If you’re qualified, employers will hire you. Don’t like low paying jobs?
But now complaining your government doesn’t protect your rights.
Yes, I don’t know Singapore much, I visited the country for just 3 days and in a very short period of time I see it’s a very expensive country to work and live in.
If your country will hire me for a high salary of my demand, I couldn’t care less about your battle cry. If your country wouldn’t hire your young fresh graduates, highly qualified professionals, then why not find a job in other country?
All you do is whine and complain, why don’t you put yourselves in the test and try finding a job in a foreign land.
If you’re that confident about your qualifications but your country doesn’t want you to work for them, why continuously cry like a bunch of spoiled brats waiting for their parents to feed them.
Explore your options if you have the qualifications. Don’t expect your country to give you special treatments just because you’re a local.
It happens globally, if you’re a local with exceptional talent and very qualified, employers will drool all over you.
But mediocre qualification and skill, don’t be too picky.
That’s why other people call you racist, not me, just to be clear. If you truly believe you’re as qualified as the next foreign worker beside you, don’t push them out of your beloved country, compete with them head-on.
And may the best employee win.
Posted by: the game
Editor’s note: this article is retrieved from a comment posted on our site.
I might be flamed by fellow opposition supporters for saying this, but I feel it’s better if we opposition supporters voice out our concerns BEFORE the upcoming GE.
Firstly, not all opposition parties have the same status. The strongest opposition party at the moment is the WP which has 7 parliamentary seats and 2 non-constituency members of parliament. The WP is stable, has good leadership, party discipline, a strong brand name, strong grassroots network and has managed to attract a critical mass of skilled professionals. These factors explain why the WP has a better image and thus a better chance of winning than the other opposition parties. As was seen in the Punggol East by-election, in a multi-cornered fight, the WP candidate will attract a much larger share of votes than the minor opposition parties.
Next in the ranking of the opposition parties, is the SDP. Why? Because this is a party with a history, alternative policies and a clear ideology. SDP’s grassroots potential is underused but not lacking, as it seems to be able to attract social activists and other liberals. Say what you may about the SDP but at least it does not give the image that it is an unstable party that lacks people. The party website is well designed and is kept up to date. SDP’s decision to pull out of the Punggol by-election and avoid being a spoiler earned it goodwill from opposition supporters and thus the SDP’s image was not tarnished by a great defeat. The SDP may have committed some blunders such as implying that they were unwilling to run a town council, but they have corrected that mistake! They realized that they have to turn their attention to municipal matters too. And thus, earlier this year, they published a paper detailing their plans on running a town council. The SDP is not perfect, but if your constituency is not contested by WP, it’s your best bet if you want an opposition win.
Why did I not list the SPP which has 1 NCMP as the second pick for opposition supporters? Last GE, we saw a nationwide 6.5% vote swing AWAY from the PAP. Thus, every constituency that was also contested by the opposition in 2006 saw a larger percentage of the votes gained by the opposition in 2011. All constituencies save for one – Potong Pasir. SPP instead saw their votes in Potong Pasir drop by 6%, leading to their narrow loss of a safe seat to the PAP’s Sitoh Yi Pin!
This is largely due to the choice of SPP to field Lina Chiam who was intended to be Chiam See Tong’s successor. This is widely perceived to be the reason why SPP lost. Mrs Chiam was not eloquent enough at her rallies. Nor did she attack the PAP candidate sufficiently. Most importantly, she did not manage to convince the swing voters that she had a good chance of winning against the PAP candidate. That was why there were 242 spoiled votes. If just half these votes had gone to SPP, she would have won!
I’m not against SPP but I’m just saying that SPP has to deal with these REAL perceptions if they intend to field Mrs Chiam in Potong Pasir again. A party only stands a decent chance if it can generate hype among its supporters. Supporters and swing voters have to be convinced that the party can win. Remember, Sitoh Yi Pin has been the incumbent MP for Potong Pasir for 4 years now and he has a huge advantage over Mrs Chiam. It is no longer 50-50 as was the case in 2011. Even other opposition parties like the DPP are doubting Mrs Chiam’s ability to win again. That is why these opportunists want to cause a multi-cornered fight in Potong Pasir.
SPP can still win back Potong Pasir if they field someone younger, whose appeal to the voters is stronger. If they wish to revive Mr Chiam’s legacy while renewing SPP, then why not field Mr Chiam’s daughter? As Nicole Seah proved in the last GE, it is possible for a young, eloquent and inspiring female politician to generate sufficient hype to shift the vote towards her party, even against a strong incumbent from the ruling party.
SPP has been gifted with the entry of strong opposition personalities like Ravi Philemon and Jeanette Chong-Aruldoss, who is poised to give the PAP a tough fight at Mountbatten SMC once again. So why not build on that to renew the party’s overall image? I hope SPP can see the bigger picture and try to attract back swing voters.
All the other opposition parties are not main contenders. NSP received a lot of bad publicity after GE2011 because they went through a change of 5 secretary generals in such a short time and furthermore lost almost all their top candidates in the last GE to other political parties. Singfirst and PPP are new parties with no history and swing voters usually stick to established parties when they vote. RP and SDA have been discredited by their secretary generals losing their deposits in the Punggol by-election. These parties will be entering the upcoming GE with voters perceiving them to have a low chance of winning. They have a lot of hard work ahead of them. It will be an uphill task for them to win a seat in parliament.
A 48-year-old Permanent Resident (PR) from the United Kingdom is suspected of assaulting a 37-year-old financial consultant and drove a car towards the other, charged on Tuesday morning.
The accused, John Duncan Tasker faces two charges, namely for the use of criminal force and for driving rashly towards another driver, Yi Yongjie.
The accused was charged on Tuesday morning and will have the hearing next month on 25 August.
Provoked assault?
The incident is said to have happened at the car park of Parkland Green, East Coast Park, on 30 May (Saturday) around 6:10pm.
Mr Yi was waiting for a parking lot after dropping off his wife and kids at the car park when a silver colored car, driven by Mr Tasker, came driving in against the flow of traffic.
The car then parked in front of the space that Mr Yi was waiting for with his hazard light turned on. As a result, Mr Yi drove his car forward, in front of Mr Tasker’s car and wound down his car window to confront the latter.
According to Mr Yi, Mr Tasker alighted from his car and starting scolding him, calling him “an idiot for being slow”. An argument then ensued between the two men.
All of a sudden, Mr Tasker punched Mr Yi through the car’s window and walked back to his car.
The force of the punch was so great that it broke Mr Yi’s glasses and resulted in bleeding on his face.
Despite being stunned from the punch, Mr Yi hurried down from his car and tried to take down the Mr Tasker’s car license plate number.
“I stood in front of his car and he just stepped on the accelerator, trying to run me over while escaping.” said Mr Yi, who was subsequently treated at Changi Hospital for his injuries.
If convicted, the accused faces up to two-years’ imprisonment or a fine of $5,000 dollars, or both.
Grassroots leader and former military man
In an article about the visit of the British royalty to Singapore three years ago, Mr Tasker was reported to be formerly from the British military and he was once a personal protection officer for the late Princess Diana.
“Among those present were former members of the British military, including 45-year-old John Tasker. His 15-year military career included a stint as a personal protection officer for the late Princess Diana.” (see link)
In his LinkedIn account, apart from listing his current occupation of the Chief Operating Officer at The JLC Group of Companies (a privately held entity with offices in both Singapore and the United Kingdom). Mr Tasker identifies himself as a grassroots leader in his local community in the position of vice-chairman of a Neighbourhood Committee, a grassroots organisation under the aegis of the People’s Association.
He says his role as a grassroots leader include organising and managing community events and “ad hoc meet the people session with our local MP, Dr Maliki Osman.”
Here is a photo of a get-well card and flower bouquet which Dr Maliki’s had apparently sent to Mr Tasker.
Jan 15, 2013 – Workers’ Party (WP) candidate for Punggol East Lee Li Lian on Tuesday defended the performance of her party mates in Parliament over the past year and a half following criticism that they failed to present a strong alternative voice.
Expectations of the opposition group had been raised after it scored its best showing in the general election in 2011 in which it won six out of 87 seats up for grabs and grabbed two places for Non-Constituency Members of Parliament.
“I think that the Workers’ Party MPs have done a good job — given the imbalance in numbers. We had eight, whereas the PAP (People’s Action Party) have 80. There’s a difference definitely in terms of time given to us” she told Yahoo! Singapore in a one-on-one interview on Tuesday afternoon in Rivervale Drive.
She said her party MPs — currently consisting of secretary-general Low Thia Khiang, chairman Sylvia Lim, Pritam Singh, Chen Show Mao and Muhamad Faisal bin Abdul Manap for Aljunied GRC, and Png Eng Huat for Hougang SMC, as well as NCMPs Gerald Giam and Yee Jenn Jong — have raised “pertinent issues” in Parliament so far, pressing the government for answers on public transport, housing, healthcare, population and immigration, among others.
“I hope to be able to add to the strength that we currently have,” she added.
A focus on procreation policies
Asked what issues she will focus on should she join the ranks of her cadre in Parliament, she said she will raise concerns that residents in Punggol East have brought up.
“(I foresee that to include) the considerations and concerns that young couples will have,” she said, noting that the constituency possesses a distinctly younger age demographic — with almost 50 per cent being between age 22 and 49, while those aged 50 and above forming about 20 to 30 per cent of residents.
These, she added, correspond to issues she holds close to her heart and feels most strongly about: the concerns of young couples, families and the welfare of the elderly, particularly those of single parents and stay-at-home mothers.
“Stay-at-home mothers don’t qualify for workfare bonus, but that doesn’t mean that they are not doing anything,” she said. “They’re working at home… when you come home, they have piping hot food for you — are they not working? They are. So why are they not given this? I think they should be given more attention,” she added.
Lee also feels that fathers should be given six days of paternity leave — one of the practical policy changes she says she will fight for, should she gain a seat in Parliament.
“I think it would be good (to have more paternity leave), perhaps half funded by the government, because fathers play an equally important role in family-building,” she said.
Turning to single mothers, Lee said they take priority on her list because she has seen for herself how they suffer at the hands of existing policies, in particular the prevailing rule that does not allow single parents with their children to form a family unit and purchase an HDB flat.
“(That rule) is one thing I hope can be abolished so they can have a shelter when they have no one to depend on,” she said. “When you have a pair of parents, it’s already not easy, so if you have only one, I think it’s even tougher. I’m not saying they should receive special incentives… what they’re asking for is just the same benefits as other married mothers,” she said.
Lee previously responded to other criticism that she had not been walking the ground in Punggol East over the past year and a half since she lost to ex-Speaker of Parliament Michael Palmer in 2011
In the press conference Monday where she was unveiled as the WP candidate of choice for the upcoming by-election, she said she still visited Punggol East on occasion despite being preoccupied with her duties as legislative assistant to Singh, helping the Aljunied GRC MP with his constituency groundwork.
She also continued to dodge questions about other possible candidates in the election, or requests for estimates on her chances at the polls, reiterating that she preferred to focus on her campaign and her priority in getting reacquainted with the residents.
Watch a video interview that we did with Lee here:
Punggol East by-election – One on One with Worker’s Party candidate Lee Li LianSatish Cheney finds out more about the woman the Workers’ Party is counting on to bring in the votes at the Punggol East by-election. The 34-year-old Liverpool fan with a creative streak reveals more about herself and gives her take on issues on the ground.
“Raise fares to improve train service”, says the title of the letter to the Straits Times forum page on Wednesday.
Mr Jonathan Toh Joo Khai, the writer, pointed at the Public Transport Council (PTC), which regulates public transport fares, as the “root cause of SMRT’s frequent train breakdowns.”
“The fare hikes are miserly compared with the rate of inflation,” Mr Toh said.
He then rattled off a litany of “financial indicators” of the SMRT which, he said, “had been falling for five straight years.”
“Unlike other companies, SMRT cannot shed its money-losing train business,” Mr Toh said. “Yet, it is yet expected to improve reliability even as the PTC moderates fare hikes to meet the demands of commuters, some of whom even want a freeze to fare hikes until reliability improves.”
“How is that possible?” he asked.
He argued that “train fares in Singapore are low relative to gross domestic product per capita.”
Mr Toh thus called for fares to be increased, and that discounts be given to those in need.
“The rest who happily use our latest flashy iPhones and Samsungs to kill time on the trains can surely afford a fare hike,” he concluded.
The public transport operators (PTOs) make yearly application, usually towards the end of the year, for “fares review”, which the PTC will consider and decide on several months later, usually around March.
Mr Toh’s call is not new and is the latest in the last two years or so from various quarters who have also also called for higher fares for buses.
In January 204, for example, this report appeared in the TODAY newspaper:
TODAY, Jan 2014
“Rather than complain about both poor service and fare increases, perhaps it is time for a shift in commuters’ thinking towards paying even more, so that we get the transport services we deserve in a world-class city,” the writer said.
About four months later, the former chairman of the PTC, Gerard Ee, echoed the same sentiments.
Straits Times, May 2014
“At the end of the day, buses and trains are about transporting a lot of people from Point A to B as affordably as possible,” Mr Ee said. “So by that very nature, they are going to be crowded. They’re not designed for comfort.
“If you treasure your time and treasure your comfort, you pay a premium – there are premium bus services. If you value your time and comfort even more, buy a car. And then ultimately, get a chauffeur. You have to decide for yourself what it is you want.”
Straits Times, Jan 2014
But in January 2014, the PTC itself delinked the relationship between fare hikes and better service, particularly breakdowns of the system.
The PTC’s remarks were in response to public sentiments that fares should not go up when trains are still breaking down.
“[The] Public Transport Council (PTC) has said that the two issues should be kept separate,” the Straits Times reported.
Nonetheless, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in September last year that progress and improvements have been made, and that “there are not so many breakdowns as before.”
But just three months later, the TODAY newspaper reported that the “number of major MRT delays had hit a] four-year high.”
Sept 2014
There were 12 “major delays” in the first nine months of 2014 alone, the newspaper reported. This was more than the 11 for the entire year in 2011, the previous record number of delays.
And on Thursday, 30 July 2015, the Straits Times reported that there have already been “five major delays in Q1, nearly half last year’s total.”
Straits Times, 30 July 2015
“[There] were five service delays lasting more than 30 minutes between January and March this year,” the Straits Times said.
This included a disruption in February where a breakdown in the line between Yew Tee and Kranji station lasted for four hours and 38 minutes.
And earlier in July, the entire train system was shut-down for several hours due to a train fault, affecting 250,000 commuters.
Would all these problems disappear with the simple solution of increasing fares?
One would be hard-pressed to argue for such a simplistic expectation.
Yet, the truth is that much public funds have been poured into the transport system, billions in fact, and billions more have been earmarked for the same in the next decade.
And are the PTOs making losses?
If they were, there would be no justification for them to double the salary of their chief executive officer, as SMRT did this year, raising its CEO pay from S$1.2m in 2013, to $2.25m to $2.5m in 2015. (See here: “SMRT CEO paid $2.2m to $2.5m – a multifold jump in three years?“.
