Category: Politik

Lui Tuck Yew To Step Down From Politics, Will Not Stand In Coming Elections

With the General Election (GE) around the corner, the Prime Minister’s Office unexpectedly announced today (Aug 11) that Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew will step down from politics and not stand in the coming elections.

In a letter dated today, Mr Lui wrote to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to confirm his decision, which he said was taken “with deep regret”, not to stand for re-election in the coming GE — having broached the subject with Mr Lee “early this year”.

In his reply to Mr Lui, Mr Lee praised Mr Lui’s work as Transport Minister and said he accepted the decision “reluctantly”. He added that he was disappointed that he failed to change Mr Lui’s mind and persuade him to stay on. “My senior colleagues share my view that you have more to contribute, both in transport and in other areas in government. We discussed the matter with you several times, but could not persuade you to continue,” he said. “So I have no choice but to accept your decision not to stand for election again.”

Mr Lee pointed out that Mr Lui has “done very good work” helming the transport portfolio. “You put your heart and soul into the task. As a result, we made significant progress over the last four years”, he said.
Mr Lee said Mr Lui has “contributed crucially to this progress”, citing his role in setting policies, implementing major projects and supervising the public transport network’s operations. Mr Lui has put in place many improvements whose benefits can be seen only in the coming years, Mr Lee noted. “The job is not yet complete, as we are reminded from time to time when train services break down. But despite these incidents, I am confident that we are heading in the right direction, to get the public transport system that Singaporeans deserve,” the Prime Minister said.

In his letter, Mr Lui acknowledged that Mr Lee and several senior members of the Cabinet tried hard to persuade him to change his mind.

Mr Lui said: “You reminded me that the responsibility of Government was a collective one, and no minister carried difficult problems like public transport alone. I deeply appreciate the reassurance and support. But having thought the matter over carefully, I have decided that I should stand by my original decision.”

He noted that Mr Lee had conveyed the intention to re-appoint him as a Cabinet Minister if he was re-elected. But the GE “also provides an opportunity for me to step back from politics without causing any major disruption to Government at the end of its term”, Mr Lui said.

‘I HAVE PUT MY UTMOST INTO FULFILLING MY RESPONSIBILITIES’

Mr Lui, who was formerly Chief of Navy and chief executive of the Housing and Development Board, entered politics in 2006 and was elected as a Member of Parliament for Tanjong Pagar Group Representation Constituency (GRC), where the People’s Action Party (PAP) had a walkover.

In the 2011 GE, he was part of the PAP team which won Moulmein-Kallang GRC with 58.6 per cent of the votes, beating off the challenge of the Workers’ Party. Soon after the 2011 GE, where transport was among the hotly-debated topics during the hustings, Mr Lui was appointed Transport Minister, taking over from Mr Raymond Lim.

About six months into the job, Mr Lui had to handle two massive breakdowns on the North-South Line on Dec 15 and 17, which led to the setting up of a Committee of Inquiry. Between then and now, the rail system has continued to be dogged by disruptions. The disruption early last month, deemed Singapore’s most serious rail disruption, halted both the North-South and East-West Lines for about three hours during the evening peak, affecting some 250,000 commuters.

Under Mr Lui’s charge, the Ministry of Transport (MOT) and Land Transport Authority (LTA) ramped up capacity for buses and trains. Under the Bus Service Enhancement Programme, 550 buses were injected, with 450 more to be added by 2017.

More new trains and new rail lines have been introduced. For instance, the Jurong Region Line and Cross Island Line will be ready by 2025 and 2030 respectively. The entire Downtown Line will open by 2017.
In his letter, Mr Lui made reference to these improvements, pointing out that train delays and withdrawals across all lines have been reduced, and waiting times for buses have dropped. But he acknowledged that they have “had some setbacks”.

“Large-scale or prolonged disruptions still happen more frequently than is acceptable,” he said. “We have embarked on major upgrades and initiated further efforts in the last quarter to identify additional areas that need systematic renewal and strengthen overall maintenance practices. Given the nature and scale of our rail network, these improvements will take time,” he added.

“But the measures we have put in place will allow our problems to be progressively dealt with and resolved. I am proud of the good work my team and MOT and LTA have done. I have put my utmost into fulfilling my responsibilities.”

LUI ‘SERVED WITH HONOUR AND DISTINCTION’: DPM TEO

Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, in a statement, thanked Mr Lui “for serving, and being ready to take on challenging tasks”. Mr Teo said: “I have known Tuck Yew for more than thirty years, since he was a young officer. He has served with honour and distinction, and has brought commitment, an analytical mind, and compassion and concern for people to every responsibility he has undertaken.”

Mr Teo – who has known Mr Lui for more than 30 years and had encouraged him to enter politics – noted that since Mr Lui was elected in 2006, he has served the residents of Moulmein division and in a number of different portfolios.

“As the Minister for Transport since 2011, he has put all his energy into improving our transport system. The programmes he implemented have begun to show results and will in time improve our transport system significantly,” said Mr Teo, adding that he spoke to Mr Lui “to ask him to continue” but was unable to change his mind.

“I understand and respect his reasons,” said Mr Teo. “Tuck Yew has much to offer in whatever he pursues. I wish Tuck Yew, Soo Fen, and their family good health and much happiness.”

Source: www.todayonline.com

August 11, 2015
I’m Not Pro-PAP, I’m Pro-Singapore

If you have read my “About Me” page, you would probably have realised that I am pro-government.

“And if you ask me: why politics? Well, I have an unabashed deep admiration for my Singapore government…”

It was probably a risk to have made that statement in my introductory page. Fervent opposition party supporters would probably have blacklisted my blog or swore never to come by again. (Not that I’ve actually ever blogged about politics.) Yet, being the passionate person that I am, I had no qualms in professing my ardent support of the incumbent government, albeit not explaining why.

Today, on the 50^th birthday of this country that I love with all my heart – that in order to protect it, (if need be) I’m willing to die on the battlefield – I will endeavour to justify my utmost support for the government: not with political arguments but with day-to-day experiences.

To begin, I confess that I used to be a naïve – critics call it “brainwashed” – supporter of the PAP. I would volunteer at the local Meet-the-People Session religiously every week. I would read the news and take the ministers’ words as it is. I would aggressively defend against irrationalised opinions of government policies. I chose to study Politics with a great intent to understand the psyche of politicians, to be well equipped to combat any accusations of the government that were poorly thought of.

I completed my freshmen year as a Politics and International Relations undergraduate in the United Kingdom (University of Manchester). What I learnt in university turned out to be different from what I had expected. Instead of reinforcing my beliefs, it made me more critical. Liberal democracy, checks and balances, free press, freedom of speech… The more I studied, the more I realised how my government was under the attack of the prodemocrats. However, at the same time, something else seemed to be invigorating my allegiance to the Singapore government. It wasn’t what I was learning in university. It was my everyday experiences – the long walks down the streets of Manchester, the trips to the Underground Tube in London, and the interaction with friends from all around the world – that bolstered my faith in how Singapore is being run, and my sense of pride to be called a Singaporean.

I walked to college and back every day, saddened by the sight of homeless men and women begging for spare change. I visited the city center every weekend to immerse myself in the vibrant city life, only to be tainted by the ugly streets plastered with splotches of unwanted gum. I tried my best to go home before the sun went down; otherwise, I would be jumping at every alarming sound that could possibly have been a gunshot or a violent attack. I ran to the bus stop on Sunday mornings, hoping and praying that I didn’t missed the bus (for I would never know when the next one would come). I walked to the nearby Underground Tube when I was in London for the weekend, half expecting the station not to be operating on that day. I learnt about the concerns of my peers in finding a job back in their home country upon graduation. I heard about their plans of not returning to their country, in search of better prospects elsewhere.

All of these are things I would rarely – if not, never – experience in Singapore. And on one of the occasions when I sought the opinion of a European friend of mine on Singapore’s lack of freedom of expression, his reply took me by surprise. “Who cares? You have money.” His reply brought things into perspective. I’m not saying (and I believe that’s not what he meant) that such freedoms aren’t important. What I’m saying, reader, is that compared to the people living in many other countries, in fact even in most of the 1^st world countries, we are very fortunate to be living in Singapore. Before the anything-but-PAP supporters rebut with their arguments on how we – the average citizen – “technically” don’t have money, or that money isn’t everything, I would like to remind them that despite how financially handicapped you are, you still have the freedom to food security and personal safety that more than a handful of Europeans do not even have. My point is simply: do not take it for granted.

On the 23^rd of March this year at about 9p.m., I was on a trip to London, waiting for my scrumptious dinner to be served at the very sought-after Burger and Lobster. While waiting for my platter of steamed lobster to appear in front of me, I was scrolling through Facebook. That was when I first caught sight of PM Lee’s official statement on the passing of former MM Lee Kuan Yew. My first instinct told me that his Facebook account was probably hacked, again. Denial. It was only after confirming with the various sources that I finally came to terms with reality. I, along with my fellow Singaporean friends who were on holiday with me, continued dining as though nothing had happened. Yet, deep inside, we all knew that something had changed. There was an extremely unsettling feeling within me – a subtle amalgamation of grief and anxiety. I was tempted to pour out my feelings in a blog post a few days after his death; to lament the death our dearest founding father, to vent my anger at those who were disrespectful, to express the innumerous worries that I was harbouring for the future of Singapore. However, I abstained from doing so in order not to pass off as non-objective and emotional.

Today, more than 4 months after the death of Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, I vindicate the anxiety that I had harboured and I restore the right to write this blog post. The general elections are coming. There are speculations that it would be in September. If that is the case, I wouldn’t get to vote – I would be a month late. Yet, I hope that through this post, I would convince at least one person to consider where Singapore is right now, in the light of what is happening in the world – what is happening to our neighbours, what is happening to our former colonial authorities, what is happening to the supposed 1^st world. In the light of all these, there is a reason to be grateful to our government. There is a reason to rejoice for your birth in this blessed nation. There is a reason to stay and fight for the country amidst its challenges.

I do not want to sound over-optimistic. There are a myriad of issues and policies that I have started to question ever since I have been exposed to liberal democracy outside the country. I hate the inequality; my family struggled for more than a year with the meager earnings of my father’s small business. I do not believe in gerrymandering; I reckon that a capable party should compete based on fair elections. I don’t think that ministers should be paid so much; a genuine servant of the country ought not to be motivated by money. I disagree with certain aspects of how the public service is being run; more than 2 years in the Armed Forces have showed me more than enough flaws to convince me of the inefficiencies of the public service. Yet, unlike many who turn these frustrations into blind hatred for the government, I choose to accept that no government is perfect.

I’m no longer pro-PAP. I’m pro-Singapore. I love my country and I would support the party that proves its mettle and worth. For taking care of my country for the past 50 years and nurturing her to whom she is today, I’m grateful to the PAP. However, if there comes a day when the country is being wrecked in the hands of this party that I have placed my trust in, I will not hold back my vote for the opposition, if there be a more capable one.

And on a final note, to the Singaporeans who claim that they hate the country (especially because of the huge influx of foreigners) and are eager to leave for another country: by doing so, you are a hypocrite and you are no different from the foreigners in our country that you so very hate. You are not welcomed in another country either.

Source: www.melodysim.com

August 11, 2015
Aide Debunks Picture Of Rosmah ‘Bossing’ Najib At SG50 Parade

Rizal Mansor, the aide to the prime minister’s wife Rosmah Mansor, has debunked a photograph of Rosmah apparently ‘leading’ her husband Najib Abdul Razak during the Singapore National Day celebration last Sunday.

The photograph, which has gone viral, was used to claim it to be an example of Rosmah “bossing” her husband as she is seen walking ahead of Najib.

They were seen walking past Johor Sultan Ibrahim Ismail Iskandar and Johor Crown Prince Ismail Ibrahim, both of whom have been subtly critical of Najib, without any acknowledgement.

Rizal said there were more important issues to be concerned about, but nonetheless he still addressed the photograph after noting that many people had played up the matter.

He pointed out that Rosmah had to walk ahead as she was supposed to sit on the inside.

“Rosmah walking in front of Najib, have a look at the arrangement sitting. It was like going to the movies, who is seated on the inside must go in first.

“The seating and the position she enters is determined by Singapore’s protocol. We are guest, we have to follow,” he says in his Facebook posting.

Rizal also addressed another photograph taken from an angle that apparently showed Rosmah as the only head of government’s wife present at the celebration.

Other leaders too had their wives present…

The aide posted a separate photograph, pointing out that there were also other heads of states or governments who were accompanied by their wives.

“Rosmah was the only head of government’s wife?

“Have a look at today’s (yesterday’s) Utusan Malaysia photograph. The wife of Indonesia’s vice-president was present, Vietnam and New Zealand too.

“Out of eight head of states or representatives present, four of them brought their spouses.

“Singapore prime minister’s wife was also there,” Rizal said.

Social media has often made fun of Rosmah’s alleged influence over Najib, despite the prime minister denying that his wife plays any role in his administration.

Najib is also suing Taiping MP Nga Kor Ming on his claim that Rosmah was present in a cabinet meeting, based on a photograph that Najib said was merely a regular meeting between him and a few ministers, at which his wife was present.

Source: www.malaysiakini.com

August 11, 2015
PAP vs WP – What These Four Years Have Shown

An interesting period in Singapore politics will soon end with the coming general election.

In fact, it was probably the most significant four years between elections. How so?

This requires some explanation, so I should start at the beginning, after the 2011 GE.

When the ruling party lost Aljunied GRC, there were some who argued that it was a good result for the country.

They were not necessarily opposition supporters but believed that the People’s Action Party’s almost complete electoral domination could not last.

Sooner or later, it would lose some of its appeal: its policies might not be working as well, voters want more alternatives or they might simply tire of its longevity and desire change.

This transition to a more competitive political landscape could result in several possible scenarios. Will a two-party system emerge, as in many mature democracies? Would the PAP lose power one day? Or might it survive and continue to succeed but renewed and transformed.

Whatever the outcome, Singaporeans hoped the change would be gradual, peaceful and lead to a stronger nation, one as able as it was in the past to overcome its challenges. What they feared

most was sudden, unpredictable change, leading to instability or mediocrity and a loss of confidence in the country.

Seen from this perspective, GE 2011 was a good outcome.

Even though the PAP lost a GRC, it scored a landslide victory nationwide, winning 80 out of 87 seats and 60.1 per cent of the votes.

If the country was indeed transiting towards a more normal democracy, this was a gradual, controlled shift.

That was the initial assessment in the days immediately after the GE.

Now, four years later, and as another election looms, the question is whether the experience so far has reinforced or weakened this view.

Did it offer a glimpse of what the changing politics might look like and which of those three scenarios is the more likely?

In fact, these four years were rich with data, and if I were a political scientist I would have had a field day.

The ruling party swung into action on the policy front, determined to fix those policies that had caused much unhappiness in 2011. It tightened immigration, ramped up the construction of Housing Board flats and added hundreds more buses to the public transport network financed from government coffers.

In doing so, it lived up to its reputation of being able to deliver results when it puts its mind to it.

But there was no radical change in its approach to solving these problems, no huge departure from existing policies.

Those who wanted a more fundamental review of, say, housing or transport would have been disappointed, though the Government might counter that it was more interested in tackling the problems in a pragmatic way rather than indulging in the grand ideas.

The biggest shift in thinking was on social policy.

It seems unlikely the subsidies and assistance given to senior citizens will end with the pioneer generation – more likely it signals a new approach to welfare support.

Ditto the new health insurance scheme, MediShield Life, which now covers those with pre-existing medical problems.

While you could argue the merits of each of these changes, taken together, the picture seems clear: The Government has become more responsive in helping vulnerable segments of the population.

The PAP set out to make sure these issues would not dominate the agenda when it fights the next general election.

On the political front, though, its approach could not be more different, refusing to concede much ground, and it might even have dug in some more.

It pressed the WP on the management of its town council and the saga is still ongoing.

It tightened legislation on online media and took legal action against several people for what they said in their blogs.

Wasn’t this reverting to the bad old days? If it was, so be it, it seemed to be saying to its critics.

For the PAP, change would not mean going soft on its political opponents. If these four years have shown how the party is responding to the new political landscape, it is this: fix the policies but give no quarter on the political front.

On the opposition side, the only party of note is the WP, and it too showed plenty how it was managing the new situation.

Those who expected it to liven up politics here by proactively engaging the PAP and giving it a hard time would have been disappointed. Even when the debate was over ministerial salaries, an issue on which it could have scored many political points, it did not rise to the bait and maintained a position not too far off the Government’s.

Did these four years show up its inadequacy as the main opposition party holding the Government accountable or was it part of its strategy to consolidate its gains.

Possibly both.

The WP is intent on being regarded as a serious-minded party appealing to the middle ground, not one on the fringe.

It believes this is the way to increase its share of the votes and that, with its small presence in Parliament, going full frontal against the ruling party on every issue will bring more risks than gains. That is why it prefers to work quietly on the ground in its own wards and in those it fancies at the next election.

For the WP, the four years have shown it is content to make headway steadily rather than noisily. It appears more in consolidation phase than in any hurry to install a two-party system.

One area though hasn’t been revealed but will become clearer in the coming weeks when it introduces its candidates for the GE: Its ability to attract people into the party, particularly those with ability and commitment.

For me, this will be the most interesting and revealing part of its four-year journey so far.

Do well on this front, and it would have made real progress.

For the other opposition parties, I am afraid the four years have been more of the same. Still at the fringes, and all of them still hoping for the one breakthrough on Polling Day.

Back to the question I posed at the beginning: Has it been good for the country?

From the way the PAP responded, it has to be a qualified yes. The people got a more responsive government and the main opposition party is still keeping alive the hopes of opposition supporters. Voters now have a better measure of the two main parties and can cast their votes accordingly.

In fact, you could also say GE 2011 was good for the PAP, forcing it to adjust to the new reality. I bet that’s not how they saw it four years ago.

Source: www.straitstimes.com

August 11, 2015
Amos Yee Follows Reform Party On Walkabouts In Ang Mo Kio GRC

Prominent teen blogger Amos Yee shared on Facebook that he followed the Reform Party on their walkabout in Ang Mo Kio GRC. Even though he did not help in passing out fliers or urge people to vote out the PAP, he did film the process and learnt the inner workings of the Reform Party along the way. Is this a sign of things to come? Will Amos Yee stand for elections together with Roy Ngerng under the Reform Party flag?

This is his Facebook update:

“Here you see me chillin with M Ravi. An extremely nice person. I’m just hangin out with my politically savvy buddies again.

Not only was I introduced to M Ravi today, but other fellow members and volunteers of the reform party (Quite notably, Jeyaretnam), the opposition party contesting for the Ang Mo Kio GRC (Lee Hsien Loong’s pride and joy), while they were doing their walkabout.

I followed them, though I didn’t actually do the walkabout, as in passing out the fliers and telling people fuck PAP vote for the reform party (They didn’t actually phrase it that way of course xD). But as you can see with that little camera on my hand, I did film it, and learned a little bit of the inner workings of the reform party along the way.

As of now, due to lack of information and research on my part, I’m currently undecided whether you guys are worth voting for over PAP in the upcoming elections. I hope you are though, shouldn’t be much of a problem having a group of people that’s better than Lee Hsien Loong’s lackeys, and you guys have the added assistance of Roy Ngerng. So good luck.”

Source: www.allsingaporestuff.com

August 11, 2015