The Secretary-General of Singapore’s Democratic Party, Chee Soon Juan has written a letter addressed to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong to question him whether a by-election will be held at Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC, following Halimah Yacob’s resignation.The full letter is attached below.
The latest scheme adopted by the NTUC to provide professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) who are retrenched with financial assistance is a modified version of the SDP’s proposal launched 2010.
The PAP’s idea, called Returner Work Trial, will assist employers to offer job training for the individuals who have been unemployed for at least two years. The trainee, who must be 30 and above, will receive
The payout period for trainees is limited to six months.
Compare this to the SDP’s RESTART (Re-Employment Scheme and Temporary Assistance for the ReTrenched) programme where retrenched workers will receive:
The payout period is capped at 18 months and MOM will help match retrenched individuals with jobs. The job-seekers can only reject up to three job offers.
Read also SDP proposes RESTART to support retrenched workers
The NTUC’s idea is essentially an unemployment benefits scheme similar to RESTART but with the difference that under the Returner Worker Trial programme, a retrenched worker has to undergo training in order to get the financial support. There are many problems with the measure:
One, it is restricted only to PMETs. There are many retrenched workers who are not PMETs. They also face the same hardships when laid-off.
Two, the payout-training period lasts for only six months after which the employer has no obligation to offer the trainee a permanent job. This is especially salient as Singapore’s economy contracts with job vacancies continuing to fall.
Three, how are retrenched workers expected to survive if they have to remain unemployed for two years before they qualify for the scheme? A study found that 50 percent of households have little or no savings due to the high cost of living to tide them through difficult times.
In addition, why is the government using taxpayers’ money to subsidise businesses? Companies can use the scheme as a cheap source of labour. Also, will this not encourage companies to lay off workers and then profit by “training” others under the scheme at a state-subsidised rate?
Given such loopholes, Temasek Holdings needs to state how many of its Government-linked companies are participating in the scheme and the government needs to tell the public how much these GLCs will stand to benefit from it.
In the past, the PAP has also followed the SDP’s lead on minimum wage, universal healthcare, and employing Singaporeans first.
Source: http://yoursdp.org
We continued our house visits at one of the HDB blocks in Marsiling this evening.
We asked the residents 2 questions:
1. The incumbent, Mdm Halimah Yacob, has indicated her interest to contest the next Presidential Election (PE). She claimed that she has received a lot of encouragement & blessings from Marsiling constituents. Are you supportive of her presidential bid?
Most of the residents we spoke to appeared lukewarm to this question & did not seem really bothered if she would contest or not- let alone support her.
2. If Mdm Halimah contests the next PE, she will have to resign from the PAP & vacate her parliamentary seat. Do you think a by-election should be called thereafter so that Marsiling-Yew Tee GRC residents have a chance to elect a full slate of 4 new MPs?
All the residents we spoke to unanimously agreed that a by-election should be called.
The residents’ sentiments are in sharp contrast to what Minister Chan Chun Sing has said in Parliament (https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/…/no-by-election-if-minor…/).
In the last General Elections in 2015, the PAP campaigned based on the slogan: “With You, For You, For Singapore”.
It will be interesting to see how they can continue to keep the above election promise when they deny the voters of Marsiling-Yew Tee their constitutional rights to elect new political representatives via a by-election.
Source: Bryan Lim Boon Heng (林文兴)
Four of my five children are in Madrasah. They spanned 3 out of the 6 remaining full-time Madrasah still providing valuable service to the Muslim community. The Madrasah is a vital educational institution serving both iconic and strategic value to the interest and identity of the local Muslim community. The recent adjustment to allow Madrasah students to get Students yearly per capita grants for extra-curricular programs are overdue but nonetheless welcomed and helpful.
Yet decades on, the government is still only making baby steps towards acting as they should to provide equal share of aid to all educational institutions that serves the arduous task to the public of providing learning for our next generation. Just because it is a religious institution that is privately owned do not in any way justify an exclusion from its rightful entitlement for public aid when it is crystal clear that the Madrasah have no profit motives in doing their selfless work for the Muslim community.
It was only like yesterday when the Muslim community had to rally behind these 6 full-time Madrasah when changes to the education act were made imposing compulsory secular education upon them. By the Grace of God, far from wrapping up, the Madrasah raised up their game and vigorously struggled and came up to speed in meeting the conditions imposed upon them. Backed by a very strong united collective community-driven action, they continued to move forward under severe duress straining and testing them tremendously along the way.
It was never a level playing field for the 6 surviving full-time Madrasah. Some had to struggle under enormous circumstances to keep the listing institution alive and floating believing in their relevance and value to the community. Financially, the Madrasah were severely tested having to cope with burden of staff salary, operational cost from maintenance, upkeep, etc., to ensuring educationally robust infra-structure within severe spatial constraints to meet the ever changing challenging new educational needs for their students.
It was nothing short of a miracle that with only the heavily subsidized fees paid by parents which barely covered not more than 30% of operational cost, the deluge of donations from the community became the vital lifeline for the Madrasah over the last few decades until today. But surely this is a great affront to justice, fairness and equality that the 6 Madrasah continue to be denied the equivalent financial support they should have been entitled to like other similar religiously based schools that runs in Singapore providing selfless services to their communities.
Why does the Government choose to discriminate against the Madrasah by denying their full right to be fully funded as a legitimate educational institution in this country serving the public with no profit motives?
We can see religious based schools among them the Buddhist based schools such as Manjusri and Maha Bodhi operating in spanking buildings paid for by taxpayers money. We have even huge buildings for Christian based schools from convent schools such as CHIJ to St Andrews, St Joseph and many more with some even sitting on prime sites in various parts of this Island. We then have the race based Chinese schools with its strong Confucious ethics and Chinese identity with the label of SAP schools endowed with even more glorious infra-structure. The only exceptions are our Hindu brethren as the second biggest minority without any religious or ethnic based school.
The Government must answer for its refusal to give equal treatment like what is accorded to the other religious or ethnic based schools but not to the Madrasah. The past excuses are really unacceptable when we think of the severely imbalanced provision given to the examples of the list of religious and ethnic based schools mentioned above.
Here the Muslim community had never asked for special provision, it is simply equal, fair and just treatment that we are asking from the Government. There is no justification for the Government not providing all the material support needed by the Madrasah like any other educational institutions that serves the people albeit a designated group in society, the Muslim families who chooses to school their children in the Madrasah.
The selective arguments that Madrasah is a private school do not hold water. The Madrasah is a private school categorised as Islamic schools in the Ministry of Education apart from other private schools in general and directly under the purview of the Islamic Council of Singapore, MUIS.
This demarcation shows the unique position of the Madrasah as an essentially Muslim community based school and not a strictly private school with profit motives. How can the Government choose to place the Madrasah on the same status as other profit-driven private schools knowing fully well that they never functioned today as a strictly private entity but exists only as first an Islamic educational service provider for the Muslim community and now fully running national curriculum too?
The recent news of the merger of JCs leaving potentially unused infra-structure should be good news for the 6 full-time Madrasah as they should have first right of refusal to occupy the premise under subsidized or even rental free occupancy since they were not given any funding or privileges for decades before to build on any land provisioned with the luxury of space conducive and ideal for an educational institution comparable to other national ones or the religious/ethnic based ones mentioned earlier.
It is overdue that the Government be just and fair to the 4% or less of Muslim students who chooses Madrasah as their choice of school so that the constitutional demands that each Singaporean child be given equal opportunity to access the best education in sufficiently provided space for full holistic learning of the mind and physique be met. This grotesque marginalization of Madrasah and the education it offers must end as it goes against the spirit of our beloved country’s constitution that guarantees equal rights and access to quality education regardless of race, language or religion.
Source: Damanhuri Bin Abas
In his Facebook post, DPM Tharman Shanmugaratnam called on Singaporeans to “have confidence” in the present system of governance, adding, “You can count on PM Lee Hsien Loong and all of us in his team for that.”
To have confidence in the government, Singaporeans need transparency. So before the DPM asks for trust in Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s team, the PAP must first account for and explain:
1. Price hikes
Why the Government announced a slew of price hikes, including a drastic 30% increase in water fees, only after the 2015 general elections and at a time of economic uncertainty for the people.
2. Asset enhancement
Then PM Goh Chok Tong’s assurance in 1992 that HDB prices will “continue to rise” only to be told in 2017 by National Development Minister Lawrence Wong that prices will “come down” until the flats are eventually returned to HDB.
3. AGO report
The Auditor-General’s 2016 report that PAP Government lacked “principles of good governance and financial controls” which resulted in a large number of instances where there was a “breakdown in the controls.” This included the construction of a rubbish centre for $880,000.
4. GIC losses in UBS
The GIC’s loss of nearly $6 billion this year in its investment in UBS despite the SDP’s repeated warnings about the problems with the Swiss bank, and the subsequent refusal of the Government to account for the loss.
5. Elected Presidency
The sudden decision to change the rules – and the contorted reasoning for the change – to restrict candidacy for the EP after Dr Tony Tan nearly lost the election in 2015.
6. Hep-C outbreak
Health Minister Gan Kim Yong’s refusal to release correspondence such as emails, memos, minutes of meetings between officials at MOH and SGH over the Hepatitis C outbreak in 2015 as well as the refusal to openly identify the officers who were at fault and the penalties meted out to them.
7. Cracks in new MRT trains
The failure to inform the public of cracks in brand new MRT trains and the secretive nature of the way the trains were shipped back to China for repairs.
8. Deteriorating infrastructure
The Government’s inability to deal with constant breakdown of MRT services, HDB lift mishaps (which have caused death and injury), falling slabs of HDB blocks, and flooding of our roads whenever it rains heavily.
9. Productivity decline
The stagnant productivity levels despite the more than $20 billion the PAP Government has thrown at the problem. The situation has deteriorated to the point where PM Lee now admits that our economy has “maxed out” after easy gains in recent years.
10. Future economy
The lack of direction and rehash of old ideas from the Committee on the Future Economy despite the involvement of five ministers and one full year of work.
11. Online gambling
The introduction of online gambling despite widespread public objection.
12. Foreign labour
The continued influx of foreign workers despite falling job vacancies and increasing unemployment among Singaporeans.
13. China relations
The mishandling of relations with China leading to Mr Lee Hsien Loong’s exclusion from the OBOR summit in Beijing.
14. Zika and TB
The explosion of Zika infections and the increase in new cases of active TB in Singapore in 2016.
15. Money laundering
The discovery of money laundering in our financial system last year despite SDP’s warning since 2008 that Singapore was becoming a haven for tax evaders and money launderers.
16. Neptune Orient Lines
Mr Ng Yat Chung’s appointment as CEO of SPH despite his running aground the NOL (losing $1.5 billion in the process) and which resulted in the company being sold to the French CMA CGM in 2016. The new owners turned NOL’s fortunes around registering a US$26m-profit in less than one year.
17. Keppel and SembMarine
The deep financial troubles of Temasek-owned Keppel Corp and Sembcorp Marine amidst charges of corruption against the companies in Brazil following the bust in the oil-rig industry.
18. Shortage of engineers
How, after more than 50 years of uninterrupted PAP rule, Singapore now finds itself short of engineers, a situation which “poses a national risk”.
19. Ailing retail
The shuttering of retail shops and empty shopping centres. This is epitomised by a dying Orchard Road.
20. Closing of JCs
The controversial closing down of neighbourhood Junior Colleges in which MOE provided dubious reasons.
21. GIC/Temasek non-transparency
The non-transparent manner in which the GIC and Temasek Holdings are managed and the related issue of the retention of CPF funds through the Minimum Sum Scheme.
This list does not, of course, include the allegations of impropriety by Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang against PM Lee and his team which necessitates even more accountability. Mr Tharman’s call for confidence in the current administration is desperately misplaced.
Source: http://yoursdp.org