in victory and agony in defeat?”

5. We said this 15 years ago...We highlighted the fact that we have been steadfast in our objection to the withholding of Singaporeans' CPF savings after retirement, pointing to a piece which we published on our newspaper The New Democrat 15 years ago.

Singaporeans reacted positively to this post because it reinforced the SDP's enduring commitment to speaking for the people even before the issue became a hot topic through the Internet.

4. LHL on teachers leaving professsion: “We knew we had a problem”

Education, again, attracted much of our readers' attention. Occupying 4th position on our Top 10 list was a write-up on the PAP's philosophy towards the teaching profession and how teachers have become disillusioned with the system. PM Lee's idea to throw money at the problem doesn't seem to have had an effect.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

3. Not possible for poor Singaporeans to live on $1,000 a month

Dr Chee Soon Juan's reply to the Government's response to his Wall Street Journal piece takes the #3 position. The Government had, through its Hong Kong Consulate-General Jacky Foo, pointed out that Singaporeans earning $1,000 could survive as well as own a flat. Yet, it accused Dr Chee of being out of touch with reality.

2. Picture touches raw nerve among PAP supporters 

Holding the #2 spot is our story about how the PAP treats our elderly who have been suffering for decades without proper financial support. When the Internet exposes the neglect with photos of older Singaporeans cleaning toilets and clearing tables, the PAP does what they should have done a long time ago by introducing the Pionerr Generation Package.

But not before spending much public money through posters and TV commercials making itself look like Robin Hood. The crux of the matter is how the PAP uses instead of values the people and, apparently, from the popularity of this article, Singaporeans agree with the SDP.

1. Why do we do this to our children?

Coming at the top of our countdown is our report on the shocking effects our education system inflicts on our children. Statistics show that nearly a quarter of our schoolchildren think of killing themselves as a result of exam pressure.

This was, by far, the top story that you read. With more than 76,000 page views, 4,200 FB Likes, comments and shares, and reaching nearly a quarter of a million people, this report obviously struck a chord with Singaporeans.

Which forces the question: Is the PAP idea of putting our students through the grinding exam machine so that it can identify top students for its scholarship programme the best way forward for Singapore? Or is our education system out-moded for a future more dependent on creative ideas than rote-learning?

We thank you for visiting our website and making 2014 another meaningful year for us. We remain committed to bringing you these reports and analyses, and becoming the competent, constructive and compassionate voice in Parliament that you want to see.

2015 here we come!

Time to grow our own timber in the backyard?

$
0
0

By Tan Jee Say

This is the second of three postings about my experiences as Harvard Fellow at the university. The first article was on my meeting with Singaporean students currently studying in Harvard and MIT. The next and final posting will be about the winners and losers of immigration policy.

As the new year approaches, there is much expectation about ASEAN. 2015 is earmarked as the year of economic integration of ASEAN. Harvard has got interested too. I attended 2 seminars on ASEAN while in Harvard recently. One was on the future of ASEAN and the other examined Japan-Southeast Asia security relations.

Tan Jee Say with professors at harvard seminar

(L-R) Siddharth George (moderator), Prof Jay Rosengard, Thai Ambassador HE Vijavat Isarabhakdi, Tan Jee Say and Prof David Dapice, at Harvard Seminar “The Future of ASEAN” on 20 November 2014

Just a talk-shop?

To most outsiders, ASEAN has not lived up to its promise. With the third largest labour force in the world after China and India that has a combined population of about 600 million, majority of whom are young, why has it not delivered on its potential? As an organisation, it does not have much force and will not move beyond what individual countries want it to. Each country has its own agenda and there is no ASEAN identity to speak of. Even in the area of security for which ASEAN was set up in 1968 as a bulwark against communist expansion beyond Indo-China, Prof Ken Jimbo from Keio University doubted it would ever develop into a solid organisation like NATO; in a telling way, he observed that Japan prefers to deal bilaterally with the Philippines and Vietnam over the South China Sea, and will develop its strategy towards Southeast Asia based on its bilateral experiences.

The only speaker on the panel who believes in ASEAN was the Thai Ambassador to the US. His Excellency (HE) Vijavat Isarabhakdi said there was a strong ASEAN identity among government officials but acknowledged the need to develop this identity among ordinary people. He thought ASEAN has made real progress even if it is slow but he was sure that we can expect more tangible results after the 2015 integration.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

The ASEAN potential in SingFirst’s plan

I can see the potential of ASEAN as a major facilitator of Singapore’s future economic growth. After 50 years of high dependence on multinational corporations and foreign labour, we at SingFirst believe that it is time that we “grow our own timber” by developing our own talent pool of local entrepreneurs, managers, professionals, engineers, technical specialists and skilled workers. We will place high priority on developing our local enterprises, particularly the small and medium enterprises, into major regional or global firms. With land and manpower constraints within Singapore, ASEAN is a convenient step next door for our enterprises to tap on its vast potential of land and labour. Like good neighbours, we can collaborate on the use of land and labour resources. When we work together as friendly neighbours and economic partners, we will all succeed as strong economies individually as countries and collectively as a solid organisation to be reckoned with. We will all emerge winners together.

Look out for details of SingFirst’s proposal to grow our own timber in the coming months.

tan jee say with prof ezra vogel

With Prof Ezra Vogel, best-selling author of Japan as No. 1, at the seminar “Japan-Southeast Asia Security Relations” in Harvard on 24 November 2014. Prof Vogel was a regular visitor to Singapore.

 

Source: http://singfirst.org/2014/12/29/time-to-grow-our-own-timber-in-the-backy...

 

PAP: Our Top 10 Policies that Benefited Singaporeans in 2014

$
0
0

Top Ten Policies that Singaporeans have benefited in 2014! Look Foward to More in 2015!

1. Pioneer Generation package
More than 450,000 senior citizens, aged 65 and above and those who became Singapore Citizens before 1987, benefitted from the $8 billion Pioneer Generation package. 
The package included subsidised medical and dental treatments for our pioneers. It also included Medisave Top-ups and lower premiums for the new insurance scheme, Medishield Life, which will be rolled out in 2015.

2. ASPIRE (Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE review) 
Provided more emphasis on skills and job performance. It also advocated guidance and various pathways to Poly and ITE students to enhance their skills and qualifications.

3. SkillsFuture Council
The Council, chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, will develop a system comprising education, training and career progression for all Singaporeans. It will also promote industry support for Singaporeans to advance based on their skills. A culture of lifelong learning will also fostered.

4. Enhanced public transport system
More buses were put on the road under the $1 billion Bus Service Enhancement Programme and new rails lines – Thomson Line and Eastern Region Line - were announced.

5. More uses for CPF funds
CPF contribution rates for all Singaporeans will go up by one percentage point from 2015. Older Singaporeans, who fail to qualify as the pioneer generation, will receive five years of annual CPF Medisave top-ups.
The CPF Advisory Panel is reviewing the way CPF monies could be further utilised to maximise gains. The panel will release its findings in 2015.

6. Municipal Services Office for improved service
The Municipal Services Office was set up in October 2014 to improve the government’s coordination and delivery of services.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

7. Lease Buyback Scheme enhanced
The scheme was enhanced to allow more senior citizens to benefit and it was also made more flexible to suit their needs. The scheme was extended to 4-room flats and by this more than 75% of elderly households stand to gain. The raising of the income ceiling and topping up of the CPF Retirement Accounts were also relaxed.

8. More job opportunities for Singaporeans
A new job portal – Jobs Bank - for Singaporeans was launched in 2014. Through this portal, Singaporeans could access job opportunities. The portal also allowed employers to access a larger pool of qualified Singaporeans.

9. Sustaining Singapore
A national plan to create a more liveable and sustainable future for Singaporeans – Sustainable Singapore Blueprint 2015 – was launched. Under the blueprint, “Eco-Smart” towns, a “Car-lite” Singapore, a “Zero-Waste” nation, a “Green” economy and an “Active and Gracious” community are envisioned.

10. New IPPT format
The backbone of Singapore’s defence, our soldiers, whether in active or reservist duty will gain from the new IPPT format, which was made simpler, more relevant and effective.

 

PAP

*Article first appeared on https://www.facebook.com/pap.sg/posts/963601346984599:0

 

Shanmugam: Resident who Complained about Nee Soon "Cat Culling" is Spreading Lies

$
0
0

Background Story: About Nee Soon South Town Council and their Cat "Removal" Policy

What Nee Soon South Town Council is doing this Christmas: "Removing" Community Cats

I have been following the issue of stray cats in Nee Soon South. Some of the residents have been irresponsible in feeding stray cats without observing the proper hygiene procedures and follow-ups. This has led to unhappiness amongst residents over hygiene and inconvenience.

The MP in the constituency, Dr Lee Bee Wah, has the responsibility to deal with the issue – because her residents are complaining to her.

There has been a lot of false statements about what she has done/intends to do. Dr Lee, when she received the complaints, first approached the cat welfare activists on how to deal with the problem. She also polled residents on how they would like to deal with the stray cats. And she engaged cat lovers and tried to explain the situation and listen to their feedback.

No decision has been made on what to do with the cats, as yet. Dr Lee intends to work with the Cat Welfare Society, cat lovers and the relevant agencies to come up with solutions that would make sense for all.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

One person who attended one of the engagement meetings went online to make untrue allegations, misrepresenting the discussions, and claiming that a decision has been made to cull the cats when that was simply untrue.

If we want to be a civil society solving problems together, we need to remain truthful, responsible and stick to the facts. It is unproductive to attack those who genuinely try to help and look after the interest of the greater community. Making false allegations sensationalises the situation, but is not a responsible thing to do; and will ultimately impact on how we can operate properly to deal with a community problem.

Just as important, activists have to be mindful there are many people who don’t like the disamenities that are caused by the actions of irresponsible cat feeders. These residents have rights too. And if they complain to the MP, then the MP has to take action. If they are in the majority, then their wishes cannot be disregarded, simply because a (smaller) group is more vocal. Those who don’t want the cats to be culled should come forward to suggest solutions, to help the residents. Dr Lee Bee Wah has tried to do that – by forming a group, comprising animal lovers, to see what can be done.

 

K Shanmugam

*Article first appeared on https://www.facebook.com/k.shanmugam.page/posts/813038035409395

 

Singapore Democratic Party Announces Details of GE2015 Campaign Kick-off

$
0
0

The Singapore Democratic Party announced today further details of its 2015 General Election campaign launch on 10 January 2015, Saturday, to be held at the Holiday Inn Atrium, Outram Road from 2pm-5:30pm. The program includes:

  1. Presentation of a new vision for Singapore

  2. Unveiling of the campaign slogan and campaign message

  3. Announcement of key policies during the campaign

  4. Announcement of campaign actvities in 2015

  5. Presentation of campaign structure and support networks

Party leaders, including Vice-Chairman John Tan, Policy Unit Head Dr James Gomez, Ground Operations Unit Bryan Lim, Training & Development Unit Head Chee Siok Chin, and Prof Paul Tambyah will be on hand to make the presentations.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

“Since the 2011 election the SDP has made great strides and we continue to grow,” said Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary-General. "As the voice of ordinary Singaporeans, we aim to work for their dreams and hopes. We will be their voice."

The launch will enthuse Singaporeans about our vision and alternative ideas for the country. We look forward to using the event as a start to building a campaign that will culminate in the electoral success of our candidates.

 

PAP Announces New Members to its Central Executive Committee

$
0
0

The PAP has announced its full list of central executive committee members following a meeting held today.

There are several new faces on top of the previously announced members.

Now, there are a total of 18 members in the PAP CEC inclusive of 12 who were elected by party cadres at the biennial PAP convention in December.

The CEC office holders have remained unchanged but additional members have been co-opted into the CEC.

The secretary general is PM Lee Hsien Loong with DPM Teo Chee Hean and Tharman Shanmugaratnam the 1st and 2nd second assistant secretary generals.

Khaw Bon Wan is the Party Chairman and Yaacob Ibrahim is the vice chairman.

Lim Swee Say holds the position of Treasurer with K Shanmugam the assistant treasurer.

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

Gan Kim Yong , Ng Eng Hen and Chan Chun Sing are organising secretaries.

Teo Ser Luck and Sam Tan are the 2nd organising secretaries along with newly co-opted Masagos Zulkifli.

Additionally, Ms Grace Fu was appointed Chair of the PAP Women's Wing, while Mr Chan Chun Sing is Chair of Young PAP. Mdm Halimah Yacob was appointed Chair of PAP.SG. 

Other co-opted members include Zaqy Mohamed, Liang Eng Hwa and Lawrence Wong

 

National Solidarity Party: Looking back at 2014

$
0
0

Looking back at 2014: A message for our members, supporters and well-wishers

Looking back at 2014, the National Solidarity Party (NSP) is proud to have been at the frontline of the move for political change in Singapore.

From our position paper proposing an electoral reform[1], to our comments on transport policies changes[2], to our call for declassification of documents[3] and to our appeal to President against biased conditions for granting newspaper permits to opposition parties[4] – we challenged the People’s Action Party government to review its policies for the betterment of Singaporeans.

We were part of the movement advocating for a revamp of the CPF Scheme. After a dialogue with concerned members of the public, we released a Paper entitled ‘Re-Visioning the CPF Scheme with 6/6 Clarity’[5].

On a lighter note, in May 2014, NSP hosted a Dinner which was attended by leaders of other political parties, prominent members of civil society, well-known journalists and writers[6] as well as many well-wishers and supporters.  Building better relationship with friends and opposition party members was one of our main priorities for 2014.

To commemorate the 49th year of Singapore’s independence on 9 August 2014, we produced and released a video[7] which paid homage to the tenets of our National Pledge.

However, we continue to face challenges on many fronts.  Despite the 2011 General Election being widely heralded as a watershed, many Singaporeans still shy away from supporting political change for fear of reprisals[8].   We are also chronically constrained by lack of funds and resources. (On this note, please see our Appeal for Donations, below.)Throughout the year, we kept our presence felt in the areas we contested in the last General Election through our regular Sunday outreaches and weekday house visits.  We are committed to staying closely connected to the ground, so that we may be an effective voice of the hearts and minds of ordinary Singaporeans.

As we enter the new year and with the next General Election drawing nearer, new challenges await us. The road ahead is daunting, but with you standing with us, we are sure that we can scale this mountain.

We thank you for your past support and we also solicit your continued support, so that we may together serve the Party’s aim of seeking better, happier lives for fellow citizens.

Forward to 2015!

Warm Wishes,

Jeannette Chong-Aruldoss, Secretary-General
On behalf of the 15th Central Executive Committee
of the NATIONAL SOLIDARITY PARTY

 


 

Tags: 
Wrap Text field: 

Appeal for Donations

Donations from Members, Well-Wishers and Supporters are our main source of funds.  On behalf of the Party, we seek your kind generosity to consider making either a one-time donation to the Party or a pledge to give the Party a fixed amount every month, to enable us to carry out our plans. 

Details on how to donate to NSP are set out at this link:   http://nsp.sg/donate/ 

If you would like to know more about the financial needs and constraints of the Party, please feel free to send your queries to secgen@nsp.sg
 


[1] Electoral Reform Proposal to replace the Group Representation Scheme with a Constituency Reserved for Minority Scheme at http://nsp.sg/2014/07/03/electoral-reform-proposal-constituency-reserved...

[2] Statement on Bus Service Reliability Framework at

http://nsp.sg/2014/05/29/statement-on-the-new-bus-contracting-model-scheme/ ;

Statement on the new Bus Contracting Model Scheme at

http://nsp.sg/2014/01/10/nsp-statement-on-bus-service-reliability-framew...

[3] http://nsp.sg/2014/10/23/establish-a-public-interest-declassification-bo...

[4] http://nsp.sg/2014/10/20/appeal-to-the-president-mci-refuses-to-process-... and  http://nsp.sg/2014/12/10/statement-on-nsps-additional-submissions-to-the...

[5] http://bit.ly/1t8aT0D

[6] http://nsp.sg/2014/05/26/speech-by-our-secretary-general-at-nsps-27th-an...

[7] http://nsp.sg/2014/08/07/pledge-guiding-light-future/

[8] http://nsp.sg/2014/06/02/the-silence-of-fear/

January 5, 2015

Viewing all 937 articles
Browse latest View live