Rilek1Corner

Tag: Singaporeans

  • What I Like And Don’t Like About The Workers’ Party Manifesto

    What I Like And Don’t Like About The Workers’ Party Manifesto

    He Ting Ru, one of my favourite new politicians, partly because she puts paid to the notion that opposition candidates are necessarily substandard. But more importantly, because she is a “crazy cat lady” with eight!

    “The opposition has nothing new or concrete to offer.”

    I am tiring of this lazy, ignorant, biased statement. So I have put my unemployment to good use and done some homework.

    Having just gone through the WP’s manifesto, I have selected here the many statements that I like and also the three that I don’t like—including the one that I REALLY dislike. (Scroll to the bottom for those.)

    I have selected policies that I believe are significantly different from PAP policies. Like political parties everywhere, they both indulge in a lot of waffle—so forgive me for not humouring vapid commentary about helping SMEs, boosting productivity, broadening our definitions of achievement, encouraging flexible work arrangements, enhancing healthcare systems, strengthening regional stability, assisting Singaporeans abroad, etc. etc.

    Those are all noble, lofty pursuits. Below are the ones I believe are practical and implementable. (Caveat: as with many of the PAP’s proposed policies, a more thorough analysis of the trade-offs and fiscal impact is necessary.)

    Note: I have read up on the WP, since it is shaping up to be the most likely opposition in a putative bipartisan system; if, however, I detect enough interest in this post, I’d be happy to glean the other opposition parties’ manifestos.

    What I like

    Immigration and workforce
    “Foreign spouses of Singaporeans should be given priority for citizenship, as they naturally integrate with a Singaporean family.” (p.8)

    “Targeted Training and Job-Matching Schemes for Female Workers. The labour force participation rate is significantly lower for women than men…we propose targeted training and job-matching schemes be introduced for women 30 years of age and older. Additional cash grants and special employment credits…” (P.10)

    “We propose it be made mandatory for large companies to implement workplace and job redesign for senior workers. We also propose targeted measures and incentives for SMEs.” (P.11)

    My thoughts: I hear too many stories of foreign spouses having immigration trouble. This is completely unacceptable. The focus on boosting female and senior labour force participation is also great, and something the PAP has been very late to the game with. More broadly, I like that the WP is eager to recast many of these constituencies—the elderly, single mums, the poor—as active, economic contributors to our society. Rather than “policy problems” that must be managed, as is the PAP’s way.

    Employment/jobs
    “Employment Security Fund (ESF). We propose a mandatory unemployment insurance scheme similar to schemes in other developed countries. The ESF would require an additional 0.1% of basic salary to be paid into it….” (P.12)

    “National Minimum Wage. We propose a national minimum wage be established and pegged to the Average Household Expenditure on Basic Needs, so that workers can earn a living wage to meet the needs of their family.” (P.13)

    “Educational Credential Assessments (ECA). We propose all Employment Pass and S Pass applicants with university degrees and diplomas earned outside Singapore be subject to mandatory ECA. The cost of the ECA should be borne by the applicant…..” (P.13)

    My thoughts: The ESF would go some way towards compensating the losers from globalisation, something essential for an open economy like ours. Similarly, while I used to be strongly opposed to a minimum wage—on the grounds of market distortion—I am increasingly of the view that we need to consider a well-thought out policy. Tim Harford, “the undercover economist”, has written a good piece about minimum wage misconceptions.

    Finally, there is a lot of dissatisfaction about foreigners supposedly lying to gain employment. The ECA will sort the wheat from the chaff and thus, among other things, go some way towards improving foreigner integration.

    CPF
    “Transparency in CPF Monies Investment Returns. CPF monies are currently used by GIC for investment, while the government guarantees returns back to the CPF. We propose CPF members be given full transparency on the nature and performance of their CPF monies that have been so invested. We further propose that the difference between the investment returns of GIC and the net interest payable on CPF member balances, on a 10-year moving average basis, be reported to CPF members. The government could return one third of this difference to CPF members’ Special Accounts as special dividends to enhance retirement adequacy when the difference crosses a predetermined threshold in years of high return.” (P.13)

    Taxation
    “Progressive Top-bracket Income Tax. We propose personal income tax be made more progressive, as our effective top tax personal income rates are significantly lower than almost all locations with which Singapore competes for offshore banking and similar economic activities. We propose further tiering above $320,000 (currently at flat rate of 22%). This cut-off has not been adjusted for more than a decade even though incomes at the higher end have soared.” (P.14)

    Education
    “10-Year Through-train School Programme (10 YTS). To offer more diversity in the education system, we propose a 10-Year Through-train School programme from Primary 1 to Secondary 4 as an option for parents who wish for their child to bypass the PSLE…The 10 YTS will pair up existing primary and secondary schools and therefore complement, not replace, these primary and secondary schools.” (P.20)

    “Equitable funding for schools. There is a gap in disposable funds between elite schools and neighbourhood schools. This is because elite schools usually charge higher fees, enjoy greater economies of scale and have wealthy alumni….We propose neighbourhood schools receive additional government funds in order to ensure that all schools are adequately funded to become good schools.” (P.21)

    “Equitable Support for Single Parents. We reiterate our call to grant single unwed mothers the full 16 weeks of paid maternity leave. In addition, single mothers should be made eligible for both the Working Mother’s Child Relief as well as the Foreign Maid Levy Relief. Excluding single mothers from these schemes unnecessarily penalises vulnerable children and single mothers. The government should extend the same help to single fathers.” (P.22)

    My thoughts: Yes, Yes and Yes. Judging by my peers, PSLE has proved to be a very poor indicator of future success. Or anything else. And we need to do a LOT more to ensure our children compete on a level playing field.

    Social protection
    “Social Protection Steps. We should move towards measuring relative poverty to provide a clearer picture of low-income families who are unable to keep up with the living standards of the majority of society. We reiterate our proposal to establish Social Protection steps pegged at 30%, 50% and 80% of the annual median monthly household income per member….” (P. 25)

    “Caregivers Support Scheme. Full-time informal caregivers who fall in the lower socio- economic stratum should be given yearly CPF top-ups to reduce the pressure of being underemployed and less prepared for retirement. More research should also be done to find out how to improve utilisation of formal care services such as senior day activity centres to augment informal care.” (P.25)

    My thoughts: One of the PAP’s biggest sins is its refusal to establish a poverty line in Singapore; and thus effectively keeping the pretense that poverty doesn’t exist. Tissue sellers are “entrepreneurs”??? The greatest euphemism for beggars ever.

    Healthcare
    “Enhanced Primary Care Subsidies. We propose the monthly household income cap to qualify for subsidies for primary care at general practitioner (GP) clinics under the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) be raised to the median monthly household income per member….” (P.26)

    My thoughts: Sensible. The current CHAS cut off is $1,800. Makes sense to keep it in line with median monthly income (S$2,380 in 2014). If anything, could go even further.

    Housing
    “20-25 BTO Pricing. We propose HDB flat ownership should be delinked from land costs by adjusting the debt service ratio formula for calculating BTO selling price to 25% of median monthly household income of applicants servicing a 20-year mortgage after the 10% down payment….” (P.28)

    “Removing the Ethnic Quota. As our society has now attained a level of multi-racial integration, we propose the ethnic quotas governing citizens’ home ownership of HDB flats should be removed to allow all Singaporeans freedom of choice of home locations, regardless of race.” (P.29)

    Transport
    “Government Contracting Model. The government has been moving away from the profit-based privatisation model of running public transport towards the WP’s National Transport Corporation (NTC) proposal to run public bus and MRT operations on a not- for-profit basis of maintenance and cost recovery…”

    “Promoting Bicycle Sharing and Car Sharing. We propose a bicycle-sharing scheme to be developed for short journeys where bicycle-docking stations can be set up between residential areas and transport nodes, and within heritage trail and park connector routes. The scheme should be integrated with mobile applications and EZ- Link cards for registration and payment purposes.” (P.33)

    My thoughts: The government is slowly nationalising our public transport system. At least the WP has always been consistently honest about the need to. Meanwhile, cyclists are not going to disappear. We need a better plan.

    Town management
    “A Unifying People’s Association. The People’s Association (PA) should be depoliticised and reorganised to serve as a unifying institution….Government grassroots serving as eyes and ears of the ruling party cripple the growth of natural community leadership and hinder the development of community living.” (P.34)

    Culture
    “Mandatory Impact Assessments. We propose Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), Social Impact Assessments (SIAs), and Heritage Impact Assessments (HIA) should be made mandatory by law for all development projects affecting green areas, existing infrastructure and the building of new infrastructure before those projects are approved.” (P.35)

    Democracy
    “Single Constituency Members of Parliament. We propose Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs) be abolished, as they dilute the individual voter’s voice. Instead, the elections should be run on single seats, with individual MPs fully accountable to constituents. The Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) scheme would then be unnecessary. The Nominated MP scheme should be abolished.” (P. 36)

    “Fixed-Term Parliaments. We propose the term for Parliament between elections be fixed. The Prime Minister should not have the unfettered discretion to dissolve Parliament and call for elections before the end of the fixed term. Early dissolution of Parliament should be allowed under special circumstances such as a vote of no confidence or with the assent of a two-thirds majority in Parliament.” (P.37)

    “Strengthening the Franchise. We propose lowering the voting age from 21 to 18. This will encourage young people to have an early interest in political governance.” (P.37)

    “Independent Election Commission. To ensure political neutrality, parliamentary elections should not be organised by the Prime Minister’s Office. Instead, we propose an independent Election Commission….” (P.37)

    “Independent Electoral Boundary Review Committee. To ensure political neutrality, the delineation of electoral boundaries should not be done under the Prime Minister’s Office. We propose an independent committee…” (p.37)

    Governance
    “Enhanced Gateway Process. We propose the current threshold of $500 million threshold of the Gateway Process to monitor capital expenditure for public infrastructure projects be reduced to $100 million. The results of these approvals should be made public, as should regular reports and updates after approvals. Non-infrastructure projects with budgets of more than $100 million, such as the Youth Olympic Games and the SEA games, should also go through the Gateway Process. (P.38)

    “Office of Ombudsman. We propose the independent Office of Parliamentary Ombudsman be established. Any citizen aggrieved by the action of any public servant may, instead of commencing an expensive lawsuit, lodge a complaint with this office…” (P.38)

    Justice
    “Judicial Discretion for Capital Cases. We propose trials for capital cases should be conducted by a tribunal of two judges whose decision to impose the death sentence must be unanimous. On appeal, the death sentence should be upheld only if all three judges in the Court of Appeal confirm it unanimously….” (p.39)

    “Dedicated Anti-Terrorism Law. We propose the Internal Security Act, which provides for detention without trial in cases of alleged subversion, be abolished. Singapore shall be brought in line with international practices to try such cases, including espionage, with modified procedures to protect official secrets if necessary. In cases of alleged terrorism, the government should be enabled by a dedicated anti-terrorism law to make swift arrests and detain suspects without trial. However, these suspects must be afforded real avenues to challenge the legality of their arrests through the courts and an advisory board. These bodies should be empowered to order the person’s release if not satisfied as to the legality of the detention.” (P.39)

    My thoughts: I would prefer if we abolished the death penalty, but this is one small step. Second, throughout my life, there has always been one point on which I fervently disagree with most liberals I know: the need for some sort of detention without trial, purely because of the terrorist threat. The WP’s proposal here appeals to my inner Rumsfeld.

    Public sphere

    “Free and Competitive Local Newspaper and Broadcasting Companies. We propose the Newspapers and Printing Presses Act be amended to abolish clauses giving the government powers to approve the holders of management shares and to control the shareholdings and voting power of newspaper companies….” (P.40)

    “Internet Regulation. We propose the repeal of the Broadcasting (Class License) Notification – which requires websites that report regularly on Singapore to register and post a bond of $50,000 subjecting them to government regulation of content – that was gazetted in 2013 without public consultation….” (p.40)

    “Review of Public Order Act. We call for the repeal of the sections of the Public Order Act (POA) that govern the right to public assembly, issuance of move-on orders, and restrictions on filming of law enforcement operations, to remove obstacles to the promotion of an active citizenry. We propose peaceful demonstrations be allowed subject to prior notification to the police to ensure minimum disruption to traffic and public convenience….” (p.41)

    “Independent Body for Arts Licensing. We propose an independent body with representation from the arts community should be set up to oversee arts licensing….” (p.41)

    “Declassification of Archives. We propose a structured de-classification system for archived material where material in the National Archives will be automatically declassified after 25 years of the date of record. In the interest of national security, material marked “Secret” will still be subject to requests and approval. All cabinet papers should be automatically released after 40 years. A panel of experts should be set up to consider requests for early declassification.” (P.41)

    Defence
    “National Service for First Generation Citizens. We propose first generation male citizens between 21 and 40 years of age who have not served full time national service should be required to serve up to 40 days a year over 10 years in the SAF, SPF, SCDF, public hospitals or the social services….” (p.46)

    What I don’t like

    Immigration
    “Our approach involves keeping the non-resident population constant at around 1.5-1.6 million as long as we achieve the 1%. This allows for a temporary addition of foreign workers to make up for shortfalls if we are not able to achieve the 1% target.
    In the best-case scenario that we have modelled (details available in our Population Policy Paper), the trade-off compared to the government’s policy would be 0.5% less in annual GDP growth but 1 million less in population. This prioritises long-term economic stability over short-term economic growth.” (p. 9)

    My thoughts: Zero foreigner growth (is what the WP wants, assuming Singapore achieves 1% resident population growth).

    I remember when Lee Hsien Loong grilled Low Thia Kiang in parliament about this, I was too occupied to think too much about it. On hindsight, I’m glad he grilled him.

    Zero foreigner growth would be the death of Singapore.

    I have been as critical as anybody of the PAP’s ultra-liberal immigration policies of the past twenty years, simply because they have failed to manage inflows and integration and social equities. All that has directly led to the worst xenophobia I have ever seen in Singapore. (To put things in perspective, from 2001-2010, Singapore had SIX TIMES the immigration rate of the UK. And just look at what’s happened there. I have written more extensively about racism and xenophobia here.)

    However, the answer to all that is not to close our doors completely—which is what the WP is proposing if Singapore achieves 1% resident population growth. Yes, we must make it harder for foreigners to come here, bringing Singapore in line with the immigration practices of other developed countries. But we must never have zero as stated policy.

    Let me give you three reasons why this is wrong. The first is moral. If a person from another country absolutely needs to move here—perhaps because he/she has been banished from Malaysia or if it is a family member of somebody in Singapore—we cannot make that person’s move contingent on one foreigner leaving Singapore.

    The second is economic. There will always be jobs for which a company needs to hire an able foreigner, whether head of a media organisation or brain surgeon. We can never assume that there will be a Singaporean who can simply step up. Globally-competitive companies need to have the option to bring in a foreigner IF no local can be found.

    The last, and possibly most important, is the signalling effect. Singapore’s success has always been dependent on us being open. Already some foreign businesses, investors and residents feel that Singapore is anti-foreign. We must never develop that reputation. If we prevent other country’s people from moving here, what if those countries decide to stop selling us food?!?

    I like the WP. I want to see more of them in parliament. But I hope that this zero foreigner growth is not a firm policy. I hope they are just politicking, the same way the PAP has been politicking on this issue—tightening immigration post-2011, when everybody knows post-GE2015 it is going to open the gates again.

    CPF
    “Lower CPF Payout Eligibility Age. We propose lowering the CPF Payout Eligibility Age to 60. This will give CPF members the option to start receiving CPF monthly payouts earlier if they need to, instead of having to wait until age 65….” (P.13)

    My thoughts: I’m not sure this CPF change is prudent or necessary.

    Social policies
    “Stop at Two. We opposed the legalisation of casinos in 2005. We propose there be no more casinos built beyond the existing two. A permanent moratorium on new casino licences should be implemented after the current 10-year moratorium expires in 2016. Casinos should not issue annual levy passes, and the cost of entry should be kept at $100 for every 24 hours. These annual levy passes incentivise frequent gambling, which should be discouraged.” (P.24)

    My thoughts: Stop treating Singaporeans like children. That ship has sailed: we have the casinos, now we have to deal with them. Singaporeans should not be discriminated against. We need to manage any negative externalities in other ways, just as we do with other “sins” like alcohol.

     

    Source: http://sudhirtv.com

  • Jufrie Mahmood: Damansuri Abas Dan Sidek Mallek Antara Calon Melayu Terbaik Yang Dikemukakan SDP

    Jufrie Mahmood: Damansuri Abas Dan Sidek Mallek Antara Calon Melayu Terbaik Yang Dikemukakan SDP

    Kedua dua calon Melayu SDP, Sidek Mallek dan Damanhuri Abas adalah antara yg terbaik yg pernah dikemukakan oleh pembangkang.
    Masyarakat kita memang mempunyai ramai cerdik pandai tapi mereka rata-rata lebih suka bersendirian dgn keluarga ataupun berjuang dlm persatuan-persatuan bukan bersifat politik.

    Yang masuk politik biasanya ambil jalan yg lebih mudah dan ‘selamat’, dapat ganjaran yg lumayan. Mereka sertai PAP tanpa benar-benar bertekad menyelesaikan masalah sebenar masyarakat yg telah lama tertunggak – 5 dekad terlalu lama untuk kita menunggu.

    Mereka seolah acuh tak acuh. Lebih teruk lagi jika mereka bersifat seperti melukut di tepi gantang. Soal diskriminasi masih berleluasa walaupun mereka cuba menafikannya. Soal seperti pemakaian tudung, misalnya, dianggap seperti menangani serangan perganasan atau terrorisma. Mereka biarkan diri mereka ditekan dan diperbodohkan oleh tuan-tuan besar mereka. Sungguh tak masuk akal.

    Lebih tak masuk akal lagi, masih ada saja Melayu cerdik pandai yg cenderung menyertai PAP. Sedih sekali kerana mereka tak dapat menggambarkan di benak mereka bahawa jika baik kedudukan masyarakat Melayu maka baiklah juga kedudukan masyarakat keseluruhannya. Negara kita akan lebih makmur dan sempurna.

    Itulah pendekatan kita dlm SDP. Sila gembling masyarakat kita supaya memberikan sokongan padu kpd calon-calon kami. Kami berpadu tenaga sebagai satu pasukan. Kita usaha sambil berdoa. Doakanlah kejayaan kami. Syukran.

     

    Source: Mohamed Jufrie Mahmood

  • Lee Hsien Loong: Opposition Party Like ‘Mouse In The House’

    Lee Hsien Loong: Opposition Party Like ‘Mouse In The House’

    Nine parties may be contesting this election but to most observers, the keenest contests will be in wards featuring the People’s Action Party (PAP) and the Workers’ Party (WP).

    The exception is Potong Pasir where PAP faces the Singapore People’s Party (SPP).

    PAP and WP clash in wards including Aljunied, East Coast and Marine Parade GRCs and single seats in Fengshan and MacPherson.

    The clash between the two rival parties underscores two differing agendas.

    Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong sees it as an election to find leaders for the next generation while WP says it needs to entrench opposition for a healthier parliament.

    For the first time in independent Singapore’s electoral history, all seats will be contested. And for the third time since 2006, PAP did not return to power on Nomination Day.

    A two-party system is common in some developed countries like the US and Australia. The question is whether Singapore is on the cusp of a similar system.

    WP’s success at GE 2011 has allowed it to attract better qualified candidates – 12 out of the 19 WP candidates introduced started volunteering with the party from 2011.

    For GE 2015, the party was able to field its largest slate ever – 28 candidates – to contest in five GRCs and five SMCs.

    Yesterday, at a press conference at the PAP headquarters, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong spelt out the battle lines after the close of nominations. “This is an election where there is a lot at stake and where we have to take very seriously people’s concerns, people’s aspirations, their outlook in a new world and also the way the election is going to be fought,” he said.

    Reports and pictures by Ariffin Jamar, Azim Azman, Benjamin Seetor, Chai Hung Yin, Choo Chwee Hua, David Lee, David Sun, Elizabeth Law, Foo Jie Ying, Koh Hui Theng, Hariz Baharudin, Jennifer Dhanaraj, Jeremy Long, Jonathan Choo, Mohd Ishak, Ng Jun Sen, Nurul Nabilah, Phyllicia Wang, Ronald Loh, Shahriya Yahaya and Tan Tam Mei

    ‘More is better? Depends on the quality’

    PM Lee described the performance of opposition MPs in Parliament over the last term as “disappointing”.

    “When you go for election rallies, it’s very easy to make fierce, rousing speeches,” he said, adding that opposition candidates also make many promises.

    “But when they come to Parliament, none of these issues are raised… because they know that in Parliament if they raise these issues, face to face in debate, they will be pinned down and the fallacies, insincerities and untruths will be exposed,” he said.

    “You voted for a tiger in a Chamber and you got a mouse in the House.”

    PM Lee added that they would then hope that people would not notice this before repeating the tactic in the run-up to the next election.

    The WP painted a different scenario of its performance on its website.

    In a review of its 2011 to 2015 Parliamentary performance released yesterday, it highlighted several changes its party members effected in Parliament – everything from healthcare to public housing.

    So is WP ready to form the next Government?

    While its party leadership has said no, East Coast GRC candidate Gerald Giam said on Saturday that taking over the Government remains a long-term aim, but WP wants to “focus on what our goals are for this election”.

    Singapore Management University (SMU) law don Eugene Tan said: “We can see it as the WP indicating that they are shifting gears and that they now have more confidence that they can move in a more concerted manner towards trying to develop Singapore’s political system into a two-party one.”

    When asked if more opposition parties would give rise to better governance, PM Lee said: “More is better? Depends on the quality.”

    Dr Gillian Koh, senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, said: “The WP will have to convince voters that they can multi-task. They have to be the opposition voice in Parliament but also be effective in local governance, and certainly be above suspicion in how it manages those practicalities as that is the political system today.”

    You voted for a tiger in a chamber and you got a mouse in the house.

    — Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on the opposition MPs in last term’s Parliament

    ‘…all 89 seats have to be fought seriously’

    The possibility of the People’s Action Party (PAP) losing a majority share – all of which are contested – is real, said PM Lee Hsien Loong.

    “So we are fighting this election on the assumption that all 89 seats have to be fought seriously.”

    At the same press conference, Senior Minister of State for Law and Education Indranee Rajah said every vote against the PAP could mean a PAP candidate or team of candidates not elected into Parliament, and that would mean the PAP will have less ability to deliver the results voters want.

    In the past, opposition politicians had relied on the by-election effect, arguing that since the PAP is returned to power on Nomination Day, voters should then get opposition politicians into Parliament to voice their concerns.

    But for the third time since 2006, the PAP was not returned to power on Nomination Day.

    UNLIKELY

    So is Miss Indranee’s scenario plausible? Is there a likelihood of a freak result with the PAP not securing a majority?

    Unlikely, said observers.

    Dr Lan Luh Luh, associate professor at the National University of Singapore business school and faculty of law, said: “In by-elections, people will think more of the local, municipal agenda. But on a national level, people do not want to shake the foundations of the Government.”

    SMU’s law don Eugene Tan said: “(The state of play) may affect undecided voters and they might feel that much more is at stake. They might think, ‘I should be more careful.’”

    ‘Investing in the young… motivates our whole venture’

    PM Lee Hsien Loong said the PAP is constantly looking for ways to connect with the young.

    For example, he tries to bond with his Facebook followers through his social media posts on nature, festivals or politics.

    “Basically, they are looking for a human connection – not abstract policies – a person they can feel they can connect with, they can understand and who understands what they want.

    “Investing in the young… motivates our whole venture.”

    Unlike GE 2011, where PAP roped in several candidates from the NTUC and the civil service, GE 2015 sees the median age of the new PAP candidates rise from 38.5 in 2011 to 42.3 now.

    Of the 24 new faces, 15 are from the private sector.

    HIGH-CALIBRE

    The WP’s pitch appears to be that voters want higher-calibre candidates and since the last GE, it has been attracting some from top universities.

    Five of them have law backgrounds, another five business- or finance-related education, and one, Dr Daniel Goh, has a background in academia.

    The remaining seven candidates who first got involved with the party before 2011 are from social and grassroots work.

    Veteran journalist P. N. Balji said: “2011 was a turning point for WP in attracting solid candidates. That has continued into this election: like Goh, He Tingru and Leon Perera.”

    NUS sociologist Tan Ern Ser said: “It makes sense to join a winning team. I think WP can be seen as having a good ‘business’ model.”

    PM Lee yesterday said this election will be a tough fight, with the country at a turning point.

    “As I told our candidates: if you are in a PAP ward, you fight as if you can lose. If you are in an opposition ward, you fight with a conviction that you can win.”

    ‘When you vote for someone and he wins, he will run a town council’

    Running a town council is a litmus test of whether an MP is capable of going on to run a government, said PM Lee Hsien Loong.

    “When you vote for someone and he wins, he will run a town council.”

    He also said: “People who aspire to be the government will first be tested in running a town council and demonstrating (whether they are) capable of administering, managing, leading and producing results to Singaporeans.”

    PM Lee said the Aljunied-Hougang-Punggol East Town Council (AHPETC) saga was a serious issue concerning governance, profitability and propriety.

    WP chairman Sylvia Lim had earlier accused the PAP of using the Ministry of National Development (MND) to make political attacks.

    But PM Lee said it was the government agency’s responsibility to investigate and take action if necessary.

    He pointed out that the Aljunied GRC and Punggol East SMC town councils were running healthy surpluses before they were amalgamated into AHPETC, which then reported a deficit.

    RICH

    Meanwhile, AHPETC’s former managing agent, FM Solutions and Services (FMSS), went from nothing into a rich company, said PM Lee.

    “In such a situation, can you say that it’s not my business? I think voters should be able to tell it’s not so simple,” he added.

    WP has said that AHPETC’s latest annual report, filed on Monday, shows the town council had made a $1.7 million surplus if the $7.2 million operating grant withheld by MND is factored in.

    The report was also filed on time – an improvement over the filing of the previous year’s report that was 10 months overdue.

    Asked if AHPETC would become a significant issue in this General Election, Ms Lim said earlier: “I’m sure the PAP wants to make it an issue.”

    BY THE numbers

    Total number of voters 2,460,977

    Total candidates 181 29 in SMCs and 152 in GRCs

    Parliamentary seats 89 with 9 NMP and up to 9 NCMP seats available

    Number of political parties contesting 9 (PAP, WP, SPP, SDP, NSP, SDA, RP, SingFirst, PPP)

     

    Source: www.tnp.sg

  • Top 10 Electoral Battles To Watch

    Top 10 Electoral Battles To Watch

    It is election season in Singapore. GE2015 is finally here and it is the most keenly contested election since 1965, with 181 candidates from 9 political parties and 2 independents going for all 89 seats in Parliament. No more walkovers and “instant MPs” whom we didn’t vote for!

    There will a total of 13 Single-Member Constituencies (SMCs) and 16 GRCs in GE2015, up from the current 12 SMCs and 15 GRCs. That’s a total of 29 contests to watch. Which will be the most keenly contested or interesting ones to watch? Get ready your popcorn. Here is list of the top 10 battles,adjusted from my previous list, after taking into account the development on Nomination Day where all the contesting candidates in each wards are disclosed.

    First off, I believe the National Solidarity Party (NSP), will no longer be a serious contender after all the flip-flopping and “pattern more than badminton” moves that the party has been up to over a span of just a few weeks leading up to Nomination Day. They also lost most of their strongest candidates from GE2011 like Hazel Poa and Nicole Seah.

    Oh, and most of the election trolls like that Uber driver, the “Parrot Man”, the crying tuition teacher and even the supposed candidate backed by the king of online troll, SMRT Ltd (Feedback) – all did not make it. 

    Surprisingly, Han Hui Hui made it, resulting in a three-cornered fight in Radin Mas SMC. Nonetheless, Radin Mas is still not in the revised top ten as it is likely the incumbent PAP will win by a wide margin, given the two much weaker opposition candidates are going to split votes from each other.

    Here’s the revised top ten list:

    1.

    East Coast GRC

    Incumbents: PAP’s Lim Swee Say, Senior Lee Yi Shyan, Mohamad Maliki Osman and Jessica Tan

    Challengers: WP’s Gerald Giam, Daniel Goh, Leon Perera and Mohamed Fairoz Shariff

    Without a doubt, this will be the hottest contest to watch for GE2015. The strongest opposition party, with 7 MPs and 1 Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) in parliament, is set for a rematch in East Coast GRC where they narrowly lost to the People’s Action Party (PAP). It was the narrowest win for a GRC for the ruling party, with just 54.8% of valid votes. For the WP, Gerald Giam from the losing team in East Coast GRC managed to snatch a seat in parliament as a NCMP for being one of the best-performing losers.

    Giam is leading the WP team for this second showdown. Will he be second time lucky? The incumbents seem pretty confident of defending their turf as much has been done by the team on the ground in recent years.

    “Someone was joking to me that because we have undergone so many changes in Bedok Town Centre, some of (the Opposition candidates) who come here once every five years might get lost, so we might need to provide free tour guide services to show them around,” shared Lee Yi Shyan in a media interview.

    2.

    Aljunied GRC

    Incumbents: WP’s Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim, Chen Show Mao, Pritam Singh and Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap

    Challengers: PAP’s Yeo Guat Kwang, Victor Lye, Chua Eng Leong, K. Muralidharan Pillai and Shamsul Kamar

    This is the only GRC currently helmed by an opposition party. The WP’s top guns are all in this GRC, including WP’s secretary-general, Low Thia Khiang, and WP’s chairman, Slyvia Lim.

    The PAP is unwilling to send any current bigwigs to contest in Aljunied GRC.Instead, they chose to field a ‘suicide squad’ of political unknowns, led by four-term labour MP Yeo Guat Kwang, mentored by former PAP chairman and Cabinet Minister Lim Boon Heng.

    WP’s Achilles heel are the controversies over town council funds and the way the WP is running the town council. By fielding a team of grassroot leaders, the PAP may be capitalising on this issue to bring down the WP. Do not dismiss the ‘suicide squad’ just yet as they may be the underdogs necessary to win over the hearts of Aljunied voters. Not too sure how Lim Boon Heng will be of help though.

    3.

    Potong Pasir SMC

    Incumbent: PAP’s Sitoh Yih Pin

    Challenger: SPP’s Lina Chiam

    This was the longest held opposition ward in Singapore for 27 years, helmed by popular opposition figure, Chiam See Tong, 80, Secretary-General of the Singapore People’s Party (SPP), until the PAP won back the SMC in 2011.

    In GE2011, the wife of Chiam See Tong, Lina Chiam, lost the SMC to twice-unsuccessful challenger Sitoh Yih Pin of the PAP by a mere 114 votes in a close 7973-7859 vote count. Since then, Sitoh has been hard at work, slowly winning the ground with his sincerity.

    Lina Chiam has also been shoring up her experience in parliament, speaking on a wide variety of issues, fielding the most questions among all the MPs, NMPs and NCMPs.

    Both take their jobs very seriously. The two are now set for a rematch.

    A third independent candidate, lawyer Tan Lam Siong had expressed interest to contest in the SMC but had pulled out at the last minute, choosing instead to lend his support to Mrs Chiam.

    This will be a very close fight. It really could swing either way.

    4. 

    Tanjong Pagar GRC

    Incumbent: PAP’s Chan Chun Sing, Chia Shi-Lu, Indranee Rajah, Joan Pereira, Melvin Yong

    Challenger: SingFirst’s Tan Jee Say, Ang Yong Guan, Chirag Desai, Fahmi Rais, Melvyn Chiu

    The voters in Tanjong Pagar GRC has never voted before since the GRC was first set up as it was helmed by Singapore’s founding prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew, who passed away earlier this year.

    It would be extremely foolhardy to go against Lee, who has a god-like status in the hearts and minds of most Singaporeans, regardless if they are supportive of him or not.

    Nonetheless, the GRC is now helmed by newbie minister, Chan Chun Sing, Minister in Prime Minister’s Office and the Secretary-General of the National Trade Union Congress.

    A new political party, Singaporeans First (SingFirst), helmed by Tan Jee Say, will be contesting the GRC. Tan is an investment adviser and former civil servant. He was a principal private secretary to former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong.

    The electoral at Tanjong Pagar GRC is largely untested as they have not voted for ages. As such, it will be interesting to observe how they vote.

    5. 

    Holland-Bukit Timah GRC

    Incumbent: PAP’s Vivian Balakrishnan, Christopher de Souza, Liang Eng Hwa, Sim Ann

    Challenger: SDP’s Chee Soon Juan, Chong Wai Fung, Paul Tambyah, Sidek Mallek

    The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) fielded their best team in this GRC. Dr Paul Ananth Tambyah, 50, Professor of the National University Hospital at the Department of Medicine is a strong candidate to watch from the SDP. Another interesting figure to watch will be Dr Chee Soon Juan, the controversial secretary-general of the party who was recently discharged from bankruptcy and is contesting in together with Dr Tambyah in the same GRC.

    Holland-Bukit Timah GRC is led by Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Dr Vivian Balakrishnan.

    The SDP garnered a respectable 39.9% of valid votes, their best result for GE2011. Would they be able to up their vote shares this election? Or will the PAP be able to garner a wider vote share and win with an even bigger margin, given all the policy changes since 2011?

     6.

    Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC

    Incumbent: PAP’s Ng Eng Hen, Josephine Teo, Chong Kee Hiong, Chee Hong Tat, Saktiandi Supaat

    Challenger: SPP’s Benjamin Pwee, Hamim Aliyas, Law Kim Hwee, Abdillah Zamzuri, Bryan Long

    The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), led by Benjamin Pwee, fielded a joint team together with Chiam See Tong’s SPP, with two of their members quitting DPP to join SPP. Pwee contested in the GRC in 2011 together with Chiam under the SPP before he splintered off to join the DPP. They have since reunited.

    The PAP is fielding a strong team at the GRC, helmed by Defence Minister, Dr Ng Eng Hen and Senior Minister of State for Transport and Finance, Josephine Teo.

    They will be joined by three new faces – Chee Hong Tat, former Second Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Trade and Industry; Chong Kee Hiong, CEO, OUE Hospitality Trust; and Saktiandi Supaat, Head of Foreign Exchange Research, Maybank.

    The PAP won with 56.93% of valid votes in GE2011. Would they be able to improve their winning margin? Or will the SPP be able to make further inroads to capture the GRC?

    7.

    Macpherson SMC

    Incumbent: PAP’s Ms Tin Pei Ling

    Challengers: WP’s Mr Bernard Chen and NSP’s Mr Cheo Chai Chen

    This is a new SMC carved out from Marine Parade GRC and will see a three-cornered fight between the incumbent PAP’s candidate and a candidate each from WP and NSP.

    Tin was extremely unpopular in 2011 and almost cost PAP to lose Marine Parade GRC which was helmed by former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong. She has since worked hard on the ground and in parliament. Her public image has improved and she seems to enjoy strong support in her constituency.

    Bernard Chen is a long-time WP supporter and party member. He slowly rise through the ranks with his hard work and determination.

    Cheo Chai Chen is a has-been, one-term MP when he contested and won a seat under the then-SDP led by Chiam See Tong. Many see him as a vote-spoiler for the opposition. It is unlikely he will draw much vote and I am of the opinion that he will get less than 1% of valid votes, losing his deposit.

    Taking Cheo out of the equation, the battle is mainly between PAP and WP; Tin Pei Ling and Bernard Chen. For Tin, it will be sweet validation to all her critics if she can win this on her own, showing that her hard work paid off.

    8. 

    Marine Parade GRC

    Incumbent: PAP’s Goh Chok Tong, Edwin Tong, Fatimah Lateef, Seah Kian Peng, Tan Chuan-Jin

    Challenger: WP’s Yee Jenn Jong, Dylan Ng, Terence Tan, Firuz Khan, He Ting Tu

    Versus a weak opposition party, the NSP, who had just one strong candidate in their team, fresh face, Nicole Seah, then 23, the much stronger PAP team was only able to win with a small margin of 56.65% of valid votes in 2011.

    For the coming election, the PAP team will see competition from a stronger opposition party, the WP. Plus Yee Jenn Jong nearly won in Joo Chiat SMC which has since been absorbed into Marine Parade. He is leading the WP team.

    With Goh Chok Tong stepping down from the cabinet, the anchor minister for Marine Parade GRC is now Minister for Social and Family Development, Tan Chuan-Jin.

    Would Tan be able to win back vote shares? Or would WP claw away more votes?

    9.

    Fengshan SMC

    Candidates: PAP’s Ms Cheryl Chan and WP’s Mr Dennis Tan

    This is a new SMC carved out from East Coast GRC, which many speculated as a move to protect East Coast GRC as Fengshan had allegedly polled poorly for the ruling party in GE2011. The anchor minister for East Coast GRC, Lim Swee Say, however, has dismissed this as untrue.

    In any case, expect a keen contest between PAP and WP with a small winning margin.

    Long-time grassroots volunteer Cheryl Chan is the first new PAP candidate to be fielded in a new SMC in nearly three decades, since the GRC system was introduced in 1988.

    10.

    Ang Mo Kio GRC

    Incumbent: Lee Hsien Loong, Ang Hin Kee, Darryl David, Gan Thiam Poh, Intan Azura Mokhtar, Koh Poh Koon

    Challenger: Reform Party’s M. Ravi, Gilbert Goh, Jesse Loo, Osman Sulaiman, Roy Ngerng, Siva Chandran

    This GRC is helmed by none other than the current Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Hsien Loong. It is interesting how this GRC has consistently been contested since GE2006 when the WP fielded a young, untested ‘suicide squad’ led by Yaw Shin Leong, then the leader of the WP’s Youth Wing.

    The PAP won with 66.14% of valid votes, lower than than the national average.

    In GE2011, the PAP won with a wider margin of 69.33% of valid votes, against a motley crue of candidates, assembled last minute by the Reform Party.

    The Reform Party is back again. This time with lawyer, M Ravi leading the team, featuring a roster of Hong Lim Park regulars like activist and blogger, Roy Ngerng as well as frequent rally organiser, Gilbert Goh.

    Ngerng started his sociopolitical blog, The Heart Truths, in 2012. He was found guilty in October 2014 of defaming Lee Hsien Loong in a blog post. Goh is famous for the multiple ‘Say No to 6.9 million’ protests which he organised in Hong Lim Park.

    All of them seem to have an axe to grind with Lee Hsien Loong.

    While it is highly unlikely for the Reform Party to capture Ang Mo Kio GRC, it will still be extremely interesting to watch the group go about harassing Lee Hsien Loong at political rallies, cornering him with tough questions.

    Get your popcorn ready!

     

    Source: https://sg.news.yahoo.com

  • Faisal Manap: Workers’ Party Lebih Bersedia, 5 GRC Dijangka Menjadi Medan Pertarungan Panas

    Faisal Manap: Workers’ Party Lebih Bersedia, 5 GRC Dijangka Menjadi Medan Pertarungan Panas

    Sekurang-kurangnya lima GRC dijangka hangat dipertandingkan dalam pilihan raya 11 September ini.

    Empat GRC tersebut turut diwakili calon Melayu PAP.

    Satu-satunya kawasan undi baru dalam pilihan raya kali ini – GRC Marsiling-Yew Tee, mengambil sebahagian besar kawasan GRC Chua Chu Kang dan Sembawang.

    Pasukan PAP diterajui bersama Menteri Kebudayaan, Masyarakat dan Belia, Encik Lawrence Wong, dan Speaker Parlimen, Cik Halimah Yacob.

    Mereka berdepan Parti Demokratik Singapura (SDP) pimpinan John Tan.

    SDP kalah kepada PAP di GRC Sembawang pada pilihan raya umum 2011.

    “Berikan kita peluang untuk terus berkhidmat dan kita akan bekerja dengan keras dan memberikan lebih banyak sumbangan kepada penduduk Marsiling-Yew Tee,” kata Cik Halimah.

    Cik Halimah juga memberitahu pasukannya akan mengeluarkan sebuah manifesto yang mengandungi rancangan-rancangan mereka untuk kawasan undi tersebut.

    Beliau menjelaskan, “Dalam manifesto tersebut ada dua bahagian. Satu daripadanya ialah rancangan pembaikan dari segi infrastruktur dan keadaan sekitaran bagi penduduk kita dan bukan sahaja program-program ‘hardware’ tetapi ‘software’  di mana program-program untuk membantu anak-anak, keluarga kurang berkemampuan dan sebagainya,”

    GRC Tanjong Pagar pula tidak pernah ditandingi sejak lima pilihan raya lalu.

    Kali ini hampir 130,000 pengundinya boleh membuat pilihan antara pasukan PAP dan pencabarnya Parti Warga Diutamakan (SingFirst).

    Pasukan PAP dipimpin ketua pergerakan buruh, Menteri di Pejabat Perdana Menteri Chan Chun Sing, 45 tahun.

    SingFirst, sebuah parti politik baru diketuai Encik Tan Jee Say, mantan calon Presiden.

    Satu lagi diramalkan sebagai antara ‘kerusi panas’ pilihan raya kali ini ialah pertarungan bagi GRC Jalan Besar pimpinan Menteri Perhubungan dan Penerangan Dr Yaacob Ibrahim.

    Pada pilihan raya lalu, GRC ini membentuk sebahagian GRC Moulmein-Kallang dan meraih 58.55 peratus undi menentang WP.

    Pasukan Dr Yaacob sekali lagi ditentang WP yang dipimpin pensyarah politeknik L Somasundaram.

    “Kami berempat berterima kasihmenjadi calon bagi GRC Jalan Besar.Undilah PAP parti yang bekerjasama untuk kepentingan anda, parti yang bekerjasama untuk anda demi untuk Singapura,” jelas Dr Yaccob.

    GRC East Coast juga sekali lagi menjadi medan pertarungan antara pasukan PAP dan WP.

    Pada 2011, pasukan PAP meraih 54.83 peratus undi menentang WP yang menampilkan Gerald Giam dan Png Eng Huat.

    Ia merupakan kemenangan paling tipis bagi PAP dan Encik Giam mendapat kerusi di Parlimen sebagai AP Tanpa Kawasan Undi.

    Pasukan PAP yang mempertahankan GRC itu dipimpin Menteri Tenaga Manusia Lim Swee Say dan turut dianggotai Menteri Negara Pertahanan merangkap Pembangunan Negara, Mohd Maliki Osman.

    Pasukan PAP di Aljunied pula siap sedia berjuang bagi mencabar lawannya dari WP.

    Diketuai AP veteran Yeo Guat Kwang, pasukan muka baru ini bertekad untuk menawan semula GRC Aljunied.

    WP juga menyatakan hasrat ingin kekal mempertahankan kerusi itu dengan pasukan ‘A’ mereka.

    “Dengan pengalaman yang ditimba, kami lebih bersedia, berkomited dan bersemangat untuk berkhidmat kepada anda semua kali ini,” jelas Faisal Manap, Calon WP bagi GRC Aljunied.

    “Pengundi-pengundi Aljunied, berilah kami kesempatan untuk berkhidmat untuk anda. Rakan-rakan kami akan bekerja keras untuk kamu, bagi kamu, demi untuk Singapura,” kata Shamsul Kamar, Calon PAP bagi GRC Aljunied.

    Source: http://berita.mediacorp.sg

deneme bonusu