This is the SDP’s response to media queries about Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s proposal to increase the number of NCMPs:
The proposals by PM Lee serve only to distract the people from the real problems that plague elections in Singapore. A democratic election system requires a free media, freedom of speech and assembly, and a transparent electoral process. If the PAP is genuinely interested in a democratic system, it should take the following measures:
1. Amend the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act and the Broadcasting Act. The control of the media by the PAP is what has kept it in power all these decades.
2. Abolish the GRC system. The GRC system has enabled the PAP to draw constituency boundaries to its advantage.
3. Repeal the Public Order Act. The police stop the opposition from speaking and meeting freely with the people while PAP MPs have free access to the electorate.
4. Lengthen the campaign period. The election period should be lengthened to at least 3 weeks. The short campaign period makes it unnecessarily difficult for the opposition to mount a meaningful campaign.
5. Remove the Elections Department from the control of the PMO. A genuinely free and fair elections can come about only if there is an independent body to conduct and monitor elections
Of the recent speeches by our politicians, two in particular stood out for me.
First was the one given by Minister Yaacob Ibrahim, in which he said Singaporeans must be tolerant, and the only thing we should be intolerant towards is intolerance.
This is most definitely a welcomed speech; the idea of accepting and tolerating different viewpoints is wonderful. (of course, intolerance needs to be defined properly first.)
In this spirit, i hope more politically diverse opinions will be tolerated. I hope the media will give more coverage to different viewpoints. I hope serious discussions will take place on important issues: for example, the discourse on terrorism has been heavily skewed towards religious ideologies. While religious ideology is undoubtedly a factor, almost every major and serious research on terrorism states that other factors (foreign policy, socio-political conditions, loss of trust in authority etc) matter in radicalization too. Therefore, we must be tolerant of different viewpoints and discuss these issues openly and honestly. I further hope those with different standpoints will be met with reasoned argumentation, rather than the full force of the law.
I truly hope, that we are indeed intolerant towards intolerance; whether it is religious or political.
The second was by WP’s Leon Perrera, where he argued for a culture of diversity of opinions. Again, this would be a fantastic thing to have in our society. I hope WP will put its money where its mouth is: in the last parliament, there were occasions in which WP refused to take a stand on some issues or just ignored discourses that were going on in society, perhaps to not offend anyone and reach out to the median voter. I fail to see how keeping silent in important moments contributes to creating this culture.
Hopefully, WP will truly exemplify the culture of diversity, not only by taking a stance on important matters, but by allowing its own members to take different positions on issues.
If one is familiar with parliamentary speeches throughout the world, one would notice that they are often filled with grandiose plans and bombastic words, but unfortunately, with little outcome. One can only hope, that is not the case with these two promising speeches.
Special Assistance Plan (SAP) schools were established in 1979 with the aim of developing in students high competency in English and Chinese.
There are about 15 primary schools and 10 secondary schools under the programme.
The inherent nature of the two languages in focus precludes most non-Chinese from enrolling in these schools, resulting in a lack of diversity among the students.
Our common space is shaped by the friendships we develop in our early formative years.
Hence, I fear the perspective on interracial issues these students will bring into their working lives and when they assume leadership positions in various sectors.
Do they possess that keen awareness of interracial, interfaith sensitivity and respect that can be learnt only through personal friendship forged in their student years?
The aim of fostering higher competency in languages is now being fulfilled by the Higher Mother Tongue subject.
Thus, for the sake of enlarging our common space, let us do away with the SAP school system.
This letter written by Teo Tze Wei was published in ST Forum, on 25 Jan 2015
The above is what most Singaporeans woke up to on 20 Jan 2016 in this article here.
I am a Singaporean Muslim and my family have been in Singapore since the late 1800s. (Yes, Singapore was built from the ground up by Arabs, Malays, Europeans, Persians, Jews, etc. – not just the current majority Chinese) We helped build this country to what it was and still is – an outpost of rational modernity where people from all corners of the world can come to work on their business, freely practice their faith and build a home together that we could be proud of.
I would first like to address the headline of this Article. The TODAY Newspaper – with this one headline – has in my eyes reduced its integrity as a newspaper to that of a tabloid the likes of The New Paper. When its copies are given out for free it means its value is less than the paper its printed on. At the very least, The New Paper has to be bought.
Why do I say this? The writer SIAU MING EN who can be contacted here, has decided to sensationalise the speech. Now I know for a fact the Editor may also have a role to play in this so i reserve judgement on being solely the fault of the writer. This writer took it upon himself to write an article that effectively misrepresents the Minister’s words and alienate the local Muslim population at one go – how efficiently stupid.
When our country is facing a rising tide of intolerance from many faiths – the TODAY newspaper felt that selling more newspapers was more important that communicating as effectively and calmly as possible an issue that is inherently sensitive.
It in fact hid is the sub-header the following line
This tells me, as a graduate in Mass Communication, that the article was MEANT to inflame and outrage and therefore receive more attention – a tactic only used by the basest of journalists.
The TODAY newspaper, by allowing this article to be published, is effectively nothing more than a money chasing fear-mongerer.
Now I would like to pursue the text of what was ascribed to Minister Shanmugam. According to the article:
A sentiment among some younger Muslims that sending greetings to friends on other religious festivals or reciting the National Pledge and serving National Service are at odds with their faith.
I am supposing that the Minister Shanmugam has access to data that we are not exposed to but once again the writer has chosen not to furnish or pursue such details. This communicates that whatever the Minister said is true – something we as Muslims in Singapore recognise to be wrong. So I issue this challenge to both the Minister Shanmugam and Siau Ming En to furnish the data behind how much exactly of this rising tendency exists and what part of the Muslim population truly are at comfort with living together with peoples of other faiths.
The article also highlights portions of the speech –
…a developing trend is being watched with concern by the Government: A sentiment among some younger Muslims that sending greetings to friends on other religious festivals or reciting the National Pledge and serving National Service are at odds with their faith.
As religiosity sweeps the world, the Muslim population here is also growing “somewhat more distant” from the rest of the community, partly due to influences from the Middle East. Some people also feel that the democratic elected governance system here is “incompatible with Islam” and Singapore should be part of a caliphate, he added.
“These are worrying trends, and if these sentiments become widespread, the Muslim community that grows apart from the mainstream is not good for the Muslim community and not good for Singapore, with serious long-term implications,” said Mr Shanmugam.
As a Muslim, I see far more Muslims sending greetings to friends to other faiths than not. In fact – the majority of Muslims here laugh at those who insist on not sending greetings because of a misplaced ideal of religiosity. It is ridiculous because it isn’t who we are as a people. In fact we welcome the opportunity to engage with our non-Muslim neighbours as evident in the picture below:
The article on this actual overwhelmingly neighbourly behaviour of Singaporean Muslims can be found here.
With regards to the Muslim population here being influenced by Middle Eastern influences – I must agree to this statement. Religion whether in the Middle East or any other part of the world – is still the same religion. The only difference is cultural influences. For example, there is a rising trend of believing what works in Saudi Arabia should work in Singapore. This idea is empirically false. The geo-politics, history and cultural nuances between the Middle East and South East Asia couldn’t be more apart from each other. On this respect – I find it amusing that Muslims in Singapore are increasingly seen to ditch their own culture, even their cultural dress in order to dress themselves like Middle Easterners so as to be more religious. The idea that your cultural dress influences your piety is a laughable construct. For this – the Muslims in Singapore are wrong.
The article, only after pointing out the Muslims as examples of growing intolerance, goes on to say that the current model for Muslims in Singapore is a successful one and that we should cherish it. In media, we understand what is referred to as attention span. The average reader doesn’t read beyond the fourth paragraph. In this respect anything positive about our Muslim population only appeared after 5th paragraph.
Why are the above points on how the article was written a great disservice to Singapore? The immediate impact was the Muslims taking a defensive posture, demanding data and statistics to back up the statements in the article. This puts the Minister who is in charge into a difficult position because it doesn’t clearly portray his stand on the issue. It also pits non-Muslims and Muslims at odds into a game of finger-pointing. It makes talking more difficult and accusing far easier.
Ultimately it points out the the Today newspaper is more interested in sensationalising news than taking into consideration what impacts how and what they publish might have on the social fabric of our country.
To Muslims I say this – stop being the victim. You are not. Stand up and be counted amongst those who value life and peace. To the non-Muslims I say this – before easily drawing the lines in the sand consider that there is more to be had without doing so.
Nurul Ain’s family did not approve of her relationship with her then-boyfriend Hermanto, but they showed them that their love can conquer it all.
She shared the story of how they met and got married for Stomp’s love story contest:
“It all started when I just had a bad day at work, posting all the unnecessary shoutout on Tagged
“Yes!! Tagged… a website where most of us have it and always think that girls/guys in Tagged are useless… but nevertheless, ‘HE’ private messaged me and tried to cool me down, he gave me words full of encouragement, and he melted me!!:)
“We talked all day and night, and when it was time, we arranged a day to meet up.
“It all went well and he told me everything! yes… everything!! From ex-convict to divorce and his family background,so did I.
“I was scared he might not want to contact me after all that we have shared, but I was wrong:)
“We got closer and closer! 🙂 We went through so many ups and downs.
“Financial was the worse situation. He had no shelter at that point of time (due to some miscommunication and family hatred).
“To cut the story short, on Dec 2014 he was sentenced to 8 months in prison, and I had to go through HELL!!
“Because we weren’t married yet but we already have a rental house and I’m unemployed, I have to struggle to look for financial assistance. But at last I managed,and also found a job!!
“I visited him on my every day off @ AWP, until one day I was admitted due to too much stress and dehydration.
“Yet I pulled through… Well,my family still disapproves my marriage with him cause of his background.
“But after all, people make mistakes and they still deserve a second chance to stand up and be happy! YES I waited for him until the day when he was released.
“I made up my mind that I wanted to stay with him and ignore all those nagging and negative responses.
“We were so happy until my parent want to see us. YES we did, and ALLAH listened to my prayer, WE WERE GETTING MARRIED!
“It’s not easy though, we have been through a lot (some are not stated).
“130615 is the day we were legally husband and wife, and thank god, with all those guidance, my family has accepted him and we are happy now!!:)”
